Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
WK - January 27, 2015
"IN "Ok 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULLVArcO N.W.. ANDUVI=K, MINNLSU IA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV City Council Workshop Tuesday, January 27, 2015 Conference Rooms A & B 1. Call to Order — 6:00 p.m. 2. Joint Meeting with Park & Recreation Commission Discuss Kelsey Round Lake Park Master Plan Draft RFP/Project 15 -11 Discuss Current 2015 -2019 CIP and Project Goals of the City Council Other Business 3. Update on Storm Water Plan/l 3-27/3d Generation Surface Water Management Plan — Engineering 4. Discuss Bike Route Designations/Woodland Estates Development — Engineering 5. Discuss Bunker Lake Blvd. NW from Crane St. NW to Jefferson St. /11 -25 /Sycamore St. Study & Open House - Engineering 6. 2014 General Fund Budget Progress Report 7. December 2014 City Investments Review 8. Other Business 9. Adjournment C I T Y O F a• NDC-VE 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD (76 5 89 3 ANDOVER, 4 - 763) 755.5100 WWW, ANDOVERMN GOV To: Mayor & City Council CC: Jim Dickinson, City AdministratorlieWorks/City s David D. Berkowitz, Director of P Engineer From: Todd J. Haas, Assistant Public Works Director Subject: Discuss Kelsey Round Lake Park Master Plan Draft RFP /15-11 — Engineering Date: January 27, 2015 INTRODUCTION The Park and Recreation Commission is requesting the City Council discuss the Kelsey Round Lake Park Master Plan draft Request for Proposal (RFP), Project 15 -11. DISCUSSION Attached is the draft RFP for your review. There are a number of Tasks that are included in the RFP (Pages 9 and 10) that are recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission to be included as part of the Master Plan. The two items in particular that will need discussion include Task C (expansion of the existing park to include additional property around the perimeter of Round Lake itself to determine if it is feasible to acquire the necessary properties to have a park/open space /trail system around the lake) and Task D (assessment of a possible interpretive center which may include restrooms and a plaza). For those not familiar with the 153 acre park or the area, attached is information in regards to the history of the area that was included in the first master plan that was developed in 1992. There were a number of improvements that were discussed in the original Master plan but the main focus was keeping the park a passive park. Once a Master Plan has been prepared and approved by the City Council, the Park Commission will be able to recommend improvements that could be included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Having a Master Plan and identifying the improvements in the CIP will allow the City to have a better opportunity of receiving state grant funds to continue developing the park. The proposed timetable for issuing the RFP's and when the Master Plan is to be completed is identified,on Page 5. a Mayor & Council Members January 27, 2015 pg. 2 of 2 BUDGETIMPACT $50,000 has been allocated for the preparation of the RFP as identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. ACTION REQUESTED The Park and Recreation Commission is requesting the City Council to discuss the Kelsey Round Lake Park Master Plan draft Request for Proposal (RFP), Project 15 -11. Respectfully submitted, ,A,, am- Todd J. Haas Attachments: Draft RFP� Existing trail ma/Introduction of park and plan from original Master Plan from 1992; History of the land around Round Lake;Projected fund balance and detailed of the park projects for 2015 -2019 J Cc: Park and Recreation Commission Members REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROJECT #15 -11 Master Plan Consulting Services for Kelsey Round Lake Park Andover, Minnesota Proposals due by: Friday, March 6, 2015 @ 4:30 PM City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover, MN 55304 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Part 1.0 Introduction Part 2.0 instructions for Proposers Part 3.0 Evaluation of Proposals and Award Part 4.0 Specifications Part 5.0 Terms and Conditions Attachments: ExhibitA — Specimen Contract Exhibit B — Insurance Requirements 4 10 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS KELSEY ROUND LAKE PARK MASTER PLAN PART 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The purpose of this Proposal is to enter into an agreement for Professional Services for consulting services for the Master Plan of Kelsey Round Lake Park. Proposer must submit detailed plans stating how they intend to perform the services required and identify a potential schedule (including milestones, estimated timetable, and reports to be provided). 1.2. BACKGROUND Kelsey Round Lake Park is located at address 15521 Xenia Street NW, in Andover, MN, and is part of the Anoka County Parks and Recreation System. The nature park has been around over 20 years and the City now is ready to refocus on the park and consider future opportunities for the development of the park including but not limited to trail development, prairie and wetland restoration, interpretive center which may include restrooms and a plaza, playground equipment, potential acquisitions of additional properties around the perimeter of Round Lake and additional landscaping. Kelsey Round Lake Park is 152 acres in size and is located adjacent to Round Lake on the west side. Currently visitors have access to trails, woods, wetlands, and prairie ecosystems. No programming is currently available at the park. The park is open year for those that like to ride bike, walk, jog, snow shoe, cross country ski or just come to the park to see what nature has to offer. 1.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES The City of Andover will enter into an agreement with a qualified Consulting Firm to develop a Master Plan to address development of the park. The plan will include trail development, potential expansion of the park by acquiring private properties around Round Lake that could become park and /or open space, prairie and /or wetland restoration, interpretive center which may include restrooms and a plaza, playground equipment and additional landscaping. The plan will also need to include a vision, goals, and a strategic plan designed to meet the future needs of the interpretive center. The project scope is described below: • The Master Plan will be critical to the long and short term planning for possible park improvements and upgrades. The study should address existing conditions and provide ideas for future improvements and upgrades. • The Master Plan will need to address the potential expansion of the existing park around the perimeter of Round Lake itself to determine if it is feasible to acquire the necessary properties to have a park /open space /trail system around the lake. • If it determined that an interpretive center is needed, a staffing/volunteers evaluation with options must be provided. • Present findings to various groups (such as City staff, the Andover Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council) during the evaluation process. A minimum of up four presentations will be made to the Park Commission and /or City Council and up to four meetings with City staff. It is the intention of the City to enter into a contract with the selected proposer who will complete the scope of work in accordance with terms and conditions as hereinafter provided. 1.4 IMPLEMENTATION DEADLINE The City would like the selected proposer to begin the evaluation and assessment in April 2015. The City would like to have the completed Master Plan report by August 28, 2015 to present to the Andover Parks and Recreation Commission for their meeting in September 2015. The selected Consultant is to provide a detailed project timeline, outlining when each step will be accomplished, based upon the April 2015 start and the August 28, 2015 completion. PART 2.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSERS Vendor's proposal must be prepared in strict compliance with the "Proposal Format" below. Failure to comply with all provisions of this RFP may result in disqualification of the submitted proposal. 2.1 Proposal Deadline Proposals must be received by 4:30 p.m. CST, Friday, March 6, 2015, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, MN 55304. All proposers must submit three (3) complete proposals and one electronic version. One proposal must be marked "original." Any proposal received after the time stipulated will be rejected. All proposals must be addressed to: "Master Plan Consulting Services for Kelsey Round Lake Park" City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover, MN 55304 - 2.2 Proposals will not be opened publicly at the closing of the RFP. All data contained in the proposals will be disclosed as required, in accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 13.591. Trade secret data that a proposer wishes to protect during and after the evaluation process must meet the definition and classification in Minn. Stat. § 13.37. Proposers must invoke the protections of this section prior to or upon submission of the data, and identify the data and state the reasons why protection is sought. 2.3 A pre - proposal meeting, which is not mandatory, will be held at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 17, 2015. The meeting will be held at the City of Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, MN 55304. 4 Any questions concerning the RFP must be submitted in writing by 12 PM (noon), Thursday, February 26, 2015 to: City of Andover Attn: Todd Haas, Assistant Public Works Director /Parks Coordinator 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW Andover, MN 55304 E -mail: t.haas@andovermn.aov A written response, in the form of an addendum(s) will be made available to all no later than Tuesday, March 3, 2015. 2.4 Procurement Timetables The following projected timetable should be used as a working guide for planning purposes. The City of Andover reserves the right to adjust this timetable as required during the course of the RFP process. Issue RFP — February 5, 2015 Pre - proposal meeting at Andover City Hall - Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 2:00 p.m. Questions due — Thursday, February 26, 2015 by 12:00 PM (noon) Responses provided by— Tuesday, March 3, 2015 Proposals received by— Friday, March 6, 2015 at 4:30 PM Interviews as needed — March 23 -25, 2015 Recommendation to the Andover Parks & Recreation Commission —April 2, 2015 Recommendation to City Council —April 7, 2015 Consultant to execute contract and begin Master Plan —April 13, 2015 Master Plan to be completed — August 28, 2015 2.5 Disclaimer The City of Andover reserves the right to withdraw this RFP at any time and for any reason, and to issue such clarifications, modifications, and /or amendments, as it may deem appropriate. The City of Andover reserves the right to waive minor irregularities in proposals, if such action is in the best interest of the City of Andover. Any such waiver shall not modify any remaining RFP requirements or excuse the proposer from full compliance with the RFP specifications and other contract requirements if the proposer is awarded the contract. 2.6 Proposals and Presentation Costs The City of Andover will not be liable in any way for any costs incurred by proposers in the preparation of their proposals in response to this RFP nor for the presentation of their proposals and /or participation in any discussions or negotiations prior to the award of the contract. 2.7 Proposals 2.7.1 Rejection of proposals The City of Andover reserves the right to accept or reject in part or in whole, any or all proposals submitted. The City of Andover shall reject the proposal of any vendor who is determined to be non - responsive. The unreasonable failure of a proposer to promptly supply information in connection with respect to responsibility may be grounds for a determination of non - responsibility. 2.7.2 Acceptance of Proposals All proposals properly submitted shall be accepted by the City of Andover. However, the City of Andover reserves the right to request clarifications or corrections to proposals. Requests for clarifications or corrections by the City of Andover shall be in writing. Said requests for clarifications or corrections shall not alter the Vendor's price contained in the cost proposal. 2.9 General Instructions 2.9.1 Proposal Term: All Proposals must be valid for 90 days from the proposal submission date. 2.9.2 Late Submissions: Proposals received after the specified date and time for proposal submission will not be accepted. 2.9.3 Letter of Transmittal; The Letter of Transmittal should be a formal letter from the proposer prepared in standard business format. It should be brief, signed by a person who is authorized to commit the proposer organization to perform the work included in the proposal, and should identify all materials and enclosures being forwarded in response to the RFP. 2.9.4 Executive Summary: The Executive Summary of the Proposal shall be limited to three (3) single- spaced typewritten pages. The purpose of the Executive Summary is to provide a high -level description of the proposer's ability to meet the requirements of the RFP. 2.10 Proposal Format Proposers must submit proposals that are complete, thorough and accurate. Brochures and other similar material may be attached to the proposal. 2.10.1 Outline of Proposal: The Proposers must submit a narrative response to Part 4.0 of this RFP, "Specifications and Requirements." Responses shall be prefaced with the summary title and corresponding section number. 2.10.2 Proposers must submit a Narrative response or acknowledged agreement to Part 5 of this RFP, "Terms and Conditions." Responses shall be prefaced with the summary title and corresponding section number. 1.1 2.10.3 Appendices - the content is left to the Proposer's discretion, but should be limited to materials that will be helpful in describing the services proposed. 2.10.4 Qualifications of Proposer - Shall contain pertinent information relative to the firm's background, expertise and qualifications to accomplish all tasks set forth in this RFP. This section should include: • Identify the Assessment and Design Team, including the names, company employed with, qualifications, and the person's strengths or specialized experience. • A list of sub - consultants and their role. • Examples of related projects should be included. • A minimum of three references similar in size and scope, including name, address, contact, phone number. • Current client list. • New or innovative systems, products, or services recommended in past studies. • Ideas you have utilized in past studies, to minimize or reduce future maintenance and operational costs. • How your firm would gather information from stake holders during the needs assessment. • Proposals must be signed by an authorized representative of your firm. • Price proposal, hourly rates of all staff involved and all other costs including overhead, copying, travel, etc. 2.10.5 A detailed cost estimate and work plan for each task in Section 4.1 shall be identified. This work plan will be used as a scheduling and managing tool, as well as the basis for invoicing. The proposal shall be based on a "time and material deliverables" with an hourly rate and a not to exceed amount for each task based on the scope of services provided for this project. Also provide a total not to exceed cost summarized for all tasks. The not to exceed amount shall include reimburseables. 2.10.6 Compliance with RFP - This section should demonstrate the responder's understanding of the City's needs and how closely the submitted plan for services complies with the requirements of the RFP. 2.10.7 All proposals shall be bound and contained in a single volume. Proposals should be prepared to provide a straightforward, concise description of your firm's capabilities to satisfy the requirements of the RFP. You must also submit one electronic version of your proposal on a CD. 2.11 Exceptions to Format It is intended that this RFP describe the requirements and proposal format in sufficient detail to secure comparable proposals, recognizing that various proposer's approaches may vary widely. Proposals, which materially differ from the described format, may be rejected. All information requested must be submitted, or alternatively, a statement giving the rationale of the proposer 7 for not submitting requested information must be provided. The City of Andover may, if it deems it to be in its best interest, consider such statements in determining the responsiveness of the proposal. 2.12 Implied Requirements Products and services which are not specifically requested in this RFP, but which are necessary to provide the functional capabilities proposed by the proposer, must be included in the proposal. The proposer must include detailed information, including products, services, costs, and how it will affect the implementation in time, quality of service etc. PART 3.0 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS AND AWARD Award shall be made to the responsible and responsive proposer whose proposal is determined to be the most advantageous to the City of Andover taking into consideration of the (not necessarily in the order of importance or limited to): knowledge and experience, implementation requirements, corporate resources and local operating plan, cost, and references. 3.1 Process Overview Proposals will be examined to eliminate those, which are clearly non - responsive to stated requirements. Proposers should exercise particular care in reviewing the Proposal Format portion of this RFP. The detailed evaluation may result in one or more finalists. At this point, presentations may be requested of the proposers and negotiation will be carried out to finalize the award of the project. 3.2 Proposal Evaluation Factors A panel representing the City of Andover staff and the Andover Parks and Recreation Commission will evaluate proposals. Any response that takes exception to any mandatory items in this Proposal Process may be rejected and not considered. Proposals will be evaluated using the factors detailed below (not necessarily in any order of importance or limited to): a. A clearly demonstrated understanding of the work to be performed. b. A detailed timeline to accomplish the tasks outlined in the Scope of Services. c. Experience and qualifications of key personnel. d. The firm's record of experience on similar projects, including past performance with public entities. e. Proposal organization, clarity, conciseness and thoroughness. f. References. g. Financial Considerations. 3.4 Contract Development The City of Andover reserves the right to negotiate further with one or more responsible and responsive proposers. The content of the RFP and the successful proposer's proposal(s) will become an integral part of the contract, but may be modified by the provisions of the final 8 negotiated contract. By submission of proposals pursuant to this RFP, Proposer's acknowledge that they are amenable to the inclusion in a contract of any information provided either in response to this RFP or subsequently during the selection process. Further, all proposers, by submitting proposals, agree that they have read, are familiar with all the terms and conditions of the different documents making up the Contract Documents, and will abide by the terms and conditions thereof. The City of Andover has the right to use, as the City of Andover determines to be appropriate and necessary, any information, documents, and anything else developed pursuant to the RFP, the proposal and the contract. The successful proposal shall be incorporated into the resulting contract and shall be a matter of public record subject to the provisions of Minnesota law. The City of Andover shall have the right to use all system ideas, or adaptations of those ideas, contained in any proposal received in response to this RFP. Selection or rejection of the proposal shall not affect this right. 4.0 SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Project Overview — Development of a Master Plan for the Kelsey Round Lake Park to provide clear vision, direction, goals and strategies for the next 15 -20 years of operation. The final product Master Plan should include the following Tasks as a minimum: Tasks: A. Mapping and evaluation of the current condition and function of the park and physical features of the grounds. B. Concept and schematic drawings showing the existing and future trails planned. C. The plan will need to address the possible expansion of the existing park to include additional property around the perimeter of Round Lake itself to determine if it is feasible to acquire the necessary properties to have a park /open space /trail system around the lake. D. Assessment of a possible interpretive center which may include restrooms and a plaza in relation to the overall park, e.g. accessibility, way finding signage, and other park features and facilities. E. A staffing/volunteers evaluation with options must be provided if an interpretive center is needed. F. Concept and schematic drawings depicting the future planned interior features of the interpretive center including: future physical amenities, displays and exhibit spaces, work spaces, meeting spaces, restrooms, plaza and other features. G. Specific recommendations for providing displays and exhibits including educational topics, interactive features, themes, and concepts in the interpretive center. 0 H. Development of a capital improvements plan (CIP) including estimates for each improvement being identified in the CIP for Kelsey Round Lake Park. I. Development of a programming services and marketing framework for the interpretive center including recommendations on programs, general visits, equipment rental (such as cross country skiing), room rental, social media, and other opportunities for the center. J. Development of a staffing and volunteer framework plan to meet future goals, including support services of the Parks Maintenance Department, e.g. maintenance /operations. K. An assessment or recommendation of Kelsey Round Lake Park as to how to promote the park (social media and other). L. Attend up to four meetings with City staff and up to 4 meetings with the Andover Park Commission and /or City Council is anticipated. 4.2 SUB CONSULTANT MANAGEMENT The vendor shall identify all sub consultants to be utilized in the performance of this contract, including the type /amount of work /services they will be providing. If Sub consultants are used, the City of Andover will consider the proposing vendor to be the Prime Consultant and to be solely responsible in all contractual matters, including payment of any and all charges resulting from such sub - Consultant arrangements. The Prime Consultant will be fully responsible for the acts, errors, and omissions of the Sub - Consultant. The successful respondent shall cause appropriate provision of its proposal to be inserted in all subcontracts ensuing to assure fulfillment of all contractual provisions by sub consultants. The consultant shall be responsible for the management of all subcontracted personnel. The consultant shall provide the City with its policies and procedures for sub consultant management including the following: • Consultant's level of experience with the sub consultant(s). • Quality control measures. PART 5.0 TERMS AND CONDITIONS 5.1 Contract for Services The Contract resulting from this RFP shall be subject to the terms and conditions as provided in the attached sample Contract for Services, Exhibit A. Please acknowledge agreement with these terms and conditions in your proposal. 5.2 Insurance Requirements of Consultant The Vendor agrees to obtain and to maintain insurance as required in the attached document (Insurance Requirements) Exhibit B. Certificate of Insurance. 10 'WELCOME TO KELSEY- ROUND LAKE PARK City of Andover Minnesota 1) Park hours are 6:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. everyday. 2) All trails are open for biking arid hiking and when snow cover permits, crosscounfry skiing. Extra caution must be exercised while using the multi - purpose trails. 3) All skiers are required to have a current Minnesota State Ski Pass before skiing these trails. The ski trails are not groomed. 4) Alcohol, firearms, motorized vehicles and obscene language are not permitted. Pets must be kept on a leash or under control at e)1 times. 153RD AVE ' /� ll 151.17'AVt I 149THAVENUE I -.. p�� IJJTHLN pelhYwry / I Paeany I _ —� - -. -.- P>3dw.y - ROUND LAKE Park Features: 4ke Puk Bmnduy ® W,roM W land . Bea R�.d lake Trail Type: jN 9ituminaus I MP ar ,mv,/w, cyy„m.. N br•: cad,ar..r�.n.ar au „s „m eupmw rMl 10D 0 100 600 600 B00 Kelsy Park Project Introduction ZINFO F12am MCtOer PIM Kelsey Park is located along the western and northwestern boarders of Round Lake in Andover, Minnesota. This one hundred And sixty -acre piece of land was a center of brick production in the mid- 1800's under a man whose surname was Kelsey. clay was removed from 2 sites on the land, shaped into bricks and baked in kilns. The kilns were fired by oak trees on the land. The bricks were then carried to the city of Anoka to the railroad by horse and buggy. The Kelsey Brick Company prospered until a proposal for a railroad shuttle between Andover and Anoka was defeated and the price of brick dropped. it closed in the early 1900's leaving only open pits and the Kelsey house as evidence of the brick production. The Kelsey house, built of the yellow Kelsey brick, is now deemed a historical site. It is located just one half mile from the proposed Kelsey Park. The property was bought by Dr. Ghostley, who farmed the land. He also had a large chicken breeding operation and in 25 years had doubled the size of the Leghorn chickens egg while only In-. creasing the chicken size by one -half! The land also once contained Indian burial grounds that were prevented by law from excavation. The law however, did not for- bid farming over the sites and they have since been plowed under. 0 Andover City presently owns 40 acres of the proposed park. It is undeveloped and designated as park land. The other 120 acres is owned by 3 different developers. Andover City is in the process of acquiring that land from the developers through a community land grant. The park was designed in. answer to two expressed needs; the first being that Andover needs well developed park lands. The city owns many small pieces of land (1/4 to 1/2 of various blocks) within the city, but none are developed for multi purpose use. Even with the spacious yards of the sprouting developments, there are no established playgrounds, picnic areas or ballfields within the city limits. The present need for a developed park is increasing with the growing population of the Pound Lake area. The second reason for a park is an expressed desire to preserve the history and heritage of this part of Anoka County. This includes the clay pits, one which is located inside the park boundaries. They are an excellent opportunity for PEap1C, to discover the history of the land. Along with conserving the history and heritage, we propose to incorporate as much of the wildlife that are presently existing by the lake shores. To be consistent with these needs, the basic plan, is to design a park which will accommodate the needs of the entire community but caters specifically to the local residents. C: t �Ab2- a-r z x yr x: 1N7 r ry r f' 1 '1111. f' Y i ••w '�i�'I G MW r ,: «y rwrYiYlNYiI, '.k wl"mlww t � � YI�rIY11RYYl � ^\ `\ 111 •( t 3S> '..'w \,, rrYwnYlln�,al y'',�♦ ;' a" 14. •o••R \ �'� ryl0lam pwWlY llv i / 3 y �t�F •rte._ a"alml v+ls., _''. ; -hy t ih f1A"tlbl x yr x: 1N7 r ry r f' 1 '1111. f' Y i ••w '�i�'I `\ 111 •( t _ �t�F •rte._ a"alml v+ls., _''. ; x yr x: 1N7 r ry r f' " 11 ",,', ` ♦ l! a �i / -. - -� — ^ -__ � � ; I •. � - i, 'r: \ lore ule . �.. ,\\ \, \\ iy v LAKb81DE'iWWrs 6 ` I�♦ '__ - i_. , Y�� YY N"\\, ",` �'"�_i� -��1 . /'-"fir +�� -'•• �'. }''iii }` I _•/ ��' �.I. !� ; ^� � y� ..� � _ �'i i l� �Il i i;rr -, ,:.v ' - �:� _ � _^ ::\ •wa y \,�`•` \�. ♦• Y ,___ ,` fJJr � 1• , % ' I l f�' � � ' ' CYM141➢- � ~, l � n itiµ � „ ��r 1 ,, 5'ryl�ry.� '` ♦1 \ ♦ ♦` r i • Y ♦ 1, (, / ,�'�:IYIUIr..Y , '°• /` ''+•i /' � s ' 1 �J rrlYYwo.e,lrwl. i ,•-J ( ' ,= J � _� � I / 1 ;/ /" �. /: J' �'�___^�' ' ' 'ir JJ / /. '`1 • \• i Jam, .. t�j I I i � i � `�\ � I } ri � , � /if, . �, i i - � \r'- __ mn:we ' r G -, �'' i N f r / ` • \\ `" // ;•, Ili i � i'� �' I Ji: + / 1 I • � \IItlMPOIM .- ,...� n , � }l/`_ i I•I � ♦ " -'� ♦ ♦- ,z `; rl I :� I I. ^ ^ ♦I .� ./ � "." / j ... - _�Sq -b!4 ti•r.•�':i+��" _____ ' i :W \ � - /:� ^`�\ y c , I � ' 1 \\ .�Ir.p10 ♦ /'� r , i, i', 1 � \ \" `� `_ / l♦ �aa; • \ Y -/ /' :::p -_ Mo _ \ 1 __\ , 1 � 11 r,. i. r ..aCr %' R •J ',1' 'w � \ 11' , ',� -;_. �, ?_ _ _' ' i ii \ :ice �1 = 1s_ -:_ rw•�r -_ �` -�i•' ___ -_ \ _ t.t♦ ( \I� fl /f 6� _ \ '_� ♦ \mil' T 1 r. ill`♦ " 1 `� '\ J t< _ i 4. araram .1Yi"YY Jr' y.- - MliS�t PLAN KELSEY - ROUND LAKE PARK \ L ,!, _ ANDOVER MIlVNFSOTAy ��• � •�.� e OYC V.M YAK YN .-' Vn � r ej I 4 I i " 11 ",,', ` ♦ l! a �i / -. - -� — ^ -__ � � ; I •. � - i, 'r: \ lore ule . �.. ,\\ \, \\ iy v LAKb81DE'iWWrs 6 ` I�♦ '__ - i_. , Y�� YY N"\\, ",` �'"�_i� -��1 . /'-"fir +�� -'•• �'. }''iii }` I _•/ ��' �.I. !� ; ^� � y� ..� � _ �'i i l� �Il i i;rr -, ,:.v ' - �:� _ � _^ ::\ •wa y \,�`•` \�. ♦• Y ,___ ,` fJJr � 1• , % ' I l f�' � � ' ' CYM141➢- � ~, l � n itiµ � „ ��r 1 ,, 5'ryl�ry.� '` ♦1 \ ♦ ♦` r i • Y ♦ 1, (, / ,�'�:IYIUIr..Y , '°• /` ''+•i /' � s ' 1 �J rrlYYwo.e,lrwl. i ,•-J ( ' ,= J � _� � I / 1 ;/ /" �. /: J' �'�___^�' ' ' 'ir JJ / /. '`1 • \• i Jam, .. t�j I I i � i � `�\ � I } ri � , � /if, . �, i i - � \r'- __ mn:we ' r G -, �'' i N f r / ` • \\ `" // ;•, Ili i � i'� �' I Ji: + / 1 I • � \IItlMPOIM .- ,...� n , � }l/`_ i I•I � ♦ " -'� ♦ ♦- ,z `; rl I :� I I. ^ ^ ♦I .� ./ � "." / j ... - _�Sq -b!4 ti•r.•�':i+��" _____ ' i :W \ � - /:� ^`�\ y c , I � ' 1 \\ .�Ir.p10 ♦ /'� r , i, i', 1 � \ \" `� `_ / l♦ �aa; • \ Y -/ /' :::p -_ Mo _ \ 1 __\ , 1 � 11 r,. i. r ..aCr %' R •J ',1' 'w � \ 11' , ',� -;_. �, ?_ _ _' ' i ii \ :ice �1 = 1s_ -:_ rw•�r -_ �` -�i•' ___ -_ \ _ t.t♦ ( \I� fl /f 6� _ \ '_� ♦ \mil' T 1 r. ill`♦ " 1 `� '\ J t< _ i 4. araram .1Yi"YY Jr' y.- - MliS�t PLAN KELSEY - ROUND LAKE PARK \ L ,!, _ ANDOVER MIlVNFSOTAy ��• � •�.� e OYC V.M YAK YN .-' Vn � r ej I 4 I /-e /r.? _ /2o u. 41V1 �, The history of the land in and around Round Lake is very unique. i Pa/ K Round Lake was formed by a glacier. It has no inlet or outlet into any r Ier or stream. The lake is relatively large, but quite shall w, so it should not be used for such types of activities as Ovate skiing, surfboarding or speedboating. This type of use would literally.destroy a great deal of the beauty and usefulness of the lake area. It is.not a typical Minnesota fishing lake. Rather,.it is one of the finest waterfowl and wildlife habitat.lakes.in central Minnesota. Round Lake and the area surrounding it are ideally suited to such outdoor activities as canoeing, cross - country skiing, sliding, birdwatching and hiking. Because the lake is shallow there is an abundance of nesting ducks - and it is one of the southernmost lakes with nesting Loons. In the fall the lake is heavily used by migrating waterfowl, including ducks, geese, and swans. Round Lake apparently is situated along a major migration flyway for the white swans. As a result, at times during some migration seasons there are hundreds of swans nesting on the water at one time. For many centuries this area was home to the buffalo. This has been evidenced by buffalo wallows and many fossils, including the prehistoric mastodon. As a result of the richness of the wildlife and area also served as home to different Indian tribes, including the Sioux and the Chippewa Near the lake was an Indian burial ground which resulted from a famous 1853 battle between the Sioux and Chippewa tribes. Just to the west of the lake is an old clay pit. This clay was used by the Indians for making pottery and pipes. This same msterial was later used for the manufacture of the yellow brick for construction of homes and other buildings. Many of these structures are still in use today including several homes, stores on Main Street in Anoka, and the inside walls of the old Minneapolis courthouse. The area continues to have an abundance of wildlife - both animals and birds - including whitetail deer, fox, mink, muskrat, various types of waterfowl mentioned above, pheasants, ruffed grouse, and many more. If you enjoy the outdoors, you will find Round Lake a special place to live. 0 t X ,V yy I it X. ' R.: 5•t, � f.,]{. _i(r .' �i f5C ev Wfl.Vf. "h .r (h a 6F 4 d I � • .yw � Y '� �_ pia I s �, s _Y. �_• 1 a v a r i •Y � A r 3„ fit ''e, a > * v Legend Parka NWI2013 ti g" Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested /Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond aF' K Riverine Lake F Demo, all 0 -7 J 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV To: Mayor & City Council CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator "' v David D. Berkowitz, Director of bhc rks /City Engineer From: Todd J. Haas, Assistant Public Works (D Subject: Discuss Current 2015 -2019 CIP and Project Goals of the City Council -- Engineering Date: January 27, 2015 The City Council is requested to discuss the current 2015 -2019 Park Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and project goals of the City Council as requested by the Park and Recreation Commission. DISCUSSION Attached is the approved 2015 -2019 Park CIP for your review. Before the Park Commission begins working on the 2016 -2020 CIP the Commission would like to hear from the City Council on their thoughts on future projects and/or improvements (for example Pine Hills North). Also attached are the City Council/Park Commission workshop meeting minutes of May 27, 2014 for your review of direction provided last year. ACTION REQUESTED No action is required. Respectfully su witted, Todd J. Haas Cc: Park and Recreation Commission Members I* Department Project# Priority 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Fire St #2 Addition with additional land purchase 18- 41900 -01 2 835,000 835,000 G.O. Band Capldl EWPment Reserve 15,800 mom 875XW Addition to Storage Building & Vehicle Maint Shop 19. 41900 -01 1 3,200,000 3,200,000 GO.BOnd Replace /Repair Major Paris Projects - Various Parks 15- 45000 -02 3204000 3200&0 Attached Storage Building 19-41900-02 1 320,000 320,000 G0.8ard P;w*Da0GW nFads 115,000 324WO 3299W Relocate Fuel Station vd Canopy 19-41900-03 2 320,000 320,0.70 GO. Bone ParkDediW&WFunds 50,000 talon 324000 Pedestrian Tunnel Under Crosstown Blvd, 1941900-04 1 450,000 450000 GO.8w1d Crooked Lake School Hockey Rink 1545001 -06 MOW 45800 Facility Management Total Information Technolo Microsoft DataCenter & CAL's License 15 -01420 -01 tr4aWEq*1- #8esena 865,000 Microsoft Office Upgrade 15.41420-02 Capldl EWPment Reserve 15,800 Information Technolm Total 15,OW Park & Rec - Operations 75,0.70 Replace/Repair Play Structures - Various Parks 15- 45000-01 CalwEgtdppnest Reserve 20,000 Replace /Repair Major Paris Projects - Various Parks 15- 45000 -02 C4%W EWprwrf Reserve 20000 Park & Rec - Operations Total 2a0W Park & Rec - Projects 15,000 Annual Miscellaneous Park Projects 1545001 -01 P;w*Da0GW nFads 115,000 Irrigation Projects - Small Parks 15- 45001 -02 PantDedaaBdiFmds 254000 Pine Hills IoM - Phase II 15-45001-03 CalWW Equipment Reserve Oaixdmn 34070 ParkDediW&WFunds 50,000 Kelsey Round Lake Park Master Plan 1545001 -04 ParkD8&cW Fur,& 250,000 Fencing Upgrades - Ballfeld Safety Initiatives 1"5001 -05 Pa* DedraffunFleds 54OW. Crooked Lake School Hockey Rink 1545001 -06 Caplal Egdpnad R s- 25,000 Parks ftwis Lary 25,000 City Campus Rinks - Pave Hockey Pink & Parking Lot 18- 45001 -01 Pant0edcadonFUnds AoW Langseth Park Trail Improvement 1945001 -01 PrkDedicavan Fads 10£800 For Meadows Park - Renovation 194001 -02 PnkDed/fadan Furds 75,000 63,000 165,000 440,000 865,000 4,355,000 $509000 1 15,000 15,800 15,007 15,OW 1100 75,0.70 15000 20,000. 20,000 20,000 20,000 War 2 15,000 20000 24W8 2a0W 240@0 15,000 14tao 400,000 100,000 115,000 450,000 15,(110 30,000 254000 34070 1 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 54000 54000 54090 54OW. 548W 2549W 1 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 125,000 25,OW AoW 25W AAW X010 10£800 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 37AOW 1 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000 151000 15,800 15,007 15,OW 1100 740W 1 20,000 20,000. 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,007 14000 20000 24W8 2a0W 240@0 1alaaa 1 60,000 400,000 100,000 115,000 450,000 1,125,000 254000 2WdW 1 &000 Al same 124007 115&0 458800 744OW 1 50,000 54000 5400 54008 1 25,000 20000 ?rams 240LV 1 60,000 64000 54WO 5ama 140188 14000 1 150,000 150,0.70 1sao0 154000 1 20,000 20,001 240W 24000 1 200,000 20,0007 200,000 20400 18 Capital Plan City of Andover, MN Project# 15- 45001 -01 Project Name Annual Miscellaneous Park Projects 0 2015 thru 2019 Type Improvement Department Park & Rec - Projects Useful Life Unassigned Contact Asst.Public Works Director Category Park Improvements Priority 1 -High This is for unforeseen or requested miscellaneous projects that may arise during the year, requested by the public, staff City Council or the Park and Recreation Commission each year. Justification This gives flexibility to the City to do certain small -sized projects that may be warranted; for example, purchase soccer goals. This funding has been recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission. Expenditures 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Imnr^% rn l 1CMn 1C M0 1Cln. IC /VYI 4. nnn 79N Total 15,000 UAW 15,000 15,W0 15,000 75,000 Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total D., n.Ain Nl C.m . 1. nnn 1L nnn 1CnM 1C 11nn 1C nM 9C Mn Total 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 16,000 75,000 52 Capital Plan ON of Andover_ MN 2015 thru 2019 0 most of the City parks have sandy soils, irrigation is pretty much the only way to keep the grass green vise the area will tam to dirt and will be unsightly. Expenditures 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Improvement _ 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 Total 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Park Dedica0on Funds 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 Total 20,000 20,000 20,00 20,000 20,000 100A00 53 Capital Plan City of Andover, MN Project# 15- 45001 -03 Project Name Pine Hills North -Phase II Type Improvement Useful Life 20 Years Category Improvements 2015 thru 2019 Department Park & Rec - Projects Contact Asst.Public Works Director Priority 1 -High 'the new sporting complex will include a playground and bathroom enclosures (2015 - $60k), parking lots (2016 - $400k), a storage 1017 - $100k), well and septic system (2018 - $115k) and constructing a multi- purpose building (2019 - $450k). The land was in 2012. The fields were graded, irrigated and seeded in 2013. Other potential Phase H improvements would include trails, a and pedestrian bridges, nature trails, gazebo, and a few other amenities. will be comolete as to the growth of soccer, football, and lacrosse; an additional sports complex is necessary to keep up Lot over -used and allows those fields additional time to recover between games and practices. 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total 60,000 400.000 100,000 115,000 450,000 1,125,000 TOW 60,000 400,000 100,000 115,000 450.000 1,12500 Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Capital Equipment Reserve 280,000 280,000 Donations 100,000 - 100,000 Park Dedication Funds 60,000 120,000 115,000 450,000 745,000 Total 60,060 460,006 100,066 115,066 450A00 1,126,060 will put additional burdens on ELI Capital Plan 2015 thru 2019 City of Andover, MN Project n 15_45001 -04 Project Name Kelsey Round Lake Park Master Plan Type Improvement Department Park&Rec - Projects Useful Life Contact Asst.Public Works Director Category Park Improvements Priority I -High e are future opportunities for the park such as trail development, prairie reatomtir landscaping; it has been recommended to hire an independent consultant to help what future improvements should be has been awhile since new improvements have been made to the park. With that in mind, the Park Commission has determined it the best interest of the city to hive an independent consultant to evaluate options for future development of the park. 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Planning /Design 50,000 50,000 Total 50.000 _ 5%w Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Parr Dedication Funds 50,000 50,000 Total 50.000 50,000 56 0 Capital Plan City of Andover, MN Project s 15- 45001 -05 Project Name Fencing Upgrades - Ballfield Safety Initiatives Type Improvement Useful Life 15 Years Category Improvements 2015 thru 2019 Department Park &Fe - Projects Contact Asst.Public Works Director Priority 1- High J to help protect players and spectators at the three parks to 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Total M000 2s,00o Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Park Dedication Funds 25,000 25,000 Total 25,000 25,000 58 Capital Plan City of Andover, MN (Project# 15- 45001 -06 Project Name Crooked Lake School Hockey Rink Type Improvement Useful Life 15 Years Category Improvements 2015 thru 2019 Department Park & Rec - Projects Contact Asst.Pubiic Works Director Priority 1 -High south side of warming house to to the condition of the existing hockey rink and issues that do exist for the free skating, the hog and the free skate rink is to be relocated from the south of the warming house to the north side 2015 2016 2017 2018 s recommended to be ming house. 2019 Total Total 601000 60,000 Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Capital Equipment Reserve 50,000 50,000 Parks Projects Levy 10,000 10,000 Total 60.000 601000 annual maintenance. 62 ■ Capital Plan City of Andover, MN Project# 15- 45001 -07 Project Name Langseth Park Trail Improvement Type Improvement Useful Life 20 Years Category Improvements a bituminus trail from 175th Lane to 2015 thru 2019 Department Park & Rex: - Projects Contact Asst.Public Works Director Priority 1 -High tructing a new trail from 175th Lane NW to Langseth park will allow for a safer access from the neighborhood to the north to the park . rwise without a direct connection to the park, residents would have to access around the neighborhood along Round Lake Blvd and then along 174th Lace NW. Round Lake Blvd does not currently have a shoulder to walk or bike on. 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Total 20.000 20,0011 Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Park Dedleation Funds 20,000 20,000 annual maintenance. Total 20,000 24000 64 Capital Plan City of Andnver_ MN 2015 thru 2019 C�D() he rinks allows hockey teams or individuals to take advantage of having a hard surface to work on various he allows it. Also, providing a hard surface will allow the rinks to be ready earlier in the winter for ice skating. Expenditures 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Improvement 150,000 150,000 Total 150,000 150000 Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Park Dedication Funds - 150,000 150,000 TOW 150,000 150,060 66 Capital Plan City of Andover, MN 2015 thru 2019 D For the sin of this park, it is underutilized. Due to the condition of the existing field and the lack of a good playing surface, the field needs to be upgraded. An additional smaller practice field adjacent to the full size field will help the association programs so that they have a place to practice. In some cases, the soccer association may be able to use the smaller field for games since their highest concentration of players in their oroAram are voun¢er aced Wavers. 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Total 200,000 200.000 Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Total 200,000 200,00 68 Projected Sources of Revenue Park Dedication Fee - Residential Units Park Dedication Fee - Residential (E2,8991una) Park Dedication Fee - Commercial Donation! Contribution Capital Projects Levy - Park Improvements Total Revenues Available Prole ted Commitments Hidden Creek North Pak - Tower Rental Rose Pak- Reconstruction Prairie Kroll Pak - Pave Parking Lots WayFinding Sigre/Exerdse Stations Irrigation Project - Smell Kelsey Round Lake Pak Master Plan Fencing Upgrade& - Ballfald Safety Initiatives Crooked Lake School Hockey Rink - Pine Hills North - Phase II Playground 5 Enclosures Parking Lot W Curb (3D% Pak Dedication) Storage Building (Donations) Septic 8 Wen Multi- Purpose Building City Campus Hockey Rinks - Pave rinks & parking lot Langseth Park Tra9 Improvement Fox Meadows- Reconstruction Annual Miscellaneous Projects Total Commitments Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures CITY OF ANDOVER Park Improvement Fund Projected Fund Balance 2014 2016 2016 2017 2018 2019 TOTALS So 5D 50 25 25 E 95,211 E 144,950 E 144,950 E 144,950 E 72,475 E 72,475 E 675,011 61,173 - - - - - 61,173 - - - 100,000 - - 100,000 60,907 61,500 61,500 61,500 61,500 61,500 368,407 217,291 206,460 206A60 306AN 133,976 133,976 1,204,691 2,720 2,729 200,000 200,000 141,195 141,195 11,360 11,360 26,653 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 126,653 50,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 60,000 120,000 120,000 100,000 100,000 115,000 115,000 450,000 450,000 150,D00 150,000 20.000 20,000 200,000 200,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 396,937 180,000 156,000 135,000 300,000 705,000 1,871,937 (179,646) 26A60 61AN 171 AN (166,025) (671.026) Fund Balance as of December 31, 2013 343,151 Fiord Balance Brought Foneard 163,505 189,955 241,405 412,855 246,830 Ending Fund Balance" S 163,605 { 189,956 E 241A06 { 412,886 E 246,838 $ 1320.196) "Target - $0.000 to create a contingency for any project overages. 