HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.a. Dakota County Incinerator Review ProcessCITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMKARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:November 24, 1992
AGENDA ITEK:Dakota County Incinerator
AGENDA ECTION:
Permit Review Process
Old Business
PREPARED BY: Stephan Jilk
AGEMTW.�
ta' A
ATTACM4ENTS: Memo, Review Process Schedule
AP OVE BY:
Dakota County & Resource Strategies Letters
gzo�
Dakota County is asking the Cit? of Rosemount to proceed with the local
permitting review of the Countys Waste to Energy facility. At the Council _
meeting of November 17 the City Council heard overviews of the recommended
process that the City will follow in this review and reco endations for
the hiring of consultants and contract employees for the ity's involvement
in this review and the subsequent permitting and inspecti n of the project.
The Council had voiced concerns about the hiring of Resource Strategies
Incorporated for the consulting work on the project. It was decided to _
table discussion on the matter until this meeting.
It is still my recommendation to have the City utilize thE services of
Resource Strategies Inc. for this project. I recognize thE concerns that
the Council has for the use of this firm. I strongly believe, though, that
the continued use of this firm will allow for the best anc most efficient
use of the City of Rosemounes staff time and, because the County will be
reimbursing the City for all costs in this matter, the most efficient use
of Dakota Countys financial resources.
As noted in the letter from Mr, Jeff Connell, of the firm, this firm has
extensive experience in dealing with these types of projects as well as
this specific project.
Bringing in a new firm at this time will cause a great dea
spent on the selection of the new firm and then extensive
the new firm "up to speed" on this project as well as the
Rosemounts process in dealing with the project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:A motion to authorize city staff to
process to continue review of the Dakota County Resourc
project and the necessary consulting and staffing arran
lined in the staff memo from LIsa Freese and Ron Wasmun
COUNCIL ACTION:
1 of time to be
time in bringing
City of
roceed with the
Recovery
'ements as out-
. dated 11-13-92
(V -
C�llty o(Rosemount
PHONE (612) 423.4411 2675 - 145th Street West, Rosemount, Minnesota
FAX (612) 423-5203 Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 510, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068.0510
TO: Mayor McMenomy
Councilmembers Klassen, Staats, Willcox, Wippermann
FROM: Lisa Freese, Director of Planning
Ron Wasmund, City Engineer/Building Official
DATE: November 13, 1992
SUBJ: Planning Review and Building Code Administration
Dakota County Incinerator Project
This memo identifies the requirements for the City of Rosemount's
review for the Dakota County incinerator project.
PLANNING REVIEW
CURRENT STATUS OF THE PLANNING REVIEW
MAYOR
Edward B. McMenomy
COUNCILMEMBERS
Sheila Klassen
James (Red) Staats
Harry Willoox
Dennis Wippermann
ADMINISTRATOR
Stephan Jilk
and building code
As the Council will recall, in the fourth quarter of 1991 a Comprehensi a Guide Plan
amendment was submitted to the Metropolitan Council regarding the incinerator. This minor
guide plan amendment clarified the Waste Management element of theCity's Comprehensive
Plan to -include only private waste management activities. In addition, this amendment
clarified the Public and Institutional element of the City's existing Com rehensive Plan to
permit publicly owned incinerator facilities. This amendment was forwarded to the
Metropolitan Council without recommendation by the City. In Decemb Dr, 1991, the
Metropolitan Council notified the City of its approval of this amendment and authorized the
City to proceed with implementation. Because the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(PCA) denied the permit for the incinerator, the City Council never to action on this guide
plan amendment. It would be the Planning staff's recommendation that the Planning
Commission revisit this guide plan amendment and make a recommendation prior to City
Council adoption.
OTHER NECESSARY PLANNING REy1Ew STEPS
Once the guide plan amendment is adopted, the County will be requi to follow the
following steps:
1) petition to amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit publicly -owned unicipal waste
incineration facilities in the Public/Institutional Zoning District via Interim Use Permit
MJP);
2) petition to rezone the land from Agricultural (AG) to Public (PUB); and
3) to request an IUP for the facility.
Approval of all three steps would be required in order to permit the fa ility in the City.
Additionally, a site plan review for the facility would need to be approved by the Planning
Commission and the Metropolitan Council would need to complete a public building review,
as required through the Airport Search .Area Review guidelines.
