Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-11-2014 City Council Packet CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 6:00 P.M. 6:00 p.m. I. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance/Approval of Agenda Estimated times 6:05 p.m. II. Council/Staff Reports A. Mayor McComber B. Councilmember Dougherty C. Councilmember Liljegren D. Councilmember Runk E. Councilmember Swenson F. Staff 6:05 p.m. III. Visitors/Public Comment This is an opportunity for the public to address the Council with questions or concerns on issues not part of the regular agenda(Please limit comments to 3 minutes in length), 6:10 p.m. IV. Consent Agenda(Roll Call Vote) A. Approve Bills & Investments B. Approve City Council Minutes—February 25, 2014 (1) C. Approve Resolution for American Cancer Society, Inc. to Conduct a One-Day Raffle on August 1, 2014 at the Stillwater Area High School (2) D. Approve Mayoral Proclamation in Observance of National Donate Life Month (3) 6:15 p.m. V. Public Hearings None 6:15 p.m. VI. Old Business A, Establish TIF Area 1-2 and Related Ehlers Agreement (4) 6:20 p.m. VII. New Business A. City Ord. Amendments: 602 Keeping of Livestock or Farm Animals (5) B. Municipal Consent Request—County State Aid Alignment Changes CSAH 21 & 23 (6) C. Consider Application for TIGER Funding (7) D. MNDOT Request to City—Turn back of Lookout Trail (8) 6:40 p.m. VIII. Other Council Items or Announcements 6:45 p.m. IX. Adjournment Pagel of 162 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 2 of 162 144 .. Oak Park Heights ENCL 1 Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11, 2014 Agenda Item. Approve City Council Minutes—February 25, 2014 Time Req. 0 Agenda Placement Consent Originating Department/Requestor Administration/Jennifer Pinski Requester's Signature J Action Requested Approve Background/Justification(Please indicate any previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have been advised). See attached. Page 3 of 162 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES I. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance/Approval of Agenda: Mayor McComber called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Dougherty, Runk, and Swenson. Staff present: City Administrator Johnson, City Attorney Vierling, and City Engineer Riefsteck. Absent: Councilmember Liljegren and City Planner Richards. Mayor McComber added three items to the Agenda: "Approve Resolution Supporting Legislation Allowing Cities to Establish Street Improvement Districts"as Consent Agenda Item I. and "Approve Resolution Supporting Legislation Allowing Cities to Designate their Cities Website to Publish Notices" as New Business Item J., and"Signage Options—STH 36 Corridor and Pennants" as Old Business Item C. Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Dougherty, moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Carried 4-0. II. Council/Staff Reports: A. Mayor McComber: She reported that the next Parks Commission held a Public Hearing on February 24 regarding the proposed Swager Park improvements; the next Parks Commission meeting was set for March 17; the Joint Legislation meeting was set for February 27; and she would be attending the mayor's meeting on March 4. B. Councilmember Doughert y: He reported that the MSCWMO approved the street reconstruction project and the tax collections for the Convention and Visitor's Bureau were the highest so far. C. Councilmember Liljegren: Absent. D. Councilmember Runk: He reported that the Planning Commission was set for March 13 at 7:00 p.m. E. Councilmember Swenson: He reported that the Cable Commission meeting for February 13 was cancelled due to lack of a quorum and will be rescheduled. F. Staff. City Administrator Johnson reported that the City had been receiving reports of frozen pipes. He recommended that residents contact a plumber and also inform the City as the City Council would be considering adjustment of water bills. Johnson also reported that staff would be meeting with Jon Chiglo of MNDOT the following week. Page 4 of 162 City Council Meeting Minutes February 25, 2014 Page 2 of 4 Deputy Clerk Pinski reported that Jean Makowski of 14174 54`x' Street North and Richard Bartkey of 14478 57`h Street North were chosen as the recycling award winners for the month of February. III. Visitors/Public Comment: None IV. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Bills & Investments B. Approve City Council Minutes—February 11, 2014 C. Approve License for Sale/Storage of Fireworks at Menards Store D. Approve Liquor License for Bridge Banquet, LLC dba Heights Hall and Club E. Adopt Proclamation for April 25, 214 as Arbor Day and May 2014 as Arbor Month F. Adopt Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan for Advance of Certain Costs in Connection with a Tax Increment Financing District G. Approve Resolution Supporting State of MN Raising the Minimum Wage to $9.50 per hour H. Accept Donation of$100 from Virginia Crain of Paris Ave I. Approve Resolution Supporting Legislation Allowing Cities to Establish Street Improvement Districts J. Approve Resolution Supporting Legislation Allowing Cities to Designate their Cities Wcbsite to Publish Notices Councilmember Dougherty pulled Item G. Councilmember Swenson pulled item J. Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Dougherty, moved to approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda. Roll call vote taken. Carried 4-0. Councilmember Dougherty suggested that the minimum wage issue was a state and federal issue, not a City issue. Councilmember Runk agreed. Councilmember Dougherty, seconded by Councilmember Runk, moved to remove the item from the Agenda. Carried 4-0. Councilmember Swenson stated he would like notices to continue to be published in the local newspaper. Mayor McComber stated that the intent of the Resolution was not to eliminate those newspaper publications. Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Runk, moved to approve the Resolution. Carried 4- 0. V. Public Hearings: None Page 5 of 162 City Council Meeting Minutes February 25, 2014 Page 3 of 4 VI. Old Business: A. Street Reconstruction — Adopt Resolution Ordering Assessment Hearing= Discuss Received Bids: City Engineer Reifsteck reported that the low bidder was Hardrives. He explained the alternates. Mayor McComber asked Reifsteck what the latest discussion on Area D was. He reported that the plan was to construct Area D in 2015. Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Dougherty, moved to approve the Resolution. Roll call vote taken. Carried 4-0. B. Sale of Lands to MNDOT—Parcel 39: City Administrator Johnson reported that the Resolution was drafted so that MNDOT would reconstruct the trail connection at their expense if they disconnect the trail. Councilmember Runk, seconded by Councilmember Swenson, moved to approve the Resolution. Roll call vote taken. Carried 4-0. C. SignaV Options — STH 36 Corridor and Pennants: Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Dougherty, moved to approve the Resolution. Roll call vote taken. Carried 4-0. VII. New Business: A. Consider Policy on Water Service Line FreeKc -Up: City Administrator Johnson reported that approximately 25 complaints were received that the line from the main to the home had frozen. He stated that the City had tried to assist where it could with the resources it had. Councilmember Swenson stated that he would like the City to take names and send contractors out to the residences to reduce liability and fire risk. City Administrator Johnson stated that staff could recommend companies and aid in coordinating who was called. Swenson stated that he wanted it in the policy that City staff would assist. He wanted it made clear that the City would not pay for the service. City Administrator Johnson stated that he would add language that the City would give a list of reputable contractors to contact. Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Dougherty, moved to approve the policy. Carried 4-0. B. 57"' Street & City Hall Entrance—Temporary Open to Two-Way Traffic: Mayor McComber suggested that 57th Street North at the entrance to the City Hall parking lot be opened to two-way traffic during the bridge construction. Councilmember Runk stated he was opposed to the idea. He stated that 5711' Street was not built to handle increased traffic. He also stated that the area was designed to make it difficult for traffic to go eastbound. Councilmember Dougherty suggested that the area be Page 6 of 162 City Council Meeting Minutes February 25, 2014 Page 4 of monitored and revisit the idea again if traffic had increased. The City Council agreed with that suggestion. VIII. Other Council Items or Announcements Mayor McComber stated she would like to set a tentative worksession regarding the St. Croix River Crossing project. Councilmember Dougherty, seconded by Councilmember Swenson, moved to set the worksession for 5:30 p.m. on March 11. Carried 4-0, IX. Closed Session A. Labor Negotiations closed pursuant to MN Stat. 13.D.03): City Attorney Vierling reported that the City Council would go into closed session to discuss matters relating to labor negotiations. He stated that the meeting would be recorded, and the recording would be kept on file as required by statute. Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Dougherty, ;roved to go into closed session. Carried 4-0. The regular meeting was reconvened. City Attorney Vierling reported that the City Council received input from City Administrator Johnson and that no actions were taken during the closed session. X. Ad_lournment Councilmember Swenson, seconded by Councilmember Runk, moved to adjourn at 8:15 p.m. Carried 4-0. Respectfully submitted, Approved as to Content and Form, Jennifer Pinski Mary McComber Deputy Clerk Mayor Page 7 of 162 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 8 of 162 � w Oak Park Heights ENCL 2 Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11, 2014 Agenda Item Approve Resolution for American Cancer Society, Inc. to Conduct•a One-Day Raffle on August 1, 2014 at the Stillwater Area High School Time Req. 0 Agenda Placement Consent Originating Departmcnt/Requestor ,Adniinistration/Jennifer Pinski Requester's Signature Action Requested Approve Background/Justification(Please indicate any previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have been advised). See attached. Page 9 of 162 XIINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING 1/13 Page 1 of 2 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that: Application fee (non refundable) conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and - awards less than $54,000 in prizes during a calendar year. If application is postmarked or received 30 days or If total prize value for the year will be$1,500 or less,contact the licensing more before the event $50; otherwise $100. specialist assigned to your county. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION Organization name Previous gambling permit number American Cancer Society, Inc. X-93160-006 Minnesota tax ID number, if any Federal employer ID number(FEIN), if any 13-1788491 Type of nonprofit organization. Check one. Fraternal Religious ___Veterans X Other nonprofit organization Mailing address City State Zip code County 250 Williams Street, 4th Floor Atlanta GA 30303 Fulton Name of chief executive officer [CEO] Daytime phone number E-mail address John Seffrin 404-329-7601 john.seffrin@cancer.org NONPROFIT STATUS Attach a copy of ONE of the following for proof of nonprofit status. Nonprofit Articles of Incorporation OR a current Certificate of Good Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 60 Empire Drive, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55103 Phone: 651-296-2803 X IRS income tax exemption [501(c)] letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt fetter, have an organization officer contact the IRS at 877-829-5500. IRS-Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization [charter] If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of both of the following: a. IRS letter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501(c) organization with a group ruling, and b. the charter or letter from your parent organization recognizing your organization as a subordinate. 0,AMBLTING PREMISCS INFORMATION Name of premises where the gambling event will be conducted. For raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place. Stillwater Area High School Address [do not use PO box] City or township Zip code County 5701 Stillwater Blvd. N. Stillwater 55082 Washington Date[s] of activity, For raffles, indicate the date of the drawing. August 1st, 2014 Check each type of gambling activity that your organization will conduct. Bingo* X Raffle Paddlewheels* Pull-tabs* Tipboards* *Gambling equipment for bingo paper, paddlewheels, pull-tabs, and tipboards must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the Minnesota Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization authorized to conduct bingo. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on Distributors under the WHO'S WHO?LIST OF LICENSEES, or call 651-539-1900. Page 10 of 162 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit 1/13 Page 2 of 2 LOCAL. UN HT OF GOVERNMENT ACimf OWLEDG MENT CITY APPROVAL - COUNTY APPROVAL for a gambling premises for a gambling premises located within city limits located in a township The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting _The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 [60 days for a 1st class city], days. The application is denied. The application is denied. Print city name Print county name Signature of city personnel Signature of county personnel Title Date Titre Date __ TOWNSHIP.If required by the county. On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity within the township limits. - _ [A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny Local unit of government must sign an application, per Minnesota Statutes 349.166.] Print township name Signature of township officer Title Date CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the financial report will be completed and returned to the Board within 30 days of the event date. Chief executive officer's signature Date Print name REQUIREMENTS Complete a separate application for: Financial report and recordkeeping required • all gambling conducted on two or more consecutive days,or A financial report form and instructions will be sent with your • all gambling conducted on one day. permit, or use the online fill-in form available at Only one application is required if one or more raffle drawings www.gcb.state.mn,us. are conducted on the same day Within 30 days of the event date, complete and return Send application with: the financial report form to the Gambling Control Board. a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and Questions? —application fee (non refundable). Make check payable to Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board "State of Minnesota." at 651-539-1900. To: Gambling Control Board Thisform will be made available in alternative format(i.e.large print,Braille) 1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South upon request. Roseville, MN 55113 Data privacy notice: 'The information requested on this All other information provided will be pri- General; Commissioners of Administration, form (and any attachments) will be used by the Gambling vate data about your organization until the Minnesota Management&Budget,and Control Board(Board)to determine your organization's Board issues the permit. When the Board Revenue; Legislative Auditor, national and qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling activities in issues the permit,all information provided international gambling regulatory agencies; Minnesota, Your organization has the right to refuse to will become public. If the Board does not anyone pursuant to court order; other indi- supply the information; however, if your organization issue a permit, all information provided viduals and agencies specifically authorized refuses to supply this information, the Board may not be remains private,with the exception of your by state or federal law to have access to able to determine your organization's qualifications and, organization's name and address which will the information; individuals and agencies as a consequence, may refuse to issue a permit. If your remain public. Private data about your for which law or legal order authorizes a organization supplies the information requested,the Board organization are available tot Board mem- new use or sharing of information after this will be able to process the application. Your organization's bers, Board staff whose work requires notice was given; and anyone with your name and address will be public information when received access to the information; Minnesota's written consent. by the Board. Department of Public Safety; Attorney Page 11 of 162 RESOLUTION 14-03-16 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION GRANTING THE APPLICATION OF AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY, INC. TO CONDUCT A ONE-DAY RAFFLE AT STILLWATER AREA HIGH SCHOOL ON AUGUST 1, 2014 WHEREAS, John Seffrin, on behalf of American Cancer Society, Inc. has applied with the State of Minnesota Gambling Control Board for a permit to conduct a one-day raffle on August 1, 2014 at the site of the Stillwater Area High School, 5701 Stillwater Boulevard North; and WHEREAS, the City of Oak Park Heights has reviewed the application and finds that its purposes meet the necessary community standards; and WHEREAS, the City of Oak Park Heights has solicited the input of the public and there have been no objections to the granting of the application for the raffle permit as applied for by American Cancer Society, Inc. with the State of Minnesota Gambling Control Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS AS FOLLOWS: That the application of American Cancer Society, Inc. with the State of Minnesota Gambling Control Board to conduct a one-day raffle on August 1, 2014 at the site of the Stillwater Area High School, 5701 Stillwater Boulevard North, within the City of Oak Park Heights and the same are hereby approved with no waiting period. Passed by the City Council of Oak Park Heights this l I'day of March, 2014. Mary McComber ATTEST: Mayor Eric A. Johnson City Administrator Page 12 of 162 ENCL 3 Oak.Park Heights Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11', 2014 Time Required: 1 Minute Agenda Item Title: APPROVE MAYORAL PROCLAMATION IN OBSERVANCE OF NATIONAL DONATE LIFE MONTH Agenda Placement Consent Agenda Originating Department/Requestor Mayor Mary McComber Requester's Signature Action Requested Approve Proclamation Background/Justification(Please indicate if any previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have advised): See attached proclamation. Page 13 of 162 �.o CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA MA YORAL PROCLAMA TION IN OBSER YANCE OF NA TIONAL DONA TE LIFE MONTH Whereas, April is considered National.Donate Life Month; and Whereas, Organ, eye and tissue donation is a gift which extends hope and healing to those in need; and Whereas, Nearly 115,000 Americans and approximately 3,000 people in Minnesota are waiting for a life-saving transplant; and Whereas, There is a serious shortage of transplantable organs in the United States, resulting in only 28,000 transplants and nearly 6,000 preventable deaths each year; and Whereas, One organ, eye and tissue donor can save or improve the lives of up to sixty people; and Whereas, Minnesota is a leader in registered organ, eye and tissue donors. Any person of any age can become a donor by indicating their preference on their state ID or by registering on-line through either Donate Life Minnesota or Lifesource, one of America's Leading organ procurement organization Now, Therefore, I, Mayor Mary McComber do hereby proclaim April, 2014 as NATIONAL DONATE LIFE MONTH AND, I urge all residents of Oak Park Heights to mark this day by taking the time to consider becoming an organ donor in order to help others continue to celebrate life. IN TESTIMONY WHERE OF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Oak Park Heights, Minnesota to be affixed on this 11th day of March, 2014. Mary McComber, Mayor Attest: Eric Johnson City Administrator Page 14 of 162 ENCL 4 Oak Park Heights Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11 th 2014 Time Required: 5 Minutes Agenda Item Title: Establish TIF,4a -2 d Related Ehlers Agreement Agenda Placement Old Bus' ess/// — Originating Departme ustor ric Jo �itvAdministjrator qe JV Requester's Signatur Action Requested See belo Background/Justification(Please indicate if any previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have advised): Consistent with the MEMO dated Feb 7a`,2014;the City has secured a proposal from EHLERS Public Finance to aid the City in developing TIF District 1-2.The City's former consultant with Northland Securities,Nick Skarich has left to go to another firm and is not involved in TIF development at this time. EHLERS is well known for this type of work and can properly lead the City through the concepts. At this point,the general scope if for RENEWAL district,similar to Tim Nolde's development and has fewer compliance hurdles than full Redevelopment District.And,only permits financing for up to 16 years,resulting in returning lands to the full tax roll sooner. The proposed cost is$3,750 and would be reimbursed from the TIF proceeds once established.Recall,the plan is to facilitate the construction of a new Fury Dealership in this area. EHLERS work would provide the economic analysis needed and well as develop the final TIF Agreements between the City and Fury.Please see their full proposal and timeline. The action requested this evening is: 1. Approve the engagement of EHLERS consistent with their submitted proposal. 2. Approve an action,calling for the holding of a public hearing for the establishment of a TIF district in the depicted area—to be held on May 13th,2014,. Page 15 of 162 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. I AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT THEREIN AND THE ADOPTION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") for the City of Oak Park Heights, Minnesota(the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Public Hearin,?. This Council shall meet on April 8th, 2014, at approximately 7:00 P.M.,to hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Development Prograiri for Municipal Development District No. 1, the proposed establishment of a Tax Increment Financing District, (a renewal and renovation district), and the proposed adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor, all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 to 469.133, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended, in an effort to encourage the development and redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and Section 2. Notice of Public Hearing,Filing of Plans. City staff is authorized and directed to work with Ehlers to prepare a Modification to the Development Program for Municipal Development District No. 1 and a Tax Increment Fin zinc 1n'- Plan for the Tax Increment Financing District and to forward documents to the appropriate taxing jurisdictions including Washington County and Independent School District No. 834. The City Administrator is authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing, together with an appropriate map as required by law, to be published at least once in the official newspaper of the City not later than 10,nor more than 30,days prior to April 8"i', 2014,and to place a copy of the Plans on file in the City Administrator's office at City Hall and to make such copy available for inspection by the public. Dated: March 11,2014. Adopted: Mary McComber,Mayor ATTEST: Eric Johnson,City Administrator Page 16 of 162 February 27, 2014 Proposal for Tax Increment Advisory Services City of Oak Park Heights, Minnesota Main Contact: Mark Ruff, Senior Financial Advisor/Principal Team Members: Rebecca Kurtz, Senior Financial Advisor Jake QeBower, TIF Coordinator _----- www,ehlers-inc.com E H L E RS Minnesota phone 651-697-8500 3060 Centre Pointe Drive LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Offices also in Wisconsin and Illinois fax 651-697-8555 PagPq*g4 I%MN 55113-1122 toll free 800-552-1171 February 27, 2014 Eric Johnson City Administrator City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Boulevard Oak Park Heights,MN 55082 Re: Proposal for Advisory Services related to a Tax Increment Finance Plan On behalf of Ehlers,I am pleased to present this proposal for tax increment services to the City of Oak Park Heights.The proposal demonstrates the ability and readiness to deliver a full scope of services and exceed the City's expectations. Proposals are words,but financial advisory work is performed by people. Ehlers offers ateam of people with a full understanding of the nuances of Minnesota, the property tax system,and its tax increment laws. Mark Ruff and Rebecca Kurtz have worked on more than two hundred tax increment projects over the past 20+ years. The City deserves a Financial Advisor who will listen and seek to understand the City and its future as a whole —not simply requirements of this project. We hope that you will agree that Ehlers is best prepared to serve as your sounding board, information source, and trusted financial advisor. I appreciate your consideration of our proposal and look forward to discussing how Ehlers can best deliver the City's desired scope of services. Sincerely, Ehlers Mark Ruff Senior Financial Advisor/Principal ww.ehiers-inc.com EH L E RS Minnesota phone 651-697-8500 3060 Centre Pointe Drive LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Offices also in Wisconsin and Illinois fax 651-697-8555 Pagge�gl&M 55113-1122 toll free 800-552-1171 Principal and Key Staff Working with the city Staffing is a critical element cif this proposal, Ehlers uses a team approach, One financial advisor will have primary responsibility for our work with the City and will be assisted by other Financial Advisors and Tax Increment Coordinators. This approach fixes responsibility and assures continuity of service for the client from the time of the proposal through any follow-up work on any project. Additionally,it allows a better match of Ehlers'staff expertise and experience to the particular needs of the City. You will have access to the entire staff of Ehlers. During the course of a project, various staff will be responsible for processing and documenting information pertaining to your project. Our key individuals will provide special expertise or professional backup as necessary. Ma rk Ruff will also serve as a primary contact for the redevelopment.He has over 23 years of experience in the area of public finance and redevelopment. He is an industry leader in tax increment,tax abatement, and debt issuance. Rebecca Kurtz will also serve as a contact on all matters related to tax increment,including presentations and the final TIF Plan. She brings over 18 years of experience in economic development, housing, and redevelopment. She is a recognized expert in tax increment financing,abatement,project management,and proforma analysis. Mark and Rebecca's resumes are found at www.ehiers-inc.com/contact-us/miniiesota Local clients currently served by Mark and/or Rebecca with active projects include the following cities: Woodbury,Little Canada, Richfield,Edina, St.Louis Park,Minnetonka,Osseo,Brooklyn Park,Arden Hills, Coon Rapids,Eagan,Waconia,Norwood Young America,New Brighton,Chanhassen,Plymouth,Champlin, Circle Pines,and Duluth. We encourage you to contact any of these clients for references. Our firm also represents several dozen other cities along with the Washington County HRA along with other HRAs and CDAs in the metropolitan area. Ehlers is an independent financial advisory firm employing over 75 people serving several thousand local governments in five states. Our firm does not represent private sector clients. General information on the firm is found at www.ehlers-inc.com. Mark and Rebecca's resumes are found at www.ehlers-ine.com/coiitact- us/minnesota. Ehlers Proposal for the City of Oak Park Heights, MN pp?gL7 X]J2 Tax Increment Finance Plan February Project Budget and Fees Below is our 2014 flat fee structure for renewal and renovation TIF Districts: TIF—R&R District $9,750 Following is a listing of services included in the flat fee and services that will be billed on an hourly basis: Services Provided in Flat Fee: I. Development of TIF model and three(3)TIF runs 2. Up to three(3)TIF Schedule of Events with revisions 3. One(1)Planning Commission Resolution 4. Two(2)EDA Resolutions (call and plan approval if EDA is administrative authority) 5. Two(2)City Council Resolutions(call and plan adoption) 6. One(1)EDA Resolution approving interfund loan(if EDA is implementing entity) 7. One(1)City Council Resolution approving interfund loan(required even if EDA is implementing entity or not) 8. Distribution List for TIF Documents 9. Public hearing notice for newspaper(Ehlers submits) 10. Letter to Board Chair regarding establishment of the TIF district 11. TIF Plan—draft with fiscal implications, draft for Council Review at public hearing and final copy(1 copy each) 12. Ehlers internal reviews of TIF Plan 13. Fiscal Implications Notification Letter to appropriate agencies(county and school district) 14. Letter to County Commissioner regarding creation of TIF District and needed county road improvements(if necessary) 15. File TIF plan with the MN Department of Revenue and Office of State Auditor and request certification of the District with the County 16. One(I)hour of parcel history research(hourly