14. TH 212 Task Force update 111 roe
............-0
r
CITYOF 1 t
.=
,=
CHANHASSEN
, ‘4.,,
1 Nkv
4,2 / , . .
`\ .. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
I (612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
I
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
IFROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner
DATE: March 9, 1988
ISUBJ: TH 212 Task Force Update
This is to provide a progress report for the TH 212 Task Force.
IOn December 3, 1987, the TH 212 Task Force interviewed three
consultants : Howard, Needles, Tammen and Bergendoff (HNTB) ; BRW,
I Inc. ; and Donohue and Associates, Inc. Attending the meeting
representing Chanhassen were the City Engineer, Gary Warren, Jay
Johnson, and myself. The Task Force chose HNTB to be the con-
y sultant to complete the EIS and Location Design Study Report.
Since selection, Carver County has negotiated with HNTB to
establish a cooperative planning agreement. Attached is the pre-
liminary draft of the planning agreement with noted corrections
I in various areas. Appendix B-1 reflects the proposed project
time table. All members of the Task Force agreed that it was an
aggressive process, however, it is imperative that the process
I proceed on a timely schedule so that all permits and study
reports can be completed in a timely fashion. It is my
understanding at this point that the consultant will sign the
contract as amended and work will begin shortly.
INo action is required on this item.
� r ATTACHMENTS
■ 1 . Task Force Membership as of February 10, 1988 .
2 . Task Force minutes dated December 3 , 1987 .
I 3 . Task Force minutes dated December 30, 1987 .
4 . Planning Services Cooperative Planning Agreement.
I
I
i
r
I
T.H. 212 E. I .S.
TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP
AS OF
FEBRUARY 10, 1988
AGENCY MEMBER AGENCY POSITION MAILING ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER
City of Chaska Shirley Bruers Community Devel- 205 East 4th Street 448-2851
opment Director Chaska 55318 ro
City of Chanhassen Barb Dacy City Planner 690 Coulter Drive 937-19G_ 1
Chanhassen 55317
City of Chanhassen Jay Johnson Councilperson 7496 Saratoga Drive 934-5680
Chanhassen 55317
City of Chanhassen Mike Mulligan Citizen Repre- 8511 Tigua Circle 934-4487
sentative Chanhassen 55317
City of Eden Prairie Gene Dietz City Engineer 7600 Executive Drive 937-2262
Eden Prairie 55344
Hennepin County Dave Schmidt Planning Engineer 320 Washington Ave So 935-3381
Hopkins 55343
Carver County Roger Gustafson County Engineer 600 East 4th Street 448-343
cl Chaska 55318
Metropolitan Council Ann Braden Transportation 00 Metro Square Bldg 291-3)0,
Planner L'(0 t. Paul 55101 .< .) , .,
MnDOT Carl Hoffstedt Transportation 2055 North Lilac Drive 593-8540
Planning Engineer Golden Valley 55422
MnDOT Evan Green Project Manager 2055 North Lilac Drive 593-8537
Golden Valley 55422
i IM M NM I I M OM I MIll MN M N = M MI MI MI MN
k
' Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
TH 212 Task Force
' Consultant Interviews
Thursday, December 3, 1987
Present: G. Dietz, R. Gustafson, J. Johnson, A. Braden, G. Warren,
C. Hoffstedt, E. Green, B. Dacy
I
The consultants were interviewed in the following sequence: HNTB, BRW, and
Donohue. The interviews began at 9:00 am. Each firm was permitted 45 minutes
for its presentation and task force members asked each team specific
questions. Following each interview, task force members individually completed
their evaluation forms. After breaking for lunch, the task force discussed
the merits and shortcomings of the different firms and their approaches to the
study. Based on a majority vote, the task force selected HNTB to serve as
consultant for the study. Roger Gustafson said he would notify the firms of
the task force's choice. He and MnDOT representatives would then meet with the
firm to prepare a detail draft contract. The Task Force will next meet to
review the draft contract. The task force adjourned at 2:45 pm.
1
1
r
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612 291-6359/TDD 291-0904
Minutes of a Meeting
of the
T.H. 212 Task Force I
Monday, November 30, 1987
PRESENT: Roger Gustafson, Dave Schmidt, Gene Dietz, Carl Hoffstedt, Evan
Breen, Jay Johnson, Barb Dacy, Ann Braden and Gary Warren
I. Call To Order
Roger Gustafson called the meeting to order at 1 :35 p.m.
II. Approval of Agenda
• The agenda was approved as written. '
III. Approval of Minutes
The October 15, 1987 minutes were approved as written.
IV. Review Consultant Evaluation Form
Roger said all three firms had been meeting extensively with both him and
Mn/DOT.
The Committee discussed in general the format of the interviews. It was
pointed out that there should be no details of project costs discussed before
the selection is made. The members discussed the evaluation form Roger pre-
pared.
It was agreed that more points were needed under the Project
Manager characteristics. Each of the seven criteria under "Consulting Firm or
Firms forming the Team" was reduced by 1 point. These seven points were then
reallocated to the four criteria under "Project Manager" (4,4,3,4,), increasing
the point subtotal from 8 to 15.
Under "C", the criteria dealing with environmental, transportation alternatives
and highway corridor alternatives sensitivities were moved to the "D. Project
Specific" category.
Roger will have new forms typed with one form per firm and a final tally sheet. 1
V. List of Consultant Interview Questions
Roger proposed a format for the interviews:
o Thank them for coming
o Introduce interview committee
o Consultant presentation
o Questions from the committee
o Termination
p
IAgreement No.
PLANNING SERVICES
' COOPERATIVE PLANNING AGREEMENT
IITotal Fee - $320,000.00
Agreement between the
II
County of Carver
and
Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff
IIRE: Trunk Highway 212 Environmental Impact Statements and Study Report
I INDEX
PAGE
Parties to the Agreement 1
Explanation and Justification 1
I Article 1. General Description of Work To Be Done 1
Article 2. Time For Completion 2
Article 3: Compensation To Consultant 2
II Article 4. Changed or Extra Work 5
Article 5. Standard Practices and Requirements 5
Article 6. Documents Forming The Contract 5
Article 7. Abandonment, Change of Plan and Termination 5
I Article 8. Interchange of Data 6
Article 9. Disposition of Plans, Reports and Other Data 6
Article 10. Damages and Delays 6
I Article 11. Independent Contractor 6
Article 12. Patent Rights 7
Article 13. Assignment 7
Article 14. Covenant Against Contingent Fees 7
II
Article 15. Equal Employment Opportunity Assurances 7
Article 16. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Participation 7
Article 17. Environmental Protections 7
IAttachment 1 - Contractor Contractual Requirements, Title VI Assurances 9
I Exhibit A - Scope of Services A-1
Exhibit B - Schedule B-1
Exhibit C - Cost Estimate and Budget C-1
II
1
II
I
1
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the County of Carver,
hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY" and Howard Needles Tammen & 11 Bergendoff, a partnership with offices at 6700 France Avenue South,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT".
