Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 01.13.2009MINUTES COUNCIL WORKSHOP JANUARY 13, 2009 6:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS A Council Workshop was held in the Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Ken Olson at 6:30 p.m. on January 13, 2009. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: _x Emelie Eaton _x Kate Hart _x Chuck Rodgers Alex Wilkins _x Doug Poehls _x Mark Mace _x Chuck Dickerson _x Norm Stamper OTHERS PRESENT: Sam Painter Mary Embleton Bill Sheridan Kurt Markegard James Caniglia Rick Musson Scott Wilm Jan Faught Public InAut (three-minute limit): Citizens may address the Council regarding any item of City business not on the agenda. The duration for an individual speaking under Public Input is limited to three minutes. While all comments are welcome, the Council will not take action on any item not on the agenda. Kevin Burson, 108 Durland Avenue, addressed the council. Mr. Burson has been a Laurel resident and property owner for fifteen years. He stated that the street maintenance tax has gone up 300 percent since 2004. His 2003 tax statement had a street maintenance tax of $39.33. Since 2004, it has gone to $157.30 a year. Mr. Burson spoke regarding the condition of Railroad Avenue between 5`h and 8`h West. In 2007, Cenex opened its back door access, which created extra truck traffic and degraded the street even more. He received a letter from the city on May 5, 2007, regarding maintenance of his property between his fence line, the sidewalk and Railroad Avenue. He cleaned up the property at that time, but did not do so last summer and did not receive a letter from the city. He asked the city to address the condition of Railroad Avenue. Planning: • Annexation for RK Development (Randall Swenson - TenderNest) • Special Review for RK Development James Caniglia stated that the annexation and special review are for the TenderNest assisted living center on the southwest corner of 12'h Street and First Avenue. Currently, there are two buildings with eleven residents in each. Randy Swenson, the applicant, wants to annex two large lots on First Avenue and five smaller lots on 12`h Street. His long-term plan is to expand the two current buildings from eleven beds to sixteen each and eventually build another building to house sixteen more people. There would be forty-eight units total. James stated that this would be a good thing for the city. The Planning Board recommended approval of this. The benefits would be to get curb, gutter, and sidewalk up First Avenue to 12'h and along 120' Street. James stated that it is good to have an assisted living facility next to a medical clinic. Assisted living centers can be located in residential districts Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 per the special review process. The applicant would pay for the curb, gutter and sidewalk and would not receive a Certificate of Occupancy until the work is completed. The resolution will be on the January 20th council agenda. Clerk/Treasurer: • Resolution - Bond resolution Mary Embleton stated that the bond resolution is for the water plant upgrade project that has been broken out into two phases. The bond resolution addresses the funding for the first phase, which mainly addresses the filters and pumps at the water plant. The funding would be for $690,000 of SRF loan and the remainder would be from the city's existing reserves. A commitment agreement from the DNRC will be prepared. The bond resolution was prepared by Dorsey & Whitney. The city attorney needs to review the document. Mary explained the Certificate as to Satisfaction of Conditions Precedent for Issuance of Additional Parity Bonds, which means that the city's 1997 bond was not issued by the SRF. The $1 million bond for the water reservoir was brokered through D.A.Davidson and funded a little differently. Those bond documents have a provision that, if any subsequent revenue bonds are issued from the Water Fund, it is necessary to look back at the two preceding years. Capturing two calendar years of data on the accounting system required some additional work, and the city met the requirement. The city should be able to refinance this old bond at a better interest rate next year in the next phase of the water system. This would provide a better interest rate for the money and remove the need to deal with the parody issue. The bid for the project was let and came in quite low. Dick Anderson is the contractor. With the funding part, $690,000 needs to be borrowed, with the first $500,000 at 2.75 percent interest, which is why the bond document includes two series of bonds. The first $500,000 is the 2009A Bond and the remainder is the 2009B Bond. The first half million is eligible for a hardship rate because the city's rates and charges are already high. The remaining $190,000 will have a 3.75 percent interest rate. Mary recommended approval of the loan and bond resolution. She stated it would not go forward unless it all comes forward properly