Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1A, Safe Routes to School Project .. ~HIEES MEMORANDUM Item I.A DATE: June 9, 2009 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michelle Olson, Parks and Recreation Manager Deb Bloom, City Engineer SUBJECT: Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update BACKGROUND At the Council work session on March 16,2009, the Safe Routes to School Project was discussed. At that meeting, Council asked staff to review potential cost savings, identify additional funding so~rces and bring the project back for further discussion. Shortly after this meeting, the economic stimulus funding solicitation was announced. At the March 30, 2009 City Council Meeting, staffwas directed to apply for Transportation Enhancements (TE) Funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for the Safe Routes to School extra costs and the DNR Perry Park Trail Connection Project. The application for this grant (ARRA) was submitted on April 3, 2009. Staff included all costs to construct both pathways, including the drainage improvements, retaining walls, hydrant relocations, and driveway gates. The City has recently been informed that our project, now officially called the Elmer L. Andersen Memorial Trail Connections was successful in this solicitation and will be funded. The Metropolitan Council officially acted on this at their June 10, 2009 meeting. We scored 4th out of 50 projects. The top 10 projects were funded. While waiting to hear back on our ARRA funding application, staff continued to work on the Safe Routes to School Project issues identified at the March Worksession. Below is what staff found out during these investigations: How much of the construction work could our Public Works staff do in order to reduce the cost of the project? Response: Deb Bloom, Michelle Olson, Greg Hoag and Mike Schifsky met to discuss the possibility of our Public Works crew completing a portion of the Safe Routes to School construction project, specifically, hydrant relocation and retaining wall construction. Although our Public Works staff feel confident in their technical ability to do small construction projects, taking over the construction of a large project would take time away from our day to day tasks. Relocating 9 hydrants would occupy 5 of our full \\Metro-inet\ardenhills\Admin\Council\Agendas & Packet Information\2009\06-15-09 Worksession\Packet Information\Memo to CC re ARRA - Elmer Andersen Project Review.doc Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update - 06/09/09 time employees for 9 full working days (about 2 weeks). Constructing the retaining walls for the County Road E-2 project would take 3 full time employees and 2 seasonal employees about 4 weeks. In addition, we would need to, rent special equipment to complete the work. Please review the attached memo from Greg Hoag regarding the impact these types of projects would have on our day to day City tasks. The Council had a number of questions regarding the crossing of the Valentine Lake Discharge channel located in the Ramsey County Open Space. Including; Are there ways to reduce the costs of the culvert? Could we install smaller pipes, or fill within the floodplain? Staff has requested that Beth Kunkel, Kimley- Horn, attend the W orksession to address any further questions the Council may have. Response: The proposed crossing of the Valentine Lake Discharge Channel is in an area where the floodplain and floodway boundaries are defined to be the same line. The floodplain and floodway for the entire discharge channel is identified in the 1981 Flood Insurance Study (FEMA). The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) rules contain the following provision for floodplain alteration. "If a 1 DO-year floodway has been defined according to FEMA procedures andfloodplain encroachment is subject to a DNR-approvedfloodplain ordinance, fill in the floodway is prohibited but fill within the flood fringe is permitted. "[Rule E, Item 3aJ To strictly meet the rule listed above, the only option to provide a pathway crossing of the floodway would be the construction of a pedestrian bridge that spanned the entire width of the floodway. This pedestrian bridge would need to be approximately 50' long by 14' wide. A typical prefabricated steel bridge of this size would cost approximately $150,000. Technically, this rule eliminates the option of providing a culvert crossing at the channel, as any culvert crossing would require some amount of fill to be placed within the defined floodway. In addition to the cost, staff did not feel a bridge structure was compatible with the natural feel of this open space. Kimley-Horn conducted a meeting with the RCWD and its consultant, Houston Engineering. The RCWD indicated that the intention of the rule is to eliminate any rise in the surface water elevation of the floodplain. The RCWD indicated that if the City can show a proposed crossing option that did not raise the water surface elevation, the RCWD would be able to permit the project in accordance with their rules. Conversely, if the culvert would result in some rise, the City could request a variance to the rule demonstrating