Loading...
06/07/2005 - City Council Public Works CommitteePUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE TUESDAY, JUNE 7 4 P CONFERENCE ROOMS 2A&B I. REVIEW OF LOCAL ORDINANCE IN LIEU OF MN WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT H. FRONT YARD FENCES / CURRENT STANDARDS III. OTHER BUSINESS Agenda Information Memo June 7, 2005, Eagan City Council Public Works Committee Meeting I. REVIEW OF LOCAL ORDINANCE IN LIEU OF MN WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: 1. To provide a recommendation to the City on whether to proceed with the development of a comprehensive wetland protection and management plan; and, 2. To further discuss issues raised by the Public Works Committee regarding surface water management, mandates, and future committee meetings. FACTS: At the May 31, 2005 Special City Council meeting, the Council reviewed background information and the proposed RFP with regard to a comprehensive wetland protection and management plan (CWPMP). ➢ The Council, at the May 31 workshop, directed that the Public Works Committee further discuss the proposed CWPMP. Eric Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator, Russ Matthys, City Engineer and Public Works Director Colbert will be present to further discuss the proposed plan with the committee. ➢ In addition to the CWPMP, staff is prepared to discuss the following issues with the Committee: o Surface water management— The management of surface waters continues to grow in complexity. Staff is prepared to discuss the increased complexity and how issues such as flood control measures and alum dosing fit into the City's overall surface water management strategy. o Mandates—Examples of pending State and Federal mandates related to water quality that continue to be an issue for the City. What can cities do to address these mandates? o Ongoing Public Works Committee meetings—What is the ongoing need for future Public Works Committee meetings to review and address the aforementioned issues (i.e. bi-monthly, quarterly, semi annually, etc.)? ATTACHMENTS: ➢ Enclosed on pages �-- through /D is the background material from the May 31, 2005 City Council meeting pertaining to a Local Comprehensive Wetland Protection and Management Plan. Agenda Information Memo May 31, 2005 Special City Council Meeting ITEM VI. LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE WETLAND PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FACTS: • In January and February 2005, the Natural Resources Subcommittee and the APrC considered the possible development of a wetland protection and management plan, which would result in local ordinance. This approach would enable the City to manage wetlands consistent with but in lieu of Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) rules. • On April 26, the City Council reviewed the preliminary recommendation of the APrC and directed staff to draft a Request for Proposal to develop a Comprehensive Wetland Protection and Management Plan (CWPMP). • The CWPMP will provide alternative standards for wetland management based on specific needs and priorities of the City, and it must meet or exceed requirements of the WCA. A CWPMP will also provide up-to-date information to other planning and policy efforts that are imminent in the future at city and watershed scales. The first step of the CWPMP process is a detailed field inventory of wetland functions and values. Decision-making and policy standards (e.g., sequencing, replacement, buffers, etc) are then developed. Once approved by the Board of Water and Soil Resources, the CWPMP can be incorporated into local ordinance. • The process may take up to a year and be contracted at an estimated cost of $30,000 to 50,000. Staff implementation of the eventual program is estimated to be at a savings compared to current investments for WCA implementation. • Council directed staff to provide the draft RFP and supplemental information indicating advantages and disadvantages of administering a local program versus the WCA. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: • Eagan's 1990 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) is 15 years old and needs to be updated. Staff drafted an RFP that addresses citywide issues of surface water quality management and incorporates relevant work items for a state-of-the-art update of the WQMP for 2006 to 2020. The CWPMP work item is covered on Page 2 of the draft RFP. • By incorporating the full spectrum of work tasks that appear to be necessary to complete the overall updates, the City has enhanced flexibility to choose how best to proceed with any (or all) of the options. ATTACHMENTS: • A copy of the RFP is attached on pages ! -� • A copy of benefits and concerns for a CWPMP is attached on pages e�4 a .REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE JUNE 2005 SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION Contract Administration All correspondence regarding this request for propose- ("P) and submitted proposals must be addressed to: Eric Macbeth Water Resources Coordinator City of Eagan 3501 Coachman Point `:...yam Eagan, MN 55122-1211. 