Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 02-12-2018AGENDA REGULAR MEETING — MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, February 12, 2018 — 6:30 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center CITY COUNCIL CLOSED MEETING 5:45 p.m. (Academy Room) 5:45 p.m. Consideration of offers for the sale of the bio -solids site (1645 County Road 39 NE) Mayor: Brian Stumpf Council Members: Jim Davidson, Bill Fair, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart 1. General Business A. Call to Order & Pledge of Allegiance B. Approval of Meeting Minutes • Regular Meeting Minutes from January 22, 2018 C. Consideration of Adding Items to the Agenda D. Citizen Comments • Boy Scouts - Webelos Den #2 E. Public Service Announcements • Presidents Day Hours • Spring Tree Sale • TH 25 Coalition Open House F. Council Liaison Updates • Hwy 25 Coalition • Parks and Recreation Commission • BCOL • IEDC • Planning Commission • EDA G. Department Updates • City Administrator Update • Wright County Sheriff's Office Quarterly Report • FiberNet Quarterly Report 2. Consent Agenda A. Consideration of approving payment of bills B. Consideration of approving new hires and departures for City departments C. Consideration of approving the sale/disposal of surplus city property D. Consideration of approving three appointments to the Park and Recreation Commission E. Consideration of renewing membership in the I-94 West Corridor Coalition for 2018 in the amount of $6,568 F. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-05 stating intent to reimburse certain expenditures from bond proceeds for improvements to the fire station G. Consideration to authorizing distribution of request for proposals (RFP) for architectural services relating to design and construction management of fire station addition H. Consideration of authorizing Fire Department to initiate design process for ladder truck I. Consideration of approving fire agreement renewals with Monticello Township and Silver Creek Township Consideration of accepting the 2018 Pathway Connections guide map for future land use and capital improvement planning K. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-06 accepting feasibility report and setting a public hearing for February 26, 2018, for improvements to 7th Street, Chelsea Road, and Washington Street, as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project, City Project No. 16C006 L. Consideration of approving Resolution 2018-07 appointing the State Commissioner of Transportation as agent of the City of Monticello for accepting federal aid funds for eligible transportation improvements M. Consideration of approving revisions to fees for the purchase of land for 700 and 7077 Ih Street (Bluff's apartment complexes) with a net reduction of $1,300 as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project, City Project No. 16C006 N. Consideration of renewing membership in the Highway 25 Coalition for 2018 in the amount of $15,000 O. Consideration of approving the purchase of a 2018 Ford 350 4X4 truck and plow on the state contract for a total cost of $36,221.61 as budgeted in the 2018 Water and Sewer enterprise funds 2A. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion 3. Public Hearings A. PUBLIC HEARING — Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-08 ordering improvements and authorizing preparation of plans and specifications for Chelsea Road Utility and Street Improvements, City Project No. 17C001 4. Added Items 5. Adjournment AGENDA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORSHOP MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, February 12, 2018 — 5:45 p.m. Academy Room, MCC AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. 5:45 p.m. CLOSED Meeting — Consideration of Offers for Sale of the Bio -solids Site - Address: 1645 County Road 39 NE 3. Adjournment REGULAR MEETING — MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, January 22, 2018 — 6:30 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Present: Brian Stumpf, Jim Davidson, Bill Fair, Charlotte Gabler, and Lloyd Hilgart Absent: None. 1. General Business A. Call to Order & Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Stumpf called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. All City Councilmembers were present. B. Approval of Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting Minutes from meeting on January 8, 2018 Councilmember Gabler moved approval of the regular meeting minutes of January 8, 2018. Councilmember Fair seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. C. Consideration of Adding Items to the Agenda None. D. Citizen Comments None. E. Public Service Announcements None. F. Council Liaison Updates EDA — Councilmember Davidson noted that the EDA approved their annual work plan and addressed loan guidelines and TIF funding approvals. There was significant discussion on proposed business loan improvement program for businesses downtown. I-94 Coalition — Councilmember Gabler noted that the group reviewed their financials for year end. IN addition, there were project updates and submissions for Corridors of Commerce. WCAT — Rachel Leonard, Communications Coordinator, provided an update on the WCAT meeting. The board was informed that there were some additional changes to be made to the Joint Powers Agreement from the Minnesota Counties Insurance Trust that will need City Council approval. Trailblazer has ordered three new buses that will be put into City Council Minutes —January 22, 2018 Page 115 service in Wright County in the latter half of 2018 to help deal with demand in this area. The board elected its officers. G. Department Updates City Administrator Update — Jeff O'Neill gave an update on the following: 1. FiberNet and the Wright County Sheriff's Office quarterly updates will be on February 12. 2. Transportation Day at the Capitol — March 7. 3. I-94 Coalition Legislative Breakfast — February 16. 4. League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Conference — March 22. 5. State of City Presentation — Chamber of Commerce — February 20. 6. Highway 25 Coalition Open House — February 13. 7. Coalition of Utility Cities — updated legislation in regard to modifying method of valuing property. Tom Pawelk, Parks Superintendent, provided an update on the permitting process at BOOL. In November 2017 staff submitted a land alteration permit that was submitted to Wright County and Monticello Township for BCOL Phase I of construction for 2019. In January 2018 the permit was approved. Current plans of the group included an RFP for traffic study for Briarwood, 901h and Cahill Avenue. It is anticipated that there will be an MOU between the three parties for future road improvements. • Mr. Pawelk noted that three applicants for the Parks and Recreation Commission will be brought to the City Council for appointment. • Mr. Pawelk stated that the cemetery mowing contract is open. The RFP will be available through public works. • Hi -Way Liquors Annual Update — Randall Johnsen, Liquor Store Manager, and Wayne Oberg gave a presentation. The presentation included: annual sales, monthly sales, and improvements, events, and overview of 2017. • DMV Annual Update — Carolyn Granger, Deputy Registrar Manager, and Wayne Oberg gave a presentation. The presentation included: mission statement, core values, information on staff, and DMV statistics including transactions, revenue, and operations. 2. Consent Agenda Councilmember Fair moved approval of the Consent Agenda excluding items I and M. Councilmember Hilgart seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. A. Consideration of approving the payment of bills. Recommendation: Approved the bill and purchase card registers for a total amount of $2,185,739.32. B. Consideration of approving new hires/departures. Recommendation: Approved the hires for MCC and departures for MCC. C. Consideration of approving the sale/disposal of surplus city property. Recommendation: Approved as presented. City Council Minutes —January 22, 2018 Page 2 15 D. Consideration of appointing Olive (011ie) White to the Economic Development Authority for a term to commence immediately and expire December 31, 2018. Recommendation: Approved the appointment of 011ie White to the EDA for a term ending on 12-31-2018. E. Consideration of approving a special event permit for the March Madness 5K being held on March 24, 2018, sponsored by Monticello High School Track/CC Booster Club. Recommendation: Approved the special event permit and waiving the fee and use of park. F. Consideration of approving the 2018 Wright County Annual Highway Maintenance Agreement. Recommendation: Approved the 2018 Maintenance Agreement with Wright County with total compensation payable to the city in December 2018, in the amount of $26,944.73. G. Consideration of approving Biosolids Farm Lease Agreement with Mark Holker. Recommendation: Approved lease agreement with Mark Holker. H. Consideration of approving a request for Conditional Use Permit for an approximately 780 square foot residential detached Accessory Use Structure Major in an R-1 (Single -Family Residence) District. Applicant: James and Erica Witzmann. Recommendation: Approved the Conditional Use Permit for a proposed approximately 780 square foot structure, subject to the conditions in Exhibit Z, and based on findings in Resolution No. PC -2018-001. I. Consideration of authorizing preparation of a partnership agreement with the Monticello Lions to develop, fund and operate a splash pad at Pioneer Park. Recommendation: ITEM REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-02 accepting the feasibility report and setting a public hearing on February 12, 2018, for the Chelsea Road Utility and Street Improvements, City Project No. 17C001. Recommendation: Adopted Resolution 2018-02 accepting the Feasibility Report and setting a public hearing on February 12, 2018 for Chelsea Road Utility and Street Improvements, City Project No. 17C001. K. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-03 authorizing preparation of a feasibility report for a 2018 Pedestrian Improvement Project. Recommendation: Adopted Resolution 2018-03 authorizing preparation of a Feasibility Report for a 2018 pedestrian improvement project. L. Consideration of approving additional fees for the purchase of land for 213 Chelsea Road (WSI Industries, Inc.) in the amount of $2,300 as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project, City Project No. 16C006. Recommendation: Approved additional fees for the purchase of land for 213 Chelsea Road City Council Minutes —January 22, 2018 Page 3 15 (WSI Industries, Inc.) in the amount of $2,300, as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project, City Project No. 16C006. M. Consideration of approving a three-year contract extension to RES Specialty Pyrotechnics for the annual Riverfest fireworks show for a total of $28,500. Recommendation: ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA. N. Consideration of approving purchase of 576 new street name signs that meet federal regulations per the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for SE Quad from M & R Signs of Fergus Falls, MN in the amount of $15,305.92. Recommendation: Authorized the purchase of 576 street name signs for the SE quad of the city from M & R Signs of Fergus Falls, MN for the amount of $15,305.92 including freight. O. Consideration to ratify Jim Lindberg to an at -large position on the Bertram Chain of Lakes Advisory Council. Recommendation: Approved the appointment of Jim Lindberg to fill the vacant at -large position of the Bertram Chain of Lakes Advisory Council. P. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-04 approving the amended bylaws for the Bertram Chain of Lakes Advisory Council. Recommendation: Adopted Resolution 2018-04 approving the amended by-laws for the advisory council. 2A. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion I. Consideration of authorizing preparation of a partnership agreement with the Monticello Lions to develop, fund and operate a splash pad at Pioneer Park. Councilmember Gabler questioned whether or not the city would have to have additional liability insurance with the installation of the splash pad. Wayne Oberg responded that there is no extraordinary risk associated with the installation of a splash pad. Councilmember Fair questioned whether the issue of parking had been discussed. Tom Pawelk, Parks Superintendent, responded that the splash pad will add to the constraint of the parking lot. Councilmember Fair questioned whether there could be unforeseen budget issues — such as a park attendant, fence, etc. Tom Pawelk commented that the Parks Department feels comfortable with evaluating the use of the splash pad and see if there are any issues. There is no plan for an attendant at this time. Councilmember Davidson expressed concern that a downtown location for a splash pad wasn't considered further attention, especially considering the amount of attention being given to downtown. Tom Pawelk responded that there are other ideas being developed, such as a different type of water feature, for downtown. In addition, the Monticello Lions, who are partnering with the project, would like to see the splash pad in Pioneer Park. Councilmember Gabler moved approval of Pioneer Park as the location for a community splash pad and to enter into a partnership agreement with the City Council Minutes —January 22, 2018 Page 4 15 Monticello Lions to develop a splash pad with a shared construction cost not to exceed $300,000 for the total project. Councilmember Fair seconded the motion. Motion failed 4-1; Councilmember Davidson voted against because of the location. M. Consideration of approving a three- ear contract extension to RES Specialty Pyrotechnics for the annual Riverfest fireworks show for a total of $28,500. Mayor Stumpf questioned whether any other quotes were received since the cost is over $25,000. Tom Moores, Street Superintendent, responded that three years ago they did go out for bids, however, this year they did not. This would be extending the three year contract with the current company. He added that he could obtain bids for the project. Mayor Stumpf commented that if the company's total cost could be under $25,000 he would see no need for the quotes. Mayor Stumpf moved to table the item to research what service could be obtained for under $25,000 and to see what other quotes could be obtained. Councilmember Fair seconded the motion to table. Motion carried unanimously. 5. Adiournment By consensus, the meeting was adjourned at 7:44 p.m. Recorder: Jennifer Schreiber Approved: Attest: City Administrator City Council Minutes —January 22, 2018 Page 5 15 � � .. .� :' .:.. � II .. � .m 2016 Activity 2,775 Calls For Service assigned in Monticello UROTOMMI Property Crimes: 5 Burglaries 31 Damage to Property 62 General Thefts 5 Theft from vehicle 31 Gas Drive -Off 18 Shoplifting 26 Drug Complaints 37 Juvenile Complaints 104 Motor Vehicle crashes (5 of those involved injuries) 8 Assault Complaint 58 Domestic Disturbance Complaints 575 Traffic Stops 246 Citations issued 40 viduals arrested/booked into jail 2017 Activity 3,028 Calls for Service assigned in Monticello 5 Burglaries 19 Damage to Property 44 General Thefts 8 Theft from vehicle 54 Gas Drive -Off 33 Shoplifting 25 Drug Complaints 35 Juvenile Complaints 95 Motor Vehicle crashes (4 involved injuries) 5 Assault Complaint 56 Domestic Disturbance Complaints 662 Traffic Stops 422 total citations issued 2016 Activity 11 444 Calls For Service assigned in Monticello 6,544 cases assigned to patrol 83 Damage to Property 231 General Thefts 29 Theft from vehicle 118 Drug Complaints 173 Juvenile Complaints " ill 11 111 1 11111111 111 lI 21 Assault Complaint 241 Domestic Disturbance Complaints F 446 Traffic Stops �74 Citations issued 169 individuals arrested/booked into jail 2017 Activity 12,031 Calls for Service assigned in Monticello 6,740 cases assigned to patrol perty Crimes: 20 Burglaries 143 Gas Drive -Off 96 Shoplifting 113 Drug Complaints 169 Juvenile Complaints 327 Motor Vehicle crashes (21 involved injuries) 23 Assault Complaint 223 Domestic Disturbance Complaints 2,892 Traffic Stops 1,315 total citations issued 204 individuals arrested/booked in jail 3,028 Calls for Service assigned in Monticello which resulted in 1,736 cases assigned to patrol in the 41hQuarter of 2017. Notable Investigations: A citizen reported a needle was found in a piece of candy while trick or treating on the evening of Halloween A personal injury car vs. pedestrian crash was investigated on School Boulevard on 11 /27/2017. A juvenile was struck while riding his bike across the road in a crosswalk at the intersection of School Boulevard and Fallon Ave NE at 7:12 a.m. The case is being reviewed by the County Attorney's Office for charges. (30) cases were assigned to the Criminal Investigations Division (CID) in T the city of Monticello during the 4th Quarter. Theft and fraud were the most prevalent cases assigned. Notable Investigation(s): A Patrol Deputy stopped a vehicle that had just stolen a bobcat and trailer from a local business in the early morning hours 11 /01 , the incident was reported by an employee of a neighboring business. The CID Division conducted several search warrants which resulted in information that the suspects were involved in other possible crimes in othe jurisdictions. I 11111111q� 1111111liq 1111 1 i it (13) cases were assigned /investigated by the MCIU Division in the city of Monticello during the 41hQuarter The MCIU Division assisted in collecting evidence and documenting the scen' of the pedestrian crash on School Boulevard in November. I F (9) cases were assigned t® SIU in the city of Monticello daring the 41h The SIU Division Served (3) Narcotic Search Warrants in the city of Monticello during this time period. The SIU Division also conducted (3) Controlled Buy's of Narcotics in the city of Monticello during this time period.s forfeitedAs a result there were (5) Felony Arrests for Narcotic Offenses and (2) vehicles ii , 11111q� q I (33) cases were assigned to the School Resource Officers in Monticello Schools during the 4thQuarter. Juvenile complaints, social media, and harassment continued to be the majority of cases investigated by School Resource Officers during this time period. �4' 412 Wright CountySheriff's Office Sheriff Joe Hagerty 0 380U � Draddk Ave. NE. Bull'alo. MN 5530 1-800-3b2.3667 Fax:763,692-7610 CFS - Monticello Crossings Apt 2016-2018 Printed on February 1, 2018 CFS Year Descriptions 2016 2017 2018 Totals Abuse 0 1 0 1 Agency Assist 0 1 0 1 Animal 0 1 0 1 Check Welfare 1 2 0 3 Civil Complaint 0 8 1 9 Civil Process 4 4 0 8 Commercial Fire Alarm 1 1 0 2 Commercial General Alarm 6 0 0 6 Criminal Damage to Property 0 1 0 1 Domestic Disturbance 1 7 1 9 Drugs 2 1 0 3 Duplicate Call 1 0 0 1 Fire - Structure 0 0 1 1 Fraud - Checks - Cards 1 0 0 1 Fraud - Forgery 0 1 0 1 Harassment 0 2 0 2 Hospice Death 0 1 0 1 Info 2 0 0 2 Intoxicated Person 0 2 0 2 Juvenile - Complaint 0 1 1 2 Medical - Allergies - Stings 0 0 1 1 Medical - Breathing Problems; Dispatch - CAD 0 1 0 1 Medical - Fall Under 6 Feet 1 2 0 3 Medical - Psychiatric - Behavioral 0 1 0 1 Neighborhood Dispute 0 1 0 1 Noise 0 1 1 2 Phone Call 0 1 0 1 Repossession 0 2 0 2 Residential General Alarm 1 0 0 1 Residential Medical Alarm 0 0 1 1 SIA Area Watch 9 0 0 9 SIA Foot Patrol 4 0 0 4 Stoparm Violation 0 1 0 1 Suspicious - Circumstances 0 4 0 4 Suspicious - Person - Vehicle 3 2 0 5 Theft 2 4 1 7 Theft - From Vehicle I 1 1 3 Threats 1 1 0 2 Traffic Stop 1 1 0 2 Li,,, ZMRCHER Page 1 of 2 CFS Year Descriptions Warrant - Attempt 2016 2017 2018 Totals 43 60 9 112 ,M C' , hv WMCHER Page 2 of 2 Wright County Sheriff's Office Sheriff Joe Hagerty 3900 BrdJd,wkAw NE. Buffalo. NIN 55313 1.800-367-31,67 FaN:76_;-6R2-7610 CFS - Mills Fleet 2017-2018 Printed on February 1, 2018 CFS Year Descriptions 2017 2018 Totals 911 Hang-up 1 0 1 Abandoned Vehicle 1 0 1 Abuse 1 0 1 Agency Assist 1 0 1 Animal 2 0 2 Check Welfare 1 0 1 Civil Complaint 1 0 1 Commercial Fire Alarm 1 0 1 Commercial General Alarm 9 1 10 Duplicate Call 1 0 1 Fire - Smoke - Odor; Dispatch - CAD 1 0 1 Fraud - Checks - Cards 1 1 2 Lost - Found Property 1 0 1 Medical - Fall Under 6 Feet 1 1 2 Medical - Sick 1 0 1 MVA - No Injuries 3 0 3 Open Door- Window 2 0 2 SIA Area Watch 16 0 16 SIA Business Walk Through 3 2 5 SIA Door Check 1 0 1 SiA Foot Patrol 6 0 6 SIA Other 1 0 1 Suspicious - Circumstances 1 0 1 Suspicious - Person - Vehicle 2 0 2 Theft 2 0 2 Theft - From Vehicle 1 0 1 Theft - Gas Drive Off 1 0 1 Theft - Shoplifting 33 7 40 Traffic - Hazard 1 0 1 Traffic Stop 3 3 6 3 0 3 Totals 103 15 118 M�de i y Page 1 of 1 Residential & Business Subscribers Service Q4 - 2015 Q2 - 2016 _24 - 2016 69 66 Phone Only 32 28 28, Internet Only 664 717 829 35 Television Only 74 73 72 252 Phone & Internet 164 156 145 1,652 1,670 :Phone & Television 44 42 39, -Internet& Television 318 280 279 :Triple Play 278 254 253 Total Subscribers 1574 1550 1,645 Total Phone 518 480 465 Total Internet 1424 1407 1,506 Total Television 714 9 643 July 1st 2016 Arvig's 1st Day 7 Q1 - 2,017�L Q2 - 2017 3- 27 24 23 24 2 71 880 915 934 945 55 164_ 35 232 204 1,659 427 1,521 1,546 1,550 1,545 589 567 543 526 69 66 58 156 164 164 35 34 33 1 255 252 239 230 215 1 213 1,652 1,670 1,664 448 437 433 1,521 1,546 1,550 1,545 589 567 543 526 Business Subscribers . . ... ..... .... . . . .......... Service2016 ;Phone Only to 10 linternet Only 37 31 'Television Only 1 2 ;Phone & Internet 70 66 ,Phone & Television 12 i 35 1 I 6411, 1 3 17 132 93 1 119 21 1 LLernet & Television 3 ,Triple Play 15 'Total Subscribers 137 'Total Phone 96 ;'Total Internet 125 94 ITotal Television 20 'Phone & Television 1 4 15 129 92 116 22 [oz IWAIJ . a I I I Q 13 35 2 12 i 35 1 I 6411, 1 3 17 132 93 1 119 21 10, 35 1 67 3 16 133 94 121 21 9 36 1 67 1 3 17 134 94 123 22 60 4 19 133 92 118 25 Residential Subscribers Service Q4 - 20151 12 - 2016 Q4 - 201k, Phone Only 22 18 15 Internet Only 627 686 794 Television Only 73 71 70 Phone & Internet 94 90 85 'Phone & Television 43 41 39 Internet & Television 315 276 275 -Triple Play 263 239 234 -Total Subscribers 1437 1421 1,512 -Total Phone 422 388 373 -Total Internet 1299 1291 _T 1,388 Total Television 1 694 627 618 --- I _7 - Q-_ J -2 Cl_ if 7 15 14 14 845 880 898 68 65 57 92 97 97 35 33 32 252 249 236 213 199 196 1,520 1,537 11530 355 343 339 1,402 1,425 1,427 568 546L a 33 1 68 1 4 16 133 Entity: FiberNet Entity: FiberNet Entity: FiberNet From: Arvig Enterprises, Inc. From: Arvig Enterprises, Inc. From: Arvig Enterprises. Inc, Subject; Monthly Netting Statement Subject: Monthly Netting Statement Subject: Monthly Netting Statement Netting Period: 10/01/2017 - 1013112017 Netting Period: 11/01/2017 - 1113012017 Netting Period: 1210112017 - 12131/2017 Revenues Revenues: Revenues: Revenues. 443,984.00 Subscriber Billings 151,311,00 Subscriber Billings 145,860.00 Subscriber Billings 146,813,00 Total Revenues: 151,311.00 Total Revenues: 145,860.00 Total Revenues: (38,625.00) Expenses Fixed Fee Expenses: Fixed Fee (700,20t�.00) Expenses: (391,109.22) Subscriber Fee (59,160,83) Subscriber Fee (59.14014) Subscriber Fee (59.132.£5) Management Fee (12,875.00) Management Fee (12,875,00) Management Fee (12,87500) Fixed Fee (58350.00) Fixed Fee (58,350m) Fixed Fee (58,350.00) Total Expenses: (130,385,83) Total Expenses: (130,365.74) Total Expenses: Net Income $ 20,925.17 Net Income $ 15,494.26 Net Income Entity: FiberNet From: Arvig Enterprises, Inc, Netting Statement Netting Period. 4th Quarter 2017 Tota' Entity- FiberNet From: Arvig Enterprises, Inc, subject: Netting Statement Netting Period: YTD 2017 Total (130,357.65) $ 16,45&35 Revenues: Revenues: SubscriberBillings 443,984.00 SubsciiberBillin, 1,718,564.00 Total Revenues: 443,984.00 Total Revenues Expenses: Expenses. Subscriber Fee (177r434.22) Subscriber Fee (740,38Z60) Management Fee (38,625.00) Management Fe (154,500 O�O Fixed Fee (175,050,00) Fixed Fee (700,20t�.00) Total Expenses: (391,109.22) '-Total Expenses: (1 Net Income $ 52,874,78 Net Income $ 123,4811.40 HE/CO Equipment Drops CPE Equipment Mediaroom (MMR) Transition Mapcorn - Plant Records Total 2M Capital Expense Report; Budget versus Actual 2017 Actual Budget Variance 30,361 27,650 34,917 44,750 9,833 60,305 55,000 36,483 37,500 1,017 162,066 $ 1647900 2,834 - 95,000 162,066 259,900 Financial Report January - December 2017 Actual Budget Budget 2017 2017 Variance 2018 Revenue, $1,723,934 $1,747,985 �2 "i $1,914,473 Expenses: Subscriber COGS 737,820 $813,151 $75,331 846,228 Fixed Cost 638,523 $665,217 $26,694 686,058 Cash flow from Operations $347,591 $269,617 $77,974 $382,187 Management Fee: Fixed 154,500 $154,500. - 159,135 Adjusted EBITDA $193,091 $115,117 $77,974 $223,052 Management Fee: Incentive - 50% 84,046 45,059 99,026 City Cash Flow from Operations 109,046 $ 70,058 124,026 Capital Expense (162,066) (164,900,) 2,834 (133,225) City Cash Flow after Ca Ex (53,021) (94,842) 41,822 (9,199) Budget HE/CO Equipment 12,500 Drops 35,800 CPE Equipment 47,425 Video Transition 37,50 Tota! 133,225 Unbudgeted Road lobs - Fallon Ave 140,000 Development - Featherstone 48,438 Total Unbudgeted $ 188,438 Total CPEX $ 321,663 0 FiberNet has been inserting, monthly, into the City of Monticello invoices, 711 FiberNet has been inserting, monthly, into the Chamber newsletter. 1 71 Created the directory cover for Monticello and the ads for FiberNet inside the director! Online form fills: • October: 12 • November- 23 • December: 19 • January: 13 =1975 - 0=0 0 pl, Sepieribee 2 47 302 716 0 ""5 .1 2 26 3 M 1099 -2581 401 October I, 150 333 R2 0 72-2, 1.02 4 M3 1 44 0 44 2 November 44 232 301, 731 0 T 4 0 4a cl, 82 -2 29 0 29 -2 December C 637 302 i 0 Fl; 0 606 162 1875 15 1 875 0 17443 57 january Ku"a,q;j 2 1 6 2 FE, .gz . C, 24 12,630 4 -0 2e punwonF k"q"W! sVsVM 437 8 1 63 -179 3 1.02 i J 2957 52 1.76 2V300 44 0,54 November BUMRgs 10639 0 4a 6204 -6 OAS 369 6 1,6 162 1 -0 87 17443 57 0 33 4AIS 22 006 newt& 197 6 254 43 1 -026 Seaember u Cj i npLo y i 3 02A 35 0 27 -2A67 1 x.015 154 2 E; -1 1-95 City Council Agenda: 2/12/2018 2A. Consideration of approving pavment of bills (WO) City staff submits the attached bill registers and purchasing card registers for approval by City Council. The bill registers contain all invoices processed and the purchasing card registers contain all card purchases made since the last Council meeting. Subject to MN Statutes, most invoices require Council approval prior to releasing checks for payment. The day following Council approval, payments will be released unless directed otherwise. A credit purchasing agreement and policy was approved by Council initially and card purchases must comply with the policy. If Council has no questions or comments on the bill and purchase card registers, these can be approved with the consent agenda. If requested, this item can be removed from consent and discussed prior to making a motion for approval. Al. Budget Impact: None A2. Staff Workload Impact: No additional work required B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve the bill and purchase card registers for a total amount of $966,309.31. 2. Motion to approve the registers with changes directed by Council. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends Alternative #1 or #2, per direction of Council. D. SUPPORTING DATA: 0 Bill registers and Purchase Card registers Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: Debbie.Davidson Printed: 02/01/2018 - 8:53AM Batch: 00203.02.2018 - 203.02 2018 Liquor Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Vendor: 3491 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Check Sequence: I ACH Enabled: False 3235013 resale - beer 110.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 110.20 Vendor: 1065 BELLBOY CORPORATION Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: True 62484500 resale -liquor 1,463.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 62484500 freight 19.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 62580400 freight 34.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 62580400 resale -liquor 2,298.85 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 62686800 resale -liquor 732.76 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 62686800 resale - wine 224.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 62686800 freight 13.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 62692200 freight 3.60 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 62692200 resale - liquor 104.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 97056900 freight 0.33 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 97056900 resale- mix 70.79 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 97096500 resale - bar set 9.75 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 97096500 freight 0.04 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 97128200 freight 1.05 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 97128200 resale - mix 156.30 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 97128200 resale - olives 72.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425500 Check Total: 5,204.17 Vendor: 1067 BERNICK'S Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: False 109377 resale - soda pop 88.55 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 109377 resale juice 32.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-425500 109378 resale -beer 1,669.85 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 112218 resale - beer -118.40 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 112219 resale - soda pop 82.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 112219 resale - juice 16.40 02/01/2018 609-49750-425500 112220 resale - beer 962.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 8:53 AM) Page I Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 115094 resale - soda pop 74.31 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 115094 resale - juice 32.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-425500 115095 resale - beer 2,290.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 83502 resale - beer 100.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 5,232.41 Vendor: 4328 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MN WINE & SPII Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: False 1080748898 resale - liquor 1,540.23 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 1080748898 resale- wine 504.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 1080748898 freight 35.48 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 1080748899 resale - beer 130.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 1080751943 resale - liquor 2,295.18 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 1080751943 resale- wine 203.60 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 1080751943 freight 26.30 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 1080752034 resale - beer 83.10 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 4,818.39 Vendor: 4646 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES L.P. Check Sequence. 5 ACH Enabled: True 2055335 resale - beer 21,894.55 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 2055335 resale - beer n/a 42.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 2055336 resale - beer 328.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 2058770 resale - beer 15,219.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 2058770 resale - wine 50.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 354-318 resale - beer credit -147.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 354-322 resale - beer credit -183.60 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 37,204.35 Vendor: 1095 CARLOS CREEK WINERY INC Check Sequence: 6 ACH Enabled: False 15002 resale- wine 156.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 Check Total: 156.00 Vendor: 4089 CARLSON & LYTER DISTRIBUTING, INC Check Sequence 7 ACH Enabled: True 617-0035 resale - beer 362.60 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 362.60 Vendor: 1129 DAHLHEIMER BEVERAGE LLC Check Sequence: 8 ACH Enabled: True 1327000 resale - beer 16,755.35 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 1327000 resale - beer n/a 180.65 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 166236 resale - beer- replace inv. 1322242 185.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 8:53 AM) Page 2 Invoice No Description 167651 Payment Date resale - beer 168105 3,907.10 resale - beer 168177 resale - beer credit 168202 609-49750-425200 resale- beer 168306 02/01/2018 resale - beer 168592 113.25 resale - beer 168592 resale - beer n/a 168715 609-49750-425200 resale - beer 168767 02/01/2018 resale - beer credit 61.25 Check Total: Vendor: 1662 FLAHERTY'S HAPPY TYME COMPANY 34202 609-49750-425200 resale - mix -23.00 02/01/2018 Check Total: Vendor: 4218 HOHENSTEINS, INC 941466 resale - beer 942667 Check Sequence: 9 resale - beer 57.00 02/01/2018 Check Total: Vendor: 1259 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING 2779082 resale - beer 2779082 Check Sequence: 10 resale - beer n/a 2779082 02/01/2018 freight 2779105 1,152.00 resale - beer 2779105 resale - beer n/a Check Total: Vendor: 1263 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 5917329 1,238.73 resale - liquor 5917329 freight 5917330 609-49750-425400 freight 5917330 02/01/2018 resale - wine 5917331 2,515.18 resale - beer 5918374 resale - liquor 5918374 609-49750-425400 freight 5918375 freight 5918375 resale - wine 5918375 ACH Enabled: False resale - mix 5920736 609-49750-425100 resale - liquor Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 3,907.10 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 59.70 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 -40.80 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 113.25 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 4,186.05 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 25,636.87 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 61.25 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 154.95 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 -23.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 51,176.37 Check Sequence: 9 ACH Enabled: False 57.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 57.00 Check Sequence: 10 ACH Enabled: False 531.14 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 1,152.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 1,683.14 Check Sequence: 11 ACH Enabled: False 1,238.73 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 55.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 3.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2,515.18 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 27.65 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 3,839.76 Check Sequence: 12 ACH Enabled: False 6,548 22 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 50.66 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 49.17 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 1,644.25 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 65.97 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 4,953.68 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 66.81 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 23.84 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 1,169.40 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 45.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 337.65 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 8:53 AM) Page 3 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 5920736 freight 4.47 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5920737 freight 62.58 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5920737 resale- wine 2,460.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 5922233 freight 47.67 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5922233 resale - liquor 3,486.32 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 5922234 resale - wine 1,562.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 5922234 resale- mix 114.70 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 5922234 freight 49.54 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5923324 freight 36.76 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5923324 resale - liquor 3,004.29 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 5923325 resale- wine 2,285.16 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 5923325 resale - mix 101.25 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 5923325 freight 63.81 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5925245 resale -liquor 341.04 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 5925245 freight 5.96 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5925773 freight 56.62 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5925773 resale -liquor 2,542 22 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 5925774 resale - wine 418.40 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 5925774 freight 13.41 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5927413 freight 63.10 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5927413 resale- liquor 5,714.86 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 5927414 resale- wime 2,193.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 5927414 freight 88.28 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5928491 freight 2628 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5928491 resale - liquor 2,712.46 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 5928492 resale- wine 604.70 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 5928492 resale- mix 100.49 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 5928492 freight 25.34 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 5928493 resale - beer 51.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 663998 freight creditinv.# 5918374 -4.47 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 663998 resale - liquor credit inv. # 5918374 -312.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 Check Total: 42,874.59 Vendor: 4456 LUPULIN BREWING LLC Check Sequence: 13 ACH Enabled: True 10453 resale - beer 252.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 10521 resale - beer 570.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 10555 resale - beer 270.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 1,092.00 Vendor: 1303 M AMUNDSON CIGAR & CANDY CO, LLP Check Sequence: 14 ACH Enabled: Trite 252087 resale - cigarettes 827.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-425500 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 8:53 AM) Page 4 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number 252087 resale - tobacco: soda pop; bottle wraps; etc 211.05 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 Check Total: 1,038.55 Vendor: 1427 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS CO Check Sequence: 15 2294548 resale - liquor 4,758.75 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 2294548 freight 70.03 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2294549 freight 22.35 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2294549 resale - wine 752.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 2295303 resale -liquor 1,935.12 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 2295303 freight 26.08 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2295304 freight 17.88 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2295304 resale- wine 544.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 2295304 resale - wine n/a 64.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 2296975 freight 8.94 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2296975 resale - liquor 517.45 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 2297905 resale - liquor 4,832.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 2297905 freight 61.08 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2297906 freight 22.35 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2297906 resale - wine 1,065.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 2297906 resale - wine n/a 116.25 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 2298645 resale - liquor 1,721.93 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 2298645 frieight 17.88 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2298646 frieight 19.86 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2298646 resale- wine 710.08 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 2300340 resale - liquor 1,997.70 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 2300340 freight 41.72 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2300341 freight 2.98 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2300341 resale- wine 82.75 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 2301334 resale - liquor 1,957.30 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 2301334 freight 28.31 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2302094 freight 25.83 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2302094 resale - liquor 2,499.40 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 284611 resale - liquor credit inv. 2290938 -19.75 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 284612 resale - liquor credit inv. 2266821 -7.69 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 284613 resale - liquor credit inv. 2281360 -2.24 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 284614 resale -liquor credit inv. 2289062 -9.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 284615 resale - liquor credit inv. 2290983 -11.20 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 Check Total: 23,870.14 Vendor: 4575 REPLENISHMENT SOLUTIONS LLC Check Sequence: 16 2037754 resale - beer 62.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425200 Reference ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 8:53 AM) Page 5 Invoice No Description Check Total: Vendor: 1188 TWAIT WINES, INC 2495 resale - wine Check Total: Vendor: 4781 RUE 38 LLC 2683 resale - wine 2683 freight 468.00 Check Total: Vendor: 3309 SOUTHERN GLAZER'S WINE AND SPIRITS 1639346 freight 1639346 resale - liquor 1639347 resale - wine 1639347 freight 1641867 freight 1641867 resale - liquor 1641868 freight 1641868 resale - wine Check Total: Vendor: 1188 TWAIT WINES, INC 2495 resale - wine Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 62.00 Check Total: Vendor: 1552 VIKING COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 2085787 resale - soda pop 2091713 resale - soda pop 468.00 Check Total: Vendor: 1684 VINOCOPIA 0198802 resale - wine 0198802 resale liquor 0198802 freight 0199275 resale - wine 0199275 resale - liquor 0199275 resale - beer n/a 0199275 freight 609-49750-433300 Check Total: Vendor: 1572 THE WINE COMPANY Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 62.00 Check Sequence: 17 ACH Enabled: False 468.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 7.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 475.50 Check Sequence: 18 ACH Enabled: False 15.75 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 1,357.95 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 1,043.03 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 16.45 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 21.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2,486.66 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 36.40 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 2,203.67 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 7,180.91 Check Sequence: 19 ACH Enabled: False 468.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 468.00 Check Sequence: 20 ACH Enabled: True 249.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 388.75 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 637.75 Check Sequence: 21 ACH Enabled: True 277.33 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 90.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 7.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 840.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 148.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425100 120.00 02/01/2018 609-49750-425400 25.50 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 1,508.33 Check Sequence: 22 ACH Enabled: True AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 8:53 AM) Page 6 Invoice No 60326 60326 Vendor: 1573 7168368 7168368 Description resale - wine freight Check Total: WINE MERCHANTS INC freight resale - wine Check Total Total for Check Run: Total of Number of Checks: Amount 160.00 5.00 165.00 14.90 690.24 705.14 189,922.30 23 Payment Date Acct Number 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 Check Sequence: 23 02/01/2018 609-49750-433300 02/01/2018 609-49750-425300 Reference ACH Enabled: False The preceding list of bills payable was reviewed and approved for payment. Date: 2/12/18 Approved by Mayor Brian Stumpf AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 8:53 AM) Page 7 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: Debbie.Davidson Printed: 02/01/2018 - 10:59AM Batch: 00215.01.2018 - 215.01 2018 Xcel/CPE Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Vendor: 4263 CAYAN Check Sequence: I ACH Enabled: True 536515 Dec. 2017 (16,289) Transaction Fee 1,140.23 01/31/2018 609-49754-443980 536515 Dec. 2017 (3) Genius Service Fee - cc machine r 89.85 01/31/2018 609-49754-424100 Check Total: 1,230.08 Vendor: 1102 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: True 1/31/2018 5843395 -5 -DMV 31.36 01/31/2018 217-41990-438100 1/31/2018 5863599 -6 -Animal Shelter 184.90 01/31/2018 101-42700-438100 1/31/2018 5806932-5 - Parks - River St 73.81 01/31/2018 101-45201-438100 1/31/2018 5821009 -5 -Fire Station 456.68 01/31/2018 101-42200-438100 1/31/2018 5864452-7 - Library 709.04 01/31/2018 101-45501-438100 1/31/2018 5788570-9 - Hi Way Liquor 468.35 01/31/2018 609-49754-438100 1/31/2018 5804618-6 - Parks - Fallon Ave 16.98 01/31/2018 101-45201-438100 1/31/2018 5768542 -2 -City Hall 241.28 01/31/2018 101-41940-438100 1/31/2018 5768542 -2 -MCC 5,579.53 01/31/2018 226-45126-438100 1/31/2018 5768542 -2 -Senior Center 90.48 01/31/2018 101-45175-438100 1/31/2018 5768542-2 - National Guard 120.64 01/31/2018 101-42800-438100 1/31/2018 5828859-8 - City Hall (Storage Garage) 91.52 01/31/2018 101-41940-438100 1/31/2018 8235331 -9 -Prairie Center 135.31 01/31/2018 101-41941-438100 1/31/2018 8235333-5 - Prairie Center 104.04 01/31/2018 101-41941-438100 1/31/2018 8000015233-2 - WWTP 4,674.01 01/31/2018 602-49480-438100 1/31/2018 5799425 -Pubic Works 283.48 01/31/2018 101-43127-438100 1/31/2018 5799427 - Public Works 109.89 01/31/2018 101-43127-438100 1/31/2018 5820786 - Public Works 150.21 01/31/2018 101-43127-438100 1/31/2018 5837384 -Public Works 1,215.30 01/31/2018 101-43127-438100 Check Total: 14,736.81 Vendor: 4394 DAXKO, LLC Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: True 11/01/2017 PWC CC Gateway Fees - Nov 103.20 01/31/2018 226-45122-443980 12/01/2017 PWC CC Gateway Fees - Dec 133.50 01/31/2018 226-45122-443980 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 10:59 AM) Page I Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Check Total: 236.70 Vendor: 2439 DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT & ECON DEVELO Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: True Qtr 4 2017 Qtr 4 2017 Unemployment Benefits 90.92 01/31/2018 101-43120-414200 Qtr 4 2017 Qtr 4 2017 Unemployment Benefits 3,936.25 01/31/2018 101-45201-414200 Check Total: 4,027.17 Vendor: 2405 WELLS FARGO - Monthly Charges/Returns Check Sequence: 5 ACH Enabled: True January 2018 Wells Fargo account interest earnings 12/2017 -2,443.05 01/31/2018 101-00000-362110 January 2018 Wells Fargo account interest earnings 12/2017 2,443.05 01/31/2018 101-41520-443980 January 2018 MCC CC Fees (WF- Front Desk) 1,697.41 01/31/2018 226-45122-443980 January 2018 MCC CC Fees (WF- Online) 79.87 01/31/2018 226-45122-443980 January 2018 MCC CC Fees (iAccess- Forts Mkt) 177.35 01/31/2018 226-00000-220100 January 2018 Liquor Store CC Fees (WF) 7,927.45 01/31/2018 609-49754-443980 January 2018 Liquor Store CC Fees Adj. (WF) 24.00 01/31/2018 609-49754-443980 January 2018 City Hall CC Fees (WF) 225.59 01/31/2018 101-41520-443980 January 2018 Utility CC Fees (Bluefin) 1,255.84 01/31/2018 601-49440-443980 January 2018 Utility CC Fees (Bluefin) 1,255.83 01/31/2018 602-49490-443980 January 2018 Utility CC Fees (AmEx) 75.23 01/31/2018 601-49440-443980 January 2018 Utility CC Fees (AmEx) 75.23 01/31/2018 602-49490-443980 January 2018 MCC ACH Return 1/ 16/18 207.50 01/31/2018 226-00000-115031 January 2018 MCC CCReturn 1/2/18 51.00 01/31/2018 226-45122-443200 Check Total: 13,052.30 Vendor: 1585 XCEL ENERGY Check Sequence: 6 ACH Enabled: True 1/31/2018 51-6572904-0 - WWTP 14,955.70 01/31/2018 602-49480-438100 1/31/2018 51 -6505906 -1 -Sewer 1,675.81 01/31/2018 602-49490-438100 1/31/2018 51-0395766-0 - Pu nphouse 405 Ramsey 513.23 01/31/2018 601-49440-438100 1/31/2018 51-4271112-2 - Library 12/2-1/6/18 1,048.33 01/31/2018 101-45501-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505907-2 - Parking Lots 217.58 01/31/2018 101-43160-438100 1/31/2018 ZZZNEP-IMPLEM- 51-6505908-3 - Civil Defei 17.31 01/31/2018 101-42500-438100 1/31/2018 51 -6505909 -4 -DMV &Food Shelf 214.86 01/31/2018 217-41990-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505910-7 - IIi-Way Liquor 1,529.52 01/31/2018 609-49754-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505911-8 - City Hall 1,602.01 01/31/2018 101-41940-438100 1/31/2018 51 -6505911 -8 -MCC 7,256.16 01/31/2018 226-45126-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505911-8 - Senior Center 376.94 01/31/2018 101-45175-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505911-8 -National Guard 188.47 01/31/2018 101-42800-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505912-9 - Animal Shelter 98.25 01/31/2018 101-42700-438100 1/31/2018 51 -6505912 -9 -Fire Station 455.81 01/31/2018 101-42200-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505914-1 -Shop/Garage 911.60 01/31/2018 101-43127-438100 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 10:59 AM) Page 2 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 1/31/2018 51-6505915-2 - Parks 1,301.30 01/31/2018 101-45201-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505915-2 - Water - Ice Rink 374,28 01/31/2018 601-49440-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505915-2 - ballfld lights NSP - Consc & Se 16.97 01/31/2018 101-45203-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505915-2 - ballfld lights NSP Softball Asso 218.58 01/31/2018 101-45203-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505916-3 - Streets 10/31-12/3/ 17 13,011.62 01/31/2018 101-43160-438100 1/31/2018 51-0371645-4 - Swan Cam 17.76 01/31/2018 101-45201-438100 1/31/2018 51-7780310-4- Bldg.lnspec. Garage 45.73 01/31/2018 101-41940-438100 1/31/2018 51-9391437-3 - 118 W. 6th St Bldg. 249.33 01/31/2018 101-41941-438100 1/31/2018 ZCULPS-EXPENS- 51-0623082-8- 349 Brdwy 17.31 01/31/2018 213-46522-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505905-0- Water 10/2-31/17 7,924.55 01/31/2018 601-49440-438100 1/31/2018 51-6505907-2 - Auto Protective light 11/28-12/2 76.45 01/31/2018 101-43160-438100 Check Total: 54,315.46 Total for Check Run: 87,598.52 Total of Number of Checks: 6 The preceding list of bills payable was reviewed and approved for payment. Date 2/12/18 Approved by Mayor Brian Stumpf AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/01/2018 - 10:59 AM) Page 3 Accounts Payable Computer Check Proof List by Vendor User: Debbie.Davidson Printed: 02/07/2018 - 12:52PM Batch: 00204.02.2018 - 204.02 2018 AP Invoice No Description Vendor: 2087 ALL -WAYS HEATING AND AC INC 6099 Replaced Transformers in Both Systems 6165 Check Sequence: 1 Replaced Inducer Motor, Cleaned Trap & Repair Enabled: False Check Total: Vendor: 1977 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC 75807 (6) NiMH FM Battery 75988 101-41941-440100 (3) belt clip Check Total: Vendor: 1030 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER INC 75726 repair pager- keypad; totentiometer: nameplate; e 75727 Check Sequence: 2 repair pager- LCD display; pad shock 76196 False repair pager: replc. belt clip- no freight ch. 76197 101-42200-421990 reprogrammed pager 76199 repair pager; replaced belt clip 02/13/2018 101-42200-421120 Check Total: Vendor: 1036 APEC AQUISITIONS INC 122201 Filters 16x123 (6) Check Total: Vendor: 1044 ASCAP 12/8/2017 False 2018 Public Play License for Music 02/13/2018 101-42200-440440 Check Total: Vendor: 4899 DESIREE ATCHISA 2/5/2018 101-42200-440440 Refund Daily Pass 2/5/2018 Refund Daily Pass AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Check Sequence: 1 ACH Enabled: False 582.00 02/13/2018 101-41941-440100 896.00 02/13/2018 101-41941-440100 1,478.00 Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: False 523.