32740 - CDBG Water/Sewer Applicant Information Application

Transcription

IowaGrants
1 of 18
https://www.iowagrants.gov/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentP...
Application
32740 - CDBG Water/Sewer
55769 - City of Mount Pleasant Jay Street Sanitary Sewer Replacement
CDBG
Status:
Not Awarded
Signature:
Tracey Lamm
Submitted
Date:
Submitted
By:
2012-12-18 04:15:20
Tracey Lamm
Applicant Information
Organization Information
Project Officer
AnA User Id TRACEY.LAMM@IOWAID
First Name* Tracey
Lamm
First Name
Middle Name
Last Name
Title:
Email:*
Address:*
tlamm@seirpc.com
211 N. Gear Avenue Suite 100
City*
West Burlington Iowa
City
Phone:*
Organization Southeast Iowa Regional Planning
Name:*
Commission
Organization
Regional Planning Commission
Type:*
Tax ID:
DUNS:
Organization
www.seirpc.com
Website:
Address:
211 N. Gear Avenue, Suite 100
52655
State/Province Postal Code/Zip
West Burlington Iowa
319-753-4306
Phone
City
Ext.
Program Area
CDBG
of Interest*
Fax:
Agency
Phone:
319-753-5107
Fax:
Benefactor
Vendor
Number
319-754-4763
52655
State/Province Postal Code/Zip
Ext.
Cover Sheet-General Information
Authorized Official
Name*
Steven Brimhall
Title*
Mayor
Organization*
City of Mount Pleasant
Address*
220 W. Monroe Street
City/State/Zip*
Telephone Number*
Mount Pleasant
Iowa
52641
City
State
Zip
319-385-1470
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
2 of 18
E-Mail*
schleisman@iowatelecom.net
Fiscal Officer/Agent
Name*
Susan Coffey
Title
Grant Administrator
Organization*
Southeast Iowa Regional Planning Commission
Address*
211 N. Gear Avenue
Suite 100
City/State/Zip*
West Burlington
Iowa
52656
City
State
Zip
Telephone Number*
319-753-4302
E-Mail*
scoffey@seirpc.com
County(ies) Participating,
Involved, or Affected by this
Proposal*
Henry County
Congressional District(s)
Involved or Affected by this
Proposal*
2
Iowa Senate District(s) Involved
or Affected by this Proposal*
42
Iowa House District(s) Involved
or Affected by this Proposal*
84
Congressional Map
District Map
District Map
Applicant Information
Applicant*
City/County/COG*
Mount Pleasant
Henry
Southeast Iowa Regional Planning Commission
City
County
COG
Don't have a DUNS #? Click here to apply.
*
884521493
DUNS #
Contact Information
Project Engineer*
Warner Engineering Associates, Inc.
Firm Name
*
James Warner, P.E.
Name/Title
*
102 S. Saunders Avenue
Address
*
*
Mount Pleasant
Henry
52641
City
County
Zip
319-385-4180
319-385-4401
jimwarner42@hotmail.com
Phone
Fax
E-mail
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
3 of 18
Elected Official
*
Mr.
Steve
Brimhall
Salutation
First Name
Last Name
Suffix
220 W. Monroe Street
Address
Address 2
*
*
Mount Pleasant
Henry County
52641
City
County
Zip
319-385-1470
319-385-1466
schleisman@iowatelecom.net
Phone
Fax
E-mail Address
Project Information
Provide the address for City Hall for all area-wide benefit projects.
Project Address*
Jay Street
Address
*
Mount Pleasant
Henry County
52641
City
County
Zip
Check all that apply:
Applicant received CDBG
Funds.
If prior CDBG funds received,
please identify the program, year
and amount?
Applicant has received no prior
funding.
Yes
Applicant will contract for
administration.
If applicant will contract for
administration, please identify
the entity:
Applicant will administer grant
If the applicant plans to
administer the grant, please
describe applicant's
administrative capacity.
Project Activity
Will any activites be conducted
in a 100-year flood plain?*
No
Will project activity include
demolition of a standing
structure?*
No
If yes, is the structure occupied?
Year structure was built
Is this project identified in an
Iowa Great Places agreement?*
No
If this is a wastewater project,
provide date of the project
initiation meeting with DNR.
07/12/2012
Projects included in an Iowa Great Places agreement within three years of submission of this applications entitles the applicant to additional
consideration.
The Department of Natural Resources requires project initiation meetings for all w astew ater projects before they w ill review the project
plans and specifications. Completion of this meeting prior to submitting the CDBG application will be an indication of readiness to proceed.
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
4 of 18
Will a delay in the contribution of
local effort be necessary?*
No
If yes, until what date?
If the local funds for your project are from another outside agency (i.e. USDA_RD or IDNR) and you anticipate a delay in the receipt of those
funds, you may consider requesting a delay of local effort. This w ill allow you to draw CDBG funds for project costs until the local funds are
secured. A delay of local funds can be granted until a specified date (not to exceed two months following the project bid letting ) or
until two-thirds of the grant amount has been drawn down, whichever comes first.
Proposed end date*
10/14/2014
(All contracts w ill be 18 months unless you anticipate a shorter schedule)
Project Purpose
Sewer Activity Descriptions
Water Activity Descritpions
Budget Activity
Row
Activity
Activity
Description
Activity 1
55 - Sanitary Snipe Run
Sewer
Interceptor
Improvements Sewer
Performance
Targets
CDBG
Amount
Local Amount
Total Activity
Amount
Total CDBG
Amount
Total Local
Amount
$580,000.00 $1,500,000.00 $2,080,000.00 $580,000.00 $1,500,000.00
Activity 2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Activity 3
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Activity 4
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$20,000.00
$0.00
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$0.00
Enginering,
181 Testing,
Administration
Administration Administration,
Inspection
Totals
$600,000.00 $1,500,000.00 $2,100,000.00 $600,000.00 $1,500,000.00
Sources of Local Funding
Row
Source of Local funding
Source 1
DNR/SRF
Amount Local Funds Secured?
Date
Local
Funds
Will be
Secured
$1,500,000.00 Yes