On behair ,,j 77/4. 212 77.54 Force
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the COUNTY wishes to undertake a proposed highway study, as
further described below and in attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY has selected the CONSULTANT through a competitive
selection process to perform those services; and
WHEREAS, the study must conform with state and federal regulations and
procedures to qualify for state and federal funding. '
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE DONE
The COUNTY agrees to and hereby does retain and employ the CONSULTANT, and
the CONSULTANT agrees to perform such planning services hereinafter
described for the proposed T.H. 212 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) ,
Study Report (SR) , and related studies. 1
In general, the project will:
- inventory available data and information relative to the study and
determine data needs
- describe the existing social, economic, and environmental setting
of the area
- forecast traffic volumes
- prepare roadway layouts of each alternative
- address the probable social, economic, and environmental impacts of
each alternative
- survey the affected corridor for prehistoric and historic sites
- prepare draft environmental impact statement for public hearing
- provide for public involvement throughout the project 1
- prepare final environmental impact statement
1
-1-
- 1
- prepare study report describing major design features and standards
' for the selected alternative
- coordinate the project with affected local, state, and federal
' agencies
The CONSULTANT planning services to be provided are further described in
Exhibit A - SCOPE OF SERVICES, hereto attached and made a part of this
' Agreement.
ARTICLE 2. TIME FOR COMPLETION
' The CONSULTANT agrees to submit a draft of the DEIS (Task 7.0) to the
COUNTY for review and comment within 12 months of receipt of a
Notice-to-Proceed. Review comments will be incorporated or addressed and
' the DEIS submitted for state and federal approval within three months of
receipt of review comments. The Final EIS (Task 9.0) will be prepared and
submitted to the COUNTY within three months following receipt of the agency
' and public comments relative to the DEIS public hearing. The Study Report
(Task 10.0) will be submitted to the COUNTY within three months following
the Record of Decision by the Federal Highway Administration on the FEIS.
' Exhibit B shows the anticipated project schedule. e-7 ,'s d x.74
ARTICLE 3. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT /C't:s project' sA..// be 40 Me/epfeV
, /.#ee- �9pr.1 30, 17 /
pp0.
' Payment to the CONSULTANT for services described in Exhibit A shall be in
strict accordance with the conditions set forth in this Article of the
Agreement.
3.10 Method of Payment
3.11 The COUNTY shall reimburse the CONSULTANT for services to be
' performed in accordance with the terms of this agreement as follows:
3.12 The direct salary costs incurred by the CONSULTANT related to the
' salaries of employees for time directly chargeable to the Project.
3.13 Fringe benefits and indirect costs incurred to the extent they are
' properly allocable to the Project. A provisional overhead rate of
127.73 percent of the direct salary costs will be used for the
purpose of making partial payments to the CONSULTANT.
' 3.14 The actual costs incurred by the CONSULTANT in retaining the
services of subconsultants for disciplines which are not available
within the CONSULTANT'S firm and are necessary to accomplish the
work required by the agreement. The method of compensation,
including overhead rates, fixed fees and proposed direct non-salary
costs for subconsultants, shall be approved by the County Engineer
before the subconsultant performs any work.
-2-
3.15 Other direct costs incurred to the extent they are properly
allocable to the project (which may include but not be limited to
travel, lodging, materials, film, film processing, etc.) .
3.16 Automobile expense shall be reimbursed at the current rate allowable
under the Minnesota Travel Regulations. '
3.17 Maximum reimbursement for meals, including tax and gratuity, for
employees of the CONSULTANT or subconsultants working away from
their home stations shall be in accordance with current Minnesota
Travel Regulations.
3.18 The actual acceptable costs for such additional items and services ,
as may be required by the COUNTY to fulfill the terms of the
agreement.
3.19 A fixed fee to the CONSULTANT in addition to the aforesaid costs in
the amount of $32,700.00 as shown in Exhibit C. It is understood
that the fixed fee will be subject to adjustment in case of change
• in work by subconsultants, change of scope of work, abandonment of
the work prior to its completion, or deletion of specific tasks as
presently anticipated.
3.20 Total Estimated Payments
3.21 If it appears at any time that the payments to the CONSULTANT will
exceed a total estimated payment of $320,000.00, the CONSULTANT
agrees not to perform any services that would cause that amount to
be exceeded unless the CONSULTANT has been advised by the COUNTY
that additional funds have been encumbered and the work may proceed.
It shall be the responsibility of the CONSULTANT to originate all
requests for additional encumbrances, compensation, and for
supplemental agreements. '
3.30 Employee Classifications and Hourly Rates
3.31 The CONSULTANT, and any subconsultants, shall submit a schedule of
employee classifications assigned to the Project. This schedule
shall include a range of hourly rates for each classification. The
schedule shall be subject to approval by the County Engineer and
shall remain in effect until such time as a revised schedule is
submitted by the CONSULTANT and approved by the County Engineer.
3.40 Invoices - Partial Payments '
3.41 The CONSULTANT may submit invoices monthly for costs incurred in
accordance with Article 3.10. Signed invoices shall be submitted to
the County Engineer. These invoices shall be supplemented with the
following information:
3.2 2 /f .s a...do,sAoeat b y T e pa"t/es / es d pc. t
Of 320 000.00 :$ coA)A'..9e-+71 co, rec.' ,fla t.{ ce.,tr:6u:Se.'s dY A
✓a�.u,d.N�J.e.r,'�oO.p ape ft'Ca. I
54 // , A5 ♦:.s - aiseel ,w Ex 414...i' Di 47%<4
'
3eftf�d 6 y rerr c n 14 Ceve--f 50:1 c•-• ," ivrd.,s e-
el."1 <ec.e,"&°G/ 5 Gam!'ar1- Shw d" edef /eri no GC'
'FO 1K.ei CO.o s TA N T.
3.42 A a roll cost breakdown p y wn w hich shall include the name of the
employee, classification, rate of pay, hours worked, and total
payments for each payroll period.
3.43 Other direct costs shall be identified and supported with necessary
documents to show that such costs are properly allocable to the
project.
3.44 Signed time sheets for each employee listing dates and hours worked.
3.45 Computer print-out sheets with detailed labor distributions and
employee classifications may be substituted for time sheets. If
computer print-out sheets are used, copies of signed time sheets for
each employee shall be made available for audit when and where
requested by the COUNTY.
' 3.46 Overtime premium pay for work or services performed by the
CONSULTANT or subconsultants will not be allowed without previous
' authorization by the COUNTY. Hours worked in excess of regularly
scheduled work days or on holidays without previous authorization
will be reimbursed at the regular hourly rates.
