The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council Packet 06-25-2019 SpecialCity Council 1 of 1 June 25, 2019 CITY OF PLYMOUTH AGENDA Special City Council June 25, 2019, 5:30 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. TOPICS 2.1 County Road 47 Corridor Study Update Power Point Presentation Stakeholder Engagement Summary 2.2 Plymouth Fire Station Needs Assessment and Design Recommendation Study Plymouth Fire Stations Study Presentation Plymouth Fire Station Study Report 2.3 Set future Study Sessions July August September October 3. ADJOURN 1 Special City Council June 25, 2019 Agenda Number:2.1 To:Dave Callister, City Manager Prepared by:Chris LaBounty, City Engineer Reviewed by:Michael Thompson, Public Works Director Item:County Road 47 Corridor Study Update 1. Action Requested: Receive a brief update on the progress of the County Road 47 corridor study and provide feedback on the typical roadway section. 2. Background: The City, in partnership with Hennepin County, is studying this east-west corridor from Northwest Boulevard to County Road 101 (Brockton Lane). The Council received an update at the Special Council Meeting on February 26 which covered the Flash Vote results and the public engagement process including partnering with Meadow Ridge Elementary at its International Night on March 7 and utilizing the school space for the corridor study at their open house on March 13. Approximately 100 people attended the open house at Meadow Ridge Elementary School on March 13. CCX ran a story which can be found at: https://ccxmedia.org/news/pedestrians-weigh-in-on-future-of-county-road-47/ Additionally, an interactive GIS mapping tool was utilized to collect online feedback at that time. It should be noted that Plymouth and Hennepin County also met with officials from the cities of Medina, Corcoran, and Maple Grove to garner input. A summarized version of the stakeholder engagement is attached. Plymouth residents and motorists have shared a variety of concerns regarding County Road 47 in the last decade, including speed limits, a lack of pedestrian facilities, lack of turn lanes, and the need for improved intersections and pedestrian crossings. Though County Road 47 is a Hennepin County roadway, the City is taking a proactive approach with a study of the entire corridor in 2019 to inform near-term and long-term infrastructure improvements as funding becomes available. The City's engineering consultant has completed summarizing community feedback, evaluating future traffic needs, and reviewing right-of-way and design constraints for the corridor. This is the second check-in point with the Council in which staff will provide a summary of the findings to date and seek input and direction on the roadway typical section before concept layouts and costs are developed which will ultimately inform near-term and long-term infrastructure projects. 2 3. Budget Impact: N/A 4. Attachments: Power Point Presentation Stakeholder Engagement Summary 3 4 Study Area CR 47 Corridor 5 Process & Schedule 6 Stakeholder Engagement Update Over 1,000 comments were received via: FlashVote Survey Feedback Map International Night Open HouseThere is strong support for: Sidewalks & a trail along County Road 47 Reduced vehicle speeds (& a lower speed limit) Increased visibility of all users Elimination of the bypass lanes and/or untraditional turn lanes on the east end of the corridor 7 Existing Conditions Corridor has variable turn lanes Posted speed limit is 45 or 50 MPH 2015 ADT: 3,900 – 11,200 5 signalized intersections & 16 stop-controlled intersections ▪1 pedestrian flasher 8 Crash Analysis Over half of the crashes in the corridor were at signalized intersections. 70% of the crashes in the corridor were “fender-benders” that did not result in injury. The most common types of crashes are turning-related and rear-ends. Failing to yield the right of way and distracted driving are the most common contributing factors. Crashes at stop signs and between intersections had higher rates of injury than those at traffic signals. 9 Signalized Intersection Recommendations Add north/south lane on Lawndale Lane Add turn lanes on County Road 47 at 101/Brockton Lane Optimize signal timing Only one travel lane (per direction) is needed to serve 2040 traffic 2040 Intersection ADT: 5,300 –14,900 10 Long-Term Concept Development 11 Design Speed Public input: speeds are too fast ▪Existing Speed Limit: 45-50 MPH Design context: pedestrians and bicyclists in the corridor warrant consideration of lower design speed ▪Design speed impacts the design of the roadway Design recommendation: Future CR 47 design speed is 40 MPH to balance the needs of vehicular mobility with pedestrian and bicycle crossings 12 Existing Cross-Section 1 lane in each direction Shoulder (no curb and gutter) + Turn lanes at some intersections 13 Future Typical Section (without shoulder) RIGHT AND LEFT TURN LANES INCLUDED AT ALL PUBLIC INTERSECTIONS 14 Future Typical Section (with shoulder) RIGHT AND LEFT TURN LANES INCLUDED AT ALL PUBLIC INTERSECTIONS 15 Locations for Pedestrian Crossing Treatments Middle section: Walk/Bike to Plymouth Dog Park & crossing Dunkirk Lane West end: Walk/Bike to School & Troy Lane visibility East end: Uncomfortable crossings at Dallas, Annapolis, and Yucca Lane 16 “Menu” of Pedestrian Treatments Treatments to be evaluated in Action Plan & coordinated with long term vision: Crosswalk markings & signage Striping improvements & rumble strips Curb extensions Median refuge islands Pedestrian Flashers 17 “Menu” of Pedestrian Treatments Crosswalk markings & signage Striping improvements & rumble strips Curb extensions Median refuge islands Pedestrian Flashers Treatments to be evaluated in Action Plan & coordinated with long term vision: Image Source: Federal Highway Administration 18 “Menu” of Pedestrian Treatments Crosswalk markings & signage Striping improvements & rumble strips Curb extensions Median refuge islands Pedestrian Flashers Treatments to be evaluated in Action Plan & coordinated with long term vision: Image Source: National Association of City Transportation Officials 19 “Menu” of Pedestrian Treatments Crosswalk markings & signage Striping improvements & rumble strips Curb extensions Median refuge islands Pedestrian Flashers Treatments to be evaluated in Action Plan & coordinated with long term vision: 20 “Menu” of Pedestrian Treatments Treatments to be evaluated in Action Plan & coordinated with long term vision: Crosswalk markings & signage Striping improvements & rumble strips Curb extensions Median refuge islands Pedestrian Flashers 21 CR 47 Corridor Study Next Steps Summer: Continue engineering analysis ▪Hold Open House ▪Select preferred alternative ▪Evaluate near-term pedestrian crossing improvements August-September: Develop Action Plan Fall 2019: City Council Work Session #3 22 Questions or Comments? 23 1 Public Engagement Process Summary Feedback was obtained in many ways in the first round of engagement.  Open House Attendance & Activities: Nearly 60 people signed in to the Open House on Wednesday, March 13. These sixty attendees participated in three in-person activities.  Comment Cards & Emails: 35 comment cards were filled out at the Open House, and some comments were emailed to staff after the event. The vast majority this feedback was in support of changes to the corridor; 3 notes were in opposition of change.  