Source 2
$0.00
Source 3
$0.00
Source 4
$0.00
Construction Cost Detail
Row
Item Description
Item 1
Snipe Run Interceptor Sewer
$900,000.00
Item 2
Pavement and Sidewalk
Replacement
$800,000.00
Item 3
Estimated Quantity
Estimated Cost
$0.00
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
5 of 18
Item 4
$0.00
Totals
$1,700,000.00
Professional Fees and Permits
Description
Estimated Cost
Final Design
$120,000.00
Construction Administration
$210,000.00
Permits/Archaeological Survey
$50,000.00
Legal and Bonding Fees
$0.00
CDBG Administration
$20,000.00
Other (Please specify below)
$0.00
Totals
$400,000.00
Related Construction Costs
Description
Related Construction Estimated Cost
Real Property/Easements/Acquisition
$0.00
Contigencies
$0.00
Other (Please specify below)
$0.00
Totals
$0.00
Other Narrative
If other professional fees or
permits, please describe:
If other related construction
costs, please describe:
Preparer
Date Prepared:
7/2/2012
Estimates Prepared by:
James Warner, P.E.
Address/Phone/E-mail:
102 S. Saunders Avenue, Mount Pleasant, IA
319-385-4180
jimwarner42@hotmail.com
LMI Benefit Chart
Row
Activity 1
Project Activity (as listed on the
budget)
55 - Sanitary Sewer
Improvements
Total Persons Served
8751
Total LMI Persons Served
LMI
Benefit
5551
63.0
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
6 of 18
Activity 2
0
Activity 3
0
Activity 4
0
Totals
Source of LMI Benefit Information Provided Above (Check one)
Local Income Survey
Yes
Special Census
2000 HUD Census Data
Note: 2010 Census CDBG Percentage of Low & Moderate Incomes For Cities & Counties has not been released. Please use 2000 Census
data available on our web site at http://iowalifechanging.com/community/community/default.aspx.
Other
If Other, please specify
Beneficiary Race/Ethnicity Chart
Racial/Ethnic Group
Number of Persons - Each Group
White
Number of Persons - Hispanic Origin
539
Black/African American
13
Asian
3
American Indian/Alaskan Native
2
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
4
American Indian/Alaskan Native & White
Asian & White
6
Black/African American & White
American Indian/Alaskan Native &
Black/African American
Other Multi-Racial
4
31
Sub-Total
571
31
Totals
571
31
Number of Users
Row
Number of Residential Users
Water
Sewer
2960
2577
User Fees & Revenues
Row
Water Fees
Sewer Fees
Current average monthly residential bills
$24.00
$24.00
Projected average monthly bill with CDBG
funds
$26.00
$26.00
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
7 of 18
Projected average montly bill without CDBG
funds
$27.00
$27.00
Rate Increase
Month/Year of last water rate
increase
October 2012
Month/Year of last sewer rate
increase
July 2012
Bond & Debt Information
City only, do not include county/school district levies
Current Tax Levy*
$12.00
/$1,000 of assessed value
Bonding Capacity*
$19,756,362.00
5% of assessed valuation
Current General Obligation Bond
Indebtedness*
$8,680,000.00
Detail of Existing Debt
Row
Debt Type
(Rev. Bond,
GO Bond, Other)
Purpose
Issue Date
Water Utility Debt 1
Revenue
water treatment plant
4/2/2012
Issue Amount
$2,950,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Sewer Utility Debt 1
Revenue
Refinance Sewer
Improvements
SRF
SRF
2019
$9,611,000.00
2025
Inflow/Infiltration Study
$356,000.00
2012
Jay Street Planning
$250,000.00
2013
All Other Debt 1
Year
of
Retirement
$0.00
Revenue
Diesel Generation Plant
5/2009
$3,600,000.00
All Other Debt 2
$0.00
All Other Debt 3
$0.00
All Other Debt 4
$0.00
2017
Outstanding Debt
Total outstanding water utility
debt (GO Bonds, Revenue Bonds $2,912,000.00
and other debt):
Total outstanding sewer utility
debt (GO Bonds, Revenue Bonds $2,280,000.00
and other debt):
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
8 of 18
Project Feasibility Narrative
Project Feasibility Narrative
What community needs will this project address?*
Prepare a brief narrative describing the proposed project.
The City of Mount Pleasant has several issues with inflow and infiltration in the city's sanitary sewer system.
The city has made several efforts to curtail the problem, but it remains an issue, especially in the Snipe Run
Sewer-shed, the city's worst area for inflow-infiltration overloading of the sanitary sewer system and the storm
sewers. This causes backup of water into basements and overflows from the sewers. The Snipe Run
Sewer-shed is also the cities central collection system and among the oldest sewer infrastructure in Mount
Pleasant.
The sanitary sewers in the Snipe Run Sewer-shed are in bad condition from installation methods and
deterioration over a century of use. Pipe conditions that make the proper operation and maintenance of the
sewers impossible include:
Broken Pipes
Misaligned joints that catch debris in the wastewater and sometimes create backups;
Improper taps for service lines, sometimes protruding so far into the pipe the cleaning equipment or
camera cannot pass or inspect the tap
Sagging flow lines allow water to stand in the pipe
Manholes made of brick that frequently cause clogging
Sewer locations under residences - a situation unique to the Snipe Run Sewer-shed exists because the
sewers were constructed along the waterways where they could serve the most area and installation
required less digging; people were allowed to construct homes over the sewers, and there are no
recorded easements that allow work in the back yards to do proper maintenance or repairs of the sewer
without disturbing the neighborhood, buying those homes, and relocation of the residents.
The city's Northeast Lagoon cannot provide adequate treatment, so effluent quality does not always comply with
Water Quality Limits of the NPDES Permit. Most difficulties are related to the influent volume and rainfall causes
inflow and infiltration into the sewers resulting in large volumes of influent, which overloads the lagoon. While