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-421990 47.50 02/13/2018 101-42200-421120 570.50 Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: False 193.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-440440 288.12 02/13/2018 101-42200-440440 133.75 02/13/2018 101-42200-440440 35.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-440440 145.75 02/13/2018 101-42200-440440 795.62 Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: True 188.52 02/13/2018 226-45126-422990 188.52 Check Sequence: 5 ACH Enabled: False 341.00 02/13/2018 226-45122-443700 341.00 Check Sequence: 6 ACH Enabled: False 11.64 02/13/2018 226-45127-347900 0.86 02/13/2018 226-00000-208100 Page I Invoice No Description Check Total: Vendor: 1186 BDG INC 22050 Crown Intake Tube 8" x 7' Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 12.50 Check Total: Vendor: 1065 BELLBOY CORPORATION 62727900 resale -wine 62727900 resale -liquor 62727900 freight 97139800 freight 97139800 resale - olives Check Total: Vendor: 1067 BERNICK'S 110061 Resale - Pop, Water, Muscle Milk 112856 Resale - Pop, Water, Juice, Muscle Milk 609-49750-425300 Check Total: Vendor: 3632 BRIAN BRAMLEY 10101 labor -ERS- SCBA flow test 10101 materials- ERS- SCBA flow test 10187 ERS- dba- Control Module 10205 ERS- dba- (4) Fire Dex srist glove 10210 ERS- dba- warranty rephont. valve shipping 10234 parts; ERS- dba- knob -line valve for SCBA 10234 laborERS- dba- knob -line valve for SOBA 161.47 Check Total: Vendor: 4328 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MN WINE & SPIF 1080755100 resale - liquor 1080755100 resale - wine 1080755100 resale - mix 1080755100 freight 396.00 Check Total: Vendor: 4646 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES L.P. 2061479 resale - beer Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 12.50 Check Sequence: 7 ACH Enabled: True 376.05 02/13/2018 602-49490-422100 376.05 Check Sequence: 8 ACH Enabled: True 88.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 52.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425100 5.40 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 0.07 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 16.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425500 161.47 Check Sequence: 9 ACH Enabled: False 223.00 02/13/2018 226-45125-425411 396.00 02/13/2018 226-45125-425411 619.00 Check Sequence: 10 ACH Enabled: True 52.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-421990 65.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-421990 12.66 02/13/2018 101-42200-422110 352.28 02/13/2018 101-42200-421120 23.80 02/13/2018 101-42200-421990 8.02 02/13/2018 101-42200-421990 52.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-421990 565.76 Check Sequence: 11 ACH Enabled: False 2,223.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425100 553.96 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 36.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425400 46.07 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 2,859.03 Check Sequence: 12 ACH Enabled: True 9,419.17 02/13/2018 609-49750-425200 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 2 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 2061479 resale - beer n/a 21.40 02/13/2018 609-49750-425400 Check Total: 9,440.57 Vendor: 4089 CARLSON & LYTER DISTRIBUTING, INC Check Sequence: 13 ACH Enabled: True 617-0040 resale - beer 219.50 02/13/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 219.50 Vendor: 1106 CENTRAL MCGOWAN INC Check Sequence: 14 ACH Enabled: True 00016444 Monthly Tank Rental 65.00 02/13/2018 226-45124-421600 00174978 Bulk Carbon Dioxide (362 lbs) 99.40 02/13/2018 226-45124-421600 Check Total: 164.40 Vendor: 4315 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS Check Sequence: 15 ACH Enabled: False 2/1/2018 Digital Receiver 7.95 02/13/2018 101-41110-431990 Check Total: 7.95 Vendor: 1746 CUSTOM FIRE APPARATUS INC Check Sequence: 16 ACH Enabled: True 18008 Engine 4- four-way air valve; rocker 76.49 02/13/2018 101-42200-422110 18012 Engine 4 -valve 39.75 02/13/2018 101-42200-422110 18028 Engine 4 - Primer motor 530.10 02/13/2018 101-42200-422110 Check Total: 646.34 Vendor: 1129 DAHLHEIMER BEVERAGE LLC Check Sequence: 17 ACH Enabled: True 168825 resale - beer 2,188.30 02/13/2018 609-49750-425200 Check Total: 2,188.30 Vendor: 2050 DEMVI LLC Check Sequence: 18 ACH Enabled: False 1/22/2018 Jan & Feb Parking Lot Easement Maint Agreeme 145.21 02/13/2018 213-46301-443990 Check Total: 145.21 Vendor: 1153 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Check Sequence: 19 ACH Enabled: True 567409 201806 - Otter Creek PH Ad# 775670 110.76 02/13/2018 101-41910-435100 568092 Health & Wellness Ad #772378 290.00 02/13/2018 226-45122-434990 570295 201806 - Revised - Otter Creek PH Ad# 779729 110.76 02/13/2018 101-41910-435100 Check Total: 511.52 Vendor: 1170 FASTENAL COMPANY Check Sequence: 20 ACH Enabled: False AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 3 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference MNMON105999 (10) small suppies 7.18 02/13/2018 101-43120-421990 Check Total: 7.18 Vendor: 2561 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #2516 Check Sequence: 21 ACH Enabled: False 0268891 (650) Neptune Radio Readers - cc approved I I-1 69,641.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-422701 Check Total: 69,641.00 Vendor: 4901 KATHLEEN & MICHAEL FROSLIE Check Sequence: 22 ACH Enabled: False 2/6/2018 Earnest Money Deposit for Property (a; 103 Pine 10,000.00 02/13/2018 213-00000-157010 Check Total: 10,000.00 Vendor: 1413 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC Check Sequence: 23 ACH Enabled: True 8000584 2018 Annual Facility Operator Fee- 1/2 Water 25.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-432770 8000584 2018 Annual Facility Operator Fee- 1/2 FNM 25.00 02/13/2018 656-00000-202099 Check Total: 50.00 Vendor: 1205 GRAINGER INC Check Sequence: 24 ACH Enabled: False 9684569446 50 ft 3/16" Cable (2) 54.62 02/13/2018 226-45126-422990 Check Total: 54.62 Vendor: 3684 GREATER MSP Check Sequence: 25 ACH Enabled: False Portal -2018-5 Annual Fee 2018 Greater MSP Salesforce Comn 450.00 02/13/2018 213-46301-443300 Check Total: 450.00 Vendor: 1223 HAWKINS INC Check Sequence: 26 ACH Enabled: True 4214506 Aluminum Sulfate Liquid - WWTP 6,279.17 02/13/2018 602-49480-421990 4215853 Pool Chemicals 1,098.77 02/13/2018 226-45124-421600 4215855 Pool Chemicals 17.74 02/13/2018 226-45124-421600 4216940 (9) 150# cyl chlorine; (315) ga Hydro Acid; (521 7,399.04 02/13/2018 601-49440-421600 Check Total: 14,794.72 Vendor: 1232 HILLYARD INC MINNEAPOLIS Check Sequence: 27 ACH Enabled: False 602847112 Stainless Steel Cleaner (I case/12); Nutra Rinse 169.93 02/13/2018 226-45126-421990 Check Total: 169.93 Vendor: 1239 HOGLUND BUS COMPANY INC Check Sequence: 28 ACH Enabled: True 128512 Pumper- diagnose; repair- turbo charger; actuato 8,265.17 12/31/2017 101-42200-440500 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 4 Invoice No Description 830985 Tack w/ housor - Sewer Je-tvac Check Total: Vendor: 4218 HOHENSTEINS, INC 944180 resale - beer 944362 resale- beer AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Amount Check Total: Vendor: 1242 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFICE 01182018 Acct 1400-017-223-399 fuel slips 12/21/17 thru 2779130 Check Total: Vendor: 4545 HYDRO KLEAN, LLC 59393 Materials- (101) gal grout - manhole 59393 Labor - (13.75) Iran prep-. Manhole seal/grout 5931298 Check Total: Vendor: 3971 INTL UNION OF OPER ENGINEERS LOCAL March 2018 March Health Insurance - Union March 2018 March Health Insurance AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Amount Check Total: Vendor: 1259 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING 2779130 resale - beer 2779130 resale - beer n/a 2779130 freight Check Total: Vendor: 1263 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 5931298 resale - liquor 5931298 freight 5931299 freight 5931299 resale - wine 609-49750-425200 Check Total: Vendor: 4900 JESSICA KAUFOLD 1/30/2018 Swim Refund 1/30/2018 Swim Refund AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 326.24 02/13/2018 602-49490-422100 8,591.41 Check Sequence: 29 ACH Enabled: False 415.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425200 127.50 02/13/2018 609-49750-425200 542.50 Check Sequence: 30 ACH Enabled: True 853.27 02/13/2018 101-42200-421200 853.27 Check Sequence: 31 ACH Enabled: False 2,020.00 12/31/2017 602-49490-431990 3,293.75 12/31/2017 602-49490-431990 5,313.75 Check Sequence: 32 ACH Enabled: False 12,540.00 02/13/2018 101-00000-217061 53,276.00 02/13/2018 101-00000-217061 65,816.00 Check Sequence: 33 ACH Enabled: False 1,952.43 02/13/2018 609-49750-425200 50.40 02/13/2018 609-49750-425400 3.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 2,005.83 Check Sequence: 34 ACH Enabled: False 1,407.87 02/13/2018 609-49750-425100 23.84 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 13.41 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 793.55 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 2,238.67 Check Sequence: 35 ACH Enabled: False 6.29 02/13/2018 226-45127-347900 0.46 02/13/2018 226-00000-208100 Page 5 Invoice No Description Check Total: Vendor: 3829 STEVE LANGANKI 1094 11/29-12/26/2017 Porta Toilets service Check Total: Vendor: 2626 HARRY LANTTO Jan 2018 EDA Meeting Recording 1/10/18 Jan 2018 City Council Meeting Recording 1/g/ 18 & 1/22/ Check Total: Vendor: 1270 KENNEDY AND GRAVEN CHARTERED MN 190-00101 General EDA Matters through 12/31/17 MN325-00034 220 W Broadway through 12/31/17 MN325-00036 224 East 4th St through 12/31/17 MN325-00037 255 E Broadway St through 12/31/17 Check Total: Vendor: 3829 STEVE LANGANKI 1094 11/29-12/26/2017 Porta Toilets service Check Total: Vendor: 2626 HARRY LANTTO Jan 2018 EDA Meeting Recording 1/10/18 Jan 2018 City Council Meeting Recording 1/g/ 18 & 1/22/ Amount Payment Date Acct Number 6.75 Check Sequence: 36 551.00 Check Total: Vendor: 1291 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 34761 Work Comp Ins Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp his Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Conip Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Conip Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16- 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Conip Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Conip Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Conip Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Conip Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 34761 Work Conip Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 Amount Payment Date Acct Number 6.75 Check Sequence: 36 551.00 12/31/2017 213-46301-430400 63.96 101-41110-415100 12/31/2017 213-46301-430400 880.50 28.00 12/31/2017 213-46301-430400 133.00 12/31/2017 12/31/2017 213-46301-430400 1,628.46 Check Sequence: 37 388.50 12/31/2017 101-45201-431990 388.50 Check Sequence: 38 60.00 02/13/2018 213-46301-431990 120.00 02/13/2018 101-41110-431990 180.00 Reference ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: False AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 6 Check Sequence: 39 8.00 12/31/2017 101-41110-415100 98.00 12/31/2017 101-41310-415100 28.00 12/31/2017 101-41410-415100 111.00 12/31/2017 101-41520-415100 29.00 12/31/2017 101-41800-415100 41.00 12/31/2017 101-41910-415100 873.00 12/31/2017 101-42200-415100 106.00 12/31/2017 101-42400-415100 295.00 12/31/2017 101-43110-415100 316.00 12/31/2017 101-43115-415100 1,611.00 12/31/2017 101-43120-415100 474.00 12/31/2017 101-43125-415100 163.00 12/31/2017 101-43127-415100 77.00 12/31/2017 101-43130-415100 801.00 12/31/2017 101-45201-415100 86.00 12/31/2017 101-46102-415100 33.00 12/31/2017 213-46301-415100 101.00 12/31/2017 217-41990-415100 557.00 12/31/2017 226-45122-415100 367.00 12/31/2017 226-45124-415100 593.00 12/31/2017 226-45126-415100 Reference ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: False AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 6 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 505.00 12/31/2017 601-49440-415100 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 21.00 12/31/2017 601-49441-415100 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 517.00 12/31/2017 602-49490-415100 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 21.00 12/31/2017 602-49491-415100 34761 Work Comp Final Audit 10/10/16 - 10/10/17 692.00 12/31/2017 609-49754-415100 Check Total: 8,524.00 Vendor: 1229 MARRS ADVERTISING & DESIGN INC Check Sequence: 40 ACH Enabled: True 1497 Colored Envelopes (5.000) 558.80 02/13/2018 226-45122-421990 Check Total: 558.80 Vendor: 3745 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY Check Sequence: 41 ACH Enabled: True 20586240 (605) gal. diesel a) $2.75 1,664.84 02/13/2018 101-43120-421200 20586243 (211) gal. unleaded (1% S2.35 495.84 02/13/2018 101-43120-421200 20595873 (20 1 ) gal. unleaded (iii $2.40 481.72 02/13/2018 101-43120-421200 20595876 (687) gal. diesel (a $2.78 1,908.96 02/13/2018 101-43120-421200 Check Total: 4,551.36 Vendor: 4548 MILLS FLEET FARM Check Sequence: 42 ACH Enabled: False 2/2/2018 16D002 - Mills Fleet Farm Escrow Refund 43,479.21 02/13/2018 101-00000-220110 Check Total: 43,479.21 Vendor: 1330 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS Check Sequence: 43 ACH Enabled: True 400451001759 Dec 2017 - Monti Pawn Transactions (172) 154.80 12/31/2017 101-42100-431990 Check Total: 154.80 Vendor: 2160 MINNESOTA POLLUTIION CONTROL AGED Check Sequence: 44 ACH Enabled: False 2/5/2018 MS4 Stormwater Pen -nit 400.00 02/13/2018 101-43130-443990 Check Total: 400.00 Vendor: 4174 MN PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY Check Sequence: 45 ACH Enabled: True 1/19/2018 MPFA-15-0004-R-FY16 - Semi Annual Repaym 10,263.72 02/13/2018 602-49480-461100 Check Total: 10.,263.72 Vendor: 1370 MONTICELLO DEPUTY REG #002 Check Sequence: 46 ACH Enabled: False 1/23/2018 Duplicate Plate - 86 Trailer Plate: 187981 14.50 02/13/2018 101-43120-443700 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 7 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 8 Check Total: 14.50 Vendor: 1375 MONTICELLO PRINTING INC Check Sequence: 47 ACH Enabled: True 01/19/18 (1000) No. 10 envelopes- PW 267.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-422701 Check Total: 267.00 Vendor: 1373 MONTICELLO SCHOOL DISTRICT #882 Check Sequence: 48 ACH Enabled: False 2743 Middle School Flashing Light Cost Share - 2017 84.13 12/31/2017 101-43160-438100 Check Total: 84.13 Vendor: 2518 NEOFUNDS BY NEOPOST Check Sequence: 49 ACH Enabled: False 2/4/2018 Postage Purchased 2/1/18 1,000.00 02/13/2018 101-00000-155010 2/4/2018 Postage for Pkgs to Dept Public Safety - Jan 201 145.35 02/13/2018 217-41990-432200 2/4/2018 Postage for Pkg for Fire Dept to Ancom Comm 6.52 02/13/2018 101-42200-432200 2/4/2018 Postage D Cole Reimbursed 1/30/18 Receipt #0( 17.36 02/13/2018 101-41310-432200 Check Total: 1,169.23 Vendor: 4897 NEOGOV Check Sequence: 50 ACH Enabled: False INV23212 Insight Enterprise HR Software; Includes: Licen: 6,358.00 02/13/2018 101-41800-431900 Check Total: 6,358.00 Vendor: 1401 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS Check Sequence: 51 ACH Enabled: True 23414 Jan 2018 - Technical Assistance - City Projects 2,783 24 02/13/2018 101-41910-431990 23415 201804 - Target Store Remodel - Jan 2018 907.50 02/13/2018 101-00000-220110 23415 201806 - Otter Creek 6th Addition Plat - Jan 201 346.50 02/13/2018 101-00000-220110 23416 Jan 2018 - Technical Assistance - Meetings 150.00 02/13/2018 101-41910-431990 23417 Jan 2018 - Tech Assistance - CCD Zoning Distrii 1,966.24 02/13/2018 101-41910-431990 Check Total: 6,153.48 Vendor: 1775 NORTHWESTERN POWER EQUIPMENT CO Check Sequence: 52 ACH Enabled: False 180019TE Resrvr. #4 (2) clay valve repair- last rep. 1989 893.94 02/13/2018 601-49440-422100 Check Total: 89394 Vendor: 4368 OFFICE DEPOT INC Check Sequence: 53 ACH Enabled: True 101757068001 bulletin board; (2) 4pk 9volt; ext. cord 84.05 02/13/2018 101-43120-421990 101757249001 5pk notes 8.29 02/13/2018 101-43120-421990 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 8 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number 92.34 1,572.00 99.00 1,671.00 12,259.00 462.32 12.721.32 5,312.00 5,312.00 579.00 8.75 587.75 231.15 231.15 1,495.00 1,495.00 1,884.15 53.00 52.66 2,157.04 23.05 1.49 36.00 -89.50 Check Sequence: 54 02/13/2018 226-45122-424100 02/13/2018 226-45122-421990 Check Sequence: 55 12/31/2017 601-49440-453010 02/13/2018 226-45126-431990 Check Sequence: 56 02/13/2018 702-00000-431900 Check Sequence: 57 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 Check Sequence: 58 02/13/2018 226-45125-425410 Check Sequence: 59 02/13/2018 702-00000-431900 Check Sequence: 60 Check Total: Vendor: 1858 OFFICENVIRONMENT BROKERS INC 25682 609-49750-433300 U Shaped Office Desk w/Hutch, Tack Board & F 25682 02/13/2018 Keys for Desk Set 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 Check Total: Vendor: 1411 OLSON & SONS ELECTRIC INC 55863 Well #2- Install new elec. service w/ Xcel- cc app 56408 Inspect & Change Bearings (2) on Pump #2 Check Total: Vendor: 4345 OPG -3 INC 2370 Laserfiche Software Assurance Plan (LSAP) - 3/ Check Total: Vendor: 1273 PAUSTIS & SONS WINE CO 8619129 resale - wine 8619129 freight Check Total: Vendor: 4633 PERFORMANCE FOOD GROUP INC 50806324 Cheese Sauce for Concession Check Total: Vendor: 2783 PERMITWORKS LLC 2018-0029 Jan - Dec 2018 Permits & Inspections Software! Check Total: Vendor: 1427 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS CO 2302095 resale - wine 2302095 resale - mix 2302095 freight 2304003 resale - liquor 2304003 freight 2304004 freight 2304004 resale - wine 286193 resale - liquor credit inv. #2300340 Amount Payment Date Acct Number 92.34 1,572.00 99.00 1,671.00 12,259.00 462.32 12.721.32 5,312.00 5,312.00 579.00 8.75 587.75 231.15 231.15 1,495.00 1,495.00 1,884.15 53.00 52.66 2,157.04 23.05 1.49 36.00 -89.50 Check Sequence: 54 02/13/2018 226-45122-424100 02/13/2018 226-45122-421990 Check Sequence: 55 12/31/2017 601-49440-453010 02/13/2018 226-45126-431990 Check Sequence: 56 02/13/2018 702-00000-431900 Check Sequence: 57 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 Check Sequence: 58 02/13/2018 226-45125-425410 Check Sequence: 59 02/13/2018 702-00000-431900 Reference ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: False AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 9 Check Sequence: 60 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 02/13/2018 609-49750-425400 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 02/13/2018 609-49750-425100 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 02/13/2018 609-49750-425100 Reference ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: False ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: True ACH Enabled: False AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 9 Invoice No Description 286193 freight credit inv. 92300340 Amount Payment Date Check Total: Vendor: 4898 GLEN POSUSTA 1/25/2018 609-49750-433300 Refund - Unused Portion Temp Sign Permit Check Total: Vendor: 3574 PREFERRED TITLE INC FlIeN0 0 100 1 -18 Closing on Property (h, 255 East Broadway FileNo 0100 1 -18 Fees - Closing on Property (a; 255 East Broadwa Check Sequence: 61 ACH Check Total: Vendor: 1450 RAILROAD MANAGEMENT CO III LLC 360028 License #301483 3/9/18- 3/8/19 18" Storm Ware 360029 45.00 License #301484 3/9/18- 3/8/19 12" Stonn Wate Check Total: Vendor: 4769 RECREATION BY LF,MMIE JONES LLC RLJ2017-049 ACH Spray Structure/Water Tabke/Water Dome 10% 1 False 106,000.00 Check Total: Vendor: 1455 RED'S MARATHON 01/10/18 1,350.50 (3) battery- Streets 213-00000-157010 Check Total: Vendor: 4022 REINHART FOODSERVICE LLC 175483 Food for Concession Resale 182158 Food for Concession Resale Check Sequence: 63 ACH Check Total: Vendor: 1474 PATRICIA A SALZWEDEL Feb 1st Semi Monthly Contract Payment 214.01 Check Total: Vendor: 4719 SCHMITZ EXCAVATING 1370 428.02 1821 85th St NE- Excavator remove barn roof- c Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference -1.49 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 4,116.40 Check Sequence: 61 ACH Enabled: False 45.00 02/13/2018 101-42400-322600 45.00 Check Sequence: 62 ACH Enabled: False 106,000.00 02/13/2018 213-00000-157010 1,350.50 02/13/2018 213-00000-157010 107,350.50 Check Sequence: 63 ACH Enabled: False 214.01 12/31/2017 263-49200-431990 214.01 12/31/2017 263-49200-431990 428.02 Check Sequence: 64 ACH Enabled: True 9,976.50 12/31/2017 226-45124-458010 9,976.50 Check Sequence: 65 ACH Enabled: False 375.00 02/13/2018 101-43120-422100 375.00 Check Sequence: 66 ACH Enabled: True 373.84 02/13/2018 226-45125-425410 363.45 02/13/2018 226-45125-425410 737.29 Check Sequence: 67 ACH Enabled: True 1,593.75 02/13/2018 101-42700-431200 1,593.75 Check Sequence: 68 ACH Enabled: True 1.000.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-431990 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 10 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 1,000.00 Check Total: Check Total: Vendor: 2192 SERVICEMASTER OF ST CLOUD INC 130313 Check Total: Cleaning Services - Jan 2017 - MCC 130313 861090033M90710 Cleaning Services - Jan 2017 - City Hall 130313 EPCRA Program- storage year 2017 Facility # 1: Cleaning Services - Jan 2017 - IIead End 130313 861090033M90716 Cleaning Services - Jan 2017 - Prairie Center 130313 Check Total: Cleaning Services - Jan 2017 - Library TASC 101-41941-431990 Check Total: Vendor: 2497 SIIERBURNE WRIGIIT CABLE COMMISSIC 2/6/2018 6,313.00 Cable PEG Fees - TDS/Bridgewater Q4 2017 2/6/2018 Cable Franchise Fees - TDS/Bridgewater Q4 201 Check Sequence: 70 Check Total: Vendor: 1490 CYNTHIA R SIMPSON 965216 8,959.46 Jan 2018 cleaning service 101-00000-208020 Check Total: Vendor: 3309 SOUTHERN GLAZER'S WINE AND SPIRITS. 1644533 resale - liquor 1644533 100.00 freight 1644534 freight 1644534 resale - sale Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 1,000.00 Check Total: Vendor: 2564 SPORTS PRO LLC 122 Parts - WO# 217 - Switch -Treadmill; Handle Sul Check Sequence: 69 Check Total: Vendor: 1505 STATE OF MN -DEPT PUBLIC SAFETY 861090033M90710 EPCRA Program- storage year 2017 Facility # 1: 861090033M90712 EPCRA Program- storage year 2017 Facility # 1: 861090033M90714 EPCRA Program- storage year 2017 Facility # 1: 861090033M90716 EPCRA Program- storage year 2017 Facility # 1: 656-00000-202099 Check Total: Vendor: 1516 TASC Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference 1,000.00 Check Sequence: 69 ACH Enabled: False 3,380.00 02/13/2018 226-45126-431990 580.00 02/13/2018 101-41940-431990 490.00 02/13/2018 656-00000-202099 433.00 02/13/2018 101-41941-431990 1,430.00 02/13/2018 101-45501-431990 6,313.00 Check Sequence: 70 ACH Enabled: True 1,676.20 02/13/2018 101-00000-208020 8,959.46 02/13/2018 101-00000-208020 10,635.66 Check Sequence: 71 ACH Enabled: False 100.00 02/13/2018 101-42200-431990 100.00 Check Sequence: 72 ACH Enabled: False 1,063.76 02/13/2018 609-49750-425100 13.81 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 35,23 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 2,166.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 3,278.80 Check Sequence: 73 ACH Enabled: True 105.00 02/13/2018 226-45126-422990 105.00 Check Sequence: 74 ACH Enabled: False 100.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-443700 100.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-443700 100.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-443700 100.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-443700 400.00 Check Sequence: 75 ACH Enabled: False AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page I 1 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference IN1200347 3/1/18 - 3/31/18 - Admine Fees 74.40 02/13/2018 101-41800-413500 Check Total: 74.40 Vendor: 4459 JAMES THARES Check Sequence: 76 ACH Enabled: True 1/29/2018 Mileage Reimbursement - Jan (151,5 miles) EDE 82.57 02/13/2018 213-46301-433100 Check Total: 82.57 Vendor: 4895 TRI MARK HOCKENBERGS Check Sequence: 77 ACH Enabled: False 99NOWC asst bags; cs. Kleenex; cs. canlinem es. t.tissue 337.64 02/13/2018 609-49754-421990 Check Total: 337.64 Vendor: 4859 TRIO SUPPLY COMPANY Check Sequence: 78 ACH Enabled: False 431861 es. Dawn: (4)cs. pap. twL es. can liner 181.60 02/13/2018 101-45201-421650 Check Total: 181.60 Vendor: 1552 VIKING COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Check Sequence: 79 ACH Enabled: True 2097425 resale - soda pop 219.25 02/13/2018 609-49750-425400 Check Total: 219.25 Vendor: 1684 VINOCOPIA Check Sequence: 80 ACH Enabled: True 0199776 resale - liquor 1,602.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425100 0199776 resale - wine 96.00 02/13/2018 609-49750-425300 0199776 freight 16.50 02/13/2018 609-49750-433300 Check Total: 1,714.50 Vendor: 1561 WATER LABORATORIES INC Check Sequence: 81 ACH Enabled: False 6650 Jan 2018 Water Testing 272.00 02/13/2018 601-49440-422740 Check Total: 272.00 Vendor: 4896 LUKE & ANGELA WENNER Check Sequence: 82 ACH Enabled: False 1/26/2018 Membership Refund 1,009.55 12/31/2017 226-45127-347910 1/26/2018 Membership Refund 74.45 12/31/2017 226-00000-208100 Check Total: 1,084.00 Vendor: 4798 WIN DEVELOPMENT LLC Check Sequence: 83 ACH Enabled: False 2/2/2018 ZUNION - Mattress Firm/AT& T - Escrow Refu 16,875.00 02/13/2018 101-00000-220110 AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Page 12 Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference Date: 2/12/18 Approved by AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Mayor Brian Stumpf Page 13 Check Total: 16,875.00 Vendor: 1577 WRIGHT CO AUDITOR-TREAS - ACH Check Sequence: 84 ACH Enabled: True February February 2018 Deputies Contract 105,120.00 02/13/2018 101-42100-430500 Check Total: 105,120.00 Vendor: 1581 WRIGHT CO RECORDER Check Sequence: 85 ACH Enabled: False 201800000011 201740 - CUP Jones #A 1362029 46.00 02/13/2018 101-41910-431990 Check Total: 46.00 Vendor: 1584 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC Check Sequence: 86 ACH Enabled: True 001494-950 40 140002 - Phosphorus Construction Admin - Dec 959.00 12/31/2017 602-00000-165010 002596-010 36 General Engineering Services Phase 5 - Dec 201 2,660.00 12/31/2017 101-43111-430300 002596-010 36 General Engineering Services Phase 5 - Dec 201 2,660.00 12/31/2017 601-49440-430300 002596-010 36 General Engineering Services Phase 5 - Dec 201 2,660.00 12/31/2017 602-49490-430300 002596-030 27 Maps - Dec 2017 189.00 12/31/2017 101-43111-430300 002596-040 28 GIF Support Services - Dec 2017 366.00 12/31/2017 702-00000-431990 002596-100 31 15C001 - 2016 Street Reconstruction Project - D 3,093.50 12/31/2017 400-43300-459011 002596-160 24 150004 - 7th Street/TH25 Intersection Improven 2,473.00 12/31/2017 400-43300-459014 002596-300 6 160004 - CR 39/Gillard Ave Intersection hnproN 1,008.00 12/31/2017 400-43300-459017 002596-340 15 2016 - 2017 Market Matching - Dec 2017 700.00 12/31/2017 213-46301-431990 002596-360 15 16C003 - 2017 Street Improvements - Dec 2017 3,795.00 12/31/2017 400-43300-459016 002596-390 10 201706 - Monticello Specialty Cline - Dec 2017 981.00 12/31/2017 101-43111-430300 002596-400 12 160006 - Fallon Ave Improvements - Dec 2017 60,125.55 12/31/2017 400-43300-459018 R010151-000 6 17D003 -ESCROW- Featherstone 3rd Addition - 976.00 12/31/2017 101-00000-220110 R010438-000 6 170001 - Chelsea Road Utility & Street Improve 24,575.00 12/31/2017 400-43300-430300 R010454-000 6 17C002 - 7th Street & Cedar Street Improvemen 99.00 12/31/2017 400-43300-430300 Check Total: 107,320.05 Total for Check Run: 688,788.49 The preceding list of bills payable was reviewed and approved for payment. Total of Number of Checks: 86 Date: 2/12/18 Approved by AP -Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (02/07/2018 - 12:52 PM) Mayor Brian Stumpf Page 13 City Council Agenda 2/12/2018 2B. Consideration of approving new hires and departures for Citv departments (TE) /� 9 9111916 lrl► 4 W.11►1171YXI G lI T6106111� The Council is asked to ratify the hiring and departures of employees that have occurred recently in the departments listed. It is recommended that the Council officially ratify the hiring/departure of all listed employees including part-time and seasonal workers. By ratifying departures, the council also approves the expenditure for final amounts due to terininated and otherwise departing employees. Al. Budget Impact: (positions are generally included in budget) A2. Staff Work Load Impact: If new positions, there may be some training involved. If terminated positions, existing staff would pick up those hours, as needed, until replaced. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to ratify the hire/departures of the employees as identified on the attached list. 2. Motion to deny the recommended hires and departures. C. RECOMMENDATION: By statute the City Council has the authority to approve all hires/departures. City staff recommends Alternative # 1, for the Council to approve the hires and/or departures as listed. D. SUPPORTING DATA: 0 List of new/tenninated employees NEW EMPLOYEES Name Title Department Hire Date Abigail Draack Lifeguard MCC 1/18/2018 PT Allana Staryszak Lifeguard MCC 1/25/2018 PT Tracy Yoe Guest Service MCC 1/25/2018 PT Jamie Forstie Childcare MCC 1/29/2018 PT Morgan Roden Climbing Wall MCC 1/29/2018 PT Victoria Brandt Climbing Wall MCC 1/29/2018 PT Raina Schmidt Childcare MCC 1/30/2018 PT Samantha Perovich Childcare MCC 2/2/2018 PT Joshua Joung Slide MCC 2/5/2018 PT Amanda Walker Guest Service MCC 2/5/2018 PT Myranda Turner Guest Service MCC 2/6/2018 PT Julie Lane DMV Clerk DMV 2/9/2018 PT TERMINATING EMPLOYEES Name Reason Department Last Day Kassandra Wander Voluntary MCC 11/30/17 PT Nikole Kako Involuntary MCC 1/1/18 PT New Hire and Terms City Council 2018.xlsx: 2/6/2018 Class Class City Council Agenda 2/12/2018 2C. Consideration of approving the sale or disposal of surplus Citv property (WO) There is no report this City Council cycle. City Council Agenda: 02/12/2018 2D. Consideration of approvinu appointments to the Monticello Parks and Recreation Commission to fill vacancies (TP) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: City Council is asked to appoint three representative to the Parks and Recreation Commission. The applicants are Anna Bohanon, Julie Jelen, and Lynn Anderson. The Commission approved these appointments at their last meeting in January. These appointments fill vacancies caused by recent resignations. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve the appointments to the Parks and Recreation Commission of- Anna £Anna Bohanon for a term to commence immediately and expire December 31, 2018; Julie Jelen for a term to commence immediately and expire December 31, 2019; and Lynn Anderson for a term to commence immediately and expire December 31, 2020. 2. Motion to deny the appointments at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City Staff and the Monticello Parks and Recreation Commission recommend Alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: • Applications Name ionticeflo, it not otherwise speci following boards. Industrial and Economic Development Committee (Does not require residency) City Planning Commission Library - P 8it sand ecreation Commission Economic Development Authority (May not require residency) Transportation Advisory Committee Education. Highest Level of Education Emboy merat Current Employer, if applicable h Position/Title I Dates of Employment (starting/ending) A ) Former Employer, if applicable Position/Title A -7, Dates of Em - A e- yloyment (starting/endiqg) I - -7-A N 4 C _ 1)13 4 S i 141 I�j 6 C66f J�' t 0 OQLS,- 14UC-! -36t K'64 Other Pase describe in detail why yo a7r, interested in volunteering for the City of Monticel A- sty -Y Y11 0-,y)( k IV, 4-o a_ .1 Please describe your prior volunteer experience (in lude organizati n na 'es and dales of service) TS A 1'7t4 W uo? .Sri Ke 6 Ojkd) 4F DQ N6(Q t3(, de P & C D)'`� 6ntz tb -:5�, 1 q R t^ z 6 �UIM T C- MTS e4t4-( List yourqu=tnTs6rthis apppin en : al 0 Ov e)'a�' C it, 6( V �2 viULL a -,LLA. LL L \q ilk rences Please list three non -family members who can provide references on your ability to perform this volunteer positon: Name Phone N Name Phone N Name, Phone N 'X) IMRMt .:.,= =� � •_ ,» s ��» ., z ,» s �; ��� s �d � ��� "k rVio Application.for Bonrds & Connnissions Name 1, v1K,,P,,- 5OLV4VLOV%- If not otherwise specified, you must be a resident of the City of Monticello to serve on the following boards, 0 Industrial and Economic Development Committee (Does not require residency) E? City Planning Commission 0 Library X Parks and Recreation Commission 0 Economic Development Authority (May not require residency) El Transportation Advisory Committee Highest Level of "-6 �� " Education r's Current Employer, if applicableWr,,Ak- CMA'n�'i� 0 Position/Title 4ea�— �Oww4�'d- Dates of Employment (starting/ending) /MAy 7-016 t'. G'V'vfA� Former Employer, if applicable Wy4rotA^-4- Position/Title 541 -7�ly )-Cw5 4 MO'7-016 Dates of Employment (starting/ending) -'/ No Please describe in detail why you are interested in volunteering for the City of Monticello, ,V\ L t 4l' J (A 4. ,W dt L 1, Please describe your prior volunteer experiences, (include organization names and dates of service) List your qualifications for this appointment: TA Please list three non-farnify members who can provide references on your ability to perform this volunteer positon: NameJL,�Ile I Phone Number Namjf,,�C, Phone Number Name Mi-Aclic, T,\06er4wPhone Number 1111 11�1�111 �Ig�iliii 1111111111 I understand that this is an application for and not a commitment or promise of volunteer opportunity. I certify that I have and will proviI e information throughout the selection process, including on this application for a volunteer position and in interviews with the City of Monticello that is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge, I certify that I have and will answer all questions to the best ► my ability and that I have not and will not withhold any information that would unfavorably affect my application for a volunteer position. I understand that information contained on my application will be verified by the City of Monticello, I understand that misrepresentation or omissions may be cause for my immediate rejection as an applicant for a volunteer position with the City of Monticello or my termination as a volunteer. Signature Date 1 �7 CITY Of M',ontf&,._'flO If not otherwise specified, you must be a resident of the City of Monticello to serve on the following boards. Industrial and Economic Development Committee (Does not require residency) Fib erNet Advisory Board pity [a ening Commi s s I o.9 Library Monticello Community Center Advisory Board Police Advisory Commission L- - —--1-1— '- ;-- '--I Parks Commissi - on Economic Development Authority (May not require residency) Transportation Advisory Committee JAU�11 0--1li`)c �frf�Highest Level of Education ffl(-S EMP!2yrneat A Current Employer, if applicable r? ' -'1'1(-. Position/Tille 15"' i"Ir Dates of Employment (starting/ending) S't", r -r h P" Former Employer, if applicable P'11["J 11411011"W'T') Position[Tifle Dates of Employment (startinglending) MM Please describe in detail why you are interested in volunteering for the City of Monticello, J­wmc' -1he, po_- .2-o yrs f-'7' f 4711, I A 0 KY i4 < lease describe your prior volunteer experiences (include organization names and dates of service) 91, 0 -XV i2e I I List your qualifications for this appointment, C� C Jf r( A < _1111e'� 01 V'111I � r'�- a 0 'qlj D1, 11Y, 47 References Please list three non -family members who can provide references on your ability to perform this volunteer positow N ame Phone Number N erne.. Phone Number Name Phone Number air I understand that this is an ««2«©»:»4? a commitment or promise of volunteer opportunity. I certify that I have and will provide information throughout the selection process, including on this application for a volunte»:»«2242a d in interviews with the City of Monticello that is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. I certify that I; and will answer all questions to the best of my ability and that I have not and will not withhold any information that would unfavorably affect my application for a volunteer position. I understand that information contained on my application will be verified by the City of Monticello. I understand that misrepresentatio«»:®»»«»: may be cause for my immediate rejection as an applicant for a volunteer position with the City of Monticello or. my termination as a volunteer. Da te Signature��— Return Codpieted App'li<tion to: Monticello City Hall, Attn: Human Resources, 505 Walnut St, Suite 1, Monticello, MN 55362 FAX: (763)295-4404 City Council Agenda: 02/12/2018 2E. Consideration of renewing membership in the I-94 West Corridor Coalition for 2018 in the amount of $6,568.00. (JO) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The City Council is being asked to consider making a financial contribution to the I-94 West Corridor Coalition in the amount of $6,568 for 2018. The City Council has previously approved this membership contribution for the purpose of raising awareness of the need for the development of expansion lanes to 1-94 and for soliciting state and federal funds necessary for the lane expansion. The attached documentation from the I-94 West Corridor Coalition provides detail on the group's successes and on-going initiatives. These include completion of the expansion of I-94 to three lanes in each direction from Rogers (TH 101) to St. Michael (TH 241) and funding under the Corridors of Commerce Program to complete design options for mobility for the expansion from St. Michael to Albertville. In addition, the Coalition has laid out a clear vision for legislative focus in 2018. These efforts will include working to sustain funding for the Corridors of Commerce program, which can serve as a funding source for future improvements to the I-94 corridor in the region. Efforts by the Coalition and other key stakeholders have been instrumental in raising the awareness of this corridor and securing the funding for these projects. The Coalition recognizes that they need to continue this momentum and is seeking the city's continued support for the expansion of I-94 to Monticello and then onto St Cloud. The Coalition, through continuing to advocate for additional lanes east and west will provide direct benefit to Monticello by: • Encouraging and supporting existing and future commercial, industrial and residential development. • Supporting the Bertram Chain of Lakes Regional Park and other regional park uses. • Supporting local, regional, and statewide recreational and hospitality industries. • Allowing the city to have a voice and vote within the coalition. • Better allowing the city to secure external funding for transportation projects by demonstrating increased regional benefits, which typically results in higher project rankings that are used to award funding. Al. Budget Impact: The membership dues total $6,568 based on Monticello's 2010 census population of 12,759. The funds have been budgeted for 2018 under the General Fund PW/Engineering budget under the membership line item. A2. Staff Workload Impact: City staff will continue to represent the city by attending all regularly -scheduled coalition meetings, plus other meetings as deemed necessary. City Council Agenda: 02/12/2018 1. Motion approving a contribution of $6,568 to the 1-94 West Corridor Coalition to renew the city's membership for 2018. 2. Motion to deny said request for funding. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1. The residents and businesses that reside within Monticello have much to gain from expansion of I-94 to six lanes. As noted by the IEDC and Transportation Advisory Committee in the past, the economic health and viability of our community depends on a free flowing I-94. Therefore, it would make sense that the City should be part of the I-94 team that is engaged in this proven successful effort and provide financial support accordingly. D. SUPPORTING DATA: • Invoice for 2018 and Information 2 January 1, 2018 Mayor Stumpf City of Monticello 501 Walnut Street, Suite I Monticello, MN 55362 INVESTMENT AMOUNT: 1-94 West Corridor Coalition Method of Pavment 0 CHECK - Payable to 1-94 West Corridor Coalition Check Number: Amount enclosed: $ MAIL TO: 1-94 West Corridor Coalition PO Box 95 Rogers MN 55374 I'Tun"A G REE N L I GH 7' FROM: City of Monticello 11 1-94 West Corridor Coalition 0January 1, 2017' 1-84West Corridor Coalition P.O.Box 95 Rogers, MN 55374 Dear Mayor Stumpf, Local businesses, units of government and organizations like yours are the lifeblood of Minnesota's economy, providing jobs and sustaining families in cities, towns and neighborhoods like the ones in which we work and live. The vitality of our local businesses depends greatly on the health of our infrastructure. It is because of this need that the 1-94 West Coalition was formed and why we are asking that you renew your membership. The 1-Q4West Corridor Coalition isapartnership ofbusinesses and local governments, formed tnprovide a strong, united voice to advocate for and address transportation concerns along the 1-94 corridor, from the Fish Lake Interchange toSt. Ooud. Our growing communities require foresight, planning, and relentless advocacy to ensure our region's transportation needs are not lost atthe Capitol. We experienced major success over the past years with the opening of additional lanes between Highway 101 in Rogers and Highway 341inSt. Michael, which have resulted inoGS96reduction intotal travel delay and the completion of nearly 3 million square feet of new industrial development in the region. Phase 11 has received $1.4 million in Corridors of Commerce funding for initial design and engineering for expansion from St. Michael to Albertville. 2018 will be an exciting year for the Coalition! During the 2017 legislative session, the legislatureaddeden additional $300 million in trunk highway bonds spread over four years and $25 million per year in cash to the Corridors of Commerce program. In response, MnDOT decided to select $400 million of projects in the next round of Corridors of Commerce funding. The 1-94 West Corridor Coalition intends to submit our eligible priority projects for the Corridors of Commerce funding selection which would greatly increase capacity and reduce congestion along the |-94Corridor. It is because of the involvement of organizations like yours, that the 1-94 West Corridor Coalition experiences remarkable support and success. 1-94 Coalition Members demonstrated their commitment to our region though billboard sponsorships, interviews, legislative testimonies, and much more. The support ofyour organization and many others has been phenomena[, and we look forward to working together in 201'bwith the renewal of your membership. Please find enclosed our priority projects map and an invoice to renew your membership, Membership benefits include: recognition on the new coalition website (greenlight94.com); email updates about coalition activities and transportation news; invitations to coalition events; and alerts about ways to get involved to further our efforts. Please con1octinfo@green|ight94.com or call the Coalition at6l2'S94-7S57for more information. Sincerely, Priority Proiects The 1-94 Corridor Coalition has achieved much over the past few years with the opening of the capacity expansion on 1-94 between Rogers and St. Michael, as well as the design options for St. Michael to Albertville. However, much work remains to unleash the power of the mobility along this crucial freight corridor. There are currently three projects of regional significance that are shovel -ready that would greatly increase capacity and reduce congestion along the 1-94 Corridor: St. Cloud Monticello Otsego SIC.` (0 1-94 CAPACITY EXPANSION From 4 to 6 -lanes between CR 19 in Albertville and Hwy 241 in St. Michael 4"M Albertville Dayton Aft= St. Michael Rogers (0 BROCKTON INTERCHANGE 5, Preparation fcr futon expansiCll Slated for expansion "Im 6101 TER 81 RV_J (:6 DIO Maple Grove Twin Cities City Council Agenda: 02/12/2018 2F. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-05 statim intent to reimburse from bond proceeds for the improvements to the fire station (WO) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The Internal Revenue Service requires the city to adopt a resolution declaring official intent to reimburse certain project expenditures from bond proceeds if it plans to issue bonds to finance project costs. By passing this resolution it would allow the city to include the fire station improvement project in a future bond issue. Without the resolution, the project could not be financed by bonds. Al. Budget Impact: By adopting the resolution, the city has the ability to include the fire station improvement project in a future bond issue. A2. Staff Workload Impact: There would be no impact on the staff by this action. If the city issues debt there would be staff time and consultant costs related to the bond issue. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2018-05 declaring the official intent to reimburse expenditures from the proceeds of bonds for improvements to the fire station. 2. Motion to not adopt a resolution declaring the official intent to reimburse expenditures from the proceeds of bonds at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff supports Alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Resolution 2018-05 B. Five Bugles Design cost estimate CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2018-05 DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE FIRE STATION WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has issued Treas. Reg. S 1.150-2 providing that proceeds of tax-exempt bonds used to reimburse prior expenditures will not be deemed spent unless certain requirements are met; and WHEREAS, the City expects to incur certain expenditures which may be financed temporarily from sources other than bonds, and reimbursed from the proceeds of a bond; WHEREAS, the City has determined to make this declaration of official intent ("Declaration") to reimburse certain costs from proceeds of bonds in accordance with the Reimbursement Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO (THE "CITY") AS FOLLOWS: The City reasonably intends to make expenditures for the projects described in Exhibit A (the "Projects"), and reasonably intends to reimburse itself for such expenditures from the proceeds of debt to be issued by the City in the maximum principal amount described in Exhibit A. All reimbursed expenditures will be capital expenditures, costs of issuance of the bonds, or other expenditures eligible for reimbursement under Section 1.150-2(d)(3) of the Reimbursement Regulations. 2. This Declaration has been made not later than 60 days after payment of any original expenditure to be subject to a reimbursement allocation with respect to the proceeds of bonds, except for the following expenditures: (a) costs of issuance of bonds; (b) costs in an amount not in excess of $100,000 or 5 percent of the proceeds of an issue; or (c) "preliminary expenditures" up to an amount not in excess of 20 percent of the aggregate issue price of the issue or issues that finance or are reasonably expected by the City to finance the project for which the preliminary expenditures were incurred. The term "preliminary expenditures" includes architectural, engineering, surveying, bond issuance, and similar costs that are incurred prior to commencement of acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of a project, other than land acquisition, site preparation, and similar costs incident to commencement of construction. 