HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 04-08-2003 SpecialAgenda
City of Plymouth
Special City Council Meeting
Tuesday, April 8, 2003
5:30 p.m.
Public Safety Training Room
1. Call to Order
2. Discuss pond cleaning options and policy for handling
drainage concerns
3. Schedule future study session topics
4. Adj ourn
Q_
DATE: April 4, 2003 for the City Council Meeting of April 8, 2003
TO: <
aniel
ight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: L. Faulkner, P.E. Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: DRAINAGE SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
Plymouth City Council and staff have been discussing storm sewer system maintenance for some time. This
report provides a brief discussion on the City's storm sewer system and some of the issues involved. The
report includes a brief history, problems, and some proposed options.
BACKGROUND: The design and maintenance of the City's storm drainage system is an integral part of
preventing flooding, reducing damage to the City's infrastructure and maintaining the health of the City's
water resources. Storm sewer system maintenance and management has always been an integral part of the
Public Works Department. The first major storm drainage improvements were undertaken in the mid 1960s.
This initial Storm Drainage Program was subsequently updated with the 1973 Storm Drainage Plan which
presented an overall layout of major drainage facilities in Plymouth, including trunk storm sewers, ponding
areas, and major drainageways. The main purpose of the 1973 plan was to provide an adequate and
economical means of conveying stormwater runoff through Plymouth. This plan was revised and updated in
1980 to reflect recent platting and development proposals, storm drainage improvements, and the Land Use
Guide Plan. The plan provided information on storm sewer and open channel sizes, storm water flows, pond
storage volumes, water levels, and costs. In 1995 the City began a major up -date to its storm sewer plan by
incorporating water quality management into the City's first Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan.
This plan was based on an integrated resource management concept. The 1980 Storm Drainage Plan
addressed stormwater quantity while the new Plymouth Water Resources Management Plan largely focused
on quality as well as updating City Goals and Policies for both quantity and quality.
The City has just completed a digital (GIS) map of the storm sewer system. According to this map the
Plymouth storm sewer system infrastructure has 117 miles of pipes, 4,910 catch basins and manholes, 1,165
outfalls, and 708 outlets. Some sections of the system are over forty years old with others constructed as the
City developed. Much of the system is within public easements, however portions are on private property
without easements. Since 1991, the City has tracked all constructed water quality (NURP) ponds and
required an agreement that specifies the property owners are responsible for maintaining the pond. In
addition, the agreements require the property owners to have an engineer annually certify that the pond does
not need maintenance and is operating as it was designed. Prior to 1991 the primary function of ponds
constructed was for water quantity with water quality a secondary benefit. As of 2002, there were 135
maintenance agreements covering 190 water quality ponds. In addition Plymouth has 8 major lakes, over
800 wetland basins, along with various number of dry ponds, wet ponds and the designated ponding areas.
Drainage system maintenance generally consists of repair of system failures or removal of sediment. System
failure may include pipe separation, catch basin or manhole repair or replacement. Sediment removal is a
continuous effort to remove accumulated sediments. Sedimentation creates a number of problems such as:
SUBJECT: STORM SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
Page 2
impedes flow and drainage,
increases flooding potential,
degrades downstream water resources,
impacts aesthetics,
damages storm sewer pipes by increasing water pressure or trapping water in the pipes ad structure
during freeze and thaw cycles,
damages the roadbed by preventing the draintile from draining into plugged structures.
Sedimentation greatly impacts both the water quality and quantity function of ponds and basins by reducing
their volume by filling them. Sedimentation is a major problem in maintenance of our drainage system.
Erosion is the basic source of sedimentation in the storm sewer system. Erosion is a natural process that will
occur in all drainage systems. The City practice of limiting discharge rates from developments has helped
reduce this affect. Many older areas of the City were constructed before this requirement for the construction
of water quality ponds was instituted and locations are often not available to retrofit ponds. Since, the
sedimentation is accumulated continuously, the problem becomes more severe and more evident the older the
system gets.
The City has been addressing the sedimentation issue through an aggressive construction erosion control
program, inspections, inventories, Capital Improvements Program (CIP) flood and drainage projects,
drainageway cleaning, and system repair. The City's storm sewer system maintenance has increased
significantly since 2001, after additional funds became available through Storm Water Utility Fee. For
example in 2002-03, approximately 20,000 cubic yards of sediment was removed from fourteen drainage
basins at an average cost of about $6,000 per site (not including disposal cost). The 2002-03 winter was an
unusually suitable year for this type of maintenance work. Lack of snowfall allowed staff time and the cold
weather made working in ponds more suitable. However, typically the City manages to maintain about eight
to ten areas per year. The City also has provided $100,000 per year in the CIP for projects larger then the
Maintenance Division is generally able to address.
As stated before, the City also has water quality agreements on about 190 water quality (NURP) ponds. Of
these 190 ponds, about 15 are 10 years old. This type of pond typically needs to be cleaned out every 15 to
20 years although it varies greatly depending on the surrounding area. Only one of these 15 ponds has been
inspected as required by the agreement. In late 2001, City staff surveyed 14 metro cities on their storm
drainage management programs. Shorewood, Minnetonka, Golden Valley, and Burnsville had from 1 to 20
water quality agreements for their newer developments. None of the cities contacted had enforced any pond
maintenance. In general, most cities are in the same situation as Plymouth, needing to expand their program
to take care of the aging NURP ponds.
The agreements for maintenance of water quality ponds constructed by developers from 1991 until 2002
include a clause that allows the property owners to petition the City to take over maintenance of the ponds if
the City implements a program to clean out similar water quality ponds. The City has not had such a
program to date. Some property owners have requested that the City take responsibility for the ponds based
on this clause. If a City program to maintain water quality ponds is instituted by the City it is expected that a
significant number of the property owners with this clause in their agreement would petition the City.
In addition to sedimentation the storm sewer infrastructure is aging. The Street Maintenance Division
currently rebuilds 30 to 40 catch basins each year and has estimated that it would need to rebuild about twice
N:\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRC\phase IITond Management\S3 Main April 8 memo.doc
SUBJECT: STORM SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
Page 3
that many to keep up. In addition, problems with storm sewer pipes are periodically identified that also need
repair.
Although, the City street crews have been working on these problems the City has not been able to keep up
with the work load for the past several years. With ongoing development coupled with an aging system, the
maintenance backlog of the City's drainage system is accumulating faster than ever before. Under the
expanded drainage maintenance program, for the past few years the City has been maintaining about 8 to 10
sites per year. However, 520 drainage basin areas and 190 constructed water quality (NURP) ponds have
been identified for a total of 710 drainage facilities. An average of 47 basins would need to be inspected,
evaluated, or maintained annually to meet a 15 -year cycle. The on going development and the aging system
has also led to an increase in the number of system failure incidents which is becoming difficult to keep up
with.
There are many options for the City to consider. Whichever option is chosen, in the near future it is possible
that the material will need to be disposed of outside the City greatly increasing costs. At an estimated
disposal cost of $5.00 per cubic yard, an additional $100,000 would have been spent for hauling excavated
material from the 14 sites this Winter.
Option 1. Continue existing program; This would involve addressing only top priority or "urgent"
drainage issues as they arise within the current budget constraints. As noted above the need for maintenance
of the drainage system continues to grow faster then the ability to address it.
This approach would not impact the existing budget. However, the backlog of work would grow and only
very high priority work would be addressed. As NURP ponds age the pond maintenance agreements would
be enforced which would require staff time and potentially legal costs. This process would likely need to
begin in the next 5 years.
Option 2. Contract out NURP pond cleaning; Although the entire drainage system is developing a
backlog of maintenance work, one option is to hire contractors to remove sediment from the water quality
ponds that are currently subject to pond maintenance agreements. Contracting the work out would not
require the capital investment to purchase equipment or the need to hire new personnel. This program would
relieve property owners with pond maintenance agreements of responsibility for maintaining their ponds.
Should this occur the Council may wish to establish parameters for taking over the ponds such as requiring
the property owners bring them to their original design condition or requiring them to pay the prorated cost
of the initial pond cleaning.
To maintain the 190 existing ponds on a 15 year cycle would require working on about 13 ponds per year.
The estimated cost of hiring a contractor to remove sediment is $13,000 per site or $169,000 per year. This
cost assumes the City provides a disposal site located in the City of Plymouth. A $0.35 per residential
equivalent factor (REF) per month increase (just over 10%) in the Surface Water Fee would be required for
this program. This would need to be increased if the City does not provide a convenient disposal site.