weather cannot be controlled, there are options for covering the lagoon and the volume of wastewater going into
the lagoon can also be controlled.
What specific outcomes will result from completion of the project?*
The City of Mount Pleasant will be able to comply with the NPDES Permit , discharging treated water that meets
the Water Quality Limits, while providing good, cost-effective sewer service for the residents and businesses of
the community.
How has the number of beneficiaries been documented?*
The beneficiaries of the project are the residents and businesses that are located within the Snipe Run
Sewer-shed area of Mount Pleasant. The number of beneficiaries has been determined by a count of the
residents and businesses in this geographically defined area by the City of Mount Pleasant. This information
was taken from US Census data and sewer user information collected by the City of Mount Pleasant.
How has the LMI benefit been documented?*
The City of Mount Pleasant has conducted a Low to Moderate Income Survey using guidelines specified by the
Iowa Economic Development Authority. The survey results indicate that there are a total of 3,010 households in
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
9 of 18
the project area. The number of households contacted for the survey was 335. The city received an 84%
response rate to the survey and it was determined through the data collected that 63.44% of those surveyed are
below the LMI income threshold. This number indicates the City of Mount Pleasant is eligible to receive
Community Development Block Grant funds for the sewer project outlined in this application.
How soon will the project proceed if an award is made?*
Considerable planning has taken place over several years regarding this project. Provided all environmental
and archeological clearances are met, and construction permits issued - the construction of the project is
scheduled to begin in October, 2013.
If applicable, has a specific site
been determined for the
project?*
Yes
Will there be acquisition of
property related to the project?*
No
Is there documented local
planning/citizen support for the
project?*
Yes
Are there formal studies by
outside agencies that support
the project?*
Yes
Describe the project owner's capacity to operate/maintain the project and continue its viability after CDBG assistance. For a stormwater
project, address how any green infrastructure will be maintained, if applicable.*
City personnel are responsible for all maintenance activities and record keeping. All regular maintenance/supply
expenditures are controlled by the City Clerk and Public Works Director, and submitted to review and approval
by the City Council at regular monthly meetings. Approval of capital improvement expenditures is the sole
responsibility of the City Council. Public hearings, competitive bid procurement, and IDNR construction permits
and approved plans and specifications are required for all wastewater projects.
The city provides sewer service for a minimum plus use fee. The City may need to revise their sewer rate
structure based on IDNR recommendations to provide for debt service for this project. The City does have a
public water system, thus meters are available. Monthly sewer bills are mailed to users. Unpaid bills are
assessed an additional charge. Sewer revenue funds are deposited into the Sewer Utility Account, which
includes regular bills, rental deposits, and arrears with interest.
Project Milestones
Environmental
Assessment/Request for Release May, 2013
of Funds
Land acquisition (if applicable)
N/A
Completion of final plans and
specifications
May, 2013
Construction permit issued
June, 2013
Bid/contract award date
August, 2013
Construction Start Date
October, 2013
Construction Completion Date
October, 2014
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
10 of 18
Project Impact Narrative
What is the potential economic/community development impact of the project on the area? For a stormwater project, what size or quantity
of rainfall event (i.e, 100-year storm, first 1.5 inches of rain, etc.) will the green and/or gray infrastructure manage? Green infrastructure
utilizes practices like bioswales and pervious surfaces, and gray infrastructure utilizes curb, gutter, storm sewer pipe, etc.*
If you are applying for a stormwater project that utilizes green infrastructure, please also reference the Green Infrastructure Tip Sheet for further items to discuss in the
narrative.
The project has the potential to greatly improve a large area of sanitary sewer for the community of Mount
Pleasant. The Snipe Run Sewer-shed encompasses some of the oldest sewer infrastructure in the community.
The replacement of the collection system will greatly improve the sewer system and assist Mount Pleasant with
meeting Water Quality limits of the NPDES Permit. The project will allow Mount Pleasant to have a stable,
functioning sewer system which will be of great benefit to the community and the economy of Mount Pleasant.
Who will be the project beneficiaries?*
The project beneficiaries will be the residents and businesses located within the Snipe Run Sewer-shed and
also the residents of the entire Mount Pleasant community. This project is located in the Snipe Run Sewer-shed,
which is the central portion of the cities sanitary sewer system and also the oldest infrastructure. The benefits of
this project will stretch beyond the immediate project area.
Have cooperative approaches/sharing with other area communities been considered?*
The proposed project will address sanitary sewer deterioration in the Snipe-Run Sewer-shed in Mount Pleasant.
Because it involves eliminating overloading of the current sanitary sewer system it is not feasible or an option to
consider cooperative approaches/sharing with other communities.
Why are CDBG funds essential to the project?*
The City of Mount Pleasant has completed several improvements to its sanitary sewer system over the past 50