' 3.47 Partial payment of the fixed fee will be determined by the
percentage of completion of the total work required under the terms
of this agreement.
3.48 Invoices will be checked by the COUNTY and payments will be made in
an amount of 100 percent of the invoice costs found to be properly
allocable to the project except that payments shall not exceed 98
' percent of the total estimated payment amount until the COUNTY has
determined that the services of the CONSULTANT are no longer
required.
II3.50 Final Payment
' 3.51 Final payment due the CONSULTANT and subconsultants will be based on
actual acceptable costs as may be determined by an audit conducted
by the COUNTY or the State of Minnesota. The audit will be con-
ducted in accordance with the cost principles and procedures set
forth in the Federal Acquisition Regulations, 48CFR 1-31.2
(Contracts with Commercial Organizations) which are made a part
hereof by reference with the same force and effect as though fully
' set forth herein.
3.52 At the time of final payment, the provisional rates will be adjusted
to reflect the actual yearly overhead rates incurred by the
II' CONSULTANT or subconsultants during the period the work under this
agreement was being accomplished. The adjusted overhead rates will
be subject to audit confirmation.
j 3.9.9 /.,..ores 540 de Pa r 0.6/e , 74.4o„74- u.;7li 90 d.,r s
' of rece/af bj, �1�, Cot/4,ry.
-4-
ARTICLE 4. CHANGED OR EXTRA WORK
Significant changes, additions, or deletions from the SCOPE OF SERVICES '
(Exhibit A) will require prior approval by the COUNTY.
If the CONSULTANT is of the opinion that any work he has been directed to
perform is beyond the scope of this Agreement and constitutes extra work,
he shall promptly notify the COUNTY of that fact. The COUNTY shall be the
sole judge as to whether or not such work is in fact beyond the scope of
this Agreement and constitutes extra work. In the event that the COUNTY
determines that such work does constitute extra work, it shall provide
compensation for such work to the CONSULTANT consistent with ARTICLE 3 -
Compensation To Consultant. '
Changed or extra work, including any increase or decrease in the amount of
the CONSULTANT's compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by the
COUNTY and the CONSULTANT, shall be fully described in a Supplemental
Agreement. The Supplemental Agreement shall be approved by the COUNTY
prior to becoming effective.
ARTICLE 5. STANDARD PRACTICES AND REQUIREMENTS
The CONSULTANT shall ascertain the relevant standard practices of the State
of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, and the Federal Highway
Administration, and shall undertake all of the services on this PROJECT in
accordance with said standards.
ARTICLE 6. DOCUMENTS FORMING THE CONTRACT
The contract documents shall be deemed to include this Agreement with all
accompanying exhibits a part hereof. The CONSULTANT shall comply with the
requirements of Attachment 1, a part hereof, pertaining to Title VI
Assurances and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Assurances.
ARTICLE 7. ABANDONMENT, CHANGE OF PLAN AND TERMINATION
The COUNTY has the right to terminate or reduce the scope of this Agree- '
went. In the event of termination there shall be no further obligation of
the COUNTY to the CONSULTANT under this Agreement, except for payment of
amounts due and owing for services performed and expenses incurred to the
date and time of termination and the cost of settling or discharging
outstanding obligations of the CONSULTANT with respect to the termination
of work and services, computed in accordance with ARTICLE 3 of this
Agreement. In the event of a reduction in scope of the project work, the
CONSULTANT shall be paid only for the services performed and the expenses
incurred on the project work thus reduced, computed in accordance with
ARTICLE 3 of this Agreement.
Reduction in the scope of work shall be set forth in a written notice from
the COUNTY to the CONSULTANT. '
-5-
If the CONSULTANT fails to perform the services described herein, the
COUNTY shall be entitled to recover from the CONSULTANT the reasonable
additional costs incurred to complete the services.
ARTICLE 8. INTERCHANGE OF DATA
All technical data developed in regard to the PROJECT and existing related
information, whether in the possession of the COUNTY or in the possession
of the CONSULTANT, shall be made available to the other party to this
Agreement without expense.
ARTICLE 9. DISPOSITION OF PLANS, REPORTS AND OTHER DATA
' At the time of completion of the services, the CONSULTANT shall make
available to the COUNTY all maps, tracings, reports, as developed, and a
' bibliography of resource materials and other documents pertaining to the
work or to the PROJECT, which material at all times shall be the property
of the COUNTY. Said records and documentation shall be retained for a
period not less than three years, subsequent to the COUNTY's final payment
to CONSULTANT, and all other pending matters are closed.
ARTICLE 10. DAMAGES AND DELAYS
' The CONSULTANT agrees that no charges or claim for damages shall be made by
him for any damages or hindrances from any cause whatsoever during the
' progress of any portion of the work to be performed pursuant to this
Agreement. Such delays or hindrances, if any, shall be compensated for by
an extension of time for such reasonable period as the COUNTY may determine
to be equitable in the circumstances, and the opportunity for renegotiation
of compensation.
ARTICLE 11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
' The CONSULTANT in performance of work hereunder operates as an independent
contractor and covenants and agrees that he will conduct himself consistent
' with such status, that he will neither hold himself out as nor claim to be
an officer or employee of the COUNTY by reason hereof, and that he will not
by reason hereof, make any claim or demand, nor shall he apply for any
right of privilege applicable to an officer or employee of the COUNTY,
' including, but not limited to, wor 's compensation coverage, unemploy-
ment insurance benefits, social security coverage or retirement membership
or credit. t��t�
' By the effective date of this Agreement, the CONSULTANT shall provide the
COUNTY with current certificates of insurance certifying $1,000,000
coverage each for business auto, comprehensive general liability,
' professional liability and errors and omissions, and $500,000 for valuable
papers. The certificates will name the COUNTY as l a cevl.�,
f:cay
Evidence of Worker's Compensation Insurance, as required by Minnesota !older:
' Statute, shall also be provided. Said certificates shall provide for
�._ le-day irrevocable notice by insurer to COUNTY in the event of
30 modification, termination, expiration or lapse.
' -6-
1
1
ARTICLE 12. PATENT RIGHTS
Any work product patentable or subject to copyright arising out of this '
Agreement, as well as all information, designs, specifications, know-how,
data, and findings, shall be made available without cost to the COUNTY for
Public use.
ARTICLE 13. ASSIGNMENT
This Agreement, being intended to secure the personal services of the
individuals employed by and through the CONSULTANT performing work here-
under, shall not be assigned, sublet or transferred without the written
consent of the COUNTY. Except, however, that it is mutually agreed that
the CONSULTANT will subcontract certain of the services to be provided
pursuant to Exhibit A to DBE firms and other individuals, as noted
elsewhere in this Agreement. '
ARTICLE 14. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES
' The CONSULTANT warrants that no person or legal entity has been employed or
retained to solicit or secure this contract upon an agreement or under-
standing for a commission, percentage, brokerage or contingent fee, except
bona-fide employees or bona-fide established commercial or selling agencies
maintained by the. CONSULTANT for the purpose of securing business. For
breach or' violation of this warranty, the COUNTY shall have the right to
annul this Agreement without liability or in its discretion to deduct from
payment to the CONSULTANT the full amount of such commission, percentages,
brokerage or contingent fee.
