HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-05-2020 Council Work Session PacketCITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA
CITY OF LINO LAKES
Monday, October 5, 2020
Council Chambers
6:00 P.M.
1. Burque Property PUD Concept Plan, Katie Larsen
2. NE Drainage Improvement Project, Diane Hankee
3. 2020 Pavement Management and 2021 Street Improvement Projects, Diane Hankee
4. Police Division Fleet, John Swenson
5. Employee Wellness, Sarah Cotton
6. Council Updates on Boards/Commissions, City Council
7. Monthly Progress Report, Sarah Cotton
8. Review Regular Agenda
9. Adjourn
1
WS – Item 1
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 1
Date: October 5, 2020
To: City Council
From: Katie Larsen
Re: Burque Property PUD Concept Plan
Background
The applicant, Builders Lot Group, LLC, has submitted a land use application for PUD
Concept Plan review. The proposed development is a PUD residential community
located south of NorthPointe and east of CSAH 54 (20th Avenue) and west of I-35E. It
contains 4 parcels totaling approximately 63 gross acres.
Future land use applications may include:
• Comprehensive Plan Amendment
o Land Use
Re-guide 1 parcel from Urban Reserve to Low Density Residential
o Utility Staging Area
Move 1 parcel from Stage 3 (Post 2040) to Stage 1A (2018-2025)
• Rezone property from R, Rural to PUD, Planned Unit Development
• PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat
• PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
This staff report is based on the following submittals:
• Context and Concept Plan Layout prepared by Sambatek dated July 20, 2020
• Photos of Housing Products submitted by the applicant on July 10, 2020
ANALYSIS
Proposal
The applicant is proposing the following residential unit types:
Single Family Lots (60 ft lot width) = 91 units
Single Family Lots (40 ft lot width) = 11 units
Senior Housing Building = 50 units
TOTAL = 152 units
2
The 40 ft wide lots would have 5 ft side yard setbacks, two car garages and 2 story, split
entry walkouts and villas. The 60 ft wide lots would have 5 ft side yard setbacks, 3 car
garages and 2 story, split entry walkout. Proposed front and rear yard setback and garage
size information was not provided.
Comprehensive Plan and Housing Density
At the time of this staff report, the City’s draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan was under
review by Met Council with tentative City Council approval in November 2020. This
PUD Concept Plan is being reviewed against the draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
The development proposes to incorporate Outlot A, NorthPointe 5th Addition. Per
Resolution No. 14-21 approving the NorthPointe PUD Development Stage
Plan/Preliminary,
“…Outlot C shall be developed in a future phase as an age-restricted (55+ years of age)
multiple family dwelling consistent with the regulations of the R-4, High Density
Residential District with underground parking for 50% of the required stalls and at a
density of 20 to 25 dwelling units per acre”
It should be noted that Outlot C of the preliminary plat is now final platted as
NorthPointe 5th Addition Outlot A and will be referenced as such throughout this report.
The outlot was proposed as an 88 unit senior housing complex in the NorthPointe
development. The Burque proposal shows this outlot with a 50 unit senior housing
complex.
Two of the 3 Burque parcels are guided low density residential per the 2040
Comprehensive Plan. One Burque parcel is guided Urban Reserve. NorthPointe 5th
Addition, Outlot A is guided medium density. The applicant is proposing to “transfer”
some of the density from NorthPointe 5th Outlot A over the entire Burque property
development.
3
NP 5th Outlot A Burque Property Total
Gross Area (acres)4.50 59.41 63.91
Wetlands & Water Bodies -0.73 -33.88 -34.61
Public Parks & Open Space
Arterial ROW
Other (Undevelopable)
Net Area (acres)3.77 25.53 29.30
Required Density Range PUD Resolution Low Density Total
Low High Low High Low High
Units per Net Acre 20 25 1.6 3
# Housing Units 75 94 41 77 116 171
Gross Density (units/acre)1.82 2.67
Net Density (units/acre)3.97 5.83
Density calculations for the purpose of meeting Met Council requirements are based on
net acres. The entire development’s net acreage is 29.30. The required density range
would be 3.97 to 5.83 units per acre which equates to 116 to 171 housing units.
The applicant is proposing 152 housing units at 5.19 units per acre. This is consistent
with the density range.
Staff Comments:
1. Additional wetland buffers and arterial road right-of-way dedication will affect
the net density.
2. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required to re-guide the one (1) Burque
parcel from Urban Reserve to Low Density Residential.
Rezoning
The property is currently zoned R, Rural and is guided for low density residential land
use. Per the zoning ordinance, land that is guided low density residential can be zoned R-
1, Single Family Residential, R-1X, Single Family Executive Residential or R-2, Two
Family Residential.
The property would need to be rezoned to PUD, Planned Unit Development in order to
allow for 40 ft wide lots with 50 ft of road right-of-way and allow for the “density
transfer” between NorthPointe and Burque property.
Staff Comment:
4
1. The applicant would need to provide additional public benefit in order to be
considered for PUD zoning. Examples could be wetland restoration, additional
wetland buffers, higher architectural & building standards etc.
Zoning and Land Use
Current Zoning R, Rural
Current Land Use Agricultural
Future Land Use per
2040 Comp Plan
Low Density Residential (1.6 to 3.0)
Urban Reserve
Utility Staging Area
Stage 1A (2018-2025)
Stage 1B (2025-2030)
Stage 3 (Post 2040)
Zoning Requirements and Standards
The PUD could provide flexibility from the strict standards of the residential zoning
ordinance. More detailed information is required to analyze each lot in regards to lot
sizes, lot widths and depths and setbacks.
The R-2, Two Family Residential zoning district is being used as a baseline zoning
district for comparison. The R-2 zoning district allows for 60 ft wide lots and minimum
7,500 sf lot sizes. The following chart shows a comparison of the R-2 District standards
to the proposed Burque property single family detached homes.
Lot Comparison R-2 vs. Burque Property
Standard R-2
Requirements
Proposed Nature’s
Refuge
Min. Lot Size 7,500 sf 4,400 sf (40’ wide lots)
6,600 sf (60’ wide lots)
Min. Lot Width 60 ft 40 ft (11 lots)
60 ft (91 lots)
Min. Lot Depth 125 ft
135 ft (double frontage) 110 ft
Building Setback (feet)
-From Local Streets 25 ft TBD
-From Collector or
Arterial Streets 40 ft TBD
-Rear
--Principal 25 ft TBD
-Accessory 5 ft 5 ft
5
-Side
--Principal 10 ft 5 ft
--Accessory 5 ft 5 ft
Buffer Adjacent to
Collector 15 foot Shall be provided
Impervious Surface 40% Verified with Building
Permits
Per the subdivision ordinance, minimum lot area for urban lots shall consist of buildable
land exclusive of utility transmission easements or water course easements that encumber
lot development.
Staff Comments:
1. Several lots include the wetland, wetland buffer and/or floodplain. Lots shall not
include either of these.
2. Lot widths shall be measured at the setback line.
3. The lots abutting CSAH 54 and I-35E shall have greater depth.
4. Staff would not recommend side yard setbacks less than 7.5 ft for both principal
and arterial structures.
Building Design Standards
More information is required regarding the proposed building design standards for both
the senior building and single family. Photos of the proposed single family homes were
provided. It does not appear the homes meet the minimum standards of the R-2, Two
Family District in regards to protruding garages and front porch widths. No building
elevations or photos of the senior building were provided.
Staff Comment:
1. The senior building and single family homes shall exceed minimum City
ordinance standards if PUD is considered.
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use
Direction Zoning Current Land Use Future Land Use
North PUD Single Family Medium Density
Residential
South R, Rural Rural Residential Urban Reserve
East R, Rural
R-1, Single Family
Rural Residential
Single Family
Low Density
Urban Reserve
West R, Rural Agricultural Urban Reserve
6
Subdivision Ordinance
Blocks and Lots
The proposed development provides 102 single family lots, and one 50 unit senior
housing building. Outlots would contain wetlands, buffers, stormwater ponds etc. The
lots vary in width, depth and lot size as may be allowed per the PUD flexibility.
Staff Comment:
• The block of 40 ft wide lots at the northwest corner of do not appear feasible due
to the need for additional CSAH 54 and local road right-of-way dedication, lot
depth, buffers, cul de sac design etc.
Streets and Alleys
CSAH 54 (20th Avenue) is A-Minor Arterial Reliever. I-35E is a Principal Arterial.
CSAH 34 (Birch Street) is a major collector road. Cypress Street and Chestnut Street are
local roads intended to serve the site from the north. Per the City’s Transportation Plan,
Birch Street is to extend west and connect with Cypress Street.
The majority of the proposed interior local roads have 60 foot wide right of way as
required. One section of right of way is 50 ft wide with a “half cul de sac”. Road width
information was not provided, but they should be a minimum 32 foot wide back to back.
The south access point into the development from CSAH 54 (20th Avenue) is
approximately 1,300 ft south of Birch Street and appears to meet access spacing
guidelines.
Staff is aware of current traffic concerns at I-35E/CR J/20th Avenue and Centerville
Road. The interchange is currently under evaluation by government agencies including
MnDOT, Anoka County and Ramsey. MnDOT has installed temporary signals at the
on/off ramps of I-35E/CR J. Anoka County is considering a transportation funding
application for improvement of the Centerville Road/CR J intersection. Ramsey County
is working on a federal transportation funding application to reconstruct bridge and ramp
terminals and CR J/Centerville Road intersection.
Staff Comments:
• The applicant shall work with the property owner of 6620 20th Avenue to obtain
necessary road right-of-way to connect Birch Street and Cypress Street.
• Local road right-of-way shall be a minimum of 60 ft wide.
• Cul de sacs shall not exceed 500 ft in length and bulbs shall meet City standards.
• Additional road right of way along CSAH 54 shall be required.
• Access shall be provided to the parcels south of the proposed development.
• A traffic study shall be required.
• Anoka County Highway Department is in receipt of the concept plan and will
provide additional comments on the development.
7
• Sidewalks and trails shall be incorporated throughout the development.
• The south connection to CSAH 54 (20th Avenue) shall occur in the first phase of
development.
• Sidewalks shall be incorporated though out the development.
• A noise study for the entire development is required. Staff anticipates a noise
wall will be required along I-35E.
Easements
Staff Comments:
• Standard drainage and utility easements at least 10 feet wide shall be provided
along all lot lines.
• Drainage and utility easements shall also be dedicated over stormwater
management facilities.
• Conservation easements shall be required over wetlands and greenway corridors.
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control
The concept plan does not show stormwater management facilities.
Staff Comment:
• A stormwater management plan and erosion and sediment control plan in
accordance with Chapter 1011 shall be required.
Utilities
Public water, sanitary and storm sewer utilities will be installed within the development.
The site is located in Sanitary Sewer District 3 (Sub-district 3C). Flow is collected along
East Cedar Street and conveyed east to MCES Meter M220.
Outlot A, NorthPointe 5th Addition is located in Utility Staging Area 1A (2018-2025).
Two of the 3 Burque parcels are in Utility Staging Area 1B (2025-2030). The 3rd Burque
parcel is in Utility Staging Area 3 (Post 2040).
Municipal water and sanitary sewer utilities to serve the Burque development exist along
Cypress Street and Chestnut Street in NorthPointe.
Staff Comments:
• Per the City Engineer, sanitary sewer to serve this development shall come from
Cypress Street. The sewer line in Chestnut Street does not have enough depth to
serve the proposed development.
• A comprehensive plan amendment to move from Utility Staging Area 3 to 1A is
required.
8
Parks, Greenways and Trail Plan
Per the draft 2040 Parks, Greenways and Trails Plan, this development is within the
NorthPointe Park service area. No future land dedication or park development is
required. A greenway corridor exists along the wetland and ditch. A proposed trail is
shown on the plan extending from the existing trail on Chestnut Street to Birch Street. A
proposed on-street bike route is shown along CSAH 54 (20th Avenue).
The City will require cash in lieu of land dedication. Any required trail construction
costs will be credited from the total payment in lieu.
Staff Comment:
• Additional trails along the wetland corridor shall be evaluated.
Tree Preservation and Landscaping
A Tree Preservation Plan and Landscape Plan in compliance with Section 1007.043 (17),
Required Screening, Landscaping and Buffer Yards shall be submitted.
Staff Comment:
• Additional landscaping may be required as a condition of the PUD.
Environmental Review Record
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is not warranted. The threshold
computation of unattached units (102) and attached units (50) is less than one.
The majority of the site is outside the I-35E AUAR Corridor. Outlot A in NorthPointe is
within the AUAR and was evaluated as part of that development.
Wetlands
The PUD concept plan indicates 34.61 acres of wetlands and buffers on site. The buffers
are shown as 20 ft wide. Both RCWD and VLAWMO are the local governing units
(LGU) for administering the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). NorthPointe 5th
Addition Outlot A is in RCWD. The balance of the site is in VLAWMO.
Staff Comments:
• A wetland delineation report and VLAWMO and RCWD approval shall be
required with a PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat submittal.
• Wetland buffers consistent with RCWD regulations (50 ft wide average,
monument signs etc.) may be required as part of the PUD.
• Wetland restoration may be required as part of the PUD.
9
Floodplain
The FEMA Floodplain Map indicates Zone A flood plain on the subject property.
Staff Comments:
• A Base Flood Elevation is required to be determined, using detailed methods
acceptable by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
• A FEMA CLOMR and LOMR are required for this site.
• The CLOMR shall be submitted with a PUD Development Stage Plan application.
Shoreland District
The subject property is not located within the Shoreland Management Overlay District.
Anoka County Highway Department Comments
Anoka County Highway Department reviewed the proposal on September 2, 2020. They
note an additional 27 feet of right-of-way and turn lanes are required along CSAH 54.
Traffic noise along CSAH 54 and I35E should also be assessed.
Public Safety Comments
The Police Division notes that traffic impacts along 20th Avenue be addressed if the
project were to move forward.
Environmental Board Comments
The Environmental Board reviewed the PUD Concept Plan on August 26, 2020. General
comments included the need for wetland restoration, buffers, stormwater management
and noise study.
Planning & Zoning Board Comments
The Planning & Zoning Board reviewed the PUD Concept Plan on September 9, 2020.
Overall comments from the Board were not supportive of the project. Comments
included:
• Not the intent of NorthPointe to transfer density from Outlot A to other property
• Trying to “squeeze” in too much development
• Utility staging amendments not supported
• ½ cul de sac not supported
• 40 ft wide lots too small
• Needs public benefit
• Needs Cypress Street connection
10
PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat
The City’s review and comments on the concept plan’s relation to the Comprehensive
Plan and development regulations does not grant any rights to the applicant to develop
the property as depicted by the concept plan.
A land use application for PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat shall be
required.
Requested Council Direction
The Council is asked to provide comment and feedback to the applicant regarding the
proposed PUD Concept Plan. No formal action is required.
Attachments
1. Site Location and Aerial Map
2. WSB City Engineer Memo dated September 2, 2020
3. Environmental Coordinator Memo dated August 26, 2020
4. PUD Concept and Context Plans
5. House Photos
0 600 1,200300
Feet
IJ84
§¨¦I-35E
OOTTTTEERRLLAAKKEERRDDLANGER CIRLANGER CIRIVERSON CTIVERSON CT
LLAANNGGEERRLLNN2211SSTTAAVVEESSE L L E N C TELLEN C T
H
A
R
T
F
O
R
D CIR
H
A
R
T
F
O
R
D CIR
RREE
DD
OOAA
KK
LL
NN
LLAACCAASSSSEEDDRRLACASSE CIRLACASSE CIRALBERT CTALBERT CTFF LL OO RR AA CC TTTELE LNTELE LNRROOSSEEWW OOOODD SSTT
RR OO SS EE WW OO OODDSSTT
TELE DRTELE DR
Site Location & Aerial MapBurque Property µ
NP 5th, OL A
CSAH 54 (20th Avenue)Burque Par cels (3)
Memorandum
To: Katie Larsen, City Planner, City of Lino Lakes
From: Diane Hankee, City Engineer, City of Lino Lakes
Date: September 2, 2020
Re: Burque Concept Plan
WSB has reviewed the Burque Property Concept Plan for a 152 unit PUD prepared by Sambatek and
submitted on August 8, 2020.
Engineering
• Erosion Control & Grading
The proposed Burque Property project would require mass site grading, appurtenant erosion control and
SWPPP.
• Stormwater Management
The Burque owned area of the site, 58.24 acres, overland flows to onsite private ditches that then flow through
a culvert under 20th Ave and eventually outlets to Lake Amelia within VLAWMO. The Emmerich (Outlot A
Northpointe 5th Addition) owned parcel, 4.48 areas, drains through the Northpointe Development which outlets
through a culvert under I 35E to JD3 within RCWD. There is a culvert under I 35E at the Burque Property that
brings water from the east side of I 35E to the site.
The concept plan does not identify proposed surfacewater management. The applicant will be required to meet
the City of Lino Lakes and RCWD rules for surfacewater management. We anticipate a reduction in the amount
of proposed lots to accommodate drainage. This could lead to a change in the proposed densities.
• Water Supply
There is an existing 16-inch diameter trunk watermain within Cypress St that will need to be looped to the
existing 16-inch diameter trunk watermain at Birch St. A 12-inch diameter watermain will need to be
extended south through the property or along 20th Avenue. It should then loop back to the existing 8-inch
diameter watermain within Chestnut St.
• Sanitary Sewer
There is existing 8-inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) sanitary sewer within Cypress St that will need to be
extended south to serve the south portion site. The sanitary sewer at Chestnut St is not deep enough to
serve the south portion site.
We recommend that the City consider project phasing such that the utilities are extended to the south with
the first phase.
• Transportation
The Burque property is adjacent to I-35E which is a Principal Arterial, 20th Avenue (CSAH 54) which is A-Minor
Arterial Reliever, Birch Street (CSAH 34) is a Major Collector road, Cypress Street and Chestnut Street are local
roads. Cypress Street is planned to be connected to Birch Street as outlined in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
A traffic study will be required for the site. Based on ITE Traffic Generation rates, the proposed development is
anticipated to generate a total of 1,148 daily trips, 86 AM peak hour trips and 114 PM peak hour trips.
Ms. Katie Larsen
09/02/2020
Page 2
Burque Concept Plan Engineering Review
Sidewalks and trails will need to be extended through the site.
