HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 05-08-2007CITY OF PLYMOUTH
AGENDA
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
MAY 8,2007,7:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLYMOUTH FORUMIndividuals may address the Council about any item not contained
on the regular agenda. A maximum of 15 minutes is allotted for the Forum. If the full 15
minutes are not needed for the Forum, the City Council will continue with the agenda. The
City Council will take no official action on items discussed at the Forum, with the exception of
referral to staff or Commission for future report.
4. PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC INFORMATION ANNOUNCEMENTS
4.01 Presentation of 2006 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting
5. APPROVE AGENDA—Councilmembers may add items to the agenda including items
contained in the Council Information Memorandum for discussion purposes or staff direction
only. The Council will not normally take official action on items added to the agenda.
6. CONSENT AGENDA—These items are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one
motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen
so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the ConsentAgenda and placed
elsewhere on the agenda.
6.01 Approve proposed City Council Minutes
6.02 Approve disbursements (Res2007-204)
6.03 Approve payment No. 7 and Final for 2005 Street Reconstruction Project (5 101 –
Res2007-205)
6.04 Approve Acquisition Agreements for Fernbrook Lane Improvements (10 13 –
Res2007-206)
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
May 8, 2007
Page 2
6.05 Approve Cooperative Agreement with Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Commission for West Medicine Lake Park Pond Project (3105 — Res2007-207)
6.06 Receive Feasibility Report and Order Improvements for West Medicine Lake Park
Pond Project (3105 — Res2007-208)
6.07 Accept donation of portable bullet trap for use by the Police Department (Res2007-
209)
6.08 (This item was tabled to the May 22 Council Meeting)
6.09 Approve contribution to Plymouth Civic League for Music in Plymouth (Res2007-
210)
6.10 Approve contract with Hennepin for the Natural Resource Incentives for Critical
Habitat Grant (7 101 and 7107 — Res2007-211)
6.11 Receive Nondegradation Load Assessment Report for NPDES Phase lI Program
7108E — Res2007-212)
6.12 Award contract for 2007 Seal Coat Program (7117E — Res2007-213)
6.13 Approve final release of Financial Guarantees for Ponderosa Woods 3rd Addition
Res2007-214)
6.14 Approve Encroachment Agreement for retaining wall within Taryn Hills 6" Addition
2007019 — Res2007-215)
6.15 Approve Encroachment Agreement for a boulder wall at 4700 Balsam Lane
Res2007-216)
6.16 Receive Suburban Rate Authority's (SRA) proposed 2008 Budget
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
May 8, 2007
Page 3
6.17 Approve authorization to proceed with preliminary engineering and engineering
activities on projects programmed for 2008 in the 2007-2011 Capital Improvements
Program (Res2007-217)
6.18 Accept conceptual donation of SWAT Team Vehicle for use by the Police Department
Res2007-218)
6.19 Approve Metro Wood Recycling Contract (Res2007-219)
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.01 Purchase and sale of tax forfeited property to Nanterre Homeowners Association
Res2007-220)
7.02 Vacation of all platted drainage and utility easements within Outlot M, Taryn Hills
Res2007-221)
8. GENERAL BUSINESS
8.01 Approve findings of fact denying RSF-2 zoning for 3120 Dunkirk Lane (2007025 —
Res2007-222)
8.1.1 Consider Preliminary Plat for "Dunkirk Addition" located at 3120 Dunkirk Lane
2007002 — Res2007-223)
8.02 Approve Variances to allow construction of a new home on a non -conforming lot and
for impervious surface coverage for property located at 2560 Medicine Lake
Boulevard East. Cory & Ellen Tell. (2007024)
8.03 Award contracts for 2007 Street Reconstruction Projects:
8.03.1 Hawthorne Ponds (7 101 — Res2007-224)
8.03.2 City View Acres (7107 — Res2007-225)
9. REPORTS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
May 8, 2007
Page 4
9.01 Legislative Update
10. ADJOURNMENT
6-01
Proposed Minutes
2007 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvened
April 24, 2007
The Reconvened Meeting of the 2007 Board of Appeal and Equalization was called to order by
Mayor Slavik at 5:37 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on April
24, 2007. This meeting was reconvened from April 10, 2007.
COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Slavik, Councilmembers Black, Hewitt, Stein, Willis, Murdock,
and Bildsoe (arrived at 5:55 p.m.).
COUNCIL ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Ahrens, City Assessor Bye, Senior Appraiser Olsson,
Appraisers Kingsbury, Bowman, and Vander Linden, Commercial Appraiser Hebert, Part -Time
Appraiser Pidde, Public Works Director Cote, Administrative Services Director McGann, and
City Clerk Engdahl.
City Assessor Bye stated the council has received written recommendations from staff on
appeals received at the Board of Equalization meeting conducted on April 10.
Chris Swingley, 2780 Evergreen Lane, disputed his estimated market value on his property that
he purchased in 2001. He explained when he purchased the home, he intended to tear down the
home and rebuild but was informed that it wouldn't be possible as the lot was too restrictive.
Therefore, they remodeled the home. He stated the land value is too high in comparison to other
similar sized lots and thus the resale value of the lot. He met with staff, and a small adjustment
was made to the initial valuation. He stated the comparable properties that staff reviewed are
twice the size of his property, and he is concerned about inconsistencies in lot values around the
lake. His market value has been overextended in comparison to other properties.
Motion was made by Councilmember Stein, and seconded by Councilmember Willis, to confirm
the recommendation of staff for Mr. Swingley's property. With all members voting in favor, the
motion carried.
Motion was made by Councilmember Stein, and seconded by Councilmember Willis, to confirm
recommendations of staff for the remainder of the properties contained in the packet materials.
With all members voting in favor, the motion carried.
Adiournment
Mayor Slavik declared the meeting adjourned at 6:01 p.m.
Sandra R. Engdahl, City Clerk
Proposed Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
April 24, 2007
Mayor Slavik called aRegular Meeting of the Plymouth City Council to order at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on April 24, 2007.
COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Slavik, Councilmembers Hewitt, Stein, Black, Murdock, Bildsoe,
and Willis.
ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Ahrens, Police Chief Goldstein, City Attorney Knutson, Park
and Recreation Director Blank, Fire Chief Kline, Community Development Director Juetten,
City Forester Buck, Senior Coordinator Mittelstaedt, Administrative Services Director McGann,
and City Clerk Engdahl.
Plymouth Forum
Nancy Mack, 10140
26th Avenue North, addressed the Council regarding a residential building
project (addition to a home) that began in 2004 and hasn't been completed. She stated she is
frustrated with the dumpster in the front yard, erosion fences, dirt flowing directly into Medicine
Lake, noise, and the view from her home. She stated deck permits were issued in 2005, and they
are not finished.
City Manager Ahrens stated the housing inspector has been dealing with external building issues
over the past, year. She stated since the provisions relating to building permits are according to
the State Building Code, as long as there is some continuous work being performed, the permit is
active. The City has taken enforcement action on the landscaping, and that should be completed
by May 15. She noted that there are three other similar properties in the City that are identical to
this situation. City Attorney Knutson added that this is a common issue with cities, and various
cities have requested amendments to the State Building Code to address these situations, but no
amendments have been made. The Council directed staff to send a letter to the State on possible
amendments to the State Building Code to address these types of situations.
Presentations and Public Information Announcements
4.01) Donation from the Wayzata Youth Hockey Association for Third Sheet of Ice
Greg Gibson, and players from the Wayzata Hockey Association, presented a check in the
amount of $50,000 to the City for the third sheet of ice.
4.02) Proclamation Declaring April 28 as "The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup
Day'.'
Proposed Council Minutes
Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007
Page 2 of 8
Mayor Slavik declared April 28 at "The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Day."
4.03) Presentation by Senior Council
Gene Kuehn presented the 2006 annual report of the Senior Council and provided a check in
approximate amount of $400 to the City.
4.04) . Proclamation Declaring May 16 as "Arbor Week"
City Forester Buck, along with two student representatives from Pilgrim Lane Elementary,
discussed the Arbor Day project at their school. Mayor Slavik declared May 15 as "Arbor
Week."
Approval of Agenda
Motion was made by Councilmember Bildsoe, and seconded by Councilmember Stein, to
approve the a egnda. With all members voting in favor, the motion carried.
Consent Agenda
Item No's. 6.16 and 6.19 were removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under General
Business as item No's. 8.00 and 8.04 respectively.
Motion was made by Councilmember Bildsoe and seconded by Councilmember Hewitt, to adopt
the amended Consent Agenda that included the following items:
6.01) Minutes from the April 10 Board of Appeal and Equalization and Regular Meeting of
April 10.
6.02) Resolution Approving Disbursements for the Period Ending April 14, 2007 (Res2007-
173).
6.03) Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit for John Staby to allow an Attached
Garage Containing Over 1,000 square feet for Property located at 5615 Glacier Lane North
2007015—Res2007-174).
6.04) Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a Contract Agreement
with the Robbinsdale Independent School District No. 281 to provide School Resource Officer
Services (Res2007-175).
6.05) Resolution Approving a Variance to allow a 20 -foot Rear Yard Setback where 25 feet is
required for the Construction of an Approximately 118 square foot Room Addition for Property
located at 15655 40th Avenue North (2007032 — Res2007-176).
Proposed Council Minutes
Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007
Page 3 of 8
6.06) Resolution Authorizing Condemnation Proceedings for County Road 61/47 Intersection
Improvement (6108 - Res2007-177).
6.07) Resolution Approving Construction Cooperative Agreement for Intersection
Improvement Project, County Road 61/47 (6108 - Res2007-178).
6.08) Resolution Awarding Contract for 2007 Sanitary Sewer Lining Project (7106 - Res2007-
179).
6.09) Resolution Awarding Bid for 2007 Crack Repair Program (7118E - Res2007-180).
6.10.1) Resolution Receiving Engineering Proposals and Designating the Engineer for 2008
Comprehensive Pan — Transportation Element (7120 - Res2007-181).
6.10.2) Resolution Receiving Engineering Proposals and Designating the Engineer for 2008
Comprehensive Plan for Water Supply and Distribution Plan and Wastewater Plan Elements
7121 — Res2007-182).
6.11) Resolution Approving State of Minnesota Agency Agreement between Department of
Transportation and City of Plymouth for Operation of Five Traffic Signals on Vicksburg Lane at
32nd Avenue, 35th Avenue, and 36th Avenue and on Fernbrook Lane at 27th Avenue and Harbor
Lane (1013 - Res2007-183).
6.12) Resolution Awarding Contract for 2007 Temporary Overlay Project (7123 — Res2007-
184).
6.13.1) Resolution Approving Final Release of Financial Guarantee for Sandpiper Ponds
Addition (97089 - Res2007-185).
6.13.2) Resolution Approving Final Release of Financial Guarantee for Plum Tree East 5th
Addition (20084 - Res2007-186).
6.13.3) Resolution. Approving Final Release of Financial Guarantee for Plum Tree East 6th
Addition (2001015 - Res2007-187).
6.13.4) Resolution Approving Final Release of Financial Guarantee for Plum Tree East 8th
Addition (2002032 - Res2007-188).
6.14) Resolution Approving Termination of Water Quality Pond Maintenance Agreement for
Bass Creek Business Park Addition (90080 — Res2007-189).
6.15) Resolution Approving Encroachment Agreement for Structures within the Fields of
Nanterre Development (Res2007-190).
6.16) (This item was removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under General Business as
item No. 8.00).
Proposed Council Minutes
Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007
Page 4 of 8
6.17) Ordinance Amending Chapter 20 of the Plymouth City Code Concerning Shade Tree
Disease Control (Ord2007-08).
6.18) Resolution Approving Renewal of Lawful Gambling License of Plymouth Lions Club,
Inc. (Res2007-191).
6.19) (This item was removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under General Business as
item No. 8.04).
6.20) Resolution Repealing Various Policies (Res2007-192).
6.21) Resolution Approving Change Order No. 7 and No. 8 for Plymouth Metrolink Station 73
Transit Facility (3125 — Res2007-193) and a Resolution Approving Project Budget Amendment
for Plymouth Metrolink Station 73 Transit Facility (3125 — Res2007-203).
6.22) Resolution Approving Acquisition Agreement for Parcel No. 11 (PIN 22-118-22-23-0016
and 00 17) for Fernbrook Lane Improvements (10 13 — Res2007-194).
6.23) Resolution Approving Amended Development Contract for Plymouth Crossroads Station
Res2007-195).
Motion carried to approve the Consent Agenda.
Public Hearings
7.01) 3.2 On -Sale Liquor License for Uncle Franky's,10160 6th Avenue North
City Clerk Engdahl reported on the request of L.E.N.J., LLC, d/b/a Uncle Franky's, 10160 6th
Avenue North, for 3.2 On Sale Liquor License.
Mayor Slavik opened the public hearing for testimony.
There being no one wishing to appear before the Council to give testimony, Mayor Slavik
declared the public hearing closed.
er Bildsoe. to
a Resolution A
North (Res2007-196). With all members voting in favor, the motion carried.
7.02) Vacation of 31St Avenue as Platted within Mapledell 1St Addition
Public Works Director Cote reported on the proposed Vacation. He noted an alternative
Resolution to delete reference made to a future trail easement.
Proposed Council Minutes
Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007
Page 5 of 8
Mayor Slavik opened the public hearing for testimony.
Robert Tribbenbach, 16520 30th Avenue North, requested that the easement be vacated for
security of his property.
Bev Moos, 16540 30th Avenue North, stated she didn't know that the 25 foot trail aspect was
originally included with this Vacation request, and there is no trail in the vicinity and no notation
in the Comprehensive Plan for a trail. She suggested there be a trail on the 33 acres that the City
owns.
There being no one else wishing to appear before the Council to give testimony, Mayor Slavik
declared the public hearing closed.
No action was taken at this time, and this item was discussed under item No. 8.01..
General Business
8.00) Contamination Cleanup Grant Applications with Metropolitan Council,
Department of Employee and Economic Development, and Hennepin County for Bassett
Creek Office Centre
Aaron Crohn 10205 27th Avenue North, stated the developer should be responsible for the entire
clean up costs of this site rather than utilizing grant funds.
City Manager Ahrens stated the contamination on this site isn't a concern unless the site is
developed. The developer would provide a 25% match for the grant funds, and if the grants
would be awarded, but the project didn't proceed, then the grant funds wouldn't be used.
Motion was made by Councilmember Black, and seconded by Councilmember Hewitt, to adopt a
Resolution Authorizing Application for the Hennepin County Department of Environmental
Services Environmental Response Fund for Bassett Creek Office Centre (Res2007-197),,
Resolution Authorizing Application for the Tax Base Revitalization Account for Bassett Creek
Office Centre (Res2007-198), and a Resolution Approving the Application, Committing
Match and Authorizing Contract Signatures for the Department of Employee and Economic
Development's Contamination Cleanup Grant Program on Behalf of JNA 55, LLC (Res2007-
199). With all members voting in favor, the motion carried.
8.01) Rezoning Property located at 3120 Dunkirk Lane and Preliminary Plat Approval
for "Dunkirk Addition" (Gonyea Development — 2007002)
Community Development Director Juetten gave an overview of this project. Planning
Commission reviewed the Council's suggestion to consider RSF-1 zoning which would be
consistent with the areas to the west and south of the subject property. The Planning
Commission confirmed their original recommendation for RSF-2 zoning.
Proposed Council Minutes
Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007
Page 6 of 8
Mace Prutzenreuter, 3225 Everest Lane North, requested RSF-1 zoning of this site.
Tom Gonyea, applicant, noted correspondence sent to the City requesting RSF-2 zoning.
Tom Archbold, 16915 32"d Avenue, voiced his support for RSF-1 zoning as it would be
consistent with adjacent neighborhoods He acknowledged that some of the existing properties
don't meet all the requirements of RSF-1 zoning, but the density levels would be different. If the
subject property would be rezoned RSF-2, the homes would be very close together.
Councilmembers Willis, Murdock, and Hewitt voiced their support for RSF-1 zoning which they
felt would keep this property in character with adjacent neighborhoods. It was noted that there
would be 10 lots with RSF-2 zoning, and there would be one to two lots less with RSF-1 zoning.
Motion was made by Councilmember Willis, and seconded by Councilmember Hewitt, to adopt
an Ordinance Rezoning 3120 Dunkirk Lane from FRD to RSF-1 (2007002 - Ord2007-09
Resolution ApprovingFindingsindings of Fact for Rezoning of Property Presently Addressed as 3120
Dunkirk Lane North (2007002 — Res2007-200).
Discussion was held on less park dedication funds and land with RSF-1 zoning, streets and trails
being used as transition between RSF-1 and RSF-2 areas, and the Comprehensive Plan allowing
for RSF-2 zoning.
Mr. Archbold reiterated his concern of the closeness of the homes if the subject property is
rezoned RSF-2. He stated in talking to the developer, there. would be no land dedication with
this development for parks, but rather park dedication funds.
Mr. Gonyea explained he was informed that the City could take a percentage of land or money
for park purposes. Based on his experience with similar developments in other cities, he didn't
feel there was any deal that he could broker. He reiterated his preference for RSF-2 zoning with
10 lots as that is what the Comprehensive Plan allows.
There being no further discussion, the Council voted on the main motion. With all members
voting in favor but Black, the motion carried.
Motion was made by Councilmember Black, and seconded by Councilmember Willis, to table
action on the RSF-2 rezoning request and direct staff to prepare findings of fact denying R SF -2
zoning, and tabling action on the preliminary plat for Dunkirk Addition until May 8. With all
members voting in favor, the motion carried.
Motion was made by Councilmember Willis, and seconded by Councilmember Bildsoe, to
approve the alternate Resolution Authorizing the Vacation of 31St Avenue Right -of -Way as
Platted in Mapledell First Addition (Res2007-201) (deleted future trail easement). With all
members voting in favor, the motion carried.
8.02) City Center Options
Proposed Council Minutes
Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007
Page 7 of 8
Community Development Director Juetten reported on options contained in the packet materials
for the City Center.
The majority of the Council stated they preferred`Option 3 which is a finer street grid option that
included pedestrian enhancements and roadway improvements.
Motion was made by Councilmember Hewitt, and seconded by Councilmember Murdock, to
adopt an Interim Ordinance Temporarily Prohibiting Development in a Designated Area of the
City (for the entire City Center bordered b Highway 55 to the south, Vicksburg Lane to the
west, Plymouth Boulevard to the east, and Rockford Road to the North) (Ord2007-10).
A brief discussion was held on the Hennepin County Library project, and if this action could
delay that project. Councilmember Bildsoe volunteered to accompany staff when they discuss
the library with the County, and he'll report back to the Council.
There being no further discussion and with all members voting in favor but Black, the motion
carried.
8.03) Set Future Study Sessions
Without objection, the Council changed the start time of the May 8 Study Session from 6:00 p.m.
to 5:30 p.m. and added to the agenda a preliminary 2008-2009 budget discussion. In addition,
the Council changed the start time of the May 22 Study Session from 6:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. and
added to the agenda an update with the City Manager.
8.04) Application to Extend the Licensed Premises for Joe Senser's of Plymouth d/b/a Joe
Senser's Sports Grill and Bar, 16005 County Road 24
The Council held a discussion with.Mike Hrudka, from Joe Senser's, regarding the proposed
outdoor seating area and the proposed 4' 9" distance from the fence of the outdoor area to.the
curb. Some of the Councilmembers felt this was too narrow for pedestrian, handicap, and bike
traffic and suggested that a row or two of the proposed seating be removed to increase this
distance. The suggestion was also made to install wheel stops at those parking spaces adjacent to
the business to discourage vehicles from encroaching onto the sidewalk.
Motion was made by Mayor Slavik, and seconded by Councilmember Willis, to increase the
distance from the outdoor seating to the curb six feet and to install wheel stops. With all
members voting in favor but Hewitt and Black, the motion carried.
Reports and Staff Recommendations
9.1) Legislative Update
Mayor Slavik reported on a letter received encouraging the City to support transportation
funding. The Council directed staff to send correspondence to area legislators supporting
Proposed Council Minutes
Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007
Page 8 of 8
transportation funding.
Adjournment
Mayor Slavik adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:25 p.m.
Sandra R. Engdahl, City Clerk
Agenda Number:
CIWOF PLYMOUTH''„
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager .
FROM: Jean McGann, Director of Administrative Services
SUBJECT: Disbursements
DATE: May 1, 2007 for the City Council Meeting May 8, 2007
1. PROPOSED MOTION: To adopt the attached resolution approving the disbursements for
the period ending April 28, 2007.
2. DISCUSSION: Shown below is a listing of disbursements for the various funds for the
period ending April 28, 2007.
Anchor Bank — Check Register
General & Special Revenue
Construction & Debt Service
Enterprise & Internal Service
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
Check Register Total
Anchor Bank — Housing Assistance Payments
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
GRAND TOTAL FOR ALL FUNDS
247,584.42
87,093.10
665,623.07
282.00
1,000,582.59
2,850.38
1,003,432.97
3. RECOMMENDATION: I hereby approvethe attached listing of disbursements and
recommend same for payment.
ML,8wk-x Zi -
Jean McGann
Invoice Expense Distribution for Period Ended 04/28/07
FUND 101 General Fund
201 Recreation Fund
202 Parker's Lake Cemetery Maint
203 Transit System Fund
204 Community Development Fund
205 Public Safety Grants
207 Economic Development Fund
208 Lawful Gambling
220 Comm Dev Block Grant Fund
250 HRA Section 8 Fund
251 HRA General Fund
401. General Capital Projects Fund
402 Minnesota State Aid Fund
404 Building & Equipment Rev. Fund
406 Park Replacement Fund
407 Infrasturcture Replacement Fund
408 Project Administration Fund
409 Park Construction
411 Capital Improvement Fund
421 Utility Trunk Fund
422 Improvement Project Construction
426 Shenandoah Administration
430 Public Safety Expansion
431 HRA Senior Apt. Constr Fund
440 Utility Trunk System Expansion
446 Water Sewer Construction
447 Enterprise -Other Construction
471 TIF # 7-2 O.S. (Const)
472 TIF # 7-3 P.O.S. (Const)
473 TIF #7-4 P.T.P (Const)
474 TIF Dev. Exp. Bonds 95 (Const)
475 TIF # 7-5 Rottlund (Const)
476 TIF #7-6 Continental (Const)
478 TIF #7-7 Stonecreek ('Const)
479 TIF #7-8 Shops @ Plymouth Creek
480 TIF HRA Senior Apt. Constr. Fund
481 TIF HRA 1-3 Crossroads Station
501 Water Fund
502 Sewer Fund
503 -Solid Waste Management Fund
504 Ice Center Fund
505 Water Resources Fund
507 Field House Fund
601 Central Services Fund
602 Central Equipment Fund
603 Risk Management Fund
604 Design Engineering Fund
605 Employee Benefits Fund
606 Information Technology Fund
607 Public Facilities Fund
720 Senior Housing Bond Trustee
186,372.37
46,953.78
0.00
9,513.27
0.00
1,960.00
0.00
0.00
2,785.00
3,132.38
0.00
15,000.00
0.00
2,415.74
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5,822.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
59,264.96
1,789.74
0.00
0.00
375.00
0.00
375.00
375.00
375.00
375.00
550.00
375.00
109,379.56
31,027.89
100.00
32,481.98
172,793.24
399.22
0.00
45,967.07
5,079.59
12.49
171,629.06
50,115.14
46,637.83
0.00
Total Invoice Expense Distribution: $ 1,003,432.97
Check Register Page 1 of 17
Date: 4/30/2007
Time: 7:38:34 AM
http://cityintemal/asp/asp_reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F 15 %2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
COUNCIL REPORT - CHECK
REGISTER
4/15/2007 Through 4/28/2007
Vendor Name/ Invoice Amount Check # Check Amoui
Invoice Description'
Abrakadoodle
3.19/4.30 Twoosy/Mini Doodlers 1,152.00 89426 1,152.00
Active Network Inc
1/2 pymtn Class Conversion to 400.00 89414 400.00
Adam's Pest Control, Inc.
Apr-Jun07 WTP 1 Pest Control 79.88 89564 79.88
Ahrens, Laurie
Cub/Empl recognition bags. 154.02 89613 154.02
Airgas North Central
89415 68.12PD2LSPExhalValveAssm. 44.00
PD Hazmat Hndlg Medical Mtnc 24.12
All Star Wireless
63.89 89416 63.89Battery
Allied Waste Services.
89417 526.213.29.07 PM/PW Rubbish Rmvl 526.21
American Fastener
25 5/8-11x1 1/4 Hx Cap 42 5/8- 123.45 89418 123.45
American Messaging 89565 14.55Apr072PMpagerrental14.55
American Public Wks. Assoc.
G Smith/Snow Conf 4.22/4.25 160.00 89419 160.00
American Supply Group Inc
PW 3cs 6oz Foam cups 56.58 89420 56.58
Anchor Paper
2500 11x17 Copy Paper 36.58 89421 1,190.26
200M copy paper 1,153.68
Anderson, Katherine
59.641389652AvNRefundUtility59.64 89480
Andy's Lawncare
Apr07 Snowplowing 527.85 89566 527.85
Appletree Institute
May07 Employee Medical Ins 161,277.00 89422 161,277.00
Artistic Moments
4.23 Sand Art Painting 100.00 89612 100.00
Astech Corp
3.30 20.79m Patch Grit 812.58 89423 812.58
http://cityintemal/asp/asp_reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F 15 %2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 2 of 17
Automated Entrance Products
89433 $4,659.20
89424 41.60Plasticbollardcap41.60
Elm Crk Plyfld UP 182.33
BCA./Bureau of Criminal
115.04
ICE ARENA UB 1,162.38
Pregler/4.3 Intoxilyzer 5000 r 50.00 89425 100.00
Groth 4.3 lntoxilyzer 5000 rec 50.00
Barr Engineering Co.
Proj7108E 1.27/2.23.07 3,685.50 89567 3,685.50
Barton Sand & Gravel Co.
89427 2,298.224.2/4.4 160.95tn CL5,W3/4 2,298.22
Bassett Creek Water Mgmnt
89568 166,672.0007Assessmentdues166,672.00
Best Access Systems
89569 22.88
PW 6 Keys cut 22.88
Birkholz, Corrine
4.10 MACA conf dinner/Hinckley 19.16 89575 19.16
Bolton & Menk Inc
Proj7103 Mai -07 retaining wall 1,126.00 89428 1,126.00
Boyer Trucks
Unit 278 07-19 latch asmbly 67.07 89570 67.07
Burnsville Fire Dept
4.21.07 FFI&FFII tower rental 150.00 89429 150.00
C & R Technology
PW test fiber 245.00 89532 930.38
CC install 2 voice/2 data loct 550.38
IC Fix Co Line problem SecSyst 135.00
C & R Technology
355.00 89646 355.00
WTP run cable
CDW Government Inc
89430 650.97LVO3yronsite219.00
MS GSA Publisher 2007 106.08
Viewsonic 20 LCD DVI; Sony 16x 325.89
CDW Government Inc
89571 1,650.99
Viewsonic 17 LCD DVI 576.15
4 MS Office 2006 1,074.84
CenterPoint Energy/Minnegasco 89572 41,866.30
2.19/3.23 Heating bill 41,866.30
Child Safety Solutions Inc 89431 622.50
600 Safety activity books 622.50
City of Maple Grove
690.58 89432 690.58
PD Leadership Academy
City of Plymouth/Sewer & Water
89433 $4,659.20
10905 State Hwy 55 65.32
Hilde Center UB 7.09
Elm Crk Plyfld UP 182.33
Ice Arena/Irrig UB 115.04
ICE ARENA UB 1,162.38
PS Utility bill 171.02
Bass Lake Playfield UB 121.44
http://cityintemal/asp/asp reports/financel.cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 3 of 17
Parkers Playfield UB 119.24
FS 3 UB 135.25
Pavilion UB 46.65
Zachary Pk UB 121.81
FS2 UB 146.75
PW UB 571.52
CC UB 367.82
E Med Lake UB 42.98
Plym Jr Hi Plyfld UB 122.54
La Compte Pk UB 140.16
Oakwood Pk UB 129.15
Plym Crk Pk UB 148.06
HS UB 7.46
FS1 UB 94.92
Activity Field Hse UB 640.27
City of Wayzata
Title Plates Tabs Unit 150 1,388.08 89573 1,388:08
Commercial Plumbing & Heating
13415 WaterTower Vd Pmt Refund 1,102.00 89434 1,102.00
Commercial Refrigeration LLC.
12.1.06 IC time delay relay,sp 218.76 89435 218.76
Communities in Collaboration
07 Support funding 5,887.00 89574 5,887.00
Cote, Doran
4.18.07 Sub Rate Auth meeting 10.00 89446 10.00
Country Flags
I USA Eagle,1 MN Spear oak pol 374.88 89436 374.88
Cretex Concrete Products North
2.5tt concrete 295.93 89576 295.93
DPC Industries Inc/PO 200129
4456gl Sodium Hypo @ .6322/gl 2,837.08 89437 2,837.08
DSS Commercial Inc
4.4/4.12 Ice Melt/Transit shel 774.00 89577 774.00
DSS Commercial Inc
1.31/2.26 Snow maint/var shelt 6,642.00 89681 6,642.00
Dalbec Roofing Inc
PS 3.29.roof leak repair 427.20 89438 427.20
Dalco
Rtn IOcs 290092 PCC towels 529.95) 89578 241.54
PCC 10cs hand towels 771.49
Data Recognition Corporation
Mar07 UB processing 1,643.26 89439 1,643.26
Designwrite Studios
Mar-Apr07 Newsletter 901.25 89441 901.25
Dippin Dots
3.9/3.29 IC concessions 1,725.00 89580 1,725.00
Discount School Supply 89443 439.87Varplaygroundprogramsplys439.87
Ditter Cooling & Heating
http://cityinternal/asp/asp_reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F 15 %2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 4 of 17
4170 Polaris/Fumace/water htr 2,785.00 89444 2,785.00
Drasher, Christine
Park and Rec Refund 54.00 89581 54.00
Dreelan, Dave
Southview Garden Ctr/burn mtrl 47.93 89579 47.93
E H Renner & Sons
Proj7109 #1 Well 2&5 58,968.64 89447 58,968.64
ESS Bros.
60 307,60 309 adj rings,30 rsr 12,524.40 89582 12,524.40
Earl F. Andersen Inc.
PW Dog Pk Signs Egan&Plymouth 278.03 89583 278.03
Edina Realty Relocat. Atn Kim
11300 48th Av N Refund Utility 41.70 89448 41.70
Ehlers & Associates Inc
3.12/3.26 TIF Financial mgmnt 2,537.50 89584 2,800.00
3.29'06 TIF updates to OSA 262.50
Electrical Installation & Mnt
Ind Prk Blvd @ Xenium light o 789.00 89449. 2,352.42
Th 55/Peony-Niagar/CSAH/Xenium 825.00
Vicksburg @ CSAH 9 180.00
CSAH 6 @ th E side of bridge 333.42
Parkers Lk Pk Light Repair 225.00
Electrical Installation & Mnt
St Lt Rep 169 @ Betty Crocker 142.00 89585 142.00
Emergency Apparatus Maint.
Tower 11 #31 annual cklist 969.07 89586 1,888.73
Aerial 21 #20 annual cklist 919.66
Evenflo
50 Lock clip,10 Chase Booster, 1,598.03 89587 2,003.28
1 Eurotrek,I Aura Elite,I Maje 405.25
Everett, Lily
Park and Rec Refund 50.00 89588 50.00
Express Messenger
3.19/3.26 Attorney P/U 37.80 89450 37.80
Express Messenger
4.2/4.9 Attorney P/U 37.80 89589 37.80
F&J Speciality Products Inc
10 Zeolite Cartridge 527.69 89451 527.69
Farris, Roberta Lynn
Payroll Generated Invoice 443.54 89531 443.54
Fastenal
50-S/S HCS 3/4 100 1/2 3/4 10 200.47 89452 200.47
Fedex
3.1.07 Forestry/Tree Care Ind 32.81 89453 32.81
Ferguson Enterprises Inc
1/4 x 2 Piping parts 24.39 89454 158.53
http://cityintemal/asp/asp reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 5 of 17
1/4 x 2 Piping parts $134.14
First Mortgage Strategies Grp
Unit 144&145 repairs
14100 53 Ave Refund Utility 56.43 89455 56.43
First State Tire Recycling
Heat gun/jacket highvis 145.02 89461 1,977.45
PW Tire disposal 51.87 89590 51.87
Flexible Pipe Tool Co.
Cr 9328097994 48 filter 183.52)
UV Pkg Kit Cyl Gskt Gge HsR1Kt 841.13 89591 967.12
Flt Hs 4 Pipe Hs Clmps Hs Reel 125.99
Handle pick/pry bar/chisel'
Fournier, Diane
38 4MH50 Respirators 708.23
4.1140 Mileage ScienceMuseum 19.40 89442 19.40
Fox, Karen
186.38
Grainger
Park and Ree Refund 35.00 89592. 35.00
Frick, Robert
6-1000W Lamps 194.83
Park and Ree Refund 2.00 89593 2.00
G & K Service Inc
Zach Plnt Adj Wrch Set Plr St 125.68
3.26.07 CC rug service 78.71 89456 430.93
Public Works Uniform Rntl 352.22
48 Pleated Filters; 5 Fuses
G & K Service Inc
12 Ear Mfs 200 Plugs Sfty Can 321.87
PW Uniform Rental 353.45 89594 353.45
General Office Products Co.
2 Work Stations 2,079.53 89457 6,585.41
6 Leap Chairs 4,246.00
Office Mac 259.88
Girard, Wendi
Park and Ree Refund 63.00 89458 63.00
Girl Scouts of Greater Minneap
Park and Ree Refund 300.00 89596 300.00
Gopher State One -Call, Inc.
Mar07 13 CC locates 18.85 89459 894.65.
Mar07 604 SW Locates 875.80
Grafix Shoppe
Unit 144&145 repairs 118.42 89460 118.42
Grainger
Heat gun/jacket highvis 145.02 89461 1,977.45
2 Ballasts; Drum storage rack 115.67
See cr9332504951 48 fltr/Ibupr 204.78
Cr 9328097994 48 filter 183.52)
Srvc Solenoid Vlv 560.06
36 F32T8/SP41/ECO Lamps 44.47
Handle pick/pry bar/chisel' 103.17
38 4MH50 Respirators 708.23
5 4MH50 Respirators 93.19
10 4MH51 Respirators 186.38
Grainger
Pk 50 Cable Ties 18in 486.65 .89597 2,021.90
6-1000W Lamps 194.83
100 Pk Cable Ties 11.5in 153.26
11.4 in Cable Ties 100Pk 498.57
Zach Plnt Adj Wrch Set Plr St 125.68
Multifold Towel Pk4000 33.74
Liftstation Indicator Bulbs 10 5.75
48 Pleated Filters; 5 Fuses 201.55
12 Ear Mfs 200 Plugs Sfty Can 321.87
http:Hcityintemal/asp/asp-reports/finance/ce -cheek. asp?sFroniD ate=4 %2F 15 %2F2 007 &s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 6 of 17
Greenway Lawn Maint Inc
89602 10,360.47
Apr07 Snowplowing 1,300.00 89462 1,300.00
Grissom, Dolores
10010 32 Av N Refund Utility 12.03 89445 12.03
GroundsCare Inc.
Apr07 Snowplowing 1,445.00 89598 1,445..00
HD Supply Waterworks LTD
5.00
4x 1/8 flg ffrr gasket 13.84 89463 1,214.10
50 ea SS MJ and THd Bolt Nut 433.46
8 MJ RW GATE VLV OL 766.80
HD Supply Waterworks LTD
4.00
See cr 4999818/rtn 12 flg 437.19 89599 28.23
Cr inv 4982770/rtn 12 figs 408.96)
HP - equipment
3.28/4.27 Surestore Tape Drive 483.00 89471 483.00
HP 3, LLC
R200608479 6.14.06 erosion ref 1,000.00 89600 1,000.00
Halvorson, Lisa
Park and Rec Refund 54.00 89464 54.00
Hawkins Water Treatment
520gl Carusol 20 @9.25/gl 4,825.50 89465 5,010.15
24 Rust -Go 184.65
Hawkins Water Treatment
89602 10,360.471000glHydrof,700gl C9,520gl C 10,360.47
Hawkins, Ash,Baptie & Co.
Apr07 Section 8 Acctg sery 212.00 89603 212.00
Healthfund of Minnesota
Payroll Generated Invoice 6.50 89466 112.50
Payroll Generated Invoice 5.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 2.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 61.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 4.00
Payroll Generated ILtvoice 5.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 10.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 5.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 3.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 10.00
Hennepin Chiefs Assoc
89467 350.00Hendrickson/3.22 Strategies fo 100.00
Peterson 4.9 Countering corrup 75.00
Peterson 3.22 Strategies for t 100.00
Hendrickson 4.9 Countering 75.00
Hennepin Co Info Tech Dept
89604 11,186.45Mar07FireRadioLease3,532.83
Mar07 PD MDC's,Radio lease 7,653.62
Hennepin County /NW #8121
Mar07 4.43tn Waste Hauling 176.22 89605 176.22
Hennepin County Public Records
Acct267 replenish for doc copy 228.00 89469 228.00
http://cityintemal/asplasp_reports/finance/cc_check:asp?sFroniDate=4%2F15 %2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 7 of 17
Hennepin County Treas/Prop Tax
07 1st 1/2 Property taxes 777.43 89606 777.43
Hewlett Packard/maint-support
3.28/4.27.07 Uniform 2 Maint 951.31 89470 951.31
Hildi Inc
Mar07 GASB45 Acturarial Valu 3,200.00 89607 3,200.00
Hooley, Cathy
Park and Rec Refund 5.00 89608 5.00
Howard R Green Company 89472 34,066.03Proj51103.2.07 Pressure study 34,066.03
Hydro Metering Technology
3-Itron integ rtr/ert 469.13 89473 469.13
IAAO
Olsson/Atlanta conf 9.9/9.12 500.00 89474 500.00
ICMA
07 Ahrens Membership 1,039.06 89475 1,039.06
Interfaith Outreach&Comm.Ptnrs
07 CONECT funding 10,100.00 89609 30,713.00
07 Outreach city funding 20,613.00
It's A Pets Life
3.2 K-9 dog food 36.43 89476 72.86
2.6 K-9 dog food 36.43
Itron Inc
Advantage shipping program for, 78.28 89477 78.28
K & S Engraving 89479 8.95
Lanik gear rack plate/tape 8.95
Katolight Corporation
89482 550.0007CCPMprevmaint550.00
Kochevar, Mary 89611 2.00ParkandRecRefund2.00.
LSC Resource Inc
89483 617.7025,000 Business card shells 617.70
Law Enforce Labor Serv./Union
89484 1,238.53PayrollGeneratedInvoice138.25
Payroll Generated Invoice 14.03
Payroll Generated Invoice 118.50
Payroll Generated Invoice 39.50
Payroll Generated Invoice 928.25
League of Minnesota Cities
89485 340.00
Murdock/Annual Newly Elec Earl 240.00
Tiegs/LCW 2007 20.00
Franz/Plekkenpol-LCW 2007 40.00
Leitner/Lindman-LCW 2007 40.00
Let's Get Graphic
IC Restroom sign&clear vinyl 133.19 89614 133.19
Loffler Companies Inc
89486 99.68CanonFX7TonerforFax99.68
http://cityintemal/asp/asp_reports/finance/cc_cheek.asp?sFronaDate=4%2F 15 %2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 8 of 17
Logis
Entrust SSL 596.40 89615 22,870.21
Network WO #21106 48.00
12.31.06 Expert Observer main 563.81
Feb07 PD CAD,GIS,Intemet,Rcrd 10,831.00
Mar07 PD CAD,GIS,Intemet,Rcrd 10,831.00
Long, James
4.10 dinner/MACA conf/Hinckley 19.16 89478 19.16
MPWA
Moberg/5.9/5.11 Spring conf 195.00 89616 195.00
MAAO/MN Assoc Assess Officers
5 Registr Summer seminars -Jan, 550.00 89487 550.00
MES Inc
Groves red rack wall mount 1,179.68 89488 1,179.68
MES Inc
FD Board PCB Standard 21.23 89617 21.23
MN AFSCME Council #5
Payroll Generated Invoice 68.52 89490 2,344.28
Payroll Generated Invoice 38.73
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.85
Payroll Generated Invoice 38.73
Payroll Generated Invoice 38.73
Payroll Generated Invoice 34.26
Payroll Generated Invoice 17.13
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 18.74
Payroll Generated Invoice 28.04
Payroll Generated Invoice 73.35
Payroll Generated Invoice 51.64
Payroll Generated Invoice 102.78
Payroll Generated Invoice 9.68
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 119.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 17.13
Payroll Generated Invoice 73.43
Payroll Generated Invoice 281.10
Payroll Generated Invoice 68.52
Payroll Generated Invoice 206.14
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.9I
Payroll Generated Invoice 38.73
Payroll Generated Invoice 17.13
Payroll Generated Invoice 38.73
Payroll Generated Invoice 34.26
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 298.23
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 18.74
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 34.26
Payroll Generated Invoice 18.74
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 85.65
Payroll Generated Invoice 25.82
Payroll Generated Invoice 51.39
Payroll Generated Invoice 188.43
Payroll Generated Invoice 18.74
Payroll Generated Invoice 17.13
Payroll Generated Invoice 51.39
Payroll Generated Invoice 17.13
MN AFSCME Council #5
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.91 89618 399.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 151.30
Payroll Generated Invoice 9.68
Payroll Generated Invoice 15.13
http://cityintemal/asp/asp reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFroniDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 9 of 17
Payroll Generated Invoice 18.74
Payroll Generated Invoice 105.91
Payroll Generated Invoice 15.13
Payroll Generated Invoice 60.52
Payroll Generated Invoice 9.68
MN Child Support Payment Ctr
Payroll Generated Invoice 455.00 89491 1,691.25
Payroll Generated Invoice 1,026.75
Payroll Generated Invoice 209.50 .
MN Dept of Health
3 Lic rnwls/Newberger "D" 69.00 89619 69.00
MN Dept of Natural Resources
Aquatic Plants permit to contr 750.00 89492 750.00
MN Environmental Fund
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00 89493 31.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 7.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 10.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 5.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 3.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 2.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
MN Municipal Utilities Assoc
Apr-Jun07 Safety Management 7,439.01 89620 7,439.01
MN Recreation & Park/CK ADDR
07 16 Bsktbl Team,4 berths . 816.00 89494 816.00
MN State Board of Assessors
08 5 License Rnwl/Bowman, 350.00 89495 350.00
MN State Horticultural Society
07 Buck Membership 60.00 89496 60.00
MacQueen Equip. Inc
Ign switch/key ign switch 243.98 89497 84.27
Ing switch 84.27
Cr inv2071959/ign swtch,key i 243.98)
Maintenance Experts Inc
CC UL/LL Everglazed Restrooms 915.90 89498 9,204.44
PCC Saniglazed Foors 8,212.22
Mar09CC Everglazed Floors 76.32
Maintenance Experts Inc
Apr07CC Everglaze Restroom 76.32 89621 76.32
Martin Marietta Materials
3.30 33.27tn Rip Rap. 566.92 89501 566.92
Metro Fire
Kit Chest Strap/Harness 41.21 89502 41.21
Cr inv 27475 rtn hose assy 61.40)
See cr 27646 rtn hose assy 61.40
Metro Garage Door Co.
FS2 Rplc door controllers 6,864.00 89503 6,864.00
Metro Sales Inc
PW 1 fax toner 148.68 89622 148.68
http://cityintemallasp/asp reports/finance/cc_cheek.asp?sFronLDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 10 of 17
Metro Water Conditioning Inc. 89504 265.36ICRinkA50# Solar 265.36
Metropolitan Regional Arts Cnc
Greupner/4.18 Arts Advocacy 101 25.00 89505 25.00
Michaud, Regina
4.13/4.24Sam's, I st Rate Securi 352.71 89644 352.71
Microsoft Technet
07 Technet renewal 532.19 89623 532.19
Midwest Energy Solutions 89683 10,577.05ICRinkBlighting10,577.05
Minnesota Conway 89506 88.22PDRechgDryChem; Ver Clr; Gg 88.22
Minnesota UC Fund
07 1st qtr Unemployment 26,013.60 89507. 26,013.60
Miracle Recreation Equipment
89624 329.15
I Wire mesh enclosure 329.15
Mobile Lock And Safe Co.
89625 16.04PD4CutKeys2AutoKeys16.04
Muzak
May07 Muzak 71.33 89626 71.33
My Gym Childrens Fitness Ctr
3.6/4.11.07 Fitness classes 1,I08.80 89508 1,108.80
Neopost Inc
4.'07/4.'08 Sorter/folder mach 1,407.00 89509 1,407.00
Nesbitt, Robert
4.2/4.13 MN Joint Analysis 1,960.00 89645 1,960.00
Newton, Marguerite
89499 32.483835OrchidLnNUtilityRefun32.48
Nextel Communications
89510 4,058.153.8/4.7.07 151 cell phones 4,058.15
Norby, Wayne
Reimb CDL Lic class A rnwl 19.00 89675 19.00
North Central Reforestation
89627 644.33
1000 Arbor Day seedlings 644.33
North Memorial Clinic
89628. 3,032.00
107 51 FF Spirometry testing 3,032.00
Northern Sanitary Supply Co 89512 1,250.20
IC-towels/laundry detergnt/enz 620.68
IC-bleach/10-tissue/12-urinal 629.52
Northern Sanitary Supply Co 89629 262.31
IC Glass Cleaner 6 Qts 54.00
PCC 24Degreas 12Citra 12 GlsCl 208.31
Northern Tool & Equipment
89601 287.53FuelNzlShutoffMechFlowMtr287.53
http:Hcityintemal/asp/asp_yeports/finance/ce - check. asp?sFroniD ate=4%2F 15 %2F2007 &s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 11 of 17
Northland Business Systems
10 -Mini cassette $73.53 89513 $73.53
Northwest Henn Human Svcs
07 Leadership Council Forum $1,500.00 89630 $1,500.00
Office Depot.
Paper brights
Envelope
Phone stand/dsk org/copy hdlr/
Post it notes
Optical mouse/adj wrist/cover
Clsp env
Tape w/disp/highltr/ltr fldr/p
Clsp envelope
Pncl shrpnr/ltr fldr/fldr tab/
Paper card
Battery/clips/perf pad/mrkr/ri
Bndr clps/rubbrbnds/hng fldr/p
Stl stand
Notebk clnr
Highltr/pens/pckge tape
Clsp env/copy hldr/mrkrs
Paper brights
Indx card/corrtape
Perf pad/perm mrkr/clp hldr
Od cdr
Pens
V file card/portfolio/perf pad
Literature hldr/key reel
Pckt file
note pad/easel/name badge/pape
Binder clips
Office Depot
Keyboard Drw, Mkrs, Stmp, Misc
Binder Card File Refill
PS - 12 Steno Pads
Desk Org, Sorter, Copy Holder
Bx Folders; Pens; Binders;
Wall Clock; Stplr; Markers
AA Bttry; File Box, 100 Folder
Lgl Div Class Folders
Self Inking Notary Stamp
Bookends 3 hole punch
750 File Labels
Envs; Folders; Post -it Flags
PW Pens; Pencils; Mrkrs; Leads
PS 12CD Files; 12Pk CD Sleeves
PS Envelopes; Address Book
PCC Pens, Staples, Corr Tape
IC - Bulk Roll Foam Tape
IC - 5pk Time Cards F/Ptr-4000
Partitioned Pocket Folders
Tape; Lgl Pads; Post -its
100 Pocket Folders
Stamp, XPL N05-131 3/16 x2
19.01
28.07
25.40
23.39
91.11
13.01
81.46
11.00
78.00
28.90
86.05
42.29
20.50
3.45
9.4.41
55.92
19.01
4.60
53.91
24.07
3.12
177.22
44.17
50.23
65.14
13.42
85.59
26.71
5.35
60.20
58.38
46.68
62.77
30.35
21.82
22.19
12.52
61.50
15.43
204.99
21.49
6.29
30.19.
29.13
8.00
31.44
106.50
18.63
89514
89631
1,156.86
966.15
Oil -Air Products, Inc.
4-6MJ-10MB 6400-6-10 4.95 89632 4.95
Ole and Lena's Garage Door Svc
PW install door 560.00 89633 4,431.48
PW new garage door 1,655.74 '.
PW install new garage door 2,215.74
On Site Sanitation
89515 131.793.10/3.30 PW 43.93
3.10/3.30 Dog Park 43.93
3.10/3.30 Ridgemont plyfld 43.93
http://cityinternaUasp/asp reports/finance/cc_check:asp?sFromDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s.... 4/30/2007
Check Register
Open Your Heart
Payroll Generated Invoice
Payroll Generated Invoice
Payroll Generated Invoice
Payroll Generated Invoice
Payroll Generated Invoice
Payroll Generated Invoice
Orbit Courier
4.10/4.11 Fr: Walser,MTI
Orrin Thompson Homes
16644 50 Ct N Utility Refund
6.00
1.00
25.00
2.00
1.00
10.00
29.16
20.08
89516
89634
89517
Page 12 of 17
45.00
29.16
20.08
Osborn, Kelly
Upgrade class "D" to "B" 11.00 89610 11.00
Owens Services Inc.