after that) 17. Review of business subsidy policy and requirement (required changes provided on an hourly basis) 18. Map per Office of State Auditor's(OSA)publication standards(provided by Client) 19. Phone conversations regarding questions/direction 20. TIF District book/CD containing copies of all TIF documentation for establishment and certification of the District 21. Detailed sources and uses(i.e. acquisition,demolition,public improvements,etc) for financing the project 22. Detailed project summary 23. Mailing of documents 24. Document production 25. Fiscal impact determination on other jurisdictions 26. Attendance at the public hearing Ehlers Proposal for the City of Oak Park Heights, MN Pryg�L� 2 Tax Increment Finance Plan February Services Not Included in Flat Fee: 1. Development Agreement negotiations 2. Services above in the case in which a district is halted and restarted These services or other additional services will be charged on an hourly basis according to the following 2014 fee schedule: Financial Advisor $205/hour TIF Coordinator $175/hour Financial Analyst $205/hour It should be noted that these rates are updated annually,and the client will be provided with a new hourly and flat fee schedule accordingly. We do not charge for mileage,copies, faxes,emails, or regular business expenses except for messenger and overnight services. We bill the 1''/2 of the flat fee after fiscal implication letters are sent to the County and School District and the remaining 1/2 after the public hearing. Any hourly work completed (services not included in the flat fee) are billed on a monthly basis with detailed explanations for each billing entry by person and date. Ourphilosophy has always been that a client should see proportional value in each invoice received. If the client believes that we have not provided services with value greater than the bill,we encourage them to feel free to call and will address the concerns immediately. Ehlers Proposal for the City of Oak Park Heights, MN Pa e 1 1 Tax Increment Finance Plan February 2 , 2b1 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA FOR THE MODIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. I AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-2 (a renewal and renovation district) March 11, 2014 City Council calls for public hearing on the proposed modification of Development District No. 1 and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-2. March 21, 2014 Project information (property identification numbers and legal descriptions, detailed project description, maps, but/for statement, list of sources and uses of funds, and estimated fiscal impacts of the project public improvements and on fire and police protection) for drafting necessary documentation identified and communicated between the City and Ehlers &Associates. March,2014 Building inspector reviews buildings for substandard qualifications. April 1, 2014 Ehlers & Associates confirms with the City whether building permits have been issued on the property to be included in TIF District. NIA Project infomiation submitted to the County Board for review of County Road Impacts(at least 45 days prior to public hearing). The County Board, by law,has 45 days to review the TIF Plan to determine if any county roads will be impacted by the development. April 11,2014 Fiscal/economic implications received by School Board Cierk and County Auditor(at least 30 days prior to public hearing). [Ehlers &Associates will fax& trail on or before April 11, 2014.] April, 2014 Building inspector provides final building condition report. April 14, 2014 Ehlers & Associates conducts internal review of Development Program and TIF Plan. April 25, 2014 Date of publication of hearing notice and map for establishment of TIF District (at least 10 days but not more than 30 days prior to hearing). [Stillwater Gazette publication deadline: April 22, 2014. Ehlers & Associates will submit notice, map, and instructions to the newspaper via email on or before April 22, 2014.] EHLERS L Add OEIAiEd INL Page 22 of 162 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS - PAGE 2 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA FOR THE MODIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. I AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-2 (a renewal and renovation district) May 8, 2014 Planning Commission reviews Development Program and TIF Plan at 7:30 P.M. May 13,2014 City Council holds a public hearing at 7:30 P.M.on the establishment of Development District and the establishment of TIF District, and passes resolution approving the Development Program modification and TIF Plan. [Ehlers &Associates will send Council packet information to City via email by May F, 2014.] City Council passes resolution authorizing an interfund loan in connection with TIF District. May 14, 2014 City can issue building permits. , 2014 Ehlers & Associates files Development Program and TIF Plan with the MN Department of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor, and requests certification of the TIF District with Washington County. An action under subdivision 1, paragraph (a), contesting the validity of a determination by an authority under section 469.175, subdivision 3,must be commenced within the later cif. (1) 180 days after the municipality's approc'a[ under section 469.175.subdivision 3;or (2) 90 days after the request for certification of the district is filed with the county auditor under section 469.177, subdivision 1. EHLERS Page 23 of 162 City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N•Box 2007.Oak Park Heights,MN 55082•Phone(651)439-4439•Fax(651)433-0574 February 7h, 2014 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council ember , FROM: Eric Johnson, City A RE: Fury Motors The City has continued to explore options for a redevelopment of the NW comer of STH 36 and Osgood Ave with Fury Motors, several conversations were he d. At this time, CARQUEST ownership is not interested in selling its property to any party that would facilitate the effective installation of a new frontage roadway. In addition,despite requests for additional funding from MNDOT and Dept.of Commerce has not moved forward with additional resources that would make the effort economically feasible for the City to pursue. Recall that the frontage roadway is a State highway and Osgood Ave. is a County Highway and the State additional sought the City to assume such roadway. In addition to these difficulties, FURY MOTORS, like Stillwater Motors is charged with constructing a facility that meets a specific manufacturer's standard and which would require the ultimate demolition of the current facility. Accordingly, at this time one positive option is available and would require a two-step approach: 1. Dismiss the concept of any frontage road realignment until such time the property owners request a more palatable asking price and when other public entities provide additional funding. 2. The City would acquire the Westbury property and allow the construction of a driveway from Osgood Ave to the area of a new Fury Dealership. This driveway would be constructed so as to facilitate its use as part and parcel of a new frontage roadway should it be developed in the future. Following this purchase, the City would anticipate the following and which would be placed into a development agreement between the City and Fury Motors including the following: GENERALIZATION: • The City will establish a TIF district shown for the attached Map. (exempting the CARQUEST property) • The City will purchase Westbury property for$330,000. • Fury will purchase Erickson-Post Property. Page 24 of 162 • Fury and the City will demolish/raze the buildings on Westbury Property and Erickson Post Building and restore sites to a clean-level condition ready for a redevelopment. • Fury shall commence construction of a new dealership and driveway access from Osgood Ave across City lands via City temporary permit. • Upon substantial completion of new Dealership,the City will fully convey the Westbury property to Fury for $330,000.Fury shall complete a new driveway access from Osgood Ave.to their new building across lands formerly owned by Westbury, reserving rights for a roadway if necessary. 2014 The Total Acquisition and demolition costs(principal)incurred by Fury subject to TIF repayment to their cost is estimated to be$850,000+/-(being the total Westbury and Erickson Post acquisitions and their related demolition) and will be financed by a pay-as-you go-note issue by Fury payable from TIF revenues generated from the increase construction value of a new Fury dealership. All TIF revenues shall be pledged to a limit of 13 +/-years or to such time as the principal is fully repaid, whichever is first. The City does not pledge its taxing authority for the pay-as-you go-note. The City's goal is to return the property to the general tax roll as quickly as possible. Within the next month,the City will be developing the final TIF parameters and development agreement with Fury Motors that will incorporate the above elements. The City's risk at this time is the acquisition of the Westbury property being the$330,000 should the above parameters not unfold as planned. However in most re-development scenarios it would be anticipated that this property would need to be acquired at some point. Accordingly, at this time the Staff does recommend and request that the City implements its option to purchase the Westbury property and proceed to closing as promptly as possible. The City did agree to give Mr. Westbury a substantial lead time prior to him vacating the property being up to 180 days,so it is vital that this process begin now. Page 25 of 162 i.., �t maw Nlov W N � + Q t 4A t boy I ca �t=r "_. �" " +d �• fi �u'a d,� r,+ry rid r��.r-n* �.��.: � �� 1�ra r"�� d: r tNi atti mL* O tge vy11 4 r, w . e .. �it 'p` .� g ��• S.! ..3 [� 4 r A'u J ,wdar, r"•. � r LC) CD -- al P — h H NANO ? _ m o LO LL 4 a' i - u Ln aft'.a 4 L Page 26 bf 162 LfIJ-N L1409�01--h Z Ulf;, LL L n i u I i AllkiiiiHili Mwwlw � l : HI?10N 3rN3AV N:ibC, 1517d 52527-"S'Nd U:W-i 7IOVL&'fi p M%qd 3115 O'TV AkmAsm gois iWONNsIO-aH r RAOdUfW44x62 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 28 of 162 G 2 We ENCL 5 Oak Park Heights Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11`h, 2014 Time Required: 5 Minutes Agenda Item Title: City Ord. Amendments:M2 Keeping of Livestock or Farm Animals f Agenda Placement New Bus' ssl .,-" Originating Department/ uestor J son Ci strator Requester's Signature Action Requested See BeZ Background/Justification(Please indicate if any previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have advised): Attached you will find an edited version of City Ord 602. The edits show in yellow highlight and hand-underlined. This, if passed would: 1. Prohibit the operation a bee apiary within the City limits. 2. Permit the keeping of up to 4 chickens,no roosters. This ordinance was also crafted in reviewing Stillwater and Bayport ordinances. The document as proposed does: • Not require that • Require $25.00 permit fee neighbors concur with annually. keeping chickens, as • Require Clean, safe, neighbors may say no for sanitary conditions, reasons other than the • Rear yard only. keeping of chickens. . No Roosters Also enclosed is a memo from the City of Lakeville, (avoiding the development of an extensive internal memo )which discusses most of the seminal issues and provides comparative matrix which the City of Oak Park heights proposal generally matches. The City Council may adopt these amendments or may also consider holding a public hearing for comments. Page 29 of 162 602 AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE KEEPING OF LIVESTOCK OR FARM ANIMALS AND PROVIDING FOR THE REQUIREMENT OF A SPECIAL OR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA,DOES ORDAIN: 602.01 Definitions. For the purpose of this Chapter, certain words and phrases are defined as follows: A. "Livestock or farm animals" are any and all cattle, sheep, swine, horses, mules and goats,turkeys, chickens,bees or ducks. B. "Domestic House Pet Animals" are those customary and usual house pets such as dogs, cats, et cetera, which are maintained on the premises being sheltered within the primary residential structure located thereon and being kept by the owner or person in occupation thereof for personal or family purposes. C. "Chicken"or"Chickens" as used herein shall not include Roosters. 602.02 General Provisions. A. Except as otherwise provided for in this Ordinance or other City regulations, all domestic house pet animals shall be allowed as permitted uses in any zoning district. B. Farm animals or livestock,except chickens,shall be prohibited in all districts except for the O-Open Space Conservation District where the keeping of farm animals or livestock may be allowed by conditional use permit. Prior to being granted a conditional use permit, any applicant seeking to maintain livestock or farm animals upon his property shall demonstrate conditions of this Ordinance. C. Chickens may only be ke t n sin '11v or two-family residential units; subject to the provisions of 602.11. 602.03 Pollution Control Agency Standard Minimum Requirements. A. All regulations imposed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) relating to the keeping of livestock or domestic farm animals shall be adhered to, and such regulations shall be considered the minimum safeguard necessary to prevent pollution of public waters or creation of a health hazard. Page 30 of 162 B. New livestock feedlots, poultry lots, and other animal lots are prohibited within the following- areas. 1. All districts within the City except for the O-Open Space Conservation District. 2. Within one thousand (1,000) feet of the normal high water mark of any lake, pond or flowage; or within three hundred (300) feet of a river or stream. 3. Within a flood way. 4. Within one thousand (1000) feet to the boundary of a public park. 5. Within one-half('/2)mile to the newest point to a concentration of ten (10) or more private non-farm residences. 602.04 Permit Required. No feedlot or manure storage site shall be maintained unless a permit therefore has been first issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and by the City Council as provided herein. The application for permit by the owner or other person responsible for a feedlot or manure storage site shall be accompanied by plans showing the features and method of operation and construction and existing or proposed safeguards or disposal systems, The governing body nnay thereafter issue a permit therefore upon such conditions as it shall prescribe to prevent pollution of any public water or creation of a health hazard. 602.05 Storaie of Manure or Livestock- Waste. No manure or 1 ivestock waste shall be deposited,stored,or kept or al lowed to remain in or upon any storage site or feedlot without reasonable safeguards adequate to prevent the escape or movement of such manure or waste or a solution thereof from the site which may result in pollution of any public waters or any health hazards. 602.06 Inadequate Safeguards. In case the City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights shall find that any manure is stored or kept on any feedlot or storage site without a safeguard,or that any existing safeguard is inadequate, it may order the owner or other responsible person to immediately remove the manure from the feedlot or storage site and refrain from further storage or keeping of any manure thereat, unless and until an adequate safeguard is provided as herein prescribed. 602.07 Notice Concerning loss. It shall be the duty of the owner of a feedlot or manure storage site or other responsible person in charge thereof to notify i immediately the City Clerk of any loss of stored manure, either by accident or otherwise, when such loss involves a Page 31 of 162 substantial amount which would be likely to enter any waters of the State. Such notice shall be by telephone or other comparable means and shall be made without delay after discovery of the loss. The notification shall include the location and nature of the loss and such other appurtenant information as may be available at the time. 602.08 Hazards and Nuisances. On parcels less than forty (40) acres, which are not part of a larger crop producing commercial agricultural farm,keeping of horses,cattle,livestock,or other domestic farm animals on a site with less than two (2) acres of existing grazable land per animal is hereby declared to be a nuisance. No domestic farm animals shall be placed on any site of less than five(5)acres.Keeping of bees or operating an apiary is prohibited with the City limits. 602.09 Grazable Acres. Grazable acreage shall be defined as open, non-treed acreage currently providing enough pasture or agricultural crops capable of supporting summer grazing at a density of one animal unit or its equivalent per two(2)acres. For purposes of these regulations, the following animal equivalents apply: Animal Units 1 Slaughter Steer or Heifer 1 1 Horse 1 1 Mature Dairy Cow 1.4 1 Swine over 55 pounds A 1 Sheep and Goats .5 1 Turkey .1 1 Chicken See 602.11 1 Duck .2 602.10 The Keeping of Domestic Farm Animals in Greater Density than Allowed by this Ordinance Shall be Prohibited. Variance from the above provisions may be applied for,however,the applicant must demonstrate that facilities are present and appropriate practices are being employed to preclude surface or ground water contamination, excessive manure accumulation, 3 Page 32 of 162 odor. noise, or other nuisances. The applicant must have a Minnesota. Pollution Control Agency feedlot permit for the proposed use. 602.11 Keeping of Chickens The keeping of chickens on any site shall require an annual permit. The duration ALL of the permit is January 1—December 31 of each year. The annual fee for such �. permit shall be $25.00 for up to four chickens which must be paid at the time of application. The city zoning administrator may grant a permit pursuant to this �Ns�rr�mJ section and the following conditions: a. The applicant shall make written application on such form as provide by the City and agree to adhere to all conditions under which the permit was granted(failure to adhere will result in refusal/revocation). b. The applicant adheres to a minimum of one inspection of the premises on an annual basis, failure to adhere will result in refusal/revocation. c. No roosters may be kept within the City limits at any time or for any reason. d. At no time shall there be more than any combination of four chickens kept on any single or two-family property(no chickens are allowed on any property that contains three or more dwelling units). e. The conditions under which the chickens will be kept and cared for may constitute a nuisance or health/safety concern if found to be in disrepair, unsanitary and/or unsafe. f, The chickens will at no tune be contained within a dwelling unit. g. The applicant must demonstrate that suitable facilities are present and appropriate practices are being employed to preclude surface or ground water contamination, excessive 4 Page 33 of 162 fecal accumulation, odor, noise or other nuisances. h. Chickens must be provided a secure,well ventilated, roofed structure capable of providing reasonable shelter during all seasons. No coop, shelter structure or any form of pen may be closer than 20' to any property line and may only be kept in the rear yard. L No person may allow chickens to range freely without fencing or a mobile pen. j. Chickens must be kept in the roofed structure (coop)with an attached pen, or a detached mobile pen whenever they are unattended by the keeper; but when attended by the keeper, the chickens are allowed in a completely fenced exercise yard; k. The coops attached pen must be securely constructed with at least a mesh type material and shall have protective overhead netting. 1. The coops attached pen must be well drained so there is no accumulation of moisture, The floor area of the roofed structure or a combination of the floor area and attached pen area must equal at least ten square feet of area per chicken. m. No person may slaughter chickens within the City limits. n. No person may sell chickens within the City limits. o. The city's zoning administrator or animal control officer may refuse or revoke any permit at any time for unsanitary or unfit conditions. 602.12 Enforcement. The provisions of Section 101.05 of the Code of Ordinances for the City of Oak Park Heights are hereby incorporated by reference. Each day during which compliance with this Ordinance is not achieved by an individual,owner,or person responsible for 5 Page 34 of 162 such livestock domestic farm animals or feedlot operation shall constitute a separate offense. b Page 35 of 162 City of Lakeville Planning Department Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Frank.Dempsey, AICP,Associate Planner Date: February 18, 20114 Subject: Work Session Discussion Regarding the keeping of Chickens in Residential Zoning Districts Over the past several years, Planning Department staff has received numerous inquiries from the public to allow the keeping of chickens, specifically laying hens,and other farm animals in single family residential zoning districts. The Zoning Ordinance defines chickens as farm animals which are allowed only on farm properties in the AP, Agricultural Preserve District, RA, Rural Agricultural District or the RAO, Rural Agricultural Overlay District. The Planning Commission discussed this issue as part of their overall Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance amendment process in 2011/2012. At that time,the Planning Commission decided to not consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regulations concerning the keeping of farm animals. Whether it is a theory of local sustainable agriculture or a desire to raise hens as pets,there has been an increase in the number of people expressing interest in keeping some farm animals on their single family home properties, Many cities have seen increased interest from the public in allowing some farm animals, including chickens, bees,goats,and other poultry for pets or as a means of producing food on single family residential lots. This trend has contributed to the increase in local farmer's markets, community gardens, home vegetable gardens and raising chickens for eggs. Most requests are for four to six hens or a small number of bee hives. Discussion regarding the keeping of chickens should also include discussion as to the keeping of bees,other small farm animals and the production of food products for sale from the premises. Any change to the Zoning Ordinance to allow the keeping of chickens or other farm animals should include regulations to prevent nuisances, protect the health and well being of the animals, and minimize any potential negative impact to nearby properties. The Minnesota Department of Health does not consider back yard chicken flocks to be a health 1 Page 36 of 162 risk provided that the chickens are raised in a clean,isolated and well maintained environment. Research that was conducted of nine cities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area that are adjacent to or similar in character to Lakeville in regard to population and growth characteristics shows there are a variety of rules and regulations pertaining to the keeping of chickens in residential areas. Of the nine cities studied,three do not allow the keeping of chickens outside of rural residential or farm properties. Burnsville, Farmington and Eagan allow chickens in residential areas subject to minimum coop and run design standards as well as requiring permits and regular inspections by city animal control officers. None of the cities allowed the keeping of bees (apiaries)on non-farm properties. The cities that allow chickens in residential areas allow them by interim use permit (requiring a public hearing), by administrative permit and licensing (staff approvals) or requiring no permit at all. Permits help ensure that persons keeping chickens submit plans and provide confirmation that they understand the city's regulations for keeping the animals. Regulations that other cities utilize include a maximum on the number of chickens that can be kept, minimum design standards for sanitation, coop construction standards, maximum coop height and minimum setback for the coop and run, confinement,and restrictions on produce sales. Enforcement in other cities is typically conducted by animal control or zoning enforcement personnel or on a complaint only basis. Staff contacted four of the cities on the table that allow the keeping of chickens. None of those cities have issued more than a small number of permits since amending their ordinance to allow chickens in residential areas. None claimed any significant complaints by neighbors of people keeping chickens. Exhibits 0 Comparison Table of Other Cities Regulations 0 November 17, 2011 Planning Commission Work Session Notes 0 November 2,2010 Star Tribune Article 0 Pioneer Press Article (publication date unknown) 0 September 22, 2013 Pioneer Press Article 0 June 24, 2013 Star Tribune Article 0 January 21, 2014 Star Tribune Article 0 November 14, 2010 Parade Magazine Article SUMMARY Staff is requesting City Council input into the allowance of chickens or other farm animals in residential districts. 2 Page 37 of 162 fp QJ QQQ N C H 2 d GS N gi Cl. N C u'1 Z Z L a z z O b i Q d Q -' T O N N O OC el O Z z Z Z ¢2 z z z Q Q N Q Z z z w n Z �3 P a n a+ a r9 ! � ro m � z N z z z Q ¢ z a, Q St7 ° z z ro oo au° .� a V) uj c a Q ¢ a ¢ a a a a a ¢ Q z z LU U 3 C t�O Q7 y8; Ly L O��Ct+' �6p1 �_ C z z N -_.g-+ C'C7 y , ; Vl f �c 6] O C O O f6 u T N C C c r a cif a p U7 ."�—' CT V q1.apn.7 y LV y� �"'"1 C, O = 0 O V a°i _ C ++ L C C C U) `} 'tnvr gip-" o ¢ m F-� rn ro ry � � ['`p z z n z E v " a W O n L L `Q S N C . t - t n t m Q p O� Q a7 TO cn _ 0 cm} Ny� O u 3m �n cn 6 �TS 2 Q � m a E 2 z z CL o C c' a o o n Z° n ' z E OL c LU L lY G °Nw :5 .� `� QJ �.