2021-03-02 Council agenda packetCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
March 2, 2021 – 6:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
MN Stat. 13D.021 - Meeting by telephone or other electronic means: Conditions - MN stat. 13D.021 provides that a meeting of a public body
may be conducted via telephone or other electronic means if meeting in a public location is not practical or prudent because of a health
pandemic or declared emergency.
At its meeting on March 17, 2020, the Mendota Heights City Council declared a local emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As a part of
this action, until further notice all City Council and committee meetings will be held by telephone or through other electronic means, with
social distancing measures in place. All public meetings will continue to follow the requirements of the Minnesota Open Meeting Law.
Note that while all or most of the members of the City Council will be participating remotely, the Council Chambers will be open to the public
during this meeting, assuming that social distancing protocols are followed. Interested individuals may access the meeting by using the
meeting connection information below.
With both the log-in or dial-in options, the line will be muted. Observers wishing to make comments on any of the agenda items will need to
contact the City Clerk no later than 12 noon on the day of the meeting, and provide their contact information and the agenda item which
they want to address. Note that any applicable long-distance telephone charges may apply.
Public Attendance is available via telephone: 1-312-535-8110
Meeting Access Code: 133 167 4807 # #
For viewing City Council meetings, tune in to Comcast Cable Channel 18 or view online at
https://www.townsquare.tv/webstreaming during the posted meeting times.
Meetings can also be viewed on demand, after the original airing, at https://www.townsquare.tv/webstreaming .
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Consent Agenda
a. Approve the February 16, 2021 City Council Minutes
b. Approve the February 24, 2021 City Council Work Session Minutes
c. Approve the January 2021 Fire Synopsis
d. Award the Contract for Par 3 Well Rehabilitation Project
e. Approve Resolution 2020-14 Accepting Work and Approving Final Payment for the 2019
Storm Sewer Improvement Project
f. Authorization of Contract with Ellie Family Partnerships, PLLP
g. Approve the January 2021 Treasurer’s Report
h. Approve the Claims List
6. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda)
*See guidelines below
7. Presentations
a. Rogers Lake Water Quality Report Presentation by Saint Thomas Academy
8. Public Hearing
a. NPDES Phase II Storm Water Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
– Annual Public Hearing
9. New and Unfinished Business
a. Resolution 2021-21 Authorize Participation in the MN GreenStep Cities Program
b. Resolution 2021-20 Accepting Feasibility Report and Calling for a Public Hearing on the Ivy
Falls East Neighborhood Improvements
10. Community Announcements
11. Council Comments
12. Adjourn
Guidelines for Citizen Comment Period: “The Citizen Comments section of the agenda provides an opportunity
for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. All are welcome to speak.
Comments should be directed to the Mayor. Comments will be limited to 5 minutes per person and topic;
presentations which are longer than five minutes will need to be scheduled with the City Clerk to appear on a
future City Council agenda. Comments should not be repetitious.
Citizen comments may not be used to air personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political
endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens,
nor will any decisions be made at that presentation.
Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Citizen comments will not be used as a time for problem
solving or reacting to the comments made, but rather for hearing the citizen for information only. If appropriate,
the Mayor may assign staff for follow up to the issues raised.”
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, February 16, 2021
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights,
Minnesota was held at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Levine called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Councilors Duggan, Paper, Mazzitello, and Miller,
were present using WebEx.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Levine presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Miller moved adoption of the agenda.
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was performed:
Councilor Duggan aye
Councilor Mazzitello aye
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Paper aye
Mayor Levine aye
PRESENTATIONS
A) MCCARRONS WATER PLANT PROJECT – SAINT PAUL REGIONAL WATER SERVICE
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek provided background information noting that the City receives its
water service from Saint Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS). He stated that SPRWS is planning to
make improvements to its McCarrons Water Treatment Plant.
Patrick Shea, SPRWS, stated that they are in the process of beginning a significant expansion of the
McCarrons Treatment Plant which is located in the city of Maplewood. He provided background
information on the McCarrons Water Treatment Plant.
Will Menkhaus, SPRWS, explained why this is the right time to make these improvements, noting that
they want to take a proactive approach to infrastructure in order to improve reliability, improve capacity
to handle contaminates, reduce the footprint, and take advantage of the current low interest rates. He
provided details on the preliminary project scope.
He provided additional details on the financial impacts, noting that overall rates are expected to increase
approximately 25 percent over the duration of the project. He noted that costs remain less than a penny
per gallon of water which are below average nationally.
Steve Schneider, SPRWS, stated that this process began with a needs assessment in 2012. He noted that
the water treatment plant is over 100 years old and this is the time to move forward proactively. He
recognized that this is a large project, but it is meant to provide service for a long period of time.
Councilor Miller referenced the flip the switch tactic and asked how long it would be anticipated to run
both systems in tandem. He also asked what would happen to the existing system. Mr. Menkhaus stated
they would continue to operate with the existing facility through 2024, with the new system ready to
operate in 2024. He explained that the systems would not be run in tandem, but the existing system would
be there as a backup. He stated that they expect to demolish the existing facilities while preserving the
history of the facility itself.
Councilor Paper asked for a definition of “phase four facility”. Mr. Schneider replied that the SPRWS
voluntarily participates in the Partnership for Safe Water with other entities across the nation and in
coordination with the EPA. He explained that phase four is the highest level of achievement a water
treatment facility can rank, noting that SPRWS is one of 30 facilities in the country that have earned that
rating.
Councilor Paper asked about the Water Commissioners Board. Mr. Schneider replied that there are seven
members; three are City of Saint Paul Councilmembers, two are residents of Saint Paul appointed by the
Mayor and Council of Saint Paul, and two are members from the suburban customers served.
Councilor Paper asked the condition of the aquafer that the water is being drawn from and whether the
3M contamination has had an impact. Mr. Shea replied that SPRWS is using surface water from a
combination of sources. He stated that groundwater would be used as an emergency backup. The PFAS
issue with 3M continues to be measured and monitored. PFAS is present everywhere, but the amount is
below the health-based limits.
Councilor Duggan asked for details on security. Mr. Shea stated that their control systems are separated
from the internet therefore outside tampering would not be possible. The facility will remain secure.
Councilor Duggan stated that the rate increase from 2021 to 2024 would be about 23 percent and asked if
that is standard. Mr. Schneider stated that the rates presented tonight are estimated costs for a typical
residential home. He stated that the current system was constructed over 100 years ago and this project
would be an investment to continue to provide that service for a similar amount of time going forward.
Mr. Menkhaus stated that the rate estimates are for the average customer, while Mendota Heights would
expect less of an increase because of the surcharge that will drop off.
Councilor Mazzitello stated that he appreciates the service that SPRWS provides to the residents. He
believed that the Council should consider amending the JPA to allow Mendota Heights to serve on the
SPRWS Board of Commissioners.
Mayor Levine asked if the system would have the capability to remove PFAS in lower amounts, if ever
needed. Mr. Shea provided details on the filtration process.
Mayor Levine commented on the low water rates and high quality of drinking water. She encouraged
SPRWS to look at pollinator friendly plantings for the green areas that would exist around the new facility.
Councilor Duggan asked what water backups are in place if ever needed. Mr. Shea replied that Saint Paul
has a lot of storage through different supply sources. He stated that if the water were not consumable, it
can still be pumped for fire protection and could be boiled for use.
Councilor Paper asked when groundbreaking would be anticipated. Mr. Menkhaus replied that the bulk
of construction would begin in fall of 2022 and go through 2024. He noted that finishing and demolition
would continue into summer and fall of 2025.
Councilor Paper asked when the bond sale would be anticipated. Mr. Schneider replied that the process
for financing is on a reimbursement basis through the Public Facilities Authority.
Mr. Menkhaus encouraged the Council to reach out with any additional questions they have may.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Levine presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval.
Councilor Miller moved approval of the consent calendar as presented, pulling item f. for a separate vote.
a. Approval of February 2, 2021 City Council Minutes
b. Approval of February 9, 2021 Council Work Session Minutes
c. Acknowledge the January 5, 2021 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes
d. Approve Resolution 2021-15 Final Payment, Accept Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project
e. Approve Resolution 2021-17 Accepting Work, Approving Final Payment for the Fire Hall
Remodel/Expansion – Schwickert’s Tecta America
f. Approve Purchase of Rescue Boat, Trailer, and Motor and Approve Resolution 2021-19 Disposal
of Surplus Property
g. Approve Resolution 2021-18 Accept Donation of Grill from Lowe’s, Donate to Neighbors Inc.
h. Accept Police Officer Resignation, Authorize Police Officer Recruitment Process
i. Accept Airport Relations Commissioner Selection Process
j. Acknowledge December 2020 Par 3 Financial Report
k. Approve Building Activity Report
l. Approval of Claims List
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was performed:
Councilor Mazzitello aye
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Paper aye
Mayor Levine aye
Councilor Duggan aye
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
F) APPROVE PURCHASE OF RESCUE BOAT, TRAILER, AND MOTOR AND APPROVE
RESOLUTION 2021-19 DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY
Councilor Mazzitello stated that he supports replacing the boat. He stated that as the Council goes into
goal setting and budgeting for future years, it would be prudent to establish a life expectancy for all
equipment and depreciate that over time. He stated that this would result in an incremental amount
budgeted each year rather than a fluctuation in the levy to support purchases as they arise.
City Administrator Mark McNeill stated this would lead to more stable rates of taxation and good
governance. He encouraged this discussion to continue in the budgeting session later this year.
Councilor Paper referenced the motor on the existing boat and whether the new motor would have the
same horsepower. Councilor Miller provided details on the current boat motor, which is from 1999 or
2000. He stated that the new equipment would be an updated version.
Councilor Paper asked if the old motor could be resold. Councilor Miller confirmed that the motor and
trailer would be resold by posting on a resale site.
Councilor Mazzitello moved to approve the PURCHASE OF RESCUE BOAT, TRAILER, AND
MOTOR AND APPROVE RESOLUTION 2021-19 DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY.
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was performed:
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Paper aye
Mayor Levine aye
Councilor Duggan aye
Councilor Mazzitello aye
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No one from the public wished to be heard.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
No items scheduled.
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 562 PLACING A MORATORIUM ON CRITICAL AREA
OVERLAY DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AND PERMITS AND AUTHORIZING
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
Mayor Levine noted that prior to tonight’s meeting the City Council received three written comments
from the public and those will be entered into the record.
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the Council was being asked to consider
adopting Ordinance No. 562, which establishes a temporary moratorium on any proposed land use
applications and certain building permit requests for properties in the Critical Area Overlay District. He
provided details on the written comments received, one in support and two exemption requests.
Councilor Miller referenced the small building dimensions and believed that the Council previously
changed that allowance to 200 square feet from 140 square feet. Mr. Benetti replied that adjustment was
related to the domestic chicken ordinance, which allowed a larger total square footage for coops.
Councilor Mazzitello stated that he thought about different activities that require a Critical Area Permit,
he provided examples. He asked if there would be flexibility within the moratorium should an activity
slightly exceed the amount determined as allowed for square footage. Mr. Benetti stated that the city
could allow a small addition, but the intent of the moratorium is to apply it to a new construction project.
He stated that it would be good to halt activities that would require a full critical area review in order for
the City to implement the new ordinance requirements that match the DNR rules.
Councilor Miller commented that a moratorium is a finite policy which would provide up to one year for
the City to update the code. He stated that the City would not have to take the full year. Mr. Benetti noted
that staff is currently working on the update and is looking to complete the process as quickly as possible.
Councilor Duggan referenced the proposed moratorium language and provided suggested changes. He
suggested that in the first Whereas paragraph, the word ‘finds’ be changed to ‘accepts’.
Councilor Mazzitello commented that planning application resolutions include findings of fact and
therefore the word ‘find’ would seem appropriate.
Mayor Levine suggested that the Council first discuss whether it would like to consider the moratorium
before it considers language changes to the proposed ordinance.
Councilor Mazzitello moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 562 PLACING A MORATORIUM ON
CRITICAL AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AND PERMITS.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Further discussion: Councilor Duggan continued to provide suggested grammatical changes to the
ordinance. The Councilors confirmed that in section 2.2, the word ‘study’ could be replaced with ‘studies’.
It was confirmed that ‘finds’ should remain as presented in the first Whereas paragraph.
Councilor Paper confirmed that, if approved, only two projects, the Dakota County project on Mendota
Heights Road, and the residential project at 1680 Lexington Avenue, would be exempted.
Mr. Benetti commented that moratoriums are a good tool in order to allow the City to address gaps in the
ordinance. He stated that the two parties that asked for the exemption were given tentative review/approval
for their projects in 2020. He confirmed that those are the only two projects that have begun the process
and/or received that approval.
Councilor Paper commented that he would be comfortable exempting those activities because they already
began the process. He stated that he would not be comfortable exempting a project that has not come
forward to this date.
Councilor Mazzitello stated that one concern that he would have is that this would stop people from
improving their existing homes. He asked if there would be a mechanism for property within the critical
area to apply for an exemption during the moratorium if the activity was not development, redevelopment
or subdivision related. He asked if the Council would entertain increasing the allowed square footage
from 144 square feet to include actions such as a garage addition or driveway turnaround.
Councilor Duggan commented that there is not a particular circumstance in front of the Council, therefore
he would not want to massage the ordinance to continue to include situations that could arise. He stated
that he would support the ordinance as recommended.
Councilor Mazzitello referenced Section 3, Subsection 3.4 related to exemptions. He suggested adding a
3.5 further exempting the two properties agreed upon. He stated that if another party wanted to submit a
Critical Area Permit for an activity such as a garage, they could submit an ordinance amendment to add
their address to that line.
