HomeMy Public PortalAbout11.19.2019 Complete City Council Regular Meeting Packet Posted 11/15/2019 Page 1 of 1
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
7:00 P.M.
Medina City Hall
2052 County Road 24
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of the November 5, 2019 Special Council Meeting
B. Minutes of the November 6, 2019 Regular Council Meeting
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Public Safety Director Appointment
B. Approve Stormwater Design Manual
C. Approve TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Contract Renewal for 2020
D. Approve Hennepin County Natural Resources Grant for the Ardmore Subwatershed Projects
E. Accept Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
F. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at Brockton 4th Addition
G. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at Brockton 5th Addition
H. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at Brockton 6th Addition
VI. COMMENTS
A. From Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda
B. Park Commission
C. Planning Commission
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Willow Drive/Highway 55 Regional Lift Station Project
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
XI. ADJOURN
Meeting Rules of Conduct:
Fill out and turn in white
comment card
Give name and address
Indicate if representing a group
Limit remarks to 3-5 minutes
MEMORANDUM
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson, City Administrator
DATE OF REPORT: November 14, 2019
DATE OF MEETING: November 19, 2019
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Report
V. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Public Safety Director Appointment – On October 22nd, the City Council
interviewed two internal candidates for the Public Safety Director position, with Sgt. Jason
Nelson ranking on top. When factoring in Sgt. Nelson’s current experience and pay with
the city, staff recommends starting him at $48.72 per hour ($101,337.60 annual salary),
with the ability to receive increases after yearly satisfactory reviews until maximum pay is
reached. Staff recommends approval.
See attached memo.
B. Approve Stormwater Design Manual – The City of Medina’s Local Surface Water
Management Plan (LSWMP) identifies the goals and policies that define the City’s
stormwater management program. The goals and policies are implemented via the City
Stormwater Management ordinance and this Design Manual. Medina’s stormwater
requirements were written to meet the City’s goals to preserve, protect, and manage its
water resources as well as to meet federal, state, and watershed stormwater regulations.
Staff recommends approval.
See attached manual.
C. Approve TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Contract Renewal for 2020 – Attached is an
addendum to the contract with TimeSaver’s until December 31, 2020 for recording
secretary services for meeting minutes. The rates reflect an increase of less than 2.5%.
Staff recommends approval.
See attached contract.
D. Approve Hennepin County Natural Resources Grant for the Ardmore Subwatershed
Projects – The City of Medina has been awarded a $20,000 grant for the Ardmore
Subwatershed projects from Hennepin County. The projects are scheduled to be
constructed in 2021. Staff recommends approval.
See attached agreement.
E. Accept Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study – The Chippewa Road and
Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study was initiated to develop a cohesive plan to guide the
2
transportation needs, right-of-way, public utilities, and other parameters within these
corridors, while meeting the needs of the property owners, developers, and other
stakeholders within the area. The intent of this final report memorandum is to memorialize
the process and develop the City’s vision. Staff is requesting that the City Council accept
the study at the meeting and review future steps with WSB when appropriate per the
direction at the November 6, 2019 City Council Meeting. Staff recommends approval.
See attached study.
F. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at Brockton 4th Addition – Staff
recommends approval of the resolution accepting the public utilities and authorizing the
release of the letter of credit upon receipt of a two-year warranty bond.
See attached resolution.
G. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at Brockton 5th Addition – Staff
recommends approval of the resolution accepting the public utilities and authorizing the
release of the letter of credit upon receipt of a two-year warranty bond.
See attached resolution.
H. Resolution Accepting Public Utilities within the Enclave at Brockton 6th Addition – Staff
recommends approval of the resolution accepting the public utilities and authorizing the
release of the letter of credit upon receipt of a two-year warranty bond.
See attached resolution.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Willow Drive/Highway 55 Regional Lift Station Project – On September 17, 2019 the City
Council directed staff to authorize the preparation of an engineering feasibility report for the
proposed Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station Project. The Willow Drive/TH 55
Regional Lift Station Project has been included with the City of Medina’s capital
improvement plan based on the anticipated development noted in the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan. The plan identified the need for a lift station to serve properties in and around Willow
Drive north of Chippewa Road that are not serviceable with gravity sewer, including the
proposed Adams Pest Control development. This lift station will serve as a regional lift
station and receive wastewater from the ultimate development within the EC-1 sewershed of
the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Wastewater Plan and potentially beyond.
See attached memo and feasibility study.
Recommended Motion: Consider authorizing final design for the lift station project to
prepare for possible bidding as early as February of 2020.
3
X. APPROVAL TO PAY BILLS
Recommended Motion: Motion to approve the bills, EFT 005297E-005315E for $58,638.30
and order check numbers 049512-049565 for $166,471.49 and payroll EFT 0509829-0509861
for $54,333.89.
INFORMATION PACKET:
Planning Department Update
Police Department Update
Public Works Department Update
Claims List
Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 1
November 5, 2019
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 5, 2019
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in special session on November 5, 2019 at
1:00 p.m. at the locations noted below in Medina, MN.
I. Call to Order
Members present: Albers, Anderson, DesLauriers, Martin, and Pederson
Members absent:
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Assistant City Administrator
Jodi Gallup, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, Planning Director Dusty Finke,
Finance Director Erin Barnhart, and Public Safety Director Ed Belland.
II. 2019 Fall Business Tours
GO2 Print Media Group – 62 Hamel Road – City Council and staff met with Tom
Therrien and his staff at the facility. He provided a tour and information on the business
to the City Council. Mr. Therrien informed the City Council that GO2 Print Media is
happy in Medina and look forward to continued growth. GO2 Print Media recently
purchased the JT Miller building next door and is looking to expand into that space.
SharePoint Credit Union – 3575 Sioux Drive – City Council and staff met with Peter
Masterson and his staff. Mr. Masterson provided a tour and information on the not for
profit credit union. The organization started as the Red Owl Credit Union in 1933 and
now has expanded to 6 branches in Minnesota. They are projecting better than expected
in this location and attribute the success to the new housing in the area.
Polaris – 2100 Highway 55 – City Council and staff met with Doug Fischer and Adam
Strack at the facility. Mr. Fischer provided a tour and information on the updates to the
facility and current financial projections for the company. Polaris is pleased with the
location in Medina. Staff was asked to put together a resolution recognizing Polaris for
their 20-year anniversary in Medina.
III. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m.
_________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
Medina City Council Special Meeting Minutes 2
November 5, 2019
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 1
November 6, 2019
DRAFT 1
2
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 6, 2019 3
4
The City Council of Medina, Minnesota met in regular session on November 6, 2019 at 5
7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Chambers. Mayor Martin presided. 6
7
I. ROLL CALL 8
9
Members present: Albers, Anderson, DesLauriers, Martin, and Pederson. 10
11
Members absent: None. 12
13
Also present: City Administrator Scott Johnson, Assistant City Administrator Jodi 14
Gallup, City Attorney David Anderson, City Engineer Jim Stremel, City Planning Director 15
Dusty Finke, Public Works Director Steve Scherer, and Chief of Police Ed Belland. 16
17
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (7:00 p.m.) 18
19
III. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA (7:00 p.m.) 20
The agenda was approved as presented. 21
22
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (7:00 p.m.) 23
24
A. Approval of the October 15, 2019 Council Open House Meeting Minutes 25
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to approve the October 15, 2019 Council 26
Open House meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 27
28
B. Approval of the October 15, 2019 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 29
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to approve the October 15, 2019 regular City 30
Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 31
32
C. Approval of the October 22, 2019 Special City Council Meeting Minutes 33
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to approve the October 22, 2019 special City 34
Council meeting minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously. 35
36
V. CONSENT AGENDA (7:01 p.m.) 37
38
A. Approve Cooperative Agreement for Hickory Drive Stormwater 39
Improvements 40
B. Approve LMCIT Liability Insurance Renewal Waiver 41
C. Approve Brockton Lane Engineering Design Amendment 42
D. Resolution No. 2019-70 Extending the Approval of a Site Plan Review for 43
Wealshire, LLC to Construct Phase II of Its Memory Care Facility at 4555 44
Mohawk Drive 45
Anderson stated that he has received a number of calls from residents applauding the 46
excellent work on Brockton Lane and congratulated City staff for their excellent work. 47
48
Moved by Pederson, seconded by DesLauriers, to approve the consent agenda. Motion 49
passed unanimously. 50
51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 2
November 6, 2019
VI. COMMENTS (7:01 p.m.) 1
2
A. Comments from Citizens on Items not on the Agenda 3
There were none. 4
5
B. Park Commission 6
Scherer reported that earlier this week staff met with Three Rivers Park District 7
regarding a corridor study for the Diamond Lake Trail. He noted that it was a great 8
discussion and direction was provided on how this corridor could work with the existing 9
trail system in Medina. He stated that the Park Commission discussed the Mark of 10
Excellence concept at its last meeting, noting that the consensus was to perhaps look at 11
other areas as well that could be more conducive to everything in that area. He noted 12
that the Commission agreed with preserving the trees but felt that a better location could 13
be found for an active park. 14
15
C. Planning Commission 16
Finke reported that the Park Commission will meet the following week to hold public 17
hearings for a Rezoning/Preliminary Plat/Site Plan review for Adams Pest Control and a 18
variance for the Independence Beach neighborhood related to the 25 percent hardcover 19
maximum. 20
21
VII. NEW BUSINESS 22
23
A. Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study (7:07 p.m.) 24
Stremel highlighted the different elements of the final report, which was included in the 25
Council packet. He stated that an 80-foot right-of-way would be desired, with more width 26
in the turn lane areas. He displayed the final preferred alternative, noting that the 27
roundabout option was added back in based on public input received at the open house. 28
He advised that another option was provided for the OSI driveway as well, which is a fair 29
distance north of the existing driveway. He stated that cost estimates were developed 30
for the project, noting they are fairly significant amounts. He explained that if the City 31
funds the project solely that would be the costliest option. He noted that the cost for the 32
watermain is not included but the projects could be combined. He discussed the 33
permitting requirements, noting that staff met with a representative from the DNR the 34
previous week related to the potential wetland impacts and required permits. He stated 35
that one of the next steps would be to determine the Ordinary High Water (OHW) mark. 36
He stated that the permitting timeframe for the DNR and Army Corps of Engineers would 37
be four to six months. He noted that if an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) 38
is completed that would also be about a six-month process. He stated that a previous 39
analysis was completed on the floodplain, noting that since then the data used has 40
changed and therefore that floodplain analysis would need to be updated using the Atlas 41
14 data. He explained that floodplain impacts would need to be mitigated onsite at a 42
one to one ratio. He noted that if the dual turn lane is desired, staff would recommend 43
additional traffic analysis as well. 44
45
Anderson asked why the cost for Chippewa Road would be reduced if a developer 46
comes in and how much that cost would come down. 47
48
Stremel replied that it would be difficult to estimate the cost reduction. He explained that 49
economy of scale provides benefit and noted that a development could also perhaps 50
utilize excavated materials. He noted that the project will continue to be expensive. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 3
November 6, 2019
1
Anderson asked if the DNR provided input on the potential cost for the wetland 2
mitigation costs. 3
4
Stremel stated that he included data on wetland credits, noting that would be the cost if 5
wetland credits are purchased offsite. He stated that if mitigation is provided with 6
development perhaps mitigation could be completed onsite. He noted that the wetland 7
mitigation and floodplain mitigation could also overlap to provide cost savings, which 8
would be another benefit to completing the road project in conjunction with an adjacent 9
development project. 10
11
Albers referenced the EAW and asked if that is solely for the Chippewa Road footprint or 12
whether that includes the Mark of Excellence site. 13
14
Stremel confirmed that the Mark of Excellence project could trigger the EAW. He 15
confirmed that it could make sense to complete an EAW for both elements, should it 16
progress to that point. 17
18
Albers estimated a total cost of over $7,000,000 for the road projects, sewer and 19
watermain. He commented that seems to be a high cost for about a half mile of road. 20
He asked the standard rate for road construction. 21
22
Martin stated that the project includes additional elements including mitigation, utilities, 23
infrastructure, and other improvements. 24
25
Stremel confirmed that this would be more expensive than a typical roadway. 26
27
DesLauriers commented that the cost for Brockton Lane was about $2,000,000 for 28
comparison. 29
30
Martin stated that it seemed the comment from staff was that the trigger for an EAW 31
would be based on the number of acres impacted rather than the total number of acres 32
included in the project. 33
34
Pederson asked if there is a roundabout included in the cost estimate. 35
36
Stremel explained that the cost estimates are based on the base plan and does not 37
include options such as roundabouts. 38
39
Martin asked the cost of the additional steps and the shelf life of those elements for 40
permitting purposes. 41
42
Stremel stated that the topography of the OHW and the floodplain analysis could be 43
used in perpetuity unless there were changes to the wetland complex or rainwater data. 44
He stated that the EAW would also have a long shelf life unless changes are made to 45
that corridor. He noted that the traffic counts and analysis near the OSI area could last a 46
fair amount of time as well but would have the shortest shelf life of the four. He provided 47
the cost estimates to complete each of the four additional steps. 48
49
DesLauriers referenced the six-month process for the EAW and asked if the other steps 50
would have shorter timeframes. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 4
November 6, 2019
1
Stremel confirmed that the other steps would be shorter ranging from a few days or 2
weeks to a couple of months. 3
4
Martin asked for input from the Council on the next steps. She stated that she would not 5
be interested in spending a lot money above the initial study. She noted that the 6
parameters of the project and perhaps even alignment could change dependent on 7
development proposals that come forward. 8
9
Anderson agreed and suggested tabling this until there is resolution related to the Mark 10
of Excellence concept, as that will provide additional input. 11
12
Pederson agreed that would make sense. 13
14
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to table the discussion regarding the 15
Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study until such time the Council feels a 16
determination has been made regarding the Mark of Excellence proposal. Motion 17
passed unanimously. 18
19
B. Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) – Weston Woods – E. of Mohawk 20
Dr., N. of Hwy 55 and 1952 Chippewa Road – Comprehensive Plan 21
Amendment and PUD Concept Plan (7:30 p.m.) 22
Martin noted that many of the Council members attended the Planning Commission 23
meeting and asked if any of the information differs from that information presented. 24
25
Finke reported that the presentation and input from the Planning Commission would 26
largely remain the same. He noted that additional input has been added from the Park 27
Commission. He confirmed that no changes were made to the development proposal. 28
He presented a request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment which would relate to the 29
future land use of the southern property, changing the future land use from business to a 30
combination of residential land uses. He noted that a portion of the site would also be 31
designated as park/open space and would be deeded to the City. He explained that the 32
second Comprehensive Plan amendment would relate to the staging of the northern 33
property, changing that from 2025 to 2020. He stated that would allow for the proposed 34
development of 76 twinhomes on the northern property, and 41 single-family and 33 35
townhomes on the southern property. He displayed an aerial photograph of the site and 36
surrounding properties, identified adjacent property uses. He provided the overall 37
concept plan noting that the property proposed to be deeded to the City would be left as 38
a natural preservation area. He advised that a small active park is also proposed in that 39
location. He noted that there was discussion from the Park Commission as to whether 40
that would be the best location for an active park area. He identified the large wetland to 41
the east of the site, noting that there are additional wetlands throughout the site. He 42
advised that throughout the site there would be relatively minimal wetland impacts. He 43
noted that the applicant proposes to extend Chippewa Road from Mohawk Drive to 44
Arrowhead Drive. He noted that the applicant would pay for the construction cost while 45
the City would be responsible for permitting and wetland mitigation. He stated that 46
between the two sites, the density would be three units per acre and therefore would fall 47
within the range of the Metropolitan Council. He noted that additional details are 48
provided on the PUD concept within the staff report. He explained that would be 49
contingent upon the Comprehensive Plan amendments and therefore he will focus on 50
those elements. He stated that the development proposed on the northern property falls 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 5
November 6, 2019
within the density range specified, noting that the change would move that development 1
from 2025 to 2020 with the requested change to staging. He explained that one reason 2
the staging was set at 2025 is because of the necessary infrastructure improvements 3
needed to support development in that area including the extension of the watermain 4
and the extension of Chippewa Road. He stated that the applicant is proposing to 5
address the infrastructure needs by providing those improvements with this 6
development. He stated that the City also identified a need for an active park in this 7
area, which is also proposed with this request. He noted that other elements of staging 8
are growth management and reduction of growth in concentrated areas. He referenced 9
the Comprehensive Plan amendment requested for the southern property. He explained 10
that this request would not change the MUSA but simply the uses within the MUSA, 11
noting that this would convert about 25 acres of business property to residential. He 12
reviewed goals of the Comprehensive Plan noting that the applicant makes the case that 13
their proposed development has the ability to better meet those objectives. He reviewed 14
the recommendations of the Commissions, noting that the Park Commission supported 15
the preservation of the wooded knoll through the PUD and suggested full park dedication 16
credit is collected. He said that the Park Commission stated that the location of the 17
proposed active park may not be the best location and recommended collecting park 18
dedication fees from the sites in the area as they develop in order to create a larger park 19
in another location. He noted that the Planning Commission held a public hearing the 20
previous month and ultimately the Commission voted 4-2 to recommend denial of the 21
amendments. He stated that additional comments received from the public have been 22
provided to the Council. He stated that Loretto, Corcoran and Hennepin County have 23
provided comments, general in nature. He stated that the PUD concept plan is provided 24
for the Council to provide comments, but the City will need to act on the Comprehensive 25
Plan amendments. 26
27
Bill Griffith, representing the applicant, stated that a lot of work has gone into the plan 28
even though the plan is similar to the past concept. He recognized that the City has a 29
large amount of discretion with considering these requested amendments to the 30
Comprehensive Plan. He stated that this land is already within the MUSA and therefore 31
the question would be whether the changes are appropriate. He noted that the concept 32
plan is provided to give the Council sufficient information to consider the Comprehensive 33
Plan amendment requests. He noted that this plan presents an opportunity to preserve 34
a lot of open space. He explained that the location of the open space creates a natural 35
buffer to the properties to the east. He stated that two thirds of the northern parcel 36
would be preserved as open space. He advised that the development addresses some 37
of the key goals of the Comprehensive Plan, noting a diverse range of housing types 38
available at different price points. He stated that the southern property would preserve 39
the knoll of trees. He stated that this development would also provide an opportunity for 40
infrastructure improvements. He explained that if the north and south properties are not 41
developed together, that infrastructure opportunity would be missed. He stated that the 42
vision for the community does not have to be turned upside down with these 43
applications. He noted that many of the policies support this application. He noted that 44
the seven percent increase in residential development does not mean that Medina will 45
become a faster growing City and could be offset in another area. He stated that they 46
wanted to ensure that the density proposed falls at the three units per acre line, which is 47
the minimum required by the Metropolitan Council for properties developed within the 48
MUSA. He stated that the PUD provides flexibility and they believe the concept fits 49
within the guidance for PUD approval. He stated that they believe that the basket of 50
public benefits proposed would meet the threshold for a PUD. He noted that a traffic 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 6
November 6, 2019
study was prepared and provided to City staff. He highlighted the findings that the 1
extension of Chippewa would result in improved service to the area and the 2
development would not degrade service. 3
4
Mark Smith, applicant, stated that from an aerial point of view it would appear to make 5
sense that the southern parcel be commercial because of the adjacent development. He 6
explained that when you walk the site it becomes more apparent that residential would 7
make more sense because of the winding creek and the knoll of trees that would be lost 8
with commercial development. He stated that if the southern parcel is developed 9
commercially only two acres of parkland would be required whereas his proposal would 10
preserve the five acres of trees. He stated that this would be a great residential site and 11
changing the zoning would help to preserve a nice area for the city. He referenced the 12
northern parcel and explained that things have happened in that area in the past two 13
years in terms of development to support that staging change. He explained that there 14
has been a lot of development in the area and the Chippewa Road extension has still not 15
moved forward. He noted that there are many employees of the businesses in that area 16
that would like to live close by. He noted that the Chippewa Road extension would 17
provide an improvement to the residents and businesses already in that area. He noted 18
that developing both properties at one time would allow 5.6 acres to be preserved as 19
parks rather than creating two smaller parks in separate areas. He stated that there is a 20
demand for this type of housing. He explained that people in Medina want to stay in 21
Medina but would like to transition to a different type of home. He stated that allowing 22
both properties to be developed by one developer would ensure that the necessary right-23
of-way is provided for Chippewa Road. He believed that this is a great development and 24
great opportunity for the City. 25
26
Martin noted that the Council received the comments from the public hearing held by the 27
Planning Commission along with the written comments that have been received. 28
29
Catherine Atkinson, 2000 Pawnee Road, stated that she and her husband have lived in 30
Medina since 1989 and would like to see this plan move forward. She stated that they 31
would like to stay in the area and would be interested in these types of homes. She 32
believed that all the people along Mohawk Drive would appreciate the contribution from 33
the developer towards the Chippewa Road extension. She believed that this 34
development would also help the City to increase its tax base. She noted that she 35
supports this plan. 36
37
Chris Hilberg, 4559 Trillium Drive N, encouraged the Council to focus on the costs for 38
the Chippewa Road extension and watermain extension. He hoped that the Council 39
spends time focusing on who would pay for that. He stated that the memorandum states 40
that the applicant would pay for the construction cost of the roadway, but the City would 41
still be responsible for permitting and wetland mitigation. He stated that if the applicant 42
is willing to pay for the construction of the roadway and wetland mitigation, that should 43
be memorialized before the Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved. He 44
explained that the Comprehensive Plan amendment is the biggest bargaining chip and 45
therefore there should be conditions attached. He stated that he has seen firsthand how 46
these things happen. He referenced a development agreement from Bridgewater where 47
the developer was going to pay for the road to extend into Corcoran and that has not 48
and will not happen. He asked the City to finalize the details of the road and 49
infrastructure improvements before considering the Comprehensive Plan amendments. 50
51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 7
November 6, 2019
Martin suggested that discussion focus on the Comprehensive Plan amendments. 1
2
DesLauriers stated that when this came forward almost two years ago the previous 3
Mayor made a statement regarding a D.R. Horton project Medina had denied and made 4
the comment that cities sometimes pass up good projects and later regret that they did. 5
He stated that as they go through this process two years later this is an opportunity that 6
has public benefits. He stated that when you walk the site it is a pretty site with a lot of 7
trees. He stated that a commercial development that would take away those trees would 8
be a shame. He stated that the vision of the Comprehensive Plan focused on slower 9
growth. He recognized the potential cost for the Chippewa Road and watermain 10
extensions, noting that the developer is willing to share in those costs. He stated that he 11
believes that residential would be the best use of the site. 12
13
Pederson stated that he feels that the property to the south does not suit business use 14
as well as residential because of the right-in/right-out on Mohawk Drive. He believed 15
that the concessions that the developer is willing to make are good. He commented that 16
the right-of-way would be obtained irregardless, but it would make sense to mitigate as a 17
whole with extra excavation off the property. He stated that the Chippewa Road 18
extension is needed as a public safety improvement. He stated that there is a benefit to 19
the developer with the current interest rates and it would make sense to put empty nest 20
housing on the property. He stated that he would lean towards the applicant splitting the 21
permitting and mitigation costs with the City. He stated that he struggles with the 22
reasoning of the Park Commission. He explained that he likes the knoll park and 23
believes that there needs to be an active park near Chippewa Road with a trail. He 24
stated that this would allow easy access for parking rather than making people feel like 25
they are going into a neighborhood to access a park. He referenced the staging and felt 26
that the staging was available two years ago. He stated that he did not agree with the 27
staging change in the Comprehensive Plan and therefore supports the change in 28
staging. He commented that the watermain is needed, noting previous incidents with the 29
current watermain. He believed that the residents in Bridgewater would also prefer to 30
have higher water in the case of a fire in that area. He stated that he would want a 31
commitment from the applicant as a 50/50 partner with the mitigation and permitting. He 32
commented that the need for more variety in housing exists for the older community in 33
Medina. He supported changing the future land use to residential and changing the 34
staging from 2025 to 2020. He believed that it makes sense to partner with the applicant 35
in return for the public benefits offered. 36
37
Albers stated that he was part of the Steering Committee for the Comprehensive Plan, 38
noting that a lot of time was spent on the staging and zoning of parcels. He stated that 39
there was a lot of input related to the pace of development and when development 40
should occur. He stated that residents were clear that the City should move forward with 41
the bare minimum of development. He stated that although this is only a seven percent 42
increase in development, this would give the message that the City is open to increasing 43
development. He stated that the City does not need this, and he struggles to support a 44
Comprehensive Plan amendment. 45
46
Pederson asked if another developer would be willing to contribute this type of public 47
safety improvement. He stated that is a pretty attractive element as that is a need of the 48
City. 49
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 8
November 6, 2019
Albers commented that the road is not the change requested in the Comprehensive 1
Plan, noting that the City has the decision on when to make that improvement. 2
3
Pederson commented on the high cost for the road. 4
5
Albers recognized the cost for the road and the fact that the developer is willing to 6
contribute towards that cost but noted that the citizens have stated that they do not want 7
to see accelerated development. 8
9
Anderson stated that it was almost two years ago when this issue was first discussed. 10
He noted that it was a difficult decision at that time and remains a difficult decision. He 11
stated that clearly there is a lot to be said for pursuing the Comprehensive Plan 12
amendments in terms of infrastructure and public safety benefits. He noted that he has 13
heard many comments that the southern property never should have been designated 14
as business and should be residential. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan is a 15
commitment of the City to its residents and is a collection of an enormous number of 16
residents. He stated that residents want equity in terms of where development occurs, 17
as residents do not want to see more development north of Highway 55. He stated that 18
the discussion should be whether the City is going to honor its word to the residents and 19
stay true to its commitment. 20
21
Martin agreed that this is a tough decision. She recognized that a lot of time was spent 22
collecting input throughout the Comprehensive Plan process. She recognized the 23
excellent biproducts that would be provided by this development. She stated that it 24
would be helpful to have more input from Bridgewater residents. She asked if the City 25
should mold what it can now so that they know what they will get, or whether it should 26
wait five years with the risk that they do not know what will come forward. She stated 27
that it is hard not to remember all the work that went into creating the Comprehensive 28
Plan and therefore it would be difficult to move forward in light of the discussions with 29
residents. She appreciated the comments of Mr. Hilberg to ensure that the financial 30
contributions would be tied to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. She stated that 31
perhaps there be more interaction with the Bridgewater neighborhood and the applicant 32
in attempt to resolve some of the concerns. She noted that Mr. Smith is a property 33
owner and that land will eventually develop and therefore it would be helpful to have 34
some communication with the Bridgewater neighborhood to gain additional support. She 35
stated that if those residents supported the plan, she would feel more comfortable. 36
37
Mr. Griffith stated that there is consensus in the room that Mr. Hilberg made a good point 38
with regard to tying down the commitments. He agreed that a decision could not be 39
made without knowing more specific information on that topic. He commented that the 40
Comprehensive Plan could move forward and could be made conditional upon greater 41
detail of the financial contributions, rezoning and PUD. He noted that it would also 42
benefit his client to know the cost that would be committed to the public improvements. 43
44
City Attorney David Anderson stated that if the Council supports this moving forward, a 45
resolution would come back approving the Comprehensive Plan amendment as 46
proposed and confirmed that conditions could be added related to the public 47
improvements, land use and rezoning. 48
49
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 9
November 6, 2019
Martin stated that if the Council agreed to start the process of amending the 1
Comprehensive Plan, that would move to the Metropolitan Council for approval and 2
would then come back to the City for adoption. 3
4
City Attorney Anderson confirmed that once approved by the Metropolitan Council, a 5
super majority vote of the Council would be required to formally adopt a Comprehensive 6
Plan amendment. 7
8
Pederson commented that he is the closest resident to this project, as he would be 9
within 100 feet of it. He stated that it is not easy to be in rural residential and make this 10
project something he is in favor of, but it is the right thing for most residents in Medina to 11
not have to pay for these public improvements. He believed that it is important for the 12
Council to recognize that. He stated that eventually the road will go through and the 13
watermain is needed and this is a way to reduce the cost to all the residents of Medina. 14
15
Anderson agreed that is a valid point. He offered a counterpoint that it is in the interest 16
of most residents of Medina to keep the city as is. 17
18
Pederson commented that in five years this will be developed anyways, and the public 19
benefit would be lost. 20
21
Anderson agreed that the issue of timing is an overarching issue. 22
23
Martin agreed that this would be a defensive development in securing the preservation 24
of the woods and other public benefits with a known product. She noted that the City 25
was also lucky in that it did not have to plan for much residential development and would 26
be hesitant to change that plan. 27
28
Anderson commented that he considers the promise made by the City to hold 29
development to the extent possible. 30
31
Albers suggested that the decision be tabled, as that would provide the applicant the 32
opportunity to speak with residents of Bridgewater. 33
34
Finke provided additional details on the timing of the window of review by the City. 35
36
Johnson confirmed that it would also make sense for staff to work with the applicant to 37
obtain the details of the public improvement benefit commitments. 38
39
Moved by Albers, seconded by Anderson, to ask for a written commitment from the 40
developer relating to public improvement commitments including a 50/50 split of the 41
permitting and mitigation costs and the applicant holding a public forum/neighborhood 42
meeting with residents from Bridgewater and greater Medina. Motion passed 43
unanimously. 44
45
C. Request for Rezoning 3672 and 3692 Pinto Drive (8:54 p.m.) 46
Pederson recused himself from the discussion noting that he is in the self-storage 47
business and also met with the Planning Director recently regarding a similar request. 48
49
Finke presented a rezoning request at the southeast corner of Highway 55 and Pinto 50
Drive. He noted that the parcels are vacant and located south of the railroad tracks. He 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 10
November 6, 2019
stated that there are a handful of properties in the area zoned commercial-highway, but 1
all other properties are zoned commercial-general, which is the zone the applicant is 2
requesting. He stated that the property owner is interested in developing a self-storage 3
facility which is allowed in the commercial-general district but not commercial-highway. 4
He noted that the property is guided commercial under the Comprehensive Plan and 5
therefore it is simply a decision of which zoning district would be appropriate. He 6
reviewed the different uses allowed under the two zoning districts. He provided 7
background information on the existing zoning in that area. He stated that many of the 8
uses allowed under commercial-highway would not be practical to develop on this site 9
and therefore the rezoning could provide additional flexibility. He stated that the 10
Planning Commission held a public hearing the previous month recommending approval 11
of the rezoning with a vote of 4-1. He noted that one property owner spoke against the 12
rezoning, believing that the City should hold out for a more retail development on this 13
property. 14
15
DesLauriers asked for clarification on the rezoning that previously occurred. 16
17
Finke explained that ten years ago this property was zoned the same as the surrounding 18
properties. He stated that ten years ago additional districts were added, and property 19
was then delegated. 20
21
DesLauriers asked if the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee would have looked at 22
the zoning. 23
24
Finke explained that the Comprehensive Plan focuses on land use and zoning changes 25
are made as needed based on those changes. 26
27
Charles Shots, representing the applicant, stated that this rezoning would be consistent 28
with the Comprehensive Plan and the uses would be almost identical. He noted that this 29
change would also unify the zoning on that side of the road. He commented that the 30
railroad tracks are a significant mitigating factor for development of retail on the site. He 31
stated that the Planning Commission recognized that this is a challenging property to 32
develop because of the size and proximity to the railroad tracks. He asked the Council 33
to approve the rezoning. 34
35
Anderson stated that while he is generally in favor of the rezoning, from a retail 36
perspective Aldi was constructed near the railroad tracks. He commented that the 37
railroad tracks also did not impact the credit union. 38
39
Robb Stauber stated that he lives at 777 Hamel Road and owns the business at 3795 40
Pinto Drive. He noted that his business has thrived even near the railroad tracks. He 41
noted that in 1994, 1995 and 1996 the comment was made that his property was bad, 42
but he was able to develop a business that has thrived. He noted that his mattress store 43
has thrived in this area. He stated that this is the last open corner lot in the City. He did 44
not believe it would be a vision to kick the can backwards and the City instead should 45
hold out for a more retail development. He stated that to him it is not about the 46
difference between the two zoning districts, but what could be developed there. He did 47
not believe that residents want to drive past storage units on their way down Hamel 48
Road. He believed that the property is valuable and is the most visible property on that 49
corner. He believed that something special could go there, noting that just because a 50
developer has not proposed it yet does not mean it would not happen. 51
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 11
November 6, 2019
1
Albers stated that one of the challenges with the property is access because of the 2
median on Pinto and the railroad tracks. 3
4
Martin noted that both Share Point and Aldi have developed near the railroad tracks. 5
She stated that she does not think about the railroad tracks when accessing businesses 6
in that area. She stated that retail is hard to come by in this market. She stated that 7
there are very few parcels slated for retail and this is part of Hamel and therefore the 8
idea of rezoning the property to permit a storage facility is a distractor of what the City is 9
attempting to present for Uptown Hamel. She commented that she is not prepared to 10
change the zoning to permit something other than what she would consider a retail use. 11
12
DesLauriers agreed that the railroad tracks are all over and businesses thrive in that 13
area. He noted that this is one of the two major gateways into Medina and he does not 14
want to see storage units in that location. 15
16
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to direct staff to prepare an ordinance denying 17
the rezoning of the property. Motion passed unanimously. 18
19
Pederson rejoined the Council. 20
21
D. Open Systems International (OSI) – Temporary Parking Agreement and 22
Petition and Waiver Amendment (9:16 p.m.) 23
Johnson stated that OSI did not proceed with the construction of the building originally 24
proposed and is considering an addition onto its existing facility. He stated that OSI has 25
requested to construct a temporary parking area this fall which would allow construction 26
of the addition in the spring. 27
28
Finke explained that the agreement would include the temporary parking agreement and 29
extension of the petition and waiver. He noted that if approved, construction of the 30
temporary parking would begin next week in anticipation of an approved addition over 31
the winter. He noted that if the project is approved for construction in the spring, the 32
gravel lot would be paved. He stated that the petition and waiver had a ten-year 33
lifespan, and this would allow for that agreement to be extended an additional ten years 34
which would allow for better planning along Arrowhead rather than attempting to hurry in 35
order to complete improvements. He stated that additional language was added 36
providing the option that the petition and waiver can be dissolved should the City decide 37
to assess a larger amount through another method. 38
39
Pederson asked if the alignment of the driveway would change to the north. 40
41
Finke explained that one of the changes within the amended petition and waiver 42
acknowledges that if the project moves forward the driveway alignment would be shifted 43
to the north. He stated that if the project does not move forward, that would not come 44
into play and a separate agreement would need to be made with OSI to determine what 45
improvements could be made. 46
47
Moved by Pederson, seconded by DesLauriers, to approve Temporary Parking 48
Agreement and Petition and Waiver Amendment. Motion passed unanimously. 49
50
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 12
November 6, 2019
VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT (9:24 p.m.) 1
Johnson had nothing further to report. 2
3
IX. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL REPORTS (9:25 p.m.) 4
Anderson commented on the great business tour. He noted a recent meeting with Three 5
Rivers Park District regarding their parks/trails master plan. 6
7
Martin noted that she and DesLauriers have attended multiple fire meetings and have a 8
clearer understanding of the information they would like to see. She expressed 9
appreciation to City staff that have been involved in the discussions providing input on 10
administration, public safety and finances. 11
12
Albers stated that he will attend the Veterans Service in Orono the following Monday to 13
represent Medina. 14
15
Martin commented that there is a mayor’s meeting the following week that she is 16
planning to attend, noting that if anyone else would like to attend to please let her know. 17
18
X. APPROVAL TO PAY THE BILLS (9:27 p.m.) 19
Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to approve the bills, EFT 005273E-005296E 20
for $92,066.08 and order check numbers 049447-049511 for $268,689.81 and payroll 21
EFT 0509773-0509828 for $106,175.34. Motion passed unanimously. 22
23
XI. CLOSED SESSION: ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED DISCUSSION ON 24
LITIGATION MATTER SPECIFICALLY WW FARM AND GEORGE WESSIN V. 25
CITY OF MEDINA, PURSUANT TO MINN. STAT. SEC. 13D.05, SUBD. 3(b) 26
Moved by Martin, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 9:28 p.m. to discuss 27
an attorney-client privileged litigation matter, specifically WW Farms and George Wessin 28
V. City of Medina. Motion passed unanimously. 29
30
The meeting reconvened to open session at 9:55 p.m. 31
32
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Pederson, to approve the WW Farms and George 33
Wessin V. City of Medina Settlement Agreement. Motion passed unanimously. 34
35
36
XII. CLOSED SESSION: CITY ADMINISTRATOR ANNUAL PERFORMANCE 37
REVIEW, PURSUANT TO MINN. STAT. SEC. 13D.05, SUBD. 3(a) 38
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Martin, to adjourn the meeting to closed session at 39
9:56 p.m. to conduct the annual performance review of the City Administrator. Motion 40
passed unanimously. 41
42
The meeting reconvened to open session at 10:25 p.m. 43
44
The City Administrator received a satisfactory performance review. 45
46
47
48
49
Medina City Council Meeting Minutes 13
November 6, 2019
XIII. ADJOURN 1
Moved by Anderson, seconded by Albers, to adjourn the meeting at 10:26 p.m. Motion 2
passed unanimously. 3
4
5
__________________________________ 6
Kathy Martin, Mayor 7
Attest: 8
9
____________________________________ 10
Scott Johnson, City Administrator 11
TO: Medina City Council
FROM: Scott Johnson and Jodi Gallup, City Administration
DATE: October 30, 2019
RE: Public Safety Director Appointment
On October 22nd, the City Council interviewed two internal candidates for the Public Safety
Director position, with Sgt. Jason Nelson ranking on top.
