2020-08-18 Council agenda packetCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
August 18, 2020 – 5:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Consent Agenda
a. Approve August 4, 2020 City Council Minutes
b. Approve Massage Licenses for Sharon Pollack and Cindy Messer
c. Approve Resolution 2020-49 Acknowledging the Receipt of an Additional Donation To
The City for the Scott Patrick Memorial 5k Race
d. Approve Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) application for ‘No-Loss’ determination –
Sutton Pond
e. Approve Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) application for ‘No-Loss’ determination –
Lexington Marie Pond
f. Acknowledge June 2020 Par 3 Financial Report
g. Approve the Purchase of AV Equipment for the Police Department
h. Approve the Purchase of City Hall Door Access Control Additions
i. Approving Resolution 2020-50 Accept Donation of Land from Robert and Kathleen
Bonine
j. Approve the Building Activity Report
k. Approval of Claims List
6. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda)
*See guidelines below
7. Public Hearing
a. Resolution 2020-46 Approving a Critical Area Permit and Conditional Use Permit
for Property Located At 1217 Victoria Curve
8. New and Unfinished Business
a. Ordinance 558 Amending City Code to Add No Parking on Mendota Heights Road
and Warrior Drive and Adding an All-Way Stop at Culligan Lane and Glenhill Road
b. Resolution 2020-51 Plans for Lemay Lake Erosion Control Project
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, August 4, 2020
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights,
Minnesota was held at 5:00 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, Paper, Miller, and Petschel
were also present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Petschel moved adoption of the agenda.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval.
Councilor Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented, pulling item I.
a. Approval of July 21, 2020 City Council Minutes
b. Approval of July 21, 2020 Council Work Session Minutes
c. Approval of July 27, 2020 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
d. Approval of July 27, 2020 Council Work Session Minutes
e. Approve Resolution 2020-43 Acknowledging the Receipt of Donations to the City for the Scott
Patrick Memorial 5K and the Cliff Timm Memorial Fishing Derby
f. Approve Resolution 2020-47 Call for a Public Hearing to Consider the Sale of Conduit Debt for
Augustana Regent at Burnsville, LLC
g. Approve Natural and Scenic Area Grant for 2085 Valencour Circle
h. Approve Grading Permit for 1879 Dodd Road
i. Approval of Resolution 2020-44 Provide for Second Amendment to Educational Facilities
Revenue Refunding Note (St. Thomas Academy Project)
j. Approve Appointment of City Attorney
page 3
k. Approve Fire Synopsis
l. Approval of Claims List
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
I) APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2020-44 PROVIDE FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE REFUNDING NOTE (ST. THOMAS ACADEMY
PROJECT)
Councilor Paper asked for a brief explanation.
Catherina Courtney, Bond Counsel to Mendota Heights, stated that St. Thomas has had a conduit bond
issued by the City since 2010 and explained that this is a technical amendment. She stated that St. Thomas
is not tendering the note but taking the opportunity to provide technical changes and provided a brief
summary.
Councilor Petschel moved to approve RESOLUTION 2020-44 PROVIDE FOR SECOND
AMENDMENT TO EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE REFUNDING NOTE (ST. THOMAS
ACADEMY PROJECT).
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No one from the public wished to be heard.
PUBLIC HEARING
No items scheduled.
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) RESOLUTION 2020-48 APPROVE DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY TO ADMINISTER A SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF GRANT PROGRAM
City Administrator Mark McNeill explained that the Council was being asked to authorize Dakota County
Community Development Agency (CDA) to implement a Small Business Relief Grant Program, to
provide help for COVID-19 related economic stresses experienced by small businesses.
page 4
Councilor Duggan asked how the small businesses of Mendota Heights will be aware of the program.
City Administrator Mark McNeill noted that information has been posted on the County and Chamber of
Commerce websites and the City will posting something on its website as well, as the application deadline
is August 14th.
Councilor Duggan asked what would happen with unused funds if there are any.
City Administrator Mark McNeill stated that any unused CARES Act funds would be returned to Dakota
County and therefore would stay local. He confirmed that the awards would be done through a lottery
system rather than a first come, first serve basis.
Councilor Petschel commented that some businesses have made decisions not to renew leases and asked
how that would be factored into the awarding of these funds.
City Administrator Mark McNeill stated that the County requires the business to be in good standing as
of February 29, noting that they would not be able to predict what would happen in the future.
Councilor Petschel commented that she would not want to see someone take the funds and go out of
business the next month, as there is limited funding available and the funds could perhaps have helped
another business remain open.
City Administrator Mark McNeill commented that if a business is going out of business, it is most likely
because there is debt above the amount of assistance that this program could provide.
Mayor Garlock moved to approve RESOLUTION 2020-48 APPROVING THE DAKOTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO ADMINISTER A SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF
GRANT PROGRAM ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS.
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
B) MARIE AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS CHANGE ORDER
City Administrator Mark McNeill provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked
to approve Change Order #1 for the Marie Avenue Street Improvement Project.
Councilor Duggan moved to AUTHORIZE CHANGE ORDER #1 FO THE MARIE AVENUE STREET
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
Councilor Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
page 5
C) RESOLUTION 2020-45 CITY COUNCIL MEETING START TIME
City Administrator Mark McNeill stated that the City Council is asked to discuss and determine a starting
time for its regular meetings, to become effective September 1, 2020.
Councilor Miller stated that as a head coach for girls soccer, the season will begin on August 17th. He
commented that he will have games on some Tuesday nights starting at 4:30 p.m. He could attend a 7:00
p.m. meeting but could not attend a 5 p.m. meeting. He stated that if the start time were changed to 6:00
p.m., he could attend but would miss the first few items on the agenda.
The Council confirmed the consensus with a 6:00 p.m. start time.
Councilor Duggan moved to approve RESOLUTION 2020-45 CHANGING THE STARTING TIME
FOR REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL TO 6:00 P.M.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
Assistant City Administrator Mark McNeill commented that this will be the last meeting for City Attorney
Andrew Pratt, as he is moving on to a new position. He stated that a new Attorney was appointed through
the Consent Agenda. He acknowledged the great advice that City Attorney Andrew Pratt has provided
over the years and wished him luck.
The Council thanked City Attorney Andrew Pratt for his service.
City Attorney Andrew Pratt commented that he has been working with the City for a number of years and
it has been a privilege. He thanked the Council and staff.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilor Petschel commented that tonight a grant was received from the DNR on the Consent Agenda,
noting that the City received funds to help purchase the property on Valencour Circle, which will become
part of Historic Pilot Knob. She stated that this is a step towards defining that site and maximizing its use.
Mayor Garlock commented that he recently attended a Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Committee meeting
and he encouraged veterans to reach out to himself or the Committee if they are experiencing financial
difficulty. He also reported that the VFW of Mendota will be providing a check for $5,000 to go towards
Special Olympics, increasing the total amount of funds raised for the Scott Patrick 5K to approximately
$14,500.
Councilors Miller and Paper thanked City Attorney Andrew Pratt for his work with the City.
page 6
Councilor Duggan thanked City Attorney Andrew Pratt for working with the city. He acknowledged that
about 65 people have contributed to the 5K funding and he recognized the leadership of Mayor Garlock
on that effort.
Councilor Duggan asked for an update on the possible name change for the Pilot Knob site. Councilor
Petschel commented that the name has already been changed and new signage has been installed at the
site in both English and Native American, using both names.
Councilor Duggan acknowledged the passing of John Hume noting that he was a great man for Northern
Ireland and the world.
ADJOURN
Mayor Garlock moved to adjourn.
Councilor Paper seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 5:31 p.m.
____________________________________
Neil Garlock
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 7
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Massage Licenses
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve the renewal of a massage therapist license and also approve a new
massage therapist license.
BACKGROUND
Cindy Messer has submitted an application to renew her massage therapist license. The police
department is currently conducting the background investigation.
Sharon Pollack has submitted an application for a new massage therapist license. The police
department conducted the background investigation and found no areas of concern or disqualifying
factors to prohibit licensure.
Both applications are complete and all fees have been paid to the City. They both will be working at
Green Lotus Yoga and Healing Center, 750 Main Street. If approved, the massage licenses would be
valid through June 30, 2021.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Council approve the renewal of the massage therapist license for Cindy Messer,
contingent on the Police Department finding no areas of concern;
and also approve a new massage therapist license for Sharon Pollack.
The licenses would be effective through June 30, 2021.
page 8
Request for City Council Action
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator
FROM: Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator
SUBJECT: Resolution 2020-49 Accept Additional Donation for Scott Patrick Memorial
5K
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to formally accept an additional donation for the 2020 Officer Scott
Patrick Memorial 5K Race.
BACKGROUND
By state law, all donations to the City must be accepted by the City Council by means of a
resolution.
On July 11, the annual Scott Patrick Memorial 5K Race was held virtually due to COVID-19. An
additional cash donation of $5000 was accepted from the American Veterans Post 1-Mendota,
Minnesota on August 11. This brings the total to $23,998 that was donated for the race which
includes cash, services and merchandise. There were 294 participants in the 5K this year, which
raised over $14,400 for Special Olympics of Minnesota.
The City is grateful for this generous donation.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve Resolution 2020-49.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion adopt RESOLUTION 2020-49 FORMALLY
ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF AN ADDITIONAL DONATION TO THE CITY
FOR THE SCOTT PATRICK MEMORIAL 5K RACE.
page 9
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020-49
FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF AN ADDITIONAL DONATION
TO THE CITY FOR THE SCOTT PATRICK MEMORIAL 5K RACE
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights desires to follow Minnesota Statute 465.03
“Gifts to Municipalities”; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Statute requires a resolution to accept gifts to
municipalities; and
WHEREAS, the City has previously acknowledged gifts with a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights have duly considered this
matter and wish to acknowledge the civic mindedness of citizens and officially recognize their
donations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights is accepting a donation from the following organization in support of the Scott
Patrick Memorial 5K Race.
2020 Officer Scott Patrick Memorial 5K
VENDOR DONATION VALUE
American Veterans Post 1 Cash Donation $5,000
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 18th day of August 2020.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 10
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Technician
SUBJECT: Approve Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) application for ‘No-Loss’ determination –
Sutton Pond
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve a Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Joint Water Resources Application
for ‘No-Loss’ in order to perform maintenance of the stormwater pond (identified as Wetland 3), in
conjunction with the Marie Avenue Road Improvements project.
BACKGROUND
The City Council of Mendota Heights is the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) that administers Chapter
8420 of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). A Joint Water Resources Application was
submitted for the maintenance of the City’s stormwater pond, also classified as wetland, located at Sutton
Lane and Marie Avenue. The application was submitted by the City, applicant and property owner, on
July 20, 2020.
DISCUSSION
The City inspects and maintains all publicly-owned permanent stormwater treatment features, including
stormwater ponds. This is a requirement of the City’s Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
(MS4) Permit, issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The stormwater pond at Sutton Lane
and Marie Avenue was identified as a feature that was in need of maintenance in order to comply with
stormwater treatment and storage needs. The basin has also been identified as a wetland, which has been
utilized as a stormwater pond since the creation of the Somerset development.
An application for wetland boundary determination was approved for the site by the City Council on
January 2, 2019. A WCA Joint Water Resources application for ‘No-Loss’ was noticed and submitted for
comments on July 20, 2020. An application qualifies for ‘No-Loss’ under part 8420.0415 (B) of WCA
Rules Chapter 8420 when no-loss or permanent impact to wetlands occur, and are limited to removal of
sediment or debris that has accumulated. The comment period for this application ended August 13, 2020.
No comments were received from the Technical Evaluation Panel.
BUDGET IMPACT
None, this process is a judicial requirement of the City. If council approves the application, a Notice of
Decision will be sent to Technical Evaluation Panel members and their respective agencies as any members
of the public that requested notice.
page 11
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council approve and accept the Application for ‘No-Loss’ and direct staff to
issue the Notice of Decision.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion accepting the WCA Joint
Water Resources application for No-Loss, and authorize staff to issue a Notice of Decision. This action
requires a simple majority vote.
page 12
page 13
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Technician
SUBJECT: Approve Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) application for ‘No-Loss’ determination –
Lexington Marie Pond
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve a Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Joint Water Resources Application
for ‘No-Loss’ in order to perform maintenance of the stormwater pond (identified as Wetland 4), in
conjunction with the Marie Avenue Road Improvements project.
BACKGROUND
The City Council of Mendota Heights is the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) that administers Chapter
8420 of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). A Joint Water Resources Application was
submitted for the maintenance of the City’s stormwater pond, also classified as wetland, located at
Lexington Avenue and Marie Avenue. The application was submitted by the City, applicant and property
owner, on July 20, 2020.
DISCUSSION
The City inspects and maintains all publicly-owned permanent stormwater treatment features, including
stormwater ponds. This is a requirement of the City’s Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
(MS4) Permit, issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The stormwater pond at Lexington
Avenue and Marie Avenue was identified as a feature that was in need of maintenance in order to comply
with stormwater treatment and storage needs. The basin has also been identified as a wetland, which has
been utilized as a stormwater pond since the creation of the Lexington Highland West development.
An application for wetland boundary determination was approved for the site by the City Council on
January 2, 2019. A WCA Joint Water Resources application for ‘No-Loss’ was noticed and submitted for
comments on July 20, 2020. An application qualifies for ‘No-Loss’ under part 8420.0415 (B) of WCA
Rules Chapter 8420 when no-loss or permanent impact to wetlands occur, and are limited to removal of
sediment or debris that has accumulated. The comment period for this application ended August 13, 2020.
No comments were received from the Technical Evaluation Panel.
BUDGET IMPACT
None, this process is a judicial requirement of the City. If council approves the application, a Notice of
Decision will be sent to Technical Evaluation Panel members and their respective agencies as any members
of the public that requested notice.
page 14
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council approve and accept the Application for ‘No-Loss’ and direct staff to
issue the Notice of Decision.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion accepting the WCA Joint
Water Resources application for No-Loss, and authorize staff to issue a Notice of Decision. This action
requires a simple majority vote.
page 15
page 16
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator
FROM: Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator
SUBJECT: Acknowledge June Par 3 Financial Report
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to acknowledge the June Par 3 Financial Report.
BACKGROUND
Attached is the June Par 3 Financial Report. During the month of June, the course had a total of
2,881 rounds of golf played.
For the month of June, the Par 3 had a total revenue of $35,357. This includes greens fees and
recreation programs. Due to COVID-19 the course is not offering golf cart rentals or concessions.
Including the month of June, the Par 3 had a year-to-date revenue total of $95,496.
The course’s June expenditures totaled $14,484. The year to date total is $64,458. The course
currently has positive operating revenue of $31,038 for the 2020 season. However, some staffing
in April and May came from City Hall employees who were assigned to work at the Par 3, while
City Hall was closed to the public. Their salaries were not charged to the Par 3.
