HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-06-1998 Council Packet Special Meeting^ r
h-
:>•
P fw
^On''^Cu
5V(j
^tTy /9o
Oa
'<?
AGENDA FOR SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR
TUESDAY, JANUARY 6,1998,8:00 A.M.
ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA
(*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City
Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are
available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet.
ROLL CALL
1.Resolution Endorsing Candidates for Appointment to the Minnehaha CreeU Watershed
District
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
C'x 6'
%v
%
DATE; January 2,
ITEM NO:
Department Approval:
Name RonMoorse
Title City Administrator
Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section:
City Administrator's
Report
Item Description:
Resolution Endorsing Candidates for Appointment to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Many of the cities in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have joined together to undertake a
number of cooperative activities in an effort to improve the working relationship between the
Minneheiha Creek Watershed District and the cities located within the district. One of the
cooperative activities was to interview a number of candidates for appointment to positions on the
District's Board of Managers. The interview panel was made up of representatives of 8 cities in the
district. This panel has selected a slate of candidates for endorsement to the County Board for
appointment. The panel is requesting each of the cities of the district to adopt a resolution endorsing
the candidates selected by the panel.
The candidates are as follows:
I. Hennepin County Candidates
A. Upper Watershed
1. Patrick Maloney (top ranksd candidate in upper watershed)
2. Warren McNeil
B. Lower Watershed
1. Jim Calkins (top ranked candidate in lower watershed)
2. RonBaumbach
II. Carver County Candidate
A. Jerome Keehr
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to itdopt a resolution endorsing the candidates listed above for appointment to the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District.
i }
r
DATE:
TO:
December 22,1997
Q/ ^yf
Cities of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
FROM. Steering Committee for Cities of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed district
SUBJECT: Resolution for consideration by Cities in the District
Attached is a corrected copy of the proposed resolution for endorsement of candidates
Again, Piease consider the attached resolution no later than the first Council meetina i
STEERING COMMITTEE and INTERVIEW PANEL MEMBER:
Howard Bennis, Mayor
City of Deephaven Mike Eastling, Public Works Director
City of Richfield
Fred Richards
City of Edina Terry Schwalbe, Project Coordinator
City of Wayzata
Ed Shukle, City Manager
City of Mound Phil Zietlow, Council Member
City of Medina
INTERVIEW PANEL MEMBER
Judd Mowry, Council Member
City of Tonka Bay Lee Gustafson. City Engineer
City of Minnetonka
MJE:sdr
Attachments
STEERING COMMITTEE
F JR THE CITIES OF THE
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
STEERING COMMITTEE and INTERVIEW PANEL MEMBER:
HOWARD BENNIS, MAYOR
CITY OF DEEPHAVEN
20225 COTTAGEWOOD ROAD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-1877
(home) 475-249C (work) 474-4755 fax: 474-1274
MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIR.
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH
RICHFIELD MN 55423
(work) 861-9792 fax: 861-9749
FRED RICHARDS
7225 FLEETWOOD DRIVE
EDINA MN 55435
(home) 941-7626 (work) 925-7573 fax: 925-7553
TERRY SCHWALBE
PROJECT COORDINATOR
600 EAST RICESl .^EET
WAYZATA MN 55391-1799
(home) 448-7048 (work) 404-5312 fax: 404-5318
ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND MN 55364-1687
(work) 472-0600 fax: 474-0620
PHIL ZIETLOW, COUNCIL MEMBER
2052 COUNTY ROAD 24
MEDINA MN 55340
(work) 540-3435 fax: 540-2425
INTERVIEW PANEL MEMBER:
JUDD MOWRY
TONKA BAY COUNCIL MEMBER
fax: 474-6538
LEE GUSTAFSON. CITY ENGINEER
14600 MINNETONKA BLVD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343
(work) 939-8200
December 17.1997
nirunrm tinm mm iiiiiMiitmi i mi ....................... - ,
RESOLUTION ENDORSING CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City Councils of many of the cities lying wholly or partly within the
boundaries of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (the District) have adopted resolutions
expressing concerns about the governance and conduct of activities of the District and resolving to
work cooperatively with other cities in the District to monitor and oversee the activities of the
District; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has determined that it would be in the
best interests of the public to appoint new members to the District who will provide a fresh
perspective, who will work in reasonable cooperation with the public and affected governmental
umts, and who will restore the faith and confidence of the public and the cities in the District, while
still accomplishing the objectives of the District; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 1 03D.311 , Subd. 3 provides that watershed district
managers are to be selected from a list of persons nominated by one or more of the cities and towns
affected; and
WHEREAS, a number of the cities lying within the District, acting through a Steering
committee, have solicited nomination from affected cities and have interviewed candidates for
appointment to the District; and the Steering Committee has found a number of well qualified
candidates who are capable of providing leadership in establishing prudent, consistent, reasonable
and fiscally responsible governance of the District:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ^SOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono that
the Council endorses the following candidates for appointment to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District and urges the County Boards of Hennepin and Carver Counties to make appointments from
the following list of candidates giving due regard to representation of the various hydrological areas
within the District as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 103D, Subd. 3(C):
Hennepin County candidates:
Upper Watershed:
1 . Patrick Maloney (top ranked candidate in Upper Watershed)
2. Warren McNeil
Lower Watershed:
1 . Jim Calkins (top ranked candidate in Lower Watershed)
2. RonBaumbach
Carver County candidate:
1. Jerome Keehr (top ranked candidate in Carver County)
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a special meeting this 6th
day of January, 1998.
Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor
ATTEST:Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator
Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk
1
r
received
Dear Friends of the Minn. DNR Luce^^.ine^ "/rai
Cl IY OF OROiVo
16010 5th Av^ N
Plymouth, MN 55^1
Jan. 1. 1
0/ry,JSg'8
Please find enclosed copies of articles In the Dec. 31, 1997 “Plyrnoiftl^Am
Sailor Newspaper". The DNR is requesting public comments on their Dr^
Plan to upgrade the 20+ year old Luce Line Trail before the DNR plan becomes
FINAL. Please read the articles from Barbara Burgum of the DNR and myself.
I believe the Luce Line Trail is a very important resource to the west metro
area. The Luce Line Trail needs vour and vour friends support.
The Luce Line Trail is a STATE trail, not a local trail. The west metro, area
should have the right to a first class trail like the Gateway Trail in north St.
Paul and the rest of the STATE Trails. The Luce Line is the ^mlyDNR trail
that is limestone, all of the other nine or ten multiple use DNR state trails
are asphalt. The Luce Line trail should be the best in the west metro.
The Luce Line should be asphalt to allow in-line skaters, wheelchair and
bikers other than mountain bikes to share the trail with other users.
What I am asking you to do are a) call, write, fax or e-mail vour comments to
the DNR, b) make copies for your friends and c) interested parties. Mail
comments to Barbara Burgum, DNR Trails & Waterways Unit, Box 52, 500
Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4052. Fax to 297-5475, e-mailed to
laurle,young@dnr.state.mn.us or telephoned to 296-6693.
The 20+ year old Luce Line State Trail is well worth our support for our
children and grandchildren. It will be another 20 years before we of the west
metro has another chance tell the DNR what we want.
The DNR responds to the public they are serving, if you don’t comment, the
other interests have already made their comments know.
Thank you for your help. It is worth a little of your time!! We need to be
timely, so do it soon.
incerelyu^ours.
RaymoncTt. Jorgensen
473-5539
2 S £ I ^ « g ! g S “ i‘o ;tA CJ■ ses i; £ c w a « 2-^ S c^ c.f^3 P o c ri?c '•' '-^ o r- to =Lo S 3C. S S G32 *E3•n w 0’S
<0 . fl) a
sl'^ sa- a *o o n> a X-s* w ^3 2CT »^ S I I1^ Cl- 2 pCC (9 C CL
C CL
*-l rt,Oq (t - **c e cr r;, a c 2^a m* rt o
tr* Ci waa* cr tt a o < c cr»C/i0^0W ±*0 p 50 a-oI*c ^•a n a-^ po^ a^ o «>
« o
r*c P
O ZL.o ?r
KO C H-c , cr*- O 1-3 -I « Kn C > a-2:3 3 52 ^ ^ 2 ^ o tfl p a-*§ B. ‘O o*P I 3 a • a- o. c5*6 S'Sg'|g'§ §a6-gp*^»&-C *n ^ Ji) p CLr^ •’S •§e s," 22* ^ .2 '"< 3o & •n o'g « g kjn:5 b y'go 2? ® O' a ^ ^5 €-► p B,3-<t n^ a« si 3. <<22 3 =■•< O 1- f»ii5So £T. p 2 ^ oa ^ ^ a i-<*o S-BS.SeeQ-2-gS2.I2:2®^ 5 ’ 85 ST(T) OC P^ -1 a ® E.0n o c^ OC S“ 3-2h ^n P o a “O oa^8= ^ ^
o £<g
?1
33
Oa
a* cr B^ l-’S B W2 Ou0>y ^ ci fji
3 *o 2 *< 5 ” Q. a.
g S' ® a o 2 ?? ?ras SrS
w?a t« r^ 3a S't/joc•“!no(/)ar pO o
5 V ps.3.1
(^ CL I
03r|3iyj- w 6>o 3
,- i-
a. P— *-i
p53•O pS'ff => * « 2^ 3'* W P cn
B'g
a--oo^ S-Kj-. qj ^cr o g'^ =c c a* ^ w o- a^o« 2 »» !!»?■|sr^ 2 o O< *o ^S-B.^^00
j3 a '•
2^ o o r- a c
SODaOf =a cn'<§ HiBI0 3XJ01 o a o^ So
Luce Line: Resurfacing trail is the main issue
From Poge 1
meetings concerned surfaces for the trail,
Burgum said.
