Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2018-06-05 Council packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA June 5, 2018 – 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 May 15, 2018 City Council Minutes b. Approval of May 16, 2018 Joint City Council & Parks-Rec Commission Work Session Minutes c. Acknowledge the April 24, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes d. Approval of the Liquor License Renewals e. Approval of Ordinance 523 Revise No Parking on South Plaza Drive f. Approval of Ordinance 524 Add No Parking on Copperfield Drive g. Approval of Ordinance 525 Revise Seasonal Restrictions and Weight Limits h. Authorize Contract with Rainbow Treecare for Emerald Ash Borer Treatment i. Update on Cooperative Construction Agreement for Dodd Road j. Approval of Grading Permit for Orchard Heights k. Approval of Resolution 2018-39 Plans and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Neighborhood Improvements l. Approval of Fire Hose and Nozzle Replacement m. Approval of Natural Resources Technician Job Description and Position Posting n. Approval of Claims List 6. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) *See guidelines below 7. Public Hearings - none 8. New and Unfinished Business a. Fire Station Construction/Bond Issuance 1. Resolution 2018-40 Calling For A Public Hearing On The Proposed Adoption Of A Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan And The Preliminary Issuance Of General Obligation Capital Improvement Bonds b. Award Professional Service Contract for Marie Avenue & Wesley Lane Improvements c. Resolution 2018-38 Approving a Wetlands Permit to Sherburne Construction & Hugh Cullen for property located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle (Planning Case No. 2018-11) 9. Community Announcements 10. Council Comments 11. Adjourn * Guidelines for Citizen Comment Period: “The Citizen Comments section of the agenda provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. All are welcome to speak. Comments should be directed to the Mayor. Comments will be limited to 5 minutes per person and topic; presentations which are longer than five minutes will need to be scheduled with the City Clerk to appear on a future City Council agenda. Comments should not be repetitious. Citizen comments may not be used to air personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens, nor will any decisions be made at that presentation. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Citizen comments will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made, but rather for hearing the citizen for information only. If appropriate, the Mayor may assign staff for follow up to the issues raised.” CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, May 15, 2018 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. Councilors Duggan, Miller, Paper, and Petschel were also present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. NATIONAL POLICE WEEK Mayor Garlock explained that the week of May 15 th is recognized as National Police Week, which pays special recognition to law enforcement officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty. Those individuals are being remembered during a 24 hour vigil at the state capitol. Included in that roll call is Officer Scott Patrick of the Mendota Heights Police Department. The City will also remember him on July 30, 2018, at the anniversary of his death that occurred four years ago. Mayor Garlock asked everyone to rise for a moment of silence to honor those brave men and women. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Petschel moved adoption of the agenda, moving item 7a. PRESENTATION OF JERRY MURPHY COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARD RECIPIENTS to be next on the agenda. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PRESENTATIONS A) PRESENTATION OF JERRY MURPHY COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARD RECIPIENTS Mayor Garlock noted his experience working with Jerry Murphy, who served the Police Department for more than 45 years. Mr. Murphy was a member of the Civil Defense team, a reserve officer, and a licensed part -time Police Officer. Mayor Garlock stated that Jerry was always dependable and loyal to the City. page 3 Councilor Petschel acknowledged the sponsors for this award including the Mendota Heights Criminal Apprehension Fund, the City of Mendota Heights, the Holiday Station, Sean Hoffman with the BP Station, and friends of Jerry Murphy. The recipients of the Jerry Murphy Community Service Award for outstanding volunteerism in the Mendota Heights community were: • Susan Light and Cindy Johnson – certified Master Gardeners. They were instrumental in helping to get Mendota Heights designated as a “Pollinator Friendly” community. The award was presented by former Public Works Director John Mazzitello . • Ron Katzenmaier – served 17 years on the Mendota Heights Fire Department and during much of that time he led the fire prevention and education activities. He was instrumental in the creation of the Mendota Heights Fire Department Reserve program and continues to serve as Captain of the Fire Reserves. The award was presented by former Fire Chief John Maczko. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar, pulling items b) Approval of Change Order for Fiber Installation; c) Master Services Agreement – KLJ Engineering; and e) Approve Resolution 2018- 37 Requesting Extension to Complete the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update. a. Approval of May 1, 2018 City Council Minutes b. Approval of Change Order for Fiber Installation c. Master Services Agreement – KLJ Engineering d. Approve Resolution 2018-36 Supporting the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Grant Program e. Approve Resolution 2018-37 Request Extension to Complete the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update f. Acknowledge Building Activity Report g. Approval of Claims List Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM B) APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER FOR FIBER INSTALLATION Councilor Duggan asked for a definition of ‘hand hole’ and how it was determined that it was not at the location originally indicated. Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator, explained that a ‘hand hole’ is a connection point for where the city would connect to Dakota County fiber. It is a small plastic vault in the ground with a plastic cover. She stated that this fiber installation is part of the larger fiber I-net network and Dakota County has worked with vendors to identify where fiber already is. LOGIS, acting as the city’s project manager, was going off Dakota County mapping where their fiber was supposed to be. However, when the city’s contractor installed the backbone fiber down Lexington Avenue, it discovered that the Dakota County connection was not there. This created a need to extend the fiber down Mendota Heights Road to connect at Medallion Drive. page 4 Councilor Paper asked how many feet further they had to go to reach the connection? Ms. Jacobson replied that the distance was from the corner of Lexington Avenue to Medallion Drive. The amount listed in the change order is for the additional distance ; however, the city has a cost share agreement with Dakota County. Staff will submit the invoice to the County under the cost share agreement. Councilor Duggan moved to approve the change order as submitted by Castrejon, for the installation of conduit and fiber optic cable to complete the backbone connection to the Dakota County fiber ring, in the amount of $17,840.00. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 C) MASTER SERVICES AGREEMENT – KLJ ENGINEERING Councilor Miller asked for additional information on what this agreement would mean for the city from a long-term standpoint. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that in 2016 the city developed a consultant pool and selected nine different categories that contained multiple consultants. The idea was that the city could send a work order request to one of the consultants within their area of expertise, get a price, and award the contract. It saves time and money when the consulting firms have been pre- approved. Councilor Miller asked if that would entail using KLJ Engineering for any engineering project – large or small? Mr. Ruzek replied that it could. Most of the large engineering projects would fall under the General Municipal Services, which has five consultants listed; two with State Aid or MnDOT specialties and three as general contracting. Staff is proposing to add a sixth – KLJ Engineering – because they have a vast array of services they can provide. Councilor Miller explained that he wanted to ensure the city was getting the best price available, and also the best product. Mr. Ruzek noted that staff and the city would still be in control of who they would like to invite to bid on any project proposals. The companies on the list are pre-approved; however, the city could still ask for a proposal from a company that is not on the list. Councilor Petschel noted that everyone on the pre-approved list is someone with which the city has had a positive experience working. The contracts are a ‘not-to-exceed’ contract, which further protects the city. Councilor Duggan, referencing item 2.6.5 in the agreement , asked if there would be responsibilities in relation to all of the records. Mr. Ruzek replied that when utilities are installed, staff needs to know if they were actually installed per design. Usually after something is installed it gets re-surveyed and a record drawing is sent to the city. Councilor Duggan, referencing item 3.1.6, asked who would be in charge of the record keeping identified. Mr. Ruzek replied it would be supervised by the consultant; however, the city would be the owner of any records that they request from the consultants. page 5 Referencing item 4.10, Councilor Duggan asked if a copy of the ‘supplemental agreement’ would be provided. Mr. Ruzek replied that all of the agreements signed in 2016 have supplemental agreements and it would be provided. Regarding item 4.11, Councilor Duggan asked if that should be a ‘licensed’ person or a ‘professional’ person. Mr. Ruzek replied that the coordination of activities among the contractors is not necessarily a licensed position that would be required to provide that work. Councilor Duggan moved to approve the Master Services Agreement with KLJ Engineering. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 E) RESOLUTION REQUESTING EXTENSION TO COMPLETE THE 2040 “DECENNIAL” COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE SUBMITTAL TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Councilor Duggan asked if the City is cutting it too close to the deadline. He said that when looking at the comprehensive plan, they need to have this by the end of May. He asked how much of this will be on the website. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the latest plan is currently on the website, along with all of the previous documents for the Comprehensive Plan Update. Any new plans that are prepared by the consultant or by staff are placed on the website immediately. He has spoken with the representative who explained that the due dates are very fluid. Giving the city another few months is not going to hurt the city’s ability to get the planning done. The goal was to get the plan done by July 1, 2018 and then begin the 6-month review process, and submit to the Met Council by December 31, 2018. There are many cities that are asking for an extension. Councilor Duggan noted that he read there is a blanket granting of the extension and wondered if the Council needed to go through this process. Mr. Benetti replied that the city did need to go through this process. According to the Met Council, the city needs to have an extension filed by May 31, 2018. Councilor Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2018-37 REQUESTING ADDITIONAL TIME TO COMPLETE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN “DECENNIAL” REVIEW AND UPDATE OBLIGATIONS FOR THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. PUBLIC HEARING No items scheduled. page 6 NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) ORDINANCE 522 AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 3-2 TOBACCO SALES AND SUMMARY PUBLICATION City Adm inistrator Mark McNeill said that the Council had heard a proposal to eliminate flavored tobacco sales within the city limits. At that time, the consensus of the Council was to move this forward, and to convene a meeting of the six licensees who sell tobacco products in Mendota Heights, to explain the proposed changes. The proposed changes include: 1. Prohibit ing the sale of flavored tobacco; however, it would not prohibit the flavors of tobacco, wintergreen, mint, or menthol 2. Add a definition for e-cigarettes 3. Identifies minors as persons under 18 years of age 4. Makes penalties for violations of this ordinance consistent with State Statutes Comments from the public included: Dr. Andy Grande, 813 Park Place Drive, grew up in Mendota Heights and returned after his neurosurgical training in Cincinnati to raise his family. As a parent, community member, and a physician, he fully supports the ordinance. He believed this to be the simplest and most effective way to prevent tobacco initiation in the community. He then listed the negative health effects of tobacco and noted that one of his practice and research areas is the treatment of strokes. There are only two factors for a stroke that a person can truly change to prevent stroke – diet and smoking. Smoking makes it twice as likely to die from stroke; the more a person smokes the greater the risk of having a stroke. Direct evidence of a link between e-cigarette use and heart disease emerged this year. The use of e-cigarettes was independently associated with a 79% increase in heart attack risk. She said that young people seemed to think that using e-cigarettes or vaping comes without these negative health risks, and they are just inhaling the taste of cotton candy, grape or any other sweet flavors. It is known that almost all flavored tobacco products contain nicotine, including e-cigarettes. No amount of nicotine is s afe for our youth. Nicotine is harmful to the development of the adolescent brain. Research suggests that nicotine exposure in adolescents interferes with brain maturation and can have long-term effects on development, cognitive ability, mental health, and even personality. Ms. Barb Krovitz Neren, 1860 Eagle Ridge Drive, has been a youth and parenting advocate for more than 35 years, working with youth, adolescents, and parents. She coaches parents of teens and young adults who are chemically dependent and have mental health challenges. Four years ago she did research by interviewing 300 recovering teens and young adults. She asked them what they would do different if they were parents. 99% of the kids she surveyed shared with her that they wanted a relationship with their parents and need them to be in charge. Addiction affects the whole family. She said that when one hears the word ‘addiction’ they often think of heroin and opiates, but t here are many other drugs. Tobacco is one of the most heavily used addictive products in the United States. Nearly all smokers begin using nicotine before the age of 21. The younger that someone is when they start using tobacco, the more likely that they wi ll become addicted. Studies have sho wn that tobacco use can lead teens to more substantial drug and alcohol abuse and addiction. page 7 She echoed the previous statement that nicotine is dangerous to the teens’ forming brains. Even more disturbing is that youth tobacco use in Minnesota rose for the first time in 17 years. More t han one in four Minnesota high school students use tobacco products. Tobacco products play a key role in infecting new users, particularly kids. Education and information alone cannot prevent youth from using tobacco as that is only one part of the puzzle. Public policy is a key aspect of preventing young people from starting down the path of addiction. Adopting this regulation will minimize the availability and accessibility of tobacco to youth and help prevent a lifetime of addiction. She urged the Council to adopt the proposed ordinance to prohibit retail sales of flavored tobacco products. Brittany, a student at Henry Sibley High School, asked the Council to please vote to take flavored tobacco products out of stores in Mendota Heights. She sees her peers use e-cigs and vape. Almost every day, kids are vaping in the bathrooms at school. It smells like cotton candy and strawberries. Other kids post videos of themselves smoking or vaping, which they do to fit in. What they do not realize is that one smoke or vape of these tempting products could lead to addiction. This ordinance would make a positive impact on the school and help her peers and future generations from becoming addicted. Asa, a student at Henry Sibley High School and a member of ALMAS, expressed her appreciation to the city for allowing the ALMAS group to attend. She knows that many of her friends think that vaping is safer than smoking because of the flavors; however, these products contain nicotine, which is highly addictive. These products have become popular in her school. She was very happy to see that Mendota Heights can take action to keep flavored tobacco out of the hands of kids. Mr. Robert Hansen, a teacher at Henry Sibley High School and coordinator of ALMAS, stated that as a teacher at Henry Sibley, he polled the kids in his class regarding vaping and e-cigarettes. All of them know someone in school who is vaping in school and outside of school. There have been kids caught vaping multiple times. There are consequences and they are still being caught. That is what addiction is. If children are addicted, then that is all they think about in class – not the subject being taught . As a parent, his son was in the video shared with the Council at the March 20th meeting, about flavo red tobacco. After they were done with making the video, his youngest son saw a little bottle of e-cigarette juice in his favorite ice cream flavor – he wanted to taste it. He knew it was nicotine but he still wanted to taste it. That is the reality kids are facing when they see the flavors and they are able to get these products. He expressed his appreciation to the Council for taking a look at this problem and for considering the passing of this ordinance. Councilor Miller expressed his appreciation to Councilor Paper for bringing in the ALMAS group initially and spearheading this. He said that this is the right thing to do and is long overdue. The Council has an opportunity here to stop this before kids ever have an opportunity to try it. While nothing is completely failsafe or kid-proof, this decision tonight can go a long way to help mitigate the opportunities and access to flavored tobacco. He expressed his excitement in voting in favor of this ordinance. Councilor Petschel stated that she believes the Council has had a lesson in civics over the last few months. The Council has received an example of a grass roots movement that began when Mr. Hansen and his class were so articulate. She said that she has received more letters and phone calls regarding page 8 this subject than any other since she has been on the Council. It has been positive and constructive. The students and members of ALMAS should be very proud of themselves. Councilor Paper noted that when he first had a discussion about this, he had no knowledge of flavored tobaccos. He was stunned by what is available. He does not know of any adult that smokes grape flavored cigars – it is not what his peer group does. He has received at least 46 letters and emails in support of this resolution. This is something that is very impactful to the entire community. Councilor Duggan congratulated everyone for bringing this to the Council. He stated that if ALMAS want s to make a bigger impact, they should walk in the 5K Walk/Run on June 2nd, wearing their bright green t -shirts. He also invited Town Square Television to televise the event. He also encouraged the city to work with the surrounding communities to prevent the sale of these types of tobacco products to persons under 18 years of age. He suggested the Council look at increasing the age limit to 21. Mayor Garlock personally thanked everyone who sent him messages and letters. He knows the city is doing the right thing here. Councilor Duggan referenced the following sections of the proposed ordinance and made editing suggestions: Section 3-2-1: reads “. . . marketing and public health research and tobacco industry documents reveal that tobacco companies have used fruit, candy, and alcohol flavors as a way to target persons under 18 years of age and that the presence of flavors . . .” asked if it shouldn’t read “. . . presence of all flavors. .” Councilor Paper replied that they had discussed this and did not want to include menthol. Ms. Elyse Less, representing Tobacco Free Alliance, replied that her group worked with City Council, looked at best practices from the Public Health Law Center, and looked at where the city was with flavors versus menthol. The problem sometimes with menthol is that the tobacco industry may try to intimidate small communities with threatening letters. The Council decided to start with flavors at this point . Section 3-2-1: reads “. . .persons under 18 years of age and adult tobacco users to quit; and because studies, which the city hereby accepts and adopts, . . .”, asked if the word because needed to be there. He also asked about adding the word “. . .illegal use to tobacco . . .”