The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-10-2014 Council Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE o2'" ��— I� �-COUNCIL ❑ PLANNING COMMISSION ❑ OTHER Assistive Listening Device available upon request. Please complete the following information for City records. PRESENT FOR(from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER � �, _ c— � �� -' � / L� , t C�� 1. ��T � ,^ � c., `' / J � i ��<�-z .�✓� �-u,1w 2. "l�(1.�2 c� 1�'V �� 1"��'l.u.t O�i`� �'��,�l,J � ,.— ` �,. � '' ,,/ . 9� / 3. - - ��, ��.2��__ �'��Ga,.�. /�'V6 �l `� 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. V:1(LEGAL FORMS�\�FORMS)\PUBLIC ATTENDANCE.DOC Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, February 10, 2014, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Agenda 1. Consent Agenda – Consent agenda items, including (*) asterisk items, are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under this section of the agenda. Items on the Consent Agenda are reviewed in total by the City Council and may be approved through one motion with no further discussion by the Council. Any item may be removed by any Council Member, staff member or person from the public for separate consideration. If you wish to remove any item from the Consent Agenda, please state the item number and description of the item. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet located in the lobby near the sign in sheet. Approval of Minutes 2. Council Work Session of January 27, 2014 * 3. Regular Council Meeting of January 27, 2014 * Presentation 4. Senator David Osmek LMCD Report – Andrew McDermott, Representative Planning Commission Comments – Bruce Lemke, Representative Public Comments – (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) This is an opportunity for the public to address matters not on the agenda. The council will not engage in discussion or take action on items presented at this time. However, the council may refer issues to staff for follow up or consideration at a future meeting. Speakers should state their name and home address at the podium before speaking. Planning Department Report 5. 13-3632 Dale Richardson - 4325 Chippewa Lane – Variance - Resolution 6. 13-3637 Willi Abbott o/b/o The Broadway Group, LLC - 2350 Watertown Rd & xxx Willow Drive North - Preliminary Plat & RPUD Rezoning – Draft Resolution 7. 13-3644 City of Orono - Zoning Code Amendment - Minimum Dwelling Size Standards - Ordinance 8. 14-3646 George Stickney o/b/o DNA Properties, LLC. - 1535 Bohns Pont Road - Preliminary Plat - Resolution 9. 14-3647 EOF Investments, LLC dba Your Boat Club LLC - 1444 Shoreline Dr. - Commercial Site Plan Review for Underground Fuel Storage Tank Installation Public Works Director/City Engineer’s Report 10. Watertown Road Feasibility Study – Presentation 11. Water System Study / Water System Modeling – Presentation 12. Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project – Bid Award Mayor/Council Report Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, February 10, 2014, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us – follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification City Administrator's Report 13. Golf Course Donations – Resolution 14. LMCC Release City Attorney's Report 15. Licenses & Permits * - Massage License 16. Claims/Bills * Adjournment Upcoming Events 2014 02/17 – Holiday – President’s Day – Offices Closed 02/18 – Planning Commission Meeting, *Tuesday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Cynthia Bremer) 02/24– Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 02/24 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 03/05 – Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 03/10 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 03/17 – Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Lizz Levang) 03/24– Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 03/24 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Monday, January 27, 2014 5:00 p.m. Present: Mayor Lili McMillan, Council Members Lizz Levang and Aaron Printup; representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Police Chief Correy Farniok, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jesse Struve, and Finance Director Ron Olson. Steve Kleineman from SKD Architects and Mark Kotten from Kraus‐Anderson presented information on the police garage and addition project. Discussion ensued regarding the site plan, roof plans and cost options. The consensus of the Council was to pursue the hybrid roof plan in Option 1 and to develop cost saving options for external materials. Direction was also given to review whether geothermal is a viable option for this project. Finance Director Ron Olson presented information on CIP Funding and a bonding recommendation from staff. Councilmember’s discussed projects from the CIP in 2014 to 2016. There was consensus to remove the new well from the North Water System and Public Works Director/City Engineer Jesse Struve noted the water system improvements are needed to bring the treatment plant into code compliance with the Department of Health. The Council directed staff to bring back more information to the February work session on bonding for Option 1. Public Works Director/City Engineer Jesse Struve presented information on the new seasonal golf course employees proposed to accommodate the phased retirement of Ron Steffenhagen. Under the new organization structure, the Seasonal Clubhouse Manager will take over the management of the clubhouse and Seasonal Assistant Superintendent will assist in the maintenance of the grounds and equipment. The City Council directed staff to begin the process of advertising for these positions. Mayor McMillan provided a Park Commission format for review. She asked Council to submit names of interested residents to Loftus. Administrator Loftus requested feedback and questions regarding the Building Inspector Position and Department. Council asked about the staff time it takes to run the septic program. It was also requested that the contract revenue from Minnetonka Beach be added to the financial analysis along with an estimate on how many hours of service this contract requires. Given the time constraints of the meeting, the City Council requested this item and the additional information requested be placed on the February work session. Administrator Loftus provided a brief update on the cable channel programming ending 2/28/14, the purchase of logo wear for staff and an upcoming request from the rowing club on Long Lake. The meeting closed at 6:50 p.m. ATTEST: ________________________________________ _______________________________________ Rachel Dodge, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Item #02 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Work Session Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 1 of 1] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 32 ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Lizz Levang, and Aaron Printup. Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategic Planning Michael Gaffron, Finance Director Ron Olson, Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jesse Struve, City Attorney Soren Mattick, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 1. CONSENT AGENDA No items were added to the Consent Agenda. Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 6, 2014 Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono Special City Council meeting of January 6, 2014, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *3. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 2014 Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of January 13, 2014, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS – KEVIN LANDGRAVER, REPRESENTATIVE Landgraver stated he had nothing to report but would be available for questions. PUBLIC COMMENTS None Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 1 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 32 PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES Lixiao Wang, Applicant, was present. Curtis noted this application first appeared before the Planning Commissions in October where the applicant proposed a 12-foot garage addition. The Planning Commission at that time tabled the application and recommended the addition be reduced to six feet. At the November Planning Commission meeting, the applicant proposed a 9-foot addition, which was subsequently denied by the Planning Commission. Curtis stated at the December 13 meeting, the City Council reviewed the applicant’s request to permit a 6-foot expansion of the existing garage. The Council tabled the application to give the Planning Commission an opportunity to review the applicant’s revised plans. The applicant presented his revised plans for the 6-foot garage addition to the Planning Commission at the January 21 meeting. The applicant is requesting average lakeshore, lakeshore, and side setback and hardcover variances. The Planning Commission reviewed the applicant’s request, heard testimony from the applicant and an adjacent neighbor who opposes the variances. The Planning Commission voted 4-2 in favor of a motion to approve the request allowing the 6-foot expansion of the existing attached garage. The deck/porch area above the garage was not included in the approval recommendation. The Planning Commission further recommended that future requests to add additional hardcover to the driveway, particularly in the easement area, should not be approved. Planning Staff continues to recommend denial of the variances. Curtis stated she has some photographs from the applicant depicting the area behind the rear garage wall. Curtis noted the 2001 plan shows the two-stall portion of the garage with a 23-foot depth while the current plan suggests an 18-foot depth. It is Staff’s speculation that at some time since 2001 the rear wall of the garage was relocated. Levang asked if the City Council can view the photographs that have been submitted. Curtis displayed the two photographs provided by the applicant. Levang asked if the mechanical equipment is located behind the two double doors. Wang stated yes the mechanical equipment is behind the two double doors. Levang asked if the mechanical equipment is on the other side of that wall. Wang indicated there is a small corridor that goes to the room but that the pictures show the mechanical equipment. Curtis asked if the configuration still consists of a walk-in closet and then the mechanical area. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 2 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 32 (4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued) Wang stated the previous owner added the elevator, which eliminated the ability to park a car in that area. Wang indicated the mechanical equipment is located behind the double doors. Curtis stated this is the 2001 plan that was submitted as part of the application for the elevator installation and it shows 23 feet from the front of the garage to the back of the garage where the double doors are. The applicant’s current plan from his builder depicts an 18-foot depth which Staff has not been able to reconcile. Wang stated he called his builder prior to the meeting but he indicated he is unable to attend tonight’s meeting due to an illness in the family. The builder also indicated that he would be willing to answer any questions the City Council had when he returned. Wang stated he would like a three-car garage so they can park their daughter’s car inside. Wang noted he was not aware of the difference in the plans and that he has just recently purchased the property. Wang stated due to the elevator, in order to park a vehicle in that area, they need to expand the area. Wang stated the addition had to be added to the entire garage to preserve the integrity of the garage. Levang asked if Staff can verify that the depth is 18 feet. Curtis stated the 18 feet is shown on the builder’s plans, which Staff assumes is correct. Levang asked if the applicant is requesting the 6-foot extension from the 18 feet. Curtis indicated that is correct. McMillan noted there is also another plan that depicts it as 23 feet deep, which is what is confusing. Curtis stated Staff could inspect the garage and verify the depth. McMillan stated she would like the applicant to have a functional two-car garage, which is basically 20’ x 24’. McMillan stated she is not in favor of a variance to simply allow a three-car garage. McMillan stated she has a concern with what the actual depth of the garage is, which will need to be confirmed. Wang indicated Staff put those numbers on there. Curtis stated those numbers were determined based on the scale of the plan. Wang indicated he was not present when the builder drew up his plans. McMillan stated the applicant had indicated at a previous meeting that he was unable to fit a Suburban or similar sized car in the two stalls and that the depth of the garage needs to be verified. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 3 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 32 (4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued) Levang stated the Planning Commission reviewed the plan again and voted 4-2 in favor of the 6-foot garage. Levang stated she would like the applicant to have a functional two-car garage but that she is not in favor of granting a variance simply to allow a three-car garage. Levang stated the City Council should set some sort of minimum, which would be 24 feet. Printup stated his concern with that is that anyone who has a 23-foot garage would come in and request a 24-foot garage. Printup stated the problem he has with the application is that it appears to be benign because they are only talking about a few feet, but that it becomes a slippery slope and could cause problems down the road. Printup stated he is hesitant about setting a standard since there really is no standard. Levang stated if the garage is 23 feet and they would like 24 feet, they could move the interior wall if it is structurally possible. Wang indicated the Planning Commission stated cars could also be parked outside, which would block the view somewhat, and that they are looking to park a small car in that third stall. Levang stated the City Council understands that point, and that the City Council decides whether or not to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Levang stated the City Council is interested in making sure the applicant has a functional two-car garage. McMillan noted the Planning Commission was going off that 18-foot depth, and if the depth is truly 23 feet, the Planning Commission may have recommended otherwise. McMillan stated a motion could be made conditional upon verification of the depth. Printup asked if the true depth is 23 feet, whether he could expand it one foot. McMillan stated if it is 23 feet, she would not allow it to be expanded at all. Levang stated if it is 18 feet, the City Council would allow him to go to 24 feet. McMillan noted the application would need to come back to the City Council again in order to approve the resolution, which would allow Staff time to verify the depth of the garage. McMillan stated if the depth is determined to be 23 feet, the application would be denied. Wang stated at the last Planning Commission meeting, those numbers were not on there. Levang noted the City Council needs to have that number verified. Wang indicated that is fine. McMillan stated the Planning Commission was going off a depth of 18 feet. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 4 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 32 (4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued) Mattick stated given the time constraints, the resolution will need to be adopted at the next City Council meeting, and asked what the exact parameters of an approval would be and what the parameters of a denial would be. Levang stated if the garage depth is 23 feet, the City Council will deny the variance, and if the garage is less than 23 feet, the City Council will approve the variance and allow the garage addition up to 24 feet. McMillan stated if the garage is 18 feet deep, the City Council will follow the Planning Commission recommendation. Levang noted the Planning Commission recommended the deck not be permitted and also recommended any additional requests for hardcover to the driveway not be allowed. Mattick asked whether it is 18 feet in depth or less than 23 feet in depth. Mattick stated he would like to make sure that if the depth is somewhere in between those two numbers, that the motion would cover that. Printup stated he agrees with half of the potential motion, but that he has an issue with the part that says if it 23 feet or less. Levang stated they are saying he should have a functional garage and the standard is 24 feet. If it is 18 feet deep, the garage is not functional. Printup asked when the house and garage were originally constructed. Gaffron indicated 1979. Printup commented between 1979 and now, the garage was functional. Levang noted the interior wall was potentially moved. Curtis stated the elevator was added to that third stall in 2001. McMillan stated 20 feet tends to be the minimum depth of a garage nowadays. McMillan noted the City Council has a 23-foot depth from 2001 and an 18-foot depth from the builder for this application and that the City Council is attempting to figure out which number is correct. McMillan stated if the garage is substandard, then getting it to a standard, functional depth is what she is concerned about. McMillan stated the garage appeared to be functional in 2001 and that she is less concerned about the third stall because the focus by the Planning Commission and the City Council has been that the main two-car garage is functional. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 5 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 32 (4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued) Wang stated if they do not get the third stall, they will be forced to build a two-car detached garage down near the road. Wang stated in his view the garage addition will not block anyone’s view. Wang encouraged the City Council to think about the decision they make today, noting that if the City Council denies this garage addition, he will build another garage near the road and that he will need to cut the trees down in order to construct it. Wang stated in his view the garage addition is the right thing to do and that a detached garage will increase coverage and will require the trees be cut down. McMillan noted the City Council needs a practical difficulty demonstrated in order to grant a variance, and if there is a substandard depth, that would make it nonfunctional and a practical difficulty. McMillan stated a three-car garage is not a practical difficulty and the City Council is attempting to determine the correct depth of the garage. McMillan indicated she is more concerned about making sure the main part of the garage is functional. Wang indicated he understands that point and that the issue is whether he can expand the current garage or whether he will need to construct a detached garage near the road. McMillan noted there is a discrepancy in the two numbers and that the City Council cannot make a firm decision tonight due to that since it impacts whether there is a practical difficulty or not. Wang stated he understands that. McMillan stated the City Council is attempting to figure out a way to address both possible directions depending on the verified number. City Council is attempting to find a way to address that discrepancy and resolve the issue once and for all. Wang noted he has attended a number of meetings and that he and the City Council are wasting a lot of time. McMillan stated the better the information is, the quicker issues can be decided. Wang indicated his builder could verify it when he gets back and that he could have been asked to do that prior to tonight’s meeting. Wang stated he understands what the Council has said, but that the neighbor is complaining about the 75-foot setback. McMillan stated the big concern tonight is the true size of the two-car garage. Francine Delaney, 3051 Farview Lane, noted Mr. Wang keeps stating his cars do not fit in the garage but the previous owner was able to park full-sized BMW sedans in the garage. When the home was originally constructed, it was maxed out on footprint, which is why an easement was granted on their property to accommodate additional driveway. Delaney noted the basketball hoop is actually on her property. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 6 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 32 (4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued) Delaney indicated she has been on that driveway and that if additional structure is placed on the driveway, it will make it very difficult to turn around. Delaney stated their concern is that the applicant will come back requesting additional driveway easement. Delaney stated to her understanding, the applicant has the right to come back and request additional driveway. Mattick stated it is difficult to know without seeing the easement. Delaney stated their issue is constructing additional driveway space in the easement since that is their only access to the lake. If you add six feet of additional structure, it will cause even more difficulty to turn around. Delaney stated the applicant does have the option of constructing another structure by the street. Once the leaves are down, the structure is in their view and that they continue to object to the project. McMillan stated without knowing the exact dimensions, it is difficult to proceed, but that she would like to allow a 6-foot extension if the depth of the garage is only 18 feet. Levang stated once the numbers are verified, the City Council at the next meeting would then be able to approve either a denial resolution or a resolution approving the addition. Mattick stated the denial resolution is clear and that the City Council has indicated if it is 23 feet in depth, the variance would be denied due to the lack of a practical difficulty. Mattick asked whether the garage extension would be approved if it measures less than 23 feet or whether it would be approved if it is 18 feet. McMillan stated if it is 18 feet, the variance should be approved, and if it is anything greater than 18 feet, it would be denied. Mattick noted technically 18.1 feet in depth would equal a denial and 18 feet or less would equal an approval. McMillan and Levang agreed that anything greater than 18 feet would be a denial. Printup stated if the garage is 18 feet, in his view that is functional. Mattick stated the motion would be to bring back a resolution, and if the measurement on the depth come back at 18 feet even or less, the City Council would approve it per the Planning Commission recommendation. If it comes in at 18.01 or more, Staff will bring back a resolution for denial. Levang moved, McMillan seconded, to direct Staff to draft a resolution approving Application No. 13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Lane, if the depth of the garage is 18 feet or less per the Planning Commission recommendation based upon Staff’s verification of the number, and subject to elimination of the deck/porch above the garage and no further requests for additional hardcover; and to direct Staff to draft a denial resolution if the depth of the garage is greater than 18 feet. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 7 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 32 (4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued) Curtis noted outside of the 75-foot setback, it would be an administrative permit to add hardcover. Curtis stated language could be included in the resolution that a request would not be approved for additional driveway even if they are within the 25 percent. Mattick stated in terms of denying a request, someone always has the right to petition for relief and that he would suggest that type of limitation not be included in the motion. McMillan stated she would like the resolution to also limit the height of the garage. McMillan stated the resolution should also state that the goal is to make it a functional garage and not a three-car garage. Wang stated the main issue is either they build the extension or a detached garage. Wang stated restricting any additional driveway in the easement is a meaningless condition because his understanding is that the easement originated before Mrs. Delaney bought her house. When she purchased her house, she inherited the easement. Wang stated from his point of view, he cannot expand into that any further since it is the neighbor’s property. Wang stated if he is limited to the 11 percent and the maximum is 25 percent that would not be fair. McMillan stated as it relates to the variances, the City Council can include other conditions. Wang stated he cannot expand into the neighbor’s property any further. McMillan stated she was more focusing on the structural piece. Levang stated she does not want any further expansion into the neighbor’s property. Curtis noted the neighbor would need to consent to any further hardcover in the easement area. Levang moved, McMillan seconded, to direct Staff to draft a resolution approving Application No. 13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Lane, if the depth of the garage is 18 feet or less per the Planning Commission recommendation based upon Staff’s verification of the number, subject to the elimination of the deck/porch above the garage, and to direct Staff to draft a denial resolution if the depth of the garage is greater than 18 feet. VOTE: Ayes 2, Nays 1, Printup Opposed. 5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING Willi Abbott, Applicant, was present. Gaffron stated the applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval for a 7-lot single-family residential subdivision to be known as Oliver Hill as well as rezoning to Residential Planned Unit Development. The Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat at its November meeting and recommended approval subject to a number of conditions. At the December 9 meeting, the City Council tabled the application and requested the following information be submitted: Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 8 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) 1. A revised landscaping plan, indicating additional trees and screening along Willow Drive and along abutting property boundaries. 