HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.03.00 Council Packet
COUNCIL MEETING
REGULAR
July 3, 2000
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4. APPROVE AGENDA
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments)
7. CONSENT AGENDA
a) Approve Council Minutes (6/19/00) (Regular)
b) Approve On-Sale Temporary Liquor License - St. Michael's Church
c) Capital Outlay - Police Department
d) Consider Resolution - Approve Gambling Premises Permit Farmington
Youth Hocky
e) Schools and Conferences - Administration Department
f) Approve Bills
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. AWARDOFCONTRACT
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) Consider Negative Declaration - Vermillion Grove EA W
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Consider Resolution - Accepting Akin Road Feasibility Report and
Authorizing Scheduling Neighborhood Meeting
b) Authorize Orderly Annexation Agreement - Empire Township
12. NEW BUSINESS
a) Township Fire Service Contract - Capital Depreciation Charges
b) Authorize Lease Agreement - 517 1 st Street
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
a) Jake Braking Concerns
14. ADJOURN
Action Taken
Appr()ved
4pproved
Information R-eceived
R49-00
Information .Received
Approved
R50-00
R51-00
Adopted
Authorized
Authorized
Relocate Speed Limit
Si$'U
.--
~
COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR
June 19, 2000
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3.
ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Also Present:
Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Strachan, Verch
None
City Administrator Erar, City Attorney Jamnik, City Management
Team
4. APPROYEA GENDA
MOTION by Soderberg, second by Strachan to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS
Mr. Dick Graelish, 1020 3rd Street, stated the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a ruling
allowing prayer in schools and school sponsored activities. He also heard the
Minneapolis Police Department will be enforcing handicap parking, including a fme and
cars will be towed.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
Item 7a was pulled so Councilmember Verch could abstain from voting as he was absent
from the June 5, 2000 meetings.
a) Approve Council Minutes (6/5/00) (Regular) and (Special)
MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to approve the Minutes. Voting for
Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Strachan. Abstain Verch. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION by Strachan, second by Cordes to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
b) Approved Property Owner Indemnification Request - 2000 Trunk Watermain
Project
c) Authorized Grant Application - Dakota Valley Arts Council
d) Retroactive Approval Temporary 3.2 Beer License - Farmington Fastpitch
Softball Team
e) Approved Bills
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 19,2000
Page 2
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. AWARD OF CONTRACT
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) Accept Resignation - Senior Center Advisory Board
Council accepted the resignation of Martha Graham from the Senior Center
Advisory Board effective June 5, 2000. Sarah Miller was appointed to the Senior
Center Advisory Board to fill the vacated seat. Her term will expire January 31,
2002. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to accept the resignation of
Martha Graham and appoint Sarah Miller to the Senior Center Advisory Board.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
b)
Consider Resolution - East Farmington 7th Addition Development Contract
The Development Contract for East Farmington 7th Addition has been drafted in
accordance with the approval and conditions placed on the approval of the
Preliminary and Final Plat. The Development Contract requires the Developer
enter into the Development Contract and the Developer provides the necessary
security in accordance with the terms of the contract. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the East Farmington ih Addition Preliminary and Final
Plat on April 11, 2000. The City Council approved the Corrective Preliminary
and Final Plat on June 5, 2000. MOTION by Cordes, second by Verch to adopt
RESOLUTION R43-00 approving the execution of the Development Contract
and authorizing its signing contingent upon the above conditions and approval by
the Engineering Division. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Consider Resolution - Charleswood 3rd Addition Final Plat
Genstar Land Company has submitted for Final Plat approval of Charles wood 3rd
Addition. The 3rd Addition consists of 65 single-family platted lots. The streets
throughout the development will be public and measure 60-foot right-of-ways and
32-foot wide roadways. Setbacks are going to vary from 20 to 25 feet depending
on certain locations. Lots within the two cul-de-sacs will be set at 20 feet, while
the remainder of the lots will be at 25 feet. The Final Plat also contains outlots for
the dedication of park space, ponding areas and future development. The Final
Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development
Contract and approval of the construction plans for grading, storm water and
utilities by the Engineering Division. Also, the landscape plan should be
amended excluding Sugar Maples with another species accepted in Title 10-6-
14(G). MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg to adopt RESOLUTION
R44-00 approving Charleswood 3rd Addition Final Plat upon the above
conditions. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
c)
d)
Consider Resolution- Bristol Square 2nd Addition Final Plat
Bristol Square is located east of Glenview Townhomes, south ofWestview Sales
and Dakota Storage, west of County Road 72 and the Prairie Waterway and north
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 19,2000
Page 3
of County Road 72 and the East Farmington single-family residential
development. The Developer proposes 42 townhomes in the 2nd Addition Final
Plat that is a continuation from the 42 townhomes approved in the 1 st Addition.
This is a ;rivate development maintained by a homeowners association. Access
to the 2n Addition is from 12th Street and Prairie View Trail through the 1 st
Addition and from Glenview Townhomes on the westerly border of the site. The
streets throughout the development will be private and will be 24 feet wide with
curb and gutter. No parking along any streets is allowed in the development. The
Developer proposes 94 off-street parking spaces with 26 of those constructed in
the 2nd Addition. Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and
execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans for
grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division. MOTION by
Cordes, second by Verch to adopt RESOLUTION R4S-00 approving Bristol
Square 2nd Addition Final Plat upon the above condition. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
e) Consider Resolution - Tamarack Ridge Final Plat
Tamarack Ridge consists of approximately 64 acres east of Trunk Highway 3,
south of County Road 66, west of the Prairie Waterway and Cambodia Avenue
and north of 208th and 209th Streets. The Planning Commission reviewed and
approved the final plat on June 13,2000. The preliminary plat was approved by
the Planning Commission on May 9, 2000 and by the City Council on May 15,
2000. James Development proposes to plat 28 single-family lots in the first phase
of the project. Access to the first phase of the single-family addition is from the
northerly access onto CSAH 66 from the site approved by the Dakota County Plat
Commission. The street consists of a 60-foot wide right-of-way and 28-foot wide
pavement.
Centex Homes will develop 70 two-story condominiums in 8 to 10-unit buildings
on 8 lots in the first phase of the carriage home project. The development is part
of a homeowner's association and all roadways are private.
The Farmington Family Townhome project will be constructed by Jim Deanovic
of Farmington Family Housing Limited Partnership. The project consists of32
rental units in 4-unit buildings and will be platted in one phase.
The Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the
Development Contract and approval of the construction plans for grading, storm
water and utilities by the Engineering Division. MOTION by Soderberg, second
by Cordes to adopt RESOLUTION R46-00 approving the Tamarack Ridge Final
Plat upon the above condition. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
t) Consider Resolution - Autumn Glen Corrective Plat
Arcon Development submitted a Corrective Final Plat for Autumn Glen 1 st
Addition for approval by the City Council. The Corrective Final Plat shows 43
single-family lots due to the acquisition by Arcon Development of Outlot K of the
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 19,2000
Page 4
original Autumn Glen 1st Addition Final Plat. The original 1st Addition Final Plat
was approved on May 1,2000 and showed 41 single-family lots along with a
number of outlots. A stipulation to the original 1st Addition Final Plat approval
required that when Arcon Development gained control of Outlot K, it would be
replatted to extend the rear lots on Lot 1 & 2 of Block 8 and subdivide two
additional lots as part of both Outlot K and Outlot L (Lots 19,20,21 and 22
Block 1 - Corrective Final Plat). MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to
adopt RESOLUTION R47-00 approving the Autumn Glen 1st Addition
Corrective Final Plat contingent on the preparation and execution of the
Development Contract and approval of the construction plans. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
g) Schedule Public Hearing - East Farmington TIF Plan Amendment
Staff has been discussing with Sienna Corporation the possibility of acquiring
additional land to expand the Prairie Waterway to include the temporary pond that
was created in 1999 and to incorporate this pond into the existing Prairie
Waterway system. Sienna is seeking reimbursement of $317,830 for additional
soil correction costs they incurred in the development of East Farmington.
MOTION by Cordes, second by Verch to schedule a public hearing to consider
the proposed East Farmington TIF Plan amendment for July 17,2000. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
h) Submit City Project Recommendations - Dakota County 2001-2005 CIP
Staff has met with Dakota County staff regarding the CountyfS 2001-2005 CIP
and recommended that the Council request that the following projects in
Farmington be scheduled in the County's 2001-2005 CIP:
CSAH 50, Division to TH 3
CR64 from CSAH 31 to City Limits - 2002
CSAH 31, CSAH 50 to CSAH 74 - 2005
208th Street - 2005
MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes authorizing staff to forward the
recommended requests to the County for preparation of the Dakota County draft
2001-2005 CIP. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Appoint Architectural Firm - Public Facilities (Supplemental)
The City received a total of 15 qualifying proposals from architectural firms
interested in providing architectural services to assist the City in the construction
of a new Law Enforcement Center and Central Maintenance Facility. Six firms
were selected for an interview by a project team interview panel. It was agreed
that Wold Architects and Engineers represented the firm best able to meet the
City's needs for new public facilities. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes
authorizing the appointment of Wold Architects and Engineers as the City's
project architect for the public facilities project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 19,2000
Page 5
b) Utility Connections - 209th Street Update
Staff attended the Empire Town Board meeting held on June 13, 2000 to discuss
the sewer service options the Council reviewed at the June 5, 2000 Council
workshop, relating to 209th Street. Three options were presented to the Town
Board. Option 2 was preferred which would provide for the transfer of ownership
to the City of the line in 209th Street, up to the manhole at Trunk Highway 3. City
ownership of the line would transfer to the City the responsibility for the repair
and maintenance of the sewer line and would bring these new residents under the
City's current sanitary sewer rate structure. While the line would still be
connected to the Township's sewer system, the City would actually own that
portion of the line servicing the new City residents, up to the manhole at TH 3. A
joint powers agreement between the City and the Township would be required to
address the maintenance of the manhole at TH 3 and reimbmsement to Empire
Township for the City sewage flows conveyed to the interceptor by the
Township's system. MOTION by Cordes, second by Verch authorizing staff to
prepare a draft joint powers agreement addressing the sewer service issues related
to Option 2 for review by Council and the Empire Town Board. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
12. NEW BUSINESS
a) Consider Resolution - Farmington Preserve Trail Feasibility Report
The Farmington Preserve Trail has been divided into five parts to accommodate
construction issues and budget. The five areas are:
- Akin Road - 2700 feet along Akin Road from 20Sth Street north
- Reisinger Parcel - 5800 feet north from the Akin Road segment to Autumn Glen
- Autumn Glen - 4800 feet north of the future 195th Street corridor to the northern
boundary of the City owned woods
- Prairie Creek East - 3800 feet through the proposed Prairie Creek Plat
- Lake Julia - 1600 feet through Lake Julia Park from Embers Avenue on the
southwest edge of the park to the east boundary of the park and from Egret Way
to connect with the Embers Avenue portion of the trail
MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R48-00
accepting the feasibility report, authorizing the preparation of plans and
specifications and advertise for bids. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
a) 300 1st Street Property - Update
(Councilmember Soderberg stepped down from his Council seat to avoid a
conflict of interest, as he has made an offer to Mr. King to purchase the property).
Mr. David King received a conditional use permit on June 8, 1999 to allow him to
move in and remodel a duplex unit within an R-2 zoning district at 300 lit Street.
Mr. King was sent a letter on March 8, 2000 stating substantial progress must be
made by June 8, 2000, which according to the City Attorney's office would
include approval of a building permit and the start of foundation work. Mr. King
met with staff concerning the status of the project and to obtain a building permit
for foundation work. Mr. King submitted a letter outlining the status of the
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 19,2000
Page 6
project, explaining that unforeseen title work held up the loan. He also requested
a 60-day extension from the Planning Commission to complete the project. The
Planning Commission at their June 13,2000 meeting determined that substantial
progress had not been made by Mr. King towards implementing his conditional
use permit and thus the conditional use permit and variance was determined to be
null and void. Mr. King has the option of appealing this determination to the City
Council which requires that a public hearing be scheduled or to re-apply for a new
conditional use permit which would require a new public hearing process and
notification.
Mr. King gave a chronology of events in trying to obtain ownership of the
property. Mayor Ristow informed Mr. King ifhe wanted to appeal the decision of
the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing, he should appeal it to the Planning
Commission. In the meantime, Mr. King will continue to move the process along.
(Councilmember Soderberg returned to his seat at the Council table).
Councilmember Soderberg: Daisy Knoll Park looks nice, but was concerned about the
high curb around the playground equipment. Staff replied the curb will be backfilled.
Councilmember Cordes: She met with the Chamber to discuss the streetscape. The
Chamber will be hosting a golf tournament.
City Administrator Erar: He attended an LMC Conference last week. During the
conference, Lakeville City Administrator, Bob Erickson, received the leadership award.
The audio-visual equipment should be installed June 30, and the Council Meetings will
be broadcast live in August. The Preserve Trail Feasibility Report which was approved
earlier is significant in keeping the community in line with the Comprehensive Plan.
Community Development
Director Olson: An open house and ribbon cutting will be held at Dalsin
Manufacturing on July 14, 2000.
City Engineer Mann: (City Engineer Mann forwarded the following comments on
behalf of Police Chief Siebenaler, as he had to leave the meeting). The City is looking at
adding another warning siren, and this will be reviewed during the budget process. One
site is 20Sth Street and Pilot Knob Road. The other site is CR 66 on the east edge of
Tamarack Ridge. Staff has had a preliminary discussion with Empire Township to share
the cost at the CR 66 site.
Regarding CR 72, there are issues to be resolved before the final lift is installed.