It is important to recognize that at the beginning of July staff had to refund all junior golf camps
and adult lessons due to COVID-19. Many of these refunds are not reflected in the June financial
report.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council acknowledge the June Par 3 Financial
Report.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the council concurs, it should, by motion acknowledge the June Par 3 Financial Report.
page 17
MONTHLY EXPENDITURE REPORT
JUNE 2020
MENDOTA HEIGHTS PAR 3
BUDGET TO ACTUAL REPORT
June 2020 (50% OF YEAR)
June
REVENUES June YTD YTD YTD
BUDGET 2020 2020 %2019
GREENS, LEAGUE & TOURN FEES $100,000 $31,613 $68,494 68.49%$44,344
RECREATION PROGRAMS $40,000 $3,745 $26,952 67.38%$30,408
CONCESSIONS $19,000 $0 $0 0.00%$7,962
SUNDRY REVENUE $0 $0 $50 0.00%$70
INTEREST $450 $0 $0 0.00%$0
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS $0 $0 $0 0.00%$0
PAR 3 FUND REVENUE TOTAL $159,450 $35,357 $95,496 59.89%$82,784
EXPENDITURES June YTD YTD YTD
BUDGET 2020 2020 %2019
CLUBHOUSE SALARIES $34,300 $2,215 $3,702 10.79%$10,194
ADMINISTRATIVE SALARIES $23,601 $1,793 $11,364 48.15%$8,662
FICA/PERA $10,433 $738 $2,599 24.91%$2,828
MEDICAL INSURANCE $6,653 $554 $3,326 50.00%$3,326
U/E & W/C INSURANCE $2,500 -$66 $3,258 130.32%$2,762
RENTALS $4,750 $520 $568 11.95%$1,591
UTILITIES $15,130 $1,221 $4,916 32.49%$5,078
PROFESSIONAL FEES - AUDIT $2,850 $798 $1,597 56.02%$1,577
PROF FEES - CONSULTING FEES $1,100 $0 $0 0.00%$531
PROF FEES - GROUNDS MGMT $3,000 $0 $0 0.00%$0
PROF FEES - GROUNDS WAGES $22,000 $3,021 $6,090 27.68%$6,597
PROF FEES - TREE MAINTENANCE $1,500 $0 $0 0.00%$0
ADVERTISING/NEWSLETTER $400 $0 $0 0.00%$235
LIABILITY/AUTO INSURANCE $4,200 $0 $3,893 92.70%$3,807
OPERATING COSTS/SUPPLIES $7,650 $587 $1,808 23.63%$1,968
FUEL $1,750 $224 $441 25.20%$518
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE $35,350 $1,391 $17,693 50.05%$13,694
SUNDRY/DUES/MILEAGE/CLOTHING $4,150 $36 $636 15.33%$2,314
CONTINGENCY $0 $0 $0 0.00%$0
ONLINE REG & CREDIT CARD FEES $4,275 $1,452 $2,568 60.08%$1,763
PAR 3 EXPENDITURES TOTAL $185,592 $14,484 $64,458 34.73%$67,445
8/11/2020
page 18
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Wayne Wegener, Police Captain
SUBJECT: AV Equipment for Police Department
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to authorize the purchase and installation of updated AV equipment for the
police department’s squad room.
BACKGROUND
On March 27, 2020, Governor Walz signed Executive Order 20-20. This order, commonly referred
to as the “stay at home order”, directed everyone living within the State of Minnesota to stay at their
home except to engage in specifically outlined activities or work. Since that date, the order has been
extended several times and the way in which organizations conduct business had dramatically
changed.
Executive Order 20-20 has directly affected the Mendota Heights Police Department operations in
several ways. Since the order, meetings, both large and small, which would normally have been
conducted in-person, are now conducted via Zoom, Webex, or through other teleconferencing
mediums. The order has also changed the landscape for the department’s training program. Officers
and other staff are now required to attend State mandated and other trainings, which would normally
have been conducted in-person, interactively through online platforms. Most recent is the way
Executive Order 20-20 has affected officers’ need to provide testimony in criminal cases. The police
department requires officers to provide testimony in cases in which they are summoned. The
department has been advised the court system is now conducting trials and receiving officer testimony
via online platforms.
Updates to the police department’s technology are needed to continue adhering to the directives of
Executive Order 20-20 and the guidelines implemented during the pandemic. The department’s current
technology platform is outdated and does not have the capabilities required to conduct meetings,
trainings, court proceedings, and other official business via online platforms. Updating the technology
in the department’s squad room would allow officers to attend meetings, trainings, and court
proceedings remotely. Furthermore, by updating this technology, multiple officers could attend at the
same time and still maintain social distancing requirements.
BUDGET IMPACT
Our IT vendor prepared a technology solution for the police department’s squad room. The total cost
for materials and installation for this project is $41,859.33 and was procured under a cooperative
page 19
purchasing agreement. The City has received approximately $855,000 in CARES Act funding.
Technology improvements are allowable expenses under the CARES Act. Staff is recommending the
use of CARES Act funding for this project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council approve the purchase and installation of updated AV equipment for the
police department’s squad room with the cost to be paid from CARES Act funding.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize the purchase and installation of AV equipment
for the police department’s squad room in the amount of $41,859.33, with cost to be paid from CARES
Act funding.
page 20
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: City Hall Door Access Control Additions
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to authorize the purchase and installation of additional door access controls
at City Hall.
BACKGROUND
For the health and safety of employees and visitors to City Hall, staff is proposing to install additional
card access readers at doors to the city hall employee breakroom, the police department work out area
and elections storage room.
The proposed is an expansion to the City’s current system which through the use of key fobs and card
readers allows for enhanced and efficient key control, as well as improved building security and staff
safety. Additionally, COVID-19 cleaning and disinfecting requirements, social distancing, food safety
and the potential need for contact tracing in the event of a COVID-19 exposure or outbreak can be
supported with the installation of access controls on these additional doors.
The vendor for the current system is Ban-Koe. Ban-Koe has reviewed the City’s current system and
existing doors and has provided a cost proposal in the amount of $9,066.76 which includes product
and installation.
BUDGET IMPACT
The total cost for product and installation is $9,066.76. The additional building security is not a
budgeted expense. The City has received $855,000 in CARES Act funding. Security and technology
improvements are allowable expenses under the CARES Act. Staff is recommending the use of
CARES Act funding for this project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council approve the purchase and installation of door access controls on
identified city hall doors with the cost to be paid from CARES Act funding.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize the purchase and installation of additional door
access controls at city hall through Ban-koe in the amount of $9,066.76, with cost to be paid from
CARES Act funding.
page 21
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Bonine Donation of Land
Comment:
Introduction:
The Council is asked to consider the donation of a vacant parcel of land from Robert and Kathleen
Bonine.
Background:
The Bonines live at 688 - 3rd Avenue. They have offered to donate to the City two residential
lots, which are located behind and adjacent to their main property. The attached letter and aerial
photo shows the property, which is actually a single tax parcel.
The legal description is Lots 9 and 10, Block 5, Smith TT Subdivision No. 4; consists of 0.34
acres (15,011 sq. ft.) in area; and has a taxable value of $42,600 - per Dakota County Assessor.
The parcel is fairly wooded and mostly wet, and would be difficult to develop should that ever be
a consideration. It is adjacent to a city-owned parcel with wetlands, and a private undeveloped
parcel near the northeast corner of Wentworth Park.
In reviewing historical aerial photos of the area, it appears the lot has been vacant since at least
1937, with no evidence of structures, trash, fill, or excavations. For this reason, we see no reason
to perform a Phase 1 environmental review, should the City Council decide to accept this
donation. The City would be accepting the parcel in an “as is” status.
Budget Impact:
There is a cost to the City to accept this donation, in the form of legal and title work, and
obtaining title insurance on the parcel. The title insurance would be used in case a claim is made
by a third party as to ownership; in such a case, the City could file a claim for clearance or any
damages against the title insurance company. These acceptance costs have been discussed with
the Bonines, and they have agreed to cover up to $3000 of the City’s costs which might be
incurred as a result of this donation.
page 22
The property tax impact is minimal. The 2020 bill for the property is $426, the proceeds from
which are divided between the taxing jurisdictions. The maintenance costs of ownership to the
City should be negligible.
Recommendation:
It is not critical that the City accept this property, but doing so would add to its inventory of
wetlands and undeveloped areas. I recommend accepting the donation.
Action Required:
If the City Council concurs, it should by motion, direct the following:
1. Accept the donation of Lots 9 and 10, Block 5, Smith TT Subdivision No. 4 from Bob
and Kathy Bonine, by approving the Donation Agreement, subject to the receipt of the
reimbursement of eligible donation expenses by the Donors, including Title Insurance, up
to a maximum of $3000;
2. Approve the Quit Claim Deed for the Donation; and
3. Approve of the following:
Resolution 2020-50
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A DONATION OF LAND
FROM ROBERT AND KATHLEEN BONINE
Note that the Donation Agreement and Quit Claim Deed will need to be approved by a
2/3 majority.
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
page 23
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020-50
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE DONATION TO THE CITY OF VACANT LAND
FROM ROBERT AND KATHLEEN BONINE
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights adheres to Minnesota Statute 465.03 “Gifts to
Municipalities”, which requires the City Council to adopt a resolution to accept gifts being made
to the City; and,
WHEREAS, Mendota Heights residents Robert and Kathleen Bonine have offered to
donate to the City two vacant lots totaling 15,011 square feet in size, which have a valuation as
set by Dakota County for taxation purposes in the amount of $42,600; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Mendota Heights hereby agrees that acceptance of this
vacant land would add to the City’s inventory of wetlands, and would therefore serve a public
purpose; and,
WHEREAS, the Bonines will cover the City’s costs incurred with this transfer up to the
amount of $3000; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights has duly considered this
matter and wishes to acknowledge the civic mindedness of Robert and Kathleen Bonine and
officially recognize their donation.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights that it gratefully accepts the donation of the following property from Robert
and Kathleen Bonine:
Lots 9 and 10, Block 5, Smith TT Subdivision No. 4
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Donation Agreement and Quit Claim
Deed that has been drafted to facilitate this donation shall be signed and recorded.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 18th day of August
2020.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
688 - 3rd Ave. Bonine Properties
Property Information
April 16, 2020
0 110 22055 ft
0 30 6015 m
1:1,200
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
page 40
page 41
Dakota County, MN
Property Information
April 30, 2020 0 450 900225 ft
0 130 26065 m
1:4,800
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
page 42
8/11/2020 Mendota Heights Building Activity Report Mike Andrejka, Building Official
July 1, 2020 thru July 31, 2020 January 1, 2020 thru July 31, 2020 January 1, 2019 thru July 31, 2019 January 1, 2018 thru July 31, 2018
Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected
SFD 1 644,585.00$ $7,064.89 SFD 4 2,109,865.00$ $23,557.06 SFD 4 2,836,742.00$ $28,675.36 SFD 5 2,738,348.00$ 30,437.15$
Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 1 9,135,000.00$ $63,519.64 Apartment 1 9,466,820.00$ 65,710.84$
Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 16 4,127,455.00$ 44,286.91$
Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ -$
Misc 87 1,175,009.98$ 16,099.50$ Misc 381 5,031,827.69$ 66,812.31$ Misc 429 6,040,238.73$ 112,801.93$ Misc 321 4,183,695.51$ 62,283.06$
Commercial 0 -$ $0.00 Commercial 7 1,062,090.00$ $9,670.19 Commercial 16 11,212,662.00$ $43,239.39 Commercial 12 8,067,959.00$ 58,126.14$
Sub Total 88 1,819,594.98$ 23,164.39$ Sub Total 392 8,203,782.69$ 100,039.56$ Sub Total 450 29,224,642.73$ 248,236.32$ Sub Total 355 28,584,277.51$ 260,844.10$
Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected
Plumbing 9 $862.50 Plumbing 110 $9,661.20 Plumbing 151 $23,601.28 Plumbing 141 19,786.55$
Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 -$
Sewer 1 $75.00 Sewer 11 $825.00 Sewer 5 $375.00 Sewer 31 2,325.00$
Mechanical 43 $4,076.74 Mechanical 174 397.00$ $15,843.73 Mechanical 180 $20,389.98 Mechanical 300 30,192.66$
Sub Total 53 5,014.24$ Sub Total 295 26,329.93$ Sub Total 336 $44,366.26 Sub Total 472 52,304.21$
License No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected
Contractor 0 $0.00 Contractor 0 $0.00 Contractor 263 $13,150.00 Contractor 259 12,950.00$
Total 141 1,819,594.98$ 28,178.63$ Total 687 8,203,782.69$ 126,369.49$ Total 1049 29,224,642.73$ 305,752.58$ Total 1086 28,584,277.51$ 326,098.31$
NOTE: All fee amounts exclude SAC, WAC and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan review fee and valuation totals
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor Garlock and City Council, City Administrator McNeill
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Planning Application Case No. 2020-14
Critical Area Permit and Conditional Use Permit for 1217 Victoria Curve
Introduction
City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution approving a critical area permit (CAP) to construct
a new single family dwelling on a property situated in the Critical Area Overlay District, along with
conditional use permit (CUP) to construct an oversized attached garage up to 1,475-sf. in size.
Background
Calvin Tran with Tempo Homes is seeking to build a new single-family dwelling for the Truong family.
The new home is scheduled to be a 3,142-sf. (total) two story, single-family dwelling. The owner is also
requesting a 1,480-sf. (area) garage under this new home plan, which requires approval of a CUP for any
garage more than 1,200-sf. but no more than 1,500-sf. in size.
At the July 28, 2020 Planning Commission meeting, a planning report was presented on this item, and a
public hearing was conducted. There were three written comments submitted on this request; and public
comments made during the hearing are noted. A copy of the 07/28/2020 Planning Staff Report, related
attachments, along with excerpt minutes are appended to this memo.
Discussion
The City can use its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on certain land use or zoning
decisions, such as this critical area permit, and has broad discretion. A determination regarding whether or
not the request meets the applicable code standards is required.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve a Critical Area Permit and
Conditional Use Permit applications to Tempo Homes/Vinh Truong, for the property located at 1217
Victoria Curve, based on the findings-of-fact supporting such a recommendation, with conditions.
Action Requested
Pursuant to City Code Section 12-3-17.C, the City Council is required to hold a public hearing on critical
area permit requests. The Council should open the public hearing; take public comments, close the hearing,
and give final consideration on this matter.
If the City Council wishes to affirm the recommendation from the planning commission, make a motion to
adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-46 APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT and CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1217 VICTORIA CURVE.
page 55
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020-46
RESOLUTION APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT
AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR 1217 VICTORIA CURVE
[PLANNING CASE NO. 2020-14]
WHEREAS, Tempo Homes (the “Applicant”) and acting on behalf of Vinh Truong (the
“Owner”) requests approval of a critical area permit (CAP) and conditional use permit (CUP) as
proposed under Planning Case No. 2020-14, for the property located at 1217 Victoria Curve and
legally described in attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is guided LR-Low Density Residential in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan and located in the R-1 One Family Residential District; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 12-3-1 of the City Code (Critical Area Overlay District), a
critical area permit is required for all development activities necessitating a building permit or
special zoning approval, and the Applicant is seeking permission to construct a new single-family
residential dwelling, subject to the requirements of the applicable zoning district and related
Critical Area Overlay District standards; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Title 12-1D-3, Subpart C., any attached private garage
in a residential zone more than one thousand two hundred (1,200) and up to one thousand five
hundred (1,500) square feet is allowed via a conditional use permit, and the Applicant/Owner is
requesting to construct a 1,480-sq. ft. attached garage; and
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2020, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on the proposed CAP and CUP requests, and whereupon closing the hearing,
recommended unanimously (5-0 vote) to approve both the critical area permit and conditional use
permit, which would allow the allow the Applicant to construct a new single-family dwelling in
the Critical Area Overlay District, which includes an attached garage up to 1,475-sf. in area, with
certain conditions and specific findings of fact to support said approval, as noted herein.
page 56
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the
critical area permit and conditional use permit as proposed under Planning Case No. 2020-14 may
be approved, based on the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed single-family dwelling project meets the general purpose and intent
of the Critical Area Overlay District.
B. The proposed work and disturbance to construct this new single-family dwelling is
deemed minimal, reasonable and within the spirit and intent of the Critical Area
Overlay District.
C. The proposed oversized garage requested under this application can be considered
a reasonable request, and will be compliant with the conditions included in the City
Zoning Code that allow such structures by means of a conditional use permit.
D. The proposed single family dwelling with over-sized garage will not be detrimental
to the health, safety or general welfare of the community; should not cause any
serious traffic congestion nor hazards; will not seriously depreciate surrounding
property value; and said use appears to be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the City Code and the Comprehensive Plan.
E. The overall construction of this proposed residential home with over-sized garage
will comply with all standards and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and other
applicable ordinances; represents reinvestment in a residential neighborhood that is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s goals for residential land uses; fits well
with the current developed character of the neighborhood; and will be a nice
addition to the neighborhood.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the critical
area permit and conditional use permit, which would allow the allow the construction of a new
single-family dwelling in the Critical Area Overlay District, which includes an attached garage
1,475-sf. in area, as proposed under Planning Case No. 2020-14, is hereby approved with the
following conditions:
1. A building permit, including all new grading and drainage work, must be approved
by the City of Mendota Heights prior to the commencement of any new
construction work.
2. Full erosion and sedimentation measures will be put in place prior to and during
grading and construction work activities.
3. 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.