The Public Safety Director position is a salaried position classified as pay grade 10, which
ranges from $40.89 to $52.11 per hour in 2020. When factoring in Sgt. Nelson’s current
experience and pay with the city, staff recommends starting him at $48.72 per hour
($101,337.60 annual salary), with the ability to receive increases after yearly satisfactory
reviews until the step 8 maximum is reached.
Recommendation
Appoint Jason Nelson to the position of Public Safety Director with an effective date of
April 1, 2020 with a starting annual salary of $101,337.60.
MEMORANDUM
Agenda Item # 5A
Stormwater
Design Manual
for the City of Medina
October 2019
Project Number: 011705-000
Agenda Item # 5B
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Stormwater Design Manual Table of Contents
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000
1. DESIGN OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 1
2. DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................................... 2
3. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW ING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS .................................. 4
4. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................ 5
5. LIST OF ACCEPTABLE PRACTICES .............................................................................................. 9
6. BASIC SIZING CRITERIA ............................................................................................................... 10
6.1. Volume Control Requirements .................................................................................................... 10
6.2. Volume Control Calculations ....................................................................................................... 10
6.3. Water Quality Control .................................................................................................................. 12
6.4. Rate Control ................................................................................................................................ 13
6.5. Wetlands ..................................................................................................................................... 14
6.6. Freeboard .................................................................................................................................... 15
6.7. Floodplain Management .............................................................................................................. 15
6.8. Long-term Inspection and Maintenance of Stormwater BMPs ................................................... 15
7. STORMWATER TREATMENT PRACTICE DESIGN STANDARDS .............................................. 16
7.1. Storm Sewers .............................................................................................................................. 16
7.2. Outlet and Inlet Pipes .................................................................................................................. 17
7.3. Channels and Overland Drainage ............................................................................................... 17
7.4. Ponds .......................................................................................................................................... 17
7.5. Infiltration/Filtration Practices ...................................................................................................... 18
7.6. Emergency Overflow Paths ......................................................................................................... 20
8. DESIGN EXAMPLES ...................................................................................................................... 21
9. STORMWATER TREATMENT PRACTICE DETAIL DRAWINGS ................................................. 21
10. CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS ............................................................................................ 21
11. CHECKLISTS .................................................................................................................................. 21
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Event Mean Concentrations for PondNet Modeling
Table 2: Curve Numbers for Use in Hydrologic Computations
Table 3: Bounce Restriction for Runoff Directed Through Wetlands
Table 4: Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Storm Sewer Design
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Construction Sediment and Erosion Control Checklist
Appendix B – Maintenance Agreement Template
Appendix C – BMP Operation and Maintenance Requirements
Appendix D – Standard Details
Appendix E - Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Stormwater Reuse Calculator
Appendix F – Accepted List of Best Management Practices
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 1
1. DESIGN OVERVIEW
The City of Medina’s Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) identifies the goals and policies
that define the City’s stormwater management program . The goals and policies are implemented via the
City Stormwater Management ordinance and this Design Manual. Medina’s stormwater requirements
were written to meet the City’s goals to preserve, protect, and manage its water resources as well as to
meet federal, state, and watershed stormwater regulations and to meet the following objectives:
A. Minimize increases in stormwater runoff rates from any development in order to reduce flooding,
siltation, and erosion and in order to maintain the integrity of stream channels .
B. Minimize increases in nonpoint source pollution caused by stormwater runoff from development
which would otherwise degrade local water quality.
C. Minimize the total annual volume of surface water runoff that flows from any specific site during
and following development so as not to exceed the predevelopment hydrologic regime to the
maximum extent practicable.
D. Ensure that these management controls are properly maintained and pose no threat to public
safety.
E. Implement stormwater management controls to help meet current and future total maximum daily
load (TMDL) goals, address the need to improve water quality, and meet objectives in the
LSWMP.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 2
2. DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of this Design Manual, the following definitions describe the meaning of the terms used in
this manual:
a) Applicant means a property owner or agent of a property owner who has filed an application for
a stormwater management approval.
b) Applicability means any land disturbing activity requiring a Storm water Management Plan as
defined in City Code Chapter 8-1200 Surface Water Management.
c) Best Management Practice (BMPs) means measures, either structural or nonstructural, that are
determined to be the most effective and practical means of preventing or reducing point source or
nonpoint-source pollution inputs to stormwater runoff and waterbodies.
d) Channel means a natural or artificial watercourse with a definite bed and banks that conducts
continuously or periodically flowing water.
e) Impervious Area means those surfaces that cannot effectively infiltrate rainfall (e.g., building
rooftops, pavement, sidewalks, driveways, swimming pools, etc.). Gravel areas will be considered
impervious.
f) Land Disturbance Activity means any activity that changes the volume or peak discharge rate
of stormwater runoff from the land surface. This m ay include the grading, digging, cutting,
scraping, or excavating of soil; placement of fill materials; paving; construction; substantial
removal of vegetation, or any activity that bares soil or rock ; or involves the involves the
maintenance, repair, improvement, diversion, or piping of any natural or man-made watercourse.
g) Maintenance Agreement means document recorded against the property which provides for
long-term maintenance of stormwater treatment practices.
h) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) means a conveyance or system of
conveyances (roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters,
ditches, man-made channels, storm drains, etc.) that is also:
a. Owned or operated by a public entity (which can include cities, townships, counties,
military bases, hospitals, prison complexes, highway departments, universities, etc.)
having jurisdiction over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, stormwater, or other
wastes, including special districts under State law such as a sewer district, flood control
district or drainage districts, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe or an authorized Indian
tribal organization, or a designated and approved management agency under section 208
of the Clean Water Act that discharges to waters of the United States;
b. Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater;
c. Which is not a combined sewer; and
d. Which is not part of a publicly owned treatment works.
i) New Development Project means any new construction, alteration, or improvement which
increases the impervious area by more than 5,000 square feet.
j) Nonpoint Source Pollution means pollution from any source other than from any discernible,
confined, and discrete conveyances, and shall include, but not be limited to, pollutants from
agricultural, silvicultural, mining, construction, subsurface disposal, and urban runoff sources.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 3
k) Off-Site Facility means a stormwater management measure located outside the subject property
boundary described in the permit application for land development activity.
l) Redevelopment means any construction, alteration, or improvement that has a site size of
greater than one acre and disturbs more than 40% of the site’s existing hardcover. If total
impervious area is reduced by more than 10%, no stormwater management plan is required. For
the purposes of this design manual, the area of disturbance when repaving or reclaiming an
existing paved surface shall only include those areas where soil beneath the existing gravel base
is disturbed.
m) Responsible Party means the entity which will be responsible for ownership and maintenance of
Stormwater Treatment Practices.
n) Single-family Residential Project means any construction, alteration, or improvement which
occurs on a single lot with a designated land use of single-family residential that increases
impervious by more than 5,000 square feet. An exemption for a stormwater management plan will
occur if the impervious cover is less than 20% of the overall property size.
o) Site means any tract, lot, or parcel of land or combination of tracts, lots, or parcels of land, which
are in one ownership or are contiguous and in diverse ownership, where development is to be
performed as part of a unit, subdivision, or project. Final determination of the applicable area for
stormwater management shall be made by the City.
p) Stop Work Order means an order which requires that all construction activity on a site be
stopped.
q) Stormwater Management means the use of structural or non-structural practices that are
designed to reduce stormwater runoff pollutant loads, discharge volumes, and/or peak discharge
rates.
r) Stormwater Management Plan means a set of drawings or other documents submitted by a
person as a prerequisite to obtaining a stormwater management approval, which contains all of
the required information and specifications pertaining to Stormwater Management.
s) Stormwater Runoff means flow on the surface of the ground, resulting from precipitation.
t) Water Quality Volume (WQ) means the runoff storage volume needed to treat the specified
phosphorus loading as determined in the Medina Stormwater Design Manual.
u) Watercourse means a permanent or intermittent stream or other body of water, either natural or
fabricated, which gathers or carries surface water.
v) Watershed means the total drainage area contributing runoff to a single point.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 4
3. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEWING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
PLANS
The general review process, from the submittal of the concept and final plans to the issuance of the
Stormwater Management Plan approval, is summarized in the following seven steps.
1) Determine if the project triggers the City of Medina threshold requirements under a New
Development Project, Redevelopment Project, or Single-Family Residential Project, defined in
Section 2.
o Additional activities that are exempt from completing a Stormwater Management Plan
include:
▪ Linear projects completed by the City that do not trigger stormwater permits from
the watershed agencies.
▪ Installation of fence, sign, telephone, and electric poles and other kinds of posts
or poles.
▪ Emergency work to protect life, limb, or property.
2) What non-City permits, or approvals, are required for the project site, and what waivers and/or
exemptions are applicable? (MCWD, PSCWMC, ECWMC, DNR, USACE, MPCA NPDES, WCA,
etc.)
3) Are the selected practices appropriate for this site?
4) Are the practices designed to meet the minimum performance criteria?
5) Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet other resource protection requirements as
specified in the City of Medina Code and LSWMP?
6) Are provisions for long-term maintenance adequate, including access and methods of
maintenance defined?
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 5
4. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Requirements for Stormwater Management Plan Approval
Stormwater Management Plan Required
The Stormwater Management Plan shall be prepared to meet the requirements listed in this Manual and
in the City’s Stormwater Management Ordinance.
The Stormwater Management Plan must be signed by a licensed professional engineer in the State of
Minnesota, who will verify that the design of all stormwater management practices meet the submittal
requirements outlined in the Stormwater Management Plan Requirements of this section. No building
permit, grading permit, sediment control permit, or subdivision approval shall be issued until a satisfactory
final Stormwater Management Plan, or a waiver thereof, shall have undergone a review and been
approved by the City after determining that the plan or waiver is consistent with the requirements of this
design manual.
Stormwater Management Conceptual Plan (Option al)
A stormwater management concept plan submittal is optional, but highly encouraged. A concept plan
identifies basic site information, locations of proposed development features, and preliminary locations
and sizing of BMPs. The concept submittal has a greater chance of identifying major obstacles and can
facilitate alternative stormwater management arrangements in a timely fashion. If a concept plan is
submitted for review, it should include sufficient information (e.g., maps, basic hydrologic and wat er
quality calculations, etc.) to evaluate the environmental characteristics of the project site. This
information should show the potential impacts of all proposed development of the site, both present and
future, on the water resources, and show the eff ectiveness and acceptability of the measures proposed
for managing stormwater generated at the project site. The intent of this conceptual planning process is
to determine the type of stormwater management measures necessary for the proposed project, to
ensure adequate planning for management of stormwater runoff from future development, and to identify
major issues prior to completing final plans. The concept plan is generally less time consuming and
provides a more efficient process in evaluating proposed development plans and BMPs.
The final plan provides more detailed design information for the proposed BMPs and includes final design
detail in terms of hydrologic conditions and site features.
For redevelopment occurring on a previously developed site, within the concept plan an applicant should
include measures for controlling existing stormwater runoff discharges from the site in accordance with
the standards of this Manual to the maximum extent practicable. After review of the concept plan and
modifications deemed necessary by the City are made, a final Stormwater Management Plan may be
submitted for approval.
Stormwater Management Plan Requirements
The final Stormwater Management Plan shall include all the information listed below.
Record drawings are required for all projects that impact wetlands and/or the floodplain, require the
construction of BMPs, have significant grade changes, and/or have other unusual circumstances. Record
drawings must be certified by a professional land surveyor or civil engineer. Record drawings should not
include temporary erosion control measures.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 6
Plan Details
Contact information including name, address, email/telephone number of all persons having a
legal interest in the property, and the tax reference number and parcel number of the property or
properties affected.
North arrow, street names, and lot and block numbers for property or subdivision.
Location of benchmark based on the City/County benchmark system.
Key with all line types, symbols, shading, and cross-hatching denoted.
Illustration key showing symbols for all information pertaining to lot and building design, including
grades, easements, lot and block, setbacks, etc.
Plan scale (shown graphically on a bar scale) of: 1 inch = 20 feet, 1 inch = 30 feet, 1 inch = 40
feet, 1 inch = 50 feet, or 1 inch = 100 feet. Plans in other scales will not be reviewed.
Total area of subject property, with subtotals of disturbed and undisturbed areas (tabulation
permitted).
Subject property’s boundary lines, lot lines, and right-of-way lines.
All existing and proposed drainage and utility easements.
All man-made features, including existing and proposed buildings, structures, and paved areas.
All existing storm sewer facilities within 150 feet of the subject parcel.
All proposed storm sewer facilities (include grades and size of structures).
All existing and proposed natural features including, but not limited to, significant trees and tree
lines, wetlands, ponds, lakes, streams, drainage channels, and floodplain.
Show setbacks and buffers for wetlands, ponds, lakes, streams, and floodplains.
All adjacent plats, parcels, rights-of-way, section lines, extended a minimum of 150 feet beyond
the subject parcel in all directions.
Topography
A 1" = 200' topographic base map of the site which extends a minimum of 50 feet beyond the
limits of the proposed development and indicates existing surface water drainage including
streams, ponds, culverts, ditches, and wetlands; current land use including all existi ng structures;
locations of utilities, roads, and easements; and significant natural and manmade features not
otherwise shown.
Topography details in a minimum of two-foot contour intervals with existing contours as dashed
lines and proposed contours as dark, solid lines labeled at each edge of the plan and at other
appropriate locations.
Standard lot benching detail, where appropriate (maximum slopes: 3:1).
Direction arrows indicating swales and lot drainage patterns (show percent grades along
drainage swales on plan).
Elevation Information
Proposed top of curb elevations at lot corners and driveway or entrances.
Finished spot elevations at all high and low points including flow path arrows.
Proposed elevations at garage and lowest floor for proposed buildings.
Proposed finished ground elevations around structures for final grading.
Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis
Hydrologic and hydraulic design calculations for all structural components of the stormwater system (i.e.,
storm drains, open channels, swales, management practices, etc.) for the predevelopment and post
development conditions must be submitted. Such calculations shall include:
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 7
Existing and proposed condition analysis for runoff rates, volumes, velocities, and water surface
elevations showing methodologies used, design parameters, and supporting calculations. Atlas
14 rainfall data and MSE 3 distributions must be used.
Final sizing calculations for structural stormwater management practices including contributing
drainage area, storage, normal and high-water levels, peak inflow and outflow, and outlet
configuration. Drainage areas must include any offsite drainage.
Stage-discharge or outlet rating curves and inflow and outflow hydrographs for storage facilities
(e.g., stormwater ponds and wetlands).
Analysis, computations, and supporting materials indicating that volume control, water quality,
and water quantity design criteria are being met.
Final analysis of potential downstream impact/effects of project, where necessary.
Dam breach analysis, where necessary.
Existing and proposed structural elevations (e.g., invert of pipes, catch basins, etc.).
Structural details of outlet structures, embankments, spillways, stilling basins, grade control
structures, conveyance channels, etc.
Soils information including Hennepin County Soil Survey or logs of borehole investigations that
may have been performed along with supporting geotechnical report.
Temporary Erosion Control Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Show location of all structural erosion control measures (with standard detail plates and
maintenance information for each), including, but not limited to:
Temporary rock entrance/exit for all vehicle access points.
Perimeter silt fence: silt fence and/or bale checks should also be placed along swales or slopes
greater than 50 feet in length (flare ends of silt fence up slope).
Storm sewer inlet filters (indicate type and show graphically on plan at each location).
Temporary sediment basins.
Erosion control mats, fiber blankets, netting, temporary seed, or temporary mulch. All exposed
soil areas must be stabilized as soon as possible to limit soil erosion, but in no case later than 14
days after the construction activity if that portion of the site has temporarily or permanently
ceased, and no later than seven days after construction activity in that portion of the site where
construction has temporarily or permanently ceased and discharge points on the project are
within one mile of a special or impaired water, as well as flows to that special or impaired water.
Soil stockpile areas (indicate temporary stabilization measures).
Street sweeping required: plans must include a note indicating that all adjacent streets will be
swept daily, or as directed by the City, to remove all accumulated materials. Failure to perform
any street sweeping within six hours of notice by the City will result in the work being performed
by the City and all associated costs billed to the contractor. The City also requires removal of
accumulated materials on streets during winter.
Maintenance and Repair Plan
The design and planning of all stormwater management facilities shall include detailed maintenance and
repair procedures to ensure their continued function. These plans will identify the parts or compon ents of
the BMP that need to be maintained and the equipment and skills or training necessary. Provisions for
the periodic review and evaluation of the effectiveness of the maintenance program and the need for
revisions or additional maintenance procedures shall be included in the plan. The maintenance and repair
plan must include:
Name, address, and phone number of responsible parties for maintenance.
Description of annual maintenance tasks
Maintenance easements. Access to all stormwater treatment practices at the site for the purpose
of inspection and repair must be assured by securing all the maintenance easements needed on
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 8
a permanent basis. Maintenance easements will be recorded with the plat and will remain in
effect even if the title of the property is transferred to a new owner.
Landscaping plan that includes a detailed plan for management of vegetation associated with
stormwater features after construction is finished.
Maintenance agreement that is binding on all subsequent owners of land served by an on-site
stormwater management measure in accordance with the requirements of this manual.
Description of funding source
Minimum vegetative cover requirements
Access and safety issues
Testing and disposal of sediments that will likely be necessary
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 9
5. LIST OF ACCEPTABLE PRACTICES
When developing the BMP appropriate for the development or redevelopment, infiltration/abstraction is
the most important practice to apply in the design. Filtration is warranted when site conditions do not
allow for an effective infiltration facility or other abstraction method. For flooding or rate control, detention
systems are typically the preferred practice. Low Impact Design (LID) practices are encouraged when
they can be functionally incorporated into the design. Alternative practices may be approved at the
discretion of the City Engineer.
Designers are expected to follow the nine-step screening process for BMP selection detailed in
the Minnesota Stormwater Manual; BMPs will be scrutinized using these same matrices. Deviations from
recommended guidance in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual will require detailed written explanation.
Approval of any deviation from the Minnesota Stormwater Manual guidance will be at the discretion of the
City. A list of accepted BMPs are listed in Appendix F.
Green infrastructure options shall be the preferred BMPs for accomplishing stormwater management
goals. The following green infrastructure options should be considered and must be consistent with
zoning, subdivision, and PUD requirements.
1. Preserving natural vegetation and utilizing natural upland swales, depressions, and upland
storage areas in the post-development condition to the degree that they can convey, store, filter,
and retain stormwater runoff before discharge. Preservation requires that no grading or other
construction activity occurs in these areas.
2. Maximizing open space while incorporating smaller lot si zes to conserve natural areas and
reduce the amount of stormwater runoff generated at the site (0.75 inches over preserved forest
or grassland towards volume reduction requirement)
3. Eliminating barrier curb and gutter where practicable and using vegetated swales or equivalent.
4. Minimizing impervious surface with buildings layouts and parking facility size.
5. Installing permeable pavement.
6. Utilizing vegetated areas to filter sheet flow, remove sediment and other pollutants , and increase
time of concentration.
7. Disconnecting impervious areas by allowing runoff from small impervious areas to be directed to
pervious areas where it can be infiltrated or filtered.
8. Increasing buffers around streams, steep slopes, and wetlands to protect from flood damage and
provide additional water quality treatment.
9. Installing green roofs.
10. Using irrigation ponds/systems, cisterns, and related BMPs to reuse stormwater runoff.
11. Planting of trees as a stormwater BMP (0.5 x % Interception x tree canopy area x 1 inch of
rainfall).
12. Utilizing a soil amendment/decompaction process after site disturbance.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 10
6. BASIC SIZING CRITERIA
Proposed Stormwater Management Plans must incorporate Volume Control, Water Quality Control, and
Rate Control as the basis for stormwater managem ent in the proposed development plan. Proposed
BMPs must fulfill Volume Control, Water Quality, and Rate Control sizing requirements, as defined in
Section 1.
6.1. Volume Control Requirements
Volume control measures are required on projects to meet the water quality criteria of the City of
Medina’s LSWMP. Volume control shall be required for proposed new impervious area greater
than 5,000 square feet or redevelopment that disturbs more than 40% of the existing impervious
area on a one acre or greater site. If an applicant can demonstrate that the volume control
standard has been met, then the water quality sizing criteria shall be considered satisfied.
6.2. Volume Control Calculations
Depending on applicability, a proposed development shall capture and retain o nsite 1.1 inches of
runoff from the net new impervious surfaces in post-construction conditions. Infiltration facilities
and stormwater reuse will receive full credit towards the volume control requirement. Acceptance
of infiltration or stormwater reuse will be determined on a site-by-site basis subject to the approval
of the City Engineer.
The use of infiltration techniques is prohibited in areas where the BMP will receive discharge
from, or be constructed in, any of the following areas:
• Where the industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under
an NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit issued by the MCPA.
• Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occurs.
• Where there is less than three vertical feet of separation from the bottom of the infiltration
BMP to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or the top of bedrock .
• Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by the
infiltrating stormwater.
The use of infiltration techniques shall be restricted and subject to additional city review where the
infiltration BMP will be constructed in any of the following areas:
• Where predominantly Hydrologic Soil Group C or D soils (clay) exist
• Where soil infiltration rates exceed 8.3 inches per hour
• Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) as defined in Minnesota R.
4720.5100, subp. 13.
Where site factors listed above limit the construction of infiltration systems, the proposed project
shall provide appropriate documentation to the City regarding the limitations. If the City
determines that infiltration is restricted or prohibited on -site, the applicant may construct the
alternative BMPs described below and/or utilize stormwater reuse.
Volume control credit will be given for the following BMPs if infiltration or stormwater reuse is not
feasible for the site.
• 100% credit for using an iron-enhanced sand filter
• 80% credit for using an iron-enhanced sand filter wrapped draintile (See standard detail)
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 11
• 80% credit for using stormwater ponds with extended detention storage. Additional
information on extended detention requirements is found in Section 7.4.
• 60% credit for using stormwater ponds without water reuse
• 50% credit for using standard filtration.
▪ The use of a filtration basin will be approved at the City’s discretion. All BMP
options, including those listed below, must be analyzed prior to selecting a
filtration BMP. The applicant must provide a narrative of BMPs evaluated and
why they weren’t selected.
Additional credit towards the volume control requirement can be met by using the following best
management practices. Volume credits will be based on the amount of impervious surface that
drains to each feature.
• Permeable concrete or pervious pavers will be considered fully pervious sur faces if
designed to the manufacturer’s specifications and follow the Minnesota Stormwater
Manual design guidelines and maintenance requirements. Operation and maintenance
plans are required for review by the City as part of the Stormwater Management Plan.