Option 3. Provide incentive for property owners with pond maintenance agreements; A concern
expressed by property owners with pond maintenance agreements is that they need to pay the Surface Water
Fee as well as pay for maintaining their ponds. The City could reduce the fee for these property owners if
they show they are inspecting and accumulating funds to provide the maintenance. The fee would not be
eliminated completely since many activities are undertaken with the fee for the overall public benefit besides
simple pond cleaning. A reduction of $1.00 per (REF) per month in the $3.25 per month fee would provide
N:\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRC\phase IlTond Management\S3 Main April 8 memo.doc
SUBJECT: STORM SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
Page 4
some incentive to these homeowners. One concern with this approach is that the City may still need to take
difficult actions to enforce the pond maintenance agreements.
Option 4. Clean ponds by expanding City capability; The current drainage system maintenance program
could be expanded within the City. An additional crew of 4 employees and capital equipment would be
required. An additional supervisor would also be required to avoid overloading the existing Street
Maintenance Supervisor. This is similar to the budget proposal made last year. This option would also
relieve property owners with pond maintenance agreements of responsibility for maintaining their ponds.
The cost as outlined in our 2003 budget submittal has been updated to reflect a full year program cost in the
initial year and an additional cost for tractor and trailer to haul the excavator. These updated costs do not
reflect disposal cost for the materials taken from the ponds.
The current cost of 4.0 full time equivalent positions (FTE), a supervisor and equipment for this crew is
716,313 for the initial year and $431,213 for the ongoing cost. This would be split between the General
Fund and the Water Resource Fund as indicated below.
This provides significantly more capability then is needed simply to maintain the ponds. A smaller
expansion of City staff and equipment would not be able to maintain the ponds in the limited time period the
work can be done. Generally, maintenance or sediment excavation of ponds is a winter activity, when frozen
ground is more suitable to heavy equipment traffic. This more comprehensive approach would also reduce
other drainage related backlog such as infrastructure repairs e.g. pipe or catch basin repair and replacement,
and drainage issues that can be addressed during the summer months. In addition it would enhance snow
plowing capability and address an emerging supervisory problem in the Street Maintenance Division where
one supervisor currently has 16 employees reporting directly to him. The supervisor provided by this option
would reduce this number.
SUMMARY:
The Finance Department has updated the 10 year cash flow model. The model was adjusted for 2002 actual
expenditures and revenue. Actual revenue from fees in 2002 were $57,604 more than budget. The ten year
plan also assumes a 5% increase in fees every other year. The effect on the Water Resources fund balance is
noted on the attached cash flow model. It should be noted that a one dollar per (REF) per month increase in
the fee will generate approximately $480,000 per year.
Another issue that has been raised concerns the possibility of a special assessment for properties adjacent to
ponds. Special assessments are required to be less than or equal to the benefit to the property generally
measured in the increase in property value. Demonstrating an increase in value from cleaning the pond
N:\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRC\phase ll\Pond Management\S3 Main April 8 memo.doc
GENERAL WATER TOTAL
FUND RESOURCES
FUND
72,625 643,688 716,313
ON-GOING 59,825 371,388 431,213
This provides significantly more capability then is needed simply to maintain the ponds. A smaller
expansion of City staff and equipment would not be able to maintain the ponds in the limited time period the
work can be done. Generally, maintenance or sediment excavation of ponds is a winter activity, when frozen
ground is more suitable to heavy equipment traffic. This more comprehensive approach would also reduce
other drainage related backlog such as infrastructure repairs e.g. pipe or catch basin repair and replacement,
and drainage issues that can be addressed during the summer months. In addition it would enhance snow
plowing capability and address an emerging supervisory problem in the Street Maintenance Division where
one supervisor currently has 16 employees reporting directly to him. The supervisor provided by this option
would reduce this number.
SUMMARY:
The Finance Department has updated the 10 year cash flow model. The model was adjusted for 2002 actual
expenditures and revenue. Actual revenue from fees in 2002 were $57,604 more than budget. The ten year
plan also assumes a 5% increase in fees every other year. The effect on the Water Resources fund balance is
noted on the attached cash flow model. It should be noted that a one dollar per (REF) per month increase in
the fee will generate approximately $480,000 per year.
Another issue that has been raised concerns the possibility of a special assessment for properties adjacent to
ponds. Special assessments are required to be less than or equal to the benefit to the property generally
measured in the increase in property value. Demonstrating an increase in value from cleaning the pond
N:\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRC\phase ll\Pond Management\S3 Main April 8 memo.doc
SUBJECT: STORM SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
Page 5
would be difficult especially when most of the work is below the water. The revenue generated would likely
pay for a relatively small percentage of the project cost.
If the City Council wishes to take over maintenance responsibility for the property owners with pond
maintenance agreements staff recommends implementing Option 2 and hiring contractors to do the work.
This would require an increase in the Surface Water Fee. The maintenance backlog in the City's drainage
system will also need to be addressed. Option 4 would provide some benefit in this, however more research
to establish the impact of this option on the backlog is recommended before moving ahead with it. This
research could be part of the upcoming budget process.
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
Director of Public Works
attachments: Harrison Place on Bass Creek Pond Maintenance Agreement
In-house Pond Cleaning Option — First Year
In-house Pond Cleaning Option — Ongoing
Water Resources Fund 10 Year Financial Analysis
N:\pw\Engineering\WTRRESRC\phase IlTond Management\S3 Main April 8 memo.doc
Water Resources Fund - Pond Cleaning Option
First Year
4 FTE's Maintenance Worker (1/1 -12/31) 199,763 100% Water Resources 199,763
Overtime - Maintenance Workers (9/1 -12/31) 25,200 100% Snow and Ice 25,200
Supervisor (1/1 - 12/31) 69,250 50% Water Resources 34,625
50% Street Maintenance 34,625
Supervisor Pick -Up 20,000 50% Water Resources 10,000
50% Street Maintenance 10,000
Supervisor Workstation & PC 5,600 50% Water Resources 2,800
50% Street Maintenance 2,800
One -Ton Truck 52,500 100% Water Resources 52,500
Pick -Up 29,000 100% Water Resources 29,000
Tandem Dump 140,000 100% Water Resources 140,000
Excavator 125,000 100% Water Resources 125,000
Tractor & Trailer 120,000
Contractual Sweeping 50.000 100% Water Resources 50.000
TOTAL 836,313 716,313
Water Resources 643,688
General Fund 72.625
716,313
Pond Cleaning Year 1_03_26_03.xls
4/1/2003
Water Resources Fund - Pond Cleaning Option
Ongoing
4 FTE's Maintenance Worker (1/1 - 12/31) 199,763 100% Water Resources 199,763
Overtime - Maintenance Workers (1/1 - 12/31) 25,200 100% Snow and Ice 25,200
Supervisor (1/1 - 12/31) 69,250 50% Water Resources 34,625
50% Street Maintenance 34,625
Supervisor Workstation & PC 0 50% Water Resources 0
50% Street Maintenance 0
One -Ton Truck 7,000 100% Water Resources 7,000
Pick -Up 5,000 100% Water Resources 5,000
Tandem Dump 25,000 100% Water Resources 25,000
Excavator 25,000 100% Water Resources 25,000
Tractor & Trailer 25,000 100% Water Resources 25,000
Contractual Sweeping 50.000 100% Water Resources 50.000
TOTAL 431,213 431,213
Water Resources 371,388
General Fund 59.825
431,213
Pond Cleaning Option 3-26-03.xls
4/11/2003
Expenses
Op£ratina
Personal Services
Materials & Supplies
Incentive Program
Contrectut
0.05 172,612 184,204 193,414 203,085 213,239 223,901 235,0% 246,851 259,194 272,153 285,761
0.05 40,000 50,000 52,500 55,125 57,881 60,775 63,814 67,005 70,355 73,873
0.03 39,817 36,250 37,338 38,458 39,611 40,800 42,024 43,284 44,583 45,920 47,298
25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
Capital Improvemertts
Lake
Ovate
CIP- Pond& Drainage Improvements
Water Resources Fund, 505-1750
100,000 100,000 IOo,Ouu 100,000 IOO,UUU Iuu,Wu IUU,000
10 Year Financial Analysis
tw,uuu IUu,Vuu
Other Capital 32,471
CashOow Projection 4.25°x. Base Plus Street Cleaning & Drainage Maintenance Shift
Investment Return
7,700 7,700
Inflators 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Betinnina Balance 1,795,275 2,775,234 1,546,202 1,298,573 891,013 555,145
e
805,718 1,019,487 1,083,379 1,432,947 1,752,486
Revenues
31,178 33,360 35,6%