. Councilor Petschel made the observation that the Council worked with the Tobacco Free Alliance and with City Attorney Tom Lehmann to write this proposed ordinance. She was loath to change the wording because everything in there is best practices, best wording, and has been reviewed thoroughly. She understood Councilor Duggan’s wish to have it be perfect; but she wanted it to be able to withstand legal challenges and believed that is why it was written that way; to make it more or less bulletproof. Section 3-2-2: reads “Compliance checks shall involve the use of persons under 18 years of age as authorized by this chapter. Compliance checks shall also mean the use of persons. . .”; he believed that this should read “. . . shall also include. . .” City Attorney Tom Lehmann replied that he was not one to quibble over the language. He does not know that it does mean include, but that it does mean the use of those persons under 18 years of age who attempt to purchase tobacco. It is not only doing a compliance check for the sale, but also for those who attempt. So it is using the same language – they really are checking two things. The language included is pretty standard and is a boiler plate for what other municipalities have adopted. He looked at the ordinance beforehand and was comfortable with the language as presented. page 9 Section 3-2-2: RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT: reads “Any place of business where tobacco, tobacco products, . . . The phrase shall include, but not be limited to, grocery stores, convenience stores, restaurants, and drugstores.” He suggested adding ‘bars’ to the list. Attorney Lehmann replied that the way this is phrased - “. . .shall include, but not be limited to. . .” He would say that this language specifically is used by the League of Minnesota Cities in their sample for ordinance. It is also contained in a lot of municipalities that regulate this type of activity. Section 3-2-3 F: reads “All licenses issued under this section shall be valid only on the premises for which the license was issued and only for the person to whom the license was issued.” He suggested this include ‘or employee’. Attorney Lehmann replied that he believed all city licenses to be issued to an individual and, as such, most legal representatives would not even qualify for a license. He did not know of any legal representative that would take on the responsibility of applying for a license on behalf of their c lient. This is consistent with how all of the other licenses are held and issued within the city. Section 3-2-6 B: reads “No person shall sell or offer for sale any flavored product in any retail establishment as defined in section 3-2-2 of this chapter.” He suggested this read flavored tobacco product. Attorney Lehmann replied that this is defined but also becomes that some of this is not necessarily tobacco all of the time. It may be a vaporizing of nicotine, which may not be defined as tobacco. Ms. Less added that at the beginning of the ordinance, there is a definition of flavored product that encompasses all of the different types of tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, and it excludes menthol. One would want to use the term ‘flavored product’ because that is the definition given – adding the word tobacco changes it . Section 3-2-7: reads “. . .shall either be stored behind a counter or other area not freely accessible to customers or in a case or other storage unit . . .” He asked if this shouldn’t read display case. Attorney Lehmann replied that the issue may be – display case may refer to a specific type and it may not be on display – it may be in a case so they are leaving it broad enough to include anything. Section 3-2-11: reads “Upon discovery of a suspected violation . . .” but then the next sentence reads “. . . a written notice of the civil violation”. Attorney Lehmann replied that either way – the city clerk will put in the notice what has been identified by the police department and it would ultimately be up to the City Council as they have the final say as to whether or not it was a violation. Maybe it could be a ‘written notice of the alleged civil violation’ would be sufficient. If that word was not included, Attorney Lehmann believed it would still be sufficient. The whole idea behind due process is notice and an opportunity to be heard. This is giving them notice of what the violation is and then also letting them know that if they do not agree they can request a hearing in front of the City Council. Mayor Garlock agreed that it was fine as written. Councilor Miller moved to adopt ORDINANCE 522 AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 3-2 TOBACCO SALES as presented and approve the summary publication. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 B) SUMP PUMP INSPECTION PROGRAM DISCUSSION Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that staff was seeking direction on the continuation of the sump pump inspection program. Last year, staff inspected approximately half of the homes in Mendota page 10 Heights for their sump pump connections. Of the 2,000 homes that were inspected, approximately 222 are currently labeled as non-compliant. However, 161 of those 222 did not respond to the notices that were sent out. So approximately 45 homes were verified as non-compliant. He said that t he consultant that did the work in 2017 has provided a quote of $217,580 to complete the remaining residential property inspections. The initial contract was under budget by approximately $79,850. The city would be looking at an additional $110,098 to complete all residential properties. He said that City staff had expected higher results through this inspection process. One positive note is that the city recently received the estimated rates for 2019 from the Met Council service. They showed that the flows in 2017 were reduced by 15 million gallons, or approximately 1% of the flow has been reduced. Staff asked the Council to discuss the following options and then provide direction to staff: Option 1: complete the remaining residential home inspections and instill the $75 surcharge per quarter to the non-compliant homes. The issue staff sees with that is that only half of the homes have been inspected and so would be imposing a fee that would not be equal throughout all residential properties. Option 2: put some of the money from the water fund into some additional lining projects. Currently, the Met Council has a grant program. All of the work the city completes between now and October 2019 is eligible for this grant program. Councilor Petschel stated she was delighted to see the flow rate decrease, no matter the reason. Her inclination would be to invest the money in additional lining work to gain the grant money. At the same time, as the city is getting into more care and concern for the environment, she would like legal sump pump connections to be as much a part of the natural resources plan as buckthorn removal is. Councilor Miller stated that he suspected the lower flow to be an amalgamation of all of those things; sump pump inspections and dryer weather. He asked if the heavy fines imposed by the Met Council were accurate. Mr. Ruzek replied that Mendota Heights has not paid a fine to the Met Council. The Met Council informed the city – approximately 6 years ago – that the city was exceeding its flows and needed to either put this amount of money into the system every year or be fined this amount of money. The city chose to make improvements to its system versus paying the surcharge to the Met Council. Councilor Duggan asked about the large amounts of rain received. Mr. Ruzek replied that 2014 – 2017 is the wettest three-year period on record. Councilor Duggan stated that he supports the idea of continuing the lining of pipes. Councilor Petschel asked if the lining of pipes is a ‘best practice’. Mr. Ruzek replied that the city has been maintaining its systems quite well for the last decade. It is economical because there is no need for surface restoration as far as streets, sod, and yards. However, the cost is equivalent to installing new pipe. Mayor Garlock concurred with the comments made by the Councilors. The money should be spent on the growing problems. He also saw no reason to impose the $75 non-compliant surcharge at this time. page 11 Councilor Paper asked for confirmation that the grant money is for pipe lining. Mr. Ruzek replied that the grant money could be used for a number of things. If the city choses to do a study, 25% of what the city pays for that study could be credited towards that grant; 50% of lining costs are credited towards that grant; and 100% replacement costs can be put towards the grant. Different activities are only worth a certain amount towards the grant. Councilor Paper continued, saying that the unfortunate thing is that many residents have spent money to bring their sump pumps into compliance because the city told them they were going to be inspected. Now the city is contemplating not inspecting the remaining half of the residents. Mr. Ruzek replied that the City could complete the sump pump inspections in the future. Councilor Petschel stated that she understood the point Co uncilor Paper was making; however, the City would not be abandoning inspections but putting the inspections on hold to divert some resources to lining of the pipes. Councilor Paper asked if there was data available on the age of the homes yet to be inspected. Mr. Ruzek replied that he did not have that information readily available. Councilor Petschel noted that the interceptor is a big project and if the city could get some grant money for that – that would be a benefit to all residents. Councilor Duggan moved to suspend the sump pump inspections program for now, and that the funds for that program be dedicated towards additional sewer lining projects. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 C) CHANGE TO HALLOWEEN BONFIRE City Administrator Mark McNeill explained that the city has had a Halloween Bonfire tradition; one that the residents look forward to and enjoy each year. However, it now may be impacted due to development in the area. The new Gemini Medical building will be occupied this summer and is located across the street from the burn site. The Reserve apartment building, located less than a block away, will soon be occupied. In the past, Mendota Heights’ residents have been allowed to bring brush to the site as fuel fo r the fire. The brush is sometimes green and wet and has a tendency to produce significant clouds of smoke. If the d esire is to continue a bonfire and provide for one that is less impactful on the neighborhood, Mr. McNeill suggested a company in our city that generates a significant number of oak pallets. They could be used as fuel for the bonfire. It was his understanding that oak burns with a cleaner and hotter fire. The downside is that there are people that count on the Halloween Bonfire as a way to dispose of their brush. Councilor Duggan asked if the public works department had sufficient space to store the pallets. Administrator McNeill replied that it would be a combination of indoors and outdoors storage. As the time for the bonfire got closer, they could cover the outside pallets and let them dry out. Councilor Duggan wished to do everything possible to preserve the life of the bonfire event. page 12 Councilor Miller noted that the cleanup with the oak pallets for fuel would be easier since they burn more cleanly. Councilor Duggan noted that Gertens would accept brush from the residents. Council Petschel said that Gertens is the designated Dakota County place to accept brush – for a small fee. Mayor Garlock agreed that this would be a good first step in the evaluation of the bonfire. Councilor Duggan moved to authorize staff to collect the oak pallets for use as fuel in the annual Halloween Bonfire and to inform the public on alternatives to dispose of their brush. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 D) CHANGE OF COUNCIL MEETING DATE FROM JULY 3, 2018 TO JULY 2, 2018 City Administrator Mark McNeill noted that Independence Day is on a Wednesday and asked the Council if they would like to change their regular meeting date from July 3, 2018 to July 2, 2018. Councilor Duggan moved to change the City Council meeting date from July 3, 2018 to July 2, 2018. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that Clean-up Day was held on May 5th and t here were 195 cars that came through. They collected 7.5 tons of trash, which includ ed 40 bicycles, 18 tires, 27 mattresses, and 43 appliances. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Petschel recognized the Henry Sibley and the ALMAS group for the wonderful job they did putting things in motion for the Council to be able to pass Ordinance 522. She gave kudos to Jamie Jurkovich and the middle school at St. Thomas Academy for doing a major cleanup last weekend at Rogers Lake. It was noted by the Rogers Lake Homeowners Association as being pretty spectacular. Mayor Garlock noted the upcoming Officer Scott Patrick Memorial 5K Walk/Run scheduled for June 2, 2018. At last count , there were 463 participants signed up. The funds go to Special Olympics of Minnesota. Councilor Miller congratulated City Attorney Tom Lehmann on his recent appointment to the Minnesota Court system by Governor Dayton. He will be missed, and all wished him luck. He also reminded everyone of the meeting scheduled for Wednesday, May 16 for discussion on the Natural Resources Master Plan. He encouraged anyone interested in natural resources to attend. Councilor Paper congratulated ALMAS and Mr. Hansen for supporting the flavored tobacco ban and for bringing it to the attention of the Council. page 13 Councilor Duggan noted that June 2, 2018 is the traditional celebration of the Mendota Heights Parks. He encouraged all to participate in as many events as possible. ADJOURN Councilor Paper moved to adjourn. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 8:51 p.m. ____________________________________ ATTEST: Neil Garlock Mayor _______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk page 14 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Joint City Council – Parks Recreation Commission Work Session Held May 16, 2018 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a work session of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at the City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm. Councilmembers Duggan, Miller, Paper, Petschel were present. Parks and Recreation Commission members present included Hinderscheid, Miller, Klepperich, Tupper, and Goldade. Commissioner Levine was absent. City staff present included Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Tim Benetti, Community Development Director; Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director; Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator; Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator; and Lorri Smith, City Cler k. NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN Fred Rozumalaki, Landscape Ecologist with Barr Engineering, presented on the purpose of a Natural Resources Master Plan and the different parts that would be included in the plan. He explained that managing natural resources would directly affect the health and wellness of the residents and attract people to Mendota Heights. A Natural Resources Master Plan would include defining the plan, natural threats, invasive species, and opportunities. The process of writing a master plan would take six to eight months. Also included in the plan would be a work plan and measurement tools to track progress. It was noted that grant money is hard to obtain for the development of a plan. Various questions from the audience were addressed. Mr. Rozumalaki noted that a Natural Resources Plan sh ould be reviewed and updated every ten years. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek address the best format for a Natural Resources Commission. He will continue to work with Barr Engineering and report back to the City Council with a proposal from Barr Engineering for creating a Natural Resources Master Plan for the City. DISCUSSION ON 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE SECTION Community Development Director Tim Benetti discussed a proposed natural resources section for the updated 2040 Comprehensive Plan. He noted that this section is not required, but it will be included in the update. The section will not be as detailed as a Master Plan and is meant not to be specific. It will identify goals and policies for natural resources. Mr. Benetti asked for volunteers from the residents present to work with him on finalizing this section of the Comprehensive Plan update. page 15 CITY EMERALD ASH BORER RESPONSE Mr. Ruzek reviewed the Ash Tree Management Policy of the City. He noted that boulevard trees that need to be removed will not be replaced due to the damage trees cause to streets, sidewalks, curbs, and underground utilities. The city is removing some of the trees on public property that have been infected with emerald ash borer. He further noted that some of the more prominent trees that are infected are being treated every two years. Mr. Ruzek discussed ways the City may be able to help residents with managing emerald ash borer on their properties by offering a tree sale, and by contracting with a tree service provider to provide a discounted rate for emerald ash borer treatment. The Council directed Mr. Ruzek to work with a tree service provider for a discounted rate for emerald ash borer treatments in which residents can participate. A possible tree sale will be considered in the fall. GREEN STEP CITIES PROGRAM DISCUSSION Mr. Ruzek presented the GreenStep program for discussion. It is a voluntary challenge and recognition program that provides a framework to help cities achieve their economic, environmental, and quality-of-life goals. The program is based on 29 best practices. These are tailored to Minnesota cities and focus on cost savings and energy use reduction. They also encourage civic innovation. The benefits of the GreenStep program include allowing a city to ‘brand’ itself as a green community, provide access to additional grant money, and provide a database for cities to share information with each other about sustainability initiatives. The Council determined that it would be best to develop the natural resources goals first, and then address participating in this program in the future. NATURAL RESOURCES STAFFING Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson addressed the staffing needs for natural resources and engineering. A proposed job description for a Natural Resources Technician was presented for review. It is proposed to hire one full-time staff person to handle natural resources for the city, while still allowing engineering staff some time to address the GIS needs for the city. The Council was comfortable with this proposal. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 pm. ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ____________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 16 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 24, 2018 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 24, 2018 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners John Mazzitello, Patrick Corbett, Michael Noonan, Mary Magnuson, Michael Toth, and Brian Petschel. Those absent: None Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of March 27, 2018 Minutes COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 27, 2018, AS PRESENTED. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Hearings A) PLANNING CASE #2018-10 WETLANDS PERMIT ELEVATION HOMES / ROB & SUEMI TUTTLE, 954 WAGON WHEEL TRAIL Working from materials provided to the Commission prior to the meeting, Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Elevation Homes had applied for a Wetlands Permit on behalf of Drrs. Rob and SueMi Tuttle. They desire to construct a new single-family dwelling with a three-car attached garage and an in-ground swimming pool on their property located at 954 Wagon Wheel Trail. This property is located on the north side of Rogers Lake and any work done within 100 feet of a water feature requires a Wetlands Permit. A public hearing notice on this application was published in the local newspaper and notice letters were mailed to all surrounding properties within 350-feet of the subject property. No comments or objections had been received prior to this meeting. Mr. Benetti then noted that the site is just over 4.0 acres with the buildable part consisting of just under 2.0 acres. The property currently has an 810 square foot single-story home which was built in 1939 and is in a dilapidated condition. This dwelling is scheduled for removal, as well as the existing and abandoned foundation and some old fencing. page 17 The planned setbacks for the site are 132-feet from Wagon Wheel Trail; 15-feet from the easterly property line; over 107-feet from the ordinary high water mark off Rogers Lake; and 106-feet from the westerly property line. As part of this plan, approximately 26 to 28 trees are to be removed with a number of trees being saved or protected; they also plan to install 10 new coniferous evergreens and 14 deciduous trees. The owners have no plans to alter the area near the lake. As recommended by staff, the plan shows an approximately 25-foot wetland buffer from the delineated wetland edges along Rogers Lake and the north wetland body. Mr. Benetti shared elevation images of the planned 5,500 square foot, two-story home; 1,193 square foot three-car attached garage, and swimming pool. This property would have direct access from Wagon Wheel Trail; water and sanitary sewer are available from the mains in the Wagon Wheel Trail right-of-way to the north; and the old septic system appears to have been removed many years ago. The Wagon Wheel Trail ROW was partially vacated under Resolution 2017-88, which conveyed a 30-foot wide strip of land over to this property owner. Mr. Benetti then reviewed the analysis of this property in the Comprehensive Plan; the City Code pertaining to Wetlands Systems; and the specific allowances, rules, and standards for a permit for the construction, alteration, or removal of any structure near these Wetlands Systems. He stated that his preliminary review revealed that this house is worth being built with the new grades being established, satisfactory to both engineering and zoning standards, and staff would verify or confirm these standards are met before a building permit is issued. Staff recommended approval of this Wetlands Permit application based on the Findings of Facts and with Conditions as noted in the staff report. Commissioner Magnuson asked about standards in the ordinance regarding swimming pools. With this pool being closest to Rogers Lake, she asked what the requirements are when it comes to draining the chlorinated water, backwashing the filtering system, and where do they go to ensure they are not being pumped into the wetland area or the buffer zone for Rogers Lake. Mr. Benetti deferred to Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek, who replied that the engineering department had not addressed that yet. Staff agreed to do more research on this item and should they discover that it would adversely impact the lake they would request that the owners connect those systems to the sanitary sewer system. Commissioner Toth, knowing that the previous home had been built in 1939, asked about any existing septic or sewer systems on the property and the removal of any potentially contaminated soil around the old system. Mr. Benetti replied that this is usually handled by the demolition permit or by the contractor. These are usually capped before any work is started. The new builder would access or examine the existing sewer line to determine if it is reusable or if they would need to lay a new one. Mr. Ruzek also noted that the existing home is connected to city sewer and water. Commissioner Toth then asked if there would be any problems with potentially old fuel tanks inside the existing home. Mr. Benetti replied that if there were any, they would be handled under the demolition permit. All remediation efforts need to be done as part of that demolition permit. page 18 Commissioner Mazzitello clarified that if the draining of the pool or grade is a problem with that water getting Rogers Lake that it would have to go to the storm sewer system, not to the sanitary sewer system. Any pool water going into the storm sewer system would go through treatment ponds before reaching Rogers Lake. Mr. Ruzek also noted that pool water going through the pipes evaporates its chlorine fairly quickly but he would do additional research on the subject. Commissioner Mazzitello suggested that extra measures be taken next to Rogers Lake during construction for sediment control. Commissioner Toth asked for a walkthrough of Condition 8, which reads “The Property Owner shall dedicate a 10-foot wide drainage and utility easement along the eastern property line within the vacated Rogers Avenue right-of-way; and a new permanent drainage and utility easements over the entire northerly wetland area, which should include the 25-foot no disturbance buffer strip from the delineated wetland edge, with said easements to be denoted on the Certificate of Survey or separate easement agreement submitted and recorded with Dakota County”, and how the drainage easement is going to be implemented; and the 25-foot setback on the wetlands side. Mr. Benetti, referring back to the site plan, noted that the city is requesting a 10-foot drainage and utility easement along the east side of the property; which used to be half of the ROW. The city is also asking for a permanent drainage and utility easement over the entire northerly wetland area – including the 25-foot no disturbance buffer. This way it is the city’s responsibility to maintain or take care of it, ensuring there are no adverse damages by the homeowner or anyone else to that area. Chair Field commented that in affect, the city is establishing control over that portion of the property next to Rogers Lake. Mr. Benetti confirmed. Commissioner Noonan asked if there was a condition that requires them to dedicate an easement off of the wetland. Chair Field referred him to the entirety of Condition 8. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Mr. Joe Crowley of Elevation Homes, 909 Washington Avenue North, noted that they are a division of Streeter and Associates, which has been building homes in the metropolitan area for over 35 years. This division is going on their 12th year. He expressed his appreciation to Mr. Ruzek and Mr. Benetti and to the City of Mendota Heights for being extremely welcoming. Couple of points he wished to make: • Swimming Pool – in terms of water discharge, many times now they are underwater closes; so very minimal water has to be discharged unless the liner is being replaced. Water being removed from the top of the pool cover can be directed wherever the city would like. • Septic and Well – there was a well and a septic on site. The septic has been abandoned and the well has been capped. They are currently hooked up to city sewer and water. They will scope the lines to determine their condition for continued use or replacement. page 19 Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING 2018-10 WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICATION, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The use of the subject parcel as a new single-family residential dwelling is consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan. 2. The planned development of the new dwelling, garage and swimming pool is considered a reasonable request, and is consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan. 3. The proposed residential home meets the required setbacks and other standards established under the R-1 One Family District. 4. The proposed garage and residential structure will be compliant with the conditions included in the City Code. 5. The proposed new residential home project and any related construction activities will not cause or create any negative impacts to the ecologically sensitive area of the wetlands or Rogers Lake area, due to the implementation of new wetland setback and unaltered shoreland areas; and the proximity and separation of the structure from said water features. AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The new single-family development, including the dwelling structure, garage and swimming pool shall comply with all standards and rules under Title 9 Building Regulations (ref. Ch. 2 Swimming Pools) and Title 12 Zoning of the City Code. 2. The new single-family development shall comply with or exceed the applicable standards and conditions noted under Title 12, Chapter 2 Wetlands Systems of City Code. 3. The Applicant/Owners shall submit a final grading plan, utility plan and a dimensioned site plan subject to review and approval by the Engineering Department and Planning Department as part of any building permit application. 4. All grading and construction activity will be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 5. A building permit must be approved prior to the commencement of any construction work; site construction shall occur only between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00 pm.; and full erosion/sedimentation measures shall be installed prior to commencement of work and maintained throughout the duration of the construction project. 6. No disturbance, grading work or any type of construction activities, besides installation of erosion control measures and/or limited vegetation removal, shall occur within the 25-ft. buffer strip along the northerly wetland feature; or within the buffer area defined between the wetland setback line and the OHWM line of Rogers Lake to the south; or on slopes 25% or greater. page 20 7. All new trees and wetland buffer areas shall be planted with approved native trees and pollinator friendly and wetland suitable plantings, as per the city’s Native Plant List. 8. The Property Owner shall dedicate a 10-foot wide drainage and utility easement along the eastern property line within the vacated Rogers Avenue right-of-way; and a new permanent drainage and utility easements over the entire northerly wetland area, which should include the 25-foot non-disturbance buffer strip from the delineated wetland edge, with said easements to be denoted on the Certificate of Survey or separate easement agreement submitted and recorded with Dakota County. 9. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an established, protected and permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its May 1, 2018 meeting. Announcements / Update on Developments Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that everything is progressing well on the new Gemini Medical site; and The Reserves of Mendota Heights (Plaza apartments) are doing well and wrapping up construction. Clean Up Day has been scheduled for Saturday, May 5, 2018 at Mendakota Park from 8:00 a.m. to Noon. Minnesota Public Radio (MPR) is hosting a large clean up event at Valley Park on Saturday, April 28, 2018 to do buckthorn busting and seed casts. They anticipate approximately 200 volunteers. Adjournment COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:22 P.M. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 page 21 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk SUBJECT: Renewal of Liquor Licenses COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to consider the renewal of the current liquor licenses. BACKGROUND The current liquor licenses will expire on June 30, 2018. Renewal applications have been received from all of the current licensees which include: Intoxicating Liquor and Sunday Liquor: • Felipe’s LLC dba Teresa’s Mexican Restaurant, 762 Highway 110 • Courtyard Management Corp. dba Courtyard by Marriott, 1352 Northland Drive Club Liquor and Sunday Liquor: • Mendakota Country Club, 2075 Mendakota Drive • Somerset Country Club, 1416 Dodd Road Wine licenses : • Mendo Restaurant Group, Inc., dba Mendoberri located at 730 Main Street • Windy City Pizza LLC dba Tommy Chicago’s Pizzeria located at 730 Main Street • King and I Thai, Corporation, dba King and I Thai, 760 Highway 110 Off-Sale Liquor licenses: • Twin City Beverage Inc. dba Mendota Liquor Barrel, 766 Hwy 110 On-Sale 3.2 percent Malt L iquor licenses: • Mendota Heights Par 3 located at 1695 Dodd Road, • Mendo Restaurant Group, Inc., dba Mendoberri located at 730 Main Street • Windy City Pizza LLC dba Tommy Chicago’s Pizzeria locat ed at 730 Main Street • King and I Thai Corporation, dba King and I Thai, 760 Highway 110 Off-Sale 3.2 percent Malt Liquor licenses: • Northern Tier Retail LLC dba SuperAmeri ca #4521 located at 1080 Highway 110 • Northern Tier Retail LLC dba SuperAmerica #4516 located at 1200 Mendota Heights Road page 22 Background investigations have been conducted on all of the licensees resulting in no negative findings on the above applicants. Outstanding documentation - All of the required documentation has been received, except for the following forms: Mendakota Country Club – Certificate of Insurance for new licensing period Tommy Chicago’s Pizzeria – Training of Employees Certification (training scheduled for June 24th ) If approved, the liquor licenses would be effective July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Council approve the issuance of the license renewals as listed above for the period of July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019, contingent upon the outstanding documentation being received. page 23 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Ordinance 523: No Parking on South Plaza Drive COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve Ordinance 523 amending City Code; Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3 prohibiting parking on the south side of South Plaza Drive (from Dodd Road to South Plaza Way), and extending the existing no parking zone on the north from 100 feet to 200 feet. BACKGROUND Mendota Heights has a proposed rehabilitation project planned for construction in 2018. Current no parking areas on South Plaza Drive are identified as: South Plaza Drive North Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 100 feet east South Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 200 feet east DISCUSSION Staff is proposing to widen South Plaza Drive two feet to the north from Dodd Road to 150 feet east to reconfigure the intersection. The proposed design would provide turn lanes for westbound vehicles entering Dodd Road. Due to the turn lanes being along the north curb line, the centerline between the travel lanes is proposed to be offset to the south. This offset will require parking to be prohibited within the striped portion of the road. The no parking zone will also need to be extended along the north curb. The proposed parking restriction is: South Plaza Drive North Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 200 feet east South Between Dodd Road and South Plaza Way BUDGET IMPACT The “No Parking” areas are required to be identified with street signs. Street signs will be installed with the 2018 street project. page 24 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the parking on South Plaza Drive be modified to extend the no parking zone along the north side from 100 feet to 200 feet and extend the no parking along the south side from 200 feet to the intersection of South Plaza Way. ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the city council pass a motion adopting Ordinance 523, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE”. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 25 City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 523 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota ordains as follows: The following streets are hereby added to Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3, Paragraph C of the City Code: Parking prohibited on Certain Streets: No person shall park or leave standing any motor vehicle on the following streets or portions thereof in the City: Street Side Location South Plaza Drive North Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 100 feet east South Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 200 feet east South Plaza Drive North Beginning at Dodd Road and extending 200 feet east South Between Dodd Road and South Plaza Way Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this 5th day of June, 2018. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk page 26 ÝÞßáÝÞßà759 311319422 260 892262003231821752409791 131 129 85127 111117122 121 11411311273 108105 103 1021006462 5851 925046 4327539 3 7 36 33 23224 23 2 2 902118 917 10612 1 0 5 5 20010611411211373108200111 85 100 11185 105 11311220085 64 750 750750780790800 759795791785779775771 765 2106 211221197847667722116 2075 2107 2107 790DODD RDCREEK AVE SOUTH PLAZA DR AZTEC LNDakota County GIS South Plaza DriveProposed Striping Layout May 15, 2018 City ofMendotaHeights0110 SCALE IN FEET page 27 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Ordinance 524: No Parking on Copperfield Drive COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve Ordinance 524 amending City Code; Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3 prohibiting parking on Copperfield Drive (beginning at Delaware Avenue and extending 150 feet west ). BACKGROUND The Traffic Safety Committee reviewed a complaint from a resident regarding cars parking in the striped portion of Copperfield drive near Delaware Avenue. DISCUSSION Staff mailed notices to the four properties within the striped area of Copperfield Drive and residents attended the Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) meeting on April 23, 2018. The recommendations from the TSC include prohibiting parking from Delaware Avenue extending 150 feet west. To further enhance the restricted parking area, fog lines are proposed to be striped. BUDGET IMPACT The “No Parking” areas are required to be identified with street signs. Public Works would need to purchase and install 4 signs at approximately $150 each (two posts, sign, and hardware). The striping can be added with the 2018 striping project which is funded through the street budget. RECOMMENDATION The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) recommends that parking on Copperfield Drive be prohibited from Delaware Avenue extending 150 feet west. ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the city council pass a motion adopting Ordinance 524, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE”. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 28 City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 524 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota ordains as follows: The following streets are hereby added to Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3, Paragraph C of the City Code: Parking prohibited on Certain Streets: No person shall park or leave standing any motor vehicle on the following streets or portions thereof in the City: Street Side Location Copperfield Drive Either Beginning at Delaware Avenue and extending 150 feet west Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this 15th day of May, 2018. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk page 29 257167160 9 8 2162978 167626 123538 339 15 14 11 1076 1 2345 2350 2349 2341 2337 2344 2345 DELAWARE AVECOPPERF IE LD DR Dakota County GIS Copperfield DriveNo Parking zone City ofMendotaHeights050 SCALE IN FEET GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights. Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation. 5/8/2018 page 30 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Ordinance 525: Seasonal Restrictions and Weight Limits COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve Ordinance 525 amending City Code; Title 6, Chapter 4, Section 3 revising seasonal restrictions and weight limits. BACKGROUND The current seasonal restrictions and weight limits identified in city code were adopted in 1981 and are out of date. Staff receives a number of calls every spring regarding these restrictions. DISCUSSION Proposed changes to the season restrictions and weight limits includes: • Change start date from March 1 to March 15 • Change end date from May 25 to May 1 • Change weight limit from 4 ton (8,000lb) Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) to per axle. • Add section giving city staff authority to further place restrictions on a failing street BUDGET IMPACT The proposed changes should result in a reduction of staff time in issuing no fee exemption permits and phone calls. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the proposed seasonal restrictions and weight limits be adopted. ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the city council pass a motion adopting Ordinance 525, “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE”. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 31 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 525 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3 OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, DAKOTA COUNTY, CONCERNING SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS AND WEIGHT LIMITS The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, does hereby ordain: Title 6-4-3 is hereby amended as follows: 6-4-3: SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS AND WEIGHT LIMITS ESTABLISHED: A. Except where other restrictions are imposed as provided in section 6-4-2 of this chapter, no person, firm or corporation shall operate any vehicle or combination of vehicles upon any street, road or highway under the jurisdiction of the city during the period between March 1 15 and May 25 1 of each year, where the gross weight of said vehicle together with the load thereon exceeds eight thousand (8,000) pounds per axle. (1981 Code 1105 § 1) B. The City Engineer may prohibit the operation of vehicles on streets or impose further restrictions as to the weight of vehicles to be operated on streets, when streets by reason of deterioration, rain, snow or other climatic condition will be seriously damaged or destroyed unless the use of vehicles thereon is prohibited or the permissible weights therein are reduced. This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication. Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this fift h day of June, 2018. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST ___________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 32 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Rainbow Treecare – Agreement for Professional Services Contract COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to authorize an agreement with Rainbow Treecare to provide discounted Emerald Ash Borer Treatments for City residents and businesses. BACKGROUND In the spring of 2015, the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) was discovered in Mendota Heights. Dakota County had already been on the quarantine list from the Department of Agriculture (MDA) since 2013 when the EAB was discovered in Lebanon Hills Regional Park in Eagan. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources conducted a city tree survey in 2010. The inventory includes trees that are within maintained (mowed) areas of the city (results attached). Currently there are approximately 8,600 ash trees in Mendota Heights which is the 4th highest concentration of tree species (8.8 percent). The Mendota Heights tree survey lists 682 Ash trees in maintained public right-of-way and parks. This topic was discussed at the May 15th Natural Resources workshop. The ideal time to administer EAB treatments is June 1 to September 30th. That tmeframe leaves no time to seek formal Request for Proposals. However, staff was able to contact Rainbow Treecare to seek a rate that could be offered to City residents for 2018. Rainbow has provided competitive rates for City-owned ash trees in the past, and because Rainbow serves several neighboring communities, there might also be an economy of scale in having it available to treat trees in Mendota Heights. If competitive rates are desired, it is recommended that that be done for the 2019 season. DISCUSSION Rainbow Treecare is proposing to provide chemical injection treatments to the City and residents for treatment of Ash trees. Rainbow will mail residents a flyer promoting ash tree treatments, residents will then contact Rainbow for an inspection and to receive a quote, the city will not be a party to private treatments. The bulk treatment cost to private ash trees is $5.75 per caliber inch. page 33 Rainbow is also proposing to provide treatment of city owned ash trees for $3.90 per caliber inch. This price is less than the city costs of treating ourselves. Residents or the city can choose to treat boulevard trees. If the city asks for this service it will be at the city rate, if residents request this service it will be at the private rate. Treatments are expected to last for two years. BUDGET IMPACT Mendota Heights will charge treatment costs for city owned trees to the tree removal budget for public works according to the city purchasing policy. The discounted rate being offered to residents’ city wide is due to bulk treatments (economies of scale) and is not subsidized by the city. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to execute the professional services contract with Rainbow Treecare for EAB treatments. ACTION REQUIRED If Council wishes to act on the staff recommendation, pass a motion authorizing staff to execute the professional services agreement with Rainbow Treecare. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 34 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is made effective _____________ 2018 by and between the City of Mendota Heights, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118 (the "City") and Rainbow Tree Company (the "Contractor") whose business address is 11571 K-Tel Drive Minnetonka, MN 55343. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The purpose of this agreement is to set forth terms and conditions for the provision of certain professional tree care services by the Contractor to residents and property owners within the City, and to the City. The City and the Contractor agree as follows: 1. Contractor's Services. The Contractor agrees to provide professional tree care services as described in Attachment A—Scope of Services and made a part of this Agreement ("the Work") at the costs set forth on Attachments B and C. If there is any conflict between the language of this document and the language of Attachment A, the language of this document prevails. 2. Project Manager and Staffing. The Contractor has designated Jeff Hafner to be the project superintendent for the Work. This person may be assisted by other staff members as necessary to facilitate the completion of the Work in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The Contractor may not remove or replace the designated project superintendent without the City's prior approval. 3. Time for Performance of Services. The Contractor must perform the Work within the timeframe set forth in the attached Scope of Services. If Contractor is delayed in performance due to any cause beyond its reasonable control, such as strikes, riots, fires, acts of God, governmental actions, actions of a third party, or actions or inactions of City, the time for performance will be extended by the period of time lost by reason of the delay. 4. Compensation for Services. Contractor shall be paid for the Work in the manner and at the costs described in Attachments B, C and D, which are made a part of this Agreement. A change in the Scope of Services that may increase the compensation due to Contractor will not be effective unless the City has given prior written approval. 5. Method of Payment. The Contractor must submit an itemized invoice for Work provided to the owner of the property on which the services are provided. Invoices submitted for Work provided to the City will be paid in the same manner as other invoices submitted to the City. The Contractor must verify all statements submitted to the City for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. page 35 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services 6. Audit Disclosure. The Contractor must allow the City or its duly authorized agents reasonable access to the Contractor's books and records that are pertinent to all Work provided to the City under this Agreement, including books and records of any approved subcontractors, for six years after the effective date of this Agreement. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or assembled by, the Contractor and its subcontractors under this Agreement which the City requests to be kept confidential must not be made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval. 7. Data Privacy and Security. The Contractor will take all reasonable and prudent measures to ensure the security of all data that it handles in connection with the Work. The Contractor agrees to comply with the applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and all other applicable state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. The Contractor must immediately report to the City any requests from third parties for information relating to this Agreement. The City agrees to promptly respond to inquiries from the Contractor concerning data requests. The Contractor agrees to hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from any claims resulting from the Contractor's unlawful disclosure or use of data protected under state and federal laws. 8. Document Ownership. All finished or unfinished documents, data, and reports prepared by the Contractor related to Work for the City will become the property of the City upon termination of this Agreement, but Contractor may retain copies of such documents as records of the Work provided. Except to the extent that Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 limits the City's liability, the City agrees to defend and indemnify the Contractor for any claims or losses resulting from the City's use of such documents not contemplated by the parties at the time of the preparation. 9. Term. The term of this Agreement is from the Effective Date through October 30, 2018, the date of signature by the parties notwithstanding. This Agreement may be extended upon the written mutual consent of the parties for such additional period as they deem appropriate, and upon the terms and conditions as stated in this Agreement. 10. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party by thirty days advance written notice delivered to the other party at the address written above. Upon termination under this provision if there is no fault of the Contractor, the Contractor will be paid for Work rendered and reimbursable expenses hereunder through the effective date of termination. If however, the City terminates the Agreement because the Contractor has failed to perform in accordance with this Agreement, no further payment will be made to the Contractor, and the City may retain another Contractor to undertake or complete the Work. 11. Subcontractor. The Contractor may not enter into subcontracts for Work provided in this Agreement without the express prior written consent of the City. The Contractor agrees to pay any subcontractor within ten days of the Contractor's receipt of payment from the City page 36 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Contractor must pay interest of 1.5% per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10. For any unpaid balance of less than $100, the Contractor must pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Contractor must be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney's fees, incurred in bringing the action. This paragraph is inserted in this Agreement pursuant to Minn. Stat. §471.425, Subd. 4a. 12. Independent Contractor. At all times and for all purposes under this Agreement, the Contractor is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. No statement in this Agreement may be construed to find the Contractor an employee of the City. 13. Assignment. Neither party may assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other party. 14. Services not Provided For. No claim for services furnished by the Contractor not specifically provided for in this Agreement will be honored by the City or its residents. 15. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, that decision will not affect the remaining provisions of the Agreement. 16. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained in this Agreement. This Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the same subject matter. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement will be valid only when expressed in writing and signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided in this Agreement. The residents and property owners of the City of Mendota Heights who are provided Work under the terms of this Agreement are third party beneficiaries and shall have all of the rights afforded to the City hereunder related to such Work. 17. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services under this Agreement, the Contractor must abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations pertaining to the provision of services to be provided. Any violation constitutes a material breach of this Agreement and entitles the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. 18. Equal Opportunity. The contractor agrees during the life of this contract not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, familial status, disability, sexual orientation, or age. This contract may be cancelled or terminated by the City, and all money due or to become due hereunder may be forfeited, for a second or subsequent violation of the terms and conditions of this paragraph. The Contractor must page 37 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services post in places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause and stating that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment. The Contractor must incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. 19. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement will not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 20. Indemnification. Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, insurers and employees harmless from any liability, claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission (including without limitation professional errors or omissions) of the Contractor, its agents, employees, or subcontractors in the performance of the Work and against all losses by reason of the failure of the Contractor fully to perform, in any respect, all obligations under this Agreement. 21. Insurance. During the term of this Agreement, Contractor must maintain the following insurance and furnish a certificate of insurance. The certificate must specifically state and verify that the contractor has the required insurance coverage: 1. Worker's Compensation Insurance a. Statutory Compensation Coverage b. Coverage B - Employers Liability with limits of not less than: $100,000 Bodily Injury by Disease per Employee $500,000 Bodily Injury by Disease Aggregate $100,000 Bodily Injury by Accident 2. Automobile Liability Insurance a. Minimum Limits of Liability: $1,000,000 - Per Occurrence- Bodily Injury and Property Damage Combined Single Limit. b. Coverages: X Owned Automobile X Non-owned Automobile X Hired Automobile 3. General Liability Insurance a. Minimum Limits of Liability: $1,000,000 - Per Occurrence $2,000,000 - Annual Aggregate $2,000,000 - Annual Aggregate applying to Products/Completed Operations page 38 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services b. Coverages: X Premises and Operations Bodily Injury and Property Damage X Personal &Advertising Injury X Blanket Contractual X Products and Completed Operations X Other; if applicable, please list: _____________________________ X City of Mendota Heights is named as Additional Insured The contractor must obtain insurance policy(ies) from insurance companies having an "AM Best" rating of A-(minus), Financial Size Category of VII or better, and be authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. An Umbrella or Excess Liability insurance policy may be used to supplement the Contractor's policy limits to satisfy the full policy limits required by the Contract. The contractor and authorized insurance representatives must maintain coverage in these amounts during the term of the contract and notify the City thirty (30) days before the required insurance is cancelled or changed. The insurance policies must name the City as an additional insured for the services provided under this Agreement and must provide that the Contractor's coverage will be the primary coverage in the event of a loss. A certificate of insurance on the City’s approved form that verifies the existence of these insurance coverages must be provided to the City before work under this Agreement is begun. Any policy deductibles or retention shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. No deductible greater than $50,000 is allowed on any required insurance policy without prior approval of the City’s attorney. 21. Governing Law. This Agreement will be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 22. Disputes. In an effort to resolve any conflicts that arise during or following the completion of the Work described in this Agreement, the dispute will first be submitted to non-binding mediation before a mutually agreed upon third party neutral, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. The cost of mediation will be shared equally by the parties. The parties may thereafter exercise any remedy available to them at law or in equity. 23. Attachments A. Scope of Services B. Ash Tree Injection Price Quote Form for City Property C. Ash Tree Injection Price Quote Form for Private Property and Unscheduled Public Property D. Example Outreach and Communication Materials E. EAB Treatment Guarantee F. Copy of Insurance Certificate page 39 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services SIGNATURES City of Mendota Heights: 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 By_________________________ (NAME/TITLE) By_________________________ (NAME/TITLE) Rainbow Treecare: 11571 K-Tel Drive Minnetonka, MN 55343 By: Name: Title: ______________________________________ page 40 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Attachment A—Scope of Services Rainbow Treecare Ash Tree Injection Services to the City of Mendota Heights Project Understanding The Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) threatens the lives of the thousands of ash trees located in the City of Mendota Heights (the “City”). As the City continues to prepare for this devastating infestation and infection, the City has agreed to enter a contract with Rainbow Tree Company (“Rainbow Treecare”) to provide tree injection services for ash trees (“ash injections” or the “Work”) within two separate areas: City- owned property and private property as specified herein (the “Project”). Project Goals • Protect ash trees from emerald ash borer infestation on City-owned properties, including parks. Treatments of City-owned trees will only begin after City staff makes the decision to begin treatments. • Provide a bulk discount program to all private property owners within the City of Mendota Heights to encourage residents to proactively inject their ash trees growing in order t o help preserve the City’s tree canopy and the accompanying economic and environmental benefits. Project Areas Area 1- City Property Ash trees on City property identified by the City as trees to receive injection treatments will begin after staff has made the decision to proceed with such Work. Unless City staff directs otherwise, all ash injections must be completed between June 1st and September 30th of each year, or before fall leaf color, whichever occurs sooner. All invoices will be remitted to the City of Mendota Heights and itemized by property name and unique number assigned to each tree page 41 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Area 2 – Private Property Homeowners will contact Rainbow Treecare directly to initiate an inspection, receive a quote and provide permission to perform the Work. The City will not be a party to any contract between the private owner and the proposer. Any agreement with the private owner and the Rainbow Treecare shall be subject to the following terms: o The contractor will inspect the ash trees on private property and determine whether they are appropriate for treatment o All ash tree injections must be completed between June 1st and September 30th of each year or before fall leaf color, whichever occurs sooner o Any variances in dates must be approved by the City Tree Inspector o All invoices will be remitted to the homeowner Area 3 – Unscheduled Public Property With approval from the City, residents may hire Rainbow Treecare to treat trees growing on public property (Right-of-way) which are not being treated by the City. In the event that such treatment is undertaken, this circumstance shall meet the requirements of Area 2. Project Period and Completion Dates The tree injection period will run from approximately June 1st—September 30th of each year. Rainbow Treecare may reserve the right to group tree injections based on geographic proximity within the injection period in order to achieve the efficiency needed to provide a discounted rate. Injections will occur on trees that have fully expanded leaves and have not reached fall senescence (fall leaf color). The city forester or person designated by the City Administrator reserves the right to extend or limit the time period based on seasonal conditions. Rainbow Treecare Qualifications Founded in 1976, Rainbow Treecare (RTC) has built a reputation on a solid commitment to the science of tree care and is uniquely positioned to offer the most comprehensive ash and elm protection services in the state. A pioneer of Dutch elm disease protection since 1976 and emerald ash borer protection since 2004, RTC has been working on a national level to develop cost-effective management solutions for EAB. RTC currently has more than 25,000 ash trees under protection with numerous government and public agency clients. With the most International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborists, Board-Certified Master Arborists, and members of the American Society of Consulting Arborists in Minnesota, no other company can offer the depth of skill, experience, and knowledge of tree pest and pathogen issues. Full-time GIS/GPS staff is available to manage tree inventory data and develop interactive maps of public and private trees, and our in-house art and marketing department can produce page 42 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services materials that widely and effectively communicate the Project details and assist with homeowner enrollment and involvement (examples attached). Indemnification Rainbow Treecare shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its employees, and its residents and property owners from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorney’s fees, arising out of or resulting from the performance of the work, provided that any such claim, damage, loss or expense is: (a) Attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease or death, or to injury to, or destruction of tangible property including the loss of use resulting there from, and (b) Caused in whole or in part by any negligent or wrongful act or omission of the Contractor, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them for whose acts any of them may be liable. The Project Team Contract Supervisor: Jeff Hafner, Certified Arborist (WE 6506-A) will act as the Contract Supervisor for this Project. Mr. Hafner, Rainbow Treecare Director of Municipal Consulting, has an Associate’s Degree in Commercial Horticulture and over 20 years’ experience in the horticulture industry. As a dedicated full-time employee focused on municipal and governmental forestry, Mr. Hafner is available to quickly respond to any issues that might arise throughout the contract period. Field Inspectors: Private property tree inspections will be primarily performed by P.J. Zobeck, ISA Certified Arborist #MN4509A. Technicians: All treatment technicians for this Project will be drawn from the production staff at RTC and will serve the citizens of Mendota Heights with a commitment to the highest level of customer service during the protection of trees located within the City. Equipment and Treatment Specifications Upon request, Rainbow Treecare will demonstrate proficiency with the injection equipment and knowledge of the products used to prevent EAB. Safety Standards: Rainbow Treecare will use work methods, safety procedures and personal protective equipment conforming to all ANSI and OSHA standards in performing the work under this contract and will supply any Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) to the City upon request. page 43 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Formulation Rates: It is the responsibility of Rainbow Treecare to follow all insecticide instructions. Any alterations in the formulations or equipment must be approved in advance by the city forester or person designated by the City Manager. In order to remain responsive to emerging research, the City reserves the right to request a change in formulation rates or application methods for the duration of the contract. Any such change and additional costs incurred would be agreed to in written correspondence between the Rainbow Treecare and the City. Ash Trees 1) All injections of ash trees must be with a liquid formulation of 4% Emamectin benzoate every two years. No substitutions of the formulations shall be allowed. 2) Rainbow Treecare shall inject Emamectin benzoate at the medium rate specified chart in Attachments (B) and (C). Determination of dosage shall be on the inches of diameter at breast height (DBH) within specific diameter classes listed in Attachment (B) and (C). 3) Injections must be made at the root flare to ensure the best distribution of the insecticide throughout the tree. Equipment: Rainbow Treecare will provide all necessary equipment to complete the Work under these specifications: 1) Equipment will remain in proper operating condition throughout the term of the Agreement and RTC is responsible for cleaning and providing upkeep to the injection system on a daily basis. Any maintenance issues or repairs are the sole responsibility of Rainbow Treecare. 2) Treatment technicians will use a high-helix drill bit and must replace the drill bits after every 100 DBH inches to maintain high efficiency. Drilled holes must be the size recommended by the injection equipment manufacturer. 3) Injection holes on ash must be drilled to a depth of approximately 1 inch below the bark to maximize delivery of Emamectin benzoate into ash trees. 4) Emamectin benzoate will be injected into ash trees using current industry standard injection systems that have efficacy data that supports their use, and follow all manufacturers’ specifications. 5) All injected trees must be tagged with the year of injection clearly indicated on the tag. Rainbow Treecare shall provide tags for all injected trees. The tags must be of a design and type that can persist on the tree for at least 3 years. page 44 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Guarantees and Warranties Rainbow Treecare offers the following written guarantees for the treatments of ash trees for emerald ash borer: Ash Trees Rainbow Treecare guarantees public and private ash trees in good condition that are treated by our technicians with a 4% liquid formulation of Emamectin Benzoate will not die from an emerald ash borer infestation for two years after the treatment date. This fully transferable money back guarantee refunds the cost of the most recent treatment for any treated trees that die due to an EAB infestation within two years of treatment date. Our arborists and technicians will evaluate each ash tree prior to injection and coordinate inspections with City staff to make sure protection is warranted. Rainbow Treecare reserves the right to treat private property ash trees in poor condition without the warranty. A full written description of Rainbow Treecare’s guaranties and warranties, including all criteria and eligibility, can be found in Attachment (D). This warranty applies to all healthy ash trees treated within the City, regardless of ownership (public or private). Rainbow Treecare’s guaranties and warranties shall survive any termination of the agreement between it and the City. Property Access and Notification Rainbow Treecare shall not enter private property without having previously obtained permission from the property owner. If Rainbow Treecare personnel desire to enter private property to access trees on a City owned property, it is their responsibility to notify the underlying property owner by knocking on the door at the time of the site visit or making a phone call ahead of time. Every attempt shall be made to contact the City Administrator or his designee to notify of the intent on accessing a City owned site through private property. Contract Supervision and Form of Order to Proceed The City shall refer residents interested in private property tree injections throughout the treatment period of June-September of each year in a format mutually agreed upon prior to the start of the Project. page 45 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Private Property Tree Inspections Prior to recommending treatment, all proposed ash trees shall be inspected by a qualified Rainbow Treecare employee. There may be instances when a tree is not in suitable health or condition to recommend treatment. Rainbow Treecare shall have an individual experienced in communicating tree information to the general public to explain such decisions. The person assigned to inspect the trees shall be, at the very minimum, a Certified Minnesota Tree Inspector, or have a degree in forestry, or be an ISA Certified Arborist. The individual shall be qualified to diagnose emerald ash borer; and have experience evaluating tree condition. Additionally, the individual shall be able to explain the benefits and risks of all ash protection options, with regard to pollinators, water quality, human health, and tree health and condition. Hours of Operations and Uniform The City reserves the right to set limits on hours of operation for Work on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. All weekend or holiday Work must be approved by the city administrator or his designee ahead of time. Certified applicators and GPS staff shall wear company uniform and/or a high visibility/safety vest at all times during field operations. Every vehicle associated with the Project shall display a company logo or name. page 46 Medium Rate (ml. product/tree) Tree Diameter (DBH) Class in inches Number of trees (A) Price Per Tree (B)* Price per inch (DBH) 55 10-12 1 42.90$ 3.90$ 70 13-15 1 54.60$ 3.90$ 85 16-18 1 66.30$ 3.90$ 100 19-21 1 78.00$ 3.90$ 115 22-24 1 89.70$ 3.90$ 130 25-27 1 101.40$ 3.90$ 145 28-30 1 113.10$ 3.90$ 160 31-33 1 124.80$ 3.90$ 175 34-36 1 136.50$ 3.90$ 190 37-39 1 148.20$ 3.90$ 205 40-42 1 159.90$ 3.90$ 220 43-45 1 171.60$ 3.90$ 235 46-48 1 183.30$ 3.90$ 250 49-51 1 195.00$ 3.90$ 265 52-54 1 206.70$ 3.90$ 280 55-57 1 218.40$ 3.90$ 295 58-60 1 230.10$ 3.90$ 310 61-63 1 241.80$ 3.90$ 325 64-66 1 253.50$ 3.90$ 340 67-69 1 265.20$ 3.90$ 355 70-72 1 276.90$ 3.90$ 3,357.90$ Authorized Signature: Date: Rainbow Treecare Tree Injection Services Quote to the City of Mendota Heights Attachment B- Ash Tree Injection Price Quote for Emamectin benzoate on City Property and in City Parks (Area 1) over two year time period at Medium Rate (5ml/tree diameter inch). Total Amount of Quote (Sum of Column B) (Number of trees x price per tree) Phone:952-252-0596 Name of Company:Rainbow Treecare Address: 11571 K-Tel Drive Minnetonka, MN 55343 5/17/2018 *Price reflects the middle DBH in each size class. All tree prices will be determined by price per inch (DBH) page 47 Medium Rate (ml. product/tree Tree Diameter (DBH) Class in inches Number of trees (A) Price Per Tree (B)* Price per inch (DBH) 55 10-12 1 63.25$ 5.75$ 70 13-15 1 80.50$ 5.75$ 85 16-18 1 97.75$ 5.75$ 100 19-21 1 115.00$ 5.75$ 115 22-24 1 132.25$ 5.75$ 130 25-27 1 149.50$ 5.75$ 145 28-30 1 166.75$ 5.75$ 160 31-33 1 184.00$ 5.75$ 175 34-36 1 201.25$ 5.75$ 190 37-39 1 218.50$ 5.75$ 205 40-42 1 235.75$ 5.75$ 220 43-45 1 253.00$ 5.75$ 235 46-48 1 270.25$ 5.75$ 250 49-51 1 287.50$ 5.75$ 265 52-54 1 304.75$ 5.75$ 280 55-57 1 322.00$ 5.75$ 295 58-60 1 339.25$ 5.75$ 310 61-63 1 356.50$ 5.75$ 325 64-66 1 373.75$ 5.75$ 340 67-69 1 391.00$ 5.75$ 355 70-72 1 408.25$ 5.75$ 4,950.75$ Authorized Signature: Date: Rainbow Treecare Tree Injection Services Quote to the City of Mendota Heights Attachment C- Ash Tree Injection Price Quote for Emamectin benzoate – Private Property (Area 2) and Unscheduled Public Property (Area 3) over two year time period at Medium Rate (5ml/tree diameter inch). Total Amount of Quote (Sum of Column B) (Number of trees x price per tree) Name of Company:Rainbow Treecare *Price reflects the middle DBH in each size class. All tree prices will be determined by price per inch (DBH) Phone:952-252-0596 Address: 11571 K-Tel Drive Minnetonka, MN 55343 5/17/2018 page 48 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Attachment D—Example Outreach and Communication Materials Draft Direct Mail Post Card Template #1 page 49 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Draft Direct Mail Post Card Template #2 page 50 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Draft Direct Mail Post Card Template #3 page 51 Rainbow Treecare Agreement for Professional Services Draft City EAB Flyer Template Example City Landing Page page 52 2016 Emerald Ash Borer Protection Guarantee Guaranteed to Prevent Death from Emerald Ash Borer Infestations Your ash tree will not die from an Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) infestation while under our guarantee. If your tree dies from an EAB infestation, you will be refunded your most recent EAB treatment cost(s). Tree Will Probably Be Attacked Trees protected from Emerald Ash Borer infestation will still be attacked. It is possible that up to 20% of the tree’s canopy may decline or dieback under heavy pressure. Proven Effective • Proven highly effective in University research to prevent death from EAB infestation. • Visual inspections are performed every 1-2 years. • Important to continue treatment until beetle is no longer a threat. Fact Sheet 952-922-3810 www.rainbowtreecare.com© Rainbow Treecare, All Rights Reserved V-016A Emerald Ash Borer Protection Guarantee Rainbow Tree Company Guarantees: • Your ash tree will not die from an Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) infestation while under our guarantee. If your ash tree dies from an EAB infestation while under guarantee, you will be refunded your most recent EAB treatment cost(s). • We will visually inspect your protected tree(s) every 1-2 years to examine for evidence of Emerald Ash Borer infestation. This inspection may take place at the time of re-treatment. We are available to look at your tree at any time should you be concerned about its condition. • Our trunk injected emamectin benzoate EAB guarantee will begin upon treatment and will last for two years from the date of treatment. The guarantee will not lapse if the re-treatment has been approved prior to the expiration of the two year warranty period and your account is in good standing. • You may elect to have us auto-renew your treatment(s) for your convenience and to make sure your trees remain protected. You will still be provided the cost of treatment and notified prior to the work being performed. For those choosing not to auto-renew their treatment – you will be contacted about re-treatment in the spring of the year your tree(s) are due for re-protection. • Trees protected from Emerald Ash Borer infestation will still be attacked by Emerald Ash Borer. It is possible that up to 20% of a tree’s canopy may decline or dieback under heavy pressure. Tree removal, routine pruning or deadwood removal caused by Emerald Ash Borer larvae is NOT covered under this guarantee. Important • This guarantee is fully transferable to a new property owner. • Auto-renewal ensures protection and guarantees are continuous. • Tree removal, routine pruning or deadwood removal from EAB in- festation is NOT COVERED under this guarantee. page 53 The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD CERTIFICATE HOLDER ©1988-2014 ACORD CORPORATION.All rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2014/01) AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE CANCELLATION DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE LOCJECT PRO-POLICY GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: OCCURCLAIMS-MADE COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY PREMISES (Ea occurrence)$DAMAGE TO RENTED EACH OCCURRENCE $ MED EXP (Any one person)$ PERSONAL &ADV INJURY $ GENERAL AGGREGATE $ PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ $RETENTIONDED CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR $ AGGREGATE $ EACH OCCURRENCE $UMBRELLA LIAB EXCESS LIAB DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) INSR LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF (MM/DD/YYYY) POLICY EXP (MM/DD/YYYY)LIMITS PER STATUTE OTH- ER E.L.EACH ACCIDENT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $ $ $ ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE If yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below (Mandatory in NH) OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y / N AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ANY AUTO ALL OWNED SCHEDULED HIRED AUTOS NON-OWNED AUTOS AUTOS AUTOS COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT BODILY INJURY (Per person) BODILY INJURY (Per accident) PROPERTY DAMAGE $ $ $ $ THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSD ADDL WVD SUBR N / A $ $ (Ea accident) (Per accident) OTHER: THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:REVISION NUMBER: INSURED PHONE (A/C, No, Ext): PRODUCER ADDRESS: E-MAIL FAX (A/C, No): CONTACT NAME: NAIC # INSURER A : INSURER B : INSURER C : INSURER D : INSURER E : INSURER F : INSURER(S)AFFORDING COVERAGE SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. INS025 (201401) 10/13/2017 J.A. Price Agency, Inc. 6640 Shady Oak Road, Suite 500 Eden Prairie MN 55344-6176 Jeanette Kraemer (952)944-8790 (952)944-0097 jeanette.kraemer@japrice.com Rainbow Tree Company 11571 K-Tel Drive Minnetonka MN 55343 Western National Mutual Ins Co 15377 Hanover Insurance Company 22292 Midwest Employers Casualty Company 23612 17-18 A X X X BI/PD Deductible 1,000 X CPP1059168 6/1/2017 6/1/2018 1,000,000 300,000 5,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 A X CPP1077206 6/1/2017 6/1/2018 1,000,000 A X X X 10,000 UMB1009638 6/1/2017 6/1/2018 3,000,000 3,000,000 B C N WHXA314095 (Other States)6/1/2017 6/1/2018 EWC009074 (MN)6/1/2017 6/1/2018 X 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Robert Blomster/JMK City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 jhafner@rainbowtreecare.co page 54 Additional Named Insureds Other Named Insureds OFAPPINF (02/2007)COPYRIGHT 2007, AMS SERVICES INC Rainbow Pest Experts, Inc. Rainbow Treecare Scientific Advancements, Inc. Additional Named Insured Additional Named Insured page 55 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Cooperative Construction Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the Highway 149 (Dodd Road) Rehabilitation Project COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this item is to provide an update to a Cooperative Construction Agreement with MNDOT, and to report on prices for work to be performed. BACKGROUND The Minnesota State Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is planning to rehabilitate State Trunk Highway 149 (Dodd Road) in 2018, which will impact city owned infrastructure in the State right -of-way. The City of Mendota Heights owns a sanitary sewer collection system located in State right-of-way, and is responsible for adjustments to a water main also located in the same right -of-way. The Highway 149 (Dodd Road) rehabilitation project is projected to require adjustments to 24 sanitary sewer manholes and 60 water valves. The adjustments are shown in the plans and identified on Schedule I of the agreement. City Council previously approved a Cooperative Construction Agreement with MnDOT for adjustments to those sanitary sewer and water main structures along Dodd Road (TH 149) in conjunction with the State rehabilitation project. MnDOT recently opened bids, and has updated the City of Mendota Heights regarding its financial share for this work. DISCUSSION The City has the option to perform these adjustments themselves or to independently contract for this work. The adjustment are outside of the scope of duties of public works staff and coordinating this work through a third party would be difficult. Staff is recommending that these structure be adjusted with the State project. MnDOT previously estimated a value of $500 for each manhole adjustment , and $250 for each water valve adjustment. The State is also charging an 8% (eight percent) fee for administration and construction management. Additional costs may be incurred if additional parts are needed. page 56 MnDOT has now opened bids; the unit price was decreased for each sanitary sewer manhole adjustment to $350 and each water valve adjustment remained at $250. Therefore, the total amount due for this work decreased from $29,160 to $25,272. BUDGET IMPACT The costs are proposed to be allocated to the respective utility fund budgets from the Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund and Water Utility Fund. Both funds have an adequate balance for this work. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that MnDOT continue to perform this work as part of the Dodd Road (TH 149) Rehabilitation Project. ACTION REQUIRED No action is required of Council as this is an update to a previously approve agreement. page 57 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Grading Permit for Orchard Heights COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve a grading permit for the Orchard Heights. BACKGROUND City Ordinance 14-1 requires that properties proposing any land disturbance activity in excess of 5,000 square feet apply for a grading permit if not part a separate approval process. The Orchard Height s Development is part of a city-approved development; however the developer is looking to start site grading prior to final approval of the development agreement. DISCUSSION City staff and the developer are currently working on finalizing a Developers Agreement for the Orchard Heights project. The property is also scheduled to close in early June. Once these remaining items are complete the developer will continue grading the site and installing the public utilities and proposed street. Reduced size plans are attached, full size plans are at city hall or a digital copy can be made available. BUDGET IMPACT The Mendota Heights fee schedule identifies a $200 fee for this activity to cover staff time in reviewing and inspecting the improvements. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the council approve the grading permit for Orchard Heights to begin grading operations on the site. ACTION REQUIRED If Council wishes to implement the staff recommendations, pass a motion authorizing staff to issue the Grading Permit for Orchard Heights. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 58 page 59 page 60 page 61 page 62 page 63 page 64 page 65 page 66 page 67 page 68 DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Approve Plans and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvement Project COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve the plans and specifications and authorize and advertisement for bid for the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvement Project. BACKGROUND The preparation of the feasibility report for the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvement Project, was authorized by the Mendota Heights City Council by adopting Resolution 2017-71 at the city council meeting held on September 5, 2017. The Minnesota Statute 429 process is required because the city council intends to assess a portion of the project. The feasibility report for the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvement project was accepted by the Mendota Heights City Council. The Council called for a Public Hearing on February 7, 2018 by adopting Resolution 2018-07 at the January 16, 2018, city council meeting. The recommendation in the feasibility report was to proceed with this project. The proposed streets to be rehabilitated are Avanti Drive, Bwana Court, Faro Lane, Summit Lane, Twin Circle Drive, Vail Drive, West Circle Court, Mendakota Drive, and South Plaza Drive. Based on our observations, as well as our pavement management system, a majority of these streets have deteriorated to the point where it is no longer cost effective to patch the street and rehabilitation is necessary. Council ordered the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvements at their February 7, 2018 meeting. Staff was directed to prepare plans and specifications for this street reconstruction project without including Mendakota Court. DISCUSSION Street Rehabilitation – Avanti Drive, Bwana Court, Faro Lane, Summit Lane, Twin Circle Drive, Vail Drive, and West Circle Court page 69 Proposed improvements for Avanti Drive, Bwana Court, Faro Lane, Summit Lane, Twin Circle Drive, Vail Drive, West Circle Court will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2.5” bituminous base course. It will also include a 1.5” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material, curb and gutter repair, and catch basin repair. Storm water improvements consist of adding additional catch basins and installing twelve rain gardens in this neighborhood. The street and trail approaches along Lexington Avenue will also be improved. Street Rehabilitation – Mendakota Court Proposed improvements for Mendakota Drive will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2.5” bituminous base course and a 1.5” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material, curb and gutter repair, storm sewer extension at the intersection of Dodd Road and ADA trail improvements at the park trails along the roadway. The intersection of Mendakota Drive & Mendakota Court is also proposed to be realigned. Street Rehabilitation – South Plaza Drive Proposed improvements for South Plaza Drive will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 3” bituminous base course and a 2” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material, adding curb around the cul-de-sac, widening the road two feet near the intersection with Dodd Road to allow for westbound right/left turn lanes. A small sidewalk is also proposed along the north boulevard near Dodd Road. BUDGET IMPACT The total estimated cost of the project is $1,121,148. PROJECT COSTS ITEM CONSTRUCTION INDIRECT TOTAL Total Project $1,121,148 $224,230 $1,345,378 Totals $1,121,148 $1,345,378 The Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvement Project is proposed to be financed by special assessments, municipal bonds, and utility funds. Funding sources and amounts are shown below: FUNDING SOURCES ITEM COST ESTIMATE ASSESSMENT MUNICIPAL BONDS UTILITY FUNDS Total Project $1,345,378 $550,816 $663,032 $131,530 Totals $1,345,378 $550,816 $663,032 $131,530 Street improvement projects are proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners. Pursuant to the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy adopted by the city council on June 16, 1992, the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvement Project is proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners as follows: • All units with a driveway located on a street in the project area in the single family home portion will be assessed as a street rehabilitation per the Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy using a unit assessment. • All units with frontage located on Mendakota Drive will be assessed as a street rehabilitation per the Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy using a frontage calculation. page 70 • All units with frontage located on South Plaza Drive will be assessed as a street rehabilitation per the Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy using a frontage calculation. • City costs include storm sewer and trails in addition to its share of the overall project. The city is also being assessed for its frontage of the fire department and Mendakota Court. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the council approve the plans and specifications for the Lexington Highlands & Mendakota Improvement Project, and authorize the advertisement for bids. ACTION REQUIRED If city council wishes to implement the staff recommendations, pass a motion adopting A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE LEXINGTON HIGHLANDS & MENDAKOTA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. This action requires a super majority vote, meaning a minimum of four votes in the affirmative. page 71 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2018-39 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE LEXINGTON HIGHLANDS & MENDAKOTA IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT #201706) WHEREAS, the Public Works Director reported that the proposed improvements and construction thereof were feasible, desirable, necessary, and cost effective, and further reported on the proposed costs of said improvements and construction thereof; and WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore directed the Public Works Director to proceed with the preparation of plans and specifications thereof; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for said improvements and have presented such plans and specifications to the City Council for approval. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED; by the Mendota Heights City Council as follows: 1. That the plans and specifications for said improvements be and they are hereby in all respects approved by the City. 2. That the Clerk with the aid and assistance of the Public Works Director be and is hereby, authorized and directed to advertise for bids for said improvements all in accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes, such as bids to be received at the City Hall of the City of Mendota Heights by 10:00 A.M., Wednesday, June 27, 2018, and at which time they will be publicly opened in the City Council Chambers of the City Hall by the Public Works Director, will then be tabulated, and will then be considered by the City Council at its next regular Council meeting. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this fifth day of June 2018. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST _________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 72 DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor and City Council City Administrator Mark McNeill FROM: Fire Chief Dave Dreelan SUBJECT: Fire Hose and Nozzle Replacement Comment INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to authorize the purchase of new hose and nozzles for the Fire Department. BACKGROUND The nozzles and fire hose that are currently being used by the Fire Department for interior firefighting need to be replaced. Our nozzles and fire hose are not able to deliver the appropriate gallons per minute that are needed for modern day fire ground operations. Over the last several months the department has been evaluating different types of nozzles and hose. In April, we concluded a nozzle and fire hose evaluation, and developed specifications bas ed on our needs. Three companies were sent a copy of our specification and were asked to provide a quotation for the new hose and nozzle s. Fire Safety USA was the lowest responsible bidder on the nozzles with a price of $10,000. Jefferson Fire Equipment was the lowest responsible bidder on the hose with a price of $6,868.77. BUDGET IMPACT There is currently $17,500 in the fire department budget for the purchase of the new hose and nozzles. RECOMMENDATION It is my recommendation that we move forward with the purchase of the nozzles from Fire Safety USA and the hose from Jefferson Fire Equipment. page 73 ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should authorize the purchase of new nozzles from Fire Safety USA in the amount of $10,000, and new hose from Jefferson Fire Equipment, for $6868.77 Dave Dreelan Fire Chief page 74 Request for City Council Action DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technician Job Description and Position Posting COMMENT: Introduction The Council is asked to approve the job description, set the pay grade and authorize staff to begin the recruitment process to fill the Natural Resources Technician position. Background During the joint City Council and Parks and Recreation Commission work session held on May 16, staff discussed the need for natural resources support and presented a draft Natural Resources Technician job description. The Natural Resources Technician will be responsible for performing technical work in a variety of areas including natural resources planning, administration, and implementation of programs relating to water resources, upland habitat management, wildlife management and forestry. The position will also perform general engineering technician duties including GIS work. The proposed Natural Resources Technician job description is attached. The proposed Natural Resources Technician position would combine previously identified and budgeted GIS/Engineering staffing needs into one position. Budget Impact The Natural Resources Technician is a full-time, benefitted position. The position is ranked at pay grade seven on the City’s Compensation Plan, which has a pay range of $52,584 to $64,640, annually. For hiring purposes, the position will be posted with a starting salary range of $52,584 to $58,301, which is step one to step four of pay grade seven. The 2018 budget included funding for a GIS/Engineering Technician. If approved, budgeted funds for the GIS/Engineering Technician would be used to, instead, fund the Natural Resources Technician position. page 75 Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Natural Resources Technician job description at pay grade seven of the City’s Compensation Plan and authorize staff to begin the recruitment process to fill the position. Requested Action If the City Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the Natural Resources Technician job description, the assigned pay grade and authorize staff to begin the recruitment process to fill the position. page 76 Position: Natural Resources Technician Department: Public Works FLSA Status: Non‐Exempt Reports To: Public Works Director General Definition of Work Performs skilled technical work in a variety of areas including natural resources planning, administration, and implementation of programs relating to water resources, upland habitat management, wildlife management and forestry; May also perform general engineering technician duties including GIS work. Work is performed under the limited supervision of the Public Works Director. Qualification Requirements To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential function satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Essential Functions 1. Assist with native prairie management work and planning, vegetation surveys and invasive species control. 