• Increasing buffers around streams, steep slopes, and wetlands in excess of minimum
requirements. The applicant may compute a credit of 0.5 inches over the excess buffer
area and apply that toward the abstraction volume requirement.
• Preserving undisturbed forest or grassland conservation areas. Conservation areas must
remain undisturbed during construction and must be protected by a permanent
conservation easement prescribing allowable uses and activities on the parcel and
preventing future development. A long-term vegetation management plan describing
methods of maintaining the conservation area in a natural vegetative condition must be
submitted with the stormwater management plan. The applicant may compute a credit of
0.75 inches over the conservation area and apply that toward the abstraction volume
requirement.
• Disconnecting impervious surface by redirecting runoff across a pervious surface or into
an engineered bioinfiltration facility. Impervious disconnection must be designed to
prevent any reconnection of runoff with the storm drain system. The applicant may
subtract the disconnected impervious surface area from the total impervious surface
area used to compute the required abstraction volume.
• Planting of additional trees. Credit will be calculated as follows:
0.5 x % Interception x tree canopy area x 1 inch of rainfall
Percent rainfall interception shall be determined using results from the City of
Minneapolis, Minnesota Municipal Tree Resource Analysis. Percentages for
the species studied are listed below. If desired tree species is not listed, the applicant
shall use the median value provided below or provide documentation by a
certified arborist to support a different percent interception. Tree canopy area must be
documented as part of the permit application submittal.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 12
6.3. Water Quality Control
For new development, the water quality control standard shall be considered satisfied if
the volume control standard has been satisfied . If it is infeasible to meet the volume control
standard due to contaminated soils, site constraints, or other factors, the proposed BMP will need
to detain and treat a sufficient volume of stormwater to achieve a phosphorus load reduction of
20% from existing conditions using an approved BMP.
The 20% reduction requirement does not apply to land use classifications for meadow, forested,
open space, or wetland land use (see Table 1). These areas are considered natural condition
areas, and no additional phosphorus reduction is needed from these areas. Water quality
treatment for these natural condition areas shall be controlled to existing phosphorus loading
conditions only. Approval of a waiver from the Volume Control or Water Quality requirement will
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Demonstration that the water quality criteria have been
met shall be done using P8, MIDS, PondNet, or other approved water quality modeling method.
If using PondNet, then the event mean concentrations found in Table 1 shall be used. Curve
numbers for each land use can be found in Table 2.
Table 1: Event Mean Concentrations for PondNet Modeling
Land Use Phosphorus (P) Runoff
Concentration (PPB)
Row Crop Agriculture 540
Pasture 350
Meadow* 200
Rural Residential 255
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 13
Urban Residential 450
Forested* 200
Commercial, Industrial 600
Open Space* 200
Golf Course 550
Right-of-Way 400
Wetland* 200
* - Natural Condition Area
A Microsoft Excel™ version of PondNet can be made available upon request to the City
6.4. Rate Control
Post development discharge rates must be less than or equal to existing conditions discharge
rates for the 2-year (2.5-inch), 10-year (4.3-inch), and 100-year (7.3-inch) Atlas 14 MSE 3, 24-
hour storm events. In some cases where there is the potential for adverse downstream impacts,
the rate control requirement may be more stringent than the existing conditions standard.
Ultimately, the stormwater system will be managed so that development, redevelopment, and
other infrastructure projects do not overburden the existing downstream system for the desig n
event. On sites that do not require volume control, the need for rate control best management
practices will be determined by the City if any downstream impacts are identified.
All runoff calculations shall be according to the methodology described in the Natural Resources
Conservation Service’s Technical Release 55, Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds (commonly
referred to as TR-55). Example acceptable modeling software includes HydroCAD and XP-
SWMM. Other methodology may be used with prior approval by the City. Composite curve
numbers shall not be used; instead, proposed contributing areas shall be broken into one of the
cover types in Table 2.
Curve numbers for each land use shall be chosen based on Table 2.
Table 2: Curve Numbers for Use in Hydrologic Computations
Hydrologic Soil Group
Cover Type A B C D
Open Water 100 100 100 100
Pasture 68 79 86 89
Meadow 30 58 71 78
Forested 55 55 70 77
Developed Open Space1 61 61 74 80
Impervious Areas2 98 98 98 98
Agricultural Land3 Peak Growth Formula
Row Crop - Fallow 77 86 91 94
Row Crop – Average 72 81 88 91
Gravel Road 76 85 89 91
Wetlands 98 98 98 98
1 Lawns, parks, golf courses, other grassy areas, etc.
2 Streets, parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc.
3 Where existing conditions are characterized by agricultural land use, the “peak growth” curve
number should be utilized. Calculation of the peak growth curve number is based on the
following formula:
CN average = ½ * (CN peak growth + CN fallow), or
CN peak growth = 2 * (CN average) - CN fallow
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 14
For example, for row crop agriculture and hydrologic soil group B, the peak growth curve
number is 76. This is based on average and fallow curve numbers of 81 and 86,
respectively.
An Atlas 14, MSE 3 24-hour rainfall distribution with average antecedent moisture conditions
should be utilized for runoff calculations.
• The recommended minimum outlet diameter is six inches due to plugging susceptibility
and may supersede the rate control requirement for the 2-year event.
• Infiltration will not be considered when determining rate control or freeboard.
• Waterbodies should be modeled with the starting water level at their normal water level
and/or outlet elevation. City standard detail plates should be utilized for pond outlet
structures. It is recommended that outlet structures be designed in three phases with a
primary outlet structure and secondary overflow structure routed to the storm sewer and
a defined emergency overflow as the tertiary outlet structure.
6.5. Wetlands
Bounce of water level within the wetlands shall be maintained according to the following table:
Table 3: Bounce Restriction for Runoff Directed Through Wetlands
Protection
Classification
Additional Protection Requirements for
Bounce (Change in water level due to runoff event)
Preserve Maintain bounce at or below existing conditions
Manage 1 Maintain bounce at or below existing conditions plus 0.5 feet
Manage 2 Maintain bounce at or below existing conditions plus 1.0 feet
Manage 3 No quantity requirement
The following items shall be considered in the management of landlocked basins:
• The flood levels established for landlocked basins shall take into consideration the effects
of water level fluctuations on trees, erosion, and property values. Steeply sloped
shorelines subject to slope failure and shoreline damage should not be in contact with
floodwaters for extended periods.
• The capacity of proposed outlets to landlocked basins should not be so small as to cause
extended duration of high water levels that would result in damage to upland vegetation.
Exceptions to this policy include basins that are strictly regional stormwater management
basins and not formerly wetlands. Exceptions also include wetlands converted to
regional stormwater management basins through mitigation of the affected wetland
areas.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 15
6.6. Freeboard
Elevation separations of buildings with respect to ponds, lakes, streams, and stormwater features
shall be designed as follows:
1. At least two feet of vertical separation is required from an area's emergency o verflow
elevation to the lowest opening of a structure. In areas where this separation is not or
cannot be provided, additional analysis is required to show that the 100-year back-to-
back storm event does not affect adjacent homes.
2. Drainage easements and outlots for ponds, lakes, wetlands, streams, and other features
shall encompass an area to the calculated one foot above the 100-year high water level
(HWL).
6.7. Floodplain Management
The City prohibits filling activities within the 100-year floodplain that will cause an increase in the
stage of the 100-year or regional flood, or cause an increase in the flood damages in the reach
affected unless compensatory storage is provided and/or channel improvement is provided that
will not result in the flood stage. Compensatory storage for any filling in the 100-year floodplain
shall be at a 1:1 ratio.
Filling within the floodway is prohibited unless the filling meets FEMA, DNR, and watershed
district requirements, and City Code Chapter 826.74 – 826.97.
6.8. Long-term Inspection and Maintenance of Stormwater
BMPs
No private storm water facilities may be approved unless a long-term maintenance plan is
submitted that defines how access will be provided, who will conduct the maintenance, the type of
maintenance and the m aintenance intervals. The long-term maintenance plan along with other
stormwater maintenance requirements may have been included with the project development
agreement. The applicant shall obtain all necessary easement or other property interests to allow
access to the facilities for inspection or maintenance for both the responsible party and the City of
Medina.
All settled materials including settled solids shall be removed from ponds, sumps, grit chambers,
and other devices and disposed of properly.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 16
7. STORMWATER TREATMENT PRACTICE DESIGN STANDARDS
7.1. Storm Sewers
Requirements include:
1. Manhole spacing shall not exceed 400 feet.
2. Where more than one pipe enters a structure, a catch basin/manhole shall be used.
3. Storm sewer pipe should match top of pipe to top of pipe unless grade constraints
prevent this. In that case, hydraulic calculations will be necessary to verify that excessive
surcharging will not occur.
4. Stormwater pipes shall be designed utilizing the Rational Method. Channel design shall
be hydrograph method only. All methods are subject to the City Engineer’s approval.
5. Lateral systems shall be designed for the 10-year 24-hour Atlas 14 rainfall using the
Rational Method. State Aid roadway storm sewer shall be designed per the State Aid
requirements.
6. The minimum full flow velocity within the storm sewer should be 3 feet per second (fps).
The maximum velocity shall be 10 fps, except when entering a pond, where the
maximum velocity shall be limited to 6 fps.
7. Trunk storm sewer should be designed at a minimum to carry 100-year pond discharge in
addition to the 10-year design flow for directly tributary areas. The following table shall
be used for the calculation of peak rates using the Rational Method:
Table 4: Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Storm Sewer Design
Cover Type 10-Year Runoff Coefficient
Single-family Residential 0.4
Multi-family Residential 0.5
Commercial 0.7
Industrial 0.7
Parks, Open Space 0.2
Ponds, Wetlands 1.0
8. For storms greater than the 10-year event, and in the case of plugged inlets, transient
street ponding will occur. For safety reasons, the maximum depth in streets should not
exceed 1.5 feet at the deepest point.
9. To promote efficient hydraulics within manholes, manhole benching shall be provided to
half the diameter of the largest pipe entering or leaving the manhole.
10. Vaned grate (3067V) catch basin castings shall be used on all streets.
11. The maximum design flow at a catch basin for the 10-year storm event shall be 3 cubic
feet per second (cfs), unless high capacity grates are provided. Catch basins at low
points will be evaluated for higher flow with the approval of the City Engineer.
12. All structures located in the street are to be a minimum of four feet deep (rim to invert)
and a minimum of three feet deep elsewhere. Two-by-three catch basins are to be four
feet deep.
13. The last structure in the street prior to discharging into a pond is to be a minimum of five
feet deep with a four-foot deep sump, where appropriate.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 17
7.2. Outlet and Inlet Pipes
Requirements include:
1. Inlet pipes of stormwater ponds shall be extended to the pond normal water level (NWL)
whenever possible.
2. Outfalls with velocities greater than 4 fps into channels, where the angle of the outfall to
the channel flow direction is greater than 30-degrees, require energy dissipation or stilling
basins.
3. Outfalls with velocities of less than 4 fps, that project flows downstream into a channel in
a direction 30-degrees or less from the channel flow direction, generally do not require
energy dissipaters or stilling basins, but will require riprap protection.
4. In the case of discharge to channels, riprap shall be provided on all outlets to an
adequate depth below the channel grade and to a height above the outfall or channel
bottom. Riprap shall be placed over a suitably graded filter material and filter fabric to
ensure that soil particles do not migrate through the riprap and reduce its stability. Riprap
shall be placed to a thickness at least 2.5 times the mean rock diameter to ensure that it
will not be undermined or rendered ineffective by displacement. If riprap is used as
protection for overland drainage routes, grouting may be recommended.
5. Discharge velocity into a pond at the outlet elevation shall be 6 fps or less. Riprap
protection is required at all inlet pipes into ponds from the NWL to the pond bottom.
6. Where outlet velocities to ponds exceed 6 fps, the design should be based on the unique
site conditions present. Submergence of the outlet or installation of a stilling basin
approved by the City is required when excessive outlet velocities are experienced.
7. Submerged outlet pipes from ponds are not allowed.
7.3. Channels and Overland Drainage
Requirements include:
1. Overland drainage routes where velocities exceed 4 fps should be reviewed by the City
Engineer and approved only when suitable stabilization measures are proposed.
2. Open channels and swales are recommended where flows and small grade differences
prohibit the economical construction of an underground conduit. Open channels and
swales can provide infiltration and filtration benefits not provided by pipe.
3. The minimum grade in all unpaved areas shall be 2%.
4. Maximum length for drainage swales shall be 400 feet.
5. Channel side slopes should be a maximum of 4:1 (horizontal to vertical) with gentler
slopes being desirable.
6. Riprap shall be provided at all points of juncture, particularly between two open channels
and where storm sewer pipes discharge into a channel.
7. Open channels should be designed to handle the expected velocity from a 10-year
design storm without erosion. Riprap may need to be provided.
8. Periodic cleaning of an open channel is required to ensure that the design capacity is
maintained. Therefore, all channels shall be designed to allow easy access for
equipment.
7.4. Ponds
1. Maximum allowable pond slopes above the outlet elevation are 3:1.
2. All constructed ponds and wetland mitigation areas shall have an aquatic or safety bench
around their entire perimeter. The aquatic bench is defined as follows:
a. Cross-slope no steeper than 10:1.
b. Minimum width of 10 feet.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 18
c. Located from pond outlet elevation to one foot below pond outlet elevation.
3. All constructed ponds shall be provided a maintenance access from an adjacent
roadway. The maintenance access shall be provided in the form of an easement no
narrower than 20 feet. The maintenance access shall have a longitudinal slope no
steeper than 6:1 and minimal cross slope. Maintenance access routes, due to their extra
width, also serve well as emergency overflow (EOF) routes.
4. All constructed ponds and wetland mitigation areas shall have a maintenance access
bench around sufficient perimeter to provide access to all inlets and outlets. The
maintenance bench shall be located within a designated outlot or within a permanent
easement. The maintenance bench shall extend from the outlet elevation to one foot
above the outlet elevation and its cross slope shall be no steeper than 10:1. The
maintenance bench shall connect to the maintenance access.
5. Maximum pond wet volume depth is eight feet.
6. Mean depth for wet ponds shall be a minimum of four feet. If the pond is smaller than
three acre-feet in volume, mean depths of three to four feet may be used. Mean depth is
defined as the area at outlet elevation divided by the wet volume.
7. All ponds shall be graded to one foot below design bottom elevation. This “hold down”
allows sediment storage until site restoration is complete.
8. The top berm elevation of ponds shall be a minimum of one foot above the 100-year
pond HWL.
9. Grading shall not block or raise emergency overflows from adjoining properties unless
some provision has been made for the runoff that may be blocked behind such an
embankment.
10. To prevent short circuiting, the distance between the major inlets and normal outlet shall
be maximized.
11. All ponds shall have a protected EOF.
12. Stormwater ponds shall not be constructed within protected wetland buffers.
13. When designing stormwater ponds with extended detention storage, the time is defined
as the time between the center of mass of the inflow and outflow hydrograp hs. The
minimum storage time shall be obtained from Table 5 below:
Table 5: Required Storage Time
Site Area (acres) Extended Detention Storage
Time (hrs)
0 to 1 not required
1 to 30 24
30 to 40 36
40 + 48
a. Minimum recommend outflow orifice diameter is 6”. Alternative equivalent outflow,
such as a V-notch weir can be used. Lower release rates require alternative
practices to provide control.
b. Extended detention storage shall be sized to control the 1-year peak flows.
7.5. Infiltration/Filtration Practices
Requirements include:
1. Sizing of filtration/infiltration practices, or BMPs, shall be in conformance with the volume
control requirements of this manual and the Minnesota Stormwater Manual.
2. When designing an infiltration practice for volume control and water quality management,
on-site testing and detailed analysis are required to determine the infiltration rates of the
proposed infiltration facility. Documented site-specific infiltration or hydraulic conductivity
measurements (double-ring infiltrometer) completed by a licensed soil scientist or
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 19
engineer is required. In the absence of a detailed analysis, the saturated infiltration rates
listed in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual shall be used. A piezometer shall be installed
to ascertain the level of the local groundwater table and demonstrate at least three feet of
separation between the bottom of the proposed facility and the groundwater. The soil
boring is required to go to a depth of at least five feet below the proposed bottom of the
BMP. The soils shall be classified using the Unified Soil Classification system. The least
permeable soil horizon will dictate the infiltration rate. Infiltration practices shall be
designed to infiltrate the required runoff volume within 48 hours.
3. Pretreatment in the form of ponds, forebays, filter strips, or other approved methods shall
be provided for all infiltration areas. Pretreatment upstream of volume management
practices is a key element in the long-term viability of infiltration areas. The level of
pretreatment varies largely depending on the BMP and drainage area. Local watershed
district, City staff, and Minnesota Stormwater Manual recommendations shall be utilized
for determining the appropriate level of pretreatment on a case-by-case basis.
4. Vegetation of infiltration/filtration practices shall be as shown in the City of Medina
Standard Details. A plan for the management of vegetation shall be included in the
Stormwater Management Plan and/or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
5. Subgrade soils for infiltration/filtration practices shall be as presented in the City of
Medina Standard Details. Assume a 40% void ratio for the purposes of volume
calculations.
6. For infiltration benches adjacent to ponds, benches shall have slopes no steeper than 5:1
over the proposed infiltration zone. A slope of 10:1 is preferred. The Minnesota
Stormwater Manual cites concerns with locating infiltration features immediately adjacent
to ponds. To address this, benches shall be located to maintain hydraulic separation
from the saturated zone of the pond in order to minimize the loss of infiltration potential
over time.
7.6. Water Reuse
1. Required design submittal packages for water reuse BMPs must include:
a. An analysis using Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Stormwater Reuse
Calculator. An example of the Calculator can be found in Appendix E. The full
spreadsheet can be requested from the City.
b. Documentation demonstrating adequacy of soils, storage system, and delivery
system; and
c. Operations and maintenance plan. The O& M plan should follow the guidelines
listed in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual.
2. Approved capacity of an irrigation practice will be based on:
a. An irrigation rate of 1.0 inches per week over the irrigated pervious area(s) or the
rate identified through the Stormwater Reuse Calculator (whichever is less); or as
approved by the City; and
b. No greater than a 26 week (April 15th to October 15th) growing season.
3. Design of the irrigation system must include, but is not limited to, the following items.
Each system will be reviewed and approved by the City on a site-by-site basis.
a. Plumbing code review, adherence, and permitting, if applicable.
b. Water reuse pump system design including supply line, intake, meter, and pump
c. Electrical and controls design
d. Construction drawings, specifications, and system integration
4. Two (2) feet of permanent pool from the bottom of the pond must be maintained
following drawdown for irrigation.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 20
5. Use rates should be monitored at least monthly for at least three years. This should be
compared to the water budget analysis of the design to determine whether the modeled
level of performance is being achieved.
The Minnesota Stormwater Manual provides design considerations and operations plans for
water reuse systems that should be used as guidance with submittal packages. Links to the
websites are provided below:
• Design Criteria
• Construction Specifications
• Operation and Maintenance
7.7. Emergency Overflow Paths
1. EOFs shall be sized with a minimum bottom width of five feet and 4:1 side slopes.
2. The maximum flow depth in EOFs shall be less than or equal to one foot as calculated for
a 100-year back-to-back storm event.
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 Page 21
8. Design Examples
The design process for each of the acceptable Best Management Practices is detailed in the Minnesota
Stormwater Manual.
9. Stormwater Treatment Practice Detail Drawings
Please refer to the City of Medina Engineering Standard Details in Appendix D.
10. Construction Specifications
Construction specifications and details are found in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual for each of the
acceptable BMPs, unless otherwise restricted by this Manual.
11. Checklists
Checklists for Construction Inspection
Construction Inspection Checklists are available in Appendix A of this Manual.
Checklists for Operation & Maintenance
Operations & Maintenance Checklist for each of the approved Stormwater Treatment Practices are
available in Appendix D of this Manual.
APPENDIX A
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A
Construction Sediment and Erosion Control Checklist
Construction Sequence Satisfactory /
Unsatisfactory Comments
Pre-construction meeting
Runoff diverted
Facility area cleared
Soil tested for
permeability
Project benchmark near
site
Facility location staked
out
Temporary erosion and
sediment protection
properly installed
Lateral slopes completely
level
Soils not compacted
during excavation
Size and location per
plans
Longitudinal slopes within
design range
Stockpile location not
adjacent to excavation
area and stabilized with
vegetation and/ or silt
fence
Media installed per plans
Outlets installed pre plans
Underdrain installed to
grade
Pretreatment devices
installed per plans
General BMP- construction inspection checklist
1. Pre-Construction
2. Excavation
3. Structural Components
Project:
Location:
Site Status:
Date:
Time:
Inspector:
Soil bed composition and
texture conforms to
specifications
Complies with planting
specs
Topsoil complies with
specs in composition and
placement
Soil properly stabilized for
permanent erosion
control
Dimensions per plans
Pre-treatment operational
Inlet/outlet operational
Soil/ filter bed
permeability verified
Effective stand of
vegetation stabilized
Construction generated
sediments removed
Contributing watershed
stabilized before flow is
diverted to the practice
Actions to be taken:
4. Vegetation
5. Final Inspection
Comments:
Site name:Inspector:
Address/Location:NPDES Permit # (if applicable):
Owner/operator:Date and time:
Site contact name:Weather Conditions:
Site contact info:Amount and date of last rainfall:
Other person(s) interviewed or onsite:
Name of special or impaired waters or public waters within 1 mile, if any:
Item Yes No N/A Type
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Notes, corrective actions & dates corrective actions completed:
16
17
18
19 If no to the previous, will streets be swept/cleaned within 24 hrs?
Concrete and other washout wastes contained and properly identified?
Surface waters and discharge points free of erosion and sediment?
All infiltration areas protected from compaction and sediment deposition?
Inspections performed as needed (every 7 days or within 24 hours of a half inch rainfall) and records
available?
If no to the previous, will deltas and sediment be removed within 7 days?
Perimeter control BMPs used on downgradient perimeters and upgradient of buffer zones?
Ot
h
e
r
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) present and implemented onsite?
Permanent stormwater management system onsite to retain 1 inch or more of runoff if new impervious
surfaces are one acre or more?
Sediment control devices reinstalled if they've been adjusted for short-term work
Are flocculants or other sedimentation treatment chemicals being used appropriately?
BM
P
s
t
o
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
e
s
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
di
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
Wetted perimeter of drainage ditch/swale stabilized in 24 hrs for areas within 200 ft of the property edge
or discharge point, and 14 days for the rest of the ditch/swale?
Pipe outlets have energy dissipation if connected to surface water?
Soil stockpiles have sediment controls and are not in conveyances or natural buffer zones?
Items to be evaluated at all inspections
Vehicle fueling in a contained area?
Conveyance channels route water around unstabilized areas?
BMPs discharge to vegetated areas?
Minimizing soil compaction and preserving top soil?
If no to the previous, will the BMPs be replaced by the end of the next business day?
If no to the previous, will the BMP be replaced by the end of the next business day?
Effective best management practices (BMPs) used to minimize erosion, areas of work are delineated,
and steep slope disturbance minimized?
Solid & hazardous waste stored and disposed of properly?
Paved surfaces on and next to the site free of tracked sediment?
A 50 ft buffer preserved if site is within 50 ft of, and drains to, surface water, or redundant sediment
controls used?
Soils stabilized where work has stopped for 14 days?
BM
P
s
t
o
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
e
er
o
s
i
o
n
BM
P
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
/
S
i
t
e
In
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
So
l
i
d
a
n
d
ha
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
w
a
s
t
e
Building products & chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, etc.) covered?
Portable toilets positioned so they are secure?
Vehicle & equipment washing wastes don't contact the ground & engine degreasing prohibited?
All perimeter control BMPs maintained, functioning, and properly installed?
All storm drain inlets protected?
Effective vehicle tracking BMPs used?
Effective sediment control practices used?
Sediment in sediment control BMPs is less than 1/2 the device height?
Item Yes No N/A
30
31
32
33
Notes, corrective actions & dates corrective actions completed:
Item Yes No N/A
34
35
36
Notes, corrective actions & dates corrective actions completed:
Item Yes No N/A
37
38
39
Notes, corrective actions & dates corrective actions completed:
Item Yes No N/A
40
41
42
43
44
45
Notes, corrective actions & dates corrective actions completed:
Additional notes and photos
All sediment removed from stormwater basin and conveyances (i.e. pipes)?
All temporary erosion prevention and sediment control BMPs removed?
If construction is complete
BM
P
s
f
o
r
de
w
a
t
e
r
i
n
g
Turbid or sediment-laden water discharging to a dewatering or sedimentation basin?
If project is near a special or impaired waters
Sp
e
c
i
a
l
o
r
im
p
a
i
r
e
d
w
a
t
e
r
s
Soils stabilized where work has stopped for 7 days if within 1 mile of special/impaired water, or 24 hours
(hrs) if within 200 feet (ft) of fish spawning?
If adjacent to a special water, 100 ft natural buffer preserved?
Temporary sediment basin used if 5 or more acres within 1 mile of special/impaired water disturbed?
Backwash water is disposed of offsite, retreated, reused without causing erosion, or discharged to
sanitary sewer, if applicable?
Dewatering BMPs prevent sediment discharge, erosion, and wetland inundation?
For projects with temporary sediment basins
Basin outlet withdraws water from the surface and has energy dissipation?
Sediment in basin less than 1/2 the storage volume?
Temporary sediment basin used if 10 or more acres disturbed?
Basin has an emergency overflow?
For projects with dewatering
For agriculture projects, has the land been returned it its preconstruction use?
Soils stabilized with 70% density perennial vegetative cover?
For residential lots & the house is sold, are erosion practices at the downgradient perimeter?
Te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
se
d
i
m
e
n
t
ba
s
i
n
Permanent stormwater management system is operating as designed?
Fi
n
a
l
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
APPENDIX B
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B
Maintenance Agreement Template
APPENDIX C
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 APPENDIX C
APPENDIX C
BMP Operation and Maintenance Requirements
Maintenance Item Satisfactory /
Unsatisfactory Comments
Contributing areas clean
of litter and vegetative
debris
No dumping of yard
wastes into practice
Bioretention area clean of
litter and vegetative
debris
Plant height taller than
design water depth
Fertilized per O&M plan
Plant composition
according to O&M plan
Undesirable vegetation
removed
Grass height less than 6
inches
No evidence of erosion
1. Debris Cleanout (Monthly)
Bioretention - operation and maintenance checklist
2. Vegetation (Monthly)
Project:
Location:
Site Status:
Date:
Time:
Inspector:
No evidence of sediment
buildup
Sumps should not be
more than 50% full of
sediment
No evidence of erosion at
downstream toe of drop
structure
Dewaters between storms
within 48 hours
No evidence of standing
water
Pretreatment areas clean
of sediments
Contributing drainage area
stabilized and clear of
erosion
Winter sand deposition
evacuated every spring
3. Check Dams/Energy Dissipators/Sumps (Annual, After Major Storms)
4. Dewatering (Monthly)
5. Sediment Deposition (Annual)
Good condition, no need
for repair
No evidence of erosion
No evidence of any
blockages
Filter bed has not been
blocked or filled
inappropriately
6. Outlet/Overflow Spillway (Annual, After Major Storms)
7. Integrity of Filter Bed (Annual)
Comments:
Actions to be taken:
Maintenance Item Satisfactory /
Unsatisfactory Comments
Contributing areas clean
of litter and vegetative
debris
Filtration/infiltration
facility clean
Inlets and outlets clear
Vegetation maintenance
complies with O&M plan
Vegetation meets
performance standards
(including control of
specified invasive species)
Minimum mowing depth
not exceeded
No evidence of erosion
Dewaters between storms
within 48 hours
Area clean of sediment
Winter accumulation of
sand removed each spring
Contributing drainage area
stabilized and free of
erosion
Bioretention - operation and maintenance checklist
2. Vegetation (Monthly)
3. Dewatering (Monthly)
4. Sediment Deposition (Annual)
Project:
Location:
Site Status:
Date:
Time:
Inspector:
1. Debris Cleanout (Monthly)
Good condition, no need
for repair
No evidence of erosion
No evidence of blockage
No evidence of structural
deterioration
Encroachment on
easement area (if
applicable)
Complaints from residents
(if applicable)
Any public hazards
(specify)
5. Outlet/Overflow Spillway (Annual, After Major Storms)
6. Integrity of Filter Bed (Annual)
Comments:
Actions to be taken:
Maintenance Item Satisfactory /
Unsatisfactory Comments
Contributing areas clean
of litter and vegetative
debris
Trench surface clean
Inflow pipes clear
Overflow spillway clear
Inlet area clean
Obviously trapping
sediment
Greater than 50% of
storage volume remaining
Mowing done per O&M
plan
Minimum mowing depth
not exceeded
Undesirable vegetation
removed
No evidence of erosion
Fertilized per O&M plan
No evidence of
sedimentation in gravel
filter
Sediment accumulation
doesn’t yet require
cleanout
Infiltration trench-basin - operation and maintenance checklist
1. Debris Cleanout (Monthly)
Project:
Location:
Site Status:
Date:
Time:
Inspector:
5. Sediment Cleanout of Trench (Annual)
2. Sediment Traps or Forebays (Annual)
3. Dewatering (Monthly)
4. Vegetation (Monthly)
Clean off sediment
Winter accumulation of
sand removed each spring
Contributing drainage area
stabilized and free of
erosion
Good condition
No evidence of erosion
Good condition, no need
for repair
No evidence of erosion
Surface of aggregate clean
Top layer of stone does
not need replacement
Trench does not need
rehabilitation
8. Outlet/Overflow Spillway (Annual)
6. Sediment deposition of Basin (Annual)
7. Inlets (Annual)
9. Aggregate Repairs (Annual)
Comments:
Actions to be taken:
Maintenance Item Satisfactory /
Unsatisfactory Comments
Contributing areas clean
of litter and vegetative
debris
Filtration facility clean
Inlet and outlets clear
No evidence of filter
surface clogging
Activities in drainage area
minimize oil and grease
entry
Contributing drainage area
stabilized
Undesirable vegetation
removed
No evidence of erosion
Area mowed and clipping
removed
Water holding chambers
at normal pool
No evidence of leakage
Obviously trapping
sediment
Greater than 50% storage
volume remaining
Filter chamber free of
sediments
Contributing drainage area
stabilized and free of
erosion
Media filter system - operation and maintenance checklist
2. Oil and Grease (Monthly)
5. Sediment Deposition (Annual)
1. Debris Cleanout (Monthly)
Project:
Location:
Site Status:
Date:
Time:
Inspector:
3. Vegetation (Monthly)
4. Sediment Traps and Forebays (Monthly)
No evidence of structural
deterioration
Any grates are in good
condition
No evidence of spalling or
cracking of structural parts
Good condition, no need
for repairs
No evidence of erosion (if
draining into a natural
channel)
No evidence of blockages
Evidence of flow
bypassing facility
No noticeable odors
outside of facility
8. Overall Function of Facility (Annual)
6. Structural Components (Annual)
7. Outlet/Overflow Spillway (Annual)
Comments:
Actions to be taken:
Maintenance Item Satisfactory /
Unsatisfactory Comments
1. Vegetation and ground cover adequate
2. Embankment erosion
3. Animal burrows
4. Unauthorized plantingn
5. Cracking, bulging, or sliding of embankment
a. Upstream face
b. Downstream face
c. At or beyond toe
downstream
upstream
d. Emergency spillway
6. Pond, toe & chimney drains clear and functioning
7. Seeps/leaks on downstream face
8. Slope protection or riprap failure
9. Vertical/horizontal alignment of top of dam “As-Built”
10. Emergency spillway clear of obstructions and debris
11. Other (specify)
Type: Reinforced concrete ______ Corrugated pipe ______
Masonry ______
1. Low flow orifice obstructed
N2. Low flow trash rack. a. Debris removal necessary
b. Corrosion control
3. Weir trash rack maintenance a. Debris removal necessary
4. Excessive sediment accumulation insider riser
5. Concrete/masonry condition riser and barrels a. cracks or
displacement
No evidence of erosion at downstream toe
b. Minor spalling (<1” )
c. Major spalling (rebars exposed)
d. Joint failures
No evidence of erosion at downstream toe
No evidence of erosion at downstream toe
e. Water tightness
6. Metal pipe condition
7. Control valve a. Operational/exercised
No evidence of erosion at downstream toe
b. Chained and locked
8. Pond drain valve a. Operational/exercised
b. Chained and locked
9. Outfall channels functioning
10. Other (specify)
1. Undesirable vegetative growth
2. Floating or floatable debris removal required
3. Visible pollution
4. Shoreline problem
5. Other (specify)
Project:
Location:
Site Status:
Date:
Time:
Inspector:
1. Embankment and emergency spillway (Annual, After Major Storms)
2. Riser and principal spillway (Annual)
3. Permanent Pool (Wet Ponds) (Monthly)
1.Sedimentation noted
2. Sediment cleanout when depth < 50% design depth
1. Vegetation adequate
2. Undesirable vegetative growth
3. Undesirable woody vegetation
3. Undesirable woody vegetation
4. Low flow channels clear of obstructions
5. Standing water or wet spots
6. Sediment and / or trash accumulation
7. Other (specify)
1. Riprap failures
2. Slope erosion
3. Storm drain pipes
4.Endwalls / Headwalls
5. Other (specify)
7. Other (specify)
1. Encroachment on pond, wetland or easement area
2. Complaints from residents
3.Aesthetics a. Grass growing required
b. Graffiti removal neededs
c. Other (specify)
4. Conditions of maintenance access routes.
5. Signs of hydrocarbon build-up
6. Any public hazards (specify)
1. Vegetation healthy and growing
Wetland maintaining 50% surface area coverage of wetland
plants after the second growing season.