The use of asphalt or limestone as a
trail surface seemed to be supported
equally, she said.
West of Stubb’s Bay Road, the trail is
open to snowmobilers, but a number of
people in that area would prefer to elim*
inate the use of motorized vehicles on the
trail, Burgum said.
Also, many snowmobile owners oppose
paving the trail because they would not
be able to put metal-carbide studs on the
tracks of their vehicles. While the studs
improve handling, they damage paved
surfaces. In 1997 a state law was passed
banning their use on paved trails, she
said.
Another issue discussed at the meet
ing included letting both horses and bi
cycles use the trail east of Stubb’s Bay,
Burgum .said.
The bicyclists thought they could
share the trail and respect the needs of
horses and riders, but the people with
horses feared shared use, she said.
According tu the DNR draft proposal,
short-term plans for the Luce Line in
clude:
• Rehabilitating the existing lime
stone surface from Plymouth to Winsted
Lake.
• Paving short segments west of Win
sted to meet local needs. Where asphalt
is used, a parallel treadway for sno'
biles will be provided.
• Continuing to test experimental sur
face treatments on short segments of the
trail.
Long term proposals, according to the
DNR draft proposal, include:
• Paving more surfaces if damage by
snowmobiles with studded tracks can be
eliminated.
• Retaining a limestone surface on the
main treadway from Plymouth to CSAH
127 (two miles east of Watertown).
How To
Comment
Comments can be mailed to Bar
bara Burgum, DNR Trails and Wa
terways Unit, Box 52, 500
Lafayette Road, St. Paul,
MN55155-4052. Comments also
can be faxed to 297-5475, e-mailcd
to laurie.young@dnr.state.mn.us or
telephoned to 296-6693.
ITT
I ,rro
nrwTinii4r»]mmnn\’A fYiwti ii«
piliA ravjiiTiiim:^
1?;TI kV/T\7:«i ninrtHii sT!/0:Vi
*1:10 or:vrnTiVim«r«T«•^clirniT;^OlliJVim*!
[•■.vTor*
Fill TAW*Fillet]
Kil I i fi TcI.'T Iio I Vi 1:1 IQ G
mill fin ■ I iTi l« LiMO ■III I
rt¥o jft]
r:l
F:i<rnn«Tii*i
rrnr:l:W'Ll:l: . iTil
u^ iT«in r* ■ izm t ^.iii # fiwui iitrim: vii •TiTcf.mvi inv.in o •:*
• fit Bill nM r*i m n txm
:UOiBI|*Tt|tfirirJ
r: jmmvNim: m a mKi]
01 Clil
I) MOO*
TrrT.i4
♦ o wn. . io«OMWOCOfl
iOrfO«T»T:F:'
• WT:l*Ii
aa<roiT-*:r;
r«riwuii
•J *0 f f ■:T«
I l\
lought
on taken on the Luce
:Iude additional input
e west-metro area and
representative percent-
bikers, in-line skaters
eelchair users in the
surface the limestone
IS soon as possible,
ke and level the lime-
rface three to four times
The DNR stopped this
about eight years ago
lie surface became so
Intain the trail or sur-
ith asphalt.
lond E. Jorgensen is a
of Plymouth.
COUNCIL WORK SESSION
8:00 A.M., TUESDAY, JANUARY 6,1998
AGENDA
X
%0
1 . Femdale Road North Reconstruction Project-Review of Feasibility Report
2. Cooperative Police Services Agreement with the City of Long Lake
3. Cooperative Animal Control Services and Cooperative Animal Impound Facility
n^¥ti •liV¥t RTiiTiira^MCS
O ilitWt rtTi¥t]
rtiiii rtHi
rtici
r«¥.Tir«i r«¥3im
: •
[tJlWUllHfWlElJ
•Y'.llTtl
[•racm iVniTiVt]
^ ft n uiTiTn liTunM
•1W1
rt»f]
TTFiriLiMiais
rmirtit]
^ r
T
COUNCIL mestinq
JAN 6 199J
January 2,1998
CITY OFORONO
To: Mayor and City Council Members
From: Gregory Gappa, Director of Public Services
Subject: Council Work Session for Femdale Road North Reconstruction Project
Attached you will find a draft copy of the feasibility report that has been completed for this project.
The Cities of Orono and Plymouth are working on a joint project for the reconstruction of Femdale
Road North. Both Cities have retained Bonestroo engineers to prepare plans and specifications for
this project. The City of Plymouth has agreed to be the lead City for this project, so this report is
addressed to the Plymouth Mayor and City Council.
A public hearing is scheduled for 6:30 P.M. at the January 12th City Council meeting. A meeting
notice has been published and letters sent to all of the residents served by Femdale Road. There are
approximately 100 homes in Orono adjacent to Femdale Road.
Proposed Road Design
The pavement on this road has reached the end of it’s service life, and complete reconstmction of the
road is necessary to provide for a standard 10 ton pavement design. The proposed concept is to
constmct a 36' wide urban street section with concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer. The urban
design with curb and gutter provides for a more efficient drainage system, minimizes the need for
additional right-of way, and significantly reduces tree removal. The proposed width provides for two
12' wide travel lanes and all' foot wide center turning lane. The turning lane will increase safety
to neighborhood residents by allowing left turning movements without disrupting through traffic
flow. An 8' wide bituminous walkway is proposed along the east side of the road.
Estimated Project Costs
The costs for this project were allocated based on Orono and Plymouth splitting the cost for the
street reconstruction, and storm sewer improvements along the border between Orono and Plymouth.
The City of Plymouth would pay for the trail along the east side of the road. The City of Orono
would pay for all of the improvements along the section of road between the Cities of Orono and
Wavzata.
r
A tabulation of the estimated costs from the feasibility study is shown below.
Orono Plymouth
A. Street improvements Orono/ Plymouth $432,709 $432,709
B. Street improvements Orono/ Wayzata $225,137
C. Trail improvements $77,742
D. Storm sewer improvements Orono/ Plymouth $61,134 $61,134
E. Storm sewer improvements Orono/Wayzata $69,497
Total estimated project costs $788,477 $571,585
The use of Municipal State Aid funding by the Cities of Orono and Plymouth is proposed for this
prqect. ^e City of Wayzata has a population of less than 5,000 people, and is not eligible for State
id funding. This proposed cost split is based on the fact that an annexation between Orono and
Wayzata was recently completed, so the entire Femdale Road Right of Way is within the City of
Orono. This annexation was completed to allow for State Aid funding eligibility on the entire length
of the project. The total project length is 7,000' with 5,600' between Orono/Plymouth and 1 400'
between Orono/Wayzata.
Staff has requested the city of Plymouth consider a cost split that is closer to a 50/50 split. Orono's
annexation of right-of-way from Wayzata enabled MSA funds to be used for the Femdale Road
^oject. This provided both Oiono and Plymouth with a funding source for the project. Because
rono s MSA funds are far short of meeting the city's future MSA road reconstmetion needs a larger
financial contribution by Plymouth would be very beneficial.
A summary of the City's MSA funding is attached. The City can advance encumber up to $500,000
of MSA funds interest free and repay this amount from future annual allotments of MSA funds. A
resolution reserving advance encumbered funds is on the agenda for the January 12th Council
meeting.
The advance encumbrance of MSA funds would leave a $28,000 deficit in the MSA fund. This
deficit could be covered by an internal loan from the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund (PIR)
which has a balance of $127,000 in the Road and Bridge Account.
Engineers will be at the Council work session to discuss this project.
STREET^CLP.
Watertown Road Qilvert
1997
CITY OF ORONO
MSA STREETS
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM
1998 1999
(West of Leaf SO
Old C^tal Bay Road
Bridge Approach
Brown Road
firm to Co. Rd. 6)
TH12 Safety Improvements
(Willow Dr to S. Brown Rd.)
