The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011/07/11 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA JULY 11, 2011 (Councilmember Finkelstein Out) 6:30 p.m. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations -- None 3. Approval of Minutes - - None 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items from Consent Calendar to regular agenda for discussion.) 5. Boards and Commissions - None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing - Off-Sale Liquor License - The Four Firkins Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve an off- sale intoxicating liquor license to The Four Firkins – Lagers, Ales and Wines, LLC, located at 5630 West 36th Street with the license term commencing after the closure date of the current licensed premises location at 8009 Minnetonka Boulevard through remainder of the license term ending on March 1, 2012. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Temporary Uses – 1st Reading Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the first reading of an ordinance allowing special events such as carnivals and festivals to operate for more than 14 days in a calendar year with City Council approval, and to set the second reading for July 18, 2011 9. Communication Meeting of July 11, 2011 Special City Council and Study Session Agenda Immediately following the Special City Council Meeting Tentatively 7:00 p.m. STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers Discussion Items 1. 7:00 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – July 25, 2011 2. 7:05 p.m. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan Discussion 3. 7:25 p.m. Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road 4. 7:55 p.m. Deer Management Policy 5. 8:35 p.m. Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies 6. 9:05 p.m. Change in Drug Task Force Affiliation 7. 9:30 p.m. Communications / Meeting Check-In (Verbal) 9:35 p.m. Adjourn Written Reports 8. Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Update 9. Sidewalk Repair Program Update 10. Wooddale Pointe Project Update Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at (952)924-2525 (TDD 952-924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting of July 11, 2011 Special City Council and Study Session Agenda 4. CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Approve the lease agreements between the City and Zayo Group, LLC (Zayo) for communication equipment at Elevated Water Tower #2 (EWT #2) located at 5100 Park Glen Road and at Elevated Water Tower #3 (EWT #3) located at 8301 W. 34th Street 4b. Approve for Filing Parks & Rec Advisory Commission Minutes April 6, 2011 4c. Approve for Filing Human Rights Commission Minutes April 26, 2011 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website. Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 4a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Antenna Equipment Lease Agreement with Zayo Group, LLC – EWT #2 at 5100 Park Glen Road & EWT #3 at 8301 W. 34th Street. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the lease agreements between the City and Zayo Group, LLC (Zayo) for communication equipment at Elevated Water Tower #2 (EWT #2) located at 5100 Park Glen Road and at Elevated Water Tower #3 (EWT #3) located at 8301 W. 34th Street. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to enter into the lease agreements with Zayo? BACKGROUND: History The City currently has 13 leases with 6 vendors for communication antennas and equipment on City water towers. Zayo is proposing to install equipment (no antennas) that connects to T-Mobile’s equipment to improve their communication network performance. These 2 leases are the first antenna equipment leases the City has negotiated with Zayo. These lease agreements are based on the City’s standard water tower antenna lease agreement earlier developed by the City. The City Attorney has assisted in the preparation and review of these lease agreements. EWT #2 located at 5100 Park Glen Road This agreement provides for the following: • Placement of equipment inside the tower on the equipment mezzanine. The equipment will be built, installed, and maintained by Zayo. • There will not be any antennas installed with this installation. • Five year initial lease term with four additional five year renewals. • Year 1 annual rent is $5,000 (July to December prorated amount will be $2,500.00). Subsequent year’s rent will have a 5% escalator for each year of the Agreement. Rent is subject to change if additional equipment or antennas are added in the future. There is also a one-time administrative fee of $2,000.00. • Right of pre-emption by the City if necessary for public safety communication needs. • Non-exclusive use allowing the City to lease available space to other providers. • Appropriate termination provisions, insurances and protections. Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 2 Subject: Antenna Equipment Lease Agreement with Zayo Group, LLC EWT #3 located at 8301 W. 34th Street This agreement provides for the following: • Placement of equipment under the tower adjacent to the other antenna equipment in a fenced area. The equipment will be built, installed, and maintained by Zayo. • There will not be any antennas installed with this installation. • Five year initial lease term with four additional five year renewals. • Year 1 annual rent is $5,000 (July to December prorated amount will be $2,500.00). Subsequent year’s rent will have a 5% escalator for each year of the Agreement. Rent is subject to change if additional equipment or antennas are added in the future. There is also a one-time administrative fee of $2,000.00. • Right of pre-emption by the City if necessary for public safety communication needs. • Non-exclusive use allowing the City to lease available space to other providers. • Appropriate termination provisions, insurances and protections. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Staff has negotiated these lease revenue amounts using the rent formula established for previous antenna contracts. The Year 1 lease rent amount is listed below, with a 5% escalation factor for each following year of the contract. The proceeds from the leases are deposited in the Water Fund. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: None Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: Ju1y 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 4b OFFICIAL MINUTES Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting April 6, 2011 7 p.m. – Meeting 1. Call to Order Christina Barberot, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. Commission members present: Christina Barberot, Jim Beneke, George Foulkes, George Hagemann, Kirk Hawkinson and Tom Worthington Commission members absent: Sam Flumerfelt and Steve Hallfin Staff present: Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director, Park Superintendent, Rick Beane, Environmental Coordinator, Jim Vaughan, and Administrative Secretary, Stacy Voelker. 2. Presentation: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (James Wisker) Mr. Wisker, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (“MCWD”), introduced himself. Mr. Wisker advised the water level in Minnehaha creek is controlled by the Gray’s Bay Dam on Lake Minnetonka and from snow melt off streets. The lake level on Lake Minnetonka is currently 930.22 and the one hundred year flood elevation is 931. Their model predicts back yard flooding will occur. The initial flood event was missed due to the freeze and thaw pattern. The second peak model predicts an all-time high level on Lake Minnetonka due to snow accumulation. The challenge is to balance the Lake and Creek. The dam is regulated by operating procedures and is practicing adaptive management by slowly letting out discharge to balance the water. Currently Mr. Wisker predicts the dam will need to be more open which will show with the high flows and try to minimize the potential flooding on both sides. The rain will make it difficult but the sun helps evaporate the water. Also, the dam was opened earlier than usual, in late February, with low flow. More information can be obtained by visiting the MCWD website (HUwww.minnehahacreek.orgUH) and viewing their interactive map. Mr. Wisker presented different initiatives around the Urban Creek Corridor Partnership via slide presentations. It shows the water originally comes from Lake Waconia through various channels to Minnehaha Creek. The Watershed District would like to expand the corridor, making more green space around the creek. Members previewed the land use change from the 1930’s to current, the Urban Creek policies and objectives, and their initiative in working toward making people aware of the creek and recreational trails by the creek. They would like the meandered creek to interact with the surrounding environment longer as meandering slows the water flow. Representatives from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District met with city staff to discuss drainage, trails, crossings, and to create a concept plan, Mr. Wisker advised. The District would like to meet with property owners of Target, Bremer Bank and Knollwood Mall to propose the creation of different overflow parking areas (with porous pavers) which are also storm water treatment. The proposal would include the creation of an urban forestry area. Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item 4b) Page 2 Subject: Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of April 6, 2011 Mr. Wisker advised the concepts are scheduled to be complete in late April, and ready to bring to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission after May. They will have a better idea of alignment, potential trail location, etc. Mr. Beneke inquired if the project is city funded to which Mr. Wisker advised the City and MCWD applied for and was awarded grant money so there will be no cost to the city. The Watershed District is benefited by having a great relationship with the city and county. Mr. Hagemann inquired on trail funding. Mr. Wisker indicated if trail sections are built and utilized, opportunity is created. Mr. Wisker encouraged members to attend a board meeting and write letters to encourage the District continue doing what they are doing. As a vast majority of MCWD projects are Capital items, requests to link the trails would be heard. Ms. Walsh thanked Mr. Wisker and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for all their work. Members thanked Mr. Wisker. 3. Approval of Minutes a. February 16, 2011 It was moved by Commission member Beneke seconded by Commission member Worthington to approve the Minutes. Motion passed 6 – 0. 4. New Business a. Community Open House – May 18 Mr. Beane advised members the Community Open House will be held Wednesday, May 18 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Municipal Service Center. Many departments are participating, along with the equipment division, the White Sidewalls, etc. Staff is finalizing plans and options at the event include working an interactive back hoe simulator for kids ages 5 to 12; permits will be available and general information from all departments. Ms. Walsh advised the last open house was held two years ago at The Rec Center. Council would like to hold an open house every two years at different locations. Ms. Walsh encouraged members to attend and contact staff if interested in volunteering. Mr. Vaughan advised it will be a zero waste event and will include stations to provide information on zero waste events. Mr. Worthington wondered if individuals would be interested in the MCWD presentation. Ms. Walsh will keep in mind or have easels with creek history on how it’s changed through the years. 5. Old Business a. Minnehaha Creek Clean Up Discussion Mr. Vaughan provided pictures from two years ago of the area to be cleaned. He requested all available arrive at 8:45 a.m. on Saturday, April 16 and as many people as possible are needed. Upon arrival, Mr. Vaughan will divide up into three sections with groups led by Commission members. Ms. Barberot, Mr. Hawkinson, Mr. Worthington, Mr. Foulkes, Mr. Hagemann, and Mr. Beneke confirmed their attendance. Ms. Barberot will approach Target to donate water. If not, staff will provide water. Staff will provide orange signs leading to clean up area, first aid kits, and clean up supplies. Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item 4b) Page 3 Subject: Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of April 6, 2011 b. Community Recreation Survey Results Ms. Walsh advised members 1,055 people replied to the Community Recreation survey which the consultant felt it was a good response. At Council’s March retreat, they discussed the results of survey. Two of the most popular themes that emerged include trails and sidewalks and facility types. The trail and sidewalk plan was presented to the old Council in the past and staff can bring back to the new Council to explain the plan and identify funds. A number of facilities were identified in the survey, Ms. Walsh advised, with the highest rating to include trails, indoor recreation space, natural open space, lighted athletic fields, and an indoor playground. Members were advised the Vision was phase I, the survey followed, and Decision Resources randomly calls residents with a few questions every other year. Decision Resources will make random calls this year in April and will include some clarification questions which emerged from the survey. Ms. Walsh indicated focus groups or a task force could be set up along with the questions included in the Decision Resources telephone survey. Council is committed to move forward with the survey results and spend time discussing functions versus facilities. Ms .Walsh offered to take Council members on a tour of other facilities in other cities. Ms. Walsh briefed members on various community centers and facilities/functions offered throughout nearby cities. The individuals, who requested indoor playgrounds, suggested something similar to Edinborough. Staff would like Council to see options. Locations, options, partnerships, etc. have yet to be discussed. The results of the survey shows the community is interested in open space, facilities, and park and recreation as a whole. Council is supportive and the public process is thorough. 6. Communications a. Chair Ms. Barberot inquired on a sign for the Rec Center skate shop. Ms. Walsh indicated staff is considering moving the skate shop to the area between the ice arenas and outside the Gallery. Discussions continue with staff, the Inspections Department and the Hockey Association on a partnership for volunteers. Kenwood Gymnastics will be at the Ice Cream Social, advised Ms. Barberot, to show tumbling and allow others to try also. The social will provide various entertainments at their May 15 event to be held from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. at Wolfe Park. b. Commissioners None. c. Friends of the Arts Update Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item 4b) Page 4 Subject: Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of April 6, 2011 Ms. Barberot indicated FOtA is working toward more publicity to get people aware of FOtA. d. Program Report Mr. Vaughan advised all 200 trees were sold in the third annual tree sale. The International Society of Arboriculture (“ISA”) is holding their annual conference in Sidney Australia July 23 – 28. The Minnesota Society of Arboriculture (“MSA”) is sponsoring Mr. Vaughan’s attendance to the conference. e. Director Report Westwood Hills Nature Center provided maple syrup samples for all members which were distributed. Ms. Walsh advised the Nature Center also offers a maple syrup program for school groups. Ms. Walsh advised the City will request Vision feedback for two to three weeks in May. Residents will be shown a short presentation and asked to provide feedback on the Vision St. Louis Park. Members were advised and invited to attend the combined ribbon cutting of the Wooddale bridge and celebrate the art on West 36th Street on Monday, May 16. They were also advised of the Park & Run to be held Saturday, May 14. Ms. Walsh indicated the PRAC goals were presented to Council on March 14. Council reviewed and asked the chair to return for a discussion after the Decision Resources survey is complete, on July 11. The City is hosting a national playground workshop to be held at The Rec Center. For hosting, two people from Park Maintenance will be trained for no charge. 7. Adjournment It was moved by Commission member Worthington to adjourn at 8:43 p.m. The motion passed 6 - 0. Respectfully submitted, Stacy Voelker Stacy Voelker Recording Secretary Meeting Date: Ju1y 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 4c City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Minutes – April 26, 2010 Westwood Room, City Hall I. Call to Order Chair Morgan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Commissioners Present: Darla Aman, Lordia Fok, Joseph Glaab, Brian Johnson, Stuart Morgan and Jeff Mueller Commissioners Absent: Alison Knoche Prosser, Isabella Stewart and Mary Tomback Staff: Marney Olson, Lt. Lori Dreier and Amy Stegora-Peterson B. Approval of Agenda Ms. Olson noted the Community Resource discussion would be moved to the next meeting. It was moved by Commissioner Mueller, seconded by Commissioner Morgan, to approve agenda as presented amended. The motion passed 6-0. C. Approval of Minutes It was moved by Commissioner Glaab, seconded by Commissioner Morgan, to approve the minutes of March 15, 2011, as presented. The motion passed 6-0. II. Commissioner and Committee Reports A. Individual commissioner and staff reports - None III. Ice Cream Social (Sunday, May 15th) & Community Open House Planning (Wednesday, May 18th) Ms. Olson indicated community events are a good way for commissioners to educate the community about their function and role. They provide handouts, the diversity lens, brochures, etc. The City Council encourages the commission to do outreach and education. The events are fun and they join with the Police Advisory Commission to share the tables. Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item 4c) Page 2 Subject: Human Rights Commission Minutes of April 24, 2011 IV. Film Committee Chair Morgan described how the film series had been done in the past. A film is chosen that will benefit the city and educate community members. The sub committee will choose the film and organize a speaker. Staff and the rest of the commission help advertise the event. Commissioners Glaab, Johnson and Mueller agreed to work on the Film sub committee. The goal is to show a film in September or October. V. Community Resource List – Moved to June VI. HRC Website Ms. Olson displayed the web site and discussed the information currently available (the commission’s mission and meeting dates). They would like to include more information including the brochures and fliers and the revised contact and resource list. It was also suggested to include a “submission mailbox” for other suggestions. VII. New Business Commissioner Morgan indicated he was moving out of the country and would no longer be a member of the HRC. Lt. Dreier reported that a Bias crime occurred in April, which involved the suspicion of discrimination because of sexual orientation and bullying at school. The Police Department is looking into it. The victim’s house had been egged twice. The HRC will send a letter to the victim. VIII. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy L. Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 6a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Public Hearing - Off-Sale Liquor License - The Four Firkins. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve an off-sale intoxicating liquor license to The Four Firkins – Lagers, Ales and Wines, LLC, located at 5630 West 36th Street with the license term commencing after the closure date of the current licensed premises location at 8009 Minnetonka Boulevard through remainder of the license term ending on March 1, 2012. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to approve the off-sale intoxicating liquor license to The Four Firkins? BACKGROUND: The City received an application from The Four Firkins – Lagers, Ales and Wines, LLC for an off-sale intoxicating liquor license operating at 5630 36th Street West in the Harmony Vista Building. The Four Firkins currently operates at 8009 Minnetonka Boulevard in a small storefront and has held an off-sale intoxicating liquor license since 2008. The new location will provide approximately 1800 total square feet (twice the previous space). Jason Alvey is the sole officer and plans to begin construction activities at his new location upon city approval of the liquor license. The licensee will remain at the current licensed premises location until the building at the new location is ready for occupancy. The new location license term will begin on opening day after closure of the current location at 8009 Minnetonka Boulevard. In May of 2011, The Four Firkins was one of seven businesses honored with a “Small Business Excellence” award for showing outstanding success, strength and tenacity from the SCORE Association, the Small Business Administration, and Wells Fargo Bank. The Police Department has run a full background investigation and has found no reason to deny the new ownership based on the investigation. The application and Police report are on file in the Office of the City Clerk should Council members wish to review the information prior to the public hearing. The required notice of the public hearing was published June 23, 2011. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Fees for this applicant include $500 for a new license investigation fee and a $380 off-sale license fee (pro-rated). VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable Attachments: None Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 8a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Temporary Uses – 1st Reading. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt the first reading of an ordinance allowing special events such as carnivals and festivals to operate for more than 14 days in a calendar year with City Council approval, and to set the second reading for July 18, 2011. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council agree with the ordinance change to allow special events to extend beyond 14 days with conditions and City Council approval? BACKGROUND: Current Ordinance: The existing section of the ordinance titled “Carnivals, festivals and promotional events” allows events to operate for up to 14 days per calendar year. The event is approved administratively, and may require additional permits for tents, food and other uses as needed. Events in public parks, closed right-of-ways, and events that fall within the parameters specified in an approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) are exempt from this requirement. Proposed Ordinance: The purpose of the proposed amendment is to: 1. Allow the City Council to approve events that will last more than 14 days in a calendar year. 2. List the conditions that must be met for an event of more than 14 days to be approved by the City Council. Conditions include site plan approval, financial guarantee, application fees etc. 3. Allow the City Council to approve a temporary sign plan that varies from the temporary signage regulations found in the sign code. 4. Clarify the definition of Carnivals and Festivals by removing “promotional events.” Promotional events, such as extended or seasonal sales conducted by private businesses, are not covered under this approval process. Sales events are allowed under a separate provision of the city code called “Temporary outdoor sales.” As a result of the proposed amendment, carnivals and festivals that do not exceed 14 days per calendar year will continue to be handled administratively. Also, events occurring in public parks, closed right-of-ways, and PUDs will continue to be exempt from the need for a temporary use permit. The proposed amendment will add provisions to allow the City Council to approve carnivals and festivals that exceed 14 days in duration with listed conditions. Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Temporary Uses – 1st Reading Planning Commission Action: A public hearing was held at the July 6, 2011 Planning Commission meeting. No comments were received at the public hearing, and the Commission recommended approval of the ordinance. Application Fee: An application for an event to extend beyond 14 days would require additional review by city staff and the City Council. To cover these expenses, staff is proposing a new fee for the application in the amount of $1,000. This fee is proposed to be the same amount required for minor amendments to CUPs and PUDs, because the amount of time spent on the application is similar. Extended special permits (if approved as proposed), CUPs and PUDs require staff review and City Council approval, they are not reviewed by the Planning Commission, and a public hearing is not required. A Resolution amending the fee schedule will be included with the 2nd reading of the zoning ordinance amendment. In addition to the application fee, city code allows the city to charge the applicant for any additional expenses incurred by the city beyond standard staff and City Council time. Recommendation: Approval of the attached Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow special events such as carnivals and festivals to operate for more than 14 days in a calendar year with City Council approval, and to set the 2nd reading for July 18, 2011. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: An application fee would cover staff and City Council time required for the application. Expenses above and beyond standard review can also be recovered from the applicant prior to approval of the request. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to promoting arts and culture and building community. Extending special events in excess of 14 days, when appropriate, will help meet this goal. Attachments: Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Temporary Uses – 1st Reading Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 3 Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Temporary Uses – 1st Reading ORDINANCE NO. ______-11 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 36-82 and 36-142 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 11-14-ZA). Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 36-82 and 36-142 are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language. Section breaks are represented by ***. Section 36-82 Temporary uses. *** (b) Authorized temporary uses. A structure or land in any use district may be used for one or more of the following temporary uses if the use complies with the conditions stated in this chapter: *** (4) Carnivals, and festivals and promotional events. a. Carnivals, and festivals, and promotional events, including community art fairs, shall not be permitted for more than 14 days in any calendar year except in public parks or closed right-of-way as approved by the city or as specified by PUD approval. The City Council may approve events lasting more than 14 days at any other location with the following conditions: 1. Approval of a site plan showing compliance with city code; 2. Approval of a public safety plan, including traffic control, fire protection and security of the site and area; 3. Approval of a clean up and restoration plan; 4. Other conditions to address the public health, safety, welfare and community impacts from the use, including any sound and vibration impacts to surrounding properties; 5. A financial guarantee, in an amount determined by the Zoning Administrator or City Council, may be required to ensure compliance with and/or completion of the approved plans; 6. Payment of all required application fees. b. Carnivals, and festivals, and promotional events shall be permitted within the required the front yard, side yard, andor rear yard; except where prohibited under section 36-76. Carnivals,and festivals, and promotional events shall not be allowed within the public right-of-way unless such right-of-way will be closed for the event as approved by the city. Special City Council Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 4 Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Temporary Uses – 1st Reading c. All signage must meet the temporary signage provisions found in Section 36- 362(h)(3).; a sign plan for carnivals and festivals lasting longer than 14 days may vary from the temporary signage provisions if approved by the City Council. *** Section 36-142. Descriptions. *** (g) Temporary uses. The following are typical of the temporary uses referred to in this chapter: *** (4) Carnivals, and festivals and promotional events means Carnivals, festivals, community art fairs, and other activities that include uses such as tents and stands used for entertainment, amusement rides, and/or display and the sale of food and merchandise., and amusement rides permitted for a period not exceeding 14 days. This use shall not include sales or promotional events offered by businesses with the intent of selling product or services identical or similar to those typically sold or conducted on the lot. Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 11-14-ZA are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing July 6, 2011 First Reading July 11, 2011 Second Reading July 18, 2011 Date of Publication July 28, 2011 Date Ordinance takes effect August 12, 2011 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 1 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – July 25, 2011. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the regularly scheduled Study Session on July 25, 2011. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agenda as proposed? BACKGROUND: At each study session, approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed discussion items for the regularly scheduled Study Session on July 25, 2011. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: None. Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning July 25, 2011 Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Subject: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – July 25, 2011 Study Session – Monday, July 25, 2011 – 6:30 p.m. Tentative Discussion Items 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes) 2. Dial-A-Ride Program – Community Development (30 minutes) Consideration of the initiative to expand Dial-A-Ride Program, which would provide door- to-door, dial-a-ride services to all residents of St. Louis Park, and the funding contributions that would be required. 3. Communications/Meeting Check-In – Administrative Services (5 minutes) Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session agenda for the purposes of information sharing. Reports: June 2011 Monthly Financial Report Quarterly Investment Report Semi-Annual Housing Report End of Meeting: 7:10 p.m. Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 2 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan Discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION: This report summarizes work performed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (“PRAC”) in 2010 and outlines the intentions of PRAC for work to be performed in 2011. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are the actions of the PRAC in alignment with the expectations of the City Council? BACKGROUND: At the March 14 Study Session, Council reviewed the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commissions (PRAC) 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan. At that time, Council indicated a desire to meet with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. Councilmember Sanger suggested adding sidewalks and trails to the Commissions 2011 Work Plan. That item has been added to the goals for 2011. PRAC chair, Christina Barberot, and Parks and Recreation staff will be in attendance at the meeting. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission considers matters pertaining to long-range park and recreation plans, and may offer recommendations in new development areas in relation to park and recreation space. The City Council may request the Commission to study and provide advice on other related items. The Commission consists of seven regular members and one voting youth member. Meetings are held the third Wednesday of each month at 7 p.m. In accordance with Council policy, the 2010 Year End Report and 2011 Work Plan are attached in full for City Council review. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: The 2011 PRAC Work Plan addresses participation in several focus areas of the Vision Process including being a connected and engaged community; being a leader in environmental stewardship; and promoting and integrating arts, culture and community aesthetics in all city initiatives. Attachments: Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2010 Year End Report Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2011 Work Plan Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Administrative Secretary Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Subject: Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (“PRAC”) 2010 Year End Report The Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Purpose: The Commission shall study and consider all phases of public parks and recreation and recommend to the City of St. Louis Park and Independent School District #283 a park and public recreation program which best meets the needs of all residents of St. Louis Park. 2010 Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission George Hagemann, City Representative, Chair Christina Barberot, City Representative, Vice Chair Sam Flumerfelt, Student Representative George Foulkes, School Representative Steve Hallfin, City Representative Kirk Hawkinson, City Representative Tom Worthington, City Representative Vacant, School Representative Parks and Recreation Department Staff Cindy Walsh, Director Rick Beane, Park Superintendent Rick Birno, Recreation Superintendent Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager Craig Panning, Manager of Buildings and Structures Jim Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator Stacy Voelker, Administrative Secretary 2010 Highlights Youth Association and city organization representatives attend Commission meetings and provide updates from their associations or organizations. Ideas to foster better relationships with participants, other associations and the city are also discussed. In 2010, the Commission met with the Lacrosse Association, Dakota Canine Club and he Baseball Association. Concentrating on creating a green environment initiated discussions between members and staff which included the type of recycling containers to include in parks. Staff set out various types of containers in parks to find out which is most utilized. Members reviewed the statistic and provided location suggestions to staff which were utilized in 2010. Commission members visited the idea of installing artificial turf in the High School stadium at the same time Benilde-St. Margaret’s school added it to their field. In response to the inquiry staff conducted a turf feasibility study. Staff and members continued to discuss and included questions on turf in the Community Recreation Study conducted in January of 2011. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Subject: Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan A Community Recreation Study was created, with the assistance of the Commission, to obtain feedback from the community on what residents would like to see included in St. Louis Park. Staff and the Commission worked with a consultant to develop questions presented to residents via the survey in January of 2011. The West End developers proposed a 120-unit apartment complex in the West End area. Members reviewed the proposal and acquired $80,500 in park and trail dedication fees for park dedication. Members worked with staff to stay apprised of the spread of Emerald Ash Borer and educational opportunities regarding the disease. Staff prepared and distributed flyers and information via the website for residents to instruct what to look for in Ash trees and when to remove a potentially susceptible tree. Commission members reviewed and discussed art pieces that were added throughout the city. Along with the Ellipse on Excelsior by Norman Andersen, public art added includes a “Green Mosaic” in The Rec Center entrance created by Stacia Goodman, and the streetscape art project along West 36th Street by Marjorie Pitz. Commission member, George Hagemann, is a Friends of the Arts liaison and updates the Commission regularly. Staff and members discussed overcrowding at the Oak Hill Splash Pad in 2010. By taking residential concerns into consideration, a new policy was created that provides residents use of the Splash Pad for no charge while charging non-residents a slight fee and restricting group use. The annual Minnehaha Creek cleanup was held on Saturday, April 17 and volunteers cleaned up the creek area by the Knollwood Mall canoe landing. Commission member obtained refreshment donations from Target for the event. It was estimated approximately 100 individuals volunteered at the cleanup which was great success. Commission members assisted staff in working with the four baseball associations (American Legion, Traveling league, Little League, and Babe Ruth) to merge the individual associations into one Baseball Association. The merger was finalized in 2009 and the association moved forward in 2010 by creating bylaws and adding board members. Throughout the year, staff presented and discussed Capital Improvement Projects with the Commission. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Subject: Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan 2011 Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Work Plan 2011 Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Christina Barberot, City Representative, Chair Tom Worthington, City Representative, Vice Chair James Beneke, School Representative Sam Flumerfelt, Student Representative George Foulkes, School Representative George Hagemann, City Representative Steve Hallfin, City Representative Kirk Hawkinson, City Representative 2011 Goals ¾ Athletic Association Relationship: Invite each association to their monthly meetings to continue a positive relationship. ¾ Athletic Association Research: Research how to further support association dissemination of information to reduce costs. ¾ Commissions: Meet with other commissions as appropriate. ¾ Community Recreation Survey: Review survey results and assist in moving forward with indicated priorities. ¾ Minnehaha Creek Clean-Up: Organize a cleanup of the creek and creek shores. ¾ Park User Group Relationship: Assist in facilitating interested groups and other park and recreation users (i.e. Friends of the Arts, Off-Leash Dog Park users, Historical Society, etc.). ¾ Playground Replacement Program: Encourage utilizing the Playground Replacement Program through “Kids around the World’ by evaluating playgrounds to be replaced and advising which could be utilized in another country. ¾ Recreation Resources: Invite Council to participate in exploring the city’s recreation resources (i.e. bike ride, canoe trip). ¾ Staff Appreciation Luncheon: Serve an appreciation luncheon for staff. ¾ Trails and Sidewalks: Be involved in the further study and exploration of trails and sidewalks in the City to further the desires of the residents as stated in the Community Recreation Study. Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 3 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road. RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required. Staff from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District will be in attendance to present the creek restoration plans to the Council. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council support the proposed re-meander of Minnehaha Creek, grading for a potential future trail, and construction of proposed stormwater management practices for the creek segment between Louisiana Avenue and Meadowbrook Road? BACKGROUND: In the summer of 2010 the City was approached by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (“MCWD”) about a potential restoration/re-meander of Minnehaha Creek between Louisiana Avenue and Meadowbrook Road. The creek channel was straightened during the industrial development of St. Louis Park. Re-meandering will restore the creek to a more natural channel and slow the conveyance of water runoff, while improving the floodplain characteristics of the creek. In addition to the structural improvements of re-meandering, three other environmental aspects will improve by moving forward with the project. The other three major improvements include stream bank stabilization, storm water management, and vegetative restoration. Taken together, these improvements will reduce erosion around the creek, reduce the amount of sediment and nutrients entering the creek, and improve habitat characteristics for wildlife within the creek corridor. Following the initial meeting, MCWD identified the state’s Clean Water Fund as a potential additional funding source. With MCWD assistance, the City applied for and received a grant of $300,000 from the State Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) through the Clean Water Fund. Funding for the grant is provided through the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment which was approved by Minnesota voters in 2008. The 2011 Clean Water Fund grant has a two-year term, and will fund the majority of the construction work associated with the re-meander. If approved, construction would move forward in late 2011 and early 2012 as work must be performed in winter when the ground is frozen. The City will serve as administrator for the grant, while the MCWD will manage the project consultants and contractors. MCWD is funding the engineering work associated with the project, and will cover project costs that exceed the available funding. Other matching funds provided by MCWD include the purchase of property at 7202/7252 Excelsior Boulevard in 2010, which will be used for wetland restoration and a portion of the creek meander. That site was formerly approved as a development site for the Meadowbrook Lofts condominiums. When the MCWD was interested in purchasing this property, the City Council endorsed the purchase for the preservation of wetland. This allows the area to stay in its natural state rather than being developed. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road PROJECT ENGINEERING: Preliminary engineering work included soil testing along the route of the proposed re-meander. The initial test results showed no major contamination in this area; however, MCWD has requested that the project engineers conduct several additional soil tests to verify the results. Other engineering and design work on the project is close to completion. The concept plans are attached for review. Storm water treatment areas are depicted on page five of the attachment. PROPOSED TRAIL: The project includes an option for a trail along the creek. A trail in this part of the City has long been included in the goals section of the Comprehensive Plan, and would conform to the recent Sidewalk and Trails planning work. There are three reasons why a trail along the segment of creek between Louisiana Avenue and Meadowbrook Road may be feasible: • The land under consideration for a trail is fully under public ownership. • Grading and landscape modifications associated with the re-meander may be able to incorporate the initial grading for a trail as part of this project, at no cost to the City. • A connection to the City's existing trail system along the creek, adjacent to Methodist Hospital, is possible in this location. The trail location is depicted on page five of the attachment. Two options are depicted. The first is for a trail on the north side of the creek that would be a primary conduit for traffic along the creek, which could be gravel or asphalt. The second is for a trail that would loop to the south through a wetland area. Portions of the south loop trail would need to be constructed as boardwalk to preserve the environmental characteristics of the wetland area. Although the re-meander project could possibly complete much of the grading work for a trail, the project costs funded by the BWSR grant and the MCWD would not include the installation of a gravel or asphalt trail. However, the Parks and Recreation Department is reviewing opportunities for funding such a trail in the future. During the project, City staff would like to see the grading completed which would minimize the costs of a future trail connection. This trail segment could eventually be connected to the Southwest LRT Regional Trail. Such a connection would require collaboration with Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County. CANOE LANDING - CREEKSIDE PARK: Initial plans for the creek re-meander called for minor modifications to the canoe landing at Creekside Park, just west of the City's Municipal Service Center. Through discussions and project development, it does not appear at this time that there will be major impacts to the canoe landing. Staff intends to continue to work on the design plans with MCWD and the project consultants to monitor the grading work for this area of the creek. If there is a need to modify the canoe landing, it would be critical that it remain fully accessible and in generally the same location to allow citizens to use the parking lot at Creekside Park for drop-off/pick-up. The District is exploring options to include a handicap accessible canoe launch at the Louisiana Avenue site. PUBLIC PROCESS & FUTURE STEPS: Representatives from MCWD have met with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission in April and June. Comments from the committee were generally positive. MCWD Staff plans to coordinate with City staff following Council review of the proposal to set up a neighborhood meeting for input and review of the design before its completion. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Page 3 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road The City Attorney is working on an agreement with MCWD to allow the City to provide the grant funds directly to MCWD as the project moves forward. Staff will bring forward that agreement for Council approval in August. In addition to the agreement, the project will also be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit for excavation and fill. It is likely that the CUP application would move forward in September or October. Construction on the project would then occur in December, 2011, and January 2012. District staff will discuss the potential phasing of this project during their presentation to Council on July 11. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City is not providing any direct financial support to this project, although City staff are providing input and grant administration. If a trail is desired as part of the project, the grant funds may be sufficient to complete the grading, but will not provide funding for laying a limestone or paved surface along the trail. The Parks and Recreation Department has indicated that funding for such a trail could be included in the future Capital Improvements Plan. In the long term, staff has requested that the project engineers focus on designing a trail that includes minimal amounts of boardwalk or raised sections. Maintenance costs for boardwalk tend to be higher than for a well constructed at-grade trail; additionally, winter access along a boardwalk would not be possible. VISION CONSIDERATION: The proposed re-meander, its associated environmental attributes, and the potential for trail construction along the creek meet various Vision goals. The project would enhance the City’s environmental stewardship of Minnehaha Creek, and, by bringing residents closer to the creek, increase environmental consciousness within the community. The project would also help develop the city’s network of trails. Attachments: Creek Reach 20-21 Restoration Concept Plans (10 pages) Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Planner Jim Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Laura Adler, Engineering Program Coordinator Scott Brink, City Engineer Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Minnehaha Creek Reach 20-21 Restoration Concept Plan Prepared by:In association with: Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 4 PROPOSED CONDITIONS MINNEHAHA CREEK PLAN VIEW TRAILS AND LRT CONNECTION COTTAGEVILLE PARK EXPANSION APPROXIMATE LONG-TERM CORRIDOR TRAIL PLAN EXISTING MAIN SIDEWALK CONNECTOR POTENTIAL LRT CONNECTION EDGEBROOK PARK PROPOSED LOOP TRAIL PROPOSED REACH 20 RESTORATION AREA EXISTING METHODIST HOSPITAL WETLAND AND BOARDWALK TRAIL OPTIONAL LOOP OPTION #2 OPTION #1 SOUTH OAK POND AREA OAKS PARK CONNECTION Healthy and vibrant communities link people with the environment. Communities along the Minnehaha Creek corridor, including Hopkins and St. Louis Park, are connected by roads, sidewalks, trails, rails and the creek itself. The long term vision presented here features new trails that connect to existing walk paths and bring people from multiple communities into close contact with the natural amenities of the Minnehaha Creek corridor. u$0LQQHKDKD&UHHNFRUULGRUWUDLOV\VWHPZRXOGDOORZYLVXDOO\SOHDVLQJ connections between neighborhoods, and would connect several parks. Cottageville Park, Oakes Park, Edgewood Park and the natural areas at South Oak Pond and Methodist Hospital would all be joined by a river corridor trail that could be used for biking, hiking and canoe access. u$UDLOFRUULGRUGLVVHFWV0LQQHKDKD&UHHNEHWZHHQ%ODNH5RDGDQG/RXLVLDQD Avenue. A light rail transit (LRT) stop in this area could service the surrounding neighborhoods while giving residents the opportunity to walk along the creek path in either direction. The exact location of the LRT stop is not known, but multiple opportunities exist for a stop along this segment of channel. u&URVVLQJEXV\URDGVFDQEHGDQJHURXVDQGWDNHVDZD\IURPD positive trail experience. By installing crossings under new bridges or in elevated walkways, residents and commuters could have safer and more efficient access to the Knollwood Mall/Target area, Blake Road businesses, parks and light rail connections. The exact nature and location of such crossings is a consideration for the long-term connectivity of the trail system. EXISTING REGIONAL TRAIL In association with: POTENTIAL LRT CONNECTION MEADOWBROOK ROADOXFOR D S T R E E T W EXCELSIOR BLV D .LOUISIANA AVE SBLAKE ROAD NTEXAS AVENUE SLAKE S T R E E T N E HIGHWAY 7 EDGEB R O O K D RI V E POTENTIAL TRAIL CONNECTION POTENTIAL TRAIL CONNECTOR 3 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS MINNEHAHA CREEK FLOW LOUISIANA AVE SMEADOWBROOK ROADEXCELSIOR BLV D . MINNEHAHA CREEK EXISTING CHANNEL OXFOR D S T R E E T W PLAN VIEW EXISTING CONDITIONS AND STAGING LOUISIANA CIRCLE EXISTING CANOE LAUNCH EXISTING CANOE LAUNCH EXISTING STORMWATER DETENTION AREAS STAGING AREA STAGING AREA STAGING AREA In association with: BRIDGE BRIDGE PUBLIC PARKING AND ACCESS CREEKSIDE PARK 4 POTENTIAL LRT CONNECTION Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 6 PROPOSED CONDITIONS MINNEHAHA CREEK SHEET 6 SHEET 7FLOW LOUISIANA AVE SEXCELSIOR BL V D . MINNEHAHA CREEK PROPOSED CHANNEL OXFOR D S T R E E T PROPOSED WETLAND AREA PLAN VIEW PROPOSED CONDITIONS RETAIN OR REBUILD EXISTING CANOE LAUNCH AS NEEDED LEGEND PROPOSED WETLAND AREA PROPOSED CREEK CHANNEL PARCEL LINES PROPOSED POOLS PROPOSED SPAWNING RIFFLE FABRIC ENCAPSULATED SOIL LIFTS EXISTING SIDEWALKS EXISTING STORM SEWER LINE AND MANHOLES PROPOSED PIPE CONNECTION PROPOSED 36" PIPE CONNECTION PRETREATED SETTLEMENT POOL F L OW PROPOSED BRIDGE CROSSING LOUISIANA CIRCLE FILTRATION BERM PROPOSED PIPE CONNECTION PROPOSED 12" RCP STORM SEWER FILTRATION BERM EXISTING 54" STORM SEWER EXISTING 36" STORM SEWER EXISTING 15" POND OUTLET EXISTING 15" POND OUTLET EXISTING 42" DIA. PIPE ALTERNATIVE TRAIL LOOP SEGMENT PROPOSED TRAIL In association with: WOODY DEBRIS (TYP.) RETAIN OR REBUILD EXISTING CANOE LAUNCH AS NEEDED PROPOSED STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA PROPOSED STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA PROPOSED STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA PROPOSED OPTIONAL TRAIL SEGMENT PROPOSED TRAIL 5 PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTION POTENTIAL LRT CONNECTION PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTION Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 7 FLOWEXCELSI O R B L V D. MINNEHAHA CREEK PROPOSED CHANNEL PROPOSED CONDITIONS MINNEHAHA CREEK SUBREACH 1 PLAN VIEW PROPOSED CONDITIONS FILL EXISTING CANNEL PROPOSED VERNAL POOL PROPOSED WETLAND AREA PROPOSED CREEK CHANNEL PARCEL LINES PROPOSED POOLS PROPOSED SPAWNING RIFFLE EXISTING PIPES PROPOSED PIPES FABRIC ENCAPSULATED SOIL LIFTSNATURAL LEVEE CONSTRUCTED WITH COTTONWOOD, WILLOW & SILVER MAPLE PLANTINGS SIMPLE GRADING AND FABRIC PLACEMENT, NATIVE PLANTINGS RELOCATE EXISTING CANOE LAUNCH PROPOSED PIPE CONNECTION PROPOSED 36" PIPE CONNECTION PROPOSED BRIDGE CROSSING EXISTING 15" POND OUTLET ALTERNATIVE TRAIL LOOP SEGMENT PROPOSED ALTERNATE TRAIL LOOP NATURAL LEVEE PROPOSED WETLAND AREA PROPOSED RIPARIAN VEGETATION SECONDARY STAGING PROPOSED STAGING AREA LEGEND In association with: WOODY DEBRIS (TYP.) PROPOSED STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA PROPOSED OPTIONAL TRAIL SEGMENT PROPOSED TRAIL 6 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 8 PROPOSED CONDITIONS MINNEHAHA CREEK SUBREACH 2FLOWLOUISIANA AVE SFILL EXISTING CHANNEL PLAN VIEW PROPOSED CONDITIONS PROPOSED WETLAND AREA PROPOSED CREEK CHANNEL PARCEL LINES PROPOSED POOLS PROPOSED SPAWNING RIFFLE EXISTING PIPES PROPOSED PIPES FABRIC ENCAPSULATED SOIL LIFTS NATURAL LEVEE CONSTRUCTED WITH COTTONWOOD, WILLOW & SILVER MAPLE PLANTINGS SIMPLE GRADING AND FABRIC PLACEMENT, NATIVE PLANTINGS CANOE LAUNCH PROPOSED BRIDGE CROSSING LOUISIANA CIRCLE PROPOSED CHANNEL PRETREATED SETTLEMENT POOL PROPOSED FES LIFTS PROPOSED PIPE CONNECTION PROPOSED 12" RCP STORM SEWER FILTRATION BERM EXISTING 54" STORM SEWER EXISTING 36" STORM SEWEREXISTING 36" DIA. PIPE EXISTING 42" DIA. PIPE NATURAL LEVEE PROPOSED RIPARIAN VEGETATION LEGEND In association with: WOODY DEBRIS (TYP.) PROPOSED STAGING AREA PROPOSED STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA PROPOSED STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA PROPOSED OPTIONAL TRAIL SEGMENT PROPOSED TRAIL 7 MEADOWBROOK POND Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 9 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 10 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 11 FLOWMINNEHAHA CREEK PROPOSED CONDITIONS MINNEHAHA CREEKPLAN VIEW PROPOSED CONDITIONS PROPOSED VERNAL POOL RELOCATE EXISTING CANOE LAUNCH PROPOSED BRIDGE CROSSING SECONDARY STAGING Recreational Boating Opportunities Threading through the heart of the west metro area, Minnehaha Creek offers a unique experience for recreational boaters. Making the creek more accessible to canoeing and kayaking is a long-term maintenance goal of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and surrounding communities. The plan for Reach 20 includes replacement of an existing canoe launch with one specifically designed for easy access. The stepped design shown here allows for low water boat entry over a range of water levels, and will be more convenient for people with limited mobility or small children. A trail will extend from the existing canoe launch parking lot, through the floodplain wetland and down to the streambank launch. This plan preserves the existing canoe launch locations in Reach 20, with some slight modifications. The Creekside Park trail connection will connect the parking lot with the stream, and may run along the main trail for a short distance. We anticipate a portage of no more than 150 feet. In association with: EXISTING PARKING LOT CREEKSIDE PARK 10 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 12 PROPOSED CONDITIONS MINNEHAHA CREEK PLAN VIEW PROPOSED CONDITIONS In-stream Habitat Features PROPOSED BRIDGE CROSSING PROPOSED FES LIFTS PROPOSED CHANNEL NATURAL LEVEE CONSTRUCTED WITH COTTONWOOD, WILLOW & SILVER MAPLE PLANTINGSFLOW - Logs and fallen wood make up an important part of the woodland stream ecosystem. Wood offers hiding cover for fish, nesting opportunities for waterfowl, perches for wading birds, and resting or hiding places for amphibians and reptiles. The Reach 20 design features low profile wood installation underneath banks on the outside of meander bends. In addition to providing valuable habitat, wood provides long term (10-20 years) stability of the bank, protecting the stream from immediate erosion. The wood will be placed low to the streambed, so that during boatable flows, canoes and kayaks will float over the top of the installed wood. Similar installations can be found just downstream of Louisiana Avenue in the restored section of the Methodist Hospital wetland. - Reach 20 is currently an important spawning reach for fish using Lake Minnetonka and Minnehaha Creek. These fish include sunfish, bass, suckers and various minnow species. Included in the design are riffles that provide spawning gravel of the size used regularly by these fish. - Streams that transport fine sediment and sand downstream often deposit this material on banks during floods. These deposits take the form of natural levees that might be a foot or two higher than the adjacent floodplain surface. Our design for Reach 20 repeats the work done in Reach 19 of the Methodist Hospital area project, where we included levee features to provide topographic variability. Levees offer slightly dryer wetland surfaces that promote the establishment of planted cottonwood, silver maple and black willow trees common to the riparian corridor. Typical Natural Levee Typical LWD during installation at Methodist Hospital Typical Riffle during installation at Methodist Hospital In association with: 11 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration - Louisiana Avenue to Meadowbrook Road Page 13 Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 4 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Deer Management Policy. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff desires direction from the City Council on changes it may wish to make to the City’s deer management policy. POLICY CONSIDERATION: What does the City Council want its deer management policy to accomplish? Is the City Council interested in changing any of the City’s deer management practices or current policy? BACKGROUND: The City of St. Louis Park has researched and taken action on the management of deer since 1993. Chronological information of previous discussions about deer management were provided for the City Council to review at their February 28, 2011 Study Session. At the February 28, 2011 meeting Council indicated its desire to talk more about deer management and some options for potential removal in areas of the City other than the Westwood Hills Nature Center. THINGS TO CONSIDER: The City Council can change or amend the policy at any time. The current policy was revised by the City Council in February of 1997. Permits for removing deer are obtained from the DNR each year as needed for the Nature Center. The DNR does not require public notification to remove deer. Most of the cities surveyed by staff do not notify the public when they remove deer. If the City Council would like to change the policy, the attached draft policy document shows potential changes that would allow for deer removal throughout the City. Any changes to the policy should be formally adopted at a City Council meeting. The City of Golden Valley is currently managing their deer population. Since deer do not stop at city boundaries, we could consider doing some joint removal with Golden Valley. Obtaining a joint permit would potentially help to manage numbers in both cities. Staff from both cities have spoken and are open to the possibility. CALCULATING NUMBERS: When the policy was adopted in 1997, the DNR based acceptable deer count on rural numbers. At that time, those were the only numbers available. Currently, many metropolitan cities are basing their acceptable numbers on the habitat available which is called the Biological Carrying Capacity (BCC). The BCC is the number of deer that an area can sustain without damaging habitat. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 4) Page 2 Subject: Deer Management Policy When thinking about how many deer are acceptable in an area, the DNR will issue permits to a city based on a calculated BCC for their area. Once an annual flyover occurs and the number of deer in an area is documented, a city can apply for a management permit to remove deer showing what their BCC is relative to how many deer are seen in the fly over. Staff has divided the City into six Deer Management Units (“DMU”). An attachment has been provided which explains each of these DMU areas by location and habitat and suggests what an acceptable number of deer would be in each of those areas. Jim Vaughan and Cindy Walsh will be available at the meeting to discuss potential changes to our existing policy. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Changes to our current practice may result in the need to budget additional money for 2012. Staff does not anticipate that any changes made will be cost prohibitive. VISION CONSIDERATION: Wildlife management falls under the second strategic direction “St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship”. Attachments: Potential Policy Change 2010/2011 Deer Numbers from Fly Over Deer Management Unit Locations and Goals Prepared by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 4) Page 3 Subject: Deer Management Policy ADOPTED PROVISIONS FOR AN ON-GOING DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (As revised by City Council on February 3, 1997, 2011) I. Population Reduction of Main Herd: The size of the deer herd in and around the Nature Center needs to be reduced to a level not less than the DNR recommended standard of 15-25 per square mile as soon as possible. A. Since the City is unable to get a DNR permit to transfer the deer elsewhere, the use of trained and experienced St. Louis Park Police Officers as sharpshooters at sites which are isolated and secured within the boundaries of the Nature Center is the safest and most humane means to achieve herd reduction. B. The Nature Center will be secured and signs will be posted to ensure the highest possible level of public safety. C. City Maintenance staff will field dress the animals and transport them to a location designated by the area’s DNR Conservation Officer. D. The animals will be professionally processed and all meat will be distributed to food shelves or other charitable organizations which serve needy families, whenever possible. II. I. Population Maintenance of Main Herd Deer: The herd size is to be maintained at the DNR recommended standard. A. The City will contract with Hennepin Parks Three Rivers Park District and/or the DNR on an annual basis to conduct a mid-winter aerial survey of the deer population throughout St. Louis Park. B. A viable method of immuno-contraception may be used to retard herd growth once such technology is approved and available. C. If viable contraceptive technology is not available, then the sharpshooting method as described above will be utilized and will continue on an annual basis until such contraceptive technology is available. D. In order to discourage movement of the deer from the Nature Center into adjoining neighborhoods and to reduce over-browsing there, a supplemental feeding program is to be established, preferably in areas where the deer are most likely to be seen by Nature Center visitors. B. E. To reduce predation on other public and private properties in and around the Nature Center, an ordinance banning residential feeding throughout the City has been adopted. The City will continue to enforce the current deer feeding ban on all properties. II. Deer Management in other Locations: Problems associated with excessive deer populations must be addressed in other locations throughout the community. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 4) Page 4 Subject: Deer Management Policy C. A. The City will use data produced from the annual mid-winter aerial survey to determine the size of the deer population in other areas. A permit from the DNR will be obtained by showing the City’s Biological Carrying Capacity (“BCC”) relative to how many deer are seen in the flyover. The BCC is the number of deer that an area can sustain without damaging habitat. The permit from the DNR is then issued for the difference between the number of deer that are seen in the flyover versus the BCC. D. B. On all other public properties, the City is to implement population reduction and maintenance methods which have been approved by the DNR and are deemed to be both safe and efficient in order to achieve desired population levels consistent with current Deer Management Units. not less than the DNR recommendation of 15-25 per square mile of habitat, contingent upon adequate notification procedures and Council approval. E. C. On private properties throughout the community, the City will, with full knowledge, consent and signature of the owner, make arrangements to implement the population reduction of deer. and maintenance methods described in Section 3(b) above to achieve population levels not less than the DNR recommendation of 15-25 per square mile, contingent upon adequate notification procedures and Council approval. Deer will be removed using St. Louis Park police officers or a contracted private company. All deer removed will be processed and transported to a designated food shelf or other charitable organizations to be distributed to those in need of venison. II. III. Other On-going Programs: Concerns about funding, public education and program continuity must also be addressed. A. In order to help pay the additional costs that an on-going deer management program entails, the City will create a “Deer Fund” which will enable interested residents and citizens to contribute toward keeping the City’s deer population controlled and well managed. Deer Fund contributors will be allowed to “earmark” their donation for specific programs if so desired. B. In the event that individual property owners need financial help to implement recommended procedures for reducing predation on their property, a request can be made to use Deer Fund monies. A. C. A comprehensive educational program has been developed by Parks and Recreation in conjunction with Community Education to keep the public informed on wildlife issues, with specific emphasis in the area of protecting private property from wildlife predation. B. D. The City staff will continue to work with the DNR and neighboring municipalities in an attempt to develop a unified strategy for dealing with this regional issue, and to ensure that the wildlife management efforts of St. Louis Park are not in conflict with the policies and programs of surrounding communities. Golden Valley - St. Louis Park - Theodore Wirth 0 0 0 1 11 23 15 SOO LINECANADIAN PACIFICCHICAGO NORTHWESTERN B U R L I N G T O N N O R T HERNTWIN CITIES WESTE R N SOO LINE SOO LINE BURLINGTO N N O R T H E R N §¨¦394 §¨¦394 £¤169 £¤169 ")100 ")55 ")7 ")7 ")55 ")100 ")7 ")100 UV3 UV40 UV81 UV17 UV102 UV25 UV156 UV70 UV66 UV20 UV5 UV153 UV25 36TH AVE N 32ND AVE N THOMAS AVE NWAYZATA B LV D C E D A R L A K E R D LEE AVE NLAUREL AVE UPTON AVE NREGENT AVE NNOBLE AVE NVINCENT AVE NKYLE AVE N38TH ST W WALKER ST DULUTH ST KILMER LN N36TH ST W MAJOR AVE NOLYMPIA ST 10TH AVE N TH E O D O RE W IR T H P KWY LAKE ST W G O L D E N VALLEY RDFRANCE AVE N27TH ST WTEXAS AVE SLILAC DR N23RD AVE N WESTERN AVE OXFORD STMENDELSSOHN AVE NFLAG AVE SCULVER RD HIGHWAY 7BOONE AVE NKELLY DR35TH AVE N ZENITH AVE SFLORIDA AVE SGEORGIA AVE SSUMTER AVE N40TH ST W PLY M O U TH AVE N LOUISIANA AVE NCEDAR LAKE PKWYVALDERS AVELA K E ST N EHAMPSHIRE AVE NCALHOUN PKWY WPENNSYLVANIA AVE NQUEBEC AVE NBRUNSWICK AVE NLIB R A R Y L NORKLA DRJERSEY AVE SUNITY AV E N GRIMES AVE N32ND PL N CAMBRIDGE ST HIGHWAY 100 SMCNAIR DRLOUI S I A NA AVE S 26TH AVE N TRITON D R HALIFAX AVE NCOUNTRY CLUB DR COLORADO AVE S16TH ST WZANE AVE NFLORIDA AVE N27TH AVE N 28TH AVE N KNOLL ST N HAROLD AVE ALABAMA AVE SVERNON AVE SYORK AVE NDREW AVE NXENIA AVE NYATES AVE NABBOTT AVE SSANDBURG RD 37TH ST W C E DAR LAKE RD SWES L E Y D R 29TH AVE N XERXES AVE NCEDAR LAKE AVE GOR H A M A V E R I D G EWAY RDMANOR DRVALLEY PL P A R K GLEN RDAQUILA AVE N32ND ST W PATSY LN 35TH ST W BELT LINE BLVD34TH ST W INGLEWOOD AVE STOLEDO AVE SKIPLING AVE SPARK PL A C E B LVD SCLUB RD B E TTY C R O CKER DR JOPPA AVE SHANLEY RDADAIR AVE NBROOKVIEW PKWYSUNS ET B LVDMEADOW LN NLOWRY AVE N 39TH ST W WINSDALE ST N BURNHAM RDANGELO DRPARKVIEW B LVD OAKD A L E A V E N EARL ST HUNTINGTON AVE SH I G H W A Y 5 5 ZENITH AVE NKENTUCKY AVE N2 8 T H S T W NORTH ST VIRGINIA CIR N VALE CREST RDXENIA AVE SMARYLAND AVE SXYLON AVE N30TH AVE N ZARTHAN AVE SDO U G LA S AVE YORK AVE SXERXES AVE SFLAG AVE NWINNETKA AVE SWELCOME AVE NTURNERS XRD NBA S SWOOD R D DIVISION ST EDGEBRO OK DR UPTON AVE SWESTWOOD DR SNEVADA AVE NAL T H E A LN 25 1/2 ST W HAMILTON ST CIRCLE DNS QUAIL AVE NBURNTSIDE DRPARKVIEW TERHILL PL N VICTORY MEMORIAL DRS UNSET RDGISLAND D R ZINRAN AVE S31ST ST W GOODRICH AVEAQUILA LN SUTAH AVE NGLENHURST AVE SGOLDEN HILLS DR BEARD AVE SMEADOW LN S3 1 ST A VE N TURNERS XRD SMAJOR DRABBOTT AVE NELIOT VIEW RD JULIANNE TERNATCHEZ AVE N1ST ST NWENSIGN AVE NUTICA AVE S2 3 R D ST W NORTHERN DR BYRD AVE N WESTBEND RD 26 1/2 AVE N WEBSTER AVE SXENWOOD AVE S26TH ST W 16TH AVE N 21ST AVE N FORD RDORCHARD AVE NM O N TE R EY D RNEVADA AVE S3 6 1/2 ST WYOSEMITE AVE SQUENTIN AVE SBOONE A V E S ANN LN B A S S E TT CREEK D R VALLACHE R A V ENATCHEZ AVE SFRANKLIN AVE W IDAHO AVE SLINDSAY ST SHERIDAN AVE SBEARD AVE N33RD PL N WINNETKA AVE NRHODE ISLAND AVE SFARWELL AVE HAMPSHIRE LN N GENERAL MILLS BLVDSC OTT AV E NVINCENT AVE SK E W A NEE W AY LYNN AVE SVIRGINIA CIR S LAWN TERLORING LN R HODE I S L AND AVE N24TH ST WWESTMORELAND LN POPLAR DR OTT AWA AVE SDAWNVIEW TER W O O D D AL E A V E SOREGON AVE NTOLEDO AVE NHIAWATHA AVEHILLSBORO AVE NNAPER ST DONA LN SAINT CROIX AVE N SALEM AVE S22ND ST W Y U K O N AVE NOLSON MEMOR I A L HWY34T H A V E N PENNSYLVANIA AVE SOTTAWA AVE N34TH P L NPH O E NIX S T TURNPIK E RD 12TH AVE NINDEPENDENCE AVE NJUNE AVE SWISCONSIN AVE NPAISLEY LNGAMBLE DR T Y ROL TRL N PARK L NBRIDGEWATER RDC E D A R V IE W D RWINFIELD AVE NIVY LN FRANCE AVE SBIES DRCOVE DR 25T H S T W E D GEWOOD AVE NZEALAND AVE NEDGEMOOR DRQUEBEC AVE S18 T H ST W BURD PL OAK PARK AVE N YOSEMITE AVE NPERRY AVE NCOLONIAL D R 13TH AVE N S T A NLEN RD SAINT LOUIS AVERALEIGH AVE SWYNNWOOD RDGEORGIA AVE NEWING AVE NMARKET ST E L MDALE RD UTAH D R S X Y L O N AVE SCHESTNUT AVE W 14TH ST W MEAND ER RD DEA N C TCAMPBE LL D R JERSEY AVE N30 1/2 ST W 2 9 TH S T W WILLS PL33RD AVE N 6 T H AVE NCE DAR S HORE DR29TH P L N 34 1/2 ST W CEDARWOOD RD YUKON AVE SMCNAIR A V E N SUMTER AVE SADELL A V E N SANDRA LNWATERSTONE PLMED I C INE LAKE RDLANCASTER LN NJANALYN CIR CAV E L L A VE SVE RA CRUZ AVE NDRAKE RD DAKOTA AVE SUTAH AVE SAQUILA AVE STERRACE LNORDW A Y S TMARYLAND AVE NDREW AVE SHAMPSH I R E P L N FIELD DR TYLER AVE NINDIANA AVE NL A K E V I E W AVE S22ND LN W M O N I T O R S TIDAHO AVE NLE WIS RDR I DGE DRCHOWEN AVE SPARK E R R D 35TH PL N EWING AVE SWOLFE PKWY KINGS VALLEY RD DA H LB E R G D R 35 1/2 ST WEDGEWOOD AVE S2ND AVE N THOMAS AVE SROSE MNR WINDSOR WAYT A F T A V E S BRUNSWICK AVE SMONTEREY AVE SHAMPSHIRE AVE S18TH AVE N EWALD TER CORTLAWN CIR S KYLE PL LOWRY TER P A R K C E NTER BLVDMEDLEY LN N JUNE AVE NVIEWCREST LN TYRO L TRL SBLACKSTONE AVE SKILLARNEY DR13TH LN W PRINCETON AVE SKENTUCKY AVE SOREGON AVE SMADISON AVE W PHILLIPS PKWYLA K E L A N D A V E N VAN BUREN AVE NWALLY ST BENTON BLVD HAZEL LNBONNIE LN LEBER LN VIRGINIA AVE SHILLSBORO AVE S EDLIN PL 13 1/2 ST W 33RD ST W PARKDALE DR DECATUR AVE SGREEN VALLEY RD 24TH CT W HALGLO PL17TH AVE N GETTYSBURG AVE NMERRIBEE DR BROOKVIEW DR MARIE LN W H I L L L N S WESTMORE WAY DULUTH LN WASHBURN AVE S21ST ST WWASHBURN AVE NHAMPTON RD 8TH AVE N LIST PLOAK P A R K V I L L A G E D R32ND CIR NELGIN PL N 24TH AVE N WINNETKA H E IG H T S D R ROSE LN 30TH AVE N 1 8TH ST WTHOMAS AVE SUPTON AVE NFLAG AVE S30 1/2 ST WLILAC DR N30TH AVE N UTAH AVE SCAVELL AVE SPERRY AVE N30TH AVE N JERSEY AVE SGEORGIA AVE NUNITY AVE NZENITH AVE NINDIANA AVE N31ST AVE N XERXES AVE NFLAG AVE NBOONE AVE NBOONE AVE N36TH ST WEDGEWOOD AVE S37T H ST W 29TH ST W 26TH ST W HIGHWAY 100 SLAKE ST WYOSEMITE AVE SFLAG A V E SNATCHEZ AVE SLILAC DR N28TH ST W COLORADO AVE SKNOLL ST N 23RD ST W BLACKSTONE AVE S29TH AVE N JOPPA AVE SQUEBEC AVE SIDAHO AVE S37TH ST W 29TH ST W 34TH AV E N 14TH ST W 14TH ST W HAMPSHIRE AVE SFRANKLIN AVE W 27TH ST W HAMPTON RD 33RD ST WBOONE AVE S XYLON AVE SJOPPA AVE S39TH ST W 32ND ST W HIGHWAY 100 S25TH ST W 35TH AVE N KELLY DR35TH AVE N 26TH ST W EWING AVE NFLORIDA AVE NPERRY AVE NLOUISIANA AVE SSUMTER A V E S 31ST ST W K I L MER L N N31ST ST WMARYLAND AVE SXYLON AVE N28TH ST W WA S H B U R N A VE NHILLSBORO AVE NINDEPENDENCE AVE N36TH ST W 34TH AVE N OREGON AVE SYORK AVE N33RD ST W TOLEDO AVE SWAYZATA BLVD H IG H W AY 7PLYMOUTH AVE N 29TH AVE N JERSEY AVE SIDAHO AVE SZARTHAN AVE SNEVADA AVE SWAYZATA BLVD OTTAWA AVE SKENTUCKY AVE SHIGH WAY 55EDGEWOOD AVE NSALEM AVE S35TH ST W 34TH PL N 35TH AVE N WINSDALE ST N OXFORD ST SCOTT AVE N1 6T H ST W ALABAMA AVE S26TH ST W FRANCE AVE N31ST AVE N WAYZATA BLVDSUMTER AVE SINDIANA AVE N16TH S T W PENNSYLVANIA AVE SQUENTIN AVE S28TH ST WRHODE ISLAND AVE N22ND ST W ZANE AVE NCAMBRIDGE ST 31 S T AVE NALABAMA AVE SXENIA AVE N31ST ST W LYNN AVE S34TH AVE N 35TH AVE N 31ST AVE N UPTON AVE SXENWOOD AVE SPENNSYLVANIA AVE N29TH AVE N G O L D E N VALLEY RD 37TH ST W XERXES AVE NEWING AVE S18TH ST W HIGHWAY 100 S28TH ST W W A Y Z ATA BLV D BOONE AVE SEDGEWOOD AVE S36TH AVE N NEVADA AVE SXENWOOD AVE SO L S O N M E M O RIAL HWY 2 2 N D S T W DAKOTA AVE SDAKOTA AVE S34TH AVE N THOMAS AVE SKENTUCKY AVE SYORK AVE NMENDELSSOHN AVE NLILAC DR N8TH AVE N HAROLD AVEFLAG AVE NLYNN AVE SRALEIGH AVE SCED A R L A K E R D S 35TH ST WKILMER LN NWAYZATA BLVDJERSEY AVE NVALDERS AVEHAMPSHIRE AVE NOTTAWA AVE NOLSON MEMORIAL HWY 30TH AVE N EDGEWOOD AVE NRHODE ISLAND AVE NAQUILA AVE N34TH AVE N JERSEY AVE NZANE AVE NQUENTIN AVE S27TH ST WUTAH AVE SORKLA DRGO L D E N VALLEY RD 28TH ST W 10TH A VE N 33RD AVE N H IG H W A Y 7 INDIANA AVE N16TH ST W UTICA AVE SFLORIDA AVE SWEBSTER AVE SVIRGINIA AVE SYUKON AVE NGLENHURST AVE S22ND ST W 24TH ST W PLYMOUTH AVE N DREW AVE SOXFORD ST LILAC DR N UPTON AVE SDULUTH ST TEXAS AVE S27TH AVE N GEORGIA AVE NAerial Surveys AREA_NAME Golden Valley Theodore Wirth Park St. Louis Park Lakes 0 10.5 Miles ± This map is a compilation of data from varioussources and is provided "as is" without warrantyof any representation of accuracy, timeliness, orcompleteness. The user acknowledges and acceptsthe limitations of the Data, including the fact that theData is dynamic and in a constant state ofmaintenance, correction, and update. Aerial Deer Survey2010 and 2011 Department of: NRMCreated by: Steven Hogg Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 4) Subject: Deer Management Policy Page 5 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 4) Subject: Deer Management Policy Page 6 Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 5 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council requested information regarding the City’s policies and costs associated with water and sanitary sewer service lines. This report is intended to assist with the study session discussion on this topic Staff would also like Council feedback on the proposal to revise the “Backwater Valve Pilot Program”. POLICY CONSIDERATIONS: Does Council need any additional information regarding service line policies? Does Council support: 1. Changing the Backwater Valve Pilot Program to a long term program (remove the Pilot designation)? 2. Expanding the program beyond the few select homes identified in the pilot program to other areas identified by the Utility Superintendent where the same backwater conditions (or potential) exist? BACKGROUND: History Council developed a priority list of 6 items during 2010 to be discussed at future study sessions - one of which was: Review of Policies – Expenses: City vs. Property Owner (or combination) This item was discussed at the April 11, 2011 Study Session where Council expressed an interest in further discussing the maintenance and ownership responsibilities associated with water and sewer service lines within city street right of way. Staff was directed to obtain additional information for Council discussion regarding this subject. During 2010 a water service line ownership survey was conducted by Utilities - most of which are located in the immediate metro area. The survey (see attachment - Service Line Ownership Survey - 09.29.10) indicates that about two thirds of responding cities own - maintain / replace water service lines within street right of way (main to stop box). It is uncertain if that ratio is consistent throughout this area or across the state. Staff is not aware of any utilities owning sewer service lines located in the right of way. There are a few cities that replace sewer service lines within the right of way area; comments from those cities indicate that is problematic for them. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Page 2 Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Existing Policies Water Utility - The installation, maintenance, repair, and replacement of water (domestic, commercial, and fire sprinkler) service lines from the city watermain to the meter are the responsibility of the property owner per ordinance (see attachment - Ordinance - Chapter 32: Utilities). Such plumbing shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection by the city. Any repairs found to be necessary shall be made promptly or the city will discontinue water service. This policy and approach has been in place for over 30 years. Water meters are read, owned, maintained, and replaced by the City. Adjacent plumbing, if required, is the responsibility of the property owner. The City will inspect and perform minor repairs to curbstops / stopboxs (water service line shutoffs at the right of way line) at resident request and cost. Service line replacements are occasionally required by the city as a part of certain street improvement projects (such as the recent Excelsior Blvd streetscape project) to minimize future pavement and street disruptions / repairs. These replacements are done by the city during the project construction at property owner expense. Special Assessments are offered to residents for all water service line repairs or replacements (see attachment - Special Assessments - Resolution No. 00-078). Sewer Utility - The cost of original installation or repair of all service lines up to and including the connection to the city’s main sewer line are borne entirely by the property owner per ordinance (see attachment - Ordinance - Chapter 32: Utilities). Any repairs found to be necessary shall be made promptly or the city will discontinue water service. Special Assessments are offered to residents for all sewer service line repairs or replacements (see attachment - Special Assessments - Resolution No. 00-078). Backwater Valve Pilot Program - This sanitary sewer “pilot” program was established by Council during May of 2000 (see attachment - Council Report of May 15, 2000) to participate in the installation costs of backwater valves in certain identified sanitary sewer service lines in the Sunset Ave area which were repeatedly subject to city sewer backups. This was created as a “Pilot” program for a defined area to limit city participation and costs. City costs associated with this program to date total $4,160 for participation in the installation of 4 backwater valves. The pilot program designated 11 distinct properties as eligible for participation in this pilot program. Since then, staff has identified 11 other city lift station / sewer main locations where the “potential” for this type of sewer backup exists. In each of these areas there is realistically only a handful of properties subject to this backup potential. Staff feels that the properties in these areas should be made eligible for this program. Staff recommends removing the “Pilot” designation from this program along with expanding it to cover these few additional areas. Staff feels there will be limited cost to the city in doing this, but this will be beneficial to residents that feel they need this extra protection at these locations. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Page 3 Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies At this time one resident, Marjorie Gullickson at 2901 Hillsboro, has suffered a recent backup from Lift Station #21 at W. 29th and Hillsboro. She has requested this program be expanded to cover her. We feel her request is appropriate and should be approved. Staff proposes revising this program to allow for consideration of properties in these additional areas. To control program size and costs, specific participation requests, such as Marjorie’s above, can be reviewed and approved individually by Council when requested. If Council supports revising this program, staff will bring a revised program back to Council for consideration and adoption in the near future. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: Costs to assume ownership of utility service lines within the right of way will be significant. Based on 2007 thru 2009 service line repair costs (those known to staff), we have estimated future ownership costs associated with taking over these lines (see attachment - Service Line Cost Information - May 3, 2011). Staff estimates that taking over water service line responsibilities will increase water utility costs about $750,000 per year and require an immediate rate increase of 15%. This does not include reimbursements for past recent service line replacements which could be both costly and controversial (i.e., how far back should the city consider?). In evaluating sanitary sewer service lines, staff estimates future ownership costs to be less than that for water service lines; however, sanitary sewer service line maintenance does not conveniently end at the right of way line like a water service line can. Sewer maintenance must be performed from inside homes in order to access the service line. Having to access private properties routinely to perform sewer maintenance and repairs will be problematic for the city and every resident; as such, staff does not recommend the city become involved in the ownership or maintenance of sanitary sewer service lines. Expansion of the Backwater Valve Pilot Program, as proposed above, is not expected to increase sewer utility costs of any significance. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: Service Line Ownership Survey - 09.29.10 Ordinance - Chapter 32: Utilities Special Assessments - Resolution No. 00-078 Council Report of May 15, 2000 Service Line Cost Information - May 3, 2011 Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director Assisted by: Scott Anderson, Utility Superintendent Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Main to Stopbox - Property Owner Main to Stopbox - City Apple Valley X Bloomington X Bloomington Commercial X Burnsville X Champlain X Chaska Changed in 2003 to City X Crystal X Duluth X Eagan X Eden Prairie X Edina X Falcon Heights X Fridley X Golden Valley X Hopkins X Lakeville X Lauderdale X Maple Grove X Practice Maplewood X Mendota X Mendota Heights X Minneapolis X Minnetonka X Practice Mound X New Hope X New Ulm X Practice Oakdale X Plymouth X Richfield X Robbinsdale X Rochester X Roseville X Shoreview X St. Louis Park X St. Paul X West St. Paul X Woodbury X Totals 11 26 Water Service Line Survey September 29, 2010 Practice= City ordinance says property owner, but City practice is to take responsibilty for replacement/repair of service line from main to stopbox Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 4 Chapter 32 UTILITIES Article I. In General Article II. Water Service Sec. 32-31. Water rates. Sec. 32-32. Service connection fee. Sec. 32-33. Charges for services or noncompliance. Sec. 32-34. Delinquent water accounts. Sec. 32-35. Discontinuance of service for ordinance violations. Sec. 32-36. Deficiency of water and shutting off water. Sec. 32-37. Access to buildings. Sec. 32-38. Discontinuance of water service to protect property. Sec. 32-39. Water meter inspection and repairs. Sec. 32-40. Consent to city water regulations. Sec. 32-41. Cost of installation borne by consumer. Sec. 32-42. Restrictions on water use. Secs. 32-43--32-90. Reserved. Article III. Sewer Service Sec. 32-91. Connection with public sewer system required. Sec. 32-92. Connections; how made. Sec. 32-93. Limit on buildings served by single connection. Sec. 32-94. Right of entry. Sec. 32-95. Service abandoned. Sec. 32-96. Adoption of certain regulations by reference. Sec. 32-97. Service charges for use of sewers. Sec. 32-98. Sewer rental rates. Sec. 32-99. Sewer bills. Sec. 32-100. Revision of sewer rates. Sec. 32-101. Cost of installation and repair borne by consumer. Secs. 32-102--32-140. Reserved. Article IV. Stormwater Utility Article V. Utility Lines and Service Division 1. Generally Sec. 32-201. Stop boxes. Sec. 32-202. Repair of leaks. Sec. 32-203. Water meters. Sec. 32-204. Service abandoned. Sec. 32-205. Private water supplies. Sec. 32-206. Size of connections. Sec. 32-207. Connections beyond city boundaries. Sec. 32-208. Fire hydrant connections. Secs. 32-209--32-240. Reserved. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 5 ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Secs. 32-1--32-30. Reserved. ARTICLE II. WATER SERVICE Sec. 32-31. Water rates. (a) Rates. The rate due and payable to the city by each water user with the city for billings on or after February 26, 2001, for water taken from the city water supply system shall be set by city council resolution. All charges for single-family and multiple-family dwelling users shall be determined and payable on a quarterly basis, and all charges for commercial, industrial and institutional users shall be determined and payable on a monthly or quarterly basis; provided, however, that there shall be a service charge to each water user for each quarter year period during which water service is furnished as set by city council resolution. In case the meter is found to have stopped or to be operating in a faulty manner, the amount of water used will be estimated in accordance with the amount previously used for the comparable period of the last previous year. (b) Construction purposes. When water is desired for construction purposes, the owner shall make application in the regular way and on the regular form and, if approved, the service shall be carried inside the foundation wall. If for any reason the meter cannot be installed at the time, the charges for the water shall be set forth under water rates, and when the building is completed, the meter shall be set per code requirements. (c) Water bills. Water bills shall be mailed to customers for the service periods set forth in subsection (a) of this section, and shall specify the water consumed and the charges in accordance with rates set forth by city council resolution. (d) Rates beyond boundaries. Rates due and payable to the city by each water user located beyond the territorial boundaries of the city shall be on the same basis as specified in subsections (a)--(c) of this section. (e) Revision of water rates. The city council reserves the right to adjust the rates provided in the foregoing sections from time to time. (Code 1976, § 9-101; Ord. No. 2191-01, § 1, 2-5-2001; Ord. No. 2324-06, 1-12-07) Sec. 32-32. Service connection fee. The state-mandated service connection fee listed in this section for testing water supplies will be collected by the city and remitted to the state department of revenue. The service connection fee due and payable to the city by each water user within the city for water taken from the city water supply system shall be an amount set by city council resolution. (Code 1976, § 9-101.101; Ord. No. 2324-06, 1-12-07) Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 6 Sec. 32-33. Charges for services or noncompliance. (a) Charges will be made and collected by the city for the following water services: Tapping and making connections with the city water mains; for turning on and off water as requested for nonpayment of water bills, or failure to repair leaks; for raising or lowering stop box taps; for remote meter register installations; for meter-reading service; for meter-reading noncompliance; and for other services related to water department operations. (b) Charges shall also be made and collected for noncompliance with restrictions on water use, section 32-42. Charges for the services or noncompliance shall be fixed by the city in writing and shall become effective 24 hours after the filing of a charge with the city clerk who shall endorse on each filing the time and date of filing. (Code 1976, § 9-102) Sec. 32-34. Delinquent water accounts. All charges for water shall be due and payable within three weeks of the billing date specified by the City Treasurer. Accounts shall be considered delinquent and subject to a penalty of ten percent if not paid within three weeks of the billing date. It shall be the duty of the City Treasurer to endeavor to promptly collect delinquent accounts, and in all cases where satisfactory arrangements for payments have not then been made, the director of public works shall be instructed to discontinue water service at the stop box. All delinquent accounts shall be certified by the city clerk to the city assessor who shall prepare an assessment roll each year providing for assessment of the delinquent amounts against the respective properties served, for collection as other taxes. (Code 1976, § 9-103; Ord. No. 2387-10, 7-23-10) Sec. 32-35. Discontinuance of service for ordinance violations. The director of public works is authorized to shut off water service at any stop box connection at any time provided that: (1) The owner or occupant of the premises served, or any person working on any pipes or equipment thereon which are connected with the city water supply system, has intentionally violated any of the requirements of the ordinances of the city relative to the water supply system or connections therewith. (2) The owner or occupant of the premises served threatens to violate, or cause to be violated, any of the provisions of this chapter or does not provide access to city water meter reader or maintenance personnel to read or inspect the water meter or water supply system; or does not provide the city with current water meter readings. (3) Any charge for water, service, meter, meter parts or any other financial obligations imposed on the present or former owner or occupant of the premises served, by the provisions of this chapter, is unpaid. (4) Fraud or misrepresentation by the owner or occupant in connection with an application for service. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 7 (5) Water shall not be turned off from any service pipe between the hours of 12:00 noon on Friday to 9:00 a.m. on the following Monday. (Code 1976, § 9-104) Sec. 32-36. Deficiency of water and shutting off water. The city shall not be liable for any deficiency or failure in the supply of water to consumers, whether occasioned by shutting the water off for the purpose of making repairs or connections, or from any other cause whatever. In case of fire, or alarm of fire, the city may shut off water to ensure a supply for firefighting; or in making repairs or constructing new works, the director of public works may shut off the water at any time and keep it shut off so long as he shall deem necessary. (Code 1976, § 9-105) Sec. 32-37. Access to buildings. The officers of the water division, and every person delegated by them for that purpose shall have free access at reasonable hours of the day to all parts of every building and premises connected with the city water supply system for reading of meters and inspections. (Code 1976, § 9-106) Sec. 32-38. Discontinuance of water service to protect property. The Director of Public Works is authorized to shut off water service, without charge to the owner, at any stop box connection at any time to protect the public water supply and private property based upon the finding that the property may not be sufficiently heated and that there is a danger that the water pipes may freeze based upon one or more of the following: (1) The property is uninhabitable or is vacant; (2) Other utilities to the property providing gas or electricity have been shut-off; (3) The property is not secured; (4) The property is not heated during winter months, October through April. (Ord. No. 2364-08, 12-26-08) Sec. 32-39. Water meter inspection and repairs. The city shall provide for inspection, testings and repair of all water meters connected with the city water supply system at reasonable times. (Code 1976, § 9-108) Sec. 32-40. Consent to city water regulations. Every person applying for or receiving water service from the city systems, and every user of water or owner of property for which such application is made or water service received, shall be deemed by such application or use to consent to all the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and rates of the city, and to all modifications thereof, and all new ordinances, rules, regulations or rates duly adopted, including charges for services or for noncompliance. (Code 1976, § 9-109) Sec. 32-41. Cost of installation borne by consumer. (1) The cost of original installation or repair of all plumbing between the main and the meter shall be borne entirely by the consumer. Such plumbing shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection by the city. Any repairs found to be necessary by such representatives shall be made promptly or the city will discontinue service. (2) The cost of replacing all plumbing within the City right of way between the main and the shut off as part of a street reconstruction project shall be a charge to the consumer. The cost shall be added to the consumer’s water bill and be payable over a period of 10 years in equal installments, together with an amount equal to interest on the unpaid balance at a fixed annual Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 8 rate set by the City Finance Department equal to the special assessments interest rate adopted that year. (Code 1976, § 9-110; Ord. No. 2347-07, 12-28-07) Sec. 32-42. Restrictions on water use. To avoid a water shortage due to a capacity problem in the water system, the city shall act in accordance with the city's water contingency conservation plan as required by M.S.A. § 103G-291. Secs. 32-43--32-90. Reserved. ARTICLE III. SEWER SERVICE Sec. 32-91. Connection with public sewer system required. (a) After October 1, 1973, any structures situated on property from which sewage is disposed and abutting a portion of the city public sanitary sewer system shall be connected to the public sanitary sewer system, and any such structures not so connected by October 1, 1973, shall be completely disconnected from the private sewer system, and such private sewage disposal system shall be filled or otherwise abandoned in a manner approved by the city. (b) The director of public works and the director of inspections may authorize replacement or installation of an in-ground sewage treatment system when connection to the sanitary sewer system is deemed impractical. (Code 1976, § 9-201) Sec. 32-92. Connections; how made. All work relating to sewer connections shall comply with the following: (1) Permits shall be procured before breaking ground in any street or alley for such work, as required by section 24-251. (2) After the pipe is properly laid, the refilling must proceed at once, and it must be thoroughly tamped or puddled, or both, and so done that there shall be no surplus earth left. (3) If there is a deficiency of earth to fill the excavation, the plumber doing the work shall supply such deficiency with clean sand or approved material. (4) No rock larger than four inches across or thick may be put into any excavation within two feet of cover over pipe. (5) Street, sidewalk or driveway within the public right-of-way removed on this permit must be relaid at the expense of the plumber and to the specifications of the city. (6) All work must be done under the supervision of the city, and all drain pipes to public sewers shall be inspected by the city before being covered up. (7) All work performed under this article within the public right-of-way shall be guaranteed by the contractor for one year from the date of final approval by the city. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 9 (8) No person shall build a fire within any sewer or drain for any purpose whatsoever. (Code 1976, § 9-207) Sec. 32-93. Limit on buildings served by single connection. No more than one building may be served by a single connection. (Code 1976, § 9-208) Sec. 32-94. Right of entry. The city shall have the right to enter upon the premises drained by any house drain and connected with any public sewer, at all reasonable hours, to ascertain whether the provisions of this article or any ordinance in regard to house drains have been complied with, and if lawful in regard thereto. The city shall notify the owner of such premises or agent of this fact. It shall thereupon be the duty of such owner or agent to cause such drain, or its attachments, to be so altered, repaired or reconstructed as to make them conform to the requirements of law in regard thereto within 15 days from the time of receiving such notice. (Code 1976, § 9-209) Sec. 32-95. Service abandoned. When a service is to be abandoned, the service shall be discontinued at the city main by plugging the connection in an approved manner. When a building is to be demolished, the service shall be abandoned before a demolition permit is issued. If a new building is to be erected on the same site, the service may be reused with prior approval of the city and service may be temporarily abandoned at the property line in an approved manner. Sec. 32-96. Adoption of certain regulations by reference. (a) Metropolitan Council Environment Services Regulations. The waste discharge rules for the metropolitan disposal system are adopted and incorporated in this article by reference. (b) State plumbing code. The Minnesota State Plumbing Code is incorporated in this article by reference. Such code shall apply to all public sewer connections required by this article. Sec. 32-97. Service charges for use of sewers. (a) An annual charge is hereby imposed upon every person, firm or corporation whose premises are served by the sanitary sewer system of the city, either directly or indirectly, for the use of the facilities of such sewer system and for connection therewith which charge shall be as provided in section 32-98. Such charge shall be payable as provided in section 32-99 and shall be subject to the penalties set forth in section 32-98 if not paid within 20 days after the billing date. Such charges for sewer service shall be a charge against the owner of the premises served, and all such charges which have been billed and not paid within 30 days after the due date stated on the bill shall be certified to the county auditor as an assessment against the property served for collection as other taxes. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 10 (b) The obligation to pay the charges specified in this section shall be incurred as of the time of connection of any private sewer disposal system to the city sewer, and such connection shall be deemed to be made if a sewer connection is made to the city sewer at the curbline, whether or not the connecting sewer is then in operation in connection with the private sewer system on the adjacent premises. Every person, firm or corporation whose premises can be served by the sanitary sewer system of the city, either directly or indirectly, shall pay an annual sewer rental charge as provided in sections 32-98 and 32-99. (Code 1976, § 9-230) Sec. 32-98. Sewer rental rates. Charges for sewer service to residential and nonresidential users within the city provided in section 32-97 for billings on or after February 26, 2001, shall be: an amount per 100 cubic feet of water consumption set by city council resolution, as measured during the winter consumption (or otherwise determined in subsection (1) of this section), and a monthly service charge of an amount set by city council resolution, or an amount quarterly per dwelling or account set by city council resolution. (1) All residential sewer customer charges shall be determined by computing the winter water consumption as determined by the city billing cycle for each district. Commercial sewer charges shall be determined by computing the water consumption each month throughout the year. In any case where winter meter readings are not available or appropriate, charges shall be made on the basis of current water consumption. (2) A penalty of ten percent shall be added to the amount due on any sewer bill if not paid within three weeks after the billing date. Payments received within three working days following the due date shall be deemed as paid within such period. (3) All owners, lessees and occupants of buildings discharging sewerage into the city sewer while using water from any source other than the city municipal water system shall install meters or other measuring devices meeting with the city water meter specifications to measure either the water used or the discharge into the sewer. (Code 1976, § 9-231; Ord. No. 2191-01, § 2, 2-5-2001; Ord. No. 2324-06, 1-12-07) Sec. 32-99. Sewer bills. It is hereby made the duty of the City Treasurer to render to the owners, lessees or occupants of all classes of property on a monthly or quarterly basis, as is appropriate, bills for the amount of sewer rental charge as provided in section 32-97. Such bills may be a surcharge upon the water bills rendered to such persons. All such charges when collected shall be placed in a separate fund. These funds shall be used only for the purpose authorized by M.S.A. § 444.075, and such charges, if unpaid, may be collected on direction of the city council as authorized by M.S.A. § 444.075, as set forth in sections 32-97, 32-98 and this section. (Code 1976, § 9-232; Ord. No. 2387-10, 7-23-10) Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 11 Sec. 32-100. Revision of sewer rates. The city council reserves the right to readjust the rates and charges provided in section 32-98 from time to time. (Code 1976, § 9-233) Secs. 32-101. Cost of installation and repair borne by consumer. The cost of original installation or repair of all service lines up to and including the connection to the city’s main sewer line shall be borne entirely by the consumer. Any repairs found to be necessary shall be made promptly or the city will discontinue water service. (Ord. No. 2289-05, 3-9-2005) Secs. 32-102--32-140. Reserved. ARTICLE V. UTILITY LINES AND SERVICE DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 32-200. Excavation permits required. No person shall excavate in a public street to service a water main, make connection therewith, or for any purpose which will expose a water main, unless given a permit to do so by the city. (Code 1976, § 9-123) Sec. 32-201. Stop boxes. All stop boxes and cocks must conform to the specifications of the city. (Code 1976, § 9-126) Sec. 32-202. Repair of leaks. In case of failure upon the part of any consumer or owner to repair any leak occurring from their service pipe within 24 hours after verbal or written notice has been given upon the premises, the water will be shut off from the same and will not be turned on until the sum as set by city council resolution has been paid. When the waste of water is great, or when damage is likely to result from the leak, the water will be turned off if the repair is not proceeded with immediately upon the giving of such notice. (Code 1976, § 9-131; Ord. No. 2324-06, 1-12-07) Sec. 32-203. Water meters. (a) Except for extinguishment of fires, or when authorized by special permit from the city clerk, and for temporary purposes only, no person shall use water from the water supply system of the city, or permit water to be drawn therefrom, unless the water is metered by passing through a meter supplied or approved by the city. Meters shall be set within six feet of the point of service entry into the building. (b) No person without authorization by the city clerk shall connect, disconnect, take apart, or in any manner change, or cause to be changed, or interfere with any such meter or its action. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 12 (c) No person shall damage or knowingly or negligently permit damage to be done to a water meter on his premises or elsewhere. Any person damaging any such meter or knowingly or negligently permitting the meter to be damaged shall pay all costs of making the required repairs to such meters upon demand therefor by the city. Any person damaging any such meter or knowingly permitting the same to be damaged shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. (d) The city council shall from time to time fix the charge to be made to customers for new water meters in original connection installations, and payment for the same shall be made in advance before delivery for installation. (e) Whenever any meter shall become obstructed or out of order, the director of public works shall cause it to be repaired. The director of public works shall direct the cost of such repairs to be paid out of the funds of the water department unless the meter has been damaged by freezing or willful neglect by someone outside of the city employ. On request of any customer and payment to the city clerk of a fee set by city council resolution, the director of public works will test such water meter. All water meters obtained from the city shall remain the property of the city and may be replaced at any time by the director of public works if found to be worn or defective beyond repair. Such replacement shall be paid for from water department funds. (Code 1976, §§ 9-111, 9-132; Ord. No. 2324-06, 1-12-07) Sec. 32-204. Service abandoned. When a service is to be abandoned, the meter shall be removed and returned to the city and the service shall be disconnected at the city main by plugging or capping the corporation cock or valve in an approved manner. When a building is to be demolished, the service shall be abandoned before a demolition permit is issued. If a new building is to be erected on the same site, the service may be reused with prior approval of the city and the service may be temporarily abandoned at the stop box by plugging. Sec. 32-205. Private water supplies. No water pipe of the city water supply system shall be connected with any pump, well or tank that is connected with any other source of water supply, and, when such are found, the director of public works shall notify the owner to disconnect the same, and if not done immediately the water supply shall be turned off forthwith. (Code 1976, § 9-137) Sec. 32-206. Size of connections. Connections with the mains for ordinary domestic supply shall be a minimum of five-eighths of an inch except with permission of the director of public works. (Code 1976, § 9-138) Sec. 32-207. Connections beyond city boundaries. In any and all cases where water mains of the city have been or shall be extended to or constructed in any road, street, alley or public highway adjacent to or outside the corporate limits of the city, the city is hereby authorized to issue permits to the owners or occupants of properties adjacent to, or accessible to, such water mains to tap and make proper water service pipe connections with such water mains of the city in conformity with and subject to all the terms, conditions and provisions of the ordinances of the city relating to the tapping of the city water mains and making water service pipe connections therewith, and to furnish and supply water from the waterworks system of the city to such owners and occupants of properties adjacent or accessible to such water mains of the city through and by means of water meters duly installed. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 13 Water service rendered to such persons shall be subject to all provisions of this article, and persons accepting such service shall thereby agree to be bound and obligated by this article. (Code 1976, § 9-139) Sec. 32-208. Fire hydrant connections. It shall be unlawful for any person, except when authorized by permit issued by the city, to open or interfere with any of the hydrants or gates of the city water supply system. Secs. 32-209--32-240. Reserved. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 14 RESOLUTION NO. 00-078 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 96-85 ESTABLISHING ASSESSMENT POLICIES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WHEREAS, project designs for the installation of City improvements may differ with respect to zoning districts and special characteristics of certain streets and thoroughfares; and WHEREAS, distinctions can be made with respect to benefits realized by properties adjoining these improvements in accordance with zoning designations and street characteristics; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to express its policy on assessments for improvements for the guidance of its staff and its citizens; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby amends Resolution 96-85. This Resolution shall replace the prior resolution as a guide for the assessment of improvement projects; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that; 1. DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE A. Special assessments are intended to reflect the influence of a specific local improvement upon the value of property and no matter what particular formula or method is used to establish the amount of the assessment the real measure of benefits is the increase in the market value of the land as a result of the improvement. B. Project costs shall include all costs related to the survey, design, and construction of the project. All the City’s engineering and administrative costs shall be included in the project cost as a 9 percent and 3 per cent fee based on the final construction costs. 2. PAVING, CURB AND GUTTER A. Projects to be assessed will be specially assessed a direct benefit of $13.00 per front foot for paving and $7.00 per front foot for curbing and gutter for residential properties and 100% of the cost for commercial and multi-family properties. B. STANDARD BLOCKS. All paving, curb and gutter projects, for which no assessment has been approved prior to May 1, 1972, the corner lot shall be charged 25% of the side street improvement cost. The remaining 75% of the side street improvement cost shall be charged equally on a front foot basis to all frontage, from the corner midway to the next intersection. The 75% balance is described to be the indirect benefit. C. NON-STANDARD BLOCKS. The assessor, in spreading the assessment in the following situations may deviate from the Council's formula in spreading the cost to the extent that benefits assessed are in proportion to benefits received for each type of improvement and equitably compare with assessed properties in the improvement project: 1. Where platting is irregular, including metes and bounds described properties, 2. In circumstances where subdividing has caused a rearrangement at the end of the block, 3. Where lots or building sites front on a side street contrary to the regular grid platting, 4. In circumstances where the distance between two corner lots is 300 feet or less, 5. Where "T" alleys involve lots having the depth of lot adjacent to the bottom side of the cross "T". Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 15 6. Where a lot has frontage on two streets, the assessment will be on the street where the property is addressed. D. Driveway aprons shall be assessed to the benefiting property owner 100% of the cost of the improvement. E. All lands occupied by churches not in excess of their reasonable needs and used actively and exclusively for religious purposes shall be assessed at the prevailing rate applying to single or double family houses. F. For purposes of preparation of engineering data, improvement proceedings, and other administrative and engineering details, the administrative staff and the Department of Public Works may delete from any street improvement area any street or curb and gutter which in reasonable judgment of staff should be free from major maintenance and repair (barring unforeseen problems) for at least five (5) years from the date of the proposed improvement and does not adversely affect the general need, including drainage, and other essential determinations involved in the project area. G. Any street, curb and gutter, or other appurtenance involved in such street improvement project area so deleted may be reinstated or included by petition of not less than 51% of the owners of abutting and benefiting real properties of a street previously deleted. H. The City Assessor in making his assessments on new curb and gutters shall give credit to the property owner to insure that no assessment will be made for the removed lineal footage of curb and gutter when such curb and gutter would be, in reasonable judgment of the Department of Public Works, free from major maintenance and repair (barring unforeseen problems) for at least 5 years from the date of the improvement and meets grade level requirements for gravity flow or surface storm water and that the storm sewer contractor will be responsible for the replacement costs of any curb and gutter removed or damaged due to his negligence. I. Improvements for paving, curb, and gutter shall be assessed for a period of 20 years to benefiting property owners. 3. SIDEWALKS A. On collector roadways and thoroughfares, the cost of new sidewalk installation shall be assessed at 50 percent of the actual construction costs and the remaining 50 percent of actual construction costs shall be financed by general obligation bonds or other appropriate funds of the City. B. On streets which are not collector roadways or thoroughfares, the cost of sidewalks shall be assessed 100 percent of the construction costs of sidewalks abutting them. C. Commercial, industrial, and multiple family properties shall be assessed 100 percent of the construction costs of sidewalks abutting them. D. The assessment policy for corner lots relative to sidewalk installation shall be as follows: 1. On collector roadways and thoroughfares under City jurisdiction, 25 percent of the actual construction costs of sidewalks shall be assessed against the property's sideyard (long side of the lot); 25 percent of the construction costs shall be assessed on an equal front-foot basis against properties on one-half of the block on the side of the street where the walk is constructed; and 50 percent of sidewalk construction costs shall be financed by general obligation bonds or other appropriate funds of the City. 2. On streets which are not collector roadways or thoroughfares, 50 percent of actual sidewalk construction costs shall be assessed against the property owner's sideyard and 50 percent of actual construction costs shall be assessed on an equal front foot basis against properties on one-half of the block on the side of the street where the sidewalk is constructed. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 16 E. Random sidewalk repair will not be assessed but will be paid out of the Street Department budget. 4. STREET LIGHTING A. The cost of street lighting improvements on residential streets as identified in the Comprehensive Plan shall be undertaken only by petition of 75% or more of benefiting property owners and shall be assessed 100 percent against the benefiting properties on a unit basis. After the signed petition is received by the City, but before the improvement is ordered to be made, a written notification shall be sent to benefiting property owners and contain individual assessment amounts, which properties will be assessed, and which property owners signed the petition. A unit being defined as the equivalent of a zoning lot. If a standard zoning classification does not exist throughout the project area, special assessments may be computed on a unit, area, or lineal basis or any combination thereof. Non-petitioned projects on residential streets will be financed with general revenues. B. The cost of street lighting improvements for residential properties on collector streets with existing street lighting in place will be financed with general revenues. C. The cost of street lighting improvements along any collector or thoroughfare, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, where street lighting is not currently in place, shall be assessed 50 percent of the cost of the standard residential portion of the design, that is intersectional and mid-block lighting. If a standard zoning classification does not exist throughout the project area, special assessments may be computed on a unit, area, or lineal basis or any combination thereof. General revenues shall be used to finance the remainder of the project cost. D. The cost of street lighting improvements in high density areas (six or more units per acre in R-3 Zoning Districts or a zoning district having a greater intensity than the R-3 Zone), business, or industrial areas with existing street lighting in place shall be taken out of the General Fund. E. The cost of street lighting improvements in high density residential areas (six or more units per acre in R-3 Zoning districts or a zoning district having a greater intensity than the R-3 Zone), business, or industrial areas without street lighting currently in place shall be assessed 100 percent against the benefiting properties. Costs shall be assessed on the basis of direct and indirect benefits. Direct benefits shall be equal to 30 percent of the project costs. The direct benefit shall be calculated by dividing 30 percent of the total project cost by the number of street lights in the project. The unit cost resulting from this formula shall be assessed against properties receiving a direct benefit from an adjoining street light. Direct costs shall be shared equally by adjoining properties when the street light is located on the property line. Indirect benefits shall be equal to 70 percent of the project cost. The indirect costs shall be assessed against all properties in the project area on a front-foot basis. F. The useful life of a street lighting project shall be established as 15 years. Replacement of any portion of the street lighting system shall not be assessable for a period of 15 years from the date of the last street lighting installation. Special assessments shall be financed consistent with the life of the improvement. Individual special assessments of $100 or less shall be paid in one year; and individual special assessments between $100 and $200 shall be paid in two years, unless the person paying the special assessment is a senior citizen in which case the special assessments may be deferred. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 17 5. ALLEY PAVING A. The cost of alley improvements for residential properties shall be assessed as follows when at least 51 percent (alley front feet) of the property owners petition for the improvement: 1. Thirty (30) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against all properties abutting the alley. (INDIRECT BENEFIT) 2. Seventy (70) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against directly benefited properties as defined in paragraph 5(B). (DIRECT BENEFIT) B. A property is directly benefited if it has an existing garage with direct access to the alley, if an access to the alley could be constructed from an existing garage, or if, no garage exists, there is sufficient area on the lot to build a garage with access to the alley. C. Commercial and multi-family property owners shall be assessed 100 percent of the cost of the improvement. D. Alleys shall be constructed of concrete and shall be assessed for a period of 20 years. 6. MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR UNIMPROVED STREETS AND ALLEYS A. The total cost of maintenance of unimproved streets and alleys, including material, labor, equipment, financing, supervision, and administrative overhead required for special assessment procedure and performance of work, shall be assessed against those property owners abutting the unimproved street or alley on which maintenance is performed. For purposes of this policy, maintenance is defined as grading, leveling, patching, surfacing, overlaying or sealing any or all portions of any street or alley roadway. Activities not related to restoration or improvement of the roadway surface, such as street sweeping or snow plowing, will not be considered as assessable maintenance costs. B. The assessment for street maintenance shall be determined by totaling the cost for each street maintained during the year and dividing the number of assessable feet of abutting properties to determine a cost per front foot. Said cost will be assessed against the number of feet on the front of any given lot, with side street assessments being assessed using the current City policy for street paving assessments. For purposes of this policy, a street or alley is improved when it is constructed with proper drainage, has concrete curbs (streets only) gutters, and meets the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation "Standard Specifications for Highway Construction" which includes, but is not limited to, a minimum six-inch granular base and two-inch asphalt overlay or strength equivalent, or a minimum seven-inch thickness of concrete paving material. C. The assessment for street and alley maintenance shall be determined by totaling the cost during the 12-month period beginning January 1 of each year and assessing the cost per front foot to benefiting properties. D. Single properties normally will not be assessed more than every three years for improvement of the same street or alley; however, it is anticipated that in the cost of streets and alleys which require "annual maintenance" there will be an accumulative assessment covering the three-year period. Assessments shall be payable in the year levied if the amount is less than $100.00; in two years if the amount is between $100.00 and $200.00; and in three years if the amount is greater than $200.00. The interest rate charged to those property owners electing to pay after the 30-day period following the adoption of the assessment roll shall be the same as the interest rate charged in Section 14 (A) of this resolution. E. The cost of street improvements which result from disturbing streets for storm sewers or other major utility installations and repairs shall be included as part of the utility installation or repair agreement and will not be assessed against abutting property owners. However, if the street in question has not been improved for a period of three years prior to the installation or repair work, the normal maintenance assessment procedures outlined above shall apply. F. Assessment shall be made against any government property or other tax-exempt property abutting unimproved alleys or streets. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 18 7. STORM SEWERS Storm sewers for properties located in R-1 and R-2 zonings shall be assessed $200.00 per 50 foot lot plus $1.00 for each additional foot and no assessment shall be greater than $300.00. Properties located in a R-1 or R-2 district shall not be assessed more than once or more than $300. These assessments shall be for a period of one year and other assessments for commercially zoned properties shall be assessable for a period of 20 years. 8. SANITARY SEWERS AND WATERMAINS A. Sanitary sewers and watermains shall be assessed to the benefiting property owners for 100 percent of the improvement cost. These assessments shall be for a period of 20 years. 9. WATERMAIN LOOPING A. Watermain looping shall not be assessed unless there is a benefit to the land. These assessments shall be for a period of 20 years. 10. DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PERSONS 65 YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER A. Assessments against any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older and for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments shall be deferred subject to income conditions upon submission of the appropriate application signed by the qualified person. B. The interest rate from Section 14 (A) of this resolution shall be added to the deferred assessment and shall be payable in accordance with the terms and provisions of M.S.A. Section 444.24. C. The right of deferment is automatically terminated under Section 444.24 if: 1. The owner dies and the spouse is not otherwise qualified; 2. The property or any part thereof is sold, transferred, or subdivided; 3. The property should lose its homestead status; or 4. If for any reason the City determines that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. D. The total household income requirement to be eligible for special assessment deferments be established at $10,500 or less. E. In the event the deferment is terminated, the principal and interest deferred to that date shall be due and payable, and the remaining principal and interest shall be due over the period of time remaining on the original assessment period. 11. FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS A. All petitions for the special assessment of the project must be received and acted upon by the City Council prior to the start of any fire sprinkler installation. B. The petition must meet the requirements of MS Chapter 429, as they apply to fire sprinkler systems, and include the submission of plans and specifications, a cost estimate from three (3) qualified companies (licensed by the State of Minnesota as a fire sprinkler contractor) and a written statement that the owner shall be responsible for contracting for the actual installation and proper operation of the fire sprinkler system. C. The amount to be specially assessed shall not exceed the amount of the construction estimate, plus any City administrative or interest charges. The petitioner shall be responsible for any construction costs exceeding the amount of the construction estimate. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 19 D. The City shall not approve the petition until it has reviewed and approved the plans, specifications, and cost estimates contained in the petition. E. No payment shall be made by the City for any installation until the work is completed and finally approved by the City and the assessment has been adopted. F. The fire sprinkler system is being installed in existing buildings and the installation of the sprinkler system will result in the sprinkling of the entire building in compliance with the applicable City ordinances and State laws. G. The petitioner must waive all rights to the public hearing and any appeal of the special assessment adopted by the City Council and the petition must be signed by all owners of the property. H. No special assessment shall be made for a period of more than ten (10) years, except as otherwise determined by the Council. I. If the petitioner requests the abandonment of the special assessment project, all City costs incurred shall be reimbursed by the petitioner. J. Consideration of any petition made under this policy is subject to a determination by the City Council, in its sole discretion, that sufficient City funds are available for the project. City staff will periodically advise the Council with regard to the availability of appropriate funds. K. The administrative fee for processing the sprinkler assessment application shall be one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the petitioned amount, with a minimum fee of $150.00 and a maximum fee of $750.00. L. The City Manager is authorized to develop the procedures for implementation of this policy. 12. SEWER AND WATER SERVICES A. This special assessment policy for the installation or repair of a private sewer or water service only applies to existing one and two family homes. B. The property owner(s) are responsible to contract with a licensed contractor. The contractor and property owner shall be responsible for all licenses, permits, fees and inspections. The installation must be in compliance with the applicable City Ordinances and State laws. C. The property owner may petition the City for payment of the work, not to exceed the amount of the lowest acceptable bid. D. The petition must include a waiver of public hearing and a waiver of appeal signed by all property owners. A lien waiver or sworn construction statement must be provided prior to payment by the City. E. No special assessment shall be made for a period of more than ten years, except as otherwise determined by the City Council. F. Consideration of any petition made under this policy is subject to a determination by the City Council, in its sole discretion, that sufficient City funds are available for the project. G. The petition must meet the requirements of MSA Chapter 429, include a cost estimate from two licensed contractors and a statement that the property owner will be responsible for the installation of the service. H. Payment shall be made by the City when the work is completed and approved by the City. The City shall certify the cost to special assessment rolls at the usual Fall special assessment hearings. I. The City Manager is authorized to develop the procedures for the implementation of this policy. 12.5 RELOCATION, BRIDGING OR ENCASEMENT OF CITY UTILITY LINES A. This special assessment policy applies to the relocation, bridging or encasement of City utility lines. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 20 B. The property owner(s) are responsible to contract with a licensed City approved contractor experienced in the work to be performed. The contractor and property owner shall be responsible for all licenses, permits, fees and inspections. The installation must be in compliance with the applicable City Ordinances, specifications and State laws. Plans and specifications must be approved by the City Engineer or his designee. C. The property owner may petition the City for payment of the work, not to exceed the amount of the lowest acceptable bid. D. The petition must include a waiver of public hearing and a waiver of appeal signed by all property owners. A lien waiver or sworn construction statement must be provided prior to payment by the City. E. No special assessment shall be made for a period of more than ten years, except as otherwise determined by the City Council. F. Consideration of any petition made under this policy is subject to a determination by the City Council, in its sole discretion, that sufficient City funds are available for the project. G. The petition must meet the requirements of MSA Chapter 429, include a cost estimate from two licensed contractors and a statement that the property owner will be responsible for the work. H. Payment shall be by the City when the work is completed and approved by the City. The City shall certify the cost to special assessment rolls at the usual Fall special assessment hearings. I. The City Manager is authorized to develop the procedures for the implementation of this policy. J. The administrative fee for processing the City utility line relocation assessment application shall be one-half of one person (0.5%) of the petitioned amount, with a minimum fee of $150.00 and a maximum fee of $750.00. 