Transfers 0.03 15,000 20,450
Stormwater Utility Fees 0.015 1,557,604 1,%0,968 1,684,917 1,710,190 1,822,635 1,849,975 1,971,611 2,001,185 2,132,763 2,164,754 2,307,087
Transfer WMisc 23,855
500,000
Interest Earnings 100,723 89,920 59,194 45,561 30,091 28,317. 37.979 43,756 52,359 66,282 81,197
Total Revenue -_> 1,682,182 1,670,888 1,744,110 1,755,751 1,852,727 1,878,292 2,009,589 2,044,941 2,185,122 2,231,036 2,388,284
Expenses
Op£ratina
Personal Services
Materials & Supplies
Incentive Program
Contrectut
0.05 172,612 184,204 193,414 203,085 213,239 223,901 235,0% 246,851 259,194 272,153 285,761
0.05 40,000 50,000 52,500 55,125 57,881 60,775 63,814 67,005 70,355 73,873
0.03 39,817 36,250 37,338 38,458 39,611 40,800 42,024 43,284 44,583 45,920 47,298
25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
Capital Improvemertts
Lake
Ovate
CIP- Pond& Drainage Improvements 94,666 100,000 100,000 IOo,Ouu 100,000 IOO,UUU Iuu,Wu IUU,000 luu,uuu tw,uuu IUu,Vuu
Other Capital 32,471
7,700 7,700 7,700 7,700 7,700 7,700 7,700 7,700 7,700
Allocations 0.07 18,517 19,416 20,775 22,229 23,785 25,450 27,232 29,138 31,178 33,360 35,6%
Transfers 0.03 15,000 20,450 21,064 21,695 22,346 23,017 23,707 24,418 25,151 25,905 26,683
Deferred Expenditures From 2002 500,000
Street Cleaning 0.05 203,650 213,833 224,524 235,750 247,538 259,915 272,910 286,556 300,884 315,928
Drainage Maintenance 0.05 283,866 298,059 312,962 328,610 345,041 362,293 380,408 399,428 419399 _ 440369
Total Expenses-> 704,432 2,899,920 1,991,739 2,163,312 2,188,594 1,627,718 1,795,821 1,981,049 1,835,554 1,911,497 1,991,045
EndinaBalance 2,773,025 1,546,202 1,298,573 891.013 555,145 805,718 1,019,487 1,083,379 1,432,947 1,752,486 2,149,725
Note - 2002 has been updated to actual.
Note - 2003 revenue has been revised
Note - Assumes a 5% rsle increase every two years beginning in 2004.
Water Resources Base Projections (3-2603).xls
41/2003
9:53 AM
AGREEMENT REGARDING
WATER QUALITY TREATMENT POND
THIS AGREEMENT made this day of 19 by and among the City of
Plymouth, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and, McHunter
Co., LLC and Bruggeman Properties, LLC, with reference to the following facts and circumstances:
A. Bruggeman Properties, LLC is the fee owner of certain real property situated in the City of
Plymouth, Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as follows:
HARRISON PLACE AT BASS CREEK (9405 1)
BLOCKS ONE THROUGH 17
more specifically described on the attached Exhibit "A"
hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property").
McHunter Co. LLC is responsible for construction and maintenance of the water quality pond.
B. As a condition of its approval of the development for the Subject Property, the City of
Plymouth has required that the parties hereto enter into an agreement, which makes provision
for the maintenance of the water quality treatment pond ("Water Quality Treatment Pond")
located within the boundaries of the Subject Property as the same is described and depicted in
those certain construction plans drawn by McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. and approved
by the City and constructed by McHunter Co. LLC. The Water Quality Treatment Pond is
located in the platted drainage and utility easement in Outlots A and B.
C. The parties hereto desire to set forth their agreement with respect to the maintenance of the
Water Quality Treatment Pond and the costs of such maintenance.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing facts and circumstances, and for other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto
hereby agree as follows:
1. For the purposes of this Agreement, maintenance of the Water Quality Treatment Pond shall
mean the annual inspection and certification by a professional engineer that the pond is
functioning in accordance with the approved plans and, if necessary, the periodic dredging of
the silt buildup in the Water Quality Treatment Pond as necessary to maintain the Water
Quality Treatment Capacity, as established for the Water Quality Treatment Pond in the
construction plans and to maintain the proper operation of the treatment function of the Water
Quality Treatment Pond.