Councilor Duggan referenced Section 3, subsection 3.1, stating that ‘and’ needs to be removed from the
first sentence to make it read correctly. Community Development Director Tim Benetti agreed.
A roll call vote was performed:
Councilor Paper aye
Mayor Levine aye
Councilor Duggan aye
Councilor Mazzitello aye
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Duggan moved to adopt the SUMMARY ORDINANCE 562 FOR PUBLICATION.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was performed:
Mayor Levine aye
Councilor Duggan aye
Councilor Mazzitello aye
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Paper aye
B) MARIE PARK PLAYGROUND REMODEL CONTRACT AWARD
Recreation Coordinator Meredith Lawrence presented a contract with Northland Recreation for the
replacement of playground equipment at Marie Park at a cost of $125,000. Along with the new play
equipment, the contract includes demolition and disposal of the existing play equipment, all site work, the
container, engineered wood fiber surfacing, and the installation. This playground would double the size
of the existing playground. Financing would come from the Special Parks Fund and using the proceeds
of the sale of the Village lots. Shade structures are also an option at a cost of $8,004.
Councilor Mazzitello complimented staff on the comprehensive report and asked for details on the buffer
distance between the water body and playground. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that staff
established a 25-foot buffer area around the pond. He stated that the container for the playground
equipment will be reshaped to improve the ease of mowing for staff.
Councilor Duggan commented that it is great that the size of the playground will be doubled in size and
asked if the size of the parking lot would also need to be increased. Mr. Ruzek replied that Marie Park is
more of a neighborhood park which tends to have people walking or biking to it.
Councilor Paper asked to see a site plan of how the new playground would fit into the current park. He
asked if any of the old equipment could be reused. Ms. Lawrence stated that the City is not keeping any
of the existing equipment due to safety regulations. She stated that the new playground will provide more
features than currently exist.
Councilor Paper asked if there is another way the old equipment could be repurposed. He asked why earth
tones colors were chosen rather than brighter colors. Ms. Lawrence stated that the vendor may be able to
donate some of the equipment. She stated that earth tone colors were recommended by the subcommittee.
Councilor Paper commented that he believes that shade is important and should be included. He suggested
that additional trees be planted. Mr. Ruzek displayed the map of the current playground and identified
where the new equipment would be placed.
Councilor Miller concurred that shade will be important as the tree that currently provides shade will be
removed. He agreed that more trees should be planted in the park.
Mayor Levine thanked everyone that was involved in the planning process and stated she is very excited
for the project.
Councilor Paper moved to approve AND AWARD THE PLAYGROUND REMODEL CONTRACT TO
NORTHLAND RECREATION FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $133,004.
Councilor Mazzitello seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was performed:
Councilor Duggan aye
Councilor Mazzitello aye
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Paper aye
Mayor Levine aye
C) RESOLUTION 2021-16 RENEW INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR OFF-LEASH DOG PARK AT
1360 ACACIA BOULEVARD
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek provided background information and noted that the Council is asked
to extend the expired interim use permit for the Mendota Heights Off-Leash Dog Park.
Councilor Duggan referenced the fencing requirement. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that
was a carryover from the previous resolution and could be stricken if desired.
Councilor Paper suggested leaving the language as they have done in the past when renewing this item.
He recommended extending the term for another five years.
Councilor Duggan commented that it is possible that the City could lose the dog park in the future and
suggested that the Council consider a permanent location in a future goal setting session.
Councilor Mazzitello recalled a discussion in 2015 related to the dog park. He stated that at that time
there were seven dog parks within a ten-mile radius of Mendota Heights. He stated that making the dog
park permanent in this location would devalue the site which could be used for development.
Councilor Miller commented that if dug upon, that land could contain Native American remains. He
believed that if the parcel were going to be developed, further research should be done.
Councilor Mazzitello commented that he does not believe that an in depth study has been done, even for
a dog park.
Mayor Levine noted that three members of the current Council were members of the Park and Recreation
Commission when the current location of the dog park was discussed. She stated that if the land were
disturbed there may be chemicals because of the use prior to it being used as a dog park.
Councilor Miller moved to approve RESOLUTION 2021-16 RENEWING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT
FOR AN OFF-LEASH DOG PARK AT 1360 ACACIA BOULEVARD.
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was performed:
Councilor Mazzitello aye
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Paper aye
Mayor Levine aye
Councilor Duggan aye
D) DISCUSSION OF 2021-2022 CITY GOALS AND PRIORITIES
City Administrator Mark McNeill presented a draft list of the goals suggested by Councilors at the goal
setting session of February 9th. He asked for input related to the timing proposed within the draft.
Councilor Mazzitello asked if an item shown as parked would not have action in 2021 or 2022 or would
be dependent upon another item. City Administrator Mark McNeill replied that parked items would be
on hold or could move forward as desired by the Council.
Councilor Mazzitello stated that this proposal would seem to fit the consensus to have ten or so items as
goals. He stated that many of the parked items seem related to other goals. Mr. McNeill noted that some
items cannot be completed until the pandemic has passed or other items are completed.
Councilor Paper asked if the idea of a parks referendum is going to be discussed soon, as that would be
the way to accomplish many of the goals related to improving our parks and trails.
Councilor Miller acknowledged that would seem to make sense, but he would be hesitant to jump into a
referendum now because of the pandemic.
Mayor Levine stated that she would support changing one item to read “research and develop a dedicated
funding source for parks”, as she did not believe the dedicated source has been agreed upon.
Councilor Paper commented that a parks referendum would not need to be the vehicle, but he wants to
discuss and research it further. He stated that the Par 3 funds are helpful, but the improvements continue
to increase in cost and an injection of funding is needed.
Councilor Miller suggested that the discussion of a parks referendum take a tempered approach during a
good economy. He stated the current parks equipment is not in disrepair and needing immediate action.
Mayor Levine stated that this discussion is actually one of the goals and suggested that the discussion be
refocused on the goals document. She commented that it appears the skate park is missing from the
document. She asked if the Council would support adding the skate park to the list.
City Administrator Mark McNeill confirmed that would be added as an action item.
Councilor Mazzitello suggested that the farmers market be added to the list. He asked the rational in
placing the tabletop emergency operations exercise as parked. Mr. McNeill commented that there are
tabletop exercises going on. He stated that whatever is done will involve the fire department and others
identified within the emergency operations plan. He confirmed that is an ongoing item rather than a parked
item.
Councilor Paper stated that there are several parks items listed as parked. He noted that they were close
to having the dugouts at Mendakota Park last year and he did not want to see that traction lost.
Councilor Duggan stated that if lighted ballfields are going to be completed, they should be in all parks.
He referenced the tabletop emergency exercises noting that those are activities of the fire and police
departments and not the Council. He stated that there are other elements that would involve additional
discussion, such as the dedication of the Par 3 funds.
Mayor Levine agreed that there will be discussion on the individual items over the next two years if the
document is approved.
City Administrator Mark McNeill stated that staff will make revisions to the document as discussed and
continue to add details.
Mayor Levine commented that this was a great process.
Councilor Duggan asked and received confirmation that the skate park will be added to the document.
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that the Fire Chief responded to him that the new boat
approved earlier tonight will have a Mercury motor on it.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilor Miller extended thanks to the Athletic Director at Henry Sibley High School, on behalf of the
Fire Department, as the school allowed the department to use the pool the previous week to test new
equipment. He encouraged residents to use caution on thin ice.
Councilor Mazzitello noted the recent passing of Herb Bernick. He thanked the Public Works Department
for their efforts during the recent bitterly cold weather.
Councilor Duggan commented that he also knew Herb as a business owner and was sad for his loss. He
thanked staff for the wonderful work they do. He stated that he received his first dose of the vaccination.
Councilor Paper thanked the representatives from SPRWS for their presentation tonight and looked
forward to the City gaining representation on the Board. He thanked everyone that participated in
providing input for the Marie Park playground and thanked staff for the work they do to prepare for these
projects. He noted that the City will be getting a great project for the funds.
Mayor Levine stated that Public Works has been doing a great job maintaining the ice rinks, which
continue to be well used even in the cold weather.
ADJOURN
Councilor Paper moved to adjourn.
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was performed:
Councilor Miller aye
Councilor Paper aye
Mayor Levine aye
Councilor Duggan aye
Councilor Mazzitello aye
Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 8:39 p.m.
____________________________________
Stephanie Levine
ATTEST: Mayor
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Council Work Session
Held via Webex on
Tuesday, February 24, 2021
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a work session of the Mendota Heights City Council was held at City
Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Levine called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Council members Duggan, Mazzitello, Miller, and
Paper were present. Members of the Airport Relations Board, the Planning Commission, and the Parks and
Recreation Commission were also present.
Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill, Assistant City Administrator Cheryl
Jacobson, Recreation Coordinator Meredith Lawrence, Community Development Director Tim Benetti,
City Clerk Lorri Smith, and City Attorney Elliott Knetsch.
ORIENTATION AND TRAINING
The City Council and Commission members received training on meeting etiquette, open meeting laws,
meeting procedures, and parliamentary procedures. They discussed the roles and responsibilities of being
an elected or appointed official of the city, social media, gift laws, and conflicts of interest.
ADJOURN
Mayor Levine adjourned the meeting at 9:02 pm.
____________________________________
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
DATE: March 2, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Scott Goldenstein, Assistant Fire Chief
SUBJECT: January 2021 Fire Synopsis
January had the Fire Department paged for service a total of 21 times.
Mendota Heights 16 calls
Lilydale 2 calls
Mendota 0 calls
Sunfish Lake 0 calls
Other 3 calls
Total 21 calls
Types of calls:
Fires: 2 In January, the Fire Department responded to a vehicle fire on Sibley Memorial
Highway where a vehicle on the side of the road was discovered to have a small fire in one of its
CV joint boots that was extinguished with an ABC extinguisher. In addition, the department
responded to a fire alarm at Sibley High School where it was originally believed to have been
due to the system being tested but, in fact, there was a fire in the building. The sprinkler system
had extinguished the fire and the Fire Department proceeded to ventilate the building and
investigate for any additional extension.
Mutual/Auto Aid Fires: 1 The Fire Department was dispatched to a structure fire at Gerten’s
Greenhouse in Inver Grove Heights. One engine, one ladder and one Chief’s vehicle responded
and assisted.
Medical/Extrication: 3 The station responded to two traditional EMS calls as well as one
EMS call that required removing the victim from the site of a workplace accident and assisting in
medical care.
Hazardous Situations: 2 Two times in January, the MHFD was called out for HazMat based
incidents. The first call was for a cut gas line that occurred when a boring crew struck the gas
line while installing fiber optic cable and the second call was for a smell of gasoline in the area.
Service Calls: 1 The MHFD provided assistance to the Police Department with their request
for portable lighting at the scene of a police incident.
False Alarms/Good intent Calls: 9 The department was paged out for a number of calls that
ended up not having a significant hazard. One call was for a burning smell in a commercial
structure that appeared to be due to a belt issue on a roof heating unit. We also had one call for
burnt food. Two calls came from a hotel, the first call was for a sprinkler line that ruptured and
caused a significant amount of damage due to water. The second call to this address was due to
alarm system issues relative to the earlier water issue. Another commercial location had a
sprinkler system issue causing their dry system to charge with water (but not release any water
through the sprinkler heads). A resident of one of the city’s senior living facilities called 911 out
of concern when, in fact, the system was being tested at that time. Another commercial system
had their fire alarm activate due to it being tested and the monitoring company was not being
aware of the test. Finally, the department responded to two carbon monoxide alarms that were
due to detectors malfunctioning and both were out of date as well.
Dispatched and Cancelled En route: 2 The Fire Department had two calls where we were
cancelled before arriving on scene (not including mutual/auto aid calls that cancelled).
Mutual/Auto-Aid Other: 1 The Fire Department was summoned to a reported structure fire
in West St Paul, but were cancelled before arrival.
January Training
January 13 18:30 Firefighter PPE
This drill was dedicated to going over current firefighter personal protective equipment including
its capabilities as well as its maintenance and care.
January 14 07:00 Firefighter PPE
This drill was dedicated to going over current firefighter personal protective equipment including
its capabilities as well as its maintenance and care.
January 25 18:30 Multi-Family Operations
This drill was set up as two different scenarios for firefighters to go into the new 2nd floor
training area with smoke filled, dark conditions and practice normal search and rescue
techniques.
January 26 07:00 Multi-Family Operations
This drill was set up as two different scenarios for firefighters to go into the new 2nd floor
training area with smoke filled, dark conditions and practice normal search and rescue
techniques.