13. DELINQUENT CHARGES A. Delinquent charges for abatement of nuisances, tree removal, weed removal, curb/gutter repair and responding to fire alarms shall be assessed against those properties benefiting from these services. B. At any time before the City Council adopts the assessment roll containing delinquent charges against a particular property, the property owner may petition the City to extend an opportunity to pay the delinquent charges in lieu of a special assessment. C. The petition must be signed by the property owner and must specifiy payment terms acceptable to the City, including a provision that any default in the property owner’s payment obligation will result in any unpaid portion of the delinquent charges being levied against the affected property as a special assessment. D. The petition must also include an express waiver of public hearing and a waiver of appeal signed by the property owner. E. No special assessment may be made for a period of more than one year, except as otherwise determined by the City Council. F. Consideration of any petition made under this policy is subject to a determination by the City Council, in its sole discretion, that sufficient City funds are available. G. The City Manager is authorized to develop procedures for the implementation of this policy. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 21 13A. CERTIFICATION OF UNPAID BILLS A. Each charge levied pursuant to this Resolution shall be a lien upon the corresponding lot, land or premises served by a connection to the water or sanitary sewer system of the City as provided by City Code. B. All such charges which are more than 60 days past due and having been properly billed to the owner or occupant of the premises served may be certified annually to the County Auditor by the Administrator designee. C. The City Manager or designee in certifying such charges to the County Auditor shall specify the amount, the description of the property served and the name of the owner. D. A certification processing fee of $25 shall be added to those billings that are certified to the County Auditor. E. The amount so certified shall be extended by the County Auditor on the tax rolls against such property in the same manner as other City assessments, and collected by the County Treasurer and paid to the City Treasurer along with tax settlements. 14. INTEREST RATES A. In the absence of other instructions by the City Council on specific projects, for the purpose of preparation of reports, assessment proceedings, and other administrative and financial matters, the interest rate for special assessment improvement projects will reflect the current twenty (20) year U.S. Treasury bill rate plus one percent at the time of the assessment hearings. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council July 5, 2000 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 22 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 8e* Meeting of May 15, 2000 *8e. Resolution Adopting a Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program This action would establish a pilot program in which the City would participate in the cost to furnish and install backwater valves in sanitary sewer service lines at ten (10) identified properties. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving the “Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program”. Background: On February 19 this year, the City suffered malfunctions at sanitary sewer lift station No. 19 (3036 Glenhurst Avenue). As a result of these malfunctions, a total of nine (9) residences located along Inglewood Avenue, Joppa Avenue, Minnetonka Boulevard, and Sunset Boulevard experienced sanitary sewer backups with varying degrees of damages from a few dollars of cleanup to upwards of $30,000. Some or most of these properties have also experienced sewer backups in 1987 and again in 1997, as well as at other earlier unrecorded times. As a result of these multiple sewer backups, the residents requested the City make sewer system improvements or provide service line backwater valves to prevent sewer backups at these properties. The City Council reviewed this request and possible options at their April 10 and April 24 Study Sessions. Based on these Study Session discussions, staff has developed a “Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program” for Council adoption. In addition to the Pilot Program, the Sewer Utility is planning to add a second independent alarm system to lift station No. 19 this year. This additional alarm will ensure us the necessary warning so we can respond to a lift station malfunction in a timely manner which should prevent residential backups associated with failure of this lift station. Proposed Pilot Program Summary: The proposed pilot program is attached. Below is a brief summary of the program: The City will participate in the costs associated with furnishing and installing backwater valves on service lines at the ten (10) identified locations. Participation is limited to 75% of the valve purchase and basic installation costs, up to a maximum amount of $2,000 per residence. Personal property costs beyond the basic installation costs are the responsibility of the property owner. Future valve replacement costs will be the responsibility of the property owner. Property owners must apply for City assistance under this program and will be required to provide a waiver of liability for damages Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 23 associated with future backups. Property owners will not be required to obtain sewer backup insurance coverage nor provide valve maintenance as recommended by the valve manufacture; however, it will be recommended they do so. Recommendation: If all ten (10) identified (eligible) property owners utilize this program, total City cost is limited to a maximum of $20,000. A second alarm system for this lift station is estimated to cost about $8,000. Funding for this is available in the Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund. Staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution approving the “Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program”. This program will go into effect immediately if adopted by Council. Attachments: Resolution Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program Prepared by: Scott Merkley/Mike Rardin, Public Works Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 24 RESOLUTION NO. 00-068 RESOLUTION ADOPTING SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LINE BACKWATER VALVE PILOT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City has an established sanitary sewer service operated as a public utility pursuant to Minnesota Statutes; and WHEREAS, the City has identified ten (10) properties subject to past multiple sanitary sewer backups; and WHEREAS, sewer system improvements are possible but costly; and WHEREAS, it appears to be more timely and cost effective to assist identified residents (properties) with the funding of backwater valves on their service lines in lieu of larger system improvements; and WHEREAS, the “Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program” establishes a pilot program to assist identified residents (properties) with the purchase and installation of backwater valves on their service lines; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the City adopts the “Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program” dated May 15, 2000. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2000 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 25 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LINE BACKWATER VALVE PILOT PROGRAM Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 26 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. GENERAL………………………………………………………………….1 II. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS………………………………………………… 1 III. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS……………………………………………. 1 IV. PROGRAM and APPLICANT REQUIREMENTS (RESPONSIBILITIES)……………………………………………………..2 V. PROGRAM PROCEDURE………………………………………………. 2 Exhibit A Identified Properties…………………………………………………………………....3 Exhibit B………………………………………………………………………… 4 Administrative Procedure Exhibits C through J Attached By Reference (Information, Application, Estimate, Agreement Forms, etc) Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 27 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LINE BACKWATER VALVE PILOT PROGRAM This program has been designed to assist identified property owners within the City of St. Louis Park that have been subject to recurrent sanitary sewer backups due to system related problems. This document sets forth the guidelines for the administration of the Sanitary Sewer Service Line Backwater Valve Pilot Program hereafter known as the “Program”. I. GENERAL A. The City of St. Louis Park, hereinafter known as the “City”, will provide grants to identified St. Louis Park property owners to cover costs associated with the purchase and basic installation of service line backwater valves. Property owners will be responsible for any personal property costs associated with the installation of the valves. B. Grants will be limited to 75% of the actual purchase and basic installation costs of approved backwater valves up to a maximum amount of $2,000 per property (residence). Personal property costs (flooring, paneling, bookcases, etc.) are the responsibility of the property owner and will not be paid for by the City or used for grant determination purposes. C. The City has defined a “basic installation” to mean the work required to remove concrete flooring, install the valve and associated apparatus, and to restore the concrete flooring. D. The Program will become effective immediately upon City Council approval of the Program and will be funded by the Sanitary Sewer Utility. E. The City will not participate in future valve maintenance or replacement costs. F. The Director of Public Works shall administer the Program. II. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS A. Eligible applicants are owners of property identified in the Pilot Program Properties list (Exhibit A). III. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS A. Improvements are limited to installation of sanitary sewer service line backwater valves as approved by the Director of Public Works and Inspections or designee(s) and may include but are not limited to any of the following valve types or brands/models. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 28 1. Flapper Valve 2. Floating Ball Valve. 3. Gate Valve. 4. Peterson Valve Company, Model PV-4300 IV. PROGRAM AND APPLICANT REQUIREMENTS 1. Applicants are required to complete an application form and cost estimate. 2. Applicants will be required to provide a waiver of liability to the City for future claims due to sewer backup damages. 3. It is recommended that applicants obtain or maintain sewer backup insurance coverage. 4. It is recommended that applicants provide manufacturer recommended valve maintenance. V. PROGRAM PROCEDURE A. Funding is available throughout the year. Applications will be accepted anytime throughout the year. B. Process program requests as outlined in Exhibit B. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 29 Exhibit A Pilot Program Properties Station Address / Property Impacted Events Estimated Damages Priority #19 - 3036 Glenhurst Ave S 2915 Inglewood Ave S 2/00 $1,300 1 2955 Joppa Ave S 2/00 $500 1 4008 Minnetonka Blvd 2/00 minimal 1 4120 Sunset Blvd 2/00 ? 1 4123 Sunset Blvd 7/87 2/00 87-$35,000 00-$20,000 1 4200 Sunset Blvd 7/87 7/97 2/00 87-$25,000 97- ? 00-$5,000 1 4201 Sunset Blvd 7/87 7/97 2/00 87-? 7/97-? 2/00-$25,000 1 4210 Sunset Blvd 2/00 ? 1 4220 Sunset Blvd 2/00 2/00-$25,000 1 Sewer Line 3217 Sumter Ave S Multiple Unknown 1 Notes: - Properties determined by City Council during Study Session of April 24, 2000 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 30 Exhibit B Public Works Administrative Process Procedure/Task 1. Make preliminary determination of eligibility based on Exhibit A. 2. City mail program information letter, application, and cost estimate form (Exhibits C, D, and E) to residents who express an interest in the program. 3. City conducts site inspection. 4. City reviews program rules and procedures with property owner (explain exhibits and review owner responsibilities). Review proposed backwater valve options with owner; instruct the owner to obtain quotes for the work and to provide final application to Public Works. 5. City contacts owner regarding grant application; sends owner an approval letter (Exhibit F) requesting owner to return the signed and completed Owner/City Agreement (Exhibit G), to receive final grant approval. Provide owner Completion of Work Certificate (Exhibit A) to request grant proceeds upon completion of work. 6. City receives Owner/City Agreement (Exhibit G). 7. City receives Completion of Work Certificate (Exhibit H) upon completion of work. 8. City conducts final inspection 9. City sends completion letter (Exhibit I) to owner with grant payment. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line Policies Page 31 Service Line Cost InformationMay 3, 2011Year# of Repairs Total Cost Ave CostYear # of Repairs Total Cost Ave Cost20073193,485$ 3,016$ 20072279,290$ 3,604$ 200829112,690$ 3,886$ 200823108,804$ 4,731$ 20092251,140$ 2,325$ 200995274,420$ 2,889$ Ave2785,772$ 3,075$ Ave47154,171$ 3,741$ # of Services 14,000 # of Services 14,000Age of Services See Histogram Age of Services See HistogramAve Life (yrs) 70 Ave Life (yrs) 70Long Term Capital Cost (1)(14,000 services)43,054,913$ Initial Inspection Cost (2)(14,000 services)245,000$ Initial Repair Cost - 15% (3)(2,100 services)231,000$ 476,000$ Ave Annual Replacement Costs (4)(est @ 200 / yr)615,070$ Ave Annual Inspection Costs (5)(4 yr insp pgm)61,250$ Ave Annual Repair Costs (6)(4 yr insp pgm)57,750$ 1 - 14,000 x $3,075 = $43,054,913734,070$ 2 - 14,000 x 1/2 hr x $35 = $245,00015%3 - 14,000 x 15% x $110 = $231,0004 - 200 x $3,075 = $615,070Access inspection cost estimated at $35 / hr 5 - $245,000 / 4 years = $61,250 / yearAccess repair cost estimated at $110 / hr 6 - $231,000 / 4 years = $57,750 / year2011 Budgeted Water Fund Revenues - $4,989,331Sewer Service Line RepairsInspections Department InformationInspections Department InformationPotential Ownership CostsTotal Initial CostsTotal Annual CostsOROwnership - not recommendedReplacement cost estimated at $3,075 / serviceImmediate rate increase required - based on need to enter private properties annually for inspection, cleaning, and repairs.Water Service Line RepairsWater Service Line NotesG:\Pubwks\Agendas\Study Sessions\2011 - Current\07-July\July 11\Service Lines Report and docs\Attachment 5.1.xls06/30/2011Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line PoliciesPage 32 Water Service Line Install History0100020003000400050006000700080009000pre 19401940's1950's1960's1970's1980'safter 1990Services InstalledStudy Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 5) Subject: Review of Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Line PoliciesPage 33 Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 6 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Change in Drug Task Force Affiliation. RECOMMENDED ACTION: This report is advisory in nature and staff desires to receive feedback from the City Council on the proposed change in the City’s affiliation with a drug task force. During the past few months we have been involved in discussions with police chiefs representing the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force (Edina, Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, and the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office) to explore the possibility of having the St. Louis Park Police Department join this task force. If the decision is made to join this task force, a new joint powers agreement will be drafted and presented to Council for approval prior to the end of this calendar year. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council have questions or concerns about the Police Dept making a change in its drug task force affiliation? The proposed change in the drug task force affiliation would result in leaving the Northwest Metro Drug Task Force (St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Plymouth, Golden Valley, New Hope, Crystal, Robbinsdale and Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office) effective January 1st, 2012 and joining the Southwest Metro Task Force at that time. The Hopkins Police Department has also participated in these discussions, and is currently considering this change as well. BACKGROUND: The St. Louis Park Police Department has been a member of the Northwest Metro Drug Task Force since 1988. The most recent joint powers agreement we currently operate under was approved by Council in 2006. This partnership has worked effectively and served our community well for 23 years. Looking forward, the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force offers a different model in several areas. The current practice with the Northwest Drug Task Force is to rotate the finance and administrative responsibilities among the member cities. In addition to the significant workload this creates, accompanied by a long learning curve, the aftermath of the gang strike force demise would suggest housing these responsibilities under one stable and defined agency umbrella is the better practice. The Southwest Metro Drug Task Force houses these responsibilities under the umbrella of Hennepin County. In addition to the shift in business model, this shift would enhance already established alignment with Edina, Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, and the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office in the following areas: • Longstanding ERU consortium - Our Emergency Response Unit trains bi-monthly with teams from Edina, Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, and Hopkins. In addition, these teams train together at Camp Ripley for 5 days every year, and share a longstanding culture of service and teamwork. Because the most common utilization of our ERU teams is the execution of drug warrants, this relationship would benefit both units. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 6) Page 2 Subject: Change in Drug Task Force Affiliation • The growing partnership of independent PSAPs (Public Safety Answering Points) in Hennepin County - We have been working very hard during the past few years to build an alliance with other cities operating independent dispatch centers in Hennepin County. Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, Edina, and Hopkins all operate independent PSAPs. We are creating back-up systems and networks with these cities to provide support during large scale incidents and in the event of a major mechanical or technological failure. This partnership was tested recently when construction related to the Northside Park project resulted in our fiber (phone) line being accidentally cut. Our staff and services were moved to Minnetonka Police Department for approximately seven hours, and PSAP services were delivered without incident. In addition to our strong relationship with Minnetonka in this area, we are having discussions with Hopkins on enhancing our partnership capabilities in the PSAP area as they migrate to LOGIS. • The Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office leads a consortium called CISA (Criminal Information Sharing and Analysis) which organizes cities throughout Hennepin County into geographic work groups that meet monthly to share information related to crime trends and patterns including identification of high profile suspects. Our work group is south of 394 and west of Minneapolis and includes Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie. This initiative has clearly added value as a force multiplier for our community, and there is a strong sense of teamwork and cooperation in this work group. • Finally, although this is a fairly informal partnership practice, we provide and receive mutual aid frequently with Minnetonka, Edina, and Hopkins. We request mutual aid less frequently from cities north of 394, and they request mutual aid less frequently from us. This practice is probably a function of the above three bullet points, but we do have a longstanding practice of working well with the cities in the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force in daily operations and resource sharing. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Northwest Metro Drug Task Force has about $600,000 in its operations account. This money represents a combination of forfeiture and grant funds, and by the Joint Powers Agreement belongs equally to the 7 agencies in the task force. These funds have restricted use as defined by statute, and we would not be able to take our “1/7th” with us if we leave the task force. This money is used to fund most of the operating costs outside the base salary of each officer, which is paid by the officer’s agency. The Southwest Metro Drug Task Force would need a new Joint Powers Agreement if St. Louis Park and/or Hopkins join the task force. The Sheriffs Office has spoken to the County Attorney about this, and expects no issues or costs associated with this. Tom Scott would provide assistance and review during the JPA development process as well. The Southwest Metro Drug Task Force has a different business model which utilizes the Sheriffs Office and Hennepin County as the fiscal host agency and administrative lead agency. The Sheriffs Office also provides a Lieutenant as the operations supervisor for the work group. Each agency in the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force pays the majority of the costs associated with participation during the year, and at the end of the year grant and forfeiture funds are used to reimburse each city’s general fund as a means of recovery for costs such as overtime and vehicles. Similar to the Northwest Metro Drug Task Force, the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force does not reimburse an officer’s home agency for the costs of base salary and benefits. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 6) Page 3 Subject: Change in Drug Task Force Affiliation The current Southwest Metro Drug Task Force members have indicated they did not anticipate charging any type of “equity assessment” for us to join. Minor adjustments to annual reimbursements may be proposed to address sharing of existing assets/equity by new agencies. VISION CONSIDERATION: None Attachments: None Prepared by: John Luse, Chief of Police Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 7 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Not Applicable. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. BACKGROUND: At every Study Session, verbal communications will take place between staff and Council for the purpose of information sharing. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. Attachments: None Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 8 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Update. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report is to update the Council on the recent planning and project development activities related to this project – Project No. 20120100. The City Council directed staff earlier this spring to periodically update the Council on the status of this project. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. Please let staff know of any comments or questions you might have. BACKGROUND: History The City’s Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.) indentifies the Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue intersection as a priority improvement project. The proposed project will provide for the construction of a grade-separated interchange at Louisiana Avenue and Highway 7. The project also includes pedestrian and bicycle friendly improvements along with re-configuration of the frontage roads in order to improve access, safety, and traffic flow for both the Highway 7 corridor and Louisiana Avenue. This proposed improvement is essential in meeting long term transportation and safety needs of both Mn/DOT and the City. Phase 3 Activities Phase 3 activities include Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment. The Environmental Assessment (EA) is nearing completion. The EA document was published in mid-May. A project open house/public hearing was held on Thursday, June 2, 2011 in the City Hall Council Chambers to provide an opportunity for the public to view the approved design layout and provide testimony regarding the Environmental Assessment. Eleven people attended the open house/public hearing. No formal comments were submitted or recorded at the meeting. The 30 day comment period to allow interested parties to review and comment on the findings has now concluded. Final approval of the EA is anticipated by August 1, 2011 pending any unforeseen delays due to a State shutdown. A noisewall along the north side of Highway 7 west of Louisiana Avenue was proposed based on projected traffic noise levels. A survey was sent to those property owners immediately adjacent to the location of the proposed noise wall. The survey requested a response from the property owners on whether or not they support construction of a noise wall. Those property owners who responded to the survey all indicated that they do not support construction of a noise wall. As a result of the survey responses, staff plans to recommend to Council that they adopt a resolution requesting that a noise wall not be constructed in the northwest quadrant of the project area. The resolution will be placed on the July 18, 2011 City Council meeting agenda. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 8) Page 2 Subject: Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Update Phase 4 Activities Council authorized SEH, Inc. to begin Phase 4 activities, expected to cost $958,600, on April 4, 2011. Phase 4 activities, described as Final Design and Plan Preparation, include detailed engineering work to complete plans and specifications needed for bidding. The following is a list of tasks associated with this phase of the project: • Project Management • Public Involvement • Survey Work • Geotechnical Analysis • Drainage Design • Wetland Permitting • Roadway Design • Bridge Design • Construction Staging • Lighting • Aesthetic Design and Landscape Architecture SEH, Inc. began work on Phase 4 activities later in April. Right-of-Way acquisition activities will be conducted during, but are not included in SEH Phase 4 activities. Right-of-Way acquisition activities, as needed, will be contracted for separately during Phase 4. Project Schedule The work to this point has been proceeding to allow for construction of the project to begin in the summer of 2012 (contingent on full project funding). A schedule summary is as follows: • April, 2011 – Begin Final Design (Phase 4 activity) • June 2, 2011 – Project Open House and Public Hearing on the Environmental Assessment • August, 2011 – EA completed and approved (concludes Phase 3 activities) • September - December 2011 – Right-of-Way Acquisition Process • January 2012 – Condemnation Initiated (only if needed) • January – March 2012 – Construction Plan Review/Revisions/Approval (Phase 4 activity) • March 31, 2012 – Federal Funding Sunset Date • May, 2012 – Advertise for Bids • June, 2012 – Open Bids • July, 2012 – Award Contract and Begin Construction Council can chose to slow down or to stop work on this project at any point or time. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: SEH, Inc. Design Contract Summary Phase Contract Amount Cost to Date Status 1 & 2 $306,548.00 $296,420.77 Work Completed 3 $535,000.00 $449,291.02 84% Complete 4 $958,600.00 $26,482.00 3% Complete Total $1,800,148.00 $746,848.53 Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 8) Page 3 Subject: Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Update Funding Sources and Opportunities $7,630,000 in federal funds has been secured through the Met Council’s State Transportation Program Urban Grant solicitation. $594,000 has been secured through the Mn/DOT Municipal Agreement Program. Mn/DOT has also committed $1,000,000 in Access Management Funds towards the project. The estimated project costs and funding sources known at this time are: Project Costs Construction $16,500,000 Engineering $ 2,820,000 Right of Way $ 2,680,000 Total Costs $22,000,000 Funding Sources Federal (STP) Funds $7,630,000 City (20% match – undetermined source) $2,398,000 Mn/DOT Access Management $1,000,000 Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreement $ 594,000 Total Committed Funds $11,622,000 Unfunded Amount $10,378,000 Current funding for Phases 1 through 4 is coming from HRA levy proceeds which have been designated to pay for infrastructure improvements in redeveloping areas. A funding source for the City’s required match noted above or other possible city costs has not yet been determined. The HRA levy proceeds could be a logical source. Steps have and continue to be taken to secure the remaining funds needed for this project (the “unfunded” amount noted above) VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus area has been identified by Council. St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: • Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT. Attachments: None Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 9 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Sidewalk Repair Program Update. RECOMMENDED ACTION: For information purposes only. No formal action required. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council have questions or concerns over revisions staff has made to the annual sidewalk repair program? BACKGROUND: History At the February 22, 2010 Study Session (attached) staff reported that since about 2000 Public Works has budgeted and spent $85,000 annually on repair of sidewalk trip faults. Trip faults are defined as faults of ¾ inch or greater. Sidewalks are inspected annually and where faults are found temporary bituminous patches are placed to eliminate the trip hazard until permanent repairs can be made. Permanent repairs consist of the removal and replacement of the concrete sidewalk panels. Based on the current annual budget of $85,000, Public Works is able to make permanent repairs to approximately 150 trip faults per year. At the end of 2009 there were about 1165 known trip faults in the city that had temporary bituminous patches. The total number of trip faults that are temporarily patched appears to be increasing yearly. It appears that to prevent further long term deterioration of the sidewalks in the city, either a less costly repair method needs to be found or the annual budget will need to be increased. 2010 Pilot Project A new sidewalk trip fault repair method was recently developed and introduced in the United States in 2009. It consists of saw cutting the sidewalk panel(s) horizontally (similar to grinding) to eliminate the trip fault. The saw cut creates a smooth beveled, or ramped, surface with no abrupt bump. The work is accomplished by one person using a small tractor with a concrete sawing apparatus attached to the back. In the summer of 2010, Public Works contracted for a pilot project to evaluate this method of sidewalk repair. A quote was solicited and a contract was awarded to perform 80 hours of this repair work. An additional 32 hours of work was added to the contract so that most of the needed work could be completed north of Minnetonka Blvd in the Texas Tonka, Birchwood and Fern Hill neighborhoods. At the quoted rate of $195 per hour the total contract amounted to $21,840. The pilot project repaired 546 trip hazards during the repair period with an average of 39 repairs per day at a cost of $40 per location. Our conventional repair method, where the concrete sidewalk panels are removed and replace, typically cost from $160 to $320 depending on the trip fault severity (one or two 5ft x5ft panels replaced). This is 12 to 25 percent less than our current cost to remove and replace. The disruption to sidewalk use by this method is also far less than our conventional repair method and requires no lawn restoration work. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 9) Page 2 Subject: Sidewalk Repair Program Update Public Works staff has inspected and evaluated the repairs areas and consider this repair method suitable for correcting some, but not all, trip hazards and repairs. This repair eliminates the trip fault with a smooth ramped surface which is aesthetically acceptable and can be considered a permanent repair. Should the sidewalk continue to move and create another trip fault, it would then likely be removed and replaced and the underlying cause of the soil movement would be corrected (i.e. tree root removal or base soils correction). Last summer, Park Update aired a short segment on local cable television about our pilot project showing the repair method and providing contact information for residents to comment. Few comments where received from the residents about the repair method however those few comments that were received where all positive. 2011 and Future Sidewalk Repair Program Based on results of the pilot project, Public Works staff is recommending continued use of the new sidewalk repair method. As part of the annual sidewalk repair program the $82,500 CIP Budget will be divided between the two repair methods. For 2011, staff intends to spend approximately $30,000 for the new saw cutting repair method and the remaining $52,500 will be used for traditional repairs to correct other sidewalk deficiencies (pole relocations, ped ramp relocations / renovations, barrier removals or construction, curved sidewalk realigning, etc.). Each year, the sidewalk repair program will attempt to complete the necessary repairs within two Pavement Management (PM) Areas. This year’s program will concentrate on completing sidewalk repairs in PM Areas 4 and 8, essentially the northeast quarter of the City. In 2012, sidewalk repairs will be performed in Areas 1 and 5 (southwest); in 2013, Areas 2 and 6 (southeast); and in 2014, Areas 3 and 7 (northwest). The thought behind this plan is that all the necessary sidewalk repairs would be completed the year preceding both the Sealcoat Project and PM Project. One question often posed by residents during work on the PM Project is “why don’t you fix my sidewalk while you are doing the street work.” Performing the necessary sidewalk repairs a year in advance of the PM Project should lessen this question. At the time of last year’s Pilot Project, there was only one vender known performing this new style of sidewalk repair in Minnesota. Later in the year a second vendor approached us to solicit work using a similar horizontally concrete sawing repair method. This contractor performed a demonstration cut on a sidewalk fault near the Police Department building entrance. The results were the same as those performed by the contractor of the Pilot Project. With this year’s sidewalk repair project, staff intends to solicit quotes from both vendors and may award work to each vendor to allow for a comparison of their work. At the July 18, 2011 City Council Meeting, staff intends to bring a report of the bid tabulation for the 2011 Random Concrete Repair Project and recommend award to the lowest responsible bidder. The project will include work for the annual repair and construction of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and storm sewer catch basins at various locations in the city. The estimated cost for the work is $135,000. In July, 2011, staff also intends to solicit quotes for repairing sidewalk trip faults using the horizontal concrete sawing method. Approximately $30,000 of work will be solicited and a contract will be awarded administratively. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 9) Page 3 Subject: Sidewalk Repair Program Update VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus areas have been identified by Council. St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: • Developing an expanded and organized network of sidewalks and trails. Attachments: February 22, 2010 Study Session Report Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 9) Page 4 Subject: Sidewalk Repair Program Update February 22, 2010 Study Session Report TITLE: Sidewalk Repair Pilot Project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: For information purposes only. No formal action required. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council have concerns over trying this new sidewalk trip fault repair method? BACKGROUND: History Since about 2000 Public Works has budgeted and spent $85,000 annually on repair of sidewalk trip faults. Trip faults are defined as faults of ¾ inch or greater. Sidewalks are inspected annually and where faults are found temporary bituminous patches are placed to eliminate the trip hazard until permanent repairs can be made. Permanent repairs consist of the removal and replacement of the concrete sidewalk panels. Based on the current annual budget of $85,000, we are able to make permanent repairs to approximately 150 trip faults per year. There are currently 1165 known trip faults in the city that have temporary bituminous patches. The total number of trip faults that are temporarily patched appears to be increasing yearly. It appears that to prevent further long term deterioration of the sidewalks in the city, either a less costly repair method needs to be found or the annual budget will need to be increased. Pilot Project A new sidewalk trip fault repair method has recently been developed and during 2009 started to be used in the United States. It consists of saw cutting the sidewalk panel(s) horizontally (similar to grinding) to eliminate the trip fault. Staff has been investigating the possibility of using this repair method in our city. The following link is to the company’s website where the repair method is described where before and after photos are shown along with a video of the actual repair work being done. www.SidewalksPlus.com The cost to repair trip faults utilizing this new method is estimated at 10 to 20 per cent of our current repair cost. At this cost, it appears it would be possible to repair all known trip faults in the city during 2010. At the rate of about 40 repairs daily, it would take approximately 30 days or 6 weeks to do this. Instead of repairing all faults with this new method, staff feels a pilot project consisting of two weeks of work which could repair about 400 trip faults is a more reasonable way to try this new repair technique. This pilot would cost about $20,000 with the remaining budget dollars being used to repair other sidewalk deficiencies (pole relocations, ped ramp relocations / renovations, barrier removals or construction, curved sidewalk realigning, etc.). Based on repair results and looks (aesthetics), this 2010 pilot project could be continued, expanded, or eliminated for 2011 or beyond. This work is only done by one vendor at this time. A contract for this project would be arranged for utilizing the quote process. Staff proposes to do this work immediately this spring so Council and the public have ample opportunity in 2010 to both see and comment on project results. This project would be set up as any other capital project so information regarding the progress of the work would be reported in the “Weekly Construction” updates to both the public and Council. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 9) Page 5 Subject: Sidewalk Repair Program Update VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus areas have been identified by Council. St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: • Developing an expanded and organized network of sidewalks and trails. Attachments: None Meeting Date: July 11, 2011 Agenda Item #: 10 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Wooddale Pointe Project Update. RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. The EDA will be asked to consider an amendment to the Wooddale Pointe Redevelopment Contract at the July 18th EDA meeting. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support the proposed extensions to the Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living (Greco Development) so as to allow the Wooddale Pointe project to proceed? BACKGROUND: On June 8th Greco Development purchased the 2-acre property at 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. from The Rottlund Company for its proposed Wooddale Pointe project. Recently, the Redeveloper’s financing partner, Oak Grove Capital, was able to lock in its interest rate with HUD. As a result, they have given Staff assurance that they expect to close on their project financing with HUD on or before July 29th. Greco expects then to break ground in August. Construction will take up to 15 months, and Greco anticipates completing the Wooddale Pointe project by or before November 2012. As envisioned, Wooddale Pointe will entail a five-story, mixed use building consisting of a 115 unit senior assisted living complex on the second through fifth floors, 10,000 SF of retail on the first floor and a small outdoor public gathering area including public art. Need for a Second Amendment A Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and Greco was approved June 7, 2010 to enable the above project to move forward. The time to secure a financing commitment from HUD took much longer than anticipated so on April 4, 2011 the EDA approved a First Amendment to the Contract thus extending the project’s construction schedule. According to the First Amendment of the Redevelopment Contract, construction on the Wooddale Point project was to have commenced by July 1, 2011 and be completed by September 30, 2012. In order for the Redeveloper to close with HUD and to avoid being found in default, the project’s required commencement and completion schedule needs to be adjusted through a second amendment. Under the proposed Second Amendment the project’s required commencement date would be extended six months to December 31, 2011 and its required completion date would be extended to December 31, 2012; just in case there are any further delays. Study Session Meeting of July 11, 2011 (Item No. 10) Page 2 Subject: Wooddale Point Project Update Update on Grant Applications In May the EDA, in conjunction with Greco’s environmental consultant (the Javelin Group), submitted grant applications to DEED, the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County to address the additional contamination discovered on the subject property. Staff was recently informed that the EDA was awarded a total of $217,676 in grant funding to help clean up the site ($163,676 from DEED, $70,000 from the Metropolitan Council and $47,000 from Hennepin County). The EDA was awarded all the grant funds for which it applied. The proposed Second Amendment will also recognize the grant awards and explain the procedure for their disbursement to the Redeveloper. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed contract extensions reflect the most current estimated construction schedule for completing Wooddale Pointe. The construction delay means that the Redeveloper’s reimbursement of TIF-eligible expenses related to the project will likewise be delayed. VISION CONSIDERATION: Wooddale Pointe is consistent with the City’s vision to be a community of diverse, high quality housing permeated with arts and cultural activities with many gathering places. Attachments: None Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager