HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-03 City Council Work SessionAgenda
City Council Work Session
City of Edina, Minnesota
Edina City Hall Community Room
Tuesday, May 3, 2016
5:30 PM
I.Call To Order
II.Roll Call
III.Quarterly Business Meeting - Finance
IV.State of the Infrastructure Report
V.Adjournment
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the
public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli&cation, an
interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861
72 hours in advance of the meeting.
Date: May 3, 2016 Agenda Item #: III.
To:Mayor and City Council Item Type:
Advisory Communication
From:Eric Roggeman, Finance Director
Item Activity:
Subject:Quarterly Business Meeting - Finance Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
This item is for information and discussion only. No Council action is required.
INTRODUCTION:
In 2007 the City started a quarterly review process for general fund financials called Quarterly Update. Quarterly
Update is a two-page written summary of finances and notable transactions in the general fund.
In 2012 the City added quarterly business meetings, generally held on the second work session after every
calendar quarter end. At quarterly business meetings staff present finances and notable transactions in the general
fund and all the enterprise funds. For some quarters, financial data is not ready in time to be included in Council
packets prior to the meeting.
This quarter the financial data is ready and is attached for your review.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Business Meeting Presentation
December 2015 Quarterly Update
March 2016 Quarterly Update
The CITY of EDINA
Qu
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
U
p
d
a
t
e
Ma
y
3
,
2
0
1
6
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
W
o
r
k
S
e
s
s
i
o
n
The CITY of EDINA
To
p
i
c
s
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
•
Su
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
2
0
1
5
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
(
u
n
a
u
d
i
t
e
d
)
•
GA
S
B
6
8
p
e
n
s
i
o
n
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
•
20
1
5
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
•
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
2
0
1
7
-
2
0
2
1
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
(
C
I
P
)
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
2
The CITY of EDINA
Ke
y
M
e
t
r
i
c
:
W
a
t
e
r
p
u
m
p
e
d
o
u
t
of
C
i
t
y
w
e
l
l
s
•
20
1
5
w
a
t
e
r
p
u
m
p
e
d
=
2
.
3
B
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
vs
.
2
.
4
B
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
i
n
2
0
1
4
.
•
20
1
0
-
2
0
1
4
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
r
a
t
e
w
a
s
2
.
5
B
ga
l
l
o
n
s
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
3
Ut
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Ut
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
F
u
n
d
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
Re
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
Ke
y
M
e
t
r
i
c
:
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
C
o
u
n
t
s
•
20
1
5
c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s
=
4
8
0
,
0
0
0
v
s
.
50
0
,
0
0
0
i
n
2
0
1
4
.
•
20
0
1
0
-
2
0
1
4
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
c
o
u
n
t
w
a
s
50
6
,
0
0
0
.
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
i
s
f
i
g
u
r
e
,
2
0
1
5
cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
a
r
e
d
o
w
n
5
%
f
r
o
m
hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
s
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
4
Li
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Li
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
5
Li
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
25
.
8
6
26
.
2
7
24
.
7
8
25
.
0
1
--
-
-
5
.
0
0
1
0
.
0
0
1
5
.
0
0
2
0
.
0
0
2
5
.
0
0
3
0
.
0
0
3
5
.
0
0
20
1
3
Q1
20
1
3
Q2
20
1
3
Q3
20
1
3
Q4
20
1
4
Q1
20
1
4
Q2
20
1
4
Q3
20
1
4
Q4
20
1
5
Q1
20
1
5
Q2
20
1
5
Q3
20
1
5
Q4
20
1
6
Q1
20
1
6
Q2
20
1
6
Q3
20
1
6
Q4
Li
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
S
a
l
e
s
p
e
r
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
Gr
o
s
s
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
(
s
a
l
e
s
)
p
e
r
c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
The CITY of EDINA
Ke
y
M
e
t
r
i
c
:
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
C
o
u
n
t
s
•
20
1
6
Q
1
c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s
=
1
0
9
,
0
0
0
v
s
.
10
4
,
0
0
0
i
n
2
0
1
5
•
20
1
1
-
2
0
1
5
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
Q
1
c
o
u
n
t
w
a
s
10
8
,
0
0
0
.
•
In
2
0
1
5
t
h
e
L
i
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
h
a
d
op
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
i
n
c
o
m
e
o
f
$
6
7
6
,
0
0
0
a
n
d
tr
a
n
s
f
e
r
r
e
d
$
7
8
5
,
0
0
0
o
f
c
a
s
h
o
u
t
o
f
th
e
L
i
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
t
o
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
o
t
h
e
r
Ci
t
y
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
6
Li
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
(
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
(
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
-
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
6
0
0
,
0
0
0
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Li
q
u
o
r
F
u
n
d
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
I
n
c
o
m
e
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
The CITY of EDINA
Ke
y
M
e
t
r
i
c
:
S
e
a
s
o
n
p
a
s
s
e
s
s
o
l
d
•
20
1
5
Y
T
D
p
a
s
s
e
s
=
3,
2
6
5
(
1
0
,
2
1
8
pe
o
p
l
e
)
v
s
.
3,
4
6
2
(
1
0
,
6
1
7
people) in
20
1
4
.
•
20
1
2
-
2
0
1
4
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
s
a
l
e
s
w
e
r
e
3
,
3
8
2
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
7
Aq
u
a
t
i
c
C
e
n
t
e
r
F
u
n
d
0%
10
%
20
%
30
%
40
%
50
%
60
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Aq
u
a
t
i
c
C
e
n
t
e
r
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
Re
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
Ke
y
M
e
t
r
i
c
:
B
r
a
e
m
a
r
G
o
l
f
ro
u
n
d
s
p
l
a
y
e
d
•
20
1
5
r
o
u
n
d
s
=
6
6
,
4
8
3
v
s
.
7
0
,
9
0
3
i
n
20
1
4
(
e
x
c
l
u
d
e
s
F
R
r
o
u
n
d
s
)
•
20
1
0
-
2
0
1
4
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
r
o
u
n
d
s
w
e
r
e
73
,
5
0
0
(
e
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
F
R
r
o
u
n
d
s
)
•
Re
v
e
n
u
e
i
n
Q
3
w
a
s
l
o
w
d
u
e
t
o
cl
o
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
B
r
a
e
m
a
r
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
a
n
d
Dr
i
v
i
n
g
R
a
n
g
e
f
o
r
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
8
Go
l
f
C
o
u
r
s
e
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Go
l
f
C
o
u
r
s
e
F
u
n
d
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
Re
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
•
Ex
p
e
n
s
e
s
a
r
e
d
o
w
n
.
•
Op
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
i
n
c
o
m
e
(
l
o
s
s
)
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
d
.
•
Ca
s
h
f
l
o
w
f
r
o
m
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
w
a
s
v
e
r
y
go
o
d
:
•
20
1
3
=
$
4
,
2
8
6
•
20
1
4
=
$
3
4
8
,
5
6
8
•
20
1
5
=
$
6
1
0
,
1
0
2
•
Au
d
i
t
w
i
l
l
s
h
o
w
a
n
o
n
-
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
ac
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
c
h
a
r
g
e
t
o
t
h
e
G
o
l
f
F
u
n
d
fo
r
e
n
d
i
n
g
g
o
l
f
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
t
F
r
e
d
Ri
c
h
a
r
d
s
p
a
r
k
.
T
h
e
p
a
r
k
w
i
l
l
n
o
w
re
c
e
i
v
e
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
tr
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
a
s
o
t
h
e
r
C
i
t
y
p
a
r
k
s
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
9
Go
l
f
C
o
u
r
s
e
F
u
n
d
(
6
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
(
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
(
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
-
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
6
0
0
,
0
0
0
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Go
l
f
C
o
u
r
s
e
F
u
n
d
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
In
c
o
m
e
(
L
o
s
s
)
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
The CITY of EDINA
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
10
Ar
e
n
a
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Br
a
e
m
a
r
A
r
e
n
a
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
Re
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
•
Q3
a
n
d
Q
4
2
0
1
5
w
e
r
e
m
o
r
e
pr
o
f
i
t
a
b
l
e
a
t
t
h
e
A
r
e
n
a
t
h
a
n
Q
3
a
n
d
Q4
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
l
y
.
•
Re
v
e
n
u
e
g
r
o
w
t
h
f
o
r
2
0
1
5
w
a
s
s
t
r
o
n
g
@
1
0
%
o
v
e
r
2
0
1
4
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
11
Ar
e
n
a
F
u
n
d
(
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
(
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
(
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
(
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
)
-
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Br
a
e
m
a
r
A
r
e
n
a
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
In
c
o
m
e
(
L
o
s
s
)
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
The CITY of EDINA
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
12
Ar
t
C
e
n
t
e
r
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Ar
t
C
e
n
t
e
r
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
13
Ed
i
n
b
o
r
o
u
g
h
P
a
r
k
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Ed
i
n
b
o
r
o
u
g
h
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
14
Ce
n
t
e
n
n
i
a
l
L
a
k
e
s
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Ce
n
t
e
n
n
i
a
l
L
a
k
e
s
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
20
1
5
B
u
d
g
e
t
The CITY of EDINA
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
15
Sp
o
r
t
s
D
o
m
e
F
u
n
d
0%5%
10
%
15
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
45
%
50
%
Q1
Q
2
Q
3
Q
4
Br
a
e
m
a
r
F
i
e
l
d
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
20
1
5
A
c
t
u
a
l
The CITY of EDINA
GA
S
B
6
8
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
•
Ed
i
n
a
i
s
n
o
w
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
o
u
r
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
a
t
e
s
h
a
r
e
o
f
P
E
R
A
’
s
u
n
f
u
n
d
e
d
pe
n
s
i
o
n
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
.