CSA.R6(Rightof Way)
$81,000
$3,000
$91,000
$9,000
CSA.R 15 (ROW East End)
Stubbs Bay Road
(CaRd.84toTH12)
Willow Drive, including overlay
(TH12 to Co. Rd. 6)
Femdale Road
(Ca Rd. 6 to 1-394)
Willow Drive (Railroad Bridge)
Watertown Road
(Willow Drive to Stubbs Bay)
TOTAL
MSA Budget (Carry over)
MSA Allotment
BALANCE
2000
$600,000
$170,000
$800,000
TO BE COMPLETED
$184,000
716,000
2.55,000
$787,000
$1,570,000
787,000
255,000
($528.000;
2001 2002
BY MNDCT IN 2001
(.528,000
255,000
(273,000;
155,000
(1273.0001 ($18.000'
2003
$0
$0
(18,000;
155,000
.$2.i7,(X)0
2004
$0
137,000
155,000
.$491000
2005
$0
492,000
255,000
BEYOND
2005
747,000
155,000
$747.0001 $1.002.000
1,002,000
155,000
$1.157.000
$1,100.000
$600,000
$L650,000
$3350,000
MSA-aP
updated 7/16/97
1
Report For
Ferndale Road
Street and Storm Sewer Improvements
Project No. 607
Plymouth, Minnesota
December, 1997
FUe No. 70303
^ M Bonestroo
l^osene
Anderlik&
|\|| Associates
Engineers & Architects
Bonestroo. Rosene. Anderlik and Associates. Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Bquai Opportunity Bmployer
Principals: Otto G Bonestroo. PE. • Joseph C Anderlik. PE. • Mjirvin L SoryaU. PE. •
Richard E. Turner, PE. • Glenn R. Cook. PE. • Robert G. Schunicht. PE. • Jerry A. Bourdon PB •
Robert W. Rosene. PE. and Susan M. Eberiin. C PA.. Senior Consultants
Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford. PE. • Keith A. Gordon. PE. • Robert R. Pfefferie PE •
Richard W. Foster. PE. • David O. Loskota. PE. • Robert C. Russek. A.I.A. . Mark A. Hanson PE. .
Michael T. Rautmann. PE. • Ted K.FIeld. PE. • Kenneth P Anderson. PE. • Mark R. Rolfs P.E •
Sidney P. Williamson. P£.. LS. • Robert F. Kotsmlih
Offices: St. Paul. Rochester. Willmar and St Cloud. MN • Milwaukee. Wl
December 4,1997
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482
Re: Femdale Road Reconstruction
SAP 155-178-01 and 152-110-01
City Project No. 607
File No. 70303
Dear Mayor and Council:
Attached is our report for the proposed reconstruction of Femdale Road fre Tmnk Highway 12 to
County Road 6. The report provides a detailed cost estimate of the wor' zeing considered and a
plan of the area. The work as proposed will be in accordance with Munit al State Aid standards.
Project costs which are eligible for Municipal State Aid reimbursement e described in the Cost
Analysis section.
We would be pleased meet with the City Council and staff at your < ivenience to review the
proposed project.
Respectfully submitted.
BONESTRCX), ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Thomas P. Kellogg / ^
Attachment
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional
Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Glerm R. Cook, P.E.
Date: December 4.1997 Rep. No. 9451
2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 ■ Fax: 612-636-1311
Preliminary Report
PRELIMINARY REPORT
ON
FERNDALE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
City Project No. 607
FUe No. 70303
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA
November, 1997
INTRODUCTION
Femdale Road from County Road 6 to Highway 12 is approximately one-mile in length with a
centerline that defines the boundary between Orono, to the west, and Plymouth and Wayzata, to e
east. The entire roadway Pes within the corporate limits of Plymouth and Orono. The City of
Orono has requested that the City of Plymouth act as the lead agency for this reconstruction project
The City of Plymouth has requested the preparation of this report to evaluate the feasibility of
reconstructing Femdale Road from Trunk Highway 12 to County Road 6 to meet State Aid
standards. The project location is shown on Figure 1 and the proposed street improvements are
presented on Figure 2 in this report
The purpose of this report is to define the improvements and provide estimated project costs to
determine project feasibility.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Femdale Road Reconstmction
Femdale Road is designated on the City’s Municipal State Aid Street System and is classified as a
minor collector roadway. The function of a collector roadway is to coUect traffic from l^al streete
and connect to arterial roadways. This section of Femdale Road is presently m poor condition with
significant surface distress. Inadequate sight distances at some locations present safety conce^.
The existing street consists of a 6.7 meter wide bituminous surface with 0.6 meter gravel shoulders.
The drainage along the roadway is currently directed to shallow ditches.
Femdale Road, as presented in this report, is proposed to be constructed to 11 meters in wid* with
B618 concrete curb and gutter. The urban design with curb and gutter provides a more efficient
drainage system, minimizes the need for addiUonal righMf- way and significantly reduces tr«
removal. The proposed width provides for two 3.7 meter wide traffic lanes and a 3.6 meter wide
center turning lane. The turning lane will increase safety to neighborhood residents by allowing left
turning movements without disrupting traffic flow. The roadway will be stnped for ^t an^d w^
bound turning movements at County Road 6. The hUl north of Sixth Avenue wdl need to be
lowered to meet a 30 raph design and improve sight distances. Also, a 2.4 meter wi e itummous
70303rpt
1
Preliminary Report City of Plymouth
wallcway is proposed along the east side of the street from the Luce Line trail to County Road 6.
The walkway would be located 1.5 meteis behind the curb where topography and right-of-way
permits. In areas where trees are to be preserved or embankments are steep the walkway will abut
the back of curb. Pedestrian curb ramps will be required at all locations where the walkway meets
the street.
As part of the street improvements, all existing drivev ays are proposed to be paved to ten feet from
the curb line. Retaining walls, berms or hedges are proposed in some areas to preserve specimen
trees and provide privacy for yards and houses close to the right of way. Trees will be planted from
nursery stock to replace those trees removed during construction.
Traffic Analysis
Based on traffic counts concucted by City's Public Works Department, the average daily traffic
volumes (ADT) on the north ana jnuth ends of Femdale Road from Trunk Highway 12 to County
Road 6 are 3200 and 3500 vehicles per day (VPD) respectively. Using Hennepin County ’s twenty
year projection factor of 1.5, the ADT in the year 2017 will be about 5000 VPD.
Street Design
The proposed street improvements for Femdale Road are shown on Figures 1,2 and 3. The criteria
for the roadway design are based on Mn/DOT State Aid standards. The recommended design
speed for Femdale Road is 30 miles per hour (mph), based on a posted speed limit of 30 mph. The
proposed pavement section for Femdale Road, which is based on the anticipated traffic volumes
over the next 20 years, is presented below:
50mm Type 41 bituminous wearing course
75mm Type 31 bituminous base course
400mm Aggregate base, Class 5,100% crashed rock
Soil borings have been taken along the project that show the presence of some organic materials.
Organics encountered in the subgrade will be excavated and replaced with a suitable clay or
granular material. The street section will be reinforced with a geotextile stabilization fabric that
will also provide separation between the subgrade and the aggregate base.
Water Main
An existing water main stub located n.v Femdale Green on the south end of the project would be
extended southerly off of the roadway as part of the street construction. The extension would allow
for a future water main connection by the City of Wayzata without disturbing Femdale Road. A
200 mm stub would be provided on the east side of Femdale Road approximately 100 meters north
of Twelfth Avenue to serve any future development
70303tpt
r.1 ■ MT I1~B I I I ■
r
Preliminary Report
City of Plymouth
Storm Drainage
M part of the street reconstruction on Femdale Road, storm sewer is proposed to be constructed to
improve the drainage along the street. Storm sewer would be installed at the five low points on the
roadway. Storm drainage would be directed southerly and easterly to existing ponding areas and
wetlands. Water quality ponds will be constructed where feasible. Because the land adjoining the
project is nearly fiilly developed, property to construct ponds may be impossible or impractical to
obtain. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District may allow payment to a general water quality
fund in lieu of pond construction. ^
Construction Seouencinp
The roadway will be constructed in a manner so as to minimize any impacts to residential access.
Each day the contractor will excavate a section of roadway to full width and grade, install fabric
and place the 400min of Class 5 aggregate base. The street would then be opened to traffic at the
end of the construction day. Access would only be restricted during the day and limited to a
segment that can be completed. Traffic would have either an existing bituminous or new gravel
surface to travel on during non-construction hours.
PERMITS AND EASEMENTS
The reconstruction of Femdale Road will require a Pollution Control Agency Storm Water permit,
a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit and State Aid plan approval. The DNR may require
a permit for storm sewer improvements near the Luce Line trail. Construction easements will be
necessary to construct the street improvements on Femdale Road. Storm sewer easements will be
required for ponding and drainage off of Femdale Road.