Mayor Ristow: Regarding the streetscape, he noticed the curb is lower than
the pavement. Staff replied the pavement will be ground off. Residents on Highway 50
and TH3 have reported truck drivers are using jake brakes, creating a lot of noise. A
resident wanted to know if signs could be installed prohibiting jake braking. Dew Days
will be held this weekend.
Council Minutes (Regular)
June 19,2000
Page 7
14. EXECUTIVE SESSION - Progress Land Company Litigation Update
Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:55 p.m. Executive Session adjourned at
9:23 p.m.
14. ADJOURN
The Council Meeting adjourned at 9:24 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
7 " /7~
~~ /?--7~
~nthia Muller
Executive Assistant
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
/6
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~
FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager
SUBJECT: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - St. Michael's Church
DATE: July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
St. Michael's Church is requesting a Temporary on-sale Liquor License for a Fall Festival
to be held September 16 and 17,2000.
DISCUSSION
This event will be held on St. Michael's property located at 22120 Denmark Ave. Per
State Statute, a Temporary Liquor license must first be approved by the City and then
forwarded to the State for approval.
BUDGET IMP ACT
A City fee has not been established for a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License. In
discussion with the Liquor Control Commission, staff was informed that the State of
Minnesota waives all fees for Temporary Liquor Licenses for non-profit organizations.
ACTION REOUESTED
Approve the attached application for a Temporary Liquor License for St. Michael's
Church, 22120 Denmark Ave., for their Fall Festival, September 16 and 17,2000. As the
City Council has not adopted a fee for this permit, and the State of Minnesota waives all
fees in this type of situation, Council may waive any fees associated with this request.
Accordingly, no license fee is proposed at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~
Karen Finstuen
Administrative Services Manager
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7<2-
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers and
City Administrat~~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief ofPoliee
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Capital Outlay Purchase
DATE:
July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
The Police Department has been authorized to realign staffmg to accommodate increased administrative
workload requirements.
DISCUSSION
As a result of this organizational realignment, an additional workstation in the Police Department is
required to support this position. The workstation consists of a desktop with a three-drawer pedestal, an
office chair and a computer. The eost of each component is described as:
. Desktop and pedestal. $ 780.00
. Office Chair. $ 300.00
. Computer. $2,200.00
. Total $3,280.00
It should be noted that the computer will be transferable to the new facility and the other office equipment
will be utilized by other Departments as appropriate.
BUDGET IMPACT
This equipment has not been budgeted in the 2000 budget. Staff proposes using the Police Department
Forfeiture Fund to purchase these items. This fund is discretionary as it relates to the purchase of
department equipment and supplies.
ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize the purehase of the described office furniture and equipment.
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7e1
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator~
FROM: Karen Finstuen
Administrative Services Manager
SUBJECT: Approve a Gambling Premises Permit - Farmington Youth Hockey
DATE: July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
Farmington Youth Hockey is requesting a Gambling Premises Permit at the Longbranch Saloon
and Eatery, 309 3rd Street.
DISCUSSION
Pursuant to State Statute and pertinent City Code, an organization must first obtain a resolution
from the City, granting permission for gambling to occur at a specific location. Farmington
Youth Hockey is requesting approval to conduct gambling activity at 309 3rd Street. The
appropriate application and fees have been received and the application has been reviewed by the
City Attorney.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
ACTION REQUESTED
Consider the attached Resolution approving a Gambling Premises Permit at 309 3rd Street.
Respectfully submitted,
M~~~
Karen Finstuen
Administrative Services Manager
-'~ "",- - --. - ~ .,'- - '.. - ." , '. -' ,
- - -- ---
RESOLUTION NO. R -00
APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL
GAMBLING PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR
FARMINGTON YOUTH HOCKEY
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 3rd day of July
2000 at 7 :00 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following:
WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.213, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue
or renew a Gambling Premises Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving
said permit; and,
WHEREAS, Farmington Youth Hockey has submitted an application for a Gambling Premises
Permit to be conducted at 309 3rd Street, for Council consideration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling
Premises Permit for Farmington Youth Hockey to be conducted at 309 3rd Street, is hereby
approved.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
3rd day of July 2000.
Mayor
Attested to the
day of
2000.
City Administrator
SEAL
,
~ '
~ ..
,,1'"'
d'/CJCJ ~
CITY OF FARMINGTON
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
(612) 463-7111
APPLICATION FOR A GAMBLING PREMISES PERMIT
DATE: ~-~g-Ob
APPUCANT INFORMATION:
Organization/Applicant: fCt'f\M'\~-\o \J\ YDlA~ \1-oJ.ay ~SSD<.At1~tr\A
Address: f. (), ~ox ' 1 F'QV"vv\,"")1bV\. \N1tJ 550;')..'"
Telephone No.: .
Contact Person: W\\l.~' 3. \-\v.V\'LJ/,r\:\,^~ Date of Birth: S"lo-oS"lf
(Full Name)
Gambling Manager: VV\\L~~~\ 3- \-\.u~L.(?of\A,^CJ
Address: \ q ') ~ 0 CJ ^" \\ ~ v e.. . f= l\-Y \M ,\/\ l') \1Jvl . \ItIl JJ l)!;O f)..J-f
Telephone No.: ~5' - /.-f (pO .. 050 I \^l 0.\.<1.: 0~t - 4':'1 -7 Lfi i
INFORMATION REGARDING LOCATION OF PROPOSED GAMBUNG PREMISES
("PREMISES"): .'
L<<",~ \pJ"flVv\~ ~tL\;oC'\l1 { ~~
Address:] 001 .~ ~ ~-r. FtLV VV\1 V\O)-\-nvt, l/I;J JJ 550;)...'-{
Telephone No.: (oS I - Y 0u - (Pl'{ Of ()
Lessor: 'GLS'e-rtb...V\~lfI('l.ej. ~\I' '--
Lessor's Address: "0 To'wV\ ~c(. J JJtrrMv, roy, I!V7w ,t:;l,;() 15
Lessor's Telephone No.:
Rents and other charges for use of Premises: ~ I, 0 D (). PJ.i Wo ~\..'1 ~~ \111-
DESCRIPTION OF GAMBLING ACTIVITIES TO BE CONDUCTED ON PREMISES BY
ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING DAYS AND HOURS:
~ p\,\\\~\,p~
* \/\II 0 cL6..y +-'^ X'n '^~ \" S.ll'h~ 'I[ cky " - \ d.- \N'i, t\ "" 'I I\\J\
<; V\. '\I' tlClY '1 - 1 J.... \!\A\tlM'1 t\ \...1\
The undersigned represents that the information provided on this application and the
information submitted with this application is truthful. The undersigned authorizes the City
of Farmington to investigate and contact persons/organizations named on this application.
The undersigned agrees that the use of the Premises for gambling will conform to all
applicable state laws, Gambling Control Board regulations, and ordinances of the City of
Farmington.
.
APPliCANT'S SIGNATlJRE;f1Jf"~~
66788
" .
.'
'. '".