ARTICLE 15. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ASSURANCES
The CONSULTANT shall comply with Executive Order No. 11246, entitled "Equal
Employment Opportunity" (41 CFR, Part 60) , and shall have an affirmative
action plan which declares that it does not discriminate on the basis of
race, color, religion, creed, national origin, sex and age, and which
specifies goals and target dates to assure the implementation of that plan.
ARTICLE 16. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PARTICIPATION
The CONSULTANT hereby agrees to subcontract.a minimum of 10% of the total
dollar value of the Agreement to qualified Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises.
ARTICLE 17. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS '
The CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable standards, orders, or re-
quirements
issued under Section 306 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 1857(h)) ,
Section 508 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1368) , Executive Order 11738,
and Environmental Protection regulations (40 CFR Part 15) .
-7-
1
r
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the COUNTY and the CONSULTANT have executed this
AGREEMENT as of this day of , 1988.
COUNTY
' By its
By its
' CONSULTANT •
By •
1011111111
11.
•
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
1 -s-
ATTACHMENT 1 1
CONTRACTOR CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS
TITLE VI ASSURANCES '
During the performance of this contract, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its
assignees and successors in interest agrees as follows:
1. Compliance with Regulations. The CONSULTANT shall comply with the
Regulations relative to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs of
The Department of Transportation (hereinafter, "DOT") Title 49, Code of
• Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from time to time,
(hereinafter referred to as the Regulations) , which are herein incorporated
by reference and made a part of this contract. -
2. Nondiscrimination. The CONSULTANT, with regard to the work per-
formed
by it during the contract, shall not discriminate on the grounds of
race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of subcon-
tractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The
CONSULTANT shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the
discrimination prohibited by section 21.5 of the Regulations, including
employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in
Appendix B of the Regulations.
3. Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials
and Equipment. In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or
negotiation made by the CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a sub- '
contract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each
potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the CONSULTANT of
the CONSULTANT's obligations under this contract and the Regulations
relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national
origin.
4. Information and Reports. The CONSULTANT shall provide all
information and reports required by the Regulations or directives issued
pursuant thereto and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts,
other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by
the COUNTY to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Regulations,
orders, and instructions. Where- any information ' required of the
CONSULTANT is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses
to furnish this information, the CONSULTANT shall so certify to the COUNTY,
as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the
information.
5. Sanctions for Noncompliance. In the event of the CONSULTANT's non-
compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the
• COUNTY shall impose such contract sanctions as it may determine to be
appropriate, including, but not limited to--
(a) withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under the contract
until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or
-9- 1
1
A.
I
(b) cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contract, in
whole or in part.
' 6. Incorporation of Provisions. The CONSULTANT shall include the
provisions of paragraphs 1 through 5 in every subcontract, including
' procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the
Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. The CONSULTANT shall
take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the
' COUNTY may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including
sanctions for non-compliance. Provided, however, that in the event the
CONSULTANT becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a
subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the CONSULTANT may
' request the COUNTY to enter into such litigation to protect the interests
of the COUNTY and, in addition, the contractor may request the State of
Minnesota to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the
State of Minnesota.
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) ASSURANCES
1. Policy. It is the policy of the Department of Transportation (DOT)
that disadvantaged business enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 23 shall
' have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts
financed in whole or in part with Federal funds under this agreement.
Consequently, the DBE requirements of 49 CFR Part 23 apply to this
' agreement.
2. DBE Obligation. The CONSULTANT agrees to ensure that disadvantaged
business enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 23 have the maximum oppor-
tunity to participate in the performance of contracts and subcontracts
financed in whole or in part with Federal funds provided under this
agreement. In this regard, all contractors shall take all necessary and
reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CFR Part 23 to ensure that dis-
advantaged business enterprises have the maximum opportunity to compete for
and perform contracts. The CONSULTANT shall not discriminate on the basis
of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of
DOT-assisted contracts.
PCContl-28
-10-
1
EXHIBIT A
T.H. 212 - SCOPE OF SERVICES
GENERAL. The DEIS, FEIS, and Study Report will be prepared in accordance '
with Federal Highway Administration Regulations (as specified in 23CFR771
and FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A) and the Mn/DOT Highway Project
Development Process.
TASKS
1.0 INVENTORY I
The purposes of this task are to determine data needs, by collecting and
evaluating existing data, plans, policies, maps, and other information
relative to the study -- and to prepare a base map for presentation of the
impacts of the project in the EIS.
The following sub-tasks will be performed:
1.2 Assemble relevant data, plans, policies, maps, etc. from
•
affected cities, counties, and agencies.
1.3 Determine data deficiencies and needs.
1.4 - Prepare base map for use in EIS.
1.5 Meet with Task Force and report results and needs. '
2.0 DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this task is to describe the existing social, economic and
environmental setting for the area affected by the alternatives.
The following sub-tasks will be performed: '
2.1 Describe the Social Environment, including population mix,
levels, and trends; housing; transportation, recreation, and
community facilities; accessibility to local and metropolitan
activities and opportunities; cultural aspects; public
institutions; neighborhoods and aesthetics.
2.2 Describe the Natural Environment, including topography; geology;
soils; meteorology and climatology; hydrology; vegetation;
wetlands; fish and wildlife; and visual setting.
2.3 Describe the Economic Setting, including employment levels and
trends; land values; tax base; income; labor force; industry and
services; and accessibility to centers of economic activity.
2.4 Describe local, county, and metropolitan land-use plans,
development and transportation policies, and any other federal
activities in the study are and their interrelationship with the
corridor alternatives.
A-1
1
f-
,- k
A.
II
3.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS
The purpose of this task is to forecast traffic volumes such that the
impacts of each alternative can be determined.
IThe following sub-tasks will be performed:
3.1 Update the 2005 annual average weekday traffic (AAWT) and peak
I hour volumes to the year 2010, using the growth factors in Table
A2 of TH 212 Traffic Forecasts, I-494 to Norwood/Young America,
by BRW, Inc. , August, 1985.
I 3.2 Obtain 2010 forecast of heavy commercial average weekday traffic
volumes from Mn/DOT (traffic forecast section) .
4.0 LAYOUTS OF ALTERNATIVES
' \ t The purpose of this task is to prepare roadway layouts sufficient for
�. determination of the impacts of each alternative identified for further
- =^, ti,= study in the Final Study Outline/Scoping Decision Document.
