Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2017-02-21 Council Packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA February 21, 2017 — 7:00 pm Mendota Heights City Hall 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Adopt Agenda 5. Consent Agenda a. Approval of February 7, 2017, City Council Minutes b. Approval of February 9, 2017, Council Work Session Minutes c. Approval of February 13, 2017, Closed Session Minutes d. Acknowledgement of January 2017 Fire Synopsis e. Acknowledgement of January 2017 Building Activity Report f. Acknowledgement of January 2017 Treasurer's Report g. Authorize 2016 Auditing Services with BerganKDV h. Authorize Purchase Order for Removal of Invasive Species Management i. Authorize Participation — Open to Business j. Negotiate Contract for 2017 Clean Up Day k. Appoint Scott Goldenstein as Assistant Fire Chief I. Approval of Claims List 6. Public Comments 7. Presentations a. Future Cities Presentation b. Communities for a Lifetime 8. Public Hearing — none 9. New and Unfished Business a. Resolution 2017-21 Approving a Lot Split 697 Wesley Lane b. Authorize Solar Energy Grant Applications c. Sump Pump Inspection Program Update d. Resolution 2017-19 - 2017 Sanitary Sewer Rate Adjustment e. Resolution 2017-20 - 2017 Storm Water Utility Rate Adjustment 10. Community Announcements a. Landscaping for Pollinators Workshop 11. Council Comments 12. Adjourn Page 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, February 7, 2017 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Councilmembers Miller, Petschel, and Paper. Councilmember Duggan was absent. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Garlock announced that at the request of the applicant, Item 9b; Resolution 2017-17, Approving a Lot Split for 697 Wesley Lane, has been continued to the meeting of February 21, 2017. Mayor Garlock then presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Petschel moved adoption of the agenda with the removal of Item 9b. Councilmember Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilmember Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items B) Approve January 17, 2017 City Council Workshop and Closed Session Minutes and E) Approve Repairs to Heating, Ventilation, Gas Monitoring Systems at the Fire Station a. Approve January 17, 2017 City Council Minutes b. Approve January 17, 2017 City Council Workshop and Closed Session Minutes c. Acknowledge January 24, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes d. Approve Resolution 2017-16 Granting a Permanent Easement to Dakota County e. Approve Repairs to Heating, Ventilation, Gas Monitoring Systems at the Fire Station f. Approve the Purchase of a John Deere Mower and Broom for the Public Works Department February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pagf Page 2 g. Amending Agreement with St. Paul Water Regarding Water Surcharge h. Approve Disposal of City Property from Police Department i. Approve Building Activity Report for December 2016 j. Approve Treasurer's Report k. Approval of Claims List Councilmember Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM B) APPROVE JANUARY 17, 2017 CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AND CLOSED SESSION MINUTES Mayor Garlock stated that prior to the January 17, 2017 City Council Meeting there was a closed session held by the City Council. The purpose of the closed session was to discuss a litigation issue. He announced that no action was taken by the City Council during that closed session. Councilmember Petschel moved to approve the January 17, 2017 City Council Workshop and Closed Session Minutes Councilmember Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) E) APPROVE REPAIRS TO HEATING, VENTILATION, GAS MONITORING SYSTEMS AT THE FIRE STATION Councilmember Paper asked for some background information regarding these repairs; i.e; what is broken, what is being fixed, why has Yale been chosen to be the mechanical contractor for this project, why the disparity between the quotes, is it proprietary equipment, can anyone work on it, and who runs the City's buildings. City Administrator Mark McNeill replied that the City has an individual who is employed as the Facilities Maintenance Coordinator. However, the Fire Department does its own work with assistance when needed. The City has had a relationship with both Yale and Owens companies, but that he would have to check as to why one quote was significantly less than the other. The overall condition of the fire station building was something which was discussed by the City Council during its 2017 Budget Meetings. He said that the year prior to that, an architectural study was undertaken to determine what the options were for the building. The options ranged $1.5M to $8M. The longer-term plan is on the Council's plate to discuss at a later time. However, the Council did decide to put $160,000 into the 2017 budget to address immediate safety needs. The issues presented relate to HVAC and gas monitoring. McNeill said that it is the opinion of the fire chief that this work needed to be done as soon as possible. Councilmember Petschel reiterated that the City Council received a list at the end of last year of items that were in immediate need of correction for the fire department. The HVAC was one of them. She February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pag2 Page 3 believes this is the ventilation in the room where the gear is stored, which is not functioning properly. The money is in the budget for this year to address immediate fire, life, safety, and HVAC concerns; those were identified and prioritized by the fire department itself. HVAC is one of the first items on that list to be addressed. Various other issues will be identified and brought forward to the City Council later this year. Councilmember Paper moved to Approve Repairs to Heating, Ventilation, Gas Monitoring Systems at the Fire Station as recommended. Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments PRESENTATIONS No items scheduled PUBLIC HEARING A) RESOLUTION 2017-14 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT — KENSINGTON NEIGHBORHOOD Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained the process for specially assessing a project as well as estimated project costs, funding sources, and estimated assessments. The feasibility report for this project, as required by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, was authorized by the City Council when they adopted Resolution 2016-80 on November 1, 2016. That feasibility report was accepted by City Council and called for a Public Hearing to be held this evening. This project includes rehabilitation to Bedford Court, Claremont Drive (reconstruction), Concord Way, Lockwood Drive, Stockbridge Road, and Whitfield Drive. If the City Council desires to order the project at this public hearing, the next step for City Council would be to approve the plans and specifications for the project in March and order advertisement for bids and accept /open bids in April, award the contract in May, begin construction in late May or early June, and complete the base course of asphalt in August 2017. Assessment hearings are held after the project is substantially completed, typically in October. Assessments can be paid in full at City Hall within 30 days, any unpaid assessments would roll onto the residents property tax roll for a period of ten years. An informational neighborhood meeting was held on January 18, 2017, which was attended by approximately 30 residents. Details from that meeting were in the February 7th City Council packet. Mr. Ruzek then shared a map of the proposed construction area and provided details of the proposed plans for each section. February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pagq Page 4 Total estimated cost of the project is $1,254,620, which would be financed by special assessments, municipal bonds, and utility funds. The proposed assessment amount for each of the multi -family homes is $1,318.92 per unit, and the proposed assessment amount for a single-family house would be capped at $3,950 per unit (which is $433.64 less than the estimated unit assessment per City Policy). City costs include curb and gutter replacement, sod restoration, and appurtenant work. Councilmember Paper moved to open the public hearing. Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek presented a comment given to him by Ms. Patricia Rabuse, 2526 Concord Way, who stated her concerns that there are a number of senior citizens in the area. She said that this assessment may cause additional burdens to those with limited incomes. She was also concerned with the access to her property. As mentioned during Mr. Ruzek's presentation, there should be no concerns with residents being able to access their properties during the construction. At the request of Councilmember Petschel, Mr. Ruzek explained that the City does provide some options (military deployment, senior citizens, or an undeveloped property) where special assessments can be deferred. Those deferrals may stay on through the entire ten-year repayment period. At the end of that time the City may choose either to collect the assessment, or continue it until such time as the property changes hands. Mr. Greg Quail, 2578 Lockwood, asked if city sanitary sewer or water would be affected by this project. Mr. Ruzek replied that there are no proposed improvements to the sanitary sewer and water main. There will be adjustments on the surface level to match the new street grades but the utility material would remain the same. Mr. Quail then asked for clarification on what a surmountable curb was, which Mr. Ruzek explained. Mr. Quail then asked if the deferral option applies to rental properties as well as owner -occupied properties. City Attorney Tom Lehmann replied that it would apply only to properties where the owner is the occupant. Mr. Michael Sindt, 2455 Whitfield Drive, questioned the numbers of multi -family, and single-family homes. He also questioned why it would take all summer to construct this project, and compared it to his experience with MNDOT, opining that it should only take two to three months `if the contract is structured correctly'. Councilmember Petschel replied why it was not an equal comparison. She felt that there is a big difference in the time it takes to do a mill and overlay project, and the time it takes to do a complete reconstruction. Mr. Sindt stated further that if the bid document were structured correctly, it should not take all summer to complete the project. Mr. Ruzek replied that the City could write contracts that would limit the contractor from bidding and working on other projects at the same time as this one; however, it may February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pag* Page 5 limit the amount of contractors bidding on the project, which could drive up the cost. He also referenced the timeframes for performance once the contract is assigned, and provisions for sub -contracting. Mr. Sindt asked if there was a written criterion on the curbs for replacement, Mr. Ruzek replied that, based on an initial drive through the neighborhoods, approximately 30% of the curb would need to be replaced. Staff will mark the curb to be replaced throughout the neighborhood. He described the criteria used in determining whether or not to replace the curb Mr. Howard Gleeman, 2593 Bedford Court, asked for clarification on the senior citizen deferment, by asking if both residing parties need to be over 65 years of age. Mr. Lehman replied that only one property owner would have to be over 65 years of age. He also questioned whether the assessment would be charged an interest rate of 6% per year, and how the contract amounts had already been determined, even before bonds had been sold? Mr. Ruzek explained the estimate amounts, and said that the City has been reconstructing roads annually for a number of years; unit prices are tracked on all of the materials that are going to be involved in the project. Staff also includes a 20% contingency in the estimated costs. He said that the dollar amounts shared today should be a worst-case scenario --it is anticipated that actual costs of the project would be less. Mr. Sal Lopiano, 2462 Whitfield, asked for the anticipated end date of construction. Mr. Ruzek replied that the contract has not been bid yet, so the final construction date is unknown. He said that if the project were to be ordered by Council this evening, the contracted consultant would complete the design plans and specifications. He said that the consultant should be able to turn the plans around relatively quickly. Staff therefore anticipates that in about 30 days the plans may be ready for Council to approve and authorize bidding. The City is required to advertise for three weeks. After the bids are received, Council would determine if they will accept or reject the bids. In regards to the anticipated assessment amount for a single family home plus the 6% interest rate, Mr. Lopiano asked if that would be prorated over the entire ten years. Mr. Ruzek replied that at the participants at the informational meeting had been provided a packet of materials which showed an estimated repayment schedule. He said that the principal payment for a single-family home would be the same every year; however, the interest payments will be reduced as the principal balance goes down. He said that a single-family home would be assessed no more than $3,950, resulting in total interest payments of $1,364.94. In response to the question regarding the 6% interest rate, Finance Director Kristen Schabacker stated that this has been the rate the City has consistently charged for assessment projects, at least for the preceding 8 to 10 years. The previous City Councils had directed this, so that there was consistency in rates across neighborhood projects. Mr. Lopiano stated that this seems to be a bit high considering the current interest rates. Councilmember Petschel commented that if a loan were to be had at a lower interest rate, the assessment could be in full within 30 days of the assessment hearing, and that no City interest would accrue. If the assessment is not paid in full within those 30 days, the assessment is then added to the owner's property tax statement. Mr. Lopiano asked for clarification on the driveway and street access during construction. Mr. Ruzek replied that the contractor's typical working hours are 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. throughout the neighborhood; however, the contractor is not necessarily on every street every hour. However, if the February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pam Page 6 road needs to be blocked or cars need to be moved, that would typically take place during the daytime hours. Residents would usually be able to access their driveways each evening. However, if the concrete apron at the end of a driveway is to be replaced, it usually will take from 4 to 7 days to reach sufficient strength to support a passenger vehicle. During that time, the resident could have to park in front of their driveway. Mr. Lopiano asked what kind of due diligence had been done to look for sinkholes and other unknowns. Mr. Ruzek replied that the City has done test borings, have looked at utilities, and does not anticipate any surprises in soil types. If something were to come up, he would be back in front of the City Council requesting a change order. That would not affect the assessment amounts being charged the residents. Mr. Lopiano noted that he understood that the assessments amounts were to be capped; he then asked how any overruns in expenses would be handled? Mr. Ruzek replied that the City would utilize utility funds or other funds or reserves to cover unanticipated expenses. Mr. Lopiano asked that the large machinery provided by sub -contractors be scheduled so that it would do this project all at once. Mr. Ruzek said that the contract would be awarded to a general contractor; that general contractor would then be following the contract specifications, including coordination of the sub -contractors within their power. Ms. Katie Pan, 2493 Stockbridge Road, shared several concerns raised during conversation with her neighbors. She felt that the difference of 4% between what she felt was the market interest rate, and the 6% proposed to be charged would be transferred into the General Fund. Therefore, bond payers would be subsidizing the operations of the City. She said that there had been a reference earlier to a 5 -year street plan, and later to an 8 to 10 year plan, which had her concerned. She had sent an email to Ms. Schabacker earlier about the financing, and felt that the answers that she had received were unclear. Finance Director Kristin Schabacker replied that the bonds are structured using the 6% interest rate. She went on to say that the difference between the interest rate at which the bonds are issued, and the 6% being charged is not transferred to the general fund. Instead, it remains in the debt service fund and is used to pay down the debt over the life of the bonds. It is not subsidizing the general operations of the City. Ms. Pan asked to see the most recent cash flow statement of the bonds, and one for this project, if one has been issued. Ms. Schabacker replied that the City has not yet issued bonds for this project. She said that she would provide for Ms. Pan and her neighbors the financial statements for the last bond purchased for this kind of street repair. In reference to the question about the 5 -year plan versus an 8 to 10 year plans, Councilor Petschel stated that the City has been rehabilitating and replacing streets each year that the City has been in existence. She said that the 6% interest rate charged on assessments has been in affect for the last 20 years. During her first year on the Council six years ago, the Council had been very concerned about decaying infrastructure. As a result, a study was undertaken, and looked at all of the streets and their respective conditions. Using that, the Council developed a five-year plan to address the needs of the streets, and the impact on the City's budget resources. The plan prioritized the streets and needs for improvements. In response to further Ms. Pan's requests for clarification on budgeting, bonding, and interest rates on assessments, she was asked to schedule a time with Finance Director Kristen Schabacker to address those concerns. February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pa* Page 7 Ms. Pan stated that she understands that the City has to have policy based on Minnesota Statute of the share of the projects. She stated that she and her neighbors have concerns about policy requirements, and that the assessments would match the established policy. She said that they are also concerned the City is reducing the amount of the levy for other operating costs of the City, and felt that people being assessed were subsidizing and therefore reducing the taxes being paid by everyone else in the City. They are concerned that this violates the special assessment statute financing. She cited recent St. Paul city assessments which were later determined to be taxes. She feels that she and her neighbors are concerned about this. She questioned Councilmember Petschel's suggestion that a homeowner take out a personal loan. She said that a special assessment is intended to benefit the property, and not necessarily the owner. She said that they are missing the point of special assessments. Ms. Pan stated that she is happy that the senior citizens are being taken into consideration, as this was a concern of the neighborhood group. However, she and her neighbors believe that this is an example of bad public policy. She said that she does not understand where the previously stated 4% difference is going; she said that in the past 6% was probably justifiable, but did not feel that it was anymore. She questioned whether she is paying for a plan that was put into place as referenced earlier, where there might have been a loss to the City — she said that that should not have been placed on the taxpayers. She and her neighbors are concerned that the City is exceeding its authority, and said that if this plan moves forward, they may contact the State Auditor. They feel that there is a discrepancy between what they are being charged and what the City is being charged for the bonds. Mayor Garlock stated that he personally would sit down with Ms. Pan and her neighbors to discuss these issues. He asked that she make an appointment with Finance Director Kristen Schabacker and that he would attend. Also, he would be willing to discuss this at a City Workshop Meeting if issues remain. Ms. Pan said she would issue an email with the questions and concerns tomorrow. Mr. Sindt returned and stated that he had been an attorney with the Attorney General's office for over 20 years, and was now semi -retired. He recalls that the 6% amount is the statutory maximum that the City can charge. He asked that the staff identify themselves when addressing the Council. Additionally, he said that there is a legitimate point about the fact that the City has done this in this matter for 10-20 years. He said that Councilmember Petschel mentioned that the City has contractors that they have worked with in the past and with whom they have been satisfied. There is a public bidding system; the City may impose standards in the contract, and so keep the contractor in line. He said if the City staff is not prepared or not knowledgeable enough to supervise these contracts, then they should be replaced. He urged the Councilmembers and Mayor to become involved. He questioned the need for a consultant, and referenced the work that the MNDOT construction office had done with few staff. He said that City staff did not appear to be 100% prepared for the project, and seemed to want to push this off onto consultants. He said that that is not necessarily good public policy. Councilmember Paper noted that this is a busy neighborhood with a soccer field in the middle of it; he asked if it would be possible to work this contract so that work is substantially completed by the middle of August, when soccer season will impact the neighborhood. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that staff could put restrictions on the contract. He said that the first course of asphalt that would be put February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pag? Page 8 down by that `substantial completion date'. They could then let that pavement sit for 30 days, and then put the final lift down in October, after the soccer season is complete. Staff could include those restrictions in the contract, should the Council so direct. Councilmember Petschel said that timing should be discussed with Recreation Coordinator Sloan Wallgren in terms of scheduling, etc. Mr. Gleeman returned in regards to the streets in the Kensington Association that are considered private. He asked what the considerations there are when the sewer is brought up to current standards, considering that the whole section was built in the early 1990's. He asked if the neighborhood will need to be concerned about sewer mains being clogged, causing backups of sanitary sewers or rainwater. Mr. Ruzek stated that he would have to do some research to see if those storm sewer catch basins are privately owned, or publicly owned. He believes that they may be publicly owned because the plats do show drainage and utility easements throughout a number of the areas in the project. He said that he had received one comment about drainage issues at the end of one of these private driveways. He said if repairs are needed, the City's storm water utility fund would likely be the funding source for the repairs. Mr. Ruzek also explained that the sanitary sewer system has cleaning and televising scheduled every six years. He further said that 20% of the City's storm sewers, ponds, and pond outlets are also inspected every year. Ms. Kathleen Lonergan, 2476 Whitfield Drive, stated that mid-July to mid- to late August would be best for timing for street work, at least in regards to soccer. Other tournaments are going on, and fields are mostly unused, except on Sundays. Ms. Anne Nemo, 2550 Bedford, stated that she lives on a corner, and does not wish to compete for a parking space with non-residents in front of her home. She asked that the residents receive a schedule as to when each specific area is to be worked on. She and other residents work non-standard hours and are disturbed by work going on during the day. Mr. Ruzek stated that, assuming the bids are accepted and the project awarded, staff will hold a pre - construction meeting with the contractor. At that time, the contractor would provide the City with its estimated schedule, allowing for updates to be provided on the City's website. Staff could then mail the anticipated schedule to residents. This letter would request any residents with irrigation systems to flag their sprinkler heads. He said that the City cannot force the contractor to negotiate with homeowners who might wish to have their entire driveway replaced; however, some contractors are willing to do that. Individual homeowners should discuss those desires with the contractor. However, it would be an independent contract with the contractor. In response to a noise ordinance question, Mr. Ruzek replied that the City uses the Pollution Control Agency's noise ordinance. However, the City usually writes into their contracts that work hours shall be 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. However, if the work is to be is in the middle of a residential neighborhood, staff would typically not allow them to start before 9:00 a.m. on a Saturday; Sundays and holidays would only be by Council permission. February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pa* Page 9 Regarding the anticipated October end date, Mr. Ruzek noted that the project could substantially be completed with the curbs installed, and the first lift of asphalt has been applied. Generally, the final lift of asphalt is put down in October, at least 30 days after the initial course. Substantial completion would include the base lift, curb and gutter, and black dirt backfill. Vehicle speeds relating to the soccer fields being in use and high traffic volumes were discussed. Councilmember Petschel suggested that this topic be brought to the Traffic Safety Committee. She would be willing to forward this concern to the committee on the residents' behalf. Councilmember Paper moved to close the public hearing. Councilmember Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) Councilmember Paper asked how to get the requested schedules and concerns raised by the residents into the resolution. City Administrator McNeill replied that staff had taken notes on the issues raised. He recommended that the City go through the bid process and include specifics in the contract. Councilmember Paper moved to Adopt RESOLUTION 2017-14 A RESOLUTION ORDERING OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE KENSINGTON NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT #201409) Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) B) RESOLUTION 2017-15 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT — MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD STREET REHABILITATION Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained the process for specially assessing a project, including estimated project costs and assessments, and funding sources. He noted that much of this this project was similar to the Kensington Neighborhood Project which had been discussed. The feasibility report for this project, as required by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, was authorized by the City Council when they adopted Resolution 2016-79 on November 1, 2016. That feasibility report was accepted by City Council and called for a Public Hearing to be held this evening. He said that this project includes the rehabilitation of Mendota Heights Road from Lexington Avenue to Dodd Road (Highway 149), and also Condon Court. Sanitary sewer is proposed to be extended to Condon Court, and trail rehabilitation is proposed through a mill and overlay treatment. If the City Council approves the ordering of the project at this public hearing, the next step would be to approve the plans and specifications for the project in March, order advertisement for bids and accept and open those bids in April, and award the contract in May. Since Mendota Heights Road bisects properties owned by two local schools, staff proposes to schedule the improvements to take place during February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pagg Page 10 the school off-season. This would provide for construction to begin in early June, complete the base course of asphalt in August, and hold the assessment hearing in October, 2017. Mr. Ruzek then shared a map of the proposed construction area and provided details of the proposed plans for each section. The project does include a sanitary sewer extension from Lake Drive to Condon Court. The properties on Condon Court are currently on a septic sewer system. City Council did approve a sub -division of two lots to become five lots on Condon Court. A stipulation of that development was that it needed City sewer to proceed. The developer looked for a method to obtain sewer to that neighborhood on his own; however, the developer was unable to secure the easements from private properties. The developer saw that the City was proposing this on their 5 -year plan, and saw this as an opportunity to have the sanitary sewer extended; 100% of the sewer costs would be borne by the six properties on Condon Court. The total estimated cost of the project is $1,752,585, which would be financed by special assessments, municipal bonds, MSA, and utility funds. Staff is proposing a front footage assessment on Mendota Heights Road due to the undeveloped parcels, the schools, and the multiple zonings in that area; the proposed assessment amounts for the street rehabilitation on Mendota Heights Road is $102.28 per foot. For the single-family homes on Condon Court, staff has proposed to cap the street rehabilitation assessment at $3,950 per unit; and the sanitary sewer extension on Condon Court is estimated to be $47,156.77 per unit. City costs include curb and gutter replacement, sod restoration, and appurtenant work. Councilmember Paper noted that the amount being assessed to the properties on Condon Court is only 20% of the estimated unit assessment, and asked why the City would be picking up the other 80%. Mr. Ruzek replied that the way this cul-de-sac was constructed, there are assessable parcels on only about half of the street, and not even the full cul-de-sac bulb. As a result, the City has a larger share. Councilmember Paper asked if there are many properties like this in the City. Mr. Ruzek replied that these are typically frontage road type situations. Mr. Ruzek noted that he has been able to put some of these frontage roads into the City's state aid system, so that the City at least has an additional funding source when these streets need rehabilitation work. The small cul-de-sacs do not meet state aid criteria to be put on the system, and so there are a number of streets that cannot utilize state aid funds, unless it is conjunction with another state aid street. Mayor Garlock moved to open the public hearing. Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) Ms. Susan Laughlin, 2535 Condon Court, speaking on behalf of her husband and herself, noted that theirs is the property at the end of the cul-de-sac. She said that it serves as the catch basin for Condon Court. There is a catch basin there; however, all of the water runs down the hill from the east, but only some of it actually makes it into the catch basin; the remainder runs down their driveway into what was already a high water table. She and her husband purchased the property in 2001; because of the drainage issues, they have had to spend a lot money making improvements to the property. The reason that they February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pam Page 11 initially purchased the property was because of the quiet of the property, which made it an ideal site to run their chemical dependency treatment program. She said that in 2004, their neighbor to the north became interested in tearing down the houses there, and sought to obtain different zoning in order to make that possible. She said that she has had many contacts with former City Engineer John Mazzitello about their concerns on this project, including noise and drainage issues. There was also communication with the developer of the property to the north. She continued by explaining that this current project was the City's plan to do something about Mendota Heights Road, but that Mr. Bjorklund (the developer), who had not succeeded in inducing her and her husband to get involved with changing the sewer, was unable to get the easements. She said that he was now coming to the City and include his sanitary sewer issues. She said that she and her neighbors are now going to have to absorb the cost of that. She said that Mr. Bjorklund will now be able to build next door to them, and also to tear up the road. They are very concerned about the grading and drainage issues. She said that staff knew how to reach her and her husband because of the conversations had in the past with Mr. Mazzitello; they would have been objecting. She said that the first notification about this project that they received was the notice for tonight's meeting. She said that they feel like they are being trampled upon by the noise and impact of this project. She said that risks affecting their clients, their business, themselves as landlords, and their group home residents. She concluded by stating that they object to this project. Councilmember Petschel asked for clarification that the costs of the sanitary sewer were being born by Mr. Bjorklund. Mr. Ruzek replied that staff calculations included the group home property. The group home property is not going to be required to hook-up, and any assessment would not be required to be repaid until a connection to that sanitary sewer system would be made. He said that the City would holding that debt almost as a deferment. He said that Mr. Mazzitello had never shared any concerns about drainage issues on Condon Court. Councilmember Petschel stated that she remembered when Mr. Bjorklund's townhome development came forward. She was made aware, probably by Mr. Mazzitello, that concerns were raised about the building of the townhomes possibly affecting the drainage. She ask if there was anything that could be done to alleviate any drainage issues on the cul-de-sac. Mr. Ruzek replied that they would examine that, but also mentioned that there is a partial storm sewer system that was constructed by MnDOT that may impact this. The Laughlin's were agreeable to meeting and discussing the issues and options with the City. Mr. Dick Bjorklund, the owner of 2511, and 2525 Condon Court, stated that he has owned the properties since 1988. He said that the problem at 2535 Condon Court is that the house is below top of the curb. On his preliminary plat, the City has approved all of the grading that he has done and most of it drains to the west and the southwest, which is behind the Laughlin property. He has been trying for the past two years to get sanitary sewer to the property. As the developer he has to do the legwork to get the easement; he said attempts to get an easement to put the sewer on the south February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council P*r Page 12 side of the curb of Visitation property --where the manhole is. The City needed ten to twelve feet of easement, and that he worked with Visitation to try to obtain that easement. However, he was unsuccessful. Last year, he was informed that this project would probably take place in 2016. As such, he could put the sewer in the middle of the road. It has taken four years for him to get to this point. He stated that septic systems do not last forever. However, if the Laughlins choose not to connect to the sewer system, he believes it would be a mistake, but then that would be their decision. Mr. Michael Sindt, 2455 Whitfield Drive, stated that if the developer wants a sewer line, he should pay 100% of the costs, He said that it appeared to him that the Council was asking the citizens of Mendota Heights to subsidize Visitation and St. Thomas Academy on this road project. He said that it was even more of a problem that the residents are being asked to subsidize the Patterson Companies, which he said is a multi-million dollar operation. Ms. Pam Kunkel, Director of Business Affairs, St. Thomas Academy, reiterated the concern that was voiced on the residential project about the 6% financing. She asked to be involved in the meeting to be scheduled with Finance Director Kristen Schabacker and Ms. Pan. Her other concern is related to time pressures, to which Mr. Ruzek alluded, over the summer. She said that school sports will start August 15', and that school will be back in session the last week of August. St. Thomas Academy would like assurances or some consideration be given to the timing so that project is completed as much as possible by mid-August. Mayor Garlock moved to close the public hearing. Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) Councilmember Paper asked for clarification that the property at the end of the cul-de-sac is not required to pay for the sanitary sewer hookup as long as they do not actually do the hook up. He then asked if when the property is sold or changes hands, if that would be the time that the cost would be assessed to the property. City Attorney Tom Lehmann replied that the cost could be assessed at that point, or it could be whenever the septic system fails. He said that septic systems are problematic, but are controlled by the County. The City does not have any monitoring of the septic systems; however they would get information from the County if it ever did fail. That could be the criteria that the City looks at to say that it's time for them to connect to the City sewer system. Until that point, per his understanding, until they are required to hook up — or decide to hook up — to the City's sewer system they are not required to pay the assessment. Councilmember Paper noted that if he owned a septic system and it failed, and if it would cost $20,000 to repair, it would still less than half of what it would cost to tie into the existing sewer system. He questioned why anyone would hook up to the sewer system rather than paying to repair the septic system. Attorney Lehmann replied that with septic systems, it is usually not a matter of just repairing; sometimes it is the drain fields that fail and the owner is unable to find a suitable drain field. Again, the County would have all of that information and would make the options known to the property owner. February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pam Page 13 He said that there is nothing that requires the property owner to hook into the City's sewer system. Even if a new property owner came in, they would not be required to hook into the City's sewer system. Councilmember Miller asked in regards to the timeline if the sanitary sewer line installation would be at the beginning of the project, or more towards the end. Mr. Ruzek replied that it would be done in conjunction with reclaiming the pavement and stripping off the gravel; they would have to start working on the sanitary sewer right away as the deepest utilities are done first. He also stated that staff would most likely require a complete road closure between Lake Drive and Visitation Drive. A detour would be set up from Lake Drive back to Dodd Road. St. Thomas Academy detour would be in the opposite direction. As for noise disturbances, he said that all large equipment used on this project will have back-up alarms. However, they would not surpass the limits allowed by the Pollution Control Agency. Councilmember Miller asked the Laughlins if there was a busier time of year regarding the number of clients in house. Ms. Laughlin replied that their occupancy is pretty consistent year round. However, in the summer months the clients tend to be outside more. Ms. Kunkel returned and asked that the Council take into consideration all of the other road projects in the area — not necessarily by Mendota Heights — when making decisions about their own projects to ensure that traffic actually can flow through the areas. Councilmember Petschel recommended that, because of the past concerns, that staff sends notices out to the residents on Lake Drive to make them aware of the detours and that the detours were a City decision. That way the schools would not be fielding telephone calls regarding extra traffic on Lake Drive. Mr. Ruzek replied that letters and other means of communication would be used. Councilmember Paper asked where the stockpiles of the millings would be located. Mr. Ruzek replied that they are often stored on the roadway; however, that is a detail that will be determined with the contractor during the pre -construction meeting. Councilmember Paper then asked if temporary speed bumps could be installed on Lake Drive to slow traffic during this construction period. Mr. Ruzek replied that the City currently does not own any of the rubberized temporary speed bumps, but those might be possible. He said that this contract may provide an opportunity to install temporary signage to impact traffic flow. Councilmember Paper moved to Adopt RESOLUTION 2017-15 A RESOLUTION ORDERING OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT (PROJECT #201616) Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pao Page 14 A) RESOLUTION 2017-11 APPROVING A LOT SPLIT AND CRITICAL AREA PERMIT FOR 1919 HUNTER LANE Consulting Planner Phil Carlson, AICP explained that this request was for a lot split and critical area permit at 1919 Hunter Lane. The existing property consists of two lots which were combined. The current proposal is to split the lots in the other direction, fronting on Hunter Lane instead of Culligan Lane. Since this property is at the edge of the critical area, a critical area permit is necessary. The applicant has submitted a preliminary grading plan and landscape plan. He hopes to remove the existing single-family home and construct two single-family dwellings. This would necessitate the removal of some trees in the interior of the lot, and install two driveways out to Hunter Lane. Both lots would easily meet the minimum dimensions, and size and area in the code. By meeting all of the criteria in the code, it satisfies those minimums. The grading and landscape plans are reasonable, but he said that it would be scrutinized in more detail at the building permit level. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, with conditions and findings of fact. Applicant Mike Fritz came forward and explained that the reason for this request is to move the access points onto Hunter Lane, thus improving drainage and traffic flow. Councilmember Petschel moved to Adopt RESOLUTION 2017-11 RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT AND CRITICAL AREA PERMIT AT 1919 HUNTER LANE AND PID# 27-44900-00- 020 based on the Findings of Fact and with Conditions contained therein. Councilmember Petschel noted during her motion that questions or concerns by neighbors can be revisited when the final plat and plans are brought forward, as so noted by the Planning Commission. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) B) RESOLUTION 2017-17 APPROVING A LOT SPLIT FOR 697 WESLEY LANE As noted earlier in the meeting, at the request of the applicant this item has been continued to the February 21, 2017 City Council Meeting. C) APPROVE RESOLUTION 2017-18 RENAMING OF THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS 5K Police Sergeant Tanner Spicer explained the desire to rename the Mendota Heights 5K to "Officer Scott Patrick Memorial 5K to Benefit the Special Olympics". He said that for the past 11 years, Gateway Bank has sponsored the Mendota Heights 5K to benefit Special Olympics of Minnesota. He said that the Mendota Heights Police Department would like to have the 5K renamed the "Officer Scott Patrick Memorial 5K to Benefit the Special Olympics". Sergeant Spicer then reflected on the death of Officer Patrick, and how that was a stark reminder of the uncertainty that law enforcement officers face on a daily basis. By remembering Officer Patrick, and all February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pao Page 15 officers killed in the line of duty, they are not dwelling on that uncertainty. Instead, participants are honoring the certainty of the amazing things that can be accomplished when police and the public come together and work towards a common goal. Councilmember Petschel moved to Adopt RESOLUTION 2017-18 RENAMING THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS 5K THE "OFFICER SCOTT PATRICK MEMORIAL 5K TO BENEFIT THE SPECIAL OLYMPICS" Councilmember Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) D) AUTHORIZE CONTRACT WITH JEA ARCHITECTS FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR CITY HALL LOWER LEVEL City Administrator Mark McNeill explained that to address the mold and water issues found in the lower level of City Hall, a drainage system was installed on the south side of the building. That should significantly reduce the threat of further water intrusion in to the police and building storage areas. Now that has been addressed, remodeling work can take place. Two architectural companies were asked to submit proposals to provide design services for the remodeling of the areas which have been impacted by mold. This would include demolition of the impacted areas, design of new walls, ceilings, and floor coverings; assisting the city with seeking quotes or bids as necessary, and provide construction inspection during and following the work. It was noted that the remodeling work would most likely need to be done in phases, as most of the areas will still be occupied during the work. Neither of the quotes received included mold investigation or remediation. That will need to be performed by companies that specialize in that work, and will incur a separate cost. Staff recommends JEA Architects of Hopkins, which submitted a range for its work of between $20,250 and $22,250, which was slightly higher than the alternate proposal of $18,960. However, the City is not obligated to take the low quote on professional services. Administrator McNeill stated that he has worked with JEA Architects in the past and is familiar with, and very satisfied, with their work. The proposal from JEA would provide those estimated costs prior to commencing construction drawings. If it is determined to be too costly for remodeling to proceed now, the design contract would be terminated and the City would owe only for the work done. The Facilities Reserve Fund, with a current balance of approximately $30,000, would be used to pay for the architectural services. If the decision is to move forward with the remodeling, the actual construction and mold remediation work will either come from the General Fund Reserves or the Water Tower Fund. Councilmember Miller asked if the members of the Police Department have been actively involved in the process. Administrator McNeill replied that the officers have been very patient with the amount of disruption that they had. Their desires will be accommodated as much as possible. February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council P*,5 Page 16 Councilmember Petschel recommended that funding for this project would come out of the Water Tower Fund since it is an infrastructure project. Administrator McNeill noted that that decision would be made at a later date when the scope of this project is better known. Councilmember Petschel moved to enter into an agreement with JEA Architects of Hopkins, Minnesota, for architectural design services for the lower level of Mendota Heights City Hall with costs to range from $20,250 to $22,250, plus reimbursable expenses. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Paper stated that he found it very inspiring and interesting to have so many residents come out and engage in positive discussion. Councilmember Miller echoed Councilmember Paper's sentiments. He also thanked the residents in this community with whom he has had the opportunity to meet over the course of the past week. A couple of different issues were talked about, and the commitment to their neighborhood, their homes, and the overall community is important and he greatly appreciated. He wished to use this venue to inform them and anyone else watching that if they have concerns or issues to call, email, or come to City Hall. The City's ears are open, and hopefully their minds as well. Mayor Garlock noted that he was glad to see the Police Department making this step to memorialize Officer Scott Patrick, who paid the ultimate sacrifice. He said that hopefully the 5K will continue to grow and be successful and carry on Scott's name. Councilmember Petschel noted that Ross Fefercom, the developer and owner of The Village, has passed away. The Village has become so much a part of who the City is and its daily experiences; through gatherings in the summer and sitting in the park, Christmas and the lighting of the tree. It has truly become the town center. She sent best thoughts and condolences to his family from the current and previous Councils. She also noted an article that was in the Sunday Pioneer Press on a local resident named Deb Fee. Ms. Fee had restored and refitted a barn on Dodd, which has become a peace and healing center. Ms. Fee has also written a book titled "The Address to Your Heart". Ms. Fee is looking to build another barn as a place for veterans to go for peace and healing. Councilmember Petschel wished best wishes to the owners of Lucky 13's; they opened the Mud Room that evening, which is the speakeasy. It is a homage and throwback to that speakeasy period of time. ADJOURN Councilmember Paper moved to adjourn. February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pc* Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Absent: 1 (Duggan) Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 9:32 p.m. Neil Garlock Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith City Clerk Page 17 February 7, 2017 Mendota Heights City Council Pao Page 18 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Council Workshop Thursday, February 9, 2017 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a workshop of the Mendota Heights City Council was held at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 1:31 p.m. Councilmembers Miller, Paper, and Petschel were also present. Councilmember Duggan joined the meeting via an interactive television pursuant to Minn. Stat. §13D.02. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, Finance Director Kristen Schabacker, Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek, and City Attorney Andy Pratt. HOUSING DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Village Lots Administrator McNeill opened the discussion and provided background on three vacant City -owned lots which are part of the Villages at Mendota Heights development. He reported that there has been renewed interest by developers in the site and wanted direction from the Council on how they wished to proceed with the sale and development of the site. Representatives from Trammel Crow Companies, an interested developer, presented a development proposal for a market rate senior housing apartment building. The proposed development would contain approximately 150 apartment style units in a five story building with underground parking. Council directed staff to research further other possible options for the site including development of 19 townhomes, which were part of the original development design. B. Mendota Motel Administrator McNeill introduced representatives from Michael Development. Representatives from Michael Development described the site and presented a development proposal for a market rate general occupancy apartment building. The proposed development would contain 69 apartment style units in a three story building with both surface and underground parking. Administrator McNeill explained that given the challenges of the site, the developer is seeking city assistance. One option would be the use of Tax Increment Financing. Andy Pratt from the City Attorney's office provided an overview of Tax Increment Financing and the requirements of both a Housing Tax Increment Financing District, and Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District. Page 19 Councilor Miller left the meeting at 3:10 PM; Councilor Paper left the meeting at 3:15 PM Council directed staff to work with the developer to determine development costs, including the purchase price, and further analyze the use of Tax Increment Financing as a city assistance tool in the redevelopment of the site. OTHER BUSINESS A. Council Meeting Start Time Discussion The item was not discussed. ADJOURN Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 3:33 p.m. Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk Page 20 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Special Meeting Held Monday, February 13, 2017 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 1:30 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 1:30 PM. Councilmembers Petschel, Paper, and Miller were also present. Councilmember Duggan joined by interactive television pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13D.02. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill, Police Chief Kelly McCarthy, City Attorney Tom Lehmann, and Labor Attorney Kevin Rupp. A motion to adjourn to a closed session to discuss attorney/client privilege matters relating to an existing labor grievance was made by Councilor Paper and seconded by Councilor Miller. The Motion passed 5-0. Mayor Garlock adjourned to a closed session of the City Council at 1:30 pm, Those present included Mayor Garlock, Councilmembers Miller, Paper, and Petschel. Councilor Duggan participated by telephone. Also in attendance were City Administrator Mark McNeill, Police Chief Kelly McCarthy, City Attorney Tom Lehmann, and Labor Attorney Kevin Rupp. Councilor Miller left the meeting at 2:15 PM. A motion was made by Councilor Petschel and seconded by Mayor Garlock to adjourn the closed meeting and to return to the open meeting. The motion passed 5-0. The doors were then reopened. No official action was taken by the Council in this meeting. The Council will provide a summary of the meeting as required by Minnesota Statutes. ADJOURN Motion Councilmember Petschel, second Mayor Garlock to adjourn the meeting at 2:35 PM. Motion carried 4-0. Neil Garlock, Mayor Mark McNeill, City Administrator Page 21 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heig hts.corn ❑F MEf:10OTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Dave Dreelan, Assistant Fire Chief SUBJECT: January 2017 Fire Synopsis COMMENT: Fire Calls The department responded to 22 calls for the month. The majority of calls were classified as false alarms or as good intent calls. Five of the calls were residential in nature, and eight of the calls were commercial alarms. In addition there were two utility checks, two EMS calls, two injury accidents, one mutual aid call, one car fire, and one dumpster fire. Monthly Department Training The monthly department training was a hazardous materials refresher. Firefighters reviewed the procedures for responding to hazardous material leaks. Some of the items the drill focused on were hazard identification, chemical properties, and air monitoring. Monthly Squad Training The monthly squad training focused on the use of the departments rescue struts. The department has four expandable struts that can be deployed to stabilize vehicles that have rolled over and landed on their side or roof. When a vehicle lands in ones of these positions it can be very difficult to stabilize. Stabilization must be done before any firefighters can enter the vehicle and begin EMS. MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT JANUARY 2017 MONTHLY REPORT FIRE CALLS NO. 17001 - 17022 NUMBER OF CALLS FIRE ALARMS DISPATCHED: NUMBER I STRUCTURE CONTENTS ACTUAL FIRES INSPECTIONS Structure - MH Commercial INVESTIGATIONS Structure - MH Residential RE -INSPECTION Structure - Contract Areas MEETINGS Vehicle - MH 1 Vehicle - Contract Areas SPECIAL PROJECTS Grass/Brush/No Value MH TOTAL Grass/Brush/No Value Contract MEDICAL Assist 1 Extrication 1 HAZARDOUS SITUATION Spills/Leaks 1 Arcing/Shorting Chemical Power Line Down FALSE ALARM Residential Malfunction 3 Commercial Malfunction Unintentional - Commercial 5 Unintentional - Residential 2 Criminal GOOD INTENT Smoke Scare Steam Mistaken for Smoke Other 7 MUTUAL AID 1 TOTAL CALLS 22 LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS: TO DATE MENDOTA HEIGHTS 16 16 MENDOTA 0 0 SUNFISH LAKE 3 3 LILYDALE 2 2 OTHER 1 1 TOTAL 22 22 WORK PERFORME HOURS TO DATE FIRE CALLS 310 310 MEETINGS 34.5 34.5 DRILLS 165 165 WEEKLY CLEAN-UP 32.5 32.5 SPECIAL ACTIVITY 116.5 116.5 ADMINISTATIVE 0 FIRE MARSHAL 56.5 56.5 TOTALS 715 715 Page 22 22 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $2,000 $0 TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSES $0 $0 $2,000 FIRE LOSS TOTALS MENDOTA HEIGHTS ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH) $2,000 $2,000 MEND. HTS. ONLY STRUCT/CONTENTS $0 MEND. HTS. ONLY MISCELLANEOUS $2,000 MEND. HTS. TOTAL LOSS TO DATE $2,000 BILLING FOR SERVICES LAST YEAR 0 0 LAST YEAR 259 32 158.5 41.5 138 0 55.5 684.5 MN/DOT MILW. RR CNR RR OTHERS: TOTALS: $0 $0 FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH INSPECTIONS 36.5 INVESTIGATIONS 0 RE -INSPECTION 0 MEETINGS 0 ADMINISTRATION 14.5 SPECIAL PROJECTS 5.5 TOTAL 56.5 REMARKS: SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SYNOPSIS 2/13/2017 Mendota Heights Building Activity Report Mike Androj@,�gilding Official January 1, 2017 thru January 31, 2017 January 1, 2017 thru January 31, 2017 January 1, 2016 thy. January 31, 2016 January 1, 2015 thru January 31, 2015 Building Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected SFD 0 $ $0.00 SFD 0 $ $0.00 SFD 0 $ $0.00 SFD 0 $ $ APT 0 $ $0.00 APT 0 $ $0.00 APT 0 $ $0.00 APT 0 $ $ Townhouse 0 1 $ $0.00 Townhouse 0 1 $ - $0.00 Townhouse 4 1 $ 1,015,000.00 $11,653.66 Townhouse 0 1 $ $ Condo 0 $ - $0.00 Condo 0 $ - $0.00 Condo 0 $ - $0.00 Condo 0 $ $ - Misc 27 $ 244,131.96 $ 4,785.66 Misc 27 $ 244,131.96 $ 4,785.66 Misc 23 $ 523,802.00 $ 6,212.11 Misc 24 $ 448,199.26 $ 7,573.67 Commercial 3 $ 233,285.00 $3,403.59 Commercial 3 $ 233,285.00 $3,403.59 Commercial 4 $ 1,025,345.00 $10,590.39 Commercial 2 $ 34,600.00 $ 763.19 Sub Total 30 1 $ 477,416.96 1 $ 8,189.25 Sub Total 1 30 1 $ 477,416.96 $ 8,189.25 Sub Total 31 1 $ 2,564,147.00 $ 28,456.16 Sub Total 26 1 $ 482,799.26 1 $ 8,336.86 Trade Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No. Valuation Fee Collected Plumbing 3 $225.00 Plumbing 3 $225.00 Plumbing 21 $2,207.74 Plumbing 15 $ 747.36 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $ - Sewer 5 $388.00 Sewer 5 $388.00 Sewer 1 $75.00 Sewer 0 $ - Mechanical 1 41 1 1 $5,243.91 lMechanical 1 41 1 1 $5,243.91 lMechanical 1 39 1 1 $3,331.85 1 iMechanical 1 32 1 1 $ 1,813.72 Sub Total 49 1 1 $ 5,856.91 Sub Total 49 1 $ 5,856.91 Sub Total 61 1 1 $5,614.59 11 Sub Total 1 47 1 1 $ 2,561.08 License I No. Valuation Fee Collected Licenses I No. Valuation Fee Collected Licenses I No. Valuation Fee Collected Licenses I No. Valuation Fee Collected Contractor 176 $8,800.00 Contractor 176 $8,800.00 Contractor 34 $1,700.00 Contractor 127 $ 6,350.00 Total 255 1 $ 477,416.96 1 $ 22,846.16 Total 1 255 1 $ 477,416.96 $ 22,846.16 Total 126 1 $ 2,564,147.00 1 $ 35,770.75 1 Total 1 200 1 $ 482,799.26 1 $ 17,147.94 NOTE: All fee amounts exclude SAC, WAC and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit plan review fee and valuation totals Page 24 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TREASURER'S REPORT JANUARY 2017 , BALANCE COLLATERAL American Bank Checking Account .02% $171,172.69 Savings Account .02% $640.80 $171,813.49 Collateral - Bonds $1,200,000.00 Gov't. Guar. $250,000.00 Investments Cost PV Saving Cert 1/26/15 @0.15% Cherokee $13,952.59 $13,952.59 FNMA 1.125% 7/27/21 $500,000.00 $495,800.00 FHLMC 1.00% 10/28/21 $500,000.00 $496,600.00 FFCB 2.35% 6/23/21 $500,000.00 $499,950.00 FHLMC 2.00% 1/27/22 $450,000.00 $449,505.00 Texas Exchange Bank 2.10% 1/24/22 $245,000.00 $242,501.00 Compass Bank 1.30% 12/11/17 $245,000.00 $245,340.55 Ally Bank 1.25% 12/11/17 $245,000.00 $245,245.00 Bankunited Natl Assn 1.100% 02/20/18 $245,000.00 $244,703.55 GE Capital Retail Bank 2.00% 7/6/18 $200,000.00 $201,566.00 Mercantile Commercial Bank 1.20% 9/21/18 $245,000.00 $244,159.65 Sallie Mae Bank 2.050% 11/20/18 $245,000.00 $247,148.65 BMW Bank 2.00% 12/11/18 $245,000.00 $246,957.55 Comenity Bank 2.00% 07/15/19 $200,000.00 $200,722.00 Capital One Bank USA 2.00% 08/12/19 $245,000.00 $246,643.95 Capital One Bank 2.00% 08/12/19 $245,000.00 $246,643.95 World's Foremost Bank 2.00% 08/13/19 $200,000.00 $200,746.00 Goldman Sachs Bank 2.20% 12/17/19 $100,000.00 $100,937.00 Discover Bank 2.050% 06/10/20 $200,000.00 $200,646.00 Orrstown, Bank 2.00% 08/28/20 $245,000.00 $244,282.15 JP Morgan Chase Bank 1.25% 7/29/21 $245,000.00 $241,310.30 HSBC Bank 1.25% 11/09/21 $245,000.00 $245,080.85 Fidelity Institutional Government Portfolio (Piper) $3,782,228.96 $3,782,228.96 Gov't. Securities Fund 28% Sold 6/4 $433,187.00 $1,031,000.00 MMkt Fd (WF) $543,777.79 TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE 1/31/2017 $10,734,959.83 Funds Available 1/1/2017 $12,237,681.64 Rates Money Market January Bank 0.02% 10 Yr. Tr. 2.45% Page 25 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.rrendota-heights.com T mR CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director SUBJECT: Audit Services BACKGROUND In August 2009, the city went out for RFP's for auditing services. In November 2009, the city contracted for those services with KDV for a three year term. Once the initial three year term had concluded, the city extended the audit engagement for an additional three years. The city is able to extend that contract without seeking bids from other firms. At this time, BerganKDV has provided us with a quote for the upcoming 2016 audit. The cost for the 2016 audit is as follows. 