13 © Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes — May 27, 2014 Page 4 Councilmember Knight wondered if they could get some pamphlets made up for the Fun Fest regarding the open space in the City. Mr. Carlberg stated they will do that again, Councilmember Trude wondered if in the future the Open Space and Park and Recreation Commissions would want to discuss possible joint allocation of funds rather than a bond referendum. She noted Blaine does this. Mr. Dickinson stated they would need to have a study done that would indicate they would have the ability to accept those funds and they would still need to meet a nexus test, this has to be computation and based on values. Park Commission Chair Butler stated they have a lot of passive park land in the City which has no use. JOINT MEETING 97TH PARK AND RECREA TION COMMISSION Discuss the Pronosed 2015 — 2019 CIP: Pine hills North Facility Chair Butler stated the last meeting they had there was discussion that the property was to be split into two areas, so some future improvements could be funded through park dedication fees. His main concern is that the parking lot for the ball field will need to be paved at some time, Q because it will be a highly used ball field and there will be a lot of maintenance involved with this. Chair Butler stated they have in their CIP proposal for 2015 -2019, some funds to work through the west side of Pine Hills North. He reviewed the proposed improvements and funding for it. Councilmember Knight stated this will be a go to place and they need to start thinking about some type of a building. Chair Butler stated they will need to discuss this with the associations for possible contributions. Councilmember Howard asked what improvement the $100,000 was earmarked for in the year 2015 for Pine Hills North. Chair Butler indicated they have not decided what the $100,000 would go toward. Either building construction or play equipment. Councilmember Howard thought that was a good idea. Mayor Gamache thought it was good to work on this park as much as they can to get it done. Chair Butler stated they would like to irrigate some more parks over the next five years. Possible Roller Blade Rink at the City Hockey Rink Complex ® Chair Butler reviewed possible ideas of the types of activities to place in the parks. He noted they could install a roller blade rink along with pickle ball courts. Councilmember Trude thought that was a great idea and would allow for year round use of the rinks. (9) © Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes — May 27, 2014 Page 5 Councilmember Bukkila asked if it is such a draw that it will be worth the $150,000 or would they be able to take the existing tennis courts and split the courts to accommodate pickle ball courts. Chair Butler stated they cannot realistically make tennis courts both types of courts because it involves movement of nets for each type of sport. Councilmember Bukkila thought these could be made as self - adjusting courts. Mayor Gamache agreed and noted it has been done in Coon Rapids. Councilmember Trude liked the idea of adding amenities that more people will use besides just the play equipment. Councilmember Bukkila stated they have a lot of projects going on and she would like to contain them to a few different parks. Councilmember Knight stated a lot of the children parks in the City are not being used so he thought there should be more amenities for all ages. Councilmember Bukkila was thinking the $150,000 for the City Campus hockey rinks could go to Pine Hills North Park or another park that has needs. Fox Meadows Park Redevelopment Chair Butler stated they left this in the CIP plan but moved it out to 2019 because they have other items that have more priority than this park. Ball Field Safety Initiatives and Fencing Upgrades Chair Butler stated they have placed $25,000 in the CIP for three parks to put fencing in front of the benches. The Commission thought this was a safety issue and should be done. Splash Pad Chair Butler stated a splash pad is listed in the CIP but no money was placed for it. He thought the best place for this would be at the Community Center/YMCA where there is already a water amenity. Councilmember Bukkila stated when this was initially discussed it was indicated to place this at Pine Hills North Park because it is a regional attraction. She did not know what the cost will be but she would prefer it to be in that park. Commissioner Shane Stenzel stated these are very popular. The reason the Community Center/YMCA site was picked is because of amenities already there and what is involved with the water reclamation. He noted they could also look at putting it in Pine Hills North Park. Councilmember Trude thought it might be a good idea to partner with the YMCA initially and then possibly put one into a park. Councilmember Trude stated Purple Park is a great park that is used by a lot of people. She thought it made sense to partner with someone to build this. Councilmember Bukkila indicated she would like to see a cost analysis for this. 15 O Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes —May 27, 2014 Page 6 Kelsey Round Lake Park Chair Butler stated they started talking about a Kelsey Round Lake master plan and what they might want to do with the park in the future. Commissioner Shane Stenzel reviewed the possibilities of reconstruction of the park. He thought they should look at the improvements around the lake as a 25 to 30 year plan. They should look at using the entire park as open area with trails and amenities and they could apply for State Legacy dollars to help fund. Councilmember Trude thought it would be nice to be able to get an easement to get a looped trail through the area. There was discussion regarding how the City could obtain the land to make a looped trail around . the lake. Councilmember Trude liked that the Commission is looking forward for improvements. The Council indicated they liked the direction of the CIP. Councilmember Bukkila stated she received a complaint from a resident regarding the ball field usage during the rain storms and she asked that staff consider not leaving the closing of the fields in the hands of the organizations anymore because they do not have to maintain the fields and it is expensive to repair the fields. She did not want staff to go out the next day and do damage repair on the fields. Mr. Haas stated he will send out an email to the associations reminding them about this. Councilmember Bukkila stated she wanted the City to make the decision on when a field cannot be used, not just a warning. Chair Butler suggested the Commission discuss this with City staff for a solution. Mayor Gamache stated on Pine Hills North, because the parking lot is basically on the City side he wanted the Council to consider putting in an additional $300,000 or more towards getting the parking lot done. He would Iike to see that the major focus over the next five years be to get the Pine Hills North Park done. Crooked Lake School Elementary School Hockey Rink Chair Butler reviewed the Crooked Lake School Elementary School hockey rink reconstruction plan. ® Councilmember Trude thought this would be a park maintenance issue and would the Commission want to make improvements for this rather than installing new play equipment for one year. Councilmember Bukkila stated the Council already discussed this and she thought they came up with a great plan for a reduced rink and other changes. I� © Andover City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes — May 27, 2014 Page 7 There was discussion between the Council and Commission regarding possible changes to the ice rink. Chair Butler thought they could discuss this at a Commission meeting and bring back their recommendations to the Council. Mr. Berkowitz stated their system is set up to replace play equipment when it is needed and he would hate to alter that plan in any way. Chair Butler stated the Lions Park play equipment is in need of replacement but they are deferring that project until the road project is done. He hoped the Council could find some maintenance dollars in their budget in order to replace the boards on the hockey rink. Mr. Berkowitz stated he will be requesting an additional $55,000 be added to the Parks Maintenance Budget for repairs of the hockey rink. Mr. Dickinson indicated this is a one -time expenditure and should come from a Capital Fund. The City Council recessed at 8:05 p.m. © The City Council reconvened at 8:12 p.m. UPDATE OF DITCH 6 & 71(ATLAS 14) STUDY /13-40 Mr. Berkowitz explained Todd Shoemaker from Wenck Associates, Inc. and Suzanne Juwanie of the DNR, will provide an update to the City Council regarding the ditch study. Ms. Juwanie explained the approach the DNR is taking on the new data. Councilmember Bukkila asked if this information has been made public yet. Mr. Berkowitz indicated it has not because the study has just been completed. The City will need to inform the residents affected by the changes. Mr. Berkowitz stated they will have Mr. Shoemaker look at what structures are impacted and what structures are not impacted and then they will send a letter to the residents that have been added to the floodway to inform them of the change. DISCUSS WARD LAKE DRIVE NW STORM SEWER113 -44 Mr. Berkowitz explained storm sewer improvements on Ward Lake Drive NW have been requested from the property owner at 17707 Ward Lake Drive NW. © Mr. Berkowitz reviewed the various options with the Council. Mr. Berkowitz stated the City could develop a pond where the water would be contained but they would have to obtain some easement. This would provide the required treatment of the water AC I T Y 0 F N b 06 VVE9 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV To: Mayor & City Council CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrat David D. Berkowitz, Director of b11 Works/City Engineer From: Todd J. Haas, Assistant Public Works Director Subject: Update on Storm Water Plan/13- 27/3'a Generation Surface Water Management Plan — Engineering Date: January 27, 2015 INTRODUCTION This is an update to the City Council regarding the Local Surface Water Management Draft Plan that has been completed by HydroMethods, engineering consultant. DISCUSSION The draft plan is ready to send out for public comment and to agencies including but not limited to the Coon Creek Watershed District, the Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization, surrounding communities and others. A copy of the plan is attached with this item. The draft plan establishes standards for storm water runoff management, erosion control, floodplain management, storm water treatment, wetland management, water quality and groundwater. This plan is an important document for the City, its residents, developers and businesses as it outlines goals and policies relating to water resources issues. The plan also identifies an implementation program to address items in the plan. One bigger component of the plan is public education and what residents can do to promote cleaner water. A hard copy of the plan is available in the Engineering Department. A representative from HydroMethods will be at the meeting to provide a short presentation of the draft plan and will be available to answer questions. If there are comments received from the public and/or agencies, the City will need to address them in the plan and/or provide a written response to each item. The final plan will be before the City Council for formal approval in July. BUDGET IMPACT The funding to prepare the plan is from the Storm Sewer Utility Fund. ACTION REQUESTED This item is for discussion and comment. No action is required. Respectfully submitted, Todd J. Haas Attachment: Draft 3`s Generation Surface Water Management Plan Cc: Kent Brander, HydroMethods (copy sent by e-mail) Third Generation Surface Water Management Plan City Project #13 -27 January 2015 �HYDROMETHC water resources engine 1551 Livingston Ave. Ste. 104 West St. Paul, MN 55118 763.210.5713 1 www.hydromethods . c CITY OF ANDOVER'S THIRD GENERATION SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN JANUARY 2015 Prepared By: City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd. NW Andover, MN 55304 (763) 755 -5100 CERTIFICATION Hydromethods 1551 Livingston Ave. Ste. 104 West St. Paul, MN 55118 (763) 210 -5713 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. Print Name: hWT E, 4A00, Print Name: Signature: [ c C� Signature: Date: SAN, 20, TO %5 Date: License #: q9 5-7 8 License #: Organization: 1Ay0KoKMi0rjS Organization: Title: PPtJr-QAL CNGWEM Title: City of Andover SWMP Page I I J TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 I NTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ ..............................1 1.1 PURPOSE ..... _ .......... _ .......... .. .......... _ ..................................................................... .. ...................................................... _ ............... _ 1 1.2 DOCUMENT DETAI LS ..................... .. ................. _ ................................................................... _ ... _ ... .. .......................... ................. 1 1.3 CONTACT INFORMATION ... _ .......... _............. _ ............................................................ _ .... _ ... ................... ............................. ..... 1 1.4 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY .... _ .......... _ .................. .. .......... _ .......................... .. ...................... ..................... _ .... _._ ......................... 2 1.5 COMPLIANCE DETAIL.._ ................................ _ ......................... _ ........................... _ ...................................................... _ .......... _ ... 2 1.6 AMENDMENT PROCEDURES... ............... .................................................................. .............. ..... ..... ................ _ ......... _ ........ 4 2 WATER RESOURCE RELATED AGREEMENTS .. .......... ... ....................... ............ ..... ................... .......... . .. ............ ..... .......... S 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.. ..... ... ...................................................................................................._.......... .......e......................6 3.1 OVERVIEW ........................ ............................. ..... .......................... ............................ ...................... ....................................... 6 3.2 SECTION SUMMARIES..._ .........................._..._.............._...._................................................._..................... .........._...................6 4 LAND AND WATER RESOURCE I NVENTORY ........................................................................................... ..............................7 4.1 PRECIPITATION.... ......................_........._..._......................................_....................._....................._........... ........_.........._...._.....7 4.2 SURFACE WATER RESOURCES DATA._ .........................._....__........................................._........................ ........................._....9 4.2.1 Public Waters and Public Ditch Systems ............................................... _ .... _ ........................... .. ................................ 9 4.2.2 National Wetlands i nventory ................................................................................._................... ..._..._...._..._.............9 4.2.3 Functional Values Inventory / Approach ............ _ .................................................................... ................_.............9 4.2.4 Hydrologic Characteristics.._ ..................... _ ... .. ............... _ ..................... .. ..................... _ ..................... _ ... ........... ........ 9 4.2.5 Stormwater Management System ............................... _..............._.........._...._....................._... ......_......................10 4.2.6 Flood Levels and Peak Discharges ...................... ......... ....................... .................. ............... .... ...... .......... ........... 10 4.2.7 Known Flooding Problem Areas ...................................... _ ............................ .. .................... _ ............... _ ......... _ .......... 10 4.2.8 Existing PIS Information ....... ... ... _. ................................................ _ .............................. _ ...... ............................... ... 10 4.2.9 Water Quality Data and Related Information .............................. _ ........... .. ......... _ ........................... _ ................... 11 4.2.10 Surface Water Monitoring Sites ......................................................................._........._........... _.............._.............11 4.2.11 Shoreland Ordinance_ ..................................... ». ........... .. .................... _ ...................... .. .......................... _ ................ _11 4.2.12 Surface Water Appropriations ( MnDNR) ....... _ ....................................... _ ... _ ................................. _ .... ..... ...... 11 4.3 GROUNDWATER RESOURCE DATA .................. _ ..................... _ ............................ .. ........................... _ ............... _ .... _ .......... .. .... 11 4.4 SOIL DATA ...... _ .......... _ ........... _ ..... _ .............................................................................._.........._..._............ .............._...._...._....12 4.5 LAND USE AND PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES ............................................ _....._...................._.................. ...._..............._...._...12 4.6 RECREATION, WILDLIFE, AND UNIQUE FEATURES .................................................................................... .............................13 4.7 POLLUTANT SOURCES ................................................................................................................................... ............................... 14 SESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES ....... _ .................. _ ...................... .. .............................................. .. .................. 15 5.1 WATER QUANTITY ... ................................. .. ....................................................................................... _ ..... ..................... ............. 16 City of Andover SW MP Page ( II City of Andover SWMP Page I III 5.2 WATER QUALITY .............................................................................................................................................. .............................21 5.3 RECREATION, FISH AND WILDLIFE ............................................................................................................... .............................24 5.4 ENHANCEMENT OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION; INFORMATION AND EDUCATION ..................................... .............................24 5.5 PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEMS ............ _ .................................................................................................................... .............................25 5.6 GROUNDWATER ................... ... .......... _ ......... .. ....................................... _ ................................. _ .... .. ........................... .. .... ... ......... 26 5.7 WETLANDS_ ............................ .. .... _ ... _ .......... _ .................................. _ ........... .............. _ .......... ................. ........ ....... ... ......... 26 5.8 EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION ... .................... ............................................. ............................ ........... .............. ........... ..27 5.9 RUM RIVER SCENIC RIVER DISTRICT ........... .. ............................................. .. ....................................... _ .............. .. ..... ... .......... .28 6 ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS .................................................................... ............................. 29 6.1 WATER QUANTITY .................... .. ............................ _ .................... _ ............................................................... .. ... _ ... ...... ........... 29 6.2 WATER QUALITY .................._............................................._......................_..................................._..._.... _............._...._....._...30 6.3 SOIL EROSION .. .......... .. ...................................................................................... _ .............................. _ ... .. ................... _........._.31 6.4 WETLAND PROTECTION......._ ..................... _. ..................... _ ................................. _ ................................................... .. ............ 32 6.5 NPDES PHASE 11 / MS4 SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION ....................................... _ ........................................ . ... . .... .. ............. 33 6.6 AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES ................................ .. .......... _ ............... _ ..................................................... .. ......... .. ... _ ............ _ .... 33 7 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM ........ _ ................................................................................................... ............................... 35 7.1 CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................... ....................._.......3S 7.2 FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES ......................................................... _ .......... _ ................. _ .............. . .......... _ ........... ..36 7.3 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS .................................. ......................................................... ........................ .... ................. ... _38 8 APPENDICES A. GOVERNING STATUTE AND RULE B. CURRENT ZONING, FUTURE LAND USE, AND SEWER STAGING MAPS C. CITY PARKS AND TRAILS MAP D. DEVELOPERS HANDOUT E. MNDNR NATURAL HERITAGE INFORMATION 9 DIGITAL APPENDIX (DIGITAL STORAGE DEVICE) DA1. PREVIOUS WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN (MARCH 2005) DA2. CURRENT WATERSHED PLANS DA3. MPCA GENERAL PERMIT MNR040000 DA4. CITY OF ANDOVER WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN DAS. PUBLIC WATERS SHAPEFILES DA6. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DITCHES SHAPEFILES DA7. NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY SHAPEFILE DA8. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBWATERSHEDS SHAPEFILE ( DA9. FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY (FIS) AND FIRM PANELS City of Andover SWMP Page I III DA10. ANOKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2013 WATER ALMANAC DA11. MNDNR APPROPRIATIONS SHAPEFILE DA12. CITY OF ANDOVER 2014 -2018 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) LIST OF FIGURES 1.1.1. LOCATION MAP ............ ................................ ............ » ..................... ...... ................... ................ ............. .... ..... ......_.. 41 1.3.1. WMIDS AND MUNICIPALITIES ...................... » .................................. » .................. » .......... _ ....................... .».................. 42 4.1.1.100 -YEAR. 24 -HouR sTORM .............. ... .... » ................................... » .......................................... » ................. ............... 43 4.2.1A. MNDNR PUBLIC WATERS ..... ..... ...... ..... ........... ......»................................................»..........». ........................... »... 44 4.2.118. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DITCHES ........................... .............................»........................_............... ............................... 45 4.2.2. NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY .................................... » ............................................... » ........... _ .... ». ......... m......... 46 4.2.4. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBWATERSHEDS. .... ........................ ................._.....».....»....».........._........ ........_.........._........... 47 4.2.8.100 -YEAR FLOODPLAIN ..»...........» .................»....»...»...............................».................................. ............................... 48 4.3.1. MNDNR APPROPRIATIONS PERMITS » ........... _ .............................................................................. ......................... »..... 50 4.4.1. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUPS ..............................................................................»......................... ... »................ » »... »..... 51 4.7.1. POTENTIAL POLLUTANT SOURCES ................................................................................................. ............................... 52 5.1.1. DRAINAGE SENSITIVE USE AREAS .... ... ..... ..... ........... ................ ................... ..... ................. ................... .......... ..... » 53 LIST OF TABLES 1.5.1. SW 4P COMPLIANCE DETAIL ......... ... .............................. ............. ......... ........... ........... ........................ ........... ...... ...... 3 4.1.1. PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTI MATES ...................... » .................................. .. ............ » ............... . . ..... _ ... ... .......... ....... 8 5.0.1. SWMP GOALS .............. » .............................. .. .......... _ ............................ _ ............................ .. ................. _. .......... ........... 15 5.1.1. WATER QUANTITY POLICIES .................................. » ............. ...» ............................................... » .... » ................. ». ......... 16 5.2.1. WATER QUALITY POLICIES ............ ...... ..... ....................... »............................_........._................. ............................... 21 5.3.1. RECREATION, FISH, AND WILDLIFE POLICIES ....................................».....»...............».....».......... ....... »....................... 25 5.4.1. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION POLICIES ...... » ...............................................».....................».................. ............................... 26 S.5.1. PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEMS POLICIES ................. » .......... » ........................... .. ............................. .. ..... » .... ... .............. ......... 27 5.6.1. GROUNDWATER POLICIES .................................................................................................»............ ..... »......................... 27 S.7.1. WETLANDS POLICIES ...... ............ ...............................................»..................»............................... ............................... 28 5.8.1. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION POLICIES •.......... » ......................................................................». ....................... ».... ».. 28 5.9.1. RUM RIVER SCENIC DISTRICT POLICIES ................................................. ........... .......... ........... ............. ..... ..... ..... »... 29 6.1.1. ISSUES AND ACTIONS - WATER QUANTITY .......» ...............................................................»......... .. »............................ 30 6.2.1. ISSUES AND ACTIONS - WATER QUALITY .......................................................... .. ........................... . ..... _....................... 31 6.3.1. ISSUES AND ACTIONS - SOIL EROSION ....................................................:................................»..... ............................... 33 City of AndoverSWMP Page I Iv i 6.4.1. ISSUES AND ACTIONS - WETLAND PROTECTION ............................................................................. ............................... 33 6.5.1. ISSUES AND ACTIONS - MS4 SW PPP IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................. ............................... 34 6.6.1. ISSUES AND ACTIONS - AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES .............. .. ......... .. .................. .. ........... _ ................................. ....... - 35 7.1.1. CURRENT/ONGOING SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ACrngTIES ............................ ............................... 36 7.2.1. NEW IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS .................................. .. ................ _ ........................................... .. ......... .. ...................... .... 37 7.3.1. POTENTIAL STORMWATER FUNDING SOURCES ............................................................................... ............................... 39 LIST OF ACRONYMS BMP Best Management Practice BWSR Board of Water and Soil Resources CCWD Coon Creek Watershed District CIP Capital Improvement Plan DA Digital Appendix FEMA Federal Emergenct Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map FIS Flood Insurance Study IDDE Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination LRRWMO Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization MnDNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service PFDS Precipitation Frequency Data Server SWMP Surface Water Management Plan SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (or Plan) TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service WMO Watershed Management Organization WRAP Watershed Restoration and Protection City of Andover SWMP Page I v 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE This document is entitled "City of Andover's Third Generation Surface Water Management Plan" (referred to as SWMP throughout the document). This SWMP is intended to serve as the primary planning and guidance document for surface water concerns in the City of Andover, Anoka County, Minnesota ( "City") (Figure 1.1.1). It serves as an update to, and supersedes, the previous "City of Andover Water Resource Management Plan" (March 2005). A digital version of the March 2005 Plan is included in the Digital Appendix (DA1), described below. 1.2 DOCUMENT DETAILS In addition to the main document, this SWMP includes a number of Appendices as well as a Digital Appendix, provided separately on a digital storage device. The Digital Appendix includes GIS files and other supporting data, as well as documents that relate directly to the SWMP but do not need to be included in hard copy format. The Digital Appendix is organized into numbered folders which are referenced throughout the document as DA1, DA2, etc. An effort has also been made to indicate where additional information can be found online. Web addresses and other references provided in this SWMP are current as of the date of publication. 1.3 CONTACT INFORMATION Responsibility for SWMP implementation Iles with the appropriate City departments and staff. A number of SWMP elements relate to watershed agencies with jurisdiction in portions of the City, specifically the Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization (LRRWMO) and the Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD). Boundaries for these agencies as well as adjacent cities are shown in Figure 1.3.1. Contact information for responsible personnel is as follows. City of Andover David Berkowitz, P.E. Director of Public Works / City Engineer 1685 Crosstown Blvd. NW Andover, MN 55304 (763) 755 -5100 www.andovermn.gov Coon Creek Watershed District Tim Kelly, Administrator 12301 Central Avenue NE, Suite 100 Blaine, MN 55434 (763) 755 -0975 www.cooncreekwd.org Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization City of Anoka 2015 First Avenue North Anoka, MN 55303 (763) 755 -5100 www.Irrwmo.org City of Andover SWMP Page I 1 1.4 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY This SWMP meets the provisions and requirements of Minnesota Statute 303b.235 and Minnesota Rule 8410 (Appendix A; also available online from the Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes, https:/ /www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us /). As stipulated by statute and rule, this SWMP provides direction for surface water management within the City of Andover in conformance with applicable watershed plans, specifically the LRRWMO Third Generation Watershed Management Plan (October 2011) and the CCWD 2013 -2023 Watershed Management Plan. These watershed plans can be found online at the websites of the respective organizations (http: / /www.Irrwmo.org/ and http: / /www.cooncreekwd.org /). They are also included in the Digital Appendix (DA2). As the owner /operator of a small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (small MS4), the City is subject to the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) general permit MNR040000, which establishes conditions for discharging stormwater and specific other related discharges to waters of the state from small MS4s (DA3). In accordance with that Permit, the City has developed, and the MPCA has approved, the City's MS4 General Permit application and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Document. In order to stay in compliance, it is the responsibility of the City to fulfill the requirements of the MS4 Permit and the approved SWPPP Document. Therefore, these requirements have also been incorporated into this SWMP. This SWMP is also intended to be consistent with any other planning and operational documents germane to the management of water resources within the City, including the Andover Wellhead Protection Plan (DA4), Andover City Code (available through http: / /www.andovermn.gov /), and approved departmental procedures. Any inconsistencies requiring modification of this SWMP should be addressed In accordance with Section 1.6, "Amendment Procedures." Some additional needs for written departmental procedures are identified In Section 6, "Assessment of Problems and Corrective Actions." 1.5 COMPLIANCE DETAIL Table 1.5.1 lists the governing documents for development of this SWMP, along with the associated requirements for planning and management of surface water within the City. For each listed requirement, a reference is provided indicating where or how that requirement is primarily addressed within the SWMP. In addition to the primary references provided, the listed requirements are also addressed in other locations throughout the document. City of Andover SWMP Page 12 Table 1.5.1. SWMP Compliance Detail REQUIREMENTS BY SOURCE SWMP REFERENCE Required Local Plan Contents Describe existing and proposed physical environment and land use Sec. 4 Define drainage areas and the volumes, rates, and paths of storm water 4.2 Identify adequate areas and elevations for storm water storage 4.2 Define adequate water quality and water quality protection methods Sec. 5; SWPPP Identify regulated areas Sec.1 Set forth an implementation program (Intl. official controls and CIP as Sec. 7 Required Plan Contents and Structure Purpose 1.1 Water resource management related agreements Sec. 2 Executive summary Sec. 3 Land and water resource Inventory Sec. 4 Establishment of policies and goals Sec. 5 Assessment of problems Sec. 6 Corrective actions Sec. 6 Financial considerations Sec, 7 Implementation priorities Sec. 7 Implementation program Sec. 7 Amendment procedures 1.6 Submittal and review LRft M03t�—e6 e't'fibPl�n� Education Erosion Control Shoreland Floodplain Scenic River Modeling Septic systems Wetlands Stormwater Impaired waters Anoka Dam Operation Permitting SWPPP 5.8, 6.3, 7.1, SWPPP 4.2.11, 5.9 4.2.8, 6.1 5.9 4.2.6 S.2,7.1 4.2.2, 5.7, 6.4, 5.1, 5.2, 6.5, SWPPP 6.2, 7.2 NA Sec. S, 7.1, SWPPP Sec. 5, 7.1, SWPPP City of Andover SWMP Page 13 REQUIREMENTS BY SOURCE SWMP REFERENCE CCWD 2013 -2023 Plan Ditches and Watercourses Floodplains Groundwater Soils and Erosion Control Stormwater Water Quality Wetlands Wildlife MS4 PbrtnitA*PPP Part III: Enforcement Response Procedures Part IV: Storm Sewer Map and Inventory, Part B.3. MCM1: Public Education and Outreach MCM2: Public Participation and Involvement MCM3: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination MCM4: Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control MCM5: Post - Construction Stormwater Management MCM6: Pollution Prevention /Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations 1.6 AMENDMENT PROCEDURES 4.2.1, 5.1, 5.5 4.2.8, 6.1 4.3, 5.1, 5.6 4.4, 5.8, 6.3, 7. 1, SWPPP 4.2, 5.1, 5.2, 6.5, SWPPP Sec. 5; SWPPP 4.2.2, 5.7, 6.4 5.3 5.2, 7.2, SWPPP Sec. 4, SWPPP 5.4, SWPPP 5.4, SWPPP SWPPP 5.1, 5.2, SWPPP 5.1, 5.2, 7.1, 7.2, SWPPP 7.1, 7.2 This SWMP is intended to be in place for a 10 -year period (until 2025). However, it is directly related to other programs, plans, and standards both within the City and other encompassing jurisdictional bodies, and must remain flexible enough to incorporate changes as appropriate. Changes in watershed authority plans, TMDL or WRAP studies, or the City's MS4 program may require programmatic or implementation modifications to meet new requirements. This SWMP is adopted by City Council as an official document, with regulatory policies on water resources issues set forth. The public may offer written requests for SWMP amendments, which will be addressed by City staff. Adjustments not impacting policies or programmatic activities that are required by TMDL plans, WRAP studies, or the MS4 Permit shall be considered minor amendments for this document. Minor amendments, if approved, may be completed by staff without council approval. Major amendments will be reviewed by staff and brought before Council prior to action; a public hearing may be required before adopting official SWMP revisions. To ensure conformance with all applicable rules, watershed authorities with jurisdiction in the City (the LRRWMO and CCWD) shall be provided the opportunity to review and comment on major amendments before adoption. City of Andover SWMP Page 14 2 WATER RESOURCE RELATED AGREEMENTS Management of surface water concerns within the City is also governed by water resource related agreements between the City and other parties. Such agreements may include joint powers agreements, agreements between the City and adjoining communities, or agreements between the City and other public or private entities. Copies of the water resource related agreements In effect at the date of publication of this SWMP have been assembled in a separate document, "City of Andover Water Resource Related Agreements." Additional agreements (including BMP maintenance agreements with private parties) will be added to this document as they are established and become part of the overall City surface water management program. City of Andover SWMP Page 15 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3.1 OVERVIEW This SWMP is written to be compliant with applicable regulations and standards. It provides information on City water resources and lays out the City's approach to managing those resources, including actions needed to remain in compliance following SWMP publication. While officially a separate planning document, the City's SWPPP Document addresses essentially the same issues as those prompting development of this SWMP. Therefore, in order to simplify the overall compliance effort, the requirements and action plan identified in the SWPPP Document are fully addressed in this SWMP. However, existing SWPPP materials (BMP information sheets, etc.) may still be useful for program implementation. This SWMP conveys the fact that the City water resource system is fundamentally in good condition, with management efforts in line with applicable requirements. It reflects the fact that surface water management has been, and will continue to be, a cooperative effort between the City, local watershed organizations, other agencies, and residents. A brief summary of each SWMP section is provided below. The main body of the SWMP is followed by a series of appendices providing background documentation and supporting material. 3.2 SECTION SUMMARIES Section 4: Land and Water Resource Inventory, Section 4 includes discussion and figures illustrating key land and water resources within the City. Both natural and constructed resources are included. For each subsection, some key information is included in the SWMP, along with references indicating where more detailed or updated information can be found. Section 5: Establishment of Goals and Policies. Section 5 outlines water resource related goals and policies of the City, in the categories of water quantity; water quality; recreation, fish, and wildlife; enhancement of public participation; information and education; public ditch systems; groundwater; wetlands; erosion and sedimentation; and the Rum River Scenic District. Section 6: Assessment of Problems and Corrective Actions, Section 6 provides an assessment of existing and potential water resource related problems within the City, and an outline of ongoing or planned corrective actions. The concerns and solutions were identified through discussions with City and Watershed authority staff and other planning activities. Section 7: Implementation Prouram. Section 7 identifies specific actions to be taken for managing surface water and achieving regulatory compliance. It includes both current and new activities, as well a brief discussion of financial considerations related to implementation. City of Andover SWMP Page 16 4 LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY This section provides an inventory of data related to land and water resources in the City, as well as references indicating where additional or updated data can be found. The information provided in this section gives a clear overview of the physical setting and water resources conditions, but it should be noted that for specific applications, there is a great deal of additional data available and accessible online. In addition, the City maintains a comprehensive Geographic Information System (GIS) that can be updated and is accessible online for authorized users. The GIS contains most of the land and water resource data that is needed to support decision making for the City, and the map is regularly updated with new system information as it becomes available. As referenced in the following sections, a number of GIS shapefiles with inventory information have been included in the Digital Appendix. If access to the City GIS or ESRI software is not available, these files may be viewed and edited using the free and open source software QGIS (www.aais.ore). 4.1 PRECIPITATION Based on Its location, the City experiences the same overall climate as the general Twin Cities area. A number of organizations provide detailed information about typical climate and weather conditions in the region. Some helpful online references are provided here: • Minnesota DNR Climate Page: htto: / /www.dnr.state.mn.us /climate /index.htmi • Minnesota Climatology Working Group: http: / /climate.umn.edu/ • NOAA NWS Weather Forecast Office —Twin Cities: http: / /www.crh.noaa.goy /mpx/ On average, the total annual precipitation in the City is approximately 31.8 inches, and the total annual snowfall is approximately 45.5 inches. For purposes of City planning and regulatory purposes, precipitation frequency estimates for individual storms are to be taken from NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, developed by the National Weather Service Hydrometeorological Design Studies Center. The Atlas provides updated precipitation information for Minnesota (and other states), and supersedes other common precipitation data sources such as TP40. Associated with Atlas 14 is the web -based Precipitation Frequency Data Server (PFDS), available at http:1/hdsc.nws.noaa.gov /hdsc /pfds /index.html. This site provides straightforward access to detailed precipitation frequency information for any location in Minnesota. By clicking on the State of Minnesota in the overview map, then using the on- screen navigation tools to locate and zoom in on the City of Andover, the user can select any point in the City and retrieve expected precipitation depths for recurrence intervals ranging from 1 year to 1000 years, and City of Andover SWMP Page 17 durations ranging from 5 minutes to 60 days (the typical duration for analyses required by the City and other agencies is the 24 -hour storm). As an example, the rainfall depth for the 100 -year 24 -hour storm for the City of Andover increases from north to south (see Figure 4.1.1), with the highest depths roughly a mile to the east of Crooked Lake. Table 4.1.1 provides the rainfall depths for all durations and frequencies for that location, as taken from the NOAA PFDS. These may essentially be considered the maximum depths for the City, although there may be some minor variations in the location of maximum depth, depending on the storm. Table 4.1.1. Precipitation Frequency Estimates (inches) (Values from NOAA PFDS) DILRA7IDN AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (YEARS) 1 2 5 10 25 5o 100 200 Soo 1000 S -MIN 0.358 0.421 0.517 0.617 1 0.744 0.845 0.948 1.05 1.10 1.31 10 -MIN 15 -MIN 0.525 r 0.617 0.640 0.751 0.771 0.941 90 03 1.10 1.09 1.33 1.24 1_51_4 1.39 1.69 1.54 1.89 1.76 2.15 1.92 2.35_ 30 -MIN 0.908 1.07 1.35 1.58 1.91 1 2.17 2.43 2.70 3.07 3.35 60-MIN 1.18 1.39 1.75 1 2.07I 1.54 2.93 3.33 3.77 4.37 4.86 2-HR 3-HR 1.45 1.70 1.61 1.88 1.15 2.38 i 2.56 2.85 3.17 3.57 3.69 j 4.19 4.24 4.83 5.68 6.36 4.87 5.62 6.69 7.57 6-HR 1.88 2.19 2.78 3.35 4.24 5.02 5.87 6.82 8.19 9.31 12 -HR 2.14 ! 2.51 3.20 3.85 4.85 5.71 6.65 7.68 9.16 10.4 24 -HR 1.47 2.86 3.58 4.26 5.31 6.21 1 7.19 8.26 9.80 11.1 1 -DAY 2.90 'L 3.25 3.93 4.59 5.64 6.56 7.57 8.70 10.3 11.7 3 -DAY 3.18 3.53 4.22 4.88 5.94 6.86 7.89 9.03 10.7 12.1 4 -DAY 3.40 3.78 4.50 5.18 6.26 7.20 8.22 9.36 11.0 12.4 7 -DAY 3.91 ! 4.41 5.29 6.07 7.24 8.21 9.24 10.3 11.9 13.1 10 -DAY 4.39 4.98 5.97 6.83 8.07 9.07 10.1 11.2 12.7 13.9 20 -DAY 5.97 6.69 7.87 8.86 10.2 11.3 12.4 13.5 14.9 16.0 30 -DAY 7.37 8.21 9.58 10.7 12.2 13.3 14.5 15.6 17.0 18.1 45 -DAY 9.20 10.3 11.9 13.3 15.0 16.1 17.5 18.6 20.0 21.0 60 -DAY 10.8 12.1 14.1 15.6 17.6 ri 9.0 10.3 21.5 21.9 13.8 City of Andover SWMP Page 18 4.2 SURFACE WATER RESOURCES DATA This section includes summary discussions followed by a series of figures illustrating the available surface water resource data within the City. For convenient reference, the information is organized approximately in accordance with Minnesota Rule 8410.0060, Subpart 4 (see Appendix A), although some subsections have been merged for simplicity. Additional data has been included in the SWMP Appendices and Digital Appendix where appropriate. 4.2.1 Public Waters and Public Ditch Systems A map of the Public Waters within the City is included as Figure 4.2.1a. The shapefile clipped to City boundaries is provided in DAS. The City has four main lakes which include Bunker Lake, Crooked Lake, Round Lake, and Ward Lake. Numerous other Public Waters within the City limits are designated as wetlands. Figure 4.2.1b shows the system of public and private drainage ditches present within the City, as provided by Anoka County. The shapefile clipped to City boundaries is provided in DA6. 4.2.2 National Wetlands Inventory The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map for the City is included as Figure 4.2.2 (shapefile in DA7). The wetlands data for the NWI maps are developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS); the information provided on the figure is the latest, most accurate information available. Wetlands provide a multitude of benefits in terms of both water quality and habitat. The NWI data and a great deal more information about wetlands in general can be found at the USFWS -NWI web site, located at htto: / /www.fws.gov /wetlands /NWI /. 4.2.3 Functional Values Inventory / Approach Inventory and assessment of wetlands and functional values are performed on a case -by -case basis within the City. In general, wetland considerations and administration of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) are handled by the WD /WMO having jurisdiction within City limits. The City does verify that wetland requirements for any development or redevelopment activity are met prior to issuance of any City grading or building permits. 4.2.4 Hydrologic Characteristics The key factors impacting the hydrologic characteristics of the City are the topography and the predominant sandy local soil characteristics (the latter is discussed in more detail in Section 4.4). Generally, the topography throughout the City is relatively subdued, with runoff discharging to the Rum River or Coon Creek (Anoka County Ditch 57), and ultimately to the Mississippi River. A more detailed look at the drainage patterns is provided in Figure 4.2.4, which depicts the major and minor subwatershed delineations, along with the general direction of flow within each area. (shapefile in DA8). City of Andover SWMP Page 19 4.2.5 Stormwater Management System Concerns regarding management of stormwater within the City are addressed in substantial detail in the City's SWPPP. The SWPPP contains information regarding both structural and non- structural measures taken to control both quantity and quality of stormwater runoff. In addition, the GIS database described at the beginning of Section 4 includes a storm sewer system map and inventory showing the location of public and private storm mains as well as culverts, catch basins, manholes, detention /retention basins, and other system components. Additional information about each system component can be accessed directly by clicking on the item of interest within the GIS database. The map is linked to a database that includes basic component information as well as as -built plans, reports, and other relevant computer files. 4.2.6 Flood Levels and Peak Discharges The applicable portions of the LRRWMO and CCWD plans address flood levels and peak discharges within their respective jurisdictions (and therefore within the City). Controls related flood levels and peak discharges are incorporated throughout City code as well as the SWPPP and this SWMP. Comprehensive hydrologic and hydraulic modeling is generally left to the watershed agencies with jurisdiction, although the City does regularly develop model information as development occurs. The model information developed through the development review process provides the same level of resource and property protection that would be provided by an overall hydrologic /hydraulic model of the City. Additional information regarding flood levels and peak discharges is discussed in Section 4.2.8. 4.2.7 Known Flooding Problem Areas In general there are not significant ongoing flooding concerns within the City. This can be attributed both to the existing stormwater controls as well as the relatively high permeability of underlying soils. There are a few instances where flooding concerns along the Rum River and Coon Creek have been identified, but there are no actions proposed to be taken by the City at this time. Additional information can be found in the LRRWMO and CCWD plans, as well as Section 6 of this SWMP. 4.2.8 Existing FIS Information An overview of the mapped 100 -year floodplain within the City is shown in Figure 4.2.8. All information and data regarding floodplains, floodways, and the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) within the City can be obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) website (https:Hmsc.fema.gov /), specifically through the FEMA Map Service Center. Numerous Letters of Map Change (LOMCs) have also been processed for locations within the City Limits, and these can also be viewed and downloaded at the FEMA site. For reference, the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panels covering the City are 2706890005A, 27068900106, and City of Andover SWMP Page 110 27068900158. Current copies of these panels, as well as the current FIS for the City and associated fioodway maps, are included in DA9. 4.2.9 Water Quality Data and Related Information A substantial amount of water quality data and related information has been compiled by the LRRWMO and CCWD and is available in their plans. The Anoka Conservation District (ACD) also provides a summary of water quality and quantity information for the entire county in its 2013 Water Almanac (DA10). Water quality data for lakes within Andover can also be accessed online through the MnDNR Lake Finder application ( http:// www.dnr.state.mn.us /lakefindi). This site includes information about lake levels, water quality, invasive species, and recreational information. Monitoring data is available for Round Lake (02008900), Crooked Lake (02008400), and Bunker Lake (02009000). 4.2.10 Surface Water Monitoring Sites The MPCA surface water data website (http://www.pca.state. mn.us/index php /data /surface- water.html) provides access to information about all surface water quality monitoring sites. Sites within the City can be located using the provided map- or text -based search tools. 4.2.11 Shoreland Ordinance Shoreland regulation is covered extensively in City Code, which is available at the City website (http: / /www.andovermn.itov /). Shoreland management is addressed specifically in Title 13, Chapter 4 of the Code. The standards and requirements outlined in that Chapter are aimed at ensuring wise use of shoreland and water resources and conserving their associated environmental and economic value. 4.2.12 Surface Water Appropriations (MnDNR) The City does not have any active MnDNR surface water appropriation permits. It does have a number of MnDNR permits for groundwater appropriation, for municipal and irrigation purposes. These are discussed in more detail in the following section. 