2. Assist with the water resources including lake management efforts such as aquatic invasive species control, water quality monitoring, and lake level tracking. 3. Assist with implementation of the City's natural resources outreach and education efforts including developing and distributing educational materials, meeting with residents to address issues, speaking with neighborhood and school groups, and developing content for city communications. 4. Assist in the implementation of the City’s NPDES Phase II Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. 5. Manage multiple raingardens and native plant gardens, including weed control, mulching, and working with contractors. 6. Coordinate lake and wetland monitoring volunteer programs, such as the Citizen‐Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP) and the Wetland Health Evaluation Program (WHEP). Assist with other natural resources volunteer programs. 7. Implement the Emerald Ash Borer Management Plan, which includes assessing ash tree conditions, outreach efforts, managing the tree inventory database, and coordinating contract work for tree removals, treatments and planting. 8. Implement the Emerald Ash Borer Management Plan, including assessing ash tree conditions, outreach efforts, managing tree inventory database, and coordinating contract work for tree removals, treatments and planting. 9. Assist in writing and implementing grants for natural resources projects. Research grant opportunities, provide input for grant development, and assist in grant implementation and evaluation. 10. Respond to citizen complaints and requests for assistance with native plant landscaping, drainage, erosion control and pond/lake issues. 11. Assist with the ongoing maintenance of citywide Geographic Information System (GIS) data and utilize GIS software to develop, create, maintain, edit, update and analyze citywide GIS databases. 12. Perform other duties, as assigned. Knowledge, Skills and Abilities Ability to communicate and work effectively with the public, verbally and in writing. Knowledge of principles, theories and methods of GIS as applied to designing, planning and maintaining information files. Ability to work independently, determine priorities, and make appropriate decisions. Ability to perform research, assemble information and prepare reports and educational information. Ability and willingness to perform work outdoors in all weather conditions. Knowledge of standard office procedures, practices and equipment. Education and Experience Associates degree or higher in biology, engineering, natural resources management, horticulture, environmental studies or other natural resources related field; or equivalent combination of training and education to perform the work. Experience with Microsoft Office Suite products, ArcGIS, AutoCAD, and public relations. Experience in native plant identification, habitat management, water resources and wildlife management. page 77 Pending Approval: 06/2018 Special Requirements Valid MN State Driver's License Class D Physical Requirements Work requires the occasional exertion of up to 50 pounds of force; work regularly requires walking, speaking or hearing, using hands to finger, handle or feel, reaching with hands and arms and repetitive motions, frequently requires sitting, climbing or balancing and stooping, kneeling, crouching or crawling and occasionally requires standing, smelling, pushing or pulling and lifting; no special vision is required; vocal communication is required for expressing or exchanging ideas by means of the spoken word and conveying detailed or important instructions to others accurately, loudly or quickly; hearing is required to perceive information at normal spoken word levels and to receive detailed information through oral communications and/or to make fine distinctions in sound; work requires preparing and analyzing written or computer data, visual inspection involving small defects and/or small parts, use of measuring devices, assembly or fabrication of parts within arm’s length, operating machines, operating motor vehicles or equipment and observing general surroundings and activities. Environmental Conditions Work regularly requires exposure to outdoor weather conditions and occasionally requires exposure to wet, humid conditions (non‐ weather), working near moving mechanical parts, exposure to fumes or airborne particles and exposure to the risk of electrical shock; work is occasionally in a loud noise location (e.g. grounds maintenance, heavy traffic). page 78 page 79 page 80 page 81 page 82 page 83 page 84 page 85 page 86 page 87 page 88 page 89 page 90 page 91 page 92 page 93 page 94 page 95 To: Mayor and City Council From: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief Mark McNeill, City Administrator Subject: Fire Station Construction/Bond Issuance Date: June 5, 2018 COMMENT: INTRODUCTION: At its June 5th meeting, the City Council, the City Council will be asked to call for a Public Hearing to consider the issuance of City-issued General Obligation Capital Improvements Bonds, which would be used to finance a substantial remodeling of, and an addition to, the current Mendota Heights fire station. BACKGROUND: In December, the City Council hired CNH Architects to do concept plans and preliminary budgets for proposed improvements to the existing 1984-era fire station building. It would be a combination of an addition and a remodeling, so that the station could continue to operate while construction was taking place. On February 7th, the Council met at the Fire Station to review the preliminary plans and possible budget. The decision made at that time was to table any further consideration of this issue until after the results of the ISD 197 bond issue were known. That referendum was held May 8th, and was approved by School District voters. A review of the current status and an update of the financial impact was held with the City Council on May 30th. BOND ISSUANCE Discussed at the February meeting was the possible issuance of bonds to fund this project. State law allows for City Councils to follow a process to directly issue General Obligation Capital page 96 Improvements bonds for such improvements, without a referendum. For a description of this process, see the attached memorandum of May 30 from City Attorney Andy Pratt. It should be noted that in Mendota Heights, the 5% threshold would mean signatures of at least 401 voters. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City’s financial consultant, Ehlers and Associates, was asked to project what the impact of the issuance of the Fire Station General Obligation Capital Improvements Bonds would be on local tax payers, and to combine that with the approved impact of the ISD 197 referendum, and a proposed 5% levy increase to the City’s FY 2019 operating levy. Projections assumed a $6 million construction budget. The related issuance costs would bring the overall amount of the CIP bonds to be issued to the $6.125 million. Note that the information from the City Attorney calls for $6.3 million; however, that is the maximum, and can be reduced once actual costs are known. However, the costs cited in the notices can’t be increased, which is the reason for the “worst case” cost number. The preliminary information from Ehlers was reviewed by Council at the workshop on May 30th. At that time, it was projected that the fire bonds themselves would increase the City levy by 6.6%, or $91 annually on a Mendota Heights median-valued home of $356,000. This assumes a 15 year repayment. Should a 20 year bond term be used, the annual impact would be somewhat less—an increase of 5.5%, and adding instead about $70 annually. The approved school district taxes will add $138 per year, which is 18.5% increased on the school district portion of the property taxes. A 5% increase to the City’s 2019 operating levy increases by $70 annually. Note that 5% is being used for estimating purposes—the actual amount will be set by the City Council later this summer. It is important to note that taxpayers’ overall tax increase in this scenario is NOT the sum total of the each of the percent increases—6.6% + 5%+18.5%. As shown on the attached projections sheet from Ehlers, the overall increase in property taxes for 2019 would be 7.85%, for the median-valued home in Mendota Heights of $356,000. Overall, the City’s operating budget increase accounts for an overall increase in property taxes of about 1.8%; and the Fire Bonds would be an additional 2.4% Put another way, if all three increases are put in place, the monthly increase in property taxes would be about $26 per month. The Council should be aware that since the above estimates were made, interest rates have edged up slightly, and so the financial impacts would be slightly higher as well. page 97 Note that these numbers assume no increase in property values. While the overall rate typically goes up, the rate of increase in property taxes would proportionately go down, assuming that the same amount of taxes are to be generated. Finally, it should be made clear that these Ehler’s projections do not include operating levy increases for ISD 197, Dakota County, and any other special taxing jurisdictions. With those, it could increase the overall property tax rate increase to double digits. At the May 30th meeting, the City Council asked for variations of those projections, to include a redirection of the levy currently used to pay off the Par 3 Bonds which are otherwise due to expire in 2023 to this project; to retain a portion of the levy for the Par 3 Bonds to go to the Parks system; and 15 and 20 year terms for each of the above. The actual decision on how to structure the bonds, should this proceed, would not need to be made until August 7th. Before that time, the Council should meet to fully discuss the variations. To put the overall variables into perspective in regards to the amount of interest to be paid, the difference between 15 and 20 years bond terms, and factoring in supplemental payments from the Par 3 Bonds, would look like this: Anticipated Schedules: Bond Sale: The following dates assume the Public Hearing is to be held at the City Council meeting of July 2nd: CC Calls for hearing on CIP and issuance of bonds June 5 Send Public Hearing Notice to Newspaper June 11 Public Hearing Notice Published June 15* Public Hearing on CIP July 2 Reverse Referendum date on CIP Period Expires August 1 Call for Sale of Bonds August 7 Rating Call Week of August 27 Sale of Bonds September 4 Closing on Bond Sales Last week of September *At least 14 days, but not more than 28 days (16 days prior and on a weekday--Friday) page 98 Design and Bid Schedule: If the project proceeds with the non-referendum issuance of bonds, the plan preparation and bid schedule would be as follows (dates are approximate): August 7—The architect is directed to proceed with design and bid documents November 7—Adoption of Plans and Specifications, and solicitation of bids ordered December 18—Bids opened February 5, 2019—Contract awarded April 22—Construction Starts Construction of the addition is estimated to take 9 months. Following that completion, the remodeling of the existing building should take an additional four months. NOTIFICATIONS: If approved by Council to take the next step and call for a Public Hearing, it will be important to share related information with the public. A website page with a description of the improvements and needs; the costs, and the process to be followed will be established. Postcards will be mailed out to the addresses which receive the Heights Highlights in mid-June, and at least two Open Houses at the Fire Station will be scheduled—one before, and one after the July 2nd Public Hearing. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council chooses to call for a Public Hearing to consider the issuance of CIP Bonds in an amount not to exceed $6.3 million to finance the construction of improvements and an addition to the Fire Station located at 2121 Dodd Avenue, it should, by motion approve the following: RESOLUTION NO. 2018-40 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THE PRELIMINARY ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS THEREUNDER Dave Dreelan Mark McNeill Fire Chief City Administrator page 99 Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, was duly held at City Hall in the City on Tuesday, June 5, 2018, commencing at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: and the following were absent: * * * * * * * * * Council Member _________________ then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2018-40 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THE PRELIMINARY ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS THEREUNDER BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota (the “City”) as follows: Section 1. Public Hearing. The City is proposing to remodel and construct an addition to its fire station facility, located at 2121 Dodd Road (the “Project”), all or a part of which is proposed to be financed through the issuance of general obligation bonds (the “Bonds”). Bond financing for the Project may be considered pursuant to a public hearing concerning the adoption of a five year capital improvement plan for the City (the “Plan”) prepared in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521, as amended (the “Act”). This Council shall meet on July 2, 2018, at or after 7:00 p.m., to hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of the Plan and the preliminary issuance of the Bonds, all pursuant to and in accordance with the Act. Section 2. Preparation of Plan; Notice of Public Hearing. City staff is authorized and directed to work with Ehlers & Associates, Inc., its independent municipal advisor, and Eckberg Lammers, P.C., Bond Counsel, to prepare the Plan and the financing parameters for the Bonds, in advance of the public page 100 hearing. City staff is authorized and directed to cause notice of the public hearing to be published in the City’s official newspaper or a newspaper of general circulation within the City at least 14 but not more than 28 days before the public hearing. The form of the public hearing notice is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota this 5th day of June, 2018. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA ____________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor Attest: ____________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 101 EXHIBIT A FORM OF NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THE PRELIMINARY ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS THEREUNDER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota will meet at or after 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 2, 2018 at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve in the City, to conduct a public hearing on a proposed five year Capital Improvement Plan and the preliminary issuance of general obligation capital improvement bonds thereunder, in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $6,300,000, all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521, as amended. If a qualifying petition requesting a vote on the issuance of the general obligation capital improvement bonds is signed by voters equal to five percent of the votes cast in the City in the last general election and filed with the City Clerk within 30 days after the public hearing, the bonds may be issued only after the approval of a majority of voters voting on the question is obtained. Copies of the proposed five-year Capital Improvement Plan are on file at City Hall. Persons wishing to express an opinion regarding this matter are invited to attend and testify at the hearing or to submit written comments prior to or at the hearing. BY ORDER OF THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL By: Mark McNeill City Administrator page 102 ECKBERG LAMMERS MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Neil Garlock and the Mendota Heights City Council FROM: Andy Pratt, City Attorney DATE: May 31, 2018 RE: General Obligation Capital Improvement Bonds Public Hearing Included in the City Council’s June 5, 2018 meeting packet is a brief resolution for the Council to consider. The purpose of this resolution is to call for a public hearing at the Council’s July 2, 2018 meeting, to consider a five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and the preliminary issuance of general obligation capital improvement bonds (CIP Bonds), to be issued for the funding of remodeling and a new addition to the City’s fire station facility. Design and financial information related to the fire station project was presented to the City Council at its May 30, 2018 workshop. A public hearing on the draft CIP is the necessary first step to issuing CIP Bonds under state law. As discussed at the workshop, open houses or other citizen meetings may be held to elaborate on the project, but the Council is obligated to hold the CIP public hearing. A draft CIP will be prepared and will be on file with the City when the notice of public hearing is published, on or around June 15, 2018. After the public hearing at the July 2, 2018 meeting, the City Council may consider a resolution approving the CIP and giving preliminary approval to the issuance of the CIP Bonds. The approval is preliminary because state law allows for a 30-day period of time during which a petition may be submitted to the City, requesting the CIP Bonds be issued only after a voter referendum. Such a petition must be signed by at least 5% of the voters in the City, as determined at the last general election held in the City (the 2016 general election). A form of the notice of public hearing for the CIP public hearing is attached as Exhibit A to the resolution. The maximum principal amount of the CIP Bonds included in the notice is $6,300,000. The City Council may wish to change that number before the notice is published. Please let me know if you have any questions on this resolution or the CIP Bond process. Thank you. page 103 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Award of a Professional Services Contract for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Lane Neighborhood Improvements. COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to award a contract for the design, surveying and construction services for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Lane Neighborhood Improvement Project . BACKGROUND The Marie Avenue Improvement includes rehabilitation of Marie Avenue from Lexington Avenue to Dodd Road. Design elements are proposed to include trail rehabilitation, replacement of pedestrian underpass (Dakota County), replacement of cast iron water main, retaining wall replacement, guard rail replacement, lane configuration changes (narrow road, bike lanes, bump outs), pond improvements, trail improvements along Lexington Avenue and assessment of the city owned cast on ground slab bridge. The Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project includes rehabilitation to Wesley Lane, Wesley Court, South Lane from No rth Freeway to the cul-de-sac, Mager Court, and Spring Creek Circle. Design elements include pavement replacement, storm sewer extension, and constructing a bituminous trail from Maple Street to Wesley Lane. Alternate items that could be included would be relocating Maple Street to align with Hilltop Road and constructing the bituminous trail from Wesley Lane to Marie Avenue. Staff has met with MnDOT about narrowing Dodd Road in this section to allow a wider boulevard for trail construction. DISCUSSION Staff developed a Request for Proposals (RFP) on the project and invited four firms from the pre- approved consultant pool to submit proposals. The four firms submitted quotes for this project. Consultant Design Fee Construction Fee Total Fee TKDA $129,393 $114,854 $244,300 KLJ $149,788 $126,639 $276,428 Bolton & Menk $154,764 $98,536 $296,696 SRF $221,754 $219,590 $441,344 page 104 All firms submitted thorough and complete proposals, and each addressed concerns and gave ideas on proceeding with the project. Staff is comfortable awarding the project to any of the firms, but is recommending TKDA based on the lower cost of their proposal. BUDGET IMPACT The proposed contract price of $244,300 will be charged to the project which is funded through Special Assessments, City Bonds, Municipal State Aid, Dakota County and Utility Funds. The estimated project cost is $2.2 million, not including the trail from Wesley Lane to Marie Avenue or the relocation Maple Street and its utilities. Dakota County is responsible for the design and construction costs of a proposed pedestrian underpass replacement ($400,000), Special Assessments are estimated at $419,000, Storm Utility Funds of $200,000, Municipal State Aid Funds of $750,000, and bonding for the remaining costs ($750,000). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council accept the proposal from TKDA for the proposed not-to-exceed price of $244,300. ACTION REQUIRED If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion authorizing staff to enter in to a contract with TKDA from St. Paul, Minnesota. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 105 υ City of Mendota Heights Request for Proposals for Consulting Services Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvements City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 page 106 φ Table of Contents A. Background and General Project Information B. Instructions for Proposers and Required General Proposal Content C. Required Work – Feasibility Stage D. Required Work ‐ Design Stage E. Required Work ‐ Bid Solicitation Stage F. Required Work – Construction Stage G. Required Work – Post Construction Stage H. Target Completion / Milestone Dates Appendices A. Location Map page 107 χ The City of Mendota Heights hereby solicits assistance in engineering services relating to the rehabilitation of Marie Avenue (from Lexington Avenue to Dodd Road) and Wesley Neighborhood Improvements. A. Background and General Project Information – Marie Avenue 1. The general planned improvement is the rehabilitation of Marie Avenue from Lexington Avenue to Dodd Road (TH 149). See Appendix A – Location Map. The major elements of the construction will include: Reclamation of the existing surface, curb and gutter repair, storm sewer repair, partial water main replacement, trail rehabilitation, replacement and potential relocation of pedestrian underpass with an upgrade to a 10’x14’ box culvert and trail realignment (on behalf of Dakota County), installing curb bump outs, retaining wall replacement, guard rail replacement, wetland delineation, pond improvements, new curb on Lexington Avenue (on east side from Marie Avenue to 700 feet south), bituminous surfacing, striping and assessment of and potential improvements to existing cast on ground slab bridge. Items to be furnished by the City will include any known horizontal and vertical control in the area, available traffic data, City standard plates and standard specifications, sample plans, sample feasibility report and project asbuilts. Additional data as requested if available. 