2017-03-21 Council PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
March 21, 2017 – 7:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Consent Agenda
a. Approval of March 7, 2017 City Council Minutes
b. Approval of March 7, 2017 City Council Workshop Minutes
c. Acknowledgement the 2016 Parks and Recreation Report
d. Authorization of Victoria Highlands Park Ballfield Upgrades
e. Approve Resolution 2017-25 Approve Permanent Easement to Mendota Heights for the Dodd
Road Trail
f. Northland Drive Lift Station Rehabilitation – Purchase Order
g. Approve Resolution 2017-26 Designating a Right-of-Way Acquisition for Roadway and
Utility Purposes – Lot 1, Gangl First Addition
h. Wetland Conservation Act Application – Dakota County
i. Approve Resolution 2017-27 Amendment to Fee Schedule
j. Award Contract for 2017 Street Sweeping
k. Authorization to Send to Auction - 2008 Ford Explorer Police Vehicle
l. Approve Resolution 2017-23 Comcast Franchise Agreement Extension
m. Approve Resolution 2017-24 State of Minnesota Joint Powers Agreements with the City of
Mendota Heights on behalf of its City Attorney and Police Department
n. Acknowledgment of February 2017 Fire Synopsis
o. Approve Building Activity Report February 2017
p. Approve Treasurer’s Report
q. Approval of Claims List
6. Public Comments
7. Presentations - none
8. Public Hearing
a. Wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor License Transfer – King and I Thai
9. New and Unfinished Business
a. Resolution 2017-17 Approving Lot Split (Minor Subdivision) at 697 Wesley Lane (Planning
Case - 2017-02)
b. Approve Letter of Intent with Trammell Crow for Residential Apartment Development at
Village Lots property
c. Discussion of City Council meeting starting time
d. Discuss Rescheduling of April 4th City Council Meeting
10. Community Announcements
11. Council Comments
12. Adjourn
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, March 7, 2017
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota
Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights,
Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers Miller, Petschel, and Paper
were also present. Councilmember Duggan was absent.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Paper moved adoption of the
agenda.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 (Duggan)
SWEARING IN OF FIRE CHIEF AND ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF
City Administrator Mark McNeill called former Fire Chief John Maczko to the podium to introduce his
successor.
Former Fire Chief Maczko introduced Fire Chief Dave Dreelan and Assistant Fire Chief Scott
Goldenstein and provided a brief background on each.
City Administrator Mark McNeill presided over the swearing in of Fire Chief Dave Dreelan and
Assistant Fire Chief Scott Goldenstein.
page 3
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval.
Councilmember Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for
execution of any necessary documents contained therein.
a. Approval of February 21, 2017 City Council Minutes
b. Acknowledge February 28, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes
c. Approval to Begin Police Officer Recruitment Process
d. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Lower Mississippi Watershed Management Org for Lake
Augusta Alum Treatment
e. Approve Donation of City Property
f. Approval of Claims List
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 (Duggan)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
PRESENTATIONS
A) ROGERS LAKE WATER QUALITY REPORT BY ST. THOMAS ACADEMY
City Administrator Mark McNeill introduced Mr. Tony Kinzley, Advanced Placement Environmental
Sciences Instructor at St. Thomas Academy. He also explained that St. Thomas Academy has been
monitoring several aspects of the water quality of Rogers Lake since 2001.
Mr. Kinzley introduced the students giving the presentation this year, who then presented their findings
on the following ten different parameters. The results showed that Rogers Lake continues to be a very
healthy lake. All but “Change in Temperature” showed better and acceptable results. The historical data
on the lakes’ water quality shows a trend of improvement over the past several recent years.
PUBLIC HEARING
No items scheduled.
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
page 4
A) RESOLUTION 2017-21 APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO GERALD TROOIEN,
1010 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
Planner Tim Benetti explained that Mr. Gerald Trooien of 1010 Sibley Memorial Highway has
requested to perform additional landscaping work on this site. Mr. Trooien applied for a permit in
October 2016, at which time it was discovered that he had completed more work than had been
permitted to do. He had been instructed to halt those activities immediately.
Staff subsequently met with Mr. Trooien’s landscape architect. The current application is both an “after-
the-fact” permit for the work done prior, and a new permit for the work to be done in the future.
The site is just over five acres in sizze, is guided LR–Low Density Residential and is located in the R-1
Single-Family Residential District. In 2014 the property was split into two lots. Parcel A encompasses
the current home and garage and is 3.4 acres in size. Parcel B is the new parcel and is 1.36 acres. Mr.
Trooien initially indicated that he was going to clear the ground on a particular section where he
anticipated the house pad to be located. However, it was discovered that a lot more work had been done
outside of this area. It was at this point that all work was halted. It was discovered that a number of trees
and shrubs had been improperly removed.
In 2015, Mr. Trooien provided a plan for replanting with materials consisting of white pines, burr oak,
blue spruces, and maples. He is proposing to plant the entire area with a mixture of new prairie grass
seeds, pollinator-friendly seeds, and native grasses.
Mr. Trooien is proposing to place the building pad 60 feet from the neighboring property line instead of
the original proposal of 20 feet from the property line. He is also proposing a driveway, rain garden, and
a drainage swell.
Members of the Planning Commission, Community Development Director Tim Benetti, and Consulting
Planner Phil Carlson visited the site on February 25, 2017. Mr. Benetti observed that the site was thick
with buckthorn which needs clearing. Staff believes that with help from the landscape architect, the
restoration work and the removal of buckthorn should be successful.
Mr. Benetti reviewed the resident’s concerns raised at last week’s Planning Commission meeting
regarding the plans to remove buckthorn and all invasive species up to 3” in diameter. Mr. Benetti stated
that the landscape architect is going to mark each of the growths to be removed, staff would verify that
everything has been marked properly, and that a controlled removal would be undertaken. The landscape
architecture company also treats the cut system – plantings are cut to ground level, and roots are treated
so there is no grow back. The intact roots prevent any soil erosion.
Councilmember Paper asked who was going to warranty the plant material? Mr. Benetti replied that
typically the greenhouse or the plant provider warranties the plant material.
page 5
Councilmember Paper asked for an explanation of caliper process to determine a 3” tree. Mr. Benetti
replied that the determination is made by the diameter of the planting approximately four feet from the
ground.
Councilmember Miller suggested a requirement that the plantings are warrantied for three years. Mr.
Benetti replied that he has typically seen warranties for one to two years.
Councilmember Petschel pointed out that requesting a bond or a letter-of-credit when work has been
completed prior to receiving the proper permit is fairly routine. Mr. Benetti added that the value of the
bond or letter-of-credit would be determined by staff; it is typically 125% to 150% of the value of the
work to be done, including the landscaping, grading work, etc.
Councilmember Paper asked if the 12 to 14-foot spruce trees were balled and burlapped, or spaded-in.
Mr. Benetti replied that the trees planted prior were spaded in. The new ones have been identified as
balled and burlapped. Mr. Stephen Mastey, landscape architect from Landscape Architecture, Inc.
clarified that 23 conifers were spaded in because of their large size.
After discussion and review of the final resolution, it was determined that the warranty plan will be for
two years, and will be held by the contractor or the property owner, not by a nursery.
Mr. Darin Carlson, 992 Caren Court, stated that this request has come a long way since they first noticed
the equipment out clearing the area. He believes this is a really good plan. He recognized that there are a
lot of invasive shrubs. He would like to hear more about the options to replace the invasive plantings
that could be removed.
Mr. Mastey returned and stated that as part of their restoration plan they have a mixture of trees and a
Minnesota Native Landscape Mix of approximately 20 wildflowers and approximately five grass plants.
They also would be working with City staff to finalize a native woodland mix of approximately 25
species. The long-term goal is to make this site ecologically more appropriate.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-21 APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA
PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 1010 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY, with
conditions as stated in the resolution.
Councilmember Paper seconded the motion.
Mayor Garlock called the vote.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 (Duggan)
B) RESOLUTION 2017-22 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO HOLY
FAMILY MARONITE CHURCH, 1960 LEXINGTON AVENUE
page 6
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained this Conditional Use Permit request from
Holy Family Maronite Church, located at 1960 Lexington Avenue, to make additions to the existing
church building. He said that churches are allowed as a conditional use in the R-1 district ,and anytime
that use is added to or modified, the conditional use needs to be amended or modified.
The two additions being planned total approximately 3,750 square feet. The additions would be on the
west side and the southeast corner of the building. The additions would be to expand the fellowship hall,
kitchen, storage area, and to add a sacristy, a classroom, restrooms, and two offices. There are no plans
to change the worship space; therefore, there are no changes necessary to the parking requirements.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of this request with conditions. No negative
comments or concerns were raised.
Councilmember Petschel moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2017-22 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO HOLY FAMILY MARONITE CHURCH AT 1960 LEXINGTON AVENUE, with
conditions as noted in the resolution.
Councilmember Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 (Duggan)
C) ORDINANCE NO. 508 AMENDING TITLE 5 - POLICE REGULATIONS AND TITLE 12
- ZONING REGARDING THE KEEPING OF DOMESTIC CHICKENS
Planner Tim Benetti explained this was an Ordinance Amendment regarding the keeping of domestic
chickens within the City. The Planning Commission discussed a draft ordinance and held a public
hearing at their January 24, 2017 meeting. At their February 28, 2017 meeting, the commission
reviewed the revisions of the ordinance and forwarded to it to City Council with a recommendation of
approval by a vote of 4-2. Planner Benetti reviewed the proposed Ordinance No. 508.
Councilmember Petschel asked what the license fee would be. Planner Benetti replied that the fee has
not been determined as of yet. It would be brought back to the City Council as an amendment to the fee
schedule.
Councilmember Petschel requested that, if the Council approved this Ordinance, that it be discussed
again in one year to make any necessary edits or tweaks.
Councilmember Miller moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 508 AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 5 -
POLICE REGULATIONS AND TITLE 12–ZONING REGARDING THE KEEPING OF DOMESTIC
CHICKENS, and to direct staff to add this to a council agenda in one year for review.
Councilmember Paper seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
page 7
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 (Duggan)
Mr. Patrick Watson, 1327 Delaware Avenue, expressed his appreciation in the passing of this ordinance
and noted that the fee was discussed as being $25.
D) AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2017 MUNICIPAL CLEAN UP DAY
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that staff had sent out a request-for-proposal to create a
contract with a vendor to operate the Mendota Heights Clean-Up Day rather than having a volunteer-
driven clean-up day as in the past.
Staff reviewed the pricing of items collected in previous years and proposed a new fee schedule for
2017, which they feel is comparable to previous events. Mr. Ruzek then reviewed the fee schedule
making special note that paper shredding will be held one week prior and will be a joint partnership with
the cities of West St. Paul, South St. Paul, and Inver Grove Heights.
Councilmember Petschel asked if they would be accepting building materials. Mr. Ruzek replied that the
event would not be accepting contractor debris, or large home remodeling debris.
Councilmember Paper asked how the fee schedule would be communicated to residents. Mr. Ruzek
replied that the fee schedule would be in the Heights Highlights delivered approximately April 17th,
along with advertisements on the city’s website, Facebook page, and by a direct mailing to all of the
residents.
Councilmember Petschel moved to authorize staff to execute a contract with Highland Sanitation for the
operation of the Mendota Heights 2017 Clean Up Day event to be held on April 29th, 2017.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 (Duggan)
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Paper expressed appreciation to the students of St. Thomas Academy for their
presentation regarding Rogers Lake. He also congratulated School District 197 for naming a new
superintendent.
Councilmember Miller stated that his family posthumously celebrated his father’s 91st birthday. He
spoke of his father’s experiences in World War II, and the influence he had had on his children.
Councilmember Petschel announced it was ice-out on Rogers Lake that day. She also welcomed the new
superintendent of School District 197. She expressed her appreciation to Dr. Nancy Allen-Mastro for her
page 8
tremendous service to the school district, stating that Dr. Allen-Mastro had been an absolute rock and a
delight to work with.
Mayor Garlock expressed his appreciation to the backyard chicken advocates for the communication
between them and the Planning Commission, and for their dedication in getting the ordinance approved.
ADJOURN
Councilmember Paper moved to adjourn.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 4
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 (Duggan)
Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 8:34 p.m.
____________________________________
Neil Garlock
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 9
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Council Workshop
Thursday, March 7, 2017
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a workshop of the Mendota Heights City Council was held at
City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Councilmembers Miller, Paper, and Petschel
were also present. Councilmember Duggan joined the meeting via an interactive television pursuant
to Minn. Stat. §13D.02. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant
City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, Finance Director Kristen Schabacker, Public Works Director
Ryan Ruzek, Community Development Director Tim Benetti, City Attorney Tom Lehmann and City
Clerk Lorri Smith.
VILLAGE LOTS
Administrator McNeill opened the discussion and provided background on three vacant City-owned
lots which are part of The Village at Mendota Heights development. He reported the City has
received two offers from developers.
The Council reviewed plans submitted by Trammel Crow Companies for a market rate senior
housing apartment building. The proposed development would contain approximately 154 apartment
style units in a five story building with underground parking. It was noted that this density would be
57 units per acre.
Councilmembers noted that this development would meet a lot of the needs for Mendota Heights.
Traffic congestion on Dodd Road is a major concern.
The second proposal was received from a local builder and would include 19 row townhomes
designed similar to those that are currently located in the development.
There was consensus of the Councilmembers to move ahead with completing a traffic study and an
appraisal of this property.
BOURN PROPERTIES
Administrator McNeill discussed with the Council a proposal received from a local business to
expand their business on the Bourn Lane properties. The City has been acquiring these parcels since
the early 1990’s and it includes 14 acres. The local business would like to receive an incentive from
the city.
page 10
Tab abatement was discussed as an incentive. It was suggested the City complete an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet on the property.
A second proposal was received, proposing a recreation center on this property, to include a field
house and soccer fields.
Staff was directed to get prices on the cost of completing an EAW on this property.
MENDOTA MOTEL
The possible sale of the Mendota Motel was discussed. Offering Tax Increment Financing as an
incentive to the potential developer of the property was discussed. Completing an appraisal of the
property was discussed. It was noted that the City could pay for the appraisal and reimburse
ourselves for that cost if TIF is offered to the developer.
This discussion will continue at the March 21, 2017 Workshop meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
A. Council Meeting Start Time Discussion
Changing the start time of the City Council meetings was discussed. Councilmember Paper
suggested a 6:30 pm start time. Mayor Garlock agreed. Council member Petschel noted those who
would be adversely affected by this change. Staff was directed to place this on the next Council
agenda for action.
ADJOURN
Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 6:53 p.m.
____________________________________
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 11
Mendota Heights Parks & Recreation Department 1
2016 Annual Report
Mendota Heights Parks & Recreation
page 12
Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Department 2
Mission Statement
The mission of Mendota Heights Parks & Recreation Department is to provide facilities,
activities, and parklands to enrich the lives of residents and vistitors.
Parks and Recreation Commission
Members Jay Miller
Pat Hinderscheid
Ira Kipp
Stephanie Levine
David Miller
Joel Paper, Chair
Michael Toth
Claire Dunham, Student Representative
Myles Bowman, Student Representative
Parks and Recreation Staff
Public Works Director......................... .... ..Ryan Ruzek
Public Work Superintendent ....................Terry Blum
Assistant City Administrator............Cheryl Jacobson
Recreation Program Coordinator.......Sloan Wallgren
Parks Maintenance Lead........................John Boland
Parks Maintenance..............................Cliff Kirschner
Parks Maintenance............................... Mike Maczko
Mechanic .............................................Nick Courteau
Parks and Recreation Commission
The Parks and Recreation Commission is a seven member advisory board to the city council
on matters relating to parks and recreation including:
Plan and develop programs and activities.
Develop schedules of hours and fees for the use of recreational trails and park facilities.
Study possible government and private foundation grants available for the acquisition and
development of park and trail facilities.
Develop plans for improvement and betterment of existing facilities.
Develop plans for acquisition of additional facilities.
Coordinate recreational trail and park activities with other community organizations and groups.
Promote public interest and understanding of the city’s parks and trails activities.
The Parks and Recreation Department also employs 40 part-time seasonal employees.
page 13
Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Department 3
Parks Department
Park staff annually maintains more than 310 acres
of public land.
Facilities under the stewardship of the Parks
Department include 8 picnic shelters, 1 fishing pier,
12 softball and baseball fields, 3 soccer fields, 1 sand
volleyball court, 1 cross country ski trail, 3 hockey
rinks, 4 skating rinks, 3 warming houses, 26 miles of
trails, 11 playgrounds, 10 tennis courts, 10 basketball
courts, an off-leash dog area and a skate park.
Mendota Heights Parks
• Civic Center
• Copperfield Ponds
• Friendly Hills Park
• Friendly Marsh Park
• Hagstrom-King Park
• Historic Pilot Knob
• Ivy Hills Park
• Kensington Park
• Market Square Park
• Marie Park
• Mendakota Park
• Rogers Lake Park
• Valley Park
• Valley View Heights Park
• Victoria Highlands Park
• Wentworth Park
State, Regional and Private Parks
• Fort Snelling State Park
• Harriet Island-Lilydale Regional Park
• Dodge Nature Center
• School District 197
• Big Rivers Regional Trail
•River to River Greenway
page 14
Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Department 4
2016 Parks Department Highlights
The City became Pollinator Friendly. Staff has worked with local Master
Gardeners to offer educational workshops and community events to educate
our residents on the benefits of pollinator friendly practices.
Resurfaced the basketball court at Mendakota Park.
Park staff continue to provide support and facilities for many community festivals and
events. Park Facilities hosted the following large scale special events:
Special Olympics 5K
Mendota Heights Parks Celebration
Cliff Timm Fishing Derby
Numerous Baseball/Softball
Tournaments
The City removed the old cedar
shakes and installed new shingles
on all of the park buildings.
Conducted a Feasibility Study for Bike/Pedestrian Trail along Dodd Road from Dodd & Smith
all the way south to Dodd and Mendota Heights Road. The study was funded through an
Active Living Grant from Dakota County.
New hockey boards were installed at Friendly Hills Park.
Pickelball Courts were created at Marie Park.
page 15
Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Department 5
Recreation Department Highlights
The Recreation Department’s main objectives are to provide recreation programs, events and
activities, en-courage the use of parks and trails, and promote an active lifestyle.
The Recreation Department partnered with Dakota County to
offer the Simple Steps Program. Simple Steps Walking
Program is a great way to boost energy, reduce stress and
improve your health. Regular physical activity helps prevent
chronic diseases like diabetes, cardiovascular disease and
cancer and can help you maintain a healthy weight.
Programs : in 2016 the Recreation Department offered:
3 Adult Softball Leagues with over 300 participants
20 Youth Tennis Programs with 220 participants
18 Youth Field Trips with 400 participants
10 Playground Programs with 220 participants
15 Youth Programs with 500 participants
During the 2015-2016 winter we had 4400+ skaters use our 3 hockey rinks and 4 pleasure rinks.
New Programs included the Royal Princess Ball and our Tuesday Teen Field Trips.
Added six Tuesday Teen Field Trips in 2016.
Coordination of field use with the Mendota Heights Athletic Association for over 1,800 youth
participants. As well as coordinate field use for St. Thomas Academy, Visitation, St. Joseph
and Trinity.
22 Free Performances in the Park at Market Square
page 16
Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Department 6
Volunteer Efforts—Park Partners
Volunteers helped steward Mendota Heights Parks, Trails and Green Spaces in 2016
through adopting parks and trails, beautifying community spaces and volunteering to clean up
litter and debris.
Park Volunteers keep Mendota Heights beautiful and a
great place to live.
Henry Sibley Girl's Tennis Team cleaned up
Rogers Lake Park as a fundraiser.
The Mendota Heights Mom's Club celebrated
Earth Day by cleaning up the parks.
Volunteers from the Children's Country Day
Care helped to organize a clean up day in
Valley Park.
The Mendota Heights Mom's Club annually
donates a tree to a park. In 2016 a tree was
donated and planted at Mendakota Park.
Volunteers helped to remove buckthorn
from Valley Park.
AJ Stringer designed and installed a
new pollinator friendly native rain
garden at the Mendota Heights Par 3
as part of his Eagle Scout Project.
page 17
Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Department 7
Mendota Heights Par 3 Golf Course
The Mendota Heights Par 3 is a self-supporting enterprise. Revenues generated by the course
as well as retained earnings pay for all expenses including depreciation, equipment
replacement, and capital improvements. The Par 3 is a seasonal facility, generally opening in
Mid-April and closing in Mid-November.
Mendota Heights Par 3
The Mendota Heights Par 3 had over 10,000 rounds of golf played in 2016.
Over 200 youth participated in
one of our 22 golf lesson programs.
The sport of footgolf continued to grow
and there were over 1,000 rounds of
footgolf played at the Par 3.
In 2016 landscaping was done around
the clubhouse.