(Sverylkings coming ` J6 RosemouvdY
C,1 e-cled"n,,
Dakota County Incinerator Project
Planning and Building Code Review Process
November 13, 1992'
Page 2
The Zoning Text Amendment would be the first step necessary. In order to complete this
task we will need to develop a set of standards for the IUP review. These standards will
require considerable thought and will serve as the basis for the requirements of the IUP.
The land that Dakota County intends to build the incinerator on is currently zoned
Agriculture (AG). Therefore, the second step required will be to rezone this land from
Agriculture (AG) to Public and Institutional (PUB). This process requires a Public Hearing
and notification of all property owners within a quarter mile.
The final step in this review process that the City Council will be involved with is the actual
IUP. Planning staff assumes that this permit will be similar in content and form to other
IUPs approved for the Koch Refining Spent Bauxite Facility and the Minnesota Industrial
Containment Facility. To properly assemble this IUP, all aspects of the incinerator project
will need to be integrated into this document. This will require careful coordination with
outside agencies as well as all City departments.
STAFFING FOR PLANNING REVIEW
As with previous IVPs, the Planning Department will be responsible for coordinating these
processes. I will be the Project Manager for this review. Rick Pearson, Assistant Planner,
will be responsible for the site plan review of this project. The Planning Department,
however, will need to seek outside assistance in order to complete the review process in a
timely manner. As you will recall, the planning consulting firm, Resource Strategies Corp.
(RSC), was involved in earlier components of the review process. In particular, they
provided assistance and prepared the materials for the minor guide plan amendment.
In an arrangement worked out with Dakota County, they have agreed to pay the City's
expenses for the planning review process, including any outside consulting services. To
date, approximately $9,000 has been paid to RSC for their assistance on this project. Dakota
County has indicated a desire to continue utilizing the services of RSC. Given the
investment currently made and the fact that RSC staff is familiar with this project, it appears
that it would be in the best interest of both the City and the County to resume this
contractual relationship for the remainder of the planning review.
BUILDING CODE ADMINISTRATION
The building division has met recently (10/23/92) with Barry Schade, Environmental
Management Director, and Dennis Carroll, Construction Manager, to identify the
construction and review process.
The current status of the construction phase of the project identifies demolition of existing
structures and preliminary site grading to begin yet in November. Final site grading and a
design build fast-track construction process for the building is anticipated to begin in March
of 1993. The total construction from footings to completion is expected to take 14-18
months. This is a very aggressive fast -paced schedule which will be tightly coordinated by
Mr. Dennis Carroll.
Dakota County Incinerator Project
Planning and Building Code Review Process
November 13, 1992
Page 3
A key factor in the work progression schedule is the plan review and permit issuance. It is
the initial cog in the wheel. The project, as now identified, will consist of four major
process elements or packages. The first is the pit. This is the area off the tipping floor that
will receive the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) for sorting and transferring to the boiler
incinerators. It includes structural steel reinforcements, leachate collecti n, and structural
concrete.
The next element is the boiler house which is the processing area of the facility. It includes
the structural steel building to house everything: the boilers and conveyor systems; high
pressure piping and steam turbines; ash disposal systems; concrete work and steel walkway
systems. It also involves the emissions equipment and stacks.
The next component is the tipping floor package which includes the s ctural concrete floor,
structural steel enclosure building, electrical controls room (operation center), administrative
offices, and control room.
The fourth element is referred to as the back end. This consists of the electrical turbines and
switch gear, building, footings, and high pressure piping.
In view of the schedule of this project as it relates to and impacts exist' g projects currently
underway, such as Koch's Administration Complex, the National Guard Armory, and the
anticipated 200 single family homes next year (1993), I feel it is necessary to look at outside
help.
Plan review on the facility, as its schedule is proposed, will take a minfinurn of 5-6 hours per
day and will be continuous for 10-12 months. This will be an ongoing process throughout
construction because of the design -build concept.
Inspection, documentation, and administrative coordination will be a full-time 8-10 hours per
day for the duration of the project once the first footings are ready to p ur. This will be a
continuous process until the Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
My suggestion and request is to interview firms and qualified individuals to fulfill the
requirements of two (2) positions on a contract basis.
