HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 [11] Nov 29 {Book 36}
St. Joseph City Council
November 29,2005
FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORD PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
20.
21.
NAME
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
ADDRESS
JJ.)- tJTh fiVE 5E /' 57 J2J 6'
rJ.t(d 0..13 /70 k' S:E S7.ii~
UO (t-Vh ~~ r6 s{~ s~
AdministfdtOf
Judy Weyrens
Mayor
Richard Cdrlbom
Councilors
AI Rdssier
Ross Rieke
Renee Symcmietz
Ddle Wick
CITY Of ST. JOSEPH
www.cityofstjoseph.com
St. Joseph City Council
November 29, 2005
7:00 PM - Truth & Taxation
1. Call to Order
2. Truth & Taxation
3.
Adjourn
7:30 PM - Regular Meeting
1.
Call to Order
2. Approve Agenda
3.
Consent Agenda
a. Minutes - Requested Action: Approve the minutes of October 20, November 2 an<<J 3,
2005
b. Bills Payable - Requested Action: Approve check numbers i
c. Financial Agreement - Requested Action: Authorize the Mayor and Administrato~ to
execute the Financial Advisory Agreement between the City of St. Joseph and I
Northland Securities. \
d. Bond Sale - Requested Action: Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execut~
the Resolution issuing $3,575,000 GO Revenue Bonds.
e. Fire Pension Increase - Accept the recommendation of the Fire Board and increas~
the annual Fire Pension to $1,800 per year of service.
f. 2005 Audit Service - Requested Action: Authorize execution of the engagement
letter between the City of St. Joseph and KDV for audit services for the year 200~ at
a cost of $24,000. i
g. Assessment Legal Action - Requested Action: Accept the recommendation of the I
City Attorney dismissing without prejudice Gangl/Gustafson vs City of St. Joseph,.
h. Annual Licenses - Requested Action: Approval of the Non~intoxicating Liquor
Licenses, Cigarette Licenses and Amusement/Entertainment Licenses for 2006.
1. Gambling Application - Requested Action: Accept the Gambling Premise Permit f9r
the Church of St. Joseph fora fundraiser to be held at the St. Joseph Lab School on
April 29, 2006.
4. Public Comments to the Agenda
5. City Engineer Reports
a. 2006 Trunk Watermain Project
b. Storm Water Utility Report
c. Other Matters
6. Mayor Reports
7.
Council Reports
File
8. Administrator Reports
a. WSB Contract
b. Environmental Assessment Worksheet
9. Adjourn
2., College Avenue North' PO Box 668 . Saint. joseph, Minnesota ,6,74
Phone ,2.0,6,.72.01 Fdx ,2.0.,6,.0,42.
Notes.. . . . .. . . . ....
The packets are being delivered today as your meeting is scheduled for Tuesday
and Friday is a holiday for the City employees. Unfortunately because the packet
is so early there may be additions to the agenda with additional information. We
will only add items that must be acted on before December 15 and the bills and
minutes will be forwarded on Monday.
Meeting Packet
This is the following meeting schedule for next week
November 29 5:30 PM Intergovernmental (St Augusta)
November 29 7:00 PM Truth and Taxation
November 29 7:30 PM Regular Meeting (time approx.)
Meeting Schedule
With regard to the Truth and Taxation meeting - the Council cannot act on the
budget at the meeting on November 29. At least three days must pass before
adoption of the budget and the budget must be adopted no later than December
21,2005.
Future Meetings
December 5, 2005
December 5, 2005
??????
?????
7:45 PM Sp Council Meeting, Prelirninary/Final Plat
It was recently discovered that the area being
developed as Sunrise Cottages needs to be platted. The
original property was platted by Sand Companies as on
outlot. Since the Townhomes will be sold individually
the property must be platted. The Planning Commission
is considering the matter on December 5 and the
developer would like to begin construction as soon as
possible. If the Council does not consider this matter on
December 5, the developer would have to wait until
December 15,2005 and all the lots have been sold. This
matter is more administrative than platting as the
building pads have already been established when
utilities were installed.
8:00 PM Joint CityfTownship, OA Expansion Area
LELS is meeting with the negotiating committee on
December 7, 2005. Before that meeting the Council
should meet in closed session to discuss strategy.
Possible dates include November 30 or December 6.
Please let me know your preference.
We also need to finalize the water rates and we would
like to have a follow-up with the Council from the last
planning session. Please let me know what works for
you. Do you want to do an evening beginning at 5 :00 or
and afternoon?
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 11/28/0511 :46 AM
Bills Payable
Check
Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
Nbr
036521 POSTMASTER Nov Billing $98.95 603 43230 322
036521 POSTMASTER Nov Billing $98.95 602 49490 322
036521 POSTMASTER Nov Biling $98.96 601 49440 322
036522 NORTHLAND TRUST SERVICES INC 1,655M GO Improv $46,980.01 333 47100 611
036522 NORTHLAND TRUST SERVICES INC 280M GO Cert $3,958.75 432 47100 611
036522 NORTHLAND TRUST SERVICES INC 280M GO Cert $65,000.00 432 47100 600
036524 STEARNS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION 2005 Rural $29,154.97 321 47100 640
036525 US BANK 590M GO Improv $8,803.75 323 47100 611
036525 US BANK 700M Public prj $35,000.00 329 47100 600
036525 US BANK 700M Public prj $13,571.25 329 47100 611
036525 US BANK 640M GO Sewer $25,000.00 602 47100 600
036525 US BANK 640M GO Sewer $13,281.25 602 47100 611
036525 US BANK 815M GO Fire Hall $50,000.00 331 47100 600
036525 US BANK 815M GO Fire Hall $13,392.50 331 47100 611
036525 US BANK 750M GO Improv $115,000.0 332 47100 600
036525 US BANK 2, 135M GO Improv $240,000.0 328 47100 600
036525 US BANK 590M GO Improv $115,000.0 323 47100 600
036525 US BANK 245M GO Cert $2,565.00 327 47100 611
036525 US BANK 750M GO Improv $7,408.75 332 47100 611
036525 US BANK 645M Public $24,450.00 322 47100 611
036525 US BANK 545M GO Improv $35,000.00 319 47100 600
036525 US BANK 545M GO Improv $8,867.50 319 47100 611
036525 US BANK 1,330M GO Improv $80,000.00 321 47100 600
036525 US BANK 2, 135M GO Improv $15,748.75 328 47100 611
036525 US BANK 645M Public $50,000.00 322 47100 600
036525 US BANK 810M GO Improv $165,000.0 324 47100 600
036525 US BANK 810M GO Improv $6,228.75 324 47100 611
036525 US BANK 4,700M GO Improv $405,000.0 325 47100 600
036525 US BANK 4,700M GO Improv $69,168.75 325 47100 611
036525 US BANK 810M GO Wtr Rev $85,000.00 601 47100 600
036525 US BANK 810M GO Wtr Rev $13,086.25 601 47100 611
036525 US BANK 245M GO Cert $60,000.00 327 47100 600
036525 US BANK 1,330M GO Improv $24,622.51 321 47100 611
036526 COLD SPRING ELECTRIC SERVICES install steel cover $200.00 101 43160 230
036527 FASTENAL COMPANY nylon washers $36.83 101 45202 210
036528 FEDEX package pickup $17.39 101 42120 322
036529 HARDRIVES street repair $45.77 101 43120 220
036529 HARD RIVES street repair $73.25 101 43120 220
036529 HARD RIVES street repair $26.63 101 43120 220
036529 HARD RIVES street repair $62.53 101 43120 220
036530 ITL PATCH COMPANY INC Shoulder emblems $114.23 101 42120 171
036531 KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS R Etshokin $81.53 101 42120 102
036532 KRUSE, LYLE Reimbursement for $960.00 433 43120 530
036533 MILLS FLEET FARM filters & hoses for $52.99 101 43125 220
036535 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO Parking Lot $222.69 490 43120 530
036535 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO Parking Lot $755.43 490 43120 530
036535 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO Parking Lot $41.52 490 43120 530
036535 MINNESOTA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO Parking Lot $34.60 490 43120 530
036536 MINNESOTA TRAVEL MANAGEMENT Lease unit 5556 $873.27 101 42152 414
036536 MINNESOTA TRAVEL MANAGEMENT Lease unit 4783 $928.76 101 42152 414
036536 MINNESOTA TRAVEL MANAGEMENT Lease unit 5244 $888.15 101 42152 414
036537 MN COUNTY A TIORNEY'S ASSOC DUI Vehicle $26.63 101 42120 200
036538 MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4th quarter $1,318.00 601 49440 444
036539 MOTOROLA repair pager $79.01 105 42250 230
036540 NAHAN, TOM speaker wire $12.78 101 41950 210
036540 NAHAN, TOM video cassettes $11.62 101 41950 210
036542 NEESER, CHUCK Reimbursement $840.00 433 43120 530
036543 OFFICE DEPOT usb cable & $78.30 101 41430 220
036544 SCHWAAB Bialke notary $35.73 101 41430 200
036545 SEH S1. Ben's Art Ctr $109.79 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Graceview 3 $972.44 101 43131 303
036545 SEH New Mun Wells $2,910.00 434 49440 530
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 11/28/05 11 :46 AM
Page 2
Bills Payable
Check
Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
Nbr
036545 SEH 2006 Trunk Wa $1,032.56 601 49420 303
036545 SEH 2006 St Imrpove $11,569.51 101 43131 303
036545 SEH 2005 Swer Rehab $287.70 101 43131 303
036545 SEH ISO 742 Feasibility $6,885.10 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Platting & Zoning $218.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Streets & Traffice $476.80 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Storm Sewer $394.23 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Storm Wtr $756.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Annexation $1,121.80 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Graceview 2 $68.40 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Midnight Haulers $933.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Liberty Pointe 2 $1,152.43 101 43131 303
036545 SEH ISO 742 ASTJOE $1,592.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Verizon Wireless $272.32 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Capitallmprov $648.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH 304Tth St Vac $763.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Mise Engineering $184.10 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Parks & Trails $434.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Transportation $454.00 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Cloverdale $778.10 431 43120 530
036545 SEH Hill St AST JOE $395.40 433 43120 530
036545 SEH Momingside $1,300.10 101 43131 303
036545 SEH CR 121 $3,920.25 425 43122 530
036545 SEH Well Field $385.70 434 49440 530
036545 SEH Arcon Phase I $1,588.88 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Northland 8 $590.93 430 43120 530
036545 SEH Northland Hgts $21,349.10 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Field Str Corridor $2,549.78 435 43120 530
036545 SEH Liberty Pointe $54.60 428 43124 530
036545 SEH Pond View Ridge $405.23 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Well Sites W 1-94 $148.60 434 49440 530
036545 SEH N Corridor $958.28 101 43131 303
036545 SEH Pond View 9 $1,687.49 101 43131 303
036546 SPRINT 3 mobile charges $153.54 101 42151 321
036547 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC North Corridor & $1,120.20 435 49450 530
036548 ST. JOSEPH NEWSLEAOER Truth n Taxation $153.00 101 41530 340
036549 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Oct Usage $290.06 101 45201 381
036549 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Oct Usage $45.50 602 49480 381
036549 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Oct Usage $46.27 602 49473 381
036549 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Oct Usage $47.79 602 49471 381
036549 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Oct Usage $537.75 101 43160 386
036549 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Oct Usage $48.90 602 49472 381
036550 STREICHER'S practice ammo $71.09 101 42140 210
036550 STREICHER'S practice ammo $28.60 101 42140 210
036551 SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION Annual Fire $90.00 105 42280 300
036552 TENVOOROE MOTOR COMPMANY Repair Econoline $873.60 105 42260 220
036553 TIREMAXX SERVICE CENTERS oil change Chevy $27.44 101 42152 220
036554 TRAUT WELLS Water $35.00 601 49420 312
036555 WERNER ELECTRIC SUPPLY light bulbs $27.76 601 49430 220
036556 XCEL ENERGY Nov Usage $328.48 101 45201 383
036556 XCEL ENERGY Nov Usage $87.55 101 45202 381
036556 XCEL ENERGY Nov usage $279.43 105 42280 383
036556 XCEL ENERGY Nov usage $167.51 101 43160 386
036556 XCEL ENERGY Nov usage $393.48 105 42280 381
$1,908,603.81
pratt
October 20, 2005
Page 1 of 7
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session
on Thursday, October 20, 2005 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. .
Members Present: Mayor Richard Carlbom, Councilors AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke, Renee i
Symanietz, City Administrator Judy Weyrens I
City Representatives Present: City Engineers Tracy Ekola, Joe Bettendorf, City Attorney Tom JovanoVich,
Bill Barber representing Inspectron
Others Present: Brian Orcutt, Jeff Taufen, Jamie Thelen, Jerry Hettwer, Dennis Stueve, Alex Vigil, Kevin
Johnson, Dave Trobec, Dan Nierengarten
Approve Agenda: Rassier made a motion to approve the agenda with the following revisions:
Add 4(a)
Move 10(a) to 5.5
St. Joseph Relief Association (Annual Report)
Trobec Liquor License
The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Consent Aqenda: Symanietz made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as follows; seconded
by Rassier and passed unanimously.
a. Minutes - Approve the minutes of September 1, 2005
b. Bills Payable - Approve check numbers 36310-36391
c. Bond Sale - Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute Resolution 2005-27
providing for the competitive negotiated sale of 4,595,000 General Obligation Water
Revenue Bonds, Series 2005D.
d. FSA Agreement,.... Authorize the Administrator to execute the agreement with Acclaim
Benefits to continue providing Flexible Spending Account services for the City of St.
Joseph.
e. One-Day Liquor License - Authorize a one-day liquor license for an event to be held, at
the College of St. Benedict on October 29, 2005.
Public Comments to the Aaenda: No one present wished to speak.
St. Joseph Relief Association (Annual Report): Jeff Taufen approached the Council to present the 2005
Annual Report for the St. Joseph Volunteer Fire Relief Association. Taufen stated that based on the
annual report a municipal contribution is not required. However, the City and Township have agreed' to
annual contribute $ 3,000 if a municipal contract is not required. Weyrens clarified that the $ 3,000 is paid
through the fire fund, which is split between the contracting parties.
I
Rieke made a motion to accept the 2005 Annual Report for the St. Josep~ Volunteer Fire Reli~f
Association and authorize a municipal contribution in the amount of $3,000. The motion was I
seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. '
Sand Companies - Special Use Amendment: Previously, the Planning Commission and the City Colilncil
approved the Plat entitled Morningside Acres 2. At the time of approval, the plat included 18 patio homes
(10 two-story, 8 one-story). Sand Companies is now requesting approval to construct all 18 units with two-
story townhomes.
Since a Special Use Permit was issued for the original development plan, the Planning Commission i
conducted a public hearing to consider an amendment to the Special Use Permit. The Commission iwas
of the understanding that the patio home development would consist of senior housing and question~d
the viability of two story patio homes for seniors. Sand Companies indicated that they could not pro'iride
the required parking for rental town homes and did not agree to place senior housing in the area beif1g
Draft
October 20, 2005
Page ~ of 7
discussed. After considerable discussion the Planning Commission recommended the Council approve
revis~d special use permit allowing all two-story town homes.
i
Wick made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and grant the
amendment to the Special Use Permit allowing the patio home portion of the plat entitled
Morningside Acres 2 to be developed with two-story, three bedroom townhomes. The motion was
seconded by Symanietz. .
Jamie Thelen, Sand Companies, approached the Councilors and stated that these townhomes would!
remain geared towards seniors with main floor bed and bathrooms and other main floor amenities.
Rassier stated that there would be no change in density.
The motion passed unanimously.
Trobec Liquor License: Previously, Trobec Enterprises applied for an On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licel[lse
for Trobec's Event Center located at 213 - 20th Avenue SE in St. Joseph. They currently have a lease lat
this facility until the end of the year, which may extend longer depending on the future use of the bUildirg.
Bill Barber spoke on behalf of the City's Building Official. He stated that due to the size of the building, !
which is 11,780 square foot and the intended use, the maximum occupant load is 785. An inspection was
completed and based on the Fire Code the property owner will be required install a fire suppression
system. This is mandated by the building code and the fire code. If an inspection is done and they find
something that is not up to code, a building inspector can require them to comply with the current codes.
Barber also stated that the code has been a standard code since the mid 1970's when the code went ir1lto
effect.
Trobec questioned why he would need a liquor license, as this is an event center. In his opinion, his
Minnesota Caterer's license should be sufficient. Jovanovich stated that he could not use his catering '.
license as it is his understanding that events will be held that are open to public, similar to the operations
of a liquor establishment. Jovanovich clarified that the City is considering a temporary license until the
end of the year and is also requesting that Trobec waive his rights to utilization of the Liquor Matrix in the
vent of a liquor license.
According to Carlbom, normally a catering license is only used when it is a one-night event, whereas !
Trobecs will be hosting an event every Thursday. Rassier questioned whether or not this liquor license I
could be held to the same matrix as other liquor establishments. According to Weyrens, this is not a !
viable option as they are leasing the property and they are not the property owner. The incentive to ap~ly
the regulations is not the same if you do not have a vested interest in the property.
There was also some question as to how the license could be renewed. Jovanovich explained to Trobe<i:
that the City Council would have the authority to renew this license if it is requested. However, Trobec
should not wait until the last day to request an extension.
Rassier made a motion to approve the Liquor License for Trobec's Event Center authorizing the I
Mayor and Administrator to execute an Agreement between Trobec's Event Center and the City Jf
St. Joseph outlining the terms of the license. Further, the Alcohol Matrix will only be used as a
guide in the event a liquor violation occurs. All violations will be brought before the City Counci.
for disposition. The motion was seconded by Symanietz.
Discussion: Jovanovich requested that the license agreement between Trobec's Event Center
and the City of St. Joseph include the fire provision stating that more than 300 occupants could
be allowed if the facility is brought up to code per IBC 2(a) and IFC 903.2.1.2. The Council
agreed with Jovanovich and Rassier and Symanietz agreed to include the language in the
agreement presented to the Council for approval.
Draft
October 20, 2005
Page 3 of 7
Ayes:
Nays:
Carlbom, Rassier, Symanietz, Wick
Rieke Motion Carried 4:1:0
I
Midnight Haulers - Exterior Requirements Variance: Weyrens stated that previously the City Council I
approved a development plan for Midnight Haulers. The development plan allowed for the expansion of
the current facility adding 21,000 square feet of warehouse space. The Planning Commission in June.
spent considerable time reviewing the proposed site plan. When the plan was submitted to the Planning
Commission it was not complete. However, the Planning Commission reviewed all the comments anq the
owner or owner representative agreed to meet all the Ordinance requirements. The comments submitted
by the Building Official included the Ordinance requirement whereby all buildings facing a public stree~
must include 25% exterior adornment. Therefore, since the proposed building face both CR 133 and 19th
Avenue NE, two sides of the building needed exterior adornment. '
Midnight Haulers is requesting relief from the exterior requirement for the portion of the building facing ICR
133. The building expansion includes installing a fence around the perimeter and any adornment added
would be screened from the right-of-way.
The Planning Commission determined that the purpose of the exterior adornment was to provide
aesthetics on public ROW's. Since the property owner will be fencing the property with a screened fenlPe,
the exterior will not be visible, defeating the purpose of the requirement. Therefore, the Planning :
Commission recommended the Council grant the variance providing relief on the exterior wall facing CR
133. The action of the Planning Commission also included a contingency that ifthe fence is removed I
permanently, the exterior adornment must be added at the time the fence is removed.
Wick made a motion to accept the recommendation and findings of the Planning Commission ,
granting a variance to Midnight Haulers. The variance relieves the requirement to adorn 25% of:
the exterior facing CR 133 as the property will be fenced and the adornment will not be visible '
from the ROW. The variance is conditional and if the fence is removed permanently the
adornment must be added to the building at the time of fence removal. The motion was second~d
~~~. :
Discussion: Carlborn questioned whether or not the fence would still apply if the property wou/~
be sold in the future. Jovanovich advised the Council to file that on record of real property with the
County.
The motion passed unanimously.
Midniqht Haulers - Curb and Gutter Variance: Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission considerep
the Variance request of Midnight Haulers to relief the perimeter curbing requirements. Weyrens stated I,
that she had been informed that Midnight Haulers would not be proceeding with the variance request I
regarding the curb and gutter. Therefore, an application was not submitted. It was not until the public :
hearing that the City was informed they had changed their mind, now requesting a variance. Weyrens !
stated that Midnight Haulers is requesting relief from the curbing requirements for financial reasons. Th~y
also cited that other property owners are not required to provide the curbing, however the Ordinance was
not in place when they developed their properties. The new Ordinance requirement became effective in i
2003 and properties since then have been required to meet that requirement.
The Planning Commission spent considerable time discussing the variance request. Due to some ,
misunderstandings between Midnight Haulers, their Engineer, and the City, nothill9 was prepared for th1
Planning Commission meeting. Weyrens reiterated that a formal application was never received as the :
engineer form Midnight Haulers sent a letter stating the project will include the required curbing. Dave I
Potter of Midnight Haulers stated that he did not authorize the engineer to submit the letter on his behalfl
and he is seeking the variance on the curbing requirements.
City Engineer Tracy Ekola stated that the curbing is not required for drainage, rather it is an Ordinance
requirement and the property owner was notified of the requirement from the beginning of the project. In:
[J) raft
October 20, 2005
Page 4lof 7
fact, the owner representative at the first Planning Commission meeting agreed to construct the required
improvements. Therefore the issue at this time is simply Ordinance enforcement. Weyrens stated that
the only manner in which to relieve the requirement is by granting a variance, which requires the adoption
of fact of findings. The Planning Commission could not identify any findings to support the variance, as
financial reasons cannot be the reason for granting the variance. A motion was made to deny the
variance due to lack of findings, however that motion failed 3:3. Since a variance requires a majority
vote, the variance was denied.
Symanietz questioned whether or not other businesses have complied with this Ordinance, which
Weyrens stated they had. Wick questioned the property abutting the property in question. Currently, it iis a
vacant field, however it may at some point be developed, which could result in issues with curb and .
gutter. Carlbom questioned the possibility of constructing regional pond for future industrial areas. Ekola
reported that regional ponding could be an option at some point, however she re-stated that drainage i~
not the issue, rather it is simply a requirement of the Ordinance.
Jerry Hettwer, Hettwer Realty Services, approached the Council stating that no other property owner isl
required to have curbing along the back-side of their property and questioned why Midnight Haulers is I
required to construct the curb. Carlbom stated that Bliss Media will have curb and gutter as required by
Ordinance. Weyrens clarified that the City changed the Ordinance in 2003 and only properties requiring a
building permit must conform with the new Ordinance. All new buildings must apply all current '
Ordinances including the perimeter curbing and exterior adornment.
Weyrens questioned both Barber and Ekola as to what is commonly seen in other communities regardiJ!lg
the curbing requirements. Both Barber and Ekola reported that they see this requirement in some of th~ir
other communities. .
David Potter, Midnight Haulers, approached the Council. He stated that if he is required to construct the!,
curbing the existing driveway must be replaced and he does not want to bear the additional cost.
Carlbom questioned Potter as to how they would be affected if the variance were denied. Potter stated
that he would need to shut down for a few days to repave the driveway.
Rassier stated that in order to grant the variance, the Council must establish fact of findings and
unfortunately financial considers do not apply; As the Planning Commission could not establish finding$
for the variance Rassier made a motion was made to deny the perimeter curbing variance as .
findings for approval cannot be established. The motion was seconded by Wick.
Discussion: In further discussion amongst the Councilors, Carlbom and Symanietz both stated that!
they would like clarification on what is considered a driveway. According to Carlbom, the class 2
turnaround areas should be curbed as well.
Carlbom attempted to find some findings to support the granting of the variance.
1. He stated that in the future, the type of driveway in question could be seen as a service drive.
Wick advised Carlbom that he needs to look at today, rather than look intc;> the future.
Ayes:
Nays:
Wick, Rassier
Carlbom, Rieke, Symanietz
Motion Failed 2:3:0
Weyrens advised the Council that MN Statute requires action on land use matters within 60 days of a
completed application. If the City desires to change the Ordinance it cannot be accomplished within 60 .
days. This particular Ordinance was recommended by the EDA and any changes should be referred to i
them for review and comment. Once the EDA has reviewed the Ordinance the Planning Commission .
should consider their review. At this time a public hearing could be conducted and the Ordinance would i,
not become effective until after publication. The process will take approximately three months. Therefor~
the Council must act on the request before them. !
I
Draft
October 20,2005
Page 5 of 7
Jovanovich stated that since Midnight Haulers did not formally submit an application for the curbing
variance the request could be denied. The property owner could complete an application, including
presented findings of fact for approval. The Council also has the option of reviewing the Ordinance
future industrial projects. Potter stated that he thought both variances could be done with the same
application.
Rieke, in his opinion, does not believe that 900'+ of curbing needs to be constructed as the drainage
issues can be resolved without the curbing. Rassier agreed with Rieke; however, on the other hand,
stated that another developer is being required to put in curbing on their property according to the
Ordinance. The Council can only act on adopted Ordinances and cannot look at future changes when
making decisions. .
Ekola stated that when this plan came before staff for review, Wasmund checked for Ordinance
compliance and determined that perimeter curbing would be required. The property owner was notifie(j
immediately of the requirement and at a public meeting agreed to construct the curbing. Barber agree~
with Wasmund's findings and stated that any parking or driving area is considered part of the parking Ibt
therefore requiring curbing.
There was some question as to whether or not they could table this item for further discussion after the
Ordinance has been revisited. Wick stated that he does not like the idea of tabling this because of the $0-
day rule, which states that if a decision is not made within 60 days it is granted by default. Jovanovich I
added that others have complied with the ordinance in the past and there are others that are currently \
being required to comply.
Rieke made a motion to deny the variance request for the relief of the curb and gutter, as there I
was no formal application submitted; however they can resubmit a complete application as to Why
the variance should be granted. The motion was seconded by Wick. .
Ayes: Rieke, Rassier, Wick, Symanietz
Nays: Carlborn Motion Carried 4:1:0
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
School Board Issue: Jovanovich spOke to the Council regarding the proposed school site. He stated that
his firm represents Lumber One and he represents District 742. In the past, this has not been a big issue
as the development agreement is standard and they are fairly consistent. However the proposed school
site is fairly complex and a large amount of public funds are involved. Therefore, Jovanovich stated that
his firm couldn't represent the City on the School issue. Jovanovich further stated that he contacted Jim
Stromen of Kennedy and Graven to see if they would represent the City on this issue. Kennedy and .