•
PE
R
A
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
u
s
t
h
a
t
o
u
r
s
h
a
r
e
i
s
$
1
3
.
9
M
M
f
o
r
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
p
l
u
s
$
9
.
2
M
M
fo
r
p
o
l
i
c
e
a
n
d
f
i
r
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
.
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
i
s
$
2
3
M
M
.
•
In
E
d
i
n
a
o
u
r
e
n
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
f
u
n
d
s
w
i
l
l
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
a
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
a
t
e
s
h
a
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
n
e
w
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
.
Th
i
s
w
i
l
l
m
a
k
e
a
u
d
i
t
e
d
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
l
e
v
e
l
s
l
o
o
k
l
o
w
e
r
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
y
h
a
v
e
i
n
t
h
e
p
a
s
t
.
•
Th
e
G
A
S
B
m
a
d
e
t
h
i
s
c
h
a
n
g
e
i
n
a
n
a
t
t
e
m
p
t
t
o
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
a
n
d
co
m
p
a
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
a
m
o
n
g
g
o
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
s
.
T
h
e
G
A
S
B
h
o
p
e
s
t
o
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
t
h
i
s
b
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
th
a
t
a
l
l
p
e
n
s
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
u
s
e
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
a
c
t
u
a
r
i
a
l
c
o
s
t
m
e
t
h
o
d
s
.
•
GA
S
B
6
8
i
s
n
o
t
a
c
h
a
n
g
e
t
o
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
o
r
re
t
i
r
e
e
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
.
G
A
S
B
6
8
a
l
s
o
d
o
e
s
n
’
t
ch
a
n
g
e
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
’
s
o
r
P
E
R
A
’
s
a
n
n
u
a
l
c
a
s
h
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
T
h
e
s
e
t
h
i
n
g
s
w
i
l
l
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
t
o
b
e
d
e
c
i
d
e
d
b
y
P
E
R
A
a
n
d
t
h
e
S
t
a
t
e
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
16
The CITY of EDINA
20
1
5
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
(
u
n
a
u
d
i
t
e
d
)
Re
v
e
n
u
e
•
20
1
5
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
=
$
3
5
.
8
M
v
s
.
$
3
4
.
6
M
i
n
2
0
1
4
(
3
.
5
%
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
)
•
10
5
%
o
f
b
u
d
g
e
t
,
c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d
t
o
1
0
4
%
i
n
2
0
1
4
.
20
1
0
-
2
0
1
4
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
r
a
t
e
i
s
1
0
5
%
.
Ex
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s
•
20
1
5
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
=
$
3
4
.
4
M
v
s
.
$
3
3
.
4
M
i
n
2
0
1
4
(
3
.
0
%
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
)
•
99
%
o
f
b
u
d
g
e
t
,
c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d
t
o
9
9
%
i
n
2
0
1
4
.
2
0
1
0
-
2
0
1
4
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
r
a
t
e
i
s
9
8
%
Ke
y
M
e
t
r
i
c
:
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
&
P
e
r
m
i
t
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
•
20
1
5
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
=
$
4
.
8
M
v
s
.
$
4
.
5
M
i
n
2
0
1
4
,
7
.
5
%
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
&
n
e
w
r
e
c
o
r
d
•
12
6
%
o
f
b
u
d
g
e
t
,
c
o
m
p
a
r
e
d
t
o
1
3
7
%
i
n
2
0
1
4
Ot
h
e
r
•
Th
e
C
i
t
y
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
$
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
i
n
P
a
r
k
D
e
d
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
2
0
1
5
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
17
The CITY of EDINA
20
1
5
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
(
u
n
a
u
d
i
t
e
d
)
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
18
97
.
7
%
10
1
.
2
%
95
.
7
%
85
.
7
%
93
.
0
%
99
.
6
%
89
.
6
%
97
.
9
%
102.3%98.4%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
5
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
B
u
d
g
e
t
S
p
e
n
t
The CITY of EDINA
20
1
5
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
(
u
n
a
u
d
i
t
e
d
)
Re
s
e
r
v
e
s
•
$7
6
5
,
1
0
0
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
t
o
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
f
r
o
m
L
i
q
u
o
r
f
u
n
d
w
a
s
c
a
n
c
e
l
l
e
d
•
We
a
r
e
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
n
g
u
n
a
l
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
F
u
n
d
a
t
t
h
e
e
n
d
o
f
2
0
1
5
.
Th
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
i
s
s
t
i
l
l
u
n
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
,
b
u
t
a
p
p
e
a
r
s
t
o
b
e
l
o
w
e
r
t
h
a
n
r
e
c
e
n
t
y
e
a
r
s
.
•
Th
e
r
e
a
r
e
m
a
n
y
f
a
c
t
o
r
s
,
b
u
t
t
w
o
c
o
n
s
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
y
e
a
r
s
(
2
0
1
4
-
2
0
1
5
)
o
f
c
a
n
c
e
l
l
e
d
l
i
q
u
o
r
tr
a
n
s
f
e
r
t
o
t
h
e
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
f
u
n
d
a
r
e
o
v
e
r
.
T
h
e
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
f
u
n
d
h
a
d
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
a
n
d
bu
d
g
e
t
f
l
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
a
b
s
o
r
b
t
h
e
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
.
T
h
e
2
0
1
6
b
u
d
g
e
t
w
a
s
s
e
t
w
i
t
h
ne
w
l
o
w
e
r
e
x
p
e
c
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
l
i
q
u
o
r
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
.
•
Th
e
r
e
w
o
n
’
t
b
e
m
u
c
h
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
f
i
r
s
t
y
e
a
r
o
f
t
h
e
20
1
7
-
2
0
2
1
C
I
P
.
S
i
n
g
l
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
f
u
n
d
s
l
i
k
e
u
t
i
l
i
t
y
&
P
A
C
S
w
i
l
l
s
t
i
l
l
b
e
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
z
e
d
du
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
C
I
P
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
19
The CITY of EDINA
Th
e
C
I
P
P
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
:
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
20
Di
v
i
s
i
o
n
le
a
d
e
r
s
su
b
m
i
t
CI
P
pr
o
j
e
c
t
na
r
r
a
t
i
v
e
s
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
He
a
d
s
ra
t
e
an
d
ra
n
k
CI
P
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
Su
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
re
v
i
e
w
s
su
b
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
an
d
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
s
pr
i
o
r
i
t
y
le
v
e
l
s
EL
T
re
v
i
e
w
s
an
d
co
m
m
e
n
t
s
on
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ci
t
y
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
s
dr
a
f
t
CI
P
to
Co
u
n
c
i
l
The CITY of EDINA
CI
P
T
i
m
e
l
i
n
e
Da
t
e
E
v
e
n
t
A
c
t
i
o
n
Ap
r
i
l
2
7
E
L
T
S
t
a
f
f
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
C
I
P
s
t
a
f
f
k
i
c
k
o
f
f
Ma
y
3
W
o
r
k
S
e
s
s
i
o
n
C
I
P
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
k
i
c
k
o
f
f
Ma
y
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
p
e
a
k
U
p
,
E
d
i
n
a
!
D
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Au
g
1
7
E
L
T
S
t
a
f
f
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
D
r
a
f
t
C
I
P
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
d
b
y
E
L
T
Se
p
t
7
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
a
d
o
p
t
s
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
l
e
v
y
Se
p
t
1
7
W
o
r
k
S
e
s
s
i
o
n
S
t
a
f
f
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
C
I
P
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
t
o
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
No
v
/
D
e
c
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
P
u
b
l
i
c
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
&
a
d
o
p
t
f
i
n
a
l
b
u
d
g
e
t
&
C
I
P
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
21
The CITY of EDINA
Qu
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
:
•
Ar
e
t
h
e
r
e
a
n
y
n
e
w
o
r
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
t
h
e
m
e
s
t
h
e
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
w
o
u
l
d
l
i
k
e
st
a
f
f
t
o
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
z
e
t
h
i
s
y
e
a
r
?
•
Do
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
m
i
n
g
m
a
k
e
s
e
n
s
e
?
•
Th
e
2
0
1
6
-
2
0
1
7
b
u
d
g
e
t
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
a
C
I
P
l
e
v
y
o
f
$
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
f
o
r
20
1
7
,
i
s
t
h
a
t
s
t
i
l
l
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
?
T
o
t
a
l
l
e
v
y
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
i
s
4
.
9
%
.
•
We
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
a
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
e
m
p
h
a
s
i
s
o
n
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
f
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
t
w
o
y
e
a
r
s
a
g
o
a
n
d
a
r
e
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
t
o
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
t
h
a
t
ef
f
o
r
t
t
h
i
s
t
i
m
e
a
r
o
u
n
d
.
I
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
w
e
h
a
v
e
a
d
d
e
d
t
h
e
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
S
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
F
u
n
d
.
ww
w
.
E
d
i
n
a
M
N
.
g
o
v
22
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
Quarterly Financial Update
December 2015
C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\0EE6EF90-A760-4C25-BD97-
DA703ABF9E78\Edina.2049.1.Quarterly_Update.docx 1
General Fund - Revenues
General Fund revenues (excluding park dedication fees) total $35,807,894 through
December 31, 2015. This amount represents 105% of total budgeted revenues for all of
2015, which is higher than 104% in 2014.
License and permit revenue increased $336,641 from last year due to increased permit
activity. The City has experienced rapid growth in permit revenue since 2009 of 15%, 13%,
16%, 32%, 9% and 7.5% annually from 2010 through 2015.
We also received $800,000 of parkland dedication fees in 2015, with $500,000 being
transferred to the Construction Fund to fund the Park Signage Improvement Project.
General Fund – Expenditures
Total General Fund expenditures were 99% of budget, which is the same as a year ago.
With a large percentage of our General Fund budget tied to wages and benefits, it is
common for our expenditures to be very consistent throughout the year, meaning that most
years we use about 25% of our budget every quarter. A breakdown of expenditures by
functional category is below.
General government expenditures are 98% of budget in 2015. This functional category
includes the Administration, Communications and Technology Services, Human Resources,
Finance and Community Development departments. This functional category also includes
severance expenditures for employees in all General Fund departments. Severance
expenditures are high again in 2015, with vacation and sick time payouts of about $388,000
during the year. Many of the retirements that cause severance expenses also reduce
ongoing salary and benefits expenditures in the short term. Although severance
expenditures are higher than budgeted, the excess is paid for by assigned fund balance that
we hold in the general fund for this purpose.
Public safety expenditures were 99.7% of budget for 2015. This includes the Police and Fire
departments.
Public works expenditures total 98% of budget for 2015. For clarification, the public works
“function” reported here includes both the Public Works and Engineering departments.
Parks and recreation expenditures were 98.4% of budget in 2015. Parks and Recreation is
the only department in this functional category.
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
Quarterly Financial Update
December 2015
C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\0EE6EF90-A760-4C25-BD97-
DA703ABF9E78\Edina.2049.1.Quarterly_Update.docx 2
2014
Twelve Month YTD Over/ YTD Increase/
Budget Actual (Under)Actual (Decrease)
Revenues:
Property taxes (1) 22,810,958$ 22,822,441$ 11,483$ 22,147,135$ 675,306$
Cable franchise/lodging tax 770,000 855,945 85,945 820,039 35,906
Licenses and permits (2) 3,830,080 4,827,634 997,554 4,490,993 336,641
Intergovernmental (3) 1,113,500 1,477,694 364,194 1,197,284 280,410
Charges for service 3,969,494 4,226,690 257,196 4,236,442 (9,752)
Fines and forfeitures 950,000 1,033,116 83,116 993,954 39,162
Other revenues 611,100 564,374 (46,726) 713,292 (148,918)
Total revenues 34,055,132 35,807,894 1,752,762 34,599,139 1,208,755
Expenditures:
Administration 1,619,238 1,581,291 (37,947) 1,712,123 (130,832)
Comm & tech services 1,040,674 1,053,280 12,606 1,051,309 1,971
Human resources 495,637 474,306 (21,331) 495,409 (21,103)
Severance 200,000 388,422 188,422 486,058 (97,636)
Finance 904,918 775,604 (129,314) 769,429 6,175
Community development 1,612,160 1,498,845 (113,315) 1,509,960 (11,115)
Public works 8,459,610 8,427,593 (32,017) 8,167,858 259,735
Engineering 1,735,095 1,553,881 (181,214) 1,501,316 52,565
Police 10,357,415 10,143,448 (213,967) 9,798,356 345,092
Fire 7,007,398 7,170,864 163,466 6,663,937 506,927
Parks & recreation 1,388,087 1,365,420 (22,667) 1,283,592 81,828
Other - - - - -
Total expenditures 34,820,232 34,432,954 (387,278) 33,439,347 993,607
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (765,100) 1,374,940 2,140,040 1,159,792 215,148
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in (out)
Liquor fund (4) 765,100 - (765,100) - -
Other - (1,848,294) (1,848,294) (2,254,968) 406,674
Parkland dedication - 800,000 800,000 757,278 42,722
Total other financing sources 765,100 (1,048,294) (1,813,394) (1,497,690) 449,396
Net increase (decrease)
in fund balance -$ 326,646$ 326,646$ (337,898)$ 664,544$
1 The City receives the first property tax payment from the County in June and the second payment in December.
2 The licenses and permits category includes building permits.
3 The intergovernmental category includes grants from Federal, state and county sources. Generally,
most of the grants the City receives are reimbursement grants, which means that if grant revenue
increases, expenditures must also increase by an equal or greater amount.
4 The annual liquor fund transfer is always made in December.
Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
General Fund
For the twelve months ended December 31, 2015 (unaudited)
2015
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
Quarterly Financial Update
March 2016
C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\CFD26723-2D01-43D9-A7EC-
55B0B3AF237F\Edina.2048.1.Quarterly_Update.docx 1
General Fund - Revenues
General Fund revenues total $2,986,224 through March 31, 2016. This amount represents
8% of total budgeted revenues for all of 2016, which is higher than 5% a year ago at the
same time. The City receives our first property tax payment in June and property taxes
account for 68% of our budgeted General Fund revenue.
License and permit revenue increased $265,888 from last year due to increased permit
activity. The City has experienced rapid growth in permit revenue since 2009 of 15%, 13%,
16%, 32%, 9% and 7.5% annually from 2010 through 2015. The pace through the first three
months of 2016 is another 20% increase.
General Fund – Expenditures
Total General Fund expenditures are 21% of budget so far this year, which is the same as a
year ago. With a large percentage of our General Fund budget tied to wages and benefits, it
is common for our expenditures to be very consistent throughout the year, meaning that
most years we use about 25% of our budget every quarter. The first quarter is often slightly
lower and the fourth quarter is often slightly higher than 25%. A breakdown of expenditures
by functional category is below.
General government expenditures are 23% of budget so far this year. Severance
expenditures are high again in 2016, with vacation and sick time payouts of about $86,000
so far this year. Many of the retirements that cause severance expenses also reduce
ongoing salary and benefits expenditures in the short term. In years when severance
expenditures are higher than budgeted, the excess is paid for by assigned fund balance that
we hold in the general fund for this purpose.
Public safety expenditures are 21% of budget for 2016, which is in line with expectations for
the first quarter of the year.
Public works expenditures total 18% of budget for 2016, which is similar to public works
spending in the first quarter last year.
Parks and recreation expenditures are 22% of budget for 2016, which is in line with
expectations for the first quarter of the year.
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
Quarterly Financial Update
March 2016
C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\CFD26723-2D01-43D9-A7EC-
55B0B3AF237F\Edina.2048.1.Quarterly_Update.docx 2
2015
Twelve Month YTD Over/ YTD Increase/
Budget Actual (Under)Actual (Decrease)
Revenues:
Property taxes (1) 25,023,952$ -$ (25,023,952)$ -$ -$
Cable franchise/lodging tax 810,000 2,730 (807,270) 2,890 (160)
Licenses and permits (2) 4,023,160 1,625,740 (2,397,420) 1,359,852 265,888
Intergovernmental (3) 1,191,550 221,491 (970,059) 270,165 (48,674)
Charges for service 3,940,310 608,712 (3,331,598) 695,301 (86,589)
Fines and forfeitures 975,000 139,462 (835,538) 197,265 (57,803)
Other revenues 597,900 388,089 (209,811) 315,041 73,048
Total revenues 36,561,872 2,986,224 (33,575,648) 2,840,514 145,710
Expenditures:
Administration 1,896,810 455,412 (1,441,398) 451,323 4,089
Comm & tech services 1,104,618 226,724 (877,894) 239,146 (12,422)
Human resources 590,345 125,509 (464,836) 116,969 8,540
Severance 200,000 86,874 (113,126) 44,018 42,856
Finance 833,624 189,420 (644,204) 183,715 5,705
Community development 1,646,945 350,771 (1,296,174) 334,996 15,775
Public works 8,926,600 1,611,447 (7,315,153) 1,624,576 (13,129)
Engineering 1,585,209 307,143 (1,278,066) 325,788 (18,645)
Police 11,045,546 2,377,843 (8,667,703) 2,179,235 198,608
Fire 7,457,253 1,544,692 (5,912,561) 1,502,412 42,280
Parks & recreation 1,374,922 296,798 (1,078,124) 302,657 (5,859)
Other - - - - -
Total expenditures 36,661,872 7,572,633 (29,089,239) 7,304,835 267,798
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (100,000) (4,586,409) (4,486,409) (4,464,321) (122,088)
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in (out)
Liquor fund (4) 100,000 - (100,000) - -
Other - - - - -
Parkland dedication - - - - -
Total other financing sources 100,000 - (100,000) - -
Net increase (decrease)
in fund balance -$ (4,586,409)$ (4,586,409)$ (4,464,321)$ (122,088)$
Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
General Fund
For the three months ended March 31, 2016
2016
Date: May 3, 2016 Agenda Item #: IV.