4. All work on site will only be performed between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00
PM Monday through Friday; 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM weekends.
page 57
5. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an
established and permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 4th day of August, 2020
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
________________________________
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
page 58
EXHIBIT A
Property Address: 1217 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Property ID No.: 27-15600-00-022
Legal Description:
Lot 2, BURNS HEIGHTS, except the North one-third (1/3) thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota
[Torrens Property]
page 59
Planning Staff Report
(Amended 07/29/2020)
DATE: July 28, 2020
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Case No. 2020-14
CRITICAL AREA PERMIT & CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: Tempo Homes (Calvin Tran) / Vinh Truong - Owner
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1217 Victoria Curve
ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential
ACTION DEADLINE: August 28, 2020
INTRODUCTION
Calvin Tran with Tempo Homes, as the Applicant and acting on behalf of Vinh Truong, is seeking a Critical
Area Permit to construct a new single family dwelling on property situated in the Critical Area Overlay
District. City Code Section 12-3-5 requires a critical area permit (CAP) for all major development activities
requiring a building permit or special zoning approval in this overlay district. The Applicants also seek
a conditional use permit (CUP) to construct an oversized attached garage up to 1,480-sf. in size.
This item is being presented under a duly noticed public hearing process. A notice of hearing was published
in the Pioneer Press; and notice letters were mailed to all owners within 350-feet of the subject property.
The city has not received any objection or comments related to this application.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is 0.70 acres in
size, and located between Glenhill
Road and Hunter Lane
(aerial/location image - right).
The property is situated in the R-1
One Family Residential zone, and is
in the Mississippi River Corridor
Critical Area overlay district. This
is an existing lot of record, which
has been vacant for a number of
years.
In early 2019, the former owner of
the subject property was seeking to
page 60
sell or develop the property with a new single-family dwelling. As part of his pre-development preparation
of this site, this owner requested permission to do limited tree and brush removals on the property,
consisting mainly of some overgrown buckthorn trees, box elders, volunteer shrubs and other invasive
vegetation. The owner wanted to clear an area for a proposed house pad, along with a path for a driveway.
The city council approved an Administrative Critical Area Permit to complete this vegetation removal work
by adopting Resolution No. 2019-21 (03/19/2019).
Earlier this year, the former owner sold this lot to Mr. Vinh Truong, who is now seeking to build this new
single-family dwelling on this parcel. The new home is scheduled to be a 3,142-sf. (total) two story, flat
roofed modern architectural style dwelling (see image – below).
The survey/site plan calls for the home to
have a setback of 132.5-ft. from the front
lot line. There is an additional 80-90-ft.
(approx.) of right-of-way boulevard
space from the front lot line to the curb
line of Victoria Curve. The other
setbacks are noted as 15.3 feet from the
east; 62.3-ft. from rear; and 20-ft. to the
west. The plan calls for a long driveway
to be installed off of Victoria Curve,
which leads a circular driveway pad
located in the front of the new home
(refer to image right – or full survey/site
plan attached hereto).
The proposed garage is designed with
two, 18’ x 8’ overhead garage doors.
Code limits garage doors to 36-ft. (lineal)
in length. Pursuant to City Code Title 12-
1D-3 Subpart C.1; residential dwellings
with an attached private garage are
allowed to have “more than 1,200 up to
1,500 square feet via a conditional use
permit. The Applicant is requesting to
provide a 1,480-sf. garage under this
new home plan.
page 61
ANALYSIS
Critical Are Permit
According to Title 12-3-2 of the City Code, the purpose and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District is:
…to prevent and mitigate irreversible damage to this unique state, local, regional and national resource to
promote orderly development of the residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and public areas, to
preserve and enhance its values to the public and protect and preserve the system as an essential element
in the city's transportation, sewer and water and recreational systems…
The pertinent provisions of the Critical Area Overlay District that apply to this application are:
Section 12-3-5. Site Plan Requirements:
A: Site Plan Required: No building permit, zoning approval, or subdivision approval permit or
certificate shall be issued for any action or development located in an area covered by this chapter
until a site plan has been prepared and approved in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
Section 12-3-8: Development Standards:
A. Objectives: The objectives of dimensional standards are to maintain the aesthetic integrity and
natural environment of the Mississippi River corridor critical area. These standards are designed
to protect and enhance the shoreline and bluff areas, as well as provide sufficient setback for on-
site sanitary facilities, to prevent erosion of bluffs, to minimize flood damage and to prevent
pollution of surface and ground water.
B. Structure Setbacks: All new structures shall meet the following minimum setbacks:
1. Setback from Bluff Line: No structure shall be constructed less than forty feet (40') landward
from the bluff line of the river.
2. Setback from Normal High Water Mark: No structure or road shall be constructed less than
one hundred feet (100') from the normal high water mark of any water body.
C. Height of Structures: All new structures shall be limited to the lesser of the underlying zoning
district regulations or thirty-five feet (35')
The subject property does not contain any bluffs or bluff impact zones. The subject property is situated
over 250-ft. from the nearest bluff impact zone under the current MRCCA-GIS mapping for the community,
which is located immediately to the west of the property ((red shaded areas – image below).
page 62
There are no water bodies or features in or directly adjacent to the subject property. The nearest water body
(major) is Augusta Lake, which is located southwest of the subject property, and is well over 1,450-feet
from the closest corner of the lot. The next closest water feature is City Hall Pond directly to the east,
which sits approximately 830-ft. from this site.
Zoning Code limits the heights of homes to 2-stories, and 25-feet in overall or measured height. For flat
roofed dwellings, the uppermost point or projection of the roof is measured.
The construction of this new residential dwelling will comply with all standards and regulations of the
Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant must demonstrate the development of this site will not impact
neighboring residential properties, and must ensure that proper and positive drainage is maintained during
and after construction of the new home.
For all intents and purposes, approving this critical area permit and allowing construction of this new
dwelling should have little, if any effect upon the existing Mississippi Critical Area or the surrounding
neighborhood environment.
Conditional Use Permit
The proposed attached, private garage requires a conditional use permit (CUP) to exceed the maximum
allowed size of an attached garage in the R-1 District. Pursuant to City Code Title 12-1D-3
Accessory Structures, Subpart C.1; residential dwellings are permitted to have one attached private garage
up to 1,200-sq. ft. in area, and provides an allowance for owners to request up to 1,500-sq. ft. by means
of a CUP. Under this request, the Applicant is seeking to provide a 1,480-sq. ft. garage.
Title 12-1L-6-E-1 of the City Code contains standards for reviewing a conditional use permit request, with
the following principles to be taken into consideration:
The effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, and welfare of occupants or surrounding lands;
existing and anticipated traffic conditions including parking facilities on adjacent streets; and
the effect of the proposed use on the comprehensive plan.
In addition, City Code provides the following standards which must be met:
The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community;
will not cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards;
will not seriously depreciate surrounding property value; and
the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City Code and the
comprehensive plan.
The new garage proposed by the Applicant is designed to fit within the overall “squared” footprint of the
dwelling structure, and should easily accommodate the needs of parking personal vehicles and added
personal storage and equipment. All setbacks will be met under this plan.
Although the former owner did remove a number of trees and vegetation under the previously approved
Administrative Critical Area Permit, this new house project and driveway will necessitate the removals of
some additional trees and shrubs to accommodate this project. The Applicant identified all significant trees
6-inches or greater on the survey. The Applicant has indicated they will re-plant one new tree for every
significant tree 6” or more in diameter that is removed under this new home project.
City staff believes the new single-family residential dwelling, with the oversized attached private garage,
will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the neighborhood or the community; or
page 63
cause any serious traffic congestion, hazards; or seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The
proposed dwelling appears to be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City Code and the
comprehensive plan; and the CUP as presented herein is supported and may be approved.
INTERAGENCY REVIEW
In addition to the public and private property owners within 350 feet of the subject parcel, public hearing
notices and application materials were sent to the following agencies for review and comment:
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR)
• Acknowledged receipt of the application; and have no objections or requested additional
information or conditions related to this development request.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the Critical Area Permit and Conditional Use Permit request for 1217 Victoria Curve,
which would allow the construction of a new single-family dwelling with an oversized attached
garage, based on the findings of fact that the proposed project is compliant with the policies and
standards of the City Code with certain conditions; or
2. Deny the Critical Area Permit and Conditional Use Permit request for 1217 Victoria Curve, based
on the findings of fact that the applications do not meet certain policies and standards of City Code,
as determined by the Planning Commission; or
3. Table the request; direct staff to work with the Applicants and allow them more time to refine the
site plan for the property, and extend the application review period an additional 60 days, in
compliance with MN STAT. 15.99.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval Critical Area Permit and Conditional Use Permit request for 1217 Victoria
Curve, which would allow the construction of a new single-family dwelling with an oversized attached
garage, with the following conditions:
1. A building permit, including all new grading and drainage work, must be approved by the City of
Mendota Heights prior to the commencement of any new construction work.
2. Full erosion and sedimentation measures will be put in place prior to and during grading and
construction work activities.
3. 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.
4. A complete and detailed landscaping plan must be submitted to the City for review and approval
as part of any new building permit process. The Applicant agrees to replant one new tree (minimum
2.5” caliper size for deciduous and 6’-ft. for evergreens) for each significant tree removed from the
site for this home project. As per the city’s Pollinator Friendly Policy, all new trees and landscaping
shall meet the city’s Native Plant List.
5. All work on site will only be performed between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM Monday
through Friday; 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM weekends.
6. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored and have an established and
permanent ground cover immediately after the project is completed.
page 64
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL
Critical Area Permit & Conditional Use Permit
for
1217 Victoria Curve
The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed requests:
1. The proposed single-family dwelling project meets the general purpose and intent of the Critical
Area Overlay District.
2. The proposed work and disturbance to construct this new single-family dwelling is deemed
minimal, reasonable and within the spirit and intent of the Critical Area Overlay District.
3. The proposed oversized garage requested under this application can be considered a reasonable
request, and will be compliant with the conditions included in the City Zoning Code that allow such
structures by means of a conditional use permit.
4. The proposed single family dwelling with over-sized garage will not be detrimental to the health,
safety or general welfare of the community; should not cause any serious traffic congestion nor
hazards; will not seriously depreciate surrounding property value; and said use appears to be in
harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City Code and the Comprehensive Plan.
5. The overall construction of this proposed residential home with over-sized garage will comply with
all standards and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances; represents
reinvestment in a residential neighborhood that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s goals
for residential land uses; fits well with the current developed character of the neighborhood; and
will be a nice addition to the neighborhood.
page 65
page 66
EUEUEUEUEU EU EU EU
EU
EU
$16666666666666666
6666666666666666
66666666666666
66
66666666666666666 6 6
6666 66666 6
66666666
6
FMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFM
FM
FM
FM
FM
FM FMFMFM FMFMFMFM11791215
1919
1948
2025
1190
1200
19911949
1242
1954
1199 1187
1936
1219
1942 12001206
1205
1941
1921
1169
1903
1181
1940
1916
1230
1224
1920
1935
1235 1908
1914
1905 190719081248
2020
1203
1193
1933
1163370
1901
1290
1290
1264
1902
HWY 62 HUNTER LNCULLIGAN LN
GLENHILL RDCENTRE POINTE CUR
VICTORIA CUR
VERONICA LN
HWY 62 0'476'351'
295'327'322'282'360'
249'226'
308'
299'205'287.5'217'175'15
1
'95'128'80'75'88'5
8
'62'274'0'249'1217 VICTORIA CURVE (Tempo Homes)
City of
Mendota
Heights0190
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.
7/2/2020
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
91REVISIONSBYDESIGN and DRAFTING BY:PHONE: 763.757.5997ANDOVER, MINNESOTAWWW.CROIXDESIGN.COMARCHITECTURAL DESIGN and DRAFTING SERVICEHOME PLAN SERVICECUSTOM HOMESREMODELINGTEMPOMHO SEpage 71
29TEMPO HOMESpage 72
39TEMPO HOMESpage 73
49TEMPO HOMESpage 74
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 28, 2020
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 28,
2020 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Mary Magnuson, Commissioners Patrick
Corbett, Litton Field, Michael Toth, and Andrew Katz. Those absent: Commissioners John
Mazzitello and Brian Petschel.
Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as submitted.
Approval of June 23, 2020 Minutes
COMMISSIONER CORBETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 23, 2020
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
Hearings
A) PLANNING CASE 2020-14
TEMPO HOMES AND VINH TRUONG, 1217 VICTORIA CURVE – CRITICAL
AREA PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Calvin Tran with Tempo Homes,
as the applicant acting on behalf of Vinh Truong, is seeking a Critical Area Permit to construct a
new single-family dwelling on property situated in the Critical Area Overlay District. City Code
Section 12-305 requires a critical area permit (CAP) for all major development activities requiring
a building permit or special zoning approval in this overlay district. The applicants also seek a
conditional use permit (CUP) to construct an oversized attached garage up to 1,475 square feet in
size.
Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; comments
received were included in the packet.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a planning staff report and a presentation
on this planning item to the Commission (which is available for viewing through the City’s
website).
page 75
Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions.
Commissioner Corbett asked for details on ordinances dictating the position of the home on the
lot. He asked if the string method of determining setbacks was used, or whether it should be used.
He also asked if the adjacent homes are in compliance with the right-of-way setbacks.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that staff and legal counsel came to the
conclusion that the string yard rule applies to the minimum front yard setback rule and provided
background information on that rule.
Commissioner Corbett stated that it would then appear there is no intent in the string method to
align home placement and is strictly a minimum front yard setback.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that only establishes a minimum front
yard setback. He explained that a home could be placed further back on the lot, as long as the
other required setbacks are met.
Calvin Tran, Tempo Homes, representing the applicant, provided information on the owner of the
property, who works at the VA and chose this home selection because it was close to his work.
He also provided background information on himself and his past ten years of experience. He
stated that they have taken the issues of erosion and drainage, which he believes are addressed by
their plan. He stated that the design of the home is more modern, as he builds modern custom
homes. He stated that all the concerns of the neighbors have been taken into consideration. He
stated that they revised the drainage plan to address the issues of the neighbor, directing the water
away from adjacent lots and instead to Victoria Curve.
Commissioner Katz asked for details on the choice to place the home so far back on the lot.
Mr. Tran stated that they chose the back placement in order to minimize the impact of tree removal.
He noted that the driveway was also a concern, noting that the closer to Victoria Curve, the harder
it would be to meet the slope requirements because of the topography of the hill.
Commissioner Katz stated that it would appear that they are placing the home further back and at
the highest spot, therefore his concern would be for two of the neighbors who would have a house
sitting in an area that was their backyard or side yard. He stated that he would want to see a plan
in place to create a natural border to minimize that impacts to neighbors. He asked if any of the
grading would have to be changed on the property.
Mr. Tran stated that if they choose another location for the home, they will have to remove more
trees. He stated that he has a background in landscaping, and they have revised their erosion and
grading plan to drain the water out towards the street rather than to the adjacent neighbors.
Chair Magnuson opened the public hearing.
Alan Olstein, 1954 Glenhill Road, stated that he and his neighbors have concerns with the drainage
from this site. He stated that the applicant has stated that his plan has been modified to address
page 76
some of the drainage concerns brought forward in previous conversations. He stated that if you
follow the arrows where water is going to flow, it goes into three of the adjacent neighboring lots.
He stated that they would like to know about the measures being contemplated to resolve this
drainage problem. He stated that a number of the neighbors have questions the choice of home
placement for the lot, considering the added distance between the roof and Victoria Curve, which
is where the water is supposed to go. He explained that additional front setback would only
increase the distance the water needs to travel.
Chair Magnuson asked if Mr. Olstein has had an opportunity to speak with the builder.
Mr. Olstein replied that they have not met with the builder and the first they heard of this request
was the notice from the City the previous week.
Greg Bolin, 1215 Victoria Curve, stated that he sent an email with photographs to staff last Friday.
He noted that his first concern is with the drainage for the site. He stated that the arrows on the
plan show water going right to his home/basement. He noted that he has been told that a swale is
included and wanted to ensure that would be provided to protect his home. He stated that in
reviewing the grading contours, many of the lines come close to mature trees on his property and
into some of his landscaping. He wanted to ensure that grading would be staked in order to prevent
damage to mature trees and landscaping. He stated that his final concern is with the home
placement. He noted that all of the homes were placed in a manner that each looks out into the
backyards of other, whereas the placement of this home would be in the middle of everyone’s line
of sight.
Chair Magnuson asked for details related to the elevation of the subject property compared to the
Bolin property.
Mr. Bolin replied that the subject property is about two feet higher than his property.
Lynn Burow, 1219 Victoria Curve, and property owner to the west, stated that her concern is with
the drainage. She stated that she does not want the water to go into her garage. She stated that she
does not mind the placement of the home as it is less impactful to her home and the trees would
remain.