The plan review position would start first and would be necessary with the first plan
submittals in February of 1993. The second position of inspector woulbe needed with the
issuance of the first permit 2-3 weeks after submittal of the first plans.
Paul I3eimkes and I would provide the coordination between the
other City and County personnel involved.
I am suggesting also that a mobile job office such as a Gelco unit a
the plan reviewer and inspector. This would be placed right on the
positions and the
be rented to house
zrator facility site.
=: Dakota County Incinerator Project
Planning and Building Code Review Process
November 13, 1992
Page 4
The project is estimated to produce $161,539 of permit fees and $80,769 of plan review `fees
fora total of $242,308 in revenue to the City. A portion of this money should be used to
hire the contract help'identified.
I do not have an estimate at this time. My request is to develop. the requirements of the
position and request proposals from firms and individuals. I will then bring those proposals
back to Council for your consideration and approval.
November 13, 1992
Dakota County Waste -To -Energy
Proposed Planning Review Timeline
11/24/92
Planning Commission
Comprehensive Guide Plan Recommendation
12/15/92 1
City Council
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendmen Approval
12/8/92
Planning Commission
Review Zoning Ordinance Text Amen went - IUP
12/22/92
City Council
Set Public Hearing for Text Amendment
12/29/92
Planning Commission
Final Recommendation on Text Amendment
1/5/93
City Council
Hold Public Hearing on Text Amendm nt; Take Action
1/12/93
Planning Commission
Review Rezoning, IUP, and Site Plan
1/26/93
Planning Commission
Final Action on Site Plan
Recommendation on Rezoning and lU
2/2/93
City Council
Review Rezoning and IUP
Set Public Hearing
2/16/93
City Council
Hold Public Hearing; Take Action onRezoning?
3/3/93
City Council
Take Final Action on IUP?
*Airport search area public building review by the Metropolitan Council will occur at this time in the
process.
DAKOTA COUNTY
DIVISION OF PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT
14955 GALAXIE AVENUE
DEPARTMENTS OF -
• ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
• HIGHWAYS
• PARKS
• SURVEY
• OFFICE OF PLANNING
November 3, 1992
Mr. Steve Jilk, City Administrator
City of Rosemount
2875 - 145th Street
Rosemount, MN 55068
Dear Mr. Jilk:
)UIS J. BREIMHURST, P.E.
DIRECTOR
(612)891-7005
FAX (612) 891-7031
VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124-8579
As you are aware, Dakota County is moving forward with the development of the
Resource Recovery Facility. The County has reached a settlement agreement with the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the Appellate Courts have allowed the
County to proceed with the project. The County wants to begin taking.' specific action
with regard to the necessary local permits, approvals and preliminary sit work.
With this letter, the County requests that the City of Rosemount resume activity on the
permits and approvals necessary to implement the Resource Recovery Facility. Last
year, the County authorized the City to begin work on the project, using as necessary
the funds that the County advanced to the City for that purpose. In essence, the
County would like to begin where activities ended last fall
The County recognizes that a significant amount of work was already completed on the
project last year, and in view of that fact, the County believes it is in 1he best interest
of all parties involved to continue along the same path as before. The services of the
City's previous consultant would be a great advantage in reinitiating, work on the
Resource Recovery Facility, because of that consultant's familiarity with the project,
resulting in efficiency in completing the zoning ane land use changes.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to give me a call
Sincerely,
r�<�y
Louis J. Breimhurst, P.E.
PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
ENH: JILK
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
We are pleased to be considered by the City of Rosemount to 1
assistance in the land use review and processing of the propose
Resource Recovery Facility. Resource Strategies Corporation 1
qualified to provide the combination of land use planning and,
expertise required. We are the only firm to have prepared coml
amendments and zoning change submissions for communities
Airport Final Search Area", as required by the Metropolitan G
In addition to our unique understanding of the regulatory and t
involved in this project, I served as the County's resource reco
manager for four years.. RSC has also provided planning and
services to a number of communities, including Lakeville, Ma]
Bethel, Empire, Marshan and, of course, Rosemount.
Under our original contract with the City, we provided over 1(
assistance on the Dakota County project. We believe we are cE
assistance to complete this project in a time and cost-effective
Enclosed is a copy of our Firm Profile and project summaries.
additional information you may require at this time, please do
contact me. We look forward to completing our work with the.
project.
