VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 29 POSTED ON: 5/5/2010
CITY OF SHAWNEE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 7:30 P.M. Mayor Meyers called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. in the Shawnee City Hall Council Chambers. He welcomed the public and all stood and recited the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by a moment of silence. Councilmembers Present Staff Present Councilmember Distler City Manager Gonzales Councilmember Goode Deputy City Clerk Powell Councilmember Kuhn City Attorney Rainey Councilmember Pflumm Assistant City Attorney Rainey Councilmember Sawyer Public Works Director Freyermuth Councilmember Straub City Engineer Wesselschmidt Fire Chief Hudson Councilmembers Absent Police Captain Morgan Councilmember Scott Planning Director Chaffee Councilmember Sandifer Parks and Recreation Director Holman Senior Project Engineer Lindstrom Senior Project Engineer Gregory Senior Project Engineer Schnettgoecke Members of the public who spoke: (Item 7) LEN SHERDER, 200 Spruce Street, #200, Denver, Colorado; (Item 9) DAVID MORRIS, 6125 Melrose Lane. CONSENT AGENDA 1. APPROVE MINUTES FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 12, 2006. 2. REVIEW MINUTES FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 5, 2006. 3. APPROVE MINUTES FROM THE FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 6, 2006. Councilmember Kuhn, seconded by Councilmember Goode, moved to approve the entire Consent Agenda. The motion carried 6-0. MAYOR'S ITEMS 4. There were no Mayor’s items. PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 5, 2006 5. SUP-3-04-01 WITHDRAWAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT PREVIOUSLY ISSUED TO GORDON LIQUOR, FOR A DRIVE-UP WINDOW IN A LIQUOR STORE IN THE CN (COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD) ZONING DISTRICT AT 11110 W. 75TH STREET. Mayor Meyers stated that the Planning Commission recommended 9-0 that the Council approve the withdrawal of SUP-3-04-01 to Gordon Liquor. Councilmember Pflumm asked if they have had any real problems. Planning Director Chaffee stated they closed. Councilmember Pflumm stated he did not think they had any problems while Mr. Gordon owned it and did not know about after that time and if there had been any issues. Planning Director Chaffee replied he believes there had been an issue in the last operation of selling alcohol to underage drinkers. Councilmember Pflumm asked if it was through the window. Planning Director Chaffee stated it was at that location, but he is not sure whether it was through the window or not. Councilmember Pflumm stated as far as they know, there was no issue with the window. Planning Director Chaffee stated that is correct. Councilmember Goode, seconded by Councilmember Pflumm, moved to withdraw SUP- 3-04-01, a special use permit previously issued to Gordon Liquor for a drive-up window in a liquor store in the CN (Commercial Neighborhood) zoning district at 11110 W. 75th Street. The motion carried 6-0. 6. CONSIDER SUP-05-06-06 SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO STACIE SCHEMMEL FOR A HOME DAYCARE WITH UP TO TEN (10) CHILDREN IN THE R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT AT 23600 W. 59TH. Mayor Meyers stated that the Planning Commission recommended 9-0 that the Council approve SUP-05-06-06 to Stacie Schemmel. Councilmember Pflumm, seconded by Councilmember Goode, moved to approve SUP- 05-06-06, a special use permit to Stacie Schemmel for a home daycare with up to ten (10) children in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) zoning district at 23600 W. 59th. The motion carried 6-0. PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 7. CONSIDER PUD-02-06-06, A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND REZONING FROM AG (AGRICULTURAL) TO PMR (PLANNED MIXED RESIDENTIAL) FOR SPECTRUM RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, AN INDEPENDENT SENIOR LIVING FACILITY IN THE 15700 BLOCK OF 63RD STREET. Mayor Meyers stated that the Planning Commission recommended 9-0 that the Council approve PUD-02-06-06 and rezoning from AG to PMR for Spectrum Retirement Community. If approved, an ordinance number will be assigned. Planning Director Chaffee stated the applicant requests approval of rezoning from Agriculture (AG) to Planned Mixed Residential (PMR) and the preliminary development plan approval for Spectrum Retirement Community, a 125-unit senior citizen apartment building located in the 15700 block of W. 63rd Street. Planning Director Chaffee stated the property is located at the southeast corner of 63 rd Street and Maurer Road. He stated the properties to the north across 63rd Street are zoned a combination of AG and PMR. He stated the AG property to the north is vacant and shown as medium density residential on the Future Land Use Guide. PMR property to the northeast is the location of the Wyndham senior residential facility. He stated the property to the south is zoned PMR and contains the Shawnee Station apartments. He stated the property to the west across Maurer is zoned a combination of AG and RS and contains two single family homes on property designated as being appropriate for office/commercial development. He stated the property to the east is zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential) and contains homes in the Leaton Acres subdivision. Planning Director Chaffee stated the Land Use Guide of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area as appropriate for medium density residential uses. He stated the applicant has proposed to rezone 14.69 acres for a 125 unit, three-story apartment building. He stated this would yield a density of 8.51 dwelling units per acre. Planning Director Chaffee stated sole access to the site is provided from Maurer Road. He stated Maurer Road was recently improved to collector standards. He stated because this is a senior living facility, the trips generated by residents of the facility will be far less than those associated with a standard multi-family residential development. Planning Director Chaffee stated the applicant proposes to construct a 112,710 square foot, three-story building containing 125 residential units. He stated the units are broken down by size in that the project will provide 22 studio units, 82 one-bedroom units, and 21 two-bedroom units. Planning Director Chaffee stated the proposed building has a j-shaped footprint, which allows for several wall setbacks and variations in wall angle to break up the mass of the structure. He stated many of the units have balconies that are protected with a decorative wooden railing. He stated exterior materials on all façade include red brick on the first PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 and second floors and hardi-plank fiber cement lap siding painted medium brown on portions of the second and third floors. Planning Director Chaffee stated the roofline of the building has different elevations to provide a varied ridgeline. He stated all bulk requirements have been satisfied and access to the site will be from Maurer Road. He stated submitted plans show the provision of 112 parking stalls and the Planning Commission required that they show an additional location where an additional number of stalls could be provided if necessary. Planning Director Chaffee stated landscaping shown on the submitted landscaping plan meets requirements of the zoning ordinance. He stated trash enclosure and a service delivery area have been incorporated into the building’s façade on the north elevation. He stated the multi-family amenity policy suggests that multi-family developments with 125 units provide two amenities from the approved list. He stated the applicant is providing two areas of passive walking trails with five pedestrian seating benches on the north side of the building. He stated these trails connect to an internal sidewalk that rings the entire structure. Planning Director Chaffee stated because of the average age of the resident and the nature of the facility, the recreational programs provided are far in excess of a typical multi- family development. He stated the design of the building allows approximately 30 percent of the gross floor area to be devoted to these recreational activities. Planning Director Chaffee stated storm drainage improvements required for this development shall be designed in accordance with the Shawnee Manual of Technical Specifications and Design Criteria. Planning Director Chaffee stated erosion control and sediment control measures are required for all land disturbing activities. He stated the applicant is responsible for installing all such measures as shown on the approved plans prior to commencing any grading activities. Planning Director Chaffee stated telephone, electric, and cable service facilities are to be placed within rear and side yards as required by Policy Statement PS-24, except as specifically varied or waived by action of the City Council. He stated utilities shall be placed underground. Planning Director Chaffee stated this development is subject to the provisions of SMC Chapter 12.26, which pertains to the City’s excise tax on new development. He stated the estimated excise tax for this development is $137,520.42. Planning Director Chaffee stated the Planning Commission recommends