Attach to the Application for Gambling Premises Permit the following:
1. A copy of the lease between the organization and the owner of the Premises or
evidence of the organization's ownership of the Premises.
vf. A copy of the organization's gambling license and premises permit issued by the
Gambling Control Board. .
~ A copy of the Gambling Manager's fidelity bond.
" A copy of the Gambling Manager's license.
~ A sketch of the Premises, depicting the location of all gambling activities or storage
of gambling equipment on the Premises, and depicting, if applicable, the placement of
the Premises within another premises or establishment.
f
'DnJ\\JG 'A~E ~
r=-=----=-.--If--------------- -----=1
f\lLl"'Pt~ I
(,.~IM 12 ~ I
~ TO -l V\ ("'i.
rl -
II
II t~s.\ ~ OOVVl
II
d
L:::i
t:----
I
I
I
I
i
~j
4:"
I
CG!
,
,
3, '\'U\.L\'At---; /
GAWlG -g: j
\)U f~ l-.)!,ott '.'.. I
: I
l~
Pb ~ VIA lTS n
~ ~J
LltE)J,SeS l
fO&1f_C !
I
I
L___ - -_______.._____ ..
~
O'l
i
1____::1
C=:-==l
!
~sn( (j,)lM
66788
-2-
c "
.' .4.-
<'!-- .
GAMBLING PREMISES PERMIT
The Applicant is hereby granted permission to conduct lawful gambling as stated in the
application in accordance with all applicable state laws, Gambling Control Board regulations
and City of Farmington ordinances for the Premises located at:
30'7 -3"'c::/ S'-/yee+
DATE: 7hho
CITY OF FARMINGTON
Permit Fee: .p/oo
Pennit No.
Pennit Expiration Date: 7 dA/
66788
State of Minnesota
Gambling Control Board
Premises Permit Renewal Application
For Board Use Only
Amt Pd
Check #
JG214PPR Printed: 6/1/2000
Date
License Number: B-03762-003
Effective Date: 9/1/1998
Expiration Date: 8/31/2000
Name of Organization: Hockey Farmington Youth Assoc
Gambling Premises Information
Name of the establishment where gambling will be conducted
Longbranch Saloon & Eater
309 3rd St
Farmington, MN 55024
County: Dakota
Note: Our records show the premises
is located within the city limits
Lessor Information
Desert Enterprises Inc
110 Town Rd
Northrop, MN 56075
Name of the property owner (If different):
Square footage leased per month:
Rent paid per month:
Square footage leased per bingo occasion:
Rent paid per bingo occasion:
Bingo Activity
Our records indicate that Bingo is not conducted on these premises.
15.00
1,000.00
J ~~ d~ 'fJ~ V't.U.A\oJ...,S 1 Storage Information
tHI1 ~~W\Irl.- FLit @ 1I;;s5.!Y/~ l..t.HO'f: -:S'OS frb~~{.1J
'8.J.-\ 3d 5+ 1J-~45 S~~, ;~
~~'\IA~tnVl , 1M N .550d-. I.{ "jOY' \.t voJ.At'/ J IIt1N 5S/d-..lJ
Bank Information
1st State BAlik uf C~~tI" R6ck
21....0 Ch.ipp~lldAlc Ay c.
-Farmington, MN 55024
'{\\J\. t'\,A Of ~L\.,^ \,c,
3~11 O~v. Set.
fnN'VV;'Vl~-1t\V\ I \IV11J
Gambling Bank ~~ 35"'to
Account Number: 9236831191
550J. Ii
On the lines provided below list the name, address and title of at least two persons authorized to sign checks and make deposits
and withdrawals for the gambling account. The organization's treasurer may not handle gambling funds.
Name
City, State, Zip Code
SO"d-<..f
fo.-VM' \o~, VvV0
- ~\' i. _ r ....... S.sO~Lf
J:J..:;l.~~ 11 eC\-,'\OSQ,.. VI '( ro-.(\M'i'A?\uV\ \lvh)
\d.\t; VHIM',\ \'lD'vt \K\\l~\{ to..fVV\"^ ~)\A S'5~~j \'3.V\-1.\p\n
(Be sure to complete the reverse side of this application)
Address
Title
'N\\\J.~ \\i\V\ 'L~\A.
1OVV\ ~ c.~VVI'\ -\ 'L
\~M\IAM~ \\2r\/tU D..
\Q1'80 (11,\ \ .
e.
J2Q..,.
This form will be made available in alternative format (ie. large print, braille) upon request.
Page I of2 (Continued on Back)
Gam bling Site Authorization
I hereby consent that local law enforcement
officers, the board or agents of the board, or
the comm issioner of revenue or
public safety or agents of the commissioners,
may enter the premises to enfurce the law,
Bank Records Information
The board is authorized to inspect the bank
records of the gam bling account whenever
necessary to fulfill requirements of current
gambling rules and law.
Organization License Authorization
I hereby authorize the Gambling Control
Board to modifY the class of organization
license to be consistent with the class of
permit being applied for.
Acknowledgment
Oath
I declare that:
1. I have read this application and all
information submitted to the board is true,
accurate, and complete;
2. all other required information has been
fully disclosed;
3. I am the chief executive officer of the
organization;
4. I assume full responsibility for the fair and
lawful operation of all activities to be
conducted;
5. I will familiarize myself with the laws of
Minnesota governing lawful gambling and
rules of the board and agree, if licensed, to
abide by those laws and rules, including
amendments to them;
Page 2 of2
6. any changes in application information
will be submitted to the board and local
unit of government within ten days of
the change; and
7. I understand that failure to provide
required information or provid' g false or
misleading informati may re It in the
den' or revocatio the Ii se.
gnature of the chief executive
tTicer (Designee may not sign)
~L~Y/ 00
Da
Local Unit of Government Acknowled
On behalf of the city, I hereby acknowledge this application
for lawful gambling activity at the premises located within
the city's jurisdiction, and that a resolution specifically
approving or denying the application will be forwarded to
the applying organization.
G.:L~~h:J 7 I~I 00
T~ D~
For the township: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge
that the organization is applying to conduct lawful gambling
activity within the township limits.
Print name of township
A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny an
application (Minn. Stat. sec. 349.213, subd. 2).
Signature of township official receiving application
Title
For the county: On behalf of the county, I hereby
acknowledge this application for lawful gambling activity at
the premises located within the county's jurisdiction, and
that a resolution specifically approving or denying the
application will be forwarded to the applying organization.
The information requested on this form (and
any attachments) will be used by the Gambling
Control Board (Board) to determine your
qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling
activities in Minnesota, and to assist the Board
in conducting a background investigation of
you. You have the right to refuse to supply the
information requested; however, if you refuse to
supply this infurmation, the Board may not be
able to determine your qualifications and, as a
consequence, may refuse to issue you a license.
If you supply the information requested, the
Board will be able to process your application.
Print name of county
I
Date
Signature of county personnel receiving application
Title
Your name and address will be public
information when received by the Board. All
the other information that you provide will be
private data about you until the Board issues
your license. When the Board issues your
license, all of the information that you have
provided to the Board in the process of
applying for your license will become public.