- 41 � 17 !n O' ° N c°�L WWp ® `C p a oin— z N <k c'O .E LL a o ) . oomc c N �� ` Y c CL_ o ¢ a o a ¢ a a a ¢ ¢ a a z z z z z z z` z z z z z z V yN� C ag e 0) N o Ci y c C MCA N W vi IV o d Im VV+COC a aCYt7 t`�i v-i . OU `s aac�irr �uaW Page 38 of 162 Planning Commission Work Session November 17,2011 detrimental impact on the aesthetics of the freeway corridor and the existing retail businesses in the Freeway Corridor District that have complied with the 30 foot maximum freestanding sign height. The Planning Commission directed staff to work with the property owner to identify options that would allow greater visibility of the Goodwill pylon sign to freeway motorists while working within existing Zoning Ordinance requirements. Potential Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Amendments Staff went through the list of 32 possible Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance amendments listed in the revised planning memorandum dated November 9, 2011. The Planning Commission commented on the following proposed amendments; #1 —Agreed provided the number of administrative extensions for preliminary plats is limited. #2—Agreed provided the City Council can refer the final plat to the Planning Commission if it is determined there are issues that need more extensive review and discussion_ #3—The submittal of building floor and elevation plans and a comprehensive sign plan should apply to commercial and industrial, not residential, plats. #6—Specifically listing Quik Brik as a Grade A exterior building finish should be limited to larger sized commercial buildings, should be reviewed by the Economic Development Commission, and should be considered after the construction of WaiMart is complete. #10—Tie the driveway paving requirement to a minimum detached accessory building size and/or overhead garage door size (large enough to store or get a car in and out of). #13— Input should be obtained from the owners of homes with buffer yard berming and landscaping, not just residential developers. Consider"saddle berms" as an option. #18—Tie the animal feedlot regulations to the one horse per acre requirement. #22—Input must be obtained from the Fire Marshal prior to amending the ordinance concerning propane tank exchanges. Not in favor of amending the ordinance to allow unattended clothing donation boxes. #25—Concerns were raised about allowing doggie day care in multi-tenant commercial and industrial buildings. #28—Not in favor of allow chickens on urban residential lots. Willing to host a work session to listen to the arguments of the urban chicken advocates. The issue should also be reviewed by the City Council at a worts session. #29_Supports that City staff continue working with Dakota County to gain allowance of the MN Logos trailblazer signs in County right-of-way. #30 --Any increase in freestanding and wall sign allowances in the O-R District should be tied to the size of the building and the use of the property. #31 —Supported allowing multiple wall signs for each tenant of a multi-tenant industrial building provided the total wall sign area is limited to 15% of the building fagade for each tenant space, similar to previous wall sign regulations for commercial and industrial buildings. #32--Consideration should be given to restricting the hours of operation for manufacturing uses, if they are going to be allowed back in the OP District, especially adjacent to residential uses. 2 City of Lakeville - Laserfiche Document Page 39 of 162 Fermat Dynamics :: Cl eanPrin t hN)://www,.startnbune.com/local/west/1065 72198.firm l7elr--KArks:D... Page loft -P&nt Yalu StarTrlbune.com Bloomington City Council settles People who want to keep chickens have been chicken flap vocal,starting a Facebook page to support Bloomington hens in advocating for a 30- Hens can stay - as long as owners fool lot setback.Opponents have been just as active in letting council members know keep them 50 feet fi-om property what they think,Grady said. lines. Fowl fans had hoped for 30 feet. "We have to balance those who want them with those who don't want them,"she said. By MARY JANE SMETANKAi,Star Tribune Council Member Karen Nordstrom said she Last update.November 2,2010- 10:35 PM saw allowing hens as part of the local food Bloominmon's Jong-running chicken debate movement and"another step to making Bloomington a little better place to live."But ended with a dispirited squawk for chicken Mayor Gene Winstead and council Member lovers when the City Council on Monday Vern Wilcox said they were not comfortable approved an ordinance change that allows with having farm animals in a suburb. about 21 percent of the properties in the city to keep hens. Council Member Steve Peterson said he considered the 50-foot rule a good way to Set on makin-sure tbal neighbors are not see how chickens work out.He assured bothered if the people next-door decide to chicken supporters in the audience that if no keel)hens,the council decided that chicken problems develop,perhaps the rule could be coops should be at least 50 feet from loosened in the future. residential property lines.Council Member Amy Grady proposed the setback. which is l3loominaton resident Jeanie Mellem.who half what it was in old rules that date from became the public face of chicken advocates the 1950s. when she was cited last spring for ille-alk "I have no problem with having g chicens on keeping four hens in her backyard.said k Tuesday that the decision was "silly."The lots as long as they don't bother the new rule is so restrictive that few People will neighbors,"Grady said. be able Io keel) hens,she said. A 30-foot Advardsement i)Liblic-Mar 05,2014 Document 11/.112010 Page 40 of 162 Format Dynamics :: Clean.Print :: hittp:/lwwsv.startribune.com/local/west/106572198.html?elr=KAArb�s:D.... Page 2 of 2 >� nl your StarTribune.com setback would have allowed 96 percent of the residential properties in the city to have hens. "it just doesn't make any sense to me at all," Mellem said. She said she is not sure if she will be able to keep her chickens,and had contacted the city to see how measurements in her irregular Iot would work, While she said she is confident she can find good homes for the hens if they need to go,she said she also is considering moving to another property that would be big enough to keep the hens she calls"the ladies." Mary Jane Smetanka • 612-673-7384 Shortcuts To Links In Article 1. http://ezuri.ro/4b4i i Ad venisemens Print Powered By �- g �y11:47(AM-PUblic-Mar 05,2014 {tltn /IEVixni�etatfrihiinarnni� la /1fir5i 9�A a ��'� ��'��' DOCUment 1tr�/�ntA Page 41 of 162 l -in Cities: Backhand chickens welcome. Watchdog saes, as long as okNners lollow rules ... Page I of'-'tz Twin Cities: Backyard chickens welcome, Watchdog says, as long as owners follow rules By Debra O'Connor watchdogt@pioneerpress.cona Twin Cities coin-Pioneer Press Posted TwinCities.com A reader recently squawked to the Pioneer Press after noticing chickens in the back yard of a St. Paul home. "Very cute,"the writer said. "But is this legal?" The Watchdog saw the post on SeeCfickFix, an online feature on TwinCities.com that lets users alert their communities about quality-of-life issues. The Watchdog investigated to See whether a Chicks Fix was needed in the Macalester-Groveland neighborhood As it turns out, the chickens are owned by the DuBois family. and the city of St. Paul confirmed the birds are legal. Homeowners Jacques and Katie DuBois followed the city ordinance when they first got chickens two years ago: They filed the paperwork, paid the fee, housed the chickens in an acceptable coop and secured the agreement of at least 75 percent of the neighbors living within 150 feet of their home. Jacques DuBois told the Watchdog that two of 10 neighbors dial decline, with one claiming, "People in (ZIP code) 55105 don't want to have chickens there,"while another said she didn't like the idea of having "livestock" around, DuBois said. But, lie noted, that neighbor now brings her grandchildren over to observe Mario, Luigi and Oreo scratch and cluck, Across the nation, backyard chickens-- part of what's called "urban farming"--are all the rage. In St. Paul, the population is exploding, said animal-control supervisor Bill Stephenson. "A lot of people like them as pets, and the eggs are a benefit," he said. In St. Paul, there's been a permit process in place for more than 20 years, but the city used to see only three or four requests per year from people wanting to set up backyard coops. Now, it can be that many per week. One animal-control employee works two days a week checking the living conditions and sanitation of chickens, beehives and other less-comrnon animals kept in the city, Stephenson said. Some other metro-area cities allowing chickens in a regular-sized back yard are Minneapolis, Anoka, Burnsville, Farmington, Hastings, Rosemount, Roseville, West St. Paul and Maplewood. Some communities that don't allow them include Apple Valley, Eagan, Stillwater, Woodbury, Inver Grove Heights and, thus far, Cottage Grove. That's according to a survey done by the city earlier this year, when resident Rykna Olson, who grew up on a farm, asked that Cottage Grove consider allowing chickens. As she said in an email to the city, "I miss some of the amenities that a farm provides, especially fresh eggs." The Watchdog did some research herself and found some ordinances to be fussier than others: Ham Lake, for example, requires the color of the coop to blend with that of the house. Bayport's extensive regulations note that chickens can't be kept in the house. Several cities that are still largely rural require lots to be 3 or more acres. The upscale community of North Oaks, which used to be railroad magnate James J. Hill's farm, doesn't allow the birds at all. Most cities that allow chickens require a permit, charge a fee and check on the chickens'welfare regularly. Ordinances describe an acceptable coop's configuration, along with its placement on the property. Most ordinances recognize some neighbors may not be enthusiastic about living near a miniature farm. Most don't allow roosters because they're noisy and can be aggressive In East Bethel, which doesn't bar roosters, spokeswoman Stephanie Hanson notes: "We have no complaints on chickens; however, we have numerous complaints on roosters,"Most require.some or all of the neighbors to sign off on the idea ?(,}1;14 981,'�N'atch�Io�,-buck,,-arc1-chickens-vk elc()rne-sonic-mct.pegel4 �'4W 4 ]'w°in Cities: Backyard chickens welcome. V atchdoQ saes, as long as owners follwA,miles ... Page 2 of 2 In Maplewood, which adopted an ordinance last year, the owner of every property adjacent to the applicant's must agree; or the applicant has to prove his property lines are at least 150 feet from anyone's house. And most cities limit the number of chickens to three or flour -- but not Minneapolis, where there's no official limit if a resident can convince 80 percent of the neighbors to sign off on the number and the city agrees they're properly kept. Minneapolis also allows roosters, but that has to be disclosed to neighbors and their signatures must be notarized. Minneapolis, which has allowed backyard fowl as far back as anyone in animal control can remember, now has a population of about 1,500 chickens,with an average of six to eight birds per household, according to permit coordinator Ann Thelen. Growth is still booming, with six to 10 application requests per week. "Hens are wildfire this year,"Thelen said. And beehives, another part of the urban-farming movement, are gaining momentum. "They're coming in droves, too,"Thelen said. Can Tuesday, June 5, a Stillwater family who had been cited for illegally keeping chickens appeared before the city council to ask members to consider making chickens legal. The council agreed, 3-2, to look into the matter, and will charge the standard $500 to have the city research a resident's request. "There's enough illegal chickens out there that they're having a fundraiser to change the ordinance,"said Mayor Ken Harycki. "They're pretty passionate about it. Apparently, there's a groundswell going on." Both Jacques and Katie DuBois grew up living in apartments, so having hens and a backyard garden at their St. Paul house is a way to experience something new and promote their children's health, Jacques DuBois said. The children, ages 9, 5 and 3, see the chickens as pets and will casually pick them up and carry them around. The family boxer and poodle mingle with the hens wandering in the yard. The family keeps different varieties, including the Ameraucana; nicknamed the"Easter Egger" because it lays blue-, green- and pink-tinted eggs The hens are "dual-purpose,"fit for both eggs and meat. They give enough eggs to satisfy the family's need and when, after three years or so, their laying days are done, there are companies that will process poultry for stew. The DuBoises' hens have the run of their fenced-in yard, but most have been able to flap over their 3-foot-high fence; they've lost one to a neighbor's dog and one to a hawk. And once, the family accidentally got a rooster from their chick supplier. Since noise and aggression make roosters illegal in St. Paul, they couldn't keep him. So they ate him. Editor's note: Feel like an underdog because of a problem with a business, government agency or school? To ask the Watchdog for help, go to TwinCities.comf watchdog, call 651-228-5419 or email watchdog@pioneerpress.com. Follow her at twitter.coml pioneerwatchdog. In o,::ar os ,:u i;t. ° 1r �',.. v!' : C Ct i littp:! i,�r<,--xx.twincities.coin/ci_20814598/watchdo,,-hackNrard-chickens-EN,elconie-some-rnet.Plagel4 of `l New Brighton backyard faun sows seeds of discord - "I'win[=ities.00111 Page I ot'4 New Brighton backyard farm sows seeds of discord By Sarah Homer shorner@pioneerpress.com Twin Cities.com-Pioneer Press ct—a °1� Posted.- TwinCities.com From the front, nothing about the house in suburban New Brighton appears that different. A car sits in the driveway near a flower bed of towering magenta amaranth plants. A small pirate flag waves from atop a picnic table, a nod to the "Peter Pan"-inspired name the women who live here gave the half-acre property when they moved in seven years ago. Behind the one-story house, however, is a different scene, There, you see sprawling vegetable gardens, berry plants, bee hives and lots of fowl. A large coop extends from the back deck and houses about 15 laying hens, a dozen quail, a few heritage turkeys, a couple ducks and one Serama rooster. A basket brimming with vegetables sits on a table near a garden bed. Next to it is a bowl full of multicolored eggs. The collection represents a day's harvest at "Lost Boys Acre," an experimental urban farm operated by four women in the quiet residential neighborhood near Silver Lake Road and I nterstate 694. What you don't see is the tension with their next-door neighbors, a couple in their 70s who have lived in their house for nearly 30 years, allegations of dishonesty and bullying traded between the two households. The dispute has spilled into New Brighton City Hall with complaints issued to staff and police. Kristie Kellis, 38, the registered owner of the house at 715 Forest Dale Road, said she has contacted the Minnesota Department of Human Rights as well. State officials, however, cannot confirm active complaints. While the city hasn't tracked the cost of the complaints in terms of staff hours, it has taken up substantial resources. Next-door neighbors Bob and Gerry Parrott say the women's farming is out of control and highly disruptive. Kellis says the Parrotts are unreasonable and that her property is well maintained. Furthermore, she says it's within her legal rights as a New Brighton resident to operate an urban farm. Although New Brighton has a nuisance ordinance, the city has no specific rules regulating the keeping and raising of fowl or other practices associated with farming within its city limits. Some 60 residents are said to be engaged in the practice to varying degrees. Prompted by the conflict -- now in its second year -- the city recently assembled a task force to study how other communities have tackled urban farming, an increasingly popular �l.t%.,iiicities.c6te/ratnse\county/ci_241533)88/ne%v-brightort-suburban-b ick%ard-1.p�g.�4j 4 tic"! Brighton back yard farm so�,.s seeds of discord - '1'wInC'ities.uorra I'age 2 of'4 practice in Minnesota and elsewhere. The committee is expected to make recommendations to the city council next spring. "We are not looking for this thing to spread," New Brighton Mayor Dave Jacobsen said of the Forest Dale Road conflict. "We hope the task force can clarify what is reasonable for urban farming before this issue turns our city into a battleground." IN CONFLICT On a recent tour of Lost Boys Acre, Kellis points out vegetables growing in one of the many backyard gardens. Most of them are planted in raised beds, but this year the women also planted in straw bales to honor the "experimental" part of their mission. The decision to raise quail was prompted by the same desire, Kellis said. "We experiment with what can be done in a suburban environment so we can educate other people about what works," Kellis said. She added that it's increasingly important for people to rethink how they get their food. The food they produce feeds Kellis and her three housemates as well as five other families who volunteer at Lost Boys Acre, she said. Additional food is shared with neighbors and friends. No money exchanges hands, Kellis said, adding that three of the women in the house have full-time jobs. Lost Boys Acre started raising birds about two years ago. Kellis describes the animals as relatively quiet and says odor is regulated through the use of a "deep litter" composting method. Bob Parrott disagrees. "We can't really enjoy our back yard anymore; it just depends which way the wind is blowing," Parrott said. "And then there's the noise. Have you ever heard a chicken laying an egg? It's like a woman in labor, and they have about 20 laying hens." The Parrotts also cite concerns about runoff into a pond behind their house, as well as unsightliness from the way the women maintain the property. Complaints to the city started about the time the birds arrived. Although staff can't disclose the names of complainants, 11 reports are on file related to Lost Boys Acre, according to information provided by New Brighton City Manager Dean Lotter. Some six reports have been filed with police. Only once were the women found to be in violation of city code, when a vehicle was parked on an unapproved surface, according to city records. blip:'l��u�r.twincitics.cotnlramse}cous�i}Ici 2415)388ltlew-brightonn-suburban-backyard-l' Page :4'd&l�ft14 New Brighton backyard farm sows seeds of discord Tx.vinCities.cotll Page 3 ol'4 "Part of the problem here is perspective," Jacobsen said. "City staff don't have a calibrated nose to tell what the degree of odor is or how noisy it is at all hours. ... There's a lot of gray area here." OTHERISSUES? To Kellis, the lack of violations is proof the Parrotts' beef with her and her housemates goes deeper. She suspects the couple's real issue is their non-nuclear family and religious beliefs. Two of the women practice paganism. Kellis says she follows "Earth-based spirituality." Kellis points to a time when Gerry Parrott called police claiming a garden statue on the Lost Boys Acre property was an attempt by the women to "point demons at her," Kellis said. "They won't give us one specific thing we can do differently. .,. I can negotiate with a specific problem, but they won't give me one," Kellis said. "They just hate us." While acknowledging his wife's comment showed "ignorance," Bob Parrott said allegations of bias are attempts to distract from the real issue. "We're talking about backyard farming and what is reasonable for a residential area," Parrott said. "We're not opposed to it altogether, but to have 20 laying hens, a rooster, plus ducks, quail and turkeys seems way beyond what one household needs. They're basically running a large poultry business." A mediation attempt between the neighbors last winter was unsuccessful. Each side claims the majority of other residents in the neighborhood support them. Other neighbors surveyed by the Pioneer Press were split. "They have a lot going on there, but it seems clean and weil cared for," said Chuck Hoffman, who lives down the street. "They're raising healthy food, which is hard to get at grocery stores these days." "It's easy to be OK with it if you don't live next door," said Nancy Nygaard, another neighborhood resident. "l wouldn't want them as my neighbor. They've got too many things going on that don't belong in this area." The women's other next-door neighbor couldn't be reached for comment. ELSEWHERE The city does not expect the task force to solve the dispute, Lotter said. "If the council passes no ordinance and chooses not to regulate anything, the conflict will continue. If the council adopts something very draconian ... the conflict will continue. There is no way to legislate an answer for people who don't want to get along," the city manager said. ]ltt}�: i����� .t��irtcities.cc inlr4�t7seycoltntt'/ci 241 3388/new-brill ton-suburban backyard-t'.pag A 9t l New Brig liton backyard fame sows seeds of'discord - I-x inCities.con3 Page 4 of'4 Instead, the hope is the task force will help head off future problems with what is seen as a growing trend in urban communities, Lotter said. Members will spend the winter studying the issue with hopes of making recommendations to the city council in the spring. Cities across the metro area have approached the subject differently. Some -- Blaine, White Bear Lake and Coon Rapids -- ban keeping chickens. Shoreview allows up to four birds on properties smaller than 2 acres. Maplewood permits 10 with a permit as long as 100 percent of neighbors are on board. St. Paul requires 75 percent of neighbors sign off, though it places no cap on the number of chickens allowed. Minneapolis also regulates raising chickens. It's possible New Brighton will keep urban farming unrestricted, said Char Samuelson, a city council member. "Who knows? We need to study it and see what our residents want," Samuelson said. Other council members did not respond to calls for comment. Neither the Parrotts nor the women from Lost Boys Acre were allowed on the task force, a decision Kellis said shows bias on the city's part. Both sides will watch what happens closely. "A part of me is excited because this could allow for a really progressive conversation about food policy that could make New Brighton a leader," Kellis said. "But it worries me that the council's goal is regulation and they want to specifically target chickens." Bob Parrott said he hopes restrictions are coming; otherwise, he says he and his wife will move. "We're both 70 years old. How many years do we have left and what kind of enjoyment are we getting out of a place if we continuously have the issue of noise and the occasional smell?" he said. Lost Boys Acre will be around regardless of the outcome, Kellis said. "If every time someone tried to do something new ... they just walked away when it got hard, we would never have change," Kellis said. "Someone has to stand up to bullies." "1'd say we're the ones being bullied," Bob Parrott said. Sarah Horner can be reached at 651-228-5539. Follow her at twitter.com/hornsarah. htip: ncit ic.s.coniIrawscvcaunty/ci_2415»88/rneNN-brighten-suhLLrban-back yard-feage4jNa414 Mielke, Steven From: smielke@charter.net Sent; Monday,June 24, 2013 7:32 AM To: Mie*e, Steven Subject: 5M sent you an article from www.startribune.com . wr -r>rc x' 'NSF ' .:'7- lk'leas :sx+atae, r`se ` €^"�-�`�.'' Thy *1�1s � 3 15 ` Rise of the Suburban Farmer: some MinneapolfslSt Paul suburbs start to allow backyard chicken coops Shannon Prather, Star Tribune Charles Reinhardt admits he got busted for it about five years ago. He'd kept it under wraps for years right under his neighbors' noses. Then he slipped up and shared his secret with some neighborhood kids.'within days,it had flown the coop. "I had chickens. I let the neighbor kids come over and give them some corn and someone turned me in to the city,"Reinhardt said. Initially,he was irked at the warning letter from Centerville City Hall.He complied and got rid of his chickens. Then he decided to challenge the system. It took several years but he finally persuaded the Centerville City Council to pass an ordinance allowing chickens. He's the first resident in the northern Anoka County suburb to apply for a two-year permit, at a cost of $75. He's already brought horse four young hens to roost, the maximum allowed He hopes to have fresh eggs within a few weeks. "I am a rebel. I will push things,"Reinhardt says, a little tongue in cheek. "Actually, I kind of worried people would laugh at me and think I am weird. But I thought: I ain 44 years old. I don't care what people think.You only live once. There is no reason I should have to move to have something as simple as that." Call it the rise of the suburban farmer. Urban farming has grown in popularity during the past decade as more health-conscious people clamor for locally grown and organic food options.Both Minneapolis and St. Paul allow back-yard chickens with permitting and other conditions. Now,some suburban city councils are following suit, but with provisions designed to protect neighbors from unwelcome noise and nuisance.Circle Pines and Centerville enacted ordinances that take effect this month allowing up to four hens—no roosters permitted. The city of Farmington in the south metro has also enacted a chicken ordinance this spring, allowing up to three liens at homes with certain zoning designations. Eagan also has started allowing chickens. But not every city council has fallen for the charms of the chicken. Blaine and Coon Rapids do not allow them on standard residential lots, according to their city clerks. Both city councils have discussed changing that in recent years but took no action. Audrey Matson, owner of Eggplant Urban Farm Supply, said the suburbs can actually be more skittish than big cities when it comes to allowing back-yard coops. "The suburbs are less likely to allow it even though they have more space,"Matson said. "There's just concern there's going to be problems with smelly, badly-made coops and eyesores." Matson,who has spoken to city councils on behalf of wannabe chicken owners, says a little education helps local leaders understand that back-yard chicken farming can be quiet, neat and unobtrusive to neighbors. Matson said she's definitely seeing more suburban customers asking about chickens. Even then,it's still a rare breed of suburban homeowner who takes the leap, one city manager says. "We don't expect there will be a lot of applications for this,"said Centerville's Dallas Larson. "If we get two or three applications in the course of a year, that may be about right. There is a lot of work that goes with [chicken farming]. There are a few people in that organic gardening group that will find it appealing." 11:47AFA-pubiLl:-Mar 05,2014 City of Lakeville - Laserflche Document Page 48 of 162 And there are hoops to jump through. Circle Pines' new ordinance requires that 70 percent of neighbors grant permission before a S75 two-year permit is issued. It also requires a 10,000-square-foot minimum lot size and an enclosed coop or run. "The council wanted their neighbors to have some say," said City Administrator Jim Keivath. Farmington limits chickens to larger residential properties zoned R-I. The Farmington Planning and Zoning Commission must approve applications. The commission heard its first request last %week. "I don't expect it will go gangbusters,"said assistant city planner Tony Wippler. "There is a select group of' people who raise chickens and I don't think it's widespread. I do know more and more communities are doing these thines." Reinhardt said he decided he wailed chickens after seeing them in friends' back yards. "I kind of like them. They made me feel relaxed," said the disabled army veteran. He said he's looking forward to the homegrown ep,gs. Hc's embraced the honiegrown food mop:einent and feels the less chemicals and pesticides, the better. He anticipates his hens will lay about two dozen eggs a week. He uses the manure to fertilize,his large vegetable garden. His four hens, which he bought as chicks,are four different breeds-- a gold star, silver laced wine dot. Americana. and PJ ode Island red. "I don't have names for them, but I know their personalities. I know how they act. Shannon Prather• 612-673-4804 Page 49 of 162 StarTribune - Print Page Page 1 of 2 Sribune More Twin Cities suburbs are growing - - sweet on bees Article try.Kelly Smith Star Tribune t u b" Jal 21,2014-7:49 AM r � More bees ara monng to the-burps. y, As buzl'WIM over the popular hntlhy and the dramatic wwlidw.de �y do-o l&bees.more than two dozen metro-drea lilies,incuzr inp r " Mrinalonka.6loomingtonatd Stillwater,are Vl7wng back-yard beekeepn¢ a-,.,�:nB a B.rinroe Ln v�alsu•ar in r�nPtlu. � :nn�,r renol:c On Tuesday,Eden Prairie is expmod to bathe latest oty to t[ 1pn S 5=hnr!Ea Star 11.aw.,, approve it And in Chanhassen beekeeping classes are feLN up, Ike one next momh that's sold out le rhaarty 200 people interested in staring the hobby 'The rumberof people doing it now is surpnsing. said Gary Rel who ha'ps leech classes m In t 1 L Arta elum and nxn the I v*l jyj-M F _k R L,n People ware to do their pan to her[heed and scree of it d ele batik-la- nature thnh:ng' Scdsmats say a worldwide pnenomenon known as colony collapse disorder is affecting bons,wlllch ate dying si a relit of 35 percent a Ew,,—m-gnz go 1—9 blE I,rR II,lti l bml' Iva— you 1.Thai news,eking with the movemam 10 produce food locally, a.:v wnn,bau,•4arn a vu P se, has increased merest in beekeeping_ Minneapolis and St.Paul were among the fwst cities here 10 albw ¢+�'trr; a Now roahbps Iran MMealohs City Wall to ddwNl hotels host loves. Tree irdnd bas r-r�• lc ll b-h dl::rand so for has been M06&91e.Slilhaalef has issued six permCS fbr residential beekeep- ing sirce a!0wiog n about a year ago:no compaints have come up.In the north melm,Circle Pines slonod of mv' u. A np resklen",�al a` beekeeping last July,bull has had no appl:ca:ions yeL And$L Paul Park has issued crie permit s'.nce Passing a beekeeping drbmance - aknrrslayearale s•rwea ¢ � m u b. sa, V7 ... +6�ue 47'hM suburbs e8her don't have a specific ordinance on I:ARLOS 1.0h' t"•SI..7,4,,ar ilk beekeeping.outwardly prohibit it or restrict hives h rural proper- ties carrying or.a t aalGon That s,the case in Eden Prail which currently tunes beekeeping to rurall areas.Resident Chris Endres lobbied for an ordinance Macrae His grandfather end father passed on the beekeeping hobby to him,and now he's sharing d with his 17-year-old daug.Mer, both entering tlomerl honey in Slaler Fair con4ests 9th srna he hasn't ben allowed to keep the hives in rig nmVhbodood,he's housed them at his ca l And m a friends house in neighboring Minnetonka 'h's kufd of We being a wtm comolsseur;sad Endres.who has vesting parties to show off his Minnstonlurmada honey. The pcoposed city old;rlanra to be disoussed Tuesday has spec6c Ilmitallons,such a..the colony sue.and boakeepters have to rdgister with pab so neighbors can be nallied.Jvm Schedn,the city's zoning admi r lrator,estmates a hall-dozan residents will and up reg'sterng with the city 'I've saes an uptick In interest,'he said WA have bees to our east and bees to our north They're really everywhere' Mixed real Note�arybne is supponi,re oo:lgh Tree slicking point tar most people bee Swarms bothering neighbors or atleaing residents with a'lergiss.Some sties, including Edina,prohibit beekeeping In Eden Prairie.Council Member Kathy Nel Ar was tine lane opponent,sayvig hies the hobby Shouldn't nega4vNy impact residents who haves bee alert;es,such as her daughter 'I don't see the oveswheI r lg deed to have a change,end ti Could have an extreme consecruence for some farlliiles in town,' sole said.*It doall seem Me something your next-d=neiahtxw in a suburb would do.I cowtd never have purtllased a home if I knew bees were next door' Pl l vn EndfaS say they understand concerns.but said that honeyybees are often mistaken for hornets,wasps and yells deed's,wti'ch are more likely to sting He saM he hopes allowing beekeeping will nnerease knoMill About honeybees a-c hL-p Snow their trerlerde. 'It.really binge a tat of pub:lc aw'aranes,and sans•twily.,ne said I just don 1 Ihlnk Ire a pfobtem.' Kely SmIIn•612673-4141 Twofer Qxetlystnb 1 1:47AM-public-Mar 05,2014 http:l/wrtirw.startrib r r to i V11re-4]L s�rfiche Document 1/22/2014 ccii Page 50 of 162 ...... ................. ..................­­.......................... Backyard Chickens............................................................................................................... uc k,cluck hcrc and th ow e cluck, Ludl ,founder of the CheeCh�c cl cluck there of Old Mar-Donald's communiry web5itr farm to their urban and suburban BackYard6hicketmcorn,"Mmitig bs,ckjwds.Municipalities like a handful of egg-]Ayirg hent,in a In.milyurban backyards Detroit,Perhaps concerned about relatively small yard allows 1-mopic ncro the po5iibiliry ornoise,i&wl to participate in die grove-local ,q A7w 7ica.chirkens Q,re odors,and abandoned chickens, movement without having to prohibit them.Other-,,including move."Ludlow has no precise Spokane,have significait figurts on the number of Katy)7= restrictions on coop construction. backyard-chic en owners in dw But a long list of cities---including U.S.,but when he created his —I 137-ABETRIANIPERTS Seattle,Chicago,New Yo&and I "I" . website three years ago it had only daughter,Siena, Portland,Ore.