HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.a. Comprehensive Guide Plan Revision - Contract Proposal 7
y" �
Agenda item 5a.
. TO: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: DEAN JOHNSON, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: JUNE 13, 1990
SUBJ: COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN REVISION - CONTRACT PROPOSAL
JUNE 19, 1990 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #5a.
Attached are copies of a work program, developed by the City,
and a proposal, from the Hoisington Group Inc. , for the
complete revision to the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The work
program/proposal is in response to the Council's direction to
staff, which identified the revision of the guide plan as an
immediate priority of the City.
In reviewing this information, you will note the obvious cost
consciousness of the City in soliciting the proposal. City
staff will be committed to a significant amount of
participation in this exercise. While this will primarily '
involve demands upon Community Development staff, it will also
involve assistance from Public Works and Parks . I have spaken
to Rich and Dave about their departments ` participation. If
we are successful in hosting a planning intern from the
University of Minnesota, many of the staff burdens can be
diminished.
The proposal fram Fred Hoisington is in the amount of $15,930 .
This is a very reasonable bid for the scope of services
involved, the task at hand and the time frame identified. In
1979 we entered into a cantract with Brauer and Associates for
the same purpose in the amaunt of $25, 000 . The Hoisington bid
reflects two basic differences from the 1979 contract:
increased staff involvement and the production of the final
i
text and graphics by the City.
We pulled the graphics and text fram this contract, believing
that we were better off producing the document through our GIS
capabilities . This may not only save money, it will allow
future revisions to be made to the document inexpensively and
rapidly. If this potential were to be delayed or become
unrealistic, the expenses for publication can be put in the
1991 budget.
There is one other potential expense that is not reflected in
my work program or the proposal . Any engineering services,
i.e. , transportation or utility information, which cannot be
done in-house, will need to be contracted separately. Rich
and I have not determined the potential extent ar cost of such
involvement. (This was a separate contract in 1979, as well) .
, �
Council Meeting Agenda Item 5a.
June 19, 1990 Regular Meeting
You will note in the cover letter from Fred Hoisin
reference to the proposal fc�r the retail gton the
study. This is in response to Council directaontatath�arket
"goals session. �� As of thi5 writing, I have nat recei last
more information. The proposal for this scope of serviCny
will be on the EDA agenda, as well as the City Council, es
budgeted funds for the EDA to pursue the second hase We
original market study. While this proposal willPbe ex�anded
to include industrial, the budg�t may be sufficient toPcove
this cost. r
In summary, I am confident staff can meet the obli a `
necessary to complete the guide plan in an ex editions
manner. I am also pleased with the proposal submitted, us
we have acknowledged this undertaking has not been bu While
for, we have also identified potential funding categories in
dgeted
previous discussions ,
I would recommend the City Council accept the ro 0
the Hoisington Group Inc. to assist the City in the com 1e
revision of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. P P Sal from
p te
2
_ UU � �
LAND USE CONSULTANTS
Hoisington Groun Inc.
June 8, 1990
Mr. Dean Johnson
Community Development Director
City of Rosemount
2875 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068 ,
Re: Comprehensive Plan Proposal
Dear Dean:
In the interest in giving you as much review time as possible, I am
forwarding this proposal for comprehensive planning services so you can
give me your comments early next week regarding the level of
involvement you expect fram HGI on this project.
As you can see, I have developed a Work Program more along the lines of
process than Comprehensive Plan format. It is much easier for me to
estimate fees on this basis. We are also proposing to work on an hourly
not to exceed basis anticipating that the level of involvement may be
somewhat less than my estimate. Give me a call on Monday or Tuesday
and we will make whatever changes seem appropriate.
I have not yet received the information from Jim McComb that would
allow far the continuation of his retail market analysis. I have asked him
to include industry and the types that might be intrinsically best suited to
the City of Rosernount. I still hope to have that proposal in the mail to you
by Monday, June 1l.
I will look forward to hearing from you on the llth or 12th regarding the
comprehensive planning proposal.