Graven provide legal services for the League of Minnesota Cities and Jim Stromen is representing the '!
City in the Meadowvale legal action. If approved, Kennedy and Graven would charge the City $ 150.00 \
per hour and they could have an opinion to the City by November 1, 2005. I
i
Based on the recommendation of the City Attorney, Symanietz made a motion to hire Kennedy and i
Graven to provide a legal opinion on the School Board Issue at a rate of $150/hour. The motion
was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
CITY ENGINEER REPORTS
,
Proposed 2006 Street Improvements: Previously, the City Council has ordered the Feasibility Report and
held the Public Improvement Hearing for the proposed 2006 Street Improvements. Bettendorf is asking I
the Council to make a decision as to whether or not they want to proceed with the improvements and if !
they do, what potion of the project will be constructed. The feasibility report includes the reconstruction Of
alleys and replaced the sewer lines along the project area.
praft
October 20, ~005
Page ~ of 7
Rassier made a motion to adopt Resolution 2005-26b Ordering the improvement and preparatipn
of plans and specifications for the 2006 Street Improvement Project to include the sanitary sewer
without the alleys. The motion was seconded by Symanietz.
Discussion: Carlbom stated that he had some questions with regard to the replacement of the
sanitary sewers and the necessity to do so. Bettendorf stated majority of the sewer lines in the
project area are clay pipes. Clay pipes have a tendency to allow root protrusion causing sewer
backups. The Wastewater Operator has requested replacement of the sewer lines due to thel
recent sewer backups the City experienced. While sewer replacement is the best option, linin'g
sewer pipes is another available option. This option can be completed without digging in the'
right-of-way.
Rieke questioned the impact of not improving the sanitary sewers. According to Rassier, the
worst-case scenario would be that they are not replaced and in a few years they go bad and trne
road needs to be tore up again adding additional costs. Bettendorf, with his expertise in this field,
stated that the new materials are better and as a result there is less chance of cracking, root
intrusion, etc. Carlbom stated that it might be better to just continue to monitor the sanitary selo/er
rather than replacing it.
With regard to previous improvements, Wick questioned what was done in the past. According! to
Bettendorf, nothing was replaced unless it was necessary. In this case, he believes there is a Ipw
risk if the sanitary sewers are not replaced; however, it is hard to assess the costs for the future.
Another issue that came up for discussion was that of 1st Avenue SE. Some residents have
questioned if the City would be willing to reconsider the cost split. 1st Avenue SE is the main bus
route for Kennedy Elementary School and in the opinion of the residents it is that traffic that is I
requiring the road to be reconstructed. Bettendorf stated that the utility must be replaced; ,
therefore the road would be reconstructed regardless. Rassier stated that the Council is not
establishing the assessments at this time. After the project is complete the Council can re-visit
this issue.
Wick also questioned the issue of the 4th of July Celebration and what if any impact the proposed
improvement will have on the festivities. Ekola stated that they would work with the contractors to
make sure that things are as neat as possible before that weekend. They could possibly go in ~nd
replace that sewer and repave the parking lot right away.
Ayes: Rassier, Rieke, Symanietz
Nays: Carlbom, Wick
Motion Carried 3:2:0
Rieke left at 8:45.
Field Street Contract: Bettendorf explained that previously the Council executed a contract with WSB for
the Field Street Corridor Study, which was anticipated to be completed in October 2005. Based on the
considerable amount of public input and research of alternatives, the completion date has been delayed~
WSB is requesting to extend the contract through June 30, 2006. The revised contract will reflect the I
cultural and environmental review that has previously been approved by the City Council. !
Wick made a motion to execute an amendment to the Field Street Corridor Study, Professional
and Technical Services contract to extend the contract period to June 30, 2006. The motion was '.
seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously.
304th Street Vacation: Bettendorf reported that he has been reviewing the proposed vacation of 304th
Street S. He stated that he still has some issues with the Rail Road that he needs resolved before he
would recommend that the Council act on this.
Draft
October 20, .2005
Page 7 of 7
Wick made a motion to table this issue until the Engineer brings the matter back to the City
Council for consideration. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously.
ISO 742 Improvements: Bettendorf stated the Council previously approved the completion of the ~
feasibility report to provide utilities to the proposed school site. For bonding purposes the City needslto
approve the resolution ordering the Preparation of the Feasibility report and include the provision whelreby
the cost of the study will be reimbursed through the assessments.
Wick made a motion to approve Resolution 2005-28 Ordering the preparation of report for ISO 1742
Improvements contingent upon the City recouping the costs of the report from the benefiting
property owner at the time of the assessments. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and
passed unanimously.
MAYOR REPORTS
Stearns Municipal League Meeting: Mayor Carlbom reported that the entire City Council attende~ the
Stearns Municipal League Meeting at the Fire Hall.
COUNCIL REPORTS
SYMANITZ - No Report
WICK
Park Board: Wick reported that the Park Board has completed their Capital Improvement Plan and will
be included with the budget.
RASSIER - No Report
ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS
Cable Franchise Transfer: Weyrens reported that the City has been asked to retain Miller & Van Eaton to
negotiate the cable franchise transfer for Seren Innovations (Astound) by Charter. Wick stated that th~
purpose of retaining Miller & Van Eaton is to protect the City's rights. .
Wick made a motion to approve Resolution 2005-29 Retaining Miller & Van Eaton to negotiate tJ1e
transfer agreement between Charter and Seren Innovations on behalf of the City of St. Joseph.!
City/Township Joint Meetinq: Weyrens reminded the Council of the Joint Public Hearing with the St.
Joseph Township to amend the boundaries and clarify the language in the Orderly Annexation
Agreement.
Water Rates: Weyrens stated that the Council needs to set a time to review the proposed 2006 water
rates. The meeting is scheduled for November 2,2005 at 6:30PM.
Wick made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously.
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
Attachment: Yes or No
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Consent - Approving Financial Advisory Agreement
DATE: November 29, 2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
,
I
Financial Agreement - Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute a Financial Advisory Servibe
Agreement by and between the City of S1. Joseph and Northland Securities.
PREVIOUS ACTION
The City Council authorized the Resolution issuing $ 3,575,000 in General Obligation Water Revenu~
Bonds. The Financial Advisory Agreement authorizes the sale to be conducted by Northland Securiti~s.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Financial Advisory Agreement as presented.
FISCAL IMPACT
$ 3,575,000 Debt Service
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICE AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OJi' ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
AND
NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC.
This Agreement made and entered into by and between the City of St. Joseph, Minnesota (hereinafter
"City") and Northland Securities, Inc., of Minneapolis, Minnesota (hereinafter "NSI").
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the City desires to use the services of NSI related to the issuance of City bonds as described
herein ("Debt"), and
WHEREAS, NSI desires to furnish services to the City as hereinafter described,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY NSI
Debt Issuance:
Serve as the City's Financial Advisor for the issuance of the Debt. NSI shall provide all services
necessary to analyze, structure, offer for sale and close the transaction. Examples of the services
include the following:
Planning and Development
*
*
*
Meet with City officials and others as directed to define the scope and the objectives
Assemble and analyze relevant statistical information.
Prepare a preliminary feasibility study or discuss with City officials possible funding options
and the fiscal implications of each.
Prepare details on the recommended options - information on the issue structure, method of
issuance, term, sale timing, call provisions, etc.
Prepare a schedule of events related to the issuance process.
Attend meetings of the City Council and other project and bond issue related meetings as
needed and as requested.
*
*
*
Bond Sales
*
Prepare, cause to be printed, and distribute the Official Statement and Bid Form to prospective
bidders.
Cause to be published the Official Notice of Sale if required by law.
Recommend whether the issue should secure a bond rating. If the issue is to be rated, prepare
and furnish to the rating agencies the information they require to evaluate the issue and provide
their rating. Serve as the City's representative to the rating agencies.
Directly contact underwriters most likely to serve as syndicate managers to assure that bidding
interest is established.
*
*
*
stjoseph 2006a 112205
Page 1
*
*
*
*
*
Assist the City in recelvmg the bids, compute the accuracy of the bids received, and
recommend to the City the most favorable bid for award.
Coordinate with bond counsel the preparation of required contracts and resolutions.
Post Sale Support
Coordinate the bond issue closing including making all arrangements for bond printing,
registration, and delivery.
Furnish to the City a complete transcript of the transaction.
Assist, as requested by the City, with the investment of bond issue proceeds.
Investment Assistance:
Should the City desire to invest the proceeds from the Debt issuance or any other funds of the City
through NSI in its capacity as a broker, NSI shall, at all times, transact such investments as
principal.
COMPENSA TION
For the proposed sale by the City in 2005 of its approximate $ 3,575,000 General Obligation
Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A (the "Bonds"), NSI's fee shall be a lump sum of $14,000.00
The fee due to NSI shall be payable by the City upon the closing of the Bonds.
NSI agrees to pay the following expenses from its fee:
*
*
Out-of-pocket expenses such as travel, long distance phone, and copy costs.
Production and distribution of material to rating agencies and/or bond insurance
companies.
Preparation of the bond transcript.
*
The City agrees to pay for all other expenses related to the processing of the bond issue(s)
including, but not limited to, the following:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Engineering and/or architectural fees.
Publication of legal notices.
Bond counsel and local attorney fees.
Fees for various debt certificates.
The cost of printing Official Statements, if any.
City staff expenses.
Airfare and lodging expenses of one NSI official and City. officials when and if
traveling to New York City forrating agency presentations.
Rating agency fees, if any.
Bond insurance fees, if any.
Accounting and other related fees.
*
*
*
It is expressly understood that there is no obligation on the part of the City under the terms of this
Agreement to issue the Bonds. If the Bonds are not issued, NSI agrees to pay its own expenses
and receive no fee for any services it has rendered.
st joseph 2006a 112205
""J
Page 2
AUTHORIZA TION TO BID
As a broker dealer, NSI is subject to the rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (hereinafter
"Board"). Pursuant to Rule G-23 of the Board, the City consents and does authorize NSI or any entity or
company affiliated with NSI to submit a competitive bid for the purchase of the Bonds. NSI agrees that
any bid so submitted shall be faxed directly to the City for receipt at least fifteen (15) minutes prior to the
deadline otherwise established for the receipt of such a bid.
SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS
The terms and provisions of this Agreement are binding upon and inure to the benefit of the City and NSI
and their successors or assigns.
TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT
This Agreement may be terminated by thirty (30) days written notice by either the City or NSI and it shall
terminate sixty (60) days following the closing date related to the issuance of the Bonds.
Dated this 29th day of November, 2005
Northland Securities, Inc.
By:
Richard G. Asleson, Sr. Vice President
City of St. Joseph, Minnesota
By:
And:
stjoseph 2006a 112205
Page 3
Attachment: Yes or No
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Consent - Approving Bond Sale
DATE: November 29, 2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Bond Sale - Requested Action: Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Resolution
providing for the competitive negotiated sale of$ 3,575,000 General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds.
PREVIOUS ACTION
The City Council authorized the construction of the 2006 Water Filtration Plant. This bond sale finalizes
the financing of such.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Resolution as provided.
FISCAL IMPACT
$ 3,575,000 Debt Service
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
HELD: November 29,2005
Pursuant to due call thereof, a regular or special meeting of the City Council of the City
of St. Joseph, Steams County, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall on November 29,2005,
at _ P.M. for the purpose in part of authorizing the competitive negotiated sale ofthe
$3,575,000 General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A. .
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF $3,575,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION WATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2006A
A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City ofSt. Joseph, Minnesota (the "City"),
has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue $3,575,000 General
Obligation Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A (the "Bonds"), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapters 475 and 444 for the purpose of financing a water treatment facility; and
B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Northland Securities, Inc., in Minneapolis,
Minnesota ("Northland "), as its independent financial advisor and is therefore authorized to sell
these obligations by a competitive negotiated sale in accordance with Minnesota Statutes,
Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Joseph,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. Authorization. The City Council hereby authorizes Northland to solicit proposals
for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds.
2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. This City Council shall meet at the time and place
specified in the Notice of Sale attached hereto as Exhibit A for the purpose of considering sealed
proposals and awarding the sale of the Bonds. The City Administrator or designee, shall open
proposals at the time and place specified in the Notice of Sale.
3. Notice of Sale. The terms and conditions ofthe Bonds and the negotiation thereof
are fully set forth in the Notice of Sale attached hereto as Exhibit A and hereby approved and
made a part hereof.
1846683vl
4. Official Statement. In connection with the competitive negotiated sale, the City
Administrator and other officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate,
with Northland and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds, and tp
execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion.
I
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by memb~r
and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the'
following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
I 846683vl
2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF STEARNS
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Administrator ofthe City of
S1. Joseph, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing
extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true
and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council, duly called and held on
the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to the City's $3,575,000 General
Obligation Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A.
WITNESS my hand on November 29,2005.
Ci ty Administrator
1 846683vl
3
Attachment: Yes or No
I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Consent - Fire Pension Increase
DATE: November 29, 2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEP ARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Fire Pension Increase - Requested Action: Accept the recommendation of the Fire Board and increa~e
the annual fire pension to $ 1,800 per year of service effective January 1,2006. i.
PREVIOUS ACTION
The fire fund annually contributes to the pension for the St. Joseph Volunteer Fire Department. In the
years where the fund is not in a deficit a annual contribution of$ 3,000 is provided to the Relief
Association. The Fire Relief manages the retirement fund and upon meeting the requirements, firefigl;1ers
in good standing currently receive a retirement benefit of $ 1,600 per year of service. .
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Accept the recommendation of the Fire Board and increase the annual Fire Pension to $ 1800 per year of
serVlce.
FISCAL IMPACT
A percentage of $ 42.00
COMMENTSIRECOMMENDA nONS
At the November meeting the Fire Fighters requested an increase in the retirement benefit. The increa~e
in benefit will help with recruitment and retention of existing fire fighters. Members of the Relief i
Association provided information that illustrated that if the contribution were increased to $ 1,800 per!
year, the fund would have a deficit of $ 42.00. This shortfall would be paid by all three jurisdictions in
the Fire District. The Fire Board unanimously recommended approval of the increase.
In addition, the Fire Relief will be reviewing options for the pension during the budget process for 2007.
One ofthe suggestions is to use a percentage of the State Fire Aid to fund a portion of the relief
retirement association. The Fire Board agreed to consider this matter during the budget process.
Data Entry
Data entered here will populate the 2005 Schedule form. Please use only Special Fund data.
Choose your relief association name:
I SAINT JOSEPH
Annual benefit level (effective 12/31/2005):
2004 Reportin~ Form (RF-04) Data
Ending Assets (12/31/04)
State Aid Received or Receivable ( 2004 aid may be increased by up to 3.5% )
Administrative Expense
2005 Actual and/or Projections
Revenues
Municipal 1 fudependent Fire Dept. Contributions
(must be at least the Required Contribution shown on the SC-04)
futerest 1 Dividends
Appreciation 1 (Depreciation)
Member Dues
Other Revenues
Expenses
Service Pensions
Other Benefits
Administrative Expenses
1,800 I
650,263
44,551
2,800
Deficit Section - Ifthere was deficit information on the SC-04, enter that information here.
Original Amount Amount Retired Amount Left
I Year Incurred I (from SC-04) (from SC-04 + 10%) Before Adjusting
(1) (2) (3)
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Totals
43,773
44,681
92,186
87,200
30,426
0
0
298,266
21,885
17,872
27,657
17,440
3,043
0
87,897 .
0
0
0
21,888
26,809
64,529
69,760
27,383
0
0
210,369
3,000 I
o
32,513
2,000
3,500
Form SC-05
Projection of Surplus or (Deficit) as of December 31, 2005
SAINT JOSEPlJ / Page 4
5
724,827
867,045
(142,218)
Projected Assets (Line 4)
2005 Accrued Liability (Page 3, cell A)
Surplus or (Deficit) (Line 5 minus Line 6)
Complete SectionU below.
Calculation of Municipal Contribution
A. If Line 7 is positive, complete this section:
Normal Cost (Page 3, cell C)
Projected Administrative Expense (2800 x 1.035)
State Fire Aid ( 2004 aid may be increased by up to 3.5% )
Member Dues
5% of Projected Assets at December 31, 2005 (Line 4 x 0.05)
10% of Surplus (Line 7 x 0.10)
Municipal Contribution (Add Lines 8 and 9, subtract Lines 10, 11, 12 and 13)
6
7
B. If Line 7 is negative, complete this section:
Deficit Table
I Year Incurred II Original Amount II Amt Retired 12/31/0511 Left to Retire 1/1/061
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
0
0
0
0
0
92,186
87,200
30,426
0
0
209,812
0
0
0
0
0
47,111
17,440
3,043
0
67,594
0
0
0
0
0
45,075
69,760
27,383
0
0
142,218
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Totals
If line C is positive, this is the new additional deficit for 2005. Enter the amount in Original Amount and Left
to Retire Columns. If line C is negative, reduce prior deficits according to the separate Schedule instructions.
Amortization of Deficit (Total of Original Am01ll1t column x 0.10)
Normal Cost (Page 3, cell C)
Projected Administrative Expense (2800 x 1.035)
State Fire Aid (2004 aid may be increased by up to 3.5% )
Member Dues
5% of Projected Assets at December 31,2005 (Line 4 x 0.05)
Municipal Contribution (Add Lines 15, 16 and 17, subtractLines 18, 19 and 20)
The municipal contribution must be made during 2005.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
20,981
:56,955
I 2,898
I
144,551
0
36,241
42
Attachment: Ites or No
I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Consent - 2005 Audit Service
DATE: November 29, 2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
2005 Audit Service - Requested Action: Authorize the Administrator to execute the agreement betWeen
KDV and the City of St. Joseph to conduct the 2005 Financial Audit.
PREVIOUS ACTION
The City is required annually to conduct an audit of the financial statements. Over the past years th~ City
has used KDV.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Authorize execution of the engagement letter between the City of St. Joseph and KDV for audit services
for the year 2005 at a cost of$ 24,000.
FISCAL IMP ACT
$24,000
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDA TIONS
Leslie will be contacting other firms that prepare annual audits seeking a quote. If during this proc~ss a
different firm stands out, we will provide that data. Regardless we will provide you with a summatjy of
the results. If need be this matter can be pulled from the consent agenda.
KDV
12 5 200~
KERN. DEWENTER.VIERE
('{TV Ob ,-,-
v 'I "'l- ~ \:) r J'(~1'0._ Ct>.; ,
. ... '" ""'-.~i...rl"j
October 19,2005
Ms. Judy Weyrens, City Administrator
City ofSt. Joseph
P.O. Box 668
St.Joseph;~ 56374
Dear Judy;
We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide to the City
of St. Joseph, Minnesota, for the year ended December 31, 2005. We will audit the
financial statements of the government activities, the business-type activities, each major
fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information, which collectively comprise the
entity's basic financial statements, of the City of S1. Joseph, Minnesota as of and for the
year ended December 31,2005.
The document we submit to you will also include the following additional information
that will be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial
statements.
1. Combining Financial Statements
2. Supplemental Schedules
The management's discussion and analysis that is a required component of the basic
financial statements will be subjected to certain limited procedures, but will not be
subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit, and for which our auditors'
report will disclaim an opinion.
Audit Objective
The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion as to whether your financial
statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles and to report on the fairness of the additional information
referred to in the first paragraph when considered in relation to the financial statements
taken as a whole. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
auditing standards and will include tests of the accounting records and other procedures
we consider necessary to enable us to express such an opinion. If our opinion on the
financial statements is other than unqualified, we will fully discuss the reasons with you
in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form
or have not formed an opinion, we may decline to express an opinion or to issue a report
as a result of this engagement.
Certified Public AccountanL'
Financial Services
OrganiZation Development
Strategic Consulting
Technology Seruices
Minneapolis
'7'100 Northland Circle N
Suite 119
Minneapolis, Minnesota
55428-1500
Phone: 763S~7.30l)
Fax: 7635.-:::;. t)(jg2
St. Cloud
220 Park Avenue S
P.O. Box l304
S1. Cloud, !\.'iinllesota
Waite: Park
W,\",\",'.k~h'.com
Expert advice. When you need iLsM
<lIS 3r...1 SlrC't': ,',
Suite 100
8i7.912.769G
\Vaite Park, !\lirlneSOl"
563{J2
5638-;'-::'51('
Technology Help Desk:
86G.40{l.(1426
PI lone: 320.2SI. 7010
hlX: 320.2.'J1.17x.l
Phone: 3:>}..::") 2 ,701:;:-.
Leu:: :i20.252.9G2-:"
October 19, 2005
Page 2 of6
Management Responsibilities
Management is responsible for making all financial records and related information ,
available to us. We understand that you will provide us with such informationrequireq
for our audit and that you are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of that I
information. We will advise you about appropriate accounting principles and their
application and will assist in the preparation of your financial statements, but the
responsibility for the financial statements remains with you. As part of our engagement,
we may propose standard, adjusting, or correcting journal entries to your financial
statements. You are responsible for reviewing the entries and understanding the nature of
any proposed entries and the impact they have on the financial statements. That
responsibility includes the establishment and maintenance of adequate records and
effective internal control over financial reporting, the selection and application of
accounting principles, .and the safeguarding of assets. Management is responsible for
adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and for confirming
us in the representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements
aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period
presented are immaterial; both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial
statements taken as a whole. You are responsible for the design and implementation of
programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud, and for informing us about all known
or suspected fraud affecting the government involving (a) management, (b) employees I
who have significant roles in internal control, and (c) others where the fraud could hav~ a
material effect on the financial statements. You are also responsible for informing us df
your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the government
received in communications from employees, former employees, regulators or others. In
addition, you are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the entity complies with
applicable laws and regulations.
Audit Procedures - General
An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about
the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. We will plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether thy
financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether from errors, fraudulent I
financial reporting, misappropriation of assets or violations of laws or governmental
regulations that are attributable to the entity or to acts by management or employees
acting on behalf of the entity. Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but pot
absolute, assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all I
transactions, there is a risk that material misstatements may exist and not be detected by
us. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial misstatements, or violations
of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material effect on thd
financial statements. However, we will inform you of any material errors that come to
our attention and we will inform you of any fraudulent financial reporting or
misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We will also inform you of any
violations oflaws or governmental regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly
inconsequential. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our I
audit and does not extend to matters that might arise during any later periods for whicH
we are not engaged as auditors.
October 19, 2005
Page 3 of6
Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions
recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories,
and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by
correspondence with selected individuals, creditors and financial institutions. We will
request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they
may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will also
require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and related
matters.
Identifying and ensuring that the City complies with laws, regulations, contracts and
agreements is the responsibility of management. As part of obtaining reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we
will perform tests ofthe City's compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the
provisions of contracts and agreements. However, the objective of our audit will not be
to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion.
Audit Procedures - Internal Control
In planning and performing our audits, we will consider the internal control sufficient to
plan the audit in order to determine the nature, timing, and extent of our auditing
procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the City's financial statements.
An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify reportable
conditions. However, we will inform the governing body or audit committee of any
matters involving internal control and its operation that we consider to be reportable
conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control that, in our
judgment, could adversely affect the entity's ability to record, process, summarize, and
report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial
statements.
Audit Administration, Fees and Other
We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we
request and will locate any invoices selected by us for testing.
The workpapers for this engagement are the property of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. and
constitute confidential information. However, we may be requested to make certain
workpapers available to regulatory or state agencies pursuant to authority given to it by
law or regulation. If requested, access to such workpapers will be provided under the
supervision of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd's personnel. Furthermore, upon request, we
may provide photocopies of selected workpapers to regulatory or state agencies. The
regulatory or state agencies may intend, or decide, to distribute the photocopies or
information contained therein to others, including other governmental agencies. This
engagement letter includes your authorization for us to supply you with electronically
formatted financial statements or drafts of financial statements, financially sensitive
information, spreadsheets, trial balances or other financial data from our files, upon your
request.
October 19,2005
Page 4 of6
The workpapers for this engagement will be retained for a minimum of three years after
the date the auditors' report is issued or for any additional period requested by the
regulatory,or state agencies. Ifwe are aware that a regulatory agency, pass-through entity'
or auditee is contesting an audit finding, we will contact the party(ies) contesting the
audit finding for guidance prior to destroying the workpapers.
If you intend to publish or otherwise reproduce the financial statements and make
reference to our Firm name, you agree to provide us with printers' proofs or masters for
our review and approval before printing. You also agree to provide us with a copy of the
final reproduced material for our approval before it is distributed. Additionally, if you
include our report or a reference to our Firm name in an electronic format, you agree to
provide the complete electronic communication using or referring to our name to us for
our review and approval prior to distribution.
During the course of our engagement, we will request information, and explanations from
management regarding the City's operations, internal controls; future plans, specific .
transactions and accounting systems and procedures. At the conclusion of our
engagement we will require, as a precondition to the issuance of our report, that
management provide certain representations in a written representation letter. The
procedures we will perform in our engagement and the conclusions we reach as a basis
for our report will be heavily influenced by the written and oral representations that we
receive from management. Accordingly, false representations could cause us to expend
unnecessary efforts or could cause a material error or a fraud to go undetected by our
procedures. In view ofthe foregoing, you agree that we shall not be responsible for an)!
misstatements in the City's financial statements that we may fail to detect as a result of I
false or misleading representations that are made to us by management. .
In addition, the City further agrees to indemnify and hold us harmless for any liability
and all reasonable costs, including legal fees that we may incur as a result ofthe services
performed under this engagement in the event there are false or misleading
representations made to us by any member of the City's management, except to the
extent such liability or costs are determined to have resulted from the intentional or
deliberate misconduct of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. personnel.
We estimate that our fees for these services will be $ 24,000 for the audit ofthe City's
basic.financial statements. The fee estimate is based on anticipated cooperation from
your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be
encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary, we will discuss
it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. Our
invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable
on presentation. In accordance with our firm policies, work may be suspended ifyou~
account becomes 60 days or more overdue and will not be resumed until your accounl is
paid in full. Ifwe elect to terminate our services for nonpayment, our engagement wi,l be
deemed to have been completed upon written notification of termination, even if we have
not completed our report. You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended
and to reimburse us for all out-of-pocket expenditures through the date oftermination. A
service charge of 1 % per month, which is an annual rate of 12%, will be added to all
accounts unpaid 30 days after billing date. If collection action is necessary, expenses and
reasonable attorney's fees will be added to the amount due.