(If unsatisfactory, reinforcement plantings needed)
2. Dominant wetland plants:
Survival of desired wetland plant species
Distribution according to landscaping plan?
3. Evidence of invasive species
4. Maintenance of adequate water depths for desired
wetland plant species
5. Harvesting of emergent plantings needed
6. Have sediment accumulations reduced pool volume
significantly or are plants “choked” with sediment
7. Eutrophication level of the wetland.
8. Other (specify)
4. Sediment Forebays
Comments:
Actions to be taken:
5. Dry Pond Areas
6. Condition of Outfalls (Annual , After Major Storms)
7. Other ( Monthly)
8. Wetland Vegetation (Annual))
Notes:
*Inspect tree minimum once a month and after every major storm during first year after planting.
See Minnesota Stormwater Manual for more information on inspection items listed below.
Inspection Item
Minimum Inspection
Frequency*
Date Last
Inspected
Need to
Inspect During
Current
Inspection
(Y/N)
Describe Signs of
Problems (if none, write
"none")
Action Needed and
Deadline Date Completed
Tree health Every Spring and Fall
Tree safety *
Symptoms of under or overwatering *
Tree in need of pruning Yearly
Does trunk protection need to be
replaced or removed?Yearly until removed
Do stakes need to be removed or stakes
ties need to be replaced First year only
Does tree need to be straightened?First year only
Are there girdling roots?Every 4-5 years
Does soil or mulch need to be removed
from root collar?Yearly
Soil test needed?
As needed if trees
indicate possible soil
problems
Tree
Owner Phone #
Inspector Name
Inspector Phone #
Weather Date of Inspection
Date of last rainfall prior to inspection
Date of Inspection
MAINTENANCE INSPECTION CHECKLIST FOR TREES FOR STORMWATER
*Unless otherwise notes in "minimum inspection frequency column", inspect items below minimum spring, fall, and after major storms; adjust frequency as needed
based on project conditions.
Project Name
Project Address
Owner Name
Inspection Item Inspection Frequency
Date Last
Inspected
Need to
Inspect During
Current
Inspection
(Y/N)
Describe Signs of
Problems (if none, write
"none")
Action Needed and
Deadline Date Completed
Mulch layer less than 3" deep: needs
additional mulch Yearly
Erosion *
Evidence of clogging *
Evidence of Standing Water *
Weeds present As needed
Accumulation of sediment, debris, or
trash *
Does drawdown time meet project
requirements?*
Accumulation of sediment, debris, or
trash *
Erosion *
Accumulation of sediment, debris, or
trash *
Erosion *
Evidence of Standing Water *
Evidence of Clogging *
Accumulation of sediment, debris, or
trash *
Accumulation of sediment, debris, or
trash *
Distribution and Drainage Pipes, Cleanouts
Tree Opening
Inlet (Curb Cut at Tree Opening, Curb Cut at Catch Basin, Porous Pavement, Trench Drain, or Other)
Overflow/Outlet Structure
Pretreatment (Curb Cut at Tree Opening, Catch Basin, Porous Pavement, or Other)
Inspection Item Inspection Frequency
Date Last
Inspected
Need to
Inspect During
Current
Inspection
(Y/N)
Describe Signs of
Problems (if none, write
"none")
Action Needed and
Deadline Date Completed
Other
Maintenance Item Satisfactory /
Unsatisfactory Comments
Contributing areas clean
of litter and vegetative
debris
Inlet and outlets clear
Filtration facility clean
No evidence of flow going
around structures
No evidence of erosion at
downstream toe
Mowing done per O&M
plan
Minimum mowing depth
not exceeded
Undesirable vegetation
removed
No evidence of erosion
Fertilized per O&M plan
Vegetative filter system - operation and maintenance checklist
2. Check Dams or Energy Dissipators (Annual, After Major Storms)
1. Debris Cleanout (Monthly)
Project:
Location:
Site Status:
Date:
Time:
Inspector:
3. Vegetation (Monthly)
Dewaters between storms
within 48 hours
Clean of sediment
Winter accumulation of
sand removed each spring
Contributing drainage area
stabilized and free of
erosion
Good condition, no need
for repairs
No evidence of erosion
No evidence of blockage
5. Sediment Deposition (Annual)
4. Dewatering (Monthly))
6. Outlet/Overflow Spillway (Annual)
Comments:
Actions to be taken:
Component Timeframe What to Look for During Inspection Maintenance
Treatment Systems 3 times per year AND after each rain event that
exceeds the design capacity of the collection system
Clogging of intake and filters in first
flush diverters, especially during pollen
season (filter clogging)
lean and replace as needed
Collection System After large storms General condition of first flush and high-
flow diverters (bypass system)Repair as needed
Collection System After large storms Soil erosion or flooding along diversion
flow pathways
Provide appropriate erosion control measures (rip rap, check
dams, etc.)
Overflow/Bypass
Systems Annual (above-ground)/ As needed (below-ground)Clogging or damage at overflow/bypass
intakes Clean and repair as needed
Overflow/Bypass
Systems Annual (above-ground)/ As needed (below-ground)Erosion of downstream receiving area Stabilize erosion, repair overflow system as needed, check for
failures in other upstream components
Overflow/Bypass
Systems Annual (above-ground)/ As needed (below-ground)Proper pump control and operation Repair and replace as needed
Source Area/Collection
Surface Annually Changes in land use or land disturbance Implement source control BMPs as needed to help meet pre-
storage water quality targets
Source Area/Collection
Surface Annually Pollution hot spots Implement source control BMPs as needed to help meet pre-
storage water quality targets
Source Area/Collection
Surface Annually Damage to roofing materials Repair as needed
Source Area/Collection
Surface Annually Overhanging branches Trim overhanging branches
Source Area/Collection
Surface Annually Nests or other evidence of animal
activity
Remove nests and implement additional measures to
discourage animal activity
Distribution System Monthly Presence of biofilms or sediment
accumulation on filters Replace/disinfect as needed
Storage System Monthly Sediment level in tank or pond Remove sediment when the tank sediment storage volume
has reached 50% of capacity
Source Area/Collection
Surface Monthly or as needed General condition of pavement Adjust street sweeping schedule as needed to maintain clean
pavement
Treatment Systems Monthly or as required Performance of water treatment
system
Test water quality at point of use and at other points in the
system (outlet of collection system, in-tank) as required
Treatment Systems Monthly or as required Performance of water treatment
system
Adjust treatment parameters to meet any water quality
deficiencies
Distribution System Per manufacturer and as needed Function of pumps and other control
equipment
Test all control components per manufacturer's guidelines or
as needed to diagnose problems in the system
Treatment Systems Per manufacturer specifications and as needed
Condition of replaceable components in
the treatment systems (filters,
cartridges, bulbs, etc.)
Replace/repair per manufacture’s guidelines and as needed.
Typical UV treatment is annual and filters are started on a
quarterly basis or when differential pressure drops.
Storage System Periodically following startup Tank ventilation Clean, repair and replace as needed
Storage System Periodically following startup Excess soil moisture near tanks or other
evidence of leaks Repair leaks per manufacturer’s guidance
Storage System Periodically following startup Growth of algae or microbes Drain and clean tank per manufacturer’s guidelines
Storage System Periodically following startup Intrusion of mosquitos or small animals Implement appropriate pest control as needed
Storage System Spring start up General condition of all storage system
components Clean, repair and replace as needed
Storage System Spring start up Position and function of valves Test per manufacturer’s guidelines
Storage System Spring start up Function of operational structures and
controls Test per manufacturer’s guidelines
Treatment Systems Spring startup General condition and function of all
treatment system components Conduct testing per manufacturer’s guidance
Clean and repair as
needed
Collection System Spring startup and fall General condition of gutters,
downspouts, and conveyances
Clean accumulated debris in fall prior to winter operations or
seasonal shut-down, and as needed.
Collection System Spring startup and fall Debris clogging inlets, gutters,
downspouts, and other conveyances
Clean accumulated debris in fall prior to winter operations or
seasonal shut-down, and as needed.
Collection System Spring startup and fall Evidence of leaks at junctions or along
conveyances
Clean accumulated debris in fall prior to winter operations or
seasonal shut-down, and as needed.
Distribution System Spring startup and fall General condition of all distribution
system components Repair/replace as needed
Distribution System Spring startup and fall Position and function of valves Test per manufacturer's guidelines
Distribution System Spring startup and fall Function of operational controls Test per manufacturer's guidelines
Distribution System Spring startup and fall Presence of leaks (test)Test per manufacturer's guidelines
Distribution System Spring startup and fall Function and performance of pump Complete all startup inspection and operations per
manufacturer’s guidelines
Treatment Systems Twice per year
Clogging from accumulated dirt and
debris in pre-storage treatment
components
Clean as needed
Treatment Systems Twice per year Evidence of leaks from loose fittings,
joints Repair as needed
APPENDIX D
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 APPENDIX D
APPENDIX D
Standard Details
APPENDIX E
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 APPENDIX E
APPENDIX E
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Stormwater Reuse Calculator
RWMWD Stormwater Reuse Credit Calculator
Version 1.0
DRAFT February 2014
Example 1
Watershed Area Tributary to Stormwater Reuse System (acre)5.0
Watershed Imperviousness* Tributary to Stormwater Reuse System
*assumed to be directly-connected (%)5
C
(ac-ft)0.075
(cu-ft)3267
(gal)24,439
Irrigation Application Area (ac)(acre)1.00
(in/week)1.0
(ac-ft/day)0.0119
Irrigation Season Start (month #)5
Irrigation Season End (month #)9
Does the system go offline and drain down at the end of the season?(1=Yes /
0=No)1
Average Annual Precipitation (in/yr)27.7
Average Annual Watershed Runoff Volume (ac-ft/yr)1.50
Average Annual Runoff Coefficient 0.13
(ac-ft/yr)0.4
(%)23.8
(ac-ft/yr)1.1
(%)76.2
Average Annual Irrigation Demand (ac-ft/yr)1.3
(ac-ft/yr)0.4
(%)27.1
(ac-ft/yr)1.0
(%)72.9
Required Water Quality Volume for Watershed Based on RWMWD Rules (1.1 inch)(ac-ft)0.023
Average Annual Volume Reduction for an Infiltration System Sized to Meet the RWMWD Rules (Estimated by MIDS
Calculator)(%)42.0
Average Annual Runoff Volume Reduction due to Stormwater Reuse for Irrigation (%)23.8
RWMWD Credit Factor For Stormwater Reuse 0.57
(ac-ft)0.075
(gal)24439
(cu-ft)3267
(ac-ft)0.043
(gal)13,853
(cu-ft)1852
Reuse Storage Volume that can be applied towards achieving the RWMWD Rules
Stormwater Reuse Summary of Results - Stormwater Management
Average Annual Runoff Volume Reduction due to Stormwater Reuse for Irrigation
RWMWD Credit Factor For Stormwater Reuse
Average Annual Runoff Volume Bypassing the Reuse System (including Winterization Drawdown, if applicable)
Average Annual Irrigation Augmentation (from Potable Water Supply)
Stormwater Reuse Summary of Results - Irrigation Demand
Average Annual Irrigation Demand met by Stormwater Reuse
Reuse Storage Volume Provided
Reuse Scenario Name
Watershed Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG)
Estimated Reuse Storage Volume
Irrigation Application Rate
Watershed Input Parameters
Stormwater Reuse System Input Parameters
APPENDIX F
Stormwater Design Manual
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. 011705-000 APPENDIX F
APPENDIX F
Accepted List of Best Management Practices
Abstraction Credit Volume Abstraction TP Removal TSS Removal
Amended soils - volume reduction is 0.5 inches over
the amended area (Carver County)x x x
Bioretention basin (Filtration, rain garden,
etc)50% credit x x x
Stormwater reuse Full credit for volume reused x x x
Preservation or restoration of upland
vegetation
-0.5 inches over the amended area
(Carver County)x x x
Green roof – area is excluded from the total
impervious x
Pervious pavement (Pavers, asphalt,
concrete, etc.)
– area is excluded from the total
impervious x x x
Infiltration Full credit if sized adequately x x x
Disconnecting impervious surfaces – 0.5 inches with a max flow path of
100 feet x x x
Stormwater pond 60% credit x x
Stormwater pond with filtration bench x x
Iron enhanced sand filter or bench
100% volume reduction credit, 80%
credit for using iron enhanced
wrapped draintile
x x x
Hydrodynamic separator and other similar
devices x
Alum treatment x
SAFL baffle and other sump structure
products x
Buffer enhancement for streams, lakes, and
wetlands 0.5 inches over excess buffer area x x x
Tree planting/preservation 0.75 inches over preserved area x x x
Grassed swales
Volume reduction would be based on
soils. Calculated using MIDS
calculator
x x x
Underground detention/infiltration/sand
filter Full credit if sized adequately x x x
Rain guardian (pretreatment for
bioretention)x x
Biochar filter (boosts nutrient removal and
E. coli)x x
Stormwater planters/tree trenches Full credit if sized adequately x x x
Benefits
Agenda Item # 5C
ADDENDUM TO
RECORDING SECRETARY SERVICE AGREEMENT
Dated: December 31, 2019
By and between TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. and the City of Medina, 2052 County Road 24,
Medina, MN 55340.
1. EXTENSION OF RECORDING SECRETARIAL SERVICE AGREEMENT: The term of
the existing Recording Secretary Service Agreement dated December 31, 2018 shall be
extended under the same terms and conditions to December 31, 2020.
2. TOSS CHARGES: TOSS shall be paid for its services as recording secretary for each
meeting with a one (1) hour minimum, the highest rate prevailing, as follows:
a. Base Rate: One Hundred Forty -Eight and 00/100 dollars ($148.00) for any
meeting up to one (1) hour (billable time) plus Thirty -Five and 50/100 dollars
($35.50) for each thirty (30) minutes following the first one (1) hour; or
b. Unit Rate: Forty -Six and 50/00 dollars ($46.50) for the first hour of meeting time
and Thirty -One and 00/100 dollars ($31.00) for every hour after the first hour plus
Fourteen and 75/100 dollars ($14.75) for each page of draft minutes for submission to
the City of Medina for their preparation of final minutes.
At the end of the term of this Addendum or any extension of it, the parties may make a new
Agreement or extend or modify the terms of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Addendum to the Recording
Secretary Service Agreement as of the day and year indicated.
January _, 2020
CITY OF MEDINA
By
Kathy Martin
Its Mayor
By
Scott Johnson
Its Cite Administrator
November 4, 2019 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL, INC.
By
Its
Carla Wirth
President & CEO
Agenda Item # 5D
Contract No: A177627
The GRANTEE shall submit invoices for services related to the implementation of practices. Payment
shall be made within 45 days from receipt of the invoice.
GRANTEE shall not provide services under this Agreement without receiving a purchase order or
purchase order number supplied by the COUNTY. All invoices shall display the COUNTY purchase
order number and be sent to the central invoice receiving address supplied by the COUNTY.
4. PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS
INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
5. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
GRANTEE shall select the means, method, and manner of performing the services. Nothing is intended
nor should be construed as creating or establishing the relationship of a partnership or a joint venture
between the parties or as constituting GRANTEE as the agent, representative, or employee of COUNTY
for any purpose. GRANTEE is and shall remain an independent contractor for all services performed
under this Agreement. GRANTEE shall secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing
services under this Agreement. GRANTEE's personnel and/or subcontractors engaged to perform any
work or services required by this Agreement will have no contractual relationship with COUNTY and
will not be considered employees of COUNTY. COUNTY shall not be responsible for any claims
related to or on behalf of any of GRANTEE's personnel, including without limitation, claims that arise
out of employment or alleged employment under the Minnesota Unemployment Insurance Law
(Minnesota Statutes Chapter 268) or the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act (Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 176), or claims of discrimination arising out of state, local or federal law, against GRANTEE, its
officers, agents, contractors, or employees. Such personnel or other persons shall neither accrue nor be
entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind from COUNTY, including, without
limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, workers' compensation,
unemployment compensation, disability, severance pay, and retirement benefits.
6. NON-DISCRIMINATION
In accordance with COUNTY's policies against discrimination, GRANTEE shall not exclude any person
from full employment rights nor prohibit participation in or the benefits of any program, service or
activity on the grounds of any protected status or class including but not limited to race, color, creed,
religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, public assistance status, or national origin.
No person who is protected by applicable federal or state laws against discrimination shall be subjected
to discrimination.
7. INDEMNIFICATION
GRANTEE shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless COUNTY, its present and former officials,
officers, agents, volunteers and employees from any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments,
damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly
from any act or omission of GRANTEE, a subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by
them, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or omissions they may be liable in the performance of the
services required by this Agreement, and against all loss by reason of the failure of GRANTEE to
perform any obligation under this Agreement. For clarification and not limitation, this obligation to
defend, indemnify and hold harmless includes but is not limited to any liability, claims or actions
resulting directly or indirectly from alleged infringement of any copyright or any property right of
another, the employment or alleged employment of GRANTEE personnel, the unlawful disclosure and/or
use of protected data, or other noncompliance with the requirements of the provisions set forth herein.
Contract No: A177627
8. DATA PRIVACY AND SECURITY
A. GRANTEE, its officers, agents, owners, partners, employees, volunteers and subcontractors shall,
to the extent applicable, abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 13 (MGDPA) and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules,
regulations and orders relating to data or the privacy, confidentiality or security of data, which
may include the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and its
implementing regulations (HIPAA). For clarification and not limitation, COUNTY hereby
notifies GRANTEE that the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 13.05, subd. 11, apply to
this Agreement. GRANTEE shall promptly notify COUNTY if GRANTEE becomes aware of
any potential claims, or facts giving rise to such claims, under the MGDPA or other data, data
security, privacy or confidentiality laws, and shall also comply with the other requirements of this
Section.
Classification of data, including trade secret data, will be determined pursuant to applicable law
and, accordingly, merely labeling data as "trade secret" by GRANTEE does not necessarily make
the data protected as such under any applicable law.
B. In addition to the foregoing MGDPA and other applicable law obligations, GRANTEE shall
comply with the following duties and obligations regarding County Data and County Systems (as
each term is defined herein). As used herein, "County Data" means any data or information, and
any copies thereof, created by GRANTEE or acquired by GRANTEE from or through COUNTY
pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to handwriting, typewriting, printing,
photocopying, photographing, facsimile transmitting, and every other means of recording any
form of communication or representation, including electronic media, email, letters, works,
pictures, drawings, sounds, videos, or symbols, or combinations thereof.
If GRANTEE has access to or possession/control of County Data, GRANTEE shall safeguard and
protect the County Data in accordance with generally accepted industry standards, all laws, and
all applicable COUNTY policies, rules and direction. To the extent of any inconsistency between
accepted industry standards and COUNTY policies, rules and directions, GRANTEE shall notify
COUNTY of the inconsistency and follow COUNTY direction. GRANTEE shall immediately
notify COUNTY of any known or suspected security breach or unauthorized access to County
Data, then comply with all responsive directions provided by COUNTY. The foregoing shall not
be construed as eliminating, limiting or otherwise modifying GRANTEE's indemnification
obligations herein.
9. DUTY TO NOTIFY
GRANTEE shall promptly notify COUNTY of any claim, action, cause of action or litigation brought
against GRANTEE, its employees, officers, agents or subcontractors, which arises out of the services
described in this Agreement. GRANTEE shall also notify COUNTY whenever GRANTEE has a
reasonable basis for believing that GRANTEE and/or its employees, officers, agents or subcontractors,
and/or COUNTY, might become the subject of a claim, action, cause of action, administrative action,
criminal arrest, criminal charge or litigation arising out of and/or related to the services described in this
Agreement.
10. ACCESS FOR INSPECTIONS
The GRANTEE agrees to acquire written consent from all cost -share grant recipients that the COUNTY,
and any duly authorized representatives of the COUNTY, at a time that is mutually agreed upon by the
cost -share recipient and the COUNTY, and as often as the COUNTY may reasonably deem necessary,
Contract No: A177627
shall have access to and the right to enter the cost -share recipient's property, for purposes of inspection of
the practice identified herein.
11. SUCCESSORS, SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS
GRANTEE shall not assign, transfer or pledge this Agreement and/or the services to be performed,
whether in whole or in part, nor assign any monies due or to become due to it without the prior written
consent of the COUNTY. A consent to assign shall be subject to such conditions and provisions as the
COUNTY may deem necessary, accomplished by execution of a form prepared by the COUNTY and
signed by GRANTEE, the assignee and the COUNTY. Permission to assign, however, shall under no
circumstances relieve GRANTEE of its liabilities and obligations under the Agreement.
12. MERGER, MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY
A. The entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and supersedes all oral agreements
and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter. All items that are referenced
or that are attached are incorporated and made a part of this Agreement. If there is any conflict
between the terms of this Agreement and referenced or attached items, the terms of this
Agreement shall prevail.
B. GRANTEE and/or COUNTY are each bound by its own electronic signature(s) on this
Agreement, and each agrees and accepts the electronic signature of the other party.
C. Any alterations, variations or modifications of the provisions of this Agreement shall only be
valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the
parties. Except as expressly provided, the substantive legal terms contained in this Agreement
including but not limited to Indemnification, Insurance, Merger, Modification and Severability,
Default and Cancellation/Termination or Minnesota Law Governs may not be altered, varied,
modified or waived by any change order, implementation plan, scope of work, development
specification or other development process or document.
D. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining
provisions will not be affected.
13. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION/TERMINATION
Should the GRANTEE fail to maintain the practice during its effective life, the GRANTEE is considered
to be in default and is liable to the DEPARTMENT for the full amount of financial assistance received to
install and establish the practice. The GRANTEE is not liable for cost -share assistance received if the
failure was caused by reasons beyond the GRANTEE's control, or if conservation practices are applied at
GRANTEE' s expense that provide equivalent protection of the soil and water resources.
This Agreement may be canceled with or without cause by either party upon thirty (30) day written
notice.
If this Agreement expires or is cancelled or terminated, with or without cause, by either party, at any
time, GRANTEE shall not be entitled to any payment, fees or other monies except for payments duly
invoiced for then delivered In the event GRANTEE has performed work toward a Deliverable that
COUNTY has not Accepted at the time of cancellation or termination, GRANTEE hereby expressly
acknowledges and agrees that GRANTEE shall not be entitled to any payment for said work including
but not limited to incurred costs of performance, termination expenses, profit on the work performed,
other costs founded on termination for convenience theories or any other payments, fees, costs or
expenses not expressly set forth herein.
Contract No: A177627
14. SURVIVAL OF POVISIONS
Provisions that by their nature are intended to survive the term, cancellation or termination of this
Agreement do survive such term, cancellation or termination. Such provisions include but are not limited
to: SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED (as to ownership of property); INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR;
INDEMNIFICATION; DUTY TO NOTIFY;DATA PRIVACY AND SECURITY; DEFAULT AND
CANCELLATION/TERMINATION; MEDIA OUTREACH; and MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN.
15. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
In order to coordinate the services of GRANTEE with the activities of the Hennepin County Department
of Environment and Energy so as to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement, James Kurawa, Senior
Environmentalist, 612-348-7338, or successor shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the COUNTY
and serve as liaison between the COUNTY and GRANTEE.
Scott Johnson, City Administrator, 763-473-8840, shall manage the agreement on behalf of GRANTEE.
GRANTEE may replace such person but shall immediately give written notice to the COUNTY.
16. COMPLIANCE AND NON -DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION
A. GRANTEE shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local statutes, regulations, rules and
ordinances currently in force or later enacted.
B. If the source or partial source of funds for payment of services under this Agreement is federal,
state or other grant monies, GRANTEE shall comply with all applicable conditions of the specific
referenced or attached grant.
C. GRANTEE certifies that it is not prohibited from doing business with either the federal
government or the State of Minnesota as a result of debarment or suspension proceedings.
17. PAPER RECYCLING
The COUNTY encourages GRANTEE to develop and implement an office paper and newsprint
recycling program.
18. NOTICES
Any notice or demand which must be given or made by a party under this Agreement or any statute or
ordinance shall be in writing and shall be sent registered or certified mail. Notices to the COUNTY shall
be sent to the County Administrator with a copy to the originating Department at the address given in the
opening paragraph of the Agreement. Notice to GRANTEE shall be sent to the address stated in the
opening paragraph of the Agreement or to the address stated in GRANTEE's Form W-9 provided to the
COUNTY.
19. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
GRANTEE affirms that to the best of GRANTEE's knowledge, GRANTEE's involvement in this
Agreement does not result in a conflict of interest with any party or entity which may be affected by the
terms of this Agreement. GRANTEE agrees that, should any conflict or potential conflict of interest
become known to GRANTEE, GRANTEE will immediately notify the COUNTY of the conflict or
potential conflict, specifying the part of this Agreement giving rise to the conflict or potential conflict,
and will advise the COUNTY whether GRANTEE will or will not resign from the other engagement or
representation.
Contract No: A177627
20. MEDIA OUTREACH
GRANTEE shall notify COUNTY, prior to publication, release or occurrence of any Outreach (as
defined below). The parties shall coordinate to produce collaborative and mutually acceptable Outreach.
For clarification and not limitation, all Outreach shall be approved by COUNTY, by and through the
Public Relations Officer or his/her designee(s), prior to publication or release. As used herein, the term
"Outreach" shall mean all media, social media, news releases, external facing communications,
advertising, marketing, promotions, client lists, civic/community events or opportunities and/or other
forms of outreach created by, or on behalf of, GRANTEE (i) that reference or otherwise use the term
"Hennepin County," or any derivative thereof; or (ii) that directly or indirectly relate to, reference or
concern the County of Hennepin, this Agreement, the services performed hereunder or COUNTY
personnel, including but not limited to COUNTY employees and elected officials.
21. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN
The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity
and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations between the parties and their performance.
The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation will be those courts located within the County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in
the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this Agreement is held
invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be affected.
THIS PORTION OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Contract No: A177627
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Reviewed for COUNTY by STATE OF MINNESOTA
the County Attorney's Office:
By:
Reviewed for COUNTY by:
Document Assembled by:
Daniel Boeding
E -signed 2019-10-31 04:36PM CDT
Daniel.Boeding@hennepinus
Hennepin County
OSIII
Contract No: A177627
GRANTEE
GRANTEE warrants that the person who executed this Agreement is authorized to do so on behalf of
GRANTEE as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances.*
By:
Scot -t- T. Johnson
Scott T. Johnson
E -signed 2019-11-07 04:58PM CST
scott.johnson@medinamn.gov
City Administrator
By:
*GRANTEE represents and warrants that it has submitted to COUNTY all applicable documentation (articles,
bylaws, resolutions or ordinances) that confirms the signatory's delegation of authority. Documentation is not
required for a sole proprietorship.