1. Staff informed the applicant that there will be no additional traffic allowed on Red Oak. The
Northpointe Traffic Study completed in 2013 included anticipated traffic from a proposed senior
apartment complex on outlot C. Based on ITE rates at the time, the senior apartments would
generate 292 daily trips, 17 AM peak hour trips and 21 PM peak hour trips, compared to the
proposed site that would generate 185 daily trips, 10 AM peak hour trips and 13 PM peak hour trips.
The Traffic Study should address this change. The traffic study shall include the intersections of Red
Oak and 20th Avenue, 21st Avenue and Cedar Street, Birch Street and 20th Avenue and 20th Avenue
at the proposed site intersection. The analysis should address the intersection geometrics (i.e. turn
lanes) and traffic control needed to accommodate the proposed site development.
2. The Northpointe Traffic Study should be reviewed to determine if all improvements recommended
have been completed or still required.
3. The applicant will need to receive approval from Anoka County for the site access to 20th Avenue.
The proposed access is approximately 1,300 feet south of Birch Street. It is anticipated that they will
require left and right turn lanes on 20th Avenue.
4. The City will review the access location for conformance with our Comprehensive Plan and future
development / access to the west of 20th Avenue.
5. Right of way shall be provided at the impacted intersections to accommodate any required or future
improvements. In addition, right of way shall be provided east of the Birch Street for the future
connection to the existing Northpointe development.
6. A noise study will be required, and noise attenuation should be accounted for in plat layout. Currently
there is no space provided for noise attenuation and we anticipate this will impact to the proposed
plat layout/ density.
• Wetlands
The site includes 35 acres of wetland and buffer. An approved wetland delineation will be required. The applicant
will need to work with both RCWD and VLAMWO for Wetland Conservation Act regulations.
• Landscaping
The landscaping will be reviewed with a future submittal.
• Floodplain
The site includes 60-70% Zone A Floodplain. A Base Flood Elevation will need to be determined and approved
by FEMA. A LOMR will be required and floodplain mitigation will be required as applicable.
• Drainage and Utility Easements
Drainage and Utility easements, through 6620 20th Avenue, will be required to extend municipal utilities from
Cypress Street to the proposed development. The proposed public road serving the portion of the site near
Birch Street will require Right of Way from the parcel located at 6620 20th Avenue.
Right of way along 20th Ave will need to be dedicated along with the proposed internal local roadways.
Conservation easements will be required over wetlands. Standard side yard drainage and utility easements
and easements over public utilities will be required.
• Development Agreement
Will be required with Final Platting process.
• Grading Agreement
A Grading Agreement is not applicable at this time.
• Stormwater Maintenance Agreement
A Stormwater Maintenance Agreement will be required. Public facilities will be covered by the City’s
Programmatic Maintenance Agreement.
Ms. Katie Larsen
09/02/2020
Page 3
Burque Concept Plan Engineering Review
• Permits Required
1. NPDES General Construction Permit
2. City of Lino Lakes Zoning Permit for Construction
3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
4. Minnesota Department of Health
5. Rice Creek Watershed Permit
6. Anoka County Right-of-Way Permit
7. USACE for Wetland Fill / Mitigation
8. FEMA LOMR
If you or the applicant has any questions regarding these comments, please contact Diane Hankee at (651)
982-2430 or dhankee@linolakes.us. You may also contact Kelsey Gelhar at (612) 709-4897 or
kgelhar@wsbeng.com.
Page 1
Memo
To: Katie Larsen
From: Andy Nelson
Date: August 26th, 2020
Re: Environmental Board and Environmental Coordinator comments for
Burque Property PUD Concept Plan
The following recommendations were made by the Lino Lakes Environmental
Board and Environmental Coordinator on Wednesday, August 26th, 2020
regarding the Burque Property:
1. Greenway corridor should be established through the site.
2. Consider restoring wetland hydrology and vegetation on the site.
3. Clarify proposed wetland buffer widths and total buffer area.
4. Wetland buffers should have a minimum width of 25 feet and be 50 feet wide on
average. Flexibility on wetland buffer widths could be allowable provided
restoration of wetlands to higher quality was performed.
5. If any wetland impacts are proposed with this project, a survey for rare, unique, and
significant resources should be performed.
6. Allowing for narrower streets to minimize both wetland impacts and impervious
surface area could be considered.
7. Storm water pond(s) should be located in close proximity to wetland areas.
8. Storm water pond design should take into account the site’s location in a highly
vulnerable area of the Drinking Water Supply Management Area. This may limit
infiltration possibilities on the site.
9. Recommend applicant performs a noise study for the site.
Environmental
IN
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
N
O
.
3
5
E
20TH AVENUE
COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO. 54 BIRCH STREET(C.S.A.H. NO. 34)CHESTNUTSTREETOUTLOT A20' WETLAND SETBACKFLOODPLAIN DELINEATION20' WETLAND SETBACK20' WETLAND SETBACKFLOODPLAIN DELINEATION50 UNIT SENIORHOUSING BUILDING40' MINIMUM WIDTH LOTS60'60'60'50'60' MINIMUM WIDTH LOTS60' MINIMUM WIDTH LOTS
IN
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
N
O
.
3
5
E
20TH AVENUE
COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO. 54 BIRCH STREET(C.S.A.H. NO. 34)CHESTNUTSTREETOUTLOT A
Burque PropertyPUD Concept Plan
Work Session
October 5, 2020
2
•4 parcels totaling approximately 63 gross acres
•OL A, NP 5th and 3 Burque parcels
CSAH 34 (Birch St)
3
Site Conditions
Wetlands =
Green hatch
•34.61 acres
•20ft wide
buffers
shown
•Ave 50ft wide
required
•Monument
signs
Floodplain =
Orange
•Zone A
•BFE TBD
•Ditch
4Single Family Lots (60 ft lot width) =91 units
Single Family Lots (40 ft lot width) =11 units
Senior Housing Building =50 units
TOTAL =152 units
Site Plan
Lots•40 ft wide lots
•5 ft side yard setbacks
•2 car garages
•2 story, split entry walkouts and villas
•60 ft wide lots
•5 ft side yard setbacks
•3 car garages
•2 story, split entry walkouts
•Proposed front and rear yard setback and garage size
information was not provided.5
Outlot A, NorthPointe 5th•Per Resolution No. 14-21 approving the NorthPointe PUD
Development Stage Plan/Preliminary,
•“…Outlot C shall be developed in a future phase as an age-
restricted (55+ years of age) multiple family dwelling
consistent with the regulations of the R-4, High Density
Residential District with underground parking for 50% of the
required stalls and at a density of 20 to 25 dwelling units per
acre”
•Outlot C is now platted as Outlot A, NP 5th Addition
•Proposed 88 unit senior housing complex 6
7
1
2 3
4
Land Use &
Density
#1. OL A, NP 5th
•Medium
Density
•20-25 upa
#2 & 3. Burque
Parcels
•Low
Density
•1.6-3 upa
#4. Burque Parcel
•Urban
Reserve
8
NP 5th Outlot A Burque Property Total
Gross Area (acres)4.50 59.41 63.91
Wetlands & Water Bodies -0.73 -33.88 -34.61
Public Parks & Open Space
Arterial ROW
Other (Undevelopable)
Net Area (acres)3.77 25.53 29.30
Required Density Range PUD Resolution Low Density Total
Low High Low High Low High
Units per Net Acre 20 25 1.6 3
# Housing Units 75 94 41 77 116 171
Gross Density (units/acre)1.82 2.67
Net Density (units/acre)3.97 5.83
•Net Acreage = 29.30 acres
•Required Density Range = 3.97 to 5.83 upa
•Equates to 116 to 171 housing units
•Proposal is 152 housing units is within range
•Additional wetland buffer and arterial right of way will affect net density
Transfer Density from OL A, NP 5th to the Burque parcels
Zoning•OL A, NP 5th Addition
•Currently zoned PUD
•Burque Parcels
•Zoned R, Rural
•Would need to be rezoned to PUD
•Allow for 40 ft wide lots and 50 ft ROW
•Applicant would need to provide additional public benefit in
order to be considered for PUD zoning.
•Examples could be wetland restoration, additional wetland
buffers, higher architectural & building standards etc.9
10
Lot Comparison R-2 vs. Burque Property
Standard R-2 Requirements Proposed Burque Property
Min. Lot Size 7,500 sf 4,400 sf (40’ wide lots)
6,600 sf (60’ wide lots)
Min. Lot Width 60 ft 40 ft (11 lots)
60 ft (91 lots)
Min. Lot Depth 125 ft
135 ft (double frontage)110 ft
Building Setback (feet)
-From Local Streets 25 ft TBD
-From Collector or Arterial Streets 40 ft TBD
-Rear
--Principal 25 ft TBD
-Accessory 5 ft 5 ft
-Side
--Principal 10 ft 5 ft
--Accessory 5 ft 5 ft
Buffer Adjacent to Collector 15 foot Shall be provided
Impervious Surface 40%Verified with Building Permits
Zoning
Staff Comments•Several lots include the wetland, wetland buffer and/or
floodplain.
•Lots shall not include either of these.
•Lot widths shall be measured at the setback line.
•Lots abutting CSAH 54 and I-35E shall have greater depth.
•Staff would not recommend side yard setbacks less than 7.5 ft
for both principal and accessory structures.
11
Building Design Standards•More information is needed for both single family homes and
senior building
•Single family homes do not appear to meet the minimum R-2
standards
•Protruding garages and front porch widths
•Senior Building and Single Family Homes shall exceed
minimum city requirements
12
13
14
15
16
17
Subdivision Ordinance
•40 ft wide lot not feasible
•Need for additional CSAH 54 ROW
•Lot depth, full cul de sac, buffers
•102 SF lots
•1 senior housing lot
•Multiple Outlots
•Wetlands, buffers, SW ponds etc.
18
Streets
•CSAH 54 (20th Ave) = A-Minor Arterial
•CSAH 34 (Birch St) = Major Collector
•Cypress St and Chestnut St = Local Roads
Cypress Street
•Birch St to connect to Cypress St
•Work with 6620 20th Ave
•South access = 1,300 ft south of Birch
•Adequate spacing
Staff Comments•Local road right-of-way shall be a minimum of 60 ft wide.
•32 ft wide paved roads
•Cul de sacs shall not exceed 500 ft in length and bulbs shall
meet City standards.
•Additional road right of way along CSAH 54 shall be required.
•Access shall be provided to the parcels south of the proposed
development.
•A traffic study shall be required.
19
Staff Comments
•Sidewalks and trails shall be incorporated throughout the
development.
•South connection to CSAH 54 (20th Avenue) shall occur in the
1st phase of development.
•A noise study for the entire development is required.
•Staff anticipates a noise wall will be required along I-35E.
20
Stormwater Management•A stormwater management plan and erosion and sediment
control plan in accordance with Chapter 1011 shall be
required.
21
Utilities•Flow is collected along East Cedar Street and conveyed east to
MCES Meter M220.
•Outlot A, NP 5th Addition = Utility Staging Area 1A (2018-
2025).
•2 of the 3 Burque parcels = Utility Staging Area 1B (2025-
2030).
•3rd Burque parcel = Utility Staging Area 3 (Post 2040).
22
Utilities•Sanitary sewer to serve this development shall come from
Cypress Street.
•6620 20th Avenue cooperation/easement
•Sewer line in Chestnut Street does not have enough depth to
serve the proposed development.
23
24
Parks & Trails
•NorthPointe Park
service area (#15)
•Cash in lieu of land
dedication
•Trail system (pink)
•Existing trail
from
NorthPointe
Park to Birch St
Future Land Use Applications•Comprehensive Plan Amendment
•Land Use
•Re -guide 1 parcel from Urban Reserve to Low Density Residential
•Utility Staging Area
•Move 1 parcel from Stage 3 (Post 2040) to Stage 1A (2018-2025)
•Rezone property from R, Rural to PUD, Planned Unit
Development
•PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat
•PUD Final Plan/Final Plat
25
Advisory Comments•Environmental Board reviewed on August 26, 2020.
•General comments included the need for wetland restoration,
buffers, stormwater management and noise study.
•Police Department
•20th Avenue improvements for increased traffic
•Anoka County Highway Department
•Additional 27 ft along CSAH 54 required
•NB and SB CSAH 54 left and right turn lanes required at Birch St
•NB CSAH 54 right turn and SB CSAH 54 bypass lane at south
access 26
Planning & Zoning Board•September 9, 2020
•Overall comments not supportive
•Not the intent of NorthPointe to transfer density from Outlot A to
other property
•Trying to “squeeze” in too much development
•Utility staging amendments not supported
•½ cul de sac not supported
•40 ft wide lots too small
•Needs public benefit
•Needs Cypress Street connection 27
Final Comments
•The City’s review and comments on the concept plan’s relation
to the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations does
not grant any rights to the applicant to develop the property
as depicted by the concept plan.
•A land use application for PUD Development Stage
Plan/Preliminary Plat shall be required.
28
Council Direction•Council asked to provide comment and feedback to developer
regarding PUD Concept Plan
•No formal action required.
29
WS – Item 2
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 2
Date: October 5, 2020
To: City Council
From: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer
Re: NE Lino Lakes Drainage Area Improvements
Background
The surface water in the Northeast Area of Lino Lakes has a restricted ability to drain and
is considered landlocked. This condition leads to minor flooding and inhibits the ability
to complete site improvements within this area. The Northeast Drainage Area includes
nearly 1,300 acres, attached is a project location map. The area has existing field drains
from the early 20th Century that have limited ability to drain. These agricultural drains
are now at capacity and are incompatible with future development within the watershed.
In addition, the agricultural drains do not provide any water quality benefits to the
receiving waterbody, Peltier Lake.
The Northeast Area of Lino Lakes is bound by Main Street to the south, the City of Hugo
to the east, and Peltier Lake to the west, and Rehbein Street to the north. A majority of
this watershed currently drains to the southeast to Clearwater Creek via field drains.
Clearwater Creek is impaired for aquatic life and has had a history of significant bank
erosion problems.
Multiple alternatives were vetted to address the drainage needs for the area. The project
alternatives were refined with input from land owners, potential developers, neighboring
communities, the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD), the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency, US Army Corps of Engineers, and the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources. A Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan (CSMP) was required by
RCWD for watershed approval. The CSMP and the associated surface water modeling
includes regional water quality best management practices (BMPs), stormwater volume
and rate control improvements, and a new outlet to Peltier Lake. The CSMP also
includes design standards for future developments in the Northeast Area. Peltier Lake is
impaired for nutrients and the new system will improve the quality of water entering the
lake.
The proposed project includes a new stormwater conveyance system, and multi-purpose
regional stormwater management facilities. The project will be implemented in phases in
coordination with development in the area. Phase 1 includes the construction of the
outlet to Peltier Lake and phase 2 includes a crossing of the system under I-35E to extend
the conveyance system to the east side of the freeway. As part of the approved
Watermark Master Development Agreement, the City is obligated to complete phase 1
which provides an outlet for future phases of the Watermark development and eventually
the entire NE Drainage Area.
On October 22, 2018, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications
for the first phase of the NE Drainage Area Improvement Project. Plans have been
drafted and the project permits obtained.
In March of 2019, the City Council authorized acquisition of property required to
complete the project. The acquisition included two property owners, Leibel and
Salo/Olsen. The City currently has possession of the required property. The Leibel
acquisition is still in the final settlement stage and the Salo/Olsen acquisition is
continuing through the commissioner process.
The project is funded though the Surface Water Management Fund (SWMF). The
SWMF was established in 1992 to fund costs associated with administrative, planning
and trunk stormwater costs associated with the City’s Surface Water Management
System. The estimated construction project cost, including a 10% contingency, is
$1,210,000.00.
The estimated schedule for the projects:
Order Improvement, Approve Plans and Specifications
Authorize Ad for Bids October 12, 2020
City Opens Bids October 29, 2020
City Council Awards Contract November 9, 2020
Construction Begins November, 2020
Final Completion November, 2021
Requested Council Direction
None at this time. At the October 12, 2020 Council meeting, staff will be bring forward
for consideration of the Council ordering the project, approve the plans and
specifications, and authorize the ad for bid for the NE Drainage Area Improvement
Project.
Attachments
1. NE Drainage Area Improvement Project area
§¨¦35E
20th AvenueACD 55 Br 8
A C D 5 5 M a in T rkACD 72 Main Trk
ACD 72 Br 11
ACD 72 Main Trk
Elmcrest Ave NPeltier Lake DrACD 72 Br
1PeltierLake
CentervilleLake
HUGO
CENTERVILLE
LINO LAKES
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS UserCommunity
Document Path: K:\02029-790\GIS\Maps\CSMP\Fig_LocationMap.mxd Date Saved: 3/15/2018 4:02:37 PM
Legend
CSMP Boundary
CSMP Drainage Area
RCWD Watercourses
Drain Tile
Open Ditch
Stream
Abandoned Drain Tile
Lakes
Figure 1 - Project LocationNortheast Drainage Area CSMPCity of Lino Lakes
0 1,000
Feet¯1 inch = 1,000 feet
LINO LAKES
4
STUDY AREA
§¨¦35E
§¨¦35W
§¨¦694
§¨¦35
WS – Item #3
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 3
Date: October 5, 2020
To: City Council
From: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer
Re: 2020 Pavement Management and 2021 Street Improvement Projects
Background
The City’s Pavement Management Program evaluates the condition of the roadways and provides
recommended maintenance. The Program involves rating of one-fourth of the City roadway system
mileage per year, and using pavement management software to project the condition of the
remainder of the roadways. The City’s 2020 Overall Condition Index Map is enclosed.
OCI Rating Miles of Road Percent of System
Adequate 70-100 65 miles 65%
Marginal 40-69 20.3 miles 20.3%
Problem 0-39 14.6 miles 14.6%
The City’s roadway system Weighted Average OCI is 70.97. The findings reflect that majority of
the roadways in the City are in adequate condition. The high rating is partially supported by new
development construction in the recent years helping keep the average.
It should be noted that the 2018 Pavement Management Report identified the need to focus on the
Marginal roadways so that they wouldn’t fall into the more expensive Problem category. The City’s
Plan recommended the need to increase funding to 10% per year from the standard 5% to address
the marginal roadway needs. The 2021 budget includes a 7.5% increase.