October 19, 2005
Page 5 of6
The City agrees to perform the following functions related to any bookkeeping training
assistance services in connection with this engagement:
a. Make all management decisions and perform all management functions.
b. Designate a competent individual to oversee the services.
c. Evaluate the adequacy and results ofthe services performed.
d. Accept responsibility for the results of the services.
e. Establish and maintain internal controls, including monitoring ongoing
activities.
Because there are inherent difficulties in recalling or preserving information as the period
after an engagement increases, you agree that, notwithstanding the statute of limitations
of the State of Minnesota, any claim based on this engagement must be filed within 12
months after performance of our service, unless you have previously provided us with a
written notice of a specific defect in our services that forms the basis of the claim.
The nature of our engagement makes it inherently difficult, with the passage of time, to
present evidence in a lawsuit that fully and fairly establishes the facts underlying any
dispute that may arise between us. We both agree that notwithstanding any statute of
limitation that might otherwise apply to a claim or dispute, including one arising out of
this agreement or the services performed under this agreement, or for breach of contract,
fraud or misrepresentation, a lawsuit must be commenced within twenty-four (24) months
after the date of our report. This twenty-four (24) month period applies and starts to run
on the date of each report, even if we continue to perform services in later periods and
even if you or we have not become aware of the existence of a claim or the basis for a
possible claim. In the event that a claim or dispute is not asserted at least sixty (60) days
before the expiration of this twenty-four (24) month period, then the period oflimitation
shall be extended by sixty (60) days, to allow the parties to conduct non-binding
mediation.
Our role is strictly limited to the engagement described in this letter, and we offer no
assurance as to the results or ultimate outcomes of this engagement or of any decisions
that you may make based upon our communications with, or our reports to you. Your
City will be solely responsible for making all decisions concerning the contents of our
communications and reports, for the adoption of any plans and for implementing any
plans you may develop, including any that we may discuss with you.
You agree that it is appropriate to limit the liabilityofKDV, its shareholders, directors,
officers, employees and agents and that this limitation of remedies provision is governed
by the laws of Minnesota, without giving effect to choice oflaw principles.
You further agree that you will not hold us liable for any claim, cost or damage, whether
based on warranty, tort, contract or other law, arising from or related to this agreement,
the services provided under this agreement, the work product, or for any plans, actions or
results of this engagement, except to the extent authorized by this agreement. In no event
shall we be liable to you for any indirect, special, incidental, consequential, punitive or
exemplary damages, or for loss of profits or loss of goodwill, costs or attorney's fees.
The exclusive remedy available to you shall be the right to pursue claims for actual
damages that are directly caused by acts or omissions that are breaches by us of our
duties under this agreement, but any recovery on any such claims, including any costs
October 19, 2005
Page 6 of6
and attorneys' fees incurred in pursuing them, shall not exceed the fees actually paid
under this agreement by you to KDV.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of St. Joseph, Minnesota and i
believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you i
have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as
described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us.
Sincerely,
Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd.
~-~
J nnifer Thienes
Certified Public Accountant
RESPONSE:
This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City o[St. Joseph, Minnesota.
By:
Title:
Date:
,
Attachment: yds or No
i
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Consent - Assessment Legal Action
DATE: November 29,2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Assessment Legal Action - Requested Action: Accept the opinion of the City Attorney dismissing
without prejudice Gangl/Gustafson.
PREVIOUS ACTION
The City has been served with notice contesting an assessment based on insufficient notice. The day
before dispositions were scheduled the City Attorney was notified of intent to dismiss the case. The City
Attorney requested a written document stating that the property owners did in fact receive proper notice
and in exchange the City would be willing to consider dismissing the case. The City has since receited
the requested written affirmation. I
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Accept the recommendation of the City Attorney dismissing without prejudice Gangl/Gustafson vs City
of 81. Joseph.
FISCAL IMPACT
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDA nONS
VI" Rajkowski
11 SfJventh !\venue North t~~r~~~~!~~' Ltd.
'J (10~
C.lI >..
CITY C~F ST. ,!r\C:<'.'~:~>.-j
P.O. Box 1433
November 21,2005
St. Cloud, MN 56302.1433
320.251-1055
Ms. Judy Weyrens
City Administrator for the City of St. Joseph
25 North College A venue
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Toll free B00-445.9617
Fax 320-251-5896
Re: Gangl vs City of St. Joseph and Gustafson v. City of St. Joseph
Our File No. 24845
rajhan@rajhan.com
wvvw.rajhan.com
Dear Judy:
As you know, the day before the depositions of the Gang1s and Gustafsons, their attorney called
and stated that his clients agreed to dismiss the case without prejudice because they admitted to
him they had received the appropriate notice. I then wrote Mr. Anderson a letter informing him
that the City would probably not go along with a dismissal without prejudice unless there was
some acknowledgment from the Gangls and Gustafsons that they received the full assessment
notice.
Frank J. Hajkowski
Enclosed please find letters from the Gustafsons and the Gangls. In these letters they admit that
they received the full notice of special assessment. Given this admission, I suggest the City
accept the dismissal without prejudice.
Frederick L. Grunke
A dismissal without prejudice means that the parties can reassert the lawsuit within the applicable
statute of limitations. Since both the Gangls and the Gustafsons admit they received the full
notice of special assessment, their reasons for the first lawsuit are eliminated. If they have some
other reasons to contest the assessment, they may be able to file the action again.
Gordon H. Hansmecier
Thomas G. JDvanovichOJ
Paul A. Hajkowski &
Hichard W. Sobalvarro
Given the current state of affairs, I think the most cost effective ;lppro~ch at this time is to have
the City sign the dismissal without prejudice and close our file. Normally it is unlikely people
will refile a lawsuit after it is dismissed without prejudice; however, there is no assurance that
they will not file a lawsuit. However, if they file a suit, the reasons they gave in the first suit will
no longer be available because of the two enclosed letters.
Kevin F. Gray
William J. Cashman
Susan IVL Dege
If there are any questions regarding this, please advise.
l.eAnne D. Miller
Sincerely,
.J"",
/ ,
Sarah L. Srnithvlarkin@
Troy A. Poetz
RAJKOWSKI HANS MEIER LTD.
~i
Laurel ,!- puqh
TGJ/jlp
Enclosure
/4 A t! ...,.-4.
.~,..I",}-~""~'
By ,I
ThomasG.I~~~h
I
Joseph IVI. Brorm,land
Gregory J, Haupert
Y.
VV,
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: November 29,2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT PROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Approval on Non-intoxicating Liquor Licenses, Cigarette Licenses, and Amusement! ntertainment
Licenses for 2006.
PREVIOUS ACTION
These licenses must be approved annually.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
Approval of licenses as listed in the attached document.
FISCAL IMP ACT
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
NON-INTOXICA TING/CIGARETTE/ AMUSEMENT/ENTERTAINMENT
LICENSE APPLICANTS 2006
January 1,2006 to December 31,2006
Licensee Name
<l)
t:: <l)
<l) rn
~ Q
.~ 8
u~
bJj
:::
.-
......
ro
u
.-
X
<l) 0
til1:1
IZl '1'
>+!.. Q
4-i 0
OZ
bJj
:::
.-
~
u
.-
X
Q) .8
--' Q
ro ._
IZl I
I :::
Q 0
OZ
~
S Q)
Q) rn
rn Q
::l Q)
~~
1:1
Q)
~
.- Q)
ro tJ:l
b Q
...... 8
Q .-
~.....:l
l-<
Q)
Q)
CO Q)
bJjrn
Q Q
o Q)
l-< U
...... .-
1Zl.....:l
American Legion X 1
Bo Diddley's X
Casey's Store X
Church of SJ X
Ju~y 2 - 5. 2006
Coborn's Holiday X
CSB X 1 X
El Paso X 11
JM Oil X
La Playette X 8
Loso' Pub X 6
Loso's Store X
Sal's Bar x 8 1
SJ Amoco Liquor X X
SJ Liquor Shoppe X
SJ Rec Assn X
SJ Saints X
Stonehouse
Trobec's
!
Check No. I
Previous lawful gambling exemption number
Check the item that best describes your organization:
_ Fraternal /Religious.
Veteran _ Other nonprofit organization
Check the item that indicat!:)s the type of proof your organization attached to this application:
_ IRS letter indicating income tax exempt status (501 c des igna tion)
___ Certificate of Good Standing from the Minnesota Secretary of State's Office (must be current'
_ A charter showing you are an .affiliate of a parent nonprofit organization
---.:..,IProof preYiously submitted and on file with the Gambling Control.Board
v/Catholic Directory
Gambling Premises Information
Name of premi~eswhere gambling activitywiII be conducted (for raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place)
S.b,JDse~ ~ Lab Sc~\cDL . . . . '. .
Address (do not use PO box)
wvi-b (hihMStbt st-.
Date( s) .of activity (for raffles, indicate the date .of the drawing) .
A r', L CQC) i a DOlo
\"
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
. LG220Application for Exempt Permit
Organization Information
Organization name \
, \\~)'\* ,+0~e ~
Street (mailing address)
I~ \jJt \\,\\,\!$c:;~ S;h:
Name of chief executive officer (CEO)
First name
Fv, Grre bt'
City
S6 ~.J()St pkw
(\\ '. \\..tv
Last name
O~~.
Name of treasurer
First name Last name
kv' 5pttn+lOL
Type of Nonprofit Organization
'-rY\A~+t{,
.3
Fee $50
06/03
Fee Paid
73c>/t)'
State/zip code County
I\tI f'..\ '5iJ :;"7Y ~ClrhS
Daytime phone number of CEO
Include area code
Co"U>) 3", '3. 1(:;,0'5:"
Daytime phone number of
treasurer. Include area.code
(3'",0) 3le';' -'76DS.....
State/zip code
County
S+eAYY\~
frlN
S(p~7~
Check theitem(s) that indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will be conducting:
_ *8ingo X Raffles (cash prizes may not exceed $12,000) '-- *Paddlewheels _ *Pull-tabs
*Equipment for these activities must be obtained from a licensed distributor.
This form will be made available in name and address will be public
alternative format (i.e. large print; Braille) information when received by the Board.
upon request. The information requested All the other information that you provide
on this form.Cand any attaahments) will be will be private data about you until the
used by the Gambling Control Board Board issues your permit. When the Board
(Board) to determine your qualifications to issues your permit, all of the information
be involved in lawful gambling activities in that you have provided to the Board in the
Minnesota. You have the right to refuse to process of applying for your permit will
supply the information requested; however, become public. If the Board does not issue
if you refuse to supply this information, the you a permit, all the information you have
Board may not be able to determine your provided in the process of applying for a
qualifications and, as a consequence, may permit remains private, with the exception
refuse to issue you a permit. If you supply of your name and your organization's name
the information requested, the Board will and address which will remain public.
be able to process your application. Private data about you are available only to
Your name and and your organization's the following: Board members, staff of the
*Tip~oards
- "
Board whose work assignment requires
that they have access to the infortnation;
the Minnesota Department of Public
Safety; the Minnesota Attorney General;
the Minnesota Commissioners of
Administration, Finance, and Revenue; the
Minnesota Legislative Auditor, natjonal and
international gambling regulatory ~gencies;
anyone pursuant to court order; ather .
individuals and agencies that are i .
specifically authorized by state or federal
law to have access to the information;
individuals and agencies for whicf1 law or
legal order authorizes a new use br sharing
of information after this Notice was given;
and anyone with your consent.
LG220 APPlicatioc for Exempt Permit _
Organization Name ~V\. VG\r\ n+ si:
Local Unit of Government Acknowledgment
h JDst r-k
Page 2 of2
06/03
If the gambling premises is within city limits, the If the gambling premises is located in a township, both
city must sign this application. the county and township must sign this application.
On behalf of the city, I acknowledge this application. On behalf of the county, I acknowledge this application.
Check the action that Check the action that
the city is taking on this application. the county is taking on this application.
D The city approves the application with no o The county approves the application with no
waiting period. waiting period.
D The city approves the application with a 30 day o The county approves the application with a 30 day
waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a
permit after 30 days (60 days for a first class permit after 30 days.
city).
o The city denies the application. o The county denies the application.
Print name of city Print name of county
(Signature of city personnel receiving application) (Signature of county personnel receiving application)
TItle
TItle Date--.J_/_
Date----:!----:!_ TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that
the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity
within the township limits. [A township has no statutory
authority to approve or deny an application (Minn. Stat. sec.
349.213, subd. 2).J
Print name of township
(Signature oftownship official acknowledging application)
TItle
I Date--.-J--.-J_
.
Chief Executive Officer's Signature
The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Chief executive officer's signature fr b ~4 0;;' B
Name (please print) '{If, rYR-tZ f lvLi II fie. 0 ~ '8 Date I ( I''Z 2 lOS-
t
Mail Application and Attachments
At least 45 days prior to your scheduled activity date send:
. the completed application,
. a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and
. a check for $50. Make check payable to "State of Minnesota".
Application fees are not prorated, refundable, or transferable.
Send to: Gambling Control Board
1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South
Roseville, MN 55113
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE:
November 22,2005
Engineering
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
PREVIOUS ACTION
Adopted Stormwater Utility Ordinance on April 15, 2004. Established the stormwater utility fee at
$2.25/month for single family residence. Fees for all other parcels shall be defined as the product of the
single-family residential per-acre fee, the appropriate utility factor and the total acreage of the parcel per
the Storm Water Utility Ordinance.
RECOMMENDED COUNCil- ACTION
Adopt proposed Storm Water Utility Credit Policy (Attached).
FISCAL IMPACT
Per report.
COMMENTSIRECOMMENDATIONS ,
Final changes have been made to the utility billing software to accommodate the stormwater utility fe~.
The credit policy gives credit (adjustments to monthly fee) for vacant land, green space, and best
management practices (i.e. private stormwater ponds, ete). The credit is not applicable to single family
lots.; the credit policy is applicable only where there is a per acre fee (i.e. commercial, industrial, ete)!.
With the adoption of the credit policy and completion of the billing software changes, the City intends to
initiate the stormwater utility fee for the January 2006 utility billing.
X:\Slstjoe\common\D39 Req Council Action\0312 stormwaterutility 112205.doc
ORDINANCE 44
STORM WATER UTILITY
Section 44.1: PURPOSE. This Ordinance sets forth uniform requirements for the
establishment of a Storm Water Utility.
The purpose is to provide a funding mechanism for the following services:
a) The administration, planning, implementation, and maintenance of storm water Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce the introduction of sediment and other
pollutants into local water resources.
b) The installation, operation, maintenance and replacement of public drainage systems.
c) Activities necessary to maintain compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit requirements established by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, including preparation, implementation and
management of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to address the
following control measures:
1) Public education and outreach on storm water impacts.
2) Public involvement/participation.
3) Illicit discharge detection and elimination.
4) Construction site storm water runoff control.
5) Post-construction runoff control in new development and redevelopment.
6) Pollution prevention for municipal operations.
d) Other education, engineering, inspection, monitoring, testing and enforcement
activities as necessary to maintain compliance with local, state and federal storm
water requirements.
Section 44.2: ESTABLISHMENT OF A STORM WATER UTILITY. There is hereby
established a public utility to be known as the Storm Water Utility for the City of St. Joseph. The
Storm Water Utility shall be operated as a public utility pursuant to the City Code of Ordinances
and applicable Minnesota Statutes. The revenues derived therefrom shall be subject to provisions
of this Section and Minnesota Statutes Section 444.075. The Storm Water Utility shall be part of
the Public Works Department and shall be administered by the Public Works Director. This
Ordinance shall apply to the entire City of St. Joseph.
Section 44.3: DEFINITIONS. Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the
following terms, as used in this ordinance, shall have the meanings hereinafter designed.
Adopted 4/15/04
Subd. 1: Surface Area. "Surface Area", referred to herein as "SA", shall be the area o~the
parcel in acres, subject to any standardization, adjustments or exceptions outlined in this
ordinance.
Subd. 2: Land Use. The "Land Use" for a given parcel shall be the "tax classification" for thlilt
parcel on record at the Steams County Recorder's Office.
Subd. 3: Residential Equivalency Factor. "Residential Equivalency Factor", referred t()
herein as "REF", is the ratio of the volume of runoff generated by the Surface Area of a
particular land use to the Surface Area of a detached single-family land use. Runoff
determination shall be based on a 2-inch rainfall and Natural Resources Conservation Servic~s
(NRCS) "Type B" soil conditions. The REF for various land uses within the City shall be as set
forth in the table below.
LAND USE
REF
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Apartments/Condos/Townhomes
Commercial
Industrialllnsti tutionallEducational
Public/Quasi Public
Parks/Open Space/Cemeteries
Road Right-of-Way
Lakes/Streams/Wetlands
Agricultural, Vacant
1.00
2.72
2.72
4.23
3.30
EXEMPT
EXEMPT
EXEMPT
EXEMPT
EXEMPT
The REF for Land Uses not listed above shall be determined by the City Engineer based
on probable hydrologic response.
Subd. 4: Unit Rate. "Unit Rate", referred to herein as "UR", is the rate in dollars per! acre
to be charged per one (1) REF.
Section 44.4: RATES AND CHARGES:
Subd. 1: Establishing Unit Rates: The City Council shall from time to time, by resolution,
establish the Unit Rate. The Unit Rate so established shall be on file with the City
Clerk! Administrator and shall be used to compute the charges for a given parcel of land based on
the following formula.
Storm Water Charges = (UR) x (REF) x (SA)
Subd. 2: Standardized Charges. The following rules shall apply for the purpose of
simplifying and equalizing charges:
Adopted 4/15/04
1) A standard Surface Area of 0.30 acres shall be used for detached single-family homes
and for patio homes.
2) A REF of 1 and a standard Surface Area of 0.30 acres for each unit shall be used in
computing storm water charges for the following multi-family dwellings: duplexes, twin
homes, townhouses, and detached townhouses. (For example, a parcel that contains four
townhouse units shall have a Surface Area computed as follows:
4 units x 0.30 acres/unit = 1.20 acres).
Parcels subject to these standardized charges shall not be eligible for Adjustments to Charges or
Adjustments to Area as set forth elsewhere herein
Subd. 3: Adiustments to Charges. The City Council may by resolution adopt policies
providing for the adjustment of charges for parcels or groups of parcels based upon hydrologic
response substantially different from the REF being used for the parcel or parcels. Such
adjustment shall be made only after receiving the recommendation of the City Engineer, and
shall not be made effective retroactively. If the adjustment would have the effect of changing the
REF for all or substantially all of the land uses in a particular classification, such adjustment
shall be accomplished by amending the REF table in Section 44.3, Subd. 3 ofthis Ordinance.
Subd. 4: Adiustment to Area: The total parcel area as shown in the City Assessor's
records will be used to calculate the Surface Area for a given parcel, except that apparent errors
in the recorded values may be subject to recalculation by the City. It is the responsibility ofthe
owner or manager of any parcel to provide the City with necessary surveys, and other
information as the City may reasonably request, to determine if a parcel, or portion of a parcel,
qualifies for an exception or area adjustment. Requests for exceptions and/or area adjustments
will be reviewed after receipt of all requested information. Exceptions and/or adjustments must
be approved by the City Engineer and Public Works Director, and shall become effective the
beginning of the next billing cycle following approval.
Subd. 5: Exceptions. The following land uses are exempt from the Storm Water Utility
Fees established herein: 1) public street right-of-way, 2) wetlands and public waters as defined
by state law, 3) ponds designated and used exclusively for storm water retention or treatment
purposes up to the I DO-year flood elevation, 4) undeveloped parcels, 5) publicly-owned park
lands, natural areas, and recreational fields, 6) railroad right-of-way, 7) cemeteries, 8) unsewered
parcels situated within the AG (Agricultural) zoning district of the City, and 9) City-owned land.
Subd. 6: Falsification ofInformation. Willful failure to provide information that the City
may reasonably request related to the use, development and area of a premise, or falsification of
such information, shall constitute a violation of this Ordinance.
Subd. 7: Estimated Charges. If, for any reason, precise information related to the use,
development or area of a premises is not available, then Storm Water Utility Charges for such
premise shall be estimated, and billed, based upon information then available to the City.
Adopted 4/15/04
Subd. 8: Billing Method. Storm Water Utility Fees will be computed and collected b~ the
City together with other City utility fees, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section
41 ofthis Code.
Subd. 9: Delinquent Accounts. Storm Water Utility Fees past due on October 1 of any
year may be certified to the County Auditor for collection with real estate taxes during the .
following year or any year thereafter in the manner prescribed in Section 41 of this Code,
pursuant to Minnesota Statute 444.075, Subdivision 3.
Subd. 10: Appeal: If a property owner believes that the fee charged a particular property
is incorrect, s/he may request review and re-computation of said fee.
Adopted 4/15/04
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Attachme( ~r No
'~,
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE:
November 23.2005
En2"ineerin2"
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Tracv L. Ekola. P .E.
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
2006 Trunk Watermain Project
The proposed project area starts approximately 400 feet west of 6th A venue NW along CSAH 2 near the
west city limits. The project area continues along CSAH 2, crossing Interstate 94, and ultimately i
connecting to the new water treatment plant located on the west side of Interstate 94 along the Frontage!
~~. .
PREVIOUS ACTION
Ordered preparation of Feasibility Report.
RECOMMENDED COUNCn.. ACTION
Review and comment. Order plans and specifications.
FISCAL IMPACT
Cost is outlined in Feasibility Report. Project is proposed to be funded through future trunk fees and
water availability charges (WAC). This project is proposed to be included in the second bond for the
water treatment facility.
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
This project includes the proposed extension of water utilities to the west of St. Joseph along CSAH to
the new water treatment plant. Feasibility Report is included in Council agenda packet. Review of
report and cost will be provided at Council Meeting.
X:\Slstjoe\common\D39 Req Council Action\0602 2006 trunk wm feas reporll12205.doc
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Attachment: Yes or No
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Administrator Reports..,.. WSB Contract
DATE: November 29, 2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
WSB Contract - Field Street
PREVIOUS ACTION
The City entered into a contact with WSB for the completion of the Field Street Study. The contrac~ price
including approved alternates is approximately $ 166,400.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Amend the contract to allow for the compensation for addition meetings not to exceed $ 11,410.94.
FISCAL IMP ACT
$ 11,410.94
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
As you are aware the Field Street Project is taking longer than originally scheduled. The attached I
summary illustrates that the number of T AC meetings and One on One meetings have exceeded the!
contract amount. The additional fee can be covered with the financing for the study. Also, as stated in
the request from WSB only the additional meetings that are needed in the future will be billed. Therefore
the total increase may not reach $ 11,410.94.
~
WSB
Infrastructure. Engineering. Planning. Construction
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
& Associates, fllc.
November 9,2005
Ms. JudyWeyrens
City of St. Joseph
P.O. Box 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Re: St. Joseph Field Street Corridor Study / Official Map
WSB Project No. 1617-00
Dear Ms. Weyrens:
This letter is to advise you that the Agency/Public Involvement Task for this project has developed
into a much more intense task than had originally been envisioned at the time this contract was
developed. Attached is a table which outlines which portions of this task either have or are
anticipated to exceed contract work levels.
WSB & Associates, Inc. is requesting the City of St. Joseph to increase the contract limit for this
project by $11,410.94, to $177,811.68. As always, WSB & Associates, Inc. will only bill for actual
work completed, and will make every effort to complete this contract in an efficient and timely
manner.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. If you have any questions, please contact me at
320-534-5947.
Sincerely,
Attachment
cc: Joe Bettendorf
1h
Minneapolis I St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
K:IOJ6J7-00iAdminiDoc\LTRjweyrens J J0905.doc
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
>-
"0
:::l
....
tJ)
...z
.g:!:
'i: .c::
... Q.
o Q)
o fA
.... 0
$-'
J:;,..;
tJ)tJ)
"0
]!
U.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..-
..-
_oj
lIS 00
-C")
(:.CD
~
"0 l"-
llS 00
~U)cO
....000
GlOIt)
> C")
o ~
"000
lISN
Gl .
,c"-
....
Gl
>
o
"<t
- N
lIS_N
::Sllla
'0000
<(ON
~
Gl >. "<t
Cl_ Gla
lIS...._ci
li>::SllSlt)
> o It:
<(J: ~
lIS
g ~
:;:;::SCD
:s~1t)
~
~
C
EI"-a
Gl
::::
C
_ C
U lIS
lIS-
....0-
-.:.::OON
C ....
o 0
O~
(ij
O~N
I-
III
C
::s
....
....
Gl
>
o
.:.::
III
lIS
I-
-
C
Gl
E
Gl
>
'0
>
c
.~
:c
::s
0-
-
>.
U
C
Gl
Cl
<(
Cl
.5
c
'iij C")
E
Gl
It:
"0
Gl
-
Gl
C.~N
E
o
o
N
0)
ci
..-
It)
N
~
"<t
CD
oj
a
"<to
..-
~
00
N
..-
00
N
..-
a
..-
..-
~
C")
00
cO
CD
~
CD
..-
N
0)
a
..-
It)
N
~
"<t
~
0)
a
"<to
..-
~
00
N
00
N
..-
a
..-
~
C")
00
00
CD
~
CD
..-
aNaaaC")a
NNNN..-"<t"<t
N"<tNN"-I"-"<t
NC")NN..- N
..- I"-N
III III
gCl
;c -0
Q) - .9- ....
Q)Q) ..c::ro
""'~ ..c::1Il0 III
0::::0:::: o.t:fl) 0')
~ - .?;- Q) 5: 0 0').5
o t: t: III 0 t: <V
+:: Q)E ::s ~ I- 9;: .;:: Q)
IIlro 0 ..c::......ro~
O')~ E()- 0.-0 Q)
t:l::Q)IIlC/)Q):JIQ)l!!
IIl-O> C.... III 0 CQ)
Gl Q) .... 0 .... 0 0 ()- .2 0 ::::
:;:; Q) C <9 roQ) >>..., ::0 jQ
._~u _- -::JCIIl
~()i5(ijC/)(3U5C/)O"'05:
U<(:Jg <(:gQ)
<(1-0...-1 WOt:
"l:'/'
0'1
ci
.....
