HomeMy WebLinkAbout10G - Park Fee Study
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
October 2, 2000 @
10G
Frank Boyles, City Manage~
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT TO
COMPLETE A PARK FEE STUDY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SAME.
DISCUSSION: History: The City Attorney has previously recommended that we complete
periodic analysis of our fees to assure that the amounts collected are based upon
a study and analysis of data relating to best estimates of actual park
improvement costs and that our collection of fees is authorized by state statute.
As a result of this recommendation, the City Council has previously authorized a
Trunk Storm Sewer Fee Study which is nearing completion. More recently, the
City Council approved the solicitation of proposals for a park fee study.
ISSUES:
Current Circumstances: Requests for proposal were prepared pursuant to
Council authorization and mailed to nine vendors who, we thought, would be
capable of performing the work. Three proposals were received. One of the
proposals was delivered almost thirty minutes after the advertised time of
opening. That proposal included two alternate costs to complete the work: one
for $35,920, and the other $47,110. Two other not to exceed proposals were also
received:
Bonestroo Anderlik - $14,707
Ingraham & Associates - $16,900
The staff analyzed both proposals. Bonestroo (who is completing our Trunk
Stormwater Fee Study) provided a straight forward proposal. They did not
identify similar park fee study projects they have completed. Ingraham, on the
other hand, has completed park fee studies for the cities of Shakopee, Dayton,
Hanover and Greenfield. Consequently, the City Attorney and I met with Mr.
Ingraham to review and negotiate a revision to his project proposal. The proposal
included a public survey. We advised Ingraham of our 1999 City Survey and told
him that this step and the associated costs should be eliminated from his
proposal. Accordingly, he submitted a modified proposal in the amount of
$14,305.
Conclusion: The City Attorney and I recommend that Ingraham and Associates
be selected to complete the Park Fee Study in an amount not to exceed $14,305.
The Park Dedication and Park Support Fees are the primary resource by which
the City builds its park system. Since residents judge the community, in part, by
the quality of the parks, it is important that the fee be sufficient to accomplish
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
I :\COUNCIL\AGNRPTS\2000\ 1 002_1 OG.DO~N EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
.
j
n
planned park development. Since we have not conducted such a study, we do
not know whether our funding is sufficient. It is therefore fiscally prudent for us to
complete this study.
We have not adjusted the park fee of $13,000 per acre for many years. We are
aware of recent sales of land in the community where developers have paid
between $30,000-$50,000 per acre. Therefore, we are collecting substantially
less than we should be when cash is dedicated in lieu of land.
Finally, the City Attorney has recommended that our fees be examined
periodically to assure they are justified and legally appropriate.
ALTERNATIVES: (1) Adopt a Resolution awarding contract to complete a park fee study and
authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the same.
(2) Direct staff to supply additional information before taking further action.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Motion and second to adopt a resolution awarding contract to complete a park
fee study to Ingraham and Associates in an amount not to exceed $14,305, and
authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the same.
I:\COUNCIL \AGNRPTS\2000\ 1002_1 OG.DOC
RESOLUTION oo~ IO~
I 't ~ A RESOLUTON AWARDING CONTRACT TO COMPLETE A
NNESO ARK FEE STUDY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE THE SAME.
Motion By:
Second By:
WHEREAS,
the primary source of funding City park improvements is the park dedication and support
fee; and
WHEREAS,
the existing park dedication and support fees have not been amended for many years
and are out-of-date; and
WHEREAS,
the City Attorney has recommended such fees be reviewed and studied to assure they
are sufficient and legally sanctioned; and
WHEREAS,
proposals were solicited for the completion of such a study; and
WHEREAS,
proposals were received and evaluated by the City Manager and the City Attorney; and
WHEREAS,
the City Attorney and City Manager recommend the award of contract to Ingraham and
Associates in an amount not to exceed $14,305 as set forth in a revised proposal dated
September 14, 2000.
Now THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake that the following are
hereby adopted:
1. The contract to complete the Park Fee Study is hereby awarded to Ingraham and Associates in an
amount not to exceed $14,305 as set forth in the proposal dated September 14,2000.
2. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the City's standard professional
services contract for said work.
3. Funding to complete this work is authorized to be expended from the Capital Park Fund.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 2ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000.