2. McHunter Co. LLC shall be solely responsible for the maintenance of the Water Quality
Treatment Pond, and shall bear all costs of such maintenance, until such time as Harrison Place
at Bass Lake (the "Association") is activated whereupon the Association shall bear the sole
responsibility for such maintenance and shall bear all costs of such maintenance. If McHunter
Co., LLC, or after its incorporation, the Association, does not undertake the necessary
maintenance within 30 days of notification by the City, or within 30 days provide the City with
a schedule for undertaking the necessary maintenance, the City may undertake such
AGM94051.DOC
maintenance, and the costs reasonably incurred by the City for performing such maintenance
shall be reimbursed to the City within 30 days by the party responsible for such maintenance
and, if the responsible party does not timely reimburse the City, then the City may recover its
costs by levying a special assessment against all single family house lots in the Subject
Property, each lot to bear an equal share.
3. Bruggeman Properties, LLC, as present owner of the Subject Property, for itself and respective
successors and assigns, hereby waives any statutory right which it may have to contest any such
assessment by the City of its maintenance costs on the basis of the benefit to portions of the
Subject Property.
4. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Agreement to the contrary, in the event the City
shall establish a policy for maintenance by the City of storm water quality treatment ponds
located elsewhere in the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, under which policy the costs of such
maintenance are to be paid either out of general City revenues or by collection of utility or
service fees or charges, then any owner of any portion of the Subject Property shall be entitled
to petition the City for the inclusion of the Water Quality treatment Pond under such
maintenance program, and the City shall consent to such request and thereupon authorize the
termination of this Agreement. The recording of a certified copy of the Resolution of the City
Council of the City which sets forth the consent and authorization described in the foregoing
sentence shall serve to terminate this Agreement, without further action on the part of any party
hereto.
5. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit
of, the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this document to be executed as of
the day and year first above written.
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
BRUGGEMAN PROPERTIES, LLC CITY OF PLYMOUTH
By: By:
McHUNTER CO., LLC
By: By:
Mayor
City Manager
2-
AGM94051. DOC
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was executed and acknowledged before me on this
day of , by and
Mayor and , respectively, of the
City of Plymouth, a Minnesota municipal corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing was acknowledge before me this day of
by , the
a corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the
of
Notary Public
3-
AGM94051.DOC
EXHIBIT A
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 1
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 2
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 3
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 4
Lots 1 and 2 Block 5
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 6
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 7
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 8
Lots 1 and 2 Block 9
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 10
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 11
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 12
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 13
Lots 1 and 2 Block 14
Lots 1 and 2 Block 15
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 16
Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 Block 17
4-
AGM94051.DOC
03 :57`u-, (-sn _s%n -
Page 1 of 2
Dwight Johnson
From: Bob Stein
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 9:20 AM
To: Dwight Johnson
Subject: Study Session Topic
Dwight, could you have the following information available at our Tues study session. I have been asked
asked to see if we can add Non Smoking again to our study session topics for.
Bob
City spotlight
Golden Valley makes Outdoor Recreational Facilities
Tobacco -Free During Youth Activities
On March 4, 2003, the Golden Valley City Council unanimously approved a recommendation from the city's
Open Space & Recreation Commission prohibiting the use of all tobacco products on city -owned
recreational facilities during organized youth activities. The new policy will apply to all "playing spaces,"
spectator viewing areas, and parent/supervisor resting areas.
TFYR, Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council (NWHHSC), and Golden Valley citizens assisted the
City of Golden Valley in the policy adoption process. TFYR has provided Golden Valley with permanent
metal signs for their recreational facilities to help them educate the community about the new policy.
Tobacco -Free Policies For Outdoor Youth Recreation Facilities
Make Sense. Here's Why:
Secondhand smoke harms everyone and kills thousands every year. Exposure to secondhand smoke is
the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States, killing approximately 53,000 people every
year.
Secondhand smoke is harmful in outdoor settings. According to Repace Associates, the country's leading
secondhand smoke experts, levels in outdoor public places can reach levels as high as those found in
indoor facilities where smoking is permitted (see next page).