If the Board does not issue you a license, all the
information you have provided in the process
of applying fur a license remains private, with
the exception of your name and address which
will remain public.
Private data about you are available only to the
following: Board members, staff of the
I
Date
Board whose work assignment requires that
they have access to the information; the
Minnesota Department of Public Safety; the
Minnesota Attorney General; the Minnesota
Commissioners of Administration, Finance,
and Revenue; the Minnesota Legislative
Auditor, national and international gambling
regulatory agencies; anyone pursuant to court
order; other individuals and agencies that are
specifically authorized by state or federal law
to have access to the information; individuals
and agencies for which law or legal order
authorizes a new use or sharing of
information after this notice was given; and
ease or u ~ a , it ew ee, 'pl oar , an or a e c v y- G 2
NlIml:! Of Leglll OWner of Premlllell Street Address City ZIp Daytime Phone
Desert Enterprises Inc 309 3rd. St Farmington 5502~ 612-,
N~me of 1..eslSor StrfH/1 Address City Zip Daytime Phone
(If tame tIIIlegel owner, write In "SAME")
Same ( )
Name of Leased Premises Street Addrells City Zip D:ly~m#l PhOn.!!
Lon<;Jbranch Saloon 309 3rd St Farmin9ton 55024 ( )
Name of Lesse, (nllme of organizallon INsing th, premises) GCBlicense no. of orgenlzstlcn Daytime Phone
FarminQton You Hookev Assoc. B-03762-003 ( 612 )
Gambling Control Board Fax:651-639-4073
,
....~I ~
· M'nno.sot~ Lawful Gambling
L f P II T b P ddl
~,
~ H \it T" b
Rent InformatIon
" Total rent cannot exceed $1,000 per month for all
non-bingo activIty lor thIs premises.
· For bIngo aotlvity, use leilse form LG222.
· For pull-tab dispMain~ maohlnaa, usa lease form
LG223.
Jul
3 '00 10:20 P.Ol
'--,...
d
dJ R ffl A ti it
L 2 1
· An organization may not pay rent to itself or to
any of Its ~m":;ltlis for space used for the conduct
of lawful gambling.
Sketch and Dimensions of Leased Area
Rent to be paId per month $
(If no rent Is to bo paid, IndicAIII -0-)
1,000.00
Sketch: For all areas being leased for the conduct
of gambling and storage of gambling product at this
premises, attach it sketch (dr.wing) showing: (1) the
leased area(s), and (2) the dimensions.
Olrnenelone
The leased areas are:
Storage
Storage
feet by
faet by
feet by
feet by
feet by
teet tor a total of
feet for a toml of
feet for a tot'lI of
feet for a total of
feet for iii total of
Combined total
Lawful Gambling Activity
Type of gambling activity that will be conducted at thls.gambling premises. Check all that apply.
.
PaddJewheels
~Pull-Tabs
Term of Leise
ThQ term of this lease agreement will be concurrent with the
preml"$ ptrmlt "sued by the Gambling Control Board,
unless terminated sooner by mutual consent of the lessor
and less...
_Raffles _Tlpboards
Amended Lease Only
Ifthi. is an amended lease showing change$ occurring dur-
ing the term of the current premises permit, write in the
date thl'lt the ehanges will be effective -,------1_.
Both parties that signed the lease must Inlttal and date all
chang~ll.
Questions on this form should be directed to the Licensing
Section of th~ Gambling Control 8o:ard :It (612) 630-'1000.
This publle~t1"r: will be INde tllleileble in f1lternetive. formbt
(I..,. Illlrge print. Brllllle) upon It.que,,\. Hearing Imp.lred
Individuals using a TTY may call the Minnesota Relay Service
;It 1-600-627-3529 and ask to !,Iace a eal1lo (612) 639-4000.
...
The Inronnation requested on this form will be u$ed by tile
~mbllng Control Board (Soard) .to determine your eompliance
wltfl MinnesQta steMe, !lnd rule~ governing lawful gambling
.ellvitle's. All of the lnformf,ti';m thlllt you supply on thllS form
will become publio information when re~lved by the B06lrd
eXC9pr.lfr@!l:Iulred, your SocIll Security number, which remains
private,
P~ge 1 of2
Rev. 8197
',,-
~ambljng Control Board Fax:651-539-4073
~ ~:
Lease for pull-Tab. Paddlewheel, Tipboard, ~.:1J~or Raffle Activity.. LG221
L LESSOR PROHIBITIONS I agents are found to be s~lelY 4. The lessor shall not modify or
f G bll re$ponslblt for any illegal gambling terminate: this lease in whole or In part
Management 0 am ng conducted at that site that is due to the lessor's viohation of the
Prohibited
prohlbfted by Minnesota A.ules, pert provlsionalisted on thit lease.
The own$r of the premises or the lessor 78S1 ,0050, subpart 1, or Minnesota
will not manage the conduct of gambling Statutes, section 609.75, unless the Arbitration Process
at the premises. orgsni%atlon's agents re$ponslble for The lessor agrees to arbitration when a
Participation as PI.yel"6 Prohibited the Illegal gambling activity are alGo vlollirtlon of these lease provisions Is
agents or employees of the lessor, all.ged. The arbitrator shall be the eRG.
The lessor, the lessor's Immedlatefllmlly,
b I 4. The lessor shall not modify or I I
Ql'ld any agents or gam ling emp oyees terminate the lMse in Whole or In part ACCESS TO PERMITTED PREMISES
of the Ie$sorwill not pertlctpate 8S players beeause the organ~at1on reported to
In the conduct of lawful gambling on the a state or loc,1 law eMforcement State of Minnesota rand LaW
premls,", QUthorily or the bol!lrd the occurrence Enforcement
IIIl1PgalGambllng 6lttheSiteoflllegalgamblingactivity The board and its aQ~nts, the
1. The lessor is aware ofthe prOhIbition in whioh the QJ'genization did not commissionara of re'Jenue r;lnd public
;l921n5t illegal gambling In Minn.,Q\~ pllItielp;llte. safety and their agents, and law
Statute$, section 609.15, and the Other Prohibitions enforcqrnont personnel ~ave aooE!lSS to
penalties for illegal gembling the permitted premlse$ at .ny
violations in Mlnneo.ot2 !=tul.s, part 1. Thele&$Orwill not impose restrictions reasonable time during the bU$iness.
7861.0050, su~art 3. on the orgsnfzatlon with respect to hours of the lessor.
providers {dlstrlbutor$} of gambllng- .
2. To the best ofthe lessor's knowledge, related equipment and services or In OrganIzation
the lessor offlrms that any and all the l.Ie8 of nlilt profits for lawful Th. organization has access to the
games or devices located on the purposes. permitted premises during any time
premises art. not being used, ~d are 2. The lessor, the lessor's ImmedIate reasonable and when nece~sary for the
~~n~:r:~~~~~t~~I~hge ~~~1bi~~n: family, and any agents oremploy~es cond,uct of lawful gambling on tho
against illegal gambling in Minne90~ of the h,$lor will not require the premlse$.