PCC Rep Wiring Rstrm Linkage 1,047.00 89518 12,142.00
PW Garage Rep Heat/Fan 885.00
PS Rep Rooftop Units 1, 2 241.00
PM Condemn Unit 1, Fire Unit 2 449.00
WTP2 Air flow problems 241.00
WTP2 Chlorine smell 657.00
WTP new unit heaters 7,445.00
CC Rpr Thge Vlv Problem 416.00
Well 14 - Prog'd Thermostat 189.00
CC Rep Switch Reset Adjust 572.00
PAM Oil
Oil filter/18: perform blade 100.13 89519 349.88
Top stud battery 180.30
AC battery 69.45
PAM Oil
PW AC 22 Winter Blade 40.60 89635 361.68
PW AC Battery 81.46
4 AC Durapack Oil Filters 41.15
2 AC Elements 6 Misc Filters 177.10
PW AC Elements 21.37
PLEAA
07 2 Memberships/Cox,Wettema 30.00 89520 30.00
PLEAA
B Cox/St Cloud conference 65.00 89636 65.00
PRISM
07 Contribution funding 14,000.00 89637 14,000.00
Panera Bread
3.14/3.23 CFMH,PD,EQC 530.24 89535 530.24
Park Nicollet Clinic
1.2/4.4 Employee physicals 3,432.38 89638 3,432.38
Petty Cash
4.20/4.21 Tree sale booth star 200.00 89521 200.00
Petty Cash
07 Pavilion concession cash 400.00 89522 400.00
Petty Cash
2.27/4.23 Prkng,vest rpr,tabs, 168.88 89639 1.68.88
Phasor Electric Company
PPR Install conduit alphavideo $174.10 89523 $3,371.95
http://cityintemal/asp/asp_reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F15 %2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 13 of 17
CC Motion Sns Photocell Power 1,661.65
FS2 Rewire Grg Door Opnrs 1,536.20
Postmaster/Misc
Util lockbox rental 868.00 89524 868.00
Printers Service Inc
IC 77in ice Knife Sharpening 54.00 89525 54.00
Printers Service Inc
IC Sharp 77in Ice Knife 54.00 89640 54.00
Quality Flow Systems
Rpr Flygt/rebuild kit,Greentre 1,086.97 89526 10,938.22
Greentree LS rplc rails/pump 9,851.25
Qwest
Apr07 FS 1 DSL 78.42 89641 159.96
Apr07 FS 2 DSL 81.54
Qwest Corporation
Snowplow damage pedestal 266.45 89642 619.91
12.13.04 sewer excavate damage 353.46
R & R Specialties/ Somerset WI.
Brush,water cloth sprdr 166.83 89528 166.83
R M R Services Inc
Feb07,5595 Meter reads 2,517.75 89527 2,517.75
Reed Business Information
Prcj7106 3.26.07 legal ad 102.58 89529 205.16
Proj7123 3.26.07 Legal ad 102.58
Reed Business Information
Proj7107 4.2.07 legal ad 149.41 89643 677.92
Proj7123 4.2.07 legal ad 102.58
Prcj7101 4.2.07 legal ad 147.18
Proj7106 4.2.07 legal ad 102.58
Proj6108 4.2.07 legal ad 176.17
River City Data Inc
06 Bldg Permit Insp microfich 862.40 89530 967.95
Agendas,minutes,resolutions 105.55
Rose Companies
3.1/3.2.07 Snowplowing 3,900.00 89550 3,900.00
Rosedale Chev
Unit 560'07 GMC 5500 Chassis 36,778.95 89533 36,778.95
Rouillard, Jackie
Park and Rec Refund 35.00 89647 35.00
S & S Tree&Horticultural Spec
3.21.07 Prune/Remove boxelders 478.40 89534 478.40
Safe Kids/NMHC
180 Std,60 Multisport helmets 2,700.00 89511 2,700.00
Sanco Cleaning supplies
IC cleaning grout safe gallon 234.89 89648 234.89
Scharber & Sons/Long Lake
Inner air/micronic 22.55 89649 25.43
1 Hose 2.88
http://cityintemallasp/asp reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFroniDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 14 of 17
Scherer Printing
10,600 Assessors door hngrs 910.58 89650 910.58
Schumaker, Jacquelyn
3755 Arrowood In utility refun 30.55 89682 30.55
Selectaccount
Mar07 Participant 531.65 89536 531.65
Senior Community Services
07 1st 1/2 Staff&Rockers 35,398.00 89537 35,398.00
Senior Community Services
07 Sr Outreach funding 14,500.00 89651 20,800.00
07 Sr HOME city funding 6,300.00
Short -Elliott -Hendrickson
Proj2032 Mar07 WTP's Expansn 641.41 89538 641.41
Short -Elliott -Hendrickson
R206617974 Mar07 9.29.06 41.28 89652 192.27
R200607943 Mar07 6.7.06 150.99
Showcase Promotional Advertsng
PCC 10 T's 203.50 89653 203.50
Smith, Gary
4.23/4.27 Snow Conf parking 30.00 89595 30.00
Sporting Goods, Inc. 89539 3,330.9890dz12", 1 8d 11" softballs 3,330.98
Sprint
3.15/4.14 31MDC computer cards 1,439.74 89654 1,491.16
3.15/4.14 Voller 612.490.8482 51.42
St Joseph Equipment,Inc
70 ALI B 1050A TOOTH 307:15 89540 307.15
St Joseph Equipment Inc
60 ALI B 1050A TOOTH 263.27 89655 263.27
Star Tribune
3.19/3.25 Budget analysis,Summ 3,750.00 89541 3,855.00
3.21 Twin West Banner 45.00
3.21.07 Yard&Garden Expo 60.00
State Chemical Co
89542 733.88PM2csgraffitinnvr,2cs SOSJ 733.88
State Chemical Co
346.96. 89656 346.96CC3csFragrance
State of Minnesota
Jan-Mar07 TID,CJDN Connect 870.00 89440 870.00
Streicher's Inc
Wedge and 56" Easy Kit 98.93 89543. 344.05
Police Tactical Outer Carrier 139.95
Munitions Butt Stock Caddy 41.38
2Inflate Wedges; Big Easy Kit 63.79
Sun Newspapers/Notices
89544 412.92PROJ7106SanSewerLining91.16
http://cityinternal/asp/asp_reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F 15 %2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 15 of 17
PROJ 7123 Temp Overlay 85.80
Proj 7118E Crack Rep Bids 96.53
MTKA STREET REHAB Bids 139.43
Sun Newspapers/Notices
PROJ 6108 CSAH61 CR 47 Imprvmt 117.98 89657 371.81
PROJ Vacate3l Ave ROW 32.18
Proj 1013 Pub Hrg Ntc Fernbrk 171.60
File 2007020 Ping Com Pub Hrg 50.05
Superior Ford, Inc.
Unit136 cracked lens 32.71 89545 32.71
SureFire
lbx of 72 Lithium batteries 113.70 89546 113.70
T C Field & Company
Feb-Apr07 Prop Casualty Fee 1,637.00 89547 1,637.00
T -Mobile
Apr07 GPS cell 49.99 89658 49.99
TDS Metrocom
Apr07 Parks CC 3,630.39 89659 3,630.39
TKDA & Associates Inc
2.25/3.31 Leak locates 1,794.00 89660 1,794.00
TMS Construction
Proj6104 #2/Final retainwall 3,492.93 89548 3,492.93
Taho Sportswear
P & R t -shirts -166 579.34 89661 579.34
Tee's Plus
1 DARE Windshirt 41.00 89549 41.00
Teens Alone
07 City funding 2,000.00 89662 2,000.00
Three Rivers Park District
8.11.07 PFD reservation 234.74 89663 234.74
ThyssenKrupp Elevator
IC 4.1.07 elev trap riders 255.76 89664 255.76
Tombers, Tobina
Target/Batteries P&R Prog007 8.69 89684 8.69
Tony's Welding & Fabrication
PCC revolve door repairs 162.50 89551 162.50
Total Control Systems Inc
3.25 Mission Farms LS/prom 1,016.82 89552 1,016.82
Truenow, Irma
Park and Rec Refund 4.00 89665 4.00
Truenow, Irma
Park and Rec Refund 2.00 89666 2.00
Turfwerks LLC
SMI34 10101 $36.27 89553 $36.27
Twinwest Chamber of Commerce
http://cityintemal/asp/asp reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFroniDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 16 of 17
Mar07 Ahrens/Juetten mtg $30.00 89554 $30.00
USPCA Region 12
Topp/Fadden-7.22/7.23 K-9 200.00 89667 200.00
United Arts
70.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 11.00 89555 15.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 2.00
89557 2,170.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
89670 4,797.82
United Arts
2,491.56
PP 2-7,2007 contributions 165.00 89668 165.0,0
United Way of Mpls
181.00 89558 181.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 8.00 89556 135.31
Payroll Generated Invoice 2.00
89671 35.50
Payroll Generated Invoice 10.00
89672 168.64
Payroll Generated Invoice 10.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 4.00
89500 124.25
Payroll Generated Invoice 8.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 25.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
89559 6,000.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 4.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00 1.
89673 6,000.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 1.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 5.00 1
Payroll Generated Invoice 12.00
89560 711.17
Payroll Generated Invoice 6.31
Payroll Generated Invoice 8.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 14.00
Payroll Generated Invoice 4.00
University of MN
Hofstedt/5.15 Municipals wrksh 70.00. 89669 140.00.
Langer/5.15 Municipals 70.00
University of MN/ No address
07 31 Municipals registr 2,170.00 89557 2,170.00
Valley Rich Co Inc
3410 Queensland/Rprs3.15/3.19 2,306.26 89670 4,797.82
2730Fernbrook/rprs 3.23/3.29 2,491.56
Verified Credentials Inc
Mar07 Background screening 181.00 89558 181.00
Veterinary Center on Main
4.3.07 K-9 Saber 35.50 89671 35.50
Viking Trophies
Men's Soccer Trophy and Art 168.64 89672 168.64
Violett, Marion
Wright Co notary recording 100.00 89500 124.25
3.28 50 Mileage reimb notary 24.25
Warner Connect
4.9.07 ERP Consulting 3,000.00 89559 6,000.00
3.26.07 ERP Consulting 3,000.00
Warner Connect
4.23.07 ERP Consulting 3,000.00 89673 6,000.00
4.23.07 ERP Consulting 3,000.00
Watson Company
IC Concession food resupply 711.17 89560 711.17
http://cityinternal/asp/asp_reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F 15 %2F2 007&s... 4/30/2007
Check Register Page 17 of 17
Watson Company
IC cr inv 734426 1.08) 89674 401.13
Cr inv 734426 21.60)
IC Concession food resupply 423.81
Wayzata Youth Baseball
Proj7130 Greenwood Bldg 15,000.00 89676 15,000.00
West Point Products Inc
Dlv Inst HP Printer Toners 778.78 89677 778.78
What Works Inc
3.14/3.18 Ice Center staff 2,100.00 89561 2,100.00
Xcel Energy
2.27/4.10 City Parks 967.72 89562 967.72
Xcel Energy
i
Apr07 Street lighting 158.03 89678 34,869.53
2.17/4.10 Wells & WTP's 30,736.64
Apr07 Traffic Signals/Flashers 2,321.56
Traffic Signal/Flasher 1,653.30
Yogastudio_in Plymouth LLC
3.4/4.26 Yoga classes 1,674.40 89679 1,674.40
Young, Katherine
4.10 dinner MACA conf Hinckley 19.16 89481 19.16
Zee Medical Service
PCC Medical resupply 116.50 89563 116.50
Zee Medical Service
PW Medical resupply 148.88 89680 148.88
TOTAL AMOUNT: 1,000,582.59
http://cityintemal/asp/asp reports/finance/cc_check.asp?sFromDate=4%2F15%2F2007&s... 4/30/2007
Date: 4/27/07 H.M.S. Windows - Housing Assistance Payments Page: 0001
Time: 9:21:35 AM PAYMENT REGISTER -SUMMARY QAhms\reports\PAYSUM.QRP
Bank Account Description/Account Number
Checking 3110681
Number Date Method Status Name Of Payee Total
0000563 4/27/07 Computer Ck. Paid Metropolitan Council $1,842.38
0000564 4/27/07 Computer Ck. Paid St. Louis Park Housing Authority $1,008.00
Total For Bank Account Checking $2,850.38
Of Totals
Transactions
Computer Checks 12 $2,850.38
Manual Checks 0 $0.00
Direct Deposits 0 $0.00
Total For Bank: $2,850.38
Total - All Bank Accounts Printed: $2,850.38
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO: 2007 -
APPROVING DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD
ENDING April 28, 2007
WHEREAS, a list of disbursements for the period ending April 28, 2007 was presented to the
City Council for approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the payment of the list of disbursements of the
following funds is approved:
Anchor Bank — Check Register
General & Special Revenue
Construction & Debt Service
Enterprise & Internal Service
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
Check Register Total
Anchor Bank — Housing Assistance Payments
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
GRAND TOTAL FOR ALL FUNDS
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
247,584.42
87,093.10
665.,623.07
282.00
1,000.582.59
2.850.38
1,003,432.97
6, a3
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 30, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: James Renneberg, P.E., Design Engineer
SUBJECT: PAYMENT NO. 7 AND FINAL
2005 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 5101
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution approving
Payment No. 7 and Final to Midwest Asphalt Corporation for the 2005 Street
Reconstruction Project No. 5101.
BACKGROUND: The 2005 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 5101,
involves the reconstruction of residential streets in three different areas. The first area is
called Gleanloch and includes the cul-de-sacs of Resden Road and Ravenwood Road.
The second area is Ranchview West, which is located from Vicksburg Lane to
Ranchview Lane and from 211d Avenue to 9t11 Avenue. The final reconstruction area is
Ranchview East and is located from Ranchview Lane to Niagara Lane and from 3'd
Avenue to 811i Avenue. Also included with this project is a mill and overlay on Carlson
Parkway, from the Minnetonka City limits to Gleason Lake Road.
The work on this project has been completed and certified as meeting project
specifications by the City's Design Engineering staff. This project was substantially
completed in fall of 2005 in the Ranchview areas and on Carlson Parkway, and the
Gleanloch area was substantially completed in June of 2006. Final correction items were
completed in the fall of 2006. The original contract amount for this project was
2,331,421.88. On November 29, 2005, the City Council approved Change Order
Number 1 which revised the contract amount to $2,435,263.69. The final cost and value
of work completed is $2,439,055.22 or 0.2% above the revised contract amount.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I hereby recolm-nend that the City
Council accept the project and approve Payment No. 7 and Final in the amount of
166,562.89 to Midwest Asphalt Corporation for the 2005 Street Reconstruction Project,
City Project No. 5 10 1.
attachments: Pay Request
Map
Resolution
0:\Engineering\PROJECTS\2000 - 2009\5101\Memos\FinalPayment5101Memo.doc
REQUEST FOR PAYMENT
DATE: April 30, 2007
PLACE: Plymouth, MN
PROJECT: 2005 Street Reconstruction Project
PROJECT NO.: 5101 FILE NO.:
CONTRACTOR: Midwest Asphalt Corporation
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 5477
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.: 7 -Final
SUMMARY:
1. Original Contract Amount
2. Change Order - ADDITION
3. Change Order - DEDUCTION
4. Revised Contract Amount
5. Value Completed to Date
6. Material on Hand
7. Amount Earned
8. Less Retainage N -A %
9. Less Liquidated Damages
10. Sub -Total
11. Less Amount Paid Previously
FOR PERIOD
FROM: 7/15/06 TO: 4/30/07 .
SPECIFIED CONTRACT
COMPLETION
DATE: October 1, 2005
2,331,421.38 y
103,842,31
0.00
2,435,263.69
2,439,055.22
0.00
2,439,055.22
0.00
12. AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.: 7 -Final
Approved By: (ENG EER)
By: un
OWNER APPROVAL:
By
By:
0.00
2,43 9,05 5.22 Y
2,272,492.33
166,562.89 {
Approved By: (C NT CTOR)
B1 C ptr '3 % I /VT
0:`.Engineering] PROJECTS2000 - 2009'-5101 ,Payments,regpayment7.doc
2005 Street Reconstruction Project
City Project No. 5101
Estimate No. 7 - 1/18/07
NO. ITEM UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
QUANTITY
COMPLETED
THIS PERIOD
VALUE
COMPLETED
THIS PERIOD
QUANTITY
COMPLETED
TO DATE
VALUE
COMPLETED
TO DATE
ESTIMATED
BID '- PERCENT
QUANTITY COMPLETED
1 MOBILIZATION L.S. 25,000.00 0.10 2,500.00 1.00 25,000.00 1 100%
2 TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. 10,800.00 0.10 1,080.00 1.00 10,800.00 1 100%
3 REMOVE PIPE (ALL TYPES AND SIZES) L.F. 10.60 257.00 2,724.20 172 149%
4 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH 265.00 13.00 3,445.00 12 108%
5 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S.Y. 2.05 1,526.00 3,128.30 1,526 100%
6 REMOVE CHAIN LINK FENCE EACH 5.65 16.00 90.40 41 39%
7 REMOVE AND REPLACE 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMEN S.Y. 39.50 840.40 33,195.80 1,135 74%
8 REMOVE AND REPLACE B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTEF L.F. 18.45 550.00 10',147.50 400 138%
9 REMOVE AND REPLACE D412 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTEF L.F. 19.35 354.00 6,849.90 560 63%
10 REMOVE AND REPLACE 36" CONCRETE CROSS GUTTER L.F. 23.45 68.00 1,594.60 68 100%I
11 ABANDON STORM SEWER PIPE L.F. 28.35 46.00 1,304.10 46 100%
12 SALVAGE AND INSTALL BRICK PAVER DRIVEWAY S.F. 21.20 607.50 12,879.00 390 156%
13 SALVAGE AND INSTALL SIGN PANEL, TYPE C EACH., 79.55 55.00 4,375.25 57 96%
14 SALVAGE AND INSTALL INVISIBLE DOG FENCE EACH 170.00 1.00 170.00 3 33%
15 SALVAGE AND INSTALL SPRINKLER HEAD EACH 33.95 109.00 3,700.55 60 182%
16 SALVAGE AND INSTALL MAILBOX STRUCTURE EACH 90.15 157.00 14,153.55 157 100%
17 SALVAGE AND INSTALL 10" RC STORM PIPE L.F. 38.90 8.10 315.09 10 81%
18 EDGE MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE S.Y. 9.05 25.00 226.25 25 100%
19 CLEARING TREE 155.00 53.00 8,215.00 42 126%
20 GRUBBING TREE 110.00 58.00 6,380.00 42 138%°
21 COMMON EXCAVATION C.Y. 10.80 49,780.00 537,624.00 48,972 102%
22 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION C.Y. 10.80 116.10 1,253.88 150 77%
23 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) C.Y. 6.90 17,764.00 122,571.60 17,515 101%
24 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S.Y. 1.15 2,440.00 2,806:00 600 407%
25 TEST ROLLING Rd. Sta. 28.30 178.00 5,037.40 167 107%
26 CALCIUM CHLORIDE SOLUTION GAL. 0.57 9,137.00 5,208.09 10,000 91%
27 DRIVEWAY AGG. CL. 5, 100% CRUSHED TON 43.35 700.00 30,345.00 764.60 33,145.41 25 3058%
28 BITUMINOUS PATCHING MIXTURE TON 80.00 1,374.35 109,948.00 1,070 128%
29 TYPE LVNW3 BASE COURSE MIXTURE (2") S.Y. 3.90 46,540.80 181,509.12 44,531 105%
30 TYPE LVWE4 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (1'/z') S.Y. 3.15 46,540.80 146,603.52 44,531 J 105%
31 TACK COAT GAL. 2.00 3,063.00 6,126.00 2,227 138%
32 WATER FOR DUST CONTROL MEAL 36.20 74.00 2,678.80 600 i2%i
33 4" PE STREET DRAINTILE W/SOCK L.F. 4.05 7,705.00 31,205.25 13,245 58%1
34 4" PE DRAINTILE SERVICE W/SOCK L.F. 10.00 350.00 3,500.00 420 83%
35 PE YARD DRAIN EACH 135.00 26.00 3,510.00 35 74%',
36 CONNECT DRAINTILE TO STORM SEWER STRUCTURE EACH 30.00 47.00 1,410.00 66 71%
37 CONNECT EXISTING DISCHARGE LINE TO YARD DRAIN EACH 115.00 4.00 460.00 10 40%1
38 CONNECT RCP PIPE TO EXISTING STORM SEWER STRUCTU EACH 801.00 12.00. 9,612.00 9 133%
39 12" RC PIPE STORM SEWER, CL.V L.F. 1 $ 27.60 1,618.00 44,656.80 1,612 100%
40 15" RC PIPE STORM SEWER, CL.V L.F. 31.50 713.00 22,459.50 713 100%
41 18" RC PIPE STORM SEWER, CL.V L.F. 33.95 278.00 9,438.10 278 100%
42 21" RC PIPE STORM SEWER, CL.V L.F. 38.40 504.00 19,353.60 504 100%
43 24" RC PIPE STORM SEWER, CL V L.F. 48.05 8.00 384.40 8 100%
44 27" RC PIPE STORM SEWER, CL V L.F. 76.25 16.00 1,220.00 16 100%
45 36" RC PIPE STORM SEWER, CL V L.F. 106.35 16.00 1,701.60 16 100%
46 12" RC PIPE APRON & TRASHGUARD EACH 799.00 1.00 799.00 1 100%
47 18" RC ARCH PIPE STORM SEWER, CL V L.F. 56.65 243.00 13,765.95 243 100%
48 AGGREGATE BEDDING TON 29.70 176.80 5,250.96 150 118%
49 CB TYPE ST -2 L.F. 360.15 48.81 17,578.20 57 86%
50 MH TYPE ST -5 (48" DIAMETER) L.F. 265.15 88.40 23,439.79 83.8 105%
51 MH TYPE ST -5 (60" DIAMETER) L.F. 371.15 18.61 6,907.84 22.4 83%
52 CB CASTING TYPE R -3067 -DL EACH 445.00 44.00 19,580.00 60 73%
53 CB CASTING TYPE R -3250-A EACH 470.00 6.00 2,820.00 2 300%
54 MH CASTING TYPE R-1642-1 EACH 520.00. 7.00 3,640.00 4 175%
55 HAND -PLACED RIPRAP CL III TON 83.00 6.00 498.00 6 100%
56 4" PVC SEWER SERVICE -PIPE - SDR 35 L.F. 46.15 28.90 1,333.74 25 116%
57 F & I GATE VALVE BOX EACH 833.55 0.00 2 0%
58 F & 16" GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 2,330.00 0.00 2 0%
59 ADJUST GATE VALVE EACH 140.00 30.00 4,200.00 37 81%
60 ALTER WATER SERVICE EACH 760.00 1.00 760.00 5 20%j
61 LOOSE POLYETHYLENE ENCASEMENT L.F. 11.00 0.00 20 0%1
62 INSULATE WATERMAIN (4") S.F. 4.45 645.60 2,872.92 1,000 65%
63 ADJUST FRAME AND RING CASTING EACH 280.00 58.00 16,240.00 78 74%
64 RECONSTRUCT MANHOLE/CATCH BASIN L.F. 615.00 0.00 5 0%
65 MANHOLE/CATCH BASIN REPAIR L.F. 290.00 0.00 10 0%
66 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN 8618 L.F. 8.75 29,533.00 258,413.75 29,975 99%
67 36" CONCRETE CROSS GUTTER L.F. 18.70 125.00 2:337.50 136 92%
68 RETAINING WALL - CHILTON' LIMESTONE S.F. 40.50 345.00 13:972.50 555 62%
69 WATER FOR TURF ESTABLISHMENT MGAL 26.50 Is 822.50 21,796.25 500 165%
70 COMMERCIAL FERT. ANALYSIS 5-15-10 Lb. 0.37 0.00 575 0%1
71 BALE CHECK
72 SODDING, TYPE LAWN & BOULEVARD'
EACH
S.Y.
11.15
2.90 4,494.15 $
0.00
13,033.04 29,961.00 86,886.90
3
33,250
0%
90%1
73 SEEDING: MIXTURE 50B ACRE 2,800.00 0.03 84.00 0.5 6%
74 WOOD FIBER BLANKET S.Y. 2.10 0.00 100 0%
75 SILT FENCE L.F. 2.65 0.00 150 0%
76 INLET PROTECTION -TYPE SPECIAL EACH 115.00 11.00 1,265.00 6 183%
77 RAINGARDEN #1 EACH 3,700.00 0.00 1 0%
78 RAINGARDEN #2 EACH 3,200-00 1.00 3,200.00 1 100%
79 RAINGARDEN #3 EACH 4,500.00 0.00. 1 0%
80 RAINGARDEN #4 EACH 4,000.00 0.00 1 0%
81 RAINGARDEN#5 EACH 4,600.00 1.00 4,600.00 1 100%
82 RAINGARDEN #6 EACH 4,400.00 1.00 4,400.00 1 100%
83 F&I SIGN PANELS TYPE C S. F. 25.20 0.00 18 0%
84 F&1 TREE, AUTUMN SPRIE MAPLE, 2" B&B EACH 355.00 1 0.00 3 0%
85 F&I TREE, BLACK HILLS SPRUCE, 2" B -B EACH 1 $ 290.00 0.00 3 0%
Total Base Bid 46,958.04 $ 1,968,759.86
ALTERNATE BID•A
86 AGGREGATE BASE CL 5, 100% CRUSHED (CV) JC.Y. $ 22.45 1 1 12,806.00 $ 287,494.701 11,677 1 110%1
1 MOBI AAZATION L.S. 1 1,600.00 1.00 1,600.00 1 100%
2 TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. 900.00 1.00 900.00 1 100%
3 REMOVE & REPLACE B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER L.F. 21.70 648.00 14,061.60 300 216%
4 REMOVE & REPLACE B1218 CONCRETE GUTTER L.F. 20.75 376.00 7,802.00 170 221%
5 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S.Y. 3.25 1,374.00 4,465.50 110 1249%
6 REMOVE & REPLACE 4" CONCRETE WALK S. F. 3.85 982.17 3,781.35 1,173 84%
7 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2") S.Y. 0.90 9,762.00 8,785.80 9,762 100%
8 TYPE MVWE3 WEAR. COURSE MIX 2" S.Y. 2.60 9,775.00 25,415.00 9,775 100%
9 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT GAL 2.00 500.00 1,000.00 490 102%
10 ADJUST VALVE BOX EACH 140.00 0.00 1 0%
11 ADJUST FRAME AND RING CASTINGS SPECIAL EACH 325.00 0.00 6 0%
12 7" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S.Y. 57.40 0.00 8 0%I
13CONCRETE CROSS GUTTER (8" THICK) L.F. 20.30 362.00 7,348.60 225 161%
10 PAVEMENT MESSAGE (LEFT ARROW) EPDXY EACH 111.00 6.00 666.00 6 100%
11 4" BROKEN LINE WHITE-EPDXY L.F. 1.35 536.00 723.60 536 100%
12 4" SOLID LINE WHITE-EPDXY L.F. 0.55 1,598.00 878.90 2,490 64%
13 ZEBRA CROSSWALK WHITE-EPDXY S.F. 4.25 360.00 1,530.00 324 111%
14 UX 6' LOOP DETECTOR EACH 1 1,000.00 0.00 4 0%
15 SODDING TYPE LAWN S.Y. 3.70 0.00 40 0%
16 COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER 5-15-10 Lb. 1.60 0.00 10 0%
Total ternate Bid C
BASE BID +ALTERNATE BID A+ ALTERNATE BID C
Remaining of 15% of sod paid
46,958.04
78,958.35
2;335,212.91 100.16%
11114016441 MMi :d:
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 7 AND FINAL
2005 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 5101
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth as owner and Midwest Asphalt Corporation as
contractor, have entered into an agreement for 2005 Street Reconstruction Project, City
Project No. 5101, said agreement was approved by the City Council on June 14, 2005;
and
WHEREAS, the Engineer has certified his acceptance of the work and his approval of the
final request for payment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
1. That the original contract amount was $2,331,421.88; revised contract
amount of $2,435,263.69 and the value of the work to date is
2,439,055.22 and is herewith approved. This project is above the
original contract amount by 0.2%.
2. That the work perforined by the contractor for the 2005 Street
Reconstruction Project No. 5101 and certified to the Council by the
engineer as acceptable, being the same, is hereby released from the
contract except as to the conditions of the performance bond, any and all
legal rights of the owner, required guarantees and correction of faulty
work after final payment.
3. Request for Payment No. 7 and Final in the amount of $166,562.89 to
Midwest Asphalt Corporation for the 2005 Street Reconstruction Project
No. 5101 is hereby approved and the City Finance Director is hereby
authorized and directed to pay the same forthwith.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0:\EngineeringTROJECTS\2000 - 2009\5101 \Resolutions\FinalPayment5101 Res.doc
DATE: April 26, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Daniel K. Campbell, Sr. Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: APPROVE ACQUISITION AGREEMENT FOR PERMANENT AND
TEMPORARY RIGHT-OF-WAY
FERNBROOK LANE - STREET AND SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 1013
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution approving .
Acquisition Agreement for permanent and temporary right-of-way associated with the above
project.
BACKGROUND: Fernbrook Lane between 27th Avenue and 34th Avenue is scheduled for
reconstruction in 2007. In order to construct the improvements, permanent and/or temporary
construction easements are required from 20 separate parcels adjacent to the corridor. Parcel
numbers are identified on the right-of-way plan prepared for the project. The City's consulting
engineer, SRF Consulting Group, Inc., is negotiating with the affected property owners for the
necessary easements. An Acquisition Agreement has been reached for the following parcel and
requires City Council approval:
Parcel No. 1 (PIN 21-118-22-44-0021): This property is located at 2605
Fernbrook Lane North and requires permanent and temporary construction
easements, with total compensation being offered in the amount of $57,200.
To date, including the above parcel, we have acquisition agreements'with 16 of the 20 total
parcels. Thirteen of the agreements have been made since the council authorized the use of
Eminent Domain on Nov. 28, 2006. These 16 parcels represent $846,258 in right-of-way
acquisition costs. Parcel No. 1 was included in the petition for the eminent domain proceedings
which was filed with the court on March 12, 2007. Upon City Council approval of this
acquisition agreement, the City Attorney will be directed to notify the court of the dismissal of
this property from the petition.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I recommend that the City Council adopt
the attached resolution approving an acquisition agreement for Parcel No. 1 (PIN 21-118-22-44-
0AEngineeringTR07ECTS\2000 - 2009\1013\Memos\CC_AcquisitionAgmt_1013_No_l.doc
SUBJECT: APPROVE ACQUISITION AGREEMENTS FOR PERMANENT RIGHT-OF-
WAY AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS
FERNBROOK LANE - STREET AND SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
Page 2
0021) in the amount of $57,200 and authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to sign the
agreement.
attachments: Letter
Memorandum of Agreement
Map
Resolution
WEngineeringTROJECTS\2000 - 2009\1013\Memos\CC_AcquisitionAgmt_I013_No_I.doc
HICONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Transportation • Civil • Structural . Environmental • Planning • Traffic • Landscape Architecture • Parking e Right of Way
SRF No. 5662
April 25, 2007
Robert Moberg, P.E.
City Engineer
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Moberg:
SUBJECT: FERNBROOK LANE (27TH AVENUE TO 34T" AVENUE)
PARCEL NO. 1/1sT INDUSTRIAL REALTY, L.P.
Enclosed for City Council approval are the acquisition documents for the above -referenced
project and parcel. The executed documents include the following:
1) Executed Offer Letter with Value Calculation
2) Appraisal Receipt and Disclosure (original appraisal and review were sent w/Just
Compensation Memo)
3) Administrative Settlement Memorandum
4) Memorandum of Agreement — please execute and return a copy for our files
5) Payment Authorization
6) W9 Form
7) Copy of Highway and Utility Easement (upon City Council approval, SRF will submit
the easement document to Hennepin County for recording)
8) Memorandum addressing tenant interests
9) Construction Memorandum
We will finalize this transaction upon the City of Plymouth's approval, receipt of the executed
Memorandum of Agreement and payment. If you have questions please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
IsaXclman, SR/WA
Senior Associate
LB/cjl
Enclosures
cc: Michael Turner, SRF Project Manager
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447-4443
Tel: 763-475-0010 • Fax: 763-475-2429
HAROWVtight ofWay Files\5674 Chisago CountyVarcel 1/Settlentent Letter to Client.doc
srfconsulting.com
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Case Plaza, One North Second Street
Fargo, North'Dakota 58102-4807
Tel: 701-237-0010 • Fax: 701-237-0017
SRF No. 5662
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
Fernbrook Lane (27th Avenue to 34th. Avenue)
Parcel No. 1
Fee Owners: First Industrial, L.P.
On this 30th day of March , 2007, First Industrial, L.P., Owners of the
above described parcel of property located in County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, did execute
and deliver a conveyance to the aforesaid real estate to the City of Plymouth.
This agreement is now made and entered as a Memorandum of all the terms, and the only terms,
agreed upon in cora ection with the above transaction. It is hereby acknowledged and agreed upon
between the parties that:
The Owners have been furnished with the approved estimate of just compensation for the
property acquired and a summary statement of the basis for the estimate. The Owners
understand that the acquired property is for use in connection with the construction of
Fernbrook Lane (27th Avenue to 34th Avenue) project.
2. The Owners understand and acknowledge that the City of Plymouth Right of Way
Administrator has no direct, indirect, present or contemplated future personal interest in the.
property or in any benefits from the acquisition of the property.
3. That in full compensation for the conveyance of said property, City of Plymouth shall pay the
Owners the sum of $57,200.00 for land and damages. Owners understand that payment by
the City of Plymouth must await City Council approval and processing of a voucher.
4. Additionally: Owner will petition the court for the certified offer amount of $34,900. Upon
Council approval at their meeting to be held on April 10, 2007, an additional $22,300 will be
sent to Owner. This includes $5,000 for appraisal reimbursement.
It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained in this Memorandum
of Agreement and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the
parties.
First
By. I
Its: OP6kA-VI
City of Plymouth
By:
H:IROWIRight of Way FilesU662 Fernbrook LanelParcel hWennoranclwn of.4greement.cloc
II
II
0 ,
II
II
Z
Og wZ
CLw (Nw
2(N O:2
wQ CLw
Hw ON
Of Q
CL w
c0
Z
w
w
N
Q
w
J
H
a
cr
O Z
Z H
H
N
N H
H X
X w
w
Z
aw
frm
I Ow
CL (N
ww
66
p
Z
H
N
H
X
w
N
N
OD
M
w
z
a
r
O
w
V2/92995\sa p/oo nw-M2995\sl al ad`H
J
LU
N0
c o
z d -
w N r
7p
N O
00
W I—
Z
Q N L() Cl
W R'
O m Wm rL
m Z = Oz
C z a
LU
li w U
e
0
en
000
Nto
V Lo to
I
i N
I
I H
X
w
H
Zi
f—
Z
wl w
m 2
w w
NN
Q Q
w w .
Z LL 0-1
wQ
Z
a(:
o
OV)
2 (N CL
cr 2N
w cow d'
C F --d-
M I
I
w
II
p
Z
wM
I— 11H
w OQOa
0 Zw Zw
LLI Cr
J pQ pQ
0 ,
II
II
Z
Og wZ
CLw (Nw
2(N O:2
wQ CLw
Hw ON
Of Q
CL w
c0
Z
w
w
N
Q
w
J
H
a
cr
O Z
Z H
H
N
N H
H X
X w
w
Z
aw
frm
I Ow
CL (N
ww
66
p
Z
H
N
H
X
w
N
N
OD
M
w
z
a
r
O
w
V2/92995\sa p/oo nw-M2995\sl al ad`H
J
LU
N0
c o
z d -
w N r
7p
N O
00
W I—
Z
Q N L() Cl
W R'
O m Wm rL
m Z = Oz
C z a
LU
li w U
e
0
en
000
Nto
V Lo to
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
APPROVAL OF ACQUISITION AGREEMENT FOR
PARCEL NO. 1 (PIN 21-118-22-44-0021)
FERNBROOK LANE IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 1013
WHEREAS,.a memorandum of agreement has been prepared between the City and First Industrial,
LP, owners of Parcel No. 1 (PIN 21-118-22-44-0021), for the acquisition of permanent and
temporary construction easements; and
WHEREAS, for full compensation for conveyance of said property, the City of Plymouth shall pay
the owners the sum of $57,200 for land and damages; and
WHEREAS, said memorandum agreement has been signed by the owner and it is recommended for
approval to the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: That the memorandum of agreement for Parcel No. 1 (PIN 21-
118-22-44-0021) between the City and First Industrial, LP is approved, and the Mayor and City
Manager are authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the City.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0:\Engineering\PROJECTS\2000 - 2009\1013\Resol\AuthPurchAgree_PARCEL_I_1013_Res.doc
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL. AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Bob Moberg, City Engineer
SUBJECT: WEST MEDICINE LAKE PARK POND PROJECT
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
CITY PROJECT NO. 3105
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution to approve the Cooperative
Agreement with Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) and to authorize the
Mayor and City Manager to execute the Agreement on the City's behalf.
BACKGROUND: Attached is a Cooperative Agreement prepared by BCWMC for construction of
the West Medicine Lake Park Pond Project. The project includes creation of a large stone water
detention pond iminediately upstream of where Plymouth Creek discharges into Medicine Lake. The
pond will be designed to capture sediments carried by Plymouth Creek, thereby reducing the volume of
total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP) entering Medicine Lake. BCWMC approved a
resolution (copy attached) ordering the improvements and designating the City responsible for
construction of the improvements.
This project has been included in the City's 2007-2011 Capital Iimprovement Plan (CIP) and is
scheduled for construction in 2008. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC)
recently adopted a Minor Plan Amendment (see attached resolution) so this project could also be
included in its Capital Irnproveiment Plan, thereby allowing BCWMC to reimburse the City for the cost
of the project.
BUDGET IMPACT: Total project cost is estimated at $900,000. The project will initially be funded
through the Water Resources Fund. The City's costs will be reiinbursed by BCWMC over a period of
four years, beginning in 2008. City staff have been notified the project will receive a Metropolitan
Environmental Partnership Grant of $50,000 from the Met Council.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I recommend that the City Council adopt the
attached resolution approving the Cooperative Agreement with BCWMC the above project.
attachments: Cooperative Agreement
BCWMC Resolutions (2)
Resolution
0:\Engineering\PR0JECTS\2000 - 200913105\Memos\CC_BCWMC_A9mt_3105.doc
r
COOPERA'T'IVE AGREEMENT
FOR
WEST MEDICINE LAKE PARK POND IMPROVEMENTS
This Agreement is made as of this 19tH day of April, 2007, by and between the Bassett Creek
Watershed Management Commission, a joint powers watershed management organization
hereinafter the "Commission"), and the City of Plymouth, a Minnesota municipal corporation
hereinafter the "City").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Corninission adopted the Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Commission Water Management Plan, July. 2004 on September 16, 2004 (the "Plan"), a watershed
management plan within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 103B.231; and
WHEREAS, the Plan, as amended on April 19, 2007, includes a capital improvement
program ("CIP") that lists a number of water quality project capital improvements; and
WHEREAS, the water quality projects identified in the CIP include construction of a water
quality improvement project for Medicine Lake in the City of Plyinouth described as the West
Medicine Lake Park Pond Project on Plymouth Creek immediately upstream of Medicine Lake as
more fully described in Attachment One to this Agreement, the feasibility report for the Project,
which is hereby made a part hereof, and
WHEREAS, the Plan specifies that projects in the CIP will be funded by a County tax levy
under Minn. Stat. § 103B.251; and
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2007, the Commission adopted a resolution ordering the Project,
directing that it be constructed by the City; and
WHEREAS, it is expected that Hennepin County will levy taxes throughout the watershed
for the Project for collection and settlement in the years 2008, 2009 and 2010; and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to construct the Project on the terns and conditions
hereinafter set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF THE PREMISES AND MUTUAL
COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH, THE PARTIES AGREE
AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Project will consist of water quality improvements in the City as more fully
described on Attachment One.
306939v CLLBA295-1
2. The City will design the Project and prepare plans and specifications for construction
of the Project. Plans and specifications are subject to approval by the Commission's
consulting engineer.
3. The City will advertise for bids and award contracts in accordance with the
requirements of law. The City will award the contract and supervise and administer
the construction of the Project to assure that it is completed in accordance with plans
and specifications. The City will require the contractor to provide all payment and
performance bonds required by law. The City will require that the Commission be
named as additional insured on all liability policies required by the City of the
contractor. The City will require that the contractor defend, indenmify, protect and
hold harmless the Commission and the City, their agents, officers, and employees,
from all claims or actions arising from performance of the work of the Project
conducted by the contractor. The City will supervise the work of the contractor.
However, the Cornrnission may observe and review the work of the Project until it is
completed. The City will display a sign at the construction site(s) stating. "Paid for
by the Taxpayers of the Bassett Creels Watershed".
4. The City will pay the contractor and all other expenses related to the construction of
the Project and keep and maintain complete records of such costs incurred.
5. The Commission will use its best efforts to secure payment from the County in
accordance with Minn. Stat. § 103B.251 in the amount of Nine Hundred Thousand
Dollars ($900,000). It is understood that tax settlement from the County is not
expected to occur until the years 2008, 2009 and 2010, with a Three Hundred
Thousand Dollar ($300,000) levy for collection in each of such years.
Out-of-pocket costs related to the Project, incurred and paid by the Commission for
publication of notices, securing County tax levy, preparation of contracts, review of
proposed contract documents and administration of this contract shall be repaid from
funds received in the tax settlement from Hennepin County. All funds in excess of
such expenses are available for reimbursement to the City for costs incurred by the
City in the design and construction of the Project. Reimbursement to the City will
be made as soon as finds are available provided a request for payment has been
received from the City providing such detailed information as may be requested by
the Commission to substantiate costs and expenses.
6: Reimbursement to the City will not exceed the amount received from the County for
the Project less any amounts retained by the Commission for Cormrmission expenses.
All costs of the Project incurred by the City in excess of such reimbursement shall be
borne by the City or secured by the City from other sources.
7. All City books, records, documents, and accounting procedures related to the Project
are subject to examination by the Commission.
306939v1 CLLBA295-1 2
8. The City will secure all necessary local, state, or federal permits required for the
construction of the Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their
duly authorized officers on behalf of the parties as of the day and date first above written.
BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
By:
Its Chair
And by:
Its Secretary
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
By:
Its Mayor
And by:
Its Manager
306939v1 CLL BA295-1 3
BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. C% -O 9T
A RESOLUTION ORDERING 2007 IMPROVEMENTS,
DESIGNATING MEMBERS
RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION, AND MAKING FINDINGS
PURSUANT TO MIlqNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 103B.251
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2004, the Commission adopted the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission, Water Management Plan, July 2004 (the "Plan"); and
WHEREAS, the Plan includes a Capital Improvement Program ("CIP") listing capital
projects in Table 12-2 of the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the CIP, as amended by Resolution No. adopted. on April 19,
2007, includes the following capital projects for the year 2007:
West Medicine Lake Park Pond Project on Plymouth Creek immediately
upstream of Medicine Lake as described in the Plymouth Creek Phase I
Feasibility Report for Construction of the West Medicine Labe Park Pond,
City Project #310.5, dated May 2006, prepared by Barr Engineering (the
West Medicine Lake Park Pond Project'').
Northwood Lake East Pond in New -Hope immediately downstream of
Northwood Lake, outletting to the North Branch of Bassett Creek; as
described in the Feasibility Report for Northwood East Sediment Pond, City
Project 807, New Hope, Minnesota, dated August 2006 (the "Northwood
Lake East Pond").
hereinafter collectively referred to as the 2007 Projects); and
WHEREAS, the Plan specifies a county tax levy under Minn. Stat. § 10313.251 as the source
of funding for the 2007 Projects; and
WHEREAS, on March 15, 2007, following published and mailed notice in accordance with
the Commission's Joint Power Agreement and Minn. Stat. § 103B.251, the Commission conducted
a public hearing on the 2007 Projects;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Bassett.
Creek Watershed Management Commission as follows:
1. The 2007 Projects will be conducive to the public health and promote the general
welfare and are in compliance with Minnesota Statutes 103B.205 to 103B.255 (the
3069441 CLL BA295-1
Act") and with the Plan as adopted and amended in accordance with the Act. The
2007 Projects are hereby ordered.
2. The cost of the 2007 Projects is estimated to be Nine Hundred Forty -Five Thousand
Dollars ($945,000), such amount including the cost of the West Medicine Lake Park
Pond Project of Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars ($900,000) and the cost of the
Northwood Lake East Pond Project of Forty -Five Thousand Dollars ($45,000).
3. Such cost of the 2007 Projects will be hereby certified to Hennepin County in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 103B.251 for payment by the County
in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 103B.251, Subd. 6 and the
Commission's joint powers agreement.
4. .The Commission receives, accepts and approves the feasibility reports for the 2007
Proj ects.
5. The costs of each of the 2007 Projects will be paid by the Commission up to the
amount specified in paragraph 2 above fiom proceeds received from Hennepin
County pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 103B.251. Additional costs may be
paid by the cities in which the Projects are constructed, but no costs will be charged
to other members of the Corrunission.
6. The City of Plymouth is designated as the member responsible for contracting for
the construction of the West Medicine Lake Park Pond Project, and the engineer
designated for preparation of plans and specifications is the Plymouth City Engineer,
or other substitute engineers selected and retained by the City of Plymouth.
Contracts for construction shall be let in accordance with the requirements of law
applicable to the City of Plymouth. The Commission approves the Cooperative
Agreement for West Medicine Lake Park Pond Improvements dated as of April 19,
2007, with the City of Plymouth and. authorizes and directs the execution thereof on
behalf of the Commission by the Chair and Secretary.
7. The City of New Hope is designated as the member responsible for contracting for
the construction of the Northwood Lake East Pond Project, and the engineer
designated for preparation of plans and specifications is the New Hope City
Engineer, or other substitute engineers selected and retained by the City of New
Hope. Contracts for construction shall be let in accordance with the requirements of
law applicable to the City of New Hope. The Commission approves the Cooperative
Agreement for Northwood Lake East Pond Improvements dated as of April 19,
2007, with the City of New Hope and authorizes and directs the execution thereof on
behalf of the Commission by the Chair and Secretary.
3069441 CLL BA295-1 2
Adopted by the Board of Commission of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission
the 19" day of April, 2007.
c_
Chair
ATTEST:
ecretary /
306944vl CLL BA295-1
BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. o I — p Q
RESOLUTION APPROVING WATERSHED PLAN AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, the Commission is the watershed management organization responsible for
preparing a watershed plan for the Bassett Creek watershed, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 103B.231;
and
WHEREAS, the Commission adopted its watershed plan entitled, "Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission, Water. Management Plan, July 2004" on September 16, 2004
hereinafter the "Plan"); and
WHEREAS, the Commission has submitted for review an amendment to the Plan to add to
the capital improvement program the West Medicine Lake Park Pond on Plymouth Creek and the
Northwood Lake East Pond immediately downstream of Northwood Lake (the "Plan
Amendment"); and
WHEREAS, the Plan Amendment has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements
of Minn. Stat. § 103B.231, which review is complete; and
WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the adoption of the Plan Amendment is in
accordance with the requirements of law and in the best interests of the public;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the. Board of Commissioners of the Bassett
Creels Watershed Management Commission as follows:
The Plan Amendment is hereby approved in accordance with Minn. Stat. §
103B.231, Subd. 10.
2. The. Secretary is directed to transmit a copy of the Plan Amendment to the
clerks of all member cities.
Adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Commission this 19th day of April, 2007.
Chair
ATTEST:
i
Secretary
306942vl CLL BA295-1
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
APPROVING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH
BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
WEST MEDICINE LAKE PARK POND IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 3105
WHEREAS, a Cooperative Agreement has been prepared by Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission (Commission) with reference to the improvement of a
detention pond in West Medicine Lake Park; and
WHEREAS, the proposed improvement includes construction of a detention pond
upstream of the point where Plymouth Creek discharges into Medicine Lake, as identified
in a preliminary engineering report prepared by Barr Engineering, dated May 2006; and
WHEREAS, said Agreement was approved by the Commission on April 19, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the Commission will reimburse the City for the cost of the improvements;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
1. The Council hereby approves the Cooperative Agreement as presented
and authorizes the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Agreement
on behalf of the City.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0AEngineeringTROJECTS\3000 - 2009\3l0i\Resol\BC W MC_Coop Agm[} 105—Res.doc
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Bob Moberg, City Engineer
SUBJECT: PLYMOUTH CREEK PHASE I
WEST MEDICINE LAKE PARK POND PROJECT
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
CITY PROJECT NO. 3105
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution to receive the preliminary
engineering report and order the improvement for the West Medicine Lake Park Pond Project.
BACKGROUND: Attached is a preliminary engineering report prepared by Barr; Engineering for the
Plymouth Creek Phase I — West Medicine Lake Park Pond Project. The project includes creation of a
large storm water detention pond immediately upstream of where Plymouth Creek discharges into
Medicine Lake. The pond will be designed to capture sediments carried by Plymouth Creek, thereby
reducing the volume of total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP) entering Medicine
Lake.
This project has been included in the City's 2007-2011 Capital. Improvement Plan (CIP) and is
scheduled for construction in 2008. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC),
recently adopted a Minor Plan Amendment so this project could also be included in its Capital
Improvement Plan, thereby allowing BCWMC to reimburse the City for the cost of the project.
The preliminary engineering report was presented to the Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) on
April 11, 2007, and the Commission recommended approval of the report.
The preliminary engineering report was also presented to the Park and Recreation Advisory
Commission (PRAC) on April 12, 2007. PRAC supports the project but has concerns about the
number of trees that will be removed with the project. PRAC also wants to preserve the existing
boardwalk over Plymouth Creek that connects the west parking lot to the main park facilities. The
project budget does not include extension of the boardwalk to span the proposed pond.
BUDGET IMPACT: Total project cost is estimated at $900,000. The project will initially be funded
through the Water Resources Fund. The City's costs will be reimbursed by BCWMC over a period of
four years, beginning in 2008. City staff have been notified the project will receive a Metropolitan .
Environmental Partnership Grant of $50,000 from the Met Council.
0:\Engineering\PR0JECTS\2000 - 2009\3105\Memos\CC_RecReport_3105.doc
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I recommend that the City Council adopt the
attached resolution accepting the preliminary engineering report and ordering the improvements for
the above project.
attachments: Preliminary Engineering Report
Resolution
0AEnginee ingTROJECTS\2000 - 2009\3105\Memos\CC_RecReport_3105.doc
Plymouth Creek Phase I
Feasibility Report for Construction of the
West Medicine Lake Park Pond
City Project #3105
May 2006
Plymouth Creek Phase I
Feasibility Report for Construction of the
West Medicine Lake Park Pond
City Project #3105
May 2006
4700 N%st 77"' Street
Minneapolis, MN 55435-4803
Phone: (952) 832-2600
Fax: (952) 832-2601
Plymouth Creek Phase 1 Feasibility Report for
Construction of the West Medicine Lake Park Pond
Plymouth Project #3105
Table of Contents
1.0 Summary and Conclusions....................................................................................................................1
1.1 West Medicine Lake Park Pond.................................................................................................. l
1.2 Phase 2 Stud ....................................................... l
2.0 Background and Objective.....................................................................................................................3
2.1 Background.................................................................................................................................3
2.2 Objective..................................................................................................................................... 4
3.0 Proposed Improvements......................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Plymouth Creek Watershed........................................................................................................ 5
3.2 Site Description........................................................................................................................... 5
3.3 West Medicine Lake Park Pond.................................................................................................. 5
3.4 P8 Water Quality Modeling........................................................................................................6
3.5 Wetland Issues............................................................................................................................ 7
3.6 Cost Estimate.............................................................................................................................. 8
3.7 Funding Sources..........................................................................................................................8
4.0 Phase 2 Scoping 10
4.1 Stream Bank Restoration.......................................................................................................... 10
4.2 Reroute Plymouth Creek...........................................................................................................11
4.3 Reroute 18`x' Avenue Drainage..................................................................................................12
4.5 Recommendations and Budgeting Costs...................................................................................13
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc i
List of Tables
Table 1 Estimated Pond Area and Volume
Table 2 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate
List of Figures
Figure 1 West Medicine Lake Park Pond
Figure 2 Project Features
Figure 3 FEMA Floodplain
Figure 4 National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
Figure 5 Plymouth Creek — 2004
Figure 6 Plymouth Creek'— 1947
P:\23\27\GO9\Feasibility Study\Phase I Feasibility Repoii.doc ii
1.0 Summary and Conclusions
The city of Plymouth is reviewing alternatives for reducing the Plymouth Creek Watershed
phosphorus load to Medicine Lake from the Plymouth Creek Watershed. The water quality goal
associated with improvements in the vicinity of West Medicine Lake Park, as stated in the Phase II
Medicine Lake Implementation and Management Plan (Medicine Lake Watershed Sub -committee,
August 2004), is a reduction in phosphorus loading into Medicine Lake by 336 pounds.
1.1 West Medicine Lake Park Pond
Construction of a wet detention pond would reduce the amount of phosphorus and suspended
sediments entering the lake. A review of the removal efficiency of various pond sizes was conducted
to determine the feasibility of meeting the nutrient removal goals at the West Medicine Lake Pond
site. The P8 Model predicted that a 5.5 -acre pond, approximately 6.5 feet deep, that provided
24 acre-feet of dead storage would reduce phosphorus loading into Medicine lake by approximately
350 pounds per year, on average.
Therefore, based on the P8 Model results, the West Medicine Lake Pond will meet the phosphorus
reduction goal for Plymouth Creek established in the Plymouth Medicine Lake Implementation and
Management Plan.
If feasible, a skimming device should be incorporated to reduce floating debris and litter from
entering the lake.
The total estimated cost for the West Medicine Lake Park Pond is $900,000, excluding park
improvements.
1.2 Phase 2 Study
A Phase 2 study may be necessary to address the following issues:
Stream bank erosion and restoration located upstream (west) of West Medicine Lake Drive.
Reroute and stabilize Plymouth Creek.
Reroute 18tH Avenue Drainage.
The City may consider a Phase 2 feasibility study to further address stream bank erosion and channel
Following are several recommended tasks and budgeting cost estimates that could be included in the
study.
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc
Perform wetland delineation of proposed pond and proposed study areas identified in
Figure 2 and prepare delineation report. Delineating the entire wetland complex shown on
Figure 4 would require much greater effort. Delineation should be expanded if City is
considering restoration of the historic Plymouth Creek channel. Estimate does not include
survey.—(Budgeting Cost Estimate: $5,000 to $10,000)
Identify project goals and objectives.—(City of Plymouth)
Review potential recreation assets.—(City of Plymouth)"
Perform additional review of the Plyinouth Creek'historic channel including review of aerial
photographs, quads, etc. if the City pursues restoring the entire Plymouth Creek channel.—
Budgeting Cost Estimate: $1,000 to $2,000)
Contact regulatory agencies (DNR; Corps, BCWMC) to ,discuss the proposed restoration
project, wetland delineation and impacts; conveyance and flooding issues.—(City of
Plymouth)
Detailed wetland replacement and mitigation plan assuming on site mitigation, if
necessary.—(Budgeting Cost Estimate: $10,000 to $20,000)
Revise and update September 7, 2004 creek inventory of the erosion and sedimentation sites
along Plymouth Creek from Medicine Lake to 26"' Avenue and cost estimates for repairing
the creels channel.—(City of Plymouth)
Prepare Phase 2 feasibility study to compile recommended tasks, identify problem erosion,
encroachment and flooding areas; evaluate alternatives, review hydraulics and flooding
impacts (assuming use of existing hydraulic and hydrologic models), design a stable channel,
address 18"' Avenue drainage issues and provide a construction cost estimate. Detailed
review of alternatives and new channel could significantly increase costs.
Budgeting Cost Estimate:
Restore Existing Channel: $16,000 to $21,000
Channel Relocation (Restore Historic Channel) Project: $13,000 to 18,000
Final design and preparation of plans and specifications (not including bid administration and
construction administration). Actual cost also depends on the level of detail of the feasibility
study.
Budgeting Cost Estimate:
Restore Existing Channel: $35,000 to $40,000
Channel Relocation (Restore IIistoric Channel): $30,000 to $35,000
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 2
2.0 Background and Objective
2.1 Background
Medicine Lake Watershed Implementation and Management Plan
In 2003, the city of Plymouth and its Medicine Lake Watershed Sub -committee prepared the
Medicine Lake Watershed Implementation and _Management Plan (June 2001). That plan sets forth
water quality goals for the lake and specifies watershed best management practices (BMPs) and
management activities to be undertaken to improve the quality of stormwater inflow in order to meet
those goals. Medicine Lake is classified as a Level I water body by the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission and city of Plymouth. Specific water quality goals for Medicine Lake are:
A summer average concentration for total phosphorus of 38 µg/L.
A minimum Secchi disc transparency depth of 1.5 — 1.75 meters (about 5 - 7 feet).
Phase II: Medicine Lake Watershed Implementation and Management Plan.
In 2004, the City and its Medicine Lake Watershed Subcommittee prepared the Phase II: Medicine
Lake Watershed Implementation and Management Plan (August 2004). This objective of this plan
was to reduce Medicine Lake external watershed phosphorus loading by 1,000 ponds per year and to
reduce its internal loading by controlling curly leaf pondweed. The plan recommended a goal of
removing 336 pounds of phosphorus from the Plymouth Creek outfall by realigning the creek and
excavating a 4 -acre pond in the vicinity of West Medicine Lake Park. The plan was adopted by the
City Council on September 28, 2004.
August 30, 2005 Technical Meeting
City of Plymouth staff scheduled a meeting on August 30, 2005 with technical staff from the City,
Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) and Three Rivers Park District to
discuss implementation of the Plymouth Creek portion of its plan for removal of 336 pounds of
Phosphorus. Several preliminary tasks were identified during the meeting that needed to be
completed to prior to preparation of construction documents. Some of these tasks included:
Prepare detailed topographic and boundary survey of project area.
Take soil borings and classify soils in project area.
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 3
Revise the P8 Water Quality Model of the Plymouth Creek Watershed with recent
monitoring and watershed data to assess water quality issues.
Revise or prepare hydraulic model to assess water quantity and flooding issues.
Prepare Feasibility study.
The City performed the detailed topographic survey and obtained soil borings during the winter when
frozen ground condition allowed access to the wetland areas. The City also revised the P8 Model as
discussed during the meeting.
March 24, 2006 Technical Meeting
On March 24, 2006,a meeting regarding the Plymouth Creek BMP project was held at the ,Plymouth
City Hall. Representatives from the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission, Three
Rivers Park District, Blue Water Science and the city of Plymouth engineering and parks staff
attended the meeting. Several issues regarding drainage, nutrient loading, localized street 'flooding,
stream bank erosion and aesthetics were discussed. In addition, the revised information including
topographical survey, soil borings, revised P8 modeling and recent monitoring results were
discussed. A number of project components were considered and identified as essential to the success
of the Plymouth Creek BMP project. The group also developed a preliminary list of potential best
management practices (BMPs) that could be considered for Plymouth Creek. Preliminary potential
BMPs included ponding; aeration, stream restoration and alum treatment. The City selected West
Medicine Lake Park, located along the east side of West Medicine Lake Drive, as its desired location
for implementation of a water quality pond. to meet the goal of removing 336 pound of phosphorus
annually from Plymouth Creek. This location offered the easiest access for construction and,
maintenance and provided opportunity for park and recreation use. The group/City decided to further
pursue a water quality pond at this location and indicated the initial step would be to perform
modeling and complete a feasibility study prior to design and preparation of engineering plans.
2.2 Objective
The objective of this study is to review the feasibility of constructing a water quality pond at West
Medicine Lake Park located along Plymouth Creek, east of West Medicine Lake Drive; develop a
conceptual plan for a large pond; model the concept pond using the City's recently revised P8 Model
to predict the removal efficiency of the pond; and determine if the concept pond can remove
336 pounds of phosphorus annually from Plymouth Creels.
P:\23\27\GO9\Feasibility Study\Pbase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 4
3.0 Proposed Improvements
3.1 Plymouth Creek Watershed
The 6,380 -acre Plymouth Creek watershed is located west of Medicine Lake and represents more
than half of the Medicine Lake watershed. Plymouth Creek drains a large portion of south and central
Plymouth and passes through West Medicine Lake Park before discharging into the southwest bay of
Medicine Lake. Approximately 30 percent of this watershed, including the Parkers Lake
subwatershed, enters Plymouth Creek downstream of where West Medicine Lake Drive crosses
Plymouth Creek. The City has referred to this area as the 18t" Avenue Drainage. Most of the
remaining Plymouth Creek watershed area drains through four large, channelized wetlands
downstream of Turtle Lake. Existing land use includes approximately 28 percent
commercial/industrial; 40 percent single-family residential; 4 percent multi -family residential;
7 percent highway; 7 percent parks and undeveloped land; and water surface area over the remaining
land area.
Medicine Lake receives more than 30 percent of its total annual phosphorus load (including internal
loading) and more than 60 percent of its external phosphorus load (excluding internal loading) from
Plymouth Creek. Stormwater runoff from this watershed passes through a channelized wetland area
upstream of West Medicine Lake Road before discharging to Medicine Lake.
3.2 Site Description
The City identified the West Medicine Lake Park site as its preferred location fora water quality
pond. This location offered uncomplicated access for construction and maintenance. The site is also
located on city property and provides opportunity for park and recreation activities. Plymouth Creek
passes under a bridge at West Medicine Lake Drive and flows along open channel approximately
1,400 feet downstream to Medicine Lake. West Medicine Lake Drive in the vicinity of Plymouth
Creek was relocated during 1996. Park facilities include a pedestrian bridge and boardwalk across
Plymouth Creek and the adjacent wetland; fishing piers and sand beach at Medicine Lake; basketball
courts, sand play area, children's play structure and parking facilities. A second pedestrian bridge
across Plymouth Creek is located near its convergence with Medicine Lake.
3.3 West Medicine Lake Park Pond
Construction of a wet detention pond will reduce the amount of phosphorus and suspended sediments
entering Medicine Lake. Two concept ponds were developed for analysis by the P8 Model. The
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 5
limits of the pond were maximized based on the location of existing permanent structures including
West Medicine Lake Drive and the existing parking facilities. The concept ponds were developed
using 4:1 side slopes above its normal water surface, 10:1 side slopes along its 10 -foot. bench, and
3:1 side slopes below the first foot of depth. Figure 1 shows the general location and layout of the
pond. The first concept pond was assumed to have'a'maximum depth of 6.5 feet. This depth was
selected to minimize potential wetland impacts. The second concept pond was'assunied to have a
depth 10 feet, generally 'the 'maximum accepted depth for water quality ponds. Deeper ponds tend to
stratify which can release nutrients to the water column. Table 1 summarizes the predicted area and
dead storage volume of each concept pond.
If feasible a skimming device should be incorporated to reduce floating debris and litter from
entering the lake. Design of the pond should also include. detailed review of site utilities and features.
3.4 P8 Water Quality Modeling
The previously calibrated P8 water quality model of the Plymouth Creels watershed was used to
determine how well the conceptual pond at the West Medicine Lake Park would be expected to meet
the phosphorus reduction goal for the watershed. A review of the removal efficiency of two different
pond sizes was conducted to determine the feasibility of meeting the phosphorus reduction goal
based on the maximum area available at the West Medicine Lake Park site. The surface area of the
proposed pond at the normal water level, in both cases, is 5.5 acres. The following table shows the
water quality modeling results for the 2003 and 2004 water years, both of which experienced near -
average precipitation amounts for the Twin City Metropolitan Area.
Pond Depth/Permanent Pool
Storage Scenarios
Water Year Load Reductions', lbs.
2003
Precipitation=25.60")
2004
Precipitation=28.83") Average
6.5 -feet deep/29 ac -ft storage 301 399 350
10 -feet deep/42 ac -ft storage 310 408 359
The P8 modeling results predict that a 5.5 -acre pond approximately 6.5 feet deep that provides
29 acre-feet of permanent pool storage would reduce the phosphorus loading into Medicine Lake by
approximately 350 pounds per year, on average. The P8 Model predicts that the larger, 10 -foot deep
pond at this location would only result in it further reduction of 9 pounds per year. The larger pond
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doe 6
would also be more likely to experience sediment phosphorus release under occasional anoxic
conditions. Based on the results predicted by the P8 Model, constructing a 6.5 -foot deep pond at the
West Medicine Lake Park site will meet the phosphorus reduction goal for Plymouth Creek
established in the Plymouth Medicine Lake Implementation and Management Plan.
3.5 Wetland Issues
Wetlands are protected by state and federal jurisdiction:
The Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) regulates filling and draining wetlands and excavating
with Type 3, 4, and 5 wetlands. In addition, WCA may regulate all types of wetland
alteration if any wetland fill is proposed. The WCA is administered by local government
units (LGU), which include: cities, counties, watershed management organizations, soil and
water conservation districts, and townships. Plymouth is the LGU for the proposed project
site. The Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) oversees administration of
the WCA statewide.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) regulates projects constructed
below the ordinary high water level of public waters or public waters wetlands; which alter
the course, current, or cross section of the water body. Public waters regulated by the
MnDNR are identified on published Public Waters Inventory (PWI) maps.
The Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulates the placement of fill into wetlands, if the
wetlands are hydraulically linked to a water of the United States, under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. In addition, the Corps may regulate all proposed wetland alteration if any
wetland fill is proposed.
Creation of the proposed storm water pond may involve filling and excavation within wetlands. If
wetland fill is proposed, the WCA and Corps may regulate all proposed wetland impacts.
Both the WCA and Section 404 require that anyone proposing wetland impacts conduct a
sequencing analysis" which consists of three general steps:
1. Avoid disturbing wetlands.
2. Minimize impacts to wetlands.
3. Replace any lost wetland functions and values.
P:M\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility ReFort.doc 7
When planning for wetland replacement, attempts must be made to replace wetlands on-site before
considering other options. Certain wetland activities are exempt from the WCA, allowing projects
with minimal impact or projects located on land where certain pre -established land uses are present
to proceed without regulation.
Figure 4 show the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) coverage in the project area. As shown, some
of this area has been developed. The City should perform a wetland delineation of the project site to
determine the actual wetland limits and potential wetland impacts associated with the project. These
wetland issues must be evaluated as part of the proposed project. The City should also contact the
regulatory agencies to review the delineation and outline the need for the water quality improvement
project and creek restoration project.
3.6 Cost Estimate
A conceptual cost estimate for implementation of the West Medicine Lake Drive Pond is $900,000.
This cost assumes wetland mitigation is not necessary and some assistance is provided by the City to
identify soils disposal areas. Cost does not include any park improvements. A preliminary cost
estimate for the project is included in Table 1.
3.7 Funding Sources
Discussion with Plymouth staff indicates that limited funds are currently available for the water
quality pond and the proposed Plymouth Creek improvement projects. It is our understanding the
City is investigating potential funding sources. Based on available funds, the City may consider
phasing the water quality pond and creek improvement projects as funds become available.
The city of Plymouth could also approach the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission
BCWMC) to participate in funding of the water quality pond. The City would need to formally
request the BCWMC to add the project in its Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The BCWMC
would then need to review the request. If approved, the BCWMC would submit the proposed
modification to its BassettCreels Watershed Management Plan as a "]minor plan amendment" to the
BWSR for its review and approval. The review process requires a public hearing for the proposed
project. If approved, the BCWMC could fluid up to 100% of the portions of the project related to
water quality improvements. BCWMC would obtain funds by an Ad -Valorem tax of properties
located in the Bassett Creek Watershed. The BCWMC could next review a request" to modify its CIP
during May 2007. If approved, funds could potentially be available by 2008 for, construction of the
P:\23\27\Go9\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 8
project. However, if the City elects to utilize this funding source, the City could proceed with the
project once a feasibility study has been completed, a hearing has been held by the Commission, and
the project has been approved by the BCWMC and BWSR. Reimbursement would be provided after
funds are available. The BCWMC will not fund projects that have been completed prior to its review
and approval.
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc
4.0 Phase 2 Scopin
A Phase 2 study may be necessary to address the following issues:
Stream bank erosion and restoration located upstream (west) of West Medicine Lake Drive.
Reroute and stabilize Plymouth Creek.
Reroute 18`x' Avenue Drainage.
Figure 2 shows these potential study areas. The eroding stream banks upstream of the proposed pond
will contribute significant sediment loads to the pond and increase the frequency of pond
maintenance. These are challenging issues that will require detailed analysis to thoroughly address its
feasibility and constructability.
It is important for the city of Plymouth to define its goals, objectives and project scope prior to
initiating final design and development of plans and specifications for these tasks. Once its goals and
objectives have been identified, the scope of the proposed projects can be defined. For instance, if the
goal is strictly based on improving water quality, the project approach may be different than if the
goal is strictly related to improving aesthetics or relocating the creek. Several goals & objectives and
project considerations have been identified for the Phase 2 study area, based on communication with
Plymouth staff and our knowledge of the project site. The City staff and Council should review and
prioritize these goals to ensure the project provides benefit to its citizens.
4.1 Stream Bank Restoration
Stream bank restoration to prevent erosion along the channel was addressed during the March 24,
2006 technical meeting. The city of Plymouth has recognized the importance of addressing these
erosion and sedimentation issues; however, funding limitations have prevented aggressive repair of
these sites to date. The Bassett Creek Water Management Commission (BCWMC) manages a
Channel Maintenance Fund and will contribute money for repairing erosion sites in accordance to its
allocation policy. Under its current policy, the BCWMC contributes $25,000 annually to its channel
maintenance fund. The fund is allocated to each city based on its percentage of trunk system in the
watershed and based on need. Currently (through 2006), the BCWMC has a total $33,000 allocated to
Plymouth for channel maintenance. Approximately $6,600 is provided to Plymouth each year for
stream bank restoration based on the current annual Commission assessment for creek maintenance.
P:\23\27\GO9\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 10
During 2004 the city of Plymouth prepared an inventory of the erosion and sedimentation sites along
Plymouth Creek. Its September 7, 2004 report identified sixteen sites requiring maintenance or repair
in "Section 1." The report identified "Section 1" to include the reach of Plymouth Creek from West
Medicine Lake Road to 26t1i Avenue North. The report indicated that 3,350 feet of channel requires
maintenance. The estimated cost to perform the maintenance was $435,500 according to the report.
4.2 Reroute Plymouth Creek
Discussions during the March 24, 2006 technical meeting indicated an interest to reroute Plymouth
Creek to reduce flooding potential of properties north of the channel. Rerouting Plymouth creek
requires adequately designing the channel to eliminate erosion and encroachment, address flooding
and ensure other problems are not created. In addition, rerouting the creek or 18`" Avenue drainage
channel may require a revised hydraulic model and analysis of revised flood profiles. Following is a
list of goals and objectives and project considerations the City should evaluate prior to initiating final
design and development of plans and specifications to ensure the project ultimately meets its goals:
Goals & Objective
Reroute Plymouth Creek to eliminate creek encroachment on adjacent private properties.
Eliminate channel erosion along creek to eliminate its water quality impact on Medicine
Lake.
Minimize localized flooding along streets and private properties.
Reroute Plymouth Creek to another location to restore the historic channel.
Create a meandering stream to be an asset to the Medicine Lake Park (park, trails, etc.)..
Improve water quality monitoring access.
Considerations
Restoration must minimize floodplain impacts. Figure 3 shows the FEMA floodplain
elevations along the channel. Due to homes adjacent to the creek it is critical to ensure the
proposed project does not increase flood elevations that impact these properties.
Review of 1947 and 2004 aerial photographs show that the creek channel has changed its
course (see Figures 5 and 6). Note the quarter -section lines on the photographs to orientate.
Comparing the two photographs indicate the channel has reestablished approximately
350 feet north. The main creek appears "channelized" in the 1947 photograph. In addition,
brief review of the Plymouth's 1960 topography indicates the creek may have taken a course
located further south than is shown in the 1947 aerial photo. The City could perform a
detailed review of additional historical photographs to identify Plymouth Creek's historic
PA23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 11
channel. This would be especially important if there was an interest to restore a historic
channel.
The existing erosion most likely may be most economically addressed by focusing on the
encroachment areas and relocating portions of the creek at its current location and armoring
other areas to create a stable channel.
Complete relocation of Plymouth Creek along this reach may be unreasonable from a
permitting perspective unless the relocation of public waters includes restoration of the
historic channel. These permitting issues should be addressed with DNR and Corps of
Engineers staff.
Opportunities for access for recreational uses such as boardwalks, trails, etc. should be
identified for both the current location of the creek and for the restored historic channel to
determine if there is,a significant difference in the two options.
4.3 Reroute 18th Avenue Drainage
Discussions during the March .24, 2006 technical meeting also indicated an interest to reroute
Plymouth Creek to prevent flooding and reduce maintenance at the existing culvert beneath West
Medicine Lake Drive. It is our understanding that the existing ditched area has been fairly stable.
Rerouting the drainage swale requires adequately designing the channel to prevent erosion, address
flooding and ensure other problems are not created:In addition, the work may require a revised
hydraulic model and analysis of revised flood profiles. Following is a list of goals & objectives and
project considerations the City should evaluate prior to initiating final design and developnient of
plans and specifications to ensure the project ultimately meets its goals:
Goals & Objectives
Eliminate culvert maintenance and localized flooding associated with culvert beneath West
Medicine Lake Drive.
Provide water quality treatment of stormwater from Parkers Lake and 18t" Ave. drainage
area.
Create a park/recreation amenity.
Consideration
It is our understanding, that poor foundation soils have caused continual settlement of the
existing culvert resulting in excessive maintenance. Sediment accumulation in the culvert has
also caused frequent maintenance. ,
Rerouting 1811i Avenue drainage shall be compatible with Plymouth Creels relocation.
PA23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report,doc 12
Review of 1947 and 2004 aerial photographs show the drainage swale has not significantly
changed its course.
Permitting issues should be addressed with DNR and Corps of Engineers staff.
Opportunities for access for recreational uses such as boardwalks, trails, etc. should be
identified.
4.5 Recommendations and Budgeting Costs
The City may consider a Phase 2 feasibility study to further address stream bank erosion and channel
relocation/stabilization items located west of West Medicine Lake Drive. Following are several
recommended tasks and budgeting cost estimates that could be included in the study.
Perform wetland delineation of proposed pond and proposed study areas identified in
Figure 2 and prepare delineation report. Delineating the entire wetland complex shown on
Figure 4 would require much greater effort. Delineation should be expanded if City is
considering restoration of the historic channel. Estimate does not include survey.—
Budgeting Cost Estimate: $5,000 to $10,000)
Identify project goals and objectives (City of Plymouth)
Review potential recreation assets. (City of Plymouth)
Perform additional review of the Plymouth Creek historic channel including review of aerial
photographs, quads, etc. if the City pursues restoring the entire Plymouth Creek channel.—
Budgeting Cost Estimate: $1,000 to $2,000)
Contact regulatory agencies (DNR, Corps, BCWMC) to discuss the proposed restoration
project, wetland delineation and impacts, conveyance and flooding issues. (City of Plymouth)
Detailed wetland replacement and mitigation plan assuming on site mitigation, if necessary.
Budgeting Cost Estimate: $10,000 to $20,000)
Revise and update September 7, 2004 creek inventory of the erosion and sedimentation sites
along Plymouth Creek from Medicine Lake to 26t11 Avenue and cost estimates for repairing
the creek channel. (City of Plymouth)
Prepare Phase 2 feasibility study to compile recommended tasks, identify problem erosion,
encroachment and flooding areas; evaluate alternatives, review hydraulics and flooding
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 13
impacts (assuming use of existing hydraulic and hydrologic models), design a stable channel,
address 18`x' Avenue drainage issues and provide a construction cost estimate. Detailed
review of alternatives and new channel could significantly increase costs.
Budgeting Cost Estimate:
Restore Existing Channel: $16,000 to $21,000
Channel Relocation (Restore Historic Channel) Project: $13,000 to 18,000
Final design and preparation of plans and specifications (not including bid administration and
construction administration). Actual cost also depends on the level of detail of the feasibility
study.
Budgeting Cost Estimate:
Restore Existing Channel: $35,000 to $40,000
Channel Relocation (Restore Historic Channel): $30,000 to $35,000
PA23\27\GO9\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc 14
Tables
Table 1
ESTIMATED POND AREA AND VOLUME
West Medicine Lake Park Pond
Elevation Area (ft^2) Area (Acres) Vol/layer(ac-ft)
887.7 238828 5.48
NWL)
887.0 220326 5.06 3.69
886.7 212500 4.88 1.49
886.0 207060 4.75 3.37
885.0 199340 4.58 4.66
884.0 191683 4.40 4.49
883.0 184091 4.23 4.31
882.0 176657 4.06 4.14
881.2 170968 3.92 3.19
881.0 169573 3.89 0.78
880.0 162828 3.74 3.82
879.0 156611 3.60 3.67
878.0 150530 3.46 3.53
877.7 152331 3.50 1.04
Area 6.5' 29.35 ac -ft
deep pond
Area 10' 42.18 ac -ft
deep pond
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doe
Table 2
PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
West Medicine Lake Park Pond
Item Description Units Qty. Unit Cost Extension
1 Mobilization/Demobilization (10%) LS 1 60,000 60,000
2 Site Preparation/Clearing/Grubbing AC 5 2,000 10,000
3 Pond Excavation & Disposal CY 52,000 10 520,000
4 Restoration & Plantings LS 1 50,000 50,000
5 Park Features?? LS 0 0 0
6 Wetland Mitigation?? LS 0 0 0
Project Total 640,000
Contingency 20% 130,000
Legal/Eng/Permitting/Admin 20% 130,000
Total 900,000
Note: Estimated cost assumes some assistance by Plymouth to identify soil disposal site
P:\23\27\G09\Feasibility Study\Phase 1 Feasibility Report.doc
Figures
Legend O Figure 1
Proposed Pond WEST MEDICINE
Pond Bottom - 6.5 Foot Depth Feet LAKE PARK POND
200 0 200 City Project #3105
Plymouth, Minnesota
k'
1 1 r r I • t?A „ ;E P{r ar ,NI r rdl
dh
t 1 t
ppd
T6
1 I-I
I J
i
yyy Pq _
E OI1,+
11
y r
MR,
P fl
t k ,wY1 u. R I II'I P S I ( .,:It r- v 1 s fi ;.s •!'Fd a I 1 ';.
I . ;: i •I r
ill,.
41 q'Yt r>ti .t I+.
Iri:krp it I t,i 4 1 +l!''!V r 3,.•^"=?' -pR ifi p i ' -r y, 5 y,"' "'
7
1
890r'
ti
s a I 0a . i A
1E a
Il q- i r..'"r-•..I Pti 4 li...-„r""•...«a.r
tq
r
i,r R.,• fi r'r I rr•^i .P •.:
Ir it ' 1 • 1 ..,'A v 4 !
7 n,l '`1
t w mlr, '
v
1 p v,111a ! it 1 aE' rr
4
its
1
l-
T.sy i aiIirky t elp
w wr- "' •'r r ,fit F q
g° ,r t ' 1 it .ii i r nr'',b l y P . r t'wst°r'IZ 1 1 R,.j i•ry ; X41.1 r j
1vp
4
Jv'+ I' ',
r _,
i+`!
I•' yGlr'r } tyM ;'4 + ' ' + .
i.
m :,v;
i.. r. .
Legend
l
Dr
Proposed Pond
Pi "e`+
Pw '
S P• .,.girl% f 4' , dd q`k:5"alll'k , ;; b ' :
El
Soil Borings
Study Areas
400 0
Feet
i
Avemteth e V
l
Dr
Iry ` Pi "e`+
Pw '
S P• .,.girl% f 4' , dd q`k:5"alll'k , ;; b ' :
Legend
Proposed Pond
0
aoo o aoo
Feet
Base Flood Elevations
are in NAVD88.
Figure 3
FEMA FLOODPLAIN
September 2, 2004 FIRM)
City Project #3105
Plymouth, Minnesota
p. v--$7.,_-_. :yw.
w:»»
74:1
d
2004
4u
400 0 400
Feet
Figure 5
PLYMOUTH CREEK
City Project #3105
Plymouth, Minnesota
1947
C J
00 0 ,00
Feet
Figure 6
PLYMOUTH CREEK
City Project #3105
Plymouth, Minnesota
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
RECEIVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT AND
ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS
WEST MEDICINE LAKE PARK POND PROJECT
PLYMOUTH CREEK PHASE I
CITY PROJECT NO. 3105
WHEREAS, a preliminary engineering report, dated May 2006, has been prepared by
Barr Engineering with reference to the improvement of a detention pond in West
Medicine Lake Park; and
WHEREAS, the proposed improvement includes construction of a detention pond
upstream of the point where Plymouth Creek discharges into Medicine Lake; and
WHEREAS, said report has been received by the Council on May 8, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed
improvements are necessary, cost effective, and feasible;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
1. The Council hereby adopts the preliminary engineering report as
presented and orders the Phase I improvements identified in the report.
2. Plans and specifications are to be prepared by the City Engineer, or his
appointed designee.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0AEngineering\PR0JECTS\2000 - 2009\3105\Resol\AccptFeas_3105_Res.doc
Agenda Number: 640-
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
FROM: Joel Franz, Deputy. Chief of Police
THROUGH: Michael S. Goldstein, Chief of Polic
TABLIESUBJECT: RESOLUTIONACCEPTINGA POR BULLET TRAP FROM
CITIZEN ON BEHALF OF THE CITYAND DESIGNATE TO THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT
DATE: April 25, 2007 for May 8, 2007 City Council Meeting .
1. ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council adopt the resolution accepting the portable
bullet trap, donated by a citizen of Plymouth to be retained as City equipment and designating
it for use of the Police Department.
2. BACKGROUND: On April 11, 2007, a Plymouth resident contacted the Police Department
and offered to donate a portable bullet trap to the Department. The bullet trap was
manufactured by his company, Range Systems, and has been redesigned. This trap is the last
of the old style in their inventory and therefore he wanted to eliminate it from the inventory.
The bullet trap is a portable target backstop which can be used at outdoor ranges or in our
range at Fire #3.
3. ALTERNATIVES: The alternative would be to not accept this gift.
4. DISCUSSION The bullet trap is new and lists for $849.00 on the Range System web page.
The bullet trap will see limited use and therefore should provide many years of service. We
do not anticipate replacing the bullet trap at the end of its useful life and therefore it would
not be on a replacement schedule.
5. BUDGET IMPACT: There would be no impact on the budget.
6. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend the City Council adopt the resolution accepting
the portable bullet trap on behalf of the City of Plymouth, retaining it, and designating it for
use by the Police Department.
3/8" AR500 Portable Tactical Trap with LOK-TITE(Click for Steel Options)
RANGE SYSTEMS (HOME)
Page 1 of 1
HOME ABOUT iN-RANGE NEWS CONTACTS SEARCH:
tl tl
The "'It,, nei Roo S11-?
1ovp;"
tF-,ar all, your in-ranngerneedi
Please enter the desired quantity and select Add to Cart. Contact us directly at i
free at (877) 423-1785 for bulk orders. International customers please call +1 (763)
Shop Home I Bullet Traps
Sign-up to be on our list and receive email notifications of special offers and
new products frorn Range Systems.
Copyright 2004 Range Systems by Renew Resources, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
3/8" AR500 Portable Tactical Tral
Rifle Capable Tactical Bullet Trap
This 24"x36" Portable Tactical Trap feats
allows the trap to be stand or wall mount
the wall mount using the LOK-TITE syst
required. The trap is constructed of our I
Ballistic Steel backplate with 2" ballistic! .
7.62mm. ammo. See bullet stopping dat
surface is 36" off the floor. Base is 28"W
877-432-1785 to order!
price: $696.00
Steel Option:
o; AR 500 1/2 Steel -- Wal
849.00
Wall Unit 1/2 steel-
699.00 add: $3.00
First name as name Email
http://www.range-systems.com/inrange/ProDetail. cfm?SiteID=5&CatID=62&ProductID=... 4/25/2007
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION OF A
PORTABLE BULLET TRAP FROM A CITIZEN,
RETAINING FOR CITY EQUIPMENT AND
DESIGNATING SUCH FOR USE BY
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2007 a Plymouth resident offered to give a portable bullet trap
to the Police Department; and
WHEREAS, the resident indicated he wanted the Department to have the trap for its use;
WI
WHEREAS, the Police Department would be able to put the bullet trap to good use in the
firearm training program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, the City Council adopt the resolution accepting the donation of a
portable bullet trap as City equipment and designated it for use by the Police Department.
Adopted by the City Council on
Agenda Number: 6,06
GITY OF PLYMOUTH ;
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: . Ross Beckwith, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
COUNTY ROAD 61/COUNTY ROAD 47
CITY PROJECT NO. 6108'
U
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution awarding the
contract for the Intersection Improvement Project at County Road 61/County Road 47,
City Project No. 6108.
BACKGROUND: On April 24, 2007, bids were publicly opened for the Intersection
Improvement Project at. County Road 61/County Road 47.. A total of 6 bids were
received at the following prices:
Contractor Total Bid
Knife River Corporation 838,920,20
Hardrives, Inc. 883,245.92
North Valley, Inc. 890,510.26
Forest Lake Contractors 921,264.23
C.S. McCrossan, Inc. 1,011,509.10
Midwest Asphalt, Inc. 1,016,906.38
Engineer's Estimate 921,548.00
The low bidder, Knife River Corporation out of Sauk Rapids, MN, was 9% lower than
the engineer's estimate. Engineering staff reviewed the information submitted by Knife
River Corporation to comply with the bidder qualification criteria policy and feels they
are capable of constructing the project in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications. In addition, Howard R. Green Company, the City's consultant on this
project, has submitted a letter recommending that Knife River Corporation be awarded
the contract.
O:\Engineering\PROJECTS\200D • 20D9\6108\Moinos\AwnrciCondrnol_Maino_6108.(Ioc
AWARD CONTRACT
C.P. 6108
PAGE 2
BUDGET IMPACTS: This project is included in the 2007-2011 Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) in the amount of $1,050,000. The estimated total project cost at the time
the plans and specifications were approved was $1,300,000. Based upon the lowest
responsible bid we have received, we now estimate the total project cost to be $1,220,000
including design, administration, right-of-way, legal and contingencies. Funding from
this project comes from:
Funding Source Amount
Developer 1,097,165
Hennepin County 121,000
Special Assessments 1,835
Total 1,220,000
RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council adopt the attached
resolution awarding a construction contract to Knife River Corporation for the
Intersection Improvement Project at County Road 61/County Road 47, City Project No.
6108 for the bid total amount of $838,920,20.
attachments: Map
Letter fiom Howard R. Green Company
Resolution
0:\Engincering\l'ROJEC'I'S\2000-200I\6)08\Mcmos\AwnrdContract Memo 6108.doc
Project Are i
W07
58TFA- \: Y
April 26, 2007
Ross Beckwith
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: City Project 6108 Bid Opening
Dear Ross:
This letter is in regards to the April 24, 2007 Bid Opening for City Project 6108 (CSAH 61/CR 47
Intersection Improvement Project), Based upon the bids received and examination of the
Responsible Bidder Evaluation, Howard R. Green Company recommends that Knife River be
awarded the contract for this project..
Sincerely,
Howard R. Green Company
William C.. Klingbeil, P..E..
Project Manager
Court International Building- 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 40ON • St, Paul, Minnesota 55114-1052
651,644.4389 fax 651.644..9446 toll free 888.368,4389 www.hrgreen.com
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 —
AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
COUNTRY ROAD 61/COUNTY ROAD 47
CITY PROJECT NO. 6108
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Intersection Improvement
Project at County Road 61/County Road 47, bids were received, opened and tabulated
according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the
advertisement:
Contractor Total Bid
Knife River Corporation 838,920.20
Hardrives, Inc. 883,245.92
North Valley, Inc. 890,510.26
Forest Lake Contractors 921,264.23
C.S. McCrossan, Inc. 1,011,509.10
Midwest Asphalt, Inc. 1,016,906.38
Engineer's Estimate 921,548.00
WHEREAS, it appears that Knife River Corporation of Sauk Rapids, MN is the lowest
responsible bidder, complying with the minimum specifications;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the
contract for the bid with Knife River Corporation of Sauk Rapids, MN in the
name of the City of Plymouth for the Intersection Improvement Project at County
Road 61 /County Road 47 according to the plans and specifications therefore
approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer in the
amount of $838,920.20.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders
the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder
and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
0A\EnginceringTR07ECT5\2000 - 2009\6109\Resol\AwnrdConlrnct_Res_6108.doc
Page 2
3. Funding for this project in the amount of $1,220,000 shall be from:
Developer $1,097,165
Hennepin County $121,000
Special Assessments $1,835
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
OAEnginecring\PROJECTS\2000 - 2009\6108\Resol\AwnrdContrnct Res_6108.doc
Agenda Number: 6 ( 0q
TO: Mayor and City Council ^q f
FROM: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
SUBJECT: , Contribution to Plymouth Civic League for Music in Plymouth
DATE: May 1, 2007, for City Council meeting of May 8, 2007
1. ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolution approving a 2007 contribution of
50,000 to the Plymouth Civic League for Music in Plymouth.
2. BACKGROUND: The City of Plymouth has traditionally contributed to the Plymouth Civic
League to support Music in Plymouth. The City Council allocated $50,000 in the adopted
2007 budget for the Plymouth Civic League. An additional in-kind contribution, estimated at
16,000, is provided through the services of the police, park, and fire departments for the
event.
The following monetary contribution amounts have been made by the City in previous years:
2000 $20,000
2001 $25,000
2002 $25,000
2003 $25,000
2004 $25,000
2005 $31,500 (City's
50th
anniversary)
2006 $30,000
2007 $50,000 (proposed —Music in Plymouth 35th anniversary)
3. DISCUSSION: Each year, over 10,000 people attend Music in Plymouth for an evening of
entertainment, food, and fireworks at the Hilde Performance Center and Plymouth Creek
amphitheater. The event features the Minnesota Orchestra and other musical entertainment.
This community -wide, family event helps to provide community identity for Plymouth. The
City's contribution is a portion of the Civic League budget.
The Plymouth Civic League has been working on a much expanded event for 2007 to
celebrate the 35th anniversary of Music in Plymouth this year. Therefore, the contribution
request from the City has been increased from $30,000 to $50,000. The Civic League has
indicated that the request would return to the $30,000 range for 2008.
The City Attorney indicates that the requirements of public purpose and statutory authority
have been met because Music in Plymouth is an arts and recreation event. We recommend
that the City enter into an agreement with the Civic League to ensure that the contribution is
used for purposes authorized by statute.
4. BUDGET IMPACT: There is $50,000 in the 2005 Recreation Fund budgeted for Music in
Plymouth. The City Council has adopted a policy that the 10% fee collected from charitable
gambling organizations shall be used for the purpose of Music in Plymouth. For 2007,
13,000 is transferred through the budget from gambling proceeds to the Recreation Fund.
5. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council adopt the attached resolution
contributing $50,000 to the Plymouth Civic League and authorizing an agreement with the
Civic League.
lClvoic6
To: Laurie Ahrens
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Date: .April 16, 2007
Amount: $50,000.00 contribution
ice}' 'Ji!iJ7
APR 17 2007
For: The July 5, 2007 Music in Plymouth event held at the Hilde
Performance Center in Plymouth.
ri2.ase reuait7by May 25, 20007.
r
Please send to our Director of Development:
Kris St. Martin
Community Bank Plymouth
3455 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Checks should be made payable to "Plymouth Civic League"
hank you!
FUNDING AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this 8' day of May, 2007, by and between the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and the PLYMOUTH CIVIC
LEAGUE ("Civic League").
RECITALS
A. The Civic League has requested funds from the City to support Music in
Plymouth.
B. Minn. Stat. § 471.914 authorizes the City to appropriate money to support
artistic organizations.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL
COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. PAYMENT. The City hereby grants the Civic League $50,000 to be used by
the Civic League to help finance Music in Plymouth.
2. MUSIC IN PLYMOUTH. The Civic League shall use the grant proceeds to
help finance its production of Music in Plymouth. If the grant or any part of it is not used
for the purpose intended it shall be returned to the City.
3. GENERAL CONDITIONS.
a. The Civic League agrees that it will comply with all federal, state, and
local statutes and ordinances relating to nondiscrimination.
b. The Civic League shall at all times be an independent contractor and
shall not be the employee of the City for any purpose.
C. All data created, collected, received, maintained, or disseminated for
any purpose in the course of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, any other applicable state
statute, or any state rules adopted to implement the act, as well as federal regulations
on data privacy.
d. All books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and
practices of the Civic League and its (sub)contractor(s), if any, relative to this
Agreement are subject to examination by the City.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
BY:
Kelli Slavik, Mayor
LN170
Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
PLYMOUTH CIVIC LEAGUE
Barbara Willis, President
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2007 -
APPROVING 2007 CONTRIBUTION TO THE PLYMOUTH CIVIC LEAGUE
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Plymouth that the amount of $50,000 is
approved for contribution to the Plymouth Civic League for 2007.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute such
an agreement with the Plymouth Civic League.
Adopted by the Plymouth City Council on May 8, 2007.
6,/6
DATE: April 19, 2007, for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Derek Asche, Water Resources Technician Q
SUBJECT: APPROVE THE HENNEPIN COUNTY COST -SHARE ASSISTANCE
CONTRACT FOR THE NATURAL RESOURCE INCENTIVES FOR
CRITICAL HABITAT GRANT - CITY PROJECTS 7101 AND 7107
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to approve the Hennepin County Cost -Share
Assistance Contract for the Natural Resource Incentives for Critical Habitat (NRICH) Grant
and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the contract.
BACKGROUND: The City applied for an NRICH Grant- as part of the implementation of
best management practices (BMPs) (rain gardens and wetland restoration) within 2007 street
reconstruction projects in City View Acres (Project 7107) and Hawthorne Ponds (Project
7101). The goals of the BMPs are to reduce external nutrient and sediment loading into
Gleason Lake and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed. Activities included in this grant are
part of the approved 2007 Water Resources budget.
BUDGET IMPACT: Hennepin County has awarded the City of Plymouth $10,000. The
City has budgeted $130,000 toward BMPs within the 2007 street reconstruction areas. 'The
estimated cost of the BMPs based on the bids received for the two projects is $116,000.00
including engineering and administration.. The $10,000 will be used to reduce City's cash
contribution which will be from the approved 2007 water resources budget. The term of the
contract will be from the date of execution until June 30, 2010.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I recommend that the City Council
snake a motion to approve the Hennepin County Cost -Share Assistance Contract for the
NRICH Grant and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the attached grant
agreement.
attachment: Resolution
Grant Agreement
0:\EngineeringTROJECTS\2000 - 2009\7107\Reso1\CC_NRICH_07.doe
Contract No. A070578
HENNEPIN COUNTY COST -SHARE ASSISTANCE CONTRACT
Department of Environmental Services
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the County of Hennepin, State of
Minnesota hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A-2300 Government Center, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, 55487, on behalf of the Hennepin County Department of Enviromnental Services,
417 North Fifth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55401, hereinafter referred to as the
DEPARTMENT," and the City of Plymouth c/o Derek Asche at the address: 3400 Plymouth
Boulevard, Plymouth, MN 55447 referred to as the "GRANTEE."
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements
hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY, on behalf of the DEPARTMENT, and the GRANTEE agree
as follows:
1. TERM AND COST OF THE AGREEMENT
a. The GRANTEE is responsible for the operation and maintenance of practices
applied under this contract to ensure that the conservation objective of the practice is met
for the effective life of the practice.
b. In no case shall the DEPARTMENT provide cost -share assistance to the
GRANTEE for the reapplication of a practice that was removed by the GRANTEE during
its effective life without consent of the DEPARTMENT or that failed due to improper
maintenance. If title to this land is transferred to another party before expiration of the
aforementioned life, it shall be the responsibility of the GRANTEE who signed this
contract to advise the new owner that this contract is in force.
C. Practice(s) must be planned and installed in accordance with technical standards
and specifications of the: NRCS Field Office Technical Guide or a construction plan
with written approval of DEPARTMENT Staff.
d. Increases in the practice units or cost inust be approved by the DEPARTMENT as
a condition to increase the cost -share payments by amendment.
e. The tern of this contract is fiom date of execution until June 30, 2010. Practices
shall be installed within this period unless this contract is amended by mutual consent to
reschedule the work and funding.
f. Items of cost for which reimbursement is claimed on the Voucher and Practice
Certification Summary Form (EXHIBIT A) are to be supported by invoices/receipts
HCA Fonn 101 A 2007
g. The COUNTY shall pay the GRANTEE the lesser of the following: a) seventy-
five percent (75%) of the actual cost of the practice(s); or b) the maximum grant amount
listed herein. The cost to the COUNTY shall not exceed a total of $10,000. The cost of
any work performed by the GRANTEE'S contractor in excess of this Grant will be the
sole responsibility of the GRANTEE.
2. PRACTICES TO BE IMPLEMENTED
a. The conservation practice category for which cost -share is requested is: rain garden
construction.
b. The effective life of this practice is: 10 years
c. Eligible expenses for cost -share reimbursement include: excavation, native plants,
soil, rock, mulch and other related costs with approval of DEPARTMENT
STAFF.
3. COST -SHARE PAYMENT
Cost -share payinent for practices shall be made directly to the GRANTEE after
completion.of the practice(s) and upon the presentation of a claim in the mariner provided
by law governing the COUNTY'S payment of claims and/or invoices. The GRANTEE
shall submit invoices for services related to the implementation of practices. Payment
shall be made within 45 days fiom receipt of the invoice.
4. GRANTEE STATUS
The GRANTEE shall not be considered to be. either a temporary or permanent employee
of the COUNTY. It is mutually understood that the'GRANTEE and the GRANTEE'S
contractor act hereunder as independent contractors and acquires no tenure rights or any
rights or benefits by way of Workers' Compensation, unemployment compensation,
medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, severance pay, PERA, or any other
rights or benefits offered to COUNTY employees.
HCA Form 101 A 2007 2
5. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
GRANTEE agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officials,
officers, agents and employees (including duly authorized volunteers) from any liability,
claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs or expenses, including
reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of the
GRANTEE, its officers, agents, employees (including duly authorized volunteers) or
subcontractors, or anyone whose acts and/or omissions they may be liable for in the
performance of the services required by this contract, and against all loss by reason of the
failure of said GRANTEE to perform fully, in any respect, all obligations under this
contract. Grantee's obligations under this paragraph are subject to the limitations,
immunities and defenses in Mn. Stat. Chapter 466 which are not waived and which are
incorporated herein.
6. ACCESS FOR INSPECTIONS
The GRANTEE agrees that the COUNTY, and any duly authorized representatives of the
COUNTY, at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably
deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to enter the GRANTEE's property
identified herein, for purposes of inspection of the practice identified herein, for the
effective life of the practice.
7. SUCCESSORS, SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS
The GRANTEE shall not assign, subcontract, transfer, or pledge this Agreement and/or.
the services to be performed hereunder, whether in whole or in part, without the prior
written consent of the COUNTY.
S. AMENDMENT
Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement
shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this
Agreement signed by the parties hereto.
9. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION
Should the GRANTEE fail to maintain the practice during its effective life, the Grantee is
considered to be in default and is liable to the DEPARTMENT for the full amount of
financial assistance received to install and.establish the practice. The GRANTEE is not
liable for cost -share assistance received if the failure was caused by reasons beyond the
GRANTEE's control, or if conservation practices are applied at GRANTEE's expense
that provide equivalent protection of the soil and water resources.