approval of PUD-02-06-06, the preliminary development plan and rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Mixed Residential for the 112,710 square foot Spectrum Retirement Building, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Pflumm asked if this is what they proposed, or did they work with the Planning staff already with regards to things like egress into the facility. Planning Director Chaffee replied they worked with staff and with Engineering regarding ingress and egress. Councilmember Pflumm stated the only reason he brought that up is because Maurer Road could have the potential for heavy traffic in the future with the plans for the west side. He stated if they have elderly people turning left out of there onto a three lane heavily trafficked road, they might run into issues. Planning Director Chaffee stated he thinks Engineering looks at those types of concerns when they recommend approval of where entrances and exits should be placed. He stated they would rather have the traffic onto Maurer Road than onto 63rd Street, which is unimproved. Councilmember Pflumm stated he understands that, but the plan is still not totally set in stone. He asked if the Council changes the zoning, will it still go back to Planning. Planning Director Chaffee replied if this is approved, they would then have to file their final plat before they could get a building permit. Councilmember Pflumm stated he knows 63rd Street is not improved, but asked how many residents they expect. Planning Director Chaffee stated there are 125 units and estimated there will be approximately 20 people who actually have a car and drive at the site. He stated most of the rest of the stalls will be used by the staff who works there. Councilmember Pflumm stated he had a different picture of this facility. Planning Director Chaffee stated he believes the average age at this facility is about 80 years old. Councilmember Pflumm stated they have a lot of parking spots for only 20 drivers. Planning Director Chaffee stated they need parking for the staff, as well as visitors. He stated there will not be a lot of coming and going by the residents. They will have a bus to take them to different locations within the community, such as doctor’s offices and over to Wal-Mart, Target, and other pharmacies. Councilmember Pflumm asked how similar to Sweet Life this facility is. Planning Director Chaffee replied he thinks the residents are perhaps a little more mobile than Sweet Life. PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Pflumm stated he is just concerned, because when they get people turning out there on Maurer Road, that location is probably does not have the best visibility. Planning Director Chaffee stated these are not people who are 65 years old. Councilmember Straub asked if that is their target market. Planning Director Chaffee answered yes. He stated Spectrum has several of these facilities across the country and that is the estimated age. He stated with the size of the units, heavier on the one-bedroom and studio units, they are not having a lot of space. Councilmember Straub stated he had a guy who was 99 at Town and Country that still drove. A lot of people still drive at older ages. Councilmember Goode stated he thinks this is a good location for this project. Councilmember Kuhn asked if the rezoning of this one and the others around them are similarly zoned. Planning Director Chaffee answered yes. He stated it is zoned PMR to the south and Wyndham is up to the northeast. Councilmember Pflumm stated they have R-1 to the east, basically along that whole border. Planning Director Chaffee stated there is another seven acres that will be undeveloped for Leaton and some overhead power lines and a creek that runs through that area that makes it undevelopable. Councilmember Distler asked since it says for persons ages 55 years of age and older, if it would better serve their residents to have a kitchen instead of a kitchenette. She stated since some of these people may be younger, they may want a stove. LEN SHERDER, 200 Spruce Street, Suite 200, Denver, Colorado replied as part of the enhanced living packages for these facilities, and they currently own and operate nine facilities, there is a commercial kitchen that serves three nutritious meals a day. He stated they find that for most residents, it is more of a social thing and they will come down and meet and eat. He stated it is one way for them to keep track of everyone as well. It is an informal roll call situation. He stated the kitchenettes are mostly for convenience for heating up leftovers that they take back to their rooms or maybe soup. Councilmember Distler stated when she saw the age 55 listed, she thought those people might still want to cook at times. LEN SHERDER stated the average age is actually about 84 nationwide. PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Pflumm asked Mr. Sherder if he agrees with Planning Director Chaffee as far as only about 10 percent of the people will have cars. LEN SHERDER answered yes. He stated the American Senior Housing Association, which is a national organization that basically regulates the industry, has done numerous studies on parking because it is always the big question. He stated they find that once the residents see that the facility provides a community van and can actually take them to regularly scheduled doctor’s visits, activities, and shopping, very few actually want to continue driving a car. He stated inevitably what happens are the cars get parked and noted that some people should not be driving anyway. LEN SHERDER stated the American Senior Housing Association does studies on these every year and verifies that the parking requirements and driving done by these seniors that live in their facilities is very low. Councilmember Goode, seconded by Councilmember Pflumm, moved to pass an ordinance for PUD-02-06-06, a planned unit development and rezoning from AG (Agricultural) to PMR (Planned Mixed Residential) for Spectrum Retirement Community, an independent senior living facility in the 15700 block of 63rd Street. The motion carried 6-0. Having passed, Ordinance 2819 was assigned. ITEMS FROM THE FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 06, 2006 8. PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR KING STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS. Councilmember Sawyer stated that the Committee recommended 4-0 that the Council approve the reconstruction of King Street from Johnson Drive to 57th Street, to include curb and guttering on the northeast two block length of the project, along with construction of a new parking lot at the southeast corner of King Street and 58th Street with an estimated total cost of the project at $817,400. Councilmember Sawyer, seconded by Councilmember Goode, moved to approve the preliminary plans for the King Street reconstruction and parking lot improvements from Johnson Drive to 57th Street, to include curb and guttering on the northeast two block length of the project, along with construction of a new parking lot at the southeast corner of King Street and 58th Street with an estimated total cost of the project at $817,400. The motion carried 6-0. 9. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REGULATING SKATEBOARDS, BICYCLES AND OTHER DEVICES IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Councilmember Sawyer stated that the Committee recommended 4-0 that the Council approve an ordinance regulating skateboards and bicycles in the downtown pedestrian PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 zone, generally shown as Ballentine Street to the east, 59th Street to the south, King Street to the west, and 58th Street to the north. Councilmember Sawyer, seconded by Councilmember Kuhn, moved to pass an ordinance regulating skateboarding on public right-of-ways, in parking lots open to the public for the downtown properties adjacent to Johnson Drive as outlined in a pedestrian zone, generally shown as Ballentine Street to the east, 59th Street to the south, King Street to the west, and 58th Street to the north. Councilmember Sawyer asked about Councilmember Pflumm’s original motion, with people being allowed to walk their bicycles down Johnson Drive from King Street to Ballentine Street. Councilmember Pflumm stated that was part of it, but the other part was about the parking lots. Councilmember Sawyer stated they could use them on the parking lots, unless the person posted otherwise. He asked if that is in the ordinance. Assistant City Attorney Rainey answered yes. He stated the part on walking the bicycle is being made separate, Section 9.16.040A – Walking along side a bicycle or carrying roller skates, a coaster, roller blades, skateboard, or similar devise, is not a violation of this Ordinance. Councilmember Sawyer asked if that means they can use them on the parking lots unless the owner posts otherwise. Assistant City Attorney Rainey answered yes, unless it is private property and posted by the property owner. Councilmember Straub asked the fine for a Class C charge. Assistant City Attorney Rainey replied a Class C fine is the lowest offense in the municipal court. He stated he is not really sure of the range, but believes it is $500.00 or less and up to 30 days in jail. Councilmember Straub asked if the judge will decide