Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2022-02-15 Council Agenda Packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TjFebruary 15, 2022 — 6.00 pm Mendota Heights City Hall 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Adopt Agenda 5. Presentations a. League of Minnesota Cities Mayor for the Day Recognition 6. Consent Agenda a. Approve the February 2, 2022 City Council Minutes b. Approve the February 2, 2022 Council Work Session Minutes c. Authorize Contract for Arbitrage Monitoring Services with Ehlers &Associates d. Authorize Purchase Order for Invasive Species Management and Restoration at Valley Park, Roger Lake Park, and Copperfield Ponds e. Approve Purchase Order to Tree Trust for Spring Tree Sale f. Approve Contract with Dakota County for Wetland Health Evaluation Program g. Acknowledge December 2021 Par 3 Financial Report h. Approve Purchase Of Utility Terrain Vehicle for Fire Department 1. Approve Resolution 2022-16 Disposal of Surplus Property i. Approve Revisions to the Drug and Alcohol Testing for Commercial Drivers Policy j. Approve the January 2022 Building Activity Report k. Approve the Claims List 7. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) *See guidelines below 8. Public Hearings - none 9. New and Unfinished Business a. Resolution 2022-12 Approving a Wetlands Permit to Resurrection Cemetery located at 2101 Lexington Avenue South and for Planning Case No. 2021-23 b. Resolution 2022-15 Approving a Conditional Use Permit to Amend Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development and for Planning Case No. 2021-13, the new Phase III / 79-Unit Apartment Building by At Home Apartments, LLC c. Professional Services Contract for Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan d. Change the March 15, 2022 City Council Meeting Date 10. Community Announcements 11. Council Comments 12. 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 S 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." page 3 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota He 5a. 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.45 www.mendota-heights.col, s CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Kelly Dumais, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Mayor For A Day Contest BACKGROUND Each year, the League of Minnesota Cities hosts a writing contest called Mayor for a Day in which they ask kids to write about what they would do if they could be mayor for a day. The essays are to be the original work of students who are in 41n 51h or 61h grade. The project aims at connecting young people with their community governance and to give kids an opportunity to share how they would make one of the services that the City provides better. Mendota Heights residents Anna and Luke Rexeisen submitted an essay on how they would improve the library to help reduce the spread of COVID-19. ACTION REQUESTED Informational materials only, no action required page 4 If I were I have some the mayor... great ideas to share! Wien kids cities listen. s Ilk Would your student like to be "Mayor for a Day" for a chance to win $100? Enter the League of Minnesota Cities Essay Contest: If I Were Mayor for a Day... Essays can be subri tted online or us tg the fL,,rii on page r,.o(eith•_1 • ,,, ::,I ':;I.•_•-i t•_ tt, I .,:)le form). should be no more'han One page in length o. bout 125-3r,i words , •t t ,II ::er thc. I question: Cities provide a variety of services and programs that make our lives better,including parks&rec, street maintenance,water and sewer, libraries,police,fire,and more!If you were mayor for a day,what would you do to make one of the services that your city provides even better? Essays must be the origm it work of students residing in Mi oesota who.ire in 4th.5th,or 6th grade as of fall 2021. Three winners will be selected based on creativity,original ty ability to snow a basic understanding of city services,and legibility Cif hanuwvttt0)and notified via email in early January.Eacn wflnrler will receive a$100 prize.The winning essays will also be publi3Ohed in the League's publication,Minnesota Cities mi ig;i;zlne, • Mailed entries must be postmarked by Dec.6,2021 to: League of Minnesota Cities,ATTN:Mayor for a Day,145 University Ave W.St.Paul,MN 55103. • You may also email ent,ies as an attachment by Dec.6,2021 to mayorforadayalmc.org or submit your essay at www,lmC.ortt hr7_ayrr'3r,yddy. THERE 15 NO COST TO ENTER.These restrictions apply: YOU agree to have your child,;e=:say pubh0ea in Min!teW,)Cities magazine and other League communications Ypll agree that your child's essay can be snared vrlth the chi d s city of residence. You agree that your city's m ayor rand localmedi.i will be notified of your child's winning entry. Author's Name nn&, OMAli Lut k, AlCkesXq ?,j sunmitting this form,the student's parr-tor gu�r;:i.an ac�knowirogr s�they give consent to LMC to collect this data for the limited purpose of idcntifyanq and contacting a cvrvte=_t winner,and'I-3t this consent may be revoked at any time by contacting publicaffairs;almror-q- 'h,<,cor,te.t iS help by the Lc-Iciue ofMinnesota Ci:t c..145 university Ave W,St.Paul,MN 55103,Thc•League i� i membership organization dedicated'o promoting c•.xcel once-n local gove rinntm The League=_crr=_ t5 more than$op mer^oc•cities through advocacy.education 3i•s1 tra—r'9•poliu,de'velo DMC!It.•isk—anagernent-and othtir serV,cec.:or more,information,vmt rvs^:.tiJ me 0r43. If we were mayor for a day we would help the Library. Since CLVID spreads by touching objects, We would design a box with vertical lines for eyes and a circle mouth. Below the mouth page 5 is a non-touch screen. At the bottom of the box there would be a cat flap for spheros to come out of. Next to that there would be a hole into the box. The mouth would be a microphone and you would ask which book you need. For example Land of Stories book 1. Then a speaker on the side of it would ask"land of stories by Chris Colfer book one, correct?" then you would say yes or no. Then the screen below would show the first option. If that is not what you are looking for then you would say "next book." When you find the book you are looking for you say "that is the book." Then the box sends a quick program to the sphero next in line. Then the sphero will come out of the cat flap and drive moderately slowly so the person could follow it easily. The sphero would stop by the bookshelf and say with a built in speaker"land of stories by Chris Colfer book one" and wait a couple of seconds and then drive back to the box and into the hole. By having this box to find things for you instead of everyone touching and using computers, it may help stop spreading COVID. And help the librarians focus on other things that may be more important. By Anna and Luke Rexeisen SC1' f��r page 6 +ylic�l �'Ar C�.+ +W page 7 6a. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, February 2, 2022 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 Mazzitello, Miller, and Paper were also present. Councilor Duggan was absent. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Levine presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Mazzitello moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Levine presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Miller moved approval of the consent calendar as presented,pulling item e. a. Approval of January 18, 2022 City Council Minutes b. Approval of January 18, 2022 City Council Closed Session Minutes c. Acknowledge the November 17, 2021 Airport Relations Commission Meeting Minutes d. Acknowledge the December 28, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes e. f. Approve Resolution 2022-10 Approving Settlement Agreement and Release Between the City of Mendota Heights and Anthony Patton g. Approve Change Order for the Ivy Falls East Neighborhood Improvement Project h. Approve Change Order for the Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer and Streambank Repairs i. Approve Resolution 2022-06 Permanent Easement Modification to Northern States Power at Mendakota Park j. Approve Purchase of John Deere Gator and Snow Blade k. Approve Purchase of Fire Department Mobile Radios 1. Approve the December 2021 Fire Synopsis m. Approval of December 2021 Treasurer's Report n. Approval of Claims List page 8 Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS E) APPROVE RECLASSIFICATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICIAN TO NATURAL RESOURCES COORDINATOR Councilor Mazzitello asked for an update on the status of the Natural Resources Management Plan. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that he does not have an update because staff are waiting for the spring season to include in the final report. Councilor Mazzitello moved to approve RECLASSIFICATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICIAN TO NATURAL RESOURCES COORDINATOR. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS No one from the public wished to be heard. PUBLIC HEARING A) RESOLUTION 2022-09 ORDERING OF IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CENTRE POINTE STREET IMPROVEMENTS Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that the Council was being asked to preside over a public hearing for the Centre Pointe Street Improvement project. Larry Poppler, TKDA,provided a presentation on the proposed Centre Pointe Street Improvements. Councilor Miller asked if there is a timeline for the improvements on Carmen Lane, which only has one means of egress. Mr. Poppler stated that more information will be known once a contractor is brought on board. He commented that the material from the reconstruction area could be reused for Carmen Lane, therefore he believed that work would occur in the Centre Pointe area first with Carmen Lane to follow. With only one access, the residents living in that area would be accommodated during the project. Councilor Mazzitello asked if the assessment values in the feasibility report could increase. Mr. Poppler commented they prepare the estimates to be conservative with the hopes that the value could be decreased. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that generally the estimate in the feasibility study is the worst- case scenario for assessments. February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 16 page 9 Councilor Paper asked about trail improvements planned east of Carmen Lane. Director Ruzek noted that fall protection will be installed adjacent to the ravine and the trail will be moved north to connect with the eastbound drive lane to provide a safer crossing point. He noted an ADA compliant ramp would be installed. Councilor Paper asked who would be responsible for notifications to residents related to road closures and water shutoffs. Director Ruzek stated that the only water improvements would be the replacement of two hydrants and noted that Saint Paul Regional Water Supply (SPRWS)would provide the notification. He stated that TKDA or the contractor would be responsible for notifying residents related to road closures. Councilor Paper commented that many times people do not notice something on the front door and asked if notice could be placed on garage doors. Director Ruzek commented that the field staff attempt to build relationships with residents when onsite. He stated that daily reports are received from TKDA which are then posted on the City website as well. Councilor Miller moved to open the public hearing. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Angie Leitner, 897 Carmen Lane, commented that she has concern about access during the project, along with communication, stating there are about 40 homes that use this access. She asked about the street width for Carmen Lane. She stated that she is also concerned with water shutoffs. She noted a group home in the development which makes multiple daily trips. She commented that the assessment value is shocking but noted that she appreciates the investment. There being no one further coming forward to speak, Councilor Miller moved to close the public hearing. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Director Ruzek stated that a letter will be sent to the entire Crown Point neighborhood to advise them of the project and direct them to the website for continued updates. He stated that typically street width is measured from the face of the curb, while the report showed a measurement from back of curb which adds two feet. He stated that the section from Highway 62 to Carmen would have a width of 24 feet measured from face of curb which allows for two-way traffic. He stated that from Crown Point to the cul-de-sac there would be a width of 20 feet measured from face of curb. He noted that the design has not been laid out but that they would center where the existing center line lies. He noted they will attempt to avoid the mature trees. He commented that he is unsure how the hydrant replacement would impact water use but SPRWS would have recommendations if there are shutoffs necessary. Mayor Levine commented that the group home may need special consideration. She reminded residents that information will be posted on the City website and in the Friday News newsletter. February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 of 16 page 10 Councilor Mazzitello commended Bobby Crane for his continued excellent work. He noted that Mr. Crane is working on a mapping of the street improvement projects and noted that this project completes the City. He noted that the City will have reconstructed, rehabilitated, or majorly maintained all of the City streets. He stressed the importance of continuing that cycle in order to maintain the quality of the roads. Mayor Levine commented that was a 25-year plan which took 27 years to complete. She agreed that it is an example of good governance and planning. She also commended Mr. Crane for his excellent work. She stated that the City will continue to follow the plan moving forward. Councilor Mazzitello commented that part of that moving forward will be coordinating with SPRWS on watermain replacement projects to complete street projects in conjunction with utility work. Councilor Mazzitello moved to approve RESOLUTION 2022-09 ORDERING OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CENTRE POINTE STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 9202107. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) APPOINTMENT TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Mayor Levine stated the Council was being asked to make an appointment to fill a vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Commission. She stated that interviews for the position occurred prior to tonight's meeting and the Council chose Michelle O'Connor for the position. Michelle O'Connor introduced herself and commented that she is very excited to serve in a community. Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2022-11 APPOINTMENT FILLING A VACANCY ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 B) RESOLUTION 2022-13 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR 693 MULBERRY LANE Community Development Director Tim Benetti presented Resolution 2022-13,which approves a Variance for 693 Mulberry Lane, amending Code Section 12-1D-3.C.La, which regulates the number of accessory structures permitted for a single-family residential use. Councilor Paper commented this is a project that got out of hand because of a bad contractor. He stated that licensed contractors work hard to maintain their licensure and everyone should check the credentials for anyone working in your home. February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 of 16 page 11 Mayor Levine recognized that scamming does not provide a guarantee for a variance. She appreciated the finding of the Planning Commission related to practical difficulty. She commented that the homeowner did their due diligence. Councilor Mazzitello commented that he believed the discussion of the Planning Commission was very good, noting that it included other aspects of this lot which are legally nonconforming, particularly the setbacks related to the driveway and detached garage. He asked if anything in this action should memorialize those elements for future applications that may come forward. Director Benetti commented that the City Attorney directed the City to focus on the request before it tonight. He noted that this will establish the legal nonconforming use. If the detached garage were more than 50 percent destroyed, the homeowner would need to request a variance to rebuild. He stated that if the detached garage is removed, it could not be rebuilt in the same place. He stated that the driveway appears to cross over the property line, noting that is a civil matter between the properties. Councilor Mazzitello asked if there is any other accessory structure on the property, noting that once the attached garage is completed, the detached garage would function as a shed. Director Benetti confirmed that the detached garage is the only accessory structure on the property. He noted the variance would carry forward with the property and to subsequent property owners, as would the legal nonconforming status. Councilor Paper moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2022-13 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR 693 MULBERRY LANE. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 C) CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING CASE NO. 2021-13, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AMEND MENDOTA PLAZA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR NEW PHASE III/LOT 7, 79- UNIT APARTMENTS BY AT HOME APARTMENTS, LLC Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated the Council is asked to consider a Conditional Use Permit(CUP) authorizing an amendment to the Mendota Plaza PUD of 2009. At Home Apartments, LLC is seeking this amendment in order to provide a 79-unit apartment building on Lot 7 of the development. Director Benetti presented history on the 2009 Mendota Plaza PUD Master Plan and background and timeline of the proposed development of Lot 7. He noted that Councilors Mazzitello and Duggan met with the Applicant and discussed providing more green space by redistributing, reducing or eliminating outdoor parking and moving the building to the east; establishing setbacks from adjacent curb lines rather than the property line of 15-25 feet, with the clarification that the setback did not need to be the same all the way around the building and adjust building size by considering a 3-story building; by reducing the number of units to a total closer to 60 units, and reducing the overall height of the building by removing the proposed fourth floor or"push"the building deeper in the ground. Director Benetti provided the Council with an overview of the updated site plan noting that the building had been reduced from 89 to 79 units,the parking on the east had been removed,the parking includes 146 parking spaces with 125 on the interior and 21 on the exterior, the parking ratio is 1.85 spaces per unit, February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 of 16 page 12 the building has been moved east and he noted the specific setbacks, green space was added, and a dog park and small pocket park was now included. Director Benetti explained the history of the project area in relation to the Comprehensive Plan. Leanna Stefaniak, representing At Home Apartments, commented that they are a locally owned property management and development company and are well respected in Minnesota. She stated the company owns and operates all properties they develop. She commented that this development would be geared towards young professionals, which would aim to fill a gap in the housing market in Mendota Heights. She stated that the proposal is a good use and smart planning because of the proximity to commercial, retail, highways, and parks. She stated that in November they presented this request and ultimately requested the City to table it. The City Council setup a public forum in order to continue to engage the community and receive input. She noted that Councilors Duggan and Mazzitello facilitated those discussions with the community. The Councilors then provide a list of"asks"to At Homes. She reviewed each of the asks and how At Home Apartments responded, including removal of the surface parking to provide additional greenspace;moving the building to the east to create additional greenspace and a pocket park; establishing a greater setback now proposed at 25 feet; and lowering the height of the building by four feet. She noted that they were asked to reduce the unit count to 60 but noted that would not be economically feasible, stating they reduced the number of units from 113 to 79 units. She stated they were asked to remove the entire fourth floor,but noted that they pulled back portions of the fourth floor similar to The Reserve Apartments building. She stated that in addition to their responses, they provided other positive changes to the site. She noted that this would be less impervious surface than originally requested. She stated that they increased the parking ratios noting a ratio of 1.85, making it the highest parking ratio for any recently approved multi-family development. She stated by internalizing the surface parking,they expanded the building footprint slightly which allowed increases to unit sizes. She stated that by reducing the unit count,they also reduced the daily trip count for the project. She stated that they also increased the greenspace and will continue to work with specialty consultants to design the dog park and pocket park. Pete Keely,project architect, displayed renderings of the proposed building and noted that they worked to push the fourth floor back from the south side of the building to minimize the impact. He identified a continuous sidewalk as well as an increased courtyard space. The courtyard is a place for the residents of the building to gather while also reducing the mass of the building. He reviewed different elements and amenities of the building floorplan, and provided details on the height calculation for the building height and grade. He provided photos of how the building will look from different locations in the area. He reviewed the different housing products in the area including The Reserve, The Linden, and phase 11 of The Reserve noting that those are all aimed at an older demographic. He stated that this would be a good location for the younger demographic because of the walkability and access to different retail and restaurants, along with the amenities included in the building that foster a sense of community and gathering. He noted that a younger population tends to activate and energize a community. Councilor Mazzitello stated that the Council received an email from a Dakota County master gardener related to the landscaping plan. He asked that the applicant take those comments into account. Ms. Stefaniak commented that she also received the email and stated they are working on the preliminary design of the landscaping plan. She noted that the landscaping consultants will attempt to incorporate those suggestions as they work with City staff as well. Councilor Mazzitello referenced the impervious surface and noted that the dog park and pocket park appear to be paved in the renderings. Mr. Keely provided additional details on the portions of each amenity February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 of 16 page 13 that would be pervious or impervious. He noted that there will be some hard surface areas along with green areas and over story trees in those areas. Councilor Paper commented that he does not believe overstory trees can be stressed enough for the benefit they provide. He referenced the grade on the south side of the building and asked if that is street level. Mr. Keely replied that because the building is flat and the grade slopes, the middle of the building would be at street level while the east side of the building is above grade, and the west side is below grade. Councilor Paper asked how the building would be maintained long-term to ensure it remains vibrant in year 30. Ms. Stefaniak replied that this is their investment because they own it and manage it. She stated that At Home Apartments has educated staff with different certifications to ensure the assets are well maintained. She stated that they employ all the necessary employees to maintain the buildings and grounds, as the renters are their customers, and they aim to keep them happy. Councilor Paper asked how often an apartment is renovated. Ms. Stefaniak commented that depends upon what they see when a resident moves out. A team reviews the unit to determine what is needed. Councilor Paper asked how the developer chooses which rules will be followed in terms of setbacks and other regulations. Ms. Stefaniak noted that there are no firm rules within the MU-PUD as it is intended to be flexible to allow for a mix of residential and non-residential uses. She recognized that the Council has the discretion as to what should be employed on this site. She stated that one of the asks was to provide a setback of 15 to 25 feet and they in return provided a setback of at least 25 feet. Councilor Paper asked how this item ended up here in February rather than earlier. Ms. Stefaniak stated that in November there were still a lot of questions and concerns, therefore At Homes requested the item to be tabled to continue discussions. She stated that she requested a Council task force to facilitate those discussions and Councilors Mazzitello and Duggan were selected to participate. She noted that meetings occurred which were open to the public to provide input. She stated that a lot of constructive and creative ideas were received. She stated that it was agreed at that time that they would not be able to accomplish all of the amendments to the plans during the holiday season, therefore the item was postponed. Councilor Paper asked the average rents for the smallest units and related minimum income requirements. Ms. Stefaniak replied that all tenants are required to have an income three times the rent amount. She stated that increases based on the number of occupants, noting that if two people occupy the unit the income requirement would be 3.5 times the rent amount. Mayor Levine noted young professionals working from home and asked whether there would be accommodations for them. Mr. Keely commented that they have been discussing that for all of their properties. He noted that they are incorporating space within all the units for a workstation where someone could work and participate in a Zoom call. He noted that it would not work well to conduct a Zoom call in a common area. He stated that there are also a series of spaces where someone could bring their laptop to do some work and he identified the different areas in the building that could be used. He stated that the clubhouse would be multipurpose and could be used for dining and gathering but could also be used for work on a laptop. He stated that they would also have a Zoom room where people could take those types of calls. He highlighted the outdoor spaces that could be used for that purpose. February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 of 16 page 14 Ms. Stefaniak commented that work from home required multi-family residential properties to factor that in,noting that there is wi-fi available in all common areas along with charging stations and a Zoom room. She noted that the apartments would have a built-in desktop station as well. Mayor Levine welcomed input from residents. Jill Smith, 625 Hampshire Drive, commented that the lot is described as 2.04 acres but she believes that includes right-of-way. She believed the density proposed exceeds the allowable density within the Comprehensive Plan. She commented that the MU-PUD stated that the development should be in scale with the adjacent developments. She believed that surrounding land uses around The Plaza should be considered. She expressed concern with additional traffic and impacts to the response time from the Fire Department. She stated that economic factors cannot be considered in land use decisions. She commented that this apartment project is too large for the lot. She asked that the Council support its constituents. She asked why the concerns of the Planning Commission have not been considered and asked how this project would benefit the City. She urged the Council to deny this proposal. John Maczko, 751 Cheyenne Lane, commented this discussion is about what is right for the community and what fits on the site. He stated that in November he commended Ms. Stefaniak for her request to table and have community discussions. He commented that what exists today in the PUD does not come close to what was originally envisioned for the property. He commented that there was no processor community involvement. He stated that there was one meeting on December 13th and there was no interaction between the developer and community. He stated that he believes this new plan is unchanged from the original proposal. He commented that the retaining walls are not shown and not all areas intended to be pedestrian friendly will actually be pedestrian friendly because of the grades. He stated that the adjacent building will have 58 units, therefore it does not make sense that lesser units could not work. He stated that if this is intended to be a planned unit development, this should be denied until the City can decide what it wants for the site. He does not believe this is something the community wants. He commented that he is disappointed that this is turning into a situation where the developers continue to provide presentations with the hope that residents will stop showing up. He commented that the residents should have an opportunity to say what they want on that site. Julie Bader, 910 Mendakota Court, commented that when people return to work after COVID, the traffic issues on Dodd will become worse. She stated that conditions are unsafe and adding more traffic to this area does not make sense. She believed the infrastructure should be addressed first. Mike Resnick, 894 Mendakota Court, commented that vehicles drive on the shoulder on Dodd Road which is unsafe. He noted that as a pedestrian, crossing that road is not safe with children. He was disappointed that the discussion tonight did not include traffic. Kate Christensen, 2280 Ocala Court, commented she does not feel there was a difference between the requests. She commented that the number of trees seemed to have decrease and there have been other recommended landscaping items that have not been incorporated. She stated that she would prefer landscaping in place of a pocket park. She stated that the City made a commitment towards sustainability and believed this request should be made GreenStep compliant. She recognized that this use would generate less traffic than a daycare, but would still be more than exists today. She asked for details on the height of the retaining wall, noting that it would keep people out of the courtyard which is meant to be private for the tenants. She commented that this still feels too big and not what the residents asked for. She noted that while this would be a nice building for the tenants, it would only benefit the tenants. February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 of 16 page 15 Joe Betlej, 1335 Riverside Lane, stated that the importance of how the PUD works is to consider the uses on the edges of the site and how they work with adjacent uses. He stated that the MU-PUD was designed to use standards consistent with the rest of the city and what was good development. He stated that he was bothered by the feasibility argument and the cost of the land, noting that the cost of the land has nothing to do with the request before the City. He stated that a building of this height will be a big impact on the adjacent residential homes. He noted that this building will face the backside of a retail building with dumpsters and truck traffic and believed there should be a buffer between. He commented that there has not been any discussion on the overall PUD, and has been focused on just this parcel. He commented on the parking that exists for the mall and asked if parking is being double counted. He asked how trash would be handled in the building, noting that he did not see an area for collection of trash. He asked that the Council deny the request. Tamara Will, 788 Hokah Avenue, stated that she views the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan as mistakes and that residents do not pay attention to the details during the planning process and get involved when something comes forward in their neighborhood. She noted that the Mayor provided guidelines for the residents speaking, but yet staff and the developer were allowed to speak for over an hour and will have another opportunity to speak as well. She mentioned a petition with over 30 signatures against the project. She provided comments that residents had related to the traffic on Dodd Road and their desire for increased pedestrian safety. She feels that it seems the residents are being worn down because they feel their comments do not matter. She commented this development does not make sense for the community. Bernard Friel, 750 Mohican Lane, noted the group of residents against development is not a small group, and includes former Council, Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission members, and others. He wondered why there was no market study done to support the statement made that this would be a desirable place for young professionals. He stated that the developer made a small reduction in traffic compared to a childcare center but does not review the other comparisons to a childcare center that would be negative. He stated this is a high-density residential project and, but for the fact that this is a PUD, it would be guided by the high-density provisions of the zoning ordinance. He noted that the previously planned development in the PUD included open space, which does not exist in this proposal. This development has been developed in a hodgepodge manner. He noted that the concerns for traffic and the desire for open space have been set aside. He hoped the Council would consider the input of the residents. Sarah Ziskin, 788 Hokah Avenue, commented that she will graduate college this year and loves Mendota Heights. She commented that young people want to leave their parents' home and enter the real world, and not remain in a small town they grew up in. She stated that young professionals want places to walk to. She did not believe this community is the right fit for young professionals. Stacy Styles, 2188 Aztec Lane, stated that people are not coming to meetings as they feel they are not being heard. She stated the renderings are beautiful and there have been some concessions made, but that building does not fit into the space. She believed that infrastructure should be addressed before adding more people. She does not think young professionals would be content in this space. Sally Lorberbaum, 890 Douglas Road, commented that she is a member of the Planning Commission. She noted that this is a new plan and she is pleased with many of the changes. She commented that these changes are still not right and suggested sending this back to the Planning Commission for further review. She commented on the size of the dog park, and that a third of the parking is a width of 18 feet rather than February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 9 of 16 page 16 20. She stated that the focus of the Council needs to be on the community and business community. She commented that if the developer cannot make it work financially,perhaps this is not the right fit. Thomas Smith, 625 Hampshire Drive, referenced the comment that phase II and phase III will appeal to young professionals. He stated that Mendota Heights has been rated as the most boring suburb in the Twin Cities. He stated that Councilor Duggan recommended that the number of units be reduced to 40 units and the developer requested 79, stating that any less would not be economically feasible. He stated that economic considerations should not be part of this decision. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposal and asked why the judgement of that body should be ignored. He stated that Mendota Heights is a unique residential community and has avoided dense development. He stated that people enjoy living here because the City has refused to pander to developers. He asked if there is any reason that the Council should ignore the tradition to avoid dense development. He stated that if the Council approves this request, its legacy will be far different than those that have served before. Jeff Nath, 1911 Knob Road, commented that this process has been bad. He reviewed some of the concerns he has heard from residents related to the traffic on Dodd Road. He stated that at the first meeting there was a lot of discussion about traffic concerns and a decision that a task force would be formed, and that issue should be separated from the apartment request. He stated that the residents do not feel heard on that issue. He stated that this process has been brutal with residents waiting over three hours to provide their comments. He was hurt by the fact that emailed comments carry the same weight as those residents that attend the meetings and wait hours to be heard. He stated the residents are tired of this process and have become worn down. He commented that At Home Apartments and Pastor Properties have been great in incorporating changes. He stated that those parties are not the ones causing the traffic problems, but that infrastructure has to be improved before additional development can be considered. He commented that they are continually told not to talk about traffic, which is the main concern for safety. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended denial and that was ignored. He stated that there continues to be more residents speaking in opposition than in favor and yet phase II was approved. He stated that when the process is done, the Council should look to create a better forum for residents. Mayor Levine called for a brief recess. Mayor Levine reconvened the meeting. Howard Pastor, Pastor Properties, provided background information on his family's involvement in The Plaza. He stated that there has been a lot of input throughout this process, and he will continue to welcome public dialogue as The Plaza continues to evolve. He stated that he needs the traffic issue to be addressed as well. He stated that Pastor Properties wants to be part of the solution but recognized that decisions need to be made on a much higher level with the State and County. He stated that there is a fantastic opportunity before the City today as this could realize the finalization of the downtown Mendota Heights area and complete the PUD. He noted that public input was a part of the development of the PUD and the Comprehensive Plan and this opportunity should be embraced. He stated that this would bring more people into the community and provide more housing options for residents. He stated that there should be a housing product choice for those who do not want, or are not in the position to,purchase a single-family home. He stated there is far too much vacancy at The Plaza and The Village. He commented that vacant storefronts will not bring in customers and retailers. He stated that bringing more people in will help to revitalize that commercial area. He stated that it is great that people are concerned and noted that should be converted to positive energy in order to move forward. He stated that if this next step could be approved, the next focus would be on The Plaza and how they can connect the buildings and create more February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 of]6 page 17 public gathering areas and attract more businesses and restaurants. He stated that they would love to pursue opportunities for programing public spaces within The Plaza. He stated that the time is now as this is an amazing opportunity. He asked the Council to decide to build a future that illuminates Mendota Heights as a beacon with a community center that is inclusive and accessible to everyone. Ms. Stefaniak commented that The Plaza is a welcoming center of the community. She understands the frustration in the process as she has attended all these meetings. She stated that when comparing this process to that of The Linden, it must be remembered that The Linden was public property whereas this is privately owned property. She stated that they even deviated from the typical process to include the public forum. She appreciated the efforts of the residents that took time to attempt to analyze the calculations but noted that their engineers are licensed and their numbers are accurate. She stated that they commented earlier about greenspace, the additional trees and will work with the master gardeners and City staff. She stated that they also need to design the landscaping for the dog run,pocket park, and overall landscaping. The City has made a commitment to become a GreenStep city and they are working with staff to determine how those elements can be incorporated. She understands there is an idea that this project is too big and is not what the community wants. She stated that staff and the Comprehensive Plan have said otherwise as the plan identifies housing with density requirements that are met on the minimum range. She stated that traffic has been discussed and their traffic counts are included in the report. She stated that this would generate more traffic than a daycare, but not during the peak times. She noted that their use would generate less traffic than the previously combined proposed uses. She stated that they have followed the guidelines within MU-PUD and the Council has the discretion on the decision. She noted that while not all young professionals will choose this location, others will. She stated that they have 30 years of experience and believe this will be a successful location. She noted that Eagan is also not an exciting community,but their new rental locations are filled with young professionals. She stated that she was quoted in the Star Tribune article as were others in this room. She referenced a quote in the article that stated that transients will live in the building rather than residents. She stated that referring to renters as transients is a derogatory term as there are many reasons people choose to rent and they should not be discounted as residents. She stated that the Mendota Heights that she knows is kind and inclusive and that is why she chooses to raise her family here and was bothered by a statement that would look down on someone because of how they choose to live. She urged the Council to approve the project as this would invigorate the area and bring vibrancy to The Plaza. Councilor Miller stated that economics is related to opportunity cost, which exists in every financial decision. He asked the other members of the Council why they believe this is the right thing for this space. He stated they have heard from a lot of people and many have said they do not feel their comments are being heard. Councilor Paper stated that a lot of work has been put in, going back to the Comprehensive Plan which is the guiding document for the City. The plan identifies density for this vacant property. He stated that adding density and options is one of the few things he campaigned on. He stated that he wanted options within the community to give existing residents places to go while staying in the community. He believed that the City has done a good job propelling forward in attempting to become current, under the guide of the Comprehensive Plan. He also reviewed the density range for MU-PUD. He stated that the Council worked together to develop a satisfactory range for that density,with input from the residents and Planning Commission. He referenced a housing goal to meet future needs with a variety of products and to encourage housing products in various forms. He reviewed the need for additional housing products for young people and multi-family housing options for young families also found within the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that this is a known developer coming to the City with a product that meets and exceeds February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 11 of 16 page 18 what the City is looking for, according to the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that this would be a nice project that would fit with the area and would add vibrancy to The Plaza. He noted that he has heard comments from residents both in support and opposition. He stated that he wants to ensure that the tree canopy is kept in focus. He stated that if the trees cannot be added to this parcel, they should be added to The Plaza. He stated that this development would offer inclusion. He noted that he does not want to live in a community that excludes others. He stated that he would like to see the community be more gracious and inclusive of everyone. He commented that Mendota Heights needs to move forward and be willing to make changes in a thoughtful manner. He stated that this is an opportunity with a known developer that provides a terrific product. Councilor Mazzitello stated that he was a member of the Planning Commission when the Comprehensive Plan was developed. He noted that the planning process was long with multiple times for public input, and multiple Planning Commission and City Council meetings. He recognized the comments that residents do not feel heard but noted that the community forum was held in order to hear the residents. He stated that the residents have been heard. He stated that the issue of traffic on Dodd Road came up early in the process and in response the City setup a committee to meet with MnDOT and the County. He stated that the City does not own Dodd Road and has to work with the State on any improvements. He stated that the asks that were given to the applicant were a direct result of the comments from the public. He stated that there is a whole separate list with asks for The Plaza. He agreed that this process should be improved. He recognized that the City has a 60-day review period with the ability to extend that by an additional 60 days, but then a decision must be made. He stated that he does not care about what others think he does,but what he thinks about what he does, as that defines character. He noted that it is equally as vile a sin for someone of means to look down upon someone who is challenged as it is for someone that is challenged to look upon those with means with contempt. He stated that he does not want to live in a community with those biases. He stated that he knows people that rent apartments because they choose to, but that does not make them transients. He stated that he does not want to be in a community that discriminates against people because of where they choose to live. He stated that he spent two decades serving in the military and has met people from all over the world and no one is better than anyone else. Mayor Levine stated that the Comprehensive Plan was adopted prior to her taking office and she has spent a lot of time reviewing the document. She stated that when she has been confused on the right decision, she uses the Comprehensive Plan as a guiding document. She stated that this request fits within different elements of the Comprehensive Plan which encompasses the thoughts and planning from generations before as well as a vision for the future. She commented that there is a traffic solutions committee, which Councilor Mazzitello is a part of. She heard the comments related to traffic and pedestrian safety, which need to be solved but recognized that is not a problem to be solved by this project. She stated she would have a hard time tying a denial of this request to traffic, which is not a problem created by this property. She stated she was outraged by the remark in the newspaper article as that does not represent who the community is. She stated that she was sad and embarrassed when she read the article. Councilor Miller stated this request is an MU-PUD which means it is the purview of the Council to decide whether the proposal is a good fit. He stated that he disagrees on this issue. He believed that this should be sent back for continued work. The Council was hired to review the documents and listen to the people in order to merge those things and move forward. He stated that he agrees with denouncing the comment using the word transient and would hope the person realized their comment was inconsiderate. He stated that he did not believe this is the best they can do. He agreed that Mr. Cashill builds a great product, but the question is whether this product fits the character of the city. He stated that the tone of the audience February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 12 of]6 page 19 needs to be listened to. He stated that this is a tough decision. He stated that while the other members believe this is right for the City, he believes they can do better. Councilor Mazzitello applauded Councilor Miller on a number of accounts. He stated that Councilor Miller has been a consistent voter in review of development. He noted that there has been very little he and Councilor Miller have disagreed on, with the exception of this request. He stated that honoring the past and where the City came from is a huge part of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that Mendota Heights is a model city in terms of layout of its development and where different types of development occur, including the downtown,where it is located and the amenities within. He stated that things cannot remain stagnant, and the community needs to progress. He challenged Councilor Miller to say what the best they can do would be. Councilor Miller was unsure, noting that he would like to find out. He believed that the Council should continue to listen to residents and make this as good as it can be. Councilor Paper moved to approve CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2009 MENDOTA PLAZA PUD AS REQUESTED UNDER PLANNING CASE NO. 2021-13 AND WHICH APPROVAL WOULD ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED 79-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING (PHASE III) AS PRESENTED HEREIN. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Further discussion: Councilor Paper stated that he is concerned with the landscaping and how this would tie together overall with the whole development. He stated that he wants to know for sure that the right amount of trees are being provided. He commented that this is a good product but does not want trees and landscaping to be overlooked. Councilor Mazzitello asked if a condition could be added to the motion. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that could be done but noted that the developer would be bringing back a plan as part of the future development agreement that will come before the Council. He stated that at that time additional requirements can be made based on the developed plan set. Councilor Mazzitello asked and confirmed that Councilor Paper would be in agreement with that concept. Councilor Paper commented that this is a need in the community and is important. He stated that this is not a quick decision as there has been a lot of thought, discourse, and support in favor of and in opposition of. He stated that throughout this entire process he has attempted to respond to everyone that has reached out and appreciates that input. He stated that he was put in the position to make a decision that he feels is in the best interest of the community for the long-term. Councilor Paper asked that an individual vote be taken. Mayor Levine stated that while some people will be disappointed with the outcome, she has spent countless hours meeting with staff, the applicant, and listening and responding to residents along with observing traffic in the area. She recognized the frustration some residents are feeling and thanked everyone for their input. She thanked Councilors Duggan and Mazzitello along with the residents that provided input in the community forum which helped to make this a better application. She stated that the original concerns from the Planning Commission and herself have been addressed in the revised February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 13 of]6 page 20 application. She stated that the findings of fact must be based on fact, previous decisions and fair. She stated that denying the proposal would not place the City in a better bargaining position or prevent development. She stated that an approval will offer a place for young professionals to live, which is lacking, and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that this is the last parcel in the mixed- use area and is the last opportunity for the City to offer a variety of housing products for all income levels. She noted that this also offers to add vibrancy that will benefit businesses and restaurants that have been hurt by the seemingly endless pandemic. A roll call vote was performed: Mayor Levine aye Councilor Mazzitello aye Councilor Miller nay Councilor Paper aye City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson confirmed the consensus of the Council to direct staff to prepare related findings of fact to be considered at the next meeting. C) ORDINANCE 572 ESTABLISHING A NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION 1. APPROVE THE SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE Assistant City Administrator Kelly Dumais presented Ordinance No. 572 "Establishing a Natural Resources Commission", in the City of Mendota Heights. She noted the commission will serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council on matters relating to natural resources, sustainability, and environmental and climate stewardship. It is expected that the commission will meet monthly. Councilor Miller commented that he believed this is the right thing to do and is one step of many the community needs to take to better itself and make it more sustainable. Councilor Mazzitello agreed that this is a long time in the making. He was concerned with section six,the powers, and duties, noting that A and B seem rather vague. He stated that one charge that was discussed was to have a Commission that would help the City apply its plans,policies and ordinances and therefore would like to see a related charge. He stated that would be one less step for the Council as this group would make its recommendation to the Council. Mayor Levine agreed and confirmed the consensus of the Council. Councilor Paper asked if there are certain qualifications they will look for in applicants or whether that will be left open. Mayor Levine commented that she believes that there is a wealth of knowledge in the community and feels all applicants would be qualified. She stated the group would benefit from a student representative. Assistant City Administrator Kelly Dumais stated that this ordinance focuses on the establishment of the Commission,not the bylaws. She stated that student representatives and qualifications will flex based on the timing and therefore would be addressed in the bylaws. February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 14 of]6 page 21 Councilor Paper moved to approve ORDINANCE NO. 572 ESTABLISHING A NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION. Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Councilor Mazzitello moved to approve SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 572. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson announced the upcoming Frozen Fun Fest and reviewed the related events. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilor Paper thanked everyone for coming out tonight. Councilor Miller apologized,noting that at the last meeting they discussed the issue of a facility that takes in troubled youth and he should have done better. He stated that he is sorry he did not stand up for those kids. He noted that not every kid that is in that facility is there because they got into trouble. He stated that there was robust public discourse tonight and he is thankful for that opportunity. He stated that residents always have a voice and that is in the voting booth. Councilor Mazzitello commented that he agrees with the statements on the potential shelter and the need to not disparage those that may need that service. He stated that people should be involved and should run in the election if they desire. He commented that the job of the Council is not easy. He stated that he accepted every phone call, text message and email because he is in the position he chose to be in and welcomed more participation. He stated that today is groundhog's day and the forecast predicted six more weeks of winter but acknowledged the great job public works does clearing the snow. Mayor Levine welcomed the new member of the Parks and Recreation Commission. She also thanked all those that participated in Blade with the Blue the past weekend and hoped that people participate in the upcoming Frozen Fun Fest events. ADJOURN Councilor Mazzitello moved to adjourn. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 15 of 16 page 22 Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 11:18 p.m. Stephanie Levine Mayor ATTEST: Lord Smith City Clerk February 2, 2022 Mendota Heights City Council Page 16 of]6 page 23 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 6b. DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the City Council Workshop Held Wednesday, February 2, 2022 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a work session of the Mendota Heights City Council was held at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Levine called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Council members Mazzitello and Paper were also present. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson and Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence. INTERVIEWS FOR COMMISSION OPENING The City Council interviewed candidates for one open position on the Parks and Recreation Commission. The applicants interviewed were as follows: Michael O'Hair and Michelle O'Connor. Following the interviews,the council discussed and agreed to appoint Michelle O'Connor(3 year term)to the Parks and Recreation Commission for a term which would expire on January 31, 2025. This recommendation will be brought to the February 2, 2022 Council meeting. ADJOURN Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 5:30 pm. Stephanie Levine, Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 24 6c. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-helghts.com mCITY OF MENDaTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director SUBJECT: Arbitrage Monitoring Services INTRODUCTION When the City issues bonds,there are many requirements set forth by the IRS that must be followed in order to be compliant with IRS rules and regulations. One such requirement is that once every 5 years in the life of a bond issue arbitrage must be calculated. BACKGROUND Ehlers, the city's public finance advisor, has proposed a contract in which they will monitor/calculate arbitrage for the 2017-2021 bond issuances. Ehlers will calculate the arbitrage yield of each bond issue on the 5 year anniversary of the closing. This calculation is done in accordance with highly specific and detailed federal tax rules. In performing this calculation it determines if the City has invested the debt service monies in higher yielding investments than the bonds were issued for. Ehlers will determine if there is arbitrage and if the City must rebate the arbitrage back to the US Treasury. They will submit a report to the City for our records with the findings of the arbitrage calculation. The City has worked with Ehlers for arbitrage monitoring for previous bond issues. BUDGETIMPACT The cost for the arbitrage monitoring services is $3,000 per bond issue. This cost is incurred once every five years and will be paid for out of the specific bond issue debt service funds. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council authorize the city administrator to execute the contract for arbitrage monitoring services. This action requires a majority vote of the city council. page 25 6d. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone I 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.cnm OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Coordinator SUBJECT: Authorize Purchase Orders for the Control of Invasive Plant Species and Restoration within Valley Park, Rogers Lake Park, and Copperfield Ponds Park COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to authorize a purchase order to Great River Greening for their 2022 work plan for the management of invasive species and native restoration within Valley Park, Rogers Lake Park, and Copperfield Ponds Park. BACKGROUND Mendota Heights has been working with Great River Greening on invasive species management and native species restoration in Valley Park and the Ofieyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Site for several years. Great River Greening has also been working on invasive species management around Rogers Lake starting in 2017, and Copperfield Ponds Park starting in 2019. DISCUSSION Valley Park Great River Greening began invasive species removal in 2009 in Valley Park, with a focus on garlic mustard, as well as common and glossy buckthorn. Mature plants have been cut and cleared from infested park areas and follow-up treatment is required to keep the species under control. Garlic mustard and other herbaceous invasive species that have begun to emerge in areas cleared of buckthorn in the south and north oak knob areas will be treated, carefully selecting treatment methods based on the risk to desirable native plants that have begun to emerge. In the 2022 proposed work plan, the work in Valley Park will continue to focus on removal of woody invasive species such as common and glossy buckthorn adjacent to already-cleared areas, as well as herbaceous invasive species such as garlic mustard, common burdock, and Japanese hedge parsley. Sites will be monitored for evidence of germination from the 2021 seeding, and additional revegetation using native vegetation seeding and plantings to re-establish a native ground cover will be done as-needed. Mendota Heights Parks Staff will continue to contribute to the efforts by loading and hauling cut material. The City's contribution towards this work is $5,000. page 26 Rogers Lake This is the sixth year that Rogers Lake Park has been included in the work plan with Great River Greening to remove buckthorn and restore the west side of the lake and buffer. The 2022 work plan in Rogers Lake Park will continue to follow-up on the previous control of buckthorn within the park and focus on garlic mustard treatment within these areas. The proposed work plan also includes seeding and restoring these areas with native woodland plant species. Great River Greening will also be completing some woody invasive removal west of the trail, in order to create a small pollinator planting. Mendota Heights Parks Staff will load and haul away cut material. The City contribution for this work is $9,000. Copperfield Ponds Park The Great River Greening proposed work plan for 2022 includes the continued removal of woody invasive species in Copperfield Ponds Park with follow-up treatments of cleared areas. Great River Greening cleared several areas of invasive woody species in years 2019 through 2021, opening up views to the Copperfield Ponds from City trails. The 2022 work plan includes treatment of cleared areas of invasive tree and shrub species, including herbaceous invasive species control, specifically management of non-native grasses. The site will be revegetated with a native seed mix, and some herbaceous plant and shrub plantings, with a focus on improving pollinator habitat. Mendota Heights Parks Staff will load and haul away cut material, and volunteer events organized by Great River Greening will contribute to the project. Great River Greening will contribute $50,000 towards the site over the next 2 1/2 years, utilizing the MN State Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund grant. As a land owner and partner, the City is asked to enter into an agreement with Great River Greening for the Copperfield Ponds Park project and contribute $20,000 in matching grant funds for the removal of invasive species and enhancement of pollinator habitat over the next two and a half years as part of the Trust Fund grant. The grant period for this grant is in effect until June 30, 2024. The City's contribution for the work proposed at Copperfield Ponds Park is estimated at$8,000 for 2022. BUDGET IMPACT City Council has annually included funding in City budgets for `Control of Invasive Plants' in City Parks. The available amount in the 2022 City Budget in the Parks Maintenance Budget for this effort is $50,000 for Invasive Species work. Great River Greening is requesting a City contribution of$22,000 towards Invasive Species Control and Restoration of the City Parks discussed above. Great River Greening has also secured grant funding to be used towards the work planned in Valley Park, Rogers Lake Park, and Copperfield Ponds Park over the next 3-5 years. The funds requested of the City are in part to provide grant matches for this funding. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the purchase order for invasive species control and site restoration to Great River Greening for their 2022 work plan for the management of invasive species and native restoration within Valley Park, Rogers Lake Park, and Copperfield Ponds Park. ACTION REQUIRED Approve a motion authorizing the Public Works Director to issue a `not-to-exceed' Purchase Order in the amount of$22,000 to Great River Greening, as well as enter into a Cooperative Agreement with Great River Greening for the enhancement of pollinator habitat at Copperfield Ponds Park. This action requires a simple majority vote. RIVER page 27 For internal Greening use:Agreement#:CA GREENING GREAT RIVER GREENING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT,hereinafter referred to as"Agreement",is made February 15, 2022, by and between the City of Mendota Heights, hereinafter referred to as the City and GREAT RIVER GREENING, hereinafter referred to as "GRG". RECITALS: GRG is a non-profit 501(c)(3) conservation organization based in St. Paul, Minnesota organized for the purpose of restoring natural areas and open spaces through community engagement; and The Minnesota Legislature, under M.L. 2021, First Special Session, Chp. 6, Art. 6, Sec. 2, Subd. 08c, Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement With Community Monitoring, appropriated $631,000 the first year is from the trust fund to the commissioner of natural resources for an agreement with Great River Greening to restore and enhance pollinator habitat in the metropolitan area to benefit pollinators and people and to build knowledge of the impact through community-based monitoring. Expenditures are limited to the identified project corridor areas as defined in the work plan; and GRG desires to contribute $50,000 towards the partnership project; and City desires to contribute $20,000 towards the partnership project; and City seeks to enter into an agreement with GRG for the purpose of detailing partnership contributions and the provision of Technical Services in support of the Pollinator Habitat Enhancement. With GRG contributing funds from the appropriation to the project, the Landowner is subject to terms as described in Exhibit A. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreement contained within this agreement, City and GRG hereby agrees as follows: 1. Compensation and Terms of Payment a. Compensation The Parties agree that GRG will complete or arrange for services to be completed under this Agreement. The cost of such services will be funded by joint contributions of the parties. The City's contributions/compensation under this agreement shall be paid to GRG on the basis of hourly rates for services according to rates shown in Exhibit B attached herein, plus expenses and contractor costs necessary to complete the project, not to exceed $20,000. GRG shall contribute $50,000 match to the City's contribution over the course of the project. After City contribution, GRG shall assume fiscal responsibility for all services completed under this agreement. GRG's financial obligation, as set out above, shall be in accordance with the Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement With Community Monitoring M.L. 2021 appropriation, and may be met through actual payment for services to a third party or calculation of the value, on an hourly basis, for"in-kind"services provided. b. Terms of Payment GRG will invoice City on GRG's billing schedule, but not more frequently than monthly, based upon completion or partial completion of work. 2. Condition of Payment All services provided by GRG pursuant to this agreement shall be performed to the satisfaction of the City and its authorized agent, and in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. Payment shall be withheld for work found by the City or its authorized agent to be unsatisfactory, or performed in violation of federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules or regulations. 3. Scope of Services GRG agrees to provide the following list of services for Pollinator Habitat Enhancement at Copperfield Ponds Park Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 1 page 28 GREAT e RIVER lit �" GREENING • Removal of non-native and invasive woody species • Control of herbaceous invasive species • Revegetation with native plants with an emphasis on species that provide forage and habitat for pollinators and other wildlife. Engagement of private and public volunteer groups in the above tasks where feasible, in coordination with the City. The City agrees to provide the following list of services for Pollinator Habitat Enhancement at Copperfield Ponds Park: • Removal of staged woody brush in areas accessible to City equipment(in-kind match) • Notice to adjacent residents on the planned work and project goals The scope of services is further expanded upon in Exhibit B. GRG agrees to oversee and implement the Project activities as identified in Trust Fund Work Plan. City agrees to oversee project for consistency with City plans, goals and policies. 4. Effective Date of Contract This agreement shall become effective February 15, 2022. 5. Term of Contract This agreement shall remain in effect until June 30,2024, or until all obligations set forth in this agreement have been satisfactorily fulfilled or unless earlier terminated as provided, whichever occurs first. 6. Notices The City shall appoint an authorized agent for the purpose of administration of this agreement. GRG is notified of the authorized agent of the City as follows: Cityof Mendota Heights Great River Greening Authorized Contact Authorized Contact Krista Spreiter David Schmitz Address Address 1101 Victoria Curve 251 Starkey Street, Suite 2200 Mendota Heights, MN 55118 St Paul, MN 55107 Phone Number Phone Number 651-255-1123 612-242-3540 Email Address Email Address kspreiter@mendotaheightsmn.gov dschmitz@greatrivergreening.org 7. Partner and State Audit Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 16C.05, Subd. 5(2007), the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of GRG relative to this agreement shall be subject to examination by the City and the State Auditor. Complete and accurate records of the work performed pursuant to this agreement shall be kept by GRG for a minimum of six(6)years following termination of this agreement for such auditing purposes. The retention period shall be automatically extended during the course of any administrative orjudicial action involving the City regarding matters to which the records are relevant. The retention period shall be automatically extended until the administrative or judicial action is finally completed or until the authorized agent of the City notifies GRG in writing that the records need no longer be kept. 8. Indemnity Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 2 page 29 GREAT e RIVER lit �" GREENING GRG agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the City , its employees and officials harmless from any claims, demands, actions or causes of action, including reasonable attorney's fees and expenses resulting directly or indirectly from any negligent act or omission on the part of the GRG, or its subcontractors, partners or independent contractors or any of their agents or employees, in the performance of or with relation to any of the work or services to be performed or furnished by the vendor or the subcontractors, partners or independent contractors or any of their agents or employees under the agreement. GRG shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, and the coordination of all services furnished by GRG under this agreement. GRG shall, without additional compensation, correct or revise any errors or deficiencies in GRG's final reports and services. 9. Insurance GRG shall not commence work under this agreement until it has obtained, at its own cost and expense, all insurance required herein. a. Workers' Compensation 1)State: Minnesota—Statutory 2)Employer's Liability with minimum limits of: Bodily Injury by Accident: $100,000 each Accident Bodily Injury by Disease: $100,000 each Employee Bodily Injury by Disease: $500,000 policy limit 3) Benefits required by union labor contracts: as applicable In the event GRG is a sole proprietor and has not elected to provide workers'compensation insurance, GRG shall be required to execute and submit an affidavit of sole proprietorship in a form satisfactory to the City before entering into the agreement. b. Commercial General Liability Including Premises, Operations, Products, Completed Operations, Advertising, and Personal Injury Liability, with the following minimum limits of liability: $2,000,000 Aggregate $2,000,000 Products&Completed Operations Aggregate $1,000,000 Personal Injury &Advertising Injury $1,000,000 Occurrence $ 100,000 Fire Damage Limit $ 5,000 Medical Expense Policy should be written on an occurrence basis and include explosion, collapse and underground. C. Commercial Auto Liability Minimum limits of liability shall be: If split limits: $1,000,000 each person/$1,000,000 each occurrence for Bodily Injury $1,000,000 each occurrence for Property Damage If combined single limit: $1,000,000 per occurrence 10. Subcontracts GRG shall ensure and require that any subcontractor agrees to and complies with all of the terms of this agreement. Any subcontractor of GRG used to perform any portion of this agreement shall report to and bill GRG directly. GRG shall be solely responsible for the breach, performance or nonperformance of any subcontractor. 11. Force Maieure Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 3 page 30 GREAT e RIVER lit �" GREENING City and GRG agree that GRG shall not be liable for any delay or inability to perform this agreement, directly or indirectly caused by, or resulting from,strikes, labor troubles, accidents, fire, flood, breakdowns, war, riot, civil commotion, lack of material, delays of transportation, acts of God or other cause beyond reasonable control of GRG and the City. 12. Data Practices GRG, its agents, employees and any subcontractors of GRG, in providing all services hereunder, agree to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, as amended, and Minn. Rules promulgated pursuant to Ch. 13. GRG understands that it must comply with these provisions as if it were a government entity. GRG agrees to indemnify and hold the City, its officers, department heads and employees harmless from any claims resulting from the GRG's unlawful disclosure, failure to disclose or use of data protected under state and federal laws. 13. Termination This agreement may be terminated by either party, with or without cause upon 30 days written notice to GRG or the Authorized Agent of the City. 14. Independent Contractor It is agreed that nothing contained in this agreement is intended or should be construed as creating the relationship of a partnership,joint venture, or association with the City and GRG. GRG is an independent contractor, and it, its employees, agents, subcontractors, and representatives shall not be considered employees, agents or representatives of the City (DNR, City, County, Private landowner). Except as otherwise provided herein, GRG shall maintain, in all respects, its present control over the means and personnel by which this agreement is performed. From any amounts due GRG, there shall be no deduction for federal income tax, FICA payments, state income tax, or for any other purposes which are associated with an employer/employee relationship unless otherwise required by law. Payment of federal income tax, FICA payments, state income tax, unemployment compensation taxes, and other payroll deductions and taxes are the sole responsibility of GRG. 15. Notices Any notices to be given under this agreement shall be given by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same with the United States Postal Service, addressed to GRG at its address stated herein, and to the authorized agent of the City at the address stated herein. 16. Controlling Law The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this agreement, the legal relations between the parties and performance under the agreement. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation hereunder will be those courts located within the County or City, State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this contract is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be affected. 17. Successors and Assigns The City and GRG, respectively, bind themselves,their partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to the other party to this agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this agreement. Neither the City nor GRG shall assign, sublet, or transfer any interest in this agreement without the prior written consent of the other. 18. Changes The parties agree that no change or modification to this agreement, or any attachments hereto,shall have any force or effect unless the change is reduced to writing, dated, and made part of this agreement. The execution of the change shall be authorized and signed in the same manner as for this agreement. 19. Severability Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 4 page 31 GREAT e RIVER lit �" GREENING In the event any provision of this agreement shall be held invalid and unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be valid and binding upon the parties unless such invalidity or non-enforceability would cause the agreement to fail its purpose. One or more waivers by either party of any provision, term, condition or covenant shall not be construed by the other party as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same by the other party. 20. Entire Agreement It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the City and GRG relating to the subject matter hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. CITY BY: NAME: TITLE: DATE: GREAT RIVER GREENING: BY: NAME: Kateri Routh TITLE: Interim Executive Director DATE: Grant Manager: ��t/3t/2o22 Director of Operations: 1/31/2022 Director of Finance: KR 1/31/2022 Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 5 page 32 GREAT � RIVER lit �" GREENING EXHIBIT A: TERMS OF `Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement With Community Monitoring' M.L.2021 APPROPRIATION THIS AGREEMENT is made between Great River Greening (Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund Recipient); and City of Mendota Heights (Landowner). 1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1.1 COMPLIANCE The Landowner acknowledges that these funds are proceeds from the State of Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (hereinafter the "Trust Fund"), which is subject to certain legal restrictions and requirements, including Minnesota Statutes Chapter 116P. The Landowner is responsible for compliance with this and all other relevant state and federal laws and regulations in the fulfillment of the Project. 1.2 ACCESS The Landowner agrees to allow GRG, the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources(LCCMR), and associates access to the Landowner's site and Landowner's activities for evaluation and promotion of the project. Access will be at reasonable times and with sufficient prior notification, and will extend ten (10)years beyond the project completion date. 2.0 PROJECT 2.1 CONTRIBUTIONS GRG's and Landowner's contributions must be for actual and direct costs for the Project Work. This Agreement may be modified at any time by mutual written consent of the parties. It may be terminated by either party upon 30 days advance written notice to the other party. However, if the Landowner(s)terminates the Agreement before its expiration, then the Landowner(s) agrees to reimburse the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund prior to final termination for the pro-rated costs of all habitat restoration projects placed on the described land through this Agreement. For these purposes the total cost of the habitat restoration projects to the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund are agreed to be $50.000 2.2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Landowner agrees to acknowledge the Trust Fund's financial support for this Work in any statement, press release, bid solicitation, project publications, and other public communications and outreach related to the work completed using the Trust Fund appropriation. The acknowledgement - ENVIRONMENT will contain the following language and/or Iogo(s): TRUST FUND Ago AruRa AEso�a=E (Partial) funding for this project was provided by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund as recommended by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources(LCCMR). Landowner agrees to maintain signs installed by GRG at the project site that includes this logo, and will include it in permanent signage installed by Landowner. 2.3 ECOLOGICAL AND RESTORATION MANAGEMENT PLAN For all restorations conducted with money appropriated under this section, GRG must prepare an ecological restoration and management plan that, to the degree practicable, is consistent with the highest quality conservation and ecological goals for the restoration site. Consideration should be given to soil,geology,topography, and other relevant factors that would provide the best chance for long-term success of the restoration projects. The plan must include the proposed timetable for implementing the restoration, including site preparation, establishment of diverse plant species native to Minnesota, maintenance, and additional enhancement to establish the restoration; identify long-term maintenance and management needs of the restoration and how the maintenance, management, and enhancement will be financed; and take advantage of the best available science and include innovative techniques to achieve the best restoration. The plan and its implementation will follow the current version of Minnesota Board of Water&Soil Resources Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines (https://bwsr.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/2019- 07/Updated%20guidelines%20Final%2007-01-19.pdf January 2019 version). 2.4 RESTORATION EVALUATION Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 6 page 33 GREAT e RIVER lit �" GREENING GRG must provide an initial restoration evaluation to LCCMR at the completion of the appropriation and an evaluation three years beyond the completion of the expenditure. Restorations must be evaluated relative to the stated goals and standards in the restoration plan, current science, and, when applicable, the Minnesota Board of Water&Soil Resources Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines.The evaluation shall determine whether the restorations are meeting planned goals, identify any problems with the implementation of the restorations, and, if necessary, give recommendations on improving restorations.The evaluation shall be focused on improving future restorations. 2.5 LONG TERM RESTORATION The Landowner acknowledges the long term maintenance and enhancement needs of the restoration process to achieve restoration goals. The Landowner agrees to maintain restoration for a minimum of 10 years.The Recipient agrees to make reasonable good faith effort to significantly contribute to the successful maintenance of the project. If the Landowner(s)should fail to maintain the habitat restoration for 10 years, then the Landowner(s)agrees to reimburse the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund for the pro-rated costs of all habitat restoration projects placed on the described land through this Agreement. 2.6 PROTECTED LAND Landowner testifies that the restoration project is on land permanently protected by a conservation easement or public ownership or in public waters as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005,subdivision 15; and will provide reasonable written documentation of such protection. 2.7 CONTRACTING Landowner understands that GRG must give consideration to Conservation Corps Minnesota and Iowa or its successor for sub-contract restoration and enhancement services. 2.8 RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT GUIDELINES Recipient and Landowner practices shall comply in every respect with: DNR Pollinator Best Management Practices and Habitat Restoration Guidelines (http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/2014_draft_pollinator_bmp_guidelines.pdf); and Minnesota Board of Water&Soil Resources' Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines (https://bwsr.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/2019-07/Updated%20guidelines%20Final%2007-01-19.pdf January 2019 version) MN-DNR Operational Order#113 Invasive Species (http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/assistance/grants/habitat/heritage/oporder_113.pdf) MN-DNR Operational Order#59 Pesticide and Pest Control (http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/assistance/grants/habitaUheritage/oporder_59.pdf); MN-DNR Division of Fish and Wildlife Pest and Pest Control Guidelines (http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/assistance/grants/habitaUheritage/faw_pest.pdf); These guidelines apply to planning and implementation. Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 7 page 34 G REATAmh. RIVERIlW GREENING EXHIBIT B: SCOPE OF SERVICES GOAL: Enhance Pollinator habitat on 8 acres of Copperfield Ponds Park OBJECTIVES: Invasive Brush Removal: The primary non-native species is Amur maple,Acerginnala, which has formed dense monocultures in the shrub layer across much of the park. Common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), glossy buckthorn (Rhamnus frangula), and non-native honeysuckles(Lonicera tartarica, L. morrowii, etc.)are also present onsite and will be controlled. Following initial removal, resprouts and seedlings will be controlled with foliar herbicide applications and mowing. Herbaceous Invasive Control Primary species of concern are non-native grasses, particularly smooth brome (Bromus inermis), reed canary grass (Phlaris arundinacea), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), hedge parsley (Torilis arvensis), burdock(Arctium minus), and thistles (Cirsium spp). Other known invasives will be monitored and controlled. Revegetation Invasive removal areas will be broadcast seeded with a native seed mix. Where feasible, volunteers will be engaged to install herbaceous plants,shrubs, etc. 74 n I Planting s . Planting_Area Herbaceous Control Invftial_Removal Property_Bdry A- Copperfield Ponds Overview M1 TRUST Ti2U5T FUND Figure 1:Proposed work units Pollinator Central II: Habitat Improvement with Community Monitoring 8 page 35 GREAT RIVER Ww GRFFNING Mendota Heights Work Plan Proposal 2022 Valley Park North and South Oak Knob Maintenance: • Spring garlic mustard treatment: We will treat garlic mustard in the cleared area of the north and south oak knobs, as well as the acreage cleared of BT in 2020/2021. Chemical will be selected based on the risk of off target damage to desirable native plants, especially sedge populations on the north oak knob, and spring ephemerals on the slope east of the creek. Weed torches or pulling may be considered. Garlic mustard pulling will be considered as an opportunity for volunteer engagement, which will be directed by Greening staff if undertaken. $700 • Herbaceous invasive treatment: Managed acres will be monitored for additional invasive vegetation. Species of most concern will be burdock, hedge parsley, and annual weeds that may appear due to the increased sunlight. June visit with spraying and mowing. $700 • Invasive brush removal: Focus on removing additional buckthorn on the south oak knob near the tennis court. This could be an opportunity for private/small volunteer group event. We would ask private groups for additional funding to cover costs. $1900 • Invasive brush maintenance: Regrowth of invasive brush will be monitored in the summer,with a targeted foliar application occurring in August-September, followed by a touch up of regrowth in later fall if needed. We will use any additional budget to expand the removal area in late fall, as in 2021. $1700 • Revegetation: Site will be monitored for evidence of germination from 2021 seeding. This plan does not include a budget for additional seeding. Valley Park Total:$5000 Rogers Lake • Spring Invasives: Focus on garlic mustard in the managed area. $1200 • Summer Herbacous Invasvies:Two visits. Primary targets are hedge parsley,thistles, burdock, and other weedy veg. Combination of mowing and spot treatment. $1700 • Invasive Brush Maintenance: Fall foliar between August and October. $1400 • Revegetation of open area east of trail: With some woody invasive removal and targeted site prep (spraying non-native vegetation), we could create a small pollinator planting on the larger lobe of available area east of the trail. This would add an interesting feature for park users. Excellent opportunity for a private volunteer group who wants to do planting. Budget shown includes seed but we could use additional funding for container plants/shrubs. Woody removal and invasive treatments will draw from other task budgets shown here. $2700 • Additional Invasive Brush Removal: Focus on area east of the trail. GRG will cut, treat and stack material for pickup by public works as in the past. Good opportunity for volunteer labor from small or private groups. $2000 Note:If desired, we could reduce the extra brush removal work and intensify the pollinator area. Rogers Lake Total: $9000 page 36 GREAT,„ RIVER ' GREENING Site Maps I f Vt Proposed Pollinator Enhancement,Area RkI� GREENING Figure 1:Rogers Lake Pollinator Enhancement Area page 37 GREAT�„. RIVER�r"` GREENING x. Woodland Invasive Management Area Figure 2:Rogers Lake Woodland Management 4 rY y r e , r .r� _r .r r Ap **k vt ` a i 7 F A rw M F.Y" C ,tl page 39 6e. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone I 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.cnm OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Coordinator SUBJECT: Authorize Staff to enter into a Contract with Tree Trust for a Resident Tree Sale INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to authorize staff to enter into a contract with Tree Trust for the purpose of providing a resident tree sale. BACKGROUND The City has partnered with Tree Trust to offer a tree sale to Mendota Heights residents since 2019. Trees are offered to residents at a discounted price, allowing more residents to be able to purchase tree(s)to be planted on their property. The tree sale has been a popular event in the past, and trees sell out quickly. DISCUSSION Tree Trust is a non-profit organization that offers integrated job training programs to youth and adults, in order to enhance and improve the urban tree canopy throughout the Twin Cities area. The proposed contract would entail the provision of 60-10 gallon container trees of varying shade tree species that could be purchased by residents at a rate of approximately 50% of the retail price. The cost to residents would be $60.00/tree. The remaining cost would be subsidized by both the City and Tree Trust. The total cost to the City under this contract would be $5,400.38, and includes all supplies, promotional materials,postage, transportation and delivery, as well as staffing to aid City staff on distribution day, and an online shopping platform. By entering into this contract, the City would be providing a means for residents to purchase quality shade trees at a reduced cost, thus improving diversity of the City's community forest, and replacing canopy loss due to Emerald Ash Borer. BUDGET IMPACT The costs of the proposed tree sale would be provided from the City's tree removal and replacement budget. page 40 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council authorize Staff to enter into a contract with Tree Trust to provide a community tree sale. ACTION REQUIRED If Council agrees with the staff recommendation, authorize Staff to enter into a contract with Tree Trust for the amount of$5,400.38. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 41 AV (,TI, REE TRUST Transforming Lives and Landscapes Memorandum of Understanding between The City of Mendota Heights and Tree Trust Purpose: The purpose of the partnership is to facilitate the 2022 Tree Distribution scheduled for May 14, 2022 for the city of Mendota Heights ("City") in order to encourage tree species diversification within the community on private property through a low-cost tree sale. Term: The term of this Agreement will commence upon the date of last signature by both parties of the Agreement and will terminate on June 30, 2022. Liability and Indemnification: Partner acknowledges that it is entering into this Agreement entirely at its own risk. Partner agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend Tree Trust and its directors, officers, employees and agents (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all liabilities, demands, damages, claims, actions, losses, costs, settlements, judgments, fines, penalties, or expenses, including reasonable attorneys` fees and costs (collectively, "Claims"), that directly or indirectly arise out of, relate to, or result in any way from the performance of this Agreement, whether or not the Claims have merit, involve third parties, or are caused, or alleged to be caused, by Partner or any of the Indemnified Parties; provided however, that the Partner shall not be responsible for Claims arising from the sole negligence, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of Tree Trust or any other Indemnified Party. The provisions of this section will survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. Tree Trust will: • Provide social media outreach and press releases to local newspapers/city newsletters in order to advertise the program. • Tree Trust will provide the City with a logo in a usable format. • Act as fiscal agent for the Mendota Heights property owner co-pay ($60.00/tree), estimated at $3,600, and collected from property owners participating in this program. • Select, with consultation from the City, at least 5 different species of trees to offer for the sale in order to increase tree diversity within the City. • Place order with wholesale nursery of 60 #10 container trees. No warranty is expressed or implied upon delivery at the distribution site. • Create a website for the ordering process including species specific tree details. • Receive, process and confirm orders, beginning on March 14, 2022 at 8:00 am. Tree Trust ® 1419 Energy Park Drive . St. Paul, MN 55108 • 952-767-3880 o www.treetrust.org page 42 • Respond to participating residents' questions about tree program and specifics about selection. • Monitor ordering process to ensure only City property owners are participating. • Mail, via USPS by April 25, 2022, postcards to participating residents which will serve as redemption ticket for pick up. • Unload 60 #10 trees using Tree Trust's Career Pathways Crews 24 hours ahead of the distribution date. • Provide informational brochures on how to properly plant a containerized tree, distribute link to Tree Trust's tree planting video to participants. • Recruit volunteers to assist participating residents on tree distribution day(s). • Provide staff to oversee the distribution event on May 14, 2022 in order to ensure program success. • Promote the tree sale with relevant event information, photos, logos, and links together with Partner via social media, email and website. Provide Tree Trust logo and boilerplate organization information to Partner. Partner and Tree Trust will work in collaboration to finalize content for marketing and communications plans. The City of Mendota Heights will: • Advertise the program through the City's social media and associated newsletters. • Include the name and logo of Tree Trust on all project related promotional materials. • Provide a secure location to stage trees between tree delivery and the distribution date. Responsibility for the safekeeping of tree stock is borne by the City. • Provide access to the tree distribution location by 6:30 am Saturday, May 14, 2022. • Promote the tree sale event with relevant event information, photos, logos, and links together with Tree Trust via social media, email and website. Provide Partner logo and boilerplate organization information to Tree Trust. Share Press Release and PR joint communications opportunities. Partner and Tree Trust will work in collaboration to finalize content for marketing and communications plans. • Provide payment for services rendered within 30 days of invoice receipt, not to exceed the amount of $5,400.38 presented in the provided budget. Tree Trust ® 1419 Energy Park Drive a St. Paul, MN 55108 o 952-767-3880 e www.treetrust.org page 43 Jared Smith, ED I CEO City of Mendota Heights Tree Trust Printed Name of Authorized Representative Printed Name of Authorized Representative City of Mendota Heights Tree Trust Signature of Authorized Representative Signature of Authorized Representative Date Date Tree Trust 1419 Energy Park Drive St. haul, MN 55108 Tree Trust 1419 Energy Park Drive St. Paul, MN 55108 + 952-767-8880 www.treetrust.org page 44 2022 Tree Sale Budget City of Mendota Heights Number of Trees 60 Revenue Tree Revenue @ $60/tree $3,600.00 expense Materials Tree Cost & Delivery $6,644.40 Mulch Cost & Delivery $415.80 Postage $24.00 Staff Time Project Management $1 081.08 Day of Facilitation $584.52 Contracting Subcontractors and Consulting (Online shopping platform set up and monitor) $128.18 5hopify Fees (2.9% +$0.30/transaction $122.40 Subtotal $9,000.38 (Participant Co-Pay) ($3,600.00) Total City Cost $5,400.38 Tree Trust o 1419 Energy Park Drive + St. Paul, MN 55108 952-767-3880 - www.treetrust.org page 45 6f. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone I 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.cnm OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Coordinator SUBJECT: Joint Powers Agreement(JPA) Between Dakota County and the City of Mendota Heights for the Wetland Health Evaluation Program (WHEP) INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve a JPA with Dakota County for the Wetland Health Evaluation Program (WHEP). BACKGROUND The City of Mendota Heights has been in a Joint Powers Agreement(JPA)with Dakota County for the Wetland Health Evaluation Program (WHEP) since 1999. The WHEP program assesses aspects of wetland health for specified water bodies by measuring invertebrates' species and quantity as well as wetland vegetation species and diversity in wetlands. Metrics from these evaluations are then used to determine the health of a wetland. DISCUSSION Staff is proposing to monitor two wetlands with volunteers through Dakota County WHEP: Copperfield—wetland designated as MH-2, and City Hall—wetland designated as MH-20. These water bodies are part of the City's storm water system but are unique in that they were wetlands that pre-date their respective development areas as opposed to pond constructed specifically for storm water treatment. BUDGET IMPACT The City is invoiced by Dakota County for the service of monitoring these wetlands. The fees vary from year to year as established by an annual fee schedule. The fee paid by the City of Mendota Heights has been $2,700.00 per year. The fees are not proposed to increase in 2022. The fee charges by Dakota County are paid out of the Storm Water Utility Fund. RECOMMENDATION The attached JPA is a renewal of our existing agreement and will serve to continue our participation in the WHEP program. The JPA is valid through the year 2026. Staff is recommending approval of the JPA for the WHEP program. ACTION REQUIRED If Council desires to implement the Staff recommendation,pass a motion approving the City of Mendota Heights' participation in the JPA by a simple majority vote. page 46 Dakota County Contract C0034922 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN DAKOTA COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FOR THE WETLAND HEALTH EVALUATION PROGRAM The parties to this Agreement are the County of Dakota, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (County) and the City of Mendota Heights (City), a governmental and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota. This Agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties by Minn. Stat. § 471.59. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and benefits that the County and the City shall derive from this Agreement, the County and the City hereby enter into this Agreement for the purposes stated herein. SECTION 1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to facilitate the analysis of wetlands located with the City through the Dakota County Wetland Health Evaluation Program (WHEP), which is coordinated and managed by the County, to obtain data and other information to assist both parties in performing their responsibilities under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. SECTION 2 TERM Notwithstanding the date of the signatures of the parties, the term of this Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2022, and shall continue in full force and effect until December 31, 2026, unless earlier terminated by law or according to the provisions of this Agreement. SECTION 3 COOPERATION The parties agree to cooperate and use their reasonable efforts to ensure prompt implementation of the various provisions of this Agreement and to, in good faith, undertake resolution of any dispute in an equitable and timely manner. SECTION 4 EXERCISE OF POWERS The parties to this Agreement agree that the County shall administer the funds collected hereunder and disburse these funds for expenses incurred by WHEP. SECTION 5 POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE COUNTY 5.1 The County shall administer the WHEP funds on behalf of the City. 5.2 The County shall serve as fiscal agent for the funds collected hereunder. The County shall establish and maintain such funds and accounts as may be required by generally accepted accounting practices. 5.3 The County may apply for and accept gifts, grants, loans and money, other property or assistance from federal or state agencies, or any other person to carry out the WHEP in Dakota County. 5.4 The County may use funds to hire and retain a monitoring coordinator, a non-profit agency, consulting firms and such other personnel as may be needed to provide the services contemplated under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties agree that WHEP is a volunteer-based program and that data collection shall be performed solely by volunteers trained by the County. All volunteers participating in the WHEP shall be considered agents of the County and not agents of the City. page 47 SECTION 6 FUNDING On or before March 31 each year of the term of this Agreement, the County shall provide to the City a complete WHEP fee schedule for that calendar year, including an itemization of the fee for analyzing each wetland and the fee for performing a quality assurance recheck to enable the City to evaluate whether to participate in the WHEP for that year. If the City elects to participate in the WHEP for that year, the City shall notify the County and the County shall provide the services described herein. On or about July 1 of each year that the City elects to participate, the County shall submit an invoice to the City for the WHEP fees for that year and the City shall remit payment to the County within 30 days after receipt of such invoice. SECTION 7 WHEP TIMELINE The parties agree to the following timeline for each year of the term of this Agreement: Spring The County shall provide a WHEP fee schedule to the City and the City shall notify the County if the City elects to participate in the WHEP for that calendar year and identify the specific wetlands to be analyzed. Late Spring and Summer Trained volunteers shall collect data regarding the quantity and variety of plants and macro invertebrates within each City designated wetland, making note of any invasive species sighted. A consultant hired by the County shall conduct a quality assurance recheck based on monitoring protocols. Fall The consultant hired by the County shall compile and analyze the data collected for all wetlands within the City under the WHEP and prepare a written report on the same. Winter The County shall deliver to the City the consultant's written report and the data collected for all wetlands analyzed within the City. SECTION 8 INDEMNIFICATION Each party to this Agreement shall be liable for the acts of its officers, employees or agents and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party, its officers, employees or agents. The provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 466 and other applicable laws govern liability of the County and the City. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. SECTION 9 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND LIAISONS 9.1 Authorized Representatives. The following named persons are designated the Authorized Representatives of the parties for purposes of this Agreement. These persons have authority to bind the party they represent and to consent to modifications, except that the authorized representative shall have only the authority specifically or generally granted by their respective governing boards. Notice required to be provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided to the following named persons and addresses unless otherwise stated in this Agreement, or in a modification of this Agreement: TO THE COUNTY: Georg Fischer or successor, Director Environmental Resources Department 14955 Galaxie Avenue Apple Valley, MN 55124 2 page 48 TO THE CITY: Stephanie Levine or successor, Mayor City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55044 In addition, notification to the County regarding termination of this Agreement by the other party shall be provided to the Office of the Dakota County Attorney, Civil Division,1560 Highway 55, Hastings, Minnesota 55033. 9.2 Liaisons. To assist the parties in the day-to-day performance of this Agreement and to ensure compliance and provide ongoing consultation, a liaison shall be designated by the County and the City. The parties shall keep each other continually informed, in writing, of any change in the designated liaison. At the time of execution of this Agreement, the following persons are the designated liaisons: County Liaison City Liaison Paula Liepold, or successor Ryan Ruzak or successor Telephone: (952) 891-7117 Telephone: 651-452-1850 Email: Pau Ia.liepolda-co.dakota.mn.us Email: Ryan ra-mendota-heig hts.com SECTION 10 TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time upon 90 days written notice to the other party. SECTION 11 GENERAL PROVISIONS 11.1 Compliance with Laws/Standards. The City and the County agree to abide by all federal, state or local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations now in effect or hereafter adopted pertaining to this Agreement or to the facilities, programs and staff for which either party is responsible. 11.2 Excused Default— Force Maieure. Neither party shall be liable to the other party for any loss or damage resulting from a delay or failure to perform due to unforeseeable acts or events outside the defaulting party's reasonable control, providing the defaulting party gives notice to the other party as soon as possible. Acts and events may include acts of God, acts of terrorism, war, fire, flood, epidemic, acts of civil or military authority, and natural disasters. 11.3 Contract Rights Cumulative Not Exclusive. A. All remedies available to either party for breach of this Agreement are cumulative and may be exercised concurrently or separately, and the exercise of any one remedy shall not be deemed an election of such remedy to the exclusion of other remedies. The rights and remedies provided in this Agreement are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law. B. Waiver for any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver of breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed to be modification for the terms of this Agreement unless stated to be such in writing and signed by authorized representatives of the County and the City. 11.4 Records Retention and Audits. Each party's bonds, records, documents, papers, accounting procedures and practices, and other records relevant to this Agreement are subject to the examination, duplication, transcription and audit by the other party, the Legislative Auditor or State Auditor under Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 5. If any funds provided under this Agreement use federal funds these records are also subject to review by the Comptroller General of the United States and his or her approved representative. Following termination of this Agreement, the parties must keep these records for at least six years or longer if any audit-in-progress needs a longer retention time. 3 page 49 11.5 Modifications. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing and signed by the authorized representatives of the County and the City. 11.6 Assignment. Neither party may assign any of its rights under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party. Said consent may be subject to conditions. 11.7 Government Data Practices. For purposes of this Agreement, all data on individuals collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated shall be administered consistent with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 13. 11.8 Minnesota Law to Govern. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the substantive and procedural laws of the State of Minnesota,without giving effect to the principles of conflict of laws. All proceedings related to this Agreement shall be venued in Dakota County, Minnesota. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 11.9 Merger. This Agreement is the final expression of the agreement of the parties and the complete and exclusive statement of the terms agreed upon and shall supersede all prior negotiations, understandings, or agreements. 11.10 Severability. The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed severable. If any part of this Agreement is rendered void, invalid, or unenforceable, such rendering shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remainder of this Agreement unless the part or parts that are void, invalid or otherwise unenforceable shall substantially impair the value of the entire Agreement with respect to either party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date(s) indicated below. APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAKOTA COUNTY /s/Helen R. Brosnahan 1/7/22 By Assistant County Attorney/Date Georg Fischer or successor, Director KS-21-438-006 Environmental Resources Department County Board Res. No. 21-606 Date of Signature: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Stephanie Levine or successor, Mayor Date of Signature: By Lorri Smith or successor, City Clerk Date of Signature: 4 page 50 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota 651.452.1850 phone 1 651. 6g' www.mendota-heights.com l CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHT DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator SUBJECT: December Par 3 Financial Report INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to acknowledge the December Par 3 Financial Report. BACKGROUND Attached is the December Par 3 Financial Report. For 2021,the course had a total of 15,618 rounds of golf played. Including the month of December, the Par 3 had a year-to-date revenue total of $246,336. The course's December expenditures totaled $10,286. The year-to-date expenditure total is $214,909. Although the numbers are not final until the audit is complete, the course is projecting positive operating revenues over expenses for 2021 in the amount of$31,427. Staff is working on the 2021 Annual Report for Parks and Recreation and the Golf Course. This report will be presented to the City Council at a future meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council acknowledge the December Par 3 Financial Report. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion acknowledge the December Par 3 Financial Report. MONTHLY EXPENDITURE REPORT page 51 DECEMBER 2021 MENDOTA HEIGHTS PAR 3 BUDGET TO ACTUAL REPORT DECEMBER 2021 (100% OF YEAR) Dec REVENUES Dec YTD YTD YTD BUDGET 2021 2021 % 2020 GREENS, LEAGUE &TOURN FEES $100,000 $0 $167,782 167.78% $150,063 RECREATION PROGRAMS $35,000 $0 $49,488 141.39% $23,251 CONCESSIONS $19,000 $0 $25,295 133.13% $0 SUNDRY REVENUE $0 $0 $1,271 0.00% $195 INTEREST $450 $0 $0 0.00% $0 INSURANCE CLAIM $0 $2,500 $2,500 0.00% $0 PAR 3 FUND REVENUE TOTAL $154,450 $2,500 $246,336 159.49% $173,509 EXPENDITURES Dec YTD YTD YTD BUDGET 2021 2021 % 2020 CLUBHOUSE SALARIES $34,300 $0 $43,031 125.46% $20,528 ADMINISTRATIVE SALARIES $24,676 $1,229 $21,908 88.78% $22,000 FICA/PERA $10,596 $181 $9,763 92.14% $6,914 MEDICAL INSURANCE $6,653 $554 $6,653 100.00% $6,653 U/E &W/C INSURANCE $2,750 $0 $3,238 117.76% $3,302 RENTALS $4,750 $144 $5,282 111.21% $2,486 UTILITIES $13,945 $1,220 $12,865 92.26% $10,441 PROFESSIONAL FEES-AUDIT $2,850 $0 $2,850 100.00% $2,866 PROF FEES-CONSULTING FEES $1,100 $0 $0 0.00% $0 PROF FEES-GROUNDS MGMT $4,500 $0 $0 0.00% $0 PROF FEES-GROUNDS WAGES $22,000 $49 $22,562 102.55% $18,129 PROF FEES-TREE MAINTENANCE $1,500 $0 $909 0.00% $0 ADVERTISING/NEWSLETTER $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 LIABILITY/AUTO INSURANCE $4,800 -$551 $4,253 88.59% $4,459 OPERATING COSTS/SUPPLIES $7,650 $352 $9,944 129.98% $3,122 FUEL $1,750 $0 $1,664 95.07% $965 REPAIRS& MAINTENANCE $39,350 $3,475 $50,904 129.36% $33,180 SUNDRY/DUES/MILEAGE/CLOTHING $4,500 $0 $8,702 193.38% $2,616 CONTINGENCY $0 $3,500 $3,500 0.00% $0 ONLINE REG &CREDIT CARD FEES $4,275 $132 $6,880 160.94% $7,254 PAR 3 EXPENDITURES TOTAL $191,945 $10,286 $214,909 111.96% $144,915 """These numbers are not yet final and will be adjusted in completing the 2021 audit. 2/9/2022 page 52 6h. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-hei g hts.com CITY OF m MENDOTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief SUBJECT: UTV Purchase/Disposal of Old Equipment INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to approve the purchase of a new Utility Terrain Vehicle (UTV)for the Fire Department, and authorize the disposal of the equipment which the new purchase is replacing. BACKGROUND In 2000, the fire department received a donation from a private citizen which was used for the purchase of a Hydratrek All-Terrain Vehicle. The Hydratrek no longer meets the needs of the city. Due to the expansion of the city's trail system and the growth of off-road biking, the Hydratrek is often deployed when there is a need to access victims in areas that cannot be reached with traditional vehicles. The vehicle is very slow and lacks the space and features needed to properly transport a victim that is experiencing a medical emergency or been involved in a traumatic injury. Additionally, the department is unable to use the vehicle to fight grass or bush fires because of ongoing maintenance issues related to its fire pump and its small water tank. The vehicle has a prolonged deployment time, slow operational speed, and limited crew/equipment capacity, making it of no value for ice or water rescue. The current vehicle would be replaced by a standard UTV, which is widely used in the recreational, agricultural and fire rescue sectors. A committee has reviewed the fire departments off road and trail fire/rescue plan and extensively researched the various types of UTVs which are commercially available. The committee focused on ensuring that the off road and trail fire/rescue plan meets current best practices, and any equipment we purchase meets the needs of the city and doesn't duplicate other resources. page 53 The committee researched 10 different UTV's and narrowed the focus to two manufacturers, Can-Am and Polaris. The committee determined that the Polaris Ranger Crew XP 1000 would best meet the identified needs now and into the future. Polaris Inc. is based in Minnesota, has a long history in the UT'V community, and is highly regarded in both the private and government sector. Polaris Inc. is part of the Sourcewell cooperative purchasing agreement which the city of Mendota Heights is a member of. This purchasing agreement eliminates the need to receive additional quotes and ensures were getting the best possible price. The Ranger Crew XP 1000 UTV meets all the needs of the fire department and should prove to be useful to other divisions within the city as well. The current vehicle has minimal value and the committee plans to sell the vehicle at auction or by other means to offset some of the expense. We have checked, and found that neither the Police Department, nor Public Works has a need for the current vehicle. We therefore ask for authorization to dispose of it by online auction. The Council is asked to approve the disposal of these items via resolution. BUDGET IMPACT The estimated cost of the replacement is $48,715.00,which includes the quoted price from Polaris of$39,665 for the UTV,plus an additional cost of$9,050 to configure the unit for fire service with items such as, graphics, radios, and EMS supplies. The FY2022 budget includes $32,500 allocated from general fund reserves for this vehicle. The Mendota Heights Relief Association has earmarked and additional $10,000 towards the project. The short fall of$6,125.00 will be paid out of the 2022 fire department operating budget. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the purchase of a Polaris Ranger Crew XP 1000 from Polaris Inc, at the cost of$48,715 and authorize the disposal of the existing Hydratrek All- Terrain Vehicle and related equipment. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should by motion, authorize the purchase of a Polaris Ranger Crew XP 1000 from Polaris Inc. in the amount of$48,715, and authorize the disposal of equipment by approving Resolution 2022-16, "Declaring Certain Mendota Height Fire Department Equipment to be Surplus and Authorize Its Sale or Disposal". page 54 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2022-16 DECLARING CERTAIN MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT EQUIPMENT TO BE SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZE ITS SALE OR DISPOSAL WHEREAS,the City of Mendota Heights follows the requirements in State Law and City Code for the appropriate disposition of unused or unneeded property; and WHEREAS,the Fire Chief recommends that following pieces of equipment which are currently owned by the City be considered surplus property: • Hydratrek All-Terrain Vehicle • Trailer Used to Transport the Hydratrek WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights has duly considered this matter and declares the afore listed pieces of equipment to be surplus, and of no further need or value to the City; and WHEREAS, whichever of the equipment has a market value shall be listed for sale, and offers sought through public sale using the State of Minnesotaa online auction site, and that which has no value may be otherwise properly disposed. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,the Mendota Heights City Council hereby declares the listed Hydratrek all-terrain vehicle and trailer to be surplus, and authorizes the Mendota Heights Fire Department to dispose or sell the material as authorized by law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 15th day of February, 2022. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ATTEST Stephanie Levine,Mayor Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 55 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Hei 61 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452 www.mendota-heights.com CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Kelly Dumais, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Revisions to the Drug and Alcohol Testing for Commercial Drivers Policy INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to approve revisions to the City's Drug and Alcohol Testing for Commercial Drivers Policy to reflect updated standards and guidance from the 1995 city policy. The proposed revisions are based off of the recommendations from the League of Minnesota Cities. BACKGROUND The City is required by the United State Department of Transportation to have a policy regulating the use of drugs and alcohol by employees whose jobs require that they hold a Commercial Driver's License (CDL) to perform their work duties. The policy outlines the specific job duties that would trigger the USDOT requirement for this policy. The policy outlines processes for: • Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Clearinghouse queries • Pre-employment testing • Post-Accident testing • Random Testing • Reasonable Suspicion Testing • Return to Duty testing • Follow Up Testing The revisions do not substantively change the practices of the City, however, they revise the existing policy language to accurately reflect the requirements and practices of the City. In the case that additional legislation from the federal government changed, it would overrule the city's policy. This policy exclusively applies to employees whose job responsibilities require that the employee have a CDL and does not affect requirements or processes associated with other city staff. The Federal Highway Administration has granted states the option of waiving CDL requirements for firefighters. Since the state of Minnesota is one that gives firefighters the option of obtaining a CDL or non- commercial license, the state has exercised the option not to require CDLs. Therefore, this policy is not applicable to City firefighters. page 56 BUDGET IMPACT This does not have any additional budget impact as testing expenses are already calculated within the annual budget. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the revised Drug and Alcohol Testing for Commercial Drivers Policy. ACTION REQUESTED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion approve the revised Drug and Alcohol Testing for Commercial Drivers Policy. page 57 City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING FOR COMMERCIAL DRIVERS POLICY CONTACT: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651-452-1850 APPROVED: November, 1995 REVISED: February, 2022 page 58 Contents A. Purpose and Objectives ....................................................................................................... 3 B. Persons Subject to Testing................................................................................................... 3 C. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration--Clearinghouse ............................................ 4 D. Types of Tests.......................................................................................................................4 E. Cost of Required Testing...................................................................................................... 8 F. Prohibited Conduct.............................................................................................................. 8 G. Collection and Testing Procedures .................................................................................... 10 H. Review of Test Results ....................................................................................................... 12 K. Loss of CDL License for Traffic Violations in Commercial or Personal Vehicles ................ 15 L. Maintenance and Disclosure of Records ........................................................................... 15 M. Policy Contact for Additional Information......................................................................... 16 APPENDIX A: DEFINITIONS............................................................................................................ 17 2 page 59 A. Purpose and Objectives The City of Mendota Heights ("City') has a vital interest in maintaining safe, healthy, and efficient working conditions for employees, and recognizes that individuals who are impaired because of drugs and/or alcohol jeopardize the safety and health of other workers, as well as themselves. The City is concerned about providing a safe workplace for its employees, and while the City does not intend to intrude into the private lives of its employees, it is the City's goal to provide a work environment conducive to maximum safety and optimum work standards. The City of Mendota Heights expects employees to report to work in a state of mind and physical condition to perform their assigned duties in a safe and competent manner. The use, possession, manufacture, sale, transportation, or other distribution of a controlled substance or controlled substance paraphernalia and the unauthorized use, possession, transportation, sale or other distribution of alcohol is contrary to this policy and jeopardizes public safety. In response to regulations issued by United States Department of Transportation ("DOT"), the City has adopted this Policy on Alcohol and Controlled Substances for employees who hold a commercial driver's license (CDL) to perform their work duties. Federal law requires the City to implement such a policy. Each CDL applicant and driver must abide by this policy as a term and condition of hiring and continued employment. To ensure this policy is clearly communicated to all CDL drivers and applicants, and in order to comply with applicable federal law, drivers and applicants are required to review this policy and sign the "Certificate of Receipt" portion. Because changes may occur from time to time in applicable law and the City's practices, this policy may change in the future, and nothing in this policy is intended to be a contract, promise, or guarantee the City will follow any particular course of action, disciplinary, rehabilitative or otherwise, except as required by law. This policy does not in any way affect or change the status of any at-will employee. Any revisions to the Federal Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act or Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulations will take precedent over this policy to the extent the policy has not incorporated those revisions. B. Persons Subject to Testing All employees are subject to testing whose job includes performing "safety-sensitive duties" while operating City vehicles that: 1. Have a gross combination weight rating or gross combination weight of 26,001 pounds or more, whichever is greater, inclusive of a towed unit(s) with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of more than 10,000 pounds, whichever is greater; or 2. Have a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of 26,0001 or more pounds whichever is greater; or 3 page 60 3. Are designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the driver; or 4. Are of any size and are used in the transportation of materials found to be hazardous for the purposes of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 5103(b)) and which require the motor vehicle to be placarded under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR part 172, subpart F). The Federal Highway Administration has granted states the option of waiving CDL requirements for firefighters. Since the state of Minnesota is one that gives firefighters the option of obtaining a CDL or non-commercial license, the state has exercised the option not to require CDLs. Therefore, 49 CFR Part 382 is not applicable to City firefighters. The following functions are considered safety-sensitive: • all time waiting to be dispatched to drive a commercial motor vehicle • all time inspecting, servicing, or conditioning a commercial motor vehicle • all time driving at the controls of the commercial motor vehicle • all other time in or upon a commercial motor vehicle (except time spent resting in a sleeper berth) • all time loading or unloading a commercial motor vehicle, attending the same, giving or receiving receipts for shipments being loaded or unloaded, or remaining in readiness to operate the vehicle • all time repairing, obtaining assistance, or attending to a disable commercial motor vehicle. C. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration--Clearinghouse Beginning in 2020, an applicant must provide consent to the City, and successfully pass a full query of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's Clearinghouse. At least once a year, the City will conduct a limited query of the Clearinghouse for each currently employed CDL driver. If the limited query reveals that the Clearinghouse has information about resolved or unresolved drug and alcohol program violations by a candidate or current employee, he or she will be asked to provide electronic consent to a full query of the Clearinghouse (unless he or she has previously provided electronic consent). In the event a full query of the Clearinghouse reveals unresolved violation information for a candidate or current employee, the driver will not be permitted to perform safety-sensitive functions, including the operation of a Commercial Motor Vehicle and, in the case of a candidate, may have their conditional offer of employment rescinded or, in the case of a current employee, may be subject to discipline. D. Types of Tests The City may test any applicant to whom a conditional offer of employment has been made and any driver for controlled substance and alcohol under any of the following circumstances: 4 page 61 Pre-Employment Testing: All applicants, including current employees seeking a transfer, applying for a position where duties include performing safety-sensitive duties described above, will be required to take a drug test prior to the first time a driver performs a safety-sensitive function for the City, but only after a conditional offer of employment has been made. A driver may not perform safety-sensitive functions unless the driver has received a controlled substance test result from the Medical Review Officer ("MRO") indicating a verified negative test result. In addition to pre-employment controlled substance and alcohol testing, applicants will be required to authorize in writing former employers to release alcohol test results of.04 or greater, positive controlled substance test results, refusals to test, other violations of drug and alcohol testing regulations, and completion of return to duty requirements within the preceding three years before the employee first performs safety-sensitive function for the City. Post-Accident Testing: As soon as practicable following an accident involving a commercial motor vehicle operating on a public road, the City will test each surviving driver for controlled substances and alcohol when the following occurs: • The accident involves a fatality; or • The driver receives a citation for a moving traffic violation from the accident and an injury is treated away from the accident scene; or • The driver receives a citation for a moving traffic violation from the accident and a vehicle is required to be towed from the accident scene. The following chart summarizes when DOT post-accident testing needs to be conducted: Citation issued to Test must be performed Type of accident involved the DOT covered by the City? CDL driver? YES YES i. Human fatality NO YES ii. Bodily injury with immediate YES YES medical treatment away from the scene NO NO iii. Disabling damage to any motor YES YES vehicle requiring tow away NO NO A driver subject to post-accident testing must remain readily available or the driver will be deemed to have refused to submit to testing. This requirement to remain ready for testing does not preclude a driver from leaving the scene of an accident for the period necessary to obtain assistance in responding to the accident or to obtain necessary medical care. 5 page 62 Post-Accident Controlled Substance Testing: Drivers are required to submit a urine sample for post-accident controlled substance testing as soon as possible. If the driver is not tested within thirty-two (32) hours after the accident, the City will cease its attempts to test the driver and prepare and maintain on file a record stating why the test was not promptly administered. Post-Accident Alcohol Testing: Drivers are required to submit to post-accident alcohol testing as soon as possible. After an accident, consuming alcohol is prohibited until the driver is tested. If the driver is not tested within two (2) hours after the accident, the City will prepare and maintain on file a record stating why the test was not administered within that time. If eight (8) hours have elapsed since the accident and the driver has not submitted to an alcohol test, the City will cease its attempts to test the driver and prepare and maintain on file a record stating why the test was not administered. The City may accept the results of a blood or breath test in place of an alcohol test and urine test for the use of controlled substances if: • The tests are conducted by federal, state, or local officials having independent authority for the test, and • The tests conform to applicable federal, state, or local testing requirements, and • The test results can be obtained by the City. Whenever such a test is conducted by a law enforcement officer,the driver must contact the City and immediately report the existence of the test, providing the name, badge number, and telephone number of the law enforcement officer who conducted the test. Random Testing: Every driver will be subject to unannounced alcohol and controlled substance testing on a random selection basis. Drivers will be selected for testing by use of a scientifically valid method under which each driver has an equal chance of being selected each time selections are made. These random tests will be conducted throughout the calendar year. Each driver who is notified of selection for random testing must cease performing safety-sensitive functions and report to the designated test site immediately. It is mathematically possible drivers may be selected be picked and tested more than once, and others not at all. If a driver is selected for a random test while he or she is absent, on leave or away from work, that driver may be required to undergo the test when he or she returns to work. For 2022,federal law requires the City to test at a rate of at least fifty percent (50%) of its average number of drivers for controlled substance each year, and to test at a rate of at least ten percent (10%) of its average number of drivers for alcohol each year. These minimum testing rates are subject to change by the DOT. 6 page 63 Reasonable Suspicion Testing: When a supervisor has reasonable suspicion to believe a driver has engaged in conduct prohibited by federal law or this policy, the City will require the driver to submit to an alcohol and/or controlled substance test. The City's determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the driver to undergo an alcohol test will be based on "specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech, or body odors of the driver." In the case of controlled substance, the observations may include indications of the chronic and withdrawal effects of a controlled substance. The required observations for reasonable suspicion testing will be made by a supervisor or other person designated by the City who has received appropriate training in identification of actions, appearance and conduct of a driver which are indicative of the use of alcohol or controlled substance.These observations leading to an alcohol or controlled substance test,will be reflected in writing and signed by the supervisor who made the observations. The record will be retained by the City.The person who makes the determination that reasonable suspicion exists to conduct testing, will not be the person conducting the testing, which shall instead be conducted by another qualified person. Alcohol testing is authorized only if the observations are made during, just before, or just after the driver has ceased performing such functions. If a reasonable suspicion alcohol test is not administered within two (2) hours following the determination of reasonable suspicion, the City will prepare and maintain on file a record stating the reasons the alcohol test was not promptly administered. If a reasonable suspicion alcohol test is not administered within eight (8) hours following the determination of reasonable suspicion, the City will prepare and maintain on file a record stating the reasons the alcohol test was not administered, and will cease attempts to conduct the alcohol test. Notwithstanding the absence of a reasonable suspicion test, no driver may report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while the driver is under the influence of or impaired by alcohol, as shown by the behavioral, speech, and performance indicators of alcohol use, nor will the City permit the driver to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions until (1) an alcohol test is administered and the driver's alcohol concentration is less than .02; or (2) twenty-four (24) hours have elapsed following the determination of reasonable suspicion. Return-to-Duty Testing: The City reserves the right to impose discipline against drivers who violate applicable Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) or DOT rules or this policy, subject to applicable personnel policy and collective bargaining agreements. Except as otherwise required by law, the City is not obligated to reinstate or requalify such drivers for a first positive test result. 7 page 64 Should the City consider reinstatement of a DOT covered driver, the driver must undergo a Substance Abuse Professional ("SAP") evaluation and participate in any prescribed education/treatment, and successfully complete return-to-duty alcohol test with a result indicating an alcohol concentration of less than .02 and/or or a controlled substance test with a verified negative result, before the driver returns to duty requiring the performance of a safety- sensitive function. The SAP determines if the driver has completed the education/treatment as prescribed. The employee is responsible for paying for all costs associated with the return-to-duty test. The controlled substance test will be conducted under direct observation. Follow-Up Testing: The City reserves the right to impose discipline against drivers who violate applicable FMCSA or DOT rules or this policy, subject to applicable personnel policies and collective bargaining agreements. Except as otherwise required by law, the City is not obligated to reinstate or requalify such drivers. Should the City reinstate a driver following a determination by a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) that the driver is in need of assistance in resolving problems associated with alcohol use and/or use of controlled substance,the City will ensure that the driver is subject to unannounced follow-up alcohol and/or controlled substance testing.The number and frequency of such follow- up testing will be directed by the SAP and will consist of at least six (6) tests in the first twelve (12) months following the driver's return to duty. Follow-up testing will not exceed sixty (60) months from the date of the driver's return to duty. The SAP may terminate the requirement for follow-up testing at any time after the first six tests have been administered, if the SAP determines such test is no longer necessary. The employee is responsible for paying for all costs associated with follow-up tests. Follow-up alcohol testing will be conducted only when the driver is performing safety-sensitive functions, or immediately prior to or after performing safety-sensitive functions. E. Cost of Required Testing The City will pay for the cost of pre-employment, post-accident, random, and reasonable suspicion controlled substance and alcohol testing requested or required of all job applicants and employees. The driver must pay for the cost of all requested confirmatory re-tests, return-to- duty, and follow-up testing. F. Prohibited Conduct The following conduct is explicitly prohibited by applicable DOT and FMCSA regulations and therefore constitutes violation of City policy: Under the influence of alcohol when reporting for duty or while on duty: No driver may report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while having an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater. Drivers reporting for duty or remaining on duty to 8 page 65 perform safety-sensitive functions while having an alcohol concentration of 0.02, but less than 0.04, will be removed from duty for 24 hours, escorted home and placed on leave for hours missed from work. On-Duty Use of Alcohol: No driver may use alcohol while performing safety-sensitive functions. Pre-Duty Use of Alcohol: No driver may perform safety-sensitive functions within four (4) hours after using alcohol. If an employee has had alcohol within four hours they are to notify their supervisors before performing any safety-sensitive functions. Alcohol Use Following an Accident: No driver required to take a post-accident alcohol test may use alcohol for eight (8) hours following the accident, or until the driver undergoes a post- accident alcohol test, whichever occurs first. Refusal to Submit to a Required Alcohol or Controlled Substance Test: No applicant or driver may refuse to submit to pre-employment, post-accident, random, reasonable suspicion or follow-up alcohol or controlled substance testing. In the event an applicant or driver does in fact refuse to submit to required alcohol or controlled substance testing, no test will be conducted. Refusal by a driver to submit to controlled substance or alcohol testing will be considered a positive test result, will cause disqualification from performing safety-sensitive functions, and may appear on the driver's permanent record. In accordance with the FMCSA Commercial Driver's License Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse reporting requirements, beginning January 6, 2020,the City will report a driver's refusal to submit to a DOT test for drug or alcohol use to the Clearinghouse within three (3) business days. If an applicant refuses to submit to pre-employment controlled substance testing, any applicable conditional offer will be withdrawn. For purposes of this section, a driver is considered to have refused to submit to an alcohol or controlled substance test when the driver: • Fails to provide adequate breath for alcohol testing without a valid medical explanation after he or she has received notice of the requirement for breath testing. • Fails to provide adequate urine for controlled substance testing without a genuine inability to provide a specimen (as determined by a medical evaluation), after he or she has received notice of the requirement for urine testing. • Fails to report for testing within a reasonable period of time, as determined by the City. • Fails to remain at a testing site until testing is complete. • In the case of directly observed or monitored collection, fails to permit observation or monitoring. • Fails or declines to take a second test as required by the City and/or collector. • Fails to undergo a medical examination as directed by the City pursuant to federal law. 9 page 66 • Refuses to complete and sign the alcohol testing form, to provide a breath or saliva sample, to provide an adequate amount of breath, or otherwise cooperate in any way that prevents the completion of the testing process. • Engages in conduct that clearly obstructs the test process. Altering or attempting to alter a urine sample or breath test: A driver altering or attempting to alter a urine sample or controlled substance test, or substituting or attempting to substitute a urine sample, will be subject to providing a specimen under direct observation. Both specimens will be subject to laboratory testing. In such case, the employee may be subject to immediate termination of employment and any job offer made to an applicant will be immediately withdrawn. Controlled Substance Use: No driver may report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions when the driver uses any controlled substance, except when the use is pursuant to the instructions of a licensed medical practitioner who has advised the driver in writing the substance does not adversely affect the driver's ability to safely operate a commercial motor vehicle. Drivers must forward this information regarding therapeutic controlled substance use to the City immediately after receiving any such advice. Having a medical marijuana card and/or a cannabis prescription from a physician does not allow anyone to use or possess that drug in the city's workplace. The federal government still classifies cannabis as an illegal drug. There is no acceptable concentration of marijuana metabolites in the urine or blood of an employee who performs safety-sensitive duties for the City. Employees are still subject to being tested under city policies, as well as for being disciplined, suspended or terminated after testing positive for cannabis while at work. Controlled Substance Testing: No driver may report for duty, remain on-duty or perform a safety- sensitive function, if the driver tests positive for controlled substance. G. Collection and Testing Procedures Drivers are required to report immediately upon notification to the collection site. For random tests conducted off site, employees may use a City vehicle to drive to the collection site. Drivers will be expected to provide a photo ID card for identification to the collection staff. All drivers will be expected to cooperate with collection site personnel requests to remove any unnecessary outer garments such as coats, sweaters or jackets and will be required to empty their pockets. Collection personnel will complete a Federal Custody and Control Form ("CCF") which drivers providing a sample will sign. Alcohol Testing: Employees will be tested for alcohol just before, during, or immediately following performance of a safety-sensitive function. If a driver is also taking a DOT controlled substance test, generally speaking, the alcohol test is completed before the urine collection process begins. Screening tests for alcohol concentration will be performed utilizing a non- evidential screening device included by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on its 10 page 67 conforming products list (e.g., a saliva screening device) or an evidential breath testing device ("EBT") operated by a trained breath alcohol technician ("BAT") at a collection site. An alcohol test usually takes approximately 15 minutes, if the result is negative. If a driver's first attempt is positive (with an alcohol concentration of .02 or greater), the driver will be asked to wait at least 15 minutes and then be tested again. The driver may not eat, drink or place anything in his/her mouth (e.g., cigarette, chewing gum) during this time. All confirmation tests will be conducted in a location that affords privacy to the driver being tested, unless unusual circumstances (e.g., when it is essential to conduct a test outdoors at the scene of an accident) make it impracticable to provide such privacy. Any results less than .02 alcohol concentration is considered a "negative"test result. If the driver attempts and fails to provide an adequate amount of breath, he/she will be referred to a physician to determine if the driver's inability to provide a specimen is genuine or constitutes a refusal to test. Alcohol test results are reported directly to the City by the collection site staff. Controlled Substance Testing: The City will use a "split urine specimen" collection procedure for controlled substance testing. Collection of urine specimens for controlled substance testing will be conducted by an approved collector and will be conducted in a setting and manner to ensure the driver's privacy. Controlled substance testing generally takes about 15 minutes. At the collection site, the driver will be given a sealed container and must provide at least 45 milliliters (ml) of urine for testing. Once the sample is provided the collection personnel will check the temperature and color and look for signs of contamination. The urine is then split into two separate specimen containers (A, or "primary," and B, or "split") with identifying labels and security seals affixed to both. The collection facility will be responsible for maintaining a proper chain of custody for delivery of the sample to a Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) certified laboratory for analysis. The laboratory will retain a sufficient portion of any positive sample for testing and store that portion in a scientifically-acceptable manner for a minimum 365-day period. If an employee fails to provide a sufficient amount of urine to permit a controlled substance test (45 milliliters of urine), the collector will discard the insufficient specimen, unless there is evidence of tampering with that specimen. The collector will urge the driver to drink up to 40 ounces of fluid, distributed reasonably over a period of up to three hours, or until the driver has provided a sufficient urine specimen, whichever occurs first. If the driver has not provided a sufficient specimen within three hours of the first unsuccessful attempt, the collector will cease efforts to attempt to obtain a specimen. The driver must then obtain, within five calendar days, an evaluation from a licensed physician, acceptable to the MRO, who has expertise in the medical issues raised by the employee's failure to provide a sufficient specimen. If the licensed physician concludes the driver has a medical condition, or with a high degree of probability could have, precluded the driver from providing a sufficient amount of urine, the City will consider the test to have been canceled. If a licensed physician cannot make such a determination, the City will 11 page 68 consider the driver to have engaged in a refusal to test, and will take appropriate disciplinary action under this policy. The primary specimen is used for the first test. If the test is negative, it is reported to the MRO who then reports the result,following a review of the CCF Form for compliance,to the City. If the initial result is positive or non-negative, a "confirmatory retest" will be conducted on the primary specimen. If the confirmatory re-test is also positive, the result will be sent to the MRO. The MRO will contact the driver to verify the positive result. If the MRO is unable to reach the driver directly, the MRO must contact the City who will direct the driver to contact the MRO. H. Review of Test Results The MRO is a licensed physician with knowledge and clinical experience in substance abuse disorders, and is responsible for receiving and reviewing laboratory results of the controlled substances test as well as evaluating medical explanations for certain drug test results. Prior to making a final decision to verify a positive test result, the MRO will give the driver or the job applicant an opportunity to discuss the test result, typically through a phone call. The MRO, or a staff person under the MRO's supervision, will contact the individual directly, on a confidential basis, to determine whether the individual wishes to discuss the test result. If the employee or job applicant wishes to discuss the test result: • The individual may be required to speak and/or meet with the MRO, who will review the individual's medical history, including any medical records provided. • The individual will be afforded the opportunity to discuss the test results and to offer any additional or clarifying information which may explain the positive test result. If the employee or job applicant, believes a mistake was made at the collection site, at the labor, on a chain-of-custody form, or that the drug test results are caused by lawful substance use, the employee should tell the MRO. • If there is some new information which may affect the original finding, the MRO may request the laboratory to perform additional testing on the original specimen in order to further clarify the results; and • A final determination will be made by the MRO that the test is either positive or negative, and the individual will be so advised. If the MRO upholds the positive, adulterated or substituted drug determination, that test result will be provided to the City. There is no opportunity to explain a positive alcohol test provided in the DOT regulations. The driver can request the MRO to have the split specimen (the second "B" container) tested at the driver's expense. This includes all costs that may be associated with the re-test. There is no split specimen testing for an invalid result. The driver has 72 hours after they have been notified of the positive result to make this request. If the employee requests an analysis of the split specimen, the MRO will direct the laboratory to send the split specimen to another certified laboratory for analysis. 