3. This Declaration is an expression of the reasonable expectation of the City based on the facts and circumstances known to the City as of the date hereof. The anticipated original expenditures for the Project and the principal amount of the bonds described in paragraph I are consistent with the City's budgetary and financial circumstances. No sources other than proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside pursuant to the City's budget or financial policies to pay such project expenditures. 4. The City Administrator is authorized to designate appropriate additions to Exhibit A in circumstances where time is of the essence, and any such designation shall be reported to the Council at the earliest practicable date and shall be filed with the official books and records of the City as provided in Section 3. 5. This resolution is intended to constitute a declaration of official intent for purposes of Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2 and any successor law, regulation, or ruling. ADOPTED BY the City Council this 12th day of February, 2018. CITY OF MONTICELLO Brian Stumpf, Mayor ATTEST: Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator EXHIBIT A TO OFFICIAL INTENT RESOLUTION 2018-05 ADOPTED February 12, 2018 DATE OF DECLARATION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 2/13/2017 FIRE STATION IMPROVEMENTS - including, but not limited to, construction of improvements and indirect costs, such as legal, engineering, administrative, right of way acquisition (land, etc.) and financing costs. Engineering costs includes survey, feasibility study, environmental documents, permitting, preliminary and final design, preparation of plans and specs, bidding administration, construction management, staking, inspection and material testing. MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF DEBT FOR PROJECT $ 3,900,000 ESTIMATES OF PROBABLE COSTS Following this section is an estimate of probable costs for, construction of the recommended solution that has been detailed in other sections of the report. There are few things the City and Deparlment should consider in reviewing these cosM * The costs are reflected in a low and high range due to the early nature of this work, It should be anticipated that the final cost of the project will be somewhere between these numbers. * The low and high range of the costs is created by comparing the historical costs of fire station development as tracked by Five Bugles Design and locally adjusted national costs as published by Engineering News Record. * The attached Statement of Probable Costs details construction costs plus all known or anticipated project costs including Site Development, Building Construction, FF & E, Technology, Contingend.'es and Professional Fees, * The projected costs represent costs anticipated for .2'017 construction, These numbers should be inflated by 3-5% for each year construction is deiayed, Probable Cost Summary I Element Low Range High Range I I 1� Site and Building $2,862,694 $2,97141:31 ' r Other Costs $869.228 1,296,172 Total $3,731,922 $4,269,185 In comparison a new 22,625 square foot fire station on City owned property would Likely cost between $6,000,000 and S7,000,000 in total project cost. M City Council Agenda: 2/12/18 2G. Consideration of authorizine distribution of request for proposals for architectural services relating to design and construction management of fire station addition. (JO/MM) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: City Council is asked to consider authorizing staff to formally begin the construction process for the fire station addition by approving the distribution of a request for proposal (RFP), included in packet, to potentially interested architectural firms. The City Council accepted a needs study completed by Five Bugles in February 2017, and identified construction of the addition as a priority project for the city. The concept plans derived from the Five Bugles study provides the basis of the design for the contracted architectural firm. Additionally, the RFP includes a requirement that the architect assess the potential of adding an ambulance bay and a storage/shop area for the Monticello Community Center. The ambulance bay would be used on a long-term lease basis by CentraCare-Monticello EMC and the MCC space would address unmet space needs. Within this RFP, City Council has the opportunity to address MCC/City Hall space needs on a limited basis as it is compatible with the function of the fire department. Request for inclusion of the Ambulance bay came at the request of the CentraCare- Monticello EMC Director. For more complete information on the nature of the project and projected cost of the addition, please review the Five Bugles study. The project is slated for construction in 2019 with plan development in 2018. Bond payments for this project are included in the capital improvement plan as presented at previous budget meetings. Simultaneously, staff will be initiating an environmental review process that will address the potential for petrol in the soils within the development footprint. There is a high probability of soil contamination in this area due to the historic use of the site. Clean up was necessary for the current station and MCC building. The timing of the cleanup will coincide with construction. Studies and acquisition of petrol -fund dollars will be completed by an alternate engineering firm. Cleanup activities will be added to the construction project. Quotes for phase I are currently being obtained. The Five Bugles Design Study estimated the total cost of the Fire Hall Addition at $3,731,902 to $4,269,185. The CIP has the project listed for construction and funding in 2019 at $4 million. This estimate did not include additional square footage that could result from the addition of a potential ambulance bay and storage/maintenance shop area. Al. Budget Impact: Total cost of the design and management of the project will be included in the proposals slated for review by the City Council at the second council meeting in March or the first council meeting in April. The city will utilize funds on hand to pay for the design effort with reimbursement to occur from bond proceeds. A2. Staff Workload Impact: A staff support team, led jointly by the Volunteer Fire Chief and City Administrator, will be established to facilitate the work of the architect. City staff will provide technical and administrative support through the process. City Council Agenda: 2/12/18 1. Motion to authorize distribution of Request for Proposal for architectural services related to design and construction management of the fire station addition. Staff will also obtain quotes and move forward with selection of company to conduct Phase I environmental study at an estimated cost of $2,600. 2. Motion to deny. [��lVR11WR5[-17151►I1511`11711011N, City Staff recommends Alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Request For Proposal B. 2017 Five Bugles Study ARCHITECTURAL/ENGINEERING SERVICES DESIGN FOR A FIRE HALL ADDITION Proposals are due in the office of the City Administrator, Jeff O'Neill 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, March 23, 2018 CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 505 WALNUT STREET MONTICELLO, MN 55362 February 12, 2018 February 12, 2018 To Whom It May Concern: The City of Monticello is seeking architectural and engineering services for an addition to its Fire Station at 303 West 6th Street. As described in the enclosed request for proposal, the city intends to add on to the fire station. This will be a competitive bid project. A pre -proposal informational meeting will be held at 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at the subject fire station located at 303 West 6th Street. Any questions regarding this proposal before and after the informational meeting should be emailed to the city's project coordinator at Jeff. ONeill a,ci.monticello.mn.us. The city will email its responses to all proposers. The enclosed request for proposal has been sent to the following 12 firms: • Brunton Architects • Buetow and Associates Architects • Collaborative Design Group, Inc. • DLR Group KKE • Duane R. Day Architects • Hay Dobbs • I&S Group • Joseph Conti Architecture • Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd. • Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc. • SJA Finn Daniels Architects • Tushie Montgomery Architects • Five Bugles Design Thank you for your attention. I look forward to reviewing your responses. Sincerely, Jeff O'Neill City Administrator PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The City of Monticello is seeking architectural and engineering service proposals for designing and engineering an addition to its fire station. The city's desire is to hire one team that will complete all aspects of design and engineering. The city is seeking architectural and engineering firms with considerable experience in design and engineering of fire stations to assist the city through design and construction of an addition to its fire station located at 303 West 6th Street. The city intends to start construction in the spring of 2019. The selected design team will work closely with the city's Fire Department and a city staff work group. In 2019, the city will conduct an environmental evaluation and associated site remediation activities. Preparation of design specifications and construction of the fire station addition will run parallel to the soils analysis and remediation process. The Overall project concept, scope, and budget are described in detail via the attached facility study for the Monticello Fire Department accepted by the City Council in 2017. The study estimated the project cost in a range from $3.8 to $4.3 million, including architectural fees. The consultant selected is expected to utilize the 2017 facility study as the basis for detailed design and specifications. However, the architect will have the liberty to suggest modifications to the original concept. In addition, the consultant will need to analyze the potential of adding a garage bay for an ambulance as well as a workshop and storage space needed by the adjacent Monticello Community Center. SCOPE OF SERVICES The design firm will: • Provide all design and engineering services including architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, and landscape for a project of this size, type, and scope for a competitively bid project. • Provide input and assistance concerning environmental, site survey, or other services required to move the project forward. • Attend all project meetings, including design meetings, working group meetings, City Council meetings, pre -construction meetings, and weekly construction progress meetings until completion of project. Provide exhibits in preparation for such meeting as needed. Provide meeting minutes and documentation of design meetings until construction begins. • Assist the city in the establishment of the overall master budget and overall project schedule. • Collaboratively work with the city to provide cost -benefit analysis, life cycle analysis, building system analysis, alternative materials, equipment and methods to provide the most economical, high-quality, sustainable facility possible for the City of Monticello. • Provide documents for estimating purposes at the various stages of design and engineering including schematic, design development, and construction documents. • Provide/present material selections and finishes to the work group and Planning Department. • Provide documents for various permits, state reviews, governmental reviews, etc. at the appropriate stages of the design process. • Collaboratively work with the city to provide coordination with all utility companies for utility relocations, disconnects for building demolition, and connections to new buildings. • Work with the city to develop a bidding strategy that is both economically advantageous and provides for timely completion of the project. • Define opportunities to address ancillary space use needs for the Monticello Community Center via the fire station addition. • Design to incorporate necessary elements of a functioning Emergency Operations Center, including back-up electrical generation, meeting space, and communication facilities. • Review parking/access and parking needs. • Provide potential alternatives that can be utilized during bidding as enhancement to the facilities or ensure compliance with the project budgets. • Provide construction administration including shop drawing/submittal review and comments, RFI, ASI, and RFP response and issuance to the owner, construction inspection/observation reports, change order cost review, pay application review, etc. until the project is completed. • Provide verification of punch list completion, review as-builts and operation and maintenance manuals, and coordinate with the test/balance and commissioning service for a complete close-out process. • Conduct a thorough review of the site to confirm the needs of the existing and future occupants. • Integrate sustainable building concepts, methods, and materials into the design as practicable. • Present design and recommendations to owner and Planning Department. • Provide construction plans, specifications, and bid documents to be used for bidding and construction of the fire station addition. Coordinate the front end specifications and special requirements with the owner. SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF MONTICELLO The city will: • Coordinate the municipal entitlement process (vacations, plats, etc.) • Maintain a cash flow analysis for this project. • Pay directly for the drawings and reproduction for bidding • Contract and bill vendors for testing and special inspection services required during the project 110`10] "'IU /110[170`0 J ZINVA 1110117 "I'Lei 1111 The city will provide any plans, surveys, soil borings, and other information it has available for the project sites at no cost to the consultants. A detailed timeline has not been finalized. This will be coordinated between the city and the selected architectural firm. It is the city's desire to begin and complete construction in 2019, with an early spring groundbreaking. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS The deadline for proposals is 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, March 23, 2018. Please submit five (5) paper copies and an electronic copy of the proposal for city review. Proposals should not exceed 25 pages and should provide the following information: 1. Clearly identify the firm, address, telephone number, contact person responsible for the proposal, and email address. 2. Provide relevant information about the firm, including how many years the Finn has provided architectural and/or engineering services. 3. Clearly identify all consultants proposed and each discipline specific consultants will be providing. 4. Provide relevant information about each proposed consultant, including how many years each has provided design or engineering services. 5. Provide background, training, and experience in design and construction of fire stations. 6. Clearly indicate the design team for the firm and who will be assigned to this project as principal, architect, engineer, project managers, etc. Resumes for consultants who will be permanently assigned to this project shall be included. 7. Provide a list of projects that are similar in type (i.e. fire stations, municipal buildings, governmental agencies/entities) and scope that the firm has completed in the last ten years. For the project identified, please provide the total construction cost and price per square foot, the name and telephone number of the owners' representatives on the projects, and your firm's principal and team for each project. 8. Provide an overview of your firm's understanding of, and approach to, the project. 9. Discuss what distinguishes your firm from others that might be considered for this project. 10. Identify firm's present workload, including projects in design or under construction. 11. List and describe your scope of services by bullet point. 12. Describe your firm's view of their role in owner/contractor disputes. 13. Present any additional information not requested that may be useful and applicable to the selection process. 14. Provide a basic draft, including diagram, of the project as you envision it. 15. Describe your professional fees, basic services and deliverables for programming, planning, designing, and engineering and construction administration. Professional fees should be provided as percentage of the construction costs and list any reimbursable expenses that are anticipated for this project. Use the following format: Anticipated Construction Cost $ Professional Fees $ Professional Fee/ Construction Cost % Reimbursable Expenses (Lump Sum) $ GRAND TOTAL (must not exceed) $ The selected A/E firm will be required to provide the professional fee and reimbursable expenses for billing purposes as below: • Conceptual/ Schematic Design • Design Development • Bidding and Construction Documents • Construction Administration • Post Construction/Project Close -Out Send responses to the project coordinator: Fire Stations A/E Proposal c/o Jeff O'Neill City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55337 SELECTION PROCESS Pre -proposal Information Meeting Consultants wishing to bid may attend a pre -proposal informational meeting. The meeting will be held at the City of Monticello's Fire Station located at 303 West 6th Street on Tuesday, March 6, 2018, 4:00 — 5:00 p.m. This will be the consultant's opportunity to ask any questions of available staff. Following the informational meeting, city staff will provide a tour of site. Before and after the pre -proposal meeting, any questions about the request for proposal shall be submitted via email to the project coordinator at Jeff. one 111 a,ci.monticello.mn.us. Staff will collect and review submitted questions and respond to all A/E providers simultaneously via email. Selection A selection committee, comprised of city staff will review all submissions. Selected firms will be invited for an interview. The tentative timeline for the selection process is as follows: • Pre -proposal informational meeting at fire station: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 • Submission Deadline: March 23, 2018 • Review of Responses: March 24, 2018 — March 30, 2018 • Notification of firms selected for interviews: March 30, 2018 • Interviews: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 • Appointment by City Council: April 9 or April 23, 2018 Acceptance/Refection of Proposals The City of Monticello intends to enter into a contract with the selected firm that best satisfies the needs of the city. This RFP does not commit the city to award a contract or share in any expenses of preparing these proposals. No Contact Proposers are prohibited from contacting any elected official for purposes of lobbying to secure this contract. Additional Information Each proposal will be evaluated based on the consultant's response to the RFP. Emphasis will be placed upon experience with similar projects, timeliness of the proposed schedule, project understanding, direct experience and time involved with municipal service consulting and fiscal requirements. City staff review may require additional information during the selection process. The City of Monticello will not be liable for any expense incurred by the consultant in preparing or submitting the proposal. The City of Monticello reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any irregularities in a proposal. Selected consultants will be contacted after city review of the proposals and scheduled for an interview. The selected firm will enter into a standard AIA contract (as modified by the city) with the City of Monticello. m MonticeHo, MN Fi,vE BU,GLE'S ArchimcmP.1 DcAgn fior Emagency ScrAccs a FlYeBugloDesigncom February 15, 2017 Michael Mossey, Fire Chief City of Monticello, MN 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 RE: Monticello Fire Department Facilities Study Dear Chief Gilles, Five Bugles Design respectfully submits the attached facilities study for the Monticello Fire Department. It has been a pleasure working with you and your department to develop the information contained herein. We thank you and your staff for taking the time to meet with us and participate in the effort of this study; the information provided that is specific to your department and its specific challenges is invaluable to making this report a comprehensive review of your existing facility, its current and future needs. Please review the attached study and its details. We are available to answer any questions you, your staff, and your community might have. Sincerely, Five Bugles Design Michael Clark, AIA Market Sector Leader BanburyPlue Buflding D04 Saftc 202, Mailbox 2 800 Wiscmsih Suva Eau Claim Wl 54705 .. 715.8:x , . - FAX 735.514:1860 4715 POgrim Lanc'kl MinncapoI4,UN 55442 @ 612-803773 o Fax 714.5141860 Fv'e Dosig ri iadimis`ar of ADG Arrhit-;= The Monticello Fire Department has been serving the community from the existing fire station at 303 West 6th Street in Monticello since approximately 1985. There has been growth in the community and hence within the Fire Department in the past 30 years, and while there have been some minor cosmetic and operations and maintenance type projects, there have not been any major expansions or reconfigurations of the facility. Interviews with the Fire Chief and the fire staff have developed the following basic pieces of information as direction for the study. The current location is assumed to be optimal for the next several decades. Response time is currently good. City growth is limited by a number of obstacles such as the Mississippi River to the north, Highway 94 to the south and the nuclear power plant to the west. These obstacles will present impediments to response no matter where the station would be located and therefor would suggest satellite stations rather than a relocation of the fire station. * The existing ladder truck is scheduled for replacement in the coming years. The -planned replacement vehicle will be larger than the current truck and will no longer fit in station. * Management and operations for the department have changed in the past 30 years. A single office is no longer adequate for planning, recording, and record storage for the department. ® The department's equipment has exceeded the capacity of the facility and a number of pieces of equipment are currently siting outside in trailers. Other equipment that is seasonal in nature is stored off site. * The department can foresee a time in the future when the consideration of a small complement of full-time staff, such as a fire chief, fire marshal or inspectors may become advisable in order to retain staff, maintain service and effectively manage the department given probable increases in equipment maintenance, training and reporting requirements. The purpose of the study is to examine the department's current space needs and to plan for the next several decades of fire service to the City of Monticello. Is 9071"S.1 The Five Bugles Design team met with the fire department on a number of occasions. The Fire Chief and staff provided detailed information regarding the age of the existing facility, and major maintenance upgrades that have occurred over time. The Monticello Fire Department team also provided information regarding current and future space needs. And finally Five Bugles Design's team of architects and planners reviewed the existing facility and recommended spaces and needs that are considered best -practice in the fire industry. The information we gathered was used by the team to develop an option for the expansion of the existing facility that solves those needs and issues that were uncovered. Square foot costs have been assigned for recommended construction and those numbers have been inflated to include all currently understood construction related costs including FF&E, technology, fees, inflation and contingencies. All projection of construction costs are based on a projected construction start of 2017 since there in no current construction plan. Any future planning should assume a range of 3- 5% inflation on total project cost annually per year of delay. 11 MAJOR FINDINGS: Facilities The following are some of the major findings of our review of the facility as well as the space needs study. 1. The facility is in fairly good physical condition with no obvious physical deterioration visible. Parking, drives, aprons and approaches all appear to be in relatively good condition. It is reported that the singe makeup air unit in the apparatus bay is original and it is uncertain if it is operational. The furnaces that serve the office areas were replaced in the past 10 years and remain in good condition. a It should be noted that more economical mechanical equipment maybe available for the facility that would reduce operational costs. An additional concern is the sloped roof structure. Several options for smaller additions at the current office/training location were investigated but invariably failed due to a need to revise roof structures above the existing apparatus bay. 2. There are several Americans with Disability Act Code violations, specifically in bathroom and shower areas that will need to be corrected if a major expansion or renovation is required. 3. The facility is crowded with all apparatus bays full and equipment parked at 90 degrees to travel paths. Two trailers are parked outside. Mechanical rooms are used for record and equipment storage. All officers share a single office. 4. Training options are mixed. The classroom type training space is in good condition and allows for a variety of audio and visual presentations. Physical training and operations training are limited and there is no fitness training. A small training tower exists, but is limited in its usefulness. Important training such as extraction, search and rescue, confined space, standpipe and fire protection system practice must all be performed off site. 5. There are several concerning practices that the design of the existing facility requires. While not specifically code violations, the following are NOT considered `best practice' operational procedures today: There is no direct vehicle exhaust system. This allows carcinogenic contaminant to build up in the air and settle on equipment and gear used on a regular basis by the firefighters. Turnout Gear is wall m ounted at the 'back' of the apparatus bays. This puts the gear in direct contact with the exhaust of the vehicles and can be dangerous when donning or removing gear as vehicles are backed into their spaces after a call. Equipment and gear decontamination spaces are generally located in the apparatus bays; this negates some of the gains of the decontamination processes and puts this activity in inappropriate locations meaning it gets used less than it should. -1) Project: Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN Date: September 28, 2016 ;Ladder/Snorkel 1'relesquirt IRescue Pumper lBoat/Traffer lArson Unit lUtility/Pickup IHaz Mat Trailer JHaz Mat -Diking" Doming )Portable Pump/Trailer ISnowmobile/ATVITraller (Firefighter Rehab Unit (Tanker )Command Vehicle JPortable Lighting lRescue Squad )Brush Buggy #31 = Casualty Devon/Cleanup - homeland IlVehicle Maintenance Bay Wash Bay Portable air and light unit )EMS Command Vehicle Ambulance Mass Casualty Trailer 'Phsyc Unit Total I= 45 1 X 1 16 720 90 X 16 1440 1011 1440 0 91) X 16 30 x 00 30 x 16 480 45 I x 16 720 0 22 x 16 352 35 I x 16 = 560 M� 0 20 x 16 320 0 x0 0 20 x 16 320 [5%n x 0 , 0 45 I x 16 I 720 35 x 16 $60 24 x 16 384 0 45 x 16 720 Q�M 24 x 16 = 384 0 24 x 16 384 0 20 16 320 °,M 40 x 16 640 0 70 X 0 0 24 x 16 384 0 x = 0 0 5D X 16 = 800 0 x0 0 25 x 16 400 0 1 4,9811 Existing Equipment Future Equipment See also Training for other Apparatus and Large Equipment �! 1 3 Project: Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN Date: September 28, 2016 M. ;Protective Gear Locker 240 2 1 x 4 8 ( 3: {Dirty Restroom 25 8 I x l 8 I 64 1 Hose/Training Tower 72 30 x ' 20 _ 600 1 Mezzanine 288 80 x 20 = ( 1000 1 ]Detached garage 300 x = 0 0 ]Walk-in med checked space 6 I x 8 ( = 48 0 {K-9 spaces 6 x 8 48 0 ]Work Room/SCBA 96 8 , x ( 11 88 ( 1 SCBA Clean and Fill Room I 8 I x 12 I 96 1 Hose Dryer I x l = 0 0 Commercial Laundry Room ' 15 10 x 10 = 100 1 ]Vehicle Maintenance Room 1 111 10 x 12 = 120 1 !EMS Report Writing I 8 x 12 = 96 0 ]EMS Storage 1 8 x 20 = 160 0 (Regulated Storage I 6 x( 6 - 36 0 Bio Hazard Control I 6 x( 6 36 0 Janitors Closet 113 6 x 4 = 24 1 1 lEquipment Decon 8 x ( 10 = 80 0 ITotal 1260 ser-comameo space wim vencuarion Some training/ Access issues/training 1 bay of City building (trailer, mise.) i Too small -replace and repurpose Hanging in tower Replace and repurpose Replace and repurpose I Stair, smokable, repelling 2,846 Apparatus Support Total (Pty) c i 2 2DIVII7 102ABON5.:<;01ssJ9. 4 Project; Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN Date: September 28, 2016 5 1 315 � 111! I'll 111 =9 i i ! ii Training Office 1 2 x I I ; 144 1 (Training Room 987 30 72x x 1 50 1500 1 45 people ITraining Storage (equip) I 0 1 20 406 1 1 Current at Farm house 11 1 i I Table and Chair Storage 10 I x 12 = 1 120 1 a Current Eisele Exercise/Wellness Room 15 f x 30 I = 450 1 Kitchenette 95 16 X 12 192 1 Update POC Shower/Locker Room 245 20 x 1 15 = 300 1 Update POC Shower/Toilets 8 x 10 I 80 0 f I I 3882.5 Includes efficiency ratio Proposed JAPPARATUS & EQUIPMENT 1 f 1 1 gay Mobile Live Burn TrIr (MLFTU) 60 f x60 1: 0 Mobile Training Tower (MTT) 60 x :60 1 0 Ventilation Tdr (Vent) 40 x 16 640 0 Driving Simulator (Driving) 40 1 x 16 640 0 Training 1 (Semi) 30 i x 16 480 0 Training 2 (Semi) f 30 x I 16 = 480 0 • Survive Alive Trailer 40 x 16 f = 640 1 0 Suburban (chief 3) 24 f x I 16 384 0 Pick up (Rehab) 24 x f 16 384 0 Pick up -104 24 x 16 = 384 0 Portable fighting 24 x 16 384 0 Boat and Trailer 35 x 1 16 = 560 0 snowmobile/ATV/Trailer 16 x 16 = 256 I 0 Includes efficiency ratio 1 1 � ITotal I I 1327 I I 1 i I I ( 3,883 Training Total (Ft2) 5 Project: Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN Date: September 28, 2016 Fire Chief 146 20 x 12 = 240 1 Inspector/Fire Marshal 16 x 12 = 192 0 Evidence Storage 6 x 8 = 48 0 Officers Office shared 16 x 12 = 192 1 Battalion Chiefs ( 30 x 10 = 300 0 Sleeping Room 10 x 13 = 130 I 0 Toilet shower 8 x 10 80 } 0 ,Captains Office 20 x 12 = ( 240 0 Ed Office 14 x 12 ( = 168 i 0 10ub Pub Ed Storage ' 6 i x 8 ( 48 1 JStudy/Work Area 8 x 10 = ( 80 0 Resource Library 2 x ( 10 = 20 1 Administrative Assist. Office 16 x 12 = 192 ( 0 Station Dispatch Office ( 46 16 x 12 = 192 1 1 POC Staging Area ! 8 ( x 12 = 96 I I 0 lFuture ! 16 1 x 10 1_1 160 0 Conference Room 20 x 20 400 0 dCommunicationsp/ IT 1" a „., 10 x I 20 I 200 1 Record/Re ort Storage p g 47 8 x 10 -80 1 :Mise. Office Suplies ' 4 x 6 24 1 'General Storage 0 8x 10 80 1 New Gear and Uniform Storages 8 x 16 - 128 0 Elevator ( 10 I x 20 = 200 0 Public Toilets ( 10 x 14 - 140 0 Janitors Closet 6 ( x ( 4 = 24 0 Entrance Vestibule ( 20 x 20 = 400 0 Stairs j 24 x 10 = ( 240 0 Law Enforcement Office ( 10 x 12 = 120 1 Historic Display j 20 x 40 - 800 1 Other x = I x� 239 ------- -_. 1 one 3 shared spaces One of officers above Closet in office spce Closet in office space Will utilize City staff Current is 4 x 4 ... update Shared in training room Update Currently in furnace room Office and break w/ own entrance 2,496 1 Administration/Office Spaces Total (Fe) NOTES: Fire Chiefs office is sized for an executive desk/credenza with separate table with seating for up to 4. ilrtt.. e r Q4 �51rrr �Rll!�� 6 Project., Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN iDay Room Kitchen Pantry IDining for 8-12 JBedroom ;'Restrooms/Showers POC Shower/Locker Room IPOC Shower/Toilets 11-inen Closet !Supply Closet iResidential Laundry Janitor's Closet - I i Date: Living Quarters Spaces 20 x 15 = 300 0 20 x 15 300 0 8 x 8 I 64 0 20x 15 3010 0 10 x 13 130 0 8 x 10 80 0 20 I x 15 300 I 0 8 x 10 = ao 0 6 x 8 43 0 4 x 5 20 I 0 8 x 10 :"30 0 6 x 6 0 September 28, 2016 0 Living Quarters Spaces Total (Ft2) Project: Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN Date: September 28, 2018 site EMS Staff Parking I 10 Public Parking 1 0 shared with City Hail Other Parking needs --�— a Fire Apparatus Apron x 0 EMS Apparatus Apron 0 Outdoor Training 0 Vehicle extraction space Outdoor Patio 0 Enclosed Dumpster 0 External Generator 0 17 KW new Storm Water Treatmentl ( 0 1 Heliport Pad 0 Extrication pavement 0 Other Other 1 Other f Other I I, I �— � I I � 1 i - , u !?gig ?0q i I b00 . L 9 5k.t y ! trx „ I , ,. aErc, , J! 78;32 4.S_ , 8 Project: Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN Date: September 28, 2016 ME IN 775" 77771-'-,� ,.,!77T EI III «has Apparatus Bays 1. Center to Center on existing bays is smaller than recommended Apparatus Support 1. 1000 SF Mezzanine Training 1. 900 SF Fitness Room Administration 1. 800 SF Historic Display 9 1,260 1.327 239 MR MAJOR FINDINGS: Space Needs The following issues were uncovered by the space needs portion of the study, were discussed with the team and used to inform the attached planning study. A space programming effort was led by Five Bugles. This effort examined in detail the needs of each of the five areas of major activities generally found in all fire departments: Apparatus Bays, Apparatus Support, Administration, Training and Living Quarters. A detailed breakdown of these spaces is included at the back of the report, however the space -needs can be summarized as follows: SPACE I EXISTING AREA 20 YR NEED Apparatus Bays 4,981 SF 9,581 SF Apparatus Support 1,260 SF 2,846 SF Administration 1,327 SF 4,445 SF Training 239 SF 2,495 SF Living Quarters 0 SF 0 SF * Mechanical and Elect. spaces Included above 2,905 SF Totals I 8,250 22,272 SF *Living Quarters are not anticipated in the current long term plan for the department, but it was considered prudent to plan for future additional space should it become necessary. The space needs study projecting the 20 year need essentially compares the spaces of the existing facility against what a new facility would include. This methodology allows us to compare the cost of additions and remodeling against the cost to replace the facility. This will be covered in the Cost section of the report A few additional comments on the above numbers: 1. A mechanical mezzanine of 1000 SF is included in the twenty year need as inexpensive space for mechanical rooms and training space. 2. The 4,500 square foot difference between existing and new apparatus bays reflects the larger size apparatus bays today versus what was considered the norm 30 years ago. Some observations regarding these numbers includes: Office space is severely lacking in the existing facility. Reporting, training and record keeping requirements have increased in the past 30 years and it is expected to continue to grow over the next 20 years. Adequate space for planning and record keeping should be planned into any future facility. Apparatus bays are not wide enough, too short and are all single entrance, back -in type with the exception of the one drive through for the ladder truck. Newer fire trucks have multiple side operated pumps, doors and compartments that must be opened, restocked or supplies checked at the station. Drive through bays reduce the amount of backing into station as well as provide for a more immediate response profile for first and second line equipment than the current station allows. Any new apparatus bays should be designed for drive through capacity and should be wide enough for two adjacent fire trucks to have side opening doors open simultaneously. 19 Decontamination equipment is not provided adequate space and is currently located in the apparatus bay ... adding to the contamination of the decontamination equipment. Consolidate this equipment into an enclosed and ventilated space. Gear is located in the apparatus bay. This leads to lack of proper ventilation for drying and subjects it to harsh, contaminated exhaust fumes shortening the life span of this expensive gear. If possible place turn out gear in a separate, well ventilated space. The facility lacks adequate training space for required physical types of training such as search and rescue, confined space, and other related exercises. Seek out inexpensive ways to add training opportunities to any newly constructed facilities. In summation the Space Needs portion of the work would indicate a need for a new facility at approximately 22, 272 square feet. This is comparable with facilities for similar sized departments in this region. Conversely an addition of approximately 14,000 square feet would provide the required square footage as detailed above. Corrections of approximately 2000 SF can be made to account for reuse of smaller than normal apparatus bays and other spaces in an addition and remodeling scenario. Therefore an anticipated size addition size of 12,000 gross square feet should be considered. 11 Working together with the Department our team developed several potential solutions to the space needs discrepancies that are detailed in the previous section. The results of those options are NOT presented here as they were considered failed attempts to solve the Departments long term needs. Those options that failed include: A small office expansion with two additional drive through bays. This option was considered feasible but only solved the department's needs for today. It did not take into consideration long term needs, did not resolve safety issues related to gear storage and decontamination, would curtail any future additions to the facility and did not allow for required parking. Major reconstruction of the office area to add adequate space for all issues and addition of two bays. This solution failed mostly due to the configuration of the existing roof. A major expansion on the north side of the building would require rebuilding the entire roof structure including that over the apparatus bays. This added cost and work was deemed to be a poor investment if other solutions could be found. Solutions were explored that tried to avoid impacting the Eisley building that shares the Fire Station lot. No solutions were found that could provide adequate parking on the site, meet the space needs and NOT call for the demolition of the Eisley building. At the end of this section of the report is a schematic plan with the proposed facility solution. The proposed solution detailed here provides the following benefits over others studied and will meet the needs of the department for an additional 20 years. I. Space is added as an addition versus building with substantial savings by reusing existing functional infrastructure. 2. Contiguous space is provided for turn out gear and decontamination processes. This will allow for the space to be adequately and separately vented from the apparatus bay and insure longer lasting, healthier gear for the fire fighters. 3. An enlarged office component is provided that provides the increased space required as a contiguous component that will aid in planning, record keeping and overall management of the department. It will also serve well if the department ever considers a full time fire chief or other staff. 4. An enhanced training element is added that includes a larger training room, expanded training tower and open space on a mezzanine for enhanced physical training elements such as confined space and search and rescue. S. The training room will be available to the pubic without impacting fire operations. It will also be large enough to host regional trainings; that could be used as a revenue source for the department. 6. The existing training room will be repurposed to display the department's historic truck as well as to serve as expanded training space for the department. WN r--' ------'-----'-------------'—'-------'-------'-----------'-- _ ! / \ | | | / | I ! o —, - 1Q -H �� " |— � . �o ____________________________________________________~_^' � | 13 —1 ar 0H | | -------------- " |— � . �o ____________________________________________________~_^' � | 13 = ar 0H | | " |— � . �o ____________________________________________________~_^' � | 13 14 Following this section is an estimate of probable costs for construction of the recommended solution that has been detailed in other sections of the report. There are few things the City and Department should consider in reviewing these costs: ® The costs are reflected in a low and high range due to the early nature of this work. It should be anticipated that the final cost of the project will be somewhere between these numbers. G The low and high range of the costs is created by comparing the historical costs of fire station development as tracked by Five Bugles Design and locally adjusted national costs as published by Engineering News Record. The attached Statement of Probable Costs details construction costs plus all known or anticipated project costs including Site Development, Building Construction, FF & E, Technology, Contingencies and Professional Fees. The projected costs represent costs anticipated for 2017 construction. These numbers should be inflated by 3-5% for each year construction is delayed, Probable Cost Summary Element LowRange High Range Site and Building $2,862,694 $2,973,013 Other Costs $869.228 $1,296,172 Total $3,731,922 i $4,269,185 In comparison a new 22,625 square foot fire station on City owned property would likely cost between $6,000,000 and $7,000,000 in total project cost, 15 Project: Monticello Fire Department Location: Monticello, MN Date: 29 -Nov -16 Other Sites Sub Total $0 $0 sio .1ity Extensions $0 $0 Un able Soils/Rack Removal Unsuitable 1 $0 $0 Natural Gas anti. 1 $0 $0 15000 Demo St.. Water 1 0 0 Site Improvements (hardscape) 15%-20% of building costs 1 $373,395 $509,252 Sub Total 1 I $373,395 $426,752 $426 752 40M • IRS Means (2014/2015) 10,850 $196.66 MMM $2 .1 33 .761 $2, =OEM Building Only Building Only Five Bugles Historic (2016) 10,850 $191.41 $2,076,799 1 Building Only Renovations 8,250 $50.00 $412,500 412500 Clean/Paint/Refurbish Demolition of Eisele Building $10,000 $15,000 Sub Total 12,A89,299 $2,546,261 FF&E of BuildingConstruction 1 2 49426359 $124,465 $203,701 Assumes mostly new Apparatus $0 $0 Others $50,000 $90,000 vehicle exhaust Sub Total $174,465 $293,701 Technology 3-5%. of Building Communcations $0 I $0 fff Radio, Tower, Repeaters, Etc Audo Visual Equipment Allowance $10,000 $15,000 Relocate E)dsting+Some Additional Sub Total 1 $84,679 1 $142,313 • Inflation to mid -point of construction 3%-5% total construction cost $93,655 $170,451 Assume spring of 2017 construction si Owners Contingency 5% of total construction costs I $160,775 $178,974 nforeseen Conditions, Owner Changes, Sub Total 1 i ArchitecturaVEngineering 7-9% of Construction Costs $239,088 $306,812 Geotechnical Studies I $15,000 $25,000 ( Commissioning $15,000 $35,000 LEED/Sustainability $0 Assumes no LEED requirement Hazardous Materials I $0 $0 Testing and Inspections $15,000 $25,000 During Construction Legal 2.54% of Costs $71,567 $118,921 Cost of borrowing, Aft. Fees, etc. Sub -Total I 1 1 $365,655 $510,733 16 City Council Agenda: 2/12/18 211. Consideration of authorizing Fire Department to initiate design process for ladder truck. (JO,MM) /� 904013114 millum9I1►17.1YXI GlItT6106111� City Council is asked to authorize initiation of the design process necessary for the development of bids and specifications of a ladder truck. The fire apparatus has been identifled as an important key public safety tool needed to address the commercial, industrial, and residential development of recent years. Fire Department staff, along with a truck designer, will identify features on the apparatus that best suit the department's needs. This information will aid in the development of design specifications. Additionally, it is probable the truck designer will also represent a company that will bid on the project. Staff involved in the design process is aware of this fact and the design of the vehicle is expected to be sufficiently general. This process of design, development, and bidding, has been used previously by the city. The design process will take place in 2018, ordering of the truck in 2019, and delivery in 2020 following completion of the fire station addition. The CIP identifies the cost at $1.1 M. However, based on most recent information, it is likely that the cost will be approximately $1.4 Million. Al. Budget Impact: None at this time. A2. Staff Workload Impact: Staff time necessary to assist with development of the design. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to authorize initiation of the design process necessary for the development of specifications and bids for a ladder truck. Historically, a member of the City Council served on the design team. Per Mayor and City Council, a representative could be appointment. 2. Motion to deny. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City Staff recommends Alternative #1 and the appointment of a council member to serve on the design tem at the discretion of Mayor and City Council. 0 None. Council Agenda: 2/12/2018 2I. Consideration of approval of fire contract renewals with Monticello Township and Silver Creek Township. (WO) /_x.1911101 I DIOU 15,1►1021TW 1 X" Zolyel Under a three-year contract, Silver Creek Township and Monticello Township currently pay $56.75 per parcel for fire protection coverage. Both townships have agreed to five- year agreements changing the per parcel amount to $61.00, a $4.25 or 7.5% increase. The agreements lock in the rate for the next five years. This rate has a higher frontend charge than a gradually increasing tiered rate. The prior three-year contract increased the rate by $3.25. Negotiations started in November with a meeting of the Silver Creek township supervisors. Staff followed that with a joint meeting of two members of both township boards. A subsequent meeting with the Monticello Township ended without a consensus. Further negotiations with the Silver Creek Township board resulted with the $61 proposal. The Monticello Township approved the same on February 5th Silver Creek Township's annual payment under the new agreement will be $37,088 (608 parcels @ $61.00) and Monticello Township's will be $104,554 (1714 parcels @ $61.00). Together, both agreements will bring in approximately $141,642. Growth in the number parcels occurs when lots subdivide and develop. The 2018 fire department budget is $414,328. 2017 Fire Activity Drills & Mutual Aid Maintenance 4°a 15% Silver Creek l Township 7% City Monticello 56% Township 18% Entity/Calls 2015 2016 2017 City 166 175 203 Monticello Township 61 65 67 Silver Creek Township 35 30 24 Mutual Aid 27 13 15 Drills & Maintenance 67 51 55 Total 356 334 364 Al Budget Impact: The agreements generate approximately $141,642 to defray fire department expenditures. A2 Staff Workload Impact: On average the fire department responds to 94 calls per year to the Monticello and Silver Creek Townships. Staff also prepares once week (drills and maintenance) for such calls. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve contract renewals with Monticello Township and Silver Creek Township for fire protection services at a per parcel rate of $61.00 for the years 2018 through 2022. 2. Approve contract renewals at some other rate to be determined. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The finance director recommends the approval of both five-year fire protection contract renewals offered to Monticello and Silver Creek Townships at a rate of $61.00 per parcel. D. SUPPORTING DATA: • Draft contracts 2 ratt"Tw"a I This AGREEMENT between the Citv of Monticello, Minnesota, hereafter referred to as the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT, and Township of Monticello, Minnesota, hereafter referred to whether in whole or in part as the TOWNSHIP, both agree as follows: ARTICLE I The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT agrees to furnish fire service and fire protection to all properties subject to the terms of this agreement, within the TOWNSHIP area, said area being set forth in EXHIBIT A, attached hereto. ARTICLE II The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT will make a reasonable effort to attend all fires within the TOWNSHIP area upon notification of such fire or fires, and under the direction of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Chief, subject to the following terms and conditions: A. Road and weather conditions must be such that the fire run can be made with reasonable safety to the firemen and equipment of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT. The decision of the fire chief or other officer in charge of the fire department at the time that the fire run cannot be made with reasonable safety to firemen and equipment shall be final. B. The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT shall not be liable to the TOWNSHIP for the loss or damage of any kind whatsoever resulting from any failure to furnish or any delay in furnishing firemen or fire equipment, or from any failure to prevent, control, or extinguish any fire, whether such loss or damage is caused by the negligence of the officers, agents, or employees of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT, or otherwise. ARTICLE III The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT further agrees: A. To keep and maintain in good order at its own expense the necessary equipment and fire apparatus for fire service and fire protection within the town area so serviced. B. To provide sufficient manpower in its fire department to operate fire equipment. C. To submit a summary to the TOWNSHIP on a monthly basis. Fi reAgreement2018-2022 r_I , SUMON►•A The TOWNSHIP agrees: A. To pay an annual fee of $61.00 in 2018 (through 2022) for each tax identification parcel as determined by the Wright County Assessor's and/or Wright County Auditor's office for such years as included in this agreement. These fees shall include all standby charges and fire call costs. The total annual fee for the first year of this contract is estimated to be $104,554.00 based on an estimated 1714 parcels at $61.00 each. The annual fee shall be adjusted for subsequent years for additional parcels added within the coverage area and at the same billing rate per parcel. B. To pay charges within 30 days of billing by the City of Monticello on a bi-annual basis. C. To comply with the false alarm ordinance of the City of Monticello. Any false alarm call to an individual or business that, in the opinion of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT, was the result of a defective or malfunctioning alarm system will receive a written notice outlining this policy, indicating a second false alarm call within the calendar year will subject the property owner to a $250 charge (or according to the City's current fee schedule). The notice will also indicate that three or more false alarms during the calendar year will result in the property owner being charged $350 (or according to the City's current fee schedule). This fee will be charged per the city's fee schedule. D. Any false alarm charge billed directly to an individual or business by the City under this agreement, which remains unpaid by December 31 s` of each year, shall become the responsibility of the TOWNSHIP for reimbursement to the City. E. All payments must be made in accordance with this schedule to render this agreement effective for each calendar year of the contract. W In case an emergency arises within the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT while equipment and personnel of the fire department are engaged in fighting a fire within the TOWNSHIP area, calls shall be answered in the order of their receipt unless the fire chief or other officer in charge of the fire department at the time otherwise directs. In responding to fire calls within the TOWNSHIP area, the fire chief or other officer in charge shall dispatch only such personnel and equipment as in his opinion can be safely spared from the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT. In cases where the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT receives a notification of an Fi reAgreement2018-2022 emergency other than a Ere, and its assistance is requested in the area defined in Exhibit A of this contract, it shall respond to such emergency in the salve manner as a fire as outlined in this contract. Charges for such service shall be as outlined in ARTICLE IV. ARTICLE VII The TOWNSHIP agrees to make a Ere protection tax levy or otherwise to provide funds each year in an amount sufficient to pay the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT the compensation agreed upon. ARTICLE VIII This AGREEMENT shall be in force for a term of five (5) years beginning on January 1, 2018, and ending on the 31 st day of December, 2022. This contract may be terminated upon a six- month notice by either party. CITY OF MONTICELLO By: Mayor Attest: City Administrator Fi reAgreement2018-2022 TOWNSHIP OF MONTICELLO By: Chairman Attest: Clerk 107_rll� EXHIBIT A - MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP This EXHIBIT is a part of the attached FIRE PROTECTION AGREEMENT, and its purpose is to designate the area covered under this AGREEMENT and referred to herein as the TOWNSHIP area. Therefore, the TOWNSHIP area, in which protection for fires is agreed to, involves the following sections, including platted areas, of the TOWNSHIP herein. Township 121N, Ranye 24W All or part of Sections 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 Township 121N, Ranee 25W All or part of Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 Township 122N, Ranae 25W All or part of Sections 19, 30, 31, 32 Total No. of Parcels as of 2017 billing: 1714 Fi reAgreement2018-2022 ratt"Tw"a I '111ill 1i This AGREEMENT between the Citv of Monticello, MN, hereafter referred to as the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT, and Township of Silver Creek, Minnesota, hereafter referred to whether in whole or in part as the TOWNSHIP, both agree as follows: ARTICLE I The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT agrees to furnish fire service and fire protection to all properties subject to the terms of this agreement, within the TOWNSHIP area, said area being set forth in EXHIBIT A, attached hereto. ARTICLE II The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT will make a reasonable effort to attend all fires within the TOWNSHIP area upon notification of such fire or fires, and under the direction of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Chief, subject to the following terms and conditions: A. Road and weather conditions must be such that the fire run can be made with reasonable safety to the firemen and equipment of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT. The decision of the fire chief or other officer in charge of the fire department at the time that the fire run cannot be made with reasonable safety to firemen and equipment shall be final. B. The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT shall not be liable to the TOWNSHIP for the loss or damage of any kind whatsoever resulting from any failure to furnish or any delay in furnishing firemen or fire equipment, or from any failure to prevent, control, or extinguish any fire, whether such loss or damage is caused by the negligence of the officers, agents, or employees of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT, or otherwise. ARTICLE III The MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT further agrees: A. To keep and maintain in good order at its own expense the necessary equipment and fire apparatus for fire service and fire protection within the town area so serviced. B. To provide sufficient manpower in its fire department to operate fire equipment. C. To submit a summary to the TOWNSHIP on a monthly basis. Fi reAgreement2018-2022 r_I , SUMON►•A The TOWNSHIP agrees: A. To pay an annual fee of $61.00 in 2018 (through 2022) for each tax identification parcel as determined by the Wright County Assessor's and/or Wright County Auditor's office for such years as included in this agreement. These fees shall include all standby charges and fire call costs. The total annual fee for the first year of this contract is estimated to be $34,504.00 based on an estimated 608 parcels at $61.00 each. The annual fee shall be adjusted for subsequent years for additional parcels added within the coverage area and at the same billing rate per parcel. B. To pay charges within 30 days of billing by the City of Monticello on a bi-annual basis. C. To comply with the false alarm ordinance of the City of Monticello. Any false alarm call to an individual or business that, in the opinion of the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT, was the result of a defective or malfunctioning alarm system will receive a written notice outlining this policy, indicating a second false alarm call within the calendar year will subject the property owner to a $250 charge (or according to the City's current fee schedule). The notice will also indicate that three or more false alarms during the calendar year will result in the property owner being charged $350 (or according to the City's current fee schedule). This fee will be charged per the city's fee schedule. D. Any false alarm charge billed directly to an individual or business by the City under this agreement, which remains unpaid by December 31 s` of each year, shall become the responsibility of the TOWNSHIP for reimbursement to the City. E. All payments must be made in accordance with this schedule to render this agreement effective for each calendar year of the contract. W In case an emergency arises within the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT while equipment and personnel of the fire department are engaged in fighting a fire within the TOWNSHIP area, calls shall be answered in the order of their receipt unless the fire chief or other officer in charge of the fire department at the time otherwise directs. In responding to fire calls within the TOWNSHIP area, the fire chief or other officer in charge shall dispatch only such personnel and equipment as in his opinion can be safely spared from the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT. r.\.4Nto] a ALTA Fi reAgreement2018-2022 In cases where the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT receives a notification of an emergency other than a fire, and its assistance is requested in the area defined in Exhibit A of this contract, it shall respond to such emergency in the salve manner as a fire as outlined in this contract. Charges for such service shall be as outlined in ARTICLE IV. ARTICLE VII The TOWNSHIP agrees to make a fire protection tax levy or otherwise to provide funds each year in an amount sufficient to pay the MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT the compensation agreed upon. ARTICLE VIII This AGREEMENT shall be in force for a term of five (5) years beginning on January 1, 2018, and ending on the 31 st day of December, 2022. This contract may be terminated upon a six- month notice by either party. CITY OF MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP OF SILVER CREEK By: By: Mayor Chairman Attest: Attest: City Administrator Clerk DATE: Fi reAgreement2018-2022 DATE: This EXHIBIT is a part of the attached FIRE PROTECTION AGREEMENT, and its purpose is to designate the area covered under this AGREEMENT and referred to herein as the TOWNSHIP area. Therefore, the TOWNSHIP area in which protection for fires is agreed to involves the following sections, including platted areas, of the TOWNSHIP herein. Township 121N, Ran4e 26W All of Sections 1, 2, 11, 12, 13 Section 14, except Southwest Quarter Township 122N, Ran4e 26W All of Sections 9, 14, 15, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 34, 35, 36 North half of Section 20 Section 21, except Southwest Quarter Southeast Quarter of Southeast Quarter of Section 33 Total No. of Parcels as of 2017 billing: 608 Fi reAgreement2018-2022 City Council Agenda — 2/12/18 2J. Consideration to accept the 2018 Pathwav Connections Guide map for future land use and capital improvement planning. (AS/TP) /_�l 19 XIa]131040tV1YX- 4X1Z4100C The City Council is asked to review for acceptance the proposed City of Monticello 2018 Pathway Connections map. It is intended that this map will serve as a guide for development and construction of the City's pathway system over the next ten+ years. The guide map represents a detailed connection plan for pathway segments which picks up where the broader system plans in the Park and Pathway Plan and Transportation Plan of the Comprehensive Plan leave off. The goal in preparing the plan for Council's acceptance is to provide an addendum to the current Park and Pathway Plan which responds to the following stated Comprehensive Plan objectives: • "Providing continuity and linkages between public parks, open spaces, residences and businesses." • "Allowing reasonable flexibility on final pathway routes, park locations, and plan implementation strategies." • Implementation strategy: "Parks Commission will review and prioritize pathway needs and recommend a schedule and funding framework to the City Council." The plan presented for acceptance achieves these objectives, providing guidance for staff in working with developers and in preparing capital improvement plans for street construction, reconstruction and "stand-alone" pathway projects. The map also helps identify possible locations for grant applications, which often rely on connectivity as a primary focal point. The map was developed in a systematic approach, beginning with a map update of the existing pathway network. From there, staff outlined numerous missing pathway connections and extensions throughout the community. Once the connections and extensions were added to the base map, it was presented for public feedback at the City's 2017 Walk `n' Roll pathway event. Participants were asked to mark those segments most desired for completion and to add needed connections they did not see on the map. Feedback from this event was then used to complete a new draft of the proposed map. The Parks and Streets Superintendent then used the public feedback and their knowledge of the system, street conditions and future projects to complete a 0-10 year phasing recommendation. The draft proposed map was reviewed in a series of staff meetings, and by the City Council in November, 2017. It should also be noted that the pathways proposed and the recommendation for phasing was developed based on a series of criteria, which is attached as supporting data. These criteria include such issues/items as "Creates a loop system or closes a gap" and "Does not include significant design constraints". City Council Agenda — 2/12/18 As with the Capital Improvement Plan, the map is intended as a guide. It is fully anticipated that the plan map will be revised as time goes on, with some pathway segments moving forward or backward in phasing as funding or project development changes. In addition, new routes or changing alignments may present themselves. Partnerships and grants to support development may also encourage new routes or advancement in phasing. Finally, complete streets options may be considered for projects, in which case, on -road, off-road and share the road conditions can be explored. A review of the map every 3-5 years is recommended. Parks & Recreation and Planninu Commission Recommendation The Parks & Recreation Commission has reviewed and recommended adoption of this plan (January, 2019). The Planning Commission has also reviewed and recommended acceptance of this plan (January, 2018). Al. Staff Impact: It is estimated that approximately 45-50 hours of staff time was spent in developing the proposed map. A2. Budget Impact: WSB services were utilized to prepare the snap for consideration. These expenses were included in the mapping services line item of the 2017 City budget. A3. Strategic Plan Impact: The proposed map responds to the following Strategic Plan goals or objectives: 1. Create and Preserve Sustainable Livability: The plan supports directly the objective of developing Monticello as a walkable and bikeable community. 2. Build a Connected Community: The development of pathways and completion of pathway connections provides necessary linkages between people and places. 3. Strengthen Our Image as a Destination: The plan map supports the development of pathways which connect Monticello's parks, schools, and places of interest, commerce, and history, supporting Monticello's image as a place to recreate and call home. 4. Support a Vibrant Economy: See attached handout on the economic benefits of a walkable/bikeable community. 5. Be a Regional Leader: The plan map presents opportunities for building partnerships with schools (Safe Routes), the County (trails along County Roads and to county parks), local property owners and businesses and many others. 6. Invest in People: See attached handout on the health benefits of a walkable/bikeable community. I mo\N1101IVE111I►iI9I_TOY[113►`(.` Motion to accept the 2018 Monticello Pathway Connections Guide map for future land use and capital improvement planning N City Council Agenda — 2/12/18 2. Motion not to accept the 2018 Pathway Connections Map at this time. 3. Motion to table for further discussion. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff supports the acceptance of the Pathway Connections map. The map responds to the above goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan and Comprehensive Plan and was developed in a process which engaged policy makers, public and staff. The plan: • Provides a framework for decision-making • Results in fiscal responsibility via a systematic prioritization of facilities. • Establishes reusable tools for future revision and update • Can be used to develop community partnerships (CentraCare, SHIP, Businesses) D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Proposed Pathway Connections Map B. Pathway Consideration Criteria C. Infographic — Health Benefits of Walking/Biking Investments D. Infographic — Economic Benefits of Walking/Biking Investments Pathway Criteria 1. Connects to Parks, Neighborhoods, or Points of Interest 2. Creates a Loop System or Closes a Gap 3. Can be Constructed with New Development/Redevelopment 4. Offers Local Recreation Opportunities 5. Offers Regional Recreation Opportunities 6. Serves as an Alternative Transportation Function 7. Provides a Safe Route to School 8. Increases Safety at Intersections (avoids four way intersections/major roadway crossings) 9. Located on City Owned Land/Existing Trail Easements/ROW 10. Funding Available through Grant Funding/Private Partnerships/Etc. 11. Provides High Quality Views/Viewshed 12. Provides Opportunities to Access Future Development or Redevelopment Sites 13. Stated Need/Petition by Citizens or Visitors 14. Does Not Include Significant Design Constraints (Avoids Ditch/Water Crossings/Utilities/Etc.) 15. May be a Complete Street Opportunity (vs. traditional trail or sidewalk) 16. Provides Accessibility (ADA)/Potential to Meet ADA Guidelines Without Excessive Grading/Construction HEALTHIER AND MORE ACTIVE SENIORS A study of nearly 2,400people who biked to work were fitter,b. obese, and had better triglyceride levels, bloodand insulin levels than thosewho physicallyP"i'l A didn't have a LONGER AND LIVES r ALL }Adolescents who participatebicycling,o skateboarding more than 4 times per week are 48% less likely to be overweight as ad UltS.6 01�:Agkq Participation in physical activity is positively related toci^ performance in children.' U S Department of Health & Human Scryices, Physical Activity fundamental To Prevenunrt Diseasc ASPE ,13 lune 2015 Web 'Ncighboi hood Environment and Physical Acuvity Among 0ldei Women rindmgs from the San Diego Cohoi t of the Women's Health imbative IPAH Jeui nal of Physical Activity and Health 1 lb ( :Old) I0'0 -U// Web 'US Department of Health and H!mian Services, "Phys cal Activity t ttndamental in Preventing Disease,' 2002 Web.-Gorclon-Larsen P , of al 'Active commuting and caidloaseilar disease risk"Ar,h—, el /nierriol Nedrone Iti9 13 (_009) 1216-1223 Web `All -Cause Mortality .Associated W* PhV,cal Activity Doing .elsure limc, Work. Sports, and Cycling to Work Arch Intern Med Archives of Internal M edicine 160 i 1(2000)Web 'Menschik D.,eta l"Adolcsa.nt physical activ:oc, as pied,to efyoungadultwcight' Archrtres of Pedrntncsb Adolescent ofedrnne 1621(200&) 23-28, Wcb Pam.inathan,S, etei. Happiness in Motion Ernouons. Well -Being. and Active School h avei J School Health Journal of School Health 34 c (2014): S I li-23 `Wco Singh, A , eta! ' Phvsical acLmty.incl pertonnance at echool A systematic review of the hter.inire including a methodological c cloy assessment" Archwss of Penrntrres & 4dolescent Medrnne 16CA f2Ui2)[ 49-5� Web. v I „ i, Irl. euer�E stltorlc v 4 I rl i „' 0, Iii People ike to businesses spend less per visit but visit more often, resulting in more money spent overall each month compared to customers who arrived by car .2 IMPROVES RECRUITMENT OF TALENT AND WORKERS CEOs recognize that .• - places attract topCompanies well-educatedrelocating their offices to more bikeable areas to better attract the • COMMERCIALINCREASES MSD;.' PROPERTY VALUES UnitedIn communities across the States, a one -point associatedRomw "Imeff '01m Score (which assigns a value to addresses based on walkability) is $700-$3,000 increase in home valueS.6 ��. • tr;. w s $1 million of spending. By comparison, road infrastructure projects create 7 jobs per $1 million of expenditures. 10 ,. ee, A., What Is The Prenom¢. Contnhuuon of Cyr hs+, Compared to Car Drivers in inrier 5wem t),m Melhourn✓, Shnpinnp S+rips. . 00& - Cirfvm, h., Nlorriz,ey, S., .G Ritter. C. Busir.ec, Cycle;: CatermF to the hi,ycl ria,, mark,! TR New, M.a<,e, me 280 (2012):.'6-o?, 'Access to Puhlic Tran<port,non a Top Criterion for Millennial, Whan Deciding Where to t ive, New Survey Shaws . The Rock -Pellet Fnunda uon. (2014, April T). Rel sieved Septemher =F., 70 15. Walllasper, j. f low Bicycling k T+an,formng Gtisiness. Flee 2017. - 1 tmsn, T. Evaluating Traf ,, Celmuig Benefits, Cnat, crud rnuiiV Inrpdcts. Vitoria Transport Policy Institute. 1999. Corin rt, J., Walkwin lha Walk: How WAah,inV Raises Honr, M-, in U.S. Cites. August :1009. Weh. Sireetsbieg otg, QGP H -1p, and Welloeng Program Ca,eStudy, lube 2013. An- c ai; Puhlic Health Ms ociaiinn. Puhli( H-1ph and Chronic Disea �e Cosi S:roing, and Return e9 Investment Weis.' Norih Ce jtr ,r Teas Counol of Govet nine,).. Fcnnnm,c 6erie6t: nfAtive TransportallnP.. "Garrett-Peliter, Heidi. PeresUcan And Bicycle Ioft a s, ructure: A Notional Study Of Err iployment mlaa K Political Amheist,. 01' SHERRl1ANE FTRONf , ti City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 2K. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-06 accepting the Feasibility Report and setting a public hearing on February 26, 2018, for improvements to 7th Street, Chelsea Road and Washington Street as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Proiect, Citv Proiect No.16C006 (SB) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The City Council authorized preparation of a feasibility report addressing street, sidewalk and trail improvements for purposes of considering assessments to the benefitting property owners as part of the Fallon Avenue Overpass project. The project consists of constructing a new overpass crossing of Interstate 94 (I-94) at Fallon Avenue and three roundabouts at the intersections of Fallon Avenue/Chelsea Road, Fallon Avenue/71h Street, and 7th Street/Washington Street. The project also includes trail and sidewalk connections as well as landscaping and bridge aesthetics. The purpose of this feasibility report is to consider assessments to the benefiting properties for the proposed street, sidewalk and trail improvements within the project limits. It is not proposed to assess for the Fallon Avenue Bridge, roundabouts, landscaping and aesthetics due to the regional benefit to the area. Project elements where assessments are proposed are listed below: Washington Street • Roadway reconstruction from 7th Street, approximately 460 feet north of 7th street, to the railroad crossing • Concrete sidewalk extension on the west side between 7th Street and the railroad crossing 7th Street • Roadway reconstruction between approximately 300 feet west of Washington Street and 500 feet east of the proposed Fallon Avenue connection • Concrete sidewalk extension on the south side of 7th Street from Washington Street to the proposed Fallon Avenue connection Fallon Avenue • Bituminous trail extension on the east side of Fallon Avenue, from 7th Street, along the overpass to approximately 400 feet south of Chelsea Road within the project limits. This trail is to be extended south to School Boulevard and beyond with a future project. Chelsea Road • Bituminous trail extension on the north side of Chelsea Road, west of Fallon Avenue, within the project limits. This trail is to be extended west to Edmonson Avenue with the Chelsea Road reconstruction project, City Project No. 17C001. City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 Concrete sidewalk extension on the south side of Chelsea Road, west of Fallon Avenue, within the project limits. This sidewalk is to be extended west to Cedar Street with the Chelsea Road reconstruction project, City Project No. 17C001. Conducting the public hearing, ordering of the improvements, approval of plans and specifications and authorizing the advertisement of bids for Fallon Avenue Overpass project is scheduled to be considered at the February 26, 2018 Council meeting. Al. Budget Impact: The total estimated project cost for the recommended improvements is $8,380,664 which includes estimated construction cost based on final design plans and a 22% indirect cost for legal, engineering, administrative, and financing costs. It is planned to issue abatement bonds in 2017 and 2018 to finance the Fallon Avenue Overpass project. Special assessments to the benefitting property owners will be a method to repay a portion of the debt, in addition to $2.1 million in federal funds available July 1, 2020 or earlier if available and possible advancement of State Aid funds to finance the project. A separate agenda item related to advancement of State Aid funds will be forthcoming for Council consideration. Assessments to the benefitting properties for street, sidewalk and trail improvements total $260,000 using methodology in accordance with the City's assessment policy. Of this total, $61,450 is assigned to City -owned parcels. A2. Staff Workload Impact: City staff will prepare the necessary documents for the public hearing in accordance with state statutes. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2018-06 accepting the Feasibility Report and setting a public hearing on February 26, 2018, for improvements to 7th Street, Chelsea Road and Washington Street Improvements as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project. 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution 2018-06 at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends approving Alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Resolution 2018-06 B. Feasibility Report 2 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2018-06 ACCEPTING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO 7TH STREET, CHELSEA ROAD AND WASHINGTON STREET AS RELATED TO THE FALLON AVENUE OVERPASS PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 16CO06 WHEREAS, a Feasibility Report has been prepared by the City Engineer for the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project, City Project No. 16CO06 which includes: bridge overpass, roundabout construction, reconstruction of streets including the adjustment, construction, reclamation, removal, and/or repair of existing pavement; curb and gutter; sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water supply systems; pathways; signage; railway crossings; and other necessary appurtenant work. WHEREAS, the report was received by the City Council on February 12, 2018; and WHEREAS, the reports provide information regarding whether the proposed project is necessary, cost-effective and feasible; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOL VED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: The Council will consider the proposed improvements for such street in accordance with the Feasibility Report and the assessment of abutting properties for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvements of $8,380,664. 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 26th day of February, 2018, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 6:30 p.m. and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. ADOPTED BY the Monticello City Council this 12th day of February, 2018. CITY OF MONTICELLO Brian Stumpf, Mayor F.1191=9 Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator � 91.114 to] 10 F."ITI: 1 -0 111 a us] AV 1 104, PROJECT 7t" Street, Chelsea Road, and Washington Street Improvements CITY OF MONTICELLO I WRIGHT COUNTY, MN FEBRUARY 12, 2018 Prepared for: City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 CITY PROJECT NO. 16CO06 WSB PROJECT NO. 2596-400 FALLON AVENUE OVERPASS PROJECT 7th Street, Chelsea Road, and Washington Street Improvements CITY OF MONTICELLO PROJECT NO. 16CO06 FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA February 12, 2018 Prepared By: Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 February 12, 2018 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council: Transmitted herewith is a feasibility report for the proposed street, sidewalk, and trail improvements for the purposes of considering assessments to the benefiting property owners as part of the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project. I would be happy to discuss this report with you at your convenience. Please feel free to contact me at (763) 271-3236 if you have any questions. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. d 4U. - 'P6-f"0$t— Shibani K. Bisson, PE City Engineer Attachment cc: Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator, City of Monticello Wayne Oberg, Finance Director, City of Monticello srb Building a legacy — your legacy. Equal Opportunity Employer I wsbeng.com CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Eric M. ckman, �PE Date: February 12, 2018 License No. 49954 Quality Control Review Completed By: &�Shibani K. Bisson, PE Date: February 12, 2018 License No. 41860 Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE SHEET LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL CERTIFICATION SHEET TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................1 2. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Authorization.........................................................................................................2 2.2 Scope.................................................................................................................... 2 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS..................................................................................................3 3.1 Streets................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Storm Sewer/Drainage..........................................................................................4 4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS........................................................................................5 4.1 Stormwater Treatment........................................................................................... 6 4.2 Private Utilities.......................................................................................................6 4.3 Permits.................................................................................................................. 6 4.4 Right-of-Way/Easements......................................................................................7 5. FINANCING......................................................................................................................8 5.1 Opinion of Cost......................................................................................................8 5.2 Funding.................................................................................................................8 5.2.1 Assessments............................................................................................. 8 6. PROJECT SCHEDULE..................................................................................................11 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................12 Appendix A Project Layout Appendix B Assessment Map Assessment Roll Appendix C Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Project No. 16C006 consists of constructing a new overpass crossing of Interstate 94 (1-94) at Fallon Avenue and three roundabouts at the intersections of Fallon Avenue/Chelsea Road, Fallon Avenue/7th Street, and 7th Street/Washington Street. The project also includes trail and sidewalk connections as well as landscaping and bridge aesthetics. The purpose of this feasibility report is to consider assessments to the benefiting properties for the proposed street, sidewalk and trail improvements within the project limits. It is not proposed to assess for the Fallon Avenue bridge, roundabouts, landscaping and aesthetics due to the regional benefit to the area. Assessments to be considered are listed below: Washinqton Street • Roadway reconstruction from 7th Street, approximately 460 feet north of 7th street, to the railroad crossing • Concrete sidewalk extension on the west side between 7th Street and the railroad crossing 7th Street • Roadway reconstruction between approximately 300 feet west of Washington Street and 500 feet east of the proposed Fallon Avenue connection • Concrete sidewalk extension on the south side of 7th Street from Washington Street to the proposed Fallon Avenue connection Fallon Avenue • Bituminous trail extension on the east side of Fallon Avenue, from 7th Street, along the overpass to approximately 400 feet south of Chelsea Road within the project limits. This trail is to be extended south to School Boulevard and beyond with a future project. Chelsea Road • Bituminous trail extension on the north side of Chelsea Road, west of Fallon Avenue, within the project limits. This trail is to be extended west to Edmonson Avenue with the Chelsea Road reconstruction project, City Project No. 17CO01. • Concrete sidewalk extension on the south side of Chelsea Road, west of Fallon Avenue, within the project limits. This sidewalk is to be extended west to Cedar Street with the Chelsea Road reconstruction project, City Project No. 17C001. The proposed roadway improvements on 7th Street vary due to existing pavement conditions. Due to the alignment of the proposed Fallon Avenue overpass improvements, 7th Street will be reconstructed before a reconstruction would typically be needed. As a result, proposed property assessments along 7th Street have been determined based upon the improvements that would be necessary at this time, which consists of a mill and overlay. Washington Street, however, is in need of a reconstruction and is proposed to be assessed at that rate accordingly. The proposed trail and sidewalk pathway extensions would complete system gap connections and provide pedestrian facilities on both sides of 7th Street and Chelsea Road to limit mid -block crossings at uncontrolled intersections. This is the recommendation on collector roadways according to the City's proposed pathway connections guide map. The total estimated project cost for the recommended improvements is $8,380,664 which includes estimated construction cost based on final design plans and a 22% indirect cost for legal, engineering, administrative, and financing costs. Funding sources for the proposed improvements include a tax abatement levy, with special assessments to the benefiting property owners, federal funding and advancing municipal State Aid street system funds reimbursing a portion of the debt. This project is necessary, feasible, and cost-effective from an engineering standpoint and can be constructed as proposed herein. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16C006 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 1 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1 Authorization The preparation of this report was authorized by the City Council on July 10, 2017. The proposed project is identified in the City's five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Transportation Plan. This project has been designated as City Project No. 16C006. 2.2 Scope This report addresses assessments to the benefiting properties for the proposed street, sidewalk, and trail improvements within the project limits as related to the construction of a new overpass crossing of 1-94 at Fallon Avenue and the associated street improvements on 7th Street, Washington Street, Chelsea Road, and Fallon Avenue. The improvements also include trail and sidewalk connections, utility improvements, and landscaping. A project layout can be found in Appendix A. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 2 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Streets Pavement Condition The streets identified for the proposed improvements were inspected and rated in accordance with the City's Pavement Management Program (PMP). The PMP evaluation process involves dividing the pavement surface into sections where the type, extent, and severity of the various pavement distresses noted within each section are recorded. Numerous types of pavement distresses may exist within a pavement section including, but not limited to, alligator cracking, block cracking, longitudinal cracking, transverse cracking, rutting, raveling, shoving, potholes, and patches. Each type of distress observed receives a rating of low, medium, or high severity based on the extent of the distress noted. This information is then used to calculate a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for the roadway that can be used to determine the most appropriate pavement rehabilitation method. Areas with the lowest PCI values represent streets exhibiting the highest levels of distresses in the pavement, while areas with the highest PCI values represent streets with the lowest levels of pavement distresses. The PCI ratings for the streets within the proposed improvements are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1: Pavement Condition Index Ratings Street Name Year Rated PCI Rating Rehabilitation Method 7th Street (West of Washington Street) 2013 49 Reconstruct 7th Street (East of Washington Street) 2017 69 Mill & Overlay Washington Street 2016 42 Reconstruct Fallon Avenue* N/A N/A None Chelsea Road* N/A N/A None * Fallon Avenue was reconstructed in 2009 and Chelsea Road was reconstructed in 2007 and were not rated as no improvement is needed at this time given the relatively newer condition and age of the pavement In addition to the PCI rating, previous repair history, roadway age, traffic volumes, and roadway classification were all factors in determining the most appropriate rehabilitation method to assign to the streets within the project area. Trails and Sidewalks There is an existing 10 -foot -wide bituminous trail along the north side of 7th Street from TH 25 to CSAH 18. Washington Street has an existing 8 -foot -wide concrete sidewalk on the east side of the road that connects to the bituminous trail on 7th Street. There is a gap in the sidewalk system along the west side of Washington Street between 7th Street, north to the railroad tracks. There is an 8 -foot -wide bituminous trail on the north side of Chelsea Road between CSAH 18 and Fallon Avenue and from Edmonson Avenue to the west. No trails currently exist along Chelsea Road between Fallon Avenue and Edmonson Avenue. There is an existing sidewalk along select newer developments on the south side of Chelsea Road at the Mills Fleet Farm property, located east of Fallon Avenue, and the Sherburne State Bank property, located west of Cedar Street. No sidewalks currently exist along Chelsea Road between Fallon Avenue and Cedar Street. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 3 3'2 Storm Sewer/Drainage All of the roadways within the project area have existing curb and gutter that collects stormwater runoff and conveys dtounderground storm sewer. The storm sewer within 71h Street consists of 12 -inch to 30 - inch RCP storm sewer main within the boulevard along the south side of the roadway which connects to a 60 -inch RCP storm sewer main at Washington Street where iteventually outlets to a box culvert south of the BNGFrailway. There is additional 30 -inch to 42 -inch RCP storm sewer main on the south side 7th Street east ufthe proposed Fallon overpass which outlets tothe |-Q4ditch. There ioexisting 00'inohRCP storm sewer main along the south side of Chelsea Road at the intersection of Fallon Avenue which was installed in2008with City Project No. 20O0-31C'which conveys ohormwaterrunoff hothe City pond north ufChelsea Road and west ofFallon Avenue. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City ofMonticello Project No. 1nouo* WooProject No. oao6-4uo 4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS A street and pathway improvement layout for the project area is included in Appendix A. The primary purpose of the project is to provide a new connection across 1-94 which will relieve traffic on TH 25 and CSAH 18 by providing an alternate route for local trips to cross the interstate. The project also would improve intersection operations under existing and future traffic conditions at Chelsea Road/Fallon Avenue, 7th Street/Fallon Avenue, and 7th Street/Washington Street. Street Improvements Washinqton Street • Roadway reconstruction from 7th Street, approximately 460 feet north of 7th street, to the railroad crossing • Six -foot -wide concrete sidewalk extension on the west side between 7th Street and the railroad crossing 7th Street • Roadway reconstruction between approximately 300 feet west of Washington Street and 500 feet east of the proposed Fallon Avenue connection • Six -foot -wide concrete sidewalk extension on the south side of 7th Street from Washington Street to the proposed Fallon Avenue connection Fallon Avenue • Ten -foot -wide bituminous trail extension on the east side of Fallon Avenue, from 7th Street, along the overpass to approximately 400 feet south of Chelsea Road within the project limits. This trail is to be extended south to School Boulevard and beyond with a future project. • Concrete sidewalk extension on the south side of Chelsea Road, west of Fallon Avenue Chelsea Road Ten -foot -wide bituminous trail extension on the north side of Chelsea Road, west of Fallon Avenue within the project limits. This trail is to be extended west to Edmonson Avenue with the Chelsea Road reconstruction project, City Project No. 17C001. Six -foot -wide concrete sidewalk extension on the south side of Chelsea Road, west of Fallon Avenue, within the project limits. This sidewalk is to be extended west to Cedar Street with the Chelsea Road reconstruction project, City Project No. 17C001. Pedestrian crossings meeting MnDOT and ADA requirements are proposed for the project. The proposed trail and sidewalk pathway extensions would complete system gap connections and provide pedestrian facilities on both sides of 7th Street and Chelsea Road to limit mid -block and crossings at uncontrolled intersections. This is the recommendation on collector roadways according to the City's proposed pathway connections guide map. The proposed trail along Fallon Avenue south of Chelsea Road would be extended within the project limits, with extension to the south to School Boulevard and beyond with a future project. Stormwater Improvements Existing storm sewer facilities within the project area currently consist of storm sewer manholes and catch basins which ultimately convey drainage into the trunk line storm sewer lines along Washington Street, Chelsea Road, and 7th Street. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 5 Storm sewer improvements would consist of adding catch basins structures at each of the improved intersections which would connect into existing storm sewer facilities. The system will be designed to meet current State Aid standards as required for state and federal funding. 4.1 Stormwater Treatment It is the City's practice that reconstruction projects incorporate stormwater treatment systems where feasible. In the past, water quality has been provided by grading new ponds or expanding existing ponds, grading drainage swales, and installing sump manholes or "stormceptor" manholes. The current management of stormwater in this section of the City utilizes storm sewer to route and discharge stormwater runoff directly into the Mississippi River. Flooding or ponding of surface water due to rainfall events is not significantly problematic in this area. This project as proposed will result in a small new net increase in impervious surface area. This project will trigger the threshold to obtain a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) Construction General Permit (CGP). This project will require the development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will require the integration of permanent stormwater management for the increase in impervious surface area that is 1 acre or greater. The SWPPP also requires the development of controls to prevent erosion, construction waste management, and hazardous materials management. The permanent stormwater management for the increase in impervious surface area of 1 acre or greater is to provide a water quality volume of 1 inch of runoff from the new impervious surfaces. For this project, there is limited space to provide permanent stormwater management. The MPCA CGP states, "For work on linear projects with lack of right-of-way where the Permittee(s) cannot obtain an easement or other permission for property needed to install treatment systems capable of treating the entire water quality volume on site, the Permittee(s) must maximize the water quality volume that can be treated prior to discharge to surface waters. Treatment can be provided through other methods or combination of methods such as grassed swales, filtration systems, smaller ponds, or grit chambers, prior to discharge to surface waters. A reasonable attempt must be made to obtain right-of-way during the project planning process. Documentation of these attempts must be in the SWPPP per Part III.A.5.m. in the section addressing infeasibility." The goal will be to provide permanent stormwater management to the maximum extent practical given the right-of-way constraints. For other areas, the City will need to consider the installation of sump manholes to minimize their off-site impacts and as a part of the City of Monticello's Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer System. 4.2 Private Utilities A Gopher State One Call has been completed to identify the utilities that are in the vicinity of, and adjacent to, the project area. A utility coordination meeting has been held to identify relocations necessary for the proposed improvements. 4.3 Permits This project will disturb more than 1 acre; therefore, a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit will be required. This will result in a need for a stormwater management plan and weekly inspections during construction to ensure no sediment is leaving the project site. Additional permitting required for this project includes the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Miscellaneous Work on Trunk Highway Right of Way permit for the bridge crossing 1-94. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 6 4.4 Right-of-Way/Easements The hght-ofwayacquisition process incurrently underway. Necessary easements are anticipated tobe secured in order to meet the project schedule. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City ofMonticello Project No. 1nouo* WooProject No. oao6-4uo 5. FINANCING 5.1 Opinion of Cost The opinions of probable cost incorporate anticipated 2018 construction costs and include 22% indirect costs. The indirect costs include legal, engineering, administrative, and financing items. A summary table of the proposed project costs is shown below in Table 2. The estimated project cost as proposed within this report totals $8,380,664. TABLE 2: Proposed Project Costs Street Name Fallon Avenue Fallon Avenue 7th Street Chelsea Road Washington Street ZTOTAL PROJECT COST 5.2 Funding 5.2.1 Assessments Improvement Type Roadway Improvements Bridge Improvements Roadway Improvements Roadway Improvements Roadway Improvements Landscaping Improvements Right-of-Way/Easement Acquisition Cost $1,771,671 ........................... $2,562,000 ............. .. ...- ............. $1,598,203 ... .......... $687,773 ................................. $261,017 $240,000 $1,260,000 $8,380,664 A portion of the project costs is proposed to be recovered through assessments levied against benefiting properties in the project area. Assessments are proposed to be collected for street, sidewalk and trail improvements against adjacent benefiting properties in the project areas. These assessments are described below, and a summary is shown in Tables 3 and 4. Non -Residential and Multi -Family Assessments Non-residential (commercial and industrial zoned properties) and residential multi -family (apartment buildings) are proposed to be assessed for street reconstruction and trail and sidewalk extensions at a front foot rate. The street improvement rates are based on assessing the City's standard reconstruction rate based on past residential to non-residential equivalent rates. Per the City's assessment policy, corner lots are assessed the full street reconstruction rate for the front footage of the property, 50% of the side footage as long as the property has direct access to the reconstructed street, and 25% of the side street frontage if the property does not have direct access. However, if a direct access is added at a later date the property would pay the additional 25% at that time. The proposed sidewalk and trail extensions are proposed to be assessed at a 25% rate to abutting residential and industrial zoned properties, and 50% to commercially zoned properties with the remaining costs being funded by the City. Corner lots will follow the street assessment methodology described above. Since the proposed trail functions the same as the proposed sidewalk, it is proposed to assess the adjacent properties for the sidewalk and trail at the same rate based on the footage of the trail or sidewalk fronting the property. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 8 These rates are identified below: 7th Street west of Washington Street • $90 per front foot for street reconstruction 7th Street east of Washington Street • $36 per front foot for an equivalent mill and overlay rate • $13.50 per front foot for proposed sidewalk along the south side of the roadway Washington Street: 7th Street to railroad tracks • $90 per front foot for street reconstruction • $13.50 per front foot for proposed sidewalk along the west side of the roadway Chelsea Road $13.50 per front foot for sidewalk and trail assessments along industrial zoned properties and $27 per front foot along commercially zoned properties • Street improvements are not proposed to be assessed since the roadway was reconstructed in 2007 and assessments were levied at that time. The improvements along Chelsea Road are needed for the roundabout construction at Fallon Avenue, which is not proposed to be assessed due to the regional benefit received. Fallon Avenue Trail • $27 per front foot for trail assessments along commercially zoned properties $13.50 per front foot for trail assessments along industrial zoned properties • There are two corner lot properties proposed to be assessed for this trail. One property located at the southeast corner of Chelsea Road and Fallon Avenue. The property frontage along Fallon Avenue is considered the side or long frontage of the corner lot and is proposed to be assessed 50% of the frontage at the commercial rate of $27/front foot rate since the property has an access along Fallon Avenue. The other property is located at the northeast corner of Chelsea Road and Fallon Avenue. The property frontage along Fallon Avenue is considered the side or long frontage of the corner lot and is proposed to be assessed 25% of the frontage at the industrial rate of $13.50/front foot rate since the property does not have an access along Fallon Avenue. • Street improvements are not proposed to be assessed since the roadway was reconstructed in 2007 and assessments were levied at that time. The improvements along Fallon Avenue are needed for the roundabout construction at Chelsea Road, which is not proposed to be assessed due to the regional benefit received. Citv Propertv The City currently owns five properties along 7th Street and Fallon Avenue that are included in the assessment calculations per City assessment policy. The assessment for these properties including street, trail and sidewalk assessments totals $61,450 and are included in the assessment totals noted in Table 3 on the following page. The preliminary assessment roll and accompanying map for the project area are included in Appendix B. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 9 Street 7' Street (West of Washington Street) 7th Street (East of Washington Street) Washington Street 7th Street Washington Street TABLE 3: Preliminary Assessments $36/FF Assessment Assessable Type of Assessment Rate Front (Multi -Family Residential) Footage Street Reconstruction $90/FF 471.2 Mill and Overlay $36/FF Street Reconstruction $90/FF Sidewalk $13.5/FF (Multi -Family Residential) 201.0 $5,427 Sidewalk $13.5/FF (Multi -Family Residential) $206,620* Sidewalk 2,243.7 400.4 904.4 295.0 Total $42,410 $80,773 $36,036 $12,209 $3,983 Chelsea Road (Industrial) $13.5/FF .......... .. . ........... 443.0 $5,981 Chelsea Road Sidewalk (Commercial) $27/FF .................................................................................. 274.0 $7,398 Chelsea Road Trail (Industrial) $13.5/FF .......................................... ...... 756.0 $10,206 Fallon Avenue Trail (Commercial) $27/FF ......................................... .............................. 201.0 $5,427 Fallon Avenue Trail (Industrial, Residential) $13.50/FF 162.74 $2,197 TOTAL $206,620* FF = front foot Includes City -owned property totaling $61,450 Funding sources for the proposed improvements include a tax abatement levy, with special assessments to the benefiting property owners, federal funding and advancing municipal State Aid street system funds reimbursing a portion of the debt. Currently, the City is advancing State Aid funds for previous improvements and could do the same for this project. This will be addressed under a separate resolution separate from this report. Future State Aid allocations may be used for this project once they come available. A summary of the proposed funding is presented in Table 4. TABLE 4: Proposed Project Funding Assessments City Funds Total Fallon Avenue Roadway $7,624 $1,764,047 $1,771,671 Fallon Avenue Bridge - $2,562,000 $2,562,000 7th Street $135,392 $1,462,811 $1,598,203 Chelsea Road $23,585 $664,188 $687,773 Washington Street $40,019 $220,998 $261,017 Landscaping - $240,000 $240,000 ROW/Easements - $1,260,000 $1,260,000 �) TOTAL $206,620 $8,174,044 $8,380,664 Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 10 6. PROJECT SCHEDULE The proposed schedule is as follows: Phase 1 — Feasibility Report City Council Authorizes Feasibility Study .................. City Council Accepts Feasibility Report and Sets Public Hearing Date ............................. City Council Holds Public Hearing/Orders Project .... Phase 2 — Final Design City Council Approves Plans and Specifications and Authorizes Advertisement for Bids ...................... Final MnDOT Plan Approval... ................................... OpenBids.................................................................. City Council Awards Contract .................................... Public Open House .................................................... Phase 3 — Construction Preconstruction Meeting ............................................ Begin Construction.................................................... Substantial Completion (Open to Traffic) .................. Assessment Hearing ................................................. Final Completion (Landscaping) ................................ Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 July 10, 2017 ..............February 12, 2018 ..............February 26, 2018 ...............................................February 26, 2018 ..................................................... March 5, 2018 ............................................................ April 2018 ............................................................ May 2018 ............................................................ May 2018 .... May 2018 ........................................... June 2018 .................................. November 2018 ...................................... October 2018 ........................................... June 2019 Page 11 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS City Project No. 16CO06 consists of constructing a new overpass crossing of 1-94 at Fallon Avenue and three roundabouts at the intersections of Fallon Avenue/Chelsea Road, Fallon Avenue/71" Street, and 7 t Street/Washington Street. The project also includes trail and sidewalk connections as well as landscaping and bridge aesthetics. It is recommended to approve the assessment methods outlined in the report to the benefiting properties for the proposed street, sidewalk, and trail improvements within the project limits. It is not proposed to assess for the Fallon Avenue bridge, roundabouts, landscaping, and aesthetics due to the regional benefit to the area. It is the recommendation of City staff that City Project No. 16CO06 is feasible, necessary, and cost- effective from an engineering standpoint. It is recommended to accept this feasibility report and call for a public hearing for the project in accordance with state statutes. Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16CO06 WSB Project No. 2596-400 Page 12 /_1»=1►U1LI_1 Project Layout Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16C006 WSB Project No. 2596-400 U& F 13 ...... ...... 4 ` n� 111 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I b � d A,,, � A Y 1 ^'' ^ %;nw IM,fi" �°, * � M nom. mrvW M q q; W T :!71: a. lo 7,o 7 P 3::ii:: ti.";", 4 3 I. 0, Qwry 2 C P., Legend Roadway Concxe."� Medw,lCurb Bi!,,mnou5 Trad Fcnueie Sidewak K Lapds,apvip R,Ogs� T�,cK Apron FjtLj,cj Trml tit Nr Oalk ro C I T Y 6- 0 IA Fallon ventre Improvements Monrcello City of Montcello, Minnesota APPENDIX B Assessment Map Assessment Roll Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16C006 WSB Project No. 2596-400 f ^a '1 PI F G "t IN ^ ^-m % 0"tk KKHM � dd � '� � � „�,� '-•-'. � , � .. � ..,, � ^w w � Im e I Ir '�� � s �.� A �� Juu la �„ '" "'" �„,, r ^^ ,r'", W �"" ���„ ","w�J "�'� w8V a.;�'�"^'wYw, ,,,:� ',,, .,. ,..,•*._"� ,y.;,r 'm ',"r.,, . �. � mYlll,'; I w'J" a;,,� tV�., Irl^".�, 'y a.,.".".," "�� � !I, ��" ,, ,� � ''o ` R tldu 'p�, qw w'. 4• J" ..., ., �,r ml"I rig' "" 'w. " 4w�1 Nm�, t v .. "„:., Ym .., Pµ gyp; :,\ ""��,,, �. �I �,;P� � . . � ",j� "i R� ' � „� iu''»nu,°ror" I .�',";, :a "m 1 ^ `^'•*v t w'"'" � "VM � � .,... W Y P`, 1 � iY' b "P ",'. ° 'P �`, ''•a I� r �r ,. a �m''ni�.','w, .r, `w_ "" ",YYi"B " „"I; "'r w, 4', ` !,,,." w '#kw" ", 'p^'", �r „",„ ^„ww ," nd "ti ,' /N ".,r `b" ^ !,,II ,� �,,,,,,,,'u';;;"� �R q`�.. ,w.• 1 "w gym'' y..��^ V'wm ';,:'rv� d :� w ;w "r„" ., "� •°' vw d ��. - ^p r r � � I„V ” I"� it i7 � b„ All ,,�".. 1AiR b 4 '� J mr:,� r 1, � 14a�a, a M ",'„� " "p,., "� m ra"���, ;u �, ",'ti. a ,.,,rn ,�"'; .. '��".,,�. �,,J ",,,^ '6" .. �. �,,� .•,,- '"" R..."�t^ m,4� 1 :.L. II" ..... e..." �,.r "'m ml,,,^ ".�� �,i r ���� "m ., I��'�rv" i `S.`,�q /�1 1',,,�� '„ ��, � � �� :v " 'JWI'�r I k1 Abu v,,,� � ;"� R' ^ �"''„~'^•• �'m' ��ty Street Imp rovemIt, Proposed Trail Proposed Sidewalk P ^ �,,. Multi-Family Ilu � �^. I� 1 � � M � I City Non-Residential I Undeveloped NOTE: Property #15 is Assessment Map car r not being assessed for N Mo�ikdostreet improvements 7th St, Washington Ave, because of prior Chelsea Rd, and Fallon Ave Improvements 0 400 assessments associated Monticello, MN nmmmmmE=== Feet WSB with CP 2001-07C City Project No. 16C006 Date: 2/12/18 1 inch = 400 feet Preliminary Assessment Roll - Fallon Avenue Overpass- 7Th Street, Chelsea Road and Washington Street Improvements Failnn Avenue ove,— Rn DFM, CSelsea Road and-1-1ln S11ee1Imprn -A- CITY OF MONTICFI TO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNFSOTA CITY PROJFCT NO 1b—b WSR PROJFCT NO 259b-100 PROPERTY Nn IIJFNTIFIGATION NO PROPERTY OWNER r R., .,ID PID Owner Name i 15501a00-0 WCG HUII DING PARTNFRS I I C PROPERTY MA111NG ADDRESS Property Add— lib CHFI SFA RD MONTIGFI I O MN 55362 TOTAL FRONT FOOTAGE Iand Use STREET WASTREETOO SIDEWALK wS DEWALKN FTRAILNDINGTOAI 'OSIDEWALK UFI SEA SPINGN Lantl Usa Ind'S1"I I 4410 RATEIFF /TH WASHINGTON TOTAL /TH WASHINGTON STREET STREET SIDEWALK TRAIL PROPOSED TREIIF ASSFSSMFNT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CHFI TRAILRAE FF RATE FF RATEIF A TsiFR 31150 5598050 55,96051 1551310DIU10 HOEFR FAMII Y LP 1135.STH AVE NF, SAUK RAPIDS, ON 563/9 Commercial 4020 2140 32/00 $2/00 S7.[9800 55.4_/00 512.6250, 3 155011001010 WSI INDUSTRIES INC 213 CHFI SFA RD MONTICFI IO MN 5536) Ind'Slr',1 /560 31150 s1',2'b OC SIT111b Al 4 1550/TOIL10 AFI PROPERTIES I I C 155116000010 CITY OF MONTICFI LO 155116002')0 CITY OF MONTICFI LO / 15511600)'10 CITY OF MONTICFI LO 301 CHFI SFA ROAD MONTICFI IO MN 55362 565 WAI NUT ST STF I MONTICFI IO MN»3b2 SOS WAI NUT ST STF I MONTIGFI IO MN»3b2 565 WAI NUT ST STF I MONTICFI IO UP 1—Y Indus, sl RIA,—T.1 4463 Resrdenllai 1160 1160 Resrdenllai 2954 )954 4/t0 1/90 s1160 51,593 UC s1'—. 33600 51150 316,06580 5604".3 S1b,bO)W S[b 00 51150 54,1/600 51,556 OJ 51,/4201 SIb 00 51150 51063440 53.96/90 514,62231 1550—FULIO CITY OF MONTICFI LO 155050101050 HI UFF S IN MONTICFI IO II C 10 155050101UUHIUFFSINMONTICFIIOIIC SOS WAI NUT ST STF I MONTICFI IO MN»3b2 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A AN 55391 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A AN 55391 Resrdenllai 1220 Mu11-FamJy Res 84/ 64/ MUII-Fam.Iy Res 84/ 64/ S[b 00 S[6005135' SIb 00 5115' 51.19200 54.192 OC 53.04920 51.14145 54.192 b5 53.04920 51,14145 54,192 b5 11 15505010—D M UFFS IN MONTICFI IO LIC 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A AN 55391 MUII-Fam.Iy Res 84/ 64/ SIb 00 s1160 53.04920 51,14145 54, 192 b5 11, 155-1101— M UFFS IN MONTICFI IO LIC 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A AN 55391 MUII- ,Yly Res 84/ 64/ SIb 00 s1160 53.04920 5114145 54, 192 b5 11, 155-11FIUIOHI UFFS INMONTICF11011C 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A MN 55391 MUII-Fam.Iy Res 1642 1512 SIb 00 s1160 S1.1112O 52,06".!0 5/,b129C 1 14 155050101'20 HI UFFS IN MONTICFI IO II C 155016042010 M UFFS IN MONTICFI IO LIC 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A MN 55391 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A MN 5.5391 Gnmmercial 432/ MUII-Fam.ly Res 1541 3113 )950 So000 So00' 090D9 Sit SO 16.94300 S38.—AS 53.46/25 11ITC!!t 5348250 531,4,6/5 11, 155050102010 M UFFS IN MONTICFI 1011 C 3339 CRYSTAL HAY RD WAY—A MN 55391 MUII-Fam.Iy Res 2 14 6 35 . Sib 000" 3/./3280 5501900 515./5156 16 101 155116000 CITY OF MONTICFI LO SOS WAI NUT ST STF I MONTICFI IO MN 113b2 RIA,—T.1 6162 33b 00 $2002320 520,0221 NOTES erty 42 assessed IT r. of tM1e front fnoiage alnnq Falion Ave for <nrner 44 assessed lS":. of Ne front 1, 1— Falion Ave for lot Irani assessment s.nx tM1ere rs an access Fallon Avers Int i•ari sense tM1ere rs no Falion Ave TOTAL 3029 n' ne//0 16440 "10' 131530P /1/'0 cnnsrdered iM1e srde Int srde of Ne Property Clralsea Roads he front srde rs iM1e srde Int srde of Ne CM1alsea Rnad.s Ne front srde /Sn 00 8206.619.98 erty alnnq corner assessment atcess cnnsrdered Property Property 45 assessed lSof Ne front rnnisoe alnnq Falion Ave for corner lot i•ari assessment sense tM1ere rs no atcess Falion Ave rs cnnsrdered iM1e sere Int s.d, of Ne Property CM1alsea Roads Ne front srde erty 416 assessed)S"x ni the honi fonla9e alnnq/ih sheer rnr Ae tomer tot s0eei assessmenl since mere rs nD drrecl atcess Wasnrnglon sirs Ne+rnni srde Prnnertv 41! assessed )S"x nt the A- fnoleoe along GO'h 9tnn sneer fm the turner Int meet auessment vn:e here was nn tlrreq asress mint to —1-1 mns1 1.- /[n Street rc 0e TOP side APPENDIX C Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Feasibility Report Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City of Monticello Project No. 16C006 WSB Project No. 2596-400 CONSULTANTS GEOTECHNfCAL 9ATERIA: -S FORENSICS www.amengtest.com GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATIOISP FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN REPORT Fallon Avenue.Bridge over Interstate 9 And Roadway Construction Monticello, Minnesota I Um December 20, 2017 ummmmm Mr. Andrew Plowman, PE WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Mumeapolis., MNT 55416 AET Project No. 0 1-07160 December 20, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, NIN 55416 Attn: Mr. Andrew Plowman, PE RE: Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Avenue Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction Monticello, Minnesota AET Project No. X11-071 0 Ikar Mr, Plowman: ENV1R0NWFND-4F U"E01 F 0 R, F N S I American Engineering Testing, Inc, (AET) is pleased to present the results of our subsurface exploration program and geotechnical engineering review for the proposed construction of Fallon Avenue Bridge over 194 in Monticello, Miruiesota. These services were performed according to our proposal to you dated February 15, 2017 We are submitting an electronic copy of the report to you via email, Please contact me if you have any questions about the report. Sincerely, American Engineering Testing, Inc. Mattliew P. Ruble, PE Vice President - Principal Engineer Phone: (651) 659-1314 pu: �Lible(q),an-ienp-tcst. corn 550 ClevOand Avc,'�nue Norlh I ��J, P�fl, MN PlIhnne W)l T011 Fvt,u� 800-97'1,'--b3G4 615'1-65�,13'119 Gcotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMI�'RICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEI!^,RING Report No, 01-07160 TESTING, INC, Signature Page WSB & Associates-, Inc. 701 Xenia Aventie South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Attn: Andrew Plowman, PE Report Authored By: Matthew P. Ruble, PE Vice President - Principal Engineer I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am as duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota Name: Matthew P. Ruble Date: /-,7 �/ -z License ft. 40935 Copyright 2017 American Engificering Testing, Inc, All Rights Resetvcd American Enginecring'Festing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue Nortli St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 (651) 659-900 1 /www,an1engteSt.cOj11 Peer lie;ilew Consluetpd, By: Gregory R. Reuter, PE, PG, 11GE' Principal Engineer b'nfm1hori:vd we ff CUJL>I,hlg (?fthiS dOCIMIOU is sh,01), prohibiled by an,vone rather 1han Me clienifin - the ypecific projecr Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS TransmittalLetter............................................................................................................................. i SignaturePage.................................................................................................................................ii .............................................................................................................. TABLE OF CONTENTS" iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES.............................................................................................................1 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION.....................................................................................................2 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND TESTING.................................................................2 4.1 Field Exploration Program.....................................................................................................2 4.2 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and Pavement Coring.......................................................3 5.0 SITE CONDITIONS.................................................................................................................5 5.1 Subsurface Soils/Geology......................................................................................................5 5.2 Groundwater........................................................................................................................... 5 5.3 Laboratory Testing.................................................................................................................6 6.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................6 6.1 Foundation Type and Depth...................................................................................................6 6.3 Footing Design.......................................................................................................................7 7.0 APPROACH EMBANKMENTS..............................................................................................8 7.1 Embankment Construction.....................................................................................................8 7.2 Embankment Settlements.......................................................................................................8 7.3 Waiting Period for Embankments..........................................................................................9 7.4 Embankment Side Slopes.......................................................................................................9 7.5 Abutment/Retaining Wall Backfilling...................................................................................9 8.0 Pavement.................................................................................................................................10 8.1 Definitions............................................................................................................................10 8.2 Utility Support, Bedding, and Backfilling...........................................................................14 9.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS...............................................................................14 9.1 Potential Difficulties............................................................................................................14 9.2 Excavation Backsloping.......................................................................................................15 9.3 Observation and Testing.......................................................................................................15 10.0 LIMITATIONS.....................................................................................................................16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-0X60 TESTING, INC. APPENDIX A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing Summaries of GPR Data (14 pages) i Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Boring Log Descriptive Terminology AASHTO Soil Classification System Figure 1 — Boring Locations Subsurface Boring Logs R -value Report LRFD Spread Footing Bearing Graphs APPENDIX C — Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 20I7 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 1.0 INTRODUCTION A new bridge will be constructed to carry Fallon Avenue traffic over Interstate 94 in Monticello, Minnesota. There will be no vehicular access to the Interstate. Seventh Street will be realigned to connect to Fallon Avenue. Three roundabouts will also be constructed for the project. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES AET's services on this project were performed according to our proposal dated February 15, 2017. The scope of work. performed for the new bridge and roadway construction, consists of the following: • Drill and sample three standard penetration test (SPT) borings meeting MnDOT depth criteria for bridge foundation borings. • Drill and sample nine standard penetration test (SPT) borings to a depth of about 10 feet for the new roadway. • Preform four cores to determine the thickness for the bituminous material in the existing roadway alignment. • Conduct ground penetrating radar (GPR) testing. • Conduct laboratory soil moisture content testing. • Perform R-value/Proctor tests. • Perform a geotechnical engineering review based on the gained data, and prepare this design report. These services are intended for geotechnical purposes. The scope was not intended to explore for the presence or extent of environmental contamination. Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION The new Fallon Avenue Bridge will be a two -span structure. The new bridge is planned to have an out -to -out length of 200 feet and an out -to -out width of about 54 feet - 4 inches. The bridge will have an approximately 91 -foot long south span and a 105 -foot long north span. Based on preliminary bridge plan information provided to us by WSB, we understand that abutment foundation bottom elevations will be about 958.50 at both abutment locations. The foundation bottom elevation for the interior pier will be about 950. The stated information represents our current understanding of the proposed construction. This information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us if there are changes from the information described so that we can evaluate whether modifications to our recommendations are appropriate. 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND TESTING 4.1 Field Exploration Program The subsurface exploration program conducted for the propose bridge and roadway construction consisted of twelve standard penetration test (SPT) borings. Boring B-6 was drilled at the proposed north abutment location, B-7 was drilled at the proposed pier location, and B-8 was drilled at the proposed south abutment location. B-1 through B-5 and B-9 through B-12 were drilled for the roadway construction. The boring location coordinates and ground surface elevations were provided to us by WSB. The logs of the borings and details of the methods used appear in Appendix B. The SPT and soil auger logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil classification, geologic description, and moisture condition. Relative density or consistency is also noted for the natural soils, which is based on the standard penetration resistance (N -value). Page 2 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-0X60 TESTING, INC. 4.2 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and Pavement Coring 4.2.IPavement Thickness The GPR data was collected on April 24, 2017, on the streets pre -selected by City personnel totaling approximately 1.6 miles. We used a high speed (air coupled) GPR antenna collecting the pavement thickness data at one scan per foot. The data was collected using a 2 GHz antenna, which allows material layer measurements at depths of 18 to 24 inches. The scans were collected according to SIR -20 processor settings established by GSSI Roadscan system, approximately in the middle of the traveling lane in both directions of travel. The scanned data was processed using RADAN 7, a proprietary software package from GSSI RoadScan. We have attached standardized sheets entitled "Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing." TABLE 1 - GPR Thickness Information Street Bituminous Layer 2, Possible Base Avg Avg, in. CV 15th, in. Avg, in. CV 15th, in. rotal, in. 7t" Street 5.1 10% 4.7 8.4 8% 7.6 13.6 Chelsea Road 6.4 9% 5.8 9.7 8% 8.8 16.1 Fallon Avenue S of I94 6.4 6% 6.1 7.4 19% 6.4 13.8 Washington Street 5.5 9% 5.1 8.3 10% 7.6 13.8 Average 5.9 5.4 8.5 7.6 The GPR data showed interfaces for several layers. Using the core data, we were able to choose ("pick") the bottom of the bituminous layer. It is highly discernible in the majority of the GPR data. The interface between the aggregate base and the subgrade was less obvious and we have less confidence in "picking" this layer. We have used our judgement in determining the correct layer. We have attached summaries/plots of our GPR data averaged in 10 -foot segments. Table 1 shows the statistical results of the GPR data for the through lanes for the streets averaged for the Page 3 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. two lanes. The 15th percentile represents the value that 85 percent of the pavement layer thickness is greater than, and this is the value we generally recommend using for design purposes. The CV is the coefficient of variation. Information for the turn lanes, shoulders, and auxiliary areas is included in the attached summaries/plots. 4.2.2 Pavement Thickness Four locations were chosen for coring, we obtained four -inch diameter cores at each location. The cores were obtained with a diamond bit coring machine mounted to a truck. After the cores were removed, they were returned to our laboratory for thickness measurements. The thickness of the cores ranged from 4.9 inches to 6.5 inches, with an average of 5.6 inches. The aggregate base thickness ranged from 7.5 to 8 inches with the average at 7.75 inches. The results of our thickness measurements are shown in Table 2. TABLE 2 — Core and Aggregate Base Thickness Information Core ID Street Thickness of Bituminous, in. C-1 Fallon Ave S of Chelsea 6 Rd C-2 Chelsea Rd E of Fallon 6.5 Ave C-3 E 7th St E of Fallon Ave 4.9 C-4 E 7th St W of Fallon Ave 5 L Avg 5.6 Page 4 of 16 Thickness of Aggregate Base, in. 7.5 8 8 7.5 7.75 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 5.0 SITE CONDITIONS 5.1 Subsurface Soils/Geology The subsurface exploration program conducted for the project consisted of twelve standard penetration test borings. B-1 through B-5 and B-9 through B-12 were drilled and sampled to a depth of 10 feet. Boring B-6, B-7, and B-8 were drilled to depths of 81 to 86 feet. The logs of the borings and details of the methods used appear in Appendix B. The logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil classification, geologic description, and moisture condition. Relative density or consistency is also noted for the natural soils, which is based on the standard penetration resistance (N -value). The boring locations are shown on Figure 1 in Appendix B. The borings were located in the field by AET personnel. 5.2 Groundwater Borings B-6, B-7, and B-8 had groundwater levels observed at depths of 25.2 to 31.1 feet, corresponding to elevations between 923'/2 and 927. Those were the deepest borings performed for this project because they were foundation depth borings. This observed water level is well below the bottom of footing elevations between 950 and 960. The remainder of the borings were shallow borings and did not encounter the groundwater level. Groundwater levels fluctuate due to varying seasonal and annual rainfall and snow melt amounts, as well as other factors. The measured water levels reported in the borings reflect the conditions encountered during drilling. The measured water levels do not necessarily provide the static groundwater level elevation. Page 5 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 5.3 Laboratory Testing The laboratory test program included visual and manual classification of the soil samples along with water content testing of cohesive samples. The test results appear in Appendix B on the boring logs adjacent to the samples upon which they were performed. At the location of C-1, at a depth of 1.5 to 4 feet, we obtained a bag sample for R -value testing. The results, which are attached, indicate an R -value of 75. A second R -value test was performed on soil sampled 0.5 to 1.5 feet below the surface at SB -4 with a test result of 32. A third R -value test was performed on soil sampled 0.5 to 1.5 feet below the surface at SB -8 with a test result of 13. The report also includes the methods used to obtain the results. 6.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Foundation Type and Depth Based on our interpretation of the subsurface conditions, the bridge abutments and pier can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations. Footings should be supported at least 4.5 feet below final grade for frost protection. 6.2 Foundation Grading/Filling The soils are judged to be capable of supporting the abutments and pier on spread footing foundations; however, we recommend providing a one -foot thick layer of Aggregate Bedding (MnDOT 2016 Specification 3149.2G.1 — Fine Aggregate Bedding) below the footings to assist sliding resistance. Prior to placement of the Aggregate Bedding, the exposed bearing soils should be observed, probed with hand auger borings, and evaluated for suitability by a geotechnical engineer/technician. If suitable granular soils are encountered, they should be surface compacted prior to footing construction with a smooth drum vibratory compactor. If cohesive soils are Page 6 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. encountered, or if soft, loose, or deleterious soils are encountered, they should be subcut and replaced with compacted Select Granular Material (MnDOT 2016 Specification 3149.2.B.2) up to the level of the Aggregate Bedding. The excavation should continue to extend out horizontally from the edge of foundations a distance at least equal to the depth of fill required to establish bottom of footing grade, forming a 1:1 oversizing. The Aggregate Bedding and any Select Granular Material should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness and compacted in accordance with MnDOT Specification 2105. Compaction should meet the Specified Density Method, with the modification that the entire thickness of the new fill below the footing be compacted to a minimum of 100% of the Standard Proctor density (ASTM: D698/AASHTO T99). The area of the abutment should be surcharged as shown in MnDOT standard plan 5-297.234. The surcharge should remain in place for 72 hours before removal. 6.3 Footing Design 6.3.1 Nominal Bearing Resistance — Strength Limit State The calculated nominal bearing resistance at the Strength Limit State for the abutment and pier footings are plotted in the appendix of this report. When checking Strength Limit States, a resistance factor, cpb = 0.45 should be applied. 6.3.2 Nominal Bearing Resistance — Service Limit State Settlement estimates were made for footing widths of 5, 10, 12, and 15 feet. The nominal resistance was estimated which resulted in one inch of settlement for each footing width. The results are plotted in the LRFD Spread Footing Bearing Graphs, and are net nominal bearing Page 7 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. resistances for an assumed footing length, L, of 60 feet. The resistance factor associated with the nominal resistances at the Service Limit State is 1.0. 6.3.3 Sliding Resistance of Abutment Footings The shear resistance of the Aggregate Bedding along the base of the footing must be sufficient to resist the computed lateral loads. This allows the passive resistance from the soils in front of the footing to be ignored. For this evaluation, we recommend the following parameters: a friction angle of 33 degrees for cast -in-place concrete on the Aggregate Bedding, a Nominal Sliding Resistance of 0.65 times the applied vertical force, and a Resistance Factor of 0.8. 7.0 APPROACH EMBANKMENTS 7.1 Embankment Construction Approach embankment construction should be in accordance with MnDOT Standard Plan Sheet 5-297.234 and MnDOT Spec. 2105 "Excavation and Embankment." Excavation of existing topsoil/organic soil, and any soft/disturbed soils is recommended in the new embankment areas. Excavation base soils should be evaluated at the time of construction by a Geotechnical Engineer. The embankments will be up to 28 feet higher than current grade. To reduce the amount of settlement of the final grade due to compression of the fill itself, the embankment fill should consist of compacted granular soil conforming to MnDOT Spec. 3149.2B.1 "Granular Material." 7.2 Embankment Settlements We estimate that total embankment settlement will be less than one inch. Because the foundation soils are mostly coarse-grained soils, and because all topsoil and organic soil, and any Page 8 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. soft/disturbed soils will be removed, we anticipate that the settlement of the embankment soils will take place immediately as the embankment is constructed. 7.3 Waiting Period for Embankments We anticipate that the settlement of the embankment soils will take place immediately as the embankment is constructed;. The area of the abutment should be surcharged as shown in MnDOT standard plan 5-297.234. The surcharge should remain in place for 72 hours before removal. 7.4 Embankment Side Slopes Embankment side slopes in areas not retained by walls are planned to be 1:3 (vertical: horizontal) or flatter. The stability of these slopes should not be of concern provided that they are constructed with approved embankment materials and meet compaction criteria. The side slopes must have proper erosion protection. Temporary excavation slopes should follow OSHA 29. 7.5 Abutment/Retaining Wall Backfilling Abutment and backfill material should meet the specifications of Structural Backfill MnDOT 2016 Specification 3149.2D.2 and 2105.3. Excavation slopes during construction should meet specifications for OSHA 29. The Structural Backfill geometry should be maintained per the requirements shown on the attached MnDOT Standard Sheet No. 5-297.624 (6 of 6), Retaining Wall Miscellaneous Details (Geotechnical Details). However, all excavation backsloping must also meet OSHA requirements. The backfill should be compacted per the Specified Density Method (MnDOT 2105.3F1). The wall design can be based on lateral pressures presented in MnDOT design charts. Page 9 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 8.0 PAVEMENT 8.1 Definitions For definitions related to pavement construction, and referenced in italics in the following sections, please see the attached standard sheet at the end of this report entitled "Definitions Relating to Pavement Construction." 8.1.1 Subgrade Preparation The upper subgrade soils are moderately poor to poor from a frost and drainage standpoint. These conditions can result in accelerated subgrade and aggregate base weakening resulting in cracking of the pavement surface and distortion. Long term pavement performance can be improved by construction of a sand subbase layer beneath the aggregate base. This sand subbase will better control moisture in the subgrade and associated pavement distresses. The subgrade soils near the surface are quite variable. The soils at depth are consistently more granular. If the pavement section is placed near the existing surface the existing subgrade soils will be highly variable and will provide very different pavement support as shown in the recommended R -value table below. Soils with lower R -value could be removed and replaced to obtain a higher R -value. It is our understanding a 24 inch thick subbase of select granular will be used for the project. We provide a higher R -value number to use for pavement design in the table below if the 24 inch thick select granular subbase is used. In areas of existing soil with higher R -value, an additional 24 inches of granular subbase does not provide a higher R -value for pavement design. Consideration should be made to eliminating the 24 inch granular subbase for those layers. Page 10 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. TABLE 3 — Subgrade Soils If organic soils are found to be present within the critical subgrade zone at the time of construction, we recommend removing these soils. Page 11 of 16 Depth AASHTO Recommended R -Value Recommended R -value Boring (ft) Triangular Classification Classification R -value Test with 24 inch select Results granular subbase B-1 0-0.7 Plastic Sandy Loam A-6 12 30 Slightly Plastic B-1 0.7 to 7.6 Sandy Loam A-2 to A-4 30 50 I B-2 0.2 to 2.0 Loamy Sand A-1- b 70 70* B-2 2 to 4 Sand A-1- b 70 70* Slightly Organic Plastic B-3 0 to 2 Sandy Loam A-6 12 30 B-3 2 to 4 Sand A -1-b 70 70* Slightly Plastic Sandy B-4 0 to 2 Loam A-2-4 30 32 50 Slightly Organic Silty Clay B-4 2 to 11 Loam A-6 12 30 Slightly Organic Plastic B-5 0 to 2 Sandy Loam A-6 12 30 B-5 2 to 4 Loamy Sand A-2 to A-4 70 70* B-6 0 to 1 Plastic Sandy Loam A-6 12 30 B-6 1 to 6.5 Sand A -1-b 70 70* B-7 0.7 to 4 Gravelly Loamy Sand A -1-b 70 70* B-7 4 to 6.5 Loamy Sand A-2 to A-4 70 70* Slightly Organic Plastic B-8 0 to 2 Sandy Loam A-6 12 13 30 B-8 2 to 4 Sand A -1-b 70 70* Slightly Plastic Sandy B-9 0 to 5.5 Loam A-2 to A-4 30 50 Gravelly Slightly Plastic B-10 0.5 to 1.3 Sandy Loam A-2 to A-4 30 50 Slightly Plastic Sandy B-10 1.3 to 2 Loam A-2 to A-4 30 50 B-10 2 to 6.5 Loamy Sand A-2 to A-4 70 70* 0.3 to Slightly Plastic Sandy B-11 10.5 Loam A-2 to A-4 30 50 Slightly Plastic Sandy B-12 0.4 to 0.8 Loam A-2 to A-4 30 50 B-13 0.8 to 6.5 Loamy Sand A-2 to A-4 70 75 70* *A 24 inch thick sand subbase provides essentially no additional R -value support for these layers. Consideration should be made to eliminating the sand subbase in these layers. If organic soils are found to be present within the critical subgrade zone at the time of construction, we recommend removing these soils. Page 11 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. Where there is a need to vary the thickness of this sand subbase, we recommend the thickness have a taper no steeper than 20:1 (H:V). To prevent build-up of water within the sand subbase layer, engineered perforated drain pipes should be placed at the bottom of the sand layer, in the lower areas where water would migrate if soils of lower permeability exist below the sand subbase. In some areas the existing soils below the sand subbase are free draining and do not need drain tile. The drain pipes should outfall into nearby storm sewer or daylighted into a storm water pond. 8.1.2 Stability Improvement The final subgrade should have proper stability within the critical subgrade zone. Stability of the subgrade soils should be evaluated, preferably using the test roll procedure. Following the compaction of the exposed subcut and prior to placement of the recommended sand subbase, we recommend the subgrade soils be test -rolled (as described in the attached sheet) to determine if unstable zones exist. If unstable soils are encountered, either they should be subcut and replaced, or they should be scarified, dried, and recompacted until proper stability is achieved. Soils reworked in-place should be prepared similar to new fill materials and meet the water content and compaction requirements outlined later for new fill placement. 8.1.3 Geosynthetic Use In our judgement a geotextile fabric is not needed as a part of the pavement design. However, a geotextile fabric can be incorporated during construction if needed as reinforcement to aid in off- setting subgrade instability. For stability improvement, it is desired that fabric be placed within the subgrade, below a sand subbase or aggregate base layer when a sand subbase is not constructed (which better uses the tensile properties of the fabric). The use of a fabric (or a Page 12 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. geogrid) may be helpful in areas where deeper subcutting is not possible due to in-place utilities. However, you should recognize that the use of a geotextile stabilization fabric over unstable soils may not necessarily provide an equivalent off -set (compared to proper soil stabilization). Geotextile fabric use and installation should meet the requirements of MnDOT Specification 3733. A Type V geotextile is judged appropriate for separation purposes, although the need for separation is not judged necessary when the native subgrade is stable and when a sand subbase is used. If you wish to provide subgrade reinforcement, then a stronger geotextile should be used (Type VI). The appropriate strength would depend on the extent of instability, the function of the road, the expected performance, and the available budget. 8.1.4 Frost/Drainage Improvement The use of a sand subbase layer is recommended to better control subsurface water and reduce aggregate base and upper subgrade saturation and to improve subgrade uniformity from both a frost as well as stability perspective. 8.1.5 Compaction Fill should be placed per the requirements of MnDOT Specification 2105.3F.1 (Specified Density Method). In ASTM terms, this specification requires soils placed within the critical subgrade zone be compacted to a minimum of 100% of the standard maximum dry unit weight defined in ASTM: D698 (Standard Proctor test), at a water content of 65% to 102% of the standard optimum water content. A reduced compaction level of 95% of the standard maximum dry unit weight can be used below the critical subgrade zone. The sand subbase can be considered part of a composite subgrade; and the top of the subbase can be figured as the top of the 3 foot subgrade zone needing the 100% compaction level. However the lower (dry) end of the water content range requirement does not need to apply to sands. Page 13 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 8.2 Utility Support, Bedding, and Backfilling If utility installation/repair takes place, we recommend trenching, installation, repairs, and backfilling be performed prior to final street subgrade preparation and sand subbase placement. With proper pipe bedding, the soils represented by the borings should provide adequate foundation support for utility construction. Special bedding would be needed in cases of trench bottom instability or where the pipe is placed within soils which may create point loads (e.g., high gravel content, cobble, and/or boulder laden soils). We refer you to the attached standard data sheets entitled "Bedding/Foundation Support of Buried Pipe" and "Utility Excavation Backfilling" for additional recommendations on utility bedding and for utility backfilling. If groundwater enters trenches during construction, we recommend positive dewatering be performed such that bedding placement and pipe installation can be performed in a non -standing water condition. 9.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 9.1 Potential Difficulties 9.1.1 Groundwater To allow observations of the excavation bottoms, to reduce the potential for soil disturbance, and to facilitate filling operations, we recommend water be promptly removed from within any excavation during construction. Page 14 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 9.1.2 Disturbance of Soils The on-site soils can easily become disturbed under construction traffic, especially if the soils are wet. If soils become disturbed, they should be subcut to the underlying undisturbed soils. The subcut soils can then be dried and recompacted back into place, or they should be removed and replaced with drier imported fill. 9.2 Excavation Backsloping If excavation faces are not retained, the excavations should maintain maximum allowable slopes in accordance with OSHA Regulations (Standards 29 CFR), Part 1926, Subpart P, "Excavations" (can be found on www.osha.gov). Even with the required OSHA sloping, water seepage or surface runoff can potentially induce sideslope erosion or running which could require slope maintenance. 9.3 Observation and Testing The recommendations in this report are based on the subsurface conditions found at our test boring locations. Since the soil conditions can be expected to vary away from the soil boring locations, we recommend on-site observation by a geotechnical engineer/technician during construction to evaluate these potential changes. We recommend that all foundation bearing surfaces be observed by an AET Geotechnical Engineer immediately prior to concrete placement. Soil density testing should also be performed on all fill placed at the site to document that our recommendations and the specifications for compaction and moisture have been satisfied. Where fill material type is important, laboratory sieve analyses should be performed to document that the actual fill meets the recommended gradation criteria. The building materials should also be tested in accordance with the project specifications. Page 15 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN December 20, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. 10.0 LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of scope, budget, and schedule, we have endeavored to provide our services according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty, either express or implied, is intended. Important information regarding risk management and proper use of this report is given in Appendix B entitled "Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use." Page 16 of 16 Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN June 26, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 41-07160 TESTING, INC. Appendix A Ground Penetration Radar Field Exploration and Testing Summaries of GPR Data Appendix A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing A.1 -FIELD EXPLORATION The pavement structural conditions atthe site were evaluated nondestructively using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR). The description of the equipment precedes the GPR Data and Analysis Results in this appendix. A.2 EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION A.2.1 GSSI GPR Test System The GPR test system owned by AET is a GSSI Roadscan System that consists of a bumper mounted, 2 GHz air -coupled antenna and a SIR -20 control and data acquisition processor, featuring dual channels. The GPR processor, including a SIR- 20 IR20 data acquisition system, wheel -mounted DMI (Distance Measuring Instrument), and a tough book with the SIR -20 Field Program constitutes the newest, most sophisticated GSSI Test System, which fulfills or exceeds all requirements to meet ASTM -4748, ASTM D-6087 Standards. The figure below provides a view of this equipment. Figure 1 GSSI 2 GHz air -coupled GPR Test System The GPR antenna emits a high frequency electromagnetic wave into the material under investigation. The reflected energy caused by changes in the electromagnetic properties within the material is detected by a receiver antenna and recorded for subsequent analysis. The 2 GHz air -coupled GPR is capable of collecting radar waveforms at more than 100 signals per second, allows for data to be collected at driving speeds along the longitudinal dimension of the pavements or bridge decks with the antennas fixed at the rear or in front of the vehicle. The antenna used for Roadscan is the Horn antenna Model 4105 (2 GHz). The 2 GHz antenna is the current antenna of choice for road survey because it combines excellent resolution with reasonable depth penetration (18-24 inches in pavement materials). The data collection is performed at normal driving speeds (45-55 mph), requiring no lane closures nor causing traffic congestion, At this speed the 2 GHz antenna is capable of collecting data at 1 -foot interval (1 scan/foot). The data were collected at a rate of about 1 vertical scans per foot. Each vertical scan consisted of 512 samples and the record length in time of each scan was 12 nanoseconds. Filters used during acquisition were 300 MHz high pass and 5,000 MHz low pass. In a GPR test, the antenna is moved continuously across the test surface and the control unit collects data at a specified distance increment. In this way, the data collection rate is independent of the scan rate, Alternatively, scanning can be performed at a constant rate of time, regardless of the scan distance. Single point scans can be performed as well. Data is reviewed on-screen and in the field to identify reflections and ensure proper data collection parameters. Field testing is performed in accordance with the standard ASTM procedures as described in ASTM D 4695-96, "Standard Guide for General Pavement Deflection Measurements", A.2.2 System Calibrations Horn antenna processing is used to get the velocity of the radar energy in the material by comparing the reflection strengths (amplitudes) from a pavement layer interface with a perfect reflector (a metal plate). The calibration scan is obtained with the horn antenna placed over a metal plate at the same elevation as a scan obtained over pavement. The setting for data collection is used for metal plate calibration, Fifteen seconds are needed for jumping up and down on the vehicle's bumper to collect the full range of motion for the vehicle's shocks, The filename of raw calibration file is recorded. Appendix; A — Page 1 of 3 AMERICAN ENGMERING TESTING, INC. Appendix A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing The survey wheel is calibrated by laying out a long distance (> 50 feet) with a tape measure. A.2.3 Linear Distance and Spatial Reference System Distance measuring instrument (Dnp is a trailer mounted two phase encoder system. When DMI is connected to the SIR - 20 it provides for automatic display and recording distance informatipu in both English and metric wilts with a 1 foot (0.3 meters) resolution and four percent accuracy when calibrated using provided procedure in the Field Program.. Spatial reference system is a Trimble ProXH Global Positioning System (GPS) that consists of fully integrated receiver, antenna and battery unit with Trimble°s new H Stam technology to provide subfoot (30 cm) post processed accuracy. The External Patch antenna is added to the ProXH receiver for the position of the loading plate. The External Patch antenna can be conveniently elevated with the optional baseball cap to prevent any signal blockage. A.2.4 Camera Monitoring System A battery operated independent DC -1908B multi -functional digital camera with a SD card'is used for easy positioning of the loading plate or of the pavement surface condition at the testing locations. A.3 SAMPLING METHODS At the project level, the testing interval is set at 12 scans per foot in the Outside Wheel Path (OWP) = 2.5 ft ± 0.25 ft (0.76 m + 0.08 m) for nominal 12 ft (3.7 m) wide lanes atia survey speed of approximately 10 mph. Where a divided roadbed exists, surveys will be taken in both directions if the project will include improvements in both directions. If there is more than one lane in one direction the surveys will be taken in the outer driving lane (truck lane) versus the passing lane of the highway. GPR tests are performed at a constant lateral offset down the test section. When GPR tests are performed on bridge decks, multiple survey lines are followed transversely at 2 -foot spacing between survey lines. At the network, level, GPR tests on one scan per foot are set to be able to collect data on pavements at driving speeds, without statistically compromising the quality of the data collected. If GPR tests are for the in situ characterization of material GPR data will be collected at two scan per foot at slower driving speeds. A.4 QUALITY CONTROL (QC) AND QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) Besides the daily metal plate calibration, the D -NR is also calibrated monthly by driving the vehicle over a known distance to calculate the distance scale factor. The GPR will be monitored in real time in the data collection vehicle to minimize data errors. The GPR units will -be identified with a unique number and that number will accompany all data reported from that unit as required in the QC/QA plan. Scheduled preventive maintenance ensures proper equipment operation and helps identify potential problems that can be corrected to avoid poor quality or missing data that results if the equipment malfunctions while on site. The routine and major maintenance procedures established by the LTPP are adopted and any maintenance has been dozie at the end of the day after the testing is complete and become part of the routine performed at the end of each test/travel day and on days when no other work is scheduled. To insure quality data, the GPR assessments only took place on dry pavement surfaces. A.5 DATA ANALYSIS METHODS A.5.1 Data Editipg Field acquisition is seldom so routine that no errors, omissions or data redundancy occur. Data editing encompasses issues such as data re -organization, data file merging, data header or background information updates, repositioning and inclusion of elevation information with the data. A.5.2 Basic Processing Basic data processing addresses some of the fundamental manipulations applied to data to make a more acceptable product for initial interpretation and data evaluation. In most instances this type of processing is already applied in real-time to Appendix A — Page 2 of 3 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Appendix A Ground Penetrating Radar Field Exploration and Testing generate the real-time display. The advantage of post survey processing is that the basic processing can be done more systematically and non -causal operators to remove or enhance certain features can be applied. The Reflection ricking procedure is used to eliminate unwanted noise, detects significant reflections, and records the corresponding time and depth. It uses antenna calibration file data to calculate the radar signal velocity within the pavement. A.5.3 Advanced Processing Advanced data processing addresses the types of processing which require a certain amount of operator bias to be applied and which will result in data which are significantly different from the raw information which were input to the processing. A.5.4 Data Interpretation The EZ Tracker Layer Interpretation procedure uses the output from the first step to. map structural layers and calculate the corresponding velocities and depths. A.6 TEST LIMITATIONS A:.6.I Test Methods The data derived through the testing program have been used to develop our opinions about the paveitient conditions at your site. however, because no testing program can reveal totally what is in the subsurface, conditions between test locations and at other times, may differ from conditions described in this report. The testing we conducted identified pavement conditions only at those points where we measured pavement thicknesses and observed -pavement surface conditions. Depending on the sampling methods and sampling frequency, every location may not be tested, and some anomalies which are present in the pavement may not be noted on the testing results. If conditions encountered during construction differ from those indicated by our testing, it may be necessary to alter our conclusions and recommendations, or to modify construction procedures, and the cost of construction may be affected. A.6.2 Test Standards Pavement testing is done in general conformance with the described procedures. Compliance with any other standards referenced within the specified standard is neither inferred nor implied, A.7 SUPPORTING TEST METHODS A.7.1 Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) If the pavement layer moduli and subgrade soil strength are desired the deflection data are collected using a Dynatest 8000 FWD Test System that consists of a Dynatest 8002 trailer and a third generation control and data acquisition unit developed in 2003, called the Dynatest Compactly, featuring fifteen (15) deflection channels. The new generation FWD, including a Compact15 System and a standard PC with the FwdWin field Program constitutes the newest, most sophisticated Dynatest FWD Test System, which fulfills or exceeds all requirements to meet ASTM -4694, ASTM D-4695 Standards. The system provides continuous data at pro -set spacing. A.7.2 Sail Boring/Coring Field Exploration If both pavement thicknesses and subgrade soil types and conditions are desired, the shallow coring/boring and sampling is used. A limited number of corhiglboring is necessary to verify the GPR layer thickness data. Appendix A—Page 3 of AMERICAN ENGMEPJNG TESTING, INC. American Engineering Testing, Inc 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Z" - Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4124117 514117 'SECTION 7th St Mainline Lanes ROAD 7th St TERMINI West to East ;SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches Layer EB WB Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC 5.1 10% 4.7 3.9 5.2 10% 4.7 4.4 AB 8.3 6% 7.7, 6.9 8.6 9% 7.6 6.3 Avg - Average; CV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thichmess Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 F. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. -2 -6 =Z�� -14 -22 RB AC -------- VvrB AC EB Base ------- WB Base American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR -PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4124117 514117 SECTION 7th St Shoulder ROAD 7th St TERMINI West to East SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches EB w13 Layer Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC 5.4 11% 5.0 3.7 5.2 9% 4.8 4.2 AB 8.0 10% 71 5.8 8.6 I 8% 8.0 6.7 Avg -Average; CV-Coefficlentof Variation; 15th- 15th Percentile; Min- Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thielmess Survey GPR Distance (rit) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 -2 -6 -10 _14 -22 FB AC ------- WB AC EB Base ------- WB Base American Engineering Testing, Inc. VAI 550 Cleveland Avenue North fuSt, Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (�51) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4124/17 614117 SECTION Washington Street Mainline ROAD Washington Street TERMINI 7th St to End SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: Inches NB SB Layer Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC 6.6 11%' 5.1 4.8 5.4 5% 5.1 5.0 AB 8.7 12% 7.6 6.9 7,9 4% 7.6 7.4 Avg - Average; CV - coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 so 100 ISO 200 250 -2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -6 -- -------- — ------------------ ------------ -10 -14 ---------------------------- --- --------------------------- -18 -22 NB AC ------- SB AC NB Base ------- SB Base inAmerican Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland AvenueNoxth St Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax:(651)659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING _.......��..... .- �..... A RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge. Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4124117 514117 SECTION Washington Street Shoulder ROAD Washington Street TERMINI 7th St to End SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches Layer NB SB Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC 6.1 11% 5.5 4.6 5.8 9% 5.1 4.5 AB 7.6 11% 6.7 6.4 7.8 5% 7.3 6.8 Avg -Average; CV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC -Asphalt Concrete; AB -Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thiclmess Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 50 100 150 200 250 -2 -10 -14 -18 -22 ' NB AC ------- SB AC NB Base ------- SB Base American Engineering Testing, 1-ne. FA 1550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4/24117 514/17 -SECTION J Fallon Avenue N of 194 ROAD Fallon Avenue TERMINI 7th St to' End SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches Layer NB SB Avg OV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC 4.6 7% 4.3 4.2 4,9 12% 4.4 .3.7 AB 9.5 6% 9.1 8 4% 8.7 8.7 Avg - Average; GV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 20 40 60 -2 ----------------------------- 7 10 -14-- - — - - - ----- -18 � -22 _NB AC ------- SB AC NB Base SB Base American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 4ZIL'i = Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR ........ _...... .. _...... _._.......,._ PROJECT_ ... Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Dat.o....._.... Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4/24/17 514117 SECTION Lincoln Estate Parking Lot ROAD Lincoln Estate Parking Lot TERMINI 7th St to End SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches NB SS Layer Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC 2.3 21% 1.8 1.7 2.1 19% 1.7 1.6 AB 4.4 6% 4.2 3.9 4.4 24% 3.2 2.5 Avg - Average; CV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thicloness Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 20 40 60 80 -2- ---------------------------- -- ----------------------------------- -6-------------------------------------------------------------- -- - - -- .n a -10 R -14 -18 -22 NB AC ------- SB AC NB Base ------- SB Base American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 _kA ]Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 4124117 514/17 -SECTION The Bluffs Apartment Parking Lot ROAD The Bluffs Apartment Parking Lot TERMINI 7th St to End SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: Inches Layer NB SB I Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC3,5 12% 3.0 1 2.5 3.4 16% 3.0 2.8 AB* 4,0 14% 3.4 2.4 4.5 40% 2.5 1.9 Avg - Average; CV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete, AB - Aggregate Base - Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 -2 ------ ------ -6 -------- 10 -14 -18 -22 NB AC ------- SB AC -NB Base ------- SB Base American Engineering Testing, Inc. � IA 550 Cleveland Avenue North An St, Paul, Minnesota 55114 LIPhone. (651) 659-9001 ML�1� Fax: (651) 659-1379 PROJECT PROJECT NO. SECTION ROAD TERMINI SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date 01-07160 4124117 6111117 Fallon Avenue South of 194 Fallon Avenue South Termini to Chelsea Rd W SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches Layer S13 Avg CV N13 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AG 6.4 6% 6.1 5.4 6.3 6% 6.0 5.4 AB 7.4 19% 6.4 2.0 I 7.9 15% 6.9 4.1 Avg - Average; CV - coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum Ac -,AsphaltConcrete; AB -Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 100 200 300 400 -2 -6 -10 -14 k___---- -------- -18 -- -22 1 NB AC NB Base ---- SBAC SBBase I wuAmerican Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone- (651) 659-9001 "sr' Lh`"41 Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENEtRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue. Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4124117 614117 SECTION Fallon Avenue Northbound Left Turn Lane ROAD Fallon Avenue TERMINI South. to Chelsea Rd W SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches Layer NB N/A Avg CV 15th Min Avg GV 15th Min AC 5.9 6% 5.6 5,2 0.0 0% 0.0 0.0 AB 7.7 21% 5,5 4.5 0,0 0% 0.0 0.0 Avg -Average; CV- Coefficient of Variation; 15th- 15th Percentile; Min -Minimum AC -Asphalt Concrete; AS :.,Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thickness Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 100 200 300 400 .2 - L 6 ------ -14 -18 -22 _NB AC _NB Base " American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55 114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 �j[ Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4124117 514117 SECTION Fallon Avenue Northbound Wight Turn Lane ROAD Fallon Avenue TERMINI South to Chelsea Rd W SUMMARY STATISTICS ,NB AC —NB Base Units: inches NB N/A Layer Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th- Min AC 6.8 7% 6.3 5.9. 0.0 0% 0.0 0.0 AB 6.9 15% 6.7 4,5 0.0 0% 0.0 0.0 Avg - Average; CV - coefficient of Variation; 16th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AG - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thictwess Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 100 200 300 400 -2 a -6 A. -10 -14 -18 -22 ,NB AC —NB Base American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone, (651) 659-9001 �;moi _� Fa :(651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4124117 .SECTION Chelsea Rd W Mainline thru lanes ROAD Chelsea Rd W TERMINI West to East SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: Layer WB Avg CV EB 15th Min Avg - CV 15th AC 6.5 8% 6.1 5.8 6.2 9% 5.7 AB- 9.9 7% 9.1 8.2 9.6 9% 8.6 Avg -Average; CV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AG - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base inches Min 5.0 7.9 Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thietwess Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Soo -2 -6 ------ -10 -14 -22 - ED AC ------- WB AC -EB Base ------- AVB Base Date 514117 American iringineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St, Paul, Minnesota 55 114 Pbone: (651) 659-9001 Fax: (65 1) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4/24117 5/4117 SECTION Chelsea Rd W Center Turn lane ROAD Chelsea Rd W TERMINI West to Fallon Ave SUMMARY STATISTICS Units: inches EB N/A Layer Avg CV 15th Min Avg Cv 15th Min AC -6.1 5% 5.8 5.6 0,0' 0% -0.0 0.0 AB 8.4 8% 7.8 7.0 0.0 0% 0.0 0,0 Avg -Average; CV- Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min -Minimurn AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thielmess Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 100 200 300 400 Soo -2 -6 -10 -14 -18 -22 _EB AC _EB Base n American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 Fax- (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT PROJECT NO. ,SECTION ROAD TERMINI SUMMARY STATISTICS Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date 01-07160 4/24117 5/4/17 Chelsea Rd W. Center Turn lane Chelsea Rd W Fallon Avenue to East Units: inches Layer EB N/A Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th Min AC 5.7 10% 5.1 5.0 0.0 0% 0.0 0.0 AB 7.7 8% 7.1 6.3 0.0 0% 0.0 0.0 Avg - Average; CV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thielmess Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 100 200 300 -2) -6 -10 14 -18 -22 —EB AC —EB Base American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: (651) 659-9001 ti Fax: (651) 659-1379 SUMMARY OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR PROJECT Fallon Avenue Bridge Test Date Date PROJECT NO. 01-07160 4/24/17 6/4117 SECTION Chelsea Rd W Right turn lane ROAD Chelsea Rd W TERMINI Fallon Avenue to East SUMMARY STATISTICS Units:' Layer EB N/A Avg CV 15th Min Avg CV 15th AC 6.4 7% 5.9 5.6 0.0 0% 0:0 AB 7.6 9% 6.8 6.2 0.0 0% 0.0 Avg - Average; CV - Coefficient of Variation; 15th -15th Percentile; Min - Minimum AC - Asphalt Concrete; AB - Aggregate Base Ground Penetrating Radar Pavement Thlckn.ess Survey GPR Distance (Ft) 0 100 200 300 -2 -6 -10 -14 -18 -22 —EB AC —EB Base inches. Min 0.0 0.0 DEP+INITIONS RELATING TO PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION Top of subgrade: Grade which contacts the bottom of the aggregate base layer. Sand subbase: Uniform thickness sand layer placed as the top of subgrade which is intended to improve the frost and drainage characteristics of the pavement system by increasing drainage of excess water in the aggregate base and subbase, by reducing and "bridging" frost heaving, and by reducing spring thaw weakening effects. Critical subgrade zone: The subgrade portion beneath and within three vertical feet of the top of subgrade. A sand subbase, if placed, would be considered the upper portion of the critical subgrade zone. Suitable Grading Material: Mineral soil materials, typically from the project site, excluding the following: 1) soils which have an organic content exceeding 3%, 2) cohesive soils having a Liquid Limit exceeding 50%, 3) soils which include debris, cobbles, and/or boulders, and 4) soils which are considered acceptable from an environmental standpoint. The soil must also be capable of attaining the specified compaction level at its current water content or at a water content that can be reasonably scarified, blended, and moisture conditioned to a uniform water content in order to uniformly meet compaction requirements. Granular Material: Soils meeting Mn/DOT Specification 3149.2131. This refers to granular soils which, of the portion passing the 1" sieve, contain less than 20% by weight passing the 0-00 sieve. Select Granular Material: Soils meeting Mn/DOT Specification 3149.2B2. This refers to granular soils which, of the portion passing the 1 " sieve, contain less than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve. Modified Select Granular Material: Clean, medius ,grained sands which, of the portion passing the. l" sieve, contain less than 5% by weight passing the #200 sieve and less than 40% by weight passing the #40 sieve. Compaction Subcut: Construction of a uniform thickness subcut below a designated grade to provide uniformity and compaction within the subcut zone. Replacement fill can be the materials subcut, although the reused soils should be blended to a uniform soil condition and re -compacted per the Specified Density Method (Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3111). Test Roll: A means of evaluating the near -surface stability of subgrade soils (usually non -granular). Suitability is determined by the depth of rutting or deflection caused by passage of heavy rubber -tired construction equipment, such as a loaded dump truck, over the test area. Yielding of less than V is normally considered acceptable, although engineering judgment may be applied depending on the equipment used, soil conditions present, and/or depth below final grade. Unstable Soils: Subgrade soils which do not pass a test roll. Unstable soils typically have water content exceeding the standard optinnnn water content defined in ASTM:D698 (Standard Proctor test). Organic Soils:.Soils which have sufficient organic content such that the soils engineering properties are negatively affected (typically more than3% organic content). These soils are usually black to dark brown ui color. 01 REP019 (03/12) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN June 26, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. yendix B Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing Boring Log Descriptive Terminology AASHTO Soil Classification System Figure 1— Boring Locations Subsurface Boring Logs R -value Report Appendix B Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing AE Project No. 01-07160 A.1 FIELD EXPLORATION The subsurface conditions at the site were explored by advancing twelve standard penetration test borings.. The test locations appear on Figure 1, preceding the Subsurface Boring Logs in this appendix, A.2 SOIL BORING SAMPLING METHODS A.2.1 Split -Spoon Samples (SS) - Calibrated to Neo Values Standard penetration (split -spoon) samples were collected in general accordance with ASTM:D1586 with one primary modification. The ASTM test method consists of driving a 2 -inch O.D. split -barrel sampler into the in-situ soil with a 140 -pound hainmer dropped from a height of 30 inches. The sampler is driven a total of 18 inches into the soil. After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of hammer blows to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is known as the standard penetration resistance or N -value. Our method uses a modified hammer weight, which is determined by measuring the system energy using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) and an instrumented rod. In the past, standard penetration N -value tests were performed using a rope and cathead for the lift and drop system. The energy transferred to the split -spoon sampler was typically limited to about 60% of its potential energy due to the friction inherent in this system. This converted energy then provides what is known as an N6o blow count. Most newer drill rigs incorporate an automatic hammer lift and drop system, which has higher energy efficiency and subsequently results in lower N -values than the traditional N6o values. By using the PDA energy measurement equipment, we are able to determine actual energy generated by the drop hammer. With the various hammer systems available, we have found highly variable energies ranging from 55% to over 100%. Therefore, the intent of AET=s hammer calibrations is to vary the hammer weight such that hammer energies lie within about 60% to 65% of the theoretical energy of a 140 -pound weight falling 30 inches. The current ASTM procedure acknowledges the wide variation in N -values, stating that N -values of 100% or more have been observed. Although we have not yet determined the statistical measurement uncertainty of our calibrated method to date, we can state that the accuracy deviation of the N -values using this method is significantly better than the standard ASTM Method. A.2.2 Disturbed Samples (DS)/Spin-up Samples (SU) Sample types described as "DS" or "SU" on the boring logs are disturbed samples, which are taken from the flights of the auger. Because the auger disturbs the sanplcs, possible soil layering and contact depths should be considered approximate. A.2.3 Sampling Limitations Unless actually observed in a sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the spacing of samples and the action of drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects generally cannot be recovered from test borings, and they may be present in the ground even if they are not noted on the boring logs. Determining the thickness of "topsoil" layers is usually limited, due to variations in topsoil definition, sample recovery, and other factors. Visual -manual description often relies on color for determination, and transitioning changes can account for significant variation in thickness judgment. Accordingly; the topsoil thickness presented on the logs should not be the sole basis for calculating topsoil stripping depths and volumes. if more accurate information is needed relating to thickness and topsoil quality definition, alternate methods of sample retrieval and testing should be employed. A.3 CLASSIFICATION METHODS Soil classifications shown on the boring logs are based on the Mn/DOT Triangular Textural classification system, described in Section 3-2.02 of the Mn/DOT "Geotechnical and Pavement Manual." AASHTO Soil Group classifications are also provided. Charts are attached which provide information on the Mn/DOT system, the descriptive terminology, and the symbols used on the boring logs. The boring logs include descriptions of apparent geology. The geologic depositional origin of each soil layer is interpreted primarily by observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding topography, vegetation, and development can sometimes aid this judgment. Appendix B - Page l of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Appendix S Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing AET Project No. 01-07160 A.4 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS The ground water level measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following information appears under "Water Level Measurements" on the logs: • Date and Time of measurement • Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at the time of measurement • Casing Depth: depth to bottom of easing or hollow -stem auger at time of measurement • Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring tape stops in the borehole • Water Level: depth in the borehole where free water is encountered • Drilling Fluid Level: same as Water Level, except that the liquid in the borehole is drilling fluid The true location of the water table at the boring location may be different than the water levels measured in the boreholes. This is possible because there are several factors that can affect the water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors include: permeability of each soil layer in profile, presence of perched water, amount of time between water level readings, presence of drilling fluid, weather conditions, and use of borehole easing. A.5 LABORATORY TEST METHODS A.5.1 Water Content Tests Conducted per AET Procedure 01 -LAB -010, which is performed in general accordance with ASTM:D2216 and AASHTO:T265. A.5.2 Sieve Analysis of Soils (thru #200 Sieve) Conducted per AET Procedure 0I -LAB -040, which is performed in general conformance with ASTM: D6913, Method A. A.5.3 Resistance R -Value of Compacted Soils Conducted per AET Procedure 20 -SOI -019, which is performed hi general accordance with ASTM: D2844 A.6 TEST STANDARD LIMITATIONS Field and laboratory testing is done in general conformance with the described procedures. Compliance with any other standards referenced within the specified standard is neither inferred nor implied. A.7 SAMPLE STORAGE Unless notified to do otherwise, we routinely retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the boring for a period of 30 days. Appendix B - Page 2 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. 4\10ESOT9 Minnesota Department of Transportation DO �O Q Geotechnical Section 304TOF Tfk Boring Log Descriptive Terminology (English Units) 0 0 0 0 _ a USER NOTES, ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS - Additional information available in Geotechnical Manual. This boring was made by ordinary and conventional WR ........ Weight of Rod RELATIVE DENSITY AC ........... methods and with care deemed adequate for the Mud ....... Drilling Fluids in Sample Comoactness - Granular Soils BPF Departments design purposes. Since this boring CS ......... Continuous Sample very loose ................ 0-4 was not taken to gather information relating to the w/AUG ....... loose .................... 5-10 construction of the project, the data noted in the SOIL/CORE TESTS medium dense ............ 11-24 field and recorded may not necessarily be the same SPT N6o ..... ASTM D1586 Modified dense ................... 25-50 as that which a contractor would desire. While the Blows per foot with 140 Ib. hammer and a very dense ............... >50 Department believes that the information as to the standard energy of 210 ft -lbs. This energy conditions and materials reported is accurate, it represents 60% of the potential energy of the Consistencv - Cohesive Soils BPF does not warrant that the information is necessarily system and is the average energy provided by very soft ................. 0-1 complete. This information has been edited or a Rope & Cathead system. soft ..................... 2-4 abridged and may not reveal all the information MC ........ Moisture Content firm ..................... 5-8 which might be useful or of interest to the COH ....... Cohesion stiff ..................... 9-15 contractor. Consequently, the Department will make Y • . • . Sample Density very stiff ................. 16-30 available at its offices, the field logs relating to this LL ......... Liquid Limit hard ..................... 31-60 boring. PI ......... Plasticity Index very hard ................. > 60 Since subsurface conditions outside each borehole Phi Angle F .......... ed REC Percent Core Recover COLOR are unknown, and soil, rock and water conditions ....... RQD ....... Rock Quality Description blk ....... Black whit .... White cannot be relied upon to be consistent or uniform, p (Percent of total core interval consisting of grn ....... Green .... Brown no warrant is made that conditions adjacent to this unbroken places 4 inches or longer) yet orng ...... Orange yet ..... Yellow boringwill necessarily be the same as or similar to Y ACL ....... Average Core Length dk ........ Dark It ...... Light those shown on this to Furthermore, the g' (Average length of core that is greater than 4 IDS ....... Iron Oxide Stained Department will not be responsible for any inches long) interpretations, assumptions, projections or Core Breaks Number of natural core GRAIN SIZE /PLASTICITY interpolations made by contractors, or other users of this to . breaks per 2 -foot interval. r VF ..... Very Fine I ..... p Plastic Water levels recorded on this log should be used with discretion since the use of drilling fluids in borings may serlously distort the true field conditions. Also, water levels In cohesive solls often take extended periods of time to reach equilibrium and thus reflect their true field level. Water levels can be expected to vary both seasonally and yearly. The absence of notations on this log regarding water does not necessarily mean that this boring was dry or that the contractor will not encounter subsurface water during the course of construction. WATER MEASUREMENT AB ........... After Bailing AC ........... After Completion AF ........... After Flushing w/C .......... with Casing w/M .......... with Mud WSD ......... While Sampling/Drilling w/AUG ....... with Hollow Stem Auger MISCELLANEOUS NA ........... Not Applicable wl ........... with w/o .......... with out sat .......... saturated DRILLING OPERATIONS AUG ....... Augered CD ........ Core Drilled DBD ....... Disturbed by Drilling DBJ ........ Disturbed by Jetting PD ......... Plug Drilled ST ......... Split Tube (SPT test) TW ........ Thinwall (Shelby Tube) WS ........ Wash Sample NSR ....... No Sample Retrieved WH ........ Weight of Hammer Index Sheet No. 3.0 July 1997 DISCONTINUITY SPACING Fine slpl ... Fractures Distance Bedding Very Close .. <2 inches ..... Very Thin Close ....... 2-12 inches ... Thin Mod. Close .. 12-36 inches .. Medium Wide ....... >36 inches .... Thick DRILLING SYMBOLS F ...... Fine slpl ... Slightly Cr ..... Coarse Plastic SOIL/ROCK TERMS C ...... Clay Lmst .. Limestone L ...... Loam Sst .... Sandstone S ...... Sand Dolo .. Dolostone Si ..... Slit wx .... weathered G ...... Gravel (No. 10 Sieve to 3 inches) Bldr ... Boulder (over 3 inches) ' S / /(Ellg %/ \//\\/ \ o\� �2o 'o rvo �o ao ,�o 00 ^o �o 00 �oC� T ...... till (unsorted, nonstratified glacial deposits) Mn/DOT TRIANGULAR TEXTURAL co I Vane Shear Test CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM — WS Washed Sample CLAY 100% collected during plug drilling Augered 90 PD Plug Drilled (Rotary drilled with fluid) 80 7\ / p _\ / _\ _ 70 Split Tube Sample (S T N� with 2 In. spit tube liners) v \ /� / O ° — / \ — \ / 60 with Thin Wall Sample OT (3 Inch Thln Wall Tube) 60 — / \/ \/ 40 Core Drilled\� NV Core Barrel, unless othetwlse noted) '�' 7" / \ / \/ 30 \ _ _ (� / ao \" / Continuous Soil Sample A/P Augered and Plug Drilled z0 °o L tpl\Std)\\ / /\\ \\// \ / 10 ly/pia \ / Jet Jetted A/J Augered and Jetted ' S / /(Ellg %/ \//\\/ \ o\� �2o 'o rvo �o ao ,�o 00 ^o �o 00 �oC� % SILT BORING LOG NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS TEST SYMBOLS Symbol Definition AR: Sample of material obtained from cuttings blown out the top of the borehole during air rotary procedure. B, H, N: Size of flush joint casing CAS: Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in inches COT: Clean-out tube DC: Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches DM: Drilling mud or bentonite slurry DR: Driller (initials) DS: Disturbed sample from auger flights DP: Direct push drilling; a 2.125 inch OD outer casing with an inner 1 %2 inch ID plastic tube is driven continuously into the ground. FA: Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in inches HA: Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter HSA: Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside diameter in inches LG: Field logger (initials) MC: Column used to describe moisture condition of samples and for the ground water level symbols N (BPF): Standard penetration resistance (N -value) in blows per foot (see notes) NQ: NQ wireline core barrel PQ: PQ wireline core barrel RDA: Rotary drilling with compressed air and roller or drag bit. RDF: Rotary drilling with drilling fluid and roller or drag bit REC: In split-spoou (see notes), direct push and thin-walled tube sampling, the recovered length (in inches) of sample. In rock coring, the length of core recovered (expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero indicates no sample recovered. SS: Standard split -spoon sampler (steel; 1.5" is inside diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated otherwise SU Spin -up sample from hollow stem auger TW: Thin-walled tube; number indicates inside diameter in inches WASH: Sample of material obtained by screening returning rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside the borehole after "falling" through drilling fluid WH: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and hammer WR: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod 94mm: 94 millimeter wireline core barrel V: Water level directly measured in boring 0: Estimated water level based solely on sample appearance Symbol Definition CONS: One-dunensional consolidation test DEN: Dry density, pcf DST: Direct shear test E: Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf HYD: Hydrometer analysis LL: Liquid Limit, % LP: Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf OC: Organic Content, % PERM: Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F - Field; L - Laboratory PL: Plastic Limit, % qp: Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf (at)proximate) qc: Static cone bearing pressure, tsf q": Unconfined compressive strength, psf R: Electrical Resistivity, ohm -ems RQD: Rock Quality Designation of Rock Core, in percent (aggregate length of core pieces 4" or more in length as a percent of total core run) SA: Sieve analysis TRX: Triaxial compression test VSR: Vane shear strength, remolded (field), psf VSU: Vane shear strength, undisturbed (field), psf WC: Water content, as percent of dry weight %-200: Percent of material finer than #200 sieve STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES (Calibrated Hammer Weight) The standard penetration test consists of driving a split -spoon sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to provide N60 values) and counting the number of blows applied in each of three 6" increments of penetration. If the sampler is driven less than 18" (usually in highly resistant material), permitted in ASTM: D1586, the blows for each complete 6" increment and for each partial increment is on the boring log. For partial increments, the number of blows is shown to the nearest 0.1' below the slash. The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC" column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N column. The disparity is because the N -value is recorded below the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defined in ASTM: D1586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even extend more than 18"). OIREP052C (7/11) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. AASHTO SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS Classification of Soils and Soil -Aggregate Mixtures Granular Materials Silt -Clay Materials General Classification (35% or less passing No. 200 sieve) (More than 35% passing No. 200 sieve) A-1 A-2 A-7 Group Classification 50-- Group Index (GI) = (F-35) [0.2+0.005 (LL -40) I + 0.01 (F-15) '15T (PI -10) where F = % Passing No. 200 sieve, LL = Liquid } Limit, and PI = Plasticity Index. 20 r, When working with A-2-6 and A-2-7 subgroups A-7-5 A -1-a A -1-b A-3 A-2-4 A-2-5 A-2-6 A-2-7 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7-6 Sieve Analysis, Percent passing: No. 10(2.00 mm) ............................. 50 max. .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... No. 40(0.425 mm) ............................ 30 max. 50 max. 51 min. .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... No. 200 (0.075 mm) ............................ 15 max. 25 max. 10 max. 35 max. 35 max. 35 max. 35 max. 36 min. 36 min. 36 min. 36 min. Characteristics of Fraction Passing No. 40 (0.425 mm) Liquid limit ................................... .... .... 40 max. 41 min. 40 max. 41 min. 40 max. 41 min. 40 max. 41 min. Plasticity Index ................................ 6 max. N.P. 10 max. 10 max. 11 min. 11 min. 10 max. 10 max. 11 min. 11 min. Usual Types of Significant Constituent Materials Stone Fragments, Fine Silty or Clayey Gravel and Sand Silty Soils Clayey Soils Gravel and Sand Sand General Ratings as Subgrade ..................... Excellent to Good Fair to Poor The placing of A-3 before A-2 is necessary in the "left to right elimination process" and does not Indicate superiority of A-3 over A-2. Plasticity index of A-7-5 subgroup is equal to or less than LL minus 30. Plasticity index of A-7-6 subgroup is greater than LL minus 30. Group A-8 soils are organic clays or peat with organic content >5%. PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) 1000 10 20 30 4) 50 61 7.0 i i i i 90• �• 80 Q i 70 A Soup i i E 60 cQ i rn J 50 —A•5—A 7 i 40- 3o —A•4— A 6 20- 10. Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index Ranges for the A-4, A-5, A-6 and A-7 Subgroups Definitions of Gravel. Sand and Silt-Clav The terms "gravel", "coarse sand", "fine sand" and "silt -clay", as determinable from the minimum test data required in this classification arrangement and as used in subsequent word descriptions are defined as follows: GRAVEL - Material passing sieve with 3 -in. square openings and retained on the No. 10 sieve. COARSE SANG - Material passing the No. 10 sieve and retained on the No. 40 sieve. FINE SANG - Material passing the No 40 sieve and retained on the No. 200 sieve. COMBINEO SILT ANO CLAY - Material passing the No 200 sieve BOULDERS (retained on 34n. sieve) should be excluded from the portion of the sample to which the classification Is applied, but the percentage of such material, If any, In the sample should be recorded The term "silly" Is applied to Me material having plasticity Index of 10 or less and the term "clayey" is applied to fine material having plasticity index of 11 or greater. GROUP INDEX CHART 50-- Group Index (GI) = (F-35) [0.2+0.005 (LL -40) I + 0.01 (F-15) '15T (PI -10) where F = % Passing No. 200 sieve, LL = Liquid } Limit, and PI = Plasticity Index. 20 r, When working with A-2-6 and A-2-7 subgroups the Partial Group Index (PGI) Is determined from the PI Only. 30 40— When the combined Partial Group Indices are negative, the Group Index should be reported as zero. -35� — -40 >� 30— -50 z 0 —60 N Z —70 �o V Lu Lu —80 .10— bo —90 0— ^'T w = =•100 w Example Then' a — 82% Passing No. 200 sieve PGI = 8.9 for LL LL = 38 PGI = 7.4 for PI PI=21 GI =16 01CLS022 (07/11) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION /©AMERICAN LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc.I Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=524748 Y=216919 Latitude 'North)= Longitude (West)= z Depth i's 941.6 (surveyed) ............ o SHEET 1 of 1 Q Elev. �5 Classification COH 7 — 'x . " PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little slightly plastic sandy loam, 017 '� trace roots, dark grayish brown, a little brown, moist, A-6, fill – 940.9 Formation . a.'>ft 0 0 ::< :.........................:.....:..........:..::::::::.. rk } – ' SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little plastic sandy x , "} loam, trace roots, grayish brown, a little dark grayish brown, – damp, A-2-4, fill 5— 6.5 935.1 LOAMY FINE SAND, light brown, damp, loose, A-2-4, – alluvium or fill _ 9.0 932.6 10— SAND, light brown, damp, loose, A-3, alluvium 11.0 930.6 Bottom of Hole - 11' 18 14 – 10 6 – 7 5 — 8 8 10 5 9 5 ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief.- JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X•101-GE0101-GE0FOLDERSIGINTtMI GINTPROJECTS101-07160.GPJ Boring No. Ground Elevation B-1 941.6 (surveyed) Drill Machine 1C SHEET 1 of 1 Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated Drilling 3123117 Completed SPT MC COH 7 — Other Tests N6o (/) (pst) (pct) (2) Or Remarks >,..#'..�.�, '6: re Formation . a.'>ft 0 0 ::< :.........................:.....:..........:..::::::::.. rk or Member 18 14 – 10 6 – 7 5 — 8 8 10 5 9 5 ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief.- JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X•101-GE0101-GE0FOLDERSIGINTtMI GINTPROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF ^ TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION 13 AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State Project Bridge No, or Job Desc.( Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=524928 Y=216738 Latitude "North)= Longitude (West)= = Depth o a o o Elev. Classification U.2 2.5" Bituminous pavement 946.1 • , LOAMY SAND, grayish brown, damp, A -1-b, fill _ 2.0 944.3 _ SAND, light brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium or fill _ 4,0 942,3 5— COARSE SAND, trace roots, light brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium or fill 6,5 939.8 SAND, light brown, damp, loose, A -1-b, alluvium 9,0 937.3 10— SAND, light brown, damp, medium dense, A-3, alluvium 11.0 935.3 Bottom of Hole - 11' ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No, (H) Field Crew Chief. JM Soil Class., Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X:101-GE0101-GEO FOLDERSIGINTw11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 1© TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State Project( Bridge No, or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=525077 Y=216501 Latitude 'North)= Longitude (West)= T Depth o a Q Elev. o Classification SLIGHTLY ORGANIC PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, trace roots, ', grayish brown, moist, A-6, fill _ 2.0 953.1 – SAND, a little loamy sand, grayish brown, damp, A -1-b, fill _ 4.0 951.1 5— SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, A-3, alluvium _ 9.0 946.1 10— SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium 11.0 944,1 Bottom of Hole - 11' Boring No, B-3 16 5 16 4 13 2 17 4 Ground Elevation 955.1 (Surveyed) SHEET 1 of 1 Drilling 3130117 Completed Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief: TA Soil Class., Rock Class: Edit Date., 12120/17 X:101-GE0101-GEO FOLDERSIGINTw11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State ProjectI Bridge No. or Job Desc. I Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=525341 Y=216406 Latitude "North)= Longitude (West)= = Depth o ............ o Q Elev. Classification > SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little plastic sandy loam, trace roots, dark grayish brown, a little brown, damp, ? A-2-4, fill 2.0 957.7 5 -- SLIGHTLY ORGANIC SILTY CLAY LOAM, a little loamy sand and slightly plastic sandy loam, black, a little dark brown and brown, moist, A-6, fill 10— _ 11.0 /\ 948.7 _ SAND, a little plastic sandy loam, trace roots, brown, a little grayish brown, damp, A -1-b 13.0 946.7 Bottom of Hole - 13' 3 – 14 6 21 7 33 11 50 16 – 25 17 – 5 ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief. TA Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12120/17 X:101-GE0101-GEOFOLDERSIGINTMI GINTPROJECTS101-07160.GPJ Boring No. Ground Elevation B-4 959.7 (surveyed) Drill Machine 69C SHEET 1 of 1 Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated Drilling 3/30/17 Completed SPT MC COH Y _ Other Tests N60 (/) (psf) (pcO Wo Or Remarks :::lei frre< Formation or Member 10— _ 11.0 /\ 948.7 _ SAND, a little plastic sandy loam, trace roots, brown, a little grayish brown, damp, A -1-b 13.0 946.7 Bottom of Hole - 13' 3 – 14 6 21 7 33 11 50 16 – 25 17 – 5 ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief. TA Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12120/17 X:101-GE0101-GEOFOLDERSIGINTMI GINTPROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 1© TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for WDOT State Project Bridge No, or Job Desc.I Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=525376 Y=216294 Latitude 'North)= Longitude (West)= Z Depth o n~ ............ Q Elev. o Classification > SLIGHTLY ORGANIC PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little slightly plastic sandy loam, trace roots, dark grayish brown, ? frozen to around 8" to around 14" then moist, A-6, fill _ 2.0 951.0 v _ LOAMY SAND, a little plastic loam, trace roots, dark brown, a little brown, damp, A-2-4, fill _ 4.0 949.0 5— SAND, a little clayey sand, trace roots, grayish brown, a little brown, damp, A -1-b 6.5 946.5 SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, – laminations of loamy sand, A -1-b, alluvium 10- 11.0 942.0 Bottom of Hole - 11' Boring No. B-5 10 _ 8 19 6 17 6 15 5 Ground Elevation 953.0 (surveyed) SHEET 1 of 1 Drilling 3130/17 Comaleted Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief., TA Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12120/17 X..101-GEOWI-GEOFOLDERSIGINTIMI GINTPROJECTS101-07160.GPJ �v-� DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING,UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was takkenenbbyy A American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for MrVDOT State ProjectI Bridge No. or Job Desc. I Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=525402 Y=216069 Latitude 'North)= Longitude (West)= = Depth o Q Elev. Classification X PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little sand, trace roots, dark 1.0 ' grayish brown, a little brown, moist, A-6, fill _ 949.0 SAND, a little plastic sandy loam, trace roots, light grayish _ 2,0 brown, a little dark grayish brown, damp, A -1-b, fill 948.0 SAND, light grayish brown, damp, loose, A -1-b, alluvium 5 — ;.;. 6.5 943.5 _ SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense to loose, A-3, alluvium 10- 11,5 938.5 15— SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, A-3, alluvium _ 19.0 931.0 20 — – GRAVELLY LOAMY SAND, trace roots, grayish brown, damp, medium dense, laminations of slightly plastic sandy – loam, A -1-b, alluvium _ 24.0 926.0 COARSE SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium MN Unique Well No. (H) (Continued Next Page) 7 5 7 4 12 4 11 5 12 4 20 6 16 6 21 — 6 22 3 --------------------------- Field Crew Chief.• JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12120/17 X:101-GEOW-GEO FOLDERMONTW11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF i TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN 1© ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for MnIDOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS SHEET 2 of 4 State Project Bridge No, or Job Desc, Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue ( B-6 950.0 (Surveyed) SPT MC COH r _ Other Tests Depth o N60 (/) (PsO (PcO 60' Or Remarks i a w :>F#Etxe Formation Elev. Classification 1!a o : or Member Z„ COARSE SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, 20 4 – A -1-b, alluvium (continued) – 26.5 923.5 _ _ COARSE SAND, grayish brown, saturated, medium dense, 19 13 – A -1-b, alluvium – _ 2 _ 921.1, 0 30— \ / x 23 21 _ SAND, grayish brown, saturated, medium dense to dense, PD PD A -1-b, alluvium _ _ x 34 _ _ 34.0 P D – 916.0 _ 35— . , GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, grayish brown, saturated, 24 13 % % medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium 36.5 P D 913.5 _ _ SAND, grayish brown, saturated, medium dense, A -1-b, 27 18 – alluvium – 39.0 PD P D – 911.0 40 X 23 18 .. PD 15 18 – SAND, gray, saturated, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium PD – 45— 14 x 21 - - PDD _ – \ x 23 _ 19 _ 49.0 P D – 901.0 COARSE SAND, gray, saturated, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium Continued Next Pae ------- ------- ------------ Field Crew Chief. JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X 101-GE0101-GEO FOLOERSI GINTw11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160. GPJ N a DEPARTMENT OF I I I TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. This boring was taken by American Engineering UNIQUE NUMBER Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS SHEET 3 of 4 State Project Bridge No, or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue B-6 950.0 (Surveyed) SPT MC COH Other Tests Depth N60 (psi) (pct) co: Or Remarks t Formation Q Elev. Classification 171) 0 z or Member x 13 17 COARSE SAND, gray, saturated, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium (continued) 53,0 PD 897.0 0 0 55— 0 0 0 0 GRAVEL, dark gray, saturated, medium dense, A -1-a, 13 x 0 0 0 alluvium 58.0 0 o PD 892,0 60— x• GRAVELLY SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, dark43 x 10 'x grayish brown, wet, dense, A-2-4, till x 63,0 x PD 887.0 65— 101 13 PD COARSE SAND, brownish gray, saturated, very dense, A -1-b, alluvium 70- 77 13 PD >— �: 75-------•—•----------- — -------g — — — — — --- — — — — — — — (Continued Next Page) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Field Crew Chief., JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12120117 X.101-GE0101-GEOFOLDERStGINTWI GINTPROJECTSIOI-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. This boring was taken by American Engineering UNIQUE NUMBER Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT ------------------------------------------------------------- Field Crew Chief., JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit; Date: 12120117 X101-GE0101-GE0 FOLDERSIGINTWI GINTPROJECTSWI-07160.GPJ Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS SHEET 4of4 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc, Trunk HighwaylLocation Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue B-6 950.0 (surveyed) SPT MC COH Other Tests DepthN6o (91.) (PsO (PcO UO) Or Remarks ............ C A Formation Q Elev. Classification xx Q�: or Member 52 13 COARSE SAND, brownish gray, saturated, very dense, A -1-b, alluvium (continued) 78.0 PD 872.0 80 GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, brownish gray, saturated,74 x 14 very dense, A -1-b, alluvium 83,0 PD 867,0 85— SAND, brownish gray, saturated, very dense, A-3, alluvium i- 81 25 86,0 864.0 Bottom of Hole - 86' ------------------------------------------------------------- Field Crew Chief., JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit; Date: 12120117 X101-GE0101-GE0 FOLDERSIGINTWI GINTPROJECTSWI-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF E,1 TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State Project Bridge No, or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue B-7 958.0 (Surveyed) Location County Coordinate System Drill Machine 41C SHEET 1 of 4 Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated Drilling 3/21117 X=525404 Y=215968 � Completed Latitude •North)= Longitude (West)= SPT MC COH _ Other Tests Depth o:»Nso/)(PsO <.;:.(pcO:.::; v' : Or Remarks ,�Et?re> Formation E/ev, J Classification q>:> ;: ss '#)< ' <(it ` s � dc or Member 8.25" Concrete pavement 10 0.7 ti.'�4:o – 957.3 0 – 0. 7 0. 9 – 01 o GRAVELLY LOAMY SAND, dark brown, damp, A -1-b, fill ,0 47 – 6 o _ 4.0 'o _ 954.0 5— LOAMY SAND, brown, damp, A 2-4 29 7 6.5 951.5 _ 16 6 10— ; . ; • SAND, light brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium 16 6 11 _ 5 _ • 14.0 /\ – 944.0 \ / 15-- X 12 6 SAND, light brown, damp, medium dense, A-3, alluvium 18 _ 7 _ 19.0 / \ – 939.0 \ / 20 FINE SAND, light brown, damp, dense, A-3, alluvium x 33 4 / \ – 9336.6. 5 \ / SAND, brown, damp, medium dense, A-3, alluvium x 18 _ 5 _ 24.0 934.0 COARSE SAND, brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium MN Unique Well No. (H) (Continued Next Page) Field Crew Chief., JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X.101-GEWI-GEOFOLDERSIGINTw11 GINTPROJECTS101-07160.GPJ MDEPARTMENT 0 F TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. This boring was taken by American Engineering UNIQUE NUMBER Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION -LOG & TEST RESULTS SHEET 2of4 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Trunk HighwaylLocation Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue B-7 958.0 (surveyed) SPT MC COH Other Tests Depth 8; N60 (910 (PsO WO coo Or Remarks ............ C, -8: Formation o Elev. Classification ::%R or Member COARSE SAND, brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, 22 3 alluvium (continued) 26.5 931.5 00' 0 • GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, brown, damp, medium dense, 19 4 A -1-b, alluvium 29.0 0,; 929.0 30— 1 0, 0 1 01 X22 4 GRAVELLY SAND, light brown to brown, damp to o,, saturated, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium 0 0 27 x 14 01 34.0 924.0 35— SAND, brown, saturated, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium 23 x 15 36.5 0 PD 921.5 0; 0 GRAVELLY SAND, light brown, saturated, medium dense, 23 x 14 '01 o A -1-b, alluvium — — 39.0 0 PD — 919.0 0 40— 0 GRAVEL, light brown, saturated, medium dense, A -1-A, 17 x 0 alluvium 41.5 0 0,0' PD 916.5 0 • GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, dark brown, saturated, 14 x 12 I 1 01 medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium 44.0 0 c, PD 914.0 45— 16 x 19 SAND, light brown, saturated, medium dense, A -1-b, PD alluvium x 15 15 49.0 PD 909.0 SAND, gray, saturated, medium dense, A-3, alluvium 50-----•------------- — -------g — — — — (Continued Next Pa) -------------------------- Field Crew Chief: JM Soil Class: Rock Class; Edit: Date: 12/20/17 XVI-GE0101-GE0 FOLDERS'lGINTMI GINTPROJECTSI0I-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. This boring was taken by American Engineering UNIQUE NUMBER Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS SHEET 3 of 4 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue B-7 958.0 (surveyed) SPT MC COH Other Tests Depth rn N60 (Y.) (PsO (00 C'/)) Or Remarks '.W C. 6: Formation Q Elev. Classification cE or Member X 16 23 SAND, gray, saturated, medium dense, A-3, alluvium (continued) 53.0 PD 905.0 55— 50/A X — 20 SAND, gray, saturated, very dense, A -1-b, alluvium PD 58.0 900.0 0 0 0 01 60— GRAVELLY LOAMY SAND, gray, wet, very dense, A -1-b, 127 X 12 0 alluvium 0 0 01 63.0 9 PD 895.0 0 0 0 65— 01 1 0 ' 'o 55 X 12 0, 0 0 01 9 GRAVELLY SAND, grayish brown, saturated, very dense, PD o A -1-b, alluvium 0 70— 0 9 82 X 10 0 0 0 73.0 01 9 PD 885,0 SAND, brownish gray, saturated Z: 75 -- — — -- ----- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — — --- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — (Continued Next Page) Field Crew Chief. JM Soil Class: Rock Class., Edit: Date: 12120117 X101-GEOX01-GE0 FOLDERSIGINTMI GINTPROJECTSI0I-07160.GPJ �DEPARTMENT OF t r TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION � TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue = Depth o ............ o Q Elev. Classification SAND, brownish gray, saturated (continued) 80- 81.0 877.0 Bottom of Hole - 81' x 92 – 14 PD SHEET 4 of 4 Ground Elevation 958.0 (Surveyed) Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- Field Crew Chief., JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X.•101-GE0101-GE0 FOLDERSIGINTMI GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ Boring No. B-7 SPT MC COH N60 (PsO (PCO C20 :::RSG:ffAr r` :.:::....................:.....:...:..:... : . x 92 – 14 PD SHEET 4 of 4 Ground Elevation 958.0 (Surveyed) Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- Field Crew Chief., JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X.•101-GE0101-GE0 FOLDERSIGINTMI GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF i TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State Project Bridge No, or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue I B-8 950.0 (Surveyed) Location County Coordinate System Drill Machine 69C SHEET 1 of 4 Drilling 3/30/17 Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated X=525396 Y=215864 ComDleted Latitude 'North)= Longitude (West)= SPT MC COH _ Other Tests Depth o N6o...>(91.)(pSO(pcO.:;;. � Or Remarks Fri*G€'f';l Formation Elev. Classification °'>°::: ''; '' i r;X. ' > ft)'<°; or Member SLIGHTLY ORGANIC PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, trace roots, 17 – 22 dark grayish brown, a little brown, moist, A-6, fill _ 2.0 _ 948.0 _ SAND, a little silty sand, trace roots, light brown, damp, 25 _ 3 A -1-b, fill _ 4.0 _ 946.0 5-- % . ; . GRAVELLY SAND, light brown, a little brown, damp, 17 — medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium – 6.5 943.5 _ 9 6 _ SAND, a little silty sand, trace roots, light brown, damp, _ A -1-b 10-- 14 5 11.5 938.5 _ 8 3 _ FINE SAND, light brown, damp, loose to medium dense, _ A-3, alluvium \ / 15-- X 12 5 16.5 _ 933.5 ••.• SAND, light brown, a little dark gray, damp, medium dense, 11 6 – laminations of silty clay loam, A -1-b, alluvium – _ 19.0 _ 931.0 20— % . % . COARSE SAND, light brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, 22 — 3 alluvium – 2 – 928.8. 5 GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, light brown, damp, medium 28 2 dense, A -1-b, alluvium – _ 24,0 _ 926.0 GRAVELLY SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium MN Unique Well No. (H) (Continued Next Page) Field Crew Chief. TA Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X.101-GEOW I-GEO FOLDERSIGINTw11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF � TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 1© � TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for WDOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc.( Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue SHEET 2 of 4 Boring No. Ground Elevation B-8 950.0 (Surveyed) SPT MC COH T _ Other Tests Depth o N6o (Y-) (PsO (Pci) $ Or Remarks Z o Fft?e° �. Formation Q Elev. , Classification o,:::>:::.::::::::.:::;fit>'»"> 02 or Member 25 4 GRAVELLY SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium — dense, A -1-b, alluvium (continued) — 26.5 923.5 14 _ 7 30-- X 26 10 — GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, dark brownish gray, /—\ — • , • saturated, medium dense to loose to medium dense, A -1-b, D PD — alluvium \ x 9 — _ 13 - - - PD - 35— •••• X 23 8 36.5 PD 913.5 _ _ • . COARSE SAND, dark grayish brown, saturated, dense, 41 19 — % % A -1-b, alluvium — _ 39.0 PD — 911.0 _ 40-- . . GRAVELLY SAND, light grayish brown, saturated, dense, 46 10 % ; A -1-b, alluvium 41.5 PD PD 908.5 _ _ x 39 _ 11 _ COARSE SAND, light grayish brown, saturated, dense to PD _ medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium _ 45— 26 X — 14 46.5 P D 903.5 _ _ — ; • ; • GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, gray, saturated, medium 16 X _ 10 dense to dense, A -1-b, alluvium - - . PD - 50-------•—•----------- -------g --------�------ Continued Next Pae --- -------- ----------- Field Crew Chief TA Soil Class., Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X:101-GE0101-GEO FOLDERStGINTlM1 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS SHEET 3 of 4 State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. Ground Elevation Fallon Avenue B-8 950.0 (Surveyed) SPT MC COH _ Other Tests Depth �, N60 (%) � (PsO (Pcfl n Or Remarks w o We Formation Elev. Classification ;;.;::::;::.:..:..::; :.::::::.:.:::.......... Q ox: o.:::»: .> >; ` > t ; a or Member • X 38 12 _ GRAVELLY COARSE SAND, gray, saturated, medium _ _ ; • dense to dense, A -1-b, alluvium (continued) _ _ 53.0 PD — 897.0 x — 'x • — 55— x •••> — 121 8 X _ x • ;, GRAVELLY SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, dark PD _ x grayish brown, wet, very dense, A -1-b, alluvium 60— 'x — X . _ 63.0 x . PD _ 887.0 65— — 53 22 PD _ SAND, brownish gray, saturated, very dense, A -1-b, _ _ alluvium 70— \_/ x 118 14 PD 75 ------•—•---------------------------- -------•-------•------------ (Continued Next Page) Field Crew Chief TA Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12120/17 XVI -GEW I-GEO FOLDERSIGINTM i GINT PROJECTS101-07160. GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 1© TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT Mn/DOT GEOTECHNICAL SECTION - LOG & TEST RESULTS State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc.( Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue = Depth o a............ o Q Elev. Classification _ SAND, brownish gray, saturated, very dense, A -1-b, alluvium (continued) 80- 81.0 869.0 Bottom of Hole - 81' x 175 14 SHEET 4 of 4 Ground Elevation 950.0 (Surveyed) Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- Field Crew Chief.- TA Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit. Date: 12/20/17 X•101-GE0101-GEO FOLDERSIGINTw11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ Boring No. B-8 SPT MC COH r _ N60 (%) (PSO (PCO iq Q (SIM 8rk E . 87 – 23 PD _ x 175 14 SHEET 4 of 4 Ground Elevation 950.0 (Surveyed) Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- Field Crew Chief.- TA Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit. Date: 12/20/17 X•101-GE0101-GEO FOLDERSIGINTw11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF `U ll TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for MNDOT State Project Bridge No, or Job Desc, Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=525348 Y=215660 Latitude "North)= Longitude (West)= z Depth o ............ o Q Elev. Classification — x'. _ x', ' SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, pieces of bituminous, ', dark brown to grayish brown, damp, A-2-4, fill 5— > 5,5 x 955.0 x PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little loamy sand, dark grayish _ 6.5 ' brown, a little grayish brown, moist, A-6, 954.0 x 10— 'SLIGHTLY " PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little plastic sandy x • loam, dark grayish brown, damp, A-2-4 y 13.5 x 947.0 SAND, light brown, damp, very loose to medium dense, 15— ; • ; • A -1-b, alluvium 16,0 944.5 Bottom of Hole - 16' Boring No. B-9 Drill Machine 1 C Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated SPT MC COH r 32 – 4 25 – 6 x23 — 6 15 16 9 5 12 x3 –13 5 5 x 21 4 Ground Elevation 960.5 (Surveyed) SHEET 1 of 1 Drilling 3/23/17 Completed Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief.- JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X.101-GEOI01-GEO FOLDERSIGINPMI GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State ProjectI Bridge No, or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Location County Coordinate System X=525206 Y=215365 Latitude "North)= Longitude (West)= = Depth o ti Q Elev. Classification 0.5 6" Bituminous pavement 955.7 'X GRAVELLY SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, pieces of _ 1,3 X bituminous, grayish brown, damp, A-2-4, fill – 955.0 ,SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little plastic sandy 2.0 loam, pieces of bituminous, dark grayish brown, a little 954.2 ,brown, damp, A-2-4, fill LOAMY SAND, a little plastic sandy loam, grayish brown, a little dark brown, damp, A-2-4, fill 5- 6.5 949.7 LOAMY SAND, grayish brown, damp, loose to medium _ dense, laminations of slightly plastic sandy loam and plastic sandy loam, A-2-4, alluvium 10- 11.0 945.2 Bottom of Hole - 11' Boring No. B-10 Drill Machine 1C Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated SPT MC COH r z N60 (%) (pst) (pct) COO 4 42 – 7 18 – 7 9 — 7 6 6 12 7 Ground Elevation 956.2 (Surveyed) SHEET 1 of 1 Drilling 3/23/17 Completed Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief. JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit: Date: 12120/17 X.101-GE0101-GEO FOLDERSIGINTMI G1NT PROJECTSI01-07160.GPJ �DEPARTMENT OF Y TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State. Project( Bridge No, or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Fallon Avenue Boring No. B-11 Location County Coordinate System Drill Machine 1C X=525084 Y=215267 Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated Latitude "North)= Longitude (West)= SPT MC COH >, N60 (%) (PSO (PCO C20Depth o . ::.:............... Q Elev. Classification 0.3 �PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little slightly plastic sandy loam, r 955.8 trace roots, dark grayish brown, moist, A-6, fill / – 14 – x'. 12 – 8 5— X , '} SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, a little plastic sandy 7 — 8 loam, pieces of bituminous, trace roots, dark grayish brown, " • '} damp, A-2-4, fill _ X ,} _ } 7 8 X .X •} X 10- 10.5 > 6 6 945,5 , ' , SAND, a little plastic sandy loam, light brown, a little dark _ 11.5 gray, damp, A -1-b – 944.5 % . SAND, grayish brown, damp, medium dense, A -1-b, 16 6 – alluvium or fill – 14.0 _ 942,0 FINE SAND, light grayish brown, damp, medium dense, 5 15— 15.5 A-3, alluvium 15 — 940.5 (� SILT LOAM, grayish brown, damp, medium dense, lenses X 25 16.0 \and laminations of slightly plastic sandy loam, A-4, alluvium / 940.0 Bottom of Hole - 16' Ground Elevation 956.0 (Surveyed) SHEET 1 of 1 Drilling 3/23/17 Completed Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief.- JM Soil Class: Rock Class: Edit. Date: 12/20/17 X:101-GEOI01-GEOFOLDERSIGINTMI GINTPROJECTS101-07160.GPJ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - GEOTECHNICAL SECTION AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORY LOG & TEST RESULTS - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION � TESTING, INC. UNIQUE NUMBER This boring was taken by American Engineering Testing under a consultant contract for Mn/DOT State Project Bridge No. or Job Desc. Trunk Highway/Location Boring No. Fallon Avenue B-12 Location County Coordinate System X=525352 Y=215219 Latitude 'North)= Longitude (West)= = Depth o ti Q Elev. Classification 0.4 5.25" Bituminous pavement _ 956.9x�\ SLIGHTLY PLASTIC SANDY LOAM, pieces of bituminous, 0.8 \grayish brown, damp, A-2-4, fill 956.5 •' •' – LOAMY SAND, a little plastic sandy loam, pieces of bituminous, grayish brown, a little dark brown, damp, A-2-4, – fill 5— ;.:. ^ 6.5 950.8 SAND, light grayish brown, damp, loose to medium dense, A -1-b, alluvium 10- 11.0 946.3 Bottom of Hole - 11' Drill Machine 1 C Hammer CME Automatic Calibrated SPT MC COH r 5 55 6 28 – 4 21 — 5 10 5 14 5 Ground Elevation 957.3 (Surveyed) SHEET 1 of 1 Drilling 3/23/17 Completed Other Tests Or Remarks Formation or Member ------------------------------------------------------------- MN Unique Well No. (H) Field Crew Chief., JM Soil Class: Rock Class., Edit: Date: 12/20/17 X.101-GE0101-GE0 FOLDERSIGINTw11 GINT PROJECTS101-07160.GPJ AimElRICAN ENIGINEE RING TESTING, INC+ R Value Report Client: WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC' CC: Project. Fallon Avenue Bridge Monticello, MN American Engineering Testing, Inc. St. Paul Albertville 550 Cleveland Ave N 5548 Barthel Ind Dr, Ste 500 St. Paul, MN 55114 Albertville, MN 55301 (651) 669-9001 (763) 428-5573 Toll Free: (800) 972-6364 wwvw.amengtest.com This document shall not be reproduced, except In full, wiftI written approval U from American Engineering Testing, Inc. ' Date of Issue: Reviewed By: Job No: 01-07160 §ain 6 lqeWfls Sample ID: 17-05125-S1 Field ID: C-1, 1.5'4 Date Sampled: Sampling Method: Through corehole in pavement Material: Silty Sand, a little gravel, fine to medium grained, brown (SM) Location: C-1, IH4, Jar -4125 R ValueTiksi-Rik 11.11ts --- L_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ............ -80 ....................1.I 60 ..... ........... ..... —40 ....... so .................. * ........... .......... ...... 10 70D 6� 4� 3� 1 �D 1 100 1 0 0 Exudition R-essure (psi) ASTM D 2844 R Value at 240 psi Exudation: 75 Speci'i oh-ftv�l, Moisture Content (%) 12,3 10.3 Dry Density (lb1fV) 119.1 123.9 Exudation Pressure (psi) Ill 699 R Value 64' 79 Expansion Pressure (psi) 0.0 0,2 Form No: 18964, Report No: RV.17-05125-Sl 02000-2016QESTLabby$peciraQEST.com 51512017 Benjamin Pomroy, Engl6eering Technician 11 11.3 10.8 122.8 1233 189 264 70 76 0.1 0.1 Page 1 of 1 13(ft) aSSUrnede(ft) B'(ft) %, qsettle b qn U 0 6.0 24.689 15.500 11.110 MO 0 10.0 28.912 11.500 13.037 15.0 0 1U 35,433 7.600 15.945 LRFD Spread Footing Bearing Graph Abutment Station 214+07.92 40 (AET No. 01-07160) 35 C 30 U) 25 (D 20 C C: 15 M 10 Ca 5 0 M 4 6 8 10 12 14 Footing Width (ft) E 0 z --4— Assumed Strength Urnit Siete Assumed service L) )t State -Settlement 1 inch NOTES: Assumed Length of Footing is approx. 6.0 feet Gross bearing pressures are shown, based on 4.5 ft so!] cover. �b = 0.45, for sand foundation soils, using SPT boring Assumed Bottom of Footing = Elev 958.50 ' American Engineering Testing, Inc. 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 4 B (ft) assumed e (ft) B' (ft) q, (ksf) %ettle. (ksf) q,, (ksf) 5.0 0 5.0 22.851 20.40 10.283 10.0 0 10,0 31.908 1170 14,359 12.0 0 12.0 35.455 1Z30 15.955 15.0 0 15,0 40.623 1010 18.280 (AET No. 01-07160) 6 8 10 12 --4-- Assumed Strength Limit State ---Fi - Assumed Service 1-imit State - Selflomont I inch -140TES: Assumed Length of Footing is approx. 60 feet Gross bearing pressures are shown, based on 4.5 ft soil cover. �b = 0.45, for sand foundation soils, using SPT boring B-7 Assumed Bottom of Footing = Elev 950 ft 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 4 13(ft) assumed a (ft) B(ft) q, qsuttla 4rb q, 5.0 0 6,0 24M9 M500 1 1A 10 10.0 0 MO 28,972 11.500 11037 15.0 0 15,0 35,433 7.500 15,945 LRFD Spread Footing Bearing Graph Abutment Station 216+07.92 (AET No. 01-07160) 1 1 6 8 10 12 Footing Width (ft) --o-- Assumed Strength Limit State Assumed Service Limit State - Settlement I inch NOTES Assumed Length of Footing is approx. 60 feet Gross bearing pressures are shown, based on 4.5 ft soil cover. for sand foundation soils, using SPT boring Assumed Bottom of Footing = Elev 953.50 American Engineering Testing, inc. 14 16 I Geotechnical Exploration, Foundation Analysis and Design Report Fallon Bridge over Interstate 94 and Roadway Construction; Monticello, MN AMERICAN June 9, 2017 ENGINEERING Report No. 01-07160 TESTING, INC. Appendix C Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use Appendix C Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use AET Project No. 01-07160 B.1 REFERENCE This appendix provides information to help you manage your risks relating to subsurface problems which are caused by construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. This information was developed and provided by ASFE', of which, we are a member Finn. B.2 RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION 8.2.1 Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of thein' clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one, not even you, should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. B.2.2 Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. B.2.3 A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on A Unique Set of Project -Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project -specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typically factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, panting lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the specific site explored, or • completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an -office building, or fi_om a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the design team, or • •project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes, even minor ones, and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. B.2.4 Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. 1 ASFE, 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 : mvw.asfe.oru Appendix C —Page 1 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC Appendix C Geotechnical Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use AET Project No. 41-47164 B.2.5 Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Sitc exploration identified subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotcehnieal engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes significantly, from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. B.2.6 A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical cngineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction observation. B.2.7 A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering rcports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geotechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review pertinent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruetion conferences, and by providing construction observation. B.2.8 Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. B.2.9 Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they, can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. Iu the letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need to prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. B.2.10 Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly ineludc a variety of explanatory provisions in their report. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frpnkly. B.2.11 Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenvirornmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoenviromnental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else. Appendix C — Page 2 of 2 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 2L. Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-07 appointing the State Commissioner of Transportation as Agent of the Citv of Monticello for acceptinLy federal aid funds for construction of eligible transportation improvements. (SB) In order for the City of Monticello to receive federal funding for the Fallon Avenue overpass and future transportation projects receiving federal funds for construction, the funds are distributed through the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). For this to occur the city inust appoint the Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation as the approved Agent by adopting Resolution 2018-07 and enter into an agency agreement between the City of Monticello and Mn/DOT. This will then allow Mn/DOT to accept and disburse any federal funds the city is eligible to receive. The enclosed agency agreement No. 1029976 replaces agreement No. 99962 the Council approved on December 11, 2011. The primary difference between the two agreements is formatting and revisions to paragraph 10 and the addition of paragraph 18 related to audits, that the finance department is aware of and has implemented in their policies. See enclosed summary of agreement revisions provided by MnDOT. There is no defined sunset date for the agency agreement because according to MnDOT, there are unknowns of when federal law revisions would occur to require revisions to the agreement. Al. Budget Impact: None for entering into the agreement. A2. Staff Workload Impact: Staff workload is minimal. The City Clerk will process and retain the agreement. WSB will follow the agreement procedures with the construction management of the project. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2018-07 and enter into Agency Agreement No. 1029976 between the City of Monticello and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution 2018-07 at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends approving Alternative No. 1. A. Resolution 2018-07 B. Agency Agreement No. 1029976 C. MNDOT DCP summary CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2018-07 RESOLUTION APPOINTING STATE AGENT TO ACCEPT FEDERAL AID FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO WHEREAS, the City of Monticello intends to apply for federal funding for transportation improvements within the city boundaries; and WHEREAS, it is required under State Statutes that the city appoint an agent to accept funds on behalf of the City of Monticello. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota, that pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sec. 161.36, the Commissioner of Transportation be appointed as Agent of the City of Monticello to accept as its agent, federal aid funds which may be made available for eligible transportation related projects; and BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED, that the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of the city to execute and enter into an agreement with the Commissioner of Transportation prescribing the terms and conditions of said federal aid participation as set forth and contained in "Minnesota Department of Transportation Agency Agreement No. 1029976", a copy of which said agreement was before the City Council and which is made a part hereof by reference. ADOPTED BY the Monticello City Council this 12`x' day of February, 2018. CITY OF MONTICELLO Brian Stumpf, Mayor ATTEST: Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator Minnesota Department ofTransportation DEPARTMENT OF State Aid for Local Transportation ���������k������������ ~~ ~~ ~ ~"��°`°~" =~~~"^�° "=~�` 39SJohn Ireland Boulevard, K4S50U Saint Paul, MN5S155 December 1,2OD Jeff O'Neill 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN, 55362 SUBJECT: Agency Delegated Contracting Process Agreement Dear Mr. O'Neill: Attached are two copies of the agency agreement between the City of Monticello and MnDOT, which allows for MnDOT toact asthe City's agent inaccepting federal aid. This agreement isintended Locover all federally funded projects that the City is awarded funds for until revisions are needed to the agreement, |tsupersedes the agreement executed in or about 2003,which isreferenced inthis agreement. While I do not anticipate that the requirements in Section 18.4 will apply to you, the language required by federal law and must be included in all federally funded project agreements as of October 1, 2010. Please review the agreement and ifapproved, have all two copies signed. A resolution similar to the attached example, must be passed. The certified resolution should then be placed as the last page in each of the two copies of the agreement. Please verify that the person/title authorized to sign as stated in the resolution, corresponds to the signature (person/title) on the signature page. Please return all two copies of the agreement to me for MnDOT signatures. Afully executed copy will bereturned to you. If you have any questions or need any revisions, please feel free to contact me at 651.366.3822. k� Ly ette Roshell, PE Project Development Engineer Enclosures An Equal Opportunity Employer DEPARTMENT OF tl t � TRANSPORTAiUom im This agreement is entered into by and between the City of Monticello ("Local Government") and the State of Minnesota acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("MnDOT"). =01W� Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.36, the Local Government desires MnDOT to act as the Local Government's agent in accepting federal funds on the Local Government's behalf for the construction, improvement, orenhancement oftransportation financed either in whole or in port by Federal Highway Administration ("FHWN') federal funds, hereinafter referred to as the "Project(s)"; and 2. This agreement is intended to cover all federal aid projects initiated by the Local Government and therefore has no specific State Project number associated with it, and 2.1. The Catalog of Federal Domestic AssisLance number or CFDA number is 20.205, and 2.2. This agreement supersedes agreement number old (99962) 2.3. This project isfor construction not research and development. 2.4. MnDOT requires that the terms and conditions of this agency be set forth in an agreement. 1.1. Effective Date. This agreement will be effective on the date the MnDOT obtains all required signatures under Minn. Stat. §16C.05, Subd. 2. Upon the effective date, this agreement will supersede agreement 99962. 2.1. Designation. The Local Government designates K4nDOTtoact asits agent inaccepting federal funds inits behalf made available for the Pojects\. Details onthe required processes and procedures are available on the State Aid Website 2.Z.1.The Local Government will furnish and assign apublicly employed licensed engineer, ("Project Engineer"), to be in responsible charge of the Project(s) and to supervise and direct the work to be performed under any construction contract let for the Project(s). In the alternative where the Local Government elects to use a private consultant for construction engineering services, the Local Government will provide a qualified, full-time public employee of the Local Government, to be in responsible charge of the Project(s). The services of the Local Government to be performed hereunder may not be assigned, sublet, or transferred unless the Local Government is notified in writing by MnDC]Tthat such action ispermitted under 23CFR l.S]and 23 CFR 635.1O5and state law. This written consent will in no way relieve the Local Governmentfrom its primary responsibility for performance ofthe work. IN I 2.2.2. During the progress of the work on the Project(s), the Local Government authorizes its Project Engineer to request in writing specific engineering and/or technical services from MnDOT, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.39. Such services may becovered bvother technical service agreements. If MnDOT furnishes the services requested, and if MnDOT requests reimbursement, then the Local Government will promptly pay MnDOT to reimburse the state trunk highway fund for the full cost and expense offurnishing such services. The costs and expenses will include the current &4nQOT labor additives and overhead rates, subject to adjustment based on actual direct costs that have been verified by audit. Provision of such services will not be deemed to make MnDOT a principal or co- principal with respect to the Project(s). 2.3. Pre -letting. The Local Government will prepare construction contracts in accordance with Minnesota law and applicable Federal laws and regulations. 2.3.1. The Local Government will solicit bids after obtaining written notification from MnDOTthat the FHVV8 has authorized the PnjecUs\. Any Puject(s)advertised prior 10authorization without permission will not beeligible for federal reimbursement. 2.3.2. The Local Government will prepare the Proposal for Highway Construction for the construction contract, which will include all ofthe federal -aid provisions supplied byMnDOT. 2.3.3. The Local Government will prepare and publish the bid solicitation for the Project(s) as required by state and federal laws. The Local Government will include in the solicitation the required language for federal -aid construction contracts assupplied byK4nDOT.The solicitation will state where the proposals, plans, and specifications are available for the inspection of prospective bidders, and where the Local Government will receive the sealed bids. 2.3.4. The Local Government may not include other work in the construction contract for the authorized Project(s) without obtaining prior notification from MnDOT that such work is allowed by FHWA. Failure to obtain such notification may result in the loss of some or all of the federal funds for the Project(s). All work included in a federal contract is subject tothe same federal requirements as the federal project. 2.3.5. The Local Government will prepare and sell the plan and proposal packages and prepare and distribute any addenda, ifneeded. 2.3.6.The Local Government will receive and open bids. 2.3.7. After the bids are opened, the Local Government will consider the bids and will award the bid to the lowest responsible bidder, or reject all bids. If the construction contract contains a goal for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, the Local Government will not award the bid until it has received certification of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise participation from the MnDOT Office of Civil Righty. 2.3.8. The Local Government entity must disclose in writing any potential conflict of interest to the Federal awarding agency or pass through entity in accordance with applicable Federal awarding agency policy. 2.4. Contract Administration. 2.4.1. The Local Government will prepare and execute a construction contract with the lowest responsible bidder, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor,' in accordance with the special provisions and the latest edition of MnDOT's Standard Specifications for Construction and all amendments thereto. All contracts between the Local Government and third parties or subcontractors must contain all applicable provisions of this Agreement, including the applicable federal contract clauses, which are identified in Appendix || of CFR 200l Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, and as provided in Section 18 of this agreement. N 2,4.2.The P \vviUbecunstructedinaccordanoevvitholans,speca|provsions, and standard specifications ofeach Project. The standard specifications will bethe latest edition ofK8nDOT Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, and all amendments thereto, The plans, special provisions, and standard specifications will be on file at the Local Government Engineer's Office. The plans, special provisions, and specifications are incorporated into this agreement by reference as though fully set forth herein. 2.4.3. The Local Government will furnish the personnel, services, supplies, and equipment necessary to properly supervise, inspect, and document the work for the Project(s). The services of the Local Government to be performed hereunder may not be assigned, sublet, or transferred unless the Local Government is notified in writing by MnDOT that such action is permitted under 23 CFR 1.33 and 23 CFR 635.105 and state law. This written consent will innoway relieve the Local Government from its primary responsibility for performance ofthe work. 2.4.4. The Local Government will document quantities in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the Construction Section mfthe Electronic State Aid Manual that were ineffect atthe time the work was 2.4.5. The Local Government will test materials in accordance with the Schedule of Materials Control in effect at the time each Project was let. The Local Government will notify MnDOT when work is in progress on the Project(s) that requires observation by the Independent Assurance Inspector as required bvthe Independent Assurance Schedule. 2.4.6. The Local Government may make changes in the plans or the character of the work, as may be necessary to complete the Project(s), and may enter into Change Order(s) with the Contractor. The Local Government will not be reimbursed for any costs of any work performed under a change order unless MnDOT has notified the Local Government that the subject work is eligible for federal funds and sufficient federal funds are available. 2.4.7. The Local Government will request approval from MnDOT for all costs in excess of the amount of federal funds previously approved for the Project(s) prior to incurring such costs. Failure to obtain such approval may result in such costs being disallowed for reimbursement. Z.4.8.The Local Government will prepare reports, keep records, and perform work smastmmeet federal requirements and to enable MnDDTto collect the federal aid sought by the Local Government. Required reports are listed in the MnDOT State Aid Manual, Delegated Contract Process Checklist, available from K8nDOT'sauthorized representative. The Local Government will retain all records and reports and allow MnDOT or the FHWA access to such records and reports for six years. 2.4.9. Upon completion of the Project(s), the Project Engineer will determine whether the work will be accepted. 2.5.1. The Local Government will comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, and 2.5.2. Nondiscrimination. Itisthe policy ofthe Federal Highway Administration and the State ofMinnesota that noperson inthe United States will, mnthe grounds ofrace, color, ornational origin, beexcluded from participation in, bedenied the benefits of, orbesubjected todiscrimination under any program oractivity receiving Federal financial assistance (42U.SZ.Z0ODd). Through expansion ofthe mandate for nondiscrimination in Title VI and through parallel legislation, the proscribed bases of discrimination include race, color, sex, national origin, age, and disability. In addition, the Title V| program has been extended to cover all programs, activities and services of an entity receiving Federal financial assistance, whether such programs and activities are Federally assisted Vrnot. Even in the absence of prior discriminatory practice or usage, a recipient in administering program oractivity tnwhich this part applies, is expected to take affirmative action to assure that no person is excluded from participation in, or is denied the benefits of, the program or activity on the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. It is the responsibility of the Local Government to carry out the above requirements. 2.53. Utilities. The Local Government will treat all public, private orcooperatively owned utility facilities which directly or indirectly serve the public and which occupy highway rights of way in conformance with 23CFR G45"Ud|ities"which isincorporated herein byreference. 2.6. Maintenance. The Local Government assumes full responsibility for the operation and maintenance of any facility constructed orimproved under this Agreement. 9A. Acceptance. MnDCT accepts designation as Agent of the Local Government for the receipt and disbursement of federal funds and will act in accordance herewith. 3.2lK4nQOTwill make the necessary requests to the FHVVAfor authorization to use federal funds for the Project(s), and for reimbursement of eligible costs pursuant to the terms of this agreement. 3.2.2. MnDOT will provide to the Local Government copies of the required Federal -aid clauses to be included in the bid solicitation and will provide the required Federal -aid provisions to be included in the Proposal for Highway Construction. 3.2.3. MnDOT will review and certify the DBE participation and notify the Local Government when certification is complete. If certification of DBE participation (or good faith efforts to achieve such participation) cannot be obtained, then Lmro| Government must decide whether to proceed with awarding the contract. Failure to obtain such certification will result in the project becoming ineligible for federal assistance, and the Local Government must make upany shortfall. 3.3, Authority. MnDOT may withhold federal funds, where MnDOT or the FHWA determines that the Project(s) was not completed incompliance with federal requirements. 3.4. Inspection. MnDOT, the FHWA, or duly authorized representatives of the state and federal government will have the right to audit, evaluate and monitor the work performed under this agreement, The Local Government will make available all books, records, and documents pertaining to the work hereunder, for a minimum of six years following the closing of the construction contract, 4.1. The Local Government must comply with all the time requirements described in this agreement. In the performance ofthis agreement, time isofthe essence 4.2. The period of performance is defined as beginning on the date of federal authorization and ending on the da1edeUnedinthefedera|financia\sysLemorfedena|agreennent(^enddate°). Nowork completed after the end date will beeligible for federal funding. Local Government must submit all contract close out paperwork to MnIDOT, twenty four months prior to the end date. 5.1. Cost. The entire cost of the Project(s) is to be paid from federal funds made available by the FHWA and by other funds provided by the Local Government, The Local Government will pay any part of the cost or 9 expense of the Project(s) that is not paid by federal funds. MnDOT will receive the federal funds to be paid bvthe FHVVAfor the Projedfs\,pursuant toMinnesota Statutes §l61.36,Subdivision Z.K4nDOTwill reimburse the Local Government, from said federal funds made available to each Project, for each partial payment request, subject tothe availability and limits ofthose funds. 5.2. Indirect Cost Rate Proposal/Cost Allocation Plan. If the Local Government seeks reimbursement for indirect costs and has submitted to MnDOT an indirect cost rate proposal or a cost allocation plan, the rate proposed will be used on a provisional basis. At any time during the period of performance or the final audit of a project, MnDOT may audit and adjust the indirect cost rate according to the cost principles in 2 CFR Part 200, K4nDOTmay adjust associated reimbursements accordingly. 5.3. Reimbursement. The Local Government will prepare partial estimates in accordance with the terms of the construction contract for the Project(s). The Project Engineer will certify each partial estimate. Following certification of the partial estimate, the Local Government will make partial payments to the Contractor in accordance with the terms of the construction contract for the Project(s). 5.3.1. Following certification of the partial estimate, the Local Government may request reimbursement for costs eligible for federal funds. The Local Government's request will be made to MnDOT and will include acopy ofthe certified partial estimate. 5.3.2. Upon completion of the Project(s), the Local Government will prepare a final estimate in accordance with the terms ofthe construction contract for the Pnjecds). The Project Engineer will certify the final estimate. Following certification of the final estimate, the Local Government will make the final payment to the Contractor in accordance with the terms of the construction contract for the Project(s). 5.3.3. Following certification of the final estimate, the Local Government may request reimbursement for costs eligible for federal funds. The Local Government's request will bemade tmMnDOTand will include a copy of the certified final estimate along with the required records. 5.3.4.Upon completion ofthe projec1/s\, K4nDDTvvi|\ perform afinal inspection and verify the federal and state eligibility of all the payment requests. If the Project is found to have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications, MnDOT will promptly release any remaining federal funds due the Local Government for the Pr 'ect(s).|fKAnDOTfindsthattheLoca\Governnnenthas been overpaid, the Local Government must promptly return any excess funds 5.3.5. In the event MnDOT does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature or other funding source, or funding cannot be continued at a sufficient level to allow for the processing of the federal aid reimbursement requests, the Local Government may continue the work with local funds only, until such time as MnDDTioable to process the federal aid reimbursement requests. 5.4. Matching Funds. Any cost sharing or matching funds required of the Local Government in this agreement must comply with 2CFR 2OO.3O5. 5.5. Federal Funds. Payments under this Agreement will be made from federal funds. The Local Government is responsible for compliance with all federal requirements imposed on these funds and accepts full financial responsibility for any requirements including, but not limited to, 2 CFR Part 2DOimposed bythe Local Government's failure tocomply with federal requirements. If, for any reason, the federal government fails to pay part of the cost or expense incurred by the Local Government, or in the event the total amount of federal funds is not available, the Local Government will be responsible for any and all costs or expenses incurred under this Agreement. The Local Government further agrees to pay any and all lawful claims arising out of or incidental to the performance of the work covered by this Agreement in the event the federal government does not pay the same. 5.6. Closeout The Local Government must liquidate all obligations incurred under this Agreement for each project and submit all financial, performance, and other reports as required by the terms of this Agreement and the Federal award, twenty four months prior to the end date of the period of performance for each project. MnDOT will determine, at its sole discretion, whether a closeout audit is required prior to final payment approval. if a closeout audit is required, final payment will be held until the audit has been completed. Monitoring of any capital assets acquired with funds will continue following project closeout. & Conditions of Payment. All services provided by Local Government under this agreement must be performed to MnDOT`s satisfaction, as determined at the sole discretion of MnDOTs Authorized Representative and in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The Local Government will not receive payment for work found by MnDOT to be unsatisfactory or performed in violation of federal, state, or local law. 7. Authorized Representatives 7.1. MnDOT's Authorized Representative is., Name: Mitchell Rasmussen, or his successor, Title: State Aid Engineer Phone: 651-366-4831 Email: Mitch. rasmussen@state, mn. us MnDOrs Authorized Representative has the responsibility to monitor Local Government's performance and the authority to accept the services provided under this agreement. If the services are satisfactory, MnDOT's Authorized Representative will certify acceptance on each invoice submitted for payment, 7.2. The Local Government's Authorized Representative is: Name: Jeff O'Neill or his/her successor. Title: Monticello City Administrator Phone: 763-295-2711 Emaik Jeff.oneill@ci,monticello,mn,us If the Local Government's Authorized Representative changes at any time during this agreement, the Local Government will immediately notify MnDOT. 8. Assignment Amendments, Waiver, and Agreement Complete 8.1. Assignment. The Local Government may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this agreement without the prior written consent of MnDOT and a fully executed Assignment Agreement, executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this agreement, or their successors in office. 8.2. Amendments. Any amendments to this agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original agreement, or their successors in office. 8.3. Waiver. If MnDOT fails to enforce any provision of this agreement, that failure does not waive the provision or MnDOT`s right to subsequently enforce it, 8.4. Agreement Complete. This agreement contains all negotiations and agreements between MnDOT and the Local Government, No other understanding regarding this agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party. 0 8.5. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof is found invalid or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of the Agreement, including all material provisions and the application of such provisions, will not be affected and will be enforceable to the greatest extent permitted by the law. 9.1. Tort Liability. Each party bresponsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof tothe extent authorized by law and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of any others and the results thereof. The Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 3.73(, governs K4nDOTliability. 9.2. Claims. The Local Government acknowledges that MnDOT is acting only as the Local Government's agent for acceptance and disbursement of federal funds, and not as a principal or co -principal with respect to the Project. The Local Government will pay any and all lawful claims arising out of or incidental to the Project including, without limitation, claims related to contractor selection (including the solicitation, evaluation, and acceptance or rejection of bids or proposals), acts or omissions in performing the Project work, and any u/troviresacts. The Local Government will indemnify, defend (to the extent permitted by the Minnesota Attorney General), and hold MnDOT harmless from any claims or costs arising out of or incidental to the Project(s),including reasonable attorney fees incurred byMnDOT. The Local Government's indemnification obligation extends to any actions related to the certification of DBE participation, even if such actions are recommended byK8nDOT. 10.1. Under Minn. Stat. §16C.DS Subd.5,the Local Government's books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices of the Local Government, or other party relevant to this agreement or transaction, are subject to examination by MnDOT and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this agreement, receipt and approval of all final reports, or the required period of time to satisfy all state and program retention requirements, whichever is later. The Local Government will take timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies identified by an audit. 