10b. Payment of SWMP Fees to Bonestrool
CITY OF /q
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director
Charles Folch, City Engineer
DATE: December 6, 1994
SUB7: Payment of SWMP Fees to Bonestroo
BACKGROUND
Mr. Bob Schunicht at Bonestroo, Rosene,
opportunity to address the Council regardi
Plan.
Acton BY City Adm, r1W&,y
��a -r tir �/
Dstr. ;;;�; -;;; _t rp Ccmmissio4
rtc
D iusncii
Associates has requested an
of the Storm Water Management
I ANALYSIS
r
Back in October, 1993, Bob Schunicht'sent a bill to Paul;rauss regarding the final payment
for the SWMP plan. He indicated that an additional $67,0 was due because work was done
beyond the scope of the project,, "Paul responded on Noven ber 15, 1993 with a letter
regarding additional payment. `Paul goes into great detail regarding the scope of the payment
request. His conclusion was that the city does not owe Bonestroo any additional money.
Paul also states, "He was overruns you mentioned. I
believe we have been- an excellen - t 1 nd won tratcd. a continued
willingness to break- but additional work efforts and contract for them separat. As you are
aware, in addition to the items ; mentioned above, we have also contract nth Bonestroo to
do engineering on at least three additional W#,ier qu4tyl war ielated project
improvements. I further believe your. relation fiip with the city has been a fruitful one.
Growing out of initial assistance, we requested your firm to perform relative to our
comprehensive plan, we have spun off many - thousands of dollars of work not only the
SWMP program, but also in the area of developing comprehensive plans for city water and
sewer services and construction design and management of major improvement programs. I
regret that while you apparently believe there are problems in the billing process, that you did
not come to us at an earlier point in time. I can only conclude at this point in time, that I am
unable to justify any additional expenditures in this area."
MEMORANDUM
Don Ashworth
December 6, 1994
Page 2
Since Paul's letter in November, Charles, Bob Schunicht and I have met a couple of times to
try and resolve the payment request. To date, we still concur with Paul's findings.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that no additional payment be made to Bonestroo for the SWMP plan
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter to Don Ashworth from Bonestroo dated September 8, 1994.
2. Letter to Don Ashworth from Bonestroo dated July 15, 1994.
3. Letter to Bob Schunicht from Paul Krauss dated November 15, 1993.
4. Letter to Paul Krauss from Bob Schunicht dated December 25, 1993.
Bonestroo, Romne, Ar
B onestroo Orto G. Bonestroo. P.E.
Robert W. Rosene Joseph C. Andelik. RE.
NEW Anderlik & Marvin L. Sorvala. P.E.
Richard E. Turner. P.E.
Glenn R. Cook. P.E.
A ssociates Thomas E. Noyes. P.E.
Robert G. Schunicht. P.E.
Engineers & Architects Susan M. nsu li C.P.A.
*Senior Consultant
September 8, 1994
deNik and Associates Inc. if fmative Aaion/Equal
Howard A. Sanford, P.E. Michael P. Rau. P.E.
Keith A. Gordon, P.E. Agnes M. Ring. A.I.C.P.
Robert R. Pfeffene. P.E. Thomas W. Peterson. P.E.
Richard W. Foster, P.E. Michael C. Lynch, P.E.
David O. Loskota. P.E. James R. Maland. PE.
Robert C. Russek A.I.A. Jerry D. Pertzsch, P.E.
Jerry A. Bourdon. P.E. Scott J. Arganek, P.E.
Mark A. Hanson, PE. Kenneth P. Anderson. RE
Michael T. Rautmann, P.E. Mark R. Rolls, P.E.
Ted K. Field. P.E. Mark A. Seip. P.E.
Thomas R. Anderson. A.I.A. Gary W. Morien. P.E.
Donald C. Burgardt. P.E. Paul J. Gannon. A.I.A.
Thomas A. Syfko, P.E. Daniel J. Edgerton, P.E.
Frederic J. Stenborg, P.E. A. Rick Schmidt. P.E.
Ismael Martinez. P.E. Philip J. Caswell. P.E.
:ppoftunityEmployrr�
Mark D. Wallis. RE � /At
Miles B. Jensen. P.E.
L. Phillip Gravel. P.E.
Karen L. Wiemeri, P.E.
Gary D. Kristofitz, P.E.
Keith R. Yapp. FE.
Douglas J. Benoit. P.E. '
Shawn D. Gustafson. P.E.
Cecilio Olivier, PE.
Paul G. Heuer. P.E.
John P. Gorder, PE.
Charles A. Erickson
Leo M. Pawelsky
Harlan M. Olson
James F Engelhardt
F
Mr. Don Ashworth
City of Chanhassen '
690 Coulter Dr.
P.O. Box 147 COPY
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan
Our File Nos. 39303 / 39304
Dear Don:
Approximately three years ago our firm undertook the planning of Chanhassen's sanitary
sewer, water, and stormwater systems. The purpose of the massive effort was to provide
systems that would meet the future needs of a completely developed city and to establish '
a charge system that would assure adequate funding. During the planning process several
major milestones were achieved that kept the City on track towards the goals set forth in
the Comprehensive Plan. A summary is presented below: '
• Development of wastewater data that led to the approval of the MUSA
expansion. '
• MWCC's reallocation to Chanhassen of 3.0 million gallons per day of
capacity in the Red Rock Interceptor. This set up the possibility that '
Chanhassen could be almost completely served through Eden Prairie.
• Construction of the ChasChan Lift Station. Under this agreement, the
MWCC paid Chanhassen approximately $100,000 for temporary use of
the Chanhassen system. Also, the immediate addition of a large volume '
of flow saved Chanhassen approximately $50,0004100,000 in interim '
pumps and forcemain at the Bluff Creek Station.
• Agreement with Chaska on sewer service to portions of Chanhassen. This '
agreement eliminated at least two lift stations in the Chanhassen system.
• Setup of a financing system to allow the City to undertake the $30 million
sewer and water improvements necessary to insure a sound future
infrastructure system.
I
2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612- 636 -4600
' Mr. Don Ashworth September 8, 1994
City of Chanhassen
' Page -2-
• Agreement with Chaska on water system interconnections insure safe
water supply during emergencies and puts Chanhassen in the lead of the
Metro water planning mandates.
' • Developed a stormwater management program that met or exceeded
current requirements and established Chanhassen's reputation as a leader
' in environmentally sensitive growth.
• Established a stormwater capital improvement program and funding
system that will allow Chanhassen to implement their Task Force's vision
for the community's water resources. (No city -wide funding system was
in place before the plan was undertaken).
' • By taking a close look at the lakes and Bluff Creek established the
baseline for maintaining progress and provided direction for maintenance
' on enhancement of these valuable water resources.
• Through the lake atlas, video taping, and newsletter engaged the public
' in the process of protecting water resources.
• Produced a Stormwater Management Plan that established the "state-of-
the-art" for the Metropolitan Area and provided the City with a highly
effective management tool.
The three -year period during which the comprehensive infrastructure plans were being
prepared was a dynamic time for both the City of Chanhassen and the criteria and
regulations governing the plans. The almost continual change put us in the position of
having to spend more time on the three plans- than was originally budgeted. While change
is always anticipated in establishing a project budget, the amount of change that occurred
in this case was far beyond what could have been anticipated. The magnitude of change is
reflected in the fact that the value of our total time spent on the plans is approximately
$455,000, compared to the original budget of $280,000.
Mr. Don Ashworth
City of Chanhassen
Page -3-
September 8, 1994
While a substantial portion of that cost is our responsibility, we believe that we should be
compensated for a part of the additional cost. We have included, as attachments to this
letter, copies of previous letters and memos detailing changes or additions to the original
scope and the cost of those changes. We have also included a copy of a letter from Paul
Krauss and our response to that letter. A summary of our request is presented below:
Chanhassen Plan Cost Summa
*Tune spent on project at contract hourly rate
Please review the enclosed information and call me if you have any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Robert G. Schunicht
RGS:pr
Enc.