COST ANALYSIS
Cost Summary
A detailed cost estimate for the project has been prepared and is included in the Appendix of this
report. All costs are based on anticipated unit prices for the 1997 construction se.*’"The total
project costs include five (5) percent for contingencies and twenty (20) percent for legal,
engineering and administration. No costs are included for easement acquisition or city legal fees.
The Cities of Plymouth and Orono will share equally in the street and storm sewer costs for
Femdale Road north of Wayzata. The City of Orono will bear all costs for street and storm sewer
constmction north of the Trunk Highway 12 bridge and south of the Plymouth / Orono border. The
City of Plymouth will be responsible for costs associated with walkway constmction north of the
70303q>t
rva-*.* »-Tir
r
Preliminary Report City of Plymouth
Luce Line trail. The City of Wayzata would be responsible for any construction costs if the
walkway is constructed south of the Luce Line trail.
Assessments
It is anticipated that the City of Orono will not assess any residents for the project. The City of
Plymouth will assess the residents that have direct access onto Femdale Road. Any assessments
will be in accordance with current City policy.
State Aid Participation
We have estimated that 100% the street, 80% of the storm sewer and 100% of the walkway costs
would be eligible for State Aid reimbursement. This cost estimate does not include easement
acquisition costs. Although a portion of the easement acquisition costs would be eligible for State
Aid reimbursement, the administration and a portion of the legal costs are not.
The following is a summary of the estimated project costs for each City:
Orono Plymouth Total
Street $657,846 $432,709 $1,090,555
Storm Sewer 130,631 61,134 191,765
Walkway •0 77,742 77,742
Total $788,477 $571,585
$1,360,062
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The street, storm sewer and walkway improvements presented in this report are desirable and
feasible as related to costs and construction. The project is in accordance with the City Municipal
State Aid Street Plan. Based on information contained in this report, the following
recommendations are presented for consideration by the City Council:
That this report be adopted by the City of Plymouth and the City of Orono as a guide for
construction of the proposed improvements.
That the Cities conduct a legal and fiscal review of the proposed project.
That an informational meeting be scheduled to receive input from the abutting property owners
and determine further action to be taken, llie property owners adjacent to the roadway should
be notified.
70303ipt
I
‘■•l -
I
J
r
\ i
1 1
N
jr ..
Preliminary Report City of Plymouth
I
If the project is to proceed, the City of Plymouth will need to hold a public hearing to allow for
assessments on certain properties.
That the following schedule be implemented if the project is to proceed:
70303rpt
Receive Preliminary Report ...........................................December, 1997
Hold Informational Meeting ..............................................January, 1998
Order Plans and Specifications..........................................January, 1998
Approve Plans and Specifications.......................................Match, 1998
Bid Date...........................................................................April, 1998
Award Contract ...................................................................May, 1998
Start Construction ...............................................................May, 1998
Complete Surfacing and Restoration..............................September, 1998
^, ,fc hn-uft', -ai-hTT'i-y r 1 1I tnTii'i-mmrtu i k 1^1 nif Mfii ■ I I—Ti'aaiil ii ii *'•- ^>J
r
i L
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA
FERNDALE RD. - PROJECT 607
SAP. 155-178-01 <Sc 152-110
\70303\70303MAP 7/21/97
FIGURE 1
Bonestroo
Rosene
Anderlik &
Associates
01
COMM. 70303
Engktttn A AreM0Ct»
i
r
i
TYPICAL SECTION
NO SCALE
50 mm TYPE 41 BIT. WEAR COURSE
75 mm TYPE 31 BIT. BASE COURSE
400 mm AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5. 100% CRUSHED
geotextile STABILIZATION FABRIC
DETAIL
NO SCALE
TYPICAL SECTION
PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA
FERNDALE RD. - PROJECT 607
SAP. 155-178-01 Sc 152-110-01
70303R33.0WG 11/21/97 COMM. 70303
FIGURE 3
Bonestroo
Rosene
Anderfik &
AssociatesTH
Enf^neers A Architects
^ 11 ■¥ftr [Min n n f~rTr«¥Tin~n~~iT iinrifcMii 111 i > i r > iin a in ■ ii i tfiii *—lair i nkimninti liT irnrni i« itit “ ■'tf^mank —i~t *Tt nri t< 11
APPENDIX A
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS
FERNDALE ROAD NORTH OF WAYZATA
CLEAR AND GRUB
LANDSCAPING
FRAFFIC CONTROL
RETAINING WALL
400 MM X 200 MM WET TAP
200 MM DIP WATER MAIN
REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
COMMON EXCAVATION
lOOmmPyC PERFORATED PIPE SUBDRAIN
GEOTEXTILE REINFORCEMENT FABRIC
GRANULAR SUBBASE
AGGR BASE. CL.5 100% CR ROCK 400 mm
rP 31 BIT. BASE COURSE. 75 mm THICK
rp 41 BIT. WEAR COURSE. 50 mm THICK
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK
B618 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
PAVEMENT MARKING
FURNISH & INSTALL SIGN PANELS
SODDING W/ 100 MM TOPSOIL
SiiPING W/ MULCH. FERTILIZER & TOPSOIL
Estimated construction c6st
LS.
LS.
LS.
LS.
S.M.
EA.
S.M.
C.M.
S.M.
C.M.
M. TON
M.TON
M.TON
S.M,
S.M.
COS
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
10,000.00
150.00
2,000.00
150.00
3.00
5.00
20.00
3.00
11.00
11.00
32.00
34.00
1.00
21.00
0.80
275.00
3.50
3000.00
0.79
0.79
0.79
0.79
270
9,700
8,500
17,100
1,200
17,400
2,800
1^00
3,750
2,850
5,300
10,200
1
15,800
15,800
15.800
7,900
40,500
2.000
750
+5% CONTINGENCIES
+20% LEGAL, ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
^100
42.500
1,500
51,300
13,200
191,400
89,800
84,800
3,750
55,850
4,240
2,750
35,700
3,000
$888,640^
34,342
$721,182
144.238
$865.418
J
‘i
II
) •
APPENDIX B
estimated construction cost for street and water main improvements
FFRNnALE ROAD SOUTH OF WAYZATA / PLYMOUTH BOILER
MSIB
LEAR AND GRUB
lNDSCAPING
RAFFIC CONTROL
1150 mm DIP WATER MAIN
Iremove bituminous pavement
JOMMON EXCAVATION________
llQQ mm PVC PERFORATED PIPE SUBDRAIN
iEOTEXTILE REINFORCEMENT FABRIC
iRANULAR SUBBASE
iGGR BASE. CL.5 100% CR ROCK 400 mm
•p 31 BIT. BASE COURSE. 75 mm THICK
P 41 BIT. WEAR COURSE. 50 mm THICK
IITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK
t618 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
IPAVEMENT MARKING
IfURNISH & INSTALL PANELS
iODDING W/100 mm TOPSOIL
i r-w*
LS.20.000.00 0.21 4.200
L.S.20.000.00 0.21 4.200
LS.20.000.00 0.21 4.200
LS.10.000.00 0.21 2.100
M 150.00 15 2.250l
S.M.3.00 2.600 7.800
C.M.5.00 2.900 14,500
M 20.00 25 500
S.M.3.00 4.600 13.800
C.M.11.00 300 3.300
M.TON 11.00 4.700 51.700
M.TON 32.00 7501 24.000
M.TON 34.00 500 17.000
L 1.00 1.000 1.000
M 21.00 710 14.910
M 0.80 1,400 1,120
S.M.275.00 4 1.100
S.M.3.50 2.800 9,800
ha 3000.00 0.4 1.200
+5% CONTINGENCIES
+20% LEGAL. ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
8.934
$187,614
37,523
$225.137
r a. « la lu •■itk* i,
r
APPENDIX C
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST FOR TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS
FERNDALE ROAD BETWEEN LUCE LINE AND C.R. 6
K'*•
ngEL»
RICE m
COMMON EXCAVATION C.M.5.00 600 3,000
AGGR BASE, CL.5 100% CR ROCK 150 mm M.TON 11.00 1,600 17,600
TP 41 BIT. WEAR COURSE. 50 mm THICK M. TON 50.00 500 25.000SODDING W/100 mm TOPSOIL S.M.3.50 2,600 9,100CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN RAMP EA.500.00 14 7,000
hS 1 MAI bU CUNb rHUCTION COST
+5% CONTINGENCIES
$61.700
3,085
+20% LEGAL, ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
$64,785
12.957
APPENDIX D
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST FOR STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
FERNDALE ROAD NORTH OF WAYZATA
3rt3jIiBa
300 mm RCP STORM SEWER M 80.00 11 880 1375 mm RCP STORM SEWER M 90.00 87 7,830450 mm RCP STORM SEWER M 110.00 400 44,000525 mm RCP STORM SEWER 'M 130.00 40 5,200450 mm RCP F.E.S.EA 2 2,000525 mm RCP F.E.S.EA 1200.00 2 2,400375 mm CMP CULVERT M 40.00 200 8.000STANDARD CATCHBASIN EA 4 4.000STANDARD CATCHBASIN MANHOLE EA 1500.00 11 16.500STANDARD STORM SEWER MANHOLE EA 1500.00 2 3.000IMPROVED PIPE FOUNDATION M 3.00 538 1.614
MECHANICAL TRENCH COMPACTION M 3.00 538 1,614
^^tlMAT^lI) COiviSTRUCTION c6§t
+5% CONTINGENCIES i97,038
4.852
1+20% LEGAL. ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION
$101,890
20,378
ilUIML fzZ^nMATtU COST ...$122,268
r
APPENDIX E
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST FOR STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
FERM)ALE ROAD SOUTH OF WAYZATA / PLYMOUTH BORDER
375 mm RCP STORM SEWER M 90.00 11 990
450 mm RCP STORM SEWER M 110.00 400 44.000
450 mm RCP F.E.S.EA 1000.00 1 1.000
375 mm CMP CULVERT M 40.00 30 1.200
STANDARD CATCHBASIN EA 1000.00 1 1.000
STANDARD CATCHBASIN MANHOLE EA 1500.00 2 3.000
STANDARD STORM SEWER MANHOLE EA 1500.00 1 1.500
IMPROVED PIPE FOUNDATION M 3.00 411 1.233
MECHANICAL TRENCH COMPACTION M 3.00 411 1.233