4 - Acceptance -Acceptance of Proposal Contents The contents of this RFP and the conltant's project proposal will become contractual provisions if a contract is awarded. Fakse--.of.the selected consultant (Consultant) to meet these obligations may result in cancellation of the award. All information in the awarded proposal is:bjeot.xb. disclosure under provisions of Minn. Stats. Ch. 13 — Minnesota Governme it Data Practices Act. SECTION 2: WORK STATEMENT Introduction The Consultant -will be responsible to prepare an updated, state-of-the-art water quality nagement plan. (2006 WQMP) for the City of Eagan (City). The mission of the City's water %esources program is to protect and improve natural, aesthetic, and recreational qualities'of its 1�kes, ponds, and wetlands for enjoyment by local and regional residents. The objectives of this work are to build upon an already successful but out-of-date, 15 - year -old water quality management plan (1990 WQMP), to consolidate and incorporate relevant policies, plans, and programs that have been instituted or developed since the 1990 WQMP, and to position the City to address efficiently and effectively the issues and needs of its surface water resources from 2006 through 2020. The 2006 WQMP shall be a comprehensive plan that is succinct and user-friendly. The City shall retain ownership of the completed plan, all supportive information, relevant IN DRAFT Request for Proposals, City of Eagan Surface Water Management Plan Update May 27, 2005, Page 2 of 7 data, and associated maps. The 2006 WQMP shall be developed in close collaboration with City staff including, but not limited to, the water resources coordinator. This RFP is outcome -based. It does not specify methods to address work items. Proposals shall provide explicit details as to how each of the nine (9) work items below will be addressed, with a not -to -exceed cost indicated for each. Work Items 1) Evaluate 1990 WQMP and make recommendations for revisions ofthe following components, if appropriate: a) Waterbody classification system; b) Management criteria for each waterbody classification; c) Water quality program policies and land development policies;, d) Specific requirements of new land development projects; e) Public information and education program; _ f) Waterbody management prioritization systb�, g) Water quality monitoring program; h) Watershed specific recommendations; and i) Current funding mechanisms. 2) Evaluate and revise City's capabilities to modil phosphorus lbading and in -lake concentrations:'' a) Update/calibrate currently used PONDNUT model; b) Develop new, state -of -the -,art model. 3) Develop state-of-the-art model to -predict genera4 n and transport of total suspended solids. 4) Develop st Ee-ofa =art policies and requirements for land redevelopment, including retrofitWA and low- impact developwent strategies. 5) Develop local comprehensive wetly id protection and management plan, in accordance with Minn. Rules Ch. 8420.0650, that is fully integrated into the 2006 WQMP: a) Conduct Nkmesota Routine Assessment Methodology for Evaluating Wetland Functions (MnRAM 3.0) in the faun Club Lake watershed i) Provide data electronically formatted to integrate into City's geographic information system (GIS); b) Draft City wetland management ordinance; and c) Identify and prioritize wetland basins for restoration, replacement, and banking opportunities. 6) Draft: comprehensive, 15 -year (2006-2020), state-of-the-art capital improvement plan (CIP) and budget that will accomplish 2006 WQMP goals and objectives a) Consider existing Clean Water Partnership work plans for Fish and Schwan lakes; b) Consider innovative approaches and best management practices for i) runoff reduction, infiltration, and storage DRAFT Request for Proposals, City of Eagan Surface Water Management Plan Update May 27, 2005, Page 3 of 7 ii) reduction and mitigation of phosphorus loading; c) Develop policy for amending 2006-2020 CII' to address needs and issues not originally included; and d) Develop protocols for correcting stormwater treatment basins whose wet -pond volumes have been reduced by sediment. 7) Provide opportunity for public input and involvement in 2006 WQMP process: a) Coordinate no more than 6 meetings of a water quality task force (membership identified by City); b) Attend one (1) meeting each of the Advisory Parks Commission. and the City Council to review and provide general information on the 2006 WQMP; and Q c) Attend one (1) meeting each of the Advisory Planning COmmussion and the City Council (, for final approval of the 2006 WQMP. f 8) Establish procedures for activities related to 2006 WQMP;.document: a) Future amendments; and b) Review of other City plans for compliance. 9) Provide training to City staff on any models or other snare used in the 2006 WQMP. Compliance Considerations Consultants shall provide proposals that ensue the 2006. WQW, duly complies with all relevant plans; guidelines, and controls including, but not limited to; the following authorities: a) Black Dog WatershedMaeagement Organization b) City of Eagan and 'adj acent'manicipalities "`, c) Dakota County - d) Federal Emergency M .gemeht Agency-, e) Gun Cly Laky -Watershbd Management Organization f) Lebanon Hills Reg .l Park ;. g) LovyerMinnesota RlvviMaterahW, Management District h) Metropolitan Council ' i) Minnesota. Board of Wal r and Soil Resources j) Minnesota D,opartment'of Health k) Minnesota Dep ie-nt'of Natural Resources 1) Minnesota Department of Transportation m) Minnesota Environmental Quality Board n) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency o) United States Army Corps of Engineers p) United States Environmental Protection Agency q) United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Consultants shall provide proposals that anticipate the impact of the Minnesota municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit program on City operations and include relevant details and costs in appropriate work items above. DRAFT Request for Proposals, City of Eagan Surface Water Management Plan Update May 27, 2005, Page 4 of 7 Consultants shall provide proposals that anticipate the impact of federal total maximum daily load (TMDL) regulations