V ' The following sub-tasks will be performed:
4.1 Prepare conceptual roadway layouts at 1" — 200' scale in
�, ` sufficient detail to estimate construction costs, right-of-way
II \ , , limits, construction staging and traffic management.
t,
N2 A,. �. 4.2 Address both a Transportation System Management (TSM)
_ (' alternative (including upgrading of existing Highways 5 and 212,
I ` —t fringe parking, ride-sharing, and traffic signal timing) and the
\ ' (,, effect of mass transit -- in meeting the project objectives.
i5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The purpose of this task is to address the probable social, economic, and
Ienvironmental impacts of each alternative.
The following types of impacts will be addressed, where applicable, for
each sub-task:
Io direct impacts and their significance
Io indirect (secondary) impacts and their significance
o adverse effects that cannot be avoided
IIo the relationship between short-term uses of the human
environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term
productivity
Io irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources
A-2
II
Emphasis will be placed upon identifying the key tradeoffs involved in
selecting the preferred alternative. Major advantages and disadvantages of
each alternative will be highlighted. The influence of impacts upon
specific groups will be addressed so that equity considerations can be
factored into the decision-making process, where applicable. Possible
mitigation measures will be identified in the DEIS, where appropriate.
The following sub-tasks will be performed:
5.1 Impact on neighborhoods and community cohesion.
5.2 Regional economic impacts.
•
5.3 Impact on existing business districts (centers of business '
' activity) . This would include the impactsv_of_accessibility
provided by t e alternatives'andthe proposed interchanges.
5.4 Impact on planned development (public and private) .
5.5 Impact on social groups (elderly, handicapped, transit
dependent, children, minorities) .
5.6 Relocation impacts on households and businesses.
, 5.7 -- Land use impacts and consistency with local and regional plans
and policies (criteria will be developed _to evaluate the
IV proposed number and Tocati: ges'near the MUSA).
5.8 Impact on pedestrian and bicycle use.
5.9 Visual impacts.
5.10 Air quality impacts.
5.11 Noise impacts.
From preliminary discussions with---'MPCA` taff, background
monitoring of existing CO and sound levels' will be required.
The extent and cost of the monitof r-is-unknown, but could be
significant and beyond that anticipated in the scoping of the
project. HNTB and Mn/DOT will develop a proposed monitoring
program and obtain MPCA concurrence -- early in the study. HNTB
and Mn/DOT will negotiate participation in the cost of the
monitoring program.
5.12 Energy impacts (in general terms) .
5.13 Floodplain impacts.
5.14 Wetlands impacts.
A-3
5.15 Water quality impacts.
5.16 Impact on fish and wildlife.
5.17 Impact on farmlands.
' 5.18 Construction impacts.
' 6.0 HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
The purpose of this task is to survey the affected corridor for prehistoric
and historic sites in accordance with the memorandum of understanding
' between Mn/DOT and the State Historic Preservation officer, 11/18/86.
The following sub-tasks will be performed:
6.1 Perform a Phase I records/literature search and field
reconnaissance survey in sufficient detail to identify all
prehistoric and historic sites within the impact areas of the
alternatives.
6.2 Prepare report of the findings of Phase I.
6.3 Perform a Phase II preliminary evaluation of the significance
and future research potential of impacted sites found in Phase
I.
7.0 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
' The purpose of this task is to prepare the DEIS for public and agency
review and comment.
' The following sub-tasks will be performed:
7.1 Prepare draft of DEIS and Section 4(f) evaluation, if appli-
cable.
7.2 Task Force review of draft DEIS.
' 7.3 Revise and submit DEIS to Mn/DOT and FHWA for approval and
setting date(s) of public hearing(s) .
' 8.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The purpose of this task is to provide for continuing opportunities for the
' public to be involved in the identification of social, economic, and
environmental impacts of the project.
This will be accomplished through personal contacts by the consultant of
' key individuals, businesses, groups, and officials; publication of
quarterly newsletters (or equivalent) ; public meetings with 212 Citizens
A-4
� 1
Advisory Committee, Southwest Corridor Coalition, city planning commissions '
and city councils at selected points in the project; public information
meetings on the DEIS and the formal public hearing.
9.0 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
The FEIS will be prepared by incorporating the following changes and
additions to the DEIS (assuming DEIS changes are minor and all reasonable
alternatives are adequately presented and evaluated) :
o Errata sheets making corrections to the DEIS '
o Selection of alternative and discussion of why it was
preferred over other alternatives
o Final Section 4(f) evaluation, if applicable
;/ o Wetlands findings
( o Floodplains findings
a. ' o List of commitments for mitigation measures for the selected
alternative
-- , - o Copies or summaries of all substantive comments on the DEIS
and documentation of all coordination with interested or
affected agencies and parties.
10.0 STUDY REPORT
The purpose of this task is to prepare the study report for the project.
The following sub-tasks will be performed:
10.1 Describe the major design features and design standards of the
selected alternative, including:
o typical sections (lane, median, shoulder widths and type, and
side slopes)
o clear zones
o vertical clearances
o pavement strength
o sight distances
o design speed
o posted speed limit
o present and forecast volumes
A-5 '
II
4,
o level of service analysis
' o traffic handling during construction
o safety enhancements
o bicycle and pedestrian considerations
' o multimodal issues
o layout status
o other relevant information needing discussion
10.2 Prepare ' study report including schedule, summary of social,
' economic, and environmental impacts of selected alternative,
mitigation commitments, public and agency involvement, and
design criteria.
11.0 MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
The purpose of this task is to ensure that the EIS and SR are completed on
' time, within budget, and in accordance with state and federal law, rule and
regulation.
' The following sub-tasks will be performed:
11.1 Provide adequate coordination with affected local, state, and
federal agencies throughout the study.
11.2 Review study technical approach and monitor progress and budget
throughout the study.
' 11.3 Maintain close communication with TH 212 Task Force and review
approach, progress, and results throughout the study.
1
HNTB File 00180-13-81-P40/PCCont1-29
I
A-6
1
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE
1988 1989 1990
TASK M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M
1.0 INVENTORY
2.0 DESCRIPTION o o
3.0 FORECASTS o o
4.0 LAYOUTS o o
5.0 IMPACTS o o
6.0 ARCH. o o
7.0 DEIS o o
8.0 PUB. INV. o °
9.0 FEIS o o
•
10.0 SR o o.
11.0 MGT./COORD. o
Pul Helle.g Mil MI MI MI OM 1111 • =I =I • Int— INN
I
' EXHIBIT C
COST ESTIMATE
I
1. Direct Labor $ 95,800
2. Fringe Benefits and Overhead (127.73% of Item 1) 122,400
3. Subconsultants
Enviroscience, Inc. ; C. Harrison; M. Huber 50,000
4. Reproductions, Materials, Travel, Etc. 19,100
5. Fee (15% of Items 1 and 2) 32,700
' TOTAL $320,000
1
I
1
I
1
HNTB File 00180-13-81-P40/PCCont1-31
' C-1
II
PROPOSED BUDGET 1
HNTB LABOR I
PERSON DAYS
II
TASK Senior Prof Professional Tech Clerical Total
1.0 INVENTORY 5 10 5 1 21 II
2.0 DESCRIPTION 10 15 5 5 35 I
3.0 TRAFFIC
FORECASTS* 5 15 5 1 26
II4.0 LAYOUTS 5 50 20 75
5.0 IMPACTS* 60 85 20 12 177
II
6.0 ARCH.
SURVEY* 2 2 1 5 1
7.0 DEIS* 40 30 10 12 92
8.0 PUBLIC I
INVOLVEMENT 40 10 5 5 60
9.0 FEIS* 20 20 5 5 50
10.0 SR 15 15 5 4 39
11.0 MGT./COORD. 38 8 5 51
II
TOTAL 240 260 80 51 631
*Subconsultant Involvement
1
HOURLY RATES BY CLASSIFICATION
Senior Professional $20.00-30.00
II
Professional 12.00-20.00
Technical 10.00-13.00 II
Clerical 10.00-12.00
II
HNTB File 00180-13-81-P40/PCCont1-31
II
C-2
11
MnD{' ' Agreement No. ti 4140
11 47
Hera Co. Agreement PW 20-40-87
-
Fix hit ;3 7- H.C.P. 8720
1
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
' FOR
' PERFORMANCE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
AND A DESIGN STUDY REPORT
FOR THE T.H. 212 CORRIDOR
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the State
of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan
' Council, Carver County, Hennepin County, the City of Chanhassen,
' the City of Eden Prairie, and the City of Chaska hereinafter
referred to as the "Agencies" .
WITNESSETH:
• WHEREAS , it has been determined that an Environmental Impact
Statement and a Design Study Report for the T.H. 212 corridor are
required to be performed within the area from the east end of
the Cologne bypass to I-494 in Eden Prairie, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS , it has been determined that all of the said Agencies
are a part of or have a specific interest in the stated study
area; and
WHEREAS, the said Agencies will all benefit from the results
' of the Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study Report and
• are all willing to share in the cost of the preparation and
completion of same; and
pp
•
„_ ,
•
1
1
MnDOT Agreement No.
WHEREAS, it is the expressed interest of said Agencies to
participate and cooperate in the preparation and completion of '
the said studies and in furtherance of such interest, the
Agencies will form the T.H. 212 Task Force, consisting of one or
more representatives of each Agency; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that a consulting firm will
be selected by the T.H. 212 Task Force and hired by Carver County, . I
subject to agency review, to prepare the Environmental Impact
Statement and Design Study Report; and
WHEREAS, all of the said Agencies are authorized by Minnesota
Statute 471.59 to enter into agreements providing for the exer- '
cise of powers shared in common; and
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. T.H. 212 TASK FORCE ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES ,
1 .01. There is hereby created and formed a T.H. 212 Task
Force. The T.H. 212 Task Force shall be composed of at least one
( 1) staff member from each agency signing this agreement.
Additional representatives may participate in task force deliber- - -
ations, however, each participating agency shall be entitled '
to only one (1) vote.
1 .02 . A consultant firm shall be retained to perform the 1
Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study Report. The
Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study Report shall be
-2-
11
- MnDOT Agreement No. c414O
il '
Iconducted under the direction of the T.H. 212 Task Force with
Carver County as the contracting agent for administrative pur-
poses by I through and b a designated Project Administrator. The
I p g
Project Administrator shall be the Carver County Engineer.
'l .03 . A Chairman of the Task Force shall be elected
Iby a majority vote. The Metropolitan Council representative
shall act as Secretary, responsible for assembling meeting
Ipackets, minutes and other mutually agreeable duties that the .
Itask force deems appropriate.
1 .04 . The scope of the services to be performed by the
Iconsultant pursuant to the consultant contract as generally
I outlined above shall conform with the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) rules for Environmental Impact and Related
1 Procedures, 23CFR Part 771 as appearing in the Federal Register
Vol. 45 , No. 212 , October 30 , 1980; the Public Involvement/Public -
IHearing Procedures for Federal Aid Project Development adopted by
FHWA on March 10, 1987; and the Minnesota Department of
ITransportation Highway Project Development Process. Also, the
1 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Rules for State -
Environmental Review Program (Minnesota Rules 4410.0200 - .7800) _. _
Ishall govern the conduct of the studies unless specified other-
wise in the consultant contract. The Minnesota Department of
other-
ITransporation shall be the designated Responsible Governmental
IUnit (RGU) for the project. The Minnesota Department of
Transportation agrees to advance the project pursuant to the
IFederal Highway Administration Rules 23 CFR 771.129 ( c) ( 2 ) such
that an Environmental Impact Statement re-evaluation will not be
I -3-
D- 3
MnDOT Agreement No. 6A/An
necessary per the time limitations.
1 .05 . The Agencies shall furnish any and all information '
and/or data that they have available and which is pertinent to
the Study to the consultant firm without separate compensation
therefore or adjustment to any Agency' s share of the cost.
1 .06 . The Agencies , acting through their Task Force ,
representatives , shall at all times during the term of this
Agreement be afforded the opportunity for review of the work '
being performed for the Study, including but not limited to
obtaining without additional cost, copies of such reports,
studies and data compiled to date, as may be requested. Such
review by Task Force representatives shall not be considered
the official comments of the individual Agencies. Agency com- 1
ments shall be made during the normal Environmental Impact
Statement review process. I
1 .07. The ownership of the data collected for the study I
together with summaries , diagrams, maps, charts, reports and
other data derived therefrom shall be vested with Carver County, . I
subject -to the right of all Agency-participants- of this- Agreement -
to secure access to and copies of any such data, summaries,
diagrams , maps, charts , reports and other data. Each Agency
shall be entitled without cost to no less than twenty ( 20 ) copies
of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Design '
Study Report, and upon request, a copy of each summary, diagram,
map, chart, other reports and data collected or prepared in said
documents . MnDOT shall be furnished one ( 1 ) camera ready copy of
111
11)(49A-
, 47 ( MnDOT Agreement No. ra l40
the final Environmental Impact Statement and final Design Study
Report plus two (2) additional copies. MnDOT shall provide addi-
' tional printed final Environmental Impact Statement and final •
IDesign Study Report copies per normal distribution procedures .
ISECTION 2 . CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION.
2 . 01. The consultant contract shall not exceed $320 , 000
Iand shall be approved by a majority vote of the T.H. 212 Task
Force prior to execution by Carver County and the consultant.