To:Mayor and City Council Item Type:
Reports / Recommendation
From:Chad Millner PE – Director of Engineering, Brian
Olson PE – Public Works Director Item Activity:
Subject:State of the Infrastructure Report Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
In 2015 Engineering and Public Works Staff presented two separate work session topics on utility and
transportation infrastructure to highlight overall system operations, function and the challenges of aging
infrastructure. This report combines the topics into a 'State of the Infrastructure' presentation. This work session
is meant to be paired with a public presentation at the regular council meeting.
The State of the Infrastructure Report is made up of four documents. The first is high-level for a general public
audience and is attached to the reports and presentation section of the regular council agenda. The remaining three
are detailed in nature and are attached to this work session agenda topic, they include; a report on 2015
accomplishments and 2016 initiatives and opportunities, and system reports for both transportation and utility
infrastructure.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
2015 Accomplishments and 2016 Initiatives
2016 Water, Sanitary and Stormwater Utility Systems Report
2016 Living Streets and Local Transportation Systems Report
Presentation State Of Infrastructure
DATE: May 3, 2016
TO: Mayor and City Council
CC: Scott Neal – City Manager
FROM: Chad Millner PE – Director of Engineering, Brian Olson PE – Public Works Director
RE: 2015 Accomplishments and 2016 Initiatives and Opportunities
This report accompanies the 2016 State of the Infrastructure report and reviews accomplishments and
notable challenges in the year, and details future opportunities and initiatives of the Engineering and
Public Works Departments.
2015 Accomplishments
Last year was a return to business as usual and a year to recover from tumultuous 2014 weather that
began with historic flooding, and ended in drought. 2015 was a goldilocks year of “not too much, not
too little,” with average precipitation, no major flood, and below average number of snow and ice
events. This respite allowed the Public Works division to catch up on backlogs in internal remodeling
of Utley Park, complete the overlays that we promised in 2014 that we were unable to complete,
initiate fire hydrant maintenance program and take on a major sidewalk repair in the Country Club
area. Seasonable construction weather in 2015 meant Engineering projects finished on time or early,
allowing early design and bid for 2016 projects. The early start has given the City a competitive
advantage in bidding.
2015 Public Works Department by-the-numbers:
• Fixed 3,508 Potholes, overlaid 3.97 miles and seal coated 2.0 miles of asphalt street
• Poured approximately 670 cubic yards of concrete to repair concrete streets
• Replaced over 750 traffic signs
• Installed thermoplastic pavement markings including 28 arrows, 24 stop bars, 241 crosswalk
blocks and 9 ladder crosswalks in school zones.
• Restriped all latex pavement markings
• Installed 2nd art wrap at the corner of 50th Street and Wooddale Avenue
• Repaired 54 water service leaks and 19 water main breaks
• Unclogged 11 sewer backups 10 of which were caused by “flushable” wipes or fats, oils and
grease
• Completed full city leak survey that detected 34 leaks consisting of 2 watermain trunk pipe, 16
water services and 16 fire hydrants
In 2015, the Engineering Department lead projects that constructed, reconstructed, or rehabilitated
44,669 feet (8.46 miles) of road, 7,283 feet (1.38 miles) of water main, 21,589 feet (4.09 miles) of
sanitary sewer,10,264 feet (1.94 miles) of storm sewer, 3.0 miles of sidewalk, 0.54 miles of bicycle lane
striping, and 2 RRFB’s pedestrian crossing.
The Engineering department continued to assist the City to plan for growth in southeast Edina and the
Grandview development area with transportation and utility system capacity studies kicking off in late
2015. Greater utilization of technology marches on, with GIS and Cityworks mapping and asset
management systems and continued growth in use of “Edina to Go” mobile app. While overall service
request volume was down from 2,607 in 2014 to 1,909 in 2015, a growing percentage of requests are
coming in through mobile application, 17% is 2015 up from 4% in 2014, the year it launched.
Residential redevelopment and right of way management continues to be an area of active inspection
and enforcement for Engineering staff. In 2015, 234 permits were reviewed for erosion, grading and
stormwater issues. Associated permit activity averaged 2.4 inspections and 13.5 points of contact, per
permit. Another 234 permits were issued for residential sanitary and water services. This work took
place with a renewed spirit of teamwork led by the Building, Planning, and Public Works Departments.
Partnerships with other agencies have provided opportunities for innovation. An example is the
successful partnership with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in the implementation of storm water
treatment technologies in the Arden Park Neighborhood. Our ongoing relationship with the Edina
School District increased the ADA facilities in and around the Countryside School. A cooperative
agreement between the parties allowed both parties to realize benefits of increased access to our
pedestrian facilities.
These partnerships also resulted in a huge win to improve natural resources and water quality as a part
of the Braemar Golf Course Driving Range and Executive Course Improvements. The project created
over 13 acres of natural habitat, provides more than 10 times the required water quality volume, and
creates additional flood plain storage. The Nine Mile Creek Watershed District awarded the city a
$25,000 grant to help fund the project. This project showcased ways that golf course operations and
natural resources can coexist, and serve as an example of how we can incorporate natural resources
into future golf course improvements.
In addition to the many reconstruction projects, the Engineering department’s continuous
improvement initiatives led to the following changes:
• Implementation of the Living Streets Plan.
• Increased use of asset management tools
• Began preparing an ADA (American with Disabilities Act) Transition Plan
• Improved our public right of way management
• Improvements in clarity and consistency of resident communications for the neighborhood
street reconstruction program
2016 Initiatives and Future Opportunities
This section will highlight 2016 departmental work plan initiatives that staff intends to consider.
Asset Management Approach
As mentioned last year, asset management continues to be an area of opportunity for managing aging
infrastructure. This approach allows professional staff to set service levels, assess the present condition
of the infrastructure, judge system performance, plan for repair, replacement, or future upgrades, and
assess risks. This is an increasingly data intensive approach and when paired with geographical
information systems (GIS) can also be a very powerful approach to address operations and project
coordination, and create efficiencies in project scope and prioritization decisions.
Our GIS capabilities are expanding slowing by training existing staff and by increasing the amount and
improving the quality of the data. Without action on the citywide GIS plan and governance model, and
development of staff and systems, the utilization of this technology will continue to be slow and
limited in scope. More is needed to truly utilize the power geographical information technology in the
City and the GIS Needs Assessment and Strategic Implementation Plan completed in 2015 provides a
framework to build a top tier GIS toolkit.
In addition to information management system improvements, the technology to assess utility
condition continues to develop. In 2016 Engineering will continue to look to advancements in
technology to assist us in the assessing the condition of infrastructure and better inform project
prioritization and scope decision making.
Maintenance Needs and Operational Challenges
Building sidewalks and creating aesthetically pleasing, landscaped right-of-ways creates user friendly
facilities, provides environmental benefits, and increases the overall beauty of the community. It also
created additional maintenance and operational challenges.
As we continue to build out of sidewalk network, decisions will have to be made on what are the
required levels of service for snow removal from sidewalks. With every linear foot of city maintained
sidewalk that is installed, staff and equipment are taxed to provide the level of service our users
expect. Similarly, landscaped boulevards and medians areas provide many benefits but eventually the
ability to maintain these areas will be stressed beyond current staffing levels. In both cases, either the
level of service declines or additional resources are needed to provide the level of service expected.
There are opportunities to support both increased landscaping and sidewalk facility maintenance but
trade-offs will have to be made with existing service, or additional public or community resource will
be required.
Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation
There are approximately 30 bridge structures inspected and maintained by engineering and public
works staff. Many of these structures were constructed during our growth period of the 1950’s through
the 1970’s. Inspections of these structures are completed on a regular basis to determine overall
condition and safety. With each passing year, potential maintenance and/or replacement costs
increase.
Funding comes from tax revenues, and municipal state aid maintenance and construction funds.
Utilization of grant money is also considered where available. Our current funding for bridge
maintenance is limited and will not be able to handle these increasing costs. Most of our structures do
not meet our multi-modal transportation needs. Maintenance costs alone will outpace our available
funding. This is without considering total replacement to meet our multi-modal needs. In 2016, staff
will begin adding specific bridge maintenance and replacement costs into the 2017-2021 CIP process.
This will be limited to a select few as we continue to review the inspection reports and estimated
schedule for street reconstruction near specific bridges.
Private Sanitary Service I/I
Source control of infiltration and inflow (I/I) waters is an important, but historically neglected strategy
to manage peak, storm related, events that can cause surcharge of the sanitary system and backups
into low basements. The June 2014 rainfall, and subsequent surcharge notice from the Met Council,
reminds us the importance of these long term programmatic efforts to reduce I/I. Staff is currently
serving on an I/I Task Force with the Met Council discussing this issue in regards to the private sanitary
sewer service pipes. Inspection and rehabilitation of these pipes is fragmented among agencies
depending on the political support and age of the infrastructure. This is a topic that deserves much
greater discussion on the policy side of things but will most likely wait until 2017. This timing will
correspond to the final report completed from Met Council with input from the I/I Task Force.
Engineering has reviewed three leading metro area communities and their different approaches to
public and private I/I reduction. Do we want to require more from our private property owners on this
issue that affects our public system?
We also invite you to review detailed information about transportation and utility services, summary of
service delivery, scope and scale of transportation and utility infrastructure, as well as general condition
and trends in the 2016 Transportation Report and the 2016 Water, Sanitary and Stormwater Reports.