Contract No: A177627
ATTACHMENT A
Hennepin County — Department of Environment and Energy (HCDEE)
COST - SHARE VOUCHER & PRACTICE CERTIFICATION FORM
A. - PAYEE INFORMATION ❑ Check it name or address change
B. PROJECT INFORMATION
Name:
I.D. Number:
Address:
HCDEE Program:
0 Easement • Cost -Share • Other
City, State, & Zip Code:
Practice Type (one only)
Practice Area(s)
Acres Completed:
C_ . 1 COST
Basis of Request
■ Installation ❑ Establishment • Reinstallation
Type of Request
0 Partial 0 Final
Completion Date:
INFORMATION
R/I
I ITEM
QUANTITY
UNIT
UNIT PRICE
COST
R - Receipted Item/Invoiced Item I - In - Kind Contribution (attach additional sheets as necessary) Total
I certify that this is an accurate and true summation of the actual costs and quantities of material, labor, and equipment used on the above project. In cases where the receipts
included items not used on the project, I have corrected them accordingly.
(Payee Signature) (Date)
D. PAYMENT INFORMATION EASEMENT PROGRAMS {(c) cannot exceed (a) - (b);
TOTAL COST OF PRACTICE (from above) (a) Maximum Payment Allowed I
Program Cost -share Payment: - [from box (c)] (b)Total of Previous Payments:
OTHER FUNDING SOURCES (please identify source) (c)Cost -Share Payment Requested I
- COST -SHARE PROGRAM {(b) + (c) cannot exceed 75%
of (a)}
- (a) Total Cost Approved:
- (b) Other public funds %
LAND OWNER/LAND OCCUPIER COST:
(c) HCDEE Share % I
(Attach additional sheets as
necessary
E. IICDEE CERTIFICATION -
I certify that an inspection has been performed and that the items identified in part I certify that I have reviewed this voucher and all supporting information and that
C have been completed and are in accordance with the required practice standards to the best of my knowledge and belief, the quantities and billed costs or
and specifications. disbursements are accurate and are in accordance with terms of the program
identified.
(HCDEE Technical Representative) f Date) (Authorized HCDEE Representative) (Date1
Contract No: A177627
ATTACHMENT B
Lake Ardmore Area BMP Retrofit Projects
Project Summary
This project will implement two-stormwater best management practices identified in the Lake Ardmore
Subwatershed Retrofit Assessment Study and a carp barrier between Lake Independence and Lake
Ardmore. These projects include the carp barrier, approximately 160 feet of shoreline restoration and 70
feet of stream stabilization. This project will reduce sediment and phosphorous and improve the lakes
ecosystem. It leverages an additional $102,375 in local contributions and a Clean Water, Land, and
Legacy grant.
Approved Budget Activities
Reimbursable expenses are limited to activities relating to the preparation of project specifications and
designs and related site construction and restoration work of the installed practices, in kind services,
operation and maintenance plans and related consulting and inspection for the Lake Ardmore BMP
Retrofit Projects Hennepin County Good Steward Grant application by the City of Medina received May
24, 2017 with subsequent plan set titled Ardmore Bank Stabilization Project dated March 16, 2019 and
carp barrier per feasibility study dated May 9, 2019, including the preparation of project specifications and
designs and related site construction and restoration work of the installed practices, in kind services,
operation and maintenance plans and related consulting and inspection.
Hennepin County Natural Resource "Opportunity" Grant reimbursements with said work shall not exceed
$20,000 reimbursable project expenses.
The effective life of this practice is twenty (20) years.
Reporting Requirements/Deliverables
The following reporting items are required during the project:
• Project Design and Specifications
• All invoices for consultant and/or contractor work.
• Approval of in -kind contributions prior to work.
• Certification that the project was installed according to the approved plans and specifications.
• Operation and Maintenance plans covering the life of the practice
• Final Project Report (see standard template).
Form 101 (Revised 8/2018) Page 10 of 10
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
7
0
1
X
E
N
I
A
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
|
S
U
I
T
E
3
0
0
|
M
I
N
N
E
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
M
N
|
5
5
4
1
6
|
7
6
3
.
5
4
1
.
4
8
0
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
Final Report Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jim Stremel, PE, City Engineer
Date: October 31, 2019
Re: Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
WSB Project No. R-014434-000
Background
The Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study was initiated to develop a cohesive
plan to guide the transportation needs, right-of-way, public utilities, and other parameters within
these corridors, while meeting the needs of the property owners, developers, and other
stakeholders within the area. The intent of this final report memorandum is to memorialize the
process and development of the City’s vision and to consider what the next steps may be.
The Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive area was most recently identified in the City’s 2040
Comprehensive Plan in conjunction with the capacity and operations needs for Trunk Highway
(TH) 55. The plan indicates that, “MnDOT and the City of Medina should work cooperatively, as
redevelopment occurs, to close existing direct access driveways onto TH 55 and relocate direct
access to a frontage/backage road system, consistent with the 2007 TH 55 design concept
vision.” That concept vision included the idea of connecting Chippewa Road from Arrowhead
Drive to Mohawk Drive, completing the roadway network (frontage/backage road system) in the
area. The Chippewa Road extension was also identified in previous Comprehensive Plans dating
back to the year 2000.
Information and materials used in the preparation of this report were collected from the City of
Medina, Hennepin County, MnDOT, and other impacted agencies. This data included:
·Existing and historic traffic volume data
·Updated crash history
·Proposed and anticipated development plans (Mark of Excellence, OSI)
·As-built roadway and utility plans
·Survey/topographic data previously obtained or readily available
·Wetland and floodplain locations from available mapping or other sources (proposed
development plans)
·OSI Traffic Study, other available studies. Additional traffic counts were not conducted.
Existing Conditions
Currently, there is no connection between Mohawk Drive and Arrowhead Drive, but a prescriptive
easement exists for the existing unmaintained roadway. This proposed roadway corridor is a
combination of wooded areas, agricultural land, floodplains, and wetlands with jurisdictions from
both the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Wetland Conservation Act (WCA).
The existing Mohawk Drive is currently a 26-foot-wide, bituminous paved rural section; no
pedestrian facilities exist along this section of roadway. There is currently no storm sewer within
Mohawk Drive at the intersection, but there are culverts for drainage conveyance. Mohawk Drive
is currently served by both watermain and sanitary sewer systems with stubs at Chippewa Road
that could serve future extension east; the utilities within Mohawk Drive are not proposed for
replacement with future development on the adjacent properties.
Agenda Item # 5E
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 2
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
Arrowhead Drive is currently a 26-foot-wide, bituminous paved rural section, with an 8-foot-wide,
bituminous trail on the east side extending from Bridgewater Road south to the Meander Road
intersection. There is currently no storm sewer within Arrowhead Drive, but there are culverts for
drainage conveyance. Arrowhead Drive is currently served by both watermain and sanitary sewer
systems, which are also not proposed to be replaced with future development on the adjacent
properties.
The existing OSI driveway is a 24-foot-wide, bituminous paved section. Meander Road is a 26-
foot-wide, bituminous paved rural section. Both roadways intersect at Arrowhead Drive within 500
feet of the TH 55 intersection. Significant traffic backups from TH 55 during evening rush hour
have been observed by area property owners and the City. Much of the traffic contributing to the
evening peak appears to originate from OSI. There is no storm sewer in this area, but drainage is
conveyed via culverts that cross Arrowhead Drive and Meander Road. The OSI property does
have water and sanitary lines for the building within the driveway, and a City watermain line runs
on the north side of Meander Road.
The existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes in the corridor are based on traffic counts
conducted in 2018 and 2019. Existing peak hour turning movement counts (2018) on Arrowhead
Drive at Meander Road and TH 55 were completed with the Mark of Excellence proposed
development plan. The existing ADT traffic counts for the corridor are shown in Table 1 below.
Traffic Forecasting Analysis
2040 ADT traffic forecasts were developed for Chippewa Road, Arrowhead Drive, and each of the
primary intersections within the corridors based on rates for similar land uses as documented in
the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition.
The future area development traffic was determined based on the City’s 2040 Comprehensive
Plan Land Use and adjacent development Traffic Studies for the areas between TH 55 to north of
Chippewa Road from Willow Drive to Arrowhead, and; west of Arrowhead Drive north of Meander
Road. The 2040 Future Land Use Plan shows that this area will include: business, low-density
residential, and rural residential uses. For the areas where development plans have not been
proposed, it was assumed that the business use would have a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.2, the
low-density residential use would have a density of 2.5 units/acre and the rural residential use
would have a density of 1.0 unit/acre.
The estimated existing and projected 2040 traffic volumes are shown below in Table 1.
Table 1: Existing and Projected ADT Traffic Volumes
Location Existing 2019 ADT Projected 2040 ADT
Arrowhead Drive
Meander Road to Chippewa Road 1050 7100
Arrowhead Drive
North of Chippewa Road 1050 1320
Chippewa Road
Arrowhead Drive to Mohawk Drive NA 5800
Chippewa Road
West of Mohawk Drive 690 3900
Mohawk Drive
TH 55 to Chippewa Road 375 1800
Mohawk Drive
North of Chippewa Road 100 900
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 3
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
Traffic Operations Analysis
The traffic analysis was completed evaluating the existing and projected traffic operations for the
Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive corridors, including the intersections of Chippewa Road at
Mohawk Drive, Chippewa Road at Arrowhead Drive, Arrowhead Drive at Meander Road
(including the OSI driveway), and Arrowhead Drive at TH 55.
The traffic operations were evaluated using Synchro/SimTraffic software for the traffic signal and
stop sign control analysis and RODEL software for the roundabout analysis. The analysis
documented the corridor operation and possible intersection control and lane configuration
improvements at each intersection.
The results of the operations analysis assuming the future projected 2040 traffic conditions
provided the following conclusions:
TH 55 at Arrowhead Drive:
· The southbound Arrowhead Drive left turn to TH 55 requires 200 feet of vehicle queue
storage for the average peak hour condition. However, it has been documented that
during the AM/PM peak traffic, significant backups occur past Meander Road and the
existing OSI driveway.
· The average peak hour condition assumes that traffic is distributed over an entire hour.
With the OSI facility, the evening shift change introduces a peak event during the
average peak hour that has been documented by residents and City staff. Based on
analysis the existing peaking condition would need approximately 400 feet of queue
storage.
· With the two traditional intersection concepts (OSI driveway in existing location in Figure
2 or relocated to the existing Meander Road in Figure 1), the full 200 feet of average
vehicle queue storage to TH 55 can be provided. However, there would still be backups
during the peaking conditions.
· With the roundabout option (Figure 3) at the existing Meander Road intersection, 190
feet of the required 200 feet vehicle queue storage to TH 55 could be provided for the
average condition. Backups for the peaking condition would be accommodated through
the roundabout with the driveway from OSI waiting for the through traffic on Arrowhead
Drive.
Arrowhead Drive at Meander Road/OSI Driveway:
· The northbound Arrowhead Drive left turn into the OSI driveway requires 100 feet of
vehicle queue storage for the average condition.
· With the traditional intersection option (Figure 1) of relocating the OSI driveway to line up
with Meander Road, the following was concluded:
o Only 25 feet of northbound left turn vehicle queue storage can be provided for
the OSI driveway. The analysis also indicates that in the short term with the
potential OSI expansion and moderate traffic southbound traffic on Arrowhead
Drive, this configuration would be adequate for the average condition during the
AM peak.
o A double left turn configuration at the TH 55 intersection is feasible and would
provide a longer queue length for the left turn lane into OSI (the double left turn
lanes at TH 55 would be shorter in length) and provide a reduced queue length
for traffic turning left onto TH 55 during the PM peak.
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 4
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
· With the traditional intersection option (Figure 2) of relocating Meander Road to line up
with the existing OSI driveway the following was concluded:
o 120 feet of northbound left turn vehicle queue storage can be provided for the
OSI driveway.
o The Meander Road approach can be designed with 30 MPH curves to lessen the
impacts to the wetland north of Meander Road.
o The intersection could be shifted 20 feet south to lessen the impacts to the
wetland north of Meander Road.
o As in Figure 1, a double left turn configuration at the TH 55 intersection is
feasible and would provide a longer queue length for the left turn lane into OSI
(the double left turn lanes at TH 55 would be shorter in length) and provide a
reduced queue length for traffic turning left onto TH 55 during the PM peak.
· With the roundabout option (Figure 3) at the existing Meander Road the left turn volume
and queueing into OSI driveway can be accommodated. Backups for the peaking
condition would be accommodated through the roundabout with the driveway from OSI
waiting for the through traffic on Arrowhead Drive.
Arrowhead Drive at future Chippewa Road:
· With the alignment option (Figure 1) that provides a curve on Chippewa Road to
Arrowhead Drive with a traditional “T” intersection, the following improvement needs were
identified:
o Chippewa Road curve designed for a 35 MPH design speed advisory curve
o Northbound Arrowhead Drive right turn lane
o Eastbound Chippewa Road right turn lane
o Side street stop control, stopping southbound Arrowhead Drive
· With the alignment option (Figure 2) that provides a traditional four-legged intersection,
the following improvement needs were identified:
o Chippewa Road curve designed for a 40 MPH design speed
o Northbound Arrowhead Drive right turn lane
o Eastbound Chippewa Road right turn lane
o All-way stop control
· With the roundabout concept (Figure 3) all approaches only require a single lane.
Chippewa Road at Mohawk Drive:
· With the alignment option (Figures 1 and 2) that provides a traditional four-legged
intersection, the following improvement needs were identified:
o Northbound Mohawk Drive right turn lane
o Side street stop control, stopping northbound and southbound on Mohawk Drive
· With the roundabout concept (Figure 3) all approaches only require a single lane.
Concept Plans
The initial concepts for the corridor visioning study were provided to the City Council at the
August 20th work session; these included several alignment options, graphical configurations of
the traffic operations at each intersection, and the anticipated 2040 ADT. At the work session, the
Council provided direction to staff on the preferred options at the three main intersections.
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 5
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
Initial Concept Plans Considered:
Based on the traffic forecasting and analysis, three horizontal geometric concept plans were
developed based on a 40 MPH design speed (35 MPH advisory speed along the proposed
Chippewa Road curve) that included the recommended geometric improvements, preliminary
intersection control design (stop condition or roundabout), and right-of-way needs. The street
section considered for each of the concepts was a 32’ wide urban section with an 8’ wide
bituminous trail. Where the roadway alignment extends through the wetland, the trail was
assumed to be at back of curb with a 10’ width. Figures have been attached to this memo for
reference.
· Option 1 (Figure 1) is comprised of a “T” intersection at the Arrowhead Drive and
Chippewa Road point of intersection with traditional intersections at Mohawk Drive and
Meander Road.
o Chippewa Road/Mohawk Drive Intersection:
Provides area access for existing and future development.
o Chippewa Road/Arrowhead Drive Intersection:
Encourages traffic to follow Arrowhead Drive to Chippewa Road and
discourages traffic north on Arrowhead Drive towards the Bridgewater
development.
Additional cost and right-of-way required to provide the curved alignment
than a traditional intersection.
o Arrowhead Drive/Meander Road Intersection (Realign OSI Dwy):
Does not impact wetland on the north side of the existing Meander Road.
Does not provide sufficient vehicle queue storage for the northbound left
turn into the OSI driveway for future 2040 traffic condition.
o Arrowhead Drive/TH 55 Intersection:
Provides the required vehicle queue storage for the southbound left turn
to TH 55 assuming the average peak hour condition. However, as
documented by residents and City staff, vehicles are queuing past the
OSI driveway as a result of the peaking condition from those exiting the
OSI driveway in the evening. The dual left turn lane concept would
provide adequate left turn queuing for the peaking condition.
· Option 2 (Figure 2) is comprised of traditional intersections at Mohawk Drive, Arrowhead
Drive, and Meander Road.
o Chippewa Road/Mohawk Drive Intersection:
Provides area access for existing and future development.
o Chippewa Road/Arrowhead Drive Intersection:
Does not encourage traffic to follow Chippewa Road.
Less cost and right-of-way required than Option 1.
o Arrowhead Drive/Meander Road Intersection (Realign Meander Road):
Impacts the wetland on the north side of the existing Meander Road.
Provides sufficient vehicle queue storage for the northbound left turn into
the OSI driveway for future 2040 traffic condition.
o Arrowhead Drive/TH 55 Intersection:
Provides the required vehicle queue storage for the southbound left turn
to TH 55 assuming the average peak hour condition. However, as
documented by residents and City staff, vehicles are queuing past the
OSI driveway as a result of the peaking condition from those exiting the
OSI driveway in the evening. The dual left turn lane concept would
provide adequate left turn queuing for the peaking condition.
· Option 3 (Figure 3) is comprised of roundabout intersections at Mohawk Drive,
Arrowhead Drive, and Meander Road.
o Chippewa/Mohawk Intersection:
Provides area access for existing and future development.
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 6
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
Higher cost than a traditional intersection.
Additional right-of-way needed from adjacent properties to the west.
o Chippewa/Arrowhead Intersection:
Higher cost than a traditional intersection.
Additional right-of-way needed from surrounding properties.
Reduced speed through the intersection with Arrowhead Drive to the
north.
Depending on adjacent development access, may provide better traffic
operations than Option 1 or Option 2.
o Arrowhead/Meander Intersection:
Provides better traffic operations than Option 1 or Option 2.
Higher cost than a traditional intersection and may require a retaining
wall to accommodate grading on the west side.
No (or minimal) impact to the wetland on the north side of Meander
Road.
Additional right-of-way needed on the OSI property.
o Arrowhead/TH 55 Intersection:
Does not provide the required vehicle queue storage for the southbound
left turn to TH 55 assuming the average peak hour condition. However,
as documented, vehicles are queuing past the OSI driveway as a result
of the peaking condition from vehicles exiting OSI driveway. The dual left
turn lane concept would provide adequate left turn queuing for the
peaking condition.
TH 55 Turn Lane/OSI Driveway/Meander Road Concepts:
As discussed above, there is a need for additional capacity, specifically for the southbound
Arrowhead Drive (left turn) to eastbound TH 55 and northbound left turn into the OSI driveway. A
meeting with MnDOT was held to discuss the TH 55 turn lane configuration options. Initially,
MnDOT’s preferred option was to relocate the existing OSI driveway north beyond the Meander
intersection, to eliminate any conflicts between intersections. After discussing realignment
options, MnDOT was also receptive to configuring the intersection at TH 55 with dual left turn
lanes to allow for the left turn lane into OSI to be lengthened without realigning Meander Road.
Based on the response from MnDOT, significant changes to the signal system are not anticipated
at TH 55 with the dual left turn lane option.
In order to provide the additional capacity dual left turn lane, concepts were developed for four
alternative OSI driveway locations.
· Alternative 1 – The driveway lined up with Meander Road provides approximately 150
feet of left turn storage (300 feet total) at TH 55 and approximately 25 feet of left turn
storage into the OSI driveway.
· Alternative 2 – The existing driveway location with Meander Road realigned provides
approximately 200 feet of left turn storage (400 feet total) and approximately 120 feet of
left turn storage into the OSI driveway.
· Alternative 3 – OSI driveway shifted to the north with Meander Road realigned provides
approximately 250 feet of left turn storage (500 feet total) and approximately 150 feet of
left turn storage into the OSI driveway and 150 feet southbound into Meander Road.
· Alternative 4 – Move the OSI driveway significantly north from the existing OSI driveway.
This alternative provides approximately 150 feet of northbound left turn storage into OSI
and approximately 100 feet of left turn storage for southbound traffic turning left onto
Meander Road.
Figure 5 provides an illustration of the proposed dual left turn lane.
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 7
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
Final Concept Plan:
The final concept plan and alternatives analysis was based upon input from City Council, City
staff, comments made at the open house, and the engineering team. The fourth concept shifting
the OSI driveway further north was included as a result of the meeting with MnDOT and has been
presented as the preferred option. The project cost estimates included with this report are for the
preferred options.
Figure 4 illustrates the final concept plan with the preferred alternatives and includes the option
of moving the OSI driveway farther north. Figure 5 illustrates what the dual left turn lanes at TH
55 could look like with the most constrained condition where the OSI driveway is aligned with
Meander Road.
Public Utility Planning:
Utility extensions on the new Chippewa Road, including storm sewer and new watermain, are
proposed to be a part of the final alignment option(s). The engineering work done in conjunction
with the recent 2040 Comprehensive Plan update identified the need for a 12-inch watermain.
The watermain is intended to provide a looping connection between Arrowhead Drive and
Mohawk Road to improve fire flows and provide a secondary link in case the existing watermain
loop to the south along H 55 is out of service. The existing watermain to the south has had breaks
causing the watermain to be out of service; the emergency repairs have been a costly
maintenance component for the City. The watermain loop is also intended to serve adjacent
development, but additional stubs or extensions for future development were not considered with
this study or the cost estimates.
Storm sewer improvements will likely include a storm piping system sized to convey runoff from
an urban street section to meet State Aid design criteria, stormwater treatment areas to capture
and retain storm sewer in accordance with City and Elm Creek Watershed Management
Commission (ECWMC), and culverts to facilitate upstream flow to the floodplains on north side of
the Chippewa Road extension. Additional discussion of the stormwater management
improvements are included in the section below.
At this time, sanitary sewer extensions from either Mohawk Road or Arrowhead Drive were not
considered with the visioning study. A review of sanitary sewer capacity was completed with the
recent 2040 Comprehensive Plan update and it was found that the existing sewer main-line along
both Mohawk Road and Arrowhead Drive have adequate capacity to serve the existing and future
development. At which time adjacent development is planned, it is anticipated that the
developers of those properties will extend sanitary sewer and connect to the existing system as
needed to serve the lots.
Right-of-Way Considerations:
The final roadway improvements on Mohawk Drive and the southern portion of Arrowhead Drive
near OSI (preferred alternative) are proposed to remain within the existing right-of-way. Further
refinement of the design will be needed to determine if right-of-way will be required for ditching
adjacent to the roadway.
Additional right-of-way will need to be acquired for the extension of Chippewa Road and the
northern realignment of Arrowhead Drive and the surrounding intersection with Chippewa Road.
The proposed right-of-way needs have been compiled electronically with the CAD work
completed with this visioning study and can be provided upon request.
Permitting Considerations
Stormwater Management & Floodplain Impacts:
The preferred concept plan exceeds the 5,000 square foot threshold requiring a City of Medina
Stormwater Management Plan for any new impervious surfaces. The total disturbance within the
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 8
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
project area is approximately 436,000 square feet (10 acres). The stormwater management plan
must include at a minimum:
· Volume Control – Design calculations of a BMP to capture and retain onsite 1.1 inches of
runoff from the net new impervious surface.
· Rate Control – Hydrologic and hydraulic analysis to show that post development
discharge rates are less than existing discharge rates.
· Storm Sewer Sizing – Storm sewer sizing to meet State Aid design criteria.
The proposed improvements are located within the Elm Creek Watershed Management
Commission (ECWMC). A permit will be required from ECWMC because the proposed
improvements disturb more than 1 acre. Since this is a linear project, the net new impervious
surface must meet ECWMC’s runoff rate restrictions, volume control requirements, and water
quality requirements listed below:
· Runoff rates for post development must be less than existing discharge rates.
· Stormwater runoff volume must be abstracted onsite to meet 1.1 inches of runoff from the
net new impervious surface.
· No net increase in total phosphorus (TP) and total suspended solids (TSS) from the
existing conditions.
The City of Medina’s standards are more stringent that ECWMC’s for stormwater management
for this project. NPDES permitting will be required for construction activity; Based on the amount
of impervious cover proposed the NPDES permitting requirements for treatment and volume
control do apply, but are satisfied through the City and ECWMC permitting.
There are two separate floodplains that the corridor crosses. Both floodplains are defined by
FEMA as Zone A. Zone A floodplain does not have a defined floodplain elevation. A
hydraulic/hydrologic analysis was completed in 2014 using TP 40 rainfall events (current standard
is Atlas 14) to determine the approximate floodplain elevation, for each separate floodplain. It is
important to note that this is a different Zone A floodplain than the Chippewa Road floodplain and
will therefore require a separate analysis to determine the floodplain elevation. The next step is to
update the floodplain analysis using Atlas 14 and obtain approval from the DNR and ECWMC for
these elevations prior to further refining the floodplain impacts. The analysis completed in 2014
has been include in Appendix D.
Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive both will result in significant floodplain impacts,
approximately 4,500 cubic yards with the preferred concept plan. The floodplain impacts will
require permits from the City of Medina, ECWMC, and the DNR. ECWMC requires compensatory
storage at a ratio of 1:1 for any floodplain filled as part of this Floodplain Alteration permit.
Proposed BMPs, if hydraulically connected and at a similar elevation, can be utilized for
floodplain compensatory storage. It is likely that additional area will need to be identified within
the adjacent development (Mark of Excellence) for floodplain mitigation based on the road
alignment and wetland proximity. If the impacts cause an increase in the floodplain elevation
greater than 1 foot, then a FEMA LOMR will be required. ECWMC permitting typically takes 4-6
months and FEMA LOMR applications typically require between 6-12 months to receive approval
depending on the complexity of the impacts and if additional modelling is requested.
It will be necessary to determine culvert elevations and sizes under the proposed Chippewa Road
to allow for flow from the upstream wetland complex to the north. The existing gravel road (no
longer maintained) forms a berm that results in over a 2-foot difference in the OHW of the two
wetland complexes. The culverts will need to be sized balancing the need to maintain the existing
floodplain elevation and to maintain the existing OHWs of the wetlands. A weir structure is an
option that can be considered to further aid in the control of flow.
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 9
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
Arrowhead Drive also bisects FEMA Zone A floodplain at the intersection with Meander Road.
The proposed intersection alternatives each introduce a different level of floodplain impacts.
Compensatory storage for the floodplain impacts for Meander Road/Arrowhead Drive needs to be
provided separate from the Chippewa Road mitigation. The existing culvert that conveys the
wetland complex on the south side of Meander Drive to the north will need to be extended or
modified depending on the intersection alternative that is selected. Similar permitting will be
required for wetland impacts and stormwater treatment if regulatory thresholds are exceeded.
Environmental:
Wetland impacts will occur as a result of any of the three alignment options. Approximately 2.2
acres of wetland impacts are anticipated (Figure 6). Some of those impacts may be within DNR
Public Waters (impacts below OHW elevation). Options to minimize wetland impacts will need to
be evaluated during final design. The project will require permits from the DNR, US Army Corps
of Engineers (USACOE), WCA (via City of Medina), and ECWMC. Given the number of impacts,
we expect it will take 9-12 months to prepare documents/plans and obtain permits from all
agencies.
There are two OHW elevations present within the Chippewa Road corridor due to the presence of
the existing roadbed between Mohawk Road and Arrowhead Drive. The OHW elevations (978.3
to the north, 980.6 to the south) were determined based on field observations of elevations and
predominant vegetation. Appendix D includes a graphical representation of the dividing line
between the two OHW elevations (south edge of existing road) and a response from the DNR
stating that these elevations are to be used for determining impacts and mitigation needs.
Mitigation for WCA regulated wetland impacts will be required at a 2:1 ratio and it is anticipated to
be provided through the purchase of wetland credits from an USACOE approved wetland bank or
through onsite mitigation. Wetland banks are available in Hennepin County at a cost of
approximately $2.50-$3.00/square foot (2019 dollars). Options for onsite mitigation will also be
reviewed and would require 5 years of monitoring following construction to ensure success.
The State’s existing and proposed Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) rules were
reviewed. The mandatory EAW rules are being revised and proposed mandatory EAW rules,
which are expected to replace the existing rules in February 2020, will require an EAW for
projects that impact over 1 acre of wetland within a shoreland overlay district or for projects that
impact over 1 acre of DNR Public Waters. The current wetland impact estimate is 2.2 acres, but
impacts are not within a shoreland overlay district and DNR Public Water impacts are not
expected to exceed 1 acre. The project would not trigger an EAW based on the mandatory
thresholds. However, if there is a perception that this project will cause significant environmental
impact a discretionary EAW is appropriate. A discretionary EAW can help the Responsible
Government Unit (RGU) identify the adverse environmental impacts of a project and their
severity. As such, we recommend that a discretionary EAW be completed for the project. It will
take approximately 6-9 months to prepare an EAW and make a determination on the need for an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The City would be the RGU for the EAW.
Project Cost Estimates
Opinion of Probable Cost:
A detailed opinion of cost for the project can be found in Appendix A of this report. The opinion
of cost incorporates estimated 2020 construction costs and includes a 10% construction
contingency factor. Indirect costs are projected at 28% of the construction cost and include
engineering, legal, financing, and administrative costs. The table below provides a summary of
the opinion of probable cost for the options under consideration.
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 10
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
Table 2: Estimated Project Cost Summary
Description Total Estimated
Project Cost
Chippewa Road (Mohawk to "T" Intersection at Arrowhead Dr) $2,727,000
Arrowhead Dr (South of "T" Intersection with Chippewa Rd) $327,000
Arrowhead Dr (North) & Private Drive (East) $215,000
Storm Sewer & Stormwater Management $1,096,000
Wetland Mitigation Credits $575,000
Total for Chippewa Road Extension $4,940,000
Total for Watermain Extension $459,000
Total for Mohawk Drive (South Turn Lane) $214,000
Total for OSI/Meander Area Realignment $866,000
The above costs in Table 2 are estimated costs for roadway, storm sewer, stormwater
improvements, and watermain as indicated for the preferred alternative. The cost to construct
dual turn lanes on Arrowhead Drive at TH 55 were not included with this study. The cost to
obtain right of way for the proposed improvements was not included with the project estimates; it
has been assumed that adjacent property owners would provide the necessary right of way with
proposed development.