Locals are gathering at the clubhouse
to play cribbage and scrabble during
the spring and fall.
Total revenue for 2016 was
roughly$147,000 and total
expenses were$142,000 resulting
in a net profit of $5,000. The Golf
Course Fund has a year end cash
balance of
$67,000.
The golf course purchased a greens
roller. This piece of equipment will
help keep the greens in good
condition for our customers.
The golf course offered four golf leagues for adults and five golf leagues for youth. In
2016 there were over 400 participants in our leagues.
The golf course hosted over 15 special events.
page 18
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Sloan Wallgren, Recreation Program Coordinator
SUBJECT: Victoria Highlands Park Ballfield
Introduction
The Mendota Heights Athletic Association would like to partner with the city to make upgrades
to the ballfield at Victoria Highlands Park. The upgrades include expanding the infield to
accommodate a 75 foot base path, installing an outfield fence, adding fencing on the first
baseline and making improvements to the backstop.
Background
The Mendota Heights Athletic Association is a non-profit organization that runs athletic
programs for youth attending a school or living in the boundaries of ISD 197. Currently, the
Mendota Heights Athletic Association uses Victoria Highlands Park only for baseball, however
the changes will still allow softball to be played on the field. Estimated costs for the upgrades
that the association would like to see made include:
Outfield fence $5,000
First baseline fence $1,000
Expanding infield $8,000(city would pay $3,000 for materials, MHAA contributes $5,000 in
labor)
Upgrading/Replacing the backstop $4,000 to $9,000
The Parks and Recreation Commission passed a motion at their February 14th meeting for
council to consider making the above improvements to the ballfield at Victoria Highlands Park.
Budget Impact
Funding for these improvements are recommended to come from the Special Parks Fund, which
has a balance of $651,000.
Required Action
If the council agrees with the proposed changes it should authorize staff to obtain quotes for the
fencing and move forward with expanding the infield with an amount not to exceed $18,000.
page 19
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2017-25 Approving a Permanent Easement to Mendota Heights for the
Dodd Road Trail
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to grant a permanent easement on a portion of Lot 2, Block 3, MENDOTA
HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER plat to the City of Mendota Heights for trail construction and
maintenance purposes.
BACKGROUND
Mendota Heights has a planned trail extension along the east boulevard of Dodd Road (TH 149)
proposed for 2018.
DISCUSSION
In conjunction with the Dodd Road (TH 149) reconstruction project, Mendota Heights is
proposing to construct a shared use pedestrian trail from Maple Street to Marie Avenue. For this
work to occur, the city will need to grant an easement to itself. The easement is located on a
parcel that may be sold for development purposes. The easement and depiction are attached for
your reference.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council approve Resolution 2017-25 granting a permanent easement to the
City of Mendota Heights for trail purposes on the described portion of Lot 2, Block 3,
MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion approving
Resolution 2017-25, APPROVING A PERMANENT EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS. This action requires a simple majority vote.
page 20
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2017-25
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PERMANENT EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has interest in properties described as:
Lot 2, Block 3, as recorded on the MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER plat, Dakota
County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights will need a permanent easement over a portion
of said real property to construct, maintain, and operate a shared use pedestrian trail; and
WHEREAS, an easement document was drafted by Mendota Heights granting easement
rights to said property for said purposes to the City of Mendota Heights.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mendota Heights City Council hereby
approves and authorizes a permanent easement to the City of Mendota Heights granting
immediate right to enter the above described property.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mendota Heights City Council herby authorizes
the Mayor to sign the easement.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this twenty-first day of March,
2017.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
________________________________
ATTEST Neil Garlock, Mayor
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 21
Parcel 6
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made this ______ day of ________________, 2017, by and between the
City of Mendota Heights, a municipal corporation, party of the first part, and the City of
Mendota Heights, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter called the “City”) party of the second
part.
W I T N E S S E T H:
That the City of Mendota Heights, in consideration of ONE DOLLAR AND OTHER
GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION (to it in hand paid by the party of the second
part, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, quitclaim and convey unto
the party of the second part, its successors and assigns, the following:
A permanent easement for trail access purposes, including the right of ingress and egress
for its agents, servants, and contractors, over, under and across the parcels or tracts of land lying
and being in Dakota County, Minnesota more particularly described as follows:
(THE TRACT)
Lot 2, Block 3, MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER, according to the recorded plat
thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota.
Which lies within the following permanent easement for trail purposes:
That part of Lot 2, Block 3, MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER, according to the recorded
plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota, which lies northwesterly of the following described
line: Beginning at a point on the northeast line of said Lot 2, distant 20.00 feet southeasterly of
the most northerly corner of said Lot 2, as measured along said northeasterly line of Lot 2;
thence southwesterly, 61.00 feet, to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant
10.00 feet southeasterly of the northwesterly line of said Lot 2; thence southwesterly along said
line drawn parallel with and distant 10.00 feet southeasterly of the northwesterly line of Lot 2, to
the southerly line of said Lot 2, and said line there terminating.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto set their hand the day
and year first above written.
City of Mendota Heights
By:_____________________________________
Its:_Mayor_____________________________________
State of Minnesota)
) s.s.
County of )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me on this _________ day of ____________, 2017, by
Neil Garlock, Mayor, described above and who executed the foregoing instrument as his own
free act and deed.
____________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires ____/____/_____
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
City of Mendota Heights
Engineering Department
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
page 22
page 23
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Northland Drive Lift Station Rehabilitation – Purchase Order
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve a purchase order for the rehabilitation of the Northland Drive
sanitary sewer lift station.
BACKGROUND
The Northland Drive lift station serves properties west of Pilot Knob Road in the Mendota
Heights Industrial Park. This lift station was constructed in 1979 under city project 7808 and is
in need of replacement.
DISCUSSION
The rehabilitation to the Northland Drive lift station is proposed to include a new panel, controls,
wiring, floats and transducers. The project is a complete replacement of all components except
the wet well, pumps and piping. The new control panel will also include expanded controls and
dedicated space for a future SCADA monitoring system.
Quotes were received from two companies for this work:
Minnesota Pump Works $28,840.95
Electric Pump $37,400.00
BUDGET IMPACT
The sanitary sewer utility fund has budgeted $35,000 for this improvement.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council approve a purchase order to Minnesota Pump Works for $28,840.95
for the rehabilitation of the Northland Drive lift station.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion approving a
purchase order to Minnesota Pump Works. This action requires a simple majority vote.
page 24
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2017-26 Designating a Right-of-Way Acquisition for Roadway and
Utility Purposes – Lot 1, Gangl First Addition
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve Resolution 2017-26 designating a right-of-way acquisition for
Roadway and utility purposes.
BACKGROUND
Mendota Heights acquired fee title to a 30 foot strip of land along the westerly line of Lot One
(1), Gangl First Addition in 1972 for City Project No. 7234, recorded as Document No. 409379.
The project was originally for a sanitary sewer extension on the southeast quadrant of Dodd
Road & Marie Avenue.
DISCUSSION
MnDOT is the lead agency for the Dodd Road (TH 149) reconstruction project and the Mendota
Heights Dodd Road Trail extension project. The State is required to follow additional
regulations and reporting than if the city was the lead on a project. State rules require that the
previous right-of-way acquisition that was taken by the city be identified for a specific purpose.
Staff proposes that the previous acquisition be identified for roadway and utility purposes which
will satisfy the state requirement for their work as well as the trail project.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council approve Resolution 2017-26 Designating a Right-of-Way Acquisition
for Roadway and Utility Purposes – Lot 1, Gangl First Addition.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion approving
Resolution 2017-26, DESIGNATING A RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FOR ROADWAY
AND UTILITY PURPOSES – LOT 1, GANGL FIRST ADDITION. This action requires a
simple majority vote.
page 25
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2017-26
DESIGNATING A RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FOR ROADWAY AND UTILITY
PURPOSES – LOT 1, GANGL FIRST ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights acquired the westerly 30 feet of Lot 1, Gangl
First Addition as recorded in Dakota County, Minnesota.; and
WHEREAS, the acquisition was through a warranty deed recorded as document number
409379; and
WHEREAS, the city desires that this acquisition be designated for roadway and utility
purposes.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mendota Heights City Council hereby
declares that document number 409379 in reference to a warranty deed acquiring the westerly 30
feet of Lot 1, Gangl First Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota be for roadway and utility
purposes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this twenty-first day of March,
2017.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
________________________________
ATTEST Neil Garlock, Mayor
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 26
??
?
?
G!.666666666666666666
666666666666666666"
!!
!!
"
*
*
*
*
**
!!
³"*6666666666666666666666666!!2!!2 !!2
!!2
198
255442
153
135110
18470133
55 1651481402758
76
106
710
1818
719
713
700
717
DODD RDMARIE AVE W
362'192'303.5'366'77.7'
8''16''0''Dakota County GIS
Lot 1, Gangle First Addition City ofMendotaHeights050
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat,survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information containedin this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errorsor omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
3/17/2017
Acquired Area
page 27
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Wetland Conservation Act Application – Dakota County
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked approve a Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) permit application.
BACKGROUND
The City Council of Mendota Heights is the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) that administers
the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). A wetland delineation report and replacement
plan for the Dakota County TH 110 Trail and Underpass project was submitted to the city on
February 23, 2017.
DISCUSSION
The delineation report identified eight (8) wetlands within the project limits. The applicant is
requesting a boundary type approval for all wetlands delineated in the report and is also
proposing permanent impacts to Wetland 2, Wetland 9, and Wetland 5 in two areas. The impacts
to the wetlands are proposed to be remediated through wetland banking.
The first impact to Wetland 5 totals 218 square feet being necessitated by the installation of a
storm sewer outlet. The second impact totals 0.03 acres for the construction of a pedestrian
bridge. Impacts to Wetland 9 total 0.02 acres and Wetland 2 total 126 square feet for the
construction of a pedestrian under pass of Trunk Highway 110.
Dakota County is proposing to fill the wetlands and has secured wetland credits from an
approved wetland bank. The wetlands are being replaced at a 2:1 ratio. The wetland bank
credits are of a higher value and function wetland within the same Minnesota River watershed
but not located in Mendota Heights.
Wetland Application attached.
BUDGET IMPACT
None, this process is a judicial requirement of the city. If council approves the application a
Notice of Decision will be sent to respective agencies (Dakota County SWCD, BWSR,
LMRWMO, Army Corps.) The previously listed agencies have not submitted comments but did
assist in verifying that the application was complete.
page 28
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that council approve and accept the application as submitted by SRF
Consulting Group, Inc. on behalf of Dakota County and direct staff to issue the Notice of
Decision on the report extension.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council wishes to enact the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion accepting the
delineation report and replacement plan and authorizing staff to issue a Notice of Decision. This
action requires a simple majority vote.
page 29
TH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
SP 019-090-018
Wetland Delineation Report
Version 4.0
Dakota County
March 14, 2017
SRF No. 8796
page 30
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
Methodologies ........................................................................................................... 1
Description of Wetland Resources and Land use ................................................ 2
General Description of Project Area .............................................................. 2
Water Resources Identified in the Project Corridor ..................................... 2
Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3
Wetland W-1 ....................................................................................................... 3
Wetland W-2 ....................................................................................................... 4
Wetland W-3 ....................................................................................................... 4
Wetland W-4 ....................................................................................................... 4
Wetland W-5 ....................................................................................................... 4
Wetlands W-8, W-9, and W-10 ........................................................................ 5
Regulatory Context ................................................................................................... 5
Conclusions and Recommendations ...................................................................... 5
References .................................................................................................................. 6
Appendix A – Figures
Appendix B – Wetland Delineation Data Sheets
Appendix C – Photographs
Appendix D – Climatology Data
H:\Projects\8796\EP\Reports\Wetlands\Delineation Report\Version 4_20170314\8796_TH110_V4_WetlandReport_20170314.docx
page 31
Introduction
This report documents wetland delineation efforts for the Trunk Highway (TH) 110 Pedestrian
Crossing, located in Dakota County, Minnesota (see Appendix A, Figures 1 and 2).
This report has been revised since Version 2.0 (dated April 18, 2016) to no longer include several
private parcels located along the creek and south of TH 110. The proposed project alignment would
not require right of way from these parcels; therefore, they have been removed from the project
review area.
Methodologies
Wetlands (see Appendix A, Figures 3 and 4) were delineated August 5, 2015 using the routine on-
site method set forth in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, specifically, the
Northcentral and Northeast (V. 2.0) Regional Supplement (hereafter The Manual). This method is
required under both the federal Clean Water Act and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA). Using this method, wetland boundaries are determined through an examination of
vegetation, soils and hydrology. Criteria and indicators for each of these parameters are outlined in
the Delineation Manual.
Wetland edges were surveyed in the field using the Trimble GeoXH handheld GPS unit capable of
sub-foot accuracy. Wetland boundaries for Wetlands W-3, W-4 and W-5 were marked with
sequentially numbered pin flags labeled “WETLAND DELINEATION SRF CONSULTING”.
Wetlands W-1 and W-2 were not marked with pin flags due to their clear upland / wetland boundary
and because they appeared to be manmade stormwater ponds. Due to safety concerns, median
wetlands (Wetlands W-8, W-9, and W-10) were delineated via an offsite Level 1 wetland delineation
that utilized aerial photography and contour data.
The attached data sheets (see Appendix B) document dominant plant species, results of soil
sampling and observations of hydrology at representative transect locations. In addition, identified
wetlands are classified according to methodologies set forth in Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of
Minnesota & Wisconsin - Third Edition (USCOE Publication; Eggers and Reed. 2011) and Wetlands of
the United States (USFWS Circular 39, Shaw and Fredine, 1971).
Pinnacle Engineering, Inc. also conducted a wetland delineation in this area in 2005 for an 8-acre
parcel of land owned by Paster Enterprises, LLC. Three wetlands within the project area were
delineated by Pinnacle Engineering, Inc.; they were labeled as Wetland 1 (Wetland W-5 in this
report), Wetland 3, and Wetland 4. Wetlands 3 and 4 from the delineation completed by Pinnacle
Engineering, Inc. were not found during SRF’s 2015 wetland delineation. These wetlands were likely
drained or filled as a result of development that has occurred on the Paster site between the time of
the previous delineation in 2005 and the current delineation. The wetland boundaries were approved
by Sue McDermott of the City of Mendota Heights (the Local Government Unit) on September 2,
2005.
page 32
Description of Wetland Resources and Land use
General Description of Project Area
Land use within the project area is primarily open, undeveloped land, with some forested areas and
wetlands. TH 110 crosses the north end of the project area and property north of TH 110 and west
of the project area is in commercial development (see Figure 2 in Appendix A and photographs in
Appendix C). Wetland W-1 is an open water storm pond and wetlands W-2 and W-3 are ditch
wetlands. Wetland W-4 is a large natural wetland located in the southeast portion of the project area,
adjacent to the east side of wetland W-5. Wetland W-5 is a drainage channel with steep sides that
flows northwest under the TH 110 / Dodd Road intersection via a culvert. Wetlands W-8, W-9, and
W-10 are small basins located in the TH 110 median.
Water Resources Identified in the Project Corridor
Eight wetlands were delineated within or adjacent to the project area. Descriptions of each wetland
are provided below. A summary of characteristics are given in Table 1. Additional detail concerning
vegetation, soils and hydrology are given in the attached wetland delineation data forms (Appendix
B). Photographs of the delineated wetlands and other sample point locations are provided in
Appendix C. There is one Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Public Water Basin within the
project area (P103), which overlaps portions of Wetlands W-4 and W-5.
Table 1. Project Area Wetlands
Area
ID
Delineation
Method
Mapped
Hydric Soils
Mapped
by the NWI
Type
Eggers and Reed Dominant Vegetation
W-1 Level 2 No Yes Type 5
(Shallow Open Water)
Cattails, Swamp Milkweed,
Duckweed
W-2 Level 2 No No Type 3
(Shallow Marsh)
Cattails, Reed Canary Grass,
Stinging Nettle
W-3 Level 2 No No Type 3
(Shallow Marsh)
Cattails, Reed Canary Grass,
Stinging Nettle
W-4 Level 2 Yes Yes Type 2
(Fresh Wet Meadow)
Reed Canary Grass,
Stinging Nettle
W-5 Level 2 Yes Yes*
Type 3 (Shallow Marsh) /
Type 4 (Deep Marsh) /
Type 6 (Shrub Swamp)
Reed Canary Grass,
Stinging Nettle, Cattails,
European Buckthorn
W-8 Level 1
(Median) No No Type 1
(Seasonally Flooded Basin) Reed Canary Grass
W-9 Level 1
(Median) No No Type 1
(Seasonally Flooded Basin) Reed Canary Grass
W-10 Level 1
(Median) No No Type 1
(Seasonally Flooded Basin) Reed Canary Grass
* The hydric soil or NWI wetland boundary partially overlaps the delineated wetland area.
page 33
Table 2 summarizes antecedent precipitation prior to the historical aerial imagery provided in
Appendix A (Figures 4-11), as well as the field delineation date (August 5, 2015); see Appendix D.
Table 2. Precipitation Antecedent to Aerial Photography and Field Review
Date Event Wetness Status
(Based on Minnesota Climatological Working Group Data)
4/16/1991 Aerial Photography 14 (Normal)
7/18/2003 Aerial Photography 14 (Normal)
8/20/2004 Aerial Photography 13 (Normal)
6/16/2005 Aerial Photography 12 (Normal)
5/31/2006 Aerial Photography 14 (Normal)
5/21/2008 Aerial Photography 15 (Wet)
6/2/2009 Aerial Photography 9 (Dry)
5/18/2010 Aerial Photography 11 (Normal)
8/5/2015 Field Review 16 (Wet)
Discussion
The wetlands delineated within the project area are Type 1 (seasonally flooded basin), Type 2 (wet
meadow), Type 3 (shallow marsh), Type 4 (deep marsh), Type 5 (shallow open water) and Type 6
(shrub swamp). Figure 3 (see Appendix A) shows the field-delineated wetland boundaries. The
NRCS soil survey maps hydric soil units within the project area, which overlap the boundaries of
several of the delineated wetlands (see Table 1). Wetland W-1 is mapped in the NWI as a PUBFx
(palustrine unconsolidated bottom permanently flooded excavated) wetland. Wetland W-4 and part
of Wetland W-5 are mapped in the NWI as part of a larger PEMCd (palustrine emergent seasonally
flooded drained) wetland. In addition, Figure 12 (see Appendix A) shows the light detection and
ranging (LiDAR) two-foot contours for the project area.
Wetland W-1
Wetland W-1 is a Type 5 (shallow open water) wetland located in the northwest portion of the
project area, adjacent to Dodd Road. Based on a review of historical aerial imagery, it appears to be a
created stormwater pond. A water feature (fountain) was running in the center of the wetland at the
time of the field delineation; the fountain likely slows / prevents the growth of any floating
vegetation. Dominant vegetation in the wetland fringe is cattails (Typha angustifolia), swamp milkweed
(Asclepias incarnata), and duckweed (Lemna minor). The transition to upland is well defined, with
upland species present up to the edge of the cattail fringe. The slope from upland to wetland is steep
on the west side and more gradual on the east side. Hydrology to the wetland is received via runoff
from the impervious surface to the north and east (a culvert drains into the wetland from the
northeast) and the surrounding uplands.
page 34
Wetland W-2
Wetland W-2 is a Type 3 (shallow marsh) wetland located in the northeast portion of the project
area. It is bordered by the pedestrian trail south of Market Street on the north and TH 110 on the
south. Dominant vegetation in the wetland is cattails (Typha angustifolia), reed canary grass (Phalaris
arundinacea), and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica). There is a distinct vegetation change just outside the
wetland boundary from cattails to a mown upland ditch. There are somewhat steep slopes from the
wetland to the adjacent uplands. Hydrology to the wetland is received from runoff from the
commercial area north of Market Street and a culvert at the east end of the wetland.
Wetland W-3
Wetland W-3 is a Type 3 (shallow marsh) wetland located south of TH 110, near the northeast
corner of the project area. It is located between TH 110 and the forested area that dominates the
eastern portion of the project area. Dominant vegetation in the wetland is cattails (Typha angustifolia),
reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), and stinging nettles (Urtica dioica). There is a gradual
vegetation change to the upland forest to the south and to upland ditch vegetation to the north.
There is a steep slope from the north side of the wetland to TH 110 and a more gradual slope into
the forested upland to the south. Hydrology to the wetland is received from runoff from TH 110
and the adjacent uplands.
Wetland W-4
Wetland W-4 is a Type 2 (fresh wet meadow) wetland located in the southwest corner of the project
area. It is heavily vegetated with reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and some stinging nettle
(Urtica dioica) within and beyond the project area (see Figure 3 in Appendix A). Inside the project
area, the hydrology seems to be maintained by the drainageways that pass through, along with
naturally occurring sources. Other than the steep slopes that lead into the low drainageways, the
topography is gradual in all directions. There is a fairly steep slope from the upland forest to the
north down to the wetland, with cottonwood trees (Populous deltoides) and European buckthorn
(Rhamnus cathartica) along the northern fringe of the wetland. Hydrology to the wetland is received
via runoff from surrounding uplands.