--.ue perfectly fine 50 members;now,he says,there wanted a horse.'But u about being home for the(free) 0 are more than 70,000. Thar would have been range,21 least for hem. Nrcording to Ludlow,`There's expensive,'says Lampert,the 'Alany people want to becorne a growing awareness of how fun owner of a puhlic-relations agenen, mote self-sufficient,' and rosy it is to raise backyard just outside San Francisco.Instead observes Rob chickens,plus a growing she went to a 1(x:al hay-and-feed realization that chickens art a store and bought the 10-year-ohl multi-purpose pet.The),eat the a pair of chickens.'Then Siena bugs and weeds in your yard,and thought flity were getting lonely, they generate fantastic fertilizer." so we got three more.'Lampert Of cx>ufse,they also provide your pays her daughter 52 a day to feed them,herd them back into breakfast.But generally not your dinner."I would never cat one of their coop every night,and my chickens,"Lampert says. collect their C&P,generally Tonya Lukgforcl Moyle and her two or three 2 day. husbvid,Thatcher,of Portland, 11c eggs are amazing", Ore.,have half a dozen chitkens, Lampen says,'They taste including a Rhode Isla-rd Red,a rich and creavmy.The Doininiquc,and a Brahma,whose yY>1k--it's very orange.Siena Peak egg-laying capa6ty is six a used to ask for cereal trir clI closer to the ay."It makes us feel breakfast.Now she wants-a earth.And we thought it would veggie omelet.* be w nice for o daughter.*says "Afy daughter used to Folivu,the vice president of a Web 4csigli corupgny,referring to askfor rnvalfir Invakfdst. '-year-(Id Una.Thatchcr,a Now She 4Uant.9 a veggie onWIet.' finailcial plann'Zi.went So far as W buy some architectural plans off The Internet and build a Lanipci•t is anions die her party: wrrternporar)'-Jookipg coop with thousands who have mi,ddied the Besides laying a clear roof.And his is hardly tine line,of demarcation hemren eggs.Ghic*e"s eat bugs and onk high-sMc henhouse in to%.Vyj; urban-and rural America over the Weed PSOvicip— Portland even holds an annual f? anC r lair few years,vvhf�vc brought the 'Tour de CxipN," 5• November IA,20!0 Visit us at PARADE.GOM 11:47AM-public-filar 05,2014 City of Lakeville - Laserfiche Documeni Page 51 of 162 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 52 of 162 ENCL 6 Oak Park Heights Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11"', 2014 Time Required: 10 Minutes AgQ da ltem Title; Municipal Consent Reawslf-County State Aid Ali nmcnt Chan .es CSAH 21 & 231 Agenda Placement New Busin s Originating DepartmentJReq stor Erfe son C drmnistrator Requester's Signature Z" Action Requested See Below r Background/Justification(Please indicate if any previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have advised): The City has been engaged with Washington County on the elements of the changes to Pickett Ave and Stagecoach Trl over the last several months.Part of the County's requirement is that the City must grant municipal consent to their project as it relates to County State Aid Highways. Enclosed are drafts of each agreement; • The Construction Agreement seeks$13,003 in total costs related to trail construction and manhole casting replacements,approximately$6,700 for trails and$6,250 for sanitary manhole castings. • The maintenance Agreement seeks that the City provide MINOR maintenance of the new trail way. The City Engineer has reviewed the submitted plans and Washington County has made the necessary updates. Lastly,recall the City requested that Washington County consider the installation of vehicular barriers along roadways where there could be an accidental immersion.The County slid respond indicating that such need was not necessary.Nevertheless,I have offered language that again recommends the installation of such barriers,but does not require it as a condition of Municipal Consent. Funding would be derived from the Sanitary Sewer Replacement Fund and from the City Park Dedication Fund. The enclosed resolution provides that municipal consent subject to the completion of a final construction and maintenance agreement. At this time Staff would recommend the approval of the enclosed Resolution as presented. Page 53 of 162 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS GRANTING MUNICIPAL CONSENT FOR THE CSAH 21 & 23 ALIGNMENT CHANGES. WHEREAS, plans for State Aid Project No. 82-621-28 and 82-623-07 ("the Project") showing proposed alignment, profiles grades and cross-sections for the construction, reconstruction and improvement of County State-Aid Highway No. 21 and County State-Aid Highway No. 23 within the limits of the City of Oak Park Heights as a State Aid Project have been prepared and presented to the City and are generally represented in"Exhibit A"to this Resolution—see attached; and, WHEREAS, the City further recommends, but does not require, that additional vehicular barriers be considered by Washington County and installed between any roadway surface and holding ponds or retention basins that are planned to be installed with this Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That said plans be in all things approved but is wholly contingent upon the City and the County entering into final construction and maintenance agreements which relate to this Project. Passed by the City Council for the City of Oak Park Heights this 11 th day of March, 2014. Mary McComber, Mayor Attest: Eric Johnson, City Administrator Page 54 of 162 Exhibit A to City Resolution pp � I z l iIf � s I � I Wk I kW I� ry s I S QY �; h III i �a a. 'I5 .�' if z ff!< (tea&�f -- >m2� Y}8 in a s `�•' .:..:rte •- �'•.�; �� f/ 4 +� j� X;w ES. LO PI UO ICU Ls ^i - 3nr a,v�rri.�._ ..�. T 0:8°. i VI -'fir M3173i':Tji MRJ['> 'ppli[Ili ulYA-O£a121\s��M�/�PmlYW 601V.dO-wu<5\ubn-G�OZSIII\�✓5���'n'p Page 55 of 162 CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of City of 1 hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of at a meeting therefor held in the City of , Minnesota, on the day of ,2U ,as disclosed by the records of said City in my possession. City Clerk (Seal) rr Page 56 of 162 WASHINGTON COUNTY CONTRACT NO. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DEPT PUSUC WORKS OAK PARK H TON COUNTY FOR DIVISION TRANSPORTATION CONSTRUCTION COS F TERM COUNTY S IGHWAY 21 ( STREET) THIS AGREEMENT, by and between the City of Oak Park Heights, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as the"City", and Washington County, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "County", shall consist of this agreement and Exhibits A and B attached hereto. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County intends to construct and maintain the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 21 Street) connection to TH 95; and WHEREAS, the City and County desire to construct and maihtai*:the multi-purpose trail along CSAH 21 to connect the City trail network to the St. Croix River Crossi f" _vnetwork (Exhibit A, Project Map). Said Project is located in the City and in the County; and WHEREAS, items included in the construction contract require City cost participation in accordance with County DRAFT "Cost Participation Policy for Projects Constructed in Washington County Using County State Aid Funds or Local Tax Levy Dollars" dated November 22, 2010; and WHEREAS, the City desires to use local funds for these improvements; and WHEREAS, a cooperative effort between the City and County is the appropriate method to facilitate the construction and maintenance of these transportation improvements; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is made pursuant to statutory authority contained in Minnesota Statute 162.17 sub.1 and Minnesota Statute 471.59. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: A. PURPOSE The purpose of this agreement is set forth in the above whereas clauses which are all incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. B. PLANS AND SPECIFICATION PREPARATION 1. The County shall be responsible for the preparation of the necessary plans and specifications, including compliance with all applicable standards and policies and obtaining all approvals required in arriving at the bid specifications for this project. 2. The following County project numbers have been assigned to the project: SAP 82-621-28 (CSAH 21) and SAP 82-623-07 (CSAH 23). C. RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENTS 1. The County shall acquire all permanent rights-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary slope easements and shall be responsible for all land related costs. All permanent rights-of- way, permanent easements, and temporary easements will be acquired in the name of the County. 2. Any rights-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary slope easements that cannot be obtained through negotiation will be acquired by the County through eminent domain Washington County I City of Oak Park Heights CSAH 21 Cooperative Construction Agreement P%ge 0'4 162 proceedings. D. ADVERTISEMENT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT 1. After plans and specifications have been approved by the County, all permits and approvals obtained, and acquisition of necessary rights-of-way and easements, the County shall advertise for construction bids and at the sole discretion of the County award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. E. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION, OBSERVATION, AND TESTING The County shall be responsible for the construction administration, inspection, and for the observation and testing for all construction items. ,k F. COST PARTICIPATION ITEMS AND ESTIMATED C STS- 1. The County has prepared a construction cost estimate 2nd a cost participation breakdown. The cost estimate is attached as Exhibit B. w 2. The estimated total project cost for construction is $3,440,312 as indicated in Exhibit B. The City will pay to the County 50 percent of the cost to construct the portion of the CSAH 21 ( Street) trail built within the City limits. The City will pay to the County 100 percent for replacement of sanitary manholes casting assemblies. The cost participation breakdown is detailed in Exhibit B and summarized in Table F.3 of this agreement. 3. The total estimated amount the City will pay to the County is summarized in the following table: Table F.3 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS COST SUMMARY Based on EXHIBIT B — ENIGINEERS ESTIMATE ITEM COST 50% CONSTRUCTION OF CSAH 21 ( ST) TRAIL (WITHIN CITY LIMITS) $6,753 100% REPLACEMENT OF SANITARY MANHOLES CASTING $6,250 ASSEMBLIES TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $13,003 1. Actual construction costs shall be determined at the conclusion of the project and will be based on the contractor's unit prices and the quantities constructed. G. PAYMENT 1, The County shall, when a construction contract is awarded, prepare a revised estimate and cost participation breakdown based on the contract unit prices and submit a copy to the City. The City shall pay to the Treasurer of Washington County an amount equal to 10 percent of the City's estimated construction cost. 2. During construction the County shall submit to the City an estimated cost of the partial work performed by the Contractor. Upon receipt of this estimated cost, the City shall pay to the County its share of the cost of the partial work performed as determined in Section F of this Agreement. 3. Upon substantial completion of the work the County shall prepare an updated revised estimate of cost participation breakdown which will be based upon the contract unit prices and the actual units of work performed and submit a copy to the City. The County shall add to the City's estimated final construction costs the costs of supplemental agreements, if any, make necessary adjustments for liquidated damages, if any, and deduct City funds previously Washington County I City of Oak Park Heights CSAH 21 Cooperative Construction Agreement Page 2 of 4 Page 58 of 162 advanced for the project by the City. The City agrees to pay to the County any amounts due, if more than the amount of the total of the partial payments made by the City pursuant to Section G.2. 4. In the event the calculations show that the City has advanced funds in greater amount then is due the County, the County shall refund without interest the amount to the City. 5. The City shall pay invoices to the County net 30 days. H. CONTRACT CHANGES 1. Any modifications or additions to the final approved plans and/or specifications shall be made part of the construction contract by a contract change, but only after concurrence by the City, and shall be paid for as set forth in Section F of this Agreement. 2. Through written request, the City may request changes to the final approved plans and/or specifications. Any city utility or facility which is subsequently modified or added to the final approved plans and specifications shall be made by a written amendment to this Agreement, shall be made part of the construction contract by change order or supplemental agreement, and shall be paid for in accordance with the County g9st Participation Policy as summarized in Section F of this Agreement. I. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Any liquidated damage assessed the contractor in connection with the work performed on the project shall be shared by the City and the County in the following proportion: The respective total share of construction work to the total construction cost without any deduction for liquidated damages. J. CONDITIONS The City shall not assess or otherwise recover any portion of its cost for this project through levy on County-owned property.. K. CIVIL RIGHTS AND NON-DISCRIMINATION The provisions of Minn. Stat. 181.59 and of any applicable ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set further herein, and shall be part of any Agreement entered into by the parties with any contractor subcontractor, or material suppliers. L. WORKERS COMPENSATION It is hereby understood and agreed that any and all employees of the County and all other persons employed by the County in the performance of construction and/or construction engineering work or services required or provided for under this agreement shall not be considered employees of the City and that any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged on any of the construction and/or construction engineering work or services to be rendered herein shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the City. M. INDEMNIFICATION 1. The City agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the County may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the City, its agents, officers or employees Washington County I City of Oak Park Heights ? QQ 4 CSAH 21 Cooperative Construction Agreement P Page 59f of 162 during the performance of this agreement. 2. The County agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the City may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the County, its agents, officers or employees during the performance of this agreement. 3. To the fullest extent permitted by law, actions by the parties to this Agreement are intended to be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity" and it is the intent of the parties that they shall be deemed a "single governmental unit" for the purposes of liability, as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, subd. la(b), The parties to this Agreement are not liable for the acts or omissions of another party to this Agreement except to the extent they have agreed in writing to be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other parties as provided for in Section 471.59, subd. 1 a. 4. Each party's liability shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466 and other applicable law. The parties agree that liability under this Agreement is controlled by Minnesota Statute 471.59, subdivision 1 a and that the total liability for the parties shall not exceed the limits on governmental liability for a single unit of government as specified in 466.04, subdivision 1(a). O. DATA PRIVACY All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated, or used for any purposes in the course of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes 1984, Section 16.01, et seq, or any other applicable state statutes and state rules adopted to implement the Act, as well as state statutes and federal regulations on data privacy. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have duly executed this agreement by their duly authorized officers. WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS Autumn Lehrke, Chair Date Mayor Date Board of Commissioners Molly O'Rourke Date City Administrator Date County Administrator Approved as to form: Recommended for approval: Assistant County Attorney Date Director of Public Works Date Approved as to form: City Attorney Date RA22103 CSAH 21&Pickett\2012 ProjecOAgreements&Resolutions\OPH\OPH Coop Agrmt Const Final.docx Washington County i City of Oak Park Heights 3� 46&j CSAH 21 Cooperative Construction Agreement P Pgg o 162 WASHINGTON COUNTY CONTRACT NO, COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DEPT PUBLIC WORKS OAK PARK HEIGH INGTON COUNTY olvlsIoN TRANSPORTATION F MAINTENANC F TERM COUNTY STATE AI 21 (56Th STREET) THIS AGREEMENT, by and between the City of Oak Park. Heights, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as the "City", and Washington County, a;political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "County", shall consist of thk..agrtement=and Exhibits A. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County intends to construct and maintain the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 21 (56th Street) connection to TH 95; and WHEREAS, the City and County desire to construct and maintain the multi-purpose trail along CSAH 21 to connect the City trail network to the St. Croix River Crossing trail network (Exhibit A, Project Map). Said Project is located in the City and in the County; and WHEREAS, a cooperative effort between the City and County is the appropriate method to facilitate the maintenance of these transportation improvements; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is made pursuant to statutory authority contained in Minnesota Statute 162.17 sub.1 and Minnesota Statute 471.59, NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: A. PURPOSE The purpose of this agreement is set forth in the above whereas clauses which are all incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. B. MAINTENANCEIOWNERSHIP 1. Multi-purpose trail; Upon completion of the project, the City shall own, operate and maintain the multi-purpose trail adjacent to CSAH 21 (56th Street) as shown in Exhibit A in a manner consistent with the City's trail policies. Maintenance includes snow, ice and debris removal and any other minor maintenance activities necessary to perpetuate the trail in a safe and usable manner consistent with the City's trail policies. The county will perform major maintenance including overlay of the surface, replacement and major washouts. 2. Storm Sewer; Upon completion of the project, the County shall own and maintain the storm sewer pipe, catch basins and culverts on its County road right-of-way including drains servicing pond or basins constructed under this project. 3. Infiltration Fusin; The County at its expense shall own and maintain the infiltration basin constructed under this project. 4. Parking and Other Regulations; Upon completion of the project, all parking and other regulations on County roads will be controlled by the County. 5. Signing; All permanent roadway signing installed as part of the project will be maintained by the County. All permanent bike path signing will be installed as part of the project and maintained by the City_ Washington County I City of Oak Paris Heights CSAH 21 Cooperative Construction Agreement � ���� 2 C. CIVIL RIGHTS AND NON-DISCRIMINATION The provisions of Minn. Stat. 181.59 and of any applicable ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set further herein, and shall be part of any Agreement entered into by the parties with any contractor subcontractor, or material suppliers. D. WORKERS COMPENSATION It is hereby understood and agreed that any and all employees of the County and all other persons employed by the County in the performance of construction and/or construction engineering work or services required or provided for under this agreement shall not be considered employees of the City and that any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged on any of the construction and/or construction engineering work or services to be rendered herein shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the City. E. INDEMNIFICATION 1. The City agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the County may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the City, its agents, officers or employees during the performance of this agreement. 2. The County agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the City may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay by reason of any negligent act by the County, its agents, officers or employees during the performance of this agreement. 3. To the fullest extent permitted by law, actions by the parties to this Agreement are intended to be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity" and it is the intent of the parties that they shall be deemed a 'single governmental unit" for the purposes of liability, as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, subd. 1a(b). The parties to this Agreement are not liable for the acts or omissions of another party to this Agreement except to the extent they have agreed in writing to be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other parties as provided for in Section 471.59, subd. la. 4. Each party's liability shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466 and other applicable law. The parties agree that liability under this Agreement is controlled by Minnesota Statute 471.59, subdivision 1 a and that the total liability for the parties shall not exceed the limits on governmental liability for a single unit of government as specified in 466.04, subdivision 1(a). G. DATA PRIVACY All data collected; created, received, maintained, or disseminated, or used for any purposes in the course of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes 1984, Section 13.01, et seq. or any other applicable state statutes and state rules adopted to implement the Act, as well as state statutes and federal regulations on data privacy. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have duly executed this agreement by their duly authorized officers. Washington County l City of Oak Park Heights CSAH 21 Cooperative Construction Agreement pPV 52tV�62 WASHINGTON COUNTY CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS Autumn Lehrke, Chair Date Mayor Date Board of Commissioners Molly O'Rourke Date City Administrator Date County Administrator Approved as to form: Recommended for approval: Assistant County Attorney Date Director of Public Works Date Approved as to form: City Attorney Date R:1221 03 CSAH 21 &Pickett12012 ProjectlAgreements&Resolutions10PMOPH Coop Agrmt Maintv2.docx Washington County I City of Oak Park Heights CSAH 21 Cooperative Construction Agreement � 2 Eric Johnson From: Reifsteck, Brad <Brad.Reifsteck @stantec.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 9:20 AM To: Eric Johnson Cc: Long, Chris Subject: RE: Pickett ave - county project Attachments: Letter_ReifsteckOPH_022514,pdf Yes. All items have been addressed and we have reviewed and authorized the plans by Chris' signature on the Title sheet. I've attached the response letter for your records. , wk Senior Project Manager Stantec 2335 Highway 36 West St. Paul MN 55113 Phone: 651.604.4722 Cell: 651.587.2836 Brad.Reifsteckd stantec.com The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied,modified,retransmitted,or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete all copies and notify us immediately. T� Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Eric Johnson [mai Ito:eajohnson C�cityofoakparkheights.corn) Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 8:51 AM To: Reifsteck, Brad Subject: RE: Pickett ave- county project These have all been addressed>? From: Reifsteck, Brad [ma iIto:Brad.Reifsteck(a)stantec.coml Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 8:45 AM To: Eric Johnson Subject: RE: Pickett ave - county project Here you go Brad Reifsteck Senior Project Manager Stantec 2335 Highway 36 West St. Paul MN 55113 Phone: 651.604.4722 Cell: 651.587.2836 Brad.Reifsteck @stantec.com The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied,modified,retransmitted,or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written autharization.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete all copies and notify us immediately. Q Please consider the environment before printing this email. 1 Page 64 of 162 Buifding a Better World too All of us" February 25, 2014 RE: Washington County Stagecoach Tr., 56th St., & Pickett Ave. Reconstruction S.A.P. 82-621-28 & 82-623-07 SEH No.Washc122220 14.00 Brad Reifsteck Professional Engineer Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 2335 Highway 36 West St- Paul MN 55113 Dear Mr. Re€fsteck; Thank you for the comments on the subject plan. See below for our responses. 1. We have included the City of Oak Park Heights standard detail plate STR-10A"Bituminous Residential Driveway Apron"to the Miscellaneous Details sheet of our plan. 2. The General Layout page of our plan references MnDOT Standard Plate 9350A"Mailbox Support (Swing-Away Type)". I have attached that plate to this letter. 3. We will remove the bollards as requested. 4. We have added a pay item and tabulation for remove and replace the sanitary sewer castings on Stagecoach Trail. We will include the detail plate as requested. The cost for this work is shown in the Oak Park Heights column of the estimate and will be paid for by the City. This will be noted in the Agreement. 5. We have added the City's watermain and contact to the utility tabulation sheet. 6. We have received the CAD files and plansheets for the City's watermain work. We have noted it in our plans. 7. Per our discussion, we have left the retaining wall as it is shown, but added a note requiring the contractor to construct it only after watermain work has been completed in this area. 8. A high point has been added to the approximate midpoint of the radius. This results in a grade of 5.73%from this high point to the existing gutter line on Perkins Ave. 9. We have determined that this existing line was incorrectly shown in our plans.- it has been updated and is not in conflict. 10. We do not currently have any planned treatment for the outlet west of Stagecoach. We have received approval from MSCWMO on the current design. 11. We have removed sod from our plan. 12. The County has acquired all permanent Right-of-Way and Temporary Easements required for construction. 13. Stormwater hitting the east side of Stagecoach Trail will run east down the hill as it does today. By installing storm sewer along the west side of the road we are able to capture half of the roadway's drainage. Currently(preconstruction)the west side drainage follows the roadway to an outlet near station 26+00, where it outlets east into the Xcel Substation property. Engineers I Architects I Planners ; Scientists Short Elliott Hersdrickson Inc..3535 Vadnais Center Drive,St.Paul,MN 55110-5196: SEH is 100%empieyee-owned 1 sehinc.com 1 651-490.2000 1 800-3252055 11 888.908.8166 lax page 65 of 162 Brad Reifsteck February 25, 2014 Page 2 Can you and your contractor please take note of a few things as construction progresses? 1. The proposed gate valve at the intersection of Upper 56`h& Stagecoach Trail may be in conflict with the proposed 18" RCP storm sewer along the west curb line. Please verify prior to construction. 2. The geotechnical evaluation performed by AET on Stagecoach Trail has determined that "The majority of the existing aggregate base course materials do not meet gradation requirements for MnDOT Class 5 Aggregate base." Washington County is comfortable carrying traffic on a section composed of this salvaged base in the short term, but the City's contractor is responsible for maintaining a safe traveled way at all times. 3. Analytical testing of the existing bituminous pavement on Stagecoach Trail has indicated high concentrations of PAHs and cPAHs leading to a benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) concentration above MPCA limits for regulated fill. There may be additional costs for removal, however, under the "Standing Beneficial Uses" rule this material may be re-used as roadway base. 4. The St. Croix crossing project is planning a two-week closure of the South Frontage road east of Osgood Avenue in approximately mid-April. Our plans will require Stagecoach Trail to remain open during this time, please maintain two-way traffic as well. 5. We are anticipating a City's representative attend weekly construction meetings until the watermain work on Stagecoach is complete. 