Commissioner Katz asked if the resident has a problem with drainage currently.
Ms. Burow commented that sometimes the garage is wet after a large amount of snow melts. She
stated that she would not be concerned with the addition of the homes, as long as there is not
disturbance within 20 feet of her garage as she did not believe that would impact her home at that
point. She stated that if most of the drainage goes to the street, she believed there would not be an
additional issue.
Commissioner Katz asked if the resident has spoken with Tempo Homes.
Ms. Burow commented that she has not.
page 77
Commissioner Katz asked if the retaining wall between the resident garage and the property line
is existing.
Ms. Burow stated that she has a hand-built boulder wall that is not technically a retaining wall.
Commissioner Toth asked the type of soil on the subject site.
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that a soil survey has not been submitted. He
commented that staff would not be concerned about a wetland type soil, it would be a more stable
soil.
Commissioner Toth commented that if the type of soil were known, that would help to determine
the impact. He stated that it would also be helpful to know the elevation of the footings of the
homes to the east and west compared to what is being built. He reviewed some of those elevations
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek provided details on the elevations of the proposed home.
Mr. Tran commented that the elevation of the proposed home on its east side is very similar to the
elevation of the home to the east.
Seeing no one further coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Magnuson asked for a motion to
close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER CORBETT, MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FIELD, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CRITICAL AREA PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST FOR 1217 VICTORIA CURVE, WITH WOULD ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING WITH AN OVERSIZED
ATTACHED GARAGE, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. A BUILDING PERMIT, INCLUDING ALL NEW GRADING AND DRAINAGE
WORK, MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PRIOR TO
THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION WORK.
2. FULL EROSION AND SEDIMENT MEASURES WILL BE PUT IN PLACE PRIOR TO
AND DURING GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION WORK ACTIVITIES.
3. 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.
4. A COMPLETE AND DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED TO
THE CITY FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL AS PART OF ANY NEW BUILDING
PERMIT PROCESS. THE APPLICANT AGREES TO REPLANT ONE NEW TREE
page 78
(MINIMUM 2.5” CALIPER SIZE FOR DECIDUOUS AND 6’ FOR EVERGREENS)
FOR EACH SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVED FROM THE SITE FOR THIS HOME
PROJECT. AS PER THE CITY’S POLLINATOR FRIENDLY POLICY, ALL NEW
TREES AND LANDSCAPING SHALL MEET THE CITY’S NATIVE PLANT LIST.
5. ALL WORK ON SITE WILL ONLY BE PERFORMED BETWEEN THE HOURS OF
7:00 A.M. AND 8:00 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY; 9:00 A.M. TO 5:00 P.M.
WEEKENDS.
6. ALL DISTURBED AREAS IN AND AROUND THE PROJECT SITE SHALL BE
RESTORED AND HAVE ESTABLISHED AND PERMANENT GROUND COVER
IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED.
Further discussion:
Commissioner Field noted that many of the concerns expressed will be addressed throughout the
City review process.
Chair Magnuson encouraged the builder to make themselves available to the neighbors to hear
their concerns related to drainage.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
Chair Magnuson advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 4, 2020
meeting.
page 79
Kathryn Lovaas Jewell
1948 Glenhill Rd.
Mendota Hts., MN 55118
July 22, 2020
Re: Case No. 2020-14
Mendota Heights Planning Commission
Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
Thank you for accepting my comments in writing as I will be unable to attend the July
28th planning commission meeting.
We all love our City of Mendota Heights and our community and want to be sure that we
continue to build a strong community that is considered an outstanding place to live. I
thank all of you for the thoughtful work you have invested in our community.
I live at 1948 Glenhill Road and the back 1/3 of my south lot line connects with the north
lot line of the property at 1217 Victoria Curve. I built on this lot 20 years ago. At that
time, the drainage plan indicated that rain water run-off from 1936 and 1942 Glenhill
Road would run south and across to my southern lot line. We had no more than begun
construction when we realized that the amount of water that was meant to drain from our
south lot line out to the street was more than could occur naturally. We installed a drain
in the yard that is more than two feet in diameter and it helps to empty the run-off from
my lot. In a heavy rain, I will have what looks like a river running from north to south
across my lot.
In spite of these efforts, we still have issues with the pooling of water between my home
and my neighbors’ home at 1954 Glenhill Road. We continuously work to regrade and
change the landscaping to try and eliminate this issue.
The new home at 1217 Victoria Curve has the vast majority of the run-off going out to
Victoria Curve. But the plans also indicate that run-off will come off of the northwest
corner of the roof and onto my property. It appears the home has a flat roof that will
exacerbate that run-off issue.
Please explore options for the run-off. The lot could be graded so it all slopes to Victoria
Curve or berms could be built to contain the run-off. Hopefully a solution can be found
that will not add to an already difficult rain water issue.
I have a second concern and that is the placement of the new home. I understand that the
reasons for the current placement have to do with the overhead power line and the need to
create a driveway grade that is accessible. I recognize that we do not have an
page 80
architectural review board in Mendota Heights but we seem to operate with the
expectation that setbacks are reasonably uniform. The setback for the subject project will
be different than the other homes on the block. Please review the request for home
placement to see what options are available to both meet the needs of the homeowner and
to add a property that ties in well with the other structures in the neighborhood.
My final comment pertains to the planned landscaping of the area adjacent to Victoria
Road. If I understand the plan correctly, that area is going to be left as a dip and fairly
wild. Additional landscaping in this area may help solve some of the runoff issues and
increase the attractiveness of the entry to the home.
Again, I thank you for the time and effort you provide to our city. Please feel free to
reach out to me with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Kathryn (Kae) Jewell
page 81
July 23, 2020
Re# 2020-14
Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
Mendota Heights Planning Commission
Hello,
My husband, Lowell Chapin, and I, Jane McKay, regretfully will not
make it to the July 28th meeting . You will be reviewing two projects affecting
our property at 1949 Glenhill Road. We will address them in separate memos.
Our main concern is the landscaping proposed for 1217 Victoria Curve.
The adjacent property, the north and east curb of Glenhill Road, at the
intersection of Victoria Curve and Glenhill Road. It is a blind corner caused by
vegetation is an eyesore to us, and is seldom maintained. We are hoping for
some kind of terracing .
Thank you for the time you spend on reviewing developments in our special
community.
Sincerely,
Jane McKay and Lowell Chapin
page 82
From:egbolin@comcast.net
To:Tim Benetti
Subject:Proposed Home at 1217 Victoria Curve
Date:Friday, July 24, 2020 3:35:42 PM
Tim,
We live at 1215 Victoria Curve, next door to the proposed house at 1217 Victoria
Curve. We are writing to provide comments to the City and the Planning Commission
in connection with the hearing on July 28, 2020.
The proposed home and site plan have created 3 primary concerns to us. We
respectfully request the City and the Planning Commission consider each.
We are very concerned about water flow/drainage from the new house toward
our house. We are under the understanding that a swale will be created to
divert the flow away from our house, but would like to confirm that, and have it
be made a requirement for permitting. The attached marked-up site plan shows
the area of concern.
We are very concerned about grading on the hill in front of our house. We
measured (approximately) where the dark grading lines on the site plan end.
One ends 6' from a mature 30'-40' spruce tree. We are concerned that any
grading will impact the root system. In addition, one of the grading lines runs
across an existing arbor vitae hedge. We request that it be made a requirement
for permitting that the grading area be staked prior to any grading taking place
and that any grading not be allowed that would impact the hedge or any
evergreen. The attached marked-up site plan shows the area of concern. We
will also be sending separately photos of the areas impacted.
And finally, we are concerned about site lines. Presently, there are only 6
homes in this area along Victoria Curve. All existing homes have the same set
back from the street. The proposed home is set substantially back from this
line. When we renovated our house, we constructed it assuming an in-line
home being built on the vacant lot. We will now be looking directly at the house
from just about every window we have. This will definitely, negatively affect the
value of our house. An aerial of the siting of the proposed home, along with
various site lines/views, will be sent separately.
We anticipate that we will be at the meeting, but wanted to outline our concerns in
writing prior to the meeting. We would include all scans/photos with this email, but
we're not sure if it would get through in one email. Please call with any questions.
Thanks,
Greg & Edie Bolin
1215 Victoria Curve
651-905-9318
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
From:egbolin@comcast.net
To:Tim Benetti
Cc:Ryan Ruzek
Subject:Proposed Home at 1217 Victoria Curve
Date:Wednesday, July 29, 2020 7:57:56 PM
Tim,
Please add this to the information the City Council will receive for their meeting next
week. We have reviewed the "Certificate of Survey" and the "Site & Grading Plan"
that you forwarded today and have additional comments.
During the Planning Commission meeting last night, several Commissioners
discussed the various elevations of the 1217 property. We do not read surveys on
even a limited basis, so we could not always follow along.
I spoke last night at the meeting and at the end of my time, Commissioner Magnuson
asked me the difference in elevation between my property and the 1217 property. I
responded that it was 1 or 2 feet. That is the present difference between the
properties.
What I did not realize, and what was not made clear at the meeting (at least to us), is
that the owner of the 1217 property will build up their lot an additional 3 feet in the
middle. It appears the top of their driveway and even the front steps of the proposed
house are at an elevation of 913.87.
The foundation of my house directly east of this area, is at an elevation of 908.28.
This is a difference of 5.59 feet lower, not 1 or 2 feet. Please note that we have a
basement under this part of the house and it has never flooded in 20+ years.
It also appears this decrease in elevation of 5.59 feet will occur over a distance of
approximately 30 feet. This seems rather drastic for a slope that is not there now and
will be man-made.
Furthermore, the water will run straight at our house with no diversion. That will
negatively impact our home.
Frankly, after reviewing the Site & Grading Plan, the build-up appears to flood our
entire yard all along the property line, not just by our home.
We request of the City Council that this item be tabled for further study.
Please call with any questions.
Greg & Edie Bolin
1215 Victoria Curve
651-247-9080
page 91
From:Neil Garlock
To:Tim Benetti
Subject:Fwd: 1217 Victoria Curve Home Construction up for approval at next City Council Meeting
Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:15:13 AM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "egbolin@comcast.net" <egbolin@comcast.net>
Date: August 11, 2020 at 8:19:29 PM CDT
To: Neil Garlock <neilg@mendota-heights.com>
Subject: 1217 Victoria Curve Home Construction up for approval at next City Council
Meeting
Mayor Garlock,
We live at 1215 Victoria Curve, next to the proposed house at 1217 Victoria Curve
which will come before the Council for permit approvals at next Tuesday's Council
Meeting.
While we look forward to having new neighbors, we have several concerns
regarding their plans. We respectfully request you to consider the concerns listed
below.
Water Flow/Drainage Issues:
The Site Plan contemplates adding 3 feet of fill in front of the house,
increasing the elevation from 910' to 913'. The corner of our house is 908'.
The build up creates a severe slope toward neighboring properties, including
ours, of approx. 33% to 35% from the edge of the built-up areas.
The elevation difference where the properties touch neighbors lot lines is
minimal. This increased elevation is at the center of the properties.
The Site Plan's water flow is designed to send the bulk of the drainage to
Victoria Curve, yet the home is set at the back of the lot.
In addition, the length of the driveway, plus the circular feature, results in a
greatly increased impervious area.
Our Soil has a very heavy clay content, which is not accurately reflected in
the State's overall soil mapping. This has created flooding in our basement in
the past (south side of house) and we have spent a considerable amount of
money berming and excavating/sealing some of our basement walls already.
To date we have not had that issue on our west side and do not wish to have
a problem there.
Sight Lines:
Currently there are only 6 homes on Victoria Curve, all with the same set
back from the street. 1217 will be the last site developed along Victoria
Curve. The proposed home is set substantially back from that line,
page 92
obstructing the views of numerous neighbors' backyard space.
When we renovated our home, we built assuming an in-line home being
built on the vacant lot. But, we will now be looking directly at their home
and they will be looking into our sunroom and backyard patio. The
photo attached is from edge of our lot where their home will be placed.
We will have an opposite view of their home.
Not only will we feel like we are living in a 'fish bowl', but this will
negatively affect the value of our home.
The homes surrounding the remainder of the block (on either side of Glenhill,
Culligan, and Hunter) all have equivalent setbacks. 1217 would be the only
house among the immediate 24 homes that has a different setback. There
has been an orderly development up to this point. This will adversely affect
the character of the neighborhood.
The Planning Commission, and we, were told the house could not be aligned
with the other homes due to the steep trajectory or slope of the driveway as it
would create a driveway too steep for city code.
We engaged counsel for advice (Taft law firm(fka Briggs & Morgan))
and they estimated the driveway could easily be developed to meet city
code with the house aligned with the other homes.
The Planning Commission, and we, were told the house drawings submitted
were flipped and that the garage would abut our yard. That, apparently, was
incorrect and the taller living space will look over our yard, thus increasing
privacy issues.
The Community Development Director told the Planning Commission, and us,
that it took some discussion to clarify the vague string rule with the City's
Attorney, but that it does not apply to homes moved back in lots, only those
moved forward. However, a reading of the rule would result in the house
being situated no greater than 1/3 of the lot depth. The plan currently shows
a 54% setback.
We would request a review of the placement of the proposed home and further
analysis of the drainage issues.
We hoped to discuss with the homeowner and contractor several ideas we have
regarding the soil drainage, the home's location, and privacy issues. However, our
current neighbors reached out to the contractor and were told (rather bluntly) that
they are following up with the Community Development Director and following city
and state guidelines to address any issues. They implied they did not want or need
to talk to us.
Because we have been unable to speak with the contractor or homeowner, we
reached our to Tim Benetti last week to request copies of all his correspondence,
meetings, phone conversations and emails related to the proposed construction.
We were hoping to look for their rationale for proceeding the way they are. We
have been told these are public records. Unfortunately we have not heard back
from Mr. Benetti, yet.
As of today, we discovered a new issue. Xcel indicated they are designing a
relocation of the above-ground power lines around the perimeter of the 1217 lot. It
currently bisects the lot with 123 linear feet. This new configuration will result in
369 linear feet (3 times the existing length) and will directly impact 3 adjacent lots
with overhead lines. We are just beginning to look into this, but additional overhead
lines bordering our lot is not advantageous.
page 93
We welcome new neighbors and Mendota Heights' desire to support new
development. And, we have always appreciated the city's desire to make sure new
development did not adversely affect existing homes and neighborhoods.
Could we spend a few moments, at your convenience, to discuss this with you in
person before the Council Meeting on Tuesday? We will follow up in the next few
days .
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Edie & Greg Bolin
EGBolin@comcast.net
651-905-9318
page 94
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Ordinance 558: Amending No Parking on Mendota Heights Road and Warrior
Drive and Adding an All-Way Stop at Culligan Lane and Glenhill Road
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve Ordinance 558 amending City Code; Title 6, Chapter 3, Section
1 and 3.
BACKGROUND
The Mendota Heights Traffic Safety Committee meets quarterly to discuss resident concerns
regarding traffic issues in the city. Issues discussed in 2020 include parking issues on Warrior
Drive and Mendota Heights Road. The Committee also reviewed the stop sign request for
Culligan Lane and Glenhill Road. Other items not requiring Council action were also discussed
this year including speed limits, proposed crosswalks and other traffic concerns on Sibley
Memorial Highway.
DISCUSSION
Warrior Drive
At the January Traffic Safety Committee meeting, a discussion of parking on Warrior Drive
occurred. In reviewing the existing code for parking on Warrior Drive versus how the street is
designed and currently signed, changes are required to be made. The following changes are
proposed:
• Remove the code provision restricting parking around a pedestrian access across from
Sibley Court as there is no pedestrian access at this location.
• Add a restriction to parking on the southbound lane adjacent to the median as there is not
room for on-street parking.
• Add a restriction on parking in the cul-de-sac as the cul-de-sac does not meet the standard
size due to limited right-of-way.
page 95
• Reduce the restriction on parking on the west side of Warrior Drive north of the median
to only restrict parking between 7:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M., WHEN SCHOOL IS IN
SESSION.
Mendota Heights Road (Friendly Hills Middle School)
The Traffic Safety Committee also discussed traffic movement around Friendly Hills Middle
School. The Committee proposes to meet again prior to the start of the school year and is
currently proposing to remove the “No Parking” on the north side of Mendota Heights Road and
replace the “No Parking” signs on the south side of Mendota Heights Road with “No Parking
or Stopping” signs.