Wetland W-5
Wetland W-5 is a Type 3/4/6 (shallow marsh / deep marsh / shrub swamp) wetland located along
the southwest edge of the project area. Despite the observation of some flow through the wetland
during the field review, the entire area was determined to be a wetland rather than a stream with
wetland fringe due to the presence of a mix of wetland vegetation within as well as along both sides
of the channel. The upland/wetland transition is fairly defined along most of the wetland due to
fairly steep slopes. Vegetation along the wetland varies: mostly reed canary grass (Phalaris
arundinacea), stinging nettles (Urtica dioica), European buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), and cottonwood
(Populus deltoides) along the southern portion of the wetland; mostly reed canary grass, stinging
nettles, jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), and cattails (Typha angustifolia) along the center portion of the
wetland; and mostly stinging nettles, jewelweed, and European buckthorn along the northern
page 35
portion of the wetland. Hydrology to the wetland is received via runoff from the adjacent uplands,
Wetland W-4, and other sources to the south (Wetland W-5 extends beyond the project area to the
south). Water moves through this wetland to the northwest and through the culvert that passes
underneath the TH 110 / Dodd Road intersection.
Wetlands W-8, W-9, and W-10
Wetlands W-8, W-9, and W-10 are Type 1 (seasonally flooded basin) wetlands located in the TH 110
median. These wetlands appear to have developed as a result of inadequate drainage. Vegetation in
the wetlands is mostly reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), and the median is mowed. These
wetlands were not mapped in the field due to their location in the highway median; a Level 1 off site
delineation was completed using aerial photography and contour data instead. Hydrology to the
wetland is received from surface runoff from TH 110 as well as the surrounding uplands.
Regulatory Context
Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands are regulated by the Local Government Units (LGU’s) under the
WCA. Typically, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has jurisdiction of wetlands that are
hydrologically connected to Waters of the U.S., and the DNR has jurisdiction over Public Waters
Inventory (PWI) basins. Prior to the permitting process, the USACE will be requested to complete
either a final or preliminary Jurisdictional Determination on all water resources within the project
area. Impacts to wetlands within this area of the state are typically replaced at a ratio of 2:1.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on a combination of field delineations and review of off-site sources we conclude that the
field delineated areas represent the correct wetland boundaries.
A Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) will be convened to approve the wetland boundaries. It is
recommended that no construction activities commence prior to receiving boundary approvals and
relevant permits. Concurrent with the TEP process, final or preliminary jurisdictional determinations
will be requested from the USACE.
page 36
References
Clean Water Act, Section 401. Water Quality Certification. 33 USC 1341.
Clean Water Act, Section 404. Permits for the Discharge of Dredged and Fill Material. 33 USC 1344.
Cowardin, LM, V. Carter, FC Golet, and ET LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deep-water
Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, US Department
of the Interior, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-79-31.
Executive Order 11990. Protection of Wetlands.
Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant
List: 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Protected Waters and Protected Waters Wetland Map
of Dakota County.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Protected Waters Work Permit Program.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. Various years. SSURGO soils database.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. Various years. Dakota County Hydric Soils List.
Shaw, SP, and CG Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States (‘Circular 39’). United States Fish
and Wildlife Service.
USACOE (US Army Corps of Engineers). 1987. The 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual and Associated Regulatory Guidance Letters (RGLs), and Northcentral and
Northeast (V. 2.0) Supplement.
USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). Various years. National Wetland Inventory (NWI).
USGS (US Geological Survey) 7.5-minute quadrangle maps.
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
Certified Wetland Delineator under the Wetland Delineator Certification Program for the State of
Minnesota.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Nicole Zappetillo (WDCP #1242)
Senior Environmental Analyst
page 37
Appendix A – Figures
Figure 1 – Project Location
Figure 2 – Project Area
Figure 3 – Wetland Delineation, Soils, NWI
Figure 4 – 1991 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 5 – 2003 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 6 – 2004 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 7 – 2005 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 8 – 2006 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 9 – 2008 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 10 – 2009 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 11 – 2010 Historical Aerial Photograph
Figure 12 – LiDAR Contours
page 38
!"b$
%&f(
%&h(
!"b$
%&d(
%&c(
Robbinsdale
Edina
Golden
Valley
Medina
Minnetonka
North
Oaks
Oak
Grove
Rosemount
Orono
Plymouth
Ramsey
Richfield
Roseville
Saint
Louis
Park
Shoreview
East
Bethel
Lino
Lakes
Corcoran Maple
Grove
Hugo
Eden
Prairie
Savage Apple
Valley
Bloomington
Brooklyn
Center
Minneapolis
Eagan
Prior
Lake
Shakopee
Nowthen
Saint
Francis
Hastings
Fridley
Coon
Rapids Blaine
Andover
Anoka
Grant
Champlin
Ham Lake
Victoria
Forest
Lake Scandia
Chaska
Minnetrista
Chanhassen
Wyoming
Columbus
Stacy
Burnsville
Inver
Grove
Heights
Lakeville
Saint
Paul
Cottage
Grove
Lake
Elmo
AftonWoodbury
Otsego
Greenfield
Saint
Michael
Brooklyn
Park
Elk
River
Independence
Dayton
Figure 1J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\Figure01_ProjectLocation.mxdProject LocationTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota County
Project Location
Mendota Heights, MN
!
0 5 10Miles [
SP 019-090-018
page 39
R A M S E Y
R A M S E Y
C O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
D A K O TA
D A K O TA
C O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
H E N N E P I N
H E N N E P I N
C O U N T Y
C O U N T Y
?A110?A110
?A149
?A13
?A913A
?A5
?A51
?A13
?A149
?A5
?A55
?A13
?A149
?A149
?A55
?A55
!"#494
!"#35E
!"#35EMississippi RiverMinnesota RiverMendota
Lilydale
Sunfish Lake
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
West Saint Paul
Saint Paul
Figure 2J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\Figure02_ProjectArea_20170314.mxdProject AreaTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
![
0 0.5 1
Miles
Legend
Wetland Delineation Limits
Municipal Boundary
County Boundary
page 40
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3W-5
W3-7
W3-9
W4-7
W5-3
W5-27
W5-30
W5-32
W5-33
W5-34
W5-35
W5-36
W5-5
W5-29
W5-28
W5-26
W5-25
W5-23
W5-21
W5-11 W5-9
W5-7
W4-10
W5-1
W4-8
W4-6
W4-5
W4-4
W4-3
W4-2
W4-1
W3-5
W3-3
W3-1
P-1 P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
SP-2 SP-3
SP-9
SP-8
SP-7
SP-6
SP-5
SP-4SP-1
W-8 W-9 W-10
W5
?A149
?A110
?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
PEMFd
PUBFx
PFO/EM1Cd
PEMCd
PUBFx
PUBFx
PEMFx
PFO1Cd
![
Legend
!(Sample Point
!(Photo Point
!(Wetland Point
L1 Delineated Wetlands
L2 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
NWI Wetland Classifications
Public Waters Inventory - Waterways
Public Waters Inventory - Basin
SSURGO - Dakota County Soils
SSURGO Hydric Soils - Dakota County
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service 2013 color DakotaAerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service 2013 color Dakota
Figure 3J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\Figure03_Wetlands_20170314.mxdWetlandsTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 41
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service 1991 BW USGSAerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service 1991 BW USGS
Figure 4J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure04_HistoricAerial_1991_20170314.mxd1991 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 42
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2003Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2003
Figure 5J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure05_HistoricAerial_2003_20170314.mxd2003 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 43
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2004Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2004
Figure 6J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure06_HistoricAerial_2004_20170314.mxd2004 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 44
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2005Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2005
Figure 7J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure07_HistoricAerial_2005_20170314.mxd2005 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 45
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2006Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2006
Figure 8J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure08_HistoricAerial_2006_20170314.mxd2006 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 46
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2008Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2008
Figure 9J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure09_HistoricAerial_2008_20170314.mxd2008 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 47
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2009Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2009
Figure 10J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure10_HistoricAerial_2009_20170314.mxd2009 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 48
W-5
W5
W-4
W-2
W-1
W-3
?A149
?A110 ?A110
?A149
Ri
d
g
e
P
l
Aztec LaHighway 110 Frontage RdLindenStWachtlerAve
Fox PlMaple St
Main StS Freeway Rd
Creek Ave
Ridge Pl
S Plaza Dr
Market St Highway110FrontageRd
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
0 300 600
Feet
Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2010Aerial Source: MnGeo WMS Service Dakota County 2010
Figure 11J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\historic\Figure11_HistoricAerial_2010_20170314.mxd2010 Historical Aerial PhotographTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
page 49
85
6
8
5
2850 8
4
2
84
0 838842840
834
86
4
83
8
8448428408588548408
3
2 8428
3
8
83883
2
878
876
874
870
868
862
858 884866
866
864
862 8668
6
4
848842838856
854
852
86685685486
2
860
858
862860858
856
850
854852852
850
852
850
8
6
2860858856 866864866
8
6
4856854 854852854852848848846
848
8
4
6
844
8448388
3
6
836
850
864862
8
5
8
852
8
5
6
856854
852
858
85684
8
8528
6
0
858
856
864
8
6
6
860862
852 852850850
8
4
4
868 868 86
886
8
8688628608
5
4
854854854
854
852852
850
844846842838
8
3
68348
3
4
8
3
2
832
83
0
W-3
W-4
W-1
W-5
W-5
W-8 W-9 W-10
![
0 200 400
Feet Aerial Source: NAIP Minnesota 2015 1m
Figure 11J:\Maps\8796\mxd\Wetlands\Figure12_LiDARContours_20170314.mxdLiDAR ContoursTH 110 Pedestrian Crossing
Dakota CountySP 019-090-018
Legend
L2 Delineated Wetlands
L1 Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Delineation Limits
2-foot Contours
page 50
Appendix B – Wetland Delineation Data Sheets
page 51
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
N
N
N
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
no to 5
Yes
Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the
prior period has been wetter than normal.
N
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?N
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
None
No X
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes X
Depth (inches):no to 5
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name857B-Urban land-Waukegan complex, 1 to 8 percent slopes
Lat.:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.884278 N Long.:-93.123048 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-1Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
page 52
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
Dominance test is >50%
1 Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
19
0
0
0
1
Sampling Point:SP-1VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
0
0
97
50
47
0
none
95
0
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Poa pratensis 40 Y FACU
Cirsium arvense 5 N FACU
0
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Bromus inermis 50 Y UPL
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
none
0
2
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
Ulmus pumila
250
188
0
0
0
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
2
FACU
N
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
438
0
0.00%
4.52
2
0
48
0
page 53
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
0-5 10010YR4/3
Texture
FS
Sampling Point:SP-1SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**Type*
Redox Features
Hydric Soil Indicators:
RocksType:
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):5
NHydric soil present?
Remarks
page 54
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
X
X
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.884325 N Long.:-93.123149 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-2Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name857B-Urban land-Waukegan complex, 1 to 8 percent slopes
Lat.:
None
No
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes
Depth (inches):6
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
W1
12
Yes X
Stormwater pond - no flagging due to clear wetland boundary. Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals
resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the prior period has been wetter than normal.
Y
X
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?Y
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Y
Y
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
page 55
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
122
2
100.00%
1.09
2
5
54
0
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
Populus deltoides
0
0
15
0
107
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
5 Y
FAC
0
5
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
none
0
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Typha angustifolia 90 Y OBL
Lemna minor 15 N OBL
Asclepias incarnata 2 N OBL
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
0
0
none
107
Sampling Point:SP-2VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
0
107
112
0
0
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
21
0
1
0
3
page 56
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
X Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Remarks
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):
YHydric soil present?
Hydric Soil Indicators:
noneType:
Sampling Point:SP-2SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**
8-17 10YR4/2 3 C
Type*
Redox Features
0-8 10010YR3/1
Texture
LS
SCL977.5YR5/4 M
page 57
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.883995 N Long.:-93.121139 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-3Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name250-Kennebec silt loam
Lat.:
None
No X
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes X
Depth (inches):no to 17
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
no to 17
Yes
Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the
prior period has been wetter than normal.
N
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?N
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
N
N
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
page 58
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
282
1
100.00%
2.74
1
0
52
0
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
none
50
92
0
140
0
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
0
0
0
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
none
0
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Phalaris arundinacea 70 Y FACW
Poa pratensis 20 N FACU
Bromus inermis 10 N UPL
3 N FACUTaraxacum officinale
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
0
0
none
103
Sampling Point:SP-3VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
70
0
103
10
23
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
21
0
0
0
0
page 59
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Remarks
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):
NHydric soil present?
Hydric Soil Indicators:
noneType:
Sampling Point:SP-3SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**
8-17 10YR3/1 25
7.5YR4/4
Type*
Redox Features
0-8 9010YR3/1
Texture
CL
SL
10YR5/8 25
10
10YR5/2 50
page 60
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
X
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Y
Y
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
W2
16
Yes X
Ditch wetland w/steep sides; surrounded by mowed upland ditch - no flagging due to defined boundary. Evaluation of antecedent
precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the prior period has been
wetter than normal.
Y
X
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?Y
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
None
No
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes
Depth (inches):12
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name250-Kennebec silt loam
Lat.:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.884019 N Long.:-93.120990 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-4Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
page 61
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
20
0
0
0
0
Sampling Point:SP-4VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
15
85
101
0
1
0
none
101
0
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Phalaris arundinacea 15 N FACW
Persicaria amphibia 5 N OBL
1 N FACUCirsium arvense
0
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Typha angustifolia 80 Y OBL
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
none
0
0
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
none
0
4
0
30
85
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
0
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
119
1
100.00%
1.18
1
0
51
0
page 62
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)X Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
LS20
MC0-18 105YR4/67010YR3/1
Texture
SIL
Sampling Point:SP-4SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**
2.5Y5/3
Type*
Redox Features
Hydric Soil Indicators:
noneType:
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):
YHydric soil present?
Remarks
mixed
page 63
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
N
N
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
no to 5
Yes
Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the
prior period has been wetter than normal.
N
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?N
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
None
No X
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes X
Depth (inches):no to 5
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name250-Kennebec silt loam
Lat.:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.883399 N Long.:-93.120681 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-5Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
page 64
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
21
0
1
0
2
Sampling Point:SP-5VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
1
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
75
0
111
10
26
3
Parthenocissus quinquefolia 3
105
FACU
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Securigera varia 10 N UPL
Cirsium arvense 10 N FACU
10 N FACUSolidago canadensis
0
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Phalaris arundinacea 75 Y FACW
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
none
0
3
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
Acer ginnala
50
104
0
150
0
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
3
FACU
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
304
1
100.00%
2.74
1
0
53
2
page 65
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
0-5 10010YR4/2
Texture
LS
Sampling Point:SP-5SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**Type*
Redox Features
Hydric Soil Indicators:
rocksType:
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):5
NHydric soil present?
Remarks
page 66
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
X
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Y
Y
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
W3
no to 20
Yes X
Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the
prior period has been wetter than normal.
Y
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?Y
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
None
No
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes X
Depth (inches):11
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name250-Kennebec silt loam
Lat.:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.883448 N Long.:-93.120640 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-6Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
page 67
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
21
1
0
3
0
Sampling Point:SP-6VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
55
50
108
0
0
0
none
103
0
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Phalaris arundinacea 50 Y FACW
Urtica dioica 3 N FAC
5
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Typha angustifolia 50 Y OBL
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Salix amygdaloides 5
Y
FACW
0
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
none
0
0
9
110
50
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
0
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
169
3
100.00%
1.56
3
3
52
0
page 68
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
X Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
LS955YR4/6 M
0-11 10010YR3/1
Texture
L
Sampling Point:SP-6SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**
11-20 10YR4/1 5 C
Type*
Redox Features
Hydric Soil Indicators:
noneType:
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):
YHydric soil present?
Remarks
more clay further down
page 69
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
N
N
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
no to 17
Yes
Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the
prior period has been wetter than normal.
N
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?N
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
PEMCd
No X
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes X
Depth (inches):no to 17
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name539-Klossner muck, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Lat.:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.880907 N Long.:-93.120886 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-7Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
page 70
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
22
3
2
8
5
Sampling Point:SP-7VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
65
0
135
5
30
0
none
110
0
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Urtica dioica 20 N FAC
Solidago canadensis 20 N FACU
10 N FACUArctium minus
15
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Phalaris arundinacea 60 Y FACW
Prunus americana 5 Y UPL
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Rhamnus cathartica 10
Y
FAC
10
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
5
Populus deltoides
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
25
120
105
130
0
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
5 Y
Y
FAC
FACW
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
380
4
80.00%
2.81
5
35
55
0
page 71
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
0-17 10010YR3/1
Texture
FS
Sampling Point:SP-7SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**Type*
Redox Features
Hydric Soil Indicators:
noneType:
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):
NHydric soil present?
Remarks
page 72
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
X
X
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.880829 N Long.:-93.120898 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-8Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name539-Klossner muck, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Lat.:
PEMCd
No
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes
Depth (inches):surface
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
W4
6
Yes X
Wetland & adjacent drainage into Wetland W5. Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-
month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the prior period has been wetter than normal.
Y
X
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?Y
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Y
Y
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
page 73
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
206
1
100.00%
2.02
1
2
51
0
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
none
0
0
6
200
0
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
0
0
0
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
none
0
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Phalaris arundinacea 100 Y FACW
Urtica dioica 2 N FAC
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
0
0
none
102
Sampling Point:SP-8VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
100
0
102
0
0
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
20
0
0
0
0
page 74
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
X Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Remarks
sapric muck w/loam
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):
YHydric soil present?
Hydric Soil Indicators:
noneType:
Sampling Point:SP-8SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**Type*
Redox Features
0-27 10010YR2/1
Texture
Muck
page 75
Slope (%):
NWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Sampling Date:8/5/2015Mendota Heights / Dakota
44.880737 N Long.:-93.120965 W
Section, Township, Range:Sec. 25, T28N, R23WN. Zappetillo & M. Billings, SRF Consulting Group
Sampling Point:SP-9Dakota County MN
TH 110 Crossing City/County:
Depth (inches):
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Investigator(s):
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Are "normal
circumstances" present?Yes
NAD 83
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
No (If no, explain in remarks)
Soil Map Unit Name539-Klossner muck, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Lat.:
PEMCd
No X
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Steep drop to drainages north and west; very gradual or non-existent slope south and east, clay in soil my help slow drainage,
allowing wetland conditions to persist. Could flood in spring due to adjacent drainages and large wetland to the east / south.
(includes capillary fringe)
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
Depth (inches):Yes X
Depth (inches):no to 30
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Yes X
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(C9)
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region
W4
no to 30
Yes
Evaluation of antecedent precipitation from 30-day rolling totals resulted in a multi-month score of 16 (Wet), which means that the
prior period has been wetter than normal.
Y
HYDROLOGY
No
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
No
Indicators of
wetland
hydrology
present?Y
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
required)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Marl Deposits (B15)
Datum:
Sparsely Vegetated Concave
Surface (B8)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Y
Y
Y
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Water Marks (B1)
Saturation (A3)
High Water Table (A2)
Surface Water (A1)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
Soils (C6)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
page 76
50/20 Thresholds
Tree Stratum
1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 Herb Stratum
3 Woody Vine Stratum
4
5 Dominance Test Worksheet
6
7
8 (A)
9
10 (B)
=Total Cover
(A/B)
1 Prevalence Index Worksheet
2 Total % Cover of:
3 OBL species x 1 =
4 FACW species x 2 =
5 FAC species x 3 =
6 FACU species x 4 =
7 UPL species x 5 =
8 Column totals (A)(B)
9 Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
=Total Cover
1
2
3
4
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Y
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present?
*Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and
greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
215
1
100.00%
2.05
1
5
53
0
Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius
none
0
0
15
200
0
)Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
0
0
0
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
none
0
Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
Indicator
Status
Phalaris arundinacea 100 Y FACW
Urtica dioica 5 N FAC
Woody Vine
Stratum Plot Size (
30' radius )Absolute
% Cover
Dominant
Species
0
0
none
105
Sampling Point:SP-9VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Morphogical adaptations* (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
separate sheet)
0
Indicator
Status
Number of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata:
100
0
105
0
0
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
(explain)
50%20%
21
0
0
0
0
page 77
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B
Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L
Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L)
Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L)
X Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B)
Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21)
Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
*Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Remarks
Polyvalue Below Surface
(S8) (LRR R, MLRA 149B)
Thin Dark Surface (S9)
(LRR R, MLRA 149B
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
(LRR K, L)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA
149B)
Depth (inches):
YHydric soil present?