6. The City's contractor is responsible for erosion control and traffic control during watermain work on Stagecoach. The County and City contractor must agree on a date to transfer responsibility, this can be discussed at the weekly construction meetings. Thank you again for the comments. If you have any questions or require further information, please call me at 651-490-2022 Sincerely, ` Kevin M Peterson, PE Project Manager kmp Enclosures: Standard Plate 9350A Email from Robert J. Wahistrom,AET G-, Jane Krebsbach, Washington County Chris Long, City of Oak Park Heights Eric Johnson, City of Oak Park Heights Andrew Kegley„ City of Oak Park Heights r,Yuz\MwashcN2222611-geni414-corrSoph%ie(ter mdsleck_plan commenls.doex Page 66 of 162 a� Oak Park Heights ENCL 7 Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11 h, 2014 Time Required: 5 Minutes Agenda Item Title: Consider Application for TIGER Funding Agenda Placement New Business Originating Department/Requestor Mayor Mary McComber Requester's Signature Action Requested See Below Background/Justification(Please indicate if any previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have advised): Would the City Council like to consider the application for a federal TIGER Grant for construction of any transportation facilities or possible planning grants. Please see the enclosed information. • $GOO Million Available Nationwide—See Page G for Purposes—Must be"shovel ready". • 20%Match Required for any application • Up to$35 Million available Nationwide for Planning Grants. • Must Be Transportation related;will likely require partnerships with other cities or County or State. For construction,will require upfront investment for Engineering and Technical Statement of Work—See Page 18. TIGER: Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery Ideas? Page 67 of 162 G4910-9X DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary of Transportation Docket No. DOT-OST-2014-XXXX Notice of Funding Availability for the Department of Transportation's National Infrastructure Investments under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation, DOT ACTION: Notice of Funding Availability SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of funding and requests proposals for the Department of Transportation's National Infrastructure Investments. This notice is addressed to organizations that are interested in applying and provides guidance on selection criteria and application requirements for the National Infrastructure Investments. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (Pub. L. 113-76, January 17, 2014) ("FY 2014 Appropriations Act") appropriated $600 million to be awarded by the Department of Transportation ("DOT") for National Infrastructure Investments. This appropriation is similar, but not identical, to the program funded and implemented pursuant to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the "Recovery Act") known as the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, or "TIGER Discretionary Grants," program. Because of the similarity in program structure, DOT will continue to refer to the program as "TIGER Discretionary Grants." As with previous rounds of TIGER, funds for the FY 2014 TIGER program ("TIGER FY 2014") are to be 1 Page 68 of 162 awarded on a competitive basis for projects that will have a significant impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or a region. Through this notice, DOT is soliciting applications for TIGER Discretionary Grants. In the event that this solicitation does not result in the award and obligation of all available funds, DOT may decide to publish an additional solicitation(s). DATES: You must submit final applications through Grants.gov by April 28, 2014, at 5:00 p.m. EDT (the "Application Deadline"). The Grants.gov "Apply" function will open on April 3, 2014, allowing applicants to submit applications. You are strongly encouraged to submit applications in advance of the deadline. Please be aware that you must complete the registration process before submitting an application, and that this process usuallv takes 2-4 weeks to complete. If interested parties experience difficulties at any point during the registration or application process, please call the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 1-800-518-4726, Monday-Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. EDT. Additional information on applying through Grants.gov is available in Information about Applying for Federal Grants through Grants.gov at www.dot.gov/TIGER. ADDRESSES: You must submit applications electronically through Grants.gov. Only applications received electronically through Grants.gov will be deemed properly filed. Instructions for submitting applications through Grants.gov can be found on the TIGER website (www.dot.gov/TIGER). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: For further information concerning this notice please contact the TIGER Discretionary Grant program staff via e-mail at TIGERGrants @dot.gov, or call Howard Hill at 202-366-0301. A TDD is available for 2 Page 69 of 162 individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing at 202-366-3993. In addition, DOT will regularly post answers to questions and requests for clarifications on DOT's website at www.dot.gov/TIGER. Applicants are encouraged to contact DOT directly rather than rely on third parties to receive information about TIGER Discretionary Grants. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is substantially similar to the final notice published for the TIGER Discretionary Grant program in the Federal Register on April 26, 2013. However, there are a few significant differences: 1. Across the Federal Government, the Administration is dedicated to enhancing opportunity for all Americans by investing in transportation projects that better connect communities to centers of employment, education, and services (including for non-drivers) and that hold promise to stimulate long-term job growth, especially in economically distressed areas. Additional consideration will be given to proposals that seek to strengthen opportunities to expand the middle class. While the Department will award funds to a variety of project types, priority consideration will be given to applications that address this objective. 2. TIGER FY 2014 is authorized to award up to $35 million (of the program's $600 million total) for planning grants. Planning grant applications must identify themselves as project-level or regional plan applications. 3. In the previous round of TIGER, funding was available for obligation for a very short time. Therefore, DOT used project readiness as a primary criterion in awarding that funding. TIGER FY 2014 funds, in contrast, are available for obligation until the statutory deadline of September 30, 2016. This extended 3 Page 70 of 162 schedule allows DOT to encourage the submission of applications for complex and multimodal projects that may require slightly longer schedules. However, all applicants should provide schedules and evidence that they will be able to obligate funds, if awarded, by June of 2016 and expend such funds by September 30, 2021 (31 U.S.C. 1552). 4. Applications that identify project co-applicants or project partners in addition to a lead applicant must be signed by each co-applicant and/or partner organization. Other than the differences above, and minor edits for clarification and those made to conform the notice to the statutory circumstances of this round of TIGER Discretionary Grant funding, there have been no material changes made to the notice. Each section of this notice contains information and instructions relevant to the application process for these TIGER Discretionary Grants, and you should read this notice in its entirety so that you have the information you need to submit eli 7ible and competitive applications. Table of Contents 1. Background and Outlook II. Selection Criteria and Guidance on Application of Selection Criteria III. Evaluation and Selection Process IV, Grant Administration V. Projects in Rural Areas VI. TIGER Planning Grants VII. Application Cycle VIII. Performance Management IX. Questions and Clarifications I. Background and Outlook The Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery or "TIGER Discretionary Grants" program was first created in the Recovery Act of 2009. Through 4 Page 71 of 162 the Recovery Act and subsequent four appropriations acts, Congress provided DOT with funding for five rounds of competitive grants totaling more than $4.1 billion for capital investments in surface transportation infrastructure. See DOT's website at www.dot.gov/TIGER for further background on the disbursement of past rounds of TIGER Discretionary Grants. The FY 2014 Appropriations Act appropriated $600 million to be awarded by DOT for the TIGER Discretionary Grants program. As in previous rounds, the FY 2014 TIGER Discretionary Grants are for capital investments in surface transportation infi•astructure, and are to be awarded on a competitive basis for projects that will have a significant impact on the Nation., a metropolitan area, or a region. Additionally, as in the 2010 round, the Act allows for up to $35 million (of the $600 million) to be awarded as grants for the planning of eligible transportation facilities. DOT is referring to these TIGER Discretionary Grants for planning as TIGER Planning Grants. The Act also allows DOT to use a small portion of the 5600 million for oversight of grants. "Eligible Applicants" for TIGER Discretionary Grants are State, local, and tribal governments, including U.S. territories, transit agencies, port authorities, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), other political subdivisions of State or local governments, and multi-State or multi jurisdictional groups applying through a single lead applicant (for multi-jurisdictional groups, each member of the group, including the lead applicant, must be an otherwise Eligible Applicant as defined in this paragraph). To ensure applicants receive the most accurate information possible, you must contact DOT directly, rather than through intermediaries, to get answers to questions, set up briefings on the TIGER Discretionary Grants selection and award process, or receive other assistance. Assistance can be obtained by simply contacting the TIGER 5 Page 72 of 162 Discretionary Grant program staff via e-mail at TIGERGrants @dot.gov, or by calling Howard Hill at 202-366-0301. Projects that are eligible for TIGER Discretionary Grants ("Eligible Projects") for capital projects include, but are not limited to: (1) highway or bridge projects eligible under title 23, United States Code (including bicycle and pedestrian related projects); (2) public transportation projects eligible under chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code; (3) passenger and freight rail transportation projects; (4) port infrastructure investments; and (5) intermodal projects. Projects that are eligible for- TIGER Planning Grants include, but are not limited to: activities related to the planning, preparation, or design of a single surface transportation project, or activities related to regional transportation investment planning, including transportation planning that is coordinated with interdisciplinary factors including housing, economic development, stormwater and other infrastructure investments, and/or that addresses future risks and vulnerabilities, including extreme weather and climate change. Federal wage rate requirements included in subchapter TV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code, apply to all projects receiving funds under this program, and apply to all parts of the project, whether funded with TIGER Discretionary Grant funds, other Federal funds, or non-Federal funds. This description of Eligible Projects is identical to the description of eligible projects under earlier rounds of the TIGER Discretionary Grant program.r ' Consistent with the FY 2014 Appropriations Act,DOT will apply the following principles in determining whether a project is eligible as a capital investment or a planning study in surface transportation:(1)surface transportation facilities generally include roads,highways and bridges,marine ports,freight and passenger railroads,transit systems,and projects that connect transportation facilities to other modes of transportation;and(2)surface transportation facilities also include any highway or bridge project eligible under title 23,U.S.C.,or public transportation project eligible under chapter 53 of title 49,U.S.C. Please note that the Department may use a TIGER Discretionary Grant to pay for the surface transportation components of a broader project that has non-surface transportation components,and applicants are 6 Page 73 of 162 As was the case in earlier rounds of the TIGER Discretionary Grant program, Eligible Projects do not include research, demonstration, or pilot projects that do not result in publicly accessible surface transportation infrastructure. To be funded, projects or elements of a project must have independent utility, which means that the project provides transportation benefits and is ready for its intended use upon completion of project construction. Each applicant may submit no more than three applications in each category (3 capital applications and 3 planning applications). You should focus on applications that are most likely to align well with DOT's selection criteria. While applications may include requests to fund more than one project, you may not bundle together unrelated projects in the same application for purposes of avoiding the three-application limit that applies to each applicant. Please note that the three-application limit applies only to applications where the applicant is the lead applicant, and there is no limit on applications for which an applicant can be listed as a partnering agency. If you submit more than three applications as the lead applicant, only the first three received in each category will be considered. The FY 2014 Appropriations Act specifies that TIGER Discretionary Grants may not be less than$10 million (except in rural areas) and not greater than $200 million. For projects located in rural areas (as defined in Section V,Projects in Rural Areas), the minimum TIGER Discretionary Grant size is$1 million. For TIGER Planning Grants, there is no statutory minimum grant size, regardless of location. encouraged to apply for TIGER Discretionary Grants to pay for the surface transportation components of these projects. 7 Page 74 of 162 DOT reserves the right to award funds for a part of the project included in an application, if a part of the project has independent utility and aligns well with the selection criteria specified in this notice. Pursuant to the FY 2014 Appropriations Act, no more than 25 percent of the hands made available for TIGER Discretionary Grants (or $150 million) may be awarded to projects in a single State. The FY 2014 Appropriations Act directs that not less than 20 percent of the funds provided for TIGER Discretionary Grants (or $120 million) shall be used for projects located in rural areas. Further, pursuant to the FY 2014 Appropriations Act, DOT must take measures to ensure an equitable geographic distribution of grant funds, an appropriate balance in addressing the needs of urban and rural areas, and investment in a variety of transportation modes. TIGER Discretionary Grants may be used for a to 80 percent of the costs of a project. DOT may increase the Federal share above 80 percent only for projects located in rural areas, in which case DOT may fund up to 100 percent of the costs of a project. However, priority will be given to projects that use Federal funds to complete an overall financing package, and both urban and rural projects can increase their competitiveness for purposes of the TIGER program by demonstrating significant non-Federal financial contributions. In the first five rounds, on average, projects attracted more than 3.5 additional non-Federal dollars for every TIGER grant dollar, DOT will consider any non- Federal funds, as well as funds from the Tribal Transportation Program (formerly known as Indian Reservation Roads), as a local match for purposes of this program, whether such funds are contributed by the public sector (State or local) or the private sector. However, DOT cannot consider any funds already expended (or otherwise encumbered) 8 Page 75 of 162 towards the matching requirement. Federal requirements also apply to any matching funds in your application. Therefore, the extent that a project is already underway or money intended to be matching funds is already encumbered, DOT will not consider those funds to be matching funds for the purposes of the TIGER Discretionary Grant program. You should also take note that even though "matching" funding may be provided by a State DOT or transit agency, DOT will not consider those funds to be matching funds if the source of those funds is ultimately a Federal program. The FY 2014 Appropriations Act requires that TIGER funds are only available for obligation through September 30, 2016. DOT will, therefore, consider whether or not a project is ready to proceed with obligation of grant funds within the time provided. Under the FY 2014 Appropriations Act, TIGER funding expires automatically after the deadline of September 30, 2016, if grant funds are not obligated. There is no waiver possible under the statute for this deadline. The FY 2014 Appropriations Act allows for an amount not to exceed 35 percent of the available funds (or$210 million of the $600 million) to be used by the Department to pay the subsidy and administrative costs for a project receiving credit assistance under the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 ("TIFIA-) program, if it would further the purposes of the TIGER Discretionary Grant program. Recipients of TIGER Discretionary Grants and TIGER Planning Grants in prior rounds may apply for funding to support additional phases of a project awarded funds in earlier rounds of this program. However, to be competitive, the applicant should demonstrate the extent to which the previously funded project phase has been able to meet estimated project schedules and budget, including the ability to realize the benefits expected for the project. 9 Page 76 of 162 Transportation plays a critical role in expanding opportunities for every American. Recent research has found that economic mobility varies by geography, and poor transportation connections are a factor preventing some Americans from gaining access to the middle class.2 This lack of access limits labor mobility and can be a drag on local and regional economic growth. Improving transportation infrastructure can be one of the easiest ways to address this problem. Recognizing economic mobility as a defining trait of America's promise, the 2014 TIGER program will, in part, seek to improve access to reliable, safe, and affordable transportation for disconnected communities in urban, suburban, and rural areas. Providing opportunity to all Americans is a connecting theme that weaves together all of DOT's primary criteria. The concept can be found in the explanations of the primary criteria in this NOFA and should be addressed in applications through the description of how a proposed project addresses the primary criteria. This may include, but is not limited to, capital projects that better connect people to jobs, remove physical barriers to access, and strengthen communities through neighborhood redevelopment. Additionally, this objective may include capital projects with training opportunities that focus on strengthening human capital and workforce opportunities. The above examples are not intended to be exhaustive, and project sponsors are strongly encouraged to highlight in their applications how their proposed capital projects will promote opportunities in ways not cited above. DOT may consider the extent to which a proposed project strengthens access to opportunities through transportation improvements—in addition to the statutory httpaobs.rc,fas.harvard.edulcl7ertvlanobilittir_ eo.pdf 10 Page 77 of 162 requirements for an appropriate geographic, modal, and urban/rural distribution—as a factor to differentiate meritorious applications from one another. That said, the 2014 TIGER program will continue to fund innovative and significant projects of all types, and applications of all types are encouraged. The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications for TIGER Discretionary Grants. This is a final notice. II. Selection Criteria and Guidance on Application of Selection Criteria This section specifies the criteria that DOT will use to evaluate applications for TIGER Discretionary Grants for capital projects. The criteria for TIGER Planning Grants are described in Section VI (D) of this notice. The criteria incorporate the statutory eligibility requirements for this program, which are specified in this notice as relevant. This section is divided into two parts. Part A(Selection Criteria) specifies the criteria that DOT will use to rate projects. Additional guidance about how DOT will apply these criteria, including illustrative metrics and examples, is provided in Part B (Additional Guidance on Selection Criteria). TIGER Discretionary Grants will be awarded based on the selection criteria as outlined below. There are two categories of selection criteria, "Primary Selection Criteria" and "Secondary Selection Criteria." A. Primary Selection Criteria: The five primary selection criteria are based on the priorities included in DOT's Strategic Plan for FY 2012-FY 2016. Applications that do not demonstrate a likelihood of sigru� 'ficant long-term bene is based on these criteria will not proceed in the evaluation process. For more detail on DOT's long-term priorities, please refer to the Strategic Plan, which can be found at: http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/990-355–DOT StrategiePlan-508low lI Page 78 of 162 res.pd£ DOT does not consider any primary selection criterion more important than the others. The primary selection criteria, which will receive equal consideration,are: 1. State of Good Repair: Improving the condition of existing transportation facilities and systems, with particular emphasis on projects that minimize life- cycle costs and improve resilience. DOT will assess whether and to what extent (i) the project is consistent with relevant plans to maintain transportation facilities or systems in a state of good repair and address current and projected vulnerabilities; (ii) if left unimproved, the poor condition of the asset will threaten future transportation network efficiency, mobility of goods or accessibility and mobility of people, or economic growth; (iii) the project is appropriately capitalized up front and uses asset management approaches that optimize its long-term cost structure; (iv) a sustainable source of revenue is available for operations and maintenance of the project; and (v) the project improves the transportation asset's ability to withstand probable occurrence or recurrence of an emergency or major disaster or other impacts of climate change. Additional consideration will be given to the project's contribution to improvement in the overall reliability of a multimodal transportation system that serves all users. 2. Economic Competitiveness: Contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United States over the medium- to long-term, and creating and preserving jobs. DOT will assess whether the project will (i) improve long- term efficiency, reliability or cost-competitiveness in the movement of workers or goods, with a particular focus on projects that have a significant 12 Page 79 of 162 effect on reducing the costs of transporting export cargoes; (ii) increase the economic productivity of land, capital, or labor at specific locations, particularly in Economically Distressed Areas; (iii) result in long-term job creation and other economic opportunities, particularly for low-income workers or for people in Economically Distressed Areas, and opportunities for small businesses and disadvantaged business enterprises, including veteran- owned small businesses and service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses,3 and (iv) improve economic mobility through enhanced multimodal connections to centers of employment, education, and services or the stimulation of such centers in Economically Distressed Areas. 3. Quality of Life: Like the livability criterion in past rounds, quality of life is focused on increasing transportation choices and access to transportation services for people in communities across the United States. DOT will consider whether the project furthers the six "Livability Principles" developed by DOT with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of the Partnership for 3 The Executive Office of the President,Council of Economic Advisers(CEA),issued a memorandum in May 2009 on"Estimates of Job Creation from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009." That memorandum provided a simple rule for estimating job-years created by government spending,which is that$92,000 of government spending creates one job-year(or 10,870 job-years per billion dollars of spending).More recently,in September 2011,based on further analysis both of actual job-creation experience from transportation projects under the Recovery Act and on further macroeconomic analysis, the CEA determined that a job-year is created by every$76,923 in transportation infrastructure spending (or 13,000 job-years per billion dollars of transportation infrastructure spending).This figure can be used in place of the earlier$92,000/job-year estimate.Applicants can use this estimate as an appropriate indicator of direct,indirect and induced job-years created by TIGER Discretionary Grant spending,but are encouraged to supplement or modify this estimate to the extent they can demonstrate that such modifications are justified.However,since this guidance makes job creation purely a function of the level of expenditure,applicants should also demonstrate how quickly jobs will be created under the proposed project. 13 Page 80 of 162 Sustainable Communities.4 DOT will focus on the first principle, the creation of affordable and convenient transportation choices.$ Projects that demonstrate this principle by providing transportation choices to connect economically disadvantaged populations, non-drivers, senior citizens, and persons with disabilities with employment, training and education will receive particular consideration. Further, DOT will prioritize projects developed in coordination with land-use planning and economic development decisions, including through programs like TIGER lI Planning Grants, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Regional Planning Grants, or the Environmental Protection Agency's Brownfield Area-Wide Planning Pilot Program, as well as technical assistance programs focused on quality of life or economic development planning. 4. Environmental Sustainability: Improving energy efficiency, reducing dependence on oil, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, addressing stormwater through natural means, avoiding and mitigating environmental impacts and otherwise benefitting the environment. DOT will assess the project's ability to (i) reduce energy use and air or water pollution; (ii) avoid adverse environmental impacts to air or water quality, wetlands, and endangered species; (iii) provide environmental benefits, such as brownfield redevelopment, ground water recharge in areas of water scarcity, wetlands creation or improved habitat connectivity, and stormwater mitigation, a http:ll www.sustainablecommunille..��ro%.'index.htmi 5 In full,this principle reads: "Provide more transportation choices.Develop safe,reliable and economical transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs,reduce our nations' dependence on foreign oil,improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote public health." 14 Page 81 of 162 including green infrastructure or(iv) improve the resilience of a transportation asset or the transportation system. Applicants are encouraged to provide quantitative information, including baseline information, that demonstrates how the project will reduce energy consumption, stormwater runoff, or achieve other benefits for the environment. 