Culligan Lane and Glenhill Road
The Committee is also recommending that the Glenhill Road and Culligan Lane intersection be
added as an All-Way Stop Intersection. Due to the topography and that a number of mature trees
would need to be removed from the Mississippi River Critical Area, the committee is proposing
that this intersection should become an All-Way Stop.
Letters were mailed to all residents living on these streets. The following comments were
received:
1920 Glenhill Road was opposed to having an additional sign in their yard and felt an All-Way
stop was excessive. It was explained that the existing street name signs would be installed on top
of the stop sign and there would not be an additional post. This property would also prefer the
stop sign over tree removals.
1949 Glenhill Road felt an All-Way Stop was excessive and would recommend “Yield” signs.
1224 Culligan Lane feels that only one of the streets could have a “Yield” sign. Additional
information is on the attached letter.
1248 Culligan Lane - I do agree with my neighbors with small children that something needs to
be done about other neighbors who come through the neighborhood much too fast. However, I
don’t feel that installing stop signs will do anything to curb the habits of the speeders. They will
not stop for a sign unless the police enforce the signs. I saw Mark Hunts note saying that it will
give the families with kids a false sense of security and may actually increase the chance of a
child getting hurt. I thought it may help to put a 15/mph speed limit sign at the corner of
Victoria Curve and Glenhill. Again, those who speed through the neighborhood will ignore that
sign. They don’t obey the current speed limits already in place. I don’t have the answer but, I
feel our neighbors need to come together to determine the best action to be taken before we take
the wrong action.
1936 Glenhill Road states that they are planning to remove the trees on their corner and that a
document will be submitted ahead of the meeting from other neighbors expressing an alternate
traffic control configuration.
These comments are in addition to the mostly pro-stop signs statements from residents who
attended the Traffic Safety Committee meeting, either in person or by telephone.
BUDGET IMPACT
The “No Parking” areas and All-Way Stop are required to be identified with signs. Street signs
would be installed by Public Works.
page 96
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the discussion at their meeting of July 7th (minutes attached) the Traffic Safety
Committee recommends implementation of the parking changes on Warrior Drive listed in this
memo, and that a 4-way stop sign be installed at the intersection of Glenhill Road and Culligan
Lane. To implement these changes, the Council should approve Ordnance 558 amending Tittle
6, Chapter 3 of the City Code.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should pass a motion adopting Ordinance 558, “AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3, OF THE CITY CODE”. This action requires a simple
majority vote.
page 97
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
ORDINANCE NO. 558
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 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 1, Paragraph B of the City Code:
All-Way Stop Intersections:
Culligan Lane and Glenhill Road
The following streets are hereby modified from Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3, Paragraph C of the City
Code:
Street Side Location
Mendota Heights Road Either Between and to with 100 feet east or west of the 2
driveway entrances to the Friendly Hills Middle
School
Mendota Heights Road South Between and to with 100 feet east or west of the 2
driveway entrances to the Friendly Hills Middle
School
Warrior Drive East 50 feet wide, centered on the pedestrian crosswalk
located across from and just north of Sibley Court
Warrior Drive East From Henry Sibley High School Driveway to end
Warrior Drive West From 75 feet north of Henry Sibley High School
Driveway to end
Warrior Drive West From Mendota Road to 570 feet north of
High Ridge Circle
The following streets are hereby modified from Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3, Paragraph D of the City
Code:
7:00 A.M. TO 2:00 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, WHEN SCHOOL IS IN SESSION
Street Side Location
Warrior Drive West North 600 feet
page 98
Warrior Drive West From 75 feet north of Henry Sibley High School
Driveway to 570 feet north of High Ridge Circle
Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this 18th day of August, 2020.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
By___________________________
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 99
City Base Map 2018Utilities
Date: 8/13/2020
City of
Mendota
Heights0310
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.
No Parking Anytime
No Parking 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.,
When School is in Session
page 100
August 11, 2020
Dear Ryan,
I was surprised to hear this quiet intersection warranted a traffic stop. Due to the mature trees
there, I guess some form of mitigation is needed to alert the unsuspecting to the limited visibility.
I believe a Yield sign on the least trafficked street would accomplish notice and serve to define
the right of way. Anything more than this seems excessive without further data and analysis.
My wife and I have lived at this location for roughly five years. We enjoy the q uietness of this
location. I’ve never heard any mention of a problem with this intersection. I know of no accident
there, or ever heard sudden stopping or accelerating from that direction. My office window faces
it (approximately 70 ft as I look at it right now) and I am home about 50% of the time. Who is
requesting this? We were never solicited about this. It seems very reactionary and possibly a
minority view. Safety is paramount, but anything beyond a Yield sign without further reasoning is
rather drastic. I believe there are three new families on the Glenhill cul-de-sac who like to let
their kids play out in the street. While I welcome the youth, this doesn’t bode well for how we
want to make changes to the neighborhood.
Have you considered the environmental waste of a 4-way Stop sign at this intersection? I’m
certain you have the data in front of you to realize rarely do two cars approach this intersection
at the same time. What is the rate per hour? I expect to hear that at the meeting. Ryan are you
the knowledge base for this decision? How many additional Stop signs have been added in
Mendota Heights with similar low volume flow? Having moved out of south Minneapolis, I’m very
familiar with their use of Stop signs to control speed, but only the busiest intersections have 4-
way Stop signs. Think of the gas wasted and additional brake wear for this measure. A yield
sign will serve the same purpose on one cross street.
I did talk with both homeowners with the primary trees obstructing the intersection. I gathered
that short of a completed removal, there is no other alternative. I asked about raising the
underbrush, but my impression was that it wasn't welcomed from you. Based on this information
I petition the city to strongly review the traffic flow, get more input from the residence not
contacted by the petitioning parties, and consider a Yield sign on Glenhill Rd to evaluate if that
is sufficient for all parties concerned. Safety will be taken up one level, which will be an
enhancement, without driving toward a 4-way at every corner mentality.
I plan to be at the meeting to listen to how this decision is being formulated. At this point I will be
leaving work at 5:00 p.m. which coincides with the start of the meeting, so if possible, please
move the discussion toward the end.
Lastly, my reasoning for thinking the Yield on Glenhill Rd is optimum is that fewer houses are in
that cul-de-sac and since the highest grade comes from that direction, the best speed control
will be gained slowing that momentum. (FYI, one car in the last hour if you need a data point.)
Thanks for your consideration of what is best for Mendota Heights,
Mark Hunt
1224 Culligan Lane
page 101
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Traffic Safety Committee Meeting
July 20, 2020
1. Call to Order:
The meeting convened in the City Council Chambers at 4:30 pm by Chair Jonathan
Ehrlich.
2. Roll Call:
Present: Chair Jonathan Ehrlich, Councilor Liz Petschel, Police Chief Kelly McCarthy,
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek. Members McCarthy and Mazzitello, and Chair
Erhlich participated via telephone, Also present: City Administrator Mark McNeill
3. Adopt Agenda
There were no changes to the agenda. Motion Petschel/second Ruzek, to adopt the
agenda.
A roll call vote was taken. The results were:
Chair Ehrlich AYE
McCarthy AYE
Petschel AYE
Mazzitello AYE
Ruzek AYE
The motion was approved 5-0.
4. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes:
Motion Petschel/second McCarthy to approve the minutes of the January 22, 2020,
meeting of the Traffic Safety Committee.
A roll call vote was taken. The results were:
Chair Ehrlich AYE
McCarthy AYE
Petschel AYE
Mazzitello AYE
Ruzek AYE
The motion was approved 5-0..
5. New and Unfinished Business:
5.a Request for Stop Signs at Culligan Lane and Glenhill Road:
Mr. Ruzek read two emails which had been received from neighborhood residents
requesting stop signs at the above intersection. They cited visibility problems due to
page 102
trees being on all corners, topography, and the number of children who play in and
around the streets.
Elizabeth Johnson, 1903 Hunter Lane, said that she felt the east-west traffic on Culligan
had to deal with a blind intersection due to trees and topography. Her request was for 2-
way stop signs to be placed on Culligan, making Glenhill the through street.
Stephanie Johnson, 1902 Culligan, said that traffic did not yield as it was supposed to.
Tony Scheuring, 1914 Glenhill, said that there are ten children living near the cul-de-sac,
with six under the age of five. He felt that it was a dangerous intersection, and said that a
4-way stop might be better.
Mickey Wright, 1908 Glenhill, said that it is a completely blind intersection, with trees
on all four corners. Mr. Ruzek described the City Code regarding the trimming of
vegetation for site triangles at intersections. Ms. Rice said that the stop sign would be a
simpler solution.
Chair Ehrlich said that the option seemed to be more of speed, vs. right of way
assignment. He said that cutting down mature trees might increase speed. He asked if
there was space to do a center island for traffic calming? Mr. Ruzek cited cost as a
reason not to pursue that.
Ms. Petschel said that she walks this area frequently. She said that there were not as
many young children at the time that these homes were first built. Now, there are more
families. She said that there is now more density, and more through traffic. She said that
the topography is a problem, and that the hills should cause people to pay more attention
to their driving. She was also concerned that signs would get lost in the foliage, and that
trimming should be done to make signs more visible.
Chief McCarthy said that Mendota Heights doesn’t have sidewalks, and so it is not good
to make children feel safer to be in the streets. She also said if trees are in the sight lines,
the Police would not be able to enforce the signs.
Mr. McNeill reminded those present that children should not be allowed to play
unattended until they are old enough to know when it is safe to be in the street. Parents
shouldn’t rely on traffic signs to keep their kids safe.
Chair Ehrlich said that he would be OK with 4-way stops, and would be OK with 2-way,
but would leave it to Mr. Ruzek to determine which way was best. The neighbors were
divided—three said to leave it to the experts, and Mr. Scheuring said that he preferred the
4-way stop.
Motion Petschel/second McCarthy to recommend the installation of a 4-way stop at the
intersection of Culligan Lane and Glenhill Road.
page 103
A roll call vote was taken. The results were:
Chair Ehrlich AYE
McCarthy AYE
Petschel AYE
Mazzitello AYE
Ruzek AYE
The motion was approved 5-0.
Mr. Ruzek said that this recommendation would go to the City Council on August 4th, or
August 18th. Because it will require a code amendment, an advertisement will need to be
made.
Ms. Petschel recommended checking the sight lines before the installation takes place,
and place red flags or the like to advise people of the change in traffic control. Chair
Ehrlich stated that he felt that it will be difficult to enforce.
5.b Request for Pedestrian Crosswalk on Huber Drive at Bent Tree Lane
Mr. Ruzek said that he had received a petition for a crosswalk to be installed, and that the
residents were advised that it was not necessary for them to attend this meeting to present
in person.
Ms. Petschel said that the location is a double cul-de-sac, with curb cuts on Huber. She
said that the problem is with the curvilinear segment of Huber—it makes it hard for
pedestrians to see in each direction to safely cross. In addition to the 20 or so area
homes, this location is unique due to the entrance to Dodge Nature Center. She said that
area residents know that traffic does not watch for pedestrians crossing, and so felt that a
painted crosswalk is necessary to increase awareness.
Mr. Ruzek said the impact to the City is the signs, and the paint. He said that the safest
thing to do would be to reconfigure the concrete curbing to create “bump-outs”, but that
should be delayed until Huber is reconstructed. Chair Ehrlich said that he would support
a crosswalk there, and perhaps at Decorah.
Motion McCarthy/second Mazzitello that a crosswalk be installed on Huber at Bent Tree
Lane, with appropriate signage and striping.
A roll call vote was taken. The results were:
Chair Ehrlich AYE
McCarthy AYE
Petschel AYE
Mazzitello AYE
Ruzek AYE
The motion was approved 5-0.
page 104
Ms. Petschel said that when Huber Drive comes up for reconstruction, the bump-out
installation option should be considered.
5.c Pedestrian Safety on Mendota Heights Road at Huber Drive
Mr. Ruzek said that he had received a telephone call asking for all-way stops at this
intersection to improve pedestrian safety. He had attempted to notify the requesting party
about this meeting, but had been unsuccessful in making contact.
He said that the location had been studied as a result of its proximately to Friendly Hills
School; it had been found previously that there are some opportunities to improve safety.
He said that as Mendota heights Road is now used for drop-offs at the school, there could
be striping and signage changes, and that pedestrian islands could be constructed.
Chair Ehrlich said that he was aware of the sight visibility problem. He would support
3-way stop signs, and a refuge island or bump-outs to reduce the crossing distance across
Mendota Heights Road.
Discussion followed concerning signage changes—“No Parking”, vs. “No Stopping or
Standing”. Chair Ehrlich felt that people staying in their cars while waiting for their
students would ignore No Parking signs, as they would not perceive themselves as
parking.
Mr. Mazzitello said that stop signs are to assign Right of Way. He didn’t think a 3-way
stop was warranted. He liked the recommendation of the Public Works Director, which
had been in the packet—install a center pedestrian refuge area, in conjunction with a new
striping plan. However, Mr. Ruzek said that it might make things more dangerous at
Lockwood. He recommended taking the crosswalk out at Lockwood.
Mr. Mazzitello left the meeting at 5:36 PM.
Chair Ehrlich said that he would support the signage changes as proposed—removing the
No Parking signs for westbound traffic, and adding No Stopping or Standing. He would
also prefer to see a concrete median be constructed for a refuge island, to include a turn
lane.
Motion Ehrlich/second Petschel to substitute No Standing or Stopping signs for the
westbound No Parking signs, and to add a turn lane. Discussion ensued regarding the
need for the turn lane with the island. Chair Ehrlich questioned the need for a shared
center turn lane. Mr. Ruzek said that it was needed to divert traffic.
Ms. Petschel said since the group was struggling with the decision for the center turn lane
and the island, that that decision should be tabled, as well as the signage changes. She
would prefer to meet again before the start of the school year to discuss these changes.
Chair Ehrlich withdrew his previous motion; Ms. Petschel withdrew her second.
page 105
Motion Petschel/second McCarthy to explore a School Zone for Friendly Hills Middle
School, and the construction of a pedestrian island. This should be done when staff is
ready, but before the start of the new school year.
A roll call vote was taken. The results were:
Chair Ehrlich AYE
McCarthy AYE
Petschel AYE
Ruzek AYE
Mazzitello ABSENT
The motion was approved 4-0.
5.d Speed limit discussion
Mr. Ruzek said that the Minnesota Legislature had enacted new rules for speed limits in
2019. He said that cities no longer need to do a speed study to change posted speeds. As
of the time of this meeting, he said that only Minneapolis and St. Paul had enacted the
changes.
Chair Ehrlich felt that this was a tremendous opportunity to follow the lead of the other
cities. He said that the three other topics on today’s agenda were speed related. He felt
that 30 mph in a residential area was too much, and cited the increased severity of
pedestrian injuries as speed increased. He felt that he thinks changing posted speeds will
affect driving speeds.
Chief McCarthy wanted to see data on whether people are driving too fast; she felt that it
was more a matter of perception. She said that changing the posted speed won’t change
those perceptions. She said the enforcement of 31 mph in a 25 mph zone was not
realistic, and said that anytime laws are enacted that can’t be enforced, it reduces the
legitimacy of traffic enforcement.
Chair Ehrlich spoke of St. Paul and Minneapolis, and that Minneapolis did signage at
gateways to advise of the reduced speeds. He thought that the City should do a traffic
study to determine if a speed reduction is warranted.
Ms. Petschel said that she felt there would be a feeling in Mendota Heights that the police
would enforce the lower speed. She felt that it was a mistake for St. Paul to have lowered
theirs. The majority of speeding complaints that Mendota Heights receives are for
locations where the City can’t change the speed, as in state highways (especially TH 13)
and county highways. She said that she could not support speed changes, and would
rather look at traffic calming first.
6. Adjournment:
There being no other business, Chair Ehrlich adjourned the meeting at 6:18 pm.
page 106
Minutes Taken By:
Mark McNeill,
City Administrator
page 107
page 108
Thru Yield - 1st Choice
Thru Stop - 2nd Choice
No Control - 1st Choice
Thru Yield - 2nd Choice
Thru Yield - 1st Choice
No Control
No Control - 1st Choice
Thru Yield - 2nd Choice
No Control
All-Way Stop - 1st Choice
Thru Stop - 2nd Choice
Thru Yield - 1st Choice
Thru Stop - 2nd Choice
No Control - 1st Choice
All-Way Stop - 2nd Choice
If Trees Affected
All-Way Stop - 1st Choice
Thru Stop - 2nd Choice
All-Way Stop - 1st Choice
Thru Stop - 2nd Choice
All-Way Stop - 1st Choice
Thru Stop - 2nd Choice
1254
1901
1889
1248
1247
1242
1936
1921
1902
1230
1885
1224
1920
1235
1908
1935
1914
1941
1253
1942
1903
1206
CULLIGAN LNGLENHILL RDCulligan Lane/Glenhill RoadPetition Results
Date: 8/13/2020
City of
Mendota
Heights0100
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.
page 109
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: August 18, 2020
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolutions 2020-51 Approve Plans and Authorize Advertisement for Bid for the
Lemay Lake Erosion Control Project
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to authorize staff to bid an erosion control project consisting of armoring
two drainage channels that convey storm water into Lemay Lake.
BACKGROUND
The Augusta Shores development was constructed in 2000. The storm water from this
development drains to wooded wetland adjacent to Lemay Lake and has created an eroded
channel from the wetland to the lake.
The Heights Apartment complex on Highway 13 was recently constructed. The storm sewer
system installed meets the city requirements. This property does not extend to Lemay Lake
which is the receiving water body from this development. The outlet from this development is
approximately 115 feet from the lake Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL). The storm water has
been concentrating at the outlet to this site and will eventually lead to an eroded channel.
DISCUSSION
The two areas are located in Outlot C of the Augusta Shores plat. Outlot C has a blanket
drainage and utility easement which provides the city rights to proceed with drainage
improvements.
City Council authorized the Civil Site Group to develop plans for these improvements at their
December 18, 2018 meeting. Staff walked the site earlier this winter and with the record
rainfalls received in 2019, significant degradation was noted. Staff is recommending that the two
channels be armored with a rip rap. The channels will need to be shaped, a geotextile fabric
placed and then the area covered with the rip rap. This site has a challenging access but utilizing
the city owned undeveloped right-of-way will provide a minimal disturbance.
BUDGET IMPACT
Staff identified $75,000 in the storm sewer utility capital improvement plan for this
improvement. The Storm Sewer Utility Fund has an adequate balance to complete these
page 110
improvements. Staff will provide an assessment of the storm water fund balance prior to Council
awarding the project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council authorize the advertisement for bids on the Lemay Lake
Erosion Control project. The bid opening date for this project would be September 9, 2020, with
an award date of September 15, 2020. Staff would anticipate construction starting towards in
October with a completion before the end of November.
Plans are attached for reference. Full size plans are available in engineering for review.
ACTION REQUIRED
Staff recommends that the City Council pass a motion adopting Resolution 2020-51, a resolution
“APPROVING PLANS AND AUTHORIZING THE ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS FOR
THE LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL PROJECT”. This action requires a simple
majority vote.
page 111
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2020-51
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND
AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE LEMAY LAKE EROSION
CONTROL PROJECT
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 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, September 9, 2020, 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 eighteenth day of August 2020.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 112
Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:01 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.0TITLE SHEET. .. .. .. .. .. .LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROLMENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTASHEET INDEXSHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLEC0.0 TITLE SHEETSITE LOCATION MAPNSITE SURVEYV1.0ISSUED FOR: CONSTRUCTIONMASTER LEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALCURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURB (GUTTER TOP)SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF WALLSOIL BORING LOCATIONSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF WALLEMERGENCY OVERFLOWPROPOSED MANHOLE STORMPROPOSED GATE VALVEPROPOSED SANITARY SEWERPROPOSED STORM SEWERPROPOSED WATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING LIGHTEXISTING GAS METEREXISTING MANHOLEEXISTING CATCH BASINEXISTING GATE VALVEEXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING GAS VALVEEXISTING ELECTRIC BOXEXISTING STOPBOXPROPOSED MANHOLE SANITARYPROPOSED CATCH BASIN OR CATCH BASIN MANHOLE STORMPROPOSED SIGNEXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATIONINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROWDEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER:CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS1101 VICTORIA CURVEMENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118ENGINEER / LANDSCAPE / SURVEYOR:CIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35TH STREETSUITE 200ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416612-615-0060GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:SWPPP - EXISTING CONDITIONSSW1.0GRADING PLANC3.0SWPPP - PROPOSED CONDITIONSSW1.1SWPPP - DETAILSSW1.2C2.0 SITE PLANSWPPP - NARRATIVESW1.3C1.0 REMOVALS PLANKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRTBDDYH EOF=1135.52SB-1TOPROPOSED LIGHTEXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING STORM SEWEREXISTING WATER MAINEXISTING GAS MAINEXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRICEXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER:JACOBSON ENVIRONMENTAL5821 HUMBOLDT AVE NBROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430612-802-6619SITE LOCATIONpage 113
page 114
LEMAY LAKEA
C
A
C
I
A
D
R
I
V
E
LA
K
E
A
U
G
U
S
T
A
DR
I
V
EOUTLOT CRIVER ST.N89°32'58"E 229.96S0°06'54"E
660.13
264.89Δ=60°38'59"R=250.24239.65Δ=31°33'57"R=435.00R=185.0021
7
.
1
0
Δ
=
5
0
°
4
6
'
1
9
"
R
=
2
4
5
.
0
0
DELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 108-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDCDELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 208-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDC65 LF 24" HDPESTORM @ 12.12%CONSTRUCTION LIMITSDO NOT DISTURB WETLANDNO FILL IN WETLAND ISPERMITTEDCONSTRUCTION LIMITSREMOVE EXISTING TREEAND BALL ROOT, TYP.REMOVE PORTION OFEXISTING CHAIN LINKFENCE.EX. MH, PIPE, FES, ANDRIP RAP TO REMAIN.REMOVE PORTIONS OFFENCE WITHIN GRADINGLIMITSREMOVE EX. FABRICAND STRAW.REMOVALS LEGEND:TREE PROTECTIONREMOVAL OF PAVEMENT AND ALL BASE MATERIAL,INCLUDING BIT., CONC., AND GRAVEL PVMTS.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE INCLUDING ALLFOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS.TREE REMOVAL - INCLUDING ROOTS AND STUMPSCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:18 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC1.0REMOVALS PLAN. .. .. .. .. .. .Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALREMOVE CURB AND GUTTER. IF IN RIGHT-OF-WAY,COORDINATE WITH LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT.REMOVAL NOTES:1.SEE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTIONSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN.2.REMOVAL OF MATERIALS NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITHMNDOT, STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.3.REMOVAL OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH UTILITY OWNER PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.4.REMOVED MATERIALS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF TO A LEGAL OFF-SITE LOCATION AND INACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.5.ABANDON, REMOVAL, CONNECTION, AND PROTECTION NOTES SHOWN ON THEDRAWINGS ARE APPROXIMATE. COORDINATE WITH PROPOSED PLANS.6.EXISTING ON-SITE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE PROTECTEDTHROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT.7.PROPERTY LINES SHALL BE CONSIDERED GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS. WORK WITHIN THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS SHALL INCLUDE STAGING, DEMOLITION AND CLEAN-UP OPERATIONS AS WELLAS CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.8.MINOR WORK OUTSIDE OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL BE ALLOWEDAS SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND PER CITY REQUIREMENTS.9.DAMAGE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LIMITS CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALLBE REPAIRED IN A MANNER APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ORIN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.10.PROPOSED WORK (BUILDING AND CIVIL) SHALL NOT DISTURB EXISTING UTILITIESUNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION.11.SITE SECURITY MAY BE NECESSARY AND PROVIDED IN A MANNER TO PROHIBITVANDALISM, AND THEFT, DURING AND AFTER NORMAL WORK HOURS, THROUGHOUTTHE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT. SECURITY MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE CITY.12.VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR DELIVERY ANDINSPECTION ACCESS DURING NORMAL OPERATING HOURS. AT NO POINTTHROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT SHALL CIRCULATION OF ADJACENTSTREETS BE BLOCKED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES.13.ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND ESTABLISHED PER THEREQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROLDEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO,SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETSSHALL REMAIN OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BEPERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY.14.STAGING, DEMOLITION, AND CLEAN-UP AREAS SHALL BE WITHIN THE PROPERTY LIMITSAS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNER AS REQUIRED BY THECITY.CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REMOVAL NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC REMOVAL NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0-SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:page 115
LEMAY LAKEA
C
A
C
I
A
D
R
I
V
E
LA
K
E
A
U
G
U
S
T
A
DR
I
V
EOUTLOT CRIVER ST.N89°32'58"E 229.96S0°06'54"E
660.13
264.89Δ=60°38'59"R=250.24239.65Δ=31°33'57"R=435.00Δ=27°48'03"R=185.0021
7
.
1
0
Δ
=
5
0
°
4
6
'
1
9
"
R
=
2
4
5
.
0
0
DELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 108-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDCDELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 208-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDC65 LF 24" HDPESTORM @ 12.12%PROPOSED 10' WIDETEMPORARY COMPACTEDGRAVEL CONSTRUCTIONACCESS TRAIL.10.0'PROTECT SANITARY MAINAND STRUCTURES, FIELDVERIFY RIM ELEVATIONSAND MATCH MAINTENANCEPATH GRADE, TYP.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSDO NOT DISTURB WETLANDPROPOSED TEMPORARY 10'WIDE COMPACTED GRAVELCONSTRUCTION ACCESSTRAIL.NO FILL IN WETLAND ISPERMITTEDCONSTRUCTION LIMITSMATCH EXISTING SURFACEAT FORMER LOCATION OFCHAIN LINK FENCE, COORD.W/ CITY.INSTALL EROSION CONTROL FABRIC AND 6"RIP RAP THROUGH APPROX. 10' WIDENATURAL DRAINAGE CHANNEL.RE-ESTABLISH VEGETATION BY SPREADINGMNDOT SOUTH/WEST WOODLAND EDGESEEDMIX 36-211 ALONG EDGES OFCHANNEL.1
0
.
0
'DO NOT INSTALL RIP RAP OR ANY FILLINSIDE DELINEATED WETLAND BOUNDARY.PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ACCESSROUTE BETWEEN WORK AREAS.INSTALL EROSION CONTROL FABRIC AND 6"RIP RAP THROUGH APPROX. 5' WIDENATURAL DRAINAGE CHANNEL.RE-ESTABLISH VEGETATION BY SPREADINGMNDOT SOUTH/WEST WOODLAND EDGESEEDMIX 36-211 ALONG EDGES OFCHANNEL.5.0
'Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:27 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.0SITE PLAN. .. .. .. .. .. .SITE AREA TABLE:1.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNINGCONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTYLINES, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLEFOR FINAL LOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTERCOMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, DUE TO LOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NOADDITIONAL COST TO OWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THEENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FORAPPROVAL.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING ARIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TOINSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS.4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW ANDAPPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR ALL PREFABRICATEDSITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS,PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS, BENCHES, FLAGPOLES, LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHTAND POLES. THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLYAPPROVED.5.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONSPRIOR TO SITE IMPROVEMENTS.6.FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS.7.ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCEAT THE DRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS.SITE LAYOUT NOTES:SITE PLAN LEGEND:CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS SITE SPECIFIC NOTES:01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"N1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC NOTES.Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPROPERTY LINECONSTRUCTION LIMITSpage 116
LEMAY LAKEA
C
A
C
I
A
D
R
I
V
E
LA
K
E
A
U
G
U
S
T
A
DR
I
V
EOUTLOT CRIVER ST.N89°32'58"E 229.96S0°06'54"E
660.13
264.89Δ=60°38'59"R=250.24239.65Δ=31°33'57"R=435.00Δ=27°48'03"R=185.0021
7
.
1
0
Δ
=
5
0
°
4
6
'
1
9
"
R
=
2
4
5
.
0
0
DELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 108-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDCDELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 208-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDC65 LF 24" HDPESTORM @ 12.12%CONSTRUCTION LIMITSDO NOT DISTURB WETLANDNO FILL IN WETLAND ISPERMITTEDCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:32 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC3.0GRADING PLAN. .. .. .. .. .. .1.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT & GENERAL GRADING NOTES.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING BUT NOTLIMITED TO SITE PREPARATION, SOIL CORRECTION, EXCAVATION, EMBANKMENT, ETC.) INACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTINGSHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BERESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILSENGINEER.3.GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THENATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS &PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.4.PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-LINE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED.5.PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 2:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS.MAXIMUM SLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:16.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUTTHE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISH PROPER GRADES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A FINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES ACCEPTABLE TO THEENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO TOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES.7.IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALLEXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORTSUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE.8.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE INAREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FORRESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENTAREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLSUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREADTOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES.9.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREASWITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTHFINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPESBETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTINGGRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENTCONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOMERUTTED BY TRAFFIC OR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALLAREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO EQUAL ORBETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.10.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THESTREET AND/OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADEDTANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THEDIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THESOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICH SECTIONS OF THE STREET ORPARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED INACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. NO TEST ROLL SHALL OCCURWITHIN 10' OF ANY UNDERGROUND STORM RETENTION/DETENTION SYSTEMS.11. TOLERANCES11.1.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE ORBELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.11.2.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.12.MAINTENANCE12.1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION,AND KEEP AREA FREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.12.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED, ERODED AND RUTTEDAREAS TO SPECIFIED TOLERANCES. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, IF REQUIRED, AND DURINGTHE WARRANTY PERIOD, ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BERESEEDED AND MULCHED.12.3.WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTIONOPERATIONS OR ADVERSE WEATHER, CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY, SURFACE, RESHAPE,AND COMPACT TO REQUIRED DENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER CONSTRUCTION.GENERAL GRADING NOTES:1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALGRADING PLAN LEGEND:SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTERSPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURBSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRS/TOP OF STAIRSGROUNDWATER INFORMATION:CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS GRADING NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0-SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)CURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)EMERGENCY OVERFLOWEOF=1135.52TON/Apage 117
LEMAY LAKEA
C
A
C
I
A
D
R
I
V
E
LA
K
E
A
U
G
U
S
T
A
DR
I
V
EOUTLOT CRIVER ST.N89°32'58"E 229.96S0°06'54"E
660.13
264.89Δ=60°38'59"R=250.24239.65Δ=31°33'57"R=435.00Δ=27°48'03"R=185.0021
7
.
1
0
Δ
=
5
0
°
4
6
'
1
9
"
R
=
2
4
5
.
0
0
DELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 108-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDCDELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 208-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDC65 LF 24" HDPESTORM @ 12.12%CONSTRUCTION LIMITSDO NOT DISTURB WETLANDNO FILL IN WETLAND ISPERMITTEDCONSTRUCTION LIMITSPERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSDOWNGRADIENT OFWORK AND ACCESSROUTES, TYP.Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:42 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.0SWPPP - EXISTINGCONDITIONS. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"N1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION.page 118
LEMAY LAKEA
C
A
C
I
A
D
R
I
V
E
LA
K
E
A
U
G
U
S
T
A
DR
I
V
EOUTLOT CRIVER ST.N89°32'58"E 229.96S0°06'54"E
660.13
264.89Δ=60°38'59"R=250.24239.65Δ=31°33'57"R=435.00Δ=27°48'03"R=185.0021
7
.
1
0
Δ
=
5
0
°
4
6
'
1
9
"
R
=
2
4
5
.
