Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packets - 2024/03/11
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL Monday, March 11, 2024 6:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL: Lindstrom, Cermak, Gunn, Meehlhause 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes: February 26, 2024 B. Just and Correct Claims C. Resolution 9883, Approving Increase for Auditing Services for 2023-2025 D. Resolution 9884, Authorizing Internal Recruitment Process for Police Sergeant E. Resolution 9885, Approving the Hire of Police Officer Isabel Torres F. Resolution 9886, Approving the Promotion of Chris Atkinson to Position of Public Works Foreman G. Resolution 9887, Authorizing Internal Recruitment Process for Public Works Parks Lead Worker Position H. Resolution 9888, Approving a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City and LELS 204 Regarding Neighborhood Resource officer Specialty Pay I. Resolution 9889, Approving a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City and LELS 204 Regarding Holiday Pay 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Lynette Harris — Care #4AI1 Youth Haven B. Public Informational Meeting — Silver View Storm Water Pond 7. PUBLIC COMMENT Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight's agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. 2nd Reading - Public Hearing, Resolution 9880 Private Property Inflow and Infiltration (1&1) Grant Program B. Resolution 9891 Approving the proposal from WSB for a Park System Master Plan C. Resolution 9890 — Organized Trash Hauling Negotiations 9. REPORTS A. Reports of Mayor and Council B. Reports of Staff 10. NEXT COUNCIL WORK SESSION: Monday, April 1, 2024 at 6:00 pm NEXT COUNCIL MEETING: Monday, March 25, 2024 at 6:00 pm 11. ADJOURNMENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting February 26, 2024 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Mounds View Boulevard, Mounds View, MN 55112 6:00 P.M. 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL: Cermak, Lindstrom, and Meehlhause NOT PRESENT: Gunn 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A. Monday, February 26, 2024, City Council Agenda. MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Approve the Monday, February 26, 2024, agenda as presented. Ayes — 3 5. CONSENT AGENDA Nays — 0 Motion carried. Council Member Meehlhause asked to remove Item 5C. A. Approval of Minutes: February 12, 2024. B. Just and Correct Claims. D. Resolution 9878, Appointing Chair to the Parks and Recreation and Forestry Commission. MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Approve the Consent Agenda as amended removing Item 5C. Ayes — 3 Nays — 0 Motion carried. C. Resolution 9876, Nominating Jim Freichels as Mounds View representative to the Spring Lake Park -Blaine -Mounds View Fire Department Board of Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 2 1 Directors. 2 3 Council Member Meehlhause acknowledged former Mayor Joe Flaherty and thanked him for 4 serving as the representative to the SBM Fire Board for the past six years. He then thanked Jim 5 Freichels for being willing to serve as the SBM Fire Board representative. 6 7 MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 9876, 8 Nominating Jim Freichels as Mounds View representative to the Spring Lake Park -Blaine -Mounds 9 View Fire Department Board of Directors. 10 11 City Administrator Zikmund explained Jim Freichels met with the Fire Chief for over an hour in 12 order to get up to speed on the SBM Fire Department. 13 14 Ayes — 3 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 15 16 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 17 A. 2023 MVPD Annual Report — Chief Zender. 18 19 Police Chief Zender commented on the recent tragedy that occurred in Burnsville and stated he 20 has appreciated the outpouring of support from the community. He stated his thoughts and prayers 21 go out to the families of the officers and firefighter that were involved in this tragedy. He explained 22 there was a somber mood at the Mounds View Police Department and throughout the entire law 23 enforcement community. He discussed how important it was for the community to support public 24 safety providers at this time. 25 26 Police Chief Zender presented the 2023 Mounds View Police Department Annual Report to the 27 Council. He commented on how well the department managed the presidential motorcade in 28 coordination with Public Works and Secret Services. He reviewed the numerous ways the 29 department conducted community outreach in the previous year which included coffee with a cop, 30 rock wall events, Night to Unite and Festival in the Park. He thanked all of the volunteers who 31 made the Festival in the Park possible and thanked the community for donating coats to the coat 32 drive. He discussed the departments staffing levels and noted Police Chief Harder retired in 2023 33 after 26 years of service. He commented further on the staffing changes that occurred in the 34 previous year. He reported the K-9 team continues to be a tremendous asset for the department, as 35 were the department's reserve officers. He discussed the training his officers had received in the 36 previous year and described how Flock had been used to assist with several criminal 37 apprehensions. He explained he would be working on conducting a New Americans Academy and 38 a safety fair in 2024. 39 40 Council Member Meehlhause asked how many officers were serving in the reserve program. 41 Police Chief Zender stated there were four reserve officers at this time. 42 43 Council Member Meehlhause questioned if there was an update regarding the Flock 44 implementation. Police Chief Zender explained he was still waiting on permitting from Ramsey 45 County. He stated he was eager to get this system installed in the community. 46 Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 3 1 Council Member Meehlhause requested further information regarding the New Americans 2 Academy. Police Chief Zender explained the Mounds View Police Department collaborated with 3 the City Attorney, County Attorney and SBM Fire to provide new Americans with classes to 4 familiarize these individuals on the services provided by the City, police and fire. He reported he 5 would be working to schedule an academy in 2024. 6 7 Council Member Meehlhause thanked Police Chief Zender and the entire department for their 8 dedicated service to the community. 9 10 Mayor Lindstrom asked if residents could volunteer for the reserve program. Police Chief Zender 11 explained those interested in volunteering could fill out an application on the department's 12 webpage. 13 14 Mayor Lindstrom requested further information regarding the reality based training the officers 15 would be receiving. Police Chief Zender reported he ordered simunition guns and protective gear 16 for scenario based training, which could be done at Bridges or the Blaine Tach house. 17 18 Mayor Lindstrom questioned if the SRO's were at Pinewood and Edgewood. Police Chief Zender 19 stated the school resource officers were currently servicing at both Pinewood and Edgewood, but 20 were not under contract. He noted the department invoices the school district for SRO services 21 through a good faith agreement. He explained it was his understanding the school district was 22 working on a contract for the future. 23 24 Mayor Lindstrom commented on how calls for service have normalized since 2020. Police Chief 25 Zender reported this was the case. He commented further on how the Ramsey County Appropriate 26 Response model would impact calls going forward. He stated professionally trained public health 27 responders from St. Paul would be sent to mental health calls going forward instead of sending 28 police and fire. 29 3o B. 2023 Tubman Annual Report — Jennifer Dickinson. 31 32 Jennifer Dickinson, representative from Tubman Services, provided the Council with the annual 33 report for 2023 from the Tubman Organization. She described the legal advocacy services that 34 were provided to victims and survivors of domestic violence. She noted a lot of her time was spent 35 on criminal cases on domestic incidents. She commented on the challenges she faced due to 36 complex family issues and court delays. She explained she would be attending roll calls in 2024 37 in order to get to know officers better and to speak to officers about domestic violence and 38 violations of orders for protection. She thanked the City and Mounds View Police Department for 39 partnering with Tubman. 40 41 Council Member Meehlhause asked if Tubman partnered with NYFS. Ms. Dickinson explained 42 she does not typically partner with NYFS because the organizations provide different services, but 43 noted she would be meeting with them next week to talk further about collaboration. 44 45 Council Member Meehlhause inquired if Ms. Dickinson was familiar with CSC. Ms. Dickinson 46 was not. Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 4 2 Council Member Meehlhause explained CSC (Community Support Center) was a small non-profit 3 located in New Brighton that services residents of New Brighton, Mounds View, Arden Hills and 4 Shoreview. This organization helps residents who are on the verge of losing their housing and 5 noted this may be another resource for Tubman. 6 7 Council Member Cermak stated she has used Tubman services and she would not be here today 8 without them. She urged the community to support Tubman. 9 10 Mayor Lindstrom thanked Ms. Dickinson for her presentation and for all of the assistance she 11 provides to Mounds View residents. 12 13 7. PUBLIC COMMENT 14 15 Vince Meyer, 8380 Spring Lake Road, discussed the cement warranty work that would be 16 completed on Spring Lake Road. He reported 14 of 17 driveways had cement popping, along with 17 the curb. He noted three driveways were installed too narrow and asked when this would be 18 corrected. He questioned if Schifsky would be completing the correction work. He expressed 19 concern with the fact the asphalt that was installed went three inches too far onto the curbing, 20 which was now crumbling and running into the storm sewer. He questioned if the sewer line issue 21 had been addressed. He encouraged the Council to drive down Spring Lake Road to take in the 22 poor workmanship of this roadway. 23 24 Bob King, 7408 Silver Lake Road, stated with what happened in Burnsville and due to the fact, 25 the department was short four officers, he understood morale within the Mounds View Police 26 Department was down. He understood officers were working a lot of hours and he suggested the 27 City put together an appreciation day for Mounds View Police Officers. 28 29 Mr. King encouraged the Council to introduce themselves to the three new residents of Mounds 30 View that were attending this meeting. 31 32 Luke Edmond, 8407 Spring Lake Road, commented on the request his wife made for stop signs at 33 84th and Spring Lake Road along with Arden and Spring Lake Road. He noted Public Works 34 declared that criteria had not been met to install stop signs at either of these intersections. He was 35 told the next step was to make a request to the City Council. He requested the Council consider 36 installing stop signs at 841h and Spring Lake Road and at Arden and Spring Lake Road. 37 38 City Administrator Zikmund reported once a petition was submitted the request would be 39 considered by the City Council. He stated he would follow up with Mr. Edmond to ensure he 40 receives a copy of a petition. 41 42 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 43 A. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution 9880, Approval of the Private Inflow and 44 Infiltration Grant and Program. 45 46 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson requested the Council approve the private Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 5 1 inflow and infiltration grant program. He noted the City applied for a grant through the Met 2 Council to assist the City participating in a private inflow and infiltration program. He reported 3 the City was awarded $50,000 in grant funding. Staff recommended the Council approve the grant 4 and program. 5 6 Council Member Meehlhause asked if homeowners would receive the funding before or after the 7 work was done. Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson reported a homeowner 8 would receive the $2,500 in grant funding after the work was completed. 9 10 Mayor Lindstrom inquired if residents would have to pay taxes on the $2,500 grant funding. Public 11 Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson stated he was uncertain. City Administrator 12 Zikmund anticipated residents would have to pay taxes on this grant funding because residents 13 would receive a 1099. 14 15 Mayor Lindstrom opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. 16 17 Sharon Kirscher, 8406 Red Oak Drive, asked why houses built prior to 1960 would be a priority. 18 She explained she remembered when sewer lines came into Mounds View and noted homes used 19 to have private septic systems. City Administrator Zikmund reported the City has substantial data 20 that shows pre-1960 homes have over a 90% to 95% failure on these lines. He noted the goal of 21 this grant from the Met Council was to reduce inflow and infiltration into the sanitary sewer 22 system. For this reason, pre-1960 homes were being targeted. 23 24 Hearing no further public input, Mayor Lindstrom closed the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. 25 26 MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 9880, 27 Approval of the Private Inflow and Infiltration Grant and Program. 28 29 Council Member Meehlhause commented on how the homes built before 1960 had cast iron piping 30 and over time the joints in these lines were leaking. 31 32 Mayor Lindstrom asked if the City would be sending letters to the 450+ homes that were built pre- 33 1960. Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson explained staff would be completing 34 this task. 35 36 Ayes — 3 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 37 38 B. Resolution 9879, Approving Electric Output Filters for VFD's. 39 40 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson requested the Council approve the purchase 41 of electric output filters for VFD's. He described how VFD's have been installed throughout the 42 City along with electric output filters and recommended the Council approve the installation at 43 Treatment Plant 2 and 3. He reported this expense for this project would come from the Water 44 Fund. 45 46 Mayor Lindstrom questioned how long these filters would last. Public Works/Parks and Recreation Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 6 1 Director Peterson reported annual maintenance would occur on the filters and VFD's to make sure 2 they were operating correctly. He stated he did not know the life span for the filters. 3 4 MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 9879, 5 Approving Electric Output Filters for VFD's. 6 7 Ayes — 3 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 8 9 C. Approving the Purchase of One Police Administrative Vehicle Along with 10 Additional Equipment and Setup Costs. 11 12 Police Chief Zender requested the Council approve the purchase of one police administrative 13 vehicle along with additional equipment and setup costs. He explained this investigations vehicle 14 was on the replacement schedule and was budgeted for 2024. He stated this vehicle was put out to 15 the State bid and the total expense would be $34,930.32. It was noted this expense would be 16 covered by the Vehicle and Equipment Fund. 17 18 Council Member Meehlhause questioned how many miles the department typically puts on its 19 administrative vehicles. Police Chief Zender estimated he put 90,000 on his squad in seven years 20 and marked squads put 90,000 to 95,000 miles before needing to be replaced. 21 22 Mayor Lindstrom asked if this would be the first Hyundai Sonata for the department. Police Chief 23 Zender stated this squad would be used for investigations and surveillance. He reported the BCA 24 uses a lot of Hyundai Sonatas. 25 26 MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Approve the Purchase of One Police 27 Administrative Vehicle Along with Additional Equipment and Setup Costs. 28 29 Ayes — 3 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 30 31 D. Resolution 9882, Approving a Maintenance Agreement for Installation of a 32 Storm Sewer Pipe in the Public Right of Way with Marco and Abigail 33 Montermini at 7655 Pleasant View Drive. 34 35 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson requested the Council approve a 36 maintenance agreement for installation of a storm sewer pipe in the public right of way with Marco 37 and Abigail Montermini at 7655 Pleasant View Drive. He explained the property owners 38 purchased the property and built a new home. After the home was completed, the applicants were 39 concerned with their lack of yard and spoke with City staff. He stated staff began working with 40 the property owners and Anderson Engineering on different options. He noted a retaining wall was 41 proposed along with a deeper infiltration basin in order to allow for the regrading of the lot adding 42 more flat or useable area next to the home. He reported in order to achieve this desired outcome, 43 a storm sewer pipe would have to be installed connecting the two infiltration basins underneath 44 the driveway of the property. Staff reviewed the plans and found the pipe was not located entirely 45 on private property and a portion was located on within the City right of way. He indicated staff 46 explored additional drainage scenarios, but this was the most desired option. Staff spoke with the Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 7 1 City Attorney to draft an agreement regarding the storm sewer pipe that was located on a portion 2 of City right of way. He stated the property owner will be responsible for maintaining the pipe 3 with the stipulation that if the City has to step in or repair the pipe, the homeowner will pay the 4 City back for these costs. He explained this agreement will be filed with the County and will 5 remain with the property until the pipe is removed. Staff recommended the Council approve the 6 maintenance agreement for filing with the County. 7 8 MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 9882, 9 Approving a Maintenance Agreement for Installation of a Storm Sewer Pipe in the Public Right 10 of Way with Marco and Abigail Montermini at 7655 Pleasant View Drive. 11 12 Ayes — 3 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 13 14 E. Resolution 9881, Approving Final Pay App and Project Close for the 2021 15 Water Treatment Rehabilitation Project. 16 17 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson requested the Council approve the final pay 18 and project close for the 2021 Water Treatment Rehabilitation Project. He explained Municipal 19 Builders Inc. submitted the lowest bid and was awarded the 2021 Water Treatment Rehabilitation 20 Project on April 12, 2021. He stated Municipal Builders worked on this project from 2021 through 21 2024, noting substantial completion was September 6, 2022. He reported a punch list was prepared 22 after the project was substantially completed for the remainder of minor work and those repairs 23 were completed for the project close out. It was noted the City has been withholding final payment 24 until Municipal Builders pending completion of the punch list. He indicated the original contract 25 was for $1,827,000 and after change orders the revised contract amount was $2,072,468.38. The 26 remaining payment owed to the MBI was $434,861.97. Staff requested Council approve the final 27 payment in this amount. 28 29 MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 9881, 30 Approving Final Pay App and Project Close for the 2021 Water Treatment Rehabilitation Project. 31 32 Ayes — 3 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 33 34 9. REPORTS 35 A. Reports of Mayor and Council. 36 37 Council Member Cermak stated the Mounds View Police Foundation would be hosting a 38 fundraiser at the Culvers in St. Anthony March 8 through March 10. She encouraged residents to 39 come down and purchase a concrete mixer to help support the Mounds View Police Foundation. 40 41 Council Member Cermak reported the Festival in the Park Committee was in need of volunteers 42 to assist with fundraising for this year's event. She noted the Festival would be hosting an Easter 43 Egg Hunt on Saturday, March 30 at Silver View Park at 10:00 a.m. 44 45 Council Member Cermak explained she attended the Emblems Masque for Boy Scouts and Girls 46 Scouts at the Basilica in St. Paul last week. Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 8 2 Council Member Meehlhause stated the Community Center would be hosting a St. Patrick's Day 3 event on Sunday, March 17 from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and the Mounds View Lions would be 4 serving corned beef and cabbage for an in kind donation. 5 6 Council Member Meehlhause reported the Lions would be hosting a waffle dinner on Wednesday, 7 March 13 at Abiding Savior Church from 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. for an in kind donation. All s proceeds from this event will be donated to the Ralph Reeder Food Shelf 9 10 Mayor Lindstrom stated he met with a Met Council representative along with the City 1 1 Administrator where grant funding for the City of Mounds View was discussed. 12 13 Mayor Lindstrom explained he attended the Sunnyside PTA meeting last Tuesday. He noted this 14 group was working on the spring carnival. 15 16 Mayor Lindstrom welcomed the new residents in attendance to Mounds View. He stated he 17 appreciated these new residents reaching out and for attending this meeting. 18 19 B. Reports of Staff. 20 21 Finance Director Bauman explained the auditors were onsite doing field work and should be 22 wrapped up in the coming weeks. 23 24 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson reported a neighborhood meeting was 25 scheduled for Monday, March 11 to discuss Silver View Pond. He explained Stantec has 26 completed the plans for the pond and staff was looking to remove invasive species of trees and 27 shrubs. He commented on how the oak trees would be protected. He stated water quality issues 28 would be addressed within the park and the surrounding neighborhoods, specifically with the H2 29 Flats. He indicated ongoing maintenance would occur in the coming years to address buckthorn. 30 31 City Administrator Zikmund stated the changes within Silver View Pond would be significant and 32 dramatic, and would take three to five years to complete. He indicated the pond would look better 33 after the plans were completed. 34 35 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson reported staff met with Rice Creek 36 Watershed and discussed the plans for Silver View Pond. He explained the City would be applying 37 for grant funding to assist with the water quality cleanup work. He discussed how the trail around 38 the pond would have to be relocated in order to assist with protecting the water. 39 40 Mayor Lindstrom requested staff speak with representatives from the H2 Flats to see if it would 41 be possible to get a trail from the H2 Flats. Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson 42 explained he would speak to H2 Flats regarding this matter and would report back to the City 43 Council. 44 45 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson reported weight restrictions went into effect 46 on Monday, February 26. Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 9 2 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson provided the Council with an update on the 3 work being done on Water Treatment Plant 2. He stated the goal was to have this plant up and 4 running by April 1. 5 6 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson explained staff has been reaching out to 7 residents with diseased trees and he was proud to report he was down to three properties. He 8 thanked the City Arborist Kris Paulseth for his assistance with this matter. 9 10 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson stated the Council would be discussing 1 1 wetland banking in March. 12 13 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson reported the Parks and Recreation 14 Department would be hosting a 3 on 3 basketball tournament on Thursday, March 14. 15 16 City Administrator Zikmund stated Councilmember Gunn was out of town on a family medical 17 emergency and she may not be back by next Monday. He asked if the Council was open to holding 18 the worksession meeting on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. The Council supported moving 19 the meeting to Wednesday, March 6. 20 21 City Administrator Zikmund provided the Council with an update on the garbage hauler 22 negotiations. He explained he met with the haulers last Monday and Friday where the contract was 23 reviewed. He reported the haulers met this Monday to review the contract and he would be 24 reviewing the complete proposal with the haulers on Tuesday, February 27. He indicated the 25 negotiations with the haulers have been very positive. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 City Administrator Zikmund stated early voting opened today for the upcoming election. City Administrator Zikmund reported staff and WSB would be providing the Council with a presentation on the master parks plan proposals in March. City Administrator Zikmund reviewed the matters the Council would be discussing at the March work session meeting. C. Reports of City Attorney. City Attorney Riggs had nothing additional to report. 10. Next Council Work Session: Wednesday, March 6, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. Next Council Meeting: Monday, March 11, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. Mounds View City Council February 26, 2024 Regular Meeting Page 10 2 11. ADJOURNMENT 4 The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m. 6 Transcribed by: 8 Heidi Guenther 9 Minute Maker Secretarial CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS AGAINST CITY FUNDS WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 412.141, has full authority over the financial affairs of the City and; WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the claim number 20471 through 20489 in the amount of $ 7,950.72 650 through 656 in the amount of $ 165 018.92 154481 through 154560 in the amount of $ 255 975.84 TOTAL AMOUNT OF CLAIMS PRESENTED $ 428,945.48 And has found said claims to be just and correct; It was moved that the City Council of Mounds View hereby approve the Attached list of claims dated 03/05/24 by vote ayes nays. Finance Director 2/21/2024 9:14 AM DIRECT PAYABLES CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 1 PACKET: 03629 Ck Date 02-22-2024 - 8 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View **** CHECK LISTING **** BANK: PYBNK Western Bank CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME TYPE DATE DISCOUNT AMOUNT NO# AMOUNT C4300 Life Insurance Company of North I-52020240208 AccCare, Hosp, Critical Ill R 2/22/2024 178.59 020471 I-52020240224 AccCare, Hosp, Critical Ill R 2/22/2024 178.64 020471 357.23 *VOID* 020472 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020472 **VOID** E9000 Fidelity Security Life Insuranc I-62020240208 5000832-Eyemed R 2/22/2024 180.79 020473 I-62020240224 5000832-Eyemed R 2/22/2024 97.30 020473 278,09 *VOID* 020474 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020474 **VOID** L0549 Law Enforcement Labor Services, I-70020240208 Police Union Dues R 2/22/2024 528.75 020475 1-70020240224 Police Union Dues R 2/22/2024 528.75 020475 1,057.50 L7160 The Lincoln Nat'l Life Insuranc 1-63020240206 STD # 10249130 R 2/22/2024 330.75 020476 I-63020240224 STD # 10249130 R 2/22/2024 330.75 020476 661.50 *VOID* 020477 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020477 **VOID** L7161 The Lincoln Nat'l Life Insuranc 1-61020240208 LTD #1588135 R 2/22/2024 343.77 020478 1-61020240224 LTD #1588135 R 2/22/2024 343.87 020478 687.64 *VOID* 020479 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020479 **VOID** L7165 The Lincoln National Life Insur 1-30120240208 Life Iris #400236774 R 2/22/2024 852.85 020480 I-30120240224 Life Ins #400238774 R 2/22/2024 849.02 020480 1,701.87 *VOID* 020481 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020481 **VOID** *VOID* 020482 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020482 **VOID** *VOID* 020483 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020483 **VOID** *VOID* 020484 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020484 **VOID** M7152 MN Child Support Payment Center 1-99520240224 Case #0015244278 R 2/22/2024 952.93 020485 952.93 2/21/2024 9:14 AM DIRECT PAYABLES CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 2 PACKET: 03629 Ck Date 02-22-2024 - 8 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View **** CHECK LISTING **** BANK: PYBNK Western Bank CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME TYPE DATE DISCOUNT AMOUNT NO# AMOUNT N0525 643400 - NCPERS MN Grp Life Ins I-30020240208 NCPERS Life Ins R 2/22/2024 56.00 020486 1-30020240224 NCPERS Life Ins R 2/22/2024 56.00 020486 112.00 *VOID* 020487 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020487 **VOID** 54107 Secure Benefits Systems Corp. 1-50020240208 Flex Medical R 2/22/2024 383.62 020488 1-50020240224 Flex Medical R 2/22/2024 341.68 020488 I-50320240208 Flex Daycare R 2/22/2024 708.33 020488 I-50320240224 Flex Daycare R 2/22/2024 708.33 020488 2,141.96 *VOID* 020489 VOID CHECK V 2/22/2024 020489 **VOID** ** B A N K T O T A L S ** NO# DISCOUNTS CHECK AMT TOTAL APPLIED REGULAR CHECKS: 9 0.00 7,950.72 7,950.72 HANDWRITTEN CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRE -WRITE CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 VOID CHECKS: 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 NON CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 CORRECTIONS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 BANK TOTALS: 19 0.00 7,950.72 7,950.72 2/21/2024 7:30 AM DIRECT PAYABLES CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 1 PACKET: 03630 Ck Date 02-22-2024 - 9 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View *** DRAFT/OTHER LISTING *** BANK: PYBNK Western Bank ITEM PAID ITEM ITEM VENDOR I.D. NAME TYPE DATE DISCOUNT AMOUNT NO# AMOUNT E1200 EFTPS-Direct I-T1 20240224 Income Tax W/H D 2/22/2024 17,304.60 000650 I-T3 20240224 FICA W/H D 2/22/2024 14,173.36 000650 I-T4 20240224 Medicare W/H D 2/22/2024 5,620.80 000650 37,098.76 H1016 HSA Bank I-12520240224 C1211 HSA CONTRIBUTIONS D 2/22/2024 9,047.04 000651 9,047.04 10025 ICMA Retirement Trust - 457 I-40020240224 Payroll W/H D 2/22/2024 3,044.15 000652 1-40220240224 Roth Payroll W/H D 2/22/2024 455.00 000652 1-40320240224 Payroll W/H D 2/22/2024 471.34 000652 1-41520240224 Payroll W/H D 2/22/2024 3,513.13 000652 7,483.62 M0658 MN State Retirement System I-40120240224 #98995-01 MN D 2/22/2024 2,772.58 000653 1-40420240224 #98995-01 MN ROTH D 2/22/2024 150.00 000653 1-40520240224 #98995-01 MN D 2/22/2024 144,12 000653 3,066.70 M7342 MN Dept of Revenue I-T2 20240224 State Income Tax D 2/22/2024 8,094.69 000654 8,094.69 P9250 Public Employees Retirement Ass 1-00120240224 PERA 643400 D 2/22/2024 15,482.52 000655 I-00220240224 PERP 643400 D 2/22/2024 24,959.70 000655 I-01020240224 DCP 643400 D 2/22/2024 118.76 000655 40,560.98 ** B A N K T O T A L S ** NO# DISCOUNTS CHECK AMT TOTAL APPLIED REGULAR CHECKS: 0 0.00 0..00 0.00 HANDWRITTEN CHECKS: 0 0.00 0..00 0.00 PRE -WRITE CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 6 0.00 105,351..79 10S,351.79 VOID CHECKS: 0 0.00 0..00 0.00 NON CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 CORRECTIONS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 BANK TOTALS: 6 0.00 105,351.79 105,351.79 2/27/2024 7:27 AM DIRECT PAYABLES CHECK REGISTER PAGE: 1 PACKET: 03628 Ck Date 02-22-2024 - 6 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View *** DRAFT/OTHER LISTING *** BANK: PYBNK Western Bank ITEM PAID ITEM ITEM VENDOR ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I.D. NAME TYPE DATE DISCOUNT AMOUNT NO# AMOUNT H3005 90 Degree Benefits I-12020240208 Med Exp Sourcewell D 3/01/2024 34,068.91 000656 1-12020240224 Med Exp Sourcewell D 3/01/2024 25,598.22 000656 59,667.13 ** B A N K T O T A L S ** NO# DISCOUNTS CHECK AMT TOTAL APPLIED REGULAR CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 HANDWRITTEN CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRE -WRITE CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 1 0.30 59,667.13 59,667.13 VOID CHECKS: 0 0.0❑ 0.00 0.00 NON CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 CORRECTIONS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 BANK TOTALS: 1 0.00 59,667.13 59,667.13 2/29/2024 12:06 PM VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: * ALL BANKS DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 VENDOR I.D. NAME 1 AGUILAR, JUAN C-CHECK AGUILAR, JUAN C-CHECK VOID CHECK C-CHECK VOID CHECK C-CHECK VOID CHECK C-CHECK VOID CHECK C-CHECK VOID CHECK C-CHECK VOID CHECK C-CHECK VOID CHECK ** TO T A L S REGULAR CHECKS: HAND CHECKS: DRAFTS: EFT: NON CHECKS: VOID CHECKS: TOTAL ERRORS: 0 VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: * TOTALS: BANK: * TOTALS: A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT CHECK STATUS DATE VOIDED VOIDED V 3/05/2024 V 3/05/2024 V 3/05/2024 V 3/05/2024 V 3/05/2024 V 3/05/2024 V 3/05/2024 V 3/05/2024 NO 0 0 0 0 0 8 VOID DEBITS VOID CREDITS PAGE: 1 CHECK CHECK CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 154481 32.93CR 154497 154498 154499 154500 154525 154526 154528 INVOICE AMOUNT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.93CR 32.93CR DISCOUNTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHECK AMOUNT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NO INVOICE AMOUNT DISCOUNTS CHECK AMOUNT 8 32.93CR 0.00 0.00 8 32.93CR 0.00 0.00 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 2 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 1 AGUILAR, JUAN I-000202402279541 US REFUND V 3/05/2024 154481 32.93 1 AGUILAR, JUAN VOIDED M-CHECK AGUILAR, JUAN VOIDED V 3/05/2024 154481 32.93CR 1 OSTLUND, LAUREN I-000202402279542 US REFUND R 3/05/2024 154482 700 1152 UTILITY DELQ. RECIEVABLE 11-0300-02 32.45 32.45 1 TWIN CITIES AREA PRO I-000202402279543 US REFUND R 3/05/2024 154483 700 1152 UTILITY DELQ. RECIEVABLE 06-0900-03 249.38 249.38 04081 iSpace Environments, Inc. I-27890 Service Visit R 3/05/2024 154484 252 4350-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT Service Visit 340.00 340.00 1 Irma Ruano 1-202402289544 US Refund R 3/05/2024 154485 700 1152 UTILITY DELQ. RECIEVABLE Irma Ruano: US Refun 16.46 16.46 1 Juan Aguilar I-202402289545 US Refund R 3/05/2024 154486 700 1152 UTILITY DELQ. RECIEVABLE Juan Aguilar: US Ref 16.47 16.47 A2300 AE2S I-92916 1-1-24 to 2-2-24 Prof Sery R 3/05/2024 154487 700 4823-7050 CONSTRUCTION 1-1-24 to 2-2-24 Pro 2,520.00 2,520.00 A3025 Advanced Graphix, Inc. I-213507 MVPD Crest Decal s Application R 3/05/2024 154488 100 4200-3070 COPS EVENTS MVPD Crest Decal 6 A 218.15 218.15 A5029 Connie Allen I-202402269533 Valentine Bingo Prizes R 3/05/2024 154489 252 4732-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Valentine Bingo Priz 66.97 66.97 A7007 Anoka County Treasury Office I-AR021737 2023 Fire Dispatching R 3/05/2024 154490 100 4210-3050 DISPATCHING - CONTRACTUAL 2023 Fire Dispatchin 5,970.26 5,970.26 A7564 Aspen Equipment Company I-SWO030066-1 Sewer Crane Repair R 3/05/2024 154491 730 4823-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT Sewer Crane Repair 493.43 493.43 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE B3030 Beaudry Oil & Service, inc. I-2568077 Unleaded R 3/05/2024 100 4465-1701 MOTOR FUELS & LUBRICANTS - DSLUnleaded B3045 Brian Beeman I-202402289548 Mileage for Conferences/Mtge R 3/05/2024 230 4650-3800 MILEAGE & PARKING Mileage for Conferen 230 4650-3100 TELEPHONE Cell Phone B4000 Beisswenger's Do It Best i-626926 Compressor Oil R 3/05/2024 700 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Compressor Oil I-827038 Compressor Oil WTP 1&3 R 3/05/2024 700 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Compressor Oil WTP 1 B7055 Bredemus Hardware Co., Inc. I-274036 New Padlocks R 3/05/2024 700 4823-1250 SUPPLIES, UTILITIES New Padlocks 730 4823-1250 SUPPLIES, UTILITIES New Padlocks C4510 Cintas - Chicago I-4183164993 Mats & Towels R 3/05/2024 100 4360-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 100 4410-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 100 4460-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 100 4465-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 100 4470-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 100 4472-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 100 4475-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 700 4823-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 700 4825-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 730 4823-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 745 4415-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 745 4417-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels I-4183317621 Scraper, Napkins, etc. R 3/05/2024 252 4350-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Scraper, Napkins, et 252 4350-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EScraper, Napkins, et 252 4730-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Scraper, Napkins, et I-4183559201 Uniforms & Clothing R 3/05/2024 100 4360-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 100 4410-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 100 4460-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 100 4465-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 100 4470-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 100 4472-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 100 4475-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 252 4350-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 700 4823-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing PAGE: 3 CHECK CHECK CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 154492 3,993.65 3,993.85 91.25 50.00 38.38 38.38 97.15 97.15 13.73 2.95 0.14 2.00 5.47 3.04 0.90 8.32 1.24 9.42 3.90 0.63 32.18 39.62 62.97 26.04 2.69 0.31 3.77 8.38 5.77 1.77 20.81 29.02 154493 141.25 154494 154494 76.76 154495 194.30 154496 154496 154496 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 4 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT C4510 Cintas - Chicago CONT I-4183559201 Uniforms & Clothing R 3/05/2024 154496 700 4825-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 2.31 730 4823-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 14.15 745 4415-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 6.00 745 4417-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 1.14 I-4183891014 CH/PD Floor Mats R 3/05/2024 154496 100 4160-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES CH/PD Floor Mats 51.79 I-4183891046 Mats & Towels R 3/05/2024 154496 100 4360-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 11.56 100 4410-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 2.28 100 4460-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 0.11 100 4465-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 1.54 100 4470-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 4.23 100 4472-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 2.35 100 4475-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 0.70 700 4823-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MC)PS,EMats & Towels 6.43 700 4825-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 0.96 730 4823-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 7.28 745 4415-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 3.02 745 4417-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,EMats & Towels 0.48 I-4184046871 Napkins, Tablecovers, etc. R 3/05/2024 154496 252 4350-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Napkins, Tablecovers 32.18 252 4350-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,ENapkins, Tablecovers 39.62 252 4730-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Napkins, Tablecovers 6.97 I-4184287939 Uniforms & Clothing R 3/05/2024 154496 100 4360-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 35.51 100 4410-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 4.09 100 4460-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 0.47 100 4465-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 5.73 100 4470-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 12.74 100 4472-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 8.76 100 4475-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 2.69 252 4350-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 20.81 700 4823-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 74.15 700 4825-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 3.51 730 4823-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 56.30 745 4415-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 9.11 745 4417-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING Uniforms & Clothing 1.75 715.79 C5855 Comcast 1-202402289547 2-18 to 3-17 Backup Dialer R 3/05/2024 154501 700 4823-3100 TELEPHONE 2-18 to 3-17 Backup 23.00 730 4823-3100 TELEPHONE 2-18 to 3-17 Backup 24.45 47.45 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 5 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT D8000 Dog Waste Depot I-593344 Dog Waste Bags R 3/05/2024 154502 745 4415-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Dog Waste Bags 237.77 237.77 D8015 Driver & Vehicle Services Div. I-202402269534 Titles for Forfeited Vehicles R 3/05/2024 154503 225 4200-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Titles for Forfeited 75.00 75.00 E1425 E-Kit Training I-4324-6 Field Srch Software Cert Class R 3/05/2024 154504 100 4200-3630 TRAINING & CONFERENCES Field Srch Software 595.00 595.00 F1050 Fastenal Company I-MNSPRIB9579 Playground Equipment Repair R 3/05/2024 154505 100 4360-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Playground Equipment 134.99 134.99 F1095 Ferguson WaterWorks #2518 I-0525752-1 Hydrant Tags R 3/05/2024 154506 700 4823-1250 SUPPLIES, UTILITIES Hydrant Tags 130.06 130.06 F2015 Filipino Village Grocery Store I-202402269540 2408 Cty Rd I EDA Loan R 3/05/2024 154507 230 4650-9300 BUSINESS LOANS/SUBSIDIES 2406 Cty Rd I EDA Lo 5,000.00 5,000.00 F6010 PreCise MRM, LLC I-IN200-1047315 PW #648, #430, & #708 R 3/05/2024 154508 745 4415-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT PW #648, #430, & #70 401.00 700 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT PW #648, #430, & #70 401.00 100 4465-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT PW #648, #430, & #70 403.03 1,205.03 G1000 Game Time I-PJI-0229663 Greenfield Pk Equip Paint R 3/05/2024 154509 100 4360-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Greenfield Pk Equip 296.59 296.59 G8020 Grainger I-9019748160 Splash Pad Repair Parts R 3/05/2024 154510 100 4360-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Splash Pad Repair Pa 81.08 81.08 H2805 Hawkins, Inc. I-6689026 Chlorine Tank Rental R 3/05/2024 154511 700 4825-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Chlorine Tank Rental 130.00 130.00 H3000 HealthPartners Inc. I-525049190742 March Dental Insurance R 3/05/2024 154512 100 2014 ACCRUED INSURANCE PAYABLE March Dental Insuran 4,673.48 100 2015 RETIREE INS PREM PAYABLE March Dental Insuran 722.94 5,396.42 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT H4035 Hillyard/Minneapolis I-605387604 Towels, Soaps, etc. R 3/05/2024 154513 252 4350-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Towels, Soaps, etc. 419.68 I-605387605 Towels, Cleaner, etc. R 3/05/2024 154513 100 4460-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Towels, Cleaner, etc 419.68 839.36 H4045 Hirshfield's, Inc. I-28126540 Paint R 3/05/2024 154514 252 4350-5110 REPAIRS, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Paint 494.17 494.17 H7302 Home Depot Pro - Dallas I-790155212 Filters R 3/05/2024 154515 252 4350-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT Filters 55.78 I-790372486 Filters R 3/05/2024 154515 252 4350-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT Filters 272.50 100 4460-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT Filters 272.50 600.78 I6560 Innovative Office Solutions, L I-IN4461034 Printer Toner R 3/05/2024 154516 700 4823-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Printer Toner 82.86 730 4823-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Printer Toner 85.06 I-IN4464462 Office Supplies R 3/05/2024 154516 700 4823-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Office Supplies 63.45 730 4823-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Office Supplies 63.45 I-IN4468463 Inkcart, High Yield R 3/05/2024 154516 100 4160-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Inkcart, High Yield 51.22 346.04 K2058 Kath Fuel Oil Service Co. I-792700 Windshield Wash for Equip. R 3/05/2024 154517 730 4823-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES Windshield Wash for 107.50 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES Windshield Wash for 107.50 215.00 K5020 Benjamin Knitter I-202402269535 Babbel Language Course R 3/05/2024 154518 100 4200-3630 TRAINING & CONFERENCES Babbel Language Cour 467.99 I-202402269536 Lunches R 3/05/2024 154518 100 4200-3630 TRAINING & CONFERENCES Lunches 62.89 530.88 K9047 Kusina LLC I-202402269537 2408 Cty Rd I, EDA Loan R 3/05/2024 154519 230 4650-9300 BUSINESS LOANS/SUBSIDIES 2408 Cty Rd I, EDA L 5,000.00 5,000.00 M0300 MMNTB I-202402269538 Jan Hotel Tax Americinn R 3/05/2024 154520 100 4653-3045 CONTRACTUAL N. METRO CONF BUREJan Hotel Tax Americ 1,915.31 1,915.31 6 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT M0480 MNSCIA I-EV00372 Spring Conference Reg for 2 R 3/05/2024 154521 100 4200-3630 TRAINING & CONFERENCES Spring Conference Re 160.00 160.00 M1010 MacQueen Equipment, Inc. I-G01300 Camera Van Training R 3/05/2024 154522 730 4823-3630 TRAINING & CONFERENCES Camera Van Training 219.60 219.60 M2100 McClellan Sales, Inc. I-018677B Glove Disp for Sewer R 3/05/2024 154523 730 4823-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Glove Disp for Sewer 77.00 77.00 M3505 Menards - Blaine C-62436 Inv 62283 TSTAT Returned R 3/05/2024 154524 100 4360-1210 SUPPLIES, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Inv 62283 TSTAT Retu 78.99CR I-61661 Well 3&6 Filter Cleaning R 3/05/2024 154524 700 4823-1210 SUPPLIES, BUILDING & GROUNDS Well 3&6 Filter Clea 9.59 I-61663A Flat Washer, Bolt etc. R 3/05/2024 154524 100 4460-5110 REPAIRS, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Flat Washer, Bolt et 15.43 I-63295 Heater, Cable, etc R 3/05/2024 154524 252 4350-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Heater, Cable, etc 59.96 I-63329 Duracell Batteries R 3/05/2024 154524 252 4350-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Duracell Batteries 62.51 I-63460 Strap, Cord R 3/05/2024 154524 252 4350-5110 REPAIRS, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Strap, Cord 26.95 I-63463 WTP 3 Repair Parts R 3/05/2024 154524 700 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT WTP 3 Repair Parts 70.27 I-64419 PW Shop Cleaning Supplies R 3/05/2024 154524 100 4460-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES PW Shop Cleaning Sup 52.95 I-64546 Floor Stripper, Screws, etc. R 3/05/2024 154524 252 4350-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Floor Stripper, Scre 90.68 I-64557 Bracket Screws, Fasteners etc. R 3/05/2024 154524 100 4360-1210 SUPPLIES, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Bracket Screws, Fast 89.41 I-64597 Paint for 2024 Street Project R 3/05/2024 154524 485 4470-7050-327 2024 STREET PROJECT Paint for 2024 Stree 59.43 I-64629 Splash Pad Bldg Parts R 3/05/2024 154524 100 4360-1210 SUPPLIES, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Splash Pad Bldg Part 45.21 I-64644 Circuit Break Lockout Set R 3/05/2024 154524 100 4460-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Circuit Break Lockou 39.96 I-64894 Steel Blank Plate R 3/05/2024 154524 252 4350-5110 REPAIRS, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Steel Blank Plate 29.85 I-65108 Replace Charging Cords R 3/05/2024 154524 700 4823-3100 TELEPHONE Replace Charging Cor 41.96 I-65109 Phone Charge Cord Replaced R 3/05/2024 154524 700 4823-3100 TELEPHONE Phone Charge Cord Re 9.99 625.18 7 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 8 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT M5300 Midway Ford Company C-815643 Return Mirror R 3/05/2024 154527 730 4823-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES Return Mirror 426.16CR 1-616317 PD #201 Canister Purge Value R 3/05/2024 154527 100 4465-5120 REPAIRS, VEHICLES PD #201 Canister Pur 467.12 I-816497 PD #191 Dipstick for Trans R 3/05/2024 154527 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PD #191 Dipstick for 20.71 I-616896 PD#202 Seat Base, etc. R 3/05/2024 154527 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PD#202 Seat Base, et 367.74 i-818291 PD #163 Trans Vent Cap etc. R 3/05/2024 154527 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PD #163 Trans Vent C 221.76 I-818500 PD #163 Battery R 3/05/2024 154527 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PD #163 Battery 213.96 I-818566 PD #163 Trans Dipstick R 3/05/2024 154527 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PD #163 Trans Dipsti 14.63 i-818836 PD #202 Cover R 3/05/2024 154527 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PD #202 Cover 41.69 921.45 M7346 MN Dept Labor & Industry 1-202402289546 4th Qtr 2023 Bldg Surchg Rept R 3/05/2024 154529 100 2078 DUE TO ST MN-BLDG PERMIT SURCH4th Qtr 2023 Bldg Su 877.90 100 3280 BUILDING SURCHARGE 4th Qtr 2023 Bldg Su 35.12CR 842.78 M7969 Minute Maker Secretarial I-1-11632 Verbatim Transcript & Mtgs R 3/05/2024 154530 100 4100-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CC & EDA Mtgs & Tran 465.75 100 4110-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2-7 Planning Commiss 167.00 632.75 M9250 Mounds View Animal Hospital I-405427 Shots/Checkup K9 Ace R 3/05/2024 154531 100 4200-3080 VETERINARY SERVICES Shots/Checkup K9 Ace 811.57 811.57 M9595 Municipal Builders, Inc. I -BE Final WTP 1 Rehab R 3/05/2024 154532 700 4823-7050 CONSTRUCTION WTP 1 Rehab 14,280.09 700 2050 CONTRACTS PAYABLE WTP 1 Rehab 20,581.88 34,661.97 N4800 Norseman Awards I-2735 P&R Name Badges R 3/05/2024 154533 100 4160-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES P&R Name Badges 23.86 23.66 N7007 Northland Temporaries I-657219 Janitorial Service 2-11-24 R 3/05/2024 154534 252 4730-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Janitorial Service 2 182.25 I-857237 2-18-24 Janitorial Service R 3/05/2024 154534 252 4730-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2-18-24 Janitorial S 266.76 449.01 2/29/2024 12:06 PM VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 9 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT N8515 Nuss Truck S Equipment I-PSO082762-1 PW #453 Rubber Bushings R 3/05/2024 154535 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PW #453 Rubber Bushi 26.04 26.04 N8525 Nystrom Publishing Co. I-47479 Spring 2024 Program Guide R 3/05/2024 154536 252 4732-3430 PRINTING Spring 2024 Program 5,386.14 1-47512 Spring 2024 MV Matters R 3/05/2024 154536 100 4160-3300 POSTAGE Spring 2024 MV Matte 987.33 100 4160-3430 PRINTING Spring 2024 MV Matte 3,171.91 290 4420-3300 POSTAGE Spring 2024 MV Matte 51.97 290 4420-3430 PRINTING Spring 2024 MV Matte 166.94 252 4732-3430 PRINTING Spring 2024 MV Matte 103.93 252 4732-3430 PRINTING Spring 2024 MV Matte 333.86 745 4415-3430 PRINTING Spring 2024 MV Matte 103.93 745 4415-3430 PRINTING Spring 2024 MV Matte 333.88 10,639.91 05100 Office of MNIT Services I-W24010573 January MNIT Services R 3/05/2024 154537 100 4200-3055 INFORMATION SYSTEM FEES January MNIT Service 324.45 324.45 05535 O'Reilly Auto Parts I-3298-167599 PW #430 Oil Filter R 3/05/2024 154538 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PW #430 Oil Filter 59.98 I-3298-168185 PW #836 Key Chain R 3/05/2024 154538 730 4823-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PW #836 Key Chain 3.99 63.97 P1565 Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc. I-28914 2511 Woodcrest Water Repair R 3/05/2024 154539 700 4823-5155 REPAIR, WATER SERVICE 2511 Woodcrest Water 5,087.12 I-28915 5212 Sunnyside Water Repair R 3/05/2024 154539 700 4823-5155 REPAIR, WATER SERVICE 5212 Sunnyside Water 10,564.62 I-28932 2833 MV Blvd SS s Wtr Discon. R 3/05/2024 154539 230 1610 LAND 2833 MV Blvd SS 6 Wt 1,874.24 I-28933 2716 Hillview SS S Wtr Discon R 3/05/2024 154539 230 1610 LAND 2716 Hillview SS 6 W 1,874.24 19,400.22 P4026 PipeRIGHT Plumbing, Inc. I-12927 Items to Fix Hole in Ceiling R 3/05/2024 154540 252 4350-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT Items to Fix Hole in 353.76 353.76 P6750 Pomp's Tire Service - Milwauke I-210699981 PD #201 Tires 6 Stock Tires R 3/05/2024 154541 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES PD #201 Tires 6 Stoc 1,264.00 1,264.00 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 10 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT R3002 Ramsey County I-PRRRV-002516 2023 TIF Admin Billing R 3/05/2024 154542 441 4650-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2023 TIF Admin Billi 511.86 450 4650-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2023 TIF Admin Billi 542.75 I-PRRRV-002533 2023 Truth -in -Tax Notice R 3/05/2024 154542 100 4160-3410 LEGAL NOTICES 2023 Truth -in -Tax No 1,087.72 I-PUBW-020891 7-1-23 to 12-31-23 Maint. Exp R 3/05/2024 154542 700 4823-3100 TELEPHONE 7-1-23 to 12-31-23 M 16.24 745 4415-3100 TELEPHONE 7-1-23 to 12-31-23 M 16.24 730 4823-3100 TELEPHONE 7-1-23 to 12-31-23 M 16.24 2,191.05 51022 Safe -Assure Consultants, Inc. I-3468 Safety Training R 3/05/2024 154543 700 4823-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Safety Training 3,365.22 730 4823-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Safety Training 3,385.22 745 4415-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Safety Training 3,385.21 10,155.65 51030 Safe Step LLC I-4161 LLR Sidewalk Repair R 3/05/2024 154544 100 4470-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LLR Sidewalk Repair 700.00 700.00 51505 Steele Solutions I-058532 4 Sgt Office Lockers R 3/05/2024 154545 480 4200-1230 SUPPLIES - EQUIPMENT 4 Sgt Office Lockers 6,337.00 6,337.00 54224 Sensible Office Solutions I-0061916-001 Bus. Cards Shawbold, Redding R 3/05/2024 154546 252 4732-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Bus. Cards Shawbold, 103.50 103.50 S5750 Snap-On Industrial I-ARV/60415588 Shop Tool Pliers R 3/05/2024 154547 100 4465-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Shop Tool Pliers 341.97 I-ARV/60438838 Modis Replacement New Triton R 3/05/2024 154547 100 4465-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Modis Replacement No 3,780.00 700 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Modis Replacement No 741.16 730 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Modis Replacement Ne 741.16 745 4417-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT Modis Replacement Ne 741.17 6,345.46 57520 Spring Lake Park Fire Departme I-202402269539 May -June Fire Protection Sery R 3/05/2024 154548 100 4210-3032 CONTRACTUAL FIRE SERVICES May -June Fire Protec 84,665.00 84,665.00 58513 Storm Training Group I-4542 Use of Force Instruction R 3/05/2024 154549 100 4200-3630 TRAINING 6 CONFERENCES Use of Force Instruc 899.00 899.00 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 11 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT T1357 Terminix I-237837 Pest Control 2-15-24 R 3/05/2024 252 4350-5110 REPAIRS, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS Pest Control 2-15-24 59.50 I-237838 PW Bldg Pest Control 2-15 R 3/05/2024 100 4360-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT PW Bldg Pest Control 60.00 T4270 Thul Specialty Contracting, In I-3226 Rep Catch Basin Cty I/MV Blvd R 3/05/2024 745 4415-5150 REPAIRS, UTILITY Rep Catch Basin Cty 5,600.00 T7085 Twin Cities North Chamber of C I-2022144 Mar 124 - Feb 125 Membership R 3/05/2024 100 4160-3610 MEMBERSHIPS Mar 124 - Feb '25 Me 525.00 T7125 Tyler Technologies, Inc. I-025-455400 2-9-24 Meter Reading Interface R 3/05/2024 700 4823-7030 EQUIPMENT 2-9-24 Meter Reading 145.00 U5626 Upper Cut Tree Services I-5789 Removal of Disease Trees R 3/05/2024 100 4380-3520 TREE REMOVAL Removal of Disease T 4,758.00 I-5796 Removal of Diseased Trees R 3/05/2024 100 4380-3520 TREE REMOVAL Removal of Diseased 5,909.00 I-5799 Removal Tree @ 2633 Louisa R 3/05/2024 100 4380-3520 TREE REMOVAL Removal Tree @ 2633 1,352.00 V4105 Verizon Wireless I-9955022196 Jan 24 to Feb 23 Phones R 3/05/2024 100 4180-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 128.72 100 4200-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 930.95 100 4360-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 116.62 100 4410-3100 Telephone Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 123.72 100 4460-3100 Telephone Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 64.15 100 4465-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 41.24 100 4470-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 65.38 252 4350-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 191.12 700 4823-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 221.65 730 4823-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 157.50 745 4415-3100 TELEPHONE Jan 24 to Feb 23 Pho 117.49 W0565 Walters Recycling & Refuse Inc 1-0007661963 Feb Recycling & Refuse R 3/05/2024 100 4460-3530 REFUSE COLLECTION CH/PD/PW Trash Febru 1,417.22 252 4350-3530 REFUSE COLLECTION MVCC Trash February 653.54 290 4420-3530 REFUSE COLLECTION Recycling February 229.06 154550 154550 119.50 154551 5,600.00 154552 525.00 154553 145.00 154554 154554 154554 154555 154556 12,019.00 2,158.54 2,299.82 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 12 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT W1602 Water Conservation Service, In I-13843 2500 Woodcrest Wtr Rep 1-29 R 3/05/2024 700 4823-5160 REPAIRS, SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 2500 Woodcrest Wtr R 523.58 W5275 White Cap, L.P. I-50025510957 Greenfield Rain Garden Repair R 3/05/2024 745 4415-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES Greenfield Rain Gard 2,304.94 X6000 Xcel Energy C-51-0014559373-OCM 51-0014559373-0 Elec Refund R 3/05/2024 740 4416-3210 ELECTRICITY 51-0014559373-0 Elec 3.01CR I-666326888 51-7822205-6; 01/18/24-02/19/2 R 3/05/2024 100 4200-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/18/24-02/19/24 19.10 100 4360-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/18/24-02/19/24 195.91CR 100 4360-3220 NATURAL GAS O1/18/24-02/19/24 762.50 100 4460-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/18/24-02/19/24 804.32 100 4460-3220 NATURAL GAS O1/18/24-02/19/24 2,969.77 100 4475-3250 ELECTRICTY-TRAFFIC LIGHTS O1/18/24-02/19/24 17.02 252 4350-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/18/24-02/19/24 407.40CR 252 4350-3220 NATURAL GAS O1/18/24-02/19/24 2,651.61 255 4350-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/18/24-02/19/24 50.35 700 4823-3220 NATURAL GAS O1/18/24-02/19/24 792.57 700 4825-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/18/24-02/19/24 178.39CR 730 4823-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/16/24-02/19/24 102.78 740 4416-3210 ELECTRICITY O1/18/24-02/19/24 815.56CR Z0500 Z&K Avdiu, Inc. I-039155 FEB CH/PW Office Cleaning R 3/05/2024 100 4460-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEB CH/PW Office Cle 2,300.00 ** TO T A L S ** NO REGULAR CHECKS: 72 HAND CHECKS: 0 DRAFTS: 0 EFT: 0 NON CHECKS: 0 VOID CHECKS: 1 VOID DEBITS VOID CREDITS TOTAL ERRORS: 0 154557 523.58 154558 2,304.94 154559 154559 154560 INVOICE AMOUNT DISCOUNTS 256,008.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.93CR 32.93CR 0.00 6,569.83 2,300.00 CHECK AMOUNT 255,975.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 PAGE: 13 ** G/L ACCOUNT TOTALS ** G/L ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACCOUNT NAME AMOUNT 100 2014 ACCRUED INSURANCE PAYABLE 4,673.48 100 2015 RETIREE INS PREM PAYABLE 722.94 100 2078 DUE TO ST MN-BLDG PERMIT SURCH 877.90 100 3280 BUILDING SURCHARGE 35.12CR 100 4100-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 465.75 100 4110-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 167.00 100 4160-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 126.87 100 4160-3300 POSTAGE 987.33 100 4160-3410 LEGAL NOTICES 1,087.72 100 4160-3430 PRINTING 3,171.91 100 4160-3610 MEMBERSHIPS 525.00 100 4180-3100 TELEPHONE 128.72 100 4200-3055 INFORMATION SYSTEM FEES 324.45 100 4200-3070 COPS EVENTS 218.15 100 4200-3080 VETERINARY SERVICES 811.57 100 4200-3100 TELEPHONE 930.95 100 4200-3210 ELECTRICITY 19.18 100 4200-3630 TRAINING & CONFERENCES 2,184.88 100 4210-3032 CONTRACTUAL FIRE SERVICES 84,665.00 100 4210-3050 DISPATCHING - CONTRACTUAL 5,970.26 100 4360-1210 SUPPLIES, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS 55.63 100 4360-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT 572.66 100 4360-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING 61.55 100 4360-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 25.29 100 4360-3100 TELEPHONE 116.62 100 4360-3210 ELECTRICITY 195.91CR 100 4360-3220 NATURAL GAS 762.50 100 4380-3520 TREE REMOVAL 12,019.00 100 4410-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING 6.78 100 4410-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 5.23 100 4410-3100 Telephone 123.72 100 4460-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 512.61 100 4460-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 0.78 100 4460-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 0.25 100 4460-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,300.00 100 4460-3100 Telephone 64.15 100 4460-3210 ELECTRICITY 804.32 100 4460-3220 NATURAL GAS 2,969.77 100 4460-3530 REFUSE COLLECTION 1,417.22 100 4460-5110 REPAIRS, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS 15.43 100 4460-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT 272.50 100 4465-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES 2,338.01 100 4465-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT 4,525.00 100 4465-1701 MOTOR FUELS & LUBRICANTS - DSL 3,993.85 100 4465-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 9.50 100 4465-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 3.54 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 14 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 ** G/L ACCOUNT TOTALS ** G/L ACCOUNT NAME AMOUNT 100 4465-3100 TELEPHONE 41.24 100 4465-5120 REPAIRS, VEHICLES 467.12 100 4470-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 21.12 100 4470-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 9.70 100 4470-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 700.00 100 4470-3100 TELEPHONE 65.38 100 4472-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 14.53 100 4472-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 5.39 100 4475-2400 UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 4.46 100 4475-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 1.60 100 4475-3250 ELECTRICTY-TRAFFIC LIGHTS 17.02 100 4653-3045 CONTRACTUAL N. METRO CONF SURE 1,915.31 *** FUND TOTAL *** 144,066.81 225 4200-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 75.00 *** FUND TOTAL *** 75.00 230 1610 LAND 3,748.48 230 4650-3100 TELEPHONE 50.00 230 4650-3800 MILEAGE & PARKING 91.25 230 4650-9300 BUSINESS LOANS/SUBSIDIES 10,000.00 *** FUND TOTAL *** 13,889.73 252 4350-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 697.19 252 4350-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING 41.62 252 4350-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 79,24 252 4350-3100 TELEPHONE 191.12 252 4350-3210 ELECTRICITY 407.40CR 252 4350-3220 NATURAL GAS 2,651.61 252 4350-3530 REFUSE COLLECTION 653.54 252 4350-5110 REPAIRS, BUILDINGS & GROUNDS 610.47 252 4350-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT 1,022.04 252 4730-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 518.95 252 4732-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT 170.47 252 4732-3430 PRINTING 5,823,95 *** FUND TOTAL *** 12,052,80 255 4350-3210 ELECTRICITY 50.35 *** FUND TOTAL *** 50.35 290 4420-3300 POSTAGE 51.97 290 4420-3430 PRINTING 166.94 290 4420-3530 REFUSE COLLECTION 229.06 *** FUND TOTAL *** 447.97 441 4650-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 511.86 *** FUND TOTAL *** 511.86 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 15 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 ** G/L ACCOUNT TOTALS ** G/L ACCOUNT NAME AMOUNT 450 4650-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 542.75 *** FUND TOTAL *** 542.75 480 4200-1230 SUPPLIES - EQUIPMENT 6,337.00 *** FUND TOTAL *** 6,337.00 485 4470-7050-327 2024 STREET PROJECT 59.43 *** FUND TOTAL *** 59.43 700 1152 UTILITY DELQ. RECIEVABLE 314.76 700 2050 CONTRACTS PAYABLE 20,581.88 700 4823-1210 SUPPLIES, BUILDING & GROUNDS 9.59 700 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT 1,289.19 700 4823-1250 SUPPLIES, UTILITIES 227.21 700 4823-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 146.31 700 4823-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING 103.17 700 4823-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 14.75 700 4823-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,385.22 700 4823-3100 TELEPHONE 312.84 700 4823-3220 NATURAL GAS 792.57 700 4823-5155 REPAIR, WATER SERVICE 15,651.74 700 4823-5160 REPAIRS, SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 523.58 700 4823-7030 EQUIPMENT 145.00 700 4823-7050 CONSTRUCTION 16,800.09 700 4825-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 130.00 700 4825-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING 5.62 700 4825-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 2.20 700 4825-3210 ELECTRICITY 178.39CR *** FUND TOTAL *** 60,257.53 730 4823-1220 SUPPLIES, VEHICLES 314.67CR 730 4823-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT 741.16 730 4823-1250 SUPPLIES, UTILITIES 97.15 730 4823-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 225.51 730 4823-2400 UNIFORM & CLOTHING 70.45 730 4823-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 16.70 730 4823-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,385.22 730 4823-3100 TELEPHONE 198.19 730 4823-3210 ELECTRICITY 102.78 730 4623-3630 TRAINING & CONFERENCES 219.60 730 4823-5130 REPAIRS, EQUIPMENT 493.43 *** FUND TOTAL *** 5,235.52 740 4416-3210 ELECTRICITY 818.57CR *** FUND TOTAL *** 818.57CR 2/29/2024 12:06 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 16 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Mounds View BANK: APBNK US Bank DATE RANGE: 0/00/0000 THRU 99/99/9999 ** G/L ACCOUNT TOTALS ** G/L ACCOUNT NAME 745 4415-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT 401.00 745 4415-1600 OPERATING SUPPLIES 2,542.71 745 4415-2400 UNIFORM 6 CLOTHING 15.11 745 4415-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 6.92 745 4415-3030 OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,385.21 745 4415-3100 TELEPHONE 133.73 745 4415-3430 PRINTING 437.81 745 4415-5150 REPAIRS, UTILITY 5,600.00 745 4417-1230 SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT 741.17 745 4417-2400 UNIFORM S CLOTHING 2.89 745 4417-2410 MAINTENANCE;MATS,TOWELS,MOPS,E 1.11 *** FUND TOTAL *** 13,267.66 NO INVOICE AMOUNT DISCOUNTS CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: APBNK TOTALS: 73 255,975.84 0.00 255,975.84 BANK: APBNK TOTALS: 73 255,975.84 0.00 255,975.84 REPORT TOTALS: 73 255,975.84 0.00 255,975.84 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY Item No. 5.C. mou--Nms VWW Meeting Date: March 11, e2024 nda Type of Business: Consent Agenda Administrator Review: City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Gayle Bauman, Finance Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9883 Approving Increase for Auditing Services for the Years 2023 - 2025 Background: The City Council approved a five year contract with the auditing firm of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. (MMKR) for the years 2021 — 2025 on April 12, 2021. The contract did not include the preparation of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). The ACFR has been prepared by City staff in the past. Discussion: Preparation of the ACFR consumes a lot of staff time and, depending on the worksheets utilized to create the document, can be prone to errors. Staff must also keep up with any new GASB requirements and ensure proper updates are made to the report each year. Audit firms utilize software packages that allow for the necessary groupings for statements and have standardized report formats that are updated as needed for all clients they serve. MMKR has quoted a price of $7,500 for preparing the report for 2023 and $6,000 per year thereafter. Approximately 25% of the cost is coded to the General Fund with the other 75% being coded to the Special Revenue and Utility funds. Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of resolution 9883 approving an increase for auditing services for the years 2023 — 2025. Respectfully Submitted, Gayle Bauman, Finance Director RESOLUTION NO. 9883 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING INCREASE FOR AUDITING SERVICES FOR THE YEARS 2023-2025 WHEREAS, Minnesota Statue 471.697 requires all cities with a population over 2,500 to have an annual audit and submit an audited financial report to the state auditor office; and WHEREAS, Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A. (MMKR) has been engaged by the City to provide auditing services for the years ended December 31, 2021 thru 2025; and WHEREAS, the audit services described include the base audit, GASB 34 requirements, and the fraud audit requirements; and WHEREAS, the City is requesting that the preparation of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) to be included in the annual service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby authorize an increase in the 2023 audit contact of $7,500 and an increase of $6,000 in the 2024 and 2025 audit contract for the preparation of the ACFR by MMKR. Passed and adopted this 11t" day of March, 2024. Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator (seal) MOUNDISSO, MEW City of Mounds View Staff R Item No: 5.D. Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 Type of Business: Consent Agenda Administrator review: To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Rayla Sue Ewald, Human Resource Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9884 Authorize an Internal Recruitment Process for Sergeant and Approve Job Description Introduction: The Police Department had a Sergeant retire in 2022. At this time, staff would like to begin an internal recruitment process to fill the vacant sergeant position. Discussion: Staff is requesting to start a five-day internal recruitment process for the Police Sergeant position. This is a Union, Non -Exempt position. If the internal process is unsuccessful, an open recruitment process would immediately follow. Additionally, staff has attached the newly formatted job description. Wages are as listed: 2024 -Serge nt Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% Start 6 months 12 months 24 months 36 months $44.61 $47.40 $50.18 $52.97 $55.76 Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Create a culture where employees desire to work. Financial Impact: None, this is a budgeted position. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 9884, Authorize an Internal Recruitment Process for Sergeant and Approve Job Description. Respectfully submitted, Rayla Sue Ewald Human Resource Director Attachment: Res. No. 9884 Exhibit A - Sergeant Job Description The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION NO 9884 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AUTHORIZE AN INTERNAL RECRUITMENT PROCESS FOR SERGEANT AND APPROVE JOB DESCRIPTION WHEREAS, the Police Department had a Sergeant retire in 2022; and WHEREAS, Staff is requesting to start a five-day internal recruitment process for the Union, Non -Exempt Police Sergeant position. If the internal process is unsuccessful, an open recruitment process for the position would immediately follow: 2024 - Sergeant Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% Start 6 months 12 months 24 months 36 months $44.61 1 $47.40 1 $50.18 $52.97 $55.76 And WHEREAS, a job description has been prepared for the position, which has been reviewed by staff, the HR Committee, and has been formatted by the City's consultant, D DA. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council authorizes Staff to complete the following: • Begin a five-day internal recruitment process for the position of Police Sergeant • If the internal process is unsuccessful, proceed with an open recruitment process for the Sergeant position • Approves the Sergeant job description and wage range. Adopted this 11t" day of March, 2024. Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community Moillvns ViEw JOB DESCRIPTION Job Title: Police Sergeant Grade: None Assigned. Supervisor Title: Deputy Chief Department: Police FLSA Status: Non-exempt LELS 232 Date Reviewed: 02/20/2024 Minimum Qualifications of Education and Experience: ➢ Two (2) year community college degree or vocational school training in police sciences, police science, law enforcement, criminal justice, public administration, or related field. ➢ Completion of the basic law enforcement training academy or equivalent. ➢ Five (5) years of experience as a fully commissioned police officer. Nature of Work: This position is responsible for directing and supervising patrol activities as assigned in a manner which will ensure an effective and coordinated program of law enforcement and public safety for the community. Communicates with: Internally —Department supervisors, department directors, public safety staff. Externally — General public, Law Enforcement Labor Service, County staff. Supervision: Exercises supervision of patrol officers. Essential Work Functions: • Works closely with the Police Chief and Deputy Police Chief to establish work schedules and assignment so that each officer has a clear understanding of duties assigned and level of performance expected. • Recognize opportunities to provide Patrol officers assigned with suggestions which will facilitate an effective program of law enforcement and public service. • Performs street patrol on a regular basis and/or assists other squads in responding to critical emergency situations are required. • Evaluates overall results being achieved in the Department and recommends changes in procedures or policies for approval and implementation by the Chief which will improve results being achieved. • Checks reports prepared by officers assigned to ensure accuracy, completeness, and clarity in reporting, follows through to obtain additional or correct information as circumstances dictate. • Ensures an effective program or preventative maintenance on all squad cars and related police equipment to always ensure proper working condition. • Review established department policies and regulations with all assigned personnel to ensure a complete understanding and compliance with such regulations. • Conducts daily briefing with officers to discuss patrol assignments, traffic enforcement assignments, and training topics as necessary. • Confers with the Chief on a regular basis to determine changes in work assignments or activities which must be passed along to the night shift. • Conducts interrogation of suspects and witnesses. • Ensures all reports written by assigned personnel are prepared according to established department regulations and follows through to correct discrepancies which may occur in the reporting process. Page 2 Police Sergeant • Answers citizen's complaints and inquiries related to non -criminal activities and follows through to resolve such matters to the satisfaction of all parties concerned Other Work Functions (Illustrative Only): • Performs related work as required. • Ensures established programs for law enforcement and public service are achieved and implemented. • Opportunities are taken to promote a favorable image of the department and create good public relations through civic groups and other presentations in the community. • Ensures provided services consistently command the confidence and respect of the community. Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities Required: • Valid MN Driver's license. • Peace Officers Standards and Training License or Basic Law Enforcement Training certification. • Must meet all state -mandated and employer -required certifications, medical, psychological, and other requirements. • Knowledge of: o Law enforcement weapons and equipment. o Safety principles and practices. o Defensive techniques. o Physical apprehension, handcuffing, and restraining techniques. o Geography of the City. • Ability to communicate effectively, both orally and in writing. • Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships. • Orientation towards community policing programs and principles. • Ability to work independently as well as within a team. • Ability to adapt to changes in tasks and responsibilities. • Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with others. Persons with disabilities: the above is a general listing of job duties. Essential and non -essential functions may vary by individual position. Reasonable accommodations may be available for both essential and non -essential job duties. Page 3 Police Sergeant Physical Demands and Work Environment: In compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act, the following represents the Physical and Environmental Demands: Function: 24% or Less 25% - 49% 50%- 74% 75% or more Office environment X Sitting, standing X Walking, reaching, pulling X Typing/data entry X Talking, hearing X Close and distance vision X Color vision, depth perception, accommodation, field of vision X Hazardous physical conditions X Atmospheric Conditions X Hazardous materials X Extreme temperatures X Intense noise X Travel X Environmental X Heavy Work (exert up to 100 pounds of force) X This document does not create an employment contract, implied or otherwise, other than an "at will" employment relationship. The City Council, City Administrator or appropriate Elected Official retains the discretion to add duties or change the duties of this position at any time. Mounds View is an Equal Opportunity Employer. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City will provide reasonable accommodation to qualified individuals and encourages both prospective and current employees to discuss potential accommodations with the employer. Employee Signature: Date: THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY . •'fir, Item No: 5.E. Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 Type of Business: Consent Agenda City Administrator Review: City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Rayla Sue Ewald, Human Resource Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9885, Approving the Hire of Isabel Torres to the Position of Police Officer Introduction: The Police Department has experienced a reduction in staffing due to retirements and council has authorized a recruitment process. Discussion: Staff is conducting a recruitment process for the vacant Police Officer positions. The advertisements were posted on the Minnesota POST Board, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, govjobs.com, multiple colleges for interested alumni, the League of Minnesota Cities, and the City's website and social media. Staff is interviewing qualified candidates as they apply. Isabel Torres was selected to advance in the hiring process. Ms. Torres successfully passed the oral board examination, Chief's interview, physical agility testing, police background investigation, pre -employment physical, and required psychological evaluation. Staff is requesting to begin employment of Ms. Torres as a Police Officer at the starting wage of 75% top patrol rate, with start date of March 18, 2024. 2024 Starting Wage 75% of Top Patrol Rate After 12 Months 80% of Top Patrol Rate After 24 Months 90% of Top Patrol Rate After 36 Months 100% of Top Patrol Rate $33.45 $35.68 $40.14 $44.60 Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Create a culture where employees desire to work. Financial Impact: This is a budgeted position. Recommendation: Staff recommends City Council approve Resolution 9885, Approving the Hire of Isabel Torres to the Position of Police Officer at 75% of Top Patrol Rate ($33.45/hour) of the Pay Plan in Accordance with the 2023 — 2025 Labor Agreement Between the City of Mounds View and the Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc. #204. Respectfully submitted, Rayla Sue Ewald Human Resource Director Attachment(s): Res. 9885 The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION NO. 9885 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING THE HIRE OF ISABEL TORRES TO THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER WHEREAS, the City Council has approved recruitment for the position of Police Officer in the Police Department; and, WHEREAS, the approved hiring procedures consist of a competitive written examination, training and experience scoring, oral interviews, physical agility testing, thorough background investigation, physical examination, and psychological examination; and, WHEREAS, a top candidate in the interview process was Isabel Torres; and, WHEREAS, staff of the Police Department has met with Isabel Torres, and the Chief of Police recommends that Isabel Torres be appointed to the position of Police Officer; and, WHEREAS, staff requests to begin employment of Isabel Torres at a starting wage of 75% top patrol rate. 2024 Starting Wage 75% of Top Patrol Rate After 12 Months 80% of Top Patrol Rate After 24 Months 90% of Top Patrol Rate After 36 Months 100% of Top Patrol Rate $33.45 $35.68 $40.14 $44.60 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota does hereby: • Appoint Isabel Torres to the position of Police Officer • Starting date to be March 18, 2024 • Wage at the 75% top patrol rate of pay ($33.45/hour) as indicated in the Law Enforcement Labor Services contract Adopted this 11t" day of March, 2024. Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, Administrator (seal) Item No: 05F MaL-TNDS z TTMeeting Date: March 11, 2024 enda �/1 Type of Business: Consent Agenda Administrator Review: City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Rayla Sue Ewald, Human Resource Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9886, Approving the Promotion of Chris Atkinson to the Position of Public Works Foreman Background: The City Council approved the Public Works new position of Foreman during the February 12, 2024 meeting. Discussion: Staff posted the internal job posting for the promotional opportunity of Public Works Foreman. Three (3) applicants applied, and all were interviewed. Chris Atkinson was selected for promotion to the position of Public Works Foreman. Staff and the HR Committee support the selection of Mr. Atkinson for the Foreman position. And, request a promotion date of today, March 11, 2024 with compensation following the City's 2024 pay plan, advancing to Step 4, after successfully completing a six (6) month probation: 2024 - Grade 8 4% 3.75% 3.75% 3.75% 3.5% 3.25% 3% 2.75% Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 $37.94 $39.46 $40.94 $42.47 $44.06 $45.61 $47.09 1 $48.50 $49.83 Mr. Atkinson will be required to complete an Individual Developmental Survey on or around his one (1) year anniversary. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 9886, the Promotion of Chris Atkinson to the Position of Public Works Foreman. Respectfully submitted, FP Rayla Sue Ewald Human Resource Director Attachment(s): Resolution 9886 The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION NO. 9886 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING THE PROMOTION OF CHRIS ATKINSON TO THE POSITION OF PUBLIC WORKS FOREMAN WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Public Works new position of Foreman during the February 12, 2024 Council meeting; and WHEREAS, staff posted the internal job for the promotional opportunity and received three (3) applications and interviewed all candidates; WHEREAS, Chris Atkinson was selected for the promotion to Public Works Foreman; and WHEREAS, staff and the HR Committee support the selection of Mr. Atkinson to the position of Foreman, with a start date of March 11, 2024, at Grade 8, Step 3, reflecting a starting wage of $40.94, and the ability to advance to Step 4 at six (6) months with a successful probation; and to Step 5 on October 11, 2025 (18 month anniversary), and each year advancing to the next higher Step on October 11th. 2024 - Grade 8 4% 3.75% 3.75% 3.75% 3.5% 3.25% 3% 2.75% Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 $37.94 $39.46 $40.94 $42.47 $44.06 $45.61 $47.09 $48.50 $49.83 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota does hereby appoint Chris Atkinson to the following: • Non -Union, Exempt position of Public Works Foreman, effective March 11, 2024 • Starting wage of Grade 8, Step 3, $40.94/hour • Ability to advance to Grade 8, Step 4 at six (6) months with a successful probation, on October 11, 2024 ($42.47/hour) and following Step increases will occur annually each October 11t", with successful performance reviews through Step 9 • Completion of an Individual Development Survey conducted by Martin -McAllister on or around one (1) year anniversary in the Foreman position Adopted this 11t" day of March, 2024. Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator (seal) MOUNDISSO, MEW City of Mounds View Staff R To: From: Item Title/Subject: Item No: 5.G. Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 Type of Business: Consent Agenda Administrator review: Honorable Mayor and City Council Rayla Sue Ewald, Human Resource Director Resolution 9887, Authorizing Internal Recruitment Process for Public Works Parks Lead Worker Position Introduction: Public Works Parks Lead Worker Chris Atkinson was promoted to the Foreman position effective March 11, 2024. Discussion: Staff is requesting to start the process for the vacant Public Works Parks Lead Worker position. The current Labor Agreement between the City of Mounds View and the Public Works Collective Bargaining Unit requires all permanent job vacancies be posted internally for five (5) working days so that interested employees may be considered for such vacancies before the position is advertised to the general public. Only after the vacancy has been posted for five (5) working days and no response is received from any employee will the City proceed to posting the vacancy with an external source. This information has been shared with the HR Committee. This position is a Grade 6 in the City's pay plan. 2024 - Grade 6 4% 1 3.75% 3.75% 3.75% 3.5% 3.25% 3% 2.75% Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 $31.93 $33.21 $34.46 $35.75 $37.09 $38.39 $39.64 $40.83 $41.95 Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Create a culture where employees desire to work. Financial Impact: None, this is a budgeted position. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 9887 Authorize Recruitment Process for Public Works Parks Lead Worker Position. Respectfully submitted, Rayla Sue Ewald Human Resource Director Attachment: Res 9887 The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION NO 9887 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AUTHORIZING INTERNAL RECRUITMENT PROCESS FOR PUBLIC WORKS PARKS LEAD WORKER POSITION WHEREAS, the Public Works Parks Lead was promoted to another position effective March 11, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Department has a need to fill this full-time, non- exempt position under the Public Works Collective Bargaining Unit; and WHEREAS, Staff would like to start the process of advertising for the Public Works Parks Lead position at Grade 6 based on the following wages: 2024 - Grade 6 4% 3.75% 3.75% 3.75% 3.5% 3.25% 3% 2.75% Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 $31.93 $33.21 $34.46 $35.75 $37.09 $38.39 $39.64 $40.83 $41.95 ; and WHEREAS, the current Public Works Collective Bargaining Unit requires that all permanent job vacancies be posted internally for five (5) working days so current members of the bargaining unit can be considered for the vacancy before the job is advertised to the general public; and WHEREAS, only after the vacancy is posted for five (5) working days and no response or qualified candidates are received will the vacancy be posted externally. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council authorizes Staff to advertise for the upcoming vacancy for the Public Works Parks Lead position. Adopted this 11T" day of March, 2024. Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community Item No: 5.H. MOL-AMS 2024 i T�Meeting Date: March A enda �/ Type of Business: Consent Agenda City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Rayla Ewald, Human Resource Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9888, Approving a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and LELS 204 Regarding Neighborhood Resource Officer (NRO) Specialty Pay Introduction: Staff received a Memorandum of Understanding from the Business Agent (BA) for LELS 204 (Police Officer and Investigators Union), requesting to designate 2.75% of wages to the Neighborhood Resource Officer (NRO) while the assigned Police Officer is designated and serving in the NRO capacity. Discussion: The HR Committee met to discuss the BAs request. They reviewed other employees classified or assigned by the employer within the LELS 204 contract who receive additional wages for added duties: Investigators, School Resource Officer, Violent Crimes Enforcement, Field Training Officers, and Canine Handlers. The HR Committee recommends approval of the Neighborhood Resource Officer position receiving additional compensation for duties performed as the NRO, and supports the 2.75% increase when the assigned Police Officer is designated and serving in the NRO capacity. Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Create a culture where employees desire to work. Financial Impact: This is a budgeted position. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 9888, Memorandum of Understanding between the City and LELS 204 Regarding Neighborhood Resource Officer (NRO) Specialty Pay. Respectfully submitted, F)24ff Rayla Sue Ewald Human Resource Director Attachment(s): Res. 9888 The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION NO. 9888 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES LOCAL 204 REGARDING NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCE OFFICER (NRO) SPECIALTY PAY WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View entered into a labor agreement with Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) representing Police Officers and Investigators (Local 204), valid from 2023 through the end of 2025; and, WHEREAS, the Business Agent for LELS 204 submitted a Memorandum of Understanding requesting employees assigned by the employer as the Neighborhood Resource Officer (NRO) receive an additional 2.75% of wages while designated and serving in this capacity; and WHEREAS, the HR Committee reviewed other members of the LELS 204 Union who currently receive additional wages for added duties and supports the 2.75% increase when the assigned Police Officer is designated and serving in the Neighborhood Resource Officer (NRO) capacity. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mounds View City Council does hereby approve the attached Memorandum of Understanding authorizing employees assigned by the employer as the Neighborhood Resource Officer to receive an additional 2.75% of wages while designated and serving in this capacity. Adopted this 11t" day of March, 2024. Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator (seal) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING LELS 204 — PATROL AND INVESTIGATORS NRO OFFICER TO RECEIVE AN ADDITIONAL 2.75% OF WAGES WHILE DESIGNATED AND SERVING IN THIS CAPACITY This memorandum of understanding is made between the City of Mounds View ("City") and the Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., Local #204 ("Union"). WHEREAS, the City and Union are parties to a 2023-2025 collective bargaining agreement; and WHEREAS, during the term of this agreement, a police officer assigned as the Neighborhood Resource Officer e4iEer willt-s receive an additional 2.75% of wages while designated and serving in this capacity; and WHEREAS, the City and Union wish to make this adjustment to Appendix A of the collective bargaining agreement.; NOW, THEREFORE, IT BE RESOLVED THAT the parties agree as follows: 1. Employees assigned by the EMPLOYER as the Neighborhood Resource Officer to receive an additional 2.75% of wages while designated and serving in this capacity_ In witness whereof, the parties have executive this Memorandum of Understanding on the 11th_ day of March , 2024. LELS LOCAL #204 Sean McKnight, Business Agent Date Nate Garland, Union Steward Date CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Zach Lindstrom, Mayor Date Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator Date Riley Solz, Union Steward Date Rayla Ewald, HR Director Date THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY Item No: 5.1. MOUNDS i T�Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 enda �/ Type of Business: Consent Agenda City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Rayla Ewald, Human Resource Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9889, Approving a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and LELS 204 Regarding Holiday Pay Introduction: Staff received a Memorandum of Understanding from the Business Agent (BA) for LELS 204 (Police Officer and Investigators Union), requesting to increase the holiday pay from one and one- half (1 '/2) times pay to two (2) times pay for the following premium holidays: Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Discussion: The HR Committee met to discuss the BAs request. In prior years there has been times when coverage has been an issue for the premier holidays. The HR Committee supports increasing the holiday pay from one and one-half (1 '/2) times pay to two (2) times pay for any police officer or investigator working the following premium holidays: Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Staff made revisions to the BAs original request, which was approved by the BA and the Police Officer and Investigator LELS Union 204. Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Create a culture where employees desire to work. Financial Impact: This is a budgeted position. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 9889, Memorandum of Understanding between the City and LELS 204 Regarding Holiday Pay. Respectfully submitted, Ds4ff Rayla Sue Ewald Human Resource Director Attachment(s): Res. 9889 The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION NO. 9889 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES LOCAL 204 REGARDING HOLIDAY PAY WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View entered into a labor agreement with Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) representing patrol officers and investigators (Local 204), valid from 2023 through the end of 2025; and, WHEREAS, the Labor Agreement, in Article 24, identifies the observed holidays being paid out at one and one-half (1 '/2) times pay; and WHEREAS, the Business Agent for LELS 204 submitted a Memorandum of Understanding requesting to increase wages paid to union members called into work on the following holidays: Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, and Christmas Day; and WHEREAS, the HR Committee discussed the request and determined all LELS 204 Union members working on the four (4) identified holidays should be paid at two (2) times their wage for the scheduled days, not just those who are covering for other Union members; and WHEREAS, working on one of the four (4) identified holidays, the employee must first receive supervisor approval. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mounds View City Council does hereby approve the attached Memorandum of Understanding to increase the holiday pay from one and one-half (1 '/2) times holiday pay to two (2) times pay for any police officer or investigator working the following premium holidays: Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, and Christmas Day, with Supervisor approval. Adopted this 11t" day of March, 2024. Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator (seal) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING LELS 204 — PATROL AND INVESTIGATORS HOLIDAY PAY ARTICLE 24.4 This memorandum of understanding is made between the City of Mounds View ("City") and the Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., Local #204 ("Union")_ WHEREAS, the City and Union are parties to a 2023-2025 collective bargaining agreement; and WHEREAS, during the term of this agreement, a police officer working during the holidays of Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, arrd-Christmas Day, and those who that were Formatted: strikethrough not regularly scheduled to work that day, will be compensated at a rate of two (2) times their base wage. WHEREAS, the City and Union wish to ^ ke this additie4 �change the language in Article 24.4 and add Article 24.5 to-e#the collective bargaining agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, IT BE RESOLVED THAT the parties agree Article 24.4 and 24.5 will read as follows: 24.4 G94ee. eGiied into -. e,,k , Ho'I'4 eF required t tGrt their- hi# ,,GF4, , ,,F with supeFviser- Gppr-ovGh An"Police officers working during the holidays of Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, and Christmas Day will be compensated at a rate of two (2) times their base wage. 24.5 Police Officers who were not regularly scheduled to work during the holidays of Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, and Christmas Day, however were required to start their shift early or work extra hours over those holidays, will be compensated at a rate of two (2) times their base wage, with supervisor approval. In witness whereof, the parties have executive this Memorandum of Understanding on the 11th day of March , 2024. LELS LOCAL #204 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Sean McKnight, Business Agent Date Zach Lindstrom, Mayor Date Date Nate Garland, Union Steward Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator Date Date Riley Solz, Union Steward Rayla Ewald, HR Director Date THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY MOLlrmViEw Item No: 6B Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Don Peterson, Director of Public Works/Parks and Recreation Item Title/Subject: Storm Water Update; Silver View Park Storm Water Background/Discussion: The Public Works Department has many responsibilities and one is to efficiently operate and manage the storm water system. The system was first constructed in the 1970's and as with other similar core functions, research, innovation and best management practices have changed over the years. Below is an overview of the Silver View Storm Water Pond project- provided by Dan Edgerton of Stantec Services: Silver View Strom Water Pond: Data collection In -pond veg surveys are done Sediment coring is done. Sediment needs to be hauled to landfill. Water quality sampling is done Upland vegetation summary memo was completed and reviewed with Don Peterson Wetland delineation field work was completed. Report expected shortly so TEP can get out and review. Field survey is scheduled to be completed in the next couple of weeks, with a focus on potential BMP locations Public engagement Mtg #1 was held on Thursday, 9121, 5 pm. Meeting summary was submitted to Don Mtg #2 to be held after preliminary plans and concepts complete Take the recommendations to the Park Commission early 2024, before going to the City Council Have the second public meeting at a City Council meeting, early 2024 Permitting Wetland permitting will be prepared as needed, subject to BMP selection Alum treatment submittal (if needed) will be prepared and submitted to MPCA Water quality assessment and watershed analysis o Based on public meeting comments, will review existing and proposed HWL in ponds relative to adjacent properties Preliminary analysis of water quality and sediment data and pond modeling have been performed, indicating majority of phosphorus loading is from the watershed and not internal loading Aquatic plant data has been assessed, showing primarily coontail and water lilies. Based on this result, we may not be allowed to remove the water lilies or coontail, as they are not non-native. We will follow up with the MnDNR on this, after which we will discuss with Don Peterson. P8 modeling has been performed Technical memo still needs to be prepared. It will cover. Data collection, analysis and modeling, results and recommendations Alum dosing, Aquatic plant community management, Spot dredging BMP recommendations — structural and non-structural (within park setting) Mapping Upland vegetation recommendations memo not yet started. Will be based on City review of summary memo and public input. Will develop high-level recommendations and cost estimates. Will then review with Don Peterson. Specific implementation actions still to be determined but could include: Alum treatment Aquatic plant management Spot dredging Watershed improvements Upland vegetation management (plan sheets) to be prepared following review of upland recommendations memo Stantec has completed the field work and provided 60% plans for the Silver View Strom Water Pond Project. Staff have been meeting with Stantec to review the plans and working to prepare the plans were reviewed by the Parks & Recreation & Forestry Commission at the February 22, 2024, Commission meeting. The 2nd Public Meeting will be held on March 11, 2024 (tonight) at the City Council Meeting, part of the public outreach for this project. Recommendation: Staff is requesting the Council review the information and provide Staff and Stantec with feedback and further direction. Respectfully submitted Don Peterson Director of Public Works / Parks and Recreation Attachments: Public Meeting 1 Notes and Survey Results Wetland Delineation Report Upland Vegetation Restoration Plan BMP Planting Approach Water Quality Assessment The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community ® Stantec MOUNDS VIEW SILVER VIEW PARK POND Upland Vegetation Restoration Plan DRAFT January 19, 2024 Prepared for: City of Mounds View Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc Project Number: 193806465 The conclusions in the Report titled Mounds View Silver View Park Pond are Stantec's professional opinion, as of the time of the Report, and concerning the scope described in the Report. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the scope of work was conducted and do not take into account any subsequent changes. The Report relates solely to the specific project for which Stantec was retained and the stated purpose for which the Report was prepared. The Report is not to be used or relied on for any variation or extension of the project, or for any other project or purpose, and any unauthorized use or reliance is at the recipient's own risk. Stantec has assumed all information received from City of Mounds View (the "Client") and third parties in the preparation of the Report to be correct. While Stantec has exercised a customary level of judgment or due diligence in the use of such information, Stantec assumes no responsibility for the consequences of any error or omission contained therein. This Report is intended solely for use by the Client in accordance with Stantec's contract with the Client. While the Report may be provided by the Client to applicable authorities having jurisdiction and to other third parties in connection with the project, Stantec disclaims any legal duty based upon warranty, reliance or any other theory to any third party, and will not be liable to such third party for any damages or losses of any kind that may result. Prepared by: �j5 GliL��1 Signature Larissa Mottl, Senior Ecologist Printed Name Reviewed by: Sarah Harding, Senior Landscape Architect Printed Namt Approved by: �-:- Signature Dan Edgerton, Project Manager Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................4 2 OVERVIEW OF EXISTING CONDITIONS..............................................................................4 3 VEGETATION RESTORATION RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................6 3.1 Dry-Mesic Oak Woodland Existing Cover Type..................................................................... 8 3.2 Nonnative Woodland Existing Cover Type.......................................................................... 10 3.3 Lowland Hardwoods Existing Cover Type........................................................................... 12 3.4 Nonnative Grass -Dominated Existing Cover Types............................................................. 15 3.5 Stormwater Pond Buffer Existing Cover Type..................................................................... 17 3.6 Wetland Existing Cover Type............................................................................................. 17 4 VEGETATION RESTORATION ACTIVITIES & COST ESTIMATES....................................19 4.1 Activity Types..................................................................................................................... 19 4.1.1 Tree Removal.....................................................................................................20 4.1.2 Invasive Shrub Control........................................................................................20 4.1.3 Herbaceous Weed Control.................................................................................. 21 4.1.4 Native Seeding................................................................................................... 21 4.1.5 Native Plug Planting........................................................................................... 22 4.2 Cost Estimates................................................................................................................... 22 5 VEGETATION MAINTENANCE............................................................................................22 6 POTENTIAL GRANT FUNDING...........................................................................................23 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Existing Vegetation Cover Types in the Project Area...................................................................5 Table 2 Summary of Recommended Vegetation Cover Types..................................................................7 Table 3 Vegetation Restoration Cost Estimates.....................................................................................22 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Silver View Park 2023 Existing Land Cover Map........................................................................6 Figure 2 Silver View Park Upland Vegetation Proposed Land Cover Map.................................................7 Figure 3 1940 Aerial Photo of Silver View Park......................................................................................10 Figure 4 1991 Aerial Photo of Silver View Park......................................................................................14 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond 1 Introduction This plan provides upland vegetation ecological restoration and management recommendations for the Silver View Park Pond Restoration Planning project area in Mounds View. About 7 acres of upland vegetation were observed and mapped surrounding Ponds EW-4 and EW-4.P3 as shown in Figure 1. Stantec staff conducted field surveys on August 18 and September 8, 2023. Additional observations included trail conditions, slopes, and erosion concerns that relate to vegetation restoration and management goals. The following sections include summaries of existing conditions, opportunities for non -vegetated improvements that support restoration goals and objectives, and proposed vegetation restoration and management goals, objectives, and cost estimates for initial restoration and future maintenance. Restoration goals are provided to articulate desired future vegetation cover types and functional values. The goals are designed to support water quality protection, high -quality wildlife habitat, and native plant diversity, and enhance park visitor activities and amenities, using sustainable, cost-effective, long-term vegetation management strategies. • Restoration objectives provide the detailed desired future conditions that help determine the selection of vegetation management methods and materials. The objectives provide measurable metrics that can be used to determine progress towards achieving restoration goals. High-level cost estimates are provided to aid in understanding the overall scope of funding needed for vegetation management and to help prioritize restoration activities given potential funding constraints or opportunities. The estimates assume that Mounds View pursues the restoration goals and objectives as described for each cover type. The estimates are based on outsourcing vegetation restoration and management activities to ecological restoration contractors in current market conditions. 2 Overview of Existing Conditions Vegetation cover types were identified based on vegetation structure, composition, and current management (such as mowed versus unmowed). Six upland vegetation cover types over 7 acres in total area were mapped along with a 5.5-acre wetland complex of shrub -swamp and forested wetland communities as shown in Figure 1. The wetland complex was observed for restoration potential as well. The vegetation cover types are summarized in Table 1 along with acreages and key vegetation characteristics. Project Number: 193806465 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Table 1 Existing Vegetation Cover Types in the Silver View Park Pond Restoration Planning Project Area Vegetation Cover Type Acres Key Characteristics Dry-mesic oak woodland 0.5 Bur oak and pin oak canopy; native shrubs and ground cover; nonnative trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants resent throughout Nonnative woodland 0.8 Black locust dominated canopy; patchy to bare ground cover; native trees, shrubs/vines, and ground layer plants resent but not abundant Lowland hardwoods 3.5 Cottonwood, boxelder, elm, aspen canopy; invasive trees present throughout; native shrubs/vines present; dense buckthorn cover; native ground cover present but patchy and low abundance Nonnative grasses - mowed 1.6 Mowed nonnative, cool season grasses Nonnative grasses — mowed 0.5 Mowed nonnative, cool season grasses with scattered with scattered trees landscape trees including hardwoods and conifers Stormwater pond buffer 0.2 Unmowed herbaceous cover along drainage and slopes of basin/pond; dominated by nonnative grasses with sparse cover by native grasses, sedges, & forbs Wetland 5.5 Shrub swamp and forested wetland with cottonwood and boxelder canopy; buckthorn dense in forested wetland; glossy buckthorn common in the shrub swamp; purple loosestrife and hybrid cattail dense in open wetland areas Invasive plant cover was generally high throughout the park and in all upland vegetation layers —canopy, understory, and ground layers. Invasive trees included black locust, Siberian elm, white poplar, white mulberry, and Amur maple. These tree species were present in the canopies of wooded areas and also as saplings and root suckers in wooded understories. Common buckthorn, glossy buckthorn, and honeysuckle were present in shrub layers. Invasive herbaceous plants observed were reed canary grass, smooth brome, hybrid cattails, purple loosestrife, Canada thistle, leafy spurge, creeping Charlie, and garlic mustard. Other problematic herbaceous weeds present included bittersweet nightshade, burdock, and motherwort. Project Number: 193806465 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Figure 1 Silver View Park 2023 Existing Land Cover Map 3 Vegetation Restoration Recommendations Vegetation restoration recommendations are provided for each of the existing cover types in the following sections. The recommendations consider existing conditions, Mounds View community member survey responses, non -vegetated improvements that support restoration goals, and the feasibility, sustainability, and costs associated with both short-term restoration efforts and long-term maintenance. Vegetation restoration and management actions that will improve pond buffer functionality, support water quality protection, enhance wildlife habitat, enhance native wetland, increase native plant diversity, and enhance park visitor recreational and nature experiences are prioritized. An overview map of recommended vegetation cover types is provided in Figure 2 and a summary list of cover types and acres in Table 2. Project Number: 193806465 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Table 2 Summary of Recommended Vegetation Cover Types Vegetation Cover Type Acres Pin Oak — Bur Oak Woodland 1.3 Lowland Hardwoods 3.5 Native Ground Cover 1.9 Stormwater Pond Buffer 0.2 Wet Meadow/Carr & Hardwood Swam 5.5 Figure 2 Silver View Park Upland Vegetation Proposed Land Cover Map Project Number: 193806465 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond 3.1 Dry-Mesic Oak Woodland Existing Cover Type Two small upland wooded areas near Pond EW-4.P3 comprise a total of about 0.5-acre of dry-mesic oak woodland with canopy cover dominated by bur and pin oaks that range from 8 inches to over 24 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH). A few oaks southwest of the pond are over 30-inch DBH. The oaks in this cover type are visible in a 1940 aerial photo, Figure 3, when the site was farmed, and the woodland areas were likely grazed. Boxelder was common in the canopy during the 2023 survey, along with a few black cherry and invasive, nonnative white mulberry. Some of the oaks had a somewhat open -grown growth habit, reflecting the more open historic growing conditions. Boxelder occurred occasionally beneath the oak canopy as well, along with a few American elm, pin oak, nonnative Norway maple, and nonnative, invasive Amur maple. The shrub/sapling layers of the woodlands were dominated by common buckthorn, with occasional green ash. Native shrubs such as black raspberry and red -berried elder were present but infrequent. Ground cover was generally sparse, but most often composed of the native vine Virginia creeper and the native forb white snakeroot, with occasional native violets and nonnative, invasive garlic mustard. Overall, the oak canopy and old -growth oak trees are unique and notable features for upland vegetation within the project area. Due to the old -growth oaks in this cover type, restoration towards a native plant community (NPC) resembling Pin Oak — Bur Oak Woodland (FDs37b) is recommended. This woodland NPC has been mapped and described based on vegetation plots sampled by the Minnesota Biological Survey. The following weblink provides a MN DNR fact sheet describing the vegetation structure and composition, landscape setting and soils, and natural history of Pin Oak — Bur Oak Woodlands. httos://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural resources/noc/fire dependent forest/fds37.Ddf Vegetation Management Goal • Restore to a plant community