4.3 GROUNDWATER RESOURCE DATA Within the City, groundwater wells serve municipal, irrigation, and private water needs. Each of the active wells has a groundwater appropriation permit from the MnDNR. A listing of all active groundwater appropriation permits can be found through the MnDNR waters website, at httpJ /www.dnr.state.mn.us /waters /watermgmt section /appropriations /wateruse.html. The active appropriations permits within the City of Andover are shown on Figure 4.3.1(shapefile in DA11). City of Andover SW MP Page 111 Groundwater resource data for areas within the City are described in the Anoka Sand Plain Regional Hydrogeologic Assessment completed in 1993. Currently under development is Part B of the Anoka County Geologic Atlas, which will describe the County hydrogeology. Refer to http: / /www.dnr.state.mn.us /waters /programs /gw section /mapping /platesum /anokcga.html for updated information and download links. Part A of the Atlas is completed and available at the same site. 4.4 SOIL DATA Soils within the City are primarily sand and sandy loams, and therefore have fairly high infiltration rates. This can be beneficial in terms of utilizing infiltration for management of surface water, but it also creates an increased susceptibility to groundwater contamination. Figure 4.4.1 shows the Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) classification of soils throughout the City (shapefile in DA12). The HSG is a generalized rating of the infiltration rate of a soil, with HSG A indicating the highest infiltration rate and HSG D indicating the lowest infiltration rate. When a soil has a dual classification (A/D, B /D, or C/D), the first letter represents the HSG of the soil under well- drained conditions, and the second letter represents poorly drained conditions. A wealth of soil data is readily available online through the USDA -NRCS Web Soil Survey ( htto:// websollsurvey. sc. egov .usda.gov /Aoo /HomePage.htm). This site allows the user to define an area of interest and either review or download all available soil data. Data for the City can be conveniently obtained by uploading the shapefile of the municipal boundary and using it to define the area of interest. 4.5 LAND USE AND PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICES Zoning designations within the City of Andover Include a mix of urban and rural land use, with over half of Its area zoned as rural single - family (113). The most recent Zoning Map (March 2014) showing existing land cover for the City, as well as the Future Land Use Map from the City's Comprehensive Plan (2008), are included in Appendix B. For updated information on the City's land use and planning, see the City's Comprehensive Plan and updated maps that are accessible from the Planning Departments webpage at: http: / /www.andovermn.gov/ The Comprehensive Plan's Sewer Staging Plan map Indicating the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary is also included in Appendix B. Approximately 21,600 persons are currently served by municipal sewer, with the approximately 11,000 remaining persons continuing to be served by Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS). As indicated in the Comprehensive Plan, the population of Andover is expected to grow by nearly 12,000 through 2030, with approximately 34,400 persons served by municipal sewer at that time. The remaining 10,100 persons will remain outside the MUSA boundary or within the boundary but served by private systems. City of Andover SWMP Page 122 The City's Comprehensive Water Plan (2008) details municipal water system use throughout the City, and is available on the City's website. In addition, well locations and record information is accessible through the County Well Index Online mapping tool on the Minnesota Department of Health's website at: http: / /www.heaIth. state . mn.us /divs /eh /cwi /index.htmI 4.6 RECREATION, WILDLIFE, AND UNIQUE FEATURES The City of Andover contains multiple areas available for outdoor recreational activities and connection with the natural environment. The City's Parks and Trails Map (Appendix C) identifies the City parks, waters, and public connectivity, as well as other key features within the City. The following parks and waters offer significant recreational opportunities to City residents: • Kelsey Round Lake Park: Kelsey Round Lake Park is a 136 acre nature area to the northwest of Round Lake, offering trails for hiking, biking, cross- country skiing, and natural -area viewing. A boat landing access point is located along the southeastern edge of the lake, off of Round Lake Blvd NW. • Crooked Lake: Crooked Lake is located at the southwest corner of the City and extends into the City of Coon Rapids. The Andover portion includes a public dock and small park area on the north end, while a larger park is available on the east side (in Coon Rapids). • Bunker Hills Regional Park: Bunker Hills Regional Park is a County Park located in the southeast comer of Andover and into Coon Rapids. The park provides opportunity for a range of outdoor activities, including golfing, camping, hiking, biking, cross- country skiing, and nature observation. The park trails extend to and around Bunker Lake, with a constructed boardwalk crossing along the northern edge enabling easy viewing of water -based flora and fauna. Additional information regarding recreational opportunities is available from the City of Andover (http: / /www.andovermn.gov /) or the Anoka County Parks and Recreation Department (https: / /www.anokacounty.us /372 /Parks- Recreation). Fish species present in the lakes can be found on the MnDNR Lakefinder website (http: / /www.dnr. state . mn.us /lakefind /index.htmi). Most of the land in Andover is developed or agricultural space, with the remaining natural wildlife areas contained primarily within and around the lakes, wetlands, parks and the Rum River. The Rum River runs along the western edge of the City, and is classified by the MnDNR as a "scenic" stretch of the river, as it remains free - flowing and is largely undeveloped. The City falls within the Eastern Broadleaf Forest province in the MnDNR's Ecological Classification System (http: / /www.dnr. state .mn.us /ecs /index.html). This area is a transitional region from deciduous forests in the south to the mixed coniferous - hardwood forests to the north. The morainal subsection underlying Andover is the Anoka Sand Plain, a sandy, flat area City of Andover SW MP Page 113 dominated by prairie and Oak / Aspen woodlands. The predominant vegetation of the area historically consisted of Oak barrens and openings, including bur oak and pin oak (often small and misformed in droughty upland areas). Brushland and upland prairie also likely covered large areas. In addition to the Scenic River Way along the Rum River, Andover houses a variety of rare and endangered species within its boundary. Included in Appendix D are the latest database query results from the MnDNR's Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS). As indicated, Andover does have multiple rare and endangered species within its natural areas. Wildlife corridors are an important component in sustaining and enhancing the survivability of natural species while habitat is decreased through development activities. The Anoka County Conservation District and the MnDNR identify the areas between the Rum River, Round Lake, and along Coon Creek to Bunker Hills Regional Park as a wildlife corridor. Given that this is a focus area for wildlife preservation, the City has recently purchased critical property through its land preservation program (refer to Appendix C for the location of open space property). These areas along the Rum River will now remain natural into the foreseeable future, providing perpetual habitat and natural area for human enjoyment. 4.7 POLLUTANT SOURCES A wide range of activities have the potential to be sources of surface water pollution within the City. Figure 4.7.1 shows the locations of a variety of sites of potential concern that are listed on the MPCA What's in My Neighborhood website. These sites are generally associated with some type of permit or administrative document, and often have certain reporting requirements attached. More information about each site, as well as any updated inventory information, can be obtained from the MPCA. In addition to permitted or known activities, illicit discharges are another potential pollutant source within the City. The SWPPP addresses in detail the City's approach to illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE). City of Andover SWMP Page 114 5 ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES The City has developed specific Goals and Policies conforming to Minnesota Statutes Section 1038.201. These Goals and Policies complement County, Regional, or State goals and policies, and are in strict conformance with the requirements of the LRRWMO and CCWD Plans. Following MN Rule 8410.0080, Goals and Policies are listed according to the following categories: water quantity; water quality; recreation, fish and wildlife; public participation; public ditch systems; groundwater; wetlands; and erosion and sedimentation. An additional Goal and Policies pertaining to the Rum River Scenic District are also described below. Table 5.0.1: SWMP Goals GOAL SUBJECT DEscRIPT /ON S.1 Water Quantity To protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems, and to limit public capital expenditures that are necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. 5.2 Water Quality To maintain or improve the quality of water in lakes, wetlands, streams or rivers within or immediately downstream of the City. S.3 Recreation and Fish To protect and/or enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water and Wildlife recreational facilities, with special attention given to the Rum River corridor within the City. 5.4 Enhancement of To educate and inform the public on pertinent water resource Public Participation; management issues, increase public participation and cooperation in Information and water management activities, and /or enhance regulatory and Education operational programs in light of the public interest. 5.5 Public Ditch Systems To provide a mechanism through which public ditch systems are managed, and to ensure proper operation and maintenance of the ditch systems in accordance with applicable policies. S.6 Groundwater To promote groundwater recharge, and to coordinate activities and manage surface water runoff to the degree necessary to meet requirements for groundwater protection or management as required by Anoka County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, and the Department of Natural Resources. 5.7 Wetlands To protect wetlands in conformance with the requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act. 5.8 Erosion and To prevent soil erosion and sedimentation. Sedimentation 5.9 Rum River Scenic To maintain, protect, and enhance a scenic river district along the District bluffland and shoreland of the Rum River as required by the management plan for the Rum River. City of Andover SWMP Page 115 In the sections below, specific Policies related to each of the Goals are identified. Some of the described Policies refer to plans from other agencies, or other documents utilized by the City of Andover in implementing its surface water management program. 5.1 WATER QUANTITY GOAL: To protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems, and to limit public capital expenditures that are necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff. Table 5.1.1: Water Quantity Policies [*denotes new or newly modified policies] POLICY DESCRIPTION Water Quantity 5.1.1* The City adopts by reference the water quantity related standards established in the CCWD and LRRWMO plan requirements, and will update City procedures as necessary to remain consistent with those standards. 5.1.2* The City will continue to cooperate with the CCWD and LRRWMO in the review of development drainage plans and seeking solutions to water quantity issues. 5.1.3 Activities such as placement of structures, fill, or other activities that will increase the flood stage of the 100 -year or regional event are prohibited. 5.1.4 Any improvements within a structure must be above the regulatory, 100 -year flood elevation. If the Improvements are more than 50% of the current value of the structure, the entire structure must be brought into compliance with the current floodpiain regulatory requirements. 5.1.5 Stormwater leaving a site must be routed to a public drainage system. 5.1.6 The post - development runoff rates from the site must be controlled to the extent stipulated by the governing watershed agency (CCWD or LRRWMO) for the specific location. S.1.7 Within Drainage Sensitive Use Areas (Figure 5.1.1) (refer to CCWD Watershed Management Plan for locations and additional information), rate control calculations must show that the post - development 100 -year peak flow rate does not exceed the predevelopment 25 -year peak flow rate (by subwatershed). A Drainage Sensitive Use Area is defined as all those land uses that depend on subsurface drainage (i.e. local draining of the soil profile) for their continuation. For Non - Drainage Sensitive Use Areas, the post - development 100 -year peak flow rate shall not . exceed predevelopment 100 -year peak flow rate. 5.1.8 All hydrologic studies will be based on standard hydrologic criteria and ultimate or anticipated development of the entire tributary drainage area. City of Andover SW MP Page 116 POLICY Df5CRIPTION INoter 400ntity 5.1.9 Drainage calculations shall be submitted based on the minimum requirements of the governing watershed agency (CCWD or LRRWMO), and approved as part of any development applications prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. 5.1.10 Design storm events shall be defined using Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Type -II distributions, with rainfall amounts taken from the NOAH Atlas 14 website. The web address Is: http: //hdsc.nws.noaa.eov /hdsc /ofds /ofds map cont.html7bkmrk =mn. The user can zoom in on the site of interest and double -click to see rainfall values for that location. Rainfall amounts are provided for a wide range of recurrence intervals and durations, including the 1 -, 2 -, 10 -, 25 -, and 100 -year, 24 -hour storms. To determine the rainfall amount for the back -to -back 100 -year, 24 -hour storms, the rainfall amount for the 100 -year 24 -hour storm shall be doubled, and a duration of 48 hours shall be used. Runoff depth for the 100-year, 10-day snowmelt shall be 7.2 Inches assuming frozen soil conditions. The 10D -year, 10 -day runoff event shall be 8.5 inches. 5.1.11 The 100 -year 24 -hour event will be defined as the event that requires the greatest storm water storage volume in a storage facility. These facilities include lakes, ponds, wetlands, ditches, and their outlets. 5.1.12 Major storm water facilities (i.e., ponds, pond outlet systems, and major conveyance systems) will be designed using a 100 -year event. 5.1.13 All minor drainage systems and local storm water collection systems analyses and design will be based on a 10 -year event unless otherwise specified. 5.1.14 For all storm water facilities (ponds, wetlands, storm water treatment ponds, ditches, etc.), design will include access for maintenance of the outlet structure and to the facility in general. 5.1.15 Culvert crossings or storm sewer systems in County or State right -of -way may have a design frequency that differs from the 10 -year. Each agency shall be contacted to determine the appropriate design frequency. 5.1.16 The design of storm water facilities will consider and identify location(s) of overflow(s) that prevent property damage to adjacent properties from extreme water levels. 5.1.17 The City will utilize natural ponding areas, such as wetlands and lakes, for the impoundment and treatment of surface water runoff, as appropriate. 5.1.18 Available storage volume of landlocked areas shall be established by estimating the water surface elevation resulting from a 100-year, 10-day runoff event or back -to -back 100 -year, 24- hour storm events, whichever is greater.. The starting elevation for modeling purposes shall be the highest anticipated ground water level or Ordinary High Water Level for the basin as determined by the MnDNR. 5.1.19 Emergency overflows or outlets to drainage systems will be provided to any landlocked area if the available storm water storage capacity is inadequate to prevent flooding of residences and if the available downstream conveyance system capacity is adequate to accept additional flow. City of Andover SWMP Page 117 POLICY DESCRIPTION Water Quantity 5.1.20 The City requires developers to infiltrate storm water runoff in areas where the risk to groundwater is minimal, the land use is compatible, and soil is conducive to infiltration. For projects that use infiltration, the following policies apply: a. Pretreatment of storm water in accordance with the Minnesota Stormwater Manual will be required prior to discharge to an Infiltration basin. b. The infiltration basin will be sized to infiltrate 1 inch of runoff from the new Impervious surface area in 48 hours. c. Infiltration rates of the soil shall be computed based on the current Minnesota Stormwater Manual guidelines. d. Verification of infiltration rates shall be completed according to the requirements of either the CCWD or the LRRWMO, depending on location. Verification may require either post - construction testing or a double -ring infiltrometer test prior to construction. 5.1.21 The City will not maintain infiltration areas on private property, such as individual homeowners' rain gardens, but will provide free consultation services by request. Private infiltration areas will be maintained through the Homeowners Association or landowner agreements, which are required to be recorded at the County and tied to the property. 5.1.22 The City will require that a plan that includes procedures for maintenance and funding be submitted prior to approval of private infiltration basins. 5.1.23 The City of Andover will perform maintenance measures to assure proper function of the City- owned drainage systems. 5.1.24 The lowest floor elevation for new or redevelopment shall be 3 feet above the seasonal high groundwater elevation (which is identified as the highest anticipated water table) or the lowest floor elevation shall be 2 feet above the designated or designed 100 -year flood elevation for the area, whichever is higher, unless evidence is submitted and certified by a geotechnical engineer that shall be reviewed and certified by an independent geotechnical engineer hired by the City at the expense of the developer and approved by the City Council that a separation of less than 3 feet can be achieved and is warranted. A separation of less than 3 feet would only be considered in cases where a structure backs up to a dry basin, or one where the outlet is at the bottom of the basin. 5.1.25 Where there is a formal outlet from a stormwater basin, any new development or redevelopment within the City will maintain a minimum building opening elevation of 2 feet above the designated or designed 100 -year flood elevation. Building openings shall be defined as the bottom sill of an egress window or lowest walkout elevation, whichever is lower. 5.1.26 Where construction of a formal outlet from a stormwater basin is not practical for landlocked areas, the minimum building elevation shall be the greatest of either 2 feet above the level resulting from two concurrent 100 -year, 24 -hour rainfall events or 2 feet above the 100 -year, 30-day snowmelt. City of Andover SwMP Page 118 POLICY DESCRIPTION Ware, Quanut, S.1.27 A review and permit from the Coon Creek Watershed District or Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization may be required in conformance with the Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization standards. (City) 5.1.28• Per the MS4 Permit, the City requires the use of any combination of BMPs, with preference given to Green Infrastructure techniques and practices, necessary to meet the following conditions on the site of a construction activity to the Maximum Extent Practicable: • For new development projects — no net Increase from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations Identified in the MS4 Permit and listed below. • For redevelopment projects — a net reduction from pre-project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations identified in the MS4 Permit and listed below. 5.1.29' Per the MS4 Permit, the City recognizes the following limitations on stormwater management: a. The City prohibits the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post - construction stormwater management in the Permit when the infiltration structural stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in areas: • Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under an NPDES /SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit issued by the MPCA. • Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur. • With less than three (3) feet of separation distance from the bottom of the infiltration system 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. • Within a vulnerable Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) or Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWMSA), which is the area surrounding a public water supply well that contains the wellhead protection area. Restriction applies to areas within the 1- year time of travel as designated by MDH. b. The City restricts the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post - construction stormwater management in the Permit, without higher engineering review, sufficient to provide a functioning treatment system and prevent adverse impacts to groundwater, when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas: • With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay) soils. • Within 1,000 feet up- gradient, or 100 feet down - gradient of active karst features (none known within City). • Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour. City of Andover SWMP Page 119 POLICY DESCRIPTION Water Quantity 5.1.30• Mitigation provisions: in accordance with its SWPPP, the City shall ensure that any stormwater discharges of TSS and /or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction activity are addressed through mitigation measures meeting the following minimum requirements: a. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference: 1) Locations yielding benefits to the receiving water of the original construction activity. 2) Locations within the same MnDNR catchment area as the original construction activity. 3) Locations in the next adjacent MnDNR catchment area up- stream 4) Locations anywhere within the City's jurisdiction. b. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPs or the retrofit of existing BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional structural BMP. c. Routine maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs already required by this permit cannot be used to meet mitigation requirements of this part. d. Mitigation projects shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original construction activity. e. The City shall determine, and document, who will be responsible for long -term maintenance on all mitigation projects of this part. f. If the City receives payment from the owner and /or operator of a construction activity for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or operator of that construction activity meeting the conditions for post - construction stormwater management, the City shall apply any such payment received to a public stormwater project In compliance with the MS4 Permit. 5.1.31• Long-term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs: per the MS4 Permit, for structural stormwater BMPs within the City and connected to the City's drainage system, the following maintenance provisions shall apply. Where necessary, City Code will be updated to reflect the policy. a. The City shall be allowed to conduct inspections of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the City, perform necessary maintenance, and assess costs for those structural stormwater BMPs when the City determines that the owner and /or operator of that structural stormwater BMP has not conducted maintenance. b. When ownership of a structural stormwater BMP (not owned by the City) is transferred to another party, the City shall maintain the right to ensure maintenance responsibility for the BMP. c. The City shall ensure that if site configurations or structural stormwater BMPs change, causing decreased structural stormwater BMP effectiveness, new or improved structural stormwater BMPs must be implemented to ensure the conditions for post - construction stormwater management. City of Andover SWMP Page 120 POLICY DESCRIPTION Water Quantity 5.1.32• Storm Sewer Map. The City will continue to update and improve its storm sewer system map as part of the web mapping program. Per the MS4 Permit, the following items will continue to be represented: a. At a minimum, all pipes 12 inches or greater in diameter, including stormwater flow direction in those pipes. b. Outfalls, including a unique identification (ID) number assigned by the City. c. Structural stormwater BMPs d. All receiving waters (ponds ditches, wetlands, etc.) e. An inventory of municipal facilities with the potential to contribute pollutants to runoff 5.2 WATER QUALITY GOAL: To maintain or Improve the quality of water in lakes, wetlands, streams and rivers within or immediately downstream of the City. Table 5.2.1: Water Quality Policies [• denotes policies that are new /modified for this plan] POLICY DESCRIPTION Water Qo Iiry 5.2.1• Andover adopts by reference the water quality related standards established in the CCWD and LRRWMO plan requirements and will update City Code accordingly. 5.2.2' Andover will continue to cooperate with the CCWD and LRRWMO in the review of development drainage plans and seeking solutions to water quality issues. 5.2.3 In the design and construction of new storm water conveyance systems or modification of existing systems, pretreatment of storm water runoff in accordance with Minnesota Stormwater Manual recommendations must be provided prior to discharge. 5.2.4 Construction projects must meet the permanent stormwater management requirements of the MPCA Construction Stormwater Permit. Where volume reduction is not feasible, and wet ponds are used to treat the Water Quality Volume as allowed by the MPCA, the City requires the following: a. A permanent pool average depth (basin volume /basin area) which shall be 23 feet, with a maximum depth of 510 feet. b. A stabilized emergency overflow (emergency outlet) adequate to control the 1% frequency /critical duration rainfall event, with a minimum 4' crest width and ON rise. c. Basin side slopes above the normal water level should be no steeper than 4:1, and preferably flatter. Slopes below the NWL shall be no steeper than 4:1. d. A 10' wide safety bench at a slope of 10:1 is required from the normal water level to 1' below. e. The distance between inlets and outlets shall be maximized to prevent short- circuiting. f. A 20' vehicle maintenance access no steeper than 10:1 shall be provided to the pond City of Andover SWMP Page 121 POLICY DESCRIPTION Water quafity Normal Water Level, where necessary for access to wetlands and /or ponds as required by the City Engineer. g. A flood pool ( "live storage ") volume above the principal outlet shall be adequate so that the peak discharge rates required by the CCWD or the LRRWMO are no greater than predevelopment conditions. h. If necessary, compound weir -walls are preferred over orifices within outlet control structures for control of low -flow events. No orifice smaller than 4" is permitted within outlet control structures. I. Pond outlet control structures shall be designed with a skimmer inlet placed a minimum of 1' below the NWL and 1' above the pond bottom. j. Pond embankment shall be constructed of properly compacted soils to prevent failure; provide filter diaphragm or anti - seepage collar as necessary at outlet pipe. 5.2.5 Storm water treatment can be provided via BMPs, a single pond that meets the design and treatment criteria or an on -site network of interconnected ponds. If an on -site pond network Is used, the overall pollutant removal efficiency for the network must meet the criteria. 5.2.6' in accordance with its SWPPP, the City requires the use of any combination of BMPs, with preference given to lower Impact techniques and practices (e.g., infiltration, evapotranspiration, reuse /harvesting, conservation design, urban forestry, green roofs, etc.), necessary to meet the following conditions on the site of a construction activity to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP): • For new development projects — no net Increase from pre- project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Phosphorus (TP), unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations Identified in the MS4 Permit. • For redevelopment projects — a net reduction from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (155) and Total Phosphorus (TP), unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations identified in the MS4 Permit. 5.2.7 In areas of redevelopment where infiltration or ponding is not feasible, other means of treating storm water, such as Inline proprietary treatment units, filtration systems, underground storage, or other measures identified in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual will be required. 5.2.8 The City has submitted the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Document and Application for Reauthorization for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency MS4 Permit. The SWPPP includes the following guidelines and Minimum Control Implemented on an on -going basis: • Public Education and Outreach program • Public Participation • Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination • Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control • Post- Construction Stormwater Management • Municipal Pollution Prevention /Good Housekeeping Measures (MCMs) to be City of Andover SWMP Page 122 POLICY DESCRIPTION Wow QuoPty 5.2.9 The City will continue to work cooperatively with Anoka County to implement the household hazardous waste disposal program and educate residents on the proper disposal of household hazardous waste. 5.2.10 The City will work with neighboring municipalities to require rate control and treatment prior to the discharge of storm water across municipal boundaries. 5.2.11 The City has established a 33 -foot standard street width (back of curb to back of curb) for minor urban city streets, and 31 -foot standard street width for minor rural city streets. This standard takes parking, safety, snow removal, and water resources issues into consideration. The City will evaluate where practical to reduce impervious street widths. 5.2.12 Future outlets to MnDNR Public Waters must first pass through a sediment pond /trap prior to discharging into the water body. 5.2.13 All on -site wastewater systems will be the responsibility of the owner. Biennial maintenance reporting of septic system is required by the City. If an on -site wastewater system fails, the owner will be required to upgrade, replace, or discontinue use of the system within six months from notice of noncompliance from the City. 5.2.14 The City will sweep the streets at least twice per year. The City also encourages participation in the "Adopt a Street" program to keep city streets and storm sewers litter free. 5.2.15 Permanent drainage /utility and maintenance vehicle access easements shall be provided for all drainage facilities. 5.2.16• Enforcement Response Procedures. Per the MS4 Permit, when non - compliance with stormwater management requirements is identified, the following information will be recorded as part of the City's enforcement procedures. a. Name of the person responsible for violating the requirement. b. Date(s) and location(s) of the observed violation(s) c. Description of the violation(s), including reference(s) to relevant Regulatory Mechanism(s) d. Corrective action(s) (including completion schedule) issued by the permittee e. Date(s) and type(s) of enforcement used to compel compliance f. Referrals to other regulatory organizations (if any) g. Date(s) violation(s) resolved 5.2.17" In accordance with its SWPPP and the MS4 Permit, the City implements an Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program that Includes: • Incorporation of illicit discharge detection into all inspection and maintenance activities. • Detecting and tracking the source of illicit discharges using visual inspections. • Training of all field staff in illicit discharge recognition and reporting illicit discharges. • Identification of priority areas likely to have illicit discharges. • Procedures for the timely response to known, suspected, and reported illicit discharges. • Procedures for investigating, locating, and eliminating the source of illicit discharges. • Procedures for responding to spills, including ERPs to prevent spills from entering the MS4. • When the source of the illicit discharge is found, the City shall use the ERPs required by the Permit to eliminate the illicit discharge and require any needed corrective action(s). City of Andover SWMP Page 123 POLICY DESCRIPTION Water quality 5.2.18 For purposes of illicit discharge regulation, the terms stormwater, non - stormwater, illicit discharge, and illicit connection are defined according to MPCA General Permit MNRO40000 Parts 1.A.1 -2. 5.2.190 Per the MS4 Permit, the City will develop procedures and a schedule for the purpose of determining the TSS and TP treatment effectiveness of all City owned /operated ponds constructed and used for the collection and treatment of stormwater. 5.3 RECREATION, FISH AND WILDLIFE GOAL: To protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities, with special attention given to the Rum River corridor within the City. Table 5.3.1: Recreation, Fish, and Wildlife Policies [*denotes new /modoed policies] POLICY DESCRIPTION Recreation, Fish, and Wildlife 5.3.1 The City will cooperate with the MnDNR, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Anoka County Parks, and other appropriate agencies in promoting public enjoyment and protecting fish, wildlife, and recreational resources in the City. 5.3.2 The established scenic river district along the bluffland and shoreland of the Rum River protects and preserves the scenic, recreational, natural, historical and scientific values of the Rum River In Andover in a manner consistent with Minnesota Statutes and the management plan for the Rum River. 5.3.3 Activities related to recreation, parks, open space, and trail systems shall be consistent with City code. The City encourages participation in the "Adopt a Park" program to keep parks litter free. 5.3.4 The City requires a 16.5 foot buffer strip during construction upon development or redevelopment for protection of wetlands and storm water ponds. For areas within the CCWD or LRRWMO, additional buffer requirements may be applicable. The developer will be required to work with the CCWD or LRRWMO to meet their buffer requirements, where applicable. 5.4 ENHANCEMENT OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION; INFORMATION AND EDUCATION GOAL: To educate and inform the public on pertinent water resource management issues, increase public participation and cooperation in water management activities, and enhance regulatory and operational programs in light of the public interest. City of Andover SW MP Page 124 Table SAIL: Public Participation Policies [*denotes new /modified policies] POLICY DESCRIPTION Public Participation 5.4.1 The City will continue to implement an education program which utilizes the following media: • Storm water update newsletter articles • Other educational materials • local cable channel announcements • Natural resources- related consultations and correspondence • City of Andover /4H Public Service Announcements • City web site 5.4.2* The City will provide Information directly to individuals involved with surface water, including: • Pre - construction meetings for new developments • Presentation to City Council • Presentation to City Staff 5.4.3* The City will contact area schools and give brief presentations on topics related to storm water quality issues to communicate the importance of improving storm water quality. S.4.4* Volunteer Tree Planting Projects: The City will coordinate tree planting projects by working with groups in our parks system to improve aesthetics, wildlife habitat and storm water quality. 5.4.5 The City encourages participation in the "Adopt -a- Street" program to keep roadways litter free. 5.5 PUBLIC DITCH SYSTEMS GOAL: To provide a mechanism through which public ditch systems are managed, and to ensure proper operation and maintenance of the ditch systems in accordance with applicable policies. Table 5.5.1: Public Ditch Systems Policies [*denotes new /modified policies] POLICY DESCRIPTION Public Ditch Systems SS.1 The public ditch and drainage system must be managed and maintained at design grade. 5.5.2 County Ditch 20, 37, 57 (Coon Creek), and 58 and are managed by the Coon Creek Watershed District (CCWD). See Figure 4.2.1b. 5.5.3 County Ditch 6 and 71 are managed by Anoka County. See Figure 4.2.1b. S.5.4 A Ditch Maintenance Permit from the Coon Creek Watershed District is required for work in all designated ditches within the Watershed District. 5.5.5 The CCWD requires a 100' drainage and utility easement (50' from centerline) on designated county ditches within the watershed. City of Andover SWMP Page 125 5.6 GROUNDWATER GOAL: To promote groundwater recharge, and to coordinate activities and manage surface water runoff to the degree necessary to meet requirements for groundwater protection or management as required by Anoka County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, and the Department of Natural Resources. Table 5.6.1: Groundwater Policies [*denotes new /modified policies] POLICY DESCRIPTIoN Groundwater 5.6.1 The City will cooperate with state and regional agencies on groundwater monitoring, Inventorying or permitting programs. 5.6.2 The City will work toward groundwater protection through the implementation of floodplain and shoreland ordinances in conformance with State and County regulations. 5.6.3 The City will encourage the development of alternative storm water management methods including vegetated swales and infiltration practices provided these methods do not contaminate groundwater. *S.6.4 Groundwater may not be discharged in a manner that causes erosion or flooding of the site or receiving channels or a wetland. 5.6.5 The City will cooperate with the Department of Health to ensure that all unsealed or Improperly abandoned wells within the City are properly sealed. Technical requirements for the abandonment of these wells will be in conformance with the local and state regulations. 5.6.6 The City will implement Its Wellhead Protection Plan. 5.7 WETLANDS GOAL: To protect wetlands in conformance with the Wetland Conservation Act. Table 5.7.1: Wetlands Policies [*denotes new /modified policies] POLICY DESCRIPTION Wetlands 5.7.1 The Lower Rum River WMO and Coon Creek Watershed District will act as the Local Government Unit (LGU) for the Wetland Conservation Act. (City) S.7.2 Prior to issuance of any City grading or building permits, all development and redevelopment activities must comply with the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). 5.7.3 The City requires a temporary 16.5 foot buffer strip during construction upon development or redevelopment for protection of wetlands and storm water ponds. The developer will be required to work with the CCWD or LRRWMO to meet any additional buffer requirements. City of Andover SWMP Page 126 POLICY DESCRIPTION Wetlands S.7.4 Wetland banking opportunities and grants for restoration will be pursued by the City in accordance with WCA. 5.8 EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION GOAL: To prevent soil erosion and sedimentation. Table 5.8.1: Erosion and Sedimentation Policies [*denotes new /modified policies] POLICY DESCRiprioN Erosion and Sedimentation 541 The City requires the submission and approval of a grading, drainage, and erosion control plan prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. 5.8.20 All erosion and sediment controls proposed for compliance must be in place before any land - disturbing activity begins. 5.8.3" Adjacent properties must be protected from sediment deposition. 5.8.4 The City will require any development or redevelopment to comply with the erosion control and steep slope standards. 5.8.S The City will update its erosion and sediment control standards to be in conformance with the NPDES permit as well as the requirements of the Watershed District, Watershed Management Organization, and Anoka County. The City has adopted City Code 10 Chapter 6, Construction Site Erosion and Waste Control, to meet these standards. S.8.6 Soil erosion shall be prevented through the installation of erosion control practices in accordance with MPCA guidance materials. 5.8.7 It shall be the responsibility of the developer If contractor to keep streets and property adjacent to construction areas free from sediment carried by construction traffic at site entrances and access points, and from site runoff and blowing dust. 5.8.8' Groundwater may not be discharged in a manner that causes erosion or flooding of the site or receiving channels or a wetland. City of Andover SWMP Page 127 5.9 RUM RIVER SCENIC RIVER DIsuicr GOAL: To maintain, protect, and enhance a scenic river district along the bluffland and shoreland of the Rum River as required by the management plan for the Rum River. Table 5.9.1: Rum River Scenic District Policies POLICY DESCRIPTION Rum River Scenic District 5.9.1 Land use, area lots, and the length of bluffland and water frontage suitable for building sites will be regulated through the bluffland ordinance. 5.9.2 Setbacks of structures and sanitary waste treatment facilities from bluff lines and shorelines to protect existing and /or natural scenic values, vegetation, soils, water quality, floodplain areas, and bedrock from disruption by manmade structures or facilities will be regulated as indicated in the shoreland and bluffland ordinances. 5.9.3 Alterations of natural vegetation and topography within the Scenic District will be regulated. 5.9.4 The natural scenic values and resources of the Rum River will be conserved and protected to maintain a high standard of environmental quality. S.9.5 The City will comply with Minnesota statutes and the management plan for the Rum River. S.9.6 The City will work cooperatively with Federal, State, and County agencies in the development of resource management and implementation plans affecting the Rum River. 5.9.7 The City shall apply and enforce the Rum River management plan policies. City of Andover SWMP Page 128 6 ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS This section provides an assessment of the City's water resource management system, identifying issues and concerns, as well as potential corrective actions. The assessment is based on the information collected for this Plan, including discussions with City and Watershed authority staff. The City does not currently have a large amount of specific water - related concerns; the majority of the following issues are related to the City's M54 Permit, or as listed in the CCWD or LRRWMO Plans. As corrective actions are completed, or new issues arise, the tables will be adjusted through the minor amendment process, as described in Section 9. 6.1 WATER QUANTITY Large runoff quantities associated with extreme rainfall events have the potential to cause a range of problems for a city, including damage to structures, erosion of property, and public safety issues. Increases in runoff, whether from climate change or modifications to land cover, can further exacerbate existing issues, or create issues where none existed previously. This section identifies current water quantity issues facing the City of Andover, as well as associated corrective actions. Table 6.1.1: Issues and Actions - Water Quantity LD. IssuE CORRECTIVE ACTION 6.1.1 General Increase in volume and Adopt and enforce related City Code requiring rate control flow rate associated with increased and volume control, and the City's MS4 SWPPP. Require impervious area from new growth / development plans to meet permit requirements of MPCA, urbanization over the next 20 years. CCWD, and LRRWMO. (LRRWMO 81) 6.1.2 Structural flooding along a portion of the Rum River has been noted by the City. The City approached the landowners, but did not receive cooperation to address the problem. No further action is proposed to address this issue. If a building permit is issued for improvements within a structure that is below the 100 -year flood elevation, the improvements must be above the regulatory flood elevation. If the improvements are more than 50% of the current value of the structure, the entire structure must be brought into compliance with floodplain regulations. City of AndoverSWMP Page 129 I.D. ISSUE 6.1.3 The new Atlas 14 precipitation frequency estimates indicate higher rainfall amounts for Minnesota than previously estimated. Increased estimates are based on new and more detailed data. Management of extreme rainfall events is an ongoing concern for the City. (CCWD_Issue2) 6.1.4 Flooding at some locations along Coon Creek 6.1.5 Potential groundwater depletion due to Increased use and decreased recharge associated with population growth and development. (LRRWMO_H2), (CCWD_Issue3) 6.2 WATER QUALITY CORRECTIVEACTION • City Code ensures that new development provide adequate emergency overflow to convey runoff from extreme rainfall events. • The City will be available to work with other agencies in determining the impact of Atlas 14 on regulatory flood elevation determination • The City will work with developers to minimize elimination of natural stormwater abstraction features and facilitate on -site retention, reuse and infiltration. Coordinate with CCWD to address flooding issue. Work with the Watershed and other interested agencies to sustainably manage groundwater, to meet water supply needs while minimizing environmental impacts and ensuring future resource availability. The City will continue to enforce lawn watering rules and comply with its MnDNR Water Appropriation permit, as well as encourage native, sustainable planting. The quality of stormwater runoff directly impacts downstream surface waters. When runoff contains significant concentrations of contaminants such as nutrients or sediment, the effects on local water bodies often include algal blooms, turbidity, and an overall reduction in water quality. This section identifies current water quality issues facing the City. Table 6.2.1: Issues and Actions - Water Quality I.D. ISSUE 6.2.1 Nutrient and sediment pollution in runoff from urbanization If development Impacting the Rum River, Coon Creek, and various lakes within the city. (LRRWMO_A3) 622 Excessive turbidity and aquatic invasive species in Crooked Lake CORRECTIVE ACTION • Enforce City Code requiring rate control and volume control, and the City s MS4 SWPPP. • Follow SWPPP street sweeping protocol. • Retrofit treatment to City projects as appropriate • Require development plans to meet permit requirements of MPCA, CCWD, and LRRWMO. • Support implementation of the goals and policies outlined by Coon Creek Watershed District. City of Andover SWMP Page 130 I.D. ISSUE CORRECTIVE ACTION 6.2.3 Previous trend of declining Based on the most recent available information, the water water quality of Round Lake quality in Round Lake has improved, altering the previous (LRRWMO A4) downward trend. The City will continue to be available to work with the LRRWMO, ACD and other regulatory agencies as necessary. 6.2.4 Elevated chloride levels in The City is taking a gradual approach to modifying salt County Ditch 6, as noted by the application procedures. Training is provided for City staff on Anoka Conservation District recommended salt practices, and practical measures for (ACD) reducing salt application where safe and feasible are being Restoration and Protection implemented. The City will work with the Anoka County (WRAP) projects Highway Department and the ACD to continue this effort. 6.1.5 The following water bodies are There is not an approved TMDL for AMB, while mercury is listed on the State's Impaired addressed by a state -wide TMDL. The City will be available to Waters (303d) List: work with agencies towards implementing strategies to meet • Coon Creek — Aquatic Waste Load Allocations or other reductions associated with Macroinvertebrate future TMDL studies, or similar. Bioassessments (AMB) • Rum River - Mercury • Crooked Lake — Mercury 6.2.6 Implementing recommendations A WRAP plan is currently underdevelopment by the MPCA or requirements of future Total with help from the Anoka Conservation District (ACD). The City Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) will work with the ACD, LRRWMO, and CCWD to implement studies or Watershed recommendations resulting from the findings of the Plan. Restoration and Protection (WRAP) projects 6.2.7 Susceptibility of groundwater to • The City will continue to implement its Wellhead Protection pollution from surface activity. Plan and amend as required. (LRRWMO —Hl), (CCWD Issue3) • The City will review development site designs to ensure adequate separation between infiltration areas and groundwater level, as required by the MPCA • The design, installation and Inspection of subsurface sewage treatment (SSTs) systems must be in conformance with Minnesota Rule Chapter 7080 6.3 SOIL EROSION The erosion of soil, whether natural or human - induced, can substantially Impact a community. Erosion along river banks or lake shores can alter property boundaries and undermine structures, while upland erosion can lead to decreased soil quality and increased surface water City of Andover SW MP Page 131 degradation, impacting natural ecosystems and public value. This section identifies current soil erosion and sediment transport issues facing the City of Andover. Table 6.3.1: Issues and Actions - Soil Erosion I.D. ISSUE 6.3.1 Erosion and sediment transport from construction sites pollute downstream waters. 