Statute., section 609.75, Clnd the orgl!lMlzatlon to perform Clny action
penalties tor Illegal gQmbling that woulcf vIolate statute or rule.
vlolliltlons in Mlnneso~ R.ules. part 3. lfthere is Ii! dispute as to whether any
7Be1.0050, subpl!'lrt a. Of these lease provisions have been
3. Notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, violll1dted,' thefjlesl'dewill remel t!n Inbefft9hel
part 7881.0050, subp.3, an pen n9 Q nl eterm nO! Ion y e
organi:zatlon must continue ~aking Compliance Review Group (eRG) Of
rel't pl!lymMtG. pursuant to the terms th~ Gambling Contl'018oBrd.
of the leQ$Q, Ifth@ ctganlz2Itlon or its
Jul
3 '00
10:21
F'.03
.-'
,..-'
OTHER OBLIGATIONS AND AGREEMENTS" Attachmont
All obligations and agreements between the organization end the 'tsSQr are contained in or att2lched to thie lease.
(Attach additioncal sheets if necessary. Any att2lchments to thi:5 leaM must be dated and signed by both the lessor and
tI1e less6'.)
This lease III the total snd only agreement betwnn the lessor end the organization condueting lawful gambling activities:
olner thilln bingo rand pull-tl:Ib dispensing devices. There Is no other agreement and no other eonsideration required between
the parties IiIS 0 th wful gambnng and other matters related to this leest. Any cl':engelil In this h~618. will be submitted to
tne G Ii C trol oard ten day, prior to th. effecliv& date of the chgnge.
'0' __hfX~
Si9n lure ofLe!lser ., Oete
/ i+. (J ~ i:~ '-!. ,., 1.# .... Lf'
Frlnt Namtl and Tit!" of Le!l9ee
Page2of2
-" R"v. 8197
,-, t "'I.".
-' ,
r'~
Gambling Control Board Fax:651-639-4073
l.,-",'
_,""!I""t.
. f. . i
LONGBRANCH SALOON & EATERY
Jul 3 '00 10:21
'-
P.02
l'
PULL TABS & CASH DRAWERS
o 3'
BAR
181
()
()
IfFtlOL€J:5
J
000
241
.3'
'-I'
5'i,,1l~
r- _. ,-- .-- ..- -- -- -- -- -- .-.'-.- --- -
HAS ISSUED:
ST A TE OF MINNESOTA
GAM~UNGCONTROLBOARb
1711 West County Road B
SId.te 300 South
Rosevllle, MN 55113
(612) 639--11000
Organization License B-03762
To Conduct Lawful Gambling to:
FBrmlhgtoh Yo~~h Hockey ^880C' tt I
""",_'-B__on, _nc.
Box 223
Farmington, MN 550211
EF'FECTIVE DATE:
09/01/98
;..........
'.
EXPIRATION DATE:
08/31/00
STATE. OF MINNESOTA
GAMBUNG CONTROL BoARD
1711 west County Road B
suite 300 South
Roseville, MN 55113
(612) 639-11000
Gambling Manager license G-03762-003 to:
Michael Heinzerllng
nH'rnlHgtbh YoUth 'lockey Association, Inc.
Box 223
Fa~mingt6n, MN 550211
EXPIRATION DATE:
EFFECTIVE bATE:
09/01/98
08/31/00
.~ ~. 'r
..~f-\; ~~. ~ lit. ,
i'; i:., . 4 I ',',. jt.;';'.:, ' ~TATE OF MINNESOT~ . .
( , . '. > ,~~n"" ~~'" ,~-'t., GAMBLlI'!G CONTROL BOARO
,. I ~~T." <, .'" '.n, ,....i$,.... f '
:,i ,~CiY;'~ ,..~ ~~ . \ I' i '1 t 'w p "" t t" II tl t ,I ~ 0 I'l d B
'i)' " ~.! . t> . J
. '. ,'< ~ :.' 11!~stti t',e 3/J)(" SOllt:li
i"i '.' · ,
, ~ \~. ~'; .';.... W.S' ~' ~ 0 s e \Ill 1 ('. t,1 N 5 r; 1 1 3
: l'~f"iJ5S'.\-'t,,{{.~, if (61.2) 63?--1100e,
, IUbnll~' I I,t ..' .
. ,"... l' I ~,I
HAS I~sut9;:., ,
.tr; .
A l. ,1 W .r 11 1t ,~ilfn b 1 J. n 9 P t- e III 1 s P 5 r p t 111 J t
R ..' 0 3 7 6 ? -. 0 0 3 to:
r a 1'1115. n ~1 t () n Yo 1 i t 11 "" c k t> Y f\ s s () c J " t.i 0 n ,
r 0 n : LOll q b r i'l t1 C h ~:; il J () 0 n I-:, F i,l:!> r
309 ::'lId 8t
Fnrrni.nqton. ~1N r:,r;0?1!
I 11 f; .
.!,
I
r:rrFCI1\lF. f)(\Ir:~
rXl'lRAT lOt-! 0" Ir-:
, ,
,..,
"",
09/01/<)11
0f3/11/1lI1ll
JLt-I-28-2012l0 '16: 08
FIRST STATE BfCtjl<
,
651 463 412116 P.03/11l3,
."
ALI.I I::.D
t,I~(H ...
d
, I
GAMBUNG MANAGER'S BOND
'nsiJr.nc~
BOND NO. BD 7900'76026
KNOW AlL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: Tha.t we, Michael J. Heinzerling, as
Principal and the ALLIED Mutual Insurance Company, a corporation authorized to do business
in the State of Minnesota, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto Fannington Youth Hockey
Association, in the sum of not to exceed TEN THOUSAND AND N0I100-- Donars
($10,000.00), for payment of which. wen and truly to be made, we bind ourselves and our legal
representatives, Jointly and severally, by these presents.
mE CONDITION of the above obligation is such that Whereas said Principal has been
designated Gambling Manager.. a~s required to give this bond by virtue of 349.20. MSA.
NOW, 1lIERBFORE, If sa~~~al shall faithfully perform his duties as Gambling
Manag~r, then this obligation to be v~;WJse to remain in full force and effect.
This bond may be cancelled by the ~D Mutual Insurance Company. as to future
liability, by giving written notice by Certified ,dressed to the Principal and the ObJiJee,
and sixty (60) days after themailingofsaidnoticeifiedMail.this bond shall be null and
void as to any liability thereafter arising, conditions r"'~isioD8 of this bond for any and a1l
acts covered by this bond up to the date of such cancel'fation.
Dated this 11th day of 1uly, 1997.