Tobacco -free policies help change community norms. Tobacco -free policies establish the community norm
that tobacco use is not an acceptable behavior for young people or adults within the entire community.
Most Minnesota parents support tobacco -free policies for outdoor playgrounds. A 1998 survey showed
that 68% of Minnesota parents support smoking bans in outdoor playgrounds and 80% support a ban in all
public places where children are present.
Tobacco -free policies allow leaders to model healthy lifestyle choices. In a tobacco -free environment,
coaches and recreational leaders become tobacco -free role models that send a powerful message to youth
that tobacco use is not part of a healthy lifestyle.
Tobacco -free policies help break the connection between tobacco and sports. For years the tobacco
industry has sponsored sporting events and advertised at recreational events, misguiding young people's
perception of tobacco use. Research indicates that sporting events expose youth to extensive tobacco use
by people they view as positive role models.
City-wide policies create a consistent tobacco -free policy for all recreational facilities in the
community. Since school districts prohibit tobacco use on their facilities, a tobacco -free policy for city -
owned youth recreational facilities creates continuity and eliminates confusion about which facilities are
tobacco free. A tobacco -free policy also supports recreational organizations who already have an existing
policy and use the city's facilities.
Tobacco -free outdoor recreational facilities in Minnesota
Baxter
Golden Valley
Roseville
Bloomington
Maple Grove " Sartell
Brainerd " Owatonna
Sauk Rapids
4/7/2003
Page 2 of 2
Cohasset " Richfield " Saint Cloud
Eden Prairie " Rochester " Virginia
Tobacco -Free Youth Recreation
Association for Nonsmokers -Minnesota
651 646-3005 Toll -Free (within Minnesota) 866 345-9222
FAX 651 646-0142 tfyr@ansrmn.org
4/7/2003
Agenda Number: —S
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Laurie Ahrens, Assistant City Managerj
SUBJECT: Set Future Study Sessions
DATE: April 3, 2003, for Council study session of April 8, 2003
1. ACTION REQUESTED: Review the pending study session topics list and, if desired,
establish future special meetings or amend the topics list.
2. BACKGROUND: Attached is the list of pending study session topics, as well as calendars
to assist in scheduling.
Pending Study Session Topics
at least 3 Council members have approved the following study items on the list)
Meeting with CSM — April 29?
Other requests for study session topics:
Recycling Program — future program initiatives (requested by
EQC; after legislative session)
OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS
April 2003
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1 2 3 4 5
7:00 PM 7:00 PM HUMAN
PLANNING RIGHTS
COMMISSION, COMMISSION -
Council Chambers Council Chambers
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
PRIMAVERA
PLYMOUTH
FINE ARTS
COUNCIL
SHOW
Plymouth Creek
Center
PRIMAVERA
PLYMOUTH
FINE ARTS
COUNCIL
SHOW
Plymouth Creek
Center
DAYLIGHT
SAVINGS
COMMENCES-
set clocks ahead 1
hQDf
5:30 PM SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING:
DISCUSS POND
CLEANING OPTIONS AND
POLICY FOR HANDLING
DRAINAGE CONCERNS,
Public Safety Training
Room
7:00 PM REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING,
Council Chamhers
7:00 PM
EVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
COMMITTEE
ECIC), Plymouthy
Creek Center
LMC CITY DAY
AT THE
CAPITOL
700 PM HOUSING 11
REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY (HRA),
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM PARK 8 REC
ADVISORY COMMISSION
PRAC), Council Chambers
PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH
FINE ARTS COUNCIL
SHOW Plymouth Creek
Center
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
7:30 PM YOUTHEQUAWAIONN, 7:01 FM BOARD 01oundl Passover begins Good Friday
ADVISORY
COUNCIL, Council
Chambers 7:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING (IMMEDIATELY
BD. OF
at sunset
PRIMAVERA
FOLLOWINGEQUALIZATION): DISCUSS
1 AUDIT REPORT;
PLYMOUTH FINE
ARTS COUNCIL
REPORT ON 3RD SHE ET OF
ICE,Council Cinarn a
SHOW, Plymouth
Creek Center PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE
ARTS COUNCIL SHOW,
PFAroIM Creek Center
20
Easter
21 22
5:30 PM SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING:
DISCUSS POSSIBILITY OF
ESTABLISHING A
6UA
SENSINESS
AND
OROCONICIL.