6.3.2 The stream banks along the Rum River and Coon Creek have the potential for erosion. ( LRRWMO El) 6.4 WETLAND PROTECTION CORREcrivEACrfoN Enforce City Code related to erosion control and the City's MS4 SWPPP. Require development plans to meet permit requirements of MPCA, CCWD, and LRRWMO. • Coordinate with the CCWD to continue to implement the CCWD bank stabilization program. • Coordinate with the LRRWMO to undertake biannual bank inspection and assessment Throughout the region, wetlands have been drained or filled to accommodate agriculture and development, leading to a significant reduction in existing wetland area. Consequently, there has been a resulting decrease in natural stormwater treatment and volume reduction areas around the landscape. Wetland protection and preservation is key to a healthy stormwater management system, and the City relies on the CCWD and LRRWMO to enforce the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MICA). This section Identifies existing or potential wetland - related issues facing the City. Table 6.4.1: Issues and Actions — Wetland Protection I.D. ISSUE CORRECTIVE ACTION 6.4.1 Wetland degradation due to The LRRWMO and CCWD administer the Wetland development activities Conservation Act (WCA) for the City, protecting existing (LRRWMO —Dl) wetlands and ensuring proper mitigation is performed. The City assists in some capacities for enforcement needs. 6.4.2 Lack of knowledge among general Materials developed by watershed agencies and other public regarding the benefits of organizations to educate the public shall be made wetland functions and values, and available at community events, City Hall, and other what is allowed and not allowed in resident gathering places. wetlands ( LRRWMO) City of Andover SWMP Page 132 6.5 NPDES PHASE II / MS4 SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION The issues discussed in this section are directly addressed by the City's SWPPP, as required by the NPDES MS4 Permit. Specific issues requiring immediate attention for ongoing Permit compliance are summarized in Table 6.5. Table 6.5.1: Issues and Actions - MS4 SWPPP Implementation 1. D. ISSUE 6.5.1 Detecting illicit discharges of polluting materials into the surface water management system. 6.S.2 The need to assess BM Ps for continued effectiveness 6.5.3 BMP maintenance needs, including stormwater retention ponds with PAH- contaminated sediment 6.5.4 Potentially incomplete or outdated mapping of the City's stormwater management system (Part ILDA) CORRECTIVE ACTION The City will Implement and update its illicit discharge detection program. • The city will continue its inspection and maintenance program to ensure stormwater BMPs remain effective. • As required by the MS4 Permit, the City will develop a procedure to assess the performance of existing publicly -owned stormwater ponds, and subsequently develop a maintenance schedule. The City will continue to ensure its inspection and maintenance procedures conform with the MS4 Permit requirements The City will continue to update its stormwater asset management (map) system on a regular basis, and as necessary per Permit revisions 6.S.5 Lack of agreement between City Code This SWMP is the Water Resources Management Plan and the requirements of the MS4 referred to in City Code. Upon approval of this SWMP, Permit (Part II.D.2) the standards identified herein are therefore incorporated by reference into City Code. 6.5.6 Maintaining Enforcement Response Procedures (ERPs) that satisfy the Permit (Part II.D.3) 6.6 AQUATIC INVAsm SPECIES The City will continue to update its ERPs to ensure conformance with the Permit, as revised. The spread of Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) is an ongoing concern throughout the region, and significant effort is being dedicated to their control. Invasive species often out - compete native City of Andover SWMP Page 133 populations, causing reduced diversity, degradation of ecological systems, lowered water quality, and diminished property values. This section identifies AIS issues currently facing the City of Andover. Table 6.6.1: Issues and Actions - Aquatic Invasive Species I.D. ISSUE 6.6.1 Aquatic MIMI has been Identified as a concern on Crooked lake CORRECTIVE ACTION Analysis of the water quality Information for Crooked lake indicates that water quality has improved over the years and is suitable for recreation. A milfoil management program could be undertaken if the swimming beach is re- opened in Coon Rapids. Work with the City of Coon Rapids, the CCWD, and the Crooked lake Area Association to review the water quality data. 6.6.2 The potential for the spread of aquatic • Efforts to prevent the spread of Invasive species will invasive species into Andover's waters, likely be handled at the Watershed / County level; including but not limited to: carp, zebra the City will be available to work with the agencies mussels, curly leaf pond weed, Eurasian to implement measures deemed appropriate. water milfoil, etc. (CCWD_Issue1) City of Andover SW MP Page 134 7 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM The previous sections have described the surface water related resources within the City, as well as the City's general approach and requirements for protecting those resources. In this section, the specific actions being taken by the City in order to manage surface water and achieve compliance with applicable regulations have been identified and scheduled. This implementation program has been divided into two main components. The first part, outlined in Section 7.1, includes the current activities representing the City's ongoing surface water management program. Subsequently, Section 7.2 describes the new activities specified by this SWMP and other associated planning documents. 7.1 CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES Table 7.1.1 identifies the key surface water management activities currently in place in the City. These activities are expected to continue in fundamentally the same manner, modified as necessary in order to fulfill any applicable new requirements and reflect current City priorities. Table 7.1.1: Current / Ongoing Surface Water Management Program Activities ($: <$5,000 $$:$5,000 — $50,000 $$$: $50,000 - $100,000 $$$$: >$100,000) AcavrTr RE4 ID By DESCRIPTION TIME COST FRAME ESTIMATE 7.1.1 MS4 Public Education and Outreach Storm water update newsletter articles 1 /Qtr $ Local cable channel announcements 11Yr $ Document natural resources- related consultations Ongoing $ City of Andover /41-1 Public Service Announcements Ongoing $ Document pre - construction mtgs for new developments Ongoing $ Presentation to City Council 1/Yr $ Presentation to City Staff 1/Yr $ Document collaborative efforts with WD, WMO Ongoing $ 7.1.2 MS4 Public Participation and Involvement Document procedure for handling public input Ongoing $ Annual public meeting 1/Yr $ Place SWPPP online and make available at City Hall Ongoing $ Document public input Ongoing $ Add a street to Adopt -a- Street program 1/Yr $$ Volunteer Tree Planting Projects 1/Yr $ Annual Tree Sale 1/Yr $ 7.1.3 MS4 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) Document illicit discharge reports and responses Ongoing $ CItyof Andover SWMP Page 135 ACTIVITY REQ DESCRIPTION TIME Cosr ID BY FRAME ESTIMATE Post construction septic system maintenance /reports 2/Yr $$ Conduct/document storm sewer camera tests Ongoing $$ Conduct /document sanitary sewer system maintenance Ongoing $$ 7.1.4 MS4 Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control Enforce City Code related to erosion control $ Conduct construction site inspections and reporting Ongoing $ 7.1.5 MS4 Post - Construction Stormwater Management Review proposed developments for conformance Ongoing $ Conduct site Inspections to verify BMP implementation Ongoing $ Document raingarden consultations and implementation Ongoing $ 7.1.6 MS4 Pollution Prev. /Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Staff training in SW mgmt and SWPPP requirements. Ongoing $ SW mgmt system inspections, recordkeeping, mapping Ongoing $ Street sweeping 2x/Yr $$ Inlet and manhole cleaning, maintenance, and repair Ongoing $$ Storm sewer repair, replacement, and cleaning Ongoing $$ Ditch cleaning and repair Ongoing $$ Stormwater retention pond cleaning and repair Ongoing $$ Stormwater lift station maintenance Ongoing $$ Conduct construction site inspections and reporting Ongoing $ Fertilizer /Chemical Application licensing Ongoing $ Municipal Operations and Maintenance Ongoing $$ Storm Water System Maintenance Training Ongoing $ Automobile Maintenance Ongoing $$ Parking Lot and Street Cleaning Ongoing $$ Storm Drain System Cleaning Ongoing $$ Inspection of Structural Pollution Control Devices Ongoing $ 7.1.7 Related City Plans Implement Wellhead Protection Plan Ongoing $ Nondegradation Plan Ongoing $ 7.2 FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION ACTMTIES Table 7.2.1 outlines the new activities specified by this SWMP (and the incorporated SWPPP) that will need to be implemented as part of a compliant surface water management program, as well as items specifically listed in the City's 5 -year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) (DA32). To this end, if applicable, it has been noted which program or governing body requires the activity. City of Andover SWMP Page 136 Table 7.2.1: New Implementation items ($: <$5,000 $$:55,000- $50,000 $$$: $50,000 - 5100,000 $$$$: >$100,000) ACTIVITY REQ iD By DESCRIPTION TIME COST FRAME ESTIMATE 7.2.1 MS4 Verify that City documents and procedures reflect the 2015 $ standards identified in part B of the Post - Construction Stormwater Management section of the SWPPP, either Independently or by reference to this SWMP. 7.2.2 Update Developer's Handout to reflect new rainfall 2015 $ depth /frequency information from NOAA Atlas 14. 7.2.3 CC Coordinate with CCWD to address flooding issues along Coon Ongoing $ Creek 7.2.4 MS4 Write and approve Enforcement Response Procedures (ERP) 2015 $ for violations related to illicit discharges, construction site runoff control, or permanent stormwater control. 7.2.5 MS4 Identify /write /gather together relevant emergency response 2015 $ procedures (including spill response) 7.2.6 MS4 Identify inspection and maintenance field staff and document 2015 $ that they have received training in illicit discharge detection; identify and document inspection and maintenance procedures (construction site, permanent stormwater management, building, grading and stabilization), ensuring that Illicit discharge detection is included. 7.2.7 MS4 Create map of priority areas likely to have illicit discharges; 2015 $ include analysis of land use associated with business /industrial activities, areas where illicit discharges have been identified in the past, and areas with storage of large quantities of significant materials. 7.1.8 MS4 Identify current electronic and /or hard copy files used for illicit 2015 discharge recordkeeping, and update them to include all informational items listed in the MS4 Permit, Part III.D.3.h. 7.2.9 MS4 Identify current procedures, documents, and checklists used 2015 for construction site inspection, and update them to include all information items listed in the MS4 Permit, Part III.D.4.d. 7.2.10 MS4 Add additional structural stormwater BMPs (e.g., rain gardens) 2015 to the City web mapping application (retention and detention basins are currently mapped) 7.2.11 MS4 Develop a procedure and schedule for assessing the 2015 performance of ponds /BMPs within the City's operational jurisdiction R City of Andover SWMP Page 137 ACTIVITY REQ DESCRIPTION TIME COST ID BY FRAME ESTIMATE 7.2.12 MS4 Add map of municipal facilities with potential to contribute 2015 $ pollutants to runoff to the City web mapping application 7.2.13 MS4 Following completion of all items needed for basic SWPPP 2015 compliance, include all required information as a minor amendment and appendix to this SWMP. 7.2.14 MS4 Institute Adopt -a -Pond program within the City 2015 7.2.IS CIP Storm sewer improvements Annual 7.2.16 CIP Replace Elgin Street Sweeper #169 2016 7.2.17 CIP Replace Tymco Street Sweeper #172 2018 7.3 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS S Based on recent City data, continued implementation of regulatory controls and stormwater management system operations and upkeep will likely require $300,000 to $400,000 per year into the foreseeable future. These operations will continue to be funded primarily through the City's storm water utility fund, while occasional larger equipment purchases will require supplemental funding through bonding. Additional information related to stormwater management items is In the City's 5 -year CIP in the Digital Appendix (DA12). While the City does not currently have any specific stormwater- related capital projects planned for the next 5 years, it is possible that projects will arise periodically. Ongoing TMDL or WRAP studies, changing climate patterns, or local concerns, may require treatment or hydraulic improvements within the City. Funding these types of projects would be an additional expense not accounted for in the current operating budget, and outside funding sources would likely be necessary. Multiple agencies have funding programs aimed at aiding local government units in providing improvements to municipal systems, including the LRRWMO, CCWD, BWSR, MPCA, MnDOT, MnDNR, the Metropolitan Council, etc. Table 7.3.1 lists some of these programs. City of Andover SWMP Page 138 Table 7.3.1: Potential Stormwater Funding Sources I.D. FUNDING SOURCE APPROXIMATEAPP. DUE DATE $IMATCHREQ'D 7.3.1 Lower Rum River Watershed Management Open Varies Organization 7.3.2 Coon Creek Watershed District Open Varies 7.3.3 BWSR —Clean Water Fund Competitive Grants September Varies 7.3.4 MPCA —Clean Water Partnership Grants March Varies 7.3.5 MPCA —Section 319 Grants March Varies 7.3.6 MPCA —Clean Water Legacy: Surface Water October Varies Assessment, TMDL Impl., Wastewater and Stormwater 7.3.7 MPCA— Clean Water Revolving Fund March Varies 7.3.8 MnDNR — Outdoor Recreation Program March $100,000 / 50% 7.3.9 MnDNR — Parks and Trails Grants October 100% 7.3.10 MnDNR— Aquatic Invasive Species Grants Spring/Summer Varies 7.3.11 The Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund June Varies (LCCMR) City of Andover SWMP Page 139 FIGURES REFERENCED IN TEXT City of Andover SWMP Page 140 N NDc 6 o r .� OVER . B 0 2 miles scue PFEf —hom &odds , LLC www.npmm.mna :.r<m LEGEND ANDOVER MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY FIGURE 1.1.1: LOCATION MAP Third Generation Surface Water Management Plan Andover, MN 41 i R . Y U per Rum River WMO OAK GROVE �. t. ANDOVER Lower Rum River WMO ANOKA Background Image: USGS 2012 Coon Creek WD COON RAPIDS C I T Y O F LEGEND FIGURE 1.3.1: NDOVERI " — WMO BOUNDARY WMOS AND MUNICIPALITIES ' MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY Third Generation Surface 0 5000 Water Management Plan 1-73 scut•:: FEET Andover, MN 11, romeNO11M LLC wwwhre,om.moe: yam Page 42 LEGEND FIGURE 4.1.1: NDOVERE - MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY 100 -YR 24 -HR RAIN DEPTHS —]. # #— 100- YR24 -HR STORMISOHYErS Third Generation Surface 0 5000 (NOAA Atlas 14) Water Management Plan sauE: FEU Andover, MN Ny0romethods, LlC ww..nva.ommom,mm Paae 43 4361`. _ I 3267 702W � 1 - 3837 392Nf 86W I \ 69SW .. _ 40 1., Ward Lake 399W 3167 _\ _ 70 3157 37 407W 887 325W __. 87w, ':412W 416JV _. ao4w 411W, 415A 419W .4287 - -. -.- - 3337 3347 429W ?_ "t, 4237 33 1 6W V 433W 435W 704W 432W - 4317 1 Round Lahe 1 tow 74W 127 515!4` -. 6177 516W 90p Bunker Lake 34P` b28W - 623w] Crooked Lake Background Image: USGS 2012 C I T Y O P r* LEGEND FIGURE 4.2.1a: NDOVER MN DNR PUBLIC WATER MN DNR PUBLIC WATERS s MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY Third Generation Surface 0 5000 Water Management Plan � sruF FELT Andover, MN Xytlromethotls, LLC w,am.e.oa :.,am Page 44 e 9 &ckground Image: USGS 2012 ?f a I T Y O F (: LEGEND FIGURE 4.2.1b: wE NDOVER � MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DITCHES PUBLIC DITCH Third Generation Surface 0 5000 PRIVATE DITCH Water Management Plan SCALE: FEET � FLOW DIRECTION Andover, MN Hy hor—e h — ww.nW[omaNOaS.[om Page 45 [7' Z"' AOL W- 1!5' 1 75 Al ZIP U N j% 60 S A 'W 4 4L Background Image: USGS 2012 LEGEND FIGURE 4.2.2: ANNO M A Freshwater - Forested and Shrub Wetland 2013 NWI MAP Freshwater Emergent Wetland Third Generation Surface Freshwater Pond 5000 RiveNne Water Management Plan Hydromethods, LLC SCALE: FELT Lakes Andover, MN —hyd—thods.c— Page 46 LEGEND FIGURE 4.2.4: NDc i r y n h OVER Major Watershed Boundary HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS w e — - Mfnor Watershed Boundary Third Generation Surface 0 5000 1► Flow Dwechon Water Management Plan NNNNNNNNNEZ=:� Andover, MN scuE: Ee Hydromethods, LLC Page 47 NDOVER 0 5000 Hydromethods, LLC FEET w nyeromeenMS.rom LEGEND 100 -Year Floodplaln Municipal Boundary For Floodplaln Requirement, within Coon Creek WD Eaundarei contact the CCWD. Within MWMO Uwndarks, mntatt the Cny of Andover. FIGURE 4.2.8: 100 -YEAR FLOODPLAIN Third Generation Surface Water Management Plan Andover, MN 48 " FIGURE 4.3.1: CITY DP. LEGEND NDOVERJ • MnDNRAPPROPRIATION WATER APPROPRIATIONS PERMIT MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY Third Generation Surface 0 5000 Water Management Plan scua FEET Andover, MN MyAro .h.d, m LLC www nycrsmhnse.�om Page 49 - _ rll i Ward Lake I;F s F ��H I - T [n `I Y • S :.1.. _ • _ • ' - ` i • • Round Lake " 1 I ^: ! J , l t Bunker Lake ''y • Crooked Lake - • w •'; -Background Image: USGS 2012 j -,a S� „ " FIGURE 4.3.1: CITY DP. LEGEND NDOVERJ • MnDNRAPPROPRIATION WATER APPROPRIATIONS PERMIT MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY Third Generation Surface 0 5000 Water Management Plan scua FEET Andover, MN MyAro .h.d, m LLC www nycrsmhnse.�om Page 49 LEGEND FIGURE 4.4.1: C a r r o Mv N6R HSGA HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUPS HSG A/D Third Generation Surface HSG e 0 5000 HSG B/D Water Management Plan sN Andover, MN Hydromethods, LLO Open Water hw,Qm.moo..om Page 50 l ' 4 ---0 FlowLines i Public Ditch i Private Ditch - -.._.. Drainage Sensitive Drainage Analysis*`] Andover /FA i CCWD Boundary '; t r Image from CCWD �j A i 1 �`tiiv`7t M� r i 0 ._. 07. 1 • . ._.. 2 " FIGURE 5.1.1: NDOVER w. DRAINAGE SENSITIVE USE AREAS Third Generation Surface Water Management Plan Hyaromethods Andover, MN ..,,.nW.omnnoa :.rom Page 52 i I I i ' S 0 ._. 07. 1 • . ._.. 2 " FIGURE 5.1.1: NDOVER w. DRAINAGE SENSITIVE USE AREAS Third Generation Surface Water Management Plan Hyaromethods Andover, MN ..,,.nW.omnnoa :.rom Page 52 APPENDIX A: GOVERNING STATUTE AND RULE City of Andover SWMP Appendix MINNESOTA STATUTES 2013 10313.235 10313.235 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS. Subdivision 1. Requirement. (a) After the watershed plan is approved and adopted, or amended, pursuant to section 10313.231, the local government units having land use planning and regulatory responsibility for territory within the watershed shall prepare or cause to be prepared a local water management plan, capital improvement program, and official controls as necessary to bring local water management into conformance with the watershed plan within the time period prescribed in the implementation program of the watershed plan and, as necessary, shall prepare or cause to be prepared amendments to the local comprehensive plan. (b) Each town within the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott, and Washington authorized by general or special law to plan and regulate the use of land under sections 462.351 to 462.364 shall by resolution determine whether to prepare the local water management plan itself or to delegate all or part of the.preparation of the plan to the county. (c) Towns within counties that have adopted comprehensive plans applicable to the town must use county preparation of their plan to the maximum extent possible. Subd. 2. Contents. (a) Each local plan, in the degree of detail required in the watershed plan, shall: (1) describe existing and proposed physical environment and land use; (2) define drainage areas and the volumes, rates, and paths of storm water runoff; (3) identify areas and elevations for storm water storage adequate to meet performance standards established in the watershed plan; (4) define water quality and water quality protection methods adequate to meet performance standards established in the watershed plan; (5) identify regulated areas; and (6) set forth an implementation program, including a description of official controls and, as appropriate, a capital improvement program. (b) The Board of Water and Soil Resources shall adopt rules establishing minimum local plan standards and a model environmental management ordinance for use by local government units in implementing local water plans. The standards apply to plan amendments made to conform to changes in the watershed plans that are adopted under the board rules required by section 103B.231, subdivision 6. Subd. 3. Review. After consideration but before adoption by the governing body, each local unit shall submit its water management plan to the watershed management organization for review for consistency with the watershed plan adopted pursuant to section 103B.231. If the county or counties having territory within the local unit have a state - approved and locally adopted groundwater plan, the local unit shall submit its plan to the county or counties for review. The county or counties have 45 days to review and comment on the plan. The organization shall approve or disapprove the local plan or parts of the plan. The organization shall have 60 days to complete its review; provided, however, that the watershed management organization shall, as part of its review, take into account the comments submitted to it by the Metropolitan Council pursuant to subdivision 3a. If the organization fails to complete its review within the prescribed period, the local plan shall be deemed approved unless an extension is agreed to by the local unit. Copyright 0 2013 by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 2 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2013 103B.235 Subd. 3a. Review by Metropolitan Council. Concurrently with its submission of its local water management plan to the watershed management organization as provided in subdivision 3, each local unit of government shall submit its water management plan to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment by the council. The council shall have 45 days to review and comment upon the local plan or parts of the plan with respect to consistency with the council's comprehensive development guide for the metropolitan area. The council's 45 -day review period shall run concurrently with the 60 -day review period by the watershed management organization provided in subdivision 3. The Metropolitan Council shall submit its comments to the watershed management organization and shall send a copy of its comments to the local government unit. If the Metropolitan Council fails to complete its review and make comments to the watershed management organization within the 45 -day period, the watershed management organization shall complete its review as provided in subdivision 3. Subd. 4. Adoption and implementation. After approval of the local plan by the organization, the local government unit shall adopt and implement its plan within 120 days and shall amend its official controls accordingly within 180 days. Subd. 5. Amendments. To the extent and in the manner required by the organization, all amendments to local water management plans shall be submitted to the organization for review and approval in accordance with the provisions of subdivisions 3 and 3a for the review of plans. History: 1990 c 391 art 2 s 12;1990 c 601 s 21; 1995 c 176 s 1 -3; 1995 c 184 s 11 Copyright ® 2013 by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. A 1 CHAPTER 8410 BOARD OF WATER AND SOIL RESOURCES LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0010 SCOPE. 8410.0020 DEFINITIONS. 8410.0030 CONTENT OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS. 8410.0040 REMOVAL OF ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVES. CONTENT OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION PLANS 8410.0050 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8410.0060 LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY. 8410.0070 IMPACT ON OTHER UNITS OF GOVERNMENT. 8410.0080 ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES. 8410.0090 ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS. 8410.0100 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM. 8410.0110 IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT. , 8410.0120 IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES. 8410.0130 IMPLEMENTATION COMPONENTS. 8410.0140 PLAN CONTENTS; AMENDMENTS. 8410.0150 ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS: CONTENT OF LOCAL PLANS 8410.0160 GENERAL STRUCTURE. 8410.0170. STRUCTURE. 8410.0180 DETERMINATIONS OF FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT. METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0010 SCOPE. „ Subpart 1. Application. Upon adoption, parts 8410.0010 to 8410.0180 apply to the general administration of metropolitan watershed management activities and to amendments to existing plans made after January 1, 1995. If no plan has been submitted to the board by August 3, 1992; any plan thereafter submitted must be in compliance with parts 8410.0010 to 8410.0180. A watershed management organization must amend its plan consistent with parts 8410.0010 to 8410.0180 and submit amendments to the board according to its amendment schedule and amendment procedures outlined in part 8410.0140, but not later than ten years from the date of initial plan approval. Subp. 2. Failure to implement plans. When the board determines that a plan is not being properly implemented under an action initiated according to part 8410.0180; =and there is reason to believe that an improved plan would lead to improved water management, the board may direct the responsible authorities to develop an amended plan within a reasonable time frame. In making this determination, the board 'must consider items including, but not limited to: A. when the plan was approved and adopted; B. the status of local plan development and adoption; C. the scope and anticipated costs to amend; Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, .State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 8410.0020 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT D. the availability; of funds; and 2 E. the potential short- and long -term adverse impacts on the natural resources of the affected watershed. Statutory Authority: MS s 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0020 DEFINITIONS. Subpart 1. Scope. The definitions in this part and in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.205, apply to parts 8410.0010 to 8410.0180. Subp. 2. Board. "Board" means the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources created by Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.101. Subp. 3. Capital improvement. "Capital improvement" means aphysical improvement that is not directed toward maintenance of an in -place system during its life expectancy. Subp. 4. Metropolitan Council or council. "Metropolitan Council" or "council" means the Metropolitan Council as created by Minnesota Statutes, section 473.123. Subp. 5. Flooding problem. "Flooding problem" means a flooding problem that has been identified as a problem by the watershed management organization or local unit of government. Subp. 6. Groundwater plan. "Groundwater plan" means a county plan adopted under Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.255. Subp. 7. Local comprehensive plan. "Local comprehensive plan" has the meaning given "comprehensive plan" in Minnesota Statutes, section 473.852, subdivision 5. Subp. 8. Local government unit or unit. "Local government unit" or "unit" has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section 473.852, subdivision 7. Subp. 9. Metropolitan Water Management Act. "Metropolitan water management act" has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, sections 103B.201 to 103B.255. Subp. 10. Minor plan amendments. "Minor plan amendments" means items such as recodification of the plan, revision of a procedure meant to streamline administration of the plan,' clarification of the intent of a policy, the inclusion of additional data not requiring interpretation, or any other action that will not adversely affect a local unit of government or diminish a water management organization's ability to achieve its plan's goals or implementation program. Subp. 11. Minor watershed unit. "Minor watershed unit" means each of the approximately 5;600 minor watershed units delineated on ,the state watershed boundaries map prepared under the requirements of Laws 1977, chapter 455, section 33, subdivision 7, paragraph (a): Subp. 12. Metropolitan Urban Service Area or area. "Metropolitan Urban Service Area" or "area" has the meaning given on maps prepared by the Metropolitan Council. The latest version of the map identifying the area is incorporated by reference and is subject to periodic change. The latest version of the map identifying the area is available from the State Law Library through the Minitex interlibrary loan Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0020 system. The area is the seven -county metropolitan area that the council is committed by policy to provide regional planning for sanitary sewer, highway, transit, park, and airport facilities. Subp. 13. Natural surface water storage and retention systems. 'Natural surface water storage and retention systems" means public waters and wetlands as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005, subdivisions 15 and 19. Subp. 14. Official controls. "Official controls" has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section 473.852. Subp. 15. Plan. "Plan" means the watershed management plan prepared by a watershed management organization or county as required by Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.231, subdivision 1. Subp. 16. Plan review authorities.. "Plan review authorities" means the Metropolitan Council, the Department of Health, the Department of Natural Resources, the Pollution Control Agency, the Board of Water and Soil Resources, and counties, cities, towns, and soil and water conservation districts partially or wholly within the watershed management organization as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.231, subdivisions 7, 8, and 9. Subp. 17. Public waters. "Public waters" means waters of the state identified as public waters under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005, subdivision 15. Subp. 18. Seven - county metropolitan area. "Seven -county metropolitan area" means the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington, excluding the corporate boundaries of the city of New Prague. Subp. 19. Subwatershed unit. "Subwatershed unit" means a hydrologic area less than the entire area under the jurisdiction of a watershed management organization. Subp. 20.. Watershed. "Watershed" means a drainage area with boundaries: that are substantially coterminous with those of an aggregation of contiguous minor watershed units possessing similar drainage patterns and that cross the borders of two or more local government units. Subp. 21. Watershed district. "Watershed district" means a district established under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103D. Subp. 22. Watershed management organization or organization. "Watershed management organization" or "organization` means: (1) a watershed district wholly within the metropolitan area; or (2) a joint powers entity established wholly or partly within the metropolitan area by special law or by agreement that performs some or all of the functions of a watershed district that has the characteristics and the authority specified under Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.211. Counties may be watershed management organizations if a joint powers watershed management organization does not perform and the responsibility for plan preparation is deferred to the counties. Lake improvement or conservation districts are not watershed management organizations. 1 ' Subp. 23. 'Wetlands. "Wetlands" means waters of the state identified as wetlands under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005, subdivision 19.' Subp. 24. Wetland banking system. "Wetland banking system" means an accounting system established by a unit of government for the purpose of tracking and managing net losses and gains to wetland values that occur as a result of development. Statutory Authority: MS 103B.101; 1038211; 103B.231; 103B.227 Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. 8410.0030 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 4 8410.0030 CONTENT OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS. Subpart 1. Requirements. In addition to a description of any authorities adopted under the content requirements of joint powers agreements as outlined in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.211, subdivision 1, joint powers agreements establishing a watershed management organization must, at a minimum, contain the following items: A. a purpose statement consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.201; B. a complete legal' description defining the boundary of the organization; C. a requirement to adopt rules of order and procedure; D. a process for establishing an annual budget and work plan; E. a formula for determining each member's share of the annual operating budget; F. a statement of how member appointees are to be compensated; G. a procedure providing for the establishment of citizen and technical advisory committees or other means of public participation; H. a section defining the powers and duties of the organization; I. a section establishing the duties and terns of the officers of the organization; J. a notification process on the location and time of meetings; K. a section defining the voting requirements 'for decision making and capital improvements consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.211, subdivision 1, paragraph (c); L. a section outlining meetings to be scheduled at least annually; M. the process and responsibilities of the organization and its members for filling vacancies consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 10313.227, subdivisions 1 and 2; N. the duration of the agreement and a process for dissolution that provides for at least 90 days' notice of the intent to dissolve to the affected counties and the board; and O. a section defining 'how the membership will be represented, with the total number of representatives to be at least three. Subp. 2. Updating. Joint powers agreements must be updated if necessary to be in conformance with this chapter no later than July 27, 1993. Subp. 3. County membership. A county may be a member of ajoint powers agreement organization when the conditions described in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.211, subdivision 3, are present. Statutory Authority: MS 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 5 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0060 8410.0040 REMOVAL OF ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVES. A manager of a watershed district or a member of a joint powers board. may be removed from the position by the appointing authority before term expiration for violation of a code of ethics of the watershed management organization or appointing authority or for malfeasance, nonfeasance, or misfeasance, after being provided an opportunity for hearing before the appointing authority. Managers holding the position as an elected official who are not reelected, or are serving an indefinite term at the pleasure of the appointing authority, may be removed by the appointing authority at will. A decision of the appointing authority may be appealed to the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Statutory Authority: 'MS s 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17.SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 CONTENT OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION PLANS 9410.00510 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Each plan must have a section entitled "Executive Summary." The summary ' should outline the purpose of the watershed management, organization; the membership of the organization's board of managers; the general boundaries of the organization; a brief history of the organization; a summary of the organization's goals, problems, and potential solutions; and the general content of required local plans. Statutory Authority: MS 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17,$R 146 Posted: October 13; 1997 8410.0060 LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY. Subpart 1. Required. Each plan must contain an inventory of water resource and physical factors affecting the water' resources based on existing 'records7 and publications. If data publications and maps are available at a convenient central location, they may be included by reference. The plan must indlude a brief summary of the data and must identify where the publication can be obtained. At ,a minimum, the information in of 2 to 11 must be included in the plan. Subparts 2 and 4, item E, may be in the local plan instead of the watershed management organization plan. Subp,,2. Precipitation. Each plan must includeprecipitation data normally used in the seven -county metropolitan area for, hydrologic and hydraulic design. Subp. 3. General geology and topographic data. Each organization plan shall contains summary describing the general topographic relief, geology,, aquifers, and all known groundwater and surface water connections. The summary should reference available, publications and maps where data may be available in greater detail. A map defining appropriate subwatershed units within the organization must be included. Subp, 4. Surface water resource data. Necessary surface water data within the watershed includes: i A. a map of the public waters and public ditch systems established'under Minnesota Statutes; chapter 103D or 103E, including the location of existing dams and control structures; Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes; State of Minnesota' All Rights Reserved. 8410.0060 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 6 B. a copy of the National Wetlands Inventory Map produced by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and, if considered useful by the organization, a copy of the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District Mosquito Control Wetland Inventory; C. either an inventory of the functional values of the wetlands present, a provision for a phased project to create the inventory within a given time frame; or the adoption of a specific process to identify the functional values on a case -by -case basis for the review of individual project proposals, all of which must be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 10353355; D. a table of the major hydrologic characteristics of public waters if provided by the Department of Natural Resources in format that can be readily incorporated in a plan; E. maps showing the areas served by each existing stormwater system that identify existing stormwater ponds and the location of all stormwater outfalls; F. a table summarizing available information on the 100 -year flood levels and peak discharges of existing and proposed stormwater ponds.and flood profile information that corresponds to the peak discharges of channelized flow passing through the watershed. 'The plan shall determine the need for additional data and recommend a schedule for the data. A discussion must also be provided relative to the consistency of the flood profile information developed as part of the stormwater management plan to that of any information published in a Federal Emergency Management Agency flood insurance study; G. a general discussion of, or 'a map showing areas of, known flooding problems not identified as flood -prone in a published flood insurance' study; H. a listing of the existing flood insurance studies and a location of where they can be viewed; 1. a summary of water quality data and any related information, if available, from the Pollution Control Agency, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Health, the Metropolitan Council, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, the water management organization, the soil and water conservation district, and the affected counties and cities; J. a map or list, if available, showing the location of known existing and abandoned surface water quality and quantity monitoring sites; K. a list of municipalities with approved shoreland ordinances and projected completion dates for those without ordinances; and L. a table listing the amounts and locations of all surface 'water appropriations as permitted by the Department of Natural Resources and provided to the organization. Subp. 5. Groundwater resource data. Necessary groundwater data includes any data required to be included in the organization plan by a'county groundwater plan. If a county groundwater plan is not anticipated to be completed, the organization plan must include "groundwater data as necessary to allow groundwater issues to be addressed. Subp. 6, Soil data. Eacb- organization plan must include a general discussion of the types of soil present, their development limitations, their infiltration characteristics, and their tendency to erode. The discussion must include a list of references where more detailed data are available. Subp. 7. Land 'use and public utility' services. Necessary land use and public utility services information, is limited to information that existed at the time the plan or plan amendment was developed, including: Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Mirmesota. All Rights Reserved. 7 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0070 A. a general map of existing land uses; B. a general map showing anticipated land uses; and C. reference to the location of the metropolitan urban service area. Subp. 8. Water-based recreation areas and land ownership. Necessary information on water -based recreation areas and land ownership includes a map or a discussion of the location of all existing and proposed local, regional, state, and federal parks, preserves, wildlife areas, recreation areas, canoe routes, and water accesses available for use by the public. Subp. 9. Fish and wildlife habitat. Necessary information on fish and wildlife habitat includes: A. a list and description of the Department of Natural Resources ecological and management classifications for lakes and streams, where available; B. a list and description of the conclusions and recommendations of biological surveys or reconnaissance studies, where available; and C. a description of state management plans for fish and wildlife areas; where available. Subp. 10. Unique features and scenic areas. Necessary unique feature and scenic area information includes a map or a description or listing of unique features and scenic areas with relationships to water including state designated natural and scientific areas; areas containing county, state, and federal rare and endangered species; and other features such as waterfalls, springs historic, mills, and heritage elements identified by the Department of Natural Resources heritage program, to the extent it is available from the department. Subp. 11. Pollutant sources. Necessary information on pollutant sources includes a map or list from appropriate agencies of: A. known closed and open sanitary landfills, closed and operating open dumps, and hazardous waste sites identified under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 115A or 11513, and a summary of available water quality information relating to these sites; and B. feedlots;, abandoned wells as defined by the Department of Health, registered underground and aboveground storage tank sites, permitted wastewater discharges, and a summary of available water quality information relating to these sites. If the information in this subpart is included in a county groundwater plan, the information can be excluded from the organization' plan if suitable references are provided. Statutory Authority: MSs 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13,`1997 8410.0070 IMPACT ON OTHER UNITS OF GOVERNMENT. During the development of its plan or plan amendments, each watershed management organization shall request a summary of the relevant water management policies and goals.of each local, regional, and state review authority identified in Minnesota Statutes, section 10313.231, subdivisions 7, 8, and 9. The Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved 8410.0080 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8 organization shall take into consideration the goals and policies of the review authorities when drafting the organization's goals and policies. The organization's plan shall clearly outline and justify anticipated inconsistencies between its goals and policies and those of the authorities who responded if the requested information is furnished within 45 days of the organization's request. Statutory Authority: MS s 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0080 ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS AND POLICIES. Subpart 1. Plan contents. Each plan must contain specific goal statements and corresponding policies relating to the overall purposes specified in Minnesota Statutes, section 10313.201. The goals and policies of the watershed management organization shall attempt to avoid conflict with county, regional, or state goals and policies. The goals must be outlined in sufficient detail to provide direction regarding what the policies should accomplish; provide direction to the organization's board, and allow for the success or failure of the goals and policies to be quantified. The goals and policies should recognize the fundamental relationship between water quality and eland use. Development of goals and policies must, at a minimum, address the issues in subparts 2 to 9. Subp. 2. Water quantity. Each plan must outline goals and policies describing how stormwater runoff will be managed. The maximum allowable peak runoff must be established for appropriate subwatersheds to the extent necessary to assure that the goals and policies of the organization will be met and address how runoff from developments creating more than one acre of new impervious surface will be managed with respect to Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.3365. The plan must describe the criteria used for defining "appropriate subwatersheds." Subp. 3. Water quality. Each plan must outline specific water quality goals and policies for natural surface water storage and retention systems within the organization. Goals should be related to parameters or quantities that can be measured. The relationship of land use to water quality should he considered when developing goals and policies. The goals and policies should be developed to strive for compliance with applicable water quality standards and be suitable for the intended uses of natural surface water storage and retention systems. Subp. 4. Recreation and fish and wildlife. Each plan must outline how water resource based recreational activities and wildlife interests will be protected or improved through the implementation of the plan. In consideration of these issues, the plan must determine whether there is a need to classify or prioritize individual water resources for management purposes. Subp. 5. Enhancement of public participation; information and education. Each plan must outline goals and policies describing who will participate and when public participation will be encouraged. Goals and policies must at least address the creation and purposes of advisory committees and public information programs. Subp. 6. Public ditch systems. If public ditch systems constructed under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103D or 103E, are within the organization, the plan shall by policy define the organization's relationship to the ditch authority and recommend whether or not there are advantages to managing the ditch systems under the Metropolitan Water Management Act and determine whether ditch maintenance activities have the potential of adversely impacting any goal of the organization. Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 9 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0090 Subp. 7. Groundwater. If a county groundwater plan has not commenced atthe time the plan or plan amendment is initiated, the organization shall assess the need and degree of involvement the organization has in groundwater management and establish appropriate goals and policies. Subp. 8. Wetlands. Each plan must outline specific goals and policies regarding the management of wetlands within the organization and identify high priority areas for wetland preservation, restoration, and establishment. Wetland management goals and policies should address utilization, protection and preservation, and the enhancement or restoration of wetlands identified in the organization. Each plan must also evaluate the need to establish a wetland banking system. Subp. 9. Erosion. Each plan must identify specific goals and policies that will control soil erosion consistent with the goals and policies outlined in this part. Statutory Authority: MSs 103B. Mil- 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.127 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0090 ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS. Each plan must contain an assessment of existing and potential water resource related problems using a combination of analysis of land and water resource data collected under part 8410.0060 and through the identification of existing or potential problems by residents or local, regional, or state agencies. During the development of the assessment, the watershed management organization shall request a brief assessment of existing problems affecting the organization from the plan review authorities, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Agriculture based on data, plans, and other documentation in their possession. The organization should solicit comments from residents and local officials in the watershed district for information about problems that may be primarily local in nature The organization's assessment shall include a discussion of the relationship of locally identified problems to problems identified by the plan review authorities, provided the information is received within 45 days of the organization's,written request. The assessment of existing, and potential, problems as determined by the organization must, at a minimum, include the following topic areas: A. specific lakes and streams with water quality problems; B. flooding and stormwater rate control issues within and between communities; C. impacts of water quality and quantity management practices on recreation opportunities D. impacts of stormwater discharges on water quality and fish and wildlife resources; E. impact of soil erosion on water quality and quantity; F. general impact of land use' practices and, in particular, land development and` wetland alteration on water quality and water quantity; G. the adequacy of existing regulatory controls to manage or mitigate adverse impacts on public waters and wetlands; ' H. the adequacy of programs to: (1) limit soil erosion and water quality degradation; Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 8410.0100 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT and 10 (2) maintain the tangible and intrinsic values of natural storage and retention systems; (3) maintain water level control structures; L the adequacy of capital improvement programs to correct problems relating to: (1) water quality; (2) water quantity management; (3) fish and wildlife habitat and public waters and wetland management; and (4) recreational opportunities; and J. future potential problems that are anticipated to occur generally within a 20 -year period based on growth projections and planned urbanization identified in local and regional comprehensive plans. The assessments must include a discussion of the relationship between locally identified problems and the problems and goals identified in county, regional, state, and federal plans that are brought to the attention of the organization. Statutory Authority: MSs 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0100 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM. Subpart 1. Plan contents. Each plan must describe an implementation program consisting of nonstructural, structural, and programmatic solutions to the problems, issues, and goals identified under parts 8410.0080 and 8410.0090. In developing its implementation program, the requirements in subparts 2 to 7 must be followed. Each plan should clearly define the responsibility of the watershed management organization and the local units of government in carrying out the implementation program and further define the organization's role when a local unit of government is considering a variance or fails to implement its water resource management responsibilities. Subp. 2. Regulatory controls. In establishing required regulatory controls, items A to E must be considered. A. Each plan must provide for the regulation of activities in wetlands and specify respective duties of the organization and local units of government. Each plan must describe local controls and procedures regarding carrying out the local government responsibilities under the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991, Laws 1991, chapter 354, and any rules adopted under it. Each plan must also define any other controls the organization has determined to be necessary to achieve its water management goals that may be more restrictive than those required by the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991, Laws 1991, chapter 354. The description must consider, where applicable, the following topics: (1) the relationship of the organization, state agencies, local soil and water conservation districts, and affected counties, cities, and towns with respect to authority, administration, and coordination; (2) designated repositories for required maps or inventories of wetlands; (3) procedures related to enforcement; Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. it LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0100 (4) a description of local wetland banking programs and their relationship to a corresponding state program; and (5) the methods and procedures to be used in determining replacement of wetland values in mitigation proposals. B. The organization shall specify controls or programs to reduce erosion and sedimentation to receiving waters. In rural areas, agricultural crop land erosion may be controlled by implementing zoning ordinances consistent with part 6120.3300, subpart 7, and may include other water resources outside of designated shoreland areas as considered appropriate by the organization. Organizations affected by specific state laws requiring adoption of uniform countywide erosion and sediment control standards or programs must comply with those laws. Any other organization must either adopt by.reference an existing set of erosion and sediment control guidelines or best management practices published by a county, a soil and water conservation district, the board, or the Pollution Control Agency; or establish comparable erosion and sedimentation guidelines of its own for the purpose of administering erosion controls: C. Each plan must specify controls that require all appropriate building permits, 'driveway permits, and grading permits to contain enforceable provisions to protect soil from erosion during and after construction, including sites for which approved erosion control, plans are in place. D. Each plan must identify member local,units of government that have failed to adopt and administer a Department of Natural Resources approved shoreland and floodplain ordinance where mandated by state law. If the plan notes that flood damage has occurred outside of mapped floodplains or a potential for flooding exists adjacent to stormwater facilities, the plan shall require the local unit of government to determine if additional local controls are necessary to address the situation. E. If plan notes the existence of certain land uses that could adversely affect the organization's ability to achieve its water quality goals, and these uses cannot be properly managed.or regulated with existing controls, the uses constitute a public nuisance according to Minnesota Statutes, section 609.74. In those cases, the plan must provide for the adoption of local controls to define and abate the nuisances. For the purpose of this chapter, public nuisances may include any action, failure to act, or land use practice that would impair water quality if allowed to continue. Subp. 3. Stormwater and drainage design performance standards. Each plan must contain minimum standards and provide for appropriate controls for the design of new stormwater conveyance, ponding, and treatment systems consistent with the overall goals of the: organization plan and consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.3365, subdivision 4. Included will be performance standards that provide for: A. the establishment of target.in -lake nutrient, concentrations and corresponding pollutant loadings for sediment and nutrients; B. the establishment of maximum permissible runoff rates ;refor selected design storms based on considerations such as existing and future flood levels and expected incases in runoff volume .with respect to impacts on downstream channels and adjacent development; C. the establishment of standards to reduce the impacts of flooding on natural resources and personal and real property D. the establishment of design criteria for stormwater outlet structures to address floatable pollutants and to provide for access for maintenance and repair; Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota:. All Rights Reserved: 8410.0100 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 12 E. pond design methodology for nutrient entrapment consistent with the subwatershed goals; and F. compliance with pollutant loading for specific subwatersheds consistent with local, regional, and statewide plans in consideration of Pollution Control Agency water quality standards. Subp. 4. Information program.. Each plan must provide for the publishing of at least one written communication per year identifying the representatives on the organization's board, current advisory committee members, how to contract the organization, its role in local water management, the goals and policies of the organization, when public meetings are held, how the organization is financed, where: the plan can be viewed, and other information relative to the implementation of the plan. The communication may be accomplished through the publication of a newsletter, publication of all or a portion of an annual report, an article or news release submitted to a local newspaper widely distributed in the member communities, an attachment to a sewer or water bill, or other similar media format that annually reaches the general population. I Subp. 5. Data collection programs. A. Each plan must establish water quality and quantity monitoring programs that are capable of producing accurate data to the extent necessary to determine whether the water quality and quantity goals of the organization are being achieved. The programs shall, at a minimum, include the location of sampling, the frequency of sampling, the proposed parameters to be measured, and the requirement of periodic analysis of the data. B. Each plan should encourage all units of government collecting water quality and quantity management data to annually submit the data consistent with state compatibility guidelines to the organization and other appropriate state agencies for entry into public access data bases. Subp. 6. Management programs. Each organization plan must assess or require local plans to assess the need for periodic maintenance of public works, facilities, and natural conveyance systems and specify any new programs or revisions to existing programs needed to accomplish its goals and objectives. Each plan must further ideritify which units of government or private parties are responsible for maintenance. Each plan must, at a minimum, assess or require local plans'to assess: A. the need and frequency for sweeping of public and private streets and parking lots; 13, the need and frequency for inspecting stormwater,outfalls, sumps, and ponds; C. the adequacy of maintenance programs for stormwater facilities and water level control structures owned by both organization members and nonmembers; D. the condition of public ditches constructed under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103D or 103E, if the organization has jurisdiction over these systems; E. the need to establish a water body management'elassification system to'provide for water quality and quantity management based on a hierarchical basis F. the need to establish local spill containment clean-up plans; and G. the need for other management programs as considered necessary. Copyright ®1997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. 13 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0120 All proposed management programs establishing a classification system for the management of water bodies shall be consistent with chapter 7050. If organization classifications are inconsistent, the organization shall petition the Pollution Control Agency to revise the classifications in chapter 7050. Subp. 7. Potential structural solutions to problems. A. Each plan that documents existing water management problems that cannot be resolved by preventative actions shall investigate the feasibility of implementing structural solutions that would remediate or resolve each problem. B. For each structural solution proposed, each plan shall provide a cost estimate and a recommendation as to how it should be funded. C. Each potential structural solution identified under this part shall be assigned priorities. In assigning priorities, consideration shall be given to regional and state plans in conjunction with the organization's goals, policies, and problems identified in parts 8410.0080 and 8410.0090. Statutory Authority: MS 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0110 IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Subpart 1 Existing local controls. Each plan shall review the impact of local controls and programs required by the plans according to part 8410.0100. This review shall include concerns expressed by counties; cities, and townships with respect to their administrative and financial capabilities to adopt and enforce the controls and programs in addition to a table that generally describes the status of local controls and programs of affected Bounties, cities, and townships with respect to that required by the plan. Subp. 2. Financial impact on local government. Each plan shall contain an analysis of the financial impact of implementation of the proposed regulatory controls and programs identified' under part 8410.0100. The analysis shall include, at a minimum, an estimate of the costs associated with the plan's implementation and anticipated sources of revenue. Subp. 3. Adoption by reference. All or part of a watershed, management organization plan may be adopted by reference by a local unit of government for all or part of its local plan to the degree specified in the approved organization plan. Statutory Authority: MS s 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227, History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0120 IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES. Each plan must prioritize the plan implementation components to make the best use of available local funding; to prevent future water management problems from occurring to the maximum extent practical; and to ensure that regional; county; state, and federal grant funding is targeted properly. Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. 8410.0140 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT Statutory Authority: MSs 103B,101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 1038.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0130 IMPLEMENTATION COMPONENTS. 14 Subpart 1. Controls. Each organization plan must provide for the adoption of necessary regulatory controls, stormwater design standards, education programs, data collection programs, and maintenance programs that the plan identifies under part 8410.0100. Subp. 2. Responsibilities. Each organization plan must clearly distinguish the responsibilities of the watershed management organization versus the responsibilities of affected counties, cities, and townships with respect to each implementation program element established according to part 8410.0100. Subp. 3. Schedule. Each organization plan must include a schedule for implementation by the organization, joint powers agreement members, and affected local units of government. All plan controls and programs to be implemented by the organization must be in effect within one year of plan adoption. All local plan controls and programs must be developed and in effect within two years of adoption of the last organization plan in the local unit of government. Subp. 4. Capital improvement program. Each organization plan shall include a capital improvement program that identifies specific capital improvements necessary to implement the water resource management goals and policies of the organization. Subp. 5. Enforcement. Each organization plan must identify the procedure to be followed to enforce violations of the controls of the organization as well as those of the local unit of government. Subp. 6. Administration process. Each organization plan must specify the administrative process and timelines for the submittal, review, and approval of local plans and variances by the organization. Statutory Authority: MSs 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997` 8410.0140 PLAN CONTENTS; AMENDMENTS. Subpart 1. Amendment section. Each plan must contain a section entitled "Amendments to Plan" containing the year the plan extends to and establishing the process by which interim amendments may be made and who may initiate the amendments. Subp. 2. General amendment procedure. All amendments to a plan must adhere to the review process provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.231, subdivision, 11, except when the proposed amendments constitute minor amendments and: A. the watershed management organization has held a public meeting to explain the amendments and published a legal notice of the meeting twice, at least seven days and 14 days before the date of the meeting; B. the organization has sent copies of the amendments to the affected local units of government, the Metropolitan Council, and the state review agencies for review and comment; and Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. 15 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0150 C. the board has either agreed that the amendments are minor or failed to act within 45 days of receipt of the amendments. Subp. 3. Minor amendments to capital improvements. Amendments to an approved plan's capital improvement program may be considered to be minor plan amendments if the following conditions are met: A. the original plan set forth the capital improvements but not to the degree needed to meet the definition of "capital improvement program" as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 10313.205, subdivision 3; and B. the affected county or counties have approved the capital improvement in its revised, more detailed form. Subp. 4. Form of amendments. Unless the entire document is reprinted, all amendments adopted by the organization must be printed in the form of replacement pages for the plan, each page of which must: A. on draft amendments being considered, show deleted text as stricken and new text as underlined; B. be renumbered as appropriate; and C. include the effective date of the amendment. Subp: 5. Distribution of amendments. Each organization must maintain a distribution list of agencies and individuals who have received a copy of the plan and shall distribute copies of amendments within 30 days of adoption. All organizations should consider sending drafts of proposal amendments to all plan review authorities to seek their comments before establishing a hearing date or commencing the formal review process. Statutory Authority: MS s 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History:. 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0150 ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. Subpart 1. Requirement for annual financial, activity, and audit reports. Within.120, days , of the end of the watershed management organization's fiscal year, each organization shall submit to the board a financial report, an activity report, and an audit report for the preceding fiscal year if it has expended or accrued funds during this time, These reports may be combined into a single document:, The audit report for the preceding fiscal year must be prepared by a certified public accountant or,the state auditor and forwarded to the state auditor's office within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year. Subp. 2. Content of annual financial report. The aanualfinancial report must include the following information: A. the approved budget; - B. a reporting of revenues; C. a reporting of expenditures; and Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 8410.0150 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 16 D. a financial audit report or section that includes a balance sheet, a classification of revenues ' and expenditures, an analysis of changes in final balances, and any additional statements considered necessary for full financial disclosure. Subp. 3. Content of annual activity report. The annual activity report must include the following information: 1 11 A. a list of the organization's board members, advisory committee members, and board member vacancies at the end of the reporting year, including the names of designated officers and members and information on how members can be contacted, and indicating the governmental organization that each board member represents for joint powers organizations and the county that each member is appointed by for watershed districts; B. a list of organization employees and consultants, including mailing addresses and telephone numbers; C. an assessment of the previous year's annual work plan that indicates whether the stated goals and objectives were achieved and, if they were not achieved, indicates why they could not be achieved;' D. a projected work plan for the next year indicating the desired goals and objectives; E. a summary of the permits or variances issued or denied under ordinances or rules required by the organization or local plan and any enforcement actions initiated by either the organization or its local units of government; F. a summary of water quality monitoring data collected by the organization or its local units of government; G. an evaluation of the status of local plan adoption and implementation based on a review of the local unit of governments' activities by the organization during the past year; H. a copy of the written communication required by part 8410.0100, subpart 3; I. the organization's activities related to the biennial solicitations for interest proposals for legal, professional, or technical consultant services under Minnesota Statutes, section 10313.227, subdivision 5; J. an assessment of changes in fund balances, including a description of the costs of each program element with respect to the overall annual budget; and K. the status of any locally adopted wetland banking program. Subp. 4. Procedure for state audit. The board shall use the procedure described in items A to D to determine whether to order a state financial or performance audit of an organization. A. Before the board will consider ordering a state audit, a'written complaint must be filed with the board's executive director requesting the board to order a state audit. > The complaint must state as specifically as possible the grounds for requesting a state audit. Valid grounds for requesting a state audit include the mishandling or misuse of public funds or the documented failure to implement an approved plan. B. The executive director shall determine whether there is a basis for a complaint before reporting the complaint to the board. The executive director shall ensure that the affected organization is notified of the complaint and given an opportunity to respond to the allegations before determining whether there is a basis for the complaint. Copyright ®1997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 17 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0170 C. If the executive director determines there is a basis for the complaint, the complaint shall be reported to the board. The affected organization shall be given an opportunity to appear before the board at the time the complaint is reported to it and respond to the allegations in the complaint. The complainant shall also be given an opportunity to appear. D. After having the complaint reported to it, and after providing an opportunity for the organization and the complainant to be heard by it, the board shall decide whether to order a state financial or performance audit of the organization. Statutory Authority: MS 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 CONTENT OF LOCAL PLANS 8410.0160 GENERAL STRUCTURE. Each local plan must, at a minimum, meet the requirements for local plans in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.235, except as provided by the watershed management organization plan underpart 8410.0110, subpart 3. Each local plan must include sections containing a table'of contents; purpose; water resource related agreements; executive summary; land' and water resource inventory establishment of goals and policies; relation of goals and policies to local, regional; state, and federal plans, goals, and programs; assessment of problems; corrective actions; financiaLconsiderations ;,implementation priorities; amendment procedures; implementation program; and an appendix. Each community should consider including its local plan as a chapter of its local comprehensive plan. Each local plan shall be adopted within two years of the board's approval of the last organization plan that'affects local units of government. Statutory Authority: MSs 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 , Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0170 STRUCTURE. Subpart 1. Purpose. Each local plan must have a section entitled "Purpose" outlining the purposes of the water management programs required by Minnesota Statutes, sections 103B.205 to 103B.255. Subp. 2. Water resource management' related agreements. Appropriate water resource management related agreements that have been entered into by the local community must be outlined, including joint powers agreements related to water management that the local community. may be party to between itself and watershed management organizations, adjoining communities, or private parties. Available information concerning these agreements in general' conformance with the content of joint powers agreements for organizations as outlined in part 8410.0030 must be included.' Subp. 3. Executive summary. Each plan shall have a "section entitled "Executive Summary" that generally summarizes the content of the local plan in a manner similar to that required for organization plans under part 8410.0050 Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota: All Rights Reserved 8410.0170 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 18 Subp. 4. Land and water resource inventory. Each local plan must contain a composite land and water resource inventory containing all relevant data from organization plans affecting it consistent with the data required by part 8410.0060. Subp. 5. Establishment of policies and goals. Each local plan must state specific goals and corresponding policies related to the purpose of these plans, be consistent with the policies and goals of the organization plans within the city or township, and address the relation of the local plan to the regional, state, and federal goals and programs outlined in part 8410.0070. Subp. 6. Assessment of problems. Each plan must contain a summary assessment of existing or potential water resource related problems, including those identified in organization plans that affect the community. The problem assessment must be completed for only those areas within the corporate limits of the community and meet the same content requirements as those outlined for organization plans under part 8410.0080, subparts I and 2. Subp. 7. Corrective actions. Each local plan shall describe nonstructural, programmatic, and structural solutions to the problems identified in subpart 6. The mandatory actions for organization plans outlined in part 8410.0100, subparts 1 to 6, shall be considered except that actions must be limited to those that can be implemented at a local level. All corrective actions must be consistent with the organization plans having jurisdiction'in the municipality or township. Subp. 8. Financial considerations. Each local plan must contain an analysis of the financial impact of implementation of the proposed regulatory controls and programs identified under subpart 7. The analysis must include, at a minimum, the following items: A. the estimated cost of adoption and enforcement of local controls and standards for the local municipality; B. the estimated annual cost of implementation of other specified programs to each local municipality; C. a discussion of local ability to fund adoption of and enforcement of local controls and standards, implementation of other specified programs, and capital improvements, including: (1) levy limit constraints; (2) effect on other city funding needs; (3) establishment of watershed management taxing districts; (4) ,creation ofstormwater .utilities ;,and (5) monetary impact against homes or farmsteads in affected community; D. the impact on the local municipality of local implementation of each capital improvement project component if ad valorem financing is used; and E. a summary of grant funding that would likely be available to fund water management projects and programs. Subp._ 9. Implementation priorities. Each local plan must prioritize implementation components to make the best use of available local funding and prevent future water management problems from occurring to the maximum practical extent. Local plans must prioritize organization plan implementation components Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 19 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0180 in line with organization priorities as outlined under part 8410.0120 only for implementation components that must be facilitated by the local municipality or township. Subp. 10. Implementation program. Each local plan must outline required implementation components that apply of a local level. These components shall be consistent with the required plan components outlined for organization plans under part 8410.0130. Official local controls must be enacted within six months of adoption of the local plan. Subp: 11: Amendment procedures. Each local plan must contain a section entitled "Amendments to Plan" containing the year the plan extends to and establishes the process by which amendments maybe made. The amendment procedure shall conform with the plan amendment procedure outlined in the organization plans that affect the community. Local plan amendments must be forwarded to each organization affected by the local plan amendment for review and approval before adoption. Subp. 12. Submittal and review. After consideration and before adoption, the local plan shall be submitted to all affected organizations for review according to Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.235. Each local unit of government must also notify affected organizations within 30 days of adoption and implementation of the plan, including the adoption of necessary official controls. Statutory Authority: MS 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 8410.0180 DETERMINATIONS OF FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT.. Subpart 1. Applicability. This part applies when a plan is not being implemented for watershed either because no watershed management organization exists, because the organization has not adopted an approved plan, or because the approved plan is not being carried out. Subp. 2. Establishing cause. Before the board's involvement in determinations of whether a plan is being properly implemented, the board shall first establish just cause for the determination by review of a written complaint from an aggrieved party or through conclusions arrived at by board staff under the review of an organization's annual report. A complaint or appeal made by an aggrieved parry under Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.231, subdivision 13, must be made in writing to the executive director of the board and must summarize the issues at dispute and the efforts the party made to resolve the problem. Subp. 3. Board staff responsibilities. ' :A. Board staff may investigate issues relating to alleged failure to implement plans primarily by response from written complaint from an aggrieved party or by: review; of the organization's annual report. Within 30 days of receiving a written complaint, board staff are required to initiate a preliminary investigation of the facts as they appear based on personal observation, review of all relevant documents, and discussions with involved parties. The results of this preliminary investigation shall be reviewed with the executive director, "and the board's legal counsel if appropriate, before preparation of a report. The report shall ascertain whether a failure to implement exists, define the exact nature of the failure to implement, and recommend a course of action. B. On completion of a report regarding a complaint or review of an annual report, the staff shall send a copy of its report by certified mail to the organization members of record to set a time and place for a meeting agreeable to all parties to informally discuss the contents of the report if a conflict exists. The Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 8410.0180 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 20 complainant and any other aggrieved or affected party shall also be sent a copy of the report by certified mail and shall be invited to attend any meeting held to discuss the report. C. The affected organization shall be allowed 30 days to hold a public meeting to develop a formal course of action if the joint powers agreement requires that process. Any formal response shall be sent by certified mail to the board and any aggrieved or affected party within 15 days of the meeting. D. The affected organization and any aggrieved or affected party may not appeal to the board's dispute resolution committee ,established under Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.101, subdivision 10, to hear and resolve disputes over plan implementation until after the meeting has been held according to item B. E. Based on information discovered at the meeting held according to item B, or receipt of the formal response received from the organization according to item C, board staff shall report to the board at a regular meeting as to the status of the dispute. If the board needs to take further "action to resolve the dispute, board staff shall recommend the appropriate course of action, consulting with the board's legal counsel as appropriate. Subp. 4. Board responsibilities. A. On receipt of the board staffs report and recommendations, the board is required to do any or all of the following: (1) nothing further if the staffs investigation finds that the subject plan is being properly implemented, provided the board concurs; (2) advise board staff to conduct additional fact finding it considers necessary and report back to the board accordingly; (3) order the dispute resolution committee to convene to attempt to negotiate the matter and to advise the board further; or (4) issue findings of fact and conclusions of its investigation'advising the affected organizations, county, or counties of the documented failure to implement the subject plan and advise the appropriate unit of government of its responsibility to implement the plan under Minnesota Statutes, section 10313:231, subdivision 3; paragraph (b), within a prescribed period of time. B. On issuance of its findings under. subpart 3, item A, the board shall notify the appropriate counties to proceed as required by Minnesota Statutes, section 10313.231, subdivision 3, paragraph (b) or (c), as applicable. If a county fails to act after it is notified, the board shall notify state agencies that they may initiate their prerogatives under Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.231, subdivision 3, paragraph (g). C. The board's dispute resolution committee has the following duties and responsibilities with respect to disputes relating to failure to implement a plan: ,(1) convene and hear appeals from both aggrieved parties and organizations not satisfied with the findings and recommendations of the board's staff report presented at the meeting required by subpart 2; and (2) convene at the pleasure of the board as prescribed by item A to attempt to negotiate and settle disputes over determinations relating to implementation of plans and to further advise the board. Statutory Authority: MS s 103B.101; 103B.211; 103B.231; 103B.227 Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 21 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT 8410.0180 History: 17 SR 146 Posted: October 13, 1997 Copyright 01997 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. APPENDIX B: CURRENT ZONING, FUTURE LAND USE, AND SEWER STAGING MAPS City of Andover SWMP Appendix Scenic Rlwr W*y msa.n am 3 MUSA I -m-® I I� ri(PHJ I `i I Inc, • 3.359 reel w.. 1 w 6453 RA Fr Land Vie maM L (DOVE Incorporated 1974 Comprehensive Plan Figure 2.4 FUTURE LAND USE MAP a tlle. la, a,:--: e�;o: >,„m::,`•: °nA..o:::1aT��;a ..,..,;, ;w'H:I;»a1Po _..... uaP ml. Pm1Pa,v Zola LEGEND Land Use Aues %Dr anal _ RU,m Realaentla 106222 ae s•.: URL- U,Wn Reeleeneal Lae ]068 21 1] 154 URM- URan ReatlmtlM MCJIUm 25259 11% i-URH- U,Ean Mapwltltl Hlptl 1,I all .1 lP- Tramlllon.I ReaWenllal 1.122 O.I59: ' LC- LIm11M COmme,cW IesI p02N -... I UMlee commertaYMmmm o.min 29a2 au ^-LawO- JN - RelpnbomwM COmmertal 22 e62 12L I-w- rre,erl Comm ... Wl 300 557 1]54. ® TC - TanslUO,.+I Lomme,clal 18 591 024 .... _ -� n.U9n...... 25516 Mx " -" lllllll, P - N.H. as. 214 1. RRR -RU,el R-1. 920404 0]5% 005 Dpmspu 1]526 6094 lllllll, AG Ap,ICUItuM 9].2 419° . meer 0568] 211 RI0I Ot VMY 216229 BeP, pe rre MUSA Boundary ... ®City Limits 22312.39 t00% Gross Residential Density Range by Land Use - .. �. Land Use Density Range CRR- RurYRe.I6m64 401004- 11.Peracra i URL - U,Wn ReY6ntltl WW I.25b].6 aB.[aracre PUS matlmum tlen.11y l.. unla per crt _ URY- UR.n ROI6enIMI MCNUm 101. a Pipe .1... PUD MPlnum pn.ay I.6 unla Per KM -URH -urpan fe"I'l .I Hq, pro 12 Pill. .1 cn uo m.nmum een.11Y 1.115 unlb Per.n. T K I I 1 1815TAVE 1615TAVE mA < a Q 17ITH AVE is o 0 b ■ -... w 1651H AVE E ` V y ■ ■ ttdA ■ �f "1. TANCE BLVD ,Q 161STAVE . ■ 159TH AVE as as as se - as as . , will 15iTN AVe . p Ilk W E .r.y z` (p 8 L..i z. oPOe I - i j ■ y' ROUND se asesse r -- LAKE ,,; eare i �li -1 .-1 SOON CREEK DR i- IRIMUL WILea...--..., ' _ ins] o c .., cep s, ,BUNKER LAKE BLVD BUNKER LAKE BLVD 1 Document Path H9Gisdata \PWnning\PM)ects \MUSA_Figure_2 5_010515 mad NDOVE _ Incorporated 1974 Sewer Staging Plan The Sewer Staging Plan divides undeveloped land within the Municipal Urban Service Area into five year growth stages based primarily on the proxmimity, of municipal sewer and water. The growth stages are intended to provide a reasonable estimate of urban growth to the year 2030. City of Andover - Planning Department 1685 Crosstown Blvd NW Andover, MN 55304 (763) 75551 00 Map Date: December 2014 L E G E N D - - - - -- MUSA Boundary 2005 -2010 2010 -2015 2015 -2020 2020 -2025 — 2025 -2030 Rural Reserve 0 2.500 5,000 10000 0 0.25 a5 Felt 1,5 2 Miles APPENDIX C: CITY PARKS AND TRAILS MAP City of Andover SWMP Appendix /IfWNA 1.11,14 V TRIBES 1"A �1 1 Mel CI 0: AM N oIAMaver Enpin..rin9 wP.rlrnent A 11a CounAMer.r IS n1:a ty .c. Awb cops A .. .......or. omop wQ Ow.r.wr. wnpss ee.a ine. • JdsO het EIONERA 81RN1 7REf1 I 6A City Map Key for Parks & City Features L E G E N D NDOVE In PARKS & TRAILS MAP P. op. 0 Z.. 15 Pk N.b.r NN a M p. y vB.WnE CA;P A City fleau s N� ®n City Map Key for Parks & City Features MrrPW. M.Wrm Ill 1414 I—AW x �I.m�uww nD III nlli.— IlD IT City Features: amk.�wry.hY.•.�= +•��.�*r1....R�,pp1 l Ill 1414 I—AW x nD III nlli.— IlD Ill 1414 I—AW x nD IlD City Features: amk.�wry.hY.•.�= +•��.�*r1....R�,pp1 l wp �w .o erY _ obAi �...crr r pYrP / GmW Lb Elesm. 3obo1 l� mbMWle.abd tl' ArJUrvPert[Ir. in 6b0on X1 psvrNiN [en¢r ArJOV Piljll— on X3 Yvflimv C.. l—, eery Hy4wy0.prwn l � ^9b0o.tll (. 0.m Prwr Qbesebry Y AmkuEO ®ylikrvy n`Gal(COUw 6YeYY Risk ri /.ute Cpibr p.rke MeaYeme � I.p� &b4 W Oy9me APPENDIX D: DEVELOPER'S HANDOUT City of Andover SWMP Appendix CITY OF ANDOVER SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAINAGE PLAN REVIEW DEVELOPER'S REQUIREMENTS As part of the Andover's Third Generation Surface Water Management Plan (2015), the City has developed a number of policies to address storm water management. Developers are responsible for reviewing Watershed Management Organization or Watershed District permitting requirements and meeting design requirements as necessary. Water Quantity Design Standards ITEM DEscmp ION Water Quantity City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 11 Stormwater leaving a site must be routed to a public drainage system. Where there is a catch basin/low point in the street, an emergency overflow must be provided at an elevation no more than 6 inches above the curb in that location. Activities such as placement of structures, fill, or other activities that will increase the flood stage of the 100 -year or regional event are prohibited. A hydrologic /hydraulic model must be submitted with all development plans. All hydrologic' studies will be based on standard hydrologic criteria and ultimate or anticipated development of the entire tributary drainage area. The SCS unit hydrograph method is preferred; however, other methods are permitted. Improvements to a structure must be above the regulatory, 100 -year flood elevation. If the Improvements are more than 50% of the current value of the structure, the entire structure must be brought into compliance with the current floodplain regulatory requirements. Drainage calculations for rate and volume control must be submitted in accordance with CCWD or LRRWMO requirements, and approved as part of any development applications prior to the Issuance of any building or grading permit. The post- development runoff rates from the site may not exceed predevelopment rates per requirements from the CCWD or LRRWMO. Within Drainage Sensitive Use Areas (Figure 5.1.1; also see CCWD Watershed Management Plan for locations and additional Information), rate control calculations showing that the post - development 100 -year peak flow rate shall not exceed predevelopment 25 -year peak flow rate (by subwatershed) shall be submitted. A Drainage Sensitive Use Area is defined as all those land uses that depend on subsurface drainage (i.e. local draining of the soil profile) for their continuation. For Non - Drainage Sensitive Use Areas, the post- development 100 - year peak flow rate shall not exceed the predevelopment 100 -year peak flow rate. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 11 ITEM DESCRIPTION W orer Quan[i[y City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 12 i Design storm events shall be defined using the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Type -II distributions, with rainfall amounts taken directly from the NOAA Atlas 14 website. The web site address is: http: / /hdsc.nws.noaa.aov /hdsc /pfds /pfds map cont.html ?bkmrk =mn. The map navigation features can be used to zoom in and locate the particular site of interest. Double - clicking on a particular location allows the user to see rainfall values for that location. Rainfall amounts are provided for a wide range of recurrence intervals and durations, including the 1 -year, 2-year, 10-year, 25 -year, and 100 -year, 24 -hour storms. To determine the rainfall amount for the back -to -back 100 -year, 24 -hour storms, the rainfall amount for the 100 -year 24 -hour storm shall be doubled, and a duration of 48 hours shall be used. Runoff depth for the 100 -year, 10 -day snowmelt shall be 7.2 inches assuming frozen soil conditions. The 100-year, 10-day runoff event shall be 8.5 inches. Major storm water facilities (i.e., ponds, pond outlet systems, and major conveyance systems) will be designed using a 100 -year event. All minor drainage systems and local storm water collection systems analyses and design will be based on a 10 -year event unless otherwise specified. For all storm water facilities (ponds, wetlands, storm water treatment ponds, ditches, etc.), design will include access for maintenance of the outlet structure and to the facility in general. Access will be a minimum 20' wide drainage and utility easement at a slope of 10:1 or flatter. Culvert crossings or storm sewer systems in County or State right -of -way may have a design frequency that differs from the 10 -year. Each agency shall be contacted to determine the appropriate design frequency. The design of storm water facilities shall consider and identify location(s) of overflow(s) that prevent damage to adjacent properties from extreme water levels. Available storage volume of landlocked areas shall be established by estimating the water surface elevation resulting from a 100-year, 10-day snowmeit runoff event, 300 -year, 10-day runoff event, or back -to -back 100 -year, 24 -hour events, whichever is greater. The starting elevation of the water body prior to the event shall be either the existing Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) as established by the MnDNR, or the elevation of hydric soils or highest anticipated water level, as determined by a geotechnical engineer. Emergency overflows or outlets to drainage systems shall be provided to any landlocked area if the available storm water storage capacity is inadequate to prevent flooding of residences and if the available downstream conveyance system capacity is adequate to accept additional flow. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 12 i ITEM DESCRIPTION vote' Q'iCntlty For volume control, the City requires developers to infiltrate storm water runoff in areas where the risk to groundwater Is minimal, the land use is compatible, and soil is conducive to infiltration. For projects that use infiltration, the following policies apply: a. Pretreatment of storm water in accordance with the Minnesota Stormwater Manual will be required prior to discharge to an infiltration basin. b. The infiltration basin will be sized to infiltrate 1 inch of runoff from the new impervious surface area in 48 hours. c. Absent any better Information, minimum infiltration rates of the soil shall be computed based on the current Minnesota Stormwater Manual guidelines. Watershed requirements for verification of infiltration rates must be followed where applicable. The following table of infiltration rates per soil type is reproduced from the Manual: Hydrowc Soil Gross hdgtratlon Rate In/hr son tenures Corresponding Unified Soil Classification gravel GW - well - graded gravels, sandy gravels 1.63 sandy gravel GP - gap - graded or uniform gravels, sandy gravels silty gravels GM - silty gravels, silty sandy gravels A SW - well-graded gravelly sands sand 0.8 loamy sand SP - gap - graded or uniform sands, gravelly sands sandy loam 0.45 SM - silty sands, silty gravelly sands B 0.3 loam, slit loam MH - micaceous slits, diatomaceous slits, volcanic ash C 0.2 sandy clay loam ML - slits, very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands clay loam GC - clayey gravels, clayey sandy gravels silty clay loam SC - clayey sands, clayey gravelly sands D 0.06 sandy clay CL - low plasticity clays, sandy or silty clays silty clay OL - organic slits and clays of low plasticity clay CH - highly plastic clays and sandy clays OH - organic slits and clays of high plasticity The City will not maintain private infiltration areas on private property (e.g., homeowner raingardens). Private infiltration areas will be maintained through the Homeowners Association or landowner agreements and must be recorded with the property. A plan that Includes procedures for maintenance and funding must be submitted prior to approval of private infiltration basins. A review and permit from the Coon Creek Watershed District or Lower Rum River Watershed Management Organization may be required in conformance with the Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization standards. (Cit)) City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 13 ITEM DESCRWPON Water quantity The City requires the use of any combination of BMPs, with consideration given to Green Infrastructure techniques and practices, necessary to meet the following conditions on the site of a construction activity to the Maximum Extent Practicable: For new development projects — no net increase from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations identified in the City's MS4 Permit. For redevelopment projects — a net reduction from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations identified in the City's MS4 Permit. The City prohibits the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post - construction stormwater management in the Permit when the infiltration structural stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in areas: • Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater. • Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur. • With less than three feet of separation distance from the bottom of the infiltration system to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or top of bedrock. • Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by the infiltrating stormwater. The City restricts the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post - construction stormwater management in the Permit, without higher engineering review, sufficient to provide a functioning treatment system and prevent adverse Impacts to groundwater, when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas: • With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay, muck, peat, etc.) soils. • Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWMSA), which is the area surrounding a public water supply well that contains the wellhead protection area. • Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour. Long -term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs: For structural stormwater BMPs within the City and connected to the City's drainage system, the following maintenance provisions shall apply. a. The City may conduct inspections of structural stormwater BMPs, perform necessary maintenance, and assess associated costs when the City determines that the owner and /or operator of that structural stormwater BMP has not conducted maintenance. b. When ownership of a structural stormwater BMP is transferred to another parry, the City shall maintain the right to ensure maintenance responsibility for the BMP. If site configurations or structural stormwater BMPs change, causing decreased structural stormwater BMP effectiveness, new or improved structural stormwater BMPs must be implemented to ensure the conditions for post - construction stormwater management. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 14 Low Floor Elevation Standards ITEM DESCRIPTION Cow Floor Elevation Where a structure is located adjacent to a non - landlocked basin, the following standards apply in determining allowable low floor elevations: De/tnldons: • Non - landlocked basin: basin with positive outlet provided at NWL. • HWL (High Water Level): The 100 -year elevation for a non - landlocked basin. • NWL (Normal Water Level): The basin outlet elevation, regardless of whether or not the basin is expected to drain dry or have standing water below the outlet. • HAWL (Highest Anticipated Water Level): Geotechnical engineer's professional opinion on the highest elevation the groundwater can be expected to reach. a. Low Floor Elevations: • For walkout lots: Min. of 2' above HWL or 3' above HAWL, whichever is greater. • For full basement If lookout lots: Preferred option is to achieve 2' above HWL or 3' above HAWL, whichever is greater. Low floor elevation must be a minimum of 2' above the defined NWL or 3' above the HAWL, whichever is greater. If low floor elevation is not at least 2' above the HWL, apply Darcy's Law to ensure that stage increase in the basin will not impact the low floor elevation. (see below)** b. Low Opening Elevations: • Defined as the bottom sill elevation of the lowest window on a lookout or full basement lot. For walkout lots, low floor elevation = low opening elevation. • Minimum of 2' above the HWL or 3' above the HAWL, whichever is greater. • If a window well is poured integrally with the foundation, the low opening elevation can be defined as the top of the window well. c. EOF (Emergency Overflow): An emergency overflow must be provided at the 100 - year HWL elevation for all non - landlocked basins. This can be provided with an overflow grate on top of an outlet control structure (OCS) or via overland flow. d. Outlet Pipe Diameter: If the emergency overflow (EOF) is the grate on an Outlet Control Structure (OCS), then the outlet pipe from the OCS must be at least 15" in diameter AND be at least one pipe size greater than the inlet pipe into the OCS. '* In situations where the developer proposes to have the low floor elevation less than 2' above the HWL of an adjacent basin (only applies to full basement or lookout lots), Darcy's Law calculations shall be provided to show that the stage /discharge in the adjacent basin does not Impact the low floor elevation of the structure. It will be necessary to include consideration for tail water conditions in the hydrology model for the downstream discharge point for the stormwater runoff from said basin (wetland, Rum River, County Ditch, Coon Creek, etc). Darcy's Law cannot be applied to a landlocked basin nor can it be used to construct a low floor lower than the 3' above the HAWL threshold. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 15 ITEM DESCRIPTION Low Floor Elevation Where a structure is located adjacent to a landlocked basin, the following standards apply in determining allowable low floor elevations: Deflnftfons. • Landlocked basin: basin with no outlet provided below the design HWL. • HWL (High Water Level): The elevation from 2 -100 Year storm events back to back, the 100 -year runoff event, or the 100 -year, 30 -day snowmelt event, whichever is greater. • HAWL (Highest Anticipated Water Level): Geotechnical engineer's professional opinion on the highest elevation the groundwater can be expected to reach. a. Low Floor Elevation: For all lots, regardless of building type, the low floor elevation must be a minimum of 2' above the HWL, or V above the HAWL, whichever is greater. Darcy's Law is not allowed for setting low floor elevations lower than these thresholds adjacent to landlocked basins. b. When performing hydrologic /hydraulic modeling, the starting water surface elevation of the pond shall be set at the HAWL, or at the existing OHWL as determined by the MnDNR. Water Quality Design Standards ITEM DESCRIPTION Water Quality In the design and construction of new, or modifications to existing, stormwater conveyance systems, pretreatment of storm water runoff in accordance with Minnesota Stormwater Manual recommendations must be provided prior to discharge. Stormwater treatment can be provided via BMPs, a single pond that meets applicable criteria, or an on -site network of interconnected ponds. if an on -site pond network is used, the overall pollutant removal efficiency for the network must meet the criteria. The City requires the use of any combination of BMPs, with consideration given to lower impact techniques and practices, necessary to meet the following conditions: • For new development projects — no net increase from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Phosphorus (TIP), unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations Identified in the MS4 Permit. • For redevelopment projects — a net reduction from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Phosphorus (TP), unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations identified in the MS4 Permit. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 16 ITEM DEscRIPTION Water Quality City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 17 Construction projects must meet the permanent stormwater management requirements of the MPCA Construction Stormwater Permit. Where volume reduction is not feasible, and wet ponds are used to treat the Water Quality Volume as allowed by the MPCA, the City requires the following: a. A permanent pool average depth (basin volume /basin area) which shall be 23 feet, with a maximum depth of 510 feet. b. A stabilized emergency overflow (emergency outlet) adequate to control the 1% frequency /critical duration rainfall event, with a minimum 4' crest width and 0.5' rise. c. Basin side slopes above or below the normal water level should be no steeper than 4:1, and preferably flatter. d. A 10' wide safety bench at a slope of 10:1 is required from the normal water level to 1' below. e. The distance between inlets and outlets shall be maximized to prevent short-circuiting. f. A 20' vehicle maintenance access no steeper than 10:1 shall be provided to the pond Normal Water Level g. A flood pool ( "live storage ") volume above the principal outlet shall be adequate so that the peak discharge rates are no greater than predevelopment conditions, In accordance with CCWD or LRRWMO requirements. h. If necessary, compound weir -walls are preferred over orifices within outlet control structures for control of low -flow events. No orifice smaller than 4" is permitted within outlet control structures. I. Pond outlet control structures shall be designed with a skimmer Inlet placed a minimum of 1' below the NWL and 1' above the pond bottom. j. Pond embankment shall be constructed of properly compacted soils to prevent failure; provide filter diaphragm or anti - seepage collar as necessary at outlet pipe. i In areas of redevelopment where infiltration or ponding is not feasible, other means of treating storm water, such as inline proprietary treatment units, filtration systems, underground storage, or other measures identified in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual will be required. Future outlets to MDNR Public Waters must first pass through a sediment pond /trap prior to discharging into the water body. Permanent drainage /utility and maintenance vehicle access easements shall be provided for all drainage facilities. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 17 ITEM DESCRIPTION Wa ter Quality Mitigation provisions: Per the MS4 Permit, any stormwater discharges of TSS and /or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction activity must be addressed through mitigation and, at a minimum, shall ensure the following requirements are met: a. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference: 1) Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity. 2) Locations within the same MDNR catchment area as the original construction activity. 3) Locations in the next adjacent MDNR catchment area up- stream 4) Locations anywhere within the City. b. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPS or the retrofit of existing structural stormwater BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional structural stormwater BMP. c. Routine maintenance of BMPs cannot be used to meet mitigation requirements. d. Mitigation projects shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original construction activity. e. The City shall determine, and document, who will be responsible for long -term maintenance on all mitigation projects. f. if the City receives payment from the owner and /or operator of a construction activity for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or operator of that construction activity meeting the conditions for post - construction stormwater management the City shall to a public stormwater Additional Water Resources Design Standards ITEM DESCRIPTION Additional Standards City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 18 The City requires a 16.5 foot temporary buffer strip during construction upon development or redevelopment for protection of wetlands and storm water ponds, up from the delineated wetland boundary or the pond NWL. For areas within the CCWD or LRRWMO, additional buffer requirements may be applicable. The developer will be required to work with the CCWD or LRRWMO to meet their buffer requirements, where applicable. A Ditch Maintenance Permit from the Coon Creek Watershed District is required for work in all public ditches within the Watershed District. The CCWD requires a 100' drainage and utility easement (5(Y from centerline) on designated county ditches within the watershed, including the portion of Coon Creek within City limits. The Lower Rum River WMO and Coon Creek Watershed District will act as the Local Government Unit (LGU) for the Wetland Conservation Act. (City) The City requires the submission and approval of a grading, drainage, and erosion control plan prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 18 ITEM DESCRIPTION additional 5t3ndi'ds City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 19 All erosion and sediment controls proposed for compliance must be in place before any land- disturbing activity begins. Adjacent properties must be protected from sediment deposition. Soil erosion shall be prevented through the installation of erosion control practices in accordance with MPCA guidance materials. It shall be the responsibility of the developer / contractor to keep streets and property adjacent to construction areas free from sediment carried by construction traffic at site entrances and access points, and from site runoff and blowing dust. The natural scenic values and resources of the Rum River Scenic District will be conserved and protected to maintain a high standard of environmental quality. City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 19 Stormwater Report Requirements ITEM DESCRIPTION Submittal Requirements City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 110 i Narrative explaining pre -and post- development land use and general description of stormwater design and treatment Location Map with scale no greater than one inch equals two hundred feet (i "= 200'). Existing Conditions and Proposed Conditions tributary area maps with labels, flow direction arrows, ponding areas, ditches, wetlands, storm sewer, and other related features. Hydrology calculations (preferably in HydroCAD) for required events. For landlocked basins also Include the 100-year, 10-day snowmelt event (7.2 inches), 100 -year, 10-day runoff event (8.5 Inches), and back -to -back 100 -year, 24 -hour storms. Summary of pre- and post- development runoff rates and volumes. Summary of water quality calculations detailing pre-and post- construction total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP) efficiencies. Summary of volume control (infiltration) calculations. Storm sewer calculations; design requirements are as follows (10 -year design): 1. 12" minimum pipe size on leads, 15" minimum other than leads. 2. Provide calculations with A, Tc,1, Qamatr C1r„ it, Vacuum, V to be between 3 and 10 fps. 3. Provide tributary area map with flow arrows, structure numbers, pipes, ponds, etc. 4. Rational method is preferred method of calculation. All calculations relating to CCWD and /or LRRWMO requirements (rate control, volume control, infiltration, water quality requirements, etc.) City of Andover: Developer's Requirements Page 110 i APPENDIX E: MNDNR NATURAL HERITAGE INFORMATION City of Andover SWMP Appendix ��1llf1cJtltll Dgp'1rmlk tnt Iii .Vath_trai ke otlrcc:" Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Box 25 SL'0 _afa`,a ltd Road 3t Paul. Minnesota 55155-4025 'EPA; Tq£4T CF yq,, GAS aES�GR:g : Phone: (651) 259 -5109 E-mail: lisajoyalestme.mmus May 16, 2014 Correspondence # ERDB 20140295 Mr. David Poggi Hydromethods, LLC 1551 Lingston Avenue, Ste. 104 West St. Paul, MN 55118 RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed Andover Surface Water Management Plan Update Dear Mr. Poggi, Courry Township a Sectio s Anoka 32 42 1 -30 Anoka 32 25 1,12,13 As requested, the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System has been queried to determine if any rare species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one -mile radius of the area of interest. Based on this query, several rare features have been documented within the search area. For details, please see the enclosed reports and the explanation of selected fields. For more information on the biology, habitat use, and conservation measures of these rare species, please visit the DNR Rare Species Guide at http:// www. dnr.state.mn.us /rselindex.html. I have also included fact sheets on the Blanding's Turtle and Wildlife- Friendly Erosion Control, as the database reports contain records of this state - listed threatened turtle. Please note that the enclosed reports include records from the Rare Features Database only. For your information, there are two other databases available from the Natural Heritage Information System that you may find useful in your conservation planning efforts. These databases are the Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) Native Plant Communities and the MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance. Please note that there are several high quality native plant communities within the area of interest. GIS shapefiles of these databases can be downloaded from the DNR's Data Deli website at http: / /deli.dnr.state.mn.us. Please refer to the enclosed Guidelines for help in interpreting this data. In addition, several Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Areas (RSEA) are located within the area of interest. The DNR Central Region (in partnership with the Metropolitan Council for the 7-county metro area), identified these ecologically significant terrestrial and wetland areas by conducting a landscape -scale assessment based on the size and shape of the ecological area, land cover within the ecological area, adjacent land cover /use, and connectivity to other ecological areas. The purpose of the data is to inform regional scale land use decisions, especially as it relates to balancing development and natural resource protection. A GIS shapefile of this data layer can be downloaded from the DNR Data Deli at htto: / /deli.dnr.state.mn.us. For more information on RSEAs, or to view pdf versions of the final maps, please visit htto: // www. dnr .state.mn.its /rsea/index.html. If you would like help interpreting the RSEA data, contact Hannah Texler, Regional Plant Ecologist for DNR's Central Region, at 651- 259 -5811 or hannah.texlernstate.mn.us. Finally, the area of interest also contains MBS Railroad Rights -of -Way Prairies (A GIS shapefile of MBS Railroad Rights-of-Way Prairies can be downloaded from the DNR Data Deli at http: / /de1i.dnr.state.mn.us0. Given that more than 990/6 of the prairie that was present in the state before settlement has been destroyed, and more than one -third of Minnesota's endangered, threatened, and special concern species are now dependent on the remaining small fragments of Minnesota's prairie ecosystem, we feel that all prairie remnants merit protection. The Division of Ecological and Water Resources supports including information about rare features in the Water Management Plan. A list of the native plant communities and the rare plant and v v.mndnr.gov AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER animal species that have been documented in the watershed should be included in the plan. We also recommend that the plan include goals and strategies to address how these rare species and significant native plant communities will be protected. For further information about how to address the protection of the tare features in the plan's goals & strategies, please contact Hannah Texler at the number listed above. The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS), a collection of databases that contains information about Minnesota's rare natural features, is maintained by the Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Department of Natural Resources. The NHIS is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, native plant communities, and other natural features. However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive inventory and thus does not represent all of the occurrences of rare features within the state. Therefore, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist within the area of interest. The enclosed results include an Index Report and a Detailed Report of records in the Rare Features Database, the main database of the NHIS. To control the release of specific location information, which might result in the destruction of a rare feature, both reports are copyrighted. The Index Report provides rare feature locations only to the nearest section, and may be reprinted, unaltered, in an environmental review document (e.g., EAW or EIS), municipal natural resource plan, or report compiled by your company for the project listed above. If you wish to reproduce the index report for any other purpose, please contact me to request written permission. The Detailed Report is for your personal use only as it may include specific location information that is considered nonpublic data under Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0872, subd. 2. H you wish to reprint or publish the Detailed Report for any purpose, please contact me to request written permission. For environmental review purposes, the Natural Heritage letter and database reports are valid for one year; they are only valid for the project location (noted above) and the project description provided on the NHIS Data Request Form. Please contact me if project details change or for an updated review if construction has not occurred within one year. The Natural Heritage Review does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. Instead, it identifies issues regarding known occurrences of rare features and potential effects to these tare features. To determine whether there are other natural resource concerns associated with the proposed project, please contact your DNR Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist (contact information available at httt):/hvww.drLr,state.mn.us/eco/ereview/e[p regioncontacts.htmq. Please be aware that additional site assessments or review may be requited. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. An invoice will be mailed to you under separate cover. Sincerely, Lisa Joyal Endangered Species Review Coordinator enc. Rare Features Database: Index Report, Detailed Report, & Explanation of Fields Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control cc: Brooke Haworth Links: MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance httn://wNvw.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/mcbsfbiodiversitv guidelines.litnil MBS Native Plant Communities http://wwcv.dnr.state.mn.Lls/nvc/index.html - Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System 11age I of 7 Printed April 2014 Index Report of records within I mile radius of Data valid for one year ERDB# 20140295 - ANdover Surface Water Management Update Multiple TRS Andover County Rare Features Database: T32N R25W S2; Anoka County Copyright 2014, Division of Ecological and Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR Federal MN Draft SGCN State Global Last Ohs Element Name and Occurrence Number - Status Status Status Status Rank Rank Date EO 1D # Vertebrate Animal Buteo lineatus (Red - shouldered Hawk). #45. SPC SGCN S3B,SNRN G5 1990-07 -21 11060 T32NR24W .S6,T32NR25WS1; Anoka County - Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle). #126 THR SGCN S2 G4 2003 -06 -20 7294 T32NR24WS30 ,T32NR24WS29;. Anoka County Emvdoidm blandingii. (Blanding'S Turtle) #280 THR SGCN S2 G4 1988 8820 T32NR24WS20,T32NR24W. S28, T32NR24WS29 ,T32NR24WS21; Anoka County Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle). #281 THR SGCN S2 G4 1988 -06 -19 8816 T32N R24W S32; T32N R24W S29; Anoka County Emvdoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #282 THR SGCN S2 G4 1988 -08 -09 8821 T32N R24W S32, T32N R24W S31; Anoka. County Emvdoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #285 THR SGCN S2 G4 1992 -04 -28 881.3 T32N R24W $20, T32N R24W S17, T32N R24W S16, T32N R24W S18; Anoka County Emvdoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #422 THR SGCN S2 G4 1989 -09 10025 T32NR24WS31;. Anoka County Emvdoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #488. THR SGCN S2 G4 1989 -06-01 11215 T32N R24W S30, T32N R25W S36, T32N R25W S25, T32N R24W S31; Anoka County Emydoidea blandingii (Blandines Turtle) #511 THR SGCN S2 G4 1990 -04 -22 11316 T32N R24W S20, T32N R24W S30, T32N R24W S29, T32N R24W S 19; Anoka County Emvdoidea blandingii (Standing's Turtle) #559 THR SGCN S2 G4 1990 -05 11891 T33N R24W S31, T32N R24W S6, T-33N .R25 W S36, T32N R25W.81; Anoka County .. Emvdoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #560 THR SGCN S2 04 2008-07 -08 11892 T32N R25W S2, T32N R25W S 11; Anoka County Emvdoideablandingii (Blanding'sTurtle) #56 1 - - - -- - -- -- -- THR - - SGCN S2 G4 - 1989 11897 T32N R25W S3, T32N R25W S2; Anoka County Emvdoidea blandingii (Blandine's Turtle) #562 _. THR SGCN S2 G4 1989 11893 T32N R25W S2; Anoka County Copyright 2014, Division of Ecological and Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System Page 2 of 7 Printed April 2014 Index Report of records within 1 mile radius of: Data valid for one year ERDB# 20140295 - ANdover Surface Water Management Update Multiple TRS Andover County Rare Features Database: Federal MN Draft SGCN State Global Last Ohs Element Name and Occurrence Number Status Status Status Status Rank Rank Date EO ID # Vertebrate Animal Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #614: THR SGCN S2 G4 1992 -08 -22 14821 T32N R24W S28, T32N R24W S34, T32N R24W 527; Anoka County Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #615 THR SGCN S2 G4 2006 -04 -23 14822 T33N R24W S36, T33N R24W S25; Anoka County - Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #636 THR SGCN S2 G4 1991 -04 -25 15618 T32N R24W 520; Anoka County Emydoidea blandingii ,(Blanding!s Turtle) #640 THR SGCN S2 G4 2008 -07 -08 15622 T32N R24W 512, T32N R24W S14, T32N R23W S7, T32N R24W S13; Anoka County Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #675. THR SGCN S2 G4 2009 -07 -01 16938 T33N R24W 531, T32N R24W. S6, T32N. R25W S 1, T33N R25W 836; Anoka County Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #764 THR SGCN S2 G4 1994 -09-06 21076 T32N R24W S9, T32N R24W 510; Anoka County Emvdoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) 4863 . - THR SGCN S2 04 2008 -06 -24 24990 T3 IN R24W S4, T32N R24W S35, T32N R24W S34, T3 IN R24W S3; Anoka County -. Emvdoideablandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #1011. THR SGCN S2 G4 2002 -07 -02 29991 T32N R25W S25, T32N R25W 524, T32N R25W 526; Anoka County Grus canadensis (Sandhill Crane) #326 No Status Watchlist S4B,SNR G5 2008 -06-18 15547 Just outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s).; Non -MN County - Located just outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s). Haliamtus leuooceohalus (Bald Eagle) #2206 Watchlist SGCN 83B,S3N G5 2005 -04-20 29538 T3214 R24W 530; T32N R24W 529; Anoka County - - Heterodon assigns (Plains Hog -nosed Snake) #7 SPC SGCN S3 G5 1987 -07 7157 T32N R24W 530, T32N R24W S29; Anoka County Heterodon nasicus (Plains Hog -nosed Snake) #17 SPC SGCN S3 05 1990 -09 -11 11626 T32N R24W S 16, T32N R24W S 15; Anoka County Hoterodon nasicus (Plains Hog -nosed Snake) #29 SPC - SGCN S3 G5 1997 -05 -24 24882 T32NR23W 'S7,T32NR24WS12; Anoka County •. Copyright 2014, Division of Ecologih"lcd Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR T32N R24W 525, T32N R24W 524; Anoka County Lanius lulovicianus (Loggerhead Shrike) . #10 -. T32N R24W S34, T32N. R24W 533; Anoka County Perognathus Bavescens (Plains Pocket Mouse) #I T3 IN R24W 92, T32N R24W 535, T3IN.R24W S 1, T32N R24W 536; Anoka County Perognathus Flavescens (Plains Pocket Mouse) #17 T32N R24W S9, T32N. R24W .S 10; Anoka County Pituoohis catenifer (Gophersnake) #30 . T32N R24W Mi Anoka County Pituophis catenifer (Gophersnake) #31 T32N R24W S14, T32N R24W 515; Anoka County Pitnoohis eatenifer (Gophersnake) #32 T32N R24W S26, T32N R24W 527; Anoka County Pituophiscatenifer (Gophersnake) #130' Jost outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s).; Non -MN County - Located just outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s). Invertebrate AMmal Cicindela patruela patruela -_ (Northern Barrens Tiger Beetle) #26 T3 IN 1124W S1; Anoka County HesM is leonardus leonardus (Leonard's Skipper) #4 T31N R24W S11, T32N R24W 535, T31N R24W S2, T31N R24W SL T (...]; Anoka County No Status END SGCN SIB G4 1977 -05 -31 2497 ' Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System 93 G5 2008 -08-07 Page 3 of 7 Printed April 2014 Index Report of records within 1 mile radius of S3 G5 1990 -08 -12 13389 Data valid for one year ERDB# 20140295 - ANdover Surface Water Management Update S3 G5 1990 -07 -03 11649 SPC Multiple TRS S3 G5 1990 -06 -25 11648 SPC Andover County S3 G5 1990 -06 -25 11650 Rare Features Database- SCGN S3 05 2009 -09 -23 35185 SPC Federal MN Draft SGCN State Global Last Ohs Element Name and Occurrence Number Status Status Status Status Rank Rank ED !D # Date Vertebrate Animal Heterodon nasicus (Plains Hog -nosed Snake) #32 SPC SGCN S3 G5 2009 -06-09 29880 Just outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s).; Nan -MN County - Located just outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s). - Lanius ludovicianus (Loggerhead Shrike). 98 No Status END SGCN SIB G4 1978 -05 -07 2495 T32N R24W 525, T32N R24W 524; Anoka County Lanius lulovicianus (Loggerhead Shrike) . #10 -. T32N R24W S34, T32N. R24W 533; Anoka County Perognathus Bavescens (Plains Pocket Mouse) #I T3 IN R24W 92, T32N R24W 535, T3IN.R24W S 1, T32N R24W 536; Anoka County Perognathus Flavescens (Plains Pocket Mouse) #17 T32N R24W S9, T32N. R24W .S 10; Anoka County Pituoohis catenifer (Gophersnake) #30 . T32N R24W Mi Anoka County Pituophis catenifer (Gophersnake) #31 T32N R24W S14, T32N R24W 515; Anoka County Pitnoohis eatenifer (Gophersnake) #32 T32N R24W S26, T32N R24W 527; Anoka County Pituophiscatenifer (Gophersnake) #130' Jost outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s).; Non -MN County - Located just outside Minnesota in adjacent jurisdiction(s). Invertebrate AMmal Cicindela patruela patruela -_ (Northern Barrens Tiger Beetle) #26 T3 IN 1124W S1; Anoka County HesM is leonardus leonardus (Leonard's Skipper) #4 T31N R24W S11, T32N R24W 535, T31N R24W S2, T31N R24W SL T (...]; Anoka County No Status END SGCN SIB G4 1977 -05 -31 2497 SPC SGCN 93 G5 2008 -08-07 2963 SPC SGCN S3 G5 1990 -08 -12 13389 SPC SCGN S3 G5 1990 -07 -03 11649 SPC SCGN S3 G5 1990 -06 -25 11648 SPC SCGN S3 G5 1990 -06 -25 11650 SPC SCGN S3 05 2009 -09 -23 35185 SPC SGCN S3 G3T3 2009 -06 -11 35655 SHL -SPC SGCN S3 G4T4 2009 -09 -10 23843 Lasmiplut ompressa (CreekHoelsplitter) #193 SAC SGCN Just outside Minnesota iu adjacent jurisdiction(s).; Anoka County - Copyright 2014, Division of Ecological and Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR S3 G5 2004.09 -16 32743 Printed April 2014 - Data valid for one year .. Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System Index Report of records within 1 mile radius of: ERDB# 20140295 - ANdover Surface Water Management Update Multiple TRS Andover County G5 1989 -09 -15 -. Page 4 of 7 Rare Features Database: GS 2008 -08 -07 35672 SPC S3 GS 1945 -10 -09 Federal MN Draft SGCN State Global Last Obs 8861 Element Name and Occurrence Number Status Status Status Status Rank Rank Date EO ID Invertebrate Animal 1988 -09 -27 8881 Wilchlist SNR G4G5 1989 -09 -15 Ligumiarecta (BlackSandshell) #371 SPC SGCN 93 G4G5 2004 -09-16 32744 T32N R25W 513, T32N R25W S24; Anoka County GS 2012 -07 -24 34902 Peleerina arizonensis (A Jumping. Spider) 917 SPC SGCN S3 GNR 2009 -08 -17 35660 T3 IN R24W S1, T32N R24W 536; Anoka County Vascular Plant . - Aristidatubemulosa ..(Sea- beachNeedlegrass) #15 THR S2 GS 2006 -08 -15 -30 8859 T32N R24W -S35, T3 IN R24W S2, T32N R24W 526; Anoka County Aristidatuberculosa (Sea -beach Needlegrass).. #18 T32N R24W 523; Anoka County Aristidatuberculow (Sea -beach Needlegrass) #35 T3 IN R24W S1; Anoka County Fimbristvlis autumnalis :(Autumn Fimbristylis) #8 T32N R24W S35, T32N R24W S36; Anoka County Hieracium loneipilum (Long - bearded Hawkweed). #25 T32N R24W S35, T32N R24W S36; Anoka County Hiermium langpilum (Long- bearded Hawkweed) #26 T32N R24W S35; Anoka County - Hieracium longipilum (Long - bearded Hawkweed) #27 T3 IN R24W S2; Anoka County Hieracium- longiipilum (Long - bearded Hawkweed) #29 T32N R24W 523, T32N R24W 522; Anoka County Hudsonia tomentosa (Beach - heather) #25 73 IN R24W S 12; T3 IN R24W 811, T32N -R24W S35, T-3 IN R24W S2, T [:..]; Anoka County Hudsonia tomentosa (Beach- heather) #38 T3IN.1l!24W S2, T32N R24W S35; Anoka County THR S2 G5 1989 -09 -15 9967 THR S2 GS 2008 -08 -07 35672 SPC S3 GS 1945 -10 -09 22962 Watchlist SNR G4G5 1988 -09 -27 8861 Watchlist SNR G4G5 1988 -09-27 8880 Watchlist SNR G4G5 1988 -09 -27 8881 Wilchlist SNR G4G5 1989 -09 -15 9963 THR S2 65 1935 -06 09 11167 THR S2 GS 2012 -07 -24 34902 Copyright 2014, Division of EcologirF'�'bd Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR , Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System Page 5 of 7 Printed April 2014 Index Report of records within 1 mile radios of. Data valid for one year ERDB# 20140295 - ANdover Surface Water Management Update Multiple TRS Andover County Rare Features Database: Federal MN Draft 5GCN State Global Last Ohs EO ID # Element Name and Occurrence Number Status Status Status Status Rank Rank Date Vascular Plant . Hudsoniatomentosa (Beach-heather) #40 THR S2 G5 2008 -08 -07 35670 T3 IN R24W S 1; Anoka County Nuttallanthuscanadensis. (Old FieldToaMax) #18 SPC S3 05 1992 -06 -30 13806 T32N R24W S35, T32N R24W S36, Anoka County Oenotherarhombioetala.( Rhombic - petaled Evening Primrose) #9 SPC 93 G4G5 2006- 08 -15 -30 5093 T32N R24W S35, T3 IN R24W S2; Anoka County Qenothem rhombiMtala (Rhombio-petaled Evening Primrose) #12 SPC S3 04G5 1989 -07 -19 10003 T32N R23WS31, T32N R24W S25, T32N R24W S36; Anoka County Oenothera rhombioetala (Rhombic- petaled - Evening Primrose) #13 SPC S3 G465 1989 -09 -15 9966 T32N R24W S23, .T32N R24W S22;.Anoka County Polveonum arifolium .(Halberd- leaved Tearthumb) #15. Watchlist S4 G5 1989 -07 -28 9965 T33N R24W S28; T33N R24W S27, T33N R24W S33, T33N R24W S34; Anoka County - Romlaaamosior (Tooth -cup) #4 THR S2 G5 1945 -10-09 5468 T32N R24W S35; T32MR24WS36; Anoka County . Scleriatrielomerata (Tall Nut - rush) #8 - END Sl G5 1992 -06-30 13804 T32N R24W S35, T3 IN R24W 52:; Anoka County - Triolasis ourourea var. puruurea. (Purple Sand - grass) #8 SPC S3 G4GSTN 2006 -08 -15 -30 11642 T31N R24W.S2,T32N R24W.5,35, T32N R24W S26; Aroka Cowity Native Plant Community (This may nat represent a complete list. Also see MCBS Native Plant Communities at httpJ /deli.dnr.state.mn us.) Alder - (Manic - Loosestrife) SNam'R Tvoc #1313 (NPC Code: FPn73a) '' N/A SNR GNR 1990 -08 -24 11533 T33N R24W S29, T33N R24W S27, T33N R24W S33, T33N R24W S34; Anoka County Dry Barrens Oak Savanna (Southern)• Oak SubM 917 (NPC Code: UPs 14x2) N/A S2 GNR 1971 8865 T32N R14W S35, Y32N R24W S36; Anokd Gouniy Dry Barrens Oak Savanna ( Southem)• Oak Si&b #25 (NPC Code: UPs 14x2) NIA S2 GNR 1989 -12 -09 1238 T32N R24#�S23, T32N Rd493 S22; Anoka County Copyright 2014, Division of Ecological and Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System Page 6 of Printed April 2014 Index Report of records within 1 mile radius of: Data valid for one year ERDB# 20140295 - ANdover Surface Water Management Update Multiple TRS Andover County Rare Features Database: Federal MN Draft SGCN State Global Last Obs Element Name and Occurrence Number - Status Status Status Status Rank Rank Date EO ID # Native Plant Community (This may not represent a complete list. Also see MCBS Native Plant Communities at http: / /deiLdur.state.mn.us.) Dry Barrens Prairie (Southern) Type #75 - (NPC Code: Ups 13a) N/A S2 GNR 1988 -09-27 8863 132N R24W S35, T32N R24W S36; Anoka. County Dry Barrens Prairie (Southern) Tyne #78 (NPC Code: Ups 13a) N/A S2 GNR 1989 -09 -15 9971 T32N R24W S23, T32N R24W S22; Anoka County Dry Sand - Gravel Oak Savanna (Southern) Type #55 (NPC Code: UPs 14b) N/A S2 GNR 1992 -09 -08 18318 T33N R24W S29, T33N R24W S32; Anoka County Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh Class #1025 (NPC Code: MRn83) N/A S4S5 GNR 1989 -07 -19 9972 T32N R23W S31, T32N R24W S36, T32N R24W S25, T32N R23W S30; Anoka County Northern Rich Fen (Basin) Class 155 (NPC Code: OPn92) N/A S4 GNR 1992 -09 -08 18317 T33N R24W S29, T33N R24W S32; Anoka County Pin Oak- Bur Oak Woodland Type #1278 - (NPC Code: FDs37b) N/A SNR GNR 1989 -07 -20 9949 T33N R24W S28, T33N R24W. S27, T33N R24W S33, T33N R24W S34; Anoka County Pin Oak - Bur Oak Woodland Tyne #1316 (NPC Code: FDs37b) NIA SNR GNR 1989 -07 -28 9950 T33N R24W S27, T33N R24W S34; Anoka County Sedge Meadow: Tussock Sedge Subtype #1173.:. (NPC Code: WMn82b2) N/A S4 GNR 1989 -07 -28 9973 T33N R24W S33; Anoka County Tamarack Swamp (Southern) Typg #88 (NPC Code: FPs63a) N/A S3 GNR 1989 -07 -20 9947 T33N R24W S33, T33N R24W S34; Anoka County Tamarack Swamo (Southern) Type #90 (NPC Code: FPs63a) N/A S3 GNR 1989 -0749 9961 T32N R23W S31, T32N R24W S36, .T32N R24W S25, T32N R23W S30; Anoka County .. Records Printed = 72 Minnesota's endangered species law (Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and associated rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the taking of threatened or endangered species without a permit. For plants, " - - taking includes digging or destroying. For animals, taking includes pursuing, capturing, or killing. An Explanation of Fields: Element Name and Occurrence Number: The Element is the name of the rare feature. For plant and animal species records, this, field holds the scientific name followed by the common name in CCopyright 2014, Division of Ecologi0d Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR Minnesota Natural ITeritage Information System Page 7 of Printed April 2014 Index Report of records within 1 mile radius of: Data valid for one year ERDB# 20140295 - ANdover Surface Water Management Update Multiple TRS Andover County parentheses; for all other elements it is solely the element name. Native plant community names correspond to Minnesota's Native Plant Community Classification (Version 2.0). The Occurrence Number, in combination with the Element Name, uniquely identifies each record. Federal Status: The status of the species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act: LE = endangered; LT = threatened; LE,LT = listed endangered in part of its range, listed threatened in another part of its range; LT,PDL = listed threatened, proposed for delisting; C = candidate for listing. If null or No Status,' the species has no federal status. MN Status: The legal status of the plant or animal species under the Minnesota Endangered Species Law: END = endangered; THR = threatened; SPC = special concern; NON = tracked, but no legal status. Native plant communities, geological features, and colonial waterbird nesting sites do not have any legal status under the Endangered Species Law and are represented by a N /A. Draft Status: Proposed change to the legal status of the plant or animal species under the Minnesota Endangered Species Law: END = endangered; T IR = threatened; SPC = special concern; Watchlist = tracked, but no legal status. SGCN Status: SGCN = The species is a Species in Greatest Conservation Need as identified in Minnesota's State Wildlife Action Plan (http! /www.dnr. state .mn.us /ewcs/ir.dex.html). This designation applies to animals only. State Rank: Rank that best characterizes the relative rarity or endangerment of the taxon or plant community in Minnesota The ranks do not represent a legal status. They are used by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to set priorities for research, inventory and conservation planning. The state ranks are updated as inventory information becomes available. S I = Critically imperiled in Minnesota because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S2 = Imperiled in Minnesota because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S3 = Vulnerable in Minnesota either because rare or uncommon, or found in a restricted range, or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation. S4 = Apparently secure in Minnesota, usually widespread. S5 = Demonstrably secure in Minnesota, essentially ineradicable under present conditions. SII = Of historical occurrence in the state, perhaps having not been verified in the past 20 years, but suspected to be still extant An element would become SH without the 20-year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. SNR = Rank not yet assessed. SU = Unable to rank. SX = Presumed extinct in Minnesota SNA = Rank not applicable. S #S# =Range Rank: a numeric range rank (e.g., S2S3) is used to indicate the range of uncertainty about the exact status of the element. S #B, S#N = Used only for migratory animals, whereby B refers to the breeding population of the element in Minnesota and N refers to the non - breeding population of the element in Minnesota Global Rank: The global (i.e., range -wide) assessment of the relative rarity or imperilment of the species or community. Ranges from GI (critically imperiled due to extreme rarity on a world -wide basis) to G5 (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range). Global ranks are determined by NatureServe, an international network of natural heritage programs and conservation data centers. Last Observed Date: Date that the Element Occurrence was last observed to be extant at the site in format YYY- MM -DD. EO ID #: Unique identifier for each Element Occurrence record Element Occurrence: An area of land and/or water in which an Element (i.e., a rare species or community) is, or was, present, and which has practical conservation value for the Element as evidenced by potential continued (or historical) presence and/or regular recurrence at a given location. Specifications for each species determine whether multiple observations should be considered 1 Element Occurrence or 2, based on minimum separation distance and barriers to movement. Copyright 2014, Division of Ecological and Water Resources, State of Minnesota DNR 1.. 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.AN DOVE RM N.GOV To: Mayor & City Council CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator David D. Berkowitz, Director of Pu is orks /City Engineer From: Todd J. Haas, Assistant Public Works Director Subject: Discuss Bike Route Designations/Woodland Estates Development — Engineering Date: January 27, 2015 The City Council is requested to discuss on street bike route designations that currently exist in the Woodland Estates development. Attached is a map of the Woodland Estates development that identifies the designated on street street bike routes (identified in blue). This route is currently posted no parking along both sides of the streets. Removing the designated bike route and removing the no parking will allow more flexibility with the neighborhood so residents can park on the street. The other issue has been enforcement. There have been a few signs over the years that have been removed making it difficult to enforce the no parking signs if the sign does not exist when sheriff's office receives a call or just happens to drive by along those sections of streets that are designated. Notification of the signs missing has prompted this review and discussion. If the Council is interested in eliminating the on street bike route in the Woodland Estates development, it is recommended to direct staff to notify the residents along the route identified in blue for public input. Once the input has been received, the comments will be forwarded to the City Council at a later date. If the Council is in agreement to eliminate the on street bike routes at a later date, resolutions will be available as part of the item to revoke the existing designations. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to discuss the on street bike routes and direct staff on how to proceed. Respectfully submitted, Todd — Todd J. Haas Attachments: Existing on street bike route; Aerial photo of Woodland Estates T N 1ilst L.N Lv($+ Arc L1651--j W06DLAND FVTrATE5 DE'VELOPMEAtr W K C t 1 r 11 o e NDOVE _ Woodland Estates Development �yy ,ro iy. Ai r y.• . ,�'�- 4f. -�. Al�^ '11111 4 .t= r 'v! !r ��'l ,yq. � `�•^ n a. A' �i Y r� 4, 1F "i�gi> J�? �= .���� 1�'ral - ■ lit .� -iir� all LL Z f a N Disclaimer: Maps and documents made available to the public by the City of Andover are not legally recorded maps or surveys and are not intended to be used as such. The maps and documents are created as part of the Geographic Information System (GS) w E that compiles records, information, and data from various city, county, state and federal resources. Copyright © 2013 City o /Andover, All Rights Reserved s aft.... F%i5nilfG Bike fCeuTE Printed 01/23/2015 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 . WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV To: Mayor & City Council CC: Jim Dickinson, City From: David D. Berkowitz, Director of PuNOWOrks /City Engineer 0 Subject: Discuss Bunker Lake Blvd. NW from Crane St. NW to Jefferson St. /11 -25/ Sycamore St. Study & Open House - Engineering Date: January 27, 2015 The City Council is requested to discuss the petition submitted to Anoka County requesting the intersection of Sycamore Street NW & Bunker Lake Boulevard NW to be reconstructed to a restricted access, right - in/right -out as part of the planned Bunker Lake Boulevard NW reconstruction project. DISCUSSION Twelve residents in the Hills of Bunker Lake 5`h Addition development requested through a petition to the Anoka County Highway Development to restrict access to Sycamore Street NW at Bunker Lake Boulevard NW as part of the planned reconstruction of Bunker Lake Boulevard NW. The petition is attached. Since the petition was received City staff has worked with the ACHD and their consulting Traffic Engineer to conduct a traffic study of the area which shows the change of traffic patterns based on restricting Sycamore Street NW to a right - in/right -out. The study is attached for your information. An open house was held on January 22, 2015 at the Anoka County Highway Department to share information from the study and receive feedback. There were 42 properties represented at the open house. Emails, comments and petitions have been received, which are attached. Most are in opposition or restricting the access. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to receive and discuss the information regarding Sycamore Street NW access and direct staff on how to proceed. Respectfully submitted, David D. Berkowitz - Attach: Restricted Access Petition Technical Memorandum (Traffic Study), House Sign -In Sheet lEmails, Comments and Petitions .01 tt -zS Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd (CSAH 116) It Current plan Expand Bunker lake Blvd to four lanes. Intersection of Sycamore St. and Bunker Lake Blvd will NOT have stoplights and will remain an `open' intersection. Proposed neighborhood recommendations We would like the city/county to consider one of two options for pedestrian safety and traffic concerns: 1. Completely eliminate access to Sycamore St. from Bunker Lake Blvd to prevent through traffic from using 138th Ave as a `short-cut' to Prairie Road to avoid stop light at that intersection. This option would eliminate some of the traffic that the neighborhood currently experiences. Prairie Road to 130 and 141st to Quince could be used as alternate routes. 2. Make intersection of Sycamore St. and Bunker Lake Blvd a `Right in/Right out' only intersection, similar to the current plan for Wintergreen St. This option would lessen the through traffic that the neighborhood currently experiences. Again, Prairie Road and/or 141st to Quince would be alternate routes. to 3. I like the current plan in the reconstruction project Name Address Phone Number Option 1, 2 or 3 5 —zS7D-6 7112 Qd A 130-4L N w Cps/ -i(YA pkV i x(23-��( ice -� 4- ► 13810-I�c 763 8b2,e) f Sri_ K 933', AV - i wp ► }gipS(Ca- rare Si- 1 L3 • -,V') - _32F5 !. ���� 1 K�-�l; ►�t Ave. . I -7�p -15 75 ,_ -2 1k Dave Berkowitz From: Curt Kobilaresik [ Curt.Kobilaresik@co.anoka.mn.us] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 3:20 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Cc: Doug Fischer; Andrew Witter; Gina Pizzo Subject: FW: Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd (CSAH116) Attachments: Doc -Sep 19, 2014. 1251 PM.pdf Dave- You may have already seen the attached survey. A group of residents at Sycamore /Bunker have voted on the access to Sycamore (see attached). They would like to reduce /eliminate the cut -thru traffic along 138th to Prairie Rd that avoids the traffic signal. Resident Survey Results: - Option 1: 4 votes to close access completely - Option 2: 10 votes to restrict to right in /right out - Option 3: 0 votes for full access (the current design) This has been mentioned by you in the past as well, and this information reaffirms your resident's concerns. This is a bit complicated as this is a sample of only 13 residents and not the entire neighborhood. We are open to Options 1, 2, or 3. What modification(s) to your local street network would the City support? Or, what additional information would the City need to assist in making this decision (additional resident survey ?, additional traffic study ?, neighborhood meeting ?)