Mader Mader
Ericson Ericson
Gundlach Gundlach
Petersen Petersen
Zieska Zieska
YES
NO
City Manager, City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
. ~T--'-""'r-"'''-'''''--'---''''''- ......-".........--
Prior Lake Park Fee Study
Ingraham & Associates Inc.
September 14,2000
2
PRIOR LAKE PARK FEES STUDY
CONSULTING SERVICES PROPOSAL
Project Understanding
Prior Lake uses a combination of park land dedication, park dedication fees, park support fees,
and bond referendum funds to acquire and build its park system. The following questions have
been raised about the current park and trail funding system:
1.) Is the current fee and land dedication system providing adequate funds to meet the
demand caused by new growth?
This questions raises two related questions that must be answered in detail as part of
this study:
a.) What are the future park and trail needs?
b.) What is the cost of park and trail acquisition and development?
2.) Does the current land and fee system (in particular the park support fee) meet legal
standards and the "reasonableness" test?
3.) Based on the answers to the above questions, how should the park dedication ordinance be
changed?
Park dedication policies are a fundamental tool for acquiring and building municipal park
systems. Due to recent Supreme Court cases, the legal framework for dedication requirements
is changing. Park fees must balance park land and fiscal needs with a demonstrated
relationship to the type of development and its use of the park system. Park fees must be
structured to meet the financial needs for new parks and trails and should be roughly
proportionate to an equivalent land dedication. Fees must keep up with rising land costs and
escalating construction costs. Iffees are too low, general funds will be needed to build parks
for new development.
Project Approach
We propose to use a four part process to review and update park and trail fees:
1. A Needs Assessment and Land Cost Evaluation
2. Preparation of a Park and Trail System and Financial Plan
3. A Park Dedication Fee Policy and Ordinance
4. Public Review and Approval
Prior Lake Park Fee Study
Ingraham & Associates Inc.
September 14,2000
3
The foundation of the process is the preparation of a city park and trail system plan and a
detailed estimate of the cost of acquisition and development of parks and trails. The existing
Prior Lake Comprehensive Park and Trail Plan provides a framework for the system plan, but
the Comprehensive Plan lacks the detail needed to obtain accurate costs. We will rely of input
form City staff to determine specific park and trail needs. We will prepare costs estimates
based on the system needs. The costs combined with growth forecasts drive and justify the
fees and lead to a logical and defensible park fee ordinance. The bulk of the existing ordinance
and fee system is sound. The ordinance needs to be evaluated and adjusted based on a detailed
analysis of the park system, legal framework, development costs and forecast growth. Our
work will create the supporting background and legal support for the fee system.
We have successfully evaluated and updated other metro area city's park and trail fees. Our
proven experience will work well for Prior Lake.
Scope of Services and Work Plan
We propose to use a staffwork group to assist with the study. We envision the work group to
include City staff from Administration, Legal, Parks, Public Works and Finance. We also
propose to use a developer's forum meeting to obtain input from those most directly effected
by the fee system. We will prepare progress reports which can be used to keep the City
Council and other stakeholders informed of the status of the study.
We have led many study work groups to successful and long lasting conclusions.
Scope of Work and Task Details
1. Needs Assessment and Land Valuation
We will meet with city staff to refine the work program and schedule. We will prepare a needs
assessment based on a detailed review of the Comprehensive Plan, analysis of growth forecast
and staff input regarding park and trail improvements. The needs assessment will also be based
on local and national standards for park and trail levels of service (LOS) and desired ratios of
park acres per capita and park service areas. We will work with City Finance staff and the
County Assessor to determine land values. We will also obtain input form other local sources
such as realtors or lenders to verify recent land sales figures. The needs assessment and land
cost data will lead logically to a Park and Trail System Plan (Task 2).
Meetings:
Deliverables:
Study Work Group (2), County Assessor and realtorsllenders
Park and Trail Needs Assessment Summary
Land Valuation Summary
. ',. .__.....".~_,c., ..,.. .~__.....~'._,_,.,._.' ,,",....._.--~..,...,.~...._",.-..._..~ ""
Prior Lake Park Fee Study
Ingraham & Associates Inc.
September 14, 2000
4
2. Park and Trail System and Financial Plan
A park and trail system plan will be prepared based on the needs assessment information. The
system plan is needed in order to obtain an accurate cost estimate for the total "build out" park
and trail system. That cost estimate will help determine the adequacy and level of park fees.
The existing Comprehensive Plan will provide a framework for the more detailed system plan.