Hydric Soil Indicators:
noneType:
Sampling Point:SP-9SOIL
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
**Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
3 C M
Depth
(Inches)
Matrix
%Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc**
27-30 10YR4/1 97 10YR5/8
16-27 10YR2/1
Type*
Redox Features
0-16 10010YR2/1
Texture
L
SICL
SICL
100
page 78
Appendix C – Photographs
page 79
P-1:Photo facing west of Wetland W-1,a stormwater pond located in the northeast
quadrant of the TH 110 /TH 149 intersection.This wetland was not flagged due to the
defined upland /wetland boundary.
P-2:Photo facing southeast of Wetland W-2,located in the ditch north of TH 110.
This wetland was not flagged due to the defined upland /wetland boundary.
TH 110 Crossing Delineation Report Photo Log page 80
P-3:Photo facing southwest of Wetland W-3,a Type 3 (shallow marsh)wetland
located south of TH 110 .
P-4:Photo facing east of Wetland W-4,a Type 2 (fresh wet meadow)wetland located
in the southeast portion of the wetland delineation area.
page 81
P-5:Photo facing east of Wetland W-5,a Type 3 /Type 4 /Type 6 (shallow marsh /
deep marsh /shrub swamp)wetland that extends east and southeast through the
wetland delineation area.
page 82
Appendix D – Climatology Data
page 83
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Tuesday, April 16, 1991
1991 Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
March 1991
second prior
month:
February 1991
third prior
month:
January 1991
estimated precipitation total for this location: 2.82 0.86 0.48
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 1.36 0.47 0.59
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 2.29 1.02 1.18
type of month: dry normal wet wet normal dry
monthly score 3 * 3 = 9 2 * 2 = 4 1 * 1 = 1
multi-month score: 14 (Normal)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 84
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Friday, July 18, 2003
2003 Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-20130 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
June 2003
second prior
month:
May 2003
third prior
month:
April 2003
estimated precipitation total for this location: 4.76 6.00 2.20
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 2.87 2.69 1.86
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 5.43 4.40 3.45
type of month: dry normal wet normal wet normal
monthly score 3 * 2 = 6 2 * 3 = 6 1 * 2 = 2
multi-month score: 14 (Normal)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 85
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Friday, August 20, 2004
2004 Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
July 2004
second prior
month:
June 2004
third prior
month:
May 2004
estimated precipitation total for this location: 2.71 4.24 5.46
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 2.65 2.87 2.69
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 5.02 5.43 4.40
type of month: dry normal wet normal normal wet
monthly score 3 * 2 = 6 2 * 2 = 4 1 * 3 = 3
multi-month score: 13 (Normal)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 86
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Thursday, June 16, 2005
2005 Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
May 2005
second prior
month:
April 2005
third prior
month:
March 2005
estimated precipitation total for this location: 3.17 2.12 1.84
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 2.69 1.86 1.36
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 4.40 3.45 2.29
type of month: dry normal wet normal normal normal
monthly score 3 * 2 = 6 2 * 2 = 4 1 * 2 = 2
multi-month score: 12 (Normal)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 87
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
2006 Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
April 2006
second prior
month:
March 2006
third prior
month:
February 2006
estimated precipitation total for this location: 4.60 2.06 0.40
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 1.86 1.36 0.47
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 3.45 2.29 1.02
type of month: dry normal wet wet normal dry
monthly score 3 * 3 = 9 2 * 2 = 4 1 * 1 = 1
multi-month score: 14 (Normal)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 88
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
2008 Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
April 2008
second prior
month:
March 2008
third prior
month:
February 2008
estimated precipitation total for this location: 4.38 2.25 0.51
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 1.86 1.36 0.47
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 3.45 2.29 1.02
type of month: dry normal wet wet normal normal
monthly score 3 * 3 = 9 2 * 2 = 4 1 * 2 = 2
multi-month score: 15 (Wet)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 89
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
May 2009
second prior
month:
April 2009
third prior
month:
March 2009
estimated precipitation total for this location: 0.68 2.19 1.38
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 2.69 1.86 1.36
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 4.40 3.45 2.29
type of month: dry normal wet dry normal normal
monthly score 3 * 1 = 3 2 * 2 = 4 1 * 2 = 2
multi-month score: 9 (Dry)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 90
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
2010 Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Dakota township number: 28N
township name: Mendota range number: 23W
nearest community: Mendota Heights section number: 25
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
(values are in inches)
first prior
month:
April 2010
second prior
month:
March 2010
third prior
month:
February 2010
estimated precipitation total for this location: 2.47 0.89 1.07
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than: * 1.86 1.36 0.47
there is a 30% chance this location will have
more than: * 3.45 2.29 1.02
type of month: dry normal wet normal dry wet
monthly score 3 * 2 = 6 2 * 1 = 2 1 * 3 = 3
multi-month score: 11 (Normal)
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)
page 91
EVALUATION OF ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION
FROM 30-DAY ROLLING TOTALS
Project location: TH110 Pedestrian Crossing - Mendota Heights Date of site visit: 8/5/2015
Site Visit
Prior 30-
day Block:
Dates of
Block
(30, 60, 90
days prior)
Precipitation
in inches
There is a
30% chance
this location
will have
less than:
There is a
30% chance
this location
will have
more than:
Recency
weighting
factor
Block ‘normality’
(Write:
Above normal,
Normal, or
Below normal)
Precip. level
weighting
factor
(Above: 3
Normal: 2
Below: 1)
Rating
Value
Product
of
c.3 * c.5
1st 30 days
prior
7/6/2015 –
8/4/2015 6.16 2.65 5.02 3 Above Normal 3 3 * 3 = 9
2nd 30 days
prior
6/6/2015 -
7/5/2015 4.34 2.87 5.43 2 Normal 2 2 * 2 = 4
3rd 30 days
prior
5/7/2015 -
6/5/2015 5.12 2.69 4.40 1 Above Normal 3 1 * 3 = 3
Sum of C. 5 16
If sum of c.5 is 6-9, then prior period has been drier than normal.
If sum of c.5 is 10-14, then prior period has been normal.
If sum of c.5 is 15-18, then prior period has been wetter than normal.
H:\Projects\8796\EP\Reports\Wetlands\Appendices\Appendix D - Climatology Data\8796_Evaluation of Antecedent Precipitation.doc
page 92
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: March 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk SUBJECT: Resolution 2017-27 Amendment to Fee Schedule
COMMENT:
Background
City staff has reviewed the current fee schedule which was last approved on January 3, 2017.
Two amendments to the fee schedule are being proposed:
~ Add a fee for a Domestic Chicken Permit - $25 annual fee
~ Add a fee for Canoe Rack Rental at Rogers Lake Park - $50 for summer months
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution 2017-27 Amend the Fee Schedule. This
action requires a majority vote of the city council.
page 93
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, INNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2017 - 27
REVISING SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR SERVICES TO
ADD A FEE FOR A DOMESTIC CHICKEN PERMIT AND
ADD A FEE FOR CANOE RACK STORAGE RENTAL
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights adopted Resolution 2017-01 “Adopting the
Schedule of Fees for Services” on January 3, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has established by City Code that all fee
requirements established be brought forth by resolution; and
WHEREAS, the cost of services provided escalates and new services require a fee to be set;
and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate that fees be revised to cover the escalating costs of
providing services and to cover new services.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the fee schedule be amended to add the fee for
Domestic Chicken Permits; and also to add a fee for renting of a canoe storage space on the
canoe rack at Rogers Lake Park during the summer months, effective upon passage of this
resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the attached Exhibit A, which revises the City of
Mendota Heights fee schedule, is hereby adopted and approved.
Adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council this 21st day of March 2017.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 94
Exhibit A – Resolution 2017-27
2017 Mendota Heights Fee Schedule pg 4 of 12
License and Permit Fees
Dog License Not neutered or Not spayed $15
Dog License Neutered or Spayed $10
Domestic Chickens New licensee or renewal $25
2017 Mendota Heights Fee Schedule pg 8 of 12
Parks and Recreation Fees
Canoe Rack Rental Canoe Storage at Rogers Lake Park during summer months $50/for the summer
page 95
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: March 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Terry Blum, Public Works Superintendent SUBJECT: 2017 Street Sweeping
COMMENT:
Introduction
The Council is asked to award a contract for street sweeping for 2017.
Background
Each spring the City solicits bids to sweep the city’s streets. Requests for bids were sent out to
four contractors that have been interested in bidding in the past. We received three bids and they
are as follows:
Mike McPhillps, Inc. $85.00 an hour
Pearson Bros., Inc. $86.00 an hour
Reliakor $95.00 an hour
Discussion
Mike McPhillips, Inc. has swept the city streets in the past and have been good to work with.
They would be providing four to six sweepers a day to sweep the streets.
In 2016, the total cost for sweeping the streets was $9,676.00, and took 118 hours.
Budget Impact
There is $32,000 in the 2017 Budget for street sweeping and striping.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the bid from Mike McPhillips,
Inc., the lowest bidder, to sweep the streets in 2017.
Action Required
If Council concurs with the staff recommendation, it should pass a motion awarding the contract
to the low bidder, Mike McPhillips, Inc., for their low bid of $85.00 an hour.
page 96
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator
FROM: Kelly McCarthy, Chief of Police / Emergency Manager
SUBJECT: Auction of city owned vehicle
INTRODUCTION:
The Police Department is asking for Council approval to auction a city owned vehicle pursuant
to Chapter 9 of the city code.
BACKGROUND
Former Chief Aschenbrener’s unmarked vehicle, a 2008 Ford Explorer, was purchased by the
city. Since that purchase, the police department has moved to a leasing program facilitated by
the state of Minnesota and the Explorer is no longer in use. We are asking for Council approval
to sell the vehicle at public auction as dictated by Chapter 9, section two, paragraph A of City
Code.
If council approves the sale of the vehicle, the notice will be published in the legal newspaper.
The notice will contain the description of the vehicle, as well as the time and location of the
auction. Ten days after the posting, the vehicle will be turned over to Total Auto Solutions in
Little Canada. Total Auto Solutions will facilitate the auction of the vehicle to the highest
bidder. Total Auto Solutions accepts bids both in person and on-line. The fees for facilitating
the auction are dependent on the final sale amount of the vehicle, but will not exceed $500.
BUDGET IMPACT
Proceeds from the sale of the vehicle will be deposited in the general fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Council approves the auction of the City owned 2008 Ford Explorer.
page 97
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Cable Franchise Extension
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to extend the current franchise agreement with Comcast to December
31, 2017.
BACKGROUND
At its February meeting, the NDC4 Cable Commission approved a recommended resolution for
each of its member cities’ consideration, to extend the Comcast Franchise to the end of this year,
December 31, 2017. The most recent 15-year franchise granted to Comcast (and its
predecessors) expired on March 31, 2015. Because of a proposed corporate merger in 2014/15,
the informal franchise renewal negotiations were delayed, and last year NDC4 recommended
that each City Council extend Comcast’s franchise to March 31, 2016.
2015/16 also saw the completion of the granting of competitive cable TV franchises to
CenturyLink in all seven NDC4 cities.
NDC4 been continuing informal negotiations with Comcast. There are several reasons for the
slow progress on the franchise renewal, but probably the most important is the negotiation of the
future of the NDC4 member cities’ use of the institutional network, or “NDC4 I-Net,” that has
provided critical fiber connections for our cities, schools, county and other sites (currently with
more than 41 buildings) since 2001-02.
By extending the franchise to December 31, 2017, NDC4 will continue to negotiate informally
with Comcast, and at the same time assist I-Net users to gather information on all of the various
connectivity options. This includes the Dakota County partnership project that is currently under
study, or possibly continuing a mutually agreeable I-Net provision with Comcast; other vendors
may also be asked to submit proposals. NDC4’s intent is to have a recommended franchise
renewal document ready for the seven member cities’ consideration well in advance of the
page 98
December 31st deadline. In the meanwhile, the I-Net users will continue to have access to the
currently provided I-Net fiber under the current franchise agreement, and will have the ability to
plan a transition if they choose to move to other alternatives for fiber connections.
BUDGET IMPACT
None
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Council approve the extension of the current Franchise Agreement with
Comcast through the end of this year.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should approve the following Resolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA
GRANTING COMCAST OF ST. PAUL, INC., A FRANCHISE
EXTENSION TO DECEMBER 31, 2017
page 99
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2017- 23
GRANTING COMCAST OF ST. PAUL, INC., A FRANCHISE
EXTENSION TO DECEMBER 31, 2017
WHEREAS, on or about April 1, 2000, the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota
(“City”) granted a Cable Television Franchise Ordinance (“Franchise”) which is currently
held by Comcast of St. Paul, Inc. (“Comcast”); and
WHEREAS, Comcast has requested renewal of the Franchise; and
WHEREAS, the initial term of the Franchise was extended by the City on March
3, 2015 when the City adopted Resolution No. 2015-20, which extended the term of the
Franchise until March 31, 2016; and
WHEREAS, Comcast executed Resolution No. 2015-20 and agreed to continue
complying with the Franchise, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Franchise was extended by the City on March 3, 2016 when the
City adopted Resolution No. 2016-19, which extended the term of the Franchise until
March 31, 2017; and
WHEREAS, Comcast executed Resolution No. 2016-19 and agreed to continue
complying with the Franchise, as amended; and
WHEREAS, both the City and Comcast desire to reserve all of their respective
rights under state and federal law regarding the franchise renewal process, specifically all
rights provided by 47 U.S.C. § 546.
NOW THEREFORE, the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota hereby resolves as
follows:
1. The Franchise is hereby amended by extending the term of the Franchise from
April 1, 2017 through and including December 31, 2017.
2. Except as specifically modified hereby, the Franchise shall remain in full force
and effect.
3. The City and Comcast hereby agree that neither party waives any rights either
may have under the Franchise or applicable law.
4. This Resolution shall become effective upon the occurrence of both of the
following conditions: (1) The Resolution being passed and adopted by the City;
and (2) Comcast’s acceptance of this Resolution.
page 100
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 21st day of March, 2017.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
_____________________________
ATTEST: Neil Garlock, Mayor
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 101
ACCEPTANCE AND AGREEMENT
Comcast of St. Paul, Inc. hereby accepts this Resolution No. (“Resolution”) and hereby
accepts
the terms, provisions and recitals of the Resolution and agrees to be bound by the
Franchise.
Dated this ____day of _____________, 2017.
COMCAST OF ST. PAUL, INC.
By: ________________________________
Its: _________________________________
SWORN TO BEFORE ME this
________ day of ___________________ . 2017.
_______________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
page 102
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator
FROM: Kelly McCarthy, Chief of Police / Emergency Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2017-24 Approving State of Minnesota Joint Powers
Agreements (JPA’s) with the City of Mendota Heights on behalf of its
City Attorney and Police Department.
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve JPA’s with the State of Minnesota for Police communications.
BACKGROUND
In order for the Mendota Heights Police Department to access the state criminal justice data
communications network, the City must enter into two joint power agreements. One agreement
authorizing access for the police department, and the other authorizing access for the law firm of
Grannis and Hauge.
The joint powers agreements are renewed every five years.
BUDGET IMPACT
The cost is $1080 per year and is included in the 2017 budget.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend approval.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council desires to implement the recommendation, pass a motion adopting Resolution No.
2017-24 APPROVING STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS
WITH THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ON BEHALF OF ITS CITY ATTORNEY
AND POLICE DEPARTMENT
page 103
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-24
RESOLUTION APPROVING STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS
WITH THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ON BEHALF OF ITS CITY ATTORNEY AND
POLICE DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights, on behalf of its Prosecuting Attorney and Police Department,
desires to enter into Joint Powers Agreements with the State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety,
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to use systems and tools available over the State’s criminal justice data
communications network for which the City is eligible. The Joint Powers Agreements further provide the
City with the ability to add, modify and delete connectivity, systems and tools over the five year life of
the agreement and obligates the City to pay the costs for the network connection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Mendota Heights, Minnesota as
follows:
1. That the State of Minnesota Joint Powers Agreements by and between the State of Minnesota
acting through its Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension and the City of
Mendota Heights on behalf of its Prosecuting Attorney and Police Department, are hereby
approved. Copies of the two Joint Powers Agreements are attached to this Resolution and made a
part of it.
2. That the Chief of police, Kelly McCarthy, or her successor, is designated the Authorized
Representative for the Police Department. The Authorized Representative is also authorized to
sign any subsequent amendment or agreement that may be required by the State of Minnesota to
maintain the City’s connection to the systems and tools offered by the State.
3. That the law firm of Grannis and Hauge, Jeremy P. Knutson, or his or her successor, is
designated the Authorized Representative for the Prosecuting Attorney. The Authorized
Representative is also authorized to sign any subsequent amendment or agreement that may be
required by the State of Minnesota to maintain the City’s connection to the systems and tools
offered by the State.
4. The Mayor, and the City Clerk, are authorized to sign the State of Minnesota Joint Powers
Agreements on behalf of the City of Mendota Heights, and that the City Administrator is
authorized to act as the Authorized Representative’s designee .
Passed and Adopted by the Council on this _____ day of ______________.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
________________________________
By: Neil Garlock
Its Mayor
ATTEST:_______________________________
By: Lorri Smith
Its City Clerk
page 104
COURT DATA SERVICES SUBSCRIBER AMENDMENT TO
CJDN SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT
This Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment (“Subscriber Amendment”) is entered into by the
State of Minnesota, acting through its Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal
Apprehension, (“BCA”) and the City of Mendota Heights on behalf of its Police Department
(“Agency”), and by and for the benefit of the State of Minnesota acting through its State Court
Administrator’s Office (“Court”) who shall be entitled to enforce any provisions hereof through any
legal action against any party.
Recitals
This Subscriber Amendment modifies and supplements the Agreement between the BCA and
Agency, SWIFT Contract number 110399, of even or prior date, for Agency use of BCA systems
and tools (referred to herein as “the CJDN Subscriber Agreement”). Certain BCA systems and
tools that include access to and/or submission of Court Records may only be utilized by the Agency
if the Agency completes this Subscriber Amendment. The Agency desires to use one or more BCA
systems and tools to access and/or submit Court Records to assist the Agency in the efficient
performance of its duties as required or authorized by law or court rule. Court desires to permit
such access and/or submission. This Subscriber Amendment is intended to add Court as a party to
the CJDN Subscriber Agreement and to create obligations by the Agency to the Court that can be
enforced by the Court. It is also understood that, pursuant to the Master Joint Powers Agreement for
Delivery of Court Data Services to CJDN Subscribers (“Master Authorization Agreement”)
between the Court and the BCA, the BCA is authorized to sign this Subscriber Amendment on
behalf of Court. Upon execution the Subscriber Amendment will be incorporated into the CJDN
Subscriber Agreement by reference. The BCA, the Agency and the Court desire to amend the
CJDN Subscriber Agreement as stated below.
The CJDN Subscriber Agreement is amended by the addition of the following provisions:
1. TERM; TERMINATION; ONGOING OBLIGATIONS. This Subscriber
Amendment shall be effective on the date finally executed by all parties and shall remain in effect
until expiration or termination of the CJDN Subscriber Agreement unless terminated earlier as
provided in this Subscriber Amendment. Any party may terminate this Subscriber Amendment
with or without cause by giving written notice to all other parties. The effective date of the
termination shall be thirty days after the other party's receipt of the notice of termination, unless a
later date is specified in the notice. The provisions of sections 5 through 9, 12.b., 12.c., and 15
through 24 shall survive any termination of this Subscriber Amendment as shall any other
provisions which by their nature are intended or expected to survive such termination. Upon
termination, the Subscriber shall perform the responsibilities set forth in paragraph 7(f) hereof.