"l:'/'~
.....
.....
It)
a
a
N
0>
....
Q)
.c
E
Q)
>
o
Z
~
"<t
..-
CD
a
"<t
to
~
a
00
..t
a
a
L6
~
co
co
III
(ij
-
o
I-
en
5:
Q)
~
Q)
1;;
....
Q)
a.
ro
a.
III
~
C
I
"<t
-0
Q)
-
U
:J
-0
C
o
u
~
o
2
::0
:J
a.
<Ii
-
iii
.c
Q)
5:
-0
Q)
m
-0
a.
:::>
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Attachment: l' es or No
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Administrator Reports - Environmental Assessment Worksheet
DATE: November 29, 2005
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
DEP ARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Environmental Assessment Worksheet - River Bats
PREVIOUS ACTION
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Action is not required at this meeting, only recommended changes, if any
FISCAL IMPACT
COMMENTSIRECOMMENDATIONS
Due to the scope of the proposed Baseball Stadium the City, through staff, required completion of ap.
Environmental Assessment worksheet. The close proximity to a residential neighborhood and addi~ional
traffic prompted the request for the EA W. After the EA W is prepared the City has the opportunity to
review the draft and make comments for revisions. Once this is completed the EA W the document ~s sent
to several agencies and a notice is placed in the EQB. After a waiting period during which comments can
be submitted to the City, the document will have to be approved. This process is similar to that of the
AUAR completed for Areon.
_ " <#"
..-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"'"
o"-"'~
Environmental Assessment Worksh:eet
!
Riverbats Stadium Development
Section 11, T124N, R29W
City of St Joseph
Stearns County, Minnespta
Responsible Governmental Unit
i
I
October, 2:005
~~~CITY Of ST. JOSEPH
f'~'t <:11)'(}f~I/IJ~~f1l-I-I;Pfn
City of St. Joseph
25 North College Avenue
St. Joseph, MN 59374
Phone: (320) 363-'7201
Fax: (320) 363-@342
Consultant to Project Proposer
Gohman Construction Company
815 County Road 75
St. Joseph, MN 56374
!
'"
Westwood Professional Services,! Inc.
3701 1 ih Street North
Suite206
St. Cloud, MN 5q303
Phone (320) 253-Q495
Fax (320) 253-~738
Project Number: 200550(j5.l0
I-J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EA W)
Riverbats Stadium Development
December 5, 2005
CONTENTS
list of Exhibits.................................................................................................... . ..... ...... j ii
list of Appendices............................................................................................... ............,.. ii
1. Project Title .......... .............. ............................ ............... ...(J......a....., 1
2. Proposer.....................................................................................: ........................ . 1
3. RGU .................................................................................. ................................. 1
4. Reason for EAW Preparation .........................~........... ............................................. . 1
5. Project Location ........................................... ....................... . 1
6. Description. . . ........... . . . . . ....... .......... ....... ..... ... . ..... .. . ... . .. . .. . .... ..... . . ....... . . . .... ..... . 2
7. Project Magnitude Data.................................. ................................................. 3
8. Permits and Approvals Required.............. eJ.' ......... ............................................. . 4
9. land Use................................................ .... . .. ................................................... ..,.. 4
10. Cover Types................. ........... ...........~~ ........................ .......... .............. .... ..... 5
11. Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically s~ns' ~e Turces ................................................ .5
12. Physical Impacts on Water Reso ce .................................................................... . 6
13. Water Use......................... 'e'" ....... .................................................................... 8
14 . Water-Related land Use M e ent District........................................................ . 9
15. Water Surface Use. ...... .......................................................................... . 9
16. Erosion and Sedi nta n..................................................................................... .,.10
17. Water Quality: Su unoff.........................................................................11
18. Water Quality: Waste ................................................................................... ...12
19. Geologic Haz sand il Conditions..................................................................... .13
20. Solid Waste, zardous Wastes, and Storage Tanks..............................................15
21. Traffic .~...... .................................................................... ................................. .16
22. Velicle ated ~ Emissions................................................................................. .17
23. ti~ rc ir Emissions............................................................................. .17
24. Odors, . e and Dust ............. ........ ....... ........ ....... ........ ................ ........... .............. .17
25. Nearb esources................................................................................................... .18
26. Visu Impacts.. ......................... ........ ...... ............. ...... ..... .................... .......... .......... .19
27. patibility with Plans and land Use Regulations................................................ .19
28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services.............................................................20
29. Cumulative Impacts....... ......... ............... ..... .............. ........... ........... ........... .............. .20
30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts ... ............................................. ............ ....... .20
31. Summary of Issues.................................................................................................. .21
pagei
DRAFT Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5,2005
TABLES
Page
Permits and Approvals Required. .. ...... .... ................ ........................... ..... ... ....... ..... .... 4
Estimated Before and After Cover Types ...................................................................5
Wetland Characteristics.............................................................................................. 7
Municipal Well Pumping Data............................................................................... .... 8
Shoreland Overlay Density............................................................................... ..... .. 9
Wastewater Production ..................................................................................... 12
Solid Waste Generation Estimate.......................................................... ........... 5
Typical Solid Waste Composition................................................. "e' ... ........ .15
Trip Generation ..................................................................~.... ....... ..... ......16
Effects on Local Roadways..............................................{............ ................ .17
Summary of Issues and Mitigation Measures.................. \.:.:;)"'...................... .20
EXHIBITS ~ \
~ Exhibit
Site Location Map............................ .......... ........ t"?..\.. ................................... ........... ....... 1
~~~~::r~~~i;~i~g;:';PhY'~~d'Adj~;;;;~tL~'" .~~::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::: :::::::: ;
Existing Conditions Mapping................ .L~"'~~..................................................................... 4
National Wetlands Inventory MapPi~S........................ ............ ............................ ..... 5
Delineated Wetlands Mapping.......... ................................................................................. 6
Well Location Mapping....... ...... ........................................................... .................. 7
Subwatershed and MnD Pu ic Wa rs Mapping.............................................................. 8
Digital Soils Mapping.......... .............................................................................................. 9
8.1
10.1
12.1
13.1
14.1
18.1
19.1
20.1
20.2
21.1
21.2
31.1
)(~ APPENDICES
· ~~J
ON r:r ~ge Database Search....................................................................... .~~~e:diX
We~ary Confirmation Correspondence... .............................................................. B
State Historic Preservation Office Correspondence................................................................ C
Stadium Lighting Study....... .............. ........ ..... ..... ....... .... ................ ............ ............. .... ........ ... D
Stadium Noise Study............................................................................................................. E
Traffic Study.......................................................................................................................... F
Page ii
"
~-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1- ,
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EA W)
RIVERBATS STADIUM
Note to Preparers: The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have
potential for significant environmental effects. The EA W is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU)
or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. The project,
proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for - but should not complete - the final worksheet. If a Ii
complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. The complete question ias
well as the answer must be included if the EA W is prepared electronically. ~
Note ., Reviewers: Comments must be submitted" the RGU during lbe 30-day comment period ti . oiice
oflbe EA Win lbe EQB Monitor. Comments shoold address lbe accnracy and completeness Of~' tion,
potential impacts that warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS.
The City of St. Joseph most receive commeots on this EA Why 4:30 PXn 0: 0 6.
1. Project Title Riverbats Stadium Development (.
2. Proposer: Gohman Construction 3. it of St. Jose h
Contact person: Mike Gohman udy Weyrens
City Administrator
25 North College Avemue
St. Joseph, MN 56374
(320) 363-7201
(320) 363-0342
Address:
815 County Road 75
St. Joseph, MN 56374
(320) 363-7781
(320) 363-7201
Phone:
Fax:
4. Reason for EAW Preparation
o RGU Discretion 0 Proposer V olunteeted
c tegory subpart numbers(s) Part 4410.4300 Subp 34. . and
. ies
5.
County:
City:
Twp:
Page 1
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
6. Description
a) Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor.
This 31.4-acre Riverbats Stadium development is proposed immediately south of CSAH 75 and
east of 88th Avenue in the City of St. Joseph. The development will include the construction of a
3,400 seat baseball stadium and approximately 260,000 square feet of associated
commercial/retail development.
b) Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets
as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods, and features that will cause physical
manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Indicate modifications to existing equip
industrial processes and significant demolition, removal, or remodeling of existing structures. n
timing and duration of construction activities.
The Riverbats Stadium Development is a baseball stadium/commercial develo~n opo d
for construction on 31.4 acres in the SW X of the SE ~ of Section 11, T1024N W, ity St.
Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota. The site is located south of CSAH 7. a f 88th
Avenue (Exhibit 1). ~ _
The commercial land use will include up to 260,000 square fee f comm cial/retail space on 9.3
acres (Exhibit 2). City of St. Joseph sewer and water services serve e site. A small system
of private collector roads through the development will funnel tra AH 75 to the north and
88th Avenue to the west. Open spaces will exist along th astern edge of the development,
primarily in association with existing wetlands. The re im 22.1 acres of the site will be
developed into a 3,400 seat open air baseball stadi sociated parking and concession
areas.
The proposed road network provides tw.main~s\. paints from Stearns CSAH 75 to the north.
These two access points will also funnel tr5c gSAH 75 mostly to the east back towards the
St Cloud Metropolitan area. undev~lo la d wetlands limit access to the project from the
south and west, but a road stub is pi n to w future access for the adjacent landowner to
the south (Exhibit 2).
Construction of the proje will ~ i~ the summer of 2006, and construction will be completed in
phases over roughly t thgrs, with full build out anticipated in the fall of 2009. The
project will be dev s in two phases. Phase I will consist of the construction of the
baseball stadium com south half of the property and is expected to be completed in
2006. Phase II will consl he construction of the commercial area. Construction timing in the
commercial are ill ultim ely depend on the pace of commercial development and market
conditions.
AP_OXi~~ a es of the site will be graded in phases for construction of roadways, the
se l s~, mercial buildings, utilities, storm ponds and parking areas. This approach
o ons tion is expected to minimize effects on the environment. It is anticipated that
constr cti will entail moving a total of approximately 100,000 cubic yards of soil.
ro development is expected to convert approximately 23.8 acres of cropped agricultural field,
. acres of grassland, 2.9 acres of abandoned gravel pit and 1.5 acres of woodland to
commercial land use, including roads, buildings and parking lots. Preservation of approximately
0.5 acres of woodland, 0.5 acre of grassland, 0.9 acres of wetland, and the creation of 1.8 acres
of storm water management ponds, is expected to mitigate adverse effects on wildlife to some
degree. Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented during and after construction to
protect water quality and reduce the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation.
c) Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the needfor
the project and identifY its beneficiaries.
The purpose of the Riverbats Stadium development is to provide a stadium complex for the St
Cloud Riverbats baseball team and provide associated commercial businesses that will accent
Page 2
vi
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1-)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December ~, 2005
the baseball stadium. The 8t Cloud Riverbats offer family friendly recreation opportunities for
residents of the 8t Cloud Metropolitan community.
d) Arefuture stages of this development planned or likely? DYes lifNo. If yes, briefly describefuture
stages, relationship to the present project, timeline, and plans for environmental review.
Future stages of development are not planned at this time. The project proposer owns no
adjacent property and has no future expansion plans at this time.
e) Is the project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? DYes lifNo. If yes, briefly describe the past
development, timeline, and any past environmental review.
7. Project Magnitude Data
This project is not a subsequent stage of an earlier project.
Total Project Acreage:
31.4 acres
Number of Residential Units: Unattached 0 Attached 0
Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional Building Area (gross floor spac
Indicate area of specific uses (in square feet):
Retail/Office 240,000
Warehouse N/ A N/ A
Light Industrial N/ A N/ A
Manufacturing N/ A
Other Commercial (specify) 3,400 seat baseb
Building Height 2 to 3 stories .
If over 2 stories, compare to ~
heights .fnearby bnildings Most nea~ ~' ,are 1 to 2 stories.
~
I
Page 3
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
8. Permits and Approvals Required
List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals, and financial assistance for the project. Include
modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans, and all direct and indirect forms of public
financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Fin ancing, and infrastructure.
All required permits and approvals will be obtained. Any necessary permits or approvals that are not
listed in the table below were unintentionally omitted.
Table 8.1. Permits and Approvals Required
Unit of Government
DNR Division of Waters
DNR Division of Waters
lied for
lied for
lied for
lied for
lied for
roval lied for
.
9. Land Use '- ~
Describe current and recent past land use a L1 1d~P~t on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss the
compatibility of the project with adja~cnt ~ land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts
involve environmental matters. Identi a tential environmental hazard due to past land uses, such as soil
contamination or abandoned e t , 'Proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines.
Land Use
According to USDA c
single-family home
River ts Stadium property is located in District 15 as identified in the City of St. Joseph's
nsive Plan. The City of St. Joseph has identified the area around the proposed stadium as
being suitable for tiered higher intensity uses such as commercial and high density residential
adjacent to future collector street intersections All portions of the proposed project are consistent with
the existing and planned zoning designations for the site, and are compatible with existing and
predicted future adjacent land uses. Adjoining land uses include the National Guard Armory and a
Ballroom/Entertainment Center located to the west, a farm to the south, a residential home and
wetlands to the east and commercial property to the north across CSAH 75. No land use conflicts are
anticipated.
Page 4
~-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ~,'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December ~, 2005
Potential for Environmental Contamination
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) has not been completed for the property.
Westwood Professional Services, Inc. conducted general site reviews to complete cover-type
mapping and wetland field work, and no obvious environmental contamination was observed during
these visits. A check of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) web browser "What's In My
Neighborhood?" (http://pca-gis04.pca.state.mn.us/website/mes/mesfin/entry.htm ), which maps k'rown
and potential sources of soil and ground water contamination, indicates no known sources of ;
contamination within one mile of the property. If potential sources of environmental contaminatidn
such as underground or aboveground storage tanks are identified before or during project
construction, the project proposer will dispose of such sources in compliance with applicable I c~I,
state, and federal regulations. Inactive or active wells identified on the property will be field- ated
and abandoned in accordance with Minnesota Department of Health regulations. Onsit a ~
systems identified on the property will be pumped by a licensed contractor and aba~d d I ,
accordance with city and county requirements. Conflicts involving enVironm. ental c I are ot
anticipated. .
10. Cover Types ~ ~
&timate the ac,"age of the site with each if tire following cover types beft: and qfi~pment.
Table 10.1. Estimated Before and After cove~
After (acres
0.0
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.3
7.6
10.0
7.8
2.0
1.8
0.0
31.4
lfBefore and After totals are n
ai, explain why: Before and after totals are equal.
11. Fish, Wildlife, a E logically Sensitive Resources
a) Ide"ifY }(.,-=:;:ild e resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be
ct~~oje Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts.
Fish and ~life resources on and near the site are directly related to the composition, quality!
size, a d connectivity of natural communities including grasslands, woodlands, and wetlands. i
ood Professional Services, Inc. conducted a field review on July 7,2005 to map the coyer
types and assess the quality and quantity of woodlands and wetlands on the site (Exhibit 4). The
cropped fields cover approximately 24 acres and have been farmed for agricultural crops since at
least 1939 based on examination of historical aerial photographs. Wetlands cover 0.9 acres on
the site. Deciduous woodlands include about 2.0 acres of oak-aspen forest. Most of the
overstory is dominated by bur, red and pin oak and quaking aspen. Other tree species include
red maple, black cherry, hackberry and green ash. The woodland understory consists of smo~th
sumac, common buckthorn and red cedar. The herbaceous layer includes smooth brome, poison
ivy, purple cranes-bill, false Solomon's Seal and Virginia creeper. Woodlands on the site are 1
primarily located in a thin band in the eastern portion of the property forming a divide between!the
cropped area and a large wetland located off the property to the east.
Page 5
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
Wildlife resources that exist throughout the site include species that have adapted to cropped
lands, narrow woodlots and wet meadows such as pheasant, meadowlark, field sparrow,
cottontail, red fox, and white-tailed deer. The cropped fields provide seasonal food and cover for
these species. The woodlands and wetlands provide habitat and cover for many species
commonly found in the upper Midwest such as woodcocks, thrushes, woodpeckers, raccoons,
and amphibians.
Project development is expected to convert approximately 24 acres of cropped field, 1.0 acres of
grassland, and 1.5 acres of woodland to commercial land uses, including roads, buildings and
parking areas. Some local decline in wildlife abundance is expected to result from the project.
Populations of species that depend on cropped fields will likely be dispersed. Migratory birds are
expected to respond to the development by locating alternative nesting sites upon their r urn
from wintering habitats, and some songbirds that readily adapt to fragmented habitats ma
become more numerous. Non-migratory species with small home ranges, such as
mammals, will experience more adverse effects. These species will compete wit
individuals of the same species to claim territories in neighboring habitats or s
during project construction.
Preservation of approximately 0.5 acres of woodland, 0.9 acres o~a.o.~ a
grassland, combined with the creation of about 5.7 acres of sto~water ~en
expected to mitigate adverse effects on wildlife to some degreu -
b) Are any state-listed (endangered, threatened, or special concern) specl lant communities or other
sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat, co nial waterbird nesting colonies or
regionally rare plant communities on or near the site? 0 Yes. 0 If yes, describe the resource and how
it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site surv sources has been conducted and
describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and earch program has been contacted
give the correspondence reference number: ERDB 2~3. escribe measures to minimize or avoid
adverse impacts. .
The Minnesota Department of Natural s~~ NR) reviewed the Minnesota Natural
Heritage database in August 2005 to et r;;'i~ rare plant or animal species or other significant
natural features are known to occu n approximate one-mile radius of the project site
(Appendix A). The DNR identimi kno records of rare species or communities that occur n
within approximately one mile e operty. The Minnesota DNR has determined that the
Riverbats Stadium de en' ve no effect on any known occurrences of rare features.
No other evidence re ned, ndangered, or rare plant or wildlife species was observed on
the site during field re cted in 2005.
12. Physical Impacts 0
Will the proj t i
ntains a total of 0.9 acres of wetland located in one wetland basin (Exhibit 6). Westwood
Pr nal Services delineated and flagged one wetland on the property on July 7, 2005 using the
Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, Waterways Experiment
Station, 1987). The level two routine delineation method was used in which sampling transects were
established in a representative transition zone of identified wetlands. Transects consisted of one
sampling point in upland and one point in wetland. Soils, vegetation, and hydrology information were
recorded for each point on data forms, which are included at the end of this report. Species
dominance for vegetation measurements was based on the percent aerial or basal coverage visually
estimated within a 3D-foot radius for the tree and shrub layers and a five-foot radius for the
herbaceous layer within the community type sampled. Stearns County Environmental Services
reviewed the wetland boundaries in the field and confirmed that they are acceptable for local
administration of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act in a letter dated September 29, 2005
(Appendix B). The delineated wetland is described in the following summary.
Page 6
" " I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
Wetland A is a 38,248 square foot (0.88 acres) Type 6 shrub swamp located in the southeast portion
of the property. Wetland A is depicted on NWI mapping as a Type 6 shrub swamp and a Type q
shrub swamp. The Soil Survey of Stearns County maps the Dassel sandy loam and the Markey!
muck where Wetland A is located. The wetland sample point had a predominance of wetland :
vegetation and organic soils. The soils exhibited one primary indicator, saturated soils. All of th~
three wetland delineation criteria are met at this sample point. Vegetation was dominated by uptight
sedge and speckled alder. Soils exhibited a black (10YR 2/1) mucky loam texture from the surf~ce
down to thirty inches. Saturation was observed at the surface. The upland sample point had a
predominance of upland vegetation and non-hydric mineral soils with no evidence of hydrology
observed, neither the vegetation nor soils observed satisfy the wetland delineation criteria.
Vegetation was dominated by wheat, raspberry, buckthorn and oak species. Soils were brow (10YR
3/3) with a sandy loam texture from the surface to six inches. Soils from six inches to thirty i hes
were brown (10YR 4/4) with a sandy loam texture. This soil does not meet the hydric so' 'te .~.
The Public Waters and Wetlands Inventory for Stearns County (Minnesota DNR, D' a
2004) (Exhibit 8) indicates no DNR Public Water, Wetland, or Watercourse on or ent th
property. The proposed project is expected to avoid all wetlands on the prop~ s will be
protected by complying with the City of St. Joseph's Wetland Setbac~na ce, a b veying
stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces through stormwater trejffh.ent po . r to ischar~ing
into wetlands. This stormwater treatment system will ensure conti ed sourc 0 ydrology to the
wetlands while protecting them from sediments and other possible tamin ts. Additionally, th,e
ban on phosphorus in lawn fertilizers implemented by the State of on January 1, 20051will
reduce the amount of this nutrient entering adjacent w~~
13. Water Use
a) Will the project involve installation or abandonmeet y wells? 0 Yes 0 No For abandoned
wells give the location and Unique Well Nu'fJer. 0 e wells, or other previously unpermitted well'S... '
give the location and purpose of the well and t~~ ell Number (if known). .
According to the Well Location Points di :al ~ase from the Minnesota Geological surveYls
(MGS) County Well Index, there ar istered wells within the project site (Exhibit 7). Th$
well data consists of a GeOgrae;Pfor 'on System (GIS) point coverage that was created...
from wells listed in the County In ex (CWI) database, and is current as of 2002. Any ,
unmapped active or i we are discovered on the property will be field-located,
abandoned, and se d in ccord nce with Minnesota Department of Health regulations prior: to
site development.
rved by e City of St. Joseph municipal water supply, which is authorized tq,
pump up to 1 5 PM or 150.0 MGY from three municipal wells under DNR Water Appropri$tion
permit!; 1 01.The City of St. Joseph will submit an application to the Minnesota DN',R to
arJ1Wld t City's ter Appropriation Permit to cover the increased appropriation necessary t...o
erve~n gr h of the City and development of the site. DNR records indicate that, :
'n 2, e C pumped 160.7 million gallons, exceeding the authorized volume by 10.7:
MGY. T ity of St. Joseph has planned for expansion of the municipal well system to serve the
contin d growth of the City and development of the Site.
respect to band c below, if the area requires new water supply wells, provide information about
appropriation and its potential impacts on groundwater levels; if groundwater levels would be affected;,
any impacts resulting on other resources should be addressed With respect to possible individual i
appropriations by future projects, a general assessment of the likely needfor such should be included, and
if there is potential for major appropriations, a more detailed assessment of those should be included a(ong
with a discussion of mitigation for potential problems.
b) Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water (including dewatering)? lifYes ONo
Ijyes, indicate the source, duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and DNR water
appropriation permit numbers, if known. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water levels.
Page 7
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
One or more Minnesota DNR Water Appropriation Permits may be necessary to conduct
construction dewatering. Dewatering may be necessary during construction to install sanitary
sewer, municipal water, and storm sewer in some areas where shallow groundwater may be
encountered within the site. Contractors will carry out these activities on a case-by-case basis at
the minimum duration and quantity necessary to construct utility service for the affected sites.
The quantity and duration of construction dewatering is not known at this time, but it is expected
that the dewatering will be temporary. Groundwater appropriated during for construction
dewatering purposed will be discharged to temporary or permanent stormwater ponds located
within the site.
The construction dewatering and pumping within the site could exceed the 10,OOO-gallon per day
or 1,000,000 gallons per year thresholds that trigger the requirement for a DNR Water
Appropriation Permit. If this becomes the case, the contractor or project proposer will ne
apply to the DNR Division of Waters for a water appropriation permit. If it becomes
construction dewatering will not exceed 50 million gallons in total, and a duration
the start of pumping, the contractor or project proposer will apply to the DNR f 0
DNR General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary Water Appropriations. It is possi at
construction dewatering or pumping from the site could continue long enos' ct domestic
or municipal wells, however construction dewatering is usually fo~y i talla n IS
conducted less than 15 feet under the ground. The Minnesota !feologic Cou ty Well
Index indicates that most registered wells in the area are drille to depths reater than 150 feet
so no impact is expected. If any deeper dewatering for utility illation' required steps will be
taken to prevent impacts to adjacent wells. It is not anticipated t ruction dewatering or
pumping from the site will be extensive or continue long e ugh to impact domestic or municipal
wells.
The site will be served by the City of St. Joseph m w er supply, which is authorized to
pump up to 1,750 GPM or 150.0 MGY from thr6ic I wells under DNR Water Appropriation
permit number 89-3101.The City of St. ..seph . s mit an application to the Minnesota DNR to
amend the City's Water Appropriation perSt the increased appropriation necessary to
serve continued growth of the City and ve ent of the site. DNR records indicate that,
during 2002, the City pumped 160.7 illi ga s, exceeding the authorized volume by 10.7
MGY. The City of St. Joseph has for expansion of the municipal well system to serve the
continued growth of the City an~e~op nt of the site.
The City of St. Josep oor~.tith DNR Area Hydrologist Mr. Dan Lais and the Minnesota
Department of He ure t t the expanded municipal well system will meet DNR Water
Appropriation Permit s and Department of Health regulations.
The increase in propria n will be withdrawn from the City's three existing wells, and two new
wells that the it 'ntends to have installed and operational by the end of 2006. To ensure that
the City' e well system results in a safe and clean public water supply that minimizes
pofWltia ects on roundwater and surface water resources, the City will:
~ II ting will to determine the rate at which water can be reliably produced,
e ate W head Protection Area for the expanded well field,
Estim the productive capacity of the future wells, and evaluate the associated drawdown,
M e the aquifer under the Wellhead Protection Plan to verify the zone of influence of
ping on the drawdown of the aquifer,
roperly case and grout off new wells to prevent contamination of the aquifer, and
6. Determine the transmissivity of the aquifer for a 24-hour or 72-hour period.
Amendment of the City's existing DNR Water Appropriation Permit will be required. The capacity
of the existing wells, the zone of drawdown due to pumping, and the transmissivity of the aquifer
will be evaluated to document that an increase in pumping will not result in significant adverse
effects groundwater or surface waters.
c) Will the project require connection to a public water supply system? IifYes 0 No If yes, identifY the
supply, the DNR water appropriation permit number and the quantity to be used.