? Let us know. Thanks, Curt Curt A. Kobilarcsik, P.E. Engineering Program Manager Anoka County Highway Department 1440 Bunker Lake Boulevard, NW Andover, MN 55304 www.anokacounty.us/highway Phone: 763 - 862 -4223 Fax: 763-862-4201 curt.kobilarcsik@co.anoka.mn.us Our passion is your safe way home! — -- -- -- - -- - - ---- -- - - -- — — - - - - From: Kim and Dan [mailto•kdbschultrCr�comca t nett Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 2:28 PM To: Curt Kobilaresik Subject: Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd (CSAH116) Curt, I aim a resident of Andover and live on 138th Ave NW. I have attended both of the meetings that were held to discuss the reconstruction project and am concerned about the intersection of Bunker Lake Blvd and Sycamore St and the plans to leave it as an open intersection. While I understand that traffic studies have been conducted 3. at the intersection to determine whether or not a stoplight would be warrantee, I also feel that input from the residents would also be beneficial. I have drafted the attached proposal and have reviewed it with some of the residents. Due to time constraints and unfavorable weather, I was unable to make it to every home. The letter will outline 3 proposed options and will indicate which option the occupants of the residence is in favor of. If this does not appear to be enough residents to make a difference in the overall decision, I would highly encourage you, or someone, to conduct an independent survey of this neighborhood via mail prior to making any final decisions. Again, I am not certain on when, or where, the traffic study took place but I would kindly invite you to my home any week day between 3:00 pm and 6:00 pm to analyze the traffic for yourself on this street and the Bunker Lake/Sycamore intersection. It is a very unsafe street and, unfortunately, it is only a matter of time before something tragic happens. I look forward to your thoughts on this matter. Thanks for your time Kim Schultz Begin forwarded message: From: Kim <kdbschultz(a)comcast neb Date: September 19, 2014 12:52:04 PM CDT To: Kimberle Schultz <kdbschultz(ojcomcast neb Subject: Document- Sep 19, 2014 Scanned with TurboScan. Click here to report this email as spam. Sent from my iPhone q$ S ack Im PHETRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Technical Memorandum To: Sherri Buss From: Bryant Ficek, P.E., P.T.O.E. Date: January 16, 2015 Re: Evaluation of Sycamore Street Access Restrictions at Bunker Lake Boulevard Purpose of Report Through the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) process for the Bunker Lake Boulevard corridor, public comments raised issues with the full movement access at the intersection with Sycamore Street. Currently, this full access, four - legged intersection provides access to residences on the north side via Sycamore Street and to the Bunker Hills Regional Park on the south side via County Road A. The side streets are under stop sign control with traffic on Bunker Lake Boulevard able to proceed without stopping. The public comments suggested restricting movements to and from Sycamore Street to right in /right out only. With this change, the opposing leg of the intersection, County Road A, is assumed to be restricted to a 3/4- access, eliminating the stop - controlled left turn and through movements from County Road A. The purpose of this technical memorandum is to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of such movement restrictions. Two topics are evaluated in this memorandum: traffic volumes and traffic operations. Traffic Volumes Turning movement counts were conducted or obtained from the County for the study corridor from the Bunker Lake Boulevard /Hanson Boulevard intersection to the Bunker Lake Boulevard/Trunk Highway (TH) 65 intersection. These counts included the Bunker Lake Boulevard intersection with Sycamore Street and provide the a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes in addition to the overall daily traffic. The transportation analysis section of the EAW also forecasted volumes to the year 2035. As noted above, the potential restriction would reduce access to Sycamore Street to right in /right out and to County Road A to 3/4- access. For Sycamore Street, this would eliminate all left turn and through movements. For the purposes of this memorandum, all traffic is assumed to have an origin or destination within the Sycamore Street neighborhood. In other words, no cut - through traffic seeking to avoid the traffic signal at Bunker Lake Boulevard /Prairie Road is assumed. This conservative approach establishes the greatest potential impact to other neighborhood streets. With the railroad tracks limiting options, the restricted travel routes would divert to the Bunker Lake Boulevard /Prairie Road signalized intersection. Traffic would then use the 139th Lane /Prairie Road intersection for travel to and from the neighborhood. Only the left turn and through movements from County Road A would be eliminated with the 3/4- access. Through movements would divert to the Bunker Lake Boulevard /Prairie Road intersection to continue their travel to the north. Left turn movements would have two options: perform a U -turn at the Bunker Lake Boulevard /Prairie Road intersection or travel south on County Road A to access Main Street. Since a completing a U -turn at the signalized intersection would be relatively easy and diverting south could represent a long detour, most traffic would likely choose the U -turn at Bunker Lake Boulevard /Prairie Road as their option. 5, Spack Consulting 2 of 4 Evaluation of Sycamore Street Access Restrictions at Bunker Lake Boulevard Based on this travel route analysis, Table 1 shows the expected volume impacts on Sycamore Street, County Road A, 1391h Lane, and Prairie Road with the existing volumes. Table 2 shows the expected volume impacts with the forecasted 2035 volumes. Table 1— Existing Volume Impacts with Restricted Access Location AM PM aily Volume Scenario Peak Hour Peak Hour Trafficl Sycamore Street, north of Bunker Lake Bvld Existing Volume 95 120 1,250 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction 40 75 725 Resulting Volume 55 45 525 County Road A, south of Bunker Lake Bvld Existing Volume 100 130 1,800 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction M 15 150 Resulting Volume 95 115 1,650 1391 Lane, west of Prairie Road Existing Volume 60 60 375 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction' 40 75 725 Resulting Volume 100 135 1,100 Prairie Road, north of Bunker Lake Bvld Existing Volume 285 390 5,400 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction 40 75 725 Resulting Volume 325 465 6,135 his volume impact assumes the current use of Sycamore Street and 139 Lane is all neighborhood traffic without cut -thru. Table 2 — Projected 2035 Volume Impacts with Restricted Access Location Daily Volume Scenario Peak Hour Peak Hour Traffic Sycamore Street, north of Bunker Lake Bvld 2035 Projected Volume 105 145 1,300 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction 40 90 750 Resulting Volume 65 55 550 County Road A, south of Bunker Lake Bvld 2035 Projected Volume 110 205 2,050 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction 12 15 150 Resulting Volume 105 190 1,900 139th Lane, west of Prairie Road 2035 Projected Volume' 65 70 400 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction' 40 90 750 Resulting Volume 105 160 1,150 Prairie Road, north of Bunker Lake avid 2035 Projected Volume 475 760 7,250 Impact due to Rt In /Out Restriction' 40 90 750 Resulting Volume 515 850 8,000 'Projection based upon similar growth to that expected on Sycamore Street. 'This volume impact assumes the current use of Sycamore Street and 1391° Lane is all neighborhood traffic without cut -thru. CQ 5pack Consulting 3 of 4 Evaluation of Sycamore Street Access Restrictions at Bunker Lake Boulevard As shown, the volumes would decrease on Sycamore Street and County Road A as traffic diverts to Prairie Road and 139th Lane. The subsequent increase in volume on Prairie Road would represent an approximate ten percent increase in traffic. The volume increase on 139" Lane, which would be the new route to and from Prairie Road and its intersection with Bunker Lake Boulevard, would be up to an approximate doubling of traffic during the peak hours. The daily traffic increase would be expected to be up to approximately three times the existing or projected traffic. As mentioned earlier, the projected increases on 1391h Lane assume the existing traffic on it and Sycamore Street is all neighborhood traffic with no cut -thru traffic. Other neighborhood roads, such as Palm Street and 138th Avenue, would also see an increase in traffic, although less than the impact on 139th Lane as traffic spreads through the neighborhood. Figures showing the daily and peak hour volumes are attached to this memorandum. Traffic Operations With the peak hour volumes determined based on the access restrictions, the year 2035 traffic operations were analyzed using the Synchro /SimTraffic software package. This software analysis is based upon the methodologies of the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. Intersections are assigned a "Level of Service" letter grade for the peak hour of traffic based on the number of lanes at the intersection, traffic volumes, and traffic control. Level of Service A (LOS A) represents light traffic flow (free flow conditions) while Level of Service F (LOS F) represents heavy traffic flow (over capacity conditions). Generally, a LOS D is considered acceptable. Individual movements are also assigned LOS grades. Table 3 presents a LOS summary is provided for the Bunker Lake Boulevard intersections with Sycamore Street /County Road A and with Prairie Road. The traffic analysis in the EAW provided the results for these intersections without access restrictions, which are presented for comparison purposes. Table 3— 2035 Peak Hour Analysis Results Bunker Lake Blvd /Sycamore St /County Rd A No Restrictions A (c) 4 A (f) 7 With Restrictions A (a) 4 A (b) 5 Bunker Lake Blvd /Prairie Rd No Restrictions B (c) 11 B (d) 15 With Restrictions B (c) 12 B (d) 20 he first letter is the Level of service for the intersection. The second letter (in parentheses) is the Level of Service for the worst operating movement. 2 The overall delay is the average expected delay time in seconds for all movements in the intersection. As would be expected, traffic operations at the Bunker Lake Boulevard and Sycamore Street /County Road A intersection improve as movements are restricted. The worst operations for the 2035 analysis without restrictions, which is a LOS F for the side street left turn movements, would be eliminated with the access restrictions. Operations at the intersection of Bunker Lake Boulevard and Prairie Road would decrease with the added volume. However, LOS results would be about the same and remain acceptable, including all individual movements. The average delay at the intersection would increase only one to five seconds depending upon the peak hour. 5pack Consulting 4 of 4 Evaluation of Sycamore Street Access Restrictions at Bunker Lake Boulevard It should be noted that the access restrictions increase the eastbound left turn movement from Bunker Lake Boulevard to Prairie Road by 75 vehicles during the p.m. peak hour. Combined with an expected 35 U- turns, the total volume in the eastbound left turn lane would be 395 vehicles in the p.m. peak hour. Although the LOS is acceptable, vehicle stacking would be expected to use the entire turn lane occasionally. Signal timing would need to be monitored, with more time potentially devoted to the left turn movement, to ensure the stacking does not impact the through lanes. Alternatively, the left turn stacking could be reduced with a revision of signal timing to provide protected /permissive left turn operation. Since the existing signal timing provides protected only left turn movements, this type of operation should be carefully evaluated before implementation. Conclusions /Recommendations Based upon the information presented in this memorandum, the following is concluded regarding implementation of access restrictions on Sycamore Street: a Sycamore Street would be expected to have a decrease in existing volume of 40 during the a.m. peak hour, 75 during the p.m. peak hour, and 725 over the course of a day. With projected 2035 volumes, Sycamore Street would be expected to decrease by 40 vehicles during the a.m. peak hour, 90 vehicles during the p.m. peak hour, and 750 vehicles over the course of day. • County Road A would be expected to have a decrease in existing volume of 5 during the a.m. peak hour, 15 during the p.m. peak hour, and 150 over the course of a day. A similar decrease would be expected using projected 2035 volumes. • Prairie Road would be expected to have an increase in existing volume of 40 during the a.m. peak hour, 75 during the p.m. peak hour, and 725 over the course of a day. With projected 2035 volumes, Prairie Road would be expected to increase by 40 vehicles during the a.m. peak hour, 90 vehicles during the p.m. peak hour, and 750 vehicles over the course of day. • 139th Lane would be expected to have an increase in existing volume of up to 40 during the a.m. peak hour, 75 during the p.m. peak hour, and 725 over the course of a day. With projected 2035 volumes, 1391h Lane would be expected to increase by up to 40 vehicles during the a.m. peak hour, 90 vehicles during the p.m. peak hour, and 750 vehicles over the course of day. Other surrounding roads, like Palm Street and 1381h Avenue, would also be expected to have an increase in traffic volume due to the access restrictions. However, the increase would be less than that expected on 1391h Lane as traffic spreads through the neighborhood. • Traffic operations at the intersection of Bunker Lake Boulevard and Sycamore Street /County Road A would be expected to improve with acceptable Level of Service results for all individual movements during the peak hours compared to failing side street left turn and through movements expected without the access restrictions. • Traffic operations at the intersection of Bunker Lake Boulevard and Prairie Road would be expected to decrease, with up to five seconds of additional delay for the overall intersection during the peak hours. Level of service results would be expected to remain about the same. • Traffic signal timing would need to be monitored and potentially adjusted as more traffic uses the eastbound left turn lane on Bunker Lake Boulevard to Prairie Road. Options include a change to protected /permissive timing and /or increased green time for the protected left turn movement. Appendix A. Existing Traffic B. Existing Traffic with Sycamore Street Access Restrictions C. Projected 2035 Traffic D. Projected 2035 Traffic with Sycamore Street Access Restrictions `r 31 j oa„ .}.85 °` css)oz r Al .zP , . l9uo=uaa 19 ., t r Its awaun SLSI (0)0• (SUS affi C is uiwun _} U o is aeaaP�a ° a + (o)o 6a)sl� A a (s)s p i (slo y° 6s)9z i (010 19 eae!d r Q F , (0)0 • m mas a ,os L iWO ` a - �6 (s)OL •i (000t '� (s)s <4 a is. msauv, is nav sS oot S t r is- oa,ayar- �! (0)0+ (s)S $'" is nizl (Nis 7 Pe aamai sal (sE)s� x� o I LL m - 411 a4 L (0u)s9 s (5 ,)01 ' $ (0sl)" P21 eom 1 (9)9 '11 1 �+ is uomeuer .� om WOOL a (m)si a - „- ((slay •1l • 'x�S IS inu, (59)OZ 1 r 1 �1 is Pauep1 � 1 � 1 tr6y o� 6t 'ed m PtlaPe+ 71 oot s (OUS9 m. d Pa a0 4j /+.w 1 �+ vd P0 IS moueaFS u � w t 1 tit r p OOB'4 OSZL ( (OZ)OS �5!�r i F Z $ �8 e e SOOL ueaBlaluy,) �'7* Pg i .� G i �. 0 (si)SL o Q 9 t i Q j J W V (OZ)OV ' ic• Y Y U s L(arJS __ i50 0C - 9q6 ` (9x r (s U9 F F1p. G W Q ” z .i114 _ (o)9;r $— a 20 Q Z W • (00is F 31 '. 4J1 ^R (0)s + o)s 4114 cz r SZ4 IS..w t r e s is wwun SLS'. (s 10)0+ q- `. (OZ)SL ..+ Iq (SI)S 6$ 0S x _ a �1 x x 084 t is Pauew°0 1 A 15 WIUaPWO _ IS Upvuw �* U 0 Is ue�.yan s321 ?'�„ I00 (SLkI R ° _ m W fsb r (ilk OkMd -0 A L z tr _ a h� 1W ny (0), (09 e °� m b. EP:-"t 44 (m)s L (sl)ol _ (s)ol� (0)0 'T 10001 (O a ° (s)s IDOL z � SUa1nVuM v -pd o0 4 Is al 6� i (OOS IS acWa°A t r F V •n (0 + n$c OS9 i SZSO)OS i C6S 8 0505 Sffi ISi %Aay t p LU A (06)5 Y} > O 6 .py axLay SZl (SUS '^s W e W L'i ZZ A 0 L L e (s4104 0 Ul N = "r SUu PH a-8-1 t 1 4 (0)0 Is uau.uar Q Z 0 .nyy,8[I ., t r (olbl �� (00% Y a 4J1 (0094 (s)01 cz OSZ'C Is mmeu°e - *t; (99)az e s _ (OZ)SL ..+ Iq % x x _ �1 x x 084 t is Pauew°0 1 A 15 WIUaPWO — se L (SOD 001, (0E)S[ Z o S r (ilk OkMd -0 a tr _ a h� 1W ny e °� m b. EP:-"t 44 r. (O G��i NSA t- (S; IDOL _ f v -pd o0 1 4 vkmd'a0 g t 1 IS acWa°A t r F V •n OS9 i SZSO)OS i C6S • Z O Sffi LU a Soo > O (WOr W W L'i ZZ A 0 L e, °� (obi 'T (GOS 0 Ul = o tittr m L f0)0 .�. (OE° Q Z W Y a Ib, �= rl Rm Lmttks 1�1! X55 �— t9�,.w.r ttr is aPa.n a0r z xe o �llry C ti t 30 is ..... an 00v Lmtxt $° tt (aexE; Al 0 z (sGOt= o sot oss � s o L(009t g_ t. 1! is .1w !l u " IS.un0..A r tit Ismmlt111 3 ttr 9s . „suer: (909 (WOti IL (SIML, (xkt m m I�R♦ 1r(s9Gaot 1114 is.v,,,u.r ° E !! ''. • ^tl nest jj ttf 9 — (stlx t r = 3 $ hft _ x (s IS 006 �1! ,9ns htt a» mho (9tb —�— _i (NO DOS (00u jU it GA d'-0 a V Y e 009'l sv °'Oav�o9 Is mu."O9 httr oim, 1 ■■ 0)0 OSO r; t _ o �Np • F i a�u/C bayp 111 � Pd..i hit •/� (osGSet oa "R L (sms _ ° — .ilia - r(�9kt ; ; • fr V t ! tl'Pa "oo tlMUld'o'J 1S g h WL t Z ,Z)N •1N ( (9)9t (91)09 °f�n F�� f Z % na ry ;: W °'awl 005 > O (OGS. i9• W _^ =504 ° t- N'm n v (OZ7s 0 C F o V V 0cr t ell "i'(stk Y i. J (91791 0: . = m N N Z % I • • J. IL Ib, yW5(10J5) o t - 82s(109M 140th 1n. 5151 n� =57(150) — ° y 0701 y 1050)— § y 600(1025)y o� +uMi Q 1381n 1.n. 3a 139tM1 Ln, 0 550(980- °e. S � ButlemW 51. o r J 23.201 21 700 � �ake BNtl L k'. o ^' Y N ° 11M235) ma man 630(7a5) 8 4- 835(925) 9 4`-e o tro(20) - 840(10sM 645(935 a x25(10) m Y 41 „g –e– 2 ♦]00(9]5) —720(1080) r m jC 5(5) U ,0(JS) 95(J6o) –. '�O9' y4— to(lo) 41 ra xs(,o) 590(+0a01y- +a +si B „– J) 54011165)me y 43((965)— 10(m)� o 560(990)- 505(1115)=: noo 15(5) n °n 505(p201y oon - 15(10)1 � °o c — c to M20) 6 U 15(15) 855(10]0) a i c 585(1 m' �azo(1o6M � tf 3 g ]65(92( 80 s° r (25) r 535(1085)- 65(85)-4 ° — ° 14 n � c 4~,.]05(965) ,n'C a' 4- 59s166M rvyR>r a y220111q 5(15)— x '^ s1s(5(35`4 �]a(Im2a �s ° �i2Mw1 r h N r m 4"815 eo 25(JS) – = r s` r ( 1 I S 5f201 SJC(9a5)- 555(985)- SQS) y S m 20(25) °m ~]9520025 1 tos(aiso) Z 8 0 me 508(.%5 - ry 5 ~zs(s51 5(10)51 BNSF Railroatl A5(804)- Not,. Nming .....at • Appr.n rach,l4 iralne Y..Nn.lyana ded per Day aad fieleneeJ • Sp MPH Mai Speed ANOKA COUNTY CSAN 116 (BUNKER LAKE BLVD.) r..mc Si,-1 • Control 0 Tnro Tr.me.na kLTYrn Only ES.aScrvretffight Wtt(► Approach Lan• ln(OYt ACC... 0 AM(PM) t,(oo Anoka County TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT stet/ control • HM. 8troet Accxs X ■s...tr.et A cle.a • Thru .4 A< a XX)EE) ryak Xew 1V 6 Feet p."mr! 5 M i N N E 5 O T A , T1mA 035 BUILD - SYCAMORE ST. RESTRICTIO Tram. Only Aral ... had access k NLb y' O F 0 E 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV January 13, 2015 Re: Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Boulevard, C.P. 11 -25 (Sycamore Street NW Access) Dear Andover Resident: A Neighborhood Open House is scheduled from 5:00 — 7:00 pm on Thursday. January 22 "d , 2015 at the Anoka County Highway Department Buildine(1440 Bunker lake Boulevardl to discuss and receive feedback regarding the access at Sycamore Street NW from Bunker Lake Boulevard NW. Anoka County has received a request through a petition from residents adjacent to and within the development area to limit the access at Sycamore Street NW to a full closure which would not allow any access from Bunker Lake Boulevard NW, or a conditional access of a right - in/right -out which would only allow vehicles to access when going west bound on Bunker and allow egress traffic from Sycamore Street NW to only go west bound on Bunker. The current plan from Anoka County for the reconstruction of Bunker Lake Boulevard NW shows this intersection to remain a full access which allows all movements. A traffic analysis of the area has been completed to show how the traffic distribution would change if a change in access was constructed. This open house has been City initiated to provide information from the traffic analysis and receive feedback from those most impacted by the requested change. The traffic analysis and public input from this open house will be shared with the Andover City Council so they can make an informed decision on the final access determination for this intersection. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions at (763) 767 -5133 or email me at d.berkowitzAandovermn.gov if you are unable to attend the open house and would like to provide a comment to the City Council. Sincerely, CITY OF ANDOVER David D. Berkowitz, P.E. Director of Public Works /City Engineer Cc: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator Mayor and City Council Jason Orcutt, Anoka County Highway Department Bryant Ficek, Spack Consulting File Name LGr/ l //'nI.e-/ i t 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW( (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P. 11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Address Phone & Z/6 , 4/,0,, sx "�L&� Og Am 933 �M Gve Jvvi ?63 13 7a>gJe�-164keo) 763 - 3sC1 -se26 7&3 -7&-7 575 --%? 5OA 76 3 7C, 7 70K E -Mail Kd��cd)c.e -lfz. Win, soU,�<sf :Z63 jer-o�oIggrmcadvv+ C� �� �. 31 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755.8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Address 9-�/ 1UW Aw Nw,A dz Phone (ogi- - S,4�S -R 4b( "'k5 &Od- meuGgA NoKk'a «8i0 S�cC � reS+ - r w jN�A( � oWksr,.A, ( 4(j(9 () (lit N0 P.I A-nl R4611V19- ,rdS Lc isS I, T-(� Lac� &lz 9l(,, �T7 � 26,2-314 -its O qo� tyo {` Lv, n.J G rl-3ty -s7z E -Mail 1010o.Co� MCA kcn(AOOK kloC 4ko ins kC0g -z 9- tc�`� ?/ ��i ✓Q 57` �J�- 3�f'a2',�7'�� ,- vi•��er�'n„ @l,drv�q<I -c ��d �.... S� Nyli '7lo -�►y -� y/ Y eCAW X'a 0 C't' ,, Yu' 13g z S-( NL-✓ - 767 —ZY "l s 4')102 0 ce caf�ne�` qi3 (3e rtf &vim ,v,�/ 776/2 - 2 1% -G-6 08� 763 2-55^712 'Ao -b-757s zc74e1 Y 0 F O j r L . 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV Name �lv- eica -�- ��nn� Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Address x 130t Phone E -Mail 131Fg -1 5-1 new 1v/2 - 360 -07>27 93y i3 97% Avg /U w ftl *k. Nv� IZM Syco Mom 5TN x.- -7o63767z2 o 763 - 7572-54W 13�ao5y�rn�varr '5 - 'fm -63 -)5q -�f) -< v,W,r R� 173 %3 NV ,r I,' 1"Aa g 'F7 /3i'< Ae- 265 — 75 9 -17"? 763- Vv3*&-e 763- 75'{ -Q6 g� tgia-ut8- %5 3 t5-1- -27cf - Da 7 Z _1�tcD� r0cl c0' - ddlens �atto�ua��;,,� �nr.f X11 ,Q L� ir co1r� i h eG com sG /0 Mu, l c�rr.� KU-L!4 ,h ►ce.v 1hh33��r�1 -� 7-A a d 0'c4o,,.rL2n 13 825 49 1 9 -Kexl r«.G�o- y--1su vk n 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 . WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name Address Phone E -Mail bob bud Ga (( M- SL'4'&7i/C< Xl 54 u r c2 /1i'J<cJL�L1 +�Y�L/� �.CJI4L�T�,d Ives Put eir 0,0 nlp %3e- Al't Pt4j 13g2- e S4- Nor 13SK-7 V � S� h�U-) Tq (o I Et0 r" Lat we !VW !3871 Sk AW /3991 C5 l 2-Ys L\,7 9� (nl7- - 270 -YOy9 763 -772 323-i- ClZ Toe- 614W6 7( 67009 21Q� -7,55 �G25- 76 3 - 7S7 AT qcL 760-754 -1977 It, 3 — 7sly-94Q3 Cfc�G.�ct^ cr--@c � - t P— (/lu.ar.�- sr%camcast.�j� -- -761957 l c& ✓c od�� �eMCa.a f� ae� 6 17, Dave Berkowitz From: MARK [house5258 @msn.com] Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 7:24 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Sycamore Street NW access I am writing to voice my concern against closing access to Sycamore Street. this idea seams to create more problems than it could solve. First it would limit access to Bunker Regional Park, it also puts more traffic on Palm and 139th lane in order to go east on Bunker. I do not know the reason that this is even being considered, the letter from the City of Andover was the first I have heard of this closure possibility. If possible could you please forward a copy of the petition. Mark House 968 139th ave nw Andover MN 55304 1�4 Dave Berkowitz From: bnyhammer @comcast.net Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 9:43 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: C.P. 11 -25 Dear Mr. Berkowitz, We are writing to express our concerns and opposition regarding the Sycamore/Bunker Lake Blvd. closure or restricted access. We have three reasons why we are against this change for entering or exiting The Hills of Bunker Lake and Cherrywood Estates. 1) It would greatly increase traffic on 139th Ln. In the case of a full closure, traffic on 139th Ln would increase dramatically. 139th Lane is already used by many to travel in and out of our neighborhoods. In the limited access scenario, 139th traffic would still be problematic with all of the added vehicles desiring to enter and leave our neighborhoods.The change would not make our traffic situation better it would just move the traffic on to a different street. It would also eliminate options and concentrate that traffic to primarily one street. 2) It has the potential to dramatically effect home values in our development. Most people who bought their homes in Cherrywood Estates and the Hills of Bunker Lake, were familiar with Bunker Lake Blvd and it's potential to be a busy and noisy road. People who bought homes farther away from Bunker paid more money for their homes or lots. People that bought on Bunker paid less money for their homes because of traffic and noise. If Sycamore is closed or limited, the rest of the homes in the neighborhood will lose value, especially those houses that are now on the proposed route change. 3) Safety. With a restricted or full closure it reduces the ability to enter or exit in emergencies. It will take more time for emergency vehicles to reach potential victims. Those lost minutes are extremely important in emergencies. We strongly oppose both the full closure and the limited access ideas. We respectfully ask that Sycamore remain a full access intersection. Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. Kindest Regards, Steve and Barb Nyhammer g Dave Berkowitz From: Dan Weber [danweber @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 2:56 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: C.P. 11 -25 (Sycamore St. NW Access) Hi David, My family (Mom, Dad and 2 Kids ages 12 and 10) live and own the home at 13923 Olive St. NW. My kids and many other kids play in the area and I was informed about the request to limit access at Sycamore Street. We are absolutely opposed to this idea. We already have plenty of traffic coming in off 139th and Prairie Rd. All that happens by blocking this road for the families on Sycamore is create more traffic for other families elsewhere. For the same reasons they would want to block traffic there are the same reasons we would not want to have it blocked. It only diverts traffic to other family neighborhoods and constricts traffic flow. Please consider us and other families in our neighborhood as you consider the idea to block traffic at Sycamore. Feel free to contact me at anytime. Respectfully, Dan Weber Counselor Realty, Inc. Realtor, Broker, Partner Office 763 - 755 -7437 Cell 612- 669 -0302 a0 Dave Berkowitz From: Laurie Ulpoq @q.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:18 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Bunker /Sycamore Reconstruction We are unable to attend the meeting so we'd like to voice our opinions that we would like to leave this intersection open for full access, as was planned. We don't want to close access to emergency vehicles or our way home. We don't feel it would be right to dump traffic from our homes onto a different part of our neighborhood, increasing their volume. Thank you, Joe Poquette Laurie Poquette 13971 Redwood St NW 1 04 Dave Berkowitz From: Kendra Wiswell [kwiswell @ucare.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 6:23 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Closing of Sycamore St Hello, We received the information regarding the possibility of a change to the access to Sycamore Street. We are very opposed to this change. When our home was built in 1996, Sycamore Street was the only entrance into the development. Our house presently looks directly at 139th street, and this street was the result of an expansion to the development. We were aware this would happen when we built, so we put up with all the construction noise and increased traffic that was the result of the expansion. We will not; however, tolerate additional traffic from Prairie Road and 139th that would result from the closing of Sycamore. In fact, we would like to propose that you close the access to 1391h lane from Prairie Road, and re -route all of the traffic through Sycamore to Palm Street to decrease the flow of traffic which is directly in front of our home daily! I can't believe anyone is even considering the closing of Sycamore as an option! The people who bought the homes on Sycamore were aware of the roads when they bought and built their homes, just as we were aware of the streets that would be near our home. It is extremely self- absorbed for these neighbors to think that it is ok to inconvenience the rest of the development to decrease the flow of traffic in their small area. Once again, they knew what was there when they built and bought their homes! I think all of us would like to see the railroad going over Bunker Lake Blvd shut down, but that existed when we built, so we live with it! So making a drastic change to access on Sycamore, makes about as much sense as proposing that the rail road be removed! Sincerely, Kendra and Tom Wiswell * * * * * * * * * ** *Privacy Statement * * * * * * * * * * ** This email and accompanying documents, if any, may contain confidential information which is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this emailed infonnation is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 612 - 676 -6500 or email at privacyCo)ucare.org and destroy the original message and all copies. Thank you. 20 Dave Berkowitz From: Kevin Hondl [kevinh333 @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:29 AM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Sycamore St NW Access Dear Mr. Berkowitz, My name is Kevin Hondl and I reside at 13963 Palm St. NW. I am at the comer of Palm St. and 139th Lane. I believe that my family will be negatively impacted the most if the proposed change is approved. The intersection of 139th Lane and Palm St does have a stop sign that I have observed 8 out of 10 cars go right through. The increase in traffic would be unsafe for that corner and in our neighborhood. When we built our house in 1995, and 139th did not connect with Prairie, but we understood that some day it will be and outlet to Prairie and we were accepting of that as we purchased our lot. The residents who have purchased homes near Sycamore were fully aware of that intersection and thus paid a price to accommodate the location. Changing the entrance to this neighborhood would increase the traffic to a level that we would never have agreed to when we purchased this lot. There have been a few times when road construction elsewhere has made the intersection of 139th Lane and Prairie the only entrance to this part of Andover and the stop sign had cars backed up to Olive St during the evening rush hour. We can adjust to this type of increase in traffic for short periods of time as Andover makes improvements to roads and other projects. Most evenings someone from my family is driving to the high school or some other event around 5:00 pm and we exit onto Prairie from 139th Lane. We can wait up to 4 minutes as we wait for an opening to go north on Prairie because of the traffic coming from both ways on Prairie. Making this intersection the only entrance to this neighborhood could back up traffic to Bunker Lake as cars are waiting to turn left onto 139th Lane. During the summer Lions Park is used for baseball and other activities most evenings and we believe that the easiest way to have that increase in traffic be localized to that immediate area is to keep the intersection of Sycamore and Bunker Lake open as it is currently operating. During this activities the parking lot is full with over flow parking spilling out into Sycamore and 138th. Most of the vehicles enter and exit onto Bunker Lake without driving through the neighborhood and we would like to keep it that way. We are available by phone for further discussion or questions. Sincerely, Kevin & Kris Hondl 13963 Palm St NW 612- 418 -9563 a3t Dave Berkowitz From: Norma Stueland [normastueland @msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 11:50 AM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Sycamore St NW Access off Bunker Hills Blvd. Dear Mr. Berkowitz, I have been a resident in my current home now for 20 years. I purchased my home in this neighborhood knowing I had close and convenient access to Bunker Hills Park main entrance. The recent addition of the turn lanes has improved the flow of traffic and safety from Bunker Blvd. and Sycamore. We MUST have more than one entrance and exit to our neighborhood. This is vital for our safety including all emergency vehicles for Fire and Police. We are required to have 2 or more entrances and exits to our homes and we need to always have a minimum of 2 or more entrances and exits in and out of our neighborhood. Thinking back to the Tornado that hit my neighborhood in 2005, thank goodness we had several options for getting in and out of this neighborhood. Trees were down, major destruction of our homes with debris everywhere, gas and electric sources needed immediate attention to avoid more damage. Ambulance service needed to be able to also get into the neighborhood etc. We need to continue to have this access going in and out from either direction into our neighborhood from Sycamore and Bunker Lake Blvd. Please leave this roadway access as is. I believe this addresses our neighborhood needs the best. Thank you. Sincerely, Norma Stueland Andover resident A Dave Berkowitz From: J Kunze Ujk @usfamily.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 8:49 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Question Re: Reconstruction Of Bunker Lake Blvd at Sycamore St David, We plan on attending Thursday evening's Open House regarding the Sycamore St access, but do have a question ahead of time. We live on Sycamore St in the area directly affected by this and neither us, nor neighbors around us, were aware of a petition to alter access into our development. Can you please tell us who originated the petition and how many signatures it included? Or, are you able to provide a copy of it now or at the Open House? Thank you, Jason & Jenny Kunze a5 Dave Berkowitz From: Roman Jurewicz [RJurewicz @weg.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 5:04 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Cc: Roman Jurewicz Subject: Sycamore Street Dear Mr. Berkowitz, I am writing to you in regard to the proposed change of the existing Sycamore Street NW access. I don't think this is such a good idea. There will only be one access to our street and in case of emergency I find it very dangerous and inefficient. Can't imagine multiple fire tracks, struggling on narrow streets, driving around trying to get to a house on fire from one direction only. Similar situations with any other emergency vehicles. You may remember the 2006 straight winds in our neighborhood. The damage done to houses and the debris on the streets created big mess and paralyzed our community for a few days. Area evacuation would take long time and could jeopardize safety of our kids with one exit only. Every well designed area has always multiple entries. Please feel free to contact me if necessary. Thank you, Roman Jurewicz 13928 Palm Str NW Andover, MN 55304 763 - 755 -1721 riurewicz@wea.net Clique sac m_' caso voce nao seja o destinatario deste email, ou desejar conhecer nossa politics de privacidade. Click here if you are not the intended recipient, or in case you want to know our privacy policy. Dave Berkowitz From: Thad Richardson [thadrichardson @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 7:26 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Fwd: Scanned document from HP ePrint user Attachments: filename- 1.pdf, ATT00001.htm David, Attached is a copy of the petition that I brought around the neighborhood. As you can see I have (63) signatures from among my neighbors who want to maintain full access to Bunker Lake Blvd from Sycamore St. Also, I have included the petition and signatures that Steve & Barb Nyhammer have. There petition is also requesting full access be maintained. I respectfully request that these petitions be taken into account when making any decision regarding access to Bunker lake Blvd. Please call me at (763) 221 -4919 with any questions. Sincerely, Thaddeus Richardson 13825 Sycamore St. NW Andover, MN 55304 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: e-printcenter(at.com Date: January 21, 2015 at 5:17:28 PM CST To: thadrichardson(dd),,comcast.net Subject: Scanned document from HP ePrint user Reply -To: thadrichardsonacomcast.net This email and attachment are sent on behalf of thadrichardsont7a,comcast.net. If you do not want to receive this email in future, you may contact thadrichardson(a,comcast.net directly or you may consult your email application for spam or junk email filtering options. Regards, HP Team Petition to Maintain Sycamore St Access to Bunker Blvd Full access to Bunker Blvd NW must be maintained. Limiting access between Sycamore St NW and Bunker Blvd NW will delay emergency vehicles, cause more congestion on Prairie for all residents in the area and prevent quick evacuation if required. Name Sienature Address L `: •_�.e�•..�,nraacti. i.�.�{'y -. t3'��5.5ycc,Y,.�i�. Si LtiJ 2. [ hcr/Cj��ct✓i 'I """ Li A- ` 74,7 -74 7 -'f-904 3'` A .Y fW1 k/dn nn• �� S�;nare_5t1 ✓�y s. o U' /,.t v, ls. �7 �aC3 twn ref 6. i 7. 8. y,,� 138��5 .r trn -rnr� 9.�1� SZ-- -� '�Za s�ram 1 �lM"o , /.�% ♦Y• , J/. l� i i /{.i/ G+Q` .ice }7(�J'r \= R;3ti+- -x^ J Petition to Maintain Sycamore St Access to Bunker Blvd Full access to Bunker Blvd NW must be maintained. Limiting access between Sycamore St NW and Bunker Blvd NW will delay emergency vehicles, cause more congestion on Prairie for all residents In the area and prevent quick evacuation if required. Name 13. (�oj -�/� / tjl Address /3571.�Cq,vbrL. 14.p Kebekct, Mo(W eQ '-Ab PA 13$11 SyCCtt�t0/� 1s. n. i t' A) Ul 1% 9S 3e- i3 3qrIl 21. 22. 23. ' l are-4 L 24. - l�t�v,,i- , ` rS r�G.ti,. ��NA --I.V� �'� "I � CY ,n �•_. WA 1Ju� Nl� IWAN Ed Petition to Maintain Sycamore St Access to Bunker Blvd Full access to Bunker Blvd NW must be maintained. Umiting access between Sycamore St NW and Bunker Blvd NW will delay emergency vehicles, cause more congestion on Prairie for all residents in the area and prevent quick evacuation if required. Name aenj. ..e ( . , is - - �Ul 913 139" AE A)L j ✓ 2 A Pdd6A 28. S {edeq G R, Er 13.?al (1 29. 30. 13G 5 t %�J o� res?1k,� 31. 32. ,.. ---- -: ,� `` � �/�1 }CYO �rD S`� ,.1✓ 33. e�l-e 34. {� �Ol�a r J 13ggq kohappd S/ U,-,k 35�- - -fie -s5` ec;� M J VIJ v�-) Petition to Maintain Sycamore St Access to Bunker Blvd ao. Full access to Bunker Blvd NW must be maintained. Limiting access between Sycamore St NW and Bunker Blvd NW will delay emergency vehicles, cause more congestion on Prairie for all residents in the area and prevent quick evacuation if required. orlrlrPCc Name " � � ty/3 /nn �d 3�9. C, I39Ji !� YV\N• ss-so (�r\ �6Vh, 40. 13JI/ ��glrn.slr�w nu45vbOLQA 41.1�IS1�1� Ylk'�iCV� ov 5 42. SNI�I 13`e 43. t 4 o!bS 44. .- Ip�r , rJ 46. r�qD 5`f v r J� o p (� jC1naC1 t (cwt'�Z A0,40W, M 0 55 3 48. vim' �kz acr t � Ivy iu7 31. Petition to Maintain Sycamore St Access to Bunker Blvd Full access to Bunker Blvd NW must be maintained. Limiting access between Sycamore St NW and Bunker Blvd NW will delay emergency vehicles, cause more congestion on Prairie for all residents in the area and prevent quick evacuation if required. M--- Cianntura Address Mtr�� (rem m ✓s-s- 62. au :,Cs I^iOi S 5♦ IJW 63. �rvti 1ZzutiaYr(S h 13825 �cicc�rumu- 3F N , -,,,tow mvi 553oq 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70, 71. 72. o �r, +C -+°p SiJi.tCL W♦ I Petition to Maintain Sycamore St Access to Bunker Blvd Full access to Bunker Blvd NW must be maintained. limiting access between Sycamore St NW and Bunker Blvd NW will delay emergency vehicles, cause more congestion on Prairie for all residents in the area and prevent quick evacuation if required. Names Sionature Address 49. 4YvOeV --IAv ks j� g i mLe mV I�11QOVi/ —, W C✓�[ 50. Lv\ `'s i�c �.Sg93 %Cr�wwo� S'3 1i c jS30 51//++� IXGl swc qt (� 1383E5 9�9u�, 5-r >� H t Ms> 553Y4 5 i. �- %� � ���� 38 �(a P ►�, 5� . ,Ut � ��erl ✓f'iN 5�30� 53. ry1� 54. 1: ���� (14N {�✓U w JZ }111} / YU a ni' ' 55. 5 rn 1 � r M 55'04 G q'�dcivar � N 57. i�(U ul��'LOLGIA, h�h1JP3ro10g 58. q O I'k3id,. Sl f JV� t`Yl /L H'Y��XDVty W 60. l cw/�) & Qt,(,irrr'eSf. 5:6 1zk I � V.- I$ JW i ok� +Me MIT L4( / i 10.1 r$� l<C IC Iu.Css Sore arC_ oL-+ 5 rde fie. WAA I ; !I u sF a.vvd ©CP 4 %f vvtat �3. OPPOSITION TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL CHANGE C.P. 11 -25 (SYCAMORE ST NW ACCESS) On the opposite side of this paper is a copy of the letter from the City of Andover addressing proposed changes to access at the corner of Sycamore St and Bunker Lake Blvd. (by the Andover Lions Park). After speaking with Mr. Berkowitz, he said that as of now the city is not planning on cliainging the intersection, however, there is petition by several family in that area requesting the change (explained in the letter on the other side of this paper). A meeting is being held at Anoka County _Hwy Dept. Building, 1440, Bunker Lake Blvd. to discuss and offer feedback regarding the intersection. We have started a petition to keep the intersection as is, with full access from both directions. If you wish to sign, please contact Steve or Barb Nyhammer at 763- 862 -9154 (home) or 763 - 258 -7463 (cell). Another way to voice your concern is sen ding emails to d.berkowitz(&andovermn.gov or calling Mr. Berkowitz directly at 763- 767 -5133, besides attending the meeting on Thursday Jan. 22nd from 5 to 7 pm. Our 3 main reasons for opposing the change are: 1) It will greatly increase traffic on 139th Ln. 2) The potential to decrease property values. 3) Safety issues. Limiting access from Bunker Lake Blvd and /or out of our development via Sycamore St. means in emergencies vehicles will have to go around that exit and /or out on 139th Ln. N you agree with our concerns, please give voice to Mr. Berkowitz at the City of Andover. Thank you for taking time to consider this issue which affects our daily lives in Cherrywood Estates and the Hills of Bunker Lake. j "d i z PETITION TO STOP THE CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL CHANGE C.P. 11 -25 (SYCAMORE ST. NW ACCESS) 34% WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE OPPOSEDTO THE RECONSTRUCTION OFTHE INTERSECTION ACCESS AT SYCAMORE ST NW FROM BUNKER LAKE BLVD. AS PRESENTED BY SEVERAL FAMILIES VIA PETITION. THERE ARE SEVERAL FACTORS INFLUENCING OUR OPPOSTTTON.1) BY RFSTRCTTNG FULL ACCESS AT SYCAMORE ST AND THE BUNKER LAKE INTERSECTION, IT WILL o = INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON 139Tx LN AND 140TH IN AS PRAIRIE ROAD WELL BE THE ONLY ACCESS TO BUNKER LAKE BLVD FROM THE HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE AND CHERRY WOOD ESTATES FOR DRIVERS DESIRING TOGO FAST TOWARDS HAM LAKE AND BUSNESSES ON HWY 65. s) IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES NEGATTVELY FOR FAMILIES THAT CHOSE TO PURCHASE HOMES AWAY FROM THE BUSIER STREET OF BUNKER LAKE BLVD. AGAIN, DRIVERS EXITING THE HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE AND CHERRYWOOD ESTATES WILL NOT BE ABLE TOGO EAST FROM SYCAMORE ST ONTO o BUNKER LAKE BLVD AND THEREFORE PUT UNNECFSSARYADDEDTRAFFIC ON TWO OTHER STREETS AFFECTING HOMEOWNERS THAT CHOSE TO PAY MORE FORTHEIR HOUSES TO BE AWAY FROM HEAVIER TRAFFIC. 3) SAFETY LSSUES• THE LIMITATTON OF THE NUMBER OF ENTRANCES AND EXITS FROM CHERRYWOOD ESTATES AND THE HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE PRESENT SAFETY ISSUES IN TIMES OF CRISES AS WELLAS DURING PEAK RUSH HOURTRAFFIC. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST nIATTHE SYCAMORE/BUNKER LAKE BLVD INTERSECTION REMAIN AS AFULLACCESS INTERSECTION ALLOWING VEHICLES TO EN TERANDEXITTHE AFFECTED DEVELOPMENT FROM ALLDIRECTIONS- THANKYOU FORYOURCONSIDERAIION OFTHLS MATTER! NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER DATE PETITION TO STOP THE CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL CHANGE C.P. 11 -25 (SYCAMORE ST. NW ACCESS) WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE U417MECITONACCESS AT SYCAMORE ST NW FROM BUNKER LAKE BLVD. AS PRESENTED BY SEVERAL FAMILIES VIA PETITION. THERE ARE SEVERAL FACTORS INFLUENCING OUR OPPOSITION. 1) BY RESTRCTING FULL ACCESS AT SYCAMORE ST AND THE BUNKER LAKE INTERSECTION, IT WILL GREATLY INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON 139TH IN AND 14oTH IN AS PRAIRIE ROAD WILL BE THE ONLY ACCESS TO BUNKER LAKE BLVD FROM THE HTr r OF BUNKER LAKE AND CHERRY WOOD ESTATES FOR DRIVERS DESIRING TO GC �t'INTO THE BUSINESS DISTRICTS OF ANDOVER, ANOKA AND COON RAPIDS. 2) IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES NEGATIVELY FOR FAMILIES THAT CHOSE TO PURCHASE HOMES AWAY FROM THE BUSIER STREET OF BUNKER LAKE BLVD. AGAIN, DRIVERS EXITING THE)j. i.IS OF BUNKER LAKE AND CHERRYWOOD ESTATES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GC e'a'.'$''FROM SYCAMORE ST ONTO BUNKER LAKE BLVD AND THEREFORE PUT UNNECESSARY ADDED TRAFFIC ON TWO OTHER STREETS AFFECTING HOMEOWNERS THAT CHOSE TO PAY MORE FOR THEIR HOUSES TO BE AWAY FROM HEAVIER TRAFFIC. 3) SAFETY ISSUES. THE LIMITATION OF THE NUMBER OF ENTRANCES AND EXITS FROM CHERRYWOOD ESTATES AND THE HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE PRESENT SAFETY ISSUES IN TIMES OF CRISES AS WELL AS DURING PEAK RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE SYCAMORE /BUNKER LAKE BLVD INTERSECTION REMAIN AS A FULL ACCESS INTERSECTION ALLOWING VEHICLES TO ENTER AND EXIT THE AFFECTED DEVELOPMENT FROM ALL DIRECTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER DATE &R 4 e- 7 n fTC PETITION TO STOP THE CONSTRUCTION OFTRAFFIC CONTROL CHANGE C.P. 11 -25 (SYCAMORE ST. NW ACCESS) WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERSECTION ACCESS AT SYCAMORE ST NW FROM BUNKER LAKE BLVD. AS PRESENTED BY SEVERAL FAMILIES VIA PETITION. THERE ARE SEVERAL FACTORS INFLUENCING OUR OPPOSITION. 1) BY RESTRCTING FULL ACCESS AT SYCAMORE ST AND THE BUNKER LAKE INTERSECTION, IT WILL GREATLY INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON 139PI LN AND 14oT LN AS PRAIRIE ROAD WILL BE THE ONLYACCESS TO BUNKER LAKE BLVD FROM THE HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE AND CHERRY WOOD ESTATES FOR DRIVERS DESIRING TO GO EAST TOWARDS HAM LAKE AND BUSNESSES ON HWY 65. 2) IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES NEGATIVELY FOR FAMILIES THAT CHOSE TO PURCHASE HOMES AWAY FROM THE BUSIER STREET OF BUNKER LAKE BLVD. AGAIN, DRIVERS EXITING THE HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE AND CHERRYWOOD ESTATES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GO EAST FROM SYCAMORE ST ONTO BUNKER LAKE BLVD AND THEREFORE PUT UNNECESSARY ADDED TRAFFIC ON TWO OTHER STREETS AFFECTING HOMEOWNERS THAT CHOSE TO PAY MORE FOR THEIR HOUSES TO O BE AWAY FROM HEAVIER TRAFFIC. g) SAFETY ISSUES. THE LIMITATION OF THE NUMBER OF ENTRANCES AND EXITS FROM CHERRYWOOD ESTATES AND THE HILLS OF BUNKER LAKE PRESENT SAFETY ISSUES IN TIMES OF CRISES AS WELL AS DURING PEAK RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE SYCAMORE /BUNKER LAKE BLVD INTERSECTION REMAIN AS A FULI. ACCESS INTERSECTION ALLOWING VEHICLES TO ENTER AND EXIT THE AFFECTED DEVELOPMENT FROM ALL DIRECTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER! ADDRESS PHONENUMBER DATE i?Flo3c:1�0C.S �- LILL) `1 lc3 zto 3 L- t-Z`IS T3 t�'SGltoe Si -7G'i�toa � `i�ti_j� jk r? 6�.1Vv' 'Zlrt3 ?frSa 1- `7-i5 �14:i- I�jD�' AUr nIW '1i 3 "�la�' ri5)Gi i- il- IS A, 1404/7 .1 Z Cc ?11 �Vi Dave Berkowitz From: Darryl Dalen [darryl.dalen @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:04 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Proposed Bunker Lake Blvd reconstruction This email shall serve as my objection to the proposed closing, or the removal of the eastbound turn lanes onto Sycamore street from Bunker Lake Blvd. By closing or altering this intersection, all traffic into and out of the Sycamore Street neighborhood would travel pass my house on Palm Street NW. This increased traffic flow will cause a significant safety problem for existing residents on Palm Street, plus increased travel time to the Sycamore neighborhood. If emergency vehicles are needed in this neighborhood, the delay could be life threatening. Most residents back out of their driveways and this will cause additional safety concerns. Small children playing in the neighborhood will be in danger of being struck by the altered traffic flow. The increased traffic flow was noticed on Palm Street during the reconstruction of the Bunker Lake Blvd./Prairie Road intersection. That change was temporary but this change will be permanent. It should not be allowed. Thank you, Darryl Dalen Dave Berkowitz From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Mr. Berkowitz, TERE Simmons [teresamOB05 @msn.com] Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:49 AM Dave Berkowitz Sycamore Street NW access 3�, My name is Teresa Simmons and I reside at 971 140th LN NW in Andover. My sub - division would be directly impacted by the closure of access to my home on Sycamore St NW. My husband Scott and I are very much apposed to the change of access to Sycamore Street. We use this entrance /exit every day. We are also concerned about the pending increase in traffic that will be forthcoming with the building of 80+ homes in the new development going in on Prairie and Andover blvd. This new development of houses alone will greatly increase the amount of traffic on Prairie and the closure or restricted use of the Sycamore St access will only add to the congestion. We would have to wait for a very long time at Prairie St to get in and out of our street. I can not imagine the impact this closure or restriction would have on our children's bus route to school as well. We are unable to attend the meeting regarding this matter, but would like to express our deep opposition to closing or limiting access at Sycamore St NW. We hope you take our concerns into consideration, Sincerely, Scott and Teresa Simmons 61 Dave Berkowitz From: Tracy DeQuattro [tracy_dequattro @yahoo.comj Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 12:25 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: bunker project Good Afternoon: I am reaching out to you because I will not be able to attend the meeting tonight, for the bunker expansion. 