together. The commitment agreement is a prelude to the bond and states that the city agrees to meet all the conditions and the DNRC oversees it. • Resolution - Approve contract with Housing Montana to administer the HOME Grant Program Mary stated that the city's HOME Grant Program is funded through program income. The program income comes from monies returned from clientele that were unable to stay in the homes for the specified period of time. The grant money comes back as a deferred loan and into the program in totality, plus a little more for interest. The city can then assist other first-time homebuyers into homes. The grant monies ran out a couple years ago, but the city's program continues with this funding. About seventy families have received help getting into their first homes. Big Sky EDA previously managed the program but is unable to continue. Housing Montana would like to take over the program. Mary recommended approval of the contract, which is similar to the Big Sky EDA contract. Mary reminded Mayor Olson that a council appointee is needed for the HOME Program Advisory Board. The resolution will be on the January 20th council agenda. 2 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 Resolution - Insurance Fund transfers Mary stated that the housekeeping item is done twice a year to transfer the monies collected through the Insurance Funds that are levied on property taxes to the General Fund to offset the health insurance costs. This year a total of $197,000+ will be transferred from the insurance funds into the General Fund to offset the cost. The resolution will be on the January 20`h council agenda. Chief Administrative Officer: • School District - Site Plan Bill Sheridan asked Kurt Markegard and two school district representatives to present the information regarding the possibility of providing adequate parking for elderly and handicapped individuals at the new stadium that is going to be built. Josh Middleton, Superintendent of Schools, and Scott Reiter, Director of Facilities, spoke to the council. Josh stated that the new field and track complex will have a grandstand of 4,500 seats. Code requires providing a minimum of eighteen spaces for handicapped parking. After a recent visit with Bill and Kurt, they are looking at working with the city to provide parking in the area adjacent to the Little League Field on the north end. It would benefit the school district and those who attend ball games or activities in Thomson Park. Scott stated that the area just north of the baseball diamond is about 70 feet wide by 250 feet long. The city might be able to provide surplus millings, if the school does the base work on it. Before they proceed., they need to find out if it is a possibility. The other option would be to have handicapped parking up in the high school parking lot and have people walk down to the stadium. Mayor Olson stated that the land is a piece of alkali flat that does not green up and has no particular use or value. It must be noted that the parcel is a dedicated park and would require a process to give it to the school district. The city may want to consider leasing the parcel to the school to allow joint use of the parking area by both the school district and the city. Kate stated that the Park Board discussed the issue at its last meeting. The area is not a park, and the Park Board felt that the best use would be for this kind of parking. There was council discussion regarding the benefits to both entities, the need to provide parking to people using the park, and the possibility of a lease agreement. Mayor Olson stated that the council looked on the proposal with favor. The city will schedule a meeting with the school district for further discussion regarding the fence line on the border of the Little League field, the need to abandon roads where the high school is located in order to clean up the record, and a small piece of land on the border of the Little League field that does not serve a purpose. • Presentation of stimulus package Bill stated that, with the new president in office, there will be legislation allowing major improvements to cities, counties, and states. The city prepared a list of items that need to be done in Laurel. The list was brought to the attention of the federal legislators and will be provided to the governor and President of the United States. Most of the projects will not be funded because each and every community, county, and state expects to provide a substantial number of projects. It is not known how much money is involved, how it will be disbursed, and under what circumstances. The 3 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 State asked Alec Hansen, League of Cities and Towns, to provide a fair and appropriate way of disbursing the funds. Bill asked the council for suggestions for the list. Mayor Olson asked Bill and Mary to report on today's conference call with Alec Hansen. Bill stated that Alec Hansen called on the cities to gather how specific projects would become