HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-16-2013 Council HandoutsCity of Oak Park Heights
14168 Oak Park Blvd. N • Box 2007.Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • Phone (651) 439 -4439 • Fax (651) 439 -0574
April 16` 2013
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council Memrr4
FROM: Eric Johnson, City Administra
RE: Powerline Burial — Historical Review with MNDOT
At the April 9� 2013 City Council Meeting the Council did again discuss the concepts of the issue of the
burial of the power lines related to the impacted areas of the STH 36 project. Council will recall this issue
has been placed into its immediate need tQ act as Xcel Energy does need direction from M NDOT as tQ
how to proceed, be it burial or over heading.
The point of contention of course is not that could or should certain powelines be buried, rather who is
responsible for the costs. Naturally all parties at this time, being Xcel Energy, MNDOT and the City have
indicated that it is not their responsibility to pay for this action, which of course leads to the contentious
issue.
Despite these positions, it has been represented to the City in the past that MNDOT would engage and
direct that all local ordinances in place would be complied with as part of this project and that MNDOT
provided historical assurances that these costs would not be the responsibility of the City. Accordingly,
the City Council has directed staff to review some of the historical exchanges between MNDOT and the
City as it relates to this issue.
Of course there have been dozens of conversations about this subject and to dilute these down into a
succinct document that all will inherently agree upon Is likely not possible. As such I will present
documents, timelines and recollection of statements by certain officials in a bullet point format that will
lead the City to better understand the commitments made by MNDOT to bury such power lines, at least
as the City may view the situation.
1. From the 11/22/11 meeting between the City and MNDOT officials, this matter was discussed as
noted in the Meeting summary #1: MNDOT was to "clarify Xcel responsibility for expenses for
burying utilities ". This likely was as a result of the City statement (as best I can recall) to MNDOT
at the meeting that the City has such requirements to which Ms. Marilyn Remer of MNDOT
clarified that MNDOT would require compliance with City Ordinances.
1 of 30 4 -16-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
2. On December 14` ", 2011 the City and MNDOT staff met at MNDOT Offices to discuss some of the
discussions that came out of the joint meeting on 11/22/11. The City did follow -up with a
communication dated 12/29/11 to Adam Josephson indicating that the City does have a
required power line burial ordinance. This was requested by MNDOT Staff and thus supplied.
3. On June 8"' 2012 the City again provided a letter to MNDOT, Jon Chiglo, informing MNDOT of
the City's requirement of power line burial. A copy of the revised City Ordinance was supplied
with this communication.
4. As the City continued down the path of negotiations with the Municipal consent deadlines
approaching in August 2012, a number of email drafts and exchanges occurred between City
Staff and MNDOT staff, (and I would assume in coordination with the Commissioner's office).
For example, on or about August 22 2012, Mr. Chiglo provided to the City a summary listing of
options/ considerations that could be contemplated into a letter from the Commissioner
committing to certain elements.
In this draft, dated August 22 2012, "item a ", clearly defines that the constructed impacted
power lines would be buried compliant with City Ordinance. There was no additional mention
that the City would bear these costs, especially in light of prior statements discussed above that
MNDOT would require compliance with City Ordinances. And, those Xcel facilities are similarly in
MNDOT ROW by permit much like the City's.
5. On August 23' 2012 there was an additional exchange of emails between Jon Chiglo and myself
with copies to Mark Vierling as well as Councilmembers Abrahamson and Swenson. Item e, still
maintains that similar language as discussed.
6. Both the City Council and MNDOT likely understand however that as these agreements begin to
pushed upward to higher levels, such as the Commissioner or Governor's office, massaging of
language would continue and which did occur in this instance so that a final resolution could be
agreed upon. In this instance Item #5 of the Commissioner's letter dated August 23' 2012
states, "...As Provided in MN Statutes Sec. 161.45 the relocation of construction impacted
utilities will need to comply with any applicable City Ordinance unless waived by the City..."
It is not accidental that the language utilized in the Commissioner's letter is practically identical
to the language utilized in earlier draft exchanges between the City and MNDOT Staff persons.
Although it is a bit more generic, it was meant that this was for power line burial. These final
negotiations occurred on the day of the Council meeting that passed a resolution accepting the
Governor and Commissioner's letters of commitment. Negotiations proceeded up to the hour
before the council meeting with exchanges between the Governor staff, City Staff, MNDOT City
attorney and some council members.
2 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
It is the opinion of the City Attorney that MNDOT must proceed to implement the provisions of
item # 5 within the scope of the Commissioner's letter unless released from that responsibility
by the city. At the last meeting held between the City, Mndot and Xcel, Mndot made
representations as to those electrical transmission poles that were construction impacted and
those that were not. Unquestionably the Mndot position relative to item #5 of the letter will in
their position be limited only to those poles /lines that are construction impacted.
Considering these points the City was apt to conclude and expect that the impacted power lines would
be buried by MNDOT. What the revenue sources MNDOT contemplated at the time of these discussions
and commitments was unknown to the City. The recent statements that MNDOT cannot fund the burial
of these lines with Federal or other "Bridge" specified dollars is not a condition the City has any control
over.
Lastly, as the City Attorney's letter dated Feb 20` 2013 as indicated to Xcel Energy, this is a State
project for which the City cannot direct MNDOT to order Xcel Energy to bury such lines. MNDOT rather
has made commitments to the City to complete this task.
END.
3 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
Meeting #1— Brief Summary
Oak Park Heights — MnDOT discussions
Tuesday - November 22, 2011
Attendees lead participants
Dave Beaudet Les Abrahamson Mary McComber
Mark Swenson Mike Runk Ted Lillie
Gary Kriesel Beth Bartz Scott McBride
Adam Josephson
Attendees (staff and other)
Eric Johnson, City Administrator
Mark Vierling, City Attorney
Chris Long, City Engineer
Maryanne Kelly - Sonnek, MnDOT
Marilyn Remer, MnDOT
Todd Clarkowski, MnDOT
Wayne Sandberg, County Engineer
Mike Wilhelmi, St. Croix Bridge Coalition
Note1: This meeting was part of a city council work session and not a formal council meeting.
As such no formal actions were or can be taken by the council. Opinions were shared in an
open public forum during this meeting but no binding actions were taken.
Note2: This brief meeting summary provides a general overview of the discussions that
occurred at this meeting and are not meant to be detailed meeting minutes of the discussions.
1. Welcome and Introductions
Mayor Beaudet opened the meeting as a City Council work session and welcomed all
participants. Participants introduced themselves.
Scott McBride introduced Beth Bartz, who will serve as the facilitator for the process.
2. Purp ose/Goals
Beth reviewed the purpose and goals as listed on the project agenda. She reminded group that
the purpose of this process in not to negotiate in language or specific dollar amounts a formal
agreement, but rather develop the framework from which a formal agreement can be
negotiated.
1
4 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
3. Overview of Meeting Process
Beth explained that the first meeting will focus on reviewing information; the second on
identifying and evaluating options, and the third on determining the framework and identifying
steps to implementing an agreement. Beth asked group to consider Steven Covey quote "Seek
first to understand."
4. Ground Rules
Beth reviewed the ground rules for the discussion process as listed on the agenda.
5. Summary of concerns and interests: Oak Park Heights
Les Abrahamson distributed and reviewed the handout "Approximate Listing of issues — St Croix
River Crossing" concerning costs, maintenance, equity and design issues; Issues below the first
seven bullets with the exception of "equity" were agreed to be outside of the meeting purpose
and will be discussed at a later time; additional topics for later discussion also identified were
staging area issues and construction impacts, particularly vibration.
• City needs better project cost information to make good decisions
• City Council needs to be responsible to citizens by justifying benefits in order to agree to
initial cost and on -going maintenance responsibilities.
• Regional project— City feels they are disproportionately burdened by project costs and
believe local costs should be shared more equitably
• 1995 MOU needs to be reviewed, what has changed since then?
6. Summary of concerns and interests: MnDOT
Scott McBride made the following points on behalf of MnDOT:
• MnDOT can't solve these issues for the City nor can the City solve them on its own; we
need to work together to resolve.
• Do not want to leave city in a bad spot, it is timely that these issues be resolved
• Local cost participation in MnDOT projects is shaped by state statutes (legal restrictions
on what MnDOT can or cannot do) and MnDOT policies (put in place to ensure equity
across the state in a wide variety of projects). We will be as flexible as we can with our
policies to reduce city costs; state statute restrictions will preclude some options.
• The City, as the utility owner, per state statute is responsible for determining how to
adjust affected utilities in state R/W and the costs, available HPP funds will help reduce
those costs.
Possible framework Option: Review of cost participation policies in place when 1995
municipal consent was granted may provide an avenue for flexibility.
I?
5 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
7. Background on statutes, policies, HPP funding, etc. — Adam Josephson
Adam reviewed current project information regarding layout, mitigation plan, schedule and
funding.
Available High Priority Program (HPP) funds were reviewed:
• MN191$3.6M obligated for right of way acquisition and utility relocation —these funds
are available to City for "eligible costs" with a 20% local match. "Betterment" costs are
not eligible. (Defined later.). A state /city agreement needs to be executed before costs
can be incurred and reimbursed.
• MN217 $8.11M obligated for design, construction and right of way costs. MnDOT has
been spending these funds for right of way acquisition and mitigation efforts. Required
20% match has been provided by MnDOT.
• MN126 $360,000 obligated for "preliminary design and study of long -term roadway
approach alternatives" requires a $90,000 local match.
Note: Eligibility for these funds is determined by FHWA.
Possible Framework Option: Explore possibility of MN191 funds being converted to funds
which would not require a local match.
Adam reviewed definitions of "Utilities by Permit," "First Move," and "Betterment" under state
statutes. Betterments are not HPP eligible per FHWA. Utilities by Permit and impacted by the
project may be eligible for HPP funding. First Move costs are a state responsibility.
8. Estimated cost impacts to the City of Oak Park Heights Report — dated 11/10/11
Oak Park Heights presented a summary of "St. Croix River Crossing Project: Estimated Cost
Impacts to the City of Oak Park Heights, November 10, 2011." This cost estimate included
direct up -front costs, delayed long -term costs - 20 year horizon, and direct incurred costs to
date. The Study looked at four scenarios with estimates ranging from $7 - $18 million.
9. Identified cost and maintenance issues — Adam Josephson
Adam reviewed a list of anticipated Oak Park Heights utility and up -front costs which MnDOT
has estimated at $3.3M, available HPP funds reduce estimated city costs to under $1,000,000.
MnDOT did not estimate long -term maintenance costs.
Possible Framework Option: Agreed that determination of which utility work is a
"betterment" (not eligible for HPP) versus a utility relocation eligible for HPP is worth a closer
look given current City standards for utility construction.
3
6 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
Agreed that MnDOT will meet with Oak Park Heights staff to conduct a more detailed review of
the utility plan and determinations of "first move" "utility by permit" and "betterment."
Council needs to discuss and direct staff accordingly to work with MnDOT in this effort.
10. Summary of Meeting,1
Meeting participants shared new information they had learned or insights obtained during the
first meeting.
11. Next Steps
• MnDOT agreed to look further into policy to determine if there is any discussion of cost
participation in context of regional benefit.
• MnDOT will send another copy of the utility layout to the City.
• Better define city utility costs, current numbers based on discussions from 2006 and
recent city review of project costs. City and State will work together to develop "30%
utility design" to better define impacts, betterments and costs for city utilities.
• City will determine extent of utility work needed to address utility conflicts, including if
utilities will remain in state R/W by permit or moved off state R/W to new easement
areas.
• Meeting #2 will look at options to resolve costs. Any option ideas prior to meeting
should be directed to Eric and Adam; City Council members please do not comment on
each other's submissions prior to meeting due to concerns about open meeting law
(refer any questions about this to Eric Johnson).
Meeting #2 — December 28, 2011 — 7:00 — 9 :00 PM - Boutwells Landing — discussion of
possible funding options.
Mayor Beaudet closed the work session.