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
+5% CONTINGENCIES
+20% LEGAL, ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
^55,156
2.758
$57,914
11.583
$69,497
FERNDALE ROAD COST SUMMARY ORONO PLYMTH TOTAL
A. street IMph 6v EMENTS N. OF WAYZATA 432.709 432.709 ^65.418
B. STREET IMPROVEMENTS S. OF N. WAYZATA BORDER 225.137 0 225.137
C. TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS:0 77.742 77.742
D. STORM IMPROVEMENTS N. OF WAYZATA 61.134 61.134 122.268
E. STORM IMPROVEMENTS S. OF N. WAYZATA BORDER 69.497 0 69.497
F. TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS 788.477 571.585 $1,360,062
im'.h AAqumni~ftti iiiiw- J iift ■! rr i#\j ^
►
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ron Moorse, City Administrator
DATE:December 30,1997
JAN 6
^nVojr
^998
OftoAfo
SUBJECT: City of Long Lake Pol ice Services Agreement Update
The Police Chief and City Administrator have been meeting semi-monthly with the Long Lake
Police Commission to ensure the police services provided are responsive to Long Lake's needs, and
to address any questions or concerns regarding police services. The city of Long Lake is satisfied
with the quality of police services provided but has raised questions regarding the quantity and cost
of the police services. As staff prepares responses to these questions, and continues discussions
regarding the costs of police services; it is important the Council is up to speed on these issues, and
has an opportunity to provide direction to staff regarding how the city should respond to proposals
that could significantly change the way costs are allocated for police services.
Two specific questions were raised at the December 10 Long Lake Police Commission meeting in
relation to costs and cost allocation. These are addressed below under I Cost Allocation Issues
Additional background information to give the Council some context for the cost allocation
questions is provided below under II Background .
I.COST ALLOCATION ISSITFS
At the December 10, Long Lake Police Commission meeting the Long Lake City Administrator
indicated that, based on costs and hours of service provided, the city of Long Lake is paying more
per hour for its supplemental officers than is the city of Spring Park. The total amount paid by the
city of Long Lake for supplemental officers works out to $34.13 per hour. The total amount paid
by the city of Spring Park for supplemental officers works out to $28.08 per hour. The City
Administrator asked why there is this difference in cost per hour. Staff indicated they would review
this question and provide an answer at the January Police Commission meeting.
The Long Lake City Administrator then suggested that the cost allocation formula be revised to
make supplemental officers available to the city of Long Lake at $28.08 per hour. He also suggested
changing the allocation of the general police budget expenses to significantly reduce the amount paid
by the contract cities.
Staff Response to Cost Allocation Oiip«;tir>n«;
A. Hourly rate for supplemental officers.
When Orono first began to provide police services to Spring Park, the supplemental officer staffing
level was generally to have one officer in the city around the clock. This generally was done with
the exception of individual shifts that were not filled due to sick leave, vacation, training, etc. In
1993, the city of Spring Park received a proposal from the city of Mound to provide 24 hour
coverage. At this time Spring Park made it clear that they wanted a supplemental officer in Spring
I ■'
City of Long Lake Police Services Agreement Update
Park 24 hours per day regardless of sick leave, vacation, etc. Orono submitted a proposal to provide
this level of service without an increase in cost for a number of reasons.
1.The Spring Park contract is important to the viability of the total cooperative police services
arrangement because it accounts for nearly 25% of the total police budget.
2.The contract with Spring Park calls for the Spring Park supplemental officer to loop through
the Navarre area in Orono as part of its regular patrol. This provides for a significant police
presence in Navarre which has most of Orono ’s commercial activity and population density.
Because Spring Park is paying for 24 hour service, this patrol presence is available
periodically throughout the day.
3.As part of providing police services to the city of Spring Park, the Orono Police Department
also provides substantial off-duty police security service to the Lord Fletchers restaurant.
This is a significant source of additional income for Orono officers which plays a part in
enabling Orono to attract and retain high quality officers.
4.Spring Park believed it should have been receiving the full 24 hour service in the past.
Because the level of service had been fairly close to the full 24 hour service, the Police
Department was able to fill the gaps cost-effectively through the use of part-time officers.
The current contract with Long Lake was negotiated by then-Mayor Tod Olson, who was aware that
the city had reduced the cost of police services to Spring Park. The language setting out the 70 hours
per week of supplemental coverage was added to the contract specifically to clarify the amount of
coverage to be provided to the city of Long Lake.
If the city of Orono looks ahead to the development of the Highway 12 area, in terms of additional
commercial activity and increased residential development; it may make sense to provide a
somewhat lower hourly rate for the Long Lake supplemental officers, if part of their Long Lake
patrol pattern is a loop tlirough the Highway 12 area similar to the loop through the Navarre area by
the Spring Park officer.
If the city was to charge the same hourly rate to the city of Long Lake for its supplemental officers
as is charged to Spring Park, the cost to Long Lake for supplemental officers would be reduced from
$112,610 to $90,310. This is a reduction of $22,300.
B. Allocation of "Basic Police Service" Costs
The cooperative arrangement for police services provides substantial benefits in terms of increased
service levels and reduced costs for all participating cities. The question that arises periodically is
whether the cities are sharing reasonably proportionately in the cost savings. This is the question
being raised by the city of Long Lake. The question is focused on whether Orono is receiving a
disproportionate share of the cost savings in relation to Long Lake and the other participating cities.
Igr— .i ii UWvmV.nVT'rur* u ^ 1 r wri ta
City of Long Lake Police Services Agreement Update
The current sharing of cost savings, or allocation of costs, appears to be reasonable from two
different perspectives. The first is the level of police activity, i.e. number of crimes and
number of officer contacts, in each city. The police activity in the four cities, and
particularly in Long Lake, is roughly equivalent to the overall allocation of costs among the
cities (see pages 3 and 4 of the December 9 memo to the Long Lake Police Commission-
Attachment A).
The second comparative perspective is based on a rough staffing analysis assuming each city
would have an independent police department (see pages 2 and 3 of the December 9 memo
to the Long Lake Police Commission). The rough staffing analysis shows that the overall
staffing level for the 4 cities would be 25% greater without a cooperative arrangement for
police ser/ices. Also, based on a rough analysis of each city's individual staffing needs,
Orono's share of this 25% greater cost would be approximately 30%, Long Lake's would be
approximately 44%, and Spring Park's would be approximately 25%. This analysis provides
an indication that the current allocation of cost savings among the participating cities is fairly
reasonable.
it':
Each city has its own unique character and needs, and each city should pay for police
services according to the level of police service needed and desired. Although it is true that
Orono's costs for police service would increase significantly if Long Lake was no longer a
part of the cooperative arrangement, staff does not believe it would be possible for Long
Lake to obtain the current high level of service at a low'er cost through an alternative method
of police service provision. Staff believes the city of Long Lake is receiving a high level of
service and a very good value for the amount it is paying for police services. It may be
reasonable to tweak the cost to Long Lake a bit; such as to somewhat reduce the hourly rate
for the supplemental officers, if a patrol loop through a portion of Orono can be established
similar to the patrol loop in Navarre that is part of the Spring Park agreement.
If the city of Long Lake believes a more substantial change in their police costs is needed,
it may be that it is not possible for Orono to meet their expectations in terms of cost and
service. The city of Long Lake may need to determine whether another provider could
provide them with police services at the cost and level they desire.