resembling Pin Oak — Bur Oak Woodland (FDs37b) with improved wildlife habitat, native plant diversity, and water infiltration capacity. Vegetation Management Objectives • Canopy cover is over 50% and dominated by bur oak and pin oak, with occasional black cherry. Boxelder and American elm are removed from the canopy and understory to reduce competition with oaks and increase light to ground layer vegetation. • All invasive, nonnative trees (white mulberry, Norway maple, and Amur maple) and saplings are removed. • Native shrub cover is about 25-50% and composed of species such as black raspberry, red - berried elder, gooseberry, chokecherry, American hazelnut, and gray dogwood. Tree saplings of green ash, boxelder, hackberry, and elm are eliminated. Insert zoomed in map of area, so the reader does not have to flip back to the larger map for reference Project Number: 193806465 8 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond • Invasive, nonnative shrub cover (common buckthorn, glossy buckthorn, Tartarian honeysuckle) is reduced to less than 5%. • Herbaceous ground layer vegetation cover is increased to over 75% and dominated by native grasses, sedges, and forbs, such as those listed in the table below. Garlic mustard cover is less than 5%. • Nearly continuous ground layer cover is maintained to promote water infiltration. • Diverse ground layer vegetation is established using diverse native seed mixes and plugs that include species that can provide floral resources for pollinators throughout the growing season. Dry — Mesic Oak Woodland - Desired Future Conditions Overview BUR OAK — PIN OAK WOODLAND Vegetation Layer Cover Representative Plant Species Canopy >50 Bur oak, pin oak, black cherry Subcano 5-25 Bur oak, pin oak Black raspberry, red -berried elder, gooseberry, chokecherry, American Shrub/Sapling 25-50 hazelnut, gray dogwood, Virginia creeper; seedlings and saplings of canopy species Bottlebrush grass, silky wild rye, Pennsylvania sedge, Sprengel's sedge, common woodland sedge, white snakeroot, violets, enchanter's Herbaceous 75-100 nightshade, false Solomon's seal, Clayton's sweet cicely, wild geranium, (Ground) lopseed, large -leaved aster, wild columbine, calico aster, arrowleaf aster, zig-zag goldenrod, tall bellflower, black-eyed Susan Project Number: 193806465 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Figure 3 1940 Aerial Photo of Silver View Park 3.2 Nonnative Woodland Existing Cover Type About 0.8 acre of nonnative woodland cover was mapped along the northwest drainage into the park from Silver Lake Road. This area has steep slopes. The canopy was dominated by black locust, with occasional cottonwood, elm, and a few red pines. Some of the cottonwoods in this area have 24- to 30- inch stems. Buckthorn is common throughout, with occasional honeysuckle and hackberry saplings. Ground cover is sparse to patchy and composed of Virginia creeper and white snakeroot. Garlic mustard is common. This woodland area contains a sensitive drainage feature with steep slopes lacking continuous ground cover for soil erosion control and water infiltration and retention. Pin Oak — Bur Oak Woodland is recommended as a general target plant community composition for this cover type. Restoration will require substantial canopy removal due to existing cover by invasive, Project Number: 193806465 10 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond nonnative black locust. However, the canopy removal will enable better establishment of continuous ground layer vegetation for improved water infiltration and slope stabilization along the drainage. Oak trees and other hardwoods can then be planted to fill in the canopy. Cottonwood and red pine are not typically in Pin Oak — Bur Oak Woodland but are currently present and can be maintained as part of the canopy composition. Insert zoomed in map of area, so the reader does not have to flip back to the larger map for reference Vegetation Management Goal • Plant community resembling Pin Oak — Bur Oak Woodland (FDs37b) with improved wildlife habitat, native plant diversity, and water infiltration capacity. Vegetation Management Objectives • Canopy cover is over 50% and dominated by bur oak and white oak, with occasional black cherry, red pine, and cottonwood. Pin oak and northern red oak are avoided for supplemental planting due to their high susceptibility to oak wilt. • All invasive, nonnative trees (primarily black locust) and saplings are removed. Native trees will need to be planted to increase canopy cover after invasive, nonnative trees are removed. • Native shrub cover is about 10-25% and composed of species such as black raspberry, red - berried elder, gooseberry, chokecherry, American hazelnut, and gray dogwood. • Invasive, nonnative shrub cover (common buckthorn, glossy buckthorn, tartarian honeysuckle) is reduced to less than 5%. • Herbaceous ground layer vegetation cover is increased to over 75% and dominated by native grasses, sedges, and forbs, such as those listed in the table below. Invasive, nonnative herbaceous cover is less than 5%. • Nearly continuous ground layer cover is maintained to promote water infiltration and soil stabilization. • Diverse ground layer vegetation is established using native seed mixes and plugs that include species that can provide floral resources for pollinators throughout the growing season. Project Number: 193806465 11 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Nonnative Woodland - Desired Future Conditions Overview BUR OAK — PIN OAK WOODLAND Vegetation Layer Cover Representative Plant Species Canopy >50 Bur oak, white oak, black cherry, hackberry, American elm, aspen, cottonwood, red pine Shrub/Sapling 10-25 Black raspberry, red -berried elder, gooseberry, chokecherry, American hazelnut, gray dogwood, Virginia creeper Bottlebrush grass, silky wild rye, Pennsylvania sedge, Sprengel's sedge, Herbaceous common woodland sedge, white snakeroot, violets, enchanter's 75-100 nightshade, false Solomon's seal, Clayton's sweet cicely, wild geranium, (Ground) lopseed, large -leaved aster, wild columbine, calico aster, arrowleaf aster, zig-zag goldenrod, tall bellflower, black-eyed Susan 3.3 Lowland Hardwoods Existing Cover Type The lowland hardwoods cover type was mapped across a total of 3.5 acres of the project area. About 2 acres occurred within very narrow strips along the pond shoreline. An aerial photo from 1991, Figure 4, illustrates that much of the hardwood cover along the shoreline has established over the last 30 years. Along some stretches of shoreline in 2023, this cover type was essentially only a couple of feet wide with trees and shrubs rooted in vertical banks and much of the canopy cover over water. Along other stretches, there were steep banks that dropped off from the mowed trail edges. The banks were covered by native shrubs but lacked ground cover below. Much of the steep -banked shoreline that did not have herbaceous ground cover was eroded and bare. Lowland hardwood canopy cover varied but was generally 50-75%. Boxelder was most common in the canopy, with occasional cottonwood, Siberian elm, and amur chokecherry. River birch and Amur chokecherry appear to have been intentionally planted around the pond. Other native trees that occur in this cover type, though infrequently, included paper birch, quaking aspen, black walnut, hackberry, silver maple, and black cherry. Invasive trees that occur occasionally throughout the lowland hardwoods were white mulberry, white poplar, and Siberian elm. In addition to Amur chokecherry, nonnative weeping willow and crabapple trees were present as well. Saplings of all the native canopy species were observed in the understory. One 4-inch bur oak was observed along the north shoreline in the understory. Common buckthorn and glossy buckthorn were the most common shrubs, comprising nearly continuous cover in much of the mapped lowland hardwood areas. They have formed thickets that significantly limit shoreline views of the pond from the paved trail and have also significantly restricted or eliminated native shrub and herbaceous plant growth. Buckthorn thickets also occurred under lowland hardwoods Project Number: 193806465 12 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond disconnected from the shoreline. Native shrubs such as red -osier dogwood, gray dogwood, and elderberry were common to occasional. Ground cover ranged from sparse to continuous, with areas of open canopy more likely to have continuous cover by nonnative grasses such as smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, or reed canary grass. White snakeroot, a disturbance -adapted native forb, was the most commonly encountered native forb. Garlic mustard, creeping Charlie, purple loosestrife, leafy spurge, and Canada thistle are problematic broadleaf invasive plants associated with this cover type. Several trees have been planted along the north shoreline in canopy gaps. Planted species noted during the 2023 field surveys included sycamore, bald cypress, tamarack, hackberry, and Kentucky coffee tree. Shoreline vegetation cover in the mapped lowland hardwoods cover type is in general a sensitive and important feature for stabilizing the banks of the pond and creating diverse wildlife habitat. Several wood ducks were observed during both field visits foraging in the south arm of the pond where woody vegetation hangs over shallow water and downed trees/branches are present. Maintaining lowland hardwood cover is recommended for all of the areas mapped as that cover type based on 2023 observations. Vegetation management objectives focus on removal of invasive, nonnative plants, increasing native short-statured herbaceous cover and species diversity, and enhancing pond and wildlife views. Some shoreline locations may require installation of bank stabilization features along with invasive plant removal and revegetation with native plant materials. In some areas, including the west side of the south pond lobe, the existing bituminous loop path is near the shoreline; combined with existing steep, eroded shoreline banks, long-term maintenance of a stable Insert map of shoreline will be difficult. The existing bituminous path is also showing signs of degradation with trail horizontal and longitudinal pavement cracking in some areas. We recommend shifting the path further location(s) to from the shore when reconstructing it to reduce shoreline slopes where it is steep and eroded, in order tobe relocated improve shoreline stability and ease of long-term maintenance. Vegetation Management Goal • Lowland hardwood plant communities with improved shoreline stabilization capacity, pond buffer qualities, wildlife habitat, native plant diversity, and enhanced views of the pond and associated wildlife. Project Number: 193806465 13 Insert zoomed in map of area, so the reader does not have to flip back to the larger map for reference Mounds View Silver View Park Pond V rt Ir IMb IN Ilk Mounds View Silver View Park: 1991 Land Cover QSilver View Park (approx) 2so soo ® Stantec Fe=f fJe:lo Sources G ly of tileiindti View, NA []S, MrGea 3'!0./,S J�» 1991 aencl piolo 938Gh4h5 Figure 4 1991 Aerial Photo of Silver View Park Vegetation Management Objectives • Canopy cover is 50-75% and composed of native hardwoods such as boxelder, cottonwood, river birch, paper birch, quaking aspen, black walnut, hackberry, silver maple, American elm, and black cherry. Future canopy cover may include sycamore, bald cypress, tamarack, and Kentucky coffee tree —species that have been planted as of 2023 around the pond. • Invasive, nonnative trees (white mulberry, white poplar, Siberian elm, amur maple) are eliminated. Nonnative trees such as weeping willow, crabapple, and amur chokecherry are replaced with native hardwoods over time as they deteriorate in condition. • Native shrub cover is 25-50% and composed of species such as black raspberry, red -berried elder, common elderberry, gooseberry, chokecherry, gray dogwood. Shrub cover is patchy to maintain good pond visibility for pedestrians from the surrounding trail. Project Number: 193806465 14 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Invasive, nonnative shrub cover (common buckthorn, glossy buckthorn, Tartarian honeysuckle) is reduced to less than 5%. • Herbaceous ground layer vegetation cover is over 75% and dominated by native grasses, sedges, and forbs. Invasive herbaceous plant cover by species such as Canada thistle, leafy spurge, garlic mustard, creeping Charlie, purple loosestrife, smooth brome, and reed canary grass is less than 5%. • Diverse ground layer vegetation is established using diverse native seed mixes and plugs that include species that can provide floral resources for pollinators throughout the growing season. LOWLAND HARDWOODS Desired Future Conditions Overview Vegetation Layer Cover Representative Plant Species Boxelder, cottonwood, river birch, paper birch, quaking aspen, black Canopy 50-75 walnut, hackberry, silver maple, American elm, black cherry, Kentucky coffee tree and planted sycamore, bald cypress, and tamarack Black raspberry, red raspberry, red -berried elder, common elderberry, gooseberry, chokecherry, gray dogwood, Virginia creeper, sandbar Shrub/Sapling 25-50 willow, blackberry; tree saplings may include canopy species listed above along with basswood and bur oak Variable depending upon specific location; mesic hardwood, woodland edge, and/or wet meadow/shoreline species; native species currently Herbaceous 75-100 present include bluejoint, white snakeroot, sensitive fern, ostrich fern, (Ground) violets, Solomon's seal, panicled aster, stinging nettle, jewelweeds, blue vervain, Canada goldenrod, andspotted Joe - a weed 3.4 Nonnative Grass -Dominated Existing Cover Types About 2.1 acres of the project area were mowed as of 2023. The total includes about 1.6 acres without canopy cover and about 0.5 acre with mowed lawn and scattered hardwood and conifer landscape trees. About a 3-foot mowed trail buffer was excluded from this total. Converting most of the mowed areas to native ground cover is recommended to enhance buffering for the ponds with deep-rooted native grass -dominated vegetation. Diverse native ground cover with short- statured grasses, sedges, and forbs will provide improved water infiltration, year-round wildlife habitat, seasonal blooms, fall color, and winter beauty. MN State Seed Mixes can be used as a starting point for customizing seed mixes for native ground cover in the park. Areas with little to no canopy cover should be considered for a mesic prairie mix with an emphasis on short-statured grasses, such little bluestem, sideoats grama, prairie dropseed, and June grass, that can Project Number: 193806465 15 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond provide cover and diversity without obscuring park and pond views. The shorter grasses will also maintain better views of wildflowers in the plantings. For areas with scattered canopy cover or shade during a portion of the day, a savanna or woodland edge seed mix will be more appropriate. The seed mix should contain shade -adapted species. After the initial 3- to 4-year establishment phase, annual maintenance for native plantings should provide cost savings over mowing maintenance. Mowing will still be needed along the trail sides and for access to park amenities (such as benches, swings, disc golf features), but can be significantly reduced. Mowing is Insert map recommended for continuing lawn maintenance on slivers of park land north of the trail along the north of areas hight lightedfor side of Silver View Pond for continuity with adjacent larger expanses of lawn on neighboring properties. " No The northeast corner of the park along Long Lake Road is another location where it may make the most Mowing " sense to continue with the current mowing maintenance regime. Indicate what areas Vegetation Management Goal will • Native plant cover resembling short-statured prairie or savanna understory with improved water continued to be infiltration capacity, wildlife habitat, and native plant diversity. groomed Vegetation Management Objectives • Continuous ground cover by diverse native herbaceous species, represented by deep-rooted, drought -tolerant grasses, sedges, and forbs. • Herbaceous ground cover composition is designed to match light availability —open canopy versus partial canopy/woodland edge. • Flowering plants provide blooms throughout the growing season to enhance pollinator habitat. Insert zoomed in map of area, so the reader does not have to flip back to the larger map for reference Nonnative Grass -Dominated Cover Type - Desired Future Conditions Overview NATIVE GROUND COVER Canopy variable Existing scattered hardwood and conifer landscape trees Short-statured native prairie grasses, sedges, and forbs in areas with Herbaceous 100 open canopy; short-statured native savanna/woodland grasses, sedges, (Ground) and forbs in areas with scattered trees and shade during portions of the Project Number: 193806465 16 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond 3.5 Stormwater Pond Buffer Existing Cover Type Unmowed herbaceous vegetation cover surrounds Pond EW-4.P3, northwest of Pond EW-4. Cover is primarily dominated by nonnative grasses such as brome and reed canary grass. Native plants that were observed commonly near the water's edge included wild mint, northern water plantain, and beggar's ticks. Other native plants included sensitive fern, giant goldenrod, panicled aster, broadleaf arrowhead, jewelweeds, blue vervain, violets, and a few occurrences of rice cutgrass and American manna grass. Canada thistle was common and purple loosestrife occurred occasionally around the pond as well. Insert zoomed in map of area, so the reader does not have to flip back to the larger map for reference Vegetation Management Goal • Native plant cover with improved water infiltration capacity, wildlife habitat, and native plant diversity. Vegetation Management Objective • Continuous ground cover by diverse native herbaceous species, represented by deep-rooted grasses, sedges, and forbs. Stormwater Pond Buffer Cover Type - Desired Future Conditions Overview NATIVE GROUND COVER Herbaceous (Ground) 100 Mesic prairie and woodland edge species on mid- to upper slopes; wet meadow species on lower slopes and within the drai 3.6 Wetland Existing Cover Type About 5.5 acres of shrub -swamp and forested wetlands occur in the project area. Along the east side of the south arm of Pond EW-4, the forested wetland had canopy cover by cottonwoods and boxelder with buckthorn below. Much of the remaining wetland cover was degraded Willow -Dogwood Shrub Swamp. Shrub/sapling cover was generally less than 50% and dominated by invasive shrubs, common and glossy buckthorn, and invasive, nonnative cattails, purple loosestrife, and reed canary grass. Native sandbar willow, red -osier dogwood, and Bebb's willow occurred occasionally. The wetland had scattered canopy cover by cottonwood, elm, boxelder, and quaking aspen, providing less than 25% canopy cover overall. Native plants in the herbaceous layer included swamp smartweed, giant goldenrod, panicled aster, starry false Solomon's seal, fowl manna grass, clearweed, sensitive fern, small -spike false nettle, bristly sedge, and monkeyflower. Herbaceous cover was sparse under thickets of buckthorn. Project Number: 193806465 17 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Wetland restoration is recommended to improve protection of water quality, provide higher quality wildlife habitat, and sustain diverse native plant communities. Removing invasive shrubs in the understory as part of the restoration process will also enhance park user views of the wetland habitat, pond, and associated wildlife. Northern Wet Meadow/Carr (WMn82) is recommended as a target native plant community for all but the forested portion of the wetland complex. Northern Wet Meadow/Carr is an open wetland with continuous cover by grasses, sedges, and forbs adapted to saturated soils and periodic inundation. When this wetland community has over 25% shrub cover, it is classified by the MN DNR as Willow — Dogwood Shrub Swamp (WMn82a). Several species of willow, red -osier dogwood, speckled alder, and sometimes bog birch may be present. A MN DNR fact sheet describing this wetland plant community is available at the following weblink: httos://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural resources/noc/wet meadow carr/wmn82.odf For the forested portion of the wetland complex, the community should remain forested as a "Hardwood Swamp" but can be significantly enhanced through invasive shrub removal and native seeding/planting. Insert zoomed in map of area, so the reader does not have to flip back to the larger map for reference Vegetation Management Goal • Wetlands resembling Northern Wet Meadow/Carr and Hardwood Swamp with improved water filtration capacity, wildlife habitat, and native plant diversity. Northern Wet Meadow/Carr Vegetation Management Objectives • Canopy cover is absent to sparse. Trees present may include species such as ash, elm, cottonwood, boxelder, quaking aspen, and willow. • Shrub cover may be variable, ranging from sparse to intermittent (0-75%) across the wetland complex. Shrub cover is dominated by native species such as red -osier dogwood and willows. • Invasive shrub cover is reduced to less than 5%. • Herbaceous ground layer cover is increased to over 75% throughout and composed of diverse native herbaceous species, represented by wetland grasses, sedges, and forbs. Hardwood Swamp Vegetation Management Objectives • Canopy cover is intermittent to continuous (over 75%) and composed of native hardwoods such as cottonwood, boxelder, hackberry, and elm. • Subcanopy cover may be present, variable in cover, and composed of native canopy species. • Shrub/sapling layer cover is 25-75%, composed of native wetland shrubs such as elderberry, willow, red -osier dogwood, silky dogwood, and nannyberry. • Herbaceous ground layer cover is increased to over 50%, with a diverse composition of native shade -tolerant wetland grasses, sedges, and forbs. Project Number: 193806465 18 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond Shrub -Swamp Wetland Cover Type - Desired Future Conditions Overview Northern Wet Meadow/Carr Vegetation Cover (%) Representative Plant Species Layer Canopy <5 May include ash, elm, boxelder, cottonwood, aspen, willow Willows, red -osier dogwood, silky dogwood, elderberry, nannyberry, Shrub <5 to 75 gooseberry Native sedges and grasses, such as lake sedge, bristly sedge, tussock sedge, woolgrass, dark green bulrush, and bluejoint; native forbs and Herbaceous 75-100 ferns such as tufted loosestrife, marsh skullcap, northern bugleweed, (Ground) northern marsh fern, jewelweed, swamp smartweed, clearweed, swamp milkweed, broad-leaved arrowhead, and many others Forested Wetland Cover Type - Desired Future Conditions Overview Hardwood Swam Vegetation Cover (%) Layer Representative Plant Species Canopy 75-100 Cottonwood, boxelder, ash, elm, quaking aspen, hackberr Subcanopy variable Cottonwood, boxelder, ash, elm, quaking aspen, hackberry Shrub 25-75 Elderberry, willow, red -osier dogwood, silky dogwood, and nannyberry Bristly sedge, bladder sedge, bluejoint, Virginia wild rye, cardinal flower, Herbaceous 50-100 cut -leaved coneflower, willowherb, violets, panicled aster, sneezeweed, (Ground) monke flower, Joe e-weed, boneset, and many others 4 Vegetation Restoration Activities & Cost Estimates 4.1 Activity Types The goals and objectives outlined above for each cover type can be accomplished by implementing best management practices for ecological restoration and vegetation management. The following sections describe the activities anticipated for vegetation restoration and maintenance around the ponds. The activities are most effective when integrated. For example, invasive plant control should be combined with seeding/planting to replace the invasive plant cover with desirable vegetation. Additionally, some of the activities such as invasive shrub control and herbaceous weed control will require multiple treatments over several years. The cost estimates provided in Section 4.2 anticipate the need for multiple treatments during an initial 3 years of more intense vegetation restoration effort. Project Number: 193806465 19 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond 4.1.1 TREE REMOVAL Tree removal is recommended for invasive, nonnative trees throughout the project area and for select native trees in the areas recommended for Bur Oak — Pin Oak Woodland restoration. The black locust stands near Silver Lake Road will involve the bulk of the tree removal effort. Invasive trees are otherwise scattered through the Lowland Hardwood areas. Tree removals should be planned for dormant seasons with frozen ground conditions to minimize ground disturbance and impacts to understory vegetation. Stumps should be treated with herbicide specifically proven to kill the root systems and prevent re -sprouts of target trees. Black locust and white poplar are prolific at root suckering, so any existing suckers should be cut and treated as well. Seedlings and saplings of black locust, white poplar, white mulberry, Siberian elm, and Amur maple will need to be spot treated by foliar applications during the growing season or cut/stump treatments. Eliminating these tree species elsewhere in the park will help eliminate seed production and potential re -colonization of the project area. Tree removal bids can be solicited on a cost per acre or on a per -tree basis, depending upon the scale of a restoration project. For the relatively small scale of work at Silver View Park, conducting an inventory of trees slated for removal and field marking each tree will enable development of more detailed bid specifications for more accurate contractor pricing. 4.1.2 INVASIVE SHRUB CONTROL Invasive shrub control will primarily involve common buckthorn, but glossy buckthorn, Tartarian honeysuckle and shrub/sapling-sized invasive trees should be included in this activity as well. Buckthorn ranges in size from seedlings to trees that are over 3-4" in diameter. As with the tree removal, invasive shrubs and saplings should be removed during dormant conditions. In the wetlands, invasive shrub removal should take place when the ground is frozen as well. All invasive shrubs and saplings should be cut as close to the ground as possible and cut stumps promptly treated with herbicide. Cut material can be chipped and hauled off for composting. Forestry mowing to shred cut material is an alternative to chipping and hauling for areas accessible by a skidsteer. Follow-up foliar treatments should be anticipated for any stump re -sprouts and seedlings. If there is desirable native broadleaf ground cover in areas with re -sprouts and seedlings, foliar treatment should occur after the native broadleaf plants have senesced in the fall. Areas with sparse or no desirable broadleaf plants can be foliar treated during the growing season. A minimum of three to five years of follow-up foliar treatments should be anticipated to significantly reduce invasive shrub cover and control recruitment from the soil seedbank. Prior to invasive shrub control, a seeding/planting plan should be in place for revegetation. A seed mix of native grasses and sedges is typically sown in areas where invasive shrubs will require follow-up foliar treatments with a broadleaf -selective herbicide. After the invasive shrub cover has significantly Project Number: 193806465 20 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond diminished, a seed mix with native grasses, sedges, and broadleaf flowers can be sown to add diversity, functionality, and resilience. 4.1.3 HERBACEOUS WEED CONTROL Herbaceous weed spot treatments are recommended for reducing cover by invasive plants and problematic weeds such as Canada thistle, leafy spurge, purple loosestrife, creeping Charlie, garlic mustard, burdock, motherwort, nonnative cattail, reed canary grass, and smooth brome. Treatment for some of these species may be combined with broadcast spraying as part of site preparation for native seeding/planting. As with invasive shrub control, multiple treatments should be anticipated. For the herbaceous weeds, successful control may require multiple treatments within one growing season and for at least 2-3 growing seasons. The specific control methods used, including herbicide selection and timing, will be species -dependent. Treatments should involve the most selective herbicides applied at the lowest effective rates for control based on herbicide label recommendations. Herbicide applications to flowering target species should be avoided when pollinators are highly active. Purple loosestrife is extremely abundant through the wetland complex, so biocontrol may be the best option for larger -scale control combined with spot herbicide applications to scattered individuals around the pond shorelines. Biocontrol will not eliminate purple loosestrife and effectiveness varies from year to year, but it can reduce total purple loosestrife cover for enabling better expression of native herbaceous plants. 4.1.4 NATIVE SEEDING Native seeding is recommended to enhance ground layer vegetation cover throughout the project area. No site preparation, other than weed spot treatments, may be needed in areas with some existing native vegetation. Spring seeding native woodland grasses and sedges is effective for woodland areas. The seeds will germinate during the growing season. For broadleaf seed mixes, fall seeding is recommended to enhance germination for many native broadleaf wildflowers. Other than monitoring establishment, no other grow -in maintenance activities are needed are than weed spot treatments while the herbaceous plants establish in woodland and lowland hardwood areas. Lawn areas planned for conversion to native plantings will require site preparation prior to seeding. Site preparation may involve a combination of broadcast spraying with a non -selective herbicide such as glyphosate to kill the existing sod, and light soil scarification. Mowing will be required during the first growing season after seeding to aid establishment of the native seedlings. Establishment monitoring will determine whether mowing is needed during the second growing season. At a minimum, spot weed mowing and spot herbaceous weed treatments should be anticipated for grow -in maintenance for native ground cover establishment during the second and third growing seasons. Project Number: 193806465 21 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond 4.1.5 NATIVE PLUG PLANTING Native plug planting can supplement seeding in select areas. Plugs are sometimes available for species that are not otherwise available as seed. Shoreline areas that need quicker vegetation cover should be considered for plugs. Watering should be planned as a contingency if sufficient rainfall is lacking during the first growing season. Plug planting should be done in late spring or in the fall. 4.2 Cost Estimates The following cost estimates are based on typical best management practices for conducting the activities described above, including site preparation (if needed), follow-up treatments, and grow -in maintenance. Cost estimates for activities that should be planned for at least 3 years of initial restoration include the costs for implementing 3 years of treatments. Additional costs related to potential erosion control materials and installation, tree inventory/marking, and native plug, shrub, or tree plantings are not included. We need to get estimate cost for total projects in order to the Council Table 3 Vegetation Restoration Cost Estimates Activity Approximate Acres Subtotal Cost $ /Acre Cost $ Tree removal (lump sum); within woodland, lowland $13,500 4.8 $13,500 hardwoods cover types Invasive shrub control (3 years); woodland, lowland $7,500 10.3 $77,250 hardwoods, wet meadow/carr, hardwood swam Herbaceous invasive spot treatments 3 ears $4,500 10.3 $46,350 Native seeding —woodland, lowland hardwoods, wet $2,800 10.3 $28,840 meadow/carr, hardwood swamp; includes seed and seeding 2 times Native seeding —lawn to natives, small stormwater $4,500 2.4 $10,800 pond buffer (3 years); includes site preparation, seed mix, seeding, and row -in maintenance Total 12.7 $176,740 5 Vegetation Maintenance Annual maintenance of vegetation in the project area should be anticipated to include monitoring 2-3 times per year for weed control needs, tree pruning or removal needs, and monitoring for pond buffer functionality. Spot treatments should be planned for both woody invasive plants and herbaceous Project Number: 193806465 22 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond invasives. Spot treatments may involve a combination of spot herbicide applications and spot mowing with weed whips, brush saws, or walk -behind brush mowers. Long-term maintenance of native plantings in areas converted from turf may include a combination of spot weed treatments, dormant mowing, and periodic prescribed burns. Dormant mowing and prescribed fire will help invigorate growth and flowering. Prescribed fire can aid in controlling some weed species as well, depending on the timing. Dormant mowing in early spring will break down the previous year's growth. Depending upon the location of the plantings, mowers that are used to mow the rest of the park could be used for dormant mowing. Prescribed burns should be considered for implementation every 3-4 years. Trained personnel should plan and conduct the burns. 6 Potential Grant Funding Potential state grant funding sources for ecological restoration include the Outdoor Heritage Fund (OHF), as appropriated by the Lessard -Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, and the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (ENRTF), as appropriated by the Legislative -Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR). Both of those funding sources require that funds for ecological restoration and enhancement are used on public lands or waters or on private lands encumbered by a perpetual conservation easement. The Outdoor Heritage Fund is just one of four funds established by the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment ("Legacy Amendment") to the Minnesota Constitution that was passed by Minnesota voters in 2008. The Legacy Amendment distributes revenue from three -eighths of one percent of state sales tax to four funds: the OHF, Clean Water Fund, Parks and Trails Fund, and the Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund. The MN DNR manages the Conservation Partners Legacy (CPL) Grant Program that awards funding from the OHF. The CPL grant program specifically funds "conservation projects that restore, enhance, or protect forests, wetlands, prairies, and habitat for fish, game, and wildlife in Minnesota." (MN DNR 2024) Under public ownership, Silver View Park should be eligible for CPL grants to aid in ecological restoration and enhancement. Competitive matching grants range from $5,000 to $500,000 and government entities, as well as local, regional, state, and national nonprofit organizations, are eligible to receive grants. More information about the grant program is available at the following weblink: httiDs://w\tvw.dnr.state.mn.us/arants/habitat/CDI/index.htm1. An example CPL grant funding application schedule for Fiscal Year 2024 is provided below. Include a public education component - reading / information boards / QR codes, historic photos, explaining the function importance of Silver View Storm Water Pond, water quality, on a local and regional basis , these boards could be placed around the pond in different locations, plant and tree i.d. Project Number: 193806465 23 Mounds View Silver View Park Pond WATER c v, ] AN �/5 1 AND Bc DEPARTMENT OF LEGACY NATURAL RESOURCES "'4441 Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program FY2024 Application and Funding Schedule Application system opens for all grant cycles on August 1, 2023 Expedited Conservation Projects (ECP) `ECP funds are available on a first -came, first -serve basis for approved, eligible projects. Up to 5 Rounds will be held. Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program Page 1 of 1 FY74 Applk.t.on and Funding Schedule * Traditional, Metro, and New Applicant September 11, 2023: ECP Round 1 Closes, 3:00 PM September 19, 2023: Application system closes, 3:00 PM October 20, 2023; Announce funded ECP applications Decemher30, 2023: Awards announced for Round 1 November 13, 20Z3: ECP Round 2 Closes, 3:00 PM January 3, 2024: Round Z application system opens (if funds remain) December 15, 2023: Announce funded ECP applications February 20, 2024: Application system closes, 3:00 PM May 10, 2024: Awards announced for Round 2 January 16, 2024: ECP Round 3 Closes, 3:00 PM February 16, 2024: Announce funded ECP applications March 11, 2024: ECP Round 4 Closes, 3:00 PM April 19, 2024: Announce funded ECP applications May 13, 2024: ECP Round 5 Closes, 3:00 PM June 21, 2024: Announce funded ECP applications Project Number: 193806465 24 Mounds View Silver View Park — BMP Planting Approach Examples Option A: BMPs Planted with Containers * Option B: BMPs Seeded with native seed mix and Planted with Plugs *** ** * - Image does not show native plants within this basin. Our intent would be to propose native plant species suitable for this area, if this Option A planting approach is selected, to provide pollinator benefits and more funding and educational opportunities. ** - Image of rain garden planted with #1 container stock plants and mulch shortly after installation. *** - These BMPs are several years old and have received consistent weed management since installation. Option A Option B Pros Pros The aesthetics of a "garden" or plan with plant Lower installation cost; some watering may be groupings is generally accepted by the needed during periods of drought and community establishment Quicker establishment period: Plants bloom Reduced maintenance: maintenance includes usually within the first year mowing 3x per year for 1s' 3 years, 1x per year thereafter Funding and native plant educational Funding and native plant educational opportunity, generally IF using native plant opportunity species Cons Cons Higher installation cost, higher water demand Longer establishment period: Seed and plugs during periods of drought and establishment take time to fill in and bloom Higher maintenance: maintenance includes Education may be necessary to gain community hand weeding monthly during growing season support and respond to initial perceptions of (-8x) for 1s' 2-3 years, less often thereafter "weediness" Limited variety of native plant species in larger plant stock sizes ® Stantec To: Don Peterson From City of Mounds View Project/File: Mounds View, Silver View Pond Date Restoration, Project No.193806465 Reference: Public Meeting #1 Notes and Survey Results Dan Edgerton Minneapolis October 26, 2023 Memo An onsite public meeting was held on 9/21/2023 to present and discuss the Silver View Pond restoration project. A meeting notice is attached. The agenda for the meeting was as follows: • Don Peterson welcomed the attendees and provided project background • Tyle McLeete introduced the Stantec team • Dan Edgerton discussed the City's surface water system, the previous pond inventory project, and the identified need to restore Silver View Pond • Dendy Lofton presented the status of the water quality and sediment sampling and upland vegetation survey and discussed potential restoration options • A general Q&A session was held • Dendy Lofton led several attendees on a walk around the pond • A public survey was handed out, and a link to an online version of the survey was provided A tabulation of the results of the public survey is attached. A summary of comments received is as follows: • Seventeen responses were received. Based on addresses provided by responders, all but two reside in the immediate vicinity of the park • What does Silver View Pond mean to you? Walk around, community pond, see neighbors, wildlife, beauty, nature, fountains • What is your favorite part of Silver View Pond? Walking path, neighbors, wildlife, vegetation, serenity, sound of water, turtles, birds, trees • What is your least favorite part of Silver View Pond? Path needs to be redone, hills in park block view of pond, odor, buckthorn, pond is overgrown with plants, algae, lily pads, green slime/scum on water, geese • What do you want to see changed at Silver View Pond? Get rid of hills, create picnic area, paddling, ice skating trail, better water quality, remove buckthorn, more natural habitat, clearer Design with community in mind October 26, 2023 Don Peterson Page 2 of 2 Reference: Public Meeting #1 Notes and Survey Results water, fewer pond weeds, more sitting areas, aerators on timer so some quiet time, remove invasive plants • What are your concerns for Silver View Pond? City will try to get more revenue from park, part of Rice Creek Watershed, vegetation by east swing, maintenance, water level, wildlife protection, rules and regulations, buckthorn overgrowth, more algae, unsafe water, pond looks bad, loss of trees • Additional comments? Support the improvement efforts, thank you, love the cleanup by Long Lake Road, good presentations, too many coyotes, handout would have been helpful, willing to help/volunteer Additional comments received as part of the site walk are as follows: • The hills in the park are great for sledding in the winter • Remove buckthorn but keep/improve native vegetation around the pond for wildlife • The pond used to be clearer and cleaner. Excessive algae and plant growth began in the last 8 years or so. • Protect the turtles and other wildlife • The City should provide more information on what residents can do to improve/protect water quality • Odors are worse in the southeast during late summer Regards, STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC. Dan Edgerton PE Senior Associate Phone: (612) 712-2037 Mobile: 6517755627 dan.edgerton@stantec.com stantec.com Attachment: Public meeting notice Public survey results Design with community in mind �/� �7���[� �T CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Sept.1e 023 MOUNDS VIEW DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS P U e L I c W O R K S 2466 Bronson Drive • Mounds View, MN 55112 (763) 717-4050 • Email: publicworks@moundsviewmn.org www.moundsviewmn.org *********************************************************************** IMPORTANT NOTICE *********************************************************************** SILVER VIEW PARK - STORM WATER POND INFORMATIONAL MEETING SILVER VIEW PARK, 2700 COUNTY ROAD I SEPTEMBER 21, 2023 AT 5:00 P.M. AT THE PARK PAVILION A storm water pond analysis has been completed by Stantec Engineering Service for all of the City's ponds and basins. The report includes information for the City with regard to the necessary maintenance timeframes along with a capital improvement plan for the future maintenance needs for all the storm water ponds and basins. The meeting will consist of a short presentation followed by a question and answer (Q & A) session, to include an optional "walk and learn" with City and Stantec Staff to gain an insight on the function and maintenance regarding the Silver View storm water pond. Agenda: 5:00 - 5:15 p.m. - Staff Presentation 5:15 - 5:45 p.m. — Q & A 5:45 - 6:45 p.m. — Walk and Learn with Staff 7:00 p.m. Meeting Concludes The intent of this meeting is to acquire further input from the property owners regarding water quality, upland vegetation and additional concerns regarding the pond. If there is inclement weather the meeting will be held at the Mounds View Community Center, 5394 Edgewood Drive. NOTE: The meeting will be held on -site at Silver View Park. Should you choose to participate with the option to physically visit the pond remember to have the appropriate footwear. Staff will have audio equipment present so that all participants will be able to hear. Please contact the Public Works Department, M — F, 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., (763) 717-4050 with questions regarding this meeting. > 6 v N° � O O C O o O N C m O > > 9 Q o• H W 'o ° y > ° a 3 ,°� y z o c m o E o o o E '_• °a °r v° c 3 E m .o. ao o .°. c >o�V o m o vE.a Ecm o o 0 w e 0 0 °° o. o. c «. 2 o '• ov m3 w o as -- " c a a -o w £ ° �a m > > wo a z -o= omo o o o m w m a a l o o _ o >' 3 w3 �3w e'o£'2 w o E w 0 > v .N >w c o a w - o-y ,°. ° w 'o a o Y m '^ w-° 1. a °' V _o m o E u a 3 a o o w> -roc o v c o r w o - 3 u o r o o 3 N 3 u u - = z° ro r 33 r°° = o> i E�°°� r uo>Eoa `o o d a w m c a m 3 w w m a a r a ° - m > a v m E m 3 0q c - E c E a wwm ono - c- tm a 3 `w c s v `m o _ f0 °' N - o o ,. ' `. L" o w ow m ow o -o > a o= ar '°'-' a 3 °' `o c -mo t, m - w a 0 3 c " E`o m- o w c m - a £ E c c n£ w L n o««o v `o a �' c eo ,. C v a t t c a ,°• " 3 o o w c _= = c v 3 r 3 °,�, E -° _ o o o Y c a y N 3 _ ; N -° o E i n a o 'o eo w c> E c `o y a a+ Q w a E v o '°" m a �Y' m a C 3 i o 0 3 a a E z r 3 u u s ¢ ¢` o u z o _ m i a r m- w _ o °c° r = N w -a N E ._ s Y o o. w = E E cif 3 3 o °' a N m => o a o -w ° 'o o +' ° h0 m o w, o .s. " m o a n m E a c o - ,£-., w o E o °„ w .°-, c w E E E �, E o w £ r r r« 3 a a o v a r r«« r o r a' ¢` E w r a r a w m 'w" 3 w r> w r °' 3 E w I r w y n c - mo o. ,t. o_ ao 3 a o . c w y o w n 3 .a o w 3 ° ' ° 3 w o w >> m Y n> 'o - o r w? a m m o = L N Y 3 0 3xm w a w w Y u w w w 9 a w Y 3 w o r 2 w r Y E r 3 3 w C W o N 3 a N c ,tw, o 1 a m - o" °' d o L a w v 3 m c71 _ m oom Y - '-� r ma' m C a oa Z' a 3 N �' m -• w E o c o m _ `m a 00 w Y E E E Y Y o a c y w '_� o f o >> o m m C Y o w o `- 3 C °q ; c V Y ° r = r 3 c a+ -° S00 N x a c a L 3 Y' ~ a c a 0 o Y w c 6 — w o `m t w" �O w _> O _ a .3 3 w z m° m w E" N d V %« C n u� �,° > '" o eo w o w t. t > w 3 Y_ _ m n w m '3 > - 0 3 w - a o 2 0 en Y o o9 oY >,. -`- 3 a n -'ot c ,. am -r Ez m '_ 3E a LL° Y o ->� m w >mw 3'3i2w, oaf _m3 - =0 3m _ _ 3°0" vwi w` m �° vLoi w w-oa t7m3 - 3° c 0 0 v o 0 > > r 3 r 'o r 'o C 'o r 'o > r 'o r 'o v 3 ¢ a o W. Q c V V V V V 1. j V V o W V' > a o E w l7 E t m um _ w ° - ° o Y a a o Y _ _ = 3 c - y — d E ¢` 3 ¢` z° z z° i > 6 v N° � O O C O o O N C m O > > 9 Q o• H W 'o ° y > ° a 3 ,°� y z o c m o E o o o E '_• °a °r v° c 3 E m .o. ao o .°. c >o�V o m o vE.a Ecm o o 0 w e 0 0 °° o. o. c «. 2 o '• ov m3 w o as -- " c a a -o w £ ° �a m > > wo a z -o= omo o o o m w m a a l o o _ o >' 3 w3 �3w e'o£'2 w o E w 0 > v .N >w c o a w - o-y ,°. ° w 'o a o Y m '^ w-° 1. a °' V _o m o E u a 3 a o o w> -roc o v c o r w o - 3 u o r o o 3 N 3 u u - = z° ro r 33 r°° = o> i E�°°� r uo>Eoa `o o d a w m c a m 3 w w m a a r a ° - m > a v m E m 3 0q c - E c E a wwm ono - c- tm a 3 `w c s v `m o _ f0 °' N - o o ,. ' `. L" o w ow m ow o -o > a o= ar '°'-' a 3 °' `o c -mo t, m - w a 0 3 c " E`o m- o w c m - a £ E c c n£ w L n o««o v `o a �' c eo ,. C v a t t c a ,°• " 3 o o w c _= = c v 3 r 3 °,�, E -° _ o o o Y c a y N 3 _ ; N -° o E i n a o 'o eo w c> E c `o y a a+ Q w a E v o '°" m a �Y' m a C 3 i o 0 3 a a E z r 3 u u s ¢ ¢` o u z o _ m i a r m- w _ o °c° r = N w -a N E ._ s Y o o. w = E E cif 3 3 o °' a N m => o a o -w ° 'o o +' ° h0 m o w, o .s. " m o a n m E a c o - ,£-., w o E o °„ w .°-, c w E E E �, E o w £ r r r« 3 a a o v a r r«« r o r a' ¢` E w r a r a w m 'w" 3 w r> w r °' 3 E w I r w y n c - mo o. ,t. o_ ao 3 a o . c w y o w n 3 .a o w 3 ° ' ° 3 w o w >> m Y n> 'o - o r w? a m m o = L N Y 3 0 3xm w a w w Y u w w w 9 a w Y 3 w o r 2 w r Y E r 3 3 w C W o N 3 a N c ,tw, o 1 a m - o" °' d o L a w v 3 m c71 _ m oom Y - '-� r ma' m C a oa Z' a 3 N �' m -• w E o c o m _ `m a 00 w Y E E E Y Y o a c y w '_� o f o >> o m m C Y o w o `- 3 C °q ; c V Y ° r = r 3 c a+ -° S00 N x a c a L 3 Y' ~ a c a 0 o Y w c 6 — w o `m t w" �O w _> O _ a .3 3 w z m° m w E" N d V %« C n u� �,° > '" o eo w o w t. t > w 3 Y_ _ m n w m '3 > - 0 3 w - a o 2 0 en Y o o9 oY >,. -`- 3 a n -'ot c ,. am -r Ez m '_ 3E a LL° Y o ->� m w >mw 3'3i2w, oaf _m3 - =0 3m _ _ 3°0" vwi w` m �° vLoi w w-oa t7m3 - 3° c 0 0 v o 0 > > r 3 r 'o r 'o C 'o r 'o > r 'o r 'o v 3 ¢ a o W. Q c V V V V V 1. j V V o W V' > a o E w l7 E t m um _ w ° - ° o Y a a o Y _ _ = 3 c - y — d E ¢` 3 ¢` z° z z° i ® Stantec To: Don Peterson From: Dendy Lofton, PhD, CLM City of Mounds View Dan Edgerton, P.E. Ben Otto Minneapolis Project/File: 193806465 Date: January 26, 2024 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Introduction Memo The June 2023 Mounds View Stormwater Pond Assessment report recommended a number of implementation activities for the City of Mounds View to maintain and restore its stormwater ponding system. One of the objectives in the implementation plan was the water quality improvement of Silver View Pond in 2024. Stantec conducted several field data collection activities in 2023 to support the water quality assessment. The purpose of this technical memorandum is to provide a summary of the field data collection, desktop analysis methods and results, and management recommendations to improve water quality in Silver View Pond. Water Quality Assessment In order to diagnose the existing water quality conditions in Silver View Pond, Stantec collected water samples for nutrient analysis, surveyed the aquatic vegetation community, and collected sediment cores to assess the rate of sediment phosphorus release. The phosphorus data was used to develop a lake response model for Silver View Pond that estimates the proportion of phosphorus entering the pond through runoff from the drainage area (external loading) and the proportion of phosphorus derived from sediment release (internal loading). FIELD DATA COLLECTION Water Samples Pond water samples were collected on 6/26/2023 and 9/6/2023 for analytical laboratory measurements of total phosphorus (TP), orthophosphate, total nitrogen, and chlorophyll -a, which is a proxy for algal biomass. Samples were collected from just below the water surface and delivered to RMB Laboratories for analysis. At the time of sample collection on September 6, 2023, vertical profiles (every 0.5 m) of dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, pH, and oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) were measured with a hand-held multiparameter probe (YSI). Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 2 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Aquatic Vegetation To assess the presence, abundance, and health of the lake's aquatic vegetation community, Stantec surveyed the aquatic plant communities in Silver View Pond on 6/27/2023 and 6/28/2023 (early season) and on 8/31/2023 (late season). Each lake was surveyed at distinct locations across a grid using the point - intercept methods described in Madsen (1999).' During each point -intercept survey, all submerged, floating leaf, and emergent species were identified at each survey point. Surveys were conducted at two periods in the summer growing season to account for different life cycles of commonly found aquatic native and invasive species in Minnesota. At each survey location a double -sided, weighted 14-tine rake was thrown from the boat, allowed to sink, and pulled across the lake bottom to represent approximately 1 square meter of lake area. We refer to this process as a rake toss. For each rake toss, vegetation was removed from the rake and identified to the species level. Sediment Chemistry Sediment cores were collected on 9/6/2023 from three locations in Silver View Pond, as shown in Figure 1. Sediment cores were collected for two purposes. The first was for laboratory incubation to quantify sediment phosphorus release rates under oxic and anoxic conditions. Sediments were incubated at UW- Stout under temperature- and light -controlled conditions. The second analysis was for phosphorus fractionation to quantify the mobile and non -mobile pools of phosphorus. Each core was sectioned into two depth intervals (0-5 and 5-10 cm depth intervals) for phosphorus fractionation analysis (Table 1) and sediment characteristics (i.e., moisture content, bulk density, and percent organic matter). The purpose of this analysis was to quantify the pools of P that are subject to diffusion from the sediments and characterize the areal extent of potential internal P loads to determine the feasibility of an alum treatment to suppress internal P loads. ' Madsen, J.D. 1999. Point intercept and line intercept methods for aquatic plant management. APCRT Technical Notes Collection. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 3 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN i f AVIF a, ►f . _ co�sx aa.a H2 L�peG ViEw Pond 6 1YJ A s' FY © $il�2r i FL-1— { � S�drmBllt Samptlng Locallon Starktec Cmrit,r e�.nsey S9 v M V— .. ��y .: �.wai...r�,un eac� V,umw,cw 1 �¢yor ArwR ri 4rdrW� 9n� Lim h�.P f4w�• SeA�wn�lamYw�} 7 .td¢.+a u.*}rtrawxifg9H... SemRIMp Lwgt-cne r. — Sh}rw 34 aar�AwMrRaprnP rrro-+a M++wc�o*+aM �:trtar rr New ra Ww ti[n+ 8r••e� �w+w ...ku�. +v.Kt Wv oa+r��at}r+h tau w Ow+r nion+Y+ r., .,.,, aa+wwrT "bw+'roawN�w a}+�w�B�xaKriw•*}r.. �x[.xwrk+ow wow+nwc+a•K woww sonf+�rw�pr�+•wdw S+y+ry rw rWO-1— Figure 1. Sediment coring locations in Silver View Pond. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 4 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Table 1. Operational grouping and recycling potential of phosphorus fraction. Iron -bound P Mobile P pool Loosely -bound P Biologically -labile and subject to mobilization through biogeochemical and geochemical reactions. Labile organic P Non -mobile P pool Aluminum -bound P Calcium -bound P Biologically -refractory and subject to burial; not readily available for biological uptake. Refractory P Sediment grab samples were also collected in the western forebay for sediment analysis for disposal option considerations in the event that sediment dredging would be necessary. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The following sections provide discussion of our findings from analysis of the water chemistry, aquatic vegetation, and sediment chemistry data components of the water quality assessment in Silver View Pond. Water quality Table 2 shows the concentration range of water quality parameters collected this summer from Silver View Pond. Minnesota does not have water quality standards for stormwater ponds, so we compared the Silver View Pond data to the eutrophication standards for shallow lakes in the same ecoregion (North Central Hardwood Forest) to gauge water quality under existing conditions. Chlorophyll -a is a proxy for algal biomass and is an indicator of how productive the system is in response to elevated nutrient concentrations. Both chlorophyll -a and TP exceed the limit for shallow lakes, indicating very high productivity in Silver View Pond. Total nitrogen (TN) and total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) are also elevated. Nitrite/nitrate concentrations were below the reporting limit. TKN represents ammonia and organic nitrogen, so these nitrogen data indicate that a large portion of the nitrogen pool is in an organic form. Nutrient delivery to Silver View Pond will need to be reduced in order to improve water quality and reduce frequency and duration of algal blooms. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 5 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Table 2. Range of concentrations for water quality parameters. Parameter ih Concentration Range (n=2) Eutrophication Standards for Shallow Lakes in North Central Hardwood Forest Ecoregion • .- Nitrite/nitrate Vertical profiles of physicochemical parameters are shown in Table 3. In a small shallow pond like Silver View Pond, we expect well -mixed conditions such that temperature and pH are consistent throughout the water column. Dissolved oxygen (DO) tends to decrease from the surface towards the sediments due to the demand for oxygen during microbially-driven organic matter decomposition and other oxygen -consuming geochemical processes. In early September when the profile data was collected, the pond had extensive coverage of floating aquatic plants such as duckweed and watermeal (discussed in more detail below), which can cut off the oxygen supply from the atmosphere across the air -water interface. Combined with the oxygen demand, DO in Silver View Pond was extremely low. Dissolved oxygen concentrations below 2 mg/L are considered hypoxic and would be detrimental to aquatic organisms that are not tolerant of low DO conditions. Table 3. Phvsicochemical parameters collected at 0.5 m increments in the water column. 0 23.88 2.86 7.56 0.5 23.92 2.35 7.55 1 23.81 1.52 7.5 1.5 23.73 0.2 7.31 Aquatic Vegetation Community Silver View Pond is shallow with a mean depth of approximately 6.5 ft. Consequently, the pond is shallow enough to support aquatic vegetation growth across its entire surface area, and indeed the pond experiences significant coverage by aquatic vegetation in the summer growing season. Figure 2 shows the points surveyed in Silver View Pond and conveys the number of individual taxa found at each location. Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) metrics from the two surveys are shown in Table 4 and Table 5. The diversity of aquatic plant species in Silver View Pond is relatively high for a small, shallow urban stormwater pond. Shallow ponds and lakes tend to be either macrophyte-dominated or algae -dominated 2. Systems may alternate from one state to another and experience unstable periods that reflect high densities of algae 2 Scheffer, Marten. Ecology of Shallow Lakes. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 6 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN and macrophytes under nutrient -rich conditions. From an ecological perspective, a high density of plant growth provides more habitat value than algae -dominated systems. Further, removal of plants from a system like Silver View Pond would create conditions that permit excessive growth of algae because of expanded light penetration through the water column in the absence of plants. Number of Taxa N x 0 Sil►►erview Pond 1 - 3 Number of Taxa • 4-5 • 6-7 6127 and 6/28, 2023 8131, 2023 Figure 2. Number of taxa observed at each sampling location in June and August 2023. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 7 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN There are no widely established metrics for the quality of the vegetation community in stormwater ponds, so we compared the Silver View Pond macrophyte data to established vegetation metric thresholds for shallow lakes to understand the general quality and diversity of the existing in -pond plant community (Table 4). Species richness is an ecological measure of the number of different species found in a system. Another common metric for aquatic plants is the floristics quality index (FQI). The metrics calculated for Silver View Pond exceed the species richness and FQI thresholds for shallow lakes', which points to a diverse community of aquatic plants in Silver Pond. Diversity of plant species is particularly good from an ecological perspective as this provides different habitat and food resources for a wider range of species that depend on those resources. Table 4. Silver View Pond SAV metrics from early and late season surveys 2023. Early Season Late Season Total Points Sampled 67 66 Total Littoral Points Sampled 66 66 % Littoral with Veg 98.5 97 Max depth of plant growth (ft) 8 12 Shallow Lake Species Richness 11 Threshold Species Richness 13 13 Shallow Lake Floristic Quality 17.8 Index (FQI) Threshold FQI 19.6 19.2 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.86 0.87 The frequency of occurrence is a measure of the number of a times a particular species appeared in a sampling point on the grid. The taxa observed at each point and the relative frequency of occurrence for each taxa are shown in Table 5. In general, no emergent taxa were observed. American white lily, stonewart, and coontail were the dominant submersed taxa found. American white lily provides food resources and habitat for waterfowl and is typically not removed from aquatic systems in Minnesota4. Removal of the lily would likely allow for denser growth and expansion of native species like stonewart and coontail, which can grow to nuisance conditions and have high frequency of occurrence in Silver View Pond currently. ' Radomski, P., and D. Perleberg. 2012. "Application of a versatile aquatic macrophyte integrity index for Minnesota lakes." Ecological Indicators 20: 252-268. 4 https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/aquatic_plants/floatingleaf_plants/white water Iily.html Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 8 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Table 5. Aquatic plant taxa and littoral frequency of occurrence in Silver View Pond. NIPW Early Late Season Season SUBMERSED TAXA Nymphaea odorata American white waterlily 49 55 Nuphar variegate Bullhead pond -lily 1 -- Chara sp. Stonewart 46 38 Elodea canadensis Canadian waterweed 9 12 Ceratophyllum demersum Coontail 45 44 Potamogeton zosteriformis Eel -grass pondweed 6 3 Potamogeton foliosis Leafy pondweed -- 2 Potamogeton pusillus Small pondweed 37 3 Stuckenia pectinata Sago pondweed 3 3 FLOATING TAXA Lemna trisulca Ivy -leaved duckweed 13 23 Lemna minor Small duckweed 96 58 Wolffia sp. Watermeal 81 58 Spirodela polyrhiza Large duckweed 97 59 Utricularia vulgaris Common bladderwort 1 6 EMERGENT TAXA Typha sp. Cattail -- -- Sagittaria sp. Arrowhead -- -- Schoenoplectus acutus Hardstem bulrush -- -- Note that at some points in the late season survey, watermeal was at 100% coverage on the surface of the water. However, watermeal. coverage on the rake tow was lower at these points, so the rake tow values were incorporated into the statistical analyses per the protocol. Sediment Phosphorus Chemistry Phosphorus release rates under oxic and anoxic conditions are shown in Figure 3. Rates over 2 mg/m2-d are considered high and may indicate the need to implement actions to reduce release of phosphorus from pond sediments. Anoxic release rates were higher than oxic release rates in Silver View Pond, which is typical. Anoxia -driven phosphorus release is due to reduction of iron that is bound to phosphorus, which causes the bonds to break and allows dissolved phosphorus to diffuse from the sediments. Oxic release is typically driven by aerobic decomposition of organic matter where dissolved phosphorus is released in the process. Station 3 had nearly equal rates of anoxic and oxic release which is a function of the high Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 9 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN proportion of organic matter in the sediments (28-55%). There was quite a bit of variability in rates between cores at each station. For each rate shown in Figure 3, two sediment cores were collected to achieve an average rate with a measure of variability (± 1 standard deviation of the mean). No phosphorus accumulated in one of the sediment cores for station 1, so that measure represents one single core instead of an average rate. All replicates for Stations 2 and 3 showed high variability in rates as well, which is common in lake and pond sediments. d r �a 5 yr �a dN 4 O� E yr o E 3 t a yr 2 0 t a 1 0 Silver View Pond ■ Anoxic Conditions ■ Oxic Conditions Sampling Station Figure 3. Phosphorus release rates under oxic and anoxic conditions in Silver View Pond. Sediments were also analyzed for phosphorus fractionation to quantify the mobile and non -mobile pools of phosphorus (Figure 4). This data provides us with an understanding of the potential for continued flux of phosphorus from the sediments. The pool of phosphorus that is considered most likely to diffuse from the sediments based on its reactivity and capacity to mobilize is redox-sensitive phosphorus (redox-P). This includes the iron -bound phosphorus fraction and the pool that is considered loosely bound (meaning it has simple bonds that can be easily broken). The horizontal lines in Figure 4 represent the 25t", 50t" (median), and 75t" percentiles for redox-P in our Minnesota lake sediment chemistry database. Redox-P concentrations in Silver View Pond sediments were in the lower range of concentrations observed in our database of lake sediments. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 10 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Silver View Pond � Upper 5 cm 25th Percentile Median 75th Percentile 0.50 0.45 0.40 a� 0.35 E 0.30 a 0.25 x 0.20 m W 0.15 0.10 0.05 M Sampling Station Figure 4. Concentrations of redox-sensitive phosphorus in the upper 0-5 cm of sediments collected from Silver View Pond. Phosphorus Budget A major objective of the water quality diagnostic assessment includes development of a phosphorus mass balance model for Silver View Pond that estimates the proportion of phosphorus loads from the watershed drainage area and from internal sediment release. Determination of the relative magnitude of external versus internal phosphorus loading serves to inform management strategies to reduce phosphorus concentrations in Silver View Pond. To accomplish this objective, Stantec developed a P8 model (described in more detail below) to simulate phosphorus loads to Silver View Pond from the surrounding drainage area. The loads from P8 were input into a lake response mass balance models to determine the relative proportion of external versus internal phosphorus loading. Internal load estimates were based on the direct measurements of phosphorus release rates under oxic and anoxic conditions (in units of mg/m2-d). Extrapolation up to whole -lake loads requires an estimate of the areal extent of anoxic and oxic conditions, which can be estimated for polymictic small shallow lakes based on an anoxic factor (AF) model developed by Gertrud Nurnberg5. 5 Nurnberg, Gertrud. 2009. Accessing internal phosphorus load — problems to be solved. Lake and Reservoir Management 25(4): 419-432. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 11 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN AFpred = —36.2 + 50.2 locr(TP,wnmer) Where: + 0.762 z/A).s TP = summer average a/Ao0 5 is a morphometric factor (z = mean depth in meters; Ao is surface area in km2) Once the estimated number of days of anoxic and oxic conditions are estimated, these factors are multiplied by the direct measurements of sediment release rates to obtain an approximate lake -wide TP load. For this mass balance exercise, we assumed that inputs from the atmosphere are negligible, as the goal was to determine the relative proportion of internal and external loads, which are presented in Table 6 and Figure 5. The results of the mass balance exercise indicate that the majority of the phosphorus load is derived from the surrounding watershed (66% of the total load), followed by internal loading (34%). The areal load from oxic release (26%) was greater than the areal load from anoxic release (8%). Table 6. Phosphorus Modeling Results Source Contribution External TP Load ... 176.8 ... 66% Internal TP Load - Anoxic 21 70 34% Internal TP Load - Oxic Total 267.8 100% Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 12 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Silver View Pond Internal TP Load - Oxic 26% Internal TP Load - Anoxic 8% External TP Load 66% Figure 5. Proportion of phosphorus loads from external and internal sources. Recommendations for Water Quality Improvement There is not one single management activity that will improve water quality in Silver View Pond, as there are several factors contributing to poor water quality. The following sections contain recommendations on management activities that will function to reduce nutrient delivery and/or sediment release in Silver View Pond to improve water quality conditions. VEGETATION MANAGEMENT The aquatic vegetation community in Silver View Pond is fairly diverse and consists of native species. While the density of plants may be a visual nuisance to some residents, the diversity and composition of species present provide habitat, food resources for wildlife, and nutrient uptake. Anecdotally, area residents have reported dense algae growth in Silver View Pond. The data collected this summer along with visual observations by Stantec staff on multiple occasions indicate that floating -leaved plants like watermeal often exhibited full surface coverage of the pond, resembling an algae bloom. Chlorophyll -a concentrations in Silver View Pond are elevated which indicates algae growth in addition to abundant growth of macrophytes. As mentioned above, removal of aquatic plants in small, shallow ponds can exacerbate growth of algae due to the increased light availability through the water column. Dense algae growth provides far less ecological value to wildlife and aquatic organisms than a macrophyte-dominated system. Consequently, we do not recommend any interventions to manage the submerged aquatic vegetation in Silver View Pond. Nutrient reduction and mechanical removal are the only options for reducing floating -leaved vegetation. Given the diverse and quality of existing native species in the submerged plant community, herbicide treatment to floating -leaved vegetation would not be advised due to the deleterious effects on the native community in this system. There may be some benefits to skimming the duckweed and/or watermeal from Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 13 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN the surface in late summer to open the surface of the water to the atmosphere as summertime DO drops considerably when the surface is covered by floating -leaved vegetation. SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT Our field assessments indicated accumulation of sediment around some of the outlet structures. We recommend removal of sediment plumes at these structures to original pond depths, as determined in the bathymetric survey performed as part of the June 2023 Mounds View Stormwater Pond Assessment. NUTRIENT REDUCTION Internal load reduction There are primarily four different strategies for alum applications to lakes, which can be applied individually or in some combination to achieve desired management goals. The strategies are described below. • Water column stripping: This strategy targets the phosphorus in the water column but does not account for the mass of phosphorus in the sediments. It is ineffective for capturing additional external loads following an initial alum application, as the material will settle to the sediments within 24-48 hours. • Sediment phosphorus inactivation: This strategy targets the mass of phosphorus in the sediments that is subject to mobilization and diffusion from the sediments to the water column. Upon application, some alum serves to "strip the water column" of phosphorus as well. Consequently, the water column needs for phosphorus binding are included in the dosing calculations. • Phosphorus interception: This strategy involves addition of alum (or an alum -based coagulant) to a tributary inflow to reduce the external phosphorus load before entering the lake. • Maintenance treatments: Maintenance dosing may target the water column or the sediments depending on the goal. Maintenance treatments are particularly useful when a sediment inactivation treatment has been applied, but continued external loading sustains high water column phosphorus levels and accumulation of phosphorus in the sediments overlying the floc layer. Maintenance doses function to bind with phosphorus that has entered the lake since the previous application. We recommend a pilot alum application that employs a water column stripping approach where alum is applied to the entire pond in the spring following ice -out but prior to growth of dense abundant vegetation. This would serve to bind phosphorus that is in the water column at the time of application, which will settle to the sediments in the form of an aluminum phosphate floc that is unavailable for algal uptake. Once settled to the sediments, the alum floc would capture some phosphorus in the sediments until the binding site of the alum has been occupied. Water samples for phosphorus and chlorophyll -a analysis would be collected biweekly from Silver View Pond to evaluate success of the pilot application. Depending on the pond's response to the treatment (as evidenced by phosphorus and chlorophyll -a), the strategy may need to be adaptively managed the following year. For example, an application prior to fall ice -on may provide Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 14 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN additional benefits in addition to the spring application. If the application strategy is deemed successful, annual or semi-annual applications may be needed until nutrient loading has been significantly reduced from the watershed. Based on the sediment phosphorus chemistry data, we have calculated an alum dose that is appropriate for a water column stripping dose in Silver View Pond, along with estimated material cost per application. Note that these unit prices do not include contractor mobilization and demobilization. Additionally, alum unit prices are subject to market fluctuations, so $3.25 /gallon of alum is based on our experience with alum treatment projects of small and large scales in Minnesota. Stantec can support the City with development of technical specifications and bid documents, and contractor selection when ready to move forward with the pilot application. Table 7. Alum Dose and Cost Estimates * Subject to market fluctuations External load reduction P8 modeling was used to estimate TP loading to Silver View Pond. Based on modeling results, BMPs were then designed to treat runoff from the subwatersheds with the highest loading rates. The modeling results and BMP design are presented below. Subwatershed Modeling Figure 6 shows the subwatersheds defined along with the estimated annual TP loadings, based on P8 modeling. As indicated on Figure 6, primary TP loadings to Silver View Pond are occurring at: • The forebay on the western edge • From Lake Court Drive along the north side of the pond • From the H2 Flats apartments on the southeast side of the pond • From County Road H2 on the southwest edge of the pond Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 15 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Figure 6. TP Loading by Subwatershed BMP Design Based on the subwatershed modeling, we developed BMPs to reduce TP loading to Silver View Pond. The proposed BMPs are summarized below. Forebay improvements: Improvements to the existing forebay include regrading to provide additional wet pond storage along the south portion of the forebay with an iron -enhanced filtration bench on the north side, as shown in Figure 7. The overflow berm is proposed to be regraded and an outlet control structure installed, as shown in Figure 8. Runoff will enter the forebay with sediment settlement in the wet ponding portion. The outlet control structure will be a 48" diameter structure with an inlet grate and a 12" outlet pipe Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 16 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN to a downstream depressional area, which then discharges through a large corrugated metal pipe to Silver View Pond. The secondary outlet will be filtration through the bench to a draintile which then discharges to the outlet control structure. A 10-foot wide emergency overflow notch will be graded into the existing overflow berm. Turf reinforcement matting will be added to the downslope down to the existing depressional area. NVVL 89T.D EL 696.0 EL 8950 Figure 7. Forebay Improvements Cross Section. Figure 8. Forebay Improvements Plan. Design with community in mind E.L 896.0 --6" HOPE CORRUGATED PERFORATED DRAINTILE W IT1400T SOCK @ 01 % GRADE -FINE FILTER MEDIA d January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 17 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Total cost of the improvement is estimated at $121,000. Table 8 summarizes the BMP pollutant reduction and cost-effectiveness. Table 8. Forebay Improvements Treatment Level and Cost -Effectiveness. BMP TSS TSS TSS TIP TIP TIP Cost - Inflow, Outflow, Reduction, Inflow, Outflow, Reduction, Effectiveness, Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr $/Ib TP/yr Forebay 6,051.90 6,299.90 752.0 47.90 44.10 5.80 $20,900 Improvements Sump Structures on Lake Court Drive: Improvements in the subwatershed north of the pond are limited due to grade and available space. For this reason, the proposed improvements are replacing the downstream catch basins in the street with sump structures and installing SAFL Baffles and Snout skimmers or equal. SHASM modeling was used to find a representative removal rate for a 4-foot diameter and 4-foot depth sump with a SAFL baffle. The existing loadings of the P8 modeling were used and the SHSAM removal rates applied to the existing loadings to determine the TSS reduction per year. Total cost of the improvement is estimated at $46,000. Table 9 summarizes the BMP pollutant reduction and cost-effectiveness. These structures are not designed to remove TP, so cost-effectiveness is based on TSS removal. Table 9. Sump Structures Treatment Level and Cost -Effectiveness. BMP TSS Inflow, TSS Outflow, TSS Cost- Ib/yr Ib/yr Reduction, Effectiveness, $/Ib Ib/yr TSS/yr Sump Structure 12,656.00 12,352.30 303.74 $150 Improvements Bioretention Features Along Apartment Parking Lot: Two linear bioretention features are proposed north of the H2 Flats apartments parking lots, as shown in Figure 9. Each will capture runoff from the apartment site and provide filtration/infiltration prior to discharge into the pond. Due to the flat terrain and high groundwater, the features are relatively shallow (1'), with flat draintile lines discharging directly at the pond normal water level. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 18 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Northwest Linear BMP M Northeast Linear BMP Figure 9. Linear Bioretention Features Along Apartment Parking Lot. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 19 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Total cost of the bioretention features is estimated at $165,000. Table 10 summarizes the BMP pollutant reduction and cost-effectiveness. Table 10. Linear Bioretention Features Treatment Level and Cost -Effectiveness. BMP TSS TSS TSS TIP Inflow, TIP TP Cost - Inflow, Outflow, Reduction, Ib/yr Outflow, Reduction, Effectiveness, Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr $/Ib TP/yr Linear 7,745.20 1,308.40 6,436.80 25.20 12.30 12.90 $12,600 Bioretention Features Bioretention Features on County Road H2 (CR 112): Two bioretention features are proposed in existing depressional areas north of CR H2, as shown in Figure 10. Each will capture runoff from CR H2 and provide filtration/infiltration prior to discharge into the pond. The features will make use of existing depressions and draintile lines from the 2002 CR H2 project. It appears that the existing drainage system has been largely filled with sediment and buried over time. The existing piping will be cleaned out and reused if possible; otherwise, they will be replaced. Standpipes with inlet grates will be moved and raised as needed to create appropriate wet ponding depth. The depression bottoms will be replaced with engineered sand/compost subgrades, and draintiles will be provided. Figure 10. CR H2 Bioretention Features. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 20 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN Total cost of the bioretention features is estimated at $68,000. Table 11 summarizes the BMP pollutant reduction and cost-effectiveness. Table 11. CR H2 Bioretention Features Treatment Level and Cost -Effectiveness. BMP TSS TSS TSS TIP Inflow, TIP TP Cost - Inflow, Outflow, Reduction, Ib/yr Outflow, Reduction, Effectiveness, Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr Ib/yr $/Ib TP/yr Linear 3,144.40 1,294.80 1,849.60 10.30 7.40 2.90 $23,500 Bioretention Features Summary and Recommendations A water quality assessment of Silver View Pond was performed to develop recommendations for improvements in and around the pond to improve its water quality. The assessment included: • Field data collection of bathymetry, water quality, sediment chemistry, and aquatic vegetation • Water quality modeling of the pond watershed • Lake modeling of in -pond water quality • Assessment of pond vegetation • Assessment of sediment chemistry with a focus on phosphorus release • Development of recommendations for water quality improvements, including vegetation management, sediment management, internal nutrient load reduction, and external nutrient load reduction Recommended water quality improvements are as follows: • Vegetation management: No interventions to manage the submerged aquatic vegetation are recommended, as the existing vegetation is native and provides ecological value to wildlife. Removal of submerged aquatic vegetation would likely result in a conversion to an algae - dominated system. Periodic skimming of duckweed and/or watermeal from the pond surface in late summer could aid in improving dissolved oxygen levels in the pond. • Sediment management: Sediment deltas are recommended to be removed at selected outlets to the pond. These would restore original pond depths. • Internal load reduction: A pilot alum application project using a water column stripping approach is recommended in the spring following ice -out but prior to growth of dense abundant vegetation. Follow-up monitoring of phosphorus and chlorophyll -a is recommended to determine if/when future alum dosing would be required. Design with community in mind January 26, 2024 Don Peterson Page 21 of 21 Reference: Water Quality Assessment of Silver View Pond, Mounds View, MN • External load reduction: A number of watershed improvements are recommended to reduce phosphorus loading to the pond, including improvements to the forebay on the western edge of the pond, installation of sump structures and SAFL Baffles in existing catch basin on Lake Court Drive, and installation of bioretention features along the H2 Flats Apartments parking lots and County Road H2. Design with community in mind (5 Stantec Wetland Delineation Report Silver View Pond Restoration City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, MN Stantec Project #:193806465 Lead Delineator: Mason Steele October 26', 2023 Prepared for: Don Peterson, Director of Public Works/Parks and Recreation City of Mounds View 2401 Mounds View Boulevard Mounds View, MN 55112 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 733 Marquette Ave; Suite 1000 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: (612) 712-2000 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration OCTOBER 26, 2023 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1 2.0 METHODS........................................................................................................................2 2.1 WETLANDS......................................................................................................................2 3.0 RESULTS.........................................................................................................................3 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION.........................................................................................................3 3.2 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS..................................................................................................4 3.3 WETLANDS......................................................................................................................4 3.3.1 Wetland 1........................................................................................................5 3.3.2 Wetland 2........................................................................................................5 3.3.3 Wetland 3........................................................................................................6 3.3.4 Wetland 4........................................................................................................6 3.3.5 Wetland 5........................................................................................................7 3.3.6 Wetland 6........................................................................................................7 3.3.7 Wetland 7........................................................................................................8 3.3.8 Wetland 8........................................................................................................9 3.4 UPLANDS.........................................................................................................................9 3.5 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS............................................................9 4.0 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................10 5.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................11 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Soils Identified within the Study Area.........................................................3 Table 2. Summary of Wetlands Identified within the Study Area..................................................4 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIXA FIGURES........................................................................................................ A APPENDIXB APT ANALYSIS............................................................................................. B APPENDIX C WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS .............................................. C APPENDIX D SITE PHOTOGRAPHS.................................................................................. D WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Introduction October 26, 2023 1.0 INTRODUCTION Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) performed a wetland delineation of the Silver View Pond Restoration (the Project) on behalf of The City of Mounds View. The wetland delineation was led by Mason Steele of Stantec. The wetland delineation was completed between October 23-24, 2026. The Project is approximately 7.522 acres in size and located in Section 7, Township 30 North, Range 23 East, City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Specifically, the Study Area is located within the Silver View Park City Park northwest of the intersection of Silver Lake Rd and Osborne Rd NE (Appendix A, Figure 1). The purpose and objective of the on -site wetland determination and delineation was to identify the extent and spatial arrangement of wetlands within the Project. Wetland and waterways that are considered waters of the U.S. are subject to federal regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and jurisdictional regulatory authority lies with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency certifies that discharges of dredged or fill material authorized by a federal permit or license comply with state water quality standards under Section 401 of the CWA. Section 401 authorization is obtained by completing the Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) Public Waters Work Permit Program has regulatory over Minnesota Public Waters under MN Statute 103G and Rule 6115. Most wetlands in Minnesota that are not covered by the Public Waters Work Permit Program are covered by the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Rules Chapter 6420 and administered by a Local Government Unit (LGU). LGUs can be a City, County, Watershed District, or Soil and Water Conservation District depending on project location. For this Study Area, the LGU is the City of Mounds View. Stantec recommends this report be submitted to the LGU and USACE for a for final jurisdictional review and concurrence. WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Methods October 26, 2023 2.0 METHODS 2.1 WETLANDS Wetland delineations were based on the criteria and methods outlined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1 (1987) and subsequent guidance documents (USACE 1991 a, 1991 b, 1992), and applicable Regional Supplements to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. The wetland delineation involved the use of available resources to assist in the assessment such as U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping, MNDNR Minnesota NWI Update mapping, MNDNR Protected/Public Waters mapping, and aerial photography. On -site wetland delineations were made using the three criteria (vegetation, soil, and hydrology) and technical approach defined in the USACE 1987 Manual and applicable Regional Supplement. According to procedures described in the 1987 Manual and applicable Regional Supplement, areas that under normal circumstances reflect a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology (e.g., inundated or saturated soils) are considered wetlands. As recent weather patterns influence the visibility and presence of some wetland hydrology indicators, the antecedent precipitation in the three months leading up to the field investigation was reviewed. The current year's precipitation data were compared to the most recent long-term (30-year) precipitation averages and standard deviation to determine if precipitation was normal, wet, or dry for the area using the Antecedent Precipitation Tool (APT) as developed by the USACE. Wetland boundaries were identified and flagged using pink "WETLAND DELINEATION" flags and wetland sample points were identified and flagged using lath with orange flagging tied to it. Both wetland boundaries and sample points were surveyed with a Global Positioning System (GPS) capable of sub -meter accuracy and mapped using Geographical Information System (GIS) software. 2 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Results October 26, 2023 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION The Project is comprised of Silver View City Park which is comprised of a wetland complex, a paved walking trail, and a maintained lawn. The Project consists of five separate areas across Silver View City Park. The Project is relatively flat, sloping towards the wetland complex in the center of the Project, from topographic highs of approximately 900 feet above mean sea level (amsl) on the northern area of the site to topographic lows in the southwestern portion of approximately 890 feet amsl. The Project is bordered by apartment complexes to the north and south; a residential neighborhood to the east; and Long Lake Rd to the west. Soils present within the Study Area and their hydric status are summarized in Table 1. Wetlands identified during the field investigation are located primarily within areas mapped as hydric or partially hydric soils and wetland indicator soils (Appendix A, Figure 2). Table 1. Summary of Soils Identified within the Study Area Soil Unit Soil Unit Soil symbol: Soil Unit Name Component Component Landform status status Percentage 15813: Zimmerman fine sand, Zimmerman 80-95 Rises No 1 to 6 percent slopes Cantlin 2-11 Rises No Isanti-Drained 1-3 Flats, depressions Yes Lino 1-3 Swales No Soderville 1-3 Flats, rises No 540: Seelyeville muck Seelyeville 85 Depressions Yes Cathro 8 Depressions Yes Markey 7 Depressions Yes 543: Markey muck Markey 85 Depressions Yes Seelyeville 5 Depressions on Yes outwash plains Isanti 5 Depressions on Yes outwash plains Lino 5 — No 863: Urban land -Lino complex, 0 to 3 percent Urban land 65 Outwash plains No slopes Lino 35 Outwash plains No 1027: Udorthents, wet Udorthents-Wet 90 Moraines No substratum substratum Urban land 0-20 Outwash plains No 1039: Urban land Urban land 100 Moraines No The MNDNR Protected/Public Waters map identified a protected feature that is central to all five sections of the Project (Appendix A, Figure 3). The feature is identified as a protect wetland. The Minnesota National Wetlands Inventory Update (NWI) map identifies one wetland area within the Project which is central to all five of its sections and one wetland in the center of the west section WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Results October 26, 2023 (Appendix A, Figure 4). The field delineated wetlands (W02-WO8) and the eastern wetland (W01) are all located within the same vicinity as wetlands identified on the NWI maps (Appendix A, Figure 5). 3.2 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS Average precipitation for the investigation area was obtained from by using the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool. A total of 15.22 inches of precipitation occurred in the three-month time period prior to the field investigation in 2023. Based on the APT analysis, conditions were normal (Appendix B). 3.3 WETLANDS Eight wetlands were identified and delineated within the Study Area. Wetland determination data forms were completed for 16 sample points along transects through the wetlands and adjacent uplands and are included in Appendix C. Photographs of the wetlands and adjacent lands are included in Appendix D. The wetland boundary and sample point locations are shown on Figure 5 (Appendix A). The wetlands are summarized in Table 2 below and described in detail in the following sections. Table 2. Summary of Wetlands Identified within the Study Area Wetland ID Observed Wetland Mapped NWI Adjacent Surface Acreage Type* Wetland Type Waters (on -site) Wetland 1 (W01) Wet meadow / Type 2 PEM1 F None 0.15 /PEM1F Wetland 2 (W02) Shallow Open Water / PABH None 0.14 Type 5 / PABH Wetland 3 (W03) Shallow Open Water / PABH None 0.21 Type 5 / PABH Wetland 4 (W04) Shallow Open Water / PABH None 0.15 Type 5 / PABH Wetland 5 (W05) Shallow Open Water / PABH None 0.12 Type 5 / PABH Wetland 6 (W06) Shallow Open Water / PABH None 0.17 Type 5 / PABH Shrub Swamp, Wetland 7 (W07) Shallow Open Water/ PSS1C/PEM1C None 1.16 Type 6, Type 5 / PSS1C, PABH Hardwood Swamp, Wetland 8 (W08) Shallow Open Water / PF01 C, PABH None 0.39 Type 7, Type 5 / PF01C, PABH TOTAL 2.48 'Wetland type based on Eggers & Reed 2015 / Circular 39 (Shaw & Fredine 1971) / Cowardin 1979 4 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Results October 26, 2023 3.3.1 Wetland 1 Wetland 1 (W01) is a wet meadow community in the western section of the Project. W01 is connected to Wetland 2 (W02) via two culverts on the northwest and southeast ends (Appendix A, Figure 1). Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W01 consist of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) and Culver's root (Veronicastrum virginicum, FAC). Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. No Primary Hydrology Indicators were observed. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included Geomorphic Position (D2) and a positive FAC-Neutral Test (D5). Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Zimmerman fine sand and Seelyeville muck (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Zimmerman series characteristics. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W01-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicator F6-Sandy Redox surface. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a wet meadow wetland community dominated by reed canary grass to a mesic woodland upland community dominated by common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica, FAC), white oak (Quercus alba, FACU), and black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia, FACU); and 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. 3.3.2 Wetland 2 Wetland 2 (W02) is a shallow open water community that is a part of a wetland complex which is central to all five sections of the Project. W02 is connected to W01 via a culvert on its western boundary. Most of the wetland is made up of the shallow open water community but the sample point was taken in a thin wetland fringe along the open water (Appendix A, Figure 1). Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W02 consist of sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis, FACW), boxelder (Acer negundo, FAC) and black willow (Salix nigra, OBL). Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. No Primary Hydrology Indicators were observed. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included D2 and D5. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Seelyeville muck (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Zimmerman series characteristics located adjacent to the soil unit. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W02-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicator Al 1-Depleted Below Dark Surface. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Results October 26, 2023 The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a shallow open water wetland community dominated by sensitive fern and black willow to a maintained lawn upland community dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis, FACU), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolate, FACU), and common buckthorn; 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. 3.3.3 Wetland 3 Wetland 3 (W03) is a shallow open water community that is a part of a wetland complex which is central to all five sections of the Project. Most of the wetland is made up of the shallow open water community but the sample point was taken in a thin wetland fringe along the open water (Appendix A, Figure 1). Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W03 consist of riverbank grape (Vitis riparia, FACW), cottonwood (Populus deltoides, FAC) and boxelder. Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. Primary Hydrology Indicators observed were Highwater Table (A2) and Saturation (A3). Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included D2 and D5. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Markey muck (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Markey series characteristics. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W03-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicator Al-Histosol. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a shallow open water wetland community dominated by riverbank grape and cottonwood to a mesic forest upland community dominated by ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea, FACU), beggar's lice (Hackelia virginiana, FACU), and common buckthorn; 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. 3.3.4 Wetland 4 Wetland 4 (W04) is a shallow open water community that is a part of a wetland complex which is central to all five sections of the Project. Most of the wetland is made up of the shallow open water community but the sample point was taken in a thin wetland fringe along the open water (Appendix A, Figure 1). Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W04 consist of reed canary grass, black willow and American elm (Ulmus americana, FACW). Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. Primary Hydrology Indicators observed were A2 and A3. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included D2 and D5. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. 0 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Results October 26, 2023 Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Seelyeville muck and Zimmerman fine sand (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Seelyeville series characteristics. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W04-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicators Al-Histosol. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a shallow open water wetland community dominated by reed canary grass and black willow to a mesic forest upland community dominated by ground ivy, hackberry (Celtis occidentalis, FAC), and common buckthorn; 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. 3.3.5 Wetland 5 Wetland 5 (W05) is a shallow open water community that is a part of a wetland complex which is central to all five sections of the Project. W05 is connected to a culvert along its southeast boundary. Most of the wetland is made up of the shallow open water community but the sample point was taken in a thin wetland fringe along the open water (Appendix A, Figure 1). Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W05 consist of black willow and willowherb (Epilobium coloratum, OBL). Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. Primary Hydrology Indicators observed were A2, A3, and Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl). Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included D2 and D5. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Udorthents, wet substratum and Urban land (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Seelyeville and Markey series characteristics found along other parts of the wetland complex. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W05-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicators A3-Black Histic and S4-Sandy Gleyed Matrix. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a shallow open water wetland community dominated by willowherb and black willow to a maintained lawn upland community dominated by Kentucky blue grass and black mustard (Brassica nigra); 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. 3.3.6 Wetland 6 Wetland 6 (W06) is a shallow open water community that is a part of a wetland complex which is central to all five sections of the Project. Most of the wetland is made up of the shallow open water community but the sample point was taken in a thin wetland fringe along the open water (Appendix A, Figure 1). Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W01 consist of American elm and Bebb's willow (Salix bebbiana, FACW). Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Results October 26, 2023 data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. Primary Hydrology Indicators observed were A2, A3, and C1. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included D2 and D5. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Udorthents, wet substratum and Urban land (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Seelyeville and Markey series characteristics found along other parts of the wetland complex. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W06-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicator A3-Black Histic. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a shallow open water wetland community dominated by American elm and Bebb's willow to a maintained lawn upland community dominated by Kentucky blue grass and buckthorn; 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. 3.3.7 Wetland 7 Wetland 7 (W07) is a shrub swamp community that is a part of a wetland complex which is central to all five sections of the Project (Appendix A, Figure 1). Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W07 consist of reed canary grass, black willow, and American elm. Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. Primary Hydrology Indicators observed were Surface Water (Al), A2, and A3. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included D2 and D5. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Udorthents, wet substratum, Markey muck, and Seelyeville muck (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Seelyeville and Markey series characteristics. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W07-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicator Al-Histosol. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a shallow open water and shrub swamp wetland community dominated by reed canary grass and black willow to a maintained lawn upland community dominated by quack grass (E/ymus repens, FACU) and buckthorn; 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Results October 26, 2023 3.3.8 Wetland 8 Wetland 8 (W08) is made up of a hardwood swamp and shallow open water communities that is a part of a wetland complex which is central to all five sections of the Project (Appendix A, Figure 1). The sample point for W08 was taken within the hardwood swamp community. Dominant plant species identified at sample points completed within W08 consist of common buckthorn, cottonwood, and American elm. Other common species identified in the wetland are listed on the data forms included in Appendix C. The dominant species within the wetland are comprised mostly of hydrophytic vegetation (OBL, FACW, and/or FAC) and meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. The wetland appears to have a seasonally inundated/saturated hydroperiod within the center. No Primary Hydrology Indicators were observed. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology observed included D2 and D5. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Soils within the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Udorthents, wet substratum, Urban land -Lino complex, and Seelyeville muck (Appendix A, Figure 2). The soils observed at the sample points were generally consistent with the Lino series characteristics. Field indicators of hydric soil identified at sample point W08-1w consisted of NRCS field Indicator A11-Depleted Below Dark Surface. Therefore, the hydric soil criterion was satisfied. The wetland boundary was determined based on distinct differences in vegetation, hydrology, soils, and topography consisting of the following: 1) Transition from a hardwood swamp and shallow open water wetland community dominated by cottonwood and American elm to a mesic forest upland community dominated by buckthorn; 2) Transition from an area exhibiting wetland hydrology indicators within the wetland to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators within the adjacent upland; and 3) Transition from soils exhibiting hydric soil indicators to soils lacking indicators of hydric soil conditions. The transition from wetland to upland characteristics generally correlated with a well-defined topographic break. 3.4 UPLANDS Upland within the Project primarily consisted of a paved walking trail and maintained lawn with woody vegetation growing along the edge of the wetland. Dominant vegetation in this area was comprised of ground ivy, Kentucky bluegrass, quack grass, beggar's lice, boxelder, cottonwood, and buckthorn. The upland communities across the project were prominently defined by the change in topography. In general, upland areas were determined to be non -wetland based on the lack of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and a location in areas higher in the landscape that lacked suitable geomorphic position for wetland conditions to exist. 3.5 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS This report is limited to the identification of state and/or federally regulated wetlands within the Study Area. However, there may be other regulated features within the Study Area, including, but not limited to, historical or archeological features, endangered or threatened species, navigable waters, shoreland zones, and/or floodplains, etc. Federal, state, and local units of government and regional planning organizations may have regulatory authority to control or restrict land uses within or in close proximity to these features. WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Conclusion October 26, 2023 4.0 CONCLUSION Stantec performed a wetland delineation of the Silver View Pond Restoration on behalf of the City of Mounds View. The approximately 7.522-acre Project are is located in Section 7, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota. The purpose and objective of the wetland delineation was to identify wetlands within the Project. Eight wetlands were identified and delineated within the Project in accordance with state and federal guidelines and were subsequently flagged, surveyed with GPS, and mapped using GIS software. A combined total of 2.48 acres of wetlands were delineated within the Project. Wetlands were mostly composed of wet meadow, shrub swamp, hardwood swamp, and shallow open water. Adjacent uplands were composed of maintained lawns and mesic woods. The USACE has regulatory authority over Waters of the U.S. including adjacent wetlands, and the MNDNR has regulatory authority over Minnesota Public Waters under Statute 103G and Rule 6115. Most wetlands in Minnesota that are not covered by the Public Waters Work Permit Program are covered by the Minnesota WCA Rules Chapter 6420 and administered by an LGU. LGUs can be a City, County, Watershed District or Soil and Water Conservation District depending on project location. The LGU for this Project is the City of Mounds View. Stantec recommends this report be submitted to the LGU and USACE for final jurisdictional review and concurrence. Finally, counties, townships and municipalities may have local zoning authority over certain types of wetlands and waterways. Prior to beginning work at this site or disturbing or altering wetlands, waterways, or adjacent lands in any way, Stantec recommends that the owner obtain the necessary permits or other agency regulatory review and concurrence with regard to the proposed work to comply with applicable regulations. Stantec can assist with identification and/or assessment of additional regulated resources at your request, to the extent that the work is within our range of expertise. The information provided by Stantec regarding wetland boundaries is a scientific -based analysis of the wetland and upland conditions present within the Project area at the time of the fieldwork. The delineation was performed by experienced and qualified professionals using standard practices and sound professional judgment. The ultimate decision on wetland boundaries rests with the USACE and, in some cases, the MNDNR or an LGU. As a result, there may be adjustments to boundaries based upon review by a regulatory agency. An agency determination can vary from time to time depending on various factors including, but not limited to recent precipitation patterns and the season of the year. In addition, the physical characteristics of the Project area can change over time, depending on the weather, vegetation patterns, drainage activities on adjacent parcels, or other events. Any of these factors can change the nature and extent of wetlands within the Study Area. This wetland delineation report and the associated wetland boundaries cannot be depended on until they are approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Wetland Conservation Act. It is recommended to review and confirm these approvals before depending on this report. 10 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration References October 26, 2023 5.0 REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/classwet/index.html (Version 04DEC1998). Eggers, S. D., & D. M. Reed. 2015. Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and Wisconsin (V. 3.2). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, St. Paul, MN District. Available at: https://usace.contentdm.ocic.org/digital/collection/p266001 coll l /id/2801 / Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y- 87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Kloiber, S.M., Norris, D.J., and Bergman, A.L. 2019. Minnesota Wetland Inventory: User Guide and Summary Statistic. June 2019. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul, MN. 66 pp. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 1985. Final Designation of Protected (Public) Waters and Wetlands within Ramsey County, Minnesota. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt section/pwi/d own load lists.html Shaw, S. P., and C. G. Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States: Their extent and values to Waterfowl and other wildlife. Washington D. C. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of River Basin Studies. Circular 39. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/ or http://datagateway.nres.usda.gov/. Accessed [10/18/2023]. USACE. 1991 a. 'Implementation of the 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual, " memorandum from John P. Elmore dated 27 August 1991. USACE. 1991 b. "Questions & Answers on the 1987 Manual, " memorandum from John F. Studt dated 7 October 1991. USACE. 1996. "Guidelines for Submitting Wetland Delineations in Minnesota to the St. Paul District Corps of Engineers", Public Notice from Ben Wopat dated 22 May 1996. USACE. 2011. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakely, R.W. Lichvar, C.V. Nobel, and J. F. Berkowitz. ERDC/EL TR-12-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. USACE and Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR). 2015. Guidance for submittal of Delineation Reports to the St. Paul District Army Corps of Engineers and Wetland Conservation Act Local Governmental Units in Minnesota, (Version 2). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA, NRCS). 2018. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 8.2. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and J.F. Berkowitz (eds.). USDA, NRCS in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. United States Geological Survey (USGS). Minnesota 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic) Maps. 1:24,000. Reston, VA: United States Department of the Interior, USGS. 11 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Figures October 26, 2023 Appendix A FIGURES Figure 1. Project Location Figure 2. NRCS Soil Survey Data — Hydric Ratings Figure 3. MN Protected/Public Waters Figure 4. National Wetlands Inventory Data Figure 5. Field Collected Data A Ardan Park grdan Ave -10 IILU� Spring Lake �I herwood Rd Park \� Greenfield Park IIIIII I I rL I Z '0 Hillview Rd Hillvie,,lRd��HiIlview RdJ- 0 m o \�� c Oakwood D.r \i d 111 �T-errace Dr� n P 9' I o �l Lake J d� _ County Road I- 108 I VV ��p�I r= I \\ �'lO � �f rl J _ Jn Silver View Park m Bronson Dr S:fi.Ih_A:ve-N EI ❑ 0 =��I O Mounds View �y II I Du St N E p�aa I j===3 o� IjZ o f O, \ County Road H2 W CD I Ridge LnJ ,`ry D aF 7 FJ\LJ� i Cummns I �— Q m fo— m 0_ \ i Z I a / o \\ Q'°� I o I I Woodcrest Dr tRl=H-W—JEIDL 69th Ave NE LCouny0 F IL I ff Rice Creek I West Trail Park Rice Creek �C Rice Creek North Regional I West Trail Trail y Corridor Mississippi St Miissis St NE I L Fsippi I i N 10 Lexington Legend 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Coon Circle Pines gnoka Rapids L - Approximate Project Area (At original document size of asx11) Blaine Lino.L-akes 24,000 Brooklyn Park 6 Mounds Shoreview n pringV1en' Stantec Brooklyn ake Park Ramsey Center 2 Fridle Naw Arden North Hills Oaks Project Location Prepared by JM on 2023-10-18 Columbia , T30N, R23W, S7 TR by AS on 2023-10-19 Heights C. of Mounds View, Ramsey Co., MN IR by XX on 2023-XX-XX Hilltop 51 Client/Pro'ect 193806465 City of MtView Notes Silver View Pond Restoration 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Wetland Delineation Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2- Data Sources: Stantec, NADS, USGS Figure No. 3. Background: Esri Street Map Title Project Location Page 1 of 1 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Spring Lake Park Mounds iew Anoka Ram y Fridley New Brighton Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, NADS, USGS, NRCS 3. Background: 2022 NAIP Legend Approximate Project Area NRCS Soil Survey Data Hydric Soil Rating O Hydric (H) 1" Predominantly Hydric (PrH) O Partially Hydric (PaH)* O Predominantly Non-Hydric (PNH) O Non-Hydric National Hydrography Dataset Perennial Stream* r ` Intermittent Stream* Ephemeral Stream' Waterbody 'No Features Within Data Frame 200 400 N (At original document size of 8.5x11)1) 1:4'800 ® Stantec Project Location Prepared by JM on 2023-10-18 T30N, R23W, S7 TR by AS on 2023-10-19 C. of Mounds View, Ramsey Co., MN IR by XX on 2023-XX-XX Client/PmAct 193806469 City of ounds View Silver View Pond Restoration Wetland Delineation 2 Figure No. NRCS Soil Survey Data Hydric Ratings Page 1 of 1 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Spring Lake Park Mounds iew Anoka Ram y Fridley New Brighton Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, NADS, USGS, MnDNR 3. Background: 2022 NAIP Legend Approximate Project Area DNR Protected Watercourse - MN Protected/Public Waters 0 DNR Protected Water` O DNR Protected Wetland 200 400 N Feet (At original document size of 8.5x1I) 4,800 ® Stantec Project Location Prepared by JM on 2023-10-18 T30N, R23W, S7 TR by AS on 2023-10-19 C. of Mounds View, Ramsey Co., MN IR by XX on 2023-XX-XX Clienf/PmAct 193806469 City of ounds View Silver View Pond Restoration Wetland Delineation 3 Figure No. MN Protected / Public Waters 'No Features Within Data Frame Page 1 of 1 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Spring Lake Park Mounds iew Anoka Ram y Fridley New Brighton Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, NADS, USGS, USFWS 3. Background: 2022 NAIP Legend Approximate Project Area National Wetlands Inventory Feature National Hydrography Dataset Perennial Stream' Intermittent Stream' Ephemeral Stream' Waterbody 200 400 N Feet (At original document size of 8.5x11)1) 1:4'800 ® Stantec Project Location Prepared by JM on 2023-10-18 T30N, R23W, S7 TR by AS on 2023-10-19 C. of Mounds View, Ramsey Co., MN IR by XX on 2023-XX-XX Cimnt/Pro'eet 193806469 City of �Aounds View Silver View Pond Restoration Wetland Delineation Figure No. National Wetlands Inventory *No Features Within Data Frame Page 1 of 1 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. Spring Lake Park Mounds iew Anoka Ram y Fridley New Brighton Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Minnesota South FIPS 2203 Feet 2. Data Sources: Stantec, NADS, USGS, MnGeo 3. Background: 2022 NAIP Legend 0 200 400 N Feet Approximate Project Area tar original document size Or a5x11 ) 1:4'800 A Culvert • Sample Point O Field Delineated Wetland Stantec 2ft Elevation Contour Project Location Prepared by JM on 2023-10-18 National Hydrography Dataset T30N, R23W, S7 TR by AS on 2023-10-19 C. of Mounds View, Ramsey Co., MN IR by XX on 2023-XX-XX Perennial Stream' Client/ , et 193806469 City of �4ounds View Intermittent Stream' Silver View Pond Restoration Ephemeral Stream'U1Q^n Wetland Delineation Waterbody Title Field Collected Data 'No Features Within Data Frame Page 1 of 1 Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration APT ANALYSIS October 26, 2023 Appendix B APT ANALYSIS um N N cc N >M O N Z O rV +, m U rV 00 N Qm U N LIn O N O � N 0)M :3 N Q O N M � N O N M C Ly C O N >,nm ro f V 20 rV +1 rn N M u 0 C d O_ :E 70 C O V E O Z 41 m N rl L J= C O C O a-+ C O V C } >+ 4- O 0 L j C O U Ln Ln aJ N O Ln r- _ 0) co N Ln L9 00 -0 N 0) Ln W-1-1M > r- Ln Co r- o r- Ln J0 O _ O co 0o -- m co r1 N lzt 0o O _ O � CD rn 't O r Ln Ln r ' N M O ,j- Ln O O m o) M M -�t C N rV N C ' 70 O O 00 C -j O O �NU/ LL w I I M M M Ln N N rV >' O O O O M Ln 00 M rV r- r- 0 0 C O O Ln a) rr N C) NO Ln m (V O N -- rV ) O It O O N O 70 N L Ln Q) Q) Ln Ln aJ ro ^_ In U 40 (o 0 C (6 � C O - . } `' X (6 m O V +� � (6 v aJ O w _ Ln 4� a O O >� J> aJ � Q)00 m 0 r- 0 0 a) U a) C Q Ln ro 0 m O N -1 M N L O Z 1� Ln r6 0 Q m O O N r� Q) r-. L9 r. ri . N r-. N 4' J= O O N N O Z d r- rn 't Ln r- O L.0 Ln O 00 O r- N O N a., M 00 O Ln (.0 M -i > N a) w ^ 00 N Ln m rl L9 N 00 � O M O N M N r O O 't M U C ro Ln Ln 0 o -q � m v C O (6 m CD r- O O r- O O O 00 It f V O O M Ln > a� w Ln 00 M m 0) O v (6 -i Mr- C3) m r-I M O r-I M Ln r-I L9 �Y N L O O U (,.