\\ED-FS1\EngPubWks$\ENG\ENV\Asset Management\State of the Infrastructure\2016\160503 3 2015 Accomplishments and 2016 Initiatives.docx
DATE: May 3, 2016
TO: Mayor and City Council
CC: Brian Olson PE, Chad Millner PE., Carter Schulze PE
FROM: Ross Bintner PE - Environmental Engineer
RE: 2016 Water, Sanitary and Stormwater Utility Systems Report
Introduction
This memo summarizes domestic water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer systems, defines system
service, explains current system understanding, risk and resilience and includes general information
about current trends and the state of the practice to renew aging infrastructure and plan for growing
service demands.
Background
Edina’s water, sanitary and stormwater systems provide necessary and valuable services that are central
to public quality of life. The services depend of aging infrastructure and are subject to new demands
as part of a growing and aging city. In 2014, the Engineering Department provided an overview of
utility planning and growth issues, and broadened the review in a 2015 State of the Utilities report.
This report is an update of those previous reports with minor modifications where new understanding
or challenges are identified.
Services Delivered
The City of Edina operates a public utility providing water, sanitary and stormwater services. These
utility services provide:
1) Clean and reliable drinking water to:
a. promote public health, and
b. waters to suppress fire for public safety.
2) The collection, treatment and disposal of sanitary sewer waste to:
a. prevent disease, and
b. promote public health.
3) Management of flood waters and floodplain to:
a. promote public safety, and
b. protect property.
4) Management of stormwater runoff to:
a. prevent pollution,
b. promote the public health, and
c. improve the health of local water bodies and the environmental services they provide.
System Understanding
The following is a brief description of each of the utilities in the City of Edina including:
1) Description of service: An overview of the service(s) provided, system extents and critical design
considerations.
2) Infrastructure summary: A description of major components of the system, scale of system and
current estimated replacement value (not including soft costs such as engineering, inspection,
financing, admin, or restoration costs such pavement or sod.)
3) System understanding: List of the most recent plans, review of the key design variables,
reliability and risks.
4) Function and condition assessment: Review of methods to assess system and overview of issues
with age and existing materials.
Water
1) Water production and distribution infrastructure is built to provide uninterrupted service of
clean drinking water citywide, and is made available in abundance for firefighting. Water is supplied
from groundwater aquifers through wells spread throughout the community and distributed via a
network of pipe. Some wells are connected to water filtration plants and are used to provide water
in normal use periods. The remaining wells are unfiltered and rotate into service during summer
peak use periods. A small portion of the City is served by Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Saint Louis
Park or Minneapolis water supply.
2) The domestic water system is made up of two parts. The first is a water distribution system that
includes: 220 miles of pressure water main ranging from 4-16” in diameter, nearly 5000 main valves,
2000 hydrants, and 13800 service connections, valves and meters and equal numbers of private
service pipes. The second is a water production, storage and treatment system that includes: 18
wells, 4 treatment plants, 4 water towers, and 1 reservoir. The estimated 2015 total replacement
value of this infrastructure is over $160 million.
3) The current system understanding is based on the 2002 Water Distribution System Analysis by
SEH and the 2013 Wellhead Protection Plan by Source Water Solutions. The City also has a current
InfoWater model that describes the distribution system, and regional agencies maintain a variety of
regional groundwater models used to understand and assess groundwater risk and supply.
Modeling that enhanced the system understanding include a 2013 Water System Demand and
Capacity Analysis for Water Treatment Plan 5 (WTP5). The water distribution system is sized based
on geometric constraints, system wide supply and demand, design pressure, and fire flow capacity.
Supply systems include pumps with reliable power backup, to keep the distribution system under
constant pressure to meet demand and keep contaminants out. The production system is designed
to meet peak day and peak week demands, assuming the largest well in the system is out of
service.
4) The current method of condition assessment is through maintenance records, continuity
comparison between pumped and metered flow, and visual inspection of the main during water
main repair work. The water system is remotely controlled by a data collection and control
(SCADA) system, and this system also provides insight into system function. System age affects
service reliability as spot repairs are made due to water main and service breaks.
Sanitary
1) Sanitary collection system infrastructure is built to transmit peak flows without surcharge and
reduce risk of human exposure. Wastewater is collected and routed via private service connections
to lateral and trunk sanitary pipes and then on to the regionally operated Met Council system.
There it is conveyed to either St. Paul Metro or Eagan Seneca treatment plants for treatment and
disposal of waste. The system functions via gravity flow, with intermittent pump lift stations and
sanitary force main when needed.
2) The sanitary system is made up of three parts. The first includes privately owned service pipes.
The second is a City-owned collection system that includes: 194.2 miles of gravity main ranging
from 4-33” in diameter, over 5000 maintenance access manholes, 4.5 miles of force main, and 23
lift stations. The third is a regional trunk conveyance and treatment system owned and operated by
the Met Council, to which the City pays fees based on use. The estimated 2015 total replacement
value of the City portion of infrastructure is just under $70 million. System costs for the Met Council
systems are prorated metro area wide by metered flow volume.
3) The current system understanding is based on a 2006 XP-SWMM model by Barr and a 1997
Sanitary System Evaluation by TKDA. Inflow and Infiltration is document sin reports by CH2M Hill,
1992 and by Donohue, 1983. The collection system was designed based on expected total and daily
peak flow, estimated based on land use, density, average population per household, average per
capita water use, and an allowance for inflow and infiltration during storm events at the time of
development. The system is metered continuously at three locations by the MCES, and modeling
and calibrated flow metering are periodically conducted to predict and track flow trend, most
recently in 2006 and 2012. Reducing inflow of floodwaters through manholes, basement
foundations, parking garages, and other structure flooding can increase reliability and reduce costs.
Reducing the infiltration and inflow of groundwater and stormwater though repair of manholes,
cracked pipes and service lining can reduce treatment costs.
4) The current method of condition assessment is through closed circuit televising of lines,
maintenance records, and visual inspection of manholes. Sanitary lift stations are remotely
controlled by a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, and this system also
provides insight into system function. Lining of clay pipe (VCP) is considered a high priority to
increase reliability and reduce infiltration.
Stormwater
1) Storm sewer conveyance system infrastructure is built to carry the water from a storm with a 10%
chance of occurring in a given year for neighborhood and lateral systems, and water from a storm
with a 1% chance of occurring in a given year for trunk and regional systems. Floodplain is
managed to minimize damage and maintain flood storage and conveyance capacity. Stormwater
treatment infrastructure is built to meet regulation defined pollutant removal targets, and is
complemented by programmatic pollution prevention techniques and system maintenance such as
street sweeping, stormwater education, illicit discharge enforcement and sediment trap manhole
cleaning.
2) The stormwater system includes over 127 miles of gravity main ranging from 12-84” in diameter,
6800 manholes, 900 outlets, 38 miles of sump drain, 11 stormwater lift stations, one-half mile of
stormwater force main, 150 ponds and wetlands, and numerous sediment trap structures. The
estimated 2015 total replacement value of this infrastructure is over $65 million.
3) The current system understanding is based on the 2011 Comprehensive Water Resources
Management Plan by Barr. The collection system is designed to provide drainage and manage
flood risk. Recent upward revisions to storm frequency probability (NOAA Atlas 14) mean portions
of the system previously meeting design standards are now considered under sized, and flood
storage areas now have higher peak flood elevations. Treatment systems are designed to meet
pollutant removal standards set by the State and Watershed Districts. Clean water service demand
due to water body specific Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) regulation is increasing. There is no
reliable estimate for future liability.
4) The current method of condition assessment is through visual inspection of storm manholes and
outlets and some closed circuit televising of lines where needed. System function is checked with a
calibrated computer model and though visual inspection after large storm events. Pollution
removal is estimated with an un-calibrated computer model.
This system understanding is little changed from previous years, but in 2016 revisions to the sewer and
stormwater models and planning documents will provide valuable information to plan for renewal and
growth.
Planning For Renewal
The water, sanitary, and stormwater public utility services are provided using extensive physical
infrastructure and modest programmatic efforts. Each utility is planned, operated, maintained,
expanded, replaced, and managed by professional staff in the City’s Public Works and Engineering
departments. Engineers and system operators use a process called “asset management” to set service
levels, assess the present condition of the infrastructure, judge system performance, plan for repair,
replacement, or future upgrades, and assess risks.
The tools used to manage aging infrastructure are becoming increasingly data intensive, but lead to
better decisions. The assembly of system data is currently stored in paper files, but is being
transitioned into digital files and a geographical information system (GIS) map. Also increasing
management complexities are the better scientific understanding of both the chemical, physical and
biological processes acting on the systems and the infrastructure’s interaction with the natural systems
on which each utility service depend. Evolving methods of assessing system condition such as non-
destructive water main sounding, and closed circuit television allow nuanced replacement decisions
based on component specific conditions. Changing methods of inspection such as nondestructive
water main sounding, and construction, including trenchless installation and robotic pipe rehabilitation
technology also have changed project scope choices, and continue to lower overall cost of repair.
Planning For Growth
Areas of the City are subject to future redevelopment. This redevelopment is expected to result in
significant demand growth primarily around Southeast Edina including Pentagon Park. Local
commercial nodes such as 50th and France, Grandview, Cahill and Valley View/Wooddale also expect
modest demand growth. In anticipation of this redevelopment, staff completed various infrastructure
system studies to verify capacity or identify system needs to accommodate growth. In addition to
those system studies referenced above, study or reassessment are underway, or will be performed as
part of the 2017 comprehensive planning project.