The system plan will illustrate the general location, size and type of parks, trails and recreation
facilities. It will be based on the Needs Assessment and local and national levels of service
standards. A cost estimate for acquisition and construction of all new trails and parks will be
prepared. The system plan and cost estimate will help determine the need for park fees and
will suggest an equitable structure for the Park fee system and ordinance (Task 3). The Park
and Trail System Plan will also be a highly beneficial tool. It can be used to help determine
park land dedication needs, annual CIP needs and park development.
Meetings:
Deliverables:
Study Work Group
Park and Trail System Plan (text, maps and graphics)
System Acquisition and Development Cost Estimate
3. Park Dedication Fee Policy and Ordinance
This task includes a detailed analysis of the existing fee system and ordinance. A developer's
forum will be held to obtain feedback about the dedication and fee process. A draft park
dedication and fee policy will be prepared based on the Park and Trail system cost estimate,
growth forecasts, and staff input. The draft ordinance and fee recommendation will be
reviewed with City staff and the City Attorney prior to public review. The fee system will be
designed to provide adequate fees to meet the identified system needs and to collect those fees
in an equitable manner in keeping with State statutes and case law standards.
Meetings:
Deliverables:
Study Work Group, developers forum and City Council review
Park Dedication and Fee Analysis
Draft Park Dedication Policy and Ordinance
4. Public Review and Approval
The Park and Trail Fee Policy and Ordinance will be revised into a final draft based on staff,
and Council direction. The final draft will be presented for public review and comment at a
public hearing. The policy and ordinance and supporting materials will be presented to the
City Council for approval.
Public Meetings:
Deliverables:
Public Hearing and City Council
Final Park and Trail Fee Policy Document
Final Park Dedication Ordinance
Supporting Materials
Summary Report
Prior Lake Park Fee Study
Ingraham & Associates Inc.
September 14,2000
5
Project Team
Ingraham & Associates are park planning and city planning consultants who provide solutions
and plans for Minnesota municipalities. I & A's staffhas extensive experience in park
dedication, park financing, park and trail system plans and the public planning process. Greg
Ingraham would be the project manager and principal planner for the Prior Lake Park Fee
Study. Greg brings over 20 years of experience serving local government as a consultant,
planner and park and recreation director. That experience assures a smooth and efficient
process and a first class result. Wendy Anderson-Berg will assist with park planning, cost
estimates, graphics and report preparation.
Greg Ingraham, RLA, AICP
Wendy Anderson-Berg
Principal Planner and Project Manager
Park Planner
Hourly Rate
$80.00
$65.00
Consulting Fees
We will complete the above scope of work resulting in an updated park fee policy and
ordinance and a park and trail system plan for a not-too-exceed fee of$14,305. A breakdown
of fees by task and planned meetings is attached.
Similar Project Experience
Ingraham & Associates recently completed park and trail system plans and park dedication
ordinances for the cities of Shakopee, Dayton, Hanover and Greenfield. As the former Park
Director, Greg Ingraham also prepared the park dedication fee analysis and ordinance for
Bloomington, Minnesota.
In addition, we are prepared comprehensive park and trail system plans and facility analysis for
Dayton, Afton, Hanover, Mounds View, New Brighton, Shoreviewand Arden Hills,
Minnesota and Bismarck, North Dakota. I also prepared the Bloomington Park Needs and
Financing Study, which analyzed short and long-term park and trail needs and costs, and
established a ten-year financial plan for park improvement and construction. The Plan
garnered resident and political support and resulted in allocation of$4.1 million for park and
trail projects.
Since 1996, Ingraham & Associates has conducted an annual survey of park dedication fees in
Minnesota. Our survey is widely used by municipalities across Minnesota. We have spoken
about park dedication and financing at numerous State and local conferences and are
recognized by many as the park dedication experts in Minnesota. We are trained public
facilitators and have led many similar studies and task forces. We also have extensive
experience in public opinion surveys.
See the attached project sheets for summaries of the following work:
. Shakopee Park Dedication Study
--..-.....--.....--r----,r---~-..-...--..---.-..- ..
Prior Lake Park Fee Study
Ingraham & Associates Inc.
September 14, 2000
6
. Bloomington Park Needs and Financing Study
. Park Dedication Ordinances- Bloomington, Dayton, Greenfield, Hanover, and Shako pee.