HCA Form 101 A 2007
10. PAPER RECYCLING
The COUNTY encourages the GRANTEE to develop and implement an'office paper and
newsprint recycling program.
11. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN
The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations
concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations
between the herein parties and performance under it. The appropriate venue and
jurisdiction for any litigation hereunder will be those courts located within the County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Litigation; however, in the federal courts involving the
herein parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If
any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the remaining
provisions will not be affected.
THIS PORTION OF PAGE DELIBERATELY LEFT BLANK
HCA Form 101A 2007 4
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL
The Grantee, having signed this grant agreement and the County having duly approved
this grant agreement on the day of , 2007, and pursuant to such approval,
the proper County officials having signed this grant agreement, the parties hereto agree to be
bound by the provisions herein set forth.
Reviewed by the County Attorney's
Office
Assistant County Attorney
HCA Form 10 [ A 2007
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
By:
Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator
By:
Assistant County Administrator, Public Works
Date:
Recommended for Approval
By:
Director, Department of Environmental Services
Date:
The Grantee certifies that the person who
executed this grant agreement is authorized to do so
on behalfofthe Grantee as required by applicable
articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances.*
By:
Date:
By:_
Date:
5
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL,
The Grantee, having signed this grant agreement and the County having duly approved
this grant agreement on the day of , 2007, and pursuant to such approval,
the proper County officials having signed this grant agreement, the parties hereto agree to be
bound by the provisions herein set forth.
Reviewed by the County Attorney's COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Office STATE OF MINNESOTA
Assistant County Attorney
an
Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator
Assistant County Adininistrator; Public Works
Date:
Recommended for Approval
By:
Director, Department of Environmental Services
Date:
The Grantee certifies that the person who
executed this grant agreement is authorized to do so
on behalf of the Grantee as required by applicable
articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances.*
By:_
Date:
By:_
Date:
HCA Form 101A 2007 5
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 —
APPROVING COST -SHARE ASSISTANCE CONTRACT WITH THE
HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES FOR THE NATURAL RESOURCE INCENTIVES FOR
CRITICAL HABITAT GRANT
WHEREAS, The City desires to implement best management practices within the 2007
Street Reconstruction Project; and
WHEREAS, a cost -share assistance contract with Hennepin County Department of
Environmental Services is required to receive Natural Resource Incentives for. Critical
Habitat funds;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a
cost -share assistance contract with the Hennepin County Department of
Environmental Services for the Natural Resource Incentives for Critical Habitat
Grant for implementation of BMPs within the 2007 street reconstruction projects.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0AEngineering\PROJECTS\2000 - 2009\7107\Reso1\Res_approve_NRICH.doc
611
DATE: April 26, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Derek Asche, Water Resources
TechniciantN
SUBJECT: RECEIVE LOAD ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR
MUNICPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER (MS4) GENERAL PERMIT
CITY PROJECT 7108E
ACTION REQUESTED: To make a motion to receive the Load Assessment Report.
BACKGROUND: Storm water discharging from the City of Plymouth is permitted through the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency by the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) General Permit
MNR040000). The purpose of the MS4 Permit is to establish conditions for discharging storm water
and other related discharges to waters of the State. As outlined in the permit, the City of Plymouth is a
selected" MS4 which requires a more intensive analysis of storm water discharges. Selected MS4s
must submit proposed changes to our Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) including a
Loading Assessment and Nondegradation Report by October 2007. Specifically, the. Loading
Assessment requires a water quality analysis to assess the change in storm water discharge loading for
our permitted area by modeling changes in average annual flow volume, total suspended solids, and
phosphorous from 1988 to present and present to 2020. Selected MS4s that have significant new or
expanded discharges are required to complete a Nondegradation Report.
The City has conducted its Load Assessment and determined storm water discharges have increased
for average annual flow volume and phosphorous. Total suspended solid discharges have decreased,
likely due to a significant increase in water quality ponding from 1988 to the present. Based on the
Load Assessment results, the City is required to complete a Nondegradation Report which will
incorporate best management practices (BMPs) to mitigate the effects of increased average annual flow
volume and phosphorous including BMPs to mitigate the effects of new development. Additionally,
BMPs are required to address the negative impacts of increased storm water discharge volumes having
the potential to affect designated uses of wetlands and streams.
The Load Assessment Report and Nondegradation Report must be completed before the City can finish
the Surface Water Management element of the Comprehensive Plan. The reports must also be
completed before the City can update its SWPPP, which also must be incorporated into the
Comprehensive Plan.
Page 1 of 2 0;\Engineering\PR07ECTS\2000.2009\7108E\Reso1\CC_1oad_assessment_07.doc
The Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) received the Load Assessment Report at their April
11, 2007 meeting. The EQC recommended forwarding the Load Assessment Report to the City
Council for review and acceptance.
BUDGET IMPACT: Funding for the Load Assessment comes from the 2007 approved Water
Resources Budget in the amount of $27,000. Future impacts of the MS4 permit on the Water
Resources Budget will include the Nondegradation Report, anticipated to be less than $10,000.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: To make a motion to receive the Load
Assessment Report.
Attachments: Load Assessment Report
Resolution
Page 2 of 2 O:\Engineering\PROJECTS\2000-2009\7108E\Resol\CC_load_assessment_07.doc
Nondegradation Load Assessment Report
Prepared for
City of Plymouth
Submitted by
Barr Engineering Company
April 2007
City of Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction l
1.1 MS4 Permit Requirements.......................................................................................................... l
1.1.1 Loading Assessment...................................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Nondegradation Report .................................................................................................. 1
1.1.3 Proposed SWPPP Modifications and Submittals to MPCA.......................................... 2
1.1.4 Discharges to Wetlands.................................................................................................. 3
1.1.5 Discharges Affecting Source Water Protection Areas .................................................... 3
1.2 Discussion of MPCA Guidance ......................................... ............................. 3
1.2.1 Responses to Comments................................................................................................ 3
1.2.1.1 Modeling Approach and Complexity.............................................................4
1.2.1.2 Average Annual Flow Volume...................................................................... 5
1.2.1.3 Wetlands.........................................................................................................9
1.2.1.4 Special Waters Considerations..................................................................... 10
1.2.2 Guidance Manual for MS4s......................................................................................... 10
1.2.2.1 Loading Assessment..................................................................................... 11
1.2.2.2 Nondegradation Report ...................... ....... :........................... ................. 13
2.0 Loading Assessment............................................................................................................................ 15
2.1 Land Use/Land Cover Compilation.......................................................................................... 15
2.2 Watershed Imperviousness Determination.....................................................:....:....................17
2.2.1 1988 Imperviousness Determinations.......................................................................... 17
2.2.2 2007 Imperviousness Deterrniriations:...:..:............ ......................................... 17
2.2.3 2020 Imperviousness Determinations..........................................................................21
2.2.4 Summary of Land Use/Land Cover by Watershed...................................................... 21
23 Modeling Approach and Methodology for Loading Estimates ................................................. 22
2.3.1 Average Annual Flow Volume............................................................. ....................... 29
2.3.2 Total Phosphorus......................................................................................................... 30
2.3.3 Total Suspended Solids................................................................................................ 31
2.3.4 BMP Irmplementation Modeling.................................................................................. 32
3.0 Results and Discussion........................................................................................................................ 34
3.1 Average Annual Flow Volume................................................................................................. 34
3.2 Total Phosphorus...................................................................................................................... 37
3.3 Total Suspended Solids..............................................................................................................38
3.4 Implications of Load Assessment Results................................................................................. 39
4.0 Recommendations for Nondegradation Report.................................................................................... 41
4.1 Water Quality Trend Analyses and Implications for Report....................................................41
4.2 Implications of Impaired Waters for Addressing Expanded Discharges in Report ..................43
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 1
4.3 Remaining Points to Address in Nondegradation Report .........................................................44
4.4 Recommendations for Using Load Assessment Modeling.......................................................45
References................................................................................................................................................... 46
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Land Use and Land Cover (LULL) Classes.................................................................... 15
Table 2-2 Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) for 1988, 2007 and 2020 .............................. 16
Table 2-3 Average Imperviousness by Land Use Type for Plymouth based on 2000 Landuse and
ImperviousnessData....................................................................................................... 21
Table 2-4 Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) by Watershed for 1988, 2007 and 2020 ......... 23
Table 2-5 Comparison of Modeling Attributes/Capabilities by Selection Criteria .......................... 26
Table 3-1 Plymouth Nondegradation Loading Assessment Summary ............................................. 35
List of Figures
Figure 2-1 Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) for 1988 .......................... ............... :................ 18
Figure 2-2 Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) for 2006.......................................................... 19
Figure 2-3 Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) for 2020 ...........:............................................ 20
Figure 3-1 Plymouth Loading Assessment—City-Wide Average Annual Flow Volume ..... :............ 36
Figure 3-2 Plymouth Loading Assessment—Average. Annual Flow Volume by Watershed w/ BMP
Implementation............................. ........................................... ........................................ 36
Figure 3-3 Plymouth Loading Assessment—City-Wide Total Phosphorus Loading ......................... 38
Figure 3-4 Plymouth Loading Assessment—City-Wide Total Suspended Solids Loading ............... 39
Figure 4-1 Map of Impaired Waters, BMP Treatment Areas and Watershed Discharge Nodes ........ 42
List of Appendices
Appendix A Lake Water Quality Trend Analyses
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 11
1.0 Introduction
1.1 MS4 Permit Requirements
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) revised the General NPDES/SDS Permit
MNR040000 (Permit) for the city of Plymouth to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4), effective June 1, 2006. Plymouth had previously completed a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) to address the six minimum control measures
required by the previous permit. This report has been developed to address modifications to the
SWPPP for measures that may be necessary to meet the new, applicable' requirements of Appendices
C and D in the re -issued permit.. Appendix C covers discharges to wetlands that are applicable to the
city of Plymouth. Appendix D covers the nondegradation requirements for Selected MS4s (30
permittees including the city of Plymouth); including the development of a loading assessment and
nondegradation report. The following sections describe the sections of the permit that are relevant
for the city of Plymouth.
1.1.1 Loading Assessment
Each Selected MS4 must assess the change in storm water discharge loading for its permitted area
using a pollutant loading water quality model that; at minimum,, addresses changes in average annual
flow volume; total suspended solids (TSS), and phosphorus (TP). This modeling should be based on
two time periods: from 1.988 to the present, and from the present to 2020. The Selected MS4s must
use a simple, model, or another more complex model that they find to be more appropriate,that
addresses the parameters of concern. This may include a model that the Selected MS4, has already
used. Other assessment methods' may be used if they can be shown to be as effective at quantifying
the increase in loading as the modeling methods. The models and/or other methods will be used as
part of the assessment to develop the Nondegradation Report, to help in selecting appropriate best
management practices (BMPs) that address nondegradation, to determine whether additional control
measures can reasonably be taken to reduce pollutant loading.
1.1.2 Nondegradation Report
Selected MS4s that have significant new or expanded discharges are required to complete a
Nondegradation Report and, upon approval, to incorporate its findings on BMPs that address
nondegradation into their SWPPP. The BMPs should address changes in pollutant loadings as far as
is reasonable and practical through future development. Additionally, the BMPs shall address, as far
as is reasonable and practical, the negative impacts of increased storm water discharge volumes that
Plymoutb Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc
cause increased depth and duration of inundation of wetlands having the potential for a significant
adverse impact to a designated use of the wetland, or changes in stream morphology that have the
potential for a significant adverse impact to a designated use of the streams.
The Nondegradation Report must include consideration of the Loading Assessment, which must
include analysis of flow and may include removal of pollutants by BMPs already initiated. For
purposes of the permit, 1988 levels consistently attained means runoff that would have been
produced under approximately average conditions of rainfall. Local storm water management plans
and other pertinent factors may also be considered. BMPs implemented by other parties may be
considered when those BMPs affect the storm water from the area of the Selected MS4, If the
pollutant loadings cannot be reduced to levels consistently attained in 1988, the Nondegradation
Report must describe reasonable and practical BMPs that the Selected MS4 plans to incorporate into
a modified SWPPP. The Selected MS4 must consider alternatives, explain which alternatives have
been studied but rejected and why, and propose alternatives that arereasonable and practical. The
Nondegradation Report must give high priority to BMPs that address impacts of future growth, such
as ordinances for new development. Where increases in pollutant loading have already occurred due
to past development, the Nondegradation Report must consider retrofit and mitigation options
BMPs) that the Selected MS4 determines to be reasonable, practical and appropriate for the
community. The Selected MS4 is responsible for developing any site specific cost/benefit, social, and
environmental information that the Selected MS4 wishes to bring to the Agency's attention. The
Selected MS4 must incorporate the BMPs into a modified SWPPP and include an implementation
schedule that addresses new development and retrofit BMPs it proposes to implement.
1.1.3 Proposed SWPPP Modifications and Submittals to MPCA
Prior to submittal to the MPCA, the proposed SWPPP modifications to address nondegradation will
be public noticed at the local level. Each Selected MS4 shall also submit its SWPPP modifications to
address nondegradation to the appropriate local water authority (e.g. watershed organizations or
county water planning authority) in time to allow for their review and comment. The Nondegradation
Report explaining the proposed BMPs and the entire SWPPP must be made available to the public
and local water authority upon request.
Selected MS4s must submit their proposed changes to the SWPPP, reports addressing nondegradation
for all waters, together with other supporting documents, to the MPCA in accordance with the
schedule in Appendix E of the permit. This submittal must include:
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 2
1. The Loading Assessment;
2. The Nondegradation Report;
3. The proposed SWPPP modifications to address nondegradation;
4. The public and local water authority comments on the proposed SWPPP modifications to
address nondegradation, with a Record of Decision on the comments; and
5. An application to modify the permit.
1.1.4 Discharges to Wetland's
The pen -nit does not authorize physical alterations to wetlands, or other discharge adversely affecting
wetlands, if the alteration will have a significant adverse impact to the designateduses of a wetland.
Any physical alterations to wetlands that will cause a potential for a significant adverse impact to a
designated use must be implemented in accordance with the avoidance, minimization and mitigation
requirements of Minn. R. 7050.0186 and other applicable rules.
1.1.5 Discharges Affecting Source Water Protection Areas
BMPs shall be incorporated into the SWPPP to protect any of the following drinking water sources
that the MS4 discharge may affect, and a map of these sources shall be included with the SWPPP, if
they have been mapped:
1. Wells and source waters for drinking water supply management areas identified as vulnerable
under Minn. R. 4720.5205, 4720.5210, and 4720.5330, and
2. Source water protection areas for surface intakes identified in the source water assessments
conducted by or for the Minnesota Department of Health under the federal Safe Drinking
Water Act.
1.2 Discussion of MPCA Guidance
1.2.1 Responses to Comments
Following the close of the comment period on the draft 'pennit, the MPCA issued responses to
comments received through April 15, 2005 on the Permit. To provide further guidance on
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 3
compliance with the Permit requirements, this section describes responses to comments that pertain
to the following subjects:
Loading Assessment modeling approach and complexity
Addressing volume as a parameter of concern for the Loading Assessment and
Nondegradation Report
Nondegradation requirements for Wetlands
Nondegradation requirements for Special Waters
1.2.1.1 Modeling Approach and Complexity
In response to several comments regarding the modeling approach and complexity required for the
Loading Assessment described in the Permit, the MPCA stated that the Loading Assessment should
include changes to pollutant loadings associated with changes due to past land use changes and
changes due to anticipated land use changes. The Loading Assessment is intended to be used as a
planning tool to compare 1988 levels to present and 2020 levels of discharge. It is to be presented as
comparative results (increase), not, absolute (accurate) flow, total suspended solids (TSS), and phosphorus
discharge levels from the MS4. It is acceptable for MS4s to do more extensive modeling for design of
BMPs, but it should be explained.
The Permit does not, however, specifically require that BMPs be factored into the Loading
Assessment, but the MPCA clearly states that BMP analysis could be provided if any Selected MS4
so desires. The assessment can include changes due to BMPs that have already been implemented, if
increase in the loading since 1988 is explicitly stated, as well as changes due to BMPs that are
planned to be implemented and written into the MS4's ordinances or other regulatory mechanisms.
MPCA further states that the Loading Assessment was developed after considerable discussion,
including discussion with consultants, cities, and the League of Minnesota Cities. It was determined
that to limit costs the nature of the assessment must be limited. The MPCA chose not to include
treatment options in this requirement since the level of modeling must be significantly increased to
model treatment. Many communities will not be conducting other modeling, therefore this
requirement will be a cost that needs careful distinction between what is desirable and what is
required. The MPCA chose a level that will prevent undue burden while still developing useful
information.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc
The Loading Assessment is comparable to an influent analysis, while the Nondegradation Report
addresses the actual discharges of storm water to receiving water. The permittees are allowed to show
reduction in discharge or to make other arguments they believe are appropriate in the development of
the Nondegradation Report. A detailed Loading Assessment can support the Nondegradation Report.
Under the provisions of Minn. R. 7050.0185; subp. 4, the MPCA must "determine whether additional
control measures beyond those required by subpart 3 can reasonably be taken to minimize the impact
of the discharge on the receiving water. " The MPCA does not have absolute numeric or other criteria
that it will use in making this determination for each of the Selected MS4s. The criterion of
reasonableness" requires flexibility and site specific determinations. Reasonableness determinations
will therefore be made on a case-by-case basis. Site specific variations in situation, funding,
population, and receiving water will be as critical to the determination of reasonableness as a specific
increase in loading. Additionally, the MPCA must note that the required analysis and documentation
for the Nondegradation Plans are relative, not absolute, in nature. For example, the Loading
Assessments required by the permit are net changes; we do not request the actual pollutant loading,
just estimates of the relative quantity of the change.
1.2.1.2 Average Annual Flow Volume
In response to several comments regarding the requirement for addressing volume as a parameter of
concern for the Loading Assessment and Nondegradation Report described in the Permit, the MPCA
stated that permit and guidance were revised to include more specifics on how flow volume will be
addressed in BMPs and the Nondegradation Report. The responses were qualified by first stating that
when an MS4 develops a Nondegradation Report, site specific objections, costs and other considerations
can be raised, which the MPCA must consider in its determinations. Reasonable measures, not any and all
measures, must be installed. For this permit, the reasonableness of volume control policy is not general
and applicable for all MS4s, but is det'ennined on an individual, site specific basis. In some situations the
problems created by increased flow volume can be reduced and minimized by effective implementation of
appropriate BMPs based on site specific conditions.
The MPCA asserts that based on the following statutory definition (Minn. Stat. § 115.01 Definitions
Subd 13. Pollution of water, water pollution, pollute the water.) and actual enviromnental impacts,
volume may qualify as water pollution under many specific conditions:
Pollution of water, " "water pollution, " or 'pollute the water" means: (a) the discharge of any
pollutant into any waters of the state or the contamination of any waters of the state so as to create a
nuisance or render such waters unclean, or noxious, or impure so as to be actually or potentially
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 5
harmful or detrimental or injurious to public health, safety or welfare, to domestic, agricultural,
commercial, industrial, recreational or other legitimate uses, or to livestock, animals, birds, fish or
other aquatic life; or (b) the alteration made or induced by human activity of the chemical, physical,
biological, or radiological integrity of waters of the state.
MPCA staff looked at the rules that are applicable to.nondegradation (Minn. R. 7050.0185) and
studied the concept of increased loading of one or more pollutants as used in the rule. They
determined that the rule directs the MPCA to consider the adverse effects of increased flow volume,
and where effects are adverse, to consider flow volume as a pollutant. It is not volume per se that was
asked to be addressed but the change in volume related to MS4 development. Additionally, it is well
known that increases in flow can have a variety of negative environmental impacts. A discussion of
the reasoning for the inclusion of volume of storm water as a pollutant was provided in excerpts from
Chapter 11 of the Minnesota 2001-2005 Nonpoint Source Management Program Plan. These excerpts
are summarized below:
Hydromodification, which involves changes in flow patterns in natural waterways such as
rivers or streams and wetlands, is the second leading cause of impairment of fresh waters.
Removal of perennial vegetation led to a decrease in infiltration and an increase in the
volume of runoff. Exposing soils to wind and water increased sediment loads carried by
runoff. Impervious surfaces and artificial drainage systems increased the volume of runoff
and accelerated the rate at which water was removed from the landscape. Impervious surfaces
in urban areas also transported runoff more rapidly and in greater volumes than before
development.
Minn. Stat. § 155.0 1, subd. 13 (b) defines pollution of waters as "the alteration made or
induced by human activity of the chemical, physical, biological, or radiological integrity of
waters of the state". The basis for this statute is that human activity, such as
hydromodification, affects these waters in many adverse ways. Under natural conditions and
at bank -full capacity, studies have shown that streams can handle a flow approximately equal
to the 1.5- to 2 -year frequency peak discharge within their banks (Rosgen, 1994; Leopold et
al., 1964). After urbanization, increased runoff can cause bank -full flow to be exceeded
several times each year. In addition to increased flooding, this condition causes previously
stable channels to erode and widen. Much of the eroded material becomes bed load and can
smother bottomdwell'ing organisms.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc
In this process, stream habitat diversity is, damaged or lost. Water that was once slowed by
bends, pools, and woody debris in the water column moves faster and with greater volume
cutting into the bed and eroding the banks. This faster flowing water carries with it an
increased sediment load, some of which is deposited in the downstream reaches. Many fish
and invertebrate species cannot use substrates that are laden with excessive silt for
reproduction, feeding, or cover. Riffles and pools become scarce or absent as the stream is
converted from' riffle,' run, pool sequences to long runs or pipes. Not only is habitat diversity
affected but the stream Hydrology becomes inherently less stable. As water leaves the system
faster, the natural Hydrologic timing is altered. The overall effect is an increase in the-
intensity, of the'high flows and decreased duration of low flow events. If the water is stored to
prevent increased peak flows, then the flow duration is extended. Streams in which the
surrounding vegetation has been removed or altered are usually compromised by an increase
in the amount of silt -laden runoff. Also, water temperatures within the stream may rise as the
overhead canopy is removed exposing the stream to full sunlight.
Urbanization also changes the extent and duration of inundation in wetlands, which can
modify the established wetland vegetation. Measures to control discharges to wetlands must
control the peaks and volume of flow to wetlands, if they are to be protected. This also means
that reduced surface and ground water flow caused by diversion to storm sewers is also an
area of concern, especially for `sensitive wetlands.
Urbanizing areas increase runoff from small events in greater proportion than large events.
This is important because, in Minnesota, more than 90% of the precipitation events are less
than 1.0 inch. These rainfall events also account for approximately 65% of the cumulative
runoff quantity in urban areas and proportionately large amounts of the pollutant loading
associated with these rainfall events (Pitt, 1998). While the significance of large flood events
should not be underestimated, the smaller flows with an approximately nine month to two-
year return period frequency, are probably as important or more important to overall water
quality. These flow's can be very erosive and can be the major source of increased pollutant
loading. Pollutant loading is more closely associated with total runoff volume than with peals
runoff rates. Utilizing methods to maintain volumes and peaks closer to those that originally
shaped the channel can reduce the channel reshaping process in a watershed. Examples of
appropriate management techniques are the volume reduction that results from the use of
swales instead of curb and gutter, reduced impervious surfaces or infiltration structures.
Wetland and upland vegetation can affect or be significantly affected by hydrologic changes.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doe 7
For example, drainage can obviously change the vegetation at a site, but increased water that
drains from a project area into an off-site drainage basin can impact trees and other
vegetation, including wetland vegetation. In such cases, water itself is the damaging agent
even if it is clean. The increase in water level, both surface and subsurface, can result in the
death of roots. Roots require oxygen from the air, and saturated soils create an anaerobic
condition that will eventually kill the roots. A case in point is a tamarack swamp that receives
water from several developments. As water levels increase through the swamp, the increased
flow depth results in the death of many of the tamarack trees, even though they are tolerant of
wet conditions. In Minnesota, we have several tree species that tolerate short periods of
flooding, but we should be encouraging diversity and be mindful of sensitive areas
downstream. Likewise vegetation in upland areas can change the infiltration capacity or
evapotranspiration capacity of a watershed. By using native plantings that have denser
canopies and/or deeper root networks the storage capacity of the upland areas are
significantly increased reducing run-off volumes, especially in the smaller storms.
Addressing average annual flow volume in the nondegradation plan may show that the modeling
effort indicates a significant increase in flow from 1988. This is an indication to the MPCA that your
loading of one or more pollutants has increased, and the plan will need to address what is reasonable
and practical to get the flow back to 1988 levels. Alternatively, you may wish to demonstrate that
your flow increase has not resulted in water quality degradation and therefore does not need to be
addressed. The MPCA has found flow volume to be related to significant degradation, therefore
claims to the contrary will be carefully scrutinized. To address flow volume some of the options
include consideration of BMPs for flows existing before 1988, BMPs for flows developed since
1988, and limitations on future flows. The MPCA notes that the 1.0 inch event is about the 90ti,
percentile event for 24 hour storm on an average annual basis, and that this represents 67% of the
cumulative volume of precipitation. This means that runoff reduction often can be related to BMPs
that reduce flow from events smaller than 1.0 inches in depth. If properly designed the BMPs could
also treat some percentage of flow related to larger events without loss of effectiveness for reasons
such as re -suspension. Depending on development patterns, zoning, soils, water table, and other
factors, many communities may be able to meet the non degradation goal of returning the flow to
pre -1988 levels. Treatment BMPs that reduce flow include infiltration basins, trenches, bio -retention,
enhanced swales, evapo-transpiration; disconnection of impervious surfaces, reduced
imperviousness, filterstrips, and variations and combinations of these and other BMPs.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc
In some instances, a community may not be able to reduce the flows to 1988 levels. If so, the. basis
for this conclusion should be explained. For example the current problems may be related to past
development patterns, past or present zoning, soils, water table, and other factors that may be
pertinent. In establishing the case, any cost information that is available, especially site specific
information; should be provided. The MPGA must consider the potential impact of the discharge on
the receiving water and cumulative impacts of multiple discharges. While MS4s are not required to
develop "information on this aspect of the analysis, they may find it beneficial to supply information
that supports their position.'
1.2.1.3 Wetlands
In response to several comments and questions regarding the designated uses and nondegradation
requirements for wetlands in the Permit, the MPCA clarified that the terms "designated 'uses" of the
permit relate to MPCA rules and requirements and are set by MPCA through notice and comment
rulemaking under state law and any changes to designated uses would have to be made through notice and
comment rulemaking. The MPCA has included, in guidance, the pertinent parts of those miles to help
describe the context of these terns. The permit and rules are under MPCA authority and the permit
implements,the rules.
Under this NPDES permit, the pennittee is required to comply with conditions that are established to
protect the water quality standards of wetlands as listed in Minn. R. 7050. One of the purposes of the
NPDhS permit is to establish requirements or conditions that the permittee must operate under in order to
assure compliance with the water quality standards. While the WCA for LGYJs does regulate the activities
that cause draining, filling and some excavation to certain wetlands, the WCA does allow for tern
categories of exemptions to these requirements, does not have jurisdiction over all wetlands that are
considered waters of the state, and does allow the LGU to vary wetland sequencing requirements if a local
wetland plan is developed. The permittee must recognize the nondegradation standards for wetlands and
the required mitigation sequence of Minn. R. 7050.0186 to mitigate for degradation of wetlands, apply to
all wetlands that are considered waters of the state. The MPCA water quality standards provide more
comprehensive water quality protection for all wetlands in Minnesota than is required of the LOU to
implement under WCA. Application of the WCA by the LGU will provide comparable wetland protection
to wetland impacts in many to most cases and the WCA determination would also satisfy the Minn. R.
7050.0186 determination. However, in the few projects where the requirements of the WCA are not as
comprehensive as MPCA water quality standards, then the requirements of the NPDES permit will
require an LGU to make a deiernination that will also satisfy Minn. R. 7050.0186. Considering those
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 9
exceptions, allowing the permittee to only reference the WCA requirements for wetland protection would
not be adequate to assure compliance with the NPDES permit for all cases.
The MPCA does not anticipate that it will review and make a separate determination (a duplicate
effort) regarding the evaluation of the sequence mitigation requirements when that determination has
been conducted by the permittee. MPCA enforcement of the NPDES permit requirements of Minn. R.
7050.0186 regarding wetland impacts associated with a component of the storm water system should
only be necessary .if the LGU does not apply the permit requirements to their determinations. A
separate determination by the permittee under the NPDES requirements that a wetland alteration
activity satisfy Minn. R. 7050.0186 sequencing is only initiated when the WCA requirements exempt
or consider the wetland or the activity nonjurisdictional or if the local wetland plan designation of the
wetland does not require full sequence evaluation for impacts of a wetland alteration. It should be
noted the WCA also recognizes that there may be other agencies or programs that have regulatory
jurisdiction regarding wetland impacting activities. The WCA rules contained in Minn. R. 8420.0105,
item B state that WCA rule is in addition to other regulations including those of the United States
Army Corps of Engineers, United States Department of Agriculture, Minnesota state agencies,
watershed districts, and local governments. Also, specifically the WCA requires that the person
conducting an activity in a wetland under an exemption ensure the activity is conducted in
compliance with all other applicable federal, state, and local requirements (see Minn. R. 8420.0115).
1.2.1.4 Special Waters Considerations
The evaluation for special waters is contained in Appendix C and the evaluation of other waters is
contained in Appendix D. The test for ORVWs is that feasible and prudent alternatives must be used.
The test for other waters is reasonable and practical BMPs to be implemented. These analyses have a
different criteria and standard of judgment with a long history of precedent that must be considered.
The exact format of the evaluation is not described, but this distinction should be kept in mind as
evaluations are planned; the MPCA will also address this in guidance.
1.2.2 Guidance Manual for MS4s
The purpose of this draft report (MPCA, 2006) is to provide guidance for MS4s to comply with the
Permit requirements, including the nondegradation policy. Nondegradation is achieved if 1988 levels
of flow and pollutants can be maintained. If it is not feasible for a Selected MS4 to demonstrate that
it has achieved 1988 levels of flow and pollutants, the MPCA must find if additional measures
BMPs) are "reasonable and practical" (Minn. R. 7050.0185). These measures are in addition to the
minimum measures of the permit. The MPCA will review required submittals such as the loading
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 10
assessments, and other information such as water plans; population growth data and development plans to
determine appropriate measures. During the review, the MPCA will consider what additional control
measures would be reasonable to reduce the impact on the receiving water in light of the relative
importance'of the economic and social impacts. The objective is to allow the MPCA to make an
informed, public decision that reasonably balances additional BMP costs against the adverse impact on
the environment posed by the new or expanded discharge.
Under Minn. R. 7050.0185,, the MPCA is fee to consider whatever information is available while the
MS4 has the opportunity, albeit the burden, to demonstrate to the MPCA why expanded discharges are
necessary to accommodate important economic or social development and what treatment is reasonable
and practical. This burden is appropriately placed upon the MS4 since the discharger is in the position to
know the relative costs and benefits of the proposed actions. The MPCA must consider the economic and
social development of the community; this means the houses, jobs, taxes, recreational opportunities, and
other impacts on the public at large that will result from development. Therefore, the MS4 should point
out to the MPCA how and why the public has benefited from the development that created the new or
expanded significant discharge, and why the public costs associated with the proposed BMPs are
reasonable.
1.2.2.1 Loading Assessment
Loading Assessment modeling must be conducted for the entire M94, not for individual watersheds or
areas unless the MS4 will model these for their own interests. Some communities may wish to use models
that address peak flows, or site specific increased loading. While this makes some sense in terms of
overall plan development, it is not required by the permit; it is an option that the MPCA encourages but
does not require. Modeling examples of methods that may be acceptable include but are not limited to the
following:
The Simple Method
PONDNET
SLAMM
P8 Urban Catchment Model
XP-SWMM
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doe 11
Modeling or assessment methods will be used to estimate increases in loading based on two time periods,
1988 to current development and current to projected (2020 or ultimate, whichever is first) development.
Modeling may also be used to help in the decision making process of determining appropriate BMPs to
implement to bring those discharges back to 1988 levels, or maintaining those levels into the future if
they are not already exceeded. Use of the models in this manner is not required but is encouraged.
The MPCA expects that the model will produce relative values. For this effort, the MPCA is more
concerned with the average annual increases than about specific event increases. It is not as important for
this particular requirement of the permit to get the actual loads correct as it is to model consistently,
showing the relative change in loads rather than the actual loads. Also note, the permit does not require
the development of annual rainfall tables or calculation of hydrographs and/or store and release
calculation.
All models need to be adapted for use in the specific circumstances of each MS4. Gather available
information on land use/imperviousness and other pertinent facts from conditions that existed or will exist
from 1988 to 2020. Selection of the appropriate method is often dependant on the readily available or
collectable data as well as on the outputs or results required. Since the MPCA's goal is to show relative
increases or decreases in loading, a simple method can be used rather than a more complex model. MS4s
may still want to use models that are more complex for your own purposes. The permit requirement is to
consistently model between time periods so that the result can be objectively compared. An MS4 may
want to select a model that can model BMPs to show removal from various practices that you may have
installed or that you may want to install. This is not necessary for compliance with the permit, but makes
sense when it comes to justifying your nondegradation plan. The model does not need to calculate design
features such as hydrographs, but can show removal rates based on design criteria which can be just as
useful for planning purposes. Design calculations may need to be run before implementation but often
these can be run on a much smaller scale. Runoff and loading factors should be developed based on
available information. BMP modeling, while optional, can be used in plan development and could
consider BMP measures taken since 1988 to present and proposed BMP measures for present to 2020 or
ultimate development conditions. The MPCA has examples of how the "simple method" can be applied
to every community in the metro area.
The modeler must provide an explanation of assumptions and calculation methods. The inputs will need
to be listed and the values shown. All values will need to be explicitly stated. The modeler must also
provide an explanation of assumptions and calculation used in the model, whether they are inherent to the
model or assigned by the user. The exact algorithms must be shown. The results of the model must be
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 12
examined to demonstrate reasonable results from, the model mins. Outlier values that do not seem in line
with reasonable results must be explained or discussed in enough detail to help the MPCA decide the
significance of the results.
1.2.2.2 Nondegradation Report
Based on the modeling, local stonn water management plans, and other pertinent factors, perrnittees must
develop a Nondegradation Report to get new or expanded discharges back to 1988 .levels. Where
increases in runoff or pollutant loading has occurred due to new or expanded discharges from storm water
runoff, the. Nondegradation Report must include retrofit and mitigation options (BMPs) that the pennittee
has determined to be reasonable and practical to be included in the permittee's SWPPP.
Each Selected MS4 will submit its SWPPP, including BMPs proposed to be included, to the appropriate
water authority, watershed organizations or county water planning authority, for their review and
comment. The Nondegradation Report, as the basis for the SWPPP, will'also be available to the water
authority. The intention is that these groups will work together to create a Nondegradation Report that is
acceptable to the public and other affected, parties. As required in the permit, the proposed SWPPP, as
based on the Nondegradation Report, will be public noticed at the local level for public participation.
The Nondegradation Report explains the decisions made by the permittee regarding the incorporation of
BMPs into their SWPPP to meet the nondegradation requirements. The purpose of :the Nondegradation
Report is "to allow the MPCA to make an informed, public decision that reasonably balances additional
BMP costs against the adverse impact on the environment posed by the new or expanded discharge
Minn. R. 7050.0185). The report is an explanation of the nondegradation implementation plan proposed
to be adopted by the MS4 community, explaining why some measures have been rejected and why the
measures taken are reasonable and practicable given the circumstances for the community they serve.
To help the MPCA determine if discharge loads should be allowed to increase, Selected MS4s must
submit pertinent information that demonstrates how potentially adverse water quality impacts from a new
or expanded discharge have been addressed. The goal of the Nondegradation Report is to demonstrate
what additional control measures would be reasonable to reduce the impact on the receiving water in light
of the relative importance of the environmental, economic and social impacts. The Report should explain
all aspects of the proposed Report that the pennittee intends to implement. It is understood that the
SWPPP itself may have already addressed some specific aspects of nondegradation, and it may be
beneficial to note these in the Report. The Report should also address the alternatives that have been
studied but rejected. It is not necessary to include all rejected alternatives, but it will be very important to
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doe 13
establish the general thinking regarding why some option have been rejected and the basis for such
rejection.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 14
2.0 Loading Assessment
2.1 Land Use/Land Cover Compilation
An important parameter for estimating historical TP and TSS loading and storinwater runoff volumes
is an accurate determination of land use and land cover (LULC) for the city of Plymouth for the years
of interest. These LULC data are available in Geographic Information System (GIS) data format for
various years in the Twin City Metropolitan area, but due to land use changes in Plymouth, the
LULC data available does not reflect the development status of the City during all of the years
specifically analyzed for this study.
To meet the Permit requirements, it will be necessary to estimate average annual runoff volumes, TP
and TSS loadings for 1988 (the base year), 2007 (existing conditions), and 2020. To get a consistent
comparison of LULC for all three years using the data that were available, a generalized LULC
classification system was developed. The LULC classes used are shown in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1 Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) Classes
Class Name Description
Agriculture Cultivated Row Crops, Small Grains
Agriculture (Non -
Cultivated) Hay/Pasture
Airport Airlake Airport
Commercial Commercial areas and corporate campuses
Forest Forested areas within parks or undeveloped areas
Grassland Non forested open space including most developed parks
Highway Controlled and limited access highways
Industrial Manufacturing, utilities, etc
Institutional Schools, churches, City buildings
Rural Residential Large lot housing, mostly outside of the MUSA boundary
Single Family Residential Single family homes with lots size typically less than an acre
Multi -Family Residential Duplexes, townhouses, apartments, condominiums, etc
Water Wetlands, Lakes, Detentions Ponds
LULC for the city of Plymouth (excluding County and State right-of-ways) for the 1988,
2007 and 2020 are summarized in Table 2-2. Table 2-2 shows that agriculture and some
forest and grassland has been or will be replaced by residential, commercial, industrial and
some institutional land uses during the two time periods.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 15
Table 2-2 Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) for 1988, 2007 and 2020
LULC
Area (acres) by year
1988 2007 2020
Agriculture (Cultivated) 981 249 0
Agriculture (Pasture/Hay) 1,322 640 0
Highway 21 24 23
Commercial 383 1,218 1,102
Industrial 1,197 1,648 1,813
Institutional 806 912 786
Multi -Family Residential 811 1,816 2,029
Single Family Residential 6,107 8,829 9,495
Rural Residential 0 0 990
Forest 1,131 716 276
Grassland 3,666 1,175 765
Water 5,203 4,397 4,346
Total 21,627 21,625 21,625
Total Developed 9,325 14,447 16,238
Area Imperviousness 2,686 4,743 5,076
Developed Area
Percent Impervousness 28.8% 32,8% 31.3%
For the 1988 and 2007 LULC, only the "developed" portions of rural residential properties were
Identfied by the available land use data. These smaller areas (they do not include the entire parcel)
were assumed to have similar imperviousness single family residential areas. For 2020, the City's
guide plan designated Rural Residential as the entire parcel. Therefore, a lower impervousness and a
seperate land use class was assumed.
Sources used to derive the data for 1988 and 2007 include the 1984 and 1990 Metropolitan
Council Landuse GIS data, USGS National Land Cover Database (NLCD, 1992),
Hennepin County Parcel Data, 1991 and 2006 aerial photography. City of Plymouth's
Existing Conditions (2007) Landuse GIS layer and the City Wetland Inventory and parcel -
based development information was obtained from City of Plymouth Planning Department
staff were also used. The data used to estimate the 2020 LULC included the City's 2020
Guide Plan, 2007 LULC data and input from the City's Engineering and Planning staff.
Figures 2-1, 2-2 and 2-3 show the LULC developed for 1988, 2007 and 2020, respectively.
Most of the non -urban land cover was estimated using the 1992 USGS NLCD land cover
data.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 16
2.2 Watershed Imperviousness Determination
Another parameter that is required to develop estimates of average annual runoff volume, TP
and TSS loadings is imperviousness. Imperviousness was estimated using satellite -derived
Landsat) data developed by the University of Minnesota for the MPCA. These data are
available for the entire Twin Cities Metropolitan areas for the years 1986, 1991, 1998, 2000
and 2002. Since imperviousness data was not specifically available for 1988 or 2006
additional data development and calculations were necessary for the city of Plymouth
2.2.1 1988 Imperviousness Determinations
The estimate of the amount of imperviousness, in 1988 in Plymouth required that the developed area
of the City be identified. Developed areas were identified' using the 1988 LULC discussed in Section
2.1. The land classes identified as Residential (all types), Commercial, Industrial, Highway and
Institutional were considered developed. Office these areas were identified, imperviousness was
determined by overlaying the developed area of Plymouth in 1988 with the 1991 Landsat-derived
estimates of imperviousness,
2.2.2 2007 Imperviousness Determinations
Landsat-derived imperviousness data was not available for 2006. As a result, the areas that
developed between 2002 (when the latest imperviousness data layer is available) and 2007 were
identified and imperviousness calculated separately from the pre -2002 development shown on the
2002 LandSat-derived coverage. Parcel -based built -on data were used to identify those areas that
were developed between 2002 and 2007. Aerial photography from the period of 2002 to 2006 were
also used in this effort. Landuse classification for areas developed between 2002 and 2007 were
estimated by overlaying the 2007 LULC GIS layer with the layer outling 2002-2007 developments.
Areas developed on or before 2002 were flagged and imperviousness was calculated using the 2002
imperviousness data. Imperviousness in areas of Plymouth developed, after 2002 was estimated using
a relationship that was developed between land use and imperviousness. -City; wide average
imperviousness was developed for each of the specific land use types using the 2000 Metropolitan
Council Land Use coverage and the 2000 LandSat-derived imperviousness estimates. The 2000 data
was used because it was the only year were land use and impervousness data were both -available.
The average imperviousness values for each land use type are summarized in Table 2-3.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 17
e
0 3,500 7,000
Feet
1991 Aerial Photo
Water Managemen[Organization Boundaries Forest
County and State ROW Grassland
City Limits Multi -Family Residential
Parcels (200 j Highway
1988 Landuse Industrial
e AgricultureN
Institutional
Airport Single Family Residential
Commercial Water
Figure 2-1
Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover
LULL) for 1988
H.
it
0 3,500 7,000
Feet
2005 A,nal Ph,W
6 it
It " al
hm Irk? k I=Mtel Management Organization Boundaries M Forest
K ;..I
I.
County and State ROW Grassland
MulticityLimits-Farnily Residential
IIS II lu 11
Pa—Is
MII
Irlkd 2007) Highway
2007 Landuse Industrial
Agriculture Institutional
Iire
i T I'M
iw,1!
Airport Single Family Residential
M Commercial Water
ICi
p
q -
4N
Ip I M
Iri
72
Sit ON
HE
11 rjNI ill I Oilri
VM 1pl: aw "p!I. Mi i
HH: Fell:
F:
it e
pp M FTiNe
p 0: M El. IH "WEE I Ile
Milli.
p
it 114I1
Rz
R.
M -H!
r
411
I FI
ME Figure 2-2
a!
hnr
It
r!'t Mil
ph Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover
LULC) for 2007
e-
0 3,500 7,000
Feet
2006 Aenal Phot.
Water Management Organization Boundaries I ' Grassland
County and State ROW i.. MulO-Family Residential
City Limits Highway
Parcels (2007) Industrial
2020 Landuse Institutional
Agriculture Single Family Residential
Airport Rural Residential
commercial WaterWater
Forest
Figure 2-3
Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover
LULC) for 2020
Table 2-3 Average Imperviousness by Land Use Type for Plymouth based on 2000 Landuse
and Imperviousness Data
Land Use Class Percent
Imperviousness
Commercial 62.5%
Highway 48.9%
Industrial 65.5%
Institutional 35.0%
Multi -Family Residential 40.7%
Single -Family Residential 20.8%
The total imperviousness is the sum of the impervious area for areas developed on or before 2002
and those developed after 2002.
2.2.3 2020 Imperviousness Determinations
For the areas developed as of 2007, the impervousness used for that year were used in the estimate of
imperviousness. For areas identified as developing after 2007, the imperviousness was estimated
using the estimated imperviousness summarized in Table 2-3. It should be noted that for rural
residential areas, an imperviousness of 7 percent was used based on an analysis of Rural Residential
properties previously done on this Metropolitan Council category for the City of Lakeville. The 7
percent value reflects the parcel -wide nature of land use shown in the City's Guide Plan.
2.2.4 Summary of Land Use/Land Cover by Watershed
ArcMap GIS was used to intersect the four major watershed divides with the LULC and
imperviousness data for 1988, 2007, and 2020. The City was futher divided based on the
jurisdictional extent of the MS4 permit. Therefore, Hennepin County and MnDOT right-of-way were
removed from the analysis area. The data were summarized by the following land use characteristics
to develop inputs for estimating runoff volume, TP and TSS loading:
Urban Area (includes Airport, Commercial/Corporate Campus, Highway, Industrial,
Institutional, Multi -Family Residential, Single Family Residential, Rural Residential)
Percent of Urban area that is impervious
Grassland
Forest
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doe 21
Cultivated Agriculture
Hay/Pasture Agriculture
Water
The division of agriculture between cultivated and hay/pasture was estimated using agricultural land
cover types in Plymouth from the 1992 USGS NLCD LULC data. In 1992, 43 percent of the
agricultural area was cultivated and 57 percent was hay/pasture. The land use/land cover
characteristics are summarized for the four major watersheds (excluding County and State right-of-
ways) in Table 2-4.
2.3 Modeling Approach and Methodology for Loading Estimates
Complex models used to answer simple questions are not advantageous and simple models that do
not model important or required physical processes are not useful. In keeping with the Permit
conditions and guidance discussed in Section 1.2, our modeling approach was developed based on
the following requirements:
The loading assessment should include changes to pollutant loadings associated with changes
due to past land use changes and changes due to anticipated land use changes
The modeling will produce relative values, as the MPCA is more concerned with the average
annual increases than about specific event increases. It is not as important to get the actual loads
correct as. it is to model consistently, showing the relative change in loads rather than the actual
loads
The assessment can include changes due to BMPs that have already been implemented, if
increase in the loading since 1988 is explicitly stated, as well as changes due to BMPs that
are planned to be implemented and written into the MS4's ordinances or other regulatory
mechanisms
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 22
Table 2-4 Plymouth Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) by Watershed for 1988, 2007 and 2020
Area (acres) by year
WMO LULC 1988 2007 2020
Elm Creek Agriculture (Cultivated)
Agriculture (Pasture/Hay)
Highway
Commercial
Industrial
Institutional
Multi -Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Rural Residential*
Forest
Grassland
Water
Total
Total Developed
Area Imperviousness
Developed Area
Percent lmpervousness .
WMO
Minnehaha
Creek
482
Area (acres) by year
688
WMO LULC 1988 2007. 2020
Bassett Creek Agriculture (Cultivated) 320 2 0
Agriculture (Pasture/Hay) 295 3 0
Highway 13 15 14
Commercial 281 796 786
Industrial 1,082 1,347 1,467
Institutional 629 623 542
Multi -Family Residential 552 1,032 1,103
Single Family Residential 3,118 4,337 4,447
Rural Residential* 0 0 0
Forest 294 131 121
Grassland 1,821 512 345
Water 2,717 2,324 2,296
Total 11,123 11,121 11,121
Total Developed 5,676 8,150 8,360
Area Imperviousness 1,870 3,006 3,071
Developed Area
Percent Impervousness 33.0% 36.9% 36.7%
Area (acres) by year
WMO LULC 1988 2007 2020
Elm Creek Agriculture (Cultivated)
Agriculture (Pasture/Hay)
Highway
Commercial
Industrial
Institutional
Multi -Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Rural Residential*
Forest
Grassland
Water
Total
Total Developed
Area Imperviousness
Developed Area
Percent lmpervousness .
WMO
Minnehaha
Creek
482 223
688 442
1 1
11 117
18 0
0 80
0 173
189 542
0 0
425 299
167 249
756 611
2,738 2,738
219 914
39 243'
17.7% 26.6%
0
0
1
24
0
128
257
971
494
65
207
591
2,738
1,875
415
22.1
Area (acres) by year
LULC 1988 2007 2020
Agriculture (Cultivated) 93 0
Agriculture (Pasture/Hay) 34 0
Highway 2 2
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 23
0
0
2
Commercial 35 116 125
Industrial 33 49 50
Institutional 171 159 90
Multi -Family Residential 200 217 218
Single Family Residential 1,906 2,347 2,429
Rural Residential* 0 0 0
Forest 33 33 19
Grassland 425 84 79
Water 641 564 560
Total 3,572 3,572 3,572
Total Developed 2,347 2,891 2,914
Area Imperviousness 496 653 660
Developed Area
Percent Impervousness 21.1% 22.6% 22.6%
WMO LULC 1988 2007 2020
Shingle Creek Agriculture (Cultivated) 86 24 0
Agriculture (Pasture/Hay) 305 195 0
Highway 6 6 6
Commercial 56 188 167
Industrial 63 252 296
Institutional 5 51 26
Multi -Family Residential 60 393 451
Single Family Residential 894 1,602 1,648
Rural Residential* 0 0 496
Forest 379 _ 253 71
Grassland 1,254 331 134
Water 1,088 899 900
Total 4,194 4,194 4,194
Total Developed ' - 1,084 2,493 3,090
Area Imperviousness 282 841 930
Developed Area
Percent Impervousness 26.0% 33.7% 30.1
For the 1988 and 2007 LULC, only the "developed" portions of rural residential properties were
Identfied by the available landuse data. These smaller areas (they do not include the entire parcel)
were assumed to have similar imperviousness single family residential areas. For 2020, the City's
guide plan designated Rural Residential as the entire parcel. Therefore, a lower impervousness and a
seperate land use class was assumed.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 24
S The model does not need to calculate, design features such as hydrographs, but can show
removal rates based on design criteria, which can be just as useful for planning purposes.