Water
1. Hydraulic Modeling Results - Water Treatment Plant #6 and Southdale Development (July 3,
July 13 2012 SEH Engineering)
2. Water System Demand and Capacity Analysis – Water Treatment Plan #5. (October 23, 2013 SEH
Engineering)
3. Grandview Area Water Distribution System Analysis (February 21, 2014 SEH Engineering)
4. TH 62 and Concord Water Main Break Analysis (March 10, 2014 SEH Engineering)
Sanitary
1. FilmTec Flow Analysis (April 5, 2013 Barr Engineering)
2. Sanitary Sewer Model Recalibration (November 22, 2013 Barr Engineering)
3. Southeast Edina SAC Availability Analysis (July 23, 2013 Barr Engineering)
4. Edina SAC Availability Analysis – Fairview Southdale (July 23, 2013 Barr Engineering)
5. Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study (December 5, 2013 Bolton and Menk)
6. Grandview Area Sanitary Sewer Analysis (February 21, 2014 Barr Engineering)
7. WTP #4 Sewer Analysis (2015 Barr Engineering)
The Edina Comprehensive Plan was updated in 2008. In acknowledgement of the continued pressure
to redevelop to mixed uses around existing commercial and office districts and the increase in
development density envisioned in Chapter 4, Chapter 8 describes broad trends in system capacity and
the ability of the existing infrastructure to meet future service demand.
Various development scenarios were reviewed for sanitary and water capacity during the development
of current comprehensive plan; Scenarios included Met Council estimates for growth in population and
employment and a second scenario describes an ultimate possible development density. The Met
Council estimate assumed a change from 48,500 residents and 52,100 jobs in 2010 to 50,000 residents
and 57,400 jobs in 2030. The ultimate development density assumed was 70,149 residents and 70,000
jobs. Both scenarios assume the bulk of growth will occur in the southeast quadrant of the City in
existing commercial areas. The new 2030 population and job projections that will be used for the next
Comprehensive Plan Update were recently updated to 53,000 residents and 56,100 jobs in 2040. The
following is a more detailed review of each utility, with a focus on growing areas in southeast Edina:
Water
Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8 describes trends and challenges to the public water supply.
Generally, the City has a resilient water system that can produce clean, safe and plentiful water for
public use. The increasing occurrence of groundwater quality issues and contamination (vinyl
chloride and radium) has led to increased treatment needs. Providing water for the peak demand
is also a concern. The demand for water increases in the evenings due to in-home use and in the
summer due to irrigation systems. The average daily demand in Edina is between 7 and 8 million
gallons per day (mgd). The peak demand is between 14.5 and 22 mgd, which is about three times
higher than the average daily demand. This is known as the peaking factor, and Edina (with a
peaking factor of 3.0) is in the high end of the range that is typical for similar suburban
communities.
Development scenarios include the addition of one to two additional wells and no additional water
storage assuming no decrease in the peaking factor, or one additional well with a reduction in the
peaking factor resulting from conservation efforts. No major upgrades to the distribution system
are required for either scenario assuming aquifer capacity is available and water supply is sources
by local wells. Upgrades to the distribution system would be required if water purchase
agreements with nearby communities were pursued. Additional filtration capacity is desirable
under any development density scenario.
Sanitary
System flow in the water and sanitary systems are closely linked. In general, declining trends in
system flow were noted in the sanitary sewer between 1980 and 2000, with a flat trend between
2000 and 2010. Reasons for decreased demand include changing demographics (fewer people per
household) and increasing retrofit of buildings to include efficient modern fixtures and appliances.
Reasons for increasing demand on system use include redevelopment and leaky aging pipes. The
Met Council expects to see continued pressure for redevelopment along the 494 corridor, and has
improved regional trunk sewer conveyance capacity as a result. This additional capacity is
extended to the City boundary at Xerxes and 75th and can be extended into the southeast quadrant
of the City with additional trunk infrastructure investment.
Both the 2006 XP-SWMM analysis and 2008 Comprehensive Plan concluded that expected
development could be accommodated without major trunk line upgrades but some trunk lines
were on the boarder and may require upgrade dependent on redevelopment density and pattern.
In 2013, the Engineering Department directed Barr Engineering to review the sanitary sewer model
for flow capacity constraints in southeast Edina. In general Southeast Edina is well served in the
near term with some excess capacity available for growth. The review shows most lateral lines have
excess capacity, and trunk lines are running nearer to design capacity. The review also shows a
trunk line serving western Edina and the Hwy 100 / Cahill industrial area running at capacity. The
portion of southeast Edina that serves the hospital and flows to MCES meter RF-490 (65th/Xerxes
trunk) has limited remaining capacity.
Stormwater
Storm system flows are linked to hydrologic, geologic and geometric attributes such as the
connectivity in a drainage area, the percent of a site that is impervious, condition of the soil, and
vegetation. In general, the service demands for clean water and flood protection are growing based
on increased understanding of natural systems and regulation by state and local watersheds to
remediate and protect local waters. While Nine Mile Creek capacity in southeast Edina show some
flooding risk, infrastructure used to provide local flood protections is generally robust, and soil
conditions in much of the area are favorable to reducing runoff. There is an increasing pressure on
flow due to redevelopment at higher densities, but local controls require much of the flow and
water quality treatments to happen on-site for large lot and commercial development. This trend
will lead to less utilization of city infrastructure for small storm events, and a continued reliance for
large storm events. Residential redevelopment runs counter to this trend because treatment and
control is not required for lots less than one acre in size.
Additional demand analysis was conducted for the Grandview area, and aside from minor sanitary lift
station and looped water recommendations, the area is well served to meet future demand. Demand
analysis for the Gateway/Pentagon park area was studied in detail in the June 2013 Update to the
September 26, 2007 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) by WSB Engineering. Demand growth
in this area will require the improvement of flow capacity at a Met Council lift station, and additional
local sanitary capacity in Edina and Bloomington.
Conclusion
Water, sanitary and stormwater public utilities provide critical public health, sanitation and public
safety services. These services rely on aging infrastructure systems, the operations, maintenance,
engineering and design of which support their continual function. The City is well served by planning
for the growth and renewal of its infrastructure aging utility infrastructure and the level of investment
is favorable to support localized demand growth and its continued function.
\\ED-FS1\EngPubWks$\ENG\ENV\Asset Management\State of the Infrastructure\2016\160503 4 2016 Water, Sanitary and Stormwater Report.docx
DATE: May 3, 2016
TO: Mayor and City Council
CC: Scott Neal – City Manager,
FROM: Mark K Nolan, AICP – Transportation Planner, Chad Millner, PE – Director of Engineering
RE: 2016 Living Streets and Local Transportation Systems Report
Introduction
This report summarizes road, sidewalk, trail, signal, and pavement marking systems, and includes
general information about current trends and the state of the practice.
Background
Edina’s transportation system provides the traveling public pathways to key destinations. These trips
occur 24hours a day, 7 days a week, in a variety of modes for a variety of reasons. Residents,
businesses, emergency services, and others expect a high level of service to ensure disruptions do not
occur. Regular evaluation is needed to ensure these systems meet future demands while at the same
time, rehabilitating the old.
Services Delivered
Effective transportation planning is critically important for our community. Residents must be provided
with transportation facilities and services that meet mobility needs in an efficient and safe manner.
Transportation facilities need to be planned and constructed so as to facilitate the movement of
people, goods, and services while at the same time limiting negative social, environmental, and
aesthetic impacts to the greatest degree feasible. In addition, residents who cannot or choose not to
drive need to have transportation options to meet their daily needs.
Living Streets represents an increasing service expectation for the core transportation service provided
by the City of Edina. Additionally, Living Streets functions in other realms of public services and public
infrastructure (public safety, sanitation and public health, public welfare, land use, public parks, etc.).
When stakeholders interact, conflicting individual, departmental, or organizational missions can
sometimes cause contradiction. In interpreting the Living Streets policy, network, individual project
context, and design elements, the primary and ancillary functions should be viewed in context to
overall core city services.
System Understanding
The following is a description of multiple aspects of the transportation infrastructure in the City of
Edina, including;
1) Description of service: An overview of the service(s) provided, system extents and critical design
considerations.
2) Infrastructure summary: A description of major components of the system, scale of system and
current estimated replacement value (not including soft costs such as engineering, inspection,
financing, admin, or restoration costs such pavement or sod.)
3) System understanding: List of the most recent plans, review of the key design variables,
reliability and risks.
4) Function and condition assessment: Review of methods to assess system and overview of issues
with age and existing materials.
Roads and Automobiles
1. Description of Service: Transportation road infrastructure is built to provide a durable surface
that is passable by a maximum size and weight design vehicle, depending on road classification.
Higher classification roads generally allow greater ease of movement over longer distances and
higher speeds with less access points or intersections. Higher classification roads are designed
to accommodate larger and heavier vehicles. Lower classification roads allow greater access but
at less speed over shorter distances. Road markings, control and signage systems are
standardized and designed to convey clear messages to the traveling public that are uniformly
understood and can be quickly read and acted upon.