2. Draft covenants for protection of wetlands and woodlands, maintenance of stormwater facilities, etc., with an eye toward consolidating the conservation easements rather than having multiple or overlapping easements. 3. Conceptual floor plans and site plans for individual lots indicating how they might or might not fit a 15 percent lot coverage limitation. Gaffron noted the applicant has provided today a set of floor plans, which is before the City Council tonight. 4. A plan showing how rain gardens might be located in single lots rather than straddling lot lines. 5. A plan showing positive measures for protection of wetlands, tree areas, etc., during development and construction. The applicant has submitted the following: 1. Lot by lot analysis of lot coverage percentages versus FAR. 2. Revised landscape plan showing additional buffering along Willow Drive. 3. Revised grading plans depicting rain garden relocations. 4. Site protection narrative. 5. Narrative in response to neighbor comments. 6. Conceptual floor plans. Gaffron noted Exhibit A-1 is the lot-by-lot analysis. The intent of the lot-by-lot analysis was to look at each lot in terms of massing potential and establish a standard for how much house should be allowed. The lots range in area from 0.40 acre to 0.88 acre. Since the intent of a lot coverage standard is to limit the overall visual density, Staff would suggest that visual density is a function of the overall site, such that the entire lot area should be included in the analysis and not just the contiguous dry buildable. The developer has suggested the maximum size of a 2-story house he intends for the site would be a 2,820 square foot footprint, including house, garage, deck, and screen porch, translating to a 5,180 square foot floor area including finished interior spaces, basement, garage, and screen porch. For a rambler style house, the potential maximum intended footprint would be 3,820 square foot and floor area goes up to 5,280 square foot. The applicant has indicated very few lots would have a rambler style house constructed on it. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 9 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Gaffron noted based on the total lot areas, use of the RPUD standard 0.50 floor area ratio yields allowable floor areas ranging from 8,700 square feet to 19,000 square feet. Use of the 0.50 floor area ratio for the development would potentially allow much larger homes than the developer anticipates. Staff does not recommend use of the 0.50 floor area ratio standard. Gaffron noted the average size of the house would be 4,100 square feet. The two smallest lots in Block 2 located on the south side of the road are the most able to accommodate the large rambler footprint since they are the least constrained by setbacks, wetlands, and buffers, but they would have the most difficulty meeting a 15 percent footprint limit. Gaffron indicated he has laid out a number of options for the City Council to consider for the lot coverage limit and those are contained on Page 3 of Staff’s report. Each one of them has impacts varying by the size of the lot. The applicant’s preference is to establish the limit as the larger of 3,820 square feet or 15 percent. Under this scenario, house footprint limits would range from 3,820 to 5,700 square feet. Gaffron noted the proposed grading for the site is to grade virtually the entire site south of the wetland and southwest of the tree line adjacent to the creek. The applicant has indicated future buffering will likely be new plantings or possibly transplants of existing, higher quality materials from the site. The applicant is also proposing additional screening along Willow Drive and buffering to adjacent properties. The applicant Mr. Abbott has revised the rain garden locations to be completely within each individual lot and not straddling lot lines. The rain gardens would be protected via an expansion of the perimeter drainage and utility easements. Gaffron noted the new landscaping plan suggests elimination of rain gardens in favor of shallow swales, which would be a conflict between the new landscaping plan and the new grading plan. Staff has reviewed the various easements and covenants that would be required and considered the possibilities for consolidating them into a more compact format. Gaffron stated the following easements would be required: perimeter drainage and utility easements; other drainage and utility easements devoted to stormwater facilities, ponds, rain gardens, and non-wetland drainageways; wetland flowage and conservation easements; a trail easement; city sewer easement; tree preservation easement, and a wetland buffer. Gaffron indicated the MCWD is requiring a 16-foot buffer bordering the wetland. Gaffron noted if the road is to be private, it would be platted as an outlot over which the City historically has required an underlying road, drainage and utility easement as well as a covenant establishing that the neighborhood has maintenance obligations for the road. In the case of Oliver Hill, the road is proposed to be platted as a public road, which automatically places the ownership and maintenance responsibilities on the City and no easements are required. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 10 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Gaffron indicated one option for consolidating documents may be for the developer to establish the easements and restrictions within neighborhood covenants. The downside to this is that they may get ‘buried’ and are not as readily discernible to a buyer as separate documents. When incorporated into neighborhood covenants, there must be language that makes them permanently applicable and not able to be changed without City approval. Under the current plan layout, the individual easement documents have to be filed in the title of each affected lot. If the wetlands and preservation areas were in an outlot owned by a homeowners association, the complexity created by multiple documents would decrease. If the wetlands and preservation areas were in an outlot owned by a homeowners association, the complexity created by multiple documents would decrease. Gaffron stated the simplest option might be for the wetland and tree preservation areas to be platted as a single outlot to be owned by the City, in which case certain easements would not be required. However, that would be a distinct departure from past City practice. The City’s philosophy has been for decades that the City does not want to own wetlands or little snippets of conservation areas scattered around the City. The wetland easement prohibits the developer and property owners from doing damage to the wetland, while the drainage easement allows the City to maintain drainage through it. Gaffron noted staff does not have a firm recommendation for consolidating the various easement documents that will or may be required of this plat. Staff is willing to entertain a proposal by the developer’s attorney to incorporate certain of the required elements into a neighborhood covenant, which has been done with some past developments in Orono. Gaffron noted one of the neighbors, Mr. Kelley, has submitted a letter dated January 10, 2014, in which he suggests three specific actions he feels would make for a better development. In addition to the applicant’s response, Staff would make the following observations: 1. “Increase setback from Willow Drive.” As noted in prior memos, the standard for RPUD is a 50-foot side street setback from Willow Drive. The applicant is proposing 25 feet. Kelley has suggested 40 feet. Increasing the setback to something greater than 25 feet will reduce the flexibility in house design while potentially allowing for better screening, especially if a trail is someday developed on the east side of Willow Drive. Gaffron noted of the Council Members asked what the existing setbacks are from Willow Drive. Gaffron indicated the houses across the street in the Hackberry neighborhood are approximately 50 feet from the street lot line. The one house that is furthest from the park is 30 feet. On the corner lot of Glendale Cove, due to wetlands and drainage easements, that house is 45 to 50 feet from the street right-of-way. Gaffron indicated the setbacks vary in depth and the question is whether 50 feet would be appropriate in this situation. McMillan noted Willow has a distinct setback look. Gaffron noted the City is not creating a neighborhood of two acre lots with Oliver Hill and that they are instead creating an urbanized neighborhood. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 11 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) McMillan asked whether the wetland in Glendale Cove is platted as an outlot. Gaffron indicated it is privately owned by an association. McMillan asked if it is contiguous to this other wetland. Gaffron indicated it likely is but that there might be some higher ground separating the two due to some trees in the area. McMillan asked why the City would not want this wetland to be part of an outlot. Gaffron stated Staff from the beginning has favored creation of an outlot for the wetland, which would potentially include the proposed tree preservation area. Gaffron indicated this would be similar to the development scheme of Glendale Cove to the immediate north. This would require establishment of a homeowners association to own and manage those areas, which the developer does not favor. Gaffron stated looking back at the minutes from December of 2005 and January of 2006, the discussion focused on the density and the fact that there will be city utilities in the right-of-way. The City Council had a consensus at that time that the road be a public road. The City’s Comprehensive Plan also contains a statement which reads as follows: Under urban transportation policies, No. 1, local streets in the urban area will be owned and maintained by the City. Because the land use and street use density for the urban neighborhoods is relatively high, the City will provide public street access to all urban properties. The City’s responsibility for proper maintenance levels will ensure passable all-weather streets available at all times for emergency vehicles and for general public ingress and egress. Gaffron noted they are basically following what the Comprehensive Plan says about urban development. Levang stated she has a problem with that since the City would be responsible for all the maintenance and upkeep in the future. Levang stated when the City is taking over another road, that means the City is taking on all the responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep over time, and when they are talking about serving seven homes and making that a public road, she has problem with that when so many of the surrounding neighborhoods are all private. Gaffron noted those are all two acre lots. McMillan commented it is more expensive for the homeowners on the two-acre lots given the longer driveways and road as well as fewer homes. Gaffron stated the second suggestion from Mr. Kelley is to move the access road 15 feet north. The proposed cul-de-sac abuts the northwest corner of Kelley’s property and includes a corridor segment that would allow for potential future road connection to the Kelley property. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 12 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Gaffron illustrated the location of the cul-de-sac on the overhead. Gaffron noted the City typically does not like to maintain cul-de-sacs. It also drastically reduces the possibility of making this proposed public cul-de-sac road into a through road if the Kelley property develops at some point in the future. Staff has requested that that connection be shown on the plans. While Mr. Kelley’s suggestion moves the road away from his property, it places the cul-de-sac so much further north that it has a huge impact on the build ability of the lots to the north due to the location of the creek and the required setbacks from the wetland. Moving the road and cul-de-sac northward has a significant impact on reducing the buildable area and flexibility of Lots 1 through 4 in Block 1. Gaffron stated the third suggestion by Mr. Kelley is 3 the creation of an outlot for the wetland, which has been discussed previously. Gaffron stated the City Council should reach a conclusion on each of the following items: 1. Confirm that development of this site should be as a Residential Planned Unit Development. 2. Nothing that lot sizes and proposed flexibility requests for certain lots regarding width, contiguous. Buildable area and setbacks have not changed, does the Council have any further concerns. Regarding the proposed flexibility? a. Allowing the side street setback for the two lots abutting Willow Drive to be 25 feet rather than the 50 feet setback required because Willow Drive is a collector road. b. Allowing the substandard lot widths for Lots 3, 4, and 5 which abut the cul-de-sac. c. Allowing Lots 1, 3, and 4 to contain a contiguous dry buildable area slightly less than the required 15,000 square feet on the basis that the overall density is acceptable and that there is sufficient area within the sites to allow homes to be developed. 3. Confirm acceptance of the new cul-de-sac road as a public road, with the understanding the City will ultimately maintain the road and municipal sewer system that the developer constructs. 4. Given the pros and cons of establishing an outlot for preservation of the natural amenities of the site, confirm that the Council still prefers that each lot contain its share of the areas to be protected via various easements. The Council may want to discuss the merits and methods of consolidating easements if that is still an issue. 5. Is Council in agreement with the Planning Commission that the 10 percent recreation area required by the RPUD standards is satisfied by dedication of easements for tree preservation and a walking easement over the existing and proposed 20-footsewer easements? Gaffron noted the easement would not be right up against the Glendale development. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 13 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) 6. Are the revisions to the proposed landscaping plan acceptable? Are there any concerns regarding the applicant’s proposal for vegetation preservation during site development? 7. Which of the presented options for establishing a massing limit on the individual lots does Council prefer. Planning Staff would recommend the following: 1. Process the subdivision via rezoning to RPUD. 2. Approval should be subject to the standard platting requirements, establishment of a developer’s agreement for the public and private improvements, payment of park dedication fees, stormwater trunk fees, granting of appropriate easements, etc., to be defined and enumerated in a resolution for preliminary plat approval. 3. Approval subject to the current and forthcoming comments of the City Engineer and Fire Marshal. Levang asked if Staff could show the Council visually where the walking easement would be. Gaffron stated it would start at Willow Drive and go all the way across the east end of the property. At the east end, the sewer line would head directly south and the walking easement would be along that corridor. Gaffron stated whether that makes sense is up for further discussion. Levang asked how the area would be marked. Gaffron stated in his view the intent of the applicant is that the 10 percent recreation area serves only the residents within the subdivision and would likely not be marked. Gaffron stated the residents would be aware that there is a walking easement there but that it would not be open to the general public. Gaffron stated the close proximity of Hackberry Park should be taken into consideration on this development and whether a recreation area is needed in this instance. McMillan asked if the cul-de-sac has a 100-foot diameter. Gaffron indicated the cul-de-sac as platted is 100 feet and that the City Code requires 80 feet. Gaffron stated the Fire Department would like a 96-foot paved area but noted the City has never required that. The outer 10 feet would not be paved and would likely be a ditch or contain portions of a rain garden. McMillan stated it would be nice to have a paved section but that it does not have to be 100 feet of pavement. Gaffron noted part of the rain gardens are within the 50-foot corridor. Gaffron stated the lot located right off of Willow to the right has a rain garden that is partially within the right-of-way. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 14 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 15 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) McMillan asked if each of the rain gardens have their own outlet. Gaffron indicated the applicant will need to explain that. Levang asked what the requirement is for trees. Gaffron indicated it would be the same requirement as Bayfield and that there would be trees every 40 feet lining the road. What the applicant is proposing is not necessarily following that and it might make more sense to have the trees scattered rather than methodically placed. McMillan asked if the development will have curb and gutter. Gaffron indicated that is being proposed. Levang commented she does not like the uniformed approach for the trees and that she would prefer they be scattered. Gaffron stated to his recollection the landscape plan does not show the trees being placed uniformly. McMillan commented she has a concern that the development is over-engineered. McMillan asked how the City Council feels about the lot coverage. Levang stated to her understanding this is supposed to be moderately priced homes on a small scale, but that the homes end up being larger than that. Levang stated she would rather go with small lots with small homes rather than small lots with large homes and that she would like to see some differentiation between Glendale Cove and Oliver Hill. Printup commented he also sees the resemblance to Glendale Cove. McMillan noted the City holds other lots to the 15 percent lot coverage and that the idea of increasing density does not mean they can have a large house on a small lot. Levang stated she is in agreement with the 15 percent. McMillan stated the other big issue is the setback from Willow. Levang stated in her view it should be 40 feet and that 25 feet is too close. McMillan stated it should be at least 35 feet, especially if a trail is ever constructed in that area at some point in the future. Levang stated she would also like the road to remain private. Printup and McMillan stated they are in agreement that the road should be private. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 15 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) McMillan stated it might be 50 years before that area is developed but that the road should connect down through Willow. McMillan stated in her view the road needs to be platted to avoid people becoming upset should the road ever be constructed at some point. Levang stated in her view the wetlands should also be put in an outlot. McMillan stated a homeowners association may not be necessary unless the developer feels he would like that. McMillan asked if a homeowners association is required. Mattick stated it depends how the City would like the outlot held. Mattick indicated they have discussed it at a Staff level and some of the complicating issues are all the different easements and the number of restrictions on their lot. If it is made an outlot, it would not be part of their lot to begin with, but the issue comes down to how it is maintained and who owns it. McMillan stated the outlot would be very visible for Staff to observe since it is along the road and that in her view it will not need a lot of maintenance. McMillan stated in her view it is in the best interests of the landowners to preserve the trees and maintain the buffer and that she is not sure a tree preservation easement is required. McMillan noted the middle lot on the cul-de-sac will have the most trees and that she is not sure it is necessary to have a separate easement for that. Gaffron asked if the portion of the wetland would be an outlot and then the creek going through Lots 3, 4, and 5 would be a separate set of easements for each property. McMillan indicated that is correct. McMillan stated as it relates to the walking easement, she is not in favor of that, and if a trail is ever constructed, it will provide a kind of buffer. Levang stated the one issue she is interested in relates to Mr. Kelley’s proposal about moving the roadway. One of the issues that was raised at the Planning Commission was the possibility of headlights. Levang asked if changing that roadway would help alleviate that. Gaffron stated if you follow the south line of what used to be 2350 and go directly straight west from that, you will come to a spot that is perhaps 15 to 20 feet north of the driveway serving the house at 65. Gaffron stated the road coming down and going west would aim almost directly at the middle of the front yard of the house at 65. Levang asked if that is the revised proposal. Gaffron indicated that is how it is depicted in the original proposal. If the City Council goes with Mr. Kelley’s proposal, it would further limit the two lots to the north of the road. If there is an outlot plus setbacks and if the road is moved north, the lots would be constrained even further. Gaffron stated if the road moves north, the houses will get pushed back, especially Lot 2, and Lot 2 would not have room for a deck. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 16 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Levang stated she likes the planting buffer along the cul-de-sac and that in her opinion it should be put in place to reduce the visual impacts. Gaffron stated the question becomes whether a buffer like that can be accomplished without moving the road. Gaffron stated if that area is preserved for a future road, it could also contain plantings in the interim. Levang stated she would like to see plantings in the cul-de-sac portion. McMillan stated the landscaping plan is very good as it relates to the selection of plant material and that the swales will be easier to maintain than rain gardens. Willi Abbott, Applicant, stated by increasing the road setback, the buildable area on the lot would be reduced to 40 feet for the width of a home, which would result in a long, thin home. Abbott stated what they have created with this neighborhood is wider lots and that he understands the development is on a collector street. Abbott stated they chose to use the RPUD standards for this development, which is a give and take. The concept on the interior of the development was created in a layout that works and is visually consistent and very appealing. Abbott noted this concept started way back last year and that if the setback is increased to 40 feet, it will kill the project because it will result in a lot of garage with a little bit of home visible from the front. Abbott indicated he would have to come back with a whole new plan and that he does not support that decision. Abbott stated part of what they are building is homes that have a connection to the front street and a sense of community. As it relates to the wetland outlot, Abbott stated he does not totally understand why that needs to be carved out of a landowner’s land. Abbott stated the wetland easement concept that has been around for a long time works very well. Cutting it out as a separate piece, whether it is owned by a homeowners association or the private homeowner, would result in small lots and that they are attempting to create larger lots with smaller homes. Abbott stated that would necessitate them having to go back to the 15 percent lot coverage area concept, which would not apply to this. The part that applies would be 50 percent FAR on a RPUD. Abbott stated what they were trying to come up with was a plan that would meet the lot coverage for single family in an RPUD and if they are now looking at 15 percent, that will result in a little house. Abbott stated the next issue is the private road. Abbott asked if a public road is required on an urban neighborhood under the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Gaffron stated that is the City’s Comprehensive Plan policy. Abbott noted the policy would then be changed. Levang pointed out the Comprehensive Plan is a guide. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 17 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 18 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Abbott stated if that is the case, the properties that are around there with public roads would pay the same amount of taxes as the residents on the private roads. Abbott stated he is attempting to create affordable housing, and if these property owners are required to maintain a private road, it would create an added expense to the homeowners. Gaffron stated Hennepin County, for the last 35 years, has been hit or miss on how they interpret the underlying road easements the City has for the rural private roads. Some show up as an outlot and some show up as a private road. Gaffron indicated he has attempted in the past to get that clarified but it has not yet happened. Abbott stated in speaking with Staff, it seemed that Staff wanted to go down the path of a public road. If the road is private, Abbott indicated some items will need to be changed. Abbott stated under their plan, they did what they heard Staff suggest and that in his view the public road makes the most sense. Abbott stated the added taxes the City would receive would outweigh the maintenance costs. Levang stated the City Council has expressed its opinions on the application and that the decision is up to the City Council. Abbott asked who would monitor the use of the 10 percent recreation area. Gaffron stated the neighborhood would monitor it. Another RPUD in the City includes Stone Bay, which has some areas designated for a neighborhood park. Gaffron stated when you look at Glendale Cove, the City Council concluded that the public trail that connects from Glendale Drive across the church property and becomes part of Glendale Cove Lane, is their private recreation area. Gaffron indicated there is a little outlot to the north as you enter the road that was also attributed to the private recreation area. Gaffron stated for a development of half a dozen homes, the idea of having 10 percent of the site dedicated to a neighborhood recreation area, especially when it is across the street from a city park, did not make much sense. McMillan stated that requirement was designed for bigger developments. Abbott indicated he is not in favor of doing it. Levang noted the City Council is in agreement with that point. Abbott stated the only other discussion is the decision on the FAR. John Quinlan, Gordan James Construction, stated a comment was made that this development resembles Glendale Cove. Quinlan noted the largest lot in Glendale Cover is just under a half acre and the smallest lot in this development is over a half acre. If you average the lot sizes, these lots are much bigger than Glendale Cover as a whole and will not have the same feel. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 18 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 19 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Levang stated that may be true but what is being proposed in terms of houses will be very similar. Levang stated while there may be a little more room on each side, essentially this development is a duplicate of the Glendale Cove development. Levang noted Mr. Abbott referred to a small lot with a large house. Abbott stated they are trying to do larger lots with smaller homes, but by creating the outlot and increasing the setback, that will result in a smaller buildable area. Levang noted there are a number of wetlands on the site. Abbott stated there are some wetlands on the site and that the creek separates it from the wetland. Levang stated the house sizes are fairly large if you look at the square footages that are being proposed. Abbott stated the worst case scenario on a rambler was 2,100, 2,200 square feet, and on the two-story was somewhere between 1,000 to 1,500 square feet on one floor. Levang stated when those are added together, it results in a significant amount of footprint. Levang noted they are also proposing 3-car garages. Quinlan commented that is pretty standard today. Printup noted the City Council was discussing a little earlier tonight what is standard nowadays. Quinlan stated he has not constructed a two-stall garage since 2004 and that all of the $400,000 neighborhoods have 3-car garages. Quinlan stated the litmus standard should be what they are seeing in the market, and that what they are seeing in the market is 3-stall garages on new developments. McMillan stated she understands that is the desire, but that a 2-car garage is considered to be a functional garage in Orono. Abbott stated a 2,000 square foot rambler is not that big. Levang noted Mr. Abbott has indicated he will not be constructing ramblers. Gaffron illustrated the house drawings on the overhead. Gaffron noted the drawings have been scaled and some dimensions have been added to give an idea of the sizes. McMillan stated what was confusing is some language in Staff’s report that said they would limit all seven lots to 15 percent but then it said the home sizes would range in footprints between 2,600 to 5,100 square feet. McMillan noted the larger house sizes are not being proposed. Abbott indicated that is correct. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 19 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 20 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Gaffron indicated that was based on the whole lot. McMillan stated Staff’s memo made it somewhat confusing and that it appeared he was proposing a 3,000 square foot perimeter. Abbott stated their plan is to construct something between 2,500 and 3,000 square feet. McMillan asked if that is the total amount of square feet. Abbott indicated that would be for two floors. Abbott stated the 15 percent would create a large number on a bigger lot, but that it is not their intent to construct a home that size. Quinlan stated they have the ability on many lots to construct an 8,000 to 10,000 square foot home but in their experience nobody is going to spend $200,000 on a lot and then construct a $1.5 million home. Quinlan stated even though 5,700 square feet is allowed on some of the bigger lots, it is very unlikely the people who will be purchasing these lots will be able to afford to construct a home of that size. Abbott stated they also did not want the homeowners to come back and ask for a variance, so decks and porches have been included in the calculations. McMillan asked if the floor plans are for four-season living space except for the garage. Abbot indicated that is correct. Gaffron noted the plans do not show a deck or porch. Levang stated the reality is that what is being depicted will not be constructed and that they will be constructing what the landowner wants. Quinlan indicated that is correct. Levang stated the price of the home will also be dependent on what the homeowner wants to build. Levang commented she feels a little duped by the phrase affordable housing. Abbott stated he is not attempting to dupe the City Council and that he offered to allow any wording restricting the size of the homes. Abbott indicated he is fine if the City Council wants to limit them to 3,000 square feet. Levang stated he pushed back on the 15 percent, which has caused some confusion. McMillan stated the issue was the dry contiguous. Quinlan stated they will not be constructing homes that are 5,700 square feet in this development. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 20 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 21 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Levang noted Mr. Abbott wanted the FAR rather than the 15 percent. Abbott stated if an outlot is created, that would restrict the building envelop and would result in lots that have no deck or screen porch. Abbott stated if the Council would like to restrict it to smaller homes, he would ask that the City Council tell them how they should do it. McMillan stated the floor plans are helpful but noted the City Council only received them tonight. McMillan noted in the first example the lower level is 45 feet wide and the upper level is 38 feet wide, but that he had indicated he did not want to construct a home that was 40 feet wide. McMillan stated in her view he pretty much has it designed already. Levang noted the reason it is 45 is because of a third stall garage. Abbott stated 40 feet is pretty difficult. Levang commented the garage could be limited to two cars. McMillan asked if this is not what they want to build. Quinlan stated if the house is moved over another five feet that would make a huge difference and reduces the width of the front of the house. Levang stated if it is a two-car garage, nothing would have to be moved. Quinlan stated it is difficult to sell a new home with a 2-car garage nowadays. Levang stated if they are talking about affordable housing, a two-car garage is more affordable. McMillan noted there are other lots in the subdivision that could accommodate a 3-car garage and that there are perhaps only two lots that would have to have a 2-car garage. Levang stated the City Council knows a 2-car garage is still workable in other developments. Abbott stated they are attempting to create a consistent development for new families and that their competition offers 3-car garages. McMillan stated the floor plans depict something that is close to 40 feet wide and that those are decisions that may need to be worked out. McMillan indicated she is in agreement with not creating a wetland outlot and that it is probably better to attach it to the individual lots. McMillan noted it would still be considered an easement but would allow the developer to get to a certain lot size. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 21 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 22 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Abbott asked if there will need to be permanent signage along the edge of the wetland. Abbott stated if that is the case, it will not be such a gray area for the residents. Abbott stated they are attempting to design a consistent neighborhood that will bring value to Orono. McMillan stated the City Council is also desirous of a consistent neighborhood with the setbacks. McMillan asked how engineered the rain gardens are, noting that she would prefer to keep things simple. Marty Campion, Engineer, stated the rain gardens provide water quality and rate control. The rate control would be through a 6-inch outlet pipe. Campion indicated without the pipe outlot, the rain gardens would overtop and it will be difficult to control the discharge. McMillan stated in her view the one rain garden near the cul-de-sac would need to be piped due to the slope. Campion stated the intent is on the upslope side of each of the rain gardens, since there is a curb line that water will then go to the rain garden. Campion pointed out how the area from the house to the street is tributary to the rain garden and noted that only a portion of the street would be tributary to it. Campion indicated all of the rain gardens all relatively equally balanced with the amount of water they will take. McMillan asked if the curb cuts are essential to control the runoff. Campion indicated the curbs just added to the feel of the neighborhood. Abbott commented they were also going with the concept of a public road. McMillan stated unless the development has higher density, the City tends not to require curb and gutter. Campion stated it would not be a typical rural ditch but more of a swale since there is not a lot of distance from the edge of the road to the house. Levang stated she has a concern with the maintenance of a rain garden since they may become nonfunctional over time. McMillan asked if they need to do the rain gardens. Campion indicated they have to do something to meet rain control and that the soils in the area are not real conducive to filtration. The rain gardens help create more of a filtration system and also provide some storage. Campion stated if enough treatment could be achieved through the swales and they are allowed to use the larger wetland as the rate control that would be one option, but that they have to demonstrate treatment before discharging to the wetland. Campion indicated the wetland is large enough to provide rate control but that they have to provide some type of treatment. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 22 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 23 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Levang stated she can see the rain gardens functioning for the first few years but then after that she can see them becoming a problem. Campion stated the outlots will be like a quasi-rain garden and will basically be small basins/rain gardens to provide some rate control. Levang stated she would encourage them to come back with something other than a rain garden. McMillan indicated she is in agreement. McMillan noted Staff is looking for direction on the resolution. Gaffron stated he is not sure whether Staff can draft a resolution at this point since there are enough changes being proposed. Gaffron stated if an outlot is required, Staff would need to have new numbers submitted on each of the lots. Gaffron stated if the City Council does not want an outlot, then perhaps Staff could bring back a resolution. It was the consensus of the City Council to require no outlot, a 40-foot side setback, 15 percent coverage, and to make it a private road. Gaffron noted all the roads in the neighborhood are private with bump-outs for parking. Kelly Parkway is a public road and Creekside is a private road and was done as a PRUD because it was in the two-acre zone with the homes being clustered to preserve wetlands and uplands. Gaffron indicated those lots are three-quarters to one acre on a private road with public sewer and water. The development on Watertown Road was done as PRD due to the density. Gaffron indicated Stone Bay is unique because it is individual pads with a big common area. Gaffron noted the City Council has indicated they are looking for something a little bit different than Glendale Cove. Gaffron stated to his understanding the parameters of the development are that the road be made private, a 15 percent limit on all lots, a 40-foot setback for the two lots that abut Willow Drive, no outlot for the wetland, the tree preservation area should not be an outlot, no designation of 10 percent of the property for recreation, the developer should design something other than rain gardens, no curb and gutter, and no walking easement. McMillan indicated that is correct. Gaffron stated given that direction, Staff can draft a resolution for the next City Council meeting. Gaffron indicated he is not sure how the consolidation of easements should be handled. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 23 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 24 of 32 (5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD REZONING, Continued) Mattick stated Staff can try to streamline them and that he will take a look at what is required and forward the information to the City Council. Mattick stated he heard no tree preservation easement is required. Levang indicated that is correct. The City Council took no formal action on this application. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT 6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT Struve stated before the City Council tonight is a proposal from SEH to provide professional services for a maintenance contract to repaint and maintain the City’s water tower for a 10-year period. Included with the proposal is also a memo from Bolton & Menk providing a contrasting point of view since this is kind of a new concept for the City of Orono to enter into a maintenance agreement rather than the standard design/bid/build process. Struve stated in his opinion the maintenance contract is a better value for the City of Orono. Jason Spragg, Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, stated currently the City has two elevated tanks. The existing water tower is a hydro pillar-style tank with a flute center column. The tower was originally erected in 1992 and is a 400,000 gallon facility. Spragg stated today’s construction costs for a facility such as this range from 5 to 9 million dollars per tank with a 400,000 gallon facility. Using that kind of a cost range, Spragg indicated to rebuild Orono’s tank today would range between 2 and 2.5 million dollars. Spragg stated the good news is that once the facilities are built, absent any metal fatigue, the facility should last in excess of 75 years. Spragg stated similar to any other capital assets, such as a snow plow or personal vehicle, the City could buy this asset and drive it into the ground or the City could purchase it and maintain it over time. Coating or paint on a water tank is designed to last 15 to 20 years. SEH is proposing basically a maintenance cycle, which would consist of cleaning, touching up the tank, and monitoring the tank with the idea that the total cost of ownership will be less for communities such as Orono. Spragg noted maintenance of the tank over that time ends up being almost twice as much as the initial capital cost. Spragg stated the north tower adjacent to City Hall is approximately 20 years old and is requiring maintenance. Spragg stated basically there are two options available for water towers. They can either be sand blasted and repainted or have an overcoat applied. Spragg noted he did inspect the tank with Staff approximately a year ago, and based on that inspection, it was determined that an overcoat would be appropriate and would allow the tank to last for another 15 to 20 years. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 24 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 25 of 32 (6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued) Spragg stated typically cities would do a design/bid/build approach that is overseen by an engineer. Six percent of the construction costs would go to the engineer to write the plans and specs. The City would then award the project to the lowest bidder. An engineer would subsequently be hired to oversee the construction or rehab work, which would amount to approximately 10 percent of the costs, which would be based on the amount of time spent inspecting the construction work. Both the engineer’s costs and the subsequent rehabilitation costs would be due upon satisfactory completion of the work. Spragg noted there typically will be a one-year warranty on the tank. The City would have the option of adding either a two or a five-year extended warranty as bid alternates but that that option can end up being very costly. Spragg stated SEH has done a 40-year analysis with regard to total cost of ownership. A comparison was done with the City of Cottage Grove showing significant savings by utilizing the design/build method. In the comparison, the Cities of Arden Hills, St. Paul Park, and Vadnais Heights were compared to the proposal from the design-build team of SEH/Classic. In the study, it was determined that Cottage Grove would realize savings of $80,000 to $200,000 under the design-build method. Spragg indicated the most typical size for this type of tower is 1,000,000 gallons rather than 400,000 gallons. Spragg stated if the City is interested in the design-build method, the costs, with interest, can be spread out over the life of the contract. The tank would be warrantied against defects for the length of the contract, and if the coating fails, SEH would pay for that. McMillan asked what type of failure he is talking about. Spragg stated chipping or corroding would be included in the 5-year contract and that SEH would perform routine inspections of the tank over the life of the contract. Spragg stated painting a 140-foot structure that is exposed to the elements is not an exact science and that there are things that will occur, such as chipping. The worst case scenario would be metal loss. Spragg indicated SEH would prefer to address it when it is in the chipping stage. In addition some staining and streaking may occur. McMillan asked what some typical interior failures would be. Spragg stated they would be similar to the exterior. Spragg stated the wet interior is a very caustic environment and there could be straining or corrosion as well. Spragg indicated SEH will perform interior and exterior pressure washing of the tank, which will address the staining, and if there is spot corrosion, they will also address that. McMillan asked if that is also included in the costs. Spragg indicated it is. Spragg stated in 2002, the MN Legislature amended Section 471.345 to allow for municipalities to enter into multi-year professional service contracts for engineering, repair, and maintenance of a water storage tank. The benefits of this approach are the contractor works with an engineering firm on the inspection and review of the tanks, which allows them to have intimate knowledge of the tank and allows them to include an aggressive price on the project. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 25 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 26 of 32 (6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued) Spragg stated the biggest selling point of the design-build approach is the guaranteed use of a qualified contractor. Spragg noted SEH has performed work down in Texas and west of the Rockies and works in conjunction with Classic Protective Coatings, who is one of the top water tower painting companies in the country. Spragg stated if the City elects to go with the design-build method, they would be protected against costs associated with premature failure of the coating system. McMillan asked if Classic would do the whole project or just the painting. Spragg indicated Classic would be the contractor on the project and SEH would be the inspector on the project. Classic would perform all of the necessary painting, electrical, and spot repairs. Spragg noted a fair amount of rigging is required and that weather plays a significant factor for when the work can be performed. McMillan asked if Classic is busy enough that it is difficult to schedule them. Spragg stated this coming summer they are quite busy but that it depends on the weather for when they can start and when they finish. Spragg indicated premature failures typically are a result of moisture, and that Classic will only perform the work when the weather is right. Struve noted he has received assurances from SEH and Classic that Orono will be one of the first ones on the list with a completion date of May 31. Struve stated that would be the ideal time before the peak watering season commences. McMillan asked how long the job would take to complete. Spragg stated they cannot paint with winds over 20 miles an hour and that there are other very tight weather conditions they can paint under. Spragg indicated they are looking at between five and six weeks for the work to be completed. The blasting work will be on the inside of the tank. Spragg stated May 31 is the anticipated completion date assuming a normal spring. Levang noted on Page 3 of the letter from Bolton & Menk, Point 2 under conclusions and recommendations, Bolton & Menk is saying the City does not require as many inspections as outlined by the contractor. Levang requested Struve address the items contained in Bolton & Menk’s letter. Struve stated it is a possibility that under the traditional method, that there is potential savings. Based upon the cost analysis, Struve stated in his opinion the prices that were submitted with the proposal are quite fair and would be comparable to if the City bid the project out, but that he cannot be 100 percent certain of that. Struve indicated he personally could not find any comparable 400,000 gallon hydro pillar tanks, which makes it more difficult to estimate the costs. Struve stated the other item of concern is that Bolton & Menk recommends a 10-year warranty. Struve stated he has been unable to find another instance where there was a 10-year warranty and that the typical warranty is one year with bid alternates of two years and occasionally five years. Struve stated based on that, he is unable to provide the costs associated with bidding out a 10-year similar warranty. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 26 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 27 of 32 (6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued) Struve stated in his view the $4,000 or $4,500 annually to do inspections is a very good value in order to catch problems early on and that the City does not want to have a premature failure in year seven or eight. Levang asked when the last time the tank was inspected previous to last year. Struve stated to his understanding it has not been inspected previously. Struve indicated it may have been inspected at year ten but that he has not found any formal reports to that effect. Levang asked if they are surprised at the condition of it when they did inspect it. Struve indicated he would defer to Jason on that. Spragg stated the fact that they are just looking at an overcoat after 21 years is surprising and that they were expecting the tank would have required reblasting and coating. McMillan asked if the tank has ever been power washed. Struve stated he is not aware of it happening but that he has not specifically asked Staff that question. Spragg stated the American Water Works Association recommends a five-year inspection window. Levang noted Point 3 of Bolton & Menk’s letter states that a three-coat epoxy system is commonly provided in the design-bid-build industry as well as a zinc primer. Levang asked if what they are proposing is different. Spragg stated they are proposing a two-coat system and that three coats in their opinion would be overkill. Spragg stated if they were dealing with a tank that was being blasted down to bare steel, he would likely recommend three coats, but that they are not doing that in this case. Printup indicated he is not in favor of the logo. McMillan stated she would prefer it only be on one side. Levang stated she would also rather not do the logo. Struve stated the proposal is for block lettering similar to what is currently on there and that the additional $4,800 was to put the city logo on both sides rather than the block lettering. McMillan asked if the City is required to go with the lowest bid when they go out for bids. Mattick stated the City must enter into the low bid system for work to be performed except for engineering and professional services. Mattick stated the bidding process could require mandatory qualifications, which would eliminate some bidders. McMillan asked if Mr. Struve is recommending a five or ten-year warranty. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 27 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 28 of 32 (6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued) Struve indicated he would recommend the 10-year warranty. McMillan noted the additional five years would cost $80,000 more. Struve stated the American Water Works Association has guidelines for maintenance of a water tower, and they recommend at the 5-year mark that a pressure wash and inspection be completed, which would be included in the cost of the contract. Struve indicated the cost might not be that high if they went out for bid, but that it would be in that vicinity. The additional costs would be for the yearly inspections, which perhaps could be scaled back to every other year. Struve stated the elimination of one or two inspections is what the City would be saving by not going into a maintenance agreement. Levang asked if the City would be able to enter into a new 5-year or 10-year contract after the first contract expires. Spragg indicated that is correct and that they would be happy if an overcoat lasts 20 years. Levang asked if the Council could have some flexibility with the yearly inspections and modify the contract. Spragg indicated the annual inspection is SEH’s way of protecting themselves and that they attempt to keep the inspection costs as low as possible. McMillan asked whether the City would be able to enter into a 5-year contract and then later extend that. Spragg stated the City does have that option but noted the costs are adjusted for inflation in year’s six to ten and that he cannot guarantee the costs will be that. McMillan stated if the City Council elects to go with SEH, she would recommend the 5-year contract. Struve stated he would be fine with the 5-year contract and that the type of work to be completed in those five years would not be altered under the shorter contract. Struve indicated the City could re-evaluate the situation after five years. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve a 5-year Design-Build Maintenance Contract with Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, and to direct Staff to enter into the negotiation process for the north water tower repainting project. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 28 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 29 of 32 7. FUEL SALES AGREEMENT Levang asked if Mr. Struve prefers to do it this way so he has a better grasp on what he will be paying for fuel. Struve stated that is correct and that the benefit of the fuel sales agreement is the City is locked into 85 to 90 percent of what the City’s annual consumption is. Struve stated they do not want to enter into an agreement where they purchase too much fuel because then the City has to pay a penalty. Struve stated in his opinion this agreement provides some flexibility and is a good value for the City of Orono. Levang moved, Printup seconded, to enter into the price program sales agreement for gasoline and diesel fuel with Yocum Oil. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT, CONTINUED Struve reported the contractor has arrived with the chipping equipment but the extremely cold weather has slowed down the work. The contractor is approximately half to three-quarters complete and the Public Works Department has secured some chips for the residents. Struve noted the Public Works Department is still accepting Christmas trees until the end of January. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT McMillan noted the Lake Community Coalition is looking at holding two forums, one in March and one in April. March 6 has been tentatively scheduled for the relationship issues/domestic abuse forum and the Orono and Minnetrista Police Departments are involved with that. McMillan stated the second session will likely be held on April 3 and will cover marijuana use and medical marijuana. Both forums will be held at the Gillepsie Center. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPOROT 8. JOINT MEETING WITH LONG LAKE CITY COUNCIL Loftus noted in October a joint workshop was held with the Long Lake City Council and one of the items raised was a request from the lakeshore residents in Long Lake to implement a no wake or slow down ordinance during high water. Loftus indicated Orono did not have the same volume of calls or concerns from Orono residents, but that Long Lake has requested another joint work session. Loftus stated it is her belief the lakeshore residents and the Minnehaha Watershed District will be invited to the meeting. Levang asked if the meeting would be held in Orono Chambers. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 29 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 30 of 32 (8. JOINT MEETING WITH LONG LAKE CITY COUNCIL, Continued) McMillan commented she has a couple of issues with a work session in March. McMillan noted March 24 is spring break for Orono and that the suggested 5:00 start time is also a difficult time for people to make. McMillan indicated she would like to have the work session videotaped and that she has suggested to the Long Lake Mayor that the Long Lake City Council conduct a public hearing at one of their Council meetings. The Orono City Council members could attend and the public hearing could be advertised to Orono residents. McMillan indicated Long Lake will be holding a work session in the next couple of days and that the mayor will see if that option will work. McMillan stated in her view the public hearing is important for the Long Lake residents but that Orono has not heard anything from Orono residents. McMillan stated she would prefer Long Lake hold the public hearing and then make the draft ordinance available on Orono’s website. McMillan requested City Administrator Loftus contact Long Lake’s City Administrator to see if it can occur at a Long Lake City Council meeting and that the members of the Orono City Council would be glad to attend. Levang asked if some sort of link would be put on Orono’s website of the meeting. McMillan stated that would probably be best. McMillan stated the first council meeting in March might also work for a joint work session. 9. POLICE OFFICERS LABOR AGREEMENT FOR 2014-2016 Loftus reported Orono’s bargaining committee has met with the union and they have arrived at a 3-year contract. The contract addresses wages and insurance over those three years. It is Staff’s recommendation to approve the contract. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the Labor Agreement Between the City of Orono and Law Enforcement Labor Services (Local No. 40) – Patrol Officers 2014-2016. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 10. MEMORIAL FOR WILLIE GIBBS Loftus noted the City’s building inspector died suddenly this past December. While Staff has found a number of internal ways to remember Willie Gibbs, they have also come up with a couple of public ways to honor him. Loftus stated the Council has been presented with two different options. One would be a bench with a plaque or a tree with a plaque. McMillan stated she would like to see if the City can do all three. McMillan noted the tree would be donated by Norling Landscape. Levang asked what type of bench it would be. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 30 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 31 of 32 (10. MEMORIAL FOR WILLIE GIBBS, Continued) Struve stated there are a wide variety of colors and stone available to choose from. Struve indicated the bench would look generally like patio stones that are glued and assembled together. Struve stated while there is a pretty wide range of items that can be chosen, in his view the cost for the bench would be between $400 to $500. McMillan commented the bench should be comfortable and stone may not necessarily be that comfortable. McMillan suggested the bench perhaps be located behind the lunch room. Struve stated some other options are the recycled plastic benches. Struve stated wood does have some long-term maintenance associated with it as well as replacement after a number of years. Levang stated she would prefer wood over stone. Levang stated since Norlings is willing to donate the tree, she would not say no to it, and if Norlings feel the tree will do well back there, perhaps the City should accept the offer. Loftus noted Norlings has suggested a couple of trees that will do well in wetter ground. Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve a bench, plaque and tree in memory of Willie Gibbs. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Mattick stated he had nothing to report. *LICENSES & PERMITS None *12. CLAIMS/BILLS Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 31 of 32] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 27, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 32 of 32 13. CLOSED MEETING (13d.05.3) FOR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE (WILCOX VS ORONO) 14. CLOSED MEETING FOR LABOR NEGOTIATION (13.D.03) Levang moved, Printup seconded, to go into closed session to discuss Items 13 and 14. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. (City Council went into two closed sessions from 10:03 p.m. to 10:38 p.m.) ADJOURNMENT Levang Moved, Printup seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 10:38 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. ATTEST: _____________________________________ _______________________________________ Rachel Dodge, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Item #03 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Approval of Council Minutes 01/27/2014 [Page 32 of 32] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Presentation - Senator David Osmek [Page 1 of 1] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3632 [Total Pages 33] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3637 [Total Pages 57] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #13-3644 [Total Pages 39] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3646 [Total Pages 49] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 File #14-3647 [Total Pages 91] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Watertown Road Feasibility Study - Presentation [Page 1 of 2] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Watertown Road Feasibility Study - Presentation [Page 2 of 2] R-1 FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR 2014 WATERTOWN ROAD PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA 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. David P. Martini, P.E. Date: February 5, 2014 Registration No. 26122 R-2 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 IMPETUS: The impetus for this report is a request from the City of Orono to evaluate the feasibility of improving Watertown Road. 1.2 REPORT ORGANIZATION: To address the replacement options in an orderly manner, the report is organized in three (3) sections as follows: Section 1: Introduction Section 2: Pavement Rehabilitation Section 3: Financing / Funding Figures: Project Maps and Pavement Sections Appendix A: Geotechnical Report 1.3 OVERALL FEASIBILITY AND COST EFFECTIVENESS All improvements addressed within this report are feasible from a technical standpoint. This study addresses issues with the aging infrastructure including pavement conditions and drainage structures. The improvements are necessary to provide safe and adequate infrastructure, and represent cost effective solutions for doing so. Figure No 1 shows the locations of the proposed project components, divided into potential project segments. R-3 SECTION 2 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION 2.1 BACKGROUND Watertown road carries local traffic east-west and generally parallels the alignment of TH 12 between McCulley Road and the East limits of Orono (near Harrington Dr). The proposed project would rehabilitate Watertown Road from approximately McCulley Road, to a point 500’ East of Willow Drive where the boundary of Orono shared with Long Lake divides Watertown Road. This street is designated a Municipal State Aid route from McCulley Road to Willow Drive. The existing street varies in width from 22.5-feet to 27.5-feet, but is generally 24- feet wide. The bituminous varies in depth from 2.5-inches to 14-inches. The street section in this area is rural, and stormwater is conveyed through adjacent ditches and culverts. There are a number of culverts that cross and parallel Watertown road. There are no other utilities located under the pavement. Soil borings had been performed by STS Consultants at various intervals to determine the pavement and subgrade thickness in 2006. The low number of soil borings that were completed and the high variability in pavement depths prompted further investigation for the purposes of this study. American Engineering and Testing was hired to perform a Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) assessment of the existing pavement depths and underlying subgrade section. The full report is attached in Appendix A. 2.2 STREET IMPROVEMENTS After reviewing the GPR assessment two alternatives have been considered. • 1-inch mill of existing pavement and a 3-inch to 4-inch bituminous overlay (estimated life of 10-years, approx. $1,100,000 cost ) • Full depth reclaiming of existing pavement and a 4-inch (min.) bituminous pavement section (estimated life of 20-years) Based on an estimated life of 10-years, a mill & overlay is not recommended as the preferred alternative. While a mill & overlay would cost less, the large degree of alligator cracking and pavement distresses that result in the poor ride currently experienced on Watertown Road would reflectively show through a mill & R-4 overlay rehabilitation. Mill & overlay activities do not correct any issues with the underlying subgrade materials or lack of compaction in the lower layers of bituminous. Because a mill & overlay places new pavement on top of these defects, these conditions will eventually break through the new layer of pavement, creating voids where moisture can enter and cause freeze/thaw heaving and potholes. This would reproduce the condition that Watertown Road is in now. Due to the short pavement life of the mill & overlay alternative, a full depth reclaim approach is recommended and evaluated in this study. This approach will correct many of the underlying subgrade and compaction issues by pulverizing and grinding the existing pavement down to an aggregate base that may be prepped for a new bituminous surface. This method takes the pavement down to a point where we can re-compact the newly created subgrade surface, adding strength and eliminating voids where moisture can collect, and then apply a new bituminous asphalt layer, eliminating many of the issues that are causing alligator cracking and potholes. This new bituminous surface has an expected life of 20- years, however with the underlying issues corrected, it may be maintained and treated in the same manner as a new bituminous roadway. After a period of time it may be chip sealed, seal coated, or even milled & overlaid, to prolong the life beyond the 20-year estimate. Because Watertown Road is a Municipal State Aid route, certain types of reconstruction and rehabilitation methods would trigger a requirement by MN/DOT for any improvements to meet State Aid Design Standards. Currently the horizontal geometry and width of Watertown Road does not meet state aid design standards, and will need to be modified if the road is reconstructed. There are exemptions to this requirement for maintenance and rehabilitation that will extend the life of the existing roadway without the need to meet State Aid standards. Full depth reclamation is considered pavement rehabilitation that will not trigger this requirement. . Figure No 1 indicates the proposed street area to be reclaimed and replaced. Full depth reclamation will pulverize and grind the existing bituminous asphalt surface into granular material that may be compacted in place and become a suitable base for a new bituminous surface. This will require the removal of some of the existing material so that the rehabilitated pavement surface is at a similar elevation as the removed surface. In the areas where there is significant distresses R-5 that indicate a breakdown of the underlying subgrade; specifically alligator cracking and areas that have been heavily patched additional subgrade work will be required. Due to varying depths of pavement and aggregate base, the project area has been divided into two sections for the purpose of evaluation: • Section 1: Turnham Road to Kintyre Lane/High Lane • Section 2: Kintyre Lane/High Lane to (500-feet east of Willow Drive) The proposed improvements for both sections include a full depth pavement reclamation with spot replacement of underlying subgrade. A pavement section is proposed for the both sections that includes compaction of the in-place reclaimed material in lieu of aggregate base, and a bituminous asphalt section above that. Based on the underlying soil strengths and the depths of the existing pavement to be reclaimed, the AET geotechnical evaluation proposed Section 1 to be rehabilitated with a 3-inch bituminous section, and Section 2 is proposed to be rehabilitated with a 3.5-inch bituminous section. However, based on past experience, it is recommended that a minimum of 4-inches of bituminous pavement be used. Figure 2 depicts the proposed pavement sections. In the areas where the significant distresses have been observed an additional excavation and replacement of 1-foot of material below the depth of the reclaim is proposed. To remain compliant with state aid rules, a project may replace a maximum of 20-percent of the underlying subgrade to retain designation as a maintenance activity. In the areas where additional excavation is to occur, the pavement section will also incorporate geotextile fabric, to protect the replacement material from migrating into underlying poor soils. Figure No 3 shows the storm sewer and culvert crossings that are proposed to be replaced. It is our understanding that the City of Long Lake is also considering improvements to the Watertown Road within its City limits. There is a portion of Watertown Road that is shared between the cities of Long Lake and Orono. Therefore, it is anticipated that Orono will need to participate in the cost of improving that section of roadway. Based on discussions, with officials from Long Lake, it is our understanding that they are considering assessments to the benefiting properties in Long Lake to help finance the project. With that in mind, R-6 we believe it is appropriate that the City of Long Lake lead the project within its city limits, which includes the shared portion of road. Although geotechnical information has not been gathered in the area of the shared roadway, soil borings and the GPR information collected east of Willow Drive indicate that the there is adequate bituminous and aggregate base to reclaim the existing roadway. As the Long Lake portion of the project proceeds, the proposed scope of work and pavement design will be reviewed to verify that reclamation is appropriate. No costs for that construction or participation in that project are included in this report. SECTION 3 FINANCING AND FUNDING 5.2 FINANCING & FUNDING Due to the economy of scale, it is beneficial for the City to complete the proposed improvements as one project. If completed as a single project, the total estimated project cost for the full depth reclamation rehabilitation and replacement of drainage facilities is $1,796,593. This estimated cost includes contingencies and soft costs (engineering, legal, administration, etc.). Typically, mobilization costs are minimized and the unit prices for individual items and materials are less expensive the greater the quantity. Therefore, if these rehabilitation activities are to be separated into two projects, there will be additional mobilization costs and it is expected that the cost of labor and materials will increase from one project to the next. Assuming that the projects would be completed in consecutive years, the cost of project one is estimated to be $913,836 and the estimated cost of project two is $953,125. This assumes inflation of 3% from one year to the next for labor and materials. This results in a total project cost of $1,866,961. Due to Watertown Road’s designation as a State Aid Route, the City may choose to use a portion of their state aid funds for this project. Assessments are not proposed for this project. R-7 5.3 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES The following cost estimates detail the costs for constructing the recommended improvements as one project to be completed in 2014 or two consecutive projects to be completed in 2014 and 2015. 5.3.1 Sections 1 & 2 Project Costs – Completed as one project – 2014 WATERTOWN ROAD PAVEMENT REHAB: UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL AMOUNT MOBILIZATION LS 1 $78,000.00 $78,000 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500 RECLAMATION (12" DEPTH) SQ YD 38280 $4.00 $153,120 SALVAGE & INSTALL RECLAIM & AGG CU YD 2552 $10.00 $25,520 COMMON EXCAVATION CU YD 2127 $10.00 $21,267 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW CU YD 2552 $16.00 $40,832 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TON 5527 $68.00 $375,814 1.5" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE SQ YD 40194 $6.00 $241,164 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ YD 1350 $3.50 $4,725 SUBGRADE PREPARATION SQ YD 7656 $1.00 $7,656 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION CU YD 2552 $21.00 $53,592 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V SQ YD 7656 $1.75 $13,398 ADJUST CASTING EACH 1 $500.00 $500 AGGREGATE SHOULDERING TON 780 $18.00 $14,036 REMOVE SEWER PIPE LIN FT 320 $12.00 $3,840 12" RCP LIN FT 120 $35.00 $4,200 12" APRON EACH 6 $600.00 $3,600 24" RCP LIN FT 160 $40.00 $6,400 24" APRON EACH 7 $750.00 $5,250 42" RCP LIN FT 40 $120.00 $4,800 42" APRON EACH 1 $1,400.00 $1,400 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLE EACH 2 $1,000.00 $2,000 RIP RAP CU YD 110 $60.00 $6,600 TURF ESTABLISHMENT SQ YD 19140 $4.00 $76,560 TOPSOIL DRESSING CU YD 2127 $25.00 $53,167 4" BROKEN LINE YELLOW-EPOXY LIN FT 3589 $0.50 $1,794 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $1,201,735 15% CONTINGENCIES $180,260 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $1,381,995 30% SOFT COSTS $414,598 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $1,796,593 R-8 5.3.2 Section 1 Project Costs – Separated into two projects – 2014 WATERTOWN ROAD - PAVEMENT REHAB: UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL AMOUNT MOBILIZATION LS 1.0 $52,000.00 $52,000 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1.0 $2,500.00 $2,500 RECLAMATION (12" DEPTH) SQ YD 19200 $4.00 $76,800 SALVAGE & INSTALL RECLAIM & AGG CU YD 1280 $10.00 $12,800 COMMON EXCAVATION CU YD 1067 $10.00 $10,667 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW CU YD 1280 $16.00 $20,480 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TON 2772 $68.00 $188,496 1.5" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE SQ YD 20160 $6.00 $120,960 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ YD 675 $3.50 $2,363 SUBGRADE PREPARATION SQ YD 3840 $1.00 $3,840 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION CU YD 1280 $21.00 $26,880 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V SQ YD 3840 $1.75 $6,720 AGGREGATE SHOULDERING TON 391 $18.00 $7,040 REMOVE SEWER PIPE LIN FT 120 $12.00 $1,440 24" RCP LIN FT 120 $40.00 $4,800 24" APRON EACH 5 $750.00 $3,750 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLE EACH 1 $1,000.00 $1,000 RIP RAP CU YD 46 $60.00 $2,760 TURF ESTABLISHMENT SQ YD 9600 $4.00 $38,400 TOPSOIL DRESSING CU YD 1067 $25.00 $26,667 4" BROKEN LINE YELLOW-EPOXY LIN FT 1800 $0.50 $900 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $611,262 15% CONTINGENCIES $91,689 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $702,951 30% INDIRECT COSTS $210,885 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $913,836 R-9 5.3.3 Section 2 Project Costs – Separated into two projects – 2015 (Includes 3% Inflation/construction materials cost increase) WATERTOWN ROAD - PAVEMENT REHAB: UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL AMOUNT MOBILIZATION LS 1.0 $53,560.00 $53,560 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1.0 $2,575.00 $2,575 RECLAMATION (12" DEPTH) SQ YD 19080 $4.12 $78,610 SALVAGE & INSTALL RECLAIM & AGG CU YD 1272 $10.30 $13,102 COMMON EXCAVATION CU YD 1060 $10.30 $10,918 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW CU YD 1272 $16.48 $20,963 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TON 2755 $70.04 $192,937 1.5" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE SQ YD 20034 $6.18 $123,810 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SQ YD 675 $3.61 $2,433 SUBGRADE PREPARATION SQ YD 3816 $1.03 $3,930 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION CU YD 1272 $21.63 $27,513 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE V SQ YD 3816 $1.80 $6,878 ADJUST CASTING EACH 1 $515.00 $515 AGGREGATE SHOULDERING TON 389 $18.54 $7,206 REMOVE SEWER PIPE LIN FT 200 $12.36 $2,472 12" RCP LIN FT 120 $36.05 $4,326 12" APRON EACH 6 $618.00 $3,708 24" RCP LIN FT 40 $41.20 $1,648 24" APRON EACH 2 $772.50 $1,545 42" RCP LIN FT 40 $123.60 $4,944 42" APRON EACH 1 $1,442.00 $1,442 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLE EACH 1 $1,030.00 $1,030 RIP RAP CU YD 64 $61.80 $3,955 TURF ESTABLISHMENT SQ YD 9540 $4.12 $39,305 TOPSOIL DRESSING CU YD 1060 $25.75 $27,295 4" BROKEN LINE YELLOW-EPOXY LIN FT 1789 $0.52 $921 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $637,542 15% CONTINGENCIES $95,631 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $733,173 30% SOFT COSTS $219,952 TOTAL STREET PROJECT COSTS $953,125 FIGURES TURNHAM RD O R C H A R D P A R K R D S T U B B S B A Y R D N KINTYRE LA C H R I S T I N E D R LEAF STCYGNET PL CRYSTAL CREEK RD S O M E R S E T L A WEAR LA C O P P E R V I E W D R C O U N T R Y S I D E D R W GOLDEN VIEW DR WILLOW DR N M A P L E L A E X I S T I N G S T R E E T C O N D I T I O N S F I G . 1 C I T Y O F O R O N O Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2014, All Rights Reservedc P R O P O S E D S T R E E T R E C O N S T R U C T I O N - S E C T I O N 1 L E G E N D 2 0 1 4 W A T E R T O W N R O A D R E C L A M A T I O N P R O J E C T W I L L M A R , M N C H A S K A , M N R A M S E Y , M N M A P L E W O O D , M N M A N K A T O , M N F A I R M O N T , M N S L E E P Y E Y E , M N B U R N S V I L L E , M N B A X T E R , M N R O C H E S T E R , M N A M E S , I A S P E N C E R , I A FEETSCALE 0500250H:\ORNO\C13106054\C3D\FEASIBILITY BASE.DWG 2/3/2014 12:14 PM STREET WIDTH=24' S T R E E T W I D T H = 2 4 ' S T R E E T W I D T H = 2 4 ' S T R E E T W I D T H = 2 2 . 5 ' S T R E E T W I D T H = 2 3 ' S T R E E T W I D T H = 2 4 ' S T R E E T W I D T H = 2 4 . 5 ' S T R E E T W I D T H = 2 4 ' STREET WIDTH=27.5' P R O P O S E D S T R E E T R E C O N S T R U C T I O N - S E C T I O N 2 H:\ORNO\C13106054\C3D\FEASIBILITY BASE.DWG 2/3/2014 4:04 PM 2.5" TYPE LV3 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE B 1.5" TYPE LV4 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE B цϭϮΗZ>/D''Z'd^ VARIABLE SLOPE 2% LC BITUMINOUS TACK COAT SUBGRADE PREPARATION GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, MnDOT TYPE V 12' 1' 12" SELECT GRANULAR BORROW AG G . S H O U L D E R VARIABLE SLOPE 2% C 12' 1' AG G . S H O U L D E R 2.5" TYPE LV3 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE B 1.5" TYPE LV4 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE B цϭϮΗZ>/D''Z'd^ VARIABLE SLOPE 2% LC BITUMINOUS TACK COAT 12' 1' AG G . S H O U L D E R VARIABLE SLOPE 2% C 12' 1' AG G . S H O U L D E R 2.5" TYPE LV3 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE B 1.5" TYPE LV4 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE B цϭϮΗZ>/D''Z'd^ VARIABLE SLOPE 2% LC BITUMINOUS TACK COAT CROWN 12' 1' AG G . S H O U L D E R VARIABLE SLOPE 2% C 12' 1' AG G . S H O U L D E R EXISTING STREET CONDITIONS FIG. 2 CITY OF ORONO Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2014, All Rights Reservedc 2014 WATERTOWN ROAD RECLAMATION PROJECT TYPICAL SECTION-SECTION 2 (INCLUDING 12" SUBGRADE EXCAVATION) TYPICAL SECTION-SECTION 2 TYPICAL SECTION-SECTION 1 CROWN CROWN D TURNHAM RD O R C H A R D P A R K R D S T U B B S B A Y R D N KINTYRE LA C H R I S T I N E D R DLEAF STCYGNET PL CRYSTAL CREEK RD S O M E R S E T L A WEAR LA C O P P E R V I E W D R C O U N T R Y S I D E D R W GOLDEN VIEW DR WILLOW DR N M A P L E L A S T O R M S E W E R I M P R O V E M E N T S F I G . 