Attached
City handout — Approximate Listing of Issues — St Croix River Crossing (11/22/11)
Flip Chart Notes from Nov 22 " meeting
Also distributed at Meeting #1
• 3 -Ring binder with meeting materials and agenda
4
7 of 30 4 -16-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
• Mn Statute 161.46 —see tab #25 in 3 -ring binder
• MnDOT Cost exception letter dated October 6, 2006 —see tab #7 in 3 -ring binder
• Estimated Cost Impacts to the City— report dated November 10, 2011— correction noted
on page 15 of 36 — see tab #10 in 3 -ring binder
8 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
Oak Park Heights — MnDOT Discussion of St. Croix River C ro ss ing L oca l City C Iss
Notes from 11/22/11 meeting, B. Bartz
Flip chart notes
Clarify: Xcel responsibility for expenses for burying of utilities
Options
- HPP eligibility for "betterments "?
- Convert HPP funds from 80/20 match to 100 %?
- What constitutes "betterment "?
- Re: frontage road turn -back — can replaced pipe just be meeting city policy rather than
be termed a betterment?
- Suggested detailed review of utility layout — revisit "betterment areas" — gray area
- Could Osgood to Oakgreen pipes be lined? Would this place it in a different category?
Design questions:
- Does proposed trail connect to any regional facilities (believe there is a regional trail on
the TH 5 corridor)
Could the trail along south frontage road become a sidewalk instead? If this is required
as part of a Mn /DOT facility why would City be responsible for maintenance and later
replacement?
0
9 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
City of oak Park Heights
14168 Oak Park Blvd. N • Box 2007.Oak Park Heights, MN 55062 • Phone (651) 439 -4439 • Fax (651) 439 -0574
December 29 "', 2011
Adam Josephson, P.E.
Mn/00T East Area Manager
Waters Edge Bldg
1500 West County Road B -2
Roseville, MN 55113
RE. Follow -up from Dec 14' 2011 Meeting — Utility Impacts
Dear Adam,
Thank you again for having someone prepare a meeting summary for the meeting held jointly between the
City and various MNDOT staff to discuss a "30% design plan". As a result of such meeting,, the City has
the following responses.
1. The meeting summary as provided should be used only for MNDOT internal purposes. This
document provided, despite possible edits, seems to remain an advocacy tool for MNDOT policy
and comments as opposed to being solely a more neutral summary of general discussions. So as
to avoid any misinterpretation by MNDOT or the City in the future about what was discussed, not
discussed, etc; as we move forward, these meeting summaries should be induced to the following:
location, whom was present, short statement as to the purpose of the meeting, and agreed upon
action items and next meeting date.
2. As a City Action item from the Dec 10, 2011 meeting: I have enclosed for your infonnation a
current copy of the City's Ordinance relating to the burial of power limes. This relates to elements
of the discussion that may require the burial of the Xeel Energy (and related utilities on such
poles) distribution lines. Please carefully note that the City has explored additional clarifications
to this ordinance and upon any such amendments I will forward to your attention a new copy.
3. As a City Action item from the Dee 14' 2011 meeting: The City has directed its Consulting
Engineers at STANTEC to review the MNDOT provided S.U.E. utility plans so as to better
provide an analysis of what MNDOT is accounting for is actually what is in the ground, per se.
Naturally, the City (nor MNOOT) cannot guarantee that all items will be universally accounted
for, but we would think that any omission would be minimal.
110 of Se 4-4s_1 3 _— .__...._._.._........._._. Memo to OPH City Council
_ Power Lin Burial comm nth
4. Asa City Action item from the Dec 14' 2011 meeting: I have enclosed for your information two
CD sets of the televising reports (vide and logs) of the sanitary sewer lying in the south and north
frontage roads.
5. As a City Action item from the Dec 14' 2011 meeting: I have directed Chris Long from
STANTEC to provide some information about sanitary sewer off -sets. The City generally does
not have a specific detail plan, but should follow proper design standards and that would be
conducive. to easy and manageable repairs and maintenance, i.e. pipes under ponds are not sound
practice and pose future T & 1 risks.
6. As a new item for th is process, the domnen t provided to MN-DOT in the form of the
communication provided by Bonestroo (now STANTEC) dated Sept 9' , 2011 as a follow -up to
the MNDOT meeting on Aug 20, asks three additional questions and should be reviewed
addressed in -turn by MNDQT as we proceed through this exercise. For your use, l have again
enclosed a copy of that letter.
There may need to be an expression by this group's effixt about the concept of installing a new
roadways surface on top of 40 -year old utilities. So despite concluded upon impact% how is this
matter addressed`? Perhaps it is out of the scope of this conversation, but it is of seminal
importance to the City.
Please let me know if you have any questions and we took forward to our next meeting tentatively
scheduled for Jan 12 0 ', 2012 if such meeting is amenable to the Council.
cer
Eric J son,
City dministmtor
Cc: Chris Long, P.E., STANTEC
Mark Vierling, City Attorney
Mayor and City Council Members
11 of 30 4 -16 -1 -W " "' ° "' "' Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Bur ial rnmmifmpn}e
:
City of 04* Park Heights
14168 Oak Park Blvd. N • Box 2007. Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • Phone (651) 439 -4439 • Fax (651) 439 -0574
June 8, 2012
Mr. John Chiglo
MNDOT
Water's Edge Building
1500 West County Road B -2
Roseville, MN 55113
RE: Power line Burial
Dear Mr. Chigio;
For the sake of your timing, the City wanted to remind MNDOT of the requirement that the power
distribution Imes now lying in the south and north frontage roads would be required to be placed
underground with this proposed project. This was noted in the letter to Mr. Josephson on Dec 29 "',
2011.
The City has since amended its related ordinances, enclosed, making the requirements more clear for
such undergr ding and removal of the overhead infrastructure. With this advanced reminder
MNDOT c#6 b teryoordinate Its timing with Xcel Energy.
This ill certain] affd some visual quality to the corridor and perhaps could be noted in the VC.M.
K eg1�/ --..._
9fty Administrator
Cc: Weekly Notes
Adam Josephson, MNDOT
12 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
1008
AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE PLACEMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES,
ELECTRONIC, PHONE LINES, CABLE SERVICES AND RELATED UTILIT) ES
UNDERGROUND.
THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF OAK. DARK HEIGHTS DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN:
1008.010. pu =se.
The purpose of this section is to promote the health. safety and general welfare of the
public and is intended to foster (i) safe travel over the right -of way, (ii) non - travel
related safety around homes and buildings where overhead feeds are connected and (iii)
orderly development in the city. Location and relocation, installation and reinstallation
of Facilities in the right -of -way trust be made in accordance with this section.
1008.020. Definitions.
The terms used in this section have the meanings given there.
Commis sion. "Commission" means the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.
Facili "Facility" means tangible asset in the public right -of -way required to provide
utility service. The term does not include Facilities to the extent the location and
relocation of such Facilities are preempted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.45,
governing utility facility placement in state trunk highways. Facility does not mean
electric transmission lines, as distinguished ft - om electric distribution lines.
Public right- ofway "Public right -of -way" has the meaning given it in Minnesota
Statutes, section 237.162, subdivision 3.
Right oi-way user. "Right -of -way user" means (1) a telecommunications right -of -way
user as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subdivision 4; or (2) a person
owning or controlling a facility, in the right -of -way, that is used or intended to be used
for providing utility service, and who has a right under law, franchise or ordinance to
use the public right -of -way.
Utility_ se !pe, "Utility service" means and includes: (1) service provided by a public
utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 21613.02, subdivisions 4 and 6; (2)
services of a telecommunications right-of-way user, including the transporting of voice
or data information; (3) services provided by a cable communications system as defined
in Minnesota Statutes, Section 238.02, subdivision 3; (4) natural gas or electric energy
or telecommunications services provided by a local government unit; (5) services
provided by a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes,
chapter 308A; and (6) water, sewer, steam, cooling or heating services.
13 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line B urial commitments
1008.030 Undergroundina of Facilities.
Facilities placed in the public right -of -way must be located, relocated and maintained
underground pursuant to the terms and conditions of this section and in accordance with
applicable construction standards. This section is intended to be enforced consistently
with state and federal law regulating right- of-way users, specifically including but not
limited to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 161.45, 237.162, 237.163, 300.03, 222.37,
238.084 and 216B.36 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Title 47, USC Section
253.
1008.040. Undergrounding of New Facilities.
A new Facility or a permanent extension of Facilities must be installed and maintained
underground when supplied to:
(a) a new installation of buildings, signs, streetlights or other structures;
(b) a new subdivision of land; or
(c) a new development or industrial park containing new commercial or industrial
buildings.
All owners, developers, persons submitting plats to the city for approval as well as any
utility company serving said developments are responsible for complying with the
terms and provisions of this ordinance and prior to final approval of any plat,
subdivision or development plan shalt submit to the city a written statement from the
appropriate utility company (ies) showing that all necessary arrangements with said
companies for underground service and installation have been made. To the extent
practical all underground work shall be completed prior to street surfacing.
1008.050. Ilndererounding of Permanent Replacemen - Relocated or Reconstructed facilities.
A permanent replacement, relocation or reconstruction of a Facility of more than 300
feet must be located, and maintained underground, with due regard for seasonal
working conditions. For purposes of this section, reconstruction means any substantial
repair of or any improvement to existing Facilities. Undergrounding is required
whether a replacement, relocation or reconstruction is initiated by the right -of -way user
owning or operating the Facilities, ar by the city in connection with (1) the present or
future use by the city or other local government unit of the right -of -way for a public
project, (2) the public health or safety, or (3) the safety and convenience of travel over
the right -of -way.
1008.060. Retirement of Overhead Facilities,
The city council may determine whether it is in the public interest that all Facilities
within the city, or within certain districts designated by the city, be permanently placed
and maintained underground by a date certain or target date, independently of
undergrounding required pursuant to sections 1008.040 and 1008.0.50 of this Code. The
decision to underground must be preceded by a public hearing, after published notice
and written notice to the utilities affected. (Two weeks published: 30 days written.)
At the hearing the council must consider item (1)- (4) in section 1008.080 of this Code
14 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitm
and make findings. Undergrounding may not take place until city council has, after
hearing and notice, adopted a plan containing items (1) - (6) of section 1008.090 of this
Code.
1008.070. Public Hearings.
A hearing shall be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each
hearing any person interested must be given an opportunity to be heard. The subject of
the public hearings shall be the issue of whether Facilities in the right -of -way in the
city, or located within a certain district, shall all be located underground by a date
certain. Hearings are not necessary for the undergrounding required under sections
1008.040 and 1008.050 of the City Code.
1008.080. Public Hearin Issues.
The issues to be addressed at the public hearings include but are not limited to:
(1) The costs and benefits to the public of requiring the undergrounding of
all Facilities in the right -of -way.
(2) The feasibility and cost of undergrounding all Facilities by a date certain
as determined by the city and the affected utilities.
(3) The tariff requirements, procedure and rate design for recovery or
intended recovery of incremental costs for undergrounding by the
utilities from ratepayers within the city.
(4) Alternative financing options available if the city deems it in the public
interest to require undergrounding by a date certain and deems it
appropriate to participate in the cost otherwise borne by the ratepayers.
Upon completion of the hearing or hearings, the city council must make written findings on
whether it is in the public interest to establish a plan under which all Facilities will be
underground, either citywide or within districts designated by the city.
1008.090. Under mounding Plan.
if the council finds that it is in the public interest to underground all or substantially all
Facilities in the public right of way, the council must establish a plan for such
undergrounding- The plan for undergrounding must include at least the following
elements:
(1) Timetable for the undergrounding.
(2) Designation of districts for the undergrounding unless, undergrounding
plan is citywide
(3) Exceptions to the undergrounding requirement and procedure for
establishing such exceptions.
15 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Pnwpr i ina Rwial commitmpntc ^_
(4) Procedures for the undergrounding process, including but not limited to
coordination with city projects and provisions to ensure compliance with
nondiscrimination requirements under the law.
(5) A financing plan for funding of the incremental costs if the city
determines that it will finance some of the undergrounding costs, and a
determination and vedficatton of the claimed additional costs to
underground incurred by the utility.
(6) Penalties or other remedies for failure to comply with the undergrounding.