2. Infrastructure summary: The local roadway system is made of predominantly asphalt paved
roads boarded by concrete curb and gutter underlain with structural rock and compacted soil.
There are 207.9 miles of roadway covering approximately 1.2 square miles of land. The
estimated 2015 total replacement value of road is estimated at $180 Million.
3. System understanding: The City of Edina conducts traffic counts on a rotating basis on higher
volume roads to measure and track trends of traffic volume and speed and by complaint on low
volume roads to assess safety concerns. Accident and traffic safety concerns are tracked to
address change in use, areas of unusual accident history, or user perception of danger. These
safety concern investigations often center on shared use and crossing overlain in automobile,
bike and pedestrian networks. When specific change in land use or traffic concerns are studied,
measured traffic volumes become inputs into traffic models under a scheme of service level
ratings using industry standard parameters.
4. Condition Assessment: To assess infrastructure condition streets are inspected on a four year
rotating basis using industry standard methodology that result in a pavement condition index
(PCI) and overall condition index (OCI.)
Bike, Pedestrian
1. Description of Service: Bike and pedestrian trails, marked lane, sidewalk and shared facility
infrastructure are built to provide transportation options connected to a greater network and
high use destinations and transit facilities. The service supports health and environmental policy
and economic development goals. In areas of higher use such as business districts, school
zones, and near transit connections the size of facility and level of aesthetic treatment will vary
based on context. Facilities are designed to be safe and with a level surface that is durable to
freeze thaw cycles and light maintenance vehicles. Pavement markings, control and signage
systems are standardized and designed to convey clear messages to minimize conflict among
users in the shared right of way.
2. Infrastructure Summary: Sidewalk is generally 5-foot concrete panels and bike lanes are
generally on road pavement markings. Sidewalk road network intersections are generally at
marked crosswalks designed to ADA standards to accommodate all users. Some signalized
intersections include pedestrian push buttons and walk/don’t walk indicators. The estimated
2015 total replacement value of bike and pedestrian infrastructure is estimated at $45 Million.
3. Systems understanding: Counting of bike and pedestrian volumes is a new task with limited
trend data. The City of Edina is collecting trend data for 4-6 locations for bicycle use to form a
baseline. Because volumes are typically not a limiting factor, pedestrian counts are currently
limited to the same 4-6 locations noted above and investigations of safety concerns.
4. Condition Assessment: PCI has recently been collected for some park surfaces. Trail and
sidewalk condition assessment are performed on a complaint basis for the remaining
infrastructure.
Planning For Renewal
Streets
Aging infrastructure continues to challenge us to determine the most efficient ways to renew, replace,
or rehabilitate. There at 208 miles of streets in Edina. 164 miles are designated as local streets and 41
miles are designated Municipal State Aid (MSA) streets. Many of those streets were originally
constructed during the 1950’s and 1960’s and are quickly becoming due for reinvestment.
Over the years, our public works staff has extended the life of streets though the use of mill and
overlay, sealcoating, crack sealing, and patching interventions. Staff has prioritized those streets with
the greatest need to delay the need for reconstruction. This prioritization has been reactionary based
on complaints from resident and based on available budget dollars, not always based on actual need.
Over the past 18 years, we have reconstructed 83 miles of streets; 69 miles of local streets and 13 miles
of MSA streets. The construction of new streets has provided an opportunity to be more proactive and
meet specific timing milestones in our maintenance operations. By not meeting specific maintenance
timelines, pavement life is shortened and reconstruction is required sooner.
Streets are designed for anticipated traffic volumes and vehicles loads. An increase in load or volume,
outside of the original design assumptions, reduces the service life of the pavement. Streets are
designed for approximately a 25-year service life assuming life-extending interventions are not used.
With specific maintenance interventions at key points in the life of a pavement, service life can be
extended to at least 40-years and possibly as long as 60-years.
Service life is based on pavement degradation. Pavements have degradation curves that are well
known within the industry. Our research on pavement service life has shown a general understanding
of pavement service life but not specific deterioration curves based on specific maintenance
operations. The conceptual maintenance degradation curves shown below (Figure 1) were developed
using industry standards. The purple curve assumes minimal maintenance and the shortest service life.
The green curve assumes strategic investments in maintenance operations and the longest service life.
Street maintenance staff uses these practices to extend pavement service life: crack sealing, seal
coating, edge mill and overlay, and full mill and overlay. Seal coating is a process of placing oil and
rock to make the pavements more watertight. This is typically done as the first maintenance operation
within the first 7-10 years. An edge mill and overlay, mills the edge of the pavement near the concrete
curb and gutter and then places a new layer of bituminous pavement across the entire width of the
street. This practice renews the pavement and helps the edge continue to be watertight. The final
maintenance practice is a full mill and overlay. Milling off of the pavement is completed to a specific
depth the entire width of the road sometimes down to the underlying aggregate base materials and
re-paved in one or multiple layers of new bituminous pavement. Renewal of the pavement structure
does not address the underlying aggregate base.
Our current practices of maintenance and reconstruction have started to influence our estimated
average pavement condition index (PCI) for our local streets as shown in the table below.
Year of Estimated PCI Estimated Average PCI
2011 57
2012 51
2013 51
2014 54
2015 57
Please recall pavements between 65 and 45 are considered optimal for maintenance while pavements
below 45 should be considered for reconstruction. On our local streets, our seal coat budget is
currently $100,000 annually and we estimate our mill and overlay budget at $800,000. Both include
labor, equipment, and materials.
As shown in Figure 1, there are opportunities for maintenance that will provide longer service life for
our street pavements. The benefits of longer street life are reductions in life cycle costs, less frequency
reconstruction and less frequent assessments, and a higher average PCI that leads to fewer complaints
about the condition of our streets.
Figure 1. Pavement Service Life and Maintenance Practices
Based on the green degradation curve shown in Figure 1, which is a proactive maintenance practice,
there are some concerns with our maintenance funding. The seal coat budget should be satisfactory
and meet our needs. The mill and overlay budget is underfunded. We are estimating a need of
approximately $1,100,000 annually to be proactive in our maintenance practices. This is a deficit of
$300,000 annually.
Each year we strategically maintain our streets with the available budget. As our streets become due
for maintenance, the need for additional funding increases. With continued deficits, our maintenance
will fall behind. We are not at critical point yet as most of our streets were reconstructed within the last
18 years. Our increased use of asset management software is allowing us to build our own pavement
degradation curves specific to Edina. This will continue to make our operations more efficient.
There will be opportunities for the council to consider increases in maintenance funding for our local
streets. Options we have identified that need further analysis are diverting more general fund revenue,
increasing franchise fees, or street improvement districts (this would require legislative action and has
been discussed for many years at the state legislature).
Maintenance practices and budgets directly reflect expectations for our expected level of service. Some
communities have a goal PCI. Maintenance practices can be adjusted based on the level of service
expectations. If our goal is a low PCI, our maintenance funding needs will be reduced but service life
will be reduced, reconstruction will be needed sooner and complaints may increase. If we have a
higher goal PCI, our maintenance funding needs will increase but service life will be extended,
reconstruction will occur less frequently and complaints will decrease.
Figure 2 shows conceptually where the optimal point is on the funding versus condition curve. Too
little maintenance and it drives our streets towards reconstruction, too much maintenance and we are
over spending on maintenance. The goal is to find the optimal point to maintenance a high PCI value
with the least amount of capital.
Figure 2. Funding vs. Condition Analysis
The analysis above is for our local street system. Our Municipal State Aid (MSA) streets also have a
need for maintenance. The MSA program allocates construction and maintenance funds to cities with
populations greater than 5,000. Our allocations are based on population and construction needs. We
intend to complete a similar analysis for our MSA system to determine if we are receiving adequate
funding to proactively maintain that system.
Sidewalks
There are 77 miles of existing sidewalks in Edina. 57 miles are 5-ft wide and maintained by city staff.
The remaining 20 miles are 4-ft wide and maintained by the adjacent residents. Our sidewalk snow
removal equipment is approximately 5-ft wide and does not fit on 4-ft wide sidewalks. The current
level of service to clear snow from the 57 miles of city maintained sidewalks is 2 days. This requires 5
workers with 5 machines. It is an approximately $325,000 annual expense that includes labor,
equipment and materials.
At the end of 2014, an updated Sidewalk Facilities Map was approved and amended into the
Comprehensive Plan. This plan would increase the amount of sidewalks from 77 miles to 118 miles.
Based on our current practice, it would add 17 miles to the City’s maintenance responsibilities and 24
miles to the resident’s responsibilities. The build out of the plan is expected to occur over at least 20-
years while taking advantage of the savings realized by combining sidewalk installation with street
reconstruction projects.
At build out, the city will have to add 2 additional staff and machines to meet our current level of
service of 2 days per snow event. This is estimated to increase our annual operating expense by
$125,000 to $450,000 per year.
Planning For Growth
Areas identified for future growth and redevelopment include Southeast Edina (especially the
Southdale and Pentagon Park areas) and the Grandview District. These and other areas of the City
(including Valley View/Wooddale, 50th and France, etc.) are likely to experience increased demand for
transportation infrastructure of vehicular, transit, bicycle and pedestrian modes. Moreover, while local
and national trends in overall vehicle miles travelled (VMT) decreased from about 2007 to 2013
following an unprecedented period of growth, lower gas prices and a rising economy contributed to
record VMT in 2015. In anticipation of this increased demand and the desire to not only be prepared
for it but also to do it according to Living Streets principles, two transportation studies are currently
being prepared: the Grandview District Transportation Study and the Southdale Area Transportation
Study. Studies such as these are prepared not only to identify potential demand and areas of concern,
but also to offer recommendations for mitigating negative impacts and enhancing users’ experience.