Sincerely,
Fr Hoisington, Planning Consultant
Enclosure
7300 Metro Blvd. •Suite 525• Minneapolis, MN 55435•(612)835-9960
.. �1 �1 � � ;
�AND USE CONSULTANTS
Hoisington Grou� In�.
ROSEMOUNT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PROPOSAL
A. WC�RK PROC AN�
The City and Consultant will be responsible for the following tasks:
1. Base MaR inglSched �1ing. The City will provide the Consultant
with a repro-ducible milar of the existing City Base Map for use in
rendering preliminary plans. The City will be responsible for the
updating of the base map for incorporation within the Comp-
rehensive Plan. The Consultant will prepare the implementation
schedule.
2. Data Map ing. The City will be responsible for the rough-
mapping/updating of existing conditions including existing land use,
existing utilities, soils characteristics, water resources, zoning, public
and institutional land uses, parks and open space, existing
transportation, existing water service, existing sewer service, and
designated wetland areas.
3. Inventorv/Data Collection. The City will be responsible for the
collection of all of the foilowing information:
a. Transportation information including existing traffic volumes,
streets/highway improvement proposals, transit plans and
programs, and any airport information appropriate to the City of
Rosemount.
b. Demographic information including trends in population, age,
income, household size, gender and occupation (19b0-1990),
c. Housing characteristics including type, number, condition, value,
rents, age, and occupancy.
d. Calculation and tabulation of existing land use areas.
e. Community facilities and services information including existing
� parks and open spaces, police, fire, City administration and
schools.
f. Utility systems information and storm drainage plans.
g. Any City plans and policies that are not part of the Comprehensive
Plan.
h. City history.
i. Metropolitan Council System Statements (1988 and 1989}.
j. Building permit history (5 to 10 years).
7300 Metro Blvd. •Suite 525• Minneapolis, MN 55435• (612)835-9960
k. Half-sections and air photos.
L Existing TIF plans.
m. Mississippi River Critical Area Plans.
n. Image studies.
4. n� 1 ,�,.
a. Summarize/illustrate 1960-1990 census data. (City)
b. Provide narrative of comparable data. (HGI)
c. Provide narrative - existing facilities/conditions. (HGI)
d. Develop graphics - existing conditions/facilities. (City)
e. Provide narrative summary for inventory/analysis. (HGI)
f. General analysis and synthesis. (HGI)
5. �ssumntions/forecastin,g,. (Shared) �
a. Population
b. Households
c. Employment
d. Parks and Recreation
e. Land demand
b. Communitv f�oals. The City will assemble goals and objectives and
Consultant will analyze/organize goals, link goals and objectives ta
plan elements, establish their compatibility with regional policy and
provide the final statement or summary of community goals.
7. Policv Plan and oncent Plan. The Consultant will be responsible
for the preparation of objectives, alternative policy statements and
concept plans (land use and transportation) for review with Staff and
Planning Commission.
` � 8. Comnrehensive Plan PreAaration (based on approximate Comp-
rehensive Plan format).
a. Introduction-Executive summary. (HGI)
b. Inventory and analysis. The City will be responsible for sum-
marizing and illustrating the 1960-1990 census data and existing
conditions/facilities graphics. The Consultant will be responsible
for preparing the narrative for the inven.tory and analysis section.
c. Land Use Plan.
1 } Residential/hausing Plan
2) Commercial Plan
Rosemount Work Program Page 2
3) I�ndustrial Plan
4) Agriculture/U of M Agriculture Experiment Station Plan
5) Pine Bend
6) Rosemount Research Center
7) Mississippi River Criticai Area
8) Urban �'�. Rural Service Areas (MUSA)
The Consultant will be responsible for the preparation of all plans
and text and the City will be responsible for the preparation of
charts, xables, maps and graphics.
d. Transportation Plan.
1 ) Major thoroughfares
a) Objectives
b) Policiesinarrative
c) Functional classification
d) Design standards .
e) Phasing of improvements
f) Plan graphic with projected traffic volumes
g) Consistency with Metro systems
The Consultant will be responsible for preparing plans and aIl
�f the narzative with the City to be respansible for the
functional classificatian criteria and plan graphics.