Sincerely,
*eey �JC2
Partner
JJC/sh
encl.
)vide professional
Dakota County
SC) is well
Lste management -
,hensive plan
[thin the "Major
nical issues
project
,te management
Grove, East
hours of
able of providing
there is any
t hesitate to
.tv on this
E
y
. RESOURCE
November 19,,1992
STRATEGIES
;CORPORATION
t
Mr. Stephan Tilk .
6600 CITY WEST PARKWAY
City Administrator
SUITE 240
City of Rosemount '
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
2875 145th Street west _.
55344' . -
Rosemount, MN 55068
6121942-8010
FAX 612/942-7464
Dear Mr. Jilk,
We are pleased to be considered by the City of Rosemount to 1
assistance in the land use review and processing of the propose
Resource Recovery Facility. Resource Strategies Corporation 1
qualified to provide the combination of land use planning and,
expertise required. We are the only firm to have prepared coml
amendments and zoning change submissions for communities
Airport Final Search Area", as required by the Metropolitan G
In addition to our unique understanding of the regulatory and t
involved in this project, I served as the County's resource reco
manager for four years.. RSC has also provided planning and
services to a number of communities, including Lakeville, Ma]
Bethel, Empire, Marshan and, of course, Rosemount.
Under our original contract with the City, we provided over 1(
assistance on the Dakota County project. We believe we are cE
assistance to complete this project in a time and cost-effective
Enclosed is a copy of our Firm Profile and project summaries.
additional information you may require at this time, please do
contact me. We look forward to completing our work with the.
project.
Sincerely,
*eey �JC2
Partner
JJC/sh
encl.
)vide professional
Dakota County
SC) is well
Lste management -
,hensive plan
[thin the "Major
nical issues
project
,te management
Grove, East
hours of
able of providing
there is any
t hesitate to
.tv on this
RSC has contracted with the City of East Bethel to review and analyze issues 1
East Bethel Landfill, a state and federal superfund site. In addition, the city is
to provide planning -related services.on'a retainer basis. Specific tasks currentl
by RSC include:
• Review landfill permit application/monitoring records;
• Review recycling/compost facility application;
• Identify applicable regulatory issues;
• Evaluate potential environmental impacts;
• Present policy alternatives for facility evaluation;
• Recommend appropriate land use controls for facility regulat
Contract activities were recently initiated, and are expected to be completed b
irrounding the
msidering RSC
to be performed
m.
March, 1993.
Ordinance Development Based upon Facility 1imRact Stud
RSC has contracted with the City of Lakeville to conduct a waste management background
study, in response to a proposed commercial medical waste facility. Specific tasks performed by
RSC include:
• Identify and summarize facilities;
• Summarize and analyze federal and state waste management regulations.
Summarize environmental impacts from other case studies;
• Analyze local conditions'and potential. impacts;
Prepare recommendations for amendments to land use cont ` ls.
Contract activities are expected to be completed in December, 1992:
1
Medical Waste Facility Permit Assistance
RSC. assisted a'private�clientwith permitting issues fora proposed co -generation medical waste-
facih
,. 'ty ht central Wisconsin.. The State -permitted facility'is designed to incinerate: l 50 tons per ,
„day of infectious waste, general medical waste and tires-The.responsibilities of RSC included::: ,
•Establishment of a local office to provide information on the proposed project;
Research and provision of local pertnitting requirements and support data,
• Client representation at local government meetings and service groups;
Research and assistance in steam sales procurement.
The protect is currently pending a,contested case hearing on the State's issuance of an air quality
permit: _
went Bauxite Land Disposal Facility
RSC coordinated the review and developed local permitting requirements for a proposed
in solid waste land disposal facility. The specific tasks performed by RSC included.
• Permit application documents review; environmental review coordination;
• Coordination with Dakota County, Metropolitan Council and MN Pollution
Control Agency permitting/licensing procedures;
• Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment, zoning ordinance regulations and
ordinance amendment documents; -
• Preparation of development agreement for local government permit;
• Presentations at public hearings and local government meetings.