This information along with traffic volumes, maintenance data, and geotechnical information is
used for the City’s Roadway Capital Improvement Planning (CIP). In addition, based on these
ratings, staff is recommending a change to our specifications and maintenance strategies. We have
increased our pavement thickness on new construction and are eliminating seal coating as an interim
improvement. The higher upfront cost to developers will be offset by eliminating the seal coating
fee. Additional detail is included in the attached Memorandum from Lee Gustafson of WSB and
Associates.
The City plans to complete two projects in 2021, a Street Reconstruction Project funded primarily
with Street Reconstruction Bonds, and the City’s annual Street Rehabilitation Project using
Pavement Management Funds. Water system maintenance will also be addressed where municipal
utilities exist. The proposed projects for 2021 are as follows:
2021 Street Reconstruction Project:
Full Depth Reclamation (approximately 2.2 miles) – Joyer Lane, Karth Road, Talle Lane, Canfield
Road, and Gaage Lane neighborhood roadways, and 4th Avenue (Main Street to Pine Street). The
estimated project cost is $2,600,000.00.
2021 Street Rehabilitation Project:
The estimated funding available for 2021, including a pavement fund balance carried forward and
next year’s proposed budget of $711,112.00, is a total of $855,000.00. The proposed improvements
include:
Full Depth Mill and Overlay / Reclamation (approximately 0.6 miles) – Forsham Lake Drive, Post
Road, and Stage Coach Trail (from cul du sac north 1,400 feet). The estimated project cost is
$795,000.00 including water system repairs.
Thin Overlay (approximately 1.6 miles) – James Street, Knoll Drive and Oak Lane. Thin overlays
are planned to address Problem roadways in need of reconstruction that the City cannot fund in the
short term. The estimated project cost is $170,000.00. This portion of the project will be bid as an
alternate to maintain project flexibility.
The estimated total project cost including contingency and overhead and proposed funding
sources are as follows:
Street
Reconstruction
Bonds
Pavement
Management
Fund
Water
Operating
Fund
Total
Project Cost
2021 Reconstruction $2,600,000 $2,600,000
2021 Rehabilitation $840,000 $125,000 $965,000
Total Estimated Cost $2,600,000 $840,000 $125,000 $3,565,000
Municipal State Aid funding may be available for the 2021 Reconstruction Project and will be
evaluated as part of the overall project funding.
Staff will also initiate a separate preventative maintenance project for roads in the Adequate
category. These will include streets in more recent developments.
WSB & Associates, the City Engineer, have submitted a proposal to complete the plans and
specifications, and provide bid documents for the 2021 Street Reconstruction Project is
$113,428.00 and for the 2021 Street Rehabilitation Project is $43,433.00. For a total not to
exceed amount of $156,861.00.
The project schedule:
Order Improvement, Authorize Plans and Specifications October 12, 2020
Approve Plans and Specifications, Authorize Ad for Bids November 23, 2020
City Opens Bids December 22, 2020
City Council Awards Contract December 28, 2020
Construction Begins April-May, 2021
Final Completion September, 2021
Requested Council Direction
Staff is requesting Council direction to place the authorization the Preparation of Plans and
Specifications for the 2021 Street Improvement Projects on the October 12, 2020 City Council
meeting agenda.
Attachments
1. 2020 Pavement Management Report
2. Capital Improvement Maps
3. Memorandum Regarding Street Standards from Lee Gustafson
4. WSB and Associates Proposal
2020 PAVEMENT
MANAGEMENT REPORT
SEPTEMBER 30, 2020
Prepared for:
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
WSB PROJECT NO. 016746-000
2020 Pavement Management Report September 30, 2020
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 1
Pavement Condition Report ....................................................................................................... 3
Existing Pavement Condition ........................................................................................................ 3
Pavement Ratings Example ...................................................................................................... 6
Appendix A ............................................................................................................................... 10
2020 PCI Map .............................................................................................................................. 10
Appendix B ............................................................................................................................... 12
2020 Segment PCI ....................................................................................................................... 12
1 Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Enclosed is a summary of pavement management work that was performed by
WSB for the City of Lino Lakes, completed in September 2020. This report gives
an overview of the road and pavement conditions in the City and can be used for
planning and budgeting for roadway construction and maintenance activities.
As requested by the City, WSB evaluated pavement conditions on 25 percent of
the roadways in the City this year. The roadways inspected and evaluated
consisted only of bituminous roadways that are maintained by the City.
Pavement ratings were completed using PAVER, which is a pavement
management software that calculates Pavement Condition Index (PCI) based on
surface distresses identified in the field. PCI is based on a 0 to 100 scale, with
100 being a road in perfect condition. Any type of road maintenance (i.e.
patching or crack sealing) done prior to inspections would be accounted for in
each PCI value.
Current ratings for roadways that were not inspected in 2020 were estimated
using the PAVER software, in which past inspection ratings were decreased
based on the default bituminous pavement deterioration curve. Recent roadway
improvement projects, which included overlay and full depth reclamation, were
updated in the current condition ratings. Private roadways (4.4 miles) and gravel
roadways (3.7 miles) were not evaluated.
The significant findings of the pavement condition in 2020 are as follows:
• There are currently 100.4 miles of bituminous roadways in Lino Lakes, of which
26 miles were inspected in 2020.
• The current weighted average PCI, in terms of length, for bituminous roads, in
Lino Lakes is 70.97.
The findings reflect that majority of the roadways in the City are in adequate
condition. The current roadway condition and the conditions over the past three
evaluations are shown in Table I.
2 Executive Summary
Table I. Bituminous roadway conditions in 2020 and over the past
three inspections in the City of Lino Lakes.
Condition PCI
Range
Percent of Roadway Network
2020
Inspection
2019
Inspection
2018
Inspection
2017
Inspection
Adequate 70.01 –
100 65.0 % 66.5 % 63.9 % 62.8 %
Marginal 40.01 –
70.00 20.3 % 19.8 % 22.2 % 22.8 %
Problem 0 – 40.00 14.6 % 13.7 % 13.9 % 14.4 %
Weighted Average
PCI 70.97 71.04 71.42 71.32
3 Pavement Condition Report
Pavement Condition Report
Existing Pavement Condition
This report shows the latest pavement conditions using PAVER, which is an
asset management software used to record and estimate the conditions of the
roadways.
In the field, PAVER calculates the PCI using the deduct values, which are based
on the distress type, distress severity, and distress quantity. Conditions of
roadways that were not inspected this year were estimated using the default
pavement performance curve (as shown in Figure I). The graph below
represents a typical bituminous pavement deterioration rate, and it may vary
depending on the type of maintenance activities performed over the period of
pavement life.
Figure I. Bituminous pavement performance curve applied to all the
bituminous roadways in the City of Lino Lakes.
Table II shows a breakdown of the pavement overall condition in the City. The
PCI values obtained were based on visual inspections and the recommended
strategies for each category shall only be used as guidelines. Additional
investigation such as pavement forensics or pavement boring would be required
prior to project selection and design.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40PCI
Years in Service (Age)
PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE CURVE
4 Pavement Condition Report
Table II. Breakdown of pavement conditions in the City of Lino Lakes.
PCI Category PCI Range Mileage Percent of
Roadway Network
Adequate 70.01 – 100.00 65 65.0
Marginal 40.01 – 70.00 20 20.3
Problem 0 – 40.00 15 14.6
Pavements that fall into the adequate category are recommended to have routine
maintenance and preventive maintenance performed. Routine maintenance
includes crack sealing, which is recommended to be conducted as soon as
cracks surface in order to reduce the infiltration of water and incompressible
materials through the cracks. Preventive maintenance includes surface
treatment such as fog sealing, slurry seal, and micro-surfacing. The lower the
PCI, the less effective a preventive maintenance activity in preserving the life of
the roadways. Each type of preventive maintenance serves its own function, and
project selection depends on the type and severity of distresses observed on the
surface of the road. Streets that fall into the lower range of the adequate
category, with PCI in low the 70s, may be prompted to perform a more robust
maintenance such as a mill and overlay in order to get a longer life and be more
cost effective. It is recommended to evaluate the road condition prior to project
selection to determine the appropriate maintenance for the roadways.
Pavement preservation is recommended to be conducted on roadways that fall
into the marginal category. Some of the pavement preservation methods are
overlay, and partial and full depth mill and overlay. Roadways that fall into the
lower range of the marginal category, with PCI in the 40s, may be monitored with
minimal or no maintenance activities since they have degraded to the point that
pavement preservation methods are no longer effective, and the roadways still
have residual life before a reconstruction is needed. Prior to any partial depth
mill and overlay or full depth bituminous removal and replacement, pavement
coring is strongly recommended to determine if the bituminous lifts are bonded
well and if the bituminous condition is sound for the construction operations. If
there are issues in the base and subgrade layers, pavement preservation
methods are not feasible, and those roadways would fall into the problem
category in which a full depth reclamation or reconstruction should be
considered.
Full depth reclamation (FDR) or reconstruction is recommended to be performed
on streets that fall into the problem category. An FDR is more favorable if there
is enough gravel underneath the bituminous layer. Thus, pavement coring would
5 Pavement Condition Report
be recommended prior to any design work to determine the appropriate design.
Reconstruction can help to address subsurface issues such as drainage or
increase in traffic capacity.
Appendix A includes map of all the pavements in the City showing their PCI
classification. The specific PCI rating for each pavement segment is included in
Appendix B.
6 Pavement Condition Report
Pavement Ratings Example
PCI Rating = 12
4th Avenue (Segment ID: 20)
Detailed Distresses:
• Alligator Cracking, Medium Severity, 66.90%
• Alligator Cracking, High Severity, 27.61%
• Edge Cracking, High Severity, 27.60%
• Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking, High Severity, 22.71%
• Patch/Utility Cut, Low Severity, 0.85%
• Patch/Utility Cut, High Severity, 40.96%
• Pothole, Low Severity, 2.33%
7 Pavement Condition Report
PCI Rating = 36
Elbe Street NE (Segment ID: 203)
Detailed Distresses:
• Alligator Cracking, Low Severity, 0.09%
• Patch/Utility Cut, Low Severity, 0.08 %
• Patch/Utility Cut, Medium Severity, 11.19%
8 Pavement Condition Report
PCI Rating = 62
79th Street W (Segment ID: 45)
Detailed Distresses:
• Alligator Cracking, Low Severity, 0.50%
• Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking, Low Severity, 4.79%
• Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking, Medium Severity, 0.52%
• Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking, High Severity, 0.79%
• Patch/Utility Cut, Low Severity, 1.87%
• Patch/Utility Cut, Medium Severity, 7.11%
9 Pavement Condition Report
PCI Rating = 91
Wood Duck Trail (Segment ID: 626)
Detailed Distresses:
• Block Cracking, Low Severity, 0.14%
• Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking, Low Severity, 0.71%
• Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking, Medium Severity, 0.14%
• Raveling, High Severity, 0.03%
10 Appendix A
Appendix A
2020 PCI Map
92
42
85
100
94
92
96
100
85
50
88
91
84
47
45
94
81
95
86
89
75
86
82
93
89
39
61
83
96
92
52
87
78
43
44
100
87
80
83
50
100
100
85
63
92
97
86
85
41
83
81
54
81
39
43
95
98
58
75
38
95
82
90
52
94
87
94
69
8683
88
88
71
97
58
94
88
68
55
82
44
92
21
67
84
96
73
66
21
81
31 86
52
100
84
100
95
100
96
92
83
100
79
92
90
64
76
76
86
89
79
74
95
78
87
85
89
49
87
63
70
94
83
86
97
85
53
92
60
95
75
90
61
64
83
50
67
59
84
92
90
75
81
89
92
55
65
93
96
95
52
90
78
95
86
85
93
46
57
95
86
85
100
66
87
95
93
83
90
68
93
85
91
100
82
52
100
87
78
89
84
68
44
93
93
70
82
98
73
96
89
56
79
93
94
46
95 85
79
71
33
63
96
95
43
51
73
58
92
88
56
96
91
95
61
89
49
91
50
83
69
49
84
92
68
100
54
85
85
61
90
73
83
73
100
82
78
82
62
100
100
93
89
70
92
82
89
82
80
95
51
86
55
83
85
37
85
78
85
85
96
66
7258
87
83
81
85
90
95
55
85
72
61
62
92
85
59
100
95
45
86
86
89
77
89
71
14
92
66
49
88
53
98
50
54
96
49
100
90
40
71
73
71
95
83
61
74
95
93
84
48
74
80
53
51
89
100
37
89
88
43
78
73
92
68
95
81
83
92
92
95
56
93
7
80
92
82
89
100
75
82
79
90 69
44
66
55
68
88
87
85
81
96
73
65
89
8331
71
92
88
100
89
83
95
94
95
96
89
53
63
61
68
88
92
85
87
45
48
54
95
89
53
82
70
85
92
95
42
92
50
48
46
43
92
96
89
86
84
84
93
58
96
87
90
100
79
51
78
100
90
45
95
10
93
44
77
73
92
47
37
96
23
92
9
93
60
64
16
54
25
78
96
88
92
78
54
51
88
51
80
90
84
77
89
76
67
84
95 39
95
45
100
91
95
20
84
70
76
88
88
60
96
77
48
92
54
96
66
68
76
87
8
93
80
51
48
91
75
88
69
89
65
56
96
55
55
84
95
74
49
46
48
88
66
40
49
62
91
88
77
70
91
48
70
84
82
72
57
40
90
86
96
87
84
97
64
89
87
90
34
42
100
42
57
90
31
71
100
95
90
50
86
90
96
88
28
100
65
74
87
41
100
87
91
88
91
93
88
94
87
81
100
83
54
55
49
93
93
75
51
60
55
78
80
95
91
7
87
69
91
32
42
85
100
90
81
89
85
82
100
100
54
81
47
86
90
81
83
95
78
88
62
77
95
62
86
82
50
87
89
80
95
29
81
85
79
79
94
87
80
97
69
48
11
95
88
87
96
95
88
9393
94
12
6
93
37
34
96
92
89
48
88
36
89
70
95
85
91
10
97
71
88
100
72
89
79
64
88
96
57
91
48
73
84
22
49
97
69
57
82
94
88
84
100
55
84
75
85
53
96
59
32
23
0
56
90
54
100
68
69
96
84
11
95
91
86
88
15
11
100
54
89
88
40
77
88
88
88
85
62
100
64
0
84
14
37
53
91
94
36
100
88
9
82
100
76
39
99
30
54
62
85
42
95
41
48
54
83 93
8695
1
60
89
81
66
11
30
60
91
74
88
58
86
70
89
91
92
91
88
94
9
13
96
93
17
93
72
85
81
88
29
2
84
91
6
8986
61
44
92
83
83
0
4
51
18
100
100
90
63
96
21
100
9
80
81
8
7
92
81
17
21
92
96
96
89
12
91
16
87
78
87
14
88 Otter Lake
Amelia LakeCedar Lake
Wilkinson Lake
Poplar Lake
Baldwin Lake
Rice Lake
Reshanau Lake Wards Lake
Centerville Lake
Marshan Lake
George WatchLake
Peltier Lake
Rondeau Lake
Rice CreekMarsh
Bald EagleLake
GwWX %&d(%&c(
GÀWX
GnWX
GwWX
GwWX
GwWX
G»WX
G¦WX
G¦WX
GuWX
GuWX
G¤WX %&c(
%&c(
%&c(
GnWX
GnWX
GÀWX
%&d(
%&d(
G»WX
GnWX
CentennialPark
TamarackPark
Inner Park
CityHallPark
WenzelFarms Park
CountryLakes Park
BirchPark
ShenandoahPark
LamottePark
BirchwoodAcres Park
SunsetOaks Park
ClearwaterCreek Park
MarshanPark
PheasantHillsPark
Woods OfBaldwinLake Park
BrandywoodPark
ArenaAcres
HighlandMeadowsPark
SunrisePark
Behm'sPark
Lino Park
Laurie LamotteMemorial Park
Tracie McbrideMemorial Park
AcornCreekPark
Eagle Park
HiddenSpring Park
EastsidePark Trailside Park
CornerstonePark
RoyalMeadowsPark
IndianHillsPark
Baldwin Park
NorthpointeParkLake Dr NER
ose
m
ary
W
ay N
WRoyalOaksDr
M o u n d T r l
20th Ave20th Ave20th AveBucher A v e
Market Pl Dr
P
ointcr
o
s
s
D
r Lamotte DrOtter
Lake
Rd Otter Lake RdOtter Lake RdOtter Lake RdFrenchman Rd
124th Ln NE
Woods Edge Bl
vdJodrell St NEVillageDrForestLn
80th StRondeauLakeRdW
Stella Cir
Ro
y
a
l
Oa
k
s
D
r Killdeer DrDeer Pass T r l
India
n
Hi
l
lsLnSunset Ave NEButternut St GardenWayNMeadowview DrElaine Ave
Oak Ln
Heritage PkwyN
EmpressD rN
C y p r e ss St21st AveBirch CtJardinAveNHighlandDrP
i
n
t
o
LnCe
nt
er
vill