2) Transit (HGI)
3) Aviatiori (HGI)
e. Public Facilities Plan.
1 ) Utilities (sewer water and storm sewer}
a} Objectives
b) Policies/narrative
c) Sewer flows
d) Phasing (5 and 10 year plans)
e) Consistency with Metro systems
The City to be respansible for specific sanitary sewer, public
water and storm sewer systems plans and public utility
graphics. The Consultant will be responsible for plan nanative.
2) Parks, trails and open space.
a) Objectives -
b) Policies/narrative
c) Standards
d) Plan graphics
e j Consistency with Metro systems
The City to be responsible for park system criteria and the
preparation of plan graphcs. The Consultant to be responsible
for narrative and the development of general parks, trails and
open space plans.
Rosemount Work Program Page 3
3) Other Public Facilities (administration, schools, fire, police,
public works, etc.). (City)
f. Environmental Protection Plan (including historical resources,
solar access, etc.). (City)
h. Implementation Plan. {City)
9. Mannin� of Ba kgPOLn� Information. The City will rough-map
all background information for the Consultant.
' 10. Preliminarv Plan (Tra ics. The Consu2tant will be responsible
for rough-mapping of all graphic plans.
11 . Final Plan Granhic,�. (City)
12. Working Drafts. The Consultant will. be responsible for the
preparation of alI working drafts and will provide the City with one
(1) original for reproduction by the City.
13. Final Comnrehensiv Plan Draft. The City wiii be responsible for
the preparation of all final graphics and text and for all reproduetion
' thereof.
14. �1�I e e i n g'�' The Consultant will attend up to 12 meetings and work-
shops to be conducted jointly by the Consultant and City. These
- would involve presentations of goals and policies, plan elements and
the overall draft plan to Boards, Committees, Commissions, City
Council and general public.
15. Meetin�s with itv=, It is estimated that there will be
approximately eight (8) additional meetings with City Staff
throughout the course of the planning process.
B. ADDITIONAL S�RVI ,
The following services have not been authorized by the City but are
available upon request;
1. Meetings in addition to those identified ander Paragraph A, Work
Program.
2. Revisions to the Comprehensive Plan after it has been adopted by the '
Planning Commission. I
Rosemount Work Program
Page 4
3. Additional work not outiined in Paragraph A above but requested by
the City.
C. FEF:S FnR PRnFE IONA SFRVI �
The City agrees to pay the Consultant for services rendered as follows:
l. For the Consultant's Basic Services described in Paragraph A, a fee
based on the Consultant's current hourly rate schedule plus expenses
not to exceed FIFTEEN THOUSAND NIIVE HUNDR.ED THIRTY DOLLARS
($15,930).
Fee Breakdown:
• Meetings .
12 Formal 30 hrs @ $85/hr $2,550
8 Staff 20 hrs �a $85/hr 1 700
• Analysis/Goals/ '
Policies/Text 120 hrs �a $70/hr 8 400
• Graphics 32 hrs @ $40/hr 1,2 8 0
• Secretari a l 4 8 hrs �a $30/hr 1 440
• Ex pens e s (m i l eage, prints, copies) �S 6 0
$15,930
2. For the Consultant's Additional Services as described in Paragraph B,
a fee based on the the Consultant's cunent hourly rate schedule plus
incidental expenses.
Cunent Hourl Rates:
Senior Professional (meetings and consultation} $8 5/h r
Professional $40-70/hr
Secretarial $3 0/hr
Rosemount Work Program
Page 5
i t P.O. BOX 510
\�Z� � 2875-145TH ST. W.
O�p y��� ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55068
G`r�'0��� 612-423-4411
May 23, 1990
Mr. Fred Hoisington, President
Hoisington Group Inc.
7300 Metro Boulevard, Suite 525
Edina, MN 55435
RE: Guide Plan Revision - �'roposal for Services
Dear Fred:
As you and I discussed, the City of Rosemount is preparing for the complete revision
of its Comprehensive Guide Plan. The City Council has conducted a number of
"goals" workshops with department heads and determined that updating the guide plan
is the City's immediate top priority. There are a number of obvious reasons for this;
unfortunately, this task has not been budgeted for. The City Council has also
requested that the revision be completed in 1990.