3 C I T Y O F O R O N O Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2013, All Rights Reservedc P R O P O S E D S T R E E T R E C O N S T R U C T I O N - P H A S E 1 L E G E N D 2 0 1 4 W A T E R T O W N R O A D R E C L A M A T I O N P R O J E C T W I L L M A R , M N C H A S K A , M N R A M S E Y , M N M A P L E W O O D , M N M A N K A T O , M N F A I R M O N T , M N S L E E P Y E Y E , M N B U R N S V I L L E , M N B A X T E R , M N R O C H E S T E R , M N A M E S , I A S P E N C E R , I A FEETSCALE 0500250H:\ORNO\C13106054\C3D\FEASIBILITY BASE.DWG 2/3/2014 5:01 PM P R O P O S E D S T R E E T R E C O N S T R U C T I O N - P H A S E 2 P R O P O S E D S T O R M S E W E R E X I S T I N G S T O R M S E W E R APPENDIX A Item #11 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Water System Study/Water System Modeling - Presentation [Page 1 of 1] The City of Orono, Minnesota Water System Plan Project No. C13.106056 February 2014 WATER SYSTEM PLAN FOR THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA 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. By: ____________________________________ Seth A. Peterson, P.E. License No. 26468 Date: February 4, 2014 City of Orono, Minnesota Page TOC-i Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. i A. GENERAL ............................................................................................................................ i B. WATER SUPPLY ................................................................................................................ i C. WATER TREATMENT ...................................................................................................... ii D. WATER STORAGE ............................................................................................................ ii E. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM................................................................................. iii PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS .. iii F. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................... iii G. WATER SUPPLY .............................................................................................................. iii H. TREATMENT FACILITIES .............................................................................................. iv 1. Navarre WTP ............................................................................................................... iv 2. Highway 12 Well House............................................................................................... v I. WATER STORAGE ........................................................................................................... vi J. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ............................................................................................... vii SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 A. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................ 1 B. REPORT ORGANIZATION ............................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2 - EXISTING FACILITIES ..........................................................................................2 A. GENERAL ........................................................................................................................... 2 B. WATER SUPPLY ............................................................................................................... 2 C. WATER TREATMENT ...................................................................................................... 3 D. WATER STORAGE ............................................................................................................ 3 E. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM.................................................................................. 4 SECTION 3 - LAND USE AND POPULATION ...........................................................................5 A. LAND USE .......................................................................................................................... 5 B. POPULATION PROJECTION ........................................................................................... 5 SECTION 4 - WATER USAGE ......................................................................................................6 C. EXISTING WATER USAGE.............................................................................................. 6 D. WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS ................................................................................ 10 City of Orono, Minnesota Page TOC-ii Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 5 - DRINKING WATER QUALITY ...........................................................................12 a. GENERAL ......................................................................................................................... 12 B. DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS............................................................................ 12 1. Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Regulations......................................................... 12 2. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) ....................................... 13 3. Microbial and Disinfection By-Products Rules (M-DBP) ......................................... 13 4. Inorganic Contaminants .............................................................................................. 15 5. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (DWCCL) ........................................... 16 C. SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS (SDWS) ....................................... 16 D. SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY ISSUES ................................................................ 17 SECTION 6 - WATER SYSTEM EVALUATION ......................................................................18 A. GENERAL ......................................................................................................................... 18 B. WATER SUPPLY WELLS ............................................................................................... 18 1. General........................................................................................................................ 18 2. Well Capacity ............................................................................................................. 18 3. Wellhead Protection ................................................................................................... 20 C. WATER TREATMENT .................................................................................................... 21 D. WATER STORAGE .......................................................................................................... 21 E. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM................................................................................ 25 1. General........................................................................................................................ 25 2. Analysis of Existing Water System ............................................................................ 26 SECTION 7 - PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ...........................................31 A. GENERAL ......................................................................................................................... 31 B. WATER SUPPLY ............................................................................................................. 31 C. TREATMENT FACILITIES ............................................................................................. 32 1. Navarre WTP .............................................................................................................. 32 2. Highway 12 Well House............................................................................................. 35 D. WATER STORAGE .......................................................................................................... 36 E. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ............................................................................................... 37 1. Proposed Water Pressure ............................................................................................ 37 2. Proposed Available Fire Flows................................................................................... 37 3. Long Lake Interconnections ....................................................................................... 37 City of Orono, Minnesota Page TOC-iii Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 8 - ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING OPTIONS ........................38 A. GENERAL ......................................................................................................................... 38 B. COST ESTIMATE FOR RECOMMENDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ................. 38 C. FINANCING OPTIONS .................................................................................................... 41 1. General Obligation Bonds .......................................................................................... 41 2. Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund ....................................................................... 41 APPENDICES Appendix A- United States EPA Drinking Water Standards Appendix B- United States EPA Contaminant Candidate List City of Orono, Minnesota Page TOC-iv Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. LIST OF TABLES Table Page ES.1 Well Construction Summary................................................................................................ i ES.2 Existing Storage Facilities .................................................................................................. ii ES.3 Preliminary Cost Estimate – Navarre Water System ...........................................................v ES.4 Preliminary Cost Estimate – Highway 12 Water System .................................................. vi 2.1 Well Construction Summary................................................................................................3 2.2 Existing Storage Facilities ...................................................................................................4 3.1 Metropolitan Council System Statement Summary .............................................................5 4.1 Monthly Water Pumping Records – Navarre Wells 1 & 2 ..................................................6 4.2 Monthly Water Pumping Records – Highway 12 Well 3 ....................................................7 4.3 Historical Water Trends – Navarre Wells 1 & 2 ..................................................................8 4.4 Historical Water Trends – Highway 12 Well 3 ...................................................................8 4.5 Unaccounted For Water .......................................................................................................9 4.6 Projected Water Demand – Navarre Water System ...........................................................10 4.7 Projected Water Demand – Highway 12 Water System ....................................................11 5.1 EPA National Secondary Drinking Water Contaminant Standards ...................................17 6.1 Projected Water Supply Requirements – Navarre Water System ......................................19 6.2 Projected Water Supply Requirements – Highway 12 Water System ...............................20 6.3 Required Storage Based on Average Day Use – Navarre Water System ..........................22 6.4 Required Storage Based on Average Day Use – Highway 12 Water System ...................23 6.5 Required Storage Based on Maximum Day, Fire Protection and Emergency Storage Criteria – Navarre Water System .......................................................................................24 6.6 Required Storage Based on Maximum Day, Fire Protection and Emergency Storage Criteria – Highway 12 Water System ................................................................................25 6.7 Recommended Residential Fire Flow ................................................................................27 6.8 Well Capacity for Combined Long Lake and Orono – Highway 12 Water System ..........29 8.1 Preliminary Cost Estimate – Navarre Water System .........................................................39 8.2 Preliminary Cost Estimate – Highway 12 Water System ..................................................40 8.3 Preliminary Cost Estimate – Distribution System Improvements .....................................40 8.4 Annualized Project Costs ...................................................................................................41 City of Orono, Minnesota Page TOC-v Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. LIST OF FIGURES Figure Follows Page 2.1 Existing Water Service Area ................................................................................................2 2.2 Existing Water Distribution System ....................................................................................4 4.1 Proposed Expansion Areas ................................................................................................10 6.1 Existing Average Day Pressures ........................................................................................26 6.2 Existing Peak Hour Pressures ............................................................................................26 6.3 Existing Maximum Day Available Fireflows ....................................................................27 6.4 Existing Maximum Day Available Fireflows with Two Long Lake Interconnections .....30 7.1 Proposed Water Distribution System .................................................................................36 7.2 Proposed Average Day Pressures ......................................................................................37 7.3 Proposed Maximum Day Available Fireflows ..................................................................37 City of Orono, Minnesota Page i Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. GENERAL The City has four existing water systems: the Navarre Water System, the Highway 12 Water System, the Wayzata System Extension, and the Long Lake System Extension. The Navarre Water System is located in the southern portion of Orono. It consists of two municipal wells, a treatment facility, one elevated storage tank, and a water distribution system. The Highway 12 Water System is located in the northern portion of the City. It consists of one municipal well, a chemical feed system, one elevated storage tank, and a water distribution system. The Wayzata System Extension is located in the northeast portion of Orono. It consists of a distribution system that has its water supplied from the City of Wayzata. The Long Lake System Extension is a distribution system that has its water supplied from the City of Long Lake. More than 50 percent of the households in Orono receive their potable water from private individual wells. The distribution systems are comprised of watermains ranging in size from 6 to 16 inches in diameter. B. WATER SUPPLY The City’s water is currently provided by four existing water systems. The Navarre Water System is supplied by two wells, Well 1 and 2. The Highway 12 Water System is supplied by one well, Well 3. A summary of the specific well construction information is provided in Table ES.1. The current total well capacity for the Navarre Water System is 1.80 MGD and the firm capacity is 0.60 MGD. The current total well capacity for the Highway 12 Water System is 0.60 MGD and the firm capacity is 0 MGD. TABLE ES.1 WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Navarre Well 1 Navarre Well 2 Highway 12 Well 3 Unique Well No. 205627 211965 509097 Year Constructed 1971 1971 1991 Well Pump Capacity (gpm) 1,000 500 500 Casing Diameter (inches) 12 8 16 Casing Depth (feet) NA NA NA Overall Well Depth (feet) 385 390 381 City of Orono, Minnesota Page ii Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. The total well capacity is determined as the total capacity of all wells operating for 20 hours per day. It is considered good practice to allow the well pumps a few hours of down time to “rest”, which ultimately extends the life of the pumps and allows for aquifer recharge. The firm capacity is the total capacity with the single largest pump out of service and is determined for a pumping period of 20 hours per day. Regulatory agencies recommend the firm capacity be equal to or greater than the average day demand it serves. C. WATER TREATMENT Treatment of source water for the Navarre Water System consists of sand filtration for iron and manganese removal, ion exchange softening to reduce hardness, and chemical addition prior to entry into the distribution system. Fluoride is added for dental cavity protection, chlorine is added for disinfection, and polyphosphate is added as a corrosion inhibitor. Treatment of source water for the Highway 12 system consists of chemical addition of chlorine and fluoride. D. WATER STORAGE The existing storage facilities in the City of Orono consist of one 200,000-gallon elevated water tower in the Navarre Water System and one 400,000-gallon elevated water tower in the Highway 12 Water System. Details of the water storage tower are presented in Table ES.2. TABLE ES.2 EXISTING STORAGE FACILITIES Navarre Water Tower Highway 12 Water Tower Capacity (gallons) 200,000 400,000 Year Constructed 1971 1993 High Water Level 1,102 1,165 Support Type Multi-legged Hydropillar City of Orono, Minnesota Page iii Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. E. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The Orono water system is comprised of water mains ranging in size from 6 inches to 16 inches in diameter. As previously discussed, both the Navarre and Highway 12 service areas include groundwater wells and elevated storage. The Wayzata System Extension and Long Lake System Extension are supplied with water directly from the other two Cities’ water systems and only provide a means of distribution to the customers. The existing capacities of the systems appears to be adequate in regards to pressure and available fire flow. PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS F. GENERAL The major water system components have been evaluated in the previous sections. A brief description of the proposed improvements is presented below. G. WATER SUPPLY The Navarre Water System currently has two wells with a firm capacity of 0.6 MGD. During the last four years, the maximum daily demand has averaged less than 0.5 MGD, which means the current water system has excess capacity. The service area of the Navarre Water System is close to full development so the population growth within the service area is expected to be minimal. Based off the current capacity of the wells and the expected population growth, no additional wells are needed for the Navarre Water System. The Highway 12 Water System currently only has one well which runs nearly 24 hours per day during the summer. Since there is only one well, the firm capacity is 0 MGD. Redevelopment of the existing well was evaluated to see if the capacity could be increased. According to the well records the well formation caved in during development of the well which affectively reduced the potential capacity of the well. Given the uncertainty and cost of redevelopment of the well it is not recommended to pursue redevelopment of the existing well. In addition, redevelopment would not offer any increase in firm capacity. City of Orono, Minnesota Page iv Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Since redevelopment of the existing well is not a recommended option, a new well should be drilled. Drilling a new well will not only increase the total capacity of the system but will increase the firm capacity and provide needed redundancy. H. TREATMENT FACILITIES The objective of a water system is to provide quality water that is fit for domestic and commercial use. The City currently does not have any major water quality issues that need to be addressed, but both the Navarre WTP and Highway 12 Well House have several items that need to be addressed which are discussed in detail in section 7. A table listing the proposed improvements and the costs associated with these improvements are shown below. 1. Navarre WTP The costs for upgrading and adding improvements to the Navarre Water Treatment Plant are detailed below in Table ES.3. Details of all the proposed improvements are fully described in the Section 7. City of Orono, Minnesota Page v Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE ES.3 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM Item Cost Mobilization/Admin $30,000 Chlorine Cabinet $15,000 Chemical Feed Equipment (All Chemicals) $80,000 Fluoride Room Improvements $2,000 Brine Hose Pump $10,000 Dehumidifiers (3) $7,500 Air Compressor $15,000 Replace Aeration Nozzles $3,000 Clean Etching $6,000 Replace Office Floor with Epoxy Coating $4,000 Check Valve for Backwash Waste $3,500 Repair Exterior of Brine Tank $1,000 Relocate Roof Drain $500 Replace Ceiling Panels $10,000 Control Upgrades (Softener Operation) $10,000 Miscellaneous Electrical $25,000 SUBTOTAL $222,500 Engineering/Contingency (25%) $55,500 TOTAL $278,000 2. Highway 12 Well House The costs for upgrading and adding improvements to the Highway 12 system are detailed below in Table ES.4. These improvements do include the addition of a new well with a capacity of at least 500 gpm with the possibility of a well producing nearly 1,000 gpm. Details of all the proposed improvements are fully described in the Section 7. City of Orono, Minnesota Page vi Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE ES.4 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE HIGHWAY 12 WATER SYSTEM Item Cost Mobilization/Admin $50,000 Chemical Feed Equipment (Including Phosphate) $60,000 Chlorine Cabinet $15,000 Fluoride Room Improvements $2,000 Piping Modifications $5,000 New Chlorine Booster Pump $2,000 Repair Concrete Floor at Fluoride Injector $500 HVAC Improvements $10,000 Roof Repairs $7,500 French Drain Repairs $3,000 Clean Etching $5,000 Repaint Doors $2,000 Miscellaneous Electrical $25,000 New Well $325,000 Site Piping for Well $25,000 SUBTOTAL $537,000 Engineering/Contingency (25%) $134,000 TOTAL $671,000 I. WATER STORAGE The Navarre Water System has a current storage deficit of 13,400 gallons using the average day criteria and a storage deficit of 267,000 gallons using the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria. The existing storage capacity is very close to meeting the current average demand and very little growth is expected in the Navarre Distribution System. Therefore, it is concluded that storage capacity is not needed at this time. If the City sees an increase in water demand for the Navarre System they may want to consider additional storage that would also meet the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria. The Highway 12 Water System currently meets the average day criteria and has a storage deficit of 157,500 gallons using the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria. If a second well is added to the system, the deficit decreases to 67,500 City of Orono, Minnesota Page vii Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. gallons. Given that the existing storage meets the average day criteria and nearly meets the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria with a new well, additional storage is not needed at this time. As water demands increase the City will need to consider added storage for the Highway 12 Water System as outlined in Tables 6.2 and 6.6. J. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM Various distribution system improvements are recommended and the improvements include water main extensions to serve expansion areas along the west edge of the Highway 12 system. In addition, a portion of the existing Highway 12 system is recommended to be increased in size from an 8 inch main to a 12 inch. This improved trunk main will increase available fire flow capacity during emergencies. In addition, water availability through the east interconnection will be improved. Depending on the future location of a new supply well to serve the Highway 12 system, the increased trunk capacity may also be required to allow adequate transmission of the increased supply capacity to the water tower. 1. Proposed Water Pressure The future average day pressures are adequate to meet industry standards throughout the water distribution system 2. Proposed Available Fire Flows The available fire flows generally meet industry standards for a system the size of Orono. A new 12 inch trunk water main in the Highway 12 system will result in significant improvements in expected available fire flows throughout the Highway 12 system. 3. Long Lake Interconnections The combined water systems of Long Lake and Orono are able to meet maximum day demands in the event of water emergencies which may result if one of the systems wells were to be off-line for maintenance. The current combined firm capacity is 1.8 MGD, which is greater than the combined maximum day demands of the two systems of approximately 1.3 MGD. While this may be suitable for City of Orono, Minnesota Page viii Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. emergency service, a second well is still recommended for the City of Orono to provide itself with firm capacity during routine maintenance. In addition, the combined system is capable of meeting normal domestic demands when one of the two towers are taken off line for maintenance. City staff should be aware that localized areas of reduced available fire flow will occur during these tank rehabilitations. The fire departments should be notified that tankers or other means of increased volume may be required for large industrial or institutional customers. Based on computer modeling, not all of the existing interconnections are needed in the future. We recommend that the two primary automatic PRV interconnections are maintained. These two are located at Virginia Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard and Brimhall Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard. Two interconnections will provide adequate fire protection during an emergency. In addition, having these on the east and west sides of the distribution system provides for more redundancy of service as well. Upgrades to a 12 inch main along Wayzata Boulevard between Brimhall Avenue and Willow Drove North will also provide a better hydraulic connection for transmission of water during emergency events. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 1 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION A. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide the City of Orono with relevant information regarding the state of the City’s potable water infrastructure. This report will aid the city in planning system improvements to meet future water demands. B. REPORT ORGANIZATION To adequately address the major areas that are evaluated, the report is organized in eight sections as shown below: Section 1: Introduction. Section 2: Description of existing major water system components. Section 3: Land usage and population projections. Section 4: Historical and future projections of water usage. Section 5: Drinking water quality. Section 6: Evaluation of the existing water system. Section 7: Proposed water system improvements. Section 8: Recommendations for improving the City’s water system and associated costs and financing options. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 2 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 2 - EXISTING FACILITIES A. GENERAL This Section provides a summary of the existing water supply, treatment, storage, and distribution facilities for the City of Orono. The City has four existing water systems: the Navarre Water System, the Highway 12 Water System, the Wayzata System Extension, and the Long Lake System Extension. The Navarre Water System is located in the southern portion of Orono. It consists of two municipal wells, a treatment facility, one elevated storage tank, and a water distribution system. The Highway 12 Water System is located in the northern portion of the City. It consists of one municipal well, a chemical feed system, one elevated storage tank, and a water distribution system. The Wayzata System Extension is located in the northeast portion of Orono. It consists of a distribution system that has its water supplied from the City of Wayzata. The Long Lake System Extension is a distribution system that has its water supplied from the City of Long Lake. More than 50 percent of the households in Orono receive their potable water from private individual wells. The distribution systems are comprised of watermains ranging in size from 6 to 16 inches in diameter. The existing water service area is shown in Figure 2.1. B. WATER SUPPLY The City’s water is currently provided by four existing water systems. The Navarre Water System is supplied by two wells, Well 1 and 2. The Highway 12 Water System is supplied by one well, Well 3. A summary of the specific well construction information is provided in Table 2.1. The current total well capacity for the Navarre Water System is 1.80 MGD and the firm capacity is 0.60 MGD. The current total well capacity for the Highway 12 Water System is 0.60 MGD and the firm capacity is 0 MGD. )n )n ?«A@ GôWX GôWX GÝWX GùWX GïWX GïWX GeWX GeWX GVWX151 GoWX GoWX GsWX GsWX GïWX GÞWX GVWX135 GVWX146 GVWX112 GdWX West Arm Long Lake NorthArm StubbsBay Cook's Bay FrenchLake MooneyLake DickeyLake Wayzata Bay Brown's Bay Smith's Bay Forest Lake MaxwellBay Lydiard Lake ClassenLake TanagerLake Harrison Bay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay Jenning's Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaLower Lake Phelps Bay Black Lake SetonLake Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake EchoBay Gideons Bay RobinsonsBay GraysBay Hadley Lake Wolsfeld LakeLakeKatrina Kraetz Lake CarsonsBay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake Chevy ChasePressure Zone NorthPressure Zone NavarrePressure Zone Mound Wayzata Medina Deephaven Plymouth Minnetrista Minnetonka Tonka Bay Independence Woodland Shorewood Long Lake Minnetonka Beach Minnetrista Greenwood Spring Park Shorewood Maple Plain Shorewood Excelsior October, 2013 I 0 3,500 Feet Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Existing WaterService Area Figure 2.1 CLIENTLOGO M a p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - E x i s t i n g W a t e r S e r v i c e A r e a 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d D a t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 8 / 2 0 1 3 7 : 0 5 : 0 1 P M Legend Chevy Chase Pressure Zone Navarre Pressure Zone North Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION City of Orono, Minnesota Page 3 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 2.1 WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Navarre Well 1 Navarre Well 2 Highway 12 Well 3 Unique Well No. 205627 211965 509097 Year Constructed 1971 1971 1991 Well Pump Capacity (gpm) 1,000 500 500 Casing Diameter (inches) 12 8 16 Casing Depth (feet) NA NA NA Overall Well Depth (feet) 385 390 381 The total well capacity is determined as the total capacity of all wells operating for 20 hours per day. It is considered good practice to allow the well pumps a few hours of down time to “rest”, which ultimately extends the life of the pumps and allows for aquifer recharge. The firm capacity is the total capacity with the single largest pump out of service and is determined for a pumping period of 20 hours per day. Regulatory agencies recommend the firm capacity be equal to or greater than the average day demand it serves. C. WATER TREATMENT Treatment of source water for the Navarre Water System consists of sand filtration for iron and manganese removal, ion exchange softening to reduce hardness, and chemical addition prior to entry into the distribution system. Fluoride is added for dental cavity protection, chlorine is added for disinfection, and polyphosphate is added as a corrosion inhibitor. Treatment of source water for the Highway 12 system consists of chemical addition of chlorine and fluoride. D. WATER STORAGE The existing storage facilities in the City of Orono consist of one 200,000-gallon elevated water tower in the Navarre Water System and one 400,000-gallon elevated water tower in the Highway 12 Water System. Details of the water storage tower are presented in Table 2.2. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 4 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 2.2 EXISTING STORAGE FACILITIES Navarre Water Tower Highway 12 Water Tower Capacity (gallons) 200,000 400,000 Year Constructed 1971 1993 High Water Level 1,102 1,165 Support Type Multi-legged Hydropillar E. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The Orono water system is comprised of water mains ranging in size from 6 inches to 16 inches in diameter. As previously discussed, both the Navarre and Highway 12 service areas include groundwater wells and elevated storage. The Wayzata System Extension and Long Lake System Extension are supplied with water directly from the other two Cities’ water systems and only provide a means of distribution to the customers. The existing capacities of the systems appears to be adequate in regards to pressure and available fire flow. Future improvements to provide service to planned expansion areas as well as increased supply capacities are discussed later in this report in Section 7. Mains that are 10 inches and larger are considered trunk mains for this size of distribution system. When possible, all mains should be built in loops. A dead end main without enough connected demand will require frequent flushing to reduce water stagnation problems. This problem is especially true for trunk mains because of the larger volume of water stored. The existing system has several dead end pipe segments in cul-de-sacs and other areas that limit looping. Looping of water mains also helps provide for uninterrupted service to most of the system customers when one pipe segment is shut down for repairs. With a looped system only an isolated section of the system will be out of service instead of an entire neighborhood or commercial area. Looping also provides for substantial flow increases during a fire demand as the demand at the location of the fire can be met from more than one direction in the system. The existing water distribution system is shown in Figure 2.2. !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W )n )n ?«A@ GôWX GôWX GÝWX GùWX GïWX GïWX GeWX GeWX GVWX151 GoWX GoWX GsWX GsWX GïWX GÞWX GVWX135 GVWX146 GVWX112 GdWX West Arm Long Lake NorthArm StubbsBay Cook's Bay FrenchLake MooneyLake DickeyLake Wayzata Bay Brown's Bay Smith's Bay Forest Lake MaxwellBay Lydiard Lake ClassenLake TanagerLake Harrison Bay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay Jenning's Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaLower Lake Phelps Bay Black Lake SetonLake Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake EchoBay Gideons Bay RobinsonsBay GraysBay Hadley Lake Wolsfeld LakeLakeKatrina Kraetz Lake CarsonsBay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake Chevy ChasePressure Zone NorthPressure Zone NavarrePressure Zone Mound Wayzata Medina Deephaven Plymouth Minnetrista Minnetonka Tonka Bay Independence Woodland Shorewood Long Lake Minnetonka Beach Minnetrista Greenwood Spring Park Shorewood Maple Plain Shorewood Excelsior October, 2013 I 0 3,500 Feet Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Existing WaterDistributionSystem Figure 2.2 CLIENTLOGO M a p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - E x i s t i n g W a t e r D i s t r i b u t i o n S y s t e m 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d D a t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 1 3 : 5 1 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION City of Orono, Minnesota Page 5 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 3 - LAND USE AND POPULATION A. LAND USE The water system planning area is based on providing service within the current City limits. B. POPULATION PROJECTION The Metropolitan Council’s “Orono Development Framework Forecasts Through 2030” is presented in Table 3.1. The Metropolitan Council projects the City of Orono’s population to approach 9,800 in 2030. TABLE 3.1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SYSTEM STATEMENT SUMMARY 2000 2010 2020 2030 POPULATION 7,538 8,300 9,500 9,800 HOUSEHOLDS 2,766 3,200 3,950 4,100 EMPLOYMENT 1,110 1,370 1,550 1,630 As previously noted, approximately one-half of the existing population is served by private wells. A portion of the projected population growth will be served by the Orono water system. This increase in population served is likely the growth that will occur within and adjacent to the Highway 12 water system. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 6 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 4 - WATER USAGE C. EXISTING WATER USAGE Historical water data is an important tool for determining trends and helping to assist the City in determining if there are problems within the system. Yearly and monthly pumping summaries from 2003 to 2012 are presented below in Table 4.1 for the Navarre Water System. The yearly pumping totals reveal a slight decrease in recent water usage. TABLE 4.1 MONTHLY WATER PUMPING RECORDS (MILLION GALLONS) NAVARRE WELLS 1 & 2 Month 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 January 5.713 5.572 5.859 5.468 6.243 5.013 6.431 5.523 4.216 5.161 February 5.302 5.071 4.777 4.950 5.368 4.678 5.715 5.344 4.654 4.498 March 5.636 5.413 5.197 5.070 6.385 4.584 5.854 6.166 4.904 4.755 April 5.693 5.669 4.946 4.872 7.036 4.645 9.294 5.832 4.601 4.757 May 6.501 6.365 6.701 7.382 9.091 6.690 8.580 6.885 5.394 6.375 June 8.171 8.018 7.060 10.072 11.380 8.056 9.947 8.088 7.371 7.666 July 10.017 9.817 2.184 14.472 14.603 7.024 11.303 8.852 9.676 11.744 August 12.395 9.785 9.192 10.260 9.954 10.612 7.999 8.526 11.120 9.279 September 10.181 8.597 7.952 6.541 6.288 6.980 9.062 5.941 9.337 8.403 October 7.018 5.764 5.843 6.085 5.381 6.170 5.418 5.087 6.619 5.816 November 4.967 5.611 4.798 5.270 4.691 5.336 5.068 4.765 4.810 4.483 December 6.844 5.363 5.565 5.744 5.134 7.119 5.500 4.757 4.718 4.955 Total 88.438 81.045 70.074 86.186 91.554 76.907 90.171 75.766 77.420 77.892 Yearly and monthly pumping summaries from 2003 to 2012 for the Highway 12 Water System are presented below in Table 4.2. The yearly pumping totals reveal an increasing trend in water demand with a peak in 2012. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 7 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 4.2 MONTHLY WATER PUMPING RECORDS (MILLION GALLONS) HIGHWAY 12 WELL 3 Month 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 January 0.859 1.165 1.765 1.499 1.666 1.252 0 1.228 1.217 1.490 February 1.063 1.123 1.464 1.335 1.276 1.168 0.706 1.161 1.306 1.297 March 0.834 1.117 1.355 1.333 1.365 1.081 0.917 1.268 1.236 1.388 April 1.220 2.649 1.905 1.953 1.470 1.293 1.475 2.967 1.440 2.294 May 1.840 2.456 1.805 2.647 3.477 2.835 3.803 3.399 2.479 3.594 June 3.053 2.300 2.095 5.858 6.642 4.092 7.946 4.605 3.860 4.963 July 4.074 3.982 5.440 8.590 10.126 7.760 8.010 4.868 6.070 8.488 August 5.772 0.466 5.908 5.853 5.519 8.784 6.029 3.437 6.026 7.999 September 3.998 0.008 2.727 2.636 4.061 5.394 6.029 3.437 7.557 8.068 October 0.256 2.938 2.124 2.522 1.796 1.940 1.550 2.847 4.751 4.281 November 0.124 1.706 1.587 1.940 1.336 0.0 1.328 1.547 1.438 1.594 December 1.297 1.630 1.526 1.286 1.325 0.0 1.314 1.302 1.521 1.657 Total 24.390 21.540 29.701 37.452 40.059 35.599 39.107 32.066 38.901 47.113 Tools that are an aid in determining future flows include the average day demand per capita and maximum day to average day peaking ratio. Since 2003 the Navarre Water System average demand is 106 gallons per capita per day (gpcpd). The maximum average day demand of 121 gpcpd was experienced in 2003. The maximum day to average day ratio has averaged 2.6 since 2003 and the highest ratio of 4.62 was experienced in 2008. These parameters are summarized below in Table 4.3. Since 2003 the Highway 12 Water System average day demand is 400 gpcpd. The maximum average day demand of 535 gpcpd was experienced in 2003. The maximum day to average day ratio has averaged 5.3 since 2003 and the highest ratio of 8.65 was experienced in 2004. These parameters are summarized below in Table 4.4. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 8 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 4.3 HISTORICAL WATER TRENDS NAVARRE WELLS 1 & 2 Year Avg. Day Demand (GPD) Estimated Population Avg. Day Demand per Capita (gpcpd) Maximum Daily Demand (MGD) Peaking Factor (Max. Day/Avg. Day) 2003 242,296 2,000 121.1 599,000 2.47 2004 221,434 2,025 109.4 658,000 2.97 2005 191,984 2,050 93.7 508,000 2.65 2006 236,126 2,075 113.8 609,000 2.58 2007 250,833 2,100 119.4 575,000 2.29 2008 210,129 2,120 99.1 970,000 4.62 2009 247,044 2,140 115.4 515,000 2.08 2010 207,579 2,160 96.1 414,000 1.99 2011 212,110 2,180 97.3 435,000 2.05 2012 213,403 2,200 97.0 496,000 2.32 Average 106 2.6 TABLE 4.4 HISTORICAL WATER TRENDS HIGHWAY 12 WELL 3 Year Avg. Day Demand (GPD) Estimated Population Avg. Day Demand per Capita (gpcpd) Maximum Daily Demand (MGD) Peaking Factor (Max. Day/Avg. Day) 2003 66,822 125 534.6 530,000 7.93 2004 58,852 190 309.7 509,000 8.65 2005 81,372 210 387.5 597,000 7.34 2006 102,608 230 446.1 475,000 4.63 2007 109,750 250 439.0 586,000 5.34 2008 97,265 260 374.1 464,000 4.77 2009 107,143 270 396.8 395,000 3.69 2010 87,852 280 313.8 379,000 4.31 2011 106,578 290 367.5 333,000 3.12 2012 129,077 300 430.3 389,000 3.01 Average 400 5.3 City of Orono, Minnesota Page 9 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Unaccounted for water is a tool that helps determine if the amount of water being pumped from a community’s source is being used efficiently. Unaccounted for water is the difference between the total water pumped and the total water sold. Typically, there is a certain amount of water that is pumped into the system but is unaccounted for or “lost”. Unaccounted for water may include items such as; leaks in the distribution system, under-registering meters, flushing hydrants, firefighting purposes, ice rink flooding, water for city parks, street cleanings, and unmetered water usage by contractors. The City should try to estimate the amount of unmetered water usage as best as possible to determine if there are any problems within the distribution system such as leaking pipes and under-registering meters. Typically, if unaccounted for water is 10 percent or greater of the total water pumped from the source, the City should take measures to identify the source and reduce the amount of unaccounted for water. The City’s unaccounted for water since 2008 is shown in Table 4.5. TABLE 4.5 UNACCOUNTED FOR WATER Year Water Pumped (MG) Water Sold (MG) Unaccounted For Water (MG) Percent Unaccounted For Water (%) Residential C/I/I Other Total Sold 2008 112.642 72.598 8.579 9.609 90.786 21.856 19.4 2009 129.277 72.105 26.07 5.662 103.837 25.440 19.7 2010 107.832 69.939 21.461 13.1 104.500 3.332 3.1 2011 116.371 72.527 26.551 11.109 110.187 6.184 5.3 2012 125.005 78.672 32.273 4.375 115.320 9.685 7.7 Unaccounted for water was above 10 percent in 2008 and 2009. Since then, the unaccounted for water has been very good at below 10 percent. Determining unaccounted for water is an important tool and it is recommended that the City monitor this parameter on a quarterly basis. This will allow City staff to determine if there are any problems within the system and help identify the problems and causes for the unaccounted for water. Reducing the amount of unaccounted for water will conserve the amount of water pumped as well as preserve the life expectancy of the well pumps. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 10 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. D. WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS Water demand projections have been estimated with respect to the construction of new homes. For simplicity reasons, new industrial/commercial demands have been calculated by the available acreage for development. The population projections shown below indicate what the various water demands would be should the population increase to that value. The population growth shown is only for planning purposes and it should not be presumed that this growth will occur. The proposed expansion areas of the distribution system are shown in Figure 4.1. From historical data previously presented, the average per capita daily water usage for the Navarre Water System has been selected as 106 gpcpd with a peaking factor of 2.6. The total average demand per capita for the Highway 12 Water System has been selected as 400 gpcpd. The average peaking factor of 3.8 from 2008-2012 will be used for the Highway 12 Water System instead of the 10-year average as the five year average is a more accurate representation of recent water use trends. The selected water use values were then used with population projections to project future water demands which are presented in Table 4.6 and Table 4.7. TABLE 4.6 PROJECTED WATER DEMAND NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM Service Area Population Average Daily Demand (MGD)1 Maximum Daily Demand (MGD)2 2,200 (Existing) 0.233 0.606 2,300 0.244 0.634 2,400 0.254 0.661 2,500 0.265 0.689 2,600 0.276 0.717 2,700 0.286 0.744 2,800 0.297 0.772 2,900 0.307 0.799 3,000 0.318 0.827 1 Used an average day usage of 106 gpcpd 2 Used a peaking factor of 2.6 !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W West Arm NorthArm MaxwellBay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake NavarrePressure Zone Tonka Bay Minnetonka Beach Spring Park Shorewood Mound October, 2013 I 0 0.25 Miles Source: Hennepin County, ESRI ProposedExpansion Areas Figure 4.1 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - P r o p o s e d E x p a n s i o n A r e a s 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 2 5 : 4 9 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Proposed Expansion Areas Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake Wolsfeld LakeNorthPressure Zone Medina Long Lake !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W Chevy ChasePressure Zone Wayzata Plymouth 0 2,000 Feet 0 600 Feet City of Orono, Minnesota Page 11 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 4.7 PROJECTED WATER DEMAND HIGHWAY 12 WATER SYSTEM Service Area Population Average Daily Demand (MGD)1 Maximum Daily Demand (MGD)2 400 (Existing) 0.160 0.608 600 0.240 0.912 800 0.320 1.216 1,000 0.400 1.520 1,200 0.480 1.824 1,400 0.560 2.128 1,600 0.640 2.432 1,800 0.720 2.736 2,000 0.800 3.040 1 Used an average day usage of 400 gpcpd 2 Used a peaking factor of 3.8 City of Orono, Minnesota Page 12 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 5 - DRINKING WATER QUALITY A. GENERAL Drinking water quality is regulated by numerous Federal and State regulations. In addition, the treated drinking water quality must meet local expectations for taste, odor, hardness, and general quality. The ability to test for water contaminants has evolved to parts per billion and less; however, the understanding of the health effects of some of these contaminants is still evolving. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) provides guidelines for producing safe drinking water. This section will provide an overview of drinking water regulations and a summary of existing water system quality data. Water quality design goals will be established based on regulatory requirements and public expectations. B. DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS 1. Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Regulations Through the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) in 1974, the U.S. Congress authorized the USEPA to establish drinking water regulations that apply to all public water systems in the United States. State governments, through their health departments and environmental agencies, are responsible for implementation and enforcement of the provisions of the Act. Under the SDWA, the USEPA initially proposed National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NIPDWR). Upon further research and special studies, and with the passage of the 1986 Amendments to the SDWA, the interim regulations were adopted as National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) and 83 contaminants were required to be regulated. Further changes were made to the SDWA with the 1996 Amendments. These amendments retained most of the NPDWRs previously enacted, but did change the process for selecting contaminants to be regulated and did mandate new rules regarding arsenic, uranium, radon, and groundwater disinfection. The 1996 Amendments place increasing emphasis on ensuring that all new and existing City of Orono, Minnesota Page 13 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. water systems have the technical, managerial, and financial capacity to comply with NPDWRs. Systems which do not commit the resources required to comply with the new rules may not be eligible for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) loans and may be vulnerable to enforcement actions. The major components of the SDWA of interest to the City of Orono are:  National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs)  Microbial and Disinfection By-Products Rule (M-DBP)  Total Coliform Rule  Ground Water Rule  Inorganic Contaminants Regulated by Primary Drinking Water Regulations (including arsenic)  Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (DWCCL) 2. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) National Primary Drinking Water Regulations are the enforceable standards with which water suppliers must comply. Currently, there are standards for 92 contaminants including turbidity, 8 microorganism indicators, 4 radionuclides, 19 inorganic contaminants, and 60 organic contaminants. The USEPA is required to review and revise, as appropriate, each NPDWR every six years. The most recent review was completed in May 2009. The USEPA revised the Total Coliform Rule (TCR) on February 13, 2013 with new requirements for ensuring the integrity of the distribution systems. A list of the USEPA Drinking Water Standards for Regulated Contaminants is located in Appendix A. 3. Microbial and Disinfection By-Products Rules (M-DBP) Disinfection of drinking water was one of the major public health advances in the 20th century and has been identified as the primary reason for the increasing life span of humans. Common epidemics such as typhoid and cholera have been reduced, if not eliminated, through disinfection of water supplies. However, chemical disinfectants such as chlorine, chlorine dioxide, and ozone can react with naturally occurring materials in the water to form unintended organic and City of Orono, Minnesota Page 14 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. inorganic by-products which may pose health risks. A major challenge is to balance the risks from microbial pathogens and disinfection by-products. The USEPA has some existing and developing future rules to address these concerns. Some of the rules apply only to surface water (lakes and rivers), some apply only to ground water (wells) and others apply to both surface and ground waters. Since the City of Orono only uses water from ground sources, this report will only discuss those that apply to ground water. They are as follows: Total Coliform Rule – The Total Coliform Rule, published in 1989, applies to all public water systems and establishes a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for total coliforms. As mentioned above, the USEPA made revisions to this rule based upon a 2009 review. Interim Trihalomethane Rule – In 1979, USEPA set and interim MCL for total trihalomethanes of 0.10 mg/L as an annual average. This applies to any community water system serving at least 10,000 people that adds a disinfectant to the drinking water during any part of the treatment process. As the population of City of Orono is below this threshold, this regulation does not apply to the City. Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Products Rule – The final Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Products Rule applies to community water systems and non-transient non-community systems and transient non-community water systems, including those serving fewer than 10,000 people that add a disinfectant to the drinking water during any part of the treatment process. The final Rule includes the following key provisions:  Maximum residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs) for chlorine (4 mg/L), chloramines (4 mg/L), and chlorine dioxide (0.8 mg/L).  Maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) for three trihalomethanes (bromodichloromethane (zero), dibromochloromethane (0.06 mg/L), and City of Orono, Minnesota Page 15 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. bromoform (zero)), two haloacetic acids (dichloroacetic acid (zero) and trichloroacetic acid (0.3 mg/L), bromated (zero), and chlorite (0.8 mg/L).  Maximum residual disinfection levels for three disinfectants (chlorine (4.0 mg/L), chloramines (4.0 mg/L), and chlorine dioxide (0.8 mg/L)).  Maximum contaminant levels for total trihalomethanes (0.080 mg/L) – a sum of the three listed above plus chloroform;, haloacetic acids (HAA5) (0.060 mg/L) – a sum of the two listed above plus monochloroacetic acid and mono- and dibromoacetic acids); and two inorganic disinfection by-products (chlorite (1.0 mg/L) and bromate (0.010 mg/L)).  A treatment method for removal of DBP precursor material, such as total organic carbon (TOC). Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Product Rule – The EPA published the Disinfectants and Disinfection BY-Product Rule on January 4, 2006. The rule contains maximum contaminant level goals for chloroform, monochloroacetic acid and trichloroacetic acid; National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, which consist of maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and monitoring, reporting, and public notification requirements for total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (HAA5); and revisions to the reduced monitoring requirements for bromate. Ground Water Rule - The EPA published the Ground Water rule on November 8, 2006, which specifies the appropriate use of disinfection and, just as importantly, addresses other components of ground water systems to ensure public health protection. 4. Inorganic Contaminants Twenty inorganic contaminants are regulated by the National Primary Drinking Water Standards. They include arsenic, copper, fluoride, lead, mercury, nitrate, and nitrites. The City of Orono currently is not impacted by this rule, as the levels of these contaminants in the raw water are below the MCLs. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 16 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. 5. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (DWCCL) The USEPA has drinking water regulations for more than 90 contaminants and the complete list is presented in Appendix A. The SDWA includes a process that the agency follows to identify new contaminants which may require regulation in the future. USEPA periodically releases a Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). The first list was published in March 1998 and had 60 unregulated contaminants. The second list published in February 2005 carries forward 51 of the original contaminants. The third and most recent list published July 25, 2012 includes 116 contaminants and is presented in Appendix B. C. SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS (SDWS) In addition to the NPDWRs, which cover the contaminants that affect public health, the EPA recommends Secondary Drinking Water Standards (SDWS) with limits on those contaminants that affect the aesthetic qualities of drinking water. The secondary regulations are intended to serve as guidelines and are not federally enforceable. Although the water utilities are not required to treat to SDWSs, they should be aware that keeping the quality of drinking water within these guidelines makes it more acceptable to consumers, thereby decreasing complaints to the utilities. Table 5.1 lists the secondary standards. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 17 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 5.1 EPA NATIONAL SECONDARY DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANT STANDARDS Contaminant Effects SMCL – mg/L Aluminum Colored Water 0.05 to 0.2 Chloride Salty Taste 250 Color Visible Tint 15 color units Copper Metallic Taste, blue-green stain 1 Corrosivity Metallic Taste, corrosion, fixture stains Non-corrosive Fluoride Tooth discoloration 2 Foaming Agent Frothy, cloudy, bitter taste, odor 0.5 Iron Red or rusty color and staining 0.3 Manganese Black or brown color and staining, bitter or metallic taste 0.05 Odor “rotten egg” or musty or chemical smell 3 TON PH Low pH – bitter metallic, corrosion 6.5 to 8.5 High pH – slippery feel, soda taste, deposits Silver Skin discoloration, graying of the whites of the eye 0.1 Sulfate Salty taste 250 TDS Hardness, deposits, colored water, staining, salty taste 500 D. SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY ISSUES The City of Orono currently does not have any major water quality issues relating to primary drinking water standards. Problems with the water quality are completely aesthetic with concerns to iron, manganese, and hardness. The City should continue to monitor their source water for both primary and secondary drinking water standards and modify their treatment as necessary. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 18 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 6 - WATER SYSTEM EVALUATION A. GENERAL This section provides an evaluation summary of the existing water supply, treatment, storage, and distribution systems for the City of Orono. The existing system consists of four water supply systems. These four systems consist of three supply wells, two elevated storage tanks, two water treatment facilities, and four distribution systems. The existing water infrastructure components have been evaluated in terms of current and future demands. B. WATER SUPPLY WELLS 1. General The City of Orono currently obtains water from three wells, Navarre Well 1 and 2 and Highway 12 Well 3. All three of the wells draw from the Jordan aquifer. Supply well details are presented in Table 2.1. 2. Well Capacity The Recommended Standards for Water Works (Ten State Standards) recommends that the average day demand be met by the firm capacity. Firm capacity is the pumping capacity with the largest well out of service. In addition, the daily well output is calculated based on operating for 20 hours per day to allow 4 hours per day of aquifer recharge. Using these standards, the Navarre Water System has a total capacity of 1.80 MGD and a firm capacity of 0.60 MGD. The Highway 12 Water System has a total capacity of 0.60 MGD and a firm capacity of 0.0 MGD. Table 6.1 and Table 6.2 present the number of wells that will be needed to meet future demand projections for the Navarre and Highway 12 systems. The projected demands, both average and peak day usage, are listed in Table 6.1 and Table 6.2. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 19 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. As shown in Table 6.1, no additional wells are required for the Navarre Water System as it has adequate well capacity to meet future demands. The Highway 12 System currently needs an additional well to increase the firm capacity to meet the average day demand as shown in Table 6.2. For planning purposes, the capacity of the new well is assumed to be 500 gpm. However, the formation likely will produce more than 500 gpm and may well produce 1,000 gpm. However, firm capacity is calculated with the largest well out of service and a third well would still be required once the population hit 1,400 persons for the Highway 12 system. However, the third may not be necessary based on the interconnections with Long Lake. TABLE 6.1 PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM Service Area Population Average Day Demand (MGD) Maximum Day Demand (MGD) No. of New Wells Required Firm Capacity (MGD) Total Capacity (MGD) 2,200 (Existing) 0.233 0.606 0 0.600 1.800 2,300 0.244 0.634 0 0.600 1.800 2,400 0.254 0.661 0 0.600 1.800 2,500 0.265 0.689 0 0.600 1.800 2,600 0.276 0.717 0 0.600 1.800 2,700 0.286 0.744 0 0.600 1.800 2,800 0.297 0.772 0 0.600 1.800 2,900 0.307 0.799 0 0.600 1.800 3,000 0.318 0.827 0 0.600 1.800 City of Orono, Minnesota Page 20 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 6.2 PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS HIGHWAY 12 WATER SYSTEM Service Area Population Average Day Demand (MGD) Maximum Day Demand (MGD) No. of New Wells Required * Firm Capacity** (MGD) Total Capacity (MGD) 400 (Existing) 0.160 0.608 1 0.480 1.080 600 0.240 0.912 1 0.480 1.080 800 0.320 1.216 1 0.480 1.080 1,000 0.400 1.520 1 0.480 1.080 1,200 0.480 1.824 1 0.480 1.080 1,400 0.560 2.128 2 0.960 1.560 1,600 0.640 2.432 2 0.960 1.560 1,800 0.720 2.736 2 0.960 1.560 2,000 0.800 3.040 2 0.960 1.560 *Assumes new well capacity of 0.60 MGD (500 gpm operating for 20 hours per day) **Existing Firm Capacity is 0 MGD 3. Wellhead Protection Wellhead protection should be given consideration when evaluating new well locations. Wellhead protection is a method of preventing contamination of public water supplies by managing potential contaminant sources in the area that contribute to a public water supply well. Land uses relative to commercial, industrial, and underground storage of chemicals and petroleum are considered higher risks to ground water protection than permanent open spaces, parks, farmland and low-density residential lots. All public water suppliers are required to implement wellhead protection measures. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) was granted authority to implement wellhead protection and rules governing wellhead protection were adopted in March 2007. Grouping of wells eases wellhead protection and potential treatment beyond the existing facilities. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 21 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. C. WATER TREATMENT The Navarre Water System currently uses sand filtration for iron and manganese removal, ion exchange softening to reduce hardness, and adds fluoride, chlorine, and polyphosphate to the water before entry into the distribution system. At this time, the City does not need to pursue additional water treatment capacity at the Navarre WTP. However, the City should make chemical feed and other improvements at the Navarre WTP as outlined in Section 7. The Highway 12 Water System adds chlorine and fluoride to water before entry into the distribution system. The City should pursue adding polyphosphate as a corrosion inhibitor to the Highway 12 Water System along with making changes to the chemical feed system and other improvements as indicated in Section 7. Addition of a polyphosphate will also help sequester iron and prevent staining in the distribution system. D. WATER STORAGE The City of Orono’s existing storage facilities consist of a 200,000-gallon elevated water tower in the Navarre system and a 400,000-gallon elevated water tower in the Highway 12 system. Details of the storage tanks are presented in Table 2.2. The principal purpose of storage is to provide the ability to equalize pumping rates during periods of variable rate demand. Adequate storage permits a reduction in the size of the pumps required to supply a community because peak demands are diminished by the reserve provided in storage. Storage is typically provided in elevated tanks for communities the size of Orono to provide storage and a pressure source even when the wells are not pumping. The primary reasons for providing storage are as follows:  To equalize pressure in the distribution system.  For emergency requirements (pump failure, power failure).  Fire protection. Storage adequacy can be assessed using the Average Day Criteria or the Maximum Day, Fire Protection and Emergency Storage Criteria. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 22 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Average Day Criteria Generally, the minimum recommended standard, without fire protection, is equal to the average day demand (Ten State Standards, 1997). By this standard, the Navarre Water System currently has a slight storage deficit since the average day demand in 2012 was 213,400 gpd and the current storage capacity is 200,000 gallons. As shown in Table 6.3, the Navarre Water System will have a storage deficit of 118,000 gallons when the population using the system reaches 3,000. As shown in Table 6.4, the Highway 12 Water System will have inadequate storage when the population using the system is larger than 1,000 and the average day demand rises above 400,000 gpd. When the population reaches 2,000 the Highway 12 Water System is projected to have a storage deficit of 400,000 gallons. TABLE 6.3 REQUIRED STORAGE BASED ON AVERAGE DAY USE NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM Service Area Population Avg. Day (GPD) Existing Storage (gallons) Storage Deficit Current (2012) 213,400 200,000 13,400 2,300 243,800 200,000 43,800 2,400 254,400 200,000 54,400 2,500 265,000 200,000 65,000 2,600 275,600 200,000 75,600 2,700 286,200 200,000 86,200 2,800 296,800 200,000 96,800 2,900 307,400 200,000 107,400 3,000 318,000 200,000 118,000 City of Orono, Minnesota Page 23 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 6.4 REQUIRED STORAGE BASED ON AVERAGE DAY USE HIGHWAY 12 WATER SYSTEM Service Area Population Avg. Day (GPD) Existing Storage (gallons) Storage Deficit 400 (Existing) 160,000 400,000 None 600 240,000 400,000 None 800 320,000 400,000 None 1,000 400,000 400,000 None 1,200 480,000 400,000 80,000 1,400 560,000 400,000 160,000 1,600 640,000 400,000 240,000 1,800 720,000 400,000 320,000 2,000 800,000 400,000 400,000 Maximum Day, Fire Protection and Emergency Storage Criteria Another approach is to consider the individual storage components for equalization, fire demand, and emergency reserve versus the available water supply production facilities. The water production and storage must be considered together, since an increase in production may decrease the amount of water storage required. Water storage requirements using this approach for the Navarre Water System and the Highway 12 Water System are summarized in Table 6.4 and Table 6.5. The current storage is not able to meet the maximum day, fire protection and emergency storage criteria for either water system. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 24 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 6.5 REQUIRED STORAGE BASED ON MAXIMUM DAY, FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY STORAGE CRITERIA NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM Population 2,200 (Existing) 2,400 2,600 2,800 3,000 Fire Demand (gpm)1 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Max. Day Demand (gpm) 421 459 498 536 574 Peak Usage (gpm) 2,421 2,459 2,498 2,536 2,574 Firm Pumping Supply (gpm)2 500 500 500 500 500 Withdrawal from Storage (gpm) 1,921 1,959 1,998 2,036 2,074 Fire Flow Duration (hrs) 3 3 3 3 3 Fire Demand Storage (gallons) 345,780 352,620 359,640 366,480 373,320 Emergency Storage (gallons)3 121,248 132,192 143,424 154,368 165,312 Total Storage Needed (gallons) 467,028 484,812 503,064 520,848 538,632 Current Available Storage (gallons) 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Net Storage Surplus/Deficit (gallons) (267,028) (284,812) (303,064) (320,848) (338,632) (1) Fire flow requirements vary within the City depending on type and construction of facilities. Fire flow requirements for normal residential development vary between 1,000 to 1,500 gpm. For multi- family and commercial areas such as the downtown business district, residential apartment areas, school and industrial areas; flows of 3,500 gpm for 3 hours are generally considered acceptable. (2) Based on firm capacity listed in Table 6.1. (3) Emergency storage equals 20% of maximum day demand. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 25 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 6.6 REQUIRED STORAGE BASED ON MAXIMUM DAY, FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY STORAGE CRITERIA HIGHWAY 12 WATER SYSTEM Population 400 (Existing) Existing with New Well 800 1,200 1,600 Fire Demand (gpm)1 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Max. Day Demand (gpm) 422 422 844 1,266 1,689 Peak Usage (gpm) 2,422 2,422 2,844 3,266 3,689 Firm Pumping Supply (gpm)2 0 500 500 500 1,000 Withdrawal from Storage (gpm) 2,422 1,922 2,344 2,766 2,689 Fire Flow Duration (hrs) 3 3 3 3 3 Fire Demand Storage (gallons) 435,960 345,960 421,920 497,880 484,020 Emergency Storage (gallons)3 121,536 121,536 243,072 364,608 486,432 Total Storage Needed (gallons) 557,496 467,496 664,992 862,488 970,452 Current Available Storage (gallons) 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 Net Storage Surplus/Deficit (gallons) (157,496) (67,496) (264,992) (462,488) (570,452) (1) Fire flow requirements vary within the City depending on type and construction of facilities. Fire flow requirements for normal residential development vary between 1,000 to 1,500 gpm. For multi- family and commercial areas such as the downtown business district, residential apartment areas, school and industrial areas; flows of 3,500 gpm for 3 hours are generally considered acceptable. (2) Based on firm capacity listed in Table 6.2. (3) Emergency storage equals 20% of maximum day demand. E. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 1. General The analysis of a water distribution system often requires the use of a computer model of the system. A computer model is prepared which is calibrated with field data resulting in a model that simulates the known conditions of the system as closely as possible. This model provides a basis for simulation of existing system operations and deficiencies as well as future operating conditions of the system. From these simulations, determinations can be made as to the improvements that the system will need. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 26 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. The water distribution system for the City of Orono was modeled using Bentley’s WaterCad version 8.0. The computer network is used to analyze steady state flows for pipe distribution systems. The information required by the model includes data such as diameter, length, and Hazen-Williams C Factor (pipe roughness factor) for each pipe in the system. Other data required include ground elevation of pipe junctions, elevated storage water level, and water demand on the system. Primary goals of the analysis included the following:  Analysis of pressures throughout the water system.  Analysis of available fire flows throughout the system.  Analysis of interconnections between Long Lake and Orono for the Highway 12 system. 2. Analysis of Existing Water System Existing Water Pressure Average Day (AD) pressures are depicted by pressure districts in Figure 6.1. The existing system pressures for an AD demand scenario range from 50 to 78 psi. These pressures are within acceptable standards. According to Ten States Standards for Water Works (2012), an industry standard that the Minnesota Department of Health has adopted, pressures in the system should meet the following: “The minimum working pressure in the distribution system should be 35 psi (240 kPa) and the normal working pressure should be approximately 60 to 80 psi (410 - 550 kPa). When static pressures exceed 100 psi (690 kPa), pressure reducing devices shall be provided on mains or as part of the meter setting on individual service lines in the distribution system. “ Peak Hour (PH) pressures, which represent some of the highest non-emergency demands that a system will require are shown in Figure 6.2. The existing peak hour pressures range from 44 to 73 psi, which is again within acceptable !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W West Arm NorthArm MaxwellBay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake NavarrePressure Zone Tonka Bay Minnetonka Beach Spring Park Shorewood Mound October, 2013 I 0 0.25 Miles Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Existing AverageDay Pressures Figure 6.1 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - E x i s t i n g A v e r a g e D a y P r e s s u r e s 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 0 8 : 2 6 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Existing Average Day Pressures 70 - 80 psi 60 - 70 psi 50 - 60 psi Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake Wolsfeld Lake NorthPressure ZoneMedina Long Lake !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W Chevy ChasePressure Zone Wayzata Plymouth 0 1,500 Feet 0 600 Feet !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W West Arm NorthArm MaxwellBay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake NavarrePressure Zone Tonka Bay Minnetonka Beach Spring Park Shorewood Mound October, 2013 I 0 0.25 Miles Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Existing PeakHour Pressures Figure 6.2 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - E x i s t i n g P e a k H o u r P r e s s u r e s 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 1 1 : 1 4 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Existing Peak Hour Pressures 70 - 80 psi 60 - 70 psi 50 - 60 psi 40 - 50 psi Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake Wolsfeld Lake NorthPressure ZoneMedina Long Lake !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W Chevy ChasePressure Zone Wayzata Plymouth 0 1,500 Feet 0 600 Feet City of Orono, Minnesota Page 27 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. standards. Therefore, no deficiencies were identified during computer system analysis. Existing Available Fire Flow The modeled fire flows were run up to a maximum of 5,000 gpm. The computer model indicates that higher flows are available in some areas. However, these higher flow rates are unrealistic because there are not enough hydrants or equipment available to deliver such high rates. The minimum fire flow available at any given point in a system should not be less than 500 gpm at a residual pressure of 20 psi. This represents the amount of water required to provide for two standard hose streams on a fire in a typical residential area for residential dwellings with spacing of 100 feet. The distance between buildings and the corresponding fire flow is summarized in Table 6.7. TABLE 6.7 RECOMMENDED RESIDENTIAL FIRE FLOWS Distance Between Buildings Required Fire Flow (feet) (gpm) More Than 100 500 31-100 750 30-11 1,000 Less Than 11 1,500 The computed fire flows for the current distribution system are represented in Figure 6.3. They are represented by fire flow districts in gallons per minute. Generally, available fire flows are adequate throughout the water distribution system. Areas with less than 500 gpm mostly include residential properties with limited water main looping due to locations along cul-de-sacs or dead end roads. The majority of these locations are in the Navarre system and the Wayzata System Extension. !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W West Arm NorthArm MaxwellBay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake NavarrePressure Zone Tonka Bay Minnetonka Beach Spring Park Shorewood Mound October, 2013 I 0 0.25 Miles Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Existing MaximumDay AvailableFireflows Figure 6.3 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - E x i s t i n g M a x i m u m D a y A v a i l a b l e F i r e f l o w s 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 0 7 : 1 5 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Existing Maximum Day Available Fire Flows 500 - 1000 gpm 1000 - 1500 gpm 1500 - 2000 gpm 2000 - 2500 gpm 2500 - 3000 gpm 3000 - 3500 gpm 3500 - 4000 gpm 4000 - 4500 gpm 4500 - 5000 gpm Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake Wolsfeld Lake NorthPressure ZoneMedina Long Lake !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W Chevy ChasePressure Zone Wayzata Plymouth 0 1,500 Feet 0 600 Feet City of Orono, Minnesota Page 28 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Pipe Velocities and Friction Losses Pipe segments are considered potentially deficient, or most-limiting, if they have the following conditions:  Velocities greater than 5 ft/s; and  Head losses greater than 10 ft/1000 ft. Velocities in pipe segments are acceptable up to about 10 ft/s during emergency or extreme demand conditions of short duration. As velocities increase, pipe friction increases and problems with water hammer occur. This is especially true in systems with higher pressures. The system has been checked for locations where velocities and head losses meet the above stated conditions. There are several locations where pipe velocities exceed 5 ft/s during emergency or peak demand flows. During normal operating conditions, no segments with high velocities or high head loss were observed. Long Lake Interconnections During emergency events, the Orono Highway 12 system and the Long Lake system are able to provide water service to each other through a series of interconnections. In the past, this arrangement is able to work for extended periods of time due to the large extra capacity of Long Lake wells, along with the large elevated storage in the City of Orono. In the event of emergency water supply needs, where one of the system wells are to be off-line for an extended period, the combined form supply capacity is able to meet the maximum day demands of the combined systems by nearly 500,000 gallons as shown in Table 6.8. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 29 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 6.8 WELL CAPACITY FOR COMBINED LONG LAKE AND ORONO HIGHWAY 12 WATER SYSTEM Long lake Maximum Day Demand (MGD) Orono Maximum Day Demand (MGD) Combined Maximum Day Demand (MGD) Long Lake Well Firm Capacity* (GPD) Orono Well Firm Capacity **(GPD) Combined Well Firm Capacity ***(MGD) 0.72 0.608 1.33 400,000 0 1.80 * Assumes well capacity of 1.2 MGD (1,000 gpm operating for 20 hours per day) ** Existing Firm Capacity is 0 MGD *** Assumes well capacity of 1.80 MGD(500 gpm Orono Well + 1,000 gpm Long Lake Well operating at 20 hours each per day) In addition, the combined water system can meet domestic demands for its customer base during the event that either tower is taken off line for repairs or rehabilitation. During these outages, available fire flows will be reduced significantly compared to when each tower is in operation. In the event of the Orono tank being taken off line, available firef lows will be reduced to approximately 700-750 gpm throughout the northwest area of the Highway 12 system. While adequate for residential fire flows, the fire department should be aware that tankers may be needed on-call if a larger fire occours at a large industrial or institutional customer. There are currently four interconnections between the Long Lake and Orono (Highway 12) water systems. Two of the interconnections have automatic pressure reducing valves (PRVs) which allow emergency flow in either direction if an emergency occurs and system pressure drops below a minimum pressure setting. The interconnections are located near the following intersections:  Virginia Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard (Automatic PRV)  Shaughnessy Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard  Brimhall Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard(Automatic PRV)  Willow Drive North and Wayzata Boulevard City of Orono, Minnesota Page 30 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. The PRVs rarely operate, especially since the set points for operation are at low levels which are not impacted by normal operating conditions. The primary operation of these interconnections would be during an emergency such as a large fire when additional water would be required for the duration of the fire. In the event that one system loses supply capacity or a tower is taken out of service, these interconnections can also be utilized. Available fire flows for the Highway 12 system are shown in Figure 6.4. This figure represents available fireflows when the two automatic PRV stations are operational. !