e RdCenterville RdCenterville RdOakHollowLnA s p enLnE m p ress Way N
Keith RdB a l s a m W a y
Baldwin CirBehmLn
Grotto St NBaldwin Lake RdCenterville RdUlmer Dr
LacasseDrElbe StFox Cir
127th Ln NE
1 5 8 t h S t N
EmpressAveNOak Leaf Ln
County Rd J Mill RdIvyRidgeLnBucher Ave Vaughan CtWoodduck TrlJane AveCounty Rd J E County Rd J
O tterR id g e C ir 24th Ave24th Ave24th Ave24th AveC o u n t r y L a k e s D r ValjeanBlv d N
BeaverPondWay150thStN
Scenic PlDiane StOld Birch StEagleCt
Robin son Dr
SPineDr Ellen Ct
Heritage St
Partridge Pl W Freeway Dr NEGrouse Hollow
24th Ave21st Ave101st Ln NE Wayne CtPineHollo w D r
Hobe Ct NRed Oak Ln
Cripple Cree k P a s s Mound Ct
Linda LnBlackDuck
Dr
C
o
s
ette
W
a
y N
Deerwood LnPheasantLnElmcrestAveNElmcrest Ave NGoldenrod Cir Portage WayW i d g e o n C i r
Keit
hDrPony Ct
Timberwo l f T rlLake DrLake DrLake DrLake DrLake DrLake DrArbreLnNBaldwinDrUnity AveArlo Ln
FableHillPkwy
NOpalStNETourville CirTotemTrlS t a ll ion L n
Arabian CirLaurene AveApollo DrApollo DrClearwater DrV
ictor
Path
Ridge RdPheasantHills
D
r GrangeviewO a k v ie w C tR
e
d
F
o
xRdStageCoachTrlDupre Rd
Daniel CtCounty Pkwy HPackard St NEFoxCove StellaLnTown Cente r P k w y
Hodgson Rd
Hodgson RdHodgson RdSunrise DrHighvie
w
PlStutz Ct NESumac CtWolfCirBald Eagle Blvd WBaldEagleBl
vdWScenic CtS DrQuarter Horse CtGrantaire Ln NGrayHeronDrStutz St NEChestnutSt
S R dFernwood StPa r t ridgePl Oak CirQuito St NELoneso m e P in e T r l
C
h
ero
k
e
e
Trl PetersonTrlHighland CtE R d
Ethan A
ve N
Duen WayIvy CtCoyote CtV oyager C t1 30thLnNEMeadow CtWhitetail Trl12th AveSaint Albans St N81st St
Goiffon RdPeregrine Cir
70th St
Brian
Ct
Old Mill R
d
Woodcrest DrSherwood RdSorel St
Meadow Ave
159th St N
TerraCt
Mustang Ct
Snow Owl LnN Rd
Park Ct
Ki
t
kerry Ct
NE
v
e
r
g
re
e
n L
n
Kent StMackubin StCassiopeia CtVicky Ln
Appaloosa Ct
IvyRidgeCtN Rd NE
StoneybrookDrPrairie Dr 72 1/2 StOak CtM eadow Ln Eminence Ave N74t h St
Progress RdGa teway Cir
Coyote TrlE t h a n TrlNOt
t
er
Vi
ew Ci
rPine DrOjibway PathSnow Owl Cir
RedMapleLn1 0 9 th A v e N E
Quito St NEChannel Dr
Elm St ClearRidgeE Shadow Lake Ct62nd St Black Duck Cir107th Ave NE
Clearwater Creek Ct
108th Ave NE
Cosette
L
n
NSunset AveHenry Ln
Sunset Ave NEPio n eerLnOpalStNE79th St
Redwood AveRobinOakCtP
a
rtri
d
g
e
Ct
73rd StLois LnJames St
MarilynDr
Chippew a T r l
Karth Rd
Fox Run
Black Berry CtSavanna Ct SheilaAveApoll
o Ct
Schlavin C tHeatherCt 77th St
F
awnLn20th Ave20th Ave20th AveBlueHeronDrMercantile Dr NRavens Ct Post
RdGlen v ie w Ave 4th Ave4th Ave4th AveBloom C tPheasant DrLinda Ct
Houle C ir
KingfisherCtOjibwa y Dr
Pheasant RunHobeCtWDanubeStOspreyCtEvergreenTrl
Steven Ln
Robin Ln N
RollingHillsDrSG lenTrl MallardWayBarbara Ln
Cardinal Dr
E
n
f
i
el
dAveNBeaver
CirLantern L n
Beaver Trl
F a b l e R d C t N
Arrowhead Dr
Merganse
rCtOak RdA rth u r C
t
David CtWhite Birch CtPelican Pl
EGoldenLakeRdDeerPassDr
Cir Dr
OakwoodLnOakwood DrEmpress Ave NNancyCtPa l m S t
Ware RdLanternCirGreenwood Ln
H u n ters T rlBrian DrWoodc h uckCir
Prairie Vi e w P l
FoxtailDrPine St Pine St Pine St
Pine St NE Pine St NE Pine St NE
125th Ave NE
OtterViewTrlIverson Ct
Ce n t u r y T r l
Ma rvy St
Wo o d c h u ck C tShermanLakeRdFairmont Dr Twin Lakes AveRice Lake CtTeal CtVictorHugoBlvdNGl enview Dr
SiouxLnOx
f
o
r
d
St
NPeltier Lake DrRiverBirchPlHollowLnJon AveHumber St NECherry Ln
M e adowCirConnie Ln
HokahDr2ndA
v
e
Hardwood Ave
Forsham Lake Dr
135th Ave NE
Hudson T r lSunset Ave NEOld Mill Ct
WildTurkeyTrlP a lo m inoLn
LangerLnHolly DrHolly DrJeanne DrPheasantRunS127th Cir NE
Patti DrW
hit
eOwlDrSiouxLooko u t Country LnClearwaterCreekDr
Scenic Dr
65th S tBlackbirdLn
Emil Ave
Hayfield Rd
M
yrtleLn
Ott er Ridge Rd
64th StRusticLnNational St NEC arl St AndallStMustangLn
CottonwoodCtE
dge Dr
F
a
b
l
e
Hill
Wa
y
NUnnamedShepherdCtMain St Main St Main St
Main St
Main StMain St
Main St Main St
F o x tailCtGaage LnLamotteCirChurchill St NSargentCtNLavalleDr
Fai rview St
Kelly S t
Doris Ave
R e i l i n g R d
Li la c St
Lilac St
Apple LnSan
d
h
ill
Dr
White P i ne Rd
County Rd J E
72nd St
106th Ln NE
106th Ave NE
Green Briar Dr
Pleasant View Ln
Birchwood StLois Ln
Plum Ln Center StEGoldenLakeLnQ
uito St N
E
Hillcrest Ln
Linda Ave
Inner Dr
Fox RdHunters Ridge
1 0 8 th L n N E
Maple St
Orange St
81st St
KnollDrAqua CirRevoir St
Quebec St
Olive St
W i l l o w P o n d Trl Aenon PlCounty Rd J E County Rd J E Talle LnEnid TrlNancyDrCarlson StAlameda StAppaloosaLn104th Ave NE
104th Ln NE
County Rd J W County Rd J W
County Rd J W DiamondLnHunter s R id g eLnAsh St
County Rd J
Ash St Ash St Ash St Ash St
Ash St4th AveShad AvePhelps Rd
Lakeview DrWhippoorwillLn105th Ln NE Lyons St NELindenLnNottingham LnApollo St NEOtter Lak e Dr
Thom as St ERondeauLakeDr
NECounty P kwy G
W o o d lan d D rWo
o
drid
g
e L
n
Commerce DrZodiac St NERosewoodStCarole DrMeadow View TrlW Rondeau Lake Dr NESunset AveSunset AveRondeau Lake Rd EAsh StPel
ti
e
r
Cir
W Shadow Lake DrW Shadow Lake Dr1 2 9 th S t N
115th AveNE
AquaLn
180th St N
Leonard Ave81st St
Rice Lake Dr103rd Ln NE
165th St N
170th St N
Turtle Lake RdRice Lake LnL a k e landCir114th Ave NE
121st Ave NE
Holly Ct Joyer LnHawthorn Rd
Cedar St
77th St
Rehbein St
Hobe LnE a gleTrl
EShadowLakeDrPeltier LakeDr
CountyPkwyECounty Pkwy E
Elmcrest Ave NElmcrest Ave NElmcrest Ave NElmcrest Ave NIndian Hills Dr
Holly Dr
Birch St BirchStBirch St Birch St Birch St Document Path: K:\016746-000\GIS\Maps\2020PCI_CategoryWithLabels.mxdÜ 0 1,000
Feet
Pavement Condition Index (PCI)
70.01 - 100.00
40.01 - 70.00
0.00 - 40.00
Recommended Maintenance Activity
Preventative Maintenance
Preservation
Reconstruction
Category
Adequate
Marginal
Problem
Inspection Years
2018
2017
2020
2019
12 Appendix B
Appendix B
2020 Segment PCI
Note: The recommended maintenance activity was solely based on the visual
inspection. Additional investigation such as pavement forensic or pavement
boring is recommended prior to project selection.
13 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Cedar Street E 1251 1,302 32 41,664 100 Preventive Maintenance
Cedar Street E 135 728 22 16,012 100 Preventive Maintenance
Cedar Street E 136 646 28 18,095 100 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue South 1389 2,216 56 124,110 100 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue 1390 740 40 29,600 100 Preventive Maintenance
Watermark Way 1391 894 40 35,744 100 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue 1392 543 40 21,702 100 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue 1393 744 40 29,758 100 Preventive Maintenance
Crane Drive 1394 230 40 9,200 100 Preventive Maintenance
Balsam Way 1395 160 40 6,386 100 Preventive Maintenance
Balsam Way 1396 1,148 40 45,905 100 Preventive Maintenance
Crane Drive 1397 301 40 12,058 100 Preventive Maintenance
Diamond Lane 1398 1,264 40 50,553 100 Preventive Maintenance
Forest Lane 1399 81 40 3,226 100 Preventive Maintenance
Emily Circle 1400 673 40 26,906 100 Preventive Maintenance
Crane Drive 1401 103 40 4,103 100 Preventive Maintenance
Watermark Way 1402 166 40 6,640 100 Preventive Maintenance
Harriet Lane 1403 414 40 16,542 100 Preventive Maintenance
Harriet Lane 1404 342 40 13,663 100 Preventive Maintenance
Geneva Court 1405 337 40 13,494 100 Preventive Maintenance
Crane Drive 1406 366 40 14,637 100 Preventive Maintenance
Crane Drive 1407 341 40 13,636 100 Preventive Maintenance
Forest Lane 1408 385 40 15,414 100 Preventive Maintenance
Eden Circle 1409 311 40 12,447 100 Preventive Maintenance
Forest Lane 1410 312 40 12,474 100 Preventive Maintenance
Deerwood Lane 183 223 28 6,241 100 Preventive Maintenance
Deerwood Lane 184 230 28 6,444 100 Preventive Maintenance
Deerwood Lane 186 442 28 12,373 100 Preventive Maintenance
Deerwood Lane 187 488 28 13,669 100 Preventive Maintenance
Deerwood Lane 188 485 28 13,573 100 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Road 225 164 28 4,592 100 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Road 228 634 28 17,759 100 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Road 229 1,056 28 29,581 100 Preventive Maintenance
14 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Fox Road 231 341 28 9,552 100 Preventive Maintenance
Gordon Avenue N 249 453 30 13,588 100 Preventive Maintenance
Gordon Avenue N 250 224 30 6,732 100 Preventive Maintenance
77th Street E 37 2,087 22 45,913 100 Preventive Maintenance
77th Street E 38 624 22 13,724 100 Preventive Maintenance
Peltier Lake Drive 409 656 22 14,429 100 Preventive Maintenance
Rehbein Street 443 2,081 30 62,423 100 Preventive Maintenance
Carl Street 132 1,316 24 31,575 99 Preventive Maintenance
Kelly Street 1208 380 32 12,164 98 Preventive Maintenance
Apollo Drive 64 321 36 11,559 98 Preventive Maintenance
Jane Avenue 1211 183 32 5,855 98 Preventive Maintenance
Wayne Court 1209 201 32 6,443 97 Preventive Maintenance
Kelly Street 1210 621 32 19,866 97 Preventive Maintenance
Kelly Street 1212 891 32 28,515 97 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 1214 259 30 7,763 97 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 379 934 30 28,012 97 Preventive Maintenance
Wood Duck Trail 624 169 28 4,744 97 Preventive Maintenance
Palomino Lane 685 803 28 22,476 97 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 1140 557 28 15,607 96 Preventive Maintenance
Deerwood Lane 182 988 28 27,667 96 Preventive Maintenance
Hokah Drive 279 153 68 10,389 96 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 77 217 28 6,083 96 Preventive Maintenance
Shelia Avenue 1206 484 32 15,483 96 Preventive Maintenance
Andall Street 57 905 30 27,145 96 Preventive Maintenance
Mustang Lane 649 479 28 13,423 96 Preventive Maintenance
Country Lane 163 1,529 30 45,864 96 Preventive Maintenance
Country Lane 165 811 30 24,344 96 Preventive Maintenance
Henry Lane 267 451 28 12,617 96 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Drive 276 386 28 10,821 96 Preventive Maintenance
Praire View Place 432 579 30 17,365 96 Preventive Maintenance
Mustang Court 648 352 28 9,848 96 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 380 2,168 30 65,040 96 Preventive Maintenance
Palomino Lane 689 643 28 18,000 96 Preventive Maintenance
15 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Mustang Lane 652 498 28 13,953 96 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 412 323 28 9,056 96 Preventive Maintenance
Sandpiper Drive 473 333 22 7,336 96 Preventive Maintenance
Shadow Court 480 282 28 7,894 96 Preventive Maintenance
Shadow Lake Drive E 485 3,363 24 80,705 96 Preventive Maintenance
Shadow Lake Drive E 487 331 24 7,934 96 Preventive Maintenance
Shadow Lake Drive E 493 846 24 20,316 96 Preventive Maintenance
Shadow Lake Drive E 494 3,327 24 79,857 96 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 497 102 50 5,083 96 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 498 229 28 6,407 96 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 501 1,078 28 30,180 96 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 503 516 28 14,443 96 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 505 611 28 17,119 96 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 506 458 28 12,835 96 Preventive Maintenance
Merganser Court 642 552 28 15,469 96 Preventive Maintenance
Chippewa Trail 144 759 28 21,253 95 Preventive Maintenance
Hokah Drive 280 473 28 13,256 95 Preventive Maintenance
Hokah Drive 281 476 30 14,269 95 Preventive Maintenance
Hokah Drive 284 869 30 26,056 95 Preventive Maintenance
Rice Court 445 404 28 11,314 95 Preventive Maintenance
Sioux Lane 513 289 28 8,091 95 Preventive Maintenance
South Glen Trail 521 134 28 3,763 95 Preventive Maintenance
Totem Trail 572 282 28 7,897 95 Preventive Maintenance
Totem Trail 573 326 28 9,120 95 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 78 457 28 12,807 95 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 79 536 28 15,004 95 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 81 780 28 21,827 95 Preventive Maintenance
Wood Duck Trail 625 244 28 6,818 95 Preventive Maintenance
Henry Lane 266 1,351 28 37,837 95 Preventive Maintenance
Andall Street 58 699 30 20,979 95 Preventive Maintenance
Century Trail 1160 330 28 9,233 95 Preventive Maintenance
Robinson Drive 1263 426 32 13,622 95 Preventive Maintenance
Joseph Court 315 333 28 9,316 95 Preventive Maintenance
16 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Lois Lane 381 307 30 9,201 95 Preventive Maintenance
Pony Court 427 262 28 7,344 95 Preventive Maintenance
Sherwood Lane 508 493 38 18,726 95 Preventive Maintenance
Aenon Place 53 1,113 30 33,387 95 Preventive Maintenance
Nottingham Lane 659 1,319 30 39,582 95 Preventive Maintenance
Robinson Drive 1162 403 32 12,894 95 Preventive Maintenance
Marilyn Drive 398 457 28 12,802 95 Preventive Maintenance
Mustang Lane 650 365 28 10,210 95 Preventive Maintenance
Myrtle Lane 653 766 28 21,460 95 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Drive 275 147 28 4,103 95 Preventive Maintenance
Joseph Court 314 225 28 6,307 95 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 383 297 30 8,903 95 Preventive Maintenance
Arlo Lane 73 422 28 11,813 95 Preventive Maintenance
Arlo Lane 75 818 28 22,913 95 Preventive Maintenance
Saddle Club Court 1358 182 26 4,735 95 Preventive Maintenance
Sioux Lane 1335 185 28 5,175 95 Preventive Maintenance
Hokah Drive 283 807 30 24,197 95 Preventive Maintenance
Sioux Lane 512 637 28 17,844 95 Preventive Maintenance
South Glen Trail 523 360 28 10,084 95 Preventive Maintenance
Tomahawk Trail 568 345 28 9,668 95 Preventive Maintenance
Tomahawk Trail 570 534 28 14,941 95 Preventive Maintenance
Totem Trail 571 542 28 15,172 95 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 80 581 28 16,257 95 Preventive Maintenance
Kelly Street 1204 832 32 26,636 94 Preventive Maintenance
Kelly Street 1205 953 32 30,481 94 Preventive Maintenance
Timothy Court 1207 202 32 6,464 94 Preventive Maintenance
Robinson Drive 1168 83 24 1,999 94 Preventive Maintenance
Jeanne Drive 312 1,252 30 37,559 94 Preventive Maintenance
Marilyn Drive 393 328 28 9,171 94 Preventive Maintenance
Mustang Lane 651 793 28 22,204 94 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Circle 270 129 28 3,605 94 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Lane 277 196 28 5,502 94 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Run S 1341 1,506 28 42,157 94 Preventive Maintenance
17 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Pheasant Run S 1359 455 26 11,822 94 Preventive Maintenance
Chippewa Trail 145 193 28 5,395 94 Preventive Maintenance
Hokah Drive 282 665 28 18,617 94 Preventive Maintenance
Tomahawk Court 567 253 28 7,079 94 Preventive Maintenance
Wood Duck Trail 967 679 28 19,010 93 Preventive Maintenance
Leonard Avenue 363 1,559 28 43,665 93 Preventive Maintenance
Connie Lane 159 661 30 19,834 93 Preventive Maintenance
Pine Street 1327 1,542 30 46,264 93 Preventive Maintenance
Pinto Lane 425 403 28 11,285 93 Preventive Maintenance
Black Berry Ct 1379 463 26 12,033 93 Preventive Maintenance
Killdeer Drive 1342 562 28 15,735 93 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 1170 677 24 16,258 93 Preventive Maintenance
Oak Hollow Lane 1256 147 24 3,516 93 Preventive Maintenance
Tomahawk Trail 569 292 28 8,163 93 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 603 309 35 10,827 93 Preventive Maintenance
Lamotte Circle 1221 826 28 23,118 93 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 13 320 40 12,786 93 Preventive Maintenance
20th Ave S 1340 1,242 28 34,770 93 Preventive Maintenance
Otter Lake Drive 1343 599 52 31,166 93 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 15 318 40 12,732 93 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 16 484 40 19,347 93 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 17 342 40 13,689 93 Preventive Maintenance
Glenview Avenue 242 495 27 13,353 93 Preventive Maintenance
Glenview Lane 247 325 27 8,764 93 Preventive Maintenance
Lamotte Drive 342 281 28 7,874 93 Preventive Maintenance
Lamotte Drive 344 307 28 8,591 93 Preventive Maintenance
Parkview Drive 690 501 27 13,538 93 Preventive Maintenance
Lamotte Drive 978 839 28 23,501 93 Preventive Maintenance
Glenview Lane 984 824 27 22,252 93 Preventive Maintenance
Buckthorn Lane 127 500 28 13,993 92 Preventive Maintenance
Chokecherry Road 146 425 28 11,902 92 Preventive Maintenance
Chokecherry Road 147 477 28 13,347 92 Preventive Maintenance
Pondview Circle 426 425 28 11,904 92 Preventive Maintenance
18 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Sherman Lake Road 504 482 28 13,491 92 Preventive Maintenance
Timberwolf Trail 558 213 48 10,210 92 Preventive Maintenance
Timberwolf Trail 563 260 32 8,322 92 Preventive Maintenance
Timberwolf Trail 564 423 30 12,701 92 Preventive Maintenance
Timberwolf Trail 565 469 28 13,119 92 Preventive Maintenance