12 page 69 If an employee has not contacted the MRO within 72 hours, the employee may present information documenting that serious injury, illness, lack of actual notice of the verified test result, inability to contact the MRO, or other circumstances unavoidably prevented the employee from making timely contact. If the MRO concludes there is legitimate explanation for the employee's failure to contact within 72 hours, the MRO will direct the analysis of the split specimen. If the results of the split specimen are negative, the City may pay for all costs associated with the rest and there will be no adverse action taken against the employee or job applicant. I. Notification of Test Results Employees: The City will notify a driver of the results of random, reasonable suspicion, and post- accident tests for controlled substance if the test results are verified positive, and will inform the driver which controlled substance or substances were verified as positive. Results of alcohol tests will be immediately available from the collection agent. Right to Confirmatory Retest: Within seventy-two (72) hours after receiving notice of a positive controlled substance test result, an applicant or driver may request through the MRO a re- analysis (confirmatory retest)of the driver's split specimen.Action required by federal regulation as a result of a positive controlled substance test (e.g., removal from safety-sensitive functions) will not be stayed during retesting of the split specimen. If the result of the confirmatory retest fails to reconfirm the presence of the controlled substance(s) or controlled substance metabolite(s) found in the primary specimen, or if the split specimen is unavailable, inadequate for testing or untestable, the MRO will cancel the test. Dilute Specimens: If the City receives information that a driver has provided a dilute negative specimen, the City will direct a recollection, pursuant to the MRO's direction, under direct observation. J. Consequences for Drivers Engaging in Prohibited Conduct No driver who is found to have an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 may perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions for the City, including driving a commercial motor vehicle, until the start of the driver's next regularly scheduled duty, but not less than twenty-four (24) hours following administration of the test. If a driver tests positive under this policy, or is found to have an alcohol concentration of .02 or greater but less than .04, the driver will be removed from safety sensitive duties and escorted home; the driver should not drive home, but be escorted to his or her home. The driver will then be placed on leave, for hours missed from work. Job Applicants: Any applicable conditional offer of employment will be withdrawn from a job applicant or employee seeking a transfer who refuses to be tested or tests positive for controlled substance pursuant to this policy. 13 page 70 Employees: Drivers who are known to have engaged in prohibited behavior with regard to alcohol misuse or use of controlled substance, as defined earlier in this policy, are subject to the following consequences: • Removal from Safety-Sensitive Functions: No driver may perform safety-sensitive functions, including driving a commercial motor vehicle, if the driver has engaged in conduct prohibited by federal law. • Notification of Resources Available: The City will advise each driver who has engaged in conduct prohibited by federal law or who has a positive alcohol or controlled substance test of the resources available to the driver, including but not limited to the City's EAP, in evaluating and resolving problems associated with the misuse of alcohol and use of a controlled substance, including the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of Substance Abuse Professionals and counseling and treatment programs. The City will provide this SAP listing in writing at no cost to the driver. • Discipline: The City reserves the right to impose whatever discipline the City deems appropriate in its sole discretion, up to and including termination for a first occurrence, against drivers who violate applicable FMCSA or DOT rules or this policy, subject to applicable personnel policies and collective bargaining agreements. Except as otherwise required by law, the City is not obligated to reinstate or requalify such drivers following a first positive confirmed controlled substance or alcohol test result. • Evaluation, and Return to Duty Testing: Should the City wish to consider reinstatement of a driver who engaged in conduct prohibited by federal law and/or who had a positive alcohol or controlled substance test, the driver must undergo a SAP evaluation, participate in any prescribed education/treatment, and successfully complete return-to- duty alcohol test with a result indicating an alcohol concentration of less than 0.02 and/or or a controlled substance test with a verified negative result, before the driver returns to duty requiring the performance of a safety-sensitive function. The SAP will determine what assistance, if any, the driver needs in resolving problems associated with alcohol misuse and controlled substance use and will ensure the driver properly follows any rehabilitation program and submits to unannounced follow-up alcohol and controlled substance testing. • Follow-Up Testing: If the driver passes the return-to-duty test, he/she will be subject to unannounced follow-up alcohol and/or controlled substance testing. The number and frequency for such follow-up testing will be as directed by the SAP and will consist of at least six tests in the first twelve months. These tests will be conducted under direct observation. • Refusal to test: All drivers and applicants have the right to refuse to take a required alcohol and/or controlled substance test. If an employee refuses to undergo testing, the 14 page 71 employee will be considered to have tested positive and may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination. Refer to Refusing to Test provided earlier in this policy. • Responsibility for Cost of Evaluation and Rehabilitation: Drivers will be responsible for paying the cost of evaluation and rehabilitation (including services provided by a Substance Abuse Professional) recommended or required by the City or FMCSA or DOT rules, except to the extent that such expense is covered by an applicable employee benefit plan or imposed on the City pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement. • Reporting to the FMCSA's CDL Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse: In accordance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse reporting requirements beginning January 6, 2020, the City will report the following information to the Clearinghouse within three business days: o A DOT alcohol confirmation test result with an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater; o A negative DOT return-to-duty test result; o The driver's refusal to submit to a DOT test for drug or alcohol use; o Actual knowledge a driver has used alcohol or controlled substances, based on the employer's direct observation, information provided by the driver's previous employer(s), a traffic citation for driving a CMV while under the influence of alcohol or controlled substances, or an employee's admission of alcohol or controlled substance abused except as provided in §382.121 of: ■ On duty alcohol use pursuant to §382.205; ■ Pre-duty alcohol use pursuant to §382.207; ■ Alcohol use following an accident pursuant to §382.209; ■ Controlled substance use pursuant to §382.213 o Employers will also report negative return-to-duty test results and the successful completion of a driver's follow-up testing plan as ordered by a SAP K. Loss of CDL License for Traffic Violations in Commercial or Personal Vehicles Effective August 1, 2005, the FMCSA established strict rules impacting when CDL license holders can lose their CDL for certain traffic offenses in a commercial or personal vehicle. Employees are required to notify their supervisor immediately if the status of their CDL license changes in anyway. L. Maintenance and Disclosure of Records Except as required or authorized by law, the City will not release driver's information that is contained in records required to be maintained by this policy or FMCSA and DOT regulations. In addition, a driver is entitled, upon written request, to obtain copies of any records pertaining to the driver's use of alcohol or a controlled substance, including any records pertaining to his or her alcohol or controlled substance tests. 15 page 72 M.Policy Contact for Additional Information The City designated representative is the Assistant City Administrator. The Assistant City Administrator is designated to receive communications and test results from service agents and is authorized to take immediate actions to remove employees from a safety-sensitive function and to make required decisions in the testing and evaluation processes. Information regarding the collection services,testing laboratory and Medical Review Officer is on file and available by contacting the Assistant City Administrator. N. Policy Modification Any revisions to the Federal Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act will take precedent over this policy to the extent the policy has not incorporated those revisions. The City retains the right to modify this policy to conform to changes in regulation or law, or to make changes to best suit the needs of the City. 16 page 73 APPENDIX A: DEFINITIONS Accident: An occurrence involving a commercial motor vehicle operating on a public road which results in a fatality; bodily injury to any person who, as a result of the injury, immediately receives medical treatment away from the scene of the accident; or one or more motor vehicles incurring disabling damage as a result of the accident, requiring the vehicle to be transported away from the scene by a tow truck or other vehicle. The term "accident" does not include an occurrence involving only boarding and alighting from a stationary motor vehicle; an occurrence involving only the loading or unloading of cargo; or an occurrence in the course of the operation of a passenger car or a multipurpose passenger vehicle unless the vehicle is transporting passengers for hire or hazardous materials of a type and quantitythat require the motor vehicle to be marked or placarded in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 177.823;49 C.F.R. § 382.303(a);49 C.F.R. § 382.303(f). Alcohol Concentration (or Content): The alcohol on a volume of breath expressed in terms of grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath as indicated by an evidential breath test. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Alcohol Use: The consumption of any beverage, mixture, or preparation, including any medication, containing alcohol. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Applicant: A person applying to drive a commercial motor vehicle. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Breath Alcohol Technician or BAT: An individual who instructs and assists individuals in the alcohol testing process and operates an evidential breath testing device (EBT). 49 C.F.R. § 40.3. City: Means City of Mendota Heights. City Premises: All job sites, facilities, offices, buildings, structures, equipment, vehicles and parking areas, whether owned, leased, used or under the control of the City. Collection Site: A place designated by the City where drivers present themselves for the purpose of providing a specimen of their urine or breath to be analyzed for the presence of alcohol or controlled substances. 49 C.F.R. § 40.3. Commercial Motor Vehicle: A motor vehicle or combination of motor vehicles used in commerce to transport passengers or property if the motor vehicle (1) has a gross combination weight rating or gross combination weight of 26,001 or more pounds, whoever is greater, inclusive of a towed unit(s) with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of more than 10,000 pounds, whichever is greater; or (2) has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of 26,001 or more pounds, whichever is greater; or (3) is designed to transport sixteen (16) or more passengers, including the driver; or (4) is of any size and is used in the transportation of materials found to be in the transportation of materials found to be hazardous for the purposes of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 5103(b)) and which require the motor vehicle to be placarded under the Hazardous Materials Regulation. (49 C.F.R. part 172, subpart F) § 17 page 74 382.107. Fire trucks and other emergency fire equipment are not considered to be commercial vehicles under this policy. Confirmation (or Confirmatory) Test: For alcohol testing means a second test, following a positive non-evidential test, following a positive non-evidential (e.g., saliva) screening test or a breath alcohol screening test with the result of 0.02 or greater, that provides quantitative data of alcohol concentration. For controlled substance testing, "Confirmation (or Confirmatory)Test" means a second analytical procedure to identify the presence of a specific controlled substance or metabolite which is independent of the screen test and which uses a different technique and chemical principal from that of the screen test in order to ensure reliability and accuracy. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Controlled Substance: Substances identified in 49 C.F.R. § 40.85(Marijuana, amphetamines, opiates, (including heroin), phencyclidine (PCP), cocaine, and any of their metabolites are included within this definition. 49 (C.F.R. § 382.107; 49 C.F.R. § 40.85. Department of Transportation or DOT: The United States Department of Transportation. DHHS: The Department of Health & Human Services or any designee of the Secretary, Department of Health & Human Services. 49 C.F.R. § 40.3. Dilute Specimens: When specimens have creatinine levels of greater than or equal to 2 mg/dl but less than 5 mg/dl. Disabling Damage: Damage which precludes departure of a motor vehicle from the scene of the accident in its usual manner in daylight after simple repairs, including damage to motor vehicles that could have been driven, but would have been further damaged if so driven. Disabling damage does not include damage which can be remedied temporarily at the scene of the accident without special tools or parts, tire disablement without other damage even if no spare tire is available, headlight or tail light damage or damage to turn signals, horn or windshield wipers which make them inoperative. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Driver: Any person who operates a commercial motor vehicle. This includes, but is not limited to full-time, regularly employed drivers; casual, intermittent or occasional drivers; leased drivers and independent owner-operator contractors who are either directly employed by or under lease to the City or who operate a commercial motor vehicle at the direction of or with the consent of the City. For purposes of pre-employment testing, the term driver includes a person applying to drive a commercial motor vehicle. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Drug: Has the same meaning as "controlled substance". Employee seeking a transfer: Refers to an employee who is not subject to DOT regulations seeking a transfer to a position that will subject them to DOT regulations in the sought after position. 18 page 75 Evidential Breath Testing Device or EBT: A device approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") for the evidential testing of breath and placed on NHTSA's "Conforming Products List of Evidential Breath Measurement Devices." 49 C.F.R. § 40.3. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration or FMCSA: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration of the United States Department of Transportation. Medical Review Officer or MRO: A licensed physician (medical doctor or doctor of osteopathy) responsible for receiving laboratory results generated by a controlled substance testing program who has knowledge of substance abuse disorders and has appropriate medical training to interpret and evaluate an individual's confirmed positive test result together with his or her medical history and any other relevant biomedical information. 49 C.F.R. § 40.3 Performing (a Safety-Sensitive Function): Any period in which a driver is actually performing, ready to perform, or immediately available to perform any safety-sensitive functions. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Positive Test Result: A finding of the presence of alcohol or controlled substance, or their metabolites, in the sample tested in levels at or above the threshold detection levels established by applicable law. Reasonable Suspicion: A belief a driver has engaged in conduct prohibited by the FMCSA controlled substance and alcohol testing regulations, except when related solely to the possession of alcohol, based on specific contemporaneous, articulable observations made by a supervisor or City official who has received appropriate training concerning the appearance, behavior, and speech or body odors of the driver. The determination of reasonable suspicion will be made in writing on a Reasonable Suspicion Record Form during, just preceding, or just after the period of the work day that the driver is required to be in compliance with this policy. In the case of a controlled substance, the observations may include indications of the chronic and withdrawal effects of a controlled substance. Safety-Sensitive Function: All time from the time a driver begins to work or is required to be in readiness to work until the time he or she is relieved from work and all responsibility for performing work. Safety-sensitive functions include: • All time at a city plant, terminal, facility, or other property, or on any public property, • waiting to be dispatched, unless the driver has been relieved from duty by the employer; • All time inspecting equipment as required by 49 C.F.R. § 392.7 and 392.8 or otherwise inspecting, servicing, or conditioning any commercial motor vehicle at any time; • All time spent at the driving controls of a commercial motor vehicle in operation; • All time, other than driving time, in or upon any commercial motor vehicle except time spent resting in a sleeper berth (a berth conforming to the requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 393.76); 19 page 76 • All time loading or unloading a vehicle, supervising, or assisting in the loading or unloading, attending a vehicle being loaded or unloaded, remaining in readiness to operate the vehicle, or in giving or receiving receipts for shipments loaded or unloaded; and • All time repairing, obtaining assistance, or remaining in attendance upon a disabled vehicle. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Screening Test (also known as Initial Test): In alcohol testing, means an analytical procedure to determine whether a driver may have a prohibited concentration of alcohol in her or her system. Screening tests may be conducted by utilizing a non-evidential screening device included by the National Highway Traffic Administration on its conforming products list (e.g., a saliva screening device) or an evidential breath testing device ("EBT") operated by a trained breath alcohol technician ("BAT"). In controlled substance testing, "Screening Test" means an immunoassay screen to eliminate "negative" urine specimens form further consideration. 49 C.F.R. § 382.107. Substance Abuse Professional' or "SAP": A licensed physician (medical doctor or doctor of osteopathy), licensed or certified psychologist, licensed or certified social worker, licensed or certified employee assistance professional, or licensed or certified addiction counselor (certified by the National Association of Alcoholism and Controlled Substance Abuse Counselors Certification Commission) with knowledge of and clinical experience in the diagnosis and treatment of alcohol and controlled substance-related disorders. 49 C.F.R. § 40.281. 20 .� o m •- m N 1 n s0+ 0 Q s0+ s0+ tlq u+ ^ u+ v u+ N Y6 O O h N 0 O N 0 n n � m O M h N Y �• c c c c m m m > u > > u O 0 0 0 0 M O v o o n O 0 O Z M 2 u 2 m N O O O N - a O L m E c E N o 0 0 0 o N 0 0 0 m N o ti Y o o o o Y vi o o Y 0 N u1 0 vo�i p u1 a o� R d A d en O ti O uM O ti V V V 0 0 O O O O O O O m O Q Q N O O � W O M N N c e-i c c e-i O O O O c m m m > u > > u 0 Z 0 0 0 o M 2 o Q 2 0 n O. 71 a a a �° v - uo _ a `o QbA =o 0E ° or _ E h a ` in r � E ,. 3 vc m 3 E ¢ F u ° Fti _ m o 0 0 o m N h 0 0 ^ o N O N o 0 0 0 0 05 o 0 oo v 0 o o SbA �' ro v LI O N O O M •� V V V � O c N W 0 O N Ln W O O ti N V O O N > ti ti c N c c N c O O O O O > N Q 2 ;0 0 0 0 M 2 0 v h 0 N 0 U 0 0 E � v _ �'o h a h y c v r o E E h c 0 0 0 o m 0 0 N o a u m n N O Y o 0 0 0 M. 0o 47 Y o 0 o N O Y 0 01 a o� N d d N Q O N O h O M O N oq 0 WIs O v � M ti ti U c N c c N c m m m U m > > > Q m m m v U 2 0 0 0 0 M 2 0 a h 2 0 N v O O O N N " - ti N m btl 0 d - yo O C c E E a - Q .. : a E "O Y O •� o `m 3 c �_ E M E 3 d o ti N m Q F V V F �i V z page 78 6k. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-height s.com mCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director SUBJECT: Claims List Summary VW BACKGROUND Sil4nificant Claims Met Council Environmental Services—Sewer Service $ 122,613.30 MN Department of Labor&Industry—State Surcharges $ 6,643.53 A to Z Home Inspections—January Inspections $ 7,623.75 Axon Enterprise—Software—Police Dept $ 12,845.04 Barr Engineering—Pond Improvements/Ridge Place Sanitary Sewer Project $ 8,757.14 Compass Minerals—Street Salt $ 7,531.90 LOGIS—Computer Replacements/IT Services $ 23,387.97 Mansfield Oil—Fuel $ 11,875.56 Northern Technologies—Wentworth Wanning House Project $ 4,000.00 RES Great Lakes—Parks Invasive Species Services $ 12,500.00 Manual Checks Total $ 188,565.33 System Checks Total $ 196,941.48 Total for the list of claims for the February 15,2022 city council meeting $ 385,506.81 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the list of claims for February 15, 2022. page 79 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:23 AM Page 1 Claims List MANUAL CHEKS 02/08/22 MAN Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS,CITY OF G 95-1155 CREDIT CARD TRF $7,500.00 G 45-1155 CREDIT CARD TRF $7,500.00 G 15-1155 CREDIT CARD TRF $5,000.00 G 01-1155 CREDIT CARD TRF $35,000.00 Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS,CITY OF $55,000.00 $55,000.00 page 80 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:24 AM Page 1 Claims List MANUAL CHECKS 02/09/22 MAN Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name I C M A RETIREMENT 457 G 01-2072 02/04/22 PAYROLL $2,690.00 G 01-2073 02/04/22 PAYROLL $150.00 Search Name I C M A RETIREMENT 457 $2,840.00 Search Name INVER GROVE LICENSE CENTER E 01-4490-105-15 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Engineering Enterprise $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-070-70 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Parks&Recreation $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-070-70 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Parks&Recreation $19.25 E 01-4490-105-15 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Engineering Enterprise $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 15-4490-060-60 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Utility Enterprise $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-070-70 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Parks&Recreation $19.25 E 01-4490-070-70 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Parks&Recreation $19.25 G 01-1145 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE $14.25 E 15-4490-060-60 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Utility Enterprise $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-050-50 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Road&Bridges $19.25 E 01-4490-105-15 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Engineering Enterprise $19.25 E 01-4490-070-70 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Parks&Recreation $19.25 E 01-4490-070-70 VEHICLE REGISTRATION RENE Parks&Recreation $19.25 Search Name INVER GROVE LICENSE CENTER $418.50 Search Name METRO COUNCIL ENVIRONMENT SVC E 15-4448-060-60 FEB SEWER SERVICES Utility Enterprise $122,613.30 Search Name METRO COUNCIL ENVIRONMENT SVC $122,613.30 Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY G 01-2010 SURCHARGES -$276.81 G 01-2010 SURCHARGES $6,920.34 Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY $6,643.53 Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION G 01-2072 02/04/22 PAYROLL $50.00 Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION $50.00 Search Name TIGER RIES MUSIC E 01-4435-200-70 PERFROMANCE-FROZEN FUN Parks&Recreation $1,000.00 Search Name TIGER RIES MUSIC $1,000.00 $133,565.33 page 81 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Page 1 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name 106 GROUP E 09-4220-000-00 OHEYAWAHE PILOT KNOB PRE Spec Fds $2,407.50 Search Name 106 GROUP $2,407.50 Search Name A TO Z HOME INSPECTION, LLC E 01-4231-040-40 1/3/22-1/31/22 INSPECTIONS Code Enforcement/Inspe $7,323.75 G 01-2010 12/30/21 INSPECTIONS $300.00 Search Name A TO Z HOME INSPECTION, LLC $7,623.75 Search Name ALL CITY ELEVATOR,INC. E 08-4335-000-00 FEBRUARY 2022 MAINTENANC Spec Fds $196.00 Search Name ALL CITY ELEVATOR, INC. $196.00 Search Name ALLSTREAM E 15-4210-060-60 1/15/22-2/14/22 TELEPHONE S Utility Enterprise $338.03 E 01-4210-070-70 1/15/22-2/14/22 TELEPHONE S Parks&Recreation $49.29 E 01-4210-050-50 1/15/22-2/14/22 TELEPHONE S Road&Bridges $49.29 E 01-4210-020-20 1/15/22-2/14/22 TELEPHONE S Police $205.65 Search Name ALLSTREAM $642.26 Search Name ANDREIKA, MICHAEL E 01-4402-040-40 MN MECH/FUEL GAS CODE BO Code Enforcement/Inspe $165.28 Search Name ANDREIKA, MICHAEL $165.28 Search Name ARAMARK(AMERIPRIDE SERVICES) E 01-4410-050-50 UNIFORM-PW Road&Bridges $10.82 E 01-4200-610-70 MAT SERVICE-PW Parks&Recreation $11.87 E 08-4335-000-00 MAT SERVICE-CITY HALL Spec Fds $333.93 E 15-4200-610-60 MAT SERVICE-PW Utility Enterprise $11.88 E 01-4200-610-50 MAT SERVICE-PW Road&Bridges $11.87 E 01-4410-050-50 UNIFORM-PW Road&Bridges $11.82 E 15-4200-610-60 MAT SERVICE-PW Utility Enterprise $10.00 E 01-4200-610-50 MAT SERVICE-PW Road&Bridges $10.00 E 01-4200-610-70 MAT SERVICE-PW Parks&Recreation $10.00 Search Name ARAMARK(AMERIPRIDE SERVICES) $422.19 Search Name ASPEN EQUIPMENT E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $350.80 Search Name ASPEN EQUIPMENT $350.80 Search Name ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. E 01-4280-310-50 FEBRUARY 2022 RUBBISH SER Road&Bridges $218.03 E 01-4280-310-70 FEBRUARY 2022 RUBBISH SER Parks&Recreation $218.03 E 01-4280-315-30 FEBRUARY 2022 RUBBISH SER Fire $179.45 E 01-4220-085-85 FEBRUARY 2022 ORGANIC REC Recycling $341.38 E 08-4280-000-00 FEBRUARY 2022 RUBBISH SER Spec Fds $321.17 E 15-4280-310-60 FEBRUARY 2022 RUBBISH SER Utility Enterprise $218.03 Search Name ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. $1,496.09 Search Name AXON ENTERPRISE(TASER INTL) E 01-4301-020-20 SOFTWARE-PD Police $12,170.04 E 01-4301-020-20 SOFTWARE-PD Police $675.00 Search Name AXON ENTERPRISE(TASER INTL) $12,845.04 page 82 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Page 2 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name BARR ENGINEERING G 29-2010 PARK PL/ROGERS LK POND IM $4,070.78 G 15-2010 RIDGE PLACE SANITARY SEWE $4,686.36 Search Name BARR ENGINEERING $8,757.14 Search Name BGMN, INC. E 01-4320-110-10 FUEL ADDITIVE Administration $77.78 E 15-4320-060-60 FUEL ADDITIVE Utility Enterprise $77.77 E 01-4320-070-70 FUEL ADDITIVE Parks&Recreation $77.77 E 01-4320-050-50 FUEL ADDITIVE Road&Bridges $77.77 E 01-4320-030-30 FUEL ADDITIVE Fire $77.77 E 01-4320-020-20 FUEL ADDITIVE Police $77.78 Search Name BGMN, INC. $466.64 Search Name CERTIFIED POWER,INC E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $60.12 Search Name CERTIFIED POWER, INC $60.12 Search Name COMCAST BUSINESS E 45-4210-045-45 FEB 8-MAR 7 2022 SERVICE-P Golf Course $244.49 E 01-4268-030-30 FEB 7-MAR 6 2022 SERVICE-F Fire $34.53 Search Name COMCAST BUSINESS $279.02 Search Name COMPASS MINERALS E 01-4421-050-50 SALT-STREET Road&Bridges $2,072.17 E 01-4421-050-50 SALT-STREET Road&Bridges $3,438.34 E 01-4421-050-50 SALT-STREET Road&Bridges $2,021.39 Search Name COMPASS MINERALS $7,531.90 Search Name CONCENTRA HEALTH SERVICES,INC E 01-4220-070-70 TESTING-PW Parks&Recreation $191.00 Search Name CONCENTRA HEALTH SERVICES,INC $191.00 Search Name CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQ E 15-4330-490-60 EQUIP REPAIR-UTILITY Utility Enterprise $1,300.00 Search Name CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQ $1,300.00 Search Name COVERALL E 01-4335-310-70 FEB 2022 COMMERCIAL CLEAN Parks&Recreation $86.67 E 01-4335-310-50 FEB 2022 COMMERCIAL CLEAN Road&Bridges $86.67 E 15-4335-310-60 FEB 2022 COMMERCIAL CLEAN Utility Enterprise $86.66 Search Name COVERALL $260.00 Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER E 01-4275-030-30 MARCH 2O22 DISPATCH Fire $758.99 E 01-4275-020-20 MARCH 2O22 DISPATCH Police $22,523.01 Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER $23,282.00 Search Name EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNC E 01-4330-490-30 EQUIP REPAIR-FIRE Fire $491.76 Search Name EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNC $491.76 Search Name EYE MED E 01-4131-110-10 FEB 2022 PREMIUM Administration $34.59 E 01-4131-050-50 FEB 2022 PREMIUM Road&Bridges $20.22 paga 83 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Page 3 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 01-4131-105-15 FEB 2022 PREMIUM Engineering Enterprise $5.13 E 01-4131-020-20 FEB 2022 PREMIUM Police $60.75 E 15-4131-060-60 FEB 2022 PREMIUM Utility Enterprise $24.84 E 01-4131-070-70 FEB 2022 PREMIUM Parks&Recreation $5.13 G 01-2071 FEB 2022 PREMIUM $20.22 Search Name EYE MED $170.88 Search Name FIRST NET/AT&T MOBILITY E 45-4210-045-45 IPAD WIRELESS SERVICE-PAR Golf Course $38.23 E 01-4210-070-70 CELL SERVICE-REC Parks&Recreation $50.09 E 01-4210-050-50 CELL SERVICE-STREET Road&Bridges $45.05 E 01-4490-080-80 CELL SERVICE-PLANNING Planning $45.05 E 01-4490-109-09 CELL SERVICE-CITY COUNCIL City Council $45.05 E 01-4210-105-15 CELL SERVICE- ENGINEERING Engineering Enterprise $45.05 E 01-4210-070-70 IPAD WIRELESS SERVICE-REC Parks&Recreation $38.23 Search Name FIRST NET/AT&T MOBILITY $306.75 Search Name FLEET SERVICES G 01-2010 DEC 2021 SQUAD LEASES-PD $4,942.81 Search Name FLEET SERVICES $4,942.81 Search Name FLEETPRIDE E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $89.26 E 01-4330-490-30 EQUIP REPAIR-FIRE Fire $21.97 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $34.60 E 15-4330-490-60 EQUIP REPAIR-UTILITY Utility Enterprise $66.89 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $24.02 Search Name FLEETPRIDE $236.74 Search Name FORCE AMERICA G 01-2010 OPERATING SUPPLIES-STREE $20.00 Search Name FORCE AMERICA $20.00 Search Name GOLDENSTEIN,SCOTT E 01-4330-490-30 EQUIPMENT REPAIR REIMBUR Fire $116.71 Search Name GOLDENSTEIN,SCOTT $116.71 Search Name GOPHER STATE ONE CALL E 01-4210-040-40 JANUARY 2022 SERVICE Code Enforcement/Inspe $45.90 Search Name GOPHER STATE ONE CALL $45.90 Search Name GRAINGER E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $90.96 Search Name GRAINGER $90.96 Search Name GRANNIS&HAUGE, P.A. E 01-4222-120-20 JANUARY 2022 PROSECUTIONS Police $5,891.00 Search Name GRANNIS&HAUGE,P.A. $5,891.00 Search Name HELPING HANDS HOME SERVICES E 01-4335-315-30 JANUARY 2022 BLDG MAINT- Fire $800.00 Search Name HELPING HANDS HOME SERVICES $800.00 Search Name HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $28.53 page 84 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Page 4 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount G 01-1145 LILYDALE SEWER MAINT $37.04 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $25.80 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $25.62 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $13.96 Search Name HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES $130.95 Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS E 01-4300-020-20 OFFICE SUPPLIES-PD Police $34.20 E 01-4300-020-20 OFFICE SUPPLIES-PD Police $8.55 E 01-4300-020-20 OFFICE SUPPLIES-PD Police $17.20 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMIN Administration $13.23 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMIN Administration $109.35 Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS $182.53 Search Name IRON MOUNTAIN RECORDS MGMT E 01-4490-020-20 JAN 2022 SHREDDING Police $72.75 E 01-4490-110-10 JAN 2022 SHREDDING Administration $135.29 Search Name IRON MOUNTAIN RECORDS MGMT $208.04 Search Name L E L S G 01-2075 FEBRUARY 2022 UNION DUES $910.00 Search Name L E L S $910.00 Search Name LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES E 01-4220-020-20 JANUARY 2022 SERVICE-PD Police $59.40 Search Name LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES $59.40 Search Name LEAGUE MN CITIES E 29-4404-000-00 MN CITIES STORMWATER COA Spec Fds $780.00 E 01-4400-110-10 SAFETY&LOSS CONTROL WO Administration $20.00 E 01-4400-070-70 SAFETY&LOSS CONTROL WO Parks&Recreation $20.00 Search Name LEAGUE MN CITIES $820.00 Search Name LOGIS E 01-4300-110-10 TONER-ADMIN Administration $187.82 E 01-4220-114-14 HOSTED BACKUPS/SERVER/PA Info Tech $3,586.50 E 01-4220-114-14 APPLICATION SUPPORT IT TEL Info Tech $2,285.00 G 01-2010 PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES- $1,218.75 E 01-4301-030-30 APPLICATION SUPPORT-FIRE Fire $79.00 E 01-4223-020-20 APPLICATION SUPPORT-PD Police $3,688.00 E 01-4220-114-14 ENTRUST TOKENS Info Tech $15.00 E 01-4220-114-14 COMPUTER RPLCMNTS Info Tech $10,788.90 E 01-4220-114-14 SOFTWARE LICENSE Info Tech $114.00 G 01-2010 PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES- $437.50 G 01-2010 PROFESSIONAL IT SERVICES- $987.50 Search Name LOGIS $23,387.97 Search Name LUBE-TECH E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES-UTILIT Utility Enterprise $12.65 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES-UTILIT Utility Enterprise $203.59 E 01-4305-030-30 OPERATING SUPPLIES-FIRE Fire $12.65 G 01-1210 ANTIFREEZE/COOLANT $771.45 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES- PARKS Parks&Recreation $12.65 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES-STREE Road&Bridges $12.65 page 85 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Page 5 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name LURE-TECH $1,025.64 Search Name M&M HOMES G 01-2010 REFUND SURCHARGE-BUILDI $16.09 Search Name M&M HOMES $16.09 Search Name MACQUEEN EMERGENCY E 01-4268-030-30 SCBA FLOW TEST-FIRE Fire $1,845.00 E 01-4330-490-30 EQUIP REPAIR- FIRE Fire $448.86 E 01-4268-030-30 SCBA FLOW TEST-FIRE Fire $195.00 E 01-4305-030-30 OPERATING SUPPLIES-FIRE Fire $490.46 Search Name MACQUEEN EMERGENCY $2,979.32 Search Name MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY G 01-1210 FUEL $6,062.10 G 01-1210 FUEL $5,813.46 Search Name MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY $11,875.56 Search Name MARKS TOWING E 01-4490-020-20 TOWING-PD Police $130.00 Search Name MARKS TOWING $130.00 Search Name MENARDS E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $40.33 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $10.49 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES-PARKS Parks&Recreation $40.29 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $9.87 - E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES-STREE Road&Bridges $40.29 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES-UTILIT Utility Enterprise $40.30 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges -$18.98 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIP REPAIR- PARKS Parks&Recreation $2.02 G 45-2035 BLDG MAINT-PAR 3 -$1.79 E 45-4335-045-45 BLDG MAINT-PAR 3 Golf Course $27.77 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $18.98 E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES-STREE Road&Bridges $6.15 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIP REPAIR-PARKS Parks&Recreation $1.39 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES-UTILIT Utility Enterprise $41.05 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES-PARKS Parks&Recreation $6.15 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT-CITY HALL Spec Fds $21.69 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES-UTILIT Utility Enterprise $6.14 Search Name MENARDS $292.14 Search Name METRO BLOOMS E 29-4220-000-00 2022 BLUE THUMB PARTNER F Spec Fds $500.00 Search Name METRO BLOOMS $500.00 Search Name MIDWEST MACHINERY CO(FRONTIER AG) E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIP REPAIR-PARKS Parks&Recreation $754.00 Search Name MIDWEST MACHINERY CO(FRONTIER AG) $754.00 Search Name MITCHELLI E 01-4300-030-30 FEBRUARY 2022 SERVICE Fire $174.00 Search Name MITCHELLI $174.00 Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY page 86 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Page 6 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 08-4335-000-00 ELEVATOR LICENSE-CITY HAL Spec Fds $100.00 Search Name MN DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY $100.00 Search Name MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY E 15-4400-060-60 COOLECTION SYSTEM OPERAT Utility Enterprise $23.00 Search Name MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY $23.00 Search Name NORTHERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC E 10-4620-000-00 WENTWORTH WARMING HOUS Spec Fds $4,000.00 Search Name NORTHERN TECHNOLOGIES,INC $4,000.00 Search Name NUSS TRUCK&EQUIPMENT E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $140.80 Search Name NUSS TRUCK&EQUIPMENT $140.80 Search Name OFFICE DEPOT E 01-4300-070-70 OFFICE SUPPLIES-PARKS Parks&Recreation $17.86 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMIN Administration $22.49 E 01-4300-050-50 OFFICE SUPPLIES-STREET Road&Bridges $17.86 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMIN Administration $13.69 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMIN Administration $31.99 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMIN Administration -$22.49 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMIN Administration $81.32 E 15-4300-060-60 OFFICE SUPPLIES-UTILITY Utility Enterprise $17.85 Search Name OFFICE DEPOT $180.57 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES-STREE Road&Bridges $10.33 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES-UTILIT Utility Enterprise $10.33 E 01-4200-610-70 CYLINDER RENTAL-PW Parks&Recreation $50.07 E 01-4200-610-50 CYLINDER RENTAL-PW Road&Bridges $50.07 E 15-4200-610-60 CYLINDER RENTAL-PW Utility Enterprise $50.07 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES-PARKS Parks&Recreation $10.33 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO $181.20 Search Name PUBLIC EMPL INS PROGRAM E 01-4131-070-70 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN Parks&Recreation $549.20 G 01-2010 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN $6,720.00 E 01-4131-020-20 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN Police $17,008.56 G 01-2074 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN $3,927.96 E 01-4131-110-10 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN Administration $5,534.84 E 01-4131-020-20 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN Police $10,940.64 E 08-4131-000-00 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN Spec Fds $549.20 E 01-4131-105-15 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN Engineering Enterprise $3,377.60 G 01-2071 MARCH 2O22 HEALTH INSURAN $729.84 Search Name PUBLIC EMPL INS PROGRAM $49,337.84 Search Name RES GREAT LAKES, LLC E 01-4220-070-70 NATURAL RESOURCES MGMT A Parks&Recreation $12,500.00 Search Name RES GREAT LAKES, LLC $12,500.00 Search Name ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD E 01-4330-440-20 EQUIP REPAIR-PD Police $144.93 Search Name ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD $144.93 page 87 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Claims List Page 7 SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name SCHLOMKA SERVICES, LLC G 01-1145 2/1/22 SEWER CLEANING- LLO $780.00 Search Name SCHLOMKA SERVICES, LLC $780.00 Search Name SOLBERG AGGREGATE G 01-2010 SAND-STREET $502.62 Search Name SOLBERG AGGREGATE $502.62 Search Name SPRWS E 01-4425-310-50 JANUARY 2022 SERVICE-2431 Road&Bridges $21.86 E 08-4425-000-00 JANUARY 2022 SERVICE-1101 Spec Fds $88.18 E 15-4425-310-60 JANUARY 2022 SERVICE-2431 Utility Enterprise $21.86 E 01-4425-310-70 JANUARY 2022 SERVICE-2431 Parks&Recreation $21.86 E 01-4425-315-30 JANUARY 2022 SERVICE-2121 Fire $84.48 Search Name SPRWS $238.24 Search Name ST. PAUL PIONEER PRESS E 01-4240-110-10 JANUARY 2022 LEGAL NOTICE Administration $131.60 E 01-4240-080-80 JANUARY 2022 LEGAL NOTICE Planning $37.60 E 27-4220-803-00 JANUARY 2022 LEGAL NOTICE Spec Fds $289.52 Search Name ST. PAUL PIONEER PRESS $458.72 Search Name TIME SAVER OFF SITE SEC.SVC. E 01-4220-110-10 1/18/22 CITY COUNCIL MINUT Administration $333.00 E 01-4220-080-80 1/25/22 PLANNING COMMISSI Planning $198.13 Search Name TIME SAVER OFF SITE SEC.SVC. $531.13 Search Name TOTAL TOOL E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $650.50 Search Name TOTAL TOOL $650.50 Search Name TRI STATE BOBCAT E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $14.60 ....._.......... Search Name TRI STATE BOBCAT $14.60 Search Name VERIZON WIRELESS E 01-4210-070-70 FEB 2022 CELL SERVICE Parks&Recreation $115.17 E 01-4210-110-10 FEB 2022 CELL SERVICE Administration $41.22 E 45-4210-045-45 FEB 2022 CELL SERVICE Golf Course $40.01 E 01-4210-050-50 FEB 2022 CELL SERVICE Road&Bridges $158.67 E 15-4210-060-60 FEB 2022 CELL SERVICE Utility Enterprise $41.22 E 01-4210-030-30 FEB 2022 CELL SERVICE Fire $198.41 Search Name VERIZON WIRELESS $594.70 Search Name ZEE MEDICAL SVC E 15-4300-060-60 FIRST AID SUPPLIES-PW Utility Enterprise $47.99 E 01-4300-050-50 FIRST AID SUPPLIES-PW Road&Bridges $47.98 E 01-4300-070-70 FIRST AID SUPPLIES-PW Parks&Recreation $47.98 E 01-4305-030-30 FIRST AID SUPPLIES-FIRE Fire $68.55 E 08-4335-000-00 FIRST AID SUPPLIES-CITY I A Sp--ids $2i6.85 Search Name ZEE MEDICAL SVC $429.35 Search Name ZIEGLER INC E 15-4330-490-60 EQUIP REPAIR-UTILITY Utility Enterprise $597.84 page 88 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 02/10/22 10:22 AM Claims List Page 8 SYSTEM CHECKS 02/15/22 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR-STREET Road&Bridges $699.56 Search Name ZIEGLER INC $1,297.40 $196,941.48 page 89 9a. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com CITY OF MENDDTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor Levine and City Council; City Administrator Jacobson FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2022-12 Approving a Wetlands Permit for Resurrection Cemetery —2101 Lexington Avenue South (Planning Case No. 2021-23) INTRODUCTION City Council is asked to consider adopting a resolution approving a Wetlands Permit for Resurrection Cemetery, located at 2101 Lexington Avenue South. The owner is Catholic Cemeteries and the applicant is Southview Design. BACKGROUND City Code Section 12-2-6 requires a wetlands permit for any work conducted within 100-ft. of an adjacent wetland or recognized water feature. The Owners initially sought to improve their pond feature located inside the cemetery by removing some invasive and unhealthy plantings around the pond, and install a layer of river rock along its outer edge, and replant the disturbed areas with a blue-grass seed mixture. At the December 28,2021 Planning Commission meeting, a planning report was presented,public hearing was held, and comments from the Applicant were noted. The Commission elected to table the hearing and application, requesting more detailed information and an updated landscape plan from the Applicant. At the January 25, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, this matter was reconsidered under a supplemental planning report, along with an updated landscape plan. The new plan removes the original layer of rock edging, and provides a more suitable(and acceptable)wetland seed mix used for replanting the new vegetative buffer. Copies of both reports and the respective PC meeting minutes are appended to this memo. DISCUSSION The City can use its legislative authority when considering action on a Wetlands Permit, and has broad discretion. The only limitations are that actions must be constitutional,rational, and in some way related to protecting the health, safety and general welfare of the public. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended unanimously (7-0 vote)to approve the Wetlands Permit for Resurrection Cemetery, located at 2101 Lexington Avenue, with findings-of-fact to support said approval and certain conditions, memorialized in the following draft resolution. page 90 ACTION REQUIRED The City Council may affirm this recommendation from the Planning Commission by adopting RESOLUTION NO. 2022-12, APPROVING A WETLANDS PERMIT FOR RESURRECTION CEMETERY, LOCATED AT 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH. This adoption action requires a simple majority vote. page 91 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2022-12 RESOLUTION APPROVING A WETLANDS PERMIT FOR RESURRECTION CEMETERY LOCATED AT 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE (PLANNING CASE NO. 2021-23) WHEREAS, Southview Design (as the"Applicant") and acting on behalf of The Catholic Cemeteries (as the "Owners") are seeking a Wetlands Permit as presented under Planning Case No. 2021-23, and for the property generally identified as Resurrection Cemetery, located at 2101 Lexington Avenue South (the "Subject Property"), as described in attached Exhibit-A; and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is guided Public/Semi-Public in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and situated in the R-1 One Family Residential District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 12-2-1 of the City Code, all new construction, related improvements,grading, and/or removals made within one-hundred(100)feet of a wetland or water resource-related area in the city requires a wetlands permit; and WHEREAS, the Applicants requested approval to remove a ring of invasive plantings in and around a wetland pond on the Subject Property, and restore the disturbed areas based on an initial landscaping replacement plan designed by the Applicant; and WHEREAS, on December 28, 2021 the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held an public hearing on this matter, and whereupon closing the hearing and discussion, elected to table this item, and directed the Applicant to work with the city staff to develop a more suitable native planting buffer that aligns with the goals of the comprehensive plan,the surface water management plan and land disturbance guidance document for the improvement of water quality; and WHEREAS, on January 25, 2022, the Planning Commission re-considered this wetlands permit application along with a revised landscape plan from the Applicant, indicating a new wetland seed mixture (MnDOT Seed Mix 933-261), which will provide a more suitable and adequate vegetative buffer around the pond, and voted unanimously (7-0 vote) to recommend approval of the Wetlands Permit with findings-of-fact and conditions of approval as noted herein. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council,that the recommendation from the Planning Commission is hereby affirmed, and the Wetlands Permit requested for Resurrection Cemetery,located at 2101 Lexington Avenue South is hereby approved with the following findings of fact: A. The requested pond embankment stabilization work and related landscaping work in and around the pond is a reasonable request for this very large and open cemetery property. page 92 B. All new work should have very little, if any negative impacts to the existing on-site drainage or the drainage from the surrounding properties or areas. C. Owner/Applicant will provide additional and suitable wetland protective vegetation and plantings around the perimeter of the existing pond, which help ensures storm water run-off quality; and any soil and contaminant runoff is reduced or minimized from the subject property. D. The work contemplated under this wetlands permit shall be done in accordance with the rules and standards of the City's Land Disturbance Guidance document, and meets a number of goals and policies established under the Natural Resources chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Wetlands Permit requested for Resurrection Cemetery, located at 2101 Lexington Avenue South, and as presented under Planning Case No. 2021-23, is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The revised Landscape Plan for Resurrection Cemetery, dated 01/18/2022, along with the MnDOT Seed Mix List 933-261 shall be the approved plan and vegetation replacement for this Wetlands Permit/Planning Case No. 2021-23. 2. Any grading and/or construction activity related to the pond improvement work shall be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City's Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 3. Full erosion/sedimentation measures shall be installed prior to commencement of work and maintained throughout the duration of the construction project. Erosion barriers shall be placed along the outer edges of the pond site and pond edge and remain place throughout the duration of the project and the surrounding lands have been properly restored. 4. Any new site construction or removal shall occur only between the hours of 7:00 am and 8:00 pm weekdays; and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm weekends. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 15th day of February, 2022. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Stephanie Levine, Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk Res.No.2022-12 Page 2 of 3 page 93 EXHIBIT-A Legal Description PID#27-04100-41-012 LOTS 2 2124 34 38 41 & LOTS 8 11 &20 EX PT OF LOTS 2 8 11 &20 SHOWN AS PARCEL 212 ON MN DOT R/W PLAT 19-1 & 19-2 & EX PT OF LOT 20 S'LY SE'LY&E'LY OF MN DOT R/W PLAT 19-98& 19-99&PT LOTS 33 AND Tax 40 LYING NE'LY OF LINE BEG NW COR LOT 32 SAID AUDITORS Description SUBDIVISION NO 34 S 40D19M49S E 1623.90 FT S 49D40M11S W 116.57 FT S 25D43M58S W 34.93 FT S 3D59M54S W 26.03 FT S 22D11M44S E 102.84 FT S 60D54M30S E 35.66 FT S 79D53M3S E 96.57 FT N 51D46M6S E 124.75 FT S 40D19M49S E 180.17 FT TO POINT OF BEGINNING, IN AUDITORS SUBDIVISION NO 34, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA. The plat of Resurrection Cemetery was executed in behalf of The Diocese on December 19, 1933 and it was filed with the Register of Deeds of Dakota County December 27, 1933 in Book J of Plats,page 19. TORRENSPROPERTY Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 5511 Res.No.2022-12 Page 3 of 3 page 94 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota•heights.com mCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PLANNING STAFF REPORT [Supplemental] DATE: January 25,2022 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti,Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2021-23 WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICANT: Southview Design/Catholic Cemeteries PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2101 Lexington Avenue South ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential ACTION DEADLINE: February 7,2022 (review ext. granted to April 6, 2022) INTRODUCTION At the December 28, 2021 regular meeting, Southview Design, acting on behalf of Catholic Cemeteries, presented a Wetlands Permit application for review, which would allow new landscaping and pond embankment improvements for the memorial pond located in Resurrection Cemetery. This item was presented under a public hearing, and with no persons wishing to be heard that night, the Commission closed the hearing on this matter. Upon subsequent discussion with the Applicant, it was deemed by the planning commission that the proposed 10-foot wide layer of"3'-7"river rock" surrounding the pond,along with ordinary bluegrass/rye grass seed mix around the pond edge,was not sufficient to provide added water quality treatment(surface run-off) or meet certain surface water management and land disturbance guidance standards. The Commission chose to table this item, and directed the Applicant to work with the city's natural resources staff to develop a native plant buffer that aligns with the goals of the comprehensive plan,the surface water management plan and land disturbance guidance document for the improvement of water quality. REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN Southview Design and Resurrection Cemetery representatives met with city staff to discuss a revised plan; and staff encouraged the designers to forgo the river-rock layer around the pond, as this material seemed unnecessary along the pond edge, and encouraged a smaller/lower growing wetland seed mix that is more suitable to areas in and around wetlands or stormwater ponds. The updated plan presented back to the Planning Commission now illustrates the rock layer removed; and the disturbed areas created by the previous vegetation removals around the pond (also shown by the dark- green hatched areas), will be seeded with a MnDOT Seed Mix #33-261. The types of seed and plant varieties are noted on the attached seed mix list document. page 95 The city's Natural Resources Coordinator and other city staff have reviewed this revised plan and proposed seed mix and planting plan,and we all concur and agree this plan meets the surface/stormwater management plan and land disturbance guidance standards for the City of Mendota Heights. City staff has also identified a select number of Goals and Policy statements from the Natural Resource chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which provide additional support in granting approval of this requested Wetlands Permit, as follows: GOAL 1: Develop a professional, comprehensive, strategic Natural Resources Management Plan for city-wide natural areas and natural resources. Policy No. 10. Encourage and promote the use of conservation design principles. 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. 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 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. 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. 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. 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. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the Wetlands Permit based on certain findings-of-fact, along with specific conditions of approval; or Planning Case 2021-23 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT(Resurrection Cemetery) Page 2 of 3 page 96 2. Deny the Wetlands Permit based on revised finding(s)-of-facts supporting such a recommendation as determined by the Planning Commission; or 3. Table the request and direct staff to extend the application review period an additional 60 days,pursuant to MN State Statute 15.99. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested Wetlands Permit to Catholic Cemeteries and for the property located at 2101 Lexington Avenue South,which would allow certain pond embankment improvements and landscaping around the established wetland feature, based on the attached findings-of-fact and subject to the following conditions: 1. The revised Landscape Plan for Resurrection Cemetery,dated 01/18/2022,along with the MnDOT Seed Mix List #33-261 shall be the approved plan and vegetation replacement for this Wetlands Permit/Planning Case No.2021-23. 2. Any grading and/or construction activity related to the pond improvement work shall be in compliance with applicable federal,state,and local regulations and codes,as well as in compliance with the City's Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 3. Full erosion/sedimentation measures shall be installed prior to commencement of work and maintained throughout the duration of the construction project. Erosion barriers shall be placed along the outer edges of the pond site and pond edge and remain place throughout the duration of the project and the surrounding lands have been properly restored. 4. Any new site construction or removal shall occur only between the hours of 7:00 am and 8:00 pm weekdays; and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm weekends. FINDINGS-OF-FACT FOR APPROVAL Wetlands Permit for Resurrection Cemetery 2101 Lexington Avenue South Planning Case No.2021-23 1. The requested pond embankment stabilization work and related landscaping work in and around the pond is a reasonable request for this very large and open cemetery property. 2. All new work should have very little,if any negative impacts to the existing on-site drainage or the drainage from the surrounding properties or areas. 3. Owner/Applicant will provide additional and suitable wetland protective vegetation and plantings around the perimeter of the existing pond,which help ensures storm water run-off quality; and any soil and contaminant runoff is reduced or minimized from the subject property. 4. The work contemplated under this wetlands permit shall be done in accordance with the rules and standards of the City's Land Disturbance Guidance document, and meets a number of goals and policies established under the Natural Resources chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Planning Case 2021-23 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT(Resurrection Cemetery) Page 3 of 3 page 97 Resurrection Cemetery Pond Shoreline Project The purpose of the Resurrection Cemetery Pond Shoreline project is to create more usable space for the cemetery owners (Catholic Cemeteries) and improve user experience by opening up views across the cemetery. Upon completion of the project, Catholic Cemeteries plans to put a fountain in the pond to prevent algae growth and improve the experience for the many people that run/walk through the cemetery daily. The new design for the pond shoreline will also create a more aesthetic, and maintainable space for the cemetery. The vegetation surrounding the pond is currently comprised primarily of dead/rotting trees, buckthorn, and thistle. After removing the existing vegetation, we will overseed areas where vegetation was removed with the MnDot seed mix 33-261 at a rate of 5-7lbs per 1,000 square feet. This MnDot seed mix is comprised of native plant material and is recommended for stormwater pond edges per the MnDot Seeding Manual. The newly seeded areas will be covered with a netless erosion control blanket system to prevent soil erosion and seed runoff. The grading/drainage of the area surrounding the pond will not be altered as part of this project. The construction process is expected to begin in spring of 2022. page 98 Stormwater South & 33-261 West Common Name Scientific Name Rate (lb/ac) Rate(kg/ha) (by w y w Mix eight) Seeds/sq ft � bluestem Andropog n gerardii 1 2.00 2.24 5.72% 7.35 fringed brome Bromus ciliates 2.00 2.24 5.73% 8.10 Virginia wild rye Elymus virginicus 1.60 1.68 4.28% 2.31 fowl bluegrass Poa palustris 1.06 1.19 3.03% 50.70 slender wheatgrass Elymus trach caulus 1.00 1.12 2.86% 2.63 switchgrass Panicum vir atom 0.38 0.43 1.07% 1.93 prairie cordgrass Spartina pectinata 0.38 0.43 1.07% 0.91 Indian grass Sorghastrum nutans 0.12 0.13 0.36% 0.55 Ca/amagrostis blue'oint canadensis 0.06 0.07 0.18% 6.40 Grasses Subtotal 8.60 9.53 24.29% 80.78 awl-fruited sedge Carex stipato 0.25 0.28 0.71% 3.10 dark green bulrush Scir us atrovirens 0.19 0.21 0.64% 31.70 woolgrass Scirpus cyperinus 0.06 0.07 0.18% 39.00 Sedges&Rushes Subtotal 0.50 0.56 1.43% 73.80 olden alexan_ders Zizia aurea 0.20 0.22 0.56% 0.79 autumn sneezeweed _Helenium autumna/e 0.13 0.15 ' 0.36% 5.97 marsh milkweed Ascle ias incarnata 0.11 0.12 0.32% 0.20 leafy beggarticks Bidens frondosa 0.11 0.12 0.31% 0.20 Canada anemone Anemone canadensis 0.07 0.08 0.19% 0.20 obedient plant Physostecda virginiana 0.07 0.08 0.21% 0.30 tall coneflower Rudbeckia laciniata 0.07 0.08 0.21% 0.37 Symphyotrichum New England aster novae-angliae 0.07 0.08 0.19% 1.56 flat-topped aster i Doellin eria umbellata 0.06 0.07 0.17% 1.50 s ofted Joe p e weed Eutrochium macu/atum 0.06 0.07 0.18% 2.19 blue vervain Verbena hastata 0.05 0.06 0.15% 1.85 Forbs Subtotal 1.00 1.12 2.85% 15.13 Oats ..... ... Avena sativa 25.00 28.02 71.43% 11.14 _ Cover Crop Subtotal 25.00 28.02 71.43% 11.14 Total 35.00 39.23 100.00% 180.85 Purpose: Stormwater pond edges,temporarily flooded dry ponds,and temporarily flooded _ ditch bottoms. Planting Area: Tallgrass Aspen Parklands, Prairie Parkland, and Eastern Broadleaf Forest Provinces. Mn/DOT Districts 2(west), 3B,4, Metro, 6, 7&8. Back to Table 3 13 page 99 !sting Trees,no New Trees to be Added Existing Concrete sidewalk i / flood silt Logs Installed During Construction to Prevent Soil Erosion Isting Monumen s // Pond a Existing Vegetation within this Area to be Removed �////�/�/ j / / / � (Buckthorn,Thistle, vertoking Area Seeded with MNDOT send Mik 33-2E1,and Covered with Netless Erosion Control Blanket Total Area:49159 sq.ft.) S-1. Resurrection Cemetary TayI.,W.'° 2022/01/18 „=ao Landscape plan ���� PN<. �doE"e :ht MN55121 Sheet a�oN— a� ����<N- 2101 Lexington Ave.S. P��,�<�<,..<..< 2 of 2 �<ewo�'s�'m Mendota Heights,MN,55120 page 100 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 25,2022 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 25, 2022 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Commissioners Patrick Corbett, Sally Lorberbaum, Cindy Johnson,Michael Toth,Brian Petschel, and Andrew Katz. Those absent: None Approval ofAzenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of December 28, 2021 Minutes Commissioner Lorberbaum noted on page two,the fifth paragraph from the bottom,it should state, "...three which were the native trees,the native plants, and pollinator friendly pecies..." On page seven, the third paragraph, it should state, "...lower spot that does not drain..." On page seven, the third paragraph from the bottom, it should state, "...removed and that it is was the..." On page 12, the third paragraph, it should state, "...recommendations rather than btt�r-s buffer requirements." On page 15, the fifth line, it should state, "...collaboration between City staff and the Catholic Cemetery. s�rather..." COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 28, 2021 WITH THE NOTED CHANGES. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Hearin-s A) PLANNING CASE 2021-23 SOUTHVIEW DESIGN/CATHOLIC CEMETERIES, 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH — WETLANDS PERMIT (TABLED FROM DECEMBER 28, 2021 MEETING) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that at the December 28, 2021 regular meeting, Southview Design, acting on behalf of Catholic Cemeteries,presented a Wetlands Permit application for review which would allow new landscaping and pond embankment improvements for the memorial pond located in Resurrection Cemetery. This item was presented under a public hearing and with no persons wishing to be heard that night,the Commission closed the hearing on this matter. Upon subsequent discussion with the application, it was deemed by the Planning January 25, 2022 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page I of 10 page 101 Commission that the proposed 10-foot-wide layer of river rock surrounding the pond, along with ordinary bluegrass/rye grass seed mix around the pond edge, was not sufficient to provide added water quality treatment or meet certain surface water management and land disturbance guidance standards. The Commission chose to table this item and directed the applicant to work with the City's Natural Resources staff to develop a native plant buffer that aligns with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, the Surface Water Management Plan, and Land Disturbance Guidance Document for the improvement of water quality. Community Development Director Tim Benetti stated that the applicants met with City staff to discuss a revised plan; and staff encouraged the designers to forgo the river rock layer around the pond and encouraged a smaller/lower growing wetland seed mix that is more suitable to areas in and around wetlands or stormwater ponds. The updated plan presented back to the Planning Commission illustrates that rock layer removed; and disturbed areas created by the previous vegetation removals around the pond will be seeded with a MnDOT Seed Mix 933-261. The types of seed and plant varieties are noted on the seed mix list document. 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 appreciated staff working with the applicant and appreciated the use of the seed mix. She asked how tall the plants are anticipated to grow. Community Development Director Tim Benetti believed the range was three to five feet. He noted that it would be maintained using Prairie Restoration. He commented that the cemetery would like to have low growing plant material to ensure the pond could be visible to visitors. Commissioner Johnson noted that she believes the plant materials grow three to eight feet and therefore wanted to ensure the applicant was okay with that height. Chair Field recognized that the public hearing had been closed at the last meeting and asked if the Commission would like to reopen the hearing. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PETSCHEL, TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Taylor Wald, Southview Design, was present to address any questions of the Commission. He commented that most of the plants in the seed mix would be within the three-to-five-foot range of growth. He commented that the desire is to open up views across the cemetery and they believe this seed mix would accomplish that goal. January 25, 2022 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 2 of 10 page 102 Commissioner Katz asked if the work is still anticipated for March. Mr. Wald replied that the seeding would most likely be done a bit later, but by May in order to provide the optimal results. Commissioner Lorberbaum asked the narrowest and the largest width of the buffer around the pond. Mr. Wald replied that in the narrowest section the buffer would be ten feet and the widest would be about 80 feet. Dave Kemp, Catholic Cemeteries, commented that this pond has been an eyesore for many years. He stated that there is a feature to the unborn which is a tranquil and quiet place and therefore they would like to have visibility to the water. He stated that after meeting with City staff they understand the purpose of having the buffer. He stated that they would like to maintain the openness of the pond for visitors to enjoy. Commissioner Johnson asked if there is going to be a fountain. Mr. Kemp confirmed that they would like to have a fountain so that visitors can see the water and hear the sound of running water. Commissioner Johnson commented that there is a thought that when you are placing a fountain into a stormwater pond it vaporizes the chemicals. Mr. Kemp stated that the only chemical they use is to treat dandelions in the spring. Commissioner Johnson stated that perhaps a bubbler would be considered. Seeing no one further coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TOTH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KATZ, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WETLANDS PERMIT TO CATHOLIC CEMETERIES AND FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH, WHICH WOULD ALLOW CERTAIN POND EMBANKMENT IMPROVEMENTS AND LANDSCAPING AROUND THE ESTABLISHED WETLAND FEATURE, BASED ON THE FINDINGS-OF-FACT AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THE REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR RESURRECTION CEMETERY DATED JANUARY 18, 2022, ALONG WITH THE MNDOT SEED MIX LIST #33-261 SHALL January 25, 2022 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 10 page 103 BE THE APPROVED PLAN AND VEGETATION REPLACEMENT FOR THIS WETLANDS PERMIT/PLANNING CASE NO. 2021-23. 2. ANY GRADING AND/OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RELATED TO THE POND IMPROVEMENT WORK SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND CODES, AS WELL AS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT. 3. FULL EROSION/SEDIMENTATION MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. EROSION BARRIERS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG THE OUTER EDGES OF THE POND SITE AND POND EDGE AND REMAIN IN PLACE THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT AND THE SURROUNDING LANDS HAVE BEEN PROPERLY RESTORED. 4. ANY NEW SITE CONSTRUCTION OR REMOVAL SHALL OCCUR ONLY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 A.M. AND 8:00 P.M. WEEKDAYS; AND 9:00 A.M. TO 5:00 P.M. ON WEEKENDS. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its February 2, 2022 or February 15, 2022 meeting. January 25, 2022 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 4 of 10 FOR ADDED REFERENCE TO SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT - dated 01/25/202 a 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com m* CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PLANNING STAFF REPORT DATE: December 28,2021 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case 2021-23 WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICANT: Southview Design/Catholic Cemeteries PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2101 Lexington Avenue South ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential ACTION DEADLINE: February 7,2022 INTRODUCTION Southview Design, acting on behalf of Catholic Cemeteries, is seeking approval of a Wetlands Permit to allow new landscaping and pond embankment improvements in Resurrection Cemetery. A public hearing notice for this planning item was published in the Pioneer Press and notice letters were mailed to properties within 350-feet of the subject property. City received no comments or communications regarding this matter. BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The cemetery property consists of over 187 acres of land, and is generally located south of Hwy. 62 and the Lexington Business Park,and fronts mainly along Lexington Avenue South (see Dak. Co. GIS Map image right). The entire cemetery property is I' located in the R-1 One Family Residential zone. The pond is identified under the City's Local Surface Storm Water Management Plan (LSWMP) as a Type V Wetland (see map image below-left); and is identified on the city's official Wetlands Systems Map of 1976. The second image is recent Sept. 2021 aerial map shot of the subject pond area with volunteer vegetation ring surrounding the pond (below-right). This pond provides for stormwater retention for a large portion of the cemetery lands around the main office and maintenance buildings, and some drainage from across the road(Lexington Avenue). page 105 do a�• f _ R1130 alit \ w.r _ Q 33, lrfilCE_.- Subject Pond (Wetland) SITE/LANDSCAPE PLAN The cemetery hired Southview Design as their landscaper/contractor, and has submitted a Proposed Landscape Plan for this wetlands permit review. Initial plans call for the removal of the volunteer vegetation ring that surrounds the pond,which according to Southview is noted as`Buckthorn,Thistle—Overtaking Area". The applicants indicated further in their project narrative that most of the trees surrounding the pond were dead or rotting, and their removal was needed. The replacement plan is to provide a 10-foot wide layer of 3"to 7"river rock on top of landscape fabric around the perimeter of the pond. The rock will be held in place with new poly-landscape edging; and the surrounding areas where the old vegetation is removed will be replaced with grass seed mixture. The removal of the volunteer vegetation ring and preplacement of river rock will help with pond embankment stabilization, and provide a suitable views to the reflective/memorial pond feature. Upon completion of the new landscape and outer pond improvements, the cemetery will install a new fountain to prevent algae growth and improve the visual and aesthetic appearance of the pond for visitors. ANALYSIS Pursuant to City Code Section 12-2-3, the Wetland Systems ordinance applies to wetlands and water resource related areas, and to adjacent land within one hundred feet(100')of normal high water markers of wetlands and water resource related areas as delineated on the official city wetlands systems map. City Code Section 12-2-6 further states that any work or development upon or which would otherwise alter a wetland or potentially impact a water related resource area, must obtain a written permit from the city; with the list of activities noted as follows: 1. The deposit or removal of any debris,fill or other material over 100 cubic yards. 2. Any excavation over 100 cubic yards. 3. The digging, dredging,filling, or in any other way altering or removing any material from water bodies, watercourses, wetlands,floodplain, or natural drainage system. 4. The construction, alteration, or removal of any structure. 5. The removal of vegetation. 6. The altering of any embankment,ponding, or changing of the flow of water or ponding capacity. 7. Permanently storing materials. 8. Disposing of waste materials(including sewage,garbage, rubbish, and other discarded materials). Planning Case 2021-23(Resurrection Cemetery) Page 2 of 7 page 106 9. Installation and maintenance of essential services. The purpose of the Wetlands Systems Chapter of the City Code Title 12-2-1 is to: • Provide for protection,preservation, maintenance, and use wetlands and water resource-related areas; • Maintain the natural drainage system; • Minimize disturbance which may resultfrom alteration by earthwork, loss ofvegetation, loss ofwildlife and aquatic organisms as a result of the disturbance of the natural environment or from excessive sedimentation; • Provide for protection of potable fresh water supplies; and • Ensure safety from floods. The Surface Water Management Plan provides certain guidelines and suggested standards (not requirements) for the city to follow or implement when dealing with new development near natural water features. The SWMP recommends—but does not require a 25-foot no-disturbance/natural vegetative buffer zone from the wetland edge. This buffer is meant to provide an extra level or protection or natural means in preventing erosion run-off, for silt protection, and reducing any fertilizer or chemical runoff that may occur from adjacent residential lawns. Under this plan, the cemetery is not providing any new vegetative buffer, but instead plans to install and provide the 10-foot wide rock layer as its buffer, along with the replacement of turf grass. There are no plans or indications of any new plantings or trees to be installed under this pond improvement project. Per the Wetland Ordinance Section 12-2-7 Standards and Conditions: • Runoff from developed property and construction projects may be directed to the wetland only when reasonably free of silt and debris and chemical pollutants, and at such rates such as not to disturb wetland vegetation or increase turbidity. • No deleterious waste shall be discharged in a wetland or disposed of in a manner that would cause the waste to enter the wetland or other water resource area. • Removal of vegetation shall be permitted only when and where such work within the W district has been approved in accordance with the standards of this chapter. • Removal of vegetation within the W district but outside the wetland shall be limited to that reasonably required for the placement of structures and the use of property. The Applicants have indicated the removal of the vegetative ring surrounding the existing pond was necessary due to most of it being invasive plantings (buckthorn) and noxious weeds (thistles); and a small number of trees that were dead or rotting,probably due to the wet/saturated soils next to the pond. Although the Wetlands Ordinance does not specifically require the placement(or replacement)of a wetland buffers,it has normally been suggested in other wetlands permit review cases,that Owners should leave an area approximately 25-feet from the wetland/pond edge to be left undisturbed; or install (if needed or requested) suitable and sustainable vegetative plantings that provide a natural buffer to these wetlands. Vegetative buffers provide additional natural filters for any surface water runoff entering into the wetlands, and help increase overall water quality entering the pond. Although the rock layers and grass may provide some or even adequate runoff and buffering protection,the Planning Commission may wish to discuss with the cemetery owner or landscape contractors in providing some additional vegetation around the outer limits of the pond,besides turf grass,in order to help reduce any increased silt or fertilizer infiltration;and increase the water quality entering the pond. Planning Case 2021-23(Resurrection Cemetery) Page 3 of 7 page 107 ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the Wetlands Permit based on certain findings-of-fact, along with specific conditions of approval; or 2. Deny the Wetlands Permit based on revised finding(s)-of-facts supporting such a recommendation as determined by the Planning Commission; or 3. Table the request and direct staff to extend the application review period an additional 60 days,pursuant to MN State Statute 15.99. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested Wetlands Permit to Catholic Cemeteries and for the property located at 2101 Lexington Avenue South,which would allow certain pond embankment improvements and landscaping within 100-feet of a wetland,based on the attached findings-of-fact and subject to the following conditions: 1. Any grading and/or construction activity related to the pond improvement work shall be in compliance with applicable federal,state,and local regulations and codes,as well as in compliance with the City's Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 2. Full erosion/sedimentation measures shall be installed prior to commencement of work and maintained throughout the duration of the construction project. Erosion barriers shall be placed along the outer edges of the pond site and pond edge and remain place throughout the duration of the project and the surrounding lands have been properly restored. 3. The Applicant/Owner shall install new landscaping or plantings in and around the pond area with suitable plantings and materials consistent with the direction of the Planning Commission, with final buffer planting plan to be approved by the city's Natural Resources Technician. 4. Any new trees or landscaping material used under this wetlands permit plan must meet the city's list of Native Plantings and Pollinator Friendly trees and vegetation. 5. All disturbed areas in and around the project site shall be restored or have an established,protected and permanent ground cover immediately after the pond area improvements have been installed or completed. 6. Any new site construction or removal shall occur only between the hours of 7:00 am and 8:00 pm weekdays; and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm weekends. Planning Case 2021-23(Resurrection Cemetery) Page 4 of 7 page 108 FINDINGS-OF-FACT FOR APPROVAL Wetlands Permit for Existing Pond at Resurrection Cemetery 2101 Lexington Avenue South Planning Case No.2021-23 The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the proposed requests: 1. The requested pond embankment stabilization work and related landscaping work in and around the pond is a reasonable request for this very large and open cemetery property. 2. All new work should have very little,if any negative impacts to the existing on-site drainage or the drainage from the surrounding properties or areas. 3. Owner/Applicant will provide additional, suitable and adequate vegetation and plantings around the perimeter of the existing pond, which help ensures storm water run-off quality; and any soil and contaminant runoff is reduced or minimized from the subject property. Planning Case 2021-23(Resurrection Cemetery) Page 5 of 7 page 109 SITE PHOTOS - RESURRECTION CEMETERY Ilk w i r _ n : r m- � . Planning Case 2021-23 (Resurrection Cemetery) Page 6 of 7 i R o,. "eY W 4a y_ i d page 111 Resurrection Cemetery Pond Shoreline Project The purpose of the Resurrection Cemetery Pond Shoreline project is to create more usable space for the cemetery owners (Catholic Cemeteries), and improve user experience by opening up views across the cemetery. Upon completion of the project, Catholic Cemeteries plans to put a fountain in the pond to prevent algae growth and improve the experience for the many people that run/walk through the cemetery daily. The new design for the pond shoreline will also create a more aesthetic, and maintainable space for the cemetery. The vegetation surrounding the pond is currently comprised primarily of dead/rotting trees, buckthorn, and thistle. Our process after removing the existing vegetation would be to place 1,100 linear feet of silt logs along the shoreline to prevent soil erosion,then install a 10'wide strip of landscape fabric surrounding the pond. That fabric would be covered with 200 cubic yards of 3-7" river rock, installed at an average depth of 6". Poly landscape edging would be used to define the edge of the new shoreline. Outside of the new 10' shoreline, areas where vegetation was removed will be overseeded with a mix of Fescue, Ryegrass, and Kentucky Bluegrass at a rate of 5-7lbs per 1,000 square feet. The newly seeded areas will be covered with a netless erosion control blanket system to prevent soil erosion and seed runoff. After construction is complete,the silt logs will be removed from the water's edge. The grading/drainage of the area surrounding the pond will not be altered as part of this project. The construction process is expected to begin on 12/6/2021, and finish by 12/23/2021. page 112 ORIGINAL PLAN - DO NOT USE REFER to REVISED PLAN 01/18/2022 Exls- g Trees,no Neev - Treee to'oe,-adder Existing Concrete Sidewalk - � Existing!own 511--ogs Installed During ons'uctlo to Pont Soil Erosion tiistl-g No.^.umen- Pond xistlnq A ae-atla^with, this Area o oe 2e�oveu vertokrg Area) -Iceded wi ..,Ixof Fe ..,.e,and G ec with ti tless Erc_=icn tral al.nket i 3 Rlver RocK on Top Landscape of Landscape Fabric.10' Edging Wide Perimeter Around �''aters Edge Tayl r Wald =zo Resurrection Cemetary 2383 Piloi Knob Rd Proposed Landscape Plan - "gyghts MN55120 t P 65 2°3J°aa S(lk{TH 2101 Lexington Ave.S. so.e5�acesia�o°m °tee Mendota Heights,MN,55120 ■:1 ••• lixn�nm n r..lxnlu.n 1=- _.11 xIIINII lIINIINI=_Illlxll 1�1_ 111 =_a::: _= J Nil III nl■IINIIIII ■HIIIIIIII HIIIIII■111 —�1 ■ ■ —�I I Ixlllllllllll Inl Ih': 111 NIIIINIIIIIIINIINn IIIIIIIII■1 'Eli II 11111■II 111111111111 IIIIIN xlxxxlxxxlp111111HIId ilk■�■ IININIINI INIININNIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIINI■11111111 Illlnll�l IIIIIIIINIIIINNII—_—_ .1--2 1� I ■ 111111 NINNNI IIIn1lNllll1111 111■11111111 IIIINIIIII 1111,1 llm 11111 lmilllllll xenon mnnnnomHlln an �F7. on nxnn mnnlNll I�IINlllxnn n nxnn IInN■I 1111 nxl IIIIx11Nll■NIIIIIII HIIIII■ 1111111 ==• � N1J..I —I ■ ---• — In■ �N{ilNxinnlxN I xulxl�n.. Ix nxnn nnm■ nn■-�Imnm=_°■ III II ■■11111J�1.1 x ::: 1=. r �..� ■■■■.II I Iliiial:llll nm 11!111. ��' '�11�ti1■ '. c _Iw:�1 1 1!1'�� 'nm n '1 a� i��'• ��\ 'NIAI -1� �� °� " : �. :=f Isllf Ir �� � \�; IF 'loon■Zi �'--` � ', � n- s: aaT,' I �� � �+��C': C�iTi.l: � I■r x Y- lillra ■■ r 1� e==11■ �— ■ li'�ile 1 1■ �-�: \�\t I ■:_I o Imo. m=1 ■ ter- ■ =����j`a : r . 11 •1 y. ■ f �`C'■� r ■11 ram" .�r NI - ii IN M1■ 1 • J �" _• ally' d■In ■ 1 nm' 1I "1 1 u. 1=:OMEN ■11 � - .a:ela: = larmq � 11 �;- ■�- ilk I Ili 1 I _ ... • 1 .• •• •y • •• ■■ I1 I I- Resurrection Cemetery - CONTOURS MAP page114 �• a.,,���tN�`.VE . w .�2ol co r 8� D ;860> cc` 0-0 960, -�- I December 14, 2021 1:4,800 0 225 450 900 ft 0 65 130 260 m Property Information Elevation Disclaimer:Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate,but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal,survey,or for zoning verification. Resurrection Cemetery- SOILS ID MAP page 115 a w a CULL■EN AUE w r'. WA pN WNEEL TRL ry H 4, J — t, i w ^"4 , i IG a i a� a r � r rx� 1 Crystal Lake silt loam, 1 to 8 percent slopes 3 Water 2 Udorthents,wet 4 Waukegan silt loam,0 to 2 percent slopes Disclaimer:Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. Map Scale This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or 1 inch=400 feet for zoning verification. 12/14/2021 page116 B) PLANNING CASE 2021-23 SOUTHVIEW DESIGN/CATHOLIC CEMETERIES, 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH—WETLANDS PERMIT Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that Southview Design, acting on behalf of Catholic Cemeteries is seeking approval of a Wetlands Permit to allow new landscaping and pond embankment improvements in Resurrection Cemetery. 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 approval of this application based on the findings and with conditions. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Taylor Wald, Southview Design/applicant, commented that he was contacted by Resurrection Cemetery for the project, and it was explained that the pond was manmade. He stated that the property owner stated that there was once turf grass up to the pond and over time that maintenance to the edge stopped which is when the native species and buckthorn began to grow. He stated that after reviewing the site many willows were rotting and the vegetation was not in good condition, which is why it was removed. He stated that they planned to use riprap but was open to other suggestions that should be considered. Commissioner Katz asked whether the cemetery would be willing to invest in a low growing native plant buffer around the pond. Mr. Wald confirmed that could be considered but believed rock should still be used for stability along the edge. Commissioner Corbett asked for clarity on the reference to the manmade pond. He asked if there would have been hesitation to remove vegetation if the pond were not manmade. Mr. Wald explained that it was his understanding that if the pond were manmade there would be lesser regulations related to buffer work. Commissioner Katz asked when they would be resuming work. Mr. Wald replied that they would begin work again in spring of 2022,perhaps April. Commissioner Petschel asked if the applicant is willing to commit to a 25-foot buffer around the pond. December 28, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 11 of 16 page117 Mr. Wald commented that he would be open to it but would need to verify with the cemetery. Commissioner Petschel commented that he believes there would be a requirement for that 25-foot buffer. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the City has adopted the PCA's recommended buffer distances. He explained that those are recommendations rather than buffers. He stated that the City does want a 15-to-25-foot buffer around ponds, although that is not required. He commented that he believes that there was wetland that was excavated into the pond in 1978 and therefore the City would view this as a constructed stormwater pond. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that the City has requested or held a 25-foot buffer standard as a suggestion, but it is not a requirement through ordinance. Commissioner Lorberbaum commented that the Commission could recommend a 25-foot buffer. Chair Field stated that it is unfortunate that the property owner is not present. Commissioner Toth asked when the work would start. Mr. Wald commented that the removal is completed,and the work would begin in March or April. Commissioner Toth asked why the disturbance occurred when it did as there is now no buffer protection. He asked if there was discussion to complete the work in segments. Chair Field explained that the applicant believed that this was a manmade pond and not a wetland. Mr. Wald explained that this was planned to be a two-week project to be wrapped up by Thanksgiving, but they did receive a stop order. Commissioner Johnson commented that the City's Surface Water Management Plan includes a policy for wetlands to have an average 15-foot buffer of vegetation and asked for clarity. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that those policies are related to protected wetlands. He stated that staff views this as a constructed stormwater pond. Commissioner Johnson referenced the Land Disturbance Guidance document which states that seeding around ponds should be the MnDOT standard. She stated that if the applicant were to comply it would seem the seed mix or equivalent would need to be planted. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek confirmed that would be the preference of staff. Chair Field asked if Mr. Wald would be comfortable with the Commission recommending the prescribed buffer. December 28, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 12 of 16 page118 Mr. Wald believed that would be acceptable. Commissioner Corbett commented that if the cemetery did not agree, it could come back to request a change or could choose not to move forward with the project. Chair Field stated that the alternative would be to table to allow Mr. Wald to go back to the cemetery to discuss the buffer and then come back to the next Commission meeting. Mr. Wald asked if the recommendation would be to not do the rock around the pond at all. Chair Field replied that he is unsure that is the recommendation and asked staff for clarification. Community Development Director Tim Benetti commented that the ten-foot rock layer could stay with a 15-foot planted buffer of the MnDOT seed mix. He stated that if the cemetery has an issue, they could come to the Council meeting to provide input or could call staff to request that the matter go back to the Planning Commission. Chair Field stated that would allow a failsafe for the cemetery. Commissioner Johnson referenced the fountain and noted that traditionally while fountains can be aesthetically pleasing,they do not solve the environmental problem that is attempting to be solved in algae prevention/elimination. Mr. Wald commented that it is his understanding that the fountain was for aesthetic purposes and to attempt to address the algae. He stated that he did communicate to the cemetery that the fountain will help with algae, but other measures would be necessary as well. Commissioner Johnson asked if the ten-foot rock buffer is an aesthetic desire as well. Mr. Wald replied that aesthetics is part of that decision, but it also helps with maintenance. He stated that the water level rises and falls as well, which was a factor for the rocks. Commissioner Johnson commented that the plants on the edge of the water are needed to keep the pond clean. She asked if they would be willing to reassess the ten-foot rock buffer in order to improve the water quality of the pond, which eventually flows to other bodies of water. Mr.Wald commented that he believes the cemetery would be open to that if that is what is required. He noted that would most likely be similar to what existed previously and commented that he believes the cemetery wanted to have more open space and utilize the space around the pond and keep those views open. Seeing no one further coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER LORBERBAUM MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CORBETT, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. December 28, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 13 of 16 page119 AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Corbett stated that he would like to have discussion related to what is required and what is suggested. He stated that it would appear the mix would be required. Commissioner Petschel asked to what degree the Land Disturbance Guidance document constitutes a requirement of Code. He noted that those are specified as guidelines rather than rules. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that the document is codified and therefore any disturbance activities do need to follow that document. He stated that the buffers are not well defined as being a requirement. He stated that they would be asking for a wetland seed mix in the disturbed areas around the pond. He stated that staff would prefer a 25-foot vegetative buffer with the seed mix but stated that he cannot find within the Code that it would be enforceable. Commissioner Corbett stated that the seed mix is stipulated as a requirement for disturbed areas, but the distance of the buffer is not required. He stated that a condition should be used stating that the seed mix should be used in the disturbed areas at minimum. He was unsure what could be required above that. Commissioner Petschel asked if the river rock is prohibited. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek did not believe that was prohibited. Commissioner Johnson commented that she was unsure if a riprap buffer would be allowed prior to the plantings under the other noted sources. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted that riprap has been used for streams and ponds and do work for that purpose. Commissioner Corbett asked for clarification on the concern with the river rock versus the plantings in that area. Commissioner Johnson stated that the plants assist with water quality, which will result in a less green pond and will provide higher quality water flowing to other bodies of water. Commissioner Petschel asked how the pond is connected to the lake. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that the pond has three stormwater inlets and has an outlet system that flows to the north and connects to a culvert which goes to the lake. Commissioner Johnson commented that the pond is receiving water from the property and additional water flowing in, which supports the need for a vegetative buffer. December 28, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 14 of 16 page120 Commissioner Lorberbaum asked how much of a difference there is between what was proposed by the applicant versus what Commissioner Johnson is suggesting and whether it would be more beneficial for this to come back to the Commission. Commissioner Johnson confirmed that she is suggesting something significantly different. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek commented that the applicant did try to fast track the project as they believed a permit was not required. He stated that because the work is not planned to resume until April,perhaps the best course of action would be to go back to the cemetery to further discuss the concerns mentioned tonight. Commissioner Corbett commented that it does not seem like there is an urgency to make contingent approvals tonight. He asked if Commissioner Johnson would be requesting no river rock and a larger setback. Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that she would prefer to see a collaboration rather than drastically changing what has been proposed. Chair Field stated that Mr. Wald certainly has the input from the Commission tonight to bring back to the cemetery. COMMISSIONER KATZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, TO TABLE THE REQUESTED WETLANDS PERMIT TO CATHOLIC CEMETERIES AND FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2101 LEXINGTON AVENUE SOUTH, AND DIRECT THE APPLICANT TO WORK WITH NATURAL RESOURCES STAFF TO DEVELOP A NATIVE PLANT BUFFER THAT ALIGNS WITH THE GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AND LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF WATER QUALITY. FURTHER DISCUSSION: COMMISSIONER CORBETT ASKED IF THE REQUESTED MIX WOULD SATISFY THE PROGRESSIVE ENVIRONMENT DESIRED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. CHAIR FIELD STATED THAT DOES NOT NEED TO BE SOLVED TONIGHT. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON STATED THAT THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF BUFFERS THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED AND MAY BE MORE SUITABLE FOR THE CEMETERY, WHICH IS WHY SHE DID NOT STIPULATE THE MnDOT MIX. COMMISSIONER TOTH STATED THAT MANY THINGS WERE DISCUSSED TONIGHT, BUT THERE IS A STORMWATER POND THAT IS OPEN RIGHT NOW. HE ASKED IF SILT FENCING SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PRESERVE TOPSOIL FROM RUNNING INTO THE POND. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RYAN RUZEK COMMENTED THAT IF 5,000 SQUARE FEET HAS BEEN DISTURBED, THE CITY'S LAND DISTURBANCE REQUIREMENTS WOULD December 28, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 15 of 16 page 121 BE TRIGGERED. HE NOTED THAT THE PLAN OUTLINED EROSION CONTROL MEASURES BUT WAS UNSURE IF THOSE HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. CHAIR FIELD STATED THAT STAFF CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THE CEMETERY ON THAT ELEMENT. CHAIR FIELD STATED THAT HE WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THE MOTION AS HE BELIEVES THERE ARE TOO MANY ISSUES LUMPED INTO THE MOTION. HE AGREED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE TABLED, BUT WITHOUT THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. AYES: 6 NAYS: 1 (Chair Field) Chair Field noted that this item will come back to the Planning Commission at its January 25,2022 meeting for continued review. He asked if the 60-day review should be extended. Community Development Director Tim Benetti confirmed that the City can extend the 60-day review if necessary. He confirmed that he would handle that action administratively. NewlUnfinished Business Community Development Director Tim Benetti gave the following verbal review: • The City has Piled an appeal on the Culligan versus Mendota Heights ruling to the State Appellate Court • Appointment of Chair and Vice-Chair will occur at the next meeting • Reappointments were accepted for Commissioners Petschel, Toth and Katz Adjournment COMMISSIONER TOTH MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:52 P.M. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 December 28, 2021 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting Page 16 of 16 page 122 9b. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 651.452.8940 fax ,�, www.mendota-heights.com CITY OF t MENDDTA HEIGHTS f ,"J REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 15,2022 TO: Mayor Levine and City Council; City Administrator Jacobson FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution No.2022-15 Approving a Conditional Use Permit to Amend Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development for Phase III/79-Unit Apartment Development [ref. Planning Case No. 2021-13 /At Home Apartments] INTRODUCTION City Council is asked to give consideration of Resolution No.2022-15,which would approve a conditional use permit(CUP) authorizing an amendment to the Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development. This draft resolution pertains only to the Phase III/79-Unit apartment project proposed by At Home Apartments. BACKGROUND The proposed development is identified as Phase III/Lot 7 of Mendota Plaza. Phase III is scheduled to take place on the 2.04 acre vacant parcel located behind the Plaza's main mall building and South Plaza Drive.This development is planned to be a four story apartment building,with no more than 79-living units. At the August 24t1i and October 26'1i meetings, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission conducted two separate public hearings on this proposed apartment development; and after considerable discussion, recommended to deny(by 6-1 vote)Planning Case No. 2021-13,with findings-of-fact. At the November 3,2021 city council meeting,this proposal(along with Planning Case 2021-12)were both presented to the city council for consideration. The Council subsequently took action approving Planning Case 2021-12; however,due to the late hour, elected to postpone and table further discussion on Planning Case No. 2021-13 to the November 16,2021 City Council meeting. After additional tablings,this item was presented for final consideration at the February 2,2022 city council meeting. Following additional comments and testimony from the Developer and the general public, a motion was offered by Councilor Paper, seconded by Councilor Mazzitello to approve Planning Case No. 2021-13, which passed by a 3-1 vote in favor (Mayor Levine, Councilors Paper, Mazzitello — yay / Councilors Miller—nay). The Council then directed city staff and the city attorney to prepare a draft resolution with certain conditions and findings-of-facts supporting said approval,to be brought back for final consideration at this meeting. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council may consider adopting the draft Resolution No. 2022-15 as presented, with findings-of fact and conditions memorialized in the draft document. These findings have been carefully prepared by city staff and the City Attorney for council's final consideration on this planning case item. The city council may choose to accept these findings or modify accordingly prior to taking any final action of adopting this resolution. Any motion or action to adopt this resolution requires a simple majority vote. page123 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2022-15 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AMEND THE 2009 MENDOTA PLAZA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT— FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO LOT 7,BLOCK 1,MENDOTA PLAZA EXPANSION ADDITION [PLANNING CASE NO. 2021-13] WHEREAS At Home Apartments, LLC ("At Homes" or "Applicant" or"Developer") in cooperation with Mendota Mall Associates, LLC (Paster Properties and as "Owner") has applied for a conditional use permit to amend the 2009 Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development(PUD) —Final Development Plan, in order to develop a new 79-unit apartment building known as Phase III/Lot 7, as proposed under Planning Case 2021-13 (the "Project") and for the 2,04 acre vacant parcel generally located behind The Mendota Plaza Mall building,north of South Plaza Drive and east of South Plaza Way, legally described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS the conditional use permit to amend the PUD as presented herein would authorize the construction of a 136,036 square foot apartment building with four stories,containing no more than 79-units; and WHEREAS the Mendota Heights Planning Commission took this matter up initially at their regular meeting of August 24,2021,whereby the commission heard comments and testimony under a public hearing on this matter, and continued this matter to the October 26, 2021 regular meeting, whereby the commission heard additional comments and testimony from the Developer and general public, and upon closing the hearing and follow-up discussion on this item, the Planning Commission recommended denial (by 6-1 vote) of the conditional use permit to amend the 2009 Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development, with certain findings-of-fact supporting said recommendation of denial: and WHEREAS on November 3, 2021, the Mendota Heights City Council held a regular meeting to initially discuss action on determining Planning Case 2021-13, and after receiving additional comments and testimony from the Developer and general public, elected to table this matter to the November 16, 2021 meeting; and WHEREAS, at the November 16, 2021 City Council meeting, the Developer requested the City Council table the vote on their[original]Phase III/89-unit apartment proposal to a meeting in January, 2022, whereby the Developer agreed to work with a council workgroup comprised of two councilmember (Councilors Duggan and Mazzitello)to work with the Developer and discuss certain modifications to the size and scope of the proposed Phase III apartment project; and WHEREAS, on December 13,2021,the City hosted a public engagement meeting inviting the general public to attend and offer comments, concerns, suggestions or ideas to the Developer regarding their Phase III plan,which included(but not solely limited to)building size,walkability Res. No. 2022-1 S Page I of 7 page 124 of the development site and throughout the Plaza area, additional green space of the site and throughout the Plaza area, and traffic flow in/out of and throughout the Plaza area; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 2021 the Developer and the Owner met with the council work group and city staff to discuss suggested revisions to the Phase III Project plans, which included: A. Provide for more green space by a)redistributing,reducing or eliminating(outdoor) parking; and b) moving the building to the east; B. Establish setbacks from adjacent curb lines (rather than the property line) of 15-25 feet, with the clarification that the setback did not need to be the same all the way around the building; C. Adjust building size by a) considering a 3-story building; b) reducing the number of units to a total closer to 60 units,and c)reducing the overall height of the building by removing the proposed fourth floor or"push"the building deeper in the ground; D. That suggestions and ideas for changes to the Mendota Plaza were being made separate from the At Home Apartments, LLC Phase III/Lot 7 application; and over the course of the public input process for the At Home Apartments housing proposals, residents and the City Council expressed a desire for: a) additional greenspace/community space within the [mall's] north parking area; b) additional native plantings, benches, walking paths and educational signage within the site, thus reducing hardscape; and c) improvements to traffic patterns and traffic flow; and E. The City has committed to studying,in partnership with MNDOT, Dakota County and residents, the larger resident complaint of traffic on Hwy. 62 and Hwy. 149/Dodd Road. A Traffic Solutions Committee will be established to review this issue. WHEREAS the Mendota Heights City Council wishes to adopt written findings-of-fact in support of the motion to approve Planning Case No. 2021-13, consistent with Minn. Stat. § 15.99; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the conditional use permit(CUP to amend the 2009 Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development(PUD) —Final Development Plan as proposed under Planning Case No. 2021-13, is hereby approved with the following findings of fact: 1) The proposed amendment to the 2009 Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development Final Development Plan is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the Project is consistent with the City's goal to provide a range of housing options to enhance the opportunity for people of all generations and in all stages of life to reside in the City of Mendota Heights. Currently,the City contains mostly high-end and mid-range valued single-family homes; and this Project provides much needed multi-family housing stock, consistent with the stated goal of the Comprehensive Plan. The Project is designed to provide more affordable Res. No. 2022-1 S Page 2 of 7 page125 units with smaller square footage and high-end amenities,but it will be available to people of all generations. 2) The Project enhances the City's stated goal in the Comprehensive Plan of sustainability. The Project promotes sustainability and resilience by utilizing design features such as a solar arrays on roof, low flow toilets and showerheads, and single-metered water for each residential unit to encourage conscientious use of water. The Project includes energy-efficient appliances, poured concrete, and adequate insulation. The parking is contained within the envelope of the building to reduce the impervious surface of the apartment building and grounds. The Project provides for added green space and landscaping to include pollinator friendly gardens and native trees. 3) The proposed amendment to the 2009 Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development Final Development Plan is consistent with the applicable City Code requirements for such a development in the Mixed Use-PUD zoning district. 4) The Project falls within the density range of 21 —30 units/acre,which is consistent with the density for a MU-Mixed Use land category in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The City Council specifically accepts and adopts the density calculation as presented in the Planning Reports dated July 27, 2021, August 24, 2021, and October 26,2021,all of which were presented to the Planning Commission on those respective dates, and also the Council Memo Packet Report and information provided in the February 2, 2022 council packet, which included a density calculation provided in the presentation to the City Council at the February 2, 2022 meeting, all of which are hereby fully incorporated into the approval of this Resolution. 5) The Project will be an effective and unified treatment of the existing development within the established PUD. 6) Financing for this proposed development is available and will be provided by the developer with certain conditions between the developer and their lender, and in an amount sufficient to assure completion of the proposed apartment development, which will contribute to the completion of the overall planned unit development in this MU-PUD district area. 7) The Project utilizes the flexibility of the planned unit development and other zoning standards to enhance the development of the property, without negatively impacting surrounding land uses and natural resources. 8) The design of the Project provides reasonable building and parking lot setbacks and a reasonable number of parking stalls. In particular,the Project provides 21 surface parking spaces and 125 underground (interior) spaces, for a total of 146 spaces. This provides a ratio of 1.85 parking spaces/unit, which is consistent with other apartment uses in the Mixed Use district. Res. No. 2022-15 Page 3 of 7 page126 9) The approved parking ratio of 1.85 spaces per unit serves to encourage more open space on this site; and helps reduce impervious surfaces. 10) The building and parking setbacks, building architecture and design, building height and scale, unit sizes and numbers,parking numbers, greenspace,public and private park and/or outdoor space improvements,impervious surface coverage, and the overall density of this development as presented with the Phase III Mendota Heights Apartments Project Plans (dated 01/24/2022 and presented to the City Council on 02/02/2022), does not pose any threat to the general health, safety and welfare of the surrounding properties,nor diminishes the usefulness of the planned development of this property. 11) The Project is not excessive compared to the originally planned development for the site, which is located proximate to roads with substantial capability to accommodate traffic generated by the Project. Based upon the traffic analysis prepared for this application,the proposed development will generate fewer vehicle trips or daily traffic entering/leaving this area than the original proposed commercial childcare center development previously proposed in the 2009 PUD. This 79-unit apartment building is estimated to increase traffic by 428 vehicles on Dodd Road; yet this predicted increase in traffic is minimal and will not adversely affect public safety or the general welfare. 12) The Project adequately provides sidewalks to enhance walkability for future residents of the 79-unit apartment building to encourage residents to access nearby retail and commercial areas on foot. 13) Construction of the proposed high-density residential development will contribute to a significant amount of the Metropolitan Council's Year 2040 forecasted population and household increases. 14) The proposed apartment development use occurs in a residential "Focus Area" identified in the city's 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and therefore is in character with other surrounding uses in this mixed-use commercial and high density residential project area, and the new residents projected for this site will help support and contribute to the economic sustainability of the surrounding retail and commercial uses. 15) The Sixth Amendment to the Planned Unit Development Agreement dated November 2016 provides that Section 3.2 is deleted in its entirety as it relates to the Mendota Plaza Expansion Second Addition, which includes this Project. Section 3.2 governed the timeframe in which the development must be completed. Since 3.2 was deleted in its entirety, there is currently no completion deadline in place, and accordingly, there is no timeframe limitation that prevents City Council from approving this Project. Furthermore, City Council has the authority to adjust the deadlines for development projects consistent with the City Code. Res. No. 2022-15 Page 4 of 7 page127 16) The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject to this land use request, including a deadline for completion of the Project. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact created by the conditional use permit. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the conditional use permit to amend the 2009 Mendota Plaza Planned Unit Development, as proposed under Planning Case 2021-13, is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall draft appropriate amendments to the existing Development Agreement required by approval of the proposed project, to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and approved by the City Council. 2. Any new final building plan approved under this PUD Amendment shall be constructed only in conformance to the PUD Plans approved by the city council; and all approved building and site must be certified by a registered architect and engineers (as applicable); and in accordance with all architectural and building standards found under Title 12-1E-8, Subpart F "Architectural Controls" and Subpart G— Structural, Electrical and Mechanical Requirements. 3. Any drainage and utility easement or any other easements that may be impacted by the physical placement of the new apartment structure or other improvements must be vacated and re-established/dedicated as necessary,per the direction of the Public Works Director. 4. All new signage must comply with the sign standards in the Mendota Heights Plaza PUD Agreement. 5. A park dedication fee of $4,000/residential unit shall be paid at time of building permit approval. 6. Rooftop mechanical units shall be of a low profile variety. All ground-level and rooftop mechanical utilities, other than low profile rooftop units, shall be completely screened with one or more of the materials used in the construction of the principal structure, to be reviewed by the Planning Department and verified as part of the building permit review process. 7. A final landscape plan shall be submitted to the City and reviewed by the city's Natural Resources Coordinator and Community Development Director for approval; and all new trees and plant material shall be designed to comply with the city's pollinator friendly and native plantings policy; all landscaped areas shall be irrigated; and plants used to provide an effective screening element for building utility areas. 8. A performance bond or letter of credit shall be supplied by the applicant in an amount equal to at least one and one-half(1'/2) times the value of such screening, Res. No. 2022-15 Page 5 of 7 page128 landscaping, or other improvements, to be included as part of the Development Agreement. 9. The owner, tenant and their respective agents shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris. Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site or landscape plan and which have died shall be replaced as soon as seasonal or weather conditions allow. 10. The proposed water system shall be designed and constructed to Saint Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS) standards. 11. All grading and construction activities as part of the proposed development shall be in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the City's Land Disturbance Guidance Document. 12. Building and grading permits shall be obtained from the City prior to commencement of any construction. 13. All applicable fire and building codes, as adopted/amended by the City, shall apply and the buildings shall be fully-protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system and other fire safety measures or improvements as determined by the city's Fire Marshal and/or Building Official. 14. The building permit for the new 79-unit apartment building (Phase III/Lot 7) will not be issued or approved until completion of Phase 11—58-Unit Apartments by the Developer. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 15th day of February, 2022. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Mayor Stephanie Levine ATTEST Lorri Smith, City Clerk Res. No. 2022-1 S Page 6 of 7 page129 EXHIBIT A Legal Description PID No. 27-48401-01-070 Lot 7, Block 1, Mendota Plaza Expansion Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights,MN 55118 Res. No. 2022-15 Page 7 of 7 page 130 From: Kate Christensen To: Cheryl Jacobson Subject: Re: Public Comment on At Home Apartment Proposal or Public Comment on Planning Case 2021-13 Date: Wednesday,February 9,2022 3:44:31 PM Hello Cheryl, Correction: the deadline for making the 2/2/22 Council packet was 1/26/22. Thank you. Kate Christensen On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 9:44 AM Kate Christensen >wrote: Hello Cheryl, Per your instruction in the Jan 5 email, I am submitting the following to be included in the current Council packet or the 2/2/22 Council Meeting Minutes (whichever is appropriate) so it is part of the public record. Given that the details of the new 2021-13 apartment proposal were not publically available for analysis until the Feb 2 Council Agenda was available in the Friday, Jan. 28 Council Agenda email, I was unable to meet the publication deadline (2/26/22) as it had already past. I sent the file to all the City Council members on Feb 1 and "testified" at the Feb 2 Council meeting. Thank you Kate Christensen page 131 Input from Kate Christensen Summary: 79 unit apartment proposal compared to 89 unit apartment proposal. • Building size (footprint) is the same, still 3 times/ 184%greater than the PUD approved Daycare • Building height is same however it is 4 feet deeper in the ground. The height is still 300% higher than the neighbors and the PUD approved daycare. • Impervious surface has gone up. Removed was the parking lot, exterior parking spots. Added were sidewalks, longer driveway entrance, a larger patio, a dog run, southside perimeter retaining wall, and a "pocket park". This is a Net Add to the impervious surface of the lot. • Green space has gone down. • Landscaping—GreenStep model. There is a reduction of the number of trees on the site from the last proposal. Included is only 19%of the recommended trees moving MH further from the point of claiming to be a GreenStep city. • Added for the public? A"pocket park"which is directly across from the plaza loading dock/zone and garbage bays. Hardly what the residents of MH asked for. • Goes against several chapters in the Comp Plan. • Many other codes and ordinances are deviated from. • 6 of 7 Planning Commissions voted against the proposal presented to the Council 11/16/21. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phase III Lot 7 Size Lot 7 is specified as 2.04 acres, but it includes 19,134 sq ft (p172 11/16/21 Council Agenda) of the perimeter roadways. The roads make up 21.6%of the"lot". Therefore, the buildable lot is actually 69,546 sq ft of land or 1.6 acres (1.5965). 1.6 acres of buildable land is considerably smaller than Phase II land and the Phase III building is larger. Additionally, the lot size directly abuts to the back of the plaza which consists of two garbage collection bays, the loading dock, 1 office entry, and back entry into Teresa's complete with empty beer kegs. This smaller buildable lot size impacts setbacks, building Coverage, Landscaping, impervious space, green space,walkability . . . Building The proposed apartment is- 28,747 sq ft(unknown if this includes clubhouse & porch). Coverage The building coverage is the building size divided by the buildable lot size. How much of the 28,747/69,546 =41.33% -which is above the Mendota Plaza Design standard of no lot does the more than 40%. (p316- 11/16/21 Council Agenda) building cover? The building is too big for the lot. The solution asked for was to reduce the footprint of the building. Building Much attention has been given to traffic and the daily trips that will be generated by the Coverage tenants in the apartment building. (p328, ps333-348, ps348-352—11/16/21 Council Agenda and Comparison - ps 143-146 2/2/22 Council Agenda). The developer has justified and presented that the apartment traffic will generate substantially fewer daily trips than the formerly approved Comparison of Daycare and the Daycare traffic would have had "significantly'greater peak hour trips. what was originally They compare what had been approved Daycare (under PUD contract)to what is being approved to the Phase III 79-unit proposed (89-unit apartment). 1 page 132 apartment proposal The same comparison should be made for building size—Compare what had been approved -the Daycare building size-to what is being proposed—79-unit 4 story apartment building size. The Daycare was to be 10,130 sq ft. The 79-unit apartment building is 28,747 sq ft. The apartments proposal is nearly 3 times, or 184%larger,than what was approved for the site. This does not include the additional infrastructure needed— parking, sidewalks that a much larger building requires. Conclusion: This proposal is far bigger than the intent of prior MH planning/approved PUD amendment. This extreme size goes beyond PUD flexibility. Proposed solution was to Reduce the size of the building to a maximum of 15,000 sq ft. Building Height The Phase III building is 4/5 story midrise apartment-5 stories garage elevations. (p245 11/16/21 Council Agenda) -The building was 59 feet tall to the top of the parapet. ( p 245 11/16/21 Council Packet) -The developer indicated the new proposal is the same height but 4 feet deeper in the ground. The height is indicated as 48 feet. (p133-2/22/22 packet). The math here is . . . questionable. Lower the building 4 feet from 59 to 48??? -On page 168 of the 2/2/22 council packet is the answer to the mystery. The developer started counting from the bottom at 89 rather than 100. So let's just do easy math. - The proposed apartment building is 4 stories. - All neighboring buildings except one are 1 story tall. Therefore the building is 4 times or 300%taller than the neighbors. - It is a minimum of 2 stories taller than the only multi-story neighbor- the MH Exec Center,which is 2 stories. It is still 2 times taller and 100% taller. The upper floor units will have a view of all the mechanics on the top of the mall and the other buildings. Conclusion: The building height is an outlier in the area. It is NOT a unifying size for the surrounding area. It will stick out like a wind turbine in a country wheat field. The building is too tall for the area. Proposed solution was to Reduce the height by 1-2 stories. Building Height When convenient, the developer referred to past approved PUD amendments. Comparison (Reference At Home traffic study—(p328, ps333-348, ps348-352—11/16/21 Council Agenda and ps 143-146 2/2/22 Council Agenda). Therefore, it makes sense to compare building Comparison of height to what had been approved in past PUD amendments. what was originally approved to the A one-story Daycare building was approved in the past. The new apartment proposal is 4 Phase III 89-unit apartment proposal stories. This is 4 times taller or 300% higher than the last approved PUD amendment for the Daycare. Conclusion: This tall building is clearly not what was envisioned and approved by former city councils while approving the last amendment to the PUD. It is too tall. The 2 page 133 developer was given the opportunity reduce the height and didn't. Impervious Impervious surface for the lot was calculated two ways. Surface 1. Measuring all the impervious surfaces p151 from 2/2/22 Council Agenda. 2. Measure the pervious surface using a calibrated estimation tool on PFD's. The site rendering on p163 2/2/22 Council Agenda was used. It does not show all pervious items such as retaining walls so those were added in. Bottom line: Both calculations are above the the Mixed use PUD approved allowable impervious surface of up to 75%. Impervious calculation is 80.2%. Pervious calculation was 22%. (not exactly the some because 2 separate measuring methods) My calculations show there is a 4009 sq ft net add to the impervious surface of the lot. That equals 71124 sf of impervious surface which is 80.2%of the overall lot. This is considerably above (5.2%) the Mixed use PUD approved allowable impervious surface of up to 75% This is a concrete jungle. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: I asked city staff to provide the impervious surface calculation from the developer? The percentages given in the report are not helpful when trying to do the due diligence and validate the numbers." Unfortunately,the response contained the only verbiage from the report. The percentages and numbers given by the developer didn't feel right to me so I set about calculating the change as closely as possible. Below are my calculations. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This lot is 88,680 Sq ft. The original proposal had 67,115 Sq ft of impervious surface on this lot. That is 75.7% impervious land -above 2008 PUD approved 75%. (p172&p184 11/16/21 Council packet) I needed to use the 67,115 sf as the starting number for calculating. Impervious Surface Removed Sq Ft East Parking Lot&Entrance 5396 South Exterior parking spots(9) 153 Sidewalks(will be replaced) 2898 Total Impervious Surface Removed 8447 Impervious Surface Added Scl Ft Perimeter sidewalk 6264 Entrance sidewalk 239 Dog run sidewalk 514 Garage Entrance 1606 Dog Run 1848 Pocket Park 432 Curbs-westside 614 Retaining walls S&W 344 Patio Game pad 595 Total Impervious Surface Added 12456 Net Impervious Surface Change 3 page 134 Total Impervious Surface Added 12456 Total Impervious Surface Removed 8447 Net Impervious Surface Add 4009 Total Impervious Surface Sq Ft Original imp. surf. 67115 Minus Imp Surface Removed 8447 Plus Imp Surface Added 12456 Lot Impervious Surface 71124 Impervious of Total Lot 80.2% -------------------------------------------------------------------------- See spreadsheet for detailed calculations and assumptions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Solution suggested at 11/16 meeting and 12/14 community meeting: Reduce the footprint of the building to a maximum of 15,000 sq ft. This will require less surrounding parking, driveway etc which will, in turn, reduce impervious surface. Green Space Green space is the pervious space on a lot. My calculations show a green space to be 19.8%or 17,595 sf. This is a reduction from the last proposal. This is ridiculously low and environmentally irresponsible. The green space compared to the PUD approved Daycare. They Daycare is estimated to have 36,350 sq ft including building, parking, sidewalks, play area and perimeter roads. ( It was estimated because the final daycare site plans were never completed.) This is 41% impervious for the entire lot leaving 59%, 52,330 sq ft to Green Space. This is 40% more green space than the current apartment proposal. This proposal is far bigger than the intent of prior MH planning/approval. This extreme size goes leave little green space and goes beyond PUD flexibility. Landscaping/ The MH city council resolved to be a GreenStep city in March 2021. environment/ This proposal reduced the tree coverage over the last proposal by 60%which was already GreenStep City 70%shy of the model standard. This was mentioned in most of the 5 meetings discussing these @Home Apartments. This proposal is getting furtherfrom the GreenStep landscaping model in several areas including but not limited to Overstory trees and ornamental trees. MH code does not yet reflect the GreenStep landscaping model but, as has been pointed out, the MH code needs updating. The landscape plan for Lot 7 was reviewed by the master gardener. The GreenStep Model vs. the proposed Phase III landscaping plan is the following: GreenStep Model Phase III landscape %of GreenStep Recommendation plan recommended Overstory Tree 39 7 (down from 11) 18% 4 page 135 Ornamental Tree 39 8 (down from 14) 20% Evergreen 39 1 13 (down from 29) 33% The proposed Phase III plan contains only a fraction of the GreenStep model landscape recommendations. As a goal it was recommended 50%of the GS recommendation should be met-which is the Burnsville model. The current proposal has gotten further from meeting the GreenStep recommendations. Additionally, the model recommends a buffer (p212 of 11/16/21 council packet) between the building and the back of the existing retail building. The buffer should provide opaqueness of 80% during all seasons. There is NO buffer between the building and the mall. Overstory trees are key to GreenStep landscapes. These trees are needed for heat island mitigation, energy savings and stormwater mitigation. All the above are needed to protect our city environmentally and boost resiliency focused on in the MH 2O40 Comp Plan. Safety has been mentioned twice by the developer as a reason for fewer trees -Clear sight lines for traffic safety. The building should be smaller to allow for the right amount of trees— not fewer trees because the building is too big. Commitment: Is our city really committed to reducing our impact on the environment? It seems so. Fortunately,the MH city Council keeps it at the front of many discussions. Below are just of few of the numerous comments our Council has made in support of the environment/GreenStep/sustainability: 1/4/22—Mayor Levine while discussing the Centre Point Street improvement stated, "Anytime there is construction, she wants to ensure sustainability is considered as well." 9/9/21—Mayor Levine while discussing brine plow, noted it is great to see the city replacing equipment that is better for the environment." 3/2/21—Discussing GreenStep Model Mayor Levine- "Supportive of the program." Councilor Mazzitello - "Supportive of the program. " Councilor Paper—Expressed that this (GreenStep) program is worthwhile. Councilor Miller—Stated Comp Plan has chapter on resiliency and believed that this program GreenStep will be essential to implementing that chapter. 2/16/21—Councilor Paper—"shade is important for playgrounds. He suggested additional trees be planted. Councilor Miller agreed - more trees. 10/5—Mayor Levine- Reducing salt will help the environment!" 11/15- Mayor Levine—Noted only one KPI in Park and Rec Strategic Plan involved sustainability implying there should be more. Conclusion: MH made a commitment to be a GreenStep city—a resolution to protect the environment and a nod to the spacious and gracious city we strived to be. This is the second project after our commitment to GreenStep. The first project is Phase II and it has only 30%of the recommended plantings for the GreenStep model. This is not a good look for MH. Phase III needs to be much much closer to the model or our resolution is worth nothing. Phase III is NOT closer—it is further from the recommendations. Solution recommended at 11/16 and Community meeting.: This project needs to meet 5 page 136 50%specified planting of the GreenStep landscaping program recommendations. (Burnsville model). To do this the building needs to be smaller and the setbacks need to be met to allow for plantings. Walkability Needed sidewalks were added which increased the impervious surface. Suggested at earlier meetings was to reduce the footprint of the building to allow for sidewalks and green space. 2040 Comp This proposal does meet the Comp Plan goals for Chapter 2 Density, Chapter 5 lifecycle Plan housing, and Chapter 11 meeting future needs with a variety of housing products. However, it does NOT meet the Comp Plan for the following: • Chapter 7 Natural Resources -#4 Encourage and continually update priorities for sites including public parks and open space. • Chapter 7 Natural Resources -#10 Encourage and promote the use of conservation design principles -Goal 2 pollinator,#8 reduce and minimize impervious cover city wide • Chapter 8 Resilience -Opportunity for more tree cover for resilient community and promote open spaces. Recommended solution was: A smaller apartment that leaves enough space for sidewalks,trees, pollinator plantings, and a reduction of impervious space. This would meet goals in ALL the comp plan chapters mentioned above (not just chapters. 2,5,11). Density There doesn't seem to be a consensus on the correct density calculation. However, all agree that the density can be anywhere below 30 units per acre. Is the highest density possible under the flexibility of the PUD good for MH? Who benefits from this high density? The density on Lot 7 Phase III is 50 units per acre. The calculated density for all lots is 24 units per acre. The density for only the residential lots is 55 units per acre. Parcel Parcel Area- Residential Residential Net Acres Units Density Per Lot Lot 1—Walgreens 1.74 0 0 Lot 2-Mendota Plaza 6.14 0 0 Lot 3-White Pines 2.00 46 23.00 Lot,Block 1-Reserve 2-58 units 2.05 58 28.29 Lot 1,Block 2(The Reserves) 2.20 139 63.18 Lot 7-Proposed Phase III 1.59 acres 1.59 79 49.69 Lot 8-Gemini Medical 2.31 0 0. Total Net Acre 18.03 ac.@ 75%= 13.5375 Total Units(existing&proposed) 322 Total Density of entire site 23.78 24 units/acre Total Net Acre for Residential Lots 7.84 ac.@ 75%= 5.88 Total Density for Residential Lots 54.76 55 units/acre Solution: Choose a lower density allowed under the PUD flexibility. If the building size is reduced than the density will also go down. Traffic Traffic is the number one issue voiced by the MH residents and an issue has been identified by past traffic studies. However, at the council level it has been downplayed because MH can't do anything about it. A committee will be formed . . .at some point . . . to what end? I spoke with a Civil Engineering firm to an engineer—off the record - This is a firm that MH has consulted with in the past. We discussed, albeit briefly, the timing of a project of 6 page 137 this size. It will go through many phases—define, scope, design, safety review, approve, build, test results. A project like this would take a minimum of 3 years once kicked off and more likely 5 perhaps 5+years. This issue should not be summarily dismissed because we, MH, doesn't have full control of the roads. Other Because of the PUD, the City Council has the "flexibility'to override standards. To Ordinances/ approve this Phase III proposal, broad flexibility must be exercised on following standards: Standards • Density • Setbacks— Front/Side/Rear Yard and parking lot • Parking— length of stalls, number of parking spots, width of access drive into parking 2 feet less that code, ADA outside parking • Apartment Unit Size - many smaller than code. • GreenStep landscaping model standards- Pollinator Friendly—native plans - no neonics in plant material— native plants and sustainability • Land Area • Building Coverage • Impervious surface • Walkability • Traffic Why should MH accept deviations on so many standards? Are these not standards? How is this proposal good for MH? Questions Why is it not economically feasible to put a smaller 60 unit building on Lot 7 when a smaller 59 unit apartment was just approved? The developer should collect economies of scale when 3 building are so close and could all be managed together? "Pocket Park?" A slab of cement (at least in the perspective views) directly next to the Plaza loading dock and garbage bay. Who will actually use this? This does not provide any service to MH residents. Page 165 of the packet shows the porch. Page 160 shows planting on the porch? Vibrancy Vibrancy has been mentioned numerous times. Very little green space, high density, no additional services (restaurant, convenience store) are included in Phase III proposal. 2016 PUD Amendment included restaurant and shops (which were not built) —this is needed for vibrancy. This proposal asks for only more apartments and no other restaurant/shops. Density with no space or additional services is not vibrant. Tenants will have to go somewhere else for vibrancy as will MH residents. This proposal is not vibrant - it is just crowded. Fair and On 10/26, Mr. Paster stood before the Planning Commission and implored MH to be "fair Reasonable and reasonable". I contend that MH has been more than fair and reasonable. A PUD was created and has been amended now 9 times over 11 years. Proposals have been approved and not built. Now it is time for MH to be fair and reasonable to itself. MH doesn't need to be "flexible" or deviate from so many standards such as setbacks, parking, apartment size, walkability, GreenStep model, building coverage impervious coverage, green space, Overstory trees, and landscaping not to mention the potential impact to traffic. Resolution of This proposal should be denied. This developer has been given more than enough time to 7 page 138 this meeting— develop a solution that fits in this city. The solution was an appropriately sized housing 2/2/22 (apartment,townhouse, condo) GreenStep city compliant that MH can be proud of. MH has spent many meetings with the developer proposing a much smaller, shorter, walkable, GreenStep solution that is harmonious with the area and the environment. A development that has an amenity that MH residents can enjoy—a coffee shop, a brewpub, restaurant, greenspace, trees, . . . . something to generate a sense of community on the S side of 62. Unfortunately, this is the developers 3rd or perhaps 4tn strike. Deny this proposal. 8 2112122.3:34 PM Gmaii-Fwd:At Home Development ylGmal I Teresa Duggan<tosduggan@gmail.com> Fwd: At Home Development 2 messages Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gma}l.com> Fri,Feb 4, 2022 at 9:36 AM To:Teresa Duggan<tosduggan@gmaikcom> FYI. -S&A. from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Kelly Staples<kellystapleslaw@gmall.eom> Date:February 3,2022 at 11:18:03 AM MST Te:sfav}negmerrdettahefghtsrnn gov,jr #{i e t lentie�ta#�eigfittsrrtn.gorr,Bugg n:t�lfiars gr aji.ct , jpapera@mendotaheightsmn.gov,jmezzitello@mendotaheiglitsmn.gov Subject:At Home Development Mayor and Councilmembers: d�rYl�P�'��1ti�a resirdel�t t'if dieter Grr�ve Hefgl`tts f5t�t[-grew->:4p fl�Merideta He}g}�ts drid atte�tded school there. My parents still reside in Mendota Heights and operate a business there,and my in-laws reside in Mendota Heights as well. Because I live only a mile from the Mendota Heights border, I visit your city,your parks,and-your commercial-enterprises at-least-weekly. Uhave been following W-Home's proposaRo develop additional apartment buildings in Mendota Heights for the past several months,both because I believe it Is an important Issue that will have a long-lasting impact on Mendota Heights and surrounding .P�� pArAL&..g �e 1 ?► roy.0 Heights city council to develop additional"luxury rental"apartments in my backyard which I am not in favor of. My husband and I watched all five hours of last night's council meeting on cable access. We also watched the!Tanning Commission meeting and the initial council meeting on this agenda item. As someone who has closely followed this proposal through all its various twists and turns, I wanted to let you know how utterly and deeply disappointed I was by your handling of this matter and the residents'concerns regarding the developrttent proposal. Regardless of the merits--or lack thereof— of the proposed development,you should know that the ajorl f o ed f r rn aconstit�ents'concerns wa��`}w, striking. I will never understand why various cr les'staff and a?tet,&ptiral l nder to At or e's- "`Y`` bottom line while alienating their constltuents b r off heir questions and concerns. •Ms.Ste;alti}ak igmmad Wm9e•at-ane of4he�wmmsnts fn4f e-StarT-r�+i�uneartlela,*Wma-publishedarl January 12th,implying last night that the residents who opposed her development were racist or classist. This was a red herring and an obvious attempt on her part to let you know that If you voted against her proposal-you might-appear to be racist-or classist too. Instead,of calling Mr.Friel-up to the podium to ask that he clarify his remarks and whether they were or were not taken out of contekt in the article—which any one of you easily could have done as he was present throughout the meeting last night the majority of ' Y�4���lliQrNl,�.�t�,farll�tS'�jrfcjC�ry.�ra�s a e }Vil;.Fr.}�l�n a,p�,��f��gt�lm,�?v apnlving vour own_ twmvgat��-translents.` hi worFrfel was quoted In the article as saying"Instead of having you have translents." Transient is defined as"a person staying or working in a_plaos for poly e.0p lima" Mr. F[isi's.pommoni:q d.npi.referenpe race,gender,income,or anything of the sort,nor did any other resident who spoke at Fast night's meeting. Nothing that Mr.Friel wae.00ted as saying was impro min_correct. A person who rents a 600 square foot apartment for a short duration is, by�"detinifid ransfent. It is abhorrent that after being prompted by Councilman Miler to do so, free of you Wg4 mabla to arlir.