("
COUNTERSIGNED:
By: YtlJ;u%:.ALt-ddr~
M sota Resident Agent
Michael!. Helnzer1in~
By:fJIt~_
AJ J JFO Mutual Insurance Company
By:
Brian M. Deimerly, Attorney-in-Fact
TOTAL P.03
JLN-28-2000 16: 07
FIRST STRTE B~lK
651 463 4016 P.02/03
'C
Aflietl
Insurance
.. member of Nationwide Insuranecl
It Is agreed that this bond or policy is amended a6 follows:
Wherever the name
"ALLIED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY (ALLIED)"
appears In this bond or policy, it is amended to read
"NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY",
Nothing herein contained shall be held to vary, waiver. alter or extend any of the terms,
conditions, agreeementa or declarations of the bond or policy. other than as herein
stated.
~ Ii! ItI
e
~ ~ O..k
Secretary
Vice President
~::<'/~-~~~0'~
I
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO
No. of Pages: 4
Date: 6/29/00 8:20 AM
To: Joel Jamnik From: Cindy Muller
Company: Company: City of Farmington
Fax#: Fax #: (651) 463-2591
Telephone #: Telephone #: (651) 463-1803
Comments:
Attached is a gambling premises permit for Farmington Youth Hockey. It is in
our standard format. Just need your approval.
City of Farmington
325. Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
?e..
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Schools and Conferences - Administration Department
DATE: July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
Notification has recently been received from the Senior Executive Institute (SEI) of my
acceptance into their program at the University of Virginia.
DISCUSSION
As Council may recall, support for attending a senior management training and leadership
program was received during the administratorfs 2000 performance review. Since that time, an
application to this program was made in accordance with previous Council discussions and has
been approved by SEI program administrators.
The Senior Executive Institute is a highly regarded, competitive-based senior management
training program that satisfies a variety of continuing education requirements and standards for
professional local government administrators. A list of program attendees includes top
administrators and managers from across the country.
With respect to the core program curriculum, the two week training program focuses on building
leadership skills, creating and sustaining high performance organizational models, implementing
team-building management techniques, designing customer-service management strategies and
responding to community change issues resulting from growth management issues. The program
is also recognized by the state and national public management associations.
BUDGET IMPACT
As previously discussed, costs of attending this program, including lodging and transportation
are estimated at approximately $4,200 and will be provided for in the 2000 Budget.
ACTION REOUESTED
Acknowledge administrator attendance at the Senior Executive Institute at the University of
Virginia beginning Sunday, July 16 through Friday, July 28, 2000.
file
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.c1.farmington.mn.us
/00-
TO:
Mayor, Council Members,
City Administrator%
v
Lee Smick, AICP ()&
Planning CoordinatorY
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Vermillion Grove Planned Unit Development - EA W Response to
Comments, Findings of Fact and Record of Decision
DATE:
July 3,2000
INTRODUCTION
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) was prepared for the Vermillion Grove
Planned Unit Development (PUD) pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes.
DISCUSSION
The EA W is a document prepared in a worksheet format, that is designed as a streamlined
assessment approach to determine the environmental effects that may be associated with a
proposed project. The EA W serves primarily to aid in the determination of whether an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is needed for a proposed project; and serves as a basis to
begin the scoping process for an EIS. The EA W review was triggered for the Vermillion Grove
PUD because the project exceeds the threshold of the Environmental Quality Board (EQB)
standards with the combination of the 94 detached residential units and 276 attached residential
units.
In the EA W process, the EQB assigns the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) in verifying the
accuracy of environmental doeuments and complying with the environmental review processes in
a timely manner. The RGU for the Vermillion Grove PUD is the Farmington City Council.
Therefore, the Record of Decision is approved by the City Council through a resolution.
Three types of decisions could be made concerning the EA W:
1. make a positive declaration, requiring an EIS for the project
2. postpone the decision because of lack of information
3. or make a negative declaration, stating that the project does not have a potential
significant environmental effect that warrants the preparation of an EIS.
After a project has been filed with the Environmental Quality Board, the project is sent to over 20
agencies to review the effects of the project on the environment. The agencies have 30 days to
review the project and make comments concerning how the project might impact the
environment. The comments are then assembled by the RGU after the 30-day comment period
and the RGU has 30 days to respond to the comments.
In the case of the Vermillion Grove development, the comment period ended on May 17, 2000.
Ten written eomments were received by the City concerning the EA W and those agencies
included: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota
Department of Transportation, Dakota County Soil & Water Conservation District, Vermillion
Watershed Management Commission, Dakota County Office of Planning, Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency; Minnesota Historical Society and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Based on the EA W, the response to comments and the Findings of Fact, the Record of Decision
concludes the following:
1. The EA W was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental
Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 t 4410.1700 (1997).
2. The EA W satisfactorily addressed all of the issues for which existing information could have
been reasonably obtained,
3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the project does not
have the potential for significant environmental effects,
4. Based on a review of the record prepared in this matter, the City makes a "Negative
Declaration," and
5. An EIS is not required.
6. The City of Farmington is directed to maintain a Record of Decision including the Response
to Comments on the EA W and to notify in writing all persons on the EA W distribution list,
all persons that commented in writing during the 30-day comment period and to any person
upon written request.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt a resolution approving the Response to Comments, Findings of Fact and Record of
Decision for the Vermillion Grove PUD.
Respectfully submitted,
) ft <_J;~~~~
../.{
Lee Smick, AICP
Planning Coordinator
cc: Michael Noonan, Rottlund Homes
Thomas W. Balcom, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Helen A. Boyer, Metropolitan Council
Paul Czech, Minnesota Department of Transportation
Brian Watson, Jay Riggs, Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District
Ed Matthiesen, Montgomery Watson
Lynn Moratzka, Dakota County - Office of Planning
Eric J. Kilberg, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Dennis A. Gimmestad, Minnesota Historical Society
Char M. Hauger, Department ofthe Army, Corps of Engineers
RESOLUTION NO. R -00
A RESOLUTION DECLARING NO NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMP ACT STATEMENT FOR VERMILLION GROVE PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 3rd day of July,
2000 at 7 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following:
WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) was prepared for the Vermillion
Grove Planned Unit Development (PUD) according to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB)
regulations; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the EA W was published in the EQB Monitor on April 17, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, copies of the EA W were mailed to all of the agencies and organizations on the
EQB official EA W distribution list; and,
WHEREAS, the thirty-day comment period for the Vermillion Grove PUD EA Wended on May
17,2000; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington,
Minnesota that findings in the document titled "Findings of Fact Regarding a Need for
Environmental Impact Statement" Vermillion Grove PUD, be incorporated herein by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a determination is hereby made that the preparation of the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project which is the subject of the EA W is not
needed by an application of the following criteria to the factual information contained in the
EAW:
1. Type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects;
2. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects;
3. The extent to which environinental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public
regulatory authority; and
4. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a
result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the proposer,
or an EIS previously prepared on similar projects.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
3rd day of July, 2000.
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of July, 2000.