Online Feedback Map: Nearly 250 pieces of feedback (such as experiences, likes or dislikes of comments, and identifiation of key destinations) were captured via the Online Feedback Map. 86 users logged in to the map by providing their emails. Results Summary The map below shows where each of the comments were in the corridor by mode. The comments were split evenly between the three modes, and concentrations of comments occurr at Troy Lane and Meadow Ridge Elementary, at Egan Dog Park and Dunkirk Lane, Cheshire Parkway, Dallas Lane & Annapolis Lane, and Yucca Lane. From the first round of public engagement, there is strong support for the following:  Sidewalks & a trail along County Road 47  Reduced vehicle speeds (with support for a lower speed limit)  Increased sight distances and visibility for all users (as it relates to both horizontal and vertical curves)  Elimination of the bypass lanes and/or untraditional turn lanes on the east end of the corridor 24 2 Detailed Results The comments received in the first round of engagement can be grouped into three overall categories, with subcategories in each: Missing sidewalks or trails, uncomfortable pedestrian crossings, and vehicle speeds were the most common messages. The following pages show where the comments are that mention each topic from the public engagement process. Missing Infrastructure Missing Sidewalk or Trail Missing Pedestrian Crossing Roadway Design Items Uncomfortable Pedestrian Crossing (including “Double Threat”) Blind Corner (Challenging Curves) Hill (Challenging Grades) Trend of Rolled Vehicles Narrow Section Operational Challenges Vehicle Speeds Too Fast Challenge with Turning onto CR 47 (Visibility) Challenge with Turning onto CR 47 (No Gaps/Time) Challenge with Turning off CR 47 Access Management Concern 81 52 36 28 22 22 19 18 17 15 5 2 Missing Sidewalk or Trail Uncomfortable Pedestrian Crossing (including "Double Threat") Vehicle Speeds too Fast Blind Corner (Challenging Curves) Missing Pedestrian Crossing Hill (Challenging Grades) Challenge with Turning Off CR 47 Narrow Section Challenge with Turning onto CR 47 (No Gaps/Time) Challenge with Turning onto CR 47 (Visibility) Access Management Concern Trend of Rolled Vehicles Numbers of Times Mentioned Messages from Public Engagement Round 1 25 3 Missing Infrastructure Feedback  Sidewalk, wide shoulder, and/or trail for pedestrian and bike users is noted as missing throughout  More frequent pedestrian crossings desired on the west end of the corridor  Currently Lawndale Lane and Vicksburg Lane are the only intersections with marked crossings on that section  Several people suggested that a crossing and/or infrastructure to bicycle or walk to Meadow Ridge Elementary school would be utilized  The narrow bridge deck west of the Plymouth Dog Park makes walking along CR 47 to the park challenging 26 4 Roadway Design & Operational Feedback  The most frequently noted locations had uncomfortable existing pedestrian crossings coupled with visibility and/or speed issues:  Troy Lane: Several comments described challenges turning to and from Troy Lane due to curvature & speeds of vehicles on County Road 47. Pedestrians don’t like crossing here due to the high speeds of vehicles.  Plymouth Dog Park: A narrow bridge deck makes walking along CR 47 challenging and makes it hard to see pedestrians crossing to the park. This crossing was noted as uncomfortable due to vehicle speeds.  Dunkirk Lane: several comments noted a trend of rolled vehicles. Pedestrian crossing made challenging by limited sight distances along curves and high speeds of vehicles.  Cheshire Parkway: comments were mostly regarding trail connectivity, bicycle accommodations, and speeds of vehicles  Dallas Lane: Several comments noted that drivers disregard the pedestrian flashers or are required to come to very sudden stops when they did notice pedestrians in the crosswalk. Most comments are regarding speed of vehicles approaching crosswalk.  Yucca Lane: Several comments described challenges turning onto County Road 47 from Yucca Lane, and there were similar comments to Dallas Lane, where drivers are not yielding the right of way to pedestrians. There were double threat scenarios identified at Yucca (when drivers use the turning lanes as bypass lanes). 27 5 Operational Challenges Feedback  Vehicle speeds are noted as too fast throughout the corridor, and turning is a challenge, but for different reasons depending on location:  On the west side of the corridor: Vehicle speeds were noted as a challenge for other vehicles to make turns. These challenges were due to a combination of vehicle speeds and limited visibility. Troy Lane is a primary concentration of these comments.  On the east side of the corridor: Vehicle speeds were noted as a challenge for pedestrians to cross County Road 47 and for vehicles to make turns. On the east side of the corridor, there were more comments regarding limited gaps in traffic, coupled with speed and some visibility issues. These comments were concentrated around Dallas Lane.  Vehicles experience back-pressure turning off County Road 47 throughout the corridor. 28 Special City Council June 25, 2019 Agenda Number:2.2 To:Dave Callister, City Manager Prepared by:Rodger Coppa, Fire Chief Reviewed by:Michael Goldstein, Public Safety Director Item: Plymouth Fire Station Needs Assessment and Design Recommendation Study 1. Action Requested: Discuss the Plymouth Fire Station Needs Assessment and Design Recommendation Study 2. Background: A work group comprised of Chief Coppa, Deputy Chief Dreelan, Battalion Chief Evenson, and Facilities Supervisor Mehrkens was created in response to the information discovered in the Ameresco Facilities Assessment completed in October 2018. That report identified approximately $785,000 of deferred maintenance across the three fire stations with $735,000 identified as high priority, exclusively at Fire Stations 2 and 3. In addition to this deferred maintenance, the current facilities have significant deficiencies related to meeting current safety and operational standards, including space for current and future training needs, adequate space for apparatus, and safety concerns around structural integrity, healthy environments, ergonomics and flow. Partnering the Ameresco data with these other shortfalls, staff was given direction by the City Manager to gather more information. A Request for Qualifications was sent to eight local firms with experience in municipal architectural projects - more specifically, fire stations. Staff received qualification packets from six architectural firms. The work-group scored the submissions and invited the four top scoring firms to present and interview. Staff conducted the interviews and selected CNH Architects to complete a station needs assessment and design recommendation. Fire Station 1 was not included in this needs study. This station doesn't have nearly the amount of deferred maintenance as the other two stations as well as a basement so the structural needs found at Stations 2 and 3 are not present. In addition, this station will continue to be used in its current capacity with paid-on-call firefighters; therefore, it will not require modifications for the staffing model change. The initial focus of the study was to make an accurate assessment of both buildings’ physical condition and clearly identify impediments to current and future operational needs. CNH performed site visits at both stations and was provided with the data from the Ameresco Facilities Assessment. As outlined in the CNH report, both Fire Station 2 and Fire Station 3 need significant financial investments over the next few years. Station 2 is nearing the end of its useful life span and doesn’t have the operational or programming space to support the needs of current and future response 29 model. Station 3 has significant deferred maintenance, health and safety concerns, and also doesn't meet the needs of the current or future department profile. Changing facilities to meet the operational needs of the department will allow staff to operate and train more efficiently, maintain the health and well-being of personnel, and support the ability to safely and efficiently meet the needs of the community now and into the future. 3. Budget Impact: N/A 4. Attachments: Plymouth Fire Stations Study Presentation Plymouth Fire Station Study Report 30 Plymouth Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study CNH Architects 31 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Introduction Project History Existing Facilities Current Best Practices Deferred & Future Maintenance Service Model Changes Station #2 Station #3 Conclusion / Q&A Introduction 32 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Project History Deficiencies in Station Deficiencies in Operations Service Model Changes Request for Qualifications Design Team Selection Facilities Background 33 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Existing Facilities Stations #2 & #3 Aerial Map Station 3 Station 2 Station 1 34 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Existing Facilities Station #2 Site & Building Built: 1977 Size: 11,304 SF 35 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Existing Facilities Station #3 Site & Building Built: 1989 Size: 18,806 SF 36 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Current Best Practices 37 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Current Best Practices NFPA Station Design Standards Health & Safety Carcinogen Exposure Reduction Firefighter Safety 38 Fire Station Zoning: Hot – High Hazard Zone Tr ansition – Moderate Hazard Zone Cold – Low Hazard Zone Plymouth Fire Stations Study Current Best Practices Carcinogen Exposure 39 Design & Equipment Elements to Address Sources of Carcinogens: Prevent crossover contamination Separate entrances to occupied spaces Self-sufficient design within each zone Separate toilet, laundry & janitor closet Centralized location Address transitions – signage, sinks, walk-off flooring Enclosed PPE Storage Decon Toilet/Showers Plymouth Fire Stations Study Current Best Practices Remove & Isolate Sources 40 Firefighter Training Features & Goals Reduces training cost for department More efficient use of firefighter time Better trained firefighters Plymouth Fire Stations Study Current Best Practices Training Features 41 Firefighter Training Features & Goals Recruitment and retention benefits Firefighters remain on site and available to respond Many elements use existing space with minimal added cost Plymouth Fire Stations Study Current Best Practices Training Features 42 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Deferred & Future Maintenance 43 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Deferred & Future Maintenance Ameresco Report: Station #2 44 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Deferred & Future Maintenance Ameresco Report: Station #3 45 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Service Model Changes 46 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Service Model Changes Service Model Staffed Station Model Dorms Appropriately sized living spaces Separate lockers for on-site storage of firefighter personal and departmental items Operational flow of station 47 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 48 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Issues Building Moisture Issues Deferred maintenance Building construction issues Health & Safety Cross contamination in spaces Turnout gear exposed to carcinogens Lack of appropriate ventilation 49 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Issues Insufficient Space Existing spaces too small Not enough room to add additional spaces Fire Department Operations Day to day operations changed Not enough space for training Temporary dorms have eliminated classroom spaces 50 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Needs Program Operations 2,064 SF Administration 6,933 SF Apparatus Bays/Training 9,952 SF Residence 4,509 SF Decontamination 1,447 SF Exterior Walls 1,176 SF Total Area 26,081 SF Existing 11,304 SF Shortage 14,777 SF 51 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Needs Standards Opportunity to add in station training Safe & healthy environment Meeting NFPA standards Upgrade to meet service model changes 52 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Concept Design Approach Economically infeasible to expand apparatus bays Operating during upgrades Significant repair costs Larch Lane53 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Concept Design Approach New facility adjacent to existing facility Operating during Phase I construction Improved response flow Larch Lane54 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Concept Design Site Improved flow Separation from residential Improved response Larch Lane55 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Concept Design First Floor Appropriately sized apparatus bays Separate turnout gear room Separate decon spaces In house training Residence with dorms, dayroom, & kitchen Admin command vehicle garage Apparatus Bays Operations Decon Training Residence Command Vehicle Garage 56 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Concept Design Second Floor Second story tr aining access from apparatus bays Additional office space / classroom Opportunity to relocate Admin offices (optional) Training Office Admin 57 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #2 Station #2 Concept Budget Estimate Hard Cost $8,070,396 Contingency (15%) $1,210,559 Soft Cost $ 888,951 Contingency (10%) $ 88,895 Total Cost w/o Contingency $8,959,346 Total Cost with Contingency $10,258,801 **Current dollar value 58 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 59 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Issues Building Moisture Issues Deferred maintenance Building construction issues Health & Safety Cross contamination in spaces Turnout gear exposed to carcinogens Lack of appropriate ventilation 60 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Issues Insufficient Space Existing spaces too small Not enough room to add additional spaces Fire Department Operations Day to day operations changed Space designated for training is unsafe Temporary dorms have eliminated office spaces 61 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Needs Program Operations 5,423 SF Administration 1,630 SF Apparatus Bays/Training 8,333 SF Residence 4,593 SF Decontamination 1,452 SF Exterior Walls 2,236 SF Total Area 23,667 SF Existing 18,806 SF Shortage 4,861 SF 62 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Needs Standards Safe & healthy environment Meeting NFPA standards Upgrade to meet service model changes 63 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Concept Design Approach Acceptable flow Good location Sufficient remaining value Dunkirk Lane64 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Concept Design Approach Remodel and addition feasible Use of addition to help address repairs Operating during upgrades Dunkirk Lane65 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Concept Design Site Maintaining parking stalls Mindful of contours Dunkirk Lane66 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Concept Design First Floor Additional storage Separate turnout gear room Separate decon spaces Residence with dorms, dayroom, & kitchen Apparatus Bays Operations Decon Residence Operations 67 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Concept Design Lower Floor & Second Floor Additional office space Appropriately sized locker room / restrooms Safe training spaces Office Residence Training Operations 68 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Station #3 Station #3 Concept Budget Estimate Hard Cost $4,227,441 Contingency (15%) $ 634,116 Soft Cost $ 660,713 Contingency (10%) $ 66,071 Total Cost w/o Contingency $4,888,154 Total Cost with Contingency $5,588,342 **Current dollar value 69 Plymouth Fire Stations Study Conclusion Conclusion / Q & A 70 CNH ARCHITECTS 7300 West 147th Street, Suite 504 Apple Valley, MN 55124 952.431.4433 www.cnharch.com June 19, 2019 18097 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study CITY OF PLYMOUTH ARCH I T E C T S 71 72 1CNH ARCHITECTS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA PRINT NAME: QUINN HUTSON SIGNATURE: DATE: 06/19/19 LICENSE NO: 21234 CNH Architects Quinn Hutson, AIA, Principal Architect Brooke Jacobson, Architect 7300 West 147th Street, #500 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (952) 431-4433 www.cnharch.com TEAM TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 3 Plymouth Fire Stations Map 5 Station #2 Introduction 6 Site Analysis 8 Existing Conditions Analysis 10 Building Program 12 Site Layout 14 Building Zoning 16 Building Layout 18 Cost Estimate 19 Conclusion 20 Station #3 Introduction 22 Site Analysis 24 Existing Conditions Analysis 26 Building Program 28 Site Layout 30 Building Zoning 32 Building Layout 34 Cost Estimate 35 Conclusion 36 73 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study22 Introduction The City of Plymouth contracted with CNH Architects to perform a study analyzing the current and future needs of Fire Station #2 and Fire Station #3. This study is to evaluate each of the two fire stations, rating them for a broad series of building and operational attributes. The information provided in this study includes data gathered and analyzed by CNH Architects, information from the earlier facility maintenance study commisioned by the City, as well as valuable input from Plymouth city staff. The report includes this Executive Summary followed by supporting data, diagrams, and final recommendations. Process The study process utilized the following three major steps: 1. Gather data for both stations on existing conditions, current space needs and operational goals, as well as future growth and anticipated changes to the department. 2. Develop a building program of space needs requirements for both stations based on data gathered. 3. Evaluate building program and existing conditions to determine scope of demolition, remodeling, new addition, or new building that will best meet the needs of the department now and in the future. Major Site & Building Analysis The study reviewed many aspects of each of the two fire station sites and buildings with many results being similar between the buildings while other aspects were noticably different. Since the stations were built quite a while ago (42 years for Station #2 and 31 years for Station #3) there has been many changes in standard fire station design and operations over that period. These Best Practices range from updates in NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) design standards to many fire fighter safety elements including in-station training features as well as the current focus on carcinogen reduction strategies. As would be anticipated, the current buildings are significantly lacking in thest current Best Practices that are included in typical fire stations within the metroplitan area and across the country. The earlier study provided by Ameresco highlights the deferred and future maintenance requirements for each building. This maintenance represents the cost associated with upkeep for each station just to maintain the current building looking at items such as roof replacement, caulking, mechanical and electrical equipment life expectancy, replacement of flooring and the many other costs related to the regular repairs of any facility. It does not include costs for structural or water intrusion repairs nor any expansion of the facility to meet current needs. This report indicates a combined current and expected liability over the next 30 years of a total of $6 million for the two stations combined. Also common to each Fire Station is the change in Fire Department service model with the transition to a 24/7 staffed station approach. This model creates additional facility needs within each station that was not anticipated when the facilities were built, such as dorms and the associated restroom/ shower facilities needed by the 24/7 staffing model. Finally, both fire station buildings have significant moisture and water intrusion issues. These range from leaking exterior wall systems, window joint leakage, to major basement water intrusion with the condition so deteriorated at Station #3 that the basement level is uninhabitable. While each station has water issues, the corrections vary and will be addressed individually. The following are a few major highlights of the analysis presented separately for each station. Station #2: 12000 Old Rockford Road This fire station building has many concerns starting with the moisture intrusion in multiple areas in the lower level as well as above grade. These are a result of both aging as well as poor constuction methods or materials. The Ameresco report identified approximately $2.2 million in deffered and future maintenance for the current building. The building does not meet current Best Practices in station design and fire fighter safety elements including significant issues with poor ventilation and outdated contamination separation. The space needs analysis identified a shortage of up to 14,000 square feet of building area or 130% of the existing building including lack of dorms to meet the service model and apparatus bays that are too narrow and too short, which is a very expensive condition to rectify. Due to the extensive nature of repairs and remodeling, it is not feasable for this existing structure to be updated while being occupied. E XECUTIVE SUMMARY 74 3CNH ARCHITECTS Station #3: 3300 Dunkirk Lane North Fire Station #3 likewise has many moisture intrusion issues with the basement leaking being to the point that it is not safe to use that level. CNH Architects review of the general nature of the water issues again shows a wide variety of sources resulting from again a combination of aging and poor construcion details and materials. However, we did note that the majority of issues are on the east side which could assist in developing a directed response. The deferred and future maintenance for this facility as listed in the Ameresco report shows a 30 year total of $3.8 million for the current building. The building does not meet current Best Practices in station design and fire fighter safety elements including significant issues with poor ventilation and outdated contamination separation. While the space needs analysis did identify a space shortage, the amount is a moderate 3,700 square feet representing a shortfall of only 20% if the basement is brought back into service. It was determined that it is feasible to expand and remodel this station while the fire department operates out of the facility, albeit with a certain amount of disruption. Conclusions This study indicates that there are significant current issues with both Fire Station #2 and Fire Station #3 facilities. These shortcomings impact the structural integrity, current and future fire department operations, occupant health and safety, and future costs to maintain each building. The report develops recommendations and concept plans to address each facility which are summarized in the following paragraphs. Station #2: 12000 Old Rockford Road Based on the current condition of this facility, the deferred and upcoming maintenance costs, and the grossly undersized builiding - particularly apparatus bays, it was determined that it would be economically more feasable to build a new fire station than to remodel and expand this existing building. Based on the concept plans included in the detail of this report, a new station could be built on this site while maintaining operations in the existing facility, something not practical with a major remodel and addition approach. A further benefit of this recommendation would be the avoidance of much of the maintenance liability shown in the report, instead allocating the costs to the new contruction and avoiding significant maintenance for at least the first 15 years of the new occupancy. The new facility shown in the concept plans would meet the current and future needs of the fire deparment at this location, and represents a station size and features comparable to the typical standard 3 bay facility we see around the metropolitan community and beyond, containing the Best Practices features for an efficient and safe fire station. Station #3: 3300 Dunkirk Lane North The recommendations for Fire Station #3 would be for a small addition and a complete facility remodel to address the current condition of this building and the operational and space needs of the fire department. Specifically, the concept plans shown in this report designs an addition to the east side of the existing building where the addition could address the majority of the moisture issues at almost no additional cost while providing the added space needs identified in the study. Since the existing apparatus bays are sized appropriately this remodel becomes practical, however there are still significant relocations and upgrades required within the remodeling to meeting the needs of the fire department. With phasing of the construction, this concept plan can be achieved while the facility is occupied and operational. As in Station #2, the deferred and future maintenance costs, which are sizeable for this building can mostly be applied to the addition and remodeling, at least for the first 15 years after construction work. The expanded and remodeled facility shown in the concept plans would meet the current and future needs of the fire deparment at this location, and would also represent a station size and features comparable to the typical standard 3 bay facility we see around the metropolitan community and beyond, containing the Best Practices features for an efficient and safe fire station. The body of the study report includes background data, concept plans and other supporting information to further explain the analysis of Plymouth Fire Stations #2 and #3 and the recommendations outlined above. The report also includes a preliminary cost analysis for the recommendations indicated for each station. 75 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study44 76 5CNH ARCHITECTS 5CNH ARCHITECTSInterstate 494Station #1: 13205 County Road 6 Station #2: 12000 Old Rockford Road Station #3: 3300 Dunkirk Lane North Plymouth Fire Stations Location Map The map above shows the locations of Station #2 and Station #3 that are being evaluated for needs assessment and design recommendations to better meet the fi re department’s operational functions as well as the location of Station #1. PLYMOUTH FIRE STATIONS MAP Station #3 Station #2 Hig h w a y 5 5 Rockford Road Station #1 77 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study6 Photograph: View of the fire station from Old Rockford Road. Station #2: Station 2 is an existing fire station built in 1976 consisting of a main level and a basement level. The existing square footage of the building is 10,779 square feet. The property’s current zoning designation is P-I Public / Institutional. It has a gross area of 3.70 acres of which 1.61 acres is buildable. The site is located in an existing residential area with close access to County Road 9 / Rockford Road. 78 7CNH ARCHITECTS STATION #2 79 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study8 There is potential wetland areas located along the west property line of the site that transitions into probable wetland at the far northern portion of the site. The potential wetland area could be relocated to the northern portion of the site to the north of the well house. The site is located off of Larch Lane North and Old Rockford Road in a residential neighborhood a few blocks south of Rockford Road. There is ample room and good visibility of the site to provide appropriate apparatus and public safety. The apparatus currently exit onto Old Rockford Road, however the preferred exit would be on to Larch Lane North to provide quicker access to Rockford Road. Site Statistics Street Access - Safety Wetlands 2 Site Analysis Station P-I Public / Institutional Gross Site Area 3.70 Acres 12000 Old Rockford Road Plymouth, MN 55441 Buildable Site Area 1.61 Acres Potential Wetland - HCWI Probable Wetland - HCWI Probable Wetland - NWI Wetland Key 80 9CNH ARCHITECTS The site is approximately 3.70 acres, of which 1.61 acres is buildable area. The size of the buildable area has plenty of room to expand or build a new station, however the position of the existing station and well house interrupt the allotted size of the buildable area. A large grouping of trees is located along the western portion of the site which would need to be removed if a new station is built at this location. There is a scattering of trees on the eastern portion of the site with trees at the edges of the parking lot and existing building that can mostly remain intact if a new station is built. The topography is mostly flat along the eastern portion of the site with more significant contours along the western portion of the site. The western portion of the site has a elevation change of 14 feet which would need to be addressed if a new station is built in this portion of the site. Tree Coverage Map Topography Buildable Area 2Site Analysis Station 81 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study10 2 Existing Conditions Analysis Station Infrastructure Deferred Maintenance Building Moisture Issues There are several locations in the lower level of the existing station that have building moisture issues. The factors potentially contributing to these issues are deferred maintenance and building construction issues. The Ameresco report identified that there is current deferred maintenance issues and well as potential future maintenance liabilities. Some of the current issues are concrete slab settlement, parking lot asphalt replacement, roof membrane failure, and mechanical unit replacement. The existing site layout provides adequate circulation and traffic flow as well as access to existing utilities. The site has ample room for building and parking expansion or relocation. 82 11CNH ARCHITECTS 2Existing Conditions Analysis Station Health & Safety Insufficient Space Fire Department Operations Day to day operations of the fire department have changed over the years and the current fire station does not meet the needs of the department. There is not enough space for training and only certain training aspects can be achieved at the station. There is no space for the dorms that are now needed and the current classroom will need to become the dorm rooms which leaves a void in the classroom needs of the station. The existing station raises several health and safety concerns for the firefighters that utilize the station. There is currently cross contamination between spaces and items that contain carcinogens that are directly affecting the health of firefighters. The turnout gear is currently stored in the apparatus bays where the apparatus expels carcinogens directly onto cleaned turnout gear. The existing mechanical units do not provide appropriate ventilation and negative air pressure to prevent other areas from being decontaminated within the station. The existing station has several spaces that are currently too small for day to day operations such as training, offices, dayroom, apparatus bays, turnout gear storage, locker rooms and restrooms. There is not enough room in the current station to create additional spaces that are needed for operational use such as dorm rooms, additional offices and separate turnout gear storage. Summary Fire Station #2 has multiple existing building issues that impact the building structure and systems that should be addressed in the short term. These include a backlog of deffered maintenance to the envelope, systems and equipment as well as significant upcoming maintenance needs. Further the moisture infiltration issues impair the usable spaces and finishes and will, if left unaddressed, lead to long-term further deterioration. Functionally, this station does not meet current Best Practices for health and safety including carcinogen reduction, fitness or on-site training that would be expected in a current fire station. In addition, the station is significantly undersized including apparatus bays well short of NFPA clearance standards. Finally, the building does not meet the current and future needs for fire department operations including the dorm space related to the recent service model change. 83 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study12 2 Building Program Station Program Total Area Existing Area Shortage 2,064 SF 6,933 SF 9,952 SF 4,509 SF 1,447 SF 1,176 SF Operations Administration Apparatus Bays / Training Residence Decontamination Exterior Walls 26,081 SF 11,304 SF 14,777 SF 84 13CNH ARCHITECTS 2Proposed Building Layout Station Second FloorFirst Floor Apparatus Bays Command Vehicle Storage Decontamination Operations Administration Residence Training Building Layout Key 85 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study14 2 Proposed Site Layout Station Public Parking Old Roc kf or d R o a dLarch Lane North86 15CNH ARCHITECTS Highlights • Adequate buildable area if existing fire station is removed • Phasing of construction will allow the department to stay operational during construction • Appropriate apparatus apron length • Adequate space for firefighter parking, public parking, and Admin parking • Allows for adequate exterior training capabilities • Re-positioning of station allows for quicker access onto Larch Lane North • Allows for good separation of apparatus traffic and public traffic on site 2Proposed Site Layout Station 87 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study16 2 Building Zoning Station Second Floor First Floor High Hazard Zone Moderate Hazard Zone Low Hazard Zone Fire Station Zoning Types Remove & Isolate Physical Sources - Contain and remove the contaminants • Organize to minimize paths to decontamination areas • Provide highly cleanable surfaces • Provide commercial gear washers and dryers • Provide proper SCBA, PPE and equipment storage allowing airflow - Separate Occupants and contaminants • Separate entrances to regularly occupied spaces • Include all cold zone function to be self-sufficient - Prevent crossover contamination • Include all functions and equipment needed in area • Separate toilet, laundry, and janitor closet • Centralize decontamination areas • Address transitions between contaminated areas and other areas - Enhanced decontamination strategies • Enclosed PPE storage room • Clean personal locker room • Decontamination toilet / shower rooms • Contaminated non-gear laundry (separate from dorm laundry) • Ice maker/ ice bin separate from contaminated areas - PPE and decontamination areas • Separate from apparatus bays in enclosed rooms • Provide good circulation in lockers and storage rooms • Dedicated mechanical systems with direct exhaust • Negative pressure to prevent contaminating other zones Hot Transition Cold Fire Station Zoning Key 88 17CNH ARCHITECTS 2Cost Estimate Station Cost Estimate Site & Building Hard Costs 8,959,346 10,258,801Total Estimated Project Cost $ $Total Estimated Project Cost - without Contingency (11,665 SF x $8.50)99,153$ 765,000.00$Site Work (28,192 SF x $250.00)7,048,000$ 8,070,396$Subtotal - Hard Costs 1,210,559$Contingency - 15% 7,912,153$Subtotal - Direct Cost Occupied Facility / Phasing Factor - 2%158,243$ Total Construction Hard Cost 9,280,955$ Owner FFE Soft Costs 35,761$ 93,150$ 153,700$ 888,951$Subtotal - Soft Costs 88,895$Contingency - 10% 30,000$ Total Construction Soft Cost 977,846$ Design, Testing & Fees Soft Cost 504,400$ 7,000$ 4,000$ 5,000$ 18,000$ 9,940$ Demolition Building Total Building Area (New & Existing) 28,192 SF Fire Station Equipment Furnishings & Appliances Low voltage cabling, monitors, access Utility relocation allowance Architectural & Engineering Fee Site Survey Attorney’s Fee (estimate) Geotechnical Testing & Report Special Inspections & Testing Allowance (4 x $2,485.00)Metropolitan Council SAC Fee (estimated units) 329Total Hard Cost / Area $ 28,000$Training Infrastructure ***The above Hard Cost prices shown are as of May 1, 2019. Construction cost inflation should be added to the project midpoint. The Owner FFE estimates are based on costs developed by Fire Department Staff and CNH Architects based on historic FFE costs from past fire stations. 89 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study18 90 19CNH ARCHITECTS CONCLUSION 2Conclusion Station Based on the current condition of this facility, the deferred and upcoming maintenance costs, and the grossly undersized builiding - particularly apparatus bays, it was determined that it would be economically more feasable to build a new fire station than to remodel and expand this existing building. One of the particularly costly aspects of remodeling this facility is the need to expand the apparatus bay in both width and length resulting in reconstruction of bearing walls and extension of roof structure. Further, as a 41 year old facility much of the facility has already reached its reasonable life expectancy which would limit the future life expectancy of a remodeling process if that approach was instead pursued. Based on the concept plans included in the detail of this report, a new station could be built on this site while maintaining operations in the existing facility, something not practical with a major remodel and addition approach. Additionally, the apparatus response flow could be redirected to exit onto Larch Lane reducing response time and minimizing residential impacts currently imposed by exiting onto Old Rockford Road toward residential development. A further benefit of this recommendation would be the avoidance of much of the maintenance liability shown in the Ameresco report, instead allocating the costs to the new contruction. While the new station cost of $9 to $10.5 million in total project costs is significant, it will be partially offset by much of the $2.2 million maintenance cost, will expand the facility to meet current needs, and provide a 40 to 50 year life-expectancy of a new building. The new facility shown in the concept plans would meet the current and future needs of the fire deparment at this location, and represents a station size and features comparable to the typical standard 3 bay facility we see around the metropolitan community. If the Administration Office relocation option is selected it would also provide the flexibility at the current Public Safety Facility to expand Police Department offices into the former Fire Administration area. At the same time, the concept plan allow for the removal of this option without impacting operational flow of the building. Finally, the replacement of Fire Station #2 will address the many health, safety, and operational shortcomings of the current building. The new building would incorporate today’s Best Practices features for an efficient and safe fire station benefiting fire fighters and serving the community for many decades to come.91 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study20 Photograph: View of the fire station from Dunkirk Lane North. Station #3: Station 3 is an existing fire station built in 1988 consisting of a first floor level, a second floor level, and a basement level. The existing square footage of the building is 17,744 square feet. The property’s current zoning designation is P-I Public / Institutional. It has a gross area of 3.61 acres of which 2.66 acres is buildable. The site is located in an existing residential area adjacent to a commercial area with realtively close access to Highway 55. 92 STATION #3 21CNH ARCHITECTS 93 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study22 3 Site Analysis Station Site Statistics Street Access - Safety Wetlands There is potential wetland areas and probable wetland areas at the far southeastern portion of the site. There is probable wetland areas on the all adjacent sites surrounding the current site. No wetland area would be impacted by building expansion. The site is located off of Dunkirk Lane in a residential neighborhood. There is ample room and good visibility of the site to provide appropriate apparatus and public safety. 3300 Dunkirk Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55447 P-I Public / Institutional Gross Site Area 3.61 Acres Buildable Site Area 2.66 Acres Potential Wetland - HCWI Probable Wetland - HCWI Probable Wetland - NWI Wetland Key 94 23CNH ARCHITECTS 3Site Analysis Station Tree Coverage Map Topography Buildable Area The site is approximately 3.61 acres, of which 2.66 acres is buildable area. The size of the buildable area has plenty of room to expand on either of the side of the existing station. A large grouping of trees is located along the eastern and northern portions of the site which would not be affected by building expansion. There is a scattering of trees on the western portion of the site near the existing building that would not be affected by building expansion. There are a couple of trees along the east wall of the existing building that would need to be removed for building expansion. The topography is mostly flat along the middle portion of the site with more significant contours along the eastern and western portions of the site. The western portion of the site has an elevation change of 8 feet which would need to be addressed with any building expansion along the west wall of the existing building. 95 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study24 3 Existing Conditions Analysis Station Infrastructure Deferred Maintenance Building Moisture Issues There are several locations of the existing station that have building moisture issues. The entire east wall of the lower level that is below grade has moisture issues, the south stairwell below grade has moisture issues, several of the window heads and sills have moisture issues, and the east wall of the apparatus bay has moisture issues where the roof transitions. The factors potentially contributing to these issues are deferred maintenance and building construction issues. The Ameresco report identified that there are current deferred maintenance issues as well as potential future deferred maintenance issues. Some of the issues are asphalt ruts outside of the apparatus bays, parking lot asphalt patching, and roof membrane failure. The existing site layout provides adequate circulation and traffic flow as well as access to existing utilities. The site has ample room for building expansion without disrupting the current flow of the site. 96 25CNH ARCHITECTS 3Existing Conditions Analysis Station Health & Safety Insufficient Space Fire Department Operations Day to day operations of the fire department have changed over the years and the current fire station does not meet the needs of the department. The only space allotted for training is not available due to health concerns from the moisture issues. There is no space for the dorms that are now needed and the current conference room and offices are being turned into the dorm rooms which leaves a void in the conference room and office needs of the station. The existing station raises several health and safety concerns for the firefighters that utilize the station. There is currently cross contamination between spaces and items that contain carcinogens that are directly affecting the health of firefighters. The turnout gear is currently stored in the apparatus bays where the apparatus expels carcinogens directly onto cleaned turnout gear. The existing mechanical units do not provide appropriate ventilation and negative air pressure to prevent other areas from being decontaminated within the station. The existing station has several spaces that are currently too small for day to day operations such as training, offices, dayroom, apparatus bays, turnout gear storage, locker rooms and restrooms. There is not enough room in the current station to provide larger spaces as well as create additional spaces that are needed for operational use such as dorm rooms, open office areas, separate decontamination areas, and separate turnout gear storage. Summary Fire Station #3 has multiple existing building issues that impact the building structure and systems that should be addressed in the short term. These include a backlog of deferred maintenance such as site pavement, envelope, building systems and equipment as well as significant upcoming maintenance needs. Further the moisture infiltration issues are severe, damaging building elements and making the basement uninhabitable Functionally, this station does not meet current Best Practices for health and safety including carcinogen reduction, fitness or on-site training that would be expected in a current fire station. In addition, the station is somewhat undersized including lack of separate turnout gear, decon and training space. Finally, the building does not meet the current and future needs for fire department operations including the dorm space related to the recent service model change. 97 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study26 3 Building Program Station Program Total Area Existing Area Shortage 5,423 SF 1,630 SF 8,333 SF 4,593 SF 1,452 SF 2,236 SF Operations Administration Apparatus Bays / Training Residence Decontamination Exterior Walls 23,667 SF 18,806 SF 4,861 SF 98 27CNH ARCHITECTS 3Proposed Building Layout Station Lower Floor First Floor Second Floor Apparatus Bays Command Vehicle Storage Decontamination Operations Administration Residence Training Building Layout Key 99 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study28 3 Proposed Site Layout Station Public ParkingDunkirk Lane North33rd Avenue 100 29CNH ARCHITECTS Highlights • Adequate space for building expansion to east and west of existing station • Sufficient number of existing parking stalls for firefighter parking and public parking • Sufficient existing site circulation to remain intact • Building expansion to east allows for building moisture issues along the existing east wall to be addressed 3Proposed Site Layout Station 101 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study30 3 Building Zoning Station Lower Floor First Floor Second Floor High Hazard Zone Moderate Hazard Zone Low Hazard Zone Fire Station Zoning Types Remove & Isolate Physical Sources - Contain and remove the contaminants • Organize to minimize paths to decontamination areas • Provide highly cleanable surfaces • Provide commercial gear washers and dryers • Provide proper SCBA, PPE and equipment storage allowing airflow - Separate Occupants and contaminants • Separate entrances to regularly occupied spaces • Include all cold zone function to be self-sufficient - Prevent crossover contamination • Include all functions and equipment needed in area • Separate toilet, laundry, and janitor closet • Centralize decontamination areas • Address transitions between contaminated areas and other areas - Enhanced decontamination strategies • Enclosed PPE storage room • Clean personal locker room • Decontamination toilet / shower rooms • Contaminated non-gear laundry (separate from dorm laundry) • Ice maker/ ice bin separate from contaminated areas - PPE and decontamination areas • Separate from apparatus bays in enclosed rooms • Provide good circulation in lockers and storage rooms • Dedicated mechanical systems with direct exhaust • Negative pressure to prevent contaminating other zones Hot Transition Cold Fire Station Zoning Key 102 31CNH ARCHITECTS 3Cost Estimate Station Cost Estimate Site & Building Hard Costs 4,584,733 5,254,579 ***The above Hard Cost prices shown are as of May 1, 2019. Construction cost inflation should be added to the project midpoint. The Owner FFE estimates are based on costs developed by Fire Department Staff and CNH Architects based on historic FFE costs from past fire stations. Total Estimated Project Cost $ $Total Estimated Project Cost - without Contingency (4,868 SF SF x $275.00)1,338,700$ 1,340,500$(7,660 SF x $175.00) (10,538 SF x $75.00)790,350$ 4,227,441$Subtotal - Hard Costs 634,116$Contingency - 15% 4,144,550$Subtotal - Direct Cost Occupied Facility / Phasing Factor - 2%82,891$ Total Construction Hard Cost 4,861,557$ Owner FFE Soft Costs Fire Station Equipment 57,761$ 93,060$Furnishings & Appliances Low voltage cabling, monitors, access 142,600$ 660,713$Subtotal - Soft Costs 35,729$Contingency - 10% 10,000$Utility relocation allowance Total Construction Soft Cost 393,021$ Design, Testing & Fees Soft Cost Architectural & Engineering Fee 285,352$ 7,000$Site Survey Attorney’s Fee (estimate)4,000$ 5,000$Geotechnical Testing & Report Special Inspections & Testing Allowance 18,000$ 9,940$(4 x $2,485.00) Waterproofing 225,000$ New Addition Heavy Remodel Light Remodel Total Building Area (New & Existing) 22,944 SF 212Total Hard Cost / Area $ Metropolitan Council SAC Fee (estimated units) Site Work 450,000$ 28,000$Training Infrastructure 103 Fire Station #2 & Fire Station #3 Study32 104 33CNH ARCHITECTS 3Conclusion Station CONCLUSION The recommendations for Fire Station #3 would be for a small addition and a complete facility remodel to address the current condition of this building and the operational and space needs of the fire department. Specifically, the concept plans shown in this report designs an addition to the east side of the existing building where the addition could address the majority of the moisture issues at almost no additional cost while providing the added space needs identified in the study. The addressing of the moisture issues will allow for the reintegration of the basement into the usable area of the building. Since the existing apparatus bays are sized appropriately this remodel becomes practical, however there are still significant relocations and upgrades required within the remodeling to meeting the needs of the fire department. The addition and remodeling will include separation of spaces to provide appropriate station zoning to minimize carcinogen and other toxin separation and removal. With phasing of the construction, this concept plan can be achieved while the facility is occupied and operational which is critical for maintaining appropriate fire department response times for areas served by this station. The deferred and future maintenance costs, which at $3.8 million are sizeable for this building, can mostly be applied to the addition and remodeling, at least for the first 15 years after construction. This is due to fact that many elements of the current and future maintenance work identified by Ameresco would be replaced as part of the $4.6 to $5.2 million total project cost shown in the cost estimate for this addition and remodeling project. The expanded and remodeled facility shown in the concept plans would meet the current and future needs of the fire deparment at this location, and would also represent a station size and features comparable to the typical standard new 3 bay facility we see around the metropolitan community. Finally, the replacement of Fire Station #3 will address the many health, safety, and operational shortcoming of the current building. The new building would encorporate today’s Best Practices features for an efficient and safe fire station benefiting fire fighters and serving the community for many decades to come.105 Special City Council June 25, 2019 Agenda Number:2.3 To:Dave Callister, City Manager Prepared by:Sandy Engdahl, City Clerk Reviewed by:Laurie Hokkanen, Administrative Services Director Item:Set future Study Sessions 1. Action Requested: Schedule Study Sessions and/or add topics as desired. Calendars are attached to assist with scheduling. 2. Background: Pending Study Session Topics (at least three Council members have approved the following study items on the list): • Oversight of the watershed districts (financing of projects) – joint meeting with EQC (fall 2019) • IOCP Affordable Workforce Housing Tour (off-night in September) Other Council requests for Study Session Topics: None at this time. Staff’s requests for Study Sessions: • Review schematic design for Plymouth Creek Center and consider approving design and construction documents at September 10 regular Council meeting (suggest September 5 at 5:30 p.m.) • Economic Development Advisory Commission discussion (suggest September 10 at 5:30 p.m. Reschedule board and commission discussion to September 24 at 5:30 p.m.) • Update from Hennepin County District Court (suggest September 24 at 5:30 p.m.) 3. Budget Impact: N/A 4. Attachments: July August September October 106 SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 July 2019 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 OFFICIAL CITY CALENDAR Phone: 763-509-5000 Fax: 763-509-5060 SUN TUES MON WED THUR FRI SAT 7:00 PM HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING Parkers Lake Room 5:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Plymouth Creek Center Expansion Medicine Lake Room 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers INDEPENDENCE DAY CITY OFFICES CLOSED 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING Medicine Lake Room 5:30 PM - 10:30 PM Music in Plymouth Hilde Performance Center 107 SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 5:30 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Budget/CIP Medicine Lake Room 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 August 2019 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 OFFICIAL CITY CALENDAR Phone: 763-509-5000 Fax: 763-509-5060 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers 7:00 PM HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING Parkers Lake Room SUN TUES MON WED THUR FRI SAT 5:30 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Lodging Tax Discussion Medicine Lake Room 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers CHANGES ARE NOTED IN RED 5:30 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Budget/CIP (if needed) Medicine Lake Room 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING Medicine Lake Room 108 SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 5:30 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Boards & Commissions Discussion Medicine Lake Room 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 September 2019 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 OFFICIAL CITY CALENDAR Phone: 763-509-5000 Fax: 763-509-5060 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING Medicine Lake Room 7:30 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers SUN TUES MON WED THUR FRI SAT CHANGES ARE MADE IN RED LABOR DAY CITY OFFICES CLOSED 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers 7:00 PM HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING Parkers Lake Room 7:00 PM PARK & REC ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING Park Maintenance 7:30 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers 109 SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 5:30 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING CIP, Utility Study & Other Funds Budget Review (if needed) Medicine Lake Room 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 October 2019 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 OFFICIAL CITY CALENDAR Phone: 763-509-5000 Fax: 763-509-5060 5:30 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING CIP, Utility Study & Other Funds Budget Review Medicine Lake Room 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers 7:00 PM HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING Parkers Lake Room SUN TUES MON WED THUR FRI SAT 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers CHANGES ARE NOTED IN RED 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers CHA 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING Council Chambers 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers 110