Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2021-08-04 Council agenda packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Wednesday, August 4, 2021 6:00 pm Mendota Heights City Hall 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Adopt Agenda 5. Consent Agenda a. Approval of July 21, 2020 City Council Minutes b. Acknowledge the June 22, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes c. Authorize Out-of-State Travel Request for Recreation Program Coordinator d. Authorize Assistant City Administrator Position Recruitment e. Approve Agreement with Inspectron for Septic System Inspection Services f. Accept the Retirement Notice of Firefighter Gordy Skjerven g. Accept the Retirement Notice of Firefighter Jeff Stenhaug h. Approve Fire Synopsis Report i. Approval of June 2021 Treasurer’s Report j. Approval of Claims List 6. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) *See guidelines below 7. Public Hearings - none 8. New and Unfinished Business a. Resolution 2021-64 Adopting the Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan b. Preliminary Approval of a Requested Interim Use Permit to Xcel Energy on Resurrection Cemetery Property – 2101 Lexington Avenue South 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, July 20, 2021 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Levine called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Councilors Duggan, Paper, Mazzitello, and Miller were also present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. MOMENT OF SILENCE – IN MEMORY OF SCOTT PATRICK (EOW JULY 30, 2014) Mayor Levine asked for a moment of silence in memory of Officer Scott Patrick, end of watch July 30, 2014. Councilor Paper commented that there will be an event honoring Officer Patrick on July 30th at the intersection of Smith/Dodd at 12 noon. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Levine presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Mazzitello moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Levine presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Mazzitello moved approval of the consent calendar as presented, pulling item h. for a separate vote. a.Approval of July 6, 2021 City Council Minutes b. Approve the May 11, 2021 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes c.Approve Resolution 2021-61 Accept Donation to Marie Park Playground Grand Opening d. Acknowledge May 2021 Par 3 Financial Report e.Approve Ordinance No. 570 Amending 2021 Fee Schedule July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 12 f. Approve Resolution 2021-62 Accept Park Bench Donation – Rogers Lake Park, Ivy Hills Park g. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License for Holy Family Maronite Catholic Church for September 11, 2021 h. Approve Cooperative Agreement with Great River Greening for Valley Park i. Approve Resolution 2021-63 Fire Hall Final Payments j. Approve the June 2021 Building Activity Report k. Approval of Claims List Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS H.) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH GREAT RIVER GREENING FOR VALLEY PARK Councilor Miller asked if additional context could be provided on the third stipulation related to revegetation of native species. He asked the contents of the seeding. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that he did not have the answer at this time but could provide that to the Council once determined. Councilor Miller commented that it has been stated that the broadcast seeding should be a diverse woodland mix. Mayor Levine commented that this is a great example of how the City works in partnership with other organizations, noting that Great River Greening has been a wonderful partner. She stated that Great River Greening is contributing $57,000 and the City is contributing $9,000 for this project. Councilor Miller moved to approve the COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH GREAT RIVER GREENING FOR VALLEY PARK. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS No one from the public wished to be heard. PUBLIC HEARING A) RESOLUTION 2021-59 SWEENEY ADDITION EASEMENT VACATION Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that the Council was being asked to hold a public hearing on an easement vacation in Sweeney Addition commenced by petition. Councilor Paper commented that there is a catch basin next to the pedway near lot four and asked who owns that basin and who is responsible for maintenance. Mr. Ruzek commented that was privately installed by Mr. Sweeney and is privately maintained. July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 of 12 Councilor Paper asked where the water is coming from. Mr. Ruzek commented that the catch basin handles drainage from a small portion of the County road. Councilor Mazzitello moved to open the public hearing. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0. There being no one coming forward to speak, Councilor Duggan moved to close the public hearing. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2021-59 APPROVING AN EASEMENT VACATION WITHIN SWEENEY ADDITION. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 B) RESOLUTION 2021-58 RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION FOR EUGENIA AVENUE Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that the Council was being asked to hold a public hearing on a right-of-way vacation commended by petition for Eugenia Avenue. Councilor Duggan asked if there would be enough land for 591 and 606 to allow lot splits if this is approved. Mr. Ruzek stated that 591 would not have enough square footage but 606 would exceed 30,000 square feet and could be split into two lots. Councilor Duggan asked the likelihood of MnDOT accepting a pathway across Sibley Memorial Highway from this potential vacated property. Mr. Ruzek stated that the City does not have a trail improvement plan in this area. He confirmed that Saint Paul has not reached out in desire of extending a trail. Councilor Mazzitello referenced the grade change in the right-of-way, specifically from the old alley between 591 and 606 and asked if an ADA compliant trail could be constructed with the grade changes. Mr. Ruzek stated that with grading a trail would be possible, perhaps with retaining walls. Councilor Miller asked the benefit that the City would earn from giving the easement away. Mr. Ruzek commented that he is not aware of the City investing resources into this area. He commented that the area has been maintained by the property owners. Mayor Levine stated that many well thought out written comments were received and she expressed appreciation for them. She stated that some residents referred to this as green space and asked if this fits that definition. Mr. Ruzek commented that he would consider this undeveloped right-of-way, noting that it was platted with the intention of being a roadway and not as green space. He stated that one of the July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 of 12 conditions for vacation of this area would be that the right-of-way would be covered under a drainage and utility easement which would restrict certain activities. Mayor Levine asked if there would be enough room for another home if 606 were split into two lots. Mr. Ruzek provided additional explanation on where a building pad could be located on the property. Councilor Paper asked if it would be reasonable to have a trail come out at an uncontrolled intersection of a highway. Mr. Ruzek confirmed that the City does not favor a trail unless there is a destination for it. He did not believe staff would recommend construction of a trail that goes nowhere. Councilor Paper commented that currently 606 is not large enough to be split but this vacated right-of- way would make the lot large enough to split. He asked if a condition could be added stating that the lot could not be split. Mr. Ruzek commented that the City would not have legal means to restrict that. Mayor Levine asked if the Council could vacate only a portion of the right-of-way. Mr. Ruzek stated that the Council could vacate the right-of-way on 591, but there would still be an undeveloped portion of right- of-way remaining. Councilor Duggan asked if MnDOT would provide a driveway curb cut if a new lot were split off from 606. Mr. Ruzek commented that MnDOT would have to approve a curb cut for a new lot. He stated that currently the property owner has stated that they do not have a desire to split the lot. Mayor Levine invited the applicant to address the Council. Brian Burnett, 591 Hiawatha Avenue, stated that he requests that the City vacate Eugenia right-of-way. He stated that the other side of the right-of-way has already been vacated. He stated that he has regularly maintained the right-of-way since 1994. He stated that he would plan to install a fence and improve the area. He noted that the fence would eliminate nuisance during late hours of the night and dumping of trash. He reviewed incidents that have occurred over the years beginning with a burglary of his home in 1996 along with other attempted break ins and police reports related to nuisance activity within the right- of-way area. He asked if the right-of-way is still needed and requested that it be vacated. Natalie Fiscus, 606 Sibley Memorial Highway, spoke in support of the vacation of the right-of-way. She stated that she became the primary homeowner in 2013 after her parents passed away and has done her best to clean up trash in the right-of-way area which has been a constant problem. She stated that the right-of-way is used as a dumping ground. She hoped that if the area is no longer needed for public purposes, that it could become private property. She stated that she does not have the desire to split the lot or build another home and would not desire to hinder the ability for the City to maintain an easement. She stated that she would hope to put something up to deter people from coming onto her property. It would allow her and her siblings to feel safer in their home. Councilor Mazzitello moved to open the public hearing. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 of 12 Ed Meisinger, 572 Hiawatha Avenue, stated that during the 16 years he has lived at the home, the Burnetts have been excellent neighbors and he fully supports the request. He stated that if the property could be vacated it would be a definite improvement for the neighborhood and the city. Maureen Dunagan, 597 Suttcliffe Circle, commented that she has never seen negative activity in the right-of-way. She commented that her home was also burglarized but that had nothing to do with the right-of-way. She stated that the residents on her circle use that right-of-way as a walkway to their home. She stated that she has offered to maintain the lot between her home and the Burnett’s. Bill Dunagan, 597 Suttcliffe Circle, stated that he is opposed to this vacation of right of way. He stated that the people to the north would win as they would gain additional property, but the people south of the right-of-way have also maintained this area. He stated that people in their area access the neighborhood by walking through this right-of-way. He stated that he was burglarized in 2010 but that had nothing to do with this area. He stated that he served on the Saint Paul Park and Rec Board and their policy was that land should not be given up unless it can be replaced with something else. He stated that this action would give benefit to two property owners but would take away from the enjoyment of the other four property owners in that area. He believed that vacating the right-of-way would be taking away value to the properties on the south side. He stated that vacating this does not benefit the City. Therese Radford, 613 Suttcliffe Circle, stated that they purchased their home in November and did the research to determine the right-of-way was public property. She stated that is a buffer to Highway 13 and is the only access they have to safely walk in the area. There being no one further coming forward to speak, Councilor Mazzitello moved to close the public hearing. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mr. Burnett stated that no one has ever offered to help him maintain this area. He stated that his police report states that this area was used for the burglary of his home. He stated that he sees suspicious activity in the right-of-way in the evenings. Ms. Fiscus, 606 Hiawatha, stated that she has not seen anyone else maintaining the area. She stated that when she walks her dogs, they walk on the highway to access the park and do not use the right-of-way. Councilor Mazzitello asked if the City issued a license agreement for a neighbor to plant and irrigate within the right-of-way. Mr. Ruzek stated that he was not aware of such. He noted that many times people have irrigation within right-of-way. Councilor Mazzitello asked if a license agreement would be needed in this case because there is no curb line or street in that area. Mr. Ruzek commented that he tends to assume that if someone installs something in a public right-of-way if it is damaged it would not be replaced or repaired. July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 of 12 Councilor Mazzitello referenced a recent vacation where a neighbor was allowed to plant within an easement. Mr. Ruzek commented that in 2009, half of the right-of-way was vacated. He stated that a new homeowner wanted to plant trees and the City issued a license agreement to plant the trees with a second easement being provided to ensure access. Councilor Duggan commented that this is a vacation request for 30 feet of right-of-way. Mr. Ruzek commented that the other side of the right of way was never platted. Councilor Duggan asked for the last time the City denied a right-of-way vacation request. Mr. Ruzek noted that in 2009 the vacation of this right-of-way was denied. Councilor Miller commented that he is sympathetic to all residents that experienced crime in their lives. He stated that he is not convinced that if the land is vacated by the city, that would solve that issue. He stated that while there is no immediate need, there could be a need in the future. He stated that retaining the right-of-way would allow for the possibility of a trail in the future. Councilor Paper commented that he walked the right-of-way, and it seems odd that when you get to the portion that is dense and overgrown, it is a skinny trail. He stated that if it was getting more use, as it has been stated, there should be more disturbance. He could not recall the last time the Council did not approve a vacation request. Councilor Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2021-58 APPROVING A RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION COMMENCED BY PETITION. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Further discussion: Councilor Mazzitello commented that there is a distinction between a right-of-way and easement. He stated that a right-of-way is owned by the governmental agency while an easement is owned by the private property owner with access rights granted to the governmental agency. He stated that in his 13 years with the City, he is only aware of one denied vacation request which was this request in 2009. He stated that in 1924, the first 30 feet was platted and 60 to 70 years later the second 30 feet of the intended roadway did not get platted. He stated at that time Eugenia Avenue was not going to be constructed. He stated that he could not find an ironclad definition of green space but read the definition provided by the dictionary and other entities. He did not believe this right-of-way constitutes a green space, noting that it was not intended to be such and has not been maintained as such. He stated that he would guess there are hundreds of these around the city and previously worked to develop criteria that would be used to evaluate whether right-of-way is needed. He stated that this right-of-way does not provide benefit to the City but acknowledged that it could potentially provide an option in the future. He noted that he spoke with MnDOT and there are no plans to construct a trail along Highway 13. He stated that there is litter, vandalism, potential contribution to property damage and theft and therefore believes that this right-of-way causes a liability to the City. He stated that the only issue he is concerned with is that 606 would become a splitable lot but noted that he would be okay moving forward. Mayor Levine commented that she is unsure of the future purpose of the right-of-way but does not want to pretend that there may not be a connector to the brickyards in the future. She felt that the right-of-way is an access point for properties to avoid using Sibley Memorial Highway. She stated that her other concern would be potential for lot split. She stated that while the current property owner is not interested July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 of 12 in a lot split, a future owner could. She stated that people purchased homes with the thought that the right- of-way would remain. She stated that she would be okay vacating a portion of that leaving a little trail along. She suggested vacating half of the property. Mayor Levine moved to amend the motion to vacate the right-of-way behind 591 and leave the right-of- way in place behind 606. Councilor Duggan accepted the amendment. Councilor Mazzitello stated that the resolution makes no mention of a drainage and utility easement and suggested it be included in the now be it resolved statement. He asked for opinion from legal counsel. City Attorney Elliot Knetsch stated that it would be preferred to have that included. Councilor Mazzitello commented that if the right-of-way for 606 is vacated, there would be a 30-foot easement that would remain in place. He stated that the lot would remain splitable, but it would be up to a builder as to whether it would be buildable. He stated that he does not accept the amendment to the motion. Councilor Mazzitello moved to amend the motion to include a fourth condition that prior to the vacation being enacted a drainage and utility easement shall be enacted to cover the entirety of the right-of-way area. Councilor Duggan asked if a path were desired from Hiwatha to Sibley would it need to be larger than 30 feet. It was confirmed that a path would not need to be wider than the 30 feet available. He asked if additional space would be needed for a roadway and where that space would come from. Councilor Mazzitello confirmed that additional space would be needed for a roadway. He noted that traditionally a trail is about eight feet. Mayor Levine commented that while there is a possibility for a trail in the future, only eight feet would be needed. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that while trails are eight feet in width, additional space is needed for construction and typically a 20-foot easement is desired. He stated that if the Council chooses to vacate a portion of the right-of-way, a section could remain along the southern edge and the remainder could be vacated. Councilor Mazzitello commented that his motion to amend stands as stated. He explained that would provide the property to the owners at 591 and 606 but it could not be built upon. Councilor Duggan noted that he would support that action. Mayor Levine commented that the other homes purchased with the wooded area behind them, and it would be unfair for those property owners to have the uncertainty of a splitable lot that someone could build on. She stated that currently there is a motion to vacate the right-of-way behind 591 and not 606. July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 of 12 Councilor Mazzitello commented that the motioner accepted the amendment made by Mayor Levine, but the seconder did not. He then made an amendment to the motion to place an easement across the entire right-of-way. He stated that the property at 606 would gain the 30 feet of right-of-way but it would be in an easement and could not be built upon. Councilor Paper asked if there is a way the Council could find out the amount of frontage for that lot. Councilor Mazzitello commented that the lot is currently three feet short of the frontage required for lot split. Councilor Duggan asked if there is suggestion from legal counsel as to whether restrictions could be placed upon building on the lot. City Attorney Knetsch commented that if the minimum lot size and frontage are available, the lot would be considered buildable. Councilor Duggan asked if it would be possible to only vacate the right of way along 591, or whether a separate notice would be needed for that type of action. City Attorney Knetsch commented that the hearing was for the entire right-of-way and therefore state law would allow for vacation on any part of the right-of-way. Councilor Duggan asked if there would be legal liability on the City for denying the request for 606. City Attorney Knetsch commented that the right-of-way has been in place for almost 100 years and therefore there would be no risk to the City for that right-of-way to remain. Councilor Duggan asked if there would be support to only vacate the right-of-way for 591 and not 606. Councilors Duggan and Mazzitello withdrew the motions on the table. Councilor Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2021-58 APPROVING A RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION COMMENCED BY PETITION FOR THE PROPERTY SOUTH OF 591 WITH A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE APPLIED OVER THE VACATED RIGHT-OF- WAY. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Councilor Duggan asked if Mr. Burnett is comfortable with this action. Mr. Burnett confirmed that he would be comfortable with the drainage and utility easement. Ayes: 4 Nays: 1 (Miller) NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) DISCUSSION OF USE OF LIGHTS AT MARIE PARK Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence explained that the Council was being asked to consider a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the use of the existing rink lights at Marie Park for nighttime pickleball and basketball play. July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 9 of 12 Councilor Duggan asked where the pleasure rink is located. Ms. Lawrence commented that they flood a basketball court for a pleasure rink, which does not have nets or goals for hockey. Comments from the public: Tony Reese, 1775 South Victoria Road, commented on the use of Marie Park, noting that he supports pickleball courts and kids using the parks. He stated that he is concerned about the noise that would be generated. Councilor Duggan moved to DIRECT STAFF TO IMPLEMENT THE PILOT PROGRAM FOR 2021 FROM MID-SEPTEMBER TO OCTOBER 31ST AT MARIE PARK FOR NIGHTTIME BASKETBALL AND PICKLEBALL PLAY UNTIL 8:00 P.M. Mayor Levine seconded the motion. Councilor Miller commented that he has spoken with residents that live adjacent to the pickleball courts and their primary concern is the noise. He stated that he liked the idea of the lights but after speaking with residents he will not support this action. Councilor Duggan commented that the pilot program would only use the lights until 8 p.m. Councilor Paper commented that pickleball seems to be successful and the courts are full. He commented that it is terrific but that is a lot of pressure on the park. He stated in the winter people are generally not sitting outside. He stated that he did not want to see additional pressure on the park and neighborhood and would prefer to have play limited by daylight hours. Councilor Mazzitello stated that one of the smallest parks in the community has been chosen for the pickleball epicenter. He noted that this would draw pickleball players to this neighborhood park which then creates more of a community park- setting. He stated that he is concerned that this would conflict with the desire to mitigate against light pollution and the impact on pollinators and wildlife. He stated that he would not support a pilot program. Mayor Levine commented that this park has lights on for hockey until 10 p.m. and it is not a quiet park, nor has it ever been a quiet park. She commented that people are at this park from the time its open until it closes and did not think the noise from pickleball is any more disturbing than the noise from any other park activity. She stated that the Park and Recreation Commission is tasked with doing this type of work and is recommending approval. She noted that this would be a pilot program that could be revoked at any time and therefore believed this would be a good method to try it out. She stated that neighborhood parks are not intended to exclusively be for those neighbors and were intended to attract people outside of the neighborhood. She stated that many people play in the evenings and therefore the lights would create more opportunity. She asked that the pilot be allowed to move forward and if there is a problem, they can shut the lights off. Councilor Duggan commented that a park is a park and people do not view it differently whether it is a neighborhood or community park. July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 of 12 Councilor Miller commented that he is not against pickleball but is merely suggesting that everything should be allowed in moderation. He commented that while keeping the lights on longer would allow for additional opportunity to play, it would also impact the adjacent neighbors. Mayor Levine stated that she has also spoken with members of the community, noting that there are strong advocates on both sides of the issue. She asked for input on the number of letters received. Ms. Lawrence commented that two households were in favor and four households were against. She noted that she has received many calls from residents asking when the lights would be turned on. Mayor Levine commented that she received many more comments in support from residents than against. She stated that the Student Representative to the Commission also made comments about the basketball court and that it would be nice to have that lit. She stated that she has spoken with all the neighbors that live directly across from the basketball court and pickleball courts and she is not aware of a neighbor in that area that does not want the lights on. Councilor Paper asked how it would be determined that there is a problem if the pilot program moves forward. Ms. Lawrence commented that she would work with staff to determine how the pilot program would be run. Councilor Duggan commented that this seems similar to when there was discussion related to the skate park. He stated that the City will be aware if there are issues from the comments they receive. Mayor Levine noted that the lights during September and October would provide the ability for people to play a quick game after they get home from work. Councilor Mazzitello commented that he has been contacted by residents and is not basing his position on the six letters received. He stated that he attempts to make the decision based on the information within the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he is not totally opposed to having lights on pickleball courts but does not believe a neighborhood park is the proper location. Councilor Duggan stated that perhaps the issue of community park versus neighborhood park should be considered for Marie Park as the park has grown with more recreation opportunities. He stated that he does not see a problem trying out the program. Councilor Paper asked when this would come back if this were done as a pilot program. Ms. Lawrence stated that she would bring it back soon after the pilot program is completed so that it is fresh in everyone’s mind. Mayor Levine commented that she believes if the Council wants to do lights, it should go forward with a trial period. This would give the Council the data to know whether lights would work. She stated that lighting could also be tried at Friendly Hills once those courts are completed. Councilor Duggan commented that if this moves forward there should be signage stating that the lighting is a temporary trial period. July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 11 of 12 Councilor Paper asked when this would be proposed to start. Ms. Lawrence stated the trial period would begin in mid-September and run through October 31st. Councilor Paper asked how success would be defined. Ms. Lawrence commented that she would define success as people enjoying recreational opportunities without complaints. She stated that if she receives complaints, she would work with the City Administrator to identify next steps. Councilor Paper commented that this would essentially have lights on for one to two hours past sunset for a period of six weeks. He asked if the lights could be shut off if it is raining. Ms. Lawrence replied that the City would not have that capability. Ayes: 3 (Duggan, Levine, Paper) Nays: 2 (Miller, Mazzitello) B) CONSIDER ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 568 MISSISSIPPI RIVER REVISED CRITICAL AREA PLAN Councilor Duggan asked if this could be postponed to the next meeting. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that the draft has had a public hearing at the Planning Commission and therefore the draft could be submitted to the DNR. He stated that if the Council is accepting, staff could send it to the DNR and it could come back to the Council at a later date. City Administrator Mark McNeill commented that this item could be carried over to the next meeting. Councilor Miller asked if deferring the action would have real time impact on pending litigation. Mr. Benetti replied that it would not. He stated that the City is still under the moratorium, although there are properties interested in development. Councilor Mazzitello asked when this would come back to the Council. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that depending on the timeline of the DNR this could come back at the second meeting in August or one of the September meetings. Councilor Mazzitello moved to table ORDINANCE NO. 568 AMENDING TITLE 12 – ZONING WITH THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA (MRCCA) OVERLAY DISTRICT ORDINANCE. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that the City received word from Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) that it will begin implementing a voluntary odd/even lawn watering and outdoor uses and that outdoor watering be limited to the hours outside of noon to 6 p.m. He noted that this is the first July 20, 2021 Mendota Heights City Council Page 12 of 12 time since 1988 that SPRWS has had to implement such a program. He urged residents to go to the SPRWS website for more information. He also advised of the upcoming summer concerts and noted that other activities and announcements which can be found on the City website. He noted that Night to Unite parties should be registered with the Police Department. He stated that the event will be held on August 3rd, and therefore the Council meeting will be moved to Wednesday, August 4th. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Mazzitello complimented the other members of the Council, noting that there was good debate, which was done professionally. Councilor Paper reminded the group about the July 30th event at Smith/Dodd to remember Officer Scott Patrick. Councilor Duggan commented that Neighbors Inc is celebrating its 50th anniversary next year and he will be helping to plan the event. Mayor Levine stated that Night to Unite is an opportunity to create community and get to know your neighbors. She encouraged everyone to participate. ADJOURN Councilor Duggan moved to adjourn. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. ____________________________________ Stephanie Levine Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 of 14 ITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 22, 2021 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 22, 2021 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Acting Chair Sally Lorberbaum, Commissioners Cindy Johnson, Brian Petschel, and Andrew Katz. Those absent: Chair Litton Field, Commissioners Patrick Corbett, and Michael Toth. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of May 25, 2021 Minutes COMMISSIONER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 25, 2021. FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER JOHNSON NOTED ON PAGE 9, THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, SECOND TO LAST SENTENCE, REVISE TO “…suggested an alternative of service berry trees.” ACTING CHAIR LORBERBAUM NOTED PAGE 4, THE FIRST LINE SHOULD STATE, “…most sheds range…”; PAGE 6, FIFTH PARAGRAPH, THE LAST WORD “…together.” REPLACE WITH “…apart.”; AND PAGE 14, SECOND PARAGRAPH SHOULD STATE, “…asked how it would be…” AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 Hearings A) PLANNING CASE 2021-09 MIKE FRITZ OF M & M HOMES, 777 WENTWORTH AVENUE – PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the applicant is seeking new Preliminary and Final Plat approval on the property generally located at the northeast corner of Wentworth Avenue and Wachtler Avenue (Dakota Co. Road No. 8). The property is officially addressed as 777 Wentworth Avenue. June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 2 of 14 Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; one letter was received that was provided to the Commission and no comments or objections to this request were received. 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). Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Acting Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. Mike Fritz, applicant, stated that he is present to address any questions the Commission may have. Commissioner Johnson asked the location of the retaining wall in Lot 4 in relation to the creek, specifically the distance between the creek and retaining wall. Community Development Director Tim Benetti identified the location of the retaining walls. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that the 25-foot setback line is shown right in front of the wall, therefore the wall would be 25 feet from the center line of the creek. Mr. Fritz commented that the top of the wall on Lot 4 appears to be four feet in elevation. Commissioner Johnson asked if there would be a planting buffer planned along with the wall. She referenced the notes related to erosion control which mentions seeding with a general roadside mix or alternate prairie mix. She commented that she would prefer a native prairie mix. She asked what is planned to be planted between the wall and creek. Mr. Fritz commented that the north side of the wall along with that area are planned to be planted with a roadside mix. Acting Chair Lorberbaum commented that the retaining wall would be ten feet in height in some locations and stated that under the City regulations it states that a retaining wall should not exceed five feet in height. She asked for input from staff. Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that restriction is within the critical area corridor and this property is not within that area. He stated that there is not a height limit outside the critical corridor but walls over four feet in height must be designed by a structural engineer. Commissioner Johnson stated that it is clear why some trees are proposed to be removed as they are in the area where construction is planned. She referenced tree number 3187 on Lot 1 and asked for details on why that tree is being removed. She stated that it appears some Siberian Elms are being removed but not all, noting that those are an invasive species. June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 14 Mr. Fritz commented that 3172 (a Siberian Elm) falls on the center of the property line and therefore did not believe it could be removed as part of this project. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that if there were any Siberian Elms on the property it would appear those be recommended to be removed. Mr. Fritz commented that he would have to verify whose tree it is and speak with the adjacent property owner about that tree. Commissioner Johnson commented that the native plant list is not all inclusive and is just a recommendation to provide a starting point. She stated that there are many more native plants that may be appropriate for the site. Jim Carlson, 1562 Wachtler, asked if the lots would all be graded to be level or whether the lot on the end would still have a slope. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that Lot 1 is the highest lot on the site and there would be retaining walls that step down as the lots go west. He noted that each house would be slightly higher than the home to the west of it. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF SWEENEY 2ND ADDITION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THE CONCEPT PLANS PRESENTED UNDER THIS PLAT REQUEST DO NOT REPRESENT OR PROVIDE APPROVAL OF BUILDING LAYOUTS OR SETBACKS. FINAL LAYOUTS AND SETBACKS MUST MEET R-1 ZONE STANDARDS AND SHALL BE APPROVED UNDER SEPARATE BUILDING PERMITS FOR EACH LOT. 2. PRIOR TO ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT WORK ON THE SITE, ALL EXISTING (AND NON-CONFORMING) STRUCTURES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL BE REMOVED WITH AN APPROVED DEMOLITION PERMIT ISSUED BY THE CITY. 3. A BUILDING PERMIT, INCLUDING ALL NEW GRADING AND DRAINAGE WORK, MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION WORK. 4. A COMPLETE AND DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH A NEW BUILDING PERMIT ON EACH LOT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY CITY STAFF. AS PER THE CITY’S POLLINATOR FRIENDLY POLICY, THE June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 of 14 DEVELOPER WILL ENSURE ALL NEW TREES AND LANDSCAPING COMPLIES WITH THE CITY’S NATIVE PLANTINGS LIST. 5. ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING ACTIVITIES THROUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT SITE AND ON EACH NEW BUILDABLE LOT 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. 6. FULL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION MEASURES WILL BE PUT IN PLACE PRIOR TO AND DURING GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION WORK ACTIVITIES. 7. A WETLANDS PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO ANY PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING THE NEW STORM WATER BASIN) OR ANY NEW HOME PERMIT IS APPROVED ON LOT 4 OF THIS PLAT. 8. AN ADDITIONAL PARK DEDICATION FEE OF $4,000 MUST BE PAID BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT IS RELEASED BY THE CITY FOR RECORDING WITH DAKOTA COUNTY. 9. ALL WORK ON THIS DEVELOPMENT SITE WILL ONLY BE ALLOWED BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 A.M. TO 8:00 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY AND 9:00 A.M. TO 5:00 P.M. ON THE WEEKENDS. 10. 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. 11. INVASIVE SPECIES SHALL BE REMOVED AND NO INVASIVE SPECIES SHALL BE PLANTED. 12. THE BUFFER ALONG THE STREAM SHALL BE PLANTED WITH A NATIVE SEED MIX. FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL ASKED IF THE PLAT COULD BE CONDITIONED UPON REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TIM BENETTI COMMENTED THAT IT WOULD NOT BE NORMAL TO REQUIRE TREE REMOVAL, AS THE TYPICAL GOAL IS TREE PRESERVATION. HE STATED THAT IF THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT CONDITION, STAFF COULD WORK WITH THEM. ACTING CHAIR LORBERBAUM STATED THAT HER CONCERN WOULD BE THAT THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A LIST OF INVASIVE VERSUS NON-INVASIVE. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TIM BENETTI AGREED THAT ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL TREE REMOVAL MAY BE AN OVERSTEP BUT IF THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO DO SO, THAT COULD BE INCLUDED. ACTING CHAIR LORBERBAUM STATED THAT THE ITEM COULD BE REMOVED FROM THE MOTION WITH THE GOOD FAITH EXPECTATION THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD REVIEW THAT ELEMENT. June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 of 14 COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL ASKED IF IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN THE PLAT OR INCLUDED WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TIM BENETTI NOTED THAT STAFF CAN INDICATE THAT INVASIVE SPECIES REMOVAL WOULD BE PREFERRED AS PART OF THE LANDSCAPING PLAN WHEN THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDING PERMITS COME THROUGH FOR EACH LOT. HE STATED THAT IF THE COMMISSION FEELS THOSE ARE REASONABLE REQUIREMENTS, THEY CAN BE ADDED. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL ASKED IF THE REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE SIBERIAN ELMS. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON STATED THAT SHE WOULD PREFER ALL INVASIVE SPECIES BE REMOVED. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RYAN RUZEK COMMENTED THAT HE WOULD SUGGEST THE LANGUAGE “WITHIN DISTURBED AREAS”. HE CLARIFIED THAT THERE IS OWNED LAND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CREEK AND FOR THE DEVELOPER TO GO INTO THAT AREA WOULD BE PAST WHAT IS REQUIRED OR WHAT THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO REQUIRE. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ASKED IF THE AREA NEAR THE STREAM IS BEING DISTURBED. SHE STATED THAT IF THE INVASIVE SPECIES ARE NOT REMOVED, THE SEED PLANTED WOULD NOT BE SUCCESSFUL. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RYAN RUZEK COMMENTED THAT WOULD CONFLICT WITH THE SURFACE WATER PLAN OF THE CITY AS THAT REQUIRES NO DISTURBANCE WITHIN 20 FEET OF THE CREEK, IF THAT CAN BE PREVENTED. HE STATED THAT ACTION WOULD CONFLICT WITH THE CURRENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AND REGULATIONS. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL STATED THAT PERHAPS THAT IS A BLIND SPOT IN THE SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT RELATED TO INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN THE BUFFER ZONE. HE STATED THAT THE COMMISSION COULD NOT REQUIRE THAT WORK TO BE DONE AS IT CONFLICTS WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. ACTING CHAIR LORBERBAUM STATED THAT SHE WOULD ALSO BE UNCOMFORTABLE REQUIRING THINGS THAT ARE NOT LISTED. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON COMMENTED THAT THE DNR HAS A LENGTHY LIST. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TIM BENETTI NOTED THAT LOT 4 WOULD REQUIRE A SEPARATE WETLAND PERMIT, WHICH WOULD HAVE A MORE THOROUGH REVIEW. HE STATED THAT THIS ACTION IS SIMPLY TO PLAT THE FOUR LOTS. HE STATED THAT HE CAN WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO ENSURE June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 6 of 14 THOSE CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED WHEN THE WETLAND PERMIT REVIEW IS COMPLETED. ACTING CHAIR LORBERBAUM STATED THAT SHE WOULD PREFER TO FOCUS ON THE PLATTING AT THIS TIME. AYES: 3 NAYS: 1 (Lorberbaum) Acting Chair Lorberbaum advised the City Council would consider this application at its July 6, 2021 meeting. B) PLANNING CASE 2021-08 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS – ZONING CODE AMENDMENT (GOATS) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the Planning Commission is being asked to consider the updated draft ordinance on the temporary keeping of goats on properties for prescribed grazing purposes only. Prescribed grazing refers to the natural elimination of certain invasive or noxious vegetation by goats, with said grazing allowed by special permit only. This ordinance has been updated and amended from the Commissioner comments provided at the May 25, 2021 regular meeting; and also includes revisions or suggested language from Planning Commissioner Johnson. 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). Staff recommended approval of this request. Acting Chair Lorberbaum referenced Item E1 and asked for clarity on the use of the word “ideally”. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that this item was added by the suggestion of Commissioner Johnson, because ideally there should be enough goats to complete the activity within three to five days, but it would not be required. He stated that staff would work with the providers to get the goats in and out in the most efficient manner and would think the provider would be in favor of that as well. Acting Chair Lorberbaum commented that while that would be preferred, she would prefer to remove that language. Commissioner Johnson stated that perhaps some of the items that do not quite fit within the ordinance could be part of an informational pamphlet, such as that statement. Acting Chair Lorberbaum confirmed the consensus of the Commission to remove that statement. June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 7 of 14 Commissioner Johnson referenced Item 5, noting a potential conflict in the number of goats specified per size of the parcel and the ability for the contractor to specify the number of goats required to efficiently complete the work. Commissioner Petschel asked if legal counsel stated that would be a contradiction. Commissioner Johnson commented that she believed that statement was made. Commissioner Petschel commented that he would read that as a maximum number of goats, stating that the contractor could determine the number of goats needed to efficiently complete the work as long as the maximum is not exceeded. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that language could be included in the pamphlet as well. Commissioner Petschel asked if a maximum number of goats should be set in ordinance or whether any number of goats left at the discretion of the contractor would be allowed. Commissioner Katz stated that he would like the language to remain as stated to limit the noise from the goats on the site. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that he would prefer to remove that statement and include it in a pamphlet noting that staff could work with the contractor to set the number of goats and make adjustments if there are issues. Commissioner Petschel agreed and noted that if a problem arises, a maximum number of goats could be added to the ordinance. Commissioner Katz agreed that there could be some instances when perhaps the work could be completed in one day with more goats rather than keeping goats overnight on a site, which would be preferred. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that the first statement for Item 5 would remain, and the second sentence would be removed. Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked why the plan to dispose of manure was removed. Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that was removed at the request of the Commission. Commissioner Johnson reviewed some of the research she has done on this topic and determined that item is an impossibility. Commissioner Katz referenced Item 9 and asked if it is standard to specify neutered male goats. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that is standard practice. June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 8 of 14 Commissioner Johnson referenced Item 11C, and suggested that the language, “threatened or endangered plant species shall be protected from grazing activities” remain and the remainder of the language should be removed and placed in the pamphlet. She suggested that Item E be removed as well as it would be difficult to manage. Acting Chair Lorberbaum referenced Item G and asked if that is something the City could monitor. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that was a request by Commissioner Johnson. He explained that the purpose of having the goats is for them to eat the invasive species rather than feeding the goats separately. He stated that he would not be out regulating whether the goat is being fed in addition. Commissioner Johnson stated that of the providers she spoke with the intention is to have the goats get into a site and do their job, but that language would provide that clarification. She referenced Item HB, recommending that the first sentence remain, and the remainder of the language be removed and included in the pamphlet. She referenced Item HC and recommended that be removed as after speaking with contractors she learned the survivability of the seeds is low after it passes through the system of the goat. She stated that the cleanout period can be difficult on the goat’s system and is not recommended. Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked if the ten-day period is typical related to the request to appear before the Council following revocation. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that language was suggested by the City Attorney. Acting Chair Lorberbaum commented that seems like a short period of time as the Council only meets twice per month. Commissioner Petschel commented that he understands that language to be that the permit holder shall file the request for the hearing within ten days, not that the hearing needs to occur within ten days. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that the permit holder would need to file for the hearing within 10 days following revocation or their right to appeal would be lost. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 566 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PART OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY CODE TITLE 5 – POLICE REGULATIONS AND TITLE 12 – ZONING REGARDING THE TEMPORARY KEEPING OF GOATS FOR GRAZING PURPOSES. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 9 of 14 Community Development Director Tim Benetti advised the City Council would consider this application at its July 6, 2021 meeting, pending a final review by the City Attorney. Acting Chair Lorberbaum noted that the public hearing was not held. Acting Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 10 of 14 C) PLANNING CASE 2021-07 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS – ZONING CODE AMENDMENT (MRCCA) Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that the Commission is being asked to once again review the proposed Ordinance No. 568, the new Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) Ordinance for the community. This draft ordinance includes a number of added comments and suggested revisions offered by the Commission at the June 10, 2021 Planning Commission Workshop meeting. 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). Staff recommended approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Commissioner Johnson suggested replacing “natural vegetation” with “native vegetation”. Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted a new definition which was added for keystone species at the recommendation of Commissioner Johnson. He referenced another addition of “underground springs” and that added definition as well. Commissioner Petschel asked for the opinion of the Commission as to including keystone species as an exemption from selective vegetation removal and whether the Commission would want to take away the ability to selectively remove a tree. He stated that would be a big change and would like to have discussion. Acting Chair Lorberbaum agreed that is a good point as there may be a reason behind it. Commissioner Johnson stated selective vegetation removal could be done without a permit but if it is a keystone species, she believes a permit should be needed. Commissioner Petschel stated that keystone species is a lot of information that he does not entirely understand and would not want to endorse something he does not understand. Commissioner Johnson commented that she is working to create a list of keystone species for Minnesota. Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked whether it would be reasonable for a homeowner to expect to know that they would need to get the list. Commissioner Katz commented that he would hope that any homeowner in this area doing this type of work would be working with staff. Commissioner Petschel stated that it is not incumbent for a homeowner to know what they should or should not do, but to ensure proper remediation is completed if something is done that should June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 11 of 14 not be. He stated that his concern would be that he does not know what keystone species are and whether he would support including that. Commissioner Johnson stated that she is working to provide a consolidated list to staff that could be used. Commissioner Petschel stated that he likes the idea of it, but it seems to be a bit of a power grab to say we are going to say that things can selectively be removed except for a list that has not yet been developed and will be added to. He stated that he dislikes that things can be added without review. He asked if the City has oversight as to what is added to the list of keystone species. Commissioner Johnson provided examples of keystone species and stated that the list is based on research information, but the City does not have oversight. Commissioner Petschel stated that his concern is that it is a placeholder statement that can be added to without oversight. He stated that the idea is solid, but the execution is flimsy. Commissioner Katz stated that he would compare it similar to a homeowners association. He stated that if someone is purchasing property within this area, they would be held to a different standard. Commissioner Johnson commented that this area already falls under the rules of another authority. Community Development Director Tim Benetti referenced the proposed language that was suggested to be added. He stated that keystone species can be removed from the definition and could instead be added under another area related to selective vegetation removal. Commissioner Johnson stated that she does not believe removal of keystone species should not be allowed but believed it should be allowed with a permit. Community Development Director Tim Benetti asked for the opinion of the Commission related to the definition of structure. It was the consensus of the Commission to use the State definition. It was the consensus of the Commission to move underground springs to “u” as underground springs rather than “s”. Commissioner Katz asked what is being done to protect the underground springs once identified. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that it would be treated the same way as another water source. Commissioner Johnson referenced the “conserving wooded areas in developing communities” is a link and whether that information is being provided by link. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that is a link. June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 12 of 14 Commissioner Petschel asked if links should be provided within an ordinance. He noted that links go dead all the time and if that information is important, it should be provided in an external document as the link could go away. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that the additional statement could be included, as published by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The Commission agreed. Commissioner Johnson referenced language related to screening using natural vegetation. She stated that she would like to see a percentage of native vegetation included. Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked if it would be preferred to use native rather than natural. Commissioner Johnson stated that she did not believe entirely native would be necessary, but a percentage of native would be preferred. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that there are not many river- dependent uses and did not think the additional language is needed. Acting Chair Lorberbaum stated that she would prefer “A through D” rather than “A-D” on page 93. Commissioner Petschel noted on page 96/97 and asked if that area is mapped out anywhere as to the properties that would be subject to section five. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that is identified in the MRCCA chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and includes a map. He stated that there are certain areas identified by the DNR that have established vegetative stands. Commissioner Petschel stated that these standards apply to properties not just along the bluff but also properties across the street and the City should be cautious as to how landowners would be constrained. Community Development Director Tim Benetti displayed the map with the vegetative stands identified. Commissioner Petschel asked if there is a similar map of areas of native planting communities. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that there is not such a map. Commissioner Petschel commented that he could see that being used as a weapon during a public hearing through comments by a neighbor. Commissioner Johnson read the definition. Commissioner Petschel stated that he would support that item. He explained that his concern was that there would be someone that wants to remove a building and replace that with a new one, but June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 13 of 14 the neighbors use that language to prevent the action, using the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law. Commissioner Johnson commented that it is well defined and therefore she did not believe that would be a concern. Commissioner Petschel reviewed the language that could be added related to selective removal of keystone species that could be allowed with a vegetation permit. Commissioner Johnson noted on page 98, Item F2B, it should read, include “native” vegetation. Acting Chair Lorberbaum noted that the link in that statement should be made as a reference. She noted on page 99, Item 3, it mentions City staff and asked for clarification on who that would refer to. Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that could be clarified to read Public Works Director or Zoning Administrator. Commissioner Katz stated that his concern would be with whether the name of the position changes when staff turns over. Community Development Director Tim Benetti noted that “staff” could be removed, and it could just read “to the satisfaction of the City”. Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked if that would then mean the City Council. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that Public Works Director could be used. Acting Chair Lorberbaum referenced the use of the language “may be allowed” and commented that seems wishy washy and asked if different language should be used such as “shall be allowed”. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that he would interpret it as “may” gives the Commission more power whereas “shall” would give the applicant more power. It was the consensus of the Commission to use “may”. Commissioner Johnson noted another link that should be replaced with a reference. Acting Chair Lorberbaum noted on page 104, 12-3-12, the section begins with Item 3 and should instead start with “A”. It was noted that the item numbers in that section should be replaced with letters and sub-items should be numbered. Commissioner Petschel asked if section E has enough specifics and prohibitions given that the City does not allow the construction of chicken coops on grades greater than 18 percent. He stated that under the general case of development, such restrictive language is not included. June 22, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 14 of 14 Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that he does prefer the term “may” as it provides leeway to deny an application even if the documentations are provided. Commissioner Petschel stated that it just seemed to be a contrast that the minor items are very specific, but the larger developments are not as specific. Commissioner Johnson referenced a commented received from former Commissioner Magnuson related to definitions, under bluff and asked for clarification. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that had been corrected. Acting Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Acting Chair Lorberbaum asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO 568 WITH THE CHANGES AS NOTED BY THE COMMISSION. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated city staff will be working with the city attorney to finalize language, verify section references and content; and stated the City Council would consider this proposed ordinance at its July 20, 2021 meeting. Request for City Council Action DATE: August 4, 2021 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Out of State Travel Authorization—National Recreation and Park Association INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to authorize Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence to attend the 2021 National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Conference in Nashville, Tennessee from September 21 to September 23, 2021. BACKGROUND The City’s Travel Authorization and Expense Reimbursement Policy requires that all out-of-state conference, seminar, and other education related expenses be approved in advance by the City Council, and must include an estimate of the costs of travel, lodging, and programming. The NRPA conference is recognized as the premier annual conference for Park and Recreation professionals in the United States. This national conference brings together park and recreation professionals, students, citizen advocates and industry suppliers and offers attendees the opportunity to participate in educational seminars, classes, professional development/networking and one of the largest product tradeshows in the industry. BUGET IMPACT Funds for the remainder of the cost are available in the Recreation budget. The estimated costs for attending are: Airfare $316.80 Conference Registration $0.00 Lodging $860.91 Meals $210.00 Total $1,387.71 The Recreation Program Coordinator was awarded the 2020 National Recreation and Park Association Young Professional Fellowship Award. As part of this award, the City will be reimbursed $1,000 for airfare and lodging fees and the registration fee is covered by the NRPA. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the out-of-state travel by Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator to attend the 2021 NRPA conference in Nashville, Tennessee. ACTION REQUIRED If the City Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize the out-of-state travel by Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator to attend the 2021 NRPA conference in Nashville, Tennessee. Request for City Council Action DATE: August 4, 2021 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Authorize Assistant City Administrator Position Recruitment INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to authorize staff to begin the recruitment process to fill the upcoming vacancy in the Assistant City Administrator position. BACKGROUND With the promotion of Cheryl Jacobson to City Administrator effective October 1, the position of Assistant City Administrator will be vacant. Created in 2016, the Assistant City Administrator is a key position in the operation of the city. The Assistant City Administrator is responsible for performing complex professional work assisting the City Administrator with assignments relating to the planning, direction, control and evaluation of the City operations. Responsibilities include directing the areas Human Resources, Communications, Information Technology, and Recreation. Additionally, the Assistant City Administrator oversees special projects, and related work as assigned by the City Administrator. To coincide with the City Administrator transition, and in order to complete the hiring process, staff anticipates a six week hiring timeline with a candidate starting late September/early October. BUDGET IMPACT The Assistant City Administrator position is a budgeted position and is ranked at pay grade 17 of the City’s 2021 Compensation Plan. The position’s pay range is $102,653 to $126,186 annually. For purposes of the recruitment, the advertised starting salary shall be posted at $102,653 to $113,813, which is steps one through four (midpoint) of the assigned pay grade. ACTION RECOMMENDED Staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to begin the Assistant City Administrator position recruitment process. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize staff to begin the Assistant City Administrator position recruitment process. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: July 2 , 2019 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Approve Agreement with Inspectron for Septic System Inspection Services COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve a Agreement with Inspectron for Septic System Inspection Services. BACKGROUND Mendota Heights has over forty properties that rely on septic systems for sewage treatment in the city. The city has adopted Dakota County Ordinance 113 which establishes the standards of and regulation of individual sewage treatment systems. DISCUSSION Inspectron proposes to provide the following services under the agreement: a. Review and analyze existing soil conditions and profiles b. Review and approve proposed septic system designs presented by an independent designer. c. Notify the City of pending permit d. Issue a permit to the installer for system installation per approved design e. Perform all required inspections f. Sign as-built record drawing g. Issue a Certificate of Compliance h. Forward final documents to City for record keeping. Inspectron has informally been performing these serves for Mendota Heights for many years (and has been designated by Dakota County as the City’s septic contractor) but staff prefers to have an agreement in place. The agreement can be terminated by either party with a 30 day written notice. BUDGET IMPACT The service fee for a septic system application is $456. This fee is paid directly to Inspectron from the applicant. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve the Agreement with Inspectron for Septic System Inspection Services. ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the City Council pass a motion adopting authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement with Inspectron for Septic System Inspection Services. This action requires a simple majority vote. SEPTIC SYSTEM INSPECTION SERVICES AGREEMENT This agreement is entered into this 21st day of April, 2021 by and between Inspectron, Inc., a Minnesota corporation with its principal place of business located at 15120 Chippendale Ave., Rosemount, MN, 55068 (hereinafter “Inspectron”) and the City of Mendota Heights an incorporated Minnesota city with its principal offices located at 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 (hereinafter “City”). WHEREAS, the City has enacted an Ordinance governing the repair, installation and maintenance of Onsite Site Sewage Disposal Systems (the “Code”); and WHEREAS, the City requires inspection services to ensure compliance with the Code; and WHEREAS, the City desires to enter into an agreement for the purchase of inspection services with Inspectron; and WHEREAS, Inspectron desires to provide such services to the City; and NOW THEREFORE, upon adequate consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Inspection services. During the term of this agreement, Inspectron agrees to perform the following services: a. Review and analyze existing soil conditions and profiles b. Review and approve proposed septic system designs presented by an independent designer. c. Notify the City of pending permit d. Issue a permit to the installer for system installation per approved design e. Perform all required inspections f. Sign as-built record drawing g. Issue a Certificate of Compliance h. Forward final documents to City for record keeping. City agrees to provide Inspectron with access to pertinent information, records, systems and data, as determined necessary in accordance with all Minnesota data privacy laws. The City shall provide all required forms. Inspectron shall assist in the responsibilities of administration and enforcement of the City’s zoning ordinance by reviewing all building permits for final zoning approval and land use. Inspectron shall perform the services under this contract at such location and at such times as Inspectron deems appropriate while providing the coverage requested by the City. Inspectron shall provide all tools, and communication devices it deems necessary to carry out the field services of this agreement. The City shall provide an inspection vehicle and appropriate desk space for plan review. Inspectron agrees to proceed diligently and in accordance with its usual course and manner of business. Inspectron may at its discretion retain subcontractors in the performance of this agreement. Inspectron shall notify the City in the event a sub-contractor will be used. Inspectron is contractually responsible for all service provided including any subcontracted labor. Inspectron agrees to perform additional services, to which the parties agree during the term of this contract under the terms and conditions of this agreement. 2. Term of Agreement. This agreement is effective commencing April 20, 2021 and shall consist of a period of 12 months of service. This agreement may be extended with mutual agreement of both parties upon the same terms and conditions as contained herein. 3. Payment. In consideration of such consulting work, the City agrees to pay to Inspectron under the following schedule: a. A permit fee of $456.00 shall be charged the applicant for soil verification, design review and installation inspections as required. b. Inspectron shall retain 100% of permit fee as payment for service. Charges are inclusive of equipment charges, communication charges and overhead. 4. Data. All data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated for any purpose in connection with this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, as well as other State and Federal rules and regulations relating to data privacy. 5. Relationship. Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to create employment, a partnership, joint venture, license or agency relationship and neither party shall have the right or authority to bind the other. The City agrees that it will not knowingly hire any of Inspectron’s employees, who have provided services under this agreement, during the term of this contract or for a period of one year after the expiration or termination of this agreement, without the express written consent of Inspectron, provided that Inspectron shall disclose a list to the City of all employees subject to this limitation. In the event the City hires such Inspectron employee(s) (without express written consent of Inspectron); the City shall notify Inspectron and pay a fee of ten (10%) percent of the employee’s 1st year annual salary with the City. Such payment shall be due upon the commencement of employment with the City. 6. Termination. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice. Such termination shall not affect the rights and obligations of the parties accrued prior to the termination date or rights under paragraph 3 and 4. 7. Assignability. This agreement shall not be assignable by either party without the written consent of the non-assigning party. 8. Law. This contract shall be governed by the law of the State of Minnesota. The parties agree that the venue of any legal action arising under the agreement shall be Dakota County, Minnesota. The parties further agree that tin the event either party brings an action against the other to enforce any condition or covenant of this agreement the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its court costs and reasonable attorney fees in the judgment rendered in such action. 9. Severability. If any provision of this agreement shall be held by any court to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be construed and enforced as if it had been more narrowly drawn so as to be legal, valid or enforceable. Such illegality, invalidity or unenforceability shall not have effect upon or impair the enforceability of any other provision of this agreement. 10. Indemnification. Inspectron agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers and employees from any liability, claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses including attorney fees to the extent caused by an act or omission (including without limitation professional errors and omissions) of the contractor, its agents, employees, or subcontractors in the performance of the services provided by this Agreement and against all losses by reason of the failure of Inspectron fully to perform in any respect all obligations under this Agreement. 11. Liability. Each Party will be solely responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law. 12. Nondiscrimination. During the performance of this agreement, Inspectron shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed, national origin, sex, marital status, status with respect to public assistance, disability, or age. 13. Independent Contractor. At all times and for the purposes herein, Inspectron is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. 14. Professional Liability Insurance. Inspectron shall ensure that it is insured for general liability and professional liability coverage in the minimum amount of $1,000,000.00. Inspectron shall name the City as an additional insured on all such insurance policies issued in Inspectron’s name for services provided herein. Inspectron shall provide proof of insurance coverage required by this paragraph prior to commencement of services under this Agreement and annually by the 15th day of January each year. Inspectron shall maintain work’s compensation insurance, commercial auto insurance, and Bonds for Minnesota Pollution Control. 15. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement shall not affect in any respect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 16. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing the services herein, Inspectron shall abide by all laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations pertaining to the services to be provided. Any violation shall be a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. 17. Entire Agreement. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. This agreement may be amended only by written agreement of both the City and Inspectron. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement on the day and year first written above. City Inspectron, Inc. By: ___________________________ By: ____________________________ Mayor Stephanie Levine Its:____________________________ Attest: ________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk Request for City Council Action DATE: August 4, 2021 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Firefighter Retirement INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to accept the retirement notice of Gordy Skjerven as a firefighter with the Mendota Heights Fire Department. BACKGROUND Firefighter Gordy Skjerven has announced his retirement from the Fire Department effective October 31, 2021. Gordy has been an active member of the department for the past 41 years. He started with the fire department on October 8, 1980. Gordy was the Treasurer for the Fire Relief Association for 35 years. He has been very active in the fire department and was one of the top responders to fire calls. While Gordy’s retirement will be formally recognized at the Department’s dinner next year, staff would like to acknowledge Gordy’s contributions to the department and community and also thank him for his time and commitment to the Mendota Heights Fire Department. BUDGET IMPACT N/A ACTION RECOMMENDED Staff recommends that the City Council accept the retirement notice of Gordy Skjerven as a firefighter with the Mendota Heights Fire Department and formally thank Gordy for his 41 years of service. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, accept the retirement of Gordy Skjerven from the Mendota Heights Fire Department and formally thank Gordy for his 41 years of service to the community as a Mendota Heights firefighter. Request for City Council Action DATE: August 4, 2021 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Firefighter Retirement INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to accept the retirement notice of Jeff Stenhaug as a firefighter with the Mendota Heights Fire Department. BACKGROUND Firefighter Jeff Stenhaug has announced his retirement from the Fire Department effective August 31, 2021. Jeff has been an active member of the department for the past 41 years. He started with the fire department on August 5, 1980. He has served as a firefighter under four fire chiefs. He was a captain for 34 years. He was also the vice-president of the Fire Relief Association. He served on various committees over the years including: dance committee, public education committee, turnout gear committee, uniform committee, and two building committees. While Jeff’s retirement will be formally recognized at the Department’s dinner next year, staff would like to acknowledge Jeff’s contributions to the department and community and also thank him for his time and commitment to the Mendota Heights Fire Department. BUDGET IMPACT N/A ACTION RECOMMENDED Staff recommends that the City Council accept the retirement notice of Jeff Stenhaug as a firefighter with the Mendota Heights Fire Department and formally thank Jeff for his 41 years of service. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, accept the retirement of Jeff Stenhaug from the Mendota Heights Fire Department and formally thank Jeff for his 41 years of service to the community as a Mendota Heights firefighter. Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: August 3, 2021 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Scott Goldenstein, Assistant Fire Chief SUBJECT: June 2021 Fire Synopsis COMMENT: Fire Calls In June, the Fire Department was paged for service a total of 33 times. Calls broken down by area are: Types of calls: Fires: 3 In June, the Mendota Heights Fire Department responded to a series of six grass/brush fires (all one call that apparently spread via the tree cotton on the ground and ignited in multiple areas). Other calls included an alternative fuel garbage truck fire, and one page for a pair of grass fires on 35E. Medical/Extrication: 7 For the month of June, the department was called to seven calls that were medical in nature. (Details of medical calls are omitted for this report). Hazardous Situations: 2 The fire department responded to a smell of gas at a place of worship and discovered gas coming from an unlit burner. The department was also paged for arcing power lines. Service Calls: 3 The department responded to one patient lift assist, and also for two burning complaints. False Alarms/System Malfunctions: 6 Six times the fire department responded to alarm calls that were either caused by system malfunctions or unintentional trips. Good intent Calls: 1 The station went to one call that was a good intent call. Dispatched and Cancelled En route: 3 Three times the station was paged and then cancelled before arriving at the scene. Mutual/Auto-Aid Other: 8 June was a very busy month assisting our neighbors with auto aid and mutual aid requests. We were requested to assist at a structure fire in Inver Grove Heights, two fires in Eagan (including a new hotel and a grocery store fire) and two calls for fires from South Metro Fire. For these eight calls, three of the calls we were cancelled before our arrival. Mendota Heights 21 calls Lilydale 2 calls Mendota 2 calls Sunfish Lake 0 calls Other 8 calls June Training: June 9 18:30 Water Rescue This drill was dedicated to our annual open water rescue training. This year had a heavy emphasis of getting firefighters familiar with and the proper operation of the departments new rescue boat. June 10 07:00 Water Rescue This drill was dedicated to our annual open water rescue training. This year had a heavy emphasis of getting firefighters familiar with and the proper operation of the departments new rescue boat. June 16 18:30 Rescue Equipment Mandatory 3 - Option 3 This mandatory drill was dedicated to working with rescue equipment and proper patient care at rescue scenes that included two stations. Vehicles were also used to establish rescue scenarios allowing firefighters to refresh skills including vehicle stabilization skills, setting up proper staging areas, and proper patient access. June 21 18:30 Firefighter Bailout This drill goes over proper techniques of a firefighter emergency bailout from a burning structure. It involves the firefighter exiting a building window head first and then turning 180 degrees on the ladder before climbing down the rest of the way. June 22 07:00 Firefighter Bailout This drill goes over proper techniques of a firefighter emergency bailout from a burning structure. It involves the firefighter exiting a building window head first and then turning 180 degrees on the ladder before climbing down the rest of the way. June 24 18:30 Training Makeup (TBD as needed) This drill time was dedicated to firefighters that had to make-up a training, and was designed to adapt as necessary to firefighters that needed make-up drills. June 26 08:00 Training Makeup (TBD as needed) This drill time was dedicated to firefighters that had to make-up a training, and was designed to adapt as necessary to firefighters that needed make-up drills. Number of Calls 33 Total Calls for the Year 155 FIRE ALARMS DISPATCHED:NUMBER STRUCTURE CONTENTS MISC.TOTALS TO DATE ACTUAL FIRES Structure - MH Commercial $70,000 Structure - MH Residential $0 Structure - Contract Areas $0 Cooking Fire - confined $0 Vehicle - MH 1 $75,000 $76,000 Vehicle - Contract Areas $250 Grass/Brush/No Value MH 1 Grass/Brush/No Value Contract 1 TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSES Other Fire 2 OVERPRESSURE RUPTURE $75,000 $0 $0 Excessive heat, scorch burns MEDICAL Emergency Medical/Assist 7 Vehicle accident w/injuries Extrication ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH)$75,000 Medical, other HAZARDOUS SITUATION $76,670 Spills/Leaks 1 Carbon Monoxide Incident $0 Power line down Arcing, shorting 1 $146,000 Hazardous, Other SERVICE CALL Smoke or odor removal $250 Assist Police or other agency Service Call, other GOOD INTENT Good Intent Dispatched & Cancelled 3 Current To Date Last Year Smoke Scare 20 114 106 HazMat release investigation 2 10 9 Good Intent, Other 1 2 7 7 FALSE ALARMS 0 3 11 False Alarm 9 22 25 Malfunction 1 Unintentional 5 Total:33 156 158 False Alarm, other MUTUAL AID 9 FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH Total Calls 33 Inspections 43.5 Investigations WORK PERFORMED Hours To Date Last Year Re-Inspection Fire Calls 607.5 2508 2699.75 Meetings 21 161.5 469 Meetings 2 Training 428.5 2357.5 1212 Special Activity 47 279.5 359 Administration 13 Fire Marshal 58.5 300 0 Plan Review/Training TOTALS 1162.5 5606.5 4739.75 TOTAL:58.5 Lilydale Mendota Sunfish Lake Other MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT JUNE 2021 MONTHLY REPORT FIRE LOSS TOTALS LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS Mendota Heights Mendota Heights Only Structure/Contents Mendota Heights Only Miscellaneous Mendota Heights Total Loss to Date Contract Areas Loss to Date Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: August 4, 2021 TO: Mayor Levine and City Council, City Administrator McNeill FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Adoption of the Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Introduction The Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution officially approving the new Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the community. Background The city began the comprehensive planning process in late spring 2017. Over the course of many meetings with citizen advisory committees, the planning commission and city council, an initial Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan was presented to the Planning Commission under a public hearing on April 23, 2019, whereby a unanimous recommendation was made for the council to approve the [first] draft plan. On June 4, 2019, a revised and final draft version of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan was presented to the City Council at the regular meeting; additional public comments were allowed; and a motion was made to approve the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan, with added directive for city staff to send the plan out for adjacent jurisdictional and agency review. On December 17, 2019 and upon the completion of the jurisdictional review, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-98, authorizing the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan, including the Comprehensive Sewer Plan, to be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review. On December 30, 2020, the Council conducted a Special Meeting, and authorized additional revisions and edits to the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and directed the plan be re-submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review. Recommendation On June 21 and 22, 2021, this plan was presented before the Community Development Committee and the Environment Committee of the Metropolitan Council, whereby said plan was given unanimous recommendation of approval from both committees. On July 14, 2021, the Metropolitan Council completed its review of the proposed Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Sewer Plan, and found that the Plan meets the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act; conforms to the metropolitan system plans for transportation (including aviation), water resources, and parks; is consistent with Thrive MSP 2040, and includes the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan approved by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and is compatible with the plans of adjacent jurisdictions and affected special districts and school districts. Requested Council Action Staff recommends the City Council adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2021-64, A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. This action requires a simple majority vote. Residents may view this final Comprehensive Plan document by accessing the City’s website and clicking on the following link: https://mendotaheightsmn.gov/comp_plan. A public copy of the plan is also available for viewing at City Hall during normal office hours. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2021-64 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2040 MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN, A COMPILATION OF POLICY STATEMENTS, GOALS, STANDARDS, AND MAPS FOR GUIDING THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNIT WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes section 473.864 requires each local governmental unit to review and, if necessary, amend its entire comprehensive plan and its fiscal devices and official controls at least once every ten years to ensure its comprehensive plan conforms to metropolitan system plans and ensure its fiscal devices and official controls do not conflict with the comprehensive plan or permit activities that conflict with metropolitan system plans; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes sections 473.858 and 473.864 require local governmental units to complete their “decennial” reviews by December 31, 2018; and WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights authorized the review and update of its Comprehensive Plan, including the Comprehensive Sewer Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan is a planning tool intended to guide the future growth and development of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota in a manner that conforms with metropolitan system plans and complies with the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and other applicable planning statutes; and WHEREAS, the proposed Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan reflects a community planning process conducted in the years 2016 through 2020 involving elected officials, appointed officials, city staff, community organizations, the public at large, developers, and other stakeholders; and WHEREAS, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 23, 2019, and considered the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan and all public comments, and thereafter submitted its recommendations to the Mendota Heights City Council; and WHEREAS, on June 4, 2019, the Mendota Heights City Council met to consider proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan Draft 2040, and after allowing additional public comments, a motion was made to approve the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan, with added directive for city staff to send the plan out for adjacent jurisdictional and agency review; and Res. No. 2021-64 Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 473.858, the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan was submitted to adjacent governmental units and affected special districts and school districts for review and comment on June 11, 2019, and the statutory six-month review and comment period has elapsed; and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2019, the Mendota Heights City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-98, authorizing the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan, including the Comprehensive Sewer Plan, to be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review; and WHEREAS, on December 30, 2020, the Mendota Heights City Council conducted a Special Meeting of the City Council, and authorized additional revisions and edits to the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and directed said plan be re-submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on July 14, 2021 the Metropolitan Council completed its review of the proposed Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Sewer Plan and found that the Plan meets the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act; conforms to the metropolitan system plans for transportation (including aviation), water resources, and parks; is consistent with Thrive MSP 2040, and includes the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan approved by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and is compatible with the plans of adjacent jurisdictions and affected special districts and school districts; and WHEREAS, the 2040 proposed Comprehensive Plan includes all revisions made during the review process and responds to additional advisory comments that are part of the Metropolitan Council’s actions authorizing the City of Mendota Heights to place its proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan into effect; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council approves the City of Mendota Heights’ Comprehensive Sewer Plan. NOW THERE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, that the City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan, including the Comprehensive Sewer Plan, is adopted and is effective as of the date of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, pursuant to sections 473.864 and 473.865 of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, the City of Mendota Heights will: (1) review its fiscal devices and official controls; (2) if necessary, amend its fiscal devices and official controls to ensure they do not conflict with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan or permit activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans; and (3) submit amendments to fiscal devices or official controls to the Metropolitan Council for “information purposes.” Res. No. 2021-64 Page 3 of 3 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 4th day of August, 2021. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ________________________________ Stephanie Levine, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 July 15, 2021 Tim Benetti, Community Development Director City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 RE: City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan - Notice of Council Action Metropolitan Council Review File No. 22395-1 Metropolitan Council District 13 Dear Tim Benetti: The Metropolitan Council reviewed the City of Mendota Heights’ 2040Comprehensive Plan (Plan ) at its meeting on July 14, 2021. The Council based its review on the staff’s report and analysis (attached). The Council found that the City’s 2040 Plan meets all Metropolitan Land Planning Act requirements; conforms to the regional system plans including transportation, aviation, water resources management, and parks; is consistent with Thrive MSP 2040; and is compatible with the plans of adjacent jurisdictions. In addition to the Advisory Comments and Review Record, the Council adopted the following recommendations. 1. Authorize the City of Mendota Heights to place its 2040 Comprehensive Plan into effect. 2. Revise the City’s forecasts downward as shown in Table 1 of the attached Review Record. 3. Revise the City’s affordable housing need allocation for the 2021-2030 decade to 46 housing units. 4. Advise the City to adopt the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area (MRCCA) Plan within 60 days after receiving final DNR approval and submit a copy of the final adopted plan and evidence of adoption to the DNR, Council, and National Park Service within 10 days after the adoption. 5. Approve the City of Mendota Heights’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan. 6. Advise the City to implement the advisory comments in the Review Record for wastewater services. Please consult the attached staff report for important information about the City’s next steps. Of particular importance are the Council’s actions, listed on page 1, general Advisory Comments listed on page 3, and the specific comments for technical review areas, which are found in the body of the report. The final copy of the Plan needs to include all supplemental information/changes made during the review. Page - 2 | July 15, 2021 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Congratulations on completing this important project. It was a pleasure to work with the City’s staf f and consultant throughout the review process. Sincerely, Angela R. Torres, AICP, Manager Local Planning Assistance Attachment cc: Matt Bauman, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources John Anfinson, NPS Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT Metro Division Chai Lee, Metropolitan Council, District 13 Patrick Boylan, Sector Representative/Principal Reviewer Reviews Coordinator N:\CommDev \LPA\Communities \Mendota Heights \Letters \Mendota Heights 2021 2040 CPU Post Council Action 22395-1.docx Page - 1 Committee Report Joint Business Item No. 2021-150 Community Development Committee Meeting date: June 21, 2021 Environment Committee Meeting date: June 22, 2021 For the Metropolitan Council meeting of July 14, 2021 Subject: City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Review File 22395 -1 Proposed Action That the Metropolitan Council adopt the attached Advisory Comments and Review Record and take the following actions: Recommendations of the Community Development Committee 1. Authorize the City of Mendota Heights to place its 2040 Comprehensive Plan into effect. 2. Revise the City’s forecasts downward as shown in Table 1 of the att ached Review Record. 3. Revise the City’s affordable housing need allocation for the 2021 -2030 decade to 46 housing units. 4. Advise the City to adopt the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area (MRCCA) Plan within 60 days after receiving final DNR approval, an d submit a copy of the final adopted plan and evidence of adoption to the DNR, Council, and National Park Service within 10 days after the adoption. Recommendation of the Environment Committee 1. Approve the City of Mendota Heights’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan. 2. Advise the City to implement the advisory comments in the Review Record for wastewater services. Summary of Community Development Committee Discussion/Questions Planning analyst Patrick Boylan presented the Staff Report to the Committee. Mendota Heights Community Development Director Tim Benetti was present on the WebEx conference meeting. There was no discussion or questions. The Community Development Committ ee unanimously recommended approval of the proposed action(s) at its meeting on July 14, 202 1. Summary of Environment Committee Discussion/Questions No comments or questions. The proposed action was approved on consent agenda at the Environment Committee June 22, 2021 meeting. Page - 2 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Joint Business Item No. 2021-150 Community Development Committee Meeting date: June 21, 2021 Environment Committee Meeting date: June 22, 2021 For the Metropolitan Council meeting of July 14, 2021 Subject : City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Review File 22395 -1 District(s), Member(s): District 13, Chai Lee Policy/Legal Reference: Metropolitan Land Plann ing Act (Minn. Stat. § 473.175), Minn. Stat. § 473.513 Staff Prepared/Presented: Patrick Boylan, Planning Analyst (651 -602-1438) Angela R. Torres, Local Planning Assistance Manager (651 -602-1566) Kyle Colvin, Engineering Programs, Manager (651 -602-1151) Division/Department: Community Development / Regional Planning Environmental Services / Technical Services Proposed Action That the Metropolitan Council adopt the attached Advisory Comments and Review Record and take the following actions: Recommendations of the Community Development Committee 1. Authorize the City of Mendota Heights to place its 2040 Comprehensive Plan into effect. 2. Revise the City’s forecasts downward as shown in Table 1 of the att ached Review Record. 3. Revise the City’s affordable housing need allocation for the 2021 -2030 decade to 46 housing units. 4. Advise the City to adopt the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area (MRCCA) Plan within 60 days after receiving final DNR approval, an d submit a copy of the final adopted plan and evidence of adoption to the DNR, Council, and National Park Service within 10 days after the adoption. Recommendation of the Environment Committee 1. Approve the City of Mendota Heights’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan. 2. Advise the City to implement the advisory comments in the Review Record for wastewater services. Page - 3 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Advisory Comments The following Advisory Comments are part of the Council action authorizing the City of Mendota Heights to implement its 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Plan). Community Development Committee 1. As stated in the Local Planning Handbook , the City must take the following steps: a. Adopt the Plan in final form after considering the Council’s review recommendations as contained in the body of thi s report. b. Submit one hard copy and one electronic copy of the Plan to the Council. The electronic copy must be submitted as one unified file. c. Submit to the Council a copy of the City Council resolution evidencing final adoption of the Plan. 2. The Local Plann ing Handbook also states that local governments must formally adopt their comprehensive plans within nine months after the Council’s final action. If the Council has recommended changes to the Plan, local governments should incorporate those recommended changes into the Plan or respond to the Council before “final adoption” of the comprehensive plan by the governing body of the local governmental unit. (Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 3) 3. Local governments must adopt official controls as identified in their 204 0 comprehensive plans and must submit copies of the official controls to the Council within 30 days after the official controls are adopted. (Minn. Stat. § 473.865, subd. 1) 4. Local governmental units cannot adopt any official controls or fiscal devices that conflict with their comprehensive plans or which permit activities in conflict with the Council’s metropolitan system plans (Minn. Stat. §§ 473.864, subd. 2; 473.865, subd. 2). If official controls conflict with comprehensive plans, the official controls must be amended within 9 months following amendments to comprehensive plans (Minn. Stat. § 473.865, subd. 3). Environment Committee 1. The Council-approved Comprehensive Sewer Plan becomes effective only after the Plan receives final approval from the local governmental unit’s governing body. After the Plan receives final approval from the City and the Comprehensive Sewer Plan becomes effective, the City may implement its Plan to alter, expand, or improve its sewage disposal system consistent with the Council -approved Comprehensive Sewer Plan. 2. A copy of the City Council resolution adopting its 2040 comprehensive plan, including its Comprehensive Sewer Plan, must be submitted to the Council. Page - 4 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Background The City of Mendota Heights is located in northern Dakot a County. It is surrounded by the communities of Mendota, Lilydale, St. Paul, West St. Paul, Sunfish Lake, Inver Grove Heights, Eagan, and Bloomington. The City is also bordered by Fort Snelling to the west. The City submitted its 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Plan) to the Council for review to meet the Metropolitan Land Planning Act requirements (Minn. Stat. §§ 473.851 to 473.871) and the Council’s 2015 System Statement requirements. Review Authority & Rationale Minn. Stat. § 473.175 directs the Metropolitan Council to review a local government’s comprehensive plan and provide a written statement to the local government regarding the Plan’s: • Conformance with metropolitan system plans • Consistency with the adopted plans and policies of the Council • Compatibility with the plans of adjacent governmental units and plans of affected special districts and school districts By resolution, the Council may require a local government to modify its comprehensi ve plan if the Council determines that “the plan is more likely than not to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans” (Minn. Stat. § 473.175, subd. 1). Each local government unit shall adopt a policy pl an for the collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage for which the local government unit is responsible, coordinated with the Metropolitan Council's plan, and may revise the same as often as it deems necessary (Minn. Stat. § 473.513). The attached Review Record details the Council’s assessment of the Plan’s conformance, consistency, and compatibility, and is summarized below. Review Standard Review Area Plan Status Conformance Regional system plan for Parks Conforms Conformance Regional system plan for Transportation, including Aviation Conforms Conformance Water Resources (Wastewater Services and Surface Water Management) Conforms Consistency with Council Policy Thrive MSP 2040 and Land Use Consistent Consistency with Council Policy Forecasts Consistent Consistency with Council Policy 2040 Housing Policy Plan Consistent Consistency with Council Policy Water Supply Consistent Consistency with Council Policy Community and Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) Consistent Compatibility Compatible with the plans of adjacent and affected governmental districts Compatible Thrive Lens Analysis The proposed 2040 comprehensive plan is reviewed against the land use policies in Thrive MSP 2040. To achieve the outcomes identified i n Thrive, the metropolitan development guide defines the Land Use Policy for the region and includes strategies for local governments and the Council to implement. These policies and strategies are interrelated and, taken together, serve to achieve the out comes identified in Thrive. Funding None. Page - 5 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Known Support / Opposition There is no known local opposition to the 2040 comprehensive plan. Page - 1 REVIEW RECORD City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Review File No. 22395 -1, Business Item No. 2021-150 JT The following Review Record documents how the proposed Plan meets the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and conforms to regional system plans, is consistent with regional policies, and is compatible with the plans of adjacent and affected jurisdictions. Conformance with Regional Systems The Council reviews plans to determine conformance with metropolitan system plans. The Council has reviewed the City’s Plan and finds that it conforms to the Council’s regional system plans for Regional Parks, Transportation (including Aviation), and Water Resources. Regional Parks and Trails Reviewer: Colin Kelly, Community Development (CD) - Regional Parks (651-602-1361) The Plan conforms to the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan for the Regional Parks System element. Dakota County is the Park Implementing Agency for Regional Parks System compon ents in Mendota Heights, for which the Plan accurately describes the Regional Parks System components. Regional Trails located within the City include the Big Rivers, the Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway, and the River to River Greenway regional trails. The Plan also appropriately acknowledges State recreation lands in the City, including Fort Snelling State Park (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources) (Figure 1). Regional Transportation, Transit, and Aviation Reviewer: Russ Owen, Metropolitan Transportation Services (MTS) (651 -602-1724) Plan conforms to the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) adopted in 2015. It accurately reflects transportation system components of the TPP as well as applicable land use policies for regional transitways. The Plan is also consistent with Council policies regarding community roles, the needs of non-automobile transportation, access to job concentrations, and the needs of freight. The Plan is compatible with the plans of adjacent and affected governmental units. Roadways The Plan conforms to the Roadways system element of the TPP. The Plan accurately accounts for the metropolitan highway system of principal arterials. The Plan accurately reflects the regional functional classification map of A -minor arterials roadways and has identified major collector roads. The City notes that it does not identify any minor collector roadways. The Plan identifies all the required characteristics of the City’s roadways, including existing and future functional classification, right -of -way preservation needs, and existing and forecasted traffic volumes for principal and A-minor arterials. Forecasting was done consistent with regional methodology. The Plan also includes guidelines on how access will be managed for principal and A -minor arte rials. The Plan identifies the need to more fully consider the impact of the Viking Lakes area in adjacent Eagan and Inver Grove Heights and its potential effects on Mendota Heights roadways, in particular Dodd Road and Argenta Trail. Transit The Plan conforms to the Transit system element of the TPP. It shows the location of existing transit routes and facilities and acknowledges the City is Page - 2 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL within Transit Market Areas III and IV. The Plan notes that the City should explore additional transit options for its residents, especially as the community’s population ages. The Plan incorporates existing and future transitways that are part of the Current Revenue Scenario in the TPP. These include enhancements to the existing bus service and further studies of la nd use and parking policies within the City. Longer term recommendations include the procurement of additional funding sources to significantly expand transit services and support of Robert Street Corridor, which would connect downtown St. Paul to Rosemoun t. Aviation The Plan conforms to Aviation system element of the TPP. The Plan includes policies that protect regional airspace from obstructions, addresses aircraft noise, and describes how off -site air navigation aids will be protected. The Plan identifies the Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP) International Airport and addresses elements of its long-term comprehensive plan. The Plan notes that the City has a citizen -led Airports Relations Commission that provides recommendations to the City Council on airpor t issues, in particular noise issues. Bicycling and Walking The Plan is consistent with the Bicycling and Pedestrian chapter of the TPP. The Plan describes the City’s long-term plans for addressing bicycle and pedestrian facilities and includes a map of facilities. Freight The Plan is consistent with Freight policies of the TPP. The Plan identifies the needs of freight movement in and through the community, noting that both I -35E and I-494 carry large amounts of freight through the region. Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) The Plan conforms to the TPP regarding TAZ allocations. The City’s TAZ allocations for employment, households, and population appropriately sum to the Council’s citywide forecast totals for all forecast years. Water Resources Wastewater Services Reviewer: Kyle Colvin, Environmental Services (ES) – Wastewater Planning and Community Programs, (651-602-1151). The Plan conforms to the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan (WRPP). It represents the City’s guide for future growth and development through the year 2040. It includes growth forecasts that are consistent with the Council’s accepted forecasts for population, households, and employment. Current wastewater treatment services are provided to the City by the Metropolitan Council En vironmental Services (MCES). Wastewater generated within the City is conveyed by Council Interceptor 1-MH -401 to the Metropolitan Council’s Metropolitan Treatment Plant in St. Paul for treatment. The Plan projects that the City will have 5,080 sewered hous eholds and 13,170 sewered employees by 2040. The Metropolitan Disposal System with its scheduled improvements has or will have adequate capacity to serve the City’s growth forecasts. The Plan provides sanitary flow projections in 10 -year increments. The rationale for the average day flow projections is given in the Plan and determined appropriate for planning local services. The Metropolitan Council is committing to provide the level of wastewater service based on the sewered forecasts as stated in the sewe r element of the Plan. The Land Use Plan reflects an overall minimum residential sewered density that is consistent with Council policy for future sewered residential growth for Suburban communities. Page - 3 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL The Plan defines the City’s goals, policies, and strateg ies for preventing and reducing excessive inflow and infiltration (I/I) in both the local municipal (city) and private property sanitary sewer systems. The Plan identifies previous projects including pipe lining, pipe joint repair, sump pump drainage monit oring, and a public education effort for property owners regarding I/I reduction. The Plan also states that in 2016 the City completed a City -wide sump pump inspection and disconnection program in which all homes were either found to be compliant with City code or were required to disconnect discharges to the sanitary sewer system. The Plan outlines future projects reflecting a continuation of these types of projects as well as a public education program for residents on the importance of ongoing maintenanc e of private property infrastructure. The City has an annual sanitary sewer televising program in which the entire public system is inspected every 10 -years. The Plan also states that the City is considering an additional program that would facilitate the inspection and repair of private services that could consist of either a new utility program or be included in the City’s annual street reconstruction program. Such a program would be implemented when lining of the public system is nearing completion, or a bout 10 years out. The City’s Capital Improvement Plan reflects an annual budget of $250,000 per year through 2023 for sanitary sewer pipe lining. The Plan describes the requirements and standards for minimizing I/I and references City Code (Ordinance 496, Section 10-1-1), which states that the discharge of clear water, from roofs, ground surface, subsurface drainage, down spouts, eave troughs, rain spouts, yard drains, sump pumps, and foundation drains into the City’s sewer system is prohibited. The ordina nce also states that any property failing to disconnect such prohibited discharges shall be subject to a quarterly surcharge. The Plan describes the sources, extent, and significance of existing I/I within the entire public and private wastewater collectio n system and provides a description of an implementation plan for preventing and eliminating excessive I/I from entering the combined public and private property collection systems. The Plan indicates that approximately 43% of the homes were built before 1 970 when services were predominately made of clay tile pipe. The significance of clay tile pipe is that as it ages it can become more susceptible to I/I. Approximately 50% of the pre -1970 residential services have been evaluated for I/I susceptibility with follow-up repairs when necessary. Using wastewater flow data between 2015 through 2019 to determine base dry weather, average daily, and peak monthly flow, the Plan states that the City’s annual I/I averages approximately 16%, and annual peak month I/I av erages about 31%. Sewer Element Comments The Sewer Element of the Plan has been reviewed against the requirements for Comprehensive Sewer Plans for Suburban communities. It was found to be complete and consistent with Council polices. Upon adoption of the Plan by the City, the action of the Council to approve the Sewer Plan becomes effective. At that time, the City may implement its Plan to alter, expand, or improve its sewage disposal system consistent with the approved Sewer Plan. A copy of the City C ouncil Resolution adopting its Plan needs to be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for its records. Advisory Comments Chapter 10, Water and Sanitary Systems, references forecasted sewered growth figures in two separate tables. Table 10 -1, ”Demographic and Wastewater Flow Projections by Service Area”, and Table 10 -5 “Mendota Heights Sanitary Sewer Forecasts by Meter Area”. Table 10 -5 includes a breakdown of households and employment served through the sanitary sewer system, and those served via SSTS. The figures in Table 10 -1 should reflect only those households and employment served on sewer, however, they reflect City total forecasts for growth. The Council will acknowledge those figures listed in Table 10 -5 as the sewered forecasts. It is recommended th at the City revise the figures in Table 10 -1 to reflect only the sewered forecasts. Surface Water Management Reviewer: Judy Sventek, ES – Water Resources (651-602-1156) Page - 4 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL The Plan is consistent with Council policy requirements and in conformance with the Cou ncil’s 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan for local surface water management. The Plan satisfies the requirements for 2040 comprehensive plans. Mendota Heights lies within the oversight boundaries of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (WD) and the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (WMO). The City submitted a draft Local Water Management Plan (LWMP) update to the Council in August 2017. Council Water Resources staff reviewed and commented on the draft LWMP to the City and Watersheds in a letter dated September 18, 2017. The LWMP was approved by Lower Minnesota River WD on October 25, 2017 and the Lower Mississippi River WMO on June 13, 2018. The City adopted the final LWMP on August 21, 2018. The Plan incorporates the City’s LWMP in Appendix C. Consistency with Council Policies The Council reviews plans to evaluate their apparent consistency with the adopted plans of the Council. Council staff have reviewed the City’s Plan and find that it is consistent with the Council’s poli cies, as detailed below. Forecasts Reviewer: Todd Graham, CD – Research (651 -602-1322) The Plan proposes a forecast revision (figure 1.1; tables 1.3, 2.1), as shown in Table 1 below (changes are underlined). Table 1. City of Mendota Heights Forecasts Census 2010 Estimated 2019 Council Current Forecasts City Proposed Forecast 2020 2030 2040 2020 2030 2040 Population 11,071 11,747 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 Households 4,378 4,777 4,900 4,950 5,000 4,900 5,000 5,110 Employment 11,550 11,264 12,600 13,400 13,700 12,600 12,900 13,180 The Plan also revises the sewer -serviced forecast (table 10.5), as shown in Table 2 below. Table 2. Sewer-Serviced Forecasts Census 2010 Council Current Forecasts City Proposed Forecast 2020 2030 2040 2020 2030 2040 Population 11,071 12,000 12,000 12,000 11,905 11,915 11,925 Households 4,378 4,900 4,950 5,000 4,861 4,965 5,080 Employment 11,550 12,600 13,400 13,700 12,590 12,890 13,170 Council staff find that Employment has not grown as previously expected. The Council can accept the City-proposed forecast, and the Council will approve the communitywide and sewer -serviced forecast revisions, above, simultaneous with action on the Plan. With this forecast revision, the Affordable Housing Need assignment for Mendota Heights is revised. The new 2021 -2030 Affordable Housing Need numbers are: 25 units at <=30% AMI, 16 units at 31 -50% AMI; 5 units at 51 -80% AMI; 46 units total. This informatio n is found in table 5.7. Chapter 2 of the Plan describes and inventories land supply for future development and redevelopment (table 2.4). The City expects 42 net acres of new residential development during 2020 -2040, with capacity for 210 units (at minimu m density) to 313 units (at maximum) if fully developed and absorbed. This land guidance accommodates the revised growth forecast. Thrive MSP 2040 and Land Use Reviewer: Patrick Boylan, CD – Local Planning Assistance (651-602-1438) Page - 5 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL The Plan is consistent with Thrive MSP 2040 and its land use policies. The Plan acknowledges the Thrive community designation of Suburban (Figure 2). Thrive describes Suburban communities as those that saw their primary era of development during the 1980s and early 19 90s as Baby Boomers formed families and entered their prime earning years. Suburban communities are expected to plan for forecasted population and household growth at overall average densities of at least five units per acre. Plans are also required to id entify areas for redevelopment, particularly areas that are well -served by transportation options and nearby amenities and that contribute to better proximity between jobs and housing. The existing land use is 32% residential, 7.9% commercial and industri al, and 16% park and open space; and cemetery uses comprises 3.7% of the land area of the City (Figure 3). The existing land use pattern has low-density neighborhoods and substantial areas of public and private open space, wetlands, lakes, bluff and wooded areas. The Plan identifies commercial uses in the southwest part of the City. The key industrial areas are located north of interstate 494, east of TH 13 (Sibley Memorial Highway) and west of I -35E. This City is almost fully developed, and the majority o f the land use pattern is anticipated to remain the same. Existing single-family neighborhoods will be retained, while opportunities for development and redevelopment are concentrated in areas more recently developed such as key transportation nodes and mixed-use areas. The Plan identifies 22 “Focus Areas.” These are mapped as potential infill or redevelopment areas. However, the City is not recommending any land use or rezoning changes on these sites at this time or as part of the Plan, but merely communic ating the Focus Areas with a future land use overlay. The Plan is consistent with Thrive’s land use and residential density policies for a Suburban community designation which calls for residential density to be at least 5 units per acre. The Plan shows gr owth within Low and Medium Density Residential and Mixed -Use categories of 39.8 acres yielding a range of 209 to 313 units at a minimum of 5.3 units per acre as shown in Table 3 below. Table 3. Planned Residential Density, City of Mendota Heights 2020-2040 Change Category Density Net Acres Min Units Max Units Min Max Low Density Residential 2 2.9 25.2 50 73 Medium Density Residential 3 5.9 8.2 25 48 Mixed Use* 21 30 6.4 134 192 TOTALS 39.8 209 313 *75% residential Overall Density 5.3 7.9 Mixed-use Residential Acres shown here expected to be all residential uses Page - 6 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Housing Reviewer: Ashleigh Johnson, CD – Housing (651-602-1106) The Plan is consistent with the Housing Policy Plan (HPP). As of 2016, the City has more than 4,700 homes including over 700 multifamily units and 4,000 single -family homes. Approximately 570 homes are rented. More than 1,300 housing units are currently affordable to households earning under 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), however, nearly 700 households earning 80% of AMI or below are paying more than 30% of their income toward housing costs. There are about 20 units affordable to households with income at or below 30% AMI and more than 130 cost burdened h ouseholds with incomes at or below 30% AMI. The Plan identifies existing housing needs including preserve and improve existing neighborhoods and housing units, meet future needs for entry -level housing and affordable housing. The City has more than 130 publicly subsidized housing units, including 110 that are age -restricted for seniors. The Plan acknowledges the revised 2021-2030 affordable housing need allocation of 46 units; 25 of which are needed at prices affordable to households earning 30% of AMI or less, 16 of which are needed at prices affordable to households earning between 31 and 50% of AMI, and 5 of which are needed at prices affordable to households earning between 51 and 80% of AMI. As shown in Figure 5, the Plan guides sufficient land expecte d to develop in the 2021-2030 time period at a minimum of eight units per acre to allow for development of at least 101 new housing units. The housing implementation plan component of the Plan describes that the City will consider TIF for projects that meet locally identified housing goals and needs. The Plan also indicates that the City will explore using site assembly, participating in the Livable Communities Act programs, and a local 4d program for the first time. The City states that they will evaluat e all city controls and update ordinances land policies within nine months of the adoption of the Plan. The City will evaluate their official controls within nine months of adoption of this Plan, and will work to update ordinances and policies to 1) create a more streamlined entitlement process; 2) consider how the policy could support more diversity in housing, especially for seniors and young professionals; and 3) will evaluate policies that may discourage the creation of more affordable housing options i n the community. Water Supply Reviewer: Brian Davis, ES – Water Supply Planning (651 -602-1519) The Plan is consistent with WRPP policies related to water supply, including the policy on sustainable water supplies, the policy on assessing and protecting regional water resources, and the policy on water conservation and reuse. The City is served by Saint Paul Regional Water Services. Because the City does not own/operate its municipal public water supply system, no local water supply plan is req uired. Community and Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) Reviewer: Kyle Colvin, Environmental Services (ES) – Wastewater Planning and Community Programs, (651-602-1151). The Plan indicates that there are no public or privately -owned Community Waste water Treatment Systems within the community, and that there are approximately 42 properties served by SSTSs within the City. All new residential and commercial uses are required by City policy to connect to the local sanitary sewer system when appropriate . The City contains regulations for private sewage treatment systems and incorporates the requirements of Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 and Dakota County Ordinance 113. Together these include the requirements for the installation and use of SSTS. Owners of SSTS are responsible for having their systems pumped, inspected, and reported to the City once every three years. Page - 7 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Special Resource Protection Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Reviewer: Raya Esmaeili, CD – Local Planning Assistance (651-602-1616) The Plan includes a Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan (MRCCA Plan) component that was reviewed by Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) staff and found to be substantially consistent with Minnesota Statutes 116G and Minnesota Rules Chapter 6106. Council staff also find the MRCCA Plan component to be consistent with Thrive MSP 2040 land use policies, and Minnesota Rules Chapter 6106. The DNR’s January 26, 2021 conditional approval letter is attached to the Council staff report as Figure 6. Final DNR approval of the MRCCA Plan will be sent to the City after the Council authorizes local adoption of the Plan. Advisory Comments Adopt the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area (MRCCA) Plan within 60 days after receiving final DNR approval, and submit a copy of the final adopted plan and evidence of adoption to the DNR, Council, and National Park Service within 10 days after the adoption. Solar Access Protection Reviewer: Cameran Bailey, CD – Local Planning Assistance (651-602-1212) The Plan is consistent with statutory requirements (Minn. Stat. § 473.859) and Council policy regarding planning for the protection and development of access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MLPA). The Plan includes the required solar planning elements. Aggregate Resource Protection Reviewer: Cameran Bailey, CD – Local Planning Assistance (651-602-1212) The Plan does not contain a section on aggregate resources. The Council’s aggregate resour ces inventory information contained in Minnesota Geological Survey Information Circular 46 indicates that while there are a number of natural deposits mapped within the City, they have either already been mined or are within mostly urbanized locations and no longer considered available for extraction. No changes to the Plan are necessary. Natural Resource Protection (Cameran Bailey, 651 -602-1212) The Plan includes the required natural resources planning elements and is complete and consistent with statutory requirements (Minn. Stat. § 473.859) and Council policy regarding planning for the development, redevelopment, and preservation of natural resources. Historic Preservation Reviewer: Patrick Boylan, CD – Local Planning Assistance (651-602-1438) The Plan contains policies related to protecting historic resources. Mendota Heights has a long and rich heritage, which serves as a source of identity for the community. Mendota Heights is located near the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers an d recognizes that original local tribes view the area as having cultural significance and as an important meeting place. As such, the Plan contains policies to ensure historic preservation, with a special emphasis on Pilot Knob. Specifically, the City has joined with other public entities and purchased the 25.5-acre Pilot Knob area, which will be retained as open space. Protection of the Pilot Knob area as an important Dakota site has been identified as a critical issue for many residents. O ȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2017. Page - 8 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Plan Implementation Reviewer: Patrick Boylan, CD – Local Planning Assistance (651-602-1438) The Plan includes a description of and schedule for any necessary changes to the capital impro vement program, the zoning code, the subdivision code, the SSTS code, and the housing implementation program. Mendota Heights has included supplemental materials, which describe official controls and fiscal devices that the City will employ to implement t he Plan. Goals and policies for transportation, parks, and water resources are provided. Specific implementation strategies are consolidated in the Implementation Chapter of the Plan, which includes the 2019 – 2023 Capital Improvement Plan and Implementation Schedule which summarizes the implementation strategies. Compatibility with Plans of Adjacent Governmental Units and Plans of Affected Special Districts and School Districts The proposed Plan is compatible with the plans of adjacent jurisdictions. No c ompatibility issues with plans of adjacent governmental units and plans of affected special districts and school districts were identified. Documents Submitted for Review In response to the 2015 System Statement, the City submitted the following documents for review: • December 18, 2019: Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan • December 26, 2019: Revised Introduction Chapter • January 20, 2021: Revised 2040 Comprehensive Plan Responding to Council Incomplete Items for Wastewater, Regional Parks and Trails, Tran sportation, Forecasts, Land Use, Housing, Implementation, MRCCA, and Community Wastewater Treatment and Individual Subsurface Sewage Treatment. • February 8, 2021: Updated 2040 Future Land Use Map • April 20, 2021: Updated Transportation and Water Supply and Sanitary System Chapters • May 3, 2021: Updated Water Supply and Sanitary System Chapter Attachments Figure 1: Location Map with Regional Systems Figure 2: Thrive MSP 2040 Community Designations Figure 3: Existing Land Use Figure 4: 2040 Future Land Use Figure 5: Land Guided for Affordable Housing Figure 6: Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan response from MN DNR Page - 9 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Figure 1. Location Map with Regional Systems Page - 10 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Figure 2. Thrive MSP 2040 Community Designations Page - 11 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Figure 3. Existing Land Use Page - 12 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Figure 4. 2040 Future Land Use Page - 13 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Figure 5. Land Guided for Affordable Housing 2021-2030 Page - 14 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Figure 6. Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update The City of Mendota Heights would like to acknowledge the following for the preparation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan City of Mendota Heights Mayor & City Council City Administrator Community Development Director Department Directors & City Staff Parks & Recreation Commission Planning Commission Natural Resources Advisory Committee Residents & Stakeholders Thank you to the Fire Department, Somerset Elementary, & Friendly Hills Middle School for hosting Open Houses during the Comprehensive Plan Update Consultants Stantec Swanson Haskamp Consulting Tangible Consulting WSB CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction & Background Chapter 2. Land Use & Growth Chapter 3. Transportation Chapter 4. Parks & Trails Chapter 5. Housing Chapter 6. Economic Development Chapter 7. Natural Resources Chapter 8. Resilience Chapter 9. Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area Chapter 10. Water Supply & Sanitary System Chapter 11. Implementation Appendix CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 1: Introduction & Background This page is intentionally blank. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 1 1 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND The City of Mendota Heights has a long history of commitment to planning, resulting in unique residential living environments and business centers. The city’s first Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1960, some years before the Metropolitan Land Planning Act went into effect, requiring communities to incorporate regional policies and guidelines into their plans. The city has used its Comprehensive Plan to guide decisions since the 1960’s; and the community looks much like it was envisioned in 1960 which emphasized high quality residential neighborhoods, open space and parks, and well-planned commercial and industrial areas. The community is essentially developed and is enjoying the fruits of its long-range vision and development policies. Infill properties will continue to be built out, following the community’s development philosophy. Redevelopment is also happening in targeted areas, following the city’s commitment to provide a high quality of life for its residents and businesses. The city understands its role as part of the greater Metropolitan Region and will continue to plan accordingly, which is further described in Chapter 2. Land Use & Growth. The city has adopted the following Vision and Mission Statements to guide planning and development: Vision Statement Mendota Heights will be recognized as a high quality, family- oriented residential community, with a spacious, natural feel and the amenities of a city. Mission Statement Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of life in Mendota Heights by providing quality public safety, infrastructure, and planning for orderly and sustainable growth. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 2 Plan Organization This 2040 Comprehensive Plan (“Plan”) is organized in chapters similar to the previous 2030 Comprehensive Plan, but with new chapters on Economic Development and Resilience. This Plan is organized as follows: 1.Introduction & Background 2.Land Use & Growth 3.Transportation 4.Parks & Open Space 5. Housing 6. Economic Development 7. Natural Resources 8. Resilience 9. Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area 10.Water Supply & Sanitary System 11.Implementation 12.Appendix Each chapter identifies a set of goals and policies associated with the topic. Appendix items are provided, including a Public Engagement Schedule Summary and the Surface Water Management Plan (July 2018). Setting Mendota Heights is located in northern Dakota County, bordering the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. The City of Lilydale and the City of Mendota border the city on its northwest side. Across the rivers are the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis, Fort Snelling and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP). The east is bordered by Delaware Avenue and the cities of West St. Paul and Sunfish Lake. Interstate 494 divides Mendota Heights from Eagan to the south. Interstate I-35E divides the city north to south. F0 0.5 1Miles EaganEagan West St. PaulWest St. PaulLilydaleLilydaleMississipp i R i v e r Mississipp i R i v e r Minnesota RiverMinnesota RiverFort Snelling (unorg.)Fort Snelling (unorg.)Dodge Nature Dodge Nature PreservePreserve Sunfish LakeSunfish LakeMendota HeightsMendota Heights Saint PaulSaint Paul Mendota Heights Location, Created by: SHC Source: USDA Aerial Photography Field Office Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 3 Despite being near these major business centers, much of the community maintains a natural, open appearance. The river bluffs, rolling topography, and wooded areas have provided an excellent setting for residential development. The topography has brought about the creation of a curvilinear local street system and allowed for intimate residential neighborhoods to be nestled amongst mature wooded settings, lakes, wetlands, nature preserves, and the Mississippi and Minnesota River bluffs. Mendota Heights is a premier suburb, offering high-quality residential and business areas. Per capita income and property values are among the highest in the area, but homes in more moderate price brackets are also available. The residents of Mendota Heights enjoy proximity to an extensive system of regional and local parks, and convenient access to the regional highway system, international airport, and metropolitan employment centers. These factors have helped make Mendota Heights an attractive place to live. Centrally located in the metropolitan area, the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers form a natural green belt around it, allowing the community to maintain a quiet, private way of life, unique in the Twin Cities. Mendota Heights achieved its exceptional residential neighborhoods and successful business community by following the comprehensive plans set forth some decades ago. Innovative and forward thinking on the part of community officials has resulted in a planned community, which affords a high-quality lifestyle for its residents while providing a full Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 4 array of services and employment opportunities. The community has preserved an abundance of parks and open spaces, encourages spacious residential development, and has planned for diversified, high technology offices and business areas. Excellent schools and a well-educated populace complement the traditional character of the city. Civic pride and aesthetic excellence are high priorities in Mendota Heights. The community set out early in its incorporated history to create attractive residential neighborhoods by planning for aggressive protection and wise use of its available environmental assets. The rich abundance of woods, wetlands, and open space areas that provide the natural feel of the community today, are a testament to the proactive planning of Mendota Heights’ forefathers. As the Twin Cities metropolitan area has grown up around it, Mendota Heights has actively pursued its objective of preserving open spaces, making this community one of the region’s most attractive places to live. The environment has played a central role in the city’s land use planning. Public Engagement Process The process of updating the Plan for Mendota Heights was initiated in late 2016 when Stantec, the city’s planning consultant, began updating background information and demographics for the Plan. Stantec also worked with Tangible Consulting, preparing a report analyzing the market and development content of the city. A background report was shared with the Planning Commission in early 2017. The city held three public information meetings at the local schools; and provided a “hands-on” display at the city’s annual Fire Station Open House in 2017. In a series of meetings later that year, the Planning Commission reviewed and adopted the draft Vision, Mission, and Goals & Policies for the Plan. This material was shared with the Parks Commission and with the larger community in four community open house meetings in the fall of 2017. There was also an online survey and an invitation for comments on the city website and Facebook page. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-5 Process The process of updating the Comprehensive Plan for Mendota Heights was initiated in late 2016 when Stantec, the City’s planning consultant, began updating background information and demographics for the Plan. Stantec also worked with Tangible Consulting, which prepared a report analyzing the market and development context of the City.A background report was shared with the Planning Commission in early 2017. The City held three public information meetings at the local schools; and provided a “hands- on” display at the city’s annual Fire Station Open House in 2017. In a series of meetings later that year,the Planning Commission reviewed and adopted the draft Vision, Mission, and Goals & Policies for the Plan. This material was shared with the Parks Commission and with the larger community in four community open house meetings in the fall of 2017. There was also an online survey and an invitation for comments on the City website and Facebook page. Discussion at a community open house Facebook was used to share information and invite comments on the planning process Participation at the Fire Station Open House event Discussion at a Community Open House Participation at the Fire Station Open House Event Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-5 Process The process of updating the Comprehensive Plan for Mendota Heights was initiated in late 2016 when Stantec, the City’s planning consultant, began updating background information and demographics for the Plan. Stantec also worked with Tangible Consulting, which prepared a report analyzing the market and development context of the City.A background report was shared with the Planning Commission in early 2017. The City held three public information meetings at the local schools; and provided a “hands- on” display at the city’s annual Fire Station Open House in 2017. In a series of meetings later that year,the Planning Commission reviewed and adopted the draft Vision, Mission, and Goals & Policies for the Plan. This material was shared with the Parks Commission and with the larger community in four community open house meetings in the fall of 2017. There was also an online survey and an invitation for comments on the City website and Facebook page. Discussion at a community open house Facebook was used to share information and invite comments on the planning process Participation at the Fire Station Open House event Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 5 Community Input There were over a hundred comments and stories offered in the various open house meetings and the online survey at the beginning of the planning process. The Public Engagement Schedule Summary is attached as Appendix C. The comments have been grouped into eight topics as illustrated below in the blue boxes: Character, Environment, etc. These topics relate strongly to the Key Planning Issues identified on the following page, as indicated by the arrows connecting similar ideas. Taken together, these issues and topics represent the ideas that will be the guiding force shaping the Comprehensive Plan Update. These issues are reflected in the Goals and Policies in the Plan as well. TopicsKey Planning Issues Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 6 Key Planning Issues The initial discussion with the Planning Commission, grounded in the background information and analysis, was condensed into seven key planning issues: 1. Character, Natural Feel, Design Mendota Heights is open, spacious, green, and natural. The environment and green space is essential to the city’s character, and the character and design of our community is important to maintain our quality of life. 2. Commercial/Retail Options Many people wish there were more restaurant and shopping options in Mendota Heights. 3. Development & Redevelopment Sites The city is almost fully developed, but there are a few sites where new development or redevelopment can occur and there is keen interest in how to maximize their potential. 4. Housing Mendota Heights is mostly high-end and mid-range valued single-family homes today. But the city recognizes the need for a range of housing choices including, but not limited to, 1) life-cycle opportunities for people of all generations and stages of life, and 2) workforce housing to support people working in a wide range of careers. 5. Minnesota Vikings Facility The Vikings football team has built its new headquarters and practice facilities nearby in Eagan, within a 200-acre mixed use development featuring offices, retail, and housing. Mendota Heights residents are concerned about traffic impacting the city. This mix of uses is anticipated to be developed. On the business side, the Vikings development could be competition for Mendota Heights businesses or could be an opportunity for businesses to capitalize on new activities. 6. Airport The MSP Airport is conveniently located nearby across the river, but also poses a nuisance with aircraft noise. 7. Infrastructure Like many communities, Mendota Heights’ roads, bridges and other infrastructure are aging and in need of maintenance. The city must plan in conjunction with county and state agencies in order to preserve quality of life and safety. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 7 Community History Mendota Heights has a long and rich heritage, which serves as a source of identity for the community. Mendota Heights is located near the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. The Dakota people knew and referred to this place as “Mdo’–te” or “the junction of one river with another.” French explorers and traders who settled the area in the late 1600’s named the Minnesota River “Sans Pierres” because the river was silty, with few rocks. British explores and traders who arrived a few years later misunderstood the French name, calling the river Saint Peter’s. Native Americans view the area as an important meeting place. The current Pilot Knob site (now city-owned property) overlooks the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. It is considered sacred by the Dakota who called it Oȟéyawahe, or “the hill much visited.” Pilot Knob was named by riverboat pilots as the landmark overlooking Fort Snelling, the first American fort in Minnesota. Fort Snelling was constructed in the 1820s; and the name of the area was later changed to Mendota, which in Dakota means, “meeting of the waters.” In 1852, the territorial legislature changed the name of the river to Minnesota, a version of its Dakota name. Fur traders established a trading post in the early 1830’s within what is now Mendota Heights. The trading post, coupled with Fort Snelling located across the river, formed Pilots Knob. Mouth of the Saint Peters River, 1846-1848, Seth Eastman, Source: Minnesota Historical Society Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 8 the basis for one of the first settlement areas in Minnesota. During the period from 1837 to 1858, the Dakota ceded large tracts of land to the United States, which was then deeded to settlers who tilled the land and operated dairy farms. Gradually, individual homes began to appear along the St. Paul border in the north and on the hills above Mendota Township in the west. Between them were farms, country schools, and estates. The population of Mendota Township in 1860 was 454. The area grew slowly to 1,360 at the start of World War II. St. Peter’s Church was originally built in 1840; re-built in 1853 atop the bluff overlooking the rivers; and today is the oldest church in continuous use within Minnesota. Several trails crossed the area, including the Mission Trail. It connected the river to the Dakota Village at Kaposia, located in present-day South St. Paul. Dodd Road, the first military road through the region, was completed in 1849 and connected the community to St. Peter. Dodd Road currently bisects the city and continues to provide a north-south travel artery throughout the community. The Old Mendota Road, which is now Highway 62 (formerly Highway 110), provided for east-west travel through the area. The Minnesota Central, the first Dakota County railroad, later the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul, ran through Mendota Township, crossing the Minnesota River, and carried supplies to Fort Snelling. The Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Omaha Railway was also an early railroad in the area. Following World War II, farmers began to sell lots for individual homes and acreage for residential subdivisions. Home construction increased rapidly, particularly in the northern section of the township and by 1950, the population totaled 2,107. The Township of Mendota was established in 1858, and was eventually divided into two separate towns; Mendota being chartered in 1887, and incorporated in 1936. The remainder of the township was incorporated as Mendota Heights in 1956. Omaha Railroad Depot in Mendota, ca. 1900. Source: Minnesota Historical Society Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 9 Interstate 494 comprises the southern border of Mendota Heights. Its intersection with Interstate 35E acts as a primary “gateway” into the community, as does Highway 55 as it crosses the Mendota Bridge. Other gateways include the Interstate 35E/Mississippi River crossing and Highway 62, as it enters the community from the east. Minnesota Highway 13 traverses the west and northwest edge of the city near the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. Steep bluffs along those rivers include the natural open spaces of Fort Snelling State Park, Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, and Lilydale Regional Park. These together with the Dodge Nature Center provide a greenbelt that surrounds and cuts into Mendota Heights. The location of these features is illustrated on Map 1-1. Community Facilities & Features shown below. Map 1-1. Community Facilities & Features Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 10 The natural and open space areas, when combined with the 770+ acres of community parks, three golf courses, Rogers, Augusta, and Lemay Lakes, and with the naturally rolling terrain and mature woodlands, create the appealing “natural open” setting of the city. These features and spaces are located adjacent to the major roadways and create a unique, natural setting for intimate neighborhoods. The views of the River Valleys from adjacent bluffs and bridge crossings are nothing less than spectacular. The predominance of scenic, natural vistas and corridors within a community located so close to the core of the Twin Cities is truly unique within the Metropolitan Region. This being the case, the City of Mendota Heights considers it paramount to protect and enhance the natural living environment for its residents. View of the River Valley Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 11 Development History Early History The river topography and landscape of bluffs, ravines, views, lakes, and wooded areas have provided attractive settings for residential settlement. Mendota Heights was a part of Mendota Township until the Village of Mendota Heights was incorporated in 1956. 1957 to 1977 The first Land Use Plan for Mendota Heights was adopted in 1959, one of the first in the metro area. Its purpose was to guide public and private development to achieve balanced residential and commercial/industrial growth, in order to assure the availability of tax funds for schools and public services. At that time, 21% of the land (exclusive of golf courses and cemeteries) was developed. The city’s history of early land planning established a clear and well-defined pattern for future land uses. The 1959 Plan identified the following needs: •The need for additional east-west thoroughfares; •The need for community connections across future I-35E; •The designation of a business/ industrial area in the southwest corner of the city; •The desire to limit commercial “strip” development; and •The decision to continue the semi-rural character of the residential areas. Cherry Hill Development 1961, Source: Minnesota Historical Society Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 12 Many of the major objectives of the 1959 Plan came to fruition as the Plan was largely followed over the ensuing years. In the twenty-year period from the late 1950’s to the late 1970’s, St. Thomas and Visitation schools were established (1955-56); Fort Snelling State Park was established (1961); the I-35 bridge into St. Paul was built (1965); Henry Sibley High School was built (1971); and in 1974, Mendota Heights became a city. Overall, an additional 40% of the land area was developed, most of it to establish new residential areas. 1977 to 1997 The land use pattern initially laid out by early comprehensive plans was clearly established along with several transportation improvements. Both I-35E and I-494 were built during this period. I-35E was extended in both directions, into downtown St. Paul and south into Burnsville. Interstate 494 was constructed along the southern border of the city and replaced Highway 110 (now Highway 62) as the primary east-west route. In this period, United Properties began the development of the Mendota Heights Commercial/ Industrial Business Park. Several areas designated as residential were developed throughout the city. The availability of the Interstate routes did relieve local roadways of some traffic, particularly in the cases of Highway 62 and Highway 149. The accessibility of the Interstate routes also more clearly established distinct neighborhoods in the community. The 1959 Land Use Plan emphasized the importance of east-west routes and planned crossings at Marie Avenue, Mendota Heights Road, and Wagon Wheel Trail, all of which were built more than 20 years later. Aircraft traffic noise from flights over Mendota Heights dramatically increased in this period as well, due to the growth and expansion of the airline industry and the Minneapolis-St. Paul Henry Sibley High School Visitation School Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 13 International Airport. The increasing number of flights, larger aircraft, and expanded use of the runways over the Mississippi River corridor, continue to impact the land use and living environment of the southern part of the community. The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) actually bought out one neighborhood and created a flight path corridor, near Acacia Cemetery, within Mendota Heights. Homes were removed and the area was re-developed for industrial uses. Other residential areas were part of the Part 150 Sound Insulation program, receiving funds to upgrade windows and insulation in existing homes. New residential neighborhoods have been built with additional sound insulation and modified building techniques. Total operations at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) increased from 230,793 in 1972 to 483,013 in 1998, more than doubling. This increase in flights, along with expansion of the flights over the new residential areas and outside of the flight corridor, has adversely affected many neighborhoods of the city. The city put forth considerable time and effort to reduce aircraft noise and operations over the city, establishing an Airport Relations Commission (ARC), participating in the Dakota County Airport Relations Commission (DCARC), and the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) and adopting Minnesota’s first Noise Attenuation Ordinance. MSP International Airport, located across the Minnesota River west of Mendota Heights, Source: USDA Aerial Photography Field Office Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 14 1998 – 2007 From 1998 to 2006, the city issued 436 residential building permits; and of those, 259 were for single-family homes. In 2003, the city saw the most development during this period, with a total of 125 residential permits issued during that year. A number of significant projects reshaped Mendota Heights during this time. The most visible is the Village at Mendota Heights, a mixed-use development at the northeast intersection of Highway 62 and Dodd Road. The city acquired the property to create an urban town center that includes a senior residential facility, townhomes, condominiums, a boutique-like retail center, and an open space plaza. A second significant change is the Summit of Mendota Heights, a mixed residential development consisting of townhomes and a multi-story condominium. This development is located on the former site of the Ecolab research building at Sibley Memorial Highway and Wachtler Avenue. Another residential project is the Hidden Creek development, a residential plat of generally one-acre lots. Two other projects have showcased the city’s desire to preserve and retain existing open space. The Mendota Heights Par 3 Golf Course had operated as a privately-owned facility for many years, until the owners proposed to close the 17-acre facility and develop the property into approximately 30 single-family lots. After a successful referendum, the city purchased the golf course and is now operating the facility as a municipal course. Perhaps the most important project also involves the city’s decision to spend public dollars to preserve the Pilot Knob area, just off the Mendota Bridge between Acacia Cemetery and Highway 55. The city joined with other public entities, including Dakota County and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and purchased a number of large parcels totaling 25.5 acres. The land will be retained as open space, and is currently being restored to its pre- development environment. The property has historical and cultural significance on many levels, The Village at Mendota Heights Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 15 including as a sacred site for native people, a nearby gathering area for the 1862 transfer of the Minnesota Territory lands to the U.S. government, and the “Pilot Knob” landmark for steamboats approaching the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. In 2017, Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. 2008-2018 Since the last Comprehensive Plan was prepared, a number of significant developments have taken place in Mendota Heights. The economic recession from 2007 to 2012 impacted development cross the Twin Cities, including Mendota Heights and there was little development activity during those years, but coming out of the recession there was some significant activity. The Mendota Plaza Shopping Center at Highway 62 and Dodd Road saw a major renovation during this period, with a 15,000-square-foot Walgreen’s pharmacy added in 2012; White Pine Senior Living, a 50- unit assisted living and memory care facility completed in 2014; and the 18,000-square-foot Gemini Medical offices in 2017. Also at Mendota Plaza, a new 4-story 139-unit apartment project called The Reserves at Mendota Village was completed in 2018 by At Home Apartments. It is the first new market-rate project in Mendota Heights in thirty years. The project is proposed to include 11,000 square feet of commercial space in two buildings sharing the site with the apartments. A new market rate apartment project began development in 2018 by Michael Development on the site of the former Mendota Motel and Larson Garden Center at Highway 13 and Acacia Drive. Phase I provides 70-units of market rate apartments, with underground and surface parking. Phase II is providing between 64-68 units of senior (aged 55+) units of housing. Both phases were expected to be completed by late 2019 to mid-2020. The Vikings football team’s new headquarters and surrounding development in nearby Eagan has generated considerable discussion and will impact Mendota Heights with traffic, noise and light, but also with potential increases in economic activity and property values. Located just off the southeast edge of Mendota Heights, it will include the teams’ corporate offices, practice facilities, 6,500-seat stadium, athletic clinic, team Hall of Fame, and ancillary offices, hotels, The Reserves at Mendota Village Mendota Heights Apartments - 2160 & 2180 Hwy 13, Source: Kaas-Wilson Architects Viking’s Headquarters, Practice Facilities & Development Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-19 A new market rate apartment project began development in 2018 by Michael Development on the site of the former Mendota Motel and Larson Garden Center at Highway 13 and Acacia Drive. Phase I will provide 70-units of market rate apartments, with underground and surface parking. Phase II will provide between 64-68 units of senior (aged 55+) units of housing. Both phases are expected to be completed by late 2019 to mid-2020. The Vikings football team’s new headquarters and surrounding development in nearby Eagan has generated considerable discussion and will affect Mendota Heights with traffic, noise and light, but also with potential increases in economic activity and property values.Located just off the southeast edge of Mendota Heights, it will include the teams’ corporate offices, practice facilities, 6,500-seat stadium, athletic clinic, team Hall of Fame, and ancillary offices, hotels, retail, restaurants and housing on the 200-acre site. Minnesota Vikings facility in Eagan -2017 (photo: Leila Navidi) Mendota Heights Apartments -2160 & 2180 Hwy 13 Source: Kaas-Wilson Architects Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 16 retail, restaurants and housing on the 200-acre site. While no major roadway projects have been built recently, one of the major highways in Mendota Heights has been renamed. In the summer of 2018, Highway 110 was renamed Highway 62, acknowledging it as an extension of Highway 62 that starts on the west side of the Mendota Bridge and extends west through Minneapolis and other suburbs to I-494 in Eden Prairie. Community Facilities / Services The City of Mendota Heights currently retains a full complement of administrative services, including Administration, Engineering, Planning, Public Works, Parks & Recreation, Police, Fire, Finance, and Code Enforcement. The city contracts with private consultants for planning and legal services. City Hall provides administrative office space and public meeting facilities. City Hall is located at 1101 Victoria Curve, northwest of the intersection of Highway 62 and Lexington Avenue. Police and Fire The City of Mendota Heights provides police protection for its residents. The police station is located in the lower level of City Hall. Police are dispatched from Dakota Communications Center located in Empire Township. The city also provides police services to the communities of Lilydale and Mendota. The Police Department consists of 20 officers and 2.5 non-sworn civilian employees. Fire protection is also provided by the city. The department is located on Dodd Road, one- 62 62 62 62 62 55 149 149 13 1355 55 5 5 35E 494 494 35E Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Lexington AveVictoria RdShepard RdDelaware AveRobert StMendota Rd Oakdale AveCharlton StHwy 62 Hwy 55 Source: MnDOT Hwy 110 to be renamed Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 17 quarter mile south of Highway 62. Fire and Rescue Service consists of up to 36 volunteers and has a fully equipped station consisting of a 2,000-gallon tanker, three pump trucks (one with a 65’ ladder), a rescue vehicle, a brush truck, a boat, an ATV, and other equipment and services. Renovations are close to completion for the Dodd Road facility with approximately $8 million of upgrades to relieve overcrowding in the apparatus bay, administrative space and storage areas, technology, HVAC upgrades, and improved training opportunities. The city also provides fire services to the cities of Sunfish Lake, Lilydale, and Mendota. The average response time to fire calls ranges from six to eight minutes. The Fire and Rescue Services was last rated as providing Class 4 services (1-best, 10-worst), as defined by the Insurance Services Office. Specific residential fire ratings are determined based upon a combination of factors, including the individual rating for the Fire Department, availability of water services, and the level of communications (i.e., 911 call system, fire alarms, pagers, and dispatch systems), available in the community. Mendota Heights Fire Department has been awarded “best” twice in Minnesota. Schools Minnesota Independent School District #197 serves all or parts of the communities of Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, Lilydale, Mendota, Mendota Heights, Sunfish Lake and West St. Paul. The District is comprised of five elementary schools (two neighborhood schools and three magnet schools), two middle schools, and one high school. In addition, the District serves birth-to-age five children with an Early Learning Program. Total enrollment for District schools in the 2015-2016 school year was estimated at 4,343 students. This is down from 4,885 students in the 1998-1999 school year. Mendota Heights Fire Station 3 Somerset Heights Elementary School Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 18 Table 1-1. Public School Enrollment for K-12 Schools within the City of Mendota Heights: 2007-08 vs. 2018-19 School Years School Grades 2007-08 Total Enrollment 2018-19 Total Enrollment Percent Change 2007-08 to 2015-16 Mendota Elementary School K - 4th 360 388 8% Somerset Elementary School K - 4th 318 419 32% Friendly Hills Middle School 5th - 8th 597 727 22% Henry Sibley High School 9th - 12th 1,462 1,477 1% There are six public and private schools offering kindergarten through 12th grade located within the City of Mendota Heights: Mendota Elementary School, Somerset Elementary School, Friendly Hills Middle School, Henry Sibley High School, St. Thomas Academy, and Visitation School. The previous table provides a breakdown of enrollment of the K-12 public schools located within the city at the start of the 2007 - 2008 school year compared with the 2015-2016 school year. Table 1-2. Private School Enrollment for K-12 Schools within the City of Mendota Heights: 2007-08 vs. 2018-19 School Year School Grades 2007-08 Total Enrollment 2018-19 Total Enrollment Percent Change 2007-08 to 2015-16 St. Thomas Academy 6th - 12th 695 632 -10% Visitation School Montessori - 12th 600 585 -2.5% Source: St. Thomas Academy and Visitation School websites The number of students enrolled in private schools within the city was 1,201 during the 2015- 16 school year, down from the 2007-2008 school year, when 1,295 students were enrolled in private schools. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 19 Parks, Open Space & Trails The City of Mendota Heights boasts a variety of recreational opportunities, including access to regional trails, riverside and lakeside parks, scenic bluffs and a nature preserve. These facilities represent unique features in a park system that contributes to the character of Mendota Heights. The city has 295 acres of city-owned parks and open spaces, which includes active and passive recreation areas, along with other state and private parks and open spaces. These facilities are detailed in Chapter 4. Parks & Open Space. Cemeteries There are two cemeteries in Mendota Heights – Resurrection and Acacia – which occupy a significant amount of land on the west side of the community. Valley Park Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 20 Socio-Economic Profile The purpose of the social and economic inventory is to identify past trends, to document current conditions, and to help identify issues to be addressed in planning policies. These policies will help the community address a broad base of land use and development issues. With the help of a solid information and policy base, decision makers can evaluate and prioritize proposals for the community while implementing the city’s long-term goals and objectives. Growth Trends: Mendota Heights The following graph illustrates the estimated and projected growth in the City of Mendota Heights for population, household, and employment from 1970 through 2040. The table on the following pages expands this information with comparisons to Dakota County. Figure 1-1. Mendota Heights: Population, Household, & Employment Estimates & Forecasts 1970-2040 Source: Metropolitan Council, US Census After a significant increase between 1980 and 2000, city population decreased slightly after 2000, but is expected to remain relatively stable in the decades to come. In the meantime, the number of household units is expected to grow at a slow pace, indicating a further decline in household numbers. Employment, however, has continued to grow in the past ten years, despite the economic downturn in the mid-2000’s, and is expected to continue growing but at a slightly slower pace in the next 20 years. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 21 Growth Trends: Mendota Heights vs. Dakota County Communities The following table shows population, household, and employment estimates and forecasts for the City of Mendota Heights and Dakota County, 1970 through 2040. The table shows how the city has grown slower in all three measures than the county as a whole over several decades, with the exception of employment between 1970 and 2000. The city saw its largest population percent growth from 1980 to 1990. Dakota County also experienced its highest percentage growth in population from 1980 to 1990. City population is projected to remain more or less unchanged out to 2040, whereas the county is projected to continue to grow steadily for the next three decades. Table 1-3. Mendota Heights and Dakota County: Population, Household, and Employment Estimates & Forecasts 1970 - 2040 Population/Percent Change 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Mendota Heights 6,565 7,288 9,381 11,434 11,071 12,000 12,000 12,000 Decade change -11%29%22%-3%8.3%0%1% Dakota County 139,808 194,279 275,186 355,904 398,552 435,870 474,670 514,050 Decade change -39%42%29%12%9%9%8% Household/Percent Change 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Mendota Heights 1,641 2,210 3,302 4,178 4,378 4,900 5,000 5,110 Decade Change -35%49%27%5%12%2%2% Dakota County 37,560 64,087 98,293 131,151 152,060 170,940 187,980 204,750 Decade change -71%53%33%16%12%10%9% Employment/Percent Change 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Mendota Heights 1,140 2,998 5,805 8,549 11,550 12,600 12,900 13,180 Decade change -163%94%47%35%9%2%2% Dakota County 31,100 62,134 106,029 154,242 170,192 203,330 219,860 236,500 Decade change -100%71%45%10%19%8%8% Source: Metropolitan Council, US Census Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 22 Population Figure 1-2 illustrates the estimated and forecasted population for Mendota Heights and four other communities within Dakota County – Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, West St. Paul, and South St. Paul. Mendota Heights and its neighbors West St. Paul and South St. Paul are mostly developed and will grow slowly; Eagan and Inver Grove Heights, with room to grow, will see larger population increases. Figure 1-2. Mendota Heights and Dakota County Communities: Population Estimates & Forecasts 2000-2040 Source: Metropolitan Council, US Census Household Growth Trends Figure 1-3 illustrates the growth trend in the number of households, actual and projected, in Mendota Heights and area communities within Dakota County, from 1970 to 2040. As the figure illustrates, households in West St. Paul and South St. Paul will continue to steadily increase from 2010 until 2040. As with population, Eagan and Inver Grove Heights will experience more dramatic increases between 2010 and 2040. Mendota Heights is expected to experience a modest rise in the number of households, similar to West St. Paul and South St. Paul. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 23 Figure 1-3. Mendota Heights and Dakota County Communities: Household Estimates & Forecasts 2000-2040 Source: Metropolitan Council Household Size Figure 1-4 below illustrates average household size in Mendota Heights compared to Dakota County from 1970 to 2040. Household size has declined steadily since 1970 but is expected to flatten out in the next couple decades. Figure 1-4. Average Household Size Mendota Heights & Dakota County 1970-2040 Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-27 Figure 1-4:Mendota Heights and Dakota County Communities: Household Estimates & Forecasts 2000-2040 Household Size The graph below illustrates average household size in Mendota Heights compared to Dakota County from 1970 to 2040.Household size has declined steadily since 1970 but is expected to flatten out in the next couple decades. Figure 1-5: Average Household Size Mendota Heights & Dakota County 1970-2040 4.00 3.30 2.84 2.74 2.51 2.45 2.46 2.40 2.38 3.72 3.03 2.80 2.71 2.60 2.58 2.55 2.53 2.51 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2015 2020 2030 2040Persons per HouseholdYear Mendota Heights Dakota County 4,178 4,378 4,900 4,950 5,000 23,773 25,249 27,400 28,700 30,000 11,257 13,476 15,400 17,600 19,800 8,645 8,529 9,200 9,600 10,100 8,123 8,186 8,900 9,200 9,400 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040Households Year Mendota Heights Eagan Inver Grove Heights West St. Paul South St. Paul Source: Metropolitan Council Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 24 Household Type Two types of householders are distinguished in the 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census: a family and a non-family householder. A family householder is a householder living with one or more people related to him or her by birth, marriage, or adoption. The householder and all people in the household related to him or her are family members. A non-family householder is a householder living alone or with non-relatives only. Table 1-4 below illustrates the demographic profile of the households in Mendota Heights. The table separates households by information pertaining to family and non-family households; households with or without children; and the number of households in each category. Table 1-4. Mendota Heights Household Types 2000 & 2010 Total Households HHs with Children HHs without Children Household Type 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 Married Couple Families 2,902 2,821 1,356 1,068 1,546 1,753 Female Householder 253 281 151 155 102 126 Male Householder 83 102 37 46 46 56 Total Family Households 3,238 3,204 1,544 1,269 1,694 1,935 Percent 77.5%73.2% Total Non-Family Households 940 1,174 Percent 22.5%26.8% Total Households 4,178 4,378 Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census The number of households held fairly steady between 2000 and 2010, but the significant change is in households with and without children – the trend being fewer households with children. This likely indicates a societal trend but also the presence of more retirees in Mendota Heights. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 25 Age Distribution Figure 1-5 compares the percentages of the age distribution in the City of Mendota Heights in 2000 and 2010 and 2014. The median age of Mendota Heights’ residents in 2000 was 41 years old. By 2010, the median age climbed to 47.5 years old. By 2014, the Census estimated it rose again to 49 years old. Figure 1-5. Mendota Heights Age Distribution 2000, 2010, & 2014 Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-29 Age Distribution The following bar graph compares the percentages of the age distribution in the City of Mendota Heights in 2000 and 2010 and 2014.The median age of Mendota Heights’ residents in 2000 was 41 years old.By 2010, the median age climbed to 47.5 years old.By 2014, the Census estimated it rose again to 49 years old. Figure 1-6: Mendota Heights Age Distribution 2000, 2010, & 2014 Source: US Census 2000 & 2010, ACS 2014 The largest age cohort in Mendota Heights are 45-to-64-year-olds, rising from about 29% in 2000 to over 37% in 2014. The share of children 14 and under has decreased from about 22% in 2000 to under 15% in 2014. 5.8% 16.5% 11.1% 6.9% 15.8% 18.9% 10.6% 8.3% 6.2% 4.6% 13.0%11.4% 7.2% 9.8% 18.1%18.2% 9.1%8.7%3.9% 11.5%11.7% 6.4% 10.0% 17.0% 20.2% 9.2%10.0% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0% 20.0% 22.0% Under 5 years 5 to 14 years 15 to 24 years 25 ot 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 64 years 65 to 74 years 75 years + 2000 2010 2014 Source: US Census 2000 & 2010, ACS 2014 The largest age cohort in Mendota Heights are 45-to-64-year-olds, rising from about 29% in 2000 to over 37% in 2014. The share of children 14 and under has decreased from about 22% in 2000 to under 15% in 2014. Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 26 Age Distribution Figure 1-6 to the right depicts this aging trend in Mendota Heights. In just 14 years, the share of the population over and under 45 years of age has flipped – from just under half to just over half. Mendota Heights’ age trends follow the age composition trends of the Twin Cities Metro Area. The greatest population gains in the 1990s in the Seven-County Metro Area were in the forty-five (45) to fifty-four (54) year old age group, which is the same as Mendota Heights’ largest percentage category. This was a result of the Baby Boom generation moving into an age category previously occupied by the smaller Depression and World War II generation. The generation after the baby boom generation, also known as Generation X, 35-to-44-year-old age group, also grew significantly in the 1990s, just as in Mendota Heights. The continued aging of the population creates new challenges for the Seven-County Metro Area, as well as for the City of Mendota Heights. The demand for a wider range of services and housing choices, such as townhomes, one-level housing, assisted living, and so on, rather than traditional single-family homes. The Metropolitan Council has estimated that between 2000 and 2030, the population under the age of 55 is projected to increase by nineteen percent (19%) in the Twin Cities Seven County Metro Area, while the number of people 55 and over is expected to more than double, an increase of 111%. If the City of Mendota Heights continues to follow the population trends of the greater Metropolitan Area, the needs of the aging population will need to be recognized and addressed. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-30 Age Distribution The graphs to the right depict this aging trend in Mendota Heights in a focused way.In just 14 years, the share of the population over and under 45 years of age has flipped –from just under half to just over half. Mendota Heights’ age trends have been following the age composition trends of the Twin Cities Metro Area.The greatest population gains in the 1990s in the Seven-County Metro Area were in the forty-five (45) to fifty-four (54) year old age group, which is the same as Mendota Heights’ largest percentage category.This was a result of the Baby Boom generation moving into an age category previously occupied by the smaller Depression and World War II generation.The generation after the baby boom generation, also known as Generation X, 35-to-44-year-old age group, also grew significantly in the 1990s, just as in Mendota Heights. The continued aging of the population creates new challenges for the Seven- County Metro Area, as well as for the City of Mendota Heights.It is expected to increase the demand for a wider range of services and housing choices, such as townhomes, one-level housing, assisted living, and so on, rather than traditional single-family homes. The Metropolitan Council has estimated that between 2000 and 2030, the population under the age of 55 is projected to increase by nineteen percent (19%) in the Twin Cities Seven County Metro Area, while the number of people 55 and over is expected to more than double, an increase of 111%.If the City of Mendota Heights continues to follow the population trends of the greater Metropolitan Area, the needs of the aging population will need to be recognized and addressed. Education The graph on the next page illustrates education levels for Mendota Heights’ residents ages 25 and over in 2010,compared to Dakota County, the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, and the State of Minnesota.Compared to the County, State and Metro area, Mendota Heights’ residents are very well educated.The City has more than 20 percent more residents with Bachelor’s degrees than either Dakota County or the Metro Area, and the highest percentage of high school graduates. Figure 1-7: Mendota Heights Age 45+ 2000 & 2014 44%56% 2000 45 years and older 44 and younger 56%44% 2014 45 years and older 44 and younger Figure 1-6: Mendota Heights Age 45+ 2000 & 2014 Source: American Community Survey 2000 & 2014 Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 27 Education Figure 1-7 illustrates education levels for Mendota Heights’ residents ages 25 and over in 2010, compared to Dakota County, the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, and the State of Minnesota. Compared to the County, State and Metro area, Mendota Heights’ residents are very well educated. The city has more than 20 percent more residents with Bachelor’s degrees than either Dakota County or the Metro Area, and the highest percentage of high school graduates. Figure 1-7. Educational Attainment - Mendota Heights, Dakota County, Metro Area & Minnesota Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-31 Employment Information from the 2010 Census regarding employment demographics for Mendota Heights is depicted in the table below.The statistics provided include employment information for residents over the age of 16. The majority of those employed in the City in 2010 were in Management, employing 62 percent of the population.The second largest employment category was Sales and Office, employing 23 percent of the population. Figure 1-8: Educational Attainment –Mendota Heights, Dakota County, Metro Area & Minnesota Source: ACS 2014, Metropolitan Council 97%95%92%92% 62% 40%41%33% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Mendota Heights Dakota County 7 County Metro Minnesota High School Grad or higher Bachelor's Degree or higher Table 1-5: Occupation of Residents in Mendota Heights Management, business, science, and arts occupations 3,567 Service occupations 501 Sales and office occupations 1,342 Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations 110 Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 259 Total Civilian employed population 16 years and over 5,779 Source: ACS 2014 Source: American Community Survey 2014, Metropolitan Council Employment Information from the 2010 Census regarding employment demographics for Mendota Heights is depicted in Table 1-5 below. The statistics provided include employment information for residents over the age of 16. The majority of those employed in the city in 2010 were in Management, employing 62 percent of the population. The second largest employment category was Sales and Office, employing 23 percent of the population. Table 1-5. Occupation of Residents in Mendota Heights Management, business, science and arts occupations 3,567 Service occupations 501 Sales and office occupations 1,342 Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations 110 Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 259 Total Civilian employed population 16 years and over 5,779 Source: American Community Survey 2014 Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 28 Income Figure 1-8 below illustrates the median household income for the City of Mendota Heights in 2000 was $81,155. The city’s median household income has increased since then to $98,098 in 2014. The median household income for the city is higher than that of Dakota County, the entire Twin Cities Metro Area, and the State of Minnesota. Figure 1-8. Median Household Income 2000 & 2014 Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-32 Income The median household income for the City of Mendota Heights in 2000 was $81,155.The City’s median household income has increased since then to $98,098 in 2014.The median household income for the City is higher than that of Dakota County, the entire Twin Cities Metro Area, and the State of Minnesota. Poverty Rates According to the 2000 Census and 2017 Census estimates, the City has a relatively low percentage of individuals below the poverty level, compared to Dakota County and Minnesota as a whole.Federal guidelines for 2015 considered the poverty level to be $12,071 annually for a single person,$24,230 per year for a family of four.For 2018 these increased to $12,140 and $25,100, respectively. The number living below the poverty level more than doubled in 2017 to 488 residents, or 4.3% of the estimated population. Figure 1-9: Median Household Income 2000 & 2014 Source:ACS 2014, Metropolitan Council $81,155 $61,863 $54,300 $47,111 $98,098 $74,995 $68,000 $60,828 $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 Mendota Heights Dakota County 7 County Metro Minnesota 2000 2014 Source: ACS 2014, Metropolitan Council Poverty Rates According to the 2000 Census and 2017 Census estimates, the city has a relatively low percentage of individuals below the poverty level, compared to Dakota County and Minnesota as a whole. Federal guidelines for 2015 considered the poverty level to be $12,071 annually for a single person, $24,230 per year for a family of four. For 2018 these increased to $12,140 and $25,100, respectively. The number living below the poverty level more than doubled in 2017 to 488 residents, or 4.3% of the estimated population. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 2: Land Use & Growth This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 2 LAND USE & GROWTH Most of the developable land in Mendota Heights is completely developed and the city maintains its low-density and open feeling due to substantial areas of public and private open space, wetlands, lakes, bluff and wooded areas. The developed land use pattern is dominated by strong residential neighborhoods throughout the city; business and industrial developments in the southwest corner of the community; major institutional uses such as cemeteries, schools, and golf courses spread out intermittently; and protected natural areas such as Dodge Nature Center, and the bluffs and ravines along the Mississippi River corridor. The city’s natural resources, open spaces and recreation areas define the character of the community and are reflected in both the Existing Land Use and Future Land Use Plans contained in this chapter. Further details regarding the city’s plans to maintain and enhance these systems can be found in Chapter 4. Parks and Trails; Chapter 7. Natural Resources; and Chapter 9. Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area of this Plan. This chapter focuses on creating a sustainable balance between protecting the community’s high quality natural resource systems while enhancing and supporting the built environment. Residents identified protection of the quiet, secluded feel of Mendota Heights’ mature neighborhoods as a priority, and understand that to maintain its neighborhoods it is important to preserve natural features and the environment. To achieve this vision, overarching community goals and policies such as working to reduce airplane noise and protection of the Critical Area underly much of the land use direction described in this chapter. The Future Land Use Plan presented specifically identifies areas planned to stay the same and areas planned for change. The distinction between these two areas allows for targeted development and redevelopment that is intended to support the long-term sustainability of the community, while protecting existing neighborhoods and high quality natural areas that define the character of Mendota Heights. The subsequent sections of this chapter will first describe the city’s land use context within the region. Since Mendota Heights is within the 7-County Metropolitan Area this Plan must be consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s regional plans. The regional context provides the guidelines, while the city’s specific land use plans provide the roadmap and direction for the future of the community. As such, the majority of this chapter focuses on existing land use patterns, the Future Land Use Plan and areas planned for change within this Planning Period. 2 Regional Planning Designation The City of Mendota Heights is located within the Metropolitan Council’s jurisdiction and is required to update its Comprehensive Plan for this Planning Period (2020-2040) to be consistent with the regional plan. The following narrative and policies (in gray italic type) are excerpted and paraphrased from the Metropolitan Council’s Thrive MSP 2040 Plan which provides the applicable guidelines to Mendota Heights based on its designation: The regional planning area designation and related policies identify the Metropolitan Council’s expectations for the amount, location, and standards for development. A community’s planning area designation is based on its location, amount of developable land, existing development patterns, planned land uses and availability of infrastructure. The Metropolitan Council’s Thrive MSP 2040 Plan designates Mendota Heights as “suburban.” Suburban communities experienced continued growth and expansion during the 1980s and early 1990s, and typically have automobile-oriented development patterns at significantly lower densities than in previous eras. Community designations are intended to guide regional growth and development for areas that have urban infrastructure in place and the capacity to accommodate development and redevelopment and establish land use expectations including overall densities and development patterns. The Metropolitan Council forecasts that “Suburban” communities will account for 22 percent of the region’s population growth, 27 percent of its household growth, and 43 percent of employment growth over the next three decades. The 2040 Thrive MSP policies for Suburban communities are available on the Metropolitan council website, and include the following: Burnsville Bloomington Eagan Mendota Mendota Heights Minneapolis Inver Grove Heights Lilydale South Saint Paul Sunfish Lake Richfield Saint Paul West Saint Paul Fort Snelling (unorg.) Community Designation ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 2 3 4 50.5 Miles City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Community Designation Urban Center - Core City Urban Center Urban Suburban Suburban Edge Emerging Suburban Edge Rural Center Diversified Rural Rural Residential Agricultural Outside Council planning authority County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Lakes and Major Rivers Map 2-1. Community Designation Map for Mendota Heights Source: Metropolitan Council Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 3 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •Orderly and Efficient Land Use •Plan for new growth at overall average densities of 5 units per acre1 Look for development and redevelopment opportunities that link jobs, housing and transit •Plan local infrastructure to accommodate future growth •Natural Resources Protection •Integrate natural resource conservation and restoration into the comprehensive plan and ordinances •Identify contaminated land for reclamation. •Plan for restoration of natural features and functions •Water Sustainability •Implement BMPs to control and treat stormwater in redevelopment •Housing Affordability and Choice • Support the community’s share of the region’s affordable housing need •Support a mix of housing affordability •Use various sources of funding and financing tools to facilitate the development of lifecycle and affordable housing, including the needs of multi-generational households 1. The Met Council policy applies only to new residential development in the city for this Planning Period and does not affect existing development or neighborhoods. All new single-family, medium density and high density residential development combined is planned to be 5 units/acre or more as shown in subsequent sections of this Plan. Existing residential development across the whole city is approximately 2.3 dwelling units/acre. Metropolitan Council policies for Suburban Communities: https://metrocouncil.org/ Planning/Publications-And- Resources/Thrive-MSP-2040- Plan-(1)/7_ThriveMSP2040_ LandUsePoliciesbyCD.aspx Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Introduction & Background 1-10 •Water Sustainability o Implement BMPs to control and treat stormwater in redevelopment •Housing Affordability and Choice o Support the community’s share of the region’s affordable housing need o Support a mix of housing affordability o Use various sources of funding and financing tools to facilitate the development of lifecycle and affordable housing, including the needs of multigenerational households •Access, Mobility, and Transportation Choice o Focus growth, if possible, around regional transit o Support improved pedestrian and bicycle circulation o Consider policies that reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles o Adopt Complete Streets policies Lemay Lake Lemay Lake 4 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •Access, Mobility, and Transportation Choice •Focus growth, if possible, around regional transit •Support improved pedestrian and bicycle circulation •Consider policies that reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles •Adopt Complete Streets policies •Economic Competitiveness •Identify appropriate areas for business and industrial expansion •Support the cleanup and reuse of contaminated land •Preserve the industrial base for higher-intensity employment and new industries •Protect sites for highway-, river-, and rail-dependent manufacturing and freight transportation needs •Plan for land uses that support the growth of businesses that export goods and services outside the region •Preserve locations for employment, manage growth, and minimize land use conflicts •Building Resilience •Identify potential vulnerabilities in local infrastructure as a result of severe weather •Participate in programs that incentivize wind and solar power •Consider a property-assessed clean energy (PACE) program for conservation and renewable energy •Promote community solar gardens •Encourage travel demand management (TDM) policies and ordinance •Consider development standards that increase vegetative cover and increase the solar reflective quality of surfaces. •Participate in urban forestry assistance programs Village at Mendota Heights Centre Pointe Business Park 5 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Population, Household & Employment Forecasts In 2015 the Metropolitan Council issued a System Statement to the City of Mendota Heights which provided population, household and employment forecasts for the community for this Planning Period. The past five years has provided greater direction to the city with respect to anticipated growth and as a result requested adjustments to the forecasts initially provided in 2015. The adjusted forecasts for population, household and employment as agreed to by the Metropolitan Council and the City of Mendota Heights are provided in Table 2-1. Table 2-1. Population, Household, and Employment Forecasts 2010 – 2040 2010 2018 2020 2030 2040 Population (% change)11,071 11,340 (2.4%) 12,000 (5.8%) 12,000 (0%) 12,000 (0%) Households (% change)4,378 N/A 4,900 (12%) 5,000 (2%) 5,110 (2.2%) Employment (% change)11,550 N/A 12,600 (9%) 12,900 (2.4%) 13,180 (2.2%) Source: Metropolitan Council, US Census, City of Mendota Heights, SHC As demonstrated in Table 2-1, the city is planning for some household growth between 2020 and 2040. Most of the household growth is anticipated to occur in areas designated for mixed- use, which is likely to be primarily multi-family development. As a result of this development pattern, the population is expected to remain generally constant as the number of persons-per- households shrinks. The city’s employment is anticipated to grow over this Planning Period but not quite as significantly as contemplated in the 2015 forecasts. While there remains land capacity to support increased business and light industrial development, the growth trends over the past 5-years indicate a slightly slower rate of employment growth adding approximately 580 jobs over the next 20-years to the community. GOALS & POLICIES The goals and policies set the direction for the community and describe the land use aspirations that the city hopes to achieve for this Planning Period. An important part of this Plan is to communicate to residents, business owners, and stakeholders the vision using a combination of goals, policies and maps. To that end, the goals and policies that follow focus on existing and future land uses and are intended to directly support the Future Land Use Plan contained in subsequent sections of this chapter. 6 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 1: The Future Land Use Plan will provide the foundation for all land use decisions in Mendota Heights. Policies 1.Development and redevelopment of housing, businesses, transportation systems, parks and community facilities shall be done in accordance with this Plan. 2.This Plan shall be reviewed and amended as necessary to ensure development policies are consistent with the city’s vision for current and future development decisions. 3.Any zoning and/or rezoning decisions shall conform to the Future Land Use Plan. 4.The Future Land Use Plan should be periodically updated to reflect changing priorities and conditions of the city, or if needed to conform with the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. 5.The city will strive to create a balanced land use pattern that provides appropriate designations that meet projected growth and market demand. GOAL 2: Preserve, protect, and enrich the mature, fully developed residential neighborhoods and character of the community. Policies 1.Subdivision and zoning standards will require high quality site and building design in all new developments. 2.The city will emphasize quality design, innovative solutions, and general focus on aesthetics throughout the community, including within existing developments and buildings. 3.Future parks, trails and open spaces will be planned within walking distance of all residential areas, both existing and planned. 4.Development and planning of land will be encouraged to provide reasonable access to the surrounding communities. 5.Public buildings and properties will be designed, constructed and maintained to be a source of civic pride and to set a standard for private property owners to follow. 6.A mechanism will be developed to allow for the maintenance and reinvestment in identified non-conforming properties. 7 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 7.Redevelopment of existing MR-Medium Density Residential and HR-High Density Residential properties are to be limited to densities consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. 8.LR-Low Density Residential development and redevelopment shall avoid creating new “flag lots” if the “flag” has less than 100-feet of frontage. Goal 3: Encourage and support industrial and commercial development in designated areas. Policies 1.The city will use available resources to identify redevelopment needs. This will include cooperation with Dakota County and the Metropolitan Council to achieve redevelopment objectives. 2.Transitions between adjoining land uses will be required for adjacent residential uses, and will be encouraged between compatible land uses (e.g. transition between a general manufacturing and retail use will be encouraged). 3.Amenities within the industrial and commercial districts will be encouraged to promote a more vibrant and attractive place for workers. Goal 4: Work to reduce the impact of aircraft noise throughout the community. Policies 1.Increase public participation and representation on the Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) and with the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). 2. Achieve noise reduction through advocating modified takeoff procedures and corridor compliance. 3.Monitor the continued implementation of the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) Airport Comprehensive Plan. 4. Advocate for specific noise control measures through operational changes and advanced technology. 5. Notify and work with Federal Aviation Administration and other appropriate agencies in the event that potential airspace obstructions are encountered. 6.Consider aircraft noise and safety issues in applicable land use and zoning decisions. 8 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update EXISTING LAND USE The city’s developable land is nearly fully developed with a mix of low-density single-family uses, pockets of medium and higher density multi-family housing, commercial nodes and light industrial development. The existing development pattern is expected to remain through this Planning Period, with targeted opportunities for development or redevelopment which are described in subsequent sections of this chapter. The following table indicates how the existing land use is distributed within the city which illustrated on Map 2-2. Existing Land Use. These categories are not the same and do not necessarily correspond to the Future Land Use categories identified later in this chapter. Table 2-2. 2017 Existing Land Use 2017 Existing Land Use Gross Acres % Total Net Acres *% Total Rural Residential 147.36 2.29%115.86 1.80% Low Density Residential 1,792.12 27.86%1,727.75 26.86% Medium Density Residential 63.79 0.99%59.80 0.93% Medium Density Residential - PUD 14.17 0.22%14.17 0.22% High Density Residential 127.19 1.98%126.52 1.97% High Density Residential - PUD 6.42 0.10%6.42 0.10% Business 21.78 0.34%21.78 0.34% Limited Business 98.38 1.53%96.71 1.50% Mixed-Use - PUD 38.66 0.60%37.20 0.58% Industrial 386.17 6.00%384.76 5.98% City Facilities 37.79 0.59%31.99 0.50% Schools (Public/Private)288.06 4.48%282.21 4.39% Churches Synagogues 32.59 0.51%30.53 0.47% Cemetery 239.67 3.73%238.47 3.71% Park/Open Space 1,032.68 16.05%526.46 8.18% Golf Course: large/small 292.47 4.55%281.95 4.38% Right-of-Way 1,222.47 19.00%1,202.42 18.69% Open Water 591.03 9.19%551.02 8.57% Wetland 0.00 0%696.80 10.83% Total 6,432.81 100%6,432.81 100% * The net acreage calculations reflect the gross acreage of each land use less wetland areas. Source: Metropolitan Council, City of Mendota Heights, Stantec, SHC 9 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Existing Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2017 FIGURE 2-2 Park/Open Space Mixed-Use - PUD Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential - PUD High Density Residential High Density Residential - PUD Business Limited Business Mixed Use - PUD Industrial City Facilities Schools (Public Private) Churches Synagogues Cemetery Parks/Open Space Golf Course Right-of-Way Open Water Wetland City Boundary City Boundary Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential - PUD High Density Residential High Density Residential - PUD Business Limited Business Industrial City Facilities Schools (Public/Private) Churches Synagogues Cemetery Golf Course: Large/Small Right-of-Way Open Water Wetland Map 2-2. Existing Land Use MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Existing Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2017 FIGURE 2-2 Park/Open Space Mixed-Use - PUD Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential - PUD High Density Residential High Density Residential - PUD Business Limited Business Mixed Use - PUD Industrial City Facilities Schools (Public Private) Churches Synagogues Cemetery Parks/Open Space Golf Course Right-of-Way Open Water Wetland City Boundary City Boundary Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential - PUD High Density Residential High Density Residential - PUD Business Limited Business Industrial City Facilities Schools (Public Private) Churches Synagogues Cemetery Golf Course Right-of-Way Open Water Wetland Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2017 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Existing Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2017 FIGURE 2-2 Park/Open Space Mixed-Use - PUD Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential - PUD High Density Residential High Density Residential - PUD Business Limited Business Mixed Use - PUD Industrial City Facilities Schools (Public Private) Churches Synagogues Cemetery Parks/Open Space Golf Course Right-of-Way Open Water Wetland City Boundary City Boundary Rural Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential - PUD High Density Residential High Density Residential - PUD Business Limited Business Industrial City Facilities Schools (Public Private) Churches Synagogues Cemetery Golf Course Right-of-Way Open Water Wetland 10 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update FUTURE LAND USE The Future Land Use Plan describes the city’s plan for its future land use and development patterns. As previously introduced, Mendota Heights is almost fully developed and the majority of the land use pattern is anticipated to remain the same as it is today. Existing single- family neighborhoods are planned to stay the same, while opportunities for development and redevelopment are concentrated in areas more recently developed such as key transportation nodes and mixed-use areas. This section describes 1) the overall planned future land use pattern of the community; 2) key considerations for areas planned to stay the same, with specific interest on existing neighborhoods; and 3) areas planned for change focusing on areas where new residential and commercial uses may be developed or redeveloped over this Planning Period. Future Land Use Plan The following table summarizes the city’s Future Land Use which is depicted on Map 2-3. Future Land Use Plan (2040): Table 2-3. Future Land Use Acreage by Decade 2040 Future Land Use Density Range (DU/Ac) 2020 Acres % of Total 2030 Acres % of Total 2040 Acres % of Total RR - Rural Residential 0.1-1.45 322.68 5.02%308.88 4.80%218.88 3.40% LR - Low Density Residential 2.0 - 2.9 1,680.4 26.12%1,691.10 26.29%1,781.10 27.69% MR - Medium Density Residential 3.0 - 5.9 187.64 2.92%187.64 2.92%187.64 2.92% HR - High Density Residential 6.0 - 9.0 65.57 1.02%65.57 1.02%65.57 1.02% LB - Limited Business N/A 143.86 2.24%143.86 2.24%143.86 2.24% B - Business N/A 16.07 0.25%30.87 0.48%30.87 0.48% MU - Mixed-Use 21.0 - 30.0 47.41 0.74%47.41 0.74%47.41 0.74% I - Industrial N/A 388.8 6.04%401 6.23%401 6.23% P/S - Public/Semi-Public N/A 539.41 8.39%515.51 8.01%515.51 8.01% P - Park/Open Space N/A 1,227.47 19.08%1,227.47 19.08%1,227.47 19.08% Right-of-Way N/A 1,222.47 19.00%1,222.47 19.00%1,222.47 19.00% Open Water N/A 591.03 9.19%591.03 9.19%591.03 9.19% Total 6,432.81 100%6,432.81 100%6,432.81 100% 11 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE 2040 Planned Future Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 2-5 LandUse 2040Plan LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public P - Park & Open Space Open Water RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) Legend 2040 Future Land Use LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public Open Water RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed-Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) P - Park/Open Space Map 2-3. Future Land Use Plan (2040) MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE 2040 Planned Future Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 2-5 LandUse 2040Plan LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public P - Park & Open Space Open Water RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) Legend 2040 Future Land Use LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public Open Water RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed-Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) P - Park/Open Space Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE 2040 Planned Future Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 2-5 LandUse 2040Plan LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public P - Park & Open Space Open Water RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) Legend 2040 Future Land Use LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public Open Water RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed-Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) P - Park/Open Space 12 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Future Land Use Designations The following definitions are provided to describe the Future Land Use designations identified on Table 2-3. Future Land Use Acreage by Decade. Residential Uses The city’s land uses are predominantly developed with low density single-family uses, with small pockets of multi-family housing located at key transportation corridors and nodes. The trend towards a more balanced housing pattern is recent with eight percent (8%) of the residentially- designated land in the city utilized for multiple family homes or medium to high-density development, which marks a significant increase from one percent (1%) in 1979 and five percent (5%) in 2002. The Future Land Use Plan identifies five categories with residential uses: rural, low density, medium density, high density and mixed-use. •RR – Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Acre) This land use is generally located in the east central part of the city. This designation is intended for large lot single-family residences and includes properties with and without city sewer. The Rural Residential areas are planned with a density not to exceed 1.45 units per acre. The corresponding zoning district classification is R-1A (One Family Residential). •LR – Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Acre) This land use is the most prevalent land use category in the city and generally allows development of single-family principal and accessory uses. This designation corresponds to the R-1 zoning district, which requires a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet and minimum lot width of 100 feet. •MR – Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Acre) This land use generally allows townhome and attached housing development at suburban densities. New areas of Medium Density Residential are added in this update to include existing townhouse and duplex projects that were previously designated Low Density and zoned R-1, but are actually developed consistent with this land use designation. The corresponding zoning district classifications are: R-2 (Medium Density Residential District) and MR-PUD (Medium Density Residential Planned Unit Development). 13 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •HR – High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Acre) This land use provides for multi-family and apartment development at suburban densities. Most of this land use is in a few large apartment projects. The corresponding zoning district classifications are: R-3 (High Density Residential District) and HR-PUD (High Density Residential Planned Unit Development). City Code includes Planned Unit Developments (PUD) regulations that allow for a varied and compatible development of property by encouraging reasonable flexibility from applicable standards, including higher densities than would be allowed under the underlying zoning district and/or future land use designation. Mendota Heights has approved three (3) high-density residential PUD’s in the community. •MU – Mixed-Use (21.0 - 30.0 DU/Acre for Residential Uses) Undeveloped land guided mixed-use is planned to develop approximately 75% of its acres with residential uses at the densities identified, which is consistent with existing mixed-use projects in the city. The northeast quadrant of the Highway 62 and Dodd Road intersection has been developed into a mixed-use center known as The Village at Mendota Heights. The southeast corner of this includes the Mendota Plaza shopping center which has seen renovation and redevelopment in recent years, including a new Walgreen’s pharmacy; White Pine Senior Living, a 50-unit assisted living complex, and a 4-story 139-unit apartment project developed by At Home Apartments. The current residential development has developed at densities between 21 and 30 dwelling units per acre, and adjacent undeveloped outlots are guided to develop at similar densities. Commercial Uses Commercial land uses are typically divided into three general categories; (1) office, (2) retail, and (3) mixed-use. The office category includes land uses generally considered to be of a limited business nature, typically a daytime office use. Map 2-3. Future Land Use Plan identifies these areas as “LB - Limited Business”. The current and corresponding zoning district classifications are B-1 (Limited Business), B-1A (Business Park) and B-2 (Neighborhood Business). Retail and mixed-use are similar, but the mixed-use designation includes compatible residential uses in proximity. 14 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •LB – Limited Business There are presently four locations where most Limited Business uses in Mendota Heights are currently located or planned: -In the southwest quadrant of Highway 62 and Lexington Avenue; -Either side of Mendota Heights Road, between I-35E and Dodd Road; -On the south side of South Plaza Drive, east of Dodd Road near the Mendota Plaza area; and -On the south side of Highway 13 (Sibley Memorial Highway) at the northern city boundary, east of I-35E. The second category of commercial uses expands the uses to include retail, restaurants, hotels and other commercial uses. This includes neighborhood type convenience stores and shopping centers. Map 2-3. Future Land Use Plan identifies these areas as “B - Business” and “MU - Mixed-Use”. The current and corresponding zoning district classifications are B-3 (General Business), B-4 (Shopping Center) and PUD - Planned Unit Development. •B – Business There are four locations where Business uses are planned: -The southeast quadrant of Highway 62 and Lexington Avenue; -The northeast quadrant of Lexington Avenue and Mendota Heights Road; -The area between Highway 55 to the west, Mendota Heights Road to the north, and Northland Drive to the east/south. -The 14.6 acres assemblage of city-owned parcels, located east of Highway 55, north of Bourne Lane and south of Lemay Shore Drive. The properties are commonly referred to as the “Bourne Lane Site”. Similar to the Business land use designation, the Mixed-Use designation allows for neighborhood types of retail, shops, and includes service businesses such as restaurants, salons, professional services, etc., that are compatible with residential uses. •MU – Mixed-Use The city’s largest concentration of commercial or business uses are located at Highway 62 and Dodd Road, in the Mendota Plaza and The Village at Mendota Heights developments which are both guided mixed-use. 15 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update The northeast quadrant of this intersection has been developed into a mixed-use center known as The Village at Mendota Heights. The southeast corner of this includes the Mendota Plaza shopping center which has seen renovation and redevelopment in recent years, including a new Walgreen’s pharmacy. The intent of the district is to allow for mixed-use developments that combine residential, retail, and commercial uses into a coordinated, planned development project. This land use designation is located both north and south of the Highway 62 and Dodd Road intersection, the city’s only significant retail area. These two commercial/residential developments are zoned as MU-PUD Mixed-Use-Planned Unit Development. Industrial Uses •I – Industrial The Industrial land use category is concentrated in the city’s industrial and business park in the southwest part of the city, north of I-494. The vast majority of the 400-plus acres of Industrial land is west of Highway 55, with a portion east of Highway 55 and west of I-35E. This land use includes manufacturing, office, and warehousing uses, but also hotels, and other commercial uses. Public and Open Space Uses •P/S – Public/Semi-Public The Public/Semi-Public land use designation includes various land uses that are generally outside the commercial, industrial and residential categories. Among these are city buildings, such as City Hall, public works and fire stations; schools, both public and private; churches and synagogues; and cemeteries. •P – Park/Open Space The Park/Open Space land use designation includes city, State and regional parks, golf courses and nature preserves. 16 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Areas Planned to Stay the Same As a mostly developed community, Mendota Heights expects the existing land use pattern to continue through this Planning Period with a few exceptions that are discussed in the next section of this chapter. While the city expects existing neighborhoods and commercial nodes to remain, it is important to plan how the city will maintain and preserve existing uses to ensure a high quality of life for all of the community’s residents and businesses. Guiding Properties Accurately To address and protect the city’s single-family uses, and to accurately identify pockets of non- conformity the Future Land Use Plan must reflect accurately the existing and planned uses in the city. A major effort of this planning process was to review the 2030 Plan and to update the Future Land Use Plan so as to reflect either 1) the actual use or development of the property; or 2) to guide the property consistent with the city’s vision for the future. A list of more than 20 properties of various sizes were identified as guided incorrectly since the last Plan update, and all of the identified properties have been appropriately re-guided as part of this planning process (See Appendix F for full list and map location of properties). The process to update the Future Land Use Plan provides the foundation from which the city can determine what areas should stay the same, and what areas provide opportunities for change. Non-Conforming Single-Family Uses Through this planning process the city identified the most significant existing land use pattern issue is that of non-conforming single-family uses. As described throughout this Plan, the city’s dominant single-family land use has resulted in a low density residential development pattern. While the single-family use is broadly consistent across the city, the individual neighborhood patterns vary based on the decade in which the neighborhood was developed. Design and architecture trends change over time and the neighborhoods reflect the market demand of each particular decade resulting in varying housing styles, lot sizes, and configurations. Fast forward to today, and the city is filled with single-family neighborhoods of different character depending on the decade in which it was developed, yet the city applies a uniform zoning and land use standard that results in non-conforming lots and uses all over the city. The city recognizes there are certain areas of the city where single-family lots are generally smaller (mostly platted pre-1985) and have less than the minimum lot size standard of 15,000 square feet per Zoning Code. Many of these lots and structures do not meet current setback standards that result in a property being deemed non-conforming. To fully understand this issue, a mapping analysis was completed as part of this Plan and is shown on Map 2-4. Lot Sizes for 2020 Single- Family Uses. 17 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Over time the city has updated its zoning ordinance affecting lot sizes, setbacks and other dimensional standards. These changes have resulted in single-family parcels becoming legally non-conforming which can pose problems and legal hurdles when homeowners want to improve or expand their dwellings, and in some cases run into setback or lot coverage issues. The city has identified protection and enhancement of existing single-family neighborhoods as a priority in this Planning Period and it is important for property owners to be able to improve and maintain their properties. As a result, the city supports updating the Zoning Ordinance, as part of the Implementation Plan, to provide mechanisms for assisting these legal non-conforming uses, which may permit said uses to be improved or updated without extraordinary measures, such as a variance. Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2016 Map 2-4. 2020 Single-Family Land Use Lot Size 18 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Areas Planned for Change While the majority of the city is planned to stay much the same as it is today, there are opportunities in the community where new development or redevelopment may occur during and in this Planning Period. The city has identified 22 focus areas, each with different characteristics land use designations and planned future land uses. The city acknowledges that development or redevelopment of these properties may be dependent on market conditions and has made its best estimate as to the timing of development activities. The tables that follow summarize the information contained in the narrative for each property identified in the section titled Focus Areas. Table 2-4 estimates the anticipated residential development or redevelopment of the Focus Areas by decade. As shown, the city anticipates that approximately 210 new households will be developed over the next 20-years, consistent with the revised forecasts shown in Table 2-4 of this chapter. Table 2-5 shows the estimated employment projections for development or redevelopment within the Focus Areas, as well as expansion opportunities of existing businesses. Map 2-5 identifies all Focus Areas overlaid with the Future Land Use Plan. Development and redevelopment opportunities comprise diverse land use designations allowing for a variety of potential land uses to be developed in this Planning Period. There is no “staging” plan because infrastructure and utilities are generally available throughout the city. Any site development or redevelopment will likely need site specific improvements, but utilities will either already be on-site or adjacent to the site. As such development or redevelopment could occur anywhere within the city and still be contiguous to infrastructure. The city does believe that the mixed-use areas are most likely to develop within the 2021-2030 time period given current market demand and proximity to existing mixed-use development in the city. This is indicated by the anticipated household development shown in Table 2-4. 19 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Table 2-4. Anticipated Residential Development or Redevelopment by Decade Land Use Total Net Developable Acres (Residential)* 2020 2021-2030 2031-2040 Total by 2040 Net Acres HH Net Acres HH Net Acres HH HH (Min)HH (Max) LR (Low Density Residential) 2.0-2.9 DU/Ac 25.2 --15.0 30 10.2 21 50 73 MR (Medium Density Residential) 3.0-5.9 DU/Ac 8.2 --4.1 12 4.1 12 25 48 Mixed-Use** 21.0-30.0 DU/Ac 6.4 --6.4 135 --135 192 Total 41.99 --25.5 177 14.3 33 210 313 Net Density Estimate of Areas Planned for Change 5.0 DU/ Acre 7.5 DU/ Acre * “Total Net Developable Acres” excludes wetlands, arterial right-of-way, park, and 10% parks dedication. ** Mixed-use Residential Acres calculated as 75% of Total Net Developable Acres. Table 2-5. Employment Projections (New Development or Redevelopment) Land Use Planned Acres F.A.R.SF Yield SF/Job 2040 Employment Business 14.8 35%225,641 3,000 75.21 Limited Business 36.14 35%550,990 4,500 122.44 Industrial 18.46 25%201,029 6,000 33.50 Mixed-Use*9.46 25%103,019 3,000 34.34 Subtotal New Development or Redevelopment 265.50 Business 4.0 35%61,098 3,000 20.37 Limited Business 26.49 35%403,828 4,500 89.74 Industrial 95.47 25%1,039,641 6,000 173.27 Mixed-Use*35.59 25%96,894 3,000 65.60 Subtotal Expansion Opportunity for Existing Development 315.68 Total Projected 2040 Employment 581 * Mixed-use Commercial Acres calculated as 25% of planned acres. 20 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Focus Areas In the city’s previous comprehensive plans, a number of specific properties in the city were mapped that were either vacant, under-developed, under-utilized or identified as either potential infill or redevelopment areas. Infill means that the property has the opportunity to develop or redevelop beyond its current level. The city is not recommending any land use or rezoning changes on these sites at this time or as part of this Plan. A summary of these sites are provided below, along with Map 2-5. Focus Areas with Future Land Use Overlay. 1.SE Quadrant of Highway 55 and Acacia Boulevard: This 9.1- acre city-owned site is bounded by Pilot Knob Road on the west, Acacia Boulevard on the north, and Highway 55 on the east. The site was approved under an interim use permit in 2015 as an off-leash dog park for a five year period, but is located in the industrial park and guided for future I - Industrial use. 2.2359 Pilot Knob Road: This area consists of a 3.1-acre property currently used as a single-family residence plus a 0.4-acre site owned by the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Both are guided for I - Industrial use. 3.NW Quadrant of Pilot Knob Road and Mendota Heights Road: This vacant 5-acre site is bounded by Highway 13 on the west, and an unnamed extension of Perron Road right-of-way to the north. The property is owned and adjacent to Lloyd’s BBQ business to the south. Site is guided for I - Industrial use. This property is being developed. 4.Highway 55 and Northland Drive: This 2.2- acre site is vacant and guided I - Industrial. 5.Bourne Lane Site (city-owned properties): This 14.8-acre area on Bourne Lane and Lemay Lake Road consists of nine separate parcels, all owned by the city. The site is guided for B - Business use. 6.1179 Centre Pointe Circle: This 3.6-acre site is one of two vacant parcels in the Centre Pointe Business Park. The site is guided for LB - Limited Business. 7.Centre Pointe Curve and Lexington Avenue: This 2.1-acre site is currently vacant and located on the south frontage road to Highway 62. The site is guided LB - Limited Business. 21 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 8.Victoria Curve and Glenhill Road: This 6.3-acre site is vacant and guided LR - Low Density Residential. This property is in the MRCCA Overlay district. 9.Lexington Avenue and Highway 13: Three single-family parcels totaling 3.1 acres are surrounded on three sides by multi-family development. The site is guided for LR - Low Density Residential use. 10.2015 and 2021 Victoria Road South: Two large single-family parcels totaling 3.5 acres on the north frontage road to Highway 62. The site is guided for LR - Low Density Residential use. 11.1026, 1032, and 1036 Dakota Trail: Three single-family parcels totaling 2.5 acres on Dakota Trail, the south frontage road to Highway 62, are adjacent to commercial parcels and are guided for LR - Low Density Residential use. 12.Lexington Avenue and Wagon Wheel Trail: Bounded by Lexington, Wagon Wheel Trail and I-35E, and adjacent to the Lexington Heights Apartments. The site is guided for LR - Low Density Residential use. 13.SE Quadrant of I-35E interchange and Mendota Heights Road: This 2.4-acre vacant parcel is guided for LB - Limited Business use. 14.Vacant Parcel – South of Visitation School: The Sisters of the Visitation Monastery own this 28.1-acre vacant parcel on Mendota Heights Road and I-494 just west of Dodd Road. It is one of the largest vacant parcels in the city and is guided as P/S - Public/Semi-Public use. 15.750 Mohican Lane: This property consists of three parcels (two vacant/one developed) containing 7.34 acres of total land area in the Friendly Hills neighborhood. Both are located behind residences on Mohican Lane and Pagel Road. The property is guided for LR - Low Density Residential use. 16.2455 Delaware Avenue: This is a 2.5 acre, single-family parcel, and is guided for LR - Low Density Residential use. 17.Dakota County CDA: This area consists of two separate parcels totaling 11.9 acres owned by Dakota County, part of 22 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update former reserved highway right-of-way that was never used. The property is guided for LR - Low Density Residential use. 18.Mendota Plaza Area: There are three (3) vacant parcels in and around the Mendota Plaza: (i) a 2.05 acre parcel located northwest of the new The Reserve of Mendota Village apartments; (ii) a 2.1- acre parcel on South Plaza Drive and South Plaza Way; (iii) a 2-acre parcel at the end of South Plaza Drive, owned by Dakota County CDA. All three parcels are guided and zoned MU - Mixed-Use. 19.Village Lots (city-owned properties): These city-owned properties consists of four vacant parcels totaling 1.7 acres, which are located in The Village Center development on the east side of Dodd Road (Hwy 149) and north of Maple Street. The city has been actively marketing the property as a site for high-density residential or mixed-use development. The city recently sold this property. 20.Wachtler and Wentworth: This 2.7-acre residential property in the NE quadrant of Wachtler and Wentworth Avenues adjacent to Wentworth Park is guided for LR - Low Density Residential use (under development). 21.Somerset Area: This area has been referred to as the “Superblock” due to its collection of large residential lots. It consists of over 20 separate parcels on approximately 90 acres located directly south of Somerset Country Club and Golf Course. The area is developed with single-family homes on large lots with private septic systems. The neighborhood is bounded on the east by Delaware Avenue, the north by Wentworth Avenue, and the south and west by smaller single-family lots. The neighborhood contains significant wetlands and woodlands. The area is guided RR - Rural Residential use. Due to the existing large lot configuration, the area has the potential to be further subdivided, provided public sewer, water and road systems would be extended to the area. 22.1170 Dodd Road: This property consists of approximately 3.7 total acres. The property is guided LR - Low Density Residential use. 23 Chapter 2 - Land Use & Growth City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Map 2-5. Focus Areas with Future Land Use Overlay MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE 2040 Planned Future Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Legend 2040 Future Land Use RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed-Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) Open Water LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public P - Park/Open Space FocusAreas Dakota County CDALands Infill Somerset "Super-Block"Area Legend 2040 Future Land Use LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public Open Water P - Park/Open Space Focus Areas RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed-Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) Dakota County CDA Lands Infill Somerset "Super-Block" Area MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD1 2 3 4 5 6 8 7 9 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 21 20 22 10 11 17 DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Focus Areas Map µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Infill Sites and/or Redevelopment Areas City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County, 2016 City of Mendota Heights, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 2-7 Legend 2040 Future Land Use LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public Open Water P - Park/Open Space FocusAreas RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed-Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) Dakota County CDA Lands Infill Somerset "Super-Block" Area Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 7 9 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 21 20 22 10 11 17 DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Focus Areas Map µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Infill Sites and/or Redevelopment Areas City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County, 2016 City of Mendota Heights, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 2-7 Legend 2040 Future Land Use LB - Limited Business B - Business I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public Open Water P - Park/Open Space FocusAreas RR - Rural Residential (0.1 - 1.45 DU/Ac) LR - Low Density Residential (2.0 - 2.9 DU/Ac) MR - Medium Density Residential (3.0 - 5.9 DU/Ac) HR - High Density Residential (6.0 - 9.0 DU/Ac) MU - Mixed-Use (Res. 21.0 - 30.0 DU/Ac) Dakota County CDALands Infill Somerset "Super-Block"Area CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 3: Transportation This page is intentionally blank. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 1 3 TRANSPORTATION Mendota Heights is strategically located within the regional roadway system, with access to major highways connecting to both downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul, MSP Airport, and all parts of the region in all directions. The completion of Interstates 494 and 35E in the late 1980’s altered the physical environment of Mendota Heights. The highway systems have connected the community to the region, and this access has contributed to growth of the residential, commercial, and industrial base of the community; but these major transportation systems have also increased air, noise, and water pollution in parts of the community. This chapter of the plan addresses transportation in many forms – automobiles, transit, bicycles and pedestrians, aviation, and freight. F0 0.5 1Miles 35E 35E 494494 6262 5555 EaganEagan West St. PaulWest St. PaulLilydaleLilydaleMississippi R i v e r Mississippi R i v e r Minnesota RiverMinnesota RiverFort Snelling (unorg.)Fort Snelling (unorg.)Sunfish LakeSunfish LakeMendota HeightsMendota Heights Saint PaulSaint Paul Created by: SHC, Source: USDA Aerial Photography Field Office Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 2 GOALS & POLICIES GOAL 1: Provide a safe, high quality, and cost effective multi-modal transportation system in the community. Policies 1.Transportation improvements will be coordinated with the plans of MnDOT, Dakota County, Metropolitan Council, and adjoining communities. 2.When feasible, the city will support regional improvements to major transportation facilities serving the city. 3.New construction techniques, technologies, and environmental sustainability will be incorporated in planning transportation facilities. 4.A network of sidewalks and trails will be constructed in all new developments and redevelopments, where practical and feasible. 5.Developers will be required to provide the transportation facilities within and adjacent to new subdivisions, including rights-of-way, roadways, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities necessary to support their development. 6.Existing transportation facilities will be maintained so as to preserve or improve service levels and minimize life-cycle costs, including an ongoing pavement management program for city streets. 7.Where practical and feasible, planning for roadway improvements will include landscaping, street lighting (where deemed appropriate), and other aesthetic improvements. 8.Advocate for transportation improvements outside of Mendota Heights, as identified in the Dakota County Regional Roadway Visioning Study. 9.Investigate funding alternatives that would reduce or eliminate the need for special assessments. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 3 GOAL 2: Expand transit options that serve Mendota Heights. Policies 1.The city will continue to support and participate in efforts to implement proposed improved transit service in the city. 2.The city will support the appropriate transit agencies in the seeking of county, regional, state or federal funding to expand transit services in and around the city. 3.The city will support park and ride facilities if demand is met or requested by the residents and/or local businesses. Transportation Analysis Zones In order to develop forecasts and plan for regional roads and highways, the Metropolitan Council needs to know the demographic forecasts for smaller geographic areas within a community, known as Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ). Each zone provides an estimated allocation of the Metropolitan Council’s forecasts on population, households, and employment within each area. Table 3-1 on the following page is consistent with the 2020, 2030 and 2040 forecasts and estimates. The distribution of future growth within these areas reflects the communities overall land use planning efforts. Map 3-1. Traffic Analysis Zones identifies the eighteen zones geographically that correlate to the tabulated data provided in Table 3-1. Transportation Analysis Zone Estimates for 2020, 2030 & 2040. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 4 Table 3-1. Transportation Analysis Zone Estimates for 2020, 2030 & 2040 Population Households Employment TAZ 2020 2030 2040 2020 2030 2040 2020 2030 2040 396 371 301 229 169 136 103 0 0 0 397 1,465 1,451 1,443 563 572 580 332 355 395 398 338 334 332 131 132 134 135 143 147 399 868 860 856 335 341 346 52 55 57 400 574 577 583 221 225 229 84 95 105 402 314 320 326 146 152 156 91 92 90 403 788 791 790 363 369 372 61 64 65 404 835 842 848 380 389 400 108 106 99 405 369 417 472 142 161 194 12 14 17 406 207 208 210 84 85 85 1 2 3 407 721 717 716 290 289 288 647 659 635 408 375 381 388 141 144 152 32 39 46 409 13 14 14 5 5 5 1,073 1,080 1,130 410 3 3 3 1 1 1 5,721 5,800 5,870 411 1,094 1,090 1,089 457 456 456 2,626 2,718 2,815 412 592 606 620 210 213 217 888 926 930 413 1,340 1345 1,345 547 605 643 605 667 685 414 1,735 1,740 1,737 716 726 746 88 91 92 Total 12,002 11,997 12,001 4,901 5,001 5,107 12,556 12,906 13,181 Source: Metropolitan Council, SHC Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 5 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE TAZ: 409 TAZ: 411 TAZ: 412 TAZ: 413 TAZ: 402 TAZ: 396 TAZ: 414 TAZ: 410 TAZ: 397 TAZ: 403 TAZ: 407 TAZ: 399 TAZ: 398 TAZ: 406 TAZ: 405 TAZ: 404 TAZ: 408 TAZ: 400 Traffic Analysis Zones City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet City Boundary Open Water 35E 35E 5555 6262 494 494 Created: December 2020, Source: Metropolitan Council, 2016 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD TAZ: 400 2040 Population: 550 2040 Household: 220 2040 Employment: 140 DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE TAZ: 409 2040 Population: 10 2040 Household: 0 2040 Employment: 1,140 TAZ: 411 2040 Population: 1,040 2040 Household: 440 2040 Employment: 3,160 TAZ: 412 2040 Population: 590 2040 Household: 210 2040 Employment: 930 TAZ: 413 2040 Population: 1,270 2040 Household: 540 2040 Employment: 720 TAZ: 402 2040 Population: 650 2040 Household: 320 2040 Employment: 380 TAZ: 396 2040 Population: 380 2040 Household: 200 2040 Employment: 360 TAZ: 414 2040 Population: 1,640 2040 Household: 700 2040 Employment: 90 TAZ: 410 2040 Population: 0 2040 Household: 0 2040 Employment: 5,900 TAZ: 397 2040 Population: 1,370 2040 Household: 560 2040 Employment: 480 TAZ: 403 2040 Population: 780 2040 Household: 380 2040 Employment: 80 TAZ: 407 2040 Population: 680 2040 Household: 280 2040 Employment: 580 TAZ: 399 2040 Population: 810 2040 Household: 330 2040 Employment: 60 TAZ: 398 2040 Population: 320 2040 Household: 130 2040 Employment: 150 TAZ: 406 2040 Population: 200 2040 Household: 80 2040 Employment: 0 TAZ: 405 2040 Population: 470 2040 Household: 180 2040 Employment: 20 TAZ: 404 2040 Population: 800 2040 Household: 380 2040 Employment: 100 TAZ: 408 2040 Population: 370 2040 Household: 140 2040 Employment: 50 Traffic Analysis Zones Map with Metropolitan Council Projected 2040 Population and Employmentµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Source: Metropolitan Council, 2016 City of Mendota Heights June 2019 FIGURE 3-1 Map 3-1. Traffic Analysis Zones Map with Metropolitan Council Projected 2040 Population and Employment Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 6 Functional Classification System Mendota Heights’ street system consists of Principal Arterials, “A” Minor Arterials, “B” Minor Arterials, and community collectors, and a series of local streets. Map 3-2. Transportation Systems illustrates the classification of the roads within the City of Mendota Heights and identifies the number of lanes for all functionally classified roadways. There are no known planned expansions of the City’s functionally classified roadways. •Principal Arterials Interstates 494 and 35E, State Trunk Highway (TH) 55, and the western part of Highway 62 (formerly Highway 110) – from 35E to TH 55 – are all designated Principal Arterials. Interstate 494 forms the southern boundary of the city, while Interstate 35E bisects the city from east to west. Highway 62 bisects the community from north to south, with Highway 55 further dividing the southwestern part of Mendota Heights. •Arterial Roadways “A” Minor Arterials are further classified as minor augmenters, minor relievers, and minor expander roads. The definitions of these classes are outlined in the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Transportation Policy Plan. The major function of an arterial road is to move traffic from the smaller community collector roads to principal arterials as efficiently as possible. The “A” Minor Arterials within the City of Mendota Heights are Highway 62, (35E to Delaware Avenue), Dodd Road (Highway 149), Highway 13 (Highway 55 to Interstate 494), and Pilot Knob Road or County Road 31 (Interstate 494 to Highway 13). Wentworth Ave West (Dodd Road to Delaware Avenue) is the only roadway currently classified as a “B” Arterial Roadway. Arterial roadways, except county roads, are maintained by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). Traffic on both principal and arterial roadways within the city limits has increased steadily over the last ten years. •Community Collectors Community collector streets are broken down by major collectors and minor collectors. The City of Mendota Heights does not have any minor collectors. Delaware Avenue functions as a major collector on the city’s eastern border. It is otherwise known as County Road 63. Other roads within Mendota Heights that are designated as Collector Streets are: Lexington Avenue or County Road 43, Mendota Heights Road, Marie Avenue, Sibley Memorial Highway, and Highway 13 (Highway 55 to Sibley Memorial Highway). County Roads 8 (Wentworth Avenue and Wachtler Avenue), 63 Delaware Avenue), 43 (Lexington Avenue) and 31 (Pilot Knob Road) are all maintained by Dakota County. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 7 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD5,6006,0009701,0403,2003,4304,6004,9306,0006,4305,4005,7903,6503,9102,6003,900101,000108,000 1,7501,880 3,4003,650 105,000113,000 28,50037,500 9501,0201,1001,180 1, 5 5 0 1, 6 6 0 8,40010,5007,80010,5004,3004,6006907401,0501,130 33,50035,700 77083079,00084,7007,0007,5103,4003,6502,3502,5206,6007,080 96,000103,000 3,3503,590 26,00027,900 25 , 5 0 0 26 , 7 0 0 9,2009,650 5,0005,36014,20015,2005,2005,5802,2002,3601,0501,130 29,50031,600 56, 0 0 0 60, 0 0 0 5,2005,580455490 4,0004,2902,2502,4201,1501,230 1,6001,720 3,1003,3206,6007,08086,00092,2009 3 , 0 0 0 9 9 , 7 0 0 3,3005,000 2,6002,790 9,90011,4007,4007,9402,6002,790 3,5505,5005,8006,2209,3009,9706,3006,7603,5503,810DELAWARE AVE13,4009,500DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DRSIBLEYMEMORIAL NORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Transportation Systems Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2-Lane Roadway 4-Lane Roadway 6-Lane Roadway Principal Arterial A Minor Augmentor A Minor Reliever A Minor Expander B Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local Road Railroad City of Mendota Heights City of Mendota Heights = 2016 Traffic Volumes (AADT)#,### = Projected 2040 Traffic Volumes (AADT)#,### = Projected 2040 Traffic Volumes (AADT) without Delaware Avenue Interchange #,### Source: MNDOT, 2016; Stantec June 2019 FIGURE 3-2 Created: June 2019, Source: MnDOT, 2016 & Stantec Map 3-2. Transportation Systems MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD5,6006,0009701,0403,2003,4304,6004,9306,0006,4305,4005,7903,6503,9102,6003,900101,000108,000 1,7501,880 3,4003,650 105,000113,000 28,50037,500 9501,0201,1001,180 1, 5 5 0 1, 6 6 0 8,40010,5007,80010,5004,3004,6006907401,0501,130 33,50035,700 77083079,00084,7007,0007,5103,4003,6502,3502,5206,6007,080 96,000103,000 3,3503,590 26,00027,900 25 , 5 0 0 26 , 7 0 0 9,2009,650 5,0005,36014,20015,2005,2005,5802,2002,3601,0501,130 29,50031,600 56, 0 0 0 60, 0 0 0 5,2005,580455490 4,0004,2902,2502,4201,1501,230 1,6001,720 3,1003,3206,6007,08086,00092,2009 3 , 0 0 0 9 9 , 7 0 0 3,3005,000 2,6002,790 9,90011,4007,4007,9402,6002,790 3,5505,5005,8006,2209,3009,9706,3006,7603,5503,810DELAWARE AVE13,4009,500DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D RSIBLEYMEMORIAL NORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Transportation Systems Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2-Lane Roadway 4-Lane Roadway 6-Lane Roadway Principal Arterial A Minor Augmentor A Minor Reliever A Minor Expander B Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local Road Railroad City of Mendota Heights City of Mendota Heights = 2016 Traffic Volumes (AADT)#,### = Projected 2040 Traffic Volumes (AADT)#,### = Projected 2040 Traffic Volumes (AADT) without Delaware Avenue Interchange #,### Source: MNDOT, 2016; Stantec June 2019 FIGURE 3-2 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD5,6006,0009701,0403,2003,4304,6004,9306,0006,4305,4005,7903,6503,9102,6003,900101,000108,000 1,7501,880 3,4003,650 105,000113,000 28,50037,500 9501,0201,1001,180 1, 5 5 0 1, 6 6 0 8,40010,5007,80010,5004,3004,6006907401,0501,130 33,50035,700 77083079,00084,7007,0007,5103,4003,6502,3502,5206,6007,080 96,000103,000 3,3503,590 26,00027,900 25 , 5 0 0 26 , 7 0 0 9,2009,650 5,0005,36014,20015,2005,2005,5802,2002,3601,0501,130 29,50031,600 56, 0 0 0 60, 0 0 0 5,2005,580455490 4,0004,2902,2502,4201,1501,230 1,6001,720 3,1003,3206,6007,08086,00092,2009 3 , 0 0 0 9 9 , 7 0 0 3,3005,000 2,6002,790 9,90011,4007,4007,9402,6002,790 3,5505,5005,8006,2209,3009,9706,3006,7603,5503,810DELAWARE AVE13,4009,500DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D RSIBLEYMEMORIAL NORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Transportation Systems Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2-Lane Roadway 4-Lane Roadway 6-Lane Roadway Principal Arterial A Minor Augmentor A Minor Reliever A Minor Expander B Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local Road Railroad City of Mendota Heights City of Mendota Heights = 2016 Traffic Volumes (AADT) #,### = Projected 2040 Traffic Volumes (AADT) #,### = Projected 2040 Traffic Volumes (AADT) without Delaware Avenue Interchange #,### Source: MNDOT, 2016; Stantec June 2019 FIGURE 3-2 Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 8 Traffic Volumes Map 3-2. Transportation Systems illustrates the current daily traffic counts, the forecasted 2040 traffic volumes, both in average annual daily trips (AADT), and the existing number of lanes for each roadway. There are no planned or proposed lane expansions of functionally classified roadways as part of this plan. Transportation Issues Mendota Heights commissioned a North-South Mobility Traffic Study to compile data from existing traffic studies into one complete study for the city to use in identifying needed improvements. While the city continues to study various roadway intersections, at this time there are no known or identified road rights-of-way identified within this Plan. New right-of- way needed to serve a development or redevelopment will be required to be dedicated at time of platting consistent with the city’s ordinances. Previous Studies The need for this study was prompted in response to multiple major growth plans surrounding the study area. Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion and the Minnesota Vikings Headquarters and Mixed-Use Development Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review (AUAR) planning documents identified traffic and impacts for each development respectively, but neither document examined the combined impact of both developments. The intersections for each study were also primarily south of I-494 along Dodd Road and Argenta Trail and did not fully consider the impacts of traffic traveling to the north of the study areas into the City of Mendota Heights. In addition to the two AUARs, this study also incorporated two other Mendota Heights’ expected future developments. These impact studies and other past studies that were used to provide a basis for this project included: •Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion AUAR (Sept 2007) •Regional Roadway System Visioning Study (Aug 2010) •Vikings Headquarters & Mixed-Use Development AUAR (April 2016) •Mendota Plaza Expansion Traffic Impact Study (Aug 2016) Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 9 •Dodd Road Trail Feasibility Study (Nov 2017) •Linden Street Senior Housing Traffic Impact Study (Dec 2017) •Viking Lakes Event Travel Demand Management Plan (Jan 2018) Study Intersections Key intersections in the study area were identified by Mendota Heights’ staff that could be impacted by future development. These intersections included the following list on each study corridor: •Dodd Road at: -I-494 South Ramps -I-494 North Ramps -Mendota Heights Road -Lake Drive -Wagon Wheel Trail/Decorah Lane -South Plaza Drive -Highway 62 (formerly Highway 110) -Market Street -Maple Street -Marie Avenue -Wentworth Avenue •Delaware Avenue at: -O’Neill Drive -Mendota Heights Road -Huber Drive / Charlton Road -Highway 62 •Mendota Heights Road and Lake Drive •Lake Drive and Swan Drive Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 10 Existing Traffic Operations Existing traffic operations were analyzed to identify intersection delay and level of service (LOS) based on Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) guidance. LOS grade values correspond to specific traffic characteristics within a given system. At intersections, LOS is a function of average vehicle delay. For two-way stop controlled intersections, minor approach delay is reported in addition to intersection LOS results. LOS “E” or worse, according to MnDOT standards, is considered deficient under normal traffic operations. Results of the existing traffic operations analysis identified several intersections and operational deficiencies in the study area. Noteworthy deficiencies include: •Dodd Road at Highway 62 has unacceptable operations in the AM peak hour and approaching capacity in the PM peak hour. The queues in the AM peak hour spill back to cause unacceptable conditions and block movements at Market Street. •Delaware Avenue at Highway 62 is approaching capacity. Existing Traffic Control Warrant analysis results showed that signal warrants were met for all existing signalized intersections. For the un-signalized intersections that were analyzed, existing all-way stop intersections at Marie Avenue and Wentworth Avenue met Multi-Way Stop Application (MWSA) and 70% signal warrants for four hour and peak hour conditions. The remaining two way stop control intersections did not meet signal or MWSA warrants under their current volume conditions. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 11 FUTURE CONDITIONS Traffic projections were developed for 2040 to evaluate operating conditions under both existing and proposed roadway infrastructure. Multiple 2040 traffic scenarios were developed to determine the impact from major developments that are under construction or planned in the area. 2040 Base Scenario •Based on traffic projections from 2030 Dakota County Comprehensive Plan extrapolated to 2040. •Includes planned Mendota Plaza development near Dodd Road and Highway 62. •Does not include the new Viking Lakes development (Minnesota Vikings practice facility and adjacent development) or the planned Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion. 2040 Build Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review (AUAR) - No Interchange Scenario •Includes 2040 base scenario traffic growth assumptions as well as traffic generated by the Viking Lakes site and Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion. Trip generation for the Viking Lakes and Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion sites are based on information in the respective AUAR documents for each site. •Does not assume a future Argenta Trail/I-494 Interchange. •Assumes the most densely developed Viking Lakes scenario that was considered in the AUAR. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 12 Viking Lakes Development Details The Viking Lakes development is in the southeast quadrant of the I-494 and Dodd Road interchange. The site will include the new Minnesota Vikings practice facility and associated office space, other offices not affiliated with the Vikings, hotels, retail, and apartments. During typical operating conditions (i.e., no major events occurring at the Vikings facilities), the following traffic volumes are expected to be added to the surrounding roadway network compared to existing conditions: •40,000 daily trips •3,100 AM peak hour trips (74 percent entering/26 percent exiting) •3,800 PM peak hour trips (35 percent entering/65 percent exiting) Viking Lakes Event Traffic As part of a separate study, a Travel Demand Management Plan was developed for the Viking Lakes site to best accommodate traffic during atypical event conditions such as Vikings training camp, high school athletic events, concerts, etc. This event plan looked at events between 500 and 7,200 attendees for existing events and up to 21,000 attendees for future events. However, vehicle traffic to and from the event site will be much lower due to transit/walk/bike and vehicle occupancy which decreases the maximum vehicles to 2,495 for existing events and 7,280 for future expanded capacity events. Many events will occur during off-peak time periods, during weekends, midday, or evening, where total volume splits using Dodd Road or Delaware Avenue are expected to be less than peak volumes. Therefore, the North-South Mobility Study will only evaluate typical operating conditions in the area. Results from the ongoing Travel Demand Management Plan will be considered in recommendations made in the North-South Mobility Study to ensure consistency between analyses and recommendations across studies. Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion Development Details The planned development covers a 3,140-acre area in Inver Grove Heights that is generally bound by I-494, Argenta Trail, TH 55, and Babcock Trail. Land uses include low, medium, and high density residential, commercial, office/industrial, public/institutional, and open space. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 13 The development is expected to add the following traffic volumes to the surrounding roadway network: •102,200 daily trips •5,300 AM peak hour trips (49 percent entering/51 percent exiting) •8,400 PM peak hour trips (47 percent entering/53 percent exiting) Traffic Forecasts Traffic projections for both 2040 Base Scenario and 2040 Build Scenario conditions were developed based on trip generation assumptions that are described above. This included the development of 2040 daily traffic projections as well as AM and PM peak hour turning movement projections. Origins and destinations of site generated trips were assumed after a review of prevailing traffic patterns and previous documentation. Adjustments were made based on existing regional travel patterns which differed slightly from the Viking Lakes AUAR. It is expected that six percent of Vikings Lakes development traffic will use Dodd Road and nine percent will use Delaware Avenue between I-494 and Highway 62. Six percent of Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion development traffic will use Delaware Avenue to the north of I-494. Future Traffic Operations Increased traffic volumes through 2040 are expected to trigger many operational deficiencies throughout the study area, especially in the 2040 Build Scenario with added traffic from the Viking Lakes and Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion developments. The 2040 Build Scenario is expected to trigger LOS F at all Dodd Road study intersections north of Wagon Wheel Trail and at all Delaware Avenue/Argenta Trail study intersections, except at Huber Drive. Daily trips on Dodd and Delaware are projected to increase to levels creating unacceptable conditions at various city intersections. Although some solutions lie within the city itself, rising levels of “pass through” traffic from development to the south of the city need to be addressed. This must be accomplished through a regional traffic plan that involves Mendota Heights, Inver Grove Heights, Eagan, MnDOT and Dakota County. This should be a formal process with clear goals and objectives. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 14 Future Traffic Control Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) warrants were evaluated with projected 2040 volumes to identify potential traffic control revisions throughout the study area. Intersections that were identified as being deficient in existing or 2040 conditions were analyzed under several options to provide improvements to the intersection. Several options per intersection were identified as possible improvements, with a recommended option being identified for each intersection. To maintain a complete corridor vision, intersections were grouped together based on their existing control and location. High level cost estimates were included for comparison purposes only. They represent high-level estimates and do not include right-of-way costs. MN Highway 62 Intersections The MN HWY 62 intersections with Dodd Road and Delaware Avenue are both high traffic volume intersections. With 37,500 daily entering vehicles at Dodd Road and 35,000 daily entering vehicles at Delaware Avenue, both intersections are approaching the capacity of their existing four-lane highway footprint. With 2040 volumes identifying growth up to 50,000 daily entering vehicles for both intersections, an alternative corridor design or interchange will likely be necessary in the future. Market, Maple, and South Plaza Drive The four intersections adjacent to the Highway 62 and Dodd Road intersection were identified as having deficient 2040 intersection operations. Dakota County recommends at least 1/4 mile spacing for signals along a major arterial roadway precluding a signal at either Market Street or North Plaza Drive. The queuing from Highway 62 would also impact closely spaced signals. If all four access locations were unchanged, signal warrants for the four intersections are expected to not be met. However, if access is reduced at Market Street and N Plaza Drive, the resulting traffic shifts would warrant signals at Hilltop Road/Maple Street and South Plaza Drive. The results of the analysis showed that when queuing was minimized at Dodd Road and Highway 62 that operations were generally acceptable at South Plaza Drive, Market Street, and Maple Street. By reconfiguring to a reduced access design, delays at the study intersections were decreased from unacceptable to acceptable conditions. Although right-in right-out access at N Plaza Drive was modeled and preferred, the option of keeping southbound access into Mendota Plaza should be considered in the future. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 15 Marie and Wentworth Dodd Road intersections with Marie Avenue and Wentworth Avenue are both slightly skewed all-way stop controlled intersections. With volumes on Marie and Wentworth expected to increase from 3,000-4,000 existing to 5,000-6,000 in 2040 cross street traffic will drive the need for an alternative intersection that will benefit both safety and operations. Wagon Wheel Trail and Decorah Lane With MnDOT’s 2018 TH 149 reconstruction project, Wagon Wheel Trail and Decorah Lane will be reconstructed into a three-lane segment with a pedestrian crossing median between the intersections. This improvement is a near-term solution to increase both vehicle and pedestrian safety at the intersection. However, as volumes increase on Dodd Road this intersection will have future unacceptable operations and long-term alternatives will need to be considered. Delaware Avenue Delaware Avenue is expected to see the highest percentage increase in development traffic in the study area. Volumes are expected to increase from 3,000 daily trips to more than 13,000 daily trips in the full build scenarios. If these volumes are not mitigated, Delaware Avenue will be at capacity with several intersections that have unacceptable conditions. The future Argenta Trail interchange in the adjacent City of Inver Grove Heights, is expected to be installed at or near a location 1,500 feet east of the existing overpass on I-494. This new intersection location is the preferred option; the City of Mendota Heights supports the location and building of this intersection. It is expected that 90 percent of development traffic using Delaware Avenue will be shifted to using the Argenta Interchange restoring the acceptable operations of the corridor in the 2040 Base Conditions. If the interchange is not built, long-term alternatives and options will need to be explored and considered by the city and affected jurisdictions. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 16 Multimodal Considerations Although this study was focused on identifying vehicular traffic due to regional development, bike and pedestrian facilities are an important consideration for the final corridor vision. In depth pedestrian and bike facilities were not analyzed as part of the current study (as a previous trail study was finished in Nov 2017). Many of the alternative recommendations will coincide with multimodal improvements and will be analyzed in depth during preliminary design of the concepts. The Dodd Road Trail Feasibility Study (Nov 2017) identified Dodd Road as a major N-S regional trail facility. The existing facilities are mostly on-street trails (wide shoulders) however north and south of Highway 62 there are existing sections of off-street trails. A pedestrian/bike tunnel was just recently constructed under Highway 62 connecting these two segments. Trail crossings were also proposed at Wagon Wheel Trail / Decorah Lane as part of the TH 149 resurfacing project in addition to existing crossings at Mendota Heights Road, South Plaza Drive, and Marie Avenue. The recommendations of the study were to build several additional sections of off-street trail segments along Dodd Road with public support as construction would require property owners to sell property or easements for the trail segments. Due to the limited right-of-way along Delaware Avenue, pedestrian accommodations in the study area between I-494 and Highway 62 would be constrained by roadway grade profiles and right-of-way needed from property owners. Existing off-street trails on Huber Drive and Mendota Heights Road allow connections from Delaware Avenue to the west and serve as alternative multimodal routes to the narrow corridor. Highway 62 Pedestrian Underpass Tunnel Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 17 Access Management Access management is the planning, design, and implementation of land use and transportation strategies that maintain a safe flow of traffic while accommodating the access needs of adjacent development. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has set up access management guidelines which provide numerous benefits such as, reduce congestion and crashes, preserve road capacity and postpone the need for roadway widening, improve travel times for the delivery of goods and services, ease movement between destinations, and support local economic development. To provide safe and convenient travel within the city, access management guidelines will be applied when making development decisions. MnDOT access management guidelines will be incorporated into this Comprehensive Plan update. 1.Think land use AND transportation. Before approving a subdivision or rezoning, consider what road design and improvements will be needed to support the develop- ment and link it to the surrounding area. 2. Identify and plan for growth areas. Incremental and uncoordinated development will not lead to a livable community or a healthy business climate. Support eco- nomic growth by planning and investing in a local road network to support development. 3. Develop a complete hierarchy of roads. A viable community requires a variety of roadways organized as an integrated system. Highways and arterials are needed for longer, higher speed trips. Local streets and collectors provide access to homes and businesses. Recognize that different roads serve different purposes. 4. Link access regulations to roadway function. Access requirements in zoning and subdivision regulations should fit each roadway’s functional classification. Recognize that the greatest access control is needed for those roads in- tended to serve longer, higher speed trips. 5. Avoid strip development. Promote commercial nodes. Commercial development can be located adjacent to and visible from the highway, but should be accessed via a system of parallel lo- cal roads and side streets that complement the state highway system. 6. Connect local streets between subdivisions. Give residents convenient options for travel from one neighbor- hood to another by connecting local streets from one subdivision to the next. 7. Design subdivisions with access onto local streets. Avoid lot designs with driveways that enter onto major state or county highways. Orient business and residential driveways to local streets that feed onto the highway at a few carefully de- signed and spaced intersections. 8. Practice good site planning principles. Locate entrances away from intersection corners and turn lanes. Provide adequate space on the site for trucks to maneuver and for vehicles to queue at drive-through windows without backing or stacking on the roadway. Adjacent businesses should provide shared driveways and cross access, so customers can make multiple stops without entering the arterial. 9. Correct existing problems as opportunities arise. Adopt a long range vision for improving access along older, de- veloped corridors. Correct unsafe accesses as individual parcels expand or redevelop. Work with affected property owners to con- solidate driveways and provide internal access between parcels. Fill in the supporting roadway network with local access roads as part of the redevelopment process. 10. Coordinate local development plans with Mn/DOT and coun- ty road agencies. Share plans for subdivisions, rezonings, and site plans with af- fected road authorities early in the development process. Con- tact Mn/DOT and the County Highway Department to talk about long range plans and development needs. MnDOT Access Management Guidelines Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 18 Bicycles and Pedestrians Mendota Heights installed its backbone trail system in 1989 as part of an approved referendum. The backbone trail system connects residents to amenities throughout the city. In addition to city trails, Dakota County provides regional trail connections identified as greenways. Dakota County Trails are noted as follows: Big Rivers Regional Trail Located along the northern edge of Dakota County from Eagan to Lilydale, the Big Rivers Regional Trail is a scenic 4 1/2-mile paved trail that overlooks the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. The trail also links to the 72-mile Mississippi National River and Recreation Area, hundreds of miles of trails throughout the greater Twin Cities area and historic landmarks including Fort Snelling, Pike Island and, one of Minnesota’s oldest settlements, the City of Mendota. The Big Rivers Trailhead provides access to a nearly flat paved trail built on an abandoned railroad bed. Highway 55 in Mendota Heights, Interstate 494 in Eagan, and Interstate 35E in Mendota Heights are additional access points to the Big Rivers Regional Trail. Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway The Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway is proposed to travel 8.5 miles through Mendota Heights, Inver Grove Heights, and Eagan. Today, the landscape is largely suburban. Remaining agricultural areas, primarily in Inver Grove Heights’ Northwest Area, are expected to develop over the next 20-30 years. This will allow for future development patterns in this area to be organized around and shaped by the greenway’s natural, cultural, and recreational amenities. An underpass crossing of Highway 62 was opened in 2017. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 19 River to River Greenway The “River to River Greenway” connects Lilydale, Mendota Heights, West St. Paul and South St. Paul. The trail is in place between Robert Street and the Mississippi River in South St. Paul. Future construction projects will link Valley Park in Mendota Heights to the area near Dodge Nature Center in West St. Paul. These and all other trail systems throughout the community are further described and illustrated on Map 4-2. Bicycle Facilities and Plan, contained in the following Chapter 4: Parks & Open Space. TRANSIT PLAN Public Transit Service Mendota Heights is within Market Area III and IV of the Transit Market Area classifications. Map 3-3. Existing Transit System identifies the existing transit system options located in the City. Market Area III emphasizes commuter express bus service with suburban local routes providing basic coverage. General public dial-a-ride services supplement where regular-route service is not available. Regularly scheduled transit route service is provided by the Metropolitan Council Transit Operations (MCTO). There are six (6) transit routes that operate within the City of Mendota Heights. These bus routes provide service to downtown Minneapolis, St. Paul, the University of Minnesota, the Mall of America, as well as other suburban areas, including Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, and West St. Paul. Several express routes, as well as local limited routes, are available for use by community residents. The city does not have designated Park and Ride facilities or MnPASS lanes. The city will support park and ride facilities if demand is met or requested by the residents and/or local businesses. Metro Mobility, which serves people who need specially-equipped vehicles for transportation, is offered throughout the Twin Cities and within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 20 Transportation services for seniors and persons with disabilities is provided by Dakota Areas Resources and Transportation for Seniors. DARTS Loop Transportation services are provided in the neighboring communities of West St. Paul and South St. Paul, which offers transit options for residents tailored to the community preferences, with affordable all-you-can ride fares, and allows riders to get on and off any stops along a continuous one-hour LOOP route. The City of Mendota Heights should explore or seek reliable transit and transportation alternatives for its residents, especially as the community’s population ages. MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD417 417 415446 436 436 446 415 470470446 452 452 480 484 489 446 75 417 436 446 446 417 446 417 DELAWARE AVEDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRLHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Existing Transit Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Transit Stops Transit Routes Planned Express Bus Corridor City of Mendota Heights Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: Metropolitan Council, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 3-3 Created: June 2019, Source: Metropolitan Council, 2016 Map 3-3. Existing Transit System MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD 417 417 415446 436 436 446 415 470470446 452 452 480 484 489 446 75 417 436 446 446 417 446 417 DELAWARE AVEDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W LEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R LHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Existing Transit Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Transit Stops Transit Routes Planned Express Bus Corridor City of Mendota Heights Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: Metropolitan Council, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 3-3 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD 417 417 415446 436 436 446 415 470470446 452 452 480 484 489 446 75 417 436 446 446 417 446 417 DELAWARE AVEDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W LEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R LHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Existing Transit Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Transit Stops Transit Routes Planned Express Bus Corridor City of Mendota Heights Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: Metropolitan Council, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 3-3 Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 21 Robert Street Corridor Transit Feasibility Study (Prepared for Dakota County Regional Rail Authority by URS Corporation, CR Planning, Connetics Transportation Group, 2008) The Robert Street Corridor in Dakota County extends from Union Depot in St. Paul to Rosemount. The corridor is bound by I-35E on the west and the Mississippi River on the east. Existing and projected conditions such as population and employment growth, changing demographics, limited transit service coverage, increased roadway congestion, and lack of planned roadway improvements drove the need to consider transportation alternatives. Short and medium term recommendations were formulated to correspond with the long term vision for the Robert Street Corridor. Short term recommendations focus on enhancements to the existing bus service and commencing studies of land use and parking policies. Medium term recommendations require additional sources of funding to significantly expand bus services. The long term vision of the Robert Street Corridor is to build a transit way from downtown St. Paul to Rosemount linking major destinations. The proposed Robert Street transit way alignment is east of the City of Mendota Heights. However, the long term vision would directly affect the roadways within city limits. The plan presents a limited stop Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line on Highway 62 and an express bus route on TH 55 which would connect to the existing Light Rail Transit (LRT). The citizens of Mendota Heights would also benefit from additional park and ride facilities within nearby cities. Aviation Plan Mendota Heights benefits from its close proximity to Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) but is also directly affected by aircraft operations. Residents and businesses have easy and quick access to a major international airport. However, aircraft noise is a major issue for some in Mendota Heights because of the detrimental impacts of increased operations on the quality of life in existing neighborhoods and the impact of land use compatibility guidelines and noise contours on development options. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 22 Since the opening of the “North-South” runway, previous issues with the distribution of air traffic have been reduced. All residential areas in Mendota Heights were in conformance with the original aviation guidelines and their previous projections of air noise and air traffic. Mendota Heights was the only city that adopted the original Metropolitan Council noise zones and guidelines and is the only city to adopt and enforce a Noise Attenuation Ordinance. The Runway Use System at MSP relies heavily on “land compatibility” as a guiding principle for departure determination, thereby increasing the volume of traffic and the percentage of exclusive use of the southeast corridor, which was zoned commercial/ industrial in cooperation with regional and local planning agencies. This increased traffic has impacted existing compatible residential neighborhoods in Mendota Heights. The City of Mendota Heights has worked diligently to address airport noise issues. A citizen Airports Relations Commission has been established by Mendota Heights to provide recommendations to the City Council on airport issues. This plan is a compilation of the city’s work and history regarding the airport, a set of policies and actions to guide future decisions on airport, a description of the conflicts with other agencies responsible for airport impacts, and a discussion of the potential land use impacts from agency requirements. In addition to these local efforts, the city has adopted a zoning ordinance consistent with federal requirements for height control jurisdictions. The city refers to and utilizes Map 3-4. MSP Airport Safety Zones, Noise Contours and Airspace Heights Limits when analyzing or approving new developments in these airspace zones. Seaplane Use There are no surface waters designated for seaplane use, or as a seaplane base, by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) in the City of Mendota Heights. Nearby MSP International Airport Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 23 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y DODD RD65 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 60 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 65 D N L i n 2 0 2 5 991'1090'6 0 DN L i n 2 0 2 5 70 D N L i n 2 0 2 5 65 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE 1010'1030'1070'1060'1050'1080'960'950'940'930'920'910'900'950'960'940'930'991'970'920'910'890'890'880'880'870'870'860'900'980'MSP Airport Safety Zones, Noise Contours, and Airspace Height Limits Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2018 Actual DNL Contour 60 DNL 65 DNL 70 DNL 2025 Forecasted DNL Contours DNL 60 DNL DNL 65 DNL DNL 70 DNL Airspace Zone Limit AirSpace Contours MSP Safety Zone B MSP Safety Zone C DNL: The day-night sound level, or 24-hr. equivalent continuous sound level (time averaged A-weighted sound level) from 12:00 midnight to 12:00 midnight, obtained after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels measured from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00) A.M. City of Mendota Heights June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights & MetropolitanAirport Commission FIGURE 3-4 Created: June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights & Metropolitan Airport Commission Map 3-4. MSP Airport Safety Zones, Noise Contours, and Airspace Height Limits MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y DODD RD 65 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 60 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 65 D N L i n 2 0 2 5 991'1090'6 0 DN L i n 2 0 2 5 70 D N L i n 2 0 2 5 65 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE 1010'1030'1070'1060'1050'1080'960'950'940'930'920'910'900'950'960'940'930'991'970'920'910'890'890'880'880'870'870'860'900'980'MSP Airport Safety Zones, Noise Contours, and Airspace Height Limits Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2018 Actual DNL Contour 60 DNL 65 DNL 70 DNL 2025 Forecasted DNL Contours DNL 60 DNL DNL 65 DNL DNL 70 DNL Airspace Zone Limit AirSpace Contours MSP Safety Zone B MSP Safety Zone C DNL: The day-night sound level, or 24-hr. equivalent continuous sound level (time averaged A-weighted sound level) from 12:00 midnight to 12:00 midnight, obtained after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels measured from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00) A.M. City of Mendota Heights June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights & MetropolitanAirport Commission FIGURE 3-4 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y DODD RD 65 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 60 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 65 D N L i n 2 0 2 5 991'1090'6 0 DN L i n 2 0 2 5 70 D N L i n 2 0 2 5 65 D N L i n 2 0 1 8 DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE 1010'1030'1070'1060'1050'1080'960'950'940'930'920'910'900'950'960'940'930'991'970'920'910'890'890'880'880'870'870'860'900'980'MSP Airport Safety Zones, Noise Contours, and Airspace Height Limits Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2018 Actual DNL Contour 60 DNL 65 DNL 70 DNL 2025 Forecasted DNL Contours DNL 60 DNL DNL 65 DNL DNL 70 DNL Airspace Zone Limit AirSpace Contours MSP Safety Zone B MSP Safety Zone C DNL: The day-night sound level, or 24-hr. equivalent continuous sound level (time averaged A-weighted sound level) from 12:00 midnight to 12:00 midnight, obtained after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels measured from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00) A.M. City of Mendota Heights June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights & MetropolitanAirport Commission FIGURE 3-4 Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 24 AVIATION-RELATED GOALS & POLICIES GOAL 3: Reduce negative airport impacts in Mendota Heights; and work diligently with all noise issues and agencies to decrease aircraft noise in volume and to decrease the area of noise impacts. Aircraft Noise Policies 1.Increase public participation and representation through the Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). 2.Achieve noise reduction through advocating modified takeoff procedures and corridor compliance. 3.Monitor the continued implementation of the Minneapolis/ St. Paul (MSP) airport Comprehensive Plan. 4.Advocate for specific noise control measures through operational changes and advanced technology. 5.Notify and work with MAC in the event that potential airspace obstructions are encountered. 6.Advocate for an equitable distribution of aircraft traffic and a more equitable runway use system. History of Noise Reduction Efforts The City of Mendota Heights has addressed aircraft noise issues in several ways, including the following formal actions: 1.Membership in the NOC. 2.Modification of the Land Use Plan consistent with the established aircraft flight corridor. 3.Adoption of the Aircraft Noise Attenuation Ordinance. 4.Establishment of the citizen Airports Relations Commission (ARC) to study airport issues and make recommendations to the City Council. 5.Agreement to a contract with MAC prohibiting construction of a third parallel runway. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 25 The city has worked through the various agencies on issues including: modification of aircraft landings and departures, supporting the installation of Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS), supporting the prohibition of Stage II aircraft, and educating homeowners about the Part 150 program. The City of Mendota Heights planned its land use according to the flight corridor, as originally established, and adopted land use guidelines into an ordinance format in 1987. Operations have strayed to existing residential areas outside of the planned corridor however, significantly impacting several neighborhoods. Impacts of Future Land Use Planning Mendota Heights has planned its land uses in relation to the city’s experience with aircraft noise and the airport’s aviation guidelines. New development and redevelopment in the areas affected by air noise is closely scrutinized and has been accomplished with success through strict adherence to site planning and building design regulations. The City of Mendota Heights has adopted the Metropolitan Council’s model Sound Attenuation Ordinance and has enforced the provisions of this ordinance for all building permits in the Noise Zones since 1986. Town home projects are considered to be consistent with the Aviation Policy compatibility guidelines for Noise Zone 4, which allows residential land uses, as a conditional use. The conditional use for residential land use in Noise Zone 4 is satisfied through the enforcement of the city’s Sound Attenuation Ordinance, thereby, allowing residential construction to meet the Aviation Guide Plan’s land use compatibility guidelines. Freight Plan Freight is an important aspect in supporting a community by providing residents and business with the goods and materials they need. The Twin Cities area is a primary freight hub for the upper Midwest region. Roadways, railroads, barges, and air are the four modes of freight transportation within the Twin Cities Metro area. Mendota Heights does not have any Air/Truck, Barge/Truck, or Rail/Truck freight terminals. See Map 3-5. Metropolitan Freight Systems. Truck freight primarily impacts the city with two US Interstates located within the city limits. I-494 and -35E both carry large amounts of commercial commerce to and from the downtown Minneapolis/St. Paul area (see Map 3-6. Heavy Commercial Volumes (HCAADT). No local roadways have been identified as creating significant issues for the movement of goods within the City of Mendota Heights. See Map 3-7. Twin Cities Freight Railroads. Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 26 Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Transportation 3-23 Freight PlanFreight is an important aspect in supporting a community by providing residentsand business with the goods and materials they need.The Twin Cities area is aprimaryfreight hub for the upper Midwest region. Roadways, railroads, barges,and air are the four modes of freight transportation within the Twin Cities Metroarea. Mendota Heights does not have any Air/Truck, Barge/Truck, or Rail/Truck freight terminals.See Figure 3-5 below.Figure 3-5 Metropolitan Freight Systems Map 3-5. Metropolitan Freight Systems Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 27 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDELAWARE AVELEXINGTON AVEDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RD LILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DRSIBLEYMEMORIAL NORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE 240200260700 1000 6000 12585 7801652501701451150 20005602808 1 0 33 0 0 960 435055031010870 1 8 5 0 35 µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2016 HCAADT Map 3-6. Heavy Commercial Volumes MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDELAWARE AVELEXINGTON AVEDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R D LILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D RSIBLEYMEMORIAL NORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE 240200260700 1000 6000 12585 7801652501701451150 20005602808 1 0 33 0 0 960 435055031010870 1 8 5 0 35 µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 2016 HCAADT Chapter 3 - Transportation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 28 Map 3-7. Twin Cities Freight Railroads CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 4: Parks & Trails This page is intentionally blank. 3 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 4 PARKS AND TRAILS The City of Mendota Heights has a robust system of recreational and open space opportunities in the community, including regional trails, riverside and lakeside parks, scenic bluffs and a nature preserves. These facilities represent unique features in a park system that helps to shape the character of Mendota Heights beyond the ordinary. They offer a visual identity to the city, in addition to contributing to the quality of life for those who live and recreate in the community. Mendota Heights has over 771 acres of parks and open space, which includes city parks, both active and passive recreation areas, along with other state and private parks and open spaces. The 33 miles of city trails and bicycle facilities located adjacent to roadways or meandering through the bounty of open space in the community offer an excellent opportunity for exercise and relaxation. Opportunities for walking, bicycling, bird watching, cross country skiing, golfing and nature hiking are sprinkled throughout the community. The city’s parks are supplemented by three golf courses: Mendakota Golf Course, Somerset Golf Course, and the Mendota Heights Par 3 golf course that contribute to open space views and recreational opportunities for residents. 4 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS and POLICIES GOAL 1: Provide a park system that is safe, accessible, and equitable in its offerings to all of Mendota Heights’ residents, stakeholders and visitors. Policies 1.Create and maintain a park system that provides the optimum amount of active and passive open space for the enjoyment of all Mendota Heights residents. 2.Provide facilities and programs that allow people of varying ages and abilities to participate. 3.Build, maintain and retrofit park facilities and equipment to be safe for all users. 4.Plan and build safe connections for pedestrians and bicyclists within and between park facilities and major destinations in the community. 5.Strive to make all facilities and programs open and welcoming to people of all ages and diverse backgrounds. GOAL 2: Provide a park system that assures high quality facilities, buildings, grounds, trails, amenities, and natural settings. Policies 1.Keep the park system up-to-date in terms of facilities, activities and programs that are responsive to the community’s desires and needs. 2.Support the park system adequately through the facilities, activities and programs offered. 3.Provide bicycle amenities in parks and along trails. 4.Provide a sustainable funding stream and operate the park system in a fiscally sound manner, including taking advantage of available grants. 5 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Goal 3: Use the park system as a means to enhance and sustain the environment of each neighborhood and the city as a whole. Policies 1.Provide facilities, programs and opportunities in the park system that bring people together and create community. 2.Ensure that stormwater is managed in park facilities in a manner that protects and preserves water quality and the ecology of the watershed. 3.Strive to make all park facilities, equipment and construction projects and materials environmentally friendly and sustainable. Goal 4: Cooperate with Dakota County and surrounding communities in park and recreation facilities and programming. Policies 1.Support the Dakota County 2030 Greenway Corridors Plan and Vision. 2.Continue to cooperate with South St. Paul, West. St. Paul and other neighboring communities on park and recreation programs and facilities. 3.Encourage the preservation of open space by private property owners and the city. 4.Explore new opportunities and continue to work cooperatively with School District #197, St. Thomas, Visitation, Fort Snelling State Park, and other entities to provide maximum recreational opportunities and avoid duplication in programming and facilities. 5.Improve and expand safe bicycle and pedestrian connections to city parks and other community destinations. 6 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Previous Development Previous Comprehensive Plans and Park Plans have guided the city in the development of its park system. As development has occurred, parkland has been dedicated to provide residents with recreational opportunities. Since the adoption of the 1979 Comprehensive Plan, the city has made improvements to many parks and has developed the following new parks: Copperfield Ponds, Hagstrom-King, Kensington, Mendakota, Sibley, Valley View Heights, and Victoria Highlands. The location of these new parks closely resembles Plan recommendations and reflects the city’s commitment to providing park services to all residents as opportunities arise. Not only has the city made improvements and developed new parks, it has also made efforts to maintain and protect existing open space such as purchasing the 17-acre Mendota Heights Par 3 Golf Course. The city also joined with other public entities and purchased the 25.5-acre Pilot Knob area, which will be retained as open space. Protection of the Pilot Knob area as an important Dakota site has been identified as a critical issue for many residents in the city. O ȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2017. Existing City Park Facilities and Types Mendota Heights currently has 756.7 acres of lands dedicated to city parks, golf courses, and open space. The city also features part of the Fort Snelling State Park within their boundaries, totaling an additional 849 acres. The city has 17 public parks throughout the community, including Historic Pilot Knob. These parks contain over 295 acres of land area. A brief discussion of the three types of parks that typically comprise a local park system is provided below. The descriptions and standards serve as a guide to the city with respect to park typologies and programming. Other factors, such as proximity to regional or county parks, financing, or major trends in recreation, will also influence the evolution of the city’s park system. Regional and State parks are discussed later in this chapter. 7 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 1) Neighborhood Park Neighborhood parks are the foundation of the park system and serve as the recreational and social focus of the neighborhood. They accommodate a wide variety of age and user groups, both children and adults. They create a sense of place by bringing together the unique character of the site and the neighborhood. Mendota Heights should seek to achieve a balance between active and passive neighborhood parks. Neighborhood parks range from 5 to 30 acres and serve a ½-mile area. Communities often will operate a joint neighborhood park with the school district and elementary schools. The city’s neighborhood parks include Friendly Hills, Hagstrom-King, Ivy Hills, Marie, Valley View Heights, Victoria Highland, and Wentworth. 2) Community Park Community parks are designed to meet the recreational needs of several neighborhoods or larger segments of the community. They are intended for ball fields, larger athletic facilities, and community gatherings. They can also be designed to preserve unique landscapes and open spaces. They serve a ½-mile to five mile radius. The city’s community parks include Kensington, Valley, Roger’s Lake, Mendakota, and Sibley Athletic Complex. The city also provides an off-leash dog park only, located off Acacia Blvd., south of the Historic Pilot Knob area. The dog park is on approximately 3 acres of a larger city owned piece of land that is approximately 10.9 acres. The dog park was approved as a temporary dog park under an interim use permit in 2015, and this permit expired in 2020. The city has not yet determined if this dog park 8 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update will continue, or allow the lands to be developed into an industrial use, which is what the site is guided for under this 2040 Plan. 3) Natural Resource Area Natural resource areas are lands set aside to preserve significant or unique landscapes. They are often, but not always, properties with steep slopes, drainage ways, ravines, or wetlands. In addition, there may be locations where local tree protection, shoreland and critical area ordinances, or state and local wetland ordinances restrict development in some way. Natural Resource areas include Friendly Marsh, Copperfield Ponds, Valley Park, Pilot Knob Preservation, and Dodge Nature Center. Table 4-1. Parks and Recreational Facilities on the following page identifies the various parks and open spaces throughout the city, along with their general locations and facilities offered: 9TABLE 4-1 City of Mendota Heights Parks & Facilities TableAcres Nature Areas Trails Softball or Baseball Soccer Tennis Basketball Volleyball Playground Equipment Picnic Area/Shelter Hockey/Skating Rinks Parking Fishing Dock/Piers Restroom Facilities Civic Center (next to City Hall) 4 X X X X Copperfield Ponds (east of Huber Dr. at Cheyenne Ln) 24.9 X P X Friendly Hills Park (South of Decorah Ln. - east of Pueblo Ln.) 15.5 X P X X X X 3 X X X X X Friendly Marsh Park (north of Cheyenne Ln. between Apache & Huber) 33.4 X P X Hagstrom-King Park (555 Mendota Heights Rd) 9.6 X P X X X 3 X X X Historic Pilot Knob (2100 Pilot Knob Rd. - Acacia Blvd. & Pilot Knob) 25.5 X X X Ivy Hills Park (645 Butler Ave. – between Butler & Maple Park Dr.) 9.3 X P X X X X 3 X X X Kensington Park (2627 Concord Way / 640 Mendota Heights Rd.) 14.6 X P X X F X X E X X C Marie Park (1780 Lilac Ln. – NW corner of Lilac & Marie Ave.) 6.2 X P X X X X X X X Mendakota Park (SW Corner of Dodd Road & Mendakota Dr.) 19.7 X X X Y X X X X E X X C Roger's Lake Park (1000 Wagon Wheel Trail- east of I-35E) 9.2 X X X 3 X 4 X X E X X X Sibley Athletic Complex 1 (Henry Sibley High School - Marie & Delaware) 11 X X X F X 2 X X C Market Square Park (The Village of Mendota Heights) 0.5 X X Valley Park (821 Marie Ave – east of I-35E) 94.4 X X X X X 3 X X X X Valley View Heights (SE corner of Cullen Ave. & Timmy St.) 0.7 X X 3 X Victoria Highland Park (1700 Diane Rd.-between Victoria, Douglas & Diane) 6.7 X X X 3 X X X Wentworth Park (739 Wentworth Ave.) 10.5 X P X X X X 3 X X X X X TOTAL 295.7 1. Sibley Athletic Complex is a joint use facility owned and operated by ISD #1973. Half-court only.2. ISD #197 maintains 12 tennis courts at Henry Sibley High School4. Sand volleyball court – all others on grass. E = Electrical service. P = Pond/Natural areas. F = Full size soccer field(s). Y = Youth soccer fields. C = Comfort station – Permanent toilet facility Table 4-1. Parks and Recreational Facilities 10 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Trail Facilities Trails for walking, running, biking, and roller blading are very popular. There are 28.5 miles of off-road trails and 4.9 miles of wide shoulders and on-street bicycle facilities currently in portions of the city’s neighborhoods. These trails are both off- and on-road and serve as important connections for recreational opportunities and travel. Improved trail connections are important in Mendota Heights because many residential areas are divided by highways and arterial roads. Access to the Big Rivers Regional Trail is difficult due to the significant elevation changes. As a result, many areas of the community cannot be easily accessed on bikes, roller blades or foot from other areas of the community. Additional or improved trail connections are needed to provide residents access to city parks and other recreational opportunities in the region. Regional Trails Big Rivers Regional Trail: Developed in 1996 by Dakota County along the old Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way, this trail enables residents to bike, walk, and roller blade along the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. This trail serves as an important link to other communities and has greatly improved the awareness and accessibility of the River. River-to-River Greenway: This trail serves as a link from Big Rivers Regional Trail through Valley Park to West St. Paul and to South St. Paul. Local Trails and On-street Facilities Mendota Heights has a network of paved and on-street bicycle facilities connecting different neighborhoods in the city. Most bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the city are off-street six to eight- foot-wide bituminous trails. There are also a few on-street bicycle facilities in the community, along Dodd Road, Delaware Avenue, and Decorah Lane. City parks and trails, including other natural resource areas, are illustrated on Map 4-1. Parks and Trails. 11 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RDCITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIA RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augus ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake Minnesota R iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. M ENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RIVERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GRE ENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OFWEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLERAVE VICTORIARDMENDOTAHEIGHTS RDMENDOTAHEIGHTS RDDODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI- 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSONAVE LILYDALETRAIL SIBLEYMEMORIALHWYFUTUREBIGRIVERSREGIONALTRAILSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODD RD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park CemetaryLake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaRiverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private) NSP Tank Farm FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire HallPickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2) Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7)Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Proposed Future Trail Connection City Park (See List) Golf Course Cemetary Nature Preserve State Property Water City boundary µ03,0006,000Feet June 2019 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OFWEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLERAVE VICTORIARDMENDOTAHEIGHTS RDMENDOTAHEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSONAVE LILYDALETRAIL SIBLEYMEMORIALHWY FUTUREBIGRIVER SR E GIONALTRAILSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park CemetaryLake Augus ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaRiverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private) NSP Tank Farm FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8)Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Proposed Future Trail Connection City Park (See List) Golf Course Cemetary Nature Preserve State Property Water City boundary µ03,0006,000Feet June 2019 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OFWEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLERAVE VICTORIARDMENDOTAHEIGHTS RDMENDOTAHEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI- 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R IDG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSONAVE L IL Y D ALETRAILSIBLEYMEMORIALHWY FUTUREBIGRIVERSR E GIONALTRAILSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park CemetaryLake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaRiver MississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private) NSP Tank Farm FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Proposed Future Trail Connection City Park (See List) Golf Course Cemetary Nature Preserve State Property Water City boundary µ03,0006,000Feet June 2019 FIGURE 4-1 Park & Trail Notes: 1. Public Schools in “Blue” text have public playgrounds. 2. Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3. Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Map created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department Map 4-1. Parks and Trails MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIARDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake Minnesota R iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. M ENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RI VERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GRE ENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIARDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaR iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. MENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RI VERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GRE ENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIARDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaR iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. MENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RI VERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GRE ENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIARDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaR iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. MENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RI VERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GRE ENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIARDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaR iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. MENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RI VERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GRE ENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIARDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaR iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. MENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RI VERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GRE ENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 MARIE AVE W MARIE AVE W LEXINGTON AVEPILOT KNOB RD CITY OF EAGAN CITY OF WEST ST PAULCITY OF SUNFISH LAKEDELAWARE AVEWENTWORTH AVEWACHTLER AVEVICTORIARDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RDMENDOTA HEIGHTS RD DODD RDDODD RDTH 55TH 5 5 M E N D O T A B R I D G E CITY OF MENDOTA I-494 I-494I-35EI - 3 5E I- 3 5 E B R I DG E CITY OF LILYDALE CITY OF ST PAUL EMERSON AVE L IL Y D ALETRAILS IB L E Y M E M O R I A L HW YSIBLEYMEMORIALHWYDODDRD1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mendakota Golf Course (Private) Par 3 (Public) Dodge Nature Center Henry Sibley Senior High Friendly Marsh Rogers Lake Visitation Monastery St Thomas Academy Friendly Hills Middle Resurrection Cemetary Acacia Park Cemetary Lake Augu s ta L em a y L a k e Gun Club Lake MinnesotaR iverMississippiRiverBIGRIVERSREGIONAL TRAILSt Peter'sChurchTH 62 TH 62 Mendota Element. Somerset Element. Somerset Golf Course (Private)FortSnellingStatePark^Scenic Overlook (Dakota County) ^ City Hall & Police ^Fire Hall PickerelLakeRamsey County Park ^Public Works Garage Cem. MENDO T At oLEBANON HILLSGREENW AY & TRAIL TextRIVER t o RI VERGREENWA YRIVERtoRIVE R GREENWAY Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Surveying & Land Information Department PARK & TRAIL NOTES: 1) Public Schools in "Blue" text have public playgrounds. 2) Neighborhood concrete sidewalks are not shown on plan. 3) Copperfield Pond trail is a gravel trail. Parks 1) Friendly Hills Park 2)Friendly Marsh Park 3) Hagstrom King Park 4) Ivy Hills Park 5) Kensington Park 6) Marie Park 7) Mendakota Park 8) Rogers Lake Park 9) Valley Park 10) Victoria Highland Park 11) Wentworth Park 12) Valley View Heights Park 13) Copperfield Ponds 14) Sibley Park 15) Civic Center Ball Park 16) Historic Pilot Knob 17) Acacia Off-Leash Dog Park 18) Market Square Park River to River Greenway Planned Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway Big Rivers Regional Trail Lilydale Pedestrian Trail (6' wide) Wide Shoulders/On Street Off Street Bituminous Trail (6'-8' wide) State Park/Property Nature Preserve Cemetary Golf Course City Park (See List) Parks and Trails Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet February 2020 FIGURE 4-1 12 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Future Park and Trail Needs Future Park Needs The City of Mendota Heights is committed to developing and enhancing its park and open space system. City Park needs can be determined by evaluating the number, size, and accessibility and use of parks. The city meets the National Recreation and Park Association’s recommendation of park land and acreage and will continue to reserve city-owned lands and explore options for expanding additional park and recreation space in the city. Future Trail Connections As part of the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan, the Metropolitan Council identified future regional trail opportunities and priority trail corridors. The Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) consists of a series of prioritized Tier 1 and Tier 2 corridors and routes. The goal of the RBTN is to establish an integrated network of on-street bikeways and off-road trails which move bicyclists more efficiently and encourage the implementation of future bikeways. Mendota Heights has approximately 6 roadways within Tier 1 RBTN alignments and 1 roadway within Tier 2 RBTN alignments. Providing connections north-south and east-west through Mendota Heights will be critical. Planned trail connections are noted as follows: •Dodd Road Trail Corridor: Dodd Road runs approximately 3.8 miles north- south the entire length of the city. Approximately one mile of this corridor is served by an existing trail, with potential expansion of the trail corridor in the future. Mendota Heights analyzed 2.8 miles of the corridor between Delaware Avenue and Marie Avenue and between Wagon Wheel Trail and Mendota Heights Road. •Planned Bike Lane – Annapolis Street: a bike lane located along Annapolis Street at the city’s northern border (now under construction). •Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway: The Mendota-Lebanon Hills Greenway is proposed to travel 8.5 miles through Mendota Heights, Inver Grove Heights, and Eagan. Today, the landscape is largely suburban. Remaining agricultural areas, primarily in Inver Grove Heights’ Northwest Area, are expected to develop over the next 20-30 years. This will allow for future development patterns in this area to be organized around and shaped by the greenway’s natural, cultural, and recreational amenities. 13 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •River to River Greenway: The River to River Greenway connects Lilydale, Mendota Heights, West St. Paul and South St. Paul. The trail is in place between Robert Street and the Mississippi River in South St. Paul. Future construction projects will link Valley Park in Mendota Heights to the area near Dodge Nature Center in West St. Paul. •Eagan Soo Line Trail: The City of Eagan and Dakota County have initiated a trail feasibility study in the general area where I-494, I-35E, and TH 55 all come together. This corridor has been identified as a potential regional trail greenway that would connect the Big Rivers and the Mendota-Lebanon Regional Trail corridors. The initial alignment being evaluated includes an abandoned railroad line and two railroad bridges owned by MnDOT. Areas within or adjacent to Highway 55 and I-494 right of way are also identified. These and all other trail systems throughout the community are identified on Map 4-2. Bicycle Facilities and Plan. MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDM e ndotatoLebano n HillsGreenwayRegional TrailDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE RivertoRiverGreenwayBicycle Facilities and Plan Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet City of Mendota Heights February 2020 Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2018 Metropolitan Council, 2016 FIGURE 4-2 Legend Existing Bike Lane Planned Bike Lane Existing Paved Trail Existing Non-Paved Trail Planned Paved Trail Existing Roadway with Shoulder >= 5' Other Bicycle Facilities USBR 45 Mississippi River Trail Bikeway Metropolitan CouncilTier 1 RBTN Alignments Metropolitan CouncilTier 1 Priority Regional Bicycle Transportation Corridor Metropolitan CouncilTier 2 RBTN Alignments Map 4-2. Bicycle Facilities and Plan Map created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2018 Metropolitan Council, 2016 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD M e ndotatoLebano n HillsGreenwayRegional TrailDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE RivertoRiverGreenwayBicycle Facilities and Plan Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet City of Mendota Heights February 2020 Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2018 Metropolitan Council, 2016 FIGURE 4-2 Legend Existing Bike Lane Planned Bike Lane Existing Paved Trail Existing Non-Paved Trail Planned Paved Trail Existing Roadway with Shoulder >= 5' Other Bicycle Facilities USBR 45 Mississippi River Trail Bikeway Metropolitan CouncilTier 1 RBTNAlignments Metropolitan CouncilTier 1 Priority Regional Bicycle Transportation Corridor Metropolitan CouncilTier 2 RBTNAlignments MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD M e ndotatoLebano n HillsGreenwayRegional TrailDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE RivertoRiverGreenwayBicycle Facilities and Plan Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet City of Mendota Heights February 2020 Source: City of Mendota Heights, 2018 Metropolitan Council, 2016 FIGURE 4-2 Legend Existing Bike Lane Planned Bike Lane Existing Paved Trail Existing Non-Paved Trail Planned Paved Trail Existing Roadway with Shoulder >= 5' Other Bicycle Facilities USBR 45 Mississippi River Trail Bikeway Metropolitan Council Tier 1 RBTN Alignments Metropolitan Council Tier 1 Priority Regional Bicycle Transportation Corridor Metropolitan Council Tier 2 RBTN Alignments 14 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update State, Regional, and Private Parks and Open Spaces In addition to the city’s parks, there are numerous regional, county and private facilities within or near the city’s borders: Fort Snelling State Park As noted earlier in this chapter, Fort Snelling State Park is the largest park in Mendota Heights with 849 of its 2,642 acres located in the city. It provides outdoor recreation opportunities and natural resource conservation for the public and is considered part of the regional recreational open space system. Fort Snelling State Park is a recreational state park offering swimming, large group and family picnic grounds, a boat launch, interpretive center and historical areas, trails, and scenic overlooks. Most of the park’s active facilities are located on the Bloomington side of the River, requiring most Mendota Heights residents to drive or bike across the I-494, I-35E, and Mendota bridges to access the park. The Mendota Heights portion of the park is left primarily as a natural area as it contains extensive floodplain marsh habitat. Facilities located in Mendota Heights support less intensive uses, such as biking, hiking, cross country skiing, and fishing. The Sibley and Faribault historic sites are also located on the Mendota Heights side. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Parks & Trails 4-11 State, Regional, and Private Parks and Open Spaces In addition to the City’s parks, there are numerous regional, county and private facilities within or near the City’s borders: Fort Snelling State Park As noted earlier in this chapter,Fort Snelling State Park is the largest park in Mendota Heights with 771 of its 2,642 acres located in the city. It provides outdoor recreation opportunities and natural resource conservation for the public and is considered part of the regional recreational open space system. Fort Snelling State Park is a recreational state park offering swimming, large group and family picnic grounds, a boat launch, interpretive center and historical areas, trails, and scenic overlooks.Most of the park’s active facilities are located on the Bloomington side of the River, requiring most Mendota Heights residents to drive or bike across the I-494, I-35E, and Mendota bridges to access the park.The Mendota Heights portion of the park is left primarily as a natural area as it contains extensive floodplain marsh habitat.Facilities located in Mendota Heights support less intensive uses, such as biking, hiking, cross country skiing, and fishing. The Sibley and Faribault historic sites are also located on the Mendota Heights side. Source: c. 2018, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 15 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Dodge Nature Center The Dodge Nature Center, also referred to as the “Lilly Property”, is a 170- acre private nature preserve area and facility of the city, generally located at the southwest corner of Highway 62 and Delaware Avenue. The nature center is dedicated to the restoration of native plants and animal communities. The center provides excellent educational programs and events for the public, including habitat restoration projects, invasive species removal demonstrations, prairie burns, and native plantings. There are no visitor buildings or restrooms at this location. Trails are open during daylight hours every day of the week; and there are no fees to hike at Dodge Nature Center. Historic Pilot Knob As was noted in Chapter 1, Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob is generally located south and west of Highway 55, north of Acacia Boulevard and east of Pilot Knob Road. The 112 acres site is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and provides an excellent opportunity for the public to visit and experience historic views of the surrounding areas, and learn more about the history and culture of this significant and sacred place. Pilot Knob is a wonderful natural place to read the landscape; watch migratory birds; and to learn more about prairie and oak savanna restoration work currently in progress. Pilot Knob provides a small vehicle parking area, with walking trails, interpretive areas, and gathering spaces. Refer to the image Map 4-3. O ȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Landscape Plan: Issues and Opportunities. F0 0.5 1 Miles Pilot Knob Pilot Knob Preservation Preservation EaganEagan West St. PaulWest St. PaulLilydaleLilydaleMississipp i R i v e r Mississipp i R i v e r Minnesota RiverMinnesota RiverFort Snelling (unorg.)Fort Snelling (unorg.)Sunfish LakeSunfish LakeDodge Nature Dodge Nature PreservePreserve Mendota HeightsMendota Heights Saint PaulSaint Paul Location of Dodge Nature Center, Created by: SHC, Source: USDA Aerial Photography Field Office 16 Chapter 4 - Parks & Trails City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update /PickleballConsulting Group, Inc.Great River GreeningCity of Mendota Heights10699 | 071318Oĥéyawahe / Pilot Knob Historic Landscape Plan: Issues and Opportunities Key MapACACIA BLVDACACIA PARK CEMETERYCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS OWNED PROPERTYBUS & OVERFLOW PARKING ALONG ROADPILOT KNOB RD HWY 13 HWY 110EBHWY 110 WB SIBL E Y MEM O R I A L H IG H W A Y BIG RIVERS R EG IO NAL TR AI L HWY 55 VALENCOUR CIR1234677811121314141516179105LEGENDEXISTING TRAILSOFF-STREET TRAILINTERPRETIVE FEATUREKEY VIEWSWETLAND0’N200’400’1611271238134914165101517Entry AreaParking LotPilot Knob Road + UtilitiesGravel Road ExtensionExisting TrailBluff SlopeExisting Interpretive PanelsMedicine Wheel Overlook - SouthSeven Oaks Gathering AreaFour Oaks Gathering AreaMedicine Wheel Overlook - NorthSeven Council Fires OverlookBig River Regional Trail StopPrivately Owned ParcelsAcacia Park Cemetery - East-sideAcacia Park Cemetery - North-sideOff-Leash Dog AreaKEY FEATURESMap 4-3. Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Landscape Plan: Issues and Opportunities Key Map CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 5: Housing This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 5 HOUSING The health and character of a community is in part measured by its housing stock. Mendota Heights provides a variety of housing choices and work to ensure that existing housing is well maintained. The City of Mendota Heights also encourages the development of new housing that addresses the changing needs of the community. Existing and future residents are looking for more services and amenities near where they choose to live, including convenient shopping options and easily-accessible walking and biking trails. Housing has evolved into more than a place to live, but a community in which to thrive. Where people live is important. For many Americans, a high-quality environment, walkable neighborhoods and diversity make a neighborhood a great place to live. Mendota Heights supports life-cycle housing options for current residents to stay in the city regardless of changes in family size, income, aging, or other issues that may occur. The community strives to be welcoming to everyone who wishes to live in Mendota Heights, and to create sustainable neighborhoods for generations to come. This chapter includes goals and policies to promote housing opportunities in Mendota Heights, followed by an assessment of existing housing stock, tenure, and affordability. Examples of different housing types 2 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS & POLICIES The following goals and policies are identified to assist the City of Mendota Heights in decision-making regarding the preservation of its current housing stock and the development of new households in this Planning Period. Goals and policies typically address development and redevelopment expectations, housing maintenance and preservation, and density and diversity of housing type. GOAL 1: Preserve and improve existing neighborhoods and housing units. Policies 1.Continue to enforce housing maintenance and zoning codes. 2.Explore options for flexibility in Zoning Code standards and encourage reinvestment in existing houses. 3.Partner with Dakota County, the Metropolitan Council, the State of Minnesota and other agencies that provide housing rehabilitation programs and services. 4.Protect public safety by requiring owners to repair substandard housing or as a last resort, abate and demolish dangerous housing. 5.Develop a housing maintenance program that promotes and requires safe homes and attractive neighborhoods. GOAL 2: Meet future needs with a variety of housing products. Policies 1.Encourage life-cycle housing opportunities in Mendota Heights of various forms and tenures that allow residents to remain in the community throughout their lives. This includes: i.Maintenance of existing entry level housing. 3 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update ii.Construction of move-up single-family development that supports life-cycle housing. iii.Construction of various types of senior housing, including senior ownership units, senior rental units, memory care and assisted living units. iv.Support the development of a mix of affordable housing opportunities for all income levels, age groups, and special housing needs. 2.Encourage environmentally sustainable housing development and construction practices. 3.Provide for housing development that maintains the attractiveness and distinct neighborhood characteristics in the community. 4.Support the maintenance and rehabilitation of the community’s existing housing stock. 5.Periodically assess the housing needs in the community, including for the elderly, disabled, active retirees, and other groups with special housing needs to determine development priorities and to formulate strategies to assist those needs and maintain an adequate and quality housing supply. Example of representative historic single-family housing type 4 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Assessment of Housing Stock The following includes an assessment of the current housing stock within the City of Mendota Heights. It includes information on the tenure of occupants; the number, type, and age of housing units; and housing costs. The remainder of this chapter addresses affordable housing needs, goals and policies of the city, and an implementation section identifying ways to address the city’s housing needs. Housing Types and Tenure Table 5-1. Housing Type by Units in Structure illustrates the existing housing types by the units in the structure. According to the 2016 American Community Survey, 98.5 percent of the total housing units in Mendota Heights were occupied, while only 1.5 percent were vacant. Table 5-1. Housing Type by Units in Structure Single-Family Two Unit Three + Unit Mobile Home Total Detached Attached Number of Units 3,380 623 19 684 9 4,715 Percent of Housing Stock 71.7%13.2%0.4%14.5%0.2%100% Source: Metropolitan Council, American Community Survey, 2016 Example of single-family housing type 5 Out of the occupied housing units in the city, 88 percent are owner-occupied, while only 12 percent are renter-occupied as shown in Table 5-2. Housing Tenure 2016. This is compared to the national average of 63.4 percent of the occupied housing units in the United States being owner-occupied, while 36.4 percent are renter-occupied (Source: American Community Survey, 2012-2016 estimates). Mendota Heights is well above the national average for owner-occupied housing units. The majority of housing units in the city are single-family, detached structures, with multi-family properties and single-family attached homes being other common unit types in the city. Table 5-2. Housing Tenure 2016 Households % Ownership Units 4,143 88% Rental Units 572 12% Total 4,715 100% Source: Metropolitan Council, American Community Survey Age of Housing Mendota Heights experienced a rapid pace of housing construction, starting in the 1940s and continuing through the 1950s. During this time period (1940 to 1959), 850 housing units were constructed. This pace slowed in the 1960s, but started picking up again in the 1970s, when 662 housing units were constructed. Housing construction peaked in the 1980s when 1,162 housing units were built. This number accounts for twenty-seven percent (27%) of the total housing units that were constructed in 2000 and prior. Between 1990 and 1998, another 910 housing units were constructed within the city. The number of new housing units slowed in the 2000s, as the amount of vacant land available within the city was minimal. Housing stock age is illustrated in Map 5-1. Age of Housing Stock. Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 6 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Housing Value and Rent The median home value in Mendota Heights is $351,100, which is higher than the Dakota County median value of $226,900 and higher than the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area median value of $212,600. Compared to other communities in the region, Mendota Heights’ housing values are above average. Map 5-2. Estimated Market Value of Owner-Occupied Housing shows that the majority of the city’s existing housing stock is valued above $238,500 which is identified as the price that is affordable to a household earning 80% of AMI in 2016. Table 5-3 provides a comparison of Median Housing Values within the region for comparison. MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Age of Housing Stock Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Built before 1970 Built between 1970 and 1980 Built between 1980 and 1990 Built between 1990 and 2000 Built after 2000 City Boundary Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 5-1 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Age of Housing Stock Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Built before 1970 Built between 1970 and 1980 Built between 1980 and 1990 Built between 1990 and 2000 Built after 2000 City Boundary Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 5-1 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Age of Housing Stock Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Built before 1970 Built between 1970 and 1980 Built between 1980 and 1990 Built between 1990 and 2000 Built after 2000 City Boundary Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 5-1 Map 5-1. Age of Housing Stock Created June 2019, Source: Dakota County 2016 7 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Homesteaded EMV <$238,500 $238,501 - $450,000 $450,001 - $750,000 $750,001+ Table 5-3. Median Housing Values in and around Mendota Heights Community Median Housing Value 2016 Median Housing Value 2019 Mendota Heights $351,100 $392,600 Eagan $251,500 $288,200 Inver Grove Heights $216,400 $254,500 Dakota County $226,900 $266,000 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area $212,600 $284,500 Source: American Community Survey, 2016 & 2019 Created December 2020, Source: Dakota County 2016 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Homesteaded EMV <$238,500 $238,501 - $450,000 $450,001 - $750,000 $750,001+MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Homesteaded EMV <$238,500 $238,501 - $450,000 $450,001 - $750,000 $750,001+ Map 5-2. Estimated Market Value of Owner-Occupied Housing 8 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update The median rent in Mendota Heights is $1,097 per month, which is higher than the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area ($916) and higher than Dakota County ($1,003). Compared to other communities in the area, Mendota Heights’ median rent is slightly higher. This may be attributed to the large number of single-family homes that are rented in the city as well as the development of new, market rate apartment units in the city. Table 5-4 includes median monthly rents in nearby communities. Table 5-4. Median Rent in and around Mendota Heights Community Median Monthly Rent Mendota Heights $1,097 Eagan $1,074 Inver Grove Heights $990 Dakota County $1,003 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area $916 Source: American Community Survey, 2016 Housing Affordability Affordable Housing Stock in Mendota Heights The Metropolitan Council defines an “affordable” home as one costing $85,500, for households making less than 30 percent Area Median Income (AMI), a home costing $153,000 for households making 31-50 percent AMI, and a home costing $240,500 for households making 51-80 percent AMI. In Mendota Heights, the median home value is $351,100, indicating that much of the city’s housing stock is unaffordable at 80 percent AMI or lower. Housing affordability is discussed later in this chapter. These characteristics are summarized in Table 5-5. Affordable Housing Stock in Mendota Heights. Table 5-5. Affordable Housing Stock in Mendota Heights Total Number of All Housing Units 4,693 Number of Affordable Units At or below 30% AMI 31-50% AMI 51-80% AMI 50 311 1,053 Number of Publicly Subsidized Units Senior Housing People with Disabilities All other publicly subsidized units 110 0 24 Source: Metropolitan Council 9 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Cost Burdened Households Many residents in communities across the Twin Cities experience challenges affording their housing costs. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines housing to be affordable if the residents do not pay more than 30 percent of their income towards housing costs. Housing costs can include rent or mortgage payments, utility bills, HOA fees or other fees associated with living in the home. Residents who pay more than 30 percent are considered “Cost-burdened”. In Mendota Heights, over seven hundred households (16.8 percent of households) are considered to be cost-burdened. Table 5-6. Housing Cost Burdened Households outlines the number of cost-burdened households by median income level. Table 5-6. Housing Cost-burdened Households Household Income Level Number of Cost-burdened Households At or below 30% AMI 229 31 to 50% AMI 270 51 to 80% AMI 237 Total Households 736 Source: Metropolitan Council Summary of Existing Housing Needs As demonstrated by the assessment of the existing housing stock the city is dominated by single- family detached uses. While the city is almost fully developed, and redevelopment is unlikely to occur in existing established neighborhoods, it remains important for the city to support programs that assist homeowners with maintenance and upkeep to ensure a sustainable housing stock. This is most important for households that are cost burdened which may make it difficult to maintain large single-family homes and properties. Additionally, the analysis demonstrates the need for additional housing options that are more affordable. As shown in Chapter 1 of this Plan, there is a fairly large senior population which may desire more affordable options, or at the least housing options that are more accessible to services. Secondarily, there is not a huge young-adult population and this could be attributed to a lack of affordable options, and/or a lack of multi-family rental options. Subsequent sections of this chapter describe how areas planned for change or development/redevelopment could support the needs identified in this section by providing additional diversity to the city’s housing stock. 10 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Housing Projections & Need Although the City of Mendota Heights is relatively built out, it will still need to accommodate for new residents of all socioeconomic backgrounds. The Metropolitan Council has allocated approximately 46 new units of affordable housing (at or below 80 percent AMI) in the city between 2021 and 2030 to meet potential demand. Based on their projections, the city should consider supporting the development of new units that are affordable to different levels, which is provided in Table 5-7. Affordable Unit Allocations for Mendota Heights. Table 5-7. Affordable Unit Allocations for Mendota Heights Household Income Level Number of Units At or below 30% AMI 25 31 to 50% AMI 16 51 to 80% AMI 5 Total Households 46 Source: Metropolitan Council (Revised December 2020) The city’s Future Land Use Plan contained in Chapter 2. Land Use & Growth of this Plan identifies the mixed-use land use category to potentially support the development of affordable housing options in the community. The area guided mixed-use is adjacent to existing, recently developed, multi-family housing which positions the vacant land area for development sometime in the next 10-years. Table 5-8. Future Land Use Designation and Affordable Housing Allocation demonstrates how the Future Land Use designations and corresponding units accommodate the allocated units identified in Table 5-7. Affordable Unit Allocations for Mendota Heights. Table 5-8. Future Land Use Designations and Affordable Housing Allocation Land Use Category Density Acres Households Mixed-Use 21-30 DU/Ac.6.4 135-192 Total Households 135-192 Source: City of Mendota Heights, SHC 11 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Strategies to Promote a Diverse Housing Stock In order for Mendota Heights to meet its goals and policies pertaining to housing, and especially to accommodate the projected needs of affordable housing units, the city can rely on a number of existing programs and policies to promote housing stock diversity. Numerous efforts are available for Mendota Heights to employ in order to facilitate the construction of affordable housing and to expand local housing options including regional, state, and national programs, fiscal devices, official controls, and land use regulation. A summary of key tools are provided in the following pages, and all available tools are provided in Table 5-8. Affordable Housing Implementation Tools. Livable Communities Act In 1995, Minnesota Legislature created the Livable Communities Act (LCA) as defined by Minnesota State Statute 473.25. The LCA is a voluntary, incentive- based approach to help metro area communities address affordable and lifecycle housing needs. The LCA provides funds to communities to assist them in carrying out their development plans for affordable housing and creation of new jobs. Participation in the Local Housing Incentives Program portion of the LCA requires communities to negotiate housing goals with the Metropolitan Council and prepare a Housing Action Plan. Livable Communities Demonstration Accounts (LCDA) LCDA funds support regional growth strategies promoting development and redevelopment that make efficient and cost-effective use of urban lands and infrastructure; improve jobs, housing, transportation, and service connections; and expand affordable and lifecycle housing choices in the region. Funds are available to municipalities that participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program of the Livable Communities Act (LCA). The LCDA is open to local housing and redevelopment authorities, economic development authorities or port authorities in LCA- participating cities, or to counties on behalf of projects located in LCA-participating cities. As the name of the account suggests, LCDA funds are intended to be used for projects that demonstrate innovative and new ways to achieve and implement the statutory objectives, not merely to fill project funding needs. Mendota Heights is a participant of the LCA and would consider further exploration of the program if specific development opportunities become available in the community. Example of a senior living facility 12 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Local Housing Incentive Account (LHIA) LHIA grants help to produce new and rehabilitated affordable rental and owner occupied housing, and to promote the Council’s policy to expand and preserve lifecycle and affordable housing options to meet changing demographic trends and market preferences, and support the region’s economic competitiveness. Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA) The TBRA provides funds to clean up polluted land to make it available for economic redevelopment, job retention, and job growth, or the production of affordable housing to enhance the tax base of the recipient municipality. TBRA funds are raised by a legislatively authorized levy capped at $5 million annually. If the TBRA project includes a housing component, a portion of the housing is required to be affordable. Ownership units are considered affordable if they can be purchased by buyers earning 80% of the area median income (AMI). Affordable rental units are those renting at the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit rent limits based on 50% of the AMI. The city has used TBRA funds in the past for economic redevelopment associated with job growth in the community. The city could explore using TBRA funds in the future, and could consider usage of funds to meet its affordable housing goals. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program The CDBG Program is provided through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The CDBG program is a flexible program that provides communities with resources to address a wide range of unique community development needs. The CDBG program works to ensure affordable housing, to provide services to the most vulnerable in our communities, and to create jobs through the expansion and retention of businesses. The city has participated in the CDBG program and will continue to use the resource, as needed or applicable to achieve its housing goals and policies. 13 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Fiscal Devices Fiscal devices, such as revenue bonds, tax increment financing, or tax abatement can be used to help ease the construction and availability of affordable housing in the City of Mendota Heights. Official Controls Official controls and land use regulation can be used to assist in the construction of affordable housing units. Controls and regulations can also be used to simplify the process of expanding local housing options. Table 5-9. Affordable Housing Implementation Tools is a list of official controls that the City of Mendota Heights can use to implement its housing goals and policies: Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Building Codes, Design Requirements, lot splits and new home construction, and supports the actualization of the process. These regulatory tools impact the type and cost of new housing. The city will evaluate their official controls within 9-months of adoption of this Plan, and will work to update ordinances and policies to 1) create a more streamlined entitlement process; 2) consider how the policy could support more diversity in housing, especially for seniors and young professionals; and 3) will evaluate policies that may discourage the creation of more affordable housing options in the community. 14 Chapter 5 - Housing City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Table 5-9 - Affordable Housing Implementation Tools Tools that Address Identified Housing Needs Resources that will be Considered to Address Housing Goals/Needs Experienced and Used Will Explore Unlikely to Use this Tool Local Funding and Support Mechanisms Tax Increment Financing (TIF)X X Tax Abatement X Housing Revenue Bonds X Housing Improvement Areas (HIA)X Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)X X Regional, State, and Federal Funding Housing Choice Voucher/Public Housing on Scattered Sites or Project Based (CDA)X Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)X X Housing Rehabilitation Loans (CDA)X X Homecare/Chore Service (DARTS)X X Site Assembly X X MN Housing Finance Agency (MHFA)X First Time Buyer X X HOME Funds (CDA)X X Livable Communities Act - Metropolitan Council (LHIP, LCDA, LHIA )X X Tax Base Revitalization Act X X X Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC)X HUD Insured Mortgage X X Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA)X X Other Housing Initiatives Community Land Trust X Community Development Corporation (Land Bank)X Local Initiative Support Corporation (LISC)X X Vo-Tech Building Programs X X Registration. Licensing, Inspection of Rental Housing X X X 4(D) Property Tax Relief X X NOAH (Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing)X X CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 6: Economic Development This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 6 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT A strong community is not simply about housing and parks but it is also about its economic vitality. Mendota Heights seeks to support its community through a diverse mix of commercial offerings, retention and expansion of employment-generating businesses, and preserving land for commercial and industrial activities with adequate buffering from nearby residential areas. Regional Context The Metropolitan Council recommends including an economic development element in local comprehensive plans to achieve regional goals for economic competitiveness. Providing suitable locations for businesses to succeed, particularly industries that export products or services beyond our region and bring revenue and jobs into the region, is a significant need. The Metropolitan Council defines two key terms related to this element: •Economic Competitiveness – Examining and strengthening the ability of the region to compete effectively and prosper in the global economy. •Economic Development – Activities that directly aim to retain, attract, and grow businesses that bring wealth into a community or region. While the city focuses its efforts on growing businesses within its own boundary, it is also important to understand the context for that growth within the region and work with regional partners to achieve shared success. Part of Mendota Heights regional context is its excellent accessibility within the region from the roadway network and its proximity to MSP International Airport. F0 0.5 1Miles EaganEagan West St. PaulWest St. PaulSunfish LakeSunfish LakeLilydaleLilydaleSaint PaulSaint Paul Mississippi Riv e r Mississippi Riv e r Downtown Downtown Saint PauSaint Paull MSP International MSP International AirportAirport Minnesota RiverMinnesota RiverFort Snelling (unorg.)Fort Snelling (unorg.)35E 494 494 35E 5555 6262 Mendota HeightsMendota Heights Mendota Heights Regional Context, Created by: SHC, Source: USDA Aerial Photography Field Office 2 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Both proximity to the airport and accessibility to regional roadways is critical for cities to compete within the regional economic environment, and Mendota Heights location is perfectly positioned to capitalize on both making it a highly desirable location for businesses to locate. Economic Development topics addressed in this chapter include: •Economic Overview •Redevelopment and Business Development •Education and Workforce •Economic Information, Monitoring, and Strategic Initiatives GOALS & POLICIES GOAL 1: Promote Economic Development in Mendota Heights through a comprehensive approach to meeting business needs. Policies 1.Manage growth and land resources to ensure an appropriate mix of developments and, where possible, land to secure new business investments. 2.Retain the present industrial and commercial base and encourage companies with their expansion needs where appropriate. 3 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 3.Attract quality businesses consistent with the city’s target market to areas available for development. 4.Explore options for sites and buildings to meet the demand for commercial and industrial development. 5.Maintain an infrastructure system to meet the needs of current businesses and facilitate future growth. 6.Address unique development challenges including the reuse and redevelopment of vacant buildings. 7.Foster private investment and economic activity without compromising community objectives to maintain and enhance Mendota Heights’ environment. GOAL 2: Promote business attraction, retention, and expansion In Mendota Heights. Policies 1.Identify target markets and prepare and implement a marketing plan to attract businesses that fit this market. 2.Work with local businesses and industry to ensure needs for expansion and development are adequately met and maintain an open line of communication with the business sector through the Business Retention and Expansion Program. 3.Continue to actively provide information and market Mendota Heights to commercial brokers and retail businesses in order to expand retail and service opportunities in the city. 4.Work cooperatively with local business groups, the school district, and area colleges and universities to provide training for workers, which in turn will help develop skills needed for sustaining productive workforce for existing and future Mendota Heights businesses. 4 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 3: Promote Economic Development through Public Financing Tools. Policies 1.Periodically review economic development opportunities, such as incentive programs from county, regional, state, and federal agencies. 2.Review new and innovative economic development incentives proposed by existing and future businesses in Mendota Heights. 3.Pursue outside funding sources to develop or redevelop land for commercial and industrial uses, such as Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account, Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA), Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, and other applicable grants. GOAL 4: Continue to develop and redevelop community commercial areas that serve the whole community. Policies 1.Provide and support commercial areas to supply convenience goods and services for residents of Mendota Heights. 1.To mitigate conflicts between commercial and residential development, require appropriate land use transitions at the edges of residential neighborhoods through the use of setbacks, screening, buffering and fencing. 1.Require sidewalk connections along major streets leading up to neighborhood commercial centers and direct connections from the public sidewalk to the storefronts. 5 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 5: Continue to develop business and industrial park areas that provide jobs and serve the local and regional economy. Policies 1.Provide opportunities for new industrial development and expanded employment opportunities to create livable-wage positions in Mendota Heights and the redevelopment of existing industrial uses to serve existing businesses in the community. 2.Provide attractive, planned environments as a means to induce employers to locate within the city. 3.Continue to provide and enforce standards for industrial developments that improve the appearance and character of industrial properties. 4.Provide high quality public services and infrastructure in all commercial and industrial districts. Economic Overview A 2016 report by Tangible Consulting Services evaluated the market and development conditions in preparation for the comprehensive plan update (see attached Appendix G). It provided an overview of the unique demography and economic base that characterizes the city and investigated the market and development factors that may shape future growth in housing, retail, and industrial development. Mendota Heights is mostly developed, which limits opportunities for new development; however, there is a need to stay viable and attractive as the demographics of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area shift. The population is growing, it is aging, and more households will be renters. Choices about purchasing and employment will also evolve. Decisions about housing redevelopment, retail support and location, and office and employment opportunities will affect Mendota Heights’ character as a desirable place to live. 6 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Redevelopment and Business Development Opportunities for business investment will likely include retail, business, office and industrial uses. Existing retail areas in Mendota Heights benefit from their visibility from the heavily traveled Highway 62 corridor, and benefit from their distance from other retailers. Their distance to retail centers in the nearby communities of Eagan and West St. Paul gives Mendota Heights’ retailers a competitive advantage for neighborhood goods and services for residents in the surrounding neighborhoods. These locational characteristics are likely to keep the areas strong into the future. Mendota Heights is more limited in its prospects for destination retail given its competition in this category from surrounding communities. The Mendota Heights Industrial District (MHID) is an important contributor to the tax base compared to nearby competing areas. It is in the South Central industrial sub-market of the Twin Cities which encompasses West St. Paul, South St. Paul, Inver Grove Heights, Eagan, Apple Valley, and Burnsville. New industrial development in the South Central Sub-market is coming online more slowly than in the metro area overall. Figure 6-1. Industrial Comparison Areas Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Economic Development 6-5 Redevelopment and Business Development Opportunities for business investment will likely include retail, business, office and industrial uses. Retail areas in Mendota Heights benefit from their visibility from the heavily traveled Highway 62 corridor. They also benefit from their distance from other retailers. Their distance from retail centers in the nearby communities of Eagan and West St. Paul gives Mendota Heights’retailers a corner on neighborhood goods and services for residents in the surrounding neighborhoods. These locational characteristics are likely to keep the areas strong into the future. Mendota Heights is more limited in its prospects for destination retail given its competition in this category in surrounding communities. The Mendota Heights Industrial District (MHID)is an important contributor to the tax base compared to nearby competing areas. It is in the South Central industrial submarket of the Twin Cities which encompasses West St. Paul, South St. Paul, Inver Grove Heights, Eagan, Apple Valley, and Burnsville. New industrial development in the South Central Submarket is coming online more slowly than in the metro area overall. Source: Tangible Consulting 7 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update The Mendota Heights Industrial District is attractively positioned for continued business occupancy due to its central location in the region, proximity to the airport, flat topography, diversity of existing tenants, and available utilities. A major challenge is the limited opportunity for on-site facility expansion and few sites for new industrial development. The office buildings in the Mendota Heights Industrial District and the Centre Pointe Business Park operate in a different competitive environment than the industrial facilities. Vacancy rates tend to be higher in office properties. Office developments typically cluster into specialized areas or recognized districts within the metropolitan area, due to transit availability and proximity to amenities. Office buildings in Mendota Heights’ two districts are 20 years old on average and together offer around 1.4 million square feet of floor area. Market indicators are mixed for office buildings in Mendota Heights – the 2016 vacancy rate is lower than the metro as a whole but rents are also lower. Retail Redevelopment Opportunities While there are limited opportunities for additional retail in Mendota Heights, two exist: •Expanding retail opportunities beyond what is already planned at Mendota Plaza and The Village at Mendota Heights along Highway 62 at Dodd Road. •Better capturing the daytime population at the Mendota Heights Industrial District. Small footprint retail and restaurants could better serve these employees. 8 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Industrial Redevelopment Opportunities The Mendota Heights Industrial District Redevelopment Plan makes several recommendations for actions to strengthen the area’s attractiveness to industrial users and invite building renovation and improvement. These include: •Explore ways to communicate, brand, and promote the Industrial District; •Consider city policies toward redevelopment incentives, which will provide a positive impact on future projects or existing business expansion projects; and •Consider investments in broadband and other technology infrastructure as necessary to ensure the area is competitive and serves the business needs. Office Redevelopment Opportunities To support continued viability of the office areas in Mendota Heights, consideration could be given to actions such as: •Strengthen the office identity and branding of the southern part of the Mendota Heights Industrial District; let the district be part of the broader Eagan/Mendota Heights office district; and •Build the amenity base of the area with the addition of some retail and restaurants, even if the opportunities to do so are limited. Education and Workforce A strong, educated workforce supports local businesses and gives Mendota Heights’ residents an opportunity to work and go to school close to home. If a community has daytime workers, it leads to more retail and restaurant offerings since those businesses can now capture a daytime crowd in addition to evenings and weekends. Additionally, residents who can work close to home reduce transportation costs and gain more time in their day that would have otherwise be spent on long commute. Education Mendota Heights is served by public schools, including Somerset Elementary, Mendota Elementary, Friendly Hills Middle School and Henry Sibley High School, all of which are part of Independent School District 197. The city is also home to St. Thomas Academy and Convent of the Visitation School. 9 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update There are currently no post-secondary schools located in Mendota Heights, but the city’s central location in the Twin Cities offers many easily accessible post-secondary options. Workforce Mendota Heights has a unique employment profile for a Twin Cities suburb. Businesses in Mendota Heights offer a high number of good-paying jobs and there are almost two jobs in Mendota Heights for every employed person who lives in the city. However, most Mendota Heights workers commute to jobs outside of the city. Of the roughly 5,500 workers who live in Mendota Heights, almost 95% go to work at a location outside the city limits. Only around 300 residents work at a business in Mendota Heights. While some jobs are in a neighborhood serving retail businesses and the community’s educational institutions, the majority of jobs in Mendota Heights are in the industrial facilities and offices in the city’s industrial and office areas. The majority of employment in Mendota Heights is focused in two distinct areas – the Mendota Heights Industrial District and the Centre Point Business Park. Businesses in the Mendota Heights Industrial District (MHID) offer over 7,000 principal jobs. The MHID is home to a mix of industrial and office developments. The Centre Pointe Business Park offers around 800 jobs. The business park was developed in the 1990s and 2000s and is comprised entirely of office buildings. Industrial and office jobs tend to pay a living wage which are higher on average than jobs in some other sectors such as retail stores and services. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Economic Development 6-8 While some jobs are in neighborhood serving retail businesses and the community’s educational institutions, the great majority of jobs in Mendota Heights are in the industrial facilities and offices in the city’s industrial and office areas. The majority of employment in Mendota Heights is focused in two distinct areas – the Mendota Heights Industrial District and the Centre Point Business Park. Figure 6-2: Office and Industrial Context Source: Mendota Heights Assessor Data Map 6-1. Office and Industrial Context Source: Tangible Consulting, Mendota Heights Assessor Data 10 Chapter 6 - Economic Development City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Economic Information, Monitoring, & Strategic Initiatives Through a partnership with the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) and the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD), the city makes available a certified “Open to Business” consultant to offer free services to local businesses. The service is free to any Mendota Heights business or resident. Experts help businesses plan by providing information on business start-up or acquisition, creating a business plan, evaluating financials, and analyzing the viability of commercial sites. The West St. Paul Work Force Center is a valuable tool for local job seekers and businesses searching for employees in the surrounding communities. Part of a larger initiative sponsored by the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), job seekers have access to job search coaching, information for veterans and people who require special services, training programs for in-demand occupations, and a free online job bank. Businesses can get help finding workers, developing a workforce strategy, locating and expanding their business, and data analysis on the local labor market. The city also partners with the Dakota County CDA on strategic initiatives such as: •Investing in transportation; •Coordinating strategic infrastructure and land development; •Linking workforce development and economic development; •Building the capacity to respond to business prospects; •Providing quality workforce housing; and •Strengthening development-related research and policy capacity. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7: Natural Resources This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 7 NATURAL RESOURCES The City of Mendota Heights is fortunate to have a wide variety of natural resources throughout the community. These natural resources are an important recreation, aesthetic, and ecological asset to the community of Mendota Heights. During the city’s developing stages, a strong emphasis was placed on preserving high quality open spaces and woodland areas. Residents enjoy numerous lakes, streams, wetlands, open spaces, parks, trails, and the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. These natural areas provide tremendous benefits to the community and its residents and are an important focal point of Mendota Heights. Protect, Connect, Restore and Manage Ecosystems, Plant Communities & Species The quality of life for the community of Mendota Heights highly depends on how it manages its natural resources—the air, minerals, land, water, and biota that form the foundation to life in the city. This chapter is a guide for managing the city’s natural resources in a sustainable way. It will help protect and enhance residents’ quality of life for current and future generations by suggesting strategies to protect, connect, restore and manage ecosystems, plant communities, and species. 2 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Purpose The environmental benefits provided by the community’s natural resources are essential for human life. Protecting and preserving these natural resources require preventing, and providing treatment for, potential harmful pollutants that can adversely affect the health of our air, water, and soil. Some of the strategies for addressing pollutants include, but are not limited to: stormwater infiltration and treatment, providing flood control, providing and preserving healthy soil for plants, and providing and preserving habitat for pollinators and wildlife. Natural resources can also provide economic value, recreation, health benefits, and aesthetic beauty. Healthy natural resources help ensure that Mendota Heights has a high quality of life that can be sustained for future generations. GOALS and POLICIES GOAL 1: Develop a professional, comprehensive, strategic Natural Resources Management Plan for city-wide natural areas and natural resources. Policies 1.Develop capabilities to monitor and implement the Natural Resources Management Plan through city staff expertise, as well as through partnerships with community groups, volunteers, and adjacent communities and agencies, thus recognizing the interconnectedness of ecosystems. 2.Implement a formal Natural Resources Management and Sustainability Commission to aid in the execution of the strategic Natural Resources Plan. This Commission may begin as a Task Force, whose charge would be to establish the by-laws and city ordinance necessary to establish this commission. 3.Develop site-specific management plans that identify and prioritize opportunities to enhance and protect the city’s high-quality areas and Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-1 7Natural Resources The City of Mendota Heights is fortunate to have a wide variety of NaturalResources. These natural resources are an important recreation, aesthetic, andecological asset to the community of Mendota Heights. During the City’s developing stages, a strong emphasis was placed on preserving high quality open spaces and woodland areas. Residents enjoy numerous lakes, streams, wetlands, open spaces, parks, trails, and the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. These natural areas provide tremendous benefits to the community and its residents and are an important focal point of Mendota Heights. Protect, Connect, Restore and Manage Ecosystems, Plant Communities and Species The quality of life for the community of Mendota Heights highly depends on how it manages its natural resources—the air, minerals, land, water, and biota that form the foundation to life in the City. This Chapter is a guide for managing the City’s natural resources in a sustainable way. It will help protect and enhance residents’ quality of life for current and future generations by suggesting strategies to protect, connect, restore and manage ecosystems, plant communities, and species. Photo courtesy of Rachel QuickSource: Natural Resources Advisory Committee 3 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update address significant issues, such as: vegetation plans, tree planting plans, tree inventories, green infrastructure, surface waters, roadside restoration, wildlife management, tree diseases, pests, and invasive species. 4.Establish and continually update priorities for sites, including public parks and open space, and management activities. 5.Develop and continually maintain tracking of management activities, using frameworks such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to gather, manage, and analyze data. 6.Develop and implement city strategies to increase tree canopy, during existing operational, new development, and redevelopment activities. 7.Seek partnerships and grant opportunities to help implement natural resources goals. 8.Work with Dakota County and other agencies to maintain and/or acquire, where feasible, natural greenway corridors to foster ecosystem continuity. 9.Protect steep slopes, bluffs, and other sensitive areas from erosion and other threats, specifically throughout the development process. 10.Encourage and promote the use of conservation design principles. 11.Explore the opportunity to develop a Natural Resource Matching Fund and work with agency partners to achieve the vision and goals of the Natural Resources Management Plan. 4 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 2: Protect, connect, restore, buffer, and manage natural areas, wildlife habitat, and other natural resources, for high ecological quality and diversity of plant and animal species. Policies 1.Monitor new developments for restoration and invasive plant management. 2.Monitor tree disease and pest outbreaks (i.e. Emerald Ash Borer) with the implementation of control and replanting programs, such as an Integrated Pest Management program, for current tree diseases as well as emerging diseases and pests. 3.Continue to partner with outside agencies and community groups to monitor and control invasive species and noxious weeds. 4.Restore areas throughout the city with pollinator-friendly or native species to protect and enhance habitat for native pollinators and birds in accordance with City Resolution 2016-01 (see Appendix - E). 5.Monitor wildlife populations and address over-population as needed. 6.In new development and redevelopment, retain mature trees that have high ecological value, replace lost trees, and plant additional trees if not present originally. 7.Explore the development of ordinances and or policies that establish minimum soil standards for development and redevelopment that can support turf, plantings, and/or healthy turf alternatives. 8.Look for opportunities to reduce or minimize impervious cover city-wide. 9.Emphasize the use of, and identify areas including public open space and park land, that could be restored to include native species, pollinator plants, wildlife habitat, or turf alternatives. 10.Prior to approval of landscape and development plans, work with applicants to encourage the preservation and installation of high ecosystem value communities. 11.Encourage avenues for homeowners to take on ownership of, and responsibility for, boulevard trees where the location of the tree is considered appropriate as well as an overall community benefit. 5 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 12.Implement the strategic planting of trees to avoid monoculture plantings and choose tree species identified as most resilient to changing climate and weather patterns. GOAL 3: Protect and restore the natural ecological functions of the city’s water resources with emphasis on the improvement of stormwater management. Policies 1.Explore and develop operational and procedural modifications to better enhance and support the thriving of the natural environment. 2.Work with partners to implement projects and develop and support programs that encourage infiltration, to reduce stormwater runoff and pollution to water-bodies. 3.Work with partners to monitor Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS). Set goals for AIS removal and management, and reintroduction of native species. Educate lakeshore owners and residents about AIS. 4.Identify areas within the city, including public and private land that are lacking adequate stormwater treatment, and other stormwater BMPs. Implement projects to establish functioning stormwater treatment in order to protect and improve the city’s water resources. 5.Implement the city’s Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) through the use of ordinances, policies, and development standards. 6.Carry out steps toward meeting the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) Swimmable, Fishable, Fixable water quality standards. 7.Manage public riparian areas to be resilient to stormwater runoff. 8.Improve the process for review and inspection of native planting and permanent stormwater Best Management Practices on development projects to increase successful establishment. 6 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 4: Enhance and provide public education and understanding of nature, natural systems, and environmental issues by providing programs, materials, and information; while promoting a culture of stewardship on public and private lands. Policies 1.Educate adults, families, schools, community groups, and staff on natural resources topics, improving compliance and understanding of environmental regulations and requirements. 2.Continue to develop, improve, and expand audiences through the use of diverse methods of education and outreach including: programs, field trips, brochures, exhibits, signage, articles, website, video, social media, service learning, and community gatherings and events. 3.Collaborate with other agencies, such as Watershed Districts, Watershed Management Organizations, and surrounding County and Metropolitan Cities to share information and ideas regarding natural resources. 4.Develop and promote stormwater educational outreach programs, using available programs offered through outside agencies, and utilizing volunteer groups such as Master Gardeners, Master Water Stewards, and Master Naturalists. 5.Implement, encourage, and sustain collaborative city programs such as residential curb-cut rain gardens and green infrastructure, throughout road re-construction projects. 6.Educate homeowners, commercial and institutional property owners, and city Public Works staff, on turf management Best Management Practices (BMPs), as well as lawn alternatives, to reduce the amount of traditional turf throughout the city. 7.Develop a Natural Resources webpage on the city’s website that offers city resources, community updates and activities, volunteer opportunities, links to useful resources, and other topics as they relate to natural resources. 8.Provide education and training on tree care for private landowners. 9.Engage residents in the strategic planting of trees in order to encourage a more diverse, native community forest. 7 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 10.Develop material (print as well as electronic media) to teach property owners environmentally friendly ‘backyard’ practices, including but not limited to: sustainable lawn care, native plantings, drought-tolerant landscaping, rain gardens, proper disposal of yard and animal waste, and composting. 11.Educate residents, developers, and others on the impact of noise, and other forms of pollution (i.e. light, air quality, heat, etc.). 12.Provide programs to support residents in their stewardship efforts. Explore innovative ideas and opportunities to serve the community in stewardship efforts such as grant and rebate programs, curb- side buckthorn pick-up program, city-sponsored tree sale, etc. 13.Develop and implement city-led initiatives to engage citizens in the stewardship and care of natural areas and infrastructure through programs such as Adopt-a-Park, Adopt-a-Roadside Pollinator Planting, Adopt-a-Boulevard, Adopt-a-Tree, and Adopt-a-Storm Drain. 14.Implement, evaluate, or enhance citizen participation in monitoring programs such as the Wetland Health Evaluation Program (WHEP), State and Metropolitan Council water monitoring programs, as well as other Citizen Science monitoring programs that monitor vegetation, aquatic invasive species, as well as those programs that monitor wildlife such as birds, bats, bees, aquatic wildlife, and insects 15.Encourage citizen engagement in the city’s annual Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit meeting and process, and use this as a forum to share concerns, discuss proposed community initiatives, and offer suggestions concerning stormwater. 8 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 5: Address issues that impact air quality, light pollution, and noise pollution, such as vehicle emissions, traffic flow, air traffic, lighting, and street design. Policies 1.Evaluate proactive solutions to air quality issues such as the installation of an electric vehicle charge stations, and mass transit options. 2.Consider taking an advocacy role to encourage the MPCA and the Minnesota Department of Health to address air quality issues and improve air quality. 3.Strive to monitor and limit community exposure to excessive noise levels and review and evaluate current city policies and ordinances regarding noise. 4.Develop ordinances that proactively and effectively deal with noise pollution and its impact on all facets of the community, including human, ecological, safety, security, and energy. 5.Encourage use of research-based systems, such as Backlight-Uplight-Glare (BUG) that reduce light pollution and provide guidelines for effective control of unwanted or unhealthy light for residents, as well as wildlife. 6.Develop ordinances that proactively and effectively deal with light pollution within the city and work with neighboring communities to coordinate lighting solutions and address its impact on all facets of community: human, ecological, safety, security, and energy. 7.Increase efforts to provide healthier lighting solutions for residents and the preservation of the city’s natural assets. 9 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Mendota Heights Natural History and Landscape General Topography and Drainage The City of Mendota Heights is located near the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers in northern Dakota County. The topography of the City of Mendota Heights varies greatly, from floodplains of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers to the primary and secondary bluffs of these rivers. The topography of Mendota Heights includes rolling to hilly terrain interspersed with poorly drained depressions that form many ponds and small lakes. Steep slopes occur along the Minnesota and Mississippi river bluffs on the western and northern borders of the city. The majority of the city is dominated by relatively flat terrain at an elevation approximately 200 feet above the river. Mississippi and Minnesota River floodplain also exists on the city’s western border. Elevation in the city ranges from approximately 690 feet along the Minnesota River to approximately 1,030 feet along the city’s northern border with West St. Paul, as illustrated in the Map 7-1. Topography. The surficial geology of Mendota Heights consists of glacial and alluvial (outwash) deposits which cover most of the city. The City of Mendota Heights is within the Twin Cities Formation of the Eastern St. Croix Moraine geomorphic area. This area was formed at the southern extent of the Superior and Rainey glacial lobes as they flowed side by side as a single lobe and then terminated to form the St. Croix Moraine. As the glacier retreated and melted, it left behind areas of outwash and till deposit formations. The area of outwash formations that is located in the western portion of the city is comprised of silt, sand, and gravel that were carried, sorted, and deposited by glacial melt-water. The area of till formations located in the eastern two-thirds of the city is composed of unsorted clay, silt, sand, and boulders transported and deposited by glacial ice. Silt and sand lenses are interspersed throughout this formation. The original terrain and vegetation of the area were mainly altered for purposes of farming when the area was first settled. Marshes and wetlands were left relatively undisturbed except for a few ditching projects. More detailed information on the drainage system of the city can be found in the city’s 2018 Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) Appendix I. 10 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Soils The Soil Conservation Service has identified the following soil associations within the City of Mendota Heights: •Nearly Level Soils on the Floodplains. This area is on the floodplains of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers, mostly located in the Fort Snelling State Park. The area consists of mixed Alluvial sand and some Sawmill soils. Colo soils, Riverwash, and Peat Muck are also present. •Light Colored, Rolling to Hilly Soils. This general area is in the Morainic part of the County. It is characterized by steep slopes and numerous poorly drained depressions. The soils are extremely variable in depth, texture, and productivity. The major soils include Scandia Kingsley, Hayden, and Burnsville series. Included are soils of the Freer and Adolph series. •Light Colored to Moderately Dark Colored, Rolling to Loose Hilly Soils on Till. In topography and texture, this soil association is mostly the light colored rolling high soils described above. Most of the soils develop from calcareous materials. The major soils in the area include the Hayden, Burnsville, Lester series. 11 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Topography Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 50' Contour Lines Elevation up to 700' Elevation 700' - 750' Elevation 750' - 800' Elevation 800' - 850' Elevation 850' - 900' Elevation 900' - 950' Elevation 950' - 1,000' Elevation above 1,000' City Boundary Land Parcel Line Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 7-1 Map 7-1. Topography Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2016 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Topography Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 50' Contour Lines Elevation up to 700' Elevation 700' - 750' Elevation 750' - 800' Elevation 800' - 850' Elevation 850' - 900' Elevation 900' - 950' Elevation 950' - 1,000' Elevation above 1,000' City Boundary Land Parcel Line Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 7-1 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Topography Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 50' Contour Lines Elevation up to 700' Elevation 700' - 750' Elevation 750' - 800' Elevation 800' - 850' Elevation 850' - 900' Elevation 900' - 950' Elevation 950' - 1,000' Elevation above 1,000' City Boundary Land Parcel Line Open Water City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2016 June 2019 FIGURE 7-1 12 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Rivers, Streams, Lakes, and Wetlands The City of Mendota Heights has many water resources available for the use and enjoyment of its residents. These include rivers, lakes, wetlands, and streams that are important surface water resources within the community. Many of these major water resources are State of Minnesota Public Waters and are protected as such. Additional and more comprehensive information regarding the city’s surface water resources, and surface water resources related issues; including impaired waters, assessments, and subsequent action steps can be found in the city’s 2018 Surface Water Management Plan (attached as Appendix I of this plan). Lakes Lake Augusta Lake Augusta is a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) public water, identified as Public Water 81P. It is a land-locked lake, with a maximum depth of 33 feet, a median depth of approximately 18 feet, and an area of approximately 44 acres. The area of its watershed is approximately 410 acres, giving a watershed to lake-ratio of 9.3 to 1. Lake Augusta is included in the State’s Impaired Waters List for Nutrients Impairment, and as a result has been approved for a Total Maximum Daily Load Study. The city has partnered with the Lower Mississippi Water Management Organization to conduct a feasibility study for Lake Augusta, to potentially address the issues of erosion, nutrients, and the possibility of creating an outlet. Augusta LakeAugusta Lake 6262 5555 35E Lake Agusta, Created by: SHC, Source: USDA Aerial Photography Field Office 13 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Lemay Lake Lemay Lake is a Minnesota DNR Public Water, identified as Public Water 82W, and is located in the upper reaches of the Industrial Park drainage district. It is a shallow lake with a maximum depth of approximately 13 feet. Shallow lakes are typically dominated by wetland habitat that provide critical resources for fish and wildlife. Lemay Lake has a watershed of 98.5 acres with a surface area of 30 acres, giving a watershed to lake-ratio of 3.3 to 1. The lake drains via an outlet that extends under Hwy 55. Gun Club Lake Gun Club Lake and the stream that serves as its outlet are DNR public waters, identified as Public Water 78P. The lake resides within the floodplain of the Minnesota River, and is located in the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. The lake discharges to an unnamed stream that flows to the Minnesota River. Although Gun Club Lake resides within city limits, it is managed by Fort Snelling State Park. Rogers Lake Roger’s Lake is a DNR Public Water (80P). It is a shallow lake, with a maximum depth of 8 feet. Its surface area is approximately 114 acres, with a watershed of approximately 366 acres, giving it a watershed to lake-ratio of 3.2 to 1. The lake discharges to the city’s storm sewer system along Wagon Wheel Trail. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-12 shallow lake with a maximum depth of approximately 13 feet. Shallow lakes are typically dominated by wetland habitat that provide critical resources for fish and wildlife. Lemay Lake has a watershed of 98.5 acres with a surface area of 30 acres, giving a watershed to lake- ratio of 3.3 to 1. The lake drains via an outlet that extends under Hwy 55. Gun Club Lake Gun Club Lake and the stream that serves as its outlet are DNR public waters, identified as Public Water 78P. The lake resides within the floodplain of the Minnesota River, and is located in the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. The lake discharges to an unnamed stream that flows to the Minnesota River. Although Gun Club Lake resides within city limits, it is managed by Fort Snelling State Park. Rogers Lake Roger’s Lake is a DNR Public Water (80P). It is a shallow lake, with a maximum depth of 8 feet. Its surface area is approximately 114 acres, with a watershed of approximately 366 acres, giving it a watershed to lake- ratio of 3.2 to 1. The lake discharges to the City’s storm sewer system along Wagon Wheel Trail. Source: Dakota County GIS Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights Gun Club LakeGun Club Lake 5555 494 Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-12 shallow lake with a maximum depth of approximately 13 feet. Shallow lakes are typically dominated by wetland habitat that provide critical resources for fish and wildlife. Lemay Lake has a watershed of 98.5 acres with a surface area of 30 acres, giving a watershed to lake- ratio of 3.3 to 1. The lake drains via an outlet that extends under Hwy 55. Gun Club Lake Gun Club Lake and the stream that serves as its outlet are DNR public waters, identified as Public Water 78P. The lake resides within the floodplain of the Minnesota River, and is located in the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. The lake discharges to an unnamed stream that flows to the Minnesota River. Although Gun Club Lake resides within city limits, it is managed by Fort Snelling State Park. Rogers Lake Roger’s Lake is a DNR Public Water (80P). It is a shallow lake, with a maximum depth of 8 feet. Its surface area is approximately 114 acres, with a watershed of approximately 366 acres, giving it a watershed to lake- ratio of 3.2 to 1. The lake discharges to the City’s storm sewer system along Wagon Wheel Trail. Source: Dakota County GIS Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights Gun Club Lake, Created by: SHC, Source: USDA Aerial Photography Field Office 14 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Friendly Marsh and Copperfield Ponds This lake consists of three separate basins referred to as the Copperfield Ponds, which contain the two upper basins; and Friendly Marsh, which is the lower basin, and has a normal water level of approximately two feet lower in elevation than the two upper basins. The upper two basins are separated by a narrow isthmus, and connected by a culvert. These three basins are identified as Minnesota DNR Public Water 103P. Given the differences in normal water level elevations for each of these three basins, the hydrologic model considers these three separate basins. Streams and Rivers Interstate Valley Creek Interstate Valley Creek is an intermittent stream that begins near the intersection of Highway 62 (formerly 110) and Highway 149 (Dodd Road) at the outlet of Friendly Marsh. The creek flows northward, and generally parallels Interstate 35E. A portion of the creek is identified as a DNR Public Water, and is also on the State’s Impaired Waters List for the pollutant E-coli. A Total Maximum Daily Load Study has been approved for this creek as a result. Interstate Valley Creek has the single largest watershed within the City of Mendota Heights. Its watershed also includes areas within the cities of Inver Grove Heights, Sunfish Lake, and West St. Paul. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-13 Friendly Marsh and Copperfield Ponds This lake consists of three separate basins referred to as the Copperfield Ponds, which contain the two upper basins; and Friendly Marsh, which is the lower basin, and has a normal water level of approximately two feet lower in elevation than the two upper basins. The upper two basins are separated by a narrow isthmus, and connected by a culvert. These three basins are identified as Minnesota DNR Public Water 103P. Given the differences in normal water level elevations for each of these three basins, the hydrologic model considers these three separate basins. Streams and Rivers Interstate Valley Creek Interstate Valley Creek is an intermittent stream that begins near the intersection of Highway 62 (formerly 110) and Highway 149 (Dodd Road) at the outlet of Friendly Marsh. The creek flows northward, and generally parallels Interstate 35E. A portion of the creek is identified as a DNR Public Water, and is also on the State’s Impaired Waters List for the pollutant E-coli. A Total Maximum Daily Load Study has been approved for this creek as a result. Interstate Valley Creek has the single largest watershed within the City of Mendota Heights. Its watershed also includes areas within the cities of Inver Grove Heights, Sunfish Lake, and West St. Paul. Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-13 Friendly Marsh and Copperfield PondsThis lake consists of three separatebasins referred to as the CopperfieldPonds, which contain the two upperbasins; and Friendly Marsh, which is the lower basin, and has a normal water level of approximately two feet lower in elevation than the two upper basins. The upper two basins are separated by a narrow isthmus, and connected by a culvert. These three basins are identified as Minnesota DNR Public Water 103P. Given the differences in normal water level elevations for each of these three basins, the hydrologic model considers these three separate basins. Streams and Rivers Interstate Valley Creek Interstate Valley Creek is an intermittent stream that begins near the intersection of Highway 62 (formerly 110) and Highway 149 (Dodd Road) at the outlet of Friendly Marsh. The creek flows northward, and generally parallels Interstate 35E. A portion of the creek is identified as a DNR Public Water, and is also on the State’s Impaired Waters List for the pollutant E-coli. A Total Maximum Daily Load Study has been approved for this creek as a result. Interstate Valley Creek has the single largest watershed within the City of Mendota Heights. Its watershed also includes areas within the cities of Inver Grove Heights, Sunfish Lake, and West St. Paul. Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights 15 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Ivy Falls Creek Ivy Falls Creek is an intermittent stream that begins within the Somerset Golf Course and flows northwest, discharging to Pickerel Lake in the City of Lilydale. The gradient of the creek is steep; dropping 180 feet in elevation from Dodd Road to Highway 13, and flows over a 50-foot waterfall before terminating in Pickerel Lake. This steep gradient makes the creek susceptible to erosion. Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers The Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers are Minnesota Public Waters within the City of Mendota Heights, but the shorelines of these rivers are under the jurisdiction of, and managed by, Fort Snelling State Park. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-14 Ivy Falls CreekIvy Falls Creek is an intermittent stream that begins within the Somerset GolfCourse and flows northwest, discharging to Pickerel Lake in the City of Lilydale. The gradient of the creek is steep; dropping 180 feet in elevation from Dodd Roadto Highway 13, and flows over a 50-foot waterfall before terminating in PickerelLake. This steep gradient makes the creek susceptible to erosion. Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers The Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers are Minnesota Public Waters within the City of Mendota Heights, but the shorelines of these rivers are under the jurisdiction of, and managed by, Fort Snelling State Park. Source: City of Mendota Heights Source:City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights 16 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Wetlands Wetlands are an important surface water resource and significant asset to the city and its residents. They provide a variety of benefits and functions including filtering stormwater pollutants, providing flood protection and storage, and providing wildlife habitat and recreational enjoyment. The city contains many wetland areas that vary in quality. Most are impacted by stormwater runoff, with some receiving direct input from storm pipes. Wetland areas are protected under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and Minnesota Rule 8420. The City Council is also the Local Government Unit for Mendota Heights, and is responsible for administrating the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) within the city. In accordance with State Rules and the Minnesota WCA, the city has adopted and maintained a Wetlands Systems Ordinance under City Code Title 12-2-1 and provides for Wetland Protection under City Code Title 14-1-9, all of which help ensure the preservation and enhancement of the functions and values of its wetlands. It is anticipated that the Wetland Management Plan, through wetland inventorying, will provide a planning tool for the city to use for future projects that may affect wetlands. The inventory of wetlands will allow the city to identify restoration areas within public lands, enhance wetland value for wildlife, provide and enhance recreational values of wetlands, designate wetland restoration or enhancement opportunities, protect wetlands and adjacent resources that provide valuable ecological support, and provide stormwater protection. The city is also an active participant in the Wetland Health Evaluation Program (WHEP), which engages citizens in evaluating and monitoring the health of wetland areas throughout the city. Map 7-2. Wetlands is also included as part of the city’s 2018 Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). More detailed information on the city’s wetlands can be found in the 2018 SWMP, included as Appendix I. Floodplain Although the City of Mendota Heights is located in close proximity to the Mississippi River and the Minnesota River, floodplain does not exist within developed areas of the city. As the Floodplain map portrays, there is floodplain on both sides of the Mississippi River and Minnesota River, within the cities of St. Paul, Lilydale, Mendota, and Eagan. This floodplain makes up the majority of the northwest boundary of the city. 17 Map 7-2. Wetlands 18 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Watersheds Mendota Heights is part of two watersheds: The Lower Mississippi and Lower Minnesota River watersheds, which are illustrated on Map 7-3. Hydrography. The Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO) encompasses 50 square miles in Dakota and Ramsey Counties. Other surrounding communities include: Inver Grove Heights, Lilydale, St. Paul, South St. Paul, Sunfish Lake, and West St. Paul. The LMRWMO was established by a Joint Powers Agreement in 1985. The watershed contains well-drained soils with many small depressions and steep slopes. Issues of concern include water quality, erosion control, wildlife habitat and water recreation. The Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) is located in the southwest part of the Twin Cities metropolitan area along the Minnesota River. The district boundaries encompass an area of 64 square miles of Carver, Hennepin, Dakota, Scott, and Ramsey counties, which includes the Minnesota River Valley from Fort Snelling, at the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers, upstream to Carver, Minnesota. The width of the district includes the bluffs on both sides of the Minnesota River within this reach of the river. The City of Mendota Heights entered into an agreement with the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District in 2005. Issues of concern include dredging, spoil site acquisition, and bank erosion control. Significant Vegetation The City of Mendota Heights contains a wide variety of forested areas including a large amount of floodplain forest along the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. There is a large area of altered, non-native deciduous forest on the east side of Gun Club Lake. Map 7-4. Significant Vegetation illustrates the location of wooded and forested areas throughout the city. A Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) search was performed for the areas below the bluffs. The bluffs themselves are upland areas. The MLCCS Summary Table 1 (City of Mendota Heights 2018 SWMP, Section 2.6) provides a list of the land cover types below the bluffs and the area of each type that falls within the Mendota Heights city limits. Of special note is the presence of a calcareous seepage fen prairie. The Lower Minnesota River Watershed District considers calcareous fens to be high priority areas for wetland preservation and restoration. 19 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDCAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION EAGAN-INVER GROVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZTION LOWER MINNESOTA WATERSHED DISTRICT Hydrography Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Watershed Boundary Open Water Wetland 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: FEMA, City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 7-3 Map 7-3. Hydrography Map created June 2019, Source: FEMA, City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY F A L L S A V E LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION EAGAN-INVER GROVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZTION LOWER MINNESOTA WATERSHED DISTRICT Hydrography Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Watershed Boundary Open Water Wetland 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: FEMA, City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 7-3 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RD CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT DODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY F A L L S A V E LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION EAGAN-INVER GROVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZTION LOWER MINNESOTA WATERSHED DISTRICT Hydrography Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Watershed Boundary Open Water Wetland 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: FEMA, City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 7-3 20 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Table 7-1. MLCCS Summary of Areas Below the Bluffs Land Cover Description Total Area (acres) Oak (forest or woodland) with 11-25% impervious cover 1.9 51% to 75% impervious cover with deciduous trees 18.0 Pavement with 91-100% impervious cover 2.5 Short grasses with sparse tree cover on upland soils 10.2 Short grasses on upland soils 5.5 Oak forest 3.9 Floodplain forest 209.8 Lowland hardwood forest 6.1 Aspen forest - temporarily flooded 1.5 Mixed hardwood swamp - seasonally flooded 7.2 Altered/non-native deciduous woodland 2.8 Altered/non-native dominated temporarily flooded shrubland 0.8 Willow swamp 3.3 Medium-tall grass altered/non-native dominated grassland 12.8 Temporarily flooded altered/non-native dominated grassland 2.0 Calcareous seepage fen prairie subtype 37.0 Mixed emergent marsh - seasonally flooded 62.5 Mixed emergent marsh 106.4 Mixed emergent marsh - intermittently exposed 57.2 Mixed emergent marsh - permanently flooded 22.1 Grassland with sparse deciduous trees - altered/non-native dominated vegetation 3.4 River mud flats 3.6 Slow moving linear open water habitat 139.3 Limnetic open water 145.1 Palustrine open water 41.6 Source: City of Mendota Heights 2018 SWMP, Section 2.6 21 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Significant Vegetation Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Altered/Non-Native Deciduous Forest Altered/Non-Native Deciduous Woodland Altered/Non-Native Mixed Woodland Aspen Forest Floodplain Forest Lowland Hardwood Forest Maple-Basswood Forest Oak Forest White Pine-Hardwood Forest Mesic Prairie Open Water Wetland City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County MLCCS, 2013 June 2019 FIGURE 7-4 Map 7-4. Significant Vegetation Map created June 2019, Source: Dakota County MLCCS, 2013 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY F A L L S A V E Significant Vegetation Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Altered/Non-Native Deciduous Forest Altered/Non-Native Deciduous Woodland Altered/Non-Native Mixed Woodland Aspen Forest Floodplain Forest Lowland Hardwood Forest Maple-Basswood Forest Oak Forest White Pine-Hardwood Forest Mesic Prairie Open Water Wetland City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County MLCCS, 2013 June 2019 FIGURE 7-4 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY F A L L S A V E Significant Vegetation Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Altered/Non-Native Deciduous Forest Altered/Non-Native Deciduous Woodland Altered/Non-Native Mixed Woodland Aspen Forest Floodplain Forest Lowland Hardwood Forest Maple-Basswood Forest Oak Forest White Pine-Hardwood Forest Mesic Prairie Open Water Wetland City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: Dakota County MLCCS, 2013 June 2019 FIGURE 7-4 22 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update A variety of vegetation also surrounds Lake Augusta and Lemay Lake, including the following: altered/non-native deciduous forest, altered/non-native deciduous woodland, oak forest, native dominated disturbed upland shrubland, and aspen forest. The east side of 35E within the City of Mendota Heights, just before entering Lilydale, contains a variety of vegetation, from altered/non-native deciduous forest, altered/non-native deciduous woodland, altered/non-native mixed woodland, oak forest, floodplain forest, and lowland hardwood forest. There are also pockets of a variety of forests and woodlands between 35E and the boundary with West St. Paul and Sunfish Lake, especially surrounding the water features. Site Classifications and Natural Resources Issues Natural areas abound in Mendota Heights on public as well as on private lands. The city manages natural resources at both the site level and by broad, city-wide natural resource issues, through city policies and ordinances, collaboration with other agencies and citizen groups, and the use of adopted plans and guidance documents. Parks and Trails Some of Mendota Heights’ Parks have areas of woodland or naturalized landscapes. Park natural areas with high ecological quality should be prioritized and actively managed. Open Spaces There are many other city-owned natural areas that are not part of Mendota Heights’ Park System. Many of these contain wetlands or steep slopes. Some have high quality oak woodlands. Open spaces provide habitat, natural resource connections, stormwater management, and visual interest. Some open space sites have moderate to high ecological quality and should be inventoried and identified on an ecological overlay as part of the city GIS mapping and asset inventory. Active management is needed to sustain these high quality resources. 23 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update City-wide Natural Resources Issues and Natural Resources Trees and Urban Forest Mendota Heights’ urban forest includes boulevard trees, park trees, woodlands, and trees on private property. The city’s forestry program includes: trimming and removal of trees on city property, tree planting on city property, diseased tree inspection and management when feasible, and education and outreach. In 2017, Emerald Ash Borer was documented for the first time in Mendota Heights. The city began ash tree removals on city property in December 2017, and will continue management into the future. The city anticipates it will lose most of its ash trees to this invasive insect. Given the proximity of Mendota Heights to the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers and accompanying tree-lined bluffs, the city has an opportunity and responsibility to protect and enhance native species of trees in the city. The management, removal, and replacement of invasive trees and shrubs with native species helps sustain the city’s natural resources, the river bluffs, critical areas, ecological communities, as well as quality of life for the community. Urban Wildlife Large areas of contiguous habitat are needed for healthy, diverse wildlife. The city’s approach to wildlife management is on providing habitat for wildlife. While the city does not manage for particular species, it does strive to manage for and increase native plant diversity to provide higher quality habitat for native pollinators. The city became a Pollinator Friendly City in 2016 (see Resolution 2016-01, adopted January 5, 2016 and Pollinator Friendly Native Plantings List – Appendix E). In accordance with that policy, and best practices for protecting and increasing Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-22 City-wide Natural Resources Issues and Natural Resources Trees and Urban Forest Mendota Heights’ urban forest includes boulevard trees, park trees, woodlands, and treeson private property. The City’s forestry program includes: trimming and removal of trees on City property, tree planting on City property, diseased tree inspection and management when feasible, and education and outreach. In 2017, Emerald Ash Borer was documented for the first time in Mendota Heights. The City began ash tree removals on City property in December 2017, and will continue management into the future. The City anticipates it will lose most of its ash trees to this invasive insect. Given the proximity of Mendota Heights to the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers and accompanying tree-lined bluffs, the City has an opportunity and responsibility to protect and enhance native species of trees in the City. The management, removal, and replacement of invasive trees and shrubs with native species helps sustain the City’s natural resources, the river bluffs, critical areas, ecological communities, as well as quality of life for the community. Urban Wildlife Large areas of contiguous habitat are needed for healthy, diverse wildlife. The City’s approach to wildlife management is on providing habitat for wildlife. While the City does not manage for particular species, it does strive to manage for and increase native plant diversity to provide higher quality habitat for native pollinators. The City became a Pollinator Friendly City in 2016 (see Resolution 2016-01, adoptedJanuary 5, 2016 and Pollinator Friendly Native Plantings List – APPENDIX C). In accordance with that policy, and best practices for protecting and increasing native pollinators, the City will continue its efforts to protect native pollinators as well as other beneficial insects. Urban wildlife can sometimes become a nuisance by damaging gardens, congregating in yards, or creating public safety issues. The City has a deer Source: Natural Resources Advisory Committee 24 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update native pollinators, the city will continue its efforts to protect native pollinators as well as other beneficial insects. Urban wildlife can sometimes become a nuisance by damaging gardens, congregating in yards, or creating public safety issues. The city has a deer management program in Valley Park which monitors deer population and uses annual bow-hunt removals. The city does not have removal programs for geese, turkey, beaver or other wildlife. Meadows and Prairies Historically, Mendota Heights had several areas of native grassland prairie. Much of that has been lost to development, although there may be some small fragmented areas that remain within the city as illustrated on Map 7-4. Significant Vegetation. Prairies and meadows are beneficial to native pollinators and other wildlife such as non- migratory and migratory birds, as well as for stormwater infiltration, filtration, and interception. Reestablishing native meadows and prairies throughout the city will help create contiguous pollinator corridors, provide sustainable management practices, and cost savings measures. Private Property Private, residential, commercial, industrial, and other land uses are an integral part of the city’s overall ecosystem and play an important role in the health of birds, pollinators, wildlife, water quality, and more. The city will engage in outreach activities, various collaborative opportunities for home and business owners (e.g., curb-cut rain gardens with road reconstruction projects), and educational forums, in order to enhance knowledge, encourage environmentally sustainable behaviors, build community, and enhance the overall health of the city’s ecosystem. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Natural Resources 7-23 management program in Valley Park which monitors deer population and uses annual bow-hunt removals. The City does not have removal programs for geese, turkey, beaver or other wildlife. Meadows and Prairies Historically, Mendota Heights had several areas of native grassland prairie. Much of that has been lost to development, although there may be some small fragmented areas that remain within the City as illustrated on the Significant Vegetation Map – FIGURE 7-4. Prairies and meadows are beneficial to native pollinators and other wildlife such as non-migratory and migratory birds, as well as for stormwater infiltration, filtration, and interception. Reestablishing native meadows and prairies throughout the City will help create contiguous pollinator corridors, provide sustainable management practices, and cost savings measures. Private Property Private, residential, commercial, industrial, and other land uses are an integral part of the City’s overall ecosystem and play an important role in the health of birds, pollinators, wildlife, water quality, and more. The City will engage in outreach activities, various collaborative opportunities for home and business owners (e.g., curb-cut raingardens with road reconstruction projects), and educational forums, in order to enhance knowledge, encourage environmentally sustainable behaviors, build community, and enhance the overall health of the City’s ecosystem. Invasive Vegetation Invasive vegetation is vegetation that is non-native (or alien) to the ecosystem under consideration; and whose presence or introduction causes, or is likely to cause, economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.Controlling invasive vegetation before it becomes widespread is more effective and less costly than managing it after widespread establishment. The City is committed to control or eradicate invasive species on the State Noxious Weed list. Source:City of Mendota HeightsSource: City of Mendota Heights 25 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Invasive Vegetation Invasive vegetation is vegetation that is non-native (or alien) to the ecosystem under consideration; and whose presence or introduction causes, or is likely to cause, economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. Controlling invasive vegetation before it becomes widespread is more effective and less costly than managing it after widespread establishment. The city is committed to control or eradicate invasive species on the State Noxious Weed list. Surface Water Quality The city has a diverse collection of surface water resources within its boundaries including lakes, streams, rivers, and wetlands. Protecting these resources requires ensuring that the storm water that enters these surface waters does not degrade, or further degrade, the health of the city’s surface water resources and the aesthetic, ecological, and recreational benefit they provide. The city utilizes a variety of strategies to monitor and protect its surface water resources including: •Collaboration with other government agencies, community groups, and citizens to help monitor and protect these resources. •The city uses its current Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) as a guide to conserve, protect, and manage the city’s surface water resources. •The City of Mendota Heights holds a required National Pollution Detection and Elimination System (NPDES Phase II) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit (see the SWMP, within the Appendix) with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, that includes an evaluation of the city’s stormwater system, and a Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), that identifies Best Management Practices, goals, and actions for implementation. •The city works in conjunction with Watershed Districts, Watershed Management Organizations, and other government agencies to establish strategies for addressing its impaired waters. Surface waters are designated as impaired if they do not meet State standards for their designated use due to a specific pollutant or stressor. Impaired Waters within Mendota Heights include the Minnesota River, Interstate Valley Creek, and Lake Augusta. 26 Chapter 7 - Natural Resources City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •The city also has adopted water resources management ordinances and policies that include Title 14, Chapter 1 of City Code: Stormwater Management, Illicit Discharge, Soil Erosion, and Sedimentation, which establishes standards and specifications for conservation practices and planning activities to protect and enhance water quality. Issues & Opportunities The City of Mendota Heights finds it critical to prioritize projects to protect and manage the most important sites to make the best use of funding and staff time. The science of managing natural systems continues to evolve. The city will continue to cultivate strong partnerships with other agencies, non-profits, and citizen groups to seek expertise in the management of its natural resources. Additionally, the city will strive to educate residents on environmental issues and foster stewardship and volunteerism. Grants for enhancing natural areas that are available through State, County, and other agencies should be vetted on an ongoing basis by city staff. The city should inventory and track natural resource assets such as open space sites, public trees, and permanent stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs). This will provide an opportunity to better manage these resources. The city should also manage all of its surface water resources using scientifically based, common sense approaches that meet or exceed regional, state, and federal regulatory requirements. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 8: Resilience This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 8 RESILIENCE Resilience can be defined as the ability to recover from difficulties – the ability to return to a sense of normalcy. Preventing disasters is the first priority but responding effectively to disasters is also essential to be resilient. Between 2012 and 2018 alone, Mendota Heights faced three serious emergencies, two of which were weather-related, the other infrastructure related. To be resilient Mendota Heights needs to anticipate disasters and be ready to respond to catastrophic events. In the wake of climate change, our community’s resiliency will likely be challenged, since extreme weather is likely to continue with increased frequency. This chapter outlines reactive strategies for handling emergency services in the event of disaster as well as proactive strategies for mitigating the effects of climate change. The world’s climate is changing, and the growing frequency and large-scale impact of severe weather events demonstrates the importance of building a foundation of resilient systems to meet ordinary and extraordinary circumstances. Resilience is not a required element for the 2040 Comprehensive Plans in the region, but Mendota Heights is committed to investing in resilience. Supporting resiliency strategies will protect local and regional vitality for future generations by preserving our capacity to maintain and support our region’s well-being and productivity. Considerations of vulnerabilities in resilience strategies, and response to those vulnerabilities, will strengthen community preparedness and response to climate impacts. The Resilience update for Mendota Heights primarily focuses on goals and policies related to: -Hazard mitigation and emergency response; -Climate action; -Resilient energy; and -Resilient food systems. Additional chapters within the Mendota Heights 2040 plan also contribute to building resilience in Mendota Heights, which include Land Use; Natural Resources; Parks and Trails; Transportation; and Economic Development. 2 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Hazard Mitigation & Emergency Response Dakota County Hazard Mitigation Plan In 2016, Dakota County developed an All-Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan incorporated numerous cities and townships in Dakota County and was developed to identify and prepare for a variety of hazards such as flooding or tornadoes before they occur. The purpose of the plan is to reduce the loss of lives and property damage in the event of a hazard occurring in the area. The All-Hazard Mitigation Plan includes a list of goals, objectives and strategies for the county to better prepare and coordinate efforts for disasters. The goals of the plan include: -Reduce Hazard Risks and Impacts; -Build on Existing Efforts; and -Share Information and Raise Awareness. This plan serves as a framework for managing public and private investment in the face of a changing climate and more severe storm events. Mendota Heights Emergency Operation Plan The Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) was written to ensure a coordinated, effective response by elected officials and city staff to disasters that create significant disruption and stress to community resources. The plan was written per state and federal law to describe proper management of a given emergency or disaster. The purpose of the plan is to: -Maximize the protection of life and property; -Stabilize incidents; -Effectively respond to an emergency or disaster; -Ensure the continuity of government and continuity of services; and -Provide recovery and restoration of services This framework is intended to account for resources and procedures that will allow for the effective response to an emergency or disaster. 3 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Climate Action Minnesota, Dakota County, and the City of Mendota Heights are already experiencing the impacts of a changing climate. Climate trends suggest that in the next 50 years we will experience increased precipitation, hotter summers, warmer and wetter winters, and more severe weather events. These changes can damage infrastructure, disrupt essential services, drain resources and impact a city’s capacity to respond to citizen’s needs. These climate changes are also expected to have substantial impacts on public health and emergency responders as a result. Direct impacts include increases in injuries and deaths attributed to extreme heat events, extreme weather events (e.g., floods), air pollution, and vector-borne and other infectious diseases (see Figure 8-1). Climate resilient communities can prevent the worst public health and economic impacts of climate change by effectively adapting the built environment to climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the impacts of climate change. Many of the solutions to reducing impacts are already a part of our municipal government expertise. In many instances, responding to climate change does not require large scale changes to municipal operations, but simply requires adapting existing plans and polices to incorporate knowledge about changing Figure 8-1. Changes in Our Atmosphere Lead to Health Effects Source: Health Effects of Climate Change, 2016. Minnesota Department of Health. https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/climate/ climate101.html 4 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update levels of risk across key areas such as public health, infrastructure planning and emergency management. Strategies which strengthen resilience in time of emergency also help communities thrive even more during good times. Population Vulnerability Assessment & Climate Adaptation Framework A Population Vulnerability Assessment and Climate Adaptation Framework may seek to: •Increase awareness of potential climate impacts and population vulnerabilities; •Increase inclusion of climate adaptation dialogue within city planning and decision making processes; •Strengthen adaptive capacity based on the best available information on regional climate change projections and impacts; •Outline priority risks, vulnerabilities, and possible near-term actions; •Lay the foundation for the development of implementation plans that consider available resources and prioritize the most effective actions from a cost and benefit perspective; and •Prevent or reduce the risks to populations most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. A Population Vulnerability Assessment describes how climate affects the community and region of today, and the changes and impacts expected over the coming decades, and includes identifiers of population vulnerabilities. A Climate Adaptation Framework provides recommended Adaptation Goals as well as a menu of Adaptation Strategies. The city can enact these climate resilience goals and strategies to reduce the impact of climate change, improve public health, and expand the local economy. Across all of these goals, there are four priority areas of action. 1.Assess vulnerabilities - e specially among populations most vulnerable to climate change impacts. 2. Train and educate local officials, planners, and community organizations 5 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 3.Incorporate climate vulnerabilities into existing planning documents. 4. Develop partnerships to fund on-going research and implementation. GOALS & POLICIES – Hazard Mitigation & Climate Action GOAL 1: Protect and maintain infrastructure and constructed systems that provide critical services. Policies 1.Assess public buildings and sites for vulnerabilities to extreme weather and make improvements to reduce or prevent damage and sustain function. Increase the resilience of natural and built environment to more intense rain events and associated flooding. 2.Improve the reliability of back-up energy for critical infrastructure. Support well- planned improvements to the private utility and communications networks that provide efficiency, security and needed redundancy. 3.Continue to explore and incorporate new and emerging technologies to construct, rehabilitate, maintain and manage public assets and infrastructure in an efficient, cost effective manner. 4.Support the efforts of residents and businesses to plant and install new trees in areas with low coverage, areas with high heat vulnerability, or areas exposed to more vehicle exhaust. 6 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 2: Proactively maintain public health and safety during extreme weather and climate-related and other unforeseen events. Policies 1.Continue to work with Dakota County in updating the All- Hazard Mitigation Plan and partner to ensure essential needs of all residents are met during an emergency. 2. Investigate funding opportunities to support the city’s resilience efforts. 3.Consider conducting a Population Vulnerability Assessment and Climate Adaptation Framework plan to outline priority vulnerabilities and identify available resources to strengthen community capacity to respond. 4.Designate appropriate facilities that will be made available to the public as community safe shelters and arrange for adequate provisions and backup power. 5.Coordinate with emergency dispatch and first responders to address the specific concerns of residents who may be more vulnerable in each type of event. GOAL 3: Promote social connectedness and build an engaged community of resilience. Policies 1.Strengthen working relationships with community organizations to support the most at-risk residents. 2. Promote education and outreach with the community on the health impacts and risk mitigation of air pollution, longer allergy seasons, extreme heat, water quality changes, and vector-borne disease. 3. Promote and report on the city’s sustainability and resilience projects and initiatives. 4. Review ordinances with respect to recreational fires and particulate emissions and update as needed to protect and maintain healthy air quality. 5. Review emergency communications procedures to ensure the public is adequately informed in the event of an emergency. Develop a communications plan for the residents to inform them in the event of an emergency. 7 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Resilient Energy Local renewable energy resources are abundant and readily available for economic capture. Renewable energy resources currently available in Mendota Heights include solar, with the potential to incorporate wind, biomass, geothermal, and efficiency resources (e.g. building improvements for energy efficiency). All of these resources should be evaluated for use at residential, private and community scale. Mendota Heights desires to set goals and policies that treat sustainable local energy resources as an economically valuable local resource. Strategies to reduce energy consumption including alternative modes of transportation must be initiated. Renewable Energy Efforts in Mendota Heights The City of Mendota Heights is committed to a resilient future, including promoting renewable energy where feasible. The city has existing code language supporting residential rooftop and ground-mounted solar development throughout the community. Although solar energy systems are allowed in all zoning districts, systems must be accessory to the primary land use. Large- scale commercial solar farms or gardens are not currently allowed in Mendota Heights. The ordinance also addresses building-integrated solar systems and passive solar energy systems. As stated in the goals for this chapter and emphasized in the code of ordinances, Mendota Heights supports the development of solar energy systems that result in a net gain in energy and do not have negative impacts on surrounding uses and surrounding solar access. This Plan also includes information on gross solar resources to provide data context to these recommendations. 8 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Gross and Rooftop Solar Resources The Metropolitan Council has calculated the gross and rooftop solar potential for the City of Mendota Heights to identify how much electricity could be generated using existing technology. The gross solar potential and gross solar rooftop potential are expressed in megawatt hours per year (Mwh/yr), and these estimates are provided in Table 8-1. Gross and Rooftop Solar Potential: Table 8-1. Gross and Rooftop Solar Potential Community1 Gross Potential (Mwh/yr) Rooftop Potential (Mwh/yr) Gross Generation Potential (Mwh/yr)22 Rooftop Generation Potential (Mwh/yr)2 Mendota Heights 12,356,007 945,566 1,235,600 94,556 Source: Metropolitan Council Developed areas with low building heights and open space areas have the highest potential for solar development in the city. Many of the developed neighborhoods and some natural areas in Mendota Heights do not have high gross solar potential due to existing tree cover. This gross development potential is illustrated on Map 8-1. Gross Solar Potential. 1. There are a few communities where generation potential calculations could not be produced. There are areas within some maps where data was unusable. These areas were masked and excluded from gross rooftop potential and generating potential calculations. 2. In general, a conservative assumption for panel generation is to use 10% efficiency for conversion of total isolation into electric generation. These solar resource calculations provide an approximation of each community’s solar resource. This baseline information can provide the opportunity for a more extensive, community-specific analysis of solar development potential for both solar gardens and rooftop or accessory use installations. For most communities, the rooftop generation potential is equivalent to between 30% and 60% of the community’s total electric energy consumption. The rooftop generation potential does not consider ownership, financial barriers, or building-specific limitations. 9 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 35E Mendota Heights DODD RDWENTWORTH AVE W HIGHWAY 110 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVE SONEILL RD DELAWARE AVEPILOT KNOB RDHIGHWAY 13MARIE AVE W 55 55 62 High : 1276135 Low : 900001 Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Gross Solar Potential Source: University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 20.5 Miles 12/22/2016 City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Gross Solar Potential (Watt-hours per Year) MENDOTA LILYDALE Gross Solar Potential Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet City Boundary 35E Mendota Heights DODD RD WENTWORTH AVE W HIGHWAY 110 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVE S ONEILL R D DELAWARE AVEPILOT KNOB RDHIGHWAY 13 MARIE AVE W 55 55 110 High : 1276135 Low : 900001 Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Gross Solar Potential Source:University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 20.5 Miles 12/22/2016 City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Gross Solar Potential (Watt-hours per Year) FIGURE 8-3 June 2019 Source: Metropolitan Council Created June 2019, Source Metropolitan Council Map 8-1. Gross Solar Potential 35E Mendota Heights DODD RD WENTWORTH AVE W HIGHWAY 110 MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVE S ONEILL R D DELAWARE AVEPILOT KNOB RDHIGHWAY 13 MARIE A V E W 55 55 62 High : 1276135 Low : 900001 Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Gross Solar Potential Source: University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 20.5 Miles 12/22/2016 City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Gross Solar Potential (Watt-hours per Year) MENDOTA LILYDALE Gross Solar Potential Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet City Boundary 35EMendotaHeights DODD RD WENTWORTH AVE WHIGHWAY110 MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVE S ONEILL R D DELAWARE AVEPILOT KNOB RDHIGHWAY 13MARIE AVE W 55 55 110 High : 1276135 Low : 900001 Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Gross Solar Potential Source: University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 20.5 Miles 12/22/2016 City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Gross Solar Potential (Watt-hours per Year) FIGURE 8-3 June 2019 Source: Metropolitan Council 35E Mendota Heights DODD RD WENTWORTH AVE W HIGHWAY 110 MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVE S ONEILL R D DELAWARE AVEPILOT KNOB RDHIGHWAY 13 MARIE AVE W 55 55 62 High : 1276135 Low : 900001 Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Gross Solar Potential Source: University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 20.5 Miles 12/22/2016 City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Gross Solar Potential (Watt-hours per Year) MENDOTA LILYDALE Gross Solar Potential Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet City Boundary 35EMendotaHeights DODD RD WENTWORTH AVE WHIGHWAY110 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVE S ONEILL R D DELAWARE AVEPILOT KNOB RDHIGHWAY 13MARIE AVE W 55 55110 High : 1276135 Low : 900001 Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Gross Solar Potential Source:University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. ANOKA DAKOTA HENNEPIN RAMSEY SCOTT WASHINGTON CARVER Extent of Main Map 0 1 20.5 Miles 12/22/2016 City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County Gross Solar Potential (Watt-hours per Year) FIGURE 8-3 June 2019 Source: Metropolitan Council 10 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update The city is committed to demonstrating and providing solar development within the community and on city-owned properties. In 2017 through 2018, the city worked with a solar energy consultant group to provide up to 140-KW of solar energy production at various city- owned sited, including a 40-KW solar field at City Hall, a 60-KW rooftop system at the Public Works facility, and two smaller 20-KW rooftop systems at the Par 3 Golf Course and Fire Station facility, respectively. Images of the City Hall field and rooftop system at Public Works are shown below: Alternative Transportation In our daily lives, a large portion of the energy we consume is a result of the way we move through our community. The mode of transportation in which we chose impacts the amount of energy we use. By supporting alternative modes of transportation, the city helps to enable its citizens to make choices that reduce energy consumption. The utilization of modes of transportation that require less energy than single-occupancy automotive vehicles reduces dependency on finite resources and reduces emissions of greenhouse gases. See the Transportation Chapter for specific goals and policies. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Resilience 8-10 The City is committed to demonstrating and providing solar development within the community and on city-owned properties. In 2017 through 2018, the city worked with a solar energy consultant group to provide up to 140-KW of solar energy production at various city-owned sited,including a 40-KW solar field at City Hall, a 60-KW rooftop system at the Public Works facility, and two smaller 20-KW rooftop systems at the Par 3 Gold Course and Fire Station facility, respectively.Images of the City Hall field and rooftop system at Public Works are shown below: Alternative Transportation In our daily lives, a large portion of the energy we consume is a result of the way we move through our community. The mode of transportation in which we chose impacts the amount of energy we use. By supporting alternative modes of transportation, the City helps to enable its citizens to make choices that reduce energy consumption. The utilization of modes of transportation that require less energy than single-occupancy automotive vehicles reduces dependency on finite resources and reduces emissions of greenhouse gasses. See the Transportation Chapter for specific goals and policies. GOALS and POLICIES -Resilient Energy GOAL 8.4: Continue to support, plan for, and encourage the use of solar energy as a renewable energy source. Policies: 8.4.1 Encourage the development and use of active and/or passive solar energy systems. 8.4.2 Encourage the installation of solar energy system options,for space heating and cooling and hot water heating in residential, commercial and industrial buildings. City Hall Solar Field Public Works Facility –Rooftop Solar Panels Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Resilience 8-10 The City is committed to demonstrating and providing solar development within the community and on city-owned properties. In 2017 through 2018, the city worked with a solar energy consultant group to provide up to 140-KW of solar energy production at various city-owned sited,including a 40-KW solar field at City Hall, a 60-KW rooftop system at the Public Works facility, and two smaller 20-KW rooftop systems at the Par 3 Gold Course and Fire Station facility, respectively.Images of the City Hall field and rooftop system at Public Works are shown below: Alternative Transportation In our daily lives, a large portion of the energy we consume is a result of the way we move through our community. The mode of transportation in which we chose impacts the amount of energy we use. By supporting alternative modes of transportation, the City helps to enable its citizens to make choices that reduce energy consumption. The utilization of modes of transportation that require less energy than single-occupancy automotive vehicles reduces dependency on finite resources and reduces emissions of greenhouse gasses. See the Transportation Chapter for specific goals and policies. GOALS and POLICIES -Resilient Energy GOAL 8.4: Continue to support, plan for, and encourage the use of solar energy as a renewable energy source. Policies: 8.4.1 Encourage the development and use of active and/or passive solar energy systems. 8.4.2 Encourage the installation of solar energy system options,for space heating and cooling and hot water heating in residential, commercial and industrial buildings. City Hall Solar Field Public Works Facility –Rooftop Solar Panels City Hall Solar Field Public Works Facility - Rooftop Solar Panels 11 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS & POLICIES - Resilient Energy GOAL 4: Continue to support, plan for, and encourage the use of solar energy as a renewable energy source. Policies 1.Encourage the development and use of active and/ or passive solar energy systems. 2.Encourage the installation of solar energy system options, for space heating and cooling and hot water heating in residential, commercial and industrial buildings. 3.Consider a site-specific solar energy capacity study for industrial and/or commercial sites to identify the most beneficial placement for solar Photo-Voltaic (PV) development. 4.Provide information on grants and incentives for alternative energy. GOAL 5: Adopt climate mitigation and/or energy independence goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Policies 1.Explore and investigate means to track city vehicles and facility emissions to formulate a baseline and establish greenhouse gas reduction goals every 5 to 10 years to assure progress in city emission reductions. 2.Explore collaborating regionally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 3.Begin the application process to the Minnesota Green Step Cities Program. 4.Encourage alternative fuel stations, electric vehicle charging stations, and supporting infrastructure at commercial sites, office sites, parking ramps and residential sites. 12 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 6: Support long-range planning efforts to build the community’s renewable energy capability and maximize the benefits of renewable energy development. Policies 1.Regularly review renewable energy policies and programs, including the alternative energy systems ordinance (§12-1D-18). 2.Support mass transit goals as detailed in Transportation Section 3. 3.Prioritize infrastructure improvements that support walking and biking as an integral part of the transportation system. Resilient Food System The well-being of our residents is vital to long-term sustainability and prosperity of our community. Local planning policies can reduce or reinforce structural barriers that prevent our food supply from being as healthy, equitable, affordable, and resilient as we would like it to be. By prioritizing policy initiatives at a local level that support a robust food infrastructure, Mendota Heights can help improve the quality of life for its residents and leave a legacy of health for future generations. Small Scale Food Production in Mendota Heights The City of Mendota Heights has an opportunity to build from established food system policy efforts, currently including: •Keeping Chickens: The city permits residents to keep up to six female chickens for individual egg production (§12- 1D-3). The city’s code specifies coop and run requirements as well as guidance on proper care and the permitting process for domestic chickens on residential lots. •Farming Operations: Existing farms are permitted in the city, with the exception of animal farming (§12-1D-8). Farmers may also sell products produced at an on-site farm stand. 13 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •Beekeeping: The City of Mendota Heights allows for the keeping of honey bees on parcels of 50-acres or more in the R-1 Residential Zone (Sect. 12-1E-3C). The acreage limitation was established to minimize the impact honey bees may have on native bees by outcompeting them for food resources, and transmitting diseases to native bees. Access to Food Markets There are no grocery stores or supermarkets within the City of Mendota Heights. Although such markets exist in neighboring municipalities, access to those stores is largely dependent on the automobile. As the population ages, access via automobile may become problematic. An important consideration should be that the city supports local food markets. Disposal of Food Waste and Organic Recycling The City of Mendota Heights participates in Dakota County’s curb-side recycling program and residents can opt-in to participating in the County’s organics drop off program in West St. Paul. Businesses are also eligible to participate in recycling programs with the County to further reduce waste in the city. As technology advances, the city will study the feasibility of introducing curb-side organic recycling programs as has been done in other municipalities in efforts to reduce waste. 14 Chapter 8 - Resilience City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS & POLICIES – Resilient Food System GOAL 7: Explore opportunities to support land use guiding and regulations that support practices that integrate healthy food production in residential settings and support food-related businesses and activities. Policies 1.Support the development of a Mendota Heights Farmers Market as an accessible and reliable source for local, healthy food. 2.Support innovative local food production solutions such as aquaponics, hydroponics, indoor agriculture, backyard gardening and composting, community gardens, and urban farming, where appropriate. 3.Encourage edible and pollinator-friendly landscapes on residential properties. 4.Support innovative practices such as mobile food markets and mobile food pantries/food shelves that can bring food closer to elderly and other under- resourced residents. GOAL 8: Promote responsible waste disposal and study feasibility of improving systems that encourage residents to make responsible decisions. 1.Promote use of County Organics drop-off station. 2.Study feasibility of organics pick-up in the years to come as technology advances and is more readily available. 3.Educate on and support back-yard composting in efforts to reduce waste. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 9: Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 9 MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA Pursuant to the Critical Areas Act of 1973 and Executive Orders in the 1970s, the State of Minnesota established the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan (MRCCA) to protect and preserve the natural, scenic, recreational, and transportation resources of Mississippi River as it travels through the Twin Cities. The MRCCA covers a 72-mile stretch of the Mississippi River through the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, comprising 54,000 acres of land in 30 local jurisdictions from Dayton in the north to Hastings in the south. The purpose of the MRCCA is to: •Protect and preserve the Mississippi River and adjacent lands that the legislature finds to be unique and valuable state and regional resources for the benefit of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the state, region, and nation; •Prevent and/or mitigate irreversible damages to these state, regional, and national resources; •Preserve and enhance the natural, aesthetic, cultural, and historical values of the Mississippi River and adjacent lands for public use and benefit; •Protect and preserve the Mississippi River as an essential element in the national, state, and regional transportation, sewer and water, and recreational systems; and •Protect and preserve the biological and ecological functions of the Mississippi River Corridor. 2 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update The MRCCA is important because of its many significant natural and cultural resources, including scenic views, water, navigation, geology, soils, vegetation, minerals, fauna, cultural resources, and recreational resources. The MRCCA is home to a full range of residential neighborhoods and parks, as well as river-related commerce, industry, and transportation facilities. In 2016, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) revised the rules and regulations governing development within the MRCCA which have been incorporated into this Plan and will be incorporated into the city’s zoning ordinance after Plan approval. Local communities within the Corridor are required to complete a MRCCA plan as a chapter of their Comprehensive Plan update for this Planning Period. The rules also require local governments to update their MRCCA plans and their MRCCA ordinances, if they exist, or create both the plan and supporting ordinances consistent with the rules. MRCCA in Mendota Heights The City of Mendota Heights accepts that the Mississippi River Corridor exists within the metropolitan area and the city is a unique and valuable local, state, regional and national resource. The river is an essential element in the local, regional, state and national transportation, sewer and water, and recreational systems and serves important biological and ecological functions. The prevention and mitigation of irreversible damage to this resource and the preservation and enhancement of its natural, aesthetic, cultural and historic values is in furtherance of the health, safety and general welfare of the city. Since it is a new rule that the MRCCA chapter be incorporated into the Plan, the City of Mendota Heights must create both the chapter and a supporting ordinance to implement the information contained herein. The goals stated within this chapter are new, and prior to this planning process no specific plans or goals were formally adopted by the city. The city did have a reference to the MRCCA/MNRRA which identified the Critical Area Overlay and enforced a corresponding ordinance which provided regulations for all new developments within the overlay area. The city will incorporate applicable sections from the existing ordinance into the updated ordinance, which will be developed to implement this MRCCA chapter. Generally, the boundaries of the MRCCA in Mendota Heights are situated along the Mississippi River Corridor, starting at Fort Snelling State Park / Interstate 494 to the south and extends northwesterly along this natural corridor and Sibley Memorial Highway (State Highway 13) for approximately 5 miles, and to the northerly boundary line of the city at Annapolis Street (See Map 9-1 and Map 9-2). The MRCCA boundary fluctuates in width along this corridor from one-tenth (1/10) to one-third (1/3) of mile in width in areas. Much of this land is used for single-family residential purposes or public park land. 3CA-UMCA-UMCA-RNCA-ROSCA-UMCA-ROSCA-ROSCA-UMCA-ROSCA-SRCA-SRCA-RNCA-RNCA-RTCCA-RNCA-RNCA-RNCA-SRCA-RTCCA-UCCA-RTCCA-RNSaint PaulMendota HeightsNewportSouth Saint PaulLilydaleMendotaMaplewoodInver Grove HeightsMississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) District Map - St. PaulMinnesota Rules, part 6106.0100´00.510.25MilesCA-RN: River NeighborhoodCA-SR: Separated from RiverCA-UM: Urban MixedCA-UC: Urban CoreMRCCA Districts(Effective January 4, 2017)CA-ROS: Rural & Open SpaceCA-RTC: River Towns & CrossingsWaterMunicipal BoundariesMRCCA BoundaryTextFIGURE9-1June 2019Source: Metropolitan CouncilMap 9-1. Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) Districts - Saint Paul Minnesota Rules, part 6106.0100Created June 2019, Source: Metropolitan Council 4 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet MRCCA DISTRICTS CA-ROS Rural & Open Space CA-RN River Neighborhood CA-SR Separated from River CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing City boundary Open Water June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 9-2 Map 9-2 MRCCA - District Map Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet MRCCA DISTRICTS CA-ROS Rural & Open Space CA-RN River Neighborhood CA-SR Separated from River CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing City boundary Open Water June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 9-2 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet MRCCA DISTRICTS CA-ROS Rural & Open Space CA-RN River Neighborhood CA-SR Separated from River CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing City boundary Open Water June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 9-2 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE Mississippi RIver Critical Area District Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet MRCCA DISTRICTS CA-ROS Rural & Open Space CA-RN River Neighborhood CA-SR Separated from River CA-RTC River Towns & Crossing City boundary Open Water June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 9-2 5 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update MRCCA DISTRICTS The Minnesota Rules define six districts within the overall MRCCA designation. These districts are characterized by the various natural and built features of the river corridor. Most standards and requirements outlined in the rules apply uniformly throughout the corridor. However, certain requirements such as structure setbacks, bluff standards, building height limits, additional subdivision standards, and the amount of open space required for development vary by district. There are three (3) MRCCA districts present in Mendota Heights. 1. Rural & Open Space District (CA-ROS): Rural and Open Space District (CA-ROS): The CA-ROS district is characterized by rural low density development patterns and land uses, and includes land that is riparian or visible from the river, as well as large, undeveloped tracts of high ecological value, floodplain, and undeveloped islands. Many primary conservation areas exist in this district. The “rural and open space” district has the lowest level of development of all of the proposed districts within the MRCCA. To preserve the rural and open space characteristics of this district and its unique recreational value, a structure height limit of 35-feet is proposed for this district. This district includes agricultural and rural residential areas, parkland and natural areas adjacent to the river. This height is intended to keep structures at or below the level of the tree line and is consistent with height restrictions in most of the local zoning standards that apply in these areas The CA-ROS district must be managed to sustain and restore the rural and natural character of the Corridor, and to protect and enhance existing habitat, public river corridor views, and scenic, natural and historic areas. In Mendota Heights, the CA-ROS district encompasses primarily the Fort Snelling State Park area (including Gun Club Lake) and a small area of Lilydale/Harriet Island/Cherokee Park property located on the north side of Hwy. 13, between Wachtler Avenue and Sylvandale Road. These districts comprise approximately 591.5 acres of vacant, open and natural land areas. 6 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 2. River Neighborhood District (CA-RN): River Neighborhood District (CA-RN): The CA-RN district is characterized by residential neighborhoods that are riparian or readily visible from the river or that abut riparian parkland. The district includes land separated from the river by distance, topography, development, or a transportation corridor. The land in this district is not readily visible from the Mississippi River. The MnDNR Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR) outlines height limits for the CA-RN District, which is a 35-foot height limit for all residential “river neighborhood” districts. The height limit is intended to allow a typical two-story single-family dwelling that does not break the top of the tree line. This height restriction is consistent with existing structure heights in residentially zoned neighborhoods and height restrictions in most of the local zoning standards that apply in these areas. The City of Mendota Heights intends to preserve and maintain a 25- foot height (maximum) standard for all single-family dwellings as currently regulated in the city’s Zoning Ordinance, or the adopted height standards for any underlying zoning district inside the CA-RN district. The CA-RN district must be managed to maintain the character of the river corridor within the context of existing residential development, and to protect and enhance habitat, parks and open space, public river corridor views, and scenic, natural, and historic areas. Minimizing erosion and the flow of untreated stormwater into the river and enhancing shoreline habitat are priorities in this district. In Mendota Heights, the CA-RN district encompasses approximately 256 acres of area. 3. Separated from River District (CA-SR) Separated from River District (CA-SR): This district includes non-riparian land that is separated from the Mississippi River by distance, development, or transportation infrastructure. Because of this separation, underlying zoning standards govern height, with the stipulation that structure height must be compatible with the existing tree line, where present, and surrounding development. The MnDNR Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR) further describes height restrictions for the CA-SR District. The “separated from river” district includes non-riparian land that is separated from the Mississippi River by distance, development, or transportation infrastructure. Because of this separation, underlying zoning standards govern height, with the stipulation that structure height must be compatible 7 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update with the existing tree line, where present, and surrounding development. The City of Mendota Heights intends to preserve and maintain a 25-foot height (maximum) standard for all single- family dwellings as currently regulated in the city’s Zoning Ordinance, or the adopted height standards for any underlying zoning district inside the CA-SR district. The CA-SR district provides flexibility in managing development without negatively affecting the key resources and features of the river corridor. Minimizing negative impacts to primary conservation areas and minimizing erosion and flow of untreated storm water into the Mississippi River are priorities in the district. MRCCA with Future Land Use & Zoning The planned land uses within the MRCCA districts in Mendota Heights are a mix of existing and planned low-density residential areas; small segments of existing and planned medium-density residential areas; a small limited business area; and a large public recreation/open space area in and around Fort Snelling Park/Gun Club Lake. As part of their comprehensive planning process, the City of Mendota Heights has developed a 2040 Future Land Use Plan. The map illustrates planned land uses including single and multi-family residential, commercial, public and open space area. Most of the city area inside the MRCCA boundary is predominantly developed with single-family housing, though there are small commercial and mixed-use areas along the Highway 13 (Sibley Memorial Highway) and near the Highway 13/I-35E interchange. Most of the Park and Open Space areas include the Fort Snelling State Park and Lilydale/Harriet Island Regional Park, and other lands along the Mississippi River. These planned future land uses correspond appropriately to the districts that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) has developed. Future land uses in each of these districts are listed as follows. Rural and Open Space District CA-ROS: Future land uses include parks and open spaces. River Neighborhood District CA-RN: Future land uses include single-family, multi-family, and parks and open spaces. Separated from River District CA-SR: There are some parcels in the MRCCA district with planned future land uses of single-family and a very limited number of multi-family residential uses. 8 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE MRCCA Boundary with 2040 Future Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Mississippi River Critical Area Layer RR - Rural Residential LR - Low Density Residential MR - Medium Density Residential HR - High Density Residential LB - Limited Business B - Business MU - Mixed Use I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public P - Park & Open Space Open Water Map 9-3. MRCCA Boundary with 2040 Future Land Use Plan Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE MRCCA Boundary with 2040 Future Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Mississippi River Critical Area Layer RR - Rural Residential LR - Low Density Residential MR - Medium Density Residential HR - High Density Residential LB - Limited Business B - Business MU - Mixed Use I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public P - Park & Open Space Open Water MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE MRCCA Boundary with 2040 Future Land Use Map City of Mendota Heights µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Mississippi River Critical Area Layer RR - Rural Residential LR - Low Density Residential MR - Medium Density Residential HR - High Density Residential LB - Limited Business B - Business MU - Mixed Use I - Industrial P/S - Public/Semi-Public P - Park & Open Space Open Water City boundary June 2019 Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2017 FIGURE 9-3 9 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update A map illustrating the 2040 Future Land Uses along with an overlay mapping of all applicable MRCCA districts is illustrated on Map 9-3. MRCCA Boundary with 2040 Future Land Use Plan. As an implementation step of this Plan, the city will fully evaluate its preferred dimensional requirements for the property for any new developments and redevelopment of lands, and will work with the MnDNR on proper steps to incorporate flexibility within the MRCCA ordinance to address this particular area. Most of the properties located in this MRCCA boundary are planned and guided for low-density residential uses, which are primarily developed with single-family uses. The city will work with property owners through the MRCCA ordinance preparation process to understand existing conditions of the property within the CA-RN and CA-SR districts, and identify any potential conflicts with the existing standards and how to address non-conforming uses within the district. Table 9-1. Category Comparisons MRCCA District Future Land Use Map Categories Existing Land Uses CA-ROS Rural and Open Space District •Park and Open Space •Park and Open Space CA-RN River Neighborhood District •Low Density Residential •Single-Family Residential •Park and Open Space CA-SR Separated from River District •Low Density Residential •Medium Density Residential •Limited Business (Commercial) •Right-of-way •Single-Family Residential •Medium Density Residential •Park and Open Space •Right-of-way 10 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS & POLICIES GOAL 1: Guide land use and development and redevelopment activities consistent with the management purpose of each district. Policies 1.Adopt a new MRCCA ordinance overlay district compliant with the goals and policies of the MRCCA plan, and with Minnesota Rules, part 6106.0070, Subp. 5 - Content of Ordinances; and work collaboratively with the MnDNR to address flexibility with the ordinance, if needed, and as noted in previous sections of this Plan. 2.Update zoning map to include new MRCCA overlay districts. 3.Ensure that information on the new MRCCA districts and zoning requirements is readily available to property owners to help them understand which ordinance requirements - such as setbacks and height requirements - apply to their property for project planning and permitting. 4.Work with the MnDNR on height standards to determine appropriate height restrictions, particularly on redevelopment areas with existing site constraints. PRIMARY CONSERVATION AREAS (PCA) General Overview As the MnDNR’s Statement of Needs and Reasonableness (SONAR) defines it, the term “primary conservation areas” (PCAs) addresses the key natural and cultural resources and features managed by MRCCA rules. These features are given priority consideration for protection with regard to proposed land development, subdivision, and related activity. PCAs include Shore Impact Zones (SIZ), Bluff Impact Zones (BIZ), floodplains, wetlands, gorges, areas of confluence with tributaries, natural drainage routes, unstable soils and bedrock, native plant communities, cultural and historic properties, significant existing vegetative stands, tree canopies and “other resources” identified in local government MRCCA plans. 11 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Shore Impact Zone Shore Impact Zones (SIZs) apply to the Mississippi and all of its backwaters, as well as to its four key tributaries, including the Crow, Rum, Minnesota, and Vermillion rivers. They include land along the river’s edge deemed to be environmentally sensitive and in need of special protection from development and vegetation removal. A typical shore impact zone (SIZ) is a “buffer” area that is required between the water’s edge and the area where development is permitted (see Figure 9-1); and is the focus of many of the MRCCA rule standards for land alteration and vegetation management. Mendota Height’s zoning map and the related Critical Corridor Area map will provide a detailed delineation of the boundary of the MRCCA, however, there are no additional shore impact zones or shoreland regulations identified or included in the city’s zoning ordinance or this plan. The only area of “shoreland” is along the Fort Snelling State Park/Gun Club Lake region located within the city, for which no development has or will take place. Nevertheless, recognizing a shore impact zone would highlight the importance of protecting the river shore from development and vegetative removal, maintaining a buffer area between the river banks and urban development. Adding ordinance requirements for the shore impact zone will be considered by the city when it updates its zoning ordinance. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-10 9.1.4 Work with the DNR on height standards to determine appropriateheight restrictions, particularly on redevelopment areas with existingsite constraints.PRIMARY CONSERVATION AREAS (PCA)General OverviewAs the DNR’s Statement of Needs and Reasonableness (SONAR)defines it, theterm “primary conservation areas” (PCAs) addresses the key natural and culturalresources and features managed by MRCCA rules. These features are givenpriority consideration for protection with regard to proposed land development,subdivision, and related activity. PCAs include Shore Impact Zones (SIZ),Bluff Impact Zones (BIZ), floodplains, wetlands, gorges, areas of confluence with tributaries, natural drainage routes, unstable soils and bedrock, native plant communities, cultural and historic properties, significant existing vegetative stands, tree canopies and “other resources” identified in local government MRCCA plans. Shore Impact Zone Shore Impact Zones (SIZs) apply to the Mississippi and all of its backwaters, as well as to its four key tributaries, including the Crow, Rum, Minnesota, and Vermillion rivers. They include land along the river’s edge deemed to be environmentally sensitive and in need of special protection from development and vegetation removal.A typical shore impact zone (SIZ) is a “buffer” area that is required between the water’s edge and the area where development is permitted (see Figure 9-4 right); and is the focus of many of the MRCCA rule standards for land alteration and vegetation management. Mendota Height’s zoning map and the related Critical Corridor Area map will provide a detailed delineation of the boundary of the MRCCA, however, there are Figure 9-4. Shoreland Impact Diagram (Typical)Figure 9-1. Shoreland Impact Diagram (Typical) Source: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 12 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Floodplains & Wetlands Although the City of Mendota Heights is located in close proximity to the Mississippi River and the Minnesota River, there is no floodway within the city boundaries. As Map 9-4. FEMA Floodplains portrays, there is floodway on both sides of the Mississippi River and Minnesota River, but within the cities of St. Paul, Lilydale, Mendota, and Eagan. The floodway basically follows the northwest boundary of the city. See Map 9-4. FEMA Floodplain Map and Map 9-5. MRCCA Wetlands & Floodplains. There are a number of known wetlands identified within the MRCCA boundary in Mendota Heights. These wetlands and water features have been identified and mapped, and are made part of the city’s Surface Water Management Plan, which is provided as Appendix I. Map 9-4. FEMA Floodplains MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE FEMA Floodplains Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Open Water City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 9-6 Created June 2019, Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY F A L L S A V E FEMA Floodplains Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Open Water City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 9-6 MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BLEYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA R DHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY F A L L S A V E FEMA Floodplains Mapµ0 3,000 6,000 Feet 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Open Water City Boundary City of Mendota Heights Source: City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, 2018 June 2019 FIGURE 9-6 13 Map 9-5. MRCCA - Wetlands & Floodplains Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-12 FIGURE 9-5. MRCCA Floodplains & Wetlands Map Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-12 FIGURE9-5. MRCCA Floodplains & Wetlands Map Source: Metropolitan Council 14 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Natural Drainage Ways Natural drainage ways are linear depressions that collect and drain surface water. They may be permanently or temporarily inundated. There are a few identified natural drainage routes that flow from some of the city’s own water features and eventually towards the Mississippi River. The city’s existing topography acts to provide a natural northward flow pattern for most of these waterways, and the proximity of Interstate 494 to the south acts as a significant barrier to natural drainage to the south or into adjacent communities. See Map 9-6. MRCCA – Major Natural Drainage Routes. Bluffs & Bluff Impact Zones According to Minnesota Rules 6106.0050, subp. 10, a “bluff” is defined as a natural topographic feature having either of the following characteristics: A.a slope that rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope to the top of the slope; and the grade of the slope from the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope to the top of the slope averages 18 percent or greater, measured over a horizontal distance of 25 feet; or B.a natural escarpment or cliff with a slope that rises at least 10 feet above the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope to the top of the slope with an average slope of 100% or greater. The development and land use standards are tied to the Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ). In the MRCCA, the rules in the BIZ are more restrictive than those for land within the shoreland area. They prohibit the placement of structures, land alteration, vegetation clearing, stormwater management facilities, and most construction activities in the BIZ. However, some limited exceptions to these restrictions, such as for public utilities and recreational access to the river, are allowed. This greater degree of protection is necessitated by development pressures on bluffs throughout the river corridor and the susceptibility of these features to erosion and slope failure. Mendota Heights has several areas or narrow strips of land identified as a BIZ within the MRCCA boundary. See Map 9-7. MRCCA – Bluff Impact Zones. 15 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-14 Natural Drainage Ways Natural drainage ways are linear depressions that collect and drain surface water.They may be permanently or temporarily inundated. There are a few identifiednatural drainage routes that flow from some of the city’s own water features andeventually towards the Mississippi River. The city’s existing topography acts provides a natural northward flow pattern for most of these waterways, and theproximity of Interstate 494 to the south acts as a significant barrier to naturaldrainage to the south or into adjacent communities.See MRCCA –Major Natural Drainage Routes Map –FIGURE 9-7 (below). FIGURE 9-7. MRCCA Natural Drainage Ways Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-14 Natural Drainage Ways Natural drainage ways are linear depressions that collect and drain surface water.They may be permanently or temporarily inundated. There are a few identifiednatural drainage routes that flow from some of the city’s own water features andeventually towards the Mississippi River. The city’s existing topography acts provides a natural northward flow pattern for most of these waterways, and theproximity ofInterstate 494 to the south acts as a significant barrier to naturaldrainage to thesouth or into adjacent communities.See MRCCA –Major NaturalDrainage Routes Map –FIGURE 9-7 (below).FIGURE9-7. MRCCA Natural Drainage Ways Map 9-6. MRCCA - Major Natural Drainage Routes Source: Metropolitan Council 16 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-16 FIGURE 9-8. MRCCA –Bluff Impact Zones Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-16 FIGURE9-8. MRCCA –Bluff Impact Zones Map 9-7. MRCCA - Bluff Impact Zones Source: Metropolitan Council 17 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Native Plant Communities & Significant Existing Vegetative Stands Native plant communities are plant communities that have been identified as part of the Minnesota biological survey. They represent the highest quality native plant communities remaining in the MRCCA. Significant vegetative stands are plant communities identified by the National Park Service that are largely intact, connected and contain a sufficient representation of the original native plant community. Much of this vegetation contributes to the scenic value of the MRCCA. Mendota Heights has one large area of native plant communities within the city and its MRCCA boundaries, which primarily encompasses Fort Snelling Park/Gun Club Lake reserve. There are also a number of significant [existing] vegetative stands in the MRCCA. See Map 9-8. MRCCA – Native Plant Communities and Significant Existing Vegetative Stands. The Corridor generally exhibits a mostly wooded and natural vegetative character, with a variety of other vegetative environments like prairie, shrubs and wetlands. These wooded areas are mostly located within or near the Fort Snelling/Gun Club lake area, and in smaller developed and undeveloped area inside the MRCCA boundary. Tree species include oaks, maples, cottonwood, elms, and Linden (basswood) trees along with a wide variety of evergreen trees such as white pine, black hill spruce, blue spruce and others. Unfortunately, the Corridor is also impacted by some invasive species, such Siberian elms, black locusts, and buckthorn. Regardless of these desired and invasive plants, these wooded and vegetative areas naturally provide limited animal habitat areas, and offer natural erosion control measures, especially those located on slopes and bluffs. Previous and current efforts to prevent and control elm and oak tree diseases have been generally effective in preserving these forested resources. Throughout the course of the years, the city has carefully regulated all new development and redevelopment sites within the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, and the regulations have controlled the loss of woodland and other significant vegetation on bluff areas and slopes whenever land development was requested. 18 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Map 9-8. MRCCA - Native Plant Communities and Significant Existing Vegetative Stands Cultural & Historic Properties The City of Mendota Heights does not have a historic preservation ordinance, but supports preservation through state and national registers. As opportunities for preservation are discovered, the city will handle them on a case-by-case basis, drawing from resources such as the Minnesota Historical Society, Dakota County, and community/non-profit organizations. According to the Minnesota Historical Society, the following properties in the city are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and are located in the MRCCA: Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-18 FIGURE 9-9. MRCCA Native Plant Communities & Vegetation Map Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-18 FIGURE9-9. MRCCA Native Plant Communities & Vegetation Map Source: Metropolitan Council 19 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •Fort Snelling – Mendota Bridge – Is a steel-reinforced, continuous-arch concrete bridge located on Minnesota Highway 55 over the Minnesota River. It was built in 1925-26, according to the plans prepared by Walter Wheeler and C.A.P. Turner. The bridge was reconstructed between 1992 and 1994, reflecting the original design. •St. Peter’s Church – This church complex includes one of the oldest church buildings used by Minnesota’s early settlers of the Mendota area, and is still in use today. The church was constructed in 1840. Growth of the congregation has resulted in the addition of several other buildings on the site, although the historic building remains in use. Adjacent to the Mendota Bridge is Pilot Knob which warrants mention given its historic significance in the area. While not in the MRCCA, the landmark is adjacent and may be partially visible from MRCCA protected areas. •Pilot Knob – Currently restored and protected to its pre-development condition, the Pilot Knob area, just off of the east end of the Mendota Bridge, has special historical meaning through a wide spectrum of Minnesota history. The city and other public agencies have acquired much of the property and are adding interpretive facilities to the site as opportunity permits. Unstable Soils & Bedrock The city has not conducted or completed a comprehensive review or analysis of unstable soils or bedrock in the MRCCA. However, if and when development is proposed the city will require soil borings and geotechnical analysis to demonstrate stability of any proposed development area. Further development conditions may include protection of signficant trees, plans for revegetation, groundwater monitoring, etc. In addition to potential development area, the Gun Club Lake and Fort Snelling State Park area includes some bluff land which may be susceptible to erosion. This area is protected as permanent parkland and open space, and there are no development plans or vegetative alterations planned in this protected areas. St. Peter’s Church - 1840 20 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Public River Corridor Views Public river corridor views (PRCVs) are views toward the river from public parkland, historic properties, and public overlooks, as well as views toward bluffs from the ordinary high water level of the opposite shore, as seen during the summer months. PRCVs are deemed highly valued by the community and are worth protecting because of the aesthetic value they bring to the MRCCA. Views Toward the River from Public Places The existing tree coverage and topography in Mendota Heights limits some views toward the Mississippi River from public places and portions of the Corridor contain private properties within the MRCCA boundary. Map 9-9. Public River Corridor Views identifies views from Mendota Heights at the opposite shore, and views from other communities looking at the Mendota Heights shoreline. As demonstrated, there are several locations where views of the shore are important and valuable. Four locations are identified on Map 9-9. Public River Views including: 1) View from Big River Regional Trail is important because it includes both a view of the Mississippi River Corridor, Gun Club Lake preserve and part of the City of St. Paul skyline; 2a) View provides both easterly and north-south views of the river corridor, and bluffs are visible; 2b) View provides serene view of shoreline and bluffs; and 3) View from Lilydale Regional Park provides bluff and shoreline views towards Mendota Heights. These views may be negatively impacted if significant vegetative clearing were to occur, especially if such activities compromised the stability of the bluffs. As a result, vegetative management and preservation is a priority for the city as it prepares its zoning ordinance to support this Plan. 21 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan UpdateMinnesota RiverMinnesota RiverMississippi RiverMississippi RiverMendota HeightsMendota HeightsSaint PaulSaint PaulMendotaMendotaFort Snelling (unorg.)Fort Snelling (unorg.)LilydaleLilydaleIntermittent River Views on Big River Intermittent River Views on Big River Regional Trail Corridor*Regional Trail Corridor**Significant portion of river frontage is not within Mendota Heights*Significant portion of river frontage is not within Mendota HeightsF00.51Miles2b. View from Picnic Island looking north2b. View from Picnic Island looking north3. View from Lilydale Regional Park looking east3. View from Lilydale Regional Park looking east towards Mendota Heightstowards Mendota Heights2a. View from Picnic Island looking east2a. View from Picnic Island looking eastMendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June2019Critical Area (MRCCA)9-20The view is valuable to Mendota Heightsbecause it includes both a view of theMississippi River corridor, Gun Club Lake preserve and part of the City ofSt. Paulskyline.Another important view is from 1) Picnic Island looking east across the MinnesotaRivertowards the cities of Mendota and Mendota Heights and, 2) Views fromPicnic Island looking north towards Pike Island and the Mississippi River bluffsalong Shepard Rd. in St. Paul.Hwy 55/62 Bridge –View from Picnic IslandSource: City of Mendota Heights112a2a2b2b331. View from Big River Regional Trail 1. View from Big River Regional Trail looking west across Minnesota Riverlooking west across Minnesota RiverMendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June2019Critical Area (MRCCA)9-20The view is valuable to Mendota Heightsbecause it includes both a view of theMississippi River corridor, Gun Club Lake preserve and part of the City ofSt. Paulskyline.Another important view is from 1) Picnic Island looking east across the MinnesotaRivertowards the cities of Mendota and Mendota Heights and, 2) Views fromPicnic Island looking north towards Pike Island and the Mississippi River bluffsalong Shepard Rd. in St. Paul.Hwy 55/62 Bridge –View from Picnic IslandSource: City of Mendota Heights35E49449435E62625555Map 9-9. Public River Views Source: SHC, City of Mendota Heights 22 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS & POLICIES - Primary Conservation Areas (PCAs) GOAL 2: Protect PCAs and minimize impact to PCAs from public and private development and land use activities (landscape maintenance, river use, walking/hiking, etc.). Policies 1.Adopt a new MRCCA ordinance overlay district compliant with the goals and policies of the MRCCA plan, and with Minnesota Rules, part 6106.0070, Subp. 5 - Content of Ordinances; and work with the MnDNR on flexibility with the ordinance as noted in previous sections of this Plan. 2.Support mitigation of impacts to PCAs through: subdivisions/PUDs, variances, CUPs, and other permits. 3.Prioritize the restoration and protection of Native Plant Communities and natural vegetation in riparian areas a high priority during development. 4.Support alternative design standards that protect the Local Government Units (LGU’s) identified PCAs, such as conservation design, transfer of development density, or other zoning and site design techniques that achieve protection or restoration of primary conservation areas. 5.Protect and prioritize through permanent protection measures, such as public acquisition, conservation easement, deed restrictions, etc., which protect PCAs in the corridor. 6.Create and update ordinances that protect and minimize impacts to PCAs from public and private vegetation management activities. 7.Work with adjacent communities to determine appropriate protection of identified PCAs. 23 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Primary Conservation Areas - Implementation Actions •Ensure that information on the location of PCAs is readily available to property owners to understand how PCA-relevant ordinance requirements, such as vegetation management and land alteration permits, apply to their property for project planning and permitting. Establish procedures and criteria for processing applications with potential impacts to PCAs, including: -Identifying the information that must be submitted and how it will be evaluated, -Reviewing appropriate mitigation procedures/methods for variances and CUPs; and -Establishing evaluation criteria for protecting PCAs when a development site contains multiple types of PCAs and the total area of PCAs exceed the required set aside percentages. -Developing administrative procedures for integrating MnDNR and local permitting of riprap, retaining walls and other hard armoring. -Actively communicate with other communities to protect views that other communities have identified as valuable, as well as to protect views identified by the city through this process. 24 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update PRIORITIES FOR RESTORATION General Overview Natural vegetation is critical to the health of the ecosystem along the Mississippi River corridor, providing important habitat for area wildlife and natural function of plant and waterway systems. The MnDNR has identified a number of high priority areas for restoration of natural vegetation, not only within the established Critical Corridor Area, but in other areas throughout the city, including lakes, streams, wetlands, and drainage ways. These areas were determined based on identifying existing significant stands of vegetation, areas of erosion, and areas of needed stabilization. MRCCA requires communities identify areas that are priorities for restoration due to poor quality natural vegetation or bank erosion issues. Much of the Critical Corridor Area is wooded and vegetated, with a large expanse of open space and park or vegetated residential land. If development or redevelopment occurs within MRCCA, protection of existing vegetation or restoration will be required in accordance with MRCCA ordinance requirements. Mapping for Mendota Heights was completed by MnDNR and Metropolitan Council and is identified on Map 9-9. Vegetation Restoration Priorities. The city has not identified any specific areas of concern for erosion prevention, bank and slope stabilization or other restoration activities. As noted, the city will incorporate standards into its ordinance to address future study and analysis as development or redevelopment occurs to ensure appropriate vegetation management and restoration activities are incorporated. 25 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Map 9-9. MRCCA Vegetation Restoration Priorities Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Critical Area (MRCCA) 9-23 FIGURE 9-10. MRCCA Vegetation Restoration Priorities Map Source: Metropolitan Council and MnDNR 26 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS & POLICIES - Restoration Goal 3: Protect native and existing vegetation during the development process and require restoration if any is removed by development. Priorities for restoration shall include stabilization of erodible soils, riparian buffers and bluffs or steep slopes visible from the river. Policies 1.Seek opportunities to restore vegetation to protect and enhance PRCVs identified in this Plan. 2.Seek opportunities to restore vegetation in restoration priority areas identified in this Plan through the CUP, variance, vegetation permit and subdivision/ PUD processes. 3.Sustain and enhance ecological functions (habitat value) during vegetation restorations. 4.Evaluate proposed development sites for erosion prevention and bank and slope stabilization issues and require restoration as part of the development process. Restoration Implementation Actions •Ensure that information on the location of natural vegetation restoration priorities is readily available to property owners to understand how relevant ordinance requirements apply to their property for project planning and permitting. •Establish a vegetation permitting process that includes permit review procedures to ensure consideration of restoration priorities identified in this plan in permit issuance, as well as standard conditions requiring vegetation restoration for those priority areas. (Note: vegetation permitting process is a required element of MRCCA ordinance.) •Establish process for evaluating priorities for natural vegetation restoration, erosion prevention and bank and slope stabilization, or other restoration priorities identified 27 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update in this plan in CUP, variances and subdivision/PUD processes. (Note: A process for evaluating priorities is a required element of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.) SURFACE WATER USES Mendota Heights has very little surface water use in the MRCCA other than recreational motorboats and small paddle crafts such as canoes and kayaks. There are no public boat launches or marinas in Mendota Heights; however there is a small private marina/boat dock associated with the Pool and Yacht Club in the City of Lilydale (located just east of the I-35E bridge crossing), and to which some residents of Mendota Heights belong. There is limited barge traffic that passes Mendota Heights, heading west on the Minnesota River to Ports Bunge and Cargill in Savage, and a loading facility in Burnsville just west of I-35W. No additional policies or implementations actions are applicable for surface water use for MRCCA in the City of Mendota Heights. Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Missis si p pi Ri v er Missis si p pi Ri v er Pool & Yacht ClubPool & Yacht Club 35E Source: Created by: SHC, Source: ESRI Imagery Basemaps, Dakota County 28 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update WATER-ORIENTED USES General Overview Water-oriented uses within the Mississippi River Corridor are very limited within Mendota Heights. Most of the land adjacent to the river is primarily in the Gun Club Lake and Fort Snelling State Park preserve area on the far west edge of the community. There are no proposed new water-oriented uses for the city in the 2040 Planning Period. OPEN SPACE & RECREATIONAL FACILITIES General Overview Open space and recreational facilities, such as parks, trails, scenic overlooks, natural areas, and wildlife areas add to the quality of a community. One purpose of a MRCCA plan is to promote the protection, creation, and maintenance of these features and locations in each community along the metropolitan Mississippi River corridor. Fort Snelling State Park Fort Snelling State Park, with 849 of its 2,642 acres located in the city, is considered the largest in Mendota Heights. This park provides outdoor recreation opportunities and natural resource conservation for the public and is considered part of the regional recreational open space system. Fort Snelling State Park is a recreational state park offering swimming, large group and family picnic grounds, a boat launch, interpretive center and historical areas, trails, and scenic overlooks. A passive recreation area located within the boundaries of Mendota Heights, but situated across the Minnesota River is an area known as Picnic Island. This 75-acre tract of land appears to have been created or carved out by an “oxbow lake” feature in the Minnesota River corridor, and is located underneath the Highway 62/55 Bridge. The site is accessed from Hwy. 5 in St. Paul, off the Post Road/Snelling Lake Road exit ramp. Most of the park’s active facilities are located on the Bloomington side of the River, requiring most Mendota Heights residents to drive or bike across the I-494, I-35E and Mendota bridges. The Mendota Heights portion of the park is left primarily as a natural area as it contains extensive floodplain marsh habitat. Facilities located in Mendota Heights support less intensive uses, such as biking, hiking, cross country skiing, and fishing. The Sibley and Faribault historic sites in the City of Mendota Heights are also located on the Mendota Heights side of the River. 29 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Harriet Island-Lilydale Regional Park Located just north of Mendota Heights, this park is managed by the City of St. Paul. The lower portion of the park in the City of Lilydale is planned to remain passive open space. A beach and concessions area are planned, but eventual development is highly unlikely due to wetland issues. The area also has a ramp for boat access to the River. A trail through the park, separate from the roadway, is planned to link St. Paul to the Big Rivers Regional Trail. GOALS & POLICIES - Open Space & Recreational Facilities Goal 4: Protect and enhance the city’s open space and recreational facilities within the MRCCA through appropriate land use guiding and zoning implementation. Policies 1.Encourage creation, connection, and maintenance of open space and recreational facilities that provide access to the river. 2.Identify and encourage connections of CA-SR land to existing and planned parks and trails within the city. 3.Encourage land dedication requirements be incorporated into the city’s park dedication ordinance and park planning that provide public connections to the river, where possible. 4.Require new development to identify significant natural features such as steep slopes, bluffland, vegetation, etc., and protect such features into perpetuity through a conservation easement, or similar. Open Space & Recreational Facilities Implementation Actions •Continue to review, track, and monitor open space required as part of the subdivision review process and ensure land that meets the policies stated herein are considered for land dedication at time of plat approval. TRANSPORTATION & PUBLIC UTILITIES There are no existing or future planned public transportation facilities located within the MRCCA corridor in the City of Mendota Heights. Chapter 3. Transportation of this Plan provides detail regarding planned roadway and transit improvements in the city over this Planning Period. 30 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Electric Power Generating Facilities There are no existing or planned power generating facilities, such as solar farms or wind generation facilities located within the PCAs or within areas identified as public river corridor views (PRCVs). There are existing overhead electric lines within the corridor, which are generally shown on Map 9-10. Approximate Location of Overhead Power Lines. While these essential services are visible, they are an existing condition and there are no known plans for these utilities to buried, or enlarged, in the corridor. There are no other utility impacts planned or anticipated to occur over this Planning Period. The City does not permit community solar farm installations in any zoning district. Personal or residential solar panels are permitted, and the city will evaluate its standards regarding these standards as part of its ordinance update and implementation of this Plan. Map 9-10. Approximate Location of Overhead Power Lines Minnesot a Riv er Minnesot a Riv er Mississippi RiverMississippi RiverMendota HeightsMendota Heights Saint PaulSaint Paul MendotaMendota Fort Snelling (unorg.)Fort Snelling (unorg.) LilydaleLilydale Electric Lines Corridor within Mississippi Electric Lines Corridor within Mississippi River Critical AreaRiver Critical Area F 0 0.5 1 Miles 35E 494 494 35E 6262 5555 31 Chapter 9 - MRCCA City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOALS & POLICIES - Transportation & Public Utilities Goal 5: Monitor any transportation and public utility improvements within the MRCCA corridor and encourage alternate routes for such improvements when possible. Policies 1.Minimize impacts to PCAs and PRCVs from solar and wind generation facilities, public transportation facilities and public utilities. Transportation & Public Utilities Implementation Actions •The city will monitor any potential plans that may include transportation facilities within the MRCCA, and will discourage placement within this corridor if possible. •The city will review and update, as necessary, its design and placement standards for personal/residential solar panel installations within the city to minimize potential impact to PCAs and PRCVs. •The city will discourage the construction or installation of new essential and transmission services within the PCA an PRCV, as appropriate. This page is intentionally blank. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 10: Water Supply & Sanitary System This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 10 WATER SUPPLY & SANITARY SYSTEM The purpose of this chapter is to provide general information regarding the city’s existing and future water supply/service networks; surface water and stormwater management; and waste water management. Water Supply Systems In 2016, the city transferred the ownership of its municipal water supply system to the St. Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). SPRWS provides water to all of Mendota Heights’ properties, and owns the water tower and distribution system. SPRWS also maintains the water lines and hydrants and bills its customers directly. The two-million-gallon water tower, located on Lexington Avenue, next to the city’s Public Works Facility, also provides reserve water capacity. GOAL 1. The city will assist SPRWS in maintaining a safe, clean, resilient and cost-effective water supply system for the community. Policies 1.The city will encourage regular testing and independent analysis of water samples as needed. 2.The city will encourage and help conduct seasonal hydrant flushing of mains. 3.The city will encourage residents and local businesses to implement seasonal irrigation system/lawn sprinkling restrictions. 4.Complete capital improvement projects to maintain infrastructure. 5.The city will work with SPRWS to maintain an affordable water utility rate for the residents and businesses. 2 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 6.The city will cooperate and work in conjunction with SPRWS to provide or offer extension of water supply utilities to surrounding communities to service future development, if needed, and only if the local system is capable and without compromising the ability to service Mendota Heights’ properties. Surface Water & Stormwater Management The city’s Public Works Department is responsible for handling stormwater runoff, both to reduce flooding and to protect water quality. This has been identified as an important issue for Mendota Heights. The city completed a Surface Water Management Plan (July 2018), which is made part of this Comprehensive Plan Update, detailing the programs and policies for surface water management in the city, and is included as Appendix I. GOAL 2: Provide effective stormwater management and protection for existing lands throughout the community, and ensure future development/redevelopment areas do not pose any threat or create any harmful impacts to surrounding areas and water features. Policies 1.Maintain and improve the following in the community and other affected jurisdictions: -Water quality and quantity; -Erosion and sediment control; -Public water bodies, including lakes, streams and wetlands; -Public participation, information, and education; -Maintenance and inspection; -Recreation, fish and wildlife; and -Analyze and consider appropriate measures to reduce salt use on local roadways. 3 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update GOAL 3. Implement the Surface Water Management Plan. Policies 1.Continue to educate and provide the city’s residents and developers of the policies and standards under the city’s SWMP, and ensure sites meet or exceed SWMP rules and standards. 2.Carefully review and approve on-site stormwater treatment systems on future development or redevelopment projects. 3.Carefully monitor, inspect and permit municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) regulatory activities throughout the city, to ensure the reduction to the amount of sediment and other pollutants entering water bodies from city stormwater systems. 4.Cooperate with local watershed groups to ensure compliance with policies and standards in the SWMP, and provide for any changes or amendments as recommended or needed. 5.Continue to implement an effective city-wide street sweeping program. 6.Maintain best management practices (BMP’s) in the maintenance of areas in the respective watershed districts and development sites, which include the following: -Public education and outreach; -Public participation and involvement; -Illicit discharge detection and elimination; -Construction site stormwater runoff control; -Post-construction stormwater management; and -Pollution prevention. 4 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Wastewater Management The city’s Public Works Department operates and maintains the city’s sanitary sewer system. The responsibilities of the sanitary sewer system include maintenance of the sanitary sewer lift stations, sanitary sewer main repair, and sanitary sewer hook-up inspections. The sanitary sewage system in Mendota Heights was developed based upon the Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan dated March 28, 1966. In 1972, the Plan was approved by the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Sewer Board. The city is a fully sewered community with the exception of the Somerset Rural Residential neighborhood and a limited number of scattered sites that still utilize private, on-site septic systems. The collection and treatment of sanitary wastewater is a primary function of the city and the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). All properties served within Mendota Heights ultimately flow to MCES interceptor laterals. The vast majority of the city’s collection system flows via gravity toward a MCES interceptor comprised of a three barrel Mississippi River Crossing (Siphon) that flows from south to north at the north end of the city. Since the city is nearly fully developed, the vast majority of properties are connected to the public sanitary sewer collection network. It is expected that all properties within the city will eventually be served by the system. The city also operates five lift stations as part of its system. The following Goal and Policies will guide the city’s future wastewater system planning during this Planning Period. GOAL 4. Maintain and improve the wastewater system to serve existing and future development. Policies 1.Maintain and improve the following in the community and other affected jurisdictions: -Require properties to connect to the system when appropriate, as part of utility or road reconstruction projects, when feasible; -Continue to implement the annual sanitary sewer televising program and address any issues as part of street reconstruction projects; -Continue to implement the annual sanitary sewer lining program in areas suspected to have Inflow and infiltration (I/I) potential; 5 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update -Plan for localized improvements and expansions to accommodate foreseeable growth and redevelopment; and -Consider extension of wastewater utilities to surrounding communities to service future development, as long as the system is capable and without compromising the ability to service Mendota Heights’ properties. Metropolitan Sewer Service The city is served by the regional sewer interceptor line listed in the following table and one other metershed district. No new trunk systems are anticipated. Metershed M063AB serves nearly 97 percent of city. The remainder of the city is served by metershed M001 which flows directly into a St. Paul system at Chippewa Avenue and Annapolis Street. The total 2018 sewer flow for all properties was approximately 554,900,000 gallons. The table shows the forecast changes in demographics and sewage flow. The estimated total outflow when the city is fully developed (after year 2030) 557,000,000 gallons per year. Table 10-1. Demographic and Wastewater Flow Projections by Service Area 2020 2030 2040 Population (% change) 12,000 (5.8%) 12,000 (0%) 12,000 (0%) Households (% change) 4,900 (12%) 5,000 (2%) 5,110 (2.2%) Employment (% change) 12,600 (9%) 12,900 (6%) 13,180 (2%) Source: Metropolitan Council as revised December 2020, Mendota Heights, SHC 6 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Municipal Collection System The existing and future wastewater flows generated within the city were estimated based on land use and the flow assumptions for each land use listed in Table 10-2. Wastewater Flow Assumptions by Future Land Use. The existing wastewater flow estimates were calibrated using city-wide MCES meter data. Table 10-2. Wastewater Flow Assumptions by Future Land Use Land Use Density (units/acre)Flow Assumption (gpd/acre) Single-Family 1 180 Low Density Residential 2.25 405 Medium Density Residential 4.5 810 High Density Residential 7.5 1,350 Mixed Use (75% Residential, 25% Business)25.0 2,650 Business, Industrial N/A 800 Institutional N/A 600 Parks, Open Space, ROW N/A 0 Source: Mendota Heights, WSB The capacities of the city’s existing trunk sanitary sewers and lift stations were analyzed to determine if any system improvements will be needed to accommodate future development. The trunk sanitary sewer capacity analysis is summarized in Table 10-3, and the lift station capacity analysis is summarized in Table 10-4, and Table 10-5 provides the Projected Growth by Interceptor which was derived using the Future Land Use Plan. Table 10-3. Trunk Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis District Pipe Diameter Capacity (MGD) Existing Peak Hourly Flow (MGD) 2040 Peak Hourly Flow (MGD) 2040 Residual Capacity (MGD) Southwest 21”1.48 1.21 1.31 0.18 Southeast 27”8.95 2.64 2.76 6.19 East 27”11.67 3.13 3.16 8.51 West 12”1.08 0.49 0.54 0.54 Northeast 18”2.25 0.94 0.95 1.30 7 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Table 10-4. Lift Station Capacity Analysis Lift Station Capacity (gpm)Existing Peak Hourly Flow (gpm) 2040 Peak Hourly Flow (gpm) 2040 Residual Capacity (gpm) Main 600 524 585 15 Veronica 500 106 119 381 Northland 100 94 94 6 Culligan 100 5 5 95 Centre Pointe 100 71 84 16 St. Thomas 300 108 161 139 Based on the 2040 residual capacities in Tables 10-3 and 10-4, all of the city’s trunk sanitary sewers and lift stations are projected to have sufficient capacity for the development planned through 2040. The Main Lift Station and Northland Lift Station are projected to approach their capacities. Therefore, it is recommended that the city consider additional review, for example pump and force main hydraulic analysis and flow metering, prior to significant development or redevelopment within these lift station service areas. Table 10-5. Mendota Heights Sanitary Sewer Forecasts by Metered Area 2020 2030 2040 Est. HH/ Jobs Avg Flow (MGD) Unsewered Units/Jobs Est. HH/ Jobs Avg Flow (MGD) Unsewered Units/Jobs Est. HH/ Jobs Avg Flow (MGD) Unsewered Units/Jobs HouseholdsM063AB 4,725 0.851 39 4,829 0.869 35 4,944 0.890 30 M001 136 0.024 0 136 0.024 0 136 0.024 0 TOTAL 4,861 0.875 39 4,965 0.894 35 5,080 0.914 30 EmploymentM063AB 12,590 0.567 10 12,890 0.580 10 13,170 0.593 10 M001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 12,590 0.596 10 12,890 0.580 10 13,170 0.593 10 Total Wastewater Flow 1.44 1.47 1.81 Source: Metropolitan Council, City of Mendota Heights, WSB *Land use designation changes between 2020 and 2040 may account or differing acreages and resulting average flows by use type. Map 10-1. Existing Sanitary Sewer System on the following page shows the current extents of the system by MCES District. 8 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Map 10-1. Existing Sanitary Sewer System F M FM FM FMFMFM FM6 6666k kk k k k k k k Centre Pointe Lift Station Veronica Lift Station Culligan Lift Station St Thomas Lift Station Northland Lift Station Main Lift Station Met Council Connection Point Sanitary Sewer Pipe Sewer Type 6Gravity, City of Mendota Heights FMForce Main, City of Mendota Heights 6Pipe not owned by Mendota Heights kLift Stations µ03,000 6,000 Feet F M FM FM FMFMFM FM6 6666k kk k k k k k k Centre Pointe Lift Station Veronica Lift Station Culligan Lift Station St Thomas Lift Station Northland Lift Station Main Lift Station Met Council Connection Point Sanitary Sewer Pipe Sewer Type 6 Gravity, City of Mendota Heights FM Force Main, City of Mendota Heights 6 Pipe not owned by Mendota Heights k Lift Stations µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Source: Metropolitan Council, City of Mendota Heights 9 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Inflow & Infiltration Inflow and infiltration (I/I) are terms for the ways stormwater runoff and groundwater (clear water) make their way into the sanitary sewer system. With inflow, clear water enters the regional wastewater system through rain leaders, sump pumps, storm sewer cross connections, and foundation drains connected to sanitary sewer pipes. Inflow is greatest during major storm events and can more than triple wastewater volumes. Infiltration is a more gradual process, and occurs when water seeps into sanitary sewer pipes through cracks, leaky pipe joints and/or deteriorated manholes. Excessive I/I in sewer systems create multiple problems: •Expensive treatment of clear water •Reduced interceptor capacity •Water quality •Less recharge to aquifers The clearwater flow entering the sanitary sewer system was estimated using city-wide MCES meter data from 2015 to 2019. The average annual I/I rate and peak month I/I rate were calculated as the difference between the average flow and the base flow. The base flow was approximated as the lowest monthly flow within each year. The estimated clearwater flow is listed in Table 10-5. 10 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Table 10-5. Estimated I/I Rate Year Average Flow (MGD)Average I/I Rate Peak Month Flow (MGD)Peak Month I/I Rate 2015 1.32 18%1.67 35% 2016 1.48 13%1.67 23% 2017 1.44 14%1.84 33% 2018 1.39 16%1.65 29% 2019 1.59 18%2.00 35% Average 1.44 16%1.77 31% Source: Mendota Heights, WSB I/I Potential Sources Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) can come from several sources contributing non-sanitary flow into the sanitary sewer system. Example sources include surface runoff from roofs and manholes drainage from draintile and sump pumps, aging housing stock (see Table 10-6. Age of Housing Stock) and leaks from failing sanitary infrastructure. As shown, approximately 43% of the city’s housing stock was constructed pre-1970 and approximately 50% of those properties have been evaluated for I/I susceptibility and repair. The Metropolitan Council establishes I/I goals in the 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan for all communities discharging wastewater to the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS), which Mendota Heights addresses in subsequent sections of this chapter. Table 10-6. Age of Housing Stock Construction Year Households Percent Approx. % Evaluated Pre-1970 1,655 42.8%50% Post-1970 2,212 57.2%50% Total 3,867 100%- Source: Mendota Heights, SHC 11 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Mendota Heights’ I/I Reduction Efforts The city will continue to address I/I matters to minimize unnecessary flow into the sanitary sewer system. In 2016, a residential sump pump inspection program was completed. All houses were either compliant or altered their plumbing to eliminate connections to the sanitary sewer. Clearwater flow has not been measured or estimated beyond excessive flow monitoring performed by MCES and the high level estimate above. An analysis has not been completed to measure the amount of clear water flow generated from particular parts of the municipal public and private sewer systems. Schedules and funding have yet to be determined, but such an analysis would be completed in conjunction with I/I reduction efforts. Objectives for I/I Management Mendota Heights will continue its efforts to eliminate excess I/I with the following objectives for system management: •Replace sewer linings •Repair cracks and joints in public system •Monitor sump pump drainage •Educate property owners about reducing I/I The current I/I target for the City of Mendota Heights is an allowable peak hourly flow of 5.03 mgd. The Metropolitan Council’s metering program shows that the City of Mendota Heights’ 2020 Adjusted Average Daily Flow (AAF) was 1.437 mgd. Notwithstanding exceeding our I/I target, the City of Mendota Heights continues to seek opportunities to reduce clear water flow into the sanitary sewer system. Mendota Heights will also work cooperatively with other agencies and property owners to educate residents and businesses about the importance of reducing I/I and promote ongoing maintenance of infrastructure on private property. It is particularly important to inspect and repair damaged sewer service lines connected to the MDS, and replace older pipes that are beyond their useful life. 12 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Implementation Plan The c ity has an annual sanitary sewer-televising program, and the entire system is televised and cleaned every six years. The c ity also undertakes an annual sewer-lining project in areas suspected to have I/I potential and annually lines approximately 10,000 feet of sanitary sewer through a public bidding process. The c ity continues to seek improvement in reducing potential I/I. An additional program under consideration is facilitating private sanitary sewer service inspections and repairs. This either could take the form of a new utility program or included as part of annual street reconstruction program activities. Additional emphasis will be placed on private connections when the public system relining process is nearing completion, which is 10+ years out. I/I Cost Estimates Schedules and funding remain to be determined, but it is expected that existing utility fees will be adequate as existing fund sources are reallocated to new improvement initiatives. Policies and Regulations Mendota Heights regulates against inflow and infiltration to the sanitary system from surface water sources in their city code. Section 10-3-10: Clear Water Discharge Prevention and Prohibition states that, “No clear water, as defined in section 10-1-1 of this title, shall be discharged, directly or indirectly, into the city’s sewer system;” and it further stipulates that, “No sump pump system shall discharge clear water into the city’s sanitary sewer system.” The City will continue to monitor compliance with this ordinance through its permitting processes. (See Appendix E for copy of applicable Code section). 13 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Private Sewage Treatment Systems The city’s records indicate that approximately 42 properties are currently served by private sub-subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS). There are no other known public or privately-owned Community Wastewater Treatment Systems. The City Code contains regulations for private sewage treatment systems, which incorporates the provisions of Minnesota Administrative Rules Chapter 7080 (MPCA) and Dakota County Ordinance 113. The regulations include permissible system standards, prohibits installation of new private systems where public sewer is available, requires permitting for installation, alteration, repair, or extension, contractor licensing requirements, and penalties for non-compliance. Property owners are required to submit pumping reports for existing private systems to the C ity. Due to the low number of private systems in operation, the reporting and review process is sufficient to ensure property owners are performing the system maintenance. MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVERMINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYMARIE AVE W MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RDHUBER DR SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND DR WENTWORTH AVE WWACHTLER AVEWAGON WHEEL TRL MENDOTA RDHUNTER LNORCHARD PL VICTORIA RD SIVY FALLS AVE µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Individual Subsurface Sewer Treatment Systems (Approx. 46) MENDOTA LILYDALE PICKEREL LAKEMISSISSIPPI RIVER MINNESO T A RI V E R ROGERS LAKELAKE AUGUSTA LA K E L EMA Y GUN CLUB LAKE DODD RDDODD RDDELAWARE AVESIBLEY MEMORIAL HWY MARIE A V E W MENDOTA H E I G H T S R DLEXINGTON AVELILYDALE RDPILOT KNOB RD HUBER D R SI BL EYMEMORIALNORTHLAND D R WENTWORTH A V E WWACHTLER AVE WAGON W H E E L T R L MENDOTA RDHUNTER LN ORCHARD P L VICTORIA RD S IVY FALLS AVE µ0 3,000 6,000 Feet Individual Subsurface Sewer Treatment Systems (Approx. 46) Map 10-2. Private Sub-Surface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) 14 Chapter 10 - Water Supply & Sanitary System City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Inter-Jurisdictional Flows The C ity has agreements with the Cities of Mendota, Sunfish Lake, and West St. Paul to provide sanitary sewer service for properties in isolated areas, which are necessary due to topographic conditions and is the most efficient way to serve these properties. These agreements outline methods of payment for sanitary sewer flow. In most cases, the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) makes a flow correction to account for services outside of the city. The city of Mendota Heights bills the customer directly for services to these properties consistent with its ordinance. A description of the inter-community areas are generally identified below: A.Forty-four (44) single-family residential properties located along Delaware Avenue and north of Dodd Road (TH 149) are currently served by the City of West St. Paul. B.Approximately 125 single-family residential properties generally located in the northeastern section of the city are currently served by the City of St. Paul/MCES. Please note that the City does not have an agreement with the City of St. Paul, and therefore is not included. The properties served by St. Paul are billed and serviced by St. Paul, not the City of Mendota Heights. C.The adjacent community of Mendota currently serves St. Peter’s Church, located at 1405 Highway 13 under a separate agreement. D.The city provides wastewater service to five (5) single-family residential properties in the City of Sunfish Lake, located on the east side of Delaware Avenue Localized improvements may be needed to accommodate foreseeable growth and redevelopment. Otherwise, the current system is adequately-sized to serve the city’s current and forecast growth needs. Sanitary Sewer Line Extensions The city has identified the neighborhood bound by Marie Avenue to the south, Delaware Avenue to the east, Wentworth Avenue to the north and Dodd Road to the west as an area that will be served by an extended sewer system. This sewer extension will be tied to a reconstruction of Wentworth Avenue (County Road 8). This extension is not a trunk line, and the city has not identified a timeline for completion of this extension. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 11: Implementation This page is intentionally blank. 1 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 11 IMPLEMENTATION The following chapter outlines an implementation methodology for the Mendota Heights Comprehensive Plan and offers tools to assist the public and private sectors in the realization of the community vision. While many implementation strategies will be the responsibility of the City of Mendota Heights or other public-sector partners, many of the directives will take a cooperative effort over time from business owners, property owners, and private developers. The tables on the following pages outline by chapter how the recommendations in this Plan can begin to be realized, defining the implementing body and timeframe for implementation. Chapter 1: Introduction & Background Summary Chapter 1 serves as the introduction of the Comprehensive Plan, identifying existing conditions, history and development, a vision and mission, and key issues of the Plan. The Chapter also includes a natural resource inventory and demographic trends in the city. The vision and mission serve as the framework for the plan and are integrated throughout each of the content areas (chapters 2 through 9). The vision and mission are high-level, aspirational goals for Mendota Heights, to be implemented through the Plan’s goals and policies. Goals and Policies to be implemented •No goals in this chapter, no implementation steps are required 2 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 2: Land Use & Growth Summary Chapter 2 provides an overview of existing and planned future land use in Mendota Heights. Because it is the most wide-reaching of any of the plan chapters, the land use goals and policies address numerous topics including land use, zoning, community character, redevelopment, and the impacts of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. At a basic level, State law requires zoning to reflect a city’s future land use plan. There are numerous implementation strategies that were developed for this chapter, reflecting the various goals, policies, and land use plans. Goals to be implemented •Chapter 2, Goal 1: The land use plan will serve as the foundation for land use decisions in Mendota Heights. •Chapter 2, Goal 2: Preserve, protect, and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and character of the community. •Chapter 2, Goal 3: Support industrial and commercial development in designated areas. •Chapter 2, Goal4: Reduce the impact of aircraft noise within the community. Other implementation steps •Future Land Use Map – implement the future land use plan by updating the existing zoning map and code to reflect new land use changes. 3 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 2. Land Use & Growth Implementation Goals Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level The land use plan will serve as the foundation for land use decisions in Mendota Heights Goal 1 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing High Preserve, protect, and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment and character of the community Goal 2 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing High Support industrial and commercial development in designated areas Goal 3 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing Medium Reduce the impact of aircraft noise within the community Goal 4 City Staff; Airport Relations Commission Ongoing Medium Implement the future land use plan by updating the existing zoning map and code to reflect new land use changes City Staff, Planning Commission Short-term (1 year)High 4 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 3: Transportation Summary Chapter 3: Transportation addresses all aspects of the transportation system including roadways, rail, freight, and transit. The goals and policies in this section emphasize an efficient multi- modal system that works for residents, employees and visitors to Mendota Heights. Many public entities have authority over transportation elements in the city, so all parties will need to work in partnership to implement the transportation recommendations. From the public side, the primary implementation tool for infrastructure improvements is the city’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Federal, State, and local grants may also be a possibility should an opportunity for funding become available. Goals to be implemented •Chapter 3, Goal 1: Provide a safe, high quality, and cost effective multi-modal transportation system. •Chapter 3, Goal 2: Expand transit options serving Mendota Heights. •Chapter 3, Goal 3: Reduce negative airport impacts in Mendota Heights; and work diligently with all noise issues and agencies to decrease aircraft noise in volume and to decrease the area of noise impacts. Other implementation steps •Implement roadway projects as identified in the city’s CIP and Comprehensive Plan. •Implement the future transportation network as designated in the Comprehensive Plan and on the future roadway and transit facility maps. 5 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 3. Transportation Implementation Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level Provide a safe, high quality, and cost effective multi-modal transportation system Goal 1 City Staff Ongoing Medium Expand transit options serving Mendota Heights Goal 2 City Staff, Planning Commission; Metro Transit Ongoing Medium Reduce negative airport impacts in Mendota Heights; and work diligently with all noise issues and agencies to decrease aircraft noise in volume and to decrease the area of noise impacts Goal 3 City Staff; Airport Relations Commission Ongoing Medium Implement roadway projects as identified in the city’s CIP and Comprehensive Plan City Staff; City Council Medium-term (5 years)High Implement the future transportation network as designated in the Comprehensive Plan and on the future roadway and transit facility maps City Staff; Planning Commission Long-term (10+ years)Medium 6 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 4: Parks & Trails Summary The Parks and Trails Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan addresses existing parks, natural areas, and trails within the City of Mendota Heights. The city is also home to three golf courses which serve local and regional visitors. Goals and policies in this chapter emphasize creating an integrated network of park facilities and connecting to amenities, such as the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers and regional park and trail systems. Goals to be implemented •Chapter 4, Goal 1: Provide a park system that is safe, accessible, and equitable in its offerings to all Mendota Heights’ residents and visitors. •Chapter 4, Goal 2: Provide a park system that assures high quality facilities, buildings, grounds, trails, amenities, and natural settings. •Chapter 4, Goal 3: Use the park system as a means to enhance and sustain the environment of each neighborhood and the city as a whole. •Chapter 4, Goal 4: Cooperate with Dakota County and surrounding communities in park and recreation facilities and programming. Other implementation steps •Implement park and trail improvements and planning projects as outlined in the city’s CIP, Comprehensive Plan, and bicycle facilities map. 7 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 4. Parks & Trails Implementation Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level Provide a park system that is safe, accessible, and equitable in its offerings to all Mendota Heights’ residents and visitors Goal 1 City Staff, Parks Commission Ongoing High Provide a park system that assures high quality facilities, buildings, grounds, trails, amenities, and natural settings Goal 2 City Staff, Parks Commission Ongoing High Use the park system as a means to enhance and sustain the environment of each neighborhood and the city as a whole Goal 3 City Staff, Parks Commission Ongoing Medium Cooperate with Dakota County and surrounding communities in park and recreation facilities and programming Goal 4 City Staff Ongoing Medium Implement park and trail improvements and planning projects as outlined in the city’s CIP, Comprehensive Plan, and bicycle facilities map City Staff, Parks Commission Long-term (10+ years)Medium 8 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 5: Housing Summary The Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan addresses existing and future housing needs for residents of Mendota Heights. In addition to goals and policies developed by the community, the Metropolitan Council has placed affordable housing requirements on the city which will need to be met by 2040. The goals and policies in this chapter address preserving existing housing stock while providing diverse stock for young homeowners, seniors, and move-up housing. Goals and Policies to be implemented •Chapter 5, Goal 1: Preserve and improve existing neighborhoods and housing units. •Chapter 5, Goal 2: Meet future needs with a variety of housing products. Other implementation steps •Explore ways to encourage 46 new affordable housing units by 2030, as per requirements from the Metropolitan Council. •Seek funding opportunities to develop an affordable and diverse housing stock including funds from the Livable Communities Act, Local Housing Initiative Account, or Tax Base Revitalization Account. 9 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 5. Housing Implementation Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level Preserve and improve existing neighborhoods and housing units Goal 1 City Staff Ongoing High Meet future needs with a variety of housing products Goal 2 City Staff Ongoing Medium Explore ways to encourage 46 affordable housing units by 2030, consistent with the requirements from the Metropolitan Council City Staff, Dakota County CDA Staff; Metropolitan Council Staff Long-term (10+ years)Low Seek funding opportunities to develop an affordable and diverse housing stock including funds from the Livable Communities Act, Local Housing Initiative Account, or Tax Base Revitalization Account City Staff, Metropolitan Council Staff Ongoing Low Chapter 6: Economic Development Summary Chapter 6: Economic Development summarizes existing market conditions in Mendota Heights, identifies redevelopment areas in the city, and identifies roles that the city can take to attract new businesses to the community. Goals and policies in this chapter emphasize business attraction and retention and commercial/business park areas in the community. Goals to be implemented •Chapter 6, Goal 1: Promote economic development in Mendota Heights through a comprehensive approach to business needs. •Chapter 6, Goal 2: Promote business attraction, retention, and expansion In Mendota Heights. 10 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •Chapter 6, Goal 3: Promote economic development through Public Financing Tools. •Chapter 6, Goal 4: Continue to develop and redevelop community commercial areas that serve the whole community. •Chapter 6, Goal 5: Continue to develop business and industrial park areas that provide jobs and serve the local and regional economy. Other implementation steps •Implement recommendations identified in the existing Mendota Heights Industrial District Redevelopment Plan, including branding, redevelopment incentives, and investments in broadband. •Focus job-based redevelopment and commercial investment in the existing Mendota Heights Industrial District. Chapter 6. Economic Development Implementation Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level Promote economic development in Mendota Heights through a comprehensive approach to business needs Goal 1 City Staff Ongoing Medium Promote business attraction, retention, and expansion In Mendota Heights Goal 2 City Staff Ongoing High Promote economic development through Public Financing Tools Goal 3 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing Low Continue to develop and redevelop community commercial areas that serve the whole community Goal 4 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing Medium Continue to develop business and industrial park areas that provide jobs and serve the local and regional economy Goal 5 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing Medium Implement recommendations identified in the existing Mendota Heights industrial district redevelopment plan, including branding, redevelopment incentives, and investments in broadband City Staff Ongoing Medium 11 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7: Natural Resources Summary Natural resource protection is critical for the City of Mendota Heights. Chapter 7: Natural Resources Plan identifies critical water, open space, and recreational areas in the community and issues these areas face. Goals and policies in this chapter emphasize protecting and enhancing existing natural areas, providing habitat to support biodiversity and developing a full natural resource plan for the city. Other goal areas in the chapter address public education and reducing air, noise, and light pollution. Goals to be implemented •Chapter 7, Goal 1: Develop a professional, comprehensive, strategic Natural Resources Management Plan for city-wide natural areas and natural resources. •Chapter 7, Goal 2: Protect, connect, restore, buffer, and manage natural areas, wildlife habitat, and other natural resources, for high ecological quality and diversity of plant and animal species. •Chapter 7, Goal 3: Protect and restore the natural ecological functions of the city’s water resources with emphasis on the improvement of stormwater management. •Chapter 7, Goal 4: Enhance and provide public education and understanding of nature, natural systems, and environmental issues by providing programs, materials, and information; while promoting a culture of stewardship on public and private lands. •Chapter 7, Goal 5: Address issues that impact air quality, light pollution, and noise pollution, such as vehicle emissions, traffic flow, air traffic, lighting, and street design. Other implementation steps •Implement a formal Natural Resources Management and Sustainability Commission to aid in the development and execution of the strategic Natural Resources Plan. •Improve and implement the city’s Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). 12 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 7. Natural Resources Implementation Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level Develop a professional, comprehensive, strategic Natural Resources Management Plan for city-wide natural areas and natural resources. Goal 1 City Staff, Natural Resources Commission, City Council Medium-term (5 years)High Protect, connect, restore, buffer, and manage natural areas, wildlife habitat, and other natural resources, for high ecological quality and diversity of plant and animal species. Goal 2 City Staff, Natural Resources Commission, City Council Ongoing High Protect and restore the natural ecological functions of the city’s water resources with emphasis on the improvement of stormwater management. Goal 3 City Staff Ongoing High Enhance and provide public education and understanding of nature, natural systems, and environmental issues by providing programs, materials, and information; while promoting a culture of stewardship on public and private lands. Goal 4 City Staff Ongoing Medium Address issues that impact air quality, light pollution, and noise pollution, such as vehicle emissions, traffic flow, air traffic, lighting, and street design. Goal 5 City Staff, Planning Commission, Natural Resources Commission Medium-term (5 year)Medium Implement a formal Natural Resources Management and Sustainability Commission to aid in the development and execution of the strategic Natural Resources Plan. City Staff, City Council Short-term (1-year)High Improve and implement the city’s Surface Water Management Plan City Staff Medium-term (5 years)High 13 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 8: Resilience Summary Chapter 8: Resilience addresses the unique challenges Mendota Heights will face in the future regarding climate change. Although Resilience is not a required element for the 2040 comprehensive plans in the region, Mendota Heights is committed to investing in resilience. Supporting resilience strategies will protect local and regional vitality for future generations by preserving our capacity to maintain and support our region’s well-being and productivity. Goals and policies in this chapter address infrastructure, public health, and health and safety during extreme weather events. Goals to be implemented •Chapter 8, Goal 1: Protect and maintain infrastructure and constructed systems that provide critical services. •Chapter 8, Goal 2: Proactively maintain public health and safety during extreme weather and climate-related and other unforeseen events. •Chapter 8, Goal 3: Promote social connectedness and build an engaged community of resilience. •Chapter 8, Goal 4: Continue to support, plan for, and encourage the use of solar energy as a renewable energy source. •Chapter 8, Goal 5: Adopt climate mitigation and/or energy independence goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. •Chapter 8, Goal 6: Support long-range planning efforts to build the community’s renewable energy capability and maximize the benefits of renewable energy development. •Chapter 8, Goal 7: Explore opportunities to support land use guidance and regulations to support practices that integrate healthy food production in residential settings and support food-related businesses and activities. •Chapter 8, Goal 8: Promote responsible waste disposal and study feasibility of improving systems that encourage residents to make responsible decisions. 14 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 8: Resilience Implementation Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level Protect and maintain infrastructure and constructed systems that provide critical services Goal 1 City Staff Ongoing High Proactively maintain public health and safety during extreme weather and climate-related and other unforeseen events Goal 2 City Staff, City Council Ongoing High Promote social connectedness and build an engaged community of resilience Goal 3 City Staff Ongoing Medium Continue to support, plan for, and encourage the use of solar energy as a renewable energy source Goal 4 City Staff Ongoing Medium Adopt climate mitigation and/or energy independence goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions Goal 5 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing High Support long-range planning efforts to build the community’s renewable energy capability and maximize the benefits of renewable energy development Goal 6 City Staff Medium-term (5 years)Medium Explore opportunities to support land use guidance and regulations to support practices that integrate healthy food production in residential settings and support food-related businesses and activities Goal 7 City Staff, Planning Commission Medium-term (5 years)Low Promote responsible waste disposal and study feasibility of improving systems that encourage residents to make responsible decisions Goal 8 City Staff, Planning Commission Short-term (1-year)High 15 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 9: Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Summary The Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan is a required plan for communities located along the 72-mile stretch of the Mississippi River in the Twin Cities. The Metropolitan Council and Department of Natural Resources have identified numerous issues that must be addressed in the Critical Area Plan, each with their own goals and policies. These required issues include: •Critical Area Districts •Primary Conservation Areas •Restoration Goals to be implemented •Chapter 9, Goal 1: Guide land use and development and redevelopment activities consistent with the management purpose of each district. •Chapter 9, Goal 2: Protect Primary Conservation Areas (PCA’s) and minimize impact to PCAs from public and private development and land use activities (landscape maintenance, river use, walking/hiking, etc.). •Chapter 9, Goal 3: Protect native and existing vegetation during the development process and require restoration if any is removed by development. Priorities for restoration shall include stabilization of erodible soils, riparian buffers and bluffs or steep slopes visible from the river. Other implementation steps •Restoration: Ensure that information on the location of natural vegetation restoration priorities is readily available to property owners to understand how relevant ordinance requirements apply to their property for project planning and permitting. •Restoration: Establish a vegetation permitting process that includes permit review procedures to ensure consideration of restoration priorities identified 16 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update in this plan in permit issuance, as well as standard conditions requiring vegetation restoration for those priority areas. (Note: vegetation permitting process is a required element of MRCCA ordinance.) •Restoration: Establish process for evaluating priorities for natural vegetation restoration, erosion prevention and bank and slope stabilization, or other restoration priorities identified in this plan in CUP, variances and subdivision/ PUD processes. Chapter 9. Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Implementation Table Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level Guide land use and development and redevelopment activities consistent with the management purpose of each district. Goal 1 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing High Protect Primary Conservation Areas (PCA’s) and minimize impact to PCAs from public and private development and land use activities (landscape maintenance, river use, walking, hiking, etc.) Goal 2 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing High Protect native and existing vegetation during the development process and require restoration if any is removed by development. Priorities for restoration shall include stabilization of erodible soils, riparian buffers and bluffs or steep slopes visible from the river. Goal 3 City Staff, Planning Commission Ongoing High Adopt a new MRCCA ordinance overlay district compliant with the goals and policies of the MRCCA plan, and with Minnesota Rules, part 6106.0070, Subp. 5 - Content of Ordinances; and work with the Minnesota DNR on flexibility with the ordinance as noted in previous sections of this Plan. City Staff, Planning Commission; MnDNR Staff Short-term (1 year)High Update zoning map to reflect new MRCCA districts City Staff, Planning Commission Short-term (1 year)High 17 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Chapter 10: Water Supply & Sanitary System Summary The Water Supply & Sanitary System chapter is a required component of the Comprehensive Plan update per the Metropolitan Council requirements. The purpose of this chapter is to evaluate the existing water supply, stormwater management and sanitary sewer systems and to identify any needed improvements (particularly an improvements to regional systems) that may be necessary a result of planned development or redevelopment in the city. Since Mendota Heights is almost fully developed maintenance and management of the existing systems is a top priority. Additionally, the city must plan for potential development and redevelopment of its focus areas as identified in Chapter 2: Land Use & Growth. Goals to be implemented •Chapter 10, Goal 1: The city will assist SPRWS in maintaining a safe, clean, resilient and cost-effective water supply system for the community. •Chapter 10, Goal 2: Provide effective stormwater management and protection for existing lands throughout the community, and ensure future development/ redevelopment areas do not pose any threat or create any harmful impacts to surrounding areas and water features. •Chapter 10, Goal 3: Implement the Surface Water Management Plan. Other implementation steps •Sanitary Sewer System: The city has identified several areas planned for change that may experience development or redevelopment within this planning period. As noted in Chapter 10 it is important to plan for, and monitor, the capacities of the city’s lift stations to ensure infrastructure is adequate to support new development. 18 Chapter 11 - Implementation City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Item/Action Goals Implementing Body Timeframe Priority Level The city will assist SPRWS in maintaining a safe, clean, resilient and cost-effective water supply system for the community. Goal 1 SPRWS, City Staff Ongoing Medium Provide effective stormwater management and protection for existing lands throughout the community, and ensure future development/redevelopment areas do not pose any threat or create any harmful impacts to surrounding areas and water features. Goal 2 City Staff Ongoing High Implement the Surface Water Management Plan.Goal 3 City Staff, MnDNR Staff, Watershed Districts Ongoing Medium Monitor lift station capacities to ensure development and/or redevelopment is adequate served by the city’s sanitary sewer system City Staff Ongoing High A.Adjacent and Affected Jurisdictional Review and Comments B.Resolution 2019-98: A Resolution Approving Submittal of the Draft 2040 Mendota Heights Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council C.Public Engagement Schedule Summar y D.Intercommunit y Service Agreements E.Supporting Cit y Ordinances and Resolutions •Resolution 2016-01 Declaring the City of Mendota Heights to be a Pollinator-Friendly Community, and Pollinator Friendly Plantings List •Clear Water Discharge Prevention and Prohibition •Ordinance No. 496. Concerning the Inspection and Compliance of Sump Pump Connections F.Land Use Changes from 2030 to 2040 Comprehensive Plans G.Background Report: Market and Development Context 2016 H.Mendota Heights Capital Improvement Plan 2019 - 2023 I.Mendota Heights Surface Water Management Plan 2018 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update APPENDIX This page is intentionally blank. APPENDIX A Adjacent and Affected Jurisdictional Review and Comments This page is intentionally blank. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Affected Jurisdictions & Agencies Jurisdiction Name Jurisdiction Type Response (Yes/No/Date) Bloomington Adjacent Community Yes: 11/18/19 Eagan Adjacent Community No Inver Grove Heights Adjacent Community Yes: 6/25/19 Lilydale Adjacent Community No Mendota Adjacent Community No St. Paul Adjacent Community Yes: 6/25/19 Sunfish Lake Adjacent Community Yes: 7/15/19 West St. Paul Adjacent Community No Dakota County Adjacent Community Yes: 11/26/19 Hennepin County Adjacent Community No Ramsey County Adjacent Community No 197; West St. Paul-Mendota Heights-Eagan School District Yes: 6/19/19 Eagan-Inver Grove Heights Watershed Management Organization Watershed Management Organization No Lower Minnesota River Watershed District Watershed Management Organization No Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization Watershed Management Organization No Dakota County Park Operating Agency No MnDOT State Agency Yes: 6/28/2019 MAC State Agency No Minn. DNR (Commissioner)State Agency No National Park Service; MNRRA Federal Agency No Friends of the Mississippi River Public Advocacy Group No 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Affected Jurisdictions & Agencies Jurisdiction Name Jurisdiction Type Bloomington Adjacent Community Eagan Adjacent Community Inver Grove Heights Adjacent Community Lilydale Adjacent Community Mendota Adjacent Community St. Paul Adjacent Community Sunfish Lake Adjacent Community West St. Paul Adjacent Community Dakota County Adjacent Community Hennepin County Adjacent Community Ramsey County Adjacent Community 197; West St. Paul-Mendota Hts.-Eagan School District Eagan-Inver Grove Heights Watershed Management Organization Watershed Management Organization Lower Minnesota River Watershed District Watershed Management Organization Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization Watershed Management Organization Dakota County Park Operating Agency MnDOT State Agency MAC State Agency Minn. DNR (Commissioner)State Agency National Park Service; MNRRA Federal Agency Friends of the Mississippi River Public Advocacy Group APPENDIX B Resolution 2019-98 This page is intentionally blank. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2019-98 A RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF THE DRAFT 2040 MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE TO THE METRO POLIT AN COUNCIL WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes section 473.864 requires each local governmental unit to review and, if necessary, amend its entire comprehensive plan and its fiscal devices and official controls at least once every ten years to ensure its comprehensive plan conforms to metropolitan system plans and ensure its fiscal devices and official controls do not conflict with the comprehensive plan or permit activities that conflict with metropolitan system plans; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes sections 473.858 and 473.864 require local governmental units to complete their "decennial" reviews by December 31, 2018; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No . 