The cost to mitigate disturbed wetland areas were also included where pertinent; it was assumed
the purchase of wetland credits and not onsite mitigation. No contingency or overhead were
included with the cost of the wetland credits. Onsite mitigation for the wetland disturbance is a
feasible alternative and may be more cost effective due to the large area required, but there is no
upland available immediately adjacent to Chippewa Road; the onsite mitigation area would need
to be identified in the adjacent development proposed by Mark of Excellence. Onsite mitigation of
the floodplain impacts will be required, but costs were not included in this study. It is assumed
that an onsite floodplain mitigation area would be identified in conjunction with an onsite wetland
mitigation area within the adjacent development proposed by Mark of Excellence. The cost to
mitigate both the wetland and floodplain onsite would likely be less than purchasing wetland
credits alone.
Excavation quantities were estimated based on available soil information (NRCS) and known
wetland locations; soil borings or a geotechnical analysis were not completed with the visioning
study. The actual depth and composition of peat or other poor soils within the project area could
affect the cost of the project significantly. Soil borings and a geotechnical analysis are
recommended if further refinement of the design is intended.
Community Engagement & Agency Coordination
Meeting with MnDOT Signals Group:
City engineering staff met with MnDOT to discuss the turn lane configuration options on
Arrowhead Drive at TH 55 and OSI driveway. Initially, MnDOT’s preferred option was to relocate
the existing OSI driveway north beyond the Meander intersection, to eliminate any conflicts
between intersections. After discussing realignment options, MnDOT was also receptive to
configuring the intersection at TH 55 with dual left turn lanes to allow for the left turn lane into OSI
to be lengthened without realigning Meander Road. Based on the response from MnDOT,
significant changes to the signal system are not anticipated with the dual left turn lane option.
Neighborhood Open House:
A Neighborhood Open House meeting for adjacent property owners was held on October 15,
2019. Preliminary information was available to property owners regarding the concept plans and
impacts associated with the project. Approximately ten residents were in attendance, as well as
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 11
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
the full City Council, several City staff, and WSB engineering representatives. The primary
feedback was:
· Concerns with traffic back-ups at TH 55 and Arrowhead during evening rush hour
(primarily from traffic coming from OSI)
· Vehicle speeds along the existing Arrowhead Drive corridor
· The additional traffic volume proposed due to adjacent development and extension of
Chippewa Road
· Vehicle speeds along the proposed Chippewa Road extension, especially at the
intersection with Arrowhead Drive to the north
Comment cards were made available to attendees at the meeting; one response has been
received in the mail and is included in Appendix B.
Conclusion
The Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive area was included in the City’s 2040 Comprehensive
Plan with the intent that, “MnDOT and the City of Medina should work cooperatively, as
redevelopment occurs, to close existing direct access driveways onto TH 55 and relocate direct
access to a frontage/backage road system, consistent with the 2007 TH 55 design concept
vision.” That concept vision included the idea of connecting Chippewa Road from Arrowhead
Drive to Mohawk Drive, completing the roadway network in the area.
The 2040 Future Land Use Plan shows that this area has been planned for a combination of
business, low-density residential, and rural residential land uses. Based on recent development
proposals submitted to the City, primarily from the Mark of Excellence and OSI, all or a significant
portion of the project areas will likely be constructed in conjunction with these adjacent
developments, if approved. In general, the City may consider the benefit that adjacent properties
receive due to the roadway and utility connections, which are needed for development in this
area.
To accommodate the roadway extension of Chippewa Road, the northern realignment of
Arrowhead Drive, and the realignment of Meander Road intersections, additional right-of-way will
be needed. The roadway improvements on Mohawk Drive and the southern portion of Arrowhead
Drive are proposed to remain within the existing right-of-way and closely match the existing
roadway locations. Further refinement of the right-of-way needs will be needed as development is
proposed or as projects proceed into final design.
A more immediate finding of the visioning process is the need to consider additional southbound
left turn capacity on Arrowhead Drive at TH 55. Based on field observations and a more
conservative and specific traffic analysis for OSI operations, the vehicles exiting OSI in the
evening rush hour are causing operational issues and back-ups along Arrowhead Drive. A dual
left turn configuration at TH 55 will allow for greater stacking capacity during peak operational
conditions, with any of the OSI Driveway and Meander Road alternatives.
A significant driving factor for the Chippewa Road extension and the re-alignment of Meander
and/or the OSI driveway is the adjacent development. Development proposals have been
submitted to the City in 2019. Final design and construction of the street projects may occur in
conjunction with these developments or portions could be development into City led projects.
Until development proposals and plans are approved by the City it is unknown when these
projects will proceed. With that in mind, the next steps for the City to consider in the meantime
are the following:
1. Obtain additional survey topography within the northerly OHW area to confirm
surrounding elevations
Final Report Memorandum
City of Medina Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study
October 31, 2019
Page 12
K:\014434-000\Admin\Docs\Final Report\1. Chippewa & Arrowhead Visioning Study - Final Report- Final Draft.docx
2. Update the floodplain elevation determination analysis with Atlas 14 and obtain approval
from the respective governing bodies,
3. Consider drafting a discretionary EAW for the proposed improvements within the
Chippewa Road corridor
4. Consider additional traffic counts (video and counters) in and around the OSI driveway
and at TH 55 to provide the data needed to proceed with approval from MnDOT for the
dual turn lane option.
The Chippewa Road and Arrowhead Drive Visioning Study was initiated to develop a cohesive
plan to guide the transportation needs, right-of-way, public utilities, and other parameters within
these corridors, while meeting the needs of the property owners, developers, and other
stakeholders within the area. This project has been planned by the City for some time, and at this
point, it is a matter of when, not if, the project will occur. The final concept plan and alternatives
analysis is based upon input from City Council, City staff, MnDOT staff, comments made at the
open house, and the City’s engineering team. This represents the City’s vision for this corridor.
List of Figures and Appendices
Figure 1 – Option 1 “T” Intersection
Figure 2 – Option 2 Traditional Intersections
Figure 3 – Option 3 Roundabout Intersections
Figure 4 – Final Alternatives Analysis & Preferred Options
Figure 5 – TH 55 & Arrowhead Drive Dual Left Configuration
Figure 6 – Anticipated Wetland and Floodplain Impacts
Appendix A – Opinion of Project Costs – Detailed Estimates
Appendix B – Open House Documents and Comment Card
Appendix C – Meeting Minutes with MnDOT and DNR
Appendix D – OHW Determination & 2014 Floodplain Analysis
W
S
B
F
il
e
n
a
m
e
:
D
a
t
e
:
P
r
in
t
e
d
:
8
/
1
5
/
2
0
1
9
K:
\
0
1
4
4
3
4
-
0
0
0
\
C
a
d
\
E
x
h
ib
it
s
\
P
r
e
l
i
m
in
a
r
y
A
li
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
\
O
p
t
i
o
n
1
T
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
d
g
n
City of Medina
Chippewa Road & Arrowhead Drive Corridor Visioning Study
2'
LC
TRAIL
8'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/W R/W
BLVD
6'
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CHIPPEWA ROAD
2'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/WR/W
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
TRAIL
10.67'
ARROWHEAD DRIVE
LC
N
0
SCALE IN FEET
150 300
Figure 1
MINNESOTA
55 Meander Road
A
r
r
o
w
h
e
a
d
D
r
i
v
e
M
o
h
a
w
k
D
r
i
v
e
Chippewa Road
T Intersection
OHW = 980.6
DNR Jurisdictional Wetlands
WCA Wetlands
OHW: 978.3
OHW: 980.6
OHW Separation
Average Daily Traffic
XXX EXISTING ADT
PROJECT 2040 ADT(XXX)
Queue Analysis
SB LEFT
NB LEFT
200
25
AVAILABLE
200
100
REQUIRED
1050
(5800)
1
0
3
0
(
1
3
2
0
)
0
(7100)
1
0
0
(
9
0
0
)
690
(3900)
3
7
5
(
1
8
0
0
)
S
T
O
P
STOP
S
T
OP
STOP
STOP
W
S
B
F
il
e
n
a
m
e
:
D
a
t
e
:
P
r
in
t
e
d
:
8
/
1
5
/
2
0
1
9
K:
\
0
1
4
4
3
4
-
0
0
0
\
C
a
d
\
E
x
h
ib
it
s
\
P
r
e
l
i
m
in
a
r
y
A
li
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
\
O
p
t
i
o
n
2
T
r
a
d
it
i
o
n
a
l
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
d
g
n
City of Medina
Chippewa Road & Arrowhead Drive Corridor Visioning Study
2'
LC
TRAIL
8'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/W R/W
BLVD
6'
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CHIPPEWA ROAD
2'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/WR/W
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
TRAIL
10.67'
ARROWHEAD DRIVE
LC
N
0
SCALE IN FEET
150 300
Figure 2
Traditional Intersection
MINNESOTA
55 Meander Road
A
r
r
o
w
h
e
a
d
D
r
i
v
e
M
o
h
a
w
k
D
r
i
v
e
Chippewa Road
WCA Wetlands
OHW = 980.6
DNR Jurisdictional Wetlands
OHW: 978.3
OHW: 980.6
OHW Separation
3
7
5
(
1
8
0
0
)
690
(3900)
0
(7100)
1
0
3
0
(
1
3
2
0
)
1050
(5800)
Average Daily Traffic
XXX EXISTING ADT
PROJECT 2040 ADT(XXX)
Queue Analysis
SB LEFT
NB LEFT
200
100
REQUIRED
200
120
AVAILABLE
STOP
1
0
0
(
9
0
0
)
S
T
O
P
S
T
OP
S
T
O
PSTOP
S
T
OP
STOP
W
S
B
F
il
e
n
a
m
e
:
D
a
t
e
:
P
r
in
t
e
d
:
8
/
1
5
/
2
0
1
9
K:
\
0
1
4
4
3
4
-
0
0
0
\
C
a
d
\
E
x
h
ib
it
s
\
P
r
e
l
i
m
in
a
r
y
A
li
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
\
O
p
t
i
o
n
3
R
o
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
In
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
d
g
n
City of Medina
Chippewa Road & Arrowhead Drive Corridor Visioning Study
2'
LC
TRAIL
8'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/W R/W
BLVD
6'
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CHIPPEWA ROAD
2'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/WR/W
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
TRAIL
10.67'
ARROWHEAD DRIVE
LC
N
0
SCALE IN FEET
150 300
Figure 3
Roundabout Intersection
MINNESOTA
55 Meander Road
A
r
r
o
w
h
e
a
d
D
r
i
v
e
M
o
h
a
w
k
D
r
i
v
e
Chippewa Road
OHW = 980.6
DNR Jurisdictional Wetlands
WCA Wetlands
OHW: 978.3
OHW Separation
OHW: 980.6
Queue Analysis
SB LEFT
NB LEFT
190
NA
AVAILABLE Average Daily Traffic
XXX EXISTING ADT
PROJECT 2040 ADT(XXX)
1050
(5800)
1
0
3
0
(
1
3
2
0
)
0
(7100)
3
7
5
(
1
8
0
0
)
1
0
0
(
9
0
0
)
690
(3900)
200
NA
REQUIRED
W
S
B
F
il
e
n
a
m
e
:
D
a
t
e
:
P
r
in
t
e
d
:
1
1
/
1
/
2
0
1
9
K:
\
0
1
4
4
3
4
-
0
0
0
\
C
a
d
\
E
x
h
ib
it
s
\
P
r
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
A
li
g
n
m
e
n
t
\
A
lt
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
A
n
a
ly
s
is
-
F
i
n
a
l.
d
g
n
City of Medina
Chippewa Road & Arrowhead Drive Corridor Visioning Study
2'
LC
TRAIL
8'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/W R/W
BLVD
6'
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CHIPPEWA ROAD
2'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/WR/W
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
TRAIL
10.67'
ARROWHEAD DRIVE
LC
N
0
SCALE IN FEET
150 300
Figure 4
MINNESOTA
55
Meander Road
A
r
r
o
w
h
e
a
d
D
r
i
v
e
M
o
h
a
w
k
D
r
i
v
e
Chippewa Road
OHW = 980.6
DNR Jurisdictional Wetlands
WCA Wetlands
OHW: 978.3
OHW: 980.6
OHW Separation
Average Daily Traffic
XXX EXISTING ADT
(XXX)
Queue Analysis
SB LEFT
NB LEFT
200
100
REQUIRED
1050
(7100)
1
0
3
0
(
1
3
2
0
)
0
(5800)
1
0
0
(
9
0
0
)
690
(3900)
3
7
5
(
1
8
0
0
)
S
T
O
P
S
T
OP
S
T
OP
STOP
STOP
200
120
AVAILABLE
PROJECTED 2040 ADT
Alternatives Analysis - Final
S
T
O
P
S
T
OP
- Realign OSI Driveway
Alternative Layout C
- Traditional Intersection
Alternative Layout B
- Roundabout Intersection
Alternative Layout A
100 Year Floodplain Boundary
- Roundabout Intersection
Alternative Layout A
- Realign Meander
Alternative Layout B
S
T
OP
S
T
O
P
November 2019
WSB Filename:Date: Printed:11/1/2019
K:\014434-000\Cad\Exhibits\Preferred Alignment\TH55-ArrowheadDr Dual Left.dgn
Ci
t
y
o
f
M
e
d
i
n
a
Ch
i
p
p
e
w
a
R
o
a
d
&
A
r
r
o
w
h
e
a
d
D
r
i
v
e
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
V
i
s
i
o
n
i
n
g
S
t
u
d
y
AREA
=
1
5
S
Q
'
REM =
4
8
S
Q
'
PERIM
E
T
E
R
=
3
0
'
AREA
=
1
5
S
Q
'
REM = 4
8
S
Q
'
PERIME
T
E
R
=
3
0
'
PERIMET
E
R
3
0
F
T
PERIME
T
E
R
3
0
F
T
PERIMETE
R
3
0
F
T
PERIME
T
E
R
3
0
F
T
AREA =
1
5
S
Q
'
REM =
4
8
S
Q
'
PERIME
T
E
R
=
3
0
'
AREA =
1
5
S
Q
'
REM = 4
8
S
Q
'
PERIME
T
E
R
=
3
0
'
PERIMET
E
R
3
0
F
T
PERIMETE
R
3
0
F
T
PERIMET
E
R
3
0
F
T
AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 '
AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 '
AREA =
1
5
S
Q
'
REM =
4
8
S
Q
'
PERIM
E
T
E
R
=
3
0
'
AREA = 1
5
S
Q
'
REM = 4
8
S
Q
'
PERIME
T
E
R
=
3
0
'
N
MI
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
55
STOP
S T OP
TH
5
5
a
n
d
A
r
r
o
w
h
e
a
d
D
r
i
v
e
D
u
a
l
L
e
f
t
s
0 SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
50
10
0
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
9
Fi
g
u
r
e
5
W
S
B
F
il
e
n
a
m
e
:
D
a
t
e
:
P
r
in
t
e
d
:
1
0
/
2
9
/
2
0
1
9
K:
\
0
1
4
4
3
4
-
0
0
0
\
C
a
d
\
E
x
h
ib
it
s
\
W
e
t
la
n
d
Im
p
a
c
t
s
.
d
g
n
City of Medina
Chippewa Road & Arrowhead Drive Corridor Visioning Study
2'
LC
TRAIL
8'
URBAN SECTION WITH TRAIL
THRU LANE
16'
THRU LANE
16'
80'R/W R/W
BLVD
6'
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CURB & GUTTER
B618 CONCRETE
CHIPPEWA ROAD
30
31
3 2
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
6
3
7
3
8
3
9
105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123
124
125
126
127
128 129
1
3
0
1
3
1
132 133
134
1
3
5
1
3
6
1
3
7
1
3
8
1
3
9
1
4
0
1
4
1
1
4
2
1
4
3
1
4
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
3
40 41424344
CL
982.21
CHIPPEWA.CHIPPEWA
128+00.00 R1
1:3.0 1.5%2.0%2.0%4.0%1:
3.
0
80 SF
CL
982.01
CHIPPEWA.CHIPPEWA
128+50.00 R1
1:3.0 1.5%2.0%2.0%4.0%
1:
3.
0
134 SF
1:4 SLOPE
1:4
S
LO
PE
0.26 ACRES
0.05 ACRES
0.01 ACRES
Chippewa Road
A
r
r
o
w
h
e
a
d
D
r
i
v
e
M
o
h
a
w
k
D
r
i
v
e
0
SCALE IN FEET
100 200
N
Figure 6
November 2019
Potential Wetland & Floodplain Impacts
1.81 ACRES
Cross Section Excerpts
Legend
Potential Wetland Impacts
Potential Floodplain Impacts
2.13 AC
4,500 CF
100 Year Floodplain Boundary
WCA Wetlands
OHW = 980.6
DNR Jurisdictional Wetlands
WSB Project:Chippewa Road & Arrowhead Drive Corridor Design By:LME
Project Location:Medina, MN Checked By:JLS
City Project No.:
WSB Project No:14434-000 Date:11/1/2019
Item
No.
MnDOT
Specification
No.
Description Unit Estimated Total
Quantity
Estimated Unit
Price Estimated Total Cost
1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 93,000.00$ 93,000.00$
2 2101.505 CLEARING ACRE 0.5 4,000.00$ 2,000.00$
3 2101.505 GRUBBING ACRE 0.5 4,000.00$ 2,000.00$
4 2105.504 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y 17500 2.50$ 43,750.00$
5 2106.507 EXCAVATION - MUCK C Y 11734 16.00$ 187,744.00$
6 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON C Y 8031 9.00$ 72,279.00$
7 2106.507 EMBANKMENT - COMMON C Y 7880 9.00$ 70,920.00$
8 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE C Y 7570 16.00$ 121,120.00$
9 2106.507 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV)C Y 19991 24.00$ 479,784.00$
10 2112.519 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RDST 25 300.00$ 7,500.00$
11 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER WITH PICKUP BROOM HOUR 50 175.00$ 8,750.00$
12 2211.509 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 C Y 5316 30.00$ 159,480.00$
13 2231.603 BITUMINOUS RAMPING LF 4630 1.25$ 5,787.50$
14 2357.506 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 1088 5.00$ 5,440.00$
15 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 1203 75.00$ 90,225.00$
16 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEAR COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 2405 72.00$ 173,160.00$
17 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C) - TRAIL S Y 5166 30.00$ 154,980.00$
18 2502.541 4" PERF PE PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 2500 15.00$ 37,500.00$
19 2502.602 4" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 10 550.00$ 5,500.00$
20 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
21 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 4630 16.00$ 74,080.00$
22 2531.504 6" CONCRETE WALK S F 160 10.00$ 1,600.00$
23 2531.618 TRUNCATED DOMES S F 32 50.00$ 1,600.00$
24 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL L S 1 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
25 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN PANEL EACH 3 300.00$ 900.00$
26 2564.518 SIGN PANELS TYPE C S F 27 60.00$ 1,620.00$
27 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 2,500.00$ 2,500.00$
28 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 5 250.00$ 1,250.00$
29 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 3500 2.50$ 8,750.00$
30 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 3500 2.50$ 8,750.00$
31 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE ROCK L F 1500 8.00$ 12,000.00$
32 2574.507 BOULEVARD TOPSOIL BORROW C Y 1052 30.00$ 31,560.00$
33 2575.504 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y 9801 2.50$ 24,502.50$
34 2575.504 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 4 S Y 9801 1.25$ 12,251.25$
35 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 25-141 LB 330 5.00$ 1,650.00$
36 2575.604 SEEDING SPECIAL ACRE 3 4,000.00$ 12,000.00$
37 2582.503 4" SOLID LINE PAINT L F 4630 1.00$ 4,630.00$
38 2582.503 DOUBLE SOLID LINE PAINT L F 4500 1.00$ 4,500.00$
39 2582.503 4" BROKEN LINE PAINT L F 2320 1.00$ 2,320.00$
40 2582.518 PAVT MSSG PAINT S F 36 4.00$ 144.00$
41 2582.518 CROSSWALK PAINT S F 320 4.00$ 1,280.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 1,936,807.25$
CONTINGENCY TOTAL (10%)193,680.73$
SUBTOTAL 2,130,487.98$
INDIRECT COST TOTAL (28%) 596,536.63$
TOTAL 2,727,000.00$
WETLAND MITIGATION COST 575,000.00$
42 2106.507 EXCAVATION - POND (LARGE)C Y 5255 16.00$ 84,080.00$
43 2106.507 EXCAVATION - POND (SMALL)C Y 3411 16.00$ 54,576.00$
44 2106.507 FILTRATION MEDIA (LARGE, FILTRATION BASIN) C Y 923 40.00$ 36,920.00$
45 2106.507 FILTRATION MEDIA (SMALL, FILTRATION BASIN) C Y 512 40.00$ 20,480.00$
46 2412.503 8X3 PRECAST CONCRETE BOX CULVERT L F 200 900.00$ 180,000.00$
47 2412.503 8X3 PRECAST CONCRETE BOX CULVERT END SECTION EACH 4 2,000.00$ 8,000.00$
48 2452.601 SHEET PILING CAP L S 1 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$
49 2452.618 STEEL SHEET PILING (PERMANENT)S F 1800 50.00$ 90,000.00$
50 2502.541 6" PERF PE PIPE DRAIN LIN FT 250 15.00$ 3,750.00$
51 2502.602 6" PVC PIPE DRAIN CLEANOUT EACH 6 550.00$ 3,300.00$
52 2503.502 24" FLARED END EACH 2 2,000.00$ 4,000.00$
53 2503.503 15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 576 50.00$ 28,800.00$
54 2503.503 18" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 500 55.00$ 27,500.00$
55 2503.503 24" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL III L F 1500 70.00$ 105,000.00$
56 2506.502 CASTING ASSEMBLY (STORM)EACH 18 750.00$ 13,500.00$
57 2506.503 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 L F 108 450.00$ 48,600.00$
58 2506.602 CONST DRAINATE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPEC (2'X3') EACH 18 2,500.00$ 45,000.00$
59 2506.602 CONST DRAINATE STRUCTURE DES SPEC 2 (CONTROL STRUCTURE) EACH 2 5,000.00$ 10,000.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 778,506.00$
CONTINGENCY TOTAL (10%)77,850.60$
SUBTOTAL 856,356.60$
INDIRECT COST TOTAL (28%) 239,779.85$
TOTAL 1,096,000.00$
60 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 16,000.00$ 16,000.00$
61 2105-601 DEWATERING LS 1 4,000.00$ 4,000.00$
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
A. Chippewa Road (Mohawk to "T" Intersection at Arrowhead Dr)
C. Chippewa Road Watermain Looping
B. Chippewa Road Storm Sewer
62 2504.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN EACH 2 4,000.00$ 8,000.00$
63 2504.602 HYDRANT EACH 3 5,500.00$ 16,500.00$
64 2504.602 6" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH 3 1,800.00$ 5,400.00$
65 2504.602 12" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH 4 4,000.00$ 16,000.00$
66 2504.603 6" WATERMAIN DUCTILE IRON CL 52 L F 175 65.00$ 11,375.00$
67 2504.603 12" WATERMAIN PVC C900 (DIRECTIONAL DRILLED) L F 2575 95.00$ 244,625.00$
68 2504.608 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS LB 550 8.00$ 4,400.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 326,300.00$
CONTINGENCY TOTAL (10%)32,630.00$
SUBTOTAL 358,930.00$
INDIRECT COST TOTAL (28%) 100,500.40$
TOTAL 459,000.00$
69 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 11,000.00$ 11,000.00$
70 2101.505 CLEARING ACRE 0.1 4,000.00$ 400.00$
71 2101.505 GRUBBING ACRE 0.1 4,000.00$ 400.00$
72 2104.503 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)L F 118 8.00$ 944.00$
73 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 5836 3.00$ 17,508.00$
74 2105.504 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y 1450 2.50$ 3,625.00$
75 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON C Y 2200 16.00$ 35,200.00$
76 2106.507 EMBANKMENT - COMMON C Y 570 18.00$ 10,260.00$
77 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE C Y 590 12.00$ 7,080.00$
78 2106.507 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV)C Y 618 24.00$ 14,832.00$
46 2112.519 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RDST 4 300.00$ 1,200.00$
47 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER WITH PICKUP BROOM HOUR 10 175.00$ 1,750.00$
48 2211.509 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 C Y 754 30.00$ 22,620.00$
49 2357.506 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 89 5.00$ 445.00$
50 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 163 75.00$ 12,225.00$
51 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEAR COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 331 72.00$ 23,832.00$
52 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C) - TRAIL S Y 376 30.00$ 11,280.00$
53 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$
54 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 783 18.00$ 14,094.00$
55 2531.504 6" CONCRETE WALK S Y 160 60.00$ 9,600.00$
56 2531.618 TRUNCATED DOMES S F 32 50.00$ 1,600.00$
57 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL L S 1 7,500.00$ 7,500.00$
58 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN PANEL EACH 1 300.00$ 300.00$
59 2564.518 SIGN PANELS TYPE C S F 9 60.00$ 540.00$
60 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$
61 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 3 250.00$ 750.00$
62 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 500 2.50$ 1,250.00$
63 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 500 2.50$ 1,250.00$
64 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE ROCK L F 200 8.00$ 1,600.00$
65 2574.507 BOULEVARD TOPSOIL BORROW C Y 195 30.00$ 5,850.00$
66 2575.504 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y 1089 2.50$ 2,722.50$
67 2575.504 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 4 S Y 1089 1.25$ 1,361.25$
68 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 25-141 LB 36 5.00$ 180.00$
69 2575.604 SEEDING SPECIAL ACRE 1 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
70 2582.503 4" SOLID LINE PAINT L F 783 1.00$ 783.00$
71 2582.503 DOUBLE SOLID LINE PAINT L F 700 1.00$ 700.00$
72 2582.503 4" BROKEN LINE PAINT L F 392 1.00$ 392.00$
73 2582.518 PAVT MSSG PAINT S F 36 4.00$ 144.00$
74 2582.518 CROSSWALK PAINT S F 320 4.00$ 1,280.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 231,997.75$
CONTINGENCY TOTAL (10%)23,199.78$
SUBTOTAL 255,197.53$
INDIRECT COST TOTAL (28%)71,455.31$
TOTAL 327,000.00$
75 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 8,000.00$ 8,000.00$
76 2101.505 CLEARING ACRE 0.1 4,000.00$ 400.00$
77 2101.505 GRUBBING ACRE 0.1 4,000.00$ 400.00$
78 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 167 3.00$ 501.00$
79 2105.504 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y 1080 2.50$ 2,700.00$
80 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON C Y 2046 16.00$ 32,736.00$
81 2106.507 EMBANKMENT - COMMON C Y 61 18.00$ 1,098.00$
82 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE C Y 381 12.00$ 4,572.00$
83 2106.507 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV)C Y 399 24.00$ 9,576.00$
84 2112.519 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RDST 3 300.00$ 900.00$
85 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER WITH PICKUP BROOM HOUR 5 175.00$ 875.00$
86 2211.509 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 C Y 445 30.00$ 13,350.00$
87 2357.506 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 52 5.00$ 260.00$
88 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 104 75.00$ 7,800.00$
89 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEAR COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 210 72.00$ 15,120.00$
90 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$
91 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 546 35.00$ 19,110.00$
92 2531.504 6" CONCRETE WALK S Y 160 60.00$ 9,600.00$
93 2531.618 TRUNCATED DOMES S F 32 50.00$ 1,600.00$
94 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL L S 1 7,500.00$ 7,500.00$
95 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN PANEL EACH 1 300.00$ 300.00$
96 2564.518 SIGN PANELS TYPE C S F 9 60.00$ 540.00$
97 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$
98 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 3 250.00$ 750.00$
99 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 250 2.50$ 625.00$
100 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 250 2.50$ 625.00$
101 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE ROCK L F 100 8.00$ 800.00$
D. Arrowhead Dr (South of "T" Intersection with Chippewa Rd)
E. Arrowhead Dr (North) & Private Drive (East)
102 2574.507 BOULEVARD TOPSOIL BORROW C Y 111 30.00$ 3,330.00$
103 2575.504 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y 363 2.50$ 907.50$
104 2575.504 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 4 S Y 363 1.25$ 453.75$
105 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 25-141 LB 12 5.00$ 60.00$
106 2575.604 SEEDING SPECIAL ACRE 1 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
107 2582.503 4" SOLID LINE PAINT L F 546 1.00$ 546.00$
108 2582.503 DOUBLE SOLID LINE PAINT L F 500 1.00$ 500.00$
109 2582.503 4" BROKEN LINE PAINT L F 273 1.00$ 273.00$
110 2582.518 PAVT MSSG PAINT S F 36 4.00$ 144.00$
111 2582.518 CROSSWALK PAINT S F 320 4.00$ 1,280.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 152,732.25$
CONTINGENCY TOTAL (0%)15,273.23$
SUBTOTAL 168,005.48$
INDIRECT COST TOTAL (0%)47,041.53$
TOTAL 215,000.00$
F. Mohawk Drive (Turn Lane & Widening)
112 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 8,000.00$ 8,000.00$
113 2104.503 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)L F 52 8.00$ 416.00$
114 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 554 3.00$ 1,662.00$
115 2105.504 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y 1015 2.50$ 2,537.50$
116 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON C Y 372 18.00$ 6,696.00$
117 2106.507 EMBANKMENT - COMMON C Y 55 20.00$ 1,100.00$
118 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE C Y 711 14.00$ 9,954.00$
119 2106.507 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV)C Y 744 28.00$ 20,832.00$
120 2112.519 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RDST 4 300.00$ 1,200.00$
121 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER WITH PICKUP BROOM HOUR 10 175.00$ 1,750.00$
122 2211.509 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 C Y 821 35.00$ 28,735.00$
123 2357.506 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 685 5.00$ 3,425.00$
124 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 121 85.00$ 10,285.00$
125 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEAR COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 241 83.00$ 20,003.00$
126 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$
127 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 450 25.00$ 11,250.00$
128 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL L S 1 7,500.00$ 7,500.00$
129 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN PANEL EACH 2 300.00$ 600.00$
130 2564.518 SIGN PANELS TYPE C S F 18 60.00$ 1,080.00$
131 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$
132 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 5 250.00$ 1,250.00$
133 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 500 2.50$ 1,250.00$
134 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 500 2.50$ 1,250.00$
135 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE ROCK L F 200 8.00$ 1,600.00$
136 2574.507 BOULEVARD TOPSOIL BORROW C Y 39 30.00$ 1,170.00$
137 2575.504 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y 231 2.50$ 577.50$
138 2575.504 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 4 S Y 231 1.25$ 288.75$
139 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 25-141 LB 6 5.00$ 30.00$
140 2575.604 SEEDING SPECIAL ACRE 1 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
141 2582.503 4" SOLID LINE PAINT L F 830 1.00$ 830.00$
142 2582.503 DOUBLE SOLID LINE PAINT L F 450 1.00$ 450.00$
143 2582.503 4" BROKEN LINE PAINT L F 450 1.00$ 450.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 151,671.75$
CONTINGENCY TOTAL (10%)15,167.18$
SUBTOTAL 166,838.93$
INDIRECT COST TOTAL (28%) 46,714.90$
TOTAL 214,000.00$
G. OSI/Meander - Preferred Alternate (Move OSI Intersection)
144 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 1 30,000.00$ 30,000.00$
145 2101.505 CLEARING ACRE 0.1 4,000.00$ 400.00$
146 2101.505 GRUBBING ACRE 0.1 4,000.00$ 400.00$
147 2104.503 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)L F 76 8.00$ 608.00$
148 2104.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER L F 400 4.00$ 1,600.00$
149 2104.504 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y 294 10.00$ 2,940.00$
150 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y 3089 3.50$ 10,811.50$
151 2105.504 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V S Y 4550 2.50$ 11,375.00$
152 2105.618 WETLAND IMPACTS S F 19400 3.00$ 58,200.00$
153 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON C Y 1419 10.00$ 14,190.00$
154 2106.507 EMBANKMENT - COMMON C Y 8511 10.00$ 85,110.00$
155 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE C Y 1354 16.00$ 21,664.00$
156 2106.507 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV)C Y 6161 24.00$ 147,864.00$
157 2112.519 SUBGRADE PREPARATION RDST 10 300.00$ 3,000.00$
158 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER WITH PICKUP BROOM HOUR 10 175.00$ 1,750.00$
159 2211.509 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 C Y 738 35.00$ 25,830.00$
160 2357.506 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 238 5.00$ 1,190.00$
161 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 114 84.00$ 9,576.00$
162 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 NON-WEAR COURSE MIX (2,C)TON 152 82.00$ 12,464.00$
163 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,C) - TRAIL S Y 779 30.00$ 23,370.00$
164 2503.502 24" FLARED END EACH 1 2,500.00$ 2,500.00$
165 2503.503 15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 300 48.00$ 14,400.00$
166 2503.503 18" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL V L F 250 58.00$ 14,500.00$
167 2503.503 24" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL III L F 50 72.00$ 3,600.00$
168 2506.502 CASTING ASSEMBLY (STORM)EACH 2 750.00$ 1,500.00$
169 2506.503 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 L F 16 450.00$ 7,200.00$
170 2506.602 CONST DRAINATE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPEC (2'X3') EACH 8 2,500.00$ 20,000.00$
171 2505.601 UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$
172 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F 2160 18.00$ 38,880.00$
173 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL L S 1 7,500.00$ 7,500.00$
174 2564.502 INSTALL SIGN PANEL EACH 4 300.00$ 1,200.00$
175 2564.518 SIGN PANELS TYPE C S F 36 60.00$ 2,160.00$
176 2573.501 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION EXIT LS 1 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$
177 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH 2 250.00$ 500.00$
178 2573.503 SILT FENCE, TYPE MS L F 1500 2.50$ 3,750.00$
179 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F 1500 2.50$ 3,750.00$
180 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE ROCK L F 500 8.00$ 4,000.00$
181 2574.507 BOULEVARD TOPSOIL BORROW C Y 379 30.00$ 11,370.00$
182 2575.504 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CATEGORY 3 S Y 1815 2.50$ 4,537.50$
183 2575.504 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 4 S Y 1815 1.25$ 2,268.75$
184 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 25-141 LB 60 5.00$ 300.00$
185 2575.604 SEEDING SPECIAL ACRE 1 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
186 2582.503 4" SOLID LINE PAINT L F 1760 1.00$ 1,760.00$
187 2582.503 DOUBLE SOLID LINE PAINT L F 1000 1.00$ 1,000.00$
188 2582.503 4" BROKEN LINE PAINT L F 880 1.00$ 880.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL 615,398.75$
CONTINGENCY TOTAL (10%)61,539.88$
SUBTOTAL 676,938.63$
INDIRECT COST TOTAL (28%) 189,542.82$
TOTAL 866,000.00$
Background
Planned improvement identified in City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan
• Roadway system connectivity
• Alte rnative ro utes to access TH 55
• Deve lopment acce ss
• Identified need in previous Comprehensive Plans dating back to 2000
• Consistent with MnDOT's TH 55 capacity and operations plan
Vis ioning Study
• Develo p cohesiv e plan fo r Chippewa/Arrowhe ad co rrido rs
• Provide traffic projectio ns and operation analysis
• Refine roadway and intersection geometrics
• Identify right-of-way needs
• Allow right-of-way to be secured and construct improvements with
future development
K:\02712-180\Admin\Docs\Warranty Bond\2019 LTR Request for Warranty Bond - Enclave at Brockton 4th. 5th, 6th - Streets.docx
7
0
1
X
E
N
I
A
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
|
S
U
I
T
E
3
0
0
|
M
I
N
N
E
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
M
N
|
5
5
4
1
6
|
7
6
3
.