years that come close to a $25 million investment, with little to no assistance from grant funds. Property
taxpayers in the community have borne all of the cost of all previous sewer infrastructure improvements. Sewer
user fees will need to be raised in order to complete this project with the help of CDBG funds. To complete this
project without the assistance of CDBG funds will place too high of a burden on property taxpayers in the Mount
Pleasant community.
How would the project affect current and future land use patterns?*
The City of Mount Pleasant has a solid land use plan in place. This project will not affect current land use
patterns as it will provide repairs to the current sanitary sewer system in the Snipe-Run Sewer shed. There is no
plan with this project to increase the capacity of the current sanitary sewer system - which could have an impact
on future land use patterns.
Is the site within the city limits?*
This project is located within the city limits of Mount Pleasant. The site for this project is Jay Street in Mount
Pleasant. The Snipe Run Sewer-shed includes some of the oldest portions of the Mount Pleasant community.
The earliest sewers in this part of the system were likely built before 1920.
Is the project appropriate for the community’s size, including expected population trends?*
The project is not an expansion of the current sanitary sewer system, but rather a project to address inflow and
infiltration issues in the current sanitary system, specifically for the Snipe-Run Sewer-shed. This project is not
being undertaken in order to increase the current system capacity and there is not excess capacity being
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
11 of 18
planned for this project. The population of Mount Pleasant has been projected to remain steady over the next
several years.
Will the project have significant excess capacity?*
The project has been sized to be of maximum benefit to the Snipe Run Sewer-shed and does not include
excess capacity in order to promote future development. The project is being proposed in order to replace an
area of sanitary sewer infrastructure that has become most troublesome to repair and maintain for the
community of Mount Pleasant.
How well is the project targeted for maximum impact on a geographic area/specific group?*
The project is located along Jay Street in Mount Pleasant. The replacement of the sanitary sewer in this location
will have the greatest impact upon the Snipe-Run Sewer-shed area in Mount Pleasant - which is the location of
some of the oldest sewer collection infrastructure in the entire community. This area is the central service area
in Mount Pleasant. This location was selected because it has the greatest need for replacement and because
the area identified for replacement will have the greatest impact on the community.
Were other options explored? Describe options considered and why they were rejected.*
The City of Mount Pleasant considered five (5) options before deciding upon the best course of action for this
project. All of the alternatives for this project are listed here - including the project that this application is based
upon:
1. Expansion of the lagoon - The Lagoon is close to Big Creek and any expansion of city property would be in the flood plain and
some environmental issues could be signficant, including: a. potential discoveries of Native American or Pioneer discoveries in the
area; b. proximity of the site to residential development and limitations on expansion with clearance requirements to inhabited
buildings; c. the adjacent property is remnant of a large farmland tract acquired for highway construction, used to mitigate wildlife
habitat, and could not easily be acquired for lagoon use; d. the aerated lagoon treatment process as a continuously discharging
system is unlikely to always meet the stringent Water Quality discharge limits on Big Creek, particularly as it is currently affected by
inflow and infiltration.
2. Pump all wastewater from the Lagoon site back to the 'new plant' so the lagoon could be abandoned - a. the waterwater pumped
by the Hamlin Street Lift Station would all be repumped at least doubling the cost of transporting that sewage; b. a new pumping
station at the lagoon would be an big expense, made even more expensive if stormwater going to the lagoon is repumped back to
the new plant; c. the cost of a forcemain from the NE Lagoon to a sewer on the system with the capacity to handle that additional
flow would be huge, possibly requiring a forcemain to the transportation sewer draining directly to the Heather Branch Lift Station,
without any specific routing a distance of at least four (4) miles. This option would allow for the treatment of all wastewater at the
new treatment plant with the need for only one NPDES permit and the savings of operating and maintaining the NE Lagoon system
would be significant. However the cost to transport all of the water that is now transported to the NE Lagoon would be huge. The
cost to build a large lift station and enough forcemain to transport the sewage back to the community can easily be projected to
exceed $2.5 million. The operating cost of the lift stations will continue and the city would still have a worn out interceptor sewer on
Snipe Run.
3. Pump from the Hamlin Street Lift Station to the "new plant" - a. this option would still require replacement of the Jay Street
interceptor to carry sewage from the collector sewers in the south half of the Snipe Run Sewer Shed, and the cost to build a
smaller interceptor on Jay Street would not be substantially less than extending the 24" gravity sewer at the Hamlin Street lift
station. There is not much advantage to this alternative because it still requires reconstruction of the Jay Street interceptor and the
Hamlin Street Lift Station to continue to operate.