on City operations and include relevant details and costs in appropriate work items above. Documentation All maps and related data prepared for the 2006 WQMP shall be provided in electronic formats that integrate into City's GIS. All documents and data sheets shall be prepared using current standard software. All input and output data files for hydrologic, hydraulic, and water quality models shall be provided electronically as well as hard copy, where appropriate. The Consultant shall work in close collaboration with City staff including, but not. l ited to, the water resources coordinator to choose suitable modeling software. SECTION 3: PROPOSALS The proposal shall contain the type of information summarized below. Addiiional information is acceptable as long as it is dir• ectly relevant to the*bTfiqbJectives of this RFP. Proposal Format The proposal shall follow the table of c the proposal shall be separated by tabs: I. GeneralInformatio, *�.a H. Project Understating _ III. Project Apprp IV. Proposed Project"Ttam and Experience V. Schedule VI. Fee Q60t ti4l� VII. Proposed Modificabons to Scope VIIL 'Adtional Informat,n. A brief description'of each sectimn follows: below. The. _following eight (8) sections of I. General Information. General information and a. brief history of the consultant's firm. Include similar information on principal sub -consultants, if any, proposed for the project. II. Project Understanding A summary of the consultant's understanding of the project. III. Project Approach Specific approaches, methods, and assumptions that will be utilized to accomplish each work item. Include information about quality assurance and document management. Describe the collaboration of City staff (water resources coordinator) and the consultant's project team. kid DRAFT Request for Proposals, City of Eagan Surface Water Management Plan Update May 27, 2005, Page 5 of 7 IV. Proposed Project Team and Experience • Identify principal project team members and describe specific roles. Include team members and describe specific roles of any sub -consultants. Include one-page resumes of principal project team members, including field personnel. Provide a contact name and information for each of the 'RFP work items. • Describe relevant experience and provide information on at least three (3) reference projects completed in the last five (5) years. Include specific descriptions of team members' roles on reference projects. V. Schedule A proposed, detailed schedule for the 2006 WQMP from beginninglo end; including breakdowns for each of the nine (9) work items. VI. Fee Quotation A not -to -exceed cost estimate for completion of the project. Include detail: estimates of number of work hours by each project team member on each -.Work item. Include total cost estimate for each of the nine (9) work items. ,k NOTE: The fee quotation will be used to estimate overall project costs and is the basis of contract negotiations. Please include the rye and phone num6rr of the person(s) authorized to negotiate a contract with the City. A single Bum shall administer all.provisions of a contract with the City. VII. Proposed Modifications -t $hgpe Any modifications to the mope ou i6, pd herein t6 consultant believes are necessary to ensure compliance of the 2006 WQMP with statutes, rules. and other requirements. These modifications and associated cost estimates shall bezlearly identified in the proposal. The RFP outline of work items is for general. guidance and A.iay be ,iddifiedlas appropriate with City staff approval. VIII. Additabnal 1n;format on :. Other infbmihtion the consuitnt believes -to be directIv relevant to the work objectives of this RFP, but not specifically requested. Submission of Proposal Consultants shall submit f ve (5) copies of the proposal for the evaluation process. One copy shall be unbound. Proposals must'be addressed to: Eric Macbeth Water Resources Coordinator City of Eagan 3501 Coachman Point Eagan, MN 55122-1211 To be considered, proposals must be received no later than 12:00 p.m. on June 17, 2005. 7 DRAFT Request for Proposals, City of Eagan Surface Water Management Plan Update May 27, 2005, Page 6 of 7 SECTION 4: CONSULTANT SELECTION City staff will review and evaluate proposals on the following basis: • Consulting firm reputation and principal staff experience in surface water management planning, relevant regulations, wetland classification and management, and public participation; • Proposed approach; • Proposed schedule; and 16 Proposed costs. 4 Following review of written proposals, City representatives may apk _consultants to make oral presentations of their proposals. SECTION 5: TERMS AND CONDITIONS V 1) The City reserves the right to contract only for pn,ns of t`he plan update. Deletions of specific components, such as individual project mee Ags,.,* ll be at the disctetion of the City. 2) If, for any reason, a firm is not able to commence the slices in that firm's proposal within 30 days of the award, at its discretion; the .City reserves the light to contract with another firm. 3) The City will pay the Consultant for services" used -on the not -,to -exceed fee quotation approved in the proposal or agreed in neg6hatiog� 4) The City shall not be liable krany expenses incurred Dy -66 Consultant prior to the signing of a contract includingb but not limited to, pr© osalpreparation, attendance at interviews, or final contract negis. �m 5) The proposal must be silted in ink -by an official authorized to bind the Consultant to its provisions. The proposal xn t_include a slatedi6nt as to the period during which the proposal remains valid. This, period mus be at least 90 days from the date of the proposal. 