The project was approved and permitted in October, 1991
Industrial Waste Containment Facility
RSC coordinated the review and permitting requirements for a 2.5 million cubic yard non-
hazardous industrial solid waste containment facility. Specific tasks performed by RSC included:
• Permit application documents review; environmental review coordination;
Coordination with Dakota County, Metropolitan Council and MN Pollution
Control Agency permitting/licensing procedures;
• Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment, zoning ordinance regulations and
ordinance amendment documents;
• -Preparation of development agreement for local government permit;
• Presentationsat public hearings and local government meetings.
The project was approved and permitted in February, 1992.
Municipal Solid Waste Resource Recovery Facility
RSC coordinated the review and permitting requirements for the 800 ton per day Dakota County
solid waste resource recovery facility. Specific tasks performed by RSC included:
• Permit application documents review;` environmental review coordination;
• Coordination with Dakota County, Metropolitan Council and MN Pollution
Control Agency permitting/licensing procedures;
• Airport Search Area Land Use Change, comprehensive guide plan amendment, `
zoning ordinance regulations and zoning ordinance amendment;
• Presentations at public hearings and local government meetings.
2
Municipal` Solid Waste Compost Facility
I
RSC coordinated the environmental review and permitting requirements fora 400
ton per day
municipal solid waste compost facility. Specific tasks performed by RSC inclu
ed:
•'Peiinit application documents review;
•Environmental review coordination;
• Comprehensive guide plan and zoning ordinance regulation's 'fid
amendment
procedures;
• Presentations at local government meetings: 1
Ile project is on hold, pending waste designation commitments from counties
within the Twin
Cities Metropolitan Area.
Commercial Waste Recycling and Reduction_ Analysis
RSC is currently working with a private property management company that manages
500,000
square feet of commercial property for sixty tenants in the Minneapolis -St. Paul
metropolitan
area, including a wide variety of retail, office and manufacturing activities. The
purpose of the .
project is to provide recommendations regarding ways in which to reduce the amount
of waste
that is generated and disposed by tenants.
Specific activities by RSC include:
• Identify, through conducting waste audits, the amount and type
of waste that is _
generated by tenants;
• Identify current disposal costs and disposal requirements ate each
location;
• Determine opportunities for cost savings through reduction o
waste by tenants;
• Assist in training for program implementation of retail busine
es and offices;
• Provide a reconunended system and associated costs for coordinating
the
collection of recyclables at all properties managed by the company.
Recommendations are expected to be completed in November, 1992.
Analysis of School District Recycling Program opportunities
RSC is currently working with Milwaukee Public Schools to establish a recycli
reduction program to provide for the collection of mixed office paper, newspri
glass, plastic, corrugate and milk cartons for 148 schools and six administrativ,
District. Specific tasks performed by RSC include:
Assemble and analyze generation data and waste manageme
for the District:
• Conduct waste audits to determine the actual amount of pote
generated by the District, as well as procurement policies and
• Analyze organizational roles related to the waste collection a
for the District;
• Identify recyclables markets and pricing trends;
• Identify opportunities for waste reduction;
• Provide analysis of potential cost savings and marketability c1
collected by the District;
• Assist with a Request For Proposals for qualified vendors to
recycling program for the District;
• Assist with a training and educational program for staff and
maximum participation in recycling and reduction activities,
standards for the quality of materials collected for recycling.
3
ng and waste
t, metal cans,
locations in the
t cost estimates
tial recyclables
material usage;
d hauling system
materials
cement a
;nts to insure
provide
I tne.scnool Distract is currently in the process of evaluating its options.
Reeyclabte Materials Cooperative Market Development
RSC worked with the Headwaters Regional Development Commission (HRDC) in, establishing
. a cooperative marketing strategy for recyclable materials. The HRDC contracted with twelve
counties in northwestern Minnesota and the Association of Minnesota Counties as part of a grant
from the Minnesota Office of Waste Management. The purpose of the project is to enhance
marketing opportunities for recyclable materials generated in the region.
The specific areas of involvement by RSC in the project include:
• Identifying recyclable material prices and end user facility capacity;
• Identifying trends in recyclable materials prices;
Determining pricing factors by end users for recyclable materials, to include
level of processing required for marketing, potential contract
terms, and transportation requirements
• Determining opportunities and end user interest regarding cooperative
marketing effort.
Research and study recommendations were completed in May, 1992. The final report was
completed for submission to the MN Office of Waste Management in August, 1992.
4