� O m m O L.O Ln O Ln 410 O rl r-r O M m � rn rn rn Ls a) Ln z o a--, M_ } Ln z Z z o U) LU = z 00j. CD Ln = z Ln M J Q J Q z p Q r>� z O JLQL O J Ln W O J a} sp�yy r a� L �-' C as C LJJ $ x-i Ci C O CL Ln } -W ap rV} V {Q a} uLL L 00 n l0 Ln :I- M N r-I O (sagDul) Ilejuip%d WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS October 26, 2023 Appendix C WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W01-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Side slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope %: 50-60 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.104112 Long:-93.218169 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Zimmerman fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W01 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W01-1u Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Robinia pseudoacacia 20 Yes FACU Number of Dominant Species 2. Quercus alba 20 Yes FACU That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 3. Acernegundo 15 Yes FAC Total Number of Dominant 4. Celtis occidentalis 5 No FAC Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 60 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1. Rhamnus cathartica 20 Yes FAC FACW species 15 x 2 = 30 2. FAC species 55 x 3 = 165 3. FACU species 55 x 4 = 220 4. UPL species 10 x 5 = 50 5. Column Totals: 135 (A) 465 (B) 6 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.44 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 20 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) - 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Phalaris arundinacea 15 Yes FACW - 3 -Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Parthenocissus inserta 15 Yes FACU - 3. Setaria pumila 10 No FAC - 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. Leonurus cardiaca 10 No UPL 5. Rhamnus cathartica 5 No FAC Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. 8. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 55 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No X Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W01-1u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 3/1 95 2.5YR 4/8 5 C M Loamy Sand 8-20 10YR 3/1 100 Loamy Sand 20-24 10YR 2/1 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) X Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W01-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-1 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.10407 Long:-93.218191 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Zimmerman fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes NWI classification: PEM1 F Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W01 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W01-1w Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Number of Dominant Species 2. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 0 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species x 1 = 1 FACW species x 2 = 2. FAC species x 3 = 3. FACU species x 4 = 4. UPL species x 5 = 5. 6 Column Totals: (A) (B) 7 Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 = Total Cover x 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) — x 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Phalaris arundinacea 75 Yes FACW - 3 Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Veronicastrum virginicum 5 No FAC — Taraxacuorricinale 3' m 5 No FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree — Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub — Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 85 = Total Cover Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W01-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 5/1 95 2.5YR 4/8 5 C M Loamy Sand 8-16 10Y 4/1 100 Loamy Sand 16-24 10Y 6/1 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) X Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W02-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Shoulder Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 10-20 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.103997 Long:-93.217664 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Seelyeville muck NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W02 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point was take next to a paved walking trail. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W02-1u Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Salix nigra 30 Yes OBL Number of Dominant Species 2. Acernegundo 10 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 40 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 30 x 1 = 30 1. Rhamnus cathartica 10 Yes FAC FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 2. FAC species 30 x 3 = 90 3. FACU species 40 x 4 = 160 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. Column Totals: 100 (A) 280 (B) 6 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.8 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 10 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Alliaria petiolata 25 Yes FACU X 3 Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Rhamnus cathartica 10 No FAC Taraxacuofficinale 3' m 10 No FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. Poa pratensis 5 No FACU 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree — Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub — Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 50 = Total Cover Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W02-1 u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 3/1 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA 1496) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) High Chrome Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1496) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 1496) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Refusal on walk way till at 8in. Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W02-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-5 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.10397 Long:-93.217624 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Seelyeville muck NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W02 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point take in wetland fringe associated with pond. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W02-1w Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Salix nigra 40 Yes OBL Number of Dominant Species 2. Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 No FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 45 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 40 x 1 = 40 1. Acernegundo 5 Yes FAC FACW species 25 x 2 = 50 2. FAC species 25 x 3 = 75 3. FACU species 10 x 4 = 40 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. Column Totals: 100 (A) 205 (B) 6 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.05 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Onoclea sensibilis 20 Yes FACW X 3 Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Acernegundo 15 Yes FAC 3. Alliaria petiolata 10 Yes FACU — 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. Rhamnus cathartica 5 No FAC 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 50 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W02-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-10 10YR 3/1 100 Loamy Sand 10-16 10YR 3/1 95 2.5YR 4/8 5 C M Loamy Sand 16-24 10YR 2/1 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W03-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Shoulder Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope %: 0-10 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.103959 Long:-93.211807 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Markey muck NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W03 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken next to a paved walkway. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W03-1 u Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Acernegundo 30 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 2. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 30 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1. Rhamnus cathartica 10 Yes FAC FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 2. FAC species 45 x 3 = 135 3. FACU species 115 x 4 = 460 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. 6 Column Totals: 160 (A) 595 (B) 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.72 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 10 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) — 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Glechoma hederacea 90 Yes FACU — 3 -Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Hackelia virginiana 5 No FACU — Rhanus cathartica 3' m 5 No FAC _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 100 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Parthenocissus quinquefolia 20 Yes FACU Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 20 = Total Cover Present? Yes No X Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W03-1 u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-32 10YR 2/1 100 Mucky Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: X Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA 1496) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) High Chrome Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1496) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 1496) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W03-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-1 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.103919 Long:-93.211797 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Markey muck NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W03 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point take in wetland fringe along pond. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) X High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) X Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) X Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 20 Saturation Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 8 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W03-1w Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Acernegundo 20 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 2. Populus deltoides 20 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 40 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1. Acernegundo 10 Yes FAC FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 2. FAC species 70 x 3 = 210 3. FACU species 20 x 4 = 80 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. 6 Column Totals: 90 (A) 290 (B) 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.22 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 10 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) — X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Vitis riparia 20 Yes FAC - 3 Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Glechoma hederacea 10 Yes FACU — 3. Hackelia virginiana 10 Yes FACU — 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 40 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W03-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-32 10YR 2/1 100 Mucky Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: X Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA 1496) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) High Chrome Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1496) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 1496) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W04-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Shoulder Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope %: Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.103723 Long:-93.214578 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Zimmerman fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W04 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken next to paved walking path. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W04-1 u Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Celtis occidentalis 40 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 2. Populus deltoides 20 No FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 60 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1. Rhamnus cathartica 30 Yes FAC FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 2. Morus rubra 5 No FACU FAC species 95 x 3 = 285 3. FACU species 35 x 4 = 140 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. Column Totals: 130 (A) 425 (B) 6 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.27 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 35 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) — X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Glechoma hederacea 30 Yes FACU - 3 Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Rhamnus cathartica 5 No FAC — 4 - Morphological Adaptations' 3' _ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 35 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W04-1 u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-24 10YR 3/1 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) X Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/23/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W04-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-1 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.10366 Long:-93.214587 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Seelyeville muck NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W04 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken along the edge of a pond. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) X High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) X Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 8 Saturation Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W04-1w Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) 1. Ulmus americana 2. Salix nigra 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) 1. Rhamnus cathartica 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 20 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species 20 Yes OBL That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: 40 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 20 x 1 = 20 50 Yes FAC FACW species 30 x 2 = 60 FAC species 50 x 3 = 150 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 100 (A) 230 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 50 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 10 Yes FACW X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 10 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W04-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-20 10YR 2/1 100 Mucky Loam 20-28 10YR 5/1 100 Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: X Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W05-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Shoulder Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope %: 15-25 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.102583 Long:-93.209066 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents, wet substratum NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W05 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken next to sidewalk. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W05-1 u Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Ulmus americana 15 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species 2. Populus deltoides 10 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 25 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1 FACW species 15 x 2 = 30 2. FAC species 10 x 3 = 30 3. FACU species 30 x 4 = 120 4. UPL species 40 x 5 = 200 5. 6 Column Totals: 95 (A) 380 (B) 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) — 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Brassica nigra 40 Yes UPL — 3 -Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Poa pratensis 30 Yes FACU — 3' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 70 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes No X Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W05-1 u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 3/1 100 Sandy Loam 8-10 10YR 5/4 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Remarks: Refusal at 10 on till US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W05-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-5 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.102563 Long:-93.209127 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents, wet substratum NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W05 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken on the fringe of a pond. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) X High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) X Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) X Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 6 Saturation Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: C1 at 4in. US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W05-1w Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) 1. Salix nigra 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) 1. Epilobium coloratum 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) 1, Vitis riparia 2. 3. 4. Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: 0 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 10 x 1 = 10 5 No OBL FACW species 0 x 2= 0 FAC species 10 x 3 = 30 FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 20 (A) 40 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 5 No OBL X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 5 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 10 Yes FAC Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation 10 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W05-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-4 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 4-8 10YR 5/1 100 Loamy Sand 8-24 10Y 4/1 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) X< Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W06-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Shoulder Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-5 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.102656 Long:-93.21015 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Urban land NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W06 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken next to paved walkway. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W06-1u Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Populus tremuloides 10 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 2. Ulmus americana 10 Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 20 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1. Rhamnus cathartica 20 Yes FAC FACW species 10 x 2 = 20 2. FAC species 30 x 3 = 90 3. FACU species 55 x 4 = 220 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. Column Totals: 95 (A) 330 (B) 6 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.47 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 20 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) — X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Poa pratensis 25 Yes FACU - 3 Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Solidago canadensis 20 No FACU — 3' Lotus corniculatus 10 No FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree — Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub — Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 55 = Total Cover Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W06-1 u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 3/1 100 Sandy Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA 1496) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) High Chrome Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1496) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 1496) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Refusal at 8in on till. Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W06-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-1 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.10267 Long:-93.21014 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Urban land NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W06 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken along the edge of a pond. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) X High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) X Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) X Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 2 Saturation Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W06-1w Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Ulmus americana 10 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species 2. Salix discolor 10 Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 3. Salix bebbiana 10 Yes FACW Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 30 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1 FACW species 30 x 2 = 60 2. FAC species 0 x 3 = 0 3. FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. 6 Column Totals: 30 (A) 60 (B) 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 = Total Cover x 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) x 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. x 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0' 2. 3' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 0 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W06-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-14 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 14-24 10Y 4/1 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) X Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W07-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Side slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope %: 10-20 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.102307 Long:-93.21381 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents, wet substratum NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W07 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W07-1u Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) 1. Rhamnus cathartica 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) 1. Elymus repens 2. Solidago canadensis 3. Cirsium arvense 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) 1. 2. 3. 4. Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: 0 =Total Cover Total o Cover of: 10 Yes 10 = Total Cover 9b = Total Cover 0 = Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 1 (A) 2 (B) 50 (A/B) Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FAC FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 10 x 3 = 30 FACU species 95 x 4 = 380 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 105 (A) 410 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.9 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FACU - FACU - 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0' FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W07-1 u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 3/1 100 Loamy Sand 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA 1496) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) High Chrome Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1496) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 1496) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Refusal at 6in on gravel. Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W07-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-1 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.102342 Long:-93.213837 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents, wet substratum NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W07 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken along the edge of a pond. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) X Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) X High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) X Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 4 Water Table Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present Yes X No Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W07-1w Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Ulmus americana 20 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species 2. Rhamnus cathartica 20 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) 3. Salix nigra 10 Yes OBL Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 50 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 20 x 1 = 20 1. Rhamnus cathartica 20 No FAC FACW species 65 x 2 = 130 2. Salix nigra 10 Yes OBL FAC species 40 x 3 = 120 3. FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. 6 Column Totals: 125 (A) 270 (B) 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.16 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 30 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. Phalaris arundinacea 40 Yes FACW X 3 Prevalence Index is <<-3.0' 2, Symphyotrichum lanceolatum 5 No FACW 3' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. 8. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 9. Tree — Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub — Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 45 = Total Cover Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Most of area is open water. US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W07-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-24 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: X Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA 1496) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) High Chrome Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1496) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 1496) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W08-1u Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Shoulder Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope %: 40-50 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.101324 Long:-93.214675 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents, wet substratum NWI classification: PF01C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W08 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken 4 feet above wetland. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W08-1u Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Populus deltoides 30 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 2. Ulmus americana 15 Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 3. Rhamnus cathartica 10 No FAC Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 55 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1. Rhamnus cathartica 55 Yes FAC FACW species 20 x 2 = 40 2. Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 No FACW FAC species 95 x 3 = 285 3. FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. 6 Column Totals: 115 (A) 325 (B) 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.83 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 60 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. x 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0' 2. 3' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. 8. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 0 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) No herb species. US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W08-1 u Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-7 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy Loam 7-12 10YR 5/6 100 Sandy Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Remarks: Refusal at 12 in on gravel US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Northcentral and Northeast Region Project/Site: Silver View Pond City/County: Ramsey County Sampling Date: 10/24/2023 Applicant/Owner: City of Mounds View State: MN Sampling Point: W08-1w Investigator(s): Mason Steele Section, Township, Range: S07, T030N, R023W Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope %: 0-1 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR K, MLRA 91 B Lat: 45.10132 Long:-93.214727 Datum: WGS84 Soil Map Unit Name: Udorthents, wet substratum NWI classification: PF01C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation _ , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: W08 Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Point taken in a PFO dominate by buckthorn. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Drainage Patterns (1310) High Water Table (A2) _ Aquatic Fauna (613) Moss Trim Lines (1316) Saturation (A3) Marl Deposits (615) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (131) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (132) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (133) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) X Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (135) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Microtopographic Relief (D4) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Saturation Present Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: W08-1w Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover Species Status Dominance Test worksheet: 1. Populus deltoides 30 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 2. Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10 No FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 3. Ulmus americana 10 No FACW Total Number of Dominant 4. Rhamnus cathartica 10 No FAC Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 5. 6 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 7. Prevalence Index worksheet: 60 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft ) OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 1. Rhamnus cathartica 60 Yes FAC FACW species 20 x 2 = 40 2. FAC species 100 x 3 = 300 3. FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 4. UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 5. Column Totals: 120 (A) 340 (B) 6 7. Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.83 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 60 = Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 1. x 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0' 2. 4 - Morphological Adaptations' 3' _ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. 5 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6• Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 7. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: 8. 9. Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in 10. diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 11. 12 Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. 0 = Total Cover Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 1. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in 2• height. 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) No herb species. US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: W08-1w Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-7 10YR 3/2 100 Sandy Loam 7-24 10YR 3/2 93 10YR 4/6 7 C M Sandy Loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, Histic Epipedon (A2) MLRA 1496) Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Redox (S5) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Red Parent Material (F21) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region — Version 2.0 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Silver View Pond Restoration Site Photographs October 26, 2023 Appendix D SITE PHOTOGRAPHS �U (9 0 CD U) CM E O N L E 7 Z O co O U d J O U O M N O N cM (V L O U O L O Z N 0 0 O_ O C'M M I O i L > U M N O N M N N O U Q L O Z a� r O 0 a cri O M CY)I N O_ M N w 2 c m U M N O N M N L O u V O C 7 O _O O 0 a 't N co M co N O _O O M N N Y U) O .2 -0 1 o M N O N cM N o o O d >O N �U (9 0 CD U) CM E O N L E 7 Z O co O 0 d J C O u w N U N >O M N O N M N U O +j U (o W 3 a� 0 0 Q r N O *i U O 7 U O M N O N M N O O U O C 7 0 CD m r 0 0 Q L M M N O co N C0 2 N >O CM N O N M N L 0 U O L O Z 3 a� 0 0 Q O r N O -i O N 7 U M N O N M N O 0 U O C 7 0 C� 3 m r 0 0 Q M M N O CYM -0 N C U) 2 a C' Lo 10 N Ilk ,��,5 '�"!•-'x�C i��� �� f .ram... 4 ur'./u; M10 4 � '� ���~� _ t • r of e tiF T AI kmiljrO'A AN ri C14 CN CD Y, ow c-) 04 '. "v-r, -� AR hN 10 cy') i, 74 09 c) kn �U (9 0 CD U) CM E O /CD T N L E z O co O d J c 0 u w N U 0 0 c� N O CV 't N L U 0 W 3 a� 0 0 Q T T T T O i ►� O 7 U co N O N N O O U 0 L +J 7 0 m T O 0 Q 00 Cl) O �I N O T M N CO 2 3 rl- 0 CM N O N N L O U 0 L L O z> i a� 0 0 Q C T co T i T O i 0 O cM N O N N L O 0 U O O z 3 a� T 0 0 Q O _O T 3 T O i cs• j '. 4 Y • %:.•awn - WWI : j ill lo NQ _ � .•. ems.`; � F l�} /.'7 Ok '` i I `LT n A 8� Ah ' M ' I � ' n N O .i M N O N MOUNWS ViEw City of Mounds View Staff Report Item No: 8A Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Don Peterson, Director of Public Works/parks and Recreation Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9880 — 2nd Public Hearing for the 2024 Private Property Inflow and Infiltration Grant Program from the Metropolitan Council Introduction/Discussion: Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) established an Inflow and Infiltration (I&I) grant program for municipalities. In 2023 MCES received $1.5 million for a private property I&I pilot program. This grant was designed to assist private property owners with reducing I&I throughout the service area. By reducing I&I, MCES treatment system can more efficiently treat the incoming sanitary sewer discharges. Qualified spending on eligible work can happen between Jan. 1, 2024 and Dec. 31, 2024. The City was awarded $50,000 from MCES for the Private I & I Grant, and the City Council must establish guidelines for implementing the program. The City Council reviewed the information and determined the following guidelines for administering the program to Mounds View property owners at the February 5, City Council Works Session as follows; 1) The City will concentrate on residential homes built prior to 1960. 2) Only homes not selling shall be eligible to be included in the program. 3) Property owners need to submit an application to be eligible to participate in the program. 4) Each property that submits the application will be placed in a lottery and will receive $2,500.00 if drawn. 5) Property owners must submit the original cost estimate and the Contractors 1099 form in order to receive the $2,500.00. A Public Hearing must be held in order for the City to participate in the MCES Private Property I & I Program. Tonight's City Council Meeting is the first Public Hearing to officially adopt the program before the dead line of March 15, 2024. The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and recommended some changes the agreement which MCES has agreed to these changes. Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Maintain and Plan for Infrastructure Improvements. Ensure Clean Water and Maintenance. Financial Impact: No financial Impact to the 2024 Budget. The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community Recommendation: Staff is requesting the City Council hold the Public Hearing to receive comments. Staff Further recommends that the Council approve the attached resolution approving the City Guidelines for the Private Property Inflow and Infiltration Grant Program from the Metropolitan Council. This is the 2nd Public Hearing for the 1/1 Grant Program Respectfully submitted, Don Peterson Director of Public Works Director/Parks and Recreation The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION 9880 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE 2024 PRIVATE PROPERTY INFLOW AND INFILTRATION GRANT PROGRAM FROM THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHEREAS, the City was awarded $50,000 from MCES for the Private I & I Grant, and the City Council must establish guidelines for implementing; and WHEREAS, The City Council reviewed the information and determined the following guidelines for administering the program to Mounds View property owners at the February 5, City Council Work Session; and WHEREAS, A Public Hearing must be held in order for the City to participate in the MCES Private Property I & I Program; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and recommended some changes the agreement which MCES has agreed to these changes; and WHEREAS, Staff is requesting the City Council hold the Public Hearing to receive comments and approve this resolution establishing the guidelines for the Private Property Inflow and Infiltration Grant Program from the Metropolitan Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. Accept the $50,000.00 awarded to the City of Mounds View as part of the MCES for the Private I & I Grant. 2. The City sets the following guidelines in administering the Private I & I Program. a. The City will concentrate on residential homes built prior to 1960. b. Only homes not selling shall be eligible to be included in the program. c. Property owners need to submit an application to be eligible to participate in the program. d. Each property that submits the application will be placed in a lottery and will receive $2,500.00 if drawn. e. Property owners must submit the original cost estimate and the Contractors 1099 form in order to receive the $2,500.00. 3. The City Council holds a Public Hearing on February 26, 2024 and March 11, 2024 in order to receive feedback on the Private I & I Program from the MCES. 111C 1V1VU11UJ V 1CVV V Mull A Thriving Desirable Community Resolution 9880 Continued 4. The Director of Public Works/Parks and Recreation is authorized to make approvals related to contract modifications during construction of the Project on behalf of the City Council as per the Purchasing Policy. 5. The Mayor and City Administrator, Staff and consultants are hereby authorized and directed to take any and all additional steps and actions necessary or convenient in order to accomplish the intent of this Resolution. Adopted this 26th day of February, 2024 Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator (Seal) The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community M0L__TNDS ViEw City of Mounds View Staff Report Item No: 8B Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 Type of Business: CB Administrator Review: To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Don Peterson, Director of Public Works/Parks and Recreation Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9891, Approving the Proposal from WSB for a Park System Master Plan Background/Discussion: The City of Mounds View has many responsibilities to include efficiently operating and managing the entire Park system. The Park system includes 11 Parks with over 123 acres of grounds, 9 basketball courts, 2 tennis courts, 11 playgrounds, 4 park buildings, 5 soccer fields, 7 ball fields, a disc golf course plus numerous other park infrastructure and amenities. The City Council discussed implementing a Park System Master Plan (PSMP) at the January 29, 2024 Work Session in which WSB attended. WSB outlined the benefits for Mounds View to complete a PSMP that included an overall community vision for the parks, trails, and recreation for the next 20 years. This plan will assist with future investments and improvements, establish goals, objectives and setting overall priorities in the Community. Council directed Staff to obtain a cost proposal from WSB for a scope of services: 1) Project Start up and Data Collection a. Project Kickoff meeting b. Data Collection c. Project Management 2) Needs Analysis a. Park Inventory and Level of Service Analysis b. Demographics Analysis c. Trail Gap Analysis d. Building Analysis e. General Athletic Field & Support Analysis f. Park Dedication Review 3) Community Engagement a. Project Steering Committee / Task Force b. Stakeholder Interviews c. Open House Meetings d. Pop -Up Meeting & Events e. Social Pinpoint f. Social Media / Press Assistance The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community 4) Park System Plan and Meetings a. Park Recreation and Forestry Commission Meetings b. City Council Meetings c. Planning Recommendations d. Park System Plan e. Parks System Plan Review The cost proposal from WSB to provide the services to create a PSMP is $106,500.00. Strategic Plan Strategy/Goal: Maintain and Plan for Infrastructure Improvements. Financial Impact: Financial Impact the 2024 Budget. This item is not budgeted and the Special Project Fund would be used to finance this project. Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached resolution approving the proposal from WSB to create a Park System Master Plan. Respectfully submitted, Don Peterson Director of Public Works / Parks and Recreation The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community RESOLUTION 9891 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING THE PROPOSAL FROM WSB FOR A PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, The City of Mounds View has many responsibilities to include efficiently operating and managing the entire Park system; and WHEREAS, the City Council discussed implementing a Park System Master Plan (PSMP) at the January 29, 2024 Work Session in which WSB attended; and WHEREAS, Council directed Staff to obtain a cost proposal from WSB for a scope of services; and WHEREAS, WSB has provided a Scope of Services proposal for a cost of $106,500.00; and WHEREAS, Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached resolution approving the Proposal from WSB to Create a Park System Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. Approves the proposal from WSB for the Park System Master Plan of a cost of $106,500.00 as outlined in the proposal to be funded from the 2024 Special Project Fund. 2. The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to execute all appropriate documents to effectuate the actions contemplated by this resolution. 3. The Mayor and City Administrator, Staff and consultants are hereby authorized and directed to take any and all additional steps and actions necessary or convenient in order to accomplish the intent of this Resolution. Adopted this 11t" day of March, 2024 Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator (SEAL) The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community 2 0 U c� z w m L0 L0 z ui J 0 EL a w z z 2 0 0 co w D U) T w D z w Q Q z W x 0 r_ wsb March 5, 2024 Mr. Don Peterson Director of Public Works / Parks & Recreation City of Mounds View 2466 Bronson Drive Mounds View, MN 55112 Re: Mounds View Park System Plan Dear Don, WSB LLC (Consultant) is pleased to present this proposal to the City of Mounds View (Client) for the development of a Park System Master Plan. Our project understanding, scope of work, and proposed fee is listed below. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City of Mounds View desires the development of a full Park System Master Plan to guide future developments and improvements for an improved and more equitable park system that is in line with current and projected community needs and demands. The following Scope of Services is meant to provide the City with a successful planning process and outcome. WSB is always willing to adjust the Scope of Services and corresponding fees as necessary to meet the goals of the City. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES PROJECT START-UP AND DATA COLLECTION A. Project Kick -Off Meeting 1) Consultant will facilitate an in -person meeting with the Client to review the preliminary schedule, anticipated deliverables, identify key stakeholders, and general discussion of the project goals, concerns, and planning vision. 2) Consultant will prepare and distribute meeting summary notes to those in attendance following the meeting. B. Data Collection 1) The Consultant will gather all relevant data from the Client. This may include prior planning documents, efforts, and outcomes; existing programming; current city revenue, expenditures, and operating budgets for the park system; staffing, operations, and maintenance data; and park policies and guidelines. 2) The Consultant will set up base maps for the park system to include GIS data, current aerials, and general topography information such as lidar suitable for the planning efforts. This task does not include the preparation of site topographical base surveys for each park. C. Project Management 1) Consultant will provide ongoing project management throughout the course of the project to include: \\wsbgvfiles01.wsbeng.local\resources\.Clients All\Mounds View\Proposals\2024 Park System Plan Proposal\Letter Proposal_2024 Park System Plan.docx Don Peterson March 5, 2024 Page 2 a. Monthly memo to the Client regarding current schedule with tasks completed to - date, tasks remaining, current budget used and remaining, and upcoming needs. b. Monthly review meetings with the Client to review over the project to -date to ensure feedback and decision making throughout the course of the project. c. Internal review of project schedule, budget, staff allocation, invoicing, and related management tasks. NEEDS ANALYSIS A. Park Inventory and Level of Service (LOS) Analysis 1) The Consultant will identify and map the locations of the parks within the community with their corresponding park classification (neighborhood park, community park, special use park, etc.) and will inventory their existing amenities. The Consultant will also identify recreational opportunities outside of the community that may be contributing to its residents. This includes schools, County / Regional Parks, and parks in neighboring communities. The map will illustrate the quarter and half mile radii of each City park based upon their location and any potential barriers that may affect adequate access to the park or recreational amenity to identify potential locations of those lacking proper access. 2) The Consultant will conduct individual park site visits to assess the existing features to determine how well a park is meeting basic design standards. This includes identifying the age and condition of the amenities, function, general accessibility, safety concerns, and the demographics being served by the amenities. 3) An analysis of the existing recreational amenities, funding, and budgetary information will be prepared in conjunction with general NRPA metrics and peer community comparisons. This provides insight into how well the community is meeting the basic levels of service expectations. B. Demographics Analysis 1) The Consultant will collect 2020 Census data and will also develop ESRI demographics maps of the City of Mounds View identifying various demographics breakdowns based on housing density, income levels, ethnicity, and age distribution. Tapestry Segmentation maps will provide insight into the general population classifications within the community. 2) The Consultant will utilize the demographics information to better understand the locations where underserved populations may be located and methods to improve equitable distribution or access to recreational opportunities. This may include identifying locations for targeted community engagement strategies. C. Trail Gap Analysis 1) The Consultant will conduct a high-level analysis of the existing trails and walks in the community, along with future planned routes, to identify any gaps or areas of concern that may need to be addressed. This may also include identifying locations for efforts to improve pedestrian safety. D. Building Analysis 1) The sub-Consulant, KODET, will conduct an analysis of the existing building at Silver View Park to determine code compliance along with identifying potential improvements that may be necessary for meeting the needs of the community and the cost-effectiveness of the associated costs. \\wsbgvfiles01.wsbeng.local\resources\.Clients All\Mounds View\Proposals\2024 Park System Plan Proposal\Letter Proposal_2024 Park System Plan.docx Don Peterson March 5, 2024 Page 3 E. General Athletic Field & Supply Analysis 1) The Consultant will conduct a general athletic field and supply analysis based upon information provided by the athletic associations and city programs. This is to determine general field usage and identify any major potential shortfalls for meeting athletic demands. This general analysis is not intended to provide an in depth study of field time or any detailed recommendations about athletic programming or scheduling. F. Park Dedication Review 1) The Consultant will undertake a review of the existing park dedication policies and compare them to peer communities to identify any areas of significant discrepancies. COMMUNITY ENAGAGEMENT A. Project Steering Committee / Task Force 1) The Client will select a diverse group of approximately 8-10 members to be part of a project steering committee to provide guidance, decision -making, and feedback based on their background or perspectives throughout the course of the project. The committee members will also interface with the greater community and their associations, as applicable, to enhance awareness of the system planning process and relay information back and forth. Up to three (3) meetings will be held to include: a. Project Visioning: This meeting will be held to provide an overview of the planning process, identify methods for the committee members to help raise awareness of the project, identify primary project stakeholders to include in the process, gather input and concerns related to the existing park system, establish a draft set of project goals, and develop the framework for a project vision statement. This will include a brief review of previous planning efforts, such as the expansion of the community center. b. Planning Findings, Goals & Objectives: This meeting will be held following the completion of the needs analysis and community engagement efforts to review over the primary public findings. The members will also finalize the project vision and provide feedback on project goals and objectives. c. Draft Park System Plan Recommendations: This meeting will focus on review of the system plan recommendations for the parks, trails, and initial priorities in order to develop strategies for implementation and development of the CIP. B. Stakeholder Interviews 1) The Consultant will coordinate with the City to identify primary project stakeholders that can provide greater insight into the park and trail system from varying perspectives. This may include athletic associations, city staff, school district, Festival in the Park members, Chamber of Commerce, watershed district, etc. The Consultant will include one full day of in -person meetings for up to six (6) stakeholder groups, each lasting approximately one hour. Additional meetings can be added to the scope as needed. C. Open House Meetings 1) The Consultant will facilitate up to three (3) public open house style meetings, as follows: a. Project Visioning & Brainstorming: This interactive meeting will inform the public of the upcoming project process and will include a small presentation followed by interactive engagement activities to gather quick input related to issues, concerns, desires, and community visions as it relates to the future of the park and trail system. \\wsbgvfiles01.wsbeng.local\resources\.Clients All\Mounds View\Proposals\2024 Park System Plan Proposal\Letter Proposal_2024 Park System Plan.docx Don Peterson March 5, 2024 Page 4 b. Findings & Recommendations: This meeting will be held following the completion of the draft planning recommendations. A presentation will be held describing the findings of the needs analysis and community engagement process, along with draft recommendations of the system plan in order to identify feedback, concerns, and potential priorities to carry forward. c. Draft System Plan Review: This meeting will be held following the completion of the draft Park System Master Plan as part of the public review period necessary for plan finalization. The community will be allowed to provide feedback on the draft plan and priorities. D. Pop-up Meetings & Events 1) The Consultant will facilitate and coordinate with the Client to determine optimal locations and events throughout the community to hold quick pop-up meetings to gather input and raise awareness of the project. These may vary in forms of engagement generally lasting approximately up to 2 hours in length, plus preparation time, and may include games, engagement activities, and maps or other graphics to encourage interaction. A total of up to ten (10) pop-up meetings are included. Any direct costs for snacks, food, games, or language interpretation will be included as direct reimbursable costs to the Client with no additional mark-up. E. Social Pinpoint 1) The Consultant will set up a customized project website with interactive map using Social Pinpoint. The program allows for a drag -and -drop interface that can be easily shared through various forms of social media platforms. This website will be used to gather input from the community, gather feedback on planning recommendations, and promote community engagement. It will also include up to two (2) surveys. F. Social Media / Press Assistance 1) The Consultant will assist the Client in the development of imagery and information to include in the City social media postings, development of post cards or mailers, and drafting information to include in any press releases or newsletters. This includes up to five (5) social media posts, two (2) postcard designs, and two (2) newsletters or press releases. 4. PARK SYSTEM PLAN AND MEETINGS A. Parks, Recreation and Forestry Commission Meetings 1) The Consultant will attend up to three (3) Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Commission Meetings, as follows: a. Project Startup: The Consultant will provide an overview of the planning process, draft schedule, and gather input or feedback related to anticipated project goals and outcomes. b. Findings & Draft Recommendations: The Consultant will provide an overview of the findings from the needs analysis and community engagement process, along with draft recommendations for review and discussion. c. Draft System Plan: The Consultant will preset the draft Park System Plan with recommendations and priorities for review and discussion. B. City Council Meetings 1) Draft System Plan: The Consultant will present the planning process, outcomes, and draft Park System Plan for review and comment. 2) Final System Plan: The Consultant will present the final Park System Plan for approval and adoption. \\wsbgvfiles01.wsbeng.local\resources\.Clients All\Mounds View\Proposals\2024 Park System Plan Proposal\Letter Proposal_2024 Park System Plan.docx Don Peterson March 5, 2024 Page 5 C. Planning Recommendations 1) The Consultant will use the findings of the needs assessment and community engagement process to guide the recommendations of the system plan. As a part of this effort, the Consultant will develop recommendations for the parks that will focus on strategic improvements for meeting the existing and future needs of the community in an equitable manner. This will include the development of recommendations for individual parks to include corresponding high-level conceptual graphics to help communicate the recommendations. 2) The Consultant will use the findings to develop recommendations for the pedestrian trail network that will improve connectivity and safety across the community. 3) The Consultant will develop high level estimates of probable costs for the corresponding recommendations which will be included along with strategic priorities that will provide the greatest benefit to the community. This will include a draft 10- year Capital Improvement Plan in order to help identify budgetary needs to implement the plan recommendations. 4) The Consultant will identify potential funding opportunities and partnerships that may be applicable and help the City with implementation efforts. D. Park System Plan: The Consultant will undertake planning reviews in order to create recommendations for the City based on the planning process outcomes which will be summarized in the Park System Plan document of the entire process to include the following sections: 1) System Plan Overview 2) Needs Assessment & Community Engagement Findings 3) Project Vision, Goals, & Objectives 4) Park System Plan and Recommendations 5) Trail System Plan and Recommendations 6) Implementation Plan including CIP 7) Corresponding plans, graphics, and illustrations 8) Appendix with collected data E. Park System Plan Review: The Consultant will distribute the draft Park System Plan for an adjacent community review, as identified by the Metropolitan Council. This will allow for time to make any plan refinements that will ensure approval and adoption by the Metropolitan Council. III. ASSUMPTIONS Consultant has based the scope of work and fee upon the following assumptions. 1. Mailings and Correspondence: It is assumed that the City of Mounds View will be responsible for any mailings or correspondence to the residents for upcoming meetings or events. 2. Trail System. It is assumed that the City of Mounds View will have the necessary GIS data for the existing trail system to be incorporated into the Consultant's maps for use in planning purposes. 3. Metropolitan Council Submission: It is assumed that the City of Mounds View will be responsible for distribution of the final Park System Master Plan to the Metropolitan Council for approval and adoption as an Appendix to the 2040 Park System Plan, if desired. \\wsbgvfiles01.wsbeng.local\resources\.Clients All\Mounds View\Proposals\2024 Park System Plan Proposal\Letter Proposal_2024 Park System Plan.docx Don Peterson March 5, 2024 Page 6 IV. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional services may be added upon approval by both Client and Consultant via amendment to this Agreement. 1. The following items are excluded from this Agreement; however, Consultant can provide these professional services for additional compensation by amendment to this Agreement. A. Master Plan and 3-dimensional Graphics: The planning efforts do not include more graphical master plan imagery or 3-dimensions but can be added at additional cost if desired. B. Language Translation: Language translation services by INGCO International, can be added as needed. They provide on -site or remote interpretation, as well as documents, graphics, and website translation services. Rates vary depending on language. It is approximately $180/hour for Hmong; $160/hour for Somali; $150/hour for Spanish; and $0.25/word for written translation. C. Food, Snacks, or Games: Food, snacks, or games necessary for community engagement efforts are not included but can be provided as a reimbursable direct expense to the Client without any markup. D. Virtual Public Meetings: Additional services can be provided to provide virtual options to be included as part of the open house or public meetings. This includes video production, upload, and an online comment map. V. PROPOSED FEES, SCHEDULE AND ACCEPTANCE Services outlined in Section II — Scope of Services listed above will be provided for a total hourly not -to -exceed fee of $106,500. The following fee table provides an overview of fees that are broken into the main categories of work with a detailed spreadsheet as an attachment. Project Start -Up & Data Collection $13,000 Needs Analysis $21,000 Community Engagement $34,000 Park System Plan & Meetings $38,500 Total $106,500 Reimbursable expenses will be billed in addition to the professional fees above. VI. SCHEDULE A detailed schedule will be provided following the project kick-off meeting. This project is assumed to start in late April to early May and be complete by December 2024. ACCEPTANCE This letter represents our entire understanding of the project scope. If the City of Mounds View is in agreement, the necessary contract documents can be provided and signed. WSB will start work upon receipt of a signed contract. \\wsbgvfiles01.wsbeng.local\resources\.Clients All\Mounds View\Proposals\2024 Park System Plan Proposal\Letter Proposal_2024 Park System Plan.docx Don Peterson March 5, 2024 Page 7 Please contact Candace Amberg via 612.518.3694 or CAmberg@wsbeng.com if you have questions about this proposal. Thank you again for this opportunity to submit our proposal for this exciting project. Sincerely, WSB \\wsbgvfiles01.wsbeng.local\resources\.Clients All\Mounds View\Proposals\2024 Park System Plan Proposal\Letter Proposal_2024 Park System Plan.docx m Nm�^Noo�orvo oo vi mvrvvnory �n �oorv0000..n��v�omo �o m..mmoo �o ��o.. oory .. o�av�o N.. N O 00 N moo ogNo� N vin is°� el°l O f N V� �/) - VV H N N iA N - N 4V N - N M N M N i/� H M H M •i V� s1noH lelol mom ..00rvoarvamaa0000m mo.. ..o mom Nrva mvmoao slolluoD S19 "c SIEJ Y luawa2e2u3 E ti mom E luawa2e2ul w lauueld S a' wwpV c oa N III Vl v' me me rvom Boa ..o 4o1V puel A I Vl 7 c 0 y,1V puel v ledlouud d 4o1V pUel A Wd d .i V N V t0 V of M m a0 W N N vt M i° V N t° 00 m � tp 4o,V puel o L ob m N N E vi ¢ c _ _ m o o o v a '^aa.75 N N R'�v N o e w _c 3 o�«� c c c E E L q o z °' o £ o. m ¢ a�i W Z wf r n m u3 d o ° .a o w E c °1 c' �' o £ o N m E £ a ¢ z w Y min co_ o a` E 3 o N u vi °�' n`�r E y o.-75 n a o u a '°°x�aiL a c_ w E E o °"' d.�a O f0�,"m, a y m n o c oD w oo c YumvY �000L7�o �.L O E m 4 c j Z o — d m u MOUNDS VIEW City of Mounds View Staff Report Item No: 8C Meeting Date: March 11, 2024 Type of Business: Council Business City Administrator Review: To: Honorable Mayor and View City Council From: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Resolution 9890 related to Organized Collection Negotiations Introduction: Council provided direction to staff at their March 6, 2024 workshop to draft a resolution to terminate negotiations with currently licensed haulers and schedule additional meetings of the organized collection options committee. The attached resolution memorializes that direction. Discussion: Negotiations with the currently licensed haulers ("haulers") began on October 12, 2023. Since negotiations began, the City has been focused on obtaining a price for organized collection. This desire stems from ongoing desire by City residents to compare their current bill to an organized collection bill before determining whether to support organized collection. Throughout negotiations, the haulers have indicated that the price is directly tied to the terms of the organized collection contract. For that reason, the City drafted a contract for the haulers' consideration and provided that draft to the haulers in November of 2023. In total, the haulers and the City have met 16 times. The City has produced 18 drafts of the contract. The City sent frequent emails to summarize meetings and offer to communicate outside of formal negotiation settings. The City sent such on the following 16 dates: 10/16/23, 10/23/23, 11/9/23, 11/16/23, 11/29/23, 12/14/23, 1/2/24, 1/4/24, 1/10/24, 2/8/24, 2/9/24, 2/12/24, 2/19/24, 2/21/24, 2/26/24, and 2/28/24. During meetings and in these emails, the City provided updates to encourage progress, summarized discussions, listed outstanding issues, and repeatedly offered to provide any assistance or accommodation requested by the haulers that would help negotiations progress. The haulers provided their first substantive written response to the draft on February 8, 2024, and received a second substantive response on February 19th. The parties reached a tentative agreement on contract terms on February 26t". The agreement is tentative because, as of February 26t", the haulers had not submitted the agreement to their attorneys for review. It is assumed by all the parties that an agreement on those remaining terms can be reached. On the evening of February 26, 2024, the haulers sent the City proposed pricing data and proffered price adjustment language, which are included in the Council packet. The parties met on the afternoon of February 271" to discuss the offer. The haulers were offered an opportunity to explain their offer. They did not provide any supporting documentation or explanation for how the offer was calculated. When questioned by the City, the haulers indicated that the price was not their last and best offer and that they remained open to negotiations. The City explained that it wanted the best and final offer, and that the City would consider any amended proposals the haulers submit. The City also explained that the Council would meet the week of March 4t" to DOCSOPEN\MU210\320\93 8225.v1-3/6/24 MU210\313\938517.v1 City Council Staff Report 3//2024 Page 2 review the proposal and would make a determination about whether to continue negotiations. The City sent an email to the haulers on March 5, 2024, inviting them to the City Council workshop, explaining that the Council would consider whether to continue negotiations, and notifying them that they would have an opportunity to address the council directly. Prior to the Council meeting, the City provided to the haulers a copy of the spreadsheet of rates being paid by current residents and a table of rates being paid by other cities. One representative, from Republic Services, attended the workshop and addressed the Council. No other representatives appeared or otherwise addressed the Council. The representative from Republic expressed an openness on behalf of all haulers to continue to negotiate price and a desire to come to an agreement. It should be noted that: The haulers were originally told the meeting would be held on March 5th, at that time the City did not realize that March 51h was an election day and that the Council meeting was prohibited. At the March 6th meeting, the representative from Republic indicated that the table of rates from other cities contained inaccurate or irrelevant information, so that table has been updated and is included in this packet. Staff Recommendation: Respectfully submitted, Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator Attachment: 1) Resolution 2) Proposed rates sheet 3) Proffered price adjustment 4) Updated table of rates form other cities 5) Spreadsheet of rates being paid by current residents The Mounds View Vision A Thriving Desirable Community DOCSOPEN\MU210\320\938225.v1-3/6/24 MU210\313\938517.v1 RESOLUTION NO. 9890 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ORGANIZED COLLECTION OPTIONS COMMITTEE IN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute § 115A.94, et. seq. (hereinafter "Statute") authorizes a City to organize trash collection and creates a required procedure a City must follow; and WHEREAS, on March 6, 2023, the Mounds View City Council (hereinafter "Council"), directed City Staff to proceed with the research and planning process for establishing an organized collection system; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2023, the City notified the public and all currently licensed collectors of its intent to consider organized collection; and WHEREAS, on May 31, 2023, the City held three public engagement sessions regarding organized collection to determine which services and other factors related to trash collection were important to residents; and WHEREAS, the City also conducted a survey of residents regarding organized collection to determine which services and other factors related to trash collection were important to residents; and WHEREAS, on June 26, 2023, the City invited all currently licensed collectors to a council work session for a "meet and confer", pursuant to the Statute, regarding trash collection issues, including but not limited to road deterioration, public safety, pricing mechanisms, and contractual considerations unique to organized collection; and WHEREAS, the Council discussed the citizen survey results and the feedback from the currently licensed collectors at work sessions held on July 5, 2023 and August 7, 2023; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 2023, the Council held a public hearing and directed staff to begin the mandatory 60-day exclusive negotiation period with currently licensed collectors, and outlined the priorities to guide the negotiations; and WHEREAS, on October 12, 2023, the City began negotiations and met with the currently licensed collectors on 7 separate occasions on October 12th and 26th, November 9th, 16th, and 30th; December 14th, and January 4th; and WHEREAS, prior to the initiation of negotiations, the City, by letter, notified the current collectors that the deadline for a best and final proposal from the haulers is approximately January 11, 2023; and WHEREAS, if the City is unable to come to an agreement with the current collectors, it is the City's intention to issue a Request for Proposals for organized collection; and WHEREAS, Subdivision 4a of the Statute requires that, in the event an agreement is not reached with existing collectors, before implementing organized collection, the council must 1 MU210\313\938465.v1 establish an organized collection options committee to identify, examine, and evaluate various methods of collection and appoint the members of the committee; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 2024, the City Council established an organized collections options committee which met on January 17th, January 24th, and January 31st, and WHEREAS, the City and the haulers have continued to negotiate and met with the haulers on 9 additional occasions, January 11th 18th and 25th, and February 5th 8th 12th 19th 26th , and 27th, and March 5th; and WHEREAS, throughout the negotiation process the City produced 18 drafts of a Residential Solid Waste Contract, with the parties coming to a tentative agreement on contract language on February 26th; and WHEREAS, the haulers sent a proposal for rates throughout the term of the contract to the City on the evening of February 26th; and WHEREAS, on March 6, 2024, the City Council held a work session where it heard an update on the negotiations from City staff and legal counsel and reviewed the price proposal, rate increase proposal, and a comparison of that proposal to what is being paid by current Mounds View residents and in other cities; and WHEREAS, a representative of one of the haulers was present at the work session, but no other hauler representatives attended the session; and WHEREAS, the representative addressed the City Council, provided further information and feedback, and indicated that the haulers were willing to further discuss price and would consider a counter-offer from the City; and WHEREAS, the Council considered whether to continue to negotiate and directed staff to prepare a resolution to end negotiations with the currently licensed haulers and schedule further meetings with the organized collections options committee so that the council can determine whether to issue a request for proposals for collection services; and WHEREAS, the Council wants to ensure that the process to organize collection continues to move toward a signed agreement in a timely manner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby ends negotiations with the currently licensed haulers; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council directs staff to convene further meetings with the organized collections options committee so that the committee can issue a report on its research, findings, and any recommendation to the Council; and BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Council directs City Staff to begin drafting a Request for Proposals, which will be further informed by and completed after the committee report, for Council consideration. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Minnesota this day of March, 2024. 2 MU210\313\938465.v1 Resolution 9890 — Page 3 Zach Lindstrom, Mayor ATTEST: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator MU210\313\938465.v1 W v u Q L L 0 c V O O O 0 03 N J W OJ OJ L M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- O LL Z M1• M1• M1• Z Z Z Z Z Z D Z T f0 4 ' c �0 u rn c c c +1 c 41 m Ln a v v v v QJ U a M CL W c c- C c m c oC a O O M O c O u O V Ln U o U o U U U Z N M1• M1• M1• O M C M c Z c V c W H Q J D Ol O M O w O N RT O O O O Q Z ri 6 0 r-I O -! 6 O 00 O O J O O O Z N O--t 4 00 O O O Ln O O N V N O a a Ol r-I r-I 00 M r-I Ol r-I LO Ol N r-I Z ri N Z J � J J Z � w N-�t w I, O M O,t Ln O w O 0 VV 0 m l0 N M Ln It O It r- Ln M O LU l0 Ln Ln I� ul r� 6 r� ul ul l0 kO 00 \ \ Z J J a Z 1.0 1.0 O 00 It Ol N Ln I- r- Ln O O Ol Ln LM O w a1 0 u) I� F, u1 3 I� Ln Or� 4 Ln M w N w M w 4 m 4r� m 00 n O O Ol N N W u1 O 00 O r-I r-I N N r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I ri M N N N M J J a C7 Z l0 I, O n Ln Il N l0 Il 01 l0 Ln O 00 01 C1 O u1 0 O1 M M N O li O1 Lfl --t M O rl 00 N --t r i W N Ln N.4 r-I cc 4 LA M 4 Ln Ol O1 rl O M O r-I r-I N r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r•I N N "i N M LD .... i/} i/} i/} t/? t/? t/? t/? t/? t/? t/? t/? i/1 •Vf• t/? t/? •V1 •!/� J J a 0 Z u) ClO 00 NM O O M rl Ln O Ln M 0 M O I� Ol 00 Ol M't N O M N 00 O It O r-I O Ln ri O ri N 01 N l0 00 I� O n N n O r-I w r-I r-I w r� r-I M r-I r-I r-I ri r1 r-I r-I r-I N M � •t/)• •t/)• •t/)• •t/� •t/� •c/� t/� •t/� •t/� •t/� •N• i/F i/} t/)• � V1 � O a w H V a ~ Z 10 O Ol N r-I O M Ol I� N r-I N r-I N N N N r-I r-I N o O O O O O O O O O O V N N N N N N N N N N V Q Z Q J v V _ An w sZ c C t W A C N G CL OA 0 H W Q C = = Z N W N .0 H f=6 V1 ,, t uf (7 taH m C7 = CL E Y �, @ M c , a w o 0. w 3 Q o a c 2 o Nf N V w V 2 Z w OC > Q a d Q CL c O d0 C E O O .w i 4_ 0 0 S_ _T O S_ O O i f�0 E tl c O � c E2 - L O N m c c 0 E 0 Y M O 0-mO � O rn cc U 2 m 0 F. s 7 O O a, O_ m s Ln O O O N O Ln • v t U VA • 00 N O N \ O c-I (6 U L >� U — a) 7 c V) f6 f6 -� LJ a1 U c '0 N L U 4- Q a1 o Ln Ln }, M � Ln 4' N 4(' O r1l Ln 4-1 N O c-I a) E +, 4- c `" .� L L fu O -Cc: E E a) v O = an U c LOAMOJ N O U Uf c6 r, O U! Q t/) N O � L Y 0 v c m L 4-1 a1 L L O > O vV) > V) v n3 L a1 .� O O c Ln o L!1 v o0 L > o fo U 4-' � u a m v ai L E L L c0 3 0 a U L do c O .� ai C c fB N o o an .z7; M_ O >O 4 7 > > Q N > v v > O 1' Z = = Ln Q O O O ro • • L vi ao 3 O U O U a1 Ln L (0 4-1 a1 =� an a1 lC0 C N X N N O i CL U Q U c L L 0 U N c L x 0 + U +• V 2 O U U O > U N > LnU L O O C = O 4' U a1 O O dA txc 3 L bA Y Ln 4- 2- -r- O > 4- 0 Ln o E U U o a1 LO a1 4 U a + (p > a on � Q � a1 U � 3 c a) 4- (0 i -O ate-+ U N O 0 c O N O O O c — a- a1 � M O NO Y 00 Ql N tv E 0 Ln O Ln o a -a x c u 4-1 C c i � QU N 0 U c v U C O ++ v on c C:) O v u > o a1 o -0 o w 0 to coqt _ ro v a _ U) � ro x O U +1 = L C !4 f6 v to a 0 (10 O O a... M O N N O ai m C vmi Jo) O O O N t � 0 Ln C� C C L a) a1 ., n > o O Y N Ln 7 ai Q- o ul 4 E a1 a a1 +, a1 4� U N Y a1 ro Ln > a1 U a1 -0 a -0 L a1 a U L > U a v U a 0o 7 O � O O t N • 0