the higher level of consideration and be brought to the attention of the new administration. Mary stated that the League met with Senator Jon Tester last Friday to get guidance on how to address this. It is a huge undertaking, time is of the essence, and it is expected to move forward very quickly. During last Friday's meeting, Senator Tester wanted the League of Cities to spearhead how the cities and towns' needs would be addressed. He wanted the process to include accountability, a distribution system, and fairness, as he has the needs of the smaller communities in mind. Today's conference call was mainly made up of the Legislative Committee of the League of Cities, of which Mayor Olson is a member, and the Board of Directors, of which Mary is a member. Alec specifically invited Janet Cornish, who is well-versed in federal projects, spending and the process. She suggested that a two- tiered distribution system similar to what CDBG uses would be appropriate. CDBG Programs recognize the three major cities in the State of Montana, and federal guidelines are anything over 50,000. The communities of Missoula, Great Falls, and Billings are in one category with CDBG and the remaining cities are in another category. Tim Burton, City of Helena, developed an outline to address the accountability. He said that the projects must be shovel ready in a very short time and officially approved by the councils and commissions of the state to make sure they are approved projects and should generate new jobs. The main focuses of the stimulus package are infrastructure and job creation. The League will communicate the information to the 129 incorporated cities and towns in the State of Montana. The big cities have the resources to have projects ready to go, but smaller communities do not. They were mindful of the smaller communities and suggested that engineering monies be included. How these things are going to be rated and how the monies will be distributed will be a work in progress. One idea was shared revenue based on population. Another idea was using a three-tiered system, with the three entitlement cities on one level, and the remaining first and second class cities on a second level. They would have a disbursement system through the CDBG Program for the monies. The third class cities and towns would be modeled after the TSEP program. TSEP does not cater to larger communities, but is concerned about a community's needs. It is a complex issue. The governor submitted projects that had already been submitted to state programs like CDBG and TSEP. If TSEP projects are funded by this pot of money, it would free up TSEP to fund other projects. Executive review: • Laurel Urban Renewal Agency Mayor Olson stated that six letters of interest were received for the Laurel Urban Renewal Agency. He asked the council for input and will present a list of five to fill the positions at the next council workshop. • Update on the water intake project Kurt Markegard stated that COP Construction requested to suspend work on the project until spring when the ice melted off and before high flows. Patrick Murtagh, Great West Engineering, disagreed with that assessment of the river and requested that COP Construction review the river weekly as far as having the flows open and being able to do the work. There have not been any problems at the water plant to date besides having some slush ice due to the coldness of the water. 4 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 • Update on the asphalt plant Bill spoke regarding the asphalt plant located on Railroad Street. He has contacted Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroads. The objective is to get access to the property to test for problems with the soils. Grants are available to allow us to clean that up. There are structures on the property that may create contamination of the soils and airborne problems. Bill stated that grants might be available to begin the process of dismantling the structures. There was discussion regarding ownership of the property, the city's right to condemn the property, the railroad's interest in cleaning up the property, and the available grants. • Discussion regarding annexation of Riverside Park Mayor Olson asked staff to present comments regarding the annexation of Riverside Park. James Caniglia stated that there was interest in annexing the park about a year ago prior to the centennial celebration. The annexation request would need to go to the Planning Board for a recommendation to the council. James stated that annexation would allow law enforcement more control over the park. There are some issues such as leases with buildings and the shooting range used by the Rifle Club, as city codes do not allow open shooting ranges. There is an active lease with the Rifle Club, but the other clubs do not have current leases. The lease with the Rifle Club has a moratorium on the use of firearms and expires in 2010. Kate Hart stated that the Park Board recommends annexation of Riverside