City Administrator
SEAL
FINDINGS OF FACT/RECORD OF DECISION
PROPOSED VERMILLION GROVE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
June 27,2000
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the development of a 123-acre mixed-use development. The site
will include 340 residential units of low-to-mid densities, parkland, trails, and natural amenities.
An alternative site plan to be considered for the PUD proposes 330 residential units and 10,000
- 15,000 sq. ft. of commercial development.
2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION
The City of Farmington is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for the proposed Vermillion
Grove Planned Unit Development Project, in the City of Farmington. An Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) has been prepared for the proposed project in accordance with
the Environmental Review Program of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB).
The EAW was filed with the MEQB and circulated for review and comment to all parties on the
Minnesota Environmental Review Program distribution list. A Notice of Availability was
published in the EQB Monitor on April 17, 2000, and a press release was provided to the local
newspaper. The thirty-day public comment period ended May 17, 2000. All comments received
were considered in determining the potential for significant environmental impacts as a result
of the proposed project. Written comments received on the proposed project are responded to
in the separate Response to Comments.
3. CRITERIA
A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Impacts
The EAW describes the project and adequately identifies and analyzes the possible
environmental impacts associated with the project. The results of this analysis are that no
irreversible adverse environmental impacts will occur as a result of this project.
B. Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects
The proposed project will not result in cumulative environmental effects not already guided
by the City's existing Comprehensive Plan. Future projects or related development are not
associated with the project.
C. Extent to Which Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation by Ongoing Public
Regulatory Authority
The City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will maintain ongoing authority over the project
as a result of permit applications.
D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects Can Be Anticipated and Controlled as a
Result of Other Environmental Studies
Environmental effects have been predicted and planned for in the City's Surface Water
Management Plan, which was prepared previous to the proposed project. No other
environmental studies have been performed.
4. COMMENTS RECEIVED
Written comments were received from nine agencies on the EAW distribution list, which are listed
below. No comments were received from the general public. Specific responses to agency
comments are contained in the separate Response to Comments document.
A. Minnesota Pollution Control Aaency (MPCA). May 17. 2000.
B. Minnesota Historical Society. May 9. 2000.
C. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. May 17. 2000.
D. Minnesota Department of Transportation. April 20. 2000.
E. Vermillion River Watershed Manaaement Commission. May 4, 2000.
F. U.S. Army Corps of Enaineers. May 3. 2000.
G. Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District. May 17. 2000.
H. Dakota County Office of Plannina. June 1. 2000.
I. Metropolitan Council. June 1. 2000.
CONCLUSION
The City of Farmington, acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit, makes a negative
declaration. The proposed project does not require the preparation of an environmental impact
statement.
John F. Erar, City Administrator
City of Farmington
Date
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Vermillion Grove PUD Environmental Assessment Worksheet
The City of Farmington here provides the following responses to comments received during the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) comment period for the Vermillion Grove
development.
Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT)
In their letter of April 20, 2000, MnlDOT had no comment since the project does not impact
state highway right-of-way. MnlDOT asked that future correspondence relating to plats, site
plans, environmental reviews and comprehensive plan amendments be forwarded to Ms. Sherry
Narusiewicz, which will be done. No substantive response to MnlDOT's comment letter is
required.
Vermillion River Watershed Management Commission (VRWMC)
On behalf of the VRWMC, Montgomery Watson stated in a letter dated May 4, 2000 that the
water discharge rate and water quality policies stated in the EA Ware consistent with the City's
Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) and with the Commission's draft Watershed
Management Plan. Also, the VRWMC stated that they have adopted a policy of infiltrating the
first 0.5 inch of precipitation where appropriate and asked that the applicability of infiltration for
this project be investigated.
The infiltration policy adopted by the VR WMC represents guidance only and is not required by
ordinance. Further, this guidance was developed after the adoption of the City of Farmington
Surface Water Management Plan. The Vermillion Grove development is being designed to fully
comply with the Farmington Surface Water Management Plan, several objectives of which bear
directly on the same water quantity and quality issues of concern to the VRWMC. Accordingly,
the City believes that these issues have already been adequately addressed by virtue of their
compliance with established City requirements. The project proposer has, however, endeavored
to reduce the amount of impervious surface to the extent practicable. City street widths have
been reduced from 32 to 30 feet and private streets will be 22 feet wide. Pervious islands are
being explored within cul-de-sacs. The proposer is utilizing curb and gutter on site roadways to
comply with City requirements.
The City will work with the proposer to continue to seek additional reductions in impervious
surface to the degree allowed by on-site conditions and City requirements. The City has not
required specific infiltration basin requirements on the Vermillion Grove project based on: (1)
the fine textured soils on the site, (2) the experimental nature of infiltration basin technology, (3)
past research documenting the relatively short life-spans and poor performance of infiltration
basins, and (4) the high maintenance commitment that would be required.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stated in a letter dated May 3, 2000 that they had
reviewed the EA W and that a permit would be needed if any discharge of dredged or fill material
into wetlands was planned. As stated on pages 5, 14, 15, 35 and as shown in Exhibit E, no
wetland fill impacts will occur with the implementation of this project. Therefore, there will be
no jurisdictional issues or permits required from the COE and no permit application will be filed
with the COE. Accordingly, the USACE comment letter requires no substantive response.
Minnesota Historical Society (MHS)
The MHS stated in a letter dated May 9, 2000 that the EA W had acknowledged their concern
regarding the potential for archaeological resources on the upland peninsula located between
Wetlands A and B. The MHS noted that the EA W stated the project would not disturb this area.
The MHS expressed concern regarding the future ownership of the peninsula and the measures
that would be taken to ensure that cultural resource issues are considered by possible future
owners. The City of Farmington will be assuming ownership of the area as part of development
approval for park and open space purposes. A Phase I archaeological survey was done on the
peninsula for the Murphy Farm project. One projectile point was found but no evidence of
habitations or other features worthy of supplemental investigation were identified. No requests
for further information have been received from the MHS and cultural resource issues appear to
be resolved.
The MHS also stated that it appeared that Section 106 review issues need to be addressed due to
the need for an NPDES permit for the proposed project. Since this program is administered by
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, no permit is required from a federal agency and
therefore a 106 review is not necessary.
Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD)
In their letter of May 17, 2000, Dakota County SWCD listed a number of concerns. These
concerns are individually itemized below, and which are followed by the City's response:
1. EA W Item 8 - Coordination with VRWMC
The SWCD noted that they do not issue erosion and sedimentation control permits. The SWCD
asked that the City and project proposer coordinate closely with the Vermillion River Watershed
Management Commission (VRWMC) to ensure compliance with their draft watershed
management plan. The City and project proposer will coordinate with the VR WMC to review
the draft plan and make any design changes that are found feasible, prudent and consistent with
the City's SWMP.
2. EA W Item 11 - Characterization of Forested Area & Impacts of Mass Grading
The SWCD has asked for more detailed information regarding tree inventory data and the
character of the existing upland vegetation. No detailed tree survey has been done to date and
the City of Farmington does not have a tree ordinance that would require one. The only forested
area affected