4. Gravity Interceptor Sewer from Hamlin Street Lift Station to the 24" Interceptor allows diversion of influent to the Hamlin Street Lift
Station to the Saunders Branch Lift Station; b. replaces the undersized and deteriorated Snipe Run interceptor from the existing
24" near Green and Locust to Madison and Hamlin intersection; c. a big price tag but probably the most cost effective solution; d.
still have gravity sewer flows to the NE Lagoon, but considerably reduced and less inflow and infiltration is likely because the
gravity sewer is PVC pipe with gasket joints; e. save operating costs of the Hamlin Street Lift Station by shutting it down; f. with
flows considerably reduced to the NE Lagoon, the feasibility of pumping that wastewater back to this gravity sewer to flow to the
plant is far more feasible, so the city would have only one plant and one permit and one discharge to manage and monitor.
5. Build the gravity sewer from Hamlin Street Lift Station to the 24" interceptor at Green and Locust, as proposed in Option #4, plus
build a new Northeast Lift Station to intercept the remainder of the flows to the NE Lagoon and pump back to the Hamlin Street Lift
Station site - a. all flows would go to the new plant; b. a big price tag, but the cost effective portion of this alternative would be the
elimination of operation costs of the NE Lagoon and the Hamlin Street Lift Station; c. use the Hamlin Street forcemain with
reversed direction of flow to save money and transport the wastewater back to the new interceptor.
After careful consideration, the City of Mount Pleasant chose option #4 as the solution to this issue.
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
12 of 18
How does the project promote orderly, compact development?*
The replacement of the Snipe Run Interceptor system does not represent an expansion of the current capacity
of the Mount Pleasant sewer system. The project will replace deteriorated infrastructure and does not
encourage development, but rather will stabilize the current interceptor system.
Survey Tabulation Results
Is the Survey Tabulation Results
required?*
Yes
Month and year the survey was
conducted
September, 2012
Description of the survey method Mailed out survey went to every other household.
used
Total number of households in
the project area
3010
Number of households in the
project area that were contacted
(include contacts with no
answer)
335
Total number of households in the project area should equal the number of households contacted unless a random survey was done. If the
two numbers do not equal, please explain.
A random survey was completed for this project.
Number of usable responses
284
Percent of households
responding
85.0
How many persons were below
the LMI income figure?
394
How many persons were above
the LMI income figure?
227
Percent of persons below the
LMI income figure
63.45
Percent of persons above the
LMI income figure
37.0
Total number of persons in the
project area
8751
Total number of LMI Persons
benefiting
5552
MUST BE 80% TO BE VALID
(For community-w ide benefit projects, use 2010 census population figure.)
If respondents were asked other questions in addition to income, provide a breakdown of responses by number and percent of the total
responding.
In addition to the income, respondents were asked if they would be in favor of the City of Mount Pleasant
pursuing the project and of the 387 households responding, 386 indicated they were in favor of the project.
Community Development and Housing Needs Assessment
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
13 of 18
Community Development and Housing Needs of LMI Persons*
The City of Mount Pleasant along with the Mount Pleasant Chamber Alliance have been working for the past
year to improve the housing stock of the community in order to benefit the low to moderate income population
and the expected population in the future. Community members, city staff, Chamber staff, Council of
Government staff met with a developer recently to discuss the need in Mount Pleasant for more multi-family
housing that would be affordable for lower wage earners. A local manufacturer of marketing materials will be
substantially increasing the payroll and the average wage being considered is $9/hour. This makes the need for
safe, adequate housing important for the community. Transit opportunities for the workforce were also
discussed at these meetings.
Other Community Development and Housing Needs*
The City of Mount Pleasant has received grant funding in the past in order to improve the available housing
stock, specifically multi-family housing units. The city continues to work toward improved quality, affordable
housing for all residents of Mount Pleasant. The city is also served by the Southeast Iowa Regional BUS
service. The City continues to find ways that its residents can utilize SEIBUS service for their transportation
needs.
Planned or Potential Activities to Address Housing and Community Needs*
The city plans to seek out all forms of grant assistance that will provide incentives for property developers to
invest in increasing the communities availability of affordable housing.
The City also has a plan to address the communities infrastructure by applying for CDBG funding when
appropriate.
Date assessment was prepared*
10/21/2011
Location where assessment was
prepared*
Mount Pleasant Area Chamber Alliance
Number of local residents
participating*
15
Procurement of Engineer
Please provide the information requested below regarding the procurement of the engineering firm.
Name of newspaper notice was
published in
Mount Pleasant News
Date of publication
09/15/2011
Date letter sent to engineering
firms requesting qualifications
09/15/2011
List of engineering firms receiving letter request for qualifications
Shive-Hattery, 2834 Northgate Drive, Iowa City, IA