Number of Calls 21 Total Calls for Year 21
FIRE ALARMS DISPATCHED:NUMBER STRUCTURE CONTENTS MISC.TOTALS TO DATE
ACTUAL FIRES
Structure - MH Commercial 1 $20,000 $50,000 $70,000
Structure - MH Residential $0
Structure - Contract Areas $0
Cooking Fire - confined $0
Vehicle - MH $0
Vehicle - Contract Areas 1 $250 $250 $500
Grass/Brush/No Value MH
Grass/Brush/No Value Contract TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSES
Other Fire
OVERPRESSURE RUPTURE $20,250 $50,250 $0
Excessive heat, scorch burns
MEDICAL
Emergency Medical/Assist 2
Vehicle accident w/injuries
Extrication ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH)$70,500
Medical, other 1
HAZARDOUS SITUATION $70,000
Spills/Leaks 1
Carbon Monoxide Incident $0
Power line down
Arcing, shorting $70,000
Hazardous, Other 1
SERVICE CALL
Smoke or odor removal $500
Assist Police or other agency 1
Service Call, other
GOOD INTENT
Good Intent
Dispatched & Cancelled 2 Current To Date Last Year
Smoke Scare 1 16 16 16
HazMat release investigation 2 2 3
Good Intent, Other 1 0 0 3
FALSE ALARMS 0 0 1
False Alarm 3 3 6
Malfunction 4
Unintentional 2 Total:21 21 29
False Alarm, other 1
MUTUAL AID 2 FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH
Total Calls 21 Inspections 30.5
Investigations 0
WORK PERFORMED Hours To Date Last Year
Re-Inspection 0
Fire Calls 413.5 413.5 500.5
Meetings 52 52 128.5 Meetings 0
Training 353.5 353.5 190
Special Activity 0 0 23.5 Administration 14
Fire Marshal 48.5 48.5 0
Plan Review/Training 4
TOTALS 867.5 867.5 842.5 TOTAL:48.5
Mendota Heights Only Structure/Contents
Mendota Heights Only Miscellaneous
Mendota Heights Total Loss to Date
Contract Areas Loss to Date
MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT
JANUARY 2021 MONTHLY REPORT
Mendota Heights
Sunfish Lake
Other
FIRE LOSS TOTALS
LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS
Lilydale
Mendota
Request for City Council Action
DATE: March 2, 2021
TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator, and Assistant City
Administrator
FROM: Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator
John Boland, Public Works Superintendent
SUBJECT: Award Contract for Par 3 Well Rehabilitation Project
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to award the Par 3 Well Rehabilitation Project to Keys Well Drilling.
BACKGROUND
To irrigate the Par 3 golf course and supply water to the course’s maintenance building, the city
uses a well located on the property as its water source. While an inspection of the well to test its
functionality is conducted annually, little was known about the well, the pump or the motor which
operate the well.
Historical background and documentation on the pump such as age, amount of power or size of
the current pump is unavailable. To better understand the system’s condition, the pump was pulled
and a comprehensive inspection of the well including the pump and motor were performed. The
inspection was performed by Keys Well Drilling Company.
It was determined that the well is 8” wide x 450’ deep and was drilled in 1961. The current depth
was measured at 449’, which is considered healthy. The static water level was measured at 75’.
The pump and motor have a date code of 1987, which makes it 34 years old. Typically, a well
pump and motor have a life expectancy of approximately 20 years. The motor is in fair condition
considering its age. The inspection identified that the well’s 4” drop pipe consists of multiple
sections in different lengths; which is highly uncommon. Additionally, there is significant
corrosion near the threads of each section of pipe. Finally, the well seal, which seals the discharge
head and well casing, is cracked.
Based on the inspection findings, it is recommended that the city replace the well pump and motor
in addition to the component parts including the drop pipe and well seal.
BUDGET
The FY2021 budget includes $19,000 for the Par 3 Well Rehabilitation Project.
Per the city’s procurement policy, staff solicited quotes from two reputable vendors for the
recommended replacement. Quotes received were as follows:
• Traut Companies: $22,578
• Keys Well Drilling Company: $17,135.25
Staff has paid Keys Well Drilling Company $2,580 to pull the pump and for the initial inspection
of the current well hardware.
Attachments:
• Quote from Keys Well Drilling Company
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends awarding the contract to the company submitting the lowest quote, Keys Well
Drilling Company, in the amount of $17,135.25 for the replacement of the Par 3 well pump, motor
and component parts.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the City Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the replacement of the Par 3 well pump,
motor and component parts and award Keys Well Drilling Company the contract for the Par 3
Well Rehabilitation Project.
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: March 2, 2021 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Bobby Crane, Senior Engineering Technician Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2021-14 Final Payment and Acceptance of the 2019 Storm Sewer Improvements – Project #201905 COMMENT:
Introduction
The Council is asked to approve Resolution 2021-14, to accept work and approve the final payment
for project #201905, which is the 2019 Storm Sewer Improvements project.
Background
The City Council awarded the contract to Alcon Construction Corp. at their September 17, 2019,
City Council meeting for their low bid of $226,717.90.
The project has been completed, inspected, and approved, and is now ready for final payment.
This will start the one-year guarantee period. All required paperwork needed before the final
payment can be issued has been submitted.
Discussion
The final payment for this contract is $37,486.56. The total cost for this project was $244,036.86
and is $17,318.96 over the original contract amount. The reasons for the project being over budget
are unforeseen private utility conflicts that lead to field changes and redesign, poor soil conditions
that resulted in the importation of suitable materials, and winter weather conditions extending
restoration into the spring of 2020.
Budget Impact
There are sufficient funds in the Storm Water Utility Fund to cover the final payment.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the attached Resolution No.
2021-14 “RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR
PROJECT #201905, 2019 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS”.
Action Required
If Council concurs with the staff recommendation, they should pass a motion adopting Resolution
No. 2021-14 “RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL
PAYMENT FOR PROJECT #201905, 2019 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS”, by
simple majority vote.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2021-14
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT
FOR PROJECT #201905
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract with the City of Mendota Heights on
September 17, 2019, with Alcon Construction Corp., of Rochester, MN, has satisfactorily
completed the improvements for the 2019 Storm Sewer Improvement Project #201905, in
accordance with such contract.
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Mendota Heights that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted
and approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby
directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of
$37,486.56, taking the contractor’s receipt in full.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this second day of
March, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
_________________________________
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
DATE: March 2, 2021
TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator
FROM: Wayne Wegener, Police Captain
SUBJECT: Authorization of a professional services contract with Ellie Family
Partnerships, PLLP and the City of Mendota Heights
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to authorize a professional services contract with Ellie Family Partnerships
PLLP and the City of Mendota Heights.
BACKGROUND
The Mendota Heights Police Department is continually examining ways to better the physical and
mental health of police officers. In doing so, the Police Department reached out to Ellie Family
Partnerships, PLLP. In conjunction with the City Attorney, the Police Department drafted a
professional services contract for wellness consultations for the City’s police officers. These
consultations will allow for officers begin to have open discussions and check-in with a mental
health professional. Additional resources and recommendations may be provided to officers who
choose to engage in further services at their leisure.
BUDGET IMPACT
The expected annual cost for this contract is $4,400.00. Funding for this contract will be covered
within the Police Department’s budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council authorize the professional services contract with Ellie Family
Partnerships, PLLP and the City of Mendota Heights.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council agrees with the staff recommendation, authorize Staff to execute a professional
services contract with Ellie Family Partnerships, PLLP and the City of Mendota Heights. This
action requires a simple majority vote.
Service Agreement
THIS SERVICE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made as of by and between Ellie Family
Services, PLLP (hereinafter referred to as “Clinic”), and Mendota Heights (hereinafter referred
to as the “City”), each a Party and, collectively, the “Parties.”
WHEREAS the Clinic has agreed to provide services set out in clause (2) hereof to City and the
parties have agreed and do hereby agree that the terms of such agreement be put into writing
NOW THEREFORE the parties agree to be bound by the following terms and conditions:
1. The Term
This agreement term is 12 months from the date it was signed. It is terminable by either party by
giving the other party thirty (30) days written notice mailed or delivered to the other party.
2. The Services
The Clinic will perform the agreed upon wellness consultation services (“Services”) as described
below for police officers employed by the City (“Employees”).
Wellness Consultation Services offers Employees the opportunity to meet with one of
Clinic’s mental health professionals for two (2) sessions. Wellness Consultations sessions
are between 50-55 minutes in length and are not therapeutic in nature. Additional
resources and recommendations may be provided by the mental health professional to the
Employee and the Employee may choose to engage in further services at their expense.
3. Billing
City shall pay Clinic $110.00 per session for the Services described in paragraph 2. Clinic will
invoice the City for previously provided Services semi-annually in April and December. The
City shall remit payment to Clinic within 30 days of receipt of an invoice.
All change orders, regardless of amount, must be approved in advance and in writing by the City.
No payment will be due or made for work done in advance of such approval.
4. Location and Scheduling
Wellness Consultation services may be held at the Clinic’s St. Paul location at 1150 Montreal
Ave # 107, St Paul, MN 55116 or onsite at the City’s location.
All sessions can be scheduled by direct outreach to Clinic’s program manager (651) 319-1059.
5. Warranties
The Clinic warrants that they possess the necessary expertise, skill and experience to provide the
Service and will provide unbiased and independent advice in respect of the Service. Clinic shall
exercise the same degrees of care, skill, and diligence in the performance of the Services as is
ordinarily possessed and exercised by a professional consultant under similar circumstances.
City shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies in the accuracy of Clinic’s Services.
6. Site Requirements
The City will at all times comply with security regulations which are in force or which are
generally or specifically imposed by Clinic from time to time and that they will comply with all
statutory site requirements.
7. Indemnification
Each Party agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other Party and its employees,
officials, and agents from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses, and expenses,
including reasonable attorney fees, brought by someone other than the Parties and arising out of
the indemnifying Party’s own negligence or performance or failure to perform its obligations
under this Agreement. Neither Party shall be entitled to indemnification arising from its own
gross negligence or willful misconduct.The Parties agree this indemnity obligation shall survive
the completion or termination of this Agreement.
8. Insurance
Clinic shall secure and maintain such insurance as will protect Clinic from claims under the
Worker's Compensation Acts and from claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage
which may arise from the performance of services under this Agreement. Such insurance shall
be written for amounts not less than:
Commercial General Liability: $1,000,000 each occurrence/$3,000,000 aggregate
The City shall be named as an additional insured on the general liability and umbrella policies on
a primary and noncontributory basis.
The Clinic shall secure and maintain a professional liability insurance policy. Said policy shall
insure payment of damages for legal liability arising out of the performance of professional
services in the insured's capacity as Clinic, if such legal liability is caused by a negligent act,
error or omission of the insured or any person or organization for which the insured is legally
liable. The policy shall provide minimum limits of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per
occurrence and Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) aggregate with a deductible maximum of
One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00).
Before commencing work, the Clinic shall provide the City a certificate of insurance evidencing
the required insurance coverage in a form acceptable to City.
9. Ownership
The City will not obtain rights in any data, materials, or systems otherwise utilized or provided
by Clinic in connection with this Agreement. At the request and expense of Clinic, the City will
do all such things and sign all documents or instruments reasonably necessary in the opinion of
Clinic to enable Clinic to obtain, defend and enforce its rights in any such data, materials or
systems. City shall, upon request by Clinic, promptly deliver to Clinic copies of such data,
materials or systems that may be in the possession, custody or control of the City.
All Intellectual Property Rights in and to any software, documentation, drawings, data,
information, database or product created or produced by the Clinic in performing the Services
under this Agreement will be the property of Clinic. The City hereby assigns to Clinic absolutely
its whole right, title and interest, present and future in and to such Intellectual Property Rights
free from all liens, charges and encumbrances. The City will provide Clinic with all information
which Clinic may reasonably request for the purpose of allowing Clinic to fully exercise its
proprietary rights in any jurisdiction.
The City will at Clinic’s request and expense undertake and execute all acts, deeds, documents
and steps necessary to effectively vest such Intellectual Property Rights in Clinic and will, at
Clinic’s request and expense provide Clinic with all reasonable assistance required to vest the
same in Clinic in any part of the world.
The provisions and requirements of this clause will survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement.
10. Confidentiality
Clinic shall maintain such records as are deemed necessary by the applicable professional and
regulatory standards. Clinic shall maintain records in a manner that insures confidentiality to
service recipients. All paper reports provided to the Clinic from the City shall be securely
maintained in locked file drawers or a locked room.
Clinic acknowledges that the City may withhold information, data, or reports when the release of
such information, data, or reports could compromise an ongoing criminal or civil investigation,
when it contains information regarding child sexual abuse or juvenile offenders, or when
dissemination is prohibit by law or regulation.
Clinic agrees that, unless required or authorized by federal or state law, no personal client
information will be shared without a written authorization form signed by the individual client.
Individual clients will receive informed consent when seeking counseling, whether part of the
department annual mental health check-in or other service offered by the Clinic.
11. Compliance and Standard of Care
In providing services hereunder, Clinic shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and
regulations pertaining to the services to be provided under the terms of this Agreement.
12. Independent Contractor
The Clinic is an independent contractor and nothing in this Agreement will render them an agent,
employee, or partner of the City and the Clinic will not hold themselves out as such. The Clinic
will not have any right or power to bind City to any obligation. This Agreement will not establish
a joint venture, agency or partnership between Clinic and the City.
13. Publicity
The City will not publicize or advertise this Agreement or any of the terms of this Agreement
without the prior written consent of the Clinic.
14. Entire Agreements
This Agreement supersedes all prior arrangements, agreements and understandings between the
parties.
No addition to or modification of any provision of this Agreement will be binding upon the
Parties unless made by written instrument and signed by an authorized representative of each of
the Parties.
15. Law
This agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
Minnesota. Any dispute which may arise between the parties concerning this Agreement will be
venued in Dakota County and the parties hereby submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Dakota County courts.
16. Government Data Practices/Privacy
The Clinic agrees to abide by the applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data
Practice Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, HIPAA requirements and all other applicable state
or federal rules, regulations or orders pertaining to privacy or confidentiality. The Clinic
understands that all of the data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or
disseminated by the Clinic in performing those functions that the City would perform is subject
to the requirements of Chapter 13, and the Clinic must comply with those requirements as if it
were a government entity. This does not create a duty on the part of the Clinic to provide the
public with access to public data if the public data is available from the City, except as required
by the terms of this Agreement.
THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Signed by and on behalf of Clinic Group, Ellie Family Services, PLLP
By Erin Pash, LMFT, Co-Owner
And/Or Kyle Keller, LICSW, Co-Owner
Signature ______________________________________________
Dated ________________
Signature ______________________________________________
Dated ________________
City of Mendota Heights
______________________________
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 2, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Technician
SUBJECT: Rogers Lake Water Quality Report Presentation by Saint Thomas Academy
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
At its regular meeting of March 2nd, the Council will hear a presentation from students at St.