16 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
.- -Power Line Burial com w __
Eric Johnson
From: Eric Johnson
Sent Wednesday, August 22, 2012 4:22 PM
To: 'Chiglo, Jon (DOT)'
Subject: RE: list of items
Attachments: possible list of improvments and issues - redline.docx
Jon,
I have taken your document—accepted all the changes, and provide a few edits....
Minor through they are.
Let me know about those highlighted ones as soon as possible
Thanks for your help
eric
From: Chiglo, Jon (DOT) ( mailto:jon.chigloOstate.mn.us ]
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 3:57 PM
TO; Eric Johnson
Subject:
17 of 30 4 -16-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
a. Final design for Lookout Trail at TH 95 to provide for a right in- right out
configuration
b. Trail location along Lookout Trrail will either extend all the way from TH 95
to the Scenic Lookout and Beach Road as part of a proposed MnDOT
reconstruction of Lookout TtraRew and turn back to the city of Oak Park Heights
c. The Omaha Ave right in right out intersection with TH 36 shall be
reconstructed as part of the Design build project
d. North and South Frontage Roads within the City's jurisdiction remain under
MNDOT ownership
e. All construction impacted Xcel power lines within the TH 36 Corridor be
undergrounded compliant with City ordinance
f. Work on Oakgreen Avenue shall be extended to the south from the proposed
southern termini of work depicted on the construction plans to approximately the
northern termini of Oakgreen Ave atod 58 street. A right turn lane will be
constructed at Oakgreen Ave and 58 street to facilitate right turns from Oak
Green Ave onto 58 Street. T4i&All -work upon Oakgreen Avenue will consist of an
urban roadway sections and stay within the existing right of way.
g. All existing stormwaters now entering the TH 36 corridor from the City of
Oak Park Heights shall be captured and treated within MNDOT systems for
volume and rate control and the City shall have no ongoing maintenance or
reconstruction responsibilities therefore.
h. All MNDOT trails within the TH 36 corridor shall be owned by MNDOT with
the City having minor maintenance thereon. Trails constructed under this project
within the City shall be regulated in use under the City's park ordinance and may
be seasonally closed as directed by the City Ceouncil. Any trail reconstruction shall
remain a MNDOT responsibility.
i. All signalizations within the TH 36 and TH 95 corridors to which MNDOT
policy would otherwise call for a municipal contribution shall be funded by
MNDOT using MNDOT funding sources, not reducing other allocations to the
18 of 30 4 -1 6-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
City or in a manner resulting in no out of pocket contribution from the City. The
City will participate in future minor maintenance consistent with re- lamping and
painting and power supply.
j. The layout for Oakgreen Avenue will be adjusted to provide a pull back of the
Frontage Road from the Pine Grove Gardens development. MnDOT provided the
city with a concept that will increase the distance between the townhomes and
the south frontage road by approximately 30 ft. This provides a total distance
between the townhomes and frontage road of - approximately 50 feet.
I. That MNDOT implement and complete reasonable maintenance to the Scenic
Overlook as committed to under the mitigation commitments.
m. That MNDOT install appropriate and distinct TH 36 pedestrian crossing
elements at Osgood Ave and at Oakgreen/Greely so that surface markings are
constructed of materials that are distinct from typical road section, such as
pavers, concrete or other durable materials.
n. Project limits for the TH 36 and bridge project will be established on the
west end at TH 36 /Norell- Washington. This is to ensure construction begins at
the eastern termini of previous projects along the frontage roads and TH36.
o. All new streets or street /drive extensions created by the project will be
established as private drives unless the City of Oak Park Heights agrees to accept
them as public streets.
p. The Holiday Gas Station shall retain its access point on Osgood Avenue.
M
r. A reasonable access for the Home for Me Townhomes ( Oakgreen and South
Frontage Road) shall be maintained
19 of 30 4 -16-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
Eric ,Johnson
From: Eric Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 201210:09 AM
To: Chiglo, Jon (DOT) Oon.chiglo @state.mn.us)
Cc: 'LesAbrahamson @comcast.net'; 'Swenson, Mark'; 'Mark Vierling'
Subject: possible list of improvments and issues - Possible Final - Updated 8 -23 -12
Attachments: possible list of improvments and issues - Possible Final - Updated 8- 23- 12.docx
Jon,
Here is the current draft, which seem to work on all accounts, with the two noted exceptions at the bottom in yellow.
The City really needs these two items.
If you have some alternative language to the ponding matter, We stand ready to listen for suggestions. We understand
your points about non - impacted storm sewer elements, but then perhaps there can be some offered language that
ameliorates that problem.
We do appreciate your continued finessing.
eric
z
20 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
a. Final design for Lookout Trail at TH 95 to provide for a right in- right out configuration
b. Lookout Trail: The pedestrian and bike Trail will run adjacent to the curb on Lookout trail and be
continuous between Beech Road and TH 95. This work will be incorporated in a proposal by MnDOT to
reconstruct Lookout Trail and ultimately be a roadway turn back to the city of Oak Park Heights.
c. The Omaha Ave right in right out intersection with TH 36 shall be reconstructed as part of the St. Croix
Crossing Design build project
d. North and South Frontage Roads within the City's jurisdiction remain under MNDOT ownership
e. All construction impacted Xcel power lines within the TH 36 Corridor be undergrounded compliant
with City ordinance.
f. Work on Oakgreen Avenue shall be extended to the south from the proposed southern termini of work
depicted on the construction plans to approximately the northern termini of Oakgreen Ave at 58 street. A
right turn lane will be constructed at Oakgreen Ave and 58th street to facilitate right turns from Oak Green
Ave onto 58th Street. All work upon Oakgreen Avenue will consist of an urban roadway sections and stay
within the existing right of way.
g. All MNDOT trails within the TH 36 corridor shall be owned by MNDOT with the City having minor
maintenance thereon. Any trail reconstruction shall remain a MNDOT responsibility.
h. The layout for Oakgreen Avenue will be adjusted to provide a pull back of the Frontage Road from
the Pine Grove Gardens development. MnDOT provided the city with a concept that will increase the
distance between the townhomes and the south frontage road by approximately 30 ft. This provides a
total distance between the townhomes and frontage road of approximately 50 feet.
i. MNDOT will implement and complete reasonable maintenance to the Scenic Overlook as committed
to under the mitigation commitments.
j. MNDOT will install appropriate and distinct and durable materials TH 36 pedestrian crossing elements at
Osgood Ave and at Oakgreen /Greely.
k. Western Project limits for the St. Croix Crossing Project will be established to ensure reconstruction of all
frontage roads and TH 36 mainline not constructed since the 1990's and ensure the project begins where
the previous phase of construction ended.