. Bismarck Park District Strategic Plan
. Park System Plans - Afton, Dayton, East Grand Forks, Hanover, New Brighton
. Park and Recreation Facility Analysis - Arden Hills, Mounds View, New Brighton, North
Oaks, Shoreview, and White Bear Lake.
. Minnesota Park Dedication Survey - Annual survey of 100 Minnesota Cities.
Summary
We are excited about the opportunity to work with the City of Prior Lake. Our professional
experience and background in park financing, park planning, and city planning are well suited
to needs of this project and our recent work on the other cities park dedication ordinances will
benefit the City of Prior Lake. This is the type of project we want to be involved with and we
guarantee your satisfaction.
~
.Q
....~
QJ II)
.g>>~
:::s
CXl
lD e
.g>>:::s
cij~
"i
(I)
o
jc.
ClJ e
.JD.
...
o >-
.C 'tJ
D.S
-0
o QJ
~QJ
_u.
(Ji!:
ClJ
D.
-
QJ
r:::
r:::
o
l
~
~
~
o::C
w 0
zl!!-
ZllllO
c:('Cco
..Jcw
0..<(-;
>.....
:lc::'CQ)
o::cal
<(Ill
0..3:
E
1-0::11I
Ow.s:::.
", 11I ~
w",,"'O
,<( Cleo
Oz.Ew
0::<( ~
a.. :E ~
C>
.!
-6
QJ
'5
U)
o
o
6
~
lO
eo
C'I!.
10
o
M
"It
T""
o
o
N
8
~
~
8
...!.
8
o/S
"0
c:
as
~ffi
as-
Q.D..
-as
o .0
c: c:
o as
.. c:
eu:
as "0
a.c:
~ as
Q. E
ii
t-~
~-
= .e
t-t-
CD
CD
U.
c:
o
~
iQ)
o g
~as
as .~
Q."E
QJO
!"O
.c c:
t-as
~
(1)=
ClJ 0
t-Q.
10
<0
<0
N
T""
(I)
Q
c:
;;0. E
CD :]
CD 0 2
:E~ 0
'tJC> u.
:~~l!!
o 0 c:
c.~ 5 0
e >-U Q)
a..-g~>
- - .- Q)
O(/)uo
:Jt:~N..-
VI
en
c:
:;:;
CD
CD
E
'0
c:
:]
o
o
VI
CD
B
:c
c:
D
VI
0)
c:
:;:;
CD
CD
E
a.
:]
e
G
~
~
>-
"C
:]
en
VI
CD
~
"C
c:
mI
o
~
..,.
.....
-
m
al
Ul
";;;
III
0::
0)
c:
:;:;
CD
CD
E
E
2
o
u.
~
CD
a.
o
Q)
>
CD
o
VI
CD
B
:c
c:
II
....-~-----r-......-"1r""-. . --.----.
STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made on the 2nd day of October, 2000, between the CITY OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA (hereinafter "City"), whose business address is 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E., Prior
Lake, MN 55372-1714, and INGRAHAM & ASSOCIATES, a Minnesota (hereinafter
"Consultant") whose business address is 2659 Dupont Avenue South, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN
55408.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of consultants to provide a variety of
professional services for City projects. That policy requires that persons, firms or corporations providing
such services enter into written agreements with the City. The purpose of this agreement is to set forth
the terms and conditions for professional services by Consultant for completion of a park fee study as set
forth in the City's Request for Proposals, and the Consultant's Revised Consulting Services Proposal for
Park Fee Study dated September 14, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the "Work").
The City and Consultant agree as follows:
1. Scope of Work. The Consultant agrees to provide the professional services shown in Exhibit "AU
in connection with the Work.
2. Time for Performance of Services. The Consultant shall perform the services described in
Exhibit A by December 31,2000 unless otherwise agreed upon in writing:
3. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Consultant $14,305 for the services as
described in Paragraph 1 (and Exhibit A).
A. Any changes in the scope of the work which may result in the compensation due the
Consultant shall require prior written approval by an authorized representative of the City
or by the City Council. The City will not pay additional compensation for services that do
not have prior written authorization.
B. Special Consultants may be utilized by the Consultant when required by the complex or
specialized nature of the Work and when authorized in writing by the City.
C. City agrees to pay Consultant for extra services by the Consultant or Special Consultants
when authorized in writing by the City.