2016 audit $34,100 The cost of the 2015 audit was $33,500. The submitted quote represents an increase of 1.2%. The City has had a good working relationship with BerganKDV. They provide a thorough report with useful information. I recommend that we continue to work with BerganKDV and extend the contract for the 2016 audit at a cost of $34,100. BUDGET IMPACT This price has been budgeted for in the 2017 budget. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council extend the contract for auditing services with BerganKDV for the 2016 audit as quoted above. Page 26 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.irendota-helghts.com s CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Authorize Purchase Order for the Removal/Control of Invasive Plants in Valley Park and Rogers Lake Park COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to authorize a purchase order to Great River Greening for their 2017 work plan on Invasive Species Management. BACKGROUND In 2002, the City funded (with the support of a fifty -percent matching grant from the Metro Greenways Planning Grant, Minnesota DNR) development of a Natural Resources Management Plan. Two of the three focus areas in the plan were Valley Park and Rogers Lake Park. In both parks, communities of invasive plants were identified and management recommendations were presented. In addition to buckthorn, other invasive species identified are: black locust, Siberian elm, garlic mustard, burdock, sweet clover, thistle, Amur Maple, spotted knapweed, and more. DISCUSSION Great River Greening began invasive species removal in 2009 in Valley Park. Mature plants have been cut and cleared from infested park areas and follow-up treatment is required to keep the species under control. Spraying of newly emerging one or two year old plants has proven to be very effective. This is the first year that Rogers Lake Park has been included in the work plan. The walking path west of Rogers Lake is severely overgrown. BUDGET IMPACT City Council has annually included funding in city budgets for `Control of Invasive Plants' in City Parks. The available amount in the 2017 City Budget in the Parks Maintenance Budget for this effort is $11,000. Great River Greening's proposal is $10,000. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the council approve the purchase order for invasive species control in Valley Park per the Great River Greening work plan. ACTION REQUIRED Approve a motion authorizing the Public Works Director to issue a `not -to -exceed' Purchase Order in the amount of $10,000 to Great River Greening. Page 27 Date: 2/15/17 Subject: Valley Park and Rogers Lake Park Draft Work Plan 2017 To: Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director, City of Mendota Heights Prepared by: Karin Jokela, Project Manager Ecologist, Great River Greening Valley Park 2017: Proposed Work Plan Vegetation management in 2017 will include: • Spring herbicide treatment of buckthorn seedlings and garlic mustard focusing on north and central oak knobs. • If the opportunity arises, >_ 1 private volunteer event(s) Base cost: $2,500 (See map below for proposed work areas.) Rogers Lake Park 2017: Proposed Work Plan • The first wave of buckthorn removal at Rogers Lake Park will focus on the oak savanna shoreline near the park bench overlook. • Greening field crew will cut and treat buckthorn and invasive honeysuckle in the spring. • Volunteers will haul and stack buckthorn at >_ 1 private volunteer event(s). • Greening field crew will follow up with a foliar herbicide application in the fall to treat buckthorn re -sprouts. • Aggressive native seed will be spread in the fall to begin the re -vegetation process. Base cost: $7,500 (See map below for proposed work areas.) Page 29 Rogers Lake Park Buckthorn Removal 2017 GREAT N RIVERl a 20 goo 1,000 Feet GREED ING Page 30 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com CITY OF MENEDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: "Open to Business" Program Participation COMMENT.- INTRODUCTION OMMENT: INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to authorize participation in the "Open to Business" (OTB) economic development assistance program for 2017. BACKGROUND For the past three years, the City of Mendota Heights has been a participant in the OTB program, which is administered by the Dakota County Community Development Agency. The CDA operates OTB in partnership with the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD). The program assists start-up businesses, existing businesses with operational questions, and small businesses with financing and loan issues. Through this program, the MCCD worked with nine Mendota Heights businesses (or prospects) during 2016; in the 4ffi quarter. One Mendota Heights business, Boltz's Tae Kwon Do, received a loan for their expansion project with the assistance of the MCCD and Open to Business Program. The CDA is proposing to the participating Dakota County cities a one year extension—through the end of 2017 --of the OTB program. Details of the program are contained in the attached contract between the CDA and MCCD, as well as the Joint Powers Agreement for the City to sign. BUDGET IMPACT The total cost of the program for 2017 is $140,000. Those costs are divided between the CDA and the cities, with the individual cities' shares being determined by population. The Mendota Heights' share for 2017 is $2585, which is available in the 2017 budget. Page 31 RECOMMENDATION The Open to Business program has benefitted Mendota Heights. I recommend that the City Council authorize a renewal of our participation. ACTION REQUIRED If the City Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize execution of the Joint Powers Agreement City for the Open to Business program for 2017, and payment of the $2585 participation fee. Mark McNeill City Administrator Page 32 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Open to Business Program THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (this "Agreement"), is made as of January 1, 2017, by and between the DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (the "CDA"), a public body corporate and politic organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "State"), and each of the CITY OF BURNSVILLE, CITY OF LAKEVILLE, CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, INVER GROVE HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, APPLE VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, HASTINGS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ROSEMOUNT PORT AUTHORITY, FARMINGTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SOUTH ST. PAUL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AND WEST ST. PAUL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MINNESOTA (each individually a "Local Government Entity" and together the "Local Government Entities"), each a political subdivision of the State. RECITALS: A. In order to pursue common goals of fostering economic development, the CDA and the Local Government Entity Cities desire to engage the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers, a Minnesota non-profit corporation ("MCCD") to undertake the "Open To Business Program" (the "Program") within Dakota County (the "County"). B. Pursuant to the Program, MCCD will provide technical assistance and access to capital to small business and potential entrepreneurs in the County. C. The CDA and the Local Government Entities propose to jointly exercise their common economic development powers to undertake the Program. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations of the CDA and each of the Local Government Entities, each party does hereby represent, covenant and agree with the others as follows: Section 1. Representations. Each of the Local Government Entities and the CDA makes the following representations as to itself as the basis for the undertaking on its part herein contained: (a) It is a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota with the power to enter into this Agreement and carry out its obligations hereunder. Joint Powers Agreement Page 33 (b) Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by or conflicts with or results in a breach of, the terms, conditions or provisions of any restriction or any evidences of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which it is now a party or by which it is bound, or constitutes an event of default under any of the foregoing. Section 2. Powers to be Exercised. The powers to be jointly exercised pursuant to this Agreement are the powers of the CDA and the Local Government Entities under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469, to undertake activities to promote economic development within their respective jurisdictions. Section 3. Method for Exercising Common Powers; Funds. The CDA, on its own behalf and on behalf of the Local Government Entities, will initially enter into an agreement with MCCD in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Agreement") to engage MCCD to operate the Program within Dakota County. The CDA and each of the Local Government Entities will make payments to MCCD as described in Exhibit A of the Agreement. The CDA may from time to time execute and deliver documents amending, modifying or extending the Agreement as it deems necessary or convenient, provided, that no such document will adversely affect services provided to, or amounts payable by, any Local Government Entity without the prior written consent of such Local Government Entity. Section 4. Limited Liability. Neither the CDA nor the any of the Local Government Entities shall be liable for the acts or omissions of the other in connection with the activities to be undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. To the extent permitted by law, (a) the CDA hereby indemnifies the Local Government Entities for costs associated with claims made against the Local Government Entities directly relating to actions taken by the CDA, and (b) each Local Government Entity hereby indemnifies the CDA for costs associated with claims made against the CDA directly relating to actions taken by such Local Government Entity. Nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver by the indemnifying party of the limits on liability set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466; and the indemnifying party shall not be required to pay, on behalf of the indemnified party, any amounts in excess of the limits on liability set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04, less any amounts the indemnifying party is required to pay on behalf of itself, its officers, agents and employees for claims arising out of the same occurrence. Section 5. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable. The CDA and each of the Local Government Entities, to the best of its knowledge, represents and agrees that no member, official or employee of their respective bodies shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, nor shall any such member, official or employee participate in any decision relating to this Agreement which affects his or her personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership, or association in which he or she is directly or indirectly interested. No member, official or employee of the CDA or any Local Government Entity shall be personally liable with respect to any default or breach by any of them or for any amount which may become due to the other party or successor or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. 2 Joint Powers Agreement Page 34 Section 6. Term; Distribution of Property. The term of this Agreement shall expire on December 31, 2017. There is no property which will be acquired by the CDA or any Local Government Entity pursuant to the Program which would need to be distributed at the end of the term hereof. Section 7. Notices and Demands. A notice, demand or other communication under this Agreement by any party to another shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally to the person and at the addresses identified on each signature page hereto, or at such other address with respect to either such parry as that party may, from time to time, designate in writing and forward to the other as provided in this Section. Section 8. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank] Joint Powers Agreement Page 35 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CDA and the Local Government Entities have caused this Agreement to be duly executed in their respective names and behalf as of the date first above written, with actual execution on the dates set forth below. Dated: Notice Address: DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY By Its Executive Director Dakota County Community Development Agency 1228 Town Centre Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Attn: Lisa Alfson, Director of Community and Economic Development S-1 Joint Powers Agreement CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Dated: By Its By Its Notice Address: 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Attn: Page 36 S-5 Joint Powers Agreement Page 37 Contract for Services for the Open to Business Program THIS AGREEMENT is dated January 25, 2017 and is between the Dakota County Community Development Agency ("CDA") and Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation ("MCCD"). WHEREAS, the CDA, on behalf of itself and the eleven political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota listed on Exhibit A hereto (the "Local Government Entities"), which each have powers with respect to a city with a population over 10,000 (collectively the "Municipalities"), wishes to engage MCCD to render services under a model known as "Open to Business," an initiative providing small business technical assistance services to existing businesses and residents and other parties interested in opening a business within Dakota County (the "County") (the "Initiative"); and WHEREAS, MCCD has successfully provided the services required to administer and carry out the Initiative in Dakota County from 2013 - 2016; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CDA Resolution No. 17-5830, adopted on January 24, 2017 (the "Resolution"), the CDA is authorized to enter into this agreement with MCCD for the Initiative; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Resolution and certain joint powers agreements to be entered into between the CDA and the Local Government Entities (the "Joint Powers Agreements"), the CDA will act as fiscal agent for the Local Government Entities in connection with this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the CDA will pay from its own funds 50% of the fee charged by MCCD for the Initiative in the Municipalities and 100% of the fee charged by MCCD for the Initiative in the small cities and townships within the County with populations of less than 10,000 people ("Small Cities and Townships"), as further described herein and in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreements, the Local Government Entities will be required to pay a Participation Fee to the CDA in accordance with the schedule in Exhibit A, representing the remaining 50% of the fee charged by MCCD for the Initiative in the Municipalities. Now therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: TIME OF PERFORMANCE The term of this Agreement and the period during which MCCD will provide services hereunder will commence on January 1, 2017 and will end on December 31, 2017, Page 38 subject to earlier termination as provided herein. MCCD will perforin services necessary to carry out the Initiative as promptly as possible, and with the fullest due diligence. COMPENSATION Subject to reduction as provided below, the CDA will compensate MCCD for its services hereunder an amount equal to One Hundred Forty Thousand Dollars ($140,000) ("Contract Amount"). The CDA will pay such amount in two equal installments, the first no earlier than January 30, 2017 and the second no earlier than June 30, 2017, upon receipt of invoices from MCCD. Subject to the limits above, payments will be due within 15 days of receipt of the respective invoices. The portion of the Contract Amount payable from Participation Fees will be payable by the CDA only from and to the extent such Participation Fees are paid by the respective Local Government Entities. In the event a Local Government Entity does not pay to the CDA its Participation Fee in amounts and by the deadline described in Exhibit A, the CDA will notify MCCD, and MCCD will immediately cease the Initiative in that Municipality. Upon such termination, the Contract Amount will be reduced by an amount equal to the Participation Fee which such Local Government Entity did not pay and the amount the CDA would have paid as a matching payment. SCOPE OF SERVICES MCCD will provide technical assistance to existing businesses, residents and those parties interested in starting a business in any of the Municipalities and Small Cities and Townships as further described on Exhibit B and Exhibit C attached hereto, which sets forth the Dakota Open to Business Program Scope of Services. REPORTING MCCD will submit quarterly reports to the CDA in form and substance acceptable to the CDA. Reports will provide infonnation in the aggregate for the County and will include a sub -report for each Municipality and each of the Small Cities and Townships. Reports will include the following information: Number of inquiries ➢ Hours of technical assistance provided Type of assistance provided ➢ Type of business ➢ Annual sales revenue Y Number of businesses opened y Number of business expanded/stabilized 2 Page 39 ➢ Number and amounts of financing packages ➢ Demographic information on entrepreneurs Business address or resident address Number and wage of FTEs created > Number and wage of FTEs retained The required reporting schedule is as follows: 151 quarter January — March, report due April 30"' 2nd quarter April — June, report due July 31" 3'd quarter July — September, report due October 31 S` 01 quarter October — December, report due January 31 ", 2018 In addition to the foregoing, MCCD will provide additional reports as reasonably requested by the CDA. PERSONNEL MCCD represents that it has, or will employ or contract for, at its own expense, all personnel required to perform the services necessary to carry out the Initiative. Such personnel will not be employees of, or have any contractual relationship with, the County, the CDA or any of the Local Government Entities. No tenure or any other rights or benefits, including worker's compensation, unemployment insurance, medical care, sick leave, vacation pay, severance pay, or any other benefits available to the County's, the CDA's or any of the Local Government Entities' employees shall accrue to MCCD or employees of MCCD performing services under this agreement. The MCCD is an independent contractor. All of the services required to carry out the Initiative will be performed by MCCD and all personnel engaged in the work shall be fully qualified and shall be authorized or permitted under State and local law to perform such work. USE OF CDA OFFICE SPACE The CDA will make available a cubicle space for MCCD personnel at the CDA office building for use by MCCD in carrying out the Initiative. MCCD personnel will have access to the CDA's meeting rooms, wireless internet service, copy machines and printers. MCCD personnel shall comply with all CDA office rules and policies regarding the use of CDA office space, equipment and internet access. If the CDA, in its sole discretion, determines that MCCD Personnel have failed to comply with CDA office rules and policies, MCCD Personnel will be required to vacate the GDA office and the CDA will cease to provide MCCD office space to carry out the Initiative. Page 40 INTEREST OF MEMBERS OF THE CDA AND OTHERS No officer, member, or employee of the CDA and no member of its governing body, and no other public official or governing body of any locality in which the Initiative is situated or being carried out, who exercises any functions or responsibilities in the review or approval of the undertaking or carrying out of the Initiative, will participate in the decision relating to this Agreement which affects his/her personal interest or the interest of any corporation, partnership, or association in which he/she is, directly or indirectly, interested or has any personal or pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement. ASSIGNABILTY MCCD will not assign any interest in this Agreement, and will not transfer any interest in the same without the prior written approval of the CDA. COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL LAWS MCCD agrees to comply with all federal laws, statutes and applicable regulations of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the Local Government Entities. INSURANCE MCCD agrees at all times during the term of this Agreement, and beyond such term when so required, to have and keep in force the following insurance coverages: Limits Commercial General Liability on an occurrence basis with contractual liability coverage: General Aggregate $2,000,000 Products—Completed Operations Aggregate 2,000,000 Personal and Advertising Injury 1,500,000 Each Occurrence• --Combined Bodily Injury and Property Damage 1,500,000 2. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation Statutory In the event that MCCD should hire employees or subcontract this work, MCCD shall obtain the required insurance. Employer's Liability. Bodily injury by: Accident—Each Accident 500,000 Disease ---Policy Limit 500,000 Disease—Each Employee 500,000 Page 41 INDEMNIFICATION MCCD agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County, the CDA, the Local Government Entities, and each of their respective officials, officers, agents, volunteers and employees from any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of MCCD, its subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by MCCD or any of its subcontractors, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or omissions MCCD may be liable in the performance of the services required by this Agreement, and against all loss by reason of the failure of MCCD to perform any obligation under this Agreement. NOTICES A notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement by either party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally; and (a) In the case of MCCD, is addressed or delivered personally to: Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers 3137 Chicago Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55407 (b) In the case of the CDA is addressed or delivered personally to: Lisa Alfson, Director of Community and Economic Development Dakota County Community Development Agency 1228 Town Centre Dr. Eagan, MN 55123 or at such other address with respect to any party as that party may designate in writing and forward to the other as provide in the Section. MODIFICATION This Agreement may not be modified, changed, or amended in any manner whatsoever without the prior written approval of all the parties hereto. NON-DISCRIMINATION In connection with its activities under this Agreement, MCCD will not violate any Federal or State laws against discrimination. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION Failure of the MCCD to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement to the satisfaction of the CDA will constitute a default hereunder. Unless MCCD's default is cured within 15 days following notice by the CDA, the CDA 5 Page 42 may (i) cancel this Agreement in its entirety by 5 additional days' written notice to MCCD, or (ii) withhold payment from MCCD as long as such default continues. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations between the parties and their performance. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation will be those courts located within the County. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be affected. 