hardship caused by a bridge. Similarly, FEMA regulations require demonstration of how much rise a culvert would have on the floodway and floodplain. The process for providing this information is via a request for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) for any improvements in a floodplain. If the City can show and verify that the project will cause absolutely no rise (0.00 Feet) in the floodplain elevation, then the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources can approve the project without a CLOMR and no involvement from FEMA. The most cost-effective option for this project to cross the Valentine Lake Discharge Channel is the construction of a culvert. To analyze the impacts a culvert would have on the channel's floodway water surface elevation, Kimley-Horn used the HEC-2 Water 2 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update—06/09/09 software was used in the hydraulic modeling completed as part of the FEMA Flood Insurance Study, and that existing model was available through the Minnesota DNR. Although the floodway is defined to be 45-50 feet wide,the actual channel is approximately 8 ft wide and 3 ft deep. To minimize disturbance of flow within the channel, an 8' x 4' culvert was modeled construc ted a foot below the channel to minimize any fill needed at the channel crossing. It was assumed that the existing ground elevations outside the channel,but still within the floodway, would be maintained in the proposed condition. Installing smaller culverts would not have adequate capacity for the design storm events. The modeling results showed a 0.07 ft (0.84 inch) rise in the floodway elevation from the existing condition from the proposed culvert crossing. Additional model iterations were completed to verify that different culvert size or shape options would not have less impact to the water surface elevation. Despite only a 0.07 ft(0.84 inch)rise in the water surface with the installation of an 8' x 4' culvert, it still exceeds the requirement of showing absolutely no rise in the floodway elevation. As a follow-up to the model results, Kimley-Hom met with both the Minnesota DNR and the RCWD to discuss results and explore any other options available. Suzanne Jiwani, a hydrologist with the Minnesota DNR indicated during our meeting that there may be a possibility to waive the need for a CLOMR, and just submit an official Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) after the project was complete. She though this may be possible due to the minimal change in water surface elevation for the project and the project would only affect the City and Ramsey County property(no structure impacts), both of whom are involved in the project already. Suzanne's inquiry to FEMA was met with the response that a CLOMR would be necessary, however given the small impact and no structure impacts, that the typical six-month review process usually needed to obtain a CLOMR could be expedited. The RCWD indicated,based on legal review, that they could not approve a permit if submitted with a project causing a rise in the floodway of 0.07 feet,without a variance request. They indicated that the City would have a good case to demonstrate hardship for a variance request. Also, that the modeling needed to go through the CLOMR/LOMR process to register the change in floodway elevation of the Valentine Lake Discharge Channel, could be used for RCWD variance review. Will Ramsey County Parks and Recreation participate in cost sharing regarding the culvert? Response: Ramsey County does not have additional capitol improvement funds available at this time to assist in the cost of constructing the creek crossing. However,the County is still committed to contributing $15,000 toward construction of this project crosswalk signal. Ramsey County Public Works has agreed to stripe the crosswalks, an estimated contribution of$1,800. Staff also explored the following options for this project: • Staff held a meeting with Ken Haider from Ramsey County Public Works to inquire about the possibility of utilizing existing shoulder to reduce or eliminate the need to construct a 3 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update—06/09/09 retaining wall along County Road E-2. The County was willing to work with the City on this, as long as the lane widths are not minimized. However, upon close review of the cross sections, realigning the curb in this section would not completely eliminate the need to construct a retaining wall. As a result, we did not pursue this option further. The retaining wall costs for the project are fully funded through the ARRA grant. • Michelle Olson and James Lehnhoff approached Boston Scientific shortly after the March work session to inquire if they might want to contribute toward the Safe Routes to School Project. Staff described the project and the budget concerns that had delayed the project. Boston Scientific responded that unfortunately, the Safe Routes Project does not meet the corporate guidelines to fit into their giving programs. However, they were very interested in contributing something to this worthwhile project. Therefore,they informed the City that they would like to contribute $10,000 toward the project. The only restriction on the donation is that it only be used to fund the SRTS project. Staff is planning on placing acceptance of this donation at the next City Council Meeting. • Michelle Olson also contacted Bethel University to inquire if they would be interested in contributing to the Safe Routes to School Project. Bruce Kunkel, Vice President of Student Services informed staff that they strongly support the project. However they are more interested in partnering with the City on the Old Highway 10/CP Rail Project in 2010. FINAL DESIGN Kimley- Horn has been working on the environmental aspects of this project, including wetlands, modeling, and permitting. What follows is a summary of the necessary additional storm water engineering work that Kimley-Horn has identified to get this project through final design and permitting. Permitting: Wetlands (DNR) The trail follows the south side of CR E2. Two wetlands,both identified as DNR protected waters, have been identified directly adjacent to or partially within the existing right of way. Both wetlands also have associated 100-year floodplains identified. It has been estimated that 4,000 square feet of impact is not avoidable to the eastern wetland, while impact to the western wetland can be avoided through construction of a 375 foot long retaining wall. Mitigation for the wetland will be required and can be accommodated via purchasing credits from a wetland bank at $1.50/square foot or $12,000 (2:1 replacement ratio required). Floodplain storage volume lost due to fill will also need to be replaced on-site via excavation. As a result a small amount of runoff volume needs to be directed to an infiltration or filtration area,which could be in the form of a small rain garden. Excavation of the rain garden could also provide the flood storage mitigation needed. Floodplain (FEMA) Two submittals are required for the FEMA process; a CLOMR which needs to be approved prior to project implementation, and a LOMR which is submitted after the project is completed for recording of the map change. The primary steps in completing a CLOMR include: • Hydraulic Modeling o Generating revised existing and proposed conditions floodway model 4 • Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update—06/09/09 o All modeling outputs are included in CLOMR appendices. • Floodplain Workmaps o Generating revised existing and proposed conditions FEMA regulatory floodplain workmaps. o Workmaps included as appendix in CLOMR. • FEMA Forms o The appropriate FEMA forms must be completed and attached to the CLOMR. • CLOMR Document o Report includes understanding of existing hydrology and hydraulics of study area, description of the proposed improvements, assumptions made in the modeling of those improvements, and summary of the impact the proposed improvements has on the floodplain and floodway. Typical fees for preparing a CLOMR application, conducting the required modeling, providing coordination with DNR and FEMA, and providing additional information as requested, is $7,500. The primary steps in completing a LOMR include: • Coordinate As-built Survey o We have assumed City staff will complete an as-built survey of the project improvements. o Kimley-Horn will work with City staff to produce an as-built plan verifying the improvements were built as specified within the CLOMR. • FEMA Forms o The appropriate FEMA forms will need to be re-submitted with the LOMR. • LOMR Document o The report text will be updated showing the proposed improvements as completed and the new LOMR document will be submitted. Assuming the proposed improvements are constructed consistent with the plan submitted with the CLOMR, typical fees for preparing a LOMR application, providing coordination with DNR and FEMA, and providing additional information as requested, is $2,500. Permit Coordination Given the number of permits required for this project, it is anticipated that there will be time needed to coordinate with each agency regarding submittals, reviews, additional information needs, and updates. This additional cross coordination between agencies may require up to $4,000 before all permits are issued. Plan Preparation and Coordination Based on the submittal requirements of the RCWD, DNR, FEMA and the COE, the City's plan set needs additional notes and details added. The following describes a number of the additional items that are needed: • Pathway Design Coordination o Coordination of North Pathway design with hydraulic modeling to be included in CLOMR and RCWD submittals. 