Page 8
,I
.,~
'.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December ~, 2005
The proposed development will be connected to the City of St. Joseph municipal watersup~ly,
which is authorized under ONR Water Appropriation Permit numbers 89-3101-3, 89-3101-4,iand
89-3101-5. The City of St. Joseph currently obtains its raw water primarily from three produption
wells (well numbers 3, 4, and 5), which have a combined capacity of 1,000 gallons per minute
(gpm), or 1.44 MGO (million gallons per day). The system also has one 500,000- gallon elevated
storage reservoir to equalize pressures and supply water during peak demands. The City of St.
Joseph also has an emergency sharing agreement with the College of St. Benedict that woqld
allow the City to draw from the college's 150,000-gallon water storage facility in the event thl1lt the
City needed to shut down its wells and reservoir.
The City currently maintains one water treatment plant, which was built in 1970 and renovat~d in
1996. The treatment plant is designed to filter 1.08 million gallons of water per day (MGO .
Water use has steadily increased as the population of St. Joseph has grown.
The quantity of water used is expected to be proportional to the amount of san ita
produced. Water demand estimates for the scenario were based on the assu 0 at
consumption is approximately 110 percent of wastewater generation (item 18 . ani ry
wastewater production was estimated at 33,000 GPO by applying rates oa' 2000 $t.
Cloud Area Master Plan, and at 21,865 GPO by applying rates o~ i the rvic aila~.. ility
Charge (SAC) Procedures Manual (Metropolitan Council EnviroJfnental . , 20 5). Thj3
maximum daily demand for municipal water generated by the Telopme1t within the site afte.. r full
build- out is estimated to be 36,300 GPO (110% x 33,000). ~ .
The following table provides information on the projected pulations taken from the St. Joseph
Comprehensive Plan (Populations exclude the College f Benedict student population, whO
obtain water from the schools separate water supply and future maximum daily water
demand estimates, which were calculated from th are derived from current average
daily flow and future population estimate;' ~ \ I
Table 13.2 pr7if..Wcer Use
Table 13.2. Pr ~e ~ed~iCipal Water Use
Maximum Daily
Demand (MGD)
3,481 0.653
5,660 0.957
8 852 1.468
om Table 3-8 of the City of St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan, Table 3-8.
The City of 0 ph has and continues to plan for an adequate water supply and distribution
system ~rve and other future developments. The City has completed test drilling for a\
nel'wel i the ummer of 2003. The city is currently planning the drilling of two new water
P~I~ i nds to have the two new wells in place and operational by the end of 2006.
The ~~~t. Joseph Well Study indicates the two wells will each be able to supply an additi~nal
500 G M, or 0.721.44 MGD. The City is currently acquiring land around the two new wells fo~
the for. ation of a new well field and Wellhead Protection Area, and plans to construct a new I
Treatment Plant in the new well field. '
The St. Joseph Water Treatment Facility currently has a maximum capacity of 1,080,000 GPO.
gpd (gallons per day). The City's new well field, expanded Water Treatment Facility, and new
water tower is currently planning water treatment expansion and intends to have two new well,s in
place and operational by the end of 2006. A well study has been completed and indicates the.
two wells will be able to supply an additional 500 gpm each or 1.44 million gallons per day. Th,e
City is currently also acquiring land around the two new wells for the formation of a new well fi~ld
and is also planning on constructing a new water treatment plant in the new well field. The nef
well field and water treatment plant will supplement the existing water supply system and provipe
sufficient municipal water to serve the plant and wells. With these well, the system will be able to
Page 9
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5,2005
adequately supply water to the development associated with the site and other anticipated new
development.
14. Water-Related Land Use Management District
Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated] DO-year flood plain, or a state or
federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? a Yes @No If yes, identifY the district and discuss
project compatibility with district land use restrictions.
Shore land Overlav Zonina District
The project does not lie with 1000 feet of any DNR Public Waterbody or within 400 feet of an
Public Watercourse and is therefore not within any Shoreland Overlay Zoning District.
Floodplain. Wild and Scenic River. and Other Areas
The project area does not contain a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a state or f~esi
wild or scenic river land use district. 0' ~
15. Water Surface Use ~ _
Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water boL DYes ~TO
If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any~;~crowding or conflicts
with other uses. ~
The project site is not located near any waterbody and w'l . rease the number of watercraft on
any waterbody.
16. Erosion and Sedimentation . ~
Give the acreage to be graded 0' excavate~~~ds of ,oil to be moved,
Acres: It is anticipated that approximate es of the 31.4-acre site will be graded.
Cubic Yards: On-site grading: approael\t 100,000 cubic yards
(Note: the anticipated cubic f gr~a preliminary estimate that is subject to change)
Describe any steep slopes 0 Ie soils and identifY them on the site map. Describe any erosion and
sedimentation control measure b used during and after project construction.
According to th~eNRCS Highly Erodible Soil Map Unit List for Stearns County (October, 1993),
there are no~" highly erodible soil units on the property.
Anal Sit ~'~ top' raphic mapping indicates the site includes no areas of steep slopes.
fore initi~~onstruction, proposers of projects disturbing at least one acre of land must obtain
verage u der Minnesota's NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System)/SDS (State
osal stem) General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity (MNR100001), issued August
Because construction of developments within the project area will disturb at least one acre of land,
application for coverage under the NPDES/SDS General Permit must be submitted to the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) prior to initiating earthwork on those projects. This permit requires:
(1) management of stormwater discharge during construction, (2) use of Best Management Practices
(BMPs) to control erosion, and (3) inspection of all erosion controls at least once every seven days
during active construction and within 24 hours after a rainfall event greater than 0.5 inch in 24 hours.
Requirements for construction activity under the General Stormwater Permit include:
A. The Permittee must design and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
BMPs identified in the SWPPP must be installed in an appropriate and functional manner.
Page 10
" I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December ~, 2005
B. Temporary Sediment Basins must be located wherever 10 or more acres drain to a common
location, and sized to capture runoff from a 2-year, 24-hour storm.
C. Permanent stormwater management systems, such as sedimentation or infiltration basins,
must be constructed where at least one acre of cumulative impervious surface is created.
D. Erosion Prevention Practices:
1. The Permittee must implement appropriate construction phasing, vegetative buffer $trips,
horizontal slope grading, and other construction practices that minimize erosion.
2. Exposed soils with a continuous positive slope within 200 feet of a surface water m4st
have temporary erosion or permanent cover established within the time period set forth
under the General Permit, which ranges from 7 to 12 days, depending on the slope.
3. The normal wetted perimeter of any drainage ditch that carries water from or ar d a
construction site must be stabilized within 200 feet from the property edge or in f
I
discharge to surface water. Stabilization must be complete d within 24~0 so. I
connecting to a surface water.
4. Pipe outlets must have energy dissipation within 24 hours of con~ a rfac
water.
E. Sediment Control Practices: ~
1. Sediment control practices must minimize sediment e ring surf ce waters, including
curb and gutter systems and storm sewer inlets:
2. Sediment control practices must be established on all do adient perimeters befpre
any upgradient land disturbing activities b~ practices must remain until fi~..., al
stabilization has been established. ,
3. Sediment control practices may be adjust 0 modate short-term activities such
as clearing, grubbing, or vehicle passeay rt-term activity must be completed as
quickly as possible and the sed.ent rol ractices must be installed immediately after
the activity is completed. ~
4. All storm drain Inlets must ~t appropriate BMPs during construction unl"iI all
sources with potential for d' r 'ng t the inlet have been stabilized. '
5. Temporary soil stockPietl. st ha e silt fence or other effective sediment controls, ~"" nd
cannot be placed in su e ters or stormwater conveyances such as curb and gutter
systems or d'
6. Vehicle tr c nt from the construction site must be minimized by BMPs such
as stone pads, h racks, or equivalent systems. Street sweeping must be used if such
BMPs ar not ade ate to prevent sediment from being tracked onto the street.
7. r .ttee must install temporary sedimentation basins as required in Part III.B. of the
m~ :
F. tt=~. iI' ati of the site must be achieved by establishing perennial vegetative cov~.,r, or
G eq Ie means, to prevent soil failure under erosive conditions. For residential !,
cons ion, final stabilization is achieved when the residence is transferred to the .
ho e wner.
Clition to the requirements of the NPDES/SDS General Permit, individual projects will need to
adhere to the requirements of the City of St. Joseph. Erosion control plans will be reviewed and
approved by the City of St. Joseph prior to construction. With the implementation of the abote
BMPs, potential adverse effects from construction-related sediment and erosion on water quality
will be minimized to the extent practical. It is anticipated that potential adverse erosion and .
sedimentation impacts will be limited primarily to short-term effects.
17. Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff
a) Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls
to manage or treat runoff. Describe any storm water pollution prevention plans.
i
Pa'ge 11
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5,200'5
The project area slopes and drains toward the south and east, and surface water drainage from
the property flows into Wetland A which is a finger of a large wetland complex southeast of the
property.
The quantity of surface water runoff will increase during storm events as additional impervious
surface area is added with the construction of pavement and buildings. The increase in
impervious surface will be mitigated by construction of stormwater ponds designed to increase
the total flood storage volume on the site and handle run-off nutrients from up to a 1 OO-year storm
event prior to discharging to wetlands. Stormwater ponds will be used to slow runoff and
attenuate flows to keep peak flows to a level at or below existing conditions. Construction of the
stormwater ponds will adhere to the City of St. Joseph's stormwater management requirements.
b) IdentifY routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream wat
as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receivin
According to DNR Division of Waters digital watershed mapping, the project si
the Sauk River minor (16012) and major watershed (Exhibit 9). Stormwater g te fro is
development will be routed into a series of planned stormwater ponds that! rate control
and water quality treatment prior to discharging to wetlands on th~e . T e water
ponds are proposed on the Riverbats Stadium development. T'/6 ponds uld ervice the
northern portion of the development will be located along the e tern pro rty boundary. The
third pond will be located adjacent to Wetland A, and will provi eparat' n of the wetland area
from the stadium. Stormwater will be pretreated in the three sto ponds prior to
discharging to the wetland.
The ponds will be designed in accordance with NUR . wide Urban Runoff Program)
standards to handle a 100-year storm event. In are ent, stormwater will be retained in
designed to protect water quality by reqving e ed sediment and nutrients, and provide
flood flow desynchronization by reducing r~~ rom the site.
18. Water Quality: Wastewaters :4 ~
a) Describe sources, composition an~nrties of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater
produced or treated at the . e. V
Only normal com . I r production is expected. The types of wastewater produced
will be typical of com lopments. No on-site municipal or industrial wastewater or
sanitary sewage treatme nticipated. No onsite sanitary sewage treatment is proposed. All
wastewater fro he site I be routed through a series of lateral and trunk sanitary sewer pipes
and exported on yed to the St. Cloud Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). As of
Octobe , urrent average flow at the WWTP was approximately 10.0 MGD. The
Mi.issi . iver is e receiving water body for the St. Cloud WWTP discharge. The Sewer Use
resn e he City of St. Joseph and the City of St. Cloud was amended on August 27,
1 P 'ding surplus conveyance capacity in the Waite Park and Pan Interceptors for the City
of St. J s . This brings the current total surplus capacity available for St. Joseph to
116,82 ,925 GPY (gallons per year), or 320,068 GPD. Total conveyance capacity available to
e . of St. Joseph is an average flow rate of 2,100,000 gpd. The total treatment capacity
I able is an average flow rate of 600,000 gpd.
Sanitary wastewater production for the site was calculated using two methods. The method that
resulted in the largest estimate is considered the worst case scenario. The first method used
average sanitary sewer flows outlined in the St. Cloud Area Master Plan (2000). The Plan
identifies growth areas that will eventually be served by the greater St. Cloud area wastewater
facilities. The Ultimate Service Area, which is comprised of stages over the next 50 years and
includes the City of S1. Joseph, was used to determine the design of all future sanitary trunk
sewer facilities. The Ultimate Service Area was divided into 109 districts to predict future flow
generation. Appendix A2 and 82 of the Master Plan indicate the Ultimate Service Area consists
of 94,238 acres with an average flow of 49.28 MGD. The stadium area is located within District
Page 12
" I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December~, 2005
22. The following table provides the average sanitary sewer flows per acre by land use cate1gory,
and the total estimated average daily sanitary sewer flow for the site.
Table 18.1. Wastewater Production
Proposed Use SAC Rate Units SAC Gallons/Dav Wastew~ter
Units SAC Unit (gallons/day)
Stadium 1:110 seats 3 400 seats 30.9 274 8 4671
Office/Retail 1 :2,400 s.f. 126000 s.f 52.5 274 1438$
Total 22,85~
District 22 encompasses a total of 1,115 acres and has a total estimated average dai se 9ge
flow of 1.10 million GPD. The stadium site encompasses 31.4 acres, or 3 percent 0 '22.
Proportionately, one would estimate the average daily flow for the stadium Site~o G...... '
which is 11,135 more GPD than the estimate of 21,865 that was derived from Ian us his
suggests that the St. Cloud Area Master Plan has adequately planned foCr . sewer
capacity in the Site. ,
The alternative maximum daily sanitary sewer flow estimate w derived lying rates !
outlined in the Service Availability Charge (SAC) Procedures ual (Me opolitan Council
Environmental Services, 2005). Based on an estimate of 274 g f w ewater per SAC unit,
the site would be is expected to generate 22,852 gpd of a axim entia I wastewater flow
after full build-out.
Design flow demands were measured against exist' e system capacity to determine:the
future capacity needs. The current surplus wa~t a atment capacity currently available.......... for
the City of St. Joseph is 247,000 GPD. As bui f the site is accomplished coupled witH
additional growth within the city, the Cit1tf St. se will likely need to purchase more ;
conveyance treatment capacity from the . 0 P. Under the recent Sewer Use
Agreement with St. Cloud, and the curr t 5- plan to expand the St. Cloud WWTP, the City of
St. Joseph has demonstrated that t 't icon nuing to plan for adequate sewer capacity as
demand increases.
b) Describe waste treatment
treatment. IdentifY re vin
discharge impact on
the suitability of site con
od ~ _\ tion prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after
at~ding major downstream water bodies, and estimate the ,
eiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, d~scuss
~~~~ i
sewag treatment is proposed. All wastewater from the site will be routed
lateral and trunk sanitary sewer pipes and exported conveyed to the St. Cloud
Reg,ion as r Treatment Plant (WWTP). The current average flow at the WWTP as of
Odeber i ap oximately 10.0 MGD. The Mississippi River is the receiving water body for
s~ou discharge. St. Cloud Public Utilities indicated that the average phosphprus
concent . in the discharge to the Mississippi River during 2002 was 0.92 mg/L (milligrams per
liter; p . This amount has not been considered by the MPCA to have a significant effect qn
downs eam lakes and reservoirs. The lowest phosphorus concentration planning category in the
's Phosphorus Management Planning Guidance (March, 2000) is 4.0 mg/L. The MPdA
recommends that municipal wastewater treatment plants with effluent phosphorus concentrations
of less than 4.0 mg/L focus on maintaining or improving performance.
c) If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identifY the facility, describe any
pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes,
identifYing any improvements necessary.
The St. Cloud Regional WWTP is located near Interstate 94 and CSAH Highway 75 in southbrn
St. Cloud. The plant has a total capacity of 13 MGD and currently, the plant receives wastewater
flow of about 10.0 MGD from St. Cloud and surrounding municipalities. According to the St.
Cloud Area Master Plan, the treatment plant has ample room for expansion. Several large
Page 13
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
interceptors were installed and extended into surrounding growth areas. The interceptors were
sized to accommodate wastewater flows for future growth and development over the next five
decades.
Comparison of the daily St. Cloud Area Master Plan sanitary sewer generation estimates for the
development scenario on the site to the future capacity of the St. Cloud Regional WWTP
indicates there will be adequate sewer line and treatment plant capacity to serve the flows from
the Site. The average and maximum daily sewer generation estimates for the Site are 21,865 to
33,000 GPO, respectively. These estimates are less than the 320,068 GPO surplus capacity
currently available for St. Joseph. The estimated amount of sanitary sewer generated from the
site will comprise approximately 1.3 percent of the St. Cloud Regional WWTPs capacity of 13
MGD. These figures indicate there 6
Because the estimated amount of sanitary sewer generated from the site will compr"
approximately 0.25 percent of the St. Cloud Regional WWTPs capacity of 13 MG ere be
adequate sewer line and treatment capacity to serve the flows that will be gen e
development of the site. Considering the planned sanitary sewer expansion f St Clo
area, no wastewater facility or treatment capacity issues are anticipated, f"'Il\ tion
measures have been considered. ~ V
d) If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe dis
discuss capacity of handle the volume and composition of manure. Ide
Describe any required setbacks for land disposal sYste~m.
The project will not include facilities that generate liq' . I manure requiring disposal.
19. Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions . ~
Approximate depth (in feet) to groundwater: inimum 12 average
Approximate depth (infeet) to bedroc~: minimum 50-100 average
a) Describe any ofthefollowing geologi rds to groundwater and also identifY them on the site map:
sinkholes, shallow limestone form~c:;. kar conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize
environmental problems due to a'Ve hazards.
No known geologi ar' th form of sinkholes, faults, shallow limestone formations, and
karst topography are e he project site. Measures to avoid or minimize environmental
problems due to these h s are not proposed.
According to e eologic Atlas of Stearns County: Hydrogeology of the Quaternary Confined
Aquifer. a k Aquifers (Minnesota Geological Survey, Plate 9, 1998), the water table
cOrW>ur round, 60 feet above mean sea level (msl). Two-foot topographic mapping
i dicse 'on n the site range from 1,062 to 1,076, and exist mostly between 1,070 and
, ms. Wa er levels in wetlands on the property are around 1,060 feet. Thus, depth to
ground a averages 12 feet. Because surficial groundwater is sometimes encountered in the
wetlan ,the minimum depth to groundwater is estimated at 0 feet.
Geologic Atlas of Stearns County: Depth to Bedrock (Minnesota Geological Survey, Plate 5,
1995) indicates the general depth to bedrock on the site varies from 50-100 feet.
b) Describe the soils on site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, ifknown. Discuss soil granularity and
potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils.
Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination.
The Soil Survey of Stearns County, Minnesota (USDA, 1993) indicates the following soils occur
within the project area.
Page 14
" I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December, 5, 2005
Table 19.1. Soils Classification
Map Soil Classification Hydric 1 Prime Farmland 2
Svmbol
41A Estherville sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes No No
41B Estherville sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes No No
183 Dassel sandY loam Yes No
543 Markev Muck Yes No
1 Based on the NRCS List of Hydric Soils of Minnesota (1995).
2 Based on the USDAlNRCS Prime Farmland of Stearns County, Minnesota (2002).
'I
The project is located in the Estherville-Hawick Association on the General Soil Map of Stebrns
County. This association is described as nearly level to very steep, somewhat excessiv iand
excessively drained, moderately coarse textured and coarse textured soils on outwas pi's and
stream terraces.
Upland soils mapped on the property generally consist of sandy loams in the ~rv se' .
Estherville soils are somewhat excessively drained sandy loams located~ 0 n side",
slopes of stream terraces and outwash plains. .
Wetland soils consist of decomposed organic muck of the Mar .y series a ,_, ~pressional ~andy
loams of the Dassel series. The Markey series consist of near level, ve poorly drained "
organic soils located in depressions on uplands. The Dassel s con t of nearly level, poorly
drained loams located in swales, broad flats and on the rim of de ns. The Markey and
Dassel series are all characteristic of wetland soils.
The potential for groundwater contamination is esti te high based on the depth to
groundwater and the permeability of the dominant s found on the site according to the
Geological Atlas of Stearns County: SensitiVitY.en ater syst,ems to Pollution, (Minm" esota
Geological Survey, Plate 10, 1998). Se~itivit gr ndwater systems to pollution is indic~ted
by the approximate time it takes water to i~ land surface until it is discharged or I,
pumped from an aquifer. Although sha w g water is highly susceptible to contaminat:ion,
moderately permeable soils with fin tex res ill slow or restrict the movement of water, Which
extends the time needed for Ch~' a eak down before reaching the water table. The
proposed project will include th ing characteristics, which are expected to minimize the
potential for 9 roundwat onta nat' n: (1) connection of the site's sanitary sewer system; to the
City of St Cloud's W e ter ent Facility through the City of St. Joseph's wastewater
collection system, . n of surface water runoff in stormwater retention ponds b~fore
release into wetlands eglonal waterbodies. '
tes, and Storage Tanks
aJ ts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure,
ed during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal.
r p . cts rat,' municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how
the proj i I be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous
waste 'ni ization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments.
aste generation will be typical of a commercial development. The commercial ,
evelopment is expected to include small retail, restaurants and lodging that would accent ~
baseball stadium and is not expected to include any industrial or any commercial that wouldl
produce hazardous waste such as a dry-cleaning facility. It is not anticipated that the propoSed
development will generate significant amounts of wastes that would be considered "hazardo'us."
Specific information about the composition of municipal solid waste generation in St. Joseph is
not available at this time.
Page 15
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
Table 20.1. Solid Waste Generation Estimate
Unit of Tons/Unit Number Waste Generation
Use Measure Year of Units Estimate
(TonsNear)
Commercial 100 SF 0.51 2,600 1,326.0
Total 1,326.0
The Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance (MOEA) reported an estimate of commercial
solid waste generation of 0.51 tons per 100 square feet of floor space per year in 1998 for the
Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The proposed commercial floor space is then divided by 100 and
is then multiplied by 0.51 tons, based on the MOEA figure for the Twin Cities. ~
Using these figures, the proposed development is expected to generate approximate , tons
of commercial municipal solid waste per year. Types of solid waste generatiO~d an the
relative percentage of each type (by weight) are estimated in the following tab The
estimates are rough approximations based on studies of similar but unreJ~ ents 1
Table 20.2. Typical Solid Waste composi~ V
Waste Type rcentag
'dent'
Pa er 27.6
Glass 4.0
Metal 4.6
Plastic 8.8
Other Or anics 45.0
Construction/Demolition 4.5
Household Hazardous Waste 0.3
S ecial Waste 1.2
Mixed Residue 4.0
Total 100.0
1 Other Organic includes suecs as , leaves, grass, prunings, and textiles.
2 Construction/Demolition in I s it ms such as concrete, asphalt, lumber, gypsum board, and soil.
3 Household Ha Wa' es items such as paint, vehicle fluids, and batteries.
4 Special Wa 'nclu items such as ash, sewage solids, industrial sludge, and bulky items.
x end its solid waste and recyclable materials collection services to
Identi any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used
ent them from contaminating groundwater. if the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a
regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the
waste, discharge or emission.
As discussed under Item 9, if potentially hazardous materials or potential sources of
environmental contamination such as storage tanks or septic systems are discovered on the
property before or during project construction, they will be properly disposed of or abandoned in
accordance with applicable local, state and federal regulations.
1 (Solid Waste Characterization Study: Results and Final Report, California Integrated Waste
Management Board, December 1999).
Page 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
No known hazardous materials are currently located on the site. Use of toxic or hazardous
materials, outside of vehicle fuels, commercial cleaners, and lawn care chemicals, is not
expected on the project site in conjunction with the proposed development.
c) Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products
or other materials, except water. Describe and emergency response containment plans. I
It is not anticipated that the Riverbats Stadium Development will involve installation of
aboveground or underground storage tanks (ASTs or USTs). If storage tank installation becomes
necessary on the site, they will be installed according to MPCA regulations and consideration will
be given to spill and leak detection and prevention technologies, as well as double-walled tank
construction.
21. Traffic
The purpose 01 this traffic analysis is to assess the traffic implications 01 the p~Bal..
baseball stadium on the surrounding external street network. ,~ .
This EAW traffic analysis addresses the impact 01 pre- and post-gac) d to be
generated by the stadium.
Site Description '
The stadium site is located in St. Joseph, Minnesota, south of .S.A.H. 75 and east of 88th Avenue
South. The proposed stadium location is shown in Figure F. 1. i
Access
Vehicles will enter the site traveling southbound oneut g of the intersection of C.S.A.H.. 75
and 88th Avenue South. Two on-site parki~lots . e rovided, as shown on the site plan in
Figure F-2. Vehicles will have access to the e~ sides of the primary parking lot near the
stadium and from the west to the smallSee 0 . verflow parking will also be provided west o. f 88th
Avenue and north of the stadium. .
Exiting vehicles will leave the stadie via .SAH. 75 at either 88th Avenue or Street B, I~.,.. cated
to the east of 88th Avenue. Exiting icl s at Street B will be restricted to a right-turn only !
movement towards St. CI .
Seating
The seating capacity of the p
ed stadium is 3,400 seats.
Events
The baseba s expected to host 36 home games per year. The typical start time for i
weekd. ev g game is 7:00 P.M. During the last season, 34 of 36 games started at this time.
Two am~ Y'tIII ypi lIy take place on Saturday afternoon beginning at 2:00 P.M.
arking Cap~
e stadiu grounds will include parking capacity for 945 vehicles in two lots, as shown in the table
w' overflow parking available to accommodate an additional 131 vehicles west of 88th
and to the north of the main stadium parking. A total of 1,076 parking spaces are planned.
Table F-1
Parking Space Availability
Location Number of Available
Soaces
West Lot 762
East Lot 183
Overflow Lot 131
Total 1076
~age 17
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5,2005
Existing Conditions
The existing conditions analysis was limited to C.S.A.H. 75 and 88th Avenue South.
Lane Geometry
The roadway geometry at C.S.A.H. 75 and 88th Avenue, shown in Figure F-3, is identical in both
directions, including two through lanes, a Jeft-turn Jane and a right-turn lane. The south leg of
88th Avenue has a single approach lane for left, through and right-turning vehicles. The north leg
has a single lane to accommodate left and through vehicles and a dedicated right-turn lane.
Figure F-3
Analysis Network Lane Geometry
I
Traffic Volumes ~
The proposed stadium site is p ntl undeveloped. To assess current operations in the study
area, peak period tur . ove unts were conducted at the intersection of C.S.A.H. 75
and 88th Avenue 0 We esda evening (corresponding to the pre-game time period) and a
Saturday afternoon a corresponding to Saturday pre-game and post-game time
periods) in the Fall of 2
Jraffi :A.nalysis
ntersection of C.S.A.H. 75/88th Avenue is controlled by a traffic signal, while the 88th
Avenue / Lancer Street intersection is controlled by a 2-way stop for the eastbound and
westbound directions. Intersection Level of Service analyses were computed for both the
Wednesday and Saturday counts using the methodologies spelled out in the Highway Capacity
Manual. Table F-2 summarizes the results of these capacity analyses.