I. The Holiday Gas Station shall retain its access point on Osgood Avenue.
M. A reasonable access for the Home for Me Townhomes ( Oakgreen and South Frontage Road) shall be
maintained
o. All new streets or street /drive extensions created by the project will be
established as private drives unless the City of Oak Park Heights agrees to accept
them as public streets.
"The storm water design will meet the volume, rate and water quality requirements for
the project as a whole. MnDOT will be responsible for pond maintenance and any
future reconstruction."
21 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
RESOLUTION NO. 12-08-32
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK
HEIGHTS APPROVING THE SUBMITTED CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR
THE ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING AND ITS APPROACHES, FINDING
SAME TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANS AS
GRANTED MUNICIPAL CONSENT FORTHE 1995 LAYOUT
WHEREAS, in 1995 the City Council for the City of Oak Park Heights
(hereafter referred to as the "City ") approved a particular layout for the
construction of the various roadway and layout approaches for the St. Croix
Crossing Project, and;
WHEREAS, in 1995 the City and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation signed a Memorandum of Understanding that documents actions
related to a specific layout, the execution of the project, including costs, timelines
and statutory provisions, and;
WHEREAS, the Department has continually worked towards the
resurrection of the Project ultimately leading to a July 2nd, 2012 submission of
construction plans to the City as required by Minnesota Statutes 161.177( 1995),
and;
WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the MNDOT submitted construction
plans from July 2, 2012 relative to the 1995 layout plan approved by the City on
August 10, 1995, and has had the input of their City Engineer, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the changes existing between Layout
Plans as approved by the City in 1995 and the construction plans are insignificant or
otherwise beneficial to the city at large, and;
22 of 30 4 -16-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
WHEREAS, the City has received and acknowledges the commitment from
the Minnesota Department of Transportation as set forth within correspondence
signed by the Commissioner of Transportation Thomas Sorel dated August 23, 2012,
and this City approves of same, and;
WHEREAS, the City of Oak Park Heights and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation have benefitted from the input and participation and the resolution of
various issues by the intervention of the Honorable Mark Dayton, Governor of the
State of Minnesota, and acknowledges and is grateful for his input and commitments
as outlined in his correspondence to the City dated August 23, 2012, and the City
approves of same, and;
WHEREAS, the City of Oak Park Heights has previously been benefitted by
the assistance of the Honorable Kathy Lohmer, member of the House of
Representatives of the State of Minnesota in securing additional funds for the City in
this project to address financial needs as presented, and is gratefttl for her input; and,
WHEREAS, the City has been benefitted also on the federal level by the
participation of the Honorable Michele Bachmann member of the United State
Congress and her staff in addressing Federal handing issues relative to this project,
and is grateful for her input and continuing assistance;
WHEREAS, the City has been benefitted also on the federal level by the
participation of the Honorable Amy Klobuchar member of the United States Senate
and her staff in addressing Federal funding issues relative to this project, and is
grateful for her input and continuing assistance;
WHEREAS, the City has been benefitted by the diligent work of its City staff,
together with MNDOT staff, and Project Director Jon Chiglo in working to find
solutions to the various issues that have been presented relative to this project and the
various renditions and changes that have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City
Council for the City of Oak Park Heights as follows:
1. That the City Council approves the construction plans submitted
by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to the City on July 2, 2012 as being
in accordance with the 1995 Layout Plans as approved by the City on August 14,
1995 in Resolution 95- 08 -39.
2
23 of 30 4 -16-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
2. The City of Oak Park Heights approves of all work associated
with the St. Croix Crossing Project as the City finds the plans as submitted benefit
and are in the best interest of the citizens and residents of the City of Oak Park
Heights.
3. That the City of Oak Park Heights waves or releases any claim of
statutory non - compliance by the Minnesota Department of Transportation with the
submission of the construction plans on July 2, 2012.
4. That the City Council authorizes its staff to begin work with the
staff of the Minnesota Department of Transportation to negotiate and formalize
Cooperative Construction and Utility Agreements consistent with the commitments
and financial projections agreed to between State and City staff.
5. The City of Oak Park Heights is committed to working with
MnDOT as an active partner through the development and implementation of the St.
Crnix f rnecina Prniprt
is 23"`
III
24 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
'•• O rIbF �Arj '•�\.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Office of Governor Mark Dayton
a
130 State Capitol 0 75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard Saint Paul, MN 55155
Mayor David Beaudet
Councilmember Les Abrahamson
Councilmember Mary McComber
Councilmember Mike Runk
Councilmember Mark Swenson
Oak bark Heights City Hall
14168 Oak Park Boulevard North
Oak Park Heights, Minnesota 55082
August 23, 2012
Dear Mayor Beaudet and City Councihnembers:
Over the last six months, my Administration has worked closely with the City of Oak
Park Heights to advance the critically important and tine- sensitive construction of the St. Croix
River Crossing between Wisconsin and Minnesota.
A crucial next step in this process is the passage by the City on August 23, 2012, of a
resolution expressing unconditional municipal consent to, and approval of, all work associated
with the St. Croix River Crossing project.
Working together, the City of Oak Park Heights and the Minnesota Depat•tinent of
Transportation have successfully resolved many issues associated with this project. These
agreements are outlined by MnDOT Commissioner Tom Sorel in the attached letter.
In addition, the City has asked for help covering the cost of utility betterments associated
with the project amounting to $2,871,997.90. In the 2012 session, the Legislature appropriated
$1 million in state General Obligation bonds from resources provided in the Local Road
buprovement Fund (Minnesota Laws 2012, chapter 293, section 16, subdivision 3). The City of
Oak Sark Heights has agreed to take responsibility for $351,828 of these costs, leaving a gal) of
$1,520,170.