10.2. All requests for reimbursement are subject to audit, at MnDOT's discretion. The cost principles outlined in 2 CFR 200.400-.475 will be used to determine whether costs are eligible for reimbursement under this agreement. I03. If Local Government expends $750,000 or more in Federal Funds during the Local Government's fiscal year, the Local Government must have a single audit or program specific audit conducted in accordance with 2 CFR Part 2OO. 11, Government Data Practices. The Local Government and MnDOT must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch, 13.aabapplies Loall data provided bvK8nDOTunder this agreement, and asb applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Local Government under this agreement. The civil remedies of Minn, Stat. §13.08 apply to the release of the data referred tointhis clause bveither the Local Government orW1nD{}T. 12. Workers Compensation. The Local Government certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. §176,181, Subd. 2,pertaining toworkers' compensation insurance coverage. The Local Government's employees and agents will not beconsidered MnDDTemployees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act on behalf of these employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these employees are in no way MnDOT's obligation or responsibility. 13' Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue. Minnesota law, without regard to its choice -of -law provisions, governs this agreement. Venue for all legal proceedings out of this agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 14- Termination; Suspension 0 l41Termination by MnDOT. MnDOT may terminate this agreement with or without cause, upon 3Odays written notice tothe Local Government. Upon termination, the Local Government will beentitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed. 14.2.Termination for Cause. MnDOT may immediately terminate this agreement if MnDOT finds that there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of this agreement, that reasonable progress has not been made, that fraudulent or wasteful activity has occurred, that the Local Government has been convicted of a criminal offense relating to a state agreement, or that the purposes for which the funds were granted have not been or will not be fulfilled, W1nDOT may take action to protect the interests ofK4nDOTof Minnesota, including the refusal todisburse additional funds and requiring the return ofall orpart ofthe funds already disbursed. 14.3. Termination for Insufficient Funding. K4nDOTmay immediately terminate this agreement if: 14.3.1. It does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature; or 14.3.2. 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 the Local Government. MnDOT is not obligated to pay for any services that are provided after notice and effective date of termination. However, the Local Government will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed to the extent that funds are available. MnDOT will not be assessed any penalty if the agreement is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source, not to appropriate funds. MnDOT will provide the Local Government notice of the lack offunding within a reasonable time ofMnDOT's receiving that notice. 14.4. Suspension. MnDOT may immediately suspend this agreement in the event of a total or partial government shutdown due to the failure to have an approved budget by the legal deadline. Work performed bvthe Local Government during a period of suspension will be deemed unauthorized and undertaken at risk of non-payment. 15. Data Disclosure. Under Minn. Stat, § 27OC.65'Subd.3,and other applicable law, the Local Government consents to disclosure of its social security number, federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification number, already provided to MnDOT, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved inthe payment ofstate obligations. These identification numbers may beused inthe enforcement offederal and state tax laws which could result in action requiring the Local Government to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, ifany. 16. Fund Use Prohibited. The Local Government will not utilize any funds received pursuant to this Agreement to compensate, either directly or indirectly, any contractor, corporation, partnership, or business, however organized, which is disqualified or debarred from entering into or receiving a State contract. This restriction applies regardless of whether the disqualified or debarred party acts in the capacity of a general contractor, a subcontractor, oras anequipment ormaterial supplier. This restriction does not prevent the Local Government from utilizing these funds to pay any party who might be disqualified or debarred after the Local Government's contract award on this Project. 17. Discrimination Prohibited bvMinnesota Statutes §181.59.The Local Government will comply with the provisions mfMinnesota Statutes §181.59which requires that every contract for ornnbehalf ofthe State ofMinnesota, or any county, city, town, township, school, school district or any other district in the state, for materials, supplies or construction will contain provisions by which Contractor agrees: 1) That, in the hiring of common or skilled labor for the performance of any work under any contract, or any subcontract, no Contractor, material supplier or vendor, will, by reason of race, creed or color, discriminate against the person or persons who are citizens of the United States or resident aliens who are qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment relates; 2)That no Contractor, material supplier, or vendor, will, in any manner, discriminate against or intimidate, orprevent the employment of any person orpersons identified inclause lofthis section, oronbeing hired, prevent or conspire to prevent, the person or persons from the performance of work under any contract on account of race, creed or color; 3) That a violation of this section is a misdemeanor; and 4) That this contract may becanceled orterminated bvthe state ofMinnesota, orany county, city, town, township, school, school district or any other person authorized to contracts for employment, and all money due, or to become due under the contract, may be forfeited for a second or any subsequent violation of the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 10. Appendix 112 CFR Part 200 Federal Contract Clauses. The Local Government agrees to comply with the following federal requirements as identified in 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements,Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, and agrees to pass through these requirements to its subcontractors and third party contractors, as applicable. In addition, the Local Government shall have the same meaning as "Contractor" in the federal requirements listed below. 18.1. Remedies. Contracts for more than the simplified acquisition threshold currently set at $150,000, which is the inflation adjusted amount determined by the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) as authorized by 41 U.S.C. 1908, must address administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties asappropriate. 18.2. Termination. All contracts in excess of$lO,0O0 must address termination for cause and for convenience by the non -Federal entity including the manner bywhich itwill beeffected and the basis for settlement, the definition of "federally assisted construction contract" in 41 CFR Part 60-1.3 must include the equal opportunity clause provided under 41 CFR 60-1.4(b), in accordance with Executive Order 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity" (30 FR 12319, 12935, 3 CFR Part, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 339), as amended by Executive Order 11375, "Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity," and implementing regulations at 41 CFR part 60, "Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor." I8.4. Davis -Bacon Act, as amended. (4K]U.G.[3I4I-3148\When required bvFederal program legislation, all prime construction contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by non -Federal entities must include a provision for compliance with the Davis -Bacon Act (4OU.S.[.3141-3144,and 314G-3148)assupplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR 5, "Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering FederaUyFinoncedandAssistedConstruction").|naccnrdancevviththestatute,contractosnnustbe required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages specified in a wage determination made by the Secretary of Labor. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week. The non -Federal entity must place a copy of the current prevailing wage determination issued by the Department of Labor in each solicitation. The decision to award a contract or subcontract must be conditioned upon the acceptance of the wage determination. The non -Federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency. The contracts must also indudeaprovisinnforconnp|iancevvi1htheCmpe|and"Anti-KickbomK'Art(4OU.S.C. 3145),assupp|ennented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR 3, "Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States"). The Act provides that each contractor or subrecipient must be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction, completion, or repair of public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he or she is otherwise entitled. -The non -Federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency. 18.5. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act. (40 U.S.C. 3701'3708) Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U,S,C. 3701-3708). Where applicable, all contracts awarded by the non -Federal entity in excess of $100,000 that involve the employment of mechanics or laborers must include a provision for W compliance with 40 U.S.C. 3702 and 3704, as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5).Under 4OU.S.C.37OZufthe Act, each contractor must berequired Locompute the wages ofevery mechanic and laborer on the basis of a standard work week of 40 hours. Work in excess of the standard work week is permissible provided that the worker is compensated at a rate of not less than one and a half times the basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in the work week. The requirements of 40 U.S.C. 3704 are applicable to construction work and provide that no laborer or mechanic must be required to work in surroundings or under working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous or dangerous. These requirements do not apply to the purchases of supplies or materials or articles ordinarily available on the open market, or contracts for transportation or transmission of intelligence. 18.6 Rights to inventions Made Under a Contract or Agreement. If the Federal award meets the definition of "funding agreement" under 37 CFR §401.2 (a) and the recipient or subrecipient wishes to enter into a contract with a small business firm or nonprofit organization regarding the substitution of parties, assi8nmentmrperhornnanceofexperinneota|,deve|opmenta|,orresearchworkunderthat"fundinQ agreement," the recipient or sub,recipient must comply with the requirements of 37 CFR Part 401, "Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts and Cooperative Agreements," and any implementing regulations issued by the awarding agency. 18.7. Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387), as amended. Contracts and subgrants of amounts in excess of $150,000 must contain a provision that requires the non -Federal award to agree to comply with all applicable standards, orders or regulations issued under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387). Violations must be reported to the Federal awarding agency and the Regional Office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 18.8. Debarment and Suspension. (Executive Orders 12549 and 12689) A contract award (see 2 CFR 180,220) must not be made to parties listed on the government wide exclusions in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR part 1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR part 1989 Comp., p. 235), "Debarment and Suspension." SAM Exclusions contains the names of parties debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded by agencies, as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or regulatory authority other than Executive Order 12549. 1O.9. ByrdAnti-Lobbying Amendment. (31 U.S.C. 1352) Contractors that apply or bid for an award exceeding $100,000 must file the required certification, Each tier certifies to the tierabovethatbxviUnotendhasnot used Federal appropriated funds to pay any person or organization for influencing or attempting to influence enofficer oremployee ofany agency, amember mfCongress, officer oremployee ofCongress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal contract, grant orany other award covered by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Each tier must also disclose any lobbying with non -Federal funds that takes place in connection with obtaining any Federal award. Such disclosures are forwarded from tier to tier up10the non -Federal award. 18.10. Procurement of Recovered Materials. See 2 CFR 200,322 Procurement of Recovered Materials. I8.11. Drug -Free Workplace. |naccordance with 2[F.R. §32.4OU,the Local Government will comply with the Drug -Free Workplace requirements under subpart Bof49 C.F.N. Part 32. 1&12. Nondiscrimination. The Local Government hereby agrees that, as a condition of receiving any Federal financial assistance under this agreement, it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d), related nondiscrimination statutes (i.e., 23 U.S.C. § 324, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975), and applicable regulatory requirements to the end that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, handicap, or age be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be IN subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which the Local Government receives Federal financial assistance. The specific requirements of the Department of Transportation Civil Rights assurances (required bv49C}.R. §§22.7and 27.9)are incorporated inthe agreement. 18J3.1. This Agreement requires the Local Government to provide supplies and/or services that are funded in whole or in part by federal funds that are subject to FFATA. The Local Government is responsible for ensuring that all applicable requirements, including but not limited to those set forth herein, of FFATA are met and that the Local Government provides information to the MnDOT as required. Reporting ofTotal Compensation ofthe Local Government's Executives. b. The Local Government shall report the names and total compensation of each of its five most highly compensated executives for the Local Government's preceding completed fiscal year, if inthe Local Government's preceding fiscal year itreceived: 80 percent or more of the Local Government's annual gross revenues from Federal procurement contracts and Federal financial assistance subject to the Transparency Act, asdefined at2CFR 170.32O(and subavvanjs); and ii. $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from Federal procurement contracts (and subcontracts), and Federal financial assistance subject to the Transparency Act (and aubav/ards);and iii. The public does not have access to information about the compensation of the executives through periodic reports filed under section 13(a)or15(d)ofthe Securities Exchange Act mf1Q34/15U.S.[7Qrn(a),7Do(d)>orsection 61O4ofthe Internal Revenue Code of 1986. (To determine if the public has access to the compensation information, see the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission total compensation filings at Executive means officers, managing partners, or any other employees in management positions. Total compensation means the cash and noncash dollar value earned by the executive during the Local Government's preceding fiscal year and includes the following (for more information Salary and bonus. Awards of stock, stock options, and stock appreciation rights. Use the dollar amount recognized for financial statement reporting purposes with respect to the fiscal year in accordance with the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised 2004) (FAS 123R), Shared Based Payments. HE Earningsforservicesundernon-equhyinomnhvep|ans.Thbdoesnctindude@roup|ife health, hospitalization or medical reimbursement plans that do not discriminate in favor ufexecutives, and are available generally toall salaried employees. iv. Change in pension value. This is the change in present value of defined benefit and actuarial pension plans. V. Above -market earnings on deferred compensation which is not tax qualified. 41 10.13J. Other compensation, if the aggregate value of all such other compensation (e.g. severance, termination payments, value of life insurance paid on behalf of the employee, perquisites or property) for the executive exceeds $1O,OUO. 18.13.3. The Local Government must report executive total compensation described above to the MnDOT bythe end ofthe month during which this agreement isawarded. 18.13.4. The Local Government will obtain a Data Universa/ Numbering System (DUNS) number and maintain its DUNS number for the term ofthis agreement. This number shall beprovided to MnDOT on the plan review checklist submitted with the plans for each project. More information about obtaining a DUNS Number can be found at: ht1r)://fedgov.dnh.com/webfornn/ 18.13.5. The Local Government's failure tocomply with the above requirements is a material breach ofthis agreement for which the MnDOT may terminate this agreement for cause. The K4nDDTwill not be obligated to pay any outstanding invoice received from the Local Government unless and until the Local Government isinfull compliance with the above requirements. W City mfMonticello Local Government certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the contract onbehalf ofthe Local Government asrequired byapplicable articles, bylaws, resolutions orordinances Title: JIM LIM 910 Updated December 1,2O17 13 DCP Agreement date « ByLynnwtteRuaholl,Federal Aid ADmmnon &Spooia//rogmmo£nginoer Earlier this month many of you received o time sensitive package from SALT. This envelope contained anupdated Delegat- ed Contract Process (DCP) agreement for federal aid projects with bid openings in 2018 and beyond. Please take this agreement to your board or council as soon mapossible for execution. Your current DCP agreement will becan- celled mfectiveJuly 1.2O1B.The update was necessary to odd details which are required to by 2 CRF 200. The agree- ment has also been reformatted horeflect the new yWnDOTagreement format (and logo). Most of the language is the same as the previous agreement but it is just organized in a different manner. SALT requests that all agreements bereturned touobyMarch 1.2O18 if you have afed- eral project in this state Uonm! year. We would prefer to receive and have the agreements fully executed before you award any projects in 2018, but efew of you already have projects that are being advertised now and may not have enough time to get the agreement through your approval process. VVeask By, Gary Reitil, Federal Aid Project Development Earlier this summer the St. Paul District ry Branch issued a public notice an- nouncing its intent to develop several new Regional General Permits (RGPs), most of the currently available RGPs au- thorized for use in the St. Paul District (MN and WI). The proposed 2018 RGPs would provide streamlined authorization for regulated minor activities in waters of nesota, Wisconsin and within the exterior ican Indian reservations in both states. that you get approval masoon ampossi- ble.Neegnet that wmdid not get these to you earlier this fall as we know some of you have modified board schedules this month. If you have any questions please contact LynnetteRnmheU. You will notice very few changes inthe language except the hamu listed in 2 CFR 200. Because wmwish to keep the DCP agreement generic for all projects that your agency does into the future some ofthe information that 2CFR 2UO requires is very specific. Those items which are project specific will beprovid- ed in the cover letter that comes with your project bid opening information. The auditors have started to auk for these items intheir reviews. Because CFR 2OOimwritten for all types offeder- al awards some of the terminology is not what we generally use with FHVVA funds. We will have e croemvvo|k of ����- (PDF) to explain what the eudi tom are looking for or you can ue|| LynneheRoohoU. Another revision isthe addition mfan Our interest isparticular to the follow- ing: Transportation: This RGP is proposei to authorize regulated activities associ- ated with the minor maintenance ani't modification of existing linear transpor- tation projects, the construction of new linear transportation projects, the con- struction or expansion of non-linear transportation projects, and temporary discharges, including survey activities, needed to construct transportation pro - end date to your federal project, see other article in this State Aid Scene. A writing error in a section related hzthe end date resulted in the need for a change to page 5 of the agreement. In addition contact persons are listed in the agveement, this is o requirement of 2 CFR 200. Mitch Rasmussen is listed as the contact for [NnD0T as all of the items GA[[ is required to do by federal law and byK8nOOTpolicy fall under the duties cfpeople who work for him. Cur- rent officia|cuuntyengineemwenaaent the agreement, amwell ancurrent city engineers who one not also employed by o consultant. For cities with consult- ant engineers the original agreements were sent to the city administrator/ manager for execution by the city coun- cil. Not getting this agreement executed could delay award of projects later this summer. If you have any questions or concerns please no|| Lynnette RosheU at }ynnette.noshe||(e-�ata1e,moLis or 651- 366-3822. To EPA for review and verification for 401 Certification (45 — 60 days) 14 Implementation mid to late Febru- ary 2018 (There could be some delay to the implementation if the Corps allows MnDOT and Locals time to bid contracts that are al- ready authorized under RGP 3 or (continue on page 3) im 4,,,Federal Project Ed Dates By., Lynnatte Roshell, Federal Aid Agreement & Special Programs Engineer Since late in2O14.the FHVAhas been assigning project end dates tuall projects aathey are authorized. FHVVAdefinem the end date aathe last date that they will pay for any work done on the project. Only work performed after the authoriza- tion date will be eligible for federal reim- bursement. So, the period of perfor- mance is the time between the authoriza- tiondahmmndthomnddate.Thisimnnoof the items required tobedefined now by2 CFR 200. Seethe dnleline ohari (PDF) fora visual sequence of milestones in o project. Looking at historical data, FHVVAagneed that K8nDDTcould put anend date onall new construction projects ofseven years after authorization. For agreement pro- jects the ro'ieotoihe end date is two years after the expiration of the aAreement, since most agreements are written for five years this is also about seven years. Projects au- thorized before 2Oi4donot have formal end dates unless they have been finan- cially modified since late 2O14. This end date IS NOT the last date you can submit pepenwork k8nOOT needs time to process the paperwork so m clause in your new DCP agreement states that all final paperwork must be submitted tothe DSAE24months prior hothe assigned end date, hzallow time for processing. The law says that the projects need hobeclosed out within Q0 days ofthe end date. Beginning in 2018 SALT will get quar- terly repurtnofupcomingenddatesond will forward the list tothe DSAEs for the purposes ofreminding local agencies 6o submit the final paperwork. The Minne- sota FHVVA Division Office has told us that they will take end dates even more Life of a Federal Project December 1, 2017 � FHWA Period of Performance i [--- ---- -- - J F, | seriously than Inactive Projects. FHVVA understands that things happen and project completion dates may need toboextended, but they have made it clear that end dates will only bechang- es with really good reasons. What ex- actly these reasons will be we don't know until wehave tobegin hoask. The moral isget your projects done hn a timely manner and avoid missing end date deadlines and the inactive project list. |fyou have questions you may con- tact Merry Daher at L��� or 651-366-3821 or Lynnette Rouhe|| at |vnxe�eronhe8��at��amnua or 651- 366-3822. | m~= | DICIP l t~_no� | | | y=� �� ���m� | ` � ` ���°�=� =W119 `~^ Time*�� .�c '="tileltne*rat wscale 2M. A. City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 Consideration of approvinu revisions to fees for the purchase of land for 700 and 707 7th Street (Bluffs apartment complexes) with a net reduction of $1,300 as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Proiect, Citv Proiect No. 16CO06 (SB/JO) On November 13, 2017, City Council approved the following payments based on the original property appraisals dated July 18, 2017 and presented to Council on August 14, 2017. Parcel 3: PID 155-050-001010, 700 7th Street Amount: $95,200 Parcel 4: PID 155-050-002010, 707 7th Street Amount: $16,100 Revisions to the market value appraisals were made on August 18, 2017, reflecting the most accurate easement area and compensation calculations at the time, in which the offers were presented, as shown below. Parcel 3: PID 155-050-001010, 700 7th Street Parcel 4: PID 155-050-002010, 707 7th Street Amount: $93,200 Amount: $16,800 The result is a decrease in the revised appraisal value for Parcel 3 of $2,000 and an increase in the revised appraisal value for Parcel 4 of $700, resulting in a net decrease of $1,300. Negotiations are still in process for Parcels 1-4 for the Bluff's apartment complexes. Per the quick take process, a court hearing date has been scheduled for February 23, 2018, at which time these funds must be deposited with the court in order for the city to take possession of the needed property for the project. Al. Budget Impact: The revised compensation amount reflects a net decrease of $1,300. A2. Staff Workload Impact: Minimal and part of project scope. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion approving revisions to fees for the purchase of land for 700 and 707 7th Street (Bluff's apartment complexes) with a net reduction of $1,300, as related to the Fallon Avenue Overpass Project City Project No. 16C006. 2. Motion to deny approval at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends approving Alternative #I based on the revised appraisal. City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 City Council Agenda: 2/12/18 2N. Consideration of renewing membership in the Hiehwav 25 Coalition for 2018 in the amount of $15,000 (JS) /� 7 91 W 317 oQue 9I1►117.1YXI G lI T6100111� City Council is asked to approve renewing membership in the Highway 25 Coalition. The portion due was originally approved with the Joint Powers Agreement in January 2017 when the city of Becker and Becker Township were added as members. The agreed funding amount by the group was $150,000/annually. Sherburne and Wright County evenly split 50% of the cost and the cities of Monticello, Big Lake, and Becker, and the townships of Big Lake and Becker split the remaining 50%. Big Lake Township serves as the fiscal agent for the coalition. A1. Budget Impact: $15,000 was budgeted in the 2018 budget. A2. Staff Workload Impact: Meetings are once per month and attended by the Mayor and City Administrator. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve membership renewal in the Highway 25 Coalition for 2018 in the amount of $15,000. 2. Motion to deny. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City Staff recommends Alternative # 1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. 2018 Work Plan and Budget B. Invoice Highway 25 Coalition 2018 Work Plan and Budget 1. Work Plan A. Completion of Transportation Plan B. Identification of key improvements by June 2018 for inclusion in member jurisdiction capital improvement planning. C. Promote adoption of Transportation Plan by member jurisdictions D. Promote and support Initiation of official mapping by member jurisdictions E. Conduct feasibility studies on individual projects where enabled by Joint Powers Agreement. F. Assist member jurisdictions with implementation of priority projects G. Assist member jurisdictions with identification of Federal and State Funding Opportunities H. Lobby for State and Federal project funding in support of member projects 1. Exploration of Private and Public Partnerships J. Coordinate/Communication with - 194 Coalitions K. Coordination and support for CEDS initiatives 2. Budget Consensus during previous discussion was to keep budget same as 2017 at $150,000 A. Ongoing Transportation Planning Efforts A. Follow-up studies relating to priority projects B. Feasibility Studies/preliminary drawings C. General ongoing consultant support B. Communications/lobbying A. Consultant fees B. Community Outreach C. Web site Town of Big Lake P. 0. Box 75 21960 County Rd. 5 Big Lake, MN 55309 763.263.8111 Fax 763.263.3660 To: City of Monticello Attn: Jeff O'Niell 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 2018 Budget = $150,000.00 City of Monticello share (1/5 of Y2of TOTAL = $150,000.00 x.5 x.2) Make all checks payable to: Town of Big Lake UNIT PRICE AMOUNT $15,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $15,000-00 TOTAL DUE $15,000-00 If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: Brenda Kimberly -Maas, Clerk (763) 263-8111 City Council Agenda 02/12/18 20. Consideration of approvinu the purchase of a 2018 Ford 350 4X4 truck and plow on the state contract for a total cost of $36,221.61 as budeeted in the 2018 Water and Sewer enterprise funds. (MT) City Council is asked to consider approving the specifications and authorizing the replacement of Water and Sewer truck #301, a 2003 Ford F250 4X4 regular cab 8' foot box equipped with a 2000 9' Meyers plow, with a new 2018 Ford F350 4X4 regular cab 8' foot box equipped with a snow plow package from Ford. The State contract price from Midway Ford for the 2018 F350 4X4 single cab with an 8' foot box for the Water and Sewer Department is $29,199.84. After the truck is ordered staff will work with Crysteel Truck Equipment to have a Boss snow plow installed with electronic plow controller in the amount of $7,021.77 which is also on the State contract pricing. It is staff's opinion that selling the old equipment at the next available public auction will bring the highest price rather than trading the equipment into the dealer. Al. Budget Impact: In preparation for these purchases, the Water and Sewer Department has budgeted appropriate funds in the 2018 Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds. A2. Staff Workload Impact: The staff workload impact of a new unit will be very positive. Updating the truck will improve staff efficiencies with fewer breakdowns and safer equipment. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Motion to approve the specifications and authorize purchase of a Ford F350 4X4 regular cab 8' box from Midway Ford for $29,199.84, equipped with a Boss snow plow package for $7,021.77. Based upon the state contract pricing the total is $36,221.61. Authorization is also requested to post the old 2003 Ford F250 with the 2000 Meyers snow plow at the next public auction following delivery of the completed truck package. 2. Motion to deny the replacement of truck #301 at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends Alternative #1 to replace the old 2003 Ford F250 and the 2000 Meyers snow plow and place the old unit up for public auction following delivery of the completed new truck and plow package. By purchasing this equipment, we will increase productivity and reduce the cost of maintenance in the department. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. State contract pricing for new Ford F350 from Midway Ford. B. State contract pricing of Boss snow plow from Crysteel. C. Photos of old truck and plow to be put up for public auction. Midway Ford Commercial F+&�"*V&Wam-r&-L_51Me3 t777 N. Snelling Ave. Roseville MN 55113 T-79 2018 F350 4X4- Regular Cab- 8' Box Automatic Transmission Dual Front Air Bags AM/FM Radio Tow Hitch Tilt Wheel "NAM"', 11=01111111 �w'kffi AN 15N, &M. "0, W W1.42,S1 40/20/40 Vinyl Front Seat Standard Base Upholstery 4 -Wheel ABS Brakes Air Conditioning LT245/7507 E All Season Tires Travis Swanson 651-343-5212 tswanson na.rosevillemidwavford.com Fax It 651-604-2936 Front Tow Hooks Rubber Floor Covering Black Bumpers w/Rear Step Matching Full Size Spare Tirm. 6.2L V8 E85 6ptions Code Price Select' K�terior Colors' Code select 4.30 Axle "M JeanuusMe''6talliuc N'l x BTake Controller 52B &18F Affires TDX 6 4 F upfiffe i-S"wit—ches 66S P I o we r 1.11 Gro I u p 6L amperu/Snow Plow F:7kg 47,u Mud Flaps 61S 24b A'm`­p Aife'�nator 67 E lRunning Boards .. ......... - '_ 18B ITailgate 9—tep 8uuu5G Back -tap Alarm C r u i s e Control 52 10-ption Total 6.2 Cas Options Price Totals Extended Warranty Transit Impr Excise Tax Tax Exempt Lic 6.5% Sales Tax Document fee Sub total per vehicle lNumber of Vehicles Grand Total for all units $249 X Race Red _PQ 1 511, -11- 1 1-1.------- - - _­ - 11-1-1. . 1-11-111,11 U . ... ...... . $152 X Caribou Metallic 1LQ $419 x Shadow Black $162 x Magnetic Metallic ,17 __$_295- x E ctend dS" - e r­v­ i c" i e C, 6 1 n" t- r, a c'" tU Cost' Selec i $345 x 17 year/75,000 mile $2,570 1PremiumCare Warranty $128 z per to Bumper) $216 x You must have a active FIN code to participate in this Totals purchase contract : FIN code $25,600.84 Purchase Order required prior to order placement M, Kel M. _Ac_cel3f�_nce Signature Contact Person/ Phone # Print Name and Title Date —4,Contact's e-mail address and fax # 113073 d Avenue NE Highway 60 East 0 YST LN Fridley, MN 55432 Lake Crystal, MN 5605 R jE (763) 571-1902 (507) 726-6041 TF41-ICIII E011.11PME-1 -800-795-1280 1-800-722-0588 1-301111 RAIN111101010; Matt City of Monticello Crysteel Truck Equipment is pleased to submit this quote for your approval. Boss 87~V-XTSteel Plow Moldboard Width (8tnaighU: 110" Plowing Width (Scoop): 92" Plowing Width (V Position): 99" Moldboard Height: 38''mtend 30^atcenter Moldboard Thickness: 11-gaSteel Cutting Edge: Y2''x6^(1.3mrnx 15 cm) Trip Springs: 4 Lift Cylinder: 2"x11/a"x1O"(5umx3omx25cm) SrnmdLorkCyUndena: 1 Y4"x 1O"(5ornx25cm) SmedHitoh2 SI -3 L.E.Dwith Ice Shield Technology SmartTouch2 PMma of Plow Installation Assembly ofMoldboard Light Adapter Labor Charge for Current Chem1G80CorDodge Diesel Snow Deflector Installed Wing Extension Kit Installed Plow Shoes (price per shoe) Back Drag Installed "Dolly Kit'Casters TlmbronsLoad Saver inFront Installed Deduct for less Power Unit for Central Hydraulic Application Bumper Trim Kit Weather Tech floor Mats Front Set Joshua Miller Subject toall applicable taxes Quote valid for 3udays `; \\© \�� \� � �� I ^ ; � \\\� � � �� \ � \�� . / � � � /� � � � \ \�� \�� }� � `; \\© \�� \� � �� I / � � � /� � � � EMOWIR W", My rl 'N M� c0l 6 4 1 ht ylrc EMOWIR W", My rl 'N M� EMOWIR W", rl 'N M� c0l 6 4 EMOWIR W", Y ¢4 S � N N a 2 :11 711 F ' p �Yd 41 Y,X r i i Ni l l} � � i � i Fy;,sw �v�yyTMi, S mill-, Y ¢4 S � N N a 2 :11 711 F ' p �Yd 41 Y,X r i i Ni l l} � � i � � Fy;,sw �v�yyTMi, mill-, Y ¢4 i" tt ti � �17r3 l l} � � i � Y �,; 0 IV'�'��'i �� ' II G M � � �', IN m � ^\/° `/� /\�.2\/�/\y� \�� \� �\ \ �� \ � / \ D City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 3A. PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of adopting Resolution 2018-08 ordering improvements and authorizing preparation of plans and specification for Chelsea Road Utilitv and Street Improvements, Citv Proiect No. 17C001 (SB) On January 22, 2018, the City Council accepted a feasibility report addressing street, trail, sidewalk, and utility improvements along Chelsea Road between TH 25 and Fallon Avenue. A public hearing is being held at this time in order to move forward with ordering the improvements per the procedure outlined in the city's assessment policy. Property owners along Chelsea Road were invited to an informational meeting on January 11, 2018 to discuss the project scope and special assessments. Representatives from Aroplax, Midwest Precision Machining and Red Rooster Properties were present. Discussions via phone also took place with Tapper's Holdings, Inc. and Wesley Sprunk. The primary comment was related to questioning the need for sidewalk and trail facilities proposed along Chelsea Road. The project improvements are described below. The segment of Chelsea Road between Edmonson Avenue and west of Fallon Avenue has deteriorated over time and is the last segment of Chelsea Road that has roadside ditches in lieu of curb and gutter with storm sewer. Based on the existing roadway conditions and geotechnical analysis of soil borings obtained in 2017, it is recommended to complete a full -depth pavement reclamation with new bituminous pavement placed along the approximate 1,875 -foot length of Chelsea Road between Edmonson Avenue and Fallon Avenue. It is proposed to widen the road section to 44 feet, add curb and gutter, and construct a stormwater collection system. It is proposed to place a nova chip seal, which is also referred to as ultra-thin bonded wearing course, along Chelsea Road from TH 25 to Edmonson Avenue. It is proposed to change the intersection traffic control at Chelsea Road and Cedar Street to a four-way stop with the installation of stop signs, based on the 2017 traffic warrant analysis performed. It is recommended to monitor traffic conditions after the Fallon Avenue overpass is completed, specifically the eastbound Chelsea Road approach back- up to TH 25. Should this become an issue, installation of a traffic signal and separate right -turn lanes for eastbound and westbound Chelsea Road and northbound Cedar Street should be considered. Based on projected growth rates, it is anticipated that the traffic signal will be needed in 2024; however, it will depend on the growth in the immediate area as well. A roundabout was considered at this intersection; however, because of the unbalanced traffic volumes of each street approach, a traffic signal is recommended as a more feasible alternative to improve traffic operations. Proposed pathway improvements include extending a bituminous trail on the north side of Chelsea Road between Fallon Avenue and Edmonson Avenue and a concrete sidewalk City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 along the south side between Fallon Avenue and Cedar Street. These pathway extensions would complete system gap connections and provide pedestrian facilities on both sides of Chelsea Road to limit crossings. This is the recommendation on collector roadways according to the City's proposed pathway connections guide snap. Boulevard tree planting installation along the corridor is proposed with the project. Dual forcemains are proposed to continue to extend along the Chelsea Road boulevard from Cedar Street to the trunk sanitary sewer main just west of Fallon Avenue. This forcemain system, which extends from the Otter Creek lift station, was previously identified in 2005 to address future development in the City's northwest area with the former Heritage/Silver Springs development and was re-evaluated with current land use plans. It is timely to construct the forcemains with this project based on projected growth and to limit construction impacts to one year. Al. Budget Impact: The estimated costs for the improvements total $2,731,790, which include a 10% contingency and 22% for legal, engineering, administrative, and financing costs. Special assessments to the benefitting adjacent property owners are proposed for street, storm sewer, trail, and sidewalk improvements per the city's assessment policy. Funding sources for the proposed improvements include special assessments in order to reimburse a portion of a future bond issue or use of reserves, capital improvement funds, and advancement of State Aid funds to finance the project. A separate agenda item related to advancement of State Aid funds will be forthcoming for Council consideration. A2. Staff Workload Impact: WSB will prepare the plans and specifications with input from City staff. 2 Assessments City Funds Total Street Reconstruction (Edmonson Avenue to Fallon $388,815 $591,371 $980,186 Avenue) Nova Chip Seal _ $117,412 $117,412 (TH25 to Edmonson Avenue) Sidewalk Improvements $83,922 $84,190 $168,112 Trail Improvements ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................_........................................................................ $36,922 $63,205 °........................................................... $100,127 ................................................... Forcemain Improvements ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ - $999,757 $999,757 Storm Sewer Improvements $223,082 $143,114 $366,196 TOTAL $732,741 $1,985,984 $2,731,790 Special assessments to the benefitting adjacent property owners are proposed for street, storm sewer, trail, and sidewalk improvements per the city's assessment policy. Funding sources for the proposed improvements include special assessments in order to reimburse a portion of a future bond issue or use of reserves, capital improvement funds, and advancement of State Aid funds to finance the project. A separate agenda item related to advancement of State Aid funds will be forthcoming for Council consideration. A2. Staff Workload Impact: WSB will prepare the plans and specifications with input from City staff. 2 City Council Agenda: 02/12/18 1. Motion to adopt Resolution 2018-08 ordering the improvements and authorizing preparation of plans and specifications for Chelsea Road Utility and Street Improvements, City Project No. 17C001. 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution 2018-08 at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends approving Alternative #1. Chelsea Road has deteriorated over time, is in need of repair and was included in the city's Capital Improvement Plan. It is timely to consider moving forward with these improvements at the same time as the Fallon Avenue overpass project in order to limit major construction and traffic impacts to the year 2018. D. SUPPORTING DATA: • Resolution 2018-08 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2018-08 ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FROM CHELSEA ROAD UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT NO. 17C001 WHEREAS, a resolution was adopting by the City Council on January 22, 2018, accepting the Feasibility Report of proposed improvements to Chelsea Road by the reconstruction of streets including the adjustment, construction, reclamation, removal, and/or repair of existing pavement; curb and gutter; sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water supply systems; pathways; sidewalks; traffic control; signage; and other necessary appurtenant work; and WHEREAS, a resolution was adopted by the City Council on January 22, 2018, calling for a Public Hearing to be held on February 12, 2018, where the Council shall consider the proposed improvements in accordance with the feasibility reports and the assessment of abutting properties for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429; and WHEREAS, on February 1, 2018 and February 8, 2018, the city published notice of a public hearing to be held on February 12, 2018, to consider ordering improvements for said project; and WHEREAS, on February 1, 2018, affected property owners were mailed a notice of the public hearing to be held February 12, 2018; and WHEREAS, at said hearing there was available a reasonable estimate of the amount to be assessed and a description of the methodology was presented. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota as follows: 1. Said improvements are necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the Feasibility Reports at an estimated cost of $2,731,790. It is advisable, expedient and necessary that said improvements as described in the Notice of Hearing thereon be constructed, and the same are hereby ordered made. 2. WSB & Associates, Inc., is hereby designated as the engineer for the improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements. 3. The City Council shall let the contract for all or part of the work for said improvements or order all or part of the work done by day labor or otherwise as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.041, Subdivision 2 within one year of the date of this resolution ordering said improvements. ADOPTED BY the Monticello City Council this 12th day of February, 2018. CITY OF MONTICELLO Brian Stump, Mayor ATTEST: Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator MONTICELLO VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Monticello, Minnesota 55362 2O17ANNUAL REPORT [)FTHE MONT|CELLOFIRE DEPARTMENT President - John Bauer Vice Pnaaiderd- Matt Theisen Secretary ' Neil Kranz Chief -Mike Monsey Captains ' Jake Olinger Kurt Liefert Asst. Chief - Don Anderson Lieutenants - Scott E\earey Dustin Craig There were 293 calls which required 5.566 man hours. The average attendance at a call was 15 men. The breakdown of calls is as follows: Monticello City — 187, Monticello Township — 73, Silver Creek Township — 21. Mutual aid was given 12 times (included in day or night totals) and received 10 times. We had 192 calls during the daytime (6 a.m. to 6 p.m.) and -I 01 calls during the night (6 p.m. to 6 a.m.). During the year we had 23 training sessions requiring 1,351 man hours. The average attendance per session was 26 men. In addition, we had 12 work nights requiring 539 man hours. We also had 9 special drills as follows: House Burn (20 men, 117 man hours), Hazmat/SCBA's (3 men, 12 man hours), Pipeline Safety (12 men, 24 man hours), Pump/ Roll/Hydrant Filling (2 men, 6 man hours), Hydrant LDH (2 men, 4 man hours), Air Bags (1 man, 2 man hours), Truck Pumping (1 man, 2 man hours), Prescribed burn (prairie) which required 16 men for 93 man hours, and a trailer demo - kitchen (1 man, 5 man hours). Also, one man attended an E.M.T. Recertification for 12 man hours, one man attended two safety meetings for 4 man hours, one man spent 3 hours picking up the ladder truck from getting repairs done. One man attended the Firefighter 1 &2/Hazmat courses (162 hours) and one man attended the Firefighter 2 course (27 hours). Agility Testing for the new hires was done which required 19 men for 37 man hours. Also during the year quarterly fire investigation meetings were held which required 27 man hours, and fire investigation aid was given on a structure in Delano requiring one man for two man hours. The department escorting the 1TIAITIL hockey team back into town after the state tournament. They also escorted ti-rit VFW baseball team into town after winning the state championship. The department being honored by the Monticello Lions Club at their annual Chili Feed in February. A fire prevention demonstration at Pumpkin Patch Preschool (3 men, 8 man hours). The department toured the new Mills Fleet Farm in Monticello (24 men, 48 man hours), and 1 man attended an emergency preparedness training/drill (table top) for 4 man hours. 40ROMM& Mil M - celebration (2 men, 4 man hours). and Monticello Early Explorers Preschool Daycare during Fire Prevention Week. The department was in attendance at Benusa's Open House, and Moose Fest's 5K (6 men, 12 man hours). Sincerely, Neil B. Kranz momm- -IMLOM Alarm ..................... 70 Grass ..................... 1 Medical ..................... 18 Rescue ..................... 40 Structure .................. 10 Vehicle ..................... 4 Other ........................ 44 Monticello Township: Alarm ..................... 12 Grass ..................... 7 Medical ..................... 4 Rescue ..................... 17 Structure .................. 5 Vehicle ..................... 8 Other ........................ 20 Silver Creek: Alarm..................... 8 Grass ..................... 1 Medical ..................... 1 Rescue ..................... 6 Structure .................. 0 Vehicle ..................... 4 Other ........................ 1 llyimuliwl r#4;r4T-=- i J.'aytime Calls (6 a.m. to 6 p.m.) ............... 192(66%11 unz • =-# XI&III 1:1111 2017 FOURTH QUARTER REPORT OF THE MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT President - John Bauer Vice President - Matt Theisen Secretary - Neil Kranz Chief - Mike Mossey Captains - Jake Olinger Kurt Liefert Asst. Chief - Don Anderson Lieutenants - Scott Gearey Dustin Craig The following is the quarterly report of the Monticello Fire Department from October 1 through December 31, 2017. There were 84 calls which required 1667 man hours. The average attendance at a cal, was 15 men. The nature of the calls were as follows: Alarm — 37, Rescue — 17, Vehicle — 8, Structure — 7, Medical — 5, Brakes on fireDebris Clean-up — 1, Gas Leak — 1, Grass — 1, Illegal burn — 1, Natural Gas Leak — 1, Smell of Natural Gas — 1, Smell of Smoke — 1, Smoke in Apt. — 1, and mutual aid was given once to Big Lake. During this quarter, we had 7 training sessions requiring 376 man hours. The average attendance per session was 25 men. A fire investigation quarterly meeting was held which was attended by one person for two man hours. During the quarter we had 3 work nights which involved an average of 23 men each for a total of 136 man hours. The department visited the Monticello elementary schools (8 men, 42 man hours), Home Depot, Rolling Hills Landfill, and Monticello Early Explorers Preschool Daycare during Fire Prevention Week. In December the department hosted their Annual Christmas Family Brunch and 6th Annual Holiday/Retirement Party. ME= Monticello Fire Department Breakdown of calls for October 1 through December 31, 201 Monticello is Alarm .....................30 Grass ..................... 0 Medical ..................... 5 Rescue ..................... 8 Structure .................. 5 Vehicle ..................... 2 Other ........................ 6 Monticello Township: Alarm ..................... 4 Grass ..................... 1 Medical ..................... 0 Rescue ..................... 6 Structure .................. 2 Vehicle ..................... 4 Other ........................ 2 Silver Creek: Alarm..................... 3 Grass ..................... 0 Medical ..................... 0 Rescue ..................... 3 Structure .................. 0 Vehicle ..................... 2 Other........................ 0 W I'aytime Calls (6 a.m. to • p.m.) ........................... 52 • Calls • p.m. to • a.m.) ........................ 32