Velvetleaf Lane 591 278 28 7,770 92 Preventive Maintenance
White Oak Road 608 497 28 13,909 92 Preventive Maintenance
White Oak Road 609 453 28 12,681 92 Preventive Maintenance
White Oak Road 610 233 28 6,515 92 Preventive Maintenance
White Oak Road 611 852 28 23,842 92 Preventive Maintenance
Whitetail Trail 618 336 28 9,400 92 Preventive Maintenance
Whitetail Trail 619 556 28 15,565 92 Preventive Maintenance
Century Trail 1159 439 28 12,294 92 Preventive Maintenance
Wood Duck Trail 966 3,123 28 87,438 92 Preventive Maintenance
Arlo Lane 1101 272 25 6,800 92 Preventive Maintenance
Robinson Drive 1163 40 32 1,280 92 Preventive Maintenance
Meadowview Trail 404 1,462 30 43,847 92 Preventive Maintenance
Apollo Drive 1259 475 36 17,100 92 Preventive Maintenance
Pine Street 1324 1,811 30 54,344 92 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 1222 520 30 15,613 92 Preventive Maintenance
Oak Court 661 370 28 10,350 92 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Road 1360 1,022 25 25,559 92 Preventive Maintenance
Bubble 1151 100 120 12,000 92 Preventive Maintenance
Linda Lane 1173 229 24 5,505 92 Preventive Maintenance
Sioux Court 509 168 28 4,703 92 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 597 2,630 35 92,061 92 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 10 331 40 13,254 92 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 14 343 40 13,734 92 Preventive Maintenance
Enid Trail 1377 542 26 14,095 92 Preventive Maintenance
Enid Trail 1378 1,147 26 29,814 92 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue South 1380 1,211 33 39,954 92 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 11 333 40 13,338 91 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 12 1,457 40 58,294 91 Preventive Maintenance
19 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
21st Avenue South 7 908 30 27,254 91 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 601 1,461 35 51,140 91 Preventive Maintenance
Century Trail 1128 121 92 11,174 91 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 378 573 30 17,180 91 Preventive Maintenance
Clydesdale Circle 1165 310 28 8,680 91 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Run S 1357 1,118 26 29,076 91 Preventive Maintenance
Jon Avenue 313 659 28 18,446 91 Preventive Maintenance
Leonard Avenue 362 1,716 28 48,039 91 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 375 1,377 30 41,316 91 Preventive Maintenance
Andall Street 59 1,254 30 37,626 91 Preventive Maintenance
Carl Street 1164 597 28 16,726 91 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Trail 278 662 28 18,523 91 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 944 542 35 18,957 91 Preventive Maintenance
Wood Duck Trail 626 702 28 19,658 91 Preventive Maintenance
Palomino Lane 688 586 28 16,411 91 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Circle 271 333 28 9,326 91 Preventive Maintenance
Jeanne Drive 311 720 30 21,614 91 Preventive Maintenance
Pine Street 1323 3,846 30 115,380 91 Preventive Maintenance
Bluebill Lane 968 883 28 24,717 91 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 18 309 40 12,347 90 Preventive Maintenance
Rice Lake Drive 446 528 28 14,792 90 Preventive Maintenance
Ulmer Drive 589 643 27 17,365 90 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue South 6 386 34 13,125 90 Preventive Maintenance
2nd Avenue 9 338 40 13,529 90 Preventive Maintenance
Oakwood Lane 1250 622 28 17,424 90 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 599 1,045 35 36,559 90 Preventive Maintenance
Old Birch Street 671 978 24 23,470 90 Preventive Maintenance
Vaughan Court 1167 223 28 6,240 90 Preventive Maintenance
Oak Hollow Lane 1178 976 24 23,424 90 Preventive Maintenance
Glen Circle 240 264 28 7,381 90 Preventive Maintenance
Sioux Lookout 514 736 28 20,617 90 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 942 625 35 21,874 90 Preventive Maintenance
Blackbird Lane 120 752 28 21,044 90 Preventive Maintenance
20 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Bradley Street 125 605 30 18,156 90 Preventive Maintenance
Century Trail 1320 642 28 17,966 90 Preventive Maintenance
Arlo Lane 1102 441 29 12,794 90 Preventive Maintenance
Quarter Horse Court 433 286 28 8,005 90 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1032 359 28 10,038 90 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue South 1351 274 26 7,130 90 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue South 1352 489 26 12,706 90 Preventive Maintenance
Butternut Street 1353 155 24 3,727 90 Preventive Maintenance
21st Avenue South 1355 238 28 6,670 90 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1030 455 28 12,754 89 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1031 411 28 11,514 89 Preventive Maintenance
Arabian Circle 1132 315 28 8,809 89 Preventive Maintenance
Greenwood Lane 256 575 30 17,251 89 Preventive Maintenance
Century Trail 1127 854 28 23,916 89 Preventive Maintenance
Stallion Lane 1129 1,355 28 37,941 89 Preventive Maintenance
Oak Court 660 344 28 9,624 89 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Drive E 976 3,464 24 83,135 89 Preventive Maintenance
Villiage Drive 1196 864 40 34,553 89 Preventive Maintenance
Rice Lake Drive 448 1,769 28 49,525 89 Preventive Maintenance
Ulmer Drive 590 374 27 10,101 89 Preventive Maintenance
Robinson Drive 1263A 450 32 14,408 89 Preventive Maintenance
Robinson Drive 1263B 480 32 15,360 89 Preventive Maintenance
Robinson Drive 1263C 629 32 20,116 89 Preventive Maintenance
UNKNOWN 1362 165 28 4,615 89 Preventive Maintenance
UNKNOWN 1363 163 28 4,564 89 Preventive Maintenance
Rosewood Street 1377 1,459 24 35,027 89 Preventive Maintenance
Chestnut Street 1381 325 24 7,792 89 Preventive Maintenance
Chestnut Street 1385 897 24 21,528 89 Preventive Maintenance
Cypress Street 1375 278 26 7,216 89 Preventive Maintenance
Cypress Street 1376 737 26 19,172 89 Preventive Maintenance
Cypress Street 1378 155 26 4,030 89 Preventive Maintenance
Cypress Street 1379 243 26 6,319 89 Preventive Maintenance
Cypress Street 1382 374 26 9,717 89 Preventive Maintenance
21 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
21st Avenue South 1384 473 28 13,241 89 Preventive Maintenance
Dogwood Court 1383 345 24 8,273 89 Preventive Maintenance
Redwood Ave 1387 438 24 10,506 89 Preventive Maintenance
Dogwood Street 1386 249 24 5,985 89 Preventive Maintenance
Ivywood Avenue 1388 138 24 3,321 89 Preventive Maintenance
Sioux Lane 1368 412 26 10,712 89 Preventive Maintenance
Old Birch Street 671A 1,161 24 27,863 88 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Hollow 1153 164 26 4,252 88 Preventive Maintenance
Ravens Court 1177 473 24 11,343 88 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Circle 596 206 28 5,761 88 Preventive Maintenance
South Glen Trail 993 519 28 14,530 88 Preventive Maintenance
Bald Eagle Boulevard 1180 1,194 24 28,649 88 Preventive Maintenance
Bald Eagle Boulevard 1181 1,150 24 27,595 88 Preventive Maintenance
Bald Eagle Boulevard 1182 378 24 9,065 88 Preventive Maintenance
Bald Eagle Boulevard 1183 1,395 24 33,468 88 Preventive Maintenance
Bald Eagle Boulevard 1184 643 24 15,437 88 Preventive Maintenance
Ash Street 1338 1,173 28 32,851 88 Preventive Maintenance
Ash Street 1339 889 28 24,881 88 Preventive Maintenance
Deer Pass Trail 179 523 28 14,654 88 Preventive Maintenance
Foxtail Court 232 804 30 24,124 88 Preventive Maintenance
Foxtail Drive 233 946 30 28,390 88 Preventive Maintenance
Foxtail Drive 234 592 30 17,753 88 Preventive Maintenance
Reiling Road 444 872 28 24,410 88 Preventive Maintenance
Rolling Hills Drive 453 551 24 13,226 88 Preventive Maintenance
Sargent Court N 474 911 28 25,506 88 Preventive Maintenance
Whitetail Trail 617 412 30 12,360 88 Preventive Maintenance
Woodchuck Circle 627 821 30 24,637 88 Preventive Maintenance
Woodchuck Circle 628 588 30 17,642 88 Preventive Maintenance
Woodchuck Circle 629 764 30 22,930 88 Preventive Maintenance
Woodchuck Circle 630 573 30 17,176 88 Preventive Maintenance
Partridge Place 691 449 28 12,565 88 Preventive Maintenance
Rolling Hills Drive 982 198 20 3,966 88 Preventive Maintenance
Deer Pass Trail 983 120 28 3,353 88 Preventive Maintenance
22 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Cedar Street E 1344 1,127 22 24,800 88 Preventive Maintenance
Cedar Street E 1345 197 22 4,341 88 Preventive Maintenance
Palm Street 1350 1,175 24 28,195 88 Preventive Maintenance
Wood Duck Trail 964 333 28 9,336 88 Preventive Maintenance
Pinto Lane 1131 551 28 15,421 88 Preventive Maintenance
Jeanne Drive 310 659 30 19,764 88 Preventive Maintenance
Patti Drive 405 1,275 30 38,258 88 Preventive Maintenance
Carole Drive 133 1,483 30 44,504 88 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 374 453 30 13,582 88 Preventive Maintenance
Patti Drive 695 663 30 19,896 88 Preventive Maintenance
Rolling Hills Drive 454 1,657 24 39,773 88 Preventive Maintenance
Cedar Street E 1252 888 21 18,653 87 Preventive Maintenance
Cedar Street E 1356 30 22 664 87 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Road 1145 724 26 18,813 87 Preventive Maintenance
Red Fox Road 1147 784 26 20,382 87 Preventive Maintenance
Red Fox Road 1150 305 26 7,940 87 Preventive Maintenance
Hollow Lane 285 657 28 18,392 87 Preventive Maintenance
Sioux Lane 511 358 28 10,023 87 Preventive Maintenance
Town Center Parkway 1195 618 40 24,734 87 Preventive Maintenance
Woods Edge Blvd 1223 668 40 26,710 87 Preventive Maintenance
Town Center Parkway 1337 325 28 9,111 87 Preventive Maintenance
Andall Street 56 792 30 23,755 87 Preventive Maintenance
Lilac Street 1270 5,164 28 144,579 87 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Drive 273 663 28 18,553 87 Preventive Maintenance
Marvy Street 402 613 28 17,155 87 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Drive 272 809 28 22,662 87 Preventive Maintenance
Oak Lane 97 473 28 13,246 87 Preventive Maintenance
Highland Drive 274 488 28 13,668 87 Preventive Maintenance
Red Oak Lane 1346 560 28 15,685 87 Preventive Maintenance
Cottonwood Avenue 1347 160 24 3,841 87 Preventive Maintenance
Red Oak Lane 1348 246 28 6,880 87 Preventive Maintenance
Red Oak Lane 1349 251 28 7,041 87 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Road 1146 450 26 11,705 87 Preventive Maintenance
23 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Red Fox Road 1149 196 26 5,098 87 Preventive Maintenance
Park Court 1199 368 32 11,764 86 Preventive Maintenance
Rice Lake Drive 447 1,775 28 49,704 86 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 1120 1,134 28 31,741 86 Preventive Maintenance
Goldenrod Circle 1123 259 28 7,242 86 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 1135 298 28 8,342 86 Preventive Maintenance
Peregrine Circle 410 346 26 8,992 86 Preventive Maintenance
August Circle 1107 170 43 7,303 86 Preventive Maintenance
Stella Circle 1108 135 43 5,786 86 Preventive Maintenance
Langer Lane 1134 197 25 4,924 86 Preventive Maintenance
Butternut Street 1354 145 24 3,474 86 Preventive Maintenance
Tart Lake Road 544 223 28 6,238 86 Preventive Maintenance
Pinto Lane 1130 291 28 8,142 86 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 376 1,428 30 42,844 86 Preventive Maintenance
Appaloosa Lane 66 367 28 10,277 86 Preventive Maintenance
Century Trail 1125 607 28 17,002 86 Preventive Maintenance
Vicky Lane 592 1,343 30 40,297 86 Preventive Maintenance
Marcia Lane 390 750 30 22,501 86 Preventive Maintenance
Palomino Lane 684 482 28 13,484 86 Preventive Maintenance
Red Fox Road 1148 777 26 20,211 86 Preventive Maintenance
Blue Heron Drive 123 639 28 17,904 86 Preventive Maintenance
Prairie Flower Road 430 243 28 6,805 86 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 1122 983 28 27,518 85 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 1136 451 28 12,635 85 Preventive Maintenance
Langer Circle 1104 172 60 10,305 85 Preventive Maintenance
Hartford Circle 1106 165 43 7,103 85 Preventive Maintenance
Flora Court 222 350 24 8,399 85 Preventive Maintenance
4th Avenue 25 1,317 40 52,685 85 Preventive Maintenance
Palomino Lane 683 358 28 10,033 85 Preventive Maintenance
Patti Drive 696 737 30 22,104 85 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Cove 1152 338 26 8,788 85 Preventive Maintenance
Lakota Trail 1155 62 26 1,608 85 Preventive Maintenance
Ravens Court 1175 351 24 8,413 85 Preventive Maintenance
24 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Blue Heron Drive 122 475 28 13,299 85 Preventive Maintenance
12th Avenue S 1 784 24 18,805 85 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 1116 470 28 13,157 85 Preventive Maintenance
Sedge Court 1117 352 28 9,865 85 Preventive Maintenance
Stoneybrook Drive 1118 368 28 10,298 85 Preventive Maintenance
Stoneybrook Drive 1119 1,616 28 45,258 85 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 1138 730 28 20,428 85 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Xing N 1255 114 88 10,006 85 Preventive Maintenance
12th Avenue S 3 310 33 10,222 85 Preventive Maintenance
12th Avenue S 4 1,198 24 28,741 85 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 413 361 28 10,102 85 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 414 349 28 9,768 85 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 415 246 28 6,882 85 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 416 260 28 7,267 85 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 417 874 28 24,466 85 Preventive Maintenance
12th Avenue S 5 338 24 8,109 85 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Crossing S 576 327 28 9,160 85 Preventive Maintenance
Snow Goose Trail 977 289 28 8,101 85 Preventive Maintenance
Broken Oak Court 9778 301 28 8,433 85 Preventive Maintenance
Century Trail 1126 952 28 26,651 84 Preventive Maintenance
Teckla Court 552 316 28 8,844 84 Preventive Maintenance
Town Center Parkway 1258 481 40 19,249 84 Preventive Maintenance
NULL 1333 528 40 21,111 84 Preventive Maintenance
Town Center Parkway 1336 598 40 23,923 84 Preventive Maintenance
Villiage Drive 595 792 22 17,421 84 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 1115 271 28 7,601 84 Preventive Maintenance
Osprey Court 1253 122 88 10,744 84 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 153 215 38 8,169 84 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 154 1,236 28 34,603 84 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Drive 335 581 28 16,274 84 Preventive Maintenance
Langer Lane 350 1,712 24 41,095 84 Preventive Maintenance
Tart Lake Road 547 337 28 9,449 84 Preventive Maintenance
Tart Lake Road 549 916 28 25,656 84 Preventive Maintenance
25 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Tart Lake Road 550 615 28 17,231 84 Preventive Maintenance
62nd Avenue N 26 962 22 21,173 84 Preventive Maintenance
Lakota Trail 1156 224 26 5,814 84 Preventive Maintenance
Ojibway Path 1158 1,099 26 28,564 84 Preventive Maintenance
Ravens Court 1176 531 24 12,733 84 Preventive Maintenance
62nd Avenue N 28 234 22 5,155 84 Preventive Maintenance
62nd Avenue N 28 234 22 5,155 84 Preventive Maintenance
Hollow Lane 286 483 28 13,537 84 Preventive Maintenance
Meadowview Trail 1124 233 28 6,518 83 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 1137 403 28 11,286 83 Preventive Maintenance
Hawk Ridge Circle 261 163 21 3,427 83 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Court E 287 1,872 24 44,928 83 Preventive Maintenance
Langer Lane 1103 456 25 11,396 83 Preventive Maintenance
Stella Lane 1109 351 24 8,421 83 Preventive Maintenance
Stella Lane 1111 310 24 7,431 83 Preventive Maintenance
Delina Circle 189 260 24 6,246 83 Preventive Maintenance
Langer Lane 352 454 24 10,893 83 Preventive Maintenance
Albert Court 54 267 24 6,405 83 Preventive Maintenance
Tart Lake Road 545 173 28 4,846 83 Preventive Maintenance
Tart Lake Road 548 672 28 18,811 83 Preventive Maintenance
Northern Lights Blvd 1002 356 36 12,833 83 Preventive Maintenance
Stage Coach Trail 1201 336 32 10,753 83 Preventive Maintenance
Marshan Court 1203 340 32 10,893 83 Preventive Maintenance
Whippoorwill Lane 606 1,329 28 37,210 83 Preventive Maintenance
Marvy Street 401 1,937 28 54,236 83 Preventive Maintenance
Behm Lane 100 153 28 4,273 83 Preventive Maintenance
Marilyn Drive 391 425 28 11,896 83 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 1172 759 24 18,227 83 Preventive Maintenance
Lakota Trail 1225 198 26 5,148 83 Preventive Maintenance
Oakview Court 1121 311 28 8,708 82 Preventive Maintenance
Iverson Court 302 603 28 16,879 82 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Hills Drive 411 145 28 4,054 82 Preventive Maintenance
Tart Court 543 342 28 9,588 82 Preventive Maintenance
26 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Holly Drive E 971 340 24 8,157 82 Preventive Maintenance
Marshan Lane 400 938 20 18,754 82 Preventive Maintenance