ICosts to the municipalities , the counties , and the Metropolitan
ICouncil shall not exceed $200 ,000 . 00 and shall be shared as
follows:
IAgency Cost
City of Chanhassen $30 ,000
1 City of Chaska $30 , 000
ICity of Eden Prairie $30 , 000 _
Carver County $30 , 000
IHennepin County - $30 ,000
Metropolitan Council $50,000
IMinnesota Department of -
Transportation . _.__ _ . _.. _ _ r - $120 , 000 _
$320 ,000
Should the final cost of the study exceed $320 ,000 , the Minnesota _ _
IDepartment of Transportation agrees t6 complete the Environmental
IImpact Statement and Design Study Report at no additional cost to
the agency members listed below:
ICity of Chanhassen 1
City of Chaska
WI
I -5-
1 D4
i7 MnDOT Agreement No. 64341
City of Eden Prairie II
Carver County
Hennepin County
Metropolitan Council I
A final contract cost of less than $320 ,000 shall result in
reduced agency costs proportional to each agency' s cost obliga- 1
tions stated as follows:
Cost Percentage
I
Chanhassen $30 ,000 9 . 375%
Chaska $30 , 000 9 .375% II Eden Prairie $30 , 000 9.375%
Carver County $30 ,000 9 .375%
Hennepin County $30 ,000 9 .375%
I
Metropolitan Council $50,000 15 .625%
Minnesota Department of
Transportation $120 , 000 37.500%
$320 , 000 100 .000 I
2 .02. Each agency' s pro rata share shall be paid to Carver I
County as contracting agent, from time to time when and as
payments are required to be made by Carver County to the con-
II
sultant firm pursuant to the contract. Carver County shall
invoice each Agency from time to time as payments are required to
be made to the consultant firm. Such invoices shall reflect each I
member Agency' s share of the payment due and shall be paid within
35 days from receipt of the invoice. I
2 .03. The consultant firm shall be selected and approved
by a majority of the members of the Task Force, without separate
?r,-,-' ai otherw::_sr by the various parties hereto. The contract
I
between Carver County as contracting agent and the consultant
firm shall be approved by a majority of the members of the Task 1
Force. Agency comments shall be made during their normal contract
review processes before it is signed by Carver County. I
-6- °AY\ II
D -6
II
MnDOT Agreement No. 64' 40
SECTION 3 . DURATION AND AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS .
3 .01. This Agreement shall be valid and effective only
' when executed by the fully authorized officials of each Agency
' which officials by their signatures, shall also thereby certify
that the financial commitment will be obligated for the full
liability of their respective Agencies hereunder.
3 . 02. This Agreement shall remain in full' force and
effect until the completion of the contract with the consultant
between Carver County, as contracting agent, and the consultant
firm, or for a period of 42 months after the effective date of
the consultant' s contract with Carver County whichever comes
first.
' 3 . 03 . This agreement may be renewed for additional one
year terms upon written agreement of all parties .
1 .
•
1
1
1
v
. -
II
STATE OF MINNESOTA
I
Approved:
I
Departmen of Administration:
' I
By -' k 41111116l
Ifirj
I
Title _ {.4-4(:( _:/_.!
Date '7 11( I
As to form and execution by the I
Attorney General:
II
By - at�.
c' z I
Title 4./'
Date I
Department of Finance: I
,OdT.MAR!Rey
By
AUG 041987 II Title - ---. -
Date - --- -- -
I
Department of Transportation: - - _ II
By , )( . r.,— , � II
Title epufy torilOssi
Date 7- /s - I7 I
.
—8— 4)\ I
D- 8
111
MnD( Agreement No. 64140
The participating governmental agencies having signed this
contract and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having
duly approved this contract on the -,20 --day of �� , 1987 ;2
proper P County
and pursuant to such approval and the pro Count Officials
having signed this contract the parties hereto agree to be bound
by the provisions herein set forth.
11 HE NEPIN ' UNTY. BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
' By L kAr
Chaff
And
Associate%Deputy County ministrator
ATTEST:
glerk of County Board
tm
' Approved as to Legality Form fi -
By 7A(“-,VK Adt (
Ass-rtt_V e Di >C iunty Attorney
1 ` 7 l =g
I
I
I
I
-9
<7 Mar Agreement No. 64140 '
CARVER COUNTY
I ,
By 01 / By Cae-CISIL
ounty Cha ' man County Admi aC
Date f 9(p7 Date CQ -1 r 4t,- 1
I
Approved as to form '
4)17 - may'. f /byC�-
oui ty Attorney t
Date V ://G/3-
� '
1
r
I
I
-10- I
MnD& Agreement No. 64140
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By j By
t Council Chair E ecutive Director
Date 7 - - F7 Date 7/7/17
Approved as to form
By
' Metropolitan Council Legal Counsel
' Date 7-6 7
i
I
1
I
I
' -11-
D- (I
C r
Mrai1/4 Agreement No.
64140 1
• MUNICIPALITIES
City of Chanhassen
I
BY y' te „" By I
o r City Manager
Date / - �f"e? 7 Date 7 e—g 7
I
I
I
City of Eden Prairie
I
1
B ro/ ....//;.... �,>. By ci - I/ /
ayor Q ,! City Man. . :i
1
Date / / G''7 Date e 12.9 len .
I
. 1
•
City of Chaska 1
Aill°111111Hj ,I
BY -e' _ `, �� By ',� U-1c'/�
Mayer / City Administrator 1
Date / d r 7 Date 1/17
1
I
-12- 1
£ -Iz
I
, . 00770 y
II
RESOLUTION NO. 87-6-494
The following resolution was offered by Commissioner Sivanich, Chair
IIPublic Service Committee
I BE IT RESOLVED, That Agreement No. PW 20-40-87 with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council , Carver County and the Cities
of Eden Prairie, Chaska, and Chanhassan for the preparation of an Environmental
II Impact Statement and Design Study Report (C.P. 8720, Eden Prairie) , at an
estimated County cost of $30,000, be approved; that the Chairman of the Board be
authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of the County of Hennepin; and that
the Controller be authorized to disburse funds as directed.
I
The question was on the adoption of the resolution and there were c„o„YEAS
IIand no NAYS, as follows:
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS YEA NAY OTHER
IJeff Spartz X
IIRandy Johnson X
John Keefe X
IIJohn E. Derus ___x_
E. F. Robb, Jr. _.....X_
ISam S. Sivanich Y
Mark Andrew, Chairman Y
RESOLUTION ADOPTED.
ATTEST 7� Gt�l i iL• ;�
I Cierk the County Board �; ,
II .--i
L►i.;_ _,. ,,;,,,
2, r • `• ,.,
N.
