Loading...
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