5 • Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update—06/09/09 • Erosion Control Plan Coordination o Coordination with City design staff to update plan sheets showing erosion control devices and plans consistent with agency expectations. • Culvert Design Plans o Kimley-Horn will provide the City with the following plan sheets to insert into plan set and project documents. • Three (3)Modified Mn/DOT Standard Culvert Template Sheets • General Plan and Elevation Sheet • Railing Detail Sheet The effort needed to continue this coordination effort and produce the culvert plans is expected to require $12,500. Permit Application Fees The following permit fees have been identified for this project. • FEMA Conditional Letter of Map Revision—$4,400 • Rice Creek Watershed District—No Permit Fee • Army Corps of Engineers—No Permit Fee • Minnesota DNR—$500 • FEMA Letter of Map Revision— $4,800 Final Design Cost Summary Kimley- Horn Permit fees Wetland Replacement N/A $12,000 CLOMR $7,500 $4,400 LOMR $2,500 $4,800 Plan preparation & coordination $12,500 N/A Permit Coordination $4,000 $500 $26,500.00 $21,700.00 To date, Engineering costs for this project have been $34,868.65, of which $4,509.71 were for the Perry Park portion of the project. Typically Engineering fees run between 15 to 20% of project cost. For estimating purposes, staff uses 17% for these fees. BUDGET The following is a breakdown of the budget for the Elmer L. Andersen Memorial Trail: SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS SRTS Estimate Perry Park Estimate Pathway Construction $179,921.00 $50,500 Retaining Walls $66,675.00 $28,270 Driveway Gates $20,000.00 $0 Drainage $95,305.00 $6,700 Crosswalks $1,800.00 $0 Crosswalk signals $15,000.00 $0 Hydrant relocation $50,175.00 $0 Construction Total $428,876.00 $85,470.00 6 • Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update—06/09/09 • Non-Infrastructure $1,000 N/A Engineering(17%) $72,908.00 $14,530 Permits $21,700.00 N/A Project Total $524,484.00 $100,000.00 We have been very successful in obtaining grants for this project. Here is a summary of the proposed funding for this project: SUMMARY OF PROJECT FUNDING SRTS Perry Park DNR Grant N/A $24,000 Safe Routes to School $175,000 N/A ARRA Grant $238,076 $50,250 Ramsey County $16,800 N/A Boston Scientific $10,000 N/A Surface Water Management Fund* $48,200 N/A Park Improvement Fund $36,408 $25,750 Total $524,484.00 $100,000.00 *Staff has included a memo for Council review from Sue Iverson, Finance Director in regards to the current Surface Water Management Fund balance. NEXT STEPS Deb Bloom and Michelle Olson met with MnDOT, Federal Aid, on Monday, June 1st to discuss the next steps for this project. In order to qualify for the ARRA funds, the Elmer L. Andersen Trail Connection Project must have all required approvals by November 13, 2009. The following items must be approved to meet this deadline. • Project Memorandum: The City has an approved Project Memorandum that needs to be amended and re-approved. The amendments include information on the DNR Perry Park Trail Connection, the FEMA map revisions, and DNR approvals. This should take staff around 10 hours to complete. • Right of Way Certificate: The County will need to provide the City with a resolution for constructing this project on County right- of- way and park land. We will work with the County on getting this done in the next 2 months. • Final Plans & Specifications: The plans for the Safe Routes portion of this project are at 90%, the plans for Perry Park are at 30%. Roseville Engineering staff estimates that it will take about 3 weeks to complete final plans and specifications for this project. This will need to be coordinated with Kimley-Horn for the culvert portion of the project. • All permits from FEMA, DNR, RCWD, and MPCA must be issued. Kimley-Horn estimates that we need at least 3 months to accomplish this. Work on the CLOMR should begin as soon as possible to ensure that we meet our deadline. 7 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update—06/09/09 In order to ensure that Federal Aid has adequate time to review and approve these items, staff has set a deadline of September 18 for submittal to Mn/DOT Federal Aid for initial review of the first three items. Staff is confident that we will meet the funding deadline. Once the project has all of the required approvals,the project will be advertised for bid. Staff is anticipating construction in early spring 2010. The entire project should take 8-12 weeks. The only other deadline is for the DNR Grant funds; they must be utilized by June 30, 2010 and cannot be extended. The project specifications would stipulate that the Perry Park portion of this project be completed by June 12, 2010. This is to ensure that we meet the DNR Grant deadline. 8 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update - 06/09/09 Surface Profiles software, available from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The same software was used in the hydraulic modeling completed as part of the FEMA Flood Insurance Study, and that existing model was available through the Minnesota DNR. Although the floodway is defined to be 45-50 feet wide, the actual channel is approximately 8 ft wide and 3 ft deep. To minimize disturbance of flow within the channel, an 8' x 4' culvert was modeled constructed a foot below the channel to minimize any fill needed at the channel crossing. It was assumed that the existing ground elevations outside the channel, but still within the floodway, would be maintained in the proposed condition. Installing smaller culverts would not have adequate capacity for the design storm events. The modeling results showed a 0.07 ft (0.84 inch) rise in the floodway elevation from the existing condition from the proposed culvert crossing. Additional