5. Safety: Improving the safety of U.S. transportation facilities and systems for all modes of transportation and users. DOT will assess the project's ability to reduce the number, rate, and consequences of surface transportation-related accidents, serious injuries, and fatalities among operators, drivers and/or non- drivers in the United States or in the affected metropolitan area or region, and/or the project's contribution to the elimination of highway/rail grade crossings, or the prevention of unintended releases of hazardous materials. DOT will consider the project's ability to foster a safe, connected, accessible transportation system for the multimodal movement of goods and people. B. Secondary Selection Criteria 1. Innovation: Use of innovative strategies to pursue the long-term outcomes outlined above. DOT will assess the extent to which the project uses innovative technology (such as intelligent transportation systems, dynamic pricing, value capture, rail wayside or on-board energy recovery, smart cards, active traffic management or radio frequency identification) to pursue one or more of the long-term outcomes outlined above and/or to significantly enhance the operational performance of the transportation system. DOT will also assess the extent to which the project incorporates innovations in transportation funding and finance and leverages both existing and new 15 Page 82 of 162 sources of funding through both traditional and innovative means. Further, DOT will consider the extent to which the project utilizes innovative practices in contracting, congestion management, safety management, asset management, or long-term operations and maintenance. DOT is particularly interested in projects that apply innovative strategies to improve the efficiency of project development or improve overall project delivery in the area. 2. Partnership: Demonstrating strong collaboration among a broad range of participants, integration of transportation with other public service efforts, and/or projects that are the product of a robust planning process. (a) Jurisdictional and Stakeholder Collaboration: DOT will consider the extent to which projects involve multiple partners in project development and fitnding, such as State and local governments, other public entities, and/or private or nonprofit entities. DOT will also assess the extent to which the project application demonstrates collaboration among neighboring or regional jurisdictions to achieve national, regional, or metropolitan benefits. In the context of public private partnerships, DOT will assess the extent to which partners are incentivized to ensure long- term asset performance, such as through pay for success approaches. Multiple States or jurisdictions may submit a joint application and must identify a lead applicant as the primary point of contact. Joint applications must include a description of the roles and responsibilities of each project party and must be signed by each project party. (b) Disciplinary Integration: DOT will consider the extent to which projects include partnerships that bring together diverse transportation agencies 16 Page 83 of 162 and/or are supported, financially or otherwise, by non-transportation public agencies that are pursuing similar objectives. For example, DOT will give priority to transportation projects that are coordinated with economic development, housing, water infrastructure, and land use plans and policies; similarly, DOT will give priority to transportation projects that encourage energy efficiency or improve the environment and are supported by relevant public agencies with energy or environmental missions. Projects that grow out of a robust planning process—such as those conducted with DOT's various planning programs and initiatives, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Regional Planning Grants and Choice Neighborhood Planning Grants, or the Environmental Protection Agency's Brownfield Area-Wide Planning Pilot Program, as well as technical assistance programs focused on livability or economic development planning will also be given priority. C. Demonstrated Project Readiness Projects that receive funding in this round of TIGER will have to obligate funds by September 30, 2016, or the funding will expire. Therefore, DOT will assess every application to determine whether the project is likely to proceed to obligation within the statutory deadline upon receipt of a TIGER Discretionary Grant (see Additional Information on Project Readiness Guidelines located at www.dot.gov/TIGER for further details), as evidenced by: 1. Technical Feasibility: The technical feasibility of the project should be demonstrated by engineering and design studies and activities; the development of design criteria and/or a basis of design; the basis for the cost 17 Page 84 of 162 estimate presented in the TIGER application, including the identification of contingency levels appropriate to its level of design; and any scope, schedule, and budget risk-mitigation measures. Applicants must include a detailed statement of work that focuses on the technical and engineering aspects of the project and describes n detail he_project to be constructed; 2. Financial Feasibility: The viability and completeness of the project's financing package (assuming the availability of the requested TIGER Discretionary Grant funds) should be demonstrated including evidence of stable and reliable capital and (as appropriate) operating fund commitments sufficient to cover estimated costs; the availability of contingency reserves should planned capital or operating revenue sources not materialize; evidence of the financial condition of the project sponsor; and evidence of the grant recipient's ability to manage grants. You must include a detailed project budget in this section of your application or applications containing a detailed breakdown of how the funds will be spent that provides estimates—both dollar amount and percentage of cost--of how much each activity would cost – e.g., preparation, grading, asphalt, etc. If the project will be completed in individual segments or phases, a budget for each individual segment or phase must be included. Budget spending categories must be broken down between TIGER, other Federal, and non-Federal sources, and identify how each funding source will share in each activity. 3. Project Schedule: You must include a detailed project schedule that includes all major project milestones--such as start and completion of environmental reviews and approvals; design; right of way acquisition; approval of plan, 18 Page 85 of 162 specification and estimate (PS&E); procurement; and construction--in this section of your application with sufficiently detailed information to demonstrate that: (a) all necessary pre-construction activities will be complete to allow for any potential grant funding awarded to be obligated no later than June 30, 2016, to give DOT reasonable assurance that the TIGER Discretionary Grant funds will likely to be obligated sufficiently in advance of the September 30, 2016, statutory deadline, and that any unexpected delays will not put TIGER Discretionary Grant funds at risk of expiring before they are obligated; (b) the project can begin construction quickly upon receipt of a TIGER Discretionary Grant, and that the grant funds will be spent steadily and expeditiously once construction starts;6 and (c) any applicant that is applying for a TIGER Discretionary Grant and does not own all of the property or right-of-way required to complete the project should provide evidence that the property and/or right-of-way acquisition can and will be completed expeditiously. 4. Assessment of Project Risks and Mitigation Strategies: You should identify the material risks to the project and the strategies that the lead applicant and any project partners have undertaken or will undertake in order to mitigate those risks. In past rounds of TIGER Discretionary Grants, certain projects have been affected by procurement delays, environmental The schedule should show how many direct,on-project jobs are expected to be created or sustained during each calendar quarter after the project is underway. 19 Page 86 of 162 uncertainties, and increases in real estate acquisition costs. You must assess the greatest risks to your projects and identify how those risks will be mitigated by the project parties. Applicants, to the extent they are unfamiliar with the Federal program, should contact DOT modal field or headquarters offices for information on what steps are pre-requisite to the obligation of Federal funds in order to ensure that their project schedule is reasonable and that there are no risks of delays in satisfying federal requirements. Contacts for the Federal Highway Administration Division offices—which are located in all 50 States, Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico—can be found at http://www.fhwa.dot.%zov/about/field.cfin. Contacts for the ten Federal Transit Administration regional offices can be found at http://www.fta.dot.(_"ov/1 2926.html. D. Additional Guidance on Evaluation. 1. Project Costs and Benefits Applicants for TIGER Discretionary Grants are generally required to identify, quantify, and compare expected benefits and costs, subject to the following qualifications:7 Applicants will be expected to prepare and submit an analysis of benefits and costs; however, DOT understands that the level of detail of analysis that should be expected (for items such as surveys, travel demand forecasts, market forecasts, and statistical analyses) is less for smaller projects than for larger projects. The level of sophistication of the benefit-cost analysis (BCA) should be reasonably related to the size of the overall project and the amount of grant funds requested 'DOT has a responsibility under Executive Order 12893,Principles for Federal Infrastructure Investments, 59 FR 4233,to base infrastructure investments on systematic analysis of expected benefits and costs, including both quantitative and qualitative measures. 20 Page 87 of 162 in the application. Any subjective estimates of benefits and costs should still be quantified, and applicants should provide appropriate evidence to lend credence to their subjective estimates. Estimates of benefits should be presented in monetary terms whenever possible; if a monetary estimate is not possible, then at least another quantitative estimate (in physical, non-monetary terms, such as crash rates, ridership estimates, emissions levels, energy efficiency improvements, etc.) should be provided.. Based on feedback over previous rounds of TIGER, DOT recognizes that the benefit-cost analysis can be particularly burdensome on Tribal governments. Therefore, the Department is providing additional flexibility to Tribal governments for the purposes of this notice. At their discretion, Tribal applicants may elect to provide raw data to support the need for a project (such as crash rates, ridership estimates, and the number of people who will benefit from the project), without additional analysis. This data will then be used to allow DOT economists to make the best estimates they can develop (given the data provided) of benefits and costs. Examples of BCAs by successful Tribal applicants are also available online.8 The lack of a useful analysis of expected project benefits and costs may be the basis for not selecting a project for award of a TIGER Discretionary Grant. If it is clear to DOT that the total benefits of a project are not reasonably likely to justify the project's costs, DOT will not award a TIGER Discretionary Grant to the project. s hap:iil�n�t,dot. o��%polio '-initiati4e;'tiger;tribal-tis r-bea-examples 21 Page 88 of 162 Detailed guidance for the preparation of benefit-cost analyses is provided in the 2014 Benefit-Cost Analyses Guidance for TIGER Grant Applicants and in the BCA Resource Guide(available at www.dot.gov/TIGER). A recording of the Benefit-Cost Analysis Practitioner's Workshop (2010) and two BCA-related webinars are also available for viewing at www.dot.gov/TIGER, along with examples of benefit-cost analyses that have been submitted in previous rounds of TIGER. Benefits should be presented, whenever possible, in a tabular form showing benefits and costs in each year for the useful life of the project. Benefits and costs should both be discounted to the year 2014, and calculations should be presented for discounted values of both the stream of benefits and the stream of costs. If the project has multiple parts, each of which has independent utility, the benefits and costs of each part should be estimated and presented separately. The results of the benefit-cost analysis should be summarized in the Project Narrative section of the application itself, but the details may be presented in an attachment to the application if the full analysis cannot be included within the page limit for the project narrative. The requirement to conduct an economic analysis is not applicable to applicants seeking TIGER Planning Grants; however, such applicants should describe the expected benefits of the underlying project(s) that the planning activities will help advance. 2. Other Environmental Reviews and Approvals (a) National Environmental Policy Act: An application for a TIGER Discretionary Grant must detail whether the project will significantly impact the natural, social and/or economic environment. The application 22 Page 89 of 162 should demonstrate receipt (or reasonably anticipated receipt) of all environmental approvals and permits necessary for the project to proceed to construction on the timeline specified in the project schedule and necessary to meet the statutory obligation deadline, including satisfaction of all Federal, State and local requirements and completion of the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") process. You should submit the information listed below with your application: (i) Information about the NEPA status of the project. If the NEPA process is completed, an applicant must indicate the date of, and provide a website link or other reference to, the final Categorical Exclusion, Finding of No Significant Impact or Record of Decision. If the NEPA process is underway but not complete, the application must detail the type of NEPA review underway, where the project is in the process, and indicate the anticipated date of completion. You must provide a website link or other reference to copies of any NEPA documents prepared. (ii) Information on reviews by other agencies. An application for a TIGER Discretionary Grant must indicate whether the proposed project requires reviews or approval actions by other agencies, indicate the status of such actions, and provide detailed information about the status of those reviews or approvals and/or demonstrate compliance with any other applicable Federal, State, or local requirements, 23 Page 90 of 162 (iii) Environmental studies or other documents—preferably by way of a website link—that describe in detail known project impacts, and possible mitigation for those impacts. (iv) A description of discussions with the appropriate DOT modal administration field or headquarters office regarding compliance with NEPA and other applicable environmental reviews and approvals. (b) Legislative Approvals: Receipt of all necessary legislative approvals (for example, legislative authority to charge user fees or set toll rates), and evidence of support from State and local elected officials. Support from all relevant State and local officials is not required; however, you should demonstrate that the project is broadly supported. (c) State and Local Planning: The planning requirements of the operating administration administering the TIGER project will apply.4 You should demonstrate that a project that is required to be included in the relevant State, metropolitan, and local planning documents has been or will be included. If the project is not included in the relevant planning documents 9 All regionally significant projects requiring an action by the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA)or the Federal Transit Administration(FTA)must be in the metropolitan transportation plan,transportation improvement program(TIP)and statewide transportation improvement program(STIP).Further,in air quality non-attainment and maintenance areas,all regionally significant projects,regardless of the funding source,must be included in the conforming metropolitan transportation plan and TIP.To the extent a project is required to be on a metropolitan transportation plan,TIP,and/or STIP, it will not receive a TIGER Discretionary Grant until it is included in such plans.Projects not currently included in these plans can be amended by the State and metropolitan planning organization(MPO).Projects that are not required to be in long range transportation plans,STIPs,and TIPs will not need to be included in such plans in order to receive a TIGER Discretionary Grant.Freight and passenger rail projects are not required to be on the State Rail Plans called for in the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008.This is consistent with the exemption for high-speed and intercity passenger rail projects under the Recovery Act. However,applicants seeking funding for freight and passenger rail projects are encouraged to demonstrate that they have done sufficient planning to ensure that projects fit into a prioritized list of capital needs and are consistent with long-range goals. 24 Page 91 of 162 at the time the application is submitted, you should submit a certification from the appropriate planning agency that actions are underway to include the project in the relevant planning document. DOT reserves the right to revoke any award of TIGER Discretionary Grant funds and to award such funds to another project to the extent either that such funds cannot be timely expended and/or that construction does not begin in accordance with the project schedule. Because projects have different schedules, DOT will consider on a case-by-case basis how much time after selection for award of a TIGER Discretionary Grant each project has before funds must be obligated (consistent with law) and construction started through an executed grant agreement between the selected applicant and the relevant modal administration administering the grant. This deadline will be specified for each TIGER Discretionary Grant in the project-specific grant agreements signed by the grant recipients and will be based on critical path items identified by applicants in response to items (a)(i) through (iv) above. III. Evaluation and Selection Process A. Evaluation Process TIGER Discretionary Grant applications will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation process discussed below. DOT will establish application evaluation teams to review each application that is received by DOT prior to the Application Deadline. These evaluation teams will be organized and led by the Office of the Secretary of Transportation and will include members from each of the Relevant Modal Administrations and, in some cases, staff from other Federal agencies with relevant 25 Page 92 of 162 expertise, including freight, resilience, quality of life, environmental review, and permitting expertise. The evaluation teams will he responsible for evaluating and rating all of the projects and making funding recommendations to the Secretary. DOT will not assign specific numerical scores to projects based on the selection criteria outlined above in Section II(A) (Selection Criteria). Rather, ratings of"highly recommended." "recommended." "acceptable," or "not recommended" will be assigned to projects. DOT will award TIGER Discretionary Grants to projects that are well-aligned with one or more of the selection criteria. In addition, DOT will consider whether a project has a negative effect on any of the selection criteria, and any such negative effect may reduce the likelihood that the project will receive a TIGER Discretionary Grant. DOT will give more consideration to the Primary Selection Criteria than to the two Secondary Selection Criteria (Innovation and Partnership), which will also be considered equally Projects that are recommended by the evaluation teams for further review will have their benefit-cost analyses evaluated by an Economic Analysis Team, and will have their project readiness evaluated by a Project Readiness Team. The Economic Analysis Team will assess the likelihood that the project's benefits will exceed its costs, and the Project Readiness Team will assess the likelihood that the project will be able to obligate any grant awarded to it by the obligation deadline of September 30, 2016. The results of these evaluations will also be taken into account in the recommendations made to the Secretary. Upon completion of this rating process, DOT will analyze the preliminary list and determine whether highly-rated projects are consistent with the distributional 26 Page 93 of 162 requirements of the FY 2014 Appropriations Act, including an equitable geographic distribution of grant funds, an appropriate balance in addressing the needs of urban and rural areas, and investment in a variety of transportation modes. If necessary, DOT will adjust the list of recommended projects to satisfy the statutory distributional requirements while remaining as consistent as possible with the competitive ratings. The Secretary of Transportation will make the final project selections. B. Evaluation of Eligibility To be selected for a TIGER Discretionary Grant, a project must be an Eligible Project and the applicant must be an Eligible Applicant. DOT may consider one or more components of a large project to be an Eligible Project, but only to the extent that the components have independent utility, meaning the components themselves, not the project of which they are a part, are Eligible Projects and satisfy the selection criteria identified above in Section II(A) (Selection Criteria). For these projects, the benefits described in an application must be related to the components of the project for which funding is requested, not the full project of which they are a part. DOT will not fund individual phases of a project if the benefits of completing only these phases would not align well with the selection criteria specified in this notice because the overall project would still be incomplete. IV. Grant Administration DOT expects that each TIGER Discretionary Grant will be administered by one of the Relevant Modal Administrations, pursuant to a grant agreement between the TIGER Discretionary Grant recipient and the Relevant Modal Administration. Service Outcome Agreements, Stakeholder Agreements, Buy America compliance, and other requirements 27 Page 94 of 162 under DOT's other highway, transit, rail, and port grant programs will be incorporated into the TIGER grant agreements, where appropriate. The Secretary has the discretion to delegate such responsibilities to the appropriate Relevant Modal Administration. Applicable Federal laws, rules, and regulations of the Relevant Modal Administration administering the project will apply to projects that receive TIGER Discretionary Grants. V. Projects in Rural Areas The FY 2014 Appropriations Act directs that not less than $120 million of the funds provided for TIGER Discretionary Grants are to be used for projects in rural areas. For purposes of this notice, DOT is defining "rural area" as any area not in an Urbanized Area, as such term is defined by the Census Bureau,10 and will consider a project to be in a rural area if all or the majority of a project(determined by geographic location(s)where the majority of project money is to be spent) is located in a rural area. Therefore, if all or the majority of a project is located in a rural area, such a project is eligible to apply for less than $10 million, but at least $I million in TIGER Discretionary Grant funds, and up to 100 percent of the project's costs may be paid for with Federal funds. To the extent more than a de minimis portion of a project is located in an Urbanized Area, you should identify the estimated percentage of project costs that will be spent in Urbanized Areas and the estimated percentage that will be spent in rural areas. VI. TIGER Planning Grants A. Background Io For Census 2010,the Census Bureau defined an Urbanized Area(UA)as an area that consists of densely settled territory that contains 50,000 or more people.Updated lists of UAs are available on the Census Bureau website.Urban Clusters(UCs)will be considered rural areas for purposes of the TIGER Discretionary Grant program. 2$ Page 95 of 162 On December 16, 2009, the President signed the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which appropriated $600 million to DOT for National Infrastructure Investments, including up to $35 million for planning. That round of planning grants was conducted in conjunction with$40 million in HUD Community Challenge grants. Thirty-three total DOT planning grants were made, including 14 joint grants with HUD. In this round, DOT will not be able to pair TIGER planning grants with HUD Community Challenge grants due to the lack of available HUD funds. However, those applicants seeking to fund regional transportation planning grants should show strong coordination with housing, land use, economic development, stormwater, and other infrastructure needs, including identifying risks from extreme weather and climate change, and plans to mitigate that risk. B. Eligible Planning Activities. Activities eligible for funding under- TIGER Planning Grants are related to the planning, preparation, or design—including envirormlental analysis, feasibility studies, and other pre-construction activities—of surface transportation projects, including, but not limited to: (1) Highway or bridge projects eligible under Title 23, United States Code (including bicycle and pedestrian related projects); (2) Public transportation projects eligible under Chapter 53 of Title 49, United States Code; (3) Passenger and freight rail transportation projects; (4) Port infrastructure investments; and (5) Intermodal projects. 29 Page 96 of 162 In addition, eligible activities related to multidisciplinary projects or regional planning may include: (l) Development of master plans, comprehensive plans, or corridor plans that will provide connection to jobs for disadvantaged populations, or include affordable housing components. (2) Planning activities related to the development of a multimodal freight corridor, including those that seek to reduce conflicts with residential areas and with passenger and non-motorized traffic. (3) Development of port and regional port planning grants, including State-wide or multi-port planning within a single jurisdiction or region. (4) Planning to encourage multiple projects within a common area to engage in programmatic mitigation in order to increase efficiency and improve outcomes for communities and the environment. (5) Risk assessments and planning to identify vulnerabilities and address the transportation system's ability to withstand probable occurrence or recurrence of an emergency or major disaster or impacts of climate change. C. Selection Criteria Planning grant applications will be evaluated against the same criteria as capital grants. For project-level planning, this means considering how the project resulting from the plan will ultimately further the five primary and two secondary criteria. For regional transportation planning efforts, applications should demonstrate how the regional plan will help lead to these outcomes. 30 Page 97 of 162 Similar to capital grant applications, planning applications will be more competitive if they can demonstrate funding support above the 20 percent match requirement for urban areas, and the 0 percent match requirement for rural areas. Additionally, applicants should show the capacity to successfully implement the proposed activities in a timely manner. VII.Application Cycle A. Contents of Applications You must include all of the information requested below in your application. DOT reserves the right to ask any applicant to supplement data in its application, but expects applications to be complete upon submission. To the extent practical, you should provide data and evidence of project merits in a form that is publicly available or verifiable. 1. Standard Form 424,Application for Federal Assistance Additional clarifying guidance and FAQs to assist you in completing the SF-424 will be available at www.dot.gov/TIGER by April 3, 2014, when the "Apply" function within Grants.gov opens to accept applications under this notice. 