Table F-2
Capacity Analysis for Existing Conditions
Signalized Intersection Analysis
Page 18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
Decembe~ 5,2005
Weekday Saturday
Intersection Pre-Game Post-Game Pre-Game Post-Game
Delay / LOS Delay / LOS Delay / LOS Delay / LOS
C.S.A.H. 75 & 88th Ave. 10.0/ A 7.6/ A 9.6/ A 10.9/ B
Stop Sign AnalysIs
Critical Movement LOS (1)
Weekday Saturday
Intersection Critical Pre-Game Post-Game Pre-Game
Movement
Delay / LOS Delay / LOS
88th Ave. & Lancer St. EBL 9.5/ A 8.9/ A
(1) Delay and LOS were determined using HCM 2000 methodolo~n
for the critical movement of the intersection. /' -
Analysis of Future Conditions l J
The future conditions with the stadium in place were analy ed U~ditional multi-step traffic
forecast and analysis process. The major steps in this Rr ss include: '
1. developing trip generation, .
2. deriving the direction of ap~ro h, i
3. assigning site generated tr I e surrounding roadway network, anQ
4. analyzing developme"t-~Ia Ei tr ic impacts.
The analysis focused on the foreca;;te ak of stadium traffic during the pre- and post-
game conditions. To account for th bane d traffic demands caused by the stadium, peak
hour traffic was divided into 15-~' te ds to fully consider the impacts of these traffic !",
volumes. !
Trip Generation i
The number of trip was assumed to equal the total number of available parking
spaces. The two lots 0 e stadium grounds contain 945 spaces and the overflow lot to the
northwest contai s anoth 1 spaces, for a total of 1,076.
Fan arrival d arture patterns were provided by the stadium developer. These patterns were
convertS1 arrival and departure data and graphed as shown in Figure F-6. The lilrrival
prete r s tee ectation that some fans will arriver early to tailgate before the game, iwhile
d~u'?l ofi assumes that some fans will begin leaving before the game ends. \
Trip Dist~ion i
The tri distribution for RiverBats game attendees is based on available traffic counts in the area,
dge of local traffic patterns and professional judgment. The majority of traffic is expected
to travel to and from St. Cloud. For purposes of this analysis, trips were allocated as follows:
70% east on C.S.A.H. 75
15% west on C.S.A.H. 75
10% north on 88th Avenue
Traffic Assignment
In the trip assignment portion of the analysis, the new trips represented by fan attendance were
assigned to the roadway network using the routing patterns expected to be utilized by game
attendees. An Excel spreadsheet was developed to assign these trips to the parking lot
entrances and exits.
Page 19
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5,2005
Figure F-7 shows the game-day entering and exiting stadium traffic that will be added to key
locations on roadways surrounding the site.
Figures F-8 and F-9 show the total pre- and post-game traffic projected for these locations for
weekday evening and Saturday afternoon games, respectively.
Traffic Analysis - Synchro Delay
Traffic analyses were conducted with the total traffic for pre- and post-game conditions. The
results of these analyses are summarized in Table F-3 and F-4. As shown in Table F-3, the
signalized intersection of C.S.A.H. 751 88th Avenue will function at Level of Service "0" or better.
Table F-3
Intersection Capacity Analysis
Intersection
Weekday
Pre-Game
Delay 1 LOS
Post-Game
Delay 1 LOS
17.31 B
C.S.A.H. 75 & 88th Ave.
The forecasted vehicle delay is considered very acceptabl for this In ersection. The worst case
is the Saturday post-game ending in late afternoon. Gr a post-game delay is expected to be
experienced following Saturday games, but this shoul se a serious difficulty, as games
ending at this time are scheduled only twice a year. u Iso be noted that the traffic
demands causing the "0" Level of Service are ~te occur for only a 30-minute period of
time. .
Table F-4 summarizes results of the 2~"'~ es for the un signalized intersections of 88th
Avenue 1 Lancer Street and C.S.A.H. 7 ~Str~.
Stop ~~~:y~iS
. ic~ent LOS (1)
Weekday Saturday
Intersection Pre-Game Post-Game Pre-Game Post-Game
Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay 1 LOS Delay I LOS
L 23.4 I C 16.4 1 C 20.7 I C 19.0 I C
N/A 82.7 I F N/A 116.8/F
The 88th Avenue I Lancer Street intersection will function at a Level of Service "C" or better.
At the intersection of Street B with C.S.A.H. 75, the northbound right movement will experience
Level of Service "F" during post-game conditions. This delay will only occur for approximately the
post-game peak half-hour. Considering that post-game conditions will occur only 36 times per
year and that post-game congestion will last for approximately 30 minutes, a delay of less than
120 seconds is quite reasonable. Additionally, the delay may be slightly overstated, as drivers
leaving the stadium area may chose to use 88th Avenue instead if that route is less congested.
The driver's decisions regarding an exit route will tend to balance intersection delay.
Traffic Analysis - SimTraffic
Page 20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December, 5, 2005
Queues
A queue length analysis was conducted for traffic movements of concern. Most site-generated
traffic will approach from the east, making a west to southbound left turn at C.SAH. 75 and 88th
Avenue. The queue length of northbound traffic exiting at this intersection was also of concern.
A SimTraffic-based simulation analysis of forecasted queue lengths was conducted to verify that
the westbound left-turn lane has adequate storage. The results listed on the following tabl~ show
that the left turn lane capacity of 480 feet will exceed the forecasted queue lengths. The
northbound queue lengths were not problematic.
Table F-5
Queue Analysis (1)
C.SAH. 75 & 88th Ave.
Pre-Game
Weekday Saturday
Measure Units Critical Movement
WBL NBL TR
Storage / Link Length ft. 480 388
Maximum Queue ft. 393
95th Percentile Queue ft. 313
Upstream Block Time % 0
The post-game results listed on the following table at he west to southbound left tun')
movement will not be a concern. The northbo~ue ngths extended past the east-we*
drive:way south of C.S:A.H. 75 for only 1_ of t -h r simulation time. This situation is no~
conSidered problematiC. ~ ~ '
T~aF- I ~
Q e lysis (1)
~~tH. & 88th Ave.
O'ame
Weekday
Critical Movement
WBL NBL TR
480 388
Saturday
Measure
WBL
480
NBL TR
388
409
358
53
38
o
275
202
o
ft.
ft.
74
53
o
1%
%
95th Percentile Queue is based on statistical calculations and is not necessarily ever
observed
(2) Upstream Block Time = proportion of time upstream end of lane is blocked
(3) Queuing Penalty = rough measure of how many vehicles are affected by the blocking
(4) Average vehicle length plus distance between vehicles in SimTraffic is 19.5 ft.
Page 21
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
Delay
A SimTraffic simulation analysis was conducted to determine delay for vehicles exiting the
stadium parking area and making the north to eastbound right turn at the intersection of C.S.A.H.
75 and Street B east of 88th Avenue. A combination of delay for the intersections of Street B in
the vicinity of the parking lots and with C.S.A.H. 75 was calculated to represent the delay for a
vehicle after it exits the parking lot.
As shown in Table F-7, a delay of approximately 2 minutes is expected for vehicles exiting the
stadium after a game starting at 7:00 P.M. Although the determined delay is Level of Service "F",
it is reasonable for an infrequent and short duration post-game situation.
Table F-7
Intersection Delay in Seconds
Street B
Post-Game - Weekday
Intersection with:
Intersection with: #2 #3 #4 Overall
C.S.A.H. 75 173.3 220.2 208.9 187.5
Street A 7.6 13.2 10.3 9.5
Total Delay 180.9/F 233.4 / F 219.21 F 197.0/F
1. A traffic analysis was performed to assess the traffic implications of the proposed
RiverBats baseball stadium on the surrounding external street network. This traffic
analysis addresses the impact of pre- and post-game traffic expected to be generated by
the stadium. The following conclusions were reached during the study:
2. The RiverBats baseball stadium is expected to add about 1,076 total trips to the external
roadway system during pre-game and post-game periods. The analysis condition for this
study assumed that vehicle arrivals would fill the parking area to capacity.
Page 22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
w Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
Decembe~ 5, 2005
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The great majority of games are expected to start at 7:00 P.M. During the previous
season, 34 of 36 games started at 7:00 P.M. The phenomenon of tailgating will spread
traffic demand before games. Low background traffic volume levels after evening games
will reduce the potential for traffic congestion.
I
The signalized intersection of C.SAH. 75/ 88th Avenue will function with acceptable
Levels of Service (LOS liB" or better) during weekday evening pre-game and post-same
periods. The existing roadway geometry will prove adequate to accommodate pre.game
and post-game conditions. The signal timing at this location will require modification to
provide more time for the west to southbound left turners during the pre-game peak time.
C.SAH. 75/ 88th Avenue will operate at LOS "0" or better during Saturday after bon
pre.game and post-game periods. However, only two such games are expecte be
scheduled during a typical year.
The northbound right turn at the intersection of C.SAH. 75/ Street B~' ion ~t OS
"F" during the half-hour post-game for weekday evening games. The en a'
duration of the congestion are low and considered acceptable fOre ondit.ions.
The calculated delay is approximately two minutes for ve~ a er th ha xited the
parking lot area for evening games. f
The results of queue length analysis for traffic movem~c: of conJern did not result, in
problematic situations. The left-turn lane storage for th~outhbound left turn at
C.SAH. 75 and 88th Avenue will be adequate for re.game conditions. The northbound
queue lengths approaching C.SAH. 75 and 88 enue are not expected to be I
problematic.
As a result of preliminary traffic analYi2e e la st parking lot area was reconfigured to
provide access on both the easwnd si s. This change was important to
effectively facilitate the entrance a~' vehicles. It is anticipated that the Pia...., nned
parking lot layout will safel~:;~m . e y accommodate the forecasted parking .
demands before and after ~ .
22. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions ~ \ "
Estimate the effect of the pr . ra.Jtf""J,.ation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss
the effect of traffic impro nts other itigation measures on air quality impacts. Note: If the project
involves 500 or more parkin suit EA W Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is
needed
8.
23.
e type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air
emiSSIOns such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult
EA W Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and
ozone-depleting chemicals (chlorofluorocarbons, hydro fluorocarbons, per fluorocarbons or sulfur i
hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution co'r1trol
devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. '
No stationary source air emissions are anticipated as a result of this project.
24. Odors, Noise and Dust
Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? IifYes a No
P~ge 23
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5,2005
If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate
adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss
potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be
discussed at item 23 instead of here.)
Dust and Odors
Fugitive dust is expected to be generated during grading and construction of the Riverbats Stadium
Development, but is not anticipated to be generated in objectionable quantities. Consideration will be
given to suppression of airborne dust by application of water if significant fugitive dust generation
occurs during site grading. Upon completion of construction, disturbed areas will either be paved or
vegetated in accordance with approved site and landscaping plans. The development i~not
expected to generate dusty conditions after construction. It is not anticipated that constructi or
operation of the Riverbats Stadium Development will generate significant odors.
Noise ~
A detailed noise study was completed as a part of the EAW process to asses . of noise
from fireworks and concerts at the proposed stadium site (Appendix E oi fro ire sand
from music concerts were lhe only noise issues sludied, ail olher n . e geneam I e site is nol
expected to have any adverse effect on the neighboring properties Firework are expected to be
used at approximately 5 home games each season and will be sho after e baseball games are
complete. Noise from concerts is difficult to estimate, music type an . ent have a direct
bearing on the amount of noise generated. This report prese an analysis of the noise impacts that
concerts and fireworks events could have at the proposed 've Bats Stadium, LLC ballpark in St.
Joseph, Minnesota. The analysis is based on data from studies, noise monitoring
conducted at the proposed site, and noise monitoring ear Midway Stadium in St. Paul
during a Saints baseball game and fireworks even~ \
The study concludes that both the firew:~~rt events have the potential to cause
significant noise impacts at area re:~~ ~ controiled.
The report makes the following rec ations:
For concerts the stadium and 40\'ld be designed to assure that a continuous structure or
combination of struct d ~or berms will break the line of site between the local
residences and the nd stem Trees and shrubs are not effective sound barriers. A "house"
sound system provide Ipark should be considered for concerts. The ballpark should
provide a sound "engine all performances. The ballpark should involve the neighborhood in
planning and sc duling 0 oncerts. A neighborhood noise monitoring system should be
considered fo us during concert events.
FO'4tire~, For requent large-scale fireworks events, the ballpark should involve the
eigh~h s 'n R nning and scheduling. At a minimum a notice should be provided to all
pn to 5 ch events. If more frequent small-scale fireworks (e.g. during and after
ballgame re planned, the ballpark should limit the noise level and duration of the fireworks.
The Ci may want to adopt a standard such as the State gun club rule for frequent events.
Th plans for the stadium structure itself have not been finalized at this point, the Riverbats will
work with the city of St Joseph to incorporate mitigation measures to ensure noise issues are
resolved as the stadium is developed.
25. Nearby Resources
Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site?
If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures
to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? 0 Yes IiJNo
Page 24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December! 5, 2005
A cultural review was requested from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in advance of
EAW publication to expedite the review process. Correspondence from SHPO is included in
Appendix C. Based on their review, the SHPO concluded that there are no recorded archaeological
sites or historical architectural properties in the project area.
There are currently no structures on the property, so historic structures will not be impacted during
the development of the Riverbats Stadium property. The potential for archeological sites is als9 low.
Based on aerial photography the property has been in agricultural row crop production since at! least
1938. Additionally a three-acre gravel pit was excavated on the northeastern portion of the site
during the construction of nearby CSAH 75. These historical disturbances further reduce the
probability of archaeological sites existing on the property.
Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? Ii!! Yes a No
No farmland preservation measures have been considered. Becaus is guided for
development, and no prime farm land is located on the .:~r allematives to conversion 91
prime farmland needed.
Designatedparks, recreation areas or trails? a;es Ii!!~ \
Scenic views and vistas? aYes li!!No ~ 'V
There are no scenic views or vistas on ~~Stadium property
Other unique resources? a Yes Ii!! No ~ \
26. Visual Impacts 'V
27.
Will the project create advers . ual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense
lights, lights visible in wildernes eas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? a Yes
li!!No. If yes, explain.
e proje subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable
la ater, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? li!!Yes a No. If
yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the prqject and explain how any conflicts will be resolved
If no, explain.
The Riverbats Stadium property is located in District 15 as identified in the City of St. Joseph's i
Comprehensive Plan. The City of St. Joseph has identified the area around the proposed stadium as
being suitable for tiered higher intensity uses such as commercial and high density residential !.
adjacent to future collector street intersections All portions of the proposed project are consistent with
the existing and planned zoning designations for the site, and are compatible with existing and
predicted future adjacent land uses. No land use conflicts are anticipated.
Page 25
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
December 5, 2005
28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services
Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other irifrastructure or public services be required to serve the project?
!iJYes DNo. If yes, describe the new or additional irifrastructure or services needed. (Note: any
irifrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EA W; see EA W
Guidelines for details.)
Public and private infrastructure improvements will need to be constructed in association with this
development. These include public safety and educational services, roadways, the stormwater
system, electrical lines, telephone lines, and continued improvements and upgrades to the s itary
sewer system and water supply system as detailed in applicable plans and pOlicies adopt db the
City of St. Joseph. Impacts related to the public improvements that are directly associa . he
Riverbats Stadium Development are discussed throughout this document. ~
29. Cumulative Impacts
Mlnnesolo Rule po'14410.1700. su/po,t7. item B 'equi"sthot the RGU co thQat" alential
effects of related or anticipatedfuture projects" when determining the ne for an env ental impact
statement. IdentifY any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future pr ct that m interact with the project
described in this EA W in such a wcry as to cause cumulative impacts. Des e the ture of the cumulative
impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determi ether there is potential for
significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or disc each cumulative impact under the
appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form).
Potential cumulative effects of anticipated future proje ot known at this time, and depend
largely on the type, location, and density of develoa. The efore, it is not known if these future
projects will interact with the proposed proje@l in say as to cause cumulative effects. If future
developments meet or exceed the thresholds ~Y' atory EAW category, their potential impacts
will need to be addressed in a separate EA ~ ~
30. Other Potential Environmentallmpa
If the project mcry cause any
them here, along with any opo
on ntal impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identifY and discuss
n.
I effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
31. Summary of Issues
Page 26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Riverbats Stadium Development EAW
Decembe~ 5, 2005
I
I
Do not complete this section if the EA W is being done for EIS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the
draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the EA W. List any impacts and issues identified
above that may require further investigation before the project begins. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative
measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or
may be ordered as permit conditions.
I
Table 31.1. Summary of Issues and Mitigation Measures
I
I
Item Title
12. Physical Impacts on Water
Resources
16. Erosion and Sedimentation
17. Water Quality: Surface Water
Runoff
21. Traffic
24. Noise
Miti ation Measures
Pretreatment of stormwater prior to discharge in wetlands; avo:idance
of wetlands on the ro ert . .
BMP implementation; Compliance with NPDES/SDS General Permit
re uirements.
Creation of a stormwater pond treatment system to man e
stormwater runoff.
I
I
I
I
I
est of my knowledge.
es or components other than those 'I
ctions or phased actions, as define<;l at
I
Signature
Date
I
I
Title: Ms. Jud
inistrator
The Environmental Assessment
Minnesota Planning. For additional
ksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at
ation, worksheets or for EA W Guidelines, contact: Environmental
ul, MN 55155, (651) 296-8253, or www.mnplan.state.mn.us
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 27
,I "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXHIBITS 1 - 9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
40.
e 2005 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
...
.
~
- -
.. 5 .
1 /
.
~/
.
.
Data Source(s): MnDOT County Map Series Stearns (2002)
Legend
-- Property Boundary
I
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
- .
6
..
o
.
4,000
8,000
,Feet
Riverbats Stadium
St. Joseph, Minnesota
-'fel
I' '.1
Y",:,<:
t 1,1.
. I
. , ,
/~I'>>
. I"
t~'':''''1
.
.!!2
.
I . . . . I .
, .
, I
, I
,
I .
.
I ,
II . II I: I I I I U . I I
. . , II !_ I . II I I I . .
. . . II 'i' . . I I .. I .
:WA[TE' 'p' .
I I . . . I :. . I II
. I I '.'. '. I.' I I II I", . pOP. 6.568. . I
I . . I I . 'i I I I . I . . I
II . I . I . II I I I . . I I I
I II , . . . . ~ . I . . I I I .
. . I . I . I ;1 I . I . . . I ,
I . I . I . ,Ii, I I . I I . . .
I . I . . ,. I '. . . I I . . . I
I . I . . . .'. . . I . . I .
I . i . . I I ,f I . . . . . . i
I . I . I . .: I . . . . . '" .
I . I . I ... I .. I . . I . . . I
I ',I.','.'. I, 1.1.' . I I II"
Date: 12-05~05
N
A
Exhibit 1 I
Site Loeation
Map Document: (P:120055065.10\gisI20055065Ioc01A.mxd)
10/612005 -- 2:21:29 PM
I 02005 Weatwuod ProfealOllcl Servlcea, Inc.
f 1m
I f
I
I
I I lJ~
_-1 , ~
':LDL
-I
I
I
I
I
I
-.J
1/
LANCER STREET
- l ..c::::;;;;::~
0"""
VIIge
cIaI 0UII0t
is
~ I
I'lrrl "
'It I
is
.. II
lID I II
, I
"1
I
> =:~
~".
act
"
("",-,- ~'-'
-, \
/
A"
/
JF
\,
"P
,.
River Bats atadUm
ct;"'-
, Sf. JciIIeph, w.!
Sit~/Plan Concept
{II
f
@
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Prepe/"ed for
River Bats Sta~ium, LLC
. November 23, 2005
EllhItlI 2
3701 12th Street North,Suile206
St.Cloud,MN56303
Phone: 320.253-9495 FOlK: 320-253.873'1
20055066.OlWJF01.lf
I
co 2005 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data Source(s): USDA FSA AFPO DOQ (2003)
I
Legend
- Property Boundary
o
700
1 ,400
,Feet
Date: 12-05-05
N
A
I
I
Riverbats Stadium
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Su.rrounding I
Land Use
Exhibit 3
I
Map Document: (P:\20055065.10\gis\20055065slu01A.mxd)
10/6/2005 - 2:22:04 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data Source(s): USDA FSA AFPO DOQ (2003)
I
o
300
600
,Feet
Date: 12-05-05
N
A
I
I I
I
:. Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
~ 'f 370112th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
Riverbats Stadium
Existing
Covertypes
Exhibit 41
S1. Joseph, Minnesota
Map Document: (P:\20055065.10\gis\20055065ecv01A.mxd)
1016/2005 - 10:40:53 AM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II'
I
Data Source(s): USFWS NWI (1991), USDA FSA DOQ (2003)
Legend
- Property Boundary
(:j-.::.:-:',] NWI Mapped Wetland
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
370112th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
o
250
500
I Feet
Riverbats Stadium
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Date: 12-05-0$
National Wetland I
InventorYIMapping
Exhibit 5
Map Document: (P:\20055065.10\gis\20055065nwi01A.mxd)
11/8/2005 --11:32:17 AM
I
@ 2005 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Data Source(s): Westwood Professional Services Data (2005)
Legend
-- Property Boundary
I
II
I
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
Wetland A
Type 6 Shrub Swamp PSS1 B
38,248 square feet (0.90 Acres)
~~~c:,j
1,_.'.: . .:::'. .::':_'. >>,.!r..<.
\t~:'}~""~~7~{
o
Date: 12-05-0$
N
A
250
500
,Feet
Riverbats Stadium
Delineated Wetland I
Boundal11 Map
I
I Exhibit 6
81. Joseph, Minnesota
Map Document: (P:\20055065.10\gis\20055065wet01A.mxd)
10/6/2005 -- 2:26:05 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I d Pro"essional Services, Inc.
Westwoo "
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
I ",T Saint Cloud, Minnes4o;~ ~~~~~320) 253-8737
, , Phone: (320)-253-9
I
, W twood Professional Services, Inc.
iGl 2005 es
--i
" 'T"-
.005'04
1,
: I
jr-~.""""'"
,r I
, ". . "
1_..... (
./<1:;....-,_.
"?,r ·
., '0'0405002
"',. ~ri~~_1l118~"",
I I \,~.
,~! : \\\
~ I, ',.-;,:"::.....
'\ ..",..'" ..........' "'T"..... ",,_
" ,.1"'--- _'._
...... ... ,~...,"
.... ...'
... ...... S
.. ~, /"i
___lor- I
T !
I ~
I \
,I '\
.J I
I
,," "
" I"
~:.. --., d
..& .....
"I': 'II 11f' ~
I '...
.. I 'I
,
II i
I... ......~...I "II
~~""'~"'.''''''''
"."'''..... .............. J
~'... ...... .
.~~~.....~ I
,..... ...... I..
:--... ~ ... ,J... .F
~""'''ft;''''''''........" "'.._ "
- -... .)'
........... ..............., II
...~..~
I'
,
11Ift
IfiJ8 I
i ,,"
, .
, ,
....-.-..
';;.',,'- ,,--_..
........, .-.....~...... ,"I:i;
J'" "
~
I
II
I
I
I
l
,.
"
f
.
I.
",
'''- I
~lo:o""'L.._ I
......,,,
.
,
~
: .
I
".
\
,
q
" ~
I'
,
i I
'i
(
c-
.......,
~_....
'..
_......'"
iIoro"'.M
i
~
DRG St Joseph (1993)
( ). MGS County Well Index (2002), USGS
Data Source s . 0
Legend
c::J Property Boundary
. Mapped Well Location
..
I
.
300
600
I Feet
Date: 12-05-0~
N
A
Riverbats Stadium
County Well
Index
Exhibit 71
81. Joseph, Minnesota
i
I
t. (P'\20055065.10\9i~\20055065weIl01A.mXd)
Map Documen , . ,
10/6/2005 -- 2:49:14 PM ,
I
,
e 2005 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
I
W)
I
I
I
~_.,
1,)
I
1_\:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I /
ri~t~~,\~~~iJrr)?";~'--/)
i"
i
~
I
+/~
I
Data Source(s): MnDOT Basemap Watershed Mapping (2002) MnDNR Public Water Mapping (Draft Data 2004), USGS DRG St Joseph (1993)
Legend
CJ Property Boundary
( DNR Public Water
C Minor Watershed Boundary
o
2,000
4,000
I Feet
Date: 12-05-05
N
A
I
~
I
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
Riverbats Stadium
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Watershed
Mapping
Exhibit 8 ,
Map Document: (P:\20055065.10Igisl20055065wat01A.mxd)
10/6/2005 --11 :09:00 AM
I iB 2005 Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Legend 0
- Property Boundary
I Mapped Soil Unit
II ~ Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
I
250
500
I Feet
Date: 12-05-05
River Bats Site
Soil Survey
Exhibit 91
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Map Document: (P:120055065.1 OIgis1200550651soil01 A.mxd)
11/8/2005 --11:34:11 AM .
'I "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
DNR Natural Heritage Database Search
I
I
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
I
Natural HcritClKc and Nongame Research Program, Box 25
)'()O LafayetTe Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-40__
Phone: (651) 296-7863 Fax: (651) 296-1811 E-mail: sarah.hoffmann@dnr.state.mn.us
I
August 12,2005
I
Mr. Matthew Vollbrecht
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St. Cloud, MN 56303
I
I
Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Riverbats Baseball Stadium,
T124N R29W Section 11, Stearns County
NHNRP Contact #:ERDB 20060136
Dear Mr. Vollbrecht,
I
I
The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant ot
animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mi~e
radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review~ there
are no known occurrences of rare species or native plant communities in the area searched.
The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research
Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources. It is
continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source uf data on
Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, native plant communities, and other natural feature~. Its
purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. .
Because our informaiion is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or
otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county-by-
county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Stearns County. . Our
information about native plant communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However,
because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on-
site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records D;Jay
exist on the project area. ,
Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuse~ only
on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources
a.s a whol~ If you require further information on the envirqnmental review process for other natural.
resource-related issues, you may contact your Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Mike North,
at (218) 828-2433.
An invoice in the amount of $116.07 will be mailed to you under separate cover within two weeks
of the date of this letter. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review.
Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natur~l
resources.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sincerely,
I
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 .
~~~
".-
fr;f..- Sarah D. Hoftmann
Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator
1-888-646-6367 . TTY: 651-296-5484 . 1-800-657-3929
I
I
An Equal Opportunity Einployer
^ Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
,..... Minilllulll of 1011< Post-Consumer Waste
'I "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
Wetland Delineation Approval
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
#875-8898
COUNTY
STEA~NS
OF
&~ SewUe4 7)~
Administration Center Rm 343 · 705 Courthouse Square. St. Cloud, MN 56303
320-656-3613 . Fax 320-656-6484 · 1-800-450-0852
September 29,2005
Chris Haak
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th St North, Suite 206
St. Cloud MN 56303
Dear Mr. Haak:
RE: River Bats Stadium Site/Lahr, ESD File #31-05-002
The Wetland Delineation Report completed by Westwood Professional Services in September 2005 for
the River Bats Site located in Section 11, T 124N, R29W, Steams County, was received in Steams
County Environmental Services Department on September 28,2005. The wetland boundaries wen, field
checked by staff from the Environmental Services Department on July 11, 2005.
The Environmental Services Department found the wetland boundaries as determined in the W etlan~
Delineation Report dated September 2005 and as staked are accurate. The report and delineation fol'ow
the guidelines as set out in the 1987 U.S. Corps Wetland Delineation Manual. The wetland bounda*es
should be surveyed and included in the final plat. Steams County agrees with the finding stated in the
Delineation Report that the wetland in the northeast comer of the property was caused by gravel mining
and is incidental.
Wetland draining, filling and excavation activities are regulated by the Minnesota Wetland Conservl'ltion
Act. Please be advised that draining, filling or excavation of wetland areas is not allowed without first
obtaining the proper permits. Please note also that Steams County Zoning Ordinance 209 requires t~at all
lots created after January 27,2005 require minimum building setbacks from Types 3, 4, and 5 wetlands of
fifty (50) feet and twenty five feet (25) from all other wetlands.
Sincerely,
Susan McGuire
Steams County Environmental Specialist
Cc: Mike Gohman, Gohman Construction
"Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer"
I
1.--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
190 FIFTH STREET EAST
ST. PAUL, MN 55101-1638
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
Operations
Regulatory (2005-6615- YSB)
November 11,2005
Mr. Chris Haak
Westwood Professional Service, Inc.
3701 lih Street North, Suite 206
St. Clous, Minnesota 56303
Dear Mr. Haak:
This is in response to your memo dated September 28, 2005 addressed to Stearns County
Environmental Services regarding a wetland delineation on the River Bats Stadium Site in the SE
~ Sec. 11, T. 124 N., R. 29 W., Stearns County, Minnesota.
We have reviewed the wetland delineation report you provided and concur that the
wetland boundary on the property has been established in accordance with the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) and is adequate to establish the limits of
Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act jurisdiction. This wetland delineation shall remain valid for
a period offive years from the date of this letter, unless new information warrants revision of the
delineation before the expiration date.
i
It is recommended that the delineated wetland boundary be surveyed and identified qn
any development plans prepared for this property. .
Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Corps of Engineers has regulatory
jurisdiction over the discharge of dredged and fill materials, including discharges associated with
mechanical land clearing, in all waters of the United States, which includes most wetlands.
Please note that work performed below the ordinary high water mark in waters of th~
United States, or the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands, without a Departme~t of
the Army permit could subject you to enforcement action.
This letter is valid only for the project referenced above. If any change in design,
location, or purpose is contemplated, contact this office to avoid doing work that may be in
violation of Federal law. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS CONFIRMATION LETTER DOES
NOT ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR STATE, LOCAL, OR OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS, I
SUCH AS THOSE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OR COUNTY~
If you disagree with this jurisdictional determination, you may provide new informati;on.
Please follow the directions in Section D of the enclosed Notification of Administrative Appeal
Options and Process and Request for Appeal.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CEMVP-OP-R (2005-6615-YSBI) - 2-
Thank you for your cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulatory
program. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Yvonne Berner in our St. Paul District
office at (651) 290-5365. In any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the Regulatory
number shown above.
Sincerely,
Copy furnished:
Stearns County
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: River Bats Stadium Site IFile Number: 2005-6615 Date: 11/11/05
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of Permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of Permission) i B
PERMIT DENIAL ,- C
X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information may be found at http://usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwo/reg or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. i
A. INITIAL PROFERRED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
· ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the distribt engineer for
final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is iauthorized.
Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance ofthe LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive
all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approve jurisdictional determinations associated with
the permit.
· OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to th~ district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, ~r you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will eval~ate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address s'ome of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B. PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit.
· ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the distri~t engineer for
final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is 'authorized.
Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entir~ty, and waive
all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations ~ssociated with
the permit.
· APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions
therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing
Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
C. PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial ofa permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative!Appeal Process
by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be receiyed by the
division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D. APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD 011 provide new
information.
· ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of
the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
· APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps ofEngtneers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division en&ineer. This
form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. i
E. PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the CorpS!
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approv~d JD (which
may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further
consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
I
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
IREASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an
initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your
Ireasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lDDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record
of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the
Idministrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However,. you may provide
dditional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. .
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION !
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal If you only have questions regarding the appeal processlyou may also
rocess you may contact: contact:
I
I
Division Engineer
c/o Martha S. Chieply, Appeal Review Office
CEMVD
P. O. Box 80
Vicksburg, MS 39181-0080
Tele hone (651) 290-5365 Tele hone (601) 634-5820
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government donsultants, to
onduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site
. vestigation, and will have the 0 ortunity to artici ate in all site investi ations.
Date:
Yvonne Berner
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
190 E. 5th Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Telephone number:
'ignature of appellant or agent.
I
I
. I "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX C
State Historic Preservation Office Letter
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
P~ge 1 of2
Matt Vollbrecht
From: Cinadr, Thomas [thomas.cinadr@mnhs.org)
Sent: Friday, July 29,20057:15 AM
To: Matt Vollbrecht
Subject: RE: EAW data search
Attachments: Historic.doc
No archaeological sites were identified in a search of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historip
Structures Inventory for the search area requested. A report containing the historic properties identified is
attached.
The result of this database search provides a listing of recorded archaeological sites and historic architectural
properties that are included in the current SHPO databases. Because the majority of archaeological sites! in the
state and many historic architectural properties have not been recorded, important sites or structures ma~ exist
within the search area and may be affected by development projects within that area. Additional research,
including field survey, may be necessary to adequately assess the area's potential to contain historic properties.
With regard to Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EAW), a negative known site/structure response from the
SHPO databases is not necessarily appropriate information on which to base a "No" response to EAW Question
25a. It is the Responsible Governmental Unit's (RGU) obligation to verify the accuracy of the information
contained within the EAW. A "No" response to Question 25a without written justification should be carefully
considered.
If you require a comprehensive assessment of a project's potential to impact archaeological sites or historic
architectural properties, you may need to hire a qualified archaeologist and/or historian. Please contact thra SHPO
by phone at 651~296~5462 or by email at mnshpo@mnhs.org for current lists of prof~ssional consultants in these
fields.
Tom Cinadr
Survey and Information Management Coordinator
Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office
Minnesota Historical Society
345 Kellogg Blvd. West
St. Paul, MN 55102
651~205~4197 (voice)
651-282~237 4 (fax)
--~--Original Message-~~--
From: Matt Vollbrecht [mailto:Matt.Vollbrecht@westwoodps.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 28,20053:22 PM
To: Cinadr, Thomas
11/8/2005
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 2 of2
Subject: EAW data search
Tom, I am working on an EA W for a proposed development located in the SW Y4 ofthe SE
Y4 Section 11 T124N, R29W, Saint Joseph Township, Stearns County, Minnesota and was
hoping you could check your data base and see if there are any archeological or historic
records for that section. Thanks
Matthew Vollbrecht, Environmental Scientist
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
3701 12th Street North, Suite 206
St Cloud, MN 56303
(320) 229-2311 direct
emai/: mattvollbrecht@westwoooPs.com
Website: www.westwoodps.com
11/8/2005
'I "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX D
Stadium Lighting Study
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.Q '"' ,0.0"; ,Q.':>.o'p
... ... .... ... .... ... <> H "
. ,......
PPPPP>'''',<>,Pp
.. .., .~ .. ... '" 0:> '" '"
. . . . . . . . .
PP;;>PI>P."'PP
" <> '" ... '" '" '" " " "
,Q .J ,C' ,.; ...; p .J
... ... " '" '" (, <>
,';' ,..: ,0 .0 .': ,.; p
.. .. ... <> " " CO
. . . . . .
.".'>.0." ,0."'."
.e ..:. ..b .,;, ~ ,'; P
.. ... ., ... ,., CO .,
,0 ,; ,0 ,J ,0
,0 p ,; ,0
, , , ,; p ,0 ,0
, , , p , 0 ,
p
" ,0 .0 ,;
,0 p ,0 ,; p
" p " , , ,
e ;. , " " p ,.;
,"
p p , " ," ,.;
,^
p p " " , , ,
," " p " , ,
,J ," " ,"
. , , ,0 p p
" p ,"
I
,"
~ '" <> <> " <> " <> <> <> " ,..0 ,.,.....
. . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . .
." ." ,0 ,p .p "" ,'" ,'" p .'" ." .p .'" po .'" "" ," p ,<> ....
., "' " " '" " <> " " <> " " " <> ,., ~ " ... " "
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~
," ,<> ." .p J.' ,p ,<> p p ,<> ,<> p ,p .r> ,'" .<> p p t' ,"
<> '<> <> " " " <> " " " ... " '" " ... ~ .. ., ... ,~
.<: ,-; .,,; ,,: ,; ~ ,,; .,; ,; ,.0 ,e. ...; i~ ..: ,.; P .Q .... ,; .;
" " " ., " " "-' '" " ." " " " "'.... ......
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
." ,<> ,<> .P ." '<' ,0 ,<> ,'" .<' ." ,p ." ,'" P ,'" ." ," ,<> "
'" " <> " <> " '" '" " 0 0 " '" " " " ,~ ., ... ...
. . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
I
" " " " " " " 0 <> '" <> <> " ,~ <> <> " " " " '" " ..
I
I
I
I
,0
"
p
,0
,0
"
,0
,;
p
p
p
I
-, " " " " " <> <> <> " " <> " co <> <> '" " " '" <> <> ., ....
.0 ,0 .p ,<i .,; .d ,'; ,..; ,0 p p' ,'; ,,; .: .P ,<1 .p .0 ,'; .'~ ,0 .0 ,o.p p
<.> <;> <> <> '" <> <> <> '" '" '" " <> <> " <> <> '" '" <> Q " n
,0
I
~
,0
p
p
,0
p
'1 "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX E
Noise Study
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
St. Joseph, Minnesota
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Draft Concert and Fireworks Noise Impact
Assessment
SBP Associates, Inc.
November, 2005
Page 1
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Page 2
. For infrequent large-scale fireworks events, the ballpark should involve the
neighborhoods in planning and scheduling. At a minimum a notice should be
provided to all neighbors prior to such events.
. Ifmore frequent small-scale fireworks (e.g. during and after ballgames) are
planned, the ballpark should limit the noise level and duration of the ftreworks.
The City may want to adopt a standard such as the State gun club rule for frequent
events.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I. Summary and Conclusions
This report presents an analysis of the noise impacts that concerts and ftreworks events
could have at the proposed River Bats Stadium, LLC ballpark in St. Joseph, Minnesota.
The analysis is based on data from published studies, noise monitoring conducted at the
proposed site, and noise monitoring conducted near Midway Stadium in St. Paul during a
Saints baseball game and ftreworks event.
The study concludes that both the fireworks and concert events have the potential to
cause significant noise impacts at area residences if not controlled.
The report makes the following recommendations:
A. Concerts
. The stadium and site should be designed to assure that a continuous structure or
combination of structures and barriers or berms will break the line of site between
the local residences and the sound system. Trees and shrubs are not effective
sound barriers.
. A "house" sound system provided by the ballpark should be considered for
concerts.
. The ballpark should provide a sound "engineer" for all performances.
. The ballpark should involve the neighborhood in planning and scheduling of
concerts.
. A neighborhood noise monitoring system should be considered for use during
concert events.
B. Fireworks
II. Project Description and Location
River Bats Stadium LLC is proposing to construct a baseball park in 8t. Joseph,
Minnesota. In addition to baseball games, the proposed facility may also host music
concerts and fireworks events. 8BP Associates, Inc. (8BP) has been contracted to assess
the potential noise impacts of these events.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
St. Joseph, Minnesota
The proposed project site is located on the eastern part of the City of St. Joseph, and is
bordered by a residential area to the west, Highway 75 to the north, a residence and open
land to the east, and open land to the south. Attachment A contains a site location map, an
aerial photo, and a proposed site plan for the facility.
Page 3
III. Noise Descriptors
A number of different descriptors are used to describe noise levels. This report will refer
to the following descriptors.
. dB
. dBA
· LlO
· Lso
· Leq
A dB, or decibel is the basic unit of measurement for sound. A dBA is a unit of sound
level expressed in decibels and weighted for the purpose of approximating the human
response to sound. Ifthe term "decibel" is not further qualified, it will mean dBA in this
report. LlO means the sound level (dB A) which is exceeded for 10 percent of the time for
a one-hour period. Lso means the sound level (dBA) which is exceeded 50 percent ofthe
time for a one-hour period. Leq is essentially the average sound level measured over a
defined period of time. In this report it is understood to be the hourly Leq unless otherwise
specified.
IV. Minnesota Noise Rules
Minnesota Rules Chapter 7030 provide the Minnesota standards for noise. These
standards describe the limiting levels of sound established on the basis of present
knowledge for the preservation of health and welfare. These standards are designed to be
consistent with sleep, speech, annoyance, and hearing conservation requirements for
receivers within areas grouped according to land use activities. The Minnesota standards
are as follows:
7:00 AM to 10:00 PM 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM
LlO Lso LlO Lso
NAC-l ("Residential") 65 60 55 50
NAC-2 ("Commercial") 70 65 70 65
NAC-3 ("Industrial") 80 75 80 75
These standards recognize that the impact of noise on humans is based on both the level
and duration of the noise.
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Page 4
. The sound system used for the performance
. The type of music to be performed
. The design of the venue relative to its ability to control noise impacts.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
V. Existing Noise Levels
In order to define the existing noise levels near the proposed facility, SBP conducted
random monitoring at two project area locations. The results of the monitoring are as
follows:
Table 1
St. Joseph Ballpark Noise Study
Project Area Noise Monitoring Results
Monitoring LlO Lso Leq
Location
Site 1 61.0 56.5 52.0
Site 2 55.5 52.5 49.5
The monitoring locations and statistical summaries of the monitoring results are provided
in Attachment B. The main source of noise at both locations was traffic on Highway 75.
The levels measured are within the standards (NAC-2) for location of an entertainment
venue such as a ballpark.
VI. Concert Noise Impacts
A. Potential Concert Noise Impacts
The potential impact area of a musical concert depends on a number of factors, and can
be significant. For example, a study for a proposed amphitheatre in Minnesota estimated
that the uncontrolled impact of a large concert could cause noise levels above the State
nighttime standard to distances of well beyond 2 miles from the venue.! The actual
impact area of a concert can be much less, and will depend on a number of factors.
B. Actual Concert Impact Considerations
Accurately defining the impact of musical performances at the proposed ballpark will
depend on:
1 "Noise Study of QPrime Amphitheater" AGC Developments Inc., 2004, prepared for Scott County. The
calculation estimated the potential impact area relative to the nighttime standards to be 15,500 feet from the
venue. This is based on a noise level of 105 dBA at the mixing station, 80 feet in front of the stage. This
simplified calculation assumed dispersion as a simple point source, and did not include the impacts of any
intervening barriers or structures, did not include any reduction due to atmospheric absorption, and did not
include any reduction for ground absorption.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
St.Joseph,~innesota
1. Sound System
If every performer is to supply its own sound system for performances, there is little
control that can be maintained of the level of noise generated and its potential impact.
The impact ofthe noise on area neighbors is ultimately determined by the location of
individual speakers and the volume level of the system.
Page 5
2. Type of ~usic
The type of music, in many cases, significantly impacts the level of noise generated and
therefore the impact on area receptors. The reason for this is based on crowd
expectations. However, it is frequently the case that a crowd is surprised by the high
levels of sound chosen by some performers. Because of its location adjacent to a
residential area, a number of noise studies have been conducted at the Chastain
Amphitheater in Atlanta, Georgia. A recently published study focused on the low
frequency (The study argues that the 63 Hz octave band sound level provides the best
indication of potential annoyance ofthe adjacent neighbors) noise level impact of 17
separate concerts at the facility. As measured at the rear ofthe amphitheater, the results
ranged from a Nancy Wilson concert during which all but 12 one minute Leq levels did
not exceed 70 dB, to a Heart concert during which 13 one-minute Leq's exceeded 95 dB
and over one hour of one-minute Leq's exceeded 90 dB.2
3. Venue Design
Proper design of the venue (in this case the ballpark grandstand and the performance
stage) is critical to limiting the noise impact and therefore allowing for the greater variety
of performances. Key among these factors is the ability of the grandstand, fences, and the
stage to act as noise barriers. In order for an obstacle to be an effective sound barrier, it
must completely block the site line between the noise source and the receiver. Even a
small opening in the site line will drastically reduce the effectiveness ofthe barrier. For
example, open back bleachers would offer no significant noise reduction. Similarly, a
grandstand with open entrances allowing receivers a view of the noise sources (speakers)
would also offer limited noise reduction benefit.
c. St. Joseph Ballpark Noise Impact Example
Using a number of assumptions, SBP estimated the impact that a concert with a 105 dBA
limitation at 80 feet from the stage would have on the residential area approximately
1000 feet to the west of the proposed site.3 Uncontrolled, this level of noise would results
in noise levels at the residential area of 79 dBA, well above the ~innesota day and night
standards. An additional calculation was done assuming a 30 foot barrier (i.e. the stadium
structure) between the speaker(s) and the residential area. This calculation showed a
resulting noise level of 71 dBA at the residential area, again well above the State daytime
2 Berens, Robert S., Acentech Incorporated, "Another "New" Metric for Outdoor Amphitheater Criteria.",
Presented at NoiseCon 2005, Minneapolis, MN.
3 This calculation assumed spherical spreading from appoint source, did not account for ground absorption
and did not account for any atmospheric absorption. It was assumed that the speaker source was 10 feet of
the ground and that the back of the stadium was enclosed and was 150 feet from the speaker(s). The shape
of the frequency spectrum was assumed to be that used in the QPrime report that was based on data from a
Red Hot Chili Peppers concert.
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
St. Joseph, Minnesota
and nighttime standards. In order to achieve the Sate noise standards, the volume of the
speakers would have to be reduced on the order of 11 dBA for daytime and 21 dBA for
nighttime. This would mean noise levels at the rear of the stadium of about 87 dBA for
daytime and 77 dBA for nighttime. Both levels are adequate for listening to music with
background noise levels on the order of those measured in the area.
Page 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
There is a residence to the east of the proposed site. The proposed stadium structure does
not reduce the impact at this location. If compliance is to be achieved at this location,
volumes must be further reduced or additional barriers will need to be constructed.
D. Other Concert Noise Issues - Audibility and Music Content
The Minnesota standards do not protect from the audibility of unwanted sound signals.
For a noise to hide or mask other noises it must have the same frequency configuration,
and it must also be louder. In particular, low frequencies would be generated by the
proposed amphitheater will be heard above the background levels, even when meeting
the State's standards. The sound produced by concerts will carry lyrics and melodies that
might be offensive to neighbors. The Minnesota standards deal exclusively with the
loudness and duration of the noise.
VII. Fireworks Noise Impact
The potential for significant noise impacts from fireworks is difficult to predict because
of the wide variability of noise levels associated with the multitude of fireworks products
available.
The Minnesota State Noise standards do not address impact noises such as fireworks. The
only State rules that relate to impulse noises at all are the recently promulgated rules for
gun ranges. These rules limit the one-hour Leq at residential receptors near gun clubs to a
maximum of 63 dBA during the day, and 53 dBA at night.
In order to get an idea of the potential noise impact of fireworks presentations at a
ballpark, SBP conducted noise monitoring near Midway Stadium in St. Paul, Minnesota
during a fireworks presentation following a St. Paul Saints baseball game. The fireworks
show lasted approximately five to six minutes and consisted of an intensive presentation
with a large number of loud explosions.4 The measured Leq for this six-minute period was
87 dBA.
The Midway Stadium monitoring results are provided in Attachment C.
If we use the background Leq of 52 dBA as measured at the St. Joseph project area, the
one-hour Leq for a six-minute fireworks display as measured at the Midway stadium event
would be 77 dBA, which is above the daytime and nighttime standard for gun clubs.
4 The monitoring technician counted 283 explosions during the presentation. This is a rough estimate and
included primary and a large number of secondary explosions.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
S1. Joseph, Minnesota
The gun club standard is presented for comparison purposes only and would not apply to
fireworks displays. There has been only limited experience with this standard so its
relationship to annoyance to residents is not completely understood. The City would have
authority to develop its own standard and limitations.
Page 7
The fact that the Midway Stadium fireworks display was well over the standard for gun
clubs does suggest that fireworks displays at the proposed ballpark will have to be limited
in some way in order to not cause annoyance at the adjacent residences. This could
include restrictions on the duration and noise level of the displays as well as on the time
of day that they could be used.
VIII. Recommendations
Because both the concerts and fireworks events have the potential to cause significant
impacts on noise levels at adjacent residences, the following potential mitigation
measures are recommended.
A. Concerts
. The stadium and site should be designed to assure that a continuous structure or
combination of structures and barriers or berms will break the line of site between
the local residences and the sound system. Trees and shrubs are not effective
sound barriers.
. A "house" sound system provided by the ballpark should be considered for
concerts.
. The ballpark should provide a sound "engineer" for all performances.
. The ballpark should involve the neighborhood in planning and scheduling of
concerts.
. A neighborhood noise monitoring system should be considered for use during
concert events.
B. Fireworks
. For infrequent large-scale fireworks events, the ballpark should involve the
neighborhoods in planning and scheduling. At a minimum a notice should be
provided to all neighbors prior to such events.
. If more frequent small-scale fireworks (e.g. during and after ball games) are
planned, the ballpark should limit the noise level and duration of the fireworks.
The City may want to adopt a standard such as the State gun club rule for frequent
events.
,
'I ,~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Attachment B
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
Background Noise 'Monitoring Results
It
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
River Bats. Ball Park, LLC - Background Noise Monitoring Locations
Legend
County
NAIP _2003
D{)Q_ 1 M
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
u
I ~
I ~
~
~
I ~
~
I
I
11/10/2005 05:54
5515399578
AL PEREZ
PA!3E 04
t
o
o
i \ j I : i I i 1\1 Go
\ i ill ' I 1 I ill i III .
I I i II II' I I I , 1 I l : i ~
I ! , ; : ' , ; I I I I
I' 1 II I' j II I ; : I I : : ' , I ! . . I I J1
~ -l,.: I I I ; I
~ a\ 1 \ ~. -...--
H- - . .
'AI - ....;.-1.- ... .
. +- 111 , I! Il'
I I II ! III I \ \ I \
\ J j I i \ I
1+ I , , I -n I,
~ ~ J , I! . I i I :.1 T . I
I,..i.. \g , ~ I , I I
" : \ .. . I i
:1: I i -+ I
~
..:t: ,
- '0 J
~ 1 -
- ~ ~
~ = ~
.. Iii;)
~ a i: ,J II!
I
I
,
....
, .
. ,
- .
~. ...~ ;,...:,h.
,....:::Lt. "I
- -
.
-:. ' .......
...,...
. .
. , ......
. .
"'t""T"' -
~ .
: .. .
- "I'
..
!
. ..k I ., .
+
, -
.....+ !
,
11 I' ~ I ,
-l-
I j: I
I
! I
i
I
II"
. . .....
..
.
.. I
t ,
\I:
:
.
i
:
~
6
ci
...
c;.
a
.
t
..
l
...
a
...
Ci
...
d
t
..
...
D
UI
a
IU
IU
U
1Mt
III
a:
o
CI
III
....
..
:.
g
III
!!
ii:
"
110
-
'"
on
..
on
2:
!l
o
..
R
~
~
i
r:
!
C
.,
u
:I
~
II
C
o
.
0:.
lI\
(I
on
o
'"
o
..
Ii
~
Ii:
<>
It
2
o
...
on
~
,.
..
t
....
c;.\
...
o'
o
....
Q
o
t
=
~
I
.....
=
0'1
. 0
ClO l-
~
:tl
=
.....
'1:tA:l'1 Ol\HlOS .yap
\J
~
I
-<
~
~
11/10/2005 06:54
6516399578
AL PEREZ
.
PAGE 05
o
o
i \ I _ Illl i l i i I! 11 : III I! I I:
I T . . I ; l ~ I II . ~ l !
; ~ : , I i I I I' , , , : , : ' I ,I II' 1, i
: I. J 1" ! ; , I -I'll
1 \1 I' : I I : . . .
, , I I : . .
~ rJ . ~I f-+- f-o'.---,-
~ Ij " . .
liv:\., ... ....,."'- .:
1\ ' I I I \ I 1 i I TIll 1 !
~ j ~, ! I 1 I ,
J t I I
1. -, , 1,1 I' , 1 I
~ ~ , I! I
l:: ~ ~ .:..: . . . I ' . ,
, , '
...,. ~ .....;:;;;; I
J I
.,i. 'Q ~
ro+ - ~ ~
~ ~ ~ !:: J I
~ ..
1-. .. ~ i
~ 5 ~ J j
P" I
I
,
I
,
,
, .
. .
T- - . .
...... ~.
'-T' ...;..
.............
, -
, _. th+
-r
. . . .
..
, , . .
::1- -+-
- ~
~. -
. - -
-
.
-+ I-t. . t.
T ' I
I I T
- - .to f
. i -+-l-
, , ,
! -I II i I
.j.
I 1 I i I I
I 11
. . ,
,
-
i
..
t
I:
fl
o
iii
d
~
cS
..,
Q
...
III
!!
2
co
...
co
..
Q
"I
~
~
<:I
.
co
...