Living Streets Implementation
According to the Living Streets Plan, the City will actively promote and apply Living Streets principles
by:
• Applying the Living Streets Policy and Plan to all street projects, including those involving
operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation or
changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. This also includes privately
built roads, sidewalks, paths and trails.
• Drawing on all sources of transportation funding and actively pursuing grants, cost-sharing
opportunities and other new or special funding sources as applicable.
• Through all City departments supporting the vision and principles outlined in this Plan in their
work.
• By acting as an advocate for Living Streets principles when a local transportation or land use
decision is under the jurisdiction of another agency.
As the Plan was approved in the spring of 2015, 2016 is the first construction year where Living Streets
elements are implemented in projects. With the implementation of Living Streets and projects funded
by the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund, staff recognizes an increasing desire for “non-
traditional” transportation infrastructure, including sidewalks, bicycle facilities and “green
infrastructure.” We can anticipate that this trend will continue to increase in future years. As demand
for new sidewalks increases – including for those not on the City’s current sidewalk facilities map – it
will become more challenging to prioritize, budget and plan for them using our current funding and
project resources. In addition, the highest-priority sidewalks (i.e. those that carry more vehicle traffic
and/or are adjacent to parks and schools) often require maintenance performed by public works,
resulting in additional stress on City budgets.
The Living Streets Plan also highlights the use of street (or boulevard) trees as traffic calming devices
as well as being environmentally beneficial. To this point, the implementation of this Living Streets
element has been limited; however, there is interest at the Council and community level to incorporate
more street trees into our projects. As more resources are devoted to satisfy these and other
landscaping/green space demand, this will have an impact on the funding available for other project
components. This is also true for the implementation of overall traffic calming devices, which can be
somewhat expensive. However, utilizing resources to incorporate more traffic calming to make our
streets safer when reconstructing them – resulting in fewer miles of streets reconstructed each year –
may prove more important to the City than reconstructing more local streets miles (i.e. quality vs.
quantity).
Conclusion
Our transportation systems, specifically streets and sidewalks are vital to Edina’s quality of life. Our
decisions have economic, social and environmental impacts. We continue to make recommendations
with our mission statement in mind: “Our mission is to provide effective and valued public services,
maintain a sound public infrastructure... ...in a manner that sustains and improves the uncommonly
high quality of life enjoyed by our residents and businesses.”
\\ED-FS1\EngPubWks$\ENG\ENV\Asset Management\State of the Infrastructure\2016\160503 5 2016 Transportation Report.docx
The CITY of EDINA
2016 State of the Infrastructure Report
May 3, 2016
City Council Workshop Presentation
The CITY of EDINA Infrastructure outreach?
•Central to Modern Life: Public Works and the services they
provide are fundamental to our modern life, health and safety.
•Make the invisible, visible: while we can see some surficial
infrastructure, the majority of infrastructure that makes up
these public works are largely invisible or not fully understood
by the public.
•Re-imagination and Renewal: Raise public understanding
and appreciation of public works and the efforts that are
taking place to renew and reimagine the role of public works
in daily life.
www.EdinaMN.gov 2
The CITY of EDINA
•System overview
•Concepts and trends
•2015 accomplishments and 2016
initiatives
•Future Challenges
www.EdinaMN.gov 3
Agenda - Information
The CITY of EDINA
What we did
•Identified funding, kickoff planning
for sanitary and stormwater
•Finalized Living Streets policy and
network plans, target highest
priority
•Technology hardware investment,
mobile applications, citizen request
application
What we said
•Planning for growth (2014 State
of the Utilities)
•Integrated project decision
making (2015 state of the
streets)
•Aging infrastructure, trend data,
asset management approach
(2015 state of the utilities)
Where we’ve been
www.EdinaMN.gov 4
The CITY of EDINA System Overview
•Road miles
•163.46 local
•40.85 state aid
•22.69 trunk highway and county
•227 Total, 204.31 Subtotal local controlled
•2015 Rehab miles (% of local system)
•8.47 reconstruct (4.1%)
•*4.05 overlay (2.0%)
•*4.49 sealcoat (2.2%)
•*7605 pothole repairs (37/mile)
www.EdinaMN.gov * Revised from numbers presented in memo 5
The CITY of EDINA System Overview
•System miles, (2015 additions, % growth)
•77.0 Sidewalk (3.0 new, 3.9%)
•37.0 Bike lane (0.5 new, 1.35%)
•162.5 Storm and sump drain (1.94 new, 1.2%)
•Utility miles (2015 rehab, % rehab)
•197.2 Sanitary (4.09, 2.1%)
•223.7 Water (1.38, 0.6%)
www.EdinaMN.gov 6
The CITY of EDINA Concepts and Trends
7
Bu
i
l
d
-ou
t
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
D
i
v
i
d
e
n
d
s
Co
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
t
o
R
e
i
n
v
e
s
t
Ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
The CITY of EDINA Concepts and Trends
www.EdinaMN.gov 8
The CITY of EDINA Concepts and Trends
www.EdinaMN.gov 9
Funding &
Prioritization
Infrastructure
Risk/Condition
Operations &
Maintenance
Service Level
Capital Improvement
The CITY of EDINA Concepts and Trends
•Aging infrastructure:
•Catching up on road rehab, new funding request for new pavement
preventative maintenance
•Longer life span, replacement ramping up, combination of condition
assessment and age proxy
•Demand growth with large lot commercial changing to mixed use
•Increased customer service expectation
•Living streets storm and multimodal, project communications
•Weather dependent industry
•In house water and sanitary trending down, irrigation trending up.
www.EdinaMN.gov 10
The CITY of EDINA 2015 Accomplishments
•Great weather year / catch up on projects delayed by 2014 flood
work
•Residential redevelopment and right of way management permit
reviews, inspection and enforcement
•Agency partnerships, cooperative agreements and grant funding
•Responsive customer service and communications to ease
construction impacts
www.EdinaMN.gov 11
The CITY of EDINA 2015 Accomplishments
•Replaced 750 traffic signs
•Installed 2nd Art Wrap
•Repaired 54 water service leaks and 19 water main breaks
•Completed a full leak survey of the watermain system
www.EdinaMN.gov 12
The CITY of EDINA 2016 Initiatives
•Southdale Tower Rehab
•SCADA radio upgrades
•Complete generator RICE compliance retro fit of 6 generators on
Xcel peak load control program
•Further our use of technology to increase efficiency and
responsiveness of our parks and public works staff.
www.EdinaMN.gov 13
The CITY of EDINA Future Challenges
•Street Maintenance
•Bridges
•GIS and Asset Management
•Living Street Implementation
www.EdinaMN.gov 14
The CITY of EDINA Streets Deferred Maintenance
www.EdinaMN.gov 15
•Level of Service
•PCI Goal
•More Frequent Recons =
More Assessments
The CITY of EDINA Streets Deferred Maintenance
www.EdinaMN.gov 16
•Budget deficit for the maintenance program
•Discussion for local streets only
•In range of $200,000 to $300,000 per year
•Funding Options
•More general fund revenues
•Increasing franchise fees
•Street Improvement Districts (requires legislative action)
The CITY of EDINA Bridge Maintenance & Recon
www.EdinaMN.gov 17
•Bridge ‘anything’ is expensive
•Multi-Modal options lacking with current layouts
•Create gaps in our systems – bike / ped
•Maintenance vs. reconstruction
•CIP projects
The CITY of EDINA GIS and Asset Management
•GTG Study
•Currently small wins on the utility side
•Just touching the surface of what can be done
•Rebecca Foster, Ross Bintner and Public Works
www.EdinaMN.gov 18
The CITY of EDINA GIS and Asset Management
•Infrastructure dashboard – Current project
•CCTV – sanitary sewer inspection records – “hot spots”
•Data Quality – Challenges
•Building the tool – only as good as the data
•Collecting data and verifying data – staff & interns, limited
•Be the last to research an issue
continuous improvement
www.EdinaMN.gov 19
The CITY of EDINA Living Streets
•Represents an increase in service level
•Public Outreach – Arden, Morningside White Oaks, Birchcrest
•Multi-Modal Transportation Options
•Sidewalks
•Bike lanes
•Green infrastructure
•Storm water treatment
•Aesthetics
•Are we on track?
www.EdinaMN.gov 20
The CITY of EDINA Living Streets - Challenges
•Increase in service level
•Modi-Modal transportation options
•Sidewalks – Plowing expectations
•Bike lanes – Pavement markings maintenance
•Green infrastructure
•Storm water treatment – Outside Rate Study
•Aesthetics (Landscaping) – Funding / Maintenance
•Are we on track considering maintenance?
www.EdinaMN.gov 21
The CITY of EDINA Summary – Infrastructure
•Quality of Life, Health & Safety, and Transportation
•Edina is the city of choice.
•Sound public infrastructure
•With future challenges as system ages
Thank you for your time and input!
www.EdinaMN.gov 22