0
0
DELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 108-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDCDELINEATED WETLAND BASIN 208-08-2018 BY JACOBSONENVIRONMENTALAPPROVED ON 09-11-2018 BYKRISTA SPREITER, WDC65 LF 24" HDPESTORM @ 12.12%CONSTRUCTION LIMITSDO NOT DISTURB WETLANDNO FILL IN WETLAND ISPERMITTEDCONSTRUCTION LIMITSPERIMETER EROSIONCONTROL ATCONSTRUCTIONLIMITSDOWNGRADIENT OFWORK AND ACCESSROUTES, TYP.PLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)RESEED WITH MNDOTMIX 36-211Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:47 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.1SWPPP - PROPOSEDCONDITIONS. .. .. .. .. .. .01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:LEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION.page 119
Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:48 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.2SWPPP - DETAILS. .. .. .. .. .. .PROFILE6" MIN CRUSHED STONE75' MINIMUMPLANFINISHEDGRADETO CONSTRUCTION AREA35' REXISTINGUNDISTURBEDROADWAYN T S30' FROM EDGE OF ROADTO FRONT OF SPEED BUMPGEOTEXTILE FILTERFABRIC4" HIGH, 18" WIDESPEED BUMPSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ACCESS24' (MIN)NOTES:1.PROVIDE APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND UNDISTURBEDROADWAY.2.THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENTONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH ADDITIONAL STONE OR ADDINGSTONE TO THE LENGTH OF THE ENTRANCE.3.REPAIR AND CLEANOUT MEASURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT.4.ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY SHALL BE REMOVED ASDIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.5.FINAL LOCATION AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.6.CRUSHED STONE SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIA. CLOSE GRADED, AND IN ACCORDANCE TO MNDOT SECTION 2118.EXISTING UNDISTURBED ROADWAY35' RTO CONSTRUCTIONAREA5TAMP THE TRENCH FULL OF SOIL.SECURE WITH ROW OF STAPLES,10" SPACING, 4" DOWN FROMTRENCHOVERLAP: BURY UPPER ENDOF LOWER STRIP AS IN 'A'AND 'B'. OVERLAP END OFTOP STRIP 4" AND STAPLE.EROSION STOP: FOLD OF MATTINGBURIED IN SILT TRENCH ANDTAMPED. DOUBLEROW OFSTAPLES.PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APARTTO KEEP MATTING FIRMLYPRESSED TO SOIL.'D''C''B'BURY THE TOP END OF THEMATTING IN A TRENCH 4" ORMORE IN DEPTHTYPICAL STAPLE #8GAUGE WIRE1 1/2"10"OVERFALL'E''A'NOTE:1. PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART TOKEEP MATTING FIRMLY PRESSED TOSOIL.EROSION BLANKETN T S6FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIEDEXISTING GROUNDSURFACEDIRECTION OF FLOWWOODEN STAKES 1/2"X2"X16" MIN. PLACED 10' O.C.WHEN INSTALLED ON GROUND. IF INSTALLED ONPVMT. PROVIDE SANDBAGS BEHIND AND ON TOP ATMIN. 10' O.C.8" MIN.SEDIMENT BIO-ROLL / COMPOST FILTER LOGN T SFILLER AS SPECIFIEDNOTE:1. COMPOST FILTER LOGS (BIO ROLLS) SHALL BE FILTREXX EROSION CONTROL SOXX OR APPROVED EQUAL.2. COMPOST FILLER TO BE MADE FROM A COMPOST BLEND 30%-40% GRADE 2 (SPEC 3890) AND 60%-70%PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED WOOD CHIPS, PER MNDOT SPEC 3897.3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE GEOTEXTILE KNITTED MATERIAL WITH MAX. OPENINGS OF 3/8".4. IF MULTIPLE ROLLS NEEDED, OVERLAP BY MIN. 12" AT ENDS AND STAKE.5. SILT SHALL BE REMOVED ONCE IT REACHES 80% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE ROLL OR AS DEEMED NECESSARYBY SITE CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION.FILL UPSTREAM BASE EDGE WITH2" OF DIRT OR COMPOST TOEMBED ROLL.1FILTER FABRIC WITH WIRE SUPPORT NETAS SPECIFIED.METAL POST ASSPECIFIED.FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIED SECURETO WIRE SUPPORT NET WITH METALCLIPS 12"O.C.SUPPORT NET: 12 GAUGE 4" x 4"WIRE HOOKED ONTOPREFORMED CHANNELS ONPOSTS AS SPECIFIED.EXISTING GROUNDSURFACECARRY WIRE SUPPORT NETDOWN INTO TRENCHDIRECTION OF FLOWANCHOR FABRIC WITHSOIL, TAMP BACKFILLMETAL POSTS 8'-0" O.C.MAX.24"
24"
24"
MIN.
6"6"SEDIMENT FENCEN T S2RIPRAP SWALEN T S24"2:1 MAX.SIDESLOPEWIDTH VARIES, SEE PLANMnDOT CLASS IVD50 = 6" RIPRAP2:1 MAX.SIDESLOPENOTES:1. GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC, MnDOT SPEC. 3733, SHALL COVER THE BOTTOM AND SIDESOF THE AREA EXCAVATED FOR THE RIPRAP, GRANULAR FILTER BEDDING MATERIALS.2. GRANULAR FILTER, SPEC. 3601, MAY BE USED AS A CUSHION LAYER. PLACE FILTER PERSPEC. 2511. THE CUSHION LAYER IS INCIDENTAL.3. INSTALL CHECK DAMS PER DETAIL - SPACING TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY12"GRANULAR FILTERBEDDING MnDOT 3601-2±3" DEPTHGEOTEXTILE FILTERFABRIC PER MnDOTSPEC. 3733IN-SITU COMPACTEDSUBGRADE3ROCK CHECK DAMN T SCROSS SECTIONGENERAL NOTES:1'-6" MIN.FLOWMAXIMUM SPACINGABA AND B ARE AT EQUAL ELEVATIONS3' MAXAT CENTER>1.514' TO 6'9" MIN.1'-6" MIN.1. RIPRAP SIZE TO BE MNDOT 3601 CLASS III.2. CHECK DAMS MAY BE USED IN SLOPING DITCHESOR CHANNELS TO SLOW VELOCITY OR TO CREATESEDIMENT TRAPS.3. ENSURE THAT MAXIMUM SPACING BETWEEN DAMSPLACES THE TOE OF THE UPSTREAM DAM AT THESAME ELEVATION AS THE DOWNSTREAM DAM (SEEDIAGRAM BELOW).TYPE IV GEOTEXTILE FABRICMNDOT CLASSIII RIP RAP4page 120
Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LEMAY LAKE EROSION CONTROL
OUTLOT C, LEMAY LAKE DRIVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
1101 VICTORIA CURVE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
PROJECT
44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.08/12/20ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION. .. .. .. .. .. .PROJECT NUMBER:1823508/12/20 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. .. .. .. .. .05/06/19 CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RLMP. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....................8/12/2020 4:19:53 PMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.3SWPPP - NARRATIVE. .. .. .. .. .. .OWNER:CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS1101 VICTORIA CURVEMENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55118OWNER INFORMATIONTRAINING SECTION 21PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENTSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMCONTACT:PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT TO MEET NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. THEPROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM.AREAS AND QUANTITIES:SWPPP CONTACT PERSONCONTRACTOR:SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING:ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY APERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THENPDES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT.TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THECONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPPNOTE: QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES THE EXACTQUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT NARRATIVE:PROJECT IS ARMORED SWALES TO PREVENT EROSION. RIP RAP WILL BE PLACED IN NATURAL DRAINAGE CHANNELS.NATIVE BUFFER NARRATIVE:PRESERVING A 50' NATURAL BUFFER AROUND WATER BODIES IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WATER BODIES ARE NOTLOCATED ON SITE.INFILTRATION NARRATIVE:INFILTRATION IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THE PROJECT BECAUSE PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED.SOIL CONTAMINATION NARRATIVE:SOILS ONSITE HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AS CONTAMINATED.SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC (IF REQUIRED):THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN ONE MILE AND DISCHARGES DIRECTLY INTO LEMAY LAKE. IT IS WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE MINNESOTA RIVER AND LAKEAUGUSTA. BOTH WATER BODIES ARE IDENTIFIED AS IMPAIRED WATER BODIES PER THE MPCA'S 303(D) IMPAIRED WATERS LIST FOR THEFOLLOWING IMPAIRMENTS: NUTRIENTS. BECAUSE THESE WATERS ARE LOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE SITE, BMPS AS DEFINED IN THE NPDESPERMIT ITEMS 23.9 AND 23.10 APPLY. THESE ARE AS FOLLOWS:1.DURING CONSTRUCTION:A.STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT IN NO CASE COMPLETEDLATER THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLYCEASED.B.TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 14. MUST BE USED FOR COMMON DRAINAGE LOCATIONS THATSERVE AN AREA WITH FIVE (5) OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC:PERMANENT SEED MIX·FOR THIS PROJECT ALL AREAS THAT ARE NOT TO BE SODDED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL RECEIVE A NATIVE PERMANENT SEED MIX.··AREAS IN BUFFERS AND ADJACENT TO OR IN WET AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261 (STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST) AT 35 LBS PERACRE.··DRY AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 35-221 (DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL) AT 40 LBS PER ACRE.·MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES:THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES.THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN 1.0 ACRES SO AN NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA. THECONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES IN THE NPDES PERMIT THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.SWPPP ATTACHMENTS (ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER):CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE:ATTACHMENT A. CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE - SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTATTACHMENT B. CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLISTATTACHMENT C. MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMSATTACHMENT D: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.ATTACHMENT E: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.DESIGN ENGINEER: MATTHEW R. PAVEK P.E.TRAINING COURSE: DESIGN OF SWPPPTRAINING ENTITY: UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAINSTRUCTOR: JOHN CHAPMANDATES OF TRAINING COURSE: 5/15/2011 - 5/16/2011TOTAL TRAINING HOURS: 12RE-CERTIFICATION: 2/27/20 (8 HOURS), EXP. 5/31/2023THE CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL ORWHO IMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL MEASURE IDENTIFIED IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) GENERALPERMIT (DATED AUGUST 1, 2018 # MNR100001) AND ANY LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNINGEROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL.STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTSSWPPPTHE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS. SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS AND SWPPP NARRATIVE (ATTACHMENT A: CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)FOR ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION. THE PLANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF ALL TEMPORARY ANDPERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S. STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPPDOCUMENT.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS:1. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE2. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE AROUND SITE3. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND INFILTRATION AREAS.4. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND INSTALL5. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND (SECTION 14)6. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE7. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL8. ROUGH GRADING OF SITE9. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES10. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES11. INSTALL SILT FENCE / INLET PROTECTION AROUND CB'S12. INSTALL STREET SECTION13. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER14. BITUMINOUS ON STREETS15. FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD, INSTALL SEED AND MULCH16. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN / POND17. FINAL GRADE POND / INFILTRATION BASINS (DO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.)18. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED BY EITHER SEED OR SOD/LANDSCAPING,REMOVE SILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL.RECORDS RETENTION:THE SWPPP (ORIGINAL OR COPIES) INCLUDING, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BEKEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THE PERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THAT PORTION OF THESITE. THE SWPPP CAN BE KEPT IN EITHER THE FIELD OFFICE OR IN AN ON SITE VEHICLE DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS.ALL OWNER(S) MUST KEEP THE SWPPP, ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS, ON FILE FOR THREE (3) YEARSAFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 4. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY RECORDS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THENOT.1.THE FINAL SWPPP;2.ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT;3.RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 11, INSPECTIONSAND MAINTENANCE);4.ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OFWAY, CONTRACTS, COVENANTS AND OTHER BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE; AND5.ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENTSYSTEMS.SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES:1.THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ARE PERMITTEE(S) AS IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE ACTIVITIES OFALL OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF EROSIONPREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO OVERSEE ALL INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF BMPS ANDIMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO CONDUCTINSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTIONWITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TRAINING DOCUMENTATION FOR THESEINDIVIDUAL(S) AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. THIS TRAINING DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITHTHE SWPPP BEFORE THE START OF CONSTRUCTION OR AS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEENDETERMINED. DOCUMENTATION SHALL INCLUDE:4.1.NAMES OF THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE TRAINED PER SECTION21 OF THE PERMIT.4.2.DATES OF TRAINING AND NAME OF INSTRUCTOR AND ENTITY PROVIDING TRAINING.4.3.CONTENT OF TRAINING COURSE OR WORKSHOP INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF TRAINING.5.FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION AND THE TERMINATION OF COVERAGE FOR THE NPDES PERMIT, THE OWNER ISEXPECTED TO FURNISH LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) OF THE PERMANENT STORM WATERMANAGEMENT SYSTEM.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTSSWPPP AMENDMENTS (SECTION 6):1.ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.A OR ITEM 21.2.B OR ANOTHER QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL MUST COMPLETEALL SWPPP CHANGES. CHANGES INVOLVING THE USE OF A LESS STRINGENT BMP MUST INCLUDE A JUSTIFICATIONDESCRIBING HOW THE REPLACEMENT BMP IS EFFECTIVE FOR THE SITE CHARACTERISTICS.2.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECTPROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION,OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE DISCHARGE OFPOLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS OR GROUNDWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECTPROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER INSPECTIONS OR INVESTIGATIONS BY THE SITE OWNER OROPERATOR, USEPA OR MPCA OFFICIALS INDICATE THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE IN ELIMINATING OR SIGNIFICANTLYMINIMIZING THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS OR GROUNDWATER OR THE DISCHARGES ARECAUSING WATER QUALITY STANDARD EXCEEDANCES (E.G., NUISANCE CONDITIONS AS DEFINED IN MINN. R. 7050.0210,SUBP. 2) OR THE SWPPP IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF A USEPA APPROVED TMDL.BMP SELECTION AND INSTALLATION (SECTION 7):1.PERMITTEES MUST SELECT, INSTALL, AND MAINTAIN THE BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP AND IN THIS PERMIT IN ANAPPROPRIATE AND FUNCTIONAL MANNER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELEVANT MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS ANDACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES.EROSION PREVENTION (SECTION 8):1.BEFORE WORK BEGINS, PERMITTEES MUST DELINEATE THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED.2.PERMITTEES MUST MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR DISTURBANCE OF PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT WITH STEEP SLOPES. WHENSTEEP SLOPES MUST BE DISTURBED, PERMITTEES MUST USE TECHNIQUES SUCH AS PHASING AND STABILIZATIONPRACTICES DESIGNED FOR STEEP SLOPES (E.G., SLOPE DRAINING AND TERRACING).3.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS, INCLUDING STOCKPILES. STABILIZATION MUST BE INITIATEDIMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS PERMANENTLY OR TEMPORARILY CEASED ONANY PORTION OF THE SITE AND WILL NOT RESUME FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING 14 CALENDAR DAYS. STABILIZATION MUSTBE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS CEASED. STABILIZATION ISNOT REQUIRED ON CONSTRUCTED BASE COMPONENTS OF ROADS, PARKING LOTS AND SIMILAR SURFACES.STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT, CLAY OR ORGANICCOMPONENTS (E.G., CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCKPILES, DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES) BUTPERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF THE STOCKPILE.4.FOR PUBLIC WATERS THAT THE MINNESOTA DNR HAS PROMULGATED "WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS" DURINGSPECIFIED FISH SPAWNING TIME FRAMES, PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREASWITHIN 200 FEET OF THE WATER'S EDGE, AND THAT DRAIN TO THESE WATERS, WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING THERESTRICTION PERIOD.5.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF THE LAST 200 LINEAR FEET OF TEMPORARY ORPERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES OR SWALES THAT DRAIN WATER FROM THE SITE WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTINGTO A SURFACE WATER OR PROPERTY EDGE. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF REMAINING PORTIONS OFTEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACEWATER OR PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLYCEASES.6.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DURINGCONSTRUCTION (WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK-DITCH CHECKS, BIO ROLLS, SILT DIKES, ETC.) DO NOT NEED TO BESTABILIZED. PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THESE AREAS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER THEIR USE AS A SEDIMENTCONTAINMENT SYSTEM CEASES7.PERMITTEES MUST NOT USE MULCH, HYDROMULCH, TACKIFIER, POLYACRYLAMIDE OR SIMILAR EROSION PREVENTIONPRACTICES WITHIN ANY PORTION OF THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGEDITCH OR SWALE SECTION WITH A CONTINUOUS SLOPE OF GREATER THAN 2 PERCENT.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION AT ALL PIPE OUTLETS WITHIN 24 HOURSAFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER OR PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM.9.PERMITTEES MUST NOT DISTURB MORE LAND (I.E., PHASING) THAN CAN BE EFFECTIVELY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED INACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 11.SEDIMENT CONTROL (SECTION 9):1.PERMITTEES MUST ESTABLISH SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS ON ALL DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETERS OF THE SITE ANDDOWNGRADIENT AREAS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO ANY SURFACE WATER, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS.PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES UPGRADIENT OF ANY BUFFER ZONES. PERMITTEES MUSTINSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENT LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN AND MUST KEEPTHE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES IN PLACE UNTIL THEY ESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER.2.IF DOWNGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE OVERLOADED, BASED ON FREQUENT FAILURE OR EXCESSIVEMAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICESOR REDUNDANT BMPS TO ELIMINATE THE OVERLOADING AND AMEND THE SWPPP TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONALPRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN ITEM 6.3.3.