Sewer &
Stormwater
Item
Water Plans
Plan
Total
Value of work*
$77,892
$376,560
$454,452
Original budget amount
63,914
215,940
279,854
Difference
$13,978
$169,620
$174,598
Amount Requested
$13,978
$ 67,300
$ 81,278
*Tune spent on project at contract hourly rate
Please review the enclosed information and call me if you have any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Robert G. Schunicht
RGS:pr
Enc.
RE: Comments on November 15, 1993 letter from Paul Krauss regarding budget
expenditure update for the SWMP.
1. Level of Detail of the SWMP (Point 3)
Comment The scope of the SWMP calls for "Comprehensive Modeling" of trunks
(24" and above) and subdistricts sized between 20 and 40 acres. Due to the City's
interest in having a model that would identify all existing ponds and potential
flooding areas, the average subdistrict in developed areas was reduced to 10 acres,
and the analysis of the piping system included most of the lateral pipes (less than
24 ").
2. Lake Management Studies (Point 4)
Comment The scope of the SWMP calls only for lake ranking and evaluation of
watershed requirements concerning lakes (see Task 9 of the scope of services). The
seven lake management studies presented in the SWMP included: complete water
quality data collection and modeling; lake water quality assessment; and city -wide
improvement ranking.
I Bluff Creek Study (Point 5)
Comment No creek water quality assessment and evaluation studies were
mentioned in the original SWMP proposal. Furthermore, the study of management
alternatives for Bluff Creek was recommended by City staff and discussed during task
force meetings. The main purpose was to have some preliminary work done before
requesting money from state environmental agencies to improve Bluff Creek and
create an environmental corridor/linear park along it.
1 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612- 636 -4600
Bonestroo
Bonestrw Rosen, Anderlik and Associates lnc. P
Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E. Howard A. Sanford, P.E.
fimtadteActton /Equa/Opportunity Employer
Michael P Rau. P.E. Mark D. Wallis. PE.
R osen
Robert W Rosene, RE.*
Keith A. Gordon, P.E.
Agnes M. Ring, A.I.C.P.
Miles B. Jensen, P.E.
Joseph C. Anderlik. PE.
Robert R. Plefferle, P.E.
Thomas W. Peterson, P.E.
L. Phillip Gravel, P.E.
Anderlik &
Marvin L. Sorvaa. P.E.
Richard E. Turner. P.E.
Richard W. Foster, P.E.
David O. Loskota. P.E.
Michael C. Lynch, P.E.
James R. Maand, P.E.
Karen L. Wiemeri. P.E.
Gary D. Kristofitz. P.E.
Associates
Glenn
Thomas E. Noyes. RE.
Jerry Abert
Bourdon, RE,
Scott J. Arganek. P.E.
Douglas J. Benoit. P.E.
Robert G. Schunicht, P.E.
Mark A. Hanson, P.E.
Kenneth P Anderson. P.E.
Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E.
Eng ineers 8 Architects
9
Susan M. Ebenin, C.P.A.
*Senior Consultant
Michael T Rautmann, P.E.
Ted K. Field. P.E.
Mark R. Rolls. P.E.
Mark A. Seip. P.E.
Cecilio Olivier. PE.
Paul G. Heuer. P.E.
Thomas R. Anderson, A.I.A.
Gary W. Morien, P.E.
John P. Gorder. P.E.
Donald C. Buigardt. P.E.
Paul J. Gannon, A.I.A.
Charles A. Erickson
Thomas A. Syfko, P.E.
Daniel J. Edgerton. P.E.
Leo M. Pawelsky
Frederic J. Stenborg, P.E.
A. Rick Schmidt, P.E.
Harlan M. Olson
Ismael Martinez. P.E.
Philip J. Caswell, RE.
James E Engelhardt
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Don Ashworth
FROM:
Cecilio Olivier, Bob Schunicht
DATE:
July 15, 1994
RE: Comments on November 15, 1993 letter from Paul Krauss regarding budget
expenditure update for the SWMP.
1. Level of Detail of the SWMP (Point 3)
Comment The scope of the SWMP calls for "Comprehensive Modeling" of trunks
(24" and above) and subdistricts sized between 20 and 40 acres. Due to the City's
interest in having a model that would identify all existing ponds and potential
flooding areas, the average subdistrict in developed areas was reduced to 10 acres,
and the analysis of the piping system included most of the lateral pipes (less than
24 ").
2. Lake Management Studies (Point 4)
Comment The scope of the SWMP calls only for lake ranking and evaluation of
watershed requirements concerning lakes (see Task 9 of the scope of services). The
seven lake management studies presented in the SWMP included: complete water
quality data collection and modeling; lake water quality assessment; and city -wide
improvement ranking.
I Bluff Creek Study (Point 5)
Comment No creek water quality assessment and evaluation studies were
mentioned in the original SWMP proposal. Furthermore, the study of management
alternatives for Bluff Creek was recommended by City staff and discussed during task
force meetings. The main purpose was to have some preliminary work done before
requesting money from state environmental agencies to improve Bluff Creek and
create an environmental corridor/linear park along it.
1 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612- 636 -4600
4.
5.
6.
7.
E:3
Wetland Restoration Element (Point 6)
Comment Specific wetland improvements and restoration recommendations were
never part of Task 7 in the Scope. Task 7 includes only wetland mapping,
classification, and delineation. The additional budget mentioned in Paul's letter
relates to additional mapping, classification, and delineation of wetlands exceeding
the original 150 budgeted in the contract. It was never intended to pay for the
wetland restoration element.
Long -Term Water Quality Improvements Ranking for 14 Districts (Point 8)
Comment Task 12 of the SWMP scope calls for City -wide prioritization and CIP
for the next 20 years. Instead, a complete ranking of all future water quality
improvements was performed City -wide upon request by the task force. The task
force also requested that proposed improvements will be ranked inside each of the
14 districts in the City to help the City make management decisions inside each
watershed.
Trunk System Assessment Rates (Point 10)
Comment Task 12 in the Scope does not include the calculation of trunk
assessment rates, but this was done City -wide. The task force also requested
assessment rate calculations for each one of the 14 districts which required an
additional breakdown of costs and land uses. Also an extraordinary amount of time
was spent in researching justification for and discussing the proposed stormwater
rates with the task force.
Operation and Maintenance Section (Point 11)
Comment No operation and maintenance section is included in the Scope of
Services for the SWMP. This section was included in the Plan upon the City's
request.
Fully Edited Video (Point 12)
Comment Task 5 of the Scope of Services calls for the supply of one unedited
underwater video for taping and editing by the City. Instead, a fully edited video,
including two lakes, three wetlands, and Bluff Creek was supplied to the City.
9. Additional Draft Report (Point 13a)
Comment The SWMP scope of services calls for the preparation of only one draft
report before the final report is printed. One preliminary draft and two final drafts
were prepared following the City's request.
' 10. Field Visits (Point 13b)
' Comment About 10 field trips were budgeted in the SWMP for water
quantity /quality modeling. Due to non - existing, missing, or unreliable information,
four additional field visits were necessary.
11. Newsletter Reviews (Point 13c)
Comment An estimated 80 engineering hours were put into the newsletter's review
process due to continuous changes and revisions by the task force. Our experience
has been that no more than two reviews (or 20 engineering hours) per newsletter are
necessary.
12. Information on the SWMP (Point 13e)
Comment The bills that Paul mentioned in his letter are specific development
reviews or additional analysis requested by the City over and above the work in the
management plan. Those bills do not reflect the time spent, almost daily, answering
questions or sending information to City staff, developers, or private citizens about
the findings of the SWMP.
Finally, it is also important to point out the tremendous number of reviews, corrections, and
additions /deletions by the City and agencies that occurred during the process of putting
together the final report. Even though it was well understood that the SWMP was a "Living
Document" subject to future changes, the change was almost continuous.
FROM CITY OF CHAHHA$SEH
11.15.1995 10:13
CITY OF
CHANHASSZN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 66317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
Mr. $oq Schunicht, P. E.
Vice= Pr�ident Director of Water Resources
Bonostr�o, Rosene and Anderlik
2335' West Hwy. 36
St. Paul �MN 55113
Dear Bo
This lett has been prepared in response to yo - c espondence of October 25, 1993, regarding
project t and budget expenditure update - r Chanhassin Surface Water Management
Program: In your letter (attached), you indi th ' ou expect to have gone over the agreed
upon $2 '10,990 budget by approximately S ,000 b e time the project is completed. You
have alsb provided a breakdown of where -u believe overruns occurred. In this letter I will
attempt deal with these items on a ca by case bas
i
1. Six Additional Task Force gs - Cost $8 2
Pl - Given a num -of meetings that have ed, this is probably valid.
2. P4eparation cw of lake atlas - Cost $8,700
Finding . ad. ccn nested by the SWMP
TAsk Fvr art of our educational efforts. iTh'ast is va i
3. In d epth hydrollc/hydrologu 8ttQng Vde nc nclude all existing small ponds, detailed study of existing piping u ing laterals to identify potential local
41 oding problems - Cost $14,100
Fading_. We believe this cost is a part of the originally contracted for work program
w' bich would not be valid without these determinations. Therefore, we are not
retrommending that this allocation be approved.
F
L
F�
FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEH 11.1 5.1993 10:19
1
Mr. $o� Schunicht
Novdmb -.r 15, 1993
Paso 2 1
4. Jake "management study for each lake - citywide lake improvements ranking, lake
ti�odeling and water quality assessment - Cost $12,100
ling - These tasks were outlined in Task 9 of the original contract, therefore, we are
recommending that these costs be allowed.
5. f Creek water quality assessment evaluation, creek restoration, and management plans
'
-')Cost $3,200
F ding - We are not aware that this work exceeded any agreed upon contract
s ecifications, therefore, we are recommending that these costs not be allowed.
6. Wetland restoration element - Improvements and recommendations, extensive wetland
in list - Cost $4,400
binding - Wetland restoration, improvements and recommendations are considered to be
t of Task 7 of the contract. In the past, we have already adjusted our contract to pay
additional work that was requested of Frank Svoboda and Associates under your
contract. We believe that these items are inherent in the wetlands protection program and
therefore recommending that these costs not be allowed,
7. Street sweeping program, strategies, and analysis of sediments and evaluation of results -
dost $3,200
Finding - This program was additional work that was requested by the SWMP Task
Fdree. We are recommending that the cost of this effort be added to the contract.
8. Long term ranking system for water quality improvements for each of the 14 districts and
01 ywide - Cost $6,500
ding - The contract. under Task 12, deals with preparing cost estimates and a capital
provement program. Item B establishes that you would provide the duration and level
o annual expenditures, C provides that you will recommend sequencing of construction
ft I m outlet to upstream reaches, and D states that you will establish priorities for
construction. We clearly believe these costs are accounted for in the original contract and
tt#Frefore recommend that this adjustment not be made.
9. P r ,' paration of 1" to 2000' and 1" to 1000' cad revision of wetlands map reviews. Cost
$ ,500
Fihding - Under the deliverable section of the contract, Task 7, Wetlands Protection
Element calls for digitized wetlands layered over digitized 2 foot contour and base maps.
P. „
FROM CITY OF CHAHHASSEN
I
Mr. Poi SchbMcht
Nov6m r 15, 1993
Page 3
11.15.1993 10:39
e therefore believe these costs to have been absorbed in the original contract. If in fact
:se costs were above and beyond what had been anticipated because of the different
ale, we want a detailed explanation as to why the cost to adjust the scale for digitized
ipping would be so great. At this point we are reconunending that these costs not be
owed.
10. Estimation of trunk system assessment rates far different land uses on a per district basis
a�d citywide basis. Cost $5,100
tding - We believe that this effort is a pan of Task 12 which deals with implementation
the plan. Clearly such a funding system was a part of the Eagan document on which
,t part of our plan is based. We are therefore recommending that these costs not be
11. Section of operation and maintenance plan dealing with ponds and open channels. Cost -
900
Finding - We do believe that this is work over and above what had been contracted for,
b,4t rather believed it to be part of the original contract. We are therefore recommending
that these costs not be allowed.
12. l lly edited video. including 1 more lake, 3 wetlands, and Bluff Creek. Cost $3,300
Folding - The video was part of our originally contracted work effort. We are therefore
recommending that these costs not be allowed.
13. Miscellaneous. Cost $13,300 - There are S subcategories of expenditures in this area,
h8wever, costs are not broken down for them individually. Rather you have established
a tniscellancous fee of $13,300 for all five items. Therefore, I can only respond to them
a. One additional draft report and review process. Finding - The initial draft report
was a rough working document that staff reviewed and delivered back to the
consultant for refinement. There were clearly a number of errors and points that
needed refinement and this is normal in any planning process of this magnitude.
We see no reason why this should be broken out as an additional work item.
b. Four field visits to gather and confirm data not provided by the city or county.
Finding - On a work program that approaches a quarter million dollars, we would
anticipate that a few field visits might be necessary on the part of the consultants.
We see no reason why these costs should be defined over and above the scope of
the contract,.
FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEN 11.15.1993 10 :20
Mr. Po Schunicht
Novbmer 15, 1993
' Pa 4
I
' C Six reviews of first city's newsletter, and 4 reviews of second newsletter. Finding
- Your contract deliverables call for 2 water resources newsletters. One would
think that reviews of the document are part of this process of preparing a
' newsletter. I will also point out that city staff in fact wrote many of the articles
that were contained in these newsletters. Therefore, we are recommending that
j these costs not be allowed.
d. Preparation of Clean Water Partnership proposal. Finding - This item has come
up in the past. I clearly remember Bonestroo's commitment to work with us on
' a Clean Water Partnership grant under the contract if you were selected during the
Interview process. I eonf:idd my recollection with the City Manager when we
were first billed for this work in 1992. At that time, I wrote back to Bonestroo
' stating that we believe this billing to be inappropriate since this work had been a
part of the original project agreement, although it does not appear directly in the
' contract. A copy of my June 15 letter to you is attached for review. Based upon
this information, we are recommending that these costs not be allowed.
' e.' Provide information about SWMP preliminary results to developers and city staff.
Finding - The city and developers have been billed on numerous occasions for this
advice on an hourly basis. These bills have been paid and this appears to be a
' potential case of double dipping. We have not kept those bills current in the
' SWMP program file but rather have allocated them to individual projects.
Therefore, we are recommending that these costs not be allowed.
' Summa4
' Based upbn my review, I believe that Items 1, 2 and 7 represent areas where work was requested
above ' i beyond the scope of the contract. This totals to an additional $20,100 in work effort
on the of Bonestroo. In your letter of October 25, you indicated that there were three_ items
' which eliminated from the scope of the SWMP program that total $21,000. Therefore, as
I view it', Bonestroo remains $900 to the good on our contract.
Lastly, I ave to say that I was shocked at the magnitude of the cost overruns you mentioned.
I believe; we have been an excellent client for the firm, and I have demonstrated a continued
willingnd s to break out additional work efforts and contract for them separately. As you are
' aware, i addition to the items mentioned above, we have also contracted with Bonestroo to do
engin6e g on at least three additional water quality/storm water related project improvements.
' I further : >elieve your relationship with the city has been a Wdul one. Growing out of initial
assistanci, we requested your firm to perform relative to our comprehensive plan, we have spun
off many hundreds of thousands of dollars of work not only the SWMP program, but also in the
' areas of . developing comprehensive plans for city w #ter and sewer services and construction
design a ,d management of major improvement programs. I regret that while you apparently
1
FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEN
P
11.15.1993 10:21
Mr. 0ol� Schu t
riich
Nov .m r 15, 1993
Page' 5
believe iere are problems in the billing process that you did not come to us at an culler point
in time to discuss them. I can only conclude at this point in time, however, that I am unable to
jus* y additional expenditures in this area. I have forwarded a copy of this letter to the City
Man4getjand City Engineer and would like to set up a meeting with you and your staff to discuss
it futthet�
Sincerely,
i
Paul{r ss, AICP
Plarutin Director
PK:v
pc: D�n Ashworth, City Manager
C aries Volch, City Engineer
I
i
i
i
P. e
1 .