Thomas Academy about the water quality of Rogers Lake. The presentation will be done
remotely.
BACKGROUND
Since the early 1990’s, Saint Thomas Academy Environmental Science Classes have been
monitoring several aspects of the water quality present in Rogers Lake. The City Council hears
an annual update from the students.
The attached historical data on the lakes’ water quality shows a trend of the water quality of
Rogers Lake improving over the past several recent years. In 2019 the overall rating decreased
slightly over the preceding year which continued in to 2020.
DISCUSSION
Mr. Tony Kinzley is the Advanced Placement Environmental Sciences Instructor. He has a
group of students who have conducted the research and prepared a presentation for Council.
Attached is a summary sheet the students prepared, which will be presented at the Council
meeting.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council receive the Rogers Lake Water Quality Report presentation from
Saint Thomas Academy.
ACTION REQUIRED
No Council action is required. For informational purposes only.
Which chemical
tests were
performed?
What does each
test for?
What factors affect
the readings?
What is an
acceptable
reading?
What were the Fall
2020 readings?
Dissolved Oxygen
(D.O.)
The amount of
oxygen dissolved in
the water.
Plant life increases
D.O., organic waste
inputs (pet waste,
grass clippings,
leaves) lowers D.O.
5-12 ppm 9.7 ppm
(9.8 in 2019)
Acceptable
Fecal Coliform Levels of bacteria
associated with
pathogenic bacteria
and viruses in the
water
Goose and pet
waste. Faulty septic
systems and sewer
lines.
0 colonies/100ml is
safe to drink.
200 colonies/100ml
or less is safe for
swimming
5.1 col/100ml
(1.6 in 2019)
Acceptable
pH The acidity or
basicity of the water
Acid rain is the
typical cause of
acidification of
lakes
6.5-8.5 pH units
(slightly basic) 7.9 units
(7.7 in 2019)
Acceptable
Biochemical
Oxygen Demand
(BOD5)
How much oxygen
is being used by
bacteria in the lake
that decompose
organic waste put
into the water.
Organic waste
inputs (leaves, grass
clippings, or animal
waste) and algal
blooms from
fertilizer runoff
0-3 ppm 4.1 ppm
(3.3 in 2019)
Unacceptable
∆ Temperature
(Change In Temp.)
The difference in
temperature
between 2 testing
sites on the lake
Sun/shade
differences,
industrial thermal
pollution, removal
of trees/shade
0-1 °C 1.4 °C
(0.9 in 2019)
Unacceptable
but likely natural causes
Nitrate Measure of the
amount of Nitrates
in the water
Animal waste, grass
clippings, leaves,
fertilizers. Faulty
septic systems and
sewer lines
0.1-3 ppm
(Low levels needed
for proper aquatic
plant growth)
0.3 ppm
(0.4 in 2019)
Acceptable
Total Phosphates Measure of the
amount of various
phosphates in the
water
Soil runoff, animal
waste, grass
clippings, leaves,
some fertilizers.
Faulty sewer lines
and septic systems.
0.1-1 ppm
(Low levels needed
for proper aquatic
plant growth)
1.1 ppm
(1.1 in 2019)
Unacceptable
Turbidity Amount of
suspended solids in
the water. Measure
of water clarity
Soil erosion,
organic waste input
1-40 JTU 12.7 JTU
(9.6 in 2019)
Acceptable
Total Solids Amount of
suspended and
dissolved solids in
water
Road salt, soil
erosion, organic
waste input.
1-300 mg/L 277.1 mg/L
(264.9 in 2019)
Acceptable
Overall Rating
A composite score
of all 9 chemical
tests.
The 9 chemical tests Excellent: 90-100
Good: 70-89.9
Medium: 50-69.9
79.9
(83.0 in 2019)
Acceptable
Fall 2020 Chemical Assessment of Rogers Lake
Performed by Saint Thomas Academy
A. P. and General Environmental Science Program
Thank you for allowing us the time to share our findings with the
Mendota Heights City Council. Over eighty students participated in
the program this year and were required to prepare a formal group
presentation on Rogers Lake to their class. The winning group will
present on Tuesday, March 2. This is a genuine learning opportunity
for all of these students, especially the winning group.
This document gives an overview of the chemical water quality
monitoring program used by the A.P. Environmental Science students
at Saint Thomas Academy for the Mayor, Council Members, and
Staff.
Based on the data taken last fall, Rogers Lake once again continues to
be a very healthy lake with some areas to monitor. The actual data,
analysis of the data, areas in need of improvement, and possible
solutions will be further discussed at the council meeting.
Please direct any questions to Mr. Tony Kinzley, A.P. Environmental
Science Teacher, at tkinzley@cadets.com.
Rogers Lake Historical Data 2001‐2019 (9 Parameters and Overall Rating)Blank cells indicate that data is not availableBold values indicate data collected using probewareRed values indicate historical recordDissolved OxygenFecal ColiformpHBOD5Δ TemperaturePhosphateNitrateTurbidityTotal SolidsOverallSeason(ppm)(col./100ml)(units)(ppm)(Degrees C)(ppm)(ppm)(JTU)(mg/L)(0‐100)Fall 20016.97.84.61.81.30.740.062.5Spring 20025.98.04.02.02.20.124.168.0Fall 20025.98.23.61.71.71.122.2233.165.1Spring 20036.37.72.70.91.41.021.268.2Fall 20034.87.51.71.41.00.327.2409.664.9Spring 20043.27.62.21.61.10.422.0440.359.0Fall 200469.8Spring 200571.0Fall 20054.937.97.22.41.01.10.411.6307.570.9Spring 2006 2.71.97.61.52.01.20.711.8318.572.8Fall 20067.949.57.62.61.51.11.010.174.6Spring 20077.911.28.22.51.50.70.611.3301.878.4Fall 20077.825.97.62.81.10.60.39.0477.276.7Spring 20088.00.07.64.70.90.50.412.4321.274.3Fall 20086.434.27.93.81.21.10.417.5451.372.1Spring 20098.03.17.02.50.91.00.412.6344.677.9Fall 20097.211.66.22.11.01.00.68.8290.575.6Fall 20106.89.96.22.41.00.90.218.6293.270.8Fall 20118.134.07.54.50.81.00.416.5298.775.5Fall 20127.728.97.73.01.11.00.414.4296.175.9Fall 20137.610.87.62.50.90.80.49.2300.078.6Fall 20147.79.17.51.81.00.50.98.6280.380.8Fall 20157.15.07.72.91.01.00.615.5276.780.2Fall 20169.50.07.71.31.20.90.47.4254.185.1Fall 201710.50.87.72.21.20.91.07.9261.785.9Fall 201810.71.47.83.21.70.40.55.0231.384.3Fall 20199.81.67.73.30.91.10.49.6264.983.0Fall 20209.75.17.94.11.41.10.312.7277.179.9Average7.214.17.62.91.31.00.515.0316.874.3
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 2, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Technician
SUBJECT: NPDES Phase II Storm Water Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System (MS4) – Annual Public Hearing
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to preside over a public hearing outlining the City stormwater requirements
for compliance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s MS4 storm water permit.
BACKGROUND
The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program is a federally mandated
program established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and regulated by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to implement and maintain pollution prevention
practices for stormwater discharges by permits issued to regulated entities by the federal authority
granted under this program. Storm water discharges associated with MS4s are regulated by these
NPDES permits. The MPCA issued a new General MS4 permit in 2020, and has given an
application deadline of April 15th, 2021. The City is in the process of applying for a renewed MS4
permit with the MPCA.
Mendota Heights, as an MS4 owner, was required to develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Program (SWPPP) that incorporates best management practices that reduce pollutant discharges.
The SWPPP was developed in 2003, and updated in 2013. In 2006, the City adopted the Local
Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) that outlined how the requirements of our SWPPP are
to be met and established requirements for land disturbing activities. The City Council adopted
the 2018 update to the Surface Water Management Plan at their September 4, 2018 meeting.
DISCUSSION
There are six required components in each SWPPP, termed “minimum control measures” for each
permit authorizing storm water discharges under the NPDES program:
1. Public Education and Outreach
2. Public Participation/Involvement
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
4. Construction Site Runoff and Control
5. Post-Construction Runoff Control
6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping
As part of our SWPPP and LSWMP, the City has adopted various Best Management Practices
(BMPs) to address the six components listed above. These practices include:
1. Public Education and Outreach – Articles in the Heights Highlights, Friday News, City
website, brochures in the lobby. Providing information and educational activities at public
events such as the Earth and Arbor Day Celebration and Parks Celebration and
neighborhood meetings. Providing information and guidance as part of the City Building
Permit Program. Participating in the Adopt-a-Drain, Wetland Health Evaluation Program
(WHEP), Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP), and Landscaping for Clean
Water programs in conjunction with the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management
Organization (WMO) and Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District.
2. Public Participation/Involvement – Providing an opportunity for the public to review the
City’s SWPPP and provide comment, such as at a public meeting. Providing avenues for
stormwater complaints and concerns (e-mail contact and phone). Working with
neighborhood groups on stormwater education and volunteer projects, such as installing
community and neighborhood native plantings and rain gardens.
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination – Inspection of storm water outfalls, ponds,
and permanent stormwater BMPs for indication of illicit discharge (pollutants) that may
have entered the storm sewer system, and taking enforcement action.
4. Construction Site Runoff and Control – Passing of a Stormwater Ordinance (2009) and
establishment of land disturbance activity regulatory requirements. Establishing a storm
water permit and escrow as part of the Building Permit process (by Ordinance) and the
Land Disturbance Guidance document. Conducting erosion and sediment control
inspections on active construction sites.
5. Post-Construction Runoff Control – Construction of permanent stormwater treatment
structures, such as raingardens/bioinfiltration basins, stormwater ponds, subterranean
infiltration and filtration features, etc. Passing of the Stormwater Ordinance (2009).
Reviewing building permit and development applications for compliance with established
requirements identified in the Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping – Mapping of the City storm sewer system.
Regular maintenance and inspections of public storage facilities, and permanent BMPs
such as: sump manholes, permanent stormwater BMPs, storm sewer system, stormwater
discharge points (outfalls), and stormwater ponds.
BUDGET IMPACT
None, meeting the goals for the annual permit coverage from the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency are covered separately under the storm water utility. Projects are presented to council
individually as required.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council preside over the required annual public meeting which will
summarize the six minimum required control measures and report on the progress made in meeting
the goals identified in the Mendota Heights Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program over the
past year.
ACTION REQUIRED
After a brief presentation, the Council should open the hearing for Public comment and accept,
or convey any input received from the public on this subject.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 2, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Cassandra Johnson, Recycling Coordinator
Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2021-21 Discussion to determine if the City of Mendota Heights
should become a Minnesota GreenStep City
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The Council is asked to discuss becoming a Minnesota GreenStep City.
Cassandra Johnson, Recycling Coordinator, and Diane McKeown from the Great Plains Institute
will present on the topic.
BACKGROUND
Minnesota GreenStep Cities is a voluntary challenge, assistance, and recognition program that
provides a framework to help cities achieve their economic, environmental, and quality-of-life
goals. This free continuous improvement program, managed by a public-private partnership, is
based upon 29 best practices (a list of the best practices is attached). Each best practice can be
implemented by completing one or more actions at a 1, 2 or 3-star level, from a list of four to
eight actions. These actions are tailored to all Minnesota cities, focus on cost savings and energy
use reduction, and encourage civic innovation.
DISCUSSION
There are a variety of benefits in becoming a Minnesota GreenStep City. Cities that join can
immediately claim credit for the best practice actions that are previously completed within the
City. Special attention is paid to GreenStep Cities including being eligible for financial support
to create and strengthen a city “green team”. Access to 40 hours of free consultant help with
student interns is offered. Cities can learn from other cities on how they have completed
Minnesota GreenStep Actions. They provide a one stop shop for the most up-to-date action
resources and information on how to complete 175 actions in the areas of building, land-use,
transportation, environment and economic /community development. The program:
1. Allows cities to brand themselves as a “green” community, which is attractive to people
of all age groups and businesses as well. It provides a way to share with the community
what the city is doing to be more environmentally, socially, and financially responsible.
2. Provides access to grants. The MPCA has grants that are specifically targeted to
participating GreenStep Cities. For some grants, awards may be based on participation
level in the program.
3. It provides a database for cities to share information with each other about sustainability
initiatives. The GreenStep program provides a forum for sharing good ideas and seeing
how other cities address sustainability issues.
The processes for achieving different levels of being a GreenStep City are outlined below:
Step One: Approve a city council resolution to work toward GreenStep Cities recognition.
• Specify a GreenStep coordinator and a few best practices to implement.
• E-mail your city resolution and GreenStep contact information to the MPCA.
If approved, Mendota Heights would become a Step One GreenStep City. Step One recognition
artwork/materials would be used to let others know of the accomplishment. Formal recognition
of Step One cities usually takes place each June at the annual League of Minnesota Cities
conference.
Post initial information on the GreenStep Cities web site
• Enter simple information about the city.
• Provide brief detail on best practices previously implemented.
Get organized to begin work on implementing best practices.
• As needed, educate city staff and officials about sustainability.
• Convene a small working group.
• Specify implementation action(s) and designate lead people.
• Prepare a simple work plan for implementing selected best practices.
• Present the best practice plans to a city body or to the city council as appropriate.
Implement best practices.
• Keep everyone moving and note successes.
• Clarify, as needed, what constitutes completing an action with the MPCA
GreenStep program coordinator.