I r BACKGROUND
Current Service Levels and Cost Allocation
Orono currently provides two levels of police service to the city of Long Lake.
1. Basic Service. This is 24 hour emergency response and all overhead costs and general
City of I ong Lake Police Services Agreement Update
services of the Police Department. (See the "Basic Police Service" description - Attachment
B).
2. Supplemental officers. Because the level of service that can be provided through the
basic service level is not sufficient to handle the amount of activity generated by the types
of land uses in Long Lake, or to provide the community oriented policing type of service
desired by Long Lake; to supplement the basic service, the city of Long Lake contracts for
two supplemental officers who are assigned specifically into Long Lake for an average of
70 hours per week.
The costs for these two levels of service are as follows:
1.Basic Service. The city of Long Lake pays 13% of the total costs of operating the
police department, less the two supplemental officers provided to Long Lake and the
four supplemental officers provided to Spring Park. The 13% cost share is based on
a cost allocation formula with two factors —population and assessed market value.
The total cost to Long Lake for basic service is $136,240. (Please see the attached
cost allocation chart Attachment C).
2.Supplemental Officers. The city of Long Lake pays the costs of wages, benefits,
clothing and personal equipment, and worker compensation insurance for the two
officers. Other operating costs and capital costs such as vehicle purchase and
maintenance, fuel, support services, facilities, etc. are allocated under the basic
service portion of the contract. The cost to Long Lake for the two supplemental
officers is $112,610.
Questions Raised bv the Long Lake Police Commission
The initial question raised by the Long Lake Police Commission was whether Long Lake was
actually receiving 70 hours of supplemental officer service in their city each week. The question was
3-fold.
1.
2.
Was an officer scheduled for 70 hours per week.
Was the schedule filled each week (was there actually an officer working when
scheduled).
3. When the supplemental officers are working in Long Lake are they being called out
of Long Lake to respond to calls in Orono on a frequent basis.
In response to this question the Police Chief provided information for the month of August, 1997
(Attachment D) which indicated the folldwing: (The Police Chief is now providing this information
every month.)
1 I
r I fm F Ml P ■ I Ptt&r-nMsK-.VIMVn
City of Long Lake Police Services Agreement Update
1.The supplemental officers are scheduled for 70 hours per week. In fact the schedule
reflects 80 hours per week.
2.
3.
All of the scheduled shifts were actually worked.
The supplemental officers may leave the city of Long Lake only for the reasons
allowed in the contract:
a.) To respond to necessary call or mutual aid type calls which are defined as calls
created by immediate necessity for police service such as responding to a medical
emergency, a crime in progress, an officer requiring immediate assistance, etc. (The
supplemental officers were out of the city for 6.8 hours in August of 1997.)
b.) Scheduled travel to the Orono Police Department offices at the beginning or end
of shifts or break periods as called for by the union contract.
c.) Looping through Orono as a part of regular patrol pattern through the city of Long
Lake.
d.) Transporting prisoners to the Orono Police Department, Hennepin County Jail,
Juvenile Detention Center, Detox Center, or other locations as necessary.
The patrol loop through Orono as part of the Long Lake patrol pattern has historically been north
on North Brown to County Road 6, east to Spring Hill Road, then around the east end of Long Lake
on Old Long Lake Road to Highway 12 and back into Long Lake. The Long Lake patrol pattern had
also included a loop west on Highway 12 to North Brown Road, south to Watertown Road, then east
on Watertown Road back to Long Lake. The Watertown Road patrol loop has not been used for
many years.
In response to concerns raised by the Long Lake Police Commission, the County Road 6 patrol loop
has been discontinued.
At the October 16, Long Lake Police Commission meeting, the Police Commission made two
additional requests.
1.The Commission requested that the city of Orono determine how many officers would be
needed by Orono if Orono was to provide service only to the city of Orono and not to any
other cities.
2.The Commission requested that the city of Orono look at changing the current cost allocation
formula.
City of Long Lake Police Services Agreement Update
In response to this request staff prepared the attached memo titled Police Services Cost Allocation
dated December 9,1997. The purposes of the memo were as follows:
1.
2.
To provide background regarding cost allocation for cooperative service provision.
To show that all cities are substantially benefitting from the current police services
arrangement.
3. To show that the current overall allocation of costs is relatively reasonable and fair.
4. To compare a number of alternative cost allocation formulas/factors.
5.To show that any cost allocation method needs to take into account die specific needs
and desires of the individual cities for police services.
i
r
Attachment A
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Long Lake Police Commission
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
December 9,1997
SUBJECT: Police Services Cost Allocation
The cities of Long Lake and Orono, along with the cities of Minnetonka Beach and Spring P^k,
have been sharing the substantial benefits of the cooperative provision of police services such as
lower costs, more services.-DARE, school liaison, full-time investigator,
professional administration-and excellent emergency response. One element of the cooperati
police services arrangement that is important to keep up-to-date is the cost allocation formu a.
Cost allocation formulas for cooperative service provision have historically been b^ed on a*' effort
to match costs with service need. The formulas initially began with favors such as; population
square miles, and market value which indirectly measure service need. The assumption was made
Sat there was a fairly strong correlation between each of these factors and the need for poll
services.
In most cases of cooperative service provision, there has been a large agency providing
a significantly smaller agency. The level of service provided and the amount of
verfTow, almost incidental, in comparison to the regular work load and staffing ?
ag^cy. The service provided was basic 24 hour emergency response. There was mimmal presence
oLide of response to calls for service. Today ’s cooperative arrangements
a "full service" city providing incidental service to a rural township. They now involve cities wiA
more balanced relationships with service needs and desires that are beyond sn.ply responding to
calls for service. Cities are needing and demanding customized service. This h^ led ^ effo^ to
develop cost allocation formulas or methods that reflect the level of service needed and desired.
In the South Lake cities the indirect factors such as population and market value
by cost allocation based on actual service used (number of service hours used). T^e Hennepin
County Sheriff has made proposals to cities for police services with the cost based on hours
service provided at a specific cost per hour.
In Orono's police service arrangement with Long Lake et.al., the indirect ^
market value-have been retained; but the differing service needs have been recognized by usi g
supplemental officers to provide the level of service desired and to ensure the cities pay direc y o
this level of service.
The city of Long Lake has expressed some concern regarding this hybrid form of cost shanng and
has suggested a new cost sharing arrangement be explored.
l... .i.»supplemental ofTicers, the officers should remain in Long Lake at all times versus assisting Orono
A-1
r
on mutual aid type incidents. If the two cities had independent police departments, with each city
paying the full costs of their officers, the officers would still respond to neighboring cities when
mutual aid assistance was requested. The types of assistance currently provided by the Long Lake
supplemental officers is the same as this mutual aid assistance.
Although the city of Long Lake pays 100% of the cost of the salary and benefits of the supplemental
officers, the city of Orono pays 69% of the costs of the vehicles, fuel, vehicle repairs, office support,
management and supervision, facility, and all other support costs related to the supplemental
officers.
Staffing Analysis
The basic idea behind cooperative service arrang'ments is to gain the benefits of economies of scale
and avoid duplication of staff, equipment, and lacilities. If each city was to have its own
independent police department, each would need, at a minimum, 24 hour staffing,
managerial/supervisory oversight, office support/records management, police squads and other
equipment, and a facility.
Although all cities are benefiting substantially through the current cooperative arrangement for
police services, there has been some concern expressed about whether the current allocation of costs
reflects the actual level of police service or police staffing needed. One way of analyzing this is to
determine the level of staffing each city would require if it operated an independent department. The
following is a rough analysis of staffing needs for each city assuming minimal reliance on mutual
aid from neighboring cities.
ORONO
Two officers on duty 24 hours/day
Sworn officer staffing level required 10
Current total officers 16
10 officers as a percentage of the total 62.5%
Orono's current share of police costs 53.3%
Difference between current share of police
costs and share based on 10 officers
9.2%
LONG LAKE
One officer on duty 24 hours/day
Sworn officer staffing level required 5
Current total officers 16
5 officers as a percentage of the total 31.3%
Long Lake's current share of police costs 18.0%
Difference benveen current share of police costs and 13.3%
share based on 5 officers
A-2
~rtii Jk
hr-
SPRING PARK
One officer on duty 24 hours/day
Sworn officer staffing level required
Current total officers
5 officers as a percentage of the total
Spring Park's current share of police costs
Difference between current share of police costs and
share based on 5 officers
31.3%
23.8%
7.5%
TOTAL STAFFING - 3 INDEPENDENT DEPARTMENTS
Percentage difference
types of expenses would also incre'se by 25%, the costs of providing police service to the cities
v.rAiil/t bv annroximatelv \ ■ 0 000.would increase by approximately
This cost increase does n..t include the one-time costs to Long Lake and Spring Park of providmg
facilities, vehicles and other capital equipment.
the cost allocation among the four cities based on a number of alternative cost allocation factors is
shown below.