Park. Chief Musson has been an advocate of annexation of Riverside Park for years, which would allow the police department to better serve the citizens in that area. Mary stated that, once the park is annexed, it would be included in the street maintenance district assessment and would pay $800. Every piece of property in the city limits pays street maintenance whether they are exempt from property taxes or not. Kate stated that the Park Board has discussed this issue. Step one was getting the survey done to determine the boundaries and acreage. The Park Board has been looking at having a master plan done for the park and has discussed the possible uses, including extensive trails and expanding the area for entertainment. There are long-term and short-term goals, and cleaning up the park is the main issue. Nothing is set, but there is a lot of potential. Norm Stamper stated that there had previously been discussion regarding annexation of all city property, including the cemetery, water treatment plant, and wastewater treatment plant. Although the focus is on Riverside Park, he did not want the other properties to be forgotten. Mayor Olson stated that the city will make sure it has the proper documentation for the other lands and review the advantages and disadvantages of annexation for those particular parcels. Mayor Olson asked the council if it desired to go forward with the process of annexation. After further council discussion, Mayor Olson stated that the city would apply to the City-County Planning Board for the annexation process to begin. 5 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 Mary stated that annexation of the park would be advantageous when the city applies for grants. Other items • Resolution -Revised job description for Utility Plants Superintendent Mayor Olson stated that the previously-approved job description was for a non-exempt position. The revised job description is for an exempt, non-union position, for the supervision of the wastewater and water treatment plants. • Carl Anderson, Morrison-Maierle: Update on WWTP and I-90 crossing Mayor Olson asked Carl Anderson, Morrison-Maierle, to present options regarding the proposed wastewater project for the council's consideration. Carl stated that, at the last council workshop, he brought up an issue with the crossing under the interstate. The issues with the wastewater project were discussed at that time, and the council approved a resolution to proceed with activated sludge. Carl spoke regarding the situation with the I-90 crossing and some fixes for the issue, which was discovered during the trunk main project. With the project on Lindy Lane, a sewer line was brought up and connected to the existing sewer line underneath the interstate. The contractor had a hard time connecting because the pipe should be round and is actually oval and has cracking in it. Subsequent to that, staff tried to TV the line from a manhole south of the interstate, but the camera went in sixteen feet and the camera dropped off a ledge that was two feet in depth. A cracked pipe and the fact that the line could not be videoed are two significant issues, and there is a problem with the line. According to MDT records, there is a single crossing with two pipes going through it. One pipe is the sanitary sewer and one is a storm drain that is reported to drain from the railroad property. Carl stated that this poses the question whether it is the railroad storm drain or if the city has any responsibility there. The railroad property is there, and there is land within the city between the railroad property and the interstate right-of-way. East Railroad is the road. There may be some city responsibility or city storm drainage going into that storm drain. It is unclear exactly whose responsibility that storm drain is, but the crushed pipe and the problem with the sewer line going through there are issues. Carl explained aspects of the project that replaced the main in East Railroad and the need to replace the remaining 500 feet to East Railroad so there is new pipe all the way to the plant. The pipe is new from the frontage road to the plant. Another issue is that this is part of MDT right-of-way, and there is the question of whether MDT would pay for part of it. There are a number of technical and institutional issues that need answers. Since it is purported to be the railroad storm drain, there is also the question if the railroad would participate in the cost of the fix. Another technical question is regarding the condition of the 60-inch pipe. Carl stated that there are several different potential solutions, and he explained three diagrams and their projected costs. He had presented the highest cost option to the council on December 30a'. If the council proceeds, questions regarding the options will be addressed. The condition of the 60-inch steel casing is unknown, but it could be just fine. The interstate was built in 1964 or 1965. Carl explained that the first alternative would be to maintain the existing storm in the existing casing. It would be assumed that the storm drain is fine, which could be the case if it is the railroad's responsibility. This alternative would not connect the 500 feet by the frontage road, which may need 6 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 to be fixed in the future. The estimated costs, including engineering, is roughly about $600,000 and would be the lowest cost option. There was discussion regarding partnering with the railroad for the drainage issues of the proposed project and the railroad's method of getting rid of storm water. Carl stated that the issue has not been fully researched because Morrison-Maierle does not have a contract with the city to do so. He is presenting the information because they recognized that the problem existed and a project is coming forward. In recent discussions regarding activated sludge, staff had brought up issues about whether or not to proceed with UV. In the facility plan, Morrison- Maierle recommended postponing the UV. The thought process was that the W project and the crossing project were about the same cost, so if the council was contemplating spending extra money on UV at this point, Carl thinks the bigger need would be to correct this situation, put the UV ofd and then apply for grant funding for the UV. There was discussion regarding the unusual situation with two pipes in the same case crossing and the possibility that MDT has some responsibility. Questions about who is responsible and what the easement agreement looks like still need to be answered. Kurt stated that having two lines in one casing is no longer allowed. Alternative A would address the crushed pipe situation. The pipe would be replaced down to the frontage road and reconnected into the manhole in the frontage road. Carl stated that he would present three alternatives, but he is not sure if the first two will work as more information is needed. However, he knows that Alternative C, which is the mostly costly alternative, would work. He stated that the council needed to be informed about the issues in order to make a decision. The costs would be reduced if the railroad and MDT participate in the project. But you may need to be prepared for this. Mary asked regarding the timeframe, since the city is getting close to the deadline for the TSEP project. She asked if there is enough time to revise the Preliminary Engineering Report to include this additional work and get DEQ approval in the four months before the deadline. The city would be committing to spending an additional $1.1 million and putting an even larger burden on the ratepayers. The project is already at $5.5 million. The additional work would change the original scope of the project again and add another $1.1 million to the cost. Even though the city hopes to recover some of the cost from the railroad and MDT, the rates would have to reflect the total cost. Carl stated that he recognized that, but it was incorrect. He said that a commitment agreement with SRF is needed to satisfy the grant agreement with TSEP. Mary stated that the commitment agreement will come after DEQ approves the engineering. The deadline is June 30`h Carl stated that DEQ approval is needed. That is not an issue, but it is his understanding that it is not needed by the June deadline. He recommended that staff reconfirm that with the funding agencies. Carl stated that this proposed additional part of the project would not come out of the grant, which was written around a specific project. This money would come from the SRF loan portion. To satisfy the startup conditions for the grant, a loan commitment agreement is needed. With the water project, the city is doing the loan commitment agreement and closing on the loan simultaneously because the 7 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 project has already been designed and bid. The city is in a different position on that project than on this project. With this project, the design has not been completed and a loan commitment agreement is needed to satisfy the grant conditions. On the water project, there is not a grant so grant conditions do not have to be satisfied prior to moving forward with the project. Carl explained that the second alternative adds the remaining 500 feet to the project for an additional $200,000 cost. Nothing would be done to the storm drain, but the sewer would be extended up to Railroad. There was a question regarding whether the water and sewer lines are tighter going further up the line at this location. Alternative C would fix the storm drain and the sanitary sewer. A 54-inch casing would be inserted through the existing 60-inch casing. It would have some holes in order to inject a grout that would fill the annular space between the outside of the smaller pipe and the inside of the existing pipe. This would result in two pipes with concrete in between. Then the 30-inch sewer could be inserted and connected up straight. The benefit with this alternative is that the line would be