With this letter, I personally pledge to requesting approval from U.S. Department of
Transportation Secretary Laffood for the federal government to commit $1,520,170 for these
project costs. If Secretary LaHood informs me that the U.S. Department of Transportation is
unable to provide these funds, I will request and do my utmost to secure an additional State
General Obligation bond appropriation equal to $1,520,170 during the 2013 legislative session.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation will work with the City to ensure that cash flow and
local payment timing provides sufficient time for the 2013 Legislative to take action, if necessary.
I understand that, with these commitments, no issues remain that would prohibit the City
of Oak Park Heights from passing, on August 23, 2012, a resolution expressing its unconditional
municipal consent to, and approval of, all work associated with the St. Croix Crossing Project. In
addition, the resolution will state that the city finds the construction plans provided to it by the
Department of Transportation on July 2, 2012, to be fully in accordance with the layout plan it
approved in City of Oak Park Heights Resolution No. 95 -08 -39 on August 14,1995.
Voice: (651) 2013400 or (800) 657 -3717 Fax: (651) 797 -1850 MN Relay (800) 627 -3529
Website: httn: / / overnor,:; a a mn u,5 An Equal Opportunity Employer
Printed on recycled paper containing 15% post consumer material and state government printed
25030 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
Mayor David Beaudet and City Councihnembers
August 23, 2012
Page 2
This agreement allows us to move forward with building a bridge that will support the
economic development of communities on both sides of the river. I thank you for your diligent
work on this project and your continued service to the people of Oak Park Heights.
I ly,
Mark Dayton
Governor
Attachment: Letter from Commissioner Sorel
cc: Senator Amy Klobuchar
Congresswoman Michele Bachnnann
Chairman Mike Beard
Chairman Joe Ginise
Senator Ted Lillie
Representative Kathy Lohmer
26 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
* HNESO. '
Minnesota Department of Transportation
afT -r'o 395 John Ireland Boulevard
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 -1899
August 23, 2012
Mayor David Beaudet
Councilmember Les Abrahamson
Councilmember Mary McComber
Councilmember Mike Runk
Councilmember Mark Swenson
PO Box 2007
Oak Park Heights, MN 55082
Dear Mayor Beaudet and City Councilmembers:
"Phis letter reflects and further documents the agreements reached between the City of Oak Park
Heights and the Minnesota Department of Transportation related to the St. Croix Crossing
Project between Wisconsin and Minnesota.
1. Final design for Lookout Trail at TH 95 will provide for a right- in/right -out
configuration.
2. Lookout Trail: The pedestrian and bike accommodations will run up Lookout Trail and
be continuous between Beech Road and TH 95. This work will be incorporated into a
turn-back proposal by MnDOT to the city of Oak Park Heights. The turn back agreement
will include funding for the city to design and reconstruct Lookout Trail. The turn-
around in the current plan will be eliminated from the St. Croix Crossing project. If a turn
back agreement cannot be reached this work will not be done.
3. The Omaha Avenue right - in/right -out at grade intersection with eastbound TH 36 shall be
reconstructed as part of the St. Croix Crossing Design -Build project.
4. North and south frontage roads within the city of Oak Park Heights jurisdiction remain
under MnDOT ownership.
5. As provided in Minnesota Statutes Section 161.45 the relocation of construction impacted
utilities will need to comply with any applicable city ordinance, unless waived by the
city. MnDOT is committed to working with the City to relocate utilities to a point as
close to the right of way line as possible to minimize potential impact to these facilities in
the future.
6. Work on Oakgreen Avenue shall be extended to the south from the proposed southern
termini of work depicted on the construction plans to approximately the northern termini
of Oakgreen Avenue at 58` Street. A southbound right -turn lane will be constructed at
Oakgreen Avenue and 58' Street to facilitate right turns from Oakgreen Avenue onto 58 °i
Street. All work upon Oakgreen Avenue will consist of an urban roadway section, with
concrete curb and gutter and construction stay within the existing right of way.
27 of 30 An equal opportunity employer 4 -16-13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
7. All MnDOT trails constructed as a part of the St. Croix Crossing project and within the
City of Oak Park Heights shall be owned by MnDOT, with the city having minor
maintenance responsibilities thereon. Any trail reconstruction shall remain a MnDOT
responsibility. Closure of the trails by the City of Oak Park Heights will be in
accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and City Ordinances and Park
policies.
8. The layout for Oakgreen Avenue will be adjusted to provide a pull back of the frontage
road from the Pine Grove Gardens development. MnDOT will increase the distance
between the townhomes and the south frontage road by approximately 30 feet. This
provides a total distance between the townhomes and frontage road of approximately 50
feet.
9. MnDOT will implement and complete reasonable maintenance to the Scenic Overlook as
committed to under the Section 106 mitigation requirements.
10. MnDOT will install appropriate TH 36 at grade pedestrian crossing elements at Osgood
Avenue and Oakgreen Avenue/Greeley per MnDOT standards.
11. Western project limits for flee St. Croix Crossing project will be established to ensure
reconstruction of TH 36 mainline not constructed since the 1990s and ensure the project
begins where the previous phase of construction ended.
12. The Holiday gas station shall retain its access point on Osgood Avenue.
13. A reasonable access for the Home for Me Townhomes ( Oakgreen and South Frontage
Road) shall be maintained.
14. The storm water design will meet the volume, rate and waxer quality requirements for the
project. MnDOT will coordinate the St. Croix Crossing storm water design with the
Browns Creek Watershed District and the Middle St. Croix Water Management
Organization. MnDOT will be responsible for pond maintenance and any future
reconstruction.
15. The total cost to the city of Oak Park Heights is $2,871,997.00. This is computed by
adding city defined betterments, city share of construction impacted utilities, Grey Area
utilities and city responsibility of traffic signal costs. After applying the $1,000,000 from
the Local Road Improvement Fund and the City responsibility for Utility Bettennents
MnDOT commits that the total City of Oak Park Heights financial obligation as a result
of the St. Croix Crossing Project will not exceed $1,520,169.00. This total obligation
does not include the cost of the "Moelter Site" utility relocation which if elected by the
City will increase the total obligation to the City. This figure does assume the relocation
of City utilities between Oakgreen and Osgood as part of the project
16. MnDOT and the City will review a list of new driveways or streets and determine which
will be classified as a public facility or private facility.