2. Definitions. Unless otherwise specifically defined, each term used herein shall have
the meaning assigned to such term in the CJDN Subscriber Agreement.
page 105
a. “Authorized Court Data Services” means Court Data Services that have
been authorized for delivery to CJDN Subscribers via BCA systems and tools pursuant to an
Authorization Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement for Delivery of Court Data
Services to CJDN Subscribers (“Master Authorization Agreement”) between the Court and
the BCA.
b. “Court Data Services” means one or more of the services set forth on the
Justice Agency Resource webpage of the Minnesota Judicial Branch website (for which the
current address is www.courts.state.mn.us) or other location designated by the Court, as the
same may be amended from time to time by the Court.
c. “Court Records” means all information in any form made available by the
Court to Subscriber through the BCA for the purposes of carrying out this Subscriber
Amendment, including:
i. “Court Case Information” means any information in the Court Records
that conveys information about a particular case or controversy, including
without limitation Court Confidential Case Information, as defined
herein.
ii. “Court Confidential Case Information” means any information in the
Court Records that is inaccessible to the public pursuant to the Rules of
Public Access and that conveys information about a particular case or
controversy.
iii. “Court Confidential Security and Activation Information” means any
information in the Court Records that is inaccessible to the public
pursuant to the Rules of Public Access and that explains how to use or
gain access to Court Data Services, including but not limited to login
account names, passwords, TCP/IP addresses, Court Data Services user
manuals, Court Data Services Programs, Court Data Services Databases,
and other technical information.
iv. “Court Confidential Information” means any information in the Court
Records that is inaccessible to the public pursuant to the Rules of Public
Access, including without limitation both i) Court Confidential Case
Information; and ii) Court Confidential Security and Activation
Information.
d. “DCA” shall mean the district courts of the state of Minnesota and their
respective staff.
e. “Policies & Notices” means the policies and notices published by the Court
in connection with each of its Court Data Services, on a website or other location designated
by the Court, as the same may be amended from time to time by the Court. Policies &
Notices for each Authorized Court Data Service identified in an approved request form
under section 3, below, are hereby made part of this Subscriber Amendment by this
reference and provide additional terms and conditions that govern Subscriber’s use of Court
Records accessed through such services, including but not limited to provisions on access
and use limitations.
page 106
f. “Rules of Public Access” means the Rules of Public Access to Records of
the Judicial Branch promulgated by the Minnesota Supreme Court, as the same may be
amended from time to time, including without limitation lists or tables published from time
to time by the Court entitled Limits on Public Access to Case Records or Limits on Public
Access to Administrative Records, all of which by this reference are made a part of this
Subscriber Amendment. It is the obligation of Subscriber to check from time to time for
updated rules, lists, and tables and be familiar with the contents thereof. It is contemplated
that such rules, lists, and tables will be posted on the Minnesota Judicial Branch website, for
which the current address is www.courts.state.mn.us.
g. “Court” shall mean the State of Minnesota, State Court Administrator's
Office.
h. “Subscriber” shall mean the Agency.
i. “Subscriber Records” means any information in any form made available
by the Subscriber to the Court for the purposes of carrying out this Subscriber Amendment.
3. REQUESTS FOR AUTHORIZED COURT DATA SERVICES. Following
execution of this Subscriber Amendment by all parties, Subscriber may submit to the BCA one or
more separate requests for Authorized Court Data Services. The BCA is authorized in the Master
Authorization Agreement to process, credential and approve such requests on behalf of Court and
all such requests approved by the BCA are adopted and incorporated herein by this reference the
same as if set forth verbatim herein.
a. Activation. Activation of the requested Authorized Court Data Service(s)
shall occur promptly following approval.
b. Rejection. Requests may be rejected for any reason, at the discretion of the
BCA and/or the Court.
c. Requests for Termination of One or More Authorized Court Data
Services. The Subscriber may request the termination of an Authorized Court Data Services
previously requested by submitting a notice to Court with a copy to the BCA. Promptly
upon receipt of a request for termination of an Authorized Court Data Service, the BCA will
deactivate the service requested. The termination of one or more Authorized Court Data
Services does not terminate this Subscriber Amendment. Provisions for termination of this
Subscriber Amendment are set forth in section 1. Upon termination of Authorized Court
Data Services, the Subscriber shall perform the responsibilities set forth in paragraph 7(f)
hereof.
4. SCOPE OF ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS LIMITED. Subscriber’s access to
and/or submission of the Court Records shall be limited to Authorized Court Data Services
identified in an approved request form under section 3, above, and other Court Records necessary
for Subscriber to use Authorized Court Data Services. Authorized Court Data Services shall only be
used according to the instructions provided in corresponding Policies & Notices or other materials
and only as necessary to assist Subscriber in the efficient performance of Subscriber’s duties
page 107
required or authorized by law or court rule in connection with any civil, criminal, administrative, or
arbitral proceeding in any Federal, State, or local court or agency or before any self-regulatory
body. Subscriber’s access to the Court Records for personal or non-official use is prohibited.
Subscriber will not use or attempt to use Authorized Court Data Services in any manner not set
forth in this Subscriber Amendment, Policies & Notices, or other Authorized Court Data Services
documentation, and upon any such unauthorized use or attempted use the Court may immediately
terminate this Subscriber Amendment without prior notice to Subscriber.
5. GUARANTEES OF CONFIDENTIALITY. Subscriber agrees:
a. To not disclose Court Confidential Information to any third party except
where necessary to carry out the Subscriber’s duties as required or authorized by law or
court rule in connection with any civil, criminal, administrative, or arbitral proceeding in
any Federal, State, or local court or agency or before any self-regulatory body.
b. To take all appropriate action, whether by instruction, agreement, or
otherwise, to insure the protection, confidentiality and security of Court Confidential
Information and to satisfy Subscriber’s obligations under this Subscriber Amendment.
c. To limit the use of and access to Court Confidential Information to
Subscriber’s bona fide personnel whose use or access is necessary to effect the purposes of
this Subscriber Amendment, and to advise each individual who is permitted use of and/or
access to any Court Confidential Information of the restrictions upon disclosure and use
contained in this Subscriber Amendment, requiring each individual who is permitted use of
and/or access to Court Confidential Information to acknowledge in writing that the
individual has read and understands such restrictions. Subscriber shall keep such
acknowledgements on file for one year following termination of the Subscriber Amendment
and/or CJDN Subscriber Agreement, whichever is longer, and shall provide the Court with
access to, and copies of, such acknowledgements upon request. For purposes of this
Subscriber Amendment, Subscriber’s bona fide personnel shall mean individuals who are
employees of Subscriber or provide services to Subscriber either on a voluntary basis or as
independent contractors with Subscriber.
d. That, without limiting section 1 of this Subscriber Amendment, the
obligations of Subscriber and its bona fide personnel with respect to the confidentiality and
security of Court Confidential Information shall survive the termination of this Subscriber
Amendment and the CJDN Subscriber Agreement and the termination of their relationship
with Subscriber.
e. That, notwithstanding any federal or state law applicable to the nondisclosure
obligations of Subscriber and Subscriber’s bona fide personnel under this Subscriber
Amendment, such obligations of Subscriber and Subscriber's bona fide personnel are
founded independently on the provisions of this Subscriber Amendment.
6. APPLICABILITY TO PREVIOUSLY DISCLOSED COURT RECORDS.
Subscriber acknowledges and agrees that all Authorized Court Data Services and related Court
Records disclosed to Subscriber prior to the effective date of this Subscriber Amendment shall be
subject to the provisions of this Subscriber Amendment.
page 108
7. LICENSE AND PROTECTION OF PROPRIETARY RIGHTS. During the
term of this Subscriber Amendment, subject to the terms and conditions hereof, the Court hereby
grants to Subscriber a nonexclusive, nontransferable, limited license to use Court Data Services
Programs and Court Data Services Databases to access or receive the Authorized Court Data
Services identified in an approved request form under section 3, above, and related Court Records.
Court reserves the right to make modifications to the Authorized Court Data Services, Court Data
Services Programs, and Court Data Services Databases, and related materials without notice to
Subscriber. These modifications shall be treated in all respects as their previous counterparts.
a. Court Data Services Programs. Court is the copyright owner and licensor
of the Court Data Services Programs. The combination of ideas, procedures, processes,
systems, logic, coherence and methods of operation embodied within the Court Data
Services Programs, and all information contained in documentation pertaining to the Court
Data Services Programs, including but not limited to manuals, user documentation, and
passwords, are trade secret information of Court and its licensors.
b. Court Data Services Databases. Court is the copyright owner and licensor
of the Court Data Services Databases and of all copyrightable aspects and components
thereof. All specifications and information pertaining to the Court Data Services Databases
and their structure, sequence and organization, including without limitation data schemas
such as the Court XML Schema, are trade secret information of Court and its licensors.
c. Marks. Subscriber shall neither have nor claim any right, title, or interest in
or use of any trademark used in connection with Authorized Court Data Services, including
but not limited to the marks “MNCIS” and “Odyssey.”
d. Restrictions on Duplication, Disclosure, and Use. Trade secret information
of Court and its licensors will be treated by Subscriber in the same manner as Court
Confidential Information. In addition, Subscriber will not copy any part of the Court Data
Services Programs or Court Data Services Databases, or reverse engineer or otherwise
attempt to discern the source code of the Court Data Services Programs or Court Data
Services Databases, or use any trademark of Court or its licensors, in any way or for any
purpose not specifically and expressly authorized by this Subscriber Amendment. As used
herein, "trade secret information of Court and its licensors" means any information
possessed by Court which derives independent economic value from not being generally
known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can
obtain economic value from its disclosure or use. "Trade secret information of Court and its
licensors" does not, however, include information which was known to Subscriber prior to
Subscriber’s receipt thereof, either directly or indirectly, from Court or its licensors,
information which is independently developed by Subscriber without reference to or use of
information received from Court or its licensors, or information which would not qualify as
a trade secret under Minnesota law. It will not be a violation of this section 7, sub-section d,
for Subscriber to make up to one copy of training materials and configuration
documentation, if any, for each individual authorized to access, use, or configure Authorized
Court Data Services, solely for its own use in connection with this Subscriber Amendment.
Subscriber will take all steps reasonably necessary to protect the copyright, trade secret, and
trademark rights of Court and its licensors and Subscriber will advise its bona fide personnel
who are permitted access to any of the Court Data Services Programs and Court Data
Services Databases, and trade secret information of Court and its licensors, of the
restrictions upon duplication, disclosure and use contained in this Subscriber Amendment.
page 109
e. Proprietary Notices. Subscriber will not remove any copyright or
proprietary notices included in and/or on the Court Data Services Programs or Court Data
Services Databases, related documentation, or trade secret information of Court and its
licensors, or any part thereof, made available by Court directly or through the BCA, if any,
and Subscriber will include in and/or on any copy of the Court Data Services Programs or
Court Data Services Databases, or trade secret information of Court and its licensors and any
documents pertaining thereto, the same copyright and other proprietary notices as appear on
the copies made available to Subscriber by Court directly or through the BCA, except that
copyright notices shall be updated and other proprietary notices added as may be
appropriate.
f. Title; Return. The Court Data Services Programs and Court Data Services
Databases, and related documentation, including but not limited to training and
configuration material, if any, and logon account information and passwords, if any, made
available by the Court to Subscriber directly or through the BCA and all copies, including
partial copies, thereof are and remain the property of the respective licensor. Except as
expressly provided in section 12.b., within ten days of the effective date of termination of
this Subscriber Amendment or the CJDN Subscriber Agreement or within ten days of a
request for termination of Authorized Court Data Service as described in section 4,
Subscriber shall either: (i) uninstall and return any and all copies of the applicable Court
Data Services Programs and Court Data Services Databases, and related documentation,
including but not limited to training and configuration materials, if any, and logon account
information, if any; or (2) destroy the same and certify in writing to the Court that the same
have been destroyed.
8. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. Subscriber acknowledges that the Court, Court’s
licensors, and DCA will be irreparably harmed if Subscriber’s obligations under this Subscriber
Amendment are not specifically enforced and that the Court, Court’s licensors, and DCA would not
have an adequate remedy at law in the event of an actual or threatened violation by Subscriber of its
obligations. Therefore, Subscriber agrees that the Court, Court’s licensors, and DCA shall be
entitled to an injunction or any appropriate decree of specific performance for any actual or
threatened violations or breaches by Subscriber or its bona fide personnel without the necessity of
the Court, Court’s licensors, or DCA showing actual damages or that monetary damages would not
afford an adequate remedy. Unless Subscriber is an office, officer, agency, department, division, or
bureau of the state of Minnesota, Subscriber shall be liable to the Court, Court’s licensors, and DCA
for reasonable attorneys fees incurred by the Court, Court’s licensors, and DCA in obtaining any
relief pursuant to this Subscriber Amendment.
9. LIABILITY. Subscriber and the Court agree that, except as otherwise expressly
provided herein, each party will be responsible for its own acts and the results thereof to the extent
authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of any others and the results thereof.
Liability shall be governed by applicable law. Without limiting the foregoing, liability of the Court
and any Subscriber that is an office, officer, agency, department, division, or bureau of the state of
Minnesota shall be governed by the provisions of the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota
Statutes, section 3.376, and other applicable law. Without limiting the foregoing, if Subscriber is a
political subdivision of the state of Minnesota, liability of the Subscriber shall be governed by the
provisions of Minn. Stat. Ch. 466 (Tort Liability, Political Subdivisions) or other applicable law.
Subscriber and Court further acknowledge that the liability, if any, of the BCA is governed by a
separate agreement between the Court and the BCA dated December 13, 2010 with DPS-M -0958.
page 110
10. AVAILABILITY. Specific terms of availability shall be established by the Court
and communicated to Subscriber by the Court and/or the BCA. The Court reserves the right to
terminate this Subscriber Amendment immediately and/or temporarily suspend Subscriber’s
Authorized Court Data Services in the event the capacity of any host computer system or legislative
appropriation of funds is determined solely by the Court to be insufficient to meet the computer
needs of the courts served by the host computer system.
11. [reserved]
12. ADDITIONAL USER OBLIGATIONS. The obligations of the Subscriber set
forth in this section are in addition to the other obligations of the Subscriber set forth elsewhere in
this Subscriber Amendment.
a. Judicial Policy Statement. Subscriber agrees to comply with all policies
identified in Policies & Notices applicable to Court Records accessed by Subscriber using
Authorized Court Data Services. Upon failure of the Subscriber to comply with such
policies, the Court shall have the option of immediately suspending the Subscriber’s
Authorized Court Data Services on a temporary basis and/or immediately terminating this
Subscriber Amendment.
b. Access and Use; Log. Subscriber shall be responsible for all access to and
use of Authorized Court Data Services and Court Records by Subscriber’s bona fide
personnel or by means of Subscriber’s equipment or passwords, whether or not Subscriber
has knowledge of or authorizes such access and use. Subscriber shall also maintain a log
identifying all persons to whom Subscriber has disclosed its Court Confidential Security and
Activation Information, such as user ID(s) and password(s), including the date of such
disclosure. Subscriber shall maintain such logs for a minimum period of six years from the
date of disclosure, and shall provide the Court with access to, and copies of, such logs upon
request. The Court may conduct audits of Subscriber’s logs and use of Authorized Court
Data Services and Court Records from time to time. Upon Subscriber’s failure to maintain
such logs, to maintain accurate logs, or to promptly provide access by the Court to such logs,
the Court may terminate this Subscriber Amendment without prior notice to Subscriber.
c. Personnel. Subscriber agrees to investigate, at the request of the Court
and/or the BCA, allegations of misconduct pertaining to Subscriber’s bona fide personnel
having access to or use of Authorized Court Data Services, Court Confidential Information,
or trade secret information of the Court and its licensors where such persons are alleged to
have violated the provisions of this Subscriber Amendment, Policies & Notices, Judicial
Branch policies, or other security requirements or laws regulating access to the Court
Records.
d. Minnesota Data Practices Act Applicability. If Subscriber is a Minnesota
Government entity that is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn.
Stat. Ch. 13, Subscriber acknowledges and agrees that: (1) the Court is not subject to Minn.
Stat. Ch. 13 (see section 13.90) but is subject to the Rules of Public Access and other rules
promulgated by the Minnesota Supreme Court; (2) Minn. Stat. section 13.03, subdivision
4(e) requires that Subscriber comply with the Rules of Public Access and other rules
promulgated by the Minnesota Supreme Court for access to Court Records provided via the
page 111
BCA systems and tools under this Subscriber Amendment; (3) the use of and access to Court
Records may be restricted by rules promulgated by the Minnesota Supreme Court,
applicable state statute or federal law; and (4) these applicable restrictions must be followed
in the appropriate circumstances.
13. FEES; INVOICES. Unless the Subscriber is an office, officer, department,
division, agency, or bureau of the state of Minnesota, Subscriber shall pay the fees, if any, set forth
in applicable Policies & Notices, together with applicable sales, use or other taxes. Applicable
monthly fees commence ten (10) days after notice of approval of the request pursuant to section 3 of
this Subscriber Amendment or upon the initial Subscriber transaction as defined in the Policies &
Notices, whichever occurs earlier. When fees apply, the Court shall invoice Subscriber on a
monthly basis for charges incurred in the preceding month and applicable taxes, if any, and payment
of all amounts shall be due upon receipt of invoice. If all amounts are not paid within 30 days of
the date of the invoice, the Court may immediately cancel this Subscriber Amendment without
notice to Subscriber and pursue all available legal remedies. Subscriber certifies that funds have
been appropriated for the payment of charges under this Subscriber Amendment for the current
fiscal year, if applicable.
14. MODIFICATION OF FEES. Court may modify the fees by amending the Policies
& Notices as provided herein, and the modified fees shall be effective on the date specified in the
Policies & Notices, which shall not be less than thirty days from the publication of the Policies &
Notices. Subscriber shall have the option of accepting such changes or terminating this Subscriber
Amendment as provided in section 1 hereof.
15. WARRANTY DISCLAIMERS.
a. WARRANTY EXCLUSIONS. EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY AND
EXPRESSLY PROVIDED HEREIN, COURT, COURT’S LICENSORS, AND DCA
MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE OR MERCHANTABILITY, NOR ARE ANY WARRANTIES TO BE
IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THE INFORMATION, SERVICES OR COMPUTER
PROGRAMS MADE AVAILABLE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT.
b. ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS OF INFORMATION.
WITHOUT LIMITING THE GENERALITY OF THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPH,
COURT, COURT’S LICENSORS, AND DCA MAKE NO WARRANTIES AS TO THE
ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE
COURT RECORDS.
16. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES. Subscriber is an independent contractor
and shall not be deemed for any purpose to be an employee, partner, agent or franchisee of the
Court, Court’s licensors, or DCA. Neither Subscriber nor the Court, Court’s licensors, or DCA
shall have the right nor the authority to assume, create or incur any liability or obligation of any
kind, express or implied, against or in the name of or on behalf of the other.
17. NOTICE. Except as provided in section 2 regarding notices of or modifications to
Authorized Court Data Services and Policies & Notices, any notice to Court or Subscriber
page 112
hereunder shall be deemed to have been received when personally delivered in writing or seventy-
two (72) hours after it has been deposited in the United States mail, first class, proper postage
prepaid, addressed to the party to whom it is intended at the address set forth on page one of this
Agreement or at such other address of which notice has been given in accordance herewith.
18. NON-WAIVER. The failure by any party at any time to enforce any of the
provisions of this Subscriber Amendment or any right or remedy available hereunder or at law or in
equity, or to exercise any option herein provided, shall not constitute a waiver of such provision,
remedy or option or in any way affect the validity of this Subscriber Amendment. The waiver of
any default by either Party shall not be deemed a continuing waiver, but shall apply solely to the
instance to which such waiver is directed.
19. FORCE MAJEURE. Neither Subscriber nor Court shall be responsible for failure
or delay in the performance of their respective obligations hereunder caused by acts beyond their
reasonable control.
20. SEVERABILITY. Every provision of this Subscriber Amendment shall be
construed, to the extent possible, so as to be valid and enforceable. If any provision of this
Subscriber Amendment so construed is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,
illegal or otherwise unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed severed from this Subscriber
Amendment, and all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
21. ASSIGNMENT AND BINDING EFFECT. Except as otherwise expressly
permitted herein, neither Subscriber nor Court may assign, delegate and/or otherwise transfer this
Subscriber Amendment or any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written
consent of the other. This Subscriber Amendment shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of
the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, including any other legal entity into,
by or with which Subscriber may be merged, acquired or consolidated.
22. GOVERNING LAW. This Subscriber Amendment shall in all respects be
governed by and interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the United
States and of the State of Minnesota.
23. VENUE AND JURISDICTION. Any action arising out of or relating to this
Subscriber Amendment, its performance, enforcement or breach will be venued in a state or federal
court situated within the State of Minnesota. Subscriber hereby irrevocably consents and submits
itself to the personal jurisdiction of said courts for that purpose.
24. INTEGRATION. This Subscriber Amendment contains all negotiations and
agreements between the parties. No other understanding regarding this Subscriber Amendment,
whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party, provided that all terms and conditions of
the CJDN Subscriber Agreement and all previous amendments remain in full force and effect
except as supplemented or modified by this Subscriber Amendment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have, by their duly authorized officers, executed this
Subscriber Amendment in duplicate, intending to be bound thereby.
page 113
1. SUBSCRIBER (AGENCY)
Subscriber must attach written verification of
authority to sign on behalf of and bind the entity,
such as an opinion of counsel or resolution.
Name: _______________________________________
(PRINTED)
Signed: _______________________________________
Title: ________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Date: ________________________________________
Name: _______________________________________
(PRINTED)
Signed: _______________________________________
Title: ________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Date: ________________________________________
2. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,
BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION
Name: ____________________________________________
(PRINTED)
Signed: ___________________________________________
Title: _____________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Date: _____________________________________________
3. COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
delegated to Materials Management Division
By: ______________________________________________
Date: _____________________________________________
4. COURTS
Authority granted to Bureau of Criminal Apprehension
Name: ____________________________________________
(PRINTED)
Signed: ___________________________________________
Title: _____________________________________________
(with authorized authority)
Date: _____________________________________________
page 114
STATE OF MINNESOTA
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
AUTHORIZED AGENCY
This agreement is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal
Apprehension ("BCA") and the City of Mendota Heights on behalf of its Police Department ("Agency").