Town Center Parkway 575 344 44 15,133 82 Preventive Maintenance
Marilyn Drive 392 214 28 5,979 82 Preventive Maintenance
Carl Street 131 773 24 18,561 82 Preventive Maintenance
4th Avenue 21 1,300 40 51,998 82 Preventive Maintenance
Carpenter Place 1161 343 32 10,989 82 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 1171 186 24 4,470 82 Preventive Maintenance
Pheasant Run S 1361 321 25 8,034 82 Preventive Maintenance
Durango Point 197 475 28 13,296 82 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Crossing S 587 441 28 12,335 82 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 1112 741 28 20,743 82 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 151 439 28 12,289 82 Preventive Maintenance
Lois Lane 377 177 30 5,302 81 Preventive Maintenance
4th Avenue 23 2,661 40 106,445 81 Preventive Maintenance
Palomino Lane 686 785 28 21,975 81 Preventive Maintenance
Savanna Court 475 424 26 11,023 81 Preventive Maintenance
Shadow Lake Drive E 484 1,614 44 71,028 81 Preventive Maintenance
Arrowhead Drive 1224 276 24 6,625 81 Preventive Maintenance
Cassiopeia Court 134 360 28 10,084 81 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Drive E 292 449 24 10,786 81 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Crossing S 581 222 28 6,213 81 Preventive Maintenance
Hudson Trail 997 673 28 18,857 81 Preventive Maintenance
65th Street 1007 750 24 18,008 81 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 157 736 28 20,602 81 Preventive Maintenance
Stage Coach Trail 1200 132 32 4,239 81 Preventive Maintenance
Stage Coach Trail 1202 174 32 5,580 81 Preventive Maintenance
Aqua Circle 1227 2,399 24 57,585 81 Preventive Maintenance
Snow Owl Lane 519 1,361 28 38,115 81 Preventive Maintenance
Town Center Parkway 574 756 44 33,248 81 Preventive Maintenance
Molitor Drive 1133 781 28 21,876 80 Preventive Maintenance
Cripple Creek Court 172 345 28 9,674 80 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Xing N 577 795 28 22,253 80 Preventive Maintenance
27 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Langer Lane 1105 700 25 17,504 80 Preventive Maintenance
Stella Lane 1110 528 24 12,665 80 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 150 408 32 13,048 80 Preventive Maintenance
Country Lane 162 160 28 4,485 80 Preventive Maintenance
62nd Avenue N 29 2,313 22 50,878 80 Preventive Maintenance
Apollo Court 1226 433 26 11,250 80 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 605 571 28 15,984 80 Preventive Maintenance
Cherokee Trail 1090 324 28 9,083 79 Preventive Maintenance
Cripple Creek Court 173 785 28 21,982 79 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Drive E 975 899 24 21,582 79 Preventive Maintenance
Meadowlark Court 641 243 28 6,805 79 Preventive Maintenance
Tart Lake Road 546 327 28 9,166 79 Preventive Maintenance
Behm Lane 102 231 28 6,457 79 Preventive Maintenance
Behm Lane 101 788 28 22,075 79 Preventive Maintenance
Linda Lane 1174 444 24 10,661 79 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1035 486 28 13,596 79 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Crossing S 1254 156 88 13,692 78 Preventive Maintenance
Mineral Point 643 418 28 11,711 78 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Drive E 974 760 24 18,236 78 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 152 350 28 9,813 78 Preventive Maintenance
Linda Lane 370 313 28 8,774 78 Preventive Maintenance
Palomino Lane 687 698 28 19,549 78 Preventive Maintenance
Stage Coach Trail 1218 342 32 10,956 78 Preventive Maintenance
Elmcrest Avenue N 1233 5,618 28 157,313 78 Preventive Maintenance
Mourning Dove Road 646 486 27 13,127 78 Preventive Maintenance
Cherokee Trail 142 514 28 14,395 78 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Drive E 293 245 24 5,879 78 Preventive Maintenance
Osprey Court 676 523 28 14,639 78 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Drive E 972 287 24 6,888 78 Preventive Maintenance
Lakota Trail 1154 554 26 14,396 77 Preventive Maintenance
South Glen Trail 522 497 28 13,923 77 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1036 591 28 16,550 77 Preventive Maintenance
Gray Heron Drive 252 1,159 28 32,460 77 Preventive Maintenance
28 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Mourning Dove Road 645 371 27 10,014 77 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Drive 332 529 28 14,825 77 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Drive 333 764 28 21,402 77 Preventive Maintenance
Oakwood Lane 670 530 28 14,838 76 Preventive Maintenance
Fox Road 1144 239 28 6,692 76 Preventive Maintenance
Ware Road 947 241 28 6,750 76 Preventive Maintenance
Marilyn Drive 395 1,313 28 36,773 76 Preventive Maintenance
Park Court 1198 561 32 17,937 76 Preventive Maintenance
Arthur Court 82 549 28 15,358 76 Preventive Maintenance
Chippewa Trail 1232 263 28 7,376 75 Preventive Maintenance
Egret Lane 198 184 28 5,146 75 Preventive Maintenance
Prairie Flower Road 431 573 28 16,057 75 Preventive Maintenance
Appaloosa Lane 67 439 28 12,285 75 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1038 974 28 27,261 75 Preventive Maintenance
Marshan Court 1197 142 24 3,408 75 Preventive Maintenance
Clearwater Creek
Drive 158 679 28 19,017 75 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Court 980 275 28 7,702 75 Preventive Maintenance
River Birch Place 449 652 28 18,245 74 Preventive Maintenance
Woodridge Lane 639 1,379 27 37,227 74 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Crossing S 585 402 28 11,258 74 Preventive Maintenance
Holly Drive E 973 583 24 13,992 74 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Drive 331 407 28 11,406 74 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Circle 981 244 28 6,833 74 Preventive Maintenance
Egret Lane 199 450 28 12,599 73 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1033 339 28 9,491 73 Preventive Maintenance
Elm Street 1039 338 28 9,473 73 Preventive Maintenance
Grey Squirrel Road 258 331 27 8,932 73 Preventive Maintenance
Nancy Drive 962 393 30 11,787 73 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 500 498 28 13,931 73 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Crossing S 582 322 28 9,026 73 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Crossing S 583 219 28 6,125 73 Preventive Maintenance
Elmcrest Avenue N 1187 915 24 21,959 73 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Drive 336 418 28 11,715 73 Preventive Maintenance
29 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Elm Street 1037 361 28 10,116 72 Preventive Maintenance
Smoketree Lane 515 603 27 16,284 72 Preventive Maintenance
Lilac Street 1191 895 28 25,069 72 Preventive Maintenance
Sherman Lake Road 502 1,593 28 44,604 72 Preventive Maintenance
Tele Lane 554 355 28 9,940 72 Preventive Maintenance
Sandhill Drive 472 891 28 24,961 71 Preventive Maintenance
Gray Heron Drive 251 329 28 9,204 71 Preventive Maintenance
Gray Heron Drive 253 374 28 10,477 71 Preventive Maintenance
Snow Owl Circle 518 393 28 11,011 71 Preventive Maintenance
Sunrise Drive 534 451 24 10,828 71 Preventive Maintenance
Trappers Xing N 579 398 28 11,157 71 Preventive Maintenance
Lacasse Drive 334 201 36 7,234 71 Preventive Maintenance
Tele Drive 553 631 28 17,664 71 Preventive Maintenance
Fawn Lane 220 473 28 13,251 70 Preservation
Woodridge Lane 640 1,442 27 38,943 70 Preservation
Elm Street 1034 343 28 9,593 70 Preservation
Elm Street 1040 597 28 16,727 70 Preservation
Red Clover Lane 435 594 27 16,038 70 Preservation
Sunflower Lane 530 320 27 8,639 70 Preservation
Sunrise Road 540 865 24 20,751 70 Preservation
Trappers Crossing S 584 254 28 7,100 70 Preservation
4th Avenue 1169 546 24 13,114 70 Preservation
Elm Street 1041 1,071 28 29,988 69 Preservation
Clearwater Creek
Drive 155 936 28 26,209 69 Preservation
Ellen Court 204 200 28 5,606 69 Preservation
Red Birch Court 434 575 28 16,105 69 Preservation
Mourning Dove Road 644 334 27 9,028 69 Preservation
Partridge Place 693 719 28 20,145 69 Preservation
Partridge Place 694 799 28 22,360 69 Preservation
79th Street W 46 442 28 12,368 69 Preservation
Wolf Circle 623 310 28 8,687 68 Preservation
Grey Squirrel Road 259 336 27 9,073 68 Preservation
Sunflower Lane 531 208 27 5,617 68 Preservation
30 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Sunflower Lane 532 446 27 12,033 68 Preservation
Sunrise Road 537 316 24 7,593 68 Preservation
Laurene Avenue 359 558 24 13,396 68 Preservation
Woodridge Lane 638 1,059 27 28,589 68 Preservation
Egret Lane 200 419 28 11,727 68 Preservation
Egret Lane 201 464 28 12,986 68 Preservation
Clearwater Creek
Drive 149 214 28 5,984 67 Preservation
Grey Squirrel Road 257 270 27 7,281 67 Preservation
Royal Pines Place 1179 532 24 12,760 67 Preservation
Aqua Lane 1005 303 24 7,276 66 Preservation
Service Road 479 1,361 24 32,655 66 Preservation
Ironwood Circle 301 221 28 6,177 66 Preservation
Oakwood Lane 669 587 28 16,433 66 Preservation
Baldwin Lake Road 95 557 28 15,606 66 Preservation
Tele Lane 555 377 28 10,566 66 Preservation
Post Road 428 442 27 11,937 66 Preservation
Snow Owl Lane 520 355 28 9,948 66 Preservation
White Pine Road 615 577 27 15,566 65 Preservation
Cripple Creek Court 174 281 28 7,879 65 Preservation
Teal Court 551 650 28 18,196 65 Preservation
Aqua Lane 1004 450 36 16,200 65 Preservation
62nd Avenue N 27 617 22 13,582 64 Preservation
White Pine Road 614 1,217 27 32,857 64 Preservation
Timberwolf Trail 562 900 28 25,201 64 Preservation
Lacasse Court 326 237 28 6,626 64 Preservation
Sunfish Court 529 266 27 7,180 64 Preservation
Sunrise Road 539 505 24 12,122 64 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 483 2,167 28 60,675 63 Preservation
Timberwolf Trail 566 462 28 12,930 63 Preservation
Smoketree Lane 516 328 27 8,868 63 Preservation
Stage Coach Trail 526 252 28 7,043 63 Preservation
Antelope Drive 60 167 27 4,521 63 Preservation
Appaloosa Lane 68 1,199 28 33,575 62 Preservation
31 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
79th Street W 45 763 28 21,366 62 Preservation
Cinnamon Teal Court 148 340 28 9,530 62 Preservation
Glenview Drive 243 363 28 10,171 62 Preservation
Sunrise Drive 533 586 24 14,065 62 Preservation
Sunrise Drive 536 1,317 24 31,609 62 Preservation
River Birch Place 450 769 28 21,545 62 Preservation
Ruffed Grouse Court 467 362 28 10,145 61 Preservation
Wildflower Drive 621 333 27 8,991 61 Preservation
Red Hawk Trail 437 267 28 7,486 61 Preservation
Painted Turtle Road 680 152 28 4,266 61 Preservation
Painted Turtle Road 682 463 28 12,962 61 Preservation
Coyote Trail 992 338 28 9,462 61 Preservation
Lilac Street 1264 1,788 28 50,061 61 Preservation
Pheasant Run S 995 399 28 11,166 61 Preservation
Thomas Street 999 1,349 30 40,484 60 Preservation
Wild Turkey Trail 620 700 28 19,592 60 Preservation
Lacasse Drive 330 506 28 14,154 60 Preservation
77th Street E 39 551 24 13,232 60 Preservation
Woodridge Lane 227 262 27 7,077 60 Preservation
Pelican Place 406 1,382 28 38,691 60 Preservation
Ruffed Grouse Court 470 270 28 7,548 59 Preservation
Caribou Circle 130 363 27 9,813 59 Preservation
Sunrise Drive 535 1,003 24 24,062 59 Preservation
Ruffed Grouse Court 468 357 28 9,993 58 Preservation
Antelope Drive 63 484 27 13,063 58 Preservation
Country Lane 161 1,411 28 39,495 58 Preservation
Linda Circle 368 204 28 5,713 58 Preservation
Muskrat Run 647 331 28 9,264 58 Preservation
Aspen Lane 84 183 28 5,129 58 Preservation
Wildflower Drive 622 604 27 16,306 57 Preservation
Red Hawk Trail 436 296 28 8,289 57 Preservation
Linda Avenue 365 935 24 22,451 57 Preservation
White Pine Road 616 907 28 25,405 57 Preservation
32 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Ruffed Grouse Court 469 631 28 17,660 57 Preservation
White Birch Court 607 578 28 16,192 56 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 116 426 28 11,936 56 Preservation
Linda Lane 372 1,039 28 29,090 56 Preservation
Killdeer Drive 323 332 28 9,288 56 Preservation
Sherman Lake Road 507 324 28 9,069 56 Preservation
Gladstone Circle 236 345 27 9,327 55 Preservation
Lea Court 361 361 28 10,096 55 Preservation
Deerwood Circle 181 279 60 16,735 55 Preservation
Fawn Lane 221 698 28 19,554 55 Preservation
Lantern Circle 354 582 28 16,297 55 Preservation
Laurene Avenue 357 675 24 16,195 55 Preservation
Rohavic Lane 451 445 30 13,363 55 Preservation
White Pine Road 613 208 28 5,837 55 Preservation
Pheasant Run S 420 961 28 26,922 55 Preservation
Aspen Lane 83 582 28 16,294 55 Preservation
Forsham Lake Drive 223 678 28 18,990 54 Preservation
Gladstone Circle 237 383 28 10,730 54 Preservation
Antelope Drive 61 176 27 4,759 54 Preservation
Marilyn Drive 396 1,043 28 29,218 54 Preservation
4th Avenue 24 1,327 36 47,772 54 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 108 1,147 28 32,103 54 Preservation
Fox Road 230 506 28 14,167 54 Preservation
Linda Court 369 472 28 13,214 54 Preservation
Linden Lane 373 1,317 28 36,886 54 Preservation
Mallard Lane 388 337 28 9,427 54 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 482 558 28 15,632 54 Preservation
Beaver Circle 98 529 28 14,798 54 Preservation
Coyote Trail 990 747 28 20,903 54 Preservation
Service Road 477 460 24 11,032 53 Preservation
77th Street E 42 1,246 24 29,901 53 Preservation
Hunters Ridge 1019 983 28 27,531 53 Preservation
Painted Turtle Road 681 475 28 13,307 53 Preservation
33 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Black Duck Drive 105 409 28 11,452 53 Preservation
Linda Avenue 367 380 28 10,637 53 Preservation
Killdeer Drive 322 259 28 7,260 53 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 115 312 28 8,723 52 Preservation
Crystal Court 176 189 28 5,280 52 Preservation
Fawn Lane 219 223 28 6,239 52 Preservation
Killdeer Court 319 155 28 4,340 52 Preservation
Laurene Avenue 358 285 24 6,842 52 Preservation
Stage Coach Trail 527 345 28 9,650 51 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 114 695 28 19,465 51 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 117 487 28 13,646 51 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 118 408 28 11,431 51 Preservation
Hawthorn Road 262 1,981 28 55,480 51 Preservation
Lantern Lane 355 527 28 14,758 51 Preservation
Lonesome Pine Trail 386 523 28 14,646 51 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 492 331 40 13,224 51 Preservation
Oakwood Drive 668 570 28 15,967 51 Preservation
Timberwolf Trail 559 268 28 7,518 50 Preservation
Deerwood Circle 180 119 28 3,326 50 Preservation
Hawthorn Road 264 383 28 10,729 50 Preservation
Lonesome Pine Trail 384 334 28 9,347 50 Preservation
Coyote Trail 991 773 28 21,657 50 Preservation
Schlavin Court 476 478 30 14,345 50 Preservation
Aspen Lane 1220 164 28 4,584 50 Preservation
Aspen Lane 85 642 28 17,965 50 Preservation
Rondeau Lake Road
W 461 678 24 16,276 49 Preservation
Green Briar Drive 255 384 27 10,367 49 Preservation
Ulmer Drive 588 928 27 25,065 49 Preservation
Antelope Drive 62 333 27 8,999 49 Preservation
Timberwolf Trail 560 586 28 16,400 49 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 110 250 28 6,992 49 Preservation
Coyote Court 166 335 28 9,388 49 Preservation
Coyote Trail 169 378 28 10,574 49 Preservation
34 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Black Duck Drive 119 583 28 16,334 49 Preservation
Lakeview Drive 1043 1,325 24 31,790 48 Preservation
Green Briar Drive 254 910 27 24,561 48 Preservation
Hawthorn Road 263 595 28 16,674 48 Preservation
Lonesome Pine Trail 385 862 28 24,136 48 Preservation
Lonesome Pine Trail 387 586 28 16,415 48 Preservation
Fawn Lane 218 802 28 22,450 48 Preservation
Lantern Lane 356 556 28 15,563 48 Preservation
Laurene Avenue 360 470 24 11,275 48 Preservation
Rohavic Lane 452 477 30 14,320 48 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 481 407 28 11,410 48 Preservation
Tamarack Lane 542 571 28 15,988 48 Preservation
77th Street E 41 747 24 17,934 47 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 491 498 40 19,920 47 Preservation
Killdeer Drive 320 127 28 3,552 47 Preservation
Eva Street 212 325 30 9,759 46 Preservation
Heather Court N 265 478 28 13,374 46 Preservation
Stage Coach Trail 524 589 28 16,502 46 Preservation
Stage Coach Trail 525 291 28 8,147 46 Preservation
Birch Court 104 129 28 3,602 45 Preservation
Kingfisher Court 324 490 28 13,710 45 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 496 538 40 21,520 45 Preservation
Bloom Court 121 471 24 11,313 45 Preservation
Terra Court 556 366 28 10,245 45 Preservation
Black Duck Drive 106 318 28 8,907 44 Preservation
Baldwin Lake Road 1139 1,803 21 37,857 44 Preservation
Killdeer Drive 321 158 28 4,419 44 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 488 213 44 9,353 44 Preservation
77th Street E 43 495 24 11,875 44 Preservation
James Street 308 442 28 12,373 44 Preservation
Linda Avenue 366 182 28 5,107 43 Preservation
Linda Lane 371 332 28 9,295 43 Preservation