Public Safety Training
Room
23
8:00 AM -1:30 PM - HUMAN
RIGHTS COMMISSION
STUDENT WORKSHOP,
Plymouth Ice Center
7:D0 PM PLANNING
COMMISSION, Coundl
Chamber,
24 25 26
9:00 AM -2:00
PM LAWN &
GARDEN
EXPO, Plymouth
Creek Center
7:00 PM REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING,
Council Chambers
7:00 PM PLYMOUTH
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ON TRANSIT (PACT) -
Medicine Lake Room
27 20 29 30 Mar 2003 May 2003
7:30 PM
YOUTH
ADVISORY
COUNCIL,
Council
Chambers
11:45AM
BUSINESSCOUNCIL,
Sheraton Ridgedale
7:00 PM RECONVENE
BOARD OF
EQUALIZATION
Council Chambers
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
30 31
modified on 4/4/2003
OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS
Mav 2003
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
Jun 2003
S M T W T F S
1
7:00 HUMAN
RIGHTS
2 3
Apr 2003
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 COMMISSION -
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Council Chambers
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
27 28 29 30 29 30
4 5 6 7
7:00 PM
PLANNING
8
7:00 PM PARK &
REC ADVISORY
9 10
10:30 AM - 4:00
PM
COMMISSION, COMMISSION PLYMOUTH
Council Chambers PRAC), Council HISTORY
Chambers FEST, Parkers
Lake Park
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
9:00 AM -3:30
PM PLYMOUTH
CLEAN-UP
DAY, Public
Works
Maintenence
Facility
7:30 PM
YOUTH
ADVISORY
COUNCIL,
Council
Chambers
5:00 PM SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING-
INTERVIEW YOUTH
APPLICANTS; DISCUSS
PROPOSED EXPANSION
OF PUBLIC SAFETY
BUILDING; Public Safety
Training Room
7:00 PM REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING,
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
EVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
COMMITTEE
EQC), Plymouth
Creek Center
6:30 PM 41'30 PM
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FAIR. 091.-1Eemarnary
School, 176x0 Co. Ra.6
7:00 PMHOUSING6REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY(HRA), MWkne
LaleRoom
7:00 PM YOUTH SERVICE
AWARDS RECEPTION,
PtyrmAh Creak Garner
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
1:00 AM CITY EMPLOYEE
RECOGNITION LUNCH, 6:00 PM
GREENWOOD Plymouth Creek Center
SPORT FIELD
RIBBON
CUTTING
CEREMONY,
3635 CO, Rd,
101
7;00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION,
Council Chambers
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
MEMORIAL DAY
Observed) - City
Offices Closed
11.45 AM
PLYMOUTH-MTKA
BUSINESS COUNCIL,
BORN conference Room.
301
Carlson Parkway, 4th floor
7:00 PM
PLYMOUTH
ADVISORY
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSIT (PACT) -
Medicine Lake
7:00 PM REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING,
Council Chambers
Room
modified on 4/4/2003
OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS
June 2003
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7:00 PM
PLANNING
7:00 PM HUMAN
RIGHTS
COMMISSION, COMMISSION -
Council Chambers Council Chambers
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
7:30 PM
YOUTH
ADVISORY
COUNCIL,
Council
Chambers
7:00 PM
REGULAR
COUNCIL
MEETING, Council
Chambers
7:00 PM
EVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
COMMITTEE
EQC), Plymouth
Creek Center
7:00 PM PARK &
REC ADVISORY
COMMISSION
PRAC), Council
Chambers
Flag Day
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION,
Council Chambers
7:00 PM HOUSING 8
REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY (HRA),
Medicine Lake Room
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE, St. Cloud Civic Center
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
7:30 PM
YOUTH
ADVISORY
COUNCIL,
Council
Chambers
11:45 AM
PLYMOUTH-MTKA
BUSINESS
COUNCIL, Sheraton
Ridgedale
7:00 PM REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING,
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
PLYMOUTH
ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
TRANSIT (PACT) T) -
Medicine Lake
Room
2/ 30 May 2003 Jul 2003
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 27 28 29 30 31
modified on 4/4/2003