Jim Warner, Warner Engineering Associates, 102 S. Saunders Avenue, Mount Pleasant, IA
Derick Anderson, McClure Engineering Co., 705 1st Avenue N, Fort Dodge, IA
List of engineering firms submitting qualifications
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
14 of 18
Jim Warner, Warner Engineering Associates, 102 S. Saunders Ave., Mount Pleasant
Veenstra and Kimm, 3000 Westown Parkway, West Des Moines Iowa
Date engineering firm selected
by governing board
06/13/2012
Name and address of engineering firm selected
Jim Warner, Warner Engineering Associates, 102 S. Saunders Ave., Mount Pleasant, Iowa 52641
Required Attachments
Attachment
A PDF of the original newspaper publication and Affidavit of
Publication evidencing the newspapers name and date
published
Description
File Name
Type
File
Size
Affadavit of Publication City of
Mount Pleasant Jay Street
Public hearing noticeAffadavit.pdf
Project
pdf
290
KB
Minutes of public hearing
Public Hearing Minutes City of
Mount Pleasant Jay Street
Jay St PublicHearingMinutes.pdf
Sewer Project
pdf
791
KB
Completed HUD Disclosure Form 2880 (Applicant/Recipient
Disclosure/Update Form).
Download the form from http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal
/documents/huddoc?id=2880.pdf
HUD Disclosure Form 2880
pdf
39 KB
Map of proposed project site or service area
City of Mount Pleasant Jay
Street Sanitary Sewer Project MPProjectAreaMap.pdf
Area Map
pdf
3.2 MB
Documentation that the Public Notice has been posted in three
(3) places within the community, and names of posted areas
listed, signed and dated by municipality (if applicable)
huddocMP2013.pdf
Department of Natural Resources Notice of Violation and/or
administrative Order
Federal Assurances Signature Page.
Click here for the form.
Federal Assurances Signature
FEDERALASSURANCESSIGNATUREPAGEMP2013.pdf pdf
Page
Documentation of commitments from other funding sources or
documentation that applications have been submittd to tother IUP for City of Mount Pleasant IUP-MP.pdf
funding sources (i.e., USDA-RD, IDNR)
49 KB
pdf
182
KB
DNR inspection reports or correcspondence that indicates a
need for the project (if applicable)
Copy of current rate ordinance for water/sewer utilities
Water and Sewer Rate
Ordinances City of Mount
Pleasant
SewerRateOrdianceMP.pdf
pdf
55 KB
City of Mount Pleasant LMI
Survey Instrument
Mount Pleasant LMI Survey.doc
doc
48 KB
Facility Plan for wastewater projects or Preliminary
Engineering Report for water projects
**If over 25 pages, please mail hard copy to:
Iowa Economic Development Authority
Attn: Barb Harvey
200 E. Grand Ave.
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
Documentation of local planning/citizen support
Documentation of formal studies by outside agencies that
support the project
If LMI survey completed, please upload Income Survey
Instrument
Other Attachments
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
15 of 18
File Name
Description
File Size
Brinshore visit--Introductory Letter.doc (366 KB)
Letter documenting housing and community needs planning for the City of Mount Pleasant.
366 KB
Procurement Policy.pdf (123 KB)
City of Mount Pleasant Procurement Policy
123 KB
Resolution2012-79.pdf (22 KB)
City of Mount Pleasant Resolution Approving CDBG Application for the Jay Street Sewer Project
22 KB
Citizen Participation Checklist
Statutory Requirements (All CDBG Applications)
Part I – Public Noticing Requirements
Public Notice met (Not less than
4 days and no more than 20
days)*
Yes
Published in a newspaper of
general circulation*
Yes
Affidavit of Publication and copy
of publication uploaded?*
Yes
Documentation that Public
Notice was posted in three public No
places is uploaded *
Documentation includes dates
and places posted*
No
Held prior to governing body’s
final action regarding the filing of Yes
the application*
Public Notice states:
Specific grounds for the public
hearing*
Yes
Date of Public Hearing
10/24/2012
Time of Public Hearing
7 p.m.
Hearing Location
Mount Pleasant City Hall, 220 W. Monroe
City/Zip
Mount Pleasant
52641
Part II – Public Hearing Requirements
Minutes of public hearing are
uploaded*
Yes
Was the need for the activities
identified?*
Yes
Was the funding of the proposed
activites and the sources of
funds explained?*
Yes
Was the date the CDBG
application will be submitted
provided at the meeting?*
Yes
Was the amount of the requested
federal funds provided at the
Yes
meeting?*
Estimated portion of federal
funds that will benefit low- and
moderate-income persons was
stated?*
Yes
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
16 of 18
Location of proposed activities
stated?*
Yes
Were plans to minimize
displacement of persons and
businesses resulting fo funded
activities discussed?*
Not Applicable
Were plans to assist persons
actually displaced discussed?*
Not Applicable
Were the nature of the proposed
activities discussed?*
Yes
Minority Impact Statement
Question # 1
1. The proposed grant programs
or policies could have a
disproportionate or unique
POSITIVE IMPACT on minority
persons. *
No
If YES, describe the positive
impact expected from this
project
Indicate the group(s) positively
impacted.
Question # 2
2. The proposed grant project
programs or policies could have
a disproportionate or unique
NEGATIVE IMPACT on minority
persons. *
No
If YES, describe the negative
impact expected from this
project.
If YES, present the rationale for
the existence of the proposed
program or policy.
If YES, provide evidence of
consultation with representatives
of the minority groups impacted.
Indicate the group(s) negatively
impacted.
Question # 3
3. The proposed grant project
programs or policies are NOT
EXPECTED TO HAVE A
DISPROPORTIONATE OR
UNIQUE IMPACT on minority
persons. *
If YES, present the rationale for
determining no impact.
Yes
The completion of this project will be of equal benefit to all of the citizens located within
the project area and the citizens of the entire Mount Pleasant community. However, the