28 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
As you are aware, in March of 2012 I appointed Jon Chiglo as the St. Croix Crossing Project
Director. With this appointment, Mr. Chiglo has full authority to negotiate on behalf of the
Minnesota Department of Transportation regarding all elements of this project. The Minnesota
Department of Transportation looks forward to enhancing our partnership with Oak Park Heights
by working together to successfully complete and open the new St. Croix Bridge.
Sincerely,
Thomas K. Sorel
Commissioner
Minnesota Department of Transportation
29 of 30 4 -16 -13 Memo to OPH City Council
Power Line Burial commitments
G TOR
wr'iter`s Direct Dial:
(651) 3514118
\4'ritcr's r: mail:
I nviedinl!lwit uglamr euxorn
l " l'.l)1'itary 20, 2013
Colette Jurek
1\ilitnager - C'onln)ttnity & Local Governlllen R
Xcel Energy
3000 Maxwell Avenue
Ne.wporf., MN 55055
RC: S1. Croix River Ib•Nge 1'1 jecl
L7ec iric Relocation Di.4< llssion Silllln all)p
Our Idle No.: 01501 -1745 3
1
1.)Ci31 1\/1s..ltE1 - C (C:
Stillwater Office;
1809 tVi7r0rvCdwn Avort:e
SWIveiler, h41nne 55082
lob!) 43%2878
ax (0'i t l 43t: :'9l:i
Hudson Office:
;3G Set Wd Sheet
Lli;r;y.<i!i, 4`tii'iGgilcf(s 5491("
386 -3133
Fax M 6) 386 -6456
....:..t;<:kl;taglalllrruxs. coral
Your col of February 8, 2013 has been direaed to this off icc ias City Aitonie)-: Inv the Chy
of Oak Part; I leighm,
Relaliyc to (fie St. Croix liver l.iridge Project, that is a Minncsta Departlilent 0FYral)Sportation project,
directed by their on ices. The. City of Oak Park Rights has no ahHhy to director control your utility or
whit your conMmny IS dhvctl:d to do by Mnl)(Yr relative to its aectricai transmission line's. As 1 have
already irldicated to your counsel Me City of Oak Park R is not responsi to Xcel with regard to
the hAnDO"r Avetive, as it affects the electric relocation as a result. of'thi s project, and vvill not be liable:,
nor "Al the City tolerate its citizens (axed or charges( by Xcel, relative to this project.
Whatever directives MND0)1 directs Xcel to complete on this project are lion) MnDO"1', not from the
City of Oak Park I leights.
l.f ?:eel takes issue with thlti natter, I trust you will hav4 your corporate coullsel comer \ "vitll nle directly
aga on Ow rll2 ner, but alt this pAnt, we coi)5idt'.l the issu closed. ---
Yours very
Mark .1: Vierlin.g
M NI /ild
cc.: Eric Johnson. City of Oak Park Heights
I
9of33 c'E:ltrlti'.. 1. ;i \11;P.RS. tiitll;(;�, \Coil l l i -3 .lt.Ll \c.. ]'t Ll'
rali dy Lay: llwicr": • i wne s :x:!tl (:o1!1rFxscial I - ale '' inliral Ir.lu!; l inlrt;ryt!si Lk i
„ 4- 16 -'(§ Memo to 6PH City Council
30 of 30 h ome . G;MHW , 1 aa,n,tr Ro"'I E. IAP • I ,: W Un "W - h•icltlf„E,oc; • :'itt:r�ltai:a:1 Lrty • P6Wr l t_'14b t Mal commitments
2�
z
r;
Stillwater Office;
1809 tVi7r0rvCdwn Avort:e
SWIveiler, h41nne 55082
lob!) 43%2878
ax (0'i t l 43t: :'9l:i
Hudson Office:
;3G Set Wd Sheet
Lli;r;y.<i!i, 4`tii'iGgilcf(s 5491("
386 -3133
Fax M 6) 386 -6456
....:..t;<:kl;taglalllrruxs. coral
Your col of February 8, 2013 has been direaed to this off icc ias City Aitonie)-: Inv the Chy
of Oak Part; I leighm,
Relaliyc to (fie St. Croix liver l.iridge Project, that is a Minncsta Departlilent 0FYral)Sportation project,
directed by their on ices. The. City of Oak Park Rights has no ahHhy to director control your utility or
whit your conMmny IS dhvctl:d to do by Mnl)(Yr relative to its aectricai transmission line's. As 1 have
already irldicated to your counsel Me City of Oak Park R is not responsi to Xcel with regard to
the hAnDO"r Avetive, as it affects the electric relocation as a result. of'thi s project, and vvill not be liable:,
nor "Al the City tolerate its citizens (axed or charges( by Xcel, relative to this project.
Whatever directives MND0)1 directs Xcel to complete on this project are lion) MnDO"1', not from the
City of Oak Park I leights.
l.f ?:eel takes issue with thlti natter, I trust you will hav4 your corporate coullsel comer \ "vitll nle directly
aga on Ow rll2 ner, but alt this pAnt, we coi)5idt'.l the issu closed. ---
Yours very
Mark .1: Vierlin.g
M NI /ild
cc.: Eric Johnson. City of Oak Park Heights
I
9of33 c'E:ltrlti'.. 1. ;i \11;P.RS. tiitll;(;�, \Coil l l i -3 .lt.Ll \c.. ]'t Ll'
rali dy Lay: llwicr": • i wne s :x:!tl (:o1!1rFxscial I - ale '' inliral Ir.lu!; l inlrt;ryt!si Lk i
„ 4- 16 -'(§ Memo to 6PH City Council
30 of 30 h ome . G;MHW , 1 aa,n,tr Ro"'I E. IAP • I ,: W Un "W - h•icltlf„E,oc; • :'itt:r�ltai:a:1 Lrty • P6Wr l t_'14b t Mal commitments