Shadow Lake Drive E 489 157 40 6,286 43 Preservation
35 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Shadow Lake Drive E 490 418 40 16,701 43 Preservation
4th Avenue 19 479 41 19,643 43 Preservation
Main St 1260 624 22 13,724 42 Preservation
Fairmont Drive 217 620 22 13,642 42 Preservation
Glenview Drive 245 475 22 10,457 42 Preservation
Phelps Road 421 1,318 28 36,892 42 Preservation
White Owl Drive 612 726 28 20,331 42 Preservation
Diane Court 192 46 30 1,380 42 Preservation
Lakeview Drive 1044 1,324 24 31,777 41 Preservation
Glenview Drive 1098 655 22 14,409 41 Preservation
Fox Circle 970 173 28 4,832 41 Preservation
Meadow Court 403 585 28 16,390 40 Reconstruction
Nancy Drive 963 1,156 30 34,688 40 Reconstruction
Shadow Lake Drive E 495 388 40 15,515 40 Reconstruction
Fairmont Drive 216 604 22 13,287 40 Reconstruction
Elbe Street NE 202 177 30 5,304 39 Reconstruction
Beaver Trail 99 534 28 14,943 39 Reconstruction
Black Duck Drive 112 149 28 4,173 39 Reconstruction
Lakeview Drive 1042 1,307 24 31,375 39 Reconstruction
Hickory Place 269 185 28 5,171 38 Reconstruction
Oak Lane 664 839 24 20,146 37 Reconstruction
81st Street E 51 348 30 10,453 37 Reconstruction
81st Street E 50 415 30 12,449 37 Reconstruction
Black Duck Drive 111 498 28 13,945 37 Reconstruction
Deerwood Lane 185 1,242 28 34,766 37 Reconstruction
Elbe Street NE 203 864 30 25,923 36 Reconstruction
77th Street E 40 1,264 24 30,342 36 Reconstruction
Gladstone Circle 239 619 22 13,621 34 Reconstruction
Post Road 429 845 27 22,822 34 Reconstruction
Black Duck Drive 109 327 28 9,165 33 Reconstruction
Orange Street 675 1,017 24 24,416 32 Reconstruction
Holly Drive E 1012 726 18 13,064 32 Reconstruction
Glenview Drive 244 630 22 13,851 31 Reconstruction
36 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Country Lane 160 222 28 6,215 31 Reconstruction
Karth Road 318 454 30 13,623 31 Reconstruction
Lakeview Drive 1045 1,316 24 31,585 30 Reconstruction
Woodland Drive 636 1,364 22 30,000 30 Reconstruction
Black Duck Drive 113 1,652 28 46,250 29 Reconstruction
Rustic Lane 471 785 18 14,121 29 Reconstruction
Gladstone Circle 1020 643 22 14,157 28 Reconstruction
Diane Street 194 511 30 15,326 25 Reconstruction
Knoll Drive 989 1,019 28 28,521 23 Reconstruction
Olive Street 672 498 24 11,962 23 Reconstruction
Maple Street 389 926 24 22,228 22 Reconstruction
James Street 307 2,202 28 61,661 21 Reconstruction
Nordin Street 1261 221 28 6,200 21 Reconstruction
Diane Court 191 214 30 6,411 21 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 457 3,088 24 74,118 21 Reconstruction
Barbara Lane 994 543 28 15,196 20 Reconstruction
Oak Lane 662 2,013 24 48,306 18 Reconstruction
Peltier Lake Drive 408 2,902 22 63,836 17 Reconstruction
Diane Street 193 1,550 30 46,486 17 Reconstruction
Holly Drive E 1008 3,894 24 93,453 16 Reconstruction
Pheasant Run S 418 505 28 14,146 16 Reconstruction
Talle Lane 541 1,130 30 33,886 15 Reconstruction
62nd Avenue N 28A 141 22 3,103 14 Reconstruction
64th Street 1001 374 24 8,983 14 Reconstruction
Otter Lake Drive 679 1,243 24 29,826 14 Reconstruction
Red Maple Lane 438 1,515 28 42,414 13 Reconstruction
4th Avenue 20 3,838 24 92,101 12 Reconstruction
Orange Street 674 827 28 23,161 12 Reconstruction
Olive Street 673 799 24 19,184 11 Reconstruction
Red Maple Lane 441 1,111 28 31,096 11 Reconstruction
Evergreen Trail 215 1,135 28 31,786 11 Reconstruction
4th Avenue 22 1,363 24 32,724 11 Reconstruction
Evergreen Trail 213 503 28 14,072 10 Reconstruction
37 Appendix B
Name Section ID Length (ft) Width (ft) Area (sf) 2020 PCI Recommended
Maintenance Activity
Evergreen Trail 214 884 30 26,527 10 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 458 1,505 24 36,123 9 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 462 1,294 24 31,052 9 Reconstruction
Oak Lane 663 2,256 18 40,609 9 Reconstruction
Danube Street 177 502 30 15,072 9 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 456 2,471 24 59,313 8 Reconstruction
Canfield Road 128 562 30 16,872 8 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 464 2,603 24 62,464 7 Reconstruction
64th Street 30 708 24 17,002 7 Reconstruction
Red Maple Lane 439 432 28 12,088 7 Reconstruction
81st Street E 1000 1,253 24 30,061 6 Reconstruction
Gaage Lane 235 831 30 24,944 6 Reconstruction
Joyer Lane 316 1,972 30 59,156 4 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 455 1,682 24 40,368 2 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 465 1,349 24 32,383 1 Reconstruction
Karth Road 317 1,220 30 36,605 0 Reconstruction
Rondeau Lake Road
W 463 1,966 24 47,187 0 Reconstruction
81st Street E 49 1,034 24 24,822 0 Reconstruction
%&d(
%&c(
County Hwy 10 County Hwy 14County Hwy 21County Hwy 23County Hwy 14
Hodgson RdCounty Hwy 23County Hwy 212020 Chip Seal
Watermain Repairs
Mill & Overlay
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Thin Overlay
2020
2021
2022
2024
0 4,250Feet¯Figure 2 - Mill and Overlay Document Path: K:\02029-230\GIS\Maps\MillOverlay2019.mxd Date Saved: 10/29/2019 3:12:21 PM1 inch = 4,250 f eet
Lino Lakes PMP
Lino Lakes, MN
CENTENNIAL GREEN PARK
CENTENNIAL PARK
EASTSIDE PARK
LOCHNESS PARK
NORTH STAR
PHEASANTRUN PARK
TRAIL
CARL ECK PARK
TAMARACK PARK
INNER
CENTER PARK
CITY HALL PARK
Wenzel Farms
COUNTRY LAKES PARK
BIRCH PARK
SHENANDOAH PARK
GROVE PARK
Sunset Oaks Park
CLEARWATER CREEK PARK
MARSHAN PARK
PHEASANT HILLS PARK
Woods of Baldwin Lake
BRANDYWOOD PARK
ARENA ACRES
HIGHLAND MEADOWS PARK
Sunrise Park
BEHM'S PARK
LINO PARK
LAURIELAMOTTEMEMORIAL PARK
MCBRIDE MEMORIAL PARK
ROYAL MEADOWS PARK
ACORN CREEK PARK
EAGLE LAKE
TRAILTRAIL
BALDWIN PARK
GOLDEN LAKE PARK
CANTERBURY PARK
CANTERBURY PARK
CITY HALL PARK
Rondeau Lake
Peltier Lake
Marshan Lake
Centerville Lake
George Watch Lake
Sherman LakeWardsLake
Reshanau Lake
Rice Lake
Golden Lake
BaldwinLake
Bald Eagle Lake
AmeliaLake
Otter Lake
Cedar Lake
Rice Creek Marsh
RICE CREEKCHAIN OF LAKESREGIONAL TRAIL
County Hwy 10 County Hwy 14County Hwy 21County Hwy 23County Hwy 14
Hodgson RdCounty Hwy 23County Hwy 21%&d(
%&c(
)sBlaineLinoLakesCirclePinesLinoLakesColumbus
Lino Lakes
HugoLinoLakesH u g o
White Bear Twp.
Lino Lakes
North Oaks
Lino Lakes
S h o r e v i e w
Lino Lakes
White Bear Twp.
Lino Lakes
Centerville
Arrowhead Dr Lam otte D rL a m o t t e C i r
1 inch = 3,200 feet
5 YearStreet Reconstruction Plan
Document Path: K:\02029-230\GIS\Maps\2019StreetReconPlanNew.mxd Date Saved: 10/29/2019 12:29:34 PM
Street Reconstruction Plan
2021
2024
City of Lino Lakes MN
±
S:\Community Development\Projects\Capital Improvement Projects\2021 Street Rehab and Recon\Staff Reports\20201005 WS Pavement Management and 2021
Projects\5. 2020.09.02.Lino Lakes PMP.DOCX 701 XENIA AVENUE S | SUITE 300 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN | 55416 | 763.541.4800 | WSBENG.COM Memorandum
To: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
Diane Hankee, City Engineer
From: Lee Gustafson, WSB
Date: September 2, 2020
Re: Lino Lakes Pavement Management Program
The City of Lino Lakes pavement management program has in the past included the seal coating
of bituminous roadways. As you may be aware, many Minnesota cities, including Lino Lakes have
experienced severe surface delamination issues on streets that have previously been seal
coated. Due to these issues, a number of cities have completely gone away from seal coat
treatments.
Typical seal coat failure:
My previous position as city engineer for the City of Minnetonka allowed me the opportunity to
help build and manage a pavement management system for over 20 years. I learned a lot during
that time period and sought advice from many. The program is relatively simple. It is based on a
good road design with a thicker bituminous section. This approach provides options for cost
effective maintenance procedures such as mill and overlays. It is a very low risk program with
high rewards.
Typical Minnetonka 20+ year old street:
Michael Grochala and Diane Hankee
September 2, 2020
Page 2
S:\Community Development\Projects\Capital Improvement Projects\2021 Street Rehab and
Recon\Staff Reports\20201005 WS Pavement Management and 2021 Projects\5.
2020.09.02.Lino Lakes PMP.DOCX
Please note in this picture that there are minimal cracks and essentially no patches which greatly
reduces maintenance efforts by public works crews. The primary goal of this program is to
increase the longevity of each street to 50-60+ years - thereby making the program extremely
cost effective.
For years I have been recommending that cities refrain from seal coating due to these
delamination issues, and instead use this money towards building a thicker bituminous road
section – 4.5 to 5 inches thick preferably. A thicker road section will obviously be stronger and
last many years longer than a thinner section. As mentioned, a thicker bituminous section also
provides more options for cost effective maintenance procedures. A thicker bituminous section is
very easy to mill and overlay multiple times versus a thin bituminous section. It sometimes is not
even possible or advisable to mill a thin bituminous section.
The City of Lino Lakes recently updated their standard road section to include a thicker
bituminous section - 4.5 inches. With this thicker section, the city will now be able to effectively
use mill and overlays for future maintenance efforts. When doing a mill and overlay, the top 1.5”
or 2” will be removed and the remaining bituminous will provide a good structural base for the
new blacktop surface. Currently, the City of Lino Lake’s mill and overlay/ street rehabilitation
program has included full depth mill and overlays/ reclamations because the existing road
sections are not thick enough to complete a standard mill and overlay. This additional expense
reduces the amount of roadway linear footage the City can maintain within its annual budget.
Another benefit of a thicker bituminous section that I reviewed and discussed recently with the
Cities of Minnetrista and Champlin is the cost impact to developers. Although a thicker bituminous
section costs more upfront to construct, a thicker section can actually lead to a cost savings for
developers over the long term, or at a minimum, no net cost increase.
A thin bituminous section typically requires developers to only install a 2-inch base before they
are allowed to begin building homes. City of Lino Lake’s Ordinance requires that 70 percent of
homes be constructed before the wear course may be installed. When it comes time to install the
wear course in this situation, portions of the 2-inch base course needs to be replaced before they
are allowed to pave the wear course. With a thicker bituminous section, developers install a 3-
inch base course prior to home construction. This 3-inch section provides a better base structure
for building construction resulting in the developer replacing less base course before paving the
wear course.
Michael Grochala and Diane Hankee
September 2, 2020
Page 3
S:\Community Development\Projects\Capital Improvement Projects\2021 Street Rehab and
Recon\Staff Reports\20201005 WS Pavement Management and 2021 Projects\5.
2020.09.02.Lino Lakes PMP.DOCX
Many people have asked me – “what should I use as a surface treatment if I don’t sealcoat?” My
response has always been to keep it simple. If you can make your roads last years and years
longer with just having a good design and a thicker bituminous section, why incur additional costs
and risk applying something that you don’t know the affects in 20 years.
One of the key factors in increasing the longevity of a road is to keep the base (gravel) dry. Crack
filling is therefore an important recommend maintenance strategy for all roadways, parking lots
and trails.
Lastly, parking lots can be viewed in the same light as streets, and you also have the option to
crack fill and fog seal them. Fog seals can more easily be applied to parking lots than streets
because you can close parking lots to traffic while the fog seal cures. In addition, parking lots
have lesser concerns about skid resistance compared to streets which makes a fog seal a good
choice for parking lots.
As always, let me know if you have any questions.
C:\Users\diane.hankee\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.MSO\CAC44F8A.docx 701 XENIA AVENUE S | SUITE 300 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN | 55416 | 763.541.4800 | WSBENG.COM October 5, 2020
City of Lino Lakes
Mr. Michael Grochala
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Re: Request for Proposal to Complete 2021 Street Improvement Projects
Dear Mr. Grochala:
The City of Lino Lakes is needing engineering services for the preparation of plans and
specifications for the 2021 Street Improvement Projects. The project includes:
2021 Street Reconstruction Project:
Full Depth Reclamation (approximately 2.2 miles) – Joyer Lane, Karth Road, Talle Lane,
Canfield Road, and Gaage Lane neighborhood roadways, and 4th Avenue (Main Street to
Pine Street). The estimated project cost is $2,600,000.00.
2021 Street Rehabilitation Project:
Full Depth Mill and Overlay / Reclamation (approximately 0.6 miles) – Forsham Lake
Drive, Post Road, and Stage Coach Trail (from cul du sac north 1,400 feet). The estimated
project cost is $795,000.00 including water system repairs.
Thin Overlay (approximately 1.6 miles) – James Street, Knoll Drive and Oak Lane as a *
Bid Alternate. The estimated project cost is $170,000.00.
Based on the project scope, WSB would perform the following tasks:
I. Prepare Final Project Construction Plans
Final construction plans will be prepared indicating the project locations and plan
view sheets. The 2021 Street Reconstruction project of Joyer Lane, Karth Road, and
Gaage Lane neighborhood roadways, and 4th Avenue (Main St to the north) will include
topographic survey. The 2021 Rehabilitation project will not be surveyed, similar to past
projects, as the curb and gutter will remain. Base drawing information will include
GSOC design locates, curb inspection, city parcel map information and record plans.
II. Final Quantities
C:\Users\diane.hankee\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.MSO\CAC44F8A.docx
A bid item quantity take off and engineer’s opinion of probable cost will be
completed on the final construction plans. A proposal form will be generated for the
contractor bidding process.
III. Prepare Permits, Specifications and Bidding Documents
WSB will assist the City in preparing permit application(s) and/or approval requests
and will assist the City with submitting the applications/approval requests to the
appropriate regulatory agencies. Permit applications and/or agency review submittals
are anticipated for: (1) RCWD – erosion control, and (2) Anoka County – work in
right of way.
WSB will develop the final project plans and specifications based on the agency
review comments. This task will include a constructability review and QA/QC
review of the final plans, quantities, and specifications.
Upon completion of permitting, and agency review and approval, a final set of
construction documents will be prepared for electronic bidding.
WSB will print, assemble, and submit the final contract documents to the City and
request authorization to advertise the project for bidding. WSB will receive and
respond to bidder inquiries concerning the plans, specifications, and intent of the
project. Logs of all inquiries will be kept and maintained to document inquiries.
WSB will attend the project bid opening with the City.
WSB will review the low bidder’s bid proposal, contractor’s and subcontractor’s
personnel proposed for the project and relative experience, quality and availability of
equipment, performance on similar projects, references, nature and extent of other
similar contracts, whether or not the contractor or subcontractors have ever been
denied contract award, and any other information that would affect the ability of the
contractor to perform the work.
The engineering fee to complete the 2021 Street Reconstruction Project is $113,428.00
and for the 2021 Street Rehabilitation Project is $43,433.00. For a total not to exceed
amount of $156,861.00.
This letter represents our understanding of the 2021 Street Improvement Projects and the
proposed scope of services. If you are in agreement with the scope of services and
proposed fee, please sign in the appropriate space below and return one copy to us.
If you have any questions about this proposal, please feel free to call me at 763-287-
7167.
C:\Users\diane.hankee\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.MSO\CAC44F8A.docx
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Edward C. Youngquist
Project Manager
ACCEPTANCE:
The City of Lino Lakes hereby accepts the WSB proposal of $156,861.00 for services
outlined in this letter.
City of Lino Lakes
Name
Title
Date
Senior Water Resources
Project Engineering Project Project Office Survey Environmental Two Person Total
Manager Specialist VI Engineer Engineer Technician Coordinator Scientist Survey Crew Hours Cost
Description
2021 Reconstruction -4th Ave, Talle, Karth, Joyer
Construction Plans
Survey 2.2 miles 2 2 4 24 32 5,600.00$
Public Engagement Respond to Drainage 24 12 6 12 2 56 8,410.00$
Road Design (Alignment, x-section)10 40 12 16 6 84 11,800.00$
Cad for roadways 2 310 24 2 338 48,058.00$
Culvert replacememt and Drainage- RCWD model 20 40 12 30 4 106 15,430.00$
Quality Review 6 6 972.00$
RCWD Preperation & Permit 8 20 26 20 74 10,500.00$
Specifications and Bid Administration
Specifications 2 6 24 4 8 44 5,722.00$
Quantity Estimates 2 4 6 2 14 1,986.00$
Bid Documents 1 2 2 10 15 1,637.00$
Cost Estimate 2 2 4 2 10 1,432.00$
Quality Review 4 1 6 2 13 1,881.00$
Subtotal 82 436 122 90 28 4 6 24 792 113,428.00$
2021 Rehabilitation -Post, Forsham, Stage Coach
Construction Plans
Road Design (Alignment, x-section)16 8 8 32 4,808.00$
Cad for roadways 2 80 82 11,764.00$
Water Systems 12 10 2 24 3,642.00$
Quality Review 6 2 8 1,240.00$
RCWD Preperation & Permit 2 12 16 8 1 39 5,422.00$
Specifications and Bid Administration
Specifications 6 8 18 8 40 5,280.00$
Quantity Estimates 4 6 16 1 27 3,793.00$
Bid Documents 1 8 6 2 6 23 2,960.00$
Cost Estimate 4 12 12 28 3,972.00$
Quality Review 2 1 1 4 552.00$
Subtotal 55 144 81 11 16 307 43,433.00$
Grand Total Hours 137 580 203 101 44 4 6 24 1099 156,861.00$
Hourly Rate 162.00 143.00 134.00 143.00 94.00 162.00 143.00 185.00
Grand Total Direct Labor Costs 22,194.00$ 82,940.00$ 27,202.00$ 14,443.00$ 4,136.00$ 648.00$ 858.00$ 4,440.00$ 156,861.00$
Total Fee (Hourly not to exceed) 156,861.00$
Engineering Fee Estimate
For the City of Lino Lakes
5-Oct-20
2021 Street Improvement Projects
2020 Pavement Management Report
2021 Street Improvement Projects
Council Work Session
October 5, 2020
1
Pavement Management Plan
The City of Lino Lakes implements a Pavement Management Program for roadway
maintenance and reconstruction.
The Pavement Management Program includes:
•inspecting and rating pavement conditions
•analyzing various maintenance and rehabilitation strategies
•budgeting and constructing the necessary projects
2
Pavement Management Plan
100.4 miles of bituminous roadways in the City of Lino Lakes.
City rates 25% of City’s millage annually.
Pavement Management Software used to develop an Overall Condition Index (OCI) for
street segments. The OCI is used to categorize maintenance needs.
This information is combined with traffic volumes and input from Public Works and the
community to generate the City’s 5-year Capital Improvement Plan.
3
Pavement Management Plan
OCI is based on a 0 to 100 scale, with 100 being a road in perfect condition.
The 20 weighted average OCI for bituminous roads within Lino Lakes is 70.97.
The City has added new roadways in the recent years, helping keep the average high.
The roadway conditions are separated into three separate categories: Adequate, Marginal, and
Problem. Marginal roadways require roadway preservation and Problem roadways require
reconstruction.
The Pavement Management Report identified the need to focus on the Marginal roadways so
that they wouldn’t fall into the more expensive Problem category.
The 2020 percentages of bituminous roadways in these categories are as follows:
Adequate (PCI of 70.01-100) –65.0% (65 miles)
Marginal (PCI of 40.01-70.00) –20.3% (20 miles)
Problem (PCI of 0.00 –40.00) –14.6% (15 miles)
4
Pavement Condition Map
5
History of Maintenance
Since 2005 the City has performed the following improvements :
Preventative Maintenance
63 miles Chip Seal /Crack Fill /Reclamite
Pavement Structure Improvements
5 miles Reconstruction (drainage improvements)
15.5 miles Full Depth Reclamation (recycle in place, full pavement section replacement)
11 miles Mill and Overlay
31.5 miles Total Improved Roadways
6
Background
2018 Pavement Management Report identified the need to focus on the Marginal
roadways so that they wouldn’t fall into the more expensive Problem category.
The City’s Plan recommended the need to increase funding to 10% per year from the
standard 5% to address the marginal roadway needs. The 2021 budget includes a
7.5% increase.
Staff is recommending a change to our specifications and maintenance strategies.
Increased our pavement thickness on new construction and are eliminating seal
coating as an interim improvement. Reference Memo
7
2021 Improvement Projects
Two projects in 2021
Street Reconstruction Project funded primarily with Street Reconstruction Bonds. On June 22,
2020 the City approved the 5 year Street Reconstruction Plan.
Annual Street Rehabilitation Project using Pavement Management Funds.
Water system maintenance will also be addressed where municipal utilities exist .
2021 Street Reconstruction Project:
Full Depth Reclamation (approximately 2.2 miles) –Joyer Lane, Karth Road, Talle Lane, Canfield
Road, and Gaage Lane neighborhood roadways, and 4th Avenue (Main Street to Pine Street). The
estimated project cost is $2,600,000.00.
Municipal State Aid may be available for 4th Ave. and will be evaluated as part of project funding.
8
2021 Street Improvement Projects
2021 Street Rehabilitation Project:
2021 funding,including a pavement fund balance carried forward, and next year’s proposed
budget of $711,112.00, is a total of $855,000.00. The proposed improvements include:
Full Depth Mill and Overlay / Reclamation (approximately 0.6 miles)–Forsham Lake Drive, Post
Road, and Stage Coach Trail (from cul du sac north 1,400 feet). The estimated project cost is
$795,000.00 including water system repairs.
Thin Overlay (approximately 1.6 miles)–James Street, Knoll Drive and Oak Lane. Thin overlays
are planned to address Problem roadways in need of reconstruction that the City cannot fund in
the short term. The estimated project cost is $170,000.00. This portion of the project will be bid as
an alternate to maintain project flexibility.
Staff will also initiate a separate preventative maintenance project for roads in the Adequate
category. These will include streets in more recent developments
9
5 Year Street
Maintenance Plan
10
11
5 Year Street Reconstruction Plan
Project Costs and Funding
12
Street
Reconstruction
Bonds
Pavement
Management
Fund
Water
Operating Fund
Total
Project Cost
2021 Reconstruction $2,600,000 $2,600,000
2021 Rehabilitation $840,000 $125,000 $965,000
Total Estimated Cost $2,600,000 $840,000 $125,000 $3,565,000
2021 Street Improvement Projects
WSB & Associates submitted a proposal to complete the plans and specifications, and provide bid
documents for the 2021 Street Reconstruction Project is $113,400 and for the 2021 Street
Rehabilitation Project is $43,400. For a total not to exceed amount of $156,800.
The project schedule:
Order Improvement, Authorize Plans and Specifications October 12, 2020
Approve Plans and Specifications, Authorize Ad for Bids November 23, 2020
City Opens Bids December 17, 2020
City Council Awards Contract December 28, 2020
Construction Begins April-May, 2021
Final Completion September, 2021
13
WS – Item 4
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item 4
Date: October 5, 2020
To: City Council
From: John Swenson, Public Safety Director
Re: Police Division Fleet
Background
The Police Division has a total of 21 vehicles in the fleet with the following breakdown:
• 3 vehicles Administration
• 4 vehicles Investigations
• 12 vehicles Patrol
• 1 vehicle CSO
• 1 vehicle Police Reserves
Staff will provide information on the deployment and use of the Police Division fleet.
Attachments
Police Division Presentation – TO FOLLOW
Lino Lakes Public Safety
One Vision. One Mission.
Police Fleet Overview
One Vision. One Mission.
Purpose:
Provide information on the deployment of patrol vehicles of the
Lino Lakes Police Division
Current Police Fleet
Unit #Year Description Assignment Mileage Sept 30, 2020 Veh Age -Yrs
382 2013 Ford Interceptor Marked Reserves 91,026 7
*388 2013 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 122,763 7
*383 2013 Ford Interceptor Sedan Unmarked Patrol 128,090 7
392 2014 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 95,871 6
394 2014 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 99,960 6
393 2014 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 87,040 6
**395 2014 Ford Explorer Police Unmarked Out of Service 130,155 6
398 2015 Ford Explorer Police Unmarked Admin 65,401 5
397 2015 Ford Explorer Police Unmarked Admin 79,587 5
399 2015 Ford Explorer Police Unmarked Patrol 88,484 5
396 2015 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 119,161 5
304 2016 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 76,296 4
303 2016 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 82,147 4
302 2016 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol Sgts 93,303 4
301 2016 Ford Explorer Police Unmarked Admin 68,487 4
307 2017 Ford Fusion Unmarked Investigation 16,065 3
306 2017 Ford Fusion Unmarked Investigation 26,567 3
308 2018 GMC Sierra Crew CSO 30,440 2
309 2018 Ford Escape Investigation 15,496 2
311 2017 Jeep Cherokee Investigation 15,835 3
314 2020 Ford Explorer Police Marked K9 12,433 0
315 2020 Ford Explorer Police Marked Patrol 2,429 0
***316 2020 Ford Explorer Police Marked Not in Service 0
***317 2020 Ford Explorer Police Unmarked Not in Service 0
* To be replaced in Q4 2020 by 316 & 317
** No longer in service. To be sold.
*** To be built in Q4 2020
Police Fleet Mileage –Average Per Month
Unit #Year Assignment Mileage Sept 30, 2020 In Service Date Age in months Avg miles/month
382 2013 Reserves 91,026 7/19/2012 98 mo 929
*388 2013 Patrol 122,763 9/9/2013 84 mo 1,461
*383 2013 Patrol 128,090 1/11/2013 92 mo 1,392
392 2014 Patrol 95,871 6/10/2014 75 mo 1,278
394 2014 Patrol 99,960 6/26/2014 75 mo 1,333
393 2014 Patrol 87,040 6/13/2014 75 mo 1,161
**395 2014 (Retired)130,155 7/5/2014 75 mo 1,735
398 2015 Admin 65,401 4/14/2015 65 mo 1,006
397 2015 Admin 79,587 4/15/2015 65 mo 1,224
399 2015 Patrol 88,484 10/14/2015 59 mo 1,500
396 2015 Patrol 119,161 5/20/2015 64 mo 1,862
304 2016 Patrol 76,296 7/13/2016 50 mo 1,526
303 2016 Patrol 82,147 6/23/2016 51 mo 1,611
302 2016 Patrol Sgts 93,303 6/16/2016 51 mo 1,829
301 2016 Admin 68,487 4/20/2016 53 mo 1,292
307 2017 Investigation 16,065 8/7/2017 37 mo 434
306 2017 Investigation 26,567 8/11/2017 37 mo 718
308 2018 CSO 30,440 8/24/2018 25 mo 1,218
309 2018 Investigation 15,496 8/2/2018 25 mo 620
311 2017 Investigation 15,835 1/28/2019 20 mo 792
314 2020 K9 12,433 3/15/2020 6 mo 2,072
315 2020 Patrol 2,429 8/26/2020 1 mo 2,429
***316 2020 Patrol Not in Service NA
***317 2020 Patrol Not in Service NA
* To be replaced in Q4 2020 by 316 & 317
** No longer in service. To be sold.
*** To be built in Q4 2020
Unit #Year Assignment Mileage Sept, 2020 In Service Date Age in months Avg miles/month
*388 2013 Patrol 122,763 9/9/2013 84 mo 1,461
*383 2013 Patrol 128,090 1/11/2013 92 mo 1,392
392 2014 Patrol 95,871 6/10/2014 75 mo 1,278
394 2014 Patrol 99,960 6/26/2014 75 mo 1,333
393 2014 Patrol 87,040 6/13/2014 75 mo 1,161
399 2015 Patrol 88,484 10/14/2015 59 mo 1,500
396 2015 Patrol 119,161 5/20/2015 64 mo 1,862
304 2016 Patrol 76,296 7/13/2016 50 mo 1,526
303 2016 Patrol 82,147 6/23/2016 51 mo 1,611
302 2016 Patrol Sgts 93,303 6/16/2016 51 mo 1,829
314 2020 K9 12,433 3/15/2020 6 mo 2,072
315 2020 Patrol 2,429 8/26/2020 1 mo 2,429
***316 2020 Patrol Not in Service NA
***317 2020 Patrol Not in Service NA Total: 19,454
* To be replaced in Q4 2020 by 316 & 317
** No longer in service. To be sold.Average:1,621
*** To be built in Q4 2020
Total Patrol Mileage/Month: 19,454
Average Patrol Mileage per vehicle per Month: 1,621
Mileage –Patrol Vehicles Only
Administration and Investigation Vehicles
One Vision. One Mission.
Admin vehicles are used to respond to
police and fire incidents, and respond on-
call during off-hours.
301 -2016 Ford Interceptor -Director
397 -2015 Ford Interceptor -Dep.Director
398 -2015 Ford Interceptor -Captain
Investigation Vehicles are used for
investigators to conduct police business
and to respond to fire incidents. The
vehicles are also used by patrol when
covert/undercover vehicles are needed.
306 -2017 Ford Fusion
307 -2017 Ford Fusion
309 -2018 Ford Escape
311 -2017 Jeep Cherokee
Reserve Officer and Community Service Officer
(CSO) Vehicles
One Vision. One Mission.
•One vehicle assigned to the Reserve Unit (Unit #382 –2013 Ford
Sedan)
•One vehicle assigned to the CSO’s (Unit #308 –2018 Silverado
Crew)
•These vehicles are not fully equipped for police patrol nor fire
response, however, both are equipped and used for transporting
prisoners.
•Unit #308 serves a utility purpose as well. It is used to transport
bulk items such as road debris, training equipment, soiled fire
equipment, etc. This unit is also used for animal control/transport.
Special Use Vehicles
One Vision. One Mission.
Unit #305 is a 2001 Polaris
snowmobile used for snowmobile
enforcement, snowmobile safety
classes, and responding to winter
incidents.
Unit #312 is a 2019 Polaris Ranger Crew
used for remote area search and rescue,
remote area transportation of personnel
and equipment for wildland fire
operations, as well as off-road
enforcement efforts.
LLPSD Police Division -Patrol
One Vision. One Mission.
303399
396
394
393
392
302
388
383
315
314
K9
304
There are 12 cars assigned
to the Patrol Division. One
of the vehicles, Unit #314,
is assigned to specialty
patrol (K9) and is not
available for general patrol
One Vision. One Mission.
•With the specialty
vehicle out of the
rotation, there are 11
squads left for patrol
cars.
•To illustrate, we used
a shift with three
officers per shift.
399
396
394
393
392
388
383
315
304
303
302
One Vision. One Mission.
0600 -1600 Sgt. Boehme399
396
394
393
392
388
383
304
303
302
A
315
302
One Vision. One Mission.
0600 -1600 Sgt. Boehme
0630 -1600 Ofc. Halverson
0630 -1600 Ofc. Riehm
0700 -1500 CMS SRO Thill
399
396
394
393
392
388
383
315
304
303
302
A
399
A
383
A
302
304
SRO
0600 -1600 Sgt. Boehme
0630 -1600 Ofc. Halverson
0630 -1600 Ofc. Riehm
0700 -1500 CMS SRO Thill
1500 -0030 Ofc. Hallin
1500 -0030 Ofc. Ng
399
396
394
393
392
388
383
315
303
304
302
302
A
399
A
383
A
304
SRO
396
B
315
B
0600 -1600 Sgt. Boehme
0630 -1600 Ofc. Halverson
0630 -1600 Ofc. Riehm
0700 -1500 CMS SRO Thill
1500 -0030 Ofc. Hallin
1500 -0030 Ofc. Ng
1700 -0300 Sgt. Rumpsa
399
396
394
393
392
388
383
315
304
303
302
302
A
399
A
383
A
302
B
304
SRO
396
B
315
B
One Vision. One Mission.
0600 -1600 Sgt. Boehme
0630 -1600 Ofc. Halverson
0630 -1600 Ofc. Riehm
0700 -1500 CMS SRO Thill
1500 -0030 Ofc. Hallin
1500 -0030 Ofc. Ng
1700 -0300 Sgt. Rumpsa
2130 -0700 Ofc. Monson
2130 -0700 Ofc. Sinna
2130 -0700 Ofc. Carlson
399
396
394
393
392
388
383
315
304
303
302
A
399
A
383
A
302
B
315
B
304
SRO
396
B
304
C
399
C
394
C
302
One Vision. One Mission.
0600 -1600 Sgt. Boehme
0630 -1600 Ofc. Halverson
0630 -1600 Ofc. Riehm
0700 -1500 CMS SRO Thill
1500 -0030 Ofc. Hallin
1500 -0030 Ofc. Ng
1700 -0300 Sgt. Rumpsa
2130 -0700 Ofc. Monson
2130 -0700 Ofc. Sinna
2130 -0700 Ofc. Carlson
399
396
394
393
392
388
383
315
304
303
If this was a Saturday or Sunday, we would need two
squads for Eaglebrook. Wednesday evenings, one car
for Eaglebrook.
302
302
A
399
A
383
A
302
B
315
B
304
SRO
396
B
304
C
399
C
394
C
One Vision. One Mission.
0600 -1600 Sgt. Boehme
0630 -1600 Ofc. Halverson
0630 -1600 Ofc. Riehm
0700 -1500 CMS SRO Thill
1500 -0030 Ofc. Hallin
1500 -0030 Ofc. Ng
1700 -0300 Sgt. Rumpsa
2130 -0700 Ofc. Monson
2130 -0700 Ofc. Sinna
2130 -0700 Ofc. Carlson
399
396
394
393
392
388
383
315
304
303
302
302
A
399
A
383
A
302
B
315
B
304
SRO
396
B
304
C
399
C
394
CIf this was a Saturday or Sunday, we would need two squads for
Eaglebrook. Wednesday evenings, one car for Eaglebrook. If a
squad is being repaired or a TZD detail, that would be an
additional squad or more in use.
One Vision. One Mission.
Thank you
WS – Item 5
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item No. 5
Date: October 5, 2020
To: City Council
From: Sarah Cotton, City Administrator
Re: Employee Wellness
Background
Per the City of Lino Lakes Personnel Policy, employees may convert accrued sick leave
or PTO leave to pay for their monthly health club membership dues up to a maximum
of $60 per month, provided that the employee maintains a sick leave balance or PTO
balance of 80 hours.
Reimbursements are made on a monthly basis upon receipt of a completed form and
evidence of payment to the health club. The reimbursement is subject to federal, state,
and FICA tax withholdings.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many employees have suspended their memberships to
health clubs and have found virtual fitness alternatives that require monthly membership
dues. The current Personnel Policy does not allow for conversion of accrued sick leave
or PTO leave for this purpose; however, staff believes the intent of the policy would
apply to virtual fitness membership dues.
Requested Council Direction
Authorize the use of accrued sick leave or PTO leave for monthly health club or virtual
fitness membership dues.
Attachments
None