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENTCONTAINMENT SYSTEM (E.G., DITCHES WITH ROCK-CHECK DAMS) REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ONLY ASAPPROPRIATE FOR SITE CONDITIONS.4.A FLOATING SILT CURTAIN PLACED IN THE WATER IS NOT A SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP TO SATISFY ITEM 9.2 EXCEPT WHENWORKING ON A SHORELINE OR BELOW THE WATERLINE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SHORT TERM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY(E.G., INSTALLATION OF RIP RAP ALONG THE SHORELINE) IN THAT AREA IS COMPLETE, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL ANUPLAND PERIMETER CONTROL PRACTICE IF EXPOSED SOILS STILL DRAIN TO A SURFACE WATER.5.PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL ALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ADJUSTED OR REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATESHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING, OR PASSAGE OF VEHICLES, IMMEDIATELY AFTER THESHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED. PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE THENEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IF THE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE.6.PERMITTEES MUST PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS USING APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THEYESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER ON ALL AREAS WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THE INLET.7.PERMITTEES MAY REMOVE INLET PROTECTION FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (E.G. STREETFLOODING/FREEZING) IS IDENTIFIED BY THE PERMITTEES OR THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY (E.G.,CITY/COUNTY/TOWNSHIP/MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER). PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THENEED FOR REMOVAL IN THE SWPPP.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF STOCKPILES ONTHE DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER.9.PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE STOCKPILES OUTSIDE OF NATURAL BUFFERS OR SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDINGSTORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS UNLESS THERE IS A BYPASS IN PLACE FOR THESTORMWATER. 10. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A VEHICLE TRACKING BMP TO MINIMIZE THE TRACK OUT OF SEDIMENT FROM THECONSTRUCTION SITE OR ONTO PAVED ROADS WITHIN THE SITE. 11. PERMITTEES MUST USE STREET SWEEPING IF VEHICLE TRACKING BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENTTRACKING ONTO THE STREET. 12. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 14. 13. IN ANY AREAS OF THE SITE WHERE FINAL VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION WILL OCCUR, PERMITTEES MUST RESTRICT VEHICLEAND EQUIPMENT USE TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. 14. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE TOPSOIL ON THE SITE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 15. PERMITTEES MUST DIRECT DISCHARGES FROM BMPS TO VEGETATED AREAS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 16. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE A 50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER OR, IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE ON THE SITE, PROVIDEREDUNDANT (DOUBLE) PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS WHEN A SURFACE WATER IS LOCATED WITHIN 50 FEET OF THEPROJECT'S EARTH DISTURBANCES AND STORMWATER FLOWS TO THE SURFACE WATER. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALLPERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT LEAST 5 FEET APART UNLESS LIMITED BY LACK OF AVAILABLE SPACE. NATURALBUFFERS ARE NOT REQUIRED ADJACENT TO ROAD DITCHES, JUDICIAL DITCHES, COUNTY DITCHES, STORMWATERCONVEYANCE CHANNELS, STORM DRAIN INLETS, AND SEDIMENT BASINS. IF PRESERVING THE BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE,PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE REASONS IN THE SWPPP. SHEET PILING IS A REDUNDANT PERIMETER CONTROL IFINSTALLED IN A MANNER THAT RETAINS ALL STORMWATER. 17. PERMITTEES MUST USE POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, OR OTHER SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS IN ACCORDANCEWITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES, DOSING SPECIFICATIONS AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONSPROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER. THE PERMITTEES MUST USE CONVENTIONAL EROSION AND SEDIMENTCONTROLS PRIOR TO CHEMICAL ADDITION AND MUST DIRECT TREATED STORMWATER TO A SEDIMENT CONTROL SYSTEMFOR FILTRATION OR SETTLEMENT OF THE FLOC PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (SECTION 10):1.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERS RELATED TO DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING(E.G., PUMPED DISCHARGES, TRENCH/DITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE) TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENT BASINON THE PROJECT SITE UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MAY DEWATER TO SURFACE WATERS IF THEY VISUALLY CHECKTO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT HAS BEEN OBTAINED AND NUISANCE CONDITIONS (SEE MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2)WILL NOT RESULT FROM THE DISCHARGE. IF PERMITTEES CANNOT DISCHARGE THE WATER TO A SEDIMENTATION BASINPRIOR TO ENTERING A SURFACE WATER, PERMITTEES MUST TREAT IT WITH APPROPRIATE BMPS SUCH THAT THEDISCHARGE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE SURFACE WATER OR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES.2.IF PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE WATER CONTAINING OIL OR GREASE, THEY MUST USE AN OIL-WATER SEPARATOR ORSUITABLE FILTRATION DEVICE (E.G., CARTRIDGE FILTERS, ABSORBENTS PADS) PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.3.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE ALL WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN-DRAINING ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THAT DOESNOT CAUSE EROSION OR SCOUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS OR INUNDATION OF WETLANDS INTHE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS THAT CAUSES SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE WETLAND.4.IF PERMITTEES USE FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER, THEY MUST HAUL THE BACKWASH WATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL,RETURN THE BACKWASH WATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS, OR INCORPORATE THE BACKWASHWATER INTO THE SITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (SECTION 11):1.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE A TRAINED PERSON, AS IDENTIFIED IN ITEM 21.2.B, WILL INSPECT THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTIONSITE AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALLEVENT GREATER THAN 1/2 INCH IN 24 HOURS.2.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT AND MAINTAIN ALL PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT BMPS.3.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS AND POLLUTION PREVENTIONMANAGEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS. PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE ORSUPPLEMENT ALL NONFUNCTIONAL BMPS WITH FUNCTIONAL BMPS BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTERDISCOVERY UNLESS ANOTHER TIME FRAME IS SPECIFIED IN ITEM 11.5 OR 11.6. PERMITTEES MAY TAKE ADDITIONAL TIME IFFIELD CONDITIONS PREVENT ACCESS TO THE AREA.4.DURING EACH INSPECTION, PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE DITCHES ANDCONVEYANCE SYSTEMS BUT NOT CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS, FOR EVIDENCE OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITION.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS,CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND RESTABILIZE THE AREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS INEXPOSED SOIL. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OFDISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL, REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. PERMITTEES MUST USEALL REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS. IF PRECLUDED, REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHINSEVEN (7) DAYS OF OBTAINING ACCESS. PERMITTEES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATEAND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES AND RECEIVING ANY APPLICABLE PERMITS, PRIOR TO CONDUCTING ANY WORK IN SURFACEWATERS.5.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT CONSTRUCTION SITE VEHICLE EXIT LOCATIONS, STREETS AND CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMSWITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT FOR SEDIMENTATION FROM EROSION OR TRACKED SEDIMENT FROM VEHICLES.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM ALL PAVED SURFACES WITHIN ONE (1) CALENDAR DAY OF DISCOVERY OR, IFAPPLICABLE, WITHIN A SHORTER TIME TO AVOID A SAFETY HAZARD TO USERS OF PUBLIC STREETS.6.PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENT ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES WHEN THEY BECOMENONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/2 OF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE.7.PERMITTEES MUST DRAIN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND REMOVE THE SEDIMENT WHEN THEDEPTH OF SEDIMENT COLLECTED IN THE BASIN REACHES 1/2 THE STORAGE VOLUME.8.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE THAT AT LEAST ONE INDIVIDUAL PRESENT ON THE SITE (OR AVAILABLE TO THE PROJECT SITEIN THREE (3) CALENDAR DAYS) IS TRAINED IN THE JOB DUTIES DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.B.9.PERMITTEES MAY ADJUST THE INSPECTION SCHEDULE DESCRIBED IN ITEM 11.2 AS FOLLOWS:a. INSPECTIONS OF AREAS WITH PERMANENT COVER CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH, EVEN IF CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITY CONTINUES ON OTHER PORTIONS OF THE SITE; ORb.WHERE SITES HAVE PERMANENT COVER ON ALL EXPOSED SOIL AND NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS OCCURRINGANYWHERE ON THE SITE, INSPECTIONS CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH AND, AFTER 12 MONTHS, MAY BESUSPENDED COMPLETELY UNTIL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RESUMES. THE MPCA MAY REQUIRE INSPECTIONS TORESUME IF CONDITIONS WARRANT; ORc.WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS BEEN SUSPENDED DUE TO FROZEN GROUND CONDITIONS, INSPECTIONS MAYBE SUSPENDED. INSPECTIONS MUST RESUME WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RUNOFF OCCURRING, OR UPON RESUMINGCONSTRUCTION, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. 10. PERMITTEES MUST RECORD ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BEING CONDUCTEDAND THESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED WITH THE SWPPP. THESE RECORDS MUST INCLUDE:a.DATE AND TIME OF INSPECTIONS; ANDb.NAME OF PERSONS CONDUCTING INSPECTIONS; ANDc.ACCURATE FINDINGS OF INSPECTIONS, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC LOCATION WHERE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARENEEDED; ANDd.CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN (INCLUDING DATES, TIMES, AND PARTY COMPLETING MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES); ANDe.DATE OF ALL RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 1/2 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL FOR EACHEVENT. PERMITTEES MUST OBTAIN RAINFALL AMOUNTS BY EITHER A PROPERLY MAINTAINED RAIN GAUGE INSTALLEDONSITE, A WEATHER STATION THAT IS WITHIN ONE (1) MILE OF YOUR LOCATION, OR A WEATHER REPORTING SYSTEMTHAT PROVIDES SITE SPECIFIC RAINFALL DATA FROM RADAR SUMMARIES; ANDf.IF PERMITTEES OBSERVE A DISCHARGE DURING THE INSPECTION, THEY MUST RECORD AND SHOULD PHOTOGRAPHAND DESCRIBE THE LOCATION OF THE DISCHARGE (I.E., COLOR, ODOR, SETTLED OR SUSPENDED SOLIDS, OIL SHEEN,AND OTHER OBVIOUS INDICATORS OF POLLUTANTS); ANDg.ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP PROPOSED AS A RESULT OF THE INSPECTION MUST BE DOCUMENTED ASREQUIRED IN SECTION 6 WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS.POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT (SECTION 12):1.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE BUILDING PRODUCTS AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING ORTEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITHSTORMWATER. PERMITTEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COVER OR PROTECT PRODUCTS WHICH ARE EITHER NOT A SOURCEOF CONTAMINATION TO STORMWATER OR ARE DESIGNED TO BE EXPOSED TO STORMWATER.2.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE PESTICIDES, FERTILIZERS AND TREATMENT CHEMICALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTICSHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZECONTACT WITH STORMWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND TOXIC WASTE, (INCLUDING OIL, DIESEL FUEL, GASOLINE,HYDRAULIC FLUIDS, PAINT SOLVENTS, PETROLEUM-BASED PRODUCTS, WOOD PRESERVATIVES, ADDITIVES, CURINGCOMPOUNDS, AND ACIDS) IN SEALED CONTAINERS TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE. STORAGE ANDDISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIALS MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7045 INCLUDING SECONDARYCONTAINMENT AS APPLICABLE.4.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY STORE, COLLECT AND DISPOSE SOLID WASTE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7035.5.PERMITTEES MUST POSITION PORTABLE TOILETS SO THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT TIP OR BE KNOCKED OVER.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE SANITARY WASTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7041.6.PERMITTEES MUST TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS,INCLUDING FUEL, FROM ANY AREA WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED OR UNLOADED INCLUDING THE USE OFDRIP PANS OR ABSORBENTS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE ADEQUATE SUPPLIES ARE AVAILABLE ATALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP DISCHARGED MATERIALS AND THAT AN APPROPRIATE DISPOSAL METHOD IS AVAILABLE FORRECOVERED SPILLED MATERIALS. PERMITTEES MUST REPORT AND CLEAN UP SPILLS IMMEDIATELY AS REQUIRED BYMINN. STAT. 115.061, USING DRY CLEAN UP MEASURES WHERE POSSIBLE.7.PERMITTEES MUST LIMIT VEHICLE EXTERIOR WASHING AND EQUIPMENT TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE. PERMITTEESMUST CONTAIN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHING AREA IN A SEDIMENT BASIN OR OTHER SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE CONTROLSAND MUST DISPOSE WASTE FROM THE WASHING ACTIVITY PROPERLY. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY USE AND STORESOAPS, DETERGENTS, OR SOLVENTS.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CONTAINMENT FOR ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY WASHOUTOPERATIONS (E.G., CONCRETE, STUCCO, PAINT, FORM RELEASE OILS, CURING COMPOUNDS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTIONMATERIALS) RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. PERMITTEES MUST PREVENT LIQUID AND SOLID WASHOUTWASTES FROM CONTACTING THE GROUND AND MUST DESIGN THE CONTAINMENT SO IT DOES NOT RESULT IN RUNOFFFROM THE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES INCOMPLIANCE WITH MPCA RULES. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A SIGN INDICATING THE LOCATION OF THE WASHOUTFACILITY.PERMIT TERMINATION (SECTION 4 AND SECTION 13):1.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ALL TERMINATION CONDITIONS LISTED IN SECTION 13 ARECOMPLETE.2.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER SELLING OR OTHERWISE LEGALLY TRANSFERRING THE ENTIRESITE, INCLUDING PERMIT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ROADS (E.G., STREET SWEEPING) AND STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTUREFINAL CLEAN OUT, OR TRANSFERRING PORTIONS OF A SITE TO ANOTHER PARTY. THE PERMITTEES' COVERAGE UNDERTHIS PERMIT TERMINATES AT MIDNIGHT ON THE SUBMISSION DATE OF THE NOT.3.PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND MUST INSTALL PERMANENT COVER OVER ALL AREASPRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT. VEGETATIVE COVER MUST CONSIST OF A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATION WITH ADENSITY OF 70 PERCENT OF ITS EXPECTED FINAL GROWTH. VEGETATION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF ASPECIFIC AREA DICTATES NO VEGETATION, SUCH AS IMPERVIOUS SURFACES OR THE BASE OF A SAND FILTER.4.PERMITTEES MUST CLEAN THE PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM OF ANY ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT ANDMUST ENSURE THE SYSTEM MEETS ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 15 THROUGH 19 AND IS OPERATING ASDESIGNED.5.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.6.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS PRIORTO SUBMITTING THE NOT. PERMITTEES MAY LEAVE BMPS DESIGNED TO DECOMPOSE ON-SITE IN PLACE.7.FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ONLY, PERMIT COVERAGE TERMINATES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS IF THE STRUCTURES AREFINISHED AND TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION AND DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROL IS COMPLETE, THERESIDENCE SELLS TO THE HOMEOWNER, AND THE PERMITTEE DISTRIBUTES THE MPCA'S "HOMEOWNER FACT SHEET" TOTHE HOMEOWNER.8.FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ON AGRICULTURAL LAND (E.G., PIPELINES ACROSS CROPLAND), PERMITTEES MUSTRETURN THE DISTURBED LAND TO ITS PRECONSTRUCTION AGRICULTURAL USE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.SEED NOTES:ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO SALVAGE AND PRESERVE EXISTING TOPSOIL NECESSARY FOR FINAL STABILIZATIONAND TO ALSO MINIMIZE COMPACTION IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS. IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDING THE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TOA MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 INCHES.TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, MULCHING & BLANKET.SEED·TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112 (WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP) FOR WINTER AND 21-111 (OATSCOVER CROP) FOR SPRING/SUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEED MIXES SHALL BE APPLIED AT A SEEDING RATE OF 100LBS/ACRE.MULCH·IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING, WITHIN 24 HOURS, MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCESEED GERMINATION. MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT 90% COVERAGE (2 TONS PER ACRE OF STRAW MULCH)SLOPES·3:1 (HORIZ/VERT.) OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH·SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.·SEE PLAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS.GENERAL SWPPP REQUIREMENTS AND NOTES:RYAN RUZEKPUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR651-255-1152page 121