�alate anv actual merits to a� ppp ov ng4his development so instead you twlsted the words of a member of your community and approved this development as some sort of hyperbolic stand against racism and classism. You are fooling yourselves if you think At Home's development will somehow magically diversify your city. The luxury high density housing they build is geared towards upper-middle class people just as the rest of the housing In Mendota Heights is. If you were truly Interested in diversifying 2112122,5;34 PM Gmail-Fwd:At Home Development you would have sought low or middle-income housing options for this site. I didn't have an opportunity to vote for or against any of you,nor will I have an Opportunity to do so In your future campaigns, !can and will,however,help ensure that the residents of Mendota Heights don't forget how they were'dismissed and degraded by their elected representatives in this situation,and I wilt offer my support to any candidate that can muster up an appropriate level of respect for and engagement with their neighbors and constituents. Regards, Kelly Staples Sat,Feb 12, 2022 at 3:32 ISM Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmail.com> FYI Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message: [Quoted text hidden) 2112122,4:18 PM Gmaii-Fwd:Lot 7 Asks Teresa Duggan<tosduggan@gmall.com> Fwd: Lot 7 Asks 1 message Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmail.com> Sat,Feb 12, 2022 at 3:52 PM To:Teresa Duggan<tosduggan@gmail.com> !FYI Sent from my ir=ad Begin forwarded message: F :Ultan Duggan<dug an.ultan@gmall.com> a -.January 29,2022 at 2:15:58 AM MST T ;.mate Christensen<' nrisy2a2@gmaR,com> C .`Bernard P. Fr ` <wampy@att.net>,"Joseph R.Betlej"<Joseph.Betlej@securlanam.com>,Sally e orber@inflonHne.net>,jlosleben@so!arpartnerinc.com,miazarus@law-ml.com, jilismith38@comcast.net,John.maczko@comcast.net,zagelj@gmail.com Subject:Re:Lot 7 Asks Kate,Terrific analysis as far as the developer and the city staff will allow! For me the key Is that laws are laws,codes are codes and ordinances are set In place for all of us and more especially to ensure sound growth in our city.We should ask the developer: Are you so special that you can pick and choose which rules to follow? Are you so Important that setbacks do not apply to you? Why Is it that space,or the lack,is only of your choosing? And the green spacer And the height.%And the massiveness You,mister developer,state that this is a matter of economics yet you flaunt nearly every guide and rule the city requires so that you can build more In less,to gain more? MUPUDa created for Mendota Plaza permit 21.30 units 1 homes per acre.You have not clearly shown the two acres you are basing your calculations on .You have reduced the number of units twice now!from 113 to 89 and now to 791 Your concern for Mendota Heights would be r.,r,mmenA_ab1e if you were to i�y the rules 14 place_VV_ ynti tie L f . granted,y�sx take us.You would be a good steward if you followed the rules,did not take advantage of our benevolence and presented Mendota Heights with a legitimate plan that d ot- /4 Ok;asd established guides,rules and ordinances. A reasonable developer would request approval of Snits,total for the" bonfire"site. Averaging the 21 times 2 and the 30 times 2 results in a generous This would be so much more suitable and better for the area.And would provide you with the space necessary to the development in accord with the city and its comp plan. Ultan Duggan Sent from my]Pad On Jan 28,2022,at 7:43 Nnn,state Christensen--kchris9252@gmailxom>wrote: U!tan, ere Is a quick summary of the proposal: Building size(footprint)fs the same. « Building size is still&-#rawr�av 184%greater than the approved daycare. • Building height is 4 feet less. However,the developer says it is 48 feet which is 11 feet shorter than before. Not sure how their math works. 2112122,4:'18 PM Gma91-Fwd:Lot 7 Asks • Building height is still 30o%higher than approved daycare. • Impervious surface[a rking on. However I don't have enough real numbers to prove it all out Given they removed the parking lot but added sidewalks,a larger pa o,a dog run,and a"pocket park"it seems the impervious surface should go up. • Landscaping—GreenStep model. They have reduced the number of trees on the site. Now they are inciudin:,on1,.*1A4Qi: o rarxi= dcd Irpes. So what is the point of ciaiming to be a GreenStep city? • Added for the public? A"pocket park"which is directly across from the plaza loading dock/zone and garbage bays. Hardly what was asked for. • Developer playing games. Putting off the decision from Nov to Feb ensuring of the dissenting votes(yours)are gone from the meeting. Talking to newspaper writer telling the kuweu voca roue of residents don't like development. I will count the number of people t at ave testified. It is way more input most other topics. Having their friends and tenants of the Reserve write to Benetti and the mayor or Cheryl so that it will be published. Advertising their company as a small hometown company when they own and manage 50 building in the TWIn Cities. And so on... 1 will get a clearer analysis to you when 1 complete it. I am also going to ask Cheryl why a zoom meeting set up with you being projected on a computer right next to Jay Miller won't suffice as attending the meeting. It Is •a public meeting and you would be,projected could be heard etc. Even if you couldn't vote you could provide input. Mare to come. Kate On Fri,Jan 28,2022 at 5:07 PM Ultan Duggan<duggan.uitan@gmaii.com>wrote: } Kate,the ask was one.storey.They have:chosen/offered ,they claim, four feet:.i MUD spend the weekend digesting the staff reports.Feet free to contact me about any of the material submitted.I am trying to locate a good land use attorney.I may try NAC's planner,a former consultant to the city. Let anyone else know that I can be reached from 9.00 A.M till 7.00 P.M. Ultan 651-470-6268 Sant fmm my 11ped. >On Jan 28,2022,at 12:28 PM, Kate Christensen<kchris9292@gmail.com>wrote: >Hi Ultan, >Was one of the"asks"to At Home Developers to lower the building by 1 foot? 1 > >Thanks, >Kate 2112122,325 PM Gmail-Fwd:Plaza Landscape Plans-latest version G� Teresa Duggan<tosduggan@gmail.com> Fwd: Plaza Landscape Plans - latest version 9.message Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmall.com> Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 3:33 PM To:Teresa Duggan<tosduggan a@gmail.com> FYI Sent-from-my-iPad Begin forwarded message: From:Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmail.com> Date:February 2,2022 at 11:06:15 AM MST To:john.maczko@conncast.net Subject:Fwd:Plaza Landscape Plans-latest version FYI... ultan Sent from my!Pad Begin forwarded message: From:Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmail.com> Date:February 1,2022 at 9:02:26 AM MST T- o:•Cheryl Jacobson<cjacobson@mendota-helghts.com> Subject:Ford:Plaza Landscape Plans-latest version FYI.Another reason to delay the Plaza discussion:so many questions from concerned citizens,requiring studied,professional answers to.all the questions legitimately ralsed.What !s the hunk Ultan Sent,from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From:Susan Light<sueriitel @1ctoud.com> Date. February 1,2022 at 7:43:36 AM MST To:Stephanie Levine<slevine(a@mendotaheightsmn.gov>,"John R.Mazzitello" <Imazaitello@mendotsheightemn.gov>,Jay Miller<jaym@mendota- helglrts.com>,Ultan Duggan<duggan.uitan@gmail.com>,Joel Paper <jpaper@mendotaheightsmn.gov> Subject:Plaza Landscape Plans-latest version Dear Mayor and Council Members, I have been asking for more overstory and ornamental trees throughout this process,so I was very disappointed to see the latest version of the landscape plan actually reduced-the-number of trees by 8 from-the previous version. They took out the Oak,Serviceberry,and Ironwood trees from the previous plan. Because they removed these species there are not only 8 fewer trees, but there is not the diversity there should be. Addina back the trees•thnt wPra 2112122.3.35 PM Gmail-Fwd-.Plaza Landscape Plans-latest version removed from the plan,plus adding species like Hackberry,Blue Beech and Pagoda Dogwood would increase diversity. There are not enough trees in this plan to reduce the Heat Island Effect. According to the Heat island Map the Mendota Plaza including the existing Reserve is the major contributor to the Heat island problems in this area. it is one of the hotspots in Mendota Heights. Reducing the Heat Island Effect is one of the goals In our Comprehensive-Plan and natural Resources Management Plan. There could be 4 more trees added along the sidewalk NW to SW. These could be ornamental(smaller)trees like Serviceberry, Ironwood and Blue Beech. There could also be ornamental trees added to the pocket park area as well as some overstory trees placed near the dog run. I think getting more trees in the ground is the most important issue of concern with this landscape plan. There are some smaller issues that 1 see,but those can probably be addressed closer to the time the landscaping work Is scheduled. For example,there are Winterberry shrubs on the plan. These are attractive shrubs and birds love the berries,however Winterberry shrubs need both male shrubs and female shrubs to produce berries.The plan only calls for female shrubs. There is landscape fabric called for in the plan. If the fabric is placed in the native perennial beds,they will not be able to re-seed and fill in the area. The seeds will drop on the mulch and cloth and not make it to the soil to germinate. The trees that are planted as part of this plan should be planted differently than the trees currently growing in the plaza property. These were planted years ago,but planted ihcorrectiy. There are mounds of soil and mulch around the main trunk of the trees creating a"voicand'effect. This is a cause of stem alydling toots and often,leads eventually to tree death.Mulch needs to be pludled away from the main trunk so the root flair is exposed at ground level. Hopefully the contractors hired to plant the trees on parcel 1&2 are aware of correct planting technique. If we can get a commitment to add many more trees to this.plan,the other, smaller landscape changes can probably be addressed later. Sue tight Dakota County Master Gardener M Email Teresa Duggan<tosduggan@gmail.coma Fwd: Mendota Plaza 2 messages Ultan Duggan<duggan.ulfan@gmali.com> �^Sat,Feb 12,2022 at 3:25 PM To:Teresa Duggan<tosduggan a�@gmail.com> FYI Sent from myiPad Begin forwarded message: From:Ultan Duggan'<duggan.ultan@gmalIxom> Date,February 9,2022 at 1:32:22 AM MST To:Si-evine@mendotaheigh"tsmn.gov,john.maczico@comcast.net,Ji0azziiefio@mendotaheightsmn.gov, „Bernard R Friel"<wampy@att.net> Subject:Mendota Plaza There are many unanswered points by staff and developer in relation to the proposed reconfigured UM PUD-Why skirt or avoid them?Who is responsible for unanswered questions?Wig ara complete state andi nr rtuesiitZnable facts❑oink r"onNard unchecked Uncnaiianaed f 40hy has the Flanning Commission been denied its duty to study the reconfigured MUPUD?They have played major roles In many previous developments. The developer has had lots of time to provide answers to questions raised by the community,staff,Planning Commission and council. Why are they/we ducking these issues?What is the hurry? We are tasked with reviewing applications,studying reports,listening to the presentations to the planning Commission hewing froin the r1e�s+Tlnperl��nrrsrican# Jhee community and debating the merits of them a-U.Not so here.Joh 1< r.,f�rist +sew,the-3—M i , )erbaum and many others raised honest concerns and questions regarding this reconfigure M P D.Were they.heard? Many issues hays still been unaddressed,unanswered or ignored. I am not against developing this property.Edward P er,owner of The Plaza stated at the groundbreaking away back that l was a driving force in the revital' tion of the Plaza in the early 2000s.The community is speaking to the council ioudiy and to me,cite on ibis redevelopment.The vast majority are against:the proposed redevelopment as presented. There are regulations and codes to be followed and standards to adhere to The ci sketchily reviewed home size,setbacks,impervious surfaces,green spaces,building heights, setbacks,the mini park,formerly led a tot lot which an earlier council,as a body,determined did not func-f![SFf weir kr 1 ,p"AM-i"!si .� ,ire cnlinril•IP a.-roving the 2040 Cl rnp Plan also established standards re natural resources;yet I,lZfsp�r�1 fQsscizew t__-_t?os at this l►res�ntatio c a reconfigurad i Reallyl Who are we foaling?I am just getting stare Completed plans,including landscaping ,measurements,and all the other details were generally submitted by the developer in preparation for presentation to the city governing bodies before,public hearings and deliberations. UV-•C'i L. 9 V�e(/t r Ultan Duggan city councillor of 19 years,Planning Commissioner of 15 years,including vice chair and chair. Sent from my IPad On Feb 8,2022,at 10.42 PM, Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmail.com>wrote: Sent from my!Pad 2112122,3:40 PM Gmail-FWd:Mendota Plaza Begin forwarded message: From* O KO<john.maczko@comcast.net> Date ebruary 8,2 22 at 11:45:24 AM MST To. Levin @me tah{eightsmn.gov"<slevine@mendotaheightsmn.gov>,Joel i av '. hz a 1 ali.l. ;;��,uuy and,'"l-le COL lv'iiiiei "Jpmille @gmall,com"<jpmiller1921@gmaii.com>, "Ipaper@mendotaheightsmn.gov"<jpapera@mendotaheightsmn.gov>, "jmazzifello@mendotaheightsmn.gov"<Jmazziteilo@mandotaheightsmrt.gov>, John Mazzitello<johnrm@mendota-heights.com>, Ultan Duggan <duggan.ultan@gmall.cam> Cc:"cJacobson@mendotaheightsmri.aov"<clacobsortO_mendotaheiahtsmn. gov>,"TBenetV@mendotaheightsmn.gov"<TBenetti@mendotaheightsmn.g0 >,"rruzek@mendotahelghtsmn.gov"<rruzek@mendotaheightsmn.gov> Subject.I hope you will read After much thought I decided to attach my comments and concerns that I was intending to present at Council. I hope you take a chance to read it as I feel there are same important things you need to mare sure are addressed/clarified before you take final action on your decision to approve. I would,also like each of you to reflect on these two questions. 1) What drew you to Mendota Heights to establish a home and raise a family? 2)Why do people want to ere now. Why are they paying$70- 80K OVER.LIST PRICE t6be here? Wass it the vast array of restaurants? The high density development of the community, The retail development? or Was it the low density quiet city, close to retail, close to restaurants, close to the airport and 2 major downtowns,the greenspace and trails, the parks, the openness,the yards'the kids could play in iffle hwi a City that people (including YOU j vvAiv T to live iiii ui�d have flocked to for decades. We are not a blighted community in need of change to survive. Each of you, and those moving in could have moved to a different city that had density, retail, restaurants,transit. Infact, a few of you moved from a nearby city that had those characteristics. td�hey, ch6se to move f6-Mendota Heights..— keep Mendota Heights a place people want to comet <Transmittal letter 2-4-22 At-Home.docx> d <v2 page 156 rendering.pdf> 2112122,3,39 PM Gmail-Mendota Plaza redevelopment Gm ail Teresa Duggan<tosdugga gm tLcom>' Menddta Plaza redevelopmen 2 messages Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmaii.com> Mon,Feb 7, 2022 at 5:54 PM To:Teresa Duggan<tosduggan@gmaii.com> Confusion abounds. Is this anew development projec, e evelopment,a new PUD and who is driving this I At Home Apartments,Paster Enterprises,both,or Ms Stephaniak?The dilemma arises when one is asked to parse ownership, responsrote parties,timing as in:is the originstprojectcompiota7 is there any time frame regarding the start of this process?the seven or more amendments to that original project ,the new iterations,presented in parts? When Is a PUD or even a MUPUD complete?Surely the city of Mendota Heights has the overriding say and should determine beginning and end. A PUD is supposed to be planned:with a beginning,a middle and a definite end. is this an endless project and if so how should the city calculate fees for the significant hours spent on this?Can the city reasonably totaliP4 its time investment in seeing this project throughnts inception to a final"bow"? -It is.-the reSp8n§Ib1tity ef. .rlav�i pSr.t :r,ldg `nttheir.pinps�gali,r�aual ??�?J1f.unith,.a.satr gpitc_:.of the,prGduct, and selling that product,good or bad,to Mendota Heights. There were few objections to the"Village"development because there was extensive planning through the community,the planning commission and then the council.The same is true of the Hidden Creek Estates proposal,and. too,Park Place in its phases;again there was a process,review,planning commission overview with recommendations �. to the Council and final approvals.And significantly,all completed on time.Time is money,after all.There were few objections to the redevelopment of the challenging Larson/Motel site by the neighbors.Some councillors were challenged with the many infringements to our codes and ordinances.The proposal squeaked through. And,in case you have forgotten or not known,the Copperfleld housing development was reduced significantly In size/number of homes on the recommendation of the Planning Commission and accepted by the council.A proposal to build 30+homes where now stands the Per 3 golf course was also rejected by both the Planning commission and the Council to preserve open space;and at considerable expense to the community.A proposal by C G Rein to build apartments where Mendakota Park now stands was defeated,but not without cost and controversy. _ i ilp-Su7r'liiiltt Geve€oped-40im ifn depth ccrngidlieaflyroiii I tiled E ialatu-Jha CILy'ailU vNiis.The eventwat' developments were processed through the Planning Commission and Council,giving the city Its first 4 storey homes The Planning commission was integral to the development of ALL these areas of our very fine city.Many members of those commissions and councils are still try€ng to advise the present Council on what to support in the way of new development.Considering their successes why the push back today. And in more recent times,when concerns were raised a bout affordable housing in Mendota Heights,the city rafinnnded pnsitiveiy In partnership with rtakote too.[:omm�inity i]c�veJnnment agpnr__y ff:J7A};r ivinrg the r_Jty tw�a major blocks of rent controlled assistance for retirees and others:-one in the Plaza area and the other In the Village. Some other important facts about Mendota Heights;our south boundary is Hwy 494.....with its s ;as is true of Hwy 35 E,dissecting the city north east to south west with federal and state setback requireme ts.The state's biggest economic engine,the airport was saved in place in the'90's,rejecting a$4+billion plan to relocate it south. Those billions were eventually spent in expanding that airport!An airport that limits Mendota Heights building heights even as it constrains us in roadways and pollutes our air significantly, in 1976 the Federal Government determined that our waterways,the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers are too valuable an asset therefore must be protected,causing the establishment of the Critical Area Corridor,about 70+miles long of which Mendota Heights has approx 8 miles;another major challenge to growth and development in our city;do not tell me that set backs do not matter. Through wise and careful planning our city has quietly grown,prospered,preserved its spacious and gracious character and maintained a great place to Live,Work,Play and Stay. Growth was carefully,analyzed,controlled,parceled out,measured.We did not protest,did not block intersections,did iiotiscuy'rulfif5`Gr trisri u%rl ldi rs ii(G`r'i'aiGlirt 'i✓iirirr r€o €u!i ar u'Criiilicit`yti€uxrd pia "uialiu iiie'6€ty YVe pre to d ay.'+Nv'er followed our plan from the 1960's,stuck with it,rejecting plans that did not fit due to density,set backs and all the other constraints imposed by Federal agencies,the state,Met Council,the county and our own carefully crafted codes and ordinances.We followed our plans Ask anyone who has moved to Mendota Heights these last 20-26 years:why did you choose Mendota Heights? Why have you stayed in this quiet first ring suburb that defies logic,close to Minneapolis and St Paul,the Airport,MOA;a .city rlctse.yet.far.enough to escape most congestion noisa and density?.A-city of low crime,1pw to moderate taxes,.s;fe, well maintained,terrific infrastructure,good schools........ .. Alas,change is clamoring.The very same"newbies"who could not wait to buy a house in Mendota Heights now want to change much of the underpinnings,opting for the more fashionable young professionals and shoving aside the other major residents,many enjoying rest and quiet in a world of clang. Newbies want easy access,high density and all that that entails,especially shops.Ask yourself:For What?We are charged with building,sustaining and protecting what has been established,what Is:roadside IibraNPs_rain rtarrlanc 2112/22,3:39 PM Gmall-Mendota Plaza redevelopment pickle ball,and other chances to interact: firefighter dances,summer pmes,campfires,more music in the parks,more children's games,fireworks,outdoor dancing karaoke more weekly bike rides,youth games the farmers market,more movie nights,:building community,inviting neighbors to interact, maintaining our community, protecting what is -established;NEIGHBORLINESS IS SO VALUABLE IN OUR MODERN SOCIETY, Lefs do this,NOW? ULTAN Thanks Ultan Duggan ,cduggan.uItan@grnaII.corn> Sat, Feb 12,2022 at 3:29 PM FYI Sent from my Wad Begin forwarded message- fQuoted text hidden] 211212z,3.37 PM mail-FWd,At Homes an Friday,Febtvary 4,2022,02:38:39 PM CST,lurber@inrionlinL.net<lorber@ nflonllnne,et>%TotReVised Plans HI Mary Rose, The City is setting up a Tragic Solutions Committee,Both Mnpot and Dakota County wiN be participating. Mendota Heights does notown the street,so Improvements need to be Via a partnership. Best;Sally sally Lorberbaum home phone:651-454-55s4 cell phone: 651-SOMB04 email: iorber@lntionline.net _..._...._.. ............. ..._......_..........._..�.. _..... From*mary rose turner<ntaiyrosetumer@yahoo,com> — .___._...._-..._ ...�_ Sent;Friday,February 4,2022 7t03 AM _ •-•-•-.-__._._ To:Ultan Duggan<duggan.uttan@gmall,com>;Tamara Will<tmara j.wtll@gmaticom> Cv.Beft Joseph R.<ioSEptt.$EtiEj@src�at;5�ar;6c�tn>;t;Emardr�Frielcvam' <egbalin@comcast,net>;}fate Christenson<kchr1s6292@9mail.com>;Sally Lorbe�m Io bert Inflonimith(tne.net>suee Light<sueriits@camcast net;bobdledri rJnS.tnrrnanch jtos►eben@solarpartrtednacom;John maczko@comcast.net;mdzsunset74 @sns.00ma;i Blebs„Cummins <buzz;Maurice Lazarus<mdazarus(o�comcastnet>;Stephen ga re(c�ein�streich Ieuaacomdasmnet> Kara Wallace y<karboo.ors;Jo athan agel c mg�Brad U <(ebYaho Cummins<buazcthre rice La arus< Subject:Re:At Homes Ravised Plans am very disappointed by our mayor and a few council members. Ok,I guess they gotwhat they wanted and an apartment building will be built, tam still very concemed s Is that at?Whole addressing 1t or moving forward on how approxlmatefy 150t-people are going to get in and out of Mendota Plaza??7 Gleamy Mayor Levine is clueless. that luka he sat to Mcponatd's parking tot observing traffic, tam Sony why would you be there???The traffic issue is going to be up at South Plaza Drive and Dodd,As well a nvketr�7d t'h1u itrtad.+^�anY watt to eta for someone else next fafil{i Thank you all for your hard work on thisit Mary Rose Sentfrom Yahoo Mail for Phone On Friday,February 4,2022,2:04 AM,Ultan Duggan<duggan.ultan@gmaiLcom>wrote: i watched the meeting with eventual disgust.For a moment,sadly,a very brief momenta thought per baps The council would find Vestiges of courage to wade through the half 11es,weird logic and grandstanding to s4rrlve star Impasse! Mae,no;any courage was fleeting, n lookiTransience is quite different from transients and should never be misronstrued,Men to Heights has Its fair share of affordable housing,We even have section 3 fir looking at the area.Whorl people play with words they can reuse a huge dlssa ice enders Heights i of ue and is made u of housin stock reflecting th ear. n ce t,a 9 area. Wheytes and often you won't f the outside h events sumrrierfall end'i ntque ya% ut a nice mix of bd re n tiag--94$-oside.A wide variety of peopia can a readily Seen a many diffea tatk,share stories,admits the dog,encourage the young and the elderlyte,happy,concerned,worried busy,helpful People running late sometimes.We are a cityw For years we have had a i ulet wav of dotttu thugs,running our city,volunteering,supporting those in need,near and far,we care for each other and are law ably Heights is Maintaining our hot an padw,picking up at the ballaeld,encouraging our kids and neighbors and their kids.Unique too by attending meetings to hae provide support,encourage,listen,care,discuss jdeas,eoncepts,be heard. .........painting to this page and that paragraph to support a thought,reading Roma prepared document created before a hearing,claiming varying status,making 111% grandstanding,substituting less valuable ideas,principles and half truths for the heart of the matter are the new normal.Promises,pro Catch phrases,obfuscation,cheerleading but not leadership In many areas have become the new imperative, misEst Lots of/argon, Representation phooey;so,many care and offerfact,but they are people,; it does not fit or suit my ideal our experts know.Examine opinion,half troth or unsubstantiated rhetoric?why bet Why would any of the speakers want to serve ourfabulous city after the latent summary rejections of their taicutafions?Their concerns,?Thetrwell constructed tr •idea;?•VIHFFT•H.4n,Rku•OFTt?Efd xC• iN4 t Would have been rudent to take the Information calctulations and provide clear unambiguous answers to all the rovided aeade s YOU Cose Who OULD Ske 17LL examine it AND RESTORE TRU measure again,redraw to determine the validity Ultan Duggan page 139 9c. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights,MN n1lb 651.452.1850 phone I 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.cnm OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Authorize Professional Services Contract for the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to authorize a professional services contract with Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi) for development of a city-wide bike and pedestrian master plan. BACKGROUND City Council approved a joint powers agreement with Dakota County accepting a SHIP grant from the Minnesota Department of Health to develop a bike and pedestrian master plan. DISCUSSION Mendota Heights staff developed a request for proposals (RFP) and sent the RFP to six consulting firms. Three firms submitted proposals for the plan. Three other firms were not able to quote on the project. Staff reviewed the three proposals and are recommending HKGi for the project. The HKGi proposal was well put together and included additional public outreach versus the other firms. BUDGET IMPACT The costs for this project as identified from HKGi is $36,000. This was the highest submitted fee with the other two firms having costs slightly less than $35,000. Staff feels the additional public outreach will result in a more complete plan. The grant amount is for $30,000. The grant does require a local match of a minimum of$5,000. Staff is proposing this plan be funded from the general fund. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the Council authorize a professional services contract with HKGi for development of a bike and pedestrian master plan. ACTION REQUIRED If Council agrees with the staff recommendation, authorize staff to execute an agreement with HKGi for the bike and pedestrian master plan for a fixed fee of$36,000. This action requires a simple majority vote. r . -777170 mwjw SOME,;■s �iT+_ R.�Ya:S u'SF64•In'" , � � 'e.�'ZQ r 1 - �Yw! i A �5 —777 . r , a ° } $. a. T �. r'1r t i , 'l w �.^.�..•� ,.. Ey: `lam .L�. ��� �^ <�:. •j .,�."J�'.:I,� Px� ,� � .� L9-0 t ' u _ m a ?k >a � r 4.. PROPOSAL AND QUALIFICATIONS FOR PLANNING SERVICE 1 _.._.._ _____. - A K Prepared by HKGi i February 4, 2022 a i ih 'i.. A ., �-- ". t�. }t d . Qa CONTENTS v : ram,, 01 PROJECTTEAM.......................2 02 EXPERIENCE &REFERENCES 9 r' 03 SCOPE OF WORK 20 Y' 04 COST FOR SERVICES 32 page 142 ®© CREATING PLACES THAT 08 ENRICH PEOPLE'S LIVES February 4,2022 Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights,MN 55118 Dear Mr. Ruzek, HKGi has a long history of developing plans intended to create safer, healthier,stronger communities. In the past two decades,planning initiatives to expand and enhance multi-modal transportation facilities and encourage bicycling and walking as viable modes of transportation have become a growing segment of our practice. In addition, HKGi has long established itself as an innovative leader in the Twin Cities—and in the state of Minnesota—in the planning and development of trails and greenways. In the late 1990s our firm worked with the City of Hastings and Dakota County to establish the initial concept for a greenway network that would not only preserve land for public recreation and natural resource conservation, but would also serve as a bicycling and pedestrian transportation network. HKGi has since worked with the County and its many stakeholders to establish planning and design standards for the greenway network and master plan each of the greenways in the network. We have also worked with the County and municipalities to develop successful SHIP and other grant applications to help implement the greenway plans,provide safe routes to school,and make key improvements for the overall safety and connectivity of the bicycle and pedestrian system throughout the County. We are excited at the potential to assist the City of Mendota Heights in developing a new Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan because we are confident that we can bring difference-making value and knowledge to this planning process. We are well-positioned to conduct an efficient planning process and deliver a high-quality final product thanks to the combination of our bike-ped planning experience,our knowledge of Dakota County's multi-modal transportation planning context,our experience developing SHIP grant applications, and our work with the Metropolitan Council to evaluate the bike-ped regional solicitation grant program. Our team will be led by Gabrielle Grinde,who for the past twelve years has worked closely with Dakota County planners to develop nine regional greenway master plans.She has contributed planning leadership and expertise to bike-ped planning initiatives in Hastings and Duluth.And she has provided leadership on trail planning and design in communities across the state,including work on the River to River Greenway and the Robert Piram Regional Trail. She will serve as the project manager and main point of contact for HKGi,with Paul Paige serving as the Principal in Charge,ensuring that the planning team has the resources it needs to deliver a high-quality plan to the City of Mendota Heights. If you have questions about our proposal,or would like to speak with us about this project,please don't hesitate to contact us at the phone numbers and email addresses listed below.We appreciate the opportunity to be considered for this project,and we look forward to speaking with you. Sincerely, Gabrielle Grinde,PLA Paul Paige, PLA Project Manager Principal in Charge President 612.252.7141 •" 612.940.5285 I 4 I gabrielle@hkgi.com paul@hkgi.com Cover Letter page 143 Great River Regional Trail Master Plan Wright County, Minnesota mw PROJECT TEAM w y w y u i 0 u r a ' r e w . '� r - —eau:� r° R E W k t f f i. rg Al Y � �� �7Y � sYyr� � • 't", H KG i CREATING PLACES THAT For forty years, HKGi has helped communities throughout ENRICH PEOPLE'S LIVES the Upper Midwest create great places to live,work and play. HKGi's project work has increasingly emphasized creating environments that encourage walking and bicycling as viable means of transportation.These projects have included ®© Planning bicycle and pedestrian,trail,greenway,and Complete Street Landscape Architecture plans, but have also included downtown and neighborhood ®® Urban Design revitalization;streetscape design;transit-oriented development planning;corridor studies;comprehensive plans, 612.338.0800 and park and recreation plans. www.hkgi.com Our broad-based experience means we bring a deep 800 Washington Ave.N.,Suite 103 understanding of how land uses, urban design,and Minneapolis,Minnesota 55401 transportation infrastructure impact the environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. 4 Certified Planners Our planners take pride in knowing that the results of their 9 Licensed Landscape Architects work lead to greater connectivity,accessibility,and healthier, 8 Planners/Urban Designers stronger communities, but our professionals bring more than 1 Communications Staff passion to their work. They also bring technical expertise, design creativity,and a wealth of experience and knowledge about sustainability,community engagement,funding,and maintenance and operations issues that public improvement projects must address. Our overarching objective is to help clients build great places for people to live,work,and play. Experience has taught us (D 0 o v that the most effective way to reach that objective is to listen to stakeholders, learn from them about their values,needs and COLLABORATE desires,and then marshal our technical skills and expertise LISTEN to help them build the types of places that make great EXPLORE communities. CREATE Project Team page 145 Gabrielle Grinde P ASLA, PLA Associate and Project Manager 612.252.7141 gabrielle@hkgi.com Gabrielle will serve as the Project Manager for the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan process. In this role she will serve Years of Experience: 14 as the primary point of contact for the City and will lead Education engagement and planning efforts. Master of Landscape Architecture,University of Minnesota She brings considerable experience conducting bicycle- Bachelor of Arts-Political Science,University pedestrian and park and trail planning that emphasizes ofWisconsin-Madison connectivity,accessibility,and positioning implementation Registration projects for future funding opportunities. She has been Landscape Architect,Minnesota involved in conducting planning for the Dakota County License No.50416 Greenway network for more than a decade and has Awards completed master plans for all of the greenways currently 2021 MRPA Award of Excellence- in the system. Lumberjack Landing Park Master Plan, Stillwater She also recently completed the People Movement Plan 2020 MRPA Award of Excellence- for the City of Hastings,which seeks to enhance bike and Hutchinson Parks,Recreation and pedestrian amenities in that community,and has provided Community Education System Plan 2015 MNDOT Stewardship Award in technical expertise for several successful SHIP grant Transportation and the Natural Environment applications on behalf of Dakota County communities. -River to River Greenway,Dakota County, MN Relevant Project Experience 2015 MN APA Planning in Context Award- Greenway Guidebook and Greenway Master Plans Moorhead Red River Corridor Plan 2015 MN APA Innovation in Planning Award Dakota County, MN -Lanesboro Arts Campus Vision Plan River to River Greenway Design I West St.Paul/Dakota 2015 ASLA-MN Merit Award for Analysis and County,MN Planning-Parks and Recreation Master Plan, People Movement Plan I Hastings,MN Duluth,MN Citywide Trail and Bikeway Plan I Duluth,MN Bicycle-Pedestrian Plan Wayfinding Washington County,MN Robert Piram Regional Trail Dakota County and Saint Paul,MN Cross City Trail Master Plan Duluth,MN Great River Regional Trail Master Plan Wright County,MN Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal page 146 14,E �i f Jody Rader ASLA, PLA Landscape Architect jody@hkgi.com Jody will serve as a project advisor. Her experience Years of Experience: 12Education conducting bicycle-pedestrian and trail planning projects Master of Landscape Architecture,University for clients such as the City of Farmington,the City of of Minnesota Woodbury,Washington County,the City of Duluth,and the B.S.Architecture,University of Minnesota Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board will augment the Registration knowledge and experience of the HKGi team. Landscape Architect,Minnesota License No.57311 Jody has also provided grant writing services for several clients,including Dakota County. Her work has Awards 2021 ASLA-MN Honor Award for Planning helped the County secure millions of dollars in funding and Urban Design- Minnehaha Parkway for improvement projects that enhance multi-modal Regional Trail Master Plan,Minneapolis connectivity and bicyclist-pedestrian safety. ASLA Student Honor Award Jody is committed to conducting community planning College of Design Student Excellence and Scholarship Award and design that promotes healthy living,sustainable HUD Innovation in Affordable Housing ecosystems,and quality of life for all,and she understands Finalist the ways in which design impacts and enhances vibrancy, Professional Activities quality of life,connectivity,and accessibility. Member of ASLA and Association for Community Design Relevant Project Experience Bike Walk MN 2018 Conference,Presenter Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Farmington,MN ASLA-MN Executive Committee,Student Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Woodbury,MN Chapter Liaison,Step-Up Chair and WILA (Women in Landscape Architecture)Co- MOVE: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan I Washington Chair County,MN ASLA-MN Step-Up Intern Program Chair Grant Writing I Anoka and Dakota Counties,MN Represent ASLA-MN at planning,and design related conferences Vermillion River Greenway Master Plan I Dakota County,MN Guest reviewer for the College of Design at Cross-City Trail Master Plan I Duluth,MN the University of Minnesota and Dunwoody Minnehaha Parkway Regional Trail Master Plan Institute Architecture Department Minneapolis, MN Cedar Avenue Transitway Eagan Station Area Planning Dakota County, MN Fox Cities to High Point Trail Connection I E.Central Wisconsin RPC Project Team page 147 I Paul Paige PLA President 612.940.5285 paul@hkgi.com Paul will serve as Principal in Charge,providing quality control services and ensuring the planning team has Years of Experience: 31 the resources it needs to deliver a high-quality planning Education process. Bachelor of Landscape Architecture- Paul provides design and landscape architecture University of Minnesota leadership for many of HKGi's park,site,and streetscape design projects. His knowledge and guidance will be Registration Landscape Architect,Minnesota,License No. particularly valuable during the implementation planning 23594 phase and for delivering thorough cost estimates. He has been with HKGi for nearly three decades and Awards has been instrumental in establishing and maintaining 2020 MRPA Excellence Award-River's Edge the firm's community-focused approach in which Commons Expansion-Elk River 2020 MRPA Excellence Award-Fernbrook active listening is emphasized throughout the planning Athletic Fields Complex-Maple Grove process. Throughout his career he has also ensured that 2017 MN APA Success Stories in HKGi's planners seek to find the right balance between Implementation-Downtown Chaska Master innovation,aesthetics,feasibility,and functionality. Plan and Streetscape 2015 ACEC-MN Excellence in Engineering Relevant Project Experience Honor Award-Buffalo Downtown River to River GreenwayTrail Design I Dakota County,MN Commons Rice Marsh Lake Trail I Chanhassen, MN 2013 MN ASLA Merit Award and 2009 MRPA Award of Excellence-Rivers Edge Commons, Lake Ann Park Improvements I Chanhassen,MN Elk River,MN Lebanon Hills Connector Evaluation I Dakota County,MN 2003 Mpls AIA Merit Award-Bloomington County Road 144Trail Feasibility Study I Hassan Civic Plaza Township,MN 2002 MRPA Award of Excellence- Normandale Lake Bandshell Shingle Creek Creekside Improvements I Brooklyn Park,MN Old West Main/Baypoint Park Pedestrian Bridge I Red Wing,MN Como Regional Park Signage I St. Paul,MN Woodland Trails Park Master Plan I Elk River,MN Grams Park Concept Plan I Sherburne County,MN Big Elk Lake Park Master Plan I Sherburne County,MN Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal page 148 4 1 u r Ali Tim Solomonson PLA Landscape Architect tim@hkgi.com Tim will serve as the Project Landscape Architect for this Years of Experience:8 project and will bring GIS,mapping,cost estimation,and trail planning skills and experience to the project team. Education Master of Urban and Regional Planning, He has provided landscape architecture services on Master of Landscape Architecture,and site,streetscape,public space,and trail and park design Bachelor of Environmental Design, projects throughout the metropolitan region. He has also University of Minnesota provided planning support for a variety of community planning and urban design initiatives. His services have Registration Landscape Architect,Minnesota,License No. included visualization,GIS mapping,report layout and 53837 coordination, conceptual design,design development, construction documentation,cost estimation,and Awards construction administration. 2020 MRPA Award of Excellence-Fernbrook Tim recently provided planning and design support for Fields Athletic Complex,Maple Grove bike-ped planning projects in Woodbury and Hastings 2018 ASLA-MN Merit Award for Planning and Urban Design-St.Louis River Estuary and also provided design services for the Robert Piram National Water Trail Master Plan Regional Trail that connects Harriet Island in Saint Paul to 2017 MN APA Success Stories in Kaposia Landing in West.St. Paul. Tim is an armed services Implementation Award-Downtown Master veteran who has worked and interacted with a diverse Plan and Streetscape Reconstruction, range of peoples and cultures. Chaska,MN 2015 MN APA Planning in Context Award- Relevant Project Experience Red River Corridor Master Plan,Moorhead, MN Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan I Woodbury,MN People Movement Plan I Hastings,MN River to River GreenwayTrail Design I Dakota County,MN Mendota Greenway Master Plan I Dakota County,MN Lake Marion Greenway Master Plan Dakota County,MN Grant Writing Support(GIS Mapping) Dakota County,MN Gate,Wayfinding and Signage Plan Duluth,MN Trail and Sidewalk Study I Prior Lake,MN Minnehaha Parkway Corridor Improvements Minneapolis, MN Project Team page 149 Aoe Aimee Hackett Designer aimee@hkgi.com Years of Experience:4 Education Aimee will provide graphic design services and visual B.S.,Landscape Architecture,Arizona State communications support for the project,including the university creation of engagement materials. Awards Williams Family Scholarship,received Aimee has been a key contributor to HKGi's work by scholarship twice providing graphic design expertise and technical support Nominated for Herberger Institute for for planning initiatives. She has designed engagement Design and the Arts Design Excellence Student Award materials, infographics,engagement summaries,and plan Selected for Student Presentation at 2016 reports for a variety of projects. Aimee strives to create ACEC Annual Roads and Streets Conference a recognizable and unique brand for each project,which enhances the ability of community members to recognize and participate in engagement activities. Aimee's graphic design also helps to clearly and concisely convey key themes and messages to project stakeholders and decision-makers. Her appealing, reader-friendly documents enrich community support and can be used to secure funding and support for implementation and public improvement initiatives contained in the plan. Relevant Project Experience MOVE: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan I Washington County,MN Bicycle and Pedestrian Planj Woodbury,MN People Movement Plan I Hastings,MN Downtown Study Phase 2 Walk/Bike Connectivity Engagement I Golden Valley,MN Vermillion River Greenway Master Plan I Dakota County,MN Great River Regional Trail Master Plan I Wright County,MN Fox Cities to High Point Trail Connection I E.Central Wisconsin RPC Arts Culture and Education Corridor Study I White Bear Lake,MN Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal a � , mow., ^g „y yka Greenway Master Plans Dakota County, Minnesotary , s: u it WT�� an �'�.,T•'�Ny ° 1 b t n a m� page 151 MRR7Connecklan -- to Spring Lake Park /�� I Res""and Saint paut - _ r' r.I � Framework Diagram tanlur Hasttngs,MN S—t ckwt po nr ` rrr CR d7 rraR _ IJ—Ma Trn+.., . � •rrr _ .,y4__ �, yrrrrrr� rr+111uyuuuuuneu j x tlwpss ",,�tia►`r CommeraWl' 7' ' [UIMlFCI'a1 i�1111 111111111111��1���11fllll�lil[tf�1/rrrrrr Dfly! y14C� ��Cunn¢[Ia/ _ � o AnY 11enWn' MRR�[�ntrecNan 43'^ sok 9.a 1111111111111111 fill 11111111{It111111,t1 vi«.,.w jost1�N11111111191116P: Fi, 0 I—R.N Y A /,.. 7 a to Red Wing i A C;c—PW G x ,: a rsthstrew a '"�0 11111yj h, °c L,LA � ��Mbrow vart I,.Gmmrr4 Co e f►w..r. 7 a5mannn. o p�y.,l. vat .,! 5aaftMaSt Y�F�+,[nt y� CR ayJeT�� � __ imvErSP _r 1 ...�, wamxevarl i� 7raJf �� �' yy 1j°.r C"rgnhdeWmd.. Y � II 11A.- ,, a wl, 7 vmrYYw. �� - S gntEcalalalttllesleaarlter_�p �tm hr M1rt .__ � '��r7r�� Etnplayotentk=•:.i 67t11111� i 1111,.e? } __ v_._ _° LEGEND Future VEFMO an Sal**YT aR i' inn*W Pr.ewed6rrn nu River Gr nway r` to Karmm9tan i"wcrmr. ♦ ` pillrt y�1y ��� iiiphrM/y ,q,i +'w.walw«Hr1 411 1 \�,' rrrlli11t1111r lift rral r41",1% 71w1111 saarhrr,'x rrr ___.___.Y. EWurg AWl. pull S..W gllew cl nzcrnr rrOA A o ]S IM1W People Movement Plan Hastings,Minnesota - HKGi led a planning process to assist the City HIGHLIGHTS of Hastings in identifying strategies,investments,and implementation Comprehensive analysis of non- priorities to enhance its multi-modal transportation system. The motorized trail system. plan includes initiatives related to off-and on-street trails,sidewalks, Identification of regional and local connections with the county's greenway system,crossing safety trail connections,integration,and improvements,and wayfind'Ing. partnerships for implementation. Includes wayfinding signage concepts HKGi analyzed Hastings'existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities and then and plan. identified community destinations,which included all park and open space amenities within the city,entertainment districts,commercial and REFERENCE employment areas,schools,and civic services such as libraries and service Chris Jenkins,Parks and Recreation centers. Using the results of those analyses,HKGi's planners identified Director gaps in the system and then created a framework plan to identify City of Hastings cjenkins@hastingsmn.gov different elements within the system,such as Hubs,Primary routes, 651-280-9819 Secondary routes,and key Crossings. The Implementation section of the Plan provides detailed strategies and action items categorized into areas such as Education, Enforcement,and Programming; Institute City-wide Development Policies; Infrastructure Improvements;Operations and Maintenance;and Funding. 10 1 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal n .. r, II� t • •v v Agricultural Buffer: linear natur infiltration feature spray drift beneficial in cts k signage . natural paved trail-- ":, R * trail 40* Greenway Guidebook and Network Planning Dakota County,Minnesota- Planning for the protection,connection,and HIGHLIGHTS management of green infrastructure is essential for protecting natural 2012 MN APA Partnership in systems and the quality of life in fast-growing Dakota County. HKGi Planning Award has worked with the County to create a vision for an innovative county- wide greenway network,documented in the Greenway Collaborative Created standards for greenway Guidebook. planning and design details In the network,greenways are treated as infrastructure that serves Extensive engagement withlandowners to develop buy-in multiple public purposes, including transportation and recreation Has resulted in steady,ongoing needs,conservation of habitat and open space,and preserving water implementation efforts,both planning quality. This unique way of understanding a greenway impacts the and design of new greenways planning process and has required a high level of collaboration between REFERENCE HKGi, Dakota County,municipalities,other governmental agencies, and individual landowners in order to identify high quality corridors for John Mertens,Senior Planner Dakotainclusion in the network. 952-89 county 52-891-7036 Since the guidebook was adopted in 2010,the framework has proven john.mertens@co.dakota.mn.us effective. In that time HKGi and Dakota County have produced master plans for at least nine greenway corridors and have cooperated across agencies to secure land and funding for the network. Experience and References li x ......... 9 + } cuEuur STATE>uw ® � w.•„,�+� 0 Ee�owxsEUEFItsTATETIeLR •'},� .'� UFiMIKELOOPTRAIL � ° �� � sTCRaxcaassa�c p F:JTURE GOLD LINE Off NNECTION: A1 CORSR'}}KMONTO IIE OET4401INEO 'py •. IEGEF® �. �I.' .. $ �. FASTING SIOEWAINS II,T( ve i ��. E%ISTINGOFF-ROAQNETWORR ®• .......FUTURE OFF ROAD NETWORK .. � ® FASTING ONAOAO NE IVYOftl[ FUTURE ON-ROAO N ETWORN --�Ei1STING LOCAL 1 STAIF ROOTES r •....-FUN1fE LOCAL OR SiAIF CONKfCiOR ::.