6 Page 43 DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY Acting ExecutIve Director Date: 2 -- L- ')- k rl 1 MCCD By: Printed Name: �- �-�- E Uo f J Printed Title: of �:. ACY, Ce- --*" / / - Date: C, �� Page 44 Exhibit A 2017 Local Government Entity Participation Fee Schedule Municipality Local Government Total CDA Local Government Entity Fee Share of Entity Participation Fee Fee Eagan Economic Development Eagan Authority $15,533 $7,767 $7,766 City of Burnsville Burnsville $15,533 $7,767 $7,766 City of Lakeville Lakeville $15,533 $7,767 $7,766 Apple Valley Economic Apple Valley Development Authority $15,533 $7,767 $7,766 Inver Grove Heights Economic Inver Grove Development Authority $12,956 $6,478 $6,478 Heights Hastings Economic Hastings Development and $10,342 $5,171 $5,171 Redevelopment Authority Rosemount Port Authority Rosemount $10,342 $5,171 $5,171 Farmington Economic Farmington Development Authority $10,342 $5,171 $5,171 South St, Paul Economic South St. Paul Development Authority $10,342 $5,171 $5,171 West St. Paul Economic West St. Paul Development Authority $10,342 $5,171 $5,171 Mendota City of Mendota Heights $5,170 $2,585 $2,585 Heights Small Cities n/a $8,032 $8,032 $0 and Townships Total $140,000 $74,018 $65,982 Page 45 Exhibit B Dakota Open to Business .Program Scope of Services Open to Business ("OTB") Technical Assistance Services MCCD will provide intensive one-on-one technical assistance to Municipalities' and Small Cities' and Townships' businesses, residents and aspiring entrepreneurs intending to establish, purchase, or improve a business in Municipalities and Small Cities and Townships within Dakota County (the "County"). MCCD will dedicate one full time staff person based in the County to provide the Technical Assistance Services ("Dakota OTB Staff"). In addition, MCCD will make available the expertise of all MCCD technical and support staff in the delivery of services to Dakota Open to Business Program. Technical assistance includes, but is not limited to, the following: ➢ Business plan development ➢ Feasibility analysis ➢ Marketing ➢ Cash flow and other financial projection development ➢ Operational analysis ➢ City and State licensing and regulatory assistance ➢ Loan packaging, and other assistance in obtaining financing ➢ Help in obtaining competent legal advice MCCD Dakota OTB Staff will be available to meet clients at the CDA office building, various Municipality city halls or at the client's place of business. MCCD Dakota OTB Staff will provide technical assistance on a walk-in basis monthly in each Municipality, if requested. MCCD will also hold two-hour "Test Drive Your Business Idea" sessions once a month in various Municipality locations. Open to Business Access to Capital Access to capital will be provided to qualifying businesses through MCCD's Emerging Small Business Loan Program (see Exhibit C Small Business Loan Program Guidelines below). MCCD also provides it's financing in partnership with other community lenders, banks or Local Government Entities interested in making capital available to residents and/or businesses in their community. Wo r EXHIBIT C Small Business Loan Program Guidelines Loan Amounts-, Page 46 • Up to $25,000 for start-up businesses • Larger financing packages for established businesses • Designed to leverage other financing programs as well as private financing provided by the commercial banking community. Eligible Proiects: • Borrowers must be a "for-profit" business. • Business must be complimentary to existing business community. • Borrowers must have equity injection as determined by fund management. Allowable Use of Proceeds: • Loan proceeds can be used for working capital, inventory, building and equipment and general business operations. Interest Rates: • Loan interest rate is dependent on use, term and other factors, not to exceed 10%. Loan Term Length: • Loan repayment terms will generally range from three to five years, but may be substantially longer for major asset financing such as commercial property. Fees and Charges: • Borrowers are responsible for paying all customary legal and other loan closing costs. 10 Page 47 ILMMCCD Metropolitan Consortium of Community developers TO &VSINM Quarter 4, 2016 at a Glance Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Total MCCD Direct Loans —Total How many direct loans did we make in 2016? 12 12 13 10 47 How much of our own funds have we lent out? $184,576 $391,028 $418,200 $829,625 $1,823,429 How much other money did our loan fund leverage? $258,411 $541,529 $624,500 $5,800,739 $7,225,179 How many jobs will our small businesses create or retain? 36 100 84.5 90 310.5 Direct Loans generally of $25,000 or less (to new and emerging businesses) How many micro -loans did we make in 2016? 11 8 10 2 31 How much of our own funds did we lend out as micro -loans? $120,576 $102,028 $98,200 $19,625 $340,429 How much other money did our micro -loan program leverage? $82,173 $81,603 $237,000 $31,364 $432,140 How many jobs will our micro - loan borrowers create or retain? 25 50 15.5 2 92.5 Direct Loans generally greater than $25,000 (to second stage and growing businesses) How many second stage business loans did we make in 2016? 1 4 3 8 16 How much of our own funds did we lend out as second stage loans? $64,000 $289,000 $320,000 $810,000 $1,483,000 How much other money did our second stage loan program leverage? $176,238 $459,926 $387,500 $5,769,375 $6,793,039 How many jobs will our second stage borrowers create or retain? 11 50 69 88 218 Credit Builder Loans How many credit builder loans did MCCD make in 2016? 39 28 17 19 103 What share of our credit builder loans went to minorities? 90% 96% 100% 95% 94% rage 40 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Total Total Loan Volume Direct Loans, Credit Builder Loans, and Administered Loans) In all, how many loans did we close in 2016? 51 52 31 29 163 In all, how much money have we lent out? $194,476 $618,690 $517,655 $854,020 $2,184,841 Loans Repaid — Quarter 4, 2016 Direct Loans Borrower Loan Amount Roland's Barbeque Catering 6,100 Roland's Barbeque Catering 3,000 Halo Ramp Company LLC 1,000 Moto -I, Inc. 35,000 R.R.I. Masonry And Construction LLC 10,000 Lion's Gym, Inc. 25,000 SusiB L. L. C. dba ZA! Italian Minnesotan 50,000 GO Forward Brands L. L. C. dba Orange Theory Fitness 30,000 G & V Construction Inc 40,000 PJ Norman L. L. C. 100,000 Manny's Tortas, LLC 15,000 Manny's Tortas, LLC 1,500 Electra Beauty Salon, LLC 16,000 SEASONS PROPERTY MAINTENANCE L. L. C. 2,464 Tweak the Glam Studio L. L. C. 4,600 Wenrich PD Construction, LLC 25,000 Total $364,664 Credit Builder Loans 21 Credit Builder Borrowers $5,420 Direct Loans Closed — Quarter 4, 2016 Loan Committee #1: G & V Construction Inc. Founded in 2008 by Gregory Cholak, G & V Construction specializes in window and roof replacements. In 2011, Gregory fell while working on a job. The resulting injury impacted both his health and the health of the business. In 2016, Gregory transferred ownership of the business to his daughter Dina Zhakevich. Since Dina started managing the business, it has become bonded and is bidding on larger projects. The Chaska company successfully bid on a large project to replace roofing on several cottages in Fergus Falls housing individuals with development disabilities and owned and operated by the Minnesota Department of Human Services. MCCD provided a transactional loan of $40,000 to help G & V Construction pay for materials and labor until payment was received from the state. BOLTZ'S TAE KWON DO, INC. Greg Bolton aka Master Boltz is a sixth degree Kukkiwon-certified Black Belt Master. Passionate about the discipline of Tae Kwon Do, Master Boltz founded his family martial arts academy in Mendota Heights in 1999. The business is at capacity and many classes have waiting lists. As a result Master Boltz plans to nearly double the space of his existing building. MCCD provided financing to help with the collateral gap on this $579,000 construction project. Page 49 Jamba Express LLC With over 15 years of experience driving semi -trucks, Minneapolis resident Adan Jamba decided he was ready to buy his own semi -tractor and strike out on his own. With our partner African Development Center, MCCD provided Adan with Shari'ah compliant financing to help him purchase a 2011 Freightliner. CEDAR DIRECT MINNESOTA LLC Barn wood has become a very popular material that is used by designers and builders in furniture, cabinetry, and home finishes. Unfortunately, barn wood is very expensive and the supply is often unreliable. Tim Conyard has solved these problems. His new business CEDAR DIRECT MINNESOTA takes new low-grade cedar and other wood boards and weathers and ages them until they resemble old -use barn wood. Tim has extensive business experience and has already reached out to many prospective customers including builders and designers. He has leased a large warehouse space in Norwood Young America to start his business. In partnership with Citizen's Bank and the city of Norwood Young American, MCCD has provided financing to help the company start. Town Hall Station, LLC Town Hall Station, LLC, a new company owned by Town Hall Brewery LLLP, will renovate the former Wally's Service Station at 4500 Valley View Road in Edina into a new restaurant. Town Hall Station will be the fourth operation owned by the limited liability partnership and the first located outside of Minneapolis. The partnership also owns Town Hall Tap at 48th and Chicago, Town Hall Lanes at 50th Street and 34th Avenue, and the original Town Hall Brewery near Seven Corners by the University of Minnesota. Deerwood Bank asked MCCD to participate in this $950,000 renovation project to help the company conserve cash for working capital. Loan Committee #2: Moto -I, Inc. When you hear Ramen noodles, the first thing you might think of is the cheap packages of noodles you survived on during your college days. The ramen noodles served at Moto -I Ramen and Sake House located at Lake and Lyndale Avenues in Minneapolis are nothing like those. Moto -I serves eight traditional and delicious ramen dishes with meat or vegetables and the level of spice you desire. Moto -I also offers fresh sake brewed on site. During the fourth quarter, MCCD closed on a $100,000 loan as part of a $1.78 million working capital and refinancing package with Venture Bank. MJD Innovative Solutions L. L. C. Winters in Minnesota and other northern climes are the bane of builders. When the frozen ground is as hard as concrete, builders can either wait until spring to lay foundations or spend weeks (and thousands of dollars) trying to thaw the ground out with propane heaters. A problem solver by nature, Michael Davis has a better way for builders to deal with winter. He has invented a system that sinks giant heated drill bits into the ground that is faster and cheaper that the traditional propane heaters. Moreover, the giant drill bits also work well in drying out wet clay, the bane of builders in all climates. MCCD has provided financing to this Blaine company to purchase the equipment it needs to scale up operations. Michael has already obtained a contract with a major home builder for this winter. Queen's Court Studio of Dance, LLC Barbara Stanley has been dancing or working in dance virtually her whole life, most of it at Queen's Court Studio of Dance. In 2013, she purchased the company and doubled its enrollment in only three years. Having outgrown her existing space, Barbara found an ideal building in Blaine for her dance studio's new home. Bank Vista asked MCCD to provide financing to this $1.8 million project to help bridge a collateral gap. Page 50 Internal Loan Committee: Down Home Traditions LLC Meredith Free-Phillipps, owner of Down Home Traditions LLC, has been making and selling homemade pickles, jellies, and gluten-free baked products for several years. MCCD recently provided her with a loan to purchase equipment and convert the garage of her Watertown home into a commercial kitchen. Having access to a licensed commercial kitchen will allow Meredith to increase her production and start to wholesale her products. .l's I I C In December 2015, MCCD participated with Northeast Bank to provide start-up financing to SusiB L. L. C. dba ZA! Italian Minnesotan. Unfortunate, the Forest Lake restaurant was not successful and closed in the fall of 2016. Northeast Bank worked with the previous owner and found a buyer for the business assets. The buyer, 2 J's LLC, is owned by John Maleitzke who owns several restaurants in Stillwater and Forest Lake. MCCD cooperated with Northeast Bank on the workout of the original loan to SusiB L. L. C. The buyer, 2 J's LLC, paid off MCCD's participation loan with Northeast Bank ($42,282.08) and MCCD purchased a $40,000 participation in Northeast Bank's new loan to 2 J's LLC. Page 51 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.irendota-helghts.com s CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: 2017 Municipal Clean Up Day — Accept Quotes & Negotiate Contract COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to accept quotes and authorize a contract be negotiated for the operation of the Mendota Heights 2017 Clean Up Day. BACKGROUND Mendota Heights has held an annual Clean Up Day where residents can bring acceptable materials to a central location for recycling and disposal. City Council authorized the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) at their November 15, 2016 meeting. DISCUSSION Previous years events have been accomplished through the combined efforts of staff, volunteers and contracted waste haulers. Staff has researched similar programs in surrounding communities and determined that the cost of having the event staffed by licensed waste haulers is comparable to the format currently used by the city, but without the liability to the volunteers. Staff time is also expected to be reduced as the selected contractor will be required to manage the fee collection, signage, clean up, etc. Notices of this RFP were sent to about a dozen waste hauling companies. Four of those companies subsequently requested to be included in receiving the RFP; two companies ultimately submitted quotes for this service. Following is a chart showing the prices proposed by Highland Sanitation: Highland Sanitation Item Unit Cost ($) Pick up Load 25.00 Minivan/SUV Load 20.00 Car Load 15.00 Trailer (4x4x8) 60.00 Mattress 25.00 Appliance 20.00 Appliance w/Freon 25.00 Tires 10.00115.00 Scrap Metal 5.00 Electronics See list Page 52 The scoring criteria in the RFP for the evaluation of proposals was 50% Price, 10% checklist, 20% meeting base specifications, 10% past performance, and 10% for additional value added. The proposal from Highland Sanitation had the lowest pricing, included items on the checklist, met base specifications, and is recommending providing services in addition to those required. While Highland Sanitation has not operated a Clean Up Day since 1999, it has provided waste & recycling services to large city celebration events. An additional service proposed by Highland Sanitation included carpet recycling. Highland Sanitation also included a statement that all electronics will not be processed outside of the United States, Mexico or Canada. Mendota Heights is receiving a grant from Dakota County to assist in the Operation of Municipal Clean Up Day. Items that will need to be finalized in the contract phase include the date of the event, and City subsidization of the collection fees (this has been a practice of the City previously). In addition to the above items, the City will be contracting independently to provide paper shredding as well as collecting bicycles for reuse. BUDGET IMPACT Staff will review the quotes and make recommendations to the Council about subsidizing some of the collection fees. The City has been provided approximately $7000 per year from the Dakota County Grant for this event. This will be brought to the City Council for approval at a future meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council accept the quotes and authorize staff to negotiate a contract to Highland Sanitation for the Operation of the Mendota Heights 2017 Clean Up Day event. The final contract, including the date, will be brought back to the Council for approval. ACTION REQUIRED If Council concurs, it should pass a motion authorizing staff to negotiate a contract with Highland Sanitation for operation of the 2017 Clean Up Day event. This action requires a simple majority vote. CITY OF MENEDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council Page 53 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator Dave Dreelan, Assistant Fire Chief SUBJECT: Appointment of Assistant Fire Chief COMMENT. INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to appoint Scott Goldenstein as Assistant Fire Chief for the City of Mendota Heights, effective March 1, 2017. BACKGROUND At the January 17 City Council meeting, Assistant Fire Chief Dave Dreelan was appointed as Mendota Heights Fire Chief, effective March 1, 2017. In order to find his successor, the Council directed that the vacancy be posted, and that a Selection Panel be appointed to interview prospective candidates. Four members of the MHFD stepped forward. On February 16, the four candidates were interviewed. After considering the four highly qualified individuals, the Panel recommends to the City Council that it appoint Scott Goldenstein as the next Assistant Fire Chief for the MHFD. Scott has been a member of the MHFD for 17 years, and has served as a Captain for the past 10 years. Scott has completed numerous trainings and certifications in support of his fire service career and is well qualified for the position of Assistant Fire Chief. Should the Council approve the appointment of Scott Goldenstein as Assistant Fire Chief, Scott will be sworn in along with Dave Dreelan as Fire Chief at the March 7 City Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that the City Council appoint Scott Goldenstein as Assistant Fire Chief effective March 1, 2017. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, appoint Scott Goldenstein as Mendota Heights Assistant Fire Chief effective March 1, 2017. Page 54 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1651.452.8940 fax www. mendota-hei g hts.com CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action MEETINGDATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Directorvv� SUBJECT: Claims List Summary BACKGROUND Significant Claims MN Department of Labor & Industry - Surcharges $ 3,942.48 A to Z Home Inspections — January Inspections $ 6,483.13 Compass Minerals — Road Salt $ 24,995.96 Foth Infrastructure — Sump Pump Inspections $ 6,771.99 Mansfield Oil Company — Fuel $ 8,377.72 Motorola Solutions — Portable Radios — Police Dept. $ 93,456.25 Rupp, Anderson, Squires — Oct/Nov Legal Service $ 25,453.59 WSB & Associates — Storm Water Management Plan $ 4,621.00 Manual Checks Total System Checks Total $ 13,114.53 $ 224,991.87 Total for the list of claims for the February 21, 2017 city council meeting $ 238,106.40 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Mendota Heighs City Council approve the list of claims for February 21, 2017. Page 55 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 10:43 AM Page 1 Claims List MANUAL CHECKS 02/16/17 MAN Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name HISTORIC CONCORD EXCHANGE E 01-4435-200-70 RECREATION PROGRAM EVENT Parks & Recreation Search Name HISTORIC CONCORD EXCHANGE Search Name I C M A RETIREMENT 457 G 01-2072 2/10/17 PAYROLL Search Name I C M A RETIREMENT 457 Search Name INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE G 01-2073 2/10/17 PAYROLL Search Name INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY G 01-2010 SURCHARGES G 01-2010 SURCHARGES Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION G 01-2072 2/10/17 PAYROLL Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION Search Name SELECT ACCOUNT G 01-2071 E 05-4131-105-15 E 01-4131-070-70 E 01-4131-050-50 E 01-4131-020-20 Search Name SELECT ACCOUNT FEB 2017 HSA CONTRIBUTION FEB 2017 HSA CONTRIBUTION FEB 2017 HSA CONTRIBUTION FEB 2017 HSA CONTRIBUTION FEB 2017 HSA CONTRIBUTION Search Name UNITED WAY OF ST. PAUL G 01-2070 2/10/17 PAYROLL Search Name UNITED WAY OF ST. PAUL Engineering Enterprise Parks & Recreation Road & Bridges Police $600.00 $600.00 $1,868.67 $1,868.67 $1,287.34 $1,287.34 -$164.27 $4,106.75 $3,942.48 $50.00 $50.00 $2,405.84 $483.34 $366.67 $283.34 $1,811.85 $5,351.04 $15.00 $15.00 �13,11Y.J3 Search Name A TO Z HOME INSPECTION, LLC E 01-4231-040-40 JANUARY 2017 INSPECTIONS Page 56 $6,483.13 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 3:24 PM $6,483.13 Search Name AAA CREDIT SCREENING SERVICE Page 1 Claims List PRE-EMPLOYMENT SCREENING Administration SYSTEM CHECKS Search Name AAA CREDIT SCREENING SERVICE 02/21/17 PAY Search Name ALEX AIR APPARATUS Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL LLC Fire G 01-2035 DECEMBER 2016 ANIMAL CON -$20.63 G 01-2010 DECEMBER 2016 ANIMAL CON $320.63 G 01-2035 JANUARY 2017 ANIMAL CONTR -$20.63 E 01-4225-800-90 JANUARY 2017 ANIMAL CONTR Animal Control $476.63 Search Name 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL LLC $756.00 Search Name A TO Z HOME INSPECTION, LLC E 01-4231-040-40 JANUARY 2017 INSPECTIONS Code Enforcement/Inspe $6,483.13 Search Name A TO Z HOME INSPECTION, LLC $6,483.13 Search Name AAA CREDIT SCREENING SERVICE E 01-4306-110-10 PRE-EMPLOYMENT SCREENING Administration $30.00 Search Name AAA CREDIT SCREENING SERVICE $30.00 Search Name ALEX AIR APPARATUS E 01-4330-490-30 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - FIRE Fire $500.00 Search Name ALEX AIR APPARATUS $500.00 Search Name ALL CITY ELEVATOR, INC. E 08-4335-000-00 FEBRUARY 2017 MAINTENANC Spec Fds _ $161.00 Search Name ALL CITY ELEVATOR, INC. $161.00 Search Name ALLEGRA PRINT & IMAGING E 01-4300-030-30 LETTERHEAD & ENVELOPES - F Fire $370.80 E 01-4300-020-20 BUSINESS CARDS - PD Police $257.02 Search Name ALLEGRA PRINT & IMAGING $627.82 Search Name AMERIPRIDE SERVICES E 01-4200-610-70 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Parks & Recreation $22.60 E 08-4335-000-00 MAT SERVICE - CITY HALL Spec Fds $178.14 E 01-4200-610-50 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Road & Bridges $22.60 E 08-4335-000-00 MAT SERVICE - CITY HALL Spec Fds $197.72 E 01-4410-050-50 UNIFORMS Road & Bridges $13.56 E 15-4200-610-60 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Utility Enterprise $19.55 E 01-4200-610-50 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Road & Bridges $19.56 E 01-4200-610-70 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Parks & Recreation $19.56 E 01-4410-050-50 UNIFORMS Road & Bridges $18.53 E 15-4200-610-60 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Utility Enterprise $22.61 Search Name AMERIPRIDE SERVICES $534.43 Search Name ARROW BUICK & PONTIAC E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $34.56 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $116.36 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $61.62 Search Name ARROW BUICK & PONTIAC $212.54 Search Name ARROW MOWER INC. E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $11.64 Search Name ARROW MOWER INC. $11.64 Search Name AUTOZONE E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $219.98 Search Name AUTOZONE $219.98 Search Name BGMN, INC. E 01-4320-030-30 FUEL ADDITIVE Page 57 $102.06 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 3.24 PM Utility Enterprise $102.05 Page 2 FUEL ADDITIVE Claims List $102.06 E 01-4320-020-20 SYSTEM CHECKS Police $102.06 02/21/17 PAY FUEL ADDITIVE Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name BESSER WELDING & FABRICATION $510.29 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - STREETS Road & Bridges $450.00 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $450.00 E 15-4330-490-60 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - UTILITY Utility Enterprise $450.00 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Road & Bridges $76.00 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - STREETS Road & Bridges $360.00 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - STREETS Road & Bridges $67.20 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $67.20 Search Name BESSER WELDING & FABRICATION $1,920.40 Search Name BGMN, INC. E 01-4320-030-30 FUEL ADDITIVE Fire $102.06 E 15-4320-060-60 FUEL ADDITIVE Utility Enterprise $102.05 E 01-4320-050-50 FUEL ADDITIVE Road & Bridges $102.06 E 01-4320-020-20 FUEL ADDITIVE Police $102.06 E 01-4320-070-70 FUEL ADDITIVE Parks & Recreation $102.06 Search Name BGMN, INC. Search Name BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC $510.29 Search Name BLUE TARP FINANCIAL E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Road & Bridges $82.45 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Parks & Recreation $82.44 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Parks & Recreation $122.94 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Utility Enterprise $83.77 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Road & Bridges $83.77 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Parks & Recreation $83.77 Search Name BLUE TARP FINANCIAL $539.14 Search Name BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC E 01-4305-030-30 OPERATING SUPPLIES - FIRE Fire $200.44 Search Name BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC $200.44 Search Name BREDEMUS HARDWARE COMPANY, INC E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIRS - CITY HALL Spec Fds $9.95 Search Name BREDEMUS HARDWARE COMPANY, INC $9.95 Search Name BRENNAN, MICHAEL & JEAN G 15-1150 SEWER ACCOUNT REFUND $60.04 Search Name BRENNAN, MICHAEL & JEAN $60.04 Search Name C. DARLENE OEHLKE, CAP E 01-4220-110-10 2/7/17 CITY COUNCIL MINUTE Administration $288.00 Search Name C. DARLENE OEHLKE, CAP $288.00 Search Name COMPASS MINERALS E 01-4421-050-50 ROAD SALT Road & Bridges $1,887.87 E 01-4421-050-50 ROAD SALT Road & Bridges $11,693.90 E 01-4421-050-50 ROAD SALT Road & Bridges $11,414.19 Search Name COMPASS MINERALS $24,995.96 Search Name CRAWFORD DOOR E 08-4335-000-00 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS - PD Spec Fds $230.00 Search Name CRAWFORD DOOR $230.00 Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER Page 58 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 3:24 PM Page 3 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/21/17 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 01-4275-020-20 MARCH 2017 DCC FEE Police $16,745.00 E 01-4275-030-30 MARCH 2017 DCC FEE Fire $527.00 Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER $17,272.00 Search Name DAKOTA COUNTY G 15-2010 2016 JPA PUMP FEES $177.00 E 15-4490-060-60 2017 JPA PUMP FEELS Utility Enterprise $177.00 Search Name DAKOTA COUNTY $354.00 Search Narne DAKOTA COUNTY RECORDER G 01-2010 DECEMBER 2016 DOCUMENT R $966.00 Search Name DAKOTA COUNTY RECORDER $966.00 Search Name ECKBERG LAMMERS E 01-4481-110-10 JANUARY 2017 LEGAL SERVICE Administration $450.00 E 01-4220-120-80 JANUARY 2017 LEGAL SERVICE Planning $150.00 E 01-4481-110-10 JANUARY 2017 LEGAL SERVICE Administration $975.00 E 01-4220-120-80 JANUARY 2017 LEGAL SERVICE Planning $600.00 E 01-4220-120-20 JANUARY 2017 LEGAL SERVICE Police $150.00 E 01-4220-120-10 JANUARY 2017 LEGAL SERVICE Administration $240.00 E 01-4221-120-10 JANUARY 2017 LEGAL SERVICE Administration $400.00 Search Name ECKBERG LAMMERS $2,965.00 Search Name EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS E 01-4330-490-30 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - FIRE Fire $916.77 Search Name EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS $916.77 Search Name FISCHER S SERVICE - PLOWING E 01-4335-315-30 JAN 2017 PLOWING - FIRE HAL Fire $300.00 E 01-4268-500-30 JAN 2017 PLOWING - DRIVEW Fire $1,740.00 Search Name FISCHER S SERVICE - PLOWING $2,040.00 Search Name FLEET FARM/GE MONEY BANK E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - UTILIT Utility Enterprise $51.58 Search Name FLEET FARM/GE MONEY BANK $51.58 Search Name FLEEi'PRIDE E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges $265.00 E 15-4330-490-60 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - UTILITY Utility Enterprise $64.41 E 15-4330-490-60 EQUIPMENT REPAIR CREDIT - Utility Enterprise -$6.90 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges $64.40 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR CREDIT - Parks & Recreation -$88.38 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR CREDIT - Road & Bridges -$74.80 E 01-4330-440-20 EQUIPMENT REPAIR CREDIT - Police -$109.02 G 01-2010 EQUIPMENT REPAIR CREDIT - -$2.21 E 01-4330-460-30 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - FIRE Fire $42.32 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $64.40 Search Name FLEETPRIDE $219.22 Search Name FORMS & SYSTEMS OF MN E 01-4305-020-20 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PD Police $121.05 Search Name FORMS & SYSTEMS OF MN $121.05 Search Name FOTH INFRASTRUCTURE & ENVIRON E 15-4220-060-60 SUMP PUMP INSPECTIONS Utility Enterprise $6,771.99 Page 59 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 3:24 PM Page 4 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/21/17 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name FOTH INFRASTRUCTURE & ENVIRON $6,771.99 Search Name GMS INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES, INC. E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Road & Bridges $62.37 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $62.37 Search Name GMS INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES, INC. $124.74 Search Name GOLDCOM E 01-4305-030-30 OPERATING SUPPLIES - FIRE Fire $34.27 Search Name GOLDCOM $34.27 Search Name GOODIN COMPANY E 08-4335-000-00 SUPPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $149.58 E 15-4330-490-60 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - UTILITY Utility Enterprise $66.96 Search Name GOODIN COMPANY Road & Bridges $216.54 Search Name GOPHER STATE ONE CALL - PW Parks & Recreation E 01-4210-040-40 JANUARY 2017 SERVICES Code Enforcement/Inspe $81.00 Search Name GOPHER STATE ONE CALL E 01-4335-315-30 $81.00 Search Name GRAINGER Fire Search Name JANI-KING OF MINNESOTA, INC. E 08-4335-000-00 REPAIRS - CITY HALL Spec Fds $93.84 Search Name GRAINGER $93.84 Search Name HITESMAN & WOLD, P.A. G 01-2010 FLEX BENEFITS CONSULTING $494.00 Search Name HITESMAN & WOLD, P.A. $494.00 Search Name HONSA LIGHTING SALES E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT SUPPLLIES - CITY Spec Fds $39.00 Search Name HONSA LIGHTING SALES $39.00 Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS E 01-4300-020-20 OFFICE SUPPLIES - PD Police $5.46 E 01-4300-030-30 OFFICE SUPPLIES - FIRE Fire $10.54 Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS $16.00 Search Name INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM E 01-4330-460-30 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - FIRE Fire $244.90 Search Name INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM $244.90 Search Name JANI-KING OF MINNESOTA, INC. E 15-4335-310-60 FEBRUARY 2017 SERVICE - PW Utility Enterprise E 01-4335-310-50 FEBRUARY 2017 SERVICE - PW Road & Bridges E 01-4335-310-70 FEBRUARY 2017 SERVICE - PW Parks & Recreation E 01-4331-020-20 FEBRUARY 2017 SERVICE - PD Police E 01-4335-315-30 FEBRUARY 2017 SERVICE - FIR Fire Search Name JANI-KING OF MINNESOTA, INC. Search Name KAT KEYS E 15-4335-310-60 E 01-4335-310-70 E 01-4335-310-50 Search Name KAT KEYS Search Name KEEPRS, INC BLDG MAINT - PW Utility Enterprise BLDG MAINT - PW Parks & Recreation BLDG MAINT - PW Road & Bridges $66.66 $66.67 $66.67 $801.95 $200.00 $1,201.95 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $120.00 Search Name LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - UTILIT Page 60 $10.18 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 3:24 PM Road & Bridges $10.19 Page 5 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Claims List $10.19 E 15-4305-060-60 SYSTEM CHECKS Utility Enterprise $101.64 02/21/17 PAY OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 01-4410-020-20 UNIFORM - E. HAGELEE Police $6.50 E 01-4305-020-20 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PD Police $63.00 E 01-4410-020-20 UNIFORM - K. MCCARTHY Police $262.94 E 01-4410-020-20 UNIFORM - E. HAGELEE Police $10.00 E 01-4410-020-20 UNIFORM - E. HAELEE Police $24.00 Search Name KEEPRS, INC Administration $366.44 Search Name LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - UTILIT Utility Enterprise $10.18 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Road & Bridges $10.19 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $10.19 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - UTILIT Utility Enterprise $101.64 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Road & Bridges $101.63 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $101.63 Search Name LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC $335.46 Search Name LEAGUE MN CITIES E 01-4400-110-10 TRAINING - M. MCNEILL Administration $200.00 E 01-4400-110-10 TRAINING - C. JACOBSON Administration $20.00 Search Name LEAGUE MN CITIES $220.00 Search Name LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS E 01-4240-080-80 JANUARY 2017 PUBLICATION - Planning $76.50 E 27-4220-795-00 JANUARY 2017 PUBLICATION Spec Fds $91.57 E 01-4240-110-10 JANUARY 2017 PUBLICATION - Administration $76.50 E 01-4240-050-50 JANUARY 2017 PUBLICATION - Road & Bridges $104.85 E 27-4220-790-00 JANUARY 2017 PUBLICATION Spec Fds $91.58 Search Name LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS $441.00 Search Name LOGIS E 01-4223-020-20 APPLICATION SUPPORT - PD Police $1,548.00 E 01-4223-020-20 APPLICATION SUPPORT - PD Police $2,723.00 E 01-4301-030-30 APPLICATION SUPPORT - FIRE Fire $65.00 Search Name LOGIS $4,336.00 Search Name LP GAS EQUIPMENT, INC. E 01-4320-050-50 GAS EQUIPMENT - STREET Road & Bridges $124.54 Search Name LP GAS EQUIPMENT, INC. $124.54 Search Name MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY G 01-1210 FUEL $3,830.07 G 01-1210 FUEL $4,547.65 Search Name MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY $8,377.72 Search Name MENARDS E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Road & Bridges $30.12 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $49.72 E 01-4305-030-30 OPERATING SUPPLIES Fire $25.32 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $30.12 E 01-4320-050-50 KEROSENE - SHOP Road & Bridges $53.20 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT - CITY HALL Spec Fds $20.70 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $18.30 E 15-4320-060-60 KEROSENE - SHOP Utility Enterprise $53.20 E 01-4320-070-70 KEROSENE - SHOP Parks & Recreation $53.20 Page 61 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 3:24 PM Page 6 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/21/17 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name MENARDS $333.88 Search Name METRO JANITORIAL SUPPLY INC E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Utility Enterprise $35.23 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Road & Bridges $35.24 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Parks & Recreation $35.24 Search Name METRO JANITORIAL SUPPLY INC $105.71 Search Name MID NORTHERN SERVICES E 28-4330-000-00 STREET LIGHT REPAIR Spec Fds $210.00 E 28-4330-000-00 STREET LIGHT REPAIR Spec Fds $350.00 E 01-4330-490-50 TRAFFIC SIGNAL REPAIR Road & Bridges $210.00 E 01-4330-490-50 LIGHT REPAIR - PW Road & Bridges $140.00 Search Name MID NORTHERN SERVICES $910.00 Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY E 08-4335-000-00 ELEVATOR LICENSE - CITY HAL Spec Fds $100.00 Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY $100.00 Search Name MN GLOVE INC E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Road & Bridges $62.84 Search Name MN GLOVE INC $62.84 Search Name MN ST ADMIN ITG TELECOM SRVCE E 01-4223-020-20 JANUARY 2017 WAN SERVICE Police $134.00 E 01-4220-133-10 JANUARY 2017 WAN SERVICE Administration $130.00 Search Name MN ST ADMIN ITG TELECOM SRVCE $264.00 Search Name MN TEAMSTERS LOCAL 320 G 01-2075 FEBRUARY 2017 UNION DUES $663.00 Search Name MN TEAMSTERS LOCAL 320 $663.00 Search Name MN WANNER COMPANY E 01-4330-490-70 EQIPMENT REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation $327.54 Search Name MN WANNER COMPANY $327.54 Search Name MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. E 04-4620-000-00 APX6000 PORTABLE RADIOS - Spec Fds $93,456.25 Search Name MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. $93,456.25 Search Name NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE E 15-4330-490-60 LIFT STATION REPAIRS Utility Enterprise $1,976.00 Search Name NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE $1,976.00 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO E 01-4200-610-70 CYLINDER RENTAL Parks & Recreation $35.24 E 01-4200-610-50 CYLINDER RENTAL Road & Bridges $35.24 E 15-4200-610-60 CYLINDER RENTAL Utility Enterprise $35.23 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO $105.71 Search Name PAC E 29-4337-000-00 STORM SEWER CAVE-IN MEND Spec Fds $2,450.00 Search Name PAC $2,450.00 Search Name PENTEL, REBECCA E 01-4490-020-20 CUSTOM FRAME REIMBURSEM Police $257.43 Account CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/21/17 PAY Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 08-4335-000-00 PAINTING SUPPLIES REIMBUR Spec Fds $187.80 Search Name PENTEL, REBECCA $445.23 Search Name PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS E 01-4490-110-10 DELIVERY SERVICE - ADMIN Administration $27.49 Search Name PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS $27.49 Search Name ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD E 01-4330-440-20 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PD Police $45.25 Search Name ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD $45.25 Search Name RUPP, ANDERSON, SQUIRES & WALD G 01-2010 OCT & NOV 2016 LEGAL SERVI $25,453.59 Search Name RUPP, ANDERSON, SQUIRES & WALD $25,453.59 Search Name SNAP ON TOOLS E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Parks & Recreation $26.20 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP Utility Enterprise $19.75 Search Name SNAP ON TOOLS $45.95 Search Name SOS OFFICE FURNITURE E 01-4330-440-20 OFFICE FURNITURE - PD Police $1,521.45 Search Name SOS OFFICE FURNITURE $1,521.45 Search Name SOUTH EAST TOWING E 01-4305-020-20 TOWING - MHPD REF CN# 17- Police $95.00 Search Name SOUTH EAST TOWING $95.00 Search Name SPRWS E 01-4425-310-50 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE - 2431 Road & Bridges $22.19 E 01-4425-310-70 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE - 2431 Parks & Recreation $22.19 E 08-4425-000-00 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE - 1101 Spec Fds $92.77 E 01-4425-315-30 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE - 2121 Fire $92.77 E 15-4425-310-60 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE - 2431 Utility Enterprise $22.18 Search Name SPRWS $252.10 Search Name STREICHERS E 07-4305-000-00 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PD Spec Fds $99.80 Search Name STREICHERS $99.80 Search Name TRIANGLE RUBBISH & RECYCLING E 01-4280-315-30 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE • FIRE Fire $53.10 Search Name TRIANGLE RUBBISH & RECYCLING $53.10 Search Name UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS E 01-4422-050-50 PAVING MIX Road & Bridges $494.00 Search Name UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS $494.00 Search Name UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $53.52 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - UTILIT Utility Enterprise $53.52 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE Road & Bridges $53.52 Search Name UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC $160.56 Search Name US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GRP MN E 08-4220-000-00 MEDICAL EXAM Spec Fds $278.00 Page 62 02/16/17 3:24 PM Page 7 $224,991.87 Page 63 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/16/17 3:24 PM Page 8 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/21/17 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 01-4220-050-50 MEDICAL EXAM - PW Road & Bridges $60.00 Search Name US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GRP MN $338.00 Search Name VERIZON WIRELESS E 01-4210-020-20 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Police $882.31 E 01-4490-109-09 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE City Council $51.31 E 15-4210-060-60 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Utility Enterprise $51.31 E 01-4210-070-70 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Parks & Recreation $184.98 E 01-4210-050-50 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Road & Bridges $153.93 E 01-4210-114-14 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Info Tech $105.03 E 01-4223-020-20 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Police $245.07 E 01-4210-110-10 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Administration $102.62 E 01-4210-110-10 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Administration $102.62 E 01-4210-030-30 FEBRUARY 2017 CELL SERVICE Fire $272.72 Search Name VERIZON WIRELESS $2,151.90 Search Name VITO MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIR - CITY HALL Spec Fds $288.00 Search Name VITO MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS $288.00 Search Name WASTE MANAGEMENT E 08-4280-000-00 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE Spec Fds $266.32 E 01-4280-310-70 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE Parks & Recreation $73.59 E 01-4280-310-50 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE Road & Bridges $73.59 E 15-4280-310-60 JANUARY 2017 SERVICE Utility Enterprise $73.58 Search Name WASTE MANAGEMENT $487.08 Search Name WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE E 01-4330-440-20 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PD Police $575.74 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges $50.59 Search Name WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE $626.33 Search Name WSB & ASSOCIATES E 29-4220-000-00 STORM WATER MGMT Spec Fds $4,621.00 Search Name WSB & ASSOCIATES $4,621.00 Search Name ZEP VEHICLE CARE, INC. E 01-4305-030-30 OPERATING SUPPLIES - FIRE Fire $195.34 Search Name ZEP VEHICLE CARE, INC. $195.34 $224,991.87 Page 64 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights. MN 55118 651.452.1850 Rhone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.menclota-heig hts.com CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Mark McNeill — City Administrator SUBJECT: Future Cities Competition Presentation COMMENT.- Introduction OMMENT: Introduction At its meeting of February 21St, the City Council will hear a presentation from three teams of Friendly Hills Middle School students regarding their 2017 entries. Background For the past nine years, Friendly Hills Middle School has been participating in the Future Cities Competition, which is sponsored by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Mendota Heights City staff, primarily former Public Works Director John Mazzitello, has provided mentorship to competing teams for seven out of the past nine years. This was the 25th year of the Future Cities Competition. The Future Cities Competition challenges teams of 6th through 81h grade students to design a city of the future based on a specific theme. This year's theme was "The Power of Public Spaces." Teams had to develop their cities focusing on the utilization and placement of public spaces; specifically, the conversion of brownfield (contaminated), greyfield (abandoned/blighted), and unused right-of-way into public spaces and facilities. While developing this program, they also had to consider such city staples as infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc.), energy production, public safety, zoning, transportation, waste management, education, and environmental sustainability. The State competition is held each January at Dunwoody Institute, where teams showcase their cities with a model built to scale. There is a seven -minute oral presentation about their city. In addition, teams are scored on a project plan, 1500 -word essay, and computer model using SimCity software. Once all the teams have presented, the scores are tabulated, and the top five teams advance to compete against each other in the State finals held later the same day. Discussion Friendly Hills Middle School entered three teams in the State competition for the seventh consecutive year. Each of the years that Friendly Hills has entered teams, they have won at least one award. This year was no exception, as the coveted "Best City Model" award was given to one of the Friendly Hills teams. While no Friendly Hills Middle School team was selected as a State Finalist, the top Friendly Hills team finished 7th out of the 47 teams entered. All of the students involved were able to learn about city functions by participating in the program. Since all three teams entered by Friendly Hills Middle School were comprised of 6th grade students, they will be able to compete two more times, should they choose to do so. Page 65 Recommendation Previous City Councils have heard from the Model Cities participants. As such, staff recommends that this Council view the presentation from Friendly Hills Middle School. Teacher: Mentor: Teams (Future City name) Action Reguired Crystal Mielke John R. Mazzitello "Willow Grove" "Future Five" "Brimstone" No Council action is required. For information only. CITY OF MENEDOTA HEIGHTS Page 66 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com DATE: February 7, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Communities for a Lifetime Presentation COMMENT.- INTRODUCTION OMMENT: INTRODUCTION At its February 21St meeting, the Council will hear a presentation about the Communities for a Lifetime Initiative. BACKGROUND Communities for a Lifetime (CFL) is a Dakota County program which is intended to make community leaders and residents aware of different components of life which, if properly addressed, will allow aging populations to stay active and involved. The CFL Initiative has completed City Profiles for the eleven major cities in Dakota County. The profiles highlight key components that demonstrate an age -friendly community. This includes a city's changing population data, housing performance score, types of housing, transit options, land use, walkability score, and other indicators. Age -friendly policies, such as Accessory Dwelling Unit policy, Complete Streets policy, Mixed -Use Land policy, and Bike Walk policy are also highlighted. The City Profiles will be a resource and a strategic planning tool to assist cities/communities in gauging their progress in becoming more age -friendly as they undertake a comprehensive planning process starting in 2016 Jess Luce of Dakota County will be in attendance at the February 21St meeting to make a presentation about CFL. The Community Profile for Mendota Heights is included in the Council packet. ACTION REQUIRED This is informational only. Mark McNeill, City Administrator Page 67 COMMUNITIES FOR A LIFETIME CITY PROFILE MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA ABOUT THIS REPORT This City Profile was prepared by Dakota County's Communities for a Lifetime (CFL) Initiative—an initiative engaging community members and leaders in the private and public sectors to create accessible, supportive Communities for a Lifetime that enable people to lead active vital lives. Dakota County and individual cities work together in many areas to make communities more age - friendly. We work together on housing, public safety, transportation, workforce issues, and many other areas. The population is aging. This is true across the nation, across the state, and in most communities in Minnesota. The shape and way of life in our communities needs to reflect this changing demographic landscape. Fortunately, people of any age desire similar things. They want to live in a community that is safe, affordable, and convenient, and that offers services and amenities that meet their needs, and opportunities that enrich their lives. But as people age, certain community characteristics are essential to a vital life. This profile reviews some of these features at the community level using reliable and accessible data from reputable sources. WHAT MAKES A COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME? • Transportation options to help keep people mobile and independent • Walkable neighborhoods for transport and exercise • A full range of affordable housing options as needs change • Accessible and quality services that support older adults and caregivers in home and community settings • Flexible and supportive employment and volunteer opportunities, including intergenerational activities • Effective technology to connect people and help with life's activities IS YOUR CITY BUILDING A COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME? • Does your Comprehensive Plan present a plan and a vision for residents of all ages? • Do your land use, housing, and transportation policies take the needs of an aging population into account? • Are you realizing the competitive advantage of healthy, vital, and engaged older residents? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 11 Page 68 Population- page 3 Overall Livability- page 4 Boomers in 2014 Age 65+ in 2014 AARP Livability Index HousingPerformance Spending 30% or More Score (0-100) 33.6% 19.2% 60 Housina - page 5 Home Owners 65+ Renters 65+ 1 Subsidized Rentals per HousingPerformance Spending 30% or More Spending 30% or More 100 People Age 75-84 Score in 2006 - 2015 in 2014 in 2014 0-100) 0-100 28% 66% 14 33 Assisted Living Units Memory Care Units per Non -Single Family Homes with Single per 100 People Age 100 People Age 85+ Homes in 2015 Level Living Option 85+ in 2014 0 0 29% 37% Mobilitv - page 12 Annual Household City -Wide Mixed -Use Area Percent of Streets with Transportation Costs Walk Score in 2016 Walk Score in 2016 Sidewalks or Trails in 2008-2012 (0-100) 0-100) in 2015 $14,018 11 52 23% Daily Fixed Route Door -to -Door Volunteer Driver Traffic Crashes per Public Transit Transit Program 1,000 Persons 65+ in Radius 0.31% 2.7 2014 Yes Yes Yes 17.2 Land Use -page 17 Mixed -Use Land Number of Parks Number of Grocery in 2010 in % Mile Radius Stores in % Mile 21% +2.3% Radius 0.31% 2.7 0.1 Communitv Life- page 20 Age 65+ in Labor Force in 2014 Age 65+ Volunteer Hrs. in 2014 Age 65+ Living Alone in 2014 Change in Crime 2010 to 2015 30.3%0 49,696 21% +2.3% Aae-Friendly Policies - Pape 24 Accessory Dwelling Policy Complete Streets Policy Mixed Use Land Development Policy Bike Walk Policy No No Yes No (All data presented in this one page overview is from 2013 unless otherwise noted.) Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 12 POPULATION AGING OF THE POPULATION Page 69 The Baby Boom generation, born between 1946 and 1964, now age 50 to 68, represents a large percentage of the population. As they age, many Boomers will want to remain in the community where they currently live. Cities that recognize and respond positively to the aging population can gain a competitive advantage by meeting the needs and desires of their older population, and in doing so, will attract younger age groups that want an age -friendly community. POPULATION BY AGE FOR MENDOTA HEIGHTS IN 2014 Boomers in 2014 12.0% 9.90/a 0.3% 10.0% 7.8% 8.30/o8.7% 8.0% 5.90/5.6 /o 0 5.8% 0 6.0% 3.9% 3.90/43.7% 4.2% l 4.7%.5%3.9% 0 0 4.0% 2.7% 3.0 /03.1 /o 2.0% 0.0% h D� Dx a0�h�0 � ��00,10`1,�3Cx �°�D�� �oD��h�h��o��0�'1 �1 � rp 4i °h 0h °° 3� t° 0 <° 19D°° °h 1° 1� °° "Age groupings corresponding to the Boomer generation are presented in black. Source: 2011-2014 American Community Survey (Table S0101) In 2014, 19.2% of Mendota Heights residents were 65 and older. This age group will grow substantially over the next 20 years, as members of the much larger boomer cohort age. The boomer age group (in 2014) represents about a third of the Mendota Heights population (33.6%). According to AARP, since 1990, roughly 90% of older Americans have stayed in the county they've been living in, if not the very same home. Is Mendota Heights prepared for Boomers to age in place in the community? In a 2014 National Council on Aging Survey, 54% of older adults (age 60+) said their community is doing enough to prepare for the needs of the growing aging population. e] 1 The United States of Aging Survey 2014, National Council on Aging. Retrieved on September 21, 2015 from: https://www.ncoa.ora/wp-content/uploads/USA14-National-Fact-Sheet.pdf Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 13 Page 70 OVERALL LIVABILITY THE AARP LIVABILITY INDEX The AARP Livability Index is a web -based tool that allows users to measure the overall livability of US neighborhoods, cities, counties, or states based on 40 quantitative metrics and 20 public policies defined by the AARP's Public Policy Institute. The 40 measures of livability and 20 public policy are divided into seven major categories: housing, neighborhood, transportation, environment, health, engagement, and opportunity. The tool allows users to compare the results for their community with other communities, including national leaders in livability. 100 is the highest possible score in each category. Scores above 50 should be considered above-average, and scores below 50, below-average. AARP INDEX SCORES FOR APPLE VALLEY AND SELECT PEER CITIES, 0 TO 100 Category Mendota Heights South St. Paul West St. Paul Dakota County Minnesota Total Score 60 63 65 59 60 Housing 48 52 55 47 58 Neighborhood 60 65 66 57 52 Transportation 60 71 72 53 59 Environment 59 61 65 61 62 Health 70 70 70 66 60 Engagement 58 57 57 58 67 Opportunity 1 68 68 1 72 71 62 Source: AARP Livability Index, Retrieved on November 30, 2016 from: https://Iivabilityindex.aarp.org The Total Score for Mendota Heights of 60, which is an average of the seven sub -categories, is just slightly lower than two select peer cities in Dakota County. Mendota Height's Total Score is the same as the state of Minnesota as a whole, and just one point higher than the score for all of Dakota County. By the measures and policies that make up this Index, Mendota Heights, its peers, and the whole state are above-average in terms of livability. Apple Valley scored highest in the Health category, but the two peer cities had identical scores on this measure. Mendota Heights' lowest score was in Housing with a 48, its only below-average rating; this category includes measures on housing options, affordability, and the physical accessibility of homes. Are there other cities within Dakota County and around the country, with similarities to Mendota Heights, scoring higher on the AARP Index that could push Mendota Heights forward in planning for an older population? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 14 Page 71 HOUSING OVERALL HOUSING PERFORMANCE INDICATOR: HIGH OR INCREASING ANNUAL HOUSING PERFORMANCE SCORE The Metropolitan Council rates Twin Cities' area communities to promote effective housing development and to make funding decisions for local housing projects. Each community's score is based on the following broad criteria: (a) Increased housing variety, (b) Housing cost, (c) Mixed land uses, (d) Increased transportation choices, and (e) Leverage of private investment. [Z] 2006 — 2015 Average HOUSING PERFORMANCE SCORES OF SELECT DAKOTA COUNTY CITIES, 0 TO 100 19 86 0 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 - 83 77 77 74 74 72 a o� 67 53 33 For the specific scoring criteria, please see: Guidelines for Priority Funding for Housinq Performance Source: Metropolitan Council Housing Performance Scores, 2006 - 2015. From 2006-2015, Mendota Height's average Housing Performance Score was 33, with a high score of 45 in 2006 and a low score of 26 in 2015. The average score for the eleven major cities of Dakota County from 2006 to 2015 was 69, which marks Mendota Height's average score well below average. Mendota Heights received the lowest Housing Performance Score among its peers in Dakota County. The city's low score suggests that Mendota Heights compares very unfavorably to its peers in one or more of the scoring criteria: housing variety, affordability, mixed-use development, transportation choices, and leverage of private investment. What criteria can Mendota Heights work on to improve its Housing Performance Score? Could Mendota Heights improve its approach to housing as it makes plans to develop or redevelop land? 2 Guidelines for Priority Funding for Housing Performance, Metropolitan Council, July 2015. Retrieved on Sep. 30, 2015 from: https://metrocounci1.org/Housing/Publications-And-Resources/HOUSING-POLICY-PLANS- REPORTS/Guidelines-for-Priority-Funding-for-Housinq-Perfor.aspx Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 15 Page 72 HOUSING AFFORDABILITY INDICATOR: SPENDING 30% OR LESS OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME ON HOUSING This measure has long been a standard for defining housing as affordable. It is a good measure of affordability whether a household is above or below the Median Household Income in a community. In most communities, the cost of rental housing is of greater concern than owner - occupied homes—many more renters pay more for their housing as a percentage of their income. Housing Costs as Percent of Gross Income for Homeowners and Renters 65+ in 2014 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 72% 0% Mendota Heights Home Owners ❑ Not Computed 72% 34% 29% {j% 0% ° Dakota County Home Mendota Heights Dakota County Owners Renters Renters Paying less than 30% ■ Paying 30% or More Source: 2010-2014 American Community Survey (Table B25093 and B25072) Twenty-eight percent of Mendota Heights' home owners pay more than 30% of their gross income for housing. This is nearly identical to the situation of homeowners in Dakota County as a whole. Well more than half (66%) of Mendota Heights renters pay more than 30% on their housing, while rental housing costs in Mendota Heights are identical to the county as a whole. Could Mendota Heights, Dakota County, and other public and private partners invest more in subsidized rental housing to help bring down housing costs for lower-income renters, including older adults? 