model iterations were completed to verify that different culvert size or shape options would not have less impact to the water surface elevation. Despite only a 0.07 ft (0.84 inch) rise in the water surface with the installation of an 8' x 4' culvert, it still exceeds the requirement of showing absolutely no rise in the floodway elevation. As a follow-up to the model results, Kimley-Horn met with both the Minnesota DNR and the RCWD to discuss results and explore any other options available. Suzanne Jiwani, a hydrologist with the Minnesota DNR indicated during our meeting that there may be a possibility to waive the need for a CLOMR, and just submit an official Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) after the project was complete. She though this may be possible due to the minimal change in water surface elevation for the proj ect and the project would only affect the City and Ramsey County property (no structure impacts), both of whom are involved in the project already. Suzanne's inquiry to FEMA was met with the response that a CLOMR would be necessary, however given the small impact and no structure impacts, that the typical six-month review process usually needed to obtain a CLOMR could be expedited. The RCWD indicated, based on legal review, that they could not approve a permit if submitted with a project causing a rise in the floodway of 0.07 feet, without a variance request. They indicated that the City would have a good case to demonstrate hardship for a variance request. Also, that the modeling needed to go through the CLOMR/LOMR process to register the change in floodway elevation of the Valentine Lake Discharge Channel, could be used for RCWD variance review. Will Ramsey County Parks and Recreation participate in cost sharing regarding the culvert? Response: Ramsey County does not have additional capitol improvement funds available at this time to assist in the cost of constructing the creek crossing. However, the County is still committed to contributing $15,000 toward construction of this project crosswalk signal. Ramsey County Public Works has agreed to stripe the crosswalks, an estimated contribution of $1,800. Staff also explored the following options for this project: 3 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update - 06/09/09 · Staff held a meeting with Ken Haider from Ramsey County Public Works to inquire about the possibility of utilizing existing shoulder to reduce or eliminate the need to construct a retaining wall along County Road E-2. The County was willing to work with the City on this, as long as the lane widths are not minimized. However, upon close review of the cross sections, realigning the curb in this section would not completely eliminate the need to construct a retaining wall. As a result, we did not pursue this option further. The retaining wall costs for the project are fully funded through the ARRA grant. · Michelle Olson and James Lehnhoff approached Boston Scientific shortly after the March work session to inquire if they might want to contribute toward the Safe Routes to School Project. Staff described the project and the budget concerns that had delayed the project. Boston Scientific responded that unfortunately, the Safe Routes Project does not meet the corporate guidelines to fit into their giving programs. However, they were very interested in contributing something to this worthwhile project. Therefore, they informed the City that they would like to contribute $10,000 toward the project. The only restriction on the donation is that it only be used to fund the SRTS project. Staff is planning on placing acceptance of this donation at the next City Council Meeting. · Michelle Olson also contacted Bethel University to inquire if they would be interested in contributing to the Safe Routes to School Project. Bruce Kunkel, Vice President of Student Services informed staff that they strongly support the project. However they are more interested in partnering with the City on the Old Highway 10/CP Rail Project in 2010. FINAL DESIGN Kimley- Horn has been working on the environmental aspects of this project, including wetlands, modeling, and permitting. What follows is a summary of the necessary additional storm water engineering work that Kimley-Horn has identified to get this project through final design and permitting. Permitting: Wetlands (DNR) The trail follows the south side of CR E2. Two wetlands, both identified as DNR protected waters, have been identified directly adjacent to or partially within the existing right of way. Both wetlands also have associated 100-year floodplains identified. It has been estimated that 4,000 square feet of impact is not avoidable to the eastern wetland, while impact to the western wetland can be avoided through construction of a 375 foot long retaining wall. Mitigation for the wetland will be required and can be accommodated via purchasing credits from a wetland bank at $1.50/square foot or $12,000 (2:1 replacement ratio required). Floodplain storage volume lost due to fill will also need to be replaced on-site via excavation. As a result a small amount of runoff volume needs to be directed to an infiltration or filtration area, which could be in the form of a small rain garden. Excavation of the rain garden could also provide the flood storage mitigation needed. Floodplain (FEMA) Two submittals are required for the FEMA process; a CLOMR which needs to be approved prior to project implementation, and a LOMR which is submitted after the project is completed for recording of the map change. The primary steps in completing a CLOMR include: 4 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update - 06/09/09 . Hydraulic Modeling o Generating revised existing and proposed conditions floodway model o All modeling outputs are included in CLOMR appendices. · Floodplain W orkmaps o Generating revised existing and proposed conditions FEMA regulatory floodplain workmaps. o W orkmaps included as appendix in CLOMR. . FEMA Forms o The appropriate FEMA forms must be completed and attached to the CLOMR. . CLOMR Document o Report includes understanding of existing hydrology and hydraulics of study area, description of the proposed improvements, assumptions made in the modeling of those improvements, and summary of the impact the proposed improvements has on the floodplain and floodway. Typical fees for preparing a CLOMR application, conducting the required modeling, providing coordination with DNR and FEMA, and providing additional information as requested, is $7,500. The primary steps in completing a LOMR include: . Coordinate As-built Survey o We have assumed City staffwill complete an as-built survey of the project improvements. o Kimley- Horn will work with City staff to produce an as-built plan verifying the improvements were built as specified within the CLOMR. . FEMA Forms o The appropriate FEMA forms will need to be re-submitted with the LOMR. . LOMR Document o The report text will be updated showing the proposed improvements as completed and the new LOMR document will be submitted. Assuming the proposed improvements are constructed consistent with the plan submitted with the CLOMR, typical fees for preparing a LOMR application, providing coordination with DNR and FEMA, and providing additional information as requested, is $2,500. Permit Coordination Given the number of permits required for this project, it is anticipated that there will be time needed to coordinate with each agency regarding submittals, reviews, additional information needs, and updates. This additional cross coordination between agencies may require up to $4,000 before all permits are issued. Plan Preparation and Coordination Based on the submittal requirements of the RCWD, DNR, FEMA and the COE, the City's plan set needs additional notes and details added. The following describes a number of the additional items that are needed: . Pathway Design Coordination 5 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update - 06/09/09 o Coordination of North Pathway design with hydraulic modeling to be included in CLOMR and RCWD submittals. . Erosion Control Plan Coordination o Coordination with City design staff to update plan sheets showing erosion control devices and plans consistent with agency expectations. . Culvert Design Plans o Kimley-Horn will provide the City with the following plan sheets to insert into plan set and project documents. · Three (3) Modified Mn/DOT Standard Culvert Template Sheets · General Plan and Elevation Sheet · Railing Detail Sheet The effort needed to continue this coordination effort and produce the culvert plans is expected to require $12,500. Permit Application Fees The following permit fees have been identified for this project. · FEMA Conditional Letter of Map Revision - $4,400 · Rice Creek Watershed District - No Permit Fee · Army Corps of Engineers - No Permit Fee . Minnesota DNR -$500 . FEMA Letter of Map Revision - $4,800 Final Design Cost Summary Kimley- Horn Permit fees Wetland Replacement N/A $12,000 CLOMR $7,500 $4,400 LOMR $2,500 $4,800 Plan preparation & coordination $12,500 N/A Permit Coordination $4,000 $500 $26,500.00 $21,700.00 To date, Engineering costs for this project have been $34,868.65, of which $4,509.71 were for the Perry Park portion of the project. Typically Engineering fees run between 15 to 20% of project cost. For estimating purposes, staffuses 17% for these fees. BUDGET The following is a breakdown of the budget for the Elmer L. Andersen Memorial Trail: SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS SRTS Estimate Perry Park Estimate Pathway Construction $179,921.00 $50,500 Retaining Walls $66,675.00 $28,270 Driveway Gates $20,000.00 $0 Drainage $95,305.00 $6,700 Crosswalks $1,800.00 $0 Crosswalk signals $15,000.00 $0 Hydrant relocation $50,175.00 $0 6 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update - 06/09/09 Construction Total $428,876.00 $85,470.00 Non - Infrastructure $1,000 N/A Engineering (17%) $72,908.00 $14,530 Permits $21,700.00 N/A Project Total $524,484.00 $100,000.00 We have been very successful in obtaining grants for this project. Here is a summary of the proposed funding for this project: SUMMARY OF PROJECT FUNDING SRTS Perry Park DNR Grant N/A $24,000 Safe Routes to School $175,000 N/A ARRA Grant $238,076 $50,250 Ramsey County $16,800 N/A Boston Scientific $10,000 