~
-
.
B:
l
~
i
...
.
~
i
e
r-
~
=
-.n
131\3.1 Ql\1flOS 'VAP
J:
I
I
I
I
...
.:
..
.
t
z:
.
...
~I
w
w
u
:1
o
c
~I
o
Iao
~
2
i
=1
..
~
..
il
<
III
!I
II
!I
c
~
:1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
i
o
VI
c;>
..
~
2
~
.,
,.
...
d
coo
o
~
~
cO
Ii
o
=
~
,
I ,"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Attachment C
River Bats Ballpark, LLC
Midway Stadium Noise Monitoring
Results
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
River Bats Ball Park, LLC - Midway Stadium Noise Monitoring Locations
Legend
County
NAIP _2003
DCQ_1M
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
Ie
Is
~
I~
m
I
I
. '
11/10/2005 06:54
65163'39578
AL PEREZ
PAGE 02
o
eo
t
..
..
III
o
;~ :-: I j r I 1 I ' : I I I . I ' ' ' ~ i ~ i i: ! I I' i I ' I' i I I , II i ;1 il i I il t ' I
. , I; r! I I I I _ 1.J......... 1\
T ...... , ,1-1 II I: I . ,T It! i
" , . i i i ~1 il . i J j ; : I, ! I,
-+- - ~ ~ J I . . : I I' I
-to. t,n , ' . ,
~ j ~ .., h-~'- ...
- . .
~ J J T:! I ,. I I I ! ! , I 111 1 j II I Ii I
,.J.. ~ , ~ 1 , ", , . I . , I: I I
..... " ' ' ' I I , I, i I I'i I' . I i I .
ft .~ ~ 0' j . ' ~ ' I I
, .
r" t
..... 1 -t: N J ' ,
0'"' ". ~ lj
..... r-..
~
& liS !
~ '*
,:::l oJ l I
\ I
I
I .
,
,
,
-
I . . ,
,
, "
,
---
~. ... "" .. ..,...;..,
... ....rt-'t- ... =-r...... ~--- ,
~ ....
. ........
.' + to
I . .
.,.,... . +-- ,
~..J..-,...... t
, . ...... . i
I ~ "'t"T , ,
.. o '~::r ,
...-.-- .
..... . ... .I~- .
. ,
o -I- '0 -1";- ~. ..
, ++- H+ '
++H- ......,i. 'f - t r+i-+7 ' t I !
, :
! I ! I i. , I
J.
. i \ I i I
, I ! 1
. I
.
, .
" ..
! I
5.
o
...
eo
o
..
i
;.l
..
cI
..
t
...
e:
It Q
III
Q
..
III
~
~ III
II:
0
i Cl
III
..I
C
::;,
0
a III
!
,.j
e ILl
>
III
,.j
, CI
Z
:;I
lit 0
W
ILl
0 !
""
...
~ II.
0
...
z
2 III
lJ
II:
III
Go
~ "
1ft
...
g
2
$;
o
....
a
...
~
~
i
e
"
.
..
...
t
VI
Ci
...
Q
.
..
..
..
::
;
~
Q
I:
a:
I
I :e
'IM!1 aNIlOS .VllP
$
~
= =
..". ~
8
....
~
I
~
~ '--'-'- i-"' ...j .....
"''---~ ~.. . ,..,,11/',. 4. t-+..' 0 ~-H
,"r--- .~.~..... ttt'"
1: .~..... , ~ rl-
..;... +- r.-..-z:: "':'t. ... _+ i-j ~ .
-"...,- .:. - ~-+-.... -I:;..t::t. I...... -I
, ~ _...~ f::' .~+ .rt-'.... .~
11/10/2005 06:54
6516399578
o
co I ~ i I j I I I I : I '!' I
~ i 1 ~. ~ \ I
o ,.t ~ '- ~ J j
d:~~~~~
... :.: -1~ t ~ J 1.
p ~~, ~ ~ ~ .1
" ~if3.!J
OIl
s:
~
Sil
D
... "t.
1;1
...
Co ~-.
....
Q
.
..+
R
i
l'
,
....1.. -
.m: ! i: i
I l
H t- .... .~
I, I:
II '
II I
I I
, 1 i '
. '
, ,
....
..........""1 '
;:t-.,:;:=.' ~.~ +='T: .~~-::..'.
..~ 'rJ .. . .::-- -:.-:
.-... .....:1
o
..
l'
:
IJ
I i
8:
-
t
...,
l
~
I
..
.J. ,
":J .
I I '..,...
do'~~ -<-to .
. l' .......... - -~ I
, I I ! I 'i,
1+i, i; I 11 I I
,; I: i I I 11 !
o
0'\
.
oe
AL PEREZ
.
PAGE 03
.
at
i:, I ~.~: \11 'i~ 'ill ,iii Illll!11 i il t:
_...;.~ 1 .
iil II~' .1'1' 4~ Ii; ;:1 I .1 ":1
....
"""-+.... :.......
! l II I f I I ! t i' I I i I I I
I
. "
l ,.
, : : I I
I I' I
I "
! I
!
1..1
: fl
n
I
I
I
4-.-
+J.+ or
-+-+
"i
'f
.......
."
..
.t -r1=~ .
......
'f.
~.. -
or......
~ ..1..
I
'-t-tt m~ ~ t: +f..j~~,. -t-L'
-iit 1 t- ,: +.
! I.... J ' I I
. I I I
J ; I
=
l'
s
~
c
~
1'1.A'I'l Q}llJ)OS IV8P
..
t
,
I
I
I
.
.,;
I .
t
-
.
~I
....
'"
u
:1
o
il
tAl
~I
,.
1&.1
~
!I
(I)
!I
II.
o
el
lI:
:,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
i
R
i
~
. t~
o
...
M
~
~
1ft
...
'"
c:i
...
o
-
c>
...
crt
ci
&
o
=
~
I."
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX F
Traffic Study
I. '
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
DRAFT
Appendix F
RiverBats Baseball Stadium
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Traffic Analysis
Prepared by
Westwood Professional Services, In~.
!
for
Gohman Construction Company,
St. Joseph, Minnesot$
November 22, 2005
Table of Contents
I ntrod uction .............................................................................................. II.............................................................. 1
Site Description................................................................................... 0 . " . .. . ... . . . . .. . . . ... ...1
Access .......................................................................................................................... 1
Seating....................................................................................................................... ...1
Events..................................... ............................................................................... .......1
Parking Capacity........................................................................................................... 1
Existing Conditions...... 11.11...... ... ....... .... ..... .... Ill.... III ....... ....... .... .... III Ill.. .... ...... III ... III 4
Lane Geometry.............................................................................................................4
Traffic Volumes....................... ....... ................ ........................ ......................... 0.............4
Traffic Analysis.............................................................................................. o. .............7
Analysis of Future Conditions .................................................................7
Trip Generation............................................................................................ 0................ 7
Trip Distribution............................................................................................... 0 0............8
Traffic Assignment.................. ......................................................................... ...........0.8
Traffic Analysis - Synchro .. 0.................. ............... 0.............. ......... 0.......0. ...... ......... 0" ..13
Delay......... 0 0 0 0... 0 0" 0 0........... 0.......0....... 0.0...... 0 0.........0.... 0 0..0000...0........ 0... 0.... 0.00.....0........... '" 0..13
Traffic Analysis - SimTraffic ... ....... ........ ............... .................... ....................... ......... ..14
Queues. 0......... 0" 0... 0.........0........ 0" 0....................... 0 0........ 0 0.................. 0..... 0 0..0...... 0 0.......0... 0014
Delay.. 0" 0................ 0" 0.................. 0 0....... 0...........0.............. 0" 0......... 0 0 0..00..... 0...............000..... .15
Conclusions III III ... .... .... .... III ... Ill.. ...... ... ............. ..................... ..... ... III ... ... III ..... Ill.. II 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Introduction
The purpose of this traffic analysis is to assess the traffic implications of the proposed RiverBats
baseball stadium on the surrounding external street network.
This EAW traffic analysis addresses the impact of pre- and post-game traffic expected to be
generated by the stadium.
Site Description
The stadium site is located in St. Joseph, Minnesota, south of C.S.A.H. 75 and east of 88th
Avenue South. The proposed stadium location is shown in Figure F-1.
Access
Vehicles will enter the site traveling southbound on the south leg of the intersection of C.S.A.H.
75 and 88th Avenue South. Two on-site parking lots will be provided, as shown on the site plan
in Figure F-2. Vehicles will have access to the east or west sides of the primary parking lot ~ear
the stadium and from the west to the smaller east lot. Overflow parking will also be provide~
west of 88th Avenue and north of the stadium. I
Exiting vehicles will leave the stadium area via C.S.A.H. 75 at either 88th Avenue or Street B,
located to the east of 88th Avenue. Exiting vehicles at Street B will be restricted to a right-turn
only movement towards St. Cloud.
Seating
The seating capacity of the proposed stadium is 3,400 seats.
Events
The baseball stadium is expected to host 36 home games per year. The typical start time for
weekday evening games is 7:00 P.M. During the last season, 34 of 36 games started at this
time. Two games a year typically take place on Saturday afternoon beginning at 2:00 P.M.
Parking Capacity
The stadium grounds will include parking capacity for 945 vehicles in two lots, as shown in tile
table below, with overflow parking available to accommodate an additional 131 vehicles wes~ of
88th Avenue and to the north of the main stadium parking. A total of 1,076 parking spaces are
planned. .
Table F-1
Parking Space Availability
Location Number of
Available Spaces
West Lot 762
East Lot 183
Overflow Lot 131
Total 1,076
Page 1
Figure F-1
Site Location Map
@ 2005 Westwood Professional Servicas, Inc.
40.
.
.
,,' \VAITE"'P'"
. I , . . I I . t .
.'. I,' I I I..... I 't 'p()f", 6,568. I.
I I . I I I f I I , . I I I I
. . I I I . I . I I . . I . . I
I I I I I . , . . . . . , 1 I I
I I , . I . I I I I I I I I I
I , I I . ~ I I I I I I I I . I
. , . . I , I . I I . . I I .
I . . I . I I I . . . I . I . .
. I I . I . . I I . . . . .. I
. . . I I . . . I . . I , I I I
. . . I . . . I. I . I . . I
I If' I . I . . .
Data Source(s): MnDOT County Map Series Staarns (2002)
N
A
Legend
- Property Boundary
o
4,000
Date: 12-05-05
8,000
. Feet
I'~_ Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
~ 'f 370112th Street North, Suite 206
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56303
Phone: (320)-253-9495 Fax: (320) 253-8737
Riverbats Stadium
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Site Location I
Figure F-I
Map Docu:nent (P:\20055065. 1o.gs\200550651oc01 Amxd)
101612005 - 2:21:29 PM
Page 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure F~2
Site Plan
I
I
0,
".
'<'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
h
'1\
'k
~,
~"---
I
I
I
I
I
I
_____Lu_
I
......::::*"1,"1:
~COfw.l
Page 3
Existing Conditions
The existing conditions analysis was limited to C.S.A.H. 75 and 88th Avenue South.
Lane Geometry
The roadway geometry at C.S.A.H. 75 and 88th Avenue, shown in Figure F-3, is identical in
both directions, including two through lanes, a left-turn lane and a right-turn lane. The south legl
of 88th Avenue has a single approach lane for left, through and right-turning vehicles. The north
leg has a single lane to accommodate left and through vehicles and a dedicated right-turn lane.
Figure F-3
Analysis Network Lane Geometry
Traffic Volumes
The proposed stadium site is presently undeveloped. To assess current operations in the study
area, peak period turning movement counts were conducted at the intersection of C.S.A.H. 7S
and 88th Avenue on a Wednesday evening (corresponding to the pre-game time period) and a
Saturday afternoon and evening (corresponding to Saturday pre-game and post-game time
periods) in the Fall of 2005.
The base count condition for the weekday post-game scenario occurring at 10:00 P.M. was
developed by applying appropriate factors from available 24-hour counts in the area to the pr1e-
game count.
Figures F-4 and F-5 show the pre-game and post-game peak hour volumes for the weekday
and Saturday, respectively.
Page 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure F-4
Existing Turning Movement Counts - Weekday
60J'l
O~
O~
16J'
~
O~
"'-12
f--()
cD
~~t
......
(J)
~
Ci5
Pre-Game Peak Hour
"'-12
~
f"O Lancer Street
~!t
<5. 0-.....:,
8~
0)
CD
...
CJ)
~
Ci5
Post-Game Peak Hour (Estimated)
Page 5
Q)
~
Ci5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure F-5
Existing Turning Movement Counts - Saturday
"-8
~
rO Lancer Street
4Y
()--)
~
~~t
Pre-Game Peak Hour
CD v
YJ't
6a-J'
o~
O~
"-8
f-()
rO Lancer Street
1!t
-
Q)
Q)
L..
Ci5
Post-Game Peak Hour
Page 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Traffic Analysis
The intersection of C.S.A.H. 75 1 88th Avenue is controlled by a traffic signal, while the 88th \
Avenue 1 Lancer Street intersection is controlled by a 2-way stop for the eastbound and .
westbound directions. Intersection Level of Service analyses were computed for both the I
Wednesday and Saturday counts using the methodologies spelled out in the Highway Capacity
Manual. Table F-2 summarizes the results of these capacity analyses.
Table F-2
Capacity Analysis for Existing Conditions
Signalized Intersection Analysis
Weekday Saturday
Intersection Pre-Game Post-Game Pre-Game Post-Game
Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay I LOS
C.S.A.H. 75 & 88th Ave. 10.0 I A 7.61 A 9.61 A 10.9 I B
Stop Sign Analysis
Cr"tical Movement LOS (1)
I
Weekday Saturday
Intersection Critical Pre-Game Post-Game Pre-Game Post-Game
Movement
Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay I LQS
88th Ave. & Lancer St. EBL 9.51 A 8.91 A 9.21 A 9.4/A
TI r Delay and LOS were determined using HCM 2000 methodologies in Synchro and are given for the critical movement of the
intersection.
Analysis of Future Conditions
The future conditions with the stadium in place were analyzed using a traditional multi-step
traffic forecast and analysis process. The major steps in this process include:
. developing trip generation,
. deriving the direction of approach,
. assigning site generated traffic to the surrounding roadway network, and
. analyzing development-related traffic impacts.
The analysis focused on the forecasted peak hour of stadium traffic during the pre- and post-
game conditions. To account for the unbalanced traffic demands caused by the stadium, peak
hour traffic was divided into 15-minute periodS to fully consider the impacts of these traffic
volumes.
Trip Generation
The number of trips to the stadium was assumed to equal the total number of available parking
spaces. The two lots on the stadium grounds contain 945 spaces and the overflow lot to the
northwest contains another 131 spaces, for a total of 1,076.
Page 7
Fan arrival and departure patterns were provided by the stadium developer. These patterns
were converted to vehicle arrival and departure data and graphed as shown in Figure F-6. The
arrival profile reflects the expectation that some fans will arriver early to tailgate before the
game, while the departure profile assumes that some fans will begin leaving before the game
ends.
Trip Distribution
The trip distribution for RiverBats game attendees is based on available traffic counts in the
area, knowledge of local traffic patterns and professional judgment. The majority of traffic is
expected to travel to and from St. Cloud. For purposes of this analysis, trips were allocated as
follows:
· 70% east on C.S.A.H. 75
· 15% west on C.S.A.H. 75
· 10% north on 88th Avenue
Traffic Assignment
In the trip assignment portion of the analysis, the new trips represented by fan attendance wem
assigned to the roadway network using the routing patterns expected to be utilized by game
attendees. An Excel spreadsheet was developed to assign these trips to the parking lot
entrances and exits.
Figure F-7 shows the game-day entering and exiting stadium traffic that will be added to key
locations on roadways surrounding the site.
Figures F-8 and F-9 show the total pre- and post-game traffic projected for these locations for
weekday evening and Saturday afternoon games, respectively.
Page 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
200
Figure F-6
Typical Arrival and Departure Patterns
Arrivals by Time Period
188
180 ---------~-~-
U)
.S!!
.~
.c
CI)
>
160
140
120
""" 1 00
o
G; 80
.c
E 60-
::s
Z 40--
20 ---
o
400
350
U)
.S!!
.~
.c
CI)
>
"""
o
...
CI)
.c
E
::s
Z
300
250
200
~
f3~
<.1
4:'
~
f3~
~
~~
~
9$':'
~
ro~
~
9$~
~
ro~
~
~~
<.1
~':'
~
~':'
~
~~
~
~~
~
ro~
~
~~
~~
~
g)~
<.1
ro':'
Arrival Times
Departures by Time Period
-- - -------- ---- ___m_ --- -----------------37i-m-------3jj-------------------------1
50
150 ----
100
0
f) ~ ~ S) ~ ~ (f,~ S)
9J':' 9J~ 9J~ fS~ (f,~ (f," ~~
~ <.1 ~ ~~ s::f ~ ~~ s::f ~ ~....
o;~ 0;':' o;~ o;~ ....r:S~ ..... ....r:S , fSt;:
....cs. ~
Departure Times
Page 9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure F-7
Game Day - Added Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
"-0
H>
cD Lancer Street
oj
()--7
~
Q)
Q)
.....
en
Pre-Game Entering Volumes
"-0
J J t ;g Lancer Street
oJ' ~lt
0-') co
o~ .q-
......
Q)
Q)
.....
U5
Post-Game Exiting Volumes
Page 1 0
I
Figure F-9 I
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Saturday Game - 2:00 P.M. Start Time I
I
I
I
Lancer Street I
48J d,!t I
o~
O~
.- I
Q)
Q)
....
......
(f)
Pre-Game Peak Hour I
I
I
I
"-12 I
H>
c-O Lancer Street I
64J ~lt 93. 0-...4
O~ <t~
CD 0.,\
~ ('I) I
m
Q)
Q)
....
-
(/) I
Post-Game Peak Hour
I
Page 12 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Traffic Analysis - Synchro
Delay
Traffic analyses were conducted with the total traffic for pre- and post-game conditions. The
results of these analyses are summarized in Table F-3 and F-4. As shown in Table F-3, the
signalized intersection of C.S.A.H, 75 I 88th Avenue will function at Level of Service "0" or
better.
Table F-3
Intersection Capacity Analysis
Weekday Saturday
Intersection Pre-Game Post-Game Pre-Game Post-Game
Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay I LOS
C.S.A.H. 75 & 88th Ave. 22.1 I C 17.3 I B 21.6 I C 40,2 I 0
The forecasted vehicle delay is considered very acceptable for this intersection. The worst mllse
is the Saturday post-game ending in late afternoon. Greater post-game delay is expected to be
experienced following Saturday games, but this should not pose a serious difficulty, as games
ending at this time are scheduled only twice C1 year. It should also be noted that the traffic
demands causing the "0" Level of Service are expected to occur for only a 30-minute period Of
time.
Table F-4 summarizes results of the capacity analyses for the unsignalized intersections of 8~th
Avenue I Lancer Street and C.S.A.H. 75 I Street B. .
Table F-4
Stop Sign Analysis
Critical Movement LOS (1)
Critical Weekday Saturday
Intersection Pre-Game Post-Game Pre-Game Post-Ga~e
Movement
Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay I LOS Delay / LOS
88th Ave. & Lancer St. EBL 23.4 I C 16.4 I C 20.7 I C 19.0 I C
C.S.A.H. 75 & Street B NBR N/A 82.7 I F N/A 116.8 IF
(1) . .
Delay and LOS were determined USing HCM 2000 methodologies In Synchro and are given for the cntlcal movement of the
intersection.
The 88th Avenue I Lancer Street intersection will function at a Level of Service "C" or better. I
At the intersection of Street B with C.S.A.H. 75, the northbound right movement will experience
Level of Service "F" during post-game conditions. This delay will only occur for approximately.
the post-game peak half-hour. Considering that post-game conditions will occur only 36 times
per year and that post-game congestion will last for approximately 30 minutes, a delay of less
than 120 seconds is quite reasonable. Additionally, the delay may be slightly overstated, as
drivers leaving the stadium area may chose to use 88th Avenue instead if that route is less
congested. The driver's decisions regarding an exit route will tend to balance intersection del~y.
Page 13
Traffic Analysis - SimTraffic
Queues
A queue length analysis was conducted for traffic movements of concern. Most site-generated
traffic will approach from the east, making a west to southbound left turn at C.S.A.H. 75 and 88th
Avenue. The queue length of northbound traffic exiting at this intersection was also of concern.
A SimTraffic-based simulation analysis of forecasted queue lengths was conducted to verify thal~
the westbound left-turn lane has adequate storage. The results listed on the following table
show that the left turn lane capacity of 480 feet will exceed the forecasted queue lengths. The
northbound queue lengths were not problematic.
Table F-5
Queue Analysis (1)
C.S.A.H. 75 & 88th Ave.
Pre-Game
Weekday Saturday
Measure Units Critical Movement
WBL NBLTR WBL NBLTR
Storage I Link Length ft. 480 388 480 388
Maximum Queue ft. 393 41 292 88
95th Percentile Queue ft. 313 34 275 52
Upstream Block Time % 0 0 0 0
The post-game results listed on the following table show that the west to southbound left turn
movement will not be a concern. The northbound queue lengths extended past the east-'Nest
driveway south of C.S.A.H. 75 for only 1 % of the 1-hour simulation time. This situation is not
considered problematic.
Table F-6
Queue Analysis (1)
C.S.A.H. 75 & 88th Ave.
Post-Game
Weekday Saturday
Measure Units Critical Movement
WBL NBLTR WBL NBLTR
Storage I Link Length ft. 480 388 480 388
Maximum Queue ft. 53 275 74 409
95th Percentile Queue ft. 38 202 53 358
Upstream Block Time % 0 0 0 1%
(1) 95th Percentile Queue is based on statistical calculations and is not necessarily ever observed
Upstream Block Time = proportion of time upstream end of lane is blocked
Queuing Penalty = rough measure of how many vehicles are affected by the blocking
Average vehicle length plus distance between vehicles in SimTraffic is 19.5 ft.
Page 14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Delay
A SimTraffic simulation analysis was conducted to determine delay for vehicles exiting the
stadium parking area and making the north to eastbound right turn at the intersection of .
C.S.A.H. 75 and Street B east of 88th Avenue. A combination of delay for the intersections 01
Street B in the vicinity of the parking lots and with C.S.A.H. 75 was calculated to represent the
delay for a vehicle after it exits the parking lot.
As shown in Table F-7, a delay of approximately 2 minutes is expected for vehicles exiting the
stadium after a game starting at 7:00 P.M. Although the determined delay is Level of Service
"F", it is reasonable for an infrequent and short duration post-game situation.
Table F-7
Intersection Delay in Seconds
Street B
Post-Game - Weekday
Intersection with: Critical Interval Overall
Movement #1 #2 #3 #4
C.S.A.H. 75 NBR 2.91 A 109.71 F 136.0/F 114.6/F 116.0 I F \
Street A NBT 0.31 A 1.51 A 3.81 A 5.21 A 2.81 Ai,.
Total Delay 3.2/ A 111.2/ F 139.81 F 119.8/F 118.81 F ..
Table F-8 shows delay of approximately 3.5 minutes expected for vehicles exiting the stadium
after a Saturday afternoon game. It should be noted that only two of the 36 scheduled games
had afternoon start times. Although the determined delay is Level of Service "Fil, it is
reasonable for a very infrequent and short duration post-game situation.
Table F-8
Intersection Delay in Seconds
Street B
Post-Game - Saturday
Intersection with: Critical Interval Overall
Movement #1 #2 #3 #4
C.S.A.H. 75 NBR 6.2 173.3 220.2 208.9 187.5
Street A NBT 0.2 7.6 13.2 10.3 9.5
Total Delay 6.4/ A 180.91 F 233.4 1 F 219.21 F 197.01 F
The delay calculations resulted in more post-game delay at the Street B intersection than at the
88th Avenue intersection. Since drivers can choose between the two routes, it is expected that
they will identify and follow the most efficient choice, the path of least delay. Therefore, the
actual delay experienced may prove to be somewhat lower at the Street B intersection.
Accordingly, the results shown above should be considered a worst-case scenario.
Page 15
Conclusions
A traffic analysis was performed to assess the traffic implications of the proposed RiverBats
baseball stadium on the surrounding external street network. This traffic analysis addresses thl9
impact of pre- and post-game traffic expected to be generated by the stadium. The following
conclusions were reached during the study:
1. The RiverBats baseball stadium is expected to add about 1,076 total trips to the externsll
roadway system during pre-game and post-game periods. The analysis condition for
this study assumed that vehicle arrivals would fill the parking area to capacity.
2. The great majority of games are expected to start at 7:00 P.M. During the previous
season, 34 of 36 games started at 7:00 P.M. The phenomenon of tailgating will spread
traffic demand before games. Low background traffic volume levels after evening
games will reduce the potential for traffic congestion.
3. The signalized intersection of C.S.A.H. 75/88th Avenue will function with acceptable
Levels of Service (LOS "B" or better) during weekday evening pre-game and post-gaml9
periods. The existing roadway geometry will prove adequate to accommodate pre-game
and post-game conditions. The signal timing at this location will require modification to
provide more time for the west to southbound left turners during the pre-game peak time.
4. C.S.A.H. 75/ 88th Avenue will operate at LOS "0" or better during Saturday afternoon
pre-game and post-game periods. However, only two such games are expected to be
scheduled during a typical year.
5. The northbound right turn at the intersection of C.S.A.H. 75/ Street B will function at
LOS "F" during the half-hour post-game for weekday evening games. The frequency
and duration of the congestion are low and considered acceptable for post-game
conditions. The calculated delay is approximately two minutes for vehicles after they
have exited the parking lot area for evening games.
6. The results of queue length analysis for traffic movements of concern did not result in
problematic situations. The left-turn lane storage for the west to southbound left turn Sit
C.S.A.H. 75 and 88th Avenue will be adequate for pre-game conditions. The northbound
queue lengths approaching C.S.A.H. 75 and 88th Avenue are not expected to be
problematic.
7. As a result of preliminary traffic analyses, the largest parking lot area was reconfigured
to provide access on both the east and west sides. This change was important to
effectively facilitate the entrance and exiting of vehicles. It is anticipated that the
planned parking lot layout will safely and effectively accommodate the forecasted
parking demands before and after games.
Page 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
END
OF
Document