2018-37 , requesting the Metropolitan Council grant an extension to this review period to April 1, 2019, and whereupon the expiration of this date, representatives from Metropolit an Council communicated later to city staff that submittal of the city's plan could be delayed to the end of 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council, the Planning Commission, along with city staff and the city's planning consultants have prepared a proposed Comprehensive Plan intended to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and Metropolitan Council guidelines and procedures; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 473.858, the proposed Comprehensive Plan was submitted to adjacent governmental units and affected special districts and school districts for review and comment on June 11, 2019, and the statutory six-month review and comment period has elapsed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan and all public comments, and thereafter submitted its recommendations to this City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted its last public hearing on April 23, 2019 and gave a favorable (unanimous) recommendation to the City Council to adopt the proposed draft of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mendota Heights; and WHEREAS, the City County conducted a public hearing on June 4, 2019 relative to the adoption of the proposed draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mendota Heights; and WHEREAS , the City Council has reviewed the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan and those recommendations, public comments, and comments from adjacent jurisdictions and affected districts; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes section 473.858 requires a local governmental unit to submit its proposed comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council following recommendation by the Planning Commission and after consideration but before final approval by the governing body of the local governmental unit; and WHEREAS, based on its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Planning Commission and staff recommendations, the City Council of Mendota Heights is ready to submit its proposed plan to the Metropolitan Council for review pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 473.864. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS that city staff is directed to distribute said 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mendota Heights to the Metropolitan Council by December 31, 2019 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 473.864. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 17th day of December, 2019. Lorri Smith, City Clerk (SEAL) Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 5 5118 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS )\...,._Ql<-'.)JJ ~Q Neil Garlock, Mayor APPENDIX C Public Engagement Schedule Summary This page is intentionally blank. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Appendix - C Page-1 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SCHEDULE SUMMARY Ø April 25, 2017 – Planning Commission Meeting: first discussion of 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update. Ø September 26, 2017 – Planning Commission Meeting: discussed 2040 Plan’s Proposed Vision & Goals. Ø October 11, 2017 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discuss 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update; Issues, Visions & Goals; first SWOT Analysis completed. Ø October 14, 2017 – Fire Department Community Open House Ø October 24, 2017 – Planning Commission Meeting: continued discussion of Proposed Vision, Mission Statement & Goals/Policies. Ø Public Information/Public Engagement Meetings - for the residents and stakeholders: •Thursday, November 2nd - 5:00 – 8:00 pm. – City Hall Council Chambers •Wednesday, November 8th - 5:00 – 8:00 pm. – Somerset Elementary School •Wednesday, November 15th - 5:00 – 8:00 pm. – Friendly Hills Middle School Ø January 9, 2018 – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting: Presentation of the Draft Parks and Trails Plan. Ø January 23, 2018 – City Council Meeting: presentation of the 2040 Plan Draft Goals and Policies. Ø February 27, 2018 – Planning Commission Meeting: discussed 2040 Comp Plan input summary; comments from community meetings/online; Ch. 1 Background Draft. Ø April 5, 2018 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update. Ø April 24, 2018 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update. Ø August 8, 2018 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update. Ø August 22, 2018 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan June 2019 Appendix - C Page-2 Ø September 13, 2018 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed Draft Revisions from the previous August 22, 2018 PC Workshop; discussed new Ch. 7 Natural Resources Plan and Ch. 8 Resiliency Plan. Ø September 25, 2018 – Planning Commission Meeting PUBLIC HEARING: Discussed the Land Use Plan and Transportation Plan elements of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ø October 15, 2018 - Joint Planning Commission and City Council Workshop Meeting: discussed the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Updates. Ø October 23, 2018 – Planning Commission - PUBLIC HEARING: discussed 2040 Comprehensive Plan updates. Ø November 11, 2018 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed updated Ch. 7 Natural Resources; Ch. 8 Resiliency; and other chapters. Ø December 13, 2018 – Planning Commission Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING: discussed Ch. 2 - Land Use revisions; Ch. 7 - Natural Resources revisions; Ch. 8 – Resiliency; discussed other chapters. Ø January 22, 2019 – Planning Commission Meeting - PUBLIC HEARING: discussed the proposed 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ø February 20, 2019 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed updates to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Ø February 26, 2019 – Planning Commission Meeting - PUBLIC HEARING: discussed updates to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ø March 18, 2019 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed all chapters (including appendices etc.) of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ø March 26, 2019 – Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING: discussed Final Draft of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ø April 15, 2019 – Planning Commission Workshop Meeting: discussed all chapters (including appendices etc.) to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ø April 23, 2019 – Planning Commission Meeting - PUBLIC HEARING: recommended approval of the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Ø June 4, 2019 – City Council Meeting: city council approves the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan; directs plan to be distributed to adjacent/affected jurisdictions and agencies. APPENDIX D Intercommunity Service Agreements This page is intentionally blank. ) MENDOTA -MENDOTA HEIGHTS SANITARY Smffl:R FACILITIES JOINT SERVICE AGREEJMIENT THIS AGREEMENT between the City of Mendota ("Mendota") and the City of Mendota Heights ("Mendota Heights"), both Minnesota municipal corporations, situated in Dakota County, Minnesota, was approved by Council action by the respective Cities of Mendota on the ___ day of�------' 1991 and Mendota Heights on the 9 day of ,,...ful L,, 1991. ' '-' f WIT.NESSETH WHEREAS Mendota has a trunk sanitary sewer line which could serve st. Peters Catholic Church and other areas in that general vicinity, and WHEREAS the parties agree that these areas of Mendota Heights should be connected to and served by the Mendota sanitary sewer system upon the terms and conditions in this agreement; NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the parties as follows: SECTION 1 -SERVICE AREA 1.Mendota Heights may, subject to the provisions of thiscontract, interconnect its sewers, servicing certain areasof Mendota Heights, with the sewers of Mendota. 2.The area of Mendota Heights which may be permanently servedunder this agreement is limited to the Mendota HeightsDistrict identified on "Exhibit A". SECTION 2 -DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES Mendota Heights shall at its own cost and expense construct the sewer lines within Mendota Heights and up to the Mendota Outlet Point of Interconnection, as shown on Exhibit A. Mendota Heights shall submit the plans and specifications to Mendota before commencing construction, for its review and approval. Such approval shall not be arbitrarily or unreasonably withheld. SECTION 3 -FEES AND CHARGES 1.As compensation for allowing to connect to Mendota's Sanitary Sewer System, Mendota Heights shall extend an 8 11 watermain into the City of Mendota along with the sanitary sewerto the connection point with Mendota's sanitary sewer. Afire hydrant shall be installed on the north side of TrunkHighway 13 at that location. This watermain constructionwill be installed at no charge to Mendota. 2.Mendota Heights will apply to st. Paul Water Utility forauthorization to extend the watermain to Mendota. Thisextension is contingent upon approval by st. Paul WaterUtility. APPENDIX E Supporting City Ordinances and Resolutions This page is intentionally blank. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2016-01 RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TO BE A POLLINATOR-FRIENDLY COMMUNITY WHEREAS, bees and other pollinators are a necessary component of a healthy ecosystem and food system, providing pollination of plants in order to grow vegetables, herbs and fruits; and WHEREAS, pollinator populations are in sharp decline due to an ongoing loss of habitat as a result of human land practices, which is coupled with a simultaneous large-scale expansion of insecticide use by homeowners, landscapers, property managers and farmers; and WHEREAS, neonicotinoid and other systemic insecticides have been shown to cause illness and death to bees and pollinators; and WHEREAS, alternative land management practices are available that dramatically increase pollinator forage while decreasing maintenance costs; and WHEREAS, the monetary and social cost of maintaining pollinator-friendly landscapes can be less expensive the than costs associated with maintaining chemically-treated monocrop landscapes; and WHEREAS, many Mendota Heights residents and businesses are pledging to manage their land in a pollinator-friendly way; and WHEREAS, acting in a pollinator friendly manner is not expected to inhibit any potential treatments for Emerald Ash Borer infestation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, that the City of Mendota Heights is hereby declared a Pollinator- Friendly Community, and that the City celebrates current policies and practices that protect and support pollinator health by minimizing the use of insecticides. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights urges all Mendota Heights property owners, residents, businesses, institutions and neighborhoods to become more pollinator-friendly by adopting practices including: -Committing to avoiding the use of insecticides, including systemic insecticides, on their property; -Avoiding the planting of flowering plants which are treated with systemic insecticides; -Planting more pollinator-suppmting forage on their prope1ty, and adopting organic or chemical-free lawn and landscaping practices. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of January, 2016.CL� 13 Native Plant List Most of the plants listed are perennials. Forbs are herbaceous perennials. Shrubs are woody, usually less than 20 feet tall with multiple trunks. Trees are taller and usually do not form thickets. Wildlife value includes any special features of the plant which supply food or improve the habitat for birds, mammals, and beneficial insects such as parasitoids, predators and butterflies. Zones zone 1 upland areas, prairie, dry, sun or woodland, shade zone 2 wet meadow, wet soil zone 3 emergent, lake margin, shallow water zone 4 submerged or floating leaf, aquatic Light requirements (Sun) Growth form ❍= full sun, ◗ = part shade, = shade fern, forb (herbaceous perennial), grass, rush, sedge, shrub, tree Easy to grow? Height y = yes maximum height in feet Common name maidenhair fern ostrich fern sensitive fern interrupted fern yarrow anise hyssop prairie onion lead plant thimbleweed pasqueflower wild columbine Canada wild ginger butterfly milkweed heath aster calico aster New England aster sky-blue aster Species name Adiantum pedatum Matteuccia pensylvanica Onoclea sensibilis Osmunda claytoniana Achillea millefolium Agastache foeniculum Allium stellatum Amorpha canescens Anemone cylindrica Anemone patens (Pulsatilla nutalliana) Aquilegia canadensis Asarum candadense Asclepias tuberosa Aster ericoides Aster lateriflorus Aster novae-angliae Aster oolentangiensis Zone 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sun ◗ ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ◗ to ❍to ◗ ❍ ◗to ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ Growth fern fern fern fern forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb Easy? y y y y y Height 2 5 3 4 2 3 2 3 2 0.5 2 0.5 3 2 4 4 2.5 Wildlife Values butterfly bee, butterfly bee, butterfly bee bee, butterfly, hummingbird butterfly bee, butterfly bee, butterfly Other interesting leaves may be weedy, medicinal, small white flowers blue flowers, long-blooming, licorice-scented leaves white or pink flowers, slender leaves purple flowers during the buffalo mating season white flowers in mid-spring signal for spring celebrations among the Dakota, mature plants difficult to transplant red and yellow flowers with long spurs, self-sows ground cover, roots taste like ginger, strange brownish-red flowers bright orange flowers, roots once used medicinally small white flowers in late fall, heather-like leaves blossoms once used to treat insanity spreads rapidly, purple flowers in late summer, cut flower blue flowers in early fall prairie and woodland submerged or floating leaf emergentwet meadow 14 Common name silky aster blue false indigo golden asters coreopsis white prairie clover purple prairie clover showy tick-trefoil dutchman's breeches shooting star purple coneflower boneset queen-of-the-prairie bottle gentian wild geranium prairie smoke showy sunflower ox-eye round-headed bush clover blazing star Michigan lily wild lupine Virginia bluebells wild bergamot; beebalm large-flowered beardtongue mayapple Jacob's ladder true Solomon’s seal mountain mint gray-headed coneflower black-eyed Susan bloodroot Species name Aster sericeus Baptisia australis Chrysopsis villosa (Heterotheca villosa) Coreopsis palmata Dalea candida (Petalostemum candidum) Dalea purpurea (Petalostemum purpureum) Desmodium canadense Dicentra cucullaria Dodecatheon media Echinacea purpurea Eupatorium perfoliatum Filipendula rubra Gentiana andrewsii Geranium maculatum Geum triflorum Helianthus laetiflorus Heliopsis helianthoides Lespedeza capitata Liatris species Lilium michiganense Lupinus perennis Mertensia virginica Monarda fistulosa Penstemon grandiflorus Podophyllum peltatum Polemonium reptans Polygonatum biflorum Pycnanthemum virginianum Ratibida pinnata Rudbeckia hirta Sanguinaria canadensis Zone 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sun ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ◗ ❍to ◗ ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ Growth forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb Easy? y y y y y y y y y y y y Height 1.5 3 2 3 3 3 5 0.5 1 4 3 6 2 2 1 4 3 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 4 1.5 3 2 1 Wildlife Values bee, butterfly bee butterfly terrific bee and butterfly plant butterfly bee, butterfly bumblebee bee, butterfly, bird butterfly bee, seeds eaten by bird bee, butterfly, bird bee bumblebee, butterfly bumblebee, hummingbird bee, butterfly bee, butterfly Other purple flowers, silky gray-green leaves, once used to treat arthritis blue flowers yellow aster-like flowers yellow flowers, short-lived but self-sows little purple flowers with orange pollen, leaves fragrant when crushed pink flowers leaves die back in summer early to bloom, slow to germinate, leaves die back in summer root once used for toothache, now thought to stimulate immune system cut flower fluffy bright pink flowers, spreads rapidly, once used as a love potion blue flowers, seeds are slow to germinate pink flowers, spreads but is not invasive early red flowers followed by fluffy seedhead “smoke,” groundcover self-sows, cut flower yellow flowers, cut flower, long blooming season pink spikes, cut flower, once fed to horses to make them run faster orange flowers, bulbs are edible showy blue flowers in spikes, early- bloomers, self-sows blue flowers, plants die back after blooming lavender flowers, leaves used to make tea, leaves tend to mildew early showy pink flowers, will not tolerate competition spreading ground cover, white flowers, edible fruits blue flowers green flowers, blue berries, roots used medicinally fragrant when crushed, white flowers yellow flowers yellow flowers with black center white flowers are short-lived, groundcover, red dye from rhizomes 15 Common name compass plant cup-plant false Solomon’s seal gray goldenrod showy goldenrod spiderwort bellwort blue vervain hoary vervain Culver’s root common blue violet bird’s-foot violet golden alexanders big bluestem sideoats grama switchgrass little bluestem Indian grass New Jersey tea American hazelnut wild plum common chokecherry smooth sumac wild rose American elderberry American highbush cranberry climbing prairie rose white oak bur oak red oak black locust Species name Silphium laciniatum Silphium perfoliatum Smilacina racemosa Solidago nemoralis Solidago speciosa Tradescantia ohiensis Uvularia grandiflora Verbena hastata Verbena stricta Veronicastrum virginicum Viola papilionacea Viola pedata Zizia aurea Andropogon gerardii Bouteloua curtipendula Panicum virgatum Schizachyrium scoparium/ Andropogon scoparius Sorgastrum nutans Ceanothus americanus Corylus americana Prunus americana Prunus virginiana Rhus glabra Rosa arkansana Sambucus canadensis Viburnum trilobum Rosa setigera Quercus alba Quercus macrocarpa Quercus rubra Robinia pseudoacacia Zone 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sun ❍ ❍ to ◗ ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ◗ to ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍to ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ Growth forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb grass grass grass grass grass shrub shrub shrub shrub shrub shrub shrub shrub shrub or vine tree tree tree tree Easy? y y y y y y y y y y y y Height 6 6 3 2 4 1 1 4 4 6 0.5 0.5 2.5 8 2 5 3 6 3 9 20 20 9 3 9 12 6 60 60 75 60 Wildlife Values bee, butterfly, bird bee, butterfly bee, butterfly bee, butterfly bee, butterfly cover bee, butterfly wild turkey eat the roots butterfly cover, seeds cover, seeds cover, seeds cover, seeds cover, seeds bee, butterfly nuts bee, berries berries winter food for birds berries berries bee, butterfly winter food for birds acorns, nesting sites acorns, nesting sites acorns, nesting sites bee Other yellow flowers, deeply cut leaves shaggy yellow flowers, prairie moths bore into stems, roots used medicinally white flowers followed by red berries yellow flowers in late summer, graceful form yellow flowers in spikes pink or purple flowers liquefy by noon, once used as a cure for spider bites nodding yellow flowers in early spring, pioneers used early shoots for greens blue flowers in spikes purple flowers in spikes, tolerant of disturbance white flowers in spikes, cut flower groundcover, may be invasive purple flowers in early spring, not a good competitor, leaves are food for caterpillars yellow flowers in spring, glossy leaves king of native grasses, red-brown in winter, leaves once applied to infected wounds golden or reddish in fall reddish purple winter color white flowers in June and July, leaves once used as tea fragrant white flowers, use fruit for jam fragrant white flowers, use berries for jam fall color, plant on steep slopes to prevent erosion pink flowers, red hips containing vitamin C, spreads by suckers fragrant white flowers, use purple berries for jam or in muffins white flowers, leaves turn red in fall, red berries persist through winter pink flowers, red hips best fall color of the oaks, plant acorns as soon as they fall fine shape susceptible to oak wilt fragrant white flowers 16 Common name mountain ash basswood Jack-in-the-pulpit wild white indigo turtlehead Joe pye weed prairie cord grass bottlebrush sedge red maple blue flag swamp white oak jewelweed crested fern royal fern marsh fern swamp milkweed scouring rush purple avens sneezeweed cardinal flower great blue lobelia fringed loosestrife tall meadowrue prairie ironweed swamp saxifrage smooth alder Saskatoon meadowsweet black ash black spruce cottonwood black willow northern white cedar sweet flag Species name Sorbus americanus Tilia americana Arisaema triphyllum Baptisia alba (lactea) Chelone glabra Eupatorium maculatum Spartina pectinata Carex comosa Acer rubrum Iris versicolor Quercus bicolor Impatiens capensis Dryopteris cristata Osmunda regalis Thelypteris palustris Asclepias incarnata Equisetum hyemale Geum rivale Helenium autumnale Lobelia cardinalis Lobelia syphilitica Lysimachia ciliata Thalictrum dasycarpum Vernonia fasciculata Saxifraga pensylvanica Alnus rugosa Amelanchier alnifolia Spirea alba Fraxinus nigra Picea mariana Populus deltoides Salix nigra Thuja occidentalis Acorus calamus Zone 1 1 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 2,3 1,2 2,3 1,2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Sun ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ◗ ❍to ◗ ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ Growth tree tree forb forb forb forb grass sedge tree forb tree annual forb fern fern fern forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb forb sedge shrub shrub shrub tree tree tree tree tree forb Easy? y y y y y y y y y y y y y Height 30 120 1.5 2 2 5 4 4 45 3 60 4 2 5 2 4 3 1.5 4 4 3 3 4 5 3 25 20 6 75 45 50 60 30 6 Wildlife Values berries bee bee, butterfly bee, butterfly cover, muskrat eat roots cover nesting sites bee, butterfly, cover acorns bee butterfly, wild turkey eat the roots bee, butterfly butterfly, hummingbird bee, butterfly bee, butterfly bee, butterfly birds love the fruit bee, butterfly seeds dense cover for nesting bird bee, butterfly dense cover for nesting birds, winter cover Other white flowers, orange berries, the rowan tree of Celtic mythology tiny green fragrant flowers, inner bark used to make rope distinctive green flowers and red berries, tubers are edible but must be cooked white flowers on spikes, once used for blue dye white or pink flowers fragrant fuzzy pink flowers, Joe Pye was a Native American herbalist burned as fuel during the "Long Winter" (Laura Ingalls Wilder) red or yellow leaves in fall blue or lavender flowers tolerates wet soils, acorns once eaten by Native Americans orange flowers, seed pods pop open, juice relieves itching young fiddleheads are edible rose to pink flowers, cut flower, edible flowers, roots used medicinally best in sandy soils, a primitive plant from the age of dinosaurs cut flower bright red flowers, roots used as love charm blue flowers in spikes, used medicinally small green flowers with cut leaves, roots may contain an anti-cancer drug pink flowers in late summer, cut flower green flowers in spike white flowers showy white flowers, cut flower pleasant aroma prefers acid soil yellow in fall rhizomes have sweet fragrance when cut or bruised 17 Common name marsh marigold spike rush soft rush rice cutgrass pickerelweed arrowhead hard-stem bulrush Canada bluejoint grass giant manna grass lake sedge tussock sedge green bulrush wool grass river bulrush black chokeberry buttonbush red osier dogwood marsh cinquefoil pussy willow water plantain bur-reed cattail American lotus water celery spatterdock white waterlily Species name Caltha palustris Eleocharis species Juncus effusus Leersia oryzoides Pontederia cordata Sagittaria latifoia Scirpus acutus Calamagrostis canadensis Glyceria grandis Carex lacustris Carex stricta Scirpus atrovirens Scirpus cyperinus Scirpus fluviatilis Aronia melanocarpa Cephahanthus occidentalis Cornus sericea (stolonifera) Potentilla palustris Salix discolor Alisma plantago-aquatica Sparganium americanum Typha latifolia Nelumbo lutea Valisneria americana Nuphar advena Nymphaea odorata Zone 2 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 2,3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 Sun ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍to ◗ ❍ ❍ to ◗ ❍ ❍ ❍ Easy? y y y y y Height 1.5 1.5 3.5 3 3 3 8 4 5 3 2 4 5 6 9 9 18 1.5 20 2.5 5 floating floating floating Wildlife Values cover cover, muskrat eat roots cover, food cover, food cover, food cover cover, food cover cover cover, food cover, food for muskrat berries butterfly berries bee duck, muskrat food food for muskrat, deer, beaver, moose and porcupine food Other shiny yellow flowers in May, foliage dies back in summer deep blue flowers in spikes stands up well in water forms hummocks fuzzy nutlets white flowers in June followed by black fruits, glossy leaves red stems add winter color, twigs used to make baskets red or purple flowers fuzzy catkins are a sign of spring, cuttings can be rooted poor germination from seed yellow flowers, need a rich muddy bottom, rhizomes and seeds were Native American foods cup-shaped yellow flowers, plant the rhizomes in mud, rhizomes are edible pure white fragrant flowers, plant rhizomes in fall in fertile mud Growth forb rush rush grass forb forb rush grass grass sedge sedge rush rush rush shrub shrub shrub shrubby shrub forb forb forb forb forb forb forb 10-3-10: CLEAR WATER DISCHARGE PREVENTION AND PROHIBITION: A. Discharge Requirements: 1. No "clear water", as defined in section 10-1-1 of this title, shall be discharged, directly or indirectly, into the city's sewer system. 2. All sump pump systems within the city shall meet the following requirements: a. No sump pump system shall discharge clear water into the city's sanitary sewer system; b. The sump pump system design shall provide year round discharge of clear water through a permanently installed discharge line from the interior of the structure to an appropriate drainage area on the outside of the structure, connection to the city storm sewer, or discharge through the curb and gutter to the street. In no event shall a drainage area include property owned by others or any public right of way unless said right of way is adjacent to a developed city street with an installed drainage system. Approval to discharge to storm sewer or streets must be obtained from the city; c. The sump pump system's permanent discharge line shall be made of solid, nonflexible material and shall not have any connection fittings as to permit alternative flow path subsequent to installation; and d. If the sump pump system discharge line is connected directly to the city's storm sewer system, then the discharge line shall have a check valve which shall be located within the property's boundaries and not within the public right of way. B. Inspections: 1. Inspections Required: Any property within the city that is connected to the city's sewer system shall be subject to one, no cost compliance inspection, and a subsequent follow up inspection, to determine whether the property's discharge of its clear water is in compliance with this section and is not discharged into the city's sanitary sewer system. a. Property owner or occupant shall permit the city's designated inspector on the property and within any structure thereon to complete the inspection. b. The compliance inspection shall occur within thirty (30) days of written notice from the city that a compliance inspection is required on the property. c. The compliance inspection shall occur at a time and in the manner as reasonably determined by the city's designated inspector. d. In lieu of a compliance inspection by the city inspector, property owner may have the property inspected, at the sole expense of the owner, by a private licensed plumber who shall inspect the property and file a certificate of compliance on a form provided by the city, within thirty (30) days of the city's notice of the required inspection. e. The private licensed plumber who conducts the compliance inspection shall certify on the certificate of compliance that the property's discharge of clear water is in compliance or noncompliance with the provisions of this section. f. In the event that the inspector cannot complete the compliance inspection because the property's sump pump and/or sewer "cleanout" is not readily accessible as required by the state building code, the property owner or occupant shall take all necessary steps to make the sewer cleanout readily accessible for the reinspection to be completed within thirty (30) days of the date the inspector was at the property to conduct the initial inspection. g. If the property owner or occupant fails to make the sewer line cleanout accessible for inspection, such failure shall constitute a failure to comply with inspection requirements and subject to the quarterly surcharge as defined in subsection 10-3-7C6 of this chapter. 2. Failure To Comply With Inspection Requirements: a. Property owners or occupants are required to permit authorized city employees and/or agents to enter upon properties and inside structures for purposes of inspection under section 10-3-9 of this chapter. b. If the property owner or occupant fails to permit or have completed a compliance inspection, the city may apply to the district court for an appropriate administrative search warrant authorizing the city to enter the property to conduct the inspection. 3. Reinspections: a. In the event that the discharge of clear water on the property is not in compliance with this section, a second compliance inspection shall be completed within sixty (60) days of the notice of noncompliance to determine if the necessary corrections have been made and compliance with this section has been met. b. The second compliance inspection shall be subject to the requirements set forth above. Thereafter, the property shall be subject to reinspections on an annual basis to confirm continued compliance. c. Properties that are in compliance shall also be subject to reinspections to confirm continued compliance. C. Corrections: 1. Upon notice that the discharge of clear water on the property is not in compliance with this section, the owner or occupant of the property shall immediately cease from discharging clear water in violation of this section and shall make the necessary repairs and corrections to discharge the clear water in accordance with this section. These repairs and corrections shall be completed within sixty (60) days of the date of notice of noncompliance. 2. If necessary repairs and corrections are not completed within the sixty (60) days, it shall constitute a failure to comply with the requirements of this section and the owner of the property shall be subject to the quarterly surcharge as defined in subsection 10-3-7D of this chapter. D. Inspections With Building Permits: If a city inspector is on a property for the purpose of a building permit inspection, the city inspector has the authority to inspect the property for compliance with this section without further notice to the property owner or occupant. E. Temporary Waiver: 1. The city may grant a temporary waiver from the provisions of this section where strict enforcement would cause a threat of damage or harm to other property, the environment, or public safety because of circumstances unique to the individual property or due to weather conditions. 2. A written request for a temporary waiver must be first submitted to the public works director specifying the reasons for the temporary waiver. a. If a temporary waiver is granted, the property owner shall pay an additional fee for sewerage service charges based on the number of gallons discharged into the city's (sanitary) sewer system as estimated by the public works director. b. The additional sewerage service charge fee shall be established in the city's fee schedule and shall consist of a minimum base charge plus a charge based on the number of estimated gallons of clear water discharge. 3. The public works director may set conditions to the temporary waiver. 4. The public works director may terminate the temporary waiver upon a failure to comply with any conditions imposed on the temporary waiver. 5. The public works director must give a five (5) day written notice of the termination to the property owner and occupant setting forth the reasons for the termination. 6. After expiration or termination of a temporary waiver, the property owner shall comply with the provisions of this section. (Ord. 496, 6-7-2016) APPENDIX F Land Use Changes from 2030 to 2040 Comprehensive Plan This page is intentionally blank. 1 Appendix F City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update LAND USE CHANGES FROM 2030 TO 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLANS The designated future land use for a number of properties in the city has changed between the 2030 Comprehensive Plan (in 2008) and this 2040 Comprehensive Plan (adopted in 2021). Below is a brief narrative and summary of these changes, illustrated in Map 2-3. Future Land Use Plan. •340 - D Street: This 0.86 acre parcel, referred locally as Jack’s Mfg. Co., was left blank on the 2030 Plan, and is now guided I-Industrial in the 2040 Plan to reflect its current use. There is also a small 0.27 acre triangular shaped parcel located behind this property, owned by the adjacent St. Peter’s Catholic Church. This parcel will be guided as P/S-Public/Semi-Public. •Pilot Knob Historical Site: This area consists of several parcels totaling over 32 acres in the westerly edge of the city, south of Highway 55 and either side of Pilot Knob Road and Highway 13. The westernmost parcel is owned by the Minnesota DNR; and all others by the city. In the 2030 Plan the DNR parcel was guided Right-of-Way and the city parcels were guided Parks & Nature Preserve. That land use category has been replaced with the designation Park/ Open Space, hence the change between the 2030 and 2040 Plans. The existing and intended use of all the parcels is consistent with the designation Parks/ Open Space. •Valencour Circle (2085 Valencour Cir. & 2095 Hwy 55): Two residential parcels on Valencour Circle, fronting Highway 55 north of Acacia Boulevard, were guided NP-Nature Preserve in the 2030 Plan, but being single-family residences they have been changed in the 2040 Plan to LR-Low Density Residential, reflecting their current use. •2160-2180 Highway 13 (between Acacia Drive & Victory Ave.): Up until 2017, these properties housed an old landscaping-nursery business and a motel, which were razed and redeveloped for a new apartment development. The 2030 Plan guided the properties as Business, but in 2017 the city approved the guiding of these sites to HR-High Density Residential, reflecting their future and intended use (refer to Res. No. 2017-43; adopted 06/06/17). 2 Appendix F City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •Augusta Shores / Lemay Shores Townhomes: The Augusta Shores and Lemay Shores residential developments were both guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan, but as twin-homes, it is more appropriate as Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use. There are also several parcels within each development owned in common by the homeowners association as permanent open space or conservation easement, so identifying these areas as Park/Open Space is appropriate. •Lexington Avenue and Centre Pointe Curve: The city owns a vacant 1.2- acre parcel in the southwest quadrant of Lexington Avenue and Centre Pointe Curve, backing up to Highway 62. It was guided Parks & Nature Preserve in the 2030 Plan, but as a city-owned parcel is guided Public/Semi-Public in the 2040 Plan. •Veronica Lane: There are two city-owned parcels at the end of Veronica Lane totaling 1.2 acres that were guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but are now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use as permanent open space. •Lexington Avenue and Marie Avenue: The city owns two parcels in the southeast quadrant of Lexington Avenue and Marie Avenue that are permanent open space. They were guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but are now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use. •Kingsley Estates: The Kingsley Estates townhomes on Lexington Avenue and Kingsley Circle occupy about 8.3 acres and were guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan, but have been designated Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use and density. •Caren Road: The city owns four parcels on Caren Road where it meets James Road and Lilac Lane, totaling about two acres. They were guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but are now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use as permanent open space. •Victoria Highlands: The Victoria Highlands townhomes on the north side of Marie Avenue at Victoria Road occupy about 10 acres. They were guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but are now guided Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use. 3 Appendix F City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update • Eagle Ridge: The Eagle Ridge townhomes in the southeast quadrant of Marie Avenue and Victoria Road occupy about 22 acres. They were guided HR- High Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but are now guided MR-Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use. • Valley View Heights Park: This small park at the corner of Cullen Avenue and Timmy Street was guided LR-Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but is now guided P-Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual use as a city park. • Rogers Lake Park: This 2.3-acre parcel is part of Rogers Lake Park and had been guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but is now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual use as a city park. • Wagon Wheel Trail at Rogers Lake: The 3-acre city-owned parcel on the south side of Wagon Wheel Trail as it crosses Rogers Lake was guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan, but is now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual use as permanent open space • Condon Court: Two parcels formerly addressed as 2511 and 2525 Condon Court were re-guided in 2015 from LB-PUD Limited Business-Planned Unit Development to MR-Medium Density Residential (refer to Res. No. 2015-02; adopted 01/06/15). The properties were later subdivided and rezoned R-2 Two Family Residential. These parcels will be guided in the 2040 Plan as Medium Density Residential, reflecting their current use. • 2357 Pagel Road: Two privately-owned parcels totaling 1.2 acres were shown in the 2030 Plan as Highway 149 right-of-way, but are actually privately owned parcels with 2357 Pagel Road. They are shown in the 2040 Plan as LR- Low Density Residential, reflecting their actual use. • Mendota Meadows (Monet Court): two parcels dedicated to the city for open-space/buffering and storm water pond. Re-guided from MR-PUD in the 2030 Plan to Park/Open-Space in the 2040 Plan. 4 Appendix F City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update • Mendota Woods: The Mendota Woods single-family development on Arbor Court south of Mendota Heights Road was guided HR-PUD in the 2030 Plan, but is appropriately guided Low Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting the actual use. • Kensington PUD Townhomes: The Kensington PUD townhome development, south of Mendota Heights Road at Concord Way and Lockwood Drive, was guided HR-PUD in the 2030 Plan, but is now guided Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting the actual use. • Kensington PUD Single-Family Homes: The Kensington PUD single- family development, in the southwest quadrant of Mendota Heights Road and Delaware Avenue, was guided MR-PUD in the 2030 Plan, but is appropriately guided Low Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting the actual use. • MnDOT Right-of-Way on Decorah Lane: A small triangular 0.76-acre parcel on MnDOT right-of-way fronting on Decorah Lane east of Dodd Road was guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan, but is now guided Right-of- Way in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual ownership. • Friendly Marsh Park: A one-acre triangular parcel at the end of Apache Street is part of Friendly Marsh Park, but was guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan. It is now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual use. • The Village (Dodd Road/Hwy 62/Market Street): A combination of city- owned outlots (total of 4.08 acres) located in The Village of Mendota Heights, was guided Mixed-Use PUD in the 2030 Plan, but are all guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting their actual use as permanent open space. • Somerset Area (Southwest Part): A large area in the southwest part of what was designated the Somerset Area Focus Area in the 2030 Plan was guided Rural Residential. It is actually developed as single-family residential on sewered lots and is guided Low Density Residential in the 2040 Plan. 5 Appendix F City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update •Somerset 19 Condominiums: The two-building condo project at Dodd Road and Wentworth Avenue on 8.1 acres was guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan, but is now guided Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual density and use. •723 - 3rd Avenue: The 3-acre privately-owned single-family parcel was guided Parks in the 2030 Plan, but is now guided Low Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual single-family residential ownership use. •City Parcel, Highway 13 at Ivy Falls: A narrow 2.6-acre parcel of city-owned land fronting Highway 13 on the bluff where Ivy Falls drains toward the river between Wachtler Avenue and Sylvandale Road was guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan. It is now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual use as permanent open space. •Ivy Hill - Ivy Keep Townhomes: The Ivy Hill –Ivy Keep community is comprised of approximately 19 acres near Dodd Road, Ivy Hill Drive and Maple Park Drive, and was originally guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan, but is now guided Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual density and use. The exception is the Ivy Keep Association’s 2.67-acre vacant tract known as Outlot F, which has been requested to be re-guided to Park/Open Space, reflecting its actual use as permanent open space. •Lilydale Regional Park, St. Paul Parcel: A 0.7-acre parcel at the far northern edge of the city on the west side of Highway 13 is owned by the City of St. Paul and is within the Lilydale Regional Park. It was guided Low Density Residential in the 2030 Plan but is now guided Park/Open Space in the 2040 Plan, reflecting its actual ownership and use. 6 Appendix F City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update 7 Appendix F City of Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update APPENDIX G Background Report: Market and Development Context 2016 This page is intentionally blank. Background Report: Market and Development Context In support of: 2040 Mendota Heights Comprehensive Plan Prepared for: City of Mendota Heights, MN December 2016 Prepared by: Tangible Consulting Services Stantec, Inc Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 2 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 C ONTENT S Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Residential Market Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Retail Market Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Employment Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Industrial Market Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Office Market Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 3 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Introduction Purpose The purpose of this background report is to outline the economic context that will shape the future in Mendota Heights. It overviews the unique housing and economic base that characterizes the city and provides analysis of opportunities and challenges for Mendota Heights. The report supports the Mendota Heights 2040 comprehensive and long-range planning process that will establish goals for future redevelopment and policy decisions in Mendota Heights. This report is based on several types of information: market research, a review of existing reports, interviews with local developers and real estate professionals, and direct observation. Mendota Heights is a fully developed suburb. While that status limits opportunities for new development, there is a need to stay viable and attractive as the demographics of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area shift. The population is growing, it is aging, and more households will be renters. Choices about purchasing and employment will also evolve. Decisions about housing redevelopment, retail support and location, and office and employment opportunities will influence Mendota Heights’ character as a desirable place to live. This report considers the housing, retail, industrial and office development sectors. It looks at regional trends, as well as conditions in Mendota Heights. It evaluates strengths and weaknesses of Mendota Heights locations with respect to these development sectors, and evaluates opportunities for additional growth and development. As the Mendota Heights comprehensive planning process progresses, the analysis and findings in this report will serve to inform decision-making. They will be further modified and augmented through the process of developing the comprehensive plan, based on discussion with policymakers, stakeholders, and others. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 4 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Residential Market Context Existing Conditions Mendota Heights is a fully developed first-ring suburb. Its abundance of open space, lakes and wooded areas give it a distinctly suburban and in some areas rural feel. Yet its central location gives it excellent access to downtown St. Paul and the greater metropolitan area. Housing in Mendota Heights is predominantly single family. Eighty percent of residential land is guided for low density housing, with an allowed 2.9 housing units/acre. (Source: 2030 Comprehensive Plan) Nine percent is guided rural residential which allows 1.1 units/acre. The remaining 11% of residential land is guided for medium to high density housing. Around 70% of existing housing units are single family homes. Roughly 15% are townhomes, and 15% are in apartment buildings. Owner occupied housing predominates. Less than 15% of housing units are renter occupied. Single family housing. Residential neighborhoods throughout the City are strong. Homes are generally well maintained. The great majority were built in the last 50 years, as illustrated in the map below. A smaller number of homes are older than that, and go back to the late 1800s and early 1900s. They are scattered throughout the community, but most are in the northeast area. Housing Development by Decade: Single Family Homes and Townhomes Source: Mendota Heights Assessor Data Homes in Mendota Heights are valued markedly higher than that of homes in neighboring communities, or homes in the Metropolitan Area as a whole. The median value of a single family home in Mendota Heights in 2015 was approximately $360,000. High home values are correlated with the higher household incomes that are typical in Mendota Heights. 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Census 1990 Census 2000 Estimates 2010 Estimates 2015 Mendota Heights Housing Types Single Family Homes Townhomes Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex Multifamily (5 units or more) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 1990 2000 2010 ACS 2011-2015 Mendota Heights Housing Tenure Owner occupied Renter occupied Vacant Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 5 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Source: American Community Survey, 2011-2015 Market Value: Single Family Homes and Townhomes Source: Mendota Heights Assessor Data The map of homes by value shows a similar pattern to the map of homes by age. Higher value homes tend to be in the neighborhoods that were developed most recently. Multifamily housing. Although single family housing predominates in Mendota Heights, the city offers some townhome communities, as well as a few apartment and condominium buildings. There are four existing apartment developments in Mendota Heights. Three are for seniors. One is for general occupancy. An additional four-story apartment building with 139 units is being developed in the Hwy 110/Dodd Road area. Residential Context Map Source: Mendota Heights Assessor Data $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000 Median Home Value Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 6 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Housing Needs Mendota Heights’ housing stock of mostly single family, owner-occupied homes is valued by City residents, and is a good fit for upper income, family households. It offers more limited options, however, for a range of other household types. With a metropolitan household that is aging and diversifying, the interest in a broader set of housing choices will increase. Broadening the housing types available in Mendota Heights may be beneficial for attracting younger couples and families, and providing opportunities for older residents who are transitioning from large single family homes. Few opportunities are similarly available for the moderate to average income households that may serve as teachers in the City’s schools, or be employed in some of the City’s industrial businesses. The following two chart show the affordability of the City’s existing housing, and the number of housing units that are publicly subsidized. Source: Metropolitan Council Source: Metropolitan Council Housing Units Affordable to Households with Income: At or below 30% AMI 42 30% - 50% of AMI 180 51% - 80% of AMI 995 (AMI: 2016 area median income in Twin Cities for a household of four is $85,800) Publicly Subsidized Housing Units Total Housing Units 4,676 Total Publicly Subsidized Units 134 Public Subsidized Senior Units 110 Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 7 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Market Dynamics – Regional A shift from owner occupied housing to rental housing has been occurring since the Great Recession, and is continuing in 2017. This is partly due to the reduced ability of some households to meet the financial requirements of purchasing a home, and more stringent mortgage qualification requirements. But it also reflects changes in preferences—that is, an increased preference for renting versus owning one’s home. Aging population, the lifestyle choices of many millennials, and economic factors have made rental housing an increasingly popular choice. Twin Cities Apartments: Under Construction and Completed In the Twin Cities, developers have responded to the surge in demand for rental housing by developing more rental housing—most commonly high-amenity, market rate apartments. Condominium development has lagged—partly because of reduced demand, but also because production has been constrained by state statutes that govern developer liability. If liability statutes are loosened, that would open the door to increased condominium production. Apartment development has been largely focused in the strongest urban locations in the Metro—most notably downtown Minneapolis and St Paul, and strong urban transit and commercial nodes. There has been some suburban apartment development as well, and suburban development is increasing. Twin Cities Apartments: Eastern Metro Construction Activity, 2016 Source: Colliers International The surge in apartment supply has not yet quenched the demand. From the 12 months from Fall, 2015 through Summer, 2016, over 5,000 new units were constructed in the Twin Cities metro, and close to 4,000 units were already scheduled to be delivered in the 12 months through Summer, 2017. Twin Cities Apartments: Average Rent and Vacancy Apartment rents have continued to rise. Vacancy rates continue to be low overall, but a bifurcation has emerged between Class A and Class C buildings. Perhaps because there has been little construction of non-luxury apartments, there is a particularly low Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 8 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 vacancy rate in pre-1970s apartment buildings (98.7%), which are predominantly Class C buildings. The average vacancy rate in apartment buildings built after 2000 (mostly Class A buildings) is now over 5%. Market Dynamics – Mendota Heights As indicated in the following chart and map, the suburban communities around Mendota Heights are experiencing some apartment development in recent years. (Mendota Heights is in the S. St. Paul/Eagan Submarket in the following chart.) Apartment Unit Completions by Year Source: Colliers International Multifamily (MF) Apartment Construction around Mendota Heights Since 2010 Source: CoStar Market indicators. Demand for existing multifamily development seems strong. Although Costar only tracks two of the four existing apartment buildings in Mendota Heights, those buildings experience very low vacancy. The housing that was built at The Village at Mendota Heights was sold and occupied, even though some of it came online just before the start of the recession. Mendota Heights Apartment Vacancy Source: Costar Rents for multifamily units have been increasing steadily and in 2016 are at $1.10 per square foot. Mendota Heights Apartment Asking Rents (per Square Foot) Source: CoStar The market is strong enough to have attracted new market rate multifamily housing. A four story apartment building with 139 units is under construction near Hwy 110 and Dodd. It overlooks Dodge Nature Center and will be connected via pedestrian bridge to Mendota Plaza. Additional apartment and condo development seems likely to be supported by the market in certain locations in the community. But development opportunity sites in Mendota Heights are hard to find. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 9 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Development Considerations Strengths and weaknesses. Mendota Heights has important locational strengths and weaknesses for attracting housing development, and residential population. Strengths include: Its stable single family neighborhoods Its central location in the metropolitan area, with excellent transportation connections in all directions. Proximity to both downtown St. Paul and downtown Minneapolis. High quality schools, including three high schools—Henry Sibley, and St. Thomas Academy, and Visitation—which have regional reputations. Good quality neighborhood retail at Highway 100 and Dodd, including the unique retail environment offered by The Village, a mixed- use shopping area north of Hwy 110 and Dodd. High quality natural amenities including Dodge Nature Center, two golf courses, lakes and other natural areas, and proximity to the Mississippi River and trails. Challenges include: Limited options for transit service are available. Lack of retail goods and services, restaurants and entertainment, beyond those that are available at Highway 110 and Dodd Road. Development opportunities. Because Mendota Heights is fully developed, there is little opportunity for additional development of single family homes. Because there are few new home opportunities this close to the center of the metro, homes that are developed would likely be quite marketable. The proposed At Home Apartments development at Highway 110 and Dodd Road shows that Mendota Heights can attract the type of high amenity apartment construction that is being built in other parts of the region. It will build on the success of the housing that was built at The Village in Mendota Heights. It’s notable that new housing is being concentrated at the location in Mendota Heights where there are the strongest retail amenities and dining opportunities. Additional apartment development at this commercial node would likely be attractive and marketable, if suitable sites can be identified or assembled. Other locations where housing development may be viable in the coming decades include the following. Underdeveloped locations near Augusta or Lemay Lake. Existing golf course land, if its financial viability declines in the future. The attractiveness of existing housing in Mendota Heights, and the ability to attract new housing, would benefit from steps taken to strengthen the amenity base—particularly with respect to transit availability, and retail, dining and entertainment options. Strengthening these amenities may be important to maintaining Mendota Heights desirability and attractiveness as the tastes and demographic character of the Twin Cities evolves over the coming decades. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 10 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Retail Market Context Existing Conditions A city’s retail areas play an important role in its identity and attractiveness. Retail development in Mendota Heights is almost entirely focused at the crossroads of Highway 110 and Dodd Road. Two retail areas are present at this intersection – The Village at Mendota Heights, north of Hwy 110 at Dodd, and Mendota Plaza, across Hwy 110 to the south. These developments have distinctly different characters. The Village at Mendota Heights. The Village at Mendota Heights was developed over the period of 2001 to 2007. It is a neighborhood center in its scale of development, and the type of stores that anchor the development. But it has a destination market draw. Many of its customers come from Eagan, or from east and west of Mendota Heights, arriving via Highway 110. The Village at Mendota Heights The Village is a mixed-use area of retail and office, townhomes and condominiums, senior apartments, and a park. A unique, “new urbanist” style of development, it is a high density, walkable area that provides the opportunity to live close to shopping and offices, or park in the one of the parking lots and stroll along storefront-style stores, offices and restaurants. This “experience retail” can retain its attractiveness through shifts in the retail landscape, because it has a character that cannot be replicated through online purchasing. Mendota Plaza. Mendota Plaza is a more traditional neighborhood center. It is a strip center anchored by a Walgreens, a natural food store, a fitness facility and a restaurant. It has 60,000 square feet of retail floor area with surface parking in front of the stores. It was renovated within the past ten years, and is currently undergoing an 11,000-square foot expansion in conjunction with the development of a four story, 139- unit apartment building just to the east of the existing development along Highway 110. A pedestrian bridge will connect the apartments across a wetland area to Mendota Plaza. Another key factor in the expansion is the addition of driveway access into Mendota Plaza from Hwy 110. Mendota Plaza A regional trail is being developed that will cross Highway 110 at this location via a tunnel under Highway 110. Connecting to the Mississippi River in one direction, and the City of Eagan in another, the trail will effectively connect the two retail areas for bicyclists and pedestrians. Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 11 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Market Dynamics – Regional Competitive Retail Context. The location of Mendota Plaza and The Village at Mendota Heights, relative to other retail areas in the area, has an important impact on the opportunity for additional retail development in Mendota Heights. The Retail Context Map illustrates the shopping centers in and around Mendota Heights, which are tracked by Costar according to type of center. Centers are given circular symbols that are illustrative of the size of the center. Large circles indicate regional centers. Small circles illustrate neighborhood- oriented retail centers. The City of Eagan, south of Mendota Heights is becoming a destination retail powerhouse on the scale of Woodbury. It added a new major retail development, Central Park Commons, on the former Lockheed Martin site at Pilot Knob Road and Yankee Doodle Road, west of Interstate 35E. That development includes a Hy-Vee grocery store, Marshalls, and other destination retailers. Twin Cities Premium Outlets is located a little further south at the intersection of Highways 13 and 77.The new Vikings headquarters and training facility, to be located near Interstate 494 at the intersection of Dodd Road and Lone Oak Parkway, will include office, retail, residential, hospitality and a conference center, and will become a destination in the region. The Eagan Promenade offers another cluster of destination retailers and restaurants at Yankee Doodle Road, east of I-35E. The retail offerings at these centers draw shoppers from Mendota Heights. New retail development tends to build on existing retail strength. So the retail primacy of Eagan dampens the attractiveness of Mendota Heights for destination oriented retailers. To the east, along Robert Street in West St Paul, there is a less upscale set of destination retail areas. The section of Robert Street between Wentworth and Marie Avenues hosts a Walmart, Target, and Lowe’s. The Signal Hills Shopping Center is at South Robert Street and Butler Avenue. The competing destination retail areas in Eagan and West St Paul, along with a scarcity of suitable retail locations in Mendota Heights, make it difficult to expand the retail footprint in Mendota Heights. On the other hand, the distance from Mendota Heights retail areas to competing retail areas in Eagan and West St Paul buffer the Mendota Heights retail areas from competition, and protect their long-term viability— since neighborhood centers offer goods and services that people don’t generally drive great distances for. Retail Context Map Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 12 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Regional market indicators. The Twin Cities retail market has been reaping the benefits of the economic recovery. Absorption of retail space has been strong over the past five years, to the point that average retail vacancy metro-wide is at a very low 3.6%. And retail development has followed, reaching a post-recession high in 2016. Retail Vacancy, Absorption and Deliveries Twin Cities Metro Source: Costar Average asking rents per square foot have remained pretty steady over the same period at around $13.50 per square foot. Retail Asking Rents Per Square Foot Twin Cities Metro Source: CoStar Market Dynamics – Mendota Heights Market indicators. Though limited in scale, the retail areas in Mendota Heights are outperforming the metropolitan area as a whole. Costar data shows that the retail areas at Highway 110 and Dodd Road have continued to attract retail shops and services to the point where there is no vacancy in the two retail centers. No new retail has been constructed over the past five years, but that will change with the addition to Mendota Plaza. Retail Vacancy, Absorption and Deliveries Mendota Heights Source: CoStar Asking rents at these centers, at around $15 per square foot, are higher than the metro average of $13.50 per square foot. Retail Asking Rents Per Square Foot Mendota Heights Source: CoStar Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context 13 Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 Development Considerations Strengths and weaknesses. The retail areas in Mendota Heights benefit from their visibility from the heavily traveled Highway 110 corridor. Highway 110 carries a daily traffic volume of 20,000 to 30,000 ADT (average daily trips). They are the first retail center of any size on Highway 110 after crossing the Mendota Bridge from Minneapolis or Richfield. They also benefit from their distance from competing retail areas. In a sense, their distance from the centers in Eagan and West St Paul gives them a monopoly on neighborhood goods and services for residents in the surrounding neighborhoods. These locational characteristics are likely to keep the areas strong into the future. Another foundational strength of Mendota Heights retail is the relatively high income of its residents, relative to the metro area. Residents have the purchasing power to support neighborhood retail goods and services, as well as some distinctive restaurants and night spots. Mendota Heights is more limited in its prospects for destination retail. It is not likely to be able to develop a strong destination retail area, given the strength of destination retail areas in the surrounding communities. Development opportunities. There are limited opportunities for additional retail in Mendota Heights, and these include: At Mendota Plaza and The Village at Mendota Heights, limited opportunity may emerge for additional retail expansion, beyond what is already planned. There is a daytime population at Mendota Heights Industrial District which is underserved by restaurants and retail amenities. Although land is not available that would support the development of a large- scale retail center, there are several locations where a small footprint of retail could be developed to serve the district. Prospects for retail growth would be strengthened by increased housing, particularly that which is in close proximity to the retail expansion area. Retail areas can also be strengthened by building additional connections to them. Increasing bike and pedestrian connections from neighborhoods to existing retail may bring a different type of customer traffic, and strengthen the appeal of Mendota Heights to families. 14 Industrial and Office Market Context Employment in Mendota Heights The Minneapolis–St. Paul economy continues to boast one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country, currently hovering around 3.4 percent. Over 28,000 jobs were added in the last 12 months, and the metropolitan area benefits from the headquarters of 16 Fortune 500 companies as well as large local employers like the University of Minnesota. The local workforce ranks 11th in the country in terms of education, with 41 percent achieving a bachelor’s degree or higher. The average annual household income is $69,000, topping the national average by 29 percent. Mendota Heights has a unique employment profile for a Twin Cities suburb. Businesses in Mendota Heights offer a high number of good-paying jobs. And there are almost two jobs in Mendota Heights for every employed person who lives in Mendota Heights. While some jobs are in neighborhood serving retail businesses, and in its educational institutions, the great majority of jobs in Mendota Heights are in the industrial facilities and offices in the City’s industrial and office areas. Industry mix. Mendota Heights has a quite different business profile than the metropolitan area as a whole. It has a relatively small footprint in sectors that are commonly strong, such as health care, educational services, and retail. It has an unusual concentration of businesses and employment in the following industrial sectors: Transportation and Warehousing Administration and Support Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Finance and Insurance Source: OnTheMap, US Census Bureau 0.0%5.0%10.0%15.0% Transportation and Warehousing Construction Administration & Support Management of Companies Wholesale Trade Finance and Insurance Professional, Scientific, Technical Services Accommodation and Food Services Retail Trade Educational Services Manufacturing Other Sectors Health Care and Social Assistance Industry Sectors, Mendota Heights & Metro Area MSP MSA Mendota Heights Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 15 Inflow/Outflow. Most Mendota Heights workers commute to jobs outside of Mendota Heights. Of the roughly 5,500 workers who live in Mendota Heights, almost 95% go to work at a location outside the City. Around 300 Mendota Heights residents work at a business in Mendota Heights. Mendota Heights Job Inflow/Outflow Source: OnTheMap, US Census Bureau Location of industrial and office development. The majority of employment in Mendota Heights is focused in two distinct areas—the Mendota Heights Industrial District, and the Centre Pointe Business Park. Businesses in the Mendota Heights Industrial District (MHID) offer over 7,000 principal jobs. The MHID is home to a mix of industrial and office developments. Industrial development (that is, a facility that includes a warehouse or production component in addition to any finished office space) is most common. But there are also a number of buildings that are strictly office buildings, without a warehouse component. Industrial and Office Context Map Source: Mendota Heights Assessor Data The Centre Pointe Business Park offers around 800 jobs. The business park was developed in the 1990s and 2000s, and is comprised entirely of office buildings. Public benefits of employment areas. The Mendota Heights Industrial District offers a greater job density than many comparable industrial areas. This is partly due to the prevalence of office buildings in the District. Industrial and office jobs tend to pay a living wage which are higher on the average than jobs in some other sectors such as retail stores and services. Jobs per Acre Source: OnTheMap, US Census Bureau 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Mendota Heights Industrial District Burnsville Cliff Road Eagan Dodd Road Cottage Grove Business Park Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 16 The Mendota Heights Industrial District is also an important contributor to the tax base. Industrial Market – Regional Metropolitan Area. The Twin Cities is a growing region with a vibrant and diversified economy—factors which support a positive long-term outlook for industrial development in the region. Industrial Absorption & Deliveries: Twin Cities Source: Costar Market conditions have strengthened in the industrial market. Metro-wide, there has been positive and strengthening absorption of industrial space over the past five years. New development of industrial space region-wide is at around 3 million square feet per year over the last four years. That’s up from around 0.5 million square feet per year in the preceding three years. But there’s still room to grow, since the historic average is around 5 million square feet of new industrial space per year. The ongoing absorption of industrial space over the last few years demonstrates a growing demand for the space, which manifests itself in two ways. First, the vacancy rate for industrial property has dropped over the past few years to under 5%. Industrial Vacancy: Twin Cities Source: Costar And second, average rents have been gradually rising, to a current blended rent rate of $6.50 per square foot. Industrial Asking Rents: Twin Cities Source: Costar Increasing rents lead to the development of new space, since stronger rents support a financial return for new development. South Central Submarket. Mendota Heights is in the South Central industrial submarket of the Twin Cities, as defined by Costar. The South Central Submarket encompasses cities such as West St Paul, South St Paul, Inver Grove Heights, Eagan, Apple Valley and 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Land Value per acre Taxes per acreValue Compared to Mendota HeightsIndustrial Comparison Areas Mendota Heights Industrial District Burnsville Cliff Road Eagan Dodd Road Cottage Grove Business Park Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 17 Burnsville, which are situated south of the Minnesota River and west of the Mississippi. The South Central Submarket is performing very similarly to the Twin Cities market as a whole, with an overall vacancy rate that has dipped to around 4%. Average asking rents are around $6.30, which is a little lower than the Twin Cities average rent. New industrial development in the South Central Submarket is coming online more slowly than in the metro area overall. Only three quarters of the last 12 have seen 100,000 or more square feet of new industrial product. Industrial Market – Mendota heights Strengths and weaknesses. Industrial development in Mendota Heights is located almost entirely in the 425- acre Mendota Heights Industrial District. Strengths and weaknesses of the area were assessed by a recent survey of stakeholders as part of the creation of the Mendota Heights Industrial District Redevelopment Plan. Strengths included: Centrality of the location in the region Airport proximity and access Connection to regional transportation network Flat topography Well buffered from residential areas Utility availability Reasonable tax rate Diversity of tenants in the district This impressive set of positive attributes makes the area highly attractive for industrial businesses. The district also has some weaknesses. Limited opportunity for on-site facility expansion Lack of retail or dining amenities Absence of sidewalks Airport noise Limited transit access for workers Market indicators. Overall, these attributes result in strong utilization of the industrial space in the District, which has seen positive absorption over the last three years. The vacancy rate has correspondingly declined to around 3%, which is lower than that of the metropolitan area as a whole. Industrial Vacancy Mendota Heights Industrial District Source: Costar Area demand has also resulted in an increase in average asking rents in recent years to over $10 per square foot. Industrial Asking Rents Mendota Heights Industrial District Source: Costar Development considerations. The Mendota Heights Industrial District is attractively positioned for continued business occupancy, but there is not a lot of opportunity for new industrial development. Some properties can accommodate facility expansion, and that may well be pursued by the property owner or business tenant. The Mendota Heights Industrial District Redevelopment Plan makes several recommendations for actions to strengthen the area’s attractiveness to industrial users, and invite building renovation and improvement. These include: Explore ways to communicate, brand, and promote the Industrial District Consider city policies toward redevelopment incentives to potentially implement on future projects Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 18 Consider investments in broadband and other technology infrastructure as necessary to ensure the area is competitive and serves the business needs Office Market – Regional The office buildings in the Mendota Heights Industrial District, and the Centre Pointe Business Park operate in a different competitive environment than the industrial facilities. Vacancy rates tend to be higher in office properties. There is a cachet effect that groups office development into clusters or districts within the metropolitan area. Transit availability, and proximity to amenities, are more important for attracting office tenants than they are for attracting industrial businesses. The following chart shows Twin Cities office space absorption over the past 9 quarters. There is a clear pattern of positive absorption of space, aside from the most recent quarter. This has brought the overall Twin Cities office vacancy rate down to around 7.5%. Metropolitan area rents vary by building class. They currently average around $25 per square foot for Class A office space, around $17.50 for Class B space, and around $15 for Class C space. Office Market – Mendota heights The office buildings in the Mendota Heights Industrial District and Centre Pointe Business Park are 20 years old on average. Together they offer around 1.4 million square feet of floor area. Buildings range in size from 6,000 square feet to 130,000 square feet. Many buildings are occupied by a single tenant, and many others have multiple tenants. Market indicators are mixed for the office buildings in Mendota Heights. The vacancy rate in 2016 is lower than the metropolitan area as a whole. But rents are also lower than the metropolitan average. Office Absorption, Deliveries and Vacancy Mendota Heights Source: Costar Office Average Asking Rent Mendota Heights Source: Costar Development considerations. The office districts in Mendota Heights have some strengths and face some challenges. As is true for industrial businesses, centrality in the region, and access to the freeway transportation network are significant strengths. However, the weaknesses of the area are more detrimental to the viability and attractiveness of the area to office tenants than they are for industrial Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 19 businesses. The relative lack of amenities in or near the Mendota Heights Industrial District was cited as a particular concern by real estate professionals that were interviewed for this report. Offices at the Centre Pointe Business Park are better situated in this respect than those in the Mendota Heights Industrial District. Other liabilities, such as airport noise, and the limited nature of transit service, have a dampening impact on the Mendota Heights office market. The Mendota Heights Industrial District Redevelopment Plan suggested consideration of guiding land along Interstate 494 for office development over the long term, as opposed to a mix of office and industrial. This may strengthen the attractiveness of the area to office users, and clarify an office-oriented brand for the southern part of the industrial district. On the other hand, the market support for additional office development in the area is not assured. To support continued viability of the office areas in Mendota Heights, consideration could be given to actions such as: Strengthen the office identity and branding of the southern part of the Mendota Heights Industrial district. Let the district be part of a broader Eagan/Mendota Heights office district Build the amenity base of the area with the addition of some retail and restaurants, even if the opportunities for doing this are limited Mendota Heights 2040 Comprehensive Plan Background Report – Market and Development Context Tangible Consulting Services, December 2016 APPENDIX H Mendota Heights Capital Improvement Plan 2019-2023 This page is intentionally blank. City of Mendota Heights 2019 – 2023 Capital Improvement Plan July 13, 2018 To the Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: The purpose of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is to provide a long range improvement plan to meet the needs of our community. The CIP provides policy makers and the community with a strategic approach to the implementation and administration of improvement projects. Decisions about improving the city’s infrastructure must be made not only on the basis of need, but also on the basis of availability of resources, and the long-term impact on the community. The Capital Improvement Plan identifies the city’s infrastructure, development objectives and allocation of financial resources. The 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Plan represents an excellent planning tool and provides for approximately $35.1 million of infrastructure improvements and assets during the next five years. While the improvements in the proposed Capital Improvement Plan are not "written in stone", they do provide a framework for allocating personnel and finances. The total project costs used in the CIP are rough estimates using 2018 dollar amounts, which will be refined during the budget, feasibility study and bidding process for each project. The improvement projects outlined in the CIP are designed to meet the city’s infrastructure needs and provide a safe environment for the community. Respectfully submitted, Ryan E. Ruzek, P.E. Public Works Director Certification I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Ryan E. Ruzek, PE Date Reg. No. 44990 Reviewed By: Mark McNeill Date Table of Contents CIP OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 1 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) ................................................................................................ 1 CIP Goals .................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Financing ............................................................................................................................ 1 Municipal State Aid (MSA) Fund ........................................................................................... 1 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund .................................................................................................... 1 Storm Water Utility Fund ....................................................................................................... 1 Water Revenue Fund ............................................................................................................... 1 Special Assessments ............................................................................................................... 1 City Funding (Municipal Bond Sales) .................................................................................... 1 Street Improvement and Maintenance Plan .................................................................................... 1 SIMP Goals ................................................................................................................................. 1 Sanitary Sewer Improvement and Maintenance Plan (SSIMP) ...................................................... 1 SSIMP Goals ............................................................................................................................... 1 Storm Water Improvement and Maintenance Plan (SWIMP) ........................................................ 1 SWIMP Goals ............................................................................................................................. 1 Parks Improvement and Maintenance Plan (PIMP) ........................................................................ 1 PIMP Goals ................................................................................................................................. 1 Trail Improvement and Maintenance Plan (TIMP) ........................................................................ 1 TIMP Goals ................................................................................................................................. 1 Facility Improvement and Maintenance Plan (FIMP) .................................................................... 1 FIMP Goals ................................................................................................................................. 1 Fleet Improvement and Maintenance Plan (FLIMP) ...................................................................... 1 FLIMP Goals .............................................................................................................................. 1 CIP OVERVIEW Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a planning tool that forecasts the city’s needs over a five year period based on city-adopted long-range plans, goals and policies. The CIP includes detailed descriptions of improvement projects the city anticipates to initiate during the five-year period. The CIP is updated annually to ensure consistency and the reflection of changing demands and financial resources. CIP Goals The goals of the CIP are to: o Provide a balanced program for improvements given anticipated funding revenues over a five-year planning period. o Enable the Mendota Heights City Council to evaluate the needs of the entire city objectively. o Anticipate needed improvements in advance, rather than being overlooked until critically needed. o Provide a plan for improvements that can be used in preparing the budget for the coming fiscal year. Project Financing The 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Plan which is detailed on the following pages is financed from a variety of sources. The purpose of this section is to describe and analyze these sources, in as much detail as possible, so that the users of this CIP can be certain that the program as outlined can be financed from available funding sources. Municipal State Aid (MSA) Fund The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) provides funding assistance for improvements to those municipal streets which are designated as part of its MSA system. The City of Mendota Heights receives an annual allotment of approximately $452,000 from the State of Minnesota Municipal State Aid Street Construction Account. The Municipal State Aid rules allow cities, subject to MnDOT approval, to request advanced funding for municipal state aid eligible projects from any municipal state aid funds available, provided that the amount of the advances do not exceed the city’s total estimated apportionment for the three years following the advance. Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund This fund receives revenue from the utility billing for sanitary sewer. It also is responsible for any expenses relating to the sanitary sewer system. Storm Water Utility Fund This fund receives revenue from the utility billings and is responsible for the expenses related to maintaining the city’s storm water system. Water Revenue Fund This fund accumulates the water surcharges the city receives from St Paul Regional Water Services. These funds are used for any city expenses that are incurred relating to the city’s water system and water tower. Special Assessments The City of Mendota Heights Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Assessment Policy approved in June 1992 states that the city will be responsible for financing up to 50% of street reconstruction and rehabilitation projects with the property owner being assessed for the remaining. City Funding (Municipal Bond Sales) Since it often takes several years for the city to collect special assessments, the city typically issues bonds for the remaining improvement costs for cash flow purposes. The bond payments relating to street improvement projects are then levied. If there are project costs relating to the above mentioned fund sources, the amount of bonds to be issued can be reduced by monies received from any of those funds. Special Park Fund This fund receives revenue from the Park Dedication fees. It also is responsible for expenses relating to new improvements to the Park system. City of Mendota Heights 2019 – 2023 Street Improvement Plan SIP OVERVIEW Street Improvement Plan (SIP) The Street Improvement Plan (SIP) is a planning tool that forecasts the city’s needs over a five year period based on city-adopted long-range plans, goals and policies. The SIP includes detailed descriptions of street improvement projects the city anticipates to initiate during the five-year period. The SIP is updated annually to ensure consistency and the reflection of changing demands and financial resources. SIP Goals The goals of the SIP are to: o Provide a balanced program for street improvements given anticipated funding revenues over a five-year planning period. o Enable the Mendota Heights City Council to evaluate the needs of the entire city objectively. o Anticipate needed street improvements in advance, rather than being overlooked until critically needed. o Provide a plan for street improvements that can be used in preparing the budget for the coming fiscal year. Project Details The street improvement projects being reported in the SIP will be shown within the following sections: o Street Reconstruction o Street Rehabilitation o Municipal State Aid o Preventative Maintenance Street Reconstruction A street reconstruction project will be defined as a project whereby many or all meaningful elements of an existing street are being removed and replaced. This would include curb and gutter, trails, bituminous or concrete pavement, aggregate base and items appurtenant to these elements. There are approximately 2 miles of streets in the City of Mendota Heights that have no curb and gutter. It has been the policy of the city that streets will be reconstructed with curb & gutter to maximize the life of the pavement surface, promote a uniform and standard appearance across the city, increase public safety, increase the efficiency of snow removal, and to capture and treat storm water prior to discharging into area water bodies. Typically, the City of Mendota Heights completes one street reconstruction project a year. Page 1 Street Rehabilitation A street rehabilitation project will be defined as a project in which one or more of the meaningful elements are modified or supplemented in-place, to restore the serviceability of the existing street (i.e. bituminous overlays or pavement replacement). The City of Mendota Heights maintains approximately 71.5 miles of public streets. As the street infrastructure ages, it requires preservation/rehabilitation to protect or extend its useful life. If the street infrastructure is not preserved, it will deteriorate prematurely and its benefit to the community will be lost. In addition, reconstruction costs are frequently four to five times the cost of preservation/rehabilitation and maintenance. As a result, the SIP reflects the broad direction of the City Council to preserve existing streets and infrastructure before they fall into such disrepair that expensive reconstruction is required. Municipal State Aid (MSA) The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) provides funding assistance for improvements to those municipal streets which are designated as part of its MSA system. Money for this fund is supplied with a dedicated portion of revenues collected from road use and gasoline taxes. Funds are released for improvements on those streets on the system whose design and construction meet MSA standards. Funds may be expended for any street on the MSA system at any time, and MSA funds may be accumulated over several years. The City of Mendota Heights maintains approximately 15.1 miles of streets that are designated Minnesota State Aid (MSA). Preventative Maintenance Preventative maintenance includes activities such as snow removal, crack sealing, seal coating, street patching, street striping and street sweeping. Street maintenance activities are funded through the city’s general fund. Street Sweeping Street sweeping provides two primary benefits to the city. The more obvious benefit is the collection and removal of paper, leaves, and other visible debris that collect in the gutters. In addition to being unsightly, this debris can block the catch basins and other storm water facilities, causing localized flooding during heavy rains. An equally important, but less visible benefit is the removal of pollutants and other hazardous waste products left by passing vehicles. Although they are virtually invisible, these particles can be extremely harmful to the fish and other wildlife, if they reach our creeks and lakes. Bi-annual sweeping is recommended for storm water quality. Street crack sealing and seal coating Seal coating is the process of distributing bituminous oil, or liquid asphalt, on the street surface and then covering it with small rock chips. After the rock has been allowed to work into the oil, the excess rock is swept up and the seal coat provides the street with a new water proof surface and uniform look. Prior to seal coating, the city cleans and fills pot holes and cracks, and thoroughly sweeps the streets. Page 2 There are two main reasons for seal coating streets. The first reason to seal coat streets is to seal the bituminous surface against the elements. The older that a bituminous surface gets, the more porous it becomes. This is due to the wearing away of the surface due to sunlight, rain, snow, ice and traffic. As the bituminous surface becomes more porous due to these factors, it becomes more vulnerable to deterioration, and can form potholes. Potholes are formed when water seeps into the cracked pavement, expands and displaces the ground under the bituminous pavement. As the temperatures rise, the ground returns to normal but the pavement often remains raised creating a gap. When a vehicle drives over the raised pavement and gap, the pavement surface cracks and falls into the hollow space leading to a pothole. One method of avoiding this result is to routinely seal coat the streets to keep the water out. Streets are recommended to be seal coated 5 years after their initial construction or reconstruction and then again 13 years after their construction or reconstruction. The second reason to seal coat streets with a hard material like granite is to coat the surface with a wear resistant material. This not only minimizes damage done by normal traffic wear, but it also protects our streets from damage that might be done by routine snowplowing. Consequently seal coating does not add strength to the street; therefore, it is not used on older streets that need other type of repair such as overlaying or total reconstruction. Page 3 Project Financing The 2019-2023 Street Improvement Plan which is detailed on the following pages is financed from a variety of sources. The purpose of this section is to describe and analyze these sources, in as much detail as possible, so that the users of this SIP can be certain that the program as outlined can be financed from available funding sources. Transportation Facilities Improvements totaling approximately $16.8 million are planned for the 2019-2023 SIP. Summary of Project Costs and Funding Sources MSA Street Fund Summary Improvement Projects Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation Policy STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS AND FUNDING SOURCES Project Name Proj. #2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Marie Avenue Rehabilitation 2 110 $1,450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,450,000 Wesley Neighborhood Rehabilitation 111 $517,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $517,000 Dodd Road Trail/Relocate Maple Street 304 $525,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $525,000 Centre Pointe & Commerce Drive Rehabilitation 112 $0 $1,732,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,732,000 Sylvandale Road Neighborhood Rehabilitation 113 $0 $0 $1,081,000 $0 $0 $1,081,000 Brompton/Winston Water Main Replacement 107 $0 $0 $710,000 $0 $0 $710,000 Victoria Curve 114 $0 $0 $0 $1,250,000 $0 $1,250,000 Marie/Dodd Mini Roundabout 119 $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 $325,000 Wentworth/Dodd Mini Roundabout 120 $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 $325,000 Friendly Hills Water Main Replacement 106 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,205,000 $4,205,000 Decorah Realignment w/Wagon Wheel 121 $0 $0 $0 $0 $575,000 $575,000 Dodd & Highway 110 Intersection - Super street 122 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,300,000 $3,300,000 Delaware Reconstruction Study 123 $0 $0 $0 $0 $575,000 Annual Street Crack Sealing and Seal Coating 401 $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000 Annual Pavement Markings 402 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $85,000 Annual Street Sweeping 403 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Total $2,729,000 $1,869,000 $1,928,000 $2,037,000 $8,792,000 $16,780,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $722,500 $698,600 $1,010,800 $760,000 $1,411,800 $4,603,700 Municipal State Aid Fund $750,000 $400,000 $0 $1,050,000 $1,500,000 $3,700,000 Other Government Unit Funding $632,000 $132,000 $132,000 $132,000 $2,432,000 $3,460,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Special Assessments $419,500 $561,400 $730,200 $40,000 $853,200 $2,604,300 Storm Water Utility Fund $205,000 $77,000 $55,000 $55,000 $5,000 $397,000 Water Revenue Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,015,000 $2,015,000 Total $2,729,000 $1,869,000 $1,928,000 $2,037,000 $8,217,000 $16,780,000 Future Projects Year Cost Curly's/Valley View 2024 $710,000 Tilsens Neighborhood 2024 $750,000 Bunker Hills Neighborhood 2025 $1,100,000 Carmen Lane/Dakota Drive/Waters Drive 2026 $1,200,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MUNICIPAL STATE AID (MSA) STREET FUND Available Balance (12/31/2017)$260,852 Anticipated 2017/2018 Expenditures $100,000 2018 Revenue $452,565 Total Available (12/31/2018)$613,417 Revenue 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Cash Balance $613,417 $315,982 $368,547 $821,112 $223,677 Annual Construction Allotment From State $452,565 $452,565 $452,565 $452,565 $452,565 Total Revenue $1,065,982 $768,547 $821,112 $1,273,677 $676,242 Expenditures Proj. #2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Marie Avenue Rehabilitation 2 110 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Wesley Neighborhood Rehabilitation 111 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Dodd Road Trail/Relocate Maple Street 304 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Centre Pointe & Commerce Drive Rehabilitation 112 $0 $400,000 $0 $0 $0 Sylvandale Road Neighborhood Rehabilitation 113 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Brompton/Winston Water Main Replacement 107 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Victoria Curve 114 $0 $0 $0 $400,000 $0 Marie/Dodd Mini Roundabout 119 $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 Wentworth/Dodd Mini Roundabout 120 $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 Friendly Hills Water Main Replacement 106 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Decorah Realignment w/Wagon Wheel 121 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Dodd & Highway 110 Intersection - Super street 122 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 Total Expenditures $750,000 $400,000 $0 $1,050,000 $1,500,000 Unreserved Cash Balance (12/31)$315,982 $368,547 $821,112 $223,677 -$823,758 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Marie Avenue Rehabilitation 2 TOTAL COST: $1,450,000 PROJECT #: 110 PROJECT TYPE:Rehabilitation Project Description Project Location Rehabilitation of the following road segments with complete pavement removal: - Marie Avenue (Lexington Avenue to Dodd Road) Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $250,000 $250,000 Construction/Maintenance $1,200,000 $1,200,000 Total $1,450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,450,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $172,000 $172,000 Municipal State Aid Funds $500,000 $500,000 Other Government Unit Funding $400,000 $400,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $228,000 $228,000 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $150,000 $150,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $1,450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,450,000 Replace retaining walls Marie/Victoria, Replace Pedestrian underpass, Install bump outs at Eagle Ridge & Trail Rd/Wachtler, Redeck bridge, Weir replacement, guard rail, trail overlay, curb on Lexington. Pond improvements, Water main Replacement, Dig ditch on south side of Ped crossing STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Wesley Neighborhood Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $517,000 PROJECT #: 111 PROJECT TYPE:Rehabilitation Project Description Project Location Rehabilitation of the following road segments with complete pavement removal: - Mager Court, Spring Creek Circle, Wesley Court, Wesley Lane - South Lane between Freeway Road North and the cul-de-sac Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $86,000 $86,000 Construction/Maintenance $431,000 $431,000 Total $517,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $517,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $300,500 $300,500 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $191,500 $191,500 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $25,000 $25,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $517,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $517,000 Maintenance costs are increasing and the streets are cracking, rutting and showing wear due to traffic and weathering. Rehabilitation with complete pavement removal and replacing the bituminous surface will extend life of roadway to a like new condition. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Dodd Road Trail/Relocate Maple Street TOTAL COST: $525,000 PROJECT #: 304 PROJECT TYPE:MSA Project Description Project Location Construction of a trail adjacent to the following road segments: - Dodd Road between Market Street and Wesley Lane Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $50,000 $50,000 Construction/Maintenance $475,000 $475,000 Total $525,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $525,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $250,000 $250,000 Municipal State Aid Fund $250,000 $250,000 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $25,000 $25,000 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $525,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $525,000 This section of trail has been identified as a gap in our trail system. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Centre Pointe & Commerce Drive Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $1,732,000 PROJECT #: 112 PROJECT TYPE:Rehabilitation Project Description Project Location Rehabilitation of the following road segments with complete pavement removal: - Centre Pointe Drive, Centre Pointe Boulevard, Commerce Drive and Lemay Avenue Rehabilitation of the following road segments with an edge mill and bituminous overlay: - Waters Drive Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $205,000 $205,000 Construction/Maintenance $1,527,000 $1,527,000 Total $0 $1,732,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,732,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $698,600 $698,600 Municipal State Aid Fund $400,000 $400,000 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $561,400 $561,400 Storm Water Utility Fund $72,000 $72,000 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $0 $1,732,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,732,000 Maintenance costs are increasing and the streets are cracking, rutting and showing wear due to traffic and weathering. Rehabilitation with complete pavement removal and replacing the bituminous surface will extend life of roadway to a like new condition. Rehabilitation with edge milling and overlaying with a new wearing surface will extend life of roadway to a like new condition. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Sylvandale Road Neighborhood Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $1,081,000 PROJECT #: 113 PROJECT TYPE:Rehabilitation Project Description Project Location Rehabilitation of the following road segments with complete pavement removal: - Emerson Avenue, Ivy Falls Court, Ivy Hill Drive, Laura Court, Laura Street, Maple Park Drive, Sylvandale Court, Sylvandale Court South and Sylvandale Road There have been a few water main breaks on these streets. Staff will determine if the water main should be replaced closer to the proposed project year. Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $216,200 $216,200 Construction/Maintenance $864,800 $864,800 Total $0 $0 $1,081,000 $0 $0 $1,081,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $594,200 $594,200 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $436,800 $436,800 Storm Water Utility Fund $50,000 $50,000 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $0 $0 $1,081,000 $0 $0 $1,081,000 Maintenance costs are increasing and the streets are cracking, rutting and showing wear due to traffic and weathering. Rehabilitation with complete pavement removal and replacing the bituminous surface will extend life of roadway to a like new condition. Project was proposed as a 2016 rehabilitation project in the 2012- 2016 SIP. Engineering staff recommends delaying the project to 2018 based on the pavement conditions of other city streets that need more repairs. This project is anticipated to be added to the 2014- 2018 SIP in the future. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Brompton/Winston Water Main Replacement TOTAL COST: $710,000 PROJECT #: 107 PROJECT TYPE:Recon-Water Main Project Description Project Location Reconstruction of the following road segments with complete pavement removal and replacing the water main: - Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle Winston Circle, Winston Court Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $110,000 $110,000 Construction/Maintenance $600,000 $600,000 Total $0 $0 $710,000 $0 $0 $710,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $416,600 $416,600 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $293,400 $293,400 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $710,000 $0 $0 $710,000 The existing water main on these streets is cast iron pipe and the water main break frequency on these streets is nearing the limits established by SPRWS. These streets were reconstructed in 1994 when the curb and gutters were installed. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Victoria Curve TOTAL COST: $1,250,000 PROJECT #: 114 PROJECT TYPE:XXX00001 Project Description Project Location Reconstruct Frontage Road Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $250,000 $250,000 Construction/Maintenance $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $1,250,000 $0 $1,250,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $760,000 $760,000 Municipal State Aid Funds $400,000 $400,000 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $40,000 $40,000 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $50,000 $50,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $1,250,000 $0 $1,250,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Marie/Dodd Mini Roundabout TOTAL COST: $325,000 PROJECT #: 119 PROJECT TYPE:XXX00001 Project Description Project Location Intersection Improvement Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $75,000 $75,000 Construction/Maintenance $250,000 $250,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 $325,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $325,000 $325,000 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 $325,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Wentworth/Dodd Mini Roundabout TOTAL COST: $325,000 PROJECT #: 120 PROJECT TYPE:XXX00001 Project Description Project Location Intersection Improvement Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $75,000 $75,000 Construction/Maintenance $250,000 $250,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 $325,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $325,000 $325,000 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $325,000 $0 $325,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Friendly Hills Water Main Replacement TOTAL COST: $4,205,000 PROJECT #: 106 PROJECT TYPE:Recon-Water Main Project Description Project Location Reconstruction of the following road segments with complete pavement removal and replacing the water main: - Apache Street, Aztec Lane, Cheyenne Lane, Creek Avenue, Decorah Lane, Fox Place, Hokah Avenue, Keokuk Lane, Mohican Court, Mohican Lane, Navajo Lane, Ocala Lane, Pontiac Place, Pueblo Drive, and Pueblo Lane Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $841,000 $841,000 Construction/Maintenance $3,364,000 $3,364,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,205,000 $4,205,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $1,336,800 $1,336,800 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $853,200 $853,200 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $2,015,000 $2,015,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,205,000 $4,205,000 The existing water main on these streets is cast iron pipe and the water main break frequency on these streets is nearing the limits established by SPRWS. Project Planned for 2023 These streets were reconstructed in 1995 when the curb and gutters were installed. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Decorah Realignment w/Wagon Wheel TOTAL COST: $575,000 PROJECT #: 121 PROJECT TYPE:XXX00001 Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $75,000 $75,000 Construction/Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $575,000 $575,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $75,000 $75,000 Municipal State Aid Funds $500,000 $500,000 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $575,000 $575,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Dodd & Highway 110 Intersection - Super street TOTAL COST: $3,300,000 PROJECT #: 122 PROJECT TYPE:XXX00001 Project Description Project Location Short term Traffic Improvement Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $300,000 $300,000 Construction/Maintenance $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,300,000 $3,300,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Other Government Unit Funding $2,300,000 $2,300,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,300,000 $3,300,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Delaware Reconstruction Study TOTAL COST: $100,000 PROJECT #: 123 PROJECT TYPE:XXX00001 Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $100,000 $100,000 Construction/Maintenance $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $100,000 $100,000 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Annual Street Crack Sealing and Seal Coating TOTAL COST: $600,000 PROJECT #: 401 PROJECT TYPE:PM Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000 Total $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000 The sealing of street cracks will significantly extend the useful life of the streets. This will extend the time frame when a costly street reconstruction project will be necessary. The sealing of cracks in the street surface reduces/eliminates water from entering the road base and subgrade. This process reduces the freeze/thaw cycles of the subgrade, maintaining the integrity of the road. Crack sealing is completed in a particular area one year prior to seal coating. This allows the crack sealing material to cure and minimize bleed through once seal coated. Seal coating will extend the useful life of roads by protecting the bituminous from oxidation due to adverse weather conditions (sun, rain, wind, snow, etc.). The prevention of oxidation will prolong the useful life of the pavement and defer the need for a costly reconstruction. Seal coating also improves the skid resistance of the roadway surface by increasing the friction between vehicle tires and the roadway. Streets that are reconstructed or rehabilitated are typically seal coated five years after they are paved. Each year, staff will determine an area that can be crack sealed and seal coated within the allotted budget based upon current estimated project costs. The areas tentatively planned for crack sealing and seal coating is shown on the map of seal coating projects. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Annual Pavement Markings TOTAL COST: $85,000 PROJECT #: 402 PROJECT TYPE:PM Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $85,000 Total $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $85,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $85,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $85,000 Restriping maintains the pavement markings to the required local and state standards. Additional Striping is also accomplished when part of a street reconstruction project. Typically, pavement markings last 3-5 years before restriping is needed to maintain its reflectivity. Each year, staff will determine which streets in the city should receive restriping within the allotted budget. This includes centerline striping and shoulder striping. Striping enhances the safety of the roadway by maintaining reflectivity and by directing traffic to the correct lane movement. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2018-2022 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Annual Street Sweeping TOTAL COST: $100,000 PROJECT #: 403 PROJECT TYPE:PM Project Description Project Location Entire City Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Total $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $75,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Residential street sweeping is a city service that not only beautifies our streets and community by removing litter and debris, but protects our environment and keeps the storm drain system from clogging. Street sweeping reduces the pollutant load (leaves, pet/animal debris, heavy metals, oils, grease, sediment, etc.) to the receiving waters. In addition, material removed by street sweeping will not be able to block lines reducing the amount of flooding during heavy rainfall. Leaves in the street also are a safety problem, especially when wet. The street sweeping on city streets is conducted each spring and fall. Street Sweeping enhances the safety of the roadway by removing debris. Studies have shown that street sweeping is one of the most effective methods of reducing pollutants into water bodies. The city should consider additional sweeping as a Best Management Practice (BMP) to improve water quality. CITY OF l\1ENDOTA HEIGHTS STREET REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION POLICY PURPOSE The City of Mendota Heights Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction policy is intended to provide a plan for maintaining the City's existing streets, and encourage the upgrade of rural streets to urban design. This document sets forth the methods and policies relating to local street improvements and special assessments practiced in the City of Mendota Heights. It is emphasized that the following summary is general in nature and that certain circumstances may justify deviations from stated policy as determined by the Mendota Heights City Council in its discretion. This policy may also be amended from time to time by vote of City Council. SECTION I DEFINITIONS 1. RECONSTRUCTION -will be defmed as a project whereby many or all meaningful elements of an existing street are being removed and replaced. This would include curb and gutter, sidewalks, bituminous or concrete pavement, granular base and items appurtenant to these elements. 2. REHABll..ITATION -will be defmed as a project in which one or more of the aforementioned elements is modified or supplemented in-place, to restore the serviceability of the existing street (i.e. bituminous overlays). 3. PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE -will be defmed as work that involves a level of effort less than that involved in reconstruction or rehabilitation, the extent of which is to extend the life of the existing improvement. Preventive maintenance will include but not be limited to crack filling, patching, and seal coating. 4. RURAL STREET -any street that has no curb and gutter or storm sewer, or does not otherwise meet City design standards for thickness and width. 5. URBAN STREET - a street that has curb and gutter, storm sewer, and is designed to City standards for thickness and width. 1 SECTIONll GENERAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES The following are general principles, policies and procedures applicable to all types of improvement: 1. Project costs shall include the cost of all necessary construction work required to accomplish the improvement, plus engineering, legal, fmancing, easement acquisition and contingency costs. 2. Assessable costs are project costs minus the City and County share and other credits. MSA funds will not be credited to offset assessments as they will be utilized in a revenue pool fund to offset total reconstruction program costs. 3. Special assessments will be levied as soon as practical. Normally this will be within one year after completion of the project. 4. Publicly owned properties, including but not limited to municipal building sites, schools, parks, County, State and Federal building sites, but not including public streets and alleys, are regarded as being assessable on the same basis as if such property were privately owned. 5. Revenue sources for these types of improvements will be many, including, but not limited to assessments, MSA Funds, infrastructure replacement funds and general tax levies. SECTIONll SPECIFIC POLICIES Project Initiation and Hearine Process This section describes the initiation of improvement projects and the administration required to receive fmal City Council action, pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. A. Project Initiation 1. By Petition: Citizen petitions for initiating improvement will be prepared by City staff upon request. Such petitions circulated by the affected property owners should bear the signatures of the property owners of 51 % or more, of the benefitted property(ies). , . 2 When projects are initiated through this process the costs of doing engineering feasibility studies and associated project consideration costs will be borne by the property owner(s) so petitioning. If the project proceeds through construction and assessment those costs will be considered project costs under Section n.1 above. If the project does not proceed through construction these costs will be billed back to the property owners petitioning or will be recorded for future project costs consideration at which time the project is concluded. Determination of the method of cost recovery will be made by the City Council. 2. By Council Action~ If the Council determines that an improvement is in the best interest of the City, it can, without petition, initiate the improvement with a four/fIfths vote of the Council. The Engineering Department shall inventory and rate the condition of streets in the City. This rating shall then be used to determine the priority of street improvements in the City's 5 Year Street Improvement Plan. The City will generally improve streets that have the highest priority first. B. Hearing Process 1. Improvement Hearing: After a petition is fIled and its adequacy determined, or the Council initiates the project, the City Engineer is directed to study and report as to the feasibility of the improvement. If after reviewing the feasibility report, the Council feels the project has merit, a public hearing is scheduled, notice published twice, and persons benefitted by the project notified in writing in accordance with applicable State Statutes and City Standards. If after. the improvement hearing, at which all persons are heard, the Council feels that the project still has merit, then the Council will authorize the preparation of necessary plans and specifications, and upon receipt and acceptance of those plans, will authorize the advertisement for bids, by resolution, for the construction of the project. C. Determining Assessment Method to Use 1. Front Footage Assessment -The front footage assessment method will generally be used on all multiple land use projects as per the City's adopted assessment policy. That is, if an improvement project affects parcels that are not zoned similarly the front footage method will generally be used. 3 2. Unit Assessment -Where a project affects parcels which are all zoned similarly or part of a multi-unit development, the Unit Assessment method may be applied. 3. Area Assessment -Area assessment may be used for storm sewer improvements. This may be necessary for projects where the stonn sewer is installed for reasons other than just elimination of ditches. If necessary or desirable to achieve equitable distribution of assessments, the City Council may adopt alternative methods for calculating assessments consistent with the City's adopted assessment policy. D. Amount of Assessments 1. Rehabilitated Rural Streets -Rural streets that are rehabilitated or are reconstructed as a rural section shall be . fmanced 100% through assessments to the abutting properties. As rural street sections are not considered desirable, no City funding assistance shall be available. 2. Upgraded Rural Streets -It is the City desire to upgrade rural street sections to urban street sections where possible. Therefore when a rural street is scheduled for an improvement, upgrading to urban design will be the objective unless otherwise detennined by the City Council. In making such a determination the City Council may consider a petition from property owners to perpetuate a rural street. The City will fmance up to 50 % of the total project cost through the Infrastructure Replacement Fund for an upgrade project. The affected property owners will be assessed the cost of the storm sewer pipe, the new curb, and a portion of the street reconstruction cost. 3. Rehabilitated Urban Streets -For streets that are urban design, the City shall finance 50 % of rehabilitation costs. 4. Reconstructed Urban Streets -When an urban street is reconstructed all of the reconstruction costs shall be assessed to the abutting property owners. The City will fmance 50 % of that portion of the project that could be classified as rehabilitation (the fmaIlift of blacktop). 5. Preventive Maintenance -The City shall perform routine and regular preventative maintenance to the extent practical on all streets in the City, until such time as the street has aged or deteriorated to the extent that such maintenance is no longer cost effective. 4 When a street has reached its expected life, in accordance with the City's infrastructure rating system, no additional preventative maintenance shall be performed. The only work performed will be the minimum amount necessary to keep the street reasonably safe for vehicular traffic. All preventative maintenance shall be funded by the City for streets where preventative maintenance is cost effective. On deteriorated streets, no preventative maintenance shall be performed except at the sole expense and request of the adjoining property owners E. Period of Assessments Assessments shall be spread over the life of the project. The expected life of various projects to be used in levying assessments is presented here: Project Type Rural Rehabilitation Rural Reconstruction as Rural Rural Reconstruction as Urban Urban Rehabilitation Urban Reconstruction SECTION IV CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Minimum Desiz:n Standards 10 years 10 years 20 years 10 years 20 years The following are minimum design standards applied to the design and construction of improvements in the City of Mendota Heights and are for reference to this policy. A. Storm Sewer System Lateral pipe and catch basin size shall be generally be designed to handle a 10 year event and trunk facilities shall generally be designed to handle a 100 year event as determined by the City Engineer. B. Sidewalks, Trails and Bikeways Concrete -5' wide with 6" sand base -4" thick Bituminous -8' wide (2341) Bit. with 6" Class 5, 100 percent crushed rock and 2" Bituminous 5 All trails and sidewalks will be located 1 0 off property line if at all possible, pedestrian ramps and curb drops will be installed according to MN/DOT Standards. C. Streets Urban streets shall be classified as either local or collector streets. Urban local streets shall normally be 33 feet wide, face to face, and 7 ton design, curb and gutter on local streets shall be B618. Collector streets shall be 9 ton design and shall normally be constructed to Municipal State Aid (MSA) standards. Rural streets are not desirable. Therefore for any rural street reconstruction project the City shall proceed as if the rural street is to be upgraded to urban design. Unless a neighborhood opposes this upgrade, it shall occur. Rural streets that are not upgraded will generally be rehabilitated via an overlay of 1.5"-2" of blacktop. SECTION V ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL POLICY Deferral of Special Assessments A. Purpose -To indicate in certain instances the City may allow deferral of special assessments levied under this policy. B. Conditions of Deferral: Application for deferral of special assessments under these provisions must be fIled within thirty (30) days from the date the assessment roll is adopted. Applications granted shall continue in effect for subsequent years until the property no longer qualifies. Applications shall be filed with the assessor of the taxing district in which the real property is located. C. Situations of Discretionary Deferral: 1. Senior citizen/low income deferral. At its discretion the City may defer assessments against any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability and for whom it would be a hardship to make the assessment payments. The standards and guidelines governing what constitutes hardship are established by City ordinance or resolution. 6 Additionally, the City may grant a deferral in situations where its hardships standards and guidelines have not been met if exceptional and unusual circumstances exist and no preference or discriminatory treatment will occur. This deferral is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 435.193. 2. Unimproved property deferral. The City may also defer the assessments of improvements with respect to property which is not directly and immediately affected by the improvement for which the assessment is levied. If applicable, at such times as extensions or connections regarding the improvement directly benefit such unimproved property, the City may require payment of the deferred assessments as well as those relating to the connection or extension. This deferral is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 429.051. Any such deferral shall be subject to such other terms and conditions including accrual of interest, and shall be subject to termination, all as determined by City Council. Adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council this 16th day of June 1992. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By:------=-~_ .... _~_~_r _~ __ _ Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: KHE:dfw 2019 – 2023 Sanitary Sewer Improvement and Maintenance Plan City of Mendota Heights OVERVIEW OF SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM Sanitary Sewer Collection System The City of Mendota Heights sanitary sewer collection system is available to the majority of existing land uses. Almost 100 percent of Mendota Heights current population is connected to the sanitary sewer collection system with the exception of a limited number of scattered sites that still utilize Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) which are private on-site septic systems. Wastewater from the City of Mendota Heights is collected and conveyed to the wastewater treatment plant through a network of over 79.1 miles of gravity sewers, 2.6 miles of pressure sewer (force main), 2,067 sanitary manholes and 6 lift stations. The City of Mendota Heights is completely within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The sanitary sewage system in Mendota Heights was developed based upon the Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan dated March 28, 1966. In 1972, the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan was approved by the Metropolitan Council (formerly the Metropolitan Sewer Board and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission). The City of Mendota Heights is serviced by the Metropolitan Council waste water system managed by Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). The sanitary sewerage collection system in Mendota Heights is a tributary to the Metropolitan Council system. The majority of the Mendota Heights system flows into a Metropolitan Council sewer interceptor connection, which crosses under the Mississippi River near the Interstate 35E Bridge to the West Seventh Street interceptor and ultimately to the treatment plant at Pig’s Eye Island. A portion of the northeastern part of the City flows directly into the St. Paul system at Chippewa Avenue and Annapolis Street. Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) Approximately 45 Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) are still utilized in Mendota Heights. The largest concentrations of on-site septic systems are in the Super Block neighborhood located in the east central part of the City, adjacent to the City of West St. Paul and the Olivia T. Dodge Nature Center. City Code (10-3-3: Individual Sewage Treatment Systems) outlines management practices for properties served by an Individual Sewer Treatment System (ISTS): The system must be pumped/inspected at least once every three years. The Pumping/Inspection must be performed by a person with a current MPCA sewage contractor license. The licensed contractor is responsible for filing a septic maintenance log with Dakota County. Upon verification of required maintenance, the City shall issue a statement of compliance in letter form, permitting three additional years of operation. The City will notify the owner of an ISTS no later than two months before permit expiration. The City has contracted Dakota County to perform this work. Individual Service Connections The City of Mendota Heights is not responsible for the cleaning, maintaining, or repairing individual service connections from their building up to and including the connection to the sanitary sewer main; the property owner bears the responsibility. Sanitary sewer system regulations, ordinances and management practices The City of Mendota Heights has adopted a number of practices that are aimed at protecting the quality of water resources within Mendota Heights and the integrity of the sanitary sewer system. These practices are crucial to the future performance and investment required by the utility system because they represent the manner in which this and previous sanitary sewer plans are implemented. The sanitary sewer ordinance prescribes the design and manner in which individual connections and use of public sewers are to be made. To limit the amount of inflow into the sanitary sewer system, the ordinance prohibits the flows of storm water, ground water, roof runoff, surface water, unpolluted drainage, unpolluted industrial cooling water, or unpolluted industrial process water into any public sanitary sewer. The city zoning regulations determine the specific use and development intensity of individual parcels in the community. The city subdivision ordinance requires that properties to be developed be served by the municipal sanitary sewer system, and that, all new sanitary sewers must be constructed according to plans approved by the Public Works Director. The construction of the municipal and MCES sanitary sewer systems and their on-going operations are financed by: Service Availability Charges (SAC), assessments to properties, and by customer charges that are paid on a regular basis. The City of Mendota Heights has updated its on-site septic system ordinance to comply with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requirements. The Mendota Heights Public Works Department Utilities Division is responsible for all maintenance activities associated with the sanitary sewer system. Existing system issues Basic problems that can affect the operation of a sewer collection system include infiltration, inflow, and blockages. It is important that infiltration and inflow flows be kept to a minimum to maintain pipe capacity and preserve treatment plant capacity. The most common sources of sewer blockages are tree root obstructions, and solids settling out and collecting within the sanitary sewer collection system as a result of sewer lines flowing at less than design capacity. Inflow and Infiltration The condition of sanitary sewer systems can greatly impact total sewage flow. Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) are terms for the ways that clear water (rain and groundwater) makes its way into sanitary sewer pipes. Infiltration occurs when groundwater seeps into sewer pipes through cracks, leaky joints or deteriorated manholes. Inflow is a direct connection that allows rainwater to enter the sewer system through roof leaders, basement sump pumps, or foundation drains illegally connected to the system. I/I are of great concern as it results in the unnecessary treatment of water and consumes capacity in the large regional sewer pipes. I/I can also contribute to sewer backups into homes and overflows into local lakes and rivers. In order to minimize I/I, the City of Mendota Heights prohibits the connection of sump pumps, rain leaders and passive drain tile into the sanitary sewer system. The current I/I goal for the City of Mendota Heights is an allowable peak hourly flow of 4.83 MGD with an adjusted average of 1.67 MGD. In 2016, The city began an inspection of the city to find, and ultimately eliminate, residential sump pump connections to the city sewer system. Eliminating these connections will reduce the amount of storm drainage into the sanitary sewer. SSIMP OVERVIEW Sanitary Sewer Improvement and Maintenance Plan (SSIMP) The Sanitary Sewer Improvement and Maintenance Plan (SSIMP) is a planning tool that forecasts the city’s needs over a five year period based on city-adopted long-range plans, goals and policies. The SSIMP includes detailed descriptions of sanitary sewer improvement projects and maintenance projects the city anticipates to initiate during the five-year period. The SSIMP is updated annually to ensure consistency and the reflection of changing demands and financial resources. SSIMP Goals The goals of the SSIMP are to: o Provide a balanced program for sanitary sewer improvements given anticipated funding revenues over a five-year planning period. o Enable the Mendota Heights City Council to evaluate the needs of the entire city objectively. o Anticipate needed sanitary sewer improvements in advance, rather than being overlooked until critically needed. o Provide a plan for sanitary sewer improvements that can be used in preparing the budget for the coming fiscal year. Project Details The sanitary sewer improvement projects being reported in the SSIMP will be shown within the following sections: o Preventative Maintenance o Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Preventative Maintenance Preventative maintenance includes activities such as cleaning and televising sanitary sewer lines, visual inspection of manholes, annual inspection and maintenance of lift stations, and root cutting in the main lines. Sanitary sewer maintenance and activities are funded through the Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund. Cleaning and Televising In 2006, the City of Mendota Heights started a cleaning and televising program with the goal of cleaning and televising the entire sanitary sewer system in a 5 year period. Currently, Public Works Staff along with one seasonal employee clean approximately 7-10 miles of pipe per year. In addition, the city hires a contractor each year to clean an additional 7-8 miles of pipe and televise all of the pipes that are cleaned that year. At our current rate, the city is cleaning and televising the entire sanitary sewer system every 5-6 years. Sanitary sewer pipes are cleaned and televised to identify problem areas, including leaking joints, collapsed sections of pipe and excessive root intrusion through cracks and joints. Excessive root intrusion can cause plugging, which can lead to sewage backups into basements. Through routine televising and maintenance logs, Public Works staff have identified and prioritized those sections of sewers that require disproportionate maintenance to remain functional or have a history of excessive root intrusion. The SSIMP was then developed to address these problem areas using a variety of rehabilitation techniques, including: conventional excavation and pipe replacement; pipe lining with cured-in-place pipe (CIPP); additional root treatments. CIPP installation involves inverting an epoxy saturated fiber lining into a sewer line and using water/stream pressure to cure the epoxy. Services and lateral connections are opened after the pipe has cured using a camera and robotic cutter. This process results in a continuous, joint free, structural liner that can be installed with minimal disruption to adjacent residents and traffic, and requires no excavation or street reconstruction. Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation A sanitary sewer rehabilitation project will be defined as a project in which the sanitary sewer is modified or supplemented in-place, to restore the serviceability of the existing sanitary sewer system. The City of Mendota Heights maintains approximately 81.7 miles of sanitary sewer pipe. As the sanitary sewer infrastructure ages, it requires rehabilitation to protect or extend its useful life. If the sanitary sewer infrastructure is not preserved, it will deteriorate prematurely and its benefit to the community will be lost. As a result, the SSIMP reflects the broad direction of the City Council to preserve existing sanitary sewer infrastructure before they fall into such disrepair that expensive reconstruction is required. Typically, the City of Mendota Heights completes one sanitary sewer lining project a year and additional sanitary sewer rehabilitation projects as needed. Reconstruction projects are identified and planned as part of the Street Improvement Plan (SIP) as sanitary sewer reconstruction often involves removal of the road surface for utility access. Sanitary sewer reconstruction projects that do not impact streets are identified in this plan. Sanitary Sewer Facilities Improvements totaling approximately $4 million are planned for in the 2019-2023 SSIMP. Highlights of the planned projects are as follows: Preventative Maintenance Projects: Annual Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Televising Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Projects: Annual Sanitary Sewer Lining Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects: 2019: 816 Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund Summary Improvement Projects SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS SANITARY SEWER UTILITY FUND SUMMARY Available Balance (12/31/2017)$87,000 Revenue 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Cash Balance $87,000 $226,000 $83,000 $51,000 $288,000 $560,000 Estimated Annual Sanitary Sewer Revenue $2,084,000 $2,292,000 $2,407,000 $2,527,000 $2,653,000 $2,786,000 Total Revenue $2,171,000 $2,518,000 $2,490,000 $2,578,000 $2,941,000 $3,346,000 Expenditures 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Estimated MCES Sewer Fees $1,343,000 $1,410,000 $1,481,000 $1,555,000 $1,633,000 $1,715,000 Estimated City Operational Costs $430,000 $448,000 $646,000 $423,000 $436,000 $449,000 Annual Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Televising $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 Annual Sanitary Sewer Lining $200,000 $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Lift Station Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 816 Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation $0 $315,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenditures $2,035,000 $2,435,000 $2,439,000 $2,290,000 $2,381,000 $2,476,000 Total Unreserved Cash Balance on 12/31 $136,000 $83,000 $51,000 $560,000 $870,000 2019 Revenue includes an estimated $90,000 MCES grant 2019 Operation costs include $49,000 towards Public Works Improvements (Fence, Salt Bin) 2020 Operation costs includes $235,000 for replacement of Water Jet Truck (1991) $288,000 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Annual Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Televising TOTAL COST: $310,000 PROJECT #: 501 PROJECT TYPE:Sanitary Sewer PM Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $310,000 Total $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $310,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $310,000 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $62,000 $310,000 Each year, staff will determine the sanitary sewer that can be cleaned and televised within the allotted budget based upon current estimated project costs. The areas tentatively planned for cleaning and televising are shown on the sanitary sewer cleaning and televising map. The City of Mendota Heights maintains 81.7 miles of sanitary sewer pipe. In 2006, the City of Mendota Heights started a cleaning and televising program with the goal of cleaning the entire sanitary sewer system in a 5 year period. Currently, Public Works staff along with one seasonal employee cleans approximately 7-10 miles of pipe per year. In addition, the city hires a contractor each year to clean an additional 7-8 miles of pipe and televise all of the pipes that are cleaned that year. At the current rate, the entire sanitary sewer system is cleaned every 5-6 years. Mendota Heights sanitary sewer system is aging. Many of its pipes are 60 years old and will soon be in need of repair. Cleaning the sewer system on a regular cycle will help extend the life of the pipes. Televising of the system will show where immediate repairs are needed. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Annual Sanitary Sewer Lining TOTAL COST: $1,200,000 PROJECT #: 502 PROJECT TYPE:San. Sewer Rehab Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,200,000 Total $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,200,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,200,000 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,200,000 Each year, staff will determine the sanitary sewer to be lined within the allotted budget based on previous cleaning and televising reports Mendota Heights sanitary sewer system is aging. Many of its pipes are 60 years old and will soon be in need of repair. Cleaning the sewer system on a regular cycle will help extend the life of the pipes. Televising of the system will show where immediate repairs are needed. Lining pipes and manholes in need of repair will extend the life of our system. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Lift Station Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $0 PROJECT #: 503 PROJECT TYPE:San. Sewer Rehab Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Rehabilitation of the Sanitary Sewer Lift Stations including but not limited to interior wet well repair, drainpipe replacement, and standardized electrical controls. These projects are necessary to keep the pump stations at a high level of service. Pumps, motors and other equipment should be periodically maintained in order to ensure uninterrupted service. These improvements will lower operation costs, increase pumping efficiency and provide redundancy. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 816 Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $315,000 PROJECT #: 504 PROJECT TYPE:San. Sewer Rehab Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $65,000 $65,000 Construction/Maintenance $250,000 $250,000 Total $315,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $315,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $315,000 $315,000 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $315,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $315,000 This sanitary sewer rehabilitation project was identified in the 2010 Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Televising report. The sanitary sewer manhole located at 816 Ridge Place has sunk approximately 1.5 feet. Proposed rehabilitation consists of replacing the manhole and approximately 200 ft of 27" sanitary sewer pipe. Rehabilitation of the City's sanitary sewer system is necessary to keep these utility operating at a high level of service. This sanitary sewer pipe serves approximately 40% of the city. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Operation & Maintenance TOTAL COST: $2,401,788 PROJECT #: 504 PROJECT TYPE:San. Sewer Rehab Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Operation & Maintenance $398,895 $410,862 $423,188 $435,883 $448,960 $2,117,788 Fleet/Facility $49,000 $235,000 $284,000 Total $447,895 $645,862 $423,188 $435,883 $448,960 $2,401,788 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $447,895 $645,862 $423,188 $435,883 $448,960 $2,401,788 Special Assessments $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 Total $447,895 $645,862 $423,188 $435,883 $448,960 $2,401,788 The Sanitary Sewer Utility is self funded including salaries, fleet, O&M and Capital Improvements City of Mendota Heights 2019 – 2023 Storm Water Improvement and Maintenance Plan OVERVIEW OF PONDS AND STORM SEWER SYSTEM Storm Water System The City of Mendota Heights has an extensive network of storm water conveyances which include: 81.9 miles of storm sewer pipe, 4908 catch basins, manholes and aprons, 52 sump manholes, 5 miles of streams, 124 ponds and wetlands operated by city, county, state, and private entities. SWIMP OVERVIEW Storm Water Improvement and Maintenance Plan (SWIMP) The Storm Water Improvement and Maintenance Plan (SWIMP) is a planning tool that forecasts the city’s needs over a five year period based on city-adopted long-range plans, goals and policies. The SWIMP includes detailed descriptions of storm sewer and pond improvement projects and maintenance projects the city anticipates to initiate during the five-year period. The SWIMP is updated annually to ensure consistency and the reflection of changing demands and financial resources. SWIMP Goals The goals of the SWIMP are to: o Provide a balanced program for storm water and pond improvements given anticipated funding revenues over a five-year planning period. o Enable the Mendota Heights City Council to evaluate the needs of the entire city objectively. o Anticipate needed storm water improvements in advance, rather than being overlooked until critically needed. o Provide a plan for storm water improvements that can be used in preparing the budget for the coming fiscal year. Project Details The storm water improvement projects being reported in the SWIMP will be shown within the following sections: o Storm Sewer Maintenance and Improvements o Pond Maintenance o Streambank Stabilization Storm Water Facilities Storm Water improvements totaling approximately $2.3 million are planned for in the 2019-2023 SWIMP. Summary of SWIMP Project Costs and Funding Sources Improvement Projects SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINT. PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS STORM WATER FUND Total Available (12/31/2017)$179,000 Revenue 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Cash Balance $179,000 $233,000 $112,000 $76,000 $135,000 $189,000 Annual Revenue $446,000 $476,000 $476,000 $476,000 $476,000 $476,000 Total Revenue $625,000 $709,000 $588,000 $552,000 $611,000 $665,000 Expenditures 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Operations & Maintenance $152,000 $157,000 $162,000 $167,000 $172,000 $177,000 Ivy Hills Park Pond Improvements $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 541 Marie Repair $0 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cherokee Heights Ravine $0 $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 South Plaza/Mendakota Improvements $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Lexington Highlands Improvements $80,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Lilydale Drop Structure $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Marie Avenue Rehabilitation 2 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Wesley Lane Improvements $0 $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Dodd Road Trail/Maple Street Relocation $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 2019 Streambank Stabilization $0 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Centre Pointe Rehabilitation $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 Lake Augusta Erosion $0 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 2020 Pond Improvement $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 2020 Streambank Stabilization $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 Sylvandale Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 2021 Pond Improvement $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 2021 Streambank Stabilization $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 Victoria Curve Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 2022 Pond Improvements $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 2022 Streambank Stabilization $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 Friendly Hills Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 2023 Pond Improvement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 2023 Streambank Stabilization $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 Total Expenditures $392,000 $597,000 $512,000 $417,000 $422,000 $427,000 Unreserved Cash Balance (12/31)$233,000 $112,000 $76,000 $135,000 $189,000 $238,000 Future Projects Year Lake Augusta Outlet 2024 Curley's Neighborhood Rehabilitation 2024 Tilsens's Neighborhood Rehabilitation 2024 2024 Pond Improvements 2024 2024 Streambank Stabilization 2024 Bunker Hills Neighborhood Rehabilitation 2025 2025 Pond Improvement 2025 2025 Streambank Stabilization 2025 Carmen Lane, Dakota Drive, and Waters Drive 2026 2026 Pond Improvements 2026 2026 Streambank Stabilization 2026 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Operations & Maintenance TOTAL COST: $835,000 Project Description Project Location Operaton and Maintence includes: Salaries, Rent, Repairs, Software, WMO dues, Natrive Plantings/ Rain Gardens, and other appurtenent costs. Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $157,000 $162,000 $167,000 $172,000 $177,000 $835,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $157,000 $162,000 $167,000 $172,000 $177,000 $835,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 541 Marie Repair TOTAL COST: $20,000 Project Description Project Location Repair pond outlet at 541 Marie Ave Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $5,000 $5,000 Construction/Maintenance $15,000 $15,000 Total $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $20,000 $20,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Cherokee Heights Ravine TOTAL COST: $75,000 Project Description Project Location JPA with St. Paul for erosion repair and hydrodynamic seperators Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $75,000 $75,000 Total $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $75,000 $75,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Marie Avenue Rehabilitation 2 TOTAL COST: $150,000 Project Description Project Location Dredge Lex/Marie Pond, Dredge Sutton Pond Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $25,000 $25,000 Construction/Maintenance $125,000 $125,000 Total $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $150,000 $150,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Wesley Lane Improvements TOTAL COST: $25,000 Project Description Project Location Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $25,000 $25,000 Total $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $25,000 $25,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 Replace Dodd Road structures at Wesley, fill and pipe ditch to south. Add extension at Wesley Court SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Dodd Road Trail/Maple Street Relocation TOTAL COST: $50,000 Project Description Project Location Fill ditch, install storm sewer Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $50,000 $50,000 Total $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $50,000 $50,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2019 Streambank Stabilization TOTAL COST: $120,000 Project Description Project Location Streambank Stabilization with Ridge Place Sewer Project Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $120,000 $120,000 Total $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $120,000 $120,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Centre Pointe Rehabilitation TOTAL COST:$50,000 Project Description Project Location Street Reconstruction, Improvements to 1110 Centre Point Drainage (Undersized Pipe Replacement) Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $50,000 $50,000 Total $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $50,000 $50,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Lake Augusta Erosion TOTAL COST: $150,000 Project Description Project Location Repair Erosion at Lake Augusta Inlets Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $150,000 $150,000 Total $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $150,000 $150,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2020 Pond Improvement TOTAL COST: $100,000 Project Description Project Location Wentworth move to 2018 Rogers Lake keep in 2020 Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2020 Streambank Stabilization TOTAL COST: $50,000 Project Description Project Location Location to be Determined Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $50,000 $50,000 Total $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $50,000 $50,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Sylvandale Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $50,000 Project Description Project Location Street Project costs Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $50,000 $50,000 Total $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $50,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $50,000 $50,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $50,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2021 Pond Improvement TOTAL COST: $100,000 Project Description Project Location Marie Park, Park Place Sediment Removal Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $100,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2021 Streambank Stabilization TOTAL COST: $100,000 Project Description Project Location Location to be Determined Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $100,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Victoria Curve Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $50,000 Project Description Project Location Street Poroject Costs Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $50,000 $50,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $50,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $50,000 $50,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $50,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2022 Pond Improvements TOTAL COST: $100,000 Project Description Project Location Victoria Highlands, Burrow Sediment Removal Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2022 Streambank Stabilization TOTAL COST: $100,000 Project Description Project Location Location to be Determined Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Friendly Hills Rehabilitation TOTAL COST: $100,000 Project Description Project Location Street Project Costs Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2023 Pond Improvement TOTAL COST: $100,000 Project Description Project Location Friendly Hills Sediment Removal Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: 2023 Streambank Stabilization TOTAL COST: $50,000 Project Description Project Location Location to be Determined Project Justification Project History Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Planning/Design $0 Construction/Maintenance $50,000 $50,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $50,000 $50,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 2019 – 2023 Parks Improvement and Maintenance Plan City of Mendota Heights OVERVIEW OF PARK AND TRAIL SYSTEM Park and Trail System The City of Mendota Heights enjoys an extensive park, open space, and trail system with 15 city parks. In 1989, a voter approved park referendum was passed which funded upgrading 8 existing neighborhood parks, constructing 5 new parks, and constructing 7.8 miles of trails. In addition to city parks, the City purchased the 17-acre Mendota Heights Par 3 Golf Course by a separate referendum in 2007. The City also joined with other public entities and purchased the 25.5-acre Historic Pilot Knob site in 2006/2007, which will be retained as open space. Park and trail facilities maintained by others located within or near the city boundaries are Fort Snelling State Park, Harriet Island-Lilydale Regional Park, Dodge Nature Center, Big Rivers Regional Trail, and North Urban Regional Trail, renamed the River to River Greenway (Mendota-Kaposia Trail). Park Improvement and Maintenance Plan (PIMP) The Park Improvement and Maintenance Plan (PIMP) is a planning tool that forecasts the city’s needs over a five year period based on city-adopted long-range plans, goals and policies. The PIMP includes detailed descriptions of park improvement projects and maintenance projects the city anticipates to initiate during the five-year period. The PIMP is updated annually to ensure consistency and the reflection of changing demands and financial resources. PIMP Goals The goals of the PIMP are to: o Provide a balanced program for park improvements given anticipated funding revenues over a five-year planning period. o Enable the Mendota Heights City Council to evaluate the needs of the entire city objectively. o Anticipate needed park improvements in advance, rather than being overlooked until critically needed. o Provide a plan for park improvements that can be used in preparing the budget for the coming fiscal year. Park Facilities Park improvements totaling approximately $2.4 million are planned for in the 2019-2023 PIMP. Page 1 Exhibits Park Needs Summary of Trail Project Costs and Funding Sources Park Detail Sheets PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS SUMMARY OF CITYPARKS Park Name Area (Acres) SUMMARY OF REGIONAL PARKS Caren Road 2.0 Park Name Area (Acres) Civic Center (Mertensotto Fields) 17.6 Dodge Nature Center 162.3 Copperfield Ponds 24.8 Fort Snelling State Park 800 Delaware Ponds 5.6 Lilydale Harriet Island Cherokee Park 374 Dodd/Marie 1.9 Total 1336.3 Dog Park 8.2 Friendly Hills 15.5 Future Park Options Friendly Marsh 34.5 Park Name Area (Acres) Hagestrom King 9.6 Augusta Lemay Conservation Area 53 Ivy Hills 9.1 Ivy Falls 7.0 Kensington 14.5 Pilot Knob Preservation Expansion 2.35 Lexington Marie 3.9 Total 62.4 Marie 6.6 Market Square 0.24 Mendakota 19.7 Pilot Knob Preservation 27.0 Rogers Lake 8.7 Sibley 10.8 Tot Lot 0.9 Valley 93.5 Valley View Heights 0.6 Victoria Highlands 6.7 Wentworth 10.4 Total 332.3 PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS SUMMARY OF PARKS COSTS AND FUNDING SOURCES Park Name 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Caren Road $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Civic Center (Mertensotto Fields)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Copperfield Ponds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Delaware Ponds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Dodd/Marie $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Dog Park $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Friendly Hills $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $60,000 Friendly Marsh $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Hagestrom King $180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 Ivy Hills $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $0 $125,000 Kensington $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Lexington Marie $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 Marie $80,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 Market Square $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Mendakota $140,000 $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $200,000 Pilot Knob Preservation $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $35,000 Rogers Lake $155,000 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $355,000 Sibley $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $110,000 Tot Lot $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Valley $5,000 $35,000 $105,000 $202,500 $102,500 $450,000 Valley View Heights $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $50,000 Victoria Highlands $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Wentworth $370,000 $60,000 $0 $0 $50,000 $480,000 Total $959,000 $424,000 $244,000 $516,500 $281,500 $2,425,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Special Park Fund $590,000 $100,000 $50,000 $225,000 $150,000 $1,115,000 Other Government Unit Funding/Levy $289,000 $94,000 $94,000 $91,500 $31,500 $600,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Special Assessments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $80,000 $130,000 $100,000 $200,000 $100,000 $610,000 Water Revenue Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total $959,000 $424,000 $244,000 $516,500 $281,500 $2,425,000 PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Caren Road TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 2.0 Park Description Park Location Caren Road is a Natural Area Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Open Space, Pond Pond Maintenance, Invasive Species PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Civic Center (Mertensotto Fields) TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 17.6 Park Description Park Location Mertensotto Fields is located at 1101 Victoria Curve (City Hall). Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 One Youth Baseball Field with pitching mound, irrigation, and turf infield. Outfield fence at 250 feet. Two batting cages with electric. Backstop safety netting. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Copperfield Ponds TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 24.8 Park Description Park Location Copperfield Ponds is a Natural area with an unpaved nature trail 650 Huber Drive Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Gravel Walking Trail Invasive Species, ADA, Erosion, Pond Maintenance PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Delaware Ponds TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 5.6 Park Description Park Location Delaware Ponds is a public access and considered open space Map coming soon Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 None Pond Maintenance, Invasive Species PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Dodd/Marie TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 1.9 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 None Pond Maintenance, streambank stabilization, Invasive Species Dodd/Marie is open space on the Northeast & Southwest quadrants of Dodd Road & Marie Avenue intersection. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Dog Park TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 8.2 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Fencing with double access gate, waste bags. Sun Shelter, Wider Gate The Off Leash Dog Park is located at 1360 Acacia Drive in the industrial park on a temporary trial basis. The City has committed to this as an interim use through September, 2020. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Friendly Hills TOTAL COST: $60,000 Park Size (Acres): 15.5 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Tennis Court Resurfacing $60,000 $60,000 Playground Equipment $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $60,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $60,000 $60,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $60,000 Friendly Hills Park is located at 2360 Pueblo Lane New Hockey boards, Warming House and lighting in 2017. Invasive Species, Tennis Court Resurfacing, Playground equipment. One Youth Softball Field - Outfield Depth 220/250/225 feet, not fenced. Youth Overlay Soccer field in Fall. Hockey Rink (192' x 80') with asphalt surface, lighting, and warming house. Adjacent free skating rink. Two Picnic Shelters - No electric. Additional Picnic Area next to Tennis Courts. Double (2) Tennis Courts - Fenced, Surfaced replaced in 2009/2010. Playground area (New surfacing, borders, equipment in 2009). Concrete Basketball Half Court. Grass Volleyball Court. Paved Walking Trail, Open Space, Pond. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Friendly Marsh TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 34.5 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Paved Walking Trail, Natural Area Potential location for additional park use (soccer, archery, etc.) Friendly Marsh is located at 2191 Apache Street PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Hagestrom King TOTAL COST: $180,000 Park Size (Acres): 9.6 Park Description Park Location Located at 555 Mendota Heights Road. Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Playground Equipment $120,000 $120,000 Dedicated Pickleball $60,000 $60,000 Total $180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $180,000 $180,000 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 One Youth Baseball/Softball Field Outfield at 240 feet, fenced, backstop safety net, no pitching mound. Playground Area. 2003 Updated Concrete Basketball Half Court. Pond, Natural Area, Paved Walking Trails Playground equipment, Zipline PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Ivy Hills TOTAL COST: $125,000 Park Size (Acres): 9.1 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Pond Dredging $0 Playground Equipment $100,000 $100,000 Expand Basketball Court $25,000 $25,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $0 $125,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $125,000 $125,000 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $0 $125,000 One Youth Softball Field - Outfield at 180/240/180 feet - Not Fenced. Playground Area. 2007 Update Concrete Basketball Half Court. Pond, Natural Area, Paved Walking Trail Playground equipment, expand basketball Ivy Hills is located at 645 Butler Avenue. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2018-2022 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Kensington TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 14.5 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Playground Equipment $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 North Kensington is located at 640 Mendota Heights Road. South Kensington is located at 2627 Concord Way. North Kensington: Pond, Natural Area, Paved Walking Trail. South Kensington: One Adult Soccer Field - 330'x230' One Adult Soccer Field - 360'x234'. Concession Building with restrooms. Two Picnic Shelters. Playground Area. 2011 Update Pond, Natural Area, Paved Walking Trail. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2018-2022 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Lexington Marie TOTAL COST: $200,000 Park Size (Acres): 3.9 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Dredge Pond, Improvements $100,000 $100,000 Trail Improvements $100,000 $100,000 Total $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 Funding Sources 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Municipal Bond Sales $100,000 $100,000 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Other Government Unit Funding $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 Pond, Natural Area, Paved Walking Trail. Dredge Pond, Trail Improvements for safety enhancement along Lexington Avenue. Located on the Southeast corner of Lexington Avenue and Marie Avenue. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Marie TOTAL COST: $180,000 Park Size (Acres): 6.6 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Tennis Courts $60,000 $60,000 Basketball Hoops $20,000 $20,000 Playground Equipment $100,000 $100,000 Total $80,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $20,000 $100,000 $120,000 Levy $60,000 $60,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $80,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 One Youth Softball Field - Outfield at 180/210/200 feet - Not Fenced Hockey Rink (200' x 84') with asphalt surface, lighting, and warming house. Adjacent free skating rink. Playground Area. 2005 Update Concrete Basketball Half Court. Pond, Natural Area, Paved Walking Trails. Pond Maintenance, Playground Equipment, basketball hoops, Tennis Court Resurfacing. Tennis Court and Basketball proposed for 2018 Marie Park is located at 1780 Lilac Lane. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Market Square TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 0.24 Park Description Park Location Is located within the Village Development. Park Amenities map to include Outlot E… Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Neighborhood Commons - Open/Passive Area, Fountains, Paved Walking Trails. Shade Structure, Pond dredging PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Mendakota TOTAL COST: $200,000 Park Size (Acres): 19.7 Park Description Park Location Is located at 2171 Dodd Road Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Playground Equipment (ADA)$0 Dugouts/field $140,000 $140,000 Field Lighting $0 Parking Lot $60,000 $60,000 Total $140,000 $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $200,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $140,000 $140,000 Levy $60,000 $60,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $140,000 $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $200,000 ADA Improvements Four Adult size softball fields - 290' & 300' outfield fences. One Youth Soccer Field - 240'x120'. Concession Building with Restrooms and elevated covered viewing deck. Double Batting Cage - 30'x80' with electrical outlets. Asphalt Basketball Full Court. Playground Area. 2013 Update Picnic Shelter, Paved Walking Paths. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Pilot Knob Preservation TOTAL COST: $35,000 Park Size (Acres): 27.0 Park Description Park Location Pilot Knob Preservation is located at 2100 Pilot Knob Road Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Native Planting Management $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $35,000 $0 Total $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $35,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $35,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $35,000 Maintenance of Native Plantings PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Rogers Lake TOTAL COST: $355,000 Park Size (Acres): 8.7 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total ADA Ramp $5,000 $5,000 Running Water/bathrooms $150,000 $150,000 Playground Equipment $100,000 $100,000 Pond Dredging $100,000 $100,000 Total $155,000 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $355,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $150,000 $100,000 $250,000 Levy $5,000 $5,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $100,000 $100,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $155,000 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $355,000 Sand Volleyball - Timber border. Skate Park - Tier 1 (Max 3' height, no supervision). Picnic Shelter with electric. Fishing Pier, No Swim Beach. Concrete Basketball Half Court. Playground Area. 2008 Update Pond, Natural Areas, Paved Walking Trails Skate Park Maintenance, Pond Dredging, Running Water, ADA ramp at pavillion Rogers Lake Park is located at 1000 Wagon Wheel Trail. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Sibley TOTAL COST: $110,000 Park Size (Acres): 10.8 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Maintenance Costs $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $110,000 $0 Total $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $110,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $110,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $110,000 Is located at 1819 Delaware Avenue. The park is maintained and scheduling is done through ISD 197. One Soccer Field - 330'x195'. One Softball Field - Outfiled fence at 280'. One Softball Field - Outfiled fence at 300'. One Baseball Field - Outfield Fence 330/380/330 feet. Double Batting Cage 30'x80'. Concession Building with Restrooms. Paved Walking Trails. ISD has Football, Soccer, Baseball, Track, and 12 Tennis Courts. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Tot Lot TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 0.9 Park Description Park Location Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total No Projects Planned $0 $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 No current amenities PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Valley TOTAL COST: $450,000 Park Size (Acres): 93.5 Park Description Park Location Valley Park is located at 821 Marie Avenue. Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Power Line Pollinator Planting $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $7,500 Buckthorn/Garlic Mustard $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 Weir Construction $30,000 Streambank Stabilization $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Playground Equipment $100,000 Total $5,000 $35,000 $105,000 $202,500 $102,500 $7,500 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $100,000 $100,000 Levy $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $2,500 $2,500 $20,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $30,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $330,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $5,000 $35,000 $105,000 $202,500 $102,500 $450,000 One Youth Baseball Field - Outfield at 175 feet, No Fence. Double Tennis Court with Sport Tiles. Picnic Shelter - No Electrictricity. Ashpalt Basketball Half Court. Playground Area. 2007 Update Nature Areas, Paved Walking Trails. Streambank Stabilization, Weir Construction, Invasive species, Playground Equipment. Trail Maintenace needs exist. Dakota County interested in managing trail in future. PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PROJECT NAME: Valley View Heights TOTAL COST: $50,000 Park Size (Acres): 0.6 Park Description Park Location Valley View Heights Park is located at 1056 Cullen Avenue. Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Playground Equipment $50,000 $50,000 $0 Total $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $50,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $50,000 $50,000 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $50,000 Asphalt Basketball Half Court. Playground Area. 2006 Update Paved Walking Trail. Playground Equipment, ADA needs PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Victoria Highlands TOTAL COST: $0 Park Size (Acres): 6.7 Park Description Park Location Victoria Highlands is located at 1700 Diane Road. Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Playground Equipment $0 Pond Dredging $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $0 Levy $0 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $0$0 $0$0$0 $0 One Youth Softball Field - Outfield Fence 270/285/270 Feet. Youth Overlay Soccer in Fall. Concrete Basketball Half Court. Playground Area. 2009 Update Pond, Nature Area, Paved Walking Trails. Playground Equipment, Pond Dredging PARKS IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK NAME: Wentworth TOTAL COST: $480,000 Park Size (Acres): 10.4 Park Description Park Location Wentworth Park is located at 739 Wentworth Avenue Park Amenities Park Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Rink Lighting $55,000 $55,000 Parking lot/Trails $80,000 $80,000 Running Water $50,000 $50,000 Playground Equipment $100,000 $100,000 Tennis Court Resurfacing $60,000 $60,000 Pond Dredging $80,000 $80,000 Warming House $55,000 $55,000 Total $370,000 $60,000 $0 $0 $50,000 $480,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Special Park Funds $100,000 $50,000 $150,000 Levy $190,000 $60,000 $250,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $80,000 $80,000 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $370,000 $60,000 $0 $0 $50,000 $480,000 Rink Lighting, Warming House, Running Water, Tennis Court Resurfacing, Park Redesign, Playground Equipment One Youth Softball Field - Outfield at 220/235/210 Feet, No Fence. Youth Overlay Soccer in Fall. Concrete Basketball Half Court. Two Picnic Shelters. Hockey Rink (200' x 84') with lighting, and warming house. Adjacent free skating rink. Double Tennis Court. Playground Area. 2005 Update Pond, Nature Areas, Paved Walking Trails. DATE: January 4, 2015 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sloan Wallgren, Recreation Program Coordinator SUBJECT: Declaring the City of Mendota Heights a Pollinator-Friendly City Background The Parks and Recreation Commission is consistently looking for ways to improve the Mendota Heights community and parks. Recent research has shown that the pollinator population is declining nationwide due to the loss of basic habitat, the simplification of landscapes, and the increased use of neonicotinoid systemic insecticides. It is important to participate in pollinator- friendly practices, because pollinators are a necessary component to a healthy ecosystem. At the October 13, 2015 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, the commission passed a motion for the council to consider, which would declare Mendota Heights to be a Pollinator-Friendly City. It further outlined ways to help the desired result to become a reality. The following is a list of the actions steps the commission recommends for implemetation in order for the City of Mendota Heights to become a Pollinator-Friendly City: 1.The City would make sure that future plantings on city property are pollinator-friendly. 2.The City will include an article in the April 2016 issue of the Heights Highlights to educate the residents as to why it is important to be pollinator-friendly and how to become pollinator-friendly. 3.The City will provide links on the city’s website to pollinator-friendly websites, which will include best practices and a list of pollinator-friendly plants. 4.Individual members of the Commission would work to establish a plant sharing program. 5.The City will continue to work with Green River Greening to plant pollinator-friendly plants when the opportunity presents itself. 6.The City would continue to not use neonicotinoid systemic insecticides. Staff has attached a sample of the resolution and an example of the information that would be available on the City's website. Budget Impact There will be no impact to the budget. Recommendations Thew Parks and Recreation Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution, declaring the City’s intent to become a Pollinator –Friendly community. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2016-01 RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TO BE A POLLINATOR-FRIENDLY COMMUNITY WHEREAS, bees and other pollinators are a necessary component of a healthy ecosystem and food system, providing pollination of plants in order to grow vegetables, herbs and fruits; and WHEREAS, pollinator populations are in sharp decline due to an ongoing loss of habitat as a result of human land practices, which is coupled with a simultaneous large-scale expansion of insecticide use by homeowners, landscapers, property managers and farmers; and WHEREAS, neonicotinoid and other systemic insecticides have been shown to cause illness and death to bees and pollinators; and WHEREAS, alternative land management practices are available that dramatically increase pollinator forage while decreasing maintenance costs; and WHEREAS, the monetary and social cost of maintaining pollinator-friendly landscapes can be less expensive the than costs associated with maintaining chemically- treated monocrop landscapes; and WHEREAS, many Mendota Heights residents and businesses are pledging to manage their land in a pollinator-friendly way; and WHEREAS, acting in a pollinator friendly manner is not expected to inhibit any potential treatments for Emerald Ash Borer infestation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, that the City of Mendota Heights is hereby declared a Pollinator- Friendly Community, and that the City celebrates current policies and practices that protect and support pollinator health by minimizing the use of insecticides. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights urges all Mendota Heights property owners, residents, businesses, institutions and neighborhoods to become more pollinator-friendly by adopting practices including: -Committing to avoiding the use of insecticides, including systemic insecticides, on their property; -Avoiding the planting of flowering plants which are treated with systemic insecticides; -Planting more pollinator-supporting forage on their property, and adopting organic or chemical-free lawn and landscaping practices. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 5th day of January, 2016. Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 2 of 2 2019 – 2023 Trail Improvement and Maintenance Plan City of Mendota Heights OVERVIEW OF TRAIL SYSTEM Park and Trail System The City of Mendota Heights provides 27.9 miles of city trails and on street connections (wide shoulders), 2.7 miles of county trails, 3.8 miles of MnDOT maintained on street connections, and 3.2 miles of privately owned and maintained sidewalks. In 1989, a voter-approved park referendum was passed which funded upgrading 8 existing neighborhood parks, constructing 5 new parks, and constructing 7.8 miles of trails. The City of Mendota Heights currently has sufficient park acreage to serve its residents, although not all residents have equal access to those facilities. Future improvements will focus on updating existing facilities and adding trail connections to neighborhoods that lack access to parks. Trails are an important component and are the focus of this plan because they connect neighborhoods to one another and the community to regional recreational opportunities. A comprehensive trail system also enhances alternative opportunities for transportation. Identified Trail Gaps Improved trail connections are important because many residential areas are divided by highways and arterial roads. The recent construction of the Big Rivers Regional Trail along the Minnesota River and the trail connection to the I-35E Bridge trailway have also heightened the awareness and demand for improved access to the river valley. Access to the Big Rivers Regional Trail is difficult due to the significant elevation changes. As a result, many areas of the community cannot be easily accessed on bikes, roller blades or foot from other areas of the community. Additional or improved trail connections create opportunities for alternative transportation and healthy living and are needed to provide residents access to City parks and other recreational opportunities in the region. Trail gaps and proposed connections/improvements planned by the City are shown on the existing trail system map and are listed below. Proposed Connection/Improvements (As identified in the Street Improvement Plan (SIP)) Dodd Road (Market Street to Wesley Lane) Identified Gaps Mendota Heights Road (Highway 13 to Scenic Overlook) Dodd Road (Wesley Lane to Marie Avenue) Dodd Road (Marie Avenue to Delaware Avenue) Lexington Avenue (Wagon Wheel to Tom Thumb) Page 1 TIMP OVERVIEW Trail Improvement and Maintenance Plan (TIMP) The Trail Improvement and Maintenance Plan (TIMP) is a planning tool that forecasts the city’s needs over a five year period based on city-adopted long-range plans, goals and policies. The TIMP includes detailed descriptions of trail improvement projects and maintenance projects the city anticipates to initiate during the five-year period. The TIMP is updated annually to ensure consistency and the reflection of changing demands and financial resources. TIMP Goals The goals of the TIMP are to: o Provide a balanced program for trail improvements given anticipated funding revenues over a five-year planning period. o Enable the Mendota Heights City Council to evaluate the needs of the entire city objectively. o Anticipate needed trail improvements in advance, rather than being overlooked until critically needed. o Provide a plan for trail improvements that can be used in preparing the budget for the coming fiscal year. Project Details The trail improvement projects being reported in the TIMP will be shown within the following sections: o Preventative Maintenance o Trail Rehabilitation o Trail Construction Preventative Maintenance Preventative maintenance activities that are performed on a continuous schedule are tasks such as trail sweeping, crack sealing, pothole patching, and spot repairs. Preventative maintenance activities that are performed on an as-needed basis are tasks such as snow and ice removal, drainage control, signage replacement, and graffiti control. Trail maintenance activities are funded through the Public Works Parks Department - Parks Maintenance Fund out of the General Fund Levy. Trail Sweeping Trail sweeping is an important aspect of trail maintenance, helping ensure trail user safety. Sweeping should be performed on a regular schedule. Crack Sealing, Pothole Patching and Spot Repairs Repair of bituminous trails should be closely tied to trail inspection and setting priorities for repairs. The time between observation and repair of a trail will depend on whether the needed repair is deemed a hazard, to what degree the needed repair will affect the safety Page 2 of the trail user, and whether the needed repair can be performed by the trail maintenance crew or if it is so extensive that it needs to be repaired by contracted services. Snow and Ice Removal The Mendota Heights trail system is open year round, requiring snow and ice removal. Removal of ice and snow is important for safety reasons and long term life expectancy of the trail system. Attention must be paid to those areas where there is a grade change and/or curves. Drainage Control In places where low spots on the trail catch water, trail surfaces should be raised, or drains built, to carry water away. Some trail drainage control can be achieved through the proper edging of trails. If trail drainage is corrected near steep slopes, the possibility of erosion must be considered. Signage Replacement Trail signs fall into two categories: safety and information. Trail users should be informed of their location, where they are going, and how to safely use trails. Signs related to safety are most important, thus they should receive the highest priority. Information signage can enhance the trail users experience and is prioritized behind safety signage. Graffiti Control The key to graffiti control is prompt observation and removal. Graffiti should be noted during trail inspections and the graffiti should be removed as soon as possible. Trail Rehabilitation A trail rehabilitation project will be defined as a project in which the trail is modified or supplemented in-place, to restore the serviceability of the existing trail. The City of Mendota Heights maintains approximately 27.9 miles of trails of which 26.2 miles are off-street trails maintained by the Parks Department and 1.7 miles are on-street connections (wide shoulders) maintained by the Street Department. As the trail infrastructure ages, it requires rehabilitation to protect or extend its useful life. If the trail infrastructure is not preserved, it will deteriorate prematurely and its benefit to the community will be lost. As a result, the TIMP reflects the broad direction of the City Council to preserve existing trail infrastructure before they fall into such disrepair that expensive reconstruction is required. Typically, the City of Mendota Heights completes trail rehabilitation projects in conjunction with nearby street improvement projects and as funding is available. Trail Construction A trail construction project will be defined as a project whereby many or all meaningful elements of a new trail (previously non-existent) are being constructed. Typically, the City of Mendota Heights completes new trail construction projects as funding is available. Page 3 Trail Facilities Trail improvements totaling approximately $1.0 million are planned for in the 2019-2023 TIMP. Existing Trail System Summary of Trail Project Costs and Funding Sources Improvement Projects TRAIL IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS SUMMARY OF TRAIL PROJECT COSTS AND MAINTENANCE NEEDS Project Name Trail LF Trail Rehabilitation Identified Trail Gaps Maintenance Needs Total Center Pointe Curve Trail Rehabilitation 3920 $89,091 $89,091 Dodd Road Trail Rehabiltation 1240 $28,182 $28,182 Lexington Avenue Trail Rehabilitation 980 $22,273 $22,273 Marie Avenue Trail Rehabilitation 6990 $158,864 $158,864 Mendota Heights Road Trail Rehabilitation 6360 $144,545 $144,545 Northland Drive Trail Rehabilitation 1880 $42,727 $42,727 Pilot Knob Road Trail Rehabilitation 2080 $47,273 $47,273 Somerset Elementary Trail Rehabilitation 740 $16,818 $16,818 Lexington Avenue (b/t Wagon Wheel & Tom Thumb) 2230 $253,409 $253,409 Sibley Memorial Hwy (b/t Hwy 13 & Overlook) 600 $68,182 $68,182 Trail System Five Year General Maintenance $72,000 $72,000 Total $549,773 $321,591 $72,000 $943,364 I-35EDODD RDDELAWAREAVEHWY 13 H W Y13HW Y 5 5 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RDLEXINGTON AVEONEILL RDLILYDALE RDWENTWORTH AVE W VICTORIARDD ST OTTAWA AVEI-35E RAMP ANNAPOLIS ST W BUTLER AVE W SIBLEYMEMORIALHWYPILOT KNOB RDCHEROKEE AVEAR G E N T A T R L W EMERSON AVE W LAKE DR494 RAMPNORTHLAND DR MORELAND AVE W THOMPSON AV E W S A L E M C H U RCHRD WAG O N W H E E L T R L BETTY LN 1ST AVE RUBY DR TRAPP RD 4 T H STCHARLTON RD BLUEBILL DR DECORAH LN CHIPPEWA AVEI-494 RAMP APACHESTJAMES RDHUNTER LNLILAC LNTIMMY STCHERI LN NORTHWEST PKYPAGEL RDSOUTH LNI-94 RAMP DODDRDRAMP LONEOAK PKYTRAILRDBLUE GENTI A N R D W ATERS DR AZTECLNTHERESA STC STWESLEY LN WILLIAM CTENTERPRISEDR PRIVATE ROAD 2 N D S TI-49 4 LOOPCHE RRYHILLRD RAMPMEDALLION DREAGLERIDGERDC ELIADRALICE LNDAKOTA DR COMMER C E DR PARK LN494 LOOP UPPE R C O L O N IA L D R DODD RD LOOP HWY 110 LOOP EXECUTIVE DRI-35E LOOP CHARDELCTOVERLOOK LNARVINDRORME ST W 494 RAMP FRONTAGE ROAD I- 3 5 E R A M P H W Y 1 3 494 LOOPI-494 RAMP H W Y 5 5 I-494 I-94 RAMPI-494 LOOP I-35E RAMPI-35E RAMPHUBERDRWACHTLER AVEWACHTLERAVEL E M A Y LAKE RD WALSHLNDIANE R D 3RD AVESYLVANDALERD LAURAST2ND AVE CENTRE POINTECUR E S T G S T HILLTOP RD WARRIORDRDOUGLAS RD DOUGLAS RD F S T CHEYENNELN C OPPERFI E L D D R VICTORIACUR EMERSON AVEEMERSONAVEDO RSETRDBUTLER AVE SUMMITLNSUMMIT LNOVERLOOK RD CALLAHA N P L KNOB RDMEA R S A V E STAPLES AVE EVERGRE E N KNLBACHELOR AVE ORCHARD PL K EOKUKLN PR IVATERO A D PRIVATE ROAD IV Y HILL DR 3R D STPUEBLOLNAVANTI DR FIELDSTONEDRVANDALL STM E N D OTARDRAMP2ND ST FOX PLACACIADRCONC ORD WAY LINDEN ST MARKETS T PONDVIEWDRMOHICANLN B L U E W A T E R R D MIRIAMST MEDORARDSWAN DRWINSTON CT OC A L A L N GRIEVEGLN ABBE Y WAYSUTT O NLNTWINCIRCLEDRVI S I TATIONDRLILAC RDSOMERSETRDMINA ST 4TH AVE PONTIACPL LEM AYAVE MONET CT HID D E N C REEKTRL ACACIA BLVD S T A N W I CH LN IVY FALLS AVE COLESHIRE LN PATRICIA STKAY AVE CULLIGAN LN HIAWA T H A AVE WOO D RIDGEDRMENDAK O TA DR LONEOAKPTFARMDALE R D BEEBEAVE GLENHILLRDFREEWAY R DSVIEW LNHAMPSHIREDR S TRATFORDRD D ODGELN SUNSET LN WILLOWLN HAVERTONRDKNOLLWOODLNK NOL L WO O D L N RID G E PL A PACHE L N LOCKWOODDRFREEWAY RD N CENTRE POINT E D R CREEK AVE SPR IN G STCULLEN AVE HINGHAMCI RSWANCTMAPLE PA R KDRMA P L EPARKDRLANSFORD LNBROOK SIDE LN BOURN L N SIMAR D ST PRIVATE RD CAREN RD VAIL DR ASHLEYLN SIBLEYME MORI A L RA MP FREMONT AVE VALLEYCURVER D STON E R DKIRCHNERAVEFAROLNARCADIADRJUNCTION LN WATERSEDG E TERHIGH POIN T RDNAVAJOLN JOHN ST SOUTH PLAZA DR ROGERSCTLONDO N RDSTONEBRIDGERDK ENDO N LN ROUN D HILLRDNASHUAL N APACHECTIVY LNHIGHVI E W CIRSBR ID G EVIE W C TPONDHAVENLN WHITFIELDDRPARKP LACEDR VALENCOURCIRESTHERLNCLEMENT STCLEMENT STPO NDCIREPONDCIRWDOW NIN G S T ARBORCTHAV E N V I E W C T LEMAYLAKEDR CASCADELNBENTTREEL NROGERS AVEKRESSIN AVELAKEVIEW AVE DIEGOLNCYGNET LNPARK CIRGL ENTORORDCENTREPOINTEBLVDNATURE WAYSIBLEY CT RIDGEWOODDRORCHARD C IR CO NDONCTMAPLE STCROWNPOIN T D R VALLEY LN HIGHVIE W C IR N L O W E R C O L O N IA L D R NATUREVIEWLNWHITE O A K S D RNORMALN KING S L E Y C IR N ORCHARD HL NINA CT PRESERVE PATH MAINSTEAGAN WOODS DRWESTVIEWTERHIL L T OPCT OAKSTMARY ADELE AVE DEER RUN TRL STOCKBRIDGERDPUEBLO DRFUR LONG AVE KINGSLEY CIR S DARLA CT C LARE M ONTDRMENDAKOTA CT OCALA CTHOKAH AVE BARBARA CT LAKEAU G U S T ADRHERI TAGEDRF O X W OODLNMAYFIELD HEIGHTS RDELLEN ST BROMPTON PLIVYF A L LS CT GA R D E N L N STONEBRID G E L N SUTCLIFFC I R BEDFORDCTHAZEL CTWES L E Y C T MONETLNPAMELALNHUNTER CT BROOKFIELDLNVICTORY AVE KINGSLEY C TR O LLINGGRE ENCURBLUFF CIR HAMPSHIRECTHIGHRIDGECIR DEWERFF S T STONEBRIDGECTDEER TRAIL PT WILSHIRECTQUAIL R I DGECI RVERONICA LN ADELINE CTMAGER CT LAURA CT MAPLE PARK CT S YLVANDALE CTOXFORDC TVICTORIA CT NATURE VIEW CTGRYC CTHEATHER CTBWANA CT FALLS VIEW CTWINTHROPCTDOUGLASCTRAE CTJAMES C T WEST CIRCLECT PONDHAVENCIRBOARDWALKWAGON WHEEL CTKNOLLWOOD C T CA R E N C T CROWN CIR SOMERSET CTCROWN C T MORSON CIRWINSTON CIRMEDORA CT MAYFIELD COVENTRYCTDEER TRAIL CT WIN D W O O D C T K A R L H . P L TOM THUMB BLVD POND V I E W C T WESTVIEW CIR SPRINGCREEK CIR FIELD S T O N E C T HAVERTON CIR SYLVANDALE C T S HIGH POINT CTPOND VIEW TERMENDOTAHWY 110 H W Y 1 1 0 PRIVATE ROADPRIVATE ROAD HWY13VALLEYCURVERDJUPITER DRHEIGHTS LN VICKI LNRIVE R S I D E L N ASPEN WAYBIRCH CTHEIGHTS CIRB L U E G ENTIANRDNORT H L A N DDRDELAWARE AVEDELAWARE AVEMARIE AVE MOHICAN CT D ST CANTON CTDODDRDDODDRDDODDRDDODDRDLEXINGTONAVEMARIE AVE MENDOTA HEIGHTS RD PERRON RD PILOT KNOB RDCity ofMendota City ofLilydale West St. PaulSunfish LakeEaganEagan Lake A u g u s t aL a k e L e M ay Rogers LakeGun Club Lake FriendlyMarshPickerelLakeMississippiRiver SomersetGolf Course(Private) ResurrectionCemetery City Halland Police Public WorksGarage Fire Hall Mendakota Golf Course(private) St. ThomasAcademy Visitation HenrySibleySeniorHigh MendotaElem. Friendly HillsMiddle School Par 3 (Public) AcaciaParkCemetery Vento's View(Wildlife Viewing Station)RamseyCountyPark ÊÚ ÊÚ Scenic Overlook(Dakota County)St. Peter'sChurch ME N D O T A B R I D G E MinnesotaRiverSomersetElementarySchool DodgeNature Center ^ ^BIGRIVERSREGIONALTRAILInt e r s t a t e I - 3 5 E Br i d g e FUTURE BIG RIVERS REGIONAL TRAILLE M A Y S H O R E S D R Trail Improvement andMaintenance Plan 2018-2023Existing Trail System May 1, 2017 City ofMendotaHeights00.5 Miles Legend Off Street Bituminous Trail (6' to 8' wide) Maintenance Needed Off Street Bituminous Trail (6' to 8' wide) On Street Trail Connections (Wide Shoulders) Gravel Trail / Natural Grass Trail Proposed City Trail (2017-2018) Proposed Regional Trail By Others Concrete Sidewalk (Private) Identified Trail Gap Parks/Open Space 2019 – 2023 Facility Improvement and Maintenance Plan City of Mendota Heights OVERVIEW OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FACILITIES The City of Mendota Heights has four public facility buildings; City Hall & Police, Fire Hall, Par 3, and Public Works. City Hall & Police City Hall was completed in 1989. The building currently houses the police department, administrative functions and the Council Chambers. In 2017/2018, improvements to address water infiltrating the lower level were undertaken. Some remodeling of the police facilities were also completed. Fire Hall The Fire Hall was completed in 1985. The building currently houses the fire department and the Health East Paramedics. The Fire Hall is currently in the process of investigating a building expansion project. Par 3 The Par 3 Golf Course was privately constructed in 1961. This property was purchased through a voter approved referendum in 2007 and has been operated by the city ever since. Public Works The Public Works Facility was completed in 1979, and had a small expansion in 1990. The building currently houses the Parks, Streets, Sewer and Fleet Maintenance departments. Page 1 EXHIBITS Summary of Facility Costs and Funding Sources City Hall Costs and Funding Sources Fire Hall Costs and Funding Sources Par 3 Costs and Funding Sources Public Works Costs and Funding Sources FACILITY IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS SUMMARY OF FACILITY COSTS AND FUNDING SOURCES Facility Name 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total City Hall $136,500 $376,500 $66,500 $66,500 $66,500 $712,500 Fire Hall $6,017,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $6,085,000 Par 3 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 Public Works $180,000 $168,000 $18,000 $228,000 $18,000 $612,000 Total $6,335,500 $563,500 $103,500 $313,500 $103,500 $7,419,500 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $6,000,000 $240,000 $0 $0 $0 $6,240,000 Municipal State Aid Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Levy $275,500 $267,500 $97,500 $237,500 $97,500 $975,500 Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $60,000 $56,000 $6,000 $76,000 $6,000 $204,000 Special Assessments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Storm Water Utility Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Water Revenue Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total $6,335,500 $563,500 $103,500 $313,500 $103,500 $7,419,500 FACILITY IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FACILITY NAME: City Hall TOTAL COST: $712,500 Facility Description Facility Location City Hall houses the Council Chambers, Administration & Police Facility Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Maintenance $46,500 $46,500 $46,500 $46,500 $46,500 $232,500 Generator $60,000 $60,000 Security System $0 Electrical/Lighting Upgrade $15,000 $15,000 Telephone Upgrade $0 Sidewalk, Parking Lot Expansion $15,000 $165,000 $180,000 Parking Lot paving $75,000 $75,000 Boilers & Pumps $70,000 $70,000 Air Handler $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $80,000 $0 $0 Total $136,500 $376,500 $66,500 $66,500 $66,500 $712,500 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $240,000 $240,000 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Levy $136,500 $136,500 $66,500 $66,500 $66,500 $472,500 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $136,500 $376,500 $66,500 $66,500 $66,500 $712,500 Exterior sidewalks are heaved and present a tripping hazard. FACILITY IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FACILITY NAME: Fire Hall TOTAL COST: $6,085,000 Facility Description Facility Location Facility Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Maintenance $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $85,000 Expansion $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $0 $0 $0 Total $6,017,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $6,085,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $6,000,000 $6,000,000 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Levy $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $85,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $6,017,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $6,085,000 The Fire Department has outgrown its existing facility and is working on an remoceling plan FACILITY IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FACILITY NAME: Par 3 TOTAL COST: $10,000 Facility Description Facility Location Facility Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Maintenance $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Levy $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $0 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $10,000 FACILITY IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FACILITY NAME: Public Works TOTAL COST: $612,000 Facility Description Facility Location Facility Needs Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Maintenance $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 $90,000 Fence $27,000 $27,000 Salt Storage Facility $120,000 $120,000 HVAC $15,000 $15,000 Parking Lot $150,000 $150,000 Material Storage bins $210,000 $210,000 $0 Total $180,000 $168,000 $228,000 $18,000 $522,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Levy $120,000 $112,000 $12,000 $152,000 $12,000 $408,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $60,000 $56,000 $6,000 $76,000 $6,000 $204,000 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $180,000 $168,000 $18,000 $228,000 $18,000 $612,000 $18,000 2019 – 2023 Fleet Improvement and Maintenance Plan City of Mendota Heights OVERVIEW OF FLEET City Fleet The City of Mendota Heights maintains a fleet of equipment for department use in serving its residents. Fleet maintenance is funded through respective department budgets. Fleet acquisition is generally accomplished using the tax levy, general fund or other associated fund (Utility, Special Park, etc.). Mendota Heights adopted a Fleet Safety Policy on August 20, 2013. An equipment fund was established in 2016. Over time, this fund will provide a more predictable source of funding for larger costs of capital equipment. Public Works, Engineering, and Administration Fleet improvements totaling approximately $1.1 million are planned for in the 2019-2023 Public Works, Engineering & Administration FLIMP. The current fleet practice is to maintain equipment for the following time frames: Pick Up Trucks, Skid Steer 10 years Plow Trucks 15 years Trailers 20 years Loader, Jetter, Generator 25+ years See summary sheets. Exhibits Summary of Fleet Costs and Funding Sources Public Works, Engineering, and Administration Summary Public Works Equipment list FLEET IMPROVEMENT & MAINTENANCE PLAN 2019-2023 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DEPARTMENT NAME: Public Works, Engineering, and Administration TOTAL COST: $1,104,000 Fleet Description Project Costs 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Xmark Mower Replacement - Parks $17,000 $17,000 Field Mower Replacement - Parks $100,000 $100,000 3/4 Ton Pick Up _ Streets $40,000 $40,000 Full-Ton Pickup - Streets $70,000 $70,000 KM 800T Hot Box Asphalt Trailer $27,000 $27,000 Water Jetter - Sewer $260,000 $260,000 Full-Ton Pick up - Parks $60,000 $60,000 Plow Truck Mack Truck - Streets $200,000 $200,000 Utility Vehicle $25,000 $25,000 Kubota 1 $25,000 $25,000 Trailer $10,000 $10,000 Brush Chipper $40,000 $40,000 Skid Steer $60,000 $60,000 Trailer $10,000 $10,000 Kubota 2 $25,000 $25,000 510 John Deere $25,000 $25,000 F350 Streets $60,000 $60,000 Engineering Vehicle $30,000 $30,000 John Deere Zero Turn $20,000 $20,000 Total $254,000 $560,000 $130,000 $140,000 $20,000 $1,104,000 Funding Sources 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Municipal Bond Sales $0 Municipal State Aid Funds $0 Levy $254,000 $300,000 $130,000 $140,000 $20,000 $844,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Funds $260,000 $260,000 Special Assessments $0 Storm Sewer Utility Funds $0 Water Utility Funds $0 Total $254,000 $560,000 $130,000 $140,000 $20,000 $1,104,000 Public Works operates and maintains a variety of equipment. In addition there is also an engineering pick up, a facilty pick up and a Ford explorer for use by administrative staff. APPENDIX I Mendota Heights Surface Water Management Plan 2018 This page is intentionally blank. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN July 2018 Prepared for: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 WSB PROJECT NO. 1735-04 Surface Water Management Plan City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA July 2018 Prepared By: WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 763-541-4800 763-541-1700 (Fax) TABLE OF CONTENTS Surface Water Management Plan Table of Contents City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Title Page Table of Contents Glossary of Terms SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SECTION 2: LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY SECTION 3: AGENCY COOPERATION SECTION 4: ASSESSMENT OF ISSUES SECTION 5: GOALS AND POLICIES SECTION 6: IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM Appendix A – Figures Figure 1: Land Use Map Figure 2: Watershed Boundary Map Figure 3: Impaired Waters Map Figure 4: Wetland Locations Map Figure 5: Drainage System Map Figure 6: DNR Protected Waters Map Appendix B – MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization and BMP Sheets Appendix C – System Design Guidelines Appendix D – Land Disturbance Guidance Appendix E – Stormwater Modeling Development and Results Appendix F – Wetland Management Plan – 2006 Local Surface Water Management Plan GLOSSARY OF TERMS Surface Water Management Plan Glossary of Terms City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 DEFINITIONS 100-year Flood: A flood that statistically has a one percent (1%) chance of occurring in any given year. 1-year, 10-year, and 100-year Rainfall: A rainfall event that has a 100 percent, ten percent (10%), and one percent (1%) chance respectively, of happening in any given year. Alluvial: Made up of the material—such as sand, silt, or clay—deposited on land by streams. Aquatic Macrophyte: A plant that grows in or near water. Bounce: The elevation difference between the normal water level (NWL) and the water level after a particular storm event. Buffer Strip: An area of permanent vegetation that helps to control air, soil, and water quality along with other environmental problems. Calcareous Seepage Fen: A rare and distinctive wetland characterized by a substrate of non-acidic peat and dependent on a constant supply of cold, oxygen-poor groundwater that is rich in calcium and magnesium bicarbonates. (Source: http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/Calc_fen-factsheet.pdf) Dredge: Removal of sediments and debris from the bottom of a waterbody. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Fen: A low and marshy or frequently flooded area of land. Floatables: Solid water-borne litter and debris, mainly from street litter. Floodplain: Any land area susceptible to being inundated by floodwaters from any source. Floodway: The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height. Freeboard: The vertical separation between the high water level (HWL) of the simulated rainfall or runoff event and the lowest ground elevation adjacent to a structure. Hydraulic: Related to the conveyance of liquids through pipes and channels. Hydrologic: Related to the occurrence, circulation, distribution, and effects of water on the earth’s surface, in the soil and underlying rocks, as well as in the atmosphere. Illicit Discharge: Any direct or indirect non-stormwater discharge to the storm drain system. Impaired Waters: A body of water that is too polluted or otherwise degraded to meet the water quality standards set by the State of Minnesota. Infiltration: Wter passing through a substance (generally soil) by filtering or permeating. Inlet: A place of entry into a waterbody. Land Locked Basin: Basins where no outlet exists below the proposed or existing structures. GLOSSARY OF TERMS Surface Water Management Plan Glossary of Terms City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4): The system of conveyances (including sidewalks, roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains). National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit: A permit issued by the EPA that authorizes the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States, whether the permit is applicable on an individual, group, or general area. Noxious: Harmful, poisonous, or very unpleasant. Outfall: A place where a river, drain, or sewer empties. Overland Drainage: Flow of water over the land, downslope toward a waterbody. Ponding: The pooling of runoff in flat areas or depressions from which it cannot drain out. Riprap: Loose stone used to form a foundation for a breakwater or other structure. Runoff: Precipitation and other surface drainage that is not infiltrated into or otherwise retained by the soil, concrete, asphalt, or other surface upon which it falls. Skimmers: Structures that confine floatables that may otherwise enter a downstream pond or lake. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP): A document which describes the best management practices and activities to be implemented by a person or business to identify sources of pollution or contamination at a site, and the actions to eliminate or reduce pollutant discharges to stormwater, stormwater conveyance systems, and/or receiving waters to the maximum extent practicable. Stormwater: Any surface flow, runoff, and drainage consisting entirely of water from any form of natural precipitation. Surficial Geology: Unconsolidated deposits of variable content and texture that overlie the bedrock surface. Major textural categories include alluvium, terraced sands and gravels, loess, till, and outwash. Swale: A graded, shallow trench along the land’s contour, used to manage stormwater runoff and increase infiltration. Turbulence: Unsteady movement of air, water, or other fluid. Watershed: All lands which are enclosed by a continuous hydrologic drainage divide and lay upslope from a specified outlet point. GLOSSARY OF TERMS Surface Water Management Plan Glossary of Terms City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 ACRONYMS BMP – Best Management Practice BWSR – Board of Water and Soil Resources cfs – cubic feet per second CMP – Corrugated Metal Pipe DNR – Department of Natural Resources DWSMA - Drinking Water Supply Management Area EOF – Emergency Overflow ESC – Erosion and Sediment Control FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency fps – feet per second GIS – Geographical Information System HWL – High Water Level HSG – Hydrologic Soil Group ISTS – Individual Sewage Treatment Systems LGU – Local Governmental Unit LID – Low Impact Development LIDAR – Light Detection and Ranging LMRWD – Lower Minnesota River Watershed District LMRWMO – Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization LSWMP – Local Surface Water Management Plan MDH – Minnesota Department of Health MIDS – Minimal Impact Design Standards MLCCS – Minnesota Land Cover Classification System MnDOT – Minnesota Department of Transportation MnRAM – Minnesota Routine Assessment Method MNRRA – Mississippi National River and Recreation Area MPCA – Minnesota Pollution Control Agency GLOSSARY OF TERMS Surface Water Management Plan Glossary of Terms City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 MS4 – Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System NOAA – National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration NPDES - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NURP – Nationwide Urban Runoff Program NWI – National Wetlands Inventory NWL – Normal Water Level OHWL – Ordinary High Water Level P8 – Program for Predicting Polluting Particle Passage through Pits, Puddles, and Ponds ppb – parts per billion PWI – Protected Waters Inventory RCP – Reinforced Concrete Pipe SWCD – Soil and Water Conservation District SWMP – Surface Water Management Plan SWPPP – Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWU – Stormwater Utility TCMACMP - Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride Management Plan TMDL – Total Maximum Daily Load USACE – US Army Corps of Engineers USEPA – US Environmental Protection Agency WCA – Wetland Conservation Act WHEP – Wetland Health Evaluation Program WHPP – Wellhead Protection Plan WMAt – Winter Maintenance Assessment tool WRMP – Water Resources Management Plan SECTION 1 Surface Water Management Plan Section 1 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-1 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this plan is to describe how the current Surface Water Management Plan when combined with the City policy and procedures meets statutory, rule, and Metropolitan Council requirements. The purpose of this Surface Water Management Plan is broad and the goal is to guide the City in managing its surface and groundwater resources. This will enable the City to develop drainage facilities in a cost-effective manner, while maintaining or improving the quality of its water resources. 1.1. Purposes The City of Mendota Heights’ Surface Water Management Plan (also referred to as the plan, SWMP, City plan, local plan) is a local management plan that meets the requirements of Minnesota Statutes 103B.235, Minnesota Rules 8410, the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization Third Generation Watershed Management Plan (dated August 2011, as amended August 2015) and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District’s Third Generation Watershed Management Plan (dated November 2011, as amended June 2015). The purpose of the SWMP is to serve as a guide in conserving, protecting, and managing the City’s surface water resources. This plan is an update to the 2006 Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) and includes updates to the City’s HydroCAD Model as well as the incorporation of a P8 Urban Catchment water quality model. The City submits its SWMP to the Metropolitan Council, the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization, and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District for their review. The watershed organizations have 60 days for their review after written receipt of the City SWMP. Metropolitan Council provides comments within 45 days. Metropolitan Council directs its comments to the watershed organizations which then consider these comments in formulating their own. 1.2. Surface Water Management Responsibilities and Related Agreements The City of Mendota Heights is party to two separate joint powers agreements related to surface water management: 1. With the cities of St. Paul, Lilydale, Mendota, Mendota Heights, Sunfish Lake, West St. Paul, South St. Paul, and Inver Grove Heights establishing the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO). 2. With the cities of Bloomington, Burnsville, Carver, Chanhassen, Chaska, Eagan, Eden Prairie, Lilydale, Mendota, Mendota Heights, Minneapolis, Savage, and Shakopee establishing the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD). The City also has an agreement with both the LMRWMO and LMRWD establishing the City as the Local Government Unit for administering the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) within the City. Upon approval of this SWMP by the two watersheds with jurisdiction over the City, it is the City’s intent to maintain its current permitting powers through its Permit for Land Disturbing Activities. Currently, the LMRWMO and LMRWD do not issue permits, so no impact to these organizations would occur. The watersheds would continue in their role as project review agencies. The City of Mendota Heights is responsible for construction, maintenance, and operation of the City's stormwater management systems (e.g., ponds, BMP, mechanical structures, sump manholes, pipes, channels) in accordance with its MS4 Permit. SECTION 1 Surface Water Management Plan Section 1 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-2 1.3. Metropolitan Council Requirements Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Water Resources Management Plan expands upon the requirements of Rule 8410 as follows: 1. Communities must commit to a goal of no adverse impacts (non-degradation) for area water resources. 2. The assessment of problems and corrective actions must include Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) considerations. 3. Require infiltration of the first half inch of runoff from impervious areas created by projects where there are A and B soils. 4. Require infiltration in wellhead protection areas be based on City’s wellhead protection plan. 5. Communities with trout streams must identify actions to reduce thermal pollution. 6. Communities must meet state requirements for development near outstanding resource value waters. 7. Communities must consider stormwater management practices that promote infiltration and filtration including the reduction of impervious surface. 8. Include information of types of Best Management Practices (BMPs) used to improve stormwater quality and quantity including maintenance schedules. 1.4. Plan Structure The Mendota Heights SWMP is divided into six sections: x Section 1 Executive Summary provides background information and summarizes the plan contents. x Section 2 Land and Water Resource Inventory presents information about the topography, geology, groundwater, soils, land use, public utilities, surface waters, hydrologic system and data, and the drainage system. x Section 3 Agency Cooperation outlines other governmental controls and programs that affect stormwater management. x Section 4 Assessment of Problems and Issues presents the City's water management related problems and issues. x Section 5 Goals and Policies outlines the City's goals and policies pertaining to water management. x Section 6 Implementation Program presents the implementation program for the City, which includes defining responsibilities, prioritizing, and listing the program elements. 1.4.1. Background This report provides the City of Mendota Heights with a SWMP that serves as a guide to managing the City’s surface water system, and brings the City into compliance with Minnesota Statutes. This plan is an update to the 2006 LSWMP. The plan will guide stormwater activities in the City for the next 10 years (2018-2027). Periodic amendment to the SWMP will likely occur in the intervening 10 years so that the SWMP remains current to watershed plan amendments and Metropolitan Council requirements. The City of Mendota Heights (population 11,172) is located in northern Dakota County at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers (Figure 1). Mendota Heights is a well-established community that is fully developed. The City has put emphasis on high quality residential neighborhoods, open space and parks, and well-planned commercial and industrial areas. SECTION 1 Surface Water Management Plan Section 1 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-3 The Township of Mendota was organized in 1858. After World War II, the area experiencing rapid growth and the need for community planning and services prompted a portion of the original township to incorporate as the Village of Mendota Heights in 1956. The Village of Mendota Heights became the City of Mendota Heights in 1974. Mendota Heights is a first-ring suburb located between the City of West St. Paul and Sunfish Lake to the east, Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport and Fort Snelling to the West, City of Eagan to the south, and City of St. Paul to the north. Mendota Heights falls within two watershed districts: Lower Mississippi Watershed Management Organization and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. This plan addresses the rules and regulations put forth by the both. The City of Mendota Heights is considered fully developed. Section 2.3 of this plan discusses land use in the City. 1.4.2. Summary of Implementation Section Section 6 of this plan presents the implementation program for the City of Mendota Heights, which includes defining responsibilities, prioritizing, and listing the program elements. Table 6.1, outlines the projects, programs, studies, and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) activities that have been identified as a priority to address water resource needs and problem areas within the City. SECTION 2 Surface Water Management Plan Section 2 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-1 2. LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY 2.1. Land Use Figure 1 provides the land use classifications for the City of Mendota Heights, and comes directly from the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan). The Comprehensive Plan states that the City of Mendota Heights is predominantly developed. However, the City has maintained substantial areas of public open space, wetlands, lakes, bluffs and wooded areas that give the impression of a lower density of development. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the City will strive to maintain and enrich the mature, fully developed residential environment by preserving natural features and the environment while promoting high quality and well-functioning developments. The Comprehensive Plan provides a significant amount of narrative and statistical detail on existing and proposed land use and the reader is referred to that document for more information on land use planning. There are a few areas of note that relate to surface water management, one of which is the concentrated industrial area between Highway 13, Highway 55, and Interstate 494. Having a concentrated area of impervious area can be opportunity for regional stormwater treatment when new development occurs, but it can also be a potential hotspot for stormwater pollution and management issues. The Comprehensive Plan references “focus” areas, or areas remaining to be developed. The focus areas in the Comprehensive Plan are Pilot Knob and Acacia Site, Somerset Area, St. Thomas/Visitation Campuses, Dodd/Highway 110, Furlong District, and “Infill” Sites (any property that has the opportunity to develop, or redevelop, beyond its current level). These focus areas have the potential to play an important role in the management of surface water during the next ten years. As the sites develop and potentially impact water quality and public safety, it will be essential that guidelines and best management practices, as outlined in this SWMP, are followed by developers. The hydrologic modeling that supports the SWMP used the land use that was used in the 2006 Local Surface Water Management Plan hydrologic model. A combination of aerial photos, the land use classification map, and as-built drawings were used to determine hydrologic characteristics of the full development landscape. Changes from undeveloped land uses—such as natural and agricultural—to more heavily developed land uses —such as low, medium and high density residential and commercial—have a pronounced effect on hydrology. The increased impervious surface associated with the urban land uses leads to higher runoff peak flows and increased runoff volumes. The City is unique in that although it is mostly developed, the land use consists of large areas of institutional land, resulting in less impervious area and more green and open space. 2.2. Topography and Watersheds The surficial geology of Mendota Heights consists of the glacial and alluvial (outwash) deposits which cover most of the City. Most of Mendota Heights is rolling to hilly terrain interspersed with poorly drained depressions that form many ponds and small lakes. The Comprehensive Plan provides additional detail on the general topography of the City. The City of Mendota Heights is located near the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers in northern Dakota County. Steep slopes occur along the Minnesota and Mississippi river bluffs along the west and north border of the City. Elevation in the City ranges from approximately 690 feet along the Minnesota River to approximately 1,030 feet along the City’s border with West St. Paul. The steep slopes along the river bluffs often result in challenges during hydrologic design and planning to prevent erosion. Additionally, at the bottom of the Minnesota River Bluff adjacent to SECTION 2 Surface Water Management Plan Section 2 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-2 Highway 13 is the Gun Club Lake Fen, a calcareous fen with rare and important indicator vegetation for the ecosystem. There has been significant work by LMRWD to improve and protect this resource, which includes special considerations when managing stormwater discharge into the area. The City’s hydrologic system is part of both the Mississippi River and Minnesota River watersheds. The City resides within one watershed management organization and one watershed district. The southwestern portion of the City resides in the LMRWD. The remaining portion of the City lies within the LMRWMO. Figure 2 shows jurisdictional boundaries for the two watershed organizations within the City. The City of Mendota Heights has contour data that cover the entire City and is based on 2011 LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) data. Information regarding the City’s surficial and bedrock geology and aquifers is available in the Dakota County Geologic Atlas from the Minnesota Geological Survey. 2.3. Soils Soils of the Mendota Heights area are classified into three associations of multiple soil series: x Kingsley-Mahtomedi Association x Waukegan-Wadena Hawick Association x Colo-Algansee-Minneiska Association Information about each of the soils in these associations area available from the Soil Survey of Dakota County (SCS 1983). Table 2.1 shows the drainage characteristics of each soil series from the above associations. The drainage nature of the soil is important for determining surface water runoff from a given area. If the soil is well-drained, a significant portion of the precipitation will be infiltrated into the ground, whereas if a soil is very poorly drained much more precipitation becomes runoff. The Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) defines a soil’s propensity to generate runoff for a given runoff event. More information about HSG and their properties can be found in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) Minnesota Stormwater Manual (http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/). Table 2.1 Soil Series Characteristics Soil Series Drainage Characteristic Hydrologic Soil Group Kingsley Deep, well drained B Mahtomedi Deep, excessively drained A Waukegan Deep, well drained B Wadena Deep, well drained B Hawick Deep, excessively drained A Colo-Algansee-Minneiska (alluvial soils) Poor to moderately well drained B/D When development or redevelopment occurs within areas of well-drained soils, infiltration shall be considered on a case by case basis. Section 5.3.2 discusses the City’s approach to infiltration. SECTION 2 Surface Water Management Plan Section 2 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-3 2.4. Existing Flood Insurance Studies A search of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) website showed no flood insurance studies for the City of Mendota Heights, other than those for the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. The Flood Insurance Rate Map for Mendota Heights is effective as of December 2, 2011. Mendota Heights is community number 270110. 2.5. Key Water Resources Surface waters throughout the City are available for the use and enjoyment of its residents. Many of surface waters that provide an aesthetic amenity to the community also double as a means of access for stormwater to wind its way towards its outfall. These major water resources tend to be State of Minnesota public waters. Below is a brief summary of the major surface water resources. The public waters are labeled with their Public Waters Inventory (PWI) number. Augusta Lake (PWI #19-81P) Lake Augusta is a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) public water. It is a deep lake with a maximum depth of 33 feet, and an area of 44 acres. The area of its watershed is 410 acres. LeMay Lake (PWI #19-82W) This lake is considered a public water wetland by the Minnesota DNR. It is a shallow lake and drains to an outlet under Highway 55. LeMay Lake is next to a residential neighborhood. Gun Club Lake (PWI #19-78P) Gun Club Lake and the stream it discharges to are both public waters. The lake is located along the Minnesota River within its floodplain. This lake discharges to an unnamed stream that flows to the Minnesota River, and although it is located in the City, it is managed by Fort Snelling State Park. Rogers Lake (PWI #19-80P) A shallow lake with a maximum depth of eight feet, Rogers Lake covers a surface area of approximately 114 acres. It discharges to a storm sewer pipe along Wagon Wheel Trail. Interstate Valley Creek This creek is an intermittent stream that begins near the intersection of Highway 110 and Highway 149 (Dodd Road) at the outflow point of Friendly Marsh. The creek flows northward, generally parallels Interstate 35E. Interstate Valley Creek is the single largest watershed within the City of Mendota Heights, and includes areas within the cities of Inver Grove Heights, Sunfish Lake, and West St. Paul. Ivy Falls Creek Ivy Falls Creek is an intermittent stream that begins at the Somerset Golf Course. The gradient of the stream is steep, it drops down 180 feet in the 3,000 feet from Dodd Road to Highway 13, including a 50-foot drop at Ivy Falls. The steep gradient has allowed erosion problems to occur. The creek eventually discharges to Pickerel Lake in the City of Lilydale. Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers Both of these rivers are Minnesota public waters. Shorelines of both of these rivers are found within city limits, but these shorelines are also in Fort Snelling State Park. The Minnesota and Mississippi River shorelines that are within the City’s limits are managed by Fort Snelling State Park and the St. Paul Parks and Recreation Department. SECTION 2 Surface Water Management Plan Section 2 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-4 Impaired Waters The MPCA lists the following water bodies located within or near the City as being impaired, meaning that the waters are too polluted or otherwise degraded to meet the water quality standards set by governing bodies: Table 2.3 Summary of Impaired Water Bodies Impaired Water Body Impairment Minnesota River (ID 07020012-505) x Turbidity (1996) x Dissolved Oxygen (1998) x Mercury in water column and fish tissue (1998) x Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) in fish tissue (1998) Mississippi River (ID 07010206-509) x Fecal Coliform (1998) x PCB in fish tissue (2006) Augusta Lake (ID 19-0081-00) x Nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators (2010) Unnamed Creek (ID 07010206-542) x E.Coli The locations of these impaired water bodies are shown on the water resource problem areas map (Figure 3, Appendix A). For more information on impaired waters and TMDL Plans visit the MPCA website http://www.pca.state.mn.us/. The MPCA website contains an Impaired Waters Viewer, an interactive map that can be used to view impaired waters and their updated water quality data, as well as their updated TMDL Plans. In addition to the water bodies listed above, the City is upstream of other reaches of the Mississippi River. The City may be required to implement the TMDL plans for these water bodies once complete. 2.6. Natural Communities and Rare Species A Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) search was performed for the areas below the bluffs, where land cover is divided into levels of importance and type. The bluffs themselves are upland areas. Table 2.2 shows a listing of the land cover types below the bluffs and the area of each type that falls within the Mendota Heights City limits. Of special note is the presence of calcareous seepage fen prairie. The LMRWD and the MLCCS consider calcareous fens to be high priority areas for wetland preservation and restoration. Table 2.2 MLSS Summary of Areas Below the Bluffs City of Mendota Heights Land Cover Description Total Area (acres) Oak (forest or woodland) with 11-25% impervious cover 1.9 51% to 75% impervious cover with deciduous trees 18.0 Pavement with 91-100% impervious cover 2.5 Short grasses with sparse tree cover on upland soils 10.2 Short grasses on upland soils 5.5 Oak forest 3.9 Floodplain forest 209.8 Lowland hardwood forest 6.1 Aspen forest - temporarily flooded 1.5 Mixed hardwood swamp - seasonally flooded 7.2 SECTION 2 Surface Water Management Plan Section 2 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-5 Altered/non-native deciduous woodland 2.8 Altered/non-native dominated temporarily flooded shrubland 0.8 Willow swamp 3.3 Medium-tall grass altered/non-native dominated grassland 12.8 Temporarily flooded altered/non-native dominated grassland 2.0 Calcareous seepage fen prairie subtype 37.0 Mixed emergent marsh - seasonally flooded 62.5 Mixed emergent marsh 106.4 Mixed emergent marsh - intermittently exposed 57.2 Mixed emergent marsh - permanently flooded 22.1 Grassland with sparse deciduous trees - altered/non-native dominated vegetation 3.4 River mud flats 3.6 Slow moving linear open water habitat 139.3 Limnetic open water 145.1 Palustrine open water 41.6 Water Quality Data Water quality data for the City can be obtained from the MPCA’s Environmental Data Access site and up to date information is located on their website. This data provides a snapshot of overall water quality and health of local waterbodies. This database is utilized by participating agencies to compile water quality testing data and is almost entirely used for the storage of water quality parameters. This water quality monitoring information/data and monitoring locations can be found at the MPCA’s Environmental Data Access site at https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/water-monitoring-and-reporting. The LMRWD and LMRWMO also monitor creeks and lakes within Mendota Heights. Citizens can visit the respective websites for the most recent monitoring report. 2.7. Groundwater and Water Supply Various agencies are responsible for groundwater management and protection. The DNR regulates groundwater usage rate and volume as part of its charge to conserve and use the waters of the state. Suppliers of domestic water to more than 25 people or applicants proposing a use that exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year must obtain a water appropriation permit from the DNR. Many of the agencies charged with regulating water usage are currently involved in assessing and addressing concerns of water usage. When and where feasible, the City of Mendota Heights will work with the associated agencies to be good stewards of water resources. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is the official state agency responsible for addressing all environmental health matters, including groundwater protection. For example, the MDH administers the well abandonment program, and along with the Minnesota DNR, regulates installation of new wells. The MPCA administers and enforces laws relating to pollution of the state's waters, including groundwater. The Minnesota Geological Survey provides a complete account of the state's groundwater resources. Dakota County has statutory responsibilities for groundwater management contained in its Environment and Natural Resource Management Policy Plan (adopted and approved in 2006). Dakota County is currently revising the county comprehensive plan, which is scheduled to be submitted for the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) approval in 2018. At this time the City of Mendota Heights is not aware of any Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs) within the City’s boundaries. However, parts of the City have been fl agged as significantly vulnerable to groundwater contamination. Refer to the Dakota County Comprehensive Plan for the most up to date information on DWSMAs and groundwater status. SECTION 2 Surface Water Management Plan Section 2 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-6 2.8. Hydrologic System and Data The City has been divided into four major watershed areas: Gun Club Lake, Ivy Falls Creek, Mississippi Bluffs, and Interstate Valley Creek. Each of these four watershed areas have HydroCAD models that were updated from the 2006 LSWMP for the 2018 SWMP to include the new NOAA Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Estimates. The updated HydroCAD Models were used to develop a P8 Urban Catchment Model. Modeling results and discussion can be found in Appendix E, and narrative on the City’s Hydrologic System can be found in Section 4.3. 2.9. NPDES MS4 Permit The City is holder of an NPDES MS4 Permit, which includes a SWPPP. The City completed a reauthorization in 2013, that included an evaluation of the City’s stormwater system, resulting in a final SWPPP that includes existing and proposed BMPs, responsible persons, measurable goals, and timelines for implementation. 2.10. Water Resource Management Ordinances and Policies The City Ordinance for Mendota Heights includes Stormwater Management, Illicit Discharge, . The City Ordinance can be found online at the City of Mendota Heights website, and includes sections on construction site management stormwater, illicit discharge and storm sewer connection regulations, and post-construction stormwater runoff regulations. SECTION 3 Stormwater Management Plan Section 3 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-1 3. AGENCY COOPERATION There are several local, state, and federal agencies that have rules and regulations related to local water management. The City recognizes the roles of these other agencies and will cooperate, coordinate, and partner when possible with these agencies. This SWMP is in conformance with, but does not restate, all other agency rules that are applicable to water resource management. The following agencies deal with or regulate water resources throughout the City: Minnesota Department of Health (www.health.state.mn.us) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency( www.pca.state.mn.us) Board of Water and Soil Resources (www.bwsr.state.mn.us) and the Wetland Conservation Act (www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/index.html) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (www.dnr.state.mn.us) US Army Corps of Engineers (www.mvp.usace.army.mi) Minnesota Department of Agriculture (www.mda.state.mn.us) US Fish and Wildlife Service (www.fws.gov) Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District (http://www.dakotaswcd.org/) Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (http://www.dakotaswcd.org/watersheds/lowermisswmo/) Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (http://www.watersheddistrict.org/) Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (www.eqb.state.mn.us) Metropolitan Council (www.metrocouncil.org) While these other agencies’ rules, policies, and guidelines are not all restated in this SWMP, they are applicable to projects, programs, and planning within the City. The MPCA Minnesota Stormwater Manual, which is a document intended to be frequently updated, is also incorporated by reference into this SWMP and can be found at www.pca.state.mn.us/water/stormwater/stormwater-manual.html. 3.1. County, State, and Federal Agency Requirements This section of the SWMP presents a synopsis of the current agency requirements while acknowledging the existence of other requirements that may be applicable. The City is committed to the preservation and enhancement of its wetlands and water resources through full compliance with local, state, and federal wetland regulations. 3.1.1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Types 3, 4, and 5 wetlands are protected by statute at the state level. These are areas typically recognized as wetlands and are generally characterized by open water and emergent vegetation throughout most of the year. The state has jurisdiction over only those wetlands appearing on the State’s inventory of protected waters. Further, wetlands in the inventory are generally those in excess of ten acres in rural areas or in excess of two and a half acres in municipalities and incorporated areas. Figure 6 shows the DNR protected waters within the Mendota Heights SWMP study area. If an area meets the jurisdictional criteria but is not on the State’s inventory, it is not regulated by the DNR. If it does not meet the statutory criteria but is listed on the inventory, it still is subject to DNR regulation. There is currently no mechanism for adding wetlands to or deleting wetlands from the inventory. The inventory was begun in the late 1970s and all state inventories were completed during the early 1980s. The DNR rules specify that permits may not be issued for any project except those that provide for public health, safety, and welfare. Any private development projects are effectively excluded from permit consideration by this requirement. SECTION 3 Stormwater Management Plan Section 3 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-2 The western portions of the City abutting the Minnesota River are located in the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor. According to the DNR: The purposes of designating the Mississippi River and this portion of the Minnesota River as a state critical area include the following: a) protecting and preserving a unique and valuable state and regional resource for the benefit of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens for the state, region, and nation; b) preventing and mitigating irreversible damage to this resource; c) preserving and enhancing its natural, aesthetic, cultural, and historical value for public use; d) protecting and preserving the river as an essential element in the national, state, and regional transportation, sewer and water, and recreational systems; and protecting and preserving the biological and ecological functions of the corridor. The DNR has three primary roles for the Mississippi River Critical Area Program. The DNR has undertaken the mandate of reviewing existing ordinances that affect lands within the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor for their compliance with state critical area standards and guidelines. Technical assistance for ordinance development will be provided to local communities to ensure adoption and approval of a compliant state critical area ordinance or any ordinance amendments. DNR will also provide individualized technical assistance for amending existing ordinances or developing proposed ordinances that will be consistent with the voluntary Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MNRRA) Comprehensive Management Plan policies. In addition, adoption or amendment of plans and ordinances affecting lands within the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor and relating to Executive Order 79-19 purposes and standards are effective only after approval by the DNR. The DNR reviews the plans and ordinances to ensure their consistency with the provisions of Executive Order 79-19, following an evaluation by the Metropolitan Council. In communities where critical area plans and ordinances have become effective, the local governmental unit also must notify the DNR area hydrologist at least 30 days before action is taken for all development applications or variances requiring a public hearing or discretionary action. In communities where plans and regulations have not been adopted or approved, the DNR is also to be notified about additional types of projects listed in the Interim Regulations. DNR will review and comment on the project's compliance with critical area and state requirements and MNRRA policies, as well as provide technical assistance as requested. Notice of the final action is to be sent to the DNR. The City of Mendota Heights has adopted appropriate rules and ordinance to serve as the local government unit (LGU) conducting critical area review and implementation. As the Minnesota DNR adopts new rules the City will in turn revise its rules and ordinance to remain the LGU. In cases where a large subdivision of land might occur within the Critical Area, the City would transfer its review authority to the Minnesota DNR. The other powers and duties of this Minnesota state agency and its commissioner are wide- ranging. As they affect surface water management within the City they include: Regulation of all public waters inventory waterbodies within the City – to the extent of SECTION 3 Stormwater Management Plan Section 3 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-3 their ordinary high water level (OHWL). Regulation of certified floodplains around rivers, creeks, lakes and wetlands. Management of the Flood Hazard Mitigation program. Shoreland Management. 3.1.2. US Army Corps of Engineer (USACE) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USACE regulate the placement of fill into all wetlands of the U.S. In 1993, the definition of "discharge of dredged material” was modified to include incidental discharges associated with excavation. This modification of the “discharge of dredged material” definition meant that any excavation done within a wetland required the applicant to go through Section 404 permitting procedures. In 1998, however, this decision was modified so that excavation in wetlands is now regulated by the USACE only when it is associated with a fill action. 3.1.3. Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) The local and regional wetland rules are governed by the WCA. The WCA, passed in 1991, extends protection to all wetlands unless they fall under one of the exemptions. The WCA follows a “no net loss” policy. The wetlands covered under the WCA must not be drained or filled, wholly or partially, unless replaced by restoring or creating wetland of at least equal public value under an approved replacement plan. Replacement ratio is typically two acres created for every one acre filled for wetland impacts. A designated LGU is responsible for making exemption and no-loss determinations as well as approving replacement plans. Currently, Mendota Heights acts as the LGU for the WCA within the City’s subdivision authority. The powers and duties of BWSR include: Coordination of water and soil resources planning among counties, watersheds, and local units of government. Facilitation of communication among state agencies in cooperation with the Environmental Quality Board. Approval of watershed management plans. 3.1.4. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) The MPCA implements provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act with guidance from the EPA through a permitting process. The Section 404 permit also requires a Section 401 water quality certification before it is valid. The EPA has given Section 401 certification authority to the MPCA. The powers and duties MPCA and its commissioner include: Fulfilling mandates from the EPA, particularly in regard to the Clean Water Act. Administration of Mendota Heights’ NPDES Phase II MS4 permit. Administration of the NPDES construction site permit program. Administration of the NPDES industrial site discharge permit program. Development of TMDLs for waterbodies and watercourses in Minnesota (often in conjunction with other agencies or joint powers organizations such as watersheds). 3.1.5. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) SECTION 3 Stormwater Management Plan Section 3 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-4 As it relates to surface water management within Mendota Heights, the EPA is charged with interpreting and applying aspects of the Clean Water Act. This has led to the City’s need for its NPDES MS4 permit. Total maximum daily load limits, a new initiative mandated by the EPA, also stem from the EPA’s role as steward of the Clean Water Act. 3.1.6. Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) and Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO) The powers and duties of these Minnesota statutory authorities include: Approval authority over local water management plans. Ability to develop rules regarding management of the surface water system. Ability to determine a budget and raise revenue for the purpose of covering administrative and capital improvement costs. Regulation of land use and development when one or more of the following apply: o The City does not have an approved local plan in place. o The City is in violation of their approved local plan. o The City authorizes the watershed toward such regulation. Other powers and duties as given in statute and joint powers agreements. 3.1.7. State and Federal Jurisdictional Boundaries for Public Wetlands and Waters Wetlands are delineated in accordance with the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987). Wetlands must have a predominance of hydric soils. Hydric soils by definition are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, under normal circumstances, a prevalence of hydrophytic (water tolerant) vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The USACE and the BWSR regulate wetlands as defined by a jurisdictional delineation. For wetlands that fall under the Minnesota DNR jurisdiction, the OHWL determines the boundary of the Minnesota DNR’s jurisdiction. The OHWL is established by the DNR. 3.1.8. Dakota County Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) sits on the Technical Evaluation Panel for administration of the WCA. 3.1.9. Metropolitan Council Metropolitan Council, through Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, serves as a review agency for local surface water management plans. They also review and approve municipal comprehensive plans and have a prominent role in the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor as described on the DNR website: “The Metropolitan Council reviews existing plans that affect lands within the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor. Technical assistance is provided to assist communities in amending or adopting plans to become consistent with Executive Order 79-19 standards and guidelines and any voluntary MNRRA Comprehensive Management Plan policies. The council reviews all critical area plans and ordinances and makes an evaluation to DNR prior to the approval decision. In addition, the council administers the pass-through funds from the National Park Service to provide financial assistance to communities wishing to revise their plans and ordinances. The council is also involved with oversight of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act.” SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-1 4. ASSESSMENT OF ISSUES Section 4 is an assessment of existing and potential local water resource-related issues that are known as of 2018. These issues have been identified based on an analysis of the land and water resource data collected during the preparation of this SWMP and through information provided by the City, its residents, and the watershed organizations. A description of any existing or potential issue within the City has been listed and potential future corrective actions have been incorporated into an implementation plan in Section 6. Refer to Figure 5 for the location of many of the issues discussed below. 4.1. Water Quality Assessments 4.1.1. City Assessment The City investigated the location of stormwater discharge into a fen that is located near the southwest part of the City. The assumption was that the stormwater was discharging to the Fort Snelling State Park Fen, which is a Restricted Discharge Water under the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. But the investigation determined that the stormwater discharge flowed to the Gun Club Lake Fen, which is not a Restricted Discharge Water. The City prepared a self-assessment as part of developing its SWPPP. In that self- assessment, a list of potential sources or types of pollution was developed. The City does not know of a particular source or type of pollution that is prevalent within the City. Although it is not a list of actual pollution occurrences, the list repeated below does provide information for consideration and management.. At Ivy Park Pond, there appears to be a problem where skimmers are collecting excessive floatables. A significant portion of stormwater entering the pond comes from West St. Paul. Increased maintenance attention is paid to this location. Lawn and landscape fertilizers are a potential source of pollution. The City purchases and uses only phosphorous-free products. The application of fertilizers containing phosphorus is currently prohibited by state law unless the results of a soil test show that phosphorus is indeed the limiting nutrient for turf growth. A typical salt is used on the streets. The City recognizes chloride pollution as a water quality issue, and is looking at alternative deicing products to reduce salt and sediment in stormwater and reduce street sweeping costs. Additionally, the City is looking to incorporate the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride Management Plan to reduce salt use during winter applications. Emergency fuel dumping from aircraft flying into the Minneapolis-St. Paul International airport is a potential source of pollution. In the past, citizens have reported strong jet fuel odors believed to be from fuel dumping. Fuel dumping is not known to be a frequent problem. Pet waste is recognized as a nuisance and a pollution source. Signs in parks instruct pet owners to clean up after their pets, as required by ordinance. Waste from geese is considered a serious problem. Geese use the City’s lakes and ponds throughout the year. Failing septic systems are a potential source of pollution, although not currently perceived to be a problem. Approximately 40 septic systems exist in the City. City ordinance requires inspections of the systems. The Mendota Heights ordinance that regulates septic systems is identical to that of Dakota County and meets all Metropolitan Council and MPCA requirements. Soil erosion along the bluffs and at construction sites is a potential source of pollution. The storm sewer system contains some hanging outfalls, and there is scour around some outfalls. SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-2 4.1.2. Clean Water Act Assessments The Impaired Waters List, also known as the 303(d) list from the applicable section of the federal Clean Water Act, records waters that do not currently meet their designated use due to the impact of a particular pollutant or stressor. If monitoring and assessment indicate that a water body is impaired by one or more pollutants, it is placed on the list. At some point after being added to the list, a strategy would be developed that would lead to attainment of the applicable water quality standard. The process of developing this strategy is commonly known as the TMDL process and involves the following phases: 1. Assessment and listing 2. TMDL study 3. Implementation plan development and implementation 4. Monitoring of the effectiveness of implementation efforts Responsibility for implementing the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act falls to the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). In Minnesota, the USEPA delegates much of the program responsibility to the MPCA. Information on the MPCA program can be obtained at the following web address: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/total-maximum-daily-load-tmdl-projects A map of impaired waters in Mendota Heights and TMDL’s can be found at the following web address: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/impaired-waters-viewer-iwav Table 4.1 Lists the 303(d) impaired waters within the City of Mendota Heights Table 4.1 303(d) 2016 Final List of Impaired Waters Within the City of Mendota Heights Water Body Year First Listed Assessment Unit ID # Affected Use Pollutant or Stressor TMDL start/TMDL complete Minnesota River 1998 07020012-505 Aquatic life Dissolved oxygen 2004*/- Minnesota River 1998 07020012-505 Aquatic consumption Mercury in water column 2008*/- Minnesota River 1998 07020012-505 Aquatic consumption Mercury in fish tissue 2008*/- Minnesota River 1998 07020012-505 Aquatic consumption PCB in fish tissue 1998/2025 Minnesota River 1996 07020012-505 Aquatic life Turbidity 2014/2019 Augusta Lake 2010 07010206-506 Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophicatio n Biological Indicators 2010/2014 *TMDL Plan has been approved but has not been started. SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-3 Upstream from the Mendota Heights city limits, the Mississippi River is also listed as impaired (assessment unit ID 07010206-509). This listing could potentially affect management of drainage that directly discharges to the river. The river’s affected uses are aquatic consumption and aquatic recreation. The pollutants or stressors that have been identified as causing these impairments are: Mercury in fish tissue PCB in fish tissue Fecal Coliform The absence of a waterbody from the 303(d) list does not necessarily mean the waterbody is meeting its designated uses. It may be that it has either not been sampled or there is not enough data to make an impairment determination. Additionally, where mercury is identified as a stressor, the TMDL approach will be regional in nature as mercury is most commonly an air-borne pollutant. City of Mendota Heights Actions: It remains to be seen how the TMDL issues will be resolved for the Minnesota River and the Mississippi River. Each river’s basin encompasses a significant portion of the state of Minnesota. It remains to be seen whether the TMDLs for the rivers will be implemented basin-wide or along specific reaches 4.1.3. Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO) The LMRWMO has assessed the water quality of select lakes and ponds within its jurisdiction. It was noted in the LMRWMO Watershed Management Plan (WMP) that, generally, additional water quality data needs to be collected. The LMRWMO WMP noted that water quality assessments should be performed on Roger’s Lake in Mendota Heights. According to the WMP, this lake formerly supported a public swimming beach and is popular among local residents for panfish fishing. Water quality monitoring data should be collected to classify the lake and watch trends. Interstate Valley Creek and Augusta Lake are also noted as a resource of concern for water quality problems. In 2014, LMRWMO completed a Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) Report that includes water quality data for Lake Augusta and Rogers Lake, a TMDL for Lake Augusta. The WRAPS Report can be found at LMRWMO’s website. 4.1.4. Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) Within the LMRWD’s WMP, there is an emphasis on assessing water quality within the Minnesota River. Water quality assessment data is available for the Minnesota River and many of its tributary streams within the WMP. 4.2. Water Quantity Assessments 4.2.1. City Assessments Since the City prepared its 2006 Water Resources Management Plan (WRMP), no new water quantity assessments have been conducted. This does not mean that the City has not been addressing new water quantity issues, only that these have not been significant enough in scope to warrant mention in this SWMP. 4.2.2. Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO) SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-4 In its WMP, the LMRWMO assessed intercommunity surface water management issues that the watershed should resolve. In addition, the LMRWMO Plan requires that member cities prioritize shoreland areas for restoration. Item 4 in Table 6.1 shows that the City plans to allocate funds to address issues of shoreland erosion along Interstate Valley Creek, the priority area, for bank stabilization projects. Table 4.2 summarizes these issues, which are related to flooding and erosion. Table 4.2 Erosion and Flooding Issues Related to the City of Mendota Heights 4.2.3. Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) Figure 5 shows the Mendota Heights drainage system in some detail. One of the primary discharges from this system occurs through a 54-inch pipe into the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) system adjacent to and under Trunk Highway 13. The highway system carries MnDOT and Mendota Heights runoff water into the Quarry Island fen, as indicated by the flow arrows on Figure 5. The Quarry Island fen lies within the jurisdiction of the LMRWD and the district is considering whether to pursue a detailed assessment and monitoring program for this fen. Regardless of what the watershed does toward studying the area, it is highly likely that the LMRWD and DNR will pursue a project to reroute this drainage around the fen and into Gun Club Lake. The City and MnDOT are likely to be financial participants in this project when it becomes a reality. The City’s share of the project cost could be substantial. Given this, the implementation section of this SWMP includes an item for the Quarry Island fen storm drainage project with an unknown date for implementation 4.3. System Description This subsection describes the surface water management system for the City of Mendota Heights. The SWMP area was organized into four major topographic watersheds: Interstate Valley Creek Watershed Ivy Falls Creek Watershed Mississippi River Bluffs Watershed Gun Club Lake Watershed The Interstate Valley, Ivy Falls Creek, Mississippi River Bluff, and Gun Club Lake topographic watersheds generally lie within the LMRWMO jurisdiction. Each major watershed was divided into drainage districts. The drainage districts are generally drawn to encompass all drainage to a particular pond, wetland, or lake. The City’s 1993 Plan identified 14 major drainage districts. To simplify the modeling nomenclature and allow easier cross referencing between the model and Figure 5, drainage districts within this SWMP carry the Name Location Issue Status Interstate Valley Creek Watershed Interstate Valley Creek north of Marie Avenue. Watershed includes Inver Grove Heights, Sunfish Lake, Mendota Heights, and West St. Paul Erosion Ongoing issue which has been addressed in some select locations. Additional stream bank stabilization projects will likely be needed. SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-5 suffix of one of the four major topographic watersheds. Table 4.3 provides a summary of the cross references between the 1993 Plan’s districts and the major watershed suffix used in this SWMP. Table 4.3 Drainage Districts and Areas within the City of Mendota Heights Drainage District Abbreviation Acres Rogers Lake IV 475 Southeast IV 506 Friendly Marsh IV 654 East Marie IV 331 West Marie IV 209 Lower Interstate Valley IV 829 Ivy Falls Creek IF 434 East Highway 13 MB 35 Central Highway 13 MB 121 West Highway 13 MB 228 Augusta Lake GC 442 Minnesota River Bluffs GC 176 Industrial Park IP 473 I-494 GC 285 Highway 110 MB 206 South Highway 13 GC 131 The following sections describe each drainage district in detail. Figure 5 in Appendix A includes areas for the subwatersheds within each major watershed. Appendix E includes the pond data. 4.3.1. Interstate Valley Creek Watershed (IV) The Interstate Valley Creek Watershed consists of all areas that drain to the point where Trunk Highway (TH) 13 crosses Interstate Valley Creek. The watershed’s total area is approximately 4,224 acres, of which 3,004 acres are in Mendota Heights, 414 acres are in West St. Paul, 676 acres are in the City of Sunfish Lake (including the 234-acre Sunfish Lake Watershed, which is landlocked), and 130 acres are in Inver Grove Heights. Interstate Valley Creek is an intermittent stream that begins near the intersection of TH 110 and TH 149 (Dodd Road) at the outflow point of a large wetland (Friendly Marsh). The creek flows northward under TH 110 through a 72-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) culvert. From TH 110 the creek flows 1.9 miles through Valley Park before discharging to the Mississippi River. The creek flows through culverts at Marie Avenue, at a bicycle path crossing downstream of Marie Avenue, and at Lilydale Road. Because of its relatively large size, the portion of the Interstate Valley Creek Watershed within Mendota Heights is divided into six drainage districts. Rogers Lake Drainage Subwatershed The Rogers Lake Drainage Subwatershed is nearly fully developed. This district consists of Rogers Lake and the area that drains to the lake. Rogers Lake is the district’s major hydrologic feature. The lake consists of two basins which are divided by Wagon Wheel Trail. A 73-inch span arch pipe culvert connects the two basins. The outlet of Rogers Lake is via a 30-inch RCP that connects to a storm sewer system that discharges to the Friendly Marsh District, as shown on Figure 5. SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-6 West of I-35E, the land use is predominantly single-family residential, while east of I-35E a large part of the upland in this area consists of the Mendakota Country Club golf course. Single-family homes and schools exist in the district south and east of Rogers Lake. A small area south of the lake and adjacent to I-35E is undeveloped but planned as office/industrial land use. Southeast Drainage Subwatershed The Southeast Drainage Subwatershed mostly consists of single-family homes. Within Sunfish Lake and Inver Grove Heights, 693 acres are tributary to the Southeast Drainage Subwatershed though 234 acres of this tributary area is actually landlocked by Sunfish Lake. This drainage flows from the City of Sunfish Lake into the Southeast Drainage Subwatershed through two separate culverts under County Road 63 (Delaware Avenue). Drainage from this district flows to the Friendly Marsh Drainage Subwatershed. Friendly Marsh Drainage Subwatershed The Friendly Marsh Drainage Subwatershed is generally located south of TH 110 and west of Delaware Avenue. Open space is a significant land use in this district due to the presence of the Dodge Nature Center. Single-family residential is the other predominant land use. This district receives drainage from approximately 301 acres in the cities of Sunfish Lake and West St. Paul via two culverts under Delaware Avenue. Water from the Rogers Lake and the Southeast Drainage Subwatershed also discharges into the Friendly Marsh Drainage Subwatershed. The subwatershed discharges to the Lower Interstate Valley Drainage Subwatershed. Friendly Marsh is a ditched wetland that serves as the headwaters to Interstate Valley Creek. West Marie Avenue Drainage Subwatershed This watershed is located along Marie Avenue, generally west of I-35E. The predominant land use is single- and multiple-family residential. This watershed discharges to the Lower Interstate Valley Drainage Subwatershed. East Marie Avenue Drainage Subwatershed The East Marie Avenue Drainage Subwatershed is located along Marie Avenue east of Interstate Valley Creek. Marie Creek flows through this district. The predominant land use is single-family residential. Drainage from approximately 169 acres in West St. Paul is tributary to this drainage subwatershed. The stormwater runoff from the East Marie Avenue Drainage Subwatershed discharges to the Lower Interstate Valley Drainage Subwatershed. Lower Interstate Valley Drainage Subwatershed Significant open areas exist along Interstate Valley Creek and at two golf courses located in this subwatershed. Drainage from 57 acres in West St. Paul enters this subwatershed as well as from the Friendly Marsh, West Marie Avenue, and East Marie Avenue Drainage Subwatersheds. The predominant drainage feature in this district is Interstate Valley Creek, which runs northward adjacent to I-35E. Interstate Valley Creek discharges to the City of Lilydale and then to the Mississippi River. 4.3.2. Ivy Falls Creek Watershed (IF) The Ivy Falls Creek Watershed resides within the cities of Mendota Heights and West St. Paul. The City of West Paul has approximately 274 acres tributary to Ivy Falls Creek. The SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-7 predominant land use is single-family residential. The northern portion of the Somerset Country Club golf course lies in this watershed. Ivy Falls Creek is an intermittent stream that begins in Somerset Golf Course. The streambed drops approximately 180 feet along its 3,000-foot length from Dodd Road to TH 13, including a 50-foot drop at Ivy Falls. Because of this steep gradient, erosion has occurred along the creek. 4.3.3. Mississippi River Bluffs Watershed (MB) This watershed consists of the various small drainage routes along the Mississippi River bluffs. These drainage routes discharge water to culverts under TH 13 to the City of Lilydale. Areas that drain to either Interstate Valley Creek or to Ivy Falls Creek are not included in this watershed. The drainages in this watershed have similar features; they all include a small area above the bluffs which then drains down the bluffs to ditches and culverts along TH 13. Because of the steep slopes in this watershed, the water flows quickly and erosion and flooding problems exist in some of these drainage routes. The watershed is divided into four drainage subwatersheds. West Highway 13 Drainage Subwatershed The West Highway 13 Drainage Subwatershed runs along the south side of TH 13 from the City of Mendota Heights border with the City of Mendota east to I-35E. The drainage discharges through six culverts beneath TH 13 to Lilydale. Approximately 20 acres of this drainage subwatershed are in Lilydale. Central Highway 13 Drainage Subwatershed The Central Highway 13 Drainage Subwatershed is located between the Ivy Falls Creek and Interstate Valley Creek watersheds, south of TH 13. Discharge from this subwatershed occurs through two culverts beneath TH 13. East Highway 13 Drainage Subwatershed The East Highway 13 Drainage Subwatershed is located at the northern tip of Mendota Heights. Approximately 25 acres of West St. Paul is tributary to the district. The drainage from this subwatershed discharges to Lilydale through an 18-inch culvert under TH 13. Highway 110 Drainage Subwatershed The Highway 110 Drainage Subwatershed drains through a series of ditches and ponds before discharging to the Mississippi River via a culvert that passes through the City of Mendota. The eastern extent of this drainage subwatershed is approximately at the intersection of Highway 110 and Victoria Road. 4.3.4. Gun Club Lake Watershed (GC) This watershed is in the west part of the City and includes all of the area in Mendota Heights that is within the LMRWMO and part of the area which is within the LMRWD. This watershed has five drainage subwatersheds. SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-8 Lake Augusta Drainage Subwatershed This subwatershed consists of land that drains to Lake Augusta. Open space is the predominant land use because of the presence of Resurrection Cemetery. Industrial/office and single-family land uses are also present. Lake Augusta is landlocked, so no surface discharge occurs from the lake. Mendota Heights and the LMRWMO will work toward determining whether an outlet to Lake Augusta is necessary Industrial Park Drainage Subwatershed Most of the Industrial Park Drainage Subwatershed is zoned for industrial/office land use. The 30-acre Lake LeMay is the subwatershed’s only major water body and is located in the northwest portion. Lake LeMay discharges to the Industrial Park storm sewer system via a 30-inch pipe that crosses under Highway 55. The outlet pipe is designed such that when water levels in Lake LeMay are below the normal water level (NWL), runoff collected by the 30-inch outlet pipe flows to Lake LeMay and not to the Industrial Park. When water levels are above the NWL, flows are routed to the Industrial Park. The water from the drainage subwatersheds discharges through a 54-inch storm sewer to an open channel in a ditch. The ditch drains to a 66-inch culvert under TH 13 where it again flows in an open channel, and ultimately discharges to Gun Club Lake. With the exception of Lake LeMay, little stormwater storage is available in the Industrial Park Drainage Subwatershed. Interstate 494 Drainage Subwatershed This subwatershed district is the stretch of I-35E south of Wagon Wheel Trail. The major land use in the subwatershed is industrial/office. The runoff from this drainage subwatershed flows to the I-494 drainage system that ultimately discharges to the Minnesota River. Minnesota River Bluff Drainage Subwatershed This subwatershed consists of land with several drainage routes that discharge into the Minnesota River. All surface drainage in this subwatershed discharges to culverts under the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company railroad tracks. There are approximately 22 culverts under the 1.5 miles of railroad track bordering the subwatershed. Land use in this drainage subwatershed includes open space within Fort Snelling State Park, wooded bluff slope, industrial/office, highway, cemetery, and single- family residential. South Highway 13 Drainage Subwatershed This subwatershed is generally located along TH 13 and Highway 55, between the Minnesota River Bluff and Industrial Park Drainage Subwatersheds. This subwatershed combines its discharge flow with flows from the Industrial Park Drainage Subwatershed at the MnDOT pond located near the intersection of TH 13 and I-494. The discharge ultimately flows to Gun Club Lake. 4.4. Hydrologic Modeling Discussion There was a modeling effort completed for the 2006 LSWMP that consisted of converting the 1993 WRMP model to the more user friendly HydroCAD modeling software, and to update the model to current conditions of the City. SECTION 4 Stormwater Management Plan Section 4 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-9 The 2006 HydroCAD model was updated for this 2018 SWMP to accommodate for the new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Estimates by defining additional stage/area and overflow routes so that the 100-year Atlas 14 rainfall can be run within the model without exceeding defined storage or outlets. Table 4.3 shows the Atlas 14 rainfall depths that shall be used for project reviews and stormwater design. Additionally, drainage areas and land use descriptions were reviewed and corrected when discrepancies appeared. The updated hydrologic model is summarized in Appendix E. HydroCAD stormwater runoff hydrographs are calculated in accordance with SCS TR-20 methodology. Hydrograph routing through channels and detention basins is performed using the Dynamic-Storage-Indication method. For compliance with the MS4 permit, the City is required to develop a method to ensure that its water quality ponds function according to design. A P8 Urban Catchment Model was created and the results can be found in Appendix E. Table 4.3 Atlas 14 Rainfall Depths Storm Event Rainfall Depth (Inches) 2-year, 24-hour 2.81 10-year, 24-hour 4.19 100-year, 24-hour 7.47 SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-1 5. GOALS AND POLICIES 5.1. Purpose The primary goal of Mendota Heights’ SWMP is to bring the City into statutory compliance and provide a framework for effective stormwater management. This includes guiding redevelopment activities and identifying and implementing retrofits to the existing system. These retrofits consist of both projects and programs. Additionally, the plan provides clear guidance on how Mendota Heights intends to manage surface water in terms of both quantity and quality. The goals of Mendota Heights’ SWMP are consistent with the goals of the LMRWMO and the LMRWD, while addressing the more specific and changing needs of the City. This plan is an update to the 2006 Water Management Plan and the goals of this plan were established in accordance with the guidelines contained in Minnesota Statutes 103B and Minnesota Rules 8410. A general priority of the City is to cooperate, collaborate, and partner with other entities, such as LMRWMO, LMRWD, and the MPCA as much as possible as the City implements this plan. Cooperation, collaboration, and partnering results in projects that are less likely to conflict with the goals of the affected entities, are better able to meet long-term goals, and are generally more cost-effective. In addition to the goals and policies contained in this section, the City will annually review and update its SWPPP to effectively manage its stormwater system and be in conformance with the NPDES MS4 Program. Refer to Appendix B for the most recent version of the City SWPPP. 5.2. Background The City completed its first comprehensive plan in 1960. The City has most recently updated its comprehensive plan in 2010 with its 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan reiterated the goals of the previous plan, while also strengthening the City’s traditions and development philosophy. Open spaces and parks are deeply ingrained in the City of Mendota Heights and its comprehensive plan, and surface waters play a large role in many of those assets. Specific to the goals and policies of this SWMP is the following policy statement from the 2030 Comprehensive Plan: “Work with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the region’s vital natural resources.” The 2018 Mendota Heights SWMP expands upon the goals and objectives provided in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the 2006 LSWMP, and the updated Third Generation LMRWD and LMRWMO Water Management Plan. 5.3. City of Mendota Heights SWMP Goals and Policies 5.3.1.Water Quantity 5.3.1.1. Goal Prevent flooding from surface flows while reducing, to the greatest extent practicable, the public capital expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. 5.3.1.2. Policies 1. All designs must use NOAA Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Data in stormwater design calculations and modeling. SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-2 2. Trunk storm sewers shall be designed with capacity for 100-year ponded outflows plus 10-year directly connected flows. 3. In addition to the 10-year and 100-year ponded flow primary capacity, the conveyance system shall provide capacity in excess of the 100-year event in the form of overland overflow routes or adequate surface storage volume. This surface storage volume consists of storage in street low points, within ditches, or in other transient ponding areas. 4. Proposed runoff from development and redevelopment projects shall meet or decrease peak discharge rates for the 10-year and 100-year storm events. Additionally, capacity of downstream drainage systems must be considered, and shall not exceed existing capacities. 5. Detention basins shall be designed with capacity for the critical 100-year event. At a minimum, detention basins should maintain existing flow rates for the 2-, 10- , and 100-year 24-hour rainfalls. 6. The maximum duration for rainfall critical event analysis shall be 24 hours except in cases where basins are landlocked, where back-to-back 24-hour events and the 10-day, 7.2-inch runoff event shall also be used. In all cases a hydrograph method of analysis should be used. For the 24-hour rainfall event or back-to- back 24-hour rainfall events, the Midwest and Southeast 3 (MSE3) distribution, published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, is recommended. For shorter duration critical events, other distributions may be used with the approval of the City Engineer. Regarding Water Quantity policies 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5—for systems designed and implemented prior to the 1993 WRMP, conveyance capacity and storage requirements may not meet these requirements. These policy statements in no way imply that the City intends to unilaterally upgrade these systems. 7. All drainage system analyses and designs shall be based on proposed full development land use patterns. 8. The amount of impervious surface increase on projects shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible for development and redevelopment projects in accordance with Low Impact Development (LID) techniques. A narrative shall be provided that addresses the consideration of LID techniques in development and redevelopment impervious surface design. 9. Intercommunity water resources issues planning shall consider alternative solutions: a) All drainage studies or feasibility studies, whether by a watershed organization or municipality, leading to projects in a subwatershed with an intercommunity drainage issue shall consider the impact of the project on the drainage issue and shall consider the total intercommunity project cost. b) Except in emergencies, no solutions or partial solutions to intercommunity drainage issues shall be implemented without prior completion of a feasibility study of options and adoption of a preferred option by the applicable watershed organization. SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-3 10. The following items shall be considered in the management of landlocked basins: a) The flood levels established for landlocked basins shall take into consideration the effects of water level fluctuations on trees, vegetation, erosion, and property values. Steeply sloped shorelines subject to slope failure and shoreline damage should not be in contact with floodwaters for extended periods of time. b) The capacity of proposed outlets to formerly landlocked basins should not be so small as to cause extended duration of High Water Levels (HWLs) that would result in damage to upland vegetation. c) Only the existing tributary area may discharge to a landlocked basin, unless a provision has been made for an outlet from the basin or the right to augmented storage within the basin has been secured through purchase or easement, except in cases where adverse impacts to vegetation would occur. The form of outlet may range from temporary pumps to gravity storm sewers. The outlet shall be implemented before increased water levels are likely to affect vegetation, slope stability, or property values. d) Critical event analysis of landlocked basins shall include the 10-day, 7.2- inch runoff event and back to back 24-hour, 100-year events. 11. When development occurs adjacent to a landlocked basin and the basin is not provided an outlet, freeboard should be determined based on one of three methods (whichever provides for the highest freeboard elevation): a) Three feet above the HWL determined by modeling back to back 100- year, 24-hour events; b) Three feet above the highest known water level; or c) Five feet above the HWL determined by modeling a single 100-year, 24- hour event. When modeling landlocked basins, the starting water surface elevation should be the basins Ordinary High Water elevation, which can be determined through hydrologic modeling or, in the case of a DNR regulated basin, from a DNR survey. Additionally, a continuous simulation of average annual rainfall conditions will also provide insight into whether significant, adverse impact to vegetation would occur due to development around the landlocked basin. 12. For basins with a suitable outlet, freeboard will be two feet above the HWL determined by modeling the 100-year critical event. Emergency overflows that are a minimum of one and a half feet below the lowest ground elevation adjacent to a structure should also be provided. 13. Adjacent to channels, creeks, and ravines freeboard will also be two feet from the 100-year critical event elevation. 14. Work with the DNR and watershed organizations on cooperative and collaborative projects in the public lands below the river bluffs. SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-4 Discussion: This policy is essentially a blanket policy covering the many subject areas for which goals have been developed. The City of Mendota Heights understands that its drainage system has the potential to damage ecologically sensitive areas below the bluffs in Fort Snelling State Park. The City envisions the State or watershed organizations as the lead on such projects. 15. New storm sewers and open channels shall be designed using a technical method approved by the MPCA Stormwater Manual such as the Rational Method or HydroCAD . Runoff Coefficient “C” shall be in accordance with the guidelines provided in the MnDOT’s Drainage Manual. 16. A hydrograph method based on sound hydrologic theory shall be used to analyze runoff rates and high water levels for proposed development and redevelopment projects. 17. Water quality treatment ponds (wet ponds) shall be designed in accordance with National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards. 18. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated over newly constructed stormwater management features (volume, rate control, and water quality treatment infrastructure) including but not limited to ponds, infiltration basis, rain gardens, underground storage and treatment devices, and tree trenches. Additionally, drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated for redeveloped stormwater management features and existing stormwater management features on redevelopment sites. Refer to the most up to date LMRWD and LMRWMO Rules on their websites. 5.3.2.Water Quality 5.3.2.1. Goal Work with LMRWMO, LMRWD, and neighboring communities to maintain and/or enhance the water quality of Mendota Heights’ lakes, wetlands, streams, and other water resources. 5.3.2.2. Policies 1. Given that the soils underlying the City have higher than typical infiltration capacity, infiltration is the preferred means of protecting water quality. Mendota Heights requires that stormwater infiltration facilities include sufficient water quality pretreatment (to NPDES and watershed standards) to preserve the function of these facilities. Wellhead protection areas must also be reviewed when considering infiltration. 2. Apply the MPCA’s Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS) to new developments within the City. a) All new developments that create new impervious surfaces shall endeavor to retain 1.1 inches of runoff from the net increase of impervious area. The City of Mendota Heights recommends consideration of the Flexible Treatment Options Approach through MIDS. However, the City does not adopt MIDS. As an MS4, the City of Mendota Heights is required to achieve no net increase in loadings for TSS, TP, and water volume as a result of development and redevelopment activities. The City does not believe it can uniformly expect these results on individual developments and would rather manage this responsibility across the entirety of the MS4 and not on an individual SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-5 development basis. This is why practical implementation and not adoption of MIDS is preferred. b) If a development or redevelopment site exceeds 1 acre of disturbance and is not able to retain 1.1 inches of runoff, they shall be required to meet a 50% phosphorus reduction based on existing conditions. 3. Utilize, where feasible and possible, regional stormwater detention facilities to enhance water quality by removing sediment and nutrients from runoff. 4. Support water quality monitoring efforts being undertaken by the LMRWMO and LMRWD. 5. Wherever practical, new water quality ponds will be designed and constructed to provide a water quality treatment volume equivalent to the runoff from a 2.5-inch rainfall event, or the requirements of the NPDES construction site permit, whichever leads to higher treatment capacity. In some cases, other BMPs will be used in conjunction with water quality ponds. In such cases performance of the water quality system shall be no less than the performance of a single pond designed under the 2.5-inch criterion. 6. Newly constructed ponds shall include an outlet design allowing for extended detention of the 1- to 5-year rainfall event. The hydrograph duration for pond discharge should extend a minimum of 24 hours for events within the 1- to 5-year range. 7. Outlet skimming will be required in all ponds. Skimming shall occur for up to the 5- year, 24-hour event. 8. Utilize the MPCA’s Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride Management Plan to reduce chloride pollution by effectively managing salt use. Refer to LMRWD and LMRWMO Rules on the watersheds’ websites for the most up to date version. 5.3.3.Recreation and Fish and Wildlife 5.3.3.1. Goal Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitats, water recreational facilities, and water resource aesthetics. 5.3.3.2. Policies 1. The neighborhood and regional benefits of wildlife habitat and aesthetics should be considered in any proposal to alter or eliminate wetlands, understanding that wetland elimination without mitigation is precluded by state law and understanding that even mitigated wetland impacts must meet strict sequencing guidelines. 2. The City will review inlets and outlets for aesthetics. 3. Mendota Heights shall seek to coordinate with the DNR regarding development of DNR public waters and public water wetlands. Notwithstanding ordinance provisions both existing and future that control development of shoreland areas, the City will seek DNR comments on development proposals adjacent to DNR public waters and public water wetlands. As part of its implementation plan the City will adopt a shoreland protection ordinance. SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-6 4. Water resources shall be maintained in such a manner as to preserve or restore their intrinsic aesthetic qualities and wildlife habitat. 5.3.4.Enhancement of Public Participation; Information and Education 5.3.4.1. Goal Inform and educate the public concerning urban stormwater management and the problems pollutants cause if allowed to enter into water resources. 5.3.4.2. Policies 1. Enact a public education program based on the following objectives to reduce stormwater pollution: Raise awareness of the problem and solutions Promote community ownership of the all surface water features Recognize responsible parties and actions to date Merge public feedback into program execution 2. Enact a public education program to satisfy the minimum control measures identified in the City’s NPDES permit. 3. Coordinate education efforts with the watershed organizations so that redundant efforts are avoided. 4. Report progress of meeting SWMP goals to LMRWMO and LMRWD annually. 5.3.5.Groundwater 5.3.5.1. Goal Maintain and improve groundwater quality and promote groundwater recharge. 5.3.5.2. Policies 1. To the extent that Wellhead Protection Plans (WHPPs) identify areas of groundwater recharge that require protection, the City shall work with the MDH and neighboring communities in developing adequate protection measures 2. Surface water management improvements in likely recharge areas and areas of high vulnerability to chemical or petroleum spills shall be designed to assist groundwater protection. Practically, this means infiltration shall not be considered in developments that include the potential for these types of spills. Note: The City of Mendota Heights obtains its potable water from the St. Paul Water Utility. The neighboring communities of Eagan and Inver Grove Heights have separate municipal water systems, but neither community has identified a 10-year well capture zone that overlaps into Mendota Heights. Inver Grove Heights has yet to prepare a WHPP so it remains to be seen whether Mendota Heights will be affected by a 10-year capture zone for Inver Grove Heights’ wells. Since Mendota Heights is not an active participant in the MDH Wellhead Protection Program, the City will have to rely on MDH and neighboring communities to identify 10-year capture areas. To the extent that future analyses identify these areas within Mendota Heights, the City will then use its subdivision authority to properly regulate these areas. 5.3.6.Wetlands 5.3.6.1. Goal SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-7 Protect and preserve wetlands through administration of the WCA. 5.3.6.2. Policies 1. Act as the local government unit responsible for enforcing the WCA enacted in1991. 2. Discourage wetland disturbance. Wetlands must not be drained or filled, wholly or partially, unless replaced by restoring or creating wetland areas of equal public value, as permitted by the WCA. 3. Up to one-half acre of “debit” wetland (filled or drained) will be allowed to be replaced through wetland “credit” in a bank which is located outside of Mendota Heights’ city limits, but State and County governments are exempt from this policy (M.S. 103G.222 (e)). 4. Restrict clearing and grading within close proximity of the wetland boundary to provide for a protective buffer strip of natural vegetation to promote infiltration of sediment and nutrients. In the event that grading occurs close to the wetland boundary, native plant materials shall be reestablished as a buffer strip. 5. Require that a wetland assessment be prepared for any project that includes a wetland. Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology for evaluating wetland function (current version 3.0 but as updated in the future) is the required method of assessment. 6. Runoff shall not be discharged directly into wetlands without pretreatment of the runoff. 7. Require an average 15-foot buffer of natural vegetation above the 100-year HWL or NWL around lakes, streams and wetlands. Refer to LMRWMO and LMRWD Rules and Standards on their websites for Wetland Management Policies within the City. The 2006 LSWMP included a Wetland Management Plan. The Wetland Management Plan was not updated as a part of this SWMP, but the 2006 version can be found in Appendix F. 5.3.7.Erosion and Sediment Control 5.3.7.1. Goal Prevent, to the extent possible, sediment from construction sites from entering the City’s surface water resources and control the erosion from drainage ways within the City. 5.3.7.2. Policies The City’s Stormwater Management, Illicit Discharge, Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Ordinance includes temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control standards that meets or exceeds standards contained in the NPDES construction site permit and watershed organization plans. 5.3.8.Floodplains 5.3.8.1. Goal Control development in floodplains and floodways including those subject to FEMA studies (Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers) and those that are not regulated by FEMA studies like ponds, wetlands, lakes, and channels within the City limits. SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-8 Note: Title 12, Chapter 1, Article D, Section 11 (12-1D-11) of the Mendota Heights City Code defines permitted uses within Floodway and Floodplain Districts. Chapter 2 controls development adjacent to wetlands lakes and channels that are not a FEMA-designated floodplain or floodway. Additionally, the City will be preparing a shoreland ordinance, similar to the Minnesota DNR model ordinance that will further define limitations to development along shoreland and non-federally regulated floodplain areas. 5.3.9.Mendota Heights NPDES Permit 5.3.9.1. Goal Operate and manage the City’s surface water system consistent with best current practices and the City’s NPDES Permit. 5.3.9.2. Policies 1. Projects to correct existing deficiencies, to the extent they are identified, will be prioritized as follows: Projects intended to reduce or eliminate flooding of structures in known problem areas. Projects intended to improve water quality in the City’s lakes. Projects intended to retrofit water quality treatment into developed areas. Projects intended to reduce maintenance costs. Projects intended to restore wetlands and habitat. 2. The City will actively inspect and properly operate, maintain, and repair its stormwater system. The City will follow a regular inspection, cleaning, and repair schedule. Frequency of maintenance will be event-based and informed by experience and inspection history. The City’s SWPPP outlines the frequency of these activities. Section 5 of this Plan provides some guidelines on pond maintenance and inspection cycles, but the SWPPP will remain the definitive source on the City’s intended maintenance and inspection schedules 3. The City will follow best management practices on its own lands and for its own projects including street reconstruction projects in accordance with the NPDES construction site permit and the City’s NPDES MS4 Permit. 5.3.10.Financial Management 5.3.10.1. Goal Ensure that the costs of the surface water system are equitably distributed. 5.3.10.2. Policies 1. The City will periodically update its stormwater utility rate structure to accomplish the following: Meet the requirements of its NPDES permit. Provide for the maintenance of ponds and outfall structures. Conduct repairs to the system. Update its system planning efforts. Implement rainwater gardens or other water quality retrofits. 2. Use other funding sources including land sale proceeds, partner with watershed organizations, State Aid funds, grants, among other things to pay for the implementation activities, when available and appropriate. SECTION 5 Surface Water Management Plan Section 5 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-9 5.3.11.Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) 5.3.11.1. Goal Ensure that ISTS that remain in the City do not constitute an environmental hazard. 5.3.11.2. Policy Where ISTS are known to be failing and pose an imminent environmental hazard, the City will take the necessary steps to see that these systems are repaired or eliminated. Background: Within Mendota Heights are approximately 40 ISTS. The City has an ISTS ordinance equivalent to that of Dakota County whereby property owners provide pump and inspection records to the City. SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-1 6. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM 6.1. General The Implementation Plan section of the Mendota Heights SWMP describes those activities and programs the City might develop to improve its surface water management program. Since Mendota Heights is largely developed, capital outlay for the trunk sewer system has already occurred so future outlay will be for upgrades and replacement. Typically, costs for upgrade and replacement would be borne by either the stormwater utility fund or would be recovered through direct assessment. Given this, a typical financing mechanism developed in most SWMPs, an area charge, is not a part of the Mendota Heights SWMP. Table 6.1 contains a comprehensive list of the MS4 activities and projects, programs, and studies that make up the City of Mendota Heights implementation program for the next seven years (2017-2023). The program was developed by evaluating the requirements in the MS4 permit (see MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization in Appendix B), reviewing existing information (Section 2), identifying potential and existing problems (Section 4), reviewing goals and policies (Section 5), and then assessing the need for programs, studies, maintenance, or projects. Costs were estimated, possible funding sources were identified, and a schedule was developed to complete the implementation activities. It is anticipated these tables will be updated/revised on a yearly basis. This section also includes: An overview of the City’s NPDES permit A discussion of operation and maintenance procedures and strategies An outline of an education program Financial considerations for the stormwater utility A section referencing applicable design standards for stormwater management A section on watershed implementation priorities Implementation priorities for the City 6.2. Implementation Priorities The implementation components listed in Table 6.1 were prioritized to make the best use of available local funding, meet MS4 Permit requirements, address existing stormwater management problems, and prevent future stormwater management problems from occurring. The City's implementation plan reflects its responsibility to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens by addressing problems and issues that are specific to the City of Mendota Heights. 6.3. Operation and Maintenance 6.3.1.Activities A stormwater system is a major investment for the City of Mendota Heights—both in terms of initial capital cost and in terms of ongoing maintenance costs—with meeting ongoing maintenance costs being the City’s current challenge. Typically, system maintenance is funded by the City’s stormwater utility and through the general fund. The City’s stormwater system maintenance responsibilities include the following: Street sweeping Cleaning of sump manholes and catch basins SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-2 Repair of catch basins and manholes Assessing pipe condition (typically by televising) Inspection of storm sewer inlet and outlet structures Pond mowing and other vegetation maintenance Excavation of accumulated sediments from ponds The City has maintained its pipe system for decades and staff has a strong grasp on the costs associated with this. As new development brings more ponds (and other BMPs) into the system, the City will find that maintenance becomes an increasingly large portion of both staff time and the overall maintenance budget. It is important to quantify the extent of this future commitment so that the funds necessary for pond maintenance activities can be collected via the storm water utility. The management of stormwater ponds is facilitated by creation of a geographical information system (GIS) database for all stormwater system infrastructure. The City is continuing to map its system in this software by providing data for all pipes 12 inches and larger, most private and government pipes, and pond numbering. This move to GIS to track stormwater system infrastructure represents a strong step toward an interactive mapping system. Ultimately, via its stormwater management database the City could reference its maintenance records, videotapes, and maintenance costs for the stormwater system using interactive mapping. The City’s NPDES permit calls for an incremental approach to mapping the existing storm sewer system. 6.3.2.Stormwater Basins Stormwater basins represent a sizable investment in the City's drainage system. General maintenance of these facilities helps ensure proper performance and reduces the need for major repairs. Periodic inspections are performed to identify possible problems in and around the basin. Inspection and maintenance cover the following: Basin outlets Basin inlets Side slopes Illicit dumping and discharges Sediment buildup Basin Outlets A key issue with stormwater basins is ensuring that the outlets perform at design capacity. Inspection and maintenance of basin outlets address the following: The area around outlets is kept free and clear of debris, litter, and heavy vegetation. Trash guards are installed and maintained over all inlets to prevent clogging of the downstream storm sewer. Trash guards are inspected at least once a year, typically in the spring, to remove debris that may clog the outlet. Problem areas are addressed more frequently, as required. Emergency overflow outlets are provided for all ponds when possible. These are kept clear of debris, equipment, and other materials and properly protected against erosion Basin Inlets Inspection and maintenance of basin inlets address the following: SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-3 Inlets are inspected for erosion. o Where erosion occurs near an inlet, energy dissipaters or riprap are installed. Inlets are inspected for sediment deposits, which can form at the inlets due to poor erosion practices upstream. o Where sediment deposits occur, these are removed to ensure design capacities of storm sewers entering the basin are maintained. Side Slopes Inspection and maintenance of basin side slopes address the following: Side slopes are kept well-vegetated to prevent erosion and sediment deposition into the basin. Severe erosion alongside slopes can reduce the quality of water discharging from the basin and require the dredging of sediments from the basin. Noxious weeds are periodically removed from around basins. Some basins located in highly developed areas require mowing. If mowing is performed, a buffer strip of 25 feet or more adjacent to the NWL is typically maintained. This provides filtration of runoff and protects wildlife habitat. Illicit Dumping and Discharges Inspection for and maintenance because of illicit dumping and discharges into basins address the following: Basins are periodically inspected for evidence of illicit dumping or discharges. The most common of these is dumping of yard waste into the basin. Where found, illicit material is removed, and signs are posted as needed prohibiting the dumping of yard waste. Water surfaces are inspected for oil sheens. These can be present when waste motor oil is dumped into upstream storm sewers. Skimmer structures are installed as needed at outlet structures to prevent oil spills and other floatable material from being carried downstream. Skimmer structures are periodically inspected for damage, particularly from freeze- thaw cycles. Sediment Buildup Inspection for and maintenance because of sediment buildup in basins address the following: Basins are inspected to determine if sediment buildup is causing significant loss of storage capacity from design levels. Excessive sediment buildup significantly reduces the stormwater treatment efficiency of water quality ponds. Sediment removal is performed where excessive sediment buildup has occurred. As a general guideline, ponds require dredging every 15 to 20 years. When effective, forebays are provided these may require more frequent cleaning (approximately five to seven year cycles) but tend to produce less material and have the effect of extending the maintenance cycle of ponds to as much as every 30 years. 6.3.3.Sump Manholes and Sump Catch Basins Sump manholes and sump catch basins are included in storm sewer systems to collect sediments before they are transported to downstream waterbodies. These structures SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-4 keep sediments from degrading downstream waterbodies. Once sediments are transported to a lake or pond, they become much more expensive to remove. Sediments originate primarily from road sanding operations, although construction activity and erosion can also contribute. Since these structures are designed to collect these sediments, they are routinely cleaned to provide capacity for future sedimentation. Suction vacuum equipment is typically used to clean out the structure. 6.3.4.Storm Sewer Inlet Structures To fully utilize storm sewer capacity, inlet structures are kept operational in order to get runoff into the system. All efforts are made to keep catch basins and inlet flared ends free of debris and sediments so as not to restrict inflow and cause flood damage. Leaf and lawn litter are the most frequent cause of inlet obstructions. On a routine basis, City staff visually inspects inlet structures to ensure they are operational. 6.3.5.Open Channels and Ravines Overland flow routes constitute an important part of the surface water drainage system. Open channels are typically vegetated and occasionally lined with more substantial materials. The lined channels typically require little or no maintenance. Vegetated channels are periodically inspected and maintained, as high flows can create erosion within the channel. Eroded channels can contribute to water quality problems in downstream waterbodies as the soil is continually swept away. If not maintained, the erosion of open channels would accelerate and repairs would become increasingly costlier. The erosion of channels is accelerated when the channels are at steep gradients and are used for conveying urban stormwater. 6.3.6.Piping System The storm sewer piping system constitutes a multimillion dollar investment for the City. The City performs a comprehensive maintenance program to maximize the life of the facilities and optimize capital expenditures. The following periodic inspection and maintenance procedures are followed: Catch basin and manhole castings are inspected and are cleaned and replaced as necessary. Catch basin and manhole rings are inspected and are replaced and/or re-grouted as necessary. Catch basin and manhole structures are inspected and are repaired or replaced as needed. Pipe inverts, benches, steps (verifying integrity for safety), and walls are checked. Cracked, deteriorated, and spalled areas are grouted, patched, or replaced. Storm sewer piping is inspected either manually or by television to assess pipe condition. Items looked for include root damage, deteriorated joints, leaky joints, excessive spalling, and sediment buildup. The piping system is programmed for cleaning, repair, or replacement as needed to ensure the integrity of the system. 6.3.7.De-Icing Practices Minnesota receives approximately 54 inches of snow during a typical year. This requires a large amount of de-icing chemicals (primarily salt) to be applied to roads and sidewalks each winter. SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-5 Estimates indicate that 80 percent of the environmental damage caused from de-icing chemicals is a result of inadequate storage of the material (MPCA 1989). Improper storage as well as overuse of salt increases the risk of high chloride concentrations in runoff and groundwater. High chloride concentrations can be toxic to fish, wildlife, and vegetation. The following procedures are used for storing de-icing chemicals in the City: 1. De-icing material and sand is stored in waterproof sheds. When and where this is not possible, stockpiles are covered with polyethylene and placed on impervious surfaces. No salty runoff water shall leave salt sheds 2. Road de-icing stockpiles are not located near municipal well areas or in other sensitive groundwater areas. The City shall encourage businesses within the City to apply the MPCA’s Twin Cities Area Chloride Management Plan, particularly the following procedures: Promote businesses using the Winter Maintenance Assessment tool (WMAt), a web- based tool maintained by the MPCA that helps identify opportunities to reduce salt use and save money Encourage businesses to use contracts that do not bill by the weight of salt used in order to reduce over-use. Re-use winter truck wash water for brine making, and reduce the amount of salt on a truck prior to entering the wash Create a chart of items to investigate that may reduce salt use/waste. 6.3.8.Street Sweeping Street sweeping is an integral part of the City’s effective surface water management system. It greatly reduces the volume of sediments that have to be cleaned out of sump structures and downstream waterbodies. The City has a street sweeping policy that includes at least one sweeping operation per year. Spring sweeping begins in either late March or early April after the risk of later snowfall has passed and targets sand left from winter sanding operations. Occasional fall sweeping occurs after leaf fall. Mendota Heights does not allow residents to rake leaves into the street for municipal pick up. Dakota County and the City encourage residents toward composting their yard waste. If residents desire to have yard waste removed by their private hauler, then compostable bags or reusable containers are required. Alternately, there are composting sites within Dakota County where yard waste can be brought for a fee. Overall the City’s approach to minimizing organic matter entering its stormwater system greatly reduces the incidence of inlet blockages and protects the water quality of downstream waterbodies. The objective of the City’s street sweeping and de-icing programs is to minimize impacts from leaf litter, sand, salt, and other debris on the surface waters of the City. 6.3.9.Detection of Illicit Connections Mendota Heights has modified its ordinance to prohibit the dumping of hazardous material into the stormwater system. During routine inspection for inlet grates, outfalls, and other portions of the stormwater system, City staff also look for evidence of illicit discharge, dry weather flow (indicating possible sanitary sewer connections), sedimentation, and other non-point source pollution problems. SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-6 The City has started the process of mapping its storm sewer outfalls and integrating this mapping with inspection data. This effort will be concurrent with the overall storm sewer mapping effort required by the City’s NPDES permit. 6.4. Education and Outreach 6.4.1.General Education can play an important role in any effort to implement a surface water management program like the one outlined in this SWMP. The objectives of an education effort are different, depending on the target audience. In general, the target audience for this education program is City staff, residents, and the development community. The following sections describe why education of each of these groups is important and presents educational methods that may be used for each audience. One of the more important aspects of education and outreach is close coordination with watershed organizations so that redundant efforts are avoided. The City should also work to raise the profile of its watershed organizations by including articles on watershed activities in its informational materials. One simple step toward stronger city/watershed partnership is providing a link to each watersheds website on the city website. 6.4.2.City Staff City staff have a wide range of responsibilities for implementing this plan. These include: Implementing street sweeping and spill response programs. Implementing deicing education and outreach for residents and business owners, and by encouraging involvement in the MPCA’s Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride Management Plan by using their WMAt. Maintaining detention basin/stormwater management pond performance and system operability. Planning for and managing of projects to enhance pollutant removal performance, wetland quality, among other items. Carrying out grounds maintenance of City-owned lands/facilities in a way that sets a good example for residents. Utilizing BMPs in application of ice control material. Application of BMP policies and regulations to new and redevelopment projects. Planning and delivering education programs. Working out cooperative arrangements with regulatory and non-regulatory organizations to achieve SWMP objectives. Assisting the City Council in the application of the SWMP policies. Because these responsibilities involve many different levels, City staff members are trained to have a basic understanding of the SWMP, including: A description of the major stormwater management issues (including known stormwater management problem areas, stormwater management expectations for new and re-development projects, incorporation of stormwater mitigation into capital improvement projects, and regulatory jurisdictions). The objectives and the general approach outlined in the SWMP for resolution of these issues. The responsibilities of the different work units in implementing the SWMP. The information the SWMP provides. SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-7 Identification of in-house experts. This information is disseminated in presentations at staff meetings, internal newsletters, and internal memos. As part of its NPDES permit, the City has also made a commitment to continuing education for staff in stormwater management. This will take the form of attendance at conferences and workshops. As part of the SWMP effort, staff will also be trained in the use of the City’s stormwater management model. 6.4.3.City Residents In order to obtain the necessary political and economic support for a successful SWMP implementation, it is vital to inform City residents about basic stormwater management and water quality concepts, policies and recommendations in the SWMP, and the progress of stormwater management efforts. Through the City’s quarterly newsletter, the Heights Highlites, the City keeps residents informed of stormwater and other environmental issues particularly regarding volunteer opportunities, proper lawn care practices, and recycling and hazardous waste management information. The City website is a clearing house for information on stormwater management and will be updated to provide stormwater management articles, contact numbers for reporting illicit discharges, and other stormwater related complaints. In the near term, the City will also be providing educational brochures for residents in the City Hall lobby. These brochures will most often be from other organizations but may also be produced by the City. The City has incorporated innovative stormwater management practices into both municipal and private development projects. In the future, the City will use these projects to highlight the benefit of certain stormwater management practices. It is important that residents know about these projects (including how they were funded) so that they have an awareness that the City is working for the public interest in protecting high priority resources and that dedicated financial resources such as revenue from the stormwater utility are being put to work. The City and Dakota County co-sponsor a Wetland Health Evaluation Program which samples and documents the plant, frog, and invertebrate communities found in local wetlands following techniques developed by the MPCA. Information from this survey is available to City residents on the MPCA website. The City partners with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Lake Monitoring and Citizen-Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP) program, in which residents voluntarily monitor lakes, contributing to a comprehensive database that allows cities, counties, and watershed management organization to better manage and protect these lakes. 6.4.4.Developers The SWMP is designed to provide the official policy direction that City staff and the City Council desire to guide stormwater mitigation for new and redevelopment projects. New construction in Mendota Heights is limited since there is limited land left to develop. Redevelopment, though, will likely occur on a regular basis. The information contained within this plan is disseminated to developers and their SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-8 consulting engineers as early as possible in the development review process. In this way, developers know what is expected of them and can consider the requirements in their initial assessments of the site as well as incorporate the necessary BMPs in any subsequent designs. Much of the necessary information is disseminated to the developers in an information packet as part of the development submittal information they receive from the City. While dissemination of information is valuable, there is no substitute for a meeting between key City staff and the developer as early as possible in the review process. This helps define expectations for submittals, clarify regulatory compliance issues, and provide additional detailed guidance. Developers are encouraged to do this as soon as possible after they have reviewed the SWMP information and thought about how it applies to their site. 6.5. Financing and the Stormwater Utility 6.5.1.Current Status – Summary The City of Mendota Heights implemented a stormwater utility in 1993. The current quarterly residential charge is $12.00 per residential unit and according to Table 6.2 for other land uses. The quarterly residential charge is expected to increase to $16.50 per residential unit in 2018. Table 6.2 Storm Water Utility Rates Property Type Current Rate $/Acre Business/Industrial $121.80 E 1 acre $60.90 < 1 acre Cemetery/Golf $10.15 Institutional $40.60 6.5.2.The Stormwater Utility into the Future To ensure that Storm Water Utility (SWU) funding keeps pace with increase in municipal maintenance responsibilities, the City should plan for the costs to conduct periodic pond maintenance. Limited data on maintenance activities has been developed by watershed management organizations. A review of this data suggests an annual maintenance budget of $1,250 per acre-foot of wet volume or $4,350 per acre of surface at NWL. Either parameter is relatively easy to track. This $1,250 per acre-foot maintenance item can be translated into a per household cost by virtue of the fact that one acre-foot is sufficient pond wet volume for 20 acres of residential development. Assuming two and a half units per gross acre, then $1,250 per year is spread among 50 units or $25 per unit per year. Maintenance activities that involve the disposal of stormwater pond sediment have become a high cost project due to the presence of chemicals such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (otherwise known as PAHs) in stormwater runoff. The City will continue to follow guidance from the MPCA on this issue, but it is anticipated that costs for stormwater pond maintenance activities will increase in the future. The current residential rate is $12.00 per unit per year. The current charges provide approximately $150,000 per year in revenue of which only a fraction has been used for SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-9 pond maintenance. As the City’s maintenance responsibilities grow the stormwater utility funding also needs to grow to keep pace. Mendota Heights is a regulated MS4 under the Phase II NPDES Permit. There is a cost associated with preparing an NPDES permit and the associated SWPPP. Some estimate cities the size of Mendota Heights will spend $50,000 every five years for permit preparation. For Mendota Heights, it is reasonable to assume that $10 per household will be spent every five years – adding $2 per year to the individual household’s stormwater utility bill. The NPDES permit and SWPPP commit the City to certain activities, including capital projects, for the purpose of improving the quality of the City’s stormwater discharge. The USEPA has estimated that the financial commitments that City’s will make may total $10 per household per year while others place this figure at $20. Since many of the activities identified by the SWPPP may already be funded (like street sweeping and pond maintenance) the $20 figure is probably too high. For the purposes of planning increases in SWU collection, Table 6.3 summarizes the additional stormwater utility charges identified above. Table 6.3 Future Storm Water Utility Funding Item Annual Charge to Single Residential Unit Quarterly Charge to Single Residential Unit Current commitments $18.20 $4.50 Future pond maintenance $32.50 $8.10 NPDES permit and SWPPP $2.60 $0.65 NPDES permit compliance $13.00 $3.25 Total $66.30 $16.50 6.6. Ordinance Implementation The City of Mendota Heights has updated their ordinance to include: Stormwater Management Illicit Discharge Soil Erosion and Sedimentation This will be the City’s method of instituting their site review and permitting process, and includes the submission requirements, review procedure, and enforcement policies. By incorporating site review and comments on temporary and permanent erosion control along with illicit discharge and stormwater management, there is no need to have a separate grading permit and/or stormwater management permit. Grading and erosion control review can occur in the context of the stormwater management review and permitting process. The ordinance references the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance document (Appendix D), which defines the technical erosion control, sediment control, and stormwater management guidelines required to be met. 6.7. Watershed Implementation Priorities 6.7.1.Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-10 Gun Club Lake Watershed Key Scope Items: Lake Augusta Alum Treatment 1. Continue to monitor Lake Augusta alum treatment from 2017. Ivy Falls Creek, Interstate Valley Creek, and West/Central/East Highway 13 Watersheds Key scope items: Ivy Hills Pond, Golf Course Pond, diversion to wetlands at Ivy Falls Creek and Interstate Valley Creek mouths, Dodge Nature Center wetland modifications, erosion problems north of Marie Avenue, Highway 110 and Dodd Road redevelopment, include benefits of Mayfield Heights diversion. 1. Water quality modeling was completed in 2003. 2. Feasibility study was completed in 2004. 3. Design and construction, based on results of feasibility study; start 2018-2032. Interstate Valley Creek Key scope item: Baseflow restoration and channel stabilization. Some work was completed on streambank erosion in 2006, but additional work is needed. 1. Feasibility study; start in 2018. 2. Design and construction, based on results of feasibility study; start in 2018 or later. Key scope item: Address erosion problems in Interstate Valley Creek, north of Marie Avenue. 1. Feasibility study; start in 2018. 2. Design and construction, based on results of feasibility study; start in 2018 or later. Rogers Lake 1. Stormwater BMPs upstream of Rogers Lake; part of the 2014 WRAPS study; anticipated to start in 2020. 2. Education and outreach; part of the 2014 WRAPS study; anticipated to start in 2020. 6.7.2.Lower Minnesota River Watershed District In its 2011 Third Generation Watershed Management Plan, the District currently has no Capital Involvement Projects (CIP) directly partnering with the City, however their Gully Erosion Projects encompasses all LGUs, and will be aimed at constructing bluff stabilization projects in areas identified as having severe erosion, which could include portions of the City’s bluffs. 6.8. City of Mendota Heights Implementation Priorities Table 6.1 lists the implementation priorities for the City of Mendota Heights. A tentative timetable is included with the table. Many of the City’s priorities revolve around improvements to existing stormwater infrastructure. 6.9. NPDES Permit In 2003, the MPCA required the City to submit an NPDES Permit Application to minimize the discharge of stormwater runoff pollutants and authorize stormwater discharge from the City’s MS4. The City will use funds generated from its SWU as the primary funding mechanism for its SECTION 6 Surface Water Management Plan Section 6 City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 Page-11 implementation program including; maintenance, repairs, capital projects, studies, etc. It is anticipated that the SWU will generate approximately $400,000 per year. If funds from this utility fee do not cover necessary costs, the City will consider adjusting the SWU fee to cover the costs associated with the implementation program. The City will continue to review the stormwater utility fee annually and adjust based on the stormwater related needs of the City and other available funding mechanisms. The City will also take advantage of grant or loan programs to offset project costs where appropriate and cost-effective. 6.10. Plan Revision and Amendments The City may need to revise this SWMP to keep it current. Any significant amendments that are made to the plan must be submitted to the LMRWD and LMRWMO for review and approval before adoption by the City. The City anticipates updating the Implementation Plan annually. These changes will be submitted to the Watershed Commissions for their record but not for review and approval. The City may amend this plan at any time in response to a petition by a resident or business. Written petitions for plan amendments must be submitted to the City Administrator. The petition must state the reason for the requested amendment, and provide supporting information for the City to consider the request. The City may reject the petition, delay action on the petition until the next full plan revision, or accept the petition as an urgent issue that requires immediate amendment of the plan. The City of Mendota Heights may also revise/amend the plan in response to City-identified needs. This SWMP is intended to be in effect for 10 years (implementation program outlines cost/activities for seven years) per state statute. The SWMP will be revised/updated at that time, to the extent necessary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tormwater Management Plan Appendix A City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 APPENDIX A Figures %&f(%&f(%&c(%&c(?ØA@?ØA@?ØA@?ÞA@?±A@?±A@?cA@?©A@?©A@MinnesotaRiverMississippi RiverMinnehahaC reekGun ClubPickerelSnellingRogersSunfishCrosbyU.S. Lock & Dam #2 Pool (main channel)AugustaLemayHornbeanU.S. Lock & Dam #1 PoolUpperMudPike Island MarshCemetery PondFigure 1: Land UseMendota Heights SWMPMendota Heights, MNDocument Path: K:\01735-040\GIS\Maps\SWMP Figures\Figure1_LandUseMap.mxd Ü03,200FeetCity BoundaryLand UseSingle FamilyDetachedSingle FamilyAttachedMultifamilyOfficeRetail and OtherCommercialMixed UseResidentialMixed UseIndustrialIndustrial andUtilityInstitutionalPark,Recreational orPreserveGolf CourseMajor HighwayUndevelopedWater %&f(%&f(%&c(%&c(?ØA@?ØA@?ØA@?ÞA@?±A@?±A@?cA@?©A@?©A@LOWER MISSISSIPPIRIVER WATERSHEDMANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONEAGAN-INVER GROVEWATERSHED DISTRICTMISSISSIPPIWATERSHEDDISTRICTMISSISSIPPIWATERSHEDDISTRICTMISSISSIPPIWATERSHEDDISTRICTMINNEHAHACREEK WATERSHEDDISTRICTLOWER MINNESOTARIVER WATERSHEDDISTRICTCAPITOL REGIONWATERSHEDDISTRICTRogersU.S. Lock &Dam #1 PoolPickerelSunfishSnellingCemeteryPondGun ClubMudAugustaCrosbyU.S. Lock &Dam #2 Pool(main channel)PikeIslandMarshUpperHorseshoeHornbeanLemayM inn e sota R ive rMinnesotaRiverMississippiRiver BloomingtonEaganFortSnellingInver Grove HeightsLilydaleMendotaMendotaHeightsMinneapolisSaintPaulSunfishLakeWestSaintPaulFigure 2: Watershed BoundariesMendota Heights SWMPMendota Heights, MNDocument Path: K:\01735-040\GIS\Maps\SWMP Figures\Figure2_WatershedBoundaryMap.mxd Ü03,200FeetWMO_BoundariesPWICity BoundaryParcels %&f(%&f(%&c(%&c(?ØA@?ØA@?ØA@?ÞA@?±A@?±A@?cA@?©A@?©A@Mendota HeightsSaint PaulFort SnellingMinneapolisLilydaleMendotaWest Saint PaulEaganSunfish LakeBloomingtonInver Grove HeightsMinnesotaRiverMississippi RiverMinnehahaCre ekGun ClubPickerelSnellingRogersSunfishCrosbyU.S. Lock & Dam #2 Pool (main channel)AugustaLemayHornbeanU.S. Lock & Dam #1 PoolUpperMudPike Island MarshCemetery PondFigure 3: Impaired WatersMendota Heights SWMPMendota Heights, MNDocument Path: K:\01735-040\GIS\Maps\SWMP Figures\Figure3_ImpairedWatersMap.mxd Ü03,200FeetImpaired StreamsImpaired LakesParcelsCity Boundary !5%&f(%&f(%&c(%&c(?ØA@?ØA@?ØA@?ÞA@?±A@?±A@?cA@?©A@?©A@Gun Club Lake North FenMendota HeightsSaint PaulFort SnellingMinneapolisLilydaleMendotaWest Saint PaulEaganSunfish LakeBloomingtonInver Grove HeightsMinnesotaRiverMississippi RiverMinnehahaCre ekGun ClubPickerelSnellingRogersSunfishCrosbyU.S. Lock & Dam #2 Pool (main channel)AugustaLemayHornbeanU.S. Lock & Dam #1 PoolUpperMudPike Island MarshCemetery PondFigure 4: Wetland LocationsMendota Heights SWMPMendota Heights, MNDocument Path: K:\01735-040\GIS\Maps\SWMP Figures\Figure4_WetlandLocationsMap.mxd Ü03,200Feet!5Calcareous FenFreshwaterEmergent WetlandFreshwaterForested/ShrubWetlandFreshwater PondLakeRiverineCity Boundary %&f( ?±A@ StateHwy149State Hwy 149SibleyMemorialHwyCounty Hwy 31County Hwy 31State Hwy 13 County Hwy 26 County Hwy 43County Hwy 26 County Hwy 63SibleyMemorialHwyCountyRd43County Hwy 43County Hwy 26StateHwy913ASibleyMemorialHwyMSAS 107County Hwy 26 County Rd 4SibleyMemorialHwy County Rd 8 County Rd 31ACounty Hwy 45Eagan Fort Snelling Inver Grove Heights Lilydale Mendota Mendota Heights Saint Paul Sunfish Lake West Saint Paul Lemay Hornbean Gun Club Sunfish Pickerel Pike Island Marsh Upper Crosby U.S. Lock & Dam #2 Pool (main channel) Augusta Lemay Rogers Rogers O'Neil Pond Minne sota River Mississippi River MB-1C IF-15 IF-16C IF-13C IF-18 IF-2C IF-1 IF-24C MB-21 IF-28 IF-12C IF-7C IF-6C MB-5 IF-25 MB-3C IV-126 IV-139 IV-140 MB-6 MB-7 IV-125 IV-113IV-114 IV-119C IV-111 IV-124 IV-115C IV-88C IV-100 IV-98 IV-94C IV-116 IV-92C IV-138 IV-135C MB-8 MB-9C MB-10MB-12C IV-134 IV-133 IV-76C IV-132 IV-129C IV-129a IV-128 MB-16 MB-17 IV-127 IV-104 IV-82C IV-81 IV-91 IV-51 IV-52C IV-17 IV-16 IV-15 IV-12C IV-11 IV-9 IV-8 IV-7 IV-5 GC-60C IV-19 IV-18 IV-10C IV-21-22 IV-23C IV-4 IV-6 IV-21a IV-1C IV-3 IV-75 IV-74 IV-26 IV-30 IV-69C IV-43C GC-57 GC-58GC-59 GC-62 GC-56a GC-56 IV-33 IV-35 IV-32 IV-32 IV-27C GC-5C GC-9 GC-8 IV-34C IV-36 GC-51 GC-11 GC-12 GC-13 GC-10C IP-17 IP-4a IP-12 GC-15 MB-34 MB-34m GC-39C GC-41 GC-43 GC-42 IP-18 IV-64 IP-4b IP-6 IP-8 IP-9 IP-10 IP-11 IP-5a IV-44C IV-58C GC-1 IV-61C IV-79C IV-84C IV-96 IV-67C MB_14C MB-18 MB-35 IP-1 GC-50C IP-3 IP-7 IP-19a IP-13 IP-19b IP-14 GC-49b IP-2 IP-20 GC-49a MB-32 MB-31 IP-5b MB-33 IP-15 IP-16 IV-90 IV-112 LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT EAGAN-INVER GROVE WATERSHED DISTRICT LOWER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT . 0 1,000Feet WMO Boundary Drainage Area #*Inlet/Outlet/Apron ")Catch Basin !(Manhole Structure Storm Sewer Updated Wetland Pond Gun Club Lake Ivy Falls Industrial Park Interstate Valley Creek Mississippi River Bluffs %&c( ?cA@ Figure 5: Drainage Systems Mendota Heights SWMP Mendota Heights, MN %&f(%&f(%&c(%&c(?ØA@?ØA@?ØA@?ÞA@?±A@?±A@?cA@?©A@?©A@RogersU.S. Lock& Dam#1 PoolPickerelSunfishSnellingCemeteryPondGun ClubMudAugustaCrosbyU.S. Lock& Dam #2 Pool(main channel)PikeIslandMarshUpperLemayMinnehahaCreekMinnesotaRiverMississippiRiverBloomingtonEaganFortSnellingInverGroveHeightsLilydaleMendotaMendotaHeightsMinneapolisSaintPaulSunfishLakeWestSaintPaulFigure 6: DNR Protected WatersMendota Heights SWMPMendota Heights, MNDocument Path: K:\01735-040\GIS\Maps\SWMP Figures\Figure6_DnrProtectedWatersMap.mxd Ü03,200FeetPWIParcelsCity Boundary Stormwater Management Plan Appendix B City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 APPENDIX B MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization and BMP Sheets www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 1 of 15 MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization for the NPDES/SDS General Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit MNR040000 reissued with an effective date of August 1, 2013 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Document Doc Type: Permit Application Instructions:This application is for authorization to discharge stormwater associated with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Permit Program. No fee is required with the submittal of this application. Please refer to “Example” for detailed instructions found on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) MS4 website at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4. Submittal:This MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization form must be submitted electronically via e-mail to the MPCA at ms4permitprogram.pca@state.mn.us from the person that is duly authorized to certify this form. All questions with an asterisk (*) are required fields. All applications will be returned if required fields are not completed. Questions: Contact Claudia Hochstein at 651-757-2881 or claudia.hochstein@state.mn.us, Dan Miller at 651-757-2246 or daniel.miller@state.mn.us, or call toll-free at 800-657-3864. General Contact Information (*Required fields) MS4 Owner (with ownership or operational responsibility, or control of the MS4) *MS4 permittee name: Mendota Heights *County: Dakota (city, county, municipality, government agency or other entity) *Mailing address: 1101 Victoria Curve *City: Mendota Heights *State: MN *Zip code: 55118 *Phone (including area code): 651-452-1850 *E-mail: permits@mendota-heights.com MS4 General contact (with Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program [SWPPP] implementation responsibility) *Last name: Ruzek *First name: Ryan (department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant, etc.) *Title: Assistant City Engineer *Mailing address: 1101 Victoria Curve *City: Mendota Heights *State: MN *Zip code: 55118 *Phone (including area code): 651-452-1850 *E-mail: ryanr@mendota-heights.com Preparer information (complete if SWPPP application is prepared by a party other than MS4 General contact) Last name: First name: (department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant, etc.) Title: Mailing address: City: State: Zip code: Phone (including area code): E-mail: Verification 1. I seek to continue discharging stormwater associated with a small MS4 after the effective date of this Permit, and shall submit this MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization form, in accordance with the schedule in Appendix A, Table 1, with the SWPPP document completed in accordance with the Permit (Part II.D.). Yes 2. I have read and understand the NPDES/SDS MS4 General Permit and certify that we intend to comply with all requirements of the Permit. Yes www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 2 of 15 Certification (All fields are required) Yes - I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. I certify that based on my inquiry of the person, or persons, who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of civil and criminal penalties. This certification is required by Minn. Stat. §§ 7001.0070 and 7001.0540. The authorized person with overall, MS4 legal responsibility must certify the application (principal executive officer or a ranking elected official). By typing my name in the following box, I certify the above statements to be true and correct, to the best of my knowledge, and that this information can be used for the purpose of processing my application. Name: John Mazzitello (This document has been electronically signed) Title: Public Works Director/City Engineer Date (mm/dd/yyyy): 12/30/2013 Mailing address: 1101 Victoria Curve City: Mendota Heights State: MN Zip code: 55118 Phone (including area code): 651-452-1850 E-mail: johnrm@mendota-heights.com Note: The application will not be processed without certification. www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 3 of 15 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Document I. Partnerships: (Part II.D.1) A.List the regulated small MS4(s) with which you have established a partnership in order to satisfy one or more requirements of this Permit. Indicate which Minimum Control Measure (MCM) requirements or other program components that each partnership helps to accomplish (List all that apply). Check the box below if you currently have no established partnerships with other regulated MS4s. If you have more than five partnerships, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. No partnerships with regulated small MS4s Name and description of partnership MCM/Other permit requirements involved Lower Mississippi River WMO, JPA Provides Cablecast program, etc. 1,2,3,4,5 Gun Club Lake WMO (recently abolished JPA which included Eagan and Inver Grove Heights) 1,2,3,4,5 City of West St. Paul – Joint Staff training on Good House Keeping Practices 3,6 Dakota County SWCD, cooperative relationship, blue thumb, etc. 1,2,3,4,5 B. If you have additional information that you would like to communicate about your partnerships with other regulated small MS4(s), provide it in the space below, or include an attachment to the SWPPP Document, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere_Partnerships. Also see our website @ www.mendota-heights.com. Under "Engineering" & "Storm Water Management" there are links to non-MS4partners and other sotrm water information. II. Description of Regulatory Mechanisms: (Part II.D.2) Illicit discharges A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) that effectively prohibits non-stormwater discharges into your small MS4, except those non-stormwater discharges authorized under the Permit (Part III.D.3.b.)? Yes No 1. If yes: a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): Ordinance Contract language Policy/Standards Permits Rules Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: Mendota Heights City Code, Title11, Chapter 6, Section 7 Direct link: http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=668 Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere_IDDEreg. 2. If no: Describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 4 of 15 permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: Construction site stormwater runoff control A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) that establishes requirements for erosion and sediment controls and waste controls? Yes No 1. If yes: a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): Ordinance Contract language Policy/Standards Permits Rules Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: Mendota Heights City Code Tittle 11, Chapter 6, Section 6 Direct link: http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=668 Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere_CSWreg. B. Is your regulatory mechanism at least as stringent as the MPCA general permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity (as of the effective date of the MS4 Permit)? Yes No If you answered yes to the above question, proceed to C. If you answered no to either of the above permit requirements listed in A. or B., describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: City code cannot fully be enforced without the adopted supplemental documents including the "Land Disturbance Guidance Document", "Surface Water Management Plan" and project specific approved SWPPP. C.Answer yes or no to indicate whether your regulatory mechanism(s) requires owners and operators of construction activity to develop site plans that incorporate the following erosion and sediment controls and waste controls as described in the Permit (Part III.D.4.a.(1)-(8)), and as listed below: 1. Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize erosion. Yes No 2. BMPs to minimize the discharge of sediment and other pollutants. Yes No 3. BMPs for dewatering activities. Yes No 4. Site inspections and records of rainfall events Yes No 5. BMP maintenance Yes No 6. Management of solid and hazardous wastes on each project site. Yes No 7. Final stabilization upon the completion of construction activity, including the use of perennial vegetative cover on all exposed soils or other equivalent means. Yes No 8. Criteria for the use of temporary sediment basins. Yes No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: The city will update its Land Disturbance Guidance Document and Surface Water Management Plan to be as stringent as identified in the NPDES Permit within 12 months of permit coverage. Post-construction stormwater management A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) to address post-construction stormwater management activities? Yes No 1. If yes: a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 5 of 15 Ordinance Contract language Policy/Standards Permits Rules Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: Mendota Heights City Code Title 11, Chapter 6, Section 8 Direct link: http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=668 Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere_PostCSWreg. B.Answer yes or no below to indicate whether you have a regulatory mechanism(s) in place that meets the following requirements as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a.): 1.Site plan review: Requirements that owners and/or operators of construction activity submit site plans with post-construction stormwater management BMPs to the permittee for review and approval, prior to start of construction activity. Yes No 2.Conditions for post construction stormwater management: Requires the use of any combination of BMPs, with highest preference given to Green Infrastructure techniques and practices (e.g., infiltration, evapotranspiration, reuse/harvesting, conservation design, urban forestry, green roofs, etc.), necessary to meet the following conditions on the site of a construction activity to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP): a. For new development projects – no net increase from pre-project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)). 2) Stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). 3) Stormwater discharges of Total Phosphorus (TP). Yes No b. For redevelopment projects – a net reduction from pre-project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)). 2) Stormwater discharges of TSS. 3) Stormwater discharges of TP. Yes No 3.Stormwater management limitations and exceptions: a. Limitations 1) Prohibit the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post-construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) when the infiltration structural stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in areas: a) Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under an NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit issued by the MPCA. b) Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur. c) With less than three (3) feet of separation distance from the bottom of the infiltration system to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or the top of bedrock. d) Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by the infiltrating stormwater. Yes No 2) Restrict the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post-construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), without higher engineering review, sufficient to provide a functioning treatment system and prevent adverse impacts to groundwater, when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas: a) With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay) soils. b) Within 1,000 feet up-gradient, or 100 feet down-gradient of active karst features. c) Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) as defined in Minn. R. 4720.5100, subp. 13. d) Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour. Yes No 3) For linear projects where the lack of right-of-way precludes the installation of volume control practices that meet the conditions for post-construction stormwater management Yes No www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 6 of 15 in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), the permittee’s regulatory mechanism(s) may allow exceptions as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(b)). The permittee’s regulatory mechanism(s) shall ensure that a reasonable attempt be made to obtain right-of-way during the project planning process. 4.Mitigation provisions: The permittee’s regulatory mechanism(s) shall ensure that any stormwater discharges of TSS and/or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction activity are addressed through mitigation and, at a minimum, shall ensure the following requirements are met: a. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference: 1) Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity. 2) Locations within the same Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR) catchment area as the original construction activity. 3) Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area upǦstream 4) Locations anywhere within the permittee’s jurisdiction. Yes No b. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPs or the retrofit of existing structural stormwater BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional structural stormwater BMP. Yes No c. Routine maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs already required by this permit cannot be used to meet mitigation requirements of this part. Yes No d. Mitigation projects shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original construction activity. e. The permittee shall determine, and document, who will be responsible for long-term maintenance on all mitigation projects of this part. f. If the permittee receives payment from the owner and/or operator of a construction activity for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or operator of that construction activity meeting the conditions for post-construction stormwater management in Part III.D.5.a(2), the permittee shall apply any such payment received to a public stormwater project, and all projects must be in compliance with Part III.D.5.a(4)(a)-(e). Yes No Yes No Yes No 5.Long-term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs: The permittee’s regulatory mechanism(s) shall provide for the establishment of legal mechanisms between the permittee and owners or operators responsible for the long-term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, that have been implemented to meet the conditions for post-construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). This only includes structural stormwater BMPs constructed after the effective date of this permit and that are directly connected to the permittee’s MS4, and that are in the permittee’s jurisdiction. The legal mechanism shall include provisions that, at a minimum: a. Allow the permittee to conduct inspections of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, perform necessary maintenance, and assess costs for those structural stormwater BMPs when the permittee determines that the owner and/or operator of that structural stormwater BMP has not conducted maintenance. Yes No b. Include conditions that are designed to preserve the permittee’s right to ensure maintenance responsibility, for structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, when those responsibilities are legally transferred to another party. Yes No c. Include conditions that are designed to protect/preserve structural stormwater BMPs and site features that are implemented to comply with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). If site configurations or structural stormwater BMPs change, causing decreased structural stormwater BMP effectiveness, new or improved structural stormwater BMPs must be implemented to ensure the conditions for post-construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) continue to be met. Yes No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: Mendota Heights is currently in the process of revising its Surface Water Management Plan to comply with the expanded areas of the city that will now be within the Lower Mississippi River WMO. The city intends to complete this update by 12/31/2014. It is undetermined if mitigation standards will be allowed. Items checked "no" as outlined in B.2 and B.3 will be updated for compliance with the MS4 permit within 12 months of permit coverage. III. Enforcement Response Procedures (ERPs): (Part II.D.3) A. Do you have existing ERPs that satisfy the requirements of the Permit (Part III.B.)? Yes No www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 7 of 15 1. If yes, attach them to this form as an electronic document, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere_ERPs. 2. If no, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, with twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: The city will develop/adopt written Enforcement Response Procedures within 12 months of permit coverage. B. Describe your ERPs: In general practice the citys intent to to achieve compliance without having to initiate ERP Procedures. The first step is typically a verbal conversation about the issue. If this first step is not enough a Notice of Violation and potential stop work order is issued. Depending on the severity, frequency and urgency of the violation the city may issue a fine, perform the corrective work ourselves or if necessary pursue criminal or civil actions. IV. Storm Sewer System Map and Inventory: (Part II.D.4.) A. Describe how you manage your storm sewer system map and inventory: The Mendota Heights Storm Sewer System is available in CAD, PDF, and GIS formats. The electronic database is updated annualy at a minimum. B.Answer yes or no to indicate whether your storm sewer system map addresses the following requirements from the Permit (Part III.C.1.a-d), as listed below: 1. The permittee’s entire small MS4 as a goal, but at a minimum, all pipes 12 inches or greater in diameter, including stormwater flow direction in those pipes. Yes No 2. Outfalls, including a unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee, and an associated geographic coordinate. Yes No 3. Structural stormwater BMPs that are part of the permittee’s small MS4. Yes No 4. All receiving waters. Yes No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: C.Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the requirements of 2009 Minnesota Session Law, Ch. 172. Sec. 28: with the following inventories, according to the specifications of the Permit (Part III.C.2.a.-b.), including: 1. All ponds within the permittee’s jurisdiction that are constructed and operated for purposes of water quality treatment, stormwater detention, and flood control, and that are used for the collection of stormwater via constructed conveyances. Yes No 2. All wetlands and lakes, within the permittee’s jurisdiction, that collect stormwater via constructed conveyances. Yes No D.Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the following information for each feature inventoried. 1. A unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee. 2. A geographic coordinate. 3. Type of feature (e.g., pond, wetland, or lake). This may be determined by using best professional judgment. Yes No Yes No Yes No If you have answered yes to all above requirements, and you have already submitted the Pond Inventory Form to the MPCA, then you do not need to resubmit the inventory form below. If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: E.Answer yes or no to indicate if you are attaching your pond, wetland and lake inventory to the MPCA on the form provided on the MPCA website at: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4 , according to the specifications of Permit (Part III.C.2.b.(1)-(3)). Attach with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere_inventory. Yes No If you answered no, the inventory form must be submitted to the MPCA MS4 Permit Program within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 8 of 15 V. Minimum Control Measures (MCMs) (Part II.D.5) A. MCM1: Public education and outreach 1. The Permit requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise their education and outreach program that focuses on illicit discharge recognition and reporting, as well as other specifically selected stormwater-related issue(s) of high priority to the permittee during this permit term. Describe your current educational program, including any high-priority topics included: The City’s educational program consists of a wide range of activities to educated city residents, community groups, business owners, city staff, elected officials, developers, and contractors on a wide range of water resources and stormwater management topics. The city will evaluate its education program annually and make updates as needed. The city does not anticipate the need for new BMPs, rather current BMPs will be refined and update as necessary to meet permit requirements. 2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public education and outreach program, including the distribution of educational materials and a program implementation plan. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Quarterly Newsletter – Heights Highlights Number of articles, number mailed City Website – Storm water page Implement tracking feature Educational Brochures Number Distributed Annual Public Meeting Number attended Storm Drain Stenciling Number Stenciled Pagel Pond Signs Number Posted Water Quality Monitoring Program Met Council CAMP, Dakota County WHEP Public Input on Capital Improvements Number attended to meetings Cable access programs Supported through LMRWMO, number times aired BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes 3. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Public Works Director/City Engineer B. MCM2: Public participation and involvement 1. The Permit (Part III.D.2.a.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement a public participation/involvement program to solicit public input on the SWPPP. Describe your current program: The city holds an annual public meeting to review program details and program progress with the public. The meeting also provides an opportunity for the public to give input and/or ask questions. The meeting is noticed in the local paper following applicable public notice requirements and broadcast on the local cable access station. The city takes into consideration both written and verbal forms of public input at the meeting and throughout the year. The city maintains a phone line for use by the public to report illicit discharges, report stormwater noncompliance concerns, and/or provide input, give comments, and/or ask questions about the MS4 program. 2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public participation/involvement program, including solicitation and documentation of public input on the SWPPP. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 9 of 15 Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA’s Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Telephone and email hotline Track number of issues reported, respond accordingly Volunteer opportunities Post opportunities on the city website, newsletter, etc. Annual meeting Number attended, comments received Local cable Broadcast public meetings, run storm water related programs SWPPP availability Available online and at city hall BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes 3.Do you have a process for receiving and documenting citizen input? Yes No If you answered no to the above permit requirement, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: Citzen input can be generated through phone, email, fax, meetings, mail, etc…The communication is typically logged in an Xcel file for future reference. Input submitted at public meetings will be recorded on the permanent minutes. 4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Public Works Director/City Engineer C. MCM 3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination 1. The Permit (Part III.D.3.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise their current program as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into the small MS4. Describe your current program: The City of Mendota Heights has personnel available on a normal working day basis and voice mail and email for residents to report illicit discharges, construction site sedimentation and erosion violations, other storm water related issues and to provide comments on the SWPPP. City staff keeps records of these complaints, and responds to the calls as needed. The City has an illicit discharge detection and enforcement ordinance in place that outlines in more detail the City's approach to identifying, addressing, and preventing these discharges to storm sewer. In general, when a complaint comes in, City staff will review the site, take photographs, and leave a notice or send a letter giving the owner a certain number of days to correct the problem. More urgent steps are taken if the violation is serious and/or needs immediate attention. Violators are advised that if they fail to comply, the City will correct the problem and they will be charged. The City maintains and annually updates a storm water system and inventory map. The map is currently maintained in AutoCAD and GIS formats and includes storm water conveyance system, ponds, water bodies, wetlands, structural pollution control devices, and outfalls. The City conducts regular inspections of its storm water system and conducts site specific inspections as reports are received. The city completes dry weather inspections of, at a minimum, 20% of the storm sewer system outfalls, as well as pond inlets and outlets each year. City staff is watchful for signs of illicit discharges while conducting daily activities. The city addresses ISTS inspections through the Dakota County Program. 2. Does your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program meet the following requirements, as found in the Permit (Part III.D.3.c.-g.)? a. Incorporation of illicit discharge detection into all inspection and maintenance activities conducted under the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.-f.)Where feasible, illicit discharge inspections shall be conducted during dry-weather conditions (e.g., periods of 72 or more hours of no precipitation). Yes No b. Detecting and tracking the source of illicit discharges using visual inspections. The permittee may also include use of mobile cameras, collecting and analyzing water samples, and/or other detailed procedures that may be effective investigative tools. Yes No c. Training of all field staff, in accordance with the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.g.(2)), in illicit discharge recognition (including conditions which could cause illicit discharges), and Yes No www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 10 of 15 reporting illicit discharges for further investigation. d. Identification of priority areas likely to have illicit discharges, including at a minimum, evaluating land use associated with business/industrial activities, areas where illicit discharges have been identified in the past, and areas with storage of large quantities of significant materials that could result in an illicit discharge. Yes No e. Procedures for the timely response to known, suspected, and reported illicit discharges. Yes No f. Procedures for investigating, locating, and eliminating the source of illicit discharges. Yes No g. Procedures for responding to spills, including emergency response procedures to prevent spills from entering the small MS4. The procedures shall also include the immediate notification of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty Officer, if the source of the illicit discharge is a spill or leak as defined in Minn. Stat. § 115.061. Yes No h. When the source of the illicit discharge is found, the permittee shall use the ERPs required by the Permit (Part III.B.) to eliminate the illicit discharge and require any needed corrective action(s). Yes No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: In several cases the procedures are in place but may not be entirely written, or may involve written policies and procedures from multiple departments/documents. For example, spills are typically incorporated into the city Emergency Response Plan as it would be redundant to include under the storm water ordinance. The various relevant procedures will be brought together into one place and included within the City's Surface Water Management Plan. Procedures will be completed within 12 months of coverage. If it is considered necessary, changes will be incorporated into the City ordinance. 3. List the categories of BMPs that address your illicit discharge, detection and elimination program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA’s Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Storm Sewer Map Continually update, ongoing Ordinance Update and enforce, number of permits/sites Site Inspections Track the source and enforce as necessary, number inspected. Site plan review Ensure safe guards and hazardous are in place prior to construction Training Annual staff training to assist in identification of hazards. Reporting hotline Maintain accessibility to the public and other agencies to report issues. BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Receipt and consideration of Noncompliance reports Develop written procedures 4. Do you have procedures for record-keeping within your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) program as specified within the Permit (Part III.D.3.h.)? Yes No If you answered no, indicate how you will develop procedures for record-keeping of your Illicit Discharge, Detection and Elimination Program, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended: An electronic and hard-copy list of illicit discharges is kept up to date. It needs to be modified to ensure that it includes all the information required by the Permit. Record-keeping procedures and modified forms will be developed in accordance with the Permit requirements. 5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 11 of 15 Public Works Director/City Engineer D. MCM 4: Construction site stormwater runoff control 1. The Permit (Part III.D.4) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a construction site stormwater runoff control program. Describe your current program: The City of Mendota Heights has an established program and policies that effectively control construction site stormwater and provide for the necessary inspection and enforcement measures. The city’s procedures for site plan review include review and approval by city staff and/or consultant. The city currently inspects construction sites to review compliance with code and permit requirements. The city’s ordinance also requires contractors to conduct regular site and rainfall inspections. The city maintains a phone number (business hours but has voicemail) and email on their website for the public to provide input, report noncompliance and/or other construction site stormwater information 24 hours a day. 2. Does your program address the following BMPs for construction stormwater erosion and sediment control as required in the Permit (Part III.D.4.b.): a. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you conduct prior to the start of construction activity? Yes No b. Does the site plan review procedure include notification to owners and operators proposing construction activity that they need to apply for and obtain coverage under the MPCA’s general permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity No. MN R100001? Yes No c. Does your program include written procedures for receipt and consideration of reports of noncompliance or other stormwater related information on construction activity submitted by the public to the permittee? Yes No d. Have you included written procedures for the following aspects of site inspections to determine compliance with your regulatory mechanism(s): 1) Does your program include procedures for identifying priority sites for inspection? Yes No 2) Does your program identify a frequency at which you will conduct construction site inspections? Yes No 3) Does your program identify the names of individual(s) or position titles of those responsible for conducting construction site inspections? Yes No 4) Does your program include a checklist or other written means to document construction site inspections when determining compliance? Yes No e. Does your program document and retain construction project name, location, total acreage to be disturbed, and owner/operator information? Yes No f. Does your program document stormwater-related comments and/or supporting information used to determine project approval or denial? Yes No g. Does your program retain construction site inspection checklists or other written materials used to document site inspections? Yes No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met. City ordinance states coverage must be obtained through the MPCA but does not specify the specific permit number. The city has a site plan review process; however, there are currently no written procedures for this process. The City will update its site plan review process to include written procedures, notifications, and documentation requirements in accordance with permit requirements. This effort will be completed within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. The city has a process for the receipt and consideration of construction site noncompliance reports and other stormwater related input; however, there are currently no written procedures for this process. The city will update its program for receipt and consideration of pubic stormwater reports to include written procedures in accordance with permit requirements. This effort will be completed within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. The city has a process for site inspections; however, there are currently no written procedures for this process. The city will update its current site inspection process to include written procedures and documentation requirements inaccordance with permit requirements. 3. List the categories of BMPs that address your construction site stormwater runoff control program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA’s Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 12 of 15 (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf).If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Ordinance Enforce, Review and Update as needed Site plan Review Number reviewed, comments issued. Ongoing. Site Inspections Number inspected, number in violation. Hot line/Email reporting Maintain log and follow up actions Education Distribute Land Disturbance guidance document to builders and non-exempt building permits. Wetland Permit Program Number issued BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Noncompliance standards Number received 4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Public Works Director/City Engineer E. MCM 5: Post-construction stormwater management 1. The Permit (Part III.D.5.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a post-construction stormwater management program. Describe your current program: The City has ordinances which establish requirements for post construction stormwater management. The City currently requires that drainage design and stormwater management meet the standards and specifications within the Surface Water Management Plan, Land Disturbance Guidance document and city ordinance and be approved by the City Engineer. The city’s procedures for site plan review include review and approval by city staff and/or consultant. 2. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you will conduct prior to the start of construction activity? Yes No 3.Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have the following listed procedures for documentation of post-construction stormwater management according to the specifications of Permit (Part III.D.5.c.): a. Any supporting documentation that you use to determine compliance with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a), including the project name, location, owner and operator of the construction activity, any checklists used for conducting site plan reviews, and any calculations used to determine compliance? Yes No b. All supporting documentation associated with mitigation projects that you authorize? Yes No c. Payments received and used in accordance with Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(4)(f))? Yes No d. All legal mechanisms drafted in accordance with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(5)), including date(s) of the agreement(s) and names of all responsible parties involved? Yes No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the steps that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met. The city has a site plan review process; however, there are currently no written procedures for this process. The City will update its site plan review process to include written procedures in accordance with permit requirements. This effort will be completed within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. The city currently does not allow for mitigation provisions to meet post construction stormwater requirements. The city will review its current requirements and assess whether or not to add mitigation provisions in accordance with permit requirements. This effort will be completed within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. The city will develop or update existing regulatory mechanisms to provide for the establishment of legal mechanisms between the city and owners and operators responsible for long-term maintenance of privately owned and operated structural BMPs in accordance with permit requirements. This effort will be completed within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 13 of 15 4. List the categories of BMPs that address your post-construction stormwater management program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA’s Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf).If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Ordinance Update as necessary Site Plan Review Review for compliance with city regulations Educational materials Distribute Land Disturbance guidance document with building permits and to developers Wetland permit Program Number issued Structural/Non-structural BMP’s Number/type constructed BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes 5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Public Works Director/City Engineer F. MCM 6: Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations 1. The Permit (Part III.D.6.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement an operations and maintenance program that prevents or reduces the discharge of pollutants from the permittee owned/operated facilities and operations to the small MS4. Describe your current program: The following practices are implemented throughout the City facilities: Storage of salt under shelter roofs Recycling of used oil Readily accessible materials for spill and accident clean up at facilities Conduct vehicle maintenance in covered garages. The city conducts regular inspections of its storm water system. Staff inspects, at a minimum, 20% of the storm sewer system outfalls, as well as pond inlets and outlets each year. The city conducts regular inspections and maintenance on the entire storm sewer system as needed. The city currently inspects material stockpiles and handling areas on an annual basis. The city implements a street sweeping program for vehicle safety, pedestrian safety, water quality, and environmental reasons. Street sweeping is conducted twice annually. The city currently records system inspection and significant maintenance efforts in a paper format. The city is exploring options to purchase an asset management system for developing a detailed for tracking BMPs, condition of system components, and inspection and maintenance efforts 2. Do you have a facilities inventory as outlined in the Permit (Part III.D.6.a.)? Yes No 3.If you answered no to the above permit requirement in question 2, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: The City will develop a facilities inventory to include city-owned facilities which contribute pollutants to stormwater discharges in accordance with permit requirements . This effort will be completed within 12 months of the date permit www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 14 of 15 coverage is extended. 4. List the categories of BMPs that address your pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. For an explanation of measurable goals, refer to the EPA’s Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Training Complete annual training effort generally in conjunction with the City of West St. Paul. Street Sweeping Spring and fall sweeping. Track hours & miles. Inspection Inspect 20% of ponds and outfalls annually. Sump Manholes Cleaned annually Equipment maintenance program Number trained, number vehicles inspected Lawn Maintenance Program Improved buffer strips in city parks, mow clippings into lawn, etc. BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Asset Management Software The city is currently talking to several vendors on purchasing a software program. 5. Does discharge from your MS4 affect a Source Water Protection Area (Permit Part III.D.6.c.)? a.If no, continue to 6. Yes No b.If yes, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is in the process of mapping the following items. Maps are available at http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/maps/index.htm. Is a map including the following items available for your MS4: 1) Wells and source waters for drinking water supply management areas identified as vulnerable under Minn. R. 4720.5205, 4720.5210, and 4720.5330? Yes No 2) Source water protection areas for surface intakes identified in the source water assessments conducted by or for the Minnesota Department of Health under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, U.S.C. §§ 300j –13? Yes No c.Have you developed and implemented BMPs to protect any of the above drinking water sources? Yes No 6. Have you developed procedures and a schedule for the purpose of determining the TSS and TP treatment effectiveness of all permittee owned/operated ponds constructed and used for the collection and treatment of stormwater, according to the Permit (Part III.D.6.d.)? Yes No 7. Do you have inspection procedures that meet the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.(1)- (3)) for structural stormwater BMPs, ponds and outfalls, and stockpile, storage and material handling areas? Yes No 8. Have you developed and implemented a stormwater management training program commensurate with each employee’s job duties that: a. Addresses the importance of protecting water quality? Yes No b. Covers the requirements of the permit relevant to the duties of the employee? Yes No www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5/31/13 Page 15 of 15 c. Includes a schedule that establishes initial training for new and/or seasonal employees and recurring training intervals for existing employees to address changes in procedures, practices, techniques, or requirements? Yes No 9. Do you keep documentation of inspections, maintenance, and training as required by the Permit (Part III.D.6.h.(1)-(5))? Yes No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements listed in Questions 5 – 9, then describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: Within 12 months of extendeded permit coverage, inspection procedures and the training program/schedule already in place will be updated to reflect new Permit requirements. Within the same time frame, procedures and a schedule for determining TP and TSS treatment effectiveness of stormwater ponds will be developed. These will be documented in the Surface Water Management Plan which the City will be updating. 10. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Public Works Director/City Engineer VI. Compliance Schedule for an Approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) with an Applicable Waste Load Allocation (WLA) (Part II.D.6.) A. Do you have an approved TMDL with a Waste Load Allocation (WLA) prior to the effective date of the Permit? Yes No 1. If no, continue to section VII. 2. If yes, fill out and attach the MS4 Permit TMDL Attachment Spreadsheet with the following naming convention:MS4NameHere_TMDL. This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4. VII. Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems (Part II.D.7.) A. Do you own and/or operate any Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems which are regulated by this Permit (Part III.F.)? Yes No 1. If no, this section requires no further information. 2. If yes, you own and/or operate an Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment System within your small MS4, then you must submit the Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems Form supplement to this document, with the following naming convention: MS4NameHere_TreatmentSystem. This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4. VIII. Add any Additional Comments to Describe Your Program 11-6-7: ILLICIT DISCHARGE AND CONNECTION: A. Objectives: The objectives prevent the introduction of pollutants to the stormwater system by any user, to prohibit illicit connections and discharges to the stormwater system, and to establish authority to carry out all inspection, surveillance and monitoring procedures necessary to ensure compliance with this chapter. B. Discharge Prohibitions: 1. Prohibition Of Illegal Disposal And Dumping Of Substances And Materials: No person shall throw, deposit, place, leave, maintain, or store any substance upon any street, alley, sidewalk, storm drain, inlet, catch basin conduit or drainage structure, business place or upon any public or private plot of land, so that the same might be or become a pollutant, except if secured within a container or bag or contained within a lawfully established waste disposal facility. No person shall intentionally dispose of grass, leaves, dirt or landscape material into a water resource, buffer, street, road, alley, catch basin, culvert, curb, gutter, inlet, ditch, natural watercourse, flood control channel, canal, storm drain or any fabricated natural channel. 2. Prohibition Of Illicit Discharges: No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged into the stormwater system or watercourses any materials, including, but not limited to, pollutants or waters containing any pollutants that cause or contribute to a violation of applicable water quality standards, other than stormwater. a. The commencement, execution or continuance of discharge of pollutants to the stormwater system is prohibited except as follows: water line flushing or other potable water sources, landscape irrigation or lawn watering, diverted stream flows, groundwater infiltration to storm drains, uncontaminated pumped groundwater, foundation or footing drains (not including active groundwater dewatering systems), crawl space pumps, air conditioning condensation, springs, noncommercial washing of vehicles, natural riparian habitat or wetland flows, firefighting activities, and any other water source not containing pollutants. b. Discharges specified in writing by the authorized enforcement agency as being necessary to protect public health and safety are allowed. c. Dye testing is an allowable discharge, but requires a verbal notification to the authorized enforcement agency prior to the time of the test. d. The prohibition shall not apply to any nonstormwater discharge permitted under an NPDES permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to the discharger and administered under the authority of the federal environmental protection agency, Minnesota pollution control agency, or other agency, provided that the discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, or order and other applicable laws and regulations, and provided that written approval has been granted for any discharge to the stormwater system. 3. Prohibition Of Illicit Connections: The construction, use, maintenance, or continued existence of such connections that intentionally convey nonstormwater to the stormwater system is prohibited. This prohibition expressly includes, without limitation, illicit connections made in the past, regardless of whether the connection was permissible under law or practices applicable or prevailing at the time of connection. A person is considered to be in violation of this chapter if the person connects a line conveying wastewater to the stormwater system, or allows such a connection to continue. No person shall connect or convey water from floor drains to the storm sewer system. C. Discharge Prevention: 1. Discharge Prevention Requirements: Any property owner within the city shall comply with the following requirements to prevent discharges: a. No person shall leave, deposit, discharge, dump, or otherwise expose any chemical or septic waste in an area where discharge to a street, storm sewer system, or surface water body may occur. This prohibition shall apply to actual discharges as well as the potential for discharge from, for example, a septic system in a location where emergency overflow could discharge to a street, surface water body, or storm sewer system. b. Individual sewage treatment systems must be maintained in order to prevent failure. No part of any individual sewage treatment system requiring on land or inground disposal of waste shall be located in an area where effluent could immediately or gradually reach a body of water due to the existing physical characteristics of the site or the system. c. Recreational vehicle sewage shall be disposed of at a proper sanitary waste facility. Waste must not be discharged in an area where drainage to streets or storm sewer system may occur. d. Water in swimming pools must sit for seven (7) days without the addition of any chlorine to allow for evaporation of the chlorine before it is discharged. e. Runoff of water from residential properties shall be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Paved areas must be swept prior to wash down activity. Runoff water from the washing down of paved areas on commercial or industrial properties is prohibited unless necessary for health or safety purposes and is not in violation of any other applicable regulations. f. Mobile washing companies, such as carpet cleaning and mobile vehicle washing services, shall dispose of any wastewater to the sanitary sewer system. Wastewater shall not be discharged to the streets or storm sewer system. g. Objects such as motor vehicle parts that contain grease, oil or other hazardous substances and unsealed receptacles containing hazardous materials shall not be stored in areas susceptible to runoff. Any machinery or equipment that is to be repaired or maintained in areas susceptible to runoff shall be placed in a confined area to contain any leaks, spills, or discharges. h. Debris and residue shall be removed, as required below: (1) All motor vehicle parking lots and private streets shall be swept, at a minimum of once a year in the spring, to remove debris. Such debris shall be collected and disposed of properly. (2) Fuel and chemical residue or other types of potentially harmful material, such as animal waste, garbage or batteries shall be removed as soon as possible and disposed of properly. Household hazardous waste must be disposed of through the county collection program or at any other authorized disposal site. Household hazardous waste shall not be placed in a trash container. D. Industrial Activity Discharges To The Storm Sewer System: 1. Any person subject to an industrial activity NPDES stormwater discharge permit shall comply with all provisions of such permit. Proof of compliance with said permit may be required in a form acceptable to the city prior to allowing of discharge to the storm sewer system. 2. All facilities that have stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity must adhere to the following requirements: Any person responsible for a property or premises, which is, or may be, the source of an illicit discharge may be required to implement, at said person's expense, additional structural and nonstructural BMPs to prevent the further discharge of pollutants to the storm sewer system. These BMPs shall be part of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) as necessary for compliance with requirements of the NPDES permit. E. Suspension Of Stormwater System Access: 1. Suspension Due To Illicit Discharges In Emergency Situations: The city may, without prior notice, suspend stormwater system discharge access to a person when such suspension is necessary to stop an actual or threatened discharge which presents or may present imminent or substantial danger to the environment, or to the health or welfare of persons, or to the stormwater system or waters of the United States. If the violator fails to comply with a suspension order issued in an emergency, the authorized enforcement agency may take such steps as deemed necessary to prevent or minimize damage to the stormwater system or waters of the United States, or to minimize danger to persons. If authorized enforcement agency takes steps to prevent or minimize damage to the stormwater system or waters of the United States, or to minimize danger to persons, the city may bill the property owner and/or operator, or lien the subject property for the cost of the action. 2. Suspension Due To The Detection Of Illicit Discharge: Any person discharging to the stormwater system in violation of this chapter may have their stormwater system access terminated if such termination would abate or reduce an illicit discharge. The city will notify a violator of the proposed termination of the violator's stormwater system access. The violator may petition the city for a reconsideration and hearing. A person is committing an offense and is subject to misdemeanor enforcement if the person reinstates stormwater system access to premises terminated pursuant to this chapter without the prior approval of the city. F. Monitoring Of Discharges: 1. The city shall be allowed to enter and inspect facilities and properties subject to regulation under this chapter as often as may be necessary to determine compliance with this chapter and for the purposes of inspection, sampling, examination, and the performance of any additional duties as defined by state and federal law that relate to the discharge of stormwater. If a person does not wish to allow the city to enter a building to conduct the required activity, he or she may retain a private inspector to conduct the activity. The private inspector must have credentials that are acceptable to the city. The private inspector shall provide the city with the relevant samples, test results, reports or any other information that is being requested. 2. The city shall have the right to establish on any permitted facility such devices as are necessary in the opinion of the authorized enforcement agency solely to conduct monitoring and/or sampling of the facility's stormwater discharge. 3. The city has the right to require the discharger to install monitoring equipment to ensure discharge is in compliance with MPCA standards. The facility's sampling and monitoring equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe and proper operating condition by the discharger at its own expense. 4. Any temporary or permanent obstruction to safe and easy access to the facility to be inspected and/or sampled shall be promptly removed by the owner or operator at the written or oral request of the city and shall not be replaced. The costs of clearing such access shall be borne by the owner or operator. 5. Unreasonable delays in allowing the city access to a permitted facility is a violation of a stormwater discharge permit and of this chapter. A person who is the owner and/or operator of a facility with an NPDES permit to discharge stormwater associated with industrial activity commits an offense if the person denies the city reasonable access to the permitted facility for the purpose of conducting any activity authorized or required by this chapter. G. Requirement To Prevent, Reduce, And Control Stormwater Pollutants By The Use Of Best Management Practices: 1. Owner Responsibility: The owner or operator of any property shall provide, at owner/operator's expense, reasonable protection from accidental discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes into the municipal stormwater system or watercourses through the use of structural and nonstructural best management practices (BMPs). Further any person responsible for a property or premises, which is, or may be, the source of an illicit discharge, may be required to implement, at said person's expense, additional structural and nonstructural BMPs to prevent the further discharge of pollutants to the stormwater system. These BMPs are listed in the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and the Minnesota pollution control agency's current BMPs, and are necessary for compliance with requirements of the NPDES permit and chapter 6 of the city's surface water management plan (SWMP). H. Watercourse Protection: 1. Owner Responsibility: Every owner of a property through which a watercourse passes, or such person's lessee, shall keep and maintain that part of the watercourse within their property free of trash, debris, excessive vegetation, and other obstacles that would pollute, contaminate, or significantly impact the flow of water through the watercourse. All owners or lessees shall maintain existing privately owned structures within or adjacent to a watercourse, so that such structures will not become a hazard to the use, function, or physical integrity of the watercourse. I. Notification Of Spills: 1. Notwithstanding other requirements of law, as soon as any person responsible for a facility, vehicle or operation, or responsible for emergency response for a facility or operation has knowledge of any known or suspected release of materials of any amount which are resulting or may result in illicit discharges or pollutants discharging into the stormwater system, watercourse, or waters of the United States, said person shall take all necessary steps to ensure the discovery, containment, and cleanup of such release. In the event of such a release of hazardous materials said person shall immediately notify the city and other emergency response agencies of the occurrence via emergency dispatch services. In the event of a release of nonhazardous materials, said person shall notify the city in person or by phone no later than the beginning of the next business day. If the discharge of prohibited materials emanates from a commercial or industrial establishment or vehicle, the owner or operator of such establishment or vehicle shall also retain a written record of the discharge and the actions taken to prevent its recurrence. Such records shall be retained for at least ten (10) years, or longer if required by other regulatory authority. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-6: CONSTRUCTION SITE STORMWATER RUNOFF AND EROSION CONTROL: A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to establish regulation of land disturbing activities, preservation and enhancement of the natural environment by reducing sedimentation in streams, lakes, stormwater systems and other waterways, protection of the quality of surface water resources, preserve and protection of wildlife habitat, restore sites to reduce the negative environmental effects of land disturbing activities, provide effective practices for erosion and sedimentation control, and to comply with local, state and federal regulations. B. Scope: Except where an exemption applies, any person proposing a land disturbing activity or whose land constitutes a land disturbing activity within the city shall apply to the city for the approval of a stormwater pollution prevention plan. No land shall be disturbed until the plan is approved by the city and conforms to the standards set forth herein. C. Stormwater Management Permit Required: 1. Review And Approval: No person shall grade, fill, excavate, store, dispose of soil and earth materials, or perform any other land disturbing or land filling activity without first submitting a stormwater pollution prevention plan for review and approval by the city and obtaining a permit as required in this section and the requirements of section 11-6-8, "Postconstruction Stormwater Runoff", of this chapter. If the applicability requirements of this section or section 11-6-8 of this chapter apply the stormwater pollution prevention plan submittal needs only to meet the requirements of that section. The stormwater management permit is not a replacement for a conditional use permit as required in this code or a wetlands permit as required in section 12-2-6 of this code, or the requirements of the critical area district as required in title 12, chapter 3 of this code nor is it a replacement for a watershed district permit or a state NPDES permit. 2. General Exemptions: Land disturbing activities, which meet all the following criteria are exempt from the requirements of this section: a. The disturbed or filled area is five thousand (5,000) square feet or less in area; and b. The volume of soil or earth material stored or moved is fifty (50) cubic yards or less; and c. No drainageway is blocked or has its stormwater carrying capacities or characteristics modified; and d. The activity does not take place within one hundred feet (100') by horizontal measurement from the top of the bank of a watercourse, the ordinary high water mark of a water body, or the ordinary high water mark of a wetland associated with a watercourse or water body. The activity does not take place within an established 100-year floodplain; and e. Not considered part of a larger common plan of development. 3. Categorical Exemptions: Notwithstanding the requirements of this code, the following activities are exempt from the permit requirements: a. Emergency activities necessary to prevent or alleviate immediate dangers to life or property. b. Activities that are under the regulatory jurisdiction of an authorized state or federal agency. c. General farming, gardening and nursery activities. d. Residential construction activity limited to: (1) Additions to the existing structure, (2) Landscaping and landscaping structures, and (3) Construction of a garage. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) D. Submission Requirements For A Stormwater Management Permit: 1. Application Items: Application for a stormwater management permit shall include submittal of stormwater pollution prevention plan which shall include: a. Application form and fee. b. Narrative describing temporary erosion and sediment control, permanent stabilization, pollution prevention and permanent stormwater management. c. Site map and grading plan. d. Temporary erosion and sediment control plan meeting the requirements of the city's land disturbance guidance document. e. Permanent stabilization plan meeting the requirements of the city's land disturbance guidance document. f. Permanent stormwater management measures meeting the requirements outlined in section 11-6-8 of this chapter and the city's land disturbance guidance document. g. Work schedule. h. Cost estimate. i. Landscape plan showing proposed landscape improvements (plantings, seeding, sod, etc.) if applicable to the project application. j. Lighting/photometric plan displaying proposed exterior lighting, to include light fixture type, height, and foot-candle coverage if applicable to the project application. k. The city may require the applicant to submit additional information or data it determines necessary to complete its review. Submittals determined by the city to be incomplete or otherwise unacceptable for the purposes of this chapter shall be returned to the applicant for correction and resubmittal. (Ord. 431, 2-1-2011) 2. Fees: All applications shall be accompanied by a permit fee. Fees for permits shall be fixed and determined by the city council, adopted by ordinance and uniformly enforced. Such permit fees may, from time to time, be amended by city council ordinance. A copy of the ordinance setting forth currently in effect permit fees shall be kept on file by the city and shall be open to inspection during regular business hours. E. Review Procedure: 1. Process: City staff will review each complete application for a stormwater management permit to determine its conformance with the provisions of this chapter. Within ten (10) working days of receiving an application, city staff will identify if additional materials are required to complete a permit application and within sixty (60) days of receiving an application, city staff shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a stormwater management permit application. 2. Appeal: An applicant may appeal a decision of denial of a permit under this section which shall be made under the manner prescribed in section 11-6-11 of this chapter. 3. Site Review: Once a permit is granted, city staff shall inspect the property for: a. Erosion control compliance with this code; b. Permit conditions and site plans prior to the onset of construction; and c. Permit conditions and site plans throughout project construction. 4. Stop Work Order: The city reserves the right to issue a stop work order for any violation of this chapter, or noncompliance with permit conditions, observed during site inspection. Stop work order shall remain in effect until identified violations or noncompliant issues have been corrected. F. Form Of Security: Before a permit is issued, the city may require the permittee to post security in a form acceptable to the city equal to one hundred twenty five percent (125%) of the cost estimate stated in the application and agreed by the city to be the cost of the work to be done under the permit. The security may take the form of cash in United States currency or an irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial institution in a form acceptable to the city. 1. Release Of Security: a. Provided no action has been taken by the city to recover all or a part of the security before that determination has been made, any security deposited with the city to guarantee performance of the grading and erosion control work shall be released to the person holding the permit upon determination by the city that the conditions of the permit have been satisfactorily performed. b. Provided no action has been taken by the city to recover all or part of the security filed by the permittee before that date, securities held to ensure the successful completion of an interim or final plan shall be released to the permittee either one year after termination of the permit or when a final plan is submitted for the unimproved site, whichever is later. G. Suspension Of Permit: In enforcing the permit: 1. The city may suspend the permit and issue a stop work order as provided under subsection E4 of this section. Upon receipt of a stop work order, the permittee shall cease all work on the work site except for work necessary to remedy the cause of the suspension. 2. The permittee may request a reinstatement of a suspended permit upon correction of the causes for suspension and, if the conditions of the permit have been complied with in full, the city shall reinstate the permit. 3. If the permittee fails or refuses to cease work as required under subsection E4 of this section, the city shall revoke the permit. 4. The city shall not reinstate a revoked permit but shall proceed to act against the security as provided in subsection H of this section. 5. Work performed without a permit is a violation of this chapter and is subject to misdemeanor enforcement. H. Action Against Security: The city may act against the appropriate security if any of the following conditions exist: 1. The permittee stops performing the land disturbing activities or filling, and abandons the work site prior to completion of permanent site stabilization. 2. The permittee fails to conform to the stormwater pollution prevention plan as approved, and has had its permit revoked as provided in subsection G of this section. 3. The techniques utilized for temporary or permanent stabilization fail within one year of installation or before the final plan is implemented for the site or portion of the site, whichever comes later. 4. The city determines that its actions are necessary to prevent excessive erosion from occurring on the site, or to prevent nuisance conditions from occurring on adjacent or nearby properties. The city shall use funds recovered from the security to reimburse the city for all direct and indirect costs incurred in doing the remedial work undertaken by the city or private contractor under contract with the city. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-8: POSTCONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF: A. Objectives: The objectives of this section are to establish minimum stormwater management requirements and controls to protect and safeguard the general health, safety, and welfare of the public residing in watersheds within this jurisdiction. This section seeks to meet that purpose through the following objectives: 1. Reduce stormwater runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion and nonpoint source pollution, wherever possible, through stormwater management controls and to ensure that these management controls are properly maintained and pose no threat to public safety; 2. Control stormwater runoff from development and redevelopment to reduce flooding, silt deposits and stream bank erosion, and maintain the integrity of stream channels; 3. Control nonpoint source pollution caused by stormwater runoff from development; and 4. Control the total annual volume of surface water runoff which flows from any specific site following development. B. Applicability: The rules of applicability are as set forth in section 11-6-6, "Construction Site Stormwater Runoff And Erosion Control", of this chapter. C. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: 1. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Required For All New Developments And Redevelopments: No application for development or redevelopment will be approved unless it includes a stormwater pollution prevention plan detailing how runoff and associated water quality impacts resulting from the development will be controlled or managed and contains the submission materials identified in subsection 11-6-6D of this chapter. This plan must indicate whether stormwater will be managed on site or off site and, if on site, the general location and type of practices. The stormwater pollution prevention plan(s) shall be referred for comment to interested agencies, and any comments must be addressed in a final stormwater pollution prevention plan. This final plan must be signed by a licensed professional engineer (PE) of the state of Minnesota. 2. Design Of Stormwater Facilities: The stormwater pollution prevention plan shall meet the design requirements outlined in the city's land disturbance guidance document. 3. Maintenance Of Existing Stormwater Facilities: Any stormwater facility in existence prior to the adoption date hereof shall be maintained by the owner of the stormwater facility and in a manner to conform to design standards for that facility. Any redevelopment of the stormwater facility shall require that the facility meet current stormwater design standards as set forth in the city's land disturbance guidance document. The thresholds for maintenance are triggered once sediment deposits reach a point greater than is allowed under the design standard criteria, or such deposits begin to have a substantial effect on the water quality or holding capacity of the pond. 4. Inspection Of Stormwater Facilities: Inspection programs shall be established on a regular basis, including, but not limited to, an inspection in accordance with the schedule defined in the MPCA MS4 permit section V, part 6.b or more often if deemed necessary to ensure proper functioning of the stormwater management facility. Inspections are the responsibility of the owner of the stormwater facility and must be completed by a certified erosion control specialist in the state of Minnesota hired for that purpose. Inspection results must be completed and submitted to the city in accordance with the schedule defined in the MPCA MS4 permit section V, part 6.b from the completion of development or from the adoption date hereof for a preexisting stormwater facility. Inspections may include, but are not limited to: reviewing maintenance and repair records; sampling discharges, surface water, groundwater, and material or water in drainage control facilities; and evaluating the condition of drainage control facilities and other stormwater treatment practices. All new and existing stormwater management facilities must undergo, at a minimum, an inspection in accordance with the schedule defined in the MPCA MS4 permit section V, part 6.b to document maintenance and repair needs and ensure compliance with the requirements of this chapter and accomplishment of its purposes. This maintenance may include: removal of silt, litter and other debris from all catch basins, inlets and drainage pipes; grass cutting and vegetation removal; and necessary replacement of landscape vegetation. Any maintenance needs found must be addressed in a timely manner, as determined by the city. The inspection and maintenance requirement may be increased as deemed necessary to ensure proper functioning of the stormwater management facility. D. Maintenance Covenants: Maintenance of all stormwater management facilities shall be ensured through the creation of a formal maintenance covenant that must be approved by the city and recorded at the Dakota County recorder's office prior to final plan approval. As part of the covenant, a schedule shall be developed for when and how often maintenance will occur to ensure proper function of the stormwater management facility. The covenant shall also include plans for periodic inspections to ensure proper performance of the facility between scheduled cleanouts. The owner/operator shall show in the maintenance covenant how it will utilize best management practices (BMPs) to prevent discharge of pollutants into the stormwater system. These BMPs are listed in the city's stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and the most current Minnesota pollution control agency BMP standards, the state of Minnesota stormwater manual and are necessary for compliance with requirements of the NPDES permit and the city's local surface water management plan. The threshold for maintenance is triggered once sediment deposition reaches a point greater than is allowed under the design standard criteria, or such deposition begins to have a substantial effect on the water quality or holding capacity of the pond. E. Right Of Entry For Inspection: When any new drainage control facility is installed on private property, or when any new connection is made between private property and a public stormwater system, the property owner shall grant to the city the right to enter the property at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner for the purpose of inspection. This includes the right to enter a property when the city has a reasonable basis to believe that a violation of this chapter is occurring or has occurred, and to enter when necessary for abatement of a public nuisance or correction of an ordinance violation. F. Records Of Installation And Maintenance Activities: Parties responsible for the operation and maintenance of a stormwater management facility shall make records of the installation, inspections, and of all maintenance and repairs, and shall retain the records for at least ten (10) years. These records shall be made available to the city during inspection of the facility and at other reasonable times upon request. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-10: ENFORCEMENT: A. Violation: Any action, failure to act or land use practice that would impair water quality if allowed to continue, shall constitute a public nuisance condition and be treated as a misdemeanor under this code. B. Notice Of Violation: Whenever the city finds that a person has violated any section of this chapter or failed to meet a requirement of this chapter, the city shall order compliance by written notice of violation to the responsible person. Such notice may require: 1. Monitoring, analyses and reporting; 2. Elimination of illicit discharges or connections; 3. Abatement of pollution and hazards; 4. Restoration of affected property; 5. Remediation of violation; 6. Payment of a fine to cover administrative and remediation costs; 7. Loss of any posted securities; 8. Implementation of source control or treatment BMPs; and 9. Other actions as deemed necessary by the city. If abatement of a violation and/or restoration of affected property is required, the notice shall set forth a deadline within which such remediation or restoration must be completed. The notice shall further advise that, should the violator fail to remediate or restore within the established deadline, the work will be done by the city or other local governmental unit or a contractor and the expense thereof shall be charged to the violator. C. Failure To Maintain Practices: If a responsible party fails or refuses to meet the requirements of the maintenance covenant, the city, after reasonable notice, may correct a violation of the design standards or maintenance needs by performing all necessary work to place the facility in proper working condition. In the event that the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to public safety or public health, the city shall notify the party responsible for maintenance of the stormwater management facility in writing. Upon receipt of that notice, the responsible person shall have thirty (30) days to effect maintenance and repair of the facility in an approved manner. After proper notice, the city may assess the owner(s) of the facility for the cost of repair work, and any penalties and the cost of the work shall be a lien on the property, or prorated against the beneficial users of the property, and may be placed on the tax bill and collected as ordinary taxes by the county. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-11: APPEAL OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION: Any person receiving a notice of violation may appeal the determination of the city. The notice of appeal must be received within five (5) days from the date of the notice of violation. Hearing on the appeal before the appropriate authority or designee shall take place within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the notice of appeal. The decision of the city or the local government unit or designee shall be final. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-12: ENFORCEMENT MEASURES AFTER APPEAL: If the violation has not been corrected pursuant to the requirements set forth in the notice of violation, or, in the event of an appeal, within five (5) working days of the decision of the city or local government unit upholding the decision of the authorized enforcement agency, then representatives of the authorized enforcement agency shall enter upon the subject private property and are authorized to take any and all measures necessary to abate the violation and/or restore the property. It shall be unlawful for any person, owner, agent or person in possession of any premises to refuse to allow the government agency or designated contractor to enter upon the premises for the purposes set forth above. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-13: COST OF ABATEMENT OF THE VIOLATION: Within thirty (30) days after abatement of the violation, the owner of the property will be notified of the cost of abatement, including administrative costs. The property owner must file any objection to the amount of the assessment in writing with the city within thirty (30) days. If the amount due is not paid within a timely manner, as determined by the decision of the city, or by the expiration of the time in which to file an appeal, the costs shall become a special assessment against the property and shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of the assessment. Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall become liable to the city by reason of such violation. (Ord. 421, 2- 3-2009) 11-6-14: INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter. If a person has violated or continues to violate the provisions of this chapter, the authorized enforcement agency may petition for a preliminary or permanent injunction restraining the person from activities which would create further violations or compelling the person to perform abatement or remediation of the violation. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-15: COMPENSATORY ACTION: In lieu of enforcement proceedings, penalties, and remedies authorized by this chapter, the authorized enforcement agency may impose upon a violator alternative compensatory action, such as storm drain stenciling, attendance at compliance workshops, creek cleanup, and similar programs. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-16: VIOLATIONS DEEMED A PUBLIC NUISANCE: In addition to the enforcement processes and penalties provided, any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter is a threat to public health, safety, and welfare, and is declared and deemed a nuisance, and may be summarily abated or restored at the violator's expense, and/or a civil action to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of such nuisance may be taken. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-17: CRIMINAL PROSECUTION: Any person who has violated or continues to violate this chapter shall be liable to criminal prosecution to the fullest extent of the law. The authorized enforcement agency may recover all attorney fees, court costs, and other expenses associated with enforcement of this chapter, including sampling and monitoring expenses. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) 11-6-18: REMEDIES NOT EXCLUSIVE: The remedies listed in this chapter are not exclusive of any other remedies available under any applicable federal, state or local law and it is within the discretion of the authorized enforcement agency to seek cumulative remedies. (Ord. 421, 2-3-2009) Name of MS4 PermitteeDate form completedUnique ID NumberType of Feature (Pond, Wetland or Lake)Feature Common Name (If Applicable)Y Coordinate (Latitude) Decimal DegreesX Coordinate (Longitude) Decimal DegreesCity of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P1aWetland City Hall Pond West44.8863-93.1488City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P1bPondCity Hall Pond East44.8863-93.1488City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P5PondYorkton Pond 44.8824-93.1547City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P8PondLexington Apartment Pond 44.8722-93.1465City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P9PondCemetery Pond44.8732-93.1465City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P10LakeLake Augusta44.8785-93.1568City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC - P11PondCity of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P15PondGC-P1544.8803-93.1619City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P41PondCommerce Drive Pond #2 & 344.8715-93.1706City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P43PondBitminous Roadways44.8744-93.1728City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P49dPondMNDOT Pond "D"44.8715-93.1681City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P49cPondCommerce Drive Pond #144.8733-93.1680City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P49bPondSouth Acacia44.8765-93.1649City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P50CPondHillside Gables44.8690-93.1457City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P51PondFreeway Interchange44.8646-93.1486City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P56PondTowsignant Pond44.8649-93.1391City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P56aPondIce Arena44.8649-93.1383City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P57WetlandVisitation P5744.8691-93.1302City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P58WetlandVisitation P5844.8679-93.1313City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P59WetlandVisitation Pond44.8671-93.1330City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013GC-P62Pond GC - P6244.8637-93.1390City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IF-P1PondSomerset #144.9045-93.1078City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IF-P1aPondSomerset CC44.9042-93.1069City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IF-P4PondSommerset #244.9039-93.1127City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IF-P21PondIvy Park Pond44.9101-93.1152City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IF-P15PondSutcliff Pond44.9163-93.1135MS4 Pond, Wetland, and Lake Inventory Form Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Program 'RF7\SH 3ODQV6SHFLILFDWLRQV0DSVZTVWUPZZZSFDVWDWHPQXV$YDLODEOHLQDOWHUQDWLYHIRUPDWV 77<RU3DJHRI Name of MS4 PermitteeDate form completedUnique ID NumberType of Feature (Pond, Wetland or Lake)Feature Common Name (If Applicable)Y Coordinate (Latitude) Decimal DegreesX Coordinate (Longitude) Decimal DegreesCity of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IF-P16PondMnDOT 13 Pond44.9137-93.1171City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IF-P18PondBurr Oak Pond44.9102-93.1096City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P1LakeLemay Lake44.873-93.1574City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P1bPondAugusta Shores44.8789-93.1609City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P1cPondLemay Lake Road44.8688-93.1547City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P1dWetland Lemay Lake Wetland44.8701-93.1556City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P2PondWaters Drive44.8688-93.1588City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P4PondCordon Blue44.866-93.1616City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P5PondWarehouse Pond44.8719-93.1658City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P12PondJES Pond44.8669-93.1661City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-P16PondBusiness Park44.8652-93.1633City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-17aPondVet Pond44.8645-93.1546City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-17bPondRadiology Pond44.8645-93.1582City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IP-17CPondNorthland Ponds44.8634-93.1577City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P2PondWestview Pond44.8668-93.1288City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P3PondHazel Pond44.8676-93.1280City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P4PondPagel Pond44.8681-93.1238City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P5PondMonet Pond44.8651-93.1251City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P6PondBridgeview Pond44.8668-93.1212City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P7PondArbor Pond44.8642-93.1227City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P8PondBrookfield Pond44.8639-93.1204City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P9PondLockwood Pond44.8656-93.1184City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P11PondKensington Park44.8664-93.1165City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P12PondSoutheast Ponds44.8636-93.1108City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P12bWetlandSoutheast Ponds44.8623-93.1071City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P12cWetlandSoutheast Ponds44.8635-93.1079City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P15PondOwens Pond44.8659-93.1109City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P16PondKing Pond44.8690-93.1095City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P17PondDelaware Pond 1 44.8710-93.1084City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P18PondCopperfield Pond 44.8729-93.1137City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P19PondHagstrom Pond44.8690-93.1126City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P21aPondISD 197 Friendly Hills44.8687-93.1199City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P22PondFriendly Hills44.8711-93.119City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P24PondDarsow Pond44.8738-93.1149ZTVWUPZZZSFDVWDWHPQXV$YDLODEOHLQDOWHUQDWLYHIRUPDWV 77<RU3DJHRI Name of MS4 PermitteeDate form completedUnique ID NumberType of Feature (Pond, Wetland or Lake)Feature Common Name (If Applicable)Y Coordinate (Latitude) Decimal DegreesX Coordinate (Longitude) Decimal DegreesCity of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P26Pond35E/110 MNDOT44.8840-93.1375City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P32Pond Golf Course 44.8776-93.1385City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P33PondN. Wagon Wheel44.8759-93.1380City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P39LakeN. Rogers Lake (IV-P39) 44.8769-93.1353City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013LakeS. Rogers Lake (IV - P39) 44.871-93.1392City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P39cPondGolf Course44.8806-93.1371City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P39dPondS. Wagon Wheel44.8746-93.1375City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P39eWetlandRogers L. Marsh44.8733-93.1422City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P39fPondI.O.S. Pond44.8733-93.1421City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P35PondRogers Park44.8745-93.1407City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P36Pond35-E Pond44.8721-93.1436City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P44PondMendakota Pond44.8795-93.1287City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P50PondF.M. Pond44.8759-93.1214City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P51PondSibley H.S. Pond 44.884-93.1094City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P57PondDodge N.C. Pond44.8793-93.1142City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P57bPondDelaware Pond 244.8809-93.1074City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P57cPondGlen Toro44.8779-93.1078City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P57dPondGlen Toro 244.8767-93.1077City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P63PondMNDOT POND44.884593.1235City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P63bPondVillage Pond44.885893.1204City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P64PondMcDonalds Pond 44.8826-93.1234City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P64bPondPlaza Pond44.8819-93.1225City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P68WetlandFriendly Marsh44.8786-93.1191City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P74PondLower Crown Point 44.8859-93.1296City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P75PondUpper Crown Point 44.8878-93.1309City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P110PondValley Marsh44.8903-93.1292City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P81Pond Warrior Pond 44.8881 -93.1134City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P83Pond44.8867-93.1214City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P109Pond44.8908-93.1273City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P89WetlandMarie Marsh44.8976-93.1099City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P90WetlandMarie Marsh44.8915-93.1076City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P91PondKern Pond44.8931-93.1106ZTVWUPZZZSFDVWDWHPQXV$YDLODEOHLQDOWHUQDWLYHIRUPDWV 77<RU3DJHRI Name of MS4 PermitteeDate form completedUnique ID NumberType of Feature (Pond, Wetland or Lake)Feature Common Name (If Applicable)Y Coordinate (Latitude) Decimal DegreesX Coordinate (Longitude) Decimal DegreesCity of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P93WetlandMarie Marsh 44.8951-93.1133City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P93bPond44.8935-93.1128City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P96aPondMarie/Dodd44.892-93.1161City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P96bPondHidden Creek #244.8911-93.1199City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P98Wetland44.8951-93.1183City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P100PondHidden Creek #144.8927-93.1178City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P104PondSutton/Marie Pond44.8913-93.1242City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P111PondBachelor Ave Pond/Par 344.8952-93.1244City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P112PondValley Park Pond44.8922-93.1271City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013PondThompson Pond44.9018-93.1078City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P114PondSomerset #344.9016-93.1104City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P115PondWentworth Park44.8995-93.1219City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P116PondWentworth Pond44.8975-93.1151City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P125Pond Park Place Pond 44.9001 -93.1283City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P126PondCherry Hills Pond44.9041-93.1296City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P128PondLex./Marie Ave.44.8903-93.1463City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P129aPondFaro Pond44.8907-93.1436City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P132PondBurrows Pond44.8887-93.1386City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P132bPondBurrow Storm Pond44.8878-93.1378City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P133PondMarie Pond44.8918-93.1384City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P134PondVictoria Pond44.8937-93.1360City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013IV-P139PondRavine Pond44.9020-93.1335City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P3CaPondSummit #144.9062-93.1279City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P3CbPondSummit #244.9064-93.1293City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P8PondLilac Lane Pond44.8974-93.1383City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P10PondMayfield Heights44.8948-93.1435City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P16PondKingsley Pond44.8919-93.1504City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P17PondVal's Addition44.8910-93.1509City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P31Pond44.8835-93.1606City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P31bPond44.8845-93.1474City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P32Pond44.8826-93.1605City of Mendota Heights 12/30/2013MB-P33Pond44.8828-93.1716ZTVWUPZZZSFDVWDWHPQXV$YDLODEOHLQDOWHUQDWLYHIRUPDWV 77<RU3DJHRI Stormwater Management Plan Appendix C City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 APPENDIX C System Design Guidelines Appendix C: System Design Guidelines 1. CONVEYANCE AND STORAGE SYSTEM CONCEPTS 1.1. Storm Sewer and Channels In the Mendota Heights SWMP stormwater model, a combination of storm sewer and channels has been used to transport simulated stormwater runoff. A complete system consists of a complex web of trunks, manholes, lateral lines, overland drainage ways, catch basin leads, catch basins, pond inlets and outlets, and many other items. Proper design of a storm sewer system requires that all sewer lines be provided with access through manholes for maintenance and repair operations. Generally, spacing of manholes should be no greater than 400 feet. Intervals on larger diameter lines can be increased when the pipes are sufficiently large for a person to physically enter the storm sewer pipe for maintenance operations. Regardless of sewer size, manholes should normally be provided at all junction points and at points of abrupt alignment or grade changes. Although lateral systems are designed for the 10-year storm event, their performance must be analyzed for storms exceeding the design storm. Lateral and trunk pipes will surcharge when the design storm is exceeded. During surcharging, the pipes operate as closed conduits and become pressurized with different pressure heads throughout the system. Low areas that are commonly provided with catch basins become small detention ponds often performing like pressure relief valves with water gushing out of some locations. For this reason, it is extremely important to ensure that these low areas have an acceptable overland drainage route with proper transfer capacity. At a minimum, ponding on streets must meet all of the requirements of the 100-year design criteria. For safety reasons, the maximum depth should not exceed two feet at the deepest point and the lowest ground at adjacent building elevation should be at least one and a half feet above the elevation to which water could rise before overflowing through adjacent overland routes. All storm sewer facilities, especially those conveying large quantities of water at high velocities, should be designed with efficient hydraulic characteristics. Manholes and other structures at points of transition should be designed and constructed to provide gradual changes in alignment and grade. Pond outlet control structures should be designed to allow water movement in natural flow line patterns, to minimize turbulence, to provide good self-cleaning characteristics, and to prevent damage from erosion. Intake structures should be liberally provided at all low points where stormwater collects and at points where overland flow is to be intercepted. Inlet structures are of special importance, since it is a poor investment to have an expensive storm sewer line flowing partially full while property is being flooded due to inadequate inlet capacity. Intake grates and opening should be self-cleaning and designed to minimize capacity reduction when clogged with twigs, leaves, and other debris. Effective energy dissipation devices or stilling basins to prevent stream bank or channel erosion at all stormwater outfalls should be provided. The following recommendations should be kept in mind when designing an outlet: Inlet and outlet pipes of stormwater ponds should be extended to the pond NWL whenever possible. Outfalls with velocities of less than four feet per second (fps) that project flows downstream into the channel in a direction 30 degrees or less from the normal channel axis generally do not require energy dissipaters or stilling basins, but do require riprap protection. Where an energy dissipater is used, it should be sized to provide an average outlet velocity of less than four fps, unless riprap is also used. In the latter case, or when discharge occurs at NWL of a pond, the average outlet velocity should not exceed six fps. Where outlet velocities exceed six fps, the design should be based on the unique site conditions present. Submergence of the outlet or installation of a stilling basin approved by the City is required when excessive outlet velocities are experienced. In the case of discharge to channels, riprap should be provided on all outlets to an adequate depth below the channel grade and to a height above the outfall or channel bottom. It should be placed over a suitably graded filter material and filter fabric to ensure that soil particles do not migrate through the riprap and reduce its stability. Riprap should be placed to a thickness at least two and a half times the mean rock diameter so as to ensure that it will not be undermined or rendered ineffective by displacement. If riprap is used as protection for overland drainage routes, grouting may be recommended. Overland drainage routes where velocities exceed six fps should be reviewed by the City Engineer and approved only when suitable stabilization measures are proposed. Open channels and swales are recommended where flows and small grade differences prohibit the economical construction of an underground conduit and in areas where open channel type drainage will enhance the aesthetic qualities of a development. Whenever possible, a minimum slope of two percent should be maintained in unlined open channels and overland drainage routes. Slopes less than two percent and greater than one percent are difficult to construct and maintain and may require an underdrain system. Slopes less than one percent should not be allowed. Side slopes should be a maximum of 4:1 (horizontal to vertical) with gentler slopes being desirable. Where space permits, slopes should be cut back to match existing grade. In general, the flatter the channel side slopes and the more meandering the channel alignment the more natural the channel will appear. Natural looking channels use significantly more space than common ditches. One method of providing this space is to incorporate greenway corridors over the channel area. Rock riprap should be provided at all points of juncture between two open channels and where storm sewer pipes discharge into a channel. The design velocity of an open channel should be sufficiently low to prevent erosion of the bottom. Riprap or concrete liners should be provided in areas where high velocities cannot be avoided. Periodic cleaning of an open channel is required to ensure that the design capacity is maintained. Therefore, all channels should be designed to allow easy access for equipment. Sanitary sewer manholes that could be subject to temporary inundation, due to their proximity to ponds, channels, or roadway low points, should be equipped with watertight castings. Precautions should be taken during construction to prevent the entrance of stormwater into the sanitary sewer. When access is required at all times, sanitary manholes located near ponding areas should be raised above the 100-year HWL. If access is not required, water tight castings should be installed. Future storm drainage construction should include provisions for improving the water tightness of nearby sanitary sewer manholes. All newly constructed sanitary manholes in the vicinity of ponding areas and open channels described in this report should be waterproof. 1.2. Ponds Stormwater ponding areas are an essential part of any storm drainage system. These areas provide locations where stormwater flows can be reduced to provide flood protection for downstream areas. The effective use of ponding areas enables the installation of outflow storm sewers and channels with reduced capacities, since the duration of the design storm is effectively increased over the total time required to fill and empty ponds. Smaller capacity trunk storm sewer and channels provide a cost savings to the City. The use of ponds to control stormwater runoff rates is a recent phenomenon. Historically, older cities have piped stormwater directly to the nearest large receiving water or river. Continued use of this practice has both cost and regulatory implications. In terms of cost, few cities have the funds necessary to build pipes that provide 100-year protection to properties. In fact, the older cities that have historically piped all their stormwater find that the systems they constructed provide nowhere near the 100-year protection found in newer cities that have used ponds. In terms of the regulatory control, many direct discharges (without ponding) to waters of the state are precluded. At present, even direct discharges to wetlands that are not considered waters of the state are regulated through the NPDES construction permit. Cost and regulatory considerations aside, well designed ponds: 1. Improve water quality 2. Recharge the groundwater table 3. Provide aesthetic, recreational and wildlife benefits Ponds improve stormwater quality by allowing nutrients and sediments carried by runoff to settle before discharge to important receiving waters. Groundwater recharge is increased by restricting the outflow rate from a pond, thus allowing more water to infiltrate into the soil. Careful planning of ponds can enhance a development’s appeal and still provide efficient stormwater management. In fact, lots with pond frontage command a higher price than lots without. To provide proper protection for adjacent property, the design storm for ponding areas is the maximum flood elevation obtained from analyzing 100-year critical events of different duration. Regardless the duration of the critical event, a Type II, 24-hour, 100-year rainfall event must also be analyzed. The lowest exposed elevations of structures that are adjacent to ponds should be certified by the builder during basement construction to ensure adequate freeboard. Runoff determinations for pond design vary from those for storm sewer calculations. The critical storm for storm sewer design is the short, high intensity storm, whereas the critical storm for pond design is often of longer duration, since water is being stored for longer periods of time and released at a slower rate. The use of HydroCAD computer modeling in the analysis of the ponding system has allowed for the efficient review of complicated routing patterns, each comprised of several ponds. The pond storage and outflow rates, adjusted by lag time, were determined by the HydroCAD program for all the ponds identified in this Plan. The lag time is significant as it represents the attenuation of peak flows at each pond and generally shows that the peaks are not occurring at the same time. This implies that the direct runoff to a pond has generally passed through to the downstream trunk system before the inflow of large volumes of runoff from upstream ponds. 2. WATER QUALITY SYSTEM CONCEPTS The only effective way to maintain high quality water bodies is to prevent sediment, nutrients and other materials from entering the storm drainage system. Complete interception of stormwater for treatment at the point of discharge is not currently feasible, though the City encourages the implementation of techniques such as rainwater gardens, infiltration areas, and filtration swales that capture a portion of runoff at the point of generation. Application of these small-scale techniques should be on a site specific basis. 2.1. Pollutant Control The three main sources for degradation of water quality are: 1. Solids and associated chemicals (including calcium chloride and salt) from erosion and street sanding, 2. Composted decay around ponds, and 3. Fertilizers and other chemicals from farming practices, impervious surfaces, or lawn care. Identification of the source and implementation of reasonable control measures can minimize the degradation of Mendota Heights’ waterbodies. In areas where development is taking place, stormwater runoff frequently contains substantial quantities of solids. Most commonly, these sediments are carried by runoff into the storm sewer from large grading sites, though fully developed areas also generate sediment loads particularly from winter sanding operations and in areas of structurally failing pipes. For developing areas, strict on-site erosion control practices are required to prevent sediments from entering downstream water bodies. Inspections should be conducted by the City to verify that the erosion control practices have been installed and maintained properly. Even with extensive erosion control practices, sediment and airborne particulates will continue to enter surface waters of the City. The importance of erosion control measures during construction cannot be overemphasized. The BMPs recommended in the MPCA Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas should be followed for all developments. The Minnesota general NPDES stormwater permit for construction activity requires a permit for construction activities that disturb one or more acres. When disturbing 10 or more acres, developers are required to provide temporary settling ponds to treat the runoff from their grading sites. These ponds are intended to prevent the introduction of sediment and its associated pollution into the storm sewer system and are required to function, in their various forms, until grading has ceased and adequate cover has been established. At a minimum, these temporary sedimentation basins should meet the requirements set forth in the NPDES general permit for construction activities. When the outlet for a siltation basin, either permanent or temporary, is located below the normal water surface, the basin can also serve to confine floating solids that may otherwise enter a downstream pond or lake. This practice is typically referred to as skimming. If a hazardous material such as fuel oil were to spill, a skimmer structure would retain it within the basin and thus isolate it for easy access and prompt cleanup. Skimmer structures should be used for all constructed ponds upstream of wetlands, lakes, rivers and streams. For constructed ponds that discharge into other constructed ponds, skimmer structures are not as important. Ideally, some sort of solids removal system should be installed wherever a storm sewer outlets into a pond. In certain cases, settling chamber (sump) type catch basins or manholes can be provided for storm sewers that discharge into ponds. These can provide effective removal of sand and gravel, which may be flushed into the storm sewer from streets and highways, but are ineffective in the removal of finer particles such as silts and clays. Use of this type of catch basin or manhole should be limited to those areas where regular maintenance is practical and to where the sump can be realistically expected to intercept sand from winter sanding operations and gravel from driveways and construction sites. Of late a concern regarding West Nile virus and mosquito breeding habitat has called into question the use of sump manholes. The latest data suggests that many different breeding environments exist for the mosquitoes that carry the virus including ponds, wetlands, catch basins, and manholes. Obviously, eliminating these elements of the system is not feasible. Though they should be used sparingly, sump manholes should not be prohibited due to a concern over West Nile virus. It bears repetition that a solids removal structure must be regularly maintained if it is to remain effective. Since maintenance is the controlling factor in the long term performance of sediment control measures, ponds are recommended over sump manholes. Sump manholes, if numerous, often go without maintenance. An individual pond requires more maintenance time than a sump, but system maintenance time goes down when ponds are the preferred method of sediment removal as long as pond slopes and benching allow access by maintenance equipment. For this reason sump manholes should be limited to storm sewer lines discharging directly to wetlands, lakes, rivers, streams, ravines, and constructed channels and should be avoided upstream of constructed ponds. In all cases, the location, type, and number of sediment control structures must be established at the time of final design of that portion of the storm sewer system. Maintenance of the system is discussed further in Section 6. Even with the best and most expensive solids removal system, contamination of ponds and lakes will occur unless particular attention is paid to those activities that occur after development of a site. Developers must utilize the BMPs to minimize erosion during the mass grading phase of construction. But property owners must also use care in the development and maintenance of their lawns and open areas. Debris is frequently raked from lawns into gutters; from there, if it is not removed, it washes into the storm sewer system. Generally speaking, water quality ponding within a development has to treat storm water to the level required by the downstream receiving water body and its attendant management strategy. This SWMP calls for detention pond design according to the design program developed by William Walker. At a minimum, though, detention ponds should contain wet volume equivalent to the runoff from a 2.5-inch rainfall over their tributary area. Occasionally, with small plats (of five acres of less), water quality ponding cannot be constructed to the extent required by the SWMP without severely hampering the site development or destroying other habitat such as upland grasslands and forests. In such cases, it is within the City’s discretion to reduce the required water quality ponding and/or require other methods such as filtration swales or filter beds. Stormwater Management Plan Appendix D City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 APPENDIX D Land Disturbance Guidance Document Land Disturbance Guidance Document Mendota Heights, Minnesota May 10, 2018 Project Number: 1735-04 Land Disturbance Guidance Document Title Sheet Table of Contents 1.0 Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control ...................................................................................1 1.1 Erosion Control and Prevention Practices....................................................................................1 1.2 Sediment Control Practices...........................................................................................................2 1.3 Temporary Sediment Basins.........................................................................................................3 1.4 Dewatering and Basin Draining.....................................................................................................4 1.5 Inspections and Maintenance........................................................................................................4 1.6 Pollution Management Measures/Construction Site Waste Control..............................................5 1.7 Final Stabilization..........................................................................................................................5 1.8 Training:........................................................................................................................................6 2.0 Stormwater Management Design Standards.....................................................................................7 2.1 Storm Sewer.................................................................................................................................7 2.2 Outlet and Inlet Pipes....................................................................................................................8 2.3 Channels and Overland Drainage.................................................................................................8 2.4 Ponds............................................................................................................................................8 3.0 Stormwater Management Performance Measures..........................................................................10 3.1 Volume Management .................................................................................................................10 3.2 Water Quantity............................................................................................................................11 3.3 Water Quality ..............................................................................................................................12 4.0 Submittal Requirements .................................................................................................................13 LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 1 The following requirements shall be considered as the Land Disturbance Guidance Document as defined in Title 14 Chapter 1 of the Mendota Heights City code: Stormwater Management, Illicit Discharge, Soil Erosion, and Sedimentation. The requirements below are meant to serve as a general guideline and do not account for all possible site conditions or situations. Additional measures may be necessary to meet the intent of the Mendota Heights city code. It is the obligation of the owner and designer to consider all factors contributing to erosion, flooding, and water quality impairments on the project site and include appropriate Best Management Practices for minimizing erosion and providing permanent stormwater runoff management. 1.0 Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control 1.1 Erosion Control and Prevention Practices a.The Permittee must plan for and implement appropriate construction phasing vegetative buffer strips, horizontal slope grading, and other construction practices to minimize erosion. All areas not to be disturbed shall be marked (e.g. with flags, stakes, signs, silt fence etc.) on the project site before any work begins. The Permittee must minimize the need for disturbance of portions of the project that have steep slopes. For those sloped areas which must be disturbed, the Permittee must use techniques such as phasing and stabilization practices designed for steep slopes (e.g., slope draining and terracing). b.All exposed soil areas (including stockpiles) must be stabilized as soon as possible to limit soil erosion but in no case later than 14 days after the construction activity in that portion of the site has temporarily or permanently ceased. For Public Waters that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has promulgated “work in water restrictions” during specified fish spawning time frames, all soil areas that are within 200 feet of the water’s edge, and drain to these waters must complete the stabilization activities within 24 hours during the restriction period. c.Additional BMPs together with enhanced runoff controls are required for discharges to special waters and impaired waters. The BMPs identified for each special or impaired water are required for those areas of the project draining to a discharge point on the project that is within one mile of a special or impaired water and flows to that water. d.The normal wetted perimeter of a temporary or permanent drainage ditch that drains water for the project site or diverts water around the project must be stabilized 200 lineal feet from the property edge or from a discharge point to a surface water. Stabilization must occur within 24 hours of connection to surface waters. Applying mulch, hydromulch, tackifier, polyacrylamide or similar erosion prevention practices is not acceptable stabilization in any part of a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or swale. e.Pipe outlet must have temporary or permanent energy dissipation within 24 hours before connecting to surface water. f.When possible, all slopes must be graded in such a fashion so that tracking marks made from heavy equipment are perpendicular to the slope. g.All areas disturbed during construction must be restored as detailed in these requirements. The type of permanent restoration shall be clearly shown on the plans including but not limited to sod, seed, impervious cover and structures. A minimum of 6 inches of topsoil must be installed prior to permanent restoration. Areas in which the top soil has been placed and finish graded or areas that have been disturbed and other grading or site building construction operations are not actively underway must be temporary or permanently restored as set forth in the following requirements: i)Areas with slopes that area less than 3:1 must be seeded and mulched within 14 days of the area not being actively worked. ii)Areas with slopes that area greater or equal to 3:1 must be seeded and erosion control blanket placed within 14 days of the area not being actively worked. iii)All seeded area must be either mulched and disc anchored, hydro- mulched, or covered by erosion control blanket to reduced erosion and protect the seed. Temporary or permanent mulch must be disc anchored and applied at a uniform rate LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 2 of 2 tons per acre and have 90% coverage. iv)If the disturbed area will be re-disturbed within a six month period, temporary vegetative cover shall be required consisting of an approved seed mixture and application rate. v)If the disturbed area will not be re-disturbed within a six month period, permanent vegetative cover shall be required consisting of an approved seed mixture and application rate. vi)All areas that will not have maintenance done such as mowing as part of the final design shall be permanently restored using an approved seed mixture and application rate. vii)Restoration of disturbed wetland areas shall be accomplished using an approved seed mixture and application rate. h.All erosion control measures must be maintained for the duration of the project until final stabilization has been achieved in accordance with Section 1.7. If construction operations or natural events damage or interfere with any erosion control measures, they shall be restored to serve their intended function. i.Additional erosion control measures shall be added as necessary to effectively protect the natural resources of the City. The temporary and permanent erosion control plans shall be revised as needed based on current site conditions and to comply with all applicable requirements. 1.2 Sediment Control Practices a.Sediment control practices must be established on all down gradient perimeters before any upgradient land disturbing activities begin. These practices must remain in place until final stabilization has been achieved in accordance with Section 1.7. b.If down gradient treatment system is overloaded additional up gradient sediment control practices must be installed to eliminate overloading. The SWPPP must be amended to identify the additional practices. c.There shall be no unbroken slope length greater than 75 feet with a grade of 3:1 or steeper. d.All storm drain inlets must be protected by approved BMPs during construction until all potential sources for discharge have been stabilized. These devices must be maintained until final stabilization is achieved. Inlet protection may be removed if a specific safety concern (street flooding/freezing) has been identified. e.Temporary stockpiles must have silt fence or other effective sediment controls on the down gradient side of the stockpile and shall not be placed at least twenty five (25) feet from any road, wetland, protected water, drainage channel, or storm water inlets. Stockpile left for more than fourteen (14) days must be stabilized with mulch, vegetation, tarps or other approved means. f.A 50-ft natural buffer or (if a buffer is infeasible on the site) provide redundant sediment controls when a surface water is located within 50 feet of the project’s earth disturbances and stormwater flows to the surface water. Natural buffers are not required adjacent to road ditches, judicial ditches, county ditches, stormwater conveyance channels, storm drain inlets, and sediment basins. g.Vehicle tracking of sediment from project shall be minimized by approved BMPs. These shall be installed and maintained at the City approved entrances. Individual lots shall each be required to install and maintained entrances throughout the construction building until a paved driveway is install. h.Sediment that has washed or tracked from site by motor vehicles or equipment shall be cleaned from paved surfaces throughout the duration of construction. i.Silt fence or other approved sediment control devices must be installed in all areas as shown on the SWPPP. j.Silt fence or other approved sediment control devices shall be required along the entire curb line, except for approved opening where construction entrance will be installed or drainage flows away from curb. This device must be maintained until final stabilization is achieved. k.Ditch checks shall be required in ditch bottoms. Spacing for the check must be as LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 3 followed:[Height in feet (of the sediment device used)] X 100 / Slope Gradient l.Dust control measures, such as application of water must be performed periodically due to weather, construction activity, and/or as directed by the City. m.Flows from diversion channels or pipes (temporary or permanent) must be routed to sedimentation basins or appropriate energy dissipaters to prevent the transport of sediment to outflow or lateral conveyors and to prevent erosion and sediment buildup when runoff flows into the conveyors. n.A concrete washout shall be installed on projects that require the use of concrete. All liquid and solid wastes generated by concrete washout operations must be contained in a leak-proof containment facility or impermeable liner. A sign must be installed adjacent to each washout facility to inform operators to utilize the proper facilities. o.All sediment control measures shall be used and maintained for the duration of the project until final stabilization has been achieved accordance with Section 1.7. If construction operations or natural events damage or interfere with any erosion control measures, they must be restored to serve their intended function. p.Additional sediment control measures shall be added as necessary to effectively protect the natural resources of the City. The temporary and permanent erosion control plans shall be revised as needed based on current site conditions and to comply with all applicable requirements. q.Restrict clearing and grading within 20 feet of an existing wetland, lake, or stream boundary to provide for a protective buffer strip of natural vegetation. 1.3 Temporary Sediment Basins a.A temporary sediment basin (or permanent) shall be provided when 10 or more acres of disturbed soil drain to a common location prior to the runoff leaving the site or entering surface waters. The Permittee is also encouraged, but not required to install temporary sediment basins in areas with steep slope or highly erodible soils even if the area is less than 10 acres and it drains to one common area. The basins shall be designed and constructed according to the following requirements: i)The basins must provide storage below the outlet pipe for a calculated volume of runoff from a 2 year, 24 hour storm from each acre drained to the basin, except that in no case shall the basin provide less than 1800 cubic feet of storage below the outlet pipe from each acre drained to the basin. ii)Where no such calculation has been performed, a temporary (or permanent) sediment basin providing 3,600 cubic feet of storage below the outlet pipe per acre drained to the basin shall be provided where attainable until final stabilization of the site. iii)Temporary basin outlets will be designed to prevent short-circuiting and the discharge of floating debris. The basin must be designed with the ability to allow complete basin drawdown (e.g., perforated riser pipe wrapped with filter fabric and covered with crushed gravel, pumps or other means) for maintenance activities, and provide a stabilized emergency overflow to prevent failure of pond integrity. Energy dissipation must be provided for the basin outlet. iv)Temporary (or permanent) basins must be constructed and made operational concurrent with the start of soil disturbance that is up gradient of the area and contributes runoff to the pond. v)Where the temporary sediment basin is not attainable due to site limitations, equivalent sediment controls such as smaller sediment basins, and/or sediment traps, silt fences, vegetative buffer strips or any appropriate combination of measures are required for all down slope boundaries of the construction area and for those side slope boundaries deemed appropriate as dictated by individual site conditions. In determining whether installing a sediment basin is attainable, the Permittee must consider public safety and may consider factors such as site soils, slope, and available area on site. This determination must be documented in the SWPPP. LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 4 vi)The Permittee shall maintain the sedimentation basins and will remain functional until an acceptable vegetative cover is restored to the site, resulting in a pre- development level rate of erosion. The city will not issue building permits for lots containing sediment basins until they have been removed or relocated based on the projects restoration progress. vii)Basins designed to be used for permanent stormwater management shall be brought back to their original design contours as defined in Section 1.7. 1.4 Dewatering and Basin Draining a.If water cannot be discharged into a sedimentation basin before entering a surface water it must be treated with the appropriate BMPs, such that the discharge does not adversely affect the receiving water or downstream landowners. The Permittee must make sure discharge points are appropriately protected from erosion and scour. The discharge must be dispersed over riprap, sand bags, plastic sheeting or other acceptable energy dissipation measures. Adequate sediment control measures are required for discharging water that contains suspended soils. b.All water from dewatering or basin draining must discharge in a manner that does not cause nuisance conditions, erosion in receiving channels, on down slope properties, or inundation in wetlands causing significant adverse impact to wetlands. 1.5 Inspections and Maintenance a.The Permittee shall be responsible for inspecting and maintenance of the BMPs b.The Permittee must routinely inspect the construction project once every 7 days during active construction and within 24 hours of a rainfall event of 0.5 inches or greater in 24 hours. c.All inspections and maintenance conducted during construction must be recorded in writing and must be retained with the SWPPP. Records of each inspection and maintenance activity shall include i)Date and time of inspection. ii)Name of person(s) conducting the inspections. iii)Findings of inspections, including recommendations for corrective actions. iv)Corrective actions taken (including dates, times, and the party completing the maintenance activities). v)Date and amount of all rainfall events 0.5 inches or greater in 24 hours. vi)Documentation of changes made to SWPPP. d.Parts of the construction site that have achieved final stabilization, but work continues on other parts of the site, inspections of the stabilized areas can be reduced to once a month. If work has been suspended due to frozen ground conditions, the required inspections and maintenance must take place as soon as runoff occurs or prior to resuming construction, which ever happens first. e.All erosion and sediment BMPs shall be inspected to ensure integrity and effectiveness. All nonfunctional BMPs shall be repaired, replaced or supplemented with a functional BMP. The Permittee shall investigate and comply with the following inspection and maintenance requirements. f.All silt fences must be repaired, replaced, or supplemented when they become nonfunctional or the sediment reaches 1/3 of the height of the fence. These repairs shall be made within 24 hours of discovery, or as soon as field conditions allow access. g.Temporary and permanent sedimentation basins must be drained and the sediment removed when the depth of sediment collected in the basin reaches 1/2 the storage volume. Drainage and removal must be completed within 72 hours of discovery, or as soon as field conditions allow access. h.Surface waters, including drainage ditches and conveyance systems, must be inspected for evidence of sediment being deposited by erosion. The Permittee shall remove all deltas and sediment deposited in surface waters, including drainage ways, catch basins, and other drainage systems, and re-stabilize the areas where sediment removal results in exposed LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 5 soil. The removal and stabilization shall take place within 7 days of discovery unless precluded by legal, regulatory, or physical access constraints. The Permittee shall use all reasonable efforts to obtain access. If precluded, removal and stabilization shall take place within 7 calendar days of obtaining access. The Permittee is responsible for contacting all local, regional, state and federal authorities and receiving any applicable permits, prior to conducting any work. i.Construction site vehicle exit locations shall be inspected for evidence of off-site sediment tracking onto paved surfaces. Tracked sediment shall be removed from all off-site paved surfaces, within 24 hours of discovery, or if applicable, within a shorter time. j.The Permittee is responsible for the operation and maintenance of temporary and permanent water quality management BMPs, as well as all erosion prevention and sediment control BMPs, for the duration of the construction work at the site. The Permittee is responsible until another Permittee has assumed control over all areas of the site that have not been finally stabilized or the site has undergone final stabilization, and a NOT has been submitted to the MPCA. k.If sediment escapes the construction site, off-site accumulations of sediment shall be removed in a manner and at a frequency sufficient to minimize off-site impacts (e.g., fugitive sediment in streets could be washed into storm sewers by the next rain and/or pose a safety hazard to users of public streets). l. All infiltration areas shall be inspected to ensure that no sediment from ongoing construction activities is reaching the infiltration area and these areas are protected from compaction due to construction equipment driving across the infiltration area. 1.6 Pollution Management Measures/Construction Site Waste Control a.The Permittee must implement the following pollution prevention management measures on the site. i)Solid Waste- Collected sediment, asphalt and concrete millings, floating debris, paper, plastic, fabric, construction and demolition debris and other wastes must be disposed of properly and must comply with MPCA disposal requirements. ii)Hazardous Materials such as oil, gasoline, paint and any hazardous substances must be properly stored, including secondary containment, to prevent spills, leaks or other discharge. Restricted access to storage areas shall be provided to prevent vandalism. Storage and disposal of hazardous waste shall be in compliance with MPCA regulations. iii)External washing of trucks and other construction vehicles must be limited to a defined area of the site. Runoff shall be contained and waste properly disposed of. No engine degreasing is allowed on site. iv)The City of Mendota Heights prohibits discharges of any material other than storm water, and discharges from dewatering or basin draining activities. Prohibited discharges include but are not limited to vehicle and equipment washing, maintenance spills, wash water, and discharges of oil and other hazardous substances. 1.7 Final Stabilization a.The Permittee must ensure final stabilization of the project. Final stabilization can be achieved in one of the following ways. b.All soil disturbing activities at the site have been completed and all soils will be stabilized by a uniform perennial vegetative cover with a density of at least 70 percent over the entire pervious surface area, or other equivalent means necessary to prevent soil failure under erosive conditions and; i)All drainage ditches, constructed to drain water from the site after construction is complete, must be stabilized to preclude erosion; and ii)All temporary synthetic, and structural erosion prevention and sediment control BMPs (such as silt fence) must be removed as part of the site final stabilization; LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 6 and iii)The Permittee must clean out all sediment from conveyances and from temporary sedimentation basins that are to be used as permanent water quality management basins. Sediment must be stabilized to prevent it from washing back into the basin, conveyances or drainage ways discharging off-site or to surface waters. The cleanout of permanent basins must be sufficient to return the basin to design capacity. c.For residential construction only, final stabilization has been achieved when: i)Temporary erosion protection and down gradient perimeter control for individual lots has been completed and the residence has been transferred to the homeowner. ii)The Permittee must distribute the MPCA “homeowner factsheet” to the homeowner so the homeowner is informed for the need, and benefits, of final stabilization. 1.8 Training: Training is required for those that are responsible for preparation of the SWPPP, management of the construction site and inspections. a.The SWPPP must provide a chain of command showing who prepared the SWPPP, who is responsible for the management of the construction site and inspections. b.The training shall consist of a course developed by a local, state or federal agency, professional organization, water management organization, or soil and water conservation district and must contain information that is related to erosion prevention, sediment control, or permanent stormwater management and must relate to the work that you are responsible for managing. LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 7 2.0 Stormwater Management Design Standards 2.1 Storm Sewer a.Provide for overflow routes to drain low points along streets or lot lines to ensure a freeboard of 2’ from the lowest ground adjacent to building and the calculated 100-year storm HWL elevation. Design criteria verifying the adequacy of the overland drainage route capacity is required calculated 100-year storm HWL elevation. Design criteria verifying the adequacy of the overland drainage route capacity is required. b.The storm sewer alignment shall follow the sanitary sewer and watermain alignment where practical with a minimum of 10’ of separation. Storm sewer placed along the curb alignment shall be along the curb opposite the watermain to maintain the 10’ separation. c.Catch basins shall be located on the tangent section of the curb at a point 3’ from the point of curve. Mid-radius catch basins will not be allowed. Also, catch basins shall be designed to collect drainage on the upstream side of the intersection. d.The maximum spacing between manholes is 400’. e.Manhole steps will be aligned and over the downstream side of the manhole. Steps within manholes will be: i)1” +/- Horizontal Alignment ii)1” +/- Vertical Alignment per latest OSHA Standards f.Any connections to existing manholes or catch basins shall be core drilled or the opening cut out with a concrete saw. No jack hammering or breaking the structure with a maul is permitted. Also, all connections to an existing system will require a manhole for access. g.To the greatest extent possible, manholes shall be placed in paved surfaces outside of wheel paths, (3’ and 9’ off centerline) or other readily accessible areas. h.Minimum pipe size shall be 12” diameter. i.Aprons or flared end sections shall be placed at all locations where the storm sewer outlets a ponding area. All inlet/outlet flared end sections shall be furnished with hot dipped galvanized trash guards. All trash guard installations will be subject to approval by the City Engineer. The last three pipe joints from the flared end section shall be tied together. j.Riprap and filter blanket shall be placed at all outlet flared end sections. k.The placement of the riprap shall be by hand. The minimum class of riprap shall be MnDOT 3601.2, Class III. A design criterion justifying the size and amount of riprap is required. Geotextile material is not allowed for filter aggregate where ice action along the shore line may tear the geotextile. l.The invert elevations of the pond inlet flared end sections shall match the NWL of the pond. Submerged outlets will only be allowed at the discretion of the City Engineer. m.If the storm sewer is to be installed less than 10’ deep within private property, the easement shall be a minimum of 20’ wide with the pipe centered in the easement. If the storm sewer is 10’ deep or greater, then the easement shall be twice as wide as the depth or as required by the City. n.Junction manholes should be designed to limit the hydraulic head increase by matching hydraulic flow lines and by providing smooth transition angles. o.In the development of any subdivision or ponding area, the developer and/or property owner is responsible for the removal of all significant vegetation (trees, stumps, brush, debris, etc.) from any and all areas which would be inundated by the designated controlled Normal Water elevation (NWL) of any required ponding easement as well as the removal of all dead trees, vegetation, etc., to the High Water Level (HWL) of the pond. p.Outlet control structures from ponding areas are required as directed by the City. Location and appearance of outlet structures shall be subject to City approval and may require landscape screening. q.Sump manholes with 3-foot sumps shall be constructed as the last structure that is roadway accessible prior to discharge to any waterbody. r.Inlets should be placed and located to eliminate overland flow in excess of 1,000 feet on minor streets, or a combination of minor streets and swales, and 600 feet on collector LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 8 streets and arterials. Additionally, inlets should be located such that 3 cfs is the maximum flow at the inlet for the 10-year design storm. 2.2 Outlet and Inlet Pipes a.Inlet and outlet pipes of stormwater ponds should be extended to the pond normal water level whenever possible. b.Outfalls with velocities less than 4 feet per second (fps) that project flows downstream into the channel in a direction 30 degrees or less from the normal channel axis generally do not require energy dissipaters or stilling basins, but do require riprap protection. c.Where an energy dissipater is used, it should be sized to provide an average outlet velocity of less than 4 fps, unless rip rap is also used. In the latter case, or when discharge occurs at NWL of a pond, the average outlet velocity should not exceed 6 fps. d.Where outlet velocities exceed 6 fps, the design should be based on the unique site conditions present. Submergence of the outlet or installation of a stilling basin approved by the City is required when excessive outlet velocities are experienced. e.In the case of discharge to channels, rip rap should be provided on all outlets to an adequate depth below the channel grade and to a height above the outfall or channel bottom. It should be placed over a suitably graded filter material and filter fabric to ensure that soil particles do not migrate through the rip rap and reduce its stability. Rip rap should be placed to a thickness at least 2.5 times the mean rock diameter so as to ensure that it will not be undermined or rendered ineffective by displacement. If rip rap is used as protection for overland drainage routes, grouting may be recommended. 2.3 Channels and Overland Drainage a.Overland drainage routes where velocities exceed 6 fps should be reviewed by the City Engineer and approved only when suitable stabilization measures are proposed. b.Open channels and swales are recommended where flows and small grade differences prohibit the economical construction of an underground conduit. Open channels and swales can provide infiltration and filtration benefits not provided by pipe. c.Whenever possible, a minimum slope of 2% should be maintained in unlined open channels and overland drainage routes. Slopes less than 2% and greater than 1% are difficult to construct and maintain and may require an underdrain system. Slopes less than 1% are not allowed for lot drainage and channels designed primarily for conveyance. d.Minimum grade for lot drainage swales and lot grading shall be 2% or greater. e.Maximum length for drainage swales shall be 300 feet or a total of eight lots draining to a point, or as approved by the City Engineer. f.Channel side slopes should be a maximum of 4:1 (horizontal to vertical) with gentler slopes being desirable. Where space permits, slopes should be cut back to match existing grade. g.Rock rip rap should be provided at all points of juncture between two open channels and where storm sewer pipes discharge into a channel. h.The design velocity of an open channel should be sufficiently low to prevent erosion of the bottom. Rip rap or concrete liners should be provided in areas where high velocities cannot be avoided. i.Periodic cleaning of an open channel is required to ensure that the design capacity is maintained. Therefore, all channels should be designed to allow easy access for equipment. 2.4 Ponds a. Maximum allowed pond slopes are 3:1, though 4:1 slopes are preferred. Pond slopes steeper than 4:1 shall have erosion control blanket installed immediately after finish grading. In residential areas slopes no steeper than 4:1 shall be allowed. 3:1 slopes may be allowed in “maintained” areas as approved by the City Engineer. 3:1 slopes are not allowed for road fill sections adjacent to water bodies. b. All constructed ponds and wetland mitigation areas shall have an aquatic or safety bench around their entire perimeter. The aquatic bench is defined as follows: i)Cross slope no steeper than 10:1 LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 9 ii)Minimum width 10 feet iii)Located from pond NWL to one foot below pond NWL c. All constructed ponds and wetland mitigation areas shall have a maintenance access bench around sufficient perimeter to provide access to all inlets and outlets. At a minimum the maintenance bench should extend around 50% of the basin perimeter. d. Elevation separations of buildings with respect to ponds, lakes, streams, and storm water features shall be designed as follows: i)The lowest ground elevation adjacent to homes and buildings must be a minimum of two feet above the calculated 100-yr HWL or 1.5 feet above the EOF, whichever criteria leads to the higher elevation. ii)Landlocked lakes and wetlands require either 1) a five-foot separation between basin HWL and lowest ground elevation adjacent to building or 2) a three-foot separation between basin HWL for back to back 100- year storms and the lowest ground elevation adjacent to building or 3) three-foot separation between the highest known or recorded basin elevation in the case of large wetlands and lakes and lowest ground elevation adjacent to building. Whichever of the three methods yields the highest allowable ground at building elevation should be the one used. e. Drainage easements for ponds, lakes, wetlands, streams etc. shall encompass an area to one foot (vertical) above the calculated 100-year HWL. f. Maximum pond wet volume depth is 8 feet; minimum wet volume depth is 3 feet. g. Flood bounce is defined as the vertical difference between pond NWL and pond HWL. Flood bounce shall not exceed 6 feet except in the case of regional basins, as defined by the City Engineer. h. All ponds shall have outlet skimming for up to the 5-year event. i. All ponds shall be graded to one-foot below design bottom elevation. This “hold down” allows sediment storage until such time as site restoration is complete. j. The top berm elevation of ponds shall be a minimum of 1.5 feet above the 100- year pond HWL. k. Grading shall not block or raise emergency overflows from adjoining properties unless some provision has been made for the runoff that may be blocked behind such an embankment. l. Seeding around ponds should be MnDOT standard mix 33-261 or BWSR equivalent. LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 10 3.0 Stormwater Management Performance Measures 3.1 Volume Management a. For development and redevelopment projects, the performance benchmark for runoff volume reduction, otherwise known as abstraction, is a volume equivalent to 1.1 inches of runoff off all new impervious surfaces. Allowable BMPs for abstracting runoff volume and methods for calculating abstraction are: i) Infiltration benches adjacent to constructed ponds ii) Rainwater gardens or infiltration areas separate from ponds such as depressed medians or grassed areas adjacent to parking lots and buildings iii) Pervious pavement or pavers iv) Vegetated swales v) Constructed wetlands vi) Underground storage with infiltration vii) Underground storage with water recycling for irrigation viii) Green roofs b. For public linear projects these standards shall apply only to newly created impervious surfaces that exceed 10,000 square feet. c. The amount of impervious surface increase on projects shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible for development and redevelopment projects in accordance with Low Impact Development (LID) techniques. A narrative shall be provided that addresses the consideration of LID techniques in development and redevelopment impervious surface extents. d. For all infiltration calculations the infiltration rates in Table 3.1 shall be assumed. As an alternative, percolation tests can be conducted and submitted to determine the actual rate of infiltration after subgrading is complete. Table 3.1 Infiltration Rates (Source: Minnesota Stormwater Manual) Hydrologic SilG Soil Tt Corresponding Unified Soil Cl ifi ti Infiltration RtGW - Well-graded gravel or well-graded gravel with sand GP - Poorly graded gravel or poorly graded gravel with sand GM – silty gravels, silty sandy gravels SW – well-graded gravelly sands 1.63AGravel, sand, sandy gravel, silty gravel, loamy sand, sandy loam SP – gap-graded or uniform sands, gravelly sands 0.8 SM - Silty sand or silty sand with gravel 0.45BLoam, silt loam ML - Silts, very fine sands, silty or vlayey fine sands 0.3 C Sandy clay loam ML – silts, very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands 0.2 D Clay, clay loam, silt clay loam, sandy clay, silt clay GC – clayey gravels, clayey sandy gravels SC – clayey sands, clayey gravelly sands CL - Low plasticity clays, sandy or silty clays OL – organic silts and clays of low plasticity CH - Fat clay or fat clay with sand or gravel or gravelly fat clay OH - Organic clay or organic clay with sand or gravel or gravelly organic clay .06 e. Infiltration areas shall be designed to infiltrate water in 48 hours. LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 11 f. Infiltration areas shall not be constructed in karst or fractured bedrock areas, nor should they be constructed adjacent to steep slopes. g. Infiltration practices shall be left off-line until the upgradient drainage areas are stabilized. h. The volume management standard is waived in areas of known soil contamination or for developments where the potential for spills makes infiltration inadvisable. i. Infiltration areas shall not have a 100-year design storm flood bounce that exceeds 3 feet. j. Pretreatment, in the form of forebays or filter strips, shall be considered for all infiltration areas. k. For infiltration benches adjacent to ponds the following standards apply: i) Benches shall have slopes no steeper than 6:1 over the proposed infiltration zone. A slope of 10:1 is preferred. ii) Benches may be excavated and backfilled with sand or sandy topsoil to provide additional storage volume for infiltration without violating the 3 foot flood bounce requirement. l. Porous pavement or pavers shall be considered pervious surface for the purposes of infiltration calculations. m. Porous pavement or pavers are considered sufficient to infiltrate water off impermeable surfaces at a ratio of 5:1 (impermeable surface area to porous pavement area). 3.2 Water Quantity a. At a minimum, proposed peak runoff rate from development and redevelopment project shall maintain or decrease existing flow rates for the 2, 10, and 100-year 24-hour rainfalls. Table 3.2. Storm Events Event Rainfall/Snowmelt depth (inches) 2-year, 24 hour 2.81 10-year, 24 hour 4.19 100-year, 24 hour 7.47 100-year, 10 day snowmelt 7.2 b. A Rate Control Plan shall be developed for projects that disturb one or more acre of land. Public Linear Projects shall be exempt from developing a Rate Control Plan unless the project creates 10,000 square feet or more of new impervious surface. Rate Control Plan shall include the following items: i) Delineation of the subwatersheds contributing runoff from off-site, and proposed and existing watersheds on-site. ii) Delineation of existing on-site wetlands, shoreland, and/or floodplain areas. Any removal or disturbance of streambank and shoreland vegetation should be identified and avoided. Any unavoidable removal or disturbance to this vegetation must be addressed and mitigated iii) Stormwater runoff volume and rate analyses for existing and proposed conditions iv) Administrative items included in Section 4.0 v) A narrative describing existing and proposed rate control for the site. Detention basins shall be designed with capacity for the critical 100-year event, which is defined as the 100-year event that produces the highest water level among a 2-hour, 6-hour, 12-hour, or 24 hour rainfall events or the 10-day, 7.2- inch snowmelt runoff event. c. The maximum duration for rainfall critical event analysis shall be 24 hours except in cases where basins are landlocked, where back to back 24-hour events and the 10-day 7.2-inch snowmelt runoff event shall also be used. In all cases a hydrograph method of analysis LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 12 should be used. For the 24-hour rainfall event, or back to back 24-hour rainfall events, an MSE 3 distribution should be used. For shorter duration critical events other distributions may be used with the approval of the City Engineer. d. All drainage system analyses and designs shall be based on proposed full development land use patterns. e. Development adjacent to a landlocked basin and the basin is not provided an outlet, freeboard should be determined based on one of three methods (whichever provides for the highest freeboard elevation): i) Three feet above the HWL determined by modeling back to back 100- year, 24- hour events, ii) Three feet above the highest known water level, or iii) Five feet above the HWL determined by modeling a single 100-year, 24- hour event. f. When modeling landlocked basins, the starting water surface elevation should be the basins Ordinary High Water elevation, which can be determined through hydrologic modeling or, in the case of a DNR regulated basin, from a DNR survey. g. For basins with a suitable outlet, freeboard will be 2-feet above the HWL determined by modeling the 100-year critical event. Emergency overflows a minimum of 1.5 feet below lowest ground elevation adjacent to a structure should also be provided. h. Adjacent to channels, creeks, and ravines freeboard will also be 2 feet to the 100-year critical event elevation. 3.3 Water Quality a. Storm water treatment facilities constructed in Mendota Heights shall be designed according to the standards reflected in the MPCA publication Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas, the State of Minnesota Stormwater Manual, and the design criteria from the National Urban Runoff Program. b. A 50% reduction in total phosphorous based on existing conditions must be shown for all development, redevelopment and public linear projects that exceed 1 acre of disturbed land, unless the requirements in Table 3.3 call for increased treatment capacity. Reduction in total phosphorus can be achieved using methods approved by the State of Minnesota Stormwater Manual, including but not limited to: infiltration, biofiltration/filtration, or stormwater ponds. c. In any case, the standard identified above that leads to the highest treatment capacity is the one required of any specific development. LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 13 4.0 Submittal Requirements All grading, erosion control, and site restoration work should be done in accordance with the most recent additions of the MnDOT Standard Specifications for Highway Construction and the MPCA’s Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas. All projects within the City that disturb 5,000 square feet or more of land and are not exempt by the City’s ordinance are required to show the following: 1. The developer shall obtain all regulatory agency permits and approvals including those from the MPCA for “General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity.” 2. Contact information for the engineering firm, developer, and owner. 3. Show City of Mendota Heights’ project number on the Plan. 4. Signature of company responsible for erosion and sediment control plan preparation, implementation, and maintenance. 5. Show all erosion prevention and sediment control measures are compliant with Section 1. 6. Show first floor and basement walkout elevations. 7. A location map indicating the vicinity of the site. 8. Two-foot contour information extending a minimum of 200 feet beyond the property boundary that shows features such as buildings, structures, walls, trees, or fences and any hydrologic features such as wetlands, ponds, lakes, and streams that are wholly or partially encompassed by the project perimeter. 9. Two-foot contour information shall include the following: a. Existing contours b. Proposed contours c. Contour labeling 10. Directional arrows to indicate the site and lot drainage directions. 11. Details on existing wetlands, lakes, streams etc. a. NWL and 100-year design storm HWL b. Ordinary high water level, if available, for wetlands within the site c. Whether waterbodies are DNR protected d. Wetland delineations for wetlands on the site 12. Information on individual lots including: a. Type of structure (i.e. walkout or rambler) b. Lowest ground elevation adjacent to building walkout and lookout window elevations c. Existing and proposed lot corner spot elevations d. Proposed mid-point side lot spot elevations e. Proposed spot elevations at any high points or drainage breaks f. Proposed spot elevations where drainage swales intersect lot lines g. Proposed spot elevations where drainage and utility easements intersect with lot lines h. The benchmark utilized for elevation determination. 13. All easements and outlots, existing and proposed 14. If retaining walls are needed, submit detailed plans and specifications that show type and height of retaining wall. Retaining walls will not be allowed within the City’s easements, unless approved with the overall subdivision grading plan. 15. All adjacent plats, parcels, property lines, section lines, streets, existing storm drains and appurtenances, and underground utilities (public and private). 16. Grading and clearing limits: details of topsoil removal, topsoil stockpiling, and topsoil re- spreading. All development or redevelopment projects that disturb one acre or more of land or increase net impervious surface must submit the following: 1. A narrative description of existing and proposed conditions and stormwater management performance criteria evaluated for the project. 2. Drawings showing existing and proposed drainage boundaries, including watersheds contributing runoff from off-site. 3. EOF elevations and directions of flow for all street and rear yard catch basins, parking areas, LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT City of Mendota Heights, MN WSB Project No. 1734-04 Page 14 ponds, wetlands, lakes, streams, swales, etc. 4. Hydrologic and hydraulic calculations for the 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year 24- hour (MSE3distribution) rainfall event and the critical 100-year event. 5. Provide detailed hydrologic/hydraulic calculations verifying location and capacity adequacy of all overland drainage routes. 6. Show removal of all trees and brush below the controlled water level that will be impacted from existing and newly created ponding areas. 7. Show or define access routes for maintenance purposes to all inlets or outlets at ponding areas (must be no more than 10 percent grade at two percent cross slope and no less than 10-feet- wide). 8. A note for all silt fence to be installed by the contractor and inspected by the City prior to any site work. 9. A Rate Control Plan if required by Section 3.2.b Projects that include storm sewer and water quality treatment facilities are required to show the following: 1. The developer shall obtain all regulatory agency permits and approvals necessary for the proposed construction such as DNR, USACE, or MPCA. 2. Drainage calculations shall be submitted to show the sizing of pipe, ponds, emergency overflow spillways, and catch basin interception analysis. 3. Show or define access routes for maintenance purposes to all manholes outside the public right- of-way and inlets or outlets at ponding areas (eight percent maximum grade, two percent cross slope, and ten-feet-wide). Access easements shall be dedicated at the time of final platting to provide this access. 4. The developer and/or engineer upon the completion of the construction of a designated ponding area is required to submit an as-built record plan of the ponding area certifying that the pond constructed meets all design parameters as set forth in this SWMP and its updates. Stormwater Management Plan Appendix E City of Mendota Heights WSB Project No. 1735-04 APPENDIX E Stormwater Modeling Development and Results Appendix E Stormwater Modeling Development and Results 1. PURPOSE AND GOALS The purpose of updating the City’s stormwater models to Atlas 14 is to determine the threshold of concern regarding Atlas 14 high water levels and policies to guide the City’s response to areas where flooding has been identified. Another priority for the City is to have a P8 Urban Catchment water quality model. 2. PROCEDURES AND METHODS The 2006 HydroCAD model was updated for this 2017 Surface Water Management Plan to accommodate for the new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Estimates. The updated HydroCAD model was used to develop a P8 Urban Catchment Model. 3. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 3.1 HydroCAD The City of Mendota Heights provided the following HydroCAD models: Gun Club Lake Watershed (includes 42 subwatersheds and 22 stormwater ponds) Ivy Falls Creek and Mississippi Bluffs Watershed (44 subwatersheds and 16 stormwater ponds) Interstate Valley Creek Watershed (includes 118 subwatersheds and 66 stormwater ponds) The models include unique subwatershed IDs that correspond to a unique pond name. Figure 1 shows each of the subwatershed areas and corresponding ponds. The overall modeled drainage and stormsewer network is also represented. The City also provided a GIS database containing stormsewer information that was used to update the model. Pond outlet data, where available, was incorporated into the HydroCAD model. The following Atlas 14 storm events were used for the HydroCAD modeling effort: 2 year, 24 hour storm event = 2.81 inches 10 year, 24 hour storm event = 4.19 inches 100 year, 24 hour storm event = 7.47 inches The storm events were obtained from NOAA and use an MSE Type 3 distribution. Drainage areas, CN values and Tc values were included in the models provided. The updated model included reviewing and correcting drainage area boundaries and land use information when discrepancies were found between the model and on-the-ground conditions. There were very few areas that were modified. The primary objective of modifying the HydroCAD model was to have the ability to model the larger Atlas 14 storm events. This included updating pond stage/volume rating curves, along with adding overflow elevations and routing. GIS software and Lidar data were used for determining this information. 3.2 P8 The updated HydroCAD model was used to develop a corresponding P8 model for each of the drainage areas. A discussion of the parameters used in the P8 model is provided below. P8 parameters not discussed were left at the default setting. P8 version 3.5 was used for the modeling. Time Steps Per Hour (Integer) – 4. Selection was based upon the number of time steps required to reduce the continuity errors greater than two percent. Minimum Inter-Event Time (Hours) – 10. The selection of this parameter was based upon evaluation of storm hydrographs to determine which storms should be combined and which storms should be separated to accurately depict runoff from the pond’s watershed. It should be noted that the average minimum inter-event time for the Minneapolis area is 6. Snowmelt Factors—Melt Coef (Inches/Day-Deg-F) – 0.06. This coefficient is within the lower end of the recommended range and was selected to minimize the disparity between observed and predicted snowmelt (i.e., the coefficient lessens the number of inches of snow melted per day and increases the number of snowmelt runoff days). Snowmelt Factors – Scale Factor for Max Abstraction – 1. This factor controls the quantity of snowmelt runoff (i.e., controls losses due to infiltration ). Selection was based upon the factor that resulted in the closest fit between modeled and observed runoff volumes. Particle File Selection – NURP50.PAR. The NURP 50 particle files was found to most accurately predict phosphorus loading. Air Temperature File Selection – MSP4999.tmp. The temperature file was comprised of temperature data from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport during the period from 1949 through 1999. Depression Storage – 0.02 inches (assumed, based on average watershed slope). The surface area and dead storage volume of each detention pond was determined using GIS software and Lidar data. Pond outlet and stage/discharge information was taken from the updated HydroCAD model. Infiltration was assumed only for ponds that appear to be dry, or are known to have a normal water level lower than the outlet elevation. GIS software was used to determine the directly connected and indirectly connected impervious areas for each of the modeled ponds (devices). WinSLAMM land use descriptions and the associated watershed fractions were applied to each of the subwatershed areas to determine a composite area for indirectly and directly connected impervious areas. Pervious area curve number values were taken from the updated HydroCAD model. An impervious runoff coefficient of 98 was used in the model. The water surface area for each of the ponds was routed to each device separately, assuming that the entire water area was directly connected with zero loading to each pond. It was assumed that all of the directly connected impervious areas were not swept. 4 Results HydroCAD and P8 results are summarized in Table E.1 included in this appendix. Output data is grouped by drainage area and tabulated for each individual subwatershed. PondDirect Ponded TOTAL NWL(ft)OutletUpdatedOutlet 2year 10year 100year100ͲyearHWL(ft) Name/PWI?PondType(drybasinorwetpond)TP(lb/yr)TSS(lb/yr)TP(lb/yr)TSS(lb/yr)TP(lb/ac/yr)TSS(lb/ac/yr)GCͲP180.9 0.0 80.9 891.718"rcp0.7 2.8 8.3 894.1Unnamedwet 107.1 33200.2 68.5 97.4 0.91 399.7GCͲP544.3 80.9 125.2 875.0userdefinedaddedEOF 18.4 59.4 176.4 882.4nowet 69.6 21572.3 22.8 64.5 0.13 111.1GCͲP10183.0 232.5 415.6 832.5none0.0 0.0 0.0 835.7 LakeAugustawet 135.0 41896.7 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0GCͲP812.7 0.0 12.7 880.0 userdefinedandweiraddedEOF 21.1 41.8 84.5 881.2nowet 11.5 3559.4 39.2 70.6 0.35 197.9GCͲP986.3 12.7 99 85912"rcpandweiryes 19.6 85.2 327.0 861.8nowet 53.5 16633.2 54.6 86.4 0.30 145.2GCͲP1121.0 0.0 21.0 862* userdefinedandweir6.6 19.1 48.8 867.6nodry 23.7 7357.5 25.0 58.0 0.28 203.6GCͲP125.1 21.0 26.1 862*userdefined0.0 0.0 0.0 867.6nodry 6.5 2014.9 88.7 94.3 0.22 72.9GCͲP138.30.0 8.3 858*12''rcpandweiryes 3.2 3.7 4.8 861.9nodry 10.2 3153.7 34.9 67.1 0.43 255.0GCͲP579.4 0.0 9.4 894.4weir1.0 4.5 20.4 895.4nowet 13.3 4138.8 58.1 88.0 0.82 387.9GCͲP586.3 9.4 15.7 896.0weir0.0 0.0 0.0 895.4nowet 8.8 2725.7 32.9 71.2 0.18 123.8GCͲP5915.28 15.68 30.96 881.54 userdefinedandweiraddedEOF 5.5 12.6 31.1 886.7Unnamedwet 23.1 7197.7 51.4 89.8 0.38 208.8GCͲP5656.5 5.9 62.4 858.024''rcpandweir33.9 35.9 44.0 873.1Unnamedwet 11.0 3412.3 48.8 81.4 0.09 44.5GCͲP6212.89 62.4 75.29 852* userdefinedandweiraddedEOF 39.4 53.0 72.5 857.1Unnameddry 18.8 5821.4 19.4 53.2 0.05 41.1GCͲP5147.2 0.0 47.2 852.0 userdefinedandweir4.7 17.8 38.3 857.7nowet 64.1 19881.9 55.2 86.1 0.75 362.4GCͲP439.3 0.0 9.3 824.018"rcp1.5 6.2 14.1 827.5nowet 12.9 4012.0 54.6 84.9 0.76 366.3GCͲP4119.3 0.0 19.3 842.012''rcp6.5 8.2 10.7 847.6nowet 27.4 8487.2 34.3 67.2 0.49 294.9GCͲP56a5.9 0.0 5.9 873.512''rcpandweir6.2 7.6 34.1 879.2nowet 7.7 2393.4 31.8 64.0 0.42 259.6GCͲP156.5 0.0 6.5 838* userdefinedandweir0.0 0.0 0.0 840.5nodry 9.9 3057.7 97.2 100.0 1.48 470.4GCͲP49a72.0 0.0 72.0 841.018''rcpandweiryes;addedEOF 7.9 12.2 187.5 849.7nowet 105.5 32711.7 41.1 73.7 0.60 334.8IV211.0 0.0 11.0 892.0412"rcpyes 1.1 3.4 4.5 894.19nowet 76.6 24706.5 73.4 42 5.11 943.3IV38.9 11.0 19.9 891.5015"rcpyes 0.6 2.9 7.0 893.02nowet 13.1 4232.2 72.7 40.6 0.48 86.3IV436.8 29.6 66.4 873.0515"rcpyes0.2 1.2 4.2 875.10Unnamedwet 47.1 15212.4 91.9 50.4 0.65 115.5IV59.7 0.0 9.7 894.4018"rcpyes 0.2 1.0 6.1 895.49nowet 7.7 2484.4 38.5 69.2 0.31 177.2IV618.3 66.4 87.4 872.2324"rcpyes 0.2 1.1 5.2 873.26Unnamedwet 29.9 9654.6 88.2 31.8 0.30 35.1IV711.1 0.0 11.1 877.2018"rcpyes 0.1 0.7 4.5 878.42nowet 9.6 3093.8 96.1 69.6 0.83 194.0IV816.2 11.1 27.3 875.0021"rcpyes 0.4 1.5 7.5 876.65Unnamedwet 21.1 6820.6 96.6 63.7 0.75 159.1IV916.3 0.0 16.3 878.8018"rcpyes 0.5 2.5 10.3 880.48nowet 13.3 4270.4 97.4 71.2 0.79 186.5IV1130.0 0.0 30.0 865.5624"rcpyes 1.7 8.3 23.8 869.03nowet 17.1 5501.7 87.1 58.7 0.50 107.6IV18100.7 764.6 865.3 842weiryes 8.42 37.98 158.19 842.86Unnamedwet 34.7 11174.2 91.3 24.5 0.04 3.2IV1225.0 0.0 25.0 863.7515"rcp14.7 14.8 15.1 872.44Unnamedwet 55.7 17922.4 83.6 61.7 1.86 442.3IV1531.7 25.0 56.7 854.7018"rcp0.4 1.9 6.3 857.26Unnamedwet 21.4 6885.6 96.4 60.8 0.36 73.8IV1634.0 77.6 111.6 854.2018"rcpyes 0.5 2.2 9.1 855.68Unnamedwet 25.2 8105 95 43.6 0.21 31.7IV1920.9 0.0 20.9 854.8018"rcp0.0 0.0 1.0 855.73Unnamedwet 5.8 1873.9 99.9 74 0.28 66.3IV1735.4 522.5 557.9 850.5924"rcpyes 2.2 5.2 14.5 852.35Unnamedwet 32.4 10386.1 90.7 38.7 0.05 7.2IV240 965.4 965.4 8372Ͳ59x36rcpayes 7.65 35.43 150.02 840.85Unnamedwet00 51.9 2.4 0.00 0.0IV5182.3 0 82.3 900.15*2Ͳ42"rcpandweiryes 42.06 103.2 202.87 906.69nodry 111.4 35968.8 52.6 19.8 0.71 86.5IV2263.9 16.4 80.3 845.00userdefined5.8 21.6 88.2 847.19nowet 27.8 8985 97.6 71.6 0.34 80.148"Huber19.8 80.3 100.1 840.00userdefined22.6 51.0 115.7 845.75noNA000 0 0.00 0.0IV2633.1 0.0 33.1 804.00userdefined5.4 15.0 40.6 891.78nowet 62.9 20318.7 99.4 73.9 1.89 453.6IV57154.6 390.0 544.6 850.00userdefined65.9 180.2 518.6 850.88Unnamedwet 159.7 51463.6 90.5 62.2 0.27 58.8IV3318.1 0.0 18.1 875.00userdefined3.7 12.8 40.3 875.38Unnamedwet 21.6 6972.4 98.5 72.7 1.18 280.165"I35E58.8 0.0 58.8 888.00userdefined29.0 72.9 175.7 893.17noNA 103.1 33288.90 0 0.00 0.0IV61C0.0 91.7 91.7 864.0024"rcp newpondaddedtomodel 0.0 0.0 4.0 865.15nodry00 20.9 5.7 0.00 0.0IV39152.2 322.9 475.1 872.2030"rcpyes 0.7 2.4 8.8 873.76RogersLakewet00 94.1 23.6 0.00 0.0IV326.5 0.0 6.5 874.50userdefined0.6 3.9 16.0 874.57nowet 2.2 703.4 98.9 72.6 0.33 78.6IV6341.3 50.4 91.7 846.6636''rcp40.1 94.1 264.7 858.61nowet 50.5 16297.1 45.2 15.2 0.25 27.0IV8117.3 0.0 17.3 926.4012"rcpyes 0.1 0.6 2.4 927.34Unnamedwet 168.9 54585.2 94.1 67.9 9.19 2142.4IV3647.4 0.0 47.4 872.8824"rcp3.8 13.6 24.8 878.06nowet 88.5 28593 86.3 57.8 1.61 348.7IV68263.6 2137.5 2401.1 824.80 userdefinedandweir138.4184.4 247.9 837.43Unnamedwet 278.3 89803 92.1 40 0.11 15.0IV4440.4 0.0 40.4 879.00userdefined2.5 3.2 4.4 884.55nowet 39.5 12747.8 90.4 62.6 0.88 197.5IV3514.1 0.0 14.1 874.00userdefined1.3 6.1 28.4 874.74nowet 23.7 7640.2 96.5 70.3 1.62 380.9IV5095.3 515.5 610.8 832.00userdefined28.8 72.5 238.2 834.49Unnamedwet 130.4 42085.5 75.5 32.2 0.16 22.2IV110139.3 2578.8 2718.1 809.60255x88arches217.8 419.0 658.9 817.61nodry 221.5 71463 20.2 2.4 0.02 0.6IV8333.1 17.3 50.4 862.3030''rcp,2weirs13.6 41.4 116.3 869.58nodry 51.3 16577.6 38 6.7 0.39 22.0IV21A16.4 0.0 16.4 863.2*18"rcp9.5 14.8 22.6 861.80nodry 17.4 5616.8 60 27.8 0.64 95.2IV746.2 0.0 6.2 820.5*12"rcp2.4 5.3 8.8 826.42nodry 8.1 2611.4 53 20.7 0.69 87.2IV7516.9 0.0 16.9 820.5*12"rcp,weir4.4 13.1 79.6 824.43nodry 25.5 8224.8 55.8 22.7 0.84 110.5IV10424.3 0 24.3 824.70userdefined3.37 10.09 73.02 827.71nowet 37.5 12122.5 84.7 56 1.31 279.4IV1125.2 34.7 39.9 806.0*weir2.7 9.0 37.7 807.06Unnameddry 16 5156.3 48.4 17 0.19 22.0IV8917.8 0.0 17.8 941.0*userdefined0.7 2.1 5.2 943.58nowet4 1260.7 99.3 72.8 0.22 51.6IV9115.5 169.3 184.8 952.8224"rcpyes 16.2 25.0 39.1 958.40nowet 13 4189.4 76.8 47.7 0.05 10.8IV10997.0 402.9 499.9 810.10 60''rcpanduserdefined54.2 198.6 662.4 816.60nowet138.7 44783.1 70.9 36.7 0.20 32.9IV9037.1 184.8 221.9 932.0*weiryes 8.7 40.9 111.0 932.55nodry 8.6 2755.8 54 22.5 0.02 2.8*drybasinbottomelevationIVCREEKGUNCLUBLAKEPondData&ModelingResultsRemovalDischargeRate(cfs)AnnualLoading%RemovalDrainageArea(ac) PondDirect Ponded TOTAL NWL(ft)OutletUpdatedOutlet 2year 10year 100year100ͲyearHWL(ft) Name/PWI?PondType(drybasinorwetpond)TP(lb/yr)TSS(lb/yr)TP(lb/yr)TSS(lb/yr)TP(lb/ac/yr)TSS(lb/ac/yr)IV11134.7 0.0 34.7 857.4012"rcpyes 1.0 4.2 5.8 861.97nowet 32.5 10477.2 84.1 55.1 0.79 166.4IV1008.1 0.0 8.1 896.0012''rcpandweir0.6 2.6 6.0 898.98nowet 10.9 3507.5 89.2 61.4 1.19 264.6IV9357.9 17.8 75.7 931.00userdefined1.0 2.5 4.6 934.08nowet 73.7 23781.9 96.5 69.7 0.94 219.0IV11312.2 56.6 68.8 954.8036''rcp2.2 4.2 43.8 959.46nowet 2.5 793.8 98.6 72 0.04 8.3MARIECREEKCULVERT49.4 329.24 378.64 870.62Ͳ36''rcpsyes 23.44 90.92 287.45 874.76nowet 47.2 15209.3 26.9 3.7 0.03 1.5IV11425.3 68.8 94.1 938.2536"rcpandweiryes 2.97 12.84 74.75 939.46nowet 5.7 1827.4 91.7 58.4 0.06 11.3IV9811.8 0.0 11.8 911.0*userdefined0.4 1.7 5.9 912.81nodry 17.3 5587.8 96.1 88.8 1.41 420.5IV118134.8 106.6 241.4 876.50 userdefinedandweir0.0 22.2 294.8 880.93nowet 128 41297 85.4 56.4 0.45 96.5IV11612.5 0.0 12.5 926.00 userdefinedandweir0.4 1.5 4.2 927.61nowet 2.4 755.5 99.2 72.4 0.19 43.8IV12516.1 0.0 16.1 845.0015''rcpandweiryes4.7 8.8 14.7 849.96nowet 37.9 12226.1 70.9 40.1 1.67 304.5IV12623.8 16.1 39.9 804.0*8''cmpandweiryes 0.8 3.3 52.8 810.39nodry 64.6 20874.6 78.5 56.6 1.27 296.1IV1390.0 3742.9 3742.9 723.0* userdefinedandweir318.7 605.4 1520.8 766.59nodry 254.7 82200.5 6.9 0.6 0.00 0.1IV6417.7 0.0 17.7 828.606''rcpandweir1.8 43.4 132.1 837.60nowet 15.4 4956.9 90.3 62.4 0.79 174.8IF473.7 226.4 300.1 917 userdefinedandweiryes 35.0 141.8 393.8 921.47nowet 76 23596.4 44.2 78.8 0.11 61.96IF127 199.4 226.4 957.35 userdefinedandweiryes 57.1 97.6 147.3 964.38nowet 28.3 8782.8 59.2 89.4 0.07 34.68IF21107.7 126.6 234.3 892 userdefinedandweiryes 75.9 175.1 631.8 903.91nowet 157.3 48786.6 25.1 56.3 0.17 117.23IF1510.7 0 10.7 941.63*12''rcpandweiryes 4.6 11.1 50.0 946.61nodry 16.5 5117.5 7.8 35.2 0.12 168.35IF1619.3 10.7 30 925.0*12"rcpandweiryes 6.5 22.7 117.1 930.38nodry 30.3 9395.2 7.7 31.5 0.08 98.65IF1822 0 22 968.7*12''cmpandweiryes 2.4 6.1 119.6 973.65nodry 34.3 10645.4 57.4 78.4 0.89 379.36MB834.2 0 34.2 835.4* userdefinedandweir0.0 0.0 17.5 845.35nodry 53.1 16469 96.1 99.3 1.49 478.18MB1022.2 0 22.2 847.936''cmpandweiryes 0.5 0.7 2.5 856.06nowet 34.9 10833.2 42.4 74.9 0.67 365.50MB1715.6 0 15.612''rcpandweiryes2.9 6.7 67.4 893.43nodry 24.3 7548.6 14.5 45.8 0.23 221.62MB164.1 0 4.16''rcpandweiryes 1.8 2.1 19.8 890.20nodry 2.3 724 42.6 51.5 0.24 90.94MB3162.6 0 62.6 860*24''rcpandweir3.4 13.0 23.3 866.40nodry 113.7 35243.4 89.4 97 1.62 546.10MB327.2 62.6 69.8 860*24''rcp3.4 12.7 23.1 863.33nodry 12.7 3945 95.4 99.4 0.17 56.18MB3360.9 69.8 130.7 78830''rcp4.1 16.8 38.4 793.12nowet 84.2 26120.4 53.5 84.4 0.34 168.67DrainageArea(ac)IVCREEKIvyFallsandMissBluffsDischargeRate(cfs)AnnualLoading%RemovalRemoval Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: August 4, 2021 TO: Mayor Levine and City Council, City Administrator McNeill FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Authorizing Pre-Approval of an Interim Use Permit to Xcel Energy for Temporary Outdoor Storage Yard at Resurrection Cemetery [Planning Case No. 2021-11] Introduction The City is asked to consider granting pre-approval to an Interim Use Permit request from Xcel Energy, which would allow the temporary outdoor storage of electrical poles, equipment, job trailer and employee/company vehicle parking. The storage site is located on Resurrection Cemetery – 2101 Lexington Avenue South. Background In 2015, the City Council adopted an ordinance that allows interim uses by permit in certain zoning districts. The interim use designation allows an identifiable use for a limited period of time that reasonably utilizes the property, where it is not reasonable to utilize it in the manner otherwise provided in the comprehensive plan or this code; or a use that is seasonal in nature. Xcel is currently in the beginning stages of replacing and upgrading their existing 115-kV transmission line between the Rogers Lake Substation (next to Mendakota Park) and MSP Airport. The plan is to begin work this August and finish by end of this year. Xcel is renting approximately 5-acres of vacant land at the southeast corner of the cemetery, immediately north of the Public Works/water tower site. Xcel filed a planning application request for an interim use permit (IUP) on June 28, 2021. At the July 27, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, this IUP application was presented to the commission for first consideration under a partially noticed hearing (note: due to an administrative error of not publishing the required legal notice, the commission was instructed to open the hearing, but continue this matter to a later special meeting - scheduled for August 9, 2021). The City Council meeting of August 4th was intended to give final consideration on this IUP, but due to the publishing omission, that is not possible. Xcel anticipated that the city would authorize their IUP on the 4th; and had scheduled crews to begin the overhead electrical line project the next day of August 5th. Xcel therefore requested the commission make a preliminary recommendation of approval of the IUP to the city council, to be presented to the council at the August 4th meeting. They understood that they will not receive official recommendation by the PC until its August 9th Special Meeting, and follow-up with final city council approval at the August 17th meeting. Xcel has agreed to all the conditions noted in Planning Report – Case No. 2021-11; and the July 27,2021 commission meeting minutes (excerpts) related to this item are attached to the report. Recommendation At the July 27th Planning Commission meeting, there were no negative comments received. The commissioners then indicated their support of the Interim Use Permit request from Xcel Energy and the proposed conditions provided in the staff report. Upon discussing this preliminary approval issue with city staff and the Xcel representative, the commissioners framed the following recommendation (with 5-0 vote in favor): a) The city council grants the exclusive right and privilege to Xcel the initial ability to take delivery of materials and equipment to store on the cemetery site, which will ultimately be subject to the requested IUP, which may be either approved (or denied) by the City Council at a later date; b) this preliminary approval does not give or set any precedent value to any other IUP or similar land use application in the future; and c) this approval is given due to reasons caused by the City of Mendota Heights. Action Required There is no official resolution being presented on this item at this time; and action on this preliminary approval of this Interim Use Permit requires a simple majority vote of the Council. This IUP application item is expected to be presented back to the City Council at the August 17th regular meeting with an official resolution. MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: PROPERTY ADDRESS: ZONING/GUIDED: ACTION DEADLINE: PLANNING STAFF REPORT (Amended) July 27, 2021 Planning Commission Tim Benetti, Community Development Director Planning Case 2021-11 INTERIM USE PERMIT Xcel Energy / Catholic Cemeteries 2101 Lexington Avenue South R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential September 28, 2021 INTRODUCTION Xcel Energy is seeking an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to allow for a temporary outdoor staging and laydown yard, located at the southeast corner of Resurrection Cemetery, 2101 Lexington Avenue South. Xcel plans to use this outdoor staging area for the outdoor storage of electrical poles, equipment, job trailer and employee/company vehicle parking. Notice letters of this hearing were posted at City Hall and mailed to all owners within 350-feet of the affected parcels. The city received no comments from the public related to this item. BACKGROUND & REQUEST Xcel Energy is an authorized (20-years) electric franchise operator in the community, approved under Ord. No. 463 (adopted 11/18/2014). Xcel is currently in the beginning stages of replacing and upgrading their existing 115-kV transmission line running between the Rogers Lake Substation (next to Mendakota Park) and the MSP Airport. The plan is to begin work this August and wrap-up by the end of this year. Xcel is seeking to rent or use approximately 5- acres of open, vacant cemetery land, located at the southeast corner of the cemetery and just north of the city’s Public Works/water tower site (see image – right and Street Map View - below). Planning Case 2021-11 (Xcel IUP – Resurrection Cem.) Page 2 of 7 Resurrection Cemetery consists of approximately 180 acres of total land area. This southerly section of cemetery land is unused and does not contain any graves or burial plots. The site is currently zoned R-1 One Family Residential. “Essential Service Structures” such as utility support buildings, power plants, substations, etc. are permitted by conditional use permit (CUP). This electrical line replacement work does not require any new structure(s), except for some power pole replacements, and does not require a new or amended CUP. Outdoor storage is not specifically identified as an allowed or permitted activity when related to such utility services. City Code Section 12-1D-13-5: Outside Storage In Residential Districts, provides for the outside storage of recreational equipment in all residential zoning districts; but it does not specifically address or identify this type of “outdoor storage” as requested by Xcel. In 2015, the City Council adopted an ordinance that allows interim use permits in certain zoning districts. The interim use designation allows an identifiable use for a limited period of time that reasonably utilizes the property where it is not reasonable to utilize it in the manner otherwise provided in the comprehensive plan or this code; or a use that is seasonal in nature. ANALYSIS - INTERIM USE PERMIT Title 12-1L-6-1 of the City Code includes the following standards for consideration of an interim use (Staff response or comments are noted after each standard): A. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will seriously depreciate surrounding property value. Staff Response: Staff does not believe the proposed interim use at this vacant section of cemetery lands would be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community, as this will be a tightly controlled and monitored area by Xcel. The cemetery has two access points off Lexington Avenue, and the company vehicles/employees will be using the southerly access near the cemetery’s maintenance support building. No access will be allowed at the main (dual/split lane) entrance to the cemetery. Since the 115-kV line is situated in established easement corridors and crosses the cemetery near its mid-point, it is anticipated most of the work vehicles and work itself will be limited inside these easement spaces and the cemetery lands only, and not cause any hazards to the surrounding properties. Planning Case 2021-11 (Xcel IUP – Resurrection Cem.) Page 3 of 7 Xcel stated they do not have any plans to fence or screen the site at this time, due to the temporary nature of this interim use permit. Xcel representatives indicated they do not plan to store any hazardous chemicals or transformers in this area; however, with the amount of equipment and vehicles and value of the equipment planned to be stored in this site, the planning commission may wish to discuss or ask if Xcel would be willing to place a temporary fence to ensure no unauthorized personnel accesses the temporary storage yard during this period. B. The proposed use conforms to the general purpose and intent of the city code and comprehensive plan, including all applicable performance standards, so as not to be in conflict on an on-going basis. Staff Response: City Code Title 12-1L-6-1 Interim Uses states that an interim use is allowed for a limited period of time that reasonably utilizes the property where it is not reasonable to utilize it in the manner otherwise provided in the comprehensive plan or this code; or a use that is seasonal in nature. The report acknowledged the subject site is located in the R-1 One Family Residential district, which allows for certain or defined “Essential Services” under a CUP. It seems reasonable that as part of Xcel’s efforts to replace and upgrade its electrical service lines in this area, they should be afforded some amount of special leeway or courtesy to provide on-site storage of their equipment, materials and job site trailers to help facilitate and serve their needs for conducting this project. The proximity of this storage yard to the planned work along this overhead power-line corridor, appears to be reasonable, suitable and adequate area to place such an area – provided it is temporary only. Since this Interim Use Permit is only granted for a short and limited period of time, there will be no long-term impacts or concerns by the City that this activity will be expanded, or the site will become a long-term storage facility that is not normally allowed under this R-1 District. Staff believe the proposed interim use at this location conforms to the general purpose and intent of the city code and comprehensive plan, including all applicable performance standards, so as not to be in conflict on an on-going basis. C. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. Staff Response: The Applicant has indicated the gas line replacement work will begin in “… summer of 2021 and completed by end of the current year [2021].” Staff is recommending the IUP will be valid from date of City Council approval (planned date of review August 4, 2021 to December 31, 2021. Any extension or allowance to use the storage yard beyond that date will require city council approval. D. Permission of the use will not impose, by agreement, additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. Staff Response: Staff does not believe the City would be burdened by any additional costs or expects any need for the public to take this property in the future. Xcel is a very well-established and successful utility company operating and serving this community, the metro area and state, so it seem highly unlikely the city would ever need to take this cemetery site or any other utility site at this or any other time in the future. Xcel Energy’s goal in this case is to be prompt and efficient with the electrical line replacement project, and return and fully restore the vacant cemetery space back to its original condition. E. The user agrees to any conditions that the city deems appropriate for permission of the use, including a condition that the owner will provide an appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing an interim use and any structures upon expiration or revocation of the interim use permit. Staff Response: This report provides certain conditions that will be imposed upon the Applicant as part of any interim use permit approval on this subject site. Most of these conditions are very Planning Case 2021-11 (Xcel IUP – Resurrection Cem.) Page 4 of 7 reasonable; and Staff does not have any reason to believe Xcel will not comply or follow these conditions as part of any approval related to this permit. Staff has not finalized any financial surety at this time, but does plan to negotiate a fair and reasonable amount to ensure that this IUP does cease and desist at the agreed upon expiration date, and the site is cleaned, restored and returned to its original condition (as needed). F. The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site. Staff Response: To the best of our knowledge, Staff is not aware that Xcel plans to purchase this site from Catholic Cemetery; nor are we aware of any plans by Resurrection Cemetery to sell-off or offer this site for any similar or other development by third parties. Therefore, this new IUP should not affect or cause any delay to any anticipated development, since there is nothing planned at this time. G. The property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all applicable city code standards. Staff Response: To the best of our knowledge, Staff believes the subject property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all applicable city code standards. H. The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district. Staff Response: The specific interim use requested by Xcel Energy on this site is not specifically identified or a use allowed as an interim use under the R-1 Zone; however, the interim use ordinance provides for limited/seasonal allowance of certain uses, provided they are reviewed and given full consideration by the Planning Commission under the standard public hearing process, and approved by the City Council. The use must also meet certain standards as noted herein; fulfill the conditions as prescribed by the City; and said use or operations must cease upon the approved deadline date. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend approval of the interim use permit request, based on the findings-of-fact that the proposed temporary storage yard for Xcel Energy and their proposed electrical line replacement project, complies with the policies and standards of the City Code and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, with conditions; or 2. Recommend denial of the interim use permit request, based on certain findings-of-fact that the proposed use is not compliant with the City Code and is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan; or 3. Table the request and direct staff and/or the applicant o bring more information to the next meeting (if necessary), and extend the application review period an additional 60 days, in compliance with MN STAT. 15.99. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the interim use permit request in this case, based on the findings-of-fact that the proposed temporary storage yard for Xcel Energy and their proposed electrical line replacement project, complies with the policies and standards of the City Code and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (Alternative #1), with the following conditions: 1. The interim use permit (IUP) shall terminate by December 31, 2021. Any extension of this IUP must be submitted to the City of Mendota Heights at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date, and approved by City Council. 2. The Applicant shall provide a financial surety in an amount negotiated between Xcel and the City Administrator, to cover the cost of removing all temporary trailers, vehicles, equipment and Planning Case 2021-11 (Xcel IUP – Resurrection Cem.) Page 5 of 7 materials used under the IUP, and to ensure the subject site is completely restored and returned to its original condition. 3. No hazardous, caustic, or explosive materials shall be stored on the outdoor area; with no refuse, garbage or scrapped (junk) materials stored on the site. All electrical poles and related material shall be stacked or stored neatly, and stored as far away from Lexington Avenue as possible. 4. The Applicant (Xcel Energy and/or its subsidiaries) will ensure the job trailer is secured and well maintained; and the storage space area is kept clean of trash and debris, free of weeds, and well maintained throughout the duration of the permit term. 5. Any existing or additional lighting (if provided), shall be temporary only, with downcast, shielded light heads, and all lighting directed away from any adjacent residential areas. 6. Hours of operation for moving equipment in and out of the site shall be limited between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm, Monday thru Friday, with allowance of 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday only. Any expanded hours, including Sunday or holiday hours must be approved by the City Council. 7. The interim use permit is shall comply with the provisions established under 12-1L-6-1: INTERIM USES and the conditions approved herewith, and shall be periodically reviewed to ensure compliance with the applicable codes and policies and, if necessary, amended accordingly. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL INTERIM USE PERMIT TO XCEL ENERGY Resurrection Cemetery (Catholic Cemeteries) 2101 Lexington Avenue South The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed request: 1. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor depreciate surrounding property values. 2. The proposed interim storage use conforms to the general purpose and intent of this code and comprehensive plan, including all applicable performance standards, provided all conditions are met and upheld by the property owners during the term of construction. 3. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. 4. Applicant has agreed to any conditions that the city deems appropriate for permission of the use, including a condition that the owner will provide an appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing an interim use and any structures upon expiration or revocation of the interim use permit. 5. The subject property on which the use will be located is in compliance with all applicable city code standards; and will remain so upon completion or termination of this IUP. Planning Case 2021-11 (Xcel IUP – Resurrection Cem.) Page 6 of 7 12-1L-6-1: INTERIM USES: A. Purpose: The purposes for allowing interim uses are to: 1. Allow a use for a limited period of time until a permanent location is obtained or while the permanent location is under construction. 2. Allow a use for a limited period of time that reasonably utilizes the property where it is not reasonable to utilize it in the manner otherwise provided in the comprehensive plan or this code. 3. Allow a use that is presently acceptable but that, with anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the future or will be replaced in the future by a permitted or conditional use allowed within the respective zoning district. 4. Allow a use that is seasonal in nature. B. Application For Permit: All applications for an interim use permit are subject to the requirements in subsection 12-1L-6B of this chapter. C. Referral To Planning Commission: All applications for an interim use permit are subject to the requirements in subsection 12-1L-6C of this chapter. D. Planning Commission Hearing And Recommendations: All applications for an interim use permit are subject to the requirements in subsection 12-1L-6D of this chapter. E. Action By City Council: 1. Grant Of Permit: In considering an application for an interim use permit under this chapter, the council shall consider the advice and recommendations of the planning commission and 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. The council may, by an affirmative vote of the majority of all members thereof, grant such interim use permit imposing conditions and safeguards therein if: a. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, nor will cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will seriously depreciate surrounding property value. b. The proposed use conforms to the general purpose and intent of this code and comprehensive plan, including all applicable performance standards, so as not to be in conflict on an ongoing basis. c. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. d. Permission of the use will not impose, by agreement, additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. e. The user agrees to any conditions that the city deems appropriate for permission of the use, including a condition that the owner will provide an appropriate financial surety to cover the cost of removing an interim use and any structures upon expiration or revocation of the interim use permit. f. The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site. g. The property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all applicable city code standards. h. The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district. Planning Case 2021-11 (Xcel IUP – Resurrection Cem.) Page 7 of 7 2. Denial Of Permit: Interim uses may be denied by resolution of the city council, and such resolution shall include a finding and determination that the conditions required for approval do not exist. No application for an interim use which has been denied wholly or in part shall be resubmitted for a period of six (6) months from the date of said order of denial, except on grounds of new evidence or proof of change of conditions found to be valid upon recommendation of the planning commission to the city council. F. Revocation Of Permit: An interim use permit may be revoked by any of the following; whichever occurs first: 1. A violation of any condition set forth in an interim use permit, which shall also be considered a violation of this code. 2. A violation of laws of the United States or the state of Minnesota, or this code. 3. If after approval it is discovered the permit was issued based on false, misleading, or fraudulent information. 4. An amendment to this code which prohibits the use. 5. The use becomes in conflict with the comprehensive plan. 6. The expiration date or occurrence of any event(s) stated in the permit for termination of the use. 7. The use has ceased for a continuous period of at least six (6) months. 8. The use has not commenced or a building permit for a structure to support the use has not been issued within one year after approval. G. Notice Of Revocation: Upon occurrence of the date or event for termination of the interim use permit, the city shall notify the permittee in writing that the interim use permit shall terminate not later than six (6) months after the date of such notice. H. Effect Of Permit: An interim use permit is effective only for the location specified in the application. The issuance of an interim use permit does not confer on the property any vested right. I. Permit Review: An interim use permit may be reviewed at any time if the city council is of the opinion that the terms and conditions of the permit have been violated or if one of the criteria for termination has been met or any other unintended consequences. J. Permit Extension: The city council shall have the right to extend the termination date for such additional periods as are consistent with the terms and conditions of the original permit. (Ord. 479, 7-7-2015) June 27, 2018 City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 RE: Interim Use Permit Application PID: 27-04100-41-012 Hello, Please find this letter of intent and application for an Interim Use Permit for the Catholic Cemeteries located on Lexington Ave. Xcel Energy is in the process of rebuilding a 115kV transmission line that runs between the Rogers Lake Substation and the Minneapolis−Saint Paul International Airport. The request is to use an existing grassy area located in the southeast area of the cemetery as a staging and laydown yard. Construction starts in the summer of 2021 and is scheduled to be completed by the end of the current year. Proposed uses will include a job trailer, storage of poles and equipment and parking for construction workers. Please review and let me know if you need additional information. Regards, Chris Berglund Senior Land Rights Agent Xcel Energy P: 612-330-6471 C:612-964-8827 christopher.d.berglund@xcelenergy.com July 27, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 9 B) PLANNING CASE 2021-11 XCEL ENERGY/CATHOLIC CEMETERIES, 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH – INTERIM USE PERMIT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Xcel Energy is seeking an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to allow for temporary outdoor staging and laydown yard, located at the southeast corner or Resurrection Cemetery, 2101 Lexington Avenue South. Xcel plans to use this outdoor staging area for the outdoor storage of electrical poles, equipment, job trailer and employee/company vehicle parking. Hearing notices were published and mailed to all properties within 350-ft. of the site; no comments or objections to this request were received. 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). Staff recommended that this item be tabled to the August 9th special meeting. He noted that Xcel was planning to begin this project on August 5th. He stated that Xcel is asking for a preliminary recommendation to begin moving items into the storage area on August 5th, which will be slightly ahead of the official approvals that would be gained. He noted that staff would bring the preliminary recommendation to the Council at its August 4th meeting. Commissioner Lorberbaum asked if the City would have the right to do so. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that the City Attorney has stated that the Council has the ability to grant that preliminary approval. Commissioner Petschel stated that if the Council is going to hear an action regardless of what is granted by the Commission, would the action of the Commission be necessary. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that staff would still like the recommendation from the Commission to go forward to Council for the preliminary review. He stated that if not approved preliminarily by the Council, the applicant would need to wait for the August 9th special Commission meeting and August 17th Council meeting. Commissioner Corbet commented that he would be interested in knowing what the urgency is. Commissioner Lorberbaum commented that a letter from Xcel was received and asked if there is something in writing stated that the cemetery supports this. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that the cemetery did sign the application as the property owner. July 27, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 of 9 Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that a representative from the cemetery is present tonight. Commissioner Corbet stated that his original thought was to table this, but it appears that a recommendation should also be made. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that Xcel would like to start this project sooner and therefore if there are no issues related to the outdoor storage yard staff would ask that the Commission provide a preliminary approval that will be reviewed by the Council. He did not believe that this would set precedent as this is a special circumstance. Chair Field invited the applicant to come forward to address the Commission. Chris Berglund, Xcel Energy, commented that they have schedule material delivery dates and if that needs to be changed it would result in additional costs and delays. He stated that the delay was not based on the applicant but the fact that the notice was not published in the Pioneer Press. Commissioner Toth stated that it would be fair to say this project was planned some time ago but did not happen. He recognized that materials have had delays recently. He asked for more information on the planning process. Mr. Berglund stated that they planned for months to move forward but needed a site to store the materials. He stated that once they found the cemetery was in agreement to allow them to store materials, he was alerted by the City that an Interim Use Permit would be necessary, and the process would take five to six weeks. He noted that typically their storage yards do not require IUP’s. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Ed Henn, 1288 Askin Way, stated that a reference was made to Sibley Memorial which happened about five years ago. He stated that during that time Xcel was prompt and neat and the site was cleaned up when they were finished. He stated that he would be in favor of moving this forward. Jill Smith, 625 Hampshire Drive, asked if this could be documented that this is not intended to set precedent but is instead caused by extraordinary circumstances. Dave Kemp, Catholic Cemeteries, commented that this temporary storage will not bother their site. He stated that he has been working with Xcel and has had no problems or conditions outside of the things they have already come to agreement on. He stated that the cemetery likes the project as the towers will be removed and it will become more modern. He recognized that they would have some disruption but believed that the outcome will outweigh that temporary disruption. He stated that they 100 percent support the project. Mr. Berglund thanked the Commission for their consideration. July 27, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 of 9 COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM TO TABLE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE AUGUST 9, 2021 SPECIAL MEETING. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that Xcel is asking for preliminary approval and therefore would be looking for a preliminary recommendation from the Commission that will go forward to the Council at its August 4th meeting. He noted that this matter will come back to the Commission at its special meeting on August 9th and then again to the Council on August 17th. He noted that this would allow Xcel to move forward with bringing materials and equipment onto the site. He confirmed that this would not set precedent value for other cases. Commissioner Corbet stated that he is not worried about precedent but is worried about what would occur if this were not eventually approved and the applicant has already brought materials on site. Commissioner Development Director Tim Benetti stated that staff is asking the Commission to forward this to the Council for its consideration. Chair Field noted that he would see this as the risk of the applicant. Commissioner Toth referenced the recommended conditions. He stated that there will be some wet months coming up and construction vehicles would be coming out of a dirt area and asked who would be responsible for cleaning up the streets. Chair Field stated that this discussion is only related to the preliminary period through August 17th and therefore that question should be delayed to the August 9th special meeting. Commissioner Petschel asked if this preliminary approval should sunset on August 18th which would allow one day to remove equipment if the final request is denied. Chair Field confirmed that would be implied. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBET, TO RECOMMEND PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE INTERIM USE PERMIT REQUEST THAT WILL SUNSET ON AUGUST 18, 2021, TO ALLOW DELIVERY OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS THAT WILL BE SUBJECT BY THE INTERIM USE PERMIT THAT WILL BE REVIEWED ON AUGUST 9, 2021 AND AUGUST 17, 2021; THIS IS DUE TO REASONS CAUSED BY THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AND THEREFORE DOES NOT SET PRECEDENT. FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER CORBET ASKED IF THE MATERIAL WOULD BE SCREENED. HE ALSO ASKED THE INTENSITY OF THE USAGE. July 27, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 6 of 9 CHAIR FIELD ASKED IF THE CONDITIONS FROM THE REPORT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL STATED THAT HE WAS UNSURE THAT THE MOTION WAS INTENDED TO INCLUDE THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM STATED THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THE STORAGE WOULD LOOK LIKE. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL COMMENTED THAT THERE IS A MOTION ON THE TABLE THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED. CHAIR FIELD RECOGNIZED THAT THERE WAS AN UNUSUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR THAT IS CAUSING THIS DELAY. COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL STATED THAT HE FEELS THAT IF THE CONDITIONS ARE INCLUDED AT THIS TIME IT WOULD GRANT THE FULL APPROVAL, RATHER THAN WAITING UNTIL THE AUGUST 9TH MEETING TO DO SO. COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM STATED THAT THIS COULD BE REMOVED FROM THE TABLE IN ORDER TO HEAR ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM THE APPLICANT. COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER CORBET ASKED FOR DETAILS ON HOW THE SITE WOULD BE USED AND/OR SCREENED. MR. BERGLUND STATED THAT CONSTRUCTION MATS WOULD BE PLACED TO AVOID DISTURBANCE OF THE GROUND. HE NOTED THAT THERE IS A TEN FOOT FENCE BUT THEY COULD ADD ADDITIONAL FENCING/SCREENING. HE STATED THAT IF ANY MUD WERE DRUG ONTO THE STREET, XCEL WOULD CLEAN IT UP. COMMISSIONER TOTH COMMENTED THAT THERE ARE GOOD AND BAD CONSTRUCTION SITES. HE NOTED THAT THIS IS WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND URGED XCEL TO DO AN EXCELLENT JOB. HE STATED THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WALK THROUGH THE CEMETERY PROPERTY AND SUGGESTED THAT SIGNAGE BE POSTED ALERTING PEOPLE TO KEEP OUT OF THE CONSTRUCTION AREA. MR. BERGLUND STATED THAT THREE STRUCTURES WOULD BE WITHIN THE CEMETERY AND DESCRIBED THE PROCESS THAT WOULD BE FOLLOWED. July 27, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 7 of 9 COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBET TO TABLE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE AUGUST 9, 2021 SPECIAL MEETING. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBET TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE CONDITIONS TWO THROUGH SEVEN OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0