how much. Assistant City Attorney Rainey replied that would be up to the discretion of the judge, but it is his understanding, his guess, that in the cities that have actively enforced this ordinance they have taken a person’s skateboard until they appear in court and promise not to do it again and then are given the skateboard back. His understanding in talking to Karen Toreline, the City’s prosecutor, is she expects these fines to be very minor. He stated one actual ruling was to require the violator to bring their parents to court to make sure they are aware the ordinance is being violated. This is the ordinance and they can not do it again. PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Straub asked how the City plans to enforce this ordinance. He asked if they will only be stopped if a policeman sees them. He asked if the City will actually have someone monitoring this activity. Assistant City Attorney Rainey replied he assumes it will be like any other offense in the city, from speeding to DUIs to battery; someone will complain and a law enforcement officer will show up. Councilmember Straub stated he does not want added liability to the City. He stated they have rules at the skate park and are not going to have anyone enforcing those rules 100 percent of the time. He stated he is worried about that. Councilmember Sawyer stated to answer Councilmember Straub’s question, he believes that the business owners will call the police and they will then respond. Councilmember Straub asked if it can be anyone and not just the business owners. Councilmember Sawyer stated he can not speak for the Police Department and would not, but they can definitely make a report that someone is in violation. He understands that the Police Department currently has no ability unless they catch someone doing it. Assistant City Attorney Rainey stated that is correct, because there is no current prohibition. Councilmember Straub stated he is just curious as to how this will be monitored and if there is going to be anyone enforcing this ordinance. He stated he does not want to make an ordinance the City can not enforce. He stated he does not want any more liability on the City and knows that is an issue the City is worried about. Councilmember Sawyer stated Councilmember Straub’s point is well taken, but slightly off the mark, in his opinion. DAVID MORRIS, 6125 Melrose Lane, stated he read a little of the ordinance and asked along the east side of Nieman Road, where Chopper’s is located and the medical building, if it is legal to ride skateboards and bikes in that area. Councilmember Sawyer stated he thought the boundaries were from 58th Street to 59th Street. DAVID MORRIS stated as he understands it is along the Johnson Drive corridor. Assistant City Attorney Rainey stated perhaps Mr. Morris’ confusion is related to the bicycle provision. He stated the Governing Body wanted to prohibit the operation of bicycles on sidewalks, but only on sidewalks adjoining Johnson Drive, per the comments of the committee meeting. He stated it sounded pretty clear from the minutes that is what the committee members intended from that discussion. PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Mayor Meyers stated it does meet Mr. Morris’ concern. DAVID MORRIS asked if it is then legal to ride bicycles along the east side of Nieman Road until they reach Johnson Drive. Councilmember Sawyer stated if he understands Assistant City Attorney Rainey correctly, that is correct. DAVID MORRIS stated that would be his only concern, because he really does not think it affects anyone else, but those businesses along Johnson Drive such as Hartman’s, Encore, and Pegah’s that open out onto the sidewalk and are pretty active retail businesses. Councilmember Sawyer stated he reads this to be 58th Street to 59th Street and that would be included. He asked if they would just have to spell out Nieman Road in the ordinance. Councilmember Pflumm stated he thinks Councilmember Kuhn had talked about the improved sidewalks, so it would include the sidewalks that Mr. Morris is asking about. Assistant City Attorney Rainey stated it does not state that in the ordinance as drafted. He saw some discussion on that. Councilmember Kuhn stated she thought when she proposed it, based on the fact that they have hope to some day to improve as they go further down with increased retail that it would cover now, so that if there was a business that opened up onto their improved business district, then they would be protecting people walking in and out of those businesses. She stated that is what she understood with this showing 58th Street and 59th Street. She thought that covered that area, but must have misunderstood what she was reading. She likes the idea of it being the improved area and basically, if it has the nice red pavers, then someone can not ride their bike. Assistant City Attorney Rainey stated they could simply amend Section 9.16.030 Operation of Bicycles Prohibited on Sidewalks Within Pedestrian District to read, No person shall operate a bicycle upon the sidewalks adjoining Johnson Drive or Nieman Road within the boundaries of the Pedestrian District described in Section 9.16.010. Councilmember Pflumm stated that is perfect. Councilmember Sawyer stated he would amend his motion to include that add on. Councilmember Kuhn stated she would amend her second to the motion. Therefore the amended motion read: PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Sawyer, seconded by Councilmember Kuhn, moved to pass an ordinance regulating skateboarding on public right-of-ways, in parking lots open to the public for the downtown properties adjacent to Johnson Drive as outlined in a pedestrian zone, generally shown as Ballentine Street to the east, 59th Street to the south, King Street to the west, and 58th Street to the north, and write Section 9.16.030 Operation of Bicycles Prohibited on Sidewalks Within Pedestrian District to read, No person shall operate a bicycle upon the sidewalks adjoining Johnson Drive or Nieman Road within the boundaries of the Pedestrian District described in Section 9.16.010.. The motion carried 6-0. Having passed, Ordinance 2820 was assigned. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR There was no business from the floor. STAFF ITEMS 10. APPROVAL OF BID FOR THE 47TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT, P.N. 3309. Mayor Meyers stated that bids were received on June 16, 2006. Blacktop Paving was the apparent low bidder for the project. Staff recommends tabling award of the contract to a future meeting until issues with the Debt Service Fund are resolved. Councilmember Pflumm, seconded by Councilmember Straub, moved to approve the staff recommendation to table the award of the contract to a future meeting until issues with the Debt Service Fund are resolved. The motion carried 6-0. 11. APPROVAL OF KDOT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE 47TH STREET PROJECT, P.N. 3309. Mayor Meyers stated that the 47th Street project, Mund to Woodland, is eligible for partial funding through the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) program. The agreement provides for an 80% reimbursement, up to a maximum of $275,000, for all construction costs related to the on-street bicycle lanes and sidewalks within the project. Councilmember Sawyer asked if this is just the same as what they just voted to table. He asked how they can operate on any of it, if they are going to table the first part. City Manager Gonzales replied that she and Public Works Director Freyermuth reviewed the agreement with KDOT and it does include a cancellation provision that the City would be liable for any costs incurred up to the point if we would cancel it, but at this point they do not believe there would be any or if so, very minimal costs incurred. She stated if they do not move forward with the project, they would notify KDOT of the cancellation, but felt it was expedient to go ahead and get the agreement approved and have it ready. She stated if they have to do something different, they will. PAGE 12 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Sawyer asked if the City will not be out any money if they have to cancel the project. City Manager Gonzales replied if any, very little. She stated it will only be money that KDOT contributed to the project. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated they really probably do not have a real good handle on just what the figure might be, but the thought is there would probably be no additional money from action tonight. He stated there may be some KDOT funds that have already been expended on the project to get the agreements drafted and set up everything to this point that they now have this agreement before them. Between now and awarding the contract, there should be no more activity by KDOT since there is nothing to do at this point on the project until they hear it is awarded. Councilmember Sawyer stated he wants to hear dollars. He stated he does not want to hear maybes, because they get hung up on maybes and should be and could be. He stated they get bit on every one of these. Councilmember Pflumm stated the way he understands it, is that basically KDOT already spent some money. If the City cancels the project, they will probably be liable for a portion of that or all of it. Councilmember Sawyer asked for the dollar amount. Councilmember Pflumm stated it does not change if they go ahead and continue on with the process. Councilmember Sawyer stated he understands that, but somewhere if they cancel the project they will be out money. He wants to know how much that will be. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated they may be out money. He stated they would need to check with KDOT to see if there would be any expenditures that they will assign to this project at the end of the project. He stated that typically on all past projects, they do not see any of the cost issues from KDOT until the end of the project, at which time they would then deduct 80 percent out of the $275,000 and 20 percent out of a local share the City would owe. He stated at this point, because they are doing the inspection and also administering the project, he does not think there is any cost in it, but they did put that statement in their agreement and is the only reason they brought it up. He stated they do say that they have expended funds and if the City cancels, they would have the right to recoup what they have spent to this date. He stated the staff can certainly contact KDOT and find out if they would have any expenses in the event they cancel. Councilmember Goode asked if that would be 20 percent. Public Works Director Freyermuth replied that the federal funding is based on 80/20; 80 percent federal and 20 percent local. He stated anything they have spent on the project PAGE 13 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 would be an eligible cost. It should be an 80/20 split of any costs incurred and would be just staff time in preparing the agreement that they have prepared here. Councilmember Sawyer stated that surely there would be a consulting fee on this road that they are already on the line for and asked how much is that. He stated he wants to get down to it and asked how much money has been spent so far on this project. He asked if anyone has a clue. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated at this point, they have the engineering costs the City has actually paid. He stated they have done that through City funds and he does not have those numbers with him tonight. That is an expenditure that the City has made and there was no KDOT funds nor any matching federal funds involved with that portion. He stated typically design fees would be in the range of between 10 and 12 percent, so it would be several hundred thousand dollars for design and design would be accomplished at this point. Councilmember Sawyer asked Public Works Director Freyermuth to give him an idea of what the project will be total. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated there is a total project cost of $2,770,000 with construction at $1.6 million. He stated around $160,000 would be in the 10 percent range, so it would be plus or minus that. He stated the design costs are a portion of the total cost of a project and this is a project they have been, up to this point, pursuing the construction of during this construction season. Councilmember Sawyer asked Public Works Director Freyermuth in his opinion, could they already be out 10 to 20 percent of this $275,000. Public Works Director Freyermuth replied they are probably close to 15 percent, because they have right-of-way acquisition. City Manager Gonzales stated Councilmember Sawyer is talking about the CMAQ portion. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated no CMAQ funding has been spent to this point of the $275,000. Councilmember Sawyer stated they do not know how much they could be liable for because the City does not know what they have spent. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated that is correct. He stated they just do not know what potential hours KDOT has put into it that they may want to assess back, or charge to the City if the project is cancelled. He stated if the project goes forward, he does not believe there will be any KDOT expenditures, but if they cancel, that is when they possibly, as the agreement says, might be able to recoup the hours they had in the project up until the time of cancellation. PAGE 14 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Kuhn stated with the phrasing of what the City would be out, to her that seems an inaccurate statement based on the fact that they have agreed to table this item because they have budget concerns. She thinks it would be very irresponsible of the Council to assume that the funding would be there at this time for that project. She stated the funding the City has already spent on the engineering study is not just gone, as they have the engineering study so if the budget allows at a later date, which she really hopes it would because this is an incredibly important project, then they have spent money on an engineering study that would still be good. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated that is correct. He stated the majority of the money spent on engineering is for the actual construction set of plans they would use to bid the job. He stated those plans are already finished, completed, and available to use at any time. He stated if there was a delay, they would still be used at a later date. He stated it is somewhat premature at this point to know whether or not the project will go forward or stop. Councilmember Sawyer stated he understands that part, but is merely saying the City has already spent around $300,000 – give or take. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated they have probably spent less than $300,000. It is in the $200,000 plus range with easements and right-of-way. Councilmember Sawyer stated he bets it will come in closer to $300,000 than $275,000. Councilmember Kuhn stated she understood that the reason why it was important to go ahead and approve the agreement, was if they decline the agreement at this time it only puts them further back and if when they sit in budget talks and find the funds to do the 47th Street project, then it is better to already be ahead of the game. She stated the likelihood of KDOT assessing fees to the City is much higher on a cancelled project, than on a project that actually goes forward. She stated leaning on the assumption that they are going to go forward will probably be more cost effective when dealing with Item #11. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated that would also be his understanding, as long as they move forward. He stated that they have less chance of past KDOT time charged to them. Either way, it would see a limited amount of KDOT time between tonight’s meeting and whatever decision in the next 30 to 60 days is made on whether to cancel the project or substantially delay it, at which time they would notify KDOT. He stated he does not think if there is an amount owed, they are going to owe it whether they approve the agreement this evening or not. Councilmember Sawyer asked why they would move one forward without moving the other. He asked why not table both of them. Councilmember Kuhn stated the thought process she received from City Manager Gonzales was that this one is more of a logistics, administrative-type of question as in, PAGE 15 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 they need to have Council approval to continue the paperwork and the process on it. It is best to keep moving forward with that, rather than being further behind at the end of budget talks when hopefully the 47th Street project can go ahead to where it should be. She asked if that is an accurate statement. City Manager Gonzales answered yes. She stated the staff just felt it was good to move ahead and they would have it ready and prepared to send out if the plans were approved. She stated certainly if the Council feels uncomfortable and would rather table this one, they can bring it back to the same meeting that they bring the project back to. She stated either way is appropriate. Councilmember Pflumm stated he does not have a problem going ahead and doing it. Councilmember Kuhn stated that personally, she would rather just have the logistics out of the way if it is not something that would cost the City any more money. She stated that perhaps, it might for once cost them less to be ready for something when the time comes. Councilmember Goode stated he does not think it will ever cost less, but there is a degree of reasonability. Councilmember Sawyer stated he will restate that he just does not want to see the City go out there and hang themselves for more cost on this project, in case they do not find the pot of gold that everyone thinks they are going to find. He asked if everyone thinks it is fine to spend the money, then what is one more consulting fee. He stated the City seems to be very liberal in spending money on consultants. Councilmember Kuhn asked for clarification, and by keeping this approval on the table it is not approving additional expenditures for consultants or anyone else. It is only keeping the paperwork going and the only additional funds that the City could possibly be on the line for, if any work hours that KDOT would deem are the City’s from tonight’s meeting through the maximum of 60 days when the budget is decided and 47th Street’s future is decided. City Manager Gonzales stated that is correct and staff does not believe there will be any additional work during that period of time. Councilmember Goode stated the only thing that could mess them up is the final phase out of the whole thing on behalf of the City and that is not their intention at this point in time. They all hope to bring this back in the future, or he would not be voting either way. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated they hope the project would still continue on with as much as has been done to it up to this point, towards the construction effort. As stated, staff does not feel the cost would change any between tonight’s approval or the tabling of this and knowing whether or not they will go forward with the project in the near future. PAGE 16 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Pflumm, seconded by Councilmember Straub, moved to approve authorizing the Mayor to sign the KDOT agreement related to the 47th Street project, P.N. 3309, Mund to Woodland, which is eligible for partial funding through the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) program and the agreement to provide for an 80% reimbursement, up to a maximum of $275,000, for all construction costs related to the on-street bicycle lanes and sidewalks within the project. The motion carried 5-1, with Councilmembers Pflumm, Goode, Kuhn, Straub, and Distler voting aye and Councilmember Sawyer voting nay. 12. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE K-7 HIGHWAY CORRIDOR MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU). Mayor Meyers stated that the K-7 Highway Corridor Management Study has been completed with the final public meeting held on March 28th. Staff has reviewed the final report and believes the study provides an acceptable plan for our segment of the K-7 Corridor. Councilmember Pflumm, seconded by Councilmember Kuhn, moved to authorize the Mayor to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the K-7 Highway Corridor. The motion carried 6-0. 13. WATERSHED STUDIES AND FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING UPDATE. Mayor Meyers stated that the Johnson County Stormwater Management Program began a series of watershed studies intending to provide current floodplain data for most of the county. Two major watersheds were studied in Shawnee: the Mill Creek Watershed and the Turkey Creek Watershed. A map of the watershed areas in Shawnee is attached. Staff will update the Council on the remaining steps of the process at the meeting. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated that tonight he will discuss the watershed studies Johnson County has been doing over the entire County and how they have submitted these to FEMA to use to update all the County maps concerning FEMA regulated floodplain. Councilmember Goode asked Senior Project Engineer Gregory if the County got this information and updated FEMA. Senior Project Engineer Gregory replied the County is currently working with FEMA to update them. Councilmember Goode stated whatever they do, it was their process for FEMA to come up with a new plan. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated that is correct. He stated when the County first started this process, they went ahead and re-flew the County to get new contours, so they PAGE 17 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 could have the most up-to-date information. He stated Councilmember Goode spoke about when FEMA issues new maps, they are considering what is the existing 100 year floodplain. He stated the studies performed by the County, using the 1998 contours have been completed. He stated Shawnee has been involved in two major areas: the Millcreek watershed, the Turkey Creek watershed, and the watershed up around Lake Quivira. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated the Public Works Department is planning to hold two public informational meetings in July to explain this to the property owners impacted by the change in the floodplain. He wanted to make clear that the study does not cover the whole entire City and there is a western portion next to the Kansas River and the Kansas River Basin that is not a part of the study. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated the Millcreek area covers about 25 square miles. He presented a chart showing the new floodplain area. He stated Lake Quivira also has some areas in Shawnee and he thinks there is another name for that watershed – Tulley Creek. He stated Shawnee is on the upper edge of Turkey Creek, so there are areas that have become part of the new floodplain. Councilmember Pflumm stated a lot of those areas were already in the floodplain. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated that is correct. Senior Project Engineer Gregory reviewed some history and stated in 1978, the City entered into the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) with FEMA. The maps they had at that time were considered to be the existing 100 year floodplain. In 1985, FEMA did a new study which resulted in new maps in 1991, so it takes about five to six years just to get it to the point where they can get new maps out for the area. He stated along the way in 1995 and 1997, they updated their maps with new roads, but no changes in the floodplain. He stated in 2000, the County started these new watershed studies and in 2002 they received another map update. They keep getting new maps with new dates, but there have been very few changes unless someone did a specific study and a Letter of Map Amendment to it. For instance, someone built up the ground then that little portion would be revised. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated in 2006, the studies have been completed and given to FEMA. FEMA is planning through their next year’s process to issue those maps in 2007. He pointed out that it has been about 15 years since they have had a comprehensive watershed study for the area and that quite a bit of time and development has gone by. Councilmember Goode stated the reason for those changes is probably all the hard surface asphalt and paving the City has put down in conjunction with construction. Senior Project Engineer Gregory replied whenever it is changed from Agricultural (AG) to fully developed land, it will of course have much quicker runoff of water and the peak floods will be higher. PAGE 18 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated the next map shows in yellow the existing FEMA watershed. What it is currently. He stated the yellow does not quite cover all the light blue areas which are from the new study so there are quite a few areas where it extends. He stated the studies took their evaluation further than what FEMA normally would, so they went up some side channels and different places and FEMA’s map will not extend all the way. He stated the new FEMA map may not go up little tributaries. They have yet to receive that map, but expect it in the next few weeks. He stated staff wanted to have this informational meeting before they conduct the public meetings so to inform the Council. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated some bigger changes that might affect some more established businesses will take place over in Turkey Creek down around Nieman Road and 62nd Street. He stated even though the FEMA floodplains may not go up some of the side tributaries, those houses are still in the studied 100 year floodplain and the City will regulate construction of anything that will go on by that. They have some new and good information to use and help evaluate new construction when it comes through, along with new development and subdivisions. He stated they also have a consistent way that all these studies have been done, so they can require all the engineers or developers to follow the same, consistent manner of figuring out the floodplains. Councilmember Pflumm asked about the red line on the chart. Senior Project Engineer Gregory replied it is the edge of the watershed. He pointed out the term “Bottoms” on the chart and noted that even though those are shown as the FEMA 100 year floodplain, there are levies all along there which prevent floods from happening. He added that no one has taken the time to get that out of the floodplain and he does not think they are interested in doing that. Senior Project Engineer Gregory continued with some facts about the existing FEMA floodplain. They think there are around 409 parcels of property in the current FEMA floodplain, which has about 52 residences and 77 other types of out structures. He thinks that number may even be more, since their data for out structures is based off of older data from 1998. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated the new floodplain mapping again was from the County-wide studies. He mentioned that the FEMA floodplain limits will be somewhat less than the new study limits. This means that not all the properties that are in the floodplain will be in the FEMA regulated floodplain. He stated that is an important distinction, because FEMA regulates things a little differently and they, as a City, have agreed to do that. He stated the reason they are in the FEMA NFIP (National Flood Insurance Program) is that if they are part of that program. The City’s citizens anywhere in the entire City are then able to purchase flood insurance backed by the government. Otherwise, a person would probably not be able to get the insurance or it would be very expensive. PAGE 19 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Pflumm stated if someone is in the FEMA floodplain, a person can buy insurance, but asked if the City is regulating the 100 year floodplain farther up the line than FEMA and how would that affect someone. Senior Project Engineer Gregory replied they naturally have floodplains throughout the City, but FEMA came up with this national program to provide flood insurance for people and to be part of that program, the City has to agree to regulate construction to a certain level. For instance, the City says a person has to be 200 feet above the 100 year floodplain when they build something and can not build down in it. He stated they continue to ask for more and tell the people they have to go to this latest study – whatever it is. He stated some people may now find themselves in the floodplain and can buy flood insurance. He stated even if someone sits on top of a hill, they can purchase flood insurance. Councilmember Kuhn stated more than likely, they would be required to buy flood insurance. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated only a mortgager can require that, as no one has to have flood insurance. He stated if a person feels their house is higher than the floodplain, they can work with FEMA to get themselves officially out of it and get a Letter of Map Amendment. He has helped many people do that. Councilmember Pflumm stated the City’s floodplain goes a little deeper up the channel than FEMA’s and asked how that affects those homeowners in those areas. Senior Project Engineer Gregory replied it would mean the City has a flood study that shows if a house is built up in there, some provision must be made to stay above that flood level for new construction, not old construction. He stated any time anyone builds a subdivision today, the City requires them to do, whether they are near any of the streams or not, flood studies, so the City can make sure they are taking care of any kind of flooding problems that may occur and provide 100 year drainage from the detention and 10 year drainage throughout the subdivision. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated they have certain levels of rules and the City was recently audited by FEMA. He stated Shawnee’s level of regulation has given the City the highest rating out of the State of Kansas. He stated out of all the cities that have this program, this level of regulations, Shawnee’s level is at a Level 8. He did not bring any of that information, but being in the program, with that Level 8, property owners are able to gain a discount for anyone who has to get insurance. They can get a discount of around 15 percent. Councilmember Straub asked if someone has to go through the City to get that. Senior Project Engineer Gregory answered no, it is automatic since the City is part of the program. He stated they will have members from the NFIP at the public meeting, as well as from FEMA, to explain that if anyone has a question. PAGE 20 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Straub stated he knows it is a distance from there, but asked what about height, as some people are way up on the hill and still within the 90 feet. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated that is a little different issue than 90 feet and the height. He stated they strictly go by if someone is within the line of the map that shows a floodplain. They do not care how high up they are, they are within the floodplain. He stated there are many places on the old FEMA maps where they have drawn the FEMA floodplain and it is about 30 feet away from the creek. They have missed it completely. That just means that the property owners will have to work with FEMA and find out information and get it all straightened out and done on a one-by-one basis. He stated the staff has dealt with many people over the years, one at a time, to help them figure out if they are in the floodplain, what they can do, how they can get out, what kinds of forms they need, and staff works pretty close with the developers or the individual property owners. Councilmember Distler asked with the older houses, does the City do anything proactively to minimize the advancement of the floodplain to try to keep them from flooding if they see they are now in a floodplain. Senior Project Engineer Gregory answered yes. He stated over the last 10 to 12 years, they have done 35 or 40 flood protection projects using County stormwater funds 75/25 split, where the City provides 25 percent, to help prevent unknown flooding problems. He stated if a property has been flooding, that gives it enough points and priority that they can get the funding from the County and they have done quite a few projects that way. Councilmember Distler asked if any part of Parks and Pipes covers any of this. Senior Project Engineer Gregory answered all that money goes towards those types of projects. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated he had the GIS guys figure out that there were about 1,200 parcels in the new blue area – the new floodplain. That is three times as many as there were before at 400. He stated not all of these will be in the FEMA regulated floodplain, but quite a few will, along with 203 residences and businesses. He stated many of the residences were also built in subdivisions where they knew since 2000, that this study was going on and they worked with this study. They built up the ground in those areas or took those into account and they were able to make sure they were going to be outside of the flood level in that area. A lot of those houses will fall into that, but they still need to work all those out. He stated the County will work on trying to get those properties out of the floodplain using Letters of Map Amendment, so there will be a very large effort made by the County to get those houses out at the County’s expense, as a part of these studies. PAGE 21 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated some of the areas marked on the map show different subdivisions, so there are a lot of areas where they have received information and noted it is a huge effort. He stated Millcreek is about 67 square miles and Shawnee is 25 miles of that and the entire County is covered by these studies. It is a big commitment on the part of the County to try to help the citizens, but also keep them from being in areas that are flooded. He stated good floodplain information is vital to help them regulate and make sure people do not build in the floodplain. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated the new studies are a little more conservative than in the past, so they will have information that says not only what the existing floodplain is now, but what it will be in the future, so this study should stand quite a long time before there would be any reason to change it. He does not think there would be any reason to change it. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated FEMA’s schedule shows they are currently in the review period. He stated in the next few weeks they plan on issuing the City their preliminary maps. That will be followed by a 30 day comment period, which is just to receive errors or corrections from the City like naming a street wrong, or missing it completely. On July 13th and July 19th, they will hold two public meetings in different parts of town. He stated in September, if everything goes as planned, the base flood elevations will be published in the newspaper along with the notices of these changes to these elevations and they will begin a 90 day public appeal period, where people can appeal with technical reasons of why they think they are in or out of the floodplain. He stated they may have to get engineering reports or elevations. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated if all the appeals have been resolved in December 2006, there will be a Letter of Determination issued which then gives a six month compliance period to update their ordinances and comply with the new regulations, so the City can remain in the National Flood Insurance Program. Councilmember Straub asked if the new people will be notified they are in the floodplain – will it be public notice. Senior Project Engineer Gregory replied that FEMA will publish in the local newspaper two times and the City will send letters to everyone that touches the new floodplain and invite them to the public meeting. The two meetings will repeat the same information twice. He stated his phone number will be included in the letter as well. He stated to most people, it will not make much of a difference but they will want to know about and should remain aware of what is going on. Senior Project Engineer Gregory stated that will make the effective date of the map June 2007. He stated the one public meeting will be held at the Civic Centre and the second will be held at the Mill Valley High School. The meetings will run from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. with an open meeting format where there will be a short presentation about FEMA, the mapping process, and the regulations. He stated they will also have people from the Johnson County Stormwater Management program, FEMA, NFIP, Kansas PAGE 22 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Department of Agriculture Water Resources Group, and several City staff on hand to help talk with everyone individually and help with questions. He stated they can always have more meetings with different people or developers as needed. Mayor Meyers thanked Senior Project Engineer Gregory for his presentation and stated the Council looks forward to the rest of the process. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 14. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SEMI-MONTHLY CLAIM FOR JUNE 26, 2006, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,819,369.40. Councilmember Pflumm, seconded by Councilmember Goode, moved to approve the semi-monthly claim for June 26, 2006, in the amount of $1,819,369.40. The motion carried 6-0. 15. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL ITEMS. a) Pioneer Crossing. Councilmember Goode asked Public Works Director Freyermuth about the Pioneer Crossing project on Shawnee Mission Parkway. He stated they do not seem to be getting very far with that project and wants to know the hold up. He stated they are underdeveloped in the area - the entrance to the City. Public Works Director Freyermuth replied they still need to get information from the designer of the wall itself, the mural part, and once they get the confirmation of the engineering information they will then be ready to continue the efforts. He stated the problem has been just getting the details needed from the supplier of that part of the project to know it is going to work properly. He stated Parks and Recreation Director Holman might have additional information or specifics on timing, but it is his understanding those are the details of the hold up to this point. Councilmember Goode stated just recently he received some questioning on this project. He told these people he is not sure exactly what the hold up is and asked if anyone has an idea of when they will get this thing going. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated they are hoping to get it resolved in the next couple months. He stated they have sent their comments to the engineer in New Jersey and they have to make their return comments and sit down and talk about what will happen. Councilmember Goode stated he thinks most people’s expectation is that they would have arrived at this thing quicker and that is probably why they are asking questions. PAGE 23 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated he hopes it will be sooner than three months. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated this is obviously going much longer than the staff’s expectations as well. He stated it is a unique type of construction issue – the mural itself is not something they can get everywhere and not something that is done all the time. He stated it is a little different in the details of how it is to be constructed and supported, to know it is going to last. They definitely want to protect the interest of the City and not have it be something that would cause problems and additional costs at a later time, possibly five to fifteen years down the road. Mayor Meyers asked if this is a situation where they are meeting resistance. Councilmember Pflumm asked if the supplier has been back to town. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated it is his understanding that the supplier is cooperating and working with the City on this project. There has been some resistance in some of the details needed, but they have continued to work with getting the details to the staff. He stated some of it is just getting the information correct. He stated they are trying to be very diligent in their reviews and in their consultant’s reviews of the information being sent in to make sure it is correct and everything will end up lasting a long time and not create future costs to the City. Councilmember Sawyer stated that is a very diplomatic answer, but first of all they should not paint any pretty pictures here, because the thing is not red brick like this Council approved. He stated it is fiberglass that looks like limestone, which is far from what this Council approved. He asked how many months have they been going on with this supplier. He stated the supplier hauled half or one- third of it in here and does not really know what is sitting up there, but they have been dinking with this guy to get them the engineering plans so when it ends up getting put up it will stay. He asked where do they draw the line and tell the guy to pack it up and take it back, because it is not anything near what this Council approved. He stated all of the staff involved with this project has failed to deal with the fact that it is not red brick and red brick is what was approved. He asked if that is correct and would like a yes or no answer. Parks and Recreation Director Holman replied no, it is not. He stated it was a brick material of different colors. He stated it is a concrete reinforcing fiber. He stated they wanted brick and ended up getting a panel – that is true. He stated the detail is very nice. He stated the problem is, the supplier wants to stack it and the staff disagrees. He stated it is 400 pounds on top of each other and they think the bottom one will start to crack. Councilmember Sawyer asked how they plan on getting it off the centerline. PAGE 24 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated the staff is not happy either. Councilmember Sawyer stated they were supposed to dedicate this thing in March 2006 and he thinks it might be safe to say they probably will not end up dedicating it until the end of 2007 based on this rate of anybody making the supplier comply. He asked what is it that they can do to move this forward other than telling the supplier he can do it however he wants. He is beginning to think the supplier is sitting out there waiting for the City to cave in and tell him to do whatever he wants to do. He does not want to see that happen. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated they have been having the supplier do exactly what they want him to do with the engineering to make sure it will all stack. Councilmember Pflumm asked if there was a discrepancy in the specifications and why is the supplier basically offering something that is much more economical than what the Council originally approved. Parks and Recreation Director Holman responded that the bricks were so detailed that the supplier did come back with a panel – it was more like a block and then he came back with panels. He stated the question is if they want to continue to work with the guy. He noted they have not agreed to accept the piece and it has to be put up before final acceptance. He stated if it is not accepted, he will have to pick it up and they will have to find someone else. He stated the staff is not happy either, but are at the point to wait a little longer and have the supplier bring in the other bricks to see how everyone likes it. Councilmember Goode stated if the staff is unhappy, what actually caused them to be unhappy. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated the staff is unhappy with the supplier’s commitment to this project. Councilmember Goode asked if the supplier is not following through with his original commitments. Public Works Director Freyermuth replied to a certain extent that is true. He stated some of the issues came from the fact that it changed from the bricks or blocks to these panels, which changed some of the requirements for what he needed to supply to the City to show that everything was going to work appropriately. He stated the local architect designer on this project knew the details of how the blocks would go together and be supportive of the weight of the additional blocks above the others, so everything was in pretty good shape. This panel type material requires the City to get more detail and make sure they agree before acceptance that it is going to be the equivalent and a good product. He stated the staff is disappointed that by changing the design, the supplier is still not PAGE 25 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 getting them the information in a quick and timely manner, to keep this project moving along. He stated this project has drawn out a long time, much further than they anticipated. He stated it was back in January and February that they were starting to get some of the information and details on this different material. He stated the supplier has not performed as they would have expected. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated staff can put together a report of where they are at and their options, if the Council would like to receive more detailed information. He stated at some point, they will probably recommend making some adjustment to end this contract or some other alternative, but at this point they still feel the supplier of this mural is trying to work with the staff to get the appropriate details. He stated because it is a unique type of construction and construction material, it is not something that every engineer he can go to, to work out the details will even be familiar with, so it has been a complicated issue. Mayor Meyers asked if staff has received re-engineering from him that has been sent to the City and did he respond back. Parks and Recreation Director Holman answered yes. He stated the supplier does have an engineer from New Jersey and he has sent staff the calculations for all of the material in that block. He stated the staff made their comments, along with Senior Project Engineer Schnettgoecke, and HNTB and it is now back with his engineers. He stated he thinks there are only a few items left, one being the calculations. Senior Project Engineer Schnettgoecke stated the engineering should be done in a couple of weeks. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated instead of looking at a framing system with some of the same material, they are now looking at ribs for the back and that should hold the weight. Councilmember Pflumm stated the biggest question here is if the City specifically outlined what the supplier was supposed to do and then he came back with something completely different. He asked if that is a correct statement. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated that would be correct. Councilmember Pflumm stated they have that outlined in the contract. Parks and Recreation Director Holman answered yes. Councilmember Pflumm stated now they are talking to the supplier and telling him the staff will look at his engineering specs and if they like what they see, and then maybe they will write up another contract. He stated somehow the City needs to get some monetary relief for what the supplier is providing, as opposed PAGE 26 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 to what the Council specified. He stated the supplier obviously is providing something that is much more economical than what they originally approved. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated that he is looking into this, along with Senior Project Engineer Schnettgoecke, Assistant City Attorney Rainey, and Public Works Director Freyermuth. Councilmember Pflumm asked if they have talked with the supplier about monetary relief. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated quite frankly, they are just trying to get him to bring the other half to the City and get it put up so they can decide if they are going to accept it or not. Councilmember Goode stated that is about as good as they can do. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated the detail is there and if it does go up and everyone is happy, then they will accept it. Councilmember Pflumm asked why the supplier would bring it to the City, if the Council has the option to axe it. He would then be out double the shipping costs and double the work for the second half. He stated the Council needs to decide if they are going to accept it and come to some type of an agreement. He stated if the engineers agree with the supplier’s engineering company and say it is going to hold and last for 50 years, they then need to decide how much money to pay him. Should they give him the full amount and then when the next guy comes into the City where they have asked for white topping in an intersection and instead asphalt is put down because it is more economical, are they just going to let things like that continue to happen. He asked if the City is just going to let people do that to them. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated he would hope not. City Manager Gonzales stated once the staff is satisfied with the engineering and the changes, they would then bring a composite of those changes to the Council to determine if they are okay with it and want to move forward. She stated they also need to see if they can get the supplier’s agreement as well. Councilmember Pflumm stated they are just talking about the structural part. City Manager Gonzales agreed and thinks it is all together. She stated they need to look at the whole picture and compare the value of what is being provided to the value of what was specified and determine what would be the appropriate compensation, especially with all the other additional costs incurred with engineers. She stated they would need to bring all of that to the Council to determine how they want to move forward. PAGE 27 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Sawyer stated the Council saw the actual brick originally. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated that is not correct. He stated that was the stage before the brick is made. Councilmember Sawyer stated he thought vandals damaged it and pushed it all over. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated they did a Styrofoam cutout, but they never actually saw brick. Councilmember Sawyer stated he questions whether the Council will absolutely stand together on this. He stated he is hearing that they are going to have the supplier put this thing up and then the Council will determine if they even like it. He wonders if there will be enough people on the Council strong enough to say they do not like it, take it down, and get the bricks. He doubts it. He stated they have dinked with this guy all year long and he is aware that he is sitting on the outside looking in, but apparently the supplier does not like the idea that the City is requiring him to come up with the certified engineering plan that says the structure will stay there. He thinks that was some of the problem they had when he unloaded the first load. The supplier then packed up and left town, upset, and has not been back. He asked if that was correct. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated that is true. Councilmember Sawyer asked what makes staff think that the supplier even cares. He stated he personally cares and wants this finished and does not particularly care if it is the supplier. He does not know who designed it to stack up there in block and asked who that was. Parks and Recreation Director Holman replied Charles Goslin did the artist rendering and then Tim Watson from Brickstone took that – that is what he does. He stated Tim Watson has stuff all over the place. He stated down at the St. Louis Arch the whole thing is that brick-type sculpture. Councilmember Pflumm asked if the same guy did the St. Louis Arch. Parks and Recreation Director Holman replied he did the downstairs museum piece and has some on the building. Councilmember Pflumm asked if that is what he is proposing here. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated that is the smaller bricks and these are the bigger panels. They are different. PAGE 28 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 Councilmember Sawyer stated he would have to agree with Councilmember Goode and Councilmember Pflumm and wonders if they are ever going to see anything other than these panels leaning up against each other, stacked up to the east. Councilmember Straub stated it does sound as if the Council would appreciate an update on where they are at with all of this, so they can make a decision. They need staff’s suggestions about moving forward and everyone needs to get on the same page. Councilmember Goode stated they need to get it off dead center to make some progress. He stated it is up to the staff to negotiate and make things happen. Public Works Director Freyermuth stated unfortunately the next step is the mural. They even attempted to do some additional work on site with the main general contractor, but there is really nothing he can do that does not conflict with the mural part of it. He stated it needs to be resolved before they can make additional progress on the site. Councilmember Sawyer asked how long they are going to wait. He stated he has heard two weeks and even a couple of months. He question what is it. He personally thinks two days is long enough because they have messed with this guy forever. He stated some day they have to say, okay this is the end of the line and either they have it or they do not and move on. City Manager Gonzales stated if the Council is at that point, they will put together a report and bring it in. This is probably something they should discuss in executive session at the next Council meeting. Assistant City Attorney Rainey stated he was just going to suggest the same thing and with the consent of City Manager Gonzales and Mayor Meyers, they have discussed a plan, but it is difficult for them to discuss a plan about how to react to this in a public meeting. He stated an executive session would probably be more appropriate. He stated they can then discuss all their options and the problems with this project. Councilmember Sawyer stated he agrees. Councilmember Pflumm stated he does not care that they get the project done, but concerned that they are getting sold a bill of goods. He stated that is the bigger part of this whole thing. He stated if it takes them an extra year to get this right, so be it. Parks and Recreation Director Holman stated that is why they are making sure they have everything documented with an engineer’s stamp. He stated HNTB is looking for the best product possible. PAGE 29 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2006 ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Goode, seconded by Councilmember Sawyer, moved to adjourn. The motion carried 6-0, and the meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Cindy Terrell, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: _____________________________________________ Vicki Charlesworth, Assistant City Manager/City Clerk
"CC06262006doc - CITY OF SHAWNEE"