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake NorthPressure Zone Long Lake Medina October, 2013 I 0 600 Feet Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Existing Maximum DayAvailable Fireflows withTwo Long LakeInterconnections Figure 6.4 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ A r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - E x i s t i n g M a x i m u m D a y A v a i l a b l e F i r e f l o w s w i t h T w o L o n g L a k e I n t e r c o n n e c t i o n s 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 5 8 : 3 9 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Existing Maximum Day Available Fire Flows 1000 - 1500 gpm 1500 - 2000 gpm 2000 - 2500 gpm 2500 - 3000 gpm 3000 - 3500 gpm 3500 - 4000 gpm 4000 - 4500 gpm 4500 - 5000 gpm Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION City of Orono, Minnesota Page 31 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 7 - PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS A. GENERAL The major water system components have been evaluated in the previous sections. A detailed description of the proposed improvements is presented in this section. B. WATER SUPPLY The Navarre Water System currently has two wells with a firm capacity of 0.6 MGD. During the last four years, the maximum daily demand has averaged less than 0.5 MGD, which means the current water system has excess capacity. The service area of the Navarre Water System is close to full development so the population growth within the service area is expected to be minimal. Based off the current capacity of the wells and the expected population growth, no additional wells are needed for the Navarre Water System. The Highway 12 Water System currently only has one well which runs nearly 24 hours per day during the summer. Since there is only one well, the firm capacity is 0 MGD. Redevelopment of the existing well was evaluated to see if the capacity could be increased. According to the well records the well formation caved in during development of the well which affectively reduced the potential capacity of the well. In a letter from E.H. Renner and Sons, Inc. dated May 12, 2008, it was indicated that the soft formation of the aquifer may limit the well to a maximum pumping rate of 600 gpm. Therefore, redevelopment of the well may not increase the flow rate and any pumping rates over 600 gpm will likely result in pumping sand. Given the uncertainty and cost of redevelopment of the well it is not recommended to pursue redevelopment of the existing well. In addition, redevelopment would not offer any increase in firm capacity. Since redevelopment of the existing well is not a recommended option, a new well should be drilled. Drilling a new well will not only increase the total capacity of the system but will increase the firm capacity and provide needed redundancy. As noted in Section 6, the new well is anticipated to produce at least 500 gpm. However, the formation likely will produce more than 500 gpm and may well produce a volume closer to 1,000 gpm. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 32 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. The goal for the new well would be to install the largest capacity well possible and the new well would become the primary well and the extra well capacity would help reduce the well run times during the high demand periods. It should be noted that the firm capacity is calculated with the largest well out of service and a third well would still be required once the population hit 1,400 persons for the Highway 12 system. However, since the City has interconnections with Long Lake a third well may not be necessary. This would need further evaluation once the Highway 12 system nears the 1,400 person population. C. TREATMENT FACILITIES The objective of a water system is to provide quality water that is fit for domestic and commercial use. The City currently does not have any major water quality issues that need to be addressed, but both the Navarre WTP and Highway 12 Well House have several items that need to be addressed which are discussed in the following sections. 1. Navarre WTP Water Treatment The Navarre Water Treatment Plant has a chemical room that contains both fluoride and chlorine. The Minnesota Department of Health requires that these two chemicals be kept in separate rooms. An additional room will have to be built onto the plant to house one of the two chemicals or a chlorine cabinet could be installed on the outside of the plant. The Minnesota Department of Health also requires having secondary containment for any chemicals being used at the water plant. The secondary containment must have a capacity of 110 percent of the capacity of the chemical storage tanks. The chemicals used at the Navarre WTP that require secondary containment are fluoride, potassium permanganate, and polyphosphate. None of the chemical storage tanks at the plant currently have secondary containment so secondary containment will need to be added. The chemical feed pumps that are currently being used are nearing the end of their useful life. They should be replaced before they break down and cause issues with treatment. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 33 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. The brine hose pump used for the softeners is original from 1998 and has some exterior corrosion. The brine hose pump is used to regenerate the softeners and proper regeneration of the softeners is critical to their operation. Therefore, it is recommended that a new hose pump be installed to replace the existing one. The air compressor used at the plant is from 1991 and only one of the two motors works. The plant uses automatic pneumatic valves which require compressed air to function. Therefore, a new air compressor should be installed to replace the existing one to ensure proper operation of the treatment facility. The aeration nozzles in the top of the filter are in poor condition and should be replaced. The current check valve on the backwash tank does not work properly. A new Tideflex check valve should be installed to prevent any possible backups. Building/Structure The facility has widespread etching from fluoride and should be cleaned to prevent further corrosion from the fluoride. All penetrations from the fluoride room should be sealed to prevent future corrosion throughout the facility. The electrical outlets are corroded from the fluoride and should be replaced. A number of the ceiling panels above the filters are pitted and should be replaced. Numerous areas of piping are starting to rust and should be cleaned and recoated to prevent additional corrosion. The exterior block on the front of the building next to the salt tanks is starting to crumble from excessive moisture. The roof drain that is located there should be extending away from the building so the storm water does not further degrade the exterior block. The condition of the interior and exterior walls of the salt tank is not known. The interior walls look good from a visual inspection, but a more thorough inspection should be conducted to determine the condition of the walls. Some of the wood on the exterior of the wall is rotten and in need of replacement. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 34 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Heating, Air Conditioning, and Ventilation (HVAC) The facility currently has humidity problems due to a desiccant dehumidifier that does not work properly. Removing the existing dehumidifier and installing new Hi-E Dry dehumidifiers in several locations throughout the plant would help eliminate the humidity issues. Additional Operator Concerns Operations staff would like the softeners to be recharged on a volume basis as opposed to the current setup which recharges on a time basis. This can be accomplished with modifications to the controls system. Staff also indicated that they would like the tile flooring in the office removed and replaced with an epoxy coating. Staff commented that in the past they had found resin from the softeners in the watermains. The problem has not occurred lately, but concerns remain over why it happened. Staff mentioned that a site glass would be beneficial so they could view the level of the resin within each softener. However, installation of a site glass would require cutting into the existing tank. This is not recommended because the softeners are factory designed for a pressure rating and making any further penetrations could compromise the tank. In addition, the site glass would likely not be very accurate for indicating the actual resin level within the tank, therefore the benefits of the site glass are minimal. Since staff has not seen the problem on a continuous basis, the release of resin into the watermain likely occurred from incorrect operation of a valve and not due to any failure of the resin retaining system of the softeners. Should staff repeatedly see resin in the distribution system the softeners will need to be evaluated for failure of the resin retaining system. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 35 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2. Highway 12 Well House Water Treatment The chemicals currently used at the well house are chlorine and fluoride. It is recommended to add polyphosphate to the water as a corrosion inhibitor in order to comply with lead and copper control regulations. Addition of a polyphosphate will also help sequester iron and prevent staining in the distribution system. The fluoride and chlorine are currently stored in the same room and will have to be separated into different rooms along with an additional room for the polyphosphate. The most economical way to separate the two chemicals will be to add a fiberglass chlorine cabinet to the exterior of the building. This will allow the fluoride to remain in its current location with an access door to the exterior. The polyphosphate would then be stored in the well room and construction of any additional rooms would not be necessary. Secondary contaminant will need to be provided for both the fluoride and polyphosphate. The chemical feed pumps that are currently being used are nearing the end of their useful life. They should be replaced before they break down and cause issues with treatment. The chlorine booster pump has corrosion and should also be replaced before it breaks down. The piping in the well house is original from 1991. Some of the sections of the piping have already been replaced and the remaining pipes should also be replaced. Building/Structure The concrete floor below the fluoride injection point is damaged from fluoride leaks and should be repaired. The building has widespread etching from the fluoride and it should be cleaned to prevent any further damage. All penetrations from the fluoride room should be sealed to prevent future corrosion throughout the facility. The doors and door City of Orono, Minnesota Page 36 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. frames also have significant corrosion and should be repaired and repainted or replaced if repair is not feasible. The roof is leaking and is in need of repair. It is recommended to replace the entire roof system. The French drain that services the well house should be upgraded to provide proper drainage from the facility. Currently the drain cannot handle flows from the well pump, which causes ponding on the floor. Heating, Air Conditioning, and Ventilation (HVAC)- Several HVAC components to the building should be addressed including upgrades to the heating system, upgrades to the ventilation system in the fluoride room, and removal of the unused ceiling hung dehumidifier. D. WATER STORAGE As discussed in Section 6, the Navarre Water System has a current storage deficit of 13,400 gallons using the average day criteria and a storage deficit of 267,000 gallons using the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria. The existing storage capacity is very close to meeting the current average demand and very little growth is expected in the Navarre Distribution System. Therefore, it is concluded that storage capacity is not needed at this time. If the City sees an increase in water demand for the Navarre System they may want to consider additional storage that would also meet the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria. The Highway 12 Water System currently meets the average day criteria and has a storage deficit of 157,500 gallons using the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria. If a second well is added to the system, the deficit decreases to 67,500 gallons. Given that the existing storage meets the average day criteria and nearly meets the maximum day, fire protection, and emergency storage criteria with a new well, additional storage is not needed at this time. As water demands increase the City will need to consider added storage for the Highway 12 Water System as outlined in Tables 6.2 and 6.6. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 37 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. E. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM Proposed water distribution system improvements are shown in Figure 7.1. Improvements include water main extensions to serve expansion areas along the west edge of the Highway 12 system. In addition, a portion of the existing Highway 12 system is recommended to be increased in size from an 8 inch main to a 12 inch. This improved trunk main will increase available fire flow capacity during emergencies. In addition, water availability through the east interconnection will be improved. Depending on the future location of a new supply well to serve the Highway 12 system, the increased trunk capacity may also be required to allow adequate transmission of the increased supply capacity to the water tower. 1. Proposed Water Pressure The future average day pressures are shown in Figure 7.2. As shown, the pressures remain within industry standards. 2. Proposed Available Fire Flows The future available fire flows are represented in Figure 7.3. These flows represent the future expected available fire flows with all recommended system improvements. Improved available fireflows in the Highway 12 system are a result of the proposed 12 inch trunk main. 3. Long Lake Interconnections Based on computer modeling, not all of the existing interconnections are needed in the future. We recommend that the two primary automatic PRV interconnections are maintained. These two are located at Virginia Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard and Brimhall Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard. Two interconnections will provide adequate fire protection during an emergency. In addition, having these on the east and west sides of the distribution system provides for more redundancy of service as well. Upgrades to a 12 inch main along Wayzata Boulevard between Brimhall Avenue and Willow Drove North will also provide a better hydraulic connection for transmission of water during emergency events. !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W West Arm NorthArm MaxwellBay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake NavarrePressure Zone Tonka Bay Minnetonka Beach Spring Park Shorewood Mound October, 2013 I 0 0.25 Miles Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Proposed WaterDistributionSystem Figure 7.1 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - P r o p o s e d W a t e r D i s t r i b u t i o n S y s t e m 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 5 6 : 3 1 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Future Watermain Upgrade from 8" to 12" Future 8" Future 12" Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake Wolsfeld LakeNorthPressure Zone Medina Long Lake !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W Chevy ChasePressure Zone Wayzata Plymouth 0 2,000 Feet 0 600 Feet !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W West Arm NorthArm MaxwellBay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake NavarrePressure Zone Tonka Bay Minnetonka Beach Spring Park Shorewood Mound October, 2013 I 0 0.25 Miles Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Proposed AverageDay Pressures Figure 7.2 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - P r o p o s e d A v e r a g e D a y P r e s s u r e s 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 0 3 : 2 6 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Future Watermain Upgrade from 8" to 12" Future 8" Future 12" Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Proposed Average Day Pressures 70 - 80 psi 60 - 70 psi 50 - 60 psi Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake Wolsfeld LakeNorthPressure Zone Medina Long Lake !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W Chevy ChasePressure Zone Wayzata Plymouth 0 2,000 Feet 0 600 Feet !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W West Arm NorthArm MaxwellBay Carman's Bay Lafayette Bay SpringParkBay East Crystal Bay West Crystal Bay Lake MinnetonkaUpper Lake NavarrePressure Zone Tonka Bay Minnetonka Beach Spring Park Shorewood Mound October, 2013 I 0 0.25 Miles Source: Hennepin County, ESRI Proposed MaximumDay AvailableFireflows Figure 7.3 CLIENTLOGO Ma p D o c u m e n t : \ \ a r c s e r v e r 1 \ g i s \ O R N O \ C 1 3 1 0 6 0 5 6 \ E S R I \ M a p s \ 1 0 6 0 5 6 - P r o p o s e d M a x i m u m D a y A v a i l a b l e F i r e f l o w s 1 1 x 1 7 . m x d Da t e S a v e d : 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 : 2 9 : 4 2 P M Legend !!W Wells !!T Tower Watermain 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" Proposed Maximum Day Available Fire Flows 500 - 1000 gpm 1000 - 1500 gpm 1500 - 2000 gpm 2000 - 2500 gpm 2500 - 3000 gpm 3000 - 3500 gpm 3500 - 4000 gpm 4000 - 4500 gpm 4500 - 5000 gpm Pressure Zone Parcels City Limits Surrounding Communities WATER DISTRIBUTION !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W DickeyLake ClassenLake Wolsfeld LakeNorthPressure Zone Medina Long Lake !!T !!T !!W !!W!!W !!W Chevy ChasePressure Zone Wayzata Plymouth 0 2,000 Feet 0 600 Feet City of Orono, Minnesota Page 38 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. SECTION 8 - ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING OPTIONS A. GENERAL This section presents associated user rates for recommended water system improvements, and financing options available to ensure implementation of the recommended improvements. B. COST ESTIMATE FOR RECOMMENDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Table 8.1 and 8.2 summarize the recommended improvements and provide an estimated cost for each improvement as well as the total estimated project cost for the Navarre and Highway 12 Water System Improvements. Estimated costs for improvements to the distribution system are presented in Table 8.3. It should be noted that these costs include installation of the watermain only and do not consider costs associated with street reconstruction. Annualized project costs over a 20-year period are presented in Table 8.4. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 39 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 8.1 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE NAVARRE WATER SYSTEM Item Cost Mobilization/Admin $30,000 Chlorine Cabinet $15,000 Chemical Feed Equipment (All Chemicals) $80,000 Fluoride Room Improvements $2,000 Brine Hose Pump $10,000 Dehumidifiers (3) $7,500 Air Compressor $15,000 Replace Aeration Nozzles $3,000 Clean Etching $6,000 Replace Office Floor with Epoxy Coating $4,000 Check Valve for Backwash Waste $3,500 Repair Exterior of Brine Tank $1,000 Relocate Roof Drain $500 Replace Ceiling Panels $10,000 Control Upgrades (Softener Operation) $10,000 Miscellaneous Electrical $25,000 SUBTOTAL $222,500 Engineering/Contingency (25%) $55,500 TOTAL $278,000 City of Orono, Minnesota Page 40 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 8.2 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE HIGHWAY 12 WATER SYSTEM Item Cost Mobilization/Admin $50,000 Chemical Feed Equipment (Including Phosphate) $60,000 Chlorine Cabinet $15,000 Fluoride Room Improvements $2,000 Piping Modifications $5,000 New Chlorine Booster Pump $2,000 Repair Concrete Floor at Fluoride Injector $500 HVAC Improvements $10,000 Roof Repairs $7,500 French Drain Repairs $3,000 Clean Etching $5,000 Repaint Doors $2,000 Miscellaneous Electrical $25,000 New Well $325,000 Site Piping for Well $25,000 SUBTOTAL $537,000 Engineering/Contingency (25%) $134,000 TOTAL $671,000 TABLE 8.3 PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Item Cost Mobilization/Admin $50,000 Replacement of 8" Watermain with 12" Watermain $80,000 12" Watermain Extension for West Edge of Highway 12 System $310,000 8" Watermain Extension for West Edge of Highway 12 System $115,000 SUBTOTAL $555,000 Engineering/Contingency (25%) $139,000 TOTAL $694,000* *Costs shown are for installation of watermain only. Costs do not include considerations for street reconstruction. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 41 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. TABLE 8.3 ANNUALIZED PROJECT COSTS (20 YEARS AT 3.5%) Navarre Water System Improvements Highway 12 Water System Improvements Water Distribution System Improvements Total Capital Cost $278,000 $671,000 $694,000* $1,643,000 Annualized Cost $19,570 $47,230 $48,810 $115,610 *Costs shown are for installation of watermain only. Costs do not include considerations for street reconstruction C. FINANCING OPTIONS Several funding options are available and any option should be thoroughly reviewed by the City’s financial consultant. These are described in the following paragraphs. 1. General Obligation Bonds The City could issue general obligation bonds for the various improvements. The rates for the bonds are dependent on current financial situation of the City and the rates available on the open market. 2. Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund The State Drinking Water Loan Fund administered through the Public Facilities Authority (PFA) provides financial assistance, primarily in the form of loans, to eligible public drinking water suppliers for construction of water storage, treatment and distribution systems that meet Safe Drinking Water Act Standards. The Authority provides below-market loans with interest rates determined by a Quarterly Set Rate minus discounts based on demographic characteristics of the borrower. The loan period is for 20 years. To become eligible for funding, projects must be included on the Minnesota Department of Health’s (MDH) Project Priority List and on the Authority’s Intended Use Plan (IUP). An applicant must demonstrate it has the financial capability to repay the loan and must issue a general obligation bond to the Authority as security for the loan. City of Orono, Minnesota Page 42 Water System Plan – C13.106056 Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. This project has not yet been scored by the Department of Health, but it would meet the eligibility requirements and it is possible the project could qualify for the low interest loan program. APPENDIX A United States EPA Drinking Water Standards APPENDIX B United States EPA Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) Item #12 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project - Bid Award [Page 1 of 7] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project - Bid Award [Page 2 of 7] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project - Bid Award [Page 3 of 7] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project - Bid Award [Page 4 of 7] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project - Bid Award [Page 5 of 7] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project - Bid Award [Page 6 of 7] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Navarre Street Light and Sidewalk Project - Bid Award [Page 7 of 7] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Golf Course Donations [Page 1 of 3] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Golf Course Donations [Page 2 of 3] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Golf Course Donations [Page 3 of 3] Item #14 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 LMCC Release [Page 1 of 2] Item #14 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 LMCC Release [Page 2 of 2] Item #15 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Licenses & Permits [Page 1 of 5] Item #15 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Licenses & Permits [Page 2 of 5] Item #15 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Licenses & Permits [Page 3 of 5] Item #15 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Licenses & Permits [Page 4 of 5] Item #15 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Licenses & Permits [Page 5 of 5] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 1 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 2 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 3 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 4 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 5 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 6 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 7 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 8 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 9 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 10 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 11 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 12 of 13] Item #16 - CC Agenda - 02/10/2014 Claims/Bills [Page 13 of 13]