The complete guide plan revision is too cumbersome and time consuming for staff to
take on in this time frame. It is obvious that we need outside assistance to match our
priorities. With an eye on the budget and acknowledgement of staff capabilities and
commitment, I have prepared the enclosed "work program." The purpose of the work
program is to identify tasks, as well as responsibilities of the City and consultant.
In addition'to the work program, I offer the following clarifications:
1. The goals/objectives collection is complete and identified in "town
meeting summaries," citizen attitude survey summaries and the
summary of summaries by the Citizen Advisor}� Committee. A
critical role of the consultant is to transform this information into
the revised guide plan.
2. The City and Dakota County have entered into an agreement for
the aerial photography, ground control and topographic illustration
for the entire limits of the Cit}'. This information will be
formatted into the County's GIS system and available to the City in
1991. We feel that the final graphics for the guide plan should be
prepared by the City at that time. For the purposes of the work
program, we will utilize the existing base map and "balloon
diagrams."
3. Due to the timing and completion of the graphics, the final layout
and printing of the document shall also be the responsibility of the
City. The consultant will be responsible for the "working draft"
throughout the projert.
4. The City has submitted an application to the University of
Minnesota for participation in a new graduate planning internship
program. If selected, the City would have access to a "half time"
person, whose primary responsibility will be to assist in the guide
plan revision. The City will learn about the status of this option
by mid-June.
Fred Hoisiagton
May 23, 1990
Page Two
5. It is anticipated that as many as 12 workshops/public meetings
would be conducted by the consultant and staff. These would
involve presentations of goals and policies, plan elements and the
overall draft plan to boards, committees, commissions, the City
Council and general public.
In summary, this is an ambitions undertaking, requiring extraordinary commitments.
The Community Development Department is prepared to fulfill its obligations. The
other half of this commitment on this project is yours. I'm banking on your
familiarity with the community, professional judgement, coordination/organization
capabilities and overall negotiating skills to meet the challenge.
I am certain you have some questions. Please give me a calL We would like to review
a cost proposal from you as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Dean R. Johnson
Director of Community Development
DRJ/DQ
Enclosu re
City of Rosemount
Comprehensive Guide Pfan Revision
Work Program
TASKS DESCRIPTION � �tote seco�d �tote
L INTRODUCTION - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Prepare Introduction/Purpose Narrative HGI CIT'Y
B. Describe Regional Retationships HC,I CI.I.y
C. Describe Sub-regional Trends/Assumptions HGI C�'�y
D. Summaries Local 1�ends/Assumptions HGI C�,
E. Summarize Development StrategylProjections gGi C�y
II. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
A. Summarize/Illustrate 1960-1990 Census Data CIT'Y HGI
B. Provide Narrative of Comparative Data HGI CI'ry
C• Provide Narrative - Existing Conditions/Facilities HGI CTTy
D. Develop Graphics - Existing Conditions/Facilities CI'Iy __
E• Provide Narrative Summary for Inventory/Analysis HGI CITY
III. LAND USE PLAN
A. Community Goals and Objectives
1. A.ssemble goals and objectives CTTy __
2. Analyze/organize goals and objectives HGI CTTy
3. Link goals and objectives to pian element HGI CTTy
4. Compatibility with regional policY HGi CI'1'y
5. Section narrative/policies HC,I C�.1,
B. Development Strategies
1. Policy alternatives analysis HGI CI.�,
2. Goals to policy development HGI CTTy
3. Linkage with plan elements HC,j C�.I,
4. Charts, tables, "2A00 i,and Use Graphic' CI'ry __
5. Section narrative/policies HGI C�y
C. Urban vs. Rural Service Area
1. MUSA issue description/analysis HGI CITY
2. MUSA staging, short-long term HGI C�'y
3. Linkage with public facilities HGI C�y
4. Land use graphics CITY --
5. Section narrative/policies HGI C�y
TASKS DESCRIPTION
Primarv Role Seconiarv Rols
D. Housing Plan
1. Inventory/anaiysis CI.�,
2. Regional policy HGI
3. Spec�c goals and objectives HGI C�y
4• Projections/Land use graphic HGI C�y
5. Section narrative/policies C�
HGI CiTY
E• Economic Development Plan
L Inventory/analysis C�
2. Spe�c goals and objectives HGI
3. Economic Development Authority HGj C�y
4• Commercial development strate CI� HGI
gy - CBD HGI CITY
5. Industrial development strategy - MUSA HGI
6. Employment projections/Land use graphic C�y C�
7. Section narrative/policies HGI
HGI C�y
F• Rural Open SpacelAgriculture Plan
1. Inventory/analysis CIT'Y
2. Spec�c goals and objecdves HGI
- 3. Conflicts: Housing/Industry HGI C�y
4• U of M Agriculture Experiment Station HGI C�y
5• Section narrative/policies HGI CITY
HGI CITy
�• Fine Bend Development Plan
1. Inventory/analysis CITY
�. Specific goals and objectives HGI
3� Utility provision/MUSA HGI C�y
CITl' HGI
4. �' Quality/Marketability/Compatibility HGI C�y
5. Land use graphic CITY
6. Section narrative/policies HGI
CITlr
H. Rosemount Research Center Development Plan
1. Inventory/Analysis/Environmental issues C�y
2. Specific goals and objectives HGI
3. Dakpta County Incinerator HGI ��y
4. Development feasibility/MUSA C� HGI
5. Land use graphic HGI CITY
6. Section narrative/policies CITY __
HGI CITy
I• Mississippi River Critical Area Plan
L State regulatory compatibility
2. Specific goals and objectives HGI C�y
3. Revise/incorporate existing text HGI C�y
4. Revise graplucs HGI CI1'Y
CITY __
2
TASKS DESCRIPTION Pri�► �tote second Ft �e
J. Natural Resources Plan
1. Geomorphology narrative CITY HGI
2. Specific goals and objectives CITY HGI
3. Wedands inventory/analysis CITY HGI
4. Soils/slopes inventoryJanalysis CIT'Y HGI
5. Woodlands inventory/analysis CITY HGI
6. Native vegetation inventory/analysis CITY HGI
7. Wildlife habitat inventory/analysis CITY HGI
8. Historical features inventory/analysis CI'TY HGI
9. Solar access protection CITY HGI
10. Natural resources graplucs C�y --
il. Section narrative/policies CITY HGI
N. PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN
A. Public Utilities Pian
l. Spec�c goals and objectives HGI CI'I'y
2. Sanitary sewer system CITY HGI
3. Public water system CITY HGI
4. Storm sewer system CITY HGI
5. Regional system compatibility HGI CITY
6. 5-year/10-year system plans HGI CITY
7. Public utiliry graphics CITY --
8. Section narrativelpolicies HGI CITy
B• Parks and Open Space Plan
1. Spec�c goals and objectives HGI C�'�'y
2. Regional rela6onships HGI eI'ry
3. Local park system criteria/plan CITY HGI
4. Trails plan CI'TY HGI
5. Open space plan CITY HGI
6. Park graphics CITY
7. Section narrative/policies HGI CITY
C. Transportation Plan
1. Spec�c goals and objectives HGI CITy
, ,. 2. Regional relationships HGI CI'I'y
r� 3. Funcdonal classification criteria CITY HGI
,.(� 4. Transportation plan graphic CTTY --
5. Section narrative/policies HGI CI'I'y
D. Public Facilities Plan
1. Specific goals and policies CTTy __
2. Growth and needs assessments C�y __
3. Short and long term plans CITy __
4. Public facilities graphic CITY __
3. Section narrative/policies CI'Ty __
3
TASKS DESCRIPTION Primarv Itole secondarv Rote
V. OFFICIAL CONTROLS
A. City Code CITY -
B. Zoning Ordinance CITY
C. Subdivision Ordin�nce CITY --
D. Capital Improvement Plan CITY --
E. Section Narrative CITY --
4