• Briefly describe implemented best practices on the GreenStep web site
Step Two: When 4, 6 or 8 best practices have been completed and the City posts short action
reports by April 1 each year, the City could be recognized by the LMC in June as a Step Two
GreenStep City. Road signs could be used to designate the recognition for travelers entering the
City.
Continue to work on best practices.
• Implementing a particular best practice action may take months or one to two years.
• Be alert to opportunities to complete multiple best practice actions at once.
• Check back with the city council as needed.
• Report yearly to community members.
Step Three: Completion of an additional 4, 6 or 8 best practices distributed across the five
topical areas and including a few specified high-value best practices, and have those posted short
action reports by April 1 each year, the City would be recognized by the LMC in June as a Step
Three GreenStep City.
Step Four Recognition: Step 2 and Step 3 recognition levels reflect completed city actions,
generally described in words. The GreenStep program now challenges cities to measure and
report – with numbers – the aggregate, quantitative results of taking multiple actions. Called city
performance metrics (or sustainability indicators), these Step 4 measures attempt to present to
community members the ‘state of sustainability’ achieved by a city.
Step 4 recognition is awarded to cities who report between 7 and 10 core metrics and some
additional metrics of their choice, depending on the City’s category.
Step Five Recognition: The final recognition level for the GreenStep Cities Program - Step 5 -
will challenges cities to show improvement in the Step 4 metrics.
BUDGET IMPACT
None at this time. The GreenStep program is a free voluntary program. Staff time is required to
enter data which is funded through the Recycling budget.
There are, of course, expenses involved with any improvements which might be related to the
program, but these would be funded through either grants, or in the City’s operating budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council approve Resolution 2021-21 authorizing the City of Mendota
Heights to participate in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council agrees with the recommendation, it should pass a motion approving Resolution 2021-
21 AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
MINNESOTA GREENSTEP CITIES PROGRAM. This action requires a simple majority
vote.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2021-21
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MINNESOTA GREENSTEP CITIES PROGRAM
WHEREAS, Minnesota GreenStep Cities is a voluntary challenge, assistance and recognition
program to help cities achieve their sustainability and quality-of-life goals. GreenStep is a free,
continuous improvement program, managed by a public-private partnership, and based upon 29 best
practices. Each best practice can be implemented by completing one or more actions at a 1, 2 or 3-star
level, from a list of four to eight actions. These actions are tailored to all Minnesota cities, focus on
cost savings and energy use reduction, and encourage civic innovation; and
WHEREAS, uncertainty in energy prices and the transition away from fossil fuel energy
sources present new challenges and opportunities to both the City of Mendota Heights and to the
economic health of its citizens and businesses; and
WHEREAS, climate changes have been observed in Minnesota and have the potential to
negatively impact local, regional and state economies; infrastructure development; habitat; ecological
communities, including native fish and wildlife populations; spread invasive species and exotic
diseases; reduce drinking water supplies and recreational opportunities; and pose health threats to our
citizens; and
WHEREAS, local governments have the unique opportunity to achieve both energy use
and climate change gas reductions and cost savings through building and facilities management;
land use and transportation planning; environmental management; and through economic and
community development; and
WHEREAS, efforts to address energy and climate issues provide an opportunity to move
toward energy self-reliance and greater community resiliency and quality of life; provide
environmentally healthy and cheaper-to-operate public buildings; encourage new economic
development and local jobs; and support local food and renewable energy production; and
WHEREAS, steps taken toward sustainable solutions aim to improve community quality of
life, building community capital and increasing government efficiency, accountability and
transparency; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Session Laws 2008, Chapter 356, Section 13 directed the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (“MPCA”) and Office of Energy Security in the Department of Commerce
(“Office of Energy Security”), in collaboration with Clean Energy Resource Teams (“CERTs”), to
recommend municipal actions and policies that work toward meeting the State’s greenhouse gas
emissions reduction goals; and
WHEREAS, the Next Generation Act of 2007, Minnesota Session Laws 2007 - Chapter 136:
(1) sets State greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals of cutting emissions to 15 percent below 2005
levels by 2015, 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050;
(2) sets a State energy conservation goal of achieving annual energy savings equal to 1.5 percent of
annual retail energy sales of electricity and natural gas;
(3) establishes an energy policy goal that the per capita use of fossil fuel as an energy input be reduced
by 15 percent by the year 2015, through increased reliance on energy efficiency and renewable energy
alternatives;
(4) establishes an energy policy goal that 25 percent of the electricity used in the state be derived from
renewable energy resources by the year 2025; and
WHEREAS, a broad coalition of public and private stakeholders including the League of
Minnesota Cities, the MPCA, Office of Energy Security and CERTs responded to the 2008
legislation by establishing the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program to provide a series of sustainable
development best practices focusing on local government opportunities to reduce energy use and
greenhouse gases; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program assists in facilitating technical
assistance for the implementation of these sustainable development best practices; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program provides cost-effective sustainable
development best practices in the following five categories: (1) Buildings and Lighting; (2)
Transportation; (3) Land Use; (4) Environmental Management; and (5) Economic and Community
Development.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights hereby
authorizes the City of Mendota Heights (the City) to participate in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities
program that offers a free, voluntary continuous improvement framework. Passage of this participation
resolution allows the City to be recognized as a Step One GreenStep City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights:
1. Appoints the Recycling Coordinator to serve as the City’s GreenStep coordinator for
best practice documentation/implementation; and
2. Will facilitate the involvement of community members and other units of government
as appropriate in the planning, promoting and/or implementing of GreenStep Cities best
practices; and
3. Grants to the GreenStep program’s buildings advisor review access to the City's B3
Benchmarking Database so as to facilitate analysis and cost-saving technical assistance
to the City regarding its buildings’ energy use; and
4. Will provide feedback once a year on how well the GreenStep program is serving the
city and on city needs from the program; and
5. Will claim credit for having implemented and will work at its own pace toward
implementing any GreenStep best practices that will result in energy use reduction,
economic savings, quality of life improvement, reduction in the City’s greenhouse gas
footprint, and recognition by the League of Minnesota Cities as a Step Two GreenStep
City. An on-going summary of the City’s implementation of best practices will be
posted by the City on the Minnesota GreenStep Cities web site.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this second day of March, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
_________________________________
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Best Practice #1: Efficient Existing Public Buildings
Action # 1. Enter building information into the Minnesota B3 Benchmarking database and routinely enter monthly energy, water use data
for all city‐owned buildings.
2. Make no/low cost indoor lighting and operational changes in city‐owned/school buildings to reduce energy costs.
3. Invest in energy efficiency opportunities through larger financed projects or through smaller retro‐commissioning/retrofit projects in
city‐owned/school buildings.
4. Implement information technology efforts and city employee engagement to reduce plug loads and building energy use.
5. Document that the new construction or major remodeling of a public building has met the SB 2030 energy standard or has met or
qualified under a green building or energy framework.
6. Improve the operations & maintenance of city‐owned/school buildings by using a customized online energy efficiency tool, asset
management tool, or a green building framework.
7. Install for one or more city‐owned/school buildings one of the following efficiency measures:
a. A ground‐source, closed loop geothermal system.
b. A district energy/microgrid system.
c. A rainwater harvesting system for building water use.
2. Efficient Existing Private Buildings
1. Create or participate in a marketing/outreach program to promote/achieve residential energy/water use reduction and energy
efficiency.
2. Integrate green building best practices information and assistance into the building permit process.
3. Implement an energy rating/disclosure policy for residential and/or commercial buildings.
4. Describe energy/water efficiency actions and other green building practices at businesses located within/nearby the city.
5. Conserve drinking/groundwater resources by creating a watering ordinance, water‐wise landscaping ordinance/guidance, WaterSense
purchasing program, or guidance on rainwater harvesting.
6. Provide a financial or other incentive to private parties who add energy/sustainability improvements, meet the SB 2030 energy
standard, or renovate using a green building or energy framework.
7. Customize a model sustainable building renovation policy that includes the SB 2030 energy standard and adopt the language to govern
commercial renovation projects that:
a. Receive city financial support, and/or
b. Require city regulatory approval (conditional use permits, rezonings, variances, PUD status).
3. New Green Buildings
1. Require by city policy that new city‐owned buildings be built using the SB 2030 energy standard and/or a green building framework.
2. Work with the local school district to ensure that future new schools are built using the SB 2030 energy standard and/or a green
building framework.
3. Customize a model sustainable building policy that includes the SB 2030 energy standard and adopt language governing new private
development projects that:
a. Receive city financial support, and/or
b. Require city regulatory approval (conditional use permit, rezoning, variance, PUD).
4. Provide a financial or other incentive to private parties who build new buildings that utilize the SB 2030 energy standard and/or a green
building framework.
5. Adopt environmentally preferable covenant guidelines for new common interest communities addressing issues such as stormwater,
greywater, native vegetation, growing food, clothes lines and renewable energy.
4. Efficient Outdoor Lighting and Signals
1. Require energy efficient, Dark‐Sky compliant new or replacement outdoor lighting fixtures on city‐owned/private buildings and
facilities.
2. Purchase LEDs for all future street lighting and traffic signals.
Buildings & Lighting Best Practices Category: BPs 1 ‐ 5
MINNESOTA GREENSTEP CITIES BEST PRACTICES, ACTION OPTIONS AND PROGRAM
RECOGNITION MINIMUMS (Sept. 2017)
3. Replace the city's existing street lighting with Dark Sky‐compliant LEDs, modifying any city franchise/utility agreement and adding smart
grid attributes.
4. Coordinate traffic signals and/or optimize signal timing so as minimize car idling at intersections yet maintain safe and publicly
acceptable vehicle speeds.
5. Use LED/solar‐powered lighting for a flashing sign or in a street, parking lot or park project.
6. Relamp/improve exterior building lighting for city‐owned buildings/facilities with energy efficient, Dark‐Sky compliant lighting.
7. Replace city‐owned parking lot/ramp lighting with Dark‐Sky compliant, energy efficient, automatic dimming lighting technologies.
8. Replace the city's existing traffic signals with LEDs.
5. Building Redevelopment
1. Adopt an historic preservation ordinance/regulations to encourage adaptive reuse.
2. Implement the Minnesota Main Street model for commercial revitalization.
3. Plan for reuse of large‐format retail buildings, or work with a local school to either add‐on space or repurpose space into non‐school
uses.
4. Create/modify a green residential remodeling assistance/financing program to assist homeowners in adding space to their existing
homes.
5. Adopt development/design standards and programs that facilitate infill, redevelopment, and adaptable buildings.
6. Comprehensive Plans
1. Adopt a comprehensive plan or (for Category B & C cities) adopt a land use plan that was adopted by the county or a regional entity.
2. Demonstrate that regulatory ordinances comply with the comprehensive plan including but not limited to having the zoning ordinance
explicitly reference the comprehensive plan as the foundational document for decision making.
3. Include requirements in comprehensive and/or other plans for intergovernmental coordination addressing regional land use and
watershed / wellhead impacts, infrastructure, transportation, economic development and city/regional services.
4. Include ecologic provisions in the comprehensive plan that explicitly aim to minimize open space fragmentation and/or establish a
growth area with expansion criteria.
5. Adopt climate mitigation and/or energy independence goals and objectives in the comprehensive plan or in a separate policy
document, and include direct implementation recommendations such as becoming an EV‐ready city.
7. Efficient City Growth
1. Limit barriers to higher density housing by including in the city zoning ordinance and zoning map:
a. Neighborhood single‐family density at 7 units/acre or greater.
b. Multi‐family housing at a gross density of at least 15 units/acre adjacent to a commercial zoning district or transit node.
2. Achieve higher density housing through at least two of the following strategies:
a. Incorporate a flexible lot size/frontage requirement for infill development.
b. Use density and floor area ratio (FAR) bonuses in selected residential zoning districts.
c. Tie a regulatory standard to comprehensive plan language defining compact city expansion zones that limit low‐density development.
d. Allowing accessory dwelling units or co‐housing or tiny houses / apartments by right in selected zoning districts.
3. Achieve higher intensity commercial land uses through at least one of the following strategies:
a. Include in the city zoning ordinance and zoning map a commercial district with reduced lot sizes and zero‐lot‐line setbacks, or a FAR
minimum of 1.
b. Set targets for the minimum number of employees/acre in different commercial zones.
4. Provide incentives for infill projects, or for life‐cycle housing at or near job or retail centers, or for achieving an average net residential
density of seven units per acre.
5. Modify the city zoning ordinance and zoning map to allow, without variance or rezoning in at least one district, developments that
meet the prerequisites for LEED for Neighborhood Development certification.
Land Use Category: BPs 6 ‐ 10
8. Mixed Uses
1. Organize or participate in a community planning/design process for the city/a mixed use district.
2. Locate or lease a school, city building or other government facility that has at least two of these attributes:
a. Adjacent to an existing employment or residential center.
b. Designed to facilitate and encourage access by walking and biking.
c. Accessible by regular transit service.
3. Modify a planned unit development ordinance to emphasize mixed use development or to limit residential PUDs to areas adjacent to
commercial development.
4. Determine that a (re)development meets a minimum point threshold under LEED for Neighborhood Development or the Equitable
Development Scorecard.
5. Have a downtown zoning district that allows residential and compatible commercial development.
6. Incorporate form‐based zoning approaches into the zoning code, in those areas where a diverse mix of uses is desired.
7. Create incentives for vertical mixed‐use development in appropriate locations (downtown, commercial districts near colleges or
universities, historic commercial districts).
9. Efficient Highway‐ and Auto‐Oriented Development
1. Establish design goals for at least one highway/auto‐oriented corridor/cluster.
2. Participate in regional economic development planning with representatives from surrounding townships, cities, the county and
business interests to:
a. Estimate commercial/industrial needs among all jurisdictions.
b. Jointly implement recommendations to stage highway/auto‐oriented commercial development in order to avoid overbuilding and
expensive low‐density development.
3. Adopt infrastructure design standards that protect the economic and ecologic functions of the corridor through clustering of
development and incorporating access management standards.
4. Adopt a commercial zoning district that permits only auto‐oriented land uses.
5. Adopt development policies for large format developments, such as a scorecard approval process, tax productivity thresholds, size
caps, bans, required decommissioning of vacant property.
10. Design for Natural Resource Conservation
1. Conduct a Natural Resource Inventory or Assessment (NRI or NRA); incorporate protection of priority natural systems or resources such
as groundwater through the subdivision or development process.
2. For cities outside or on the fringe of metropolitan areas, conduct a build‐out analysis, fiscal impact study, or adopt an urban growth
boundary and a consistent capital improvement plan that provides long‐term protection of natural resources and natural systems, and
agricultural practices outside the boundary.
3. For cities within metropolitan areas, incorporate woodland best management practices addressing protection of wooded areas into
zoning or development review.
4. Adopt a conservation design policy and use a conservation design tool in negotiating development agreements in cities with
undeveloped natural resource areas.
5. Develop/fund a conservation easement program, such as a purchase of development rights program, in collaboration with a land trust.
6. Conserve natural resources by adopting or amending city codes and ordinances to support sustainable sites, including roadsides, and
environmentally protective land use development.
7. Be recognized as a Bird City Minnesota.
11. Living Streets
1. Adopt a complete streets policy that also addresses street trees and stormwater.
2. Adopt zoning language or approve a development project that follows green street and/or walkable streets principles.
3. Modify a street in compliance with the city's complete streets policy.
4. Identify, prioritize and remedy complete streets gaps and lack of connectivity within your road network by, for example, adding a bike
route/lane, truck route, sidewalk or mid‐block alley.
Transportation Category: BPs 11 ‐ 14
5. Identify and remedy street‐trail gaps between city streets and off‐road trails/bike trails to better facilitate walking and biking.
6. Implement traffic calming policy/measures, including road diets, roundabouts, shared space and depaving, in at least one street
redevelopment project.
12. Mobility Options
1. Increase walking, biking and transit use by one or more of the following means:
a. Produce/distribute route maps, signage or a web site.
b. Document increased bike facilities, such as racks, bike stations or showers.
c. Add bus infrastructure, such as signage, benches, shelters, park and ride lots, and real‐time arrival data‐streaming.
d. Increase the number of employers promoting multiple commuting options, including offering qualified transportation fringe benefits
instead of only a tax‐free parking fringe benefit.
e. Be recognized as a Walk Friendly or Bicycle Friendly Community.
2. Launch an Active Living campaign such as a Safe Routes to School program.
3. Prominently identify mobility options: transit; paratransit/Dial‐A‐Ride; cab service; rental cars; bikes.
4. Promote carpooling or ridesharing among community members, city employees, businesses, high schools and institutions of higher
education.
5. Launch telework/flexwork efforts in city government, businesses or at a local health care provider.
6. Add/expand transit service, or promote car/bike sharing.
7. Implement multimodal transportation best management practices in the workplace for city employees.
13. Efficient City Fleets
1. Efficiently use existing fleet of city vehicles by encouraging trip bundling, video conferencing, carpooling, vehicle sharing and
incentives/technology.
2.Right‐size/down‐size the city fleet with the most fuel‐efficient vehicles that are of an optimal size and capacity for their intended
functions.
3. Phase‐in no‐idling practices, operational and fuel changes, and equipment changes including electric vehicles, for city or local transit
fleets.
4. Phase in bike, foot or horseback modes for police, inspectors and other city staff.
5. Document that the local school bus fleet has optimized routes, start times, boundaries, vehicle efficiency and fuels, driver actions to cut
costs including idling reduction, and shifting students from the bus to walking, biking and city transit.
6. Retrofit city diesel engines or install auxiliary power units, utilizing Project GreenFleet or the like.
14. Demand‐Side Travel Planning
1. Reduce or eliminate parking requirements and/or add parking maximums.
2. For cities with regular transit service, require or provide incentives for the siting of retail services at transit/density nodes.
3. For cities with regular transit service, require or provide incentives for the siting of higher density housing at transit/density nodes.
4. Adopt a travel demand management plan for city employees or incorporate into development regulations TDM or transit‐oriented
development standards.
5. Document that a development project certifies under the LEED for Neighborhood Development program and is awarded at least one of
the following credits:
a. Transportation Demand Management.
b. Housing and Jobs Proximity.
15. Sustainable Purchasing
1. Adopt a sustainable purchasing policy or administrative guidelines/practices directing that the city purchase at least:
a. EnergyStar certified equipment and appliances and
b. Paper containing at least 30% post‐consumer recycled content.
2. Purchase energy used by city government/distributed by a municipal utility from renewable energy sources.
Environmental Management Category: BPs 15 ‐ 23
3. Establish a local purchasing preference and, working with a local business association, develop a list of locally‐produced products and
suppliers for common purchases.
4. Require purchase of U.S. EPA WaterSense‐certified products.
5. Set minimum standards for the percentage of recycled‐content material in asphalt and roadbed aggregate or other construction
materials, and for compost use.
6. Require printing services to be purchased from companies certified by Minnesota Great Printers or by the Sustainable Green Printing
Partnership.
7. Lower the environmental footprint of meetings and events in the city.
8. Use state and national green standards/guidelines for at least 3 categories of purchasing/investments.
16. Urban Forests
1. Certify as a Tree City USA.
2. Adopt best practices for urban tree planting/quality; require them in private developments and/or use them in at least one city project.
3. Budget for and achieve resilient urban canopy/tree planting goals.
4. Maximize tree planting along your main downtown street or throughout the city.
5. Adopt a tree preservation or native landscaping ordinance.
6. Build community capacity to protect existing trees by one or more of:
a. Having trained tree specialists.
b. Supporting volunteer forestry efforts.
c. Adopting an EAB management plan / climate adaptation plan for the urban forest
17. Stormwater Management
1. Adopt and use Minnesota's Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS).
2. Complete the Blue Star City stormwater management assessment and be recognized for implementing the actions therein.
3. Adopt by ordinance one or more of the following stormwater infiltration/management strategies:
a. A narrower streets provision that permits construction of 22‐ or 24‐foot roads for public, residential access and subcollector streets
(with fewer than 500 average daily trips).
b. For sites less than one acre, retain the water quality volume of 1.1 inches of runoff from all impervious surfaces for new and fully‐
redeveloped construction sites.
c. For non‐MS4 permittees, adopt an illicit discharge prohibition rule or ordinance and an erosion and sediment control ordinance.
4. Create a stormwater utility that uses variable fees to incentivize enhanced stormwater management, minimize the volume of and
pollutants in runoff, and educate property owners.
5. Adopt and implement guidelines or design standards/incentives for at least one of the following stormwater infiltration/reuse
practices:
a. Rain gardens/infiltration practices.
b. Rainwater harvesting practices.
c. Green alleys or green parking lots.
d. Pervious/permeable pavement or pavers.
e. Green roofs / green walls.
f. Tree trenches / tree boxes.
6. Reduce road salt use to prevent permanent surfacewater and groundwater pollution.
18. Parks and Trails
1. Make improvements within your city's system of parks, offroad trails and open spaces.
2. Plan and budget for a network of parks, green spaces, water features and trails for areas where new development is planned.
3. Achieve minimum levels of city green space.
4. Adopt low‐impact design standards in parks and trails that infiltrate or retain all 2 inch, 24‐hour stormwater events on site.
5. Create park/city land management standards/practices that maximize at least one of the following:
a. Low maintenance turf management; native landscaping; organic or integrated pest management; pollinator/monarch‐safe policies.
b. Recycling/compostables collection; use of compost as a soil amendment.
c. Sources of nonpotable water, or surface/rain water, for irrigation.
6. Certify at least one golf course in the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program.
7. Document that the operation and maintenance, or construction / remodeling, of at least one park building used an asset management
tool, the SB 2030 energy standard, and/or a green building framework.
8. Develop a program to involve community members in hands‐on land restoration and stewardship projects.
19. Surface Water
1. (Action deleted on 09/22/2015)
2. Conduct or support multi‐party community conversations around improving local water quality and quantity.
3. Adopt and report on measurable, publicly announced surface water improvement targets for water bodies.
4. Adopt a shoreland ordinance for all river and lake shoreland areas.
5. Adopt goals to revegetate shoreland and create a local program or outreach effort to help property owners with revegetation.
6. Implement an existing TMDL implementation plan.
7. Create/assist a Lake Improvement District.
20. Efficient Water and Wastewater Facilities
1. Compare the energy use and performance of your facilities with other peer plants using standardized, free tools.
2. Plan and budget for motor maintenance and upgrades so as to assure the most energy efficient, durable and appropriate equipment is
available when upgrades or break downs occur.
3. Establish an on‐going budget and program for decreasing inflow and infiltration into sewer lines and losses in drinking water systems.
4. Assess energy and chemicals use at drinking water / wastewater facilities and report on implemented changes that had a short payback
period.
5. (Action deleted on 06/17/2012)
6. Implement a wastewater plant efficiency project (co‐generation, water reuse) or a program for local private business operations (water
conservation, water reuse, business co‐location).
7. Create a demand‐side pricing program to reduce demands on water and wastewater systems.
21. Septic Systems
1. Report to landowners suspected noncompliant or failing septic systems as part of an educational, informational and financial assistance
and outreach program designed to trigger voluntary landowner action to improve septic systems.
2. Use a community process to address failing septic systems.
3. Clarify/establish one or more responsible management entities for the proper design, siting, installation, operation, monitoring and
maintenance of septic systems.
4. Adopt a subsurface sewage treatment system ordinance based on the Association of Minnesota Counties' model ordinance.
5. Create a program to finance septic system upgrades.
6. Work with homeowners and businesses in environmentally sensitive areas and areas where standard septic systems are not the least‐
cost option to promote innovative waste water systems, including central sewer extensions.
7. Arrange for assistance to commercial, retail and industrial businesses with water use reduction, pollution prevention and pretreatment
prior to discharge to septics.
22. Solid Waste Reduction
1. Prevent, recycle and compost waste/toxics generated from internal city operations, including libraries, parks, schools, and municipal
health care facilities.
2. Address concerns over consumer products and packaging through encouragement/implementation of one or more of: (a) Education on
waste prevention and alternatives, including product stewardship / producer responsibility; (b) Reuse options; (c) Recycling / composting
options; (d) Credits, fees; (e) Mandates, bans.
3. Improve profitability, legal compliance and conserve resources through adoption of ordinance language, licensing and resource
management contracts.
4. Publicize, promote and use the varied businesses/services collecting and marketing used, repaired and rental consumer goods in the
city/county.
5. Arrange for a residential and/or business/institutional source separated organics collection/management program.
6. Improve recycling services and expand to multi‐unit housing and commercial businesses.
7. Improve/organize residential trash, recycling and organics collection by private and/or public operations and offer significant volume‐
based pricing on residential garbage and/or incentives for recycling.
8. Adopt a construction and demolition ordinance governing demolition permits that requires a level of recycling and reuse for building
materials and soil/land‐clearing debris.
23. Local Air Quality
1. Conduct an education/financial assistance campaign around one of the following residential wood burning/auto exhaust issues:
a. Indoor and outdoor wood burning behavior, to ensure that wood burning is only done with seasoned wood and in a manner that
lessens the impact on neighbors.
b. Indoor wood burning technology, to result in community members upgrading from inefficient/more polluting fireplaces and wood
stoves to pellet/gas/biogas devices, air source heat pumps, or the most efficient certified wood stoves.
c. Smoker cars ‐ older model/high polluting vehicles, to result in repairs spurred by repair vouchers.
2. Regulate outdoor residential wood burning, using ordinance language, performance standards and bans as appropriate, for at least one
of the following:
a. Recreational burning.
b. Outdoor residential wood boilers.
3. Conduct one or more policy or education/behavior change campaigns on the topics below and document:
a. Decreased vehicle idling in specific locations.
b. Participation in the Air Aware Employers program.
c. Adoption of a smoking‐free policy at one or more multi‐unit housing buildings, private or public.
d. Replacement of gasoline‐powered small equipment with lower polluting equipment.
e. Increased sales by retail stores of low and no‐VOC household products.
4. Document the participation of businesses in emission/idling reduction efforts/programs.
5. Install, assist with and promote one or more public fueling stations for plug‐in hybrid and full electric vehicles, flex‐fuel ethanol
vehicles, CNG vehicles.
24. Benchmarks & Community Engagement
1. Use a committee to lead, coordinate, and report to and engage community members on implementation of GreenStep best practices.
2. Organize goals/outcome measures from all city plans and report to community members data that show progress toward meeting
these goals.
3. Engage community members in a public process that results in city council adoption of and commitment to measure and report
progress on sustainability indicators.
4. Conduct or support a broad sustainability education and action campaign involving:
a. The entire community.
b. Homeowners.
c. Front yards/sidewalks, block clubs, neighborhood associations.
d. Congregations.
e. Schools, colleges.
5. Conduct or support a community education, visioning and planning initiative using a sustainability framework such as:
a. Strong Towns.
b. Transition initiatives, resiliency.
c. Eco‐municipalities, ecological footprinting, urban metabolism, permaculture.
d. ISO 14001, Smart Cities, the Precautionary Principle, environmental justice.
Economic & Community Development Category: BPs 24 ‐ 29
6. Engage community youth and college students by creating opportunities to participate in city government.
25. Green Business Development
1. Grow new/emerging green businesses and green jobs through targeted assistance and new workforce development.
2. Create or participate in a marketing/outreach program to connect businesses with assistance providers, including utilities, who provide
personalized energy, waste or sustainability audits and assistance.
3. Promote sustainable tourism in your city, and green tourism resources to tourism and hospitality businesses in/around the city.
4. Strengthen value‐added businesses utilizing local "waste" products and renting products/services.
5. Lower the environmental footprint of a brownfield remediation/redevelopment project.
6. Promote green businesses that are recognized under a local, regional or national program.
7. Conduct or participate in a buy local campaign for community members and local businesses.
26. Renewable Energy
1. Adopt solar energy standards or a wind energy ordinance that allows or encourages appropriate renewable energy installations.
2. Consistently promote at least one of the following means of increasing renewable generation:
a. A local utility's green power purchasing program that allows residents/businesses to order/buy new renewable energy.
b. Local, state and federal financial incentives for property owners to install renewable energy systems.
3. Create/participate in a renewable energy financing program such as PACE for commercial property owners to install generation
capacity/energy efficiency equipment.
4. Support or create a program that enables community members to participate in a community renewable energy project.
5. Install a public sector/municipally owned renewable energy technology, such as solar electric (PV), biomass, solar hot water/air, micro‐
hydro or wind.
6. Enable a new or demonstrate prior city collaboration for installed private sector renewable energy / energy efficient generation
capacity with at least one of the following attributes:
a. Fueled by flowing water, sun, wind, or biogas.
b. Fueled in part or whole by manure or woody biomass, optimized for minimal air and other environmental impacts and for energy
efficiency and water conservation.
c. Distributing heating/cooling services in a district energy system.
d. Producing combined heat and power; using a microgrid.
7. Create an expedited permit process for residents and businesses to install solar energy systems.
27. Local Food
1. Incorporate working landscapes ‐ agriculture and forestry ‐ into the city by adopting an ordinance for one or more of the following:
a. An agriculture and forest protection district.
b. A local food production district.
c. Performance standards for minor and major agricultural retail.
2. Facilitate creation of home gardens, chicken & bee keeping, and incorporation of food growing areas/access in multifamily residential
developments.
3. Create, assist with and promote local food production/distribution within the city:
a. A farmer's market or co‐op buying club.
b. An urban agriculture business or a community‐supported agriculture (CSA) arrangement between farmers and community
members/employees.
c. A community or school garden, orchard or forest.
4. Measurably increase institutional buying, and sales through groceries and restaurants.
a. Purchasing of local/organic/humane/equitable foods by schools, hospitals, nursing homes and event centers.
b. Sales of local/organic/humane/equitable food in markets, retail food co‐ops, rural grocery stores, urban convenience stores, hotels
and restaurants.
28. Business Synergies
1. Help businesses register as users of the Minnesota Materials Exchange and document their exchanges/sales of byproducts with other
local/regional businesses.
2. Document that at least one business/building uses waste heat or water discharge from another business.
3. Require, build or facilitate at least four of the following in a business/industrial park project:
a. Shared parking/access OR shared recreation/childcare facilities.
b. Green product development, manufacturing or sales OR a green job training program..
c. Buildings located within walking distance of transit and/or residential zoning.
d. Renovated buildings OR buildings designed for reuse.
e. Green buildings built to exceed the Minnesota energy code by 20% OR renewable energy generated on‐site.
f. Combined heat and power (CHP) generation capacity OR shared geothermal heating/cooling.
g. Low‐impact site development.
4. Use eco‐industrial park tools to identify industrial facilities that could achieve economic and environmental benefit by co‐locating in the
city's industrial park or industrial zone.
29. Climate Adaptation and Community Resilience
1. Prepare to maintain public health and safety during extreme weather and climate‐change‐related events, while also taking a preventive
approach to reduce risk for community members.
2. Integrate climate resilience into city or tribal planning, policy, operations, and budgeting processes.
3. Increase social connectedness through engagement, capacity building, public investment, and opportunities for economically
vulnerable residents to improve their economic prosperity.
4. Encourage private sector action and incentivize investment in preventive approaches that reduce risk and minimize impacts of extreme
weather and the changing climate for human health and the built environment.
5. Protect public buildings and natural/constructed infrastructure to reduce physical damage and sustain their function during extreme
weather events.
6. Reduce the urban heat impacts of public buildings, sites, and infrastructure and provide resiliency co‐benefits.
7. Protect water supply and wastewater treatment facilities to reduce physical damage and sustain their function during extreme weather
events.
8. Improve local energy resilience by minimizing fuel poverty, installing distributed renewable energy systems, and developing microgrids
that can improve energy system resiliency.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: March 2, 2021
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2021-20 Accepting Feasibility Report and Calling for a Public Hearing
for the Ivy Falls East Neighborhood Improvements Project No. 201906
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve the feasibility report and
schedule a public hearing for the Ivy Falls East Neighborhood Improvements.
BACKGROUND
The City annually conducts a street rehabilitation and reconstruction project somewhere in the
City. This year, it is proposed to be in the Ivy Falls East neighborhood.
The preparation of a feasibility report for these improvements was authorized by the Mendota
Heights City Council by adopting Resolution 2019-74 at the City Council meeting held on
October 2, 2019. The proposed streets to be rehabilitated are Brompton Place, Downing Street,
London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston Court. Based on our observations, as
well as our pavement management system, a majority of these streets have deteriorated to the
point where it is no longer cost effective to patch the street and rehabilitation is necessary. Staff
has received several inquiries in recent years as to when resurfacing will take place.
DISCUSSION
The feasibility report indicates the estimated costs for the project, along with preliminary
assessment estimates. At the end of the feasibility report, a project financing summary is
included to show project cost splits and funding sources to be utilized. The total estimated cost of
the project is $1,810,177 including indirect costs.
Staff is proposing to hold an informational meeting on March 24, 2021 and will provide the
Council with results from this meeting at the public hearing. A potential addition to the project
would be consideration of constructing a new shared use trail connecting Sylvandale Road to Ivy
Hills Park near Woodridge Drive. The new trail would improve connectivity in the
neighborhood. St Paul Regional Water has also identified areas for water main replacement on
Brompton Place, London Road, Downing Street, and a small area in Winston Court.
A portion of the feasibility report is included in the packet, the complete report is available for
review in the engineering department at city hall.
BUDGET IMPACT
Street improvement projects are proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners.
Pursuant to the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy, the benefiting properties
should be assessed 50% of the street reconstruction and rehabilitation costs. The following tables
show the estimated unit assessments based on the City policy.
PROJECT COSTS
ITEM CONSTRUCTION INDIRECT* TOTAL
STREET REHABILITATION $697,095.50 $174,273.88 $871,369.38
CURB REPLACEMENT $124,559.00 $31,139.75 $155,698.75
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION $38,908.00 $9,727.00 $48,635.00
STORM SEWER $25,250.00 $6,312.50 $31,562.50
WATER MAIN $562,329.00 $140,582.25 $702,911.25
Totals $1,448,141.50 $362,035.38 $1,810,176.88
* Includes 25% indirect costs for legal, engineering, administration, and finance.
FUNDING SOURCES
ITEM COST ESTIMATE ASSESSMENT MUNI. BONDS UTILITY FUNDS S.P.R.W.S.
STREET REHABILITATION $871,369.38 $390,500.00 $480,869.38
CURB REPLACEMENT $155,698.75 $155,698.75
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION $48,635.00 $48,635.00
STORM SEWER $31,562.50 $31,562.50
WATER MAIN $702,911.25 $702,911.25
Totals $1,810,176.88 $390,500.00 $685,203.13 $31,562.50 $702,911.25
ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS
Assessable Costs $1,027,068.13
Assessment $513,534.06
Assessable Units 71
Estimated Unit Assessment per City Policy $7,232.87
Proposed Unit Assessment $5,500.00
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council accept the feasibility report and schedule the public hearing for
April 6, 2021.
ACTION REQUIRED
If City Council wishes to implement the staff recommendation, pass a motion adopting A
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING ON THE IVY FALLS EAST NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT #201906. This action requires a simple majority vote.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2021-20
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE IVY FALLS EAST NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT (PROJECT #201906)
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2019-74, the City Council, on October 2, 2019,
ordered a feasibility report to be prepared by the Public Works Director with reference to the
improvement of Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle,
and Winston Court; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has submitted a report to the City Council with
respect to Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and
Winston Court improvements which include: removing the existing bituminous surface,
aggregate base, concrete curb and gutter repair, placing a new bituminous surface, watermain
replacement, storm sewer repair, ADA improvements, and appurtenant work; and
WHEREAS, in said report the Public Works Director reported that the proposed
improvements and construction thereof are desirable and necessary, technically and
economically feasible, cost effective, and further reported on the estimated cost of the proposed
improvements; and
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City
Council as follows:
1. The City Council hereby accepts the Feasibility Report as submitted.
2. The Council will consider the improvement of such streets and areas in accordance
with the report and the assessment of property as described in the report for all or a
portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429
at an estimated total cost of the improvements of $1,810,177.
3. A Public Hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 6th day of
April, 2021 at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota at
7:00 p.m. Statutory notice and publication requirements shall be followed.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this second day of March, 2021.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
ATTEST
Stephanie Levine, Mayor
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR
IVY FALLS EAST NEIGHBORHOOD
IMPROVEMENTS
WHICH INCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS TO:
BROMPTON PLACE, DOWNING STREET, LONDON ROAD,
SUTCLIFF CIRCLE, WINSTON CIRCLE, & WINSTON COURT
CITY PROJECT #201906
FEBRUARY 24, 2021
City of
Mendota Heights
I hereby certify that this Feasibility Report was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
February 24, 2021
Ryan E. Ruzek, P.E. Date
Reg. No. 44990
Feasibility Report Page 2
Project No. 201906
Feasibility Report Page 3
Project No. 201906
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
AUTHORIZATION ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
SCOPE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4
LOCATION .................................................................................................................................................................. 4
RESIDENT INPUT ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 5
STREETS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston Court ........................ 5
WATER MAIN ............................................................................................................................................................. 7
STORM SEWER ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
SANITARY SEWER ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
PRIVATE UTILITIES ..................................................................................................................................................... 7
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ........................................................................................................................................ 8
ROADWAY REHABILITATION ....................................................................................................................................... 8
Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston Court ...................... 8
WATER MAIN ............................................................................................................................................................. 8
STORM SEWER ............................................................................................................................................................ 8
TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................................................................................................ 9
PRIVATE UTILITIES ..................................................................................................................................................... 9
FUNDING .................................................................................................................................................................... 9
FEASIBILITY ............................................................................................................................................................... 9
FUNDING SOURCES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS .............................................................................................. 10
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS ...................................................................................................................................... 10
PROPOSED ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 11
Street Rehabilitation – Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and
Winston Court ............................................................................................................................................................ 11
FUNDING SOURCES…...…………………………………………………………………………………………………..11
PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE .............................................................................................................................. 12
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................................... 12
APPENDIX A: IVY FALLS EAST NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AREA
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDIX C: REHABILITATION TYPICAL SECTION
APPENDIX D: WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT
APPENDIX E: STORM SEWER EXTENSION – DOWNING STREET
APPENDIX F: IVY FALLS PARK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS
APPENDIX G: ENGINEER’S OPINION OF ESTIMATED COSTS
APPENDIX H: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
Feasibility Report Page 4
Project No. 201906
INTRODUCTION
Authorization
The preparation of this report was authorized by the Mendota Heights City Council by adopting
Resolution 2019-74 at the October 2, 2019, City Council meeting. This project has been
designated as City Project No. 201906. The improvements to Brompton Place, Downing Street,
London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston Court are located in Section 13,
Township 28, Range 23.
Scope
This report addresses the feasibility of street rehabilitation and water main improvements for the
urban sections of Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston
Circle, and Winston Court. This report also addresses the feasibility of trail improvements
within Ivy Falls Park. Opinions of estimated costs for the associated improvements are noted
herein and project funding strategies have been developed in this report.
Location
The proposed street reconstruction area is shown in Appendix A.
Resident Input
An informational letter and questionnaire was sent to the seventy-two (72) residents of the
neighborhood on October 4, 2019, to inform them of the project. Forty-three (43) of the
questionnaires were returned, for a 60% return rate. The two key issues that were asked in the
questionnaire were drainage and traffic/pedestrian related issues. The letter, questionnaire and
responses are shown in Appendix B.
Feasibility Report Page 5
Project No. 201906
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Streets
Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and
Winston Court
Winston Court (East) was constructed in 1962 under Project Number 6207A as part of the Water
and Sewer Improvement No.1 – Project No.1. Brompton Place (North), Downing Street, London
Road (North), and Winston Court (West) was constructed in 1965 under Project Number 6511 as
part of the Ivy Falls East Addition. Winston Circle and Winston Court (Center) were constructed
with curb and gutter in 1969 under Project Number 6920 as part of the North Ivy Hills First
Addition. Winston Court (East) was reconstructed with curb and gutter in 1975 under project
Number 7518 as part of the Northeast Section Improvements. Brompton Place (South) was
constructed with curb and gutter in 1976 under Project Number 7618 as part of the Brompton
Courts Addition. Sutcliff Circle was constructed with curb and gutter in 1989 under Project
Number 8903 as part of the North Ivy Hills Second Addition. London Road (South) was
constructed with curb and gutter in 1992 under Project Number 9208 as part of the Ivy Keep
North Addition. Brompton Place (North), Downing Street, and Winston Court (West) were
reconstructed with curb and gutter in 1992 under project 9208 as part of the London, Downing,
Brompton, Winston Street Reconstruction Project.
The existing urban street section for Winston Circle and Winston Court (Center) were
constructed in 1969. Concrete curbs and gutters were installed on these streets. The roadway
width currently measures 33 feet from face of curb to face of curb. These streets have a
pavement section consisting of a 6” bituminous surface over an 8” aggregate base. Storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, and water main were also constructed on these streets in 1969.
The existing urban street section for Winston Court (East) was constructed in 1975. Concrete
curbs and gutters were installed on this street and the roadway width currently measures 30 feet
from face of curb to face of curb. This street has a pavement section consisting of a 6”
bituminous surface over an 8” aggregate base. Sanitary sewer, and water main were constructed
on these streets in 1962. Storm sewer was constructed in 1975.
The existing urban street section for Brompton Place (South) was constructed in 1976. Concrete
curbs and gutters were installed on this street and the roadway width currently measures 33 feet
from face of curb to face of curb. This street has a pavement section consisting of a 4.5”
bituminous surface over an 8” aggregate base. Storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main were
also constructed on these streets in 1976.
The existing urban street section for Sutcliff Circle was constructed in 1989. Concrete curbs and
gutters were installed on this street and the roadway width currently measures 33 feet from face
of curb to face of curb. This street has a pavement section consisting of a 4” bituminous surface
over a 6” aggregate base. Storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main were also constructed on
Feasibility Report Page 6
Project No. 201906
these streets in 1989. To date, typical street maintenance for Sutcliff Circle has been conducted
by Public Works staff, including a slurry seal in 2001.
The existing urban street section for London Road (South) was constructed in 1992. Concrete
curbs and gutters were installed on this street and the roadway width currently measures 33 feet
from face of curb to face of curb. This street has a pavement section consisting of a 5”
bituminous surface over an 8” aggregate base. Storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main were
also constructed on these streets in 1992. To date, typical street maintenance for London Road
(South) has been conducted by Public Works staff.
The existing urban street section for Brompton Place (North), Downing Street, and Winston
Court (West) was constructed in 1992. Concrete curbs and gutters were installed on this street
and the roadway width currently measures 33 feet from face of curb to face of curb. This street
has a pavement section consisting of a 5” bituminous surface over an 8” aggregate base. Storm
sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main were also constructed on these streets in 1992. To date,
typical street maintenance for Brompton Place (North), Downing Street, and Winston Court
(West) has been conducted by Public Works staff.
The storm water for Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, and
Winston Court drains into the MnDOT drainage ditch along Sibley Memorial Highway (Hwy-
13). The Sibley Memorial Highway (Hwy-13) ditch surface drainage drains into the Mendota
Heights storm sewer system at Sylvandale Road. Storm water for Brompton Place, London
Road, Winston Circle, and Winston Court drains into the existing storm sewer system. The
existing storm sewer system drains to the Ivy Falls Park pond located within the Ivy Falls
Drainage System and the Lower Mississippi River Watershed District.
Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston
Court currently have a failing bituminous surface and are in significantly poor condition. All of
these streets appear to be near the end of their useful life and the cost to maintain and repair these
roadways are steadily increasing. These streets no longer meet the City’s minimum design
standards and it is no longer cost effective to continue to repair these streets.
Based on the extent of fatigue cracking, a rehabilitation of Brompton Place, Downing Street,
London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston Court is recommended by our
pavement management system. Street rehabilitation will consist of reclaiming the existing
bituminous roadway and the placing of a new bituminous surface over the reclaimed pavement
material. Pavement cores have been obtained for these streets that verify the existing street cross-
section and that the material will be suitable for pavement reclamation. Overlaying or seal
coating the existing pavement is no longer a feasible alternative.
Feasibility Report Page 7
Project No. 201906
Water Main
St. Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) has recommended replacing all existing cast iron
water main and hydrants on Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, and Winston Court.
The existing water main is a 6” cast iron pipe and has had a break frequency that exceeds limits
recommended by SPRWS.
SPRWS has recommended maintenance operations for the remaining ductile iron water main
pipe on Brompton Place, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston Court.
Storm Sewer
Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and Winston
Court have existing storm sewer. The storm sewer pipe is currently in good condition with no
need for replacement.
Downing Street storm sewer extension is designed to address slow drainage in an area where the
street grade is below current City design standards.
Sanitary Sewer
The sanitary sewer located within the limits of the project site was cleaned and televised as part of
Mendota Heights City Project MH201706 in 2017 on Brompton Place, Downing Street, London
Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, & Winston Court. Vitrified clay sewer pipes (VCSP) are
located on Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, &
Winston Court. Overall, the pipes throughout the proposed project site are in good condition with
very few instances of leaking located near the manholes. This project does not include replacing
any of the existing sanitary sewer lines.
Private Utilities
Providers of privately owned gas, electric, communications and cable television utilities are
present in the neighborhood.
Feasibility Report Page 8
Project No. 201906
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Roadway Rehabilitation
Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and
Winston Court
The rehabilitation of Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston
Circle, and Winston Court require a 7-ton street design to meet the City’s Street Rehabilitation
Policy. Proposed improvements for these streets will include the reclamation of the existing
bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2.5” bituminous base course and a 1.5” bituminous
wear course over the reclaimed pavement material. By using the reclaimed pavement material as
a base there is a cost savings versus importing a new aggregate base material. This method
should rehabilitate the streets to like new condition and extend the life of the pavement an
additional 20-30 years with continued preventative maintenance. See Appendix A for project
area. See Appendix C for the rehabilitation typical section.
Any damaged concrete curb and gutter along these streets will also be replaced as part of the
roadway restoration. Driveways that may be disturbed due to the street rehabilitation will be
replaced in kind. Disturbed boulevard areas will be restored with topsoil and sod.
The existing right-of-way is 60 feet wide throughout the project. No additional right-of-ways
acquisitions are anticipated with this project.
Water Main
As mentioned before, SPRWS has recommended replacing the existing water main and hydrants
on Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, and Winston Court. The existing water main
is 6” cast iron pipe and has had a break frequency that exceeds limits recommended by SPRWS.
SPRWS proposes to install 6” ductile iron pipe and replace the fire hydrants. See Appendix D
for proposed water main replacements.
As mentioned before, SPRWS has recommended maintenance operations for the remaining
ductile iron water main pipe on Brompton Place, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle,
and Winston Court. This includes fire hydrant replacements and cathodic protection installed to
prolong the life of the existing 6” ductile iron pipe.
Storm Sewer
As mentioned before, the existing storm sewer is in satisfactory condition. This project does not
include replacing any of the existing storm sewer lines.
Downing Street storm sewer extension is designed to address slow drainage in an area where the
street grade is below current City design standards. See Appendix E for proposed Downing
Street storm sewer extension.
Feasibility Report Page 9
Project No. 201906
Additional storm water improvements including, but not limited to, rain gardens will be
considered on an individual basis, based upon homeowner interest and storm water design
feasibility after the Informational Meeting scheduled on March 24, 2021.
Trail Improvements
As part of Ivy Falls East Neighborhood Improvements, an 8’ bituminous trail is considered to be
installed within Ivy Falls Park connecting Butler Avenue to Sylvandale Road. See Appendix F
for proposed Ivy Falls Park Trail Improvements.
Private Utilities
No utility companies have indicated they will be making improvements to their distribution
networks in conjunction with our proposed improvements.
Funding
Per the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy it is proposed that the benefiting
property owners will be assessed for the street rehabilitation. The property tax levy will be used
to finance the City’s portion of the street rehabilitation. Storm sewer and water main funds will
come from their respective utility accounts.
Feasibility
From an engineering standpoint, this project is necessary, cost-effective, feasible and can be
accomplished as proposed.
Feasibility Report Page 10
Project No. 201906
FUNDING SOURCES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
The area proposed to be assessed is every lot, piece, and parcel within the city limits benefiting
from said improvement, whether abutting or not, within the following described areas:
Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle, Winston Circle, and
Winston Court.
Specific property descriptions included in the above-described area, but not inclusive, are as
follows:
Ivy Falls East Addition, North Ivy Hills First Addition, Brompton Courts Addition, North
Ivy Hills Second Addition, and Ivy Keep North Addition.
The roadway improvement costs can be assessed on a unit basis to the benefiting properties as
per the Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy adopted by the City council on June 16,
1992. The following section discusses the assessment distribution for the street improvements
based on the City’s policy.
Estimated Project Costs
The following costs were prepared based upon an Engineer’s Opinion of Estimated Costs
(Appendix G) and are subject to change, depending on the final design of the project, soil
conditions, bids received, and actual work performed.
PROJECT COSTS
ITEM CONSTRUCTION INDIRECT* TOTAL
Street Rehabilitation $821,654.50 $205,413.63 $1,027,068.13
Trail Construction $38,908.00 $9,727.00 $48,635.00
Storm Sewer $25,250.00 $6,312.50 $31,562.50
Water Main $562,329.00 $140,582.25 $702,911.25
Totals $1,448,141.50 $362,035.38 $1,810,176.88
* Includes 25% indirect costs for legal, engineering, administration, and finance.
Feasibility Report Page 11
Project No. 201906
Proposed Estimated Assessments
Street Rehabilitation - Brompton Place, Downing Street, London Road, Sutcliff Circle,
Winston Circle, and Winston Court
The estimated total assessable amount for the project is based on specially assessing 50% of the
street rehabilitation costs including but not limited to mobilization, traffic control, bituminous
removal/reclamation, bituminous base course, bituminous wear course, tack coat, curb and
gutter, valve and manhole adjustments, and appurtenant work. The preliminary assessment roll
listing the assessable parcels is provided in Appendix H.
ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS - STREET REHABILITATION
Assessable Costs $1,027,068.13
Assessment $513,534.06
Assessable Units 71
Estimated Unit Assessment per City Policy $7,232.87 $513,533.77 50%
Proposed Unit Assessment $5,500.00 $390,500.00 38%
The estimated unit assessments for the street rehabilitation are higher than the rates that staff
anticipates for future rehabilitation projects with pavement reclamation due to the anticipated
sub-grade correction. Staff proposes to assess the benefiting properties $5,500/unit in order to
bring the rate closer to anticipated rehabilitation projects costs.
The costs and funding sources for the projects are summarized in the following tables:
FUNDING SOURCES
ITEM
COST
ESTIMATE ASSESSMENT
MUNICIPAL
BONDS
UTILITY
FUNDS
Street Rehabilitation $1,027,068.13 $390,500.00 $636,568.13
Trail Construction $48,635.00 $48,635.00
Storm Sewer $31,562.50 $31,562.50
Water Main $702,911.25 $702,911.25
Totals $1,810,176.88 $390.500.00 $685,203.13 $734,473.75
With a total estimated project cost of $1,810,176.88 and an estimated bond issue of $685,203.13,
the assessed amount of $390,500.00 would be equivalent to 26.9% of the total bond issue.
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 Special Assessment Bond Issue requires that a minimum of 20%
of the total bond issue amount be recovered through special assessments.
Feasibility Report Page 12
Project No. 201906
PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE
The following project schedule outlines an approach to complete the assessable projects in 2021:
ACTIVITY DATE
Accept Feasibility Study/Call for Public Hearing March 2, 2021
Hold Informational Meeting March 24, 2021
Conduct Public Hearing/Accept Project/Order Plans and Specifications April 6, 2021
Hold Second Informational Meeting (if necessary) April 2021
Approve Plans and Specifications/Order Advertisements for Bids April 20, 2021
Open Bids May 2021
Accept Bids/Award Contract May/June 2021
Begin Construction June/July 2021
Complete Base Course & Wear Course of Bituminous Pavement Fall 2021
Authorize Amount to be Assessed/Schedule Assessment Hearing October 2021
Conduct Assessment Hearing/Adopt Assessment Roll October 2021
CONCLUSION
The proposed improvements are necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering
standpoint and should be made as proposed.
The total estimated cost of the recommended improvements is $1,810,176.88. A portion of this
project is proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners and the remainder through
other funding sources.
Feasibility Report
Project No. 201906
APPENDIX A: Ivy Falls East Neighborhood Improvements
Project Area
6301043994596995613580605605100010225476135886235536006226141044557561558568554994102556261056555060656910185469901000990993104398910341040100659010281046101410071039103510331023102210121027103610205421040100410101017102010241001101510079951013CHIPPEWA AVEWINSTON CTMIRIAM STSIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYVIEW LNKIRCHNER AVEJUNCTION LNJOHN STLONDON RDDOWNING STESTHER LNDIEGO LNVALLEY LNSIMARD STBROMPTON PLSUTCLIFF CIRS Y L V A N D A L E R DWINSTON CIRH I A W A T H A A V E ELLEN STDODD RDOODRIDGE DRIvy Falls East Neighborhood Improvements (MH201906)Project AreaFebruary 23, 2021City ofMendotaHeights0300SCALE IN FEETLegend2021 Street Rehabilitation2021 Assessments
G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.G!.CHIPPEWA AVEWINSTON CTMIRIAM STSIBLEY MEMORIAL HWYVIEW LNKIRCHNER AVEJUNCTION LNJOHN STLONDON RDESTHER LNDOWNING STDIEGO LNVALLEY LNSIMARD STBROMPTON PLSUTCLIFF CIRS Y L V A N D A L E R DWINSTON CIRELLEN STH I A W A T H A A V E DODD RDWOODRIDGE DRIvy Falls East Neighborhood Improvements (MH201906)Water Main ReplacementFebruary 23, 2021City ofMendotaHeights0300SCALE IN FEETLegendExisting Water Main2021 Water Main ReplacementG!.Existing HydrantG!.2021 Hydrant Replacement
SYLVANDALE RDBUTLER AVEWOODRIDGE DRIvy Falls East Neighborhood Improvements (MH201906)Ivy Falls Park Trail ImprovementsFebruary 23, 2021City ofMendotaHeights060SCALE IN FEETLegend2021 Bituminous Trail2021 Pedestrian RampExisting Right-of-WayIvy Falls Park