Recitals
Under Minn. Stat. § 471.59, the BCA and the Agency are empowered to engage in those agreements that are necessary to
exercise their powers. Under Minn. Stat. § 299C.46 the BCA must provide a criminal justice data communications
network to benefit authorized agencies in Minnesota. The Agency is authorized by law to utilize the criminal justice data
communications network pursuant to the terms set out in this agreement. In addition, BCA either maintains repositories
of data or has access to repositories of data that benefit authorized agencies in performing their duties. Agency wants to
access these data in support of its official duties.
The purpose of this Agreement is to create a method by which the Agency has access to those systems and tools for which
it has eligibility, and to memorialize the requirements to obtain access and the limitations on the access.
Agreement
1 Term of Agreement
1.1 Effective date: This Agreement is effective on the date the BCA obtains all required signatures under Minn.
Stat. § 16C.05, subdivision 2.
1.2 Expiration date: This Agreement expires five years from the date it is effective.
2 Agreement between the Parties
2.1 General access. BCA agrees to provide Agency with access to the Minnesota Criminal Justice Data
Communications Network (CJDN) and those systems and tools which the Agency is authorized by law to access via
the CJDN for the purposes outlined in Minn. Stat. § 299C.46.
2.2 Methods of access.
The BCA offers three (3) methods of access to its systems and tools. The methods of access are:
A. Direct access occurs when individual users at the Agency use Agency’s equipment to access the BCA’s
systems and tools. This is generally accomplished by an individual user entering a query into one of BCA’s
systems or tools.
B. Indirect access occurs when individual users at the Agency go to another Agency to obtain data and
information from BCA’s systems and tools. This method of access generally results in the Agency with indirect
access obtaining the needed data and information in a physical format like a paper report.
C. Computer-to-computer system interface occurs when Agency’s computer exchanges data and information
with BCA’s computer systems and tools using an interface. Without limitation, interface types include: state
message switch, web services, enterprise service bus and message queuing.
For purposes of this Agreement, Agency employees or contractors may use any of these methods to use BCA’s
systems and tools as described in this Agreement. Agency will select a method of access and can change the
methodology following the process in Clause 2.10.
2.3 Federal systems access. In addition, pursuant to 28 CFR §20.30-38 and Minn. Stat. §299C.58, BCA may provide
Agency with access to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) National Crime Information Center.
page 115
2.4 Agency policies. Both the BCA and the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Systems (FBI-CJIS) have policies,
regulations and laws on access, use, audit, dissemination, hit confirmation, logging, quality assurance, screening (pre-
employment), security, timeliness, training, use of the system, and validation. Agency has created its own policies to
ensure that Agency’s employees and contractors comply with all applicable requirements. Agency ensures this
compliance through appropriate enforcement. These BCA and FBI-CJIS policies and regulations, as amended and
updated from time to time, are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. The policies are available at
https://app.dps.mn.gov/cjdn.
2.5 Agency resources. To assist Agency in complying with the federal and state requirements on access to and use of
the various systems and tools, information is available at https://sps.x.state.mn.us/sites/bcaservicecatalog/default.aspx.
Additional information on appropriate use is found in the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Policy on
Appropriate Use of Systems and Data available at https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/bca/bca-
divisions/mnjis/Documents/BCA-Policy-on-Appropriate-Use-of-Systems-and-Data.pdf.
2.6 Access granted.
A. Agency is granted permission to use all current and future BCA systems and tools for which Agency is
eligible. Eligibility is dependent on Agency (i) satisfying all applicable federal or state statutory requirements; (ii)
complying with the terms of this Agreement; and (iii) acceptance by BCA of Agency’s written request for use of a
specific system or tool.
B. To facilitate changes in systems and tools, Agency grants its Authorized Representative authority to make
written requests for those systems and tools provided by BCA that the Agency needs to meet its criminal justice
obligations and for which Agency is eligible.
2.7 Future access. On written request by Agency, BCA also may provide Agency with access to those systems or
tools which may become available after the signing of this Agreement, to the extent that the access is authorized by
applicable state and federal law. Agency agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement
that when utilizing new systems or tools provided under this Agreement.
2.8 Limitations on access. BCA agrees that it will comply with applicable state and federal laws when making
information accessible. Agency agrees that it will comply with applicable state and federal laws when accessing,
entering, using, disseminating, and storing data. Each party is responsible for its own compliance with the most
current applicable state and federal laws.
2.9 Supersedes prior agreements. This Agreement supersedes any and all prior agreements between the BCA and
the Agency regarding access to and use of systems and tools provided by BCA.
2.10 Requirement to update information. The parties agree that if there is a change to any of the information
whether required by law or this Agreement, the party will send the new information to the other party in writing
within 30 days of the change. This clause does not apply to changes in systems or tools provided under this
Agreement.
This requirement to give notice additionally applies to changes in the individual or organization serving a city as its
prosecutor. Any change in performance of the prosecutorial function must be provided to the BCA in writing by
giving notice to the Service Desk, BCA.ServiceDesk@state.mn.us.
2.11 Transaction record. The BCA creates and maintains a transaction record for each exchange of data utilizing its
systems and tools. In order to meet FBI-CJIS requirements and to perform the audits described in Clause 7, there
must be a method of identifying which individual users at the Agency conducted a particular transaction.
If Agency uses either direct access as described in Clause 2.2A or indirect access as described in Clause 2.2B, BCA’s
transaction record meets FBI-CJIS requirements.
When Agency’s method of access is a computer to computer interface as described in Clause 2.2C, the Agency must
page 116
keep a transaction record sufficient to satisfy FBI-CJIS requirements and permit the audits described in Clause 7 to
occur.
If an Agency accesses data from the Driver and Vehicle Services Division in the Minnesota Department of Public
Safety and keeps a copy of the data, Agency must have a transaction record of all subsequent access to the data that
are kept by the Agency. The transaction record must include the individual user who requested access, and the date,
time and content of the request. The transaction record must also include the date, time and content of the response
along with the destination to which the data were sent. The transaction record must be maintained for a minimum of
six (6) years from the date the transaction occurred and must be made available to the BCA within one (1) business
day of the BCA’s request.
2.12 Court information access. Certain BCA systems and tools that include access to and/or submission of Court
Records may only be utilized by the Agency if the Agency completes the Court Data Services Subscriber
Amendment, which upon execution will be incorporated into this Agreement by reference. These BCA systems and
tools are identified in the written request made by Agency under Clause 2.6 above. The Court Data Services
Subscriber Amendment provides important additional terms, including but not limited to privacy (see Clause 8.2,
below), fees (see Clause 3 below), and transaction records or logs, that govern Agency’s access to and/or submission
of the Court Records delivered through the BCA systems and tools.
2.13 Vendor personnel screening. The BCA will conduct all vendor personnel screening on behalf of Agency as is
required by the FBI CJIS Security Policy. The BCA will maintain records of the federal, fingerprint-based
background check on each vendor employee as well as records of the completion of the security awareness training
that may be relied on by the Agency.
3 Payment
The Agency agrees to pay BCA for access to the criminal justice data communications network described in Minn.
Stat. § 299C.46 as specified in this Agreement. The bills are sent quarterly for the amount of Seven Hundred Twenty
Dollars ($720.00) or a total annual cost of Two Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Dollars ($2,880.00).
Agency will identify its contact person for billing purposes, and will provide updated information to BCA’s
Authorized Representative within ten business days when this information changes.
If Agency chooses to execute the Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment referred to in Clause 2.12 in order to
access and/or submit Court Records via BCA’s systems, additional fees, if any, are addressed in that amendment.
4 Authorized Representatives
The BCA's Authorized Representative is Dana Gotz, Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension,
Minnesota Justice Information Services, 1430 Maryland Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55106, 651-793-1007, or her
successor.
The Agency's Authorized Representative is Chief Kelly McCarthy, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN
55118, (651) 452-1366, or his/her successor.
5 Assignment, Amendments, Waiver, and Contract Complete
5.1 Assignment. Neither party may assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement.
5.2 Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement, except those described in Clauses 2.6 and 2.7 above must be in
writing and will not be effective until it has been signed and approved by the same parties who signed and
approved the original agreement, their successors in office, or another individual duly authorized.
5.3 Waiver. If either party fails to enforce any provision of this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision
or the right to enforce it.
5.4 Contract Complete. This Agreement contains all negotiations and agreements between the BCA and the Agency.
No other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party.
page 117
6 Liability
Each party will be responsible for its own acts and behavior and the results thereof and shall not be responsible or
liable for the other party’s actions and consequences of those actions. The Minnesota Torts Claims Act, Minn. Stat. §
3.736 and other applicable laws govern the BCA’s liability. The Minnesota Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minn. Stat.
Ch. 466, governs the Agency’s liability.
7 Audits
7.1 Under Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 5, the Agency’s books, records, documents, internal policies and accounting
procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the BCA, the State Auditor or
Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this Agreement. Under Minn. Stat. §
6.551, the State Auditor may examine the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of
BCA. The examination shall be limited to the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices
that are relevant to this Agreement.
7.2 Under applicable state and federal law, the Agency’s records are subject to examination by the BCA to ensure
compliance with laws, regulations and policies about access, use, and dissemination of data.
7.3 If Agency accesses federal databases, the Agency’s records are subject to examination by the FBI and Agency will
cooperate with FBI examiners and make any requested data available for review and audit.
7.4 To facilitate the audits required by state and federal law, Agency is required to have an inventory of the equipment
used to access the data covered by this Agreement and the physical location of each.
8 Government Data Practices
8.1 BCA and Agency. The Agency and BCA must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, as it applies to all data accessible under this Agreement, and as it applies to all data created,
collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Agency under this Agreement. The remedies of
Minn. Stat. §§ 13.08 and 13.09 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the Agency or the
BCA.
8.2 Court Records. If Agency chooses to execute the Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment referred to in
Clause 2.12 in order to access and/or submit Court Records via BCA’s systems, the following provisions regarding
data practices also apply. The Court is not subject to Minn. Stat. Ch. 13 (see section 13.90) but is subject to the Rules
of Public Access to Records of the Judicial Branch promulgated by the Minnesota Supreme Court. All parties
acknowledge and agree that Minn. Stat. § 13.03, subdivision 4(e) requires that the BCA and the Agency comply with
the Rules of Public Access for those data received from Court under the Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment.
All parties also acknowledge and agree that the use of, access to or submission of Court Records, as that term is
defined in the Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment, may be restricted by rules promulgated by the Minnesota
Supreme Court, applicable state statute or federal law. All parties acknowledge and agree that these applicable
restrictions must be followed in the appropriate circumstances.
9 Investigation of alleged violations; sanctions
For purposes of this clause, “Individual User” means an employee or contractor of Agency.
9.1 Investigation. Agency and BCA agree to cooperate in the investigation and possible prosecution of suspected
violations of federal and state law referenced in this Agreement. Agency and BCA agree to cooperate in the
investigation of suspected violations of the policies and procedures referenced in this Agreement. When BCA
becomes aware that a violation may have occurred, BCA will inform Agency of the suspected violation, subject to
any restrictions in applicable law. When Agency becomes aware that a violation has occurred, Agency will inform
BCA subject to any restrictions in applicable law.
9.2 Sanctions Involving Only BCA Systems and Tools.
The following provisions apply to BCA systems and tools not covered by the Court Data Services Subscriber
page 118
Amendment. None of these provisions alter the Agency’s internal discipline processes, including those governed by a
collective bargaining agreement.
9.2.1 For BCA systems and tools that are not covered by the Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment, Agency
must determine if and when an involved Individual User’s access to systems or tools is to be temporarily or
permanently eliminated. The decision to suspend or terminate access may be made as soon as alleged violation is
discovered, after notice of an alleged violation is received, or after an investigation has occurred. Agency must report
the status of the Individual User’s access to BCA without delay. BCA reserves the right to make a different
determination concerning an Individual User’s access to systems or tools than that made by Agency and BCA’s
determination controls.
9.2.2 If BCA determines that Agency has jeopardized the integrity of the systems or tools covered in this Clause 9.2,
BCA may temporarily stop providing some or all the systems or tools under this Agreement until the failure is
remedied to the BCA’s satisfaction. If Agency’s failure is continuing or repeated, Clause 11.1 does not apply and
BCA may terminate this Agreement immediately.
9.3 Sanctions Involving Only Court Data Services
The following provisions apply to those systems and tools covered by the Court Data Services Subscriber
Amendment, if it has been signed by Agency. As part of the agreement between the Court and the BCA for the
delivery of the systems and tools that are covered by the Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment, BCA is
required to suspend or terminate access to or use of the systems and tools either on its own initiative or when directed
by the Court. The decision to suspend or terminate access may be made as soon as an alleged violation is discovered,
after notice of an alleged violation is received, or after an investigation has occurred. The decision to suspend or
terminate may also be made based on a request from the Authorized Representative of Agency. The agreement
further provides that only the Court has the authority to reinstate access and use.
9.3.1 Agency understands that if it has signed the Court Data Services Subscriber Amendment and if Agency’s
Individual Users violate the provisions of that Amendment, access and use will be suspended by BCA or Court.
Agency also understands that reinstatement is only at the direction of the Court.
9.3.2 Agency further agrees that if Agency believes that one or more of its Individual Users have violated the terms of
the Amendment, it will notify BCA and Court so that an investigation as described in Clause 9.1 may occur.
10 Venue
Venue for all legal proceedings involving this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal
court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
11 Termination
11.1 Termination. The BCA or the Agency may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, upon 30
days’ written notice to the other party’s Authorized Representative.
11.2 Termination for Insufficient Funding. Either party may immediately terminate this Agreement if it does not
obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at a level
sufficient to allow for the payment of the services covered here. Termination must be by written notice to the other
party’s authorized representative. The Agency is not obligated to pay for any services that are provided after notice
and effective date of termination. However, the BCA will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for
services satisfactorily performed to the extent that funds are available. Neither party will be assessed any penalty if
the agreement is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source, not to
appropriate funds. Notice of the lack of funding must be provided within a reasonable time of the affected party
receiving that notice.
12 Continuing obligations
The following clauses survive the expiration or cancellation of this Agreement: 6. Liability; 7. Audits; 8. Government
Data Practices; 9. Investigation of alleged violations; sanctions; and 10.Venue.
page 119
The parties indicate their agreement and authority to execute this Agreement by signing below.
1. AGENCY
Name: _____________________________________________
(PRINTED)
Signed: ____________________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Date: ______________________________________________
Name: _____________________________________________
(PRINTED)
Signed: ____________________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Date: ______________________________________________
2. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, BUREAU OF
CRIMINAL APPREHENSION
Name: _____________________________________________
(PRINTED)
Signed: ____________________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________
(with delegated authority)
Date: ______________________________________________
3. COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
delegated to Materials Management Division
By: ______________________________________________
Date: _____________________________________________
page 120
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: March 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Scott Goldenstein, Assistant Fire Chief SUBJECT: February 2017 Fire Synopsis
COMMENT:
Fire Calls
The department responded to 20 calls for the month. Of those calls, 16 were located in Mendota
Heights, two in Mendota, one in Lilydale and one Mutual Aid call. Eleven of the twenty calls
were either good intent or false alarms, five of the twenty calls were EMS in nature, one call was
a vehicle roll over with injuries and another call was a utility check. We also responded to a
request from Inver Grove Heights for mutual aid assistance. Five of the calls were at commercial
occupancies.
Monthly Department Training
This month’s department drill was set up with three different stations. The first station allows
firefighters to practice attack line deployment to structures with normal setbacks as well as
structures that have extremely short or long setbacks. The second scenario allowed firefighters to
utilize our aerial water way on Ladder 10 to supply attack lines on the second or third floor of
large buildings. Finally, the third scenario allowed our firefighters to work on their skills of
going extended distances with a hose line before setting up an interior attack line.
Monthly Squad Training
The monthly squad drill was dedicated to refining firefighter’s skills at fast and efficient hose
deployment from our engines. Over the last two years the department has transitioned to new
hose loads allowing our personnel to deploy their initial attack hose lines in a manner to
minimize hoses kinking and/or becoming tangled when being laid out.
page 121
MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT
FEBRUARY 2017 MONTHLY REPORT
FIRE CALLS NO. 17023 -17042 NUMBER OF CALLS:20
FIRE ALARMS DISPATCHED:NUMBER STRUCTURE CONTENTS MISC.TOTALS TO DATE
ACTUAL FIRES
Structure - MH Commercial $0
Structure - MH Residential $0
Structure - Contract Areas $0
Vehicle - MH $2,000
Vehicle - Contract Areas $0
Grass/Brush/No Value MH
Grass/Brush/No Value Contract TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSES
MEDICAL
Assist 4 $0 $0 $0
Extrication
HAZARDOUS SITUATION FIRE LOSS TOTALS MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Spills/Leaks
Arcing/Shorting ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH)$2,000
Chemical
Power Line Down MEND. HTS. ONLY STRUCT/CONTENTS $0
FALSE ALARM
Residential Malfunction MEND. HTS. ONLY MISCELLANEOUS $2,000
Commercial Malfunction
Unintentional - Commercial 5 MEND. HTS. TOTAL LOSS TO DATE $2,000
Unintentional - Residential 3
Criminal BILLING FOR SERVICES
GOOD INTENT
Smoke Scare AGENCY THIS MONTH TO DATE
Steam Mistaken for Smoke
Carbon Monoxide Alarms MN/DOT $0
Other 7 MILW. RR $0
MUTUAL AID 1 CNR RR $0
TOTAL CALLS 20 OTHERS:
$0
LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS:TO DATE LAST YEAR
TOTALS:$0 $0
MENDOTA HEIGHTS 16 32 26
MENDOTA 2 2 3 FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH
SUNFISH LAKE 0 3 0
LILYDALE 1 3 3 INSPECTIONS 32
OTHER 1 2 2
0 INVESTIGATIONS
TOTAL 20 42 34
RE-INSPECTION
WORK PERFORMED HOURS TO DATE LAST YEAR
MEETINGS 2
FIRE CALLS 215 525 475
MEETINGS 46 80.5 69 ADMINISTRATION 14
DRILLS 165.5 330.5 330
WEEKLY CLEAN-UP 35 67.5 78.5 SPECIAL PROJECTS 5
SPECIAL ACTIVITY 310 426.5 438
ADMINISTATIVE 0 0 TOTAL 53
FIRE MARSHAL 53 109.5 62.5
TOTALS 824.5 1539.5 1453 REMARKS:SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SYNOPSIS
page 122
3/6/2017 Mendota Heights Building Activity Report Mike Andrejka, Building Official
February 1, 2017 thru February 28, 2017 January 1, 2017 thru February 28, 2017 January 1, 2016 thru February 29, 2016 January 1, 2015 thru February 28, 2015
Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected
SFD 2 505,000.00$ $6,506.78 SFD 2 505,000.00$ $6,506.78 SFD 1 672,850.00$ $7,325.89 SFD 0 -$ -$
APT 0 -$ $0.00 APT 0 -$ $0.00 APT 0 -$ $0.00 APT 0 -$ -$
Townhouse 2 450,000.00$ $4,516.88 Townhouse 2 450,000.00$ $4,516.88 Townhouse 4 1,015,000.00$ $11,653.66 Townhouse 0 -$ -$
Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ -$
Misc 23 367,723.09$ 4,723.87$ Misc 50 611,855.05$ 9,509.53$ Misc 41 985,295.00$ 12,223.01$ Misc 54 1,232,171.31$ 20,147.41$
Commercial 1 19,610.00$ $389.25 Commercial 4 252,895.00$ $3,792.84 Commercial 4 1,025,345.00$ $10,590.39 Commercial 8 843,208.00$ 11,490.71$
Sub Total 28 1,342,333.09$ 16,136.78$ Sub Total 58 1,819,750.05$ 24,326.03$ Sub Total 50 3,698,490.00$ 41,792.95$ Sub Total 62 2,075,379.31$ 31,638.12$
Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected
Plumbing 12 $1,088.20 Plumbing 16 $1,388.20 Plumbing 32 $3,207.99 Plumbing 35 2,609.21$
Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 1 $10.00 Water 0 -$
Sewer 3 $225.00 Sewer 8 $613.00 Sewer 5 $375.00 Sewer 0 -$
Mechanical 18 $1,464.94 Mechanical 59 $6,708.85 Mechanical 66 $5,912.93 Mechanical 55 4,240.55$
Sub Total 33 2,778.14$ Sub Total 83 8,710.05$ Sub Total 104 $9,505.92 Sub Total 90 6,849.76$
License No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected
Contractor 10 $500.00 Contractor 186 $9,300.00 Contractor 186 $9,300.00 Contractor 176 8,800.00$
Total 71 1,342,333.09$ 19,414.92$ Total 327 1,819,750.05$ 42,336.08$ Total 340 3,698,490.00$ 60,598.87$ Total 328 2,075,379.31$ 47,287.88$
NOTE: All fee amounts exclude SAC, WAC and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan review fee and valuation totals
page 123
page 124
page 125
page 126
page 127
page 128
page 129
page 130
page 131
page 132
page 133
page 134
DATE: March 21, 2017 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor Licenses for
King & I Thai Corporation
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to conduct a Public Hearing regarding a transfer of wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor
licenses.