benefit will not be greater for any minority person or group.
Certification
I hereby certify that the
information on this form is
complete and accurate, to the
Yes
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
17 of 18
best of my knowledge.*
Name of Person Submitting
Certification. *
Steven Brimhall
Title of Person Submitting
Certification*
Mayor
Application Information:
Item
Yes or NA
Is the DUNS# provided?
Yes
Is flood plain information
provided?
Yes
Demolition of a standing
structure information provided?
Yes
If No, Date Requested
Date Received
12/06/2012
12/24/2012
Is the grant amount requested at
Yes
or below the amount allowable?
Is administration line 10% or less
of CDBG amount AND of total
Yes
cost?
Is Racial/Ethnic chart filled out?
Yes
Is the breakdown of construction
cost detail and professional fees Yes
& permit estimates completed?
Is applicant financial information
sheet completed? (water/sewer
fund and projects AND
Yes
community facilities storm
sewer projects)
Is operating budget completed?
(community facilities projects Not Applicable
only)
Is project location map included? Yes
Is CEO signature in federal
assurances page?
Yes
If a joint application, is assurane
Not Applicable
page for each entity included?
Is community needs assessment
included and less than 3 years
Yes
old?
Is disclosure statement
completed and signed?
(If Yes on Part 1 Question #2,
then Parts II and III must also
be completed)
Yes
Are copies of the utility rate
ordinances included?
(Water/Sewer only)
Yes
Does the application file contain
a copy of the official certified
budget form fromthe Department
Not Applicable
of Management? (water/sewer
fund projects AND community
facilities storm sewer projects)
Does the application contain the
Green Development Plan and
Not Applicable
Checklist? (community facilities
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
IowaGrants
18 of 18
projects only)
Is the Green Streets Criteria
proximity map for new
construction included?
(community facilities projects
only)
Not Applicable
Public Hearing
Item
Yes or NA
Is public hearing noticed
uploaded?
Yes
Date Received
Date Received
12/06/2012
12/18/2012
Date Received
Is the publication date no less
than 4 days but no more than 20 Yes
days prior to the hearing?
Are public hearing minutes
uploaded and includes notice
date?
Yes
Engineering:
Item
Yes or NA
Is the engineer procurement
form completed? Water/sewer
fund projects only
Yes
Is preliminary engineering report
included and signed?
Yes
(Water/sewer fund projects
only)
Computations:
Item
Yes or NA
Are computations in Project
Activity Chart correct?
Yes
cross-check total budget with
total on cost estimate sheet:
Reason for Not Awarding
If not awarded, reason :
Based on the information presented, there were concerns that the project would not proceed in a
timely manner.
Other Reason for not awarding:
Decline Letter:
4/4/2013 10:29 AM
October 21, 2011
Mr. David Brint
Brinshore Development, LLC
666 Dundee Road, Suite 1102
Northbrook, Illinois 60062
RE:
Welcome to Mount Pleasant, Iowa
Dear Mr. Brent:
On behalf of the Mount Pleasant Area Chamber Alliance and the people of Henry
County, Iowa, I want to thank you for visiting our county and region.
The recent merger of Alaniz, LLC and MetroGroup Corp. has brought a rush of
excitement to Mount Pleasant. Among our most important employers when they were
separate, these two companies together form a powerful engine for economic growth.
The good news does create some challenges, albeit desirable ones. The City of Mount
Pleasant simply is unable to meet the workforce demands of an expanding Alaniz
MetroGroup Marketing Services with its current population. As a result, a new wave of
residents is already arriving. The difficulty becomes providing housing for these men
and women that is safe and attractive.
Anticipating several years ago that a housing shortage could occur, city and county
leaders identified an excellent location for a multi-family apartment complex on countyowned property near two U.S. four-lane highways, a city park, and one of Mount
Pleasant’s largest grocery stores. That this site is within one mile of Alaniz MetroGroup
only increases the advantages.
Local officials are now committed to identifying a development partner with the
expertise and resources to build and operate a housing complex that will make the
entire community proud. Brinshore Development, with its knowledge of southeast Iowa
and reputation for success, was foremost on our list, and we look forward to working
with your organization in the near future.
Please call my cell phone, 319.537.1550, or reach me by email,
kmiller@mountpleasantiowa.org, with any questions.
Sincerely,
Kiley Miller
Executive Vice President
124 South Main Street • Mount Pleasant, Iowa 52641 • 319-385-3101 phone • 319-385-3102 fax • www.mountpleasantiowa.org
U.S. Census Quick Facts 2010—Mount Pleasant, Iowa
People QuickFacts
Population, 2010
Population, percent change, 2000 to 2010
Population, 2000
Persons under 5 years, percent, 2010
Persons 65 years and over, percent, 2010
Female persons, percent, 2010
Mount Pleasant
8,668
-0.9%
8,751
5.8%
21.1%
15.3%
47.3%
Iowa
3,046,355
4.1%
2,926,324
6.6%
23.9%
14.9%
50.5%
White persons, percent, 2010 (a)
Black persons, percent, 2010 (a)
American Indian and Alaska Native persons, percent, 2010 (a)
Asian persons, percent, 2010 (a)
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, percent, 2010 (a)
Persons reporting two or more races, percent, 2010
Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, percent, 2010 (b)
White persons not Hispanic, percent, 2010
85.7%
4.3%
0.4%
4.4%
0.3%
2.5%
6.7%
82.2%
91.3%
2.9%
0.4%
1.7%
0.1%
1.8%
5.0%
88.7%
Living in same house 1 year & over, 2005-2009
Foreign born persons, percent, 2005-2009
Language other than English spoken at home, pct age 5+, 2005-2009