1 JUN 301987
D -/3 �.rl
BOARD 01- C;VUr1 t Y 1,..,lam ',a
. CA('ER COUNTY, MINNESOT
DATE June 9, 1987
. RESOLUTION NO. 38-87
II MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Al Klingelhutz SECONDED BY CO(ISSION R Har ld TrpnAa
JOINT POWERS AGRE NENT
II
FOR
PERFORMANCE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STAMEN'
AND A DESIGN STUDY REPORT II FOR THE T.H. 212 CORRIDOR
WHEREAS, the construction of new TH 212 is a high priority of the Carver County
II
Board of Commissioners and is necessary for the continued growth and
vitality of the entire County, and
WHEREAS, the construction of new TH 212 is a critical element in reducing highway 1
congestion and providing safe transportation in the southwest metropolitan
area, and
I
WHEREAS, the completion of new TH 212 is an integral part of the county's transpor-
tation system, and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Council, the
cities of Chanhassen, Eden Prairie and Chaska, and the counties of Hennepin
and Carver have indicated a willingness to jointly fund the performance of
an Environmental Impact Statement and a Design Study Report for the TH 212
II
corridor, and
WHEREAS, a Joint Powers Agreement for the performance of an Environmental Impact
II
Statement and a Design Study Report for the TH 212 corridor has been writ-
ten, is attached hereto, and is made a part hereof,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the County Board of the County of Carver that the I
Joint Powers Agreement, a part hereof, is approved, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appropriate county officials. as identified in the
II
Joint Powers Agreement, a part hereof, be and hereby are authorized to ex-
ecute the agreement in behalf of the County of Carver. ,
YES
- ABSENT - - NO
AI Klingelhutz - II Harold Trende
Tracy D. Swanson
James Hoese II Earl F. Gnan
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF CARVER II
I, Richard J. Stolz, duly appointed, qualified and acting County Administrator of the
County of Carver, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I compared the forerd II copy of this resolution with the original minutes of the proceedings
of County Commissioners, Carver County, Minnesota, at its session held dn office, and 9th
have
day of June , 19 87 , now on file in the Admini II
the same to be a true and correct copy thereof. lb /
Dated this 9th day of June , 19 87 111 / \ ,,
J- /4+-
l �r II
4
' METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Suite 300 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
1
1
1 CERTIFICATION
1
1
1 I hereby certify that the attached excerpt from the minutes of the
Metropolitan Council meeting of June 25, 1987, is a true and exact copy of
the draft minutes on file in the offices of the Metropolitan Council. These
minutes will be approved by the full Council at its meeting of July 9, 1987.
1
Dated this 1st day of July, 1987.
•1
1
• �/ �/«ice��/�
Signae
1 Metropolitan Council Secretary
Title
i
i
1
1
Minutes of the Metropolitan Council Meeting of July 25, 1987 Page 6
Upon completion of this process, MAC should incorporate any changes in
the contours in future revisions of the Part 150 Study."
Motion carried unanimously.
1980.3.4 North Mississippi Regional Park Study/Master Plan,
Referral 9256-1 (Exhibit K)
Ulrich briefly summarized the committee's recommendation. She then moved,
seconded by Campbell:
•
"That the Metropolitan Council:
1. Approve the North Mississippi Regional Park Master Plan contingent
upon an easement or other binding agreement assuring a connection
through the Minneapolis Community Development Agency property along
the Mississippi River between 49th and 51st Avenues North.
2. Urge the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and the Minneapolis II Community Development Agency to make every possible effort
to incorporate the entire 10 acres in MCDA ownership into the regional
park."
Motion carried unanimously.
1980.3.5 Analysis of Mississippi National River and Recreation Area
Legislation (H.F. 2530) (Exhibit L)
Ulrich briefly presented the committee's recommendation. She then moved,
seconded by Evans:
•
"That the Metropolitan Council. submit testimony on the Mississippi National
River and Recreation Area legislation (H.R. 2530) at the July 2 field II
- hearing before the National Parks and Public Lands Subcommittee, based
on the staff analysis presented in this mem.;,_; and input from the
Metropolftan Waste Control Commissiot••:
Motion carried unanimously. - -
1980.4 Report of the Management Committee ,
1980.4.1 Council Participation in an Environmental Impact Statement
for TH 212 (Exhibit M)
Scully briefly explained the committee's recommendation. He then moved,
seconded by Waritz:
"1 . That the Metropolitan Council enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with
the cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie, Carver and Hennepin
Counties and the Minnesota Department of Transportation to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study Report for TH 212
between I-494 in Eden Prairie and the Cologne bypass, and that the
Executive Director be authorized to sign such agreement.
D-/6 ,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: June 29 , 1987 RESOLUTION NO: 87-65A
LMOTION BY: Hamilton SECONDED BY: Horn
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE
PERFORMANCE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND DESIGN
STUDY REPORT FOR TRUNK HIGHWAY 212
WHEREAS, for almost thirty years various agencies of the
' State of Minnesota, Metropolitan Council , cities, counties and
special interest groups have discussed and planned the TH 212
corridor through the cities of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen and
Chaska to serve said cities and the southwest sector of the
' . state; and
•
WHEREAS, the City Council has participated in citizen and
' technical advisory committee meetings regarding the TH 212
corridor; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the need for the timely
completion of the Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study
. Report; and
'
$30,000 WHEREAS, the City Council has authorized the expenditure of
as Chanhassen' s share toward the completion of the
Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study Report.
NOW,. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
11 City of Chanhassen hereby approves the Joint Powers Agreement for
the performance of the Environmental Impact Statement and Design
-Study Report.
Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this .
29th day of June, 1987. - -
ATTEST: -. -_
Don Ashworth, City Manager 'tThomas- L. Ham lton, Mayor
YES NO ABSENT
Hamilton None None
Johnson
Horn
Geving
Bovt
D-/8
- '
CITY OF CHASKA
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION '
DATE JUNE 10, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 87-51
MOTION BY ALDERMAN LINDALL SECONDED BY ALDERMAN RESS
A Resolution authorizing the execution of Hwy. 212 Environmental Impact •
Statement.
WHEREAS, the City of Chaska has determined the ultimate construction of
Hwy. 212 is critical to the economic well-being and transportation needs
of the City of Chaska; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to complete an Environmental Impact Statement on
the road project prior to it being eligible for funding; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has been unable to
provide funding in order to complete 100% of the Environmental Impact
Statement; and
WHEREAS, communities of Chaska, Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, along with
Carver County, Hennepin County and the Metropolitan Council have jointly
initiated a program to fund a portion of the environmental impact costs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESO VED, that the Mayor and City Administrator are
authorized to execute the Joint Powers Agreement for the Hwy. 212 Environ-
mental Impact Statement. •
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chaska, Minnesota .
this 15th day of June, 1987. f
/,,e,444‘
Robert P. Roepke, Mayor
Attest: K<-
Shirley BB•uers, City Clerk
I '
p-2Z