COST ALLOCATION FORMULA ALTERNATIVES (TOTAL COSTS)
The current allocation of total costs among the four cities is as follows:
Orono
Long Lake
Spring Park
Minnetonka Beach
53.3%
18.0%
23.8%
4.8%
1.Part I Crimes 10 yr Av g. (*86-'*96)
A-3
2.
3.
5.
6.
Part I and Part II Crimes 1996
Orono 49.6
Long Lake 19.9
Spring Park 24.9
Minnetonka Beach 4.7
Part I thru Part 5 Crimes 1996
Orono 57.3
Long Lake 17.2
Spring Park 19.8
Minnetonka Beach 5.7
4. # of Officer Contacts 1996
includes all incidents,
Part 1-5 Crimes, & all
contacts recorded by
dispatch.
Orono 61.5
Long Lake 16.4
Spring Park 17.4
1 Minnetonka Beach 4.6
Average of 1-4
Orono 54.8
Long Lake 18.3
Spring Park 21.2
Minnetonka Beach 5.2
Median of 1-4
Orono 55.6
Long Lake 18.0
Spring Park 21.2
Minnetonka Beach 5.2
A-4
r
7.
Orono j 63.61
Long Lake 16.19
Spring Park 15.35
Minnetonka Beach 4.84
8.
Orono 69.75
Long Lake 13.05
Spring Park 10.86
Minnetonka Beach 6.34
9.Market Value
Orono
Long Lake
Spring Park
Minnetonka Beach
75.89
9.9
7.84
6.37
10.
Orono 73.5
Long Lake 10.7
Spring Park 8.1
Minnetonka Beach 7.7
Studies have shown that high value single-family residential property is the lowest user of city
services such as police services. Given the characteristics of Orono with its high single-family
residential value, any formula that includes market value as a significant factor without any
balancing for actual service need will result in the amount of police costs allocated to Orono being
higher than the amount of police services used.
It has been suggested that the cost allocation formula be based on market value, because if Orono
and Long Lake were one city the police service costs would be shared by the citizens on the basis
of market value not on the basis of service need or service usage. Although the example was cited
of the wealthier, lower crime areas of Minneapolis paying the taxes that pay for the police service
that serves the high crime and lower income areas of Minneapolis; cities and other governmental
agencies have, for many years, been moving to methods of funding city services other than general
property taxation. The focus is to charge residents directly for the services they receive in the form
of user fees. User fees are being used in all types of services including police st rvices. When user
fees are used correctly, they can themselves serve as a mechanism for allocating scarce service
resources. Residents pay for the level of service they desire.
A-5
r
M ta^rtant element in user fees is the ability to provide a specifie benefit to a speeifie person or
level rf “volved in the police services agreement can make decisions about the
s '!! “"““"‘‘y based on service need and the level of cost desired It
in iZe of service allocation among various areas within the same city
in large ^ because the mechamsms are not in place to measure the amount of service received and
account for revenues based on neighborhoods or other sub areas of the city.
Although the ^location of police service costs may be based on market value if the two cities were
’■^Sarding merger would involve an analysis of all costs of all services
^r^ties for efficienciw and service delivery, analysis of outstanding financial obligations and
projected future costs of infrastructure replacement etc. The allocation of police costs wlu\d be one
that the overall benefits of a merger would
be greater than the cost before a merger would proceed. In other merger situations if one of the
cities 1^ a disproportionate share of outstanding liabilities, special taxing districts have been set un
to avoid one city having to take on the burden of another city’s liabilities. ^
Prior to a merger of the nvo cities, it would be very difficult to convince Orono property owners
g iierally use a relatively low amount of police service, that the city should substantial!v
Summary
Park and Minnetonka Beach are currently sharing in a very
r? ** ®<'P»«®® “™ces. I. appears that Uil cuS
®®?‘® ®‘®«ly matches the service need and/or service desires of the
pa^tag cities, f the ctties wre to move away from the cunent method of allocating costs it
pp^ that a cost allocation method based on calls for service or similar service need based formula
ihe cities. Because the level of servi^sir™ by
Spnng Park is so high, the cost allocation method may still need to include some foim of
L de!i^r^ 'f'“y ®f Long Lake detetmines that a higher level of service
desired, it appears that some sort of supplemental cost allocation method would be needed
Next Steps
'“y ®f Long Lake regarding the information
loT.!^’ “* f'gardmg the alternative cost allocation methods. The cfties need to work
0^ a consensus on a cost allocation method. If the cities are able to move towald c^„
pr^ess Beach should be involved in the
A-6
■ ■■ ■■■
r
I
r
Attachment B
BASIC POLICE SERVICE
Basic police service, as i. is denned in Lids',
response, routine patrol as needed, and . , expanded to include additional
- c1=eror4t ponce service are iisled
below.
( t
POLICE BASIC SERVICE ELEMENTS
24 hour response to calls for service
Department management and supervision (Police Chief and Sergeant)
Office support and customer service
Police records management
Investigator
Facilities^and^^mptMnt itored booking area
Intoxilizer room and intoxilizer
Property room (stolen and recovered property)
Locker rooms
Squad room/training room
Police squads
General operating items
S Ld M hour dispatch service (through Hennepin County)
Fuel
Vehicle maintenance
Insurance
Emergency preparedness (planning & response)
I
Crime prevention
- Presentations to residents, businesses
Premise surveys
Animal control
DARE program
r
POLICE BASIC SERVICE ELEMENTS continued
School liaison officer program
Police reserve unit
Police officer recruitment, selection, training, and development
Administration and negotiation of the Police Officer Labor Agreement
SUPPORT FOR SUPPLEMENTARY OFFICERS
Basic police service is provided at the level of a 10 member police department shared among the
cities. However, the facilities, management and supervision, and office support/customer service
elements of basic service are provided at the level of a 16 member police department due to the need
to support the four Spring Park supplemental officers and the two Long Lake supplemental officers.
Because these service elements, as they relate to the supplemental officers, are provided as part of
basic services, the costs are allocated according to the basic service cost allocation formula. This
means that Long Lake pays 13% of the support services and overhead costs related to the
supplemental officers and Orono pays 69% of these overhead costs.
X\APPS\WPWIN6WWPDOCS'l.IN>JlON\PO.BASIC.
~ — - ‘ I i>-| g |||^lanr‘t ~nT~ JiTunnn i a iir~B i rt i JUA #J«w»II iiM^i I •> » ■ ■■■■■■a—■■ I r ------------- - - —-----
ORONO POLICE SERVICE CONTRACT
BASE BUDGET FORMULA FACTORS
BUDGET YEAR 1998
Attachment C
PD98BUD1
ORONO LONG LAKE
MINNETONKA
BEACH
SPRING
PARK
POPULATION . 7,577 1,929 577 1,829
% OFTOTAL 63.61%16.19%4.84%15.35%
WEIGHT 50%31.80%8.10%2.42%7.68%
MARKET VALUE $815,373,500 $106,393,400 $84,224,900 $68,427,400
%OFTOTAL 75.89%9.90%7.84%6.37%
WEIGHT 50%37.94%4.95%3.92%3.18%
TOTALPERCENT 69.75%13.05%6.34%10.86%
PD98BUD1
ORONO POLICE SERVICE CONTRACT
DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS
SERVICE YEAR 1998
ORONO LONG LAKE
MINNETONKA
BEACH
SPRING
PARK
PERCENT APPI,IFD 13.05%
BASE BUDGET
•
$709,179 $131,448 $63,885 $102,902
TOWN AID CREDIT 140.594)17.5941 13,6911 f6J211
TOTAL 668,585 123,854 60,194 96,581
ADMIN CHARGE (10%)66.859 12,385 6,019 9.658
TOTAL BASE $735,444 $136,240 $66,214 $106,239
ADDITIONAL OFFICERS $124,250
•
$245,280
TOWN AID m.6401 (23,2801
TOTAL ADDL OFFICERS $112,610 S222.000
GRAND TOTAL $735,444 $248,850 $66,214 $328,239
I
I 1
I Alt ni A .1*' I • ir *
■f
\- ' v .
f
( '
LONG LAKE ADDITIONAL MANPOWER
1998 SERVICE YEAR
EXHIBIT ’C
Projected Salaries, 2.0 Officers $92,020
Overtime 2,500
Holiday Pay 3,890
P.E.R. A - City Contribution 11,910
FICA/MDCR — City Contribution 480
Health - Life Insurance 7,880
Worker Compensation Insurance 4,920
Qothing & Personal Equipment 650
Total $124,250
Deduct Town Aid Credit (11,640)
Total Additional Officers 112,610
Total Base Cost 136,240
Total Cost of Service $248,850
PD98BUD3
APPENDIX A
Attachment D
LONG LAKE ACTUAL HOURS WORKED
AUGUST 1,1997 TO AUGUST 31,1997
SUPPLEMENTAL OFFICERS
HOURS HOURS ADDITIONAL
WORKED
8-1-97 12
WORKED
8-16-97 11
HOURS
Bike Patrol - 15 hrs.