P
JA Bonestroo
Rosene
Anderlik &
Associates
Engineers & Architects
October 25, 1993
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Attention: Mr. Paul Krauss
Otto G. Sonesaoa P.E.
Robert W. Roscoe. P.E.'
Joseph C Ancle"t RE
Marvin L Somata, RE
Richard E Turner, P.E.
Glenn R. Cook P£.
Thomas E Noyes. P.E.
Robert G. ScrnracrX P£.
Susan M. Eber in. CPA
-Senior Consultant
Community Development Director
Re: Project Status and
Budget Expenditure Update
Howard A Sargord, P.E.
Keith A Goldin P£.
Robert R. Pk!(erk. P.E.
Ria" W. Foster. P.E.
David a Loslrota. P.E.
Robert C. Ruuek AJA
Jerry A. Boudoh. P.E.
Mark A Hanson. RE-
NOW T. RawnarkL P£.
Ted K. Fitly P£.
Thomas R. AhOerson. AJA
Donald C 8tagardL RE.
Thomas E Angus P£.
Ismael Maronez P.E.
Michael P. Rau. P.E.
Agnes M. Ring AICP.
Philp J. Pyre. P.E.
'Thomas W. Pemrson. P.E.
Michael C Lynch. P£.
James R. Maland. P.E.
Any D. Perasch. P.E.
Scow 1 Arpnek P.E.
Kenneth P. Anderson. P.E
Mark R. Rdfs. P.E.
Mark A Seip P.E.
Gary W. Moron. RE.
Daniell Eogerton. P.E.
A Rick Smmict. RE
Philip 1 Caswell. P£.
Mark O. VAft P.E.
Mks S. Jensen. P.E.
L Phillip Gravel. P.E.
Karin L. WiemeH. P.E.
Gary O. Knslo tt P.E.
F. Tood Foster. P.E.
Keith R. Vapp, P.E.
Douglas J. SenoiL PE.
Shawn O. Gustafson. P.E.
Cevao Olivier. P.E.
Paul G. Heuer. P.E.
John P Goroer. P.E.
Charles A Enckson
Leo M. Pavvtlsky
Harlan M. Olson
James F Engelhardt
I Dear Paul:
As you know, the second draft of the Chanhassen's SWMP has been completed, and the
final report will be ready shortly upon review by the Task Force Members and Regulatory
Agencies. Still, there is some remaining time and effort required to totally wrap -up the
project, but for the most part, the report can be considered finished.
We believe that the amount of effort, the level of detail, and the technical expertise put in
this plan makes Chanhassen's SWMP unique in its class. To the best of our knowledge, no
other City in the mid -west has such a complete, state -of- the -art Surface Water Management
Plan. We feel that the Chanhassen's SWMP is the type of project that all participants
should be proud of, especially all Task Force Members and City Staff for their vision,
continuous input, and support
' Unfortunately, the preparation of the Plan and our continuous involvement in other
collateral aspects of the project, have caused us to run over the budget originally assigned
to the SWMP. We have tried to accommodate as many additional work as possible in our
' original not -to- exceed budget of $210,990. However, our total billing to the project by the
time of the completion of the SWMP will be approximately $340,000.
' Attached to this letter is a description of the Services we provide outside the original scope
of the SWMP. Also attached is a list of services that were eliminated from the original
scope of the SWMP. We would appreciate payment of the additional services shown on the
' attached list.
393gen/cor
2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612 -636 -4600
Mr. Paul Krauss, Community Development Director
Page 2
October 25, 1993
We would be happy to discuss these costs with you or the Task Force members and provide
additional information, if desired, regarding this matter.
Yours very truly,
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Robert G. Schunicht, P.E.
Vice President, Director of Water Resources
Ismael Martinez, P.E.
Project Manager
393gen/cor
'
Bonestroo
Rosene
on G. Bonesom P.E.
Room W Roma. RE *
Josepn C. Ana"k RE.
Marvin L. Sorvala. P.E.
Richard E. %xrw. P.E.
Howard A. Swfta P.E.
Kdtn A. Gordon. P.E.
NOW 1, R. PkReft P.E.