2. Title Page The title page must include the project title, location(city, State, district), type of application (capitol, project planning, or regional planning), the applicant organization name, the type of eligible applicant (State government, local government, U.S. territory, Tribal government, transit agency, port authority, MPO, RDO, other unit of government), and the amount of TIGER funding being applied for. The information may be presented in a table or formatted list. 31 Page 98 of 162 3. Project Narrative (Attachment to SF 424) The project narrative must respond to the application requirements outlined below. DOT recommends that the project narrative be prepared with standard formatting preferences (.i.e., a single-spaced document, using a standard 12-point font, such as Times New Roman, with 1-inch margins). Your application must include information required for DOT to assess each of the criteria specified in Section II (A) (Selection Criteria), as such criteria are explained in Section II(B) (Additional Guidance on Selection Criteria). You must demonstrate the responsiveness of a project to any pertinent selection criteria with the most relevant information that you can provide, regardless of whether such information has been specifically requested, or identified, in this notice. You should provide concrete evidence of the feasibility of achieving project milestones, and of financial capacity and commitment in order to support project readiness. DOT will give priority to projects for which a TIGER Discretionary Grant will help to complete an overall funding package, so you should clearly demonstrate the extent to which the project cannot be readily and efficiently completed without a TIGER Discretionary Grant, and the extent to which other sources of funds, including Federal, State, or local funding, may or may not be readily available for the project. Any such information shall be considered part of the application, not supplemental, for purposes of the application size Iimits identified below in Part B (Length of Applications). Information provided pursuant to this paragraph must be quantified, to the extent possible, to describe the project's benefits to the Nation, a metropolitan area, or a region. Information provided pursuant to this paragraph should include projections for both the build and no-build scenarios for the project for each year between the 32 Page 99 of 162 completion of the project and a point in time at least 20 years beyond the project's completion date or the lifespan of the project, whichever is closer to the present. All applications should include a detailed description of the proposed project and geospatial data for the project, including a map of the project's location and its connections to existing transportation infrastructure. An application should also include a description of how the project addresses the needs of an urban and/or rural area. An application should clearly describe the transportation challenges that the project aims to address, the project's potential vulnerabilities to extreme weather and climate change throughout its projected life, and how the project will address these challenges. The description should include relevant data, such as passenger or freight volumes, congestion levels, infrastructure condition, and safety experience. DOT recommends that the project narrative generally adhere to the following basic outline and, in addition to a detailed statement of work, detailed project schedule, and detailed project budget, you should include a table of contents, maps, and graphics that make the information easier to review: 1. Project Description (including information on the expected users of the project, a description of the transportation challenges that the project aims to address, and how the project will address these challenges); 11. Project Parties (information about the grant recipient and other project parties); III. Grant Funds and Sources/Uses of Project Funds (information about the amount of grant funding requested, availability/commitment of funds sources and uses of all project funds, total project costs, percentage of project costs that would be paid for with TIGER Discretionary Grant 33 Page 100 of 162 funds, and the identity and percentage shares of all parties providing funds for the project (including any other pending or past Federal funding requests for the project as well as Federal funds already provided under other programs and required match for those funds); IV. Selection Criteria (information about how the project aligns with each of the primary and secondary selection criteria and a description of the results of the benefit-cost analysis): a. Primary Selection Criteria i. State of Good Repair ii. Economic Competitiveness iii. Quality of Life iv. Environmental Sustainability v. Safety b. Secondary Selection Criteria i. Innovation ii. Partnership c. Results of Benefit-Cost Analysis V. Project readiness, including planning approvals, NEPA and other environmental reviews/approvals, (including information about permitting, legislative approvals, State and local planning, and project partnership and implementation agreements); and VI. Federal Wage Rate Certification (an application must include a certification, signed by the applicant(s), stating that it will comply with the requirements of subchapter- IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States 34 Page 101 of 162 Code (Federal wage rate requirements), as required by the FY 2014 Continuing Appropriations Act). The purpose of this recommended format is to ensure that applications clearly address the program requirements and make critical information readily apparent. B. Length of Applications The project narrative may not exceed r30 pages in length. Documentation supporting the assertions made in the narrative portion may also be provided, but should be limited to relevant information. If possible, website links to supporting documentation (including a more detailed discussion of the benefit-cost analysis) should be provided rather than copies of these materials. Spreadsheets supporting the benefit-cost analysis should be original Excel spreadsheets, not PDFs of those spreadsheets. At your discretion, relevant materials provided previously to a Relevant Modal Administration in support of a different DOT discretionary program (for example, New Starts or TIFIA) may be referenced and described as unchanged. To the extent referenced, this information need not be resubmitted for the TIGER Discretionary Grant application (although provision of a website link would facilitate DOT's consideration of the information). DOT recommends use of appropriately descriptive file names (e.g., "Project Narrative." "Maps," "Memoranda of Understanding and Letters of Support,"etc.) for all attachments. Cover pages and tables of contents do not count towards the 30-page limit for the narrative portion of the application, and the federal wage rate certification may also be outside of the 30-page narrative. Otherwise, the only substantive portions of the application that should exceed the 30-page limit are any supporting documents (including a more detailed discussion of the benefit-cost analysis) provided to support assertions or conclusions made in the 30-page narrative section. 35 Page 102 of 162 C. Contact Information Contact information for a direct employee of the lead applicant organization is required as part of the SF-424. DOT will use this information to inform parties of DOT's decision regarding selection of projects, as well as to contact parties in the event that DOT needs additional information about an application. Contact information for a contractor, agent, or consultant of the lead applicant organization is insufficient for DOT's purposes. D. Protection of Confidential Business Information All information submitted as part of or in support of any application shall use publicly available data or data that can be made public and methodologies that are accepted by industry practice and standards, to the extent possible. If the application includes information you consider to be a trade secret or confidential commercial or financial information, you should do the following: (1) note on the front cover that the submission "Contains Confidential Business Information (CBI);" (2) mark each affected page "CBI;" and (3) highlight or otherwise denote the CBI portions. DOT protects such information from disclosure to the extent allowed under applicable law. In the event DOT receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, DOT will follow the procedures described in its FOIA regulations at 49 CFR § 7.17. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under that procedure will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA. VIII. Performance Management Each applicant selected for TIGER Discretionary Grant capital grant funding will be required to work with DOT on the development and implementation of a plan to collect information and report on the project's performance with respect to the relevant long- 36 Page 103 of 162 term outcomes that are expected to be achieved through construction of the project. Each recipient of a TIGER Discretionary Grant will, in accordance with its grant agreement, report on specified performance indicators for its project. Performance indicators will be negotiated for each project, considerate of the individual project's stated goals as well as resource constraints of applicants. Performance indicators will not include formal goals or targets, but will include baseline measures as well as post-project outcomes for an agreed-upon timeline, and will inform the TIGER Discretionary Grant program in working towards best practices, programmatic performance measures, and future decisionmaking guidelines. IX. Questions and Clarifications For further information concerning this notice please contact the TIGER Discretionary Grant program staff via e-mail at TIGERGrants dot. ov, or call Howard Hill at 202-366-0301. A TDD is available for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing at 202-366-3993. DOT will regularly post answers to these questions and other important clarifications on DOT's website at www.dot. ovlg TIGER. Issued On: February 25, 2014 Anthony R. F x Secretary 37 Page 104 of 162 ENCL 8 Oak Park Heights Request for Council Action Meeting Date March 11th 2014 Time Required: 5 Minutes Agenda Item Title: MNDOT Request to City.—Turn back of Lookout Trail Agenda Placement New Business i i Originating Department/Requestor 41O."'Yeo'hnson, Ci1y Administrator Requester's Signature Action Requested See Below Background/Justification lease "tidicate if an revious action has been taken or if other ublic �' , � Y P P bodies have advised): V As discussed at the Jan 21"2014 City Council Work session,the City Council indicated that it would give further consideration to the concept ofthe City taking over as a City Street Lookout Trail,subject to certain provisions and improvements being financed. The City Staff has followed up with MNDOT staff and again sought that possibility requesting a letter of proposal and draft turn back agreement; accordingly,the enclosed information provides that information in draft form provided on Thursday,March 6`h,2014. Recommended Action: If the City Council continues to desire to attain this roadway as a City street(not including the Scenic Overlook nor its maintenance),then please direct staff to beegin review of the enclosed documents and negotiations with MNDOT for such action.Once a final agreement is reached,staff will bring that back to the City Council for final consideration. Enclosures: 1. City letter dated March 41'2014 2. March 60'Communication from MNDOT—requesting the City Accept the Turn back,etc. 3. Draft.Agreement 4. Plans and Specifications. The City Council should also consider discussing a final condition prior to executing any final turn back agreement, that the final SCRCP elements and costs are fully addressed to the satisfaction of the City Council. Page 105 of 162 �s City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N•Box 2007.Oak Park Heights, MN 55082•Phone(651)439-4439•Fax(651)439-0574 March 4t", 2014 TO: Jon Chiglo, MNDOT ***ALL VIA EMAIL ONLY*** Adam Josephson, MNDOT Todd Clarkowski, MNDOT FROM: Eric Johnson, City Administrator RE: Lookout Trail Gentlemen, As we discussed both at the Jan 21" meeting with the City Council and most recently on the telephone, the City Council will gladly consider the turn-back of Lookout Trail. We are in need of a letter from MNDOT requesting that action and a draft Agreement that will itemize the specific conditions and schedule. If this information could be provided to me soon; I can then move it forward to the City Council to initiate such review. Thank you e4l_ Eric Johnson City Administrator Cc: Weekly Notes Chris Long, STANTEC Mark Vierling, City Attorney Page 106 of 162 Minnesoia Department of Transportation Metro District 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 F. March 6, 2014 -Eric Johnson Oak Park Heights City Administrator PO Box 2007 14168 Oak Park Blvd N Oak Park Heights,MN 55082 Larry Hansen Stillwater City Administrator 216 North 4h Street Stillwater,MN 55082 r i. Re: Lookout Trail Reconstruction and Release Project- S.P. 8214-114AN Draft Cooperative Construction Agreement Dear Mr.Johnson and Mr.Hansen, s. MnDOT proposes to release Lookout Trail from Beach Road to Hwy 95 to the Cities of Oak Park Heights and Stillwater. The roadway is serving primarily a local road function and is best maintained and operated at the city level. Lookout Trail is currently in fair to poor condition;therefore MnDOT proposes to provide adequate funding to the city of Oak Park Heights to reconstruct Lookout Trail prior to each city taking over ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the roadway segment in each city. MnDOT has developed a preliminary plan in accordance with State Aid Standards and a preliminary cost estimate for the reconstruction project. MnDOT proposes that Oak Park Heights let and administer the is reconstruction contract. Following the reconstruction of Lookout Trail the roadway would be"released" to the appropriate city as shown graphically in the attachment. A Draft Cooperative Construction Agreement is attached for your review and comment. The estimated roadway and storm sewer reconstruction cost for Lookout Trail is about $399,000. MnDOT proposes to cover 100%of the roadway and storm sewer construction costs,plus 8%for construction engineering and a$30,000 contingency,for a total of about$461,000. Actual costs will be based on final construction costs. Each city will be responsible for any costs associated with city utilities or other upgrades. The attached preliminary road plans show construction limits that are within existing MnDOT Right of Way,so no additional right of way should be needed for the reconstruction work, If either City proposes to do any additional work outside the current property limits,that City would be responsible for any additional right of way needs, environmental issues,permitting and the costs associated with that work. An Equal Opportunity Employer P [ge 107 oN&I i. -T— r 1 This reconstruction project is adjacent to the Scenic Overlook, a National Register listed property owned by MnDOT. MnDOT's Cultural Resources Unit has reviewed the preliminary reconstruction plans and considers the work as shown in the plan to have"no adverse effect"to the historic property. MnDOT is currently consulting with the MnSHPO to confirm this determination. We will share the results of that consultation process as we receive them. MnDOT would continue to own the Scenic Overlook after the reconstruction of Lookout Trail. MnDOT is gathering underlying soils information to better understand the extent of the rock under Lookout Trail. This information will also be shared with you as we receive the data. In Stillwater,this Lookout Trail Reconstruction and Release project is consistent with the 2006 Memorandum of Understanding(MOLD and the Stillwater-MnDOT Cooperative Agreement#01433. r: An NPDES permit is the only additional permit that has been identified as being needed for this reconstruction project. The City of Oak Park Heights as the project lead would be the applicant for this permit. All other anticipated permits,including water quality related requirements,have been obtained as part of the St. Croix Crossing Project. 4'- Please review the attached materials,provide comments and let me know if you need additional information. Sincerely Adam Josephson,P.E. MnDOT East Area Manager i.. Attachments: A. Draft Cooperative Agreement#05469 -dated 3/6/14 B. Preliminary Reconstruction Plan -dated 2/28/14 C. Preliminary Schedule I&Cost Estimate-dated 3/5/14 D. Right of Way Release graphic-dated 1128/14 Cc: Jon Chiglo, St. Croix Project Director Todd Clarkowski,St. Croix Project Coordinator Maryanne Kelly-Sonnek,MnDOT Municipal Agreements Engineer Page 108 of 162 s Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION And CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS And CITY OF STILLWATER COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT For LOOKOUT TRAIL RECONSTRUCTION AND RELEASE State Project Number(S.P.): 8214-114AN Original Amount Encumbered Trunk Highway Number(T.H.): _95 City of Oak Park Heights $460107490 This Agreement is between the State of Minnesota,acti4'.:'-g'�'hrough its Comm issio�`44 Transportation("State") and City C "X City of Oak Park I leights acting through its C, ouncil'V!04k Park Heights")and tl pity of Stillwater acting through its City Council ("Stillwater"). 1. Oak Park J4cights NNFJ I] perform reconsti,i�,ct ion and other assoc' iated construction upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 95 located on and Lookout Trail from 148 feet north of Beach Road to 2267 feet north of Beach Road according to State-prepared plans, and Oak Park Heights prepared specifications and special provisions designated l�.Y:the State as State Project No. 8214-11 4AN(T.H. 95)("Project"); and 2. The State has determined Lookout T' rAil from Beach Road to T.H 95 ("Roadway Segment")will be released to road authorities in'accordance wit h'Minnesota Statutes §161.16 and the State has further determined that Oak Park Heights and Stillwater ter ar per road authorities for the roadway segments in their respective cities; and 3. The State-will continue.to own and-maintain the Sccrijc Overlook and the conservation easement around the Scenic,Overlook; and 4. Prior to the Roadway Segmentbeing Released, the State is requiring Oak Park Heights to reconstruct the roadway; and 5. The State is willing to participate the costs of said construction and associated construction engineering; and 6. Minnesota Statutes § 161 20,sjtbdiv' ision 2 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make arrangements with and coojgeTae with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing, maintaining and improving"the trunk highway system. Agreement 1. Term of Agreement; Survival of Terms; Plans; Incorporation of Exhibits 1.1. Effective date,Survival of Terms. This Agreement will be effective on the date last signed below by the parties and by such other State of Minnesota officials as required by Minnesota Statutes §16C.05. This Agreement will remain in effect until the State has (1)served Notice of Releases, and(2)made payments as required by this Agreement. All clauses which impose obligations continuing in their nature and which must survive in order to give effect to their meaning will survive the expiration of the Agreement. 1.2. Expiration date. This Agreement will expire when all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled. Page 109 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 1.3. Plans,Specifications,Special Provisions. State-approved plans,and Oak Park Heights specifications and special provisions designated by the State as State Project No. 8214-114AN (T.H. 95)are on file in the office of Oak Park Heights and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. ("Project Plans") 1.4. Exhibits. Preliminary Schedule "I" and Exhibit "Lookout Trail Release"are attached and incorporated into this Agreement. 2. Right-of-Way Use 2.1. Limited Right to Occupy. The State grants to Oak Park Heights(and its contractors and consultants)the right to occupy trunk highway right-of-way as necessary to perform the work described in the Project Plans. This right is limited to the purpose of constructing the project, and administering such construction, and may be revoked by the State at any time,with or without cause. Cause for revoking this right of occupancy includes,but is not limited to, breaching the terms of this or any other agreement(relevant to this project) with tine State,failing to provide adequate traffic control or other safety measures,failing to perform the construction properly and in a timely manner, and failing to observe applicable environmental laws or terms of applicable permits. The State will have no liability to'Oak Park Heights(or its contractors or consultants) for revoking this right of occupancy. 2.2. State Access;Suspension of Work;Remedial Measures. The State's District Engineer or assigned representative retains the right to enter and inspect the trunk highway right-of-way (including the construction being performed on such right-of way).at any time and without notice to Oak Park Heights or its contractor. If the State determines(in its sole discretion)that the construction is not being performed in a proper or timely manner, or that environmental laws(or the terms of permits)are not being complied with, or that traffic control or other necessary safety measures are not being properly implemented,then the State may direct Oak Park Heights(and its contractor)to take such remedial measures as the State deems necessary. The State may require Oak Park Heights.(and its contractors and consultants)to suspend their operations until suitable remedial action plans are approved and implemented. The State will have no liability to the Oak Park Hcights.(or its contractors or..consultants) for exercising its rights under this provision. 2.3. Traffic Control; Worker Safety. While Oak Park Heights(and its contractors and consultants)are occupying the State right-of-way,they trust comply with the approved traffic control plan, and with applicable provisions of the Work Zone Field Handbook (litt :l/w-,N,w.dot.state.tian.us/trafficen work-z6ne/indeX:htm]). All Oak Park Heights,contractor, and consultant personnel occupying the State's right-of-way must be provided with required reflective clothing and]rats. 2.4. State Ownership of Improvements. Excluding the Roadway Segment to be released to Oak Park Heights and Stillwater,the State will retain ownership of its trunk highway right-of-way, including any improvements made to such right-of-way under this Agreement, unless otherwise noted. The warranties and guarantees made by Oak Park Heights's contractor with respect to such improvements(if any)will flow to the State. Oak Park ]Heights will assist the State,as necessary,to enforce such warranties and guarantees, and to obtain recoveryfrom Oak Park Heights's consultants,and contractor(including its sureties)for non-performance of contract work, for design errors and omissions, and for defects in materials and workmanship. Upon request of the State,Oak Park Heights will undertake such actions as are reasonably necessary to transfer or assign contract rights to the State and to permit subrogation by the State with respect to claims against Oak Park Heights's consultants and contractors. 3. Contract Award and Construction 3.1. Bids and Award Oak Park Heights will receive bids and award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder(or best value proposer), subject to concurrence by the State in that award,according to the Project Plans. The contract construction will be performed according to the approved Project Plans. 3.2. Bid Documents furnished by Oak Park Heights. Oak Park Heights will,within 7 days of opening bids for the construction contract, submit to the State's Metro District Engineer representative a copy of the low bid -2- Page 110 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 and an abstract of all bids together with Oak Park Heights's request for concurrence by the State in the award of the construction contract. Oak Park Heights will not award the construction contract until the State advises Oak Park Heights in writing of its concurrence. 3.3. Rejection of Bids. Oak Park Heights may reject and the State may require Oak Park Heights to reject any or all bids for the construction contract. The party rejecting or requiring the rejection of bids must provide the other party written notice of that rejection or requirement for rejection no later than 30 days after opening bids. Upon the rejection of all bids, a party may request, in writing, that the bidding process be repeated. Upon the other party's written approval of such request, Oak Park Heights will repeat the bidding process in a reasonable period of time, without cost or expense to the State. 3.4. Direction,Supervision and Inspection of Construction A. The contract construction will be under the direction of Oak Park Heights and under the supervision of a registered professional engineer; however,the State participation construction covered under this Agreement will be open to inspection by the State Disti ct Engineer's authorized representatives. Oak Park Heights will give the Metro District Engineer representative five days' notice of its intention to start the contract construction. B. Responsibility for the control of materials for the'contract construction,will be on Oak Park Heights and its contractor and will be carried out according to Specifications No. 1601 through and including No. 1609 in the State's current"Standard Specifications for Construction". ;= 3.5. Completion of Construction. Oak Park Heights will cause the contract construction to be started and completed according to the time schedule in the constructions contract special provisions. The completion date for the contract construction may-be extended, by an exchange of letters between the appropriate City official and the State District Engineer's authorized representative, for unavoidable delays encountered in the performance of the contract construction. 3.6. Plan Changes. The State vVill'not participate in the cost of any contract°construction that is in addition to the State participation construction covered under his W""i s the following conditions have been met: x A. The necessary State funds have been encumbered. B. All changes in the Project Plans and aft i,ddenda, change orders and supplemental agreements entered into by Oak Park He]uhts and its contractor for State participation construction are approved in writing by the State District I-Engineer's authorized representative prior to the work occurring. 3.7. Compliance with Laws, Ordinaijces, Regglations. Oak Park Heights will comply and cause its contractor to comply with all Federal, State:and Local law`s, and all applicable ordinances and regulations. With respect only to that portion of work performed on the State's trunk highway right-of-way, Oak Park Heights will not require the contractor to follow local ordinances or to obtain local permits. 4. Right-of-Way; Easements;Permits 4.1. Oak Park Heights will, without cost or expense to the State, obtain all rights-of-way,easements, construction permits and any other permits and sanctions that may be required in connection with the local and trunk highway portions of the contract construction. Before payment by the State, Oak Park Heights will furnish the State with certified copies of the documents for rights-of-way and easements, construction permits and other permits and sanctions required for State participation construction covered under this Agreement. 4.2. Oak Park Heights will comply with Minnesota Statutes § 216D.04, subdivision 1(a), for identification, notification, design meetings and depiction of utilities affected by the contract construction. -3- Page 111 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 5. Notice of Release; Conveyance Documents 5.1. Notice of Release. Upon completion of the reconstruction of the Roadway Segment,the State will deliver a "Notice of Release" to Oak Park Heights and Stillwater,releasing the Roadway Segment from the State's jurisdiction. Upon receipt of such notice,Oak Park Heights and Stillwater will each become the Road Authority with jurisdiction over the Roadway Segment within their jurisdiction and will assume all responsibility for the operation, maintenance. and reconstruction of the Roadway Segment in their jurisdiction and of all structures and facilities that are a part of the Roadway Segment. 5.2. Conveyance Documents. Subsequent to issuing the Notice of Release,the State will prepare and execute necessary and appropriate documents conveying the State's interest in the each of the Roadway Segments to Oak Park Heights and Stillwater. 6. Maintenance of Lookout Trail by the Oak Park Heights and Stillwkor 6.1. Prior to Release. Prior to the Political Subdivision's receipt��6,fihe Notice of Release,maintenance of the Roadway Segment will continue to be provided by the State:. 6.2. Upon Release. Following reconstruction of Lookout'Frail and upon receipt of the Notice of Release,Oak Park Ilcights and Stillwater will become the roadway authorities responsible for maintenance of the Roadway Segment within their respective jurisdictions as shown in Exhibit."Lookout Trail Release". Each City will thereafter be responsible for performing and paying for all maintenance and reconstruction of the Roadway Segment, including all structures and facilities that constitute a part of such roadway. 6.3. Oak Park Heights and Stillwater may enter into their own separate maintenance agresyment to address minor maintenance of the short segment ol=':��ut.Trail in Stillwater. 7. Basis of State Cost ` r 7.1. SCHEDULE "P'. The Preliminary SCHEDULE "14-Ibiclades all anticipated State participation construction items and the construction engineering cost share covered under this Agreement. 7.2. State Participation Construction, The State wzli participate in the following at the percentages indicated. The construction includes the State'.s;proportionate share of item costs for mobilization, and traffic control. 100 Percent will be the'$tate's gate of cost participation in the entire roadway and storm sewer constructioi ; 7.3. Construction Engineering Costs The State will pay a construction engineering charge equal to 8 percent of the total State participatton;:)c,.onstruction covered under this Agreement. 7.4. Addenda,:Change Orders an lSupplenaental Agreements. The State will share in the costs of construction contract addenda, change ordets,and supp6einental agreements that are necessary to complete the State participation construction coveter under this Agreement and are approved in writing by the State District Engineer's authorized.representative. 7.5. Liquidated Damages: All liquidated damages assessed Oak Park Heights' contractor in connection with the construction contract will result in a credit shared by each party in the same proportion as their total construction cost share covered under this Agreement is to the total contract construction cost before any deduction for liquidated damages. 8. State Cost and Payment by the State 8.1. State Cost. $460,074.90 is the State's estimated share of the costs of the contract construction plus the 8 percent construction engineering cost share and a $30,000.00 contingency amount as shown in the Preliminary SCHEDULE "I". The Preliminary SCHEDULE "I" was prepared using estimated quantities and unit prices, and may include any credits or lump sum costs. Upon review of the construction contract bid documents described in Article 3.2,the State will decide whether to concur in Oak Park Heights' award of the construction contract and, if so,prepare a Revised SCHEDULE "I" based on construction contract unit prices, which will replace and supersede the Preliminary SCHEDULE "I" as part of this agreement. _4_ Page 112 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 The contingency amount is provided to cover overruns of the plans estimated quantities of State participation construction and State approved additional construction including construction engineering costs. 8.2. Conditions of Payment. The State N ill pay Oak Park Heights the State's total estimated construction cost share, which does not include the 8 percent construction engineering cost share or the contingency amount, as shown in the Revised SCHEDULE "I", after the following conditions have been met: A. Encumbrance by the State of the State's total estimated construction cost share,the 8 percent construction engineering cost share,and the contingency amount,as shown in the Revised SCHEDULE "I". B. Execution of this Agreement and transmittal to both Cities, including a letter advising of the State's concurrence in the award of the construction contract. C. The State's receipt of a written request from Oak Park Heights for the advancement of funds. The request will include certification by Oak Park Heights that all necessary parties have executed the construction contract. 