4. The City agrees to provide the Consultant with the complete information concerning the Scope of
the Work and to perform the following services:
General Prof. Services
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S.E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORruNITY EMPLOYER
A. Access to the Area. Depending on the nature of the Work, Consultant may from time to
time require access to public and private lands or property. As may be necessary the City
shall obtain access to and make all provisions for the Consultant to enter upon public and
private lands or property as required for the Consultant to perform such services
necessary to complete the Work.
B. Consideration of the Consultant's Work. The City shall give thorough consideration to all
reports, sketches, estimates, drawings, and other documents presented by the Consultant,
and shall inform the Consultant of all decisions required of City within a reasonable time so
as not to delay the work of the Consultant.
C. Standards. The City shall furnish the Consultant with a copy of any standard of criteria,
including but not limited to, design and construction standards they may require in the
preparation of the report for the Project.
D. Owner's Representative. A person shall be appointed to act as the City's representative
with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement. He or she shall have
complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret, and define the
City's policy and decisions with respect to the services provided or materials, equipment,
elements and systems pertinent to the work covered by this Agreement.
5. Method of Payment. The Consultant shall submit to the City, on a monthly basis, itemized bills
for professional services performed under Section 4 of this Agreement. Bills submitted shall be
paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City.
A. Proqress Payment. For work reimbursed on an hourly basis, the Consultant shall indicate
for each employee, his or her name, job title, the number of hours worked, rate of pay for
each employee, a computation of amounts due for each employee, and the total amount
due for each project task. Consultant shall verify all statement submitted for payment in
compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable
expenses, if permitted in Exhibit A, the Consultant shall provide such documentation as
reasonably required by the City.
B. Abandoned or Suspended Work. If any work performed by the Consultant is abandoned
or suspended in whole or in part by the City, the Consultant shall be paid for any services
performed on account of it prior to receipt of written notice from the City of such
abandonment or suspension, all as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference.
C. Payments for the Consultant's Reimbursable Costs. The Consultant shall be reimbursed
for the work of special consultants, as described in Section 3B, and for other items when
authorized in writing by the City. Such items shall include: transportation of principals and
employees on special trips to the Project or to other locations, materials and supplies, and
AutoCAD as required to expedite the work, and reproduction of reports.
7. Project Manager and Staffing. The Consultant has designated Greg Inqraham to serve on the
Project. They shall be assisted by other staff members as necessary to facilitate the completion
of the Project in accordance with the terms established herein. Consultant may not remove or
replace Greq Inqraham, from the Project without the approval of the City.
General Prof. Services
2
.. . -......--...---..........-,.--........,........---..- ~
8. Standard of Care. All Work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be in accordance with
the standard of care in Scott County, Minnesota for professional services of the like kind..
9. Audit Disclosure. The Consultant shall allow the City or its duly authorized agents reasonable
access to such of the Consultant's books and records as are pertinent to all services provided
under this Agreement. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or assembled by,
the Consultant under this Agreement which the City requests to be kept confidential shall not be
made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval. All
finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs,
and reports prepared by the Consultant shall become the property of the City upon termination of
this Agreement, but Consultant may retain copies of such documents as records of the services
provided.
10. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from October 2,2000 through, December 31.2000
the date of signature by the parties notwithstanding. This Agreement may be extended upon the
written mutual consent of the parties for such additional period as they deem appropriate, and
upon the terms and conditions as herein stated.
11. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party by seven (7) days' written notice
delivered to the other party at the address written above. Upon termination under this provision if
there is no fault of the Consultant, the Consultant shall be paid for services rendered and
reimbursable expenses until the effective date of termination. If however, the City terminates the
Agreement because of the Consultant has failed to perform in accordance with this Agreement,
no further payment shall be made to the Consultant, and the City may retain another contractor to
undertake or complete the work identified in Paragraph 1. If as a result, the City incurs total costs
for the work (including payments to both the present contractor and a future contractor) which
exceed a maximum Agreement amount, if any, specified under Paragraph 3, then the Consultant
shall be responsible for the difference between the cost actually incurred and the Agreement
amount.
12. Subcontractor. The Consultant shall not enter into subcontracts for services provided under this
Agreement except as noted in the Scope of Work, without the express written consent of the City.