BACKGROUND
A public hearing has been scheduled for this evening to receive public comment regarding the transfer
of the Wine and On Sale 3.2% Malt Liquor licenses at King & I Thai. The City has received an
application from Cha Thao and Zeng Yang, owners of King & I Thai Corporation. This is a request to
transfer the Wine and 3.2 Malt Liquor licenses issued to King and I Thai LLC, locating at 760 Highway
110, in Mendota Plaza.
DISCUSSION
The applicant has submitted a license application packet and paid the required license and investigation
fees. The Mendota Heights Police Department has completed a thorough investigation of the applicants
and has found no issues or concerns. The applicant will be providing a Certificate of Liquor Liability
Insurance and the liquor bond required by the City Code.
Per City Code, all new liquor license applications shall not be approved before the next regular City
Council meeting following the public hearing. If approved at the April 4th Council meeting, the 3.2%
Malt Liquor license would be effective immediately and would be good through June 30, 2017. The
Wine License would be forwarded to the State of MN Liquor Control for their final approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council hold the public hearing, consider comments from the public, and
close the public hearing.
ACTION REQUIRED
The Council should hold, and then close the Public Hearing. Official action on the license would then
take place at the next City Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April 4, 2017.
page 135
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator
FROM: Tim Benetti, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving a Lot Split (Minor Subdivision) at 697 Wesley Lane
Planning Case 2017-02 (Mark Gergen, Applicant)
COMMENT:
Introduction
The application is for a lot split (subdivision).
Background
There is an existing single family home on the lot which would be removed to create two new single family
lots.
Discussion
The City is using its quasi-judicial authority when considering action on subdivision and zoning requests
and has limited discretion; a determination regarding whether or not the request meets the applicable code
standards is required. The Planning commission held a public hearing on the matter on January 24, 2017.
There were a number of comments from nearby neighbors expressing concerns about the character of the
neighborhood, setbacks and drainage. Staff has discussed the drainage situation with neighbors and the
applicant, and we have modified the conditions of approval to reflect the added analysis needed and
conditions of approval needed in the building permit process.
This item was originally scheduled to be presented before the City Council at the February 21, 2017
meeting. Mr. Gergen however, requested prior to the meeting to delay the application in order to give more
time to his engineer in addressing on-site pond issues, and also indicated he was out of town at the time.
Mr. Gergen has agreed to have the city extend the 60-day statutory review period to May 3, 2017.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request, with some additions to the conditions in
the staff report. If the City Council wishes to implement this recommendation, pass a motion adopting
RESOLUTION 2017-17 APPROVING A LOT SPLIT AT 697 WESLEY LANE.
Action Required
This matter requires a simple majority vote.
page 136
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2017-17
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT
AT 697 WESLEY LANE AND PID# 27-64750-01-010
WHEREAS, Mark Gergen has applied for a Lot Split as proposed in Planning Case
2017-02 and described in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this
matter at their regular meeting on January 24, 2017.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that
the request as proposed in Planning Case 2017-02 is hereby approved with the following findings
of fact:
1. No change to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation and no variance is
requested.
2. The two lots resulting from the lot split meet City code minimum standards and are
comparable in size and frontage to other lots on Wesley Lane.
3. The specific plans proposed have placed the proposed future homes and driveways such
that there is minimal removal of existing trees, thus preserving as much as practical the
existing character of the neighborhood.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Lot
Split as proposed in Planning Case 2017-02 is hereby approved with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and dimensioned site plans with
associated easements, subject to review and approval of the Engineering Department as
part of any building permit application.
2. The applicant shall provide a drainage analysis of the property prepared by a qualified
professional to quantify the runoff, show additional drainage and utility easements if
needed, and prepare grading plans that will demonstrate that no additional stormwater
beyond the existing condition drains to neighboring properties.
3. Such grading plans and building plans will allow for the preservation of the trees on both
Parcel A and Parcel B as shown on the survey drawing date 1-13-2017 from Bohlen
Surveying and will not increase drainage onto neighboring properties. Any other land
disturbance must comply with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance document.
4. Front setbacks to Wesley Lane for future structures on both Parcel A and Parcel B shall
be 40 feet and 45 feet, respectively, more or less as shown on the Bohlen survey drawing,
in order to preserve the existing trees indicated.
5. The applicant shall submit landscape plans, subject to review and approval by the
Planning Department, as part of any building permit application.
page 137
6. The applicant shall dedicate drainage and utility easements on both parcels to be denoted
on the Certificate of Survey submitted to Dakota County: 10 feet wide along the front
property lines and 5 feet wide along the side and rear property lines, and such additional
easements that may be deemed necessary by the City Engineer as a result of the requested
drainage analysis.
7. On Parcel A, the rear portion of the existing driveway will be removed, and graded so as
not to aggravate drainage problems, and the ground restored with suitable ground cover,
as approved by the City Engineer before a certificate of occupancy is issued.
8. Park dedication fees in lieu of land per current City policy will be paid before the
subdivision is recorded with Dakota County.
9. The existing home is to be demolished before the subdivision is recorded with Dakota
County.
10. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
11. On Parcel A, when the building permit is applied for it will adhere to setback
requirements for the placement of the driveway.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 21st day of March, 2017.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
_____________________________
ATTEST: Neil Garlock, Mayor
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 138
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
PID# 27-64750-01-010
Lot 1 Block 1, Rolling Woods Addition
page 139
Item No. 2017-02
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 24, 2017
To: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
From: Phil Carlson, AICP, Consulting Planner
RE: Planning Case 2017-02: Request for a Lot Split in Rolling Woods Addition
Applicant: Mark Gergen
Property Address: 697 Wesley Lane
Action: Lot Split, Approval of Subdivision Request
Deadline: March 4, 2017 (60 days from complete application submittal)
REQUEST Request to subdivide in an R-1 zoning district to replace one single-family lot
(existing home) with two conforming single-family lots
SITE CONTEXT
Existing Zoning R-1 One-Family Residential
Existing Lot
Existing Lot Area
Lot 1, Block 1, Rolling Woods Addition
35,451 square feet (.81 acres)
Designated Future Land Use Low Density Residential
Site Description and Present Use
The subject site contains an existing single family home. The site is bordered to the north and
west by existing single family homes, to the east by Wesley Court and to the south by Wesley
Lane. Existing access to the property is from Wesley Lane through a driveway along the
property’s western edge. The existing home sits in the middle of the property and the existing lot
is bordered by mature trees on both Wesley Lane and Wesley Court.
Surrounding Properties and Neighborhood
All properties adjacent to the site and most properties in its immediate vicinity are single family
homes. The exception is the church which is located at 700 Wesley Lane south of the subject site.
The property is a corner lot that directly abuts two other properties. To the west is a single family
page 140
home fronting Wesley Lane. To the northeast is a single family home fronting Wesley Court and to
the northwest is a single-family home fronting Mager Court.
Project Description
The applicant proposes to remove the existing single family home and subdivide the lot into two
single-family lots, as illustrated on the survey drawing dated 1-13-2017 from Bohlen Surveying and
Associates:
Parcel A, on the west side of the existing lot would be about 101’ x 175’, and would
include 17,762 square feet, with access from Wesley Lane via the existing curb cut and
driveway. The existing driveway is on the west lot line, closer to the lot line than the 5-foot
setback required by code.
Parcel B, on the east side of the existing lot would be about 102’ x 175’, and include
17,688 square feet, with access from Wesley Court via a new curb cut and driveway.
Some trees are proposed to be removed to allow the lot split and build two new homes:
o On Parcel A, keeping the existing curb cut and driveway in its current location
allows most of the trees on the front of the lot to remain. Four trees in the interior
of the lot would be removed for the new driveway and house. The new layout on
Parcel A would remove most of the rear section of the existing driveway,
eliminating activity and snow plowing there, a significant benefit for the neighbor
to the west, but care must be taken not to aggravate drainage problems.
page 141
o On Parcel B, four trees on the Wesley Court frontage would be removed to make
room for the new driveway and three internal trees would be removed for the
new house.
Above: View NE from Wesley Lane, Below: View SW from Wesley Court
ANALYSIS
1) This application would result in two one-family lots. Both lots exceed the minimum lot
area (15,000 square feet) and lot width (100 feet) of the R-1 District.
2) The proposed lot sizes for both lots exceed the lot size and frontages of nearby lots on
Wesley Lane and the proposed frontages are comparable.
3) Front setbacks required on Wesley Lane would be slightly more than 30 feet, per the
“average setback rule” in Section 12-1D-4D, but the proposed plan shows more than this.
page 142
4) Preserving as many of the mature trees as possible on the Wesley Lane and Wesley Court
frontages is desirable to impose the least disruption possible to the neighborhood
character.
5) Park dedication fees are required for the new lot created as a result of the lot split.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission is asked to determine the effect of the proposed lot split on the
character and development of the neighborhood in forming its recommendation to the City
Council. We recommend that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
approval of the lot split as submitted, with the following conditions:
1) The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and dimensioned site plans with
associated easements, subject to review and approval of the Engineering Department
as part of any building permit application.
2) Such grading plans and building plans that will allow for the preservation of the trees on
both Parcel A and Parcel B as shown on the survey drawing date 1-13-2017 from Bohlen
Surveying and which will serve to alleviate any drainage problems onto neighboring
properties. Any other land disturbance must comply with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance document.
3) Front setbacks to Wesley Lane for future structures on both Parcel A and Parcel B shall be
40 feet and 45 feet, respectively, more or less as shown on the Bohlen survey drawing, in
order to preserve the existing trees indicated.
4) The applicant shall submit landscape plans, subject to review and approval by the
Planning Department, as part of any building permit application.
5) The applicant shall dedicate drainage and utility easements on both parcels to be
denoted on the Certificate of Survey submitted to Dakota County: 10 feet wide along
the front property lines and 5 feet wide along the side and rear property lines.
6) On Parcel A, the rear portion of the existing driveway will be removed, and graded so as
not to aggravate drainage problems, and the ground restored with suitable ground
cover, as approved by the City Engineer before a certificate of occupancy is issued.
7) Park dedication fees in lieu of land per current City policy will be paid before the
subdivision is recorded with Dakota County.
8) The existing home is to be demolished before the subdivision is recorded with Dakota
County.
9) Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of
a building permit.
page 143
REQUESTED ACTION
Following the public hearing and discussion, the Planning Commission may consider the
following actions:
1. Recommend approval of the lot split based on the attached findings of fact.
OR
2. Recommend denial of the lot split based on findings of fact.
OR
3. Table the request, pending additional information from staff or others.
page 144
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL
Lot split for 697 Wesley Lane
1. No change to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation and no variance is
requested.
2. The two lots resulting from the lot split meet City code minimum standards and are
comparable in size and frontage to other lots on Wesley Lane.
3. The specific plans proposed have placed the proposed future homes and driveways
such that there is minimal removal of existing trees, thus preserving as much as practical
the existing character of the neighborhood.
page 145
203170 132113 101 6860189 1
7
8
100 2232
68
697
706 695
703
687
WESLEY LN WESLEY CTScale Site Plan697 Wesley Lane
Date: 1/18/2017
City ofMendotaHeights040
SCALE IN FEET
GIS Map Disclaimer:This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat, survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entityfrom which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errors or omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, contact the City of Mendota Heights.
Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation.
page 146
page 147
Vicinity of 697 Wesley Lane –Existing Topography & Drainage
page 148
Vicinity of 697 Wesley Lane –Proposed Drainage
page 149
page 150
page 151
page 152
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF HEARING
A PUBLIC HEARING ON A LOT SPLIT AT 697 WESLEY LANE
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given that the Planning Commission of Mendota Heights will
meet at 7:00 P.M., or as soon as possible thereafter, on Tuesday, January 24, 2017 in
the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota, to
consider a Lot Split at 697 Wesley Lane. This request has been assigned Planning Case
number 2017-02.
This notice is pursuant to Title 12 (Zoning) of the Mendota Heights City Code.
Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to this request will be heard at this
meeting.
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 153
Hearings
A) PLANNING CASE #2017-02
MARK GERENT, 697 WESLEY LANE
LOT SPLIT
Planner Carlson explained that this application was for a subdivision of an existing single-family
lot located on the corner of Wesley Lane and Wesley Court, 697 Wesley Lane. The proposal is to
split the lot into two new single-family lots, each of which would meet the minimum
requirements set in the City Code. There is an existing home in the middle of the lot with a
driveway coming up the west end of the lot into the rear.
Sharing an image of the proposed survey, Planner Carlson stated that the intention is to remove
the existing single family home. The narrow end of the lots would face on Wesley Lane with one
using the existing driveway to access a new garage and home, the other accessing Wesley Court
coming off the east side of the lot. The proposed location of the homes and driveways are
preliminary and for discussion only. The application is for the subdivision of the two lots and not
for the actual specific location of the homes and driveways.
A key feature of this lot is that it is heavily wooded on the south side, facing Wesley Lane,
bermed and rises creating a hidden lot. Staff worked with the applicant to ensure that the rise and
berm and most of the existing trees would be preserved along the perimeter of the lot.
Staff recommended approval of the application with conditions.
Referencing Condition No. 6, Commissioner Hennes asked if drainage problems existed on the
site. Planner Carlson replied that anecdotally he had heard that there were. The owner of the
property to the west had called and stated, due to the driveway being right on the western
property line, that when snow is plowed and when it rains in the summer that the lay of the land
is such that there is drainage that would go into the rear yard of the adjacent property to the west.
When the new lot is built upon it would be good so as to not aggravate those kinds of problems.
Taking out that driveway would be one step, at least in the winter. The plan is for that driveway
to come up short and stay in the front of the lot and not create a plowing problem with pushed
snow right next to the lot line. This is a detail that would come in at the building permit stage and
not at this point.
Commissioner Magnuson, indicating that this question was not specific to this application but to
a broader audience, noted that there is another lot split request this evening and that it appears to
be a lot of this type of requests lately, wondered if the City Council has had any conversations or
developed any guidance in terms of how they want the community to look going forward. The
City seems to be going from a community that enjoys some pretty large lot sizes to one that
seems to be subdividing up into smaller parcels. Planner Carlson answered that he is unaware of
any specific conversations taking place. City Administrator Mark McNeill replied that this new
City Council that took office on January 1, 2017 has not had that discussion.
page 154
Commissioner Noonan stated that it is the large lots that can be subdivided because they are in
accordance with the R-1 standards; so they can be subdivided as of right.
Administrator McNeill noted that this is a valid and appropriate question to ask the City Council
in light of the upcoming update to the Comprehensive Plan.
Chair Field opened the public hearing.
Mr. Mark Gergen, 1900 Oak Street, came forward to address the Council and to answer
questions. To address the issue of smaller lot splits, Mr. Gergen stated that he is affiliated with
building homes all over the Twin Cities area and one of the attractions to Mendota Heights are
the lot sizes. A lot 100-feet by 150-feet, in the metropolitan area, is a very generous lot.
Mr. Kenneth Larson, 703 Wesley Lane, is the owner of the property directly to the west of the
applicant’s property. He explained that he is very upset about this application. The property line
is within inches to one foot of his driveway. He continued by trying to explain the threats to his
life and other incidents of retaliation. This supposedly started when the real estate agent told the
previous property owners that there would not be anything built on the lot he purchased. After
making additional claims, he stated that he is against that property line being abutted within less
than five feet from his driveway. He claimed that the moving of the driveway to the front would
only make the snowplowing and drainage problems worse. He has already had to replace his
sprinklers heads many times. When he got off the phone with Mr. Carlson his daughter, who had
been shoveling snow, she pointed out to him intentional grooves that had come into their yard
from the neighbors driveway, peeling the sod off. After 25 years he no longer has any patience
for these types of shenanigans.
Chair Field requested that Mr. Larson keep to the topic at hand, that being the application for the
lot split. Mr. Larson stated that he is against this application and that he believes greed has a lot
to do with it. He also mentioned that approximately 50% of the trees on the south side of the lot
are buckthorn and are a mess.
Mr. Patrick Smith, 695 Wesley Court, stated that he is not in favor of the lot split. One of the
reasons he purchased his home two or three years ago was because they could not see a home
right next to them. Now one of the newly proposed homes will be right in view.
The second thing is that there is a drainage issue. The lot where the house sits, the house sits on
the top of the berm. The home that would be built towards Wesley Court is actually going to sit
in a trough, a low point between the road and the top of the berm. There is already standing
water that flows downward toward his fence area. His landscape people have told him that there
is nothing that can be done about it. The water is supposed to shed over towards Mager Court,
which it does not do. His fear is that if this home is sitting in that cross area, that any type of
build up to alleviate that is going to push more water towards his property.
His third concern, according to scuttlebutt in the community, is that the lot lines are not accurate.
He requested that there be a review done to make sure that whatever the original plot was that the
lot lines are accurate.
page 155
He also noted that it appears that there will only be 24 feet in between the proposed houses. He
asked if that is really what anyone wants in the community.
There are also approximately 13 trees that sit in the yard and half of those have been deemed to
come down; that does not include the row that is on Wesley Lane. It includes the trees that are
actually in the yard. Those trees are the ones that he sees out of his window and enjoys.
When he purchased his home there was an architectural committee that was part of the covenants
of the area. He asked how that is being addressed.
Chair Field reiterated that the Commission is only dealing with the lot split and not with any
issues that anyone has with the association.
Mr. Dave Dresbach, who lies in Block 1, Lot 8 of Rolling Woods Addition at 710 Mager Court,
came forward stated that he has lived at his property since 1989. He purchased his property, as
have other since, when there was an association governing homes in the subdivision. Such things
as home size, fences, and specific uses were subject to approval by association members. This
association was abandoned after the last lot was built upon. Many have expected, and have seen,
a general adherence to the association expectations.
One of the items in the covenant was that no lot would have more than one single-family
dwelling. This application seems to violate the spirit of that.
At this point, Chair Field stopped Mr. Dresbach and stated that the Commission is only dealing
with a lot split, not with issues that were in any covenants and the frustrations arising out of
those covenants not being followed today.
Mr. Dresbach, referencing the driveway issues raised by Mr. Larson, stated that the variance that
was issued to allow the installation of the driveway within a few inches of his property line
should be brought back into code. He also recommended the removal of the buckthorn on the
property.
Ms. Mary Dresbach, the wife of the previous speaker, stated that the lot split is a decision that
can be made because there are not more covenants affective in the neighborhood. This is a matter
of what the neighborhood should look like. Developers do not care as they are looking to split a
lot to build two homes; the neighbors who have been there for a long time are going to deal with
the consequences. She understands that legally all kinds of things can be done. She urged the
Commission to take into consideration the people that live in the area.
Mr. Steve Santos, 673 Wesley Lane, stated that he firmly agrees that the lot split can be a very
negative impact on the neighborhood and property values. He comes from the investment
community and sees many characteristics of the last real estate bubble seen. If homes start being
stuffed into what appears to be undersized lots, it can jeopardize the overall value of all of the
properties throughout the City, including his own. He voiced his objection to this lot split
request. He echoed the concerns made by Mr. Larson and the issues with his driveway. The
page 156
proposed split of the lot and the proposed positioning of the homes do not compliment this
neighborhood.
Mr. Mark Gergen, 1900 Oak Street, returned to respond on the comments made. To address the
driveway issue, he noted that he would prefer to move it over. In most cities there is a three-foot
minimum allowed between a driveway and the lot line. The challenge here is that the driveway
was there before the neighbor’s home was built; in redoing this he would adhere to a five-foot
minimum and possibly a little additional. However, the further away from the lot line it is moved
the more they would be cutting into the berm and the more trees would need to be removed.
To deal with most of the other issues that were brought up, he stated that he would be happy to
have a neighborhood meeting and talk about them. He suggested that the neighbors look at what
he built at 1900 Oak Street and 1930 Oak Street [a previous lot split] to be assured that this is not
something that would be detrimental to the values of the properties.
As far as architectural review and those kinds of things, he believes their standards are above
what would have been seen in the covenant or restrictions.
Commissioner Hennes asked for clarification on where the existing driveway is and where the
proposed new driveway would be located. Mr. Gergen pointed out the locations on the survey
but reiterated that he would be willing to move the new driveway and have a five-foot buffer
between the driveway and the lot line.