8-2-97 12 8-17-97 8 Com Days - 29 hrs. 55 min
8-3-97 8 8-18-97 8 Surveillance - 14-1/2 hrs.
8-4-97 12 8-19-97 8 Nat. Kite Out- 2-l/2hrs.
8-5-97 12 8-20-97 15 Dare Car - 7 hfs.
8-6-97 8 8-21-97 15
8-7-97 8 8-22-97 12
8-8-97 12 8-23-97 12 TOTAL HRS: 322 hrs.
8-9-97 12 8-24-97 12 TOTAL ADDX HRS: 69 hrs.
8-10-97 8 8-25-97 12 OVERALL
8-11-97 8 8-26-97 12
TOTAL HOURS: 391 hrs.
8-12-97 8 8-27-97 12 CONTRACT
8-13-97 8 8-28-97 8
70HRS/WK = 310 hrs.
8-14-97 8 8-29-97 12
8-15-97 8 8-30-97 12
8-31-97 12
flnwnfi mriui I miiiu H iWi m r\ n—riTrwi ~~ amj r
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
Ron Moorse, City Administrator ^%'r/. '//V,-1
January 2,1998
^fjy
SUBJECT: Cooperative Animal Control Services 0/Vo
The city currently provides animal control services to the cities of Long Lake, Minnetonka Beach,
and Spring Park using two part-time Community Service Officers. The cities of Tonka Bay,
Ghorewood, Excelsior, and Greenwood have contracted with the city of Chanhassen for animal
control services. In mid-1997, the city of Chanhassen advised these cities that they would no longer
provide animal control services effective January 1, 1998. These cities have requested Orono to
submit a proposal for the provision of animal control services.
In preparation for developing a proposal, city staff met with representatives of the south lake cities
to discuss how the animal control services could be expanded to serve the south lake cities in a way
that would benefit both the south lake cities and the city of Orono. It was determined that it would
be beneficial to be able to change from the current staff of two part-time CSOs to a staff of one frill
time Animal Control Officer and one part-time CSO. The advantages are that with a full-time
position the city would be able to reduce the turnover that occurs in the current CSO positions and
attract or develop staff with a higher level of abilities in both the handling of animals and customer
relations.
Staff has developed and submitted a general proposal to the south lake cities that enables the change
to a full-time Animal Control Officer without increasing costs to Orono. This will enable improved
services to Orono and its current contract cities and high quality services to the south lake cities.
A copy of the letter setting out the general proposal is attached. If this is acceptable, a formal
agreement setting out the specifics of the service and the costs will be prepared for approval by the
Council and the south lake cities.
; 1
I If ~r>fiTiiiiTt^ nir~i'i II AiftAsk *— .............................. HA^iiiaiif M mrmk Ml ■■ ■■ iwi n in laaiii ii i ----------------.
GlTYof ORONO
Municipal Offices
Street Address:
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066
December 29,1997
Pat Wussow
City Administrator
City of Tonka Bay
4901 Manitou Road
Excelsior, Minnesota 5S331>9560
Dear Pat:
This letter is in response to the request from the South Lake cities for a proposal fitjm the city
of Orono for the provision of Animal Control Services. The proposal was to include general patrol,
response to complaints, animal pick up, and impounds. At this time, the city can provide all of these
services except tfie impounding of animals. Orono uses the Humane Society of Wright County for
its animal impounds. The Humane Society has indicated their facility is at capacity. They will not
allow the city to impound dogs from any additional cities. As you know, the lake cities are working
toward a cooperative impound facility to serve all lake area cities. However, this facility will
probably not be available until 1999.
In discussions with the cities of Excelsior, Shorewood, and Tonka Bay, it has been
determined that the ideal set up for animal control services, for both Orono and the South Lake cities,
is to have one full-time and one part-time Animal Control Officer. The full-time position will enable
Orono to attract and retain quality staff. The part-time position provides for call outs and fills in for
the full-time position.
Costs
The total cost to the South Lake cities for this service would be $28,125.00. This includes
the cost of call outs for animal pick ups during non-scheduled hours. The breakout of costs by city
is based on the current actual cost paid to Chanhassen by each city.
CURRENT CURRENT PROPOSED
CITY COST PERCENTAGE COST
Shorewood S 14.006 57.4%$16,144
Excelsior $5,603 22.97%$6,460
Tonka Bay $4,202 17.22%$4,843
Greenwood SS84 2.4%$675
Tdephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 4734)510
d ----------- —-1 in I If I f mi niaflMTii mith hm \ f>Trw~~fi '■■■ k ' iBWTuiiMit ■■ fkianaAiKi «.J
Pat Wussow
City of Tonka Bay
December 29,1997
page 2 of2
This proposal is contingent upon approval by all of the South Lake cities.
Interim Service Prnpn*;^]
Since it will not be possible for the four South Lake cities to obtain approval of the proposal
ouUined above by Jwuary 1,1998, the city will provide on call service to the South Lake cities on
an interim basis until an agreement is formalized for a longer term solution. The interim solution
assumes that a longer term agreement will be finalized quickly, preferably by mid-January.
The on ctall service would be provided at a rate of $32.00 per call. This interim service would
be contingent on the South Lake cities providing a location for the impounding of animals. Also,
as indicated above, depending on the schedules of the two part-time CSOs, it is possible that a call
out request corld occur at a time when a timely response is not possible. In this case, the animal
would need to be held until a CSO was available, or Ae city in which the dog was being held would
need to make other arrangements for transportation of the animal.
Please let me know at your earliest convenience whether the general proposal for animal
control services meets your expectations, and whether the interim service solution meets your needs.
If you have any questions please call me.
Sincerely,
Ronald J. Moorse
City Administrator
X
I
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
January 2,1998
77,Vq
SUBJECT: Long Term Solution for Animal Impound Facilities
When a stray dog or a dog running loose is picked up by an Animal Control Officer it must be
impounded until the owner is found, or if there is no ownc *, hopefully until it can be adopted by a
new owner. The length of the impound can be anywhere from a few hours to several days. Orono
impounds approximately 60 animals per year. This includes animals impounded for the three
contract cities.
Several years ago one private kennel facility was being used by many cities in the area. This kennel
facility discontinued service to all cities with very short notice. The city scrambled to find a
replacement facility. Orono was able to work out an arrangement with the Humane Society of
Wright County to use their facility in Delano.
The current arrangements being used by the various cities in the lake area are not secure in terms of
long term availability. This was made very clear by the short notice recently given by the city of
Chanhassen to the south lake cities for the termination of animal control services, which included
the discontinuation of the arrangement with a private facility for impound services. The city of
Orono's arrangement with the Humane Society of Wright County is not a secure one in terms of long
term availability. The current impound facility is a small facility located on leased property. The
Humane Society has plans to construct a new facility in tiie western portion of Wright County. This
facility would not be viable as an impound facility for Orono due to its location.
Because of this lack of secured, long term arrangements for animal impounds, the lake area cities
have been discussing the need to have a facility that we are assured will be available over the long
term. Options considered for accomplishing this include a long term arrangement with a private
kennel, the cities jointly constructing and operating a facility, and partnering with an existing animal
humane society.
In pursuing an arrangement with a private kennel, letters were sent to all private kennels and
veterinary offices in the lake area soliciting their interest in a long term arrangement with the lake
area cities for animal impounds. No indications of interest were received in response to the mailing.
Several groups of cities in the Metro area have currently constructed and are jointly operating
impound facilities. The costs of this option arc significantly greater than the costs of options
currently being used by cities.
Several weeks ago staff met with several Board members and the Operations Manager of the
Humane Society of Wright County to discuss possible cooperative arrangements for a longer term
solution for an animal impound facility. One alternative both the city staff and the Humane Society
believed worthy of further consideration was for the city or lake area cities to construct an impound
facility to replace the Delano facility, which would be operated by the Humane Society in addition
to the new facility planned in western Wright County, Staff is pursuing this option on several fronts.
First, it is confirming with the lake area cities whether they are willing to jointly construct a facility
and jointly fund the costs of operating the facility through the Humane Society. Secondly, staff is
identifying potential sites for the facility.
The important part of the mission and philosophy of the Humane Society of Wright County is the
placement of animals into new homes. Their efforts are heavily focused on adoptions and finding
foster homes for animals versus euthanizing after a specific number of days. This philosophy is a
very good match with Orono's philosophy regarding impounding animals.
As staff pursues the various elements of an arrangement with the Humane Society of Wright County,
the Council will be periodically updated.
t 1