The Consultant shall pay any subcontractor involved in the performance of this Agreement within
the ten (10) days of the Consultant's receipt of payment by the City for undisputed services
provided by the subcontractor. If the Consultant fails within that time to pay the subcontractor any
undisputed amount for which the Consultant has received payment by the City, the Consultant
shall pay interest to the subcontractor on the unpaid amount at the rate of 1.5 percent per month
or any part of a month. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of
$100 or more is $10. For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the Consultant shall pay the actual
interest penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect
interest penalties from the Consultant shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including
attorney's fees, incurred in bringing the action.
13. Independent Consultant. At all times and for all purposes herein, the Consultant is an
independent contractor and not an employee of the City. No statement herein shall be construed
so as to find the Consultant an employee of the City.
14. Non-Discrimination. During the performance of this Agreement, the Consultant shall not
discriminate against any employee or applicants for employment because of race, color, creed,
religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, or
General Prof. Services
3
age. The Consultant shall post in places available to employees and applicants for employment,
notices setting forth the provision of this non-discrimination clause and stating that all qualified
applicants will receive consideration for employment. The Consultant shall incorporate the
foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will
require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts
for program work.
15. Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement, nor any interest arising herein, without
the written consent of the other party.
16. Services Not Provided For. No claim for services furnished by the Consultant not specifically
provided for herein shall be honored by the City.
17. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion hereof is, for any
reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision shall not
affect the remaining provisions of this Agreement.
18. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement
supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating
to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions
of this Agreement shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties,
unless otherwise provided herein.
19. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the Consultant shall
abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the provisions of services to
be provided. Any violation shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City
to immediately terminate this Agreement.
20. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement shall not
affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement.
21. Indemnification. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, and
employees harmless from any liability, claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses, including
reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission (including
without limitation professional errors or omissions) of the Consultant, its agents, employees, or
subcontractors in the performance of the services provided by this Agreement and against all
losses by reason of the failure of said Consultant fully to perform, in any respect, all obligations
under this Agreement.
22. Insurance.
A. General Liability. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain a general
liability insurance policy with limits of at least $600,000 for each person, and each
occurrence, for both personal injury and property damage. This policy shall name the City
as an additional insured for the services provided under this Agreement and shall provide
that the Consultant's coverage shall be the primary coverage in the event of a loss. The
policy shall also insure the indemnification obligation contained in Paragraph No. 21. A
certificate of insurance on the City's approved form which verifies the existence of this
General Prof. Services
4
............---...- T
1r
insurance coverage must be provided to the City before work under this Agreement is
begun.
B. Worker's Compensation. The Consultant shall secure and maintain such insurance as will
protect Consultant from claims under the Worker's Compensation Acts and from claims for
bodily injury, death, or property damage which may arise from the performance of
Consultant's services under this Agreement.
C. Professional Liability Insurance. The Consultant agrees to provide to the City a certificate
evidencing that they have in effect, with an insurance company in good standing and
authorized to do business in Minnesota, a professional liability insurance policy. Said
policy shall insure payment of damage for legal liability arising out of the performance of
professional services for the City, in the insured's capacity as the Consultant, if such legal
liability is caused by an error, omission, or negligent act of the insured or any person or
organization for whom the insured is legally liable. Said policy shall provide an aggregate
limit of $1 ,000,000.
23. Records Access. The Consultant shall provide the City access to any books, documents,
papers, and records which are directly pertinent to the specific contract, for the purpose of making
audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions, for three years after final payments and all other
pending matters related to this contract are closed.
24. Ownership of Documents. All plans, diagrams, analyses, reports, and information generated in
connection with performance of the Agreement shall become the property of the City. The City
may use the information for its purposes. Such use by the City shall not relieve any liability on the
part of the Consultant.
25. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Executed as of the day and year first written above.
Reviewed for form:
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
City Attorney
Wesley M. Mader, Mayor
Frank Boyles, City Manager
INGRAHAM & ASSOCIATES
Greg Ingraham
General Prof. Services
5
State of Minnesota )
)ss.
County of Scott )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of October, 2000, by Wesley M.
Mader and Frank Boyles, respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota, a
municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City
Council.
Notary Public
State of Minnesota )
)ss.
County of )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
Ingraham, of Ingraham & Associates, a Minnesota
behalf of the
,2000, by Greg
, on
Notary Public
This instrument drafted by:
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
General Prof. Services
6
. .... .....--..-..-..-.--,........-....-,,--...-,--.--..-.-----..---. .