5
4
1
.
4
8
0
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
November 14, 2019
Mr. Paul J. Tabone
Lennar Minnesota
16305 36th Avenue North
Suite 600
Plymouth, MN 55446
Re: Lennar Enclave at Brockton 4th, 5th, and 6th Additions – Warranty Bond Request –
Street Improvements
City Project No. SD-14-130, SD-14-149, SD-16-176
WSB Project No. 02712-180, 02712-450, 02712-850
Dear Mr. Tabone:
The City of Medina’s engineering consultant (WSB) has completed the construction observation
and testing of the street improvements (Subdivision Improvements) for the Enclave at Brockton
4th, 5th, and 6th Additions as required by the Development Agreement. The City Council must
formally accept the Subdivision Improvements, specifically the street improvements, by resolution
at a regularly scheduled council meeting.
Prior to acceptance of the Subdivision Improvements by the City Council, the developer is
required to submit a two year warranty bond for 100% of the construction costs of the Subdivision
Improvements, specifically for the streets. For this project, the warranty bond shall be in the
amount of $357,746 based on the construction cost estimates previously provided by the
developer’s engineer. The warranty bond shall cover the repair or replacement of portions of the
streets for a period of two years, normal wear and tear excepted.
City staff and their engineering consultant will consider a full reduction in the Letter of Credit after
the City Council formally accepts the Subdivision Improvements.
Please submit the two-year warranty bond to the attention of City Administrator Scott Johnson at
Medina City Hall no later than November 18, 2019 for consideration at the November 19, 2019
Council meeting.
Sincerely,
WSB
Jim Stremel, P.E.
City Engineer
Attachments: Draft resolutions accepting the Street Improvements (4th, 5th, 6th Additions)
cc: Jodi Gallup, City Clerk, City of Medina
Agenda Item No.'s: 5F, 5G, 5H
Resolution No. 2019-##
November 19, 2019
Member _________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2019-##
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PUBLIC UTILITIES WITHIN
THE ENCLAVE AT BROCKTON 4th ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Medina (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, U.S. Home Corporation (the “Developer”) has constructed improvements
on certain land within the City which has been platted as The Enclave at Brockton 4th Addition
(the “Subdivision”) for the purpose of developing single family lots; and
WHEREAS, the Developer and the City have previously entered into an agreement
dated April 19, 2013 (the “Development Agreement”) related to the development of the
Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Developer completed
construction of sanitary sewer, water, and stormwater infrastructure improvements in 2016 and
the City subsequently accepted the sanitary sewer and water improvements as public
improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has now completed construction of the street improvements
within the Subdivision (the “Street Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, the city engineer has inspected the Street Improvements, and determined
that they have been constructed in accordance with the plans incorporated in the Development
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement requires the Developer or the Developer’s
contractor to submit a warranty bond guaranteeing repair or replacement of any defects in the
Subdivision improvements for two years following completion as a condition of being accepted
by the City.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
as follows:
1. The City hereby accepts the Street Improvements, as public improvements upon the date
of this resolution or the date indicated on the warranty bond, whichever is later.
Thereafter, the City shall maintain the Street Improvements as public improvements,
except as provided for herein.
Agenda Item # 5F
Resolution No. 2019-## 2
November 19, 2019
2. The Developer shall remain responsible to repair or replace defective portions of the
Street Improvements if they show signs of failure within two years of acceptance, normal
wear and tear excepted.
3. If the Developer fails to repair or replace defective portions of the Street Improvements
as required herein and pursuant to the Development Agreement, the City may utilize the
warranty bond for such purpose.
4. The terms and conditions of the letter from the city engineer dated November 14, 2019
are hereby incorporated into this resolution and made a part hereof.
5. City staff and consultants are authorized and directed to take steps necessary or
convenient to carry out the intent and purpose of this resolution, including the release of
the letter of credit being held to ensure completion of the Street Improvements.
Dated: November 19, 2019.
_________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2019-##
November 19, 2019
Member _________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2019-##
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PUBLIC UTILITIES WITHIN
THE ENCLAVE AT BROCKTON 5th ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Medina (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, U.S. Home Corporation (the “Developer”) has constructed improvements
on certain land within the City which has been platted as The Enclave at Brockton 5th Addition
(the “Subdivision”) for the purpose of developing single family lots; and
WHEREAS, the Developer and the City have previously entered into an agreement
dated April 23, 2015 (the “Development Agreement”) related to the development of the
Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Developer completed
construction of sanitary sewer, water, and stormwater infrastructure improvements in 2016 and
the City subsequently accepted the sanitary sewer and water improvements as public
improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has now completed construction of the street improvements
within the Subdivision (the “Street Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, the city engineer has inspected the Street Improvements, and determined
that they have been constructed in accordance with the plans incorporated in the Development
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement requires the Developer or the Developer’s
contractor to submit a warranty bond guaranteeing repair or replacement of any defects in the
Subdivision improvements for two years following completion as a condition of being accepted
by the City.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
as follows:
1. The City hereby accepts the Street Improvements, as public improvements upon the date
of this resolution or the date indicated on the warranty bond, whichever is later.
Thereafter, the City shall maintain the Street Improvements as public improvements,
except as provided for herein.
Agenda Item # 5G
Resolution No. 2019-## 2
November 19, 2019
2. The Developer shall remain responsible to repair or replace defective portions of the
Street Improvements if they show signs of failure within two years of acceptance, normal
wear and tear excepted.
3. If the Developer fails to repair or replace defective portions of the Street Improvements
as required herein and pursuant to the Development Agreement, the City may utilize the
warranty bond for such purpose.
4. The terms and conditions of the letter from the city engineer dated November 14, 2019
are hereby incorporated into this resolution and made a part hereof.
5. City staff and consultants are authorized and directed to take steps necessary or
convenient to carry out the intent and purpose of this resolution, including the release of
the letter of credit being held to ensure completion of the Street Improvements.
Dated: November 19, 2019.
_________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2019-##
November 19, 2019
Member _________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2019-##
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PUBLIC UTILITIES WITHIN
THE ENCLAVE AT BROCKTON 6th ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Medina (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, U.S. Home Corporation (the “Developer”) has constructed improvements
on certain land within the City which has been platted as The Enclave at Brockton 6th Addition
(the “Subdivision”) for the purpose of developing single family lots; and
WHEREAS, the Developer and the City have previously entered into an agreement
dated March 25, 2016 (the “Development Agreement”) related to the development of the
Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Developer completed
construction of sanitary sewer, water, and stormwater infrastructure improvements in 2016 and
the City subsequently accepted the sanitary sewer and water improvements as public
improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has now completed construction of the street improvements
within the Subdivision (the “Street Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, the city engineer has inspected the Street Improvements, and determined
that they have been constructed in accordance with the plans incorporated in the Development
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement requires the Developer or the Developer’s
contractor to submit a warranty bond guaranteeing repair or replacement of any defects in the
Subdivision improvements for two years following completion as a condition of being accepted
by the City.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
as follows:
1. The City hereby accepts the Street Improvements, as public improvements upon the date
of this resolution or the date indicated on the warranty bond, whichever is later.
Thereafter, the City shall maintain the Street Improvements as public improvements,
except as provided for herein.
Agenda Item # 5H
Resolution No. 2019-## 2
November 19, 2019
2. The Developer shall remain responsible to repair or replace defective portions of the
Street Improvements if they show signs of failure within two years of acceptance, normal
wear and tear excepted.
3. If the Developer fails to repair or replace defective portions of the Street Improvements
as required herein and pursuant to the Development Agreement, the City may utilize the
warranty bond for such purpose.
4. The terms and conditions of the letter from the city engineer dated November 14, 2019
are hereby incorporated into this resolution and made a part hereof.
5. City staff and consultants are authorized and directed to take steps necessary or
convenient to carry out the intent and purpose of this resolution, including the release of
the letter of credit being held to ensure completion of the Street Improvements.
Dated: November 19, 2019.
_________________________
Kathleen Martin, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________________
Jodi M. Gallup, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member _______
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
And the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Jim Stremel, City Engineer
DATE: November 14, 2019
MEETING: November 19, 2019
SUBJECT: Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station Project
Background:
On September 17, 2019 the City Council directed staff to authorize the preparation of an
engineering feasibility report for the proposed Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station
Project.
The Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station Project has been included with the City of
Medina’s capital improvement plan based on the anticipated development noted in the 2040
Comprehensive Plan. The plan identified the need for a lift station to serve properties in and
around Willow Drive north of Chippewa Road that are not serviceable with gravity sewer,
including the proposed Adams Pest Control development. This lift station will serve as a
regional lift station and receive wastewater from the ultimate development within the EC-1
sewershed of the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Wastewater Plan and potentially beyond.
Design & Feasibility:
The design of the lift station will need to consider both the initial flow conditions and the
ultimate maximum flow conditions of the regional sewershed; these options were evaluated
during the feasibility study phase. Graphical representations of the sewer study area can be
found in the appendix of the enclosed feasibility report.
The total estimated project cost for the initial flow conditions with the more immediate
development need using smaller pumps is $786,514. The cost to construct the lift station with
larger pumps that could serve a fully developed condition is $807,689. If the City were to install
the smaller pumps initially, then come back at a later date to retrofit the lift station with the
larger pumps, the estimated cost to do so would be $80,548. All of these estimated project costs
include a 10% contingency factor and 25% indirect costs for legal, engineering, administrative,
and financing.
The project is proposed to be funded through the City Sewer Capital Fund. The City is also
planning to implement a user area charge to offset the project costs.
Agenda Item # 7A
2
Next Steps:
The next step is for the City Council to consider authorizing final design. WSB anticipates final
design to take approximately 8-10 weeks and could be structured in a way to provide the City
with construction plans and technical specifications that could be utilized regardless of when the
City decides to bid the project. Progress of adjacent development planning and approvals will
likely determine the timing of when the lift station project is bid. At the point in which a bidding
schedule is determined, the remaining contract documents can be prepared along with the
incorporation of the final construction plans and technical specifications prepared earlier.
The proposed project schedule intends to hold bidding during the optimal industry environment
for the best pricing, which typically occurs around mid-winter of each year. In order to meet the
schedule noted in the feasibility report, authorization of final design would need to be initiated
by the December 3, 2019 Council meeting.
City Council Action Requested:
Consider authorizing final design for the lift station project to prepare for possible bidding as
early as February of 2020.
FEASIBILITY REPORT
WILLOW DRIVE / TH 55
REGIONAL LIFT STATION
HENNEPIN COUNTY | MEDINA | MINNESOTA
November 19, 2019
Prepared for:
City of Medina
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340
WSB PROJECT NO. R-014877-000
FEASIBILITY REPORT
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
WILLOW DRIVE/TH 55 REGIONAL LIFT STATION
FOR THE
CITY OF MEDINA
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
November 19, 2019
Prepared By:
1
7
8
E
9
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
|
S
U
I
T
E
2
0
0
|
S
A
I
N
T
P
A
U
L
,
M
N
|
5
5
1
0
1
|
6
5
1
.
2
8
6
.
8
4
5
0
|
W
S
B
E
N
G
.
C
O
M
November 19, 2019
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Medina
2052 County Rd 24
Medina, MN 55340
Re: Feasibility Study Report
Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
The following is a feasibility study report addressing the Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station
for the City of Medina. The report evaluates sanitary sewer service in the vicinity of the proposed
regional lift station, within the Service Study Area. The City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan identified
the need for a lift station to serve properties to the west of Willow Drive, including the Adam’s
Pest Control Site. These sites would not be serviceable with sanitary sewer via gravity, so a lift
station is required. This lift station will also serve as a regional lift station and receive wastewater
from the ultimate development of the EC-1 sewershed of the City’s Comprehensive Sanitary
Sewer Plan. Therefore, the lift station needs to be designed for the initial flow conditions and the
ultimate maximum flow conditions of the sewershed. The proposed improvements include one
new regional sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain, the pumping capacity of which can be
phased with development.
WSB is available at your convenience to discuss this report. Please do not hesitate to contact me
at 651.286.8466 if you have any questions regarding this report.
Sincerely,
WSB
Greg Johnson, PE
Director of Water/Wastewater
Enclosure
kkp
CERTIFICATION
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me
or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed professional
engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Greg Johnson, PE
Date: November 19, 2019 Lic. No. 26430
Prepared By:
Jon Christensen, EIT
Date: November 19, 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
TITLE SHEET
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
CERTIFICATION SHEET
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................1
2. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................2
2.1 Authorization..........................................................................................................2
2.2 Scope.....................................................................................................................2
2.3 Data Available........................................................................................................2
2.4 Project Background................................................................................................2
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................3
3.1 Surface...................................................................................................................3
3.2 Right-of-Way..........................................................................................................3
3.3 Sanitary Sewer.......................................................................................................3
3.4 Watermain..............................................................................................................3
3.5 Storm Sewer ..........................................................................................................3
3.6 Private Utilities .......................................................................................................3
4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ........................................................................................4
4.1 Surface...................................................................................................................4
4.2 Right-of-Way/Easements.......................................................................................4
4.3 Sanitary Sewer.......................................................................................................4
4.4 Watermain..............................................................................................................6
4.5 Storm Sewer ..........................................................................................................6
4.6 Permits...................................................................................................................6
5. FINANCING.......................................................................................................................7
5.1 Opinion of Probable Construction Cost..................................................................7
5.2 Funding..................................................................................................................8
6. PROJECT SCHEDULE.....................................................................................................9
7. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION......................................................................10
APPENDIX A
Figure 1 – Service Study Area
Figure 2 – Existing Sanitary Sewer System
Figure 3 – Proposed Sanitary Sewer System
APPENDIX B
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report investigates the feasibility, service area, and sizing of the proposed Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional
Lift Station. The recommended improvements include one sanitary sewer lift station with a wet well, a
valve vault, approximately 1,500 feet of 6-inch diameter forcemain, connection to the existing gravity
sewer at the intersection of Willow Dr and Chippewa Rd, connection to new gravity sewer installed with
development to the west of the lift station, and a stub for future connection of gravity sewer to the east
and southeast of the lift station location.
The total estimated project cost for the Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift Station as recommended herein is
$807,689, which includes a 10% contingency and 25% indirect costs for legal, engineering,
administrative, and financing. Funding for the project will be through the City Sewer Capital Fund.
The proposed project is feasible, necessary, and cost-effective from an engineering standpoint. It is our
recommendation that the improvements be implemented as outlined in this report.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 2
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Authorization
On September 17, 2019, the Medina City Council authorized the preparation of an engineering feasibility
report for the Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift Station.
2.2 Scope
This report evaluates sanitary sewer service within the Service Study Area identified in Figure 1 in
Appendix A. This project is identified in the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan.
2.3 Data Available
Information and materials used in the preparation of this report include the following:
City of Medina 2040 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan
City of Medina Record Drawings
Medina (Lunski) Senior Living Community Construction Drawings
Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff
2.4 Project Background
The study and design of the Willow Dr Lift Station is driven by the proposed development plans for the
property to the west of the proposed lift station location. This lift station is identified in the City’s 2040
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan in order to provide sanitary sewer service to a broader regional
area. Therefore, the lift station will provide service to the developing property in the near term and to
additional land to the east and southeast in the long term.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 3
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Surface
Roadways in the Service Study Area include Willow Drive, Chippewa Road, and Cates Ranch Drive.
Willow Drive is a paved rural roadway from Chippewa Road to 300 feet north of Cates Ranch Drive,
where it transitions to an unpaved dirt road.
3.2 Right-of-Way
The right-of-way along Willow Drive is 66 feet wide. The City has a utility easement extending west from
Willow Drive through the property owned by “St. Louis Park Investment Co.” that will encompass the
proposed lift station location.
3.3 Sanitary Sewer
The existing sanitary sewer system includes trunk sewer in TH 55, 8-inch gravity sewer in Willow Drive
that extends as far north as the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa Road, 8-inch gravity sewer
that extends north through the Medina Senior Living Community Development to Chippewa Road, and 8-
inch gravity sewer on the north side of TH 55 at North Metro Companies, LLC. The existing sanitary
sewer system is shown in Figure 2 in Appendix A.
The existing sanitary sewer system can be extended to serve portions of the Service Study Area by
gravity, as shown in Figures 2 and 3 in Appendix A. Some areas can be served by multiple existing
gravity sewers. Where this is the case, the recommended flow path is indicated.
3.4 Watermain
There are existing 8-inch and 12-inch DIP watermains in the western boulevard of Willow Drive that
extend approximately 450 feet north of Cates Ranch Drive.
3.5 Storm Sewer
Within the project area, there is one existing 24-inch RCP storm sewer that crosses Willow Drive
approximately 350 feet north of Cates Ranch Drive.
3.6 Private Utilities
Wright Hennepin is the electrical provider in the project area. There is an electrical transformer located at
the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa Road and overhead three-phase electric in the western
boulevard of Willow Drive. Utility poles that must be moved or held to construct the utilities and roadways
as proposed will be coordinated with utility companies ahead of the project.
The private utilities that may be present within the proposed project area include:
CenturyLink (Communication)
CenterPoint Energy (Gas)
Mediacom (Communication)
Wright Hennepin (Electricity)
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 4
4. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
4.1 Surface
Due to the presence of existing watermain in the western boulevard of Willow Drive and the minimum
required horizontal separation from sanitary sewer of ten feet by the Minnesota Department of Health, it is
proposed to locate future gravity main and forcemain along Willow Drive in the eastern boulevard. In this
case, it will be necessary for the forcemain to cross Willow Drive at the proposed lift station location and
at the discharge point to the existing sanitary manhole at the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa
Road. The receiving manhole is located in the boulevard, so pavement impacts are limited to the crossing
and the area surrounding the existing manhole to the south.
4.2 Right-of-Way/Easements
It is recommended the City obtain a 30-ft by 50-ft area of land for the construction of the Willow Dr/TH 55
Regional Lift Station, ideally within a 70-ft by 70-ft construction area. It is anticipated that most gravity
main and forcemain installation will take place within existing City right-of-way or drainage and utility
easements. Temporary easements may be required from adjacent property owners at the proposed lift
station location, forcemain directional drilling pit locations, and forcemain discharge connection location.
4.3 Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary sewer is proposed to be extended by gravity from the existing gravity sewers in Willow Drive and
Chippewa Road at the Lunski property. Due to the limits of gravity serviceability, an appropriate location
for a regional lift station was identified along Willow Drive to serve development to the west and east as
shown in Figure 3 in Appendix A. The proposed lift station location was selected based on local
topography (at a low point) and proximity to a future roadway that will provide driveway access for
personnel to perform operation, service, and maintenance.
4.3.1 Projected Wastewater Flows
The flow to the proposed lift station was projected based on the net developable acres of
Business and Future Development Area land uses (excluding wetlands and platted roadway)
within the sewershed, as summarized in the table below. Based on the projections below, it is
recommended that the full build design capacity of the Willow Dr Lift Station be at least 341 gpm.
Table 4.1 – Projected Flow to Willow Dr Lift Station
Land Use Net Area
(acres)
Flow
Assumption
(gpd/acre)
Avg Flow
(gpd)
Peak
Factor
Peak
Flow
(gpd)
Peak
Flow
(gpm)
Business 46 800 37,247*4.0 148,988 103
Future Development Area 107 800 85,600 4.0 336,000 238
Total 122,847 4.0 491,388 341
*Including 447 gpd from one existing business that may connect in the future.
4.3.2 Forcemain
The Willow Dr lift station and forcemain may be designed for service in phases. A full build
capacity of 341 gpm will require a 6-inch diameter forcemain for reasonable velocity and head
loss. In order to maintain a velocity of 2.0 feet per second in the 6-inch diameter forcemain until
the full build capacity is reached in the future, initial phase pumps may be installed with a
minimum flow rate of 180 gpm. As development continues, new pumps will be needed once the
flow rate exceeds the selected initial rate (180 gpm minimum); the new pumps will have the
capacity to convey the full build flow rate. Although the full build flow rate is projected in this
report, it should be reevaluated at the time of the pump upgrade based on the actual
development and wastewater flows at that time.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 5
4.3.3 Lift Station Dimensions
The ground elevations and wetlands in the proposed service area were reviewed to determine the
required invert elevation at the proposed lift station location. At the boundaries of wetlands, it was
assumed that the basement of any building near the wetland must be two feet higher than the
wetland boundary elevation, and that the sanitary service to the building will be installed at a
slope of two percent. In open areas away from wetlands, it was assumed that the public sewer
will have a minimum cover of eight feet and that sanitary services will be installed at a slope of
two percent. In order to serve (1) ground elevations of 972 ft near the wetland in the northwest
corner of the service study area, (2) ground elevations of 974 ft near the wetland on the north
central boundary of the service study area, and (3) ground elevations of 972 ft on the east side of
Willow Drive, the wet well will require the elevations listed in the table below. If buildings are
constructed at low elevations near the boundaries of the service area, private individual lift
stations may be required in some cases.
As discussed previously, the forcemain was sized in order to achieve reasonable velocity and
head loss under full build conditions, while still allowing for an earlier phase pumping rate that
maintains a velocity of 2.0 feet per second.
Table 4.3 – Preliminary Willow Drive Lift Station Dimensions
Description Phase I Phase II
(Full Build)
Firm Pumping Capacity 180 gpm (min.)341 gpm
Approximate Pump Power 4 HP 10 HP
Wet Well Ground Elevation 980 ft 980 ft
Wet Well Invert Elevation 955 ft 955 ft
Wet Well Base Elevation 950 ft 950 ft
Wet Well Depth 30 ft 30 ft
Wet Well Diameter*8 ft 8 ft
Forcemain Length 1,500 ft 1,500 ft
Forcemain Diameter 6-inch 6-inch
Forcemain Velocity 2.0 ft/s 3.8 ft/s
*It is recommended that the lift station include a valve vault independent
of the wet well. A typical valve vault houses the check valves, gate valves,
and a bypass gate valve and connection coupling. The valve vault allows
easy access to these valves in a dry structure free from exposure to
sewage and hazardous gases. It also allows the wet well to be taken
offline for maintenance by pumping the wastewater from an upstream
manhole to the valve vault bypass connection.
4.3.4 Lift Station Electrical and SCADA
The electrical components of the lift station will include a new control panel, submersible level
transducer, and high/low level float switches. The electrical controls will operate the two
submersible pumps in a lead/lag configuration based on the level in the wet well, with both pumps
operating simultaneously if needed during peak demand.
Electrical service to the site will be determined during design. It is anticipated that three-phase
power will be made available to the site, so the pumps can be operated with full voltage motor
starters. If only single-phase power is available, the pumps can be operated with oversized
variable frequency drives (VFDs) that convert single phase power to three-phase power for the
pumps.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 6
The lift station will include a freestanding control panel with interlocked main and standby circuit
breakers and a receptacle for connection to a portable generator in the event of a power outage.
An alternate design will include a stationary generator and an automatic transfer switch. The
control panel will include branch circuit breakers and motor starters or VFDs for operation of the
pumps, a programmable logic controller (PLC), an operator interface terminal (OIT), and other
components as required. The control panel will be monitored remotely via a radio or cellular
system that is compatible with the City’s existing SCADA system. The design will include a spare
conduit stubbed out from the panel to allow for connection to a future fiber optic cable for remote
monitoring.
4.3.5 Gravity Main Capacity
The existing 8-inch diameter PVC sewer in Willow Drive has a slope of 0.34%. With a Manning’s
n coefficient of 0.011, the full-bore capacity of this pipe is 374 gpm. The existing and future
wastewater flow to this sewer is summarized in the table below.
Table 4.2 – Willow Drive Gravity Main Capacity
Description Flow
(gpm)
Willow Dr 8-inch Gravity Main Capacity 374
Existing Business Peak Hourly Flow 9
Future Gravity Extension Peak Hourly Flow*31
Willow Dr Lift Station Projected Flow 341
Willow Dr 8-inch Residual Capacity -7
*Future gravity extension peak hourly flow is based on net
developable acres of Business land use with an average
flow of 800 gallons per acre per day and a peak hourly flow
factor of 4.0. Due to the wide variability in business,
commercial, and industrial water use, actual flows may vary
by 125% or more.
Based on the residual capacity listed in the table above, the capacity of the existing 8-inch gravity
main in Willow Drive will likely be exceeded by the time of full build out of its service area.
However, the pumps at the Willow Dr Lift Station may be installed in phases as mentioned above.
The 8-inch gravity will not need to be upsized until the full build pumps are installed. At full build,
699 LF of 8-inch PVC sewer from the intersection of Willow Drive and Chippewa Road to the
south side of TH 55 will need to be upsized to 10-inch diameter. This includes a 100 LF casing
beneath TH 55. The cost of this upsizing is not included in the cost estimate at this time.
4.4 Watermain
The proposed sanitary sewer improvements do not affect or include watermain improvements.
4.5 Storm Sewer
The proposed sanitary sewer improvements do not affect or include storm sewer improvements.