2. Project implementation will proceed following Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) provisions and Minnesota Statute 429 (MS429). It is envisioned that the work will be substantially completed in the 2019 construction season. 3. Geotechnical, survey and other inspection methods will be necessary. 4. The Consultant work scope generally includes feasibility, preliminary and final design, field engineering and contract administration in accordance with Minnesota Statute 429 (MS429), City standards and processes and Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) provisions including all necessary coordination with local, county and state agencies including utility companies. Presentations to the Mendota Heights City Council will also be required from time to time. B. Background and General Project Information – Wesley Neighborhood 5. The general planned improvement is the rehabilitation of Mager Court, Spring Creek Circle, Wesley Court, Wesley Lane, and South Lane (from North Freeway Road to the end). See Appendix B – Location Map. The major elements of the construction will include: Reclamation of the existing surface, curb and gutter repair, storm sewer repair and bituminous surfacing. Additional scope of work may include relocating Maple Street to the north to align with Hilltop Road including relocating existing sewer, water and other utilities. The project may also include a bituminous trail from Maple Street to Wesley Lane or Marie Avenue (90% plans have been drafted for the trail). Items to be furnished by the City will include any known horizontal and vertical control in the area, available traffic data, City standard plates and standard specifications, sample plans, sample feasibility report, soil borings and project asbuilts. Additional data as requested if available. 6. Project implementation will proceed following Minnesota Statute 429 (MS429). It is envisioned that the work will be substantially completed in the 2019 construction page 108 ψ season with the possible exception of a final lift of bituminous pavement and final restoration in the early part of the 2020 construction season. 7. Geotechnical, survey and other inspection methods will be necessary. 8. The Consultant work scope generally includes feasibility, preliminary and final design, field engineering and contract administration in accordance with Minnesota Statute 429 (MS429), City standards and processes and Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) provisions including all necessary coordination with local, county and state agencies including utility companies. Presentations to the Mendota Heights City Council will also be required from time to time. C. Instructions for Proposers and Required General Proposal Content 1. This RFP document is available upon request to respondents in hard copy and or PDF formats. Requests for the RFP documents should be made to : Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 (651)‐452‐1850 ryanr@mendota‐heights.com 2. Respondents shall include 1 digital and 1 hard copy of their proposal document. Proposals shall not exceed ten (10) pages (font size 11) with no more than ten (10) additional pages for appendices. 3. Project team members must be identified and summaries of their qualifications included. Particular attention will be given to the proposed field inspection / field engineering personnel. Any proposed sub‐consultants that would be involved in the work should also be identified. Upon contract finalization, assignment of the work to others beyond those identified must be approved by the City in writing. Any and all potential conflicts of interest shall be identified. 4. Proposals shall also include a narrative summarizing the respondent’s understanding of the work and the proposed approach to completing the work, including project milestones and completion dates. 5. Proposals shall include proposed compensation for the work with proposed hourly rates. All work will be compensated at hourly rates subject to a not‐to‐exceed‐without‐ prior‐authorization limit proposed by the consultant. 6. Insurance – The successful respondent will be required to furnish appropriate certificates of insurance as a part of the final contract negotiations. 7. Selection Criteria i. Understanding of work and proposed approach ii. Cost 8. The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals. The City also specifically reserves the right to negotiate with proposers to potentially modify the scope of the work. 9. Any questions regarding this Request for Proposals should be directed ONLY to Ryan Ruzek at the above noted address. page 109 ω D. Required Work – Feasibility Stage 1. The consultant shall facilitate a project kick‐off meeting at which schedules and deliverables will be discussed. 2. The consultant shall prepare a feasibility report in accordance with MS 429. 3. The feasibility report should include a mailed and tabulated questionnaire from residents of assessed parcels. 4. Consultant shall participate in the MS429 process including assistance with public meetings. The City envisions that it will prepare the preliminary and final special assessment documents and supervise the hearings processes. The consultant shall participate in the MS429 meetings as well as preliminary neighborhood meetings and meetings with residents prior to and during construction. The consultant shall provide project cost data in the format necessary for the City to prepare the MS429 legal documents including the assessment rolls. Estimates of total project costs shall be sufficiently disaggregated to allow the preparation of special assessment documents. 5. The City will prepare all items for preliminary assessment rolls, required notices etc. 6. The consultant shall make appropriate staff personnel available to attend 2 public informational meetings, the Council meeting at which the Feasibility Report is presented, public hearing, the preliminary assessment hearing and not to exceed 2 other meetings with the public and the Council. E. Required Work ‐ Design Stage 1. The consultant shall complete required preliminary surveying including but not limited to: i. Surveys related to the horizontal and vertical alignment of the project as needed ii. Topographical surveys as needed iii. Right of Way (ROW) support for design – identify any needed ROW – ROW acquisition including title work, parcel drawings, appraisals etc. will be by others iv. Utility surveys (include potholing if necessary) v. Soils work necessary for pavement design vi. Wetland delineation following WCA process, Mendota Heights is the LGU. vii. Assessment of cast on ground bridge and recommendations. 2. The consultant shall complete preliminary and final design of all items in the construction work scope including but not limited to; i. Street Design – plan and profile, profile only needed for utility replacement/relocations and pedestrian tunnel. ii. Pond restoration including sediment removal iii. Sanitary sewer design for relocation of Maple Street iv. Pedestrian underpass v. Trail realignment at Marie & Lexington and as part of new pedestrian underpass. vi. Retaining wall replacement 3. Design document format ‐ The plans shall be prepared utilizing Civil 3D. Other software required for design services and communication of information will be Microsoft Office products such as Word, Excel, and Power Point. FTP sites may be required for file sharing. Other formats or software products may be required for specific tasks such as traffic modeling or truck turning movements. page 110 ϊ 4. Geotechnical services for design ‐ The scope of work for design services shall include field sampling and testing of soils necessary for proper pavement design as per the MnDOT Pavement Design Manual. 5. The consultant shall prepare technical specifications incorporating City standard plates, standard specifications and bid documents. 6. The consultant shall organize and attend design initiation and other progress meetings. 7. Consultant shall organize and attend neighborhood meetings and provide appropriate graphic displays. 8. Consultant shall attend Council meetings (not to exceed three in this phase) at which project updates and approval of plans and specifications will be discussed. 9. Consultant shall prepare and submit all necessary forms for State Aid approval. F. Required Work ‐ Bid Solicitation Stage 1. Consultant shall prepare bid advertisement and post it in appropriate bid solicitation venues. 2. Consultant shall file plans with appropriate construction bid web sites. 3. Consultant shall respond to construction bid proposer questions and requests for clarifications. 4. Consultant shall prepare required bid addenda. 5. Consultant shall the attend bid letting and a pre‐bid conference at the City’s discretion. 6. Consultant shall tabulate the bids received. 7. Consultant shall evaluate the bids and bidders and make a recommendation for award / rejection of bids. 8. Consultant shall review submitted contract documents including payment and performance bonds . G. Required Work – Construction Stage 1. The consultant shall complete all required construction surveying for all components of the construction work. 2. The consultant shall review and approve all shop drawings and other documentation required of the construction contractor. 3. The consultant shall provide resident observation. Competent and sufficient field engineering personnel shall be on the project at all times when significant construction work is progressing. This is a particular point of emphasis for the City. Response to citizen inquiry is of high importance. The City has an excellent reputation with its citizens in this regard and expects that the consultant will extend and build on that reputation. Field personnel will carry cell phones and make those phone numbers known to residents to address questions or comments. 4. The consultant shall include all QC testing of materials. 5. The consultant shall administrate the construction contract. It shall prepare and evaluate all requests for payment and prepare payment request documents for review and processing by the City Finance Department. It shall also submit State Aid Payment applications. 6. The consultant shall address and evaluate contractor demands for compensation outside of the contract prices relating to alleged changed conditions. The consultant shall prepare supplemental agreements and or change orders as appropriate. 7. The consultant shall prepare punch lists as construction nears completion. page 111 ϋ 8. The consultant shall make final inspections and prepare final payment request documents for processing by the City. 9. The consultant shall utilize compiled cost and other data to assist the City in its final assessment processes. H. Required Work – Post Construction Stage 1. The consultant shall prepare as‐built drawings for all work completed. The as‐built drawings will be submitted in the above noted format. 2. The consultant shall process any and all warranty claims. I. Target Completion / Milestone Dates – subject to change 1. May 30, 2018 – Proposals due to City 2. June 5, 2018 ‐ City awards contract 3. October, 2018 ‐ Completion of Feasibility Report 4. November, 2018 – Completion of Neighborhood Meetings 5. December, 2018 – Completion of Preliminary Hearing 6. March, 2019 ‐ Plans and specifications completed and bid solicitation issued 7. April, 2019 ‐ Bid award 8. April, 2019 – Contract approval and notice to proceed 9. May/June, 2019 – Commencement of Construction 10. September, 2019 – Substantial Completion of Construction 11. June, 2020 – Final Completion of Construction page 112 ((((((((((((((((?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ? G!. G!. G!. G!.G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.6666666666666 6 6666666666 66 666666666666666666666666666666666666666 6 66666666666666 6 6 6666 6666666666! !! ! ! "" " "" " "" ""* !" " * ! " !! !! ! " " ! " ! " "! " " ³ * * *" " * !" ! ! " " !!" " ! !" ! !" " ! ! ! !"" " " ! " " ³ " " ! """ "" ³ !" ""³³" ³ ³"* " ""** " " " *" " * * * *" ** * * **!! * ³³³ "³³* ³"* ! !666666666666666666666666 6 6 66 66 66666666 66666666 6666666 66666666666!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2!!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 (] MARIE AVE WI-35EDODD RDTRAIL RDVALL E Y C U R V E R DEAGLE RIDGE RDSUTTON LNHIGHVIEW CIR S HIGHVIEW CIR N WILL O W L N ROUND HILL RD ARVIN DRSPRING CREEK CIRI-35EDakota County GIS Exhibit A - Marie Avenue City ofMendotaHeights0250 SCALE IN FEETDate: 3/28/2018 (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ?? G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.G!.G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.G!.G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.6666 66666666 666666666666 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 666666666666666666 6 66666 66666666666666666666 666666666 6 66 66 66 6666 666 6 6 6 66 6666 666666""* ! " ! " " !"*" ! !" ( ( " ( "" ( " " ! * !! * ! * * !! * ! !"" ! !"" ! ³ " ! * !" "" ! ( " " ! " "" " ! * ³ ³ ³ * "" ! * * ³ * ³ "" " "!"** " "" "! " "³ " " " ! ³³ " * ! " " ** *³³ ³ " " ! ³ ! "³ ³" ³6666666666666666 6 6 6 666666666 66 6 6 666666666666666 666 6 6 666666 666!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 (] MARIE AVE W SUMMIT LNVICTORIA RDWALSH LNLEXINGTON AVEEAGLE RIDGE RDVICTORIA RD SFARO LNHIGHVIEW CIR S LILAC RDHIGHVIEW CIR N TWIN CIRCLE DRROLLING GREEN CUROVERLOOK LNORCHARD PL BWANA CT WIN D W O O D C T Dakota County GIS Install Curb, Reconstruct Trail Replace Pedestrian Underpass Replace Walls Pond Imp. Pond Imp. Replace Water Main Install Bumpout Install Bumpout Assess Bridge Trail Realignment Replace Guard Rail Pavement Reclamation (Typ.) Rehabilitate Trail (Typ.) Ditching page 113 ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ???? ? ? ? ??? ? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ???????? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!. G!.666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 66666 6 66666666666666666666666666! ! ! ! ! ! * "" "" "" "" " !! !! ! " "!!" " "!!" "" "!!" " !!" " * * !" !!" " !!" " " ³ " ³ ³ ³* * ³ " ³ " ³ " ³ " ³ !* "!" " ! " " " ³³ * * ³** ³ ³³ ³ ³" ³ ³"* " ³ ³ " * * * * "" " ³ " ( ³ *" " " "" " *" "" " " ³ "" " " ! " " ³ ³ ³ ³³³ ³ ³ ! ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ " "! *³ ³ ³" * " " " **!! ³ ! ! " " " " ³"* * " " ! ³"* ! " "! " " " *6666666666666 66666666666666666666666666666666 6 66666666666666666666666666666666666666666 666666666!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2!!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2!!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2!!2 !!2!!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 (] (] MARIE AVE W DODD RDWESLEY LN CALLAHAN PL SOUTH LNWARRIOR DRLINDEN STFREEWAY RD S WILL O W L N KNOB RDFREEWAY RD N HILLTOP RDVALLEY CURVE RD MAPLE ST OAK STWESLEY CT PRIVATE ROAD HIGH RIDGE CIR MAGER CT SPRING CREEK CIR Dakota County GIS Exhibit B - Wesley Neighborhood City ofMendotaHeightsDate: 3/30/2018 Install Curb, Construct Trail Relocate Maple Street, Sewer, and WaterNorth to align with Hilltop Road Pavement Reclamation (Typ.) Pavement Reclamation (Typ.) Pavement Reclamation (Typ.) Pavement Reclamation (Typ.) Pavement Reclamation (Typ.) Fill Ditch, extend storm sewer page 114 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: June 5, 2018 TO: Mayor Garlock and City Council; City Administrator McNeill FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution Approving a Wetlands Permit for 1179 Centre Pointe Circle Planning Case No. 2018-11 Introduction City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution, which would approve a Wetlands Permit to Sherburne-Slater Construction, acting on behalf of the owner Hugh Cullen, for the property located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle. Background City Code Section 12-2-6 requires a wetlands permit for any work conducted within 100-ft. of an adjacent wetland or recognized water feature. Sherburne Const. plans to construct a new 30,000 sq. ft. professional office building with outdoor surface parking area. The property is currently a vacant 3.58 acre tract. All new work will have very minimal (if any) impacts to the adjacent pond or wetland feature. At the May 22, 2018 Planning Commission meeting, a planning staff report was presented on this item; and a public hearing was conducted. There was one comment from a representative of the adjacent Catholic Cemeteries , but no major concerns or objections regarding the project. A copy of the 05/22/18 planning report, along with the planning commission meeting minutes related to this item are appended to this memo. Discussion The City can use its legislative authority when considering action on a Wetlands Permit, and has broad discretion. The only limitations are that actions must be constitutional, rational, and in some way related to protecting the health, safety and general welfare of the public. Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval (7 -0) of the application for the Wetlands Permit , with certain conditions and findings of fact to support said approval. If the City Council wishes to affirm this recommendation, make a motion to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2018-38 APPROVING WETLANDS PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1179 CENTRE POINTE CIRCLE. Action Required This matter requires a simple majority vote. page 115 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2018-38 RESOLUTION APPROVING A WETLANDS PERMIT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1179 CENTRE POINTE CIRCLE WHEREAS, Sherburne-Slater Construction (the “Applicants”), acting on behalf of Hugh Cullen (the “Owner/Developer”) have applied for a Wetlands Permit under Planning Case No. 2018-11 for the property generally located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle, and legally described in attached Exhibit A (the “Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is guided LB-Limited Business in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, is situated in the B-1 Limited Business District , and is located adjacent to an established pond feature, which is identified on the city’s Wetlands Map; and WHEREAS, the Applicants seek permission to construct a new 30,000 sq. ft. professional office building with new surface parking area on the Subject Property, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 12-2-1 of the City Code, all new construction, related improvements, grading, and/or removals made within one-hundred (100) feet of a wetland or water resource-related area requires a wetlands permit; and WHEREAS, on May 22, 2018, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter at their regular meeting, and whereupon closing the hearing and follow-up discussion on this item, the Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval (7-0 vote) of the Wetlands Permit for the property located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle, with certain findings of fact and amended conditions of approval as noted herein. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the requested Wetlands Permit for the property located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle, as proposed under Planning Case No. 2018-11, is hereby approved with the following findings of fact: A. No part of the new building and parking lot areas will physically or negatively affect the adjacent pond (wetland) feature as proposed under this new office development project. page 116 B. The proposed project is compliant with the standards for granting a wetlands permit, and can be considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, including (but not limited to): i. Enhance and protect the natural and living environment (ref. – no impact to the Wetlands); ii. Support industrial and commercial developments in designated areas. C. The proposed project is designed to minimize or cause no impacts to the adjacent wetland areas, and is therefore compliant with the standards for a wetlands permit. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Wetlands Permit proposed under Planning Case No. 2018-11 is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The Developer/Owner shall begin the work authorized by the permit within ninety (90) days from the date of issuance of the permit. The work authorized by the permit shall be completed within twelve (12) months from the date of issuance. Extension(s) will be made according to Section 12-2-8.B of Zoning Code. 2. A building permit must be approved prior to the commencement of any construction work; and full erosion/sedimentation measures shall be installed prior to commencement of work and maintained throughout the duration of the construction project. 3. All grading and construction activities as part of the proposed development shall be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 4. A complete and detailed landscaping plan must be submitted to the City for review and approval as part of the new building permit process. City staff shall approve said plan to ensure compliance with applicable City Code provisions. 5. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an established, protected and permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed. Any new trees and restored buffer areas shall be planted with approved native trees and pollinator friendly and wetland suitable plantings, as per the city’s Native Plant List. page 117 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of June, 2018. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk Drafted by City of Mendota Heights TB page 118 EXHIBIT A Legal Description Parcel ID: 27-88101-01-020 (Abstract) LOT 2, BLOCK 1, YORKTON CENTRE POINTE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION, CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA page 119 Planning Staff Report MEETING DATE: May 22, 2018 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2018-11 WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICANT: Sherburne-Slater Construction (on behalf of Hugh Cullen) PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1179 Centre Pointe Circle ZONING/GUIDED: B-1 Limited Business / LB- Limited Business ACTION DEADLINE: June 22, 2018 DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST Sherburne-Slater Construction, acting on behalf of the developer/property owner Hugh Cullen, is seeking a Wetlands Permit to construct a new 30,000 sf. office building, located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle. City Code Section 12-2-6 requires a wetlands permit for any work conducted within 100-ft. of the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level of an adjacent wetland or recognized water feature. This item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing on this item was published in the Pioneer Press newspaper; and notice letters of this hearing were mailed to all owners within 350-feet of the affected parcel. No comments or objections have been received by the city. BACKGROUND Centre Pointe Business Park was originally approved in 1984; and the follow-up Yorkton Centre Pointe South (office) subdivision plat was approved in 1986. In 2003, the owner re-subdivided Lots 4 and 5 Block 1, Yorkton Centre into three new lots, which make up Yorkton Centre South 2nd Addition today. The subject property is legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Yorkton Centre South 2nd. The subject property consists of 3.58 acres and is currently vacant land. The property is a flagged-shaped parcel with a 50-foot wide access strip coming off Centre Pointe Drive to the east. This 50-ft. wide strip provides the “right-of-way” area for Centre Pointe Circle roadway, which although is considered a private roadway, the city does maintain this road as if it were a public street. There are currently 38 parking spaces on the lot, which are being used as over-flow parking for the nearby office uses (owned by Mr. Cullen). page 120 The site is surrounded by other professional office uses, such as the 1200 Centre Pointe Offices Suites and Cemstone to the north; Centre Pointe VI Center Pointe VII offices to the immediate east and south respectively; and Resurrection-Catholic Cemeteries to the west. Mr. Cullen is looking to relocate an existing (local) high-tech engineering firm with approximately 80 full- time employees to this new stand-alone office building; and the firm is planning to add approximately 20 employees as part of this relocation and new office facility. At the May 1, 2018 regular City Council meeting, the council approved a Grading Permit to the Mr. Cullen to begin preliminary grading of the proposed office site. This approval was made per City Code Section 14-1, which allows properties proposing any land disturbance activity in excess of 5,000 square feet to receive a grading permit if not part a separate approval process. This grading permit would normally be part of the building permit process, but due to time constraints and soil corrections needed on the site, the developer is requesting to start the grading work ahead of being issued a permit. SITE & BUILDING PLANS The plans call for the construction of a new 30,000 sq. ft. professional office building, with 128 parking spaces. No elevation or architectural plans were submitted as part of the wetlands permit application. City Code states any new office building over 6,000 sq. ft. must provide 1 space per 200 square feet of net usable floor area. The submitted plans are absent of any detailed floor plans; however, city staff will review and determine the “net usable” space at time of building permit submittals. page 121 The plan calls for a driveway connection between the Center Pointe VII office center to the east. The circular shaped turn-around at the end of Centre Pointe Circle will remain in place, and three new entrance drives will be installed off this turn-around section. The new building requires the site to retain its own storm water management, which is being accomplished with a new underground storm tech system with chambers and rock layers (see images below). The system will be located just south of the new building along the shared property line. The system will collect runoff from the building san parking lot surface to provide treatment and rate control prior to discharge to the existing pond on the north side of the building The plans did not include any new landscape plans. A condition of approval will require the developer to submit a detailed landscape plan as part of the new building permit application process. ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan The subject property is guided LB-Limited Business under the current 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and is planned to remain as “Business” under the proposed 2040 Comp Plan. The current zoning of LB-Limited Business is consistent with this underlying land use. The proposed new building expansion is considered a permitted use under the LB District; and the future use of the subject property shall be compliant with the current and proposed Comprehensive Plans. Wetlands Permit Pursuant to City Code Title 12-2-1 Wetlands Systems, this chapter applies to adjacent land within 100-feet of a wetland or water resource related area. This chapter also provides specific allowances, rules and standards for certain activities near these recognized water features, including a permit for the construction, alteration or removal of any structure. The purpose of the Wetlands Systems Chapter is to: 1. Provide for protection, preservation, maintenance, and use wetlands and water resource-related areas; 2. Maintain the natural drainage system; 3. Minimize disturbance which may result from alteration by earthwork, loss of vegetation, loss of wildlife and aquatic organisms as a result of the disturbance of the natural environment or from excessive sedimentation; 4. Provide for protection of potable fresh water supplies; and 5. Ensure safety from floods. The proposed work or construction of the new office building is slightly within 100-ft. setback area from the established pond edge (as illustrated below). page 122 For the most part, all major elements to construct this new building will have little, if any direct effect upon the pond (wetland) area or its buffers. Some new grading is expected to take place around and behind the new building, but does not appear to come close or have any effect on the pond edge or buffers. This grading work should pose no threat or any negative impacts to this adjacent pond areas, provided all erosion control measures are installed and maintained throughout the duration of the project. All storm water pipes, aprons and outlets are pre-existing and are intended to remain in place. The Utility Plans indicate the static pond elevation to be at 875.0-ft., while the proposed building’s finished floor elevation is shown at 893.0-ft., which represents an 18-ft. difference. The Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) provides certain guides and suggested standards for the city to follow or implement when dealing with new development near natural water features. The LSWMP recommends a 25-foot wetland setback, which essentially provides a no disturbance buffer zone and permits a natural vegetative planting and erosion/silt protection strip along the water body. The plan identifies a D & U easement in the upper northwest corner of the property, which wraps around the back lot lines and jogs around the back side of the building. These easement areas will provide the necessary buffer areas from the pond to ensure no disturbance or impacts will occur near this wetland. Proposed erosion control measures (silt fencing) are shown on the Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plans, which basically encircles the main developable are of the lot where the new building will be situated, and along the westerly edges of the new parking lot expansion. The erosion control or stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) will be reviewed in greater detail by the Engineering Department as part of the building permit application. The scope and scale of this proposed new office project will fit nicely with the overall character and pre- existing development inside this business/office park development. Due to this relatively minor impact to the nearby pond (wetland) system and scope of the office project, the following statements are being presented for the Planning Commission to review and consider in your determination of this wetland permit: a) The work associated with the new office building and parking facilities should have very little, if any impacts to the adjacent pond (wetland) feature; page 123 b) the Applicant/Owner will provide for the protection and preservation of the adjacent wetland/water resource feature by installing a new underground storm tech water treatment system, silt fence measures and other stormwater run-off protection measures as per city staff direction; c) all disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an established, protected and permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed; d) all natural drainage way systems will be maintained during and after the project is completed; and e) the Applicant/Owner will make every attempt to minimize disturbance of the areas near, in and around the pond area in order to protect and preserve the natural surroundings, avoid excess loss of vegetation, and avoid any impacts to wildlife and aquatic organisms. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend approval of Wetlands Permit, based on the attached findings of fact, with certain conditions; 2. Recommend denial of the Wetlands Permit, based on specific finding of fact that the request is not compliant with applicable City Code standards; or 3. Table the request and direct staff to extend the application review period an additional 60 days, pursuant to MN State Statute 15.99. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Wetlands Permit for Sherburne-Slater Construction, acting on behalf of the property owner Hugh Cullen, which would allow the construction of a new 30,000 sf. office building, located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle, with the following conditions and based on the attached findings of fact which support said recommendation: 1. The Developer/Owner shall begin the work authorized by the permit within ninety (90) days from the date of issuance of the permit. The work authorized by the permit shall be completed within twelve (12) months from the date of issuance. Extension(s) will be made according to Section 12- 2-8.B of Zoning Code. 2. A building permit must be approved prior to the commencement of any construction work; and full erosion/sedimentation measures shall be installed prior to commencement of work and maintained throughout the duration of the construction project. 3. All grading and construction activities as part of the proposed development shall be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 4. A complete and detailed landscaping plan must be submitted to the City for review and approval as part of the new building permit process. City staff shall approve said plan to ensure compliance with applicable City Code provisions. 5. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an established, protected and permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed. Any new trees and restored buffer areas shall be planted with approved native trees and pollinator friendly and wetland suitable plantings, as per the city’s Native Plant List. page 124 6. The new building shall be subject to all of those standards noted under Section 12-1D-13-2 Additional Requirements for all B [Business] and I [Industrial] Districts of the Zoning Code. 7. All new building or property signage shall be subject to standards found under Section 12-1D-15 of the Zoning Code. 8. All new Lighting shall be subject to the standards found under City Code Section 12-1I-15 of the Zoning Ordinance. Attachments 1. Aerial site map/Wetlands Boundary Map 2. Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plans page 125 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL Wetlands Permit for 1179 Centre Pointe Circle The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the Wetlands Permit for 1179 Centre Pointe Circle: 1. No part of the new building and parking lot areas will physically or negatively affect the adjacent pond (wetland) feature as proposed under this new office development project. 2. The proposed project is compliant with the standards for granting a wetlands permit, and can be considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, including (but not limited to): a. Enhance and protect the natural and living environment (ref. – no impact to the Wetlands); b. Support industrial and commercial developments in designated areas. 3. The proposed project is designed to minimize or cause no impacts to the adjacent wetland areas, and is therefore compliant with the standards for a wetlands permit. page 126 AREA/LOCATION MAP - 1179 CENTRE POINTE CIR. Property Information May 17, 2018 0 450 900225 ft 0 130 26065 m 1:4,800 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. page 127 ((??G!. G!.666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 666666 6 6 6666666666666666666666666 6 66666666666666" " * ! *( ! ³ ³* !! ³ ³³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³³ ³ ³ " "! " ³ " ³ ³ ! * " "! ! ! ""6 6 6 6 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!2 !!229303029302025 1175 1200 1180 215'233' 8 ' '6''8'' 6'' Dakota County GIS 1179 CENTRE POINT CIRCLELexington Bus. Park VII City ofMendotaHeights090 SCALE IN FEET GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights. Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation. 5/14/2018 page 128 page 129 page 130 page 131 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 22, 2018 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 22, 2018 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners John Mazzitello, Patrick Corbett, Michael Noonan, Mary Magnuson, Michael Toth, and Brian Petschel. Those absent: None Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of June 28, 2016 Minutes COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 24, 2018, AS PRESENTED. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Hearings A) PLANNING CASE #2018-11 SHERBURNE-SLATER CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF HUGH CULLEN, 1179 CENTRE POINTE CIRCLE WETLANDS PERMIT Working from materials provided to the Commission prior to the meeting, Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained this application was submitted by Sherburne-Slater Construction on behalf of Hugh Cullen, who is the owner-developer of the property. They were seeking a Wetlands Permit to construct a new 30,000 square foot office building at the property located at 1179 Centre Pointe Circle. Mr. Benetti shared an image of the subject property relative to its location within the city, surrounding properties, and streets. The property is located directly south of City Hall, just off of Lexington and Centre Point. The lot itself is just over 3.5 acres and is a pie shaped lot in that it was platted with a 50-foot flag strip back in the early 2000’s. The 50-foot strip is actually a private strip of ground with a roadway on it that is considered private; however, the city has been maintaining it. This strip provides an access point for the back properties and for the future development of this lot. page 132 There are approximately 30 parking spots on the south side of the subject parcel. These spots are not used very much; however, they are used for overflow parking. The site itself is pretty vacant and overgrown with natural vegetation, but nothing specific or significant. The project involves a new 30,000 square foot building proposed by Mr. Cullen. Staff currently does not have any new elevation or architectural plans but assumes that they would be consistent with what is being built out there, consistent with the Centre Pointe Development Office project. The site is currently planned out for 120 parking spaces; the current code requires one space for every 200 square feet of useable net office space; which when taking into consideration the 30,000 square feet would equate to 150 parking spaces. Staff believes that when it nets out – when the final detailed floor plans are available – that the 120 plan parking spaces would be more than enough. Mr. Cullen also plans to have all of the office uses he currently owns or maintains to provide for some shared parking or joint parking facilities between each other. Chair Field asked for confirmation that the subject of the hearing this evening was not concerned with the number of parking spaces, but only with the Wetlands Permit application. Mr. Benetti confirmed; however, he noted that it is all tied into the site plan or building plan so staff wanted to point out anything that might cause the Commission or staff any concerns. A detailed drainage and stormwater management plan were provided to the Commissioners in their information packet. The requirements are that this property has to retain its own stormwater retention before it dumps anything into the pond on the backside of the property. Mr. Benetti reviewed the analysis of the Wetlands Permit indicating that the proposed work or construction of the new office building is slightly within the 100-foot setback area from the established pond edge. However, for the most part, all major elements to construct this new building will have little, if any, direct effect upon the pond (wetland) area or its buffers – no new piping or anything of the sort. Very minimal grading work is planned for the back side of the building and they are leaving enough space that staff is very satisfied with the buffer area. Commissioner Toth asked where the drain system – the water filtration system – drain towards. Mr. Benetti replied that eventually it does tie into existing pipes so there would be no disruption to the wetland area for the installation of the water filtration system. Commissioner Toth asked if the water flowage from the other parking lots or buildings would be flowing past this new retention system and continuing to the wetland. Mr. Benetti replied that the previous water flowage would be picked up by this new retention system first, gets pre-treated, and then flows into the pond. Commissioner Noonan, referring to the conditions, noted that numbers 1-5 were conditions relating to the wetland; however, he was unsure why numbers 6, 7, and 8 were there given the fact that they are moot – more than anything else. They have to comply with these conditions regardless. Mr. Benetti agreed that they are moot but he wanted to make sure they were reinforced upon the approvals. Commissioner Noonan understood, but the Commission is introducing conditions that have nothing to do with the application and only confuses the situation. He believed it to be bad practice to introduce conditions that have nothing to do with the application before the page 133 Commission. These conditions are normal and customary building permit conditions and have nothing to do with the wetland. Mr. Benetti replied that he would defer to the Commission’s wishes. Commissioner Magnuson asked if the Commission would see this application again or if this was the only time they would see the proposal. Mr. Benetti replied that this would be the only time they would see this. The Planning Commission does not do official site plan reviews; unless the applicant asks for a variance in the future. Mr. Nate Sherburne with Sherburne-Slater Construction had nothing to add to the staff report and thought it to be very thorough. He also indicated that this building would match the other seven buildings in the development to wrap up the business park. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Mr. Dave Kemp, 2105 Lexington Avenue South, is the Strategic Planning and Project Manager for the Catholic Cemeteries – of which Resurrection is a part of. They expressed their desire to have a couple of issues address: • In the past there has been a lot of wash coming down across their sections, depositing dirt and sediment on markers (this went back to when it was farming land). He spoke to Mr. Sherburne and believes most of these issues have been addressed. He just wanted this noted for the record. • Also, they have a catch basin on the edge of their property and this subject property and their storm sewer runs under their property to the lake. They wanted to ensure that they do not have a lot of things or if it could handle that type of flow – especially with as much impervious surface as they are now creating with the building and the parking lot. He did not know about the holding tank and believes it to be a good step forward to preventing other things going in. Commissioner Toth noted on the subject property they are going to install a retention system to collect the surface water within this new project. He assumed that it had been engineered for an average rainfall. He asked what would happen if a 4-5 inch per hour rainfall occurred and the retention system filled up with water to its fullest point and then exited towards the pond; would it have an impact on the information just provided by Mr. Kemp – or is the retention system built to handle a large amount of water. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the system was designed for a 100-year storm event using the Atlas 14 Rainfall Intensities. That does equate to an approximate 7.4 inch rainstorm over a 24-hour period. The system is also designed to have an emergency overflow. Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 page 134 COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAZZITELLO, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2018-11, WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICATION FOR 1179 CENTRE POINTE CIRCLE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. No part of the new building and parking lot areas will physically or negatively affect the adjacent pond (wetland) feature as proposed under this new office development project. 2. The proposed project is compliant with the standards for granting a wetlands permit, and can be considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, including (but not limited to): a. Enhance and protect the natural and living environment (ref. – no impact to the Wetlands); b. Support industrial and commercial developments in designated areas. 3. The proposed project is designed to minimize or cause no impacts to the adjacent wetland areas, and is therefore compliant with the standards for a wetlands permit. AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The Developer/Owner shall begin the work authorized by the permit within ninety (90) days from the date of issuance of the permit. The work authorized by the permit shall be completed within twelve (12) months from the date of issuance. Extension(s) will be made according to Section 12-2-8.B of Zoning Code. 2. A building permit must be approved prior to the commencement of any construction work; and full erosion/sedimentation measures shall be installed prior to commencement of work and maintained throughout the duration of the construction project. 3. All grading and construction activities as part of the proposed development shall be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 4. A complete and detailed landscaping plan must be submitted to the City for review and approval as part of the new building permit process. City staff shall approve said plan to ensure compliance with applicable City Code provisions. 5. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an established, protected and permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed. Any new trees and restored buffer areas shall be planted with approved native trees and pollinator friendly and wetland suitable plantings, as per the city’s Native Plant List. 6. The new building shall be subject to all of those standards noted under Section 12-1D-13- 2 Additional Requirements for all B [Business] and I [Industrial] Districts of the Zoning Code. 7. All new building or property signage shall be subject to standards found under Section 12- 1D-15 of the Zoning Code. 8. All new Lighting shall be subject to the standards found under City Code Section 12-1I-15 of the Zoning Ordinance. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its June 5, 2018 meeting. page 135