Design calculations may need to be run before implementation but often these can be run on a
much smaller scale.
Currently, there are several water quality models available for simulating urban runoff and the
treatment effectiveness of BMPs. Table 2-5 presents a qualitative comparison of several of the
important attributes associated with some of the more common runoff water quality model
capabilities based on the various selection criteria. The compiled model 'attribiattributes,and capabilities
come primarily from peer-reviewed manuals (U.S. EPA, 1997; Burton and Pitt, 2001), with
additional updated information based on our own experience and professional judgment. The water
quality models included in the table are generally listed in increasing order of complexity (from left
to right). For each attribute or selection criteria the models are categorized by possessing low,, ,
medium (intermediate) or high capabilities. Those capabilities that are not incorporated into a
particular model, or were not applicable, were also indicated. Our approach for model selection for
this assessment involved comparison of the advantages and limitations of the various models as they
pertain to the Permit requirements, available data, and objectives of the city.
Table 2-1 shows that the only limitation with the P8 model, as it relates to the modeling requirements
for the loading assessment, is that it is not intended to be used to determine pollutant loadings from
non -urban land uses. However, the Simple Method, PONDNET and GWLF can be used to determine
pollutant loadings from both urban and non -urban land uses. Both the Simple Method and
PONDNET are typically used on an annual time scale. Table 2=5 also shows that the Simple Method,
PONDNET and GWLF lack the ability to model the BMPs that would typically be considered for
implementation by the City (such as vegetated drainage ways, extended detention,
infiltration/filtration practices and street sweeping). SLAMM lacks a snowmelt runoff routine, does
not have any capabilities for including baseflow in BMP analysis, and does not have the model
output features contained in the P8 model. XP-SWMM is more complex, but is not in the public
domain, is significantly more expensive, and BMP modeling is more cumbersome, less accurate and
less intuitive than the P8 model.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 25
Table 2-5 Comparison of Modeling Attributes/Capabilities by Selection Criteria
Criteria/Attributes
Simple
Method
PONDNET SLAMM P8 GWLF XP -
SWMM
Time Scale Annual H H
Single Event H H - H
Continuous H H H H
Hydrology Runoff L L H H H H
Baseflow L H H
Snowmelt H -- H
Pollutant Sediment (TSS) H H H H H
Loading
Constituents) Nutrients H H H H H H
Pollutant Urban H H H H H H
Loading (Land
Uses) Agricultural H H H
Pollutant Transport L L L H
Routing Erosion H H
Transformation L
Hydraulic Flow Routing/Diversions L L H
Model Output Statistics L L L H L H
Graphics L H M H
Hydro/Pollutographs H - H
Format Options L L H H H H
Sensitivity Analysis H -'
Input Data Requirements L L M M M H
Calibration L L L M L H
Default Data L H H H H M
User Interface L L H H H H
GIS Compatibility L L M L M
BMPs-General Evaluation H M H L H
Design Criteria H L H -- H
Specific BMPs Ponds/Wetlands H H H - H
Extended Detention M H -- H
Infiltration/Filtration H H -- M
Street Sweeping H H -' M
Others H L
Documentation Peer Acceptance H H H Hr:HH H
Technical Support L L M L H
Cost Software L L M L H
Use L L M M M H
H — High M — Medium (Intermediate) L — Low -- Not incorporated (.Not tippiicanie)
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 26
For this loading assessment, we have chosen to ,use the Simple Method to determine the pollutant A.
loadings and runoff volumes from each of the land uses within each watershed and then use the P8
model to account for the effects of BMP implementation for the time periods of interest in the Permit
conditions. In addition to the discussion associated with Table 2-5, the following information
provides further justification for choosing the Simple Method/P8 model combination for the loading
assessment modeling, in comparison to 'SLAMM, PONDNET, XP-SWMM, or some combination
thereof:
The Simple Method inputs can be directly derived within GIS
PONDNET' does not model TSS loadings and is only intended for modeling TP within wet
detention ponds
SLAMM is more detailed than P8 with respect to distinguishing source loading areas (such as
driveways, parking lots, lawns, etc.), but P8 exceeds the capabilities of SLAMM when it
comes to networking of watersheds/BMPs and many of the graphics and advanced output
features
P8 provides routines for performing sensitivity analyses and can also be run in design mode
to determine required sizes of BMP(s) to meet treatment criteria
P8 has the highest peer acceptance in Minnesota for urban runoff and BMP water quality
modeling and enhancements have been supported by the MPCA
P8 is free, user-friendly and easy to learn with its menu driven system
P8 allows for some GIS compatibility via ASCII text file import of watershed data and export
of results
P8 models actual hourly precipitation and climatic data as it occurs, with its associated
antecedent moisture conditions, while SLAMM only reads in the total precipitation and
duration of each rainfall event and does not model actual runoff events in real-time with their
associated antecedent moisture conditions
Unlike SLAMM, P8 allows for hydrologic calibration within the program, and can be
calibrated/validated to time series runoff events continuously simulated from climatic data
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doe 27
While the City of Plymouth has conducted a significant amount of monitoring of stormwater runoff
and receiving water quality/quantity, none of the studies included monitoring of runoff from
individual land uses or specific land cover types. P8 Models have been developed, and calibrated
with the available data, for.portions of the city as part of diagnostic -feasibility studies. However,
these studies were completed in the mid-1990s and the P8 Models are not representative of either
1988 or current (2007) land use conditions, they include natural wetlands in the modeling network,
and do not include all of the individual BMPs for each developed site within the watershed (typically
due to a lack of site-specific BMP information for each site and the size limitation of the model).
Since the presence of natural wetlands in the modeled drainage systems would affect the downstream
water and pollutant loadings, it would not accurately distinguish between the expected treatment
levels or provide a truly relative comparison between the predicted loadings, with and without the
presence of the watershed BMPs.
Following the initial assessment of TSS, TP and volume contributions with the Simple Method, we
will then assess the benefit that current BMP implementation has had on the flow, TP and TSS
loadings within the city limits using the P8 water quality modeling for developments based on P8
model design criteria examples that are indicative of the ordinances and design standards that were in
place by the City, the watershed management organizations, the Wetland Conservation Act and the
MPCA when development occurred. Based on the available data, combining the Simple Method and
P8 Model for the loading assessment ensures full compliance with the Permit requirements, for the
following reasons:
The Simple Method ensures that a consistent method for calculating average annual volumes
and loadings will be applied to all land uses to produce relative values across the two times
periods of interest, as discussed in the Permit and Guidance Manual (see Sections 1.1.1 and
1.2.2.1 of this report)
The P8 Model simulations of volume and pollutant loading reductions associated with BMP
implementation, according to the various ordinances and design standards that were in place
when development occurred, is consistent with the Permit conditions and Guidance Manual
and provides a consistent method for calculating relative removal rates as suggested in
Section 1.2.2.1 (which includes the following excerpts from the Guidance Manual, "The
model ... can show removal rates based on design criteria... Design calculations may need to
be run before implementation but often these can be run on a much smaller scale.)
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 28
Excludes the effects that natural wetlands would have on improving the storm water duality
within each watershed, which ensures that the loading assessment estimates that include
BMPs (discussed in Section 2.4) do not take credit for treatment by natural wetlands
The city will not have to revise,and update existing P8 models to exclude the effects of
natural wetlands or collect significantly more data on every BMP to develop new P8 models
for the rest of the city, which would represent significantly more cost for a product that
would not provide a "distinction between what is desirable and what is required. 'The MPCA
chose a level [in its loading assessment requirements] that will prevent undue burden while
still developing useful information." (MPCA Guidance Manual, 2006)
The loading assessment modeling results were summarized for each of the four major watersheds to
show the Simple Method loading and volume estimates for each time period, as well as the loading
and volume estimates after applying the P8 model design criteria examples, based on the ordinances
and design standards that were in place when the various developments occurred.
2.3.1 Average Annual Flow Volume
The conversion of land areas to agricultural and urban land uses leads to changes in watershed
hydrology and pollutant load rates. The areal increase in impervious surfaces in urban areas over
undeveloped rural and natural land uses leads to greater surface water runoff volumes. The increased
runoff coupled with human activities increases the types of pollutants and delivery rate of these
pollutants to surface waters. Impermeable surfaces shed water as surface runoff, as do agricultural
practices that convert natural land cover, which reduces the infiltration and evapotranspiration
components of the hydrologic cycle. Surface runoff in urbanized areas is generally directed to storm
sewers and other conveyance systems to rapidly move the large volumes to receiving waters and
prevent flooding. This section provides a general discussion about the methodology used to quantify
the amount of runoff from the various land uses in the Plymouth watersheds during the two time
periods of interest for the Permit conditions.
As previously discussed, the Simple Method was used to estimate the average annual runoff volumes,
which in turn, are also used to calculate the TP and TSS loadings, for the various land uses present
within the Plymouth watersheds. In the urbanized portion of each watershed, average annual runoff
volume was calculated using the following relationships (as described in Schueler, 1987):
Annual Runoff Coeffrcieiit [RCI = 0.05 +((0.009) x (b7aperviorts T,Y-action) x 100)
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 29 l
j
I
Annual Runoff Volume (acre-feet) = RC x Annual Rainfall (inches) x Urban Area (acres) 1.12
As previously discussed, there is no monitoring data available for runoff volumes or quality from
individual land uses or specific land cover types within the city. The annual runoff. coefficients
percentage of rainfall resulting in runoff) were determined for each of the land uses based on a
review of the available literature. Reckhow et al. (1980) summarized the TP,and water yield
monitoring results of several published monitoring studies throughout the country that were specific
to individual land uses or land cover types. All of the available water runoff and rainfall volume data
were taken from Reckhow et al. (198.0) and used to determine the median runoff coefficient for the
hay/pasture land use category. The median runoff coefficient for the hay/pasture land use category
was 0.11. MCES (2004) had monitored the Crow River watershed and determined that the average
annual runoff coefficient was 0.17 between 2000 and 2004. Since, at that scale, the watershed area
has predominantly been cultivated, the long-term average runoff coefficient for the cultivated land is
expected to be a conservatively low estimate. For the forested land use, curve number methodology,
assuming good ground cover, was applied to the long-term Twin City rainfall records to estimate that
the relative event -based cumulative runoff coefficient was 0.03. It was assumed that grassland would
exhibit the same runoff coefficient as forestland. Each of these runoff coefficients, for non -urban
land uses, show good relative agreement with the urban pervious runoff coefficient of 0.05 shown
above (taken from Schueler [1987]). For the non -urbanized portion of each watershed, average
annual runoff volume was calculated for each land use category using the following relationship:
Annual Runoff Volume (acre-feet) = RC x Annual Rainfall (inches) x Land Use Area (acres) / 12
The agricultural areas of the city, specified by the Metropolitan Council land use coverage for 2020,
did not divide out pasture/hay and cultivated. Therefore, the division of agricultural land between
pasture/hay and cultivated (predominately row crops) was estimated using the breakdown from the
USGS National Land Cover Inventory (1991). The break down was 57% for pasture/hay and 43%
for cultivated land cover.
2.3.2 Total Phosphorus'
As previously discussed, there is no monitoring data available for runoff volumes or quality from
individual land uses or specific land cover types within the city. In the urbanized portion of each
watershed the TP runoff concentrations were calculated using the following relationships, developed
from several Minnesota urban runoff water quality monitoring studies, for the Detailed Assessment of
Phosphorus Sources to Minnesota Watersheds (Barr Engineering Company, 2004), and peer-reviewed
by MPCA staff:
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 30
TP Runoff Concentration (ug/L) = 1075 - 14.4 x Impervious (%) — 5.7 x Annual Rainfall (inches)
Phosphorus loading from urbanized portion: of each watershed was then calculated according to the
following equation (Barr Engineering Company, 2004):
Urban TP Load (lbs.) = Concentration (ug/L) x Annual Runoff Volume (acre-feet) x 0.00272
The TP contributions from non -urban land uses were based on Reckhow et al. (1980), which
summarized the TP export coefficients produced from several published monitoring studies
throughout the country that were specific to individual land uses or land cover types. All of the
available TP export coefficient data were taken from Reckhow et al. (19 80) and used to determine
the median export coefficients for the cultivated, hay/pasture and forested land use categories. The
median TP export coefficients for the cultivated, hay/pasture and forested land use categories were,
0.78, 0.54 and 0.09 lbs/ac/yr, respectively. The TP export coefficient for agricultural lands is likely
appropriate for Plymouth, since MCES (2004) has observed annual TP yields in the range of 0.3.0 to.
0.66 lbs/ac/yr (from 2001-2004) at its Crow River watershed monitoring station near Rockford,
which has 85% of the watershed in agricultural land uses. Itwas assumed that grassland would
exhibit the same TP export coefficient as,forestland.The average annual phosphorus loading from
each land use in each watershed was then calculated according to the following equation:
TP Load (lbs.) = Land Use Area (acres) x TP Export Coefficient (lbs/ac/yr)
2.3.3 Total Suspended Solids
As previously discussed, there is no monitoring data available for runoff volumes or quality from
individual land uses or specific land cover types within the city. In the urbanized portion of each
watershed the TSS average annual runoff concentration was assumed to be 100 mg/L; based on the
median NURP studies TSS concentration cited by Athayede et al. (1983).
TSS loading from urbanized portion of each watershed was then calculated according to the
following equation:
Urban TSS Load (lbs.) = Concentration (nag/L) x Annual Runoff Volume (acre-feet) x 2.72
The TSS contributions from non -urban land uses were based on several literature sources (MCES,
2004; DeByle and Packer, 1972; Hanns et al., 1974; Webber and Elrick, 1967; Sonzogni et al.,
1980), which summarized the TSS export coefficients produced from several published monitoring
studies throughout the country that were specific to individual land uses or land cover types. All of
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 31
the available TSS export coefficient data were taken from the literature sources and used to
determine the median export coefficients for the hay/pasture and forested land use categories. The
median TSS export coefficients for the hay/pasture and forested land use categories were 25 and 5
lbs/ac/yr, respectively. It was assumed that grassland would exhibit the same TSS export coefficient
as forestland. MCES (2004) had monitored the Crow River watershed and determined that the
average annual TSS export was 70 lbs/ac/yr between 2000 and 2004. Since, at that scale, the
watershed area has predominantly been cultivated and the sediment delivery ratio would be estimated
to be 0.05 (based on the watershed area and USDA [1972]), the long-term average TSS export
coefficient for the cultivated land would be expected to be 1,400 lbs/ac/yr, as a conservatively low
estimate. The average annual TSS loading from each land use in each watershed was then calculated
according to the following equation:
TSS Load (lbs.) = Land Use Area (acres) x TSS Export Coefficient (lbs/ac/yr)
2.3.4 BMP Implementation Modeling
As previously discussed, P8 water quality modeling was used to assess the benefit that current, and
expected future, BMP implementation would have on the flow, TP and TSS loadings within the city
limits for developments based on the ordinances and design standards that control the treatment
efficiency of the BMPs when development occurs. The NURP pond BMP design requirements have
controlled the treatment efficiency of the BMPs associated with each new development since 1991
and will likely be the design requirements that control the treatment efficiency for BMPs that are
implemented through 2020 for each watershed in the city. In a few cases, development plans may
have been approved with a BMP design that did not fully meet the ordinances or design standards
that were in place at the time that development occurred. Most of these cases involved developments
that could not meet the NURP design requirement, but could either meet an equivalent level of
treatment with other types of BMPs or could attain the NURP design requirements by contributing to
the construction of regional treatment basins. As a result, the city developed a parcel -based GIS
coverage that showed all of the developments in the city and the time that the development was
approved. This coverage was intersected with the watershed boundaries to determine the total areas
of development that complied with the NURP BMP design standard that controlled the treatment
efficiency for the time periods that are of interest in the Permit conditions.
No post -construction BMP treatment standards were in place prior to 1991 when the city adopted
development requirements consistent with the NURP wet detention pond design standards (Walker,
1987; MPGA, 1989). The NURP design scenario was run in P8 for a hypothetical low-density
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 32
residential development with 25% imperviousness and a commercial development with 80%
imperviousness to obtain a range of treatment efficiencies, as well as the average efficiency, that
would be expected for the same design standard. For the NURP design scenario; the P8 Model
estimated average TP and TSS load reductions of 56% and 87%, respectively. It was assumed that
no volume reduction would be realized from implementation of the NURP design requirements.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 33
3.0 Results and Discussion
Table 3-1 shows the results of the loading assessment modeling, which were summarized for each of
the four major watersheds to show the Simple Method loading and volume estimates for each time
period (without BMPs), as well as the loading and volume estimates after applying the P8 model
NURP design criteria example (with BMPs), based on the parcel -based GIS coverage that showed all
of the developments in the city and the BMP design standard that was implemented for each
development.
3.1 Average Annual Flow Volume
Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 show that the total average annual flow volume from the city has increased
significantly since 1988 and would continue to increase slightly by 2020, with implementation of the
proposed BMPs. A review of the development data, from the parcel -based GIS coverage, revealed
that between 16 and 20% of the area within the Plymouth portion of the Bassett Creek, Minnehaha
Creek and Shingle Creek watersheds had developed without implementation of any post -construction
BMPs and very little to no portion of the Elm Creek watershed would have developed without
implementation of NURP ponds by 2007. Since it was assumed that no volume reduction would be
realized from implementation of the NURP design requirements, Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 show that
there has been an approximate 54% overall average annual flow volume increase between 1988 and
2007 that can be attributed to development within all of the city's watersheds. The results also show
that the projected volume increase between 2007 and 2020 will be limited to less than five percent.
Table 2-7 and Figure 3-2 show that more than half of the volume increase estimated for the period
between 1988 and 2007 can be attributed to development within the Bassett Creek watershed, while
there were also significant percentage increases in volume within the Elm and Shingle Creek
watersheds during the same time period. Figure 2-1 shows that much of the Plymouth portion of the
Minnehaha Creek watershed was developed by 1988 so the flow increased less.than 25% between
1988 and 2007. Table 2-7 and Figure 3-2 show that planned development in the future will not
significantly increase the average annual flow volumes in most of the watersheds in the city,
compared to present conditions. The average annual flow volume in the Elm Creek watershed would
increase by approximately 29 percent between 2007 and 2020, but flow will not increase by more
than 8 percent in any of the remaining watersheds in the city. The average annual flow volume
increase projected for the period between 2007 and 2020 is 8, 2, and 1 percent in the Shingle, Bassett
and Minnehaha Creek watersheds, respectively.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 34
Table 3-1 Plymouth Nondegradation Loading Assessment Summary
Without BMPs
WATERSHED TOTAL RUNOFF (acre-feet) WATERSHED TP YIELD (LBS) WATERSHED TSS YIELD (LBS)
WATERSHED 1988 2007 2020 1988 2007 2020 1988 2007 2020
Bassett Creek 5,190 7,677 7,832 6,274 7,867 8,067 1,776,847 2,080,579 2,123,177
Elm Creek 542 900 1,165 1,000 1,386 1,725 726,132 501,716 312,779
Minnehaha Creek 1,462 1,804 1,81.9 2,397 2,852 2,874 508,529 488,904 493,327
Shingle Creek 992 2,266 2,445 1,472 2,654 2,878 340,786 629,518 661,869
TOTAL 8,186 12,647 13,262 11,143 14,759 15,543 3,352,295 3,700,717 3,591,152
With BMPs
WATERSHED
Bassett Creek 5,190 7,677 7,832 6,274 6,902. 6,979 1,776,847 1,541,682 1,543,990
Elm Creek 542 900 1,165 1;000 980 1,052 726,132 374,582 99,924
Minnehaha Creek 1,462. 1,804 1,819 2,397 2,595 2,604 508,529 410,561 411,039
Shingle Creek. 992 2,266 2,445 1,472 1,999 2,178 340,786 347,700 348,624
TOTAL 8,186 12,647 13,262 11,143 12,476 12,813 3,352,295 2,674,525 2,403,576
Figure 3-1
14,000 ,---
12.000
10,000
97
Plymouth Loading Assessment—City-Wide Average Annual Flow Volume
2,000
0
Figure 3-2
14,000 -T
12,000
10,000
a,o0o
1988 2007 2020
OWthout 2RAPs ®'VVIth PAPS
Plymouth Loading Assessment—Average Annual Flow Volume by Watershed w/
BMP Implementation
4;000
2;000
0
1988 2007 2020
u Basset Creek a Elm Cree'rt C Ad'innehaha Creel,, 0 Shingle Creek
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 3
3.2 Total Phosphorus
Table 3-1 and Figure 3-3 show that the average annual total phosphorus loading from the city has
increased since 1988 and would continue to increase by 2020, without implementation of BMPs.
Table 3-1 shows that implementation of the NURP ponds within each of the city's watersheds has
offset most of the increased phosphorus load between 1988 and 2007. BMP implementation between
1988 and 2007 limited the overall average annual total phosphorus loading increase from 32 to 12
percent within the city. As previously discussed, a small portion (between 16 and 20 percent) of the
Bassett Creek, Shingle Creek and Minnehaha Creek watersheds had developed without
implementation of any post -construction BMPs by 1991. Table 3-1 indicates that BMP
implementation and conversion of agricultural land has reduced the current total phosphorus loading
in the Elm Creek watershed relative to 1988 conditions.
Table 3-1 and Figure 3-3 show that continued implementation of the NURP practices, as planned in
the future, will continue to offset the increases in total phosphorus loading between 2007 and 2020
and will limit the overall TP load increase to 3 percent (from 12,476 to 12,813 lbs.), compared to the
total load estimate for 2007. Table 3-1 shows that continued implementation of the NURP practices
in the future will continue to limit the TP loading increase projected for all of the watersheds in the
city, compared to present conditions. Overall, the average annual TP load from the city in 2020, with,
BMP implementation, is approximately 15 percent higher than the TP load estimate from 1988.
Table 3-1 shows that the total flow volume estimated for 2020 conditions is 62 percent higher than
the total volume estimate for 1988, on a city-wide basis. Comparing the results of the TP load and
average annual flow volume estimates indicates that the flow -weighted mean phosphorus
concentration in storm water runoff within the city will be 29 percent lower in 2020, compared to
1988 conditions.
Plymouth Nondegradafion Load Assessment Report•doe 37
Figure 3-3
18,000
16.000
7 14,0100
Plymouth Loading Assessment—City-Wide Total Phosphorus Loading
a
of 8,00 0
F
4,000
2,009
0
1988 2082 2020
without S rdFs ®'a^f tM 6 hr1 s
3.3 Total Suspended Solids
Table 3-1 and Figure 3-4 show that the average annual TSS loading from the city has increased since
1988 and would be higher by 2020, without implementation of BMPs. Table 3-1 and Figure 3-4
show that implementation of the NURP ponds within each of the city's watersheds has offset the
increased TSS load between 1988 and 2007 and resulted in an overall average annual TSS. loading
reduction in the city, compared to 1988 conditions. The results also indicate that, with the exception
of the Shingle Creek watershed, BMP implementation and conversion of agricultural land has
reduced the current TSS loading in all of the watersheds between 1988 and 2007.
Table 3-1 and Figure 3-4 show that continued implementation of the NURP practices, as planned in
the future, will continue to offset any estimated increases in watershed TSS loading between 2007
and 2020 and will result in an overall TSS load decrease of 10 percent (from 2,674,525 to 2,403,576
lbs.), compared to the total load estimate for 2007. The results show that continued implementation
of,the NURP practices in the future, combined with conversion of agricultural land, will reduce the
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 38
overall TSS loading from the city by 28 percent between 1988 and 2020. Table 3-1 and Figure 3-4
show that, with BMP implementation, the TSS loadings estimated for 2020 conditions are lower than
the 1988 estimates for all of the watersheds, except for Shingle Creek where the TSS load is
estimated to be two percent higher.
Figure 3-4
4,000,000
3,500,000
Na
c 3,000,000
v
B
J
N
O 2,500,000
v
aat
2L 2,000,000
N
1,500,000
a
m 'f,OD0;D00
a7Q
500,000
D
Plymouth Loading Assessment—City-Wide Total Suspended Solids Loading
1988 2007 2020
19'01ithOLA BMPs M With BMPs
3.4 Implications of Load Assessment Results
The results of the loading assessment indicate that, city-wide, the average annual flow volume and
total phosphorus loading estimates are higher in 2020 relative to the 1988 condition. The estimated
increases in average annual flow volume and total phosphorus loading constitute significant new or
expanded discharges based on the Permit conditions. As discussed in Section 1.1.2, the Permit
requirements state that a Nondegradation Report must be completed when Selected MS4s have
significant new or expanded discharges, and upon approval, must incorporate its findings on BMPs
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 39
that address nondegradation into their SWPPP. The BMPs should address changes in pollutant
loadings as far as is reasonable and practical through future development. Additionally, the BMPs
shall address, as far as is reasonable and practical, the negative impacts of increased storm water
discharge volumes that cause increased depth and duration of inundation of wetlands having the
potential for a significant adverse impact to a designated use of the wetland, or changes in stream
morphology that have the potential for a significant adverse impact to a designated use of the
streams.
Since the city has experienced significant new or expanded discharges, the Permit requires that
Plymouth prepare a Nondegradation Report that includes consideration of the Loading Assessment,
which must include analysis of flow and may include removal of pollutants by BMPs already
initiated.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 40
4.0 Recommendations for Nondegradation Report
4.1 Water Quality Trend Analyses and Implications for Report
As previously discussed, the results of the loading assessment indicate that, city-wide, the estimated
total phosphorus loading is 12 percent higher in 2007 relative to the 1988 condition, after accounting
for BMP implementation. However, the average annual flow volume has increased by 55 percent
during the same time period. As a result, the flow -weighted total phosphorus concentration of the
runoff entering the receiving waters in the city would have decreased during the period between 1988
and 2007 and, the receiving water quality would be expected to improve during the same time period.
Appendix A illustrates the results of the statistical trend analyses. completed for lake water quality in
each of the city lakes with a sufficient period of record of historical total phosphorus concentrations.
Insufficient long-term total phosphorus data was available for Gleason and Lost Lakes, possibly
hindered by a lack of public access, so they were excluded from the analysis. The statistical
significance of each trend was determined by comparing the Mann Kendall. statistic to the critical
value for a range of confidence intervals. The estimated Sen's slope provides the magnitude of trend,
in µg/L/year, for those lakes exhibiting statistically significant trends. The results in Appendix A
show that statistically significant trends did not exist for Schmidt, Pormerleau, Parkers, Bass and
Mooney Lakes. Medicine Lake had a statistically significant improving trend for total phosphorus at
the 95 percent confidence interval with the Sen's slope indicating that the total phosphorus
concentration was dropping at the rate of 0.46 µg/l, per year.
The results of the trends analyses are consistent with what would be expected for receiving water
quality given the fact the flow -weighted total phosphorus concentration in the runoff entering the
receiving waters, city-wide, would have decreased during the period between 1988 and 2007 and the
receiving water quality would not be expected to degrade during the same time period. As a result,
the trend analyses indicate that the NURP pond level of BMP treatment (for areas shown in Figure 4-
1) has likely ensured that the city can demonstrate that they have not degraded the receiving water
quality for lakes, streams and wetlands due to new or expanded discharges of stornwater. Therefore,
to satisfy the remaining Permit requirements, it is recommended that the Nondegradation Report
focus special attention on addressing the concerns that the MPGA, public and local water authorities
might have about the increases in average annual runoff volume and its potential impacts on stream
morphology and wetlands due to increased depth and duration of inundation.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 41
4.2 Implications of Impaired Waters for Addressing Expanded
Discharges in Report
Figure 4-1 shows the receiving waters in the city that the MPCA has included in its 2006 impaired
waters listings because they do not meet the MPCA's water quality standards. Figure 4-1 shows that
Medicine, Schmidt, Pomerleau, Bass and Pike Lakes are each listed for excess nutrients. The
MPCA's'water quality standard that pertains to lakes for excess nutrients, requires that the average
summer (May -September) total phosphorus concentration be maintained at or below 40 µg/L. A
review of the data shown in Appendix A, along with areview of the available data for Lost and
Gleason Lakes, indicates that, except for Parkers Lake, all of the city lakes have total phosphorus
concentrations that exceed the water quality standard.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that the MPCA develop and submit Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies for each water body that they have on the impaired waters
list. TMDL studies are used to determine what the maximum allowable pollutant loadings are for
each water body without exceeding the water quality standards. The allowable pollutant loading is
then allocated to each of the NPDES-permitted (including MS4s) and non-regulated sources of
pollutants in the watershed. At a minimum, TMDL studies completed for Medicine, Schmidt,
Pomerleau, Bass and Pike Lakes are likely to require the city to provide further reductions in total
phosphorus loadings to these water bodies to comply with the MPCA's water quality standards.
Figure 4-1 shows that Elm Creek is listed for dissolved oxygen and Bass Creek is on the impaired
waters list for biota -fish. The listing for Elm Creek may be the result of excess nutrient inputs, while
the listing for Bass Creek may be due to poor water quality or poor fish habitat associated with flows
or excess turbidity. As a result, pollutant load allocations associated with the creek impairments
would also require the city to reduce nutrient and/or sediment loadings, while possibly addressing
flow volume and peak runoff rates.
It is conceivable that the pollutant load allocations developed as part of future TMDL studies will
dictate that the city will need to provide further loading reductions, beyond those currently projected
in the nondegradation load assessment. As a result, it is recommended that as part of the
development of the reasonable and practical BMPs for the Nondegradation Report that the city be
cognizant of the potential implications *of future TMDL allocations associated with the impaired
waters that are receiving storm water discharge. Since the portions of the city in both the Bassett
Creek and Minnehaha Creek watersheds are essentially fully developed, the Nondegradation Report
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 43
should also consider reasonable and practical BMPs for redevelopments as well as new development
projects.
4.3 Remaining Points to Address in Nondegradation Report
Since the city will be required to prepare a Nondegradation Report that includes consideration of the
Loading Assessment, the following Permit requirements will also have implications for preparation
of the Nondegradation Report:
Local storm water management plans and other pertinent factors may also be considered
BMPs implemented by other parties may be considered when those BMPs affect the storm
water from the area of the city
If the pollutant loadings cannot be reduced to levels consistently attained in 1988, the
Nondegradation Report must describe reasonable and practical BMPs that the city plans to
incorporate into a modified SWPPP. The city must consider alternatives, explain which
alternatives have been studied but rejected and why, and propose alternatives that are
reasonable and practical
The Nondegradation Report must give high priority to BMPs that address impacts of future
growth, such as ordinances for new development. Where increases in pollutant loading have
already occurred due to past development, the Nondegradation Report must consider retrofit
and mitigation options (BMPs) that the city determines to be reasonable, practical and
appropriate for the community
The city is responsible for developing any site specific cost/benefit, social, and
environmental information that they wish to bring to the Agency's attention
The city must incorporate the BMPs into a modified SWPPP and include an implementation
schedule that addresses new development and retrofit BMPs it proposes to implement
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 44
4.4 Recommendations for Using. Load Assessment Modeling
As discussed in Section 2.3, the load assessment modeling consisted of a simplified approach that
combined the results of the P8 modeling for the NURP pond level of BMP treatment with the Simple
Method equations in a spreadsheet specifically developed to incorporate the land use/land cover
information generated from GIS. Individual worksheets were developed in the spreadsheet for each
of the three time periods of interest that determined the TSS, TP and volume contributions with the
Simple Method equations. Another worksheet in the spreadsheet file contained the results of the P8
modeling that assessed the benefit that current and project future BMP implementation would have
on the flow, TP and TSS loadings within the city limits for developments based on the design criteria
examples that were indicative of the ordinances and design standards that were in place by the City,
the watershed management organizations, the Wetland Conservation Act and the MPCA when
development was supposed to occur. This same worksheet contains the remaining assumptions and
inputs described in Section 2.3. Another worksheet was developed to combine all of the information
generated from the Simple Method calculations in the worksheets for each time period with the
results of the P8 modeling and calculate and summarize the volumes and TP and TSS loadings shown
in Table 3-1.
Any changes that are necessary for the modeling should be made in the spreadsheet; following
necessary changes to the GIS files or additional P8 models of BMP design criteria examples. The
spreadsheet, GIS and P8 modeling files will be included as project deliverables for the city.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 45
References
Athayede, D.N., R.P. Healy and R. Field. 1983. Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program,
Volume I — Final Report. U.S. EPA, Water Planning Division. NTIS PB84-185552.
Barr Engineering Company. 2004. Detailed Assessment of Phosphorus Sources to Minnesota''
Watersheds. Prepared for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
Burton, Jr., G.A. and R.E. Pitt. 2001. Stormwater Effects Handbook: A Toolbox for Watershed
Managers, Scientists, and Engineers. ISBN 0873719247. Lewis Publishers. CRC Press, LLC.
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). 2004. Vermillion River Monitoring Station
Information.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA). 1989. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas.
Best Management Practices for Minnesota.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA). 2006. Draft Guidance Manual for Small
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). For General Permit Number
MNR040000.
Reckhow., K.H., M.N. Beaulac, and J.T. Simpson. 1980. Modeling Phosphorus Loading and
Lake Response Under Uncertainty: A Manual and Compilation of Export Coefficients. EPA
440/5-80-011.
Schueler, T.R. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff. A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban
BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
USDA, 1972. Sediment sources, yields, and delivery ratios. National Engineering Handbook, Section 3
Sedimentation.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1997. Compendium of Tools for Watershed Assessment
and TMDL Development. EPA841-B-97-006.
Walker, W.W., Jr. 1987. Design Calculations for Wet Detention Ponds. Prepared for St. Paul
Water Utility. St. Paul, MN.
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 46
Plymouth Nondegradation Load Assessment Report.doc 47
v.1.56. CAS# n/a
200-
150-
100-
0
Y
a
0 50-
U
0
Apr 1995
SEN'S SLOPE ESTIMATOR
Schmidt
Jan 2001
WQStat Plus'"
n = 107
Slope = -0.342
units per year.
Mann Kendall
normal approx. _
0.936
Alpha i 1 Siif,
0.01 -2.575 No
0.05 -1.96 No
0.1 -1.645 No
0.2 -1.282 No
r N
Jan 2001
WQStat Plus'"
n = 107
Slope = -0.342
units per year.
Mann Kendall
normal approx. _
0.936
Alpha i 1 Siif,
0.01 -2.575 No
0.05 -1.96 No
0.1 -1.645 No
0.2 -1.282 No
Oct 2006
Constituent: TP (ug/L) Facility: Lake Trend Analysis Data File: SCFMD-1
Date: 3/27/07 Time: 4:51 PM View: SCUM—TP
v.1.55. CAS# n/a
150-
0
U
0
Jul 1966
SEN'S SLOPE ESTIMATOR
Medicine
2
WQStat Plus"
n = 225
Slope = -0.46
units per year.
Mann Kendall
normal approx. _
2.463
Alpha 0ifical Si f
0.01 2.575 No
0.05 1.96 Down
0.1 1.645 Down
0.2 1.282 Down
WQStat Plus"
n = 225
Slope = -0.46
units per year.
Mann Kendall
normal approx. _
2.463
Alpha 0ifical Si f
0.01 2.575 No
0.05 1.96 Down
0.1 1.645 Down
0.2 1.282 Down
Aug 1986 Oct 2006
Constituent: TP (ug/L) Facility: Lake Trend Analysis Data File: MEDICI-1
Date: 3/27/07 Time: 4:53 PM View: MED TP
v. 1.56. CAS# n/a
1.
1
SEWS. SLOPE ESTIMATOR
Pomerleau
A.
May 1996 Dec 1999
WQStat Plus"
Slope = 0.076
units per year.
Mann Kendall
statistic = 37
Alnhn Critic -al
0.01 131 No
0.05 101 No
0.1 85 No
0.2 67 No
Jul 2003
Constituent: TP (ug/L) Facility: Lake Trend Analysis Data File: POMERL-1
Date: 3/27/07 Time: 4:57 PM View: POM—TP
Y.1.56. CAS#n/A
SEN'S SLOPE ESTIMATOR
Parkers
Jul 1980 Jul 1993
WQStat Plus'
n=11
Mann Kendall
statistic = 8
Alpha ri i ' i nif
0. 1 34 No
0.05 27 No
0.1 23 No
0.2 18 No
Jul 2006
Constituent: TP (ug(L) Facility: Lake Trend Analysis Data File: PARKS --r1
Date: 3/28/07 Time: 8:47 AM View: PARK TP
v.1.56. CAS# o/a
Ls
1
SEN'S SLOPE ESTIMATOR
Bass
Jul 1980 Jul 1993
wQstat Plus"'
n=8
Mann Kendall
statistic = 11
Alpha .ri i ~ l "i ynif
0.01 21 Na
0.05 17 No
0.1 15 No
0.2 12 No
Jul 2006
Constituent: TP (ug/L) Facility: Lake Trend Analysis Data File: BASS—S-1
Date: 3/28/07 Time: 8:45 AM View: BASS TP
V.1.56. CAS# n/a
SEN'S SLOPE: ESTIMATOR
Mooney
Constituent: TP (ug[L)
Date: 3/27/07
Mar 1994
Facility: Lake Trend Analysis
Time: 4:48 P1VI
WQStat Plush"
n=18
Mann Kendall
statistic =16
All --)ha ri ' Si gnif.
0-.61 6.8 No
0.05 53 No
0.1 45 No
0.2 36 No
Oct 1999
Data File:1VIOONEY-1
View: MOON TP
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 —
RECEIVE LOAD ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE
MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER (MS4) GENERAL PERMIT
WHEREAS, The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) requires the City to complete a
Loading Assessment for average annual flow volume, total suspended solids, and phosphorous; and
WHEREAS, a Loading Assessment is required for compliance with the MPCA's General Permit to
discharge storm water associated with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (1\4S4) under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System Permit Program; and
WHEREAS, a Load Assessment Report has been submitted to the City of Plymouth by Barr
Engineering Company;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: that the City Council adopts the resolution receiving the Load
Assessment Report for the MS4 General Permit.
Adopted by the City Council on March 8, 2007.
0AEngineeringTROJECTS12000 - 2009\7108E\Resol\ices_approve_load_assessment.doc
Agenda Number: 61 1 a
DATE: April 26, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, Director of Public Works
FROM: . Daniel K. Campbell, Sr. Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
2007 SEAL COAT PROGRAM
PROJECT NO. 7117E
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution awarding the bid for
the construction of the 2007 Seal Coat Program.
BACKGROUND: Seal coating of City streets is done annually as part of our Street
Maintenance Program. Oxidation of the street surface causes the bituminous to become brittle
and deteriorate. The seal coat rejuvenates and seals the surface extending the life of the surface.
In addition, the seal coat increases the skid resistance of the surface.
The application rates for the emulsion and aggregates will be designed to accommodate the
street's existing surface and traffic rates. Formulas to determine the proper rates of application
have been used by other municipalities as well as Plymouth and are recommended by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
DISCUSSION: Bids were received for the construction of the 2007 Seal Coat Program on
Wednesday April 25, 2007. Three bids were received with the lowest bid submitted by Pearson
Bros. Inc. of Hanover, MN in the amount of $336,270.02. This is approximately 8% above the
Engineer's estimate of $309,852. Pearson Bros. has done the seal coating in Plymouth since 2003
and has shown to be a responsible bidder.
The tentative schedule is to have the contractor begin the Seal Coat Program after July 4, and
complete the work by August 1, 2007. City staff will closely monitor the contractor's work.
BUDGET IMPACTS: $300,000 was included in the 2007 Street Division Budget for Seal
Coating. The City of Orono will be participating in the cost to seal coat Ferndale Lane since half
the road surface is within its corporate limits. The additional funding needed will come from the
0AEnginecringTROJECTS\2000 - 2009\7117E\Memos\CC_Awerd3id_5_8_07.doc
SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT
2005 SEAL COAT PROGRAM
Page 2
Temporary Mill and Overlay portion of the Street Replacement Fund. The low bid received for.
the Temporary Mill and Overlay project was approximately. $74,000 less then the projected
budget.
A suimnaiy of costs is as follows:
Seal Coat Fund $300,000
Orono participation 11,730
Street Replacement Fund 24,540
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I reconirnend that the City Council adopt
the attached resolution awarding the 2007 Seal Coat Program, City Project No. 7117E, to
Pearson Bros. Inc. of Hanover, MN in the amount of $336,270.02.
attachment: Map
Resolution
0AEngineeringTROJECTS\2000 - 2009\7117E\Memos\CC_AwardBid_5_3_07.doc
60TH AVE
55TH AVE.
50TH AVE
45TH AVE
40TH AVE.
35TH AVE
30TH AVE
25TH AVE
20TH AVE
15TH AVE
10TH AVE.
5TH AVE.
RZDGEMOUNT AV
0000rS4-rx 41 ImOnmgmK%E<cyvr pop
O<xr2rpm0 bm pOrAm H£t
LO-
PcmONbnCz>S2NHl]rmxmCgOOxzr3H rYx+4CoHxY tql••
mnmqo
nmmmbztw Kc%
mCmYC
HHen AO
F2or%
4fax10MmonmbNOzgGCHrpn AOo 0szgo0ry„H
nbnrH2Yyq m <nA2 brr2mz bm %bpmnZbx4giiw4 m Ymtq'i2Hrwxb20tim2w Fn wr2sxwmA2m2rsmmHrmnx3rrHm <brrH2'Z x
T•mZO
cmTN
m2.CmNHOmn
O
mmxHZHZmrHxmH
pyxc <bmPmxrxq ,OxEcwommpiOOOA00`SorOr O£001N011.1-'---
mNOwm2Ktr•Hi
x0H0b mwvHqmqTbz-rrH2(pp00iC
GbO bx OOOzOco0H2 1
OMI
HZ0oA
mW
F
o
ON O
s mn
2007 Seal Coat
o w
19
YUwm<>NaxHi., 0NNw.5FSa%'HaOUm>aO•paziO>HUmmC 23m£u3faNNNNw 2zmwYzm£uaxUw2qqSo2wmU4Nmm2wU2^a.4NsU0azz wZaZ mz
YO >
a4UN2KaORC2u]£
ONrCwWW0wFOOFaOOOmOOwpON
OGCYUNCS.
yNF. NFZNy OZwa
O>3z
a2aOzFmu40m
Fam >o,LaCON4wNzxF
uzNFaa
OxUHwaKCig2pw2aaHO>-waamm.
Fina»Kwod>FN3O owwoa'Hoza-
tmzU.
uHNm£Yl
mHxF•NOw,wwxaO' £ix1ryzNwaxUma"
wN
gHao»oma»
r; b *
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota
2007 Seal Coat
IE.
E.
12
M
21
E.
NT AVE.
Engineering Department
March 2007
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
RESOLUTION AWARDING BID
2007 SEAL COAT PROGRAM
CITY PROJECT NO. 7117E
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the construction of the 2007 Seal Coat
Program, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were
received complying with the advertisement:
COMPANY TOTAL BID
Pearson Bros. Inc. $ 336,270.02
ASTECH Corp. 362,172.00
Allied Blacktop Co. 368,718.20
WHEREAS, it appears that Pearson Bros. Inc. of Hanover, MN is the lowest responsible bidder,
complying with the minimum specifications;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the
contract with Pearson Bros. Inc. of Hanover, MN in the name of the City of
Plymouth for the 2007 Seal Coat Program, City Project No. 7117E according to
the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in
the office of the City Engineer in the amount of $336,270.02.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders
the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder
and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
3. Funding for this project shall be as follows:
Street Maintenance (101-1610-7510) $300,000
Street Replacement Fund $ 24,540
City of Orono $ 11,730
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0AEngineeringTRO7ECTS\2000 - 2009\7117E\Reso1Wwd_Bd.doc
13
DATE: April 27, 2007 for Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager, through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Ross Beckwith, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: APPROVE FINAL RELEASE OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
ACTION REQUESTED: On April 18, 1994, the financial guarantee for the
developer of Ponderosa Woods 3rd Addition was reduced to $70,551 (Resolution No. 94-
215). The City's records show no additional activity on this project, however, the project
was completed and the financial guarantee was reduced to $0.00 ( zero). In order to
formally close the financial matters for this development, the attached resolution is
required. I recommend that the attached resolution be adopted. The development is:
1. Ponderosa Woods 3rd Addition
attachment: Resolution
94004)
0:\Engincering\GENERA \MISC\Ross\FG-Memos\2007\FG_050807P.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
FINAL RELEASE OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
PONDEROSA WOODS 3RD ADDITION (94004)
WHEREAS, in accordance with the development contract dated January 31, 1994, Antoine J.
Poppelaars, Simone F. Poppelaars, Daniel A. Poppelaars and Carrie Lyn Poppelaars, developer
of Ponderosa Woods 3rd Addition (94004), has agreed to install certain improvements for said
development; and
WHEREAS, the developer has completed the street, utility and site grading as noted below; and
WHEREAS, the developer has requested a reduction of the development bond to reflect the
completed work;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA; that the bonding requirements are reduced as follows:
ITEM
Street Construction
Sanitary Sewer
Watennain
Stone Sewer
Boulevard and Drainage Swale Sod
Mitigation Pond Construction
Sediment Pond Construction
Street Signs (2 x 200)
Site Grading and Drainage
Improvements
Park and Trail Improvements
Setting Iron Monuments
Design, Administration, Inspection,
As-Builts
TOTAL
ORIGINAL CURRENT NEW
AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT
46,292 46,292 0-
37,483 0- 0-
29,760, 0- 0-
11,606 0- 0-
3,200 3,200 0-
0- 0- 0-
0- 0- 0-
400 400 0-
0- 0- 0-
9,600 9,600 0-
3,500 3,500 0-
17,021 7,559 0-
158,862 70,551 0-
That the letter of credit required for the above items be reduced as detailed above from $70,551
to $0 (zero) to reflect the completed work.
0AEngineering\DEVLMNYS\ 1994\94004\RESOL\BR94004_Final.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
PONDEROSA WOODS 3RD ADDITION (94004)
Page Two
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the bonding requirements for the following items per
Section 8.1 of the approved development contract be reduced as follows:
ITEM ORIGINAL CURRENT
AMOUNT AMOUNT
Maintenance of Erosion and
Sediment
Control Plan Street Sweeping and
Storm
Sewer Cleaning
Cash: $-0- $-0-
Letter of Credit: $-0- $-0-
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
O:\Engineering\DEV LMNTS\ 1994\94004\RESOL\BR94004_Pinal.doc
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT `
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Stephen Deuth, Sr. Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: APPROVE ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR
RETAINING WALL WITHIN TARYN HILLS 6TH
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution approving the
encroaclunent agreement allowing the existing retaining wall within Taryn Hills 6`
I'
BACKGROUND: The City has received a request for an encroachment agreement from Lundgren
Bros. Construction. The encroachment is for an existing retaining wall that was required to be
constructed as part of the tree preservation requirement along the south portion of Outlot K of the
original Taryn Hills development. Currently, the wall is constructed within the southerly portions of
proposed lots 5 through 10, Block 3, Taryn Hills 6'1'. The existing trees also serve as a buffer to the
park south of these lots.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: The staff reconunends that the City Council
adopt the attached resolution allowing the existing retaining wall to occupy the public drainage and
utility easements.
attachments: Petition Letter
Maps
Resolution
0:\Engineering\DEV LMNTS\2007\2007019\Memos\CC_EncrAgrmt_5_3._07.doc
SATHRE-BERGQUIIST,, INC.
150 SOUTH BROADWAY, WAYZATA, MINNESOTA,
w TJ 55391 (952) 476-6000 FAX (952) 476-01 04
c
Project: Taryn Hills 6th Addition
Location: Plymouth, Minnesota
Date: April 20, 2007
Subject: Retaining Wall Encroachment Agreement
FILE NO.: 2007019
PETITIONER: Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc.
935 East Wayzata Boulevard
Wayzata, MN 55391
FINAL PLAT: TARYN HILLS 6TH
LOCATION: East of Vicksburg Lane and south of Co Rd 47
To: Steve Deuth
From: Bob Molstad
Steve,
This letter is to request that the City of Plymouth prepare an encroachment
agreement for the existing retaining wall that crosses the standard side yard
drainage and utility easements for Lots 5-10, Block 3 of Taryn Hills 6th Addition.
The wall was constructed during the 1st
addition grading work to save trees on
the City Park property. There are no City of Plymouth utilities proposed within
these side yard easements.
If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, please contact me at 952-
476-6000.
Sincerely,
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
Robert S. Molstad, P.E.
cc: David Hinners, LBC
File 5401-626
s
26 r/ 9E'691
I
h
h I 1N IBJ lbb2 J, . m I
Z
B[ Z6=
LSO
I rn
am na U
n bN.io o
Ev
Nh o y Eh
72.
8caW .0
cN
I m o
N Ln a N _ eM
c00
oC7
LO
pS tO
v^
mM mm r b N
e22 S[ m
W v y°!1.92Q
140 .PD4 y &66[a Z6b @[.h6 mh F99S y j I
i0'21, b
X O
NN 2f cD
Ni(r'
O' 2S 6 M W10• t 6@AXI
N N as m cb mc7 o
N STS h S z n
LM
co
d'
NM Oy mM 2gG Im 3,,yh *1
IL7
04
BrQS I. / 1Z bE
V hm _
T
W ^
ry 66 z Np I
BION- QP m S°2a LUlZ'6Z/ N 46' GL h N b
d o c'Q'yho bq'S91 86',6 =
@0
F-
S m
I M,EbBBg ,
691
EL \
y
m <Y
Nf00
s`2+ m Z I Z
11a]1 In II __ ^ X32.04 __ ____ _—_—_ _____ _ ___ 0..
I t9N +mr
12ag9°
L Y m WIC
Ss
LLeo
wco
G I O
aLO
I 3
r
1 /
N
O my pp
W
3 75 a 1
X891
h /
1
R .v r1r Z1' EEl
jy "
m 7
o a0 0° Pc40.5 25,25 m ^
1
I'
vf
m
tt
NN
vmi
I
F w d'` a,,. S2
1A,540
ll'bEl ,ai r v£gg L yid S
a3ayS
nV 'np.
37422.E e\11
9gy
It7 umi m rn mm sm
9AI 5 N
bS'ZEl
m
SZ SZ o ^
m a0;1
3979\,
nNDov
momanm e p 09 AOA 'w V
m'
i
242499.77m `9gS ZZ'96 m N N 1 G' ` G 59 p5 µm'. cae, WNL n. 10.ry16y m 9ZISZ ZB'9
91.62 3 ...w o I eivN N
yah
S2S tr , m
EI I
I m W fm. N tpr+ `1.2494. ,y7. 0 V N
6 6 3.EI E7A9S and 1f7 y_
N 5509 / 3,Ay'
N
13
01 383
s m
o_co
ary
n'` 1
R3076 SZ SZ0
2g°
44'' m M v P
I
I G6.Po gaZ Q /
9a °
m\ y 12 y Leh. sgs8l°`s 8°
57
N
m •b 3.7
LO
a
6 m m y10
N
N h p`
NN ^ 1
ICN C p ry. mmrm 2 ',
ysl
m vO
m
695 IS'lLl PP' L8'EGI bl'OZI LO'Z ll AA2020S 99'969
I I I
lv6,Z0Z05 BE'tB'Z` __ I n
00E ' On 00E 008 00E oe
i
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2007 -
APPROVING ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR
A RETAINING WALL OVER LOTS 5 THROUGH 10,
BLOCK 3, TARYN HILLS 6TH ADDITION
WHEREAS, Lundgren Bros. Construction has requested approval to execute an encroachment
agreement to allow for an existing retaining wall to occupy the public drainage and utility easement;
and;
WHEREAS, the encroachment agreement only permits the encroachment of the retaining wall
within the easements and all related facilities must still meet all applicable City codes; and
WHEREAS,. the property is legally described as Lots 5 through 10, Block 3, Taryn Hills 6"'
Addition;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to sign, on
behalf of the City of Plymouth an encroachment agreement that will allow for the existing retaining
wall to occupy the public drainage and utility easements.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth
City Council on , with the original thereof on file in my office, and
the same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this
day of
City Clerk
0:\Engin eering\DE V LMNTS\20071200701912eso1\AppEncrAgrmt_TwynHllsGth_5_S_07. doc
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: Stephen Deuth, Sr. Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: APPROVE AN ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR
BOULDER WALL AT 4700 BALSAM LANE
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution approving the
construction of a boulder wall within a public drainage and utility easement.
BACKGROUND: Grant and Liana Fisher of 4700 Balsam Lane are requesting the City to allow a
2 -tiered boulder wall to encroach within the public drainage and utility easement. The Fisher's
backyard runs at a flat grade from the back of their home about 35 feet. From this point, the lawn
drastically slopes approximately 70 feet to the edge of the pond.
The Fishers want to have more of a yard that is usable. The proposal is to fill from the point of the
flat grade another 35 feet to the location of the boulder walls that will retain the additional fill. This
will create a 70 -foot flat area from the back of the home. The attached drawing shows the height of.
each wall. The farthest wall from the house structure will be less than 4 feet high. The second wall
will be 2 feet in height.
Due to the back yard grade of the adjacent properties, drainage should not be a concern. Also, the
boulder wall is designed not to extend into the side yard easements at 4700 Balsam.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: The staff recommends that the City Council
adopt the attached resolution approving the proposed boulder walls be allowed to be constructed
within the public easement.
attachments: Petition Letter
Rear Yard Photos
Maps
Agreement
Resolution
O:\Engineering\GENERAL\AGREEMTS\MEMOS\CC_EA_Boulder W all_4700Balsam.doc
To Whom It May Concern: 4/23/07
I am writing in regards to the landscaping and boulder wall work we are proposing to be done at
4700 Balsam Lane North, Plymouth, MN 55442.
Our backyard area slopes down towards the wetlands behind our property. When purchasing
this property last summer, we were excited about the possibility of leveling out some of this area
to make the yard more "useable." Currently, there is a very small area of space in our backyard
that would be considered useable for a family. We have a strong desire to expand this area. This
will greatly increase the enjoyment of our home, and it will also increase our property value over
the long term.
We were aware of a side easement when purchasing the property, which we have never planned
on altering. It wasn't until last week that we realized the easement actually consisted of most of
our property.
The city has informed us that many of our neighbors have easements that cover the majority of
their property as well. We have two neighbors directly south of us (4670 Balsam Lane and 11220
46f Place North), and their properties have been altered to make it more useable. One of these
neighbors brought in over twice as much fill as compared to what we will bring in for our
property changes. We hope the city will allow us to make the land more useable and family
friendly, just as our neighbors have done in the past.
Here are some important highlights of the proposed changes (please refer to the contractor
information):
We intend to use natural rock boulders, not man-made landscaping blocks, as the
material being used to construct the two walls.
The contractor will make the changes to our property with proper water flow drainage in
mind. This includes drain tile within the boulder walls and areas around the boulder
walls will be left unaltered for proper water flow.
The boulder walls will not affect the city's access to the side drainage easement.
The closest boulder wall in proximity to the wetland area will be approximately 25 feet
away.
The amount of useable space being created will still be built with a slight downward
slope toward the wetlands, which is being done to assist with water drainage.
We will of course agree to any access the city needs to our property, including the signing of an
encroachment agreement.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter and for considering the proposed changes for our
property.
Sincerely
J
Liana and Grant Fisher
4700 Balsam Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55442
LooWing to the Southwest from the edge of the pond
JO*J.
JI Z -
17I
I
4:709 96
705412 h
r,
54.44
186.14 `
a v 40 00
9
t
Retaining Wall Locatio NINS
w
54.44
186.14 `
a v 40 00
9
mmm V, a4r-,Q 7r=B,*z6jcr--
I Gallo by
y
e •
AZOL i
55'x 2.° t QRZ,, tG 5LIOVI
N
55 3gg'ot"
Z Zlcvt L t
r?k-Ro ul rOR
cls
m
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT for Boulder Walls
AGREEMENT made this D day of &rI7 , 2007, by and between the City of
Plymouth, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and Grant A. Fisher and Liana L. Fisher,
husband and wife, ("Owner")
Recitals
A. Grant A. Fisher and Liana L. Fisher own real property in the City of Plymouth,
County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota legally described as Lot 2, Block 5, Deerwood Estates
subject property")
B. The City owns a drainage and utility easement over part of the subject property..,
C. Owner is proposing that 2 boulder walls be constructed within the City's
easement.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is
agreed by the parties as follows:
1. Encroachment Authorization. The City hereby approves the encroachment on
its easement for the proposed boulder walls.
CADocuments and Settings\grant.fisher\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Piles\Content.lES\K9Q]W5A7\EA Tisher_L2H5_Deer oodEst 5_8_07[2].doc
2. Access for- Maintenance. At all reasonable times, the City shall have access to
the subject property for the purpose of maintaining and repairing the drainage and utility
easement. In the event it becomes necessary for the boulder walls to be removed to allow for
maintenance and repairs, such removal and subsequent replacement shall be at the sole expense
of the Owner.
3. Hold Harmless and Indemnity. In consideration of being allowed to encroach on
the City's drainage and utility easement, Owner, its successors and assigns, shall -indemnify and
hold the City harmless from any damage caused to the subject property, including the boulder
walls on the subject property, caused in whole or in part by the encroachment onto the City's
easement. The owner may be required to remove all or a portion of the boulder walls if it is
deemed necessary by the City in order to exercise the purpose of the existing easement.
4. RECORDING. This Agreement shall be recorded against the title to the subject
property.
CADocurnents and Settings\grant.fisherU.ocal SettingsUcinporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\K9QIW5A7\EA Fisher_L2B5 DeerwoodEst_5_8 07[2].doc
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Kelli Slavik, Mayor
Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
FISHER
By: ---------
Grant A. Fisher
a na L. F er
The foregoing instrument was executed and acknowledged before me on this
day of 2007, by Kelli Slavik and Laurie Ahrens, Mayor and City Manager,
respectively, of the City of Plymouth, a Minnesota municipal corporation.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SS
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Notary Public
X21
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2007, by Grant A. Fisher and Liana L. Fisher, husband and wife.
No /ary - blic
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY
HOERNISA TOCHNNAZCityofPlymouth . ;t Notary Public
3400 Plymouth Blvd. ,.,.. Minnesota
V Comm(ssion Ex fres Jan. 31, 2012Plymouth, MN 55447
CADocuments and SeltingAgrant.fisherr\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Tiles\Content.IE5\K9Q1W5A7\EA_Fisher_L2E5_DeemoodEst_5_8_07[2].doc
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2007 -
APPROVING ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR
LOT 2, BLOCK 5, DEERWOOD ESTATES
4700 BALSAM LANE
WHEREAS, Grant and Liana Fisher has requested approval to execute an encroachment agreement
to construct 2 boulder walls; and;
WHEREAS, the encroachment agreement only permits the encroachment of the 2 boulder walls
within the easement and all related facilities must still meet all applicable City codes; and
WHEREAS, the property is legally described as Lot 2, Block 5, Deerwood Estates;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to sign, on
behalf of the City of Plymouth an encroachment agreement that will allow for 2 boulder walls to be
constructed within the public drainage and utility easement.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth
City Council on , with the original thereof on file in my office, and
the same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this
day of
City Clerk
0:\Engineering\G ENE RAL\A G REEMMTS\RES OLUPIONS\Res_ Fisher_BoulderWall_5_8_07.doc
611b
DATE: April 26, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
FROM: Doran Cote, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: 2008 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY (SRA) BUDGET
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to receive the 2008 Suburban Rate Authority (SRA)
Budget.
BACKGROUND: The Suburban Rate Authority (SRA) is a joint powers organization of Twin Cities
metropolitan area suburbs totaling over 850,000 in population., The SRA intervenes in electric, gas,
and telecommunications matters before the Minnesota Public .Utilities Commission (PUC), and
actively reviews developments in right-of-way use, utility franchise, and other utility matters affecting
cities and their residents.
The SRA bylaws require member municipalities to review the proposed SRA budget. The proposed
2008 expenditures exceed the 2007 budget due mainly to anticipated rate uses ($20,000). The SRA
attorney believes that in 2008, Xcel Energy may attempt to abolish municipal pumping rates, which the
SRA opposes. Municipal pumping rates are favorable rates afforded to municipalities .for pending
water and sewer utilities.
BUDGET IMPACT: Although the 2008 SRA expenditures are expected to increase, the proposed
2008 membership dues for Plymouth would remain the same as budgeted in 2007 ($6,000). The
proposed 2008 SRA assessments would be included in the 2008 budget funded in the Public Services
Budget (101-1830-7731)
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I recommend that the City Council receive the
2008 Suburban Rate Authority (SRA) Budget.
attachments: 2007 SRA Budget
2007 SRA Assessments
2008 SRA Proposed Budget
2008 SRA Proposed Assessments
0:\Engineering\GENERAL\MEMOS\DORAN\2007\CC_SRA_2008_Budget.doc
Assets:
2007 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY BUDGET
2006
Cash and Investments (12/31/05) $5,262.00
Membership Assessments - 2006 $78,000.00
TOTAL 83 262. 0
Anticibated 2006 Expenses:
Utility Locate Rules (from 2005) 700
Qwest AFOR (from 2005) 14,000
Xcel Electric Rate Case 30,000
CenterPoint Rate Case 5,000
General (incl. costs and disbursements, insurance audits, etc.)
1,600—from 2005) 22,600
TOTAL 72,300)
Estimated Reserve at December 31, 2006: 10 962:00
Assets:
2007
Carryover from 2006 $10,962.00
Membership Assessments -
20071 $78,000.00
TOTAL 88 962.00
AnticiUated 2007 Exbenses
Xcel Municipal Pumping Task Force $7,000
Xcel Street Lighting 5,000
Right -of -Way Matters 10,000
General Matters (incl. costs and disbursements) 16,000.
TOTAL ($38,000)
Estimated Reserve at December 31, 2007: $50,962.00
This is calculated at $400 per vote based on 32 members as per 2004 Met Council population estimates.
286802v3.IMS SU 160-3
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
ASSESSMENTS
COLLECTABLE IN 2007
BALANCE
VOTES ASSESSMENT PAID DUE
Bloomington 18 $ 7,200.00 $ - 7,200.00
Brooklyn Park 14 5,600.00 - 5,600.00
Burnsville 13 5,200.00 - 5,200.00
Chanhassen 5 2,000.00 - 2,000.00
Circle Pines 1 400.00 - 400.00
Columbia Heights 4 1,600.00 - 1,600.00
Deephaven 1 400.00 - 400.00
Eden Prairie 13 5,200.00 - 5,200.00
Edina 10 4,000.00 - 4,000.00
Fridley 6 2,400.00 - 2,400.00
Golden Valley 5 2,000.00 - 2,000.00
Hastings 4 1,600.00 - 1,600.00
Hopkins 4 1,600.00 - 1,600.00
Lauderdale 1 400.00 - 400.00
Long Lake 1 400.00 - 400.00
Maple Grove 11 4,400.00. - 4,400.00
Maple Plain 1 400.00 - 400.00
Maplewood 8 3,200.00 - 3,200.00
Minnetonka 11 4,400.00 - 4,400.00
Mound 2 800.00 - 800.00
Oakdale 6 2,400.00 - 2,400.00
Orono 2 800.00 - 800.00
Plymouth 14 5,600.00 - 5,600.00
Robbinsdale 3 1,200.00 - 1,200.00
Roseville 7 2,800.00 - 2,800.00
Shakopee 5 2,000.00 - 2,000.00
Shoreview 6 2,400.00 - 2,400.00
Spring Lake Park 2 800.00 - 800.00
Spring Park 1 400:00 - 400.00
Wayzata 1 400.00 - 400.00
Woodbury 10 4,000.00 - 4,000.00
195 $ 78,000.00 $ - $ 78,000.00
Assets:
2008 .SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY BUDGET
2007
Cash and Investments (12/31/06) $ 7,408.65
Membership Assessments - 2007 $78,000.00
TOTAL $5_ 4065
Anticibated 2007 Ex>,enses:
Utility Locate Ordinances (from 2006) $ 3,800
CenterPoint Rate Case (from 2006) $ 1,377
Municipal Pumping Rates—Study Group—Xcel $12,000
2006 Xcel Gas Rate Case $18,000
Universal Telephone Service (Suburb DSL) $ 3,000
General (incl. costs and disbursements, insurance, audits, etc.)
1,653—from 2006) $22,600
TOTAL ($60,777.00)
Estimated Reserve at December 31, 2007: 24 631.65
Assets:
2008
Carryover from 2007 $24,631.65
Membership Assessments -
20081 $78,400.00
TOTAL $103,031.65
Anticipated 2008 Expenses
Xcel Municipal Pumping Study Group $ 5,000
Xcel Gas Rate Case $ 5,000
Xcel Electric Rate Case (Anticipated) $15,000
Utility Relocation Matters $10,000
Universal Telephone Service—Suburb DSL $ 5,000
General Matters (incl. costs and disbursements) $20,000
TOTAL ($60,000)
Estimated Reserve at December 31, 2008: 43 031.65
This is calculated at $400 per vote based on 31 members as per 2005 Met Council population estimates.
308634v1 JMS SU160-3
Suburban Rate Authority 2008 Assessments
City
2005
Population*
Votes Assessment
Bloomington 84,347 17 6,800
Brooklyn Park 71,048 15 6,000
Burnsville 61,262 13 5,200
Chanhassen 22,518 5 2,000
Circle Pines 5,072 2 800
Columbia
Heights 18,261
4
1,600
Deephaven , 3,737 1 400
Eden Prairie 60,955 13 5,200
Edina 47,448 10 4,000
Fridley 26,679 6 2,400
Golden Valley 20,510 5 2,000
Hastings 21,489 5 2,000
Hopkins 17,263 4 1,600
Lauderdale 2,329 1 400
Long Lake 1,839 1 400
Maple Grove 58,420 12 4,800
Maple Plain 1,982 1 400
Maplewood 36,279 8 3,200
Minnetonka 51,657 11 4,400
Mound 9,838 2 800
Oakdale 27,492 6 2,400
Orono 7,653 2 800
Plymouth 70,455 15 6,000
Robbinsdale 13,873 3 1,200
Roseville 33,882 7 2,800
Shakopee 29,335 6 2,400
Shoreview 25,964 6 2,400
Spring Lake Park 6,642 2 800
Spring Park 1,705 1 400
Wayzata 3,973 1 400
Woodbury 54,091 11 4,400
Total 897,998 196 78,400.00
Metropolitan Council estimates
308904vl JMS SU160-3
CITY OF ,PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
FROM: Doran Cote, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE ENGINEERING WORK ON
2008 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) PROJECTS
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing
Public Works staff to proceed with preliminary engineering and engineering activities on
projects programmed for 2008 in the 2007 — 2011 Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
BACKGROUND: In order to provide for the timely delivery and completion of projects
programmed in the CIP for 2008, preliminary engineering (survey, soil boring, etc.) and
engineering (design) activities should occur in 2007. , The Public Works staff would like
to initiate these activities now so that the projects can be bid early in the construction
season.
BUDGET IMPACT: Some projects will require expenditures in 2007 even though the
projects will technically show up in the 2008 budget.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I hereby recoinmend that the City
Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the engineering work on 2008 CIP
projects.
attachments: CIP projects
resolution
0:\Enguieering\GENERAL\MEMOS\DORAN\2007\CC_Eng Woi,k_2003_CIP.doc
Project Name . Department Project # Priority Project Cost
LADDER PUMPER 75' Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -028 nla 475,000
SUV FOR FIRE CHIEF Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -029 nla 30,000
QUAD CARS Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -100 nla 138,000
POOL CAR Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -173 nla 23,000
446 CAT BACK HOE Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -241 nla • 130,000
SINGLE AXLE TRUCK TO BE UPGRADED Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -265 nla 157,000
314 TON PICK UP DODGE Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -345 nla 23,000
DODGE VAN Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -351 nla 23,000
SUV JEEP Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -486 nla 20,500
SUV JEEP VehicleslEquipment 07 -VE -487 nla . 20,500
INVESTIGATOR CAR Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -491 nla 20,500
6' MOWER Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -523 nla 34,000
16' MOWER Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -525 nla 89,000
GROOMER PAINTER Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -570 nla 10,600
314 TON 4X2 PICKUP Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -573 nla 18,500
ONE TON TRUCK LIFT GATE PLOW Vehicles/Equipment 07 -VE -574 nla 61,000
Erosion Repair- Wood Creek @ E. Medicine Lake Rd Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -001 nla 250,000
Maintain Water Quality Ponds Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -002 nla 15,000 .
Erosion Repair- Conor Meadows Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -004 nla 200,000
County Road 61/County Road 9 Erosion Site Water Quality & Drainage 06-WR=006 nla 275,000
Drainage: 38th to 39th (West of Harbor Lane) Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -007 nla 40,000
TH 55 Drainage Channel and Wetland Cleaning Water Quality & Drainage 07 -WR -002 nla 140,000
Wild Wings Development Wetlands Water Quality & Drainage 07 -WR -003 nla 75,000
Storm Sewer System Repairs Water Quality & Drainage 07 -WR -004 nla 0
Mooney Lake Permanent Emergency Outlet Water Quality & Drainage 08 -WR -001 nla 250,000
Line Sanitary Sewer Main: Annual Program Water & Sewer 06 -SS -003 nla 330,000
Watermain: Vicksburg Ln (CR 47 -Schmidt Lk Rd) Water & Sewer 06-W-002 nla 750,000
fell Number 16: Zachary Well Field Water & Sewer 07-W-001 nla 1,550,000
vVell Refurbishing Water & Sewer 07-W-002 nla 220,000
Zachary Water Treatment Plant Irrigation Water & Sewer 07-W-003 nla 50,000
Produced Using the Plan -It Capital Planning Software Page 257 Nlednesday, March 28, 2007
Total for 2007 30,239,800
20.
E
0=d
Repair Roof - Pump House #8 Building/Facilities Projects 08 -PM -001 nla 16,000
Replace Roof - Pump House #5 Building/Facilities Projects 08 -PM -002. nla 16,000
Replace Roof - Plymouth Creek Shelter Build!nglFacillties Projects 08 -PM -003 nla 12,000
Replace Roof -Zachary Shelter Building/Facilities Projects 08 -PM -004 nla 12,000
Replacement of Financial/Payroll and HR Software Information Technology 07 -IT -004 nla 1,000,000
Replace UPS Backup System Information Technology 084T-001 nla 30,000
RecordslDocument Management System Information Technology 08 -IT -002 nla 205,000
New Trails Park Projects 07 -PK -001 nla 75,000
Transfer to Park Replacement Fund Park Projects 07 -PK -002 nla 50,000
Land Acquisition Park Projects 07 -PK -003 nla 4,000,000
Trail/Parking Lot Repair Park Projects 07 -PK -004 nla 90,000
Replace Irrigation System Park Projects 07 -PK -005 nla 135,000
Park Signage Park Projects 07 -PK -008 nla 10,000
Trail Crossing - Federal or State Trunk Highway Park Projects 08 -PK -001 nla 1,000,000
Replace Playground and/or Skate Park - Site TBD Park Projects 08 -PK -002 nla 125,000
Taryn Hills Neighborhood Park Park Projects 08 -PK -003 nla 150,000
Street Reconstruction - Districts 34 & 35 Street Projects 08 -ST -001 nla 6,935,000
2008 Mill & Overlay Street Projects 08 -ST -002 nla 410,000
CR 101- CR 6 to CR 24 Street Projects 08 -ST -003 nla 7,700,000
R 24 - 30th Avenue to CR 101 Street Projects 08 -ST -004 nla 3,000,000
rraffic Signals at Three Intersections Street Projects 08 -ST -005 nla 350,000
Rail Xing Safety Improvements @ Zachary Lane Street Projects 08 -ST -006 nla 255,000
Produced Using the Plan -It Capital Planning Software Page 257 Nlednesday, March 28, 2007
Project Name Department . Project # . Priority Project Cost
Replace Retaining Wall Street Projects 08 -ST -007 nla 110,000
Temporary Overlay Project Street Projects 08 -ST -008 nla 363,000
Street Reconstruction - 36th Ave. Street Projects 08 -ST -009 nla 460,000
10 Small 17 Passenger Buses Transit Projects 07 -TR -001 nla 236,000
National Transit Database Projects Transit Projects 08 -TR -001 nla 200,000
SQUAD CARS Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE nla 211,500
PICKUP TRUCK GRASS RIG Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -003 nla 32,000
PICK UP TRUCK GRASS RIG Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -006 nla 32,000
POOL CAR Vehicles]/Equipment 08 -VE -175 nla 18,500
INVESTIGATIONS CAR Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -176 nla . 18,500
ONE TON 4X4 WITH PLOW Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -249 nla 62,000
TANDEM DUMP PLOW SANDER Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -271 nla 174,000
SEWER JETTER Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -327 nla 168,000 .
112 TON PICKUP WITH UTILITY BODY Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -347 nla 26,000
POOL CAR Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -484 nla 17,000
POOL CAR Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -485 nla 17,000
MOWER 6' WITH BROOM Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -524 nla 36,400
MOWER 16' Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -526 nla 93,000
MOWER 10.5' TORO 455 Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -577 nla 65,000
PICKUP 314 T 04 DODGE PLOW Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -578 nla 28,000
PICK UP 314 T 4X4 DODGE PLOW Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -579 nla 28,000
PICK UP TRUCK 314 T 4X4 PLOW Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -580 nla 28,500
PICK UP TRUCK 314 T 4X4 PLOW Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -581 nla 28,500
AERATOR WITH SEEDER Vehicles/Equipment 08 -VE -603 nla 11,500
Erosion Repair - Wood Creek @ E. Medicine Lake Rd Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -001 nla 140,000
Maintain Water Quality Ponds Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -002 nla 30,000
Hedberg Aggregate/Nathan Lane Drainage Site Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -003 nla 25,000
Plymouth Creek Water Quality Pond @ West Med Park Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -005 nla 925,000
County Road 61/County Road 9 Erosion Site Water Quality & Drainage 06 -WR -006 nla 75,000
Stream Bank Repairs: Plymouth Creek Water Quality & Drainage 07 -WR -001 nla 50,000
Wild Wings Development'Wetlands Water Quality & Drainage 07 -WR -003 nla 175,000
Storm Sewer System Repairs Water Quality & Drainage 07 -WR -004 nla 75,000,
Timber Creek Upstream Structure/Downstream Pipe Water Quality & Drainage 08 -WR -002 nla 100,000
Unspecified Drainage Improvements Water Quality & Drainage 08 -WR -003 nla 200,000
Bass Lake Outlet Water Quality & Drainage 08 -WR -005 nla 35,000
Line Sanitary Sewer Main: Annual Program Water & Sewer 06 -SS -003 nla 363,000
Well Refurbishing Water & Sewer 07-W-002 nla 200,000
Refurbish/Upgrade 28th Ave, Sewer Liftstation Water & Sewer 08 -SS -001 nla 600,000
MainlLiftstation: Vicksburg & 54th - 2006 Segment Water & Sewer 08 -SS -002 nla 410,000
Water Main: 55th Ave (Cheshire Ln -Vicksburg Ln) Water & Sewer 08-W-003 nla 220,000
Produced Using the Plan -It Capital Planning Software Page 258 . . Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Total for 2008 31,663,400
i 2009
Replace Roof - Fire Station 1 Building/Facilities Projects 09 -PM -001 nla 85,000
Replace Roof - Pump House #2 BuildinglFacilities Projects 09 -PM -002 nla 16,000
Replace Carpet - Fire Station 1 Building/Facilities Projects 09 -PM -003 nla 35,000 .
Recarpet, Repaint City Hall Building/Facilities Projects 09 -PM -004 nla 300,000
Replace Police MDC's Information Technology 094T-001 nla 115,000
Land Management Software Replacement Information Technology 09 -IT -002 nla 500,000
Fiber to LogislZacharylFire #2 Information Technology 09 -IT -003 nla 200,000
New Trails Park Projects 07 -PK -001 nla 100,000
Transfer to Park Replacement Fund Park Projects 07 -PK -002 nla 75,000
Land Acquisition Park Projects 07 -PK -003 nla 3,750,000
Trail/Parking Lot Repair Park Projects 07 -PK -004 nla 90,000
Replace Irrigation System Park Projects 07 -PK -005 nla 140,000
Produced Using the Plan -It Capital Planning Software Page 258 . . Wednesday, March 28, 2007
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
AUTHORIZING PUBLIC WORKS STAFF TO PROCEED WITH
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING. AND ENGINEERING ACTIVITIES ON
PROJECTS PROGRAMMED FOR 2008 IN THE
2007 — 2011 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP)
WHEREAS, The City has several projects programmed in the 2007 — 2011 Capital
Improvements Program (CIP) for 2008; and
WHEREAS, it would be prudent to initiate engineering activities on the 2008 projects in
order to provide for the timely delivery and completion of the projects; and
WHEREAS, Public Works staff desires to proceed with engineering activities on these
projects even though they are in the proposed 2008 budget;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: That Public Works staff is authorized to
proceed with preliminary engineering and engineering activities on projects programmed
for 2008 in the 2007 — 2011 CIP.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0:\Engineering\RESOL\2007\Eng Work_2005_CIP.doc
Agenda Number: 6 1 a
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
FROM: Scott Webb, Police Captain
THROUGH: Michael S. Goldstein, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: RESOL UTION A CCEPTING THE DONATION OF MONEY (IN
CONCEPT) FROM THE PLYMOUTH CRIME AND FIRE
PREVENTION FUND FOR THE FUTURE PURCHASE OFA
VEHICLE FOR THE POLICE SWAT TEAM
DATE: April 30, 2007 for the May 8, 2007 City Council Meeting
1. ACTION REQUESTED: City Council authorize the approval of -a resolution to accept the
donation of a vehicle from the Plymouth Crime and Fire Prevention Fund for use by the
Police Department as a primary vehicle for its SWAT team.
2. BACKGROUND: The Plymouth Crime and Fire Prevention Fund (PC&FPF) is a non-
profit, all volunteer organization that works with the Plymouth Police and Fire Department to
identify and develop new initiatives, support ongoing programs, and purchase state -of -the art
equipment that reduces crime and enhances safety in the community..
The current method of transporting SWAT officers and equipment are two retired North
Memorial Ambulances. While they are more useful than the previous dedicated SWAT
vehicles, the primary ambulance has some significant shortcomings and the secondary unit
has lost much of its reliability. The newest primary vehicle, was a donated unit with 217,000
miles.
The secondary unit has suffered a number of mechanical problems; including no air
conditioning, little or no heat in the back, burning wires, and a broken passenger side mirror
which makes it difficult to back. It is too old to acquire parts, and currently has 138,000
miles on it.
While the department has made use of the retired ambulances, they simply are not designed
to be SWAT vehicles. They satisfy some needs but several major needs are not met such as
weapon storage, security/tactical blanket storage (assembled) and ease of ingress/egress. The
current transportation also doesn't provide enough room for the entire team. During
inclement weather or during tactical briefings, a specialized vehicle would provide shelter for
everyone and the privacy the team needs for sharing confidential information.
One of the goals of the Plymouth Police Department's SWAT Team is to substantially
improve our response time to callouts. Currently, SWAT members must come from home to
the Police Department where they outfit themselves with their necessary gear. Weapons
and/or other equipment are also loaded into the ambulances and this takes time. The primary
transport vehicle leaves with the first four arrivals and goes to the scene. Subsequent
members gear up and transport themselves with ambulance #2 or other police vehicles that
are available. A specialized, devoted vehicle would allow SWAT team members to travel
directly to the scene where their equipment would be waiting for them.
The process of arriving at the police department and loading weapons, vests and equipment
adds at least an additional 30-45 minutes to our arrival time. This time is critical in tactical
situations. In warrant situations, it would be ideal to arrive at the warrant location in a single
vehicle rather than multiple vehicles that are difficult to exit quickly and efficiently.
Our challenge is this: to find a solution to the problem of reliable, flexible, practical
transportation for staff and equipment that is cost-effective and user-friendly. Ideally, a
customized SWAT vehicle would provide safe transportation for 10 members, 12 tactical
vests and helmets, weapons, and necessary breaching tools as well as our tactical blanket.
This vehicle would allow us to have the first four responders head to the scene of the tactical
situation where other SWAT team members could meet them. Those members would then
outfit themselves with their gear from the new SWAT truck and take their place where they
are needed most. The new vehicle would provide a heated or cooled area out of the weather
and the public eye where the team could be briefed and sensitive tactical planning could take
place.
With the SWAT Team's vehicle needs being met, we could devote the secondary rig to our
SWAT negotiators. They currently use their City work cars or have to share space that may
not provide them with privacy and workspace for their own specialized equipment. With the
addition of a power inverter to the '98 ambulance, negotiators are now able to charge phones
or other electronic equipment as well as run power to the "throw phone."
3. ALTERNATIVES: Do not accept the donation.
4. DISCUSSION: Since 1977, the Plymouth Crime and Fire Prevention Fund has had legacy
of supporting quality projects that enhance and promote safety in the community. This
donation follows suit and would improve the safety of the community and the emergency
service professionals that serve the City.
5. BUDGET IMPACT: The Plymouth Crime & Fire Prevention Fund will pay the costs for
this initial vehicle; including the initial equipping and graphics. A quote was received in
February 2006 from Iten Chevrolet for a 2006 Chevrolet Express Cutaway Van, 6.OL V8
Vortec Gas Engine, Automatic, 12000# GVW, Power Windows, Power Locks, Tilt & Cruise
Control, 14' American Cargo Body along with the customizing for the SWAT gear. The
quote at that time was. $67,196.14 + Tax and licensing. With inflation, I believe we now
would need to budget approximately $75,000.00. The only costs to the City would then
be minor costs to continue operations, i.e., fuel, oil changes, etc. The vehicle will not be
placed in the replacement schedule, as there are alternatives such as future grants,
donations, or alternative service model that could impact the need for replacement of the
vehicle in the future. The life of the vehicle is anticipated to be in excess of 10 years.
6. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve the resolution
to accept the Plymouth Crime & Fire Prevention Fund donation of a vehicle to be used by
the Police Department for its SWAT team.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 07 -
RESOL UTIONACCEPTING THE DONATION OF MONEY (IN CONCEPT) FROM THE
PLYMOUTH CRIME AND FIRE PREVENTION FUND FOR THE FUTURE PURCHASE
OF A VEHICLE FOR THE POLICE SWAT TEAM
WHEREAS, the Police Department's SWAT team could use a new primary response
vehicle ordered and equipped to meet their special needs; and
WHEREAS, the Plymouth Crime and Fire Prevention Fund raised funds to purchase a
vehicle for the use of the police department's SWAT team; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, the City Council adopt the donation of money from the Plymouth
Crime and Fire Prevention Fund, for the purchase of a vehicle for use by the Police Department
as a primary vehicle for its SWAT team.
Adopted by the City Council on
DATE: May 1, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, Public Works Director
FROM: Kris Hageman, Solid Waste Coordinator
SUBJECT: Metro Wood Recycling CONTRACT
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a contract with
Metro Wood Recycling (MWR) to provide for yard waste grinding and transportation services.
BACKGROUND: Metro Wood Recycling, formerly All -Wood Products, LLC., has provided
grinding service for our wood waste and leaves collected at the City of Plymouth Yard Waste site over
the past three years. Their services include grinding yard wastes, transporting mulch off site as well as
removing a small amount of leaves in the fall.
After reviewing proposals and quotes from a number of service providers, staff is recommending
entering into a contract with Metro Wood Recycling as the lowest cost provider. Upon a favorable
annual evaluation of services provided, annual extensions of the contract may be given through May
1, 2010.
BUDGET IMPACT: The estimated annual cost for yard waste site grinding and transportation
services is $23,000-$27,000. The 2007 Solid Waste budget includes $47,000 for these services (Acct.
503-1740-7734).
RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving
a contract with Met o Wood Recycling to provide for yard waste grinding and transportation services.
Kris H eman
Solid Waste Coordi or
attachments: Contract
Resolution
0:\Engineering\SOLIDWS'RYARDWST\NIEMOS\2003\Metro Wood ProductsAGREEMENC07.doc
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH AND
Metro Wood Recycling
1 City of Plymouth and Metro Wood Recycling
Contractor Federal ID No.
2 Opening Paragraph
THIS AGREEMENT made this 1st day of May, 2007, between the City of Plymouth, a
Minnesota Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the CITY OF PLYMOUTH
and Metro Wood Recycling hereinafter referred to as Contractor.
In consideration of the following terms, conditions and mutual promises, the parties
herein agree as follows:
3 Scope of Agreement.
Contractor agrees to perform the following services for the CITY OF PLYMOUTH:
Services provided shall include, but not be limited to:
A. Tub Grinding of wood waste.
Single grind residential tree waste and brush.
Removal of single ground wood waste with small, designated amount to
remain on site.
Log material will remain on site.
Grinding frequency will be determined between both parties. Grinding
frequency will be no less than once every six weeks during the months of
April through November.
Site preparation, including grinding, will take place during March of each
year prior to road restrictions for equipment mobilization.
B. Equipment and staff
Provide operator for tub grinder
Estimated rate of output using a 3 -inch screen; 400 yards/hour.
Estimated rate of output using a 2 -inch screen 300yards/hour.
Provide equipment to load brush material into tub grinder
Provide front end loader when necessary to move brush/prepare for
grinding
Provide front end loader and staff person to move brush pile to maintain
save environment for employees and residents as requested.
C. Additional Services
Haul leaves off site in the fall at no charge.
1
4 Compensation.
Contractor shall be compensated at a rate of $200 per hour for grinding of residential
wood waste. Contractor will be compensated at a rate of $325 per hour for grinding of
leaves. The volume of wood waste materials will be estimated by both parties.
5 Effective Date and Termination Date.
This agreement shall be in full force and effect from May 1, 2007 thru May 1, 2008.
Evaluation of services provided during the contract year will be done prior to annual
extension of the contract. Upon a favorable evaluation, extension of the contract may
be given for the term of one year through May 1, 2009 and an additional one year
extension to May 1, 2010 may be given upon a favorable evaluation unless otherwise
extended by the CITY OF PLYMOUTH or terminated earlier than the termination date
under paragraph 17, Cancellation and Default.
6 Substitution and Assignments.
Services by the Contractor will be performed by the following persons:
Metro Wood Recycling
Upon approval by the CITY OF PLYMOUTH, the Contractor may substitute other
persons to perform the services. If substitution is permitted by the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, the Contractor shall furnish information to the CITY OF PLYMOUTH to
allow a proper review of the qualifications of the substituted person. No assignment of
this agreement shall be permitted, except for substitution hereunder, without the written
amendment executed by the CITY OF PLYMOUTH and the Contractor.
7 Contract Administration.
All provisions of this agreement shall be coordinated and administered by the
department identified herein under the direction of the department head signing this
agreement.
8 Amendments.
No amendments may be made to this agreement after execution by the parties, except
for extensions of time, increases in compensation or increases or reduction of the
services to be performed, unless the amendment is approved by the CITY OF
Plymouth in writing.
2
9 Independent Contractor.
The Contractor and its employees shall not be an employee of the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH. It is agreed that the Contractor and its employees will act hereunder as
an independent contractor and acquires no rights to tenure, workers' compensation
benefits, unemployment compensation benefits, medical and hospital benefits, sick and
vacation leave, severance pay, pension benefits or other rights or benefits offered to
employees of the CITY OF PLYMOUTH, its departments or agencies.
10 Hold Harmless.
The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, its officers and employees, from any liabilities, claims, damages, costs,
judgments, and expenses, including attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from
an act or omission of the contractor, its employees, agents or employees of
subcontractors, in the performance of this contract or by reason of the failure of the
contractor to fully perform, in any respect, all of its obligations under this contract.
11 Contractor's Insurance.
This contract shall be effective only upon the approval by the CITY OF PLYMOUTH of
acceptable evidence of the insurance detailed below. Such insurance secured by the
Contractor shall be issued by insurance companies acceptable to the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH and admitted in Minnesota. The insurance specified may be in a policy or
policies of insurance, primary or excess. Such insurance shall be in force on the date
of execution of the contract and shall remain continuously in force for the duration of
the contract.
The Contractor and its contractors shall secure and maintain the following insurance:
a) Worker's Compensation insurance that meets the statutory obligations with
Coverage B - Employer's Liability limits of at least $100,000 each accident,
500,000 disease - policy limit and $100,000 disease each employee.
b) Commercial General Liability insurance with limits of at least $1,000,000 general
aggregate, $1,000,000 products - completed operations $1,000,000 personal and
advertising injury, $1,000,000 each occurrence $50,000 fire damage, and $5,000
medical expense any one person. The policy shall be on an "occurrence" basis,
shall include contractual liability coverage and the CITY OF PLYMOUTH shall be
named an additional insured.
c) Commercial Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non -owned and
hired automobiles with limits of at least $500,000 per accident.
Acceptance of the insurance by the CITY OF PLYMOUTH shall not relieve, limit or
3
decrease the liability of the Contractor. Any policy deductibles or retention shall be the
responsibility of the Contractor. The Contractor shall control any special or unusual
hazards and be responsible for any damages that result from those hazards. The CITY
OF PLYMOUTH does not represent that the insurance requirements are sufficient to
protect the Contractor's interest or provide adequate coverage.
Cancellation, Certificates Of Insurance and Premiums
All polices of insurance shall provide that the insurance company will notify the CITY
OF PLYMOUTH at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of any policy
cancellation, modification or non -renewal.
Prior to the date on which the Contractor or its consultants commences performance of
its part of the work, evidence of coverage is to be provided to the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH. The CITY OF PLYMOUTH may direct that copies of the actual insurance
policies, or renewals or replacements thereof, be submitted to the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH.
The premiums for the insurance specified above to be obtained by the Contractor or its
consultants will be paid for by the Contractor or its consultants.
Waiver.
The contractor waives all its rights against the CITY OF PLYMOUTH for damages
covered by property insurance. The Contractor shall require a similar waiver from all its
consultants.
The contractor waives all of its rights of recovery against the CITY OF PLYMOUTH
because of deductible clauses in, or inadequacy of limits in, any policies of insurance
that are in any way related to the work and that are secured and maintained by the
contractor. The Contractor waives any of its rights of recovery against the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH because of a lack of insurance coverage. The Contractor shall require
similar waivers from all of its consultants.
The Contractor shall waive all of its rights of recovery against the CITY OF PLYMOUTH
for loss or damage to any of its equipment, machinery, tools or property that is used in
connection with this Agreement. The Contractor shall require a similar waiver from all
its consultants.
If any policies of insurance referred to in this Article need endorsement to permit these
waivers of subrogation, then it will be the responsibility of the "First Named Insured" to
obtain the endorsement.
Definition
The term "Contractor", as used in this Article, shall include the Contractor, its officers,
its employees, its agents, and anyone directly or indirectly employed by the Contractor.
The term "CITY OF PLYMOUTH", as used in this Article, shall include the City of
4
Plymouth, its officers, its employees, its agents, and anyone directly or indirectly
employed by the CITY OF PLYMOUTH.
12 Data Practices.
The Contractor agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act
and all other applicable state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality.
The Contractor will immediately report to the CITY OF PLYMOUTH any requests from
third parties for information relating to this agreement. The CITY OF PLYMOUTH
agrees to promptly respond to inquiries from the Contractor concerning data requests.
The Contractor agrees to hold the CITY OF PLYMOUTH, its officers, department heads
and employees harmless from any claims resulting from the Contractor's unlawful
disclosure or use of data protected under state and federal laws.
13 Compliance With The Law.
The Contractor agrees to abide by the requirements and regulations of The Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Minn. Stat.
C.363), and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These laws deal with discrimination
based on race, gender, disability, religion and with sexual harassment. In the event of
questions from the Contractor concerning these requirements, the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH agrees to promptly supply all necessary clarifications. Violation of any of
the above laws can lead to the termination of this agreement. .
14 Audits.
The Contractor agrees that the CITY OF PLYMOUTH, the Auditor or any of their duly
authorized representatives, at any time during normal business hours and as often as
they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine,
audit, excerpt and transcribe any books, documents, papers, and records that are
relevant and involve transactions relating to this agreement.
15 Applicable Law.
The law of the State of Minnesota shall govern all interpretations of this contract, and
the appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation which may arise hereunder will
be in and under those courts located within the County of Hennepin, State of
Minnesota, regardless of the place of business, residence or incorporation of the
Contractor.
16 Conflict and Priority.
In the event that a material conflict is found between provisions in this agreement, the
Contractor's Proposal or the CITY OF Plymouth's Request For Proposals, the
provisions in the following rank order shall take precedence: 1) Agreement; 2)
Proposal; and last 3) Request For Proposals.
5
17 Cancellation and Default.
Either party to this agreement may cancel this agreement upon thirty (30) days written
notice, except that if the Contractor fails to fulfill its obligations under this agreement in
a proper and timely manner, or otherwise violates the terms of this agreement, the
City of Plymouth shall have the right to terminate this agreement, if the Contractor has
not cured the default, after receiving seven (7) days written notice.
Notwithstanding the above, the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability to the CITY
OF PLYMOUTH for damages sustained by the CITY OF PLYMOUTH as a result of
any breach of this agreement by the Contractor. The CITY OF PLYMOUTH may, in
such event, withhold payments due to the Contractor for the purpose of set-off until
such time as the exact amount of damages due to the CITY OF PLYMOUTH is
determined. The rights or remedies provided for herein shall not limit the CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, in case of any default by the Contractor, from asserting any other right
or remedy allowed by law, equity, or by statute.
18 Notices.
Any notice or demand, authorized or required under this agreement shall be in writing
and shall be sent by certified mail to the other party as follows:
To the Contractor: Metro Wood Recycling
551 Barge Channel Rd.
St. Paul, MN 55107
To the CITY OF PLYMOUTH: Kris Hageman
Solid Waste Coordinator
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
C
19 Closing•
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Contractor and said CITY OF PLYMOUTH have caused
this Agreement to be executed in their behalf respectively by their proper officers as
follows:
FOR THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH
IS
Its: Its: Mayor
IS
Its: City Manager
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
APPROVING CONTRACT WITH METRO WOOD
RECYCLING TO PROVIDE WOOD WASTE GRINDING
AND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth operates a yard waste facility for residents to dispose of wood
waste, and
WHEREAS, after viewing quotes it is recommended that Metro Wood Recycling, formerly All -
Wood Products, LLC., provide wood waste grinding and transportation services for the City of
Plymouth
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and
directed to enter into a contract for wood waste grinding and transportation services with Metro
Wood Recycling.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the
Plymouth City Council on May 8, 2007, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the
same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this
day of ,
City Clerk
CADocuments and Settings\sengdahl\I.ocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKCF\ResolutionYW(2)_05_01 07.doc
Agenda Number: ,.j ,,
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
FROM: Jan Olsson, Senior Appraiser, through Jean McGann, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Approve Sale and Purchase of Tax Forfeited Property to Nanterre Homeowners
Association
DATE: April 17, 2007 for City Council Meeting May 8, 2007
1. ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolution approving the purchase and sale of tax
forfeited property to Nanterre Homeowners Association. This parcel is "common area" that is
used for their monument sign (see attached map).
2. BACKGROUND: This parcel is located at the southeast corner of Schmidt Lake Road and
Weston Lane, and currently, there is a monument on the. property identifying the subdivision. In
2003, the subject parcel had gone into tax forfeiture. A resolution was adopted by the Council
on August 26, 2003 which gave authorization for the homeowners association to purchase the
property. However, the homeowners association neglected to complete the transaction. Just
recently staff was notified that this parcel was still in tax forfeiture. The City Attorney's office
reviewed the documents and requested a new resolution for your .consideration.
3. BUDGET IMPACTS: The City would pay $180.70 for the property, and the homeowners
association would reimburse the City $1,000 (covers purchase price, deed preparation, recording
fees, State deed tax, and City Attorney fees). The City would reimburse the homeowners
association for any amount remaining of the balance following completion of the transaction.
4. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution approving the purchase and sale of tax
forfeited property to Nanterre Homeowners Association.
I"IHK—IJ1—;IJIJY 15;.52
Hennepin County Taxpayer Services
A-600 Government Center
Minneapolis MN 55487-0060
March 1, 2007
Jan 011son
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447-1482
RE: PID# 08-118-22-41-0069
Nanterre Division, OUTLOT J
Dear Jan:
www.hennepin.us
Please find enclosed copies of the appraisal and purchase costs for PID# 08-118-22-41-
0069. The appraised value is $100.00 plus fees o $80.70 for the total purchase cost of
180.70,
1
I have contacted the current president of Nanterre Homeowner's Association .and
discussed their interest in regaining ownership of this parcel. The Association President
is Robert Knudsen and he can be reached at 612-961-5628. M -r. Knutson will be
contacting you with, specific questions about the process and cost for the resale of the
parcel.
We have the City of Plymouth Resolution 2003-375 adopted on August 26, 2003,
approving this parcel is nonconservation classification and that the City has no interest in
assuming ownership or maintenance of this property. Once have confirmation of the
Association's intent to purchase the parcel, we will complete the application for private
sale to governmental subdivision for resale of parcel 08-118-22-41-0069 to the Nanterre
Homeowner Association.
Please feel free to call me at 612-348-8648 if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
an Duffle
Property Management Specialist
Attachments
r. UZ/U4
An Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper
F_ A Loft vo 1-10 44 Wj UUO!d
Fo e-ited Land Parcel Number 015426
40 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
PLYMOUTH
Wed Jan 22 15:12:08
fax ® est and P®pe y Re n aeYsec® '"
base Ar1apPrep redJ y Hennepin Counry Sure .JDivisron
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
NOTICE OF HEARING ON THE PURCHASE AND
SALE OF TAX FORFEITED PROPERTY
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Plymouth City Council will conduct a hearing
on the purchase and sale of tax forfeited property to Nanterre Homeowners Association
on May 8, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard. The subject
property is legally described Outlot J of the Nanterre Subdivision. This notice is given
pursuant to Section 12.05 of the Plymouth City Charter.
All persons wishing to address the Council regarding the purchase and sale of this
property will be heard at that time.
Sandra R. Engdahl, CMC/MMC
City Clerk
763/509-5080
Published on April 26, 2007
I'Rp Plymouthri;
Adding Quality to Life
April 19, 2007
Mr. Robert Knutson
4920 Weston Ln. N.
Plymouth, MN 55446
Dear Mr. Knutson,
I understand that you are currently the President of the Nanterre Homeowners
Association. This correspondence will serve as notice to the homeowners association
that the Council will be conducting a hearing on the purchase and sale of tax forfeited
property to the Nanterre Homeowners Association. The hearing will be held on Tuesday,
May 8, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
This subject property should be classified as "common area." As you can see from the
attachments, this property had gone into tax forfeiture; however, the association
neglected to purchase the property. Therefore, Hennepin County has recommended that a
new resolution be considered whereby the sale would go directly to the homeowners
association. The City would purchase the property for $180.70, and then the
homeowners association would reimburse the City $1,000, which would cover the
purchase price, deed preparation, recording fees, State deed tax, and City Attorney fees.
The City would reimburse the homeowners association for any amount remaining of the
balance following completion of the transaction.
I have enclosed a copy of the staff report, resolution, notice of hearing, and map that the
Council will be considering on May 8. Please contact me if you should have any
questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
144
Sandra R. Eng dahl
City Clerk
Enclosure
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel. 763-509-5000 • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us ,e
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE AND
SALE OF TAX -FORFEITED PROPERTY AND DISPENSING
WITH STATUTORY,REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW BY PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE ACQUISITION AND DISPOSAL OF THE PROPERTY
WHEREAS, Hennepin County has provided the City with notice of a non -conservation property
legally described as Outlot J, Nanterre Addition, (the "Subject Property") which the developer failed to
convey to the Nanterre Homeowner's Association ("Association") as common area and which has become
tax forfeit as a result of nonpayment of property taxes and/or special assessments by the developer;
WHEREAS, in accordance with the City Council's Tax Forfeit Land policy, the parcel has been
reviewed; and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property does not serve a public purpose; and
WHEREAS, the Association has expressed an interest in acquiring the Subject Property to use as
common area in the Associations' development;
WHEREAS, the City desires to purchase the Subject Property and resell the parcel to the
Association consistent with the use originally intended for the Subject Property and in order to put the
Subject Propertyback on the tax rolls;
WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 462.356, subd. 2 requires that the Planning Commission review the
City's proposed acquisition and disposal of real property for compliance with the comprehensive plan and to
report to the City Council in writing its findings, and;
WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 462.356, subd. 2 provides for an exception from the requirement for
review by the Planning Commission upon 2/3 vote of the City Council dispensing with the requirement and
finding that the acquisition or disposal of the real property has no relationship to the comprehensive
municipal plan; and
WHEREAS, before the City may dispose of real property, the City Charter requires the City to hold
a public hearing the proposed disposition preceded by 10 days' published notice; and
WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing was given and the City Council has
conducted a public hearing on May 8, 2007 at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an
opportunity to be heard on the disposition of the Subject Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
1. That the Subject Property is found to be unbuildable pursuant to the City's zoning and
building codes.
2. That the Subject Property may be acquired in accordance with the Hennepin County
procedures for conveyance of tax -forfeited property conditioned upon the following:
a. Prior to the City's acquisition of the Subject Property, the Association shall
reimburse the City $1,000 (covers purchase price, deed preparation, recording
fees, State deed tax, and.City Attorney fees). (The City would reimburse the
homeowners association for any amount remaining of the balance following
completion of the transaction).
b. The Association recording covenants against the Subject Property restricting its use
for Association common area and not for development.
3. That the Subject Property may be sold to the Association simultaneous with or immediately
following acquisition by the City of the Subject Property under. paragraph 2.
4. That the acquisition and conveyance of the Subject Property to the Association has no
relationship to the City's comprehensive plan.
5. Review by the Planning Commission of the acquisition and conveyance of the Subject
Property is hereby dispensed with, the proposed transaction is hereby approved, and the Mayor and City
Clerk are authorized and directed to execute all documents, and take all appropriate measures to acquire and
dispose of the Subject Property as provided herein.
ADOPTED by the Plymouth City Council on May 8, 2007.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota,
certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on
May 8, 2007, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription
thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this day
of
City Clerk
CITY. OF PLYMOUTH -
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public. Works
FROM: Stephen Deuth, Sr. Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE THE VACATION OF ALL PLATTED DRAINAGE
AND UTILITY EASEMENTS WITHIN OUTLOT M, TARYN HILLS
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the vacation
of said easements.
BACKGROUND: A petition has been received from Lennar Builders to vacate all platted
drainage and utility easements within Outlot M, Taryn Hills. These easements were dedicated
within the original Taryn Hills subdivision. The vacation request is the result of the replatting of
Outlot M into Taryn Hills 5"' Addition. New drainage and utility easements will be dedicated with
the plat of Taryn Hills 5th Addition. As shown on the attached vacation exhibit, a wetland lies
within the existing drainage and utility easement of Outlot M. This wetland will be contained in the
newly dedicated drainage and utility easement for the Taryn Hills 5th Addition.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Unless new information is submitted at the
public hearing, I recommend the City Council adopt the attached resolution vacating all drainage
and utility easements within Outlot M, Taryn Hills.
attachments: Petition Letter
Maps
Resolution
0:\Engineering\VACATION\MEMOS\AUTHORIZ\2007\OutlotM_TaiynHills_5_3_07.doc
LEjrNNk/ RW
Qraruy,vRur bjteorty,
March 23, 2007
Mr. Shawn Drill
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Taryn Hills 5th Addition- Vacation of Easements
Dear Mr. Drill:
MAR 2 7
d
The purpose of the letter is to request the City of Plymouth vacate
certain drainage and utility easements created in the plat of Taryn Hills.
When the plat of Taryn Hills was recorded, drainage and utility
easements were created over Outlot M, Taryn Hills. Recently, U.S.
Home Corporation has submitted a final plat application for a re -platting
of Outlot M, Taryn Hills into the new plat of Taryn Hills 5th Addition.
Due to adjustments, we are requesting that the drainage and utility
easements over Outlot M, Taryn Hills be vacated. With the platting of
Taryn Hills 5th Addition, the revised location of the drainage and utility
easements will be recreated.
Enclosed is a map showing the existing drainage and utility easements
to be vacated. I have also enclosed a check in the amount of $450.00
for Vacation Fee, per the attached.
Please let me know if there are any questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,
U.S. Home Corporation
T.
David A. Hinners
enclosures
935 East Wayzata Boulevard • Wayzata, MN 55391 •Telephone: 952-473-1231 0 Fax: 952-473-7401 9 www.lennar.com
LOGISMap Output Page
F -I
Proposed Vacation - Outlot M, Taryn Hills
615rAVEN
591,14 pt 14
be
Pagel of
Legend
Highlighted Featur
Street Names
City Limits
Open Water
Parks
Parcels
http://gis.logis.org/LOGIS—ArcIMS/ims?ServiceNaine=pl—LOGISMap_OV&ClientVersion... 4/2/2007
OUTLOT M, TARYN HILLS EXISTING EASEMENTS TO VACATE
j ---- 1. 1 1 --
NORTH
d0 0 40 g0 160
scnhawFrer
LI
JI
II
II
IMiz
6 ft, !o-a 1.t U.., 1—
I SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
579157'58"E
o:
F 512.45 '
7579 L
o 26-W R`so
00
0 0.
4 --So 5.3,
C--,3
8\•21 L, 8 .8 70o
01!
0 4-QoRaz oaq7,3, -41
33
o-, O>',
0EASEMENTSTOBEVACATED
06
N61033'22"W
ii 50.00
4 <
we\
o
55°23'13" j
50.00 R=3513.91
A=7°58'55"
C
C.8 -N3 2'26'06"V
1p 4
N29°24'48"E---_..."-:
00
33.34 R=1025.00-
185 14
R--16 41-41
r–
I
p--4
looll,
1p 4
N29°24'48"E---_..."-:
00
80.90-- 185 14
R--16 41-41R=629.64 p--4
looll, A=7'21'42" C--184 9 09. C=80.84
C.B-SWWOYE Sljo'4'18,,W
74 o
59 3
514o45 34"W
0
0
51, 00101
Q., r.t
Y
L E N !C i Rlkn
Quality.,'Yalrre.;lntegrrty ,
Taryn Hills 5th Addition Project Narrative
Introduction -
U.S. Home Corporation, as successor by merger to Lundgren Bros.
Construction, Inc. is the applicant for Taryn Hills 5th Addition. Lundgren Bros.
Construction, Inc. ("Lundgren") has been building homes of distinction within
the metropolitan area since 1970. The vision of Lundgren has always been
focused on building quality neighborhoods that blend with the natural
environment and enhance the community. Rolling topography, woodlands,
wetlands and other natural amenities have always been features of a
Lundgren neighborhood.
In 1999, Lundgren became a division of U.S. Home Corporation. In 2000,
U.S. Home Corporation was purchased by the Lennar Family of Builders.
Operating as a division of the Lennar Family of Builders, U.S. Home
Corporation continues to improve and enhance their ability to provide
exceptional quality, value and design with the support of one of the nation's
largest home builders.
Taryn Hills 5th Addition=
Taryn Hills 5th Addition is a replat of Outlot M, Taryn Hills. This plat will
create 86 additional Colonial Manor attached homesites. Of these, 52 homes
will be a continuation of Lennar's Colonial Manor attached back-to-back
townhomes. The remaining 34 homesites will accommodate Lennar's
Colonial Manor attached side-to-side townhomes.. The plat will also create 5
outlots, The disposition of the outlots is as follows:
Outlot A- Limited Common Area surrounding Blocks 1, 2 and 3;
Outlot B- Future Development Area;
Outlot C- Limited Common Area surrounding Blocks 7 - 13;
Outlot D- Future Development Area;
Outlot E- Limited Common Area surrounding Blocks 4 — 6.
In order to make the Fall Parade of Homes in September, we respectfully
request permission to obtain an early building permit for our proposed model
home on Block 10, Taryn Hills 5th Addition once the plat is recorded. We
would like to begin construction on the model by early May 2007.
Should there be any questions, please contact David Hinners at 952-249-
3024. ..-
FEB 2 2 2007
Vf
935 East Wayzata Boulevard • Wayzata, MN 55391 - Telephone: 952=473-1231 • Fax: 473-7.40.1"wNdnna .carr =kww
TAR HILLS 5TH ADDITION JR.t DOC. NO.
INSET A
51 71
31245 R,7579.44 4a3*5228-
77J.'.00
NORTH
2 R o 004,s.
OUTLOT B
OUTLOT
85 881 1
9TI63- 3
s5 6440P
al Be 5 4
Id
i SATHRE-BERGQUIST. INC.
qpppT ; CSF 4 ' 14FIRTS
TARYN HILLS 5TH ADDITION R.T. DOC. NO.
INSET B
8D/' \'r°ra4w
T'oFcyC3as13s•,sme` 3 8 2 9 1 9;
of
g ' , °:m .am 8F° 4 g3 a1 aw 9 '°• 1 /$', .„
v e8 c;.. .,zPo `2 1 8-^ Bs \r :E .cwFa4.sp
OUTLOT rr,x y.°j 'Bw e R ,y ny v4 z n.nav_s•z•__—_—%-x s°,y°vlNORTH
v °,,. C • '9a \ rrv.Po B. -_" 56.28 ^. C B4t,8$
ttw °°i;f ieetcn lisur _.• .•B ,y rb f f y e X12°45.21• "JO 2h'
gsxm isi!.,,'ai 'I ,n°°IIx•E `- °ro Y r 8 1 2 '• a `•v—_— 8.46 R•a61.ePi7.15' .vyayc z OB zj i 'y
rx,nlfl:,+k:h,sassioW loom S°'nivl-I,'. L• G
s°m 'g `° uw °vw „ ^• ° 8 •n'n\,^ reJ 15 .t:.. 1, 68 n" m sxm wm
2,
se x s ea4 „3 a2 a wrsw 2 4Q4r :'- s s s 1 sImm °
5 = $
m '.w w "11 e 1 m a 7g'm ,88-...M-°,-.;.. _...tm,r-•:; -"--%;:xi_.' j <'q`Jt ,' 6 k 5 k 8
Y lI. fti6T ' 100 .,,,- .,zw _ , 8 m °-,°aB e- -
um
4
pm ym ° A.;• 2 n•+I w ,aw v r°
e - •
8 "6 9' m um um nsm S e °• > °' iam
5,,, . 4 M,•x'6.r°:- °
s s 8 9$
s k - c • 8 § 10k 11''s 12 "8 4 e m,c7
9-
wnyLkn<
n" ro.247W m•I °' { a P . 8 'iPo M. - 8 q 5 g '' \T3 R `,.
mR
31m ]Lm ]20° ym um Q / VOod v
8 8 @ ,r ,qn 6+6 '¢.\ - 8 ses• s,,.m ' 0° "ate
oe,moe.m w.. nlommal r a 8 8 4.$ a `
b
8°,
5,
m / ,
p y F— m A •ss, ssm ; ' p om
rv' $`+
a Po
m
t+% OUTLOT D$ °$
sem
v w '^ S .a °a • '' I / o—.c'•_vr w!;, v rx 8 g $1OS0J 8'O'0 8 g °' N61°33'2YW 25.00 Zh ' !
r
Oka3$a a' .,_o-.a.,•.,_. g°m6s°3Oa O50.09 + a'M1a 7 2 :84m e°'°$,
R=352.91", ° 3 8 g 3
D=7°5855' 8 41
C=49.96 a' w a ;/ s 6
C.B: N32°26'06"E cys?
y`'°
0, 8 aro 5 s8 " a ' s 5 s 4 a 5 s 4 O Aa
C•J Y ,. v.u- ' 8 , j^ 44b 'i
s6s•sB,rr mLILOT
S49
7A° 8834•W
52.
P
O N76°4235E
403 yF
ly '6c
6152
Sfi
ig
C0'
m
66.78
N84°56'26"E "x_33.34R=1025.00
A=1°51'49
C=33.34
C.B. 585°52WW
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
Jrilili 1 4 UY 4 Jritt 1 J
Rin;• . `
J
I
IIII
I1If
IIIIIf
I
VORTII 1I
IW I
acnaep bu'r I
I
@ebais Er Feraia6 M,mis Ocw'al'vs I
a1Lll, vkRb i,vrvnW nbr 0`0!o!'I\'.
III
1
c oabro,,:iy qui yaw ort•rmmc. aExJ maMNb7'L:mvss W. _'S: I
e uwx..rom.l lxm w„w,m, I
I:,,`.
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
TARYN HILLS 5TH ADDITION R.T. DOC. NO. -
x 572x5`J'' - I 1 \ •'}' \\
R=7579.44 p:3o5 26w R7- '57- 00
a
t
c
3g4?I
Ro75g9 eN70O\````
INSET A cpshoz R
SEE SI)EET 3 OF 4 SI]EETS)
v %—:.
gad
A
6
J
C.B.CN796B?18.0 :vu: •'
I N61°3522"w\ '='50.00 R=758.97
56'55'
C=49.96
C.B: N32°26'O6'E
ciVlsrE1
f 1
I ?1mr
7 \
STNFFT I OF 4
ao s s
372.74
9'38'49__-
e.>s•
R=1059.41
c=a.atww,el..w-y ° :;
an7• r _ \c.B.=5TI°33'2t'w
INSET B
8 `\
1;=3'N29°24'48'EIu
A7
50.00
SEE SHEET OF SHEETS)
1 p=1°51'49'
R=629.64 p 1-47 \ +•
C=33.34 ,
IC.B.-S85°52.20"W
r,
p=7°27'42' i` / C_70°77,
C=80.84 %,y I CB.<
3y9 \ \\
C.B: S64°i6'03'E °74')8-
µ, \\ \ STNFFT I OF
4
0ml 372.
74 9'38'49__-
619ti•
4- A7
GO R=1025.
00 1 p=1°51'49' C=33.
34 , IC.B.-S85°52.20"
W
r, STNFFT I OF
4
0ml 372.
74 9'38'49__-
619
ok
I STNFFT I OF
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF
ALL DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS WITHIN
OUTLOT M, TARYN HILLS
WHEREAS, a public hearing with respect to said vacation was scheduled for May 8, 2007 in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes 412.851 and the City Charter Section 12.06; and
WHEREAS, a notice of publication of said hearing was published and posted two weeks prior to the
meeting of May 8, 2007; and
WHEREAS, all property owners adjacent to the proposed vacation were duly notified by mail; and
WHEREAS, the Council did hold a public hearing on May 8, 2007 to inform any and all interested
parties relevant to the vacation of drainage and utility easements in Taryn Hills Addition; and
WHEREAS, it was detennined by the City Council that said easements were not needed for public
purposes;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: That the following drainage and utility easements be vacated:
All drainage and utility easements as platted within Outlot M, Taryn Hills.
FURTHER, that said vacation shall not affect the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality
owning or controlling the electric or telephone poles and lines, gas lines, sanitary and storm sewer
lines, water pipes, mains, hydrants, and natural drainage areas thereon or thereunder, to continue
maintaining the same or to enter upon such way or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replac6,
remove, or otherwise attend thereof.
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
0:\Engineering\VACATION\RESOL\AUTHORIZ\2007\OutlotM_TarynHills_Res.doc
Page 2
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth
City Council on , with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a
correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this
day of
City Clerk
0:\Engineering\VACATION\RESOL\AUTHORIZ\2007\Outlot M_TvynHills_Res.doc
Agenda Number
CITY OYPLYMOUTH:
CITY COVNCIL AGENDA REPORT -
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through Steve Juetten, Community
Development Director
FROM: Shawn Drill, Senior Planner (509-5456) through Barbara Senness
Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Gonyea Development, LLC. Deny RSF-2 zoning request and approve a
preliminary plat for "Dunkirk Addition" for eight single-family lots for
property located at 3120 Dunkirk Lane (2007002)
DATE: May 1, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
Continued from the April 24, 2007 City Council- meeting)
REVIEW DEADLINE: I May 11, 2007
LAND USE GUIDING: LA -1 (Living Area 1)
ZONING: RSF-1 (Single Family Detached 1)
1. PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to adopt the following attached items:
a) a resolution approving findings of fact for denial of the RSF-2 (Single Family Detached 2)
zoning request; and
b) a resolution approving a preliminary plat for eight single-family lots.
Approval of the resolutions denying a rezoning and approving a preliminary plat requires a 4/7
vote of the City Council.
2. BACKGROUND:
The applicant requested that the City rezone the subject 5 -acre site from FRD (Future Restricted
Development) to RSF-2. On April 24, 2007, the City Council rezoned the site to RSF-1, and
directed staff to prepare a resolution with findings of fact for denial of the requested RSF-2
zoning for the site. A resolution denying RSF-2 zoning is attached.
File 2007002
After the April 24th Council meeting, the developer revised the preliminary plat pursuant to all
RSF-1 zoning standards. Because the number of lots in the plat is being reduced (from ten to
eight), and because all of the lots would comply with the zoning standards (e.g., minimum lot
area, width, and setbacks) for the RSF-1 district, the revised preliminary plat is not required to go
through another separate public hearing process. Some of the plan sheets related to the
preliminary plat (e.g., grading, utilities, etc.) may require minor adjustments that would be
addressed as part of the final plat application and review process. A resolution approving the
preliminary plat is attached.
3. RECOMMENDATION:
Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the following attached
items, subject to the findings and conditions listed:
a) a resolution approving findings of fact for denial of the RSF-2 rezoning request; and
b) a resolution approving a preliminary plat for eight single-family lots for "Dunkirk
Addition".
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Photo,
3. Site Graphics .
4. Resolution Denying RSF-2 Rezoning
5. Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat
2
Site
Avell
IL
leo
r aM. AWM75TUF.ro
Z577Nt
Avell
IL
leo
r aM. AWM75TUF.ro
32ND AVENUE NOH 1 H
i------
I I
I
I I
I
II III ,
II I PIO.20-116-22-24-00]> I I
I I I ElF G O. NLARY
117
I
li. I IIII
III PlO: 2o-ne-ual-aaso I I
I I I SUSAN BARKER i t
III I I
li I I
PRELIMINARY PLAT LEGEND
MSBNG EASENEN7S--------
A-CENT LOT LINES - - - -
EMSTMG RICNF OF war - - - -
EMSIINO AERAND —IN—
PROPaSED EASEMENTS - - - -
PROPOSED LOi LINES
PROPOSED RICHT f NAY
PROPOSED SETBACKS. - -
Id
v
W
N
H
I Ii
I I
FYO: X! -IIB -22 -IJ -0005
I I CI]Y lY PLYMOUTH
I I
I ......,,..
I I MM,OUAUTY NERAND
Ix A>•J
I S88°44'47"q 0.04
Oa baa
DNR WETLAND 27-105W
N
NWL= 993.00 -
OHWL= 993.70 Imo, BFacaf!°rTOw
100 YEAR= 996.00 ME SOUTH 436 FEET/ w ME AEsr 500 FEET of ME \
1-9-03 = 994.26 _rNIIESF OUARER OF ME Na WM Ur IA71NR/£R wf
lY =VW 24 WhNSN/P 114 RANEE 22
o 0
SCM
I Mw ,
FEZETN(
22•
sFJ4r-
sHEEr)
1 /NCH - BO FEEr (1I• s I]" SHEET)
IS'NE"AN0
BITTERSEIBACN ( -
3 I
I I
1 /D ?
ESE
i 19,]31 SF / N /
4
I
oI21,!00 SF
27,661 SF. I
I / I
I 110.0
110.'
nl.°
I
6s
11
t
1 18,525 s.F.
I
4
20, SF.
4
I
7
I
D AND U EASEAIENi
PIM: 1--22-24-00J\4\%
MOMAs k SHARON LYONS
I,
F I
1-
V I 'PIM 20-118-22-24-00]5 I ErtlI•\' JASaN k SARAN NRANR I 1-«
wy
Q J I
II I Pm: aa-IrB-u-24-aaJ6
I MICHAEL k NANLY .UREEN6 I
32ND AVENUE NOH 1 H
i------
I I
I
I I
I
II III ,
II I PIO.20-116-22-24-00]> I I
I I I ElF G O. NLARY
117
I
li. I IIII
III PlO: 2o-ne-ual-aaso I I
I I I SUSAN BARKER i t
III I I
li I I
PRELIMINARY PLAT LEGEND
MSBNG EASENEN7S--------
A-CENT LOT LINES - - - -
EMSTMG RICNF OF war - - - -
EMSIINO AERAND —IN—
PROPaSED EASEMENTS - - - -
PROPOSED LOi LINES
PROPOSED RICHT f NAY
PROPOSED SETBACKS. - -
Id
v
W
N
H
I Ii
I I
FYO: X! -IIB -22 -IJ -0005
I I CI]Y lY PLYMOUTH
I I
I ......,,..
I I MM,OUAUTY NERAND
Ix A>•J
I S88°44'47"q 0.04
Oa baa
DNR WETLAND 27-105W
N
NWL= 993.00 -
OHWL= 993.70 Imo, BFacaf!°rTOw
100 YEAR= 996.00 ME SOUTH 436 FEET/ w ME AEsr 500 FEET of ME \
1-9-03 = 994.26 _rNIIESF OUARER OF ME Na WM Ur IA71NR/£R wf
lY =VW 24 WhNSN/P 114 RANEE 22
o 0
SCM
I Mw ,
FEZETN(
22•
sFJ4r-
sHEEr)
1 /NCH - BO FEEr (1I• s I]" SHEET)
IS'NE"AN0
BITTERSEIBACN ( -
3 I
I I
1 /D ?
ESE
i 19,]31 SF / N /
4
I
oI21,!00 SF
27,661 SF. I
I / I
I 110.0
110.'
nl.° I 6s
11
t
1 18,525 s.F.
I
II
i
I till
4
20, SF.
4
I
7
D AND U EASEAIENi
4. 84.10 107.9' - -
II
1 \ I I
IENISIMC 2].393 SF
I
I; 11111LD1nc ro
IBE RENOYED \ -
I 1 I
I_ 1909 S.F. 1 m
l Jr
I 1 I
1 - s - - - —
TO ANO U EASEMENT
1
ZONAO REOUIRFMaE
EASIWG ZONING FRO
PRO°a5E0 ZONING RSF-1
BOE OEBGRUP ON
L-0005lM a Ma1u40 swat FAMLLY RIDWNMI Ears
Muiwlxl a0r ARTA - 14Eo0 u. -
ARG Or PgOPWrc - s01 ACtfs
A.RFA IA—D 101 AWES
ARTA KnANO 000 A—
tar Ow9rc RW LW.ND - 1.6 Lars/AWE
moo ownsvER exrwe wwW - Ln LO /WE
MIMMUA78Ei44CXB
1 SETBACK 25 FT.
NOISE SIDE SFMAE 15 FC
GARAGE 510E SETBACK IS Fr.
C ER SEWAf:1L
REAR SETBACK 25 FT.
MMMUM LOT HIDM TIO iT.
PROPOSED
LOTS
LOT Al SOFT.
1 23,510
2 21,300
3 19,734
4 27,661
5 27,393
6 19,019
7 20,231
6 16,525
N88°4447 "E 500.04$ BUxE-. BUFFER WIN MIN
DM
40 Fr.
IUD
31ST AVENUE NORTH (NOT CONSTRUCTED) '.
AND BUTER W. MAY) 60 n —T
I NEMNO BUFFER AKRAEE ID 50 FT
L—------- SE RIAL:Y IS FT.
O,ainOge h Ufib'y
Ir--------------------------
I I F a )s DUNIURK
AMMON
1.J t_ J _ I .I \ ,., -, . I ,:• I .: I
Plo: 20-ue-22-42-OL07
I'
PNP
PMUM/NARYPIA7
PEO: 20 -IIB -1Z-11-0001 PID' 20-116-22-4Z-000]
PI6: 7D-.116-22-92AI \ 9EWRLY k KENNETH AMS I S1EKN R JANE KUEFLER I ROBERT MIEBENBACN I MLLIAM MAGUIRE I DAY.
I FRANCIS FIA MAI
I 1 I I I BOd 2ieo0 111.1 Wft1°f Anes and 6 ef A, Zfh lOnd
I ONAHONES \ • I I I adj0infn9 side IOf lines unless •nOlhemise .nP.
TINY G.Ww nd, s
Nfn Gydfa MN 55401
M 3]]-0191 elIPASY61 AVNEE,'INC, W. Y GN
M
P911 COUNTY
hC
fs MO r Plymouth G O n Y ^ HOMES LIVIL ENGINEERS • UND SURVEYORS S 7` A,7, if
1611 CWNiY NKi/WAY 10 NE. 1 /AIM 1Af ihldlon [amb,id O1Q y"^ • ISPRINGLANEPARKMINNESOTA554]2 MinnesolB 763.7BN f)0 115.381.1150 763.689.4042PHONE (753) 780-4100
ww 4wse-".com "
Ll
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2007 -
APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENIAL OF THE RSF-2 REZONING REQUEST
BY GONYEA DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3120 DUNKIRK
LANE NORTH (2007002)
WHEREAS, Gonyea Development, LLC has requested reclassification of the zoning from FRD
Future Restricted Development District) to RSF-2 (Single Family Detached 2) for the roughly 5 -
acre site located east of Dunkirk Lane at 32'd Avenue (presently addressed as 3120 Dunkirk Lane
North), legally described as follows:
The South 436 feet of the West 500 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of Section 20, Township 118, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ("Subject Property")
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called Public Hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council rezoned the Subject Property from FRD to RSF-1 (Single Family
Detached 1) on April 24, 2007.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the request by Gonyea
Development, LLC for reclassification of the zoning from FRD to RSF-2 for the roughly 5 -acre
site located at 3120 Dunkirk Lane, based on the following findings:
1. RSF-1 zoning provides a reasonable use of the Subject Property that is consistent with the
LA -1 guiding under the City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. The property to the south and west of the Subject Property is zoned RSF-1. RSF-1
zoning provides a consistent development pattern for the area. The property to the north
and east is owned by the City and is largely vacant open space that is zoned P -I
Public/Institutional).
Resolution 2007-
2007002)
Page 2
3. Rezoning of the Subject Property to RSF-2 would not be consistent with the RSF-1
zoning of the areas located to the south and west. There is no good reason to deviate
from the established zoning pattern of the area. RSF-2 has a minimum lot area
requirement of 12,500 square feet, and RSF-1 has a minimum lot area requirement of
18,500 square feet.
4. The RSF-2 district allows side yard setbacks of 10 feet (living area) and 6 feet (attached
garage), which would not be compatible with the 15 -foot side yard setback requirement
specified for the adjacent RSF-1 neighborhoods.
5. Rezoning of the Subject Property to RSF-2 would allow more dwelling units than could
be established under RSF-1 zoning. A development that allows higher intensity use of
the land than RSF-1 zoning could potentially result in greater environmental impacts on
the natural areas (open space andwetlands) located north and east of the Subject
Property.
ADOPTED by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the
Plymouth City Council on May 8, 2007 with the original thereof on file in my office, and the
same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and. the Corporate seal of the City this
day of
City Clerk
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2007 -
APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR GONYEA DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR
DUNKIRK ADDITION" FOR PROPERTY PRESENTLY ADDRESSED AS 3120 DUNKIRK
LANE NORTH (2007002)
WHEREAS, Gonyea Development, LLC has requested approval of a preliminary plat to allow a
subdivision of eight single-family lots on a roughly 5 -acre site located east of Dunkirk Lane at
32nd Avenue (presently addressed as 3120 Dunkirk Lane North); and
WHEREAS, the property is presently legally described as follows:
The South 436 feet of the West 500 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of Section 20, Township 118, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called Public Hearing
and recommends approval.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Gonyea
Development, LLC for a preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions:
1. The preliminary plat is approved in accordance with the plan received by the City on May 1,
2007, except as may be amended by this resolution.
2. Development standards shall be as required by the RSF-1 district. No variances are granted
or implied.
3. Compliance with the City's tree preservation regulations.
Resolution 2007 -
File 2007002
Page 2
4. In conjunction with submittal of the final plat application, the applicant shall:
a. include tree protection fencing on the plans for the trees to be preserved.
b. provide the City with a draft copy of any homeowner's association (HOA) documents for
the development, for City review and approval.
c. submit fire flow calculations.
5. Any signage shall require separate permits and shall be in conformance with the Zoning
Ordinance.
6. The developer shall obtain the necessary permits and approvals as follows: City street right-
of-way permit, Hennepin County for abandonment of the septic system, Department of
Natural Resources, MPCA for sanitary sewer, Minnesota Department of Health for
watermain and capping of the well, Wetland Conservation Act, Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, Army Corps of Engineers, and NPDES.
7. The lowest building floor elevation must be a minimum of two feet higher than the 100 -year
high elevation for adjacent ponds or wetlands, and a minimum of 1.5 feet higher than the
emergency overland overflow.
8. Prior to recordiniz the final plat, the following items shall be addressed:
a. The applicant shall execute a Development Contract for the public and private
improvements, and shall submit the required financial guarantees.
b. The required park dedication fee shall be paid, in accordance with the dedication.
ordinance in effect at the time of filing of the final plat.
c. A ten -foot wide drainage and utility easement is required adjacent to all public roads. A
six-foot wide drainage and utility easement is required along all side -and rear lot lines.
d. A 20 -foot wide unobstructed drainage and utility easement is required for all public utility
pipes that are not within a public street.
e:. Drainage and utility easements are required up to the 100 -year high water elevation for all
ponds and wetlands.
f. A 15 -foot wide unobstructed access easement shall be provided for access to all water
quality pond inlets and outlets. The grade for this access easement area shall not exceed
15 percent.
g. A drainage and utility easement is required in all rear yards where storm water flows
across.
h. A maintenance agreement is required for rain gardens, together with a drainage and utility
easement over such rain gardens and access easements to such rain gardens.
i. Describe and show on the grading plan how the proposal would comply with the policies
of the Water Resources Plan.
j. One lane of traffic must be kept open at all times during the watermain connection in
Dunkirk Lane. A traffic control plan and flagman are required.
Resolution 2007 -
File 2007002
Page 3
k. Identify surmountable curb and gutter on the plans, with B-618 curb and gutter at the radii
adjoining Dunkirk Lane and at the catch basins. Provide City detail STRT-1.
1. Show a concrete pedestrian ramp at each end of the sidewalk along 32nd Avenue. Provide
City detail STRT-6.
m. Revise the pians to indicate that the 12 inch x 8 inch wet tap connection along Dunkirk
Lane shall be 10 to 15 feet south of the 90 degree bend in 32nd Avenue.
n. Identify the proposed wye stationing and service elevation of the sanitary sewer services.
o. Relocate sanitary sewer manhole number 1 a minimum of 10 feet west of the east plat
line.
p. Provide current City details per the City of Plymouth's Engineering Guidelines.
q. The wetland delineation for the wetland in the southeast corner of the property will need a
spring follow up. If it is not exempt, the plans shall be revised to reflect the wetland
setback line.
r. Show the wetland buffer setback line on the grading plan.
s. Provide the following information for the water quality pond and show on the grading
plan: 1) identify the surface area and volume at the normal water level; 2) identify the
average depth; and 3) show the phosphorus removal efficiency.
t. The silt fence around the water quality pond and adjacent to wetlands must be wire
backed.
u. Water quality treatment is required for the rear yards of Lots 3 and 4.
v. A planting schedule is required for the rain garden showing planting type and quantity.
An outlet control structure is also required.
w. An infiltration basin may be used instead of rain gardens to treat rear yards.
x. The proposed inside drop for the existing sanitary sewer manhole connection is not
allowed. An outside drop per City detail SS -4 is required. Provide City detail.
y. The proposed storm sewer catch basins at Dunkirk Lane and 32nd Avenue shall be
constructed to drain storm water from both streets.
z. A 12 -foot wide gravel or reinforced turf access road must be constructed from Dunkirk
Lane through Lot 1, Lot 2, and a portion of Lot 3, parallel with and directly south of the
north boundary of the plat. The storm sewer pipe from the outlet control structure into
the northerly wetland must be extended far enough to accommodate this 12 -foot wide
access road. Provide an unobstructed access easement over this area.
aa. A 12 -foot wide gravel or reinforced turf access road must be constructed from the
proposed sanitary sewer manhole #1 southerly to the existing manhole in 31St Avenue.
This 12 -foot wide access route may be centered on the east lot line of Lot 5. Provide an
unobstructed access easement over this area.
bb. The developer shall provide a 20 -foot wide trial easement between Lot 4 and Lot 5. The
developer shall construct an eight -foot wide bituminous trail (centered on lot line) within
that easement.
9. Prior to issuance of buildinlz permits, permanent wetland buffer monument signs must be
installed pursuant to ordinance requirements.
Resolution 2007 -
File 2007002
Page 4
10. Standard Conditions:
a. Removal of all hazardous trees from the property at the owner's expense.
b. The applicant shall comply with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants.
c. A reproducible 8 1/2 x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior to
the release or reduction of any financial guarantees.
d. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner
or applicant has substantially started construction of the project, or unless the landowner
or applicant has received prior approval from the City to extend the expiration date for up
to one additional year, as regulated under Section 510 of City Code.
ADOPTED by the City Council .on May 8, 2007.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the
Plymouth City Council on May 8, 2007, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the
same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this
day of
City Clerk
Page 1 of 1
01 1
Sandy Engdahl
To: Laurie Ahrens
Subject: RE: Dunkirk Plat
From: jiversarch@comcast.net [mailto:jiversarch@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 3:22 PM
To: Council Members
Subject: Dunkirk Plat
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
We strongly urge you to consider and approve a land dedication from Gonyea Developers for the
Dunkirk development. Jupe Hale has put in quite a lot of work on a sketch that he will present tonight.
This proposal does NOT result in another lost lot for the developer. The area he has placed it in provides
a considerable buffer for the high-quality wetlands next to it (less impervious surface), as well as a great
trail head for future connections to the surrounding park, etc.
Again, please consider and approve this land dedication.
Thank you for your time.
Jackie and Tom Archbold
16915 32nd Ave N
Plymouth, MN 55447
763-473-6031
5/8/2007
0,
May 8, 2007
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447-1482
Re: Wesleyan Church Parcel, 3120 Dunkirk Lane
Madam Mayor and Council Members —
Over the past couple months you have heard from many residents in the neighborhoods
surrounding the Wesleyan Church Parcel on Dunkirk Lane. By now, you are well aware that this
unique piece of land is important to many families in the community and the property has played
host to a number of community, social and athletic informal events. In addition, this property
abuts a beautiful piece of wetland property that has potential for trail access to other residential
and commercial developments.
At tonight's City Council meeting agenda item 8.1.1 will consider the preliminary plat for the
development of this property under RSF-1 zoning. We are requesting that you approve this
preliminary plat with the requirement that the developer include land dedication rather than a
monetary donation. After reviewing the current proposed plat, we believe the land dedication is
possible without the developer losing a lot.
Discussions with Mr. Eric Blank, City Parks Director, have determined that if a dedication could
be combined with adjacent City -owned land to total approximately one acre, he would see the
dedication as a viable option. Review of wetland maps and delineations has identified a location
the northeast corner) for such a combination. If the required land dedication of .448 acres was
to be located in the far NE corner of the property, it could be combined with .55 acres of city
owned open space to reach the acre that Mr. Blank sees as viable for use. Placed on this area of
the property, the land dedication acreage would also serve as a gateway to trails through the
wetlands, should they be desired in the future.
It is worth noting again that we believe requiring land dedication will not cost the developer
another lot; it is possible to incorporate the acreage into the existing plat with eight homes. This
is a unique piece of residential property and we ask that you consider the City-wide initiatives to
create a more walkable city, secure open space and improve the quality of life in Plymouth as
you approve this particular development.
Sincerely,
Jupe and Debbie Hale
3210 Fountain Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55447
Agenda Number 8"o a
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through Steve Juetten, Community
Development Director
FROM: Joshua Doty, Planner (763-509-5453) through Barbara Senness, Planning
Manager
SUBJECT: Cory & Ellen Tell. Variances to allow construction of a new home on a
non -conforming lot and for impervious surface coverage for property located
at 2560 Medicine Lake Boulevard East (2007024)
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
REVIEW DEADLINE: July 12, 2007
1. PROPOSED MOTION:
Move to adopt the attached resolution approving variances to allow construction of a new home
on a non -conforming lot and for impervious surface coverage for property located at 2560
Medicine Lake Boulevard East, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Approval of a variance requires a 4/7 vote of the City Council.
2. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
The applicants are requesting the following variances:
A variance to allow construction of a new home on a non -conforming lot. The Zoning
Ordinance specifies that non -conforming lots may be developed or redeveloped upon
approval of an administrative permit, provided the lot meets certain standards. The lot in
question meets all of the required standards except that for lot width. The lot is 50 feet
wide at the front setback line, where the ordinance requires at least 56 feet to be eligible.for
approval by administrative permit.
A variance for impervious surface coverage. The Zoning Ordinance specifies a maximum
impervious surface coverage of 25 percent for lots that are located in a shoreland overlay
File No. 2007024
Page 2
district. This lot is in the shoreland overlay district for Medicine Lake. The applicants are
requesting a variance to allow an impervious surface coverage of 34.7 percent in order to
accommodate construction of a new two-story home. The applicants are proposing to
reduce the amount of impervious surface coverage on their property from 39.7 percent to
34.7 percent.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
On April 18, 2007, the Planning Commission conducted the public meeting on this matter and
voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request. The applicant spoke in support of his
application. In addition to the applicant, two people from the neighboring property to the south
voiced concerns that their view to Medicine Lake would be impacted due to the proposed
placement of the house, and that the proposed house would impair light to their house. After the
Planning Commission meeting, the neighboring property owners (to the south) submitted a letter
opposing the proposed house placement. The letter is attached for your review.
House Placement
Staff responded that the proposed house would be constructed five feet in front of the
neighboring house to the south and that the garage would be 15 feet in front of the neighboring
house. Staff added that the front setback requirement in the RSF-2 Zoning District is 25 feet and
the applicant is proposing a 40 -foot front setback
Staff notes that the applicant could place the proposed house back an additional 15 feet to match
the setback of the neighboring house to the south, as requested in the attached letter from the
neighboring property owners. However, the City in the past has not required applicant's to move
houses back to meet setbacks established by existing structures on adjacent properties if the
proposed structure complies with setbacks. If a nexus can be made .between the variance to lot
width, the house design and the setback, the City Council could add a condition to the variance
approval establishing a setback different than what is in the Zoning Ordinance. It should also be
noted that moving'the house back to match the neighboring house to the south would increase the
impervious surface coverage from 34.7 percent (proposed variance) to roughly 38 percent. The
applicant stated that they attempted to design their house to be consistent with the neighboring
houses, while minimizing the variance for impervious surface coverage.
Currently, establishing a setback different than the code minimum could only be done in a
variance situation. If no variance is requested a property owner could build in front of an
adjacent home, blocking views. Staff notes that the homes in this neighborhood do not have
equal front setbacks. In addition, staff notes that the neighboring house to the south was
constructed in 1987 in front the existing houses on each side by approximately 30 feet.
File No. 2007024
Page 3
Light
Staff responded that the proposed house would be 34 feet high, where 35 feet is allowed by the
Zoning Ordinance. 'Staff added that the applicant is meeting front and side yard setback
requirements.
Staff also notes that neither the house placement nor the light issue affects the requested
variances for lot width and impervious surface coverage provided any home proposed for the lot
meets all of the requirements in the Zoning Ordinance for setback and height and as long as the
impervious surface coverage does not exceed the requested 34.7 percent. If a house plan met all
of those requirements, plus the requirements of the Building Code, the City would not have a
basis for denying a building permit for the lot.
The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting are attached. Notice of the public meeting at
the Planning Commission was mailed to all property owners within 200 feet. The notification
area map is attached.
4. CONTEXT:
A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
B. Natural Characteristics of the Site
The property is located within the Shoreland Management Overlay District for Medicine Lake.
The site contains no wetlands or floodplain.
C. Previous Actions Affecting Site
The subject lot is located in the "Medicine Lake Park 3rd Addition", which is. one of the oldest
recorded subdivisions in Plymouth (circa 1920). Many of the lots in this neighborhood do not
conform to the RSF-2 standards of 12,500 square feet for minimum lot size and 80 feet for
minimum lot width. There is an existing small home and a detached garage on the lot. Under
the redevelopment plan, the home and garage would be removed from the site.
Adjacent Land Use Guiding Zoning
North, South,
and East Single Family Living Area 1 Single Family Detached 2
Homes
West
Medicine Lake N/A N/A
B. Natural Characteristics of the Site
The property is located within the Shoreland Management Overlay District for Medicine Lake.
The site contains no wetlands or floodplain.
C. Previous Actions Affecting Site
The subject lot is located in the "Medicine Lake Park 3rd Addition", which is. one of the oldest
recorded subdivisions in Plymouth (circa 1920). Many of the lots in this neighborhood do not
conform to the RSF-2 standards of 12,500 square feet for minimum lot size and 80 feet for
minimum lot width. There is an existing small home and a detached garage on the lot. Under
the redevelopment plan, the home and garage would be removed from the site.
File No. 2007024
Page 4
5. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the
proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a
higher level of discretion with a variance because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show
that they meet the standards in the ordinance.
6. PROPOSAL:
The applicants propose to remove the existing single family home and detached garage, and
subsequently redevelop the site with a new home. Any redevelopment to the existing property
would need to meet the Zoning Ordinance requirements for 1) minimum lot area and lot width,
2) impervious surface coverage, based on the fact that the property is located on Medicine Lake,
and 3) building setback, height, etc. in the RSF-2 Zoning District. The application would meet
all the zoning requirements in the RSF-2 district with the exception of the requested variances for
redevelopment of a non -conforming lot and impervious surface coverage.
Variance for Redevelopment of a Non -conforming Lot
Section 21100.02, Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance states that an undersized lot may be
developed or redeveloped upon issuance of an administrative permit, provided the lot contains 70
percent. or more of the minimum lot area and lot width. The following table compares the lot
area and width requirements to the subject lot:
The table shows that the subject lot meets the 70 percent standard for lot area, but not lot width.
Therefore, the lot is not eligible for an administrative permit, and the applicants must request a
variance to redevelop the lot.
Variance for Impervious Surface Coverage
The applicants are requesting a variance to allow 34.7 percent impervious surface coverage. The
Zoning Ordinance permits a maximum impervious surface coverage of 25 percent, which
includes any surface that is highly resistant to infiltration by water and includes roofs, driveways
and sidewalks. Although a variance is required by the Zoning Ordinance, the applicants are
proposing to reduce the amount of impervious surface coverage on their property from 39.7
percent to 34.7 percent, as follows:
RSF-2 Standards 70% Standard Subject Lot
Lot Area: , 12,500 sq. ft. 8,750 sq. ft. 9,171 sq. ft.
Lot Width: 80 ft. 56 ft. 50 ft.
The table shows that the subject lot meets the 70 percent standard for lot area, but not lot width.
Therefore, the lot is not eligible for an administrative permit, and the applicants must request a
variance to redevelop the lot.
Variance for Impervious Surface Coverage
The applicants are requesting a variance to allow 34.7 percent impervious surface coverage. The
Zoning Ordinance permits a maximum impervious surface coverage of 25 percent, which
includes any surface that is highly resistant to infiltration by water and includes roofs, driveways
and sidewalks. Although a variance is required by the Zoning Ordinance, the applicants are
proposing to reduce the amount of impervious surface coverage on their property from 39.7
percent to 34.7 percent, as follows:
File No. 2007024
Page 5
Existing Impervious Coverage
Home
Detached Garage
Basement Access
Concrete Walk
Driveway
Proposed Impervious Coverage
Home & Attached Garage
Driveway
Rear Porch
7. ANALYSIS OF REQUEST:
Water Quality
801 sq. ft.
676 sq. ft.
32 sq. ft.
441 sq. ft.
1,691 sq. ft.
3,641 sq. ft. or 39.7 percent
1,875 sq. ft.
1,240 sq. ft.
69 sq. ft.
3,179 sq. ft. or 34.7 percent
With recent impervious surface coverage variance requests, Engineering staff has recommended
that the amount of increased impervious surface coverage be treated on site with some form of
BMP (Best Management Practice) to reduce impact on water quality by allowing infiltration of
additional runoff. Unlike most impervious surface coverage variances, the applicants in this
instance, are proposing a net reduction in impervious surface from the existing condition. A
reduction in total impervious surface from an existing condition is an eligible BMP, and a net
improvement to the property.
The applicants have also stated that they will construct an additional BUT, such as a rain garden
or infiltration basin to treat runoff on their property. Staff finds that either of these BMPs could
increase infiltration on the property. However, staff notes that a plan for the BUT should be
reviewed and approved by Engineering staff to make sure that the design would not impact
neighboring properties. Staff has therefore added a condition to the approving resolution that
requires City approval of the BUT plan, prior to issuance of a building permit.
The City Council must review the variance request with the seven standards outlined in Section
21030 of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the standards is attached. Staff used these standards
to review the application, as follows:
1) That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner
would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the
regulations were to be carried out.
The subject lot is an existing lot of record that was created prior to modern zoning and
subdivision regulations. The lot is long and narrow and the applicants are proposing to
File No. 2007024
Page 6
place the home at a setback consistent with the neighboring homes, which results in a site
plan that exceeds the allowable lot coverage. Without the variances, the lot could not be
redeveloped in a manner in keeping with the established neighborhood character.
2) . That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the
parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to
other property within the same zoning classification.
The circumstances related to this request are not generally applicable to other properties in
the RSF-2 district. This lot and all of the neighboring lots are non -conforming. The
original platting established a lot configuration that does not serve the needs of present day
land use, unless variances are granted.
3) That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the
value or income potential of the parcel of land.
The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income potential.
The existing home on the property is 801 square feet and was constructed in 1940. The size
of the existing home is substantially less than current average home sizes.
4) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Chapter and has not been
created by any persons having an interest in the parcel of land and is not a self-
created hardship.
The conditions relating to the hardship were not created by the applicants, but rather were
created by the original platting of the lot in the early 1900's. The applicants purchased the
property in 2005. The applicants would decrease the impervious surface on the lot and
would utilize a Best Management Practice to treat surface water on their property.
5) That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of
land is located.
The proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
neighborhood. Many lots in this neighborhood have a similar lot width and exceed 25
percent impervious surface coverage. Additionally, the size, location and style of the
proposed home would be compatible with the neighborhood..
6) That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or
increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or
impair property values within the neighborhood.
The proposal would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties,
increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or diminish property values within
File No. 2007024
Page 7
the neighborhood. The proposed home would meet or exceed all setback requirements for
homes located in the RSF-2 zoning district.
7) That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the
hardship.
The variance request is reasonable based upon the unique conditions of the parcel, and
strikes a balance between allowing a redevelopment of the property to occur while
minimizing the extent of the variation needed to alleviate the hardship.
8. CONCLUSION:
Staff has concluded that the requested variances meet the applicable standards. However, since
this conclusion is based on standards that are open to some interpretation, the City Council could
reasonably reach another conclusion on this application.
9. RECOMMENDATION:
Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the variances to allow
construction of a new home on a non -conforming lot and for impervious surface coverage for
property located at 2560 Medicine Lake Boulevard East, subject to the conditions listed in the
attached resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Minutes
2. Variance Standards
3. Applicant's Narrative
4. April 30, 2007 Letter from Warren and Kay Chapman
5. Location Map
6. Notification Area Map
7. Aerial Photo
8. Site Photos
9. Site Graphics
10. Resolution Approving Variances
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
April 18, 2007
Page 2
A. CORY AND ELLEN TELL (2007024)
Chair Holmes introduced the request by Cory. and Ellen Tell for variances to allow
construction of a new home on a non -conforming lot and for impervious surface coverage
for property located at 2560 Medicine Lake Boulevard East.
Planner Doty gave an overview of the April 10, 2007 staff report.
Commissioner Jaffoni asked what the square footage would be for the proposed house and
if there were concerns about the height of the house blocking views of neighbors to the
east.
Planner Doty said the footprint of the proposed house is 1,939 and it would be 34' feet
high, which conforms to the 35' height limit. He added that the house meets all setback
requirements.
Commissioner Jaffoni asked about City policy regarding grandfathered properties
undergoing redevelopment as it pertains to variances and impervious surface issues.
Planner Doty said the variance for impervious surface is required because the hard surface
coverage is over the 25%. Planner Doty noted that the applicant is reducing the impervious
coverage from what currently exists.
Planning Manager Senness said the City would have great difficulty allowing another home
on this lot without the variances. She said lots in the area are similar in size and that
variances are typical in such redevelopment situations. Planning Manager Senness said the
proposed reduction of impervious surface and the rain garden both constitute Best
Management Practices.
Chair Holmes introduced the applicant, Cory Tell, 2760 Nathan Lane. Mr. Tell said he
understands the neighbors have concerns about the setbacks of the proposed house. He
said the City setback requirement is 25 feet and the original proposal placed the house with
a 30 -foot setback, which would have been 20 to 25 feet in front of the neighbors. He said
staff recommended implementing a rain garden and moving the house back , 20 feet to
conform with the houses on the rest of the block. He said the driveway is 52' long and if
the house were placed back any further; the increased driveway would create more
impervious surface. Mr. Tell said he worked with Planner Doty to reduce impact to
Medicine Lake and the impervious surface coverage would be reduced from 39.7% to
34.4%. He said he is working with Water Resources Technician Derek Asche on a 120
square foot rain garden, which would infiltrate runoff equivalent to the area exceeding the
maximum impervious surface coverage. Mr. Tell said they have reduced all concrete
sidewalks, using deck or pervious surfaces.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
April 18, 2007
Page 3
Chair Holmes introduced Ralph Tully, 4043 Brookside Avenue South. Mr. Tully said he
represents the adjacent neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. Warren Chapman. Mr. Tully said a
fundamental component of the building code is to not allow something that would decrease
the value of adjacent properties. Mr. Tully said the proposal would decrease the value of
the Chapman property because the proposed house would be 10 feet in front of the
Chapman property. He said the variance is not to be based on a desire to increase income
potential, but that is why there is a tear -down involved. Mr. Tully said the proposed
structure would seriously impair the light to the Chapman home.
Chair Holmes introduced Warren Chapman, 2550 Medicine Lake Boulevard East. Mr.
Chapman said he had looked forward to Mr. Tell coming there but was not aware of the
setback changes from 50 feet and 15 feet to 25 feet and 10 feet. Mr. Chapman said that is
not good planning in an.established neighborhood with houses on both sides that are set
back further. Mr. Chapman said his property has a 39 -setback which is not accurately
portrayed in relation to the proposed house. Mr. Chapman referenced Plymouth Zoning
Ordinance Section 21115.03 (b) regarding building type and construction, and stated that
positioning this house so close to the road would impact houses to the north and south.
Planning Manager Senness said in 1996 the minimum setbacks for residential properties
was changed from 36 feet to 25 feet. She asked Mr. Chapman if he measured from the
right-of-way or from the property line.
Mr. Chapman said the measurement was from the survey stake.
Chair Holmes asked about the light issue relative to the variance request.
Planner Doty displayed an aerial photo indicating a portion of the proposed house would be
5 feet in front of the Chapman's house and the garage would be an additional 10 feet in
front.
Chair Holmes noted that under current zoning, the whole structure could be moved forward
up to 25 feet from the lot line.
Planner Doty concurred.
Chair Holmes addressed the light issue and said the proposed structure would be within the
35'foot height limit.
Planner Doty answered affirmatively and added that the applicant is meeting side yard
setbacks.
Planning Manager Senness added that staff suggested this placement of the house to blend
better with the neighborhood even though it increased impervious surface.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
April 18, 2007
Page 4
Commissioner Weir asked what the setback is for the existing house, as it doesn't fit into
neighborhood as it is.
Planner Doty said the setback for the house is 130 feet and 84 feet to the garage.
Chair Holmes said the variances that are requested don't appear to be the nature of the
neighbor's concerns. He said the Planning Commission needs to look at the variances for
impervious surface coverage and the most efficient placement of the house on the lot.
Chair Holmes said he would support the request.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Davis, to approve the
request by Cory and Ellen Tell for variances to allow construction of a new home on a non-
conforming lot and for impervious surface coverage for property located at 2560 Medicine
Lake Boulevard East.
Commissioner Davis said he concurred with Chair Holmes, and said the specifics of the
request are, clear cut, and there is no reason to object. He said the reasons brought up by
neighbors do not pertain.
Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved.
7. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Chair Holmes, without objection, to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
ZONING ORDINANCE
VARIANCE STANDARDS
The Board and Zoning Administrator shall not approve any variance application
major or minor) unless they find failure to grant the variance will result in undue
hardship on the applicant, and, as may be applicable, all of the following criteria
have been met:
1. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, a
particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a
mere inconvenience, if the strict letter, of the regulations were to be
carried out.
2. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are
unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not
applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning
classification.
3. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire
to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land.
4. That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Chapter and has.
not been created by any persons having an interest in the parcel of land
and is not a self-created hardship.
5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood
in which the parcel of land is located.
6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light
and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of
the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the
neighborhood.
7. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate
the hardship.
Section 21030 -Plymouth Zoning Ordinance
formsNariance Standards.doc)
To: The City of Plymouth
Re: Proposed New, Single Family Home
Address: 2560 Medicine Lake Blvd
Plymouth, MN 55441
Owners: Cory and Ellen Tell
Variance Summary Application Checklist
1. Due to the steep grade of the lot on the North Side we are not able to
put our driveway on that side. We, by necessity, will need to access
our garage on the South side of the lot. Because we do not want our
home to be out of speck with the rest of the homes on the street we
have set our home back 35 feet (still 10 feet closer than the remainder
of the homes on the street). We fear that if the house is any closer to
the street it will look odd as it will be far closer to the lake than'the
others. This has caused an increase in our hardcover beyond the
suggested 25%. In addition, because there are streets on both sides of
the lot we added a sidewalk for access from the other side of the lot. If
it is helpful we can eliminate this from our plans.
2. Due to the unique and steep grade of our lot on the North side we felt it
was best to access the property via the lake side of the lot. Given this
unique issue we have only gone over our hardcover to address this
problem.
3. Our hard cover problem is due primarily to the drive way. In addition,
we are building this home to suite the growing needs of our family and
aging parents. We have designed this home to be handicapped
accessible, even with a tuck under garage. This was not easy, but was
needed as we are trying to accommodate personal life issues.
4. This is not an issue we created for any reason, it just arose from the
land topography
5. By granting this variance we will be reducing the current hard cover
from the existing home. In addition, we are happy to add a drainage or
collection pond if that helps the cause.
6. We have complied with all of the city set back and height restrictions.
In addition we do not believe there is anything in our proposed
structure that will pose a danger to public safety.
7. We planned this home with the intention of complying with all rules as
defined by the city of Plymouth. Unfortunately, in order to make our
home fit in with the rest of the street we needed to place it further back
on the lot that we initially planned. As we mentioned we have
identified 4 major items with this variance
a. We are willing to eliminate the walkway to the front door to reduce
hardcover
b. We are willing to incorporate a drainage pond to help with runoff
c. Our proposed structure will be reducing the current hardcover
benefiting the lake and surrounding community
d. Our home will improve property values vs.the existing structure
Warren & Kay Chapman
2550 East Medicine Lake Boulevard East
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
April 30, 2007
To: All Council Members
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Re: Tear down and new construction by Cory and Ellen Tell at
2560 Medicine Lake Boulevard East (200 7024)
Dear Council Members:
Mr. and Mrs. Tell have proposed to tear down an existing house and garage on the lot adjacent to
our house immediately to the south (2550 Medicine Lake Boulevard East) and the neighbor's lot to
the north. Their house currently sits behind their garage (facing the lake) which is located to the rear
of the front of our house and the front of the neighbor's home to the north.
They applied for a variance to build on a non -conforming lot and a variance pertaining to
impervious surface coverage.
The Tells want to build a new home in front of our home and the neighbor to the north. Their
proposed set back of 41 feet does not conform to adjacent neighbors or the neighborhood. The
finding by the Planning Commission that states "The lot is long and narrow and the applicants are
proposing to place the home at a setback consistent with the neighboring homes." (underline added)
is simply false. Their proposed set back is not consistent with the homes on either side as it is
placed at least 10 feet in front of our home and the adjacent neighbors' homes.
City Ordinance, Section 21115.03 Subd. l (b) states: "Buildings in all zoning districts shall maintain
a high standard of architectural and aesthetic compatibility with surrounding properties to insure
that they will not adversely impact the property values of the adjacent properties or adversely
impact the community's public health, safety and general welfare".
The Tells' building plans violate this ordinance in that it adversely affects our property by taking
away our view of the sunsets and a portion of the lake. This in turn decreases the property value of
our home. Our view will be reduced for no logical reason.
Imagine if you had enjoyed the view of a lake and sunsets from your home for 20 years and all of a
sudden, the home next to you and to the rear is torn down and replaced with a home placed in front
of yours that takes away part of your view of the lake and the sunsets, not to mention the decrease in
value. We think you would be outraged.
City of Plymouth
April 27, 2007
Page 2
Also, note your Ordinance 21115.04 Subd.2 which states that in the case of new homes of single
family residential lots platted prior to the date of this Chapter, "The required front yard set back as
established by the respective zoning districts may be reduced, upon the approval of the Zoning
Administration, to a distance equaling the average front yard set back of existing principal
dwellings...". While this ordinance refers to reduction of set back, the intent of uniformity in set
back is obvious.
We are not trying to prevent the Tells from. tearing down their existing garage and home and
building a new home. All we are asking is that in the course of doing so they conform with their
neighbors set back and City Ordinances.
The Tells need variances in order to build on their property. As you know, variances are granted
only where hardship is involved. The City has its own set of 7 standards for applicants to pass
before a variance may be granted.
Under Standard 1, the Tells fail in that the set back is not consistent with the neighboring homes.
Under Standard 3, the Tells fail in that their building is based upon a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the home.
Under Standard 5, the Tells fail because the location of the new home is not compatible with the
neighborhood.
Under Standard 6, which states "That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of
light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion or the public streets, or
increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair
property values within the neighborhood", the Tells fail because the location of their building will
impair the property values within the neighborhood.
It is interesting to note that the conclusion of the planning staff report states "However, since this
conclusion is based on standards that are open to some interpretation, the Planning Commission
could reasonably reach another conclusion on this application. Our comment is "indeed they could."
The other variance requested by the Tells revolves around the issue of impervious surfaces. We
built a driveway that accesses our garage down the same steep grade that the applicants claim they
are unable to do. Again, they are wrong. We chose to do it, ultimately directing the driveway runoff
further from the lake.
We respectfully request that you give your attention to this matter as we feel our rights have been
ignored by the Planning Commission
City of Plymouth
April 27, 2007
Page 3
Wouldn't common sense dictate that if you are going to allow a new home on a substandard lot that
it be constructed on the basis of not taking from two neighbors basic rights they have enjoyed over
the years. Do you want to set a precedence that set backs of neighbors in the area do not matter
when other tear downs occur?
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours very truly,
Warren Chapman and Kay Chapman
WCKC/cw
Cc: Ralph H. Tully
27TH AV= . . . . . . . . .
j. .... ....
a....
tQ? . ... .... .... ....
J
2
O . . . LA'1
A .. .... .. ............
m 26TH AVE
LA*
MEDICINE LAKE
Location Map- 2007024
Legend
Cory & Ellen Tell ®
C, Comercial
TM CC, City Center
Tell New Home CO, Commercial Office
2560 E Medicine Lake Blvd IP, Planned Industrial
Request for Variances 0 LA -1, Living Area 1
LA -2, Living Area 2
LA -3, Living Area E
batyLA -4, Living Area 4
Of
LAR, Living Area Rural
Plymouth, Minnesota P-1, Public/Semi-Publidinstitutional
500 250 0 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
Hennepin County Variance Map Page 1 of 1
Hennepin County Taxpayer Services: Variance Labels
This is not a legally recorded map. It represents a compilation of information and data from City, County and State authorities.
Parcel Information:
i Parcel ID: 25-118-22-12-0010
I Owner Name: CORY C TELL & ELLEN M TELL
Parcel Address: 2560MEDICINE LAKE BLVD E PLYMOUTH MN, 55441
Buffer Size: 200 ft.
Date Printed: 3/29/2007 9:10:46 AM
http://bugle/varianceBeta1popMap.aspx?LayerID=93 &ObjectID=205786&Buffer=200&C... 3/29/2007
Aerial Photograph- 20070274
City of
Plymouth,. Minnesota
50 25 0 50 100 150
Feet
i %, .•k ry Ys
L 'y,.
af
1 k'T+"L y -'T .- \ .. _
i9tif4:
AAM -A
7WE
r
W711m, -Yk
h*
a
r 4ZI, of x. 11 4 I1IIIllltlJiil t ,t, M,
ii tiIr yr ts7 s etly `' v x,
t
T
i;.> .`," '• y -> ; :;.. 4- - 11 _ ;.-
vf, 1. ` 1 L
yy•
f hr, S1 t;'yck? P ti ..,t Zt{ h . , - -
y
i . ,;'.i 3 - ,..:r _•. - -... r ',.. .. ...:. P -:l i4 •" f'.>"ti t:.,;t t11 -y,iii / :
i' }A }y J } t - 4
i
t `- • ,l L ` ,1.
r •'S' °+ s`L ...1; r „ d ..•., `. „t'a :. 1r •:-U+ ' 3:3'Ls 1 ..;h t, , h Y,tY \ P .
iT. { (•
1
t1
it 1 1 I j '
t 4r y r
F
n.
1v
s efi , '• s4 D„t ''' ' r}t' }y' ',.
s tiqt i r t r* fl y
AV,
t 5 l I,A _ 'Ir' , ,.tiyk 1 41 ViiA t s } ` ' ':'2 !'t } ° ' Ur ,
i f
i '- it ,
rh
sr
x.
v
LOOKING NORTHEAST
t
i T
R 1
i f
i '- it ,
rh
sr
x.
v
LOOKING NORTHEAST
a `
r d , , _. i
1 • " '
4 '
Y t l l I t • • r t / l l
t of \ £ • i {
y ti
i{ j •fk( J tKj} ( 4
r
AX
P.y N' •':
it.' - ' + -'•x . ' 1 :.-£y`h r of {a`* W v°
p4 = _
4 ttt
IFSMM
y %{ t•''a jt tt iMJ (i ,} } F F ti{P „µW r `
M
yl 1
1 t s ar%Sr st
a tl{ {» R 'ti t 4 'l n ! trot ' _` ,
1
r > - t L + °. M
a
rd 1 ., . ;`` ,t '• ' r,;Yi 4.n 4,;{ r j' +; p T`t'b 's t :ati' *, ;, t
c . ; , r .>_ t -t^ u`a - i" • j l 'li?+d Y jr . 1 , • f,' ! 'N th y l -`-y`{ 'y..y..Y °'! >,'' ' y 'c+`%\ r'c . - -
W
5
o-
r: f
V ' l hr K C.:. ,j +t 1 ,ah :: ,—..d.. J lV 1 f! y j'Wh - (.+ . S P-1*lt'!uF •+ r.; N f• F y.LA ,
jt •, ,y; '-!
F'C'
4e )
yr"rt' : f •rS,S < 4%''/;'d`'"*!'.`•. "s t "'f•„^Y4S`Cf.-`
j .
a.-" -
R 4 v. .
F ,.. 1 ' . n Z}• ssj,
r 51±L sy
r c t f 't'k ,r:'.a.M' `".. ... __ `
e -fy, t 4J Yl ,
F ° ' '"d'Y' .t,a 5 ,L-r.;#.¢r5 ii t---•.._
h
i
LOOKING EAST ;
t
1 ( yrt
ti
Yom_ h5
P.y N' •':
it.' - ' + -'•x . ' 1 :.-£y`h r of {a`* W v°
p4 = _
4 ttt
IFSMM
y %{ t•''a jt tt iMJ (i ,} } F F ti{P „µW r `
M
yl 1
1 t s ar%Sr st
a tl{ {» R 'ti t 4 'l n ! trot ' _` ,
1
r > - t L + °. M
a
rd 1 ., . ;`` ,t '• ' r,;Yi 4.n 4,;{ r j' +; p T`t'b 's t :ati' *, ;, t
c . ; , r .>_ t -t^ u`a - i" • j l 'li?+d Y jr . 1 , • f,' ! 'N th y l -`-y`{ 'y..y..Y °'! >,'' ' y 'c+`%\ r'c . - -
W
5
o-
r: f
V ' l hr K C.:. ,j +t 1 ,ah :: ,—..d.. J lV 1 f! y j'Wh - (.+ . S P-1*lt'!uF •+ r.; N f• F y.LA ,
jt •, ,y; '-!
F'C'
4e )
yr"rt' : f •rS,S < 4%''/;'d`'"*!'.`•. "s t "'f•„^Y4S`Cf.-`
j .
a.-" -
R 4 v. .
F ,.. 1 ' . n Z}• ssj,
r 51±L sy
r c t f 't'k ,r:'.a.M' `".. ... __ `
e -fy, t 4J Yl ,
F ° ' '"d'Y' .t,a 5 ,L-r.;#.¢r5 ii t---•.._
h
i
LOOKING EAST ;
1 Z . ,p R Q vttiss^ .
d ^,v t -.
jet =, >°
Y •. ' l. `i
r,
e ! ;. ' / '
3 'a-.'r ,' an• "'•-1ey '.s h t` .' ,. '
7Y4
t F.:
L {
L _. I: Nle, rY iii• C
e'.,s ct ~ r.r Et lli'd• i,r a ate;- ' pE } :.]- k,c iti.
Ps
4.. {
Egs j:. ;4,.:
v igg;;,,^Y_
v,... tr,,.3..-'t ,
ly
t' •..c .
a k
ti,- A_y a`.SF/ t{`'t c fig` • if4 i5' h ' `• :,,¢'
c . F' sir y'^'3:}''.-,ra'^ vita"`' '
1lt'
Aj
1F`h•r!
c! { ' 1
7
Yr `, r .
t - ' f.x`"' —
j 'ti ,wsac, :^ 's`..:y„ •S T`'F s,=...: Et:`-v 'f.`f
t 7'
pamt
1 i ' —•-- — — — _ — — — ' ` ...y.t A `'..7' .n't• t . s a f y y 'f
i--:;P `'ft'M . jh.,r i' t .a
yc•
1r.
F-.x 3 1, Fir -' -
s - I12+ r :';$ t 3: . P rx•,::.. C y,?-.C, - . a SA, r y„. -.
a rs. rr.: "`3 _.J-.
tc. G ''• 1.' f ql?1 `"{
5 ;,
t{'tU F —
t t
t
t,
I ,
x
r
1 _;: :_. N-,-• " tij l t
t•+z err' i
t
f `.
ti': •, a
1 ..7 x41 ,.S .+< -
c _:. ..
b ,h
to a'"i+'`>.L.. ..'<... - -
two IV% dRR
11
i
I
r11' 'f ' i 1 i . ti'- . I' t.. •d y rY •3, Y.' d'r'r 'i
k
MFtlly
fir-
tE
c
1
llr
h
a
yt —
sYgj v
Eli
rtYis
r p
4y 4: +p
3y F zc yJ 5 ra r a a
it k -
s
s. z .,;,,<,<-:
S tF' ^,* x - y
t,. .`
ri
i' ••'*li — - .
t 1 ..
nil.
RI
50,
Sr ,-7r ,i ''s"2"i .,x9 ! i ; ' f ,.>. - t i ._ {,.. '.r`•<rn" Y f ( -'S
7 f.
P
i
y
t
s.
a
4 r ' ' y s^ y c..,' " 7•a•- ,^
r ate,- =. a '` r .tr _. ;;i
1 `
f
I
LOOKING SOUTHWESTa
vt
4k
7o
Vi
2894
FZ
Vq
I00f
Vr
a LOOKING WEST
THE TELL RESIDENCE SITE PLAN
LOT 25, BLOCK 8, MEDICINE LAKE PARK, THIRD DIVISION
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
2560 MEDICINE LAKE BOULEVARD EAST)
Y
D
SCALE 1 11ON DOLIULED MET
Y ,a r`inrt.{' 'lxJ®—,A —N Nbdit996)
MANANEWITA iaau1 \ Z, ,'CA . • •, . Z.1(Cf 1ClIIC Lake (xvAD 0a)
A...,':.'y ry",1.:.:
1 ' TM xu 1 , cM nn DS cax1DUR NTurvAL - 1 FWr
t\'.`,.,
G5 !
919.
t3d
STE BENCHMARK d...,
CT7FM
VICINITY MAPFD'RS NHt
NOT ,D MALE)
PIPE
Esi?°A °N f .
Oa}l
91.
oa.' o-
I iD.n
go"' edFRONTVIEWOF2560MEDICINELAKEBLVD. E. q q ^ ESIRKYLENTa •'f
MARKEDRNF n °
r'' LOT 26
a*01' 0.a 1 A •` d "
REAR NEW OF 256D MEDICINE LAKE BLVD. E.
PROPOSED \
P
ZONING REQUIREMENTS
aFLOOR
ELEVATIONSFOUNO
Lm+ (LaNESO a99.s6u./a E, nNcFIRSTrtaM111175xEsZONED: RSF-2 (SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED-2) 1141
ASMACKINFORMATION:
FRONT 25 FEET j°.• Q4'xo a 0 xh'be^
REAR 25 FEETSIDENE0FEEWTNNxc
16
4$ p °
GARAGE SIDE FEET j8
ppOyL4.
Va r.
MAXIMUM 35 FEET W' SEmAM Af A,6, D .p' O 'T f'9Y4 EXISTINGy
BUILDING HEIGHT (AS PEN CYE.1)p
8y ,'tpC . +
r6. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA
bIMPERVIOUSSURFACE25XOFLOTAREAeCp
A
LOT 35
RUINODENT F, xglEE eDl MIT
y'-. EINFORMATION REA
SE BACK °0 • Q E L EANN C
z '+,;' .
a,
1
eey'
WM
B.
d6ENdi
ACCESS DANE-1
PEP CITY OF PLYMDUIH NET '? CRETE wNK SQUARE FEET
PLANNING DEPT.Y/rcNON A91 WIJAM MET
PHONE: 763-509-5000 W -OLS 4741
1TOTALS., sm .assn
xa.
6411. m.TOx Erb
s° 9
g
PROPOSED
1..E. n RENTT CITO mo IT All CONSTRUCTION °R dcAYAnw IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA
o 's •u, os. N
M 1D ANY DCA-1 CMNAC M 10 KRFY °'4P TATO SWAAC MET7. NNERECACIND O TEE IN GOPHER STATE ONE `Y n[°MNORCN 69 SSW[ Au - - E ., ,ys x9W1T
Nt— '.
69
METaps.eD: ,
NOB:. DIVISION ro1AL ;1m soUAPE ME,
FOR DETAIL OF HOUSE SEE BUILDING 2 ' (
N696A
All. / 1- . 0— x too - 2A.661
aOPLANSBYMcPETEDRAFTINGkDESIGN'
2121 CLIFF DRIVE. SUITE 101 NlSfAv /i•q_tVda SpO, N09T.J6
LEGEND
EAGAN, MN 55122 / 'Wi
PHONE: 651-406-8200 Ix) DENOTES MEASURED DIMENSION THIS SURVEY
DENOTES RECORD DIMENSION AS PER THE PLAT OF
MEDICINE LAKE PARK, THIRD ADDITION
R1 A FIRE HYDRANT ,
SEND SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
a"'V/B95
WATER VALVE
IN O TELEPHONE RISERn
T9 .':..'::, ^.,:,'..i,°'S•' !/ a® GAS METER
d® ELECTRIC METER
REAR VIEW OF 256D MEDICINE LAKE BLVD. E. a WOOD FENCE
LAKE WATERELEVATION \ —E — OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES
ES STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN
AIR CONDITIONER UNITREFERENCEDDOCUMENT ®
ON-) ESE•TM PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE'S DEED CONCRETE SURFACE
DOCUMENT No. 8624707
MEDICINELAKE 3,. DIWx E,dT (a,. xLDaNE xE P N. „,RD HwnW. BITUMINOUS SURFACE
LAKE WATEP LEVEL DEPORT \ CCCRDiaGlE MEE SECMDED PLAT NINEN d ME A. 0' —D d ME
0EMAIm 1. DT/m/EWA \\ . OR NERE10. VACATED 10„BEAMW a
D
oAM0i" :
09C.6a Il IDT//I 11951) C-EET ALLEY ADD—f M C70%
IENNEPNv _
DE,
L°REar REc @65.6 R (DT/t3%M11 \\ —
ESD—
EXISTING CONTOUR INTERVAL
P \ — — EXISTING INDEX CONTOUR INTERVALA—DE wARRELEv6u ED .11 Il
wi Ac.— &A .62 N (DT/2a/2oEH —11 EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION
DATA'
t9Tnl9l
II \ 898 PROPOSED CONTOUR INTERVAL
CENTDCATM DRAINAGE FLOW
LOT AREA \\ PROPOSED SILT FENCEHW_EBYP2RTEY 1OPONT 6
PREPARED FOR: ELLEN M TELL "S PlEPXl T u.EE IN U-DER IT
9,171 SQUARE FEET, OR D.2105 ACRES 2560 EAST MEDICINE LANE
BOULEVARDHAT
KEMPER & ASSOCIATES INC.
PLYMOUTH, AN 55941 M yxE 4LA&EASTM11DR
PHONE: 763-764-8850 M .—B...
721 OLD HIGHWAY NO. B NN
6HTON, -
0051CERTIFICATEOFSURVEYD. NEu-E, RStHD,
NEW BRIGHTON, MINNESOTA 55332
DAZED naS_ EAT M 2W1
FAX 663-691-BB05
11- 012—D.)@ MI.SLW[
r
i
1
z' ap N—I
DD
D
11
i
1
y I
11
II J
1 i
1 1
1
3
ff K
090D
Z
X O O
mT m O3
m 0> x
NO
3
11 I
mx , X4
0
9
mm-------- ---J 0z2 x=
CO
xa X
30
iz r r O
01 i m
IM-W rOn rOn
I T --
9 3 F X55 OlilOZ F
y•3, i i cAq y't o
Z A
rn
a
i
iFFV
i
1Z
r•.••. rrr
OI NImp I
O
0
p n 3
p D
I
O i w
0 1
mOm I v N
1
9
PC
m
N
Ir/1p I SjQ5 O
XO
II
i Z Ziliq X0 N; F
I
pm
I
m o It
i I
r aw v raw
rO
14
R
i
i
gig
i
r•.••. rrr
J mill
McPe e
7
t3
BUILDER:
i
sl
SOUTH ELEVATION:
SGLE. IA i' -C s!
L
ii
PROJECT:
3
s7
EF rLL
4; RE5I1ENLE
s
I2 11 .2F
ti?p ar
z T:(
32
FINISHED
a
LidtF[:
st
3'f
SO. FT.
i!1
Cistii
SHEFfnrtE
t[ ELEVATION
53{
z
1 - 4EASTELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION (LAKE VIEW) PFC'
F
McPete
BUILDER:
i
ii
it
CEILING TOMENSULATICNINSUVAPR
BARRIER
VENT I/300
OFF ATTIC
PROJECT:
5/5' CYP. BO. SOi RIOC-c
AIR CHUTE 9 SAVE 50S SOFFIT
Is
ki
TRU5FACTUREESD
TRUSSB14.O.C.
yF TELLRESIDENCE
NGLE TYPE PER S
T
ELEVATION
5n FELT
15/31' 0.5,0. SHEATHING
i
10
w/ CLIPSIGTtIu.TER Mm-NEwAHINY -O- aF EXT. LL nETr +.
3
s 4
NORTH ELEVATION
firRTRV55 - SEALED va - t -O 1
e
S R iiT.
B
e i I
FINISHED . 14 FLOOR TRv55 h} E
e
wa.a O.C.
0. FF.
nN. .- 10'
2'.TRIOERS 5 T'
A. PER CODE
rte• s• Tt0 SUBFLmR i' 3 c,L,
e
LCOR TRu55{c}(j
i#
9• o•H FOI,No
t`
CF055
TE WE P TERON•5s SECTION
s § 05. REEVVt PER Ct
t ELEVATION
4 - 43• CONG.
RLYF oRA N
FIELD
CROSS SECTION rlw_cT.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
APPROVING VARIANCES FOR CORY AND ELLEN TELL TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION
OF A NEW HOME ' ON A NON -CONFORMING LOT AND FOR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2560 MEDICINE LAKE BOULEVARD EAST
2007024)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Cory and Ellen Tell, which requests approval of
Variances for redevelopment of a non -conforming lot and impervious surface coverage to allow
construction of a new single-family home for property legally described as follows:
Lot 25, Block 8, Medicine Lake Park Third.Division, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed -the request at a duly called public meeting
and recommends approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Cory
and Ellen Tell for variances for redevelopment of a non -conforming lot and impervious surface
coverage to allow construction of a new single-family home at. 2560 Medicine Lake Boulevard
East, subject to the following conditions:
1. This resolution approves variances to allow 1) redevelopment of an existing lot of record that
is non -conforming due to lot width and lot area, and 2) impervious surface coverage of 34.7
percent, in accordance with the application received by the City on March 14, 2007 and
revised plans received on April 10, 2007, except as may be amended by this resolution.
2. The variances are approved with the findings that the applicable variance standards are met,
as follows:
a) The subject lot is an existing lot of record that was created prior to modern zoning and
subdivision regulations. The lot is long and narrow and the applicants are proposing to
Resolution 2007-
2007024)
Page 2 of 3
place the home at a setback consistent with the neighboring homes, which results in a site
plan that exceeds the allowable lot coverage. Without the variances, the lot could not be
redeveloped in a manner in keeping with the established neighborhood character.
b) The circumstances related to this request are not generally applicable to other properties
in the RSF-2 district. This lot and all of the neighboring lots are non -conforming. The
original platting established a lot configuration that does not serve the needs of present
day land use, unless variances are granted.
c) The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income potential.
The existing home on the property is 801 square feet and was constructed in 1940. The
size of the existing home is substantially less than current average home sizes.
d) The conditions relating to the hardship were not created by the applicants, but rather were
created by the original platting of the lot in the early 1900's. The applicants purchased
the property in 2005. The applicants would decrease the impervious surface on .the lot
and would utilize a Best Management Practice to treat surface water on their property.
e) The proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
neighborhood. Many lots in this neighborhood have a similar lot width and exceed 25
percent impervious surface coverage. Additionally, the size, location and style of the
proposed home would be compatible with the neighborhood.
f) The proposal would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties,
increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or diminish property values within
the neighborhood. The proposed home would meet or exceed all setback requirements
for homes located in the RSF-2 zoning district.
g) The variance request is reasonable based upon the unique conditions of the parcel, and
strikes a balance between allowing a redevelopment of the property to occur while
minimizing the extent of the variation needed to alleviate the hardship.
3. BuildinIZ permits are required prior to demolition of the existing structures and prior to
construction of the new home.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a
plan for Best Management Practice to treat surface water on the subject property.
5. Adjacent paved streets shall be kept free of mud, sand, and silt as a result of construction.
6. The addition shall comply with all standards specified for the RSF-2 (Residential Single
Family Detached 2) zoning district. No variances other than lot width, lot area, and
impervious surface are granted or implied.
Resolution 2007-
2007024)
Page 3 of 3
7. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per
Ordinance provisions.
8. This variance approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property
owner or applicant has substantially started construction of the project, or unless the
landowner or applicant has received prior approval from the City to extend the expiration
date for up to one additional year, as regulated under Section 21030.06 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
ADOPTED by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the
Plymouth City Council on May 8, 2007, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the
same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my.hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this
day of
City Clerk
Agenda Number: 9,63, 1
CITY QF PLYMOUTII`;.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REP®R'I'
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: James Renneberg, P.E., Design Engineer
SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 7101
HAWTHORNE PONDS AREA
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution awarding the contract for
the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 7101.
BACKGROUND: The 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 7101 involves the
reconstruction of residential streets located west of County Road 101 to, and including, Queensland
Lane, from the Luce Line Trail to 6t" Avenue, including 2" d Avenue and 3rd Avenue west of
Queensland Lane, and Narcissus Lane north of 6"' Avenue, but excluding 6t" Avenue east of
Queensland Lane.
Annual Street Reconstruction projects began in 1989 as part of the Pavement Management Program.
This program helps preserve the street infrastructure in a cost effective manner. ' Pavement
management was developed in the late 1970's and is now being used by many cities throughout the
country,
On April 23, 2007, bids were publicly opened for the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project. A total of 9
bids were received at the following prices:
Contractor Total Base Bid
Palda and Sons, Inc 2,456,890.88
Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 2,482,497.97
LaTour Construction, Inc. 2,552,058.70
Hardrives, Inc. 2,670,738.17
S.R. Weidema, Inc. 2,887,532.25
Doboszenski & Sons, Inc. 2,965,458.54'
Burschville Construction 2,966,178.97
Midwest Asphalt Corp. 2,969,012.30
C.S. McCrossan Const., Inc. 3,396,638.20
Engineer's Estimate 3,079,641.97
O:iEngineering\PROJECTS%2000 - 2009',7101Memos\Awm'dConti'act7101.doc
AWARD CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECT NO. 7101
Page 2
The low bidder was 25.3% lower than the engineer's estimate. Engineering staff reviewed the
information submitted by Palda and Sons to comply with the bidder qualification criteria policy and
finds the inforination acceptable. They have not worked in the City of Plymouth, but have perfonned
similar street reconstructions in Bloomington, Golden Valley and.St. Paul. Engineering staff feels
that they are capable of constructing the project in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications.
Based on the low bidders unit prices, the assessments are expected to be lower than originally
estimated for the Public Hearing. It is anticipated that property owners will see a reduction in their
assessments ranging from $500 to $2,000 per lot.
Now that a contractor has been established, staff has submitted erosion control permit applications to
both Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
MCWD). For the MCWD, the Stormwater Management Permit is not required because this project
does not result in a net increase in impervious area. This project has met all guidelines associated
with the MCWD Erosion Control permit, but a permit has not been issued until the MPCA issues a
permit.
BUDGET IMPACTS: This project is included in the 2007-2011 Capital Improvement Program
CIP) in the amount of $3,780,000. The Feasibility Report for this project estimated the total project
cost to be $3,800,000. Based upon the low bid we received, we now estimate the total project cost at
3,250,000.
Funding for this project comes from multiple sources. The proposed funding sources and the
amounts contained in the CIP and budget are as follows:
RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding
the contract to Palda and Sons, Inc. for the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 7101,
in the Hawthorne Ponds Area, for a total arnount of $2,456,890.88.
attachments: Project Location Map
Resolution
0nEogineeriiig'.11ROIECTS`2000 - 2009,7101`.Memos,AwardContrtnc17I01.doc
CIP/Budget Proposed Fundin
Special Assessments 1,515,000 1,200,000
Water Resources Fund 40,000 26,000
Sewer Fund 25,000 12,000
Water Fund 820,000, 716,000
Street Reconstruction Fund 1,380,000 1,296,000
Total 3,780,000 3,250,000
RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding
the contract to Palda and Sons, Inc. for the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 7101,
in the Hawthorne Ponds Area, for a total arnount of $2,456,890.88.
attachments: Project Location Map
Resolution
0nEogineeriiig'.11ROIECTS`2000 - 2009,7101`.Memos,AwardContrtnc17I01.doc
In
Street Reconstruction ProjectProposed2007
Hawthorne Ponds
I.
Alp
0
AV;
i0l
Sireets to be Reconstructed I
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
AWARD CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 7101
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvements located west of
County Road 101 to, and including, Queensland Lane, from the Luce Line Trail to 6th
Avenue, including 2"
d Avenue and 3rd Avenue west of Queensland Lane, and Narcissus
Lane north of 61h Avenue, but excluding 6th Avenue east of Queensland Lane by
reconstruction of streets with the installation of bituminous pavement, concrete curb and
gutter installation and repair, storm sewer installation and repair, and all necessary
appurtenances, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the
following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
Contractor Total Base Bid
Palda and Sons, Inc 2,456,890.88
Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 2,482,497.97.
LaTour Construction, Inc. 2,552,058.70
Hardrives, Inc. 2,670,738.17
S.R. Weidema, Inc. 2,887,532.25
Doboszenski & Sons, Inc. 2,965,458.54
Burschville Construction . 2,966,178.97
Midwest Asphalt Corp. 2,969,012.30
C.S. McCrossan Const., Inc. 3,396,638.20
Engineer's Estimate 3,079,641.97
WHEREAS, it appears that Palda and Sons, Inc. of St. Paul, MN is the lowest responsible
bidder complying with the minimum specifications; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA:
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the
contract for the Base Bid with Palda and Sons, Inc. of St. Paul, MN in the name of
the City of Plymouth for the improvement of the area located west of County
Road 101 to, and including, Queensland Lane, from the Luce Line Trail to 6th
Avenue, including 2nd Avenue and 3rd Avenue west of Queensland Lane, and
Narcissus Lane north of 6th
Avenue, but excluding 61h Avenue east of Queensland
Lane, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City
Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer in the amount of
2,456,890.88.
0AEngineeringTR07ECTS\2000 - 2009\7101\Resolutions\AwardContractRes7l Ol.doc
Page 2
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders
the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder
and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
3. Funding for this project shall be as follows:
Street Reconstruction Fund
Special Assessments
Water Resources Fund
Sewer Fund
Water Fund
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
1,296,000
1,200,000
26,000
12,000
716,000
OAEngineeringTROJECTS\2000 - 2004\7101\Resolutions\AwardContractRes7101,doc
Agenda lumber: 9, 6,3,c;)-
CITY OF PLYMOUTH.
CITY COIJI CII, A(gEIVDA P®RT'
DATE: April 27, 2007 for the City Council Meeting of May 8, 2007.
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager through
Doran Cote, P.E., Director of Public Works
FROM: James Renleberg, Design Engineer
SUBJECT: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 7107
CITY VIEW ACRES AREA
ACTION REQUESTED: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution awarding the construction
contract for the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 7107.
BACKGROUND: The 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No. 7107 involves the
reconstruction of residential streets located south of County Road 6 to, and including 9`I' Avenue,
fiom County Road 101 to, and including Dunkirk Lane and 14"' Avenue, east of Dunkirk Lane.
Annual Street Reconstruction projects began in 1989 as part of the Pavement Management Program.
This program helps preserve the street infrastructure in a cost effective manner. Pavement
management was developed in the late 1970's and is now being used by many cities throughout the
country.
On April 26, 2007, bids were publicly opened for the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project. A total of 7
bids were received at the following prices:
Contractor Total Base Bid
Palda and Sons, Inc 2,596,528.81
Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 2,768,855.39
Doboszenski & Sons, Inc. 2,933,841.45
Hardrives, Inc. , 2,979,608.84
C.S. McCrossan Const., Inc. 3,124,682.10
Midwest Asphalt Corp. 3,198,631.60
Three Rivers Const. 3,712,663.00
Engineer's Estimate 3,449,112.75
The low bidder was 32.9% lower than the engineer's estimate. Engineering staff reviewed the
information submitted by Palda and Sons to comply with the bidder qualification criteria policy and
finds the information acceptable. They have not worked in the City of Plymouth, but have performed
0aGaginccring%PRO1LC'I'S,2000 • 200917107'Mcmog AwarclConU•ac17107.cloc
AWARD CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECT NO. 7107
Page 2
similar street reconstructions in Bloomington, Golden Valley and St. Paul. Engineering staff feels
that they are capable of constructing the project in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications.
Based on the low bidders unit prices, the assessments are expected to be lower than originally.
estimated for the Public Hearing. It is anticipated that property owners will see a reduction in their
assessments ranging from $500 to $1,500 per lot.
Now that a contractor has been established, staff has submitted erosion control permit applications to
both Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
MCWD). For the MCWD, the Stormwater Management Permit is not required because this project
does not result in a net increase in impervious area and attached is an email from James Wisker,
MCWD District Technician, who confirmed this. This project has met all guidelines associated with
the MCWD Erosion Control permit, but a permit has not been issued until the MPCA issues a permit.
However, due to the public concern associated with storm water discharging directly into Gleason
Lake, the MCWD did schedule, a Board meeting on May 3, 2007. Attached is a Staff Report from
MCWD for this meeting.
After the City Council approved the plans and specifications, staff added two additional sump
manholes, one on 11 "' Avenue and one on 9"' Avenue to provide storin water treatment. Staff also
reviewed a couple of locations to install rain gardens at the request of a property owner. However,
after reviewing these locations it was determined that the sites are not -ideal to install a rain garden.
Rain garden sites are evaluated based on the following criteria, in no particular order:
Amount of sun
Drainage area
Slope of the rain garden locations (i.e. will the retaining wall match existing yards)
Location of small utilities
Location of catch basin's to install draintile
Potential for an emergency overflow
Willingness of the homeowners to participate through watering, weeding and future plant
replacement.
Budget
Staff will rank all potential sites based on the criteria and will send letters out to the'most ideal spots.
If there is no response by the property owners then staff will move on to the next best area. In this
year's project, a total of eleven letters were sent out and only four properties responded with interest
of installing a rain garden adjacent to their property.
Additional rain gardens can be added after the street has been reconstructed, as the only impacts to
the street include installing a curb cut in the concrete curb and gutter. If property owners are
interested in installing a rain garden on their property, staff will work with them to see if it is
appropriate to do so.
0:•Luginecrin6`.PRO.If'CTS12000 - 2009`7107 Memos AwaidConU-ncr7l07.doc
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 7107
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvements located south of County
Road 6 to, and including 9"' Avenue, from County Road 101 to, and including Dunkirk Lane and 14"'
Avenue, east of DunkirklaneLane by reconstruction of streets with the installation of bituminous
pavement, concrete curb and gutter installation and repair, storm sewer installation and repair, and all
necessary appurtenances, bids, were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the
following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
Contractor Total Base Bid
Palda and Sons, Inc 2,596,528.81
Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 2,768,855.39
Doboszenski & Sons, Inc. 2,933,841.45
Hardrives, Inc. 2;979,608.84
C.S. McCrossan Const., Inc. 3,124,682.10
Midwest Asphalt Corp. 3,198,631.60
Three Rivers Const. 3,712,663.00
Engineer's Estimate 3,449,112.75
WHEREAS, it appears that Palda and Sons, Inc. of St. Paul, MN is the lowest responsible bidder
complying with the minimum specifications; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
enter into the contract for the Base Bid with Palda and Sons, Inc. of St. Paul, MN in the name of the
City of Plymouth for the improvement of the area located south of County Road (5 to, and including
9"' Avenue, from County Road 101 to, and including Dunkirk Lane and 14'1' Avenue, east of Dunkirk
Lane, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in
the office of the City Engineer in the amount of $2,596,528.81.
FURTHER,, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the
deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest
bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
Funding for this project shall be as follows:
Street Reconstruction Fund
Special Assessments
Water Resources Fund
Sewer Fund
Water Fund
Adopted by the City Council on May 8, 2007.
1,280,000
2,000,000
90,000
14,000
16,000
O AEngineeringWROIGCTS\2000 - 2009\7107\ltesol\AwerdContrnclRes7 ] OZdoc
AWARD CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECT NO. 7107
Page 3
Staff also reviewed revising the street location on 9`
l' Avenue, east of Garland Lane to avoid
removing a tree that is currently marked to be removed. In order to accomplish this, the street would
need to be moved 5 feet.to the north from Garland Lane to 16900 9"' Avenue. There are existing
steep yard slopes on the north side of the street, and to regrade the yards properly it is anticipated that
the restoration would need to take place on private property. In addition, there are existing utility
poles that would also be impapted and would likely need to be relocated. According to this the street
will remains as proposed. Staff has met with the property owners about this tree and will continue to
work with them in an attempt to save the tree.
BUDGET IMPACTS: This project is included in the 2007-2011 Capital Improvement Program
CIP) in the amount of $4,365,000. The Feasibility Report for this project estimated the total project
cost to be $4,390,000. Based upon the low bid we received, we now estimate the total project cost at
3,400,000.
Funding for this project comes from multiple sources. The proposed funding sources and the
amounts contained in the CIP and budget are as follows:
RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding
the construction, contract to Palda and Sons, Inc. for the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City
Project No. 7107, in the City View Acres Area, for a total amount of $ 2,596,528.81.
attachments: Project Location Map
Resolution
0:.L-nginccringPROJECTS•2000 - 2009-•.7107',Mcinos•AwardConlracl7107.doc
CIP/Budget Proposed Funding
Special Assessments 25345,000 2,000,000
Water Resources Fund 90,000 90,000
Sewer Fund 27,000 14,000
Water Fund 28,000 16,000
Street Reconstruction Fund 1,875,000 1,280,000
Total 4,365,000 3,400,000
RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding
the construction, contract to Palda and Sons, Inc. for the 2007 Street Reconstruction Project, City
Project No. 7107, in the City View Acres Area, for a total amount of $ 2,596,528.81.
attachments: Project Location Map
Resolution
0:.L-nginccringPROJECTS•2000 - 2009-•.7107',Mcinos•AwardConlracl7107.doc
Proposed 2007 Street Reconstruddon Project
City View Acres
law.
Streets to die Reconst n -i f-te
Jim Renneberg am
From: James Wisker owisker@minnehahacreek.org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 6:07 PM
To: Jim Renneberg
Subject: City View Acres Permit
Jim,
I am writing because I believe I may have mistakenly informed you that a
Rule N: Stormwater Management permit would definitely be required.
After reading through the email you sent it is apparent that there is
not a net increase in impervious surface throughout the project. As you
are likely aware, Rule N: Provides an exception for Road projects which
states:
A permit is not.required for maintenance of a public or private road,
street or highway, if the project does not result in a net increase in
impervious surface"
I apologize for this error. That being said, it may be prudent to move
forward with our initial plan to schedule a Board meeting for this
project given the contentious nature of this project. I will speak with
Mr. Eric Evenson 'to determine if this is an appropriate solution.
Please feel free to give me a call tomorrow morning to touch base
regarding these issues.
Thanks
James Wisker
District Technician
Permitting Department
Ph. 952-471-0590 (206)
fx. 952-471-0682
Minnehaha Creek. Watershed District
18202 Minnetonka Blvd.
Deephaven, MN 55391
www.minnehahacreel,.org
1
Public Hearing Requested
Permit Application No,: 07-114 Rule: Rule B
Applicant: _ City of Plymouth
Project: 2007 Road Reconstruction Project Received: 4/13/07
Location: 9n', I I L",, 12L", 13"—' & 14L" Ave. Complete: 4/20/07
Notification: 4/23/07
Recommendation:
Approval. Permit should not be issued until the following condition is met:
1. Submit a copy of the NPDES permit number obtained fi•om the MPCA.
2. Reimbursement of mailing costs in the amount of $206,21
Background:
The City of Plymouth has applied for a Rule B: Erosion Control permit for the proposed reconstruction of
the following streets: 9"', 11"', 12"', 13"' & 14"' Ave. and Garland, Dunkirk & Everest Lane.
Due to a proposed 15% reduction in impervious surface throughout the project area, the application is
exempt from Rule N: Stormwater Management pursuant to par. (e): "A permit is not required, for the
maintenance or improveivent of'o public or private road, street, highway, sidewalk or trail.. , zf the
project does not result in a net increase in impervious surface."
In conjunction with the reduction in impervious surface, the City of Plymouth is proposing the installation
of two rain -gardens, three sump manholes, a Stormwater pond and the restoration of a wetland located on
12"' Avenue. The City of Plymouth is the Local Government Unit for the Wetland Conservation Act.
Therefore, the restoration efforts are regulated by the City.
Rule B:
District erosion control requirements have been satisfied. The submitted plans include erosion control
down -gradient of land disturbing activities. Inlet protection devices will be installed in all catch basins,
throughout the project area. In addition, a permanent stabilization plan has been developed in accordance
with District standards for all disturbed areas, ponds, wetlands and rain gardens.
Public Hearing:
A public hearing was requested to discuss the potential for adverse water quality impacts to Gleason Lake
associated with the increase in pipe diameter between 930 and 940 Garland Lane. There currently exists
within the project area three direct discharges to Gleason Lake. One is located at the junction of Dunkirk
Lane and 12'11 Avenue. The other two discharge points are located on Garland Lane between 11"' & 9"'
Avenue. Improvements to the area located off Dunkirk were abandoned by the City due to difficulty in
obtaining the necessary construction easements.
In order to improve the existing erosion problems associated with the pipes located on Garland Lane, the
City is proposing to eliminate the pipe on the north end of Garland in favor of increasing the diameter of
the existing pipe between 930 and 940 Garland Lane. The proposed pipe will increase in diameter from
18 inches to 24 inches. .
Residents in the area raised concerns regarding this increase in diameter and its potential to increase
sediment loading to Gleason Lake. While this project does not trigger Rule N: Stonnwater Management,
the District engineer assessed these concerns. With the proposed decrease in impervious surface
throughout the project, placement of two rain gardens, restoration of a wetland currently being used to
retain Stormwater, the construction of a stormwater pond, the installation of three sump catch basins and
twice annual street sweeping, it was concluded that the project will result in a net improvement in the
quality of runoff discharging to Gleason Lake from within this drainage area,
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -
AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
2007 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 7107
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvements located south of County
Road 6 to, and including 9t"
Avenue, from County Road 101 to, and including Dunkirk Lane and 10'
Avenue, east of Dunkirk Lane by reconstruction of streets with the installation of bituminous
pavement, concrete curb and gutter installation and repair, storm sewer installation and repair, and all
necessary appurtenances, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the
following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
Contractor Total Base Bid
Palda and Sons, Inc 2,596,528.81
Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 2,768,855.39
Doboszenski & Sons, Inc. 2,933;841.45
Hardrives, Inc. 2,979,608.84
C.S. McCrossan Const., Inc. 3,124,682.10
Midwest Asphalt Corp. 3,198,631.60
Three Rivers Const. 3,712,663.00
Engineer's Estimate 3,449,112.75
WHEREAS, it appears that Palda and Sons, Inc. of St. Paul, MN. is the lowest responsible bidder
complying with the minimum specifications; and
NOW, THEREFORE; BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA
The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the
contract for the Base Bid with Palda and Sons, Inc, of St. Paul, MN in the name of
the City of Plymouth for the improvement of the area located south of County Road
6 to, and including 9"' Avenue, from County Road 101. to, and including Dunkirk
Lane and 14"' Avenue, east of Dunkirk Lane, according to the plans and
specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the
City Engineer in the amount of $2,596,528.81.
2. The City Cleric is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders
the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder
and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
0AEnginceringTRO]ECTS\2000 - 2009\7107\Resol\AwnrdContrnctRes7107.doc