straight and not have to drop. Temporary bypass pumping would be needed with all three alternatives in order to maintain the service. The construction sequence might be to bore the casing, bypass the pumps, and then do other things with the inside of the casing. This alternative includes the 54-inch inside the 60-inch and has a new storm drain crossing. The cost would be $1.1 million. Carl stated that the casing pipe might be acceptable, which could reduce the cost. The 30-inch pipe up the frontage road would work for any option for future development on the east side of town. Carl stated that prior discussion was about planning for this, hoping that the cost would be reduced because the pipe is technically acceptable, or that MDT and the railroad were willing to assist with the costs. He suggested that the project could be designed and included in the bid package with the treatment plant work as bid alternatives. Depending on the bids on the main project, the council could decide regarding funding and rate increases to cover the alternative project. This would give some options, as the council would know the costs before committing to the project and could end up with a lower cost fix if it is bid with a larger project. Carl distributed copies of the rate impact summary for the alternative, and a copy is attached to these minutes. The council already selected the original project plus activated sludge. He explained the proposed rate increases for the original project with activated sludge and the addition of the crossing project. He also explained the resulting rates for 2010, 2011, 2012 with annual increases versus a single increase in 2010. There was discussion regarding citizens' reactions regarding gradual rate increases versus large rate increases. Emelie stated that some residents preferred the large rate increases over small annual increases, so the city would not be "nickel and diming" them. Mark stated that the public has expressed the need for small annual rate increases. Norm mentioned that, with the large increase, ratepayers would actually be paying less in 2012 and beyond. Carl explained that is because more revenue would be generated up front. Doug stated that part of the problem is that the public does not understand that the public would not have to worry about additional increases later if the higher increase is approved initially. 8 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 Carl stated that he has seen councils raise rates for a particular project and then want to keep the rates there until the next project comes along or the money is depleted. He pointed out that the costs for running a water or wastewater system consist of labor, chemicals, power, vehicles, fuel, all of which continue to increase in price. Realistically, the council should raise rates in an amount equal to the wage increases and expenses. He is an advocate of annual rate increases similar to a cost-of-living raise. Mayor Olson thanked Carl for the presentation regarding the options. He stated that the taxpayer's dollar is always the most important thing, and making sure that the money is used in the most prudent way is one of the best illustrations of time spent tonight. Carl had indicated that an answer was not needed tonight, and the council is not prepared to make a decision. There was discussion regarding maintenance of the line before and after completion of the project. Carl commented regarding the overall project and Mary's comment about holding up the project. The council has given Morrison-Maierle direction on the activated sludge. Morrison-Maierle is moving forward with the Facility Plan amendment. Once it is done, they will move into final design. Aside from the engineering, the only thing holding the city up on the grant is the commitment agreement. If the city wanted to move forward with this, the city would not have to commit to the entire cost upfront. The city could submit an SRF loan application to include the original project, activated sludge, and the crossing project as the loan amount. Morrison-Maierle would complete the design and include the bid alternatives in the bid. When the council actually awards the contract, it will specify if it is the base bid or includes the alternatives. At that point, the council would make the decision and the city would borrow the appropriate amount of funding. The benefit is that the city would have the design and the cost figures. The city could couple this with the W project and take it to TSEP for grant application in the next grant cycle. Carl stated that there are some options, and he thinks the city should commit to the design at this point, put forth the SRF application for the whole project, and then decide whether to include the crossing in the project after the bids are received. If MDT and the railroad participate in the project, it would ease the burden on the ratepayers. Review of draft council agenda for Janu 20, 2009 Mayor Olson stated that the correct headings for the commitment agreement and the bond resolutions would be on the final agenda. Final resolutions will be in the mailboxes by Friday. Attendance at the Janu 20, 2009 council medtm Norm Stamper will not attend the council meeting. Announcements: Doug Poehls stated that an Emergency Services Committee meeting is scheduled on Monday, January 26'h. The agenda will include the Laurel Ambulance Service. Mark Mace stated that the Public Works Committee met last night to set a direction for the committee. The committee will be forwarding its recommendations to the council. Mark thanked Kurt for his presentation to the committee. He stated that it will be an active committee. . Mayor Olson thanked Mark for his efforts with the Public Works Committee. 