RKrlW W. Fo=. P.E.
David a LOOM PS
Agnes M. Ring. M.C.P.
-AV 1 Pyre' P.E.
rams W. Pearson, P.E
NkAad C. Lynch. P.E.
Janes R. Malaria P.E.
Mks B. Jensen. P.E.
L Ph*O Grave. P.E.
Karen L. Wfemeh, P.E.
Gary O. Krislofia. P.E.
f. Toot Foster P.E.
0
Anderiik &
Glenn R. Cook. RE.
Thomas E. Noyes, P.E.
'Room G. Scnuniot P.E.
n" C Russet
Jeny A f�
Mark A. Nan son. RE
� D �k.
Kenneth P. Mperson. P.E.
�as 1 Benoit P.E.
Shawn D. Gustation. P.E
Associates
Susan M. EDerkn. CPA
Mknael T. 2kxn n 1. P.E.
Mark R. ROMS. P.E.
Ceobo CNivier. P.E.
*senor Corm*ant
Ted K. Add. P.E.
Mark A. Seiµ P.E.
Paul G. Heuer. P.E.
Thomas R. Anderson. A.IA
Gary W. Morien. P.E.
John P. Gorier. P.E.
Engineers & Architects
Donald C. BurgarM P.E.
Thomas E. Angus. P.E.
oanid 1 &Vermn. P.E
A. Rkk schmidl P.E.
Chines A. Erickson
Leo M. PaweUy
Ismael MamneL P.E.
"Wo 1 Caswet P.E
HaAan M. Olson
Michael P. Rau. FE
Mark O. Writs P.E.
Janes F. Ergelharot
C SSEN SWMP BUDGET /SCOPE OVERVIEW
The following list summarizes the additional effort that Bonestroo & Associates has put into
preparing the final version of Chanhassen's SWMP. The second list shows the services that
were eliminated from the original scope during the preparation of the SWMP- The amount
at the end reflects the cost of the additional services provided by Bonestroo & Associates.
• Preparation and reviews of Lake Atlas
SERVICES OUTSIDE THE ORIGINAL SCOPE OF THE SWMP
• Six (6) additional Task Force Meetings
• In -depth Hydraulic/Hydrologic modeling of developed
districts to include all existing small ponds
(average min. district = 10 acres).
Detailed study of existing piping system
(including laterals) to identify potential local
flooding problems
• Lake Management study for each Lake
City -wide lake improvements ranking.
and Water Quality assessment
fl
(7 lakes).
Lake Modeling
• Bluff Creek; Water quality assessment and evaluation,
creek restoration and management plans
• Wetland restoration element. Improvements and recommendations.
Extensive wetland inventory list.
• Street sweeping program and strategies. Analysis of sediments
and evaluation of results
1
393gen/cor
1
Cost
$8,200
$8,700
$14,100
$12,100
$3,200
$4,400
$3,200
2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612 - 636 -4600
• Long -term ranking system for Water Quality improvements for
each of the 14 Districts and City -wide
• Preparation of 1 ":2,000' and 1 ":1,000' CADD revision of
wetlands map. Reviews
• Estimation of trunk system assessment rates for different
land uses on a per - district basis and on a City -side basis.
Analysis and final recommendations
• Section of Operation and Maintenance of ponds and open channels
• Fully edited video including 1 more lake, 3 wetlands, and
Bluff Creek
• Miscellaneous:
One additional draft report and review process
Four field visits to gather and confirm data, not provided by
City or County.
Six reviews of first City's Newsletter, 4 reviews of second
newsletter.
Preparation of Clean Water Partnership Proposal.
Provide information about SWMP preliminary results to
developers and City staff.
Cost
$6,500
$4,500
$5,100
$ 900
$3,300
$13,300
TOTAL $87,300
SERVICES ELIMINATED FROM THE ORIGINAL SCOPE OF THE SWMP
Cost
• Short-term sampling and testing $18,000
• Helicopter Survey $ 1,800
• Four Quarterly City Newsletter articles $ 1.200
TOTAL $21 9 000
TOTAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES: $87,300 - $21,000 = $67,300
393gen/cor