4.6 Permits
The following permits will be required for the recommended construction:
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) Regional Review
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Temporary Project Dewatering Permit
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 7
5. FINANCING
5.1 Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
The estimated construction cost for the recommended scope is summarized in the tables below. A
detailed breakdown of the costs can be found in Appendix B of this report. The opinion of cost
incorporates estimated 2019 construction costs and includes a 10% contingency factor. Indirect costs are
projected at 25% of the estimated construction cost and include legal, engineering, administrative, and
financing.
The estimated costs are separated by phase for comparison of: 1) the installation of 4 HP pumps for the
180 gpm capacity, 2) the upsizing of 4 HP to 10 HP pumps to increase the capacity from 180 gpm to 340
gpm, and 3) the installation of 10 HP pumps for the 340 gpm capacity today. For most of the electrical
equipment, including the stationary generator alternate, the difference in cost between equipment sized
for 4 HP versus 10 HP pumps is minimal. Therefore, it is recommended that the equipment be sized for
10 HP pumps where feasible, even if 4 HP pumps are initially installed. Accordingly, the stationary
generator cost is the same between scenarios since it is sized for 10 HP pumps, and the electrical
replacement costs to upsize from Phase I to Phase II are minimal. The bulk of the upsizing cost is the
new 10 HP pumps.
As described previously, it is recommended that the lift station include a valve vault independent of the
wet well. The cost of the valve vault is included in the estimate below. If the check valves were to be
located in the wet well rather than the valve vault, then the wet well would need to be 10-foot diameter
instead of 8-foot diameter. This size structure at the proposed depth costs more than a separate valve
vault due to the higher precast concrete and installation costs.
Table 5.1 – Phase I
Description Estimated Cost
General Conditions $58,000
Roadway/Streets $14,593
Site/Grading/Restoration $15,000
Sanitary Sewer/Lift Station (4 HP Pumps)$449,420
Stationary Generator Alternate $35,000
Construction Sub-Total $572,010
Construction Contingency (10%)$57,201
Construction Total $629,211
Indirect Costs (25%)$157,303
Total Cost $786,514
Table 5.2 – Upsize Phase I to Phase II in Future
Description Estimated Cost
General Conditions $5,000
Sanitary Sewer/Lift Station (10 HP Pumps)$53,575
Construction Sub-Total $58,580
Construction Contingency (10%)$5,858
Construction Total $64,438
Indirect Costs (25%)$16,110
Total Cost $80,548
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 8
Table 5.3 – Construct Phase II Now
Description Estimated Cost
General Conditions $58,000
Roadway/Streets $14,593
Site/Grading/Restoration $15,000
Sanitary Sewer/Lift Station (10 HP Pumps)$464,820
Stationary Generator Alternate $35,000
Construction Sub-Total $587,410
Construction Contingency (10%)$58,741
Construction Total $646,151
Indirect Costs (25%)$161,538
Total Cost $807,689
5.2 Funding
Funding for the proposed lift station, forcemain, and appurtenances will come from the City Sewer Capital
Fund. The City is planning to implement a user area charge to offset the project costs.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 9
6. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The proposed project schedule for the Willow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift Station is as follows:
Order Feasibility Report..............................................................................September 17, 2019
Project Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff.............................................................October 2, 2019
CC Receives Feasibility Report...................................................................November 19, 2019
Final Design.....................................................................................November-December 2019
CC Approve Plans / Authorize Ad for Bid........................................................January 21, 2020
Bid Opening ...................................................................................................February 20, 2020
CC Receives Bids / Awards Project .....................................................................March 3, 2020
Begin Construction...............................................................................................Spring of 2020
Substantial Completion.............................................................................................Fall of 2020
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000 Page 10
7. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION
The Willow Drive/TH 55 Regional Lift Station will serve the area roughly north of TH 55, south of the
municipal boundary, and about one-half mile west and east of Willow Drive that is not serviceable by
gravity sewer. The recommended improvements include one sanitary sewer lift station with wet well and
valve vault, approximately 1,500 feet of 6-inch diameter forcemain, connection to the existing gravity
sewer at the intersection of Willow Dr and Chippewa Rd, connection to new gravity sewer installed with
development to the west of the lift station, and a stub for future connection of gravity sewer to the east
and southeast of the lift station location.
The opinion of probable project cost was provided for multiple phases. If the Phase II (full build) 10 HP
pumps are installed with initial construction, the lift station pumping capacity will far exceed the initial
influent wastewater flow. This will cause the active volume in the wet well to fill slowly and empty quickly,
resulting in a risk of septicity and short pump runs, respectively. The larger pumps would also have higher
electric demand charges and operation and maintenance costs.
Consideration must also be given to the capacity of the receiving gravity main in Willow Drive. As detailed
in Section 4.3.5, the 8-inch gravity main will likely need to be upsized for the full build pumping rate. The
minimum turndown of the 10 HP pumps is approximately 180 gpm at 44 Hz. This lower operating point is
within the capacity of the downstream sewer. However, an incorrect setting of the pump speed could
cause a surcharge in the receiving sewer, so the maximum initial pump speed would need to be verified
downstream in the field during startup.
With that being said, it is recommended that the City construct the lift station for the 10 HP pumps at this
time, since they can be turned down to operate within the capacity of the receiving sewer, and it is more
cost effective than replacing the pumps in the future. The estimated cost to construct the lift station with
the Phase II (full build) 10 HP pumps is $807,689.
Funding for the proposed lift station, forcemain, and appurtenances will come from the City Sewer Capital
Fund. The City is planning to implement a user area charge to offset the project costs. The proposed
project is feasible, necessary, and cost-effective from an engineering standpoint. It is our
recommendation that the improvements be implemented as outlined in this report.
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
APPENDIX A
Figure 1 – Service Study Area
Figure 2 – Existing Sanitary Sewer System
Figure 3 – Proposed Sanitary Sewer System
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
"
"
!(
!(
Highway 55
W
illo
w
D
r
iv
e
Chippewa Road
Shire Road
Cates Ranch Drive
MEDINA
CORCORAN
Document Path: K:\014877-000\GIS\Maps\Fig1_ServiceStudyArea.mxd Date Saved: 11/12/2019 11:30:25 AM
Legend
Service Study Area
!(Existing Manhole
Existing Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
"15"
Waterm ain
"Storm Sewer
City Boundary
National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 1Service Study AreaWillow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift StationFeasibility ReportCity of Medina, MN
0 500Feet¯1 inch = 500 feet
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
"
"
!(
!(
MH-273RIM = 999.53INV = 981.51
MH-274RIM = 993.66INV = 979.83
8" STUBGRD = 996INV = 984.2
MHRIM = 993INV = 978.0
8" STUBRIM = 999INV = 980.5
2805 Shire RdAvg Flow = 466 gpd
4365 Willow DrAvg Flow = 1,410 gpd
4635 Willow DrAvg Flow = 447 gpd
4385 Willow DrAvg Flow = 2,943 gpd
4352 Willow DrAvg Flow = 155 gpd
4300 Willow DrAvg Flow = 22 gpd
2402 Hwy 55Avg Flow = 117 gpd
MH-268RIM = 993.21INV = 976.63
Highway 55
Wil
lo
w Drive
Chippewa RoadShire Road
Cates Ranch Drive
Lost Horse Road
MEDINA
CORCORAN
Document Path: K:\014877-000\GIS\Maps\Fig2_ExistingSanitarySewerSystem.mxd Date Saved: 10/23/2019 2:34:07 PM
Legend
!(Existing Manhole
Existing Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
"15"
Waterm ain
"Storm Sewer
Service Study Area
Serviceable by Gravity
City Boundary
National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 2Existing Sanitary Sewer SystemWillow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift StationFeasibility ReportCity of Medina, MN
0 500Feet¯1 inch = 500 feet
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
"
""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"""
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"""
"
Xä
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
"
"
!(
!(
MH-273RIM = 999.53INV = 981.51
8" STUBRIM = 999INV = 980.5
Proposed Willow Dr Lift Station341 gpm peak hourly flow (full build)180 gpm initial flow (2 fps in 6" FM)
MH-268RIM = 993.21INV = 976.63
Future Development Area107 net developable acres238 gpm peak hourly flow
Business46 net developable acres + 1 existing business103 gpm peak hourly flow
Upsize 700 LF of 8" to 10" (full build)
Highway 55
Willow Drive
Chippewa Road
Shire Road
Cates Ranch Drive
Lost Horse Road
MEDINA
CORCORAN
Document Path: K:\014877-000\GIS\Maps\Fig3_ProposedSanitarySewerSystem.mxd Date Saved: 11/12/2019 11:24:53 AM
Legend
Xä Proposed Lift Station
Proposed Forcem ain
Proposed Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
!(Existing Manhole
Existing Gravity Main
Diameter
"8"
"10"
"15"
Waterm ain
"Storm Sewer
Service Study Area
Serviceable by Gravity
City Boundary
National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 3Proposed Sanitary Sewer SystemWillow Dr/TH 55 Regional Lift StationFeasibility ReportCity of Medina, MN
0 500Feet¯1 inch = 500 feet
Feasibility Report
Willow Drive / TH 55 Regional Lift Station
City of Medina, MN
WSB Project No. R-014877-000
APPENDIX B
Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Willow Drive Lift Station - Phase I
Item
No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $18,000.00 $18,000.00
2 DEWATERING LUMP SUM 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
3 EROSION CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
4 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
5 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON EACH 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
6 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 30 $55.00 $1,650.00
7 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ FT 450 $6.00 $2,700.00
8 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ FT 1,200 $1.00 $1,200.00
9 ASPHALT PAVEMENT TON 25 $150.00 $3,806.25
10 CLASS 5 AGGREGATE TON 55 $24.00 $1,320.00
11 STABILIZATION FABRIC SQ YD 167 $4.00 $666.67
12 AGGREGATE SHOULDER CU YD 17 $45.00 $750.00
13 SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION (4 HP PUMPS)LUMP SUM 1 $336,270.00 $336,270.00
14 6" DR 11 HDPE FORCEMAIN (DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED)LIN FT 1,500 $65.00 $97,500.00
15 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
16 8" PVC PIPE SEWER LIN FT 150 $60.00 $9,000.00
17 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER LIN FT 150 $3.00 $450.00
18 CONST 48" DIA SAN MH EACH 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00
19 CASTING ASSEMBLY (SANITARY)EACH 1 $700.00 $700.00
20 STATIONARY GENERATOR LUMP SUM 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00
21 GRADING & RESTORATION LUMP SUM 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00
CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL $572,010.00
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%)$57,201.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $629,211.00
INDIRECT COSTS (25%)$157,303.00
TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $786,514.00
K:\014877-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Willow Dr LS OPC 11/14/2019
Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Willow Drive Lift Station - Upsize Phase I to Phase II
Item
No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
2 REPLACE LIFT STATION PUMPS (10 HP PUMPS)LUMP SUM 1 $49,575.00 $49,575.00
3 REPLACE LIFT STATION ELECTRICAL LUMP SUM 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00
CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL $58,580.00
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%)$5,858.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $64,438.00
INDIRECT COSTS (25%)$16,110.00
TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $80,548.00
K:\014877-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Willow Dr LS OPC 11/14/2019
Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Willow Drive Lift Station - Phase II (2019 Costs)
Item
No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $18,000.00 $18,000.00
2 DEWATERING LUMP SUM 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
3 EROSION CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
4 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
5 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON EACH 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
6 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT 30 $55.00 $1,650.00
7 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ FT 450 $6.00 $2,700.00
8 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQ FT 1,200 $1.00 $1,200.00
9 ASPHALT PAVEMENT TON 25 $150.00 $3,806.25
10 CLASS 5 AGGREGATE TON 55 $24.00 $1,320.00
11 STABILIZATION FABRIC SQ YD 167 $4.00 $666.67
12 AGGREGATE SHOULDER CU YD 17 $45.00 $750.00
13 SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION (10 HP PUMPS)LUMP SUM 1 $351,670.00 $351,670.00
14 6" DR 11 HDPE FORCEMAIN (DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED)LIN FT 1,500 $65.00 $97,500.00
15 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
16 8" PVC PIPE SEWER LIN FT 150 $60.00 $9,000.00
17 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER LIN FT 150 $3.00 $450.00
18 CONST 48" DIA SAN MH EACH 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00
19 CASTING ASSEMBLY (SANITARY)EACH 1 $700.00 $700.00
20 STATIONARY GENERATOR LUMP SUM 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00
21 GRADING & RESTORATION LUMP SUM 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00
CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL $587,410.00
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%)$58,741.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $646,151.00
INDIRECT COSTS (25%)$161,538.00
TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $807,689.00
K:\014877-000\Quantity\Preliminary\Willow Dr LS OPC 11/14/2019
Planning Department Update Page 1 of 2 November 19, 2019
City Council Meeting
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Martin and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dusty Finke, Planning Director; through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: November 14, 2019
SUBJ: Planning Department Updates – November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting
Land Use Application Review
A) Mark of Excellence Comp Plan Amendment, PUD Concept Plan – east of Mohawk Drive,
north of Highway 55 – Mark Smith (Mark of Excellence Homes) has requested a Comp Plan
Amendment and PUD Concept Plan for development of 76 twinhomes, 41 single-family,
and 32 townhomes on the Roy and Cavanaugh properties. The Planning Commission held a
public hearing at the October 8 meeting. A number of residents provided written comment
and one spoke in opposition of the amendment. Following the hearing, the Planning
Commission voted 4-2 to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The
Council reviewed and tabled the request at the November 6 meeting to allow for a
neighborhood meeting.
B) 3672 Pinto Rezoning – Woodbury REI, LLC has requested a rezoning of its property at the
northeast corner of Tower Drive and Pinto Drive from Commercial-Highway to
Commercial-General. The owner is interested in constructing self-storage on the property.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 8 and voted 5-1 to recommend
approval of the rezoning. The City Council reviewed on November 6 and determined that
the CH district was more appropriate and directed staff to prepare documentation denying
the request. Staff intends to present the resolution of denial on the December 3 consent
agenda if the applicant does not withdraw the request.
C) Adam’s Pest Control Site Plan Review, Pre Plat, Rezoning – Jan-Har, LLP (dba Adam’s
Pest Control) has requested various approvals for development of a 35,000 s.f. office
building, restaurant, and 13,000 s.f. warehouse/repair shop north of Highway 55, west of
Willow Drive (PIDs 04-118-23-21-0001 and 04-118-23-24-0001). The Planning
Commission held a public hearing at the November 12 meeting and recommended approval.
The application is scheduled for review by the City Council on December 3.
D) 4585 Balsam Hardcover Variance – Dave Raskob has requested a variance from the 25%
hardcover limitation for a lot within the shoreland overlay district, to 32%. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing at the November 12 meeting and recommended approval.
The application is scheduled for review by the City Council on December 3.
E) OSI Expansion – Arrowhead Drive, north of Highway 55 – Arrowhead Holdings (real estate
company for OSI) has requested approval of a site plan review and preliminary plat to construct an
expansion to the existing building and parking lot at 4101 Arrowhead Drive. The plat proposes to
increase the size of the main lot and decrease the size of the outlot to the north. Staff is conducting a
preliminary review of the material and will schedule for a public hearing when complete, potentially
at the December 10 meeting.
F) Roehl Preliminary Plat – 1735 Medina Road – The Estate of Robert Roehl has requested a
preliminary plat to subdivide 28 acres into two lots. The application is currently incomplete
and will be scheduled for a hearing when necessary information is submitted.
G) Cates Ranch Comp Plan Amendment and Rezoning – 2575 and 2590 Cates Ranch Drive – Robert
Atkinson has requested a change of the future land use from Future Development Area to Business, a
Planning Department Update Page 2 of 2 November 19, 2019
City Council Meeting
staging plan amendment to 2020, and a rezoning to Business Park. Staff is conducting a preliminary
review and will schedule when complete for review.
H)Van de Ven/Welch combination/rearrangement – 1765 Medina Road and 1752 County
Road 24 – Martha and Andrew Van de Ven and Mark and Sara Welch have requested to
rearrange 3 lots into 2. The Council approved the request at the October 15 meeting. The
sale closed on October 30, and staff will now close the file.
I)Johnson ADU CUP, Hamel Brewery, St. Peter and Paul Cemetery – The City Council has adopted
resolutions approving these projects, and staff is assisting the applicants with the conditions of
approval in order to complete the projects.
J)Hamel Haven subdivisions – These subdivisions have received final approval. Staff is working
with the applicants on the conditions of approval before the plats are recorded.
Other Projects
A)Quad City Agreement – Medina, Loretto, and Greenfield have signed the agreement and we are still
awaiting Independence.
B)Zoning Enforcement – three correction notices are pending for zoning violations.
C)Willow Drive Lift Station Report – Staff consulted with the City Engineer on the final report for the
lift station on Willow Drive, north of Highway 55. The report will be presented to the Council at the
November 19 meeting.
D)Staff Training – staff took the Insights Personality Survey and held a workshop to discuss how we
can take full advantage of the different personality types on staff and best communicate with each
other.
E)Diamond Lake Regional Trail – staff met with Council member Anderson, Chair Lee, and
representatives from Three Rivers Park about the process of creating a master plan for the future
Diamond Lake Regional Trail corridor which runs north-south in the eastern portion of Medina.
F)Business tours – staff attended tours/discussions with Go2Print Media, Sharepoint Credit Union,
and Polaris.
TO: City Council
FROM: Edgar J. Belland, Director of Public Safety,
Through City Administrator Scott Johnson
DATE: November 14, 2019
RE: Police Department Updates
Hiring Processes, Officer Position
On November 7th we interviewed 22 of the 35 applicants for the officer position. We will be sending
the top 7 candidates for a second interview on November 14th with police personnel, a council
member and a Medina citizen. The Chiefs interview will follow in the next week.
Hamel Fire Transition Meeting
On November 14th we will be meeting with representatives from the State Fire Marshal’s Office to
discuss a grant to hire a consultant to evaluate the City of Medina’s options for fire protection
coverage.
Department Shoot
On November 19th we will have our department annual qualifying shoot. This shoot is in the
evening and during cold weather to meet the training standards set by the Peace Officer Standards
and Training (POST) Board. The shoot is 150 rounds at many different distances while standing
kneeling and prone. Our prior shoots are to prepare our officers for the qualifying shoot.
All City Training
On November 13th our entire department attended the mandatory all city training by Insights. It was
very enlightening, I think everyone enjoyed learning a little bit more about their co-workers. The
training looked at personalities and how the different personalities communicate.
Patrol Updates – Sgt. Nelson
Training: On October 29th Officer Boecker conducted use of force training for the entire
department.
From November 4-7 Officer Hall attended leadership training at the Bureau of Criminal
Apprehension in St. Paul.
MEMORANDUM
Patrol Activities: For the dates of October 29 to November 14, 2019, our officers issued 48
citations and 119 warnings for various traffic infractions. There was a total of 9 traffic accidents, 15
medicals, and 13 alarms.
On 10-29-19, Officer McGill responded to a burglary in progress call where the homeowner called
after hearing voices inside her residence. Prior to Officer McGill arriving, the parties inside the
house had fled on foot. With the assistance of other agencies two parties were located and arrested
for burglary. Detective McKinley was called in to assist with the investigation.
On 10-30-19, Officers Gregory and Hall were dispatched to take an assault report at the McDonalds.
Upon arrival, it was learned that there had been an altercation between two employees and that one
of the employees had left the area. Case turned over to investigations.
On 11-01-19, I overhead Plymouth Police being dispatched to a traffic complaint on Hwy 55 near
our County Road 101. I was in the area and was able to locate the vehicle in question who was
having a hard time staying on the road and almost struck several vehicles head-on. I was able to get
the vehicle stopped near the Wayzata High School. The driver was believed to be under the
influence of narcotics and alcohol and Officer Scharf was called to process him. The driver was
arrested and will be charged when blood results come back.
On 11-02-19, Officers McGill, Hall and Gregory responded to the Medina Ballroom for a fight.
Upon arrival, they located the parties involved in the altercation and arrested the aggressor.
On 11-02-19, Officer Hall responded to a business burglary alarm at Maple Crest Landscape. Upon
his arrival, he located a window that had been forced open. The owner arrived a short time later and
it was determined that someone had forced entry into the building but that there was nothing
missing. The case has been forwarded to investigations.
On 11-03-19, while working a DWI detail, Officer Boecker came across a vehicle that was traveling
the wrong way on a one-way road who also drove on a sidewalk. The vehicle was stopped, and the
driver was subsequently arrested for DWI.
On 11-04-19, Officer Converse took a theft of mail report. Victim indicated that he had placed an
outgoing bill in his mailbox and put the flag up indicating that there was outgoing mail. The mail
was stolen from the mailbox before the mail carrier picked up the mail. The victim was able to
contact his bank and got the check cancelled prior to it being cashed.
Investigator Update – Investigator McKinley
Responded overnight to assist with a Burglary. I interviewed two suspects who were located on the
property. These suspects did not commit a crime inside the residence and will be facing charges of
trespassing. One of the suspects I interviewed told me they had been communicating with someone
via “Snap Chat”. This person told my suspect that they have taken items from this property recently.
Through an administrative subpoena I was able to obtain a name and phone number for this person. I
spoke with the owner of the Snap Chat account and he confirmed he was involved in the burglary,
along with two other people. I interviewed those two people and confirmed their involvement in the
burglary as well. I will be submitting my report to the Hennepin County Attorney’s office for
charging.
Investigating the Financial Exploitation of a Vulnerable Adult. I am in the process of writing
administrative subpoenas for bank records of the victim.
Investigating an assault that occurred at a business. All parties have been interviewed and I will be
sending my report to the City Attorney’s office for review
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council, through City Administrator Scott Johnson
FROM: Steve Scherer, Public Works Director
DATE: November 14, 2019
MEETING: November 19, 2019
SUBJECT: Public Works Update
STREETS
•The Brockton Lane project is substantially complete. A few minor items may have to
wait until spring. The project looks great and should be a major improvement for
pedestrians as well as traffic.
•We had our first snow event this week. It was very minor but enough to get the trucks out
and ensure things are working properly.
•Public Works has been working on getting all the valves and manholes lowered or
patched around the City to avoid damage to the snowplows.
WATER/SEWER/STORMWATER
•There was a hydrant hit at Primrose Lane and 101 during the first snow event. Public
Works will get it repaired and invoice properly for the repairs.
•The water systems have all been winterized and are ready for cold weather.
PARKS/TRAILS
•Fall cleanup has been completed in our parks.
•Public Works will be prepping the skating rinks and making snow for the sledding hill.
•The bid packages have been sent out for the grounds and lawn mowing contract that
expired this fall. This will allow potential bidders to prepare for such a large amount of
mowing if they get the bid. Proposals are due December 4th.
MISCELLANEOUS
•The ditch mowing tractor that Medina and Loretto jointly own has had several issues in
the past few years. Repairs are continuing to add up and we believe it is best to repair the
current tractor for trade in and move the purchase of a new tractor up from 2024 to next
year. We will work on getting pricing with Loretto and add it to the 2020 CIP for council
review in December.
ORDER CHECKS OCTOBER 31, 2019- NOVEMBER 19, 2019
049512 ERICKSON, KELLY ................................................................... $250.00
049513 FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL ....................................... $250.00
049514 HAMEL FIRE RELIEF ASSN ................................................ $45,885.96
049515 RAJASEKAR, NIRMALA ............................................................ $200.00
049516 SHANE, BEN/KRISTIN ................................................................ $99.16
049517 BASCO, DEBRA ........................................................................ $500.00
049518 BISCHEL, GARY ......................................................................... $15.49
049519 CENTERPOINT ENERGY ......................................................... $521.47
049520 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. ............................................... $3,113.45
049521 KESHAVA, SRINIVAS ............................................................... $250.00
049522 MACKO, MARY ......................................................................... $250.00
049523 SCHMIDT, LEE & STACY .......................................................... $250.00
049524 SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY OF BAHAIS ......................................... $250.00
049525 ADAMS PEST CONTROL INC .................................................. $386.79
049526 BEAUDRY OIL & PROPANE .................................................. $3,632.13
049527 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MN ................................... $31,391.26
049528 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC .................................................. $2,878.54
049529 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS ...................................................... $642.33
049530 CAREFREE SERVICES INC ..................................................... $466.00
049531 CONTEMPORARY IMAGES ........................................................ $24.73
049532 CORE & MAIN LP ................................................................... $6,722.80
049533 DOBOS ................................................................................... $1,116.34
049534 ECM PUBLISHERS INC .............................................................. $63.32
049535 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC ............................................. $544.05
049536 GRAFIX SHOPPE ...................................................................... $985.00
049537 HAMEL LIONS CLUB ................................................................ $675.00
049538 HENN COUNTY INFO TECH .................................................. $2,541.86
049539 HENN CTY RECORDER REGISTRAR ........................................ $44.00
049540 J & A GLASS & MIRROR INC .................................................... $282.00
049541 KD & COMPANY RECYCLING INC ........................................... $337.63
049542 LANO EQUIPMENT INC ................................................................ $2.81
049543 LEXISNEXIS ................................................................................ $40.00
049544 MAPLE PLAIN, CITY OF ........................................................... $883.07
049545 MET COUNCIL (WASTEWATER SVC) ................................ $32,076.54
049546 METRO WEST INSPECTION ............................................... $12,766.30
049547 MOTLEY AUTO SERVICE LLC ................................................... $62.00
049548 OFFICE DEPOT ........................................................................ $161.07
049549 PAINT-A-LOT ............................................................................ $999.52
049550 PREMIUM WATERS INC ............................................................. $31.00
049551 QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP INC.......................................... $588.07
049552 RCM SPECIALTIES, INC. ....................................................... $1,687.50
049553 SCHERERS PUMPKIN PATCH ................................................. $200.00
049554 STREICHERS INC ..................................................................... $248.98
049555 TALLEN & BAERTSCHI .......................................................... $3,078.13
049556 TIME SAVER OFFSITE SEC SVCS IN ...................................... $145.00
049557 TITAN MACHINERY INC ........................................................... $118.50
049558 TWIN CITY STRIPING ............................................................ $5,282.96
049559 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE ............................................. $2,476.53
049560 ZIEGLER INC ............................................................................ $123.53
049561 BURNET TITLE ........................................................................... $54.35
049562 VOID .............................................................................................. $0.00
049563 RADUECHEL, KATHRYN .......................................................... $250.00
049564 VAUGHAN, JASON/LINDSEY ....................................................... $5.38
049565 TITLE ONE, INC ........................................................................ $620.94
Total Checks $166,471.49
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS OCTOBER 31, 2019 – NOVEMBER 19, 2019
005297E FURTHER ................................................................................... $40.00
005298E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC ........................................................... $136.90
005299E PR PERA .............................................................................. $16,404.61
005300E PR FED/FICA ....................................................................... $17,233.05
005301E PR MN Deferred Comp ........................................................... $1,650.00
005302E PR STATE OF MINNESOTA .................................................. $3,807.26
005303E CITY OF MEDINA ........................................................................ $22.00
005304E FURTHER .............................................................................. $1,342.52
005305E CIPHER LABORATORIES INC. .............................................. $6,146.88
005306E PAYMENT SERVICE NETWORK INC ....................................... $952.98
005307E PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE BY PHONE ............................... $1,000.00
005308E CENTURYLINK.......................................................................... $237.27
005309E FRONTIER .................................................................................. $57.41
005310E FURTHER ................................................................................... $69.50
005311E VERIZON WIRELESS ............................................................. $1,295.40
005312E XCEL ENERGY ...................................................................... $7,454.47
005313E AFLAC ....................................................................................... $375.36
005314E MEDIACOM OF MN LLC ........................................................... $378.99
005315E CULLIGAN-METRO ..................................................................... $33.70
Total Electronic Checks $58,638.30
PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS NOVEMBER 13, 2019
0509829 BOEDDEKER, KAYLEN ........................................................... $627.91
0509830 JOHNSON, PATRICK M. .......................................................... $694.48
0509831 ALBERS, TODD M. ................................................................... $230.87
0509832 ALTENDORF, JENNIFER L. .................................................. $1,436.78
0509833 ANDERSON, JOHN G. ............................................................. $230.87
0509834 BARNHART, ERIN A. ............................................................ $2,466.20
0509835 BELLAND, EDGAR J. ............................................................ $2,801.97
0509836 BOECKER, KEVIN D. ............................................................ $3,145.71
0509837 CONVERSE, KEITH A. .......................................................... $2,120.75
0509838 DESLAURIES, DEAN ............................................................... $230.87
0509839 ENDE, JOSEPH..................................................................... $1,650.83
0509840 FINKE, DUSTIN D. ................................................................ $2,649.59
0509841 GALLUP, JODI M. .................................................................. $1,925.40
0509842 GLEASON, JOHN M. ............................................................. $2,206.44
0509843 GREGORY, THOMAS ........................................................... $1,987.43
0509844 HALL, DAVID M. .................................................................... $2,096.41
0509845 JACOBSON, NICOLE ............................................................... $848.08
0509846 JESSEN, JEREMIAH S. ......................................................... $2,561.66
0509847 JOHNSON, SCOTT T. ........................................................... $2,218.77
0509848 JONES, KATRINA M.............................................................. $1,409.81
0509849 KLAERS, ANNE M. ................................................................ $1,406.80
0509850 LEUER, GREGORY J. ........................................................... $2,148.18
0509851 MARTIN, KATHLEEN M ........................................................... $327.07
0509852 MCGILL, CHRISTOPHER R. ................................................. $1,740.65
0509853 MCKINLEY, JOSHUA D ......................................................... $2,051.68
0509854 NELSON, JASON .................................................................. $2,277.29
0509855 PEDERSON, JEFF ................................................................... $230.87
0509856 PETERSON, DEBRA A. ......................................................... $2,030.17
0509857 REINKING, DEREK M ........................................................... $1,875.66
0509858 ROERICK, AUSTIN ............................................................... $1,435.25
0509859 SCHARF, ANDREW .............................................................. $2,246.25
0509860 SCHERER, STEVEN T. ......................................................... $2,379.46
0509861 SCHNEIDER, BENJAMIN ......................................................... $643.73
Total Payroll Direct Deposit $54,333.89