� i � � ExNSi1NG IPLANNEO REWONAL lR0.1L REGIONAL TRAIL SEARCH CORRIDOR . Q1 ! } F1111FE FNTWORNamans p WASHINGTONCOROAOSORHWWAYS Engagement included pop up surveys,online w M SIA,EWGHWAY interactive input,and awareness campaigns to spark INTERSTAMIGHWWS interest and solicitgreater input forplanning efforts. MOVE: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Washington County,Minnesota- HKGi recently led the development of HIGHLIGHTS a Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan that will guide future investment decisions Social Pinpoint—used for online and prioritize initiatives to improve and enhance the County's bicycle and engagement,enabling collection of pedestrian network. detailed,location-specific input Enhanced branding to increase In the initial phase of the project HKGi and its consultant partner visibility of the project and solicit CivicBrand collected input from stakeholders from across the County greater quantity of input and conducted a detailed existing conditions analysis. Engagement Focus on identifying low-cost/high- activities included pop-up meetings at community events such as the benefit improvement initiatives Tour de Hugo and a local bluegrass festival. The existing conditions report included analyses of Level of Comfort,trip orientation-destination, REFERENCE demographic/population trends,crash data,and demand. Emily Jorgensen,Project Manager The subsequent phases of the project,the planning team established a Washington County hierarchy of existing routes and trails and identify recommended new or 651-430-4338 improved routes. HKGi also helped the County prioritize recommended emily.jorgensen@co.washingon.mn.us improvement projects by identifying low cost/high benefit improvements as well as crossings and focus areas that will have the greatest impact on safety and usage of the network. 2 1 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal figure 2.12 High Comfort Network Sermce Area Islands page 154 ' LAKE VILLE 6 ure 2.9 _^l of T°af.lc Stress Analvsis(All Levels of Comfort) LAKEVILLE ...i.. x-. �1 ?iiitil k I d, r s _ u4 . 64 .cvc EMPIRE TWP. EMPIRE TWP. r 5 f , 50 3❑ 1 e i .- ---- -- -- ---- 4 50 'EUREKA 7WP. EUREKA TIATI r..-.. < CASTLE CASTLE ROCK TVPP. ROCK TWP. 0 0 2,f 05 0 02E 05 1 Miles Le 101ilmfficStr— - _ Farm ington Chy eourdary Fa ks —1 Hgh Cfwt FarmingtonClty6oundary High Comfort Network 4W, H,ghmo,brtl,hrdr(eryde, ----- awiM1twwrireryrp�srnyanaeona Public School Facilities 2 Parks Le lef Traffie5tress Rom` ° 1Qlhrykr'welAEds —3 Public School Fxili[is —1 High Comfort —4 Low Camfwr 24 Orherlevek ofComfarr Farmington enjoys a reasonably extensive network of high comfort The Level of Stress analysis shows that many of the connecting bikeways,but they are largely disconnected islands. routes are rated as low comfort/high street routes. Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Farmington,Minnesota - HKGi led the bicycle and pedestrian planning HIGHLIGHTS process for Farmington,a suburban community at the southeastern edge Prioritizes connectivity between of the Twin Cities metro. Initial engagement,analysis,and inventory of already existing but largely existing conditions conducted by HKGi helped identify travel behavior disconnected bicycle-pedestrian routes and characteristics of commuters and potential users of a bicycle and Assessment criteria included level of pedestrian network within the community.This engagement also helped comfort and connectivity analyses identify the varying levels of comfort Farmington residents have with bicycling and walking in the community,as well as which locations residents identify as dangerous, uncomfortable,or safe places to bike and walk. Farmington's suburban development pattern has resulted in the creation of an adequate level of bicycle-pedestrian routes in several newer parts of the community, but those routes are disconnected from one another and are also disconnected from key destinations such as Farmington's downtown area. The plan created by HKGi focuses first on improving connectivity between already existing facilities. Increased functionality and use will then provide the City with greater opportunity to expand the bicycle and pedestrian network throughout the community. Experience and References o kdale J Lake Elmo v page 155 Existing BikelPed Network(2021) I Parks Lakes&Wetia rids Schools t Trail(Paved) Ctid% v G ps _ Sidewalk 1 I 1 1 Private Walk Natural Surface Trail Adjacent Community `g or StateTrall I � Grade Separated Grossing ;�. - 1 (Tunnel or Bridge) — Lr� I- Boardwalk r City Boundary - c Planned)Proposed Network Facilities _k k _ ' � --••-- Planned Trail(2040 Plan) �+.•� � r ;;fJ -, ' Proposed Trail(Draft Plan) & Planned Paved Shoulder Future Adjacent Community or StateTrall - q - 2• s Q P la nn ed or Proposed 6 rad e ? 1� Separated Crossirig ...............' •---tt•-.__`._ 11—:7 --- r ��r..,, �..'C-------- ------- •-�-- '�. Proposed Network CFassffecatlon �'. Sul@� S r NOW Primary Routes?... Washington County Corridors _ Neighborhood Collector Routes Rat k 6esti nat ion Tra i is } internal School Connections Residential Connections . . 0.25�— 0.5 1 Miles r - l t r r I For this Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan,HKGi has worked with City staff and stakeholders to create a network classification system that corresponds to recommended improvements and investments.Classifications include primary trails,county corridors,neighborhood collectors,park destinations,school connections and residential connections. Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Woodbury,Minnesota- HKGi recently led the process to create a HIGHLIGHTS bicycle pedestrian plan for this growing east metro community. At Identifying ways in which land use the beginning of this project, HKGi's planners worked with the City to offers ways to encourage or facilitate multi-modal transportation identify a set of objectives for this project that would suit Woodbury's Engage community members to current development context,while also helping the City prepare for understand their needs,concerns future expansion of the bicycle and pedestrian network in both already and desires for bicycle and pedestrian developed areas and in parts of the city yet to be developed. Engagement improvements and their usage emphasized developing a better understanding of the public's needs and patterns concerns when walking and biking in the community. Identify methods for ensuring current system can be maintained Some of the primary concerns for this plan were be to identify system preservation strategies for maintaining the existing system in a"state REFERENCE of good repair;"addressing key crossing safety issues throughout the Tony Kutzke,City Engineer community so the City can adequately prepare investment plans and City of Woodbury tony.kutzke@woodburymn.gov compete for multi-modal transportation grant programs;improve or 651-714-3593 enhance neighborhood connectivity to destinations such as parks, schools,athletic facilities,and business centers;improve multi-modal access to the planned Gold Line BRT corridor;and incorporate direction from other planning documents into this plan. 14 1 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal 156 LMENNO pr1Pw3tl®Ik•Prr�:wrf S • �WM lrw.SMm..T��9M iL , .rr>p.e dhwr ♦RM W hlYjrFnnrvd �41.iles E — — Trail and Bikeway Planning Duluth,Minnesota - HKGi has assisted the City of Duluth with a variety HIGHLIGHTS of trail and bicycle planning initiatives over the course of the past decade Completion of the Master Plan for as the City has sought to become a trail and an outdoor recreational the Cross City Trail,whose route through several industrial areas destination for the region. These projects have included the Citywide Trail and across high volume roadways and Bikeway Plan,Cross City Trail Master Plan,the St. Louis River Corridor made identifying a trail alignment Trail Master Plan,and park planning throughout the neighborhoods in particularly challenging west Duluth. Identify opportunities to enhance connections between residential areas The Citywide Trail and Bikeway Plan was the first step in guiding and the city's many high quality,off- the development of Duluth's trails and bikeways system into a road recreational trails comprehensive,connected and sustainable system serving residents, Initiatives address connectivity, businesses and visitors. The Plan outlines the steps and strategies needed especially between west Duluth's to assemble a city-wide network of multi-use off-road trails. The Plan neighborhood parks,which have been traditionally underserved,and also includes new trails connecting schools and underserved areas; the outstanding off-road trails in that improvement of connections between the ridgeline and the lakeshore; part of the city new trailheads and way-finding signage;and new on-road bike lanes, bike boulevards and bike routes that seamlessly connect with the off-road trail system. Experience and References !!r;" I M _ as EGA e EN T NT3&4 FF-: : on tl M .:5. ma,wnmstlnna.... amP�u,now, vmmnen�re-�,.wa.a m St Paul ' - LILYDALE SEGMENT • I a,n ' �ry SECTIONS y W-,d Cross ng Tip Sermon Bl Barge CM1annel R,'d TR ,Be B,g_.l inel-d Typ—,B6 Bakoh County/So M1 St aul-Typ Seron B- Llytlale S llyd,le-'A'es B i oon 1 Robert Piram Regional Trail Design St. Paul and Dakota County, Minnesota- HKGi served on a HIGHLIGHTS multidisciplinary design team to develop and implement the Robert Provided services for alignment Piram Regional Trail linking Harriet Island to Kaposia Landing and planning and DD/CD/CA for the Mississippi River Greenway connecting south to Inver Grove trailheads and other trail amenities Heights. HKGi's landscape architects provided leadership in the areas Collaborated with the consulting design team as well as the City of of wayfinding,trail amenities and furnishings,landscape restoration, Saint Paul,Dakota County,and and identification of public art opportunities. HKGi was also involved in the City of South St.Paul in the the DD/CD/CA phases of the project,designing many of the trailhead development of the trail amenities along the trail corridor. HKGi also played an important role in stakeholder engagement and in identifying potential trail alignments through challenging areas featuring industrial land uses, potentially hazardous traffic,and wetlands. HKGi's ability to problem solve and explore potential solutions helped create a truly unique trail that traverses landscapes normally restricted to all but rail traffic. 6 1 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal ..� •� � `I, I F��w � ` .tip � n� s TRAIL WOODLAND 10' TRAIL FLOOD STORAGE WETLANDS CREEK •• RE MEANDER RESTORED SHORELINE S' TRAIL POI.L INATOR PLAY LAWN PARKWAY ROAD SIDEWALK Minnehaha Parkway Regional Trail Master Plan Minneapolis, Minnesota- HKGi recently completed the master planning HIGHLIGHTS process for a regional trail corridor that cuts through the heart of south 2021 ASLA MN Honor Award Minneapolis and links the Chain of Lakes Regional Park at its western end i��t for Planning and Urban with Minnehaha Regional Park at its eastern end. The corridor follows the Design path of Minnehaha Creek and is a major east-west transitway for cyclists, Water and natural resources planning hikers,and automobiles. is key project driver Multi-modal design and park planning,along with restoring the health of The parkway is a significant amenity the creek,were at the heart of the project. HKGi and the project engineer for neighborhoods across south identified methods to mitigate frequent flooding issues and return the Minneapolis creek to a more natural state wherever possible. Creative ideas for new park amenitiesthat are ap propriate for the corridor Because the creek corridor is a significant outdoor recreational resource and can work in concert with flood for the entire southern half of the city, HKGi conducted park and trail mitigation/storm water facilities planning to strengthen the creek's parks and activity spaces. HKGi also led the process for developing solutions to several challenging traffic- bicyclist-pedestrian conflict areas along the corridor. Difficult issues throughout the corridor have required an ability to explore creative ideas that serve residents and visitors while also fitting with storm water management features and a more naturalized creek setting. Experience and References exsnHo To Smlth Kenneay Park ... " f• Cherokee Blldy¢ Park [R 5% AN NAPOLIS ST S S[Michaels Q 0 ES 6 F'.. .. : Church H. Albert Park Ha.kll Park BERNARD ST D.dd Park Harmon Field Emerson Park Oakdale Park Heritage MS S[Jose h BUTLERAVE ". .''al"M"-7— 'I[—P... ;,. .SA Y..— -�,s` T�_iG:.=-... .._. '°!e.^" ...... '{. • „ ES B Church More lantl rII St C"' Orme Park ES r wi—mg Pool Q' Lutheran HS j MOR ELANDAVE 1Q Thompson r O County � _ Mud Lake I� Park_. .. Park R7" `K a Park EMERSON AVE NORTH URBAN +` REGIONAL TRAIL Renderings were used to help the community envision WSPI=e how trail alignments and concepts might look after THOMPSONAVE Arena O - S REGIONAL TRAIL implementation. YMCA ompson oaks Alternate route car course Wescheke Park ..epl' Enisting •'- ° a P Bike WENTWORTH AVEcgy ' I - o-r � Dotlge Nature Z 'Hall C J PSP Sports QCenter F O �LN Center K arthaler Park ••- TO O O Garlou9h U t 4 '•ix, �' '. Mendota ^ Es a mom• '.'= t 1 -. L HtS.Cft MARIE AVE AT ^ ' - Carlo Park Y e'7RTYy Trail MARIE AVE " nI �j�,fl,�� �r •" y ... - O O: r I y w••. �('S'F W'. •�. a x odge#ure IIN w Southview Park„ 0 - e Henry REGIONAL TRAIL Sibley ' Alternate route W h HS ro Southv ew Country x „ O Club(Prrvate) _ y a Nortl Dakota County y MENDO TA RD Se C n[er P d B k Framexork " NORTH URBAN R gional Route NUPT 0 Meior Employer q.,. re— REGIONAL TRAIL I1ain Routes(ez aprop) "la,Housng `•"` Local Routes(ex.&prop.) _ A,—,R t.(P p walk only) O Perk end Ride ".•,�;:+�+. Robert St [C C dor 2 HKGi met with representatives of Sibley High School and —1w11 EE I I PtentalSparated Crossng • E tingSepara-Cmasng the Dodge Nature Center to address their needs in the e r�r,rF r_ae`r� Eu tngTraff,Sgnal design of the North Urban Regional Trail(above). Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan West St. Paul, Minnesota -The City of West St. Paul is a developed community immediately south of the City of Saint Paul. Although destinations such as schools, parks and retail are a walkable distance(less than a mile)from most residents,the sidewalk network is incomplete and few bicycle facilities exist. To encourage more walking and biking,the community needed a city-wide plan to prioritize improvements and build resident support. In 2011, Hoisington Koegler Group led a planning process that involved an evaluation of the city's current walk-bike network,community input in both traditional community meetings and on-line forums,and development of a network of pedestrian and bicycle routes. The resulting Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is a guide to physical projects, programs and policies that will support walking and biking to encourage healthy,active living and provide transportation choices. Priority projects focus on creating better connections to schools, parks,and transit. 8 1 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal o• vF, 1 r y n mmiC .,•. wt'w m+ 11 u HKGi works with communities to match projects with the appropriate '- grant opportunities and prepares grant applications.Successful grants w have secured funding for community gardens,trails,Safe Routes to Schools, and downtown master planning. Grant Writing Services Since 2009 HKGi has assisted cities and counties in securing more than REFERENCE $32 million in funding from a multitude of funding sources. Funded Lil Leatham,Planner projects have ranged from downtown master planning,to community/ Dakota County school gardens,to identifying how to develop an arts campus in a 952-891-7159 lil.leatham@co.dakota.mn.us community. The funding has supported active living initiatives, park and trail development,bridge construction,lighting,wayfinding and interpretation signage,and amenities such as benches and bike racks. Gretchen Etzler,SHIP Coordinator Anoka County A key component of HKGI's success lies in evaluating potential projects 763-422-7234 and assisting communities in better positioning themselves to seek grant gretchen.etzler@co.anoka.mn.us sources.This has occurred at many scales,including the preparation of project site plans, project master plans,and the preparation of system- wide park and trail plans and comprehensive plans. Grant programs successfully solicited include MnDNR Outdoor Recreation,Trail Legacy,and Trail Connection grants;MnDoT Safe Routes to Schools,Scenic Byways,and Transportation Enhancement grants;and Federal Lands Access Program grants. HKGi has also created park master plans that have successfully secured funding from the Greater Minnesota Regional Parks and Trails Commission. Experience and References � gy i9 rip MOVE: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Washington County, Minnesota th , i n` W r a* .,.. � 1 i $TIk r i r v u o , r ��'lA ,r '� HMV~ � �� • `.�,� 1 ��V ! 1 page 162 Project Understanding existing barriers and increase community-wide The City of Mendota Heights is seeking to create a access to existing and planned trail,sidewalk,and Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan that will promote a on-street bike facilities. In addition,the master plan community-supported vision for the city's bike and will identify new improvements intended to close pedestrian network. This network includes existing gaps in the current network and identify strategies trails,sidewalks,and other bicycle and pedestrian for creating safe connections to community amenities and routes,and the master plan will destinations. The master plan will be used to guide identify recommended improvements that will be decision-making regarding future investments financially feasible and that will meet the future in and prioritization of improvements to the bike needs of the community. and pedestrian system,will provide a foundation for seeking funding assistance for improvements, As stated in the Request for Proposals,the master and will result in a more bike-able and walkable planning process is expected to include an Mendota Heights. inventory of current bike and pedestrian facilities and amenities,including public facilities and routes as well as private facilities and routes. The master planning process will also identify = facilities and routes in cities immediately adjacent to Mendota Heights in order to facilitate a high level of connectivity between Mendota Heights and its surrounding communities. The City o also requests a master plan that identifies key destinations throughout the community—public _ • facilities,commercial centers,parks,schools,and ..` 9 employment centers—to ensure that master plan i�l1l�t� recommendations address improved connectivity for bikes and pedestrians to important or frequent destinations within the city. Currently,Mendota Heights has approximately 28 miles of paved trails and sidewalks and an additional - 5 miles of wide shoulders or on-street bicycle n * facilities,as noted in the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan. When combined with existing regional trails built and maintained by Dakota County,the City t offers a mostly well-connected and accessible trail system. As noted in the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan, however,some areas of the community lack Cr easy access to trails because highways and arterial e, roads act as barriers between neighborhoods and nearby trails. The Dakota County Greenway Master Plan and the Dodd Road Corridor Study are two additional planning documents that will provide a - - foundation for this Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. One of the key outcomes of this planning process will be to integrate previous planning related to - bike and pedestrian movement into a new master plan that identifies strategies to remove those Scope of Work page163 Proposed Scope of Work Task 1 - Organize the Effort The following tasks represent our proposed Timeline: mid-February through March 2022 planning process to complete the Mendota Heights The objective of this first task is to build the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP). This plan foundation for the system planning process. In this assumes that the project will commence shortly task, HKGi will set the project tasks and meetings after City Council contract approval on February schedule,collaborate with city staff to develop the 15th and will be complete no later than September public process (Community Engagement) plan, 30,2022. The scope of work proposed for this and draft initial outreach content about the system project is based on our understanding of the project planning process for the City's website. We will also as explained in the RFP and on our experience create outreach materials for advertising.A broad- conducting similar bike-ped planning in other reaching community survey will be launched,and metro-area communities. stakeholder listening sessions or interviews will be The following Meetings and Public Process Tasks conducted. are included in the phased project process outlined 1.1 Kick Off Meeting and System Tour below. A"kick off day"will serve as a means of collecting MEETINGS & COMMUNICATION information and building relationships between » (2) In-person City Staff Meetings,including: the consulting team and the City.The"kick off day" - Kick Off Meeting and System Tour will include a meeting with key City Staff,such as - Review Draft Plan Public Works staff,Parks and Recreation staff,City » (2) City Staff meetings (Virtual meetings) Engineer,City Planner,and representatives from the Advisory Park and Recreation Commission (APRC), » Check ) calls with City Project Manager(as- as appropriate,to discuss the parameters of the (as- needed) project and the project schedule,set expectations, PUBLIC PROCESS TASKS and discuss current issues specific to walking and » Develop Community Engagement Plan with staff biking in Mendota Heights.The group will then » (2) Stakeholder Listening Sessions tour representative components of the system with city staff.The tour will allow the HKGi team to » (2) Online Community Surveys, including get acquainted with Mendota Heights's existing - Social Pinpoint Survey bicycle and pedestrian network,collect photos of - Draft Plan Concept Survey key sites,and gain an understanding of the physical » (1) Community Open House or Pop Up Meeting opportunities and challenges in the city. at a local event » (4) Public Meeting Presentations*,including: 1.2 Develop Public Outreach Materials We will work with staff to identify appropriate - City Council (2) materials needed to broadcast BPMP messaging - Advisory Planning Commission via the City website and social media,as well as - Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission printed items such as business cards or flyers.These » Website and Outreach content and materials materials will set the tone, branding,and graphic » Summarization of community input results quality for the project. *Our process is flexible. We are able to swap 1.3 Develop Community Engagement meetings in order to best assist staff with Plan engagement of commissions and councils.We can prepare presentations and meeting materials for We will work with staff to develop a Community staff to present to commissions and councils,if Engagement Plan (CE Plan)which will guide the desired engagement effort throughout the duration of the planning process. The CE Plan will not only identify 221 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal page 164 specific methods (such as online surveys,in person 1.5 Conduct Stakeholder Listening interviews,and public events/open houses) used Sessions or Interviews to collect community input, it will also identify key We will work with city staff to determine the segments of the community to be targeted for appropriate stakeholder groups for listening engagement during the process and strategies for sessions. It is envisioned that the stakeholder connecting with those segments of the population. listening sessions could take place virtually or in The CE Plan will include a detailed schedule of person,and each session will last one to two hours. engagement that will enable the planning team We will work with staff to determine the appropriate to leverage existing community events and other location,date and time to accommodate opportunities to reach as many people as possible stakeholder schedules.The intention of this task during the planning process. is to gather information from specific user groups The engagement effort for this project will or community experts on bicycle and pedestrian- emphasize engagement with stakeholders related topics.City staff and HKGi will coordinate throughout the community,including: invitations and outreach for the listening sessions. Youth and school students Task 1 Meetings: Seniors >> Kick Off Meeting and System Tour(held together) Handicapped or disabled communities and >> Stakeholder Interviews advocacy groups >> City Staff Check-In Calls(as needed) Traditionally underserved or underrepresented populations Task 1 Deliverables: Health-related interest groups >> Kickoff day agenda and notes Bicycle and outdoor enthusiasts >> Community Engagement Plan Dakota County staff and other agency staff as >> Project outreach materials necessary >> Stakeholder listening session meeting notes 1.4 Develop and Launch Community Survey A broad-reaching web-based community survey will w"`. �` °'rx a °'"F'"�°"`�`'" ex+c:ai xar.sna neeer4 be launched during this task,with the intention of ;;« r3.a9-s ew>^• 3.5°6 4% 3% gathering information from the public about specific barriers to walking and biking in Mendota Heights, c g� as well as identifying key community locations to be examined more closely for pedestrian and bicycle ° =,m.,°«< °rr wm• ,,,„x, >.,, Y... ..„ ..,,.,r., .nn.°r aae,c sra„cwr. ,o,.,.�u.v mx�o °w access.This survey will be launched using the Social .................. ............................ Pinpoint platform,which is an interactive mapping tool that allows users to tag comments to specific places on a community map. Participants can view comments made by others,and indicate if they 'like'or'dislike'ideas.This survey will remain open o < �W. through the duration of Task 1 and most of Task 2, .--- ......- in order to gather as much community feedback as possible. ` IN rnw• h .... .ruHrnJ6r e.trlr a,rx, --------------------------------- Engagement results will be summarized and presented in concise, easy-to-read infographic formats. Scope of Work 123 page 165 Task 2 - Inventory and Analysis 2.2 Review Relevant Plans Timeline: mid-March through mid-May 2022 HKGi will analyze and review existing plans and This taskwill include the collection and analysis of other relevant background material to understand base information like GIS files,reviewing existing the history and trajectory of bicycle and pedestrian and concurrent plans,and creating a set of base planning and facilities in Mendota Heights,as well maps that will be used to perform analysis on the as current and proposed land uses,development existing roadway and trail network.We will look patterns,and transportation networks.These plans at the data collected for the City's comprehensive include the 2040 Comprehensive Plan,Safe Routes plan and determine how it influences the current to School Plans,the Dodd Road Corridor Study, and future bicycle and pedestrian network.We will Dakota County Greenway Master Plans impacting conduct an evaluation of service and facility gaps Mendota Heights and the surrounding communities, and overlaps based on accessibility,usage,quality and any previous bicycle and pedestrian plan and connectedness.We will concurrently review, documents and transportation studies. audit,and synthesize key findings and directions 2.3 Perform System Analysis from applicable background and related documents. HKGi will compile all existing condition data and This task will also focus on assessing community perform analysis to find network gaps and identify needs,opportunities,and priorities,including an issues,opportunities,and challenges to creating a evaluation of the existing conditions related to SHIP well-connected and convenient system.Qualitative priority populations. Demographic analysis will data,such as information gathered through listening evaluate how the community has changed,as well sessions,insight from City staff,site observation, as project influences of demographic and Active and community input from Social Pinpoint will Living trends into the future. be layered with existing inventory and existing Additionally,this task will engage with City staff, conditions to fully understand the existing and setting the stage for creating a shared language future system.This sub-task will lay the groundwork around bicycle and pedestrian facilities and jumping for the draft plan framework and recommendations. into identifying issues and opportunities.With the help of City staff,HKGi will host a community-wide 2.4 City Staff Meeting open house to identify issues and opportunities and HKGi will facilitate a virtual meeting with City Staff collect feedback from the public on network gaps to review the in-progress analysis and community and priorities for the plan.This task will culminate engagement and coordinate for upcoming with a prepared Existing Conditions+ Issues/ Community Open House. Analysis Report summarizing findings to-date. 2.5 Process Community Feedback 2.1 Assemble Background Data / HKGi will assemble and analyze community feedback Develop Base Maps received during the Community Open House,Listening HKGi will assemble GIS data for existing and planned Sessions,and the Social Pinpoint Community Survey sidewalks,trails, bikeways and related pedestrian and produce a reader-friendly report. and bicycle facilities.The City will provide HKGi with this GIS data along with supporting base 2.6 Prepare an Issues and map data such as park boundaries,community Opportunities Report destinations,topography and local transportation HKGi will prepare an Issues and Opportunities data.The City should also provide any data related Report for staff review and approval.The report will to asset management,transportation systems and summarize all of the existing conditions,analysis, previous planning efforts related to the bicycle and and community engagement gathered during pedestrian network.HKGi will work with City staff to Tasks 1 and 2 along with identified issues and address data requests for items that may not be in opportunities and the principles that will guide Plan GIS file format. recommendations. 241 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal page 166 Task 2 Meetings: Task 3 - Plan & System City Staff Meeting (virtual) Recommendations Task 2 Deliverables: Timeline: May through June 2022 Analysis map sets This taskwill build on the site analysis,community Summary of reviewed plans engagement,and guiding principles developed in Issues and Opportunities Report,to include full Tasks 1 and 2. summary of analysis,reviewed plans,community Following development of the Issues and engagement and identified issues,opportunities Opportunities report,we will develop a draft plan and guiding principles and system recommendations.The system plan will City Staff meeting agenda and summary be action oriented with specific recommendations and strategies to achieve the vision as understood sure 2.3 Four Types of Bigallsts in Farmington _ through Tasks 1 and 2.We will work closely with City staff to understand the facilities and strategies that will best fit the Mendota Heights community, ,�, • as well as identify non-infrastructural actions,such as evaluation and encouragement tools,that will 10% 34% 47% 9% build community support for the plan and assist STRONG AND ENTHUSIASTIC INTERESTED BUT NOT ABLE FEARLESS AND CONCERNED OR ENOT ST with fundraisingor grant-writing efforts. As in the CONFIDENT INTERESTED g g Advanced, Comfortable >.Prefer to takeoff streetpaths or Peoplewhohaveno confident sharingtheroad low volumeresidential streets current interest in previous task,Task 3 will include a consideration of rider who is with vehicular traffic „Safety i s a big concern for these Hhng or physically comfortable but prefer bicycle riders unable to ride a bicycle SHIP priority populations and the potential benefits riding in mest lanes,multi-use ,Don't generally self-identify as >�Often citefar distances, traffiTenn olhsitua e trails Largest weather,costs asreason and impacts of proposed recommendations. v Tendtohave »May choose to >,fargest potential for increaaes for not bikng high performance bike for health, in rl dershlp Improve andments in local Taketheshortest rra'spo�tat�on`or Ietworkswouldmakeri ridi andng ea°�luturagam rt n,, Task 3 will include an interactive staff workshop networks re co fortabdi option genre , routes and seek recreation viabl e,more comfortable option educati on could help PIafaaroasde oy rmave gh makmrediorgedtwailngf a Community Open House,and an online survey pedestrian,anfrom,du clothing egear, °b'eopp°ffuni to create a draft plan that is implementable, pedestrians due clothing to higher speeds understandable,and is supported by the community. 3.1 Develop Draft Plan Framework _.............. We will develop a draft plan framework that is .. specifically tailored to the site analysis and feedback •"� "' received from the community.This framework will lay out a network hierarchy of connections and facilities,define the appropriate vocabulary to be �_ ` used throughout the system plan,and determine an �" ';•` p outline of specific Ian and system deliverables that ¢ �.. p will be most beneficial and useful for city staff as the plan is implemented. ` 3.2 Develop System Plan and Recommendations In tandem with the draft plan framework, we will work to develop a system plan and recommendations that will address the system as a whole,and take into consideration open spaces, Analysis of current conditions and context in Mendota Heights will trails,sidewalks,on-and off-street facilities,urban include gauging stakeholder comfort levels with bicycling(top) as well as understanding the physical conditions for cycling and design and street-level amenities.We will employ walking in the community(bottom). Scope of Work page 167 the principles of active living,as well as the most up- 3.4 Develop and Launch Community to-date standards as set forth by NACTO,AASHTO, Survey #2 and the Minnesota Bicycle Design Guidelines,in An online community survey will be launched to combination with our experience working on trail gather broad community input on the draft system and system plans throughout the region,to create plan and recommendations.We will work closely the draft plan and system recommendations for with City staff to facilitate the best method (city Mendota Heights.The following components will be project website,Survey Monkey,etc.) in an effort key to the draft plan and recommendations: to reach as many Mendota Heights residents as » Multi-use trail or greenway connections to possible with this survey. We will also assist in existing trails and parks outreach efforts. » Sidewalk and pedestrian connections,especially 3.5 Community Open House or Pop in areas with transit connections,near higher- density residential and commercial areas,and Up Meeting near community destinations such as schools and We will host a community open house to share parks project information with the community,gather » Intersection and crossing treatments across high- feedback on draft recommendations,and ask for volume roadways feedback on priorities for residents of Mendota Heights. Participants will be encouraged to provide » Bicycle and pedestrian connections feedback in a variety of methods (print,verbal,web- based). Preferably,this open house will be planned » Education,evaluation,and encouragement tools in conjunction with a planned community event to » Incentives or programs for businesses to support make it easy and convenient for as many residents as plan initiatives possible to participate.We will coordinate with City » Implementation plans including establishment of staff to assist with outreach efforts for this event. implementation priorities Task 3 Meetings: » Estimated improvement costs for selected » City Staff Workshop(virtual) implementation initiatives and long-term maintenance and replacement cost estimates » Community Open House or Pop Up Meeting Task 3 Deliverables: 3.3 City Staff Workshop » Draft Plan Framework We will meet with staff virtually,using a » Draft Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan collaborative,workshop tool (Mural)to review recommendations the draft plan framework and draft system recommendations. Involvement by city » City Staff meeting agenda and summary representatives from Public Works, Parks and » Community Survey#2 Recreation,Community Development, Engineering, » Website/outreach content and materials and Administration will be key to the success of » Community Open House materials and results this workshop,as it will help to verify and confirm potential opportunities,funding,and timing for implementation. 261 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal page 168 Task 4 - Final Plan and Approvals Timeline: mid-June through September 2022 Task 4 will commence with the summary of Community Survey#2. Feedback gathered from the survey,as well as from City staff,the APRC,and EDUCATION is that mry mmmo nity gets t1v eQct same nesouroe5 subsequent presentations to the City Council and same plaim and nem the same th Into. Advisory Planning Commission will be documented and woven into revisions of the Draft Document, with the intention of obtaining approval by the City ENGAGEMENT Council during September 2022. 4.1 Revision of Draft Plan An on-going sub-task within Task 4will involve revising and refining the Draft Plan and System qi1e,,to work Darls- Recommendations per feedback received through the community survey,from City staff,the APRC and U from presentations to the City Council and Advisory BIKE SH•4RFnnr"';;,' Planning Commission and other community sources. fp 4.2 Prepare Final Draft Document and Action Plan We will prepare a final draft document and action The planning process will include consideration and incorporation plan to include a timeline of actions with associated of principles related to the SixE's: Evaluation,Equity,Education, implementation strategies,such as funding Engagement,Encouragement and Engineering. opportunities,potential partnerships,and planning tools that can be referenced during implementation. PARK DESTINATION ROUTES The action plan will also include cost estimates to 4Num rce NeM.w0.�la}s,IKanm.Pah OesL,vWnRMep p,e Faroe trio,mnvd ewfa®van.artl adewalla n�Pmwe ar+dmw ww.pa assist with City budgeting,as well as guide future ' DEAD vo x w una GESC.—.1IGN IMPLEMENTATION aw.ar w �� �,��,,,,�,�„�.,�,,,.,, , . �,�,,, maintenance and replacement schedules.The draft 41:.%�.: 0 ,a'+PP U�wG,�zs o-,[A m..v661rb c Pcxnl:wxw .1— a,rmrmu wrn document will be available in print and web-based . �arvw:wlarv,• a„a�s la,.e e•,y w^a.m ccaw:xwn wew• format,and we will work directly with City staff to best distribute draft documents for community ' �%�` CIIY6IN PaNcv. v 1,airs4[wala casM 1'aV ra•,pcao • LpCAMN occev,a,ry(walr.eeepn ai:,larel wnlir oiria ,l��l� P „ a:l a ,Y �.,,� �a,„a review. wlMn, .,PaMY r,.:,rc.�w�„aP,aro,lrp«•.re�,.e�„ �m� �,�aa ne� � •, o� r,, F 4.3 City Staff Meeting �,ro,,,�,,,e P, INTE N NDED IY9E QED USE LOGRTItlN @" We will meet with staff to review the final draft • rcr?si✓9e,n Ica4'ts I.O:aIeQ Nrnn y�gcpry�esirp ProCF,.Cb document and action plan and to coordinate the .on,wnmene yrnaG r,sngn OE51tlN•IIh7LEMEHTATILIN upcoming presentations to the Advisory Park and Recreation Commission,Advisory Planning ,8 Commission,and City Council.. The Woodbury Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan included guidance for improvements and design to different types of connections and routes such as to and from schools,neighborhoods,and parks. Scope of Work page 169 4.4 APRC Meeting (approximate date: Task 4 Meetings: .July 12) >> City Staff Meeting We will facilitate an APRC Meeting,which will >> Advisory Park and Recreation Commission primarily involve reviewing the Draft Plan and Meeting System Recommendations, reviewing feedback >> Advisory Planning Commission Meeting from the community survey to-date,and discussing Presentation the components of the Action Plan.APRC members >> City Council Meeting Presentation may be tasked with reviewing sections of the plan >> City Council Final Presentation and Approval or revisiting locations to perform audits or'ground- truthing'to verify specific recommendations. Task 4 Deliverables: Final Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan and System 4.5 Advisory Planning Commission Framework Meeting Presentation >> Presentations to the City Council, Planning (approximate date:July 26) Commission and Advisory Parks and Recreation Present Draft Plan to the Advisory Planning Commission and all related supporting materials Commission.We will work with City Staff to >> Agenda and meeting notes from City Staff coordinate distribution of packet materials in Meeting either web or print-format for the Commission,and >> Draft Action Plan &Implementation Strategies create a digital presentation to summarize the key elements of the plan for the meeting. Feedback from >> Draft Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan,to include the Commission will be recorded and integrated into System Recommendations and Action Plan the Final Document. >> Final (Approved) Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan, to include System Recommendations and Action 4.6 City Council Meeting Presentation Plan (approximate date: August 16) >> All packaged files and data shared with City staff Present Draft Plan to the City Council.We will work with City Staff to coordinate distribution of Beyond the Approved Plan packet materials in either web or print-format for As a full-service design and planning firm,HKGi is the City Council,and create a digital presentation qualified to submit future proposals to perform to summarize the key elements of the plan for the planning and design services to implement meeting. Feedback from the council will be recorded elements of the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan,as and integrated into the Final Document. well as perform additional related services,such as 4.7 City Council Presentation parking studies,grant writing, master planning and (September, 2022) design for specific recommendations. As necessary,we will re-present the Draft Plan with HKGi has a long-standing relationship with Dakota incorporated revisions to the City Council for a County and other regional agencies, providing second time,in anticipation of a vote to approve the successful grant-writing assistance specifically for Final Plan Document. trails,greenways,parks,and related facilities.We will be qualified and experienced to assist in this effort, 4.8 Final Document Deliverables as well as integrate this experience and knowledge Upon approval by the City Council,the Final Plan into the implementation strategies of the final Document and all supporting materials will be document. packaged in a digital format and delivered to City Staff.Print copies of the plan and supporting materials will be coordinated with City Staff,as well as sharing of GIS database files. 281 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal page 170 M\i r trex Y IDENTIFIED GAPS Existing Pedestrian Facilities n w�av �k Hestings,MN ID iynfNM�X `� n� - _ ( a n n..p4d ^i4l Ynv� 0 Fe.l hb� r - {) j""' \ ( «wu.o-n wYxmm nn r L i fit' ._ � R; ❑roninvx�„V � ""--_.° � r. y a w«Iw,r., Ca Nr.� ��� f CGD BBIwv n�° ICroFskgr. ' a , .axy Awrb.rwr t '�u 81 r SCHOOLS �w BIM Iwr:Aner Fan Mating TnIX.: �wkr �-�v- I O a a �. i - � l�r�.ar p!�k nestrrvntrorvs ! 'z t L 6APMRPtECEN❑ �.._-- •• _ q�, Ogg MI C—.Mrcraees .ca.d 5 . Cros.mg vwto iw rss { r w s S w iMr Si i lflry 55 '� •• _• .. f t,w� whoM h -nti;s x hnl Xwr 55 - F teoe�taimenbr e"(� ��tnmstF>•Xr�st .[L`•'"''�S 1.. f : �4.n., gf s Irtss Asilxnd svioma " !"° a �.;" r G _. �I AMwr inn Y4;" Ia1 7 ,,�•.r- , yxnllllae RlYK .',�-I h.,,�.,�p6wmery IlK..nd Lthiiciry .. - •B.k Race and Ethnicity ><In•e.R r4 I'um°y lO Mik Laap •Mmra ni.Uery ❑ 0.25 0.5 t . .. •. rrn,.�o trAiks The Hastings People Movement Plan included a wide variety of key graphics including identification ofpedestrian gaps(top),grade separated crossings plans(bottom left),and results from equity mapping(bottom right). Scope of Work V29 page 171 Schedule MUMMMEEME Survey#1 Task 1:Organize the Effort Task 2: Inventory and Analysis Task 3: Plan Survey#2 &System Recommendations Task 4: Final Plan - and Approvals Meetings and Engagement Events MEETING EVENT SYMBOL City Staff Meetings Listening Sessions Community Survey City Staff Workshop • Community Open House Advisory Park and Rec Commission Advisory Planning Commission City Council 301 Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan-Proposal > 00 page 172 0 a C Q 4 a ry a h Engagement 66 ° Tools ® HKGi uses a wide variety of online 0 O engagement tools to augment and supplement in-person engagement n activities. HKGi was a pioneer in the Twin gi Cities in the use of Social Pinpoint— (top graphic),a robust application that allows users to tag specific locations in the community,leave comments,upload photos(to show a key items such as unsafe crossings, Y for example),and complete Topic Fc 2: Green Infrastructure n surveys. v 1 __ � All changes save Another application typically used - by HKGi is Mural(bottom graphic), 1 which serves as an online white- board and is a valuable tool for conducting online workshops. ' These online tools,and others like SurveyMonkey and ESRI Story EQ Maps,offer convenient ways for m`a^ _ • stakeholders to provide detailed input,and they streamline the process of compiling and summarizing public input. ED i ... I - Are� .. sti � - Naming Aeen3 e. r r ■ '^ — — — — — — — — ...ir..r....' ,a ..... � � GreengzrF®rk z• �„!- .... PraposedFlaW yroatY6rrea!F �- � + Scope of Work page 173 0&6, People Movement Plan Hastings, Minnesota m. r ,.r4'.N"k m ,. .`;, , •,. • `rr,�•.l,. +�'k�rtf - .J+=.. -ems'_a, r 4 ON r ", • r. y•• Yx' { . fir .- avow �w f •x Ow :R� COST FOR SERVICES page 174 Cost Proposal Per Task The table below includes HKGi's Not-To-Exceed fee proposal to conduct the work scope as described in the previous section. The total fee also includes anticipated reimbursable expenses to conduct this project. These fees have been calculated using the hourly rates for staff members included in this proposal. Hourly rate ranges for each staff member are included on the table at the bottom of this page. Specific hourly rates for staff can be provided to the City,as requested. This proposed fee is valid for no less than 90 days from the date of this proposal. Task 1:Organize the Effort 60 $6,300 Task 2: Inventory and Analysis 100 $10,300 Task 3: Plan &System Recommendations 90 $9,000 Task 4: Final Plan and Approvals 80 $9,600 Subtotal 410 $35,200 Reimbursable Expenses $800 Total Fee $36,000 Hourly Rates HKGi Hourly Rates Principal - Paige I $180-240/hr Current Federal Mileage Associate-Grinde I $145-165/hr Rate/Mile Senior Professional - Rader I $90-210/hr Photocopying BW I 1 Wpage Professional II -Solomonson I $80-115/hr Photocopying Color I $1.00/page Professional I - Hackett I $50-95/hr Outside Printing I Actual Cost Technical I $50-70/hr Large Format Scanning I Actual Cost Secretarial I $60/hr B/W Bond Plots I $5.00 each Litigation Services I $240/hr Color Bond Plots I $10.00 each Testimony $285/hr Photo Paper Color Plots $30.00 each Cost for Services r r 5 ' r � • µ l r _ If�pj�f •7Y 1 � F QRN , 7 ill y j j oll 4 � ��� r' � �,, •�i8 x r� Wry `, t � ; '• R ,a w 4 All �. HK page 176 9d. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota 651.452.1850 phone I 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com m* CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Request for City Council Action DATE: February 15, 2022 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Lord Smith, City Clerk SUBJECT: Change City Council March 15, 2022 regular meeting date INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to consider changing the meeting date of the second regular City Council meeting of next month, March 15, 2022, due to a lack of a quorum. BACKGROUND Staff is asking the Council to reschedule the meeting in order to pay the claims list and other small items that may need to be taken care of before the first meeting in April. Possible meeting dates and times that could work for at least three members of the Council include March 22 or March 23 starting at 4:00 pm. If neither of those two dates would work, then the Council could look at other dates including March 9 or March 29. The meeting time should also be set. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council change the March 15, 2022 regular meeting date and time. ACTION REQUIRED Staff recommends that the City Council make a motion to change the March 15, 2022 meeting date to another date and time in March.