6) The Consultant shall supply 40 aol*es (20 printed, 20 on compact disc) of the first draft repoft and associated maps`and 75'co lies (25 printed, 50 on compact disc) of the final report and associated maps as part of the 6ontract. A cost per additional copy shall be furnished in the proposal.-. 7) The City shall retownership of all plans, maps, reports and data prepared under this proposal. The City produce any or all portions of the WQMP at its discretion. 8) If, for any reason, the tonsultant is unable to fulfill the obligations under the contract in a timely and proper manner, the City shall reserve the right to terminate the contract by specifying the date of termination in a written notice to the firm a minimum of 30 calendar days prior to the termination date. In this event, the firm shall be entitled to just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed. 9) The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals or to request additional information from any or all consultants. 10) The Consultant. shall not assign or transfer any interest in the contract without prior written consent of the City. 11) The Consultant shall maintain comprehensive general liability insurance in accordance with Section 466.04 of the Minnesota Statutes. 0 DRAFT Request for Proposals, City of Eagan Surface Water Management Plan Update May 27, 2005, Page 7 of 7 12) The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Eagan, its officials, employees, and agents from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the Consultant's (including its officials, agents, sub -consultants or employees) performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss, or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases, or death or injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting there from and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Consultant. 13) The Consultant'shall enter into a contract with the City regarding the 2006 WQMP. The terms of the contract shall be agreed upon and the contract shall be•executed prior to the Consultant commencing work on the 2006 WQMP. ~ .b 14) The consultant contract shall be governed by the laws of the gee of Minnesota. 15) Project summaries shall be submitted with each invoice bring 1W course of the project. Each summary shall detail the amount billed to date, work items that need to be completed, the estimated costs to complete these tasks, and the pr9Jected timeline for the completion of the project. Invoices submitted to the City shall include a detailed breakdown ofgtimes, personnel, mileage, etc. chargeable for that pefi�d. 16) If the Consultant has prepared similar documentation for oder plients and those documents are used in preparing this Surface Water Management Plan update, the City shall not be responsible for costs related to the preparation of the initialdocurrient. The City shall only reimburse for costs related to the update rif the document fo°incerporation into the 2006 WQWv SECTION 6: REFERENCE DOCUMENTS Consultants shall contact Eric Macbeth to arrange"to obtain the following City documents to assist in the preparation ofprbposals'—, • 1990 Water Quality Management Plan; • 1990: Stormwater M.-diagem'ent: Plan; • Storm WaterPollutionPreventiggPlan.- Local Comprehensive Wetland Protection and Management Plan (CWPMP) t These are examples of some benefits/concerns identified by the APrC in moving forward with a Comprehensive Wetland Protection and Management Plan. One of the largest benefits is the ability for the Council to have a comprehensive management tool that will be in place for any future development/re-development. This reduces the need for extensive review of a developer's recommendation of how they would manage wetlands on a site; the protection and/or restoration options would have already been identified in the management plan. Potential Benefit Potential Concern Use of wetlands for Allows the City flexibility in This will require time and resources to stormwater stormwater management o tions inventory Identify functions and Allows the City to determine the There will be challenges to integrate values best function for wetland(s) and with other local/state/federal program determine their value to the overall regulations. System Identify potential The CWPMP,process will identify Are liability issues more or less between protection and restoration appropriate protection strategies local ordinance versus state/federal options and differing restoration potentials wetland requirements? for various wetland qualities Time and resources saved There will be an estimated overall cost savings compared to current investments for WCA implementation Public and open process State rules require notification to agencies, citizens and technical staffs "to actively participate in the developwent of theplan". Local enforceability is The City will have better control ! improved over how this program is developed and monitored. City joins others having Currently Burnsville and CWPN4Ps Rosemount have their own plan which has saved significant time and effort in working with both development and re -development because the guidelines/parameters for specific wetlands are pre- determined. Valuable for re- As the City matures further, development policies and opportunities and incentives can be plans. created to restore and/or replace lost wetland values. Valuable in managing non- The City may be in an improved degradation plan condition with a CWPMP regarding state requirements to restore lost water quality values. These are examples of some benefits/concerns identified by the APrC in moving forward with a Comprehensive Wetland Protection and Management Plan. One of the largest benefits is the ability for the Council to have a comprehensive management tool that will be in place for any future development/re-development. This reduces the need for extensive review of a developer's recommendation of how they would manage wetlands on a site; the protection and/or restoration options would have already been identified in the management plan. Agenda Information Memo June 7, 2005, Eagan City Council Public Works Committee Meeting II. FRONT YARD FENCES / CURRENT STANDARDS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To review current standards for front yard fences and their enforcement and to provide direction as to whether modifications should be considered. FACTS: ➢ The City Code sets out standards for fences, specifying permitted heights depending upon whether the fence is within or outside of the front yard set back. The City Code does not require a building permit for fences, but one of the City's fact sheets for homeowners outlines the standards and staff responds to questions about standards if property owners contact City Hall about constructing a fence. ➢ If a fence is constructed that violates City Code and it comes to the City's attention, either through a complaint or because the violation is very obvious, staff will follow up with an education and correction notice and further enforcement steps as may be necessary to bring about compliance. ➢ Over the past several months, two fences in a neighborhood came to the attention of City Councilmembers and staff, because they exceeded the City's height standards. Staff is proceeding with enforcement/compliance steps with those properties. The situation resulted in City Council members identifying the issue their Goals and Work Directives for 2005-2006 as one of the items to be addressed. ➢ The purpose of this discussion item is to familiarize the Committee with the current standards and how they are enforced to help determine whether the current approach is sufficient or if changes should be considered. ATTACHMENTS: Staff memo covering the current City Code standards enclosed on page -i��' — City of Eap ma To: Jon Hohenstein, Community Development Director From: Mike Ridley, City Planner Date: June 2, 2005 Subject: Residential Fences As requested, this memo and attachment will summarize the City Code requirements for residential fences. The City does not dictate fence materials, minimum heights or internal site locations A Building Permit is not required for fence construction; however, all residential fences: ❑ Can be located upon property lines and within easements ❑ Must have the finished side face away from the fence owner's lot ❑ May not exceed a maximum height of six feet ❑ Located in front yards (from the front edge of the house to the front property line) may not exceed 42 inches in height ❑ Corner lots must preserve the "sight triangle" for traffic safety; nothing taller than thirty inches is allowed in this area (see Fence Handout graphic) The attached Fence Handout is available at the Community Development Department front desk, on-line and can be mailed upon request. Please contact me if you have questions or need additional information. CityEapo� To: Tom Hedges, City Administrator From: Eric Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator Date: June 7, 2005 Subject: Supplemental Information for Public Works Committee For your background, here's a timeline and summary of issues and perspectives that have led up to the information already provided the Committee: • In 2000, Water Resources staff first recognized the need to update the 1990 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), based on the notion that 10 years is a reasonable recurring revision time frame and acknowledging that after 10 years, more was known about water quality conditions and management strategies; • Staff have believed that an update of the WQMP should follow the update of the 1990 Stormwater Management Plan (SMP), which originally preceded the WQMP, because of the inextricable link between the two plans; • The "2000 Super Storm" and the mitigation of its effects focused the City's attention for a couple of years and suspended the SMP update; • In 2004, staff were preparing to proceed with next steps relative to the alum settling basin, however, legal issues with the private property on which the basin could be constructed remain—the project is indefinitely suspended at this time; • At.the same time, the Public Works Committee's discussions relative to Fish Lake and the alum dosing facility called for a follow-up with formation of a Fish Lake task force to study alternatives to alum dosing and long-term strategies; • Since then, staff has sought the appropriate timing and frankly has been challenged to grasp the appropriate scope and scale of such a task force given the ultimate need to deal with such issues on a citywide basis. • Relatively recent, issues (2004-2005) at the local, state, and federal level have clarified the need and the strategy of the City to proceed assertively now with a comprehensive update of its surface water management plans and programs, which is indicated in the draft Request for Proposals. • In January and February of 2005, the APrC considered the development of a comprehensive wetland protection and management plan (CWPMP). Per the recommendation of the APrC, the City Council, at the April 26 joint meeting with the APrC, directed staff to proceed with the drafting of a RFP to develop the CWPMP. Is/ Eric Macbeth Water Resources Coordinator cc: Tom Colbert, Public Works Director Cherryl Mesko, Parks and Recreation Administrative Coordinator