1 live on the corner of 138th St and Redwood st. I am VERY against you leaving the intersection at bunker & sycamore the way it is with the expansion. We already get crazy traffic on 138th st. Young kids drive too fast. I have 2 young boys and every day I am scared that one day they will be hurt by a young teenage driver going too fast and texting. Our neighborhood has a decent amount of young kids at play and would like their safety a priority when thinking about leaving Sycamore open to bunker. I feel as though a right turn in and out or shutting it down completely would help !38th st be a saver road. We have a park down the street and friends but I would not dare send my boys down 138th st with -out chaperone. It is very dangerous. I would really hope you would consider this for your decision. Safety should be everyones #1 concern. Neighborhoods should be safe and fun for all kids. Let me know If there is more I can do to persuade you to change the intersection for Sycamore and Bunker Ik blvd. Sincerely Tracy 41 Dave Berkowitz From: Melissa Norling [melissaanorling @yahoo.comj Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 12:30 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd (Sycamore St NW access) Dear David, First, thank you for letting the community be heard on this issue. It has come to my attention that people who live further back in the neighborhood are petitioning to leave Sycamore open. These are people who will not be affected by the extra traffic and do not have kids who play, bike, walk to the park or have a bus stop on 13e. Their main concern is that it will take them an extra few minutes to get to and from work. My main concern is SAFETY. Is the underlying issue convenience or safety? Doesn't safety come first? I live 2 houses in on 13810 Sycamore St NW and I have three children. We already have a huge problem with people cutting through our neighborhood (they come in on Sycamore St NW, fly down 138v'Ave NW and come out on Prairie and vice versa) to avoid the stop light on Prairie and Bunker. These people drive fast and roll thru the stop signs. Can you imagine what will happen when Bunker is opened up to 4 lanes? Is it worth the risk to "wait and see" if someone is hit and killed by a car? There are numerous bus stops on 138th with tons of kids. There are people and children walking and biking to the Lion's park all the time. Increasing Bunker to 4 lanes is going to increase the traffic tremendously, which will also increase the amount of traffic into our neighborhood. This causes a huge safety concern. If closing the intersection is off the table, please consider a one way in and out. For everyone's safety that lives close to that intersection. Please keep in mind those of us that are MOST IMPACTED by this, the people that live on Sycamore St NW and 138th Ave NW near the intersection. It's not just a matter of convenience. It's a safety matter. At the very least I am begging you to put in signs (no thru traffic) and speed bumps on Sycamore and on 138th. Thank you for your time and consideration. Melissa Norling 13810 Sycamore St NW Andover, MN 55304 I 612 - 916 -4779 John Norling 13810 Sycamore St NW Andover, MN 55304 763 - 862 -5126 4a. Dave Berkowitz From: Jurewicz, Krystyna (GE Capital) [Krystyna.Jurewicz @ge.comj Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 3:51 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Re: Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Boulevard, C.P. 11 -25 ( Sycamore Street NW Access) Good afternoon, My name is Krystyna Jurewicz , I live on Palm St NW. I would like to provide a feedback regarding the proposed change to traffic on intersection of Bunker Blvd and Sycamore St. We have lived on Palm St since 1998 and one of the reason we bought the house on Palm St was a limited traffic on this street. I and my family would like to voice our opposition to this project of changing the access to our neighborhood thru this intersection. Any changes will significantly increase the traffic on 139 Ln and Palm street and this is a big concern. Thank you, Krystyna N3. Dave Berkowitz From: Jennie [_schaaf23 @hotmai1.com] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 4:42 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Bunker and Sycamore Hello, I am a resident of Andover and live off 138th Ave NW. I unfortunately cannot make the meeting tonight to discuss the intersection of Bunker and Sycamore, but I wanted to get my opion out there. My family and I just moved to the neighborhood a year and a half ago, and if I would have known how dangerous people drive through that neighborhood, I don't know if I would have bought that house. I see people flying through the neighborhood on a daily basis, especially as they turn off of Sycamore and onto 138th. As soon as they make that turn, they "gun" it and accelerate way too quickly. It has been a concern of many neighbors and often times we will sit outside and yell at people to slow down as they drive by. I have also witnessed many people roll through the stop sign on 138th to turn onto Sycamore. The neighborhood is a close community and all the kids get together to play, ride bikes, walk to the park, etc... It makes me, as a parent, very nervous knowing that Bunker will be expanding, causing an increase in traffic. The kids are already not safe crossing the street or playing through the neighborhood, and with the expansion it will make that problem increase even more. Something has to be done with this intersection, whether it is to close off access to Sycamore completely from Bunker, or make it a right in and a right out only intersection, or issue citations to people who drive carelessly through the neighborhood. There should also be more signs posted cautioning people to slow down, kids at play. Thank you, Jennie Polzin yi• Dave Berkowitz From: Nelson, Mike [IT] [mike.a.nelson @medtronic.com] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 5:36 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Sycamore Street access David, Unfortunately I cannot make the meeting tonight. I would like to put in my vote to keep the access open, full access or right in, right out. The impact to closing the intersection impacts more than the people in the immediate neighborhood. It will impact everyone all the way to Prairie road, not to mention the 100's of people that use lions park. I live 4 houses from that intersection at 13886 Redwood St and nobody presented me with a petition or anything in the mail, so I question the validity. Thanks - Mike Nelson [CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE] Information transmitted by this email is proprietary to Medtronic and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is private, privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without proper authority, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this information in any manner is strictly prohibited. In such cases, please delete this mail from your records. To view this notice in other languages you can either select the following link or manually copy and paste the link into the address bar of a web browser: httn: / /emaildisclaimer.medtronic.com 1 X15. Dave Berkowitz From: Brock Kouba [brockkouba @gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 6:55 PM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Boulevard, (Sycamore Street NW Access) Mr. Berkowitz, My name is Brock Kouba. My wife Alanna, and our 8 yr old son Kean, live at 13850 Sycamore St NW, Andover, MN 55304. It was my intention to attend the Neighborhood Open House this evening, but due to work committments, I am not able. I recently signed a petition against the closure of Sycamore St NW access to Bunker Lake Boulevard. My family places a very high value on our existing access to Bunker Lake Boulevard, and closure of this access would have a significant negative impact on our day to day lives. Not only would the closure create a significant inconvenience, it would cause delays for any emergency vehicle attempting to access any residence along our street. I am told the petition to close the access was initiated in the name of safety. I beleive the intersection can and will be safely built and maintained through already existing means, such as traffic lights, street lights, traffic law enforcement and lane organization. I believe closing this access would be a step backwards for the neighborhood and the city, and I think the petition to close the access defies common sense. If we closed every road deemed unsafe by concerned citizens, there would be no roads. Instead, I support responsible building and maintenance of our roadways, as is currently done throughout our city. If you have any comments or concerns for me, please feel free to contact me any time. My wife and I thank your for your time, and we're sorry we couldn't attend the open house. Sincerely, Brock and Alanna Kouba 13850 Sycamore St NW Andover, MN 55304 ph 952- 807 -3517 brockkouba(a-)gmail.com 4f Dave Berkowitz From: Gina Wills [willsgina @comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 10:23 PM To: Julie Trude; Mike Knight; cm.holtus @andovermn.gov; Sheri Bukkila; Jim Goodrich; Dave Berkowitz Subject: Sycamore St. NW access To the city council and engineers of Andover, We, Scott and Gina Wills (963 -139th Ave. NW), feel that any type of closure at this intersection would be detrimental to the neighborhood and would be of little value to anyone but the few homes along 138th avenue. Also, it would bring new traffic issues to many other residents in the neighborhood. This area has not undertaken any major changes in the 16 years we have been residents. Since there has been no major influx in traffic entering and exiting the neighborhood, we don't really understand why the residents that signed this petition think that now everyone else in the area should change the way they drive. The cons definitely outweigh the pros in this case, and the majority of residents will be negatively affected. Please consider how many people this change would affect for the worse. Thanks for your time and consideration, Scott and Gina 1 06 Dave Berkowitz From: Craig Swalchick [croswalchick @yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 8:33 AM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Bunker Lake Road Project - Sycamore Street Interchange David, It was an absolute pleasure to meet you last night at the public meeting and to put a name to a face. First of all thank you for all that you do and your willingness to be the middle man between the community and Anoka County who has started this project. I would like to write in to strongly discourage a right in right out scenario at the intersection. I would like to see a semaphore there however as you described the issues regarding the railway I can see where there can be some issues. I believe that a right in and right out there would greatly detract from the accessibility of our neighborhood. I believe that emergency responders, particularly that of the sheriffs office would be delayed in responding to calls for service. I know most people don't think of that however I come from a law enforcement background and I have seen first hand how even a few moments in time can mean the difference in life and death. Whether it is a domestic call or a heart attack, the Sheriffs Office is always first on the scene. I have some grave concerns about pedestrian traffic at that intersection as well. Many people park at lions park and walk to bunker lake not to mention the amount of residents in the neighborhood that cross there. I know the option for a tunnel has been thought of and dismissed do to the water table as you described last night but with a semaphore it would aid in the foot traffic. I know that it is a challenge with the rail line, but is there any way that when the rail signals turn on the lights change to accommodate them. I have seen it in many areas especially nowadays with the light rail. Northbound, Southbound and Westbound could turn red and Eastbound green every time the rail signals turn on. This would allow any traffic within the danger area to be removed. Anyway, I know that most likely would not happen. So, moving on, we receive many trains through that area not to mention that large underground gas line running through there. I have a concern with a major disaster event and evacuation of the area. With a right in right out, you are eliminating the ability to leave and evacuate effectively. I guess to boil it down, if a semaphore can not be placed there I would strongly oppose any change and allow the freedom to move. Thank you for your time, Craig Swalchick COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C. P. 11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Address: 5q( lgQ1k L_awe' A/q/ Hill Phone: )0 -7ss7^ agyg E -Mail: G�4a�le5Ri 29`l9 NldT Comments: Pies- LPadgs-- ;t a3 :s With 1;Kr La'yeS COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Address: Phone: %ri B�fS-° �'�1 E -Mail: 1 k' �97o&/) ��1a A V'a Wn t4 W I PAAY 6 '!) 4- 7C a &-A " Name: Address: 6Dr C I T Y O F ,NDOVE COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P. 11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 , Phone: 7(_3 —'T6 7 —D 4� l� E -Mail: 4—aQ6 n c -S� 0_13zw6a N� Comments: V NT Y O F DOVE COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: I ► ) lK S Address: i 35D Q Phone: 75 Comments: l� 5 ° KI m S� E -Mail: )C .51?hV Ot�kAQ C.UnCV,5 )va Sz- R Wt-' WZQ I iir<cG ill 1 A 9 VI C I T Y O F ND OVE: COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Address: ) 3 9 7 7 & /rte S% A I 0 Phone: 763- 35_q -8z9S E -Mail: /,ss Q cov .c!&sf not Comments: 7-,, na a iavay J uslriaLeW access a- 4ke i^ ersecg�o&n. b—Kke- Y 16_k� $lad o-,Jt 5ie- Notorc ✓T. . 9,jLi]!�f mare 4'fo -P L -% 137 -k " Pra.Le led (3 mare) � e4_yd W 139 tti m;11 be ies3 go ye Foy- nei%kiw46rd _ja__1kerf earner ere_ will (fie mare 5-_6 74' i55ueS L� .se Gov �lie d� 14or7A n� rr4 re_ 0. COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P. 11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Si p Address: Idrpl� (_�Zp1,ocE = c v �� Phone: -710-� E -Mail: I�ZY-,t)n .NSr- a • 11� 11121 1 0: !,Ill! 111111i Ill, 11111�1'1111 III ANLb Y 51 . 6 COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) Name: V V V � Address: l qC (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Phone: Z6z— 3'41 — Vq 5� E -Mail: Jcb� q`1 06 A , 3Z � Gf lAi ( . GOtn Comments: P(c7(�oSG lR�v� a(c.e55 Lo / Gico'"'O✓a -- S� �S — 1 5. �— JJCS SI 0- fr �� .c �o (39 f-k %LOvv�.L. cis- -snerS �Gc�v�✓ ��v��, (y huv���— 1� d ✓Se > c�✓\ � Y(����✓c W �o � �lzE our �G'V'54 A A, V_ wl'j f✓', 4r L V Jc5 ( t ci �\ a-- o!— p en01;z-f- u5 OA I J,c_ le, d d (f Co Ss odds S y /- L)✓\ S XC-� 0"') /'W- - L �_/ () L) Ant- Y O r OVE. COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: 6 �D' �3 t, hn� S_t)e_�t G V Address: OtPZ V -hem- NN A fkkl M 55. Phone: lU� ' �Y(j1�t U «� E -Mail: !1 COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: j Address: G%3 Val , 5+ l V,/ Phone: �o �� �f lg'QS(p 2i E -Mail: Comments: `D,* L y-cw sew- �. C'r-) e W-01) -vv K.r. &r�w rtz 6LLA-tELA4 0.�3C_eA L4 CA7-v�CR -r r.5 1 , ' , p �t l3Rt -` ) e -, YGAM - d4 -A 5 `0. 2 9W-Ac_SuA 111%P S+ tiff ca'. s . fLw Js..�,.5 w..o-c e✓ - V T 17 oF 57. b-i VE COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Address: 90 f I Y 0�b 4 � Nw Phone: ra sl 3 2 Y .5-'7-L- l E -Mail: KEG ,t -g Q_ 4x4u . r � Comments: Y4 4 -rZ, e gj4- 4 w4- '-^,Y- � x -, G¢ y 4 w4- '-^,Y- � x -, G¢ AN66 _jOl COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Address: y l 92- RQ1 u 7lzlo j ST- IV w I. Phone: / 63 76 % - Z q� E -Mail: 5c.� 0.rc Z G GDw C�, r�e� - Comments: e- re- 2) 1 r'a$ti '-in &bmc TariG w;(j %e Retie -Ay '6 1 ✓%C. Sv c lu&ere 6t Ca u V-S ar I nee"scl f QAjr4 ( A 2. W ed- a CCZMAV^o r- a-f- f38Y`'-rP..( "fa �/Y•; rte . C I T Y O F MOVE COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: �ayb bi Address: l ";✓J 59. Phone: ��1 V -772 325 S� � � clan -a�� E -Mail: G cs�u- Comments: fit../; �( /i1 - ��r ,c 'fL /%tea / `•� 7� L�6 -�.- / E/J/L¢�.- 9VN66 a` COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Address: Phone: E -Mail: Comments: au, M 01 6, 1 .. ... �l�a< ♦ .. s� �J Name: Address: Phone: A A NLD6 06VVE9 COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 i s MIAM �/. Comments: %� ilG�� i� /r' r . �`T 44;m4a; X/7Irv.f�sGv1 �nn.,� .sn�yrr ..,,I11 m-/-,rPr,iJ0 ✓l 1-T LLStN9 'RAJ t i . ! - I f Lei COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P. 11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: J �4 Address: M Phone: 7(03 75V-Z -/yz E -Mail: Name: ANLb 6 W A 63, COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 ✓ 4<_ Y- i- G cvl tio- h2 Address:Ca Phone: (��Z-l�o—�/o�f9 E -Mail:— �¢Ue1Ga� �omCasl` Comments: �� YAW. �i71�1�171C7 6q6 T Y O F ANDOVE COMMENT SHEET Reconstruction of Bunker Lake Blvd. NW (Sycamore St. NW Access) (C.P.11 -25) Open House At Anoka County Hwy. Dept. Thursday, January 22, 2015 Name: Address: Phone: 'Wo3 -7La 2 l y E -Mail: e c .. r� c4nq�4 rae4. n P f 4" 6 I r-' Dave Berkowitz From: J Kunze Ujk @usfamily.net] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 11:03 AM To: Dave Berkowitz Subject: Feedback on Sycamore St Access at Bunker Lake Blvd Dave, Thank you for meeting with our neighborhood last night and presenting information about the Sycamore Street access at Bunker Lake Blvd. Could you please forward this e-mail to the City Council? We are directly affected by this issue as we live on the corner of Sycamore St and 1391" Ave. We are against any changes to this intersection and would vote for it to remain fully open to all directions of traffic. Following are some of our reasons: 1) If the Sycamore /Bunker intersection were altered (i.e. "right in, right out" only), we are very concerned with traffic congestion in the area of Prairie /Bunker and Prairie /139`" Lane. Basically traffic would just be moved from one location to another which doesn't seem to make sense. With the new housing development(s) going in north on Prairie, traffic will definitely increase at the Prairie /Bunker intersection. It would be made worse if the Sycamore St /Redwood St /Palm St families now all had to flow through this area, as well. Also, with only a stop sign at the Prairie /139th Lane intersection, cars may have a long wait and a line of cars will form (either turning from Prairie onto 139th Lane, or turning from 139th Lane onto Prairie). 2) With an altered Sycamore St /Bunker access we are concerned about emergency vehicle access to our neighborhood and longer response time. 3) With an altered Sycamore St /Bunker access we are also concerned about a lack of "escape route" should a quick evacuation need to occur (example a train accident). We would prefer to not be "boxed in" with limited exits for our large neighborhood. 4) The Lions park on the corner of Sycamore & Bunker sees a lot of activity (especially baseball games). We would like the intersection kept fully open to ease access to the park. 5) We have heard one person voice safety concerns about the Sycamore /Bunker intersection. We are not aware of any accident data that supports this, nor have we witnessed any problems in our repeated use of that intersection. 6) We have also heard one person voice concern over the school bus stop that is currently located at 1381h Ave /Sycamore. Again, we have not heard about any safety problems because of this. Bus stops are fluid and change depending on current needs. The bus stop has been located in several spots in the neighborhood in the 20 years we have lived here. So, the bus stop will not always be located at that intersection. And, if there is a true current risk, the bus stop can be moved several houses down in either direction. We ask that the City Council vote to keep the Sycamore St /Bunker Lake Blvd intersection unchanged, and fully open. Thank you, Jason & Jenny Kunze 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator SUBJECT: 2014 Budget - General Fund Progress Report — Through December 2014 DATE: January 27, 2015 The City of Andover 2014 General Fund Budget contains total revenues of $9,569,142 and total expenditures of $10,026,875 (includes $30,500 of 2013 budget carry forwards), a decrease in fund balance is planned. Monthly reporting of the City Budget progress to the Governing body is a recommended financial practice and often viewed positively by rating agencies. Attached is the General Fund Revenue & Expenditure Budget Summary - Budget Year 2014, with year to date actual - December 2014. The attachments are provided to assist discussion in reviewing 2014 progress, other documents may be distributed at the meeting. The following represents Administration's directives and departmental expectations that are in place again for 2014: 1. Expenditure budgets while approved, expenses are to meet with the spirit that needs are fulfilled first, expansions of service and special requests are to be reviewed with City Administration before proceeding. 2. Departments are to be committed to search for the best possible prices when purchasing goods and services. 3. Departments are to be committed to continually searching out new efficiencies and to challenge the status quo of how the City provides services. 4. Departments are to be committed to searching out collaborative opportunities to facilitate efficient and cost - effective utilization of governmental assets and personnel. 5. Departments are to be committed to developing effective, consistent and ongoing communications with City residents, businesses and other stakeholders. 6. Departments are to be cognizant that services provided are subject to available revenues and should not commit to services that are not sustainable. ACTION REQUESTED The Council is requested to receive a presentation and provide direction to staff. CITY OF ANDOVER General Fund Budget Summary Totals Budget Year 2014 As of 01/21/15 2013 2014 REVENGES Budget Dec YTD %Bud Final Budget Dec YTD %Bud General Property Tax $ 7,398,782 $ 7,376,284 100% $ 7,376,284 S 7,501,816 S 7,476,294 100% Licenses and Permits 288,355 536,706 186% 536,706 307,355 364,430 119% Intergovernmental 596,564 710,071 119% 710,071 609,541 657,574 108% Charges for Services 619,850 1,122,461 181% 1,122,461 685,900 941,901 137% Fines 100,750 96,130 95% 96,130 100,750 94,375 94% Investment Income 65,000 (13,242) -20% (13,242) 75,000 45,434 61% Miscellaneous 90,350 137,129 152% 137,129 91,850 150,386 164% Transfers In 196,930 196,930 100% 196,930 196,930 196,930 100% IIW1 Total Revenues S 9,356,581 S 10,162,469 109% S 10,162,469 S 9569,142 S 99927,324 104% 2013 2014 EXPENDITURES Budget Dec YTD %Bud Final Budget Dec YTD %Bud GENERAL GOVERNMENT Mayor and Council $ 87,953 S 83,595 95% $ 83,595 $ 86,840 $ 84,617 97% Administration 143,995 147,503 102% 147,503 176,265 169,176 96% Newsletter 25,500 17,678 69% 17,678 26,000 20,974 81% Human Resources 42,770 17,906 42% 17,906 39,229 17,852 46% Attorney 178,300 173,244 97% 173,244 178,300 177,427 100% City Clerk 108,925 108,311 99% 108,311 129,400 128,859 100% Elections 54,155 11,353 21% 11,353 55,336 41,506 75% Finance 221,256 215,215 97% 215,215 235,459 230,639 98% Assessing 150,000 144,561 96% 144,561 150,000 142,210 95% Information Services 161,252 135,981 84% 135,981 176,629 146,281 83% Planning & Zoning 360,970 349,488 97% 349,488 401,360 387,069 96% Engineering 440,168 452,788 103% 452,788 465,656 459,557 99% Facility Management 566,187 451,255 80% 451,255 562,905 456,452 81% Total General Gov 2,5419431 2 ,308,878 91% 2 ,308,878 2,683,379 2,462,619 92% PUBLICSAFETF Police Protection 2,740,899 2,740,899 100% 2,740,899 2,818,132 2,818,132 100% Fire Protection 1,1279444 1,126,979 100% 1,126,979 1,127,389 1,241,405 110% Protective Inspection Civil Defense 393,530 17,188 423,495 13,930 108% 81% 423,495 13,930 401,295 17,128 390,310 21,837 97% 127% Animal Control 9,950 6,037 61% 6,037 9,950 4,026 40% Total Public Safety 4,289,011 4 ,311 ,340 101% 4,311,340 4,373,894 4,475,710 102% PUBLIC WORKS Streets and Highways 585,111 572,754 98% 572,754 604,078 600,065 99% Snow and Ice Removal 511,834 630,798 123% 630,798 517,949 637,116 123% Street Signs 198,693 162,859 82% 162,859 197,274 186,587 95% Traffic Signals 36,000 26,241 73% 26,241 35,000 27,977 80% Street Lighting 36,400 31,702 87% 31,702 36,400 32,646 90% Street Lights - Billed 210,000 210,331 100% 210,331 210,000 199,766 95% Park & Recreation 1,014,366 946,545 93% 946,545 1,122,426 1,003,655 89% Recycling 128,633 178,109 138% 178,109 131,147 111,592 85% Total Public Works 2,721,037 2,759,339 101% 2,759,339 2,854,274 2,799,404 98%. OTHER Miscellaneous 171,450 158,019 92% 158,019 36,828 28,685 78% Youth Services 52,500 52,465 100% 52,465 52,500 52,500 100% Total Other 223,950 210,484 94% 2109484 89,328 81,185 91% Total Expenditures S 9,775,429 S 9,590,041 98% $ 9,590,041 S 10,000,875 $ 9,818,918 98% NET INCREASE (DECREASE) S (418,848) $ 5729428 S 571,428. $ (431,733) 5 108,406 1 C I T Y O F MOVE 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Mayor and Councilmembers Jim Dickinson, City Administrator December 2014 Investment Report January 27, 2015 Summary reporting of the City Investment portfolio to the Governing body is a recommended financial practice and often viewed positively by rating agencies. 0 Furthermore, the City of Andover Investment Policy recommends the Finance Director presents to the City Council at least quarterly the type of investments held by the City. Attached is the Investment Maturities Summary for December 2014, the December 2014 Investment Detail Report, and the December 2014 Money Market Funds Report. These attachments are intended to assist with discussion when reviewin¢ the December 2014 investments. ACTION REQUESTED The Council is requested to receive a presentation and provide feedback to staff. submitted, Jim Investment Maturities - December 2014 Investment Maturities in Years) Credit _ Rating Fair Less Than 6-10 More Than _ Investment Type Value 1 1-5 10 Money m arket funds N/A $ 2,762_,646 $ 2,762,646 $ $ $ MN Municipal Money Market Fund (4M) N/A 4,993 4,993 3,273,464 - I 492,873 - Certificates of deposit FDIC 9,240,239 5,473,903 - A/Al /A2 Local governments 662,073 - 556,876 _ 105,197 638,189 AAI /AA2/AA3 7,884,269 2,120,504 1,022,786 3,190,672 1,934,904 AAA 4,421,180 2,233,778 778,892 385,724 State governments A/Al /A2 437,142 - 208,710 311,298 228,432 277,3361 AA1/AA2/AA3 603,604 14,969 1 - AAA 434,048 76,550 336,112 21,3861 { 574,753 3,979,225 U.S. agencies AAA 439,332 2,570,531 394,610 - FNMA REMIC N/A 14,757 14,757 554,852 - U.S. agencies N/A 554,852 Total investments $ 30,999,030 $ 11,915,683 $ 13,251,051 $ 4,128,433 $ 1,703,863 3,616,464 Deposits Total cash and investments $ 34,615,494 December 20141mrestment Detail Description - Cusip Number Credit Rating Type Purchase Price Carrying Cost Maturity Amount Interest Rate Current Market Value Date Acquired Coupon Date Maturity I Due Date First Merit Bank (Ohio) 320844NY5 CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.300% 248,990.04 maturity 07116/14 matunty 07/16/14 none none 01/16/15 01/16/15 Peoples Ltd Bk Bridgeport CT 71270QEG7 CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.250% 248,950 20 Capital One Bank Glen Allen VA 14041AXUB CD 43,910.10 249 000.00 43,910.10 249,000.00 40,000.00 249,000.00 4.750% 0350% 40,080.00 249,107.07 semi - annual 05/10/11 12/18/14 none none 01/23/15 03118/15 American Express Bk 02587CDA5 CD Berkshire BanklPittsfield 084601CW1 CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.400% 0.300% 0.450% 0.200% 248,975.10 248,922.81 248,882.97 248,828.19 248,890.44 248,803.29 248,810.76 248,853.09 248,798.31 248,838.15 12119114 12123114 12/29/14 12/17114 none none none none 03119/15 03/23/15 04/02/15 04/17/15 Cathay Bank Everbank/Jacksonville FL 14915929 29976DUL2 CD CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 Integrity Bank PA 45824ABR6 CD First Source Bank 33646CEG5 CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.300% 0.200% 0.250% 12/23114 12/30/14 12/17/14 12/15114 12/16/14 12/23114 none 01130/15 none 01/15/15 none none 04/23/15 04/30/15 05/18/15 First Virginia Cmnty Bank Passumpsic Savings Bank 337478AZ4 70285TAR6 CD CD CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 Homestreel Bank 437850683 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.3509% 0.300% 0.3500% 06/15/15 06116/15 06/23/15 First Niagara Bank NY 33583CLJ6 CD CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 Bank of Baroda 66062AZP7 Essa Bank 8 Trust 29667RLY7 CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.250% 0.350% 248,723.61 248,835.66 12/23/14 12124/14 none none 06123/15 08/24115 Bank of India NY 06278CG66 CID Santander Bank NA Safra National Bank 80280JCQ2 78658QJX2 20451PKKI CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.450% 248,950.20 12/24/14 none 06/24115 CD CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.300% 0.300 %, 248,763.45 248,755.98 12130/14 12119/14 none 12/11/14 06/30115 07/13115 Compass Bk Birmingham Garrett State Bank 366526AJO CD 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 1.750% 0.300% 1.750% 201,344.00 248,601.60 252,077.64 252,119.97 monthly 05/20/11 12/19/14 monthly 07/25/11 monthly 07/25/11 06/20/11 none none none 07/20/15 09/14115 10/29115 11103115 Paragon Commercial Bank Flushing Savings Bank 699110404 344030DK4 CD CO 249,000.00 250,023.39 249,000.00 250,023.39 249,000.00 249,000.00 Portage County Bank 73565NAZ6 CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 1.650% Chaska MN 161664DT1 AA local 71,663.20 71,663.20 70,000.00 2.000°/ 1.2001% 71,064.70 100,323.00 semi - annual semi - annual 08115113 04/25/12 06/01/14 08101/12 _ 12101/15 08/01115_ Pell City AL 705880ML3 AA- local 100,000.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 Brooklyn Park Minn 114223V64 724114BH5 AA+ AA+ local local 206,700.00 181,521.00 206,700.00 181,521.00 200,000.00 180,000.00 3.400% 1 1.000% 200,436.00 180,225.00 semi - annual semi - annual 02/10/11 05/23/13 none 03101114 02101115 03/01/15 PipesloneJasper MN ISD #2689 Red Wing Minn ISD #25 757130JRI AA+ local 36,367.10 176,289.75 36,367.10 176,289.75 35,000.00 175,00000 3.500% 1.000% 35,188.30 175,526.75 semi- annual semi - annual 01/11/11 08/05 112 none 03/01/15 Ramsey MN 7518136E9 AA+ local 12/01/12 06/01/15 Austin Minn Duluth MN 052249542 2644387A3 AA2 local 79,600.00 79,600.00 80,000.00 5.100% 80,221.60 semi - annual 07/15/08 none 02/01/15 AA2 local 201,733.11 201,722.00 200,000.00 1.000 %, 200,132.00 semi - annual 11/27/12 08/01/13 02/01115 Onamia MN ISD 9480 Waunakee WI 682271 DT5 943181NZ6 AA2 local 104,979.00 104,979.00 100,000.00 3.000% 100,230.00 semi - annual 09/27/12 08/01/13 02/01115 AA2 local 55,000.00 55,000.00 55,000.00 1.500% 55,201.85 semi - annual 11/08/11 05/01112 05/01115 Waterloo IA Riley Cnty Kans Uni Sch Dist 941647NW5 766651 NP4 AA2 AA2 local 261,334.20 261,334.20 255,000.00 2.000% 256,884.45 semi - annual 06/27113 12/01/13 06/01115 local 36 ,876.00 36,876.00 35,000.00 4.730% 36,025.15 semiannual 05/05/14 03/01/10 09/01/15 Western Lake Superior MN 958522WQ3 AA2 local 101,790.00 101,790.00 100,000.00 2.000% 101,295.00 semiannual 08116/11 04/01/12 10101115 New York NY 64966JAW6 AA2 local 208 ,324.00 208,324.00 200,000.00 3.170% 204,684.00 semiannual 04107114 06/01/11 12/01115 Plainfield III 726243LT3 AA2 local 79,373.25 79,373.25 75,000.00 3.000% 76,816.50 semi - annual 12/27112 none 12/15/15 Brownsville TX 116405FY2 AA3 local 102,683.00 102,683.00 100,000.00 2.000% 100,220.00 semiannual 12/27112 02115/13 02/15/15 SouthEastem IA Cmnty College 841625MC7 AA3 local 149,060.00 149,060.00 145,000.00 2.000% 146,029.50 07/28!12 none 06/01/15 Saint Louis Park MN 791740ZJ5 AAA local 55,000.00 55,000.00 55,000.00 100,000.00 0.750% 2.9501y. 55,023.65 100,337.00 _semiannual semi - annual semiannual 10/17/12 08101/13 02/01/15 Chesterfield MO 166455EC5 AAA local 102,174.00 102,174.00 04130114 none 02/15/15 Cook Cnty IL Cmnty Cy Dist #5 216129FD3 AAA local 196,228.20 196,228.20 190,000.00 2.0000% 191,407.90 semi- annual 01108/13 06101/13 06/01115 Palm Beach Cnty FLA 696497TP1 AAA local 226,296.00 226,296.00 200,000.00 5.808% 204,588.00 semi- annual 03/14111 none 06/01/15 5,473,902.53 CD December 2014 Investment Detail Description. Cusip Number Credit Rating Type Purchase Price Carrying Cost Maturity Amount Interest Rate Current Market Value semi - annual Date Acquired 12112113 Coupon Date Maturity I Due Date Johnson Cnty KS 47870OJ99 AAA local 257,290.00 257,290.00 103,820.00 260,000.00 2.000% 253,322.50 none 04/01/13 10101/15 10/01/15 Madison Wl 55844RFY5 AAA local 103,870.00 100,000.00 2.000% 2.000% 101,295.00 116,812.40 semi - annual 10101/12 Hinsdale IL 433416LW2 AAA local 118,011.85 118,011.85 115,000.00 semi- annual 04/23/14 12/15/14 12/15/15 Oregon School Boards Assn Zero Cpn 686053CE7 AA2 state 14,233.50 14,233.50 15,000.00 3.000% 14,969.40 76,550.25 maturity 02/08112 none 06/30/15 Texas State 882722J28 AAA stale 80,158.50 80,158.50 200,000.00 75,000.00 semi - annual 03/28/12 10/29/12 04/01/12 04/29/13 10/01/15 Fed Farm Credit Bank 3133EA6K9 AAA US 200,000.00 200,000.00 0.410% 200,198.00 semi - annual 10/2W15 Fed Home Ln Mig Corp Zero Cpn 3134A1HH6 AAA US 239,277.60 239,277.60 240,000.00 239,133.60 maturity 12/04/14 _ _none 12/01/15 _ _ 9,148,044.03 Sterling Savings Bank 859532AH6 509685ES8 CD 248,000.00 248,000.00 248,000.00 200,000.00 0.750 % 0.850% 248,818.40 semi- annual 07/31/13 01/31114 01/29116 Lake Forest Bank & Trust CD 2002000.00 248,000.00 200,000.00 200,594.00 semi - annual semi - annual 08/14/13 02/14/14 08/15/16 Luana Savings Bank 549103MY2 CD 248,000.00 248,000.00 0.750% 248,972.16 08/16/13 02/16/14 08/16/16 09/06/16 Synovus Bank GA 87164DFL9 CD CD 248,000.00 248,000.00 248,000.00 0.800% 247,141.92 semi - annual monthly 09/10114 03104/15 Valley Cent Svgs Bk Reading OH NCB Savings Bank FSB 91944RAE8 150,000.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 100,000.00 1.250% 148,316.50 12122114 01122115 12/22/17 07125/18 628825JN2 _ CD CD 100,000.00 247,000.00 100,000.00 1.500% 98,794.00 semi - annual semi - annual 07/25/14 01/25/15 Barclays Bank 06740KHB6 _ 247,000.00 247,000.00 247,000.00 2.050% 244,641.15 07/03/14 01/02/15 07/02/19 07/11/19 Synchrony Bank 87164WBT4 CD 247,000.00 247,000.00 2.050% 244,455.90 244,357.10 _ semi-annual 07/11/14 01/11/15 PrivateBank & Trust Cc 74267GUOS CD 247,000.00 247,000.00 247,000.00 _ _ 247,000.00 247,000.00 2.000% semi - annual 07/21/14 01/21/15 07/22/19 07/23/19 Goldman Sachs Bank USA 38147JU59 CD 247,000.00 2.050% 244,223.72 242,787.65 1 semi - annual semi - annual 07/23/14 01/23/15 Bangor Savings Bank 060243DV1 CD 245,000.00 245,000.00 245,000.00 247,000.00 1.000% 07130/14 01/30115 07/30/19 09/24119 Victory Bank 92644LAB8 CD CD 247,000.00 247,000.00 2.000% 243,784.06 semi - annual semi - annual 09/24/14 03/24115 Third Federal Sav & Loan Celtic Bank 884130AW8 128,000.00 128,000.00 247,000.00 128,000.00 2.000% 126,613.76 11/24/14 05/24/15 11125119 12120/19 15118RJM0 CD 247,000.00 247,000.00 2.050% 245,816.87 semi - annual semi - annual 12/20/13 06120114 Steams Bank NA Elbow Lake MN 857894PB9 CD 247,000.00 247,000.00 247,000.00 165,000.00 1.000% 244,144.68 12/26/14 06126/15 12126119 12/D1/19 284281KC5 A local 170,045.70 170,045.70 2.750% 169,087.05 103,727.00 annual 12/08/14 none Oshkosh Wis Storm W r 11N 68825RB01 _ At local 101,003.00 101,003.00 114,388.00 100,000.00 3.250% _semi- semi- annual 10/05/10 05/01111 none 05101/18 04115/19 Oneida County NY 682454382 At A2 local 114,388.00 100,000.00 6.250% 109,142.00 112,311.00 semi- annual 08116/10 Junction City Kansas Barren Cnty KY 481502F72 local 101,558.00 1012558.00 43,996.00 100,000.00 40,000.00 5.500% semi- annual 05/28/08 03!01/09 09/01/18 04/01/19 068437DM1 A2 local 43,996.00 4.300% 41,388.00 semi - annual semi - annual 02/08/12 none Augusta ME 051411ND4 A3 local 28,125.00 22,500.00 20,000.00 5.250% 21,221.00 03/07/12 none 06/01/14 10101/17 12101/16 Chaska MN 161664DUB AA local 76,434.00 76,434.00 75,000.00 2.000% 76,491.75 104,888.00 semi - annual 08/15/13 North Mankato MN Port Auth Com 660760AG4 AA local 107,657.00 107,657.00 161,700.00 100,000.00 4.000% semi - annual 09120113 none none 02101/17 04/15/17 Philadelphia PA Auth Zero Coupon 71781LBJ7 AA local 161,700.00 245,000.00 235,077.50 43,998.00 maturity 01/12110 Rice Cnty MN Racine Wl 762698 GK8 AA local 45,466.80 45,466.80 40,000.00 4.400% semiannual 03/07112 none 06/01/12 02/01/19 06/01/18 7500216D4 AA- local 101,792.00 101,792.00 100,000.00 2.100% 2.450% 101,210.00 semiannual 01124112 Minnetdsta MN 604229KE3 AA- local 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,008.70 semi- annual 10/10/13 08/01114 02101119 Ramsey MN 751813PB6 AA+ local 158,677.85 158,677.85 145,000.00 4.500% 149,932.90 semi- annual 02/16/12 04/01/16 04/01/19 Minneapolis Minn 60374YP35 AA1 local 21,269.40 21,269.40 20,000.00 3250% 20,645.40 semiannual semi - annual 08102/11 07/30/12 none 03/01/16 Des Moines IA Area Cmnty Col 250097A85 AAi beat 137,668.95 137,668.95 135,000.00 1.375% 136,414.80 12101/12 06/01/16 Osseo MN ISD #279 688443J27 AA1 local 30,103.25 30,103.25 25,000.00 6.000% 27,506.50 semi - annual 12122/11 none 02/01117 Dane County Wl 236091M92 AA1 local 106,487.00 106,487.00 100,000.00 2.450% 103,216.00 semi - annual 07116/12 none 12/01/17 _ Minneapolis MN 60374YF93 W local 220,938.00 220,938.00 200,000.00 4.000% 215,646.00 semi - annual semi - annual 03/04114 none 03101118 King Cnly WA 4947401 -5 AA1 local _ _ _ 224,634.00 224,634.00 200,000.00 3.980% 215,130.00 03/27112 none 12101/18 Minneapolis MN 60374YS73 AA1 _local 111,898.00 111,898.00 100,000.00 3.250% 106,009.00 semiannual 06/05/12 12/01/11 12/01/18 3,143,290.25 local 91,519.65 state 439,331.60 US 3,273,463.87 CD December 2014 Investment Detail Description r Cusip Number Credit Rating Type Purchase Price Carrying Cost Maturity Amount Interest Rate Current Market Value Date Acquired Coupon Date Maturity / Due Date Cedar Rapids IA 150528RM1 AA1 local 217,672.00 217,672.00 200,000.00 3.000% 209,782.00 semi - annual 06111/13 12101/13 06/01/19 Minneapolis MN 60374YS81 AA1 local 278,632.50 278,632.50 250,000.00 3.500% 268,502.50 semi- annual 02/26/13 none 12101/19 Duluth Minn ISD #709 264474CK1 AA2 local 74,939.20 74,939.20 70,000.00 4.000% 71,577.10 semi - annual 01118/11 none 02/01/16 Duluth MN 264438281 AA2 local 105,652.05 105,652.05 105,000.00 1.000% 105,569.10 semi- annual 12/05/12 08/01113 02/01/16 RovAett TX 7796986H7 AA2 local 101,905.55 101,905.55 95,000.00 3.000% 97,782.55 semi - annual 07110/12 08/15/12 02/15/16 Hopkins Minn ISO #Z70 439881 HCO AA2 local 95,278.40 95,278.40 80,000.00 5.250% 88, 310.40 semi - annual 04/30/12 08101109 02101118 Scott County IA Orange Beach ALA 809486EZ2 68406PHF1 AA2 AA2 local local 114,450.33 241,689.60 112,617.00 241,689.60 100,000.00 240,000.00 4.400% 4.400% 107,150.00 256,519.20 semi - annual 10/31/12 12/01/12 06/01/18 semi - annual 08/05/10 02/01/11 02/01/19 Waterloo IA Western Lake Superior MN 941647PAI 958522WU4 AA2 AA2 local local 50,559.50 100,000.00 50,559.50 100,000.00 50,000.00 100,000 00 2.000% 50,334.00 semi - annual 06127113 12/01/13 06/01119 3.150% 103,800.00 semi - annual 08/16/11 04/01/12 10/01/19 East Bethel Minn 271074HRO AA3 local 100,941.00 100,941.00 100,000.00 200,000.00 3.200% 102,025.00 178,148.00 semiannual 12/15/10 08/01/11 02/01/16 Kane McHenry Cook 8 De Kalb Zero Cpn 484080MB9 AA3 local 157,328.00 157 328.00 maturity 07/16 /12 none 12/01118 Three Rivers MN Park Dist 885718GG5 AAA local 210,828.00 210,828.00 200,000.00 95,000.00 3.000% 3.150% 205,966.00 96,972.20 semiannual 12/12/13 08101114 02/01/16 Richardson TX 763227EC5 AAA local 98,031.45 98,031.45 semi - annual 11/12/14 none 02/15/16 Maple Grove MN Ramsey Cnty MN 56516PNY5 751622JG7 AAA AAA local local 230,520.40 100,000.00 230,520.40 100,000.00 220,000.00 100,000 00 2.000% 223,874.20 semiannual 01/10/13 08/01/13 02101117 1.130% 99,872.00 semi - annual 08/12/14 02/01/15 02101117 Tennessee Valley Auth 880591EA6 AAA local 93,153.11 93,153.11 85,000.00 115,000.00 5.500% 3.750% 94,486.00 119,909.35 semiannual 06/01/09 01/18108 07/18117 Washington County MN 937791KL4 AAA local 115,000.00 115,000.00 semi - annual 07/01/10 01/01/11 01/01/18 Saint Louis Park MN 79174OWC3 AAA local 112,114,00 112,114.00 100,000.00 3.850% 106,412.00 231,652.50 semi - annual maturity 12/22/11 none 02/01/18 Brownsville TX ISD Zero Coupon 116421E46 AAA local 229,640.00 229,640.00 250,000.00 06/26113 none 08/15/18 Minnetonka MN ISD #276 604195RA7 AAA local 37,433.20 37,433.20 35,000.00 3.1000/6 5.8981Y. 35,876.75 245,099.80 semi - annual semi - annual 12/22111 none 02/01/19 Palm Beach Cnty FLA 696497TR7 AAA local 256,504.60 256,504.60 220,000 00 07/06/11 none 06/01/19 Tenn Val Auth Cpn Ship Zero Cpn 88059EWZ3 AAA local 262,890.00 262,890.00 300,000.00 120,000.00 4.050% 274,362.00 125,683.20 maturity 12/27/13 none 06/15/19 Norwalk Conn 668844DS9 AAA local 122,464.80 122,464.80 semiannual OW04110 08101/11 08/01/19 Greensboro NC 39546OV21 AAA local 366 ,832.80 366,832.80 360,000.00 3.263% 4.961% 373,611.60 208,710.00 semiannual semiannual 07/15/11 none 10/01/19 Illinois State 452152HR5 A3 state 217,312.00 217,312.00 200,000.00 07/16/12 09/01/11 03/01116 Washington Stale 939758DL9 AA state 205,804.00 205,804.00 200,000.00 4.500% 215,936.00 70,263.20 semi - annual semiannual 01/24/12 07/29/14 04/01/12 08/01/13 10/01/18 Oregon State 6860BURVO AA1 state 70,194.60 70,194.60 70,000.00 0.890% 0 &01116 Mississippi State 605581BV8 AA2 state 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 1.116% 25,099.25 semi - annual semi - annual 09/12/13 10126111 none 02101/12 12/01/16 08101117 Tennessee Stale Georgia State 8805410M2 373384R01 AAA AA.A state state 201,894.00 26,742.50 201,894.00 200,000.00 2.326% 205,864.00 26,742.50 25,000.00 2.970% 26,227.00 semi - annual 0210 8/12 none 10/01/18 Texas State 882722,151 AAA state 103,089.00 103,089.00 100,000.00 2.894% 104,021.00 semi - annual 08110/11 04/01112 10/01/18 Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp 3134G4YD4 AAA US 200,084.00 200,084.00 200,000.00 0.500% 199,766.00 semi - annual 07115/14 10/01/14 04101/16 Fed Fan Credit Bank 3133EATE8 AAA US 99,647.00 99,647.00 100,000.00 0.900% 99,676.00 semi - annual 11/04/13 12/08/12 0610 8117 Fed Natl M19 Assn 3136GOS69 AAA US 250,000.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 0.600% 248,897.50 semi - annual 07/22/14 0480113 10/30117 Fed Hone Ln Bank 3130A1AX6 3136G16E4 AAA AAA US US 200,000.00 224,325.00 200,000.00 224,325.00 200,000.00 1.300% 198,774.00 semi- annual 03/27/14 09127114 12127/17 Fed Nat Mtg Assn 225,000.00 0.600% 224,318.25 semi- annual 07111/14 none 1212 8/17 Fed Nat Mlg Assn Fed Farm Credit Bank 3136G1AJ8 3133ECFA7 AAA AAA US US 200,000.00 100,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 0.700% 199,078.00 semi- annual 01/30/13 07/30113 01130/18 100,000.00 100,000.00 1.080% 98,899.00 semiannual 02/13113 0&13/13 02/13/18 Fed Home Ln Mfg Corp Mad Tenn Note 3134G4XK9 AAA US 200,000400 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 1.300% 200,368.00 semiannual 03127/14 09/27114 03127118 Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp 3134G46D5 AAA US 198,000.00 198,000.00 1.200% 197,780.00 semi - annual 0 6/12113 12/12/13 0 6/12/18 Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp Med Tenn Note 3134G3ZK9 AAA US 200,000.00 114,000.00 200,000.00 114,000.00 200,000.00 100,000.00 1.200% 197,922.00 semi- annual 07130/12 01/30113 07130/18 Fed Farm Credit Bank 31331Y456 AAA US 5.050% 112,608.00 semiannual 09/11/13 now 08/01/18 Fed NO Mtg Assn 3136GORB9 AAA US 294,999.00 294,999.00 300,000.00 1.375% 298,338.00 semi - annual 12105113 1212 8/12 12/2 8118 5,981,326.05 local 856,120.45 state December 2014 Investment Detail Description Cusip Number Credit Credit Type Purchase Price Carrying Cost Maturity Amount Interest Rate Current Market Value Date Acquired Coupon Date Maturity Due Date Fed Nab Mtg Assn 3136GOY70 AAA US 199,300.00 199,300.00 200,000.00 1.080% 195,448.00 semi - annual 10130/12 01130/13 01130119 Fed Farm Credit Bank 3133EC5N0 AAA US US 99,587.00 204,187.50 99,587.00 100,000.00 1.250% 98,658.00 semi - annual 01107/13 03/04/13 03104/19 Fed Natl Mtg Assn Remic 31393EAL3 14,410.10 14,114.58 4.500% 14,757.36 monthly 07/30/03 none 08125118 FICO Strip Cpn -E Zero Coupon 31771 JXM7 US US 215,452.16 236,235.00 215,452.16 224,000.00 215,617.92 maturity 12111/14 none 11102/17 FICO Strip Cpn Zero Coupon 31771 EAA9 236,235.00 250,000.00 237,712.50 maturity 06/09/14 none 05111118 Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp 31393VMQI US US 153,656.25 93,140.00 8,102.91 93,140.00 7,910.08 100,000.00 4.500% 8,249.98 93,272.00 monthly maturity 06/30103 12129/14 none 06115/18 12/27/18 FICO Strip Cpn13 Zero Coupon 31771C2G9 13,251,050.88 Citizens Alliance Bank 17318LAP9 29266NA31 CD CD 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 2.000% 246,467.67 monthly 06/27/14 07/27/14 06126120 Enerbank USA 249,000.00 249,000.00 249,000.00 2.100% 246,405.42 monthly 07/18/14 08/18/14 07120120 Chaska MN Mitchell SD Sch Dist #17-2 161663653 AA local 115,122.70 115,122.70 110,000.00 4.000% 115,200.60 semi - annual 09108114 none 02/01/24 W6687EHO AA local 116,702.00 116,702.00 100,000.00 6.000% 113,589.00 semiannual 12/20/11 06/15/19 06/15124 Steams Co MN 857896MH4 AA- local 276,875.00 276,875.00 250,000.00 4.500% 262,677.50 semiannual 04/17/13 none 06/01/20 Minnetrista MN 604229KG8 AA+ local 196,265.55 196,265.55 195,000.00 3.100% 195,122.85 semi - annual 10/10113 08/01/14 02/01/21 Greenway MN ISD #31 39678LDF6 AA, local 27,593.50 27,593.50 25,000.00 5.000% 26,880.75 semi - annual 07109113 none 03/15/21 Minnetrista MN 604229KJ2 AA+ local local 50,000.00 198,018.00 50,000.00 198,018.00 50,000.00 200,000.00 3.850% 4.800% 50,047.50 213,256.00 semi- annual semi- annual 10/10/13 06/17/10 08/01/14 02/01/11 02101/23 02/01/24 Savage Minn 80465PAN4 AA+ Des Moines IA Area Cmrdy Col 250097H21 AA1 AA1 krcal local 50,606.00 110,419.00 50,606.00 110,419.00 50,000.00 100,000.00 2.450°/ 4.7000/6 50,752.00 109,281.00 semi- annual semi- annual 11/10/14 10/31111 12/01/14 none 06/01/21 03/01123 Minneapolis MN 60374YG68 Minneapolis MN 60374YG76 AA1 local 72,201.35 286,268.00 72,201.35 286,268.00 65,000.00 295,000.00 4.800°/6 2.400% 71,331.00 299,537.10 semi- annual semi - annual 12/09/14 07117113 none 02101114 03101124 02/01/20 Portsmouth VA 73723RSLB AA2 local Moorhead MN 616141287 AA3 local 108,820.00 111,948.00 108,820.00 111,948.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 3.800% 4.650% 101,784.00 105,938.00 semiannual semiannual 11/14/11 09/13/11 none none 02/01/20 06/01/20 Davenport Iowa 238388GS5 AA3 local Whitewater Wis _ _ Hawkins Cry TN 966204KA6 420218PL7 AA3 AA3 local local 109,541.00 111,480.00 109,541.00 100,000.00 4.850% 112,283.00 semiannual semiannual 06/09/11 03/13/12 none now 12/01/20 05/01/24 111,480.00 100,000.00 4.800% 107,223.00 Woodbury MN Dallas TX Indpt Sch Dist 97913PCQ7 235308QK2 AAA AAA local local 123,037.35 116,900.00 123,037.35 115,000.00 3.250% 117,576.00 semi - annual 12/22/11 none 02/01/20 116,900.00 100,000.00 4.450% 111,439.00 semiannual 04/16/12 08/15/11 02/15!20 Tenn Valley Auth Zero Cpn Tenn Val Auth Cpn Strip Zero Cpn 88059EHD9 88059EMX9 AAA AAA local local 263,970.00 88,133.00 263,970.00 300,000.00 264,411.00 maturity 03/11/13 none 05101120 88,13100 100,000.00 88,645.00 maturity 03/18113 none 07/15/20 Minnetonka MNISD#276 Shoreview MN 604195PO4 AAA local 23,491.73 23,016.40 20,000.00 6.200% 21,142.00 semi - annual 11119/12 none 01101121 825214EH8 AAA local 197,205.75 197,205.75 175,000.00 4.900% 175,679.00 semi - annual 01125/12 none 02!01124 Florida St Dept Environmental 3416OWUAO At state 217,800.00 217,800.00 200,000.00 6.206% 228,432.00 semi- annual 08/30/10 07/01/10 07/01122 Massachusetts State 57582132T6 AA1 state 199,744.00 199,744.00 200,000.00 2.090% 200,066.00 semiannual 12/17/14 11101/14 05/01/20 Minnesota SL Hag Fn Agy Taxable 60415NE24 AA1 state 75,562.50 75,562.50 75,000.00 6.300% 77,270.25 semi- annual 07/17106 01/01/07 07101/23 Virginia State 928109XD4 AAA state 22,126.00 22,126.00 20,000.00 4.100% 21,386.20 semi- annual 02107/12 none 06101121 Fed Farm Credit Bank 3133ECOM AAA US 191,812.00 191,812.00 200,000.00 1.740% 197,940.00 semi- annual 07123/13 11/21113 05/21/20 Fed Home Ln Bank 31338031-18 AAA US 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 1.500% 196,670.00 semi - annual 07130112 01/30/13 07130/24 4,128,433.04 105,024.00 105,024.00 100,000 00 5.550% 105,197.00 semiannual 07112111 none 02/11/28 Itasca County Mmn 465452GP9 A local Lake City Minn ISD #813 508084DW7 AA+ local 103,933.00 106,941.00 103,933.00 108,941.00 100,000.00 5.000% 106,639.00 semiannual 05/11/11 now 02/01/25 Milacs Minn ISD #912 598699NT9 AA+ local 100,000.00 5.850 °h 109,386.00 semiannual 07122111 none 02101!27 Duluth MN 264438ZL9 AA2 local 29,767.20 29,767.20 30,000.00 2.625%1 28,862.10 semiannual 12/05/12 08/01/13 02101125 3,140,140.51 US 492,873.09 CD 2,713,795.50 local 527,154.45 state 394,610.00 US December 2014 Investment Detail Description Cusip.Numb Credit Rating Type Purchase Price Carrying Cost: Maturity Amount Interest Rate Current Market u Value Date Acquired Coupon Data Maturity Due Date Will County IL Cmnty Zero Coupon 969078QM9 AA2 local 159,000.00 159,000.00 500,000.00 280,335.00 112,967.00 l 7seminnual 08/25/09 none 11/01/27 Van Buren Mich Public Schools 920729HD5 AA2 local 102,750.00 102,750.00 100,000.00 6.430% 07/17/09 11/01109 05/01/29 Tennessee Valley Auth Ser E 880591CJ9 AAA local 121,500.00 121,500.00 100,000.00 6.750% 135,724.00 l 03/19/09 none 11/01/25 Ice Deposit- National Sports Center Fed Home Ln Bank none local 250,000.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 02/06/08 none 01/01/26 313381D51 AAA US 93,750.00 93,750.00 100,000.00 2.000% 89,193.00 l l 12/23/14 none 11/23/27 Fed Farm Credit Bank 31331VLC8 AAA A AA US US 106,030.45 361,06920 106,030.45 361,069.20 100,000.00 5.250% 125,902.00 02/26/10 I none 04/21/28 Fed Natl Mtg Assn 3136FTP94 360,000.00 2.000%1 359,658.00 1 semi - annual 12/13/12 none 02127/32 1,703,863.10 28,231,391.05 1,129,110.10 local 574,753.00 US INVESTMENT SCHEDULE - Money Market Funds December 31, 2014 Description Current Market Value YTD Interest Wells Far 2o t Wells Fargo Government Money Market Fund 1 $2,762,646.13 $265.95 4M 1 14M 1 1,892.52 4M PLUS I 14M Plus 3,100.71 Grand Total Money Market Funds 1 $2,767,639.36 1 $265.95 Updated. 111612015 Andover Among Best Small Cities in the Nation for Families NerdWallet considers cost of living, family - friendliness and economic growth San Francisco, CA (January 22, 2014) — NerdWallet, a consumer advocacy website, recently conducted a study to find the best small cities in the nation for families — and Andover ranked #34. To find the best communities for future parents and families alike, NerdWallet evaluated 1,030 cities, towns and census- designated places and examined the following variables: • Income and affordability • Prosperity and growth • Family- friendliness Andover, a quaint city situated in Anoka County boasts ample recreational opportunities such as hiking through acres of community parks like Kelsey Round Lake Park and participating in programs at the YMCA Community Center. Andover is one of only four Minnesota cities to make the top 50. This diverse and vibrant community experienced a 4.6% increase in income from 2009 to 2013. The housing market remains competitive but affordable, with median home values of $229,200. Other places in the top 50 include Bartlett, TN and Savage, MN. See the full study here. For more information about NerdWallet; visit nerdwallet.com /cities. E°1c:3 About NerdWallet NerdWallet provides transparent personal finance advice for consumers. Our data - driven tools and content provide support for important financial decisions like completing the FAFSA, selecting the best credit card and choosing the right healthcare plan. We have been featured in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Reuters; consumer advocates Liz Weston and Clark Howard have recommended our products. Media Contact Christine Kim I Christine@nerdwallet.com