9 Council Workshop Minutes of January 13, 2009 Chuck Dickerson asked regarding the list of acronyms. The list, which was included in the City Council Information book, will be distributed to the council again. Norm Stamper recently received the master plan for the Laurel Cemetery. The Cemetery will meet soon to review the master plan and make a recommendation to the council. Chuck Rodgers suggested contacting previous city employees that might remember information regarding Carl's presentation tonight. Emelie Eaton asked regarding truck parking in the Helena parking lot. The issue was discussed at a previous council workshop, and she has heard complaints recently. The trucks park in the Helena parking lot next to the interior curb and hinder traffic looking to the west. Mayor Olson stated that the chief of police could be contacted because it is an enforcement issue. Doug questioned if there was a stipulation requiring landscaping in the boulevard when the coffee kiosk was approved several years ago. Research will be done and presented at the next council workshop. The joint city-county meeting is scheduled on January 22"d at 5:30 p.m. at DJ's Restaurant. Items on the agenda include: Bench Connector Presentation (County Commissioners) and the Yellowstone County Veterans' Cemetery (Norm Stamper). Chuck Dickerson requested discussion regarding the speed signs on Airport Road at that meeting. Mayor Olson added discussion on the proposed stimulus package to the joint meeting agenda. The council workshop adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cindy Allen Council Secretary NOTE: This meeting is open to the public. This meeting is for information and discussion of the Council for the listed workshop agenda items. 10 2009 Federal Stimulus Funding Projects - City of Laurel, Montana January 7, 2009 1 8th Avenue, Main Street to Maryland Lane - Eng. Inc. Cost: $3,850,000 2. Submitted by State: New lift stations and new sewer interceptor mains under MRL Train Tracks and I-90 - M&M Eng. Cost: $4,650,000 3. Submitted by State: Water Mains and two new reservoirs north of Laurel- Great West Engineering; Cost - $3,000,000 4. WWTP Upgrade - M&M Engineering; Cost - $4,632,500 5. Submitted by State: WTP upgrade - Great West Engineering; Cost - $3,167,710 6. 6th Street - 8th Avenue to Juniper Avenue -- Great West Engineering; Cost - $4,700,000 7. West Laurel Interchange Project - Installation of water and sewer mains under the new interstate - Great West Engineering; Cost - $1,000,000 8. Repave of 4th Street South in Laurel - Great West Engineering; Cost - $320,000 9. Water service to Riverside Park - Great West Engineering; Cost - $150,000 10. Storm water mains/ditches - east and west of Laurel and under RR tracks - Great West Engineering; Cost - $1,650,000 It. Water and sewer services - south side of Main Street - Great West Engineering; Cost - $180,000 City of Laurel Rate Impact Summary 12/30/08 2009 % Incr, Current Approved 2010- P!O Cost Rate Rate 2012 2010 2011 2012 Resulting Rates, Ev en % Increa se 2010 - 201 2 Original Project, 2010 $4,740,750 $21.57 $ 25.57 3% $ 26.34. $ 27.13 $27.94 Orig Project + AS $5,885,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 6% $ 27.10 $ 28.73 $30.45 Orig Project + AS + UV $6,665,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 7% $ 27.36 $ 29.28 $31.32 Orig Project +AS+ Crossing $6,971,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 10% $ 28.13 $ 30.94 $34.03 Orig Project +AS+UV+ Crossing $7,751,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 12% $ 28.64 $ 32.08 $35.92 Resulting Rates, Sin /e Increase in 2010, no increase 2011, 2012 Original Project, 2010 $4,740,750 $21.57 $ 25.57 5% $ 26.85 $ 26.85 $26.85 Orig Project + AS $5,885,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 11% $ 28.38 $ 28.38 $28.38 Orig Project + AS + UV $6,665,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 15% $ 29.41 $ 29.41 $29.41 Orig Project +AS+ Crossin $6,971,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 21% $ 30.94 $ 30.94 $30.94 Orig Project +AS+UV+ Crossing $7,751,000 $21.57 $ 25.57 25% $31 96 $ 31.96 $31.96 2006 Wastewater Improvements Project (Trunk Main Project) Laurel, MT Collapsed Pipe at Connection to Existing South of I-90 near Lindy Lane and S. Frontage Rd. intersection