8.3. Limitations of State Payment;No State Payment to Contractor The State's participation in the contract construction is limited to the State participation construction shown in Article 7, and the State's participation wi I l not change except by a mutually agreed written amendment to this Agreement, The State's payment obligation extends only to Oak Park Heights...Oak Park Heights's contractor is not intended to be and;will not be deemed to be a third party beneficiary of this Agreement. Oak Park Heights's contractor will have rio,right to receive payment from the State. The State will have no responsibility for claims asserted against Oak Park Heights by Oak Park Heights's contractor. 8.4. Construelion Casts Exceeding Enewnbered Amount Whenever it appears the cost of the State participation,construction cov`ered under this Agreement is about to exceed the current amount of encumbered State fiends. Oak Park Heights will notify the State District Engineer's authorized representative in writing prior to performance of the additional State participation construction. Notification �vlll include an estimate i n the amount of additional funds necessary to complete the State participation construction including construction engineering costs and the reason(s)why the current amount encumbered w i 11 be exceeded. The State will, upon its approval of the additional State participation construction, encuttiber the necessary additional funds. That action will have the effect of amending this Agreement s)as to iriclude the State's share of the costs of the additional construction. Should Oak Park Heights care the performance of additional contract construction which would otherwise qualify for`State participation construction covered under this Agreement,but for which the State has not previously encumbered funds, that additional contract construction is done at Oak Park Heights's own risk. Oak Park Heights'kv,ill notify the State District Engineer's authorized representative in writing of the additional State participation construction. Notification will include an estimate in the amount of additional funds necessary to cover the additional State participation construction including construction engineering costs and the reason(s)why the current amount encumbered was exceeded. If the State District Engineer's authorized representative approves the additional State participation construction,Oak Park Heights's claim for compensation along with a request for encumbrance of the iiecessary additional funds will be submitted to the State's Budget Section for review of compliance with Minnesota Statutes § 16A.15, subdivision 3, but no guarantee is made that the claim will be approved by the State's Budget Section. If the claim for compensation and the request for encumbrance of the necessary additional funds are approved by the State's Budget Section,that action will have the effect of amending this Agreement so as to include the State's share of the costs of the additional construction.. -5- Page 113 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 8.5. Records Keeping and Invoicing by Oak Park Heights The State will provide Oak Park Heights with a Payment Processing Package containing a Modified SCHEDULE "I" form, instructions,and samples of documents for processing final payment of the State participation construction covered under this Agreement. Oak Park Heights will keep records and accounts that enable it to provide the State with the following prior to final payment: A. A copy of the Modified SCHEDULE "I" which includes final quantities of State participation construction. B. Copies of Oak Park Heights"contractor's invoice(s)covering all contract construction. C. Copies of the endorsed and canceled Oak Park Heights warrant(s)or check(s)paying for final contract construction, or computer documentation of the warrant(s)issued, certified by an appropriate City official that final construction contract payment has been made. D. Copies of all construction contract change orders And supplemental agreements. E. A certification form, attached to a copy of the,Final Schedule "I", both provided by the State. The certification form will be signed by Oak Parl:;Heights's Engineer in charge of the contract construction attesting to the following: i. Satisfactory performance and completion of,aIfpontr.. t;� anstruction according to the Project Plans.. ii. Acceptance and approval of;all ;materials furnished jW,1 ie contract construction relative to compliance of those materials to the State's current".Standard Specifications for Construction". iii. Full payment by Oak Park Heights to its contractor for all contract construction. F. A formal invoice (original and signed) in the amount cute Oak Park Heights as shown in the Final SCHEDULE ""I"� 8.6. Final Payment by'the State Upon completion of all contract construction,the State will prepare a Final SCHEDULE "I" according to the procedures detailed in the Payinent Processing Package and submit a copy to Oak Park Heights. The Final SCHEDULE"I"will be based on final quantities,and include all State participation construction items and the construction engineering cost share covered under this Agreement. If the final cost of the State participation construction exceeds the amount of funds advanced by the State, the State will pay the difference to Oak Park Heights without interest. If the final cost of the State participation construction is less than the amount of funds advanced by the State,Oak Park Heights will refund the difference to the State without interest. The State and Oak Park Heigh6 waive claims for any payments or refunds less than $5.40 according to Minnesota Statutes § 15.415. 9. Authorized Representatives` Each party's Authorized Representative is responsible for administering this Agreement and is authorized to give and receive any notice or demand required or permitted by this Agreement. 9.1. The State's Authorized Representative will be: Name/Title: Maryanne Kelly-Sonnek, Municipal Agreements Engineer (or successor) Address: 395 John Ireland Boulevard,Mailstop 682, St. Paul, MN 55155 Telephone: (651)366-4634 E-Mail: maryanne.kellysonnek @state.mn.us -6- Page 114 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 9.2. Oak Park Heights's Authorized Representative will be: Name/Title: Eric A.Johnson, City Administrator(or successor) Address: 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N., P.O. Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Telephone: (651)439-4439 E-Mail: eajohnson @cityofoakparkheights.com 9.3. Stillwater's Authorized Representative will be: Name/Title: Larry D. Hansen, City Administrator(or successor) Address: 216 North Forth Street Stillwater,MN 55082 'r •rf�.r Telephone: (651)430-880I E-Mail: lhansen @ci.stilwater.rnn.us 10. Assignment; Amendments; Waiver; Contract Co mplete 10.X.Assignment. Neither party may assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior consent of the other parties and a written assionment agreement, executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this Agreement, or their successors in office: 10.2.Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement must;;be in writing and will not lie effective until it has been executed and approved by the;§erne parties who executed and approved the original Agreement, or their successors in office. '':" :•. r:r 10.3. Waiver. If a party fails to enforce any provision. of.this Agreement,that failure does not waive the provision r.: or the party's right to subsequently enforce it. 10.4. Contract Complete. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between the State, Oak Park Heights and Stillwater. No other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind parties:. {r 11. Liability; Worker Compensation Claims;;Insurance�r"" 11.1. Each party is.responsible for its own acts, omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of others and the results thereof. Minnesota Statutes § 3.736 and other applicable law govern liability ofthe State. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other applicable law govern liability of Qak Park Heights or Stillwater. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Oak Park Heights will indemnify,hold harmless,and:defend (to the extent permitted by the Minnesota Attorney General)the ,State against any ai ims, causes of actions, damages, costs(including reasonable attorneys fees), and expenses arising in connection with the project covered by this Agreement,regardless of whether such claims are asserted by Oal Park Heights's contractor(s)or consultant(s)or by a third party because of an act or omission by Oak Park Heights or its contractor(s)or consultant(s). 11.2. Each party is responsible for its own employees for any claims arising under the Workers Compensation Act. 11.3. Oak Park Heights may require its contractor to carry insurance to cover claims for damages asserted against Oak Park Heights's contractor. 12. Nondiscrimination Provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 181.59 and of any applicable law relating to civil rights and discrimination are considered part of this Agreement. -7- Page 115 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 13. State Audits Under Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 5, Oak Park Heights's books,records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor,as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this Agreement. 14. Government Data Practices Oak Park Heights and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13,as it applies to all data provided under this Agreement, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by Oak Park Heights under this Agreement. The civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes §13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either Oak Park Heights or the State. 15. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue Minnesota law governs the validity, interpretation and enforcement of.t}tis Agreement. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 16. Termination; Suspension 16.1.By MutualAgreement.This Agreement may be'tenninated by mutual agreement of the parties or by the State for insufficient funding as described below. 16.2. Termination for Insufficient funding;. The State may"i mediately terminate this Agreement if it does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow for the payment of the,services covered here. Termination must be by written or fax notice to Oak Park Heights. The State is not obligatcd to pay for any services that are provided after notice and effective date of.termination. However, Oak"Park Heights`Will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed Io fhe.extent that funds are available. The State will not be assessed any penalty if this;Agreemerifis terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding sourc"e, not to appropriate funds. 16.3.Suspension. In the event of a total or partial government shutdown, the State may suspend this Agreement and all work, activities,performance And,payments 4'oorized through this Agreement. Any work perfonned"during a period of suspension will be consttiered unauthorized work and will be undertaken at the risk of non-payment. 17. Force Majeure Neither party will be responsible to:tlie other fora failure to perform under this Agreement(or a delay in performance), if such failure or delay.is due to aforce majeure event. A force majeure event is an event beyond a party's reasonable control, including;but not limited to, unusually severe weather,fire,floods, other acts of God, labor disputes,acts of war or terroris1p,or public health emergencies. [-The,re"Mainder of this page has been intentionally left blank] Page 116 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minnesota Statutes § 16A.15 and 16C.05. Recommended for Approval: Signed: By: (District Engineer) Date: Date: SWIFT Purchase Order: Ap�roed CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS By: (S ;Design Engineer) The undersigned certify that they have lawfully executed this contract on behalf of the Governmental Date Unit as required by applicable charter provisions, resolutions or ordinances. > %. r .. By: C4IVIMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION Title: Date: (With delegated authority) Date: By: Title: Date: INCLUDE COPY OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING ITS EXECUTION. -9- Page 117 of 162 Mn/DOT Contract No: 05469 CITY OF STILLWATER The undersigned certify that they have lawfully executed this contract on behalf of the Governmental Unit as required by applicable charter provisions, resolutions or ordinances. By: Title: Date: By. r. Title: f .. Date: INCLUDE COPY OF RESOLUTION APPROVING TIM AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING ITS EXECUTION.; -10- Page 118 of 162 in r, za e E9 x s as<a oc = 2-2: <5 3 _gyp a - -- uoo° Y f � •+� � o Lx J < o Q -j € O (v LLJ O c < G O �s = z ct w a CL w z m a) v) Z z a w m m m Ca �- �. JI z I 7 LL i hs cr � o ig VV ? N OE 1 0 i Q o l z v�V) e M U O p C1 .r Illw l IC �1rr`I ��,; , �� t , III II � I� f� o Y 8 ybzg � � _ - �s S3tl ygy �s :��:.s`• `Fz ° y €ore$ ���tr.-ono ry�c�\s��5��iaVlo�_inoyao,\vOSP-I��;/-S\BSZv ZI\PW+�ry\rte cV,�; Page 119 of 162 S, n W t-lj 2.25815-eb.y-p sgnu,0-a+t-Tra1RpY,Y*tsV.00kM-C4W" 2�2OL4 -a,25 PM �I 10 - �t r ft L r y• ` r �� AN r ` \% 'A z 000 , r +n -+m <+ r.. � n m �. 1` cr- � +-L 't•'i Q� v,r,m :\ p' Sb Z m0 9 Ph Q A y N 2 �m z c z z o z�'i z n m A =c a. � m \ .L n z' x \. P e 20 of 162 x �aN� mm�5m F b LO a v g �O } II��.r Wy d F dCC W �N �r J x� w Q ax ` 0 4 N a$ p Z � AS w W�° L w w` l =x l w - - I� h V) is k2l �.- I ea _ R Y t4 �FNUW aaa�� a _3 - I II e s a �NNNN �gQ e12 I N I I!r{ a I I l2 nozieziz � g�u �6P'vus'yrpyooTSy�ry�lra�t'a�0�esl�uErP-IOels-5�@Si�(I�vwi41\n\oii+5 Page 121 of 162 A�%OW\w*.c�«+�se�s-rino:-esgn��oo�ou*.r.asM1Wwrc��awaur.oc.can zrzanal+ /eBi31� rwi sa RAI e1 1 0 R " YogA oil ^ ^ LA O - C � ro .Z1 ° a z'^ P "8 o i nro N 1 A q c Z 4 H vo N� H s 10 o A V a m ^ Z< m O O m ]ILL E x age 22 of 162 x u i z - O J P NNUN`-ca < E5 cc LL6 Z N N N mYr' O _ — ti m KF Q Z Q V P �na-o J ¢< ~ UJI LLJ U a � � d e SI"13H Yard a31TR J SAH013H U31YA a ~ n om'} • z C y NYC d0 AM -11115 Yard Yrp -11115 n !0 Al[] 4 10 A110 AD A113 4 tai °u J Z o N j WTO ¢¢ c ¢4S¢C¢g¢ J Ln a+ z J v' a u s1H0I3X Yara h ay - yqp A lI] 51X013x Yard a3trx F o NYC 30 Ail] dp,kilo '- aoo z � P F s F`� w LLJ >•�� - w y +ar+ara+ Sa ¢ag w°o ii pp Nn� J _ �Cm K NO K N4 Ow ' 6j. 'nj t Otl4n pN d S1H0I3x N31Ya u d31n Slx9[3x S1N]l3x Yavd 3 ra YYO -„[1s xa Yard Yr0 ells d d0 1110 d0 All] a Y10 !0 AM d0 A113 d0 A1I7 II ff C 3 $�G ny 9f'BI'r r162/BZ/L � g n �P'9!'!ne yrrl\r!xG utl\11r�1"!rm�eoR\eE V P-Wuµ.S\BSLri[\9v'1�'mn�O M\'i Page 23 of 162 Op 72 WnimtlV29256\5-fMd-tlsgn\LCOkwt lraf\pkvhtatioakat-tlp tP.00� 2/MMJ 44&39 m 1JP T8 bm A*...miCN A m a P O~y a 8 NOQ N t Aims�r N m =N o4gm� EEEggg x i m so a s R:E�F'!"a� it y X xc mro^ _.'x EZx x^- ^2a�F^err$ tis LA g m�>w N1- xm� y4a9a4a cm°� a .�$ QN o _ �t A�Am� C xmxxx M2� m 2 R° z am 2 n m atl�-a.ym Aam�.o a2 iyti yK oO yCXm��C' y nPS VSym2 r �q w r � a~M 4z Y Z^r4 e ^ boa Annnn`E gQ z ^ Z Z 2 E Z K p S C H Z na N p 9YK� M O m 'pOa A F c� mm ov z E wOcPi «rv�N i V Ol r - c © Z m 2 a� � rat'9 C O m Np z 1.p � � v_a-' S�•- i n NFL ❑� �,� vr_ � A 4m ti D i n N � § m x F Page 124 of 162 x ` 3 �J P � r � a � m ., ITI Q NN F r NyN NnNNNNNN y,N NNNNwNNN N H [71 RSS f{i i75 bF ��LSi ulr5 c5�r'ta t3r�5 r�5335cri u ur'35 Lq�¢¢ z H o0. 3aaeanQd'aa'aaa ��h. m J m Q >- > Ww �333� tr 3n3N�3��333�3#§333�F3ii333333333 J y< 3�3NNiiv;rnin33;n§33nN33� a N _ _ n H if; O O S- -~X'iry - nl%--N- NNp�N� P N N *�i JiSN� ffLLW \\W w ° z N6 wv �Ey N4u° wH 6g E. n JSSwx~, 22K ai g N Z h n =y IT Jy=d ~'Y U� z _� _ ~z �: cs �a w s =s• °< m � `kTTts e is 4 �7YVwa r�~f NNNNNNNn E� '! V o oa z a4" 1 F �"� aaa a`aaa ¢ Z Q ao�: a'gig ZW O D lu == W f ga awn aau J + ¢a } V ��� I cp P m�,Rnnn�N ne maw - �mziezn = Lu °a•a.zxn'x�o,poor°,ww°�¢oli,ro�v°i��a°v.w„us�cstta�whawr�mc`rvc o u Page 125 of 162 ssviov/w„sma�fa,r ens-rnw-c.q^�aoaso..+.Traa�ow,an+suawaus.u+o�ano� ppfW+ 2/28/T03� �a18o�1 Pll m 4NmN XNNi p�p��04 iyi�T,N 00 �^0 O O p 2 .1 o 9Sr 99 br' r b n9 Nb b,n�0 o.o 9br - o--i mA g lei A 03 C r a mi mi g �I og 4 0 R � �[ N a p�i/�/y�,'�'� u a Y A yAAPAAARAR�A RA RR�nm�puo�fpp ! __ i'p�CRNi _T'V1pm �p AARAAA RR A -- r Top xm C a4 pcz A>��'n�w�NgH �► ��cA AA A �bA�sn�F6 � c g RAW HMXA-�OMMMMIAIMA 11 = R a 03 r °sQ°s o0 oaa D N N M Ln M � M O � o m R E � a r-. xkx .. xx x.r O Z to Page 12 3 of 162 Page 127 of 162 E■! , §` | , ( \ / \�I § ! \! q § \ - � � I § k \\ r9 § e ) - 2 \ \ ` j � ; ) ) / |� , • x . Page 28 a1& x au;j 'dosd jo >,DMapig MO N z p d E o' E o— mo>Envy �! c w } c o E n _ u, EwE � a3 i 4J CO IY s -0'o M.5 n 0w h� •� m o as o�� Eo > rJ7 0 5 a � E,i Imo ' z d _ C N m D y yl, Z Z Fy J 0 4 ; EUE' W e U a Id aY _ in I LU j cc I V) I< m O IC G Z of MIFF n rn a e I m - E p LL�Jm g� 0 lu`]JI BIZ jv�o ern N N" J 14I 1 9 o_0 ) t Z 7 - gp 4 5 QR: ra 'T ss efe Wit.ys r � �.'.fir��,3� � b,J��I 9.• i t � -. r.rtCrr.;•', s I� I � > m Md 9HBtry HOZ/f12/2 g' g���" u2iroW a�oyool\Fayeya\l la.l-irpKOOI\�vu-lauli-S\a5Z121\P'�a�n\n\0%PS Page 129 of 162 5,\RO\uVnt.,e\124258\5-i 1nd-d I SCLdp. 2176rz014 4d9d3 W! [] {ZZr �yP 41 o om A n a Y __« �1s59a3d�T,r --T, n�_ Z } H r• r l z , mac" ax _ _ vcr LM •1 11 %I - - - mzn 1d 1 r— ,ml a �� ��o ,. •, II I 1` • 0Zm w l 0 M O rri I � �\`. \\ 41 ,11VV 11ytV11 S 11. 1 p `\ R 19 jp r �' ••a \ t\ \ V t1l ' I � !ll��� L Ar yiµ�jl�?r•Jit~`il � f\ _ \`�-i��`\\\\\HIV \ \ nz -- r ca \ H a d c 1�1 ,v ' '��� a►� ti Si—4 x � Pa e 130 of 162 x w w W a u a N n MATCH LINE MATCH LINE LOOKOUT TRAIT STA. 17.60 LaIVaUT TRAIL STA.. 2; l a ? v IN: s LL o i I _ o all clll �g 1 -_� _ 1=l I �Q 4� •ti � �• SO wj b% vp ROAD CLOSED a ti 41�G l t r sti o 'f" oa«Ll •rls 71ra1 lno 3NIi Naly" �0a7 -� csoa II1.J V1 � V *a irsaa rroziw: � �� �F�I-lnOM0a TV14pN�llo�1-1nobon Tuerp-WU SOa li-S\YSZrZhA�aw1\1Y\OTK Page 1 1 of 162 slxaunlwr.�m=s�zse�s-eaa-'lso^LL.al�wr-r�aatiw,anr.ueaawr-r�e� T� 2/28/2OF1 aFA25 PY 1 I^ MATCH LINE MATCH L LOOKOUT TRAIL STA. 29«00 LOOKOUT TRAIL STA 23r00 I1' s �' jjji to "oz; LA aa r s' Y, \ 'N an !• - Y00 fiT� i NAl,, tip 4 �i vim'• !I N �R !+ ' � 'i i ♦may � ��� � � , ��z y$ ' { ROAD CLOSED rcew ptr L�7 it - nN�' 16 y_ r ot J a .Oy ,F t oo+67, 3N1� N]1tl1Y 2 X �}�1 'rS i; � �u Pag 132 of 162 0 Z m :z ;y z r 9 2 !SU j\ ) w { \ - bE 2 \ \ \ \ \ / \ \ } \ / j \ \� \ ~��` ® � \ }\ \) , 4A < U t k! W d t L E t �z __� _m . �\§| Page 1 3 of 162 SSV(Q V1Viit M%IN25a\5-fl^d'dC�40WW?Tran�pfsy+ta+loakout-tP.4T to Z/Z8/SQl� y2g01 ry r rr n�c� 4C MATCH LINE LggK0Y1T FL STA. 17-OD o n c$ .:r`� g /f 1 1•' "tl Y � 1 tiS` { �y I F5 r Ili n YJ LS isO�3d •` ' i 2 IV r !Y �• I I I _ p c: n4 c j t I{ i of. ! o 'q F z noxaa7 aal 1 C n, qq+£Z 'b15 7I 60.1[ 'V15 lIYtll 1iT010007 3NI7 H30h 3NI7 HOivh r S f- b m m z Z O O %l m m P&g 134 of 162 II X rr It a� N V d µATCN LS� 24r00 M r „"1., LOOKOkjT TRATL 1.. �a ~ LU In Q o a k- .. l 1 •�I Jt ! 'y o I I � U�Q ftl 11 W n II �11 00 p ail ! 2 II I l ! { . i 6 t a 1 I pp I =� 1 r 1 I C fft �• a lw I aNO arc— 3'.. �. d, Y I 11 Q ' i CITY OF 6T1rLWATE __ss� I 1 I. a'`'K .+Yb aK HEl 11T6 1 �g�gF k Nw ¢ • i � 4 Y 1 1 Q n 1 ilr x 1 O j i ti/ 5 1 CZ 'V45 1 r i o OQi 3Nll Hj VAIno),oOl oa.sZ 'V!5 lIVtll Lnomo0T _ 3HIl HOOM �+ r 1 I' 1 1 •• II m 8 hm SOaP2�I r102i6Z/Z � g'b'[, �G'�3'SM W4"v�fA4MO\LLO✓1-L�oYOO�\NkV-loin>�S\BSEKI\PU;vry\M\Oa\,$ Page 135 of 162 sl�ca+.wwl,r�lw�tz.zse�s-+I:+a-csoAUOamwr-r.alv+++++s.uookwt-ea.a� zixeaal+ +Izuu w a—gZ r yRO 4 C"f 0 .,o re r rr A jn r 651.11 - r 8 r I �r r R N : ' �\ v ; A 2 1 EL. -65 Al IS ti�dat. R'^ q a A n� i r_Y z r Sit, '� o e v MPt 91.27 El. Bi '••' ,1 � � H I � F;= 4 1 5 [ 9 _o L4 � + I o 17 i i 1 - YP7 .Bi•21 EL. 830:55 'A_ p37.70 i ;I �`• p n i N o m . 7 u� 1 I oN°` 1 C Y Vv - � z p c 7OO5 A LL }C i7 ♦� H m _ m r 'o O s— O r ao* t vls 1Ip21 lflo)fo l : f oo+Lt vls lIvai inovoo� m Z 3N 1 Hot / 3NIl HDIVA o n` X O G 0 1-0; � � Pa a 13 of 162 m m o x m a ¢ O o $ W MATCH LIKE LOOKOUT TRAIL STA. 23*00 CR LI E a °. _ L' 1 ilYl S A 23 00 z W 1 Z L91 n o - dlaS Ij: Z J Z a" J1 65 iJC J a •' it t I o �Sma na zo t-6. 2 � z � o 1p I u F,f 1 Ci I � OO p a � ' 10 p tr `t 1 O l [{ � Gic[ �1 b i►3� 1 W 1 zas zF J r q i s 3 + } r WWa .W o / o m o of sm 3NI7TIpal 1/101001 1Ivm1 Lf10S1f}Ol s HOlaly 3NI I:Holm � I o - ,bvrya-aMMVVT9#ua•#ago.y-t,wKUOT,�fD-w�la•s\BSZyS[�vWauN�n#ar s Page 37 of 162 s,�co+u+u�r.�e�l2vse,�z-tu,a�eapnuooxun-rrm�pr�an+auowl eur-caaP, c0.] 2/i8/201. <QW6 7W Daman -41 H LIH : + MATCH LINE LO COSI IL ST S :23. .` LOOKOUT TRAIL STA. 23.00 '4 m T93,1 1 0 3 } r S k 1 t ; i N n C n ?; mm s iii g -- 1...... o b. - . r 1 PC .2$.78.92 I v mm I `w r m y t R8 1 1 Q3Q3 y '� / tlSYl - Y 11 / < ' ?Te.r v' 0 f+ V 76.oB 1 4• 7C 7 !.• ss y � fi 1 > TT N �I tt Im I C v� v nr9.61 / I A m // . . . . ZCI '168 114- _ p 0 Y alc nN'ti o f w ;� c q° powt, so - - - , pu.• V7ii SRO`I00� °r 1O 7e5 $ OOf6Z 'YIS lIYlil 1f10 Ol '� s• 'Yis �1 VW m Y 3-f l HOl 11: . v 111 OOa6Z ,3N1� HOS rn o m - n R� m 9a 2 o m X a Pigel 138 of 162 ' '11'1. tl 1'r Y F �JI ,�r,� r •, ;1` 1111, 3 } _ ca 4 d :80'91+5£ "!d 1�; q r Q C II 1 Oro i r r i I I 'gyp 1Ji ru 3 . I H i � o f r Lo 90'99.1£ '7d ; 4 1 ICI .& . 1 r C'r'OF - 5T!(1 W47E ' G�Gay a °i z II f Q , 1 w c � C J! 3 U S s Ia a I Y 9 W oo+sz •vis IIval iRGAGOI 3at7 I+Dxvn :� is� q •sz •vis lrvw lncroz a s Nil Holvh nd el„z=r nczrezix �'8't, �a�c�-ane,toa7�e+wwlw.i-al,ovo-an.ao.w,lu-s�esrrzlw.awnmo�� Page 39 of 162 S,V OV1Un1M\Y 24259\5-1 .T,no\WW+1eLLnON wt_In t.d] PlY6/MI� k21S6 PPA o S go - - oz 'ems? CA Li y N v ♦ _ y _ a r c o r z ° O N� 13_ e 0 3 9 N a a 'g roe � a gi - o A C 4 � �5 O\ y c LIB � N I C y y Ali S c1X r N� 9 x o_oa0000-- -- - _ m R o z z r �N _ _ C G < - m o N a o m c m mho_ y 4n 2m r m = x Pagi 140 of 162 x ._°. N� In c na p040 z � 4o rn Q a z Qo 000ry �R W�� r z Zw 0 5F __. . - Y O m m n m ...._ ----- ~ m � :` O Hn LL i Z£ a zz zzzz �z IL PN �w 1 � a 1 1 }130 1 k ry G r-r w z� Own V7 f> d W �Y 7 Y • r. IX � z°OO.°• _ °� do tl � = J Q S - W y-tz LLA .Fir ui 4 �-S N pFYW cL \, H O� >ti r q� _ V O yy -a U= S$! $ Y CD a �1 MN l Q O D - 2 Cr . z _ r J I 0� 1 WLM - w WD°iul'iFCVdO\4+WUN\uaal'arwyD011l•640•puli-S1652.21\PW1�+MF\Ql\'$ Page 41 of 162 S�V:O\MViifmE\i]�z59\5-t�.a-aay+\LOakdet Tromy�yn to LLeWWt-a�weM awl i/36/2011 4e7W7 PM { ms III a s a a.t _s ka z 04 a 0 0 4� WM �3 09� 8 0 r — b y x� y a� r a� H 37 Z m C IE ma z—+ �m P Z'D �d r r bC O Z R LA ^ x Page 14 of 162 u•lu <Vr S 1 rY 4 O■ 0��!4r O :J LATCH LINE NSo m - z S LOOKOUT TRAIL STA. 17+00 J z 8 W a ♦1 z a ff=Y syR g° � x �ff 78 n 8$ LnEr.° _ @WW1{yf mN oner J Z millw C3 0 W w O J 4 WATCH LINE LOOKOUT TRAIL STA, 23+00 p 7 2^ } s w w - a S H � o CD z o P', _ � ly Z `•1 u w C a. £ gnu J �+ Er A L 4 o kAj •r'�'� J'•1 l3' � � 6 C � 1�`t, 3� ` ! 1 I kA ui w d q I J r V 1_4 ) -S'. 90+LI -VIS 'fl Vffl 1fi0 HO ���.�•.~ W 3N7'I H01Vrt 0T �aa orza� 1 �:oziaziy g` �••�-��aea���.wwav,o.i'uw>toa��„a:P-wi.-5�asa�zcw�:v,•n�oivs' Page 43 of 162 Viirmd\12�x5B\5-rinp-aagmLO ul*-rr r d. 2/2312014 'a&ar a rsY MATCH LINE LOOKOUT TRAIL STA, 24.00 III E ,. ,I � , " • ;+ p LOOKOUT LINE KOiIi 0 TRAIL STA. 23+0 L ✓� I i �$ „IY` z � c I ff r N p SIH'dd Wo r I ? f k134ftil19 Ao Lo 4 A �I Q 1 r • j ;1 ,11 ; ; .( �qIY? yo m � � Sf; i }Iyr Iy it R R p N j e � 11 I1, t •',� � � "r r r F �a 1 '1 I m o °e o i 11 RI � r- 1� b �' r . L All a O Ill it v. A% am y a N M z _ F 'It al o� t Q� eE� � igg :44 �.o tl� 1npy40 iFn N � `{' Jw_22j of ypW w vN 5Z >tl.s H71 K c �i6nminT wr .Ind u� � b -50 is tl� Y o�2 os Q oygcoa s � rri "N kF A $i xmei�R — p ya Z o gig P x P4F 144 of 162 ": 5 X Q W3Ny i 6 V 3 w nOO 1¢q c N ^itltl r kn rti p - Mai V'1 co OL Q�O M1 H W N N - � a xxxx .J. tl 4 n. Ye ±o can q x x H `zp o i �av�W cc U u O m uwin�n - N LU tines � W H ><e a ' ag� - Cis �'���' g�w� °g:egm ���a°•• �a �°q s � Vl w+g 6wti'a wo �i ~ <�NZ4 ins -ZO�VV.� ze�°a K= a°�¢ao ilaics ° �Q Yim O °� z `b.pgz^w: °o aJ'">"u=�z W c 596—uQ: X � > w K 9 d odm$ E— z ^z° moo t =Zo dog •- u 'm 1� 2 (ra�K $sma 4d KKJ`y'i �s��3nw •-. _ _~ � � °-n R g r6 a`rg � txii a:to y6����w ems �u1� y� Q w I � .8912 �a aw�iUa tl�iwotla }JY ��� III Kam¢ ¢:^aR aaKw xrcW za fax c O Ar £a wdN K°Lw �Y w�°K��dMSmg go S ® rvd?>:tz:� YloiBZrz c�,� Page 145 of 162 :s MATCH LINE LOOKOUT TRAIL STA. 17�00 X,- �n -------------- O ge G (D C: 3IN33S saml ummom T3 w C-4 ------------------ Z z JA C) 0a.rz -VIS llymi irlW400" 00-L I •vis livul InomMl 3NI*l li'3iVVI 3NI-I HDIV14 z rj Pa ejl 46 of 162 w 4 • 1 1'11 j'1' �1 W 17 111 1''1114 4UTUTRpl� L60X f ,4, ♦ Z �'_• 11 s Cat-' � � � �. I� �� it ��I .�i'� � �^, Z It e I '�' 1i1 41i r1t1� x yy SS 1 'i 4 r TPtiMmV"In Ixnl 1'�i ¢ it ', o. o } J 'f-X 111 4i w i 5 ----------- } ; All X k 1 1`'i, �V1 F F- 4 l i r I O - Ye {� -7•` NA71� 5 EA 1 1c S 11 a 1 rJ �� lrr 3 3Nr7 k�11i71��x00T 06+6Z •r1S ITY8i Lnnuol 3NIl H%vvi vov.r•�naHaa7�cavn�la�uo�i-anoynn,wsvn-ww.-......[ttaW+++mmoy Page e 47 of 162 r i - W , Y ILI :cm Ul y 1 I I o T N. o I j N I 1 cD r Y I q: qm qq I p $ }w} o _ o� i7F7 gsl 0 0 41 ... ' . s ... - N H m w m : w x n m m w m m m m m m p Pa el. 48 of 162 _ m m p � Ln m K w * � ,. .: ... ... .. .. +:: qi q. sm x N N � � I I: di .. .. _ ... O O Y �Q5 "N ya�yp O � I . . o- n I f r -mi ° a " o s a a vl o p 2 d m �m � 1 m mm Q m �1 N Page 49 of 162 - N ar D O O"l: O .. O O I� O O D. . mi m. ! 1 f y I'.. i m .. ... :,. ,.. ::. .: .. ... :44 mm : . r I i 0 u y W r � I x w8g AM sm ua o I —� a T m \ I - C U� O N O V O lJ` O N O Lil' O O O O O Alt O u G] O ILA: .0 ICI: !m I ti m m m O N�R to D � -0.- O.. ..O .'. O f : k qm :,: [wl ro _.., - + $ O J n p LO N IT S/� O 6 LF O O '{A O N to CD CD P�:gE 1 0 of 162 l P _ P CD ZBy: I i f ' v f w8 Z e o 4 L m � i ' I 4 tE 1 MI Q h I m + m n � � ry N o �i o : .. .. L' R o: N I L � � ,r'! w Page 51 of 162 IA lNOWWntmtl\I�25E\5-f t-l�o➢�r� t t o t / � 1�2�I PY O ' I _. I o- Ln::: it o .. " I W . 1 I . I -_a qm E II :.. po. m .. w::: -, � m .W.._ W_ v. —,' m m to m m m u- 14 d C N °o f 1 S ppp pN p p ..: [T zr .. .. O �H I o FIJI ' I 4 r. m y E Ln E . i W I m E Page 15 of 162 �a m r- w. . - :. ... .. Aq . mi - r w N p B: ,o m LR_. .. , 4 . sm rr 5Y� " cy , s fl O N f ! M. W W Y� .. r• n ^ m�-- Qom.-9� _ _N N ��, O ° _ G 6Y WqI � I„ I , f f + nq a :.: .._. I - I . wq � � m ' I, -\� Page 53 of 162 LA sn.o�M�w,.,aua�zse�s-�r -n .a j r I' J ro sa: cv a � N aH fit: , _ u E ) n 7 1 aS! _ }+ 1 ! i d- .. .. - O ..O' O. O .G' :N''r❑r ::N.. ... N :.N... N rn O �n O []� O N O N' ` N 'I N Ln: 7 S 5 O O 1..O O N N pt le ... .. f sm . .. ': O O �� CD n y p r y I � gr°o : 0 q r . i q x N :'N N �:.0 cn o o n '. �r O CD r -+ .. _ cn Pag D 1 4 of 162 i CD CD � ix fff � ti O J -.4 o L' $ Ln off_ t. co $ m-' s . a s rw x J Q � a Y : s 1Y .. .., .. mm.Q k p b y;. .. y sm1 .. .. .. - .. N .., -... -. :- I. ..mi w w ��K- 2c Page 155 of 162 kA LA I F A ZEE%5- 11 Q:i I r"LO-1.es.seenr, l/�eilC�n 1�21i/1 pN iv w i . _. i a C I � ti u*+ .O .. ... ..:0.. 1. D 4 4 ff 1T A -1 ti '.. . - 7 p _ ... .. O ,.I. ti n . . ..I:... .-. . . .. .... ':: :. : - . '.' .. .:. _ x CD m 'm e aL+ z �� p „ . X m VY_.aw +3+—IE�n .. qq K D� O [h O N � O"N.�a �. O O 1 o�i O �: O .�a O:� Al O m _ _ �' - p 9, 1 6 of 162 ,.p 0 m m I � � 1 � r i ' 1 " 1 sm im I 'I b i ... :: { ��Lu Page 157 of 162 Page 158 of 162 0 N c� s., a a ca c olo a rn rn rn 6'3 i 69 i� RS O w Y �I U U w � I ICI �00 ca U b n r c3 V ii aG� J w v c' G S c Y cc O 9 � iC U jj a 'ri G C �I i i rl '� C O 6�G� 9 O O I C'�C O'O C p C p C�O.Q 0 0 C.Q O O i O,C C 6 l-- O Q�=j N N ^ I� — G� [— oc oc C O!r 'Y r� N [� r� f�1 M -- 1 r-1 :T N C� o-'t m Q �t U i I f c ° c c c c° o c c o °Ic c c c,o o o c c. c o Glc CD ca c o 0 0 c G � c o G o c O.G c co GIB . ooh F- (��J � O !rn � ZO z � a � o c'c ^ o'^ c'Q c' c C) o'o c:,!I:= o.o'o C N — rn r-+ N ^ — [� �. d C� et n T !n N 00 •-, '* I ('� �.. N rn I� Vr V N Ob .�. a i I 7 'C' O' CY C.� E ? d J C'C p',z <1 < z ¢ C < �IL2 W,.�'� w �t w rr f 1 i W al a; W 5 L ❑ p ."' w 11110- O 00 ILI ` > >; L W C7 O > z Q r C W'W C O ❑ ❑ Z d Z o Z z O 1<11 W d U'C7 �? ❑ �` CI� A,'' F- U Q, v C7 O C �2- Z C C✓ {7 C� v C G CJ r ^ J C- C "� V fi r `� [�+ L] L[ C.: o � � ;G Z z � w ,:.� � W �a �: � W w�::�'r ' C7 C7 C7 1 z C7 7U- �'3 � " � r�.. e.. i•-. � U,w z o a' C C ? O O O C O C,C,O d O G ! n![ - U U Ov ^� -- N t� ,--, ..� .� .-� vt v: !n vr t� a.. rn m r i M --- ,� ,_.• vy ,n N .-. (y �c C C •� rl M t�� \U `•- �- C C ._- C'O C C G C O C-C ^i 4'7 N N N NIN Cd C*1 N N N N N I N N f d N C`J`•N N�I N N (`J N N rl N (V N ILLL P�ge i16d of 162 Q O O In O O IO OOc c = rn OiC Oli o ��, d cc C O O +n C G O •'7 ,-- �' 'n c7 O t� V"` U `J rn F c r -'x t� Cr.� �r: c� r v� C c t�! v-�',,- •N U I i e C C rn O i v^, O C O N M C7 C O O N M ,n rn M ° O N a oio a o Fes' n o c c'c G r!° o,c�lr� o o - N !Oi ol .Q Q G=- � z VI I w a W ¢ i i fm- f f 1 � i z a'ull ? C,Z N W v Q! 2 rn v O Ui Q rZ Lr Cam) C4 C7 U oc E- n n n v) to W U v) V�! o i v ,^°+ i..v .- v� .���IN .--. c.�•O�M oc N O, Q�N � ,-- � Q O!—:C O O OI cfi O M M•M'rn �'O °;O •--�E� G^i iniLr; .n � � .n •n,� r, ,r,,�nvx'v-�!�� viv-,! I--i c rte, rv� r^ 7f 7 ,r: v-, V-, V') N I T w r, xr, •n �n �, n or, �r v, 'n ��:I'n w v In ,r, xn I A J� 4' 64TH ST N _tea :�` "`�i� _ —� •_} `N'-'• 111 'I '�� '` _ uRPEH 61 ST.N .- uj i,�Aj' 63RD 5T " , Ld }''I H s si. cn i UJ w za ST. r � 1 4 a•J LU tD CY1 J I c eil wm LU Ln CD LU ,� t cpld '' f a 1 (,--�u2• IV: i Lu /W Yi Z,i ar LLA Q � �, mF �4 - f •�., w � o F1 f Page 162 of 162