Based on a question asked by Commissioner Magnuson on whether or not the applicant would
be required to adhere to the city code regarding the setback requirements for the driveway,
Planner Carlson stated that his interpretation of this is that there is an existing condition and there
is a driveway in place as a legal non-conforming situation. However, he believes it would be
reasonable to assume they could keep the portion that is there, remove what is not needed, and it
would be considered acceptable as a grandfathered in existing condition. Moving it would
certainly clean up this situation, provide the required setback, give the relief to the neighboring
property owner, but it would require pushing into the berm and removal of the tree. The Planning
Commission would be well within their rights to a judgment call on that.
Commissioner Roston commented that the Commission is only dealing with a lot split right now;
the driveway and everything else will be addressed in the site plan, construction plans, and staff
would deal with that later. He then asked if the driveway decision needs to be made right now.
Planner Carlson replied that as part of the subdivision process some of these site alteration
features could be addressed within the conditions.
Commissioner Roston noted that, as he looks at the survey, these are two conforming lots. No lot
size variances are being requested by anyone.
Commissioner Noonan asked for confirmation on the setback requirement for the driveway if the
existing non-conforming condition was not in existence. Planner Carlson replied that it would be
five feet.
page 157
Commissioner Magnus asked if Condition No. 6 could be changed. Instead of reading ‘not to
aggravate’, could it be changed to reduce, mitigate, or alleviate. This would be the perfect
opportunity to solve any existing drainage problems. Mr. Gergen replied that he would be happy
to address this at the neighborhood meeting and to listen to their concerns, and bring it back at
that time.
Planner Carlson stated that it would be appropriate to try to make sure that the Commission is
not making the problem worse with this lot split and whatever happens on the new lots.
However, he would not wish for this applicant, the Planning Commission, or staff to promise the
neighbors that they would be solving any drainage problems within this application, which is
why he worded Condition No. 6 the way he did.
Chair Field asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER ROSTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COSTELLO, TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSTON, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2017-02, LOT SPLIT, BASED ON THE
FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. No change to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation and no variance is
requested.
2. The two lots resulting from the lot split meet City code minimum standards and are
comparable in size and frontage to other lots on Wesley Lane.
3. The specific plans proposed have placed the proposed future homes and driveways such
that there is minimal removal of existing trees, thus preserving as much as practical the
existing character of the neighborhood.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and dimensioned site plans with
associated easements, subject to review and approval of the Engineering Department as
part of any building permit application.
2. Such grading plans and building plans that will allow for the preservation of the trees on
both Parcel A and Parcel B as shown on the survey drawing date 1-13-2017 from Bohlen
Surveying and which will serve to alleviate any drainage problems onto neighboring
properties. Any other land disturbance must comply with the City’s Land Disturbance
Guidance document.
3. Front setbacks to Wesley Lane for future structures on both Parcel A and Parcel B shall
be 40 feet and 45 feet, respectively, more or less as shown on the Bohlen survey drawing,
in order to preserve the existing trees indicated.
4. The applicant shall submit landscape plans, subject to review and approval by the
Planning Department, as part of any building permit application.
page 158
5. The applicant shall dedicate drainage and utility easements on both parcels to be denoted
on the Certificate of Survey submitted to Dakota County: 10 feet wide along the front
property lines and 5 feet wide along the side and rear property lines.
6. On Parcel A, the rear portion of the existing driveway will be removed, and graded so as
not to aggravate drainage problems, and the ground restored with suitable ground cover,
as approved by the City Engineer before a certificate of occupancy is issued.
7. Park dedication fees in lieu of land per current City policy will be paid before the
subdivision is recorded with Dakota County.
8. The existing home is to be demolished before the subdivision is recorded with Dakota
County.
9. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
AND WITH THE ADDITION THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
10. On Parcel A, when the building permit is applied for it will adhere to the setback
requirements for the placement of the driveway
Commissioner Magnuson, for the record, commented that she would vote in favor of this
because this lot split meets the requirements as they exist in the code and there is no reason not
to vote for it under those circumstances. She was glad to hear that the whole issue of this
subdivision process may be something that can be studied more in depth as the Comprehensive
Plan is looked up and updated going forward.
Chair Field stated that he understands where Commissioner Magnuson is coming from; however,
he was unsure if in the Comprehensive Plan Amendments there would be any changes to the
subdivision process. The only thing that can be changed is the land use.
AYES: 7
NAYS: 0
Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its February 7, 2017
meeting.
B) PLANNING CASE #2017-01
DBG, LLC, 1919 HUNTER LANE
LOT SPLIT & CRITICAL AREA PERMIT
Planner Carlson explained that this application was for a lot split and critical area permit on a
property located on Hunter Lane and Culligan Lane. There is an existing home in the middle of
the lot and the lot is large enough to accommodate a lot split. This split would create two lots
both of which would face Hunter Lane. The lots each would meet the minimum size required by
City Code.
The additional issue with this application is that it is within the critical area and so some
increased scrutiny is required. The critical area is a unique feature, a unique natural resource, and
any development in or near it should be considered carefully. Planner Carlson shared an aerial
view of the property in relation to the Mississippi River and the critical area bluff. The corner of
page 159
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Letter of Intent—Village at Mendota Heights Parcels
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to approve a Letter of Intent with Trammell Crow for the proposed
development of three parcels and an outlot in the Village at Mendota Heights development.
BACKGROUND
Trammell Crow has approached the City about the development of an “active adult” apartment
building. This project would be located on land owned by the City, adjacent to Dodd Road in the
Village development. It would be part of a new concept for the Twin Cities, whose target market
is for younger seniors who desire independent living, but will also want to be able to choose
from an “ala carte” menu of services. Trammell Crow indicates that this market is currently
underserved, but is anticipated to be in high demand as the Baby Boom generation ages. They
note that it would allow area residents to sell their current homes, yet remain in the community.
Trammell Crow is a national company, with presence in more than 30 states. It has several
market-rate multiple unit residential developments in the Twin Cities.
This Mendota Heights development is proposed to be located on three parcels totaling 1.72 acres
of land, and Outlot D, which is a parcel containing a blanket utility and drainage easement.
Maple Street between Dodd Road and Linden Street would be vacated, and become part of the
development.
The development would consist of between 150 and 164 units of apartments, in a structure which
would be five stories in height. The project density without Outlot D factored in would be 57
units per acre, which is comparable to the 63 units per acre at the Reserve at Mendota Heights
development at the Mendota Plaza location, across TH 1010.
page 160
All but 4 of the proposed parking spaces for the building would be underground. There would be
a small pocket park at the southerly end of the site.
Trammell Crow has proposed to buy the site directly from the City, with a price to be determined
by a mutually-agreed upon appraiser. Trammell Crow has proposed a timeframe which will
need to have preliminary work to commence immediately, so as to meet their desired closing on
the land by the end of this year.
This project location is part of a PUD; the property had been anticipated as 19 townhouses
(similar to those on Linden and Oak Streets in the Village development). For that reason, in
order for this is to proceed, the PUD will need to be amended.
So as to meet the May Planning Commission deadline, an appraisal and traffic study will need to
be commenced very soon. In order to get those activities can get underway, a Letter of Intent
(LOI) has been drafted by Trammell Crow, which is being reviewed by City staff. This LOI will
be presented to Council for its consideration at the March 21st meeting
The Letter of Intent is not a contractual obligation, but does allow the developer assurance that
the City will support the further exploration of this concept through the Planning Commission
consideration. Trammell Crow is open to holding a neighborhood meeting in advance of the
formal consideration by the Planning Commission to answer questions which may arise from the
surrounding property owners and residents.
BUDGET IMPACT
The LOI provides that Trammell Crow will deposit $30,000 in earnest money. The company
will also fund the appraisal and traffic study. Development fees would be determined, should the
project move forward.
RECOMMENDATION
If the Council desires to investigate this development further, it should authorize execution of the
LOI.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize the execution of the Letter of Intent with
Trammell Crow for the Mendota Heights Active Adult Apartments concept.
page 161
March 17, 2017
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
RE: Letter of Intent for Proposed Purchase and Development of Mendota Heights
Site (“Property”), consisting of Parcel Identification Nos.: 274833503020,
274833503010, and 27483350210
Dear Mr. McNeill:
This letter constitutes a summary of the agreements from the discussions between Trammell Crow
Chicago Development, Inc. (“Buyer”) and the City of Mendota Heights (“City”) with respect to the
Property and outlines the general terms and conditions upon which Buyer desires to negotiate with the
City for the purchase and sale of the Property for Buyer’s intended purpose of developing an active
adult, multi-family residential facility, as generally set forth in the design concept plans attached hereto
as Exhibit A (“Project”). The Project scale will include approximately 150-165 units. Except as
provided in Section B below (which terms will be binding), this letter does not constitute a binding
agreement or contract, and unless or until the parties negotiate and enter into a binding written
agreement for the sale and development of the Property (“Purchase Agreement”), neither Buyer nor
the City will be bound to purchase or sell the Property.
The purpose of this letter is to establish certain terms concerning the purchase and sale of the Property
and to set forth a basis upon which the parties, together with their respective attorneys, may proceed to
draft and negotiate toward the execution of a definitive and binding Purchase Agreement. It is
understood that either party may terminate negotiations at any time and for any reason.
A. Based on the foregoing understanding, the parties desire to negotiate a Purchase Agreement
pursuant to the following basic terms and conditions:
1. The Property The Property consists of three separate parcels and Outlot D,
and is located in Mendota Heights, Minnesota, between
Linden Street and Dodd Road, as generally depicted on
attached Exhibit A.
2. Purchase Price The Purchase Price will be the fair market value of the
Property, as determined by a MAI appraiser mutually
agreeable to the parties, in an appraisal to be completed
before April 24, 2017. The Purchase Price will be paid in
page 162
cash at Closing.
3. Earnest Money Buyer will place $30,000.00 (“Earnest Money”) into an
interest-bearing escrow account to be held by First American
Title Insurance Company (“Title Company”), as escrowee,
within three (3) business days following the effective date of
the Purchase Agreement. The City will have no obligation to
perform under the Purchase Agreement if the Buyer does not
deposit the Earnest Money in a timely manner. The Earnest
Money (or the applicable portion thereof, as further set forth
in Section 5 below), plus any interest earned thereon, will be
refunded to Buyer if Buyer terminates the Purchase
Agreement during the Due Diligence Period (described
below). If Buyer does not terminate the Purchase Agreement
and proceeds to Closing, the Earnest Money, plus any interest
earned, will be applied to the Purchase Price.
4. Title and Survey Buyer will obtain an ALTA survey and a title insurance
commitment issued by the Title Company, each in a form
satisfactory to Buyer, together with copies of all recorded
documents evidencing the exceptions to title that are
described in Schedule B of the title commitment. At closing,
Buyer will obtain an ALTA Owner’s Title Insurance Policy
issued by the Title Company (a) in the amount of the
Purchase Price, (b) including extended coverage, (c) showing
Buyer (or its assignee) as sole owner of the Property, and (d)
subject only to encumbrances and such other title-related
matters that are reasonably acceptable to Buyer.
5. Due Diligence Period Buyer will have an initial 180-day Due Diligence Period
commencing on the Effective Date of the Purchase Agreement.
At any time during the Due Diligence Period, Buyer may
terminate the Purchase Agreement if any one or more of the
Conditions Precedent described in Paragraph 7 below are not
satisfied. The City will cooperate with Buyer and timely
provide Buyer with all documents and other materials
reasonably requested by Buyer. Buyer may extend the Due
Diligence Period for an additional 30 days; provided, however,
that if Buyer terminates the Purchase Agreement during such
30-day extension period (as opposed to a termination during
the initial 180-day period), Buyer will be entitled to a refund of
only $20,000 of the Earnest Money, and all interest earned
thereon, and the remaining $10,000 thereupon be paid to City.
Buyer may further extend the Due Diligence Period for an
additional 30 days; provided, however, that if Buyer terminates
the Purchase Agreement during such additional 30-day
page 163
extension period (as opposed to a termination during either the
initial 180-day period or the first 30-day extension period),
Buyer will be entitled to a refund of only $10,000 of the
Earnest Money, and all interest earned thereon, and the
remaining $20,000 (and all interest earned thereon) will
thereupon be paid to City (or retained by City if same has
already been paid to City). Buyer may further extend the Due
Diligence Period for a third additional 30 day period; provided,
however, that if Buyer terminates the Purchase Agreement
during such third 30-day extension period (as opposed to a
termination during either the initial 180-day period, the first
30-day extension period or the second 30-day extension
period), Buyer will not be entitled to a refund of any Earnest
Money, and the Earnest Money will thereupon be paid to City
(or retained by City to the extent same has already been paid to
City).
6. Closing The purchase of the Property will close (“Closing”) within 30
days after the earlier to occur of (a) expiration of the Due
Diligence Period or (b) Buyer’s waiver of the Due Diligence
Period. The Closing will occur at the offices of the Title
Company or at some other location mutually acceptable to the
parties.
7. Conditions Precedent Buyer’s obligation to purchase Property will be contingent
upon Buyer’s determining (in its sole discretion) during the
Due Diligence Period that:
(a) Buyer is satisfied with the results of all
environmental investigations, studies and tests
completed by an environmental testing firm
acceptable to Buyer.
(b) Buyer is satisfied with the results of all soil and other
site engineering investigations, studies and tests,
which Buyer deems appropriate.
(c) Utilities, storm water detention and curb cuts
necessary to serve the Property are available at a
reasonable cost.
(d) All zoning and governmental approvals desired by
Buyer to develop the Property into a residential
development can be obtained prior to closing.
(e) Buyer is satisfied with its review of all agreements
page 164
relating to the Property.
(f) Buyer is satisfied with its review of all documents
provided to Buyer by City. City will provide such
documents at no recourse to City.
(g) Buyer is satisfied with its review of the status of title
to the Property.
(h) Buyer’s acquisition and use or development of the
Property will meet its financial requirements (or
those of its lender or investors, if any).
8. Property Condition Buyer agrees that it will purchase the Property “as-is” and
“with all faults,” with no warranty by City of any kind,
expressed or implied, except as provided in the Purchase
Agreement.
9. Site Work The City agrees to cooperate and assist with Buyer’s efforts to
accomplish the necessary site work for the Project, including
without limitation the partial vacation of Maple Street and the
relocation of the existing utilities currently under Maple Street.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City will have no financial
responsibility for the necessary site work for the Project. The
Buyer may additionally be financially responsible for future
public infrastructure improvements that may be required due to
the scope and size of the Project, including but not limited to a
new sanitary sewer lift station.
10. Traffic Impact Study Within 45 days after the execution of this Letter of Intent,
Buyer will cause a traffic impact study to be conducted with
respect to certain aspects of the Project.
B. The following terms of this letter are binding on Buyer and City:
1. Broker Commission Buyer and City will indemnify each other against any losses,
claims, damages, costs, expenses and liability, which Buyer or
City may incur which arise from any entity claiming a
brokerage commission in connection with this transaction to
the extent such claim arises from the activities of the other
party.
2. Existing Due Diligence Materials City shall provide Buyer, within three (3) business days of
City's counter execution of this letter, any and all documents,
reports, studies, tests, engineering drawings, surveys or other
page 165
pertinent materials which City has in its possession (or access
to) which relate to the Property. All such documents shall be
returned to the City if Purchaser does not close on the
Property.
3. Due Diligence Investigations Following City’s execution of this letter of intent, Buyer, at its
own cost and expense, with reasonable notice to City, may
enter the Property to conduct environmental, geotechnical,
and soil and engineering investigations, studies and tests of
the Property. Any damage to the Property caused by Buyer
during the Due Diligence Period shall be repaired at Buyer’s
sole cost, and Buyer shall return the Property to its condition
before the Due Diligence Period, whether or not any damage
was caused by Buyer. Buyer shall provide evidence of all
insurance satisfactory to City prior to entry on the Property.
Buyer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless City for,
from and against any losses, claims or costs incurred by City
relating to Buyer’s entry and/or inspections at the Property
prior to Closing.
4. Marketing of Property City agrees that for the period commencing on the date of this
letter and expiring on the Effective Date of the Purchase
Agreement (it being the understanding of the parties that the
Purchase Agreement will contain exclusivity provisions), City
will neither (a) promote the sale of the Property to, or solicit
offers to purchase the Property from, other parties, nor (b)
discuss or negotiate with other parties regarding the purchase
or development of the Property.
5. Project Design/Use City Council and City staff has reviewed and generally
supports Buyer's design proposal, attached as Exhibit A,
including the building design, height and number of units
and (b) Buyer’s proposed entitlement milestone schedule,
attached hereto as Exhibit B. Buyer acknowledges and
understands the City Council must approve the terms of the
Purchase Agreement and that the City Council and the
City’s Planning Commission intend to consider various
land use approvals relating to the Project. Any general
support for the Project may be absolutely and
unconditionally revoked based upon future circumstances
and the land use approval process.
Buyer and City will endeavor to negotiate and execute a Purchase Agreement immediately upon the
City's acceptance of this letter. We look forward to working with the City on this exciting development.
Thank you.
page 166
Sincerely,
John Carlson
Trammell Crow Chicago Development, Inc.:
________________________________
Agreed to and Accepted By the City of Mendota
Heights:
By:
Title
Date:
EXHIBIT A
Design Concept Plans
See Attached
page 167
page 168
page 169
page 170
EXHIBIT B
Proposed Entitlement Milestone Schedule
April 24th: Planning Commission Submittal Due
• Traffic Study
• Appraisal
• Preliminary Civil Engineering
• Concept Design
May 23rd: Planning Commission
June 6th: City Council
• PUD Approved
page 171
DATE: March 21, 2017
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Start Times
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
The Council is asked to consider whether it wants to keep the City Council meeting starting
times at 7 PM, or designate another time.
BACKGROUND:
The Council has had some discussion previously as to whether it wants to change the starting
time of its regular meetings from something other than the 7:00 PM time which it has had for
many years.
City Code section 1-5-3 states in part, …”The regular city council meetings shall commence at
such time as the city council by resolution shall from time to time prescribe.”
For comparison, following is a list of starting times for City Council meetings in other Dakota
County cities:
6:30 PM—Burnsville, Eagan. West St. Paul
7:00 PM—Apple Valley, Lakeville, Farmington, Inver Grove Heights, Hastings
7:15 PM—South St. Paul
If the Council wishes to change the start time, a resolution would need to be approved. Any
changes should become effective after sufficient notice has been given, which would also allow
for any public hearings to be adjusted to any new time.
RECOMMENDATION:
This is a matter of preference by the Council.
page 172
ACTION REQUIRED:
The council should indicate whether it wishes to change the starting time of the City Council
meetings. If it does not, no action is needed. If the Council desires to change the time, it should
direct staff to prepare a resolution for consideration at a future Council meeting.
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
page 173
Request for City Council Action
DATE: March 21, 2017 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Change April 4, 2017 meeting date
COMMENT:
Introduction
The Council is asked to consider changing the meeting date of the first regular City Council
meeting of next month due to lack of a quorum.
Background
Three of the City Council are unable to attend the first meeting in April. Because of the need
to conduct City business, staffs asks that the meeting date be changed to an alternative date,
rather than having the meeting cancelled altogether.
Alternative dates will need to be discussed at the March 21st meeting.
Action Required
City Council should discuss, and make a motion to change the April 4, 2017 meeting date to an
alternative date.
page 174
City of Mendota Heights
March 2017
1 Ash Wednesday 234
5 67891011
12 Daylight Saving 13 14 15 16 17 St. Patrick's Day 18
19 20 Spring Begins 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Professionalism core value:
"We judge others by their behavior; we
judge ourselves by our intentions." Ian Percy
SaturdaySundayMonday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
City Council Mtg 7:00 Airport Comm Mtg 7:00
Park Comm Mtg 6:30
City Council Mtg 7:00
Planning Comm Mtg 7:00
SMTWTFS
1234
567891011
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28
February '17
SMTWTFS
1
2345678
9 101112131415
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
April '17
SMTWTFS
123456
7 8 9 10111213
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
May '17
page 175
City of Mendota Heights
April 2017
1 April Fool's Day
2 345678
9 Palm Sunday 10 11 Passover 12 13 14 Good Friday 15
16 Easter 17 Taxes Due 18 19 20 21 22 Earth Day
23 24 25 26
Admin Assist Day 27 28 29
30 Service Oriented core value:
"The best cure for our own self-inflicted
suffering is often service to others."
Jonathan Lockwood Huie
SaturdaySundayMonday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
City Council Mtg 7:00
Parks Comm Mtg 6:30 Airport Comm Mtg 7:00 Public Works Closed
City Council Mtg 7:00
Planning Comm Mtg 7:00
SMTWTFS
1234
567891011
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
March '17
SMTWTFS
123456
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
May '17
SMTWTFS
123
45678910
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30
June '17
page 176