N/A Surface Water Management Fund* $48,200 N/A Park Improvement Fund $36,408 $25,750 Total $524,484.00 $100,000.00 *Staffhas included a memo for Council review from Sue Iverson, Finance Director in regards to the current Surface Water Management Fund balance. NEXT STEPS Deb Bloom and Michelle Olson met with MnDOT, Federal Aid, on Monday, June 1st to discuss the next steps for this project. In order to qualify for the ARRA funds, the Elmer L. Andersen Trail Connection Project must have all required approvals by November 13,2009. The following items must be approved to meet this deadline. · Project Memorandum: The City has an approved Project Memorandum that needs to be amended and re-approved. The amendments include information on the DNR Perry Park Trail Connection, the FEMA map revisions, and DNR approvals. This should take staff around 10 hours to complete. · Right of Way Certificate: The County will need to provide the City with a resolution for constructing this project on County right- of- way and park land. We will work with the County on getting this done in the next 2 months. · Final Plans & Specifications: The plans for the Safe Routes portion of this project are at 90%, the plans for Perry Park are at 30%. Roseville Engineering staff estimates that it will take about 3 weeks to complete final plans and specifications for this project. This will need to be coordinated with Kimley-Horn for the culvert portion of the project. · All permits from FEMA, DNR, RCWD, and MPCA must be issued. Kimley-Horn estimates that we need at least 3 months to accomplish this. Work on the CLOMR should begin as soon as possible to ensure that we meet our deadline. 7 Safe Routes to School Project/DNR Project Update - 06/09/09 In order to ensure that Federal Aid has adequate time to review and approve these items, staffhas set a deadline of September 18 for submittal to Mn/DOT Federal Aid for initial review of the first three items. Staff is confident that we will meet the funding deadline. Once the project has all of the required approvals, the project will be advertised for bid. Staffis anticipating construction in early spring 2010. The entire project should take 8-12 weeks. The only other deadline is for the DNR Grant funds; they must be utilized by June 30,2010 and cannot be extended. The project specifications would stipulate that the Perry Park portion of this project be completed by June 12, 2010. This is to ensure that we meet the DNR Grant deadline. 8 ~ MEMORANDUM DA TE: June 9, 2009 TO: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Greg Hoag, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Follow up regarding options for reducing costs for the Safe Routes to School Trail Project BACKGROUND At the March 16, 2009 City Council Work Session, discussion was held regarding options for reducing costs for the Safe Routes to School Trail Project. I have been asked to provide some information regarding the impacts of using our Public Works Maintenance Employees to complete some of the needed tasks for this project. Based on my understanding of Council's questions regarding the construction of the retaining wall and the moving of the fire hydrants I estimate that these projects would require approximately six weeks to complete utilizing a crew of 4-5 full time employees. This equates to approximately 1200 hours of staff time. The loss of this 1200 hours looked at a different way equates to our entire full time crew working only on these projects for almost an entire month. If we were to complete a project such as this many special projects that we normally would complete in the summer as well as our regular routine daily and weekly tasks would not be able to be completed as needed. These tasks and projects include: street patching and related repairs, vehicle and equipment maintenance and repairs, cleaning and televising of sanitary sewers, water meter reading and repairs, watering of trees and gardens (if no rain), lift station daily checks and gopher one utility locate requests, buckthorn pickup, as well as providing direction and assistance to the seasonal employees who complete lTIuch of our parks related work in the summer. It should also be noted that during any given week we operate with less than a full crew of our full time employees due to scheduled vacations. While we believe we are technically capable to complete small construction projects, any longer term construction projects have an impact on our ability to deliver regular Public Works services. .. ."HIEES MEMORANDUM DATE: June 10, 2009 TO: Michelle Olson FROM: Sue Iverson, Finance Director/Treasurer SUBJECT: Surface Water Management Funds In response to your request on the Surface Water Management Fund balance, there are funds available in sufficient amounts at this time. Current estimate of the cash balance available would be: Beginning Cash Balance Budgeted 2009 Revenues Budgeted 2009 Operating Exp 2009 Glenarden PMP 2010 PMP Engr 2008 PMP costs 2009 Storm Pond Maintenance Erosion Corr of Old City Hall Trail Estimated Cash Balance after CIP $553,000 427,660 303,757 400,000 11,000 1 ,000 50,000 20~000 $194,903 Please let me know if you have further questions.