High school graduates, percent of persons age 25+, 2005-2009
Bachelor's degree or higher, pct of persons age 25+, 2005-2009
Mean travel time to work (minutes), workers age 16+, 2005-2009
78.4%
8.3%
11.1%
85.6%
22.2%
13.3
83.4%
3.8%
6.4%
89.6%
24.2%
18.3
Housing units, 2010
Homeownership rate, 2005-2009
Housing units in multi-unit structures, percent, 2005-2009
Median value of owner-occupied housing units, 2005-2009
Households, 2005-2009
Persons per household, 2005-2009
Per capita money income in past 12 months (2009 dollars) 20052009
Median household income 2005-2009
People of all ages in poverty - percent, 2005-2009
3,365
65.0%
25.2%
$92,600
3,565
2.36
1,336,417
72.9%
18.7%
$115,800
1,215,970
2.36
$24,189
$38,740
15.9%
$25,060
$48,052
11.4%
Business QuickFacts
Total number of firms, 2007
Black-owned firms, percent, 2007
American Indian and Alaska Native owned firms, percent, 2007
Asian-owned firms, percent, 2007
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander owned firms, percent,
2007
Hispanic-owned firms, percent, 2007
Women-owned firms, percent, 2007
Mount Pleasant
828
F
F
F
Iowa
259,931
0.8%
0.2%
1.1%
F
F
20.5%
0.1%
0.9%
25.5%
Manufacturers shipments, 2007 ($1000)
Merchant wholesaler sales, 2007 ($1000)
Retail sales, 2007 ($1000)
Retail sales per capita, 2007
Accommodation and food services sales, 2007 ($1000)
849,909
42,779
185,962
$21,130
20,289
97,592,051
41,068,338
39,234,649
$13,172
4,737,719
Geography QuickFacts
Land area in square miles, 2010
Persons per square mile, 2010
FIPS Code
Mount Pleasant
8.51
1,019.0
54705
Henry County
Iowa
55,857.13
54.5
19
Counties
(a) Includes persons reporting only one race.
(b) Hispanics may be of any race, so also are included in applicable race categories.
FN: Footnote on this item for this area in place of data
NA: Not available
D: Suppressed to avoid disclosure of confidential information
X: Not applicable
S: Suppressed; does not meet publication standards
Z: Value greater than zero but less than half unit of measure shown
F: Fewer than 100 firms
Source: US Census Bureau State & County QuickFacts
U.S. Census Quick Facts 2010—Henry County, Iowa
People QuickFacts
Population, 2010
Population, percent change, 2000 to 2010
Population, 2000
Persons 65 years and over, percent, 2010
Female persons, percent, 2010
Henry County
20,145
-0.9%
20,336
5.8%
23.2%
16.0%
48.8%
Iowa
3,046,355
4.1%
2,926,324
6.6%
23.9%
14.9%
50.5%
White persons, percent, 2010 (a)
Black persons, percent, 2010 (a)
American Indian and Alaska Native persons, percent, 2010 (a)
Asian persons, percent, 2010 (a)
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, percent, 2010 (a)
Persons reporting two or more races, percent, 2010
Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, percent, 2010 (b)
White persons not Hispanic, percent, 2010
92.1%
2.2%
0.3%
2.3%
0.1%
1.6%
3.8%
90.1%
91.3%
2.9%
0.4%
1.7%
0.1%
1.8%
5.0%
88.7%
Living in same house 1 year & over, 2005-2009
Foreign born persons, percent, 2005-2009
Language other than English spoken at home, pct age 5+, 2005-2009
High school graduates, percent of persons age 25+, 2005-2009
Bachelor's degree or higher, pct of persons age 25+, 2005-2009
Veterans, 2005-2009
Mean travel time to work (minutes), workers age 16+, 2005-2009
84.9%
4.5%
6.4%
88.1%
19.7%
1,598
17.4
83.4%
3.8%
6.4%
89.6%
24.2%
245,653
18.3
Housing units, 2010
Homeownership rate, 2005-2009
Housing units in multi-unit structures, percent, 2005-2009
Median value of owner-occupied housing units, 2005-2009
Households, 2005-2009
Persons per household, 2005-2009
Per capita money income in past 12 months (2009 dollars) 2005-2009
Median household income, 2009
Persons below poverty level, percent, 2009
8,280
73.0%
15.7%
$94,200
8,028
2.44
$23,838
$43,887
15.8%
1,336,417
72.9%
18.7%
$115,800
1,215,970
2.36
$25,060
$48,065
11.8%
Business QuickFacts
Private nonfarm establishments, 2009
Private nonfarm employment, 2009
Private nonfarm employment, percent change 2000-2009
Nonemployer establishments, 2009
Henry County
517
13,492
11.9%
1,258
Iowa
80,971
1,283,769
1.5%
195,410
Total number of firms, 2007
Black-owned firms, percent, 2007
American Indian and Alaska Native owned firms, percent, 2007
Asian-owned firms, percent, 2007
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander owned firms, percent, 2007
Hispanic-owned firms, percent, 2007
Women-owned firms, percent, 2007
1,547
F
F
F
F
F
23.4%
259,931
0.8%
0.2%
1.1%
0.1%
0.9%
25.5%
Manufacturers shipments, 2007 ($1000)
889,862
Merchant wholesaler sales, 2007 ($1000)
90,587
Retail sales, 2007 ($1000)
Retail sales per capita, 2007
Accommodation and food services sales, 2007 ($1000)
Building permits, 2010
214,737
$10,665
22,246
18
Federal spending, 2009
138,341
Geography QuickFacts
Land area in square miles, 2010
Persons per square mile, 2010
FIPS Code
Metropolitan or Micropolitan Statistical Area
Henry County
434.33
46.4
87
None
97,592,05
1
41,068,33
8
39,234,64
9
$13,172
4,737,719
7,607
28,948,52
5
Iowa
55,857.13
54.5
19
(a) Includes persons reporting only one race.
(b) Hispanics may be of any race, so also are included in applicable race categories.
FN: Footnote on this item for this area in place of data
NA: Not available
D: Suppressed to avoid disclosure of confidential information
X: Not applicable
S: Suppressed; does not meet publication standards
Z: Value greater than zero but less than half unit of measure shown
F: Fewer than 100 firms
Source: US Census Bureau State & County QuickFacts

32740 - CDBG Water/Sewer Applicant Information Application

Transcription

Similar documents

Open living room

Mount Pleasant Community Brochure

Farmers Market

Moultrie News article on Monday`s Social and Practice Ride

city of hewitij ii

The Sandhog Project - Dark Matter Archives

PRINT the Sell Sheet PDF

www.bcwwa.org 1 Engaging with the Public and Elected Officials to

Welcome To The 26th Annual - BECKLEYREGISTER

mount kimbie album pr