20% of Minnesota Baby Boomers were considering a move in 2010 due to the cost of housing. [] 49% of older adults (age 60+) are concerned they will have too little money to last the rest of their lives. I] 3 Transform 2010 Data Report: Baby Boomer Survey, Minnesota Department of Human Services, 2010. Retrieved on September 30, 2015 from: http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/qroups/aging/documents/pub/dhsl6 156199.pdf 4 The United States of Aging Survey 2014, National Council on Aging. Retrieved on September 30, 2015 from: https://www. ncoa.org/wp-content/uploads/USA14-National-Fact-Sheet.pdf Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 16 Page 73 HOUSING CHOICE INDICATOR: INCREASED VARIETY OF HOUSING BEYOND SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES A person's housing needs and preferences evolve throughout their life. Housing variety, including the cost and features of homes, allow people to grow -up and age in the same community. Communities that lack housing variety that is desirable to older residents may lose those residents to other communities within the county or elsewhere. PERCENTAGE OF NON -SINGLE FAMILY HOME HOUSING BY TYPE IN MENDOTA HEIGHTS, 1990-2015 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 1990 2000 2010 2015 Townhomes (single-family 7% 12% 14% 14% attached) ❑ Duplex, Triplex and Quad 0% 2% 1% 1% ■ Multifamily Rentals or Condos ° 12% 12% ° 13% 14% (5 units +) v, Manufactured Home 0% 0% 0% 0% Source: U.S. Census 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2015; Metropolitan Council Housing Stock Estimates, 2015. Among major non -single family home housing types, between 1990 to 2015 Mendota Heights saw an increase in Townhomes from 7% to 14%, and a very slight increase in Multifamily Rentals or Condos, from 12% to 14%. Duplex, Triplex and Quad properties remained roughly the same. Corresponding to this growth, Single -Family Detached homes saw a decline in percentage from 80% in 1990 to 71 % in 2015. Even so, Single -Family Detached homes remain the dominant housing type in Mendota Heights. Could Mendota Heights further increase its housing variety in the coming years to appeal .to older residents who may want to down -size, or younger residents who need or prefer a non -single family home? 28% of Minnesota Boomers planning to move by 2020 reported they are considering a townhome or condominium. I`j 40% of older adults (age 60+) anticipate home maintenance will be a concern as they age. (j 5 Transform 2010 Data Report. Baby Boomer Survey 6 The United States of Aging Survey 2014, National Council on Aging. Retrieved on September 21, 2015 from: https://www. ncoa.org/wp-content/uploads/USA14-National-Fact-Sheet.pdf Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 17 Page 74 HOUSING CHOICES IN LATER LIFE INDICATOR: VARIETY AND QUANTITY OF "SENIOR HOUSING" OPTIONS Most people prefer to stay in a single family home, condominium, townhome, or all ages apartment as they age. However, whether due to preference or a need for support that cannot be met well in their conventionally designed home, some make a move to "senior housing" — housing planned for older adults. Senior housing is generally restricted to people age 55 or older; but persons age 75 to 84, and 85 and older are more likely to live in "senior housing." UNITS OF SUBSIDIZED SENIOR RENTALS AND MARKET RATE CONGREGATE HOUSING IN 2013, PER 100 PERSONS AGE 75-84 60 50 40 30 20 14 10 .0 0 Mendota Heights 0 South St. Paul 37 18 West St. Paul ■ Number of Subsidized Rentals per 100 People Age 75-84 Number of Market Rate Congregate Units per 100 People Age 75-84 Source: Comprehensive Housing Needs Assessment for Dakota County, MN, Maxfield Research, September 2013 2011-2013 American Community Survey (Table S0101) Housing Type / Age Mendota Heights South St Paul West St Paul Rental (Shallow -Subsidy)* 100 156 101 Rental (Deep -Subsidy)* 0 208 140 Independent Living (Few Services)+ 0 0 202 Congregate (Moderate Services)^ 0 0 306 People Age 75-84 1 690 1 752 1 1,375 * Subsidized Rentals refers to age -restricted independent living apartments where rents are adjusted to increase affordability for low-income seniors. + "Independent Living" refers to age -restricted independent single-family, townhomes, apartments, condominiums, and cooperatives with few, if any, supportive services. ^ "Congregate" refers to multi -unit housing, such as townhomes, apartments, condominiums, and cooperatives with increasing, moderate supportive services. "Congregate" does not include Assisted Living or Memory Care Facilities see below). Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 18 Page 75 The graph and table above present data on varieties of "senior housing" with few or very limited built-in services. Two of the housing options offer subsidies to support affordability. According to this data source, in 2013, Mendota Heights had 14 subsidized senior rental units for every 100 people age 75 to 84. This is a comparable ratio to West St Paul, which has 18 subsidized senior rental units for every 100 people age 75 to 84. However, South St Paul has a much higher ratio, with 48 units per 100 people. Mendota Heights did not have any Market Rate Congregate Housing according to this data, whereas West St Paul had 37 units for every 100 people age 75 to 84. With the cost of rental housing being such a concern, could Mendota Heights distinguish itself even further by increasing the ratio of subsidized units for older residents? Are there aging - friendly features inside the units? Could new policies or educational campaigns encourage builders to construct universally designed buildings to meet the needs of aging adults—and by doing so better meet the needs of all age groups? 77% of older adults (age 60+) plan to stay in their current home for the rest of their life. (I UNITS OF ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE IN 2013 PER 100 PEOPLE AGE 85+ 20 16 12 8 4 0 13 0 0 5 in Mendota Heights South St. Paul West St. Paul ■ Number of Assisted Living Units per 100 People Age 85+ Number of Memory Care Units per 100 People Age 85+ Source: Comprehensive Housing Needs Assessment for Dakota County, MN, Maxfield Research, September 2013 2011-2013 American Community Survey (Table S0101) Housing Type / Age Mendota Heights South St Paul West St Paul Assisted Living Units* 0 44 124 Memory Care Units^ 0 16 52 People Age 85+ 378 1 345 1 688 * "Assisted Living" refers to multi -unit housing with more intensive supportive services than the "Congregate" category referred to above. " "Memory Care" is multi -unit housing that, as the name suggests, provides intensive services for persons with declining memory. ' The United States of Aging Survey 2014, National Council on Aging. Retrieved on September 21, 2015 from: https://www. ncoa.org/wp-content/uploads/USA14-National-Fact-Sheet. pdf Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 19 Page 76 The second graph and table above look at two senior housing options that offer more built-in services for residents, such as meals, housekeeping, and transportation, and increasing levels of personal care. Adult Foster Care programs, licensed residential homes for 4 to 5 residents age 55+, and Skilled Nursing Facilities (i.e. nursing homes), are not included here. These types of housing options were not included in the report by Maxfield Research, the source of this data. According to this data source in 2013, Mendota Heights did not have assisted living or memory care units. (However, White Pine Senior Living opened in 2013—likely after the Maxfield report—offering 46 assisted living and memory care units.) Mendota Heights, like other cities, should continue to evaluate if it has the appropriate number of "senior housing" units and affordable housing options for older adults based on its current population and projections for the future. By contrast, the city of South St Paul, which has a similar number of adults 85 and older, had 13 Assisted Living Units for every 100 adults 85 and older, and 5 Memory Care units. Some observers worry that certain communities have over -built assisted living units, but this is not the case in Mendota Heights. How can Mendota Heights continue to plan for and invest in housing with services to support older residents who may want to remain in this community as they age? What if Boomers avoid moving into Assisted Living facilities all together or wait until the very end of their life? Have some communities over -built the number of Assisted Living units they may need? 68% of Minnesota Boomers who plan to move by 2020 will be looking for homes where they could live on one level. I'j 8 Transform 2010 Data Report: Baby Boomer Survey Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 110 Page 77 ACCESSIBILITY AND VISITABILITY INDICATOR: AVAILABILITY OF HOUSING WHERE RESIDENTS CAN LIVE ON ONE LEVEL The most basic home characteristic that supports accessibility and visitability is housing that allows a person to live on one level, with few or no stair systems. Stairs pose a barrier for many people if their physical functions are limited. In many cities, the best option for one level living is recently constructed multi -unit apartments or condominiums. These buildings frequently have zero -grade, accessible entries, elevators, and wide hallways and doorways leading to one -level units. While much less common, some single family homes, detached condominiums, townhomes, and multiplexes also provide residents with options for living on one level. PERCENT OF HOUSING WITH ONE -LEVEL -LIVING OPTION IN MENDOTA HEIGHTS AND OTHER CITIES, 20149 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% Mendota Heights South St. Paul West St. Paul Dakota County One -Level -Living Option Less Possible ■ One -Level -Living Option Exists Source: Dakota County Assessor's Office, 2014 Slightly more than a third of Mendota Heights' housing would allow a resident to live on one level of a home (37%). This is identical to the county as a whole. However, by comparison, South St Paul and West St Paul have many more homes with one -level -living options, 49% and 58% respectively. However, even homes that offer a good one -level -living option may need to be modified in one or more ways to make them truly accessible and visitable. Common home modifications include adding ramps to main entries, widening doorways, improving the living -level bathroom and shower, and moving laundry machines to the living -level. How could cities, the county, and organizations support more practical home modifications and repairs to help residents age in place? Could an Aging in Place partnership/fund be set up to help homeowners stay in their homes—at less cost than other housing alternatives? As new housing of all types is constructed, how could cities encourage builders to include more accessible and visitable features in their design plans? 9 The Dakota County Assessor's Office organizes residential housing into as many as 24 categories; the categories encompass all major housing types: single family homes; townhomes; duplex, triplex and quads; condominiums; and multifamily buildings. The percent of "one story" living units is based on the number of one story units across all housing types. Two story homes may allow for single -level living, but this cannot be assumed. Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 111 Page 78 MOBILITY TRANSPORTATION COSTS INDICATOR: ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD TRANSPORTATION COSTS Housing is generally the largest expense in a household budget, but transportation costs typically rank second, and so are very significant, especially for households with a low or fixed income. Some residents seek out affordable housing, which can often be found in suburban and exurban communities with lower land prices, but then inadvertently end up with higher transportation costs, especially if their housing is a long distance from their work or the many basic services we all need. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development is now promoting a combined measure of housing and transportation affordability it calls "Location Affordability," which considers the cost of housing and transportation together.10 2008-2012 Annual Transportation Costs in Select Cities, Dakota County, MN, and the US $15,124 $15,000 $14,018 $14,000 $13,350 $13,000 $13,350 $12,015 $12,000 $11,000 Mendota Heights South St Paul West St Paul Dakota County Minnesota Minnesota, Dakota County, and Select Cities Median Dakota County Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Location Affordability Index, 2008-2012, hftp://www.locationaffordability.info/lai.aspx The estimated annual household transportation costs for Mendota Heights' residents is above the Dakota County median and less than the costs experienced by Minnesotans as a whole. Additionally, residents of South St Paul and West St Paul experience relatively lower costs, with West St Paul residents spending nearly $2,000 less on transportation each year. How can Mendota Heights, and other Dakota County cities, attract more employers to reduce daily commutes for its residents? How can cities adjust land use policies to shorten distances and improve access to shopping, services, and other amenities? Further, might the city explore more public and alternative transportation services to decrease residents' reliance on cars for transportation? 10 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Location Affordability Index, Retrieved on October 31, 2016 from: hftp://www.locationaffordabiIity.info/ Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 112 Page 79 WALKABILITY INDICATOR: WALK SCORE, 0 TO 100 Walking, or rolling using an assistive device, is the most basic and affordable mode of transportation. However, since many streetscapes are designed primarily for cars, walkers may find the distances to their destination too great and the routes unsafe. Walk Scores measure the walkability of an area using digital maps and data about distances to common amenities and pedestrian friendliness. The Village of City -Wide Mendota 0-100 Walker's Paradise: Daily errands do not require a car Walk Score Heights 70-89 Very Walkable: Most errands can be accomplished on foot Walk Score 50-69 Somewhat Walkable: Some errands can be accomplished on foot 25-49 Car -Dependent: Most errands require a car 11 52 0-24 Car -Dependent: Almost all errands require a car Source: http://www.walkscore.com/score/mendota-heights-mn, October 31, 2016 Overall, Mendota Heights is a Car -Dependent city; across the city, most errands require a car. However, throughout this small city there are locations that are more walkable. A Mixed -Use or Suburban -Intensity area of the city at 750 Main Street achieved a Walk Score of 52. (Research shows that when people walk or bike to do their shopping they take more trips and spend more money each month than drivers.) While not all residents value walkability, a growing number do. Strategically investing in Suburban - Intensity developments or otherwise improving the proximity of residences and essential amenities will serve older residents and others who value walkability. How can Mendota Heights strategically invest in greater walkability, more sidewalks, and more mixed-use or Suburban -Intense developments? What policies need to be updated or changed to increase walkability? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 113 Page 80 WALKABILITY INDICATOR: PRESENCE OF SIDEWALKS Sidewalks are the building blocks of an effective pedestrian network. When sidewalks are not available, pedestrians are forced to share the street with motorists, access to public transportation is restricted, and children have fewer play areas that are safe. Streets without safe places to walk, cross, catch a bus, or bicycle put people at risk. Over 5,600 pedestrians and bicyclists died on U.S. roads and there were 115,000 reported injuries in 2014.11 Pedestrian crashes are more than twice as likely to occur in places without sidewalks; streets with sidewalks on both sides have the fewest crashes. 12 Walkability is enhanced even further by three core characteristics: the continuity and connectivity of pedestrian ways (i.e. sidewalks, trails, bike lanes, street crossings, crosswalks); the safety of the pedestrian ways; and the proximity of essential services to residences. The data of this measure speak to the first core characteristic. PERCENT OF STREETS WITH SIDEWALKS OR TRAILS IN 2015 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 44% 43% 23% Mendota Heights South St Paul West St Paul 11 -City Average Note: "Streets" are defined here as local roads, county roads, and county -state aid highways. Source: Dakota County Physical Development Division, 2015 36% Mendota Heights has nearly half as much sidewalk infrastructure than its two peer cities, and considerably less than the average for eleven major cities in Dakota County. As Mendota Heights develops and redevelops land, how might the city improve its pedestrian infrastructure? 11 Source: http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/data/factsheet crash.cfm 12 Source: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped bike/tools solve/walkways brochure Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 114 Page 81 PUBLIC TRANSIT AND ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION INDICATOR: PRESENCE OF PUBLIC AND ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION Many people who are able to drive express interest in transportation alternatives such as buses, trains, walking, or biking. But for older adults who do not drive, transportation alternatives become critically important. Without transportation, residents find it difficult to access basic services, remain independent, and stay involved in the life of the community. Alternative transportation options available to residents of Mendota Heights are described in the table below. (Some information in this table may have evolved as routes are modified and providers change.) Category Provider(s) — Scope of Service Description Fixed -route Metro Transit — Very limited local Is a fixed transportation route with scheduled Coverage; Limited commuter coverage designated stops. Riders are responsible for getting to the designated stops. Local Routes: 75; Commuter Routes: 415, 417, and 452. Fixed -route Minnesota Valley Transit Authority — Is a fixed transportation route with scheduled Very limited local Coverage; Limited designated stops. commuter coverage Local/Commuter Route: 446; Commuter Route: 436 Curb -to -Curb A -Tran -- South Metro, Mpls/St Paul Requires the rider be able to meet the vehicle at GAPP Services -- Dakota County the curb. Drivers do not help individuals into MNET -- Metro Area homes, apartment buildings or businesses. Neighbors, Inc — Select Dakota County Drivers pick-up and drop-off passengers at the Transit Link -- Metro Area curb only. Door -to -Door A -Tran -- South Metro, Mpls/St Paul Driver provides some assistance to rider to Metro Mobility -- Metro Area ensure they make it safely from their main door MNET -- Metro Area onto the vehicle. The driver provides the same Neighbors, Inc — Select Dakota County service on the return trip. Transit Link -- Metro Area Door- A -Tran --South Metro, Mpls/St Paul Driver enters the home/building to provide through -Door MNET -- Metro Area assistance to the rider to ensure they make it Neighbors, Inc — Select Dakota County safely through their front door and onto the vehicle. The driver provides the same service on the return trip. Volunteer GAPP Services — Dakota County Individuals who volunteer their time and vehicle Driver Neighbors, Inc — Select Dakota County to provide transportation services to a Program community. Most often vehicle is a sedan and space is limited to riders with only canes and folding walkers. Source: Metropolitan Council; http://www.minnesotahelp.info; "Transportation Options Resource Guide: Dakota County retrieved on July 3, 2015 from: http://www.darts1.org/transportation-options-resource-quide Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 115 Page 82 DRIVER SAFETY INDICATOR: DECREASED TRAFFIC CRASHES AND TRAFFIC RELATED INJURIES. Driving a car is the most common mode of transportation for most people. This is especially true in suburban and rural communities where mass transit options are often limited. Sidewalks and trails are also frequently underdeveloped. For these reasons, driving conditions become increasingly important. Some cities are making design improvements, including: better, larger signage for older drivers; more designated left-hand turn lanes; rumble strips on lane markers or shoulders; and improved safety at crosswalks. Number of Crashes per 1,000 People 65+ ■ Number of Injuries per 1,000 People 65+ Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety Crash Facts, 2010-2014; American Community Survey, 2010-2014 In Mendota Heights, the number of traffic crashes and injuries involving drivers 65+ increased slightly in 2011, declined in 2012 – 2013, and increased again in 2014. Only one fatality was recorded for drivers 65+ over this same period, occurring in 2013. Across the US, more than 4,500 pedestrians are killed by motor vehicles every year. However, this does not have to be the case— more can be done to save lives. These deaths are preventable. Speed does kill. Two studies, one in the US and a second in the UK, revealed that pedestrians are killed 5% of the time when struck by a car going 20 mph; 37-45% of the time when struck by a car going 30 mph; 83-85% of the time when struck by a car going 40 mph. Traffic on most American streets travel closer to 40 mph instead of 20 mph. If we reduce car speeds to 20 mph through traffic -calming road redesign, education, and enforcement strategies, we could reduce pedestrian fatalities by 90%. How can the state, county, and cities work together to prioritize dangerous streets for redesign and speed reduction to save more lives? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 116 Page 83 LAND USE MIXED-USE LAND INDICATOR: PROPORTION OF LAND DEVELOPED AS MIXED-USE Mixed-use developments (also known as Suburban -Intensity) have received increasing attention among city planners and administrators, and the general public. Well -executed mixed-use developments can address many livable community characteristics at once, including: housing - type variety, convenience to shopping and services, walkability, and public safety. PERCENT OF RESIDENTIAL LAND USE COMPARED TO MIXED-USE FOR SELECT CITIES, 2010* 40.0% 37.1% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.31% Mendota Heights 23.8% 0.88% South St Paul 33.6% 0.39% West St Paul Source: Metropolitan Council Generalized Land Use Data, 2010 (*New 2016 land use data not available until spring 2017) Note: For more source information see: htti3://metrocouncil.org/METC/files/6d/6db8637a-fe3f-4fO6-954b-58lb680de527.html Mendota Heights, like other Dakota County cities, has a very low percentage of mixed-use development. Suburban -intensity is not something that needs to be feared as increased "density," something often fought by residents of suburban communities. Suburban -intensity can be targeted to a city's core downtown area where walkability and density can be achieved more easily. The Village of Mendota Heights near the intersection of Highway 110 and Dodd Road is the prime example within Mendota Heights. Some cities are creating age -friendly areas or districts that are benefiting from this approach. Currently, Minneapolis and St. Paul are seeing record levels of construction of mixed-use developments of rental apartments with commercial space at the street level. Millennials and Boomers are competing to live in or near these walkable neighborhoods. Can suburban communities replicate and benefit from this trend that is likely to continue into the future, or will some suburban communities be left out? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 117 Page 84 PARK SPACE INDICATOR: PROXIMITY TO PARK SPACE Public parks and trails are a great common space for people of nearly any circumstance to get out and interact in the community and stay healthy. To better support older residents and people with limiting health conditions, park spaces should increasingly offer shade, shelter, a place to sit and rest, and accessible bathrooms, all of which benefit the entire community. NUMBER OF PARKS WITHIN A HALF -MILE IN 2013 Mendota Heights South St Paul West St Paul Median US Neighborhood 2.7 2.1 3.0 0.0 Source: AARP Livability Index, retrieved on October 31, 2016 from: https://Iivabilityindex.aarp.org/ Mendota Heights is similar to its peer cities in the availability and even distribution of its park space. South St Paul has a slightly lower concentration of parks than Mendota Heights or West St Paul. Some of Mendota Heights' parks and recreational amenities are described in the table below. How can Mendota Heights and other cities continue to make parks both good places for children and older adults—more benches and more equipment for both age groups? And how can cities continue to improve non -motorized access to parks through sidewalk and trail enhancements, so that people of all ages can walk, bike, or roll (i.e. using an assistive device) to their nearest park? Select Number and Description Amenities Land Area Public Parks 13 parks on Common elements include: playground equipment, skating rink, 242 acres field and court games, tennis, hockey and a shelter building. Trails 21 miles Mendota Heights offers 21 miles of trails for walking, cycling, and hiking. Most are along the scenic bluffs of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. Golf Courses 1 golf course on Mendota Heights Par 3, 9 -hole (public) 308 acres Source: City of Mendota Heights website, http://www.mendota-heights.com Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 118 Page 85 FOOD ACCESS INDICATOR: ACCESS TO HEALTHY AND AFFORDABLE FOOD It is difficult to make healthy food choices when grocery stores and farmers' markets are not near where you live. People who do not drive or lack transit options and those that are low-income are forced in many instances to rely on food options that are less healthy from nearby convenience stores, and it may cost them more money. NUMBER OF GROCERY STORES AND FARMERS' MARKETS WITHIN A HALF -MILE IN 2013 Mendota Heights South St Paul West St Paul Median US Neighborhood 0.1 0.6 1.4 0.0 Source: AARP Livability Index, retrieved on October 31, 2016 from: https://Iivabilityindex.aarp.org/ The AARP Livability Index rates a community's food access by measuring how many grocery stores or farmer's markets exist in each half -mile radius within the city, a reasonable walking distance for most people. According to the data source, Mendota Heights has almost no grocery shopping options within each half -mile area. However, a new grocery store, Fresh Natural Foods (752 Highway 110), opened in Oct. 2015, providing Mendota Heights residents with a local option. By comparison, South St Paul roughly .5 stores or markets per half -mile radius, and West St Paul has nearly 1.5. (Note: Most US neighborhoods, including vast rural areas, score a zero for grocery stores or farmer's markets within a half -mile. However, by contrast, the score for the city of Minneapolis is 5.3). Sometimes residents face financial or transportation barriers in gaining access to food. What can communities do to promote their farmers' markets to all residents, and ensure that those in need have access to grocery stores and home delivered meals or food? Service agencies can help close the food access gap. Dakota County has an excellent listing of Food Shelves & Community Meals on its website.13 Ensuring that all are fed, of whatever age and circumstance, is a basic need that all communities need to address together. 13 Dakota County, Minnesota, Community Food Resources: https://www.co.dakota.mn.us/HeaIthFamily/PersonaIFinance/FinancialCrisis/Pages/food-shelves.aspx Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 119 Page 86 COMMUNITY LIFE EMPLOYMENT INDICATOR: PERCENT OF PEOPLE AGE 65 TO 74 IN THE LABOR FORCE Complete retirement from paid work at 65 is slowly being revised in our culture, through public policy, but also through the needs, plans, and preferences of aging workers and employers. A healthy labor force participation rate should closely reflect the percent of people in any age group who express a desire to work. LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION AGE 65 TO 74 IN MENDOTA HEIGHTS WITH SELECT COMPARISONS IN 2014 100.0 80.0% 60.0% 40.0% 30.3% 20.0% 0.0% 22.7% 29.6% Mendota Heights South St Paul West St Paul Minnesota Source: 2009-2014 American Community Survey (Table S2301) 28.9% 26.6% Dakota County At 30.3%, Mendota Heights has a higher rate of labor force participation for workers age 65 to 74 than select, neighboring cities, Dakota County, and Minnesota (26.6%) as a whole. This is a favorable result for Mendota Heights. While not all older adults desire to work for pay beyond traditional retirement age, a significant portion do and will. And others will need to because of their personal financial circumstances. Older adults should be able to work with various accommodations and incentives to participate in the shrinking workforce. How are local businesses helping older workers to remain in the workforce? 23% of Minnesota Boomers have no plans to stop paid work at any age. e i 32% of older adults (age 60+) are concerned they will not be able to work as long as they would like. e] 14 Transform 2010 Data Report. Baby Boomer Survey 15 The United States of Aging Survey 2014, National Council on Aging. Retrieved on September 21, 2015 from: https://www. ncoa. org/wp-content/uploads/U SA14-National-Fact-Sheet. pdf Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 120 Page 87 VOLUNTEER CAPACITY INDICATOR: INCREASED VOLUNTEER HOURS FOR PEOPLE 65+ A growing number of people will remain in the workforce past the age of 65, but whether working or retired from paid work, older residents will volunteer in great numbers. Volunteering is not only a vital form of enrichment for older adults, but it is also a valuable community asset that should be utilized fully. ESTIMATED VOLUNTEER HOURS FOR POPULATION 65-74 AND 75+ IN MENDOTA HEIGHTS IN 2014 Older adults in Mendota Heights provided an estimated 49,696 hours of volunteer service in 2014, the most recent data available. This is the equivalent of 23.8 full time equivalent employees, and at a rate of $24.00 per hour, this amounts to a wage -labor value of $1,192,704. Older adults and aging Boomers are assets to the community; they spend more money locally, and they value their communities and most want to give back. Communities that provide meaningful opportunities for older adults to volunteer will capitalize on this vital source of talent and energy. Four Dakota County cities (Apple Valley, Inver Grove Heights, West St. Paul, and Rosemount) have partnered to fund a volunteer coordinator position to try to take advantage of residents desire to volunteer. How can Mendota Heights further capitalize on older adult volunteers as an asset to the community? Could a local entity better coordinate and advertise the opportunities that do exist? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 121 Age 65-74 ■ Age 75+ Mendota Heights 26,673 - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 Mendota Heights Statewide Estimated Number Estimated Estimated Population Volunteer Rate of Volunteers* Volunteer Hours A Volunteer by Age Group Per Year Hours Age 65-74 1,024 40.7% 417 64 26,673 Age 75+ 1,109 34.6% 384 60 23,023 *The estimated volunteer capacity in Apple Valley is an extrapolation based on reliable statewide data. ^Source: 2014 Volunteering in America, Corporation for National & Community Service; 2009-2014 American Community Survey Table DP05 Older adults in Mendota Heights provided an estimated 49,696 hours of volunteer service in 2014, the most recent data available. This is the equivalent of 23.8 full time equivalent employees, and at a rate of $24.00 per hour, this amounts to a wage -labor value of $1,192,704. Older adults and aging Boomers are assets to the community; they spend more money locally, and they value their communities and most want to give back. Communities that provide meaningful opportunities for older adults to volunteer will capitalize on this vital source of talent and energy. Four Dakota County cities (Apple Valley, Inver Grove Heights, West St. Paul, and Rosemount) have partnered to fund a volunteer coordinator position to try to take advantage of residents desire to volunteer. How can Mendota Heights further capitalize on older adult volunteers as an asset to the community? Could a local entity better coordinate and advertise the opportunities that do exist? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 121 Page 88 LIVING ALONE INDICATOR: PERCENT OF PEOPLE 65+ LIVING ALONE Some people live alone and are content with their circumstances. However, people who live alone tend to have less income, and as they age, find it more difficult to remain mobile, access services, and stay involved in the life of the community. Communities need to be aware of this segment of the population and better shape the community environment to support these residents. AGE 65 AND OVER LIVING ALONE, 2000 AND 2014 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Mendota Heights 2000 Mendota Heights 2014 Dakota County 2014 Males ■ Females Source: 2009-2014 American Community Survey (Table B09020); US Census 2000 (Table P030) The proportion of older adults living alone in Mendota Heights increased slightly between 2000 and 2014, from 21 to 22%. Fewer people live alone in Mendota Heights compared to Dakota County as a whole. Many more female residents live alone in Mendota Heights as compared to men, which is also true for Dakota County as a whole. When living alone turns to isolation, individuals can experience physical and mental decline. In circumstances like this, what could be done to better identify and assist isolated older adults? Could nonprofits or faith communities partner to provide home visits or check -ins by phone? Could more formal neighborhood networks be helpful to those living alone and create stronger neighborhood connections and support for everyone? 48% of socially -isolated older adults list transportation as the thing they will most likely need help with in the future, e'l 16 The United States of Aging Survey 2014, National Council on Aging. Retrieved on September 21, 2015 from: https://www. ncoa.org/wp-content/upload s/USA14-National-Fact-Sheet.pdf Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 122 Page 89 PUBLIC SAFETY INDICATOR: DECREASED CRIME All residents want to feel safe in their community. Feeling unsafe negatively affects residents' participation in the community. For older residents, too, feeling unsafe inhibits their trips out of the home for services, work, volunteering, or recreation, leading to harmful isolation. Part 1 Crime Rate ■ Part 2 Crime Rate * The crime rate represents the number of reported crimes per 100,000 in population. ** Part 1 Crimes: murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, vehicle theft and arson; Part 2 Crimes include: other assaults, forgery, fraud, vandalism, sex offences, drugs and alcohol and DUI Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety State Crime Books, 2010-2015 2015 Overall, crime in Mendota Heights increased by 2.3% from 2010 to 2015. During this time period, the city experienced an increase in Part 1 crime, although there was a drop in 2014, and a decrease in Part 2 crime. How can all communities continue to work with residents to lower crime rates and increase engagement of all residents, including older adults that may face isolation? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 123 Page 90 AGE -FRIENDLY POLICIES ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT POLICY An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) — also known as a "granny flat," "mother-in-law apartment" or "carriage house" — is a self-contained living unit that can be located within the walls of an existing or newly constructed home, or that can be an addition to an existing home. It can also be a freestanding structure on the same lot as the main house. ADUs have received significant attention in recent years as a way to provide more flexible housing options using existing housing stock. Over the past few decades, municipalities across the country have adopted standards to allow or encourage the construction of ADUs. Accessory Dwelling Unit Policy: Yes/No? No Some Policy Details Mendota Heights does not have an Accessory Dwelling Unit policy. Possible Next Steps to Develop a Policy: With more than a third of the population comprised of boomers, relatively high housing costs for both homeowners and renters, and having predominantly single family homes on larger lots, Mendota Heights is the type of community that could benefit greatly from having a specific ADU policy to help provide more caregiving options and affordable housing for aging residents and their families. For more information on ADUs: AARP, Accessory Dwelling Units, Model State Act and Local Ordinance http://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/consume/d17158 dwell.pdf For sample, downloadable language, see Model Code for Accessory Dwelling Units https://accessorydwellings.org/2014/11 /25/model-code-for-accessory-dwelling-units Dakota County cities with ADU policies for consideration: Apple Valley, Code of Ordinances: hftp://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/index.asl)x?NID=357 Eagan, Municipal Code: http://www.cityofeagan.com/index. php/planninq-zoning/city-code-enforcement Inver Grove Heights: Amendment: Title 10, Chapter 18: hftp://www.ci.inver-grove-hei.ghts.mn.us ADUs ordinances are often driven by requests from homeowners. What drove the development of ADU policy in other Dakota County cities? Could ADU policy in Mendota Heights be enacted to allow wider usage by increasing numbers of aging residents or those that have aging parents? For example: Could an ordinance be enacted to allow ADUs on smaller lots, or to encourage accessibility and Universal Design in the construction of the units? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 124 Page 91 COMPLETE STREETS POLICY "Complete streets" is an approach to road planning and design that considers and balances the needs of all transportation users. It is about improving the basics—the transportation system's safety and functionality for all users—but in many cases, also making transit ways more aesthetically pleasing. Its main premise is for people to get around safely and efficiently from point A to point B, using whatever mode of travel they choose. The complete streets approach helps to maximize the use of public roadways and right-of-way in order to provide a comprehensive and connected multimodal transportation system. A recent study comparing the United States with Germany and the Netherlands, where Complete Streets are common, found that when compared per mile/kilometer traveled, bicyclist and pedestrian death rates are two to six times higher in the United States. Complete Streets therefore improve safety for all users. According to an international study, as the number and portion of people bicycling and walking increases, deaths and injuries decline. This is known as the safety in numbers hypothesis: more people walking and biking reduces the risk per trip. Complete Streets Policy: Yes/No? No Some Policy Details Mendota Heights does not have a `Complete Streets Policy.' Possible Next Steps to Develop a Policy: The momentum that brought about Mendota Height's trail expansion could be leveraged to adapt a more comprehensive Complete Streets policy, attracting additional recognition towards supporting functionality, safety, and aesthetics for non -vehicular transportation (walking, biking). Interest and demand for more walkable and bikeable communities is growing rapidly, and Complete Streets design can create a safe, comfortable, integrated transportation network for all users. An ideal Complete Streets policy: • Includes a vision for how and why the community wants to complete its streets • Specifies that `all users' includes pedestrians, bicyclists and transit passengers of all ages and abilities, as well as trucks, buses and automobiles. • Applies to both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning, maintenance, and operations, for the entire right of way... For more details on an ideal policy, go to: http://www. smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets/changing-policy/policy-elements For more information on Complete Streets Policy: National Complete Streets Coalition, Resources, Fundamentals: http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets/complete-streets-fundamentals/resources Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 125 Page 92 Dakota County cities with Complete Streets policies: • Apple Valley's "Great Streets" concept: http://mn-applevalleV.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/HomeNiew/381 • Eagan's resolution: http://fresh-energy.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Eagan-Complete-Streets-Resolution. pdf How can cities realize not just the benefits of safe multi -use streets but also the economic benefits of bike and pedestrian -friendly Complete Streets? How might funding for Complete Streets projects be leveraged through increased inter -government coordination or public- private partnerships? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 126 Page 93 MIXED-USE (OR SUBURBAN -INTENSITY) LAND POLICY Mixed land use is a critical component of an aging -friendly community, enhancing mobility and housing options, and offering several other community benefits all at once. Some are now referring to mixed use planning occurring in the suburban environment as Suburban -Intensity. The uses may be mixed vertically (in a common structure) or horizontally (in a common site or area). By putting a mix of residential, commercial, and recreational uses in close proximity to one another, alternatives to driving, such as walking or biking, become more attractive. At the same time, a denser, more sizable population makes public transit more viable. Incorporating multi -unit housing options into Suburban -Intensity areas provides residents with housing options and often more accessible and visitable homes. There are also public health, public safety, and economic benefits to Suburban -Intensity areas. Compact, walkable neighborhoods encourage more physical activity, with residents walking rather than driving to their destinations. And with more people and eyes on the street, people feel safer. Economic benefits include: rising property values, increasing local tax receipts, and increased foot - traffic for local businesses. Mixed -Use Land Policy: Yes/No? Yes Some Policy Details Mendota Heights does have a mixed use land policy. Mixed Use — Planned Unit Development (MU -PUD) "The intent of the district is to allow for mixed use developments that combine residential, retail, and commercial uses into a coordinated, planned development project. Areas of the community with this land use designation are located near the intersection of Highway 110 and Dodd Road. The intersection of Dodd Road and Highway 110 is the City's only significant retail area. The northeast quadrant of this intersection has been developed into a mixed use commercial/residential center known as "The Village at Mendota Heights. Located in the southeast corner of the Dodd and Highway 110 intersection is a related commercial area. This older shopping center is being considered for redevelopment, including a mixed-use land use pattern reflecting the Village development concept. It is an objective of the City to encourage redevelopment of this area reflecting a small-town village layout, avoiding the suburban shopping center environment that dominates the current development pattern. The corresponding zoning district classification is MU -PUD (Mixed Use Planned Unit Development). The zoning ordinance will require amendments in order to establish the Corresponding mixed use, planned unit development zoning districts and performance standards." Opportunities: Interest and demand for more walkable and bikeable communities is growing, and the "The Village of Mendota Heights" has many amenities that highlight the advantages of mixed use land policy. Hopefully future developments will incorporate this mix of commercial/retail, multi -unit housing, and recreational uses. Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 127 Page 94 For more information on Mixed Use Land Policy: American Planning Association, Quick Notes, Zoning for Mixed Uses https://www.planning.org/pas/guicknotes/pdf/QN6.pdf Dakota County cities with Mixed -Use policies: • Apple Valley, Mixed Use (MU), 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Land Use (pg. 4-24) http://mn-applevalleV.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/HomeNiew/581 • Mendota Heights: Mixed Use — Planned Unit Development (pg. 44) http://www. mendota-heights. com/vertical/sites/%7BAOFB05B5-4CF8-4485-84AA- OC48DOBC98D7%7D/uploads/°/o7B604CF49D-F816-4882-A644-012E69A2AF23%7D. PDF • West St. Paul: Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Guide Plan, June 2009 (pg. 54) http://wspmn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/118 • Burnsville: MIX Mixed Use District (Title 10 -Zoning, Chapter 22C) http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book id=468 • South St. Paul: SSP/2030 South St. Paul Comprehensive Plan (pg. 69) http://www.southstpau1.org/DocumentCenterNiew/526 Source: MH 2030 Comp Plan Final Section 3 - Land Use Plan, http://www.mendota-heights.com/vertical/sites/%7BAOFB05B5- 4CF8-4485-84AA-OC48DOBC98D7%7D/uploads/%7B604CF49D-F816-4882-A644-012E69A2AF23%7D. PDF The challenge in any city is balancing what the community wants and needs with what the market is demanding at the time and what developers are willing to build. How can Mendota Heights increase the number of mixed use developments that combine residential, retail, and commercial uses to increase housing and shopping options, and walkability for the benefit of all residents? What specific policies could the city implement to ensure that mixed-use designations are continually incorporated into future land use planning? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 128 Page 95 BIKE WALK POLICY Bike walk policies focus on the safe, convenient, and enjoyable mobility of pedestrians, bicyclists, and people with disabilities who use assistive devices. These policies have much in common with Complete Streets policies, but focus more squarely on the needs and experience of pedestrians and non -motorized vehicles. Communities that have a bike walk policy or plan demonstrate that they place a high priority on planning methods and policies that favor alternative modes of travel. It also demonstrates a community's commitment to public health and quality of life, two major benefits of biking and walking. Bike Pedestrian Plan: Yes/No? No Some Policy Details Mendota Heights does not have a Bike Pedestrian Plan. However, within `MH 2030 Comp Plan Final Section 5 - Parks & Open Space Plan', there are policies that: "4. Improve and expand bicycle and pedestrian connections to City parks and other community destinations. 5. Provide neighborhoods of the City with trails, open space, and quality park facilities and amenities." "Trails for biking, walking, and roller blading have become very popular in recent years. Twenty-one (21) miles of trails currently extend through portions of the City's neighborhoods. These trails are both off- and on -road and serve as important connections for recreational opportunities and travel. Improved trail connections are important because many residential areas are divided by highways and arterial roads ... As a result, many areas of the community cannot be easily accessed on bikes, roller blades or foot from other areas of the community. Additional or improved trail connections are needed to provide residents access to City parks and other recreational opportunities in the region." Possible Next Steps to Develop a Policy: Developing a distinct and more robust Bike Pedestrian Plan could further highlight the important strides made towards prioritizing pedestrians and bicyclists in Mendota Heights, while outlining specific policies and standards to ensure that the city's goals of supporting walking and biking are realized. For more information on Bike Pedestrian Plans: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Planning Guidance http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicVcle pedestrian/guidance/inter.cfm Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, Sample Plans, see Local/County Plans http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/planning/sample plans.cfm Dakota County cities with Bike Pedestrian plans: • South St. Paul: http://www.southsti)aul.org/DocumentCenterNiew/1039 • Apple Valley: http://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/DocumentCenter/HomeNiew/327 • West St. Paul: http://wspmn.gov/DocumentCenterNiew/114 • Rosemount: http://ci.rosemount.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=452 Source: MH 2030 Comp Plan Final Section 5 - Parks & Open Space Plan http://www.mendota- heiqhts.com/index.asp?Type=B BASIC&SEC={11 B331 B5-D1A2-496E-868D-4021 E614AFC41&DE= Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 129 Page 96 Two critical issues that are often overlooked in bike walk policies and plans are safe intersection crossings and the infrastructure needs of persons with physical disabilities who use assistive devices. Safe crossings are critical for people of all ages, from parents pushing strollers, to older residents using walkers. The installation of audible and visual countdown timers at intersections is an effective feature for many users. Many roadways and intersections are planned and maintained by different levels of government; therefore communication and coordination across jurisdictions is needed to make intersections as safe as possible. How is Mendota Heights addressing the need for safe street crossings as a part of system connectivity? And are assistive devices well -supported by the current pedestrian infrastructure and maintenance program? Released Dec., 2016 1 Communities for a Lifetime City Profile I Mendota Heights, Minnesota 130 Page 97 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heig hts.corn CITY OF MEf:10OTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: City Council FROM: Phil Carlson, AICP Interim Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case 2017-02 Lot Split Mark Gergen, 697 Wesley Lane COMMENT.- Introduction OMMENT: Introduction The application is for a lot split (subdivision). Background There is an existing single family home on the lot which would be removed to create two new single family lots. Discussion The City is using its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on subdivision and zoning requests and has limited discretion; a determination regarding whether or not the request meets the applicable code standards is required. The Planning commission held a public hearing on the matter on January 24, 2017. There were a number of comments from nearby neighbors expressing concerns about the character of the neighborhood, setbacks and drainage. Staff has discussed the drainage situation with neighbors and the applicant, and we have modified the conditions of approval to reflect the added analysis needed and conditions of approval needed in the building permit process. Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request, with some additions to the conditions in the staff report. If the City Council wishes to implement this recommendation, pass a motion adopting RESOLUTION 2017 -XX APPROVING A LOT SPLIT AT 697 WESLEY LANE. Action Required This matter requires a simple majority vote. Page 98 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2017-21 RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT AT 697 WESLEY LANE AND PID# 27-64750-01-010 WHEREAS, Mark Gergen has applied for a Lot Split as proposed in Planning Case 2017-02 and described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter at their regular meeting on January 24, 2017. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the request as proposed in Planning Case 2017-02 is hereby approved with the following findings of fact: 1. No change to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation and no variance is requested. 2. The two lots resulting from the lot split meet City code minimum standards and are comparable in size and frontage to other lots on Wesley Lane. 3. The specific plans proposed have placed the proposed future homes and driveways such that there is minimal removal of existing trees, thus preserving as much as practical the existing character of the neighborhood. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Lot Split as proposed in Planning Case 2017-02 is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and dimensioned site plans with associated easements, subject to review and approval of the Engineering Department as part of any building permit application. 2. The applicant shall provide a drainage analysis of the property prepared by a qualified professional to quantify the runoff, show additional drainage and utility easements if needed, and prepare grading plans that will demonstrate that no additional stormwater beyond the existing condition drains to neighboring properties. 3. Such grading plans and building plans will allow for the preservation of the trees on both Parcel A and Parcel B as shown on the survey drawing date 1-13-2017 from Bohlen Surveying and will not increase drainage onto neighboring properties. Any other land disturbance must comply with the City's Land Disturbance Guidance document. 4. Front setbacks to Wesley Lane for future structures on both Parcel A and Parcel B shall be 40 feet and 45 feet, respectively, more or less as shown on the Bohlen survey drawing, in order to preserve the existing trees indicated. 5. The applicant shall submit landscape plans, subject to review and approval by the Planning Department, as part of any building permit application. Page 99 6. The applicant shall dedicate drainage and utility easements on both parcels to be denoted on the Certificate of Survey submitted to Dakota County: 10 feet wide along the front property lines and 5 feet wide along the side and rear property lines, and such additional easements that may be deemed necessary by the City Engineer as a result of the requested drainage analysis. 7. On Parcel A, the rear portion of the existing driveway will be removed, and graded so as not to aggravate drainage problems, and the ground restored with suitable ground cover, as approved by the City Engineer before a certificate of occupancy is issued. 8. Park dedication fees in lieu of land per current City policy will be paid before the subdivision is recorded with Dakota County. 9. The existing home is to be demolished before the subdivision is recorded with Dakota County. 10. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. On Parcel A, when the building permit is applied for it will adhere to setback requirements for the placement of the driveway. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventh day of February, 2017. ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor Res 2017-17 page 2 Page 100 EXHIBIT A Legal Description PID# 27-64750-01-010 Lot 1 Block 1, Rolling Woods Addition Res 2017-17 page 3 Page 101 2S is i Ex East drainage area Ex West drainage area Ex drains to street 3S 6S 4S Pro to the street Pro east area Pro west to the back Subcat Reach Pon Link Page 102 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pace 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) 1.313 61 Turf (1 S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S, 6S) 0.014 98 1/2 of home (1 S) 0.032 98 1/2 of house (2S) 0.066 98 Driveway (1 S, 5S) 0.022 98 East driveway (6S) 0.018 98 Home (5S) 0.037 98 New home (4S) 0.077 98 New homes (3S, 6S) 0.048 98 West driveway (6S) Page 103 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Type 11 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Ex West drainage area Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Depth> 0.84" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 1,130 98 Driveway 600 98 1/2 of home 2,370 61 Turf 4,100 77 Weighted Average 2,370 57.80% Pervious Area 1,730 42.20% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Ex East drainage area Runoff = 0.25 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af, Depth> 0.33" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 1,390 98 1/2 of house 18,250 61 Turf 19,640 64 Weighted Average 18,250 92.92% Pervious Area 1,390 7.08% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Pro east area Runoff = 0.18 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.009 af, Depth> 0.36" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Drainage caics Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. HvdroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 Hvdro Area (sf) CN Descriotion Page 104 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Type 11 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Software Solutions LLC Printed 2/7/2017 Paae 4 1,480 98 New homes 11,370 61 Turf 12,850 65 Weighted Average 11,370 88.48% Pervious Area 1,480 11.52% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Pro west to the back Runoff = 0.17 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.008 af, Depth> 0.43" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 1,630 98 New home 8,060 61 Turf 9,690 67 Weighted Average 8,060 83.18% Pervious Area 1,630 16.82% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Ex drains to street Runoff = 0.25 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.011 af, Depth> 0.54" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 790 98 Home 1,740 98 Driveway 8,170 61 Turf 10,700 70 Weighted Average 8,170 76.36% Pervious Area 2,530 23.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Page 105 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Type // 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Pro to the street Runoff = 0.51 cfs @ 11.90 hrs, Volume= 0.019 af, Depth> 0.70" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2 Year Storm Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 950 98 East driveway 2,090 98 West driveway 1,870 98 New homes 8,970 61 Turf 13,880 74 Weighted Average 8,970 64.63% Pervious Area 4,910 35.37% Impervious Area Page 106 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Type 11 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Ex West drainage area Runoff = 0.33 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.014 af, Depth> 1.81" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 1,130 98 Driveway 600 98 1/2 of home 2,370 61 Turf 4,100 77 Weighted Average 2,370 57.80% Pervious Area 1,730 42.20% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Ex East drainage area Runoff = 0.85 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.036 af, Depth> 0.97" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 1,390 98 1/2 of house 18,250 61 Turf 19,640 64 Weighted Average 18,250 92.92% Pervious Area 1,390 7.08% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Pro east area Runoff = 0.59 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.025 af, Depth> 1.03" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Drainage caics Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. HvdroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 Hvdro Area (sf) CN Descriotion Page 107 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Type 11 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Software Solutions LLC Printed 2/7/2017 Paae 7 1,480 98 New homes 11,370 61 Turf 12,850 65 Weighted Average 11,370 88.48% Pervious Area 1,480 11.52% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Pro west to the back Runoff = 0.50 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.021 af, Depth> 1.14" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 1,630 98 New home 8,060 61 Turf 9,690 67 Weighted Average 8,060 83.18% Pervious Area 1,630 16.82% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Ex drains to street Runoff = 0.64 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.027 af, Depth> 1.33" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 790 98 Home 1,740 98 Driveway 8,170 61 Turf 10,700 70 Weighted Average 8,170 76.36% Pervious Area 2,530 23.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Page 108 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Type // 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Pro to the street Runoff = 1.15 cfs @ 11.89 hrs, Volume= 0.042 af, Depth> 1.60" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 10 Year Storm Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 950 98 East driveway 2,090 98 West driveway 1,870 98 New homes 8,970 61 Turf 13,880 74 Weighted Average 8,970 64.63% Pervious Area 4,910 35.37% Impervious Area Page 109 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Type 11 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Ex West drainage area Runoff = 0.79 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af, Depth> 4.45" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Area (sf) CN Description 1,130 98 Driveway 600 98 1/2 of home 2,370 61 Turf 4,100 77 Weighted Average 2,370 57.80% Pervious Area 1,730 42.20% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Ex East drainage area Runoff = 2.73 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.116 af, Depth> 3.08" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 1,390 98 1/2 of house 18,250 61 Turf 19,640 64 Weighted Average 18,250 92.92% Pervious Area 1,390 7.08% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Pro east area Runoff = 1.84 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.078 af, Depth> 3.18" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Page 110 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Type 11 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Area (sf) CN Description 1,480 98 New homes 11,370 61 Turf 12,850 65 Weighted Average 11,370 88.48% Pervious Area 1,480 11.52% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Pro west to the back Runoff = 1.47 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.063 af, Depth> 3.38" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Area (sf) CN Description 1,630 98 New home 8,060 61 Turf 9,690 67 Weighted Average 8,060 83.18% Pervious Area 1,630 16.82% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Ex drains to street Runoff = 1.76 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.076 af, Depth> 3.70" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 790 98 Home 1,740 98 Driveway 8,170 61 Turf 10,700 70 Weighted Average 8,170 76.36% Pervious Area 2,530 23.64% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Page 111 697 WESLEY LANE DRAINAGE REPORT Drainage caics Type // 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Printed 2/7/2017 HydroCAD® 9.10 s/n 02139 © 2011 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Pro to the street Runoff = 2.84 cfs @ 11.89 hrs, Volume= 0.110 af, Depth> 4.13" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 Year Storm Rainfall=7.46" Area (sf) CN Description 950 98 East driveway 2,090 98 West driveway 1,870 98 New homes 8,970 61 Turf 13,880 74 Weighted Average 8,970 64.63% Pervious Area 4,910 35.37% Impervious Area CHETEK SANDY LOAM II 1 j ANTIAGO SILT wiJIF111 LOAM EX TO THE N W EX TO THE NE EX TO THE STREET 2 YR 0.16 CFS 2 YR 0.25 CFS 2 YR 0.25 CFS 10 YR 0.33 CFS 10 YR 0.85 CFS 10 YR 0.64 CFS 100 YR 0.79 CFS 100 YR 2.73 CFS 100 YR 1.76 CFS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by Halling Engineering, Inc. Issued me or under my direct supervision and that I BUILDING PERMIT APPL 21711 am a duly Registered Engineer under the laws 3727 East 255TH Street -Webster, Minnesota 55088 Date 02/07/2017 Registration No. 12783 Phone 952.440.1680 • Fax 952.461.3308 PROJECT NO.: 0343.01 DRAWING FILE: 34301 BASED G is r it PRO TO THE WEST PRO TO THE NE 2 YR 0.17 CFS 2 YR 0.18 CFS 10 YR 0.50 CFS 10 YR 0.59 CFS 100 YR 1.47 CFS 100 YR 1.84 CFS Halling Engineering, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERS 3727 East 255TH Street -Webster, Minnesota 55088 Phone 952.440.1680 • Fax 952.461.3308 PROJECT NO.: 0343.01 DRAWING FILE: 34301 BASED G PRO TO THE STREET 2 YR 0.51 CFS 10 YR 1.15 CFS 100 YR 2.84 CFS DRAINAGE MAP 697 WESLEY LANE ST PAUL, MN SHEET 1 Page 113 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com CITY OF MENEDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Solar Energy Grant Application Submittals COMMENT.- INTRODUCTION OMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to authorize submittals of grant applications on behalf of the City, for solar energy installations on City buildings. BACKGROUND There are two solar energy grant applications which are currently available for the City to make application: • Made In Minnesota (MiM) is a $150 million program administered by the Minnesota Department of Commerce, and which has been in operation since 2013. Its purpose is to promote the use of solar energy systems by public and private sector users in areas served by one of three investor-owned utilities, including Xcel. The systems to be installed must be manufactured within Minnesota. The current application period opened January 1St; the deadline for applications closes February 28th. • Solar Rewards Rebate Program is another program to promote the use of solar, and is through Xcel Energy. Applications for this program are received on a first come, first served basis The electricity from these solar panels may be generated from either roof -mounted, or ground mounted units. The two grant programs vary in terms of the benefit to the successful applicant. The host facility (in this case, the City) would receive a reduction in its retail electrical rates, and would eventually receive all of the electricity generated by their facility at no charge. The MiM program has more generous benefits than the Xcel program, and therefore would be the primary focus of the initial applications—MiM recipients are determined by a lottery system. Applications will also be made for the Xcel program. Because both programs are very popular, it cannot be assured that the City will be chosen for either grant program. Page 114 Within the past two weeks, City staff was contacted by two companies who proposed to make applications on behalf of the City. Staff met with both. The company with the seemingly more favorable proposal is Ideal Energies, of Minneapolis. They have offered to complete the application materials and submit them on behalf of the City at no charge. If successful with the MiM program, the City would receive a 25% savings in its electrical bills for the first 12 years; after that time, 100% of the electrical benefit would go to the City. The Xcel program has similar payback times. The MiM grant program would pay for the cost of installation, and the maintenance for the initial 12 year period. After 12 years, the City would become the owner of the system. Maintenance costs after that time would be negotiated. The design life of the solar system is typically 25-30 years, but the practical lifespan of systems can be as long as 40 years. Should the system need to be moved during that time (for example, to facilitate a reroofing), a likely payment to the solar energy company would be an extension of the time for which they receive 75% of the solar benefits. That cost would be negotiated. In exchange for their work, Ideal Energies would be able to sell their system for use, and would receive a 30% tax credit. Multiple grant applications may be made. Ideal Energies suggests that separate applications be made for the following facilities: Public Works Building Fire Station City Hall Both Par 3 Buildings The installation of the solar panels will need to go through the same process for permits as would any other solar installation in the City. The Council should also indicate if there are buildings for which it thinks it would be inappropriate for roof -mounted solar panels (i.e. City Hall). A representative of Ideal Energies will be in attendance at the February 21St City Council meeting to answer questions. BUDGETIMPACT The systems are funded through the grant applications, should the City be successful it the process. While we will need to look at specific bills to determine how much the energy savings would be, the City's total electrical bill's total $107,000. Of that total, City Hall's annual electrical bills are approximately $30,000; Public Works Building are $11,000, and the Fire Station's are $9000. Par 3's are $6000. The MiM program could reduce those by 25%. Page 115 There are also miscellaneous charges for lift stations, street lights, and other things, which may or may not qualify for the reduction in rates. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the City Council authorize the submittal of grant applications for both programs, and give direction as to which buildings would host a solar rooftop unit. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should authorize the submission of grant applications for both the Made in Minnesota, and the Xcel Energy Solar Rewards Rebate Programs. The Council should also indicate if there are any City buildings where roof -mounted solar panels should be installed. Mark McNeill City Administrator Page 116 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.irendota-helghts.com s CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E. — Public Works Director SUBJECT: Sump Pump Inspection Program COMMENT: INTRODUCTION At its meeting of February 21St, the City Council and residents will be updated on the status of a Sump Pump inspection program which is currently getting underway. BACKGROUND On June 7, 2016, the then -City Council adopted an Ordinance that established a sump pump inspection program city-wide, to make certain that sump pumps do not discharge directly into the sanitary sewer system. Both State Plumbing Code and Mendota Heights Municipal Code prohibit the discharge of sump pump water to sanitary sewers. The applicable sections are: Minnesota Plumbing Code 4715.2700 Storm water shall not be drained into sewers intended for sanitary sewage only. Mendota Heightsy Code 10-3-513 Surface Waters: It shall be unlawful to discharge or cause to be discharged into the municipal sewer system, either directly or indirectly, any roof, storm, surface or ground water of any type or kind, or water discharged from any air conditioning unit or system. (1981 Code 803 § 4) For the past 24 months, the City has been promoting the disconnection of sump pumps from the sanitary sewer system in order to comply with these code provisions. The City of Mendota Heights pays Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) a fee for sanitary sewer treatment that is based on the total flow contribution to the MCES system. In 2014, the City's total annual flow increased by approximately 60 million gallons (12.3%)*, resulting in an increase in the annual fee by 9.83%. In addition to the rate increase, MCES also initially proposed a surcharge fee of $99,600 per year for the years 2015-2018 for increasing flow over 10% in one year. Staff was able to convince MCES to remove this fee due to our ongoing sanitary sewer cleaning, televising, and lining program along with our manhole casting sealing program. Page 117 It is widely believed that the sudden and dramatic increase in flow was due to the extremely wet spring experienced from March to July of 2014. A large quantity of snow from the preceding winter melted followed by several large rain storms. The season culminated with 4.8 inches of rain that fell in a very short time on June 19, 2014. Wet weather impacts the sanitary sewer system by means of Inflow and Infiltration (UI). I/I can come from cracks in sewer pipes, broken pipe joints, tree root penetrations, or manholes, but the most prevalent possible sources for sudden increases in flow are illegal discharges to the sanitary sewer system. The most common of these discharges are basement sump pumps. Both MCES and the American Public Works Association (APWA) have published figures stating 60%-70% of sudden increases in flow volume are likely due to sump pumps connected to the sanitary sewer system. Based on some assumptions about sump pump activity from the spring of 2014, staff has calculated that approximately 39 million gallons of the approximately 60 million gallons* in increased flow (65%) is likely due to sump pumps. In order to minimize or eliminate these discharges, a policy would need to be developed and implemented, including public communications, and inspections. Eliminating, or greatly reducing the contribution to the sanitary sewer system from sump pumps would allow for a more predictable total sewer flow projection and make the budget process for the sanitary sewer utility fund more stable. It would also greatly reduce the risk of future severe flow increases and avoid future penalty surcharges. DISCUSSION Utilizing our recently created consultant pool, a contract was authorized with Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC (Foth). Foth has extensive experience with programs like this one, and has provided this or similar services to cities across the Metro area. Foth started residential property inspections this month. Foth estimates that the approximately 2,000 homes would have completed inspections by mid -summer of 2017. BUDGET IMPACT The contract with Foth to implement this program is for a not -to -exceed price of $217,580 which will be funded through the City's Water Fund. I/I contributions to the sanitary sewer system have a direct impact on the amount charged to the City by MCES. Consequently, I/I contributions directly impact what the City needs to charge residents and businesses for sanitary sewer service to keep the utility fund operable and stable. Eliminating non -sewage contributions to the sanitary sewer system can provide a much more stable and predictable cost of utility operations. RECOMMENDATION For Informational Purposes Only ACTION REOUIRED This update is to provide the council with information to address any resident inquiries. Page 118 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.irendota-helghts.com s CITY It OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E. — Public Works Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2017-19 Sanitary Sewer Utility Rate Adjustment COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve Resolution 2017-19 increasing the Sanitary Sewer Utility Fee. BACKGROUND The City of Mendota Heights has made a policy that the sanitary sewer rates would be looked at on an annual basis and adjusted periodically to account for increases in costs, specifically the charges billed to the City from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) division, for the maintenance and operations of the sewage treatment plants. In addition, the annual costs of maintaining our sanitary sewer system would be reviewed and the annual budget adjusted accordingly. Since 2012, City Staff has developed a five-year Sanitary Sewer Improvement and Maintenance Plan (SSIMP) which projects future costs for the ongoing maintenance of the City's sanitary sewer infrastructure. Part of the SSIMP projects incremental rate adjustments (presumed to be increases) to compensate for increases on costs and fees to the utility. The City's single family residential bill rate for sanitary sewer is based upon the non -summer (1St quarter) water usage quantity. The current base rate is $65.08 for the first 15,000 gallons of water consumed per quarter. For every 750 gallons used above the 15,000, single family residences are billed an additional $2.30. The commercial rate ranges from $108.65 to $1,336.61 per quarter based on the size of the water meter and are summarized in the tables in this memo. MCES invoices the City based on flow volumes contributed to the metro -wide wastewater treatment system. MCES has given indications that rate increases of 3%-5% per year should be anticipated for several years to come. The following table shows MCES fee rates per 1,000,000 gallons of sanitary sewer flow along with the annual totals: Page 119 MCES Sanitary Sewer Rates 2006-2017 (*5.8% increase over 2016) YEAR MCES RATE (per milliongallons) MCES TOTAL (per ear) YEAR MCES RATE (per milliongallons) MCES TOTAL (per ear) 2006 $1544.33 $782,570.00 2012 $1853.62 $1,000,920.00 2007 $1526.60 $892,078.00 2013 $2029.00 $991,207.00 2008 $1696.81 $864,303.00 2014 $2141.55 $1,034,516.88 2009 $1754.30 $936,092.00 2015 $2084.38 $1,161,541.00 2010 $1980.74 $895,986.00 2016 $2348.25 $1,164,404.00 2011 $2025.75 $921,414.00 2017 2484.71 $1,222,377.00* Flow quantities from the City to MCES vary greatly from year to year. In the past, Mendota Heights has had a high rate of inflow and infiltration into our sanitary sewer system. This is storm water runoff that finds its way into the sanitary sewer system through cracks in the sewer pipe, unsealed manholes, roots penetrating the sewer pipe, and basement sump pumps connected to the sanitary sewer, just to name a few. Although inflow and infiltration can never be eliminated, ongoing annual projects to televise, clean, and line the sanitary sewer pipe greatly reduce the amount of inflow and infiltration into the system, thus helping to create a more predictable sanitary sewer flow rate from year to year. Because the City of Mendota Heights does not have a sewage treatment plant, MCES controls approximately 64% of the City's sewer utility expenses through their sewer rate charge. As a result of the MCES fees increasing, an increase to our sanitary sewer billing rate is necessary. The MCES rate for 2017, represents a 5.8% increase to the MCES charge over 2016. DISCUSSION City Staff is proposing an increase to the City sanitary sewer utility rate. Staff estimates that the new base rate will need to be raised 5% to $68.35 per quarter. This represents a base rate increase of $3.27 per quarter, -$1.09 per month, or $13.08 per year. The second tier usage rate, currently set at $2.30 is proposed to increase by the same 5% rate to $2.45. The proposed rate for commercial usage would also increase by 5%. The proposed commercial rates would range from $114.10 to $1,403.15 per quarter based on the size of the water meter. Commercial properties utilizing wells for their water source have a separate billing rate schedule. Commercial Sewer Rate With 2% Increases (per Quarter) Minimum Per Meter Size Existing Rate Proposed Rate 3/4 Inch $108.65 $114.10 1 Inch $125.15 $131.40 1 1/4 Inch $168.84 $177.30 1 1/2 Inch $334.15 $350.85 2 Inch $655.20 $701.75 3 Inch $1,336.61 $1,403.45 Commercial Well Sewer Rate With 5% Increases (per Quarter) Minimum Per Meter Size Existing Rate Proposed Rate 5/8 Inch $224.40 $235.65 3/4 Inch $224.40 $235.65 1 Inch $304.34 $319.55 1 1/4 Inch $382.56 $401.70 1 1/2 Inch $519.55 $545.55 2 Inch $1,057.99 $1,110.90 Page 120 3 Inch $2,115.98 $2,221.80 4 Inch $4,481.06 $4,705.10 6 Inch $9,743.81 $10,231.00 The City of Mendota Heights has been monitoring the financial health of the sanitary sewer utility account since the last rate increase. The increase in charges from MCES is driving the necessity for a City-wide rate increase. By increasing the billed rate 5%, and by adjusting the schedule of capital improvement projects within the forecast, the Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund remains viable and out of deficit. Even after the proposed 5% sanitary sewer rate increase, the City of Mendota Heights will remain as one of the lowest base sanitary sewer rate in northern Dakota County. A five-year outlook for the Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund is provided below: 12/31/16 Balance Sanitary Sewer $ (43,236.00) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Revenue $ 1,758,300.00 $ 1,846,215.00 $ 1,938,525.75 $ 2,035,452.04 $ 2,137,224.64 $ 2,244,085.87 Depreciation Deposit $ 145,500.00 $ 145,500.00 $ 145,500.00 $ 145,500.00 $ 145,500.00 $ 145,500.00 MCES Grant for 1/1 Total Revenue $ 1,903,800.00 $ 1,991,715.00 $ 2,084,025.75 $ 2,180,952.04 $ 2,282,724.64 $ 2,389,585.87 Annual Maintenance & Operations $ 495,954.00 $ 503,078.00 $ 518,170.34 $ 533,715.45 $ 549,726.91 $ 566,218.72 MCES Fees $ 1,164,404.00 $ 1,222,377.00 $ 1,283,495.85 $ 1,347,670.64 $ 1,415,054.17 $ 1,485,806.88 1/1 Surcharge* $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Annual Sewer Cleaning $ 62,000.00 $ 62,000.00 $ 62,000.00 $ 62,000.00 $ 62,000.00 $ 62,000.00 Annual Sewer Lining $ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 $ 225,000.00 $ 225,000.00 Lift Station Rehabilitation $ 35,000.00 Trunk Main Sewer Replace $ 315,000.00 NW of Dodd &110 Sewer Camera & Software Salt Storage Facility $ 40,000.00 Fence (Public Works) $ 9,000.00 Total Expenses $ 1,832,358.00 $ 1,932,455.00 $ 1,973,666.19 $ 2,417,386.09 $ 2,251,781.09 $ 2,339,025.60 Account Balance $ 28,206.00 1 $ 87,466.00 1 $ 197,825.56 $ (38,608.50) 1 $ (7,664.94) 1 $ 42,895.32 *Surcharge avoided for 2015, 2016 & 2017 due to the amount of 1/1 prevention work the City does (cleaning & lining) BUDGETIMPACT Without additional revenues, the Sanitary Sewer Utility fund will eventually deplete its reserve balances and the City will lose capability and flexibility in maintaining and improving its sanitary sewer infrastructure. Staff is proposing the sanitary sewer utility rate increase be implemented for the 1St quarter (January - March) billing cycle of 2017. The new rate would then be collected in April of 2016 with the 1St quarter 2017 billing cycle. In the past increases for utility rates have been highlighted in the previous quarters billing cycle, that is not provided with this request. Approximately 600 property owners are on an automatic withdrawal program for their sanitary sewer bill payment. These customers must be notified in writing, and the City will incur a one- time $0.50 per account charge for changing the automatic withdrawal amount. Page 121 RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Sanitary Sewer Utility fund rate increase as outlined above. The proposed increase is required to maintain the revenue stream necessary to fund a self-sustaining utility and to defray sanitary sewer related costs. ACTION REQUIRED If Council desires to implement the Staff recommendation, pass a motion adopting Resolution 2017-19, "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATES BEGINNING IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2017," by a simple majority vote. Page 122 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2017 - 19 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SANITARY SEWER USAGE RATES BEGINNING IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2017 WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights aspires to have a self-funded sanitary sewer utility for the residents and businesses of the City; and WHEREAS, annual expenditures (including fees paid to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES)) have increased over the past several years; and WHEREAS, Sanitary Sewer Utility expenditures (including rates charged by MCES) are anticipated to continue rising over the foreseeable future; and WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has identified the need to raise sanitary sewer rates and storm sewer utility fees for 2017. NOW THEREFORE IT IS HERBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights that the rate of charge for the use of the Sanitary Sewer Utility shall be set as follows effective the 1St quarter of 2017 (to be billed in April 2017): Residential Base Rate $68.35 Residential Additional Rate per 750 gallons $ 2.45 Commercial Sewer Rate (per Quarter) Minimum Per Meter Size Proposed Rate 3/41nch $114.10 1 Inch $131.40 1 1/4 Inch $177.30 1 t/2Inch $350.85 2 Inch $701.75 3 Inch $1,403.45 Commercial Well Sewer Rate (per Quarter) Minimum Per Meter Size Existing Rate Proposed Rate 5/8 Inch $224.40 $235.65 3/4 Inch $224.40 $235.65 1 Inch $304.34 $319.55 1 '/41nch $382.56 $401.70 1 t/2Inch $519.55 $545.55 2 Inch $1,057.99 $1,110.90 3 Inch $2,115.98 $2,221.80 4 Inch $4,481.06 $4,705.10 6 Inch $9,743.81 $10,231.00 Page 123 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 21" day of February 2017. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk Page 124 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.irendota-helghts.com s CITY It OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E. — Public Works Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2017-20 Storm Water Utility Rate Adjustment COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve Resolution 2017-20 increasing the Storm Water Utility Fee for 2017. BACKGROUND In addition to the sanitary sewer bills paid by Mendota Heights' residents and businesses, there is also a flat -rate storm sewer utility fee applied to all the sewer bills sent out by the City. The storm sewer utility fee is $7.25 per quarter, or $29.00 per year. This fee creates the Storm Sewer Utility Fund, which is utilized for maintenance and upkeep of the City's storm sewer pipes, catch basins, and pond inlets and outlets. Additionally, this fund has been utilized to provide funding for street reconstruction projects that include the installation of new storm sewers, and has been used for stream bank erosion projects. DISCUSSION At the current $7.25 per quarter rate, the fund will not be able to support upcoming capital improvement projects. The current and proposed rate schedule per quarter is: Property Use 2016 Fee 2017 Fee (Proposed) Residential $7.25 $10.00 Business/Industrial > 1 Acre $121.80/acre $121.80/acre Business/Industrial < 1 Acre $60.90/acre $60.90/acre Golf Course/Cemetery $10.15/acre $10.15/acre Institution $40.60/acre $40.60/acre Page 125 The following table illustrates the account balance including a proposed increase to $10.00 per quarter, which is projected to collect an additional $40,000 in revenue annually. Item 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Revenue $ 406,000.00 $ 446,000.00 $ 446,000.00 $ 446,000.00 $ 446,000.00 Depreciation $ 32,000.00 $ 32,000.00 $ 32,000.00 $ 32,000.00 $ 32,000.00 State Disaster Relief Kensington Nei hborhood Rehabilitation $ 50,000.00 Dakota County Marie Avenue Rehabilitation 2 $ 4,850.00 $ 50,000.00 Total Revenue 1438 000.00 $ 482.850.00 $ 478.000.00 14a 000-00 $ 478.000.00 Annual O&M $ 182,274.00 $ 187,742.22 $ 193,374.49 $ 199,175.72 $ 205,150.99 Warrior Drive Rehabilitation $ 10,000.00 Mendota Road Reconstruct $ 180,000.00 Mendota Hei hts Road Rehabilitation 2 $ 50,000.00 Kensington Nei hborhood Rehabilitation $ 50,000.00 Marie Avenue Rehabilitation 2 $ 50,000.00 Wesley Neighborhood Rehabilitation $ 50,000.00 CenterPoint/Commerce Rehabilitation $ 72,000.00 S lvandale Nei hborhood Rehabilitation $ 75,000.00 Brompton/London Rehabilitation $ 50,000.00 Lake 4ugusta Alum Treatment $ 35,000.00 Somerset Creek Repair Culvert Liningi $ 35,000.00 Hwy 13 Drainage Imp $ 27,840.00 Revise Surface Water Mgt Plan $ 57,000.00 Marie Avenue Storm Improvement $ 70,000.00 IVC Streambank e airs $ 96,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Cherokee Heights Culvert Repair $ 40,000.00 Dodd Road Trail $ 80,000.00 Storm Sewer Improvements to alleviate Icing $ 100,000.00 Pond Maintenance $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 Total Expenses $ 499,274.00 $ 525,582.22 $ 469,374.49 $ 421,175.72 $ 480,150.99 Account Balance $ 37,995.00 $ (4,737.22) $ 3,888.29 $ 60,712.57 $ 58,561.58 BUDGET IMPACT Without additional revenues, the Storm Water Utility fund will eventually deplete its reserve balances and the City will lose capability and flexibility in maintaining and improving its storm sewer infrastructure. Staff is proposing the storm water utility rate increase be implemented for the 1St quarter (January - March) billing cycle of 2017. The new rate would then be collected starting in April, with the 1 st quarter 2017 billing cycle. In the past increases for utility rates have been highlighted in the previous quarters billing cycle, that is not provided with this request. Approximately 600 property owners are on an automatic withdrawal program for their sanitary sewer bill payment. These customers must be notified in writing, and the City will incur a one-time $0.50 per account charge for changing the automatic withdrawal amount. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Storm Water Utility fund rate increase as outlined above. The proposed increase is required to maintain the revenue stream necessary to fund a self- sustaining utility and to defray storm sewer related costs. ACTION REQUIRED If Council desires to implement the Staff recommendation, pass a motion adopting Resolution 2017- 20, "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STORM WATER UTILITY RATES BEGINNING IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2017" by a simple majority vote. Page 126 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2017 - 20 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STORM WATER UTILITY RATES BEGINNING IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2017 WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights aspires to have a self-funded storm water utility for the residents and businesses of the City; and WHEREAS, annual expenditures have increased over the past several years; and WHEREAS, Storm Water Utility expenditures are anticipated to continue rising over the foreseeable future; and WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has identified the need to raise storm water rates and storm sewer utility fees for 2017. NOW THEREFORE IT IS HERBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights that the rate of charge for the use of the Storm Water Utility shall be set as follows effective the 1St quarter of 2017 (to be billed in April 2017): Property Use 2017 Fee (Proposed) Residential $10.00 Business/Industrial > 1 Acre $121.80/acre Business/Industrial < 1 Acre $60.90/acre Golf Course/Cemetery $10.15/acre Institution $40.60/acre Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 21St day of February 2017. ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor