6.2. SR 07-21-2003Item # 6.2.
Howard R, Green Gompany
July 14, 2003
File: 819300J-0325
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: COUNTY ROAD 44 RECONSTRUCTION
Dear Council Members:
Attached is a draft contract proposal that City staff received from Dave Schwarting, Sherbume County
Engineer, for the purposes of having the City take the lead on the design and field services for the
reconstruction of County Road (CR) 44 (Upland Avenue/Meadowvale Road) from Trunk Highway 10
to CSAH 1. City staff met last Fdday, July 11, 2003, to review and discuss this proposed contract.
We believe the contract is unacceptable to the City of Elk River for a number of reasons. The main
points of our discussion were as follows:
The proposed contract attaches Sherbume County's Cost Participation Policy as Exhibit A.
If the City were to enter into this agreement, they are essentially "buying" into the Cost
Participation Policy for this project. In the past when the County's Cost Participation Policy
has been discussed, City Council and City staff have expressed some reservations
regarding it.
In the same attachment to the proposed contract, Exhibit A, items number 5 and 6 state
that the County will reimburse the City eight percent for design services and eight percent
for field services. The eight percent is only calculated on the County's cost participation in
the construction cost. However, if you review the County's Cost Participation Policy,
nowhere in that policy is engineering overhead discussed. In other words, it is silent and
assumes that the County will pay all of the engineering overhead, and the cost
participation between County and City is only relative to construction cost. With this
agreement the County is shifting the burden for the engineering overhead to the City for
the City's Cost Participation Policy items.
The total of 16 percent overhead for the engineering design and field services is a
reasonable percentage for strictly the design and field services, assuming as the proposed
contract states that the County will provide the base topographic information and the right-
of-way research. Items that would not be included in the 16 percent overhead would be a
feasibility study, public/assessment hearings, assessments of the project, public
informational meetings, and right-of-way issues.
3. There will likely be some widening of CR 44 as it crosses the railroad tracks. The County
Cost Participation Policy is again silent on the cost of expanding a railroad crossing and
moving the in-place safety equipment. As the City knows from the Tyler Street project, this
cost can be quite significant. City staff is concerned that with the City in the lead on this
project, the City could end up responsible for any costs associated with the wider railroad
crossing. The wider railroad crossing will likely be necessary because it is reasonable to
anticipate that the County will want to see a turn lane just south of the railroad crossing
Ltr-071403-Council
1326 Energy Park Drive · St. Paul, MN 55108 · 651/644-4389 fax 651/644-9446 toll free 888/368-4389
City Council
July 14, 2003
Page Two
onto their county road. Also, if you review the County cost participation policy, turn lanes
are to be fully funded by the City. It makes no sense that the City should fund the cost of a
turn lane from a county road onto a county road.
Item 2.G. in the body of the agreement talks about how monies will be dispersed from the
County to the City. The two methods mentioned in that paragraph are based upon the
percentage of the project completed or at the end of the project once the County has
accepted the project. City staff is concerned that with the City in the lead and in a
contractual arrangement with a contractor for the construction of this roadway, any dispute
on what the County will fund leaves the City responsible to pay the contractor for the work
performed and then deal with the dispute with the County over who should pay for it. City
staff would feel much more comfortable if the roles in this scenado were reversed.
Under item 2.A. the paragraph makes the City responsible for acquiring right-of-way for the
road if necessary. This puts the City in a unique comer. Currently, CR 44 is a rural-style
roadway; that is, it has no concrete curb and gutter and relies on roadside ditches for
drainage. Typically, an urban-style roadway with concrete curb and gutter and storm
sewer can be built within a lesser right-of-way requirement because there is no need for
ditches, and clear zones required by the Minnesota Department of Transportation are less.
However, if the road style is changed from rural to urban, the City would be required to pay
for all of the concrete curb and gutter. If it is not changed from rural to urban, the City is
required to acquire the additional right-of-way needed for road construction. It would seem
reasonable that if the County can build an urban road, minimizing the need for any
additional right-of-way acquisition, they should bear some of, if not all of the cost
responsibility for the curb and gutter, since it would be a decision based on the available
right-of-way, and not necessarily a decision based strictly on reconstructing a road in the
urban area of the City.
Based on these types of issues, it is the City's staff's recommendation that the City Council not pursue
the lead position in the reconstruction of CR 44. We also discussed how the County might react to
this position. We believe that the County may indicate that they will have difficulty finding County time
to design this roadway. If the City Council concurs, we would suggest an approach of asking the
County to put the manpower on this project for construction in 2005, rather than CSAH I in the
northern part of the City.
I will be in attendance at your July 21, 2003 City Council meeting to discuss this information further
and answer any questions.
Sincerely,
Howard R. Green Company
TJM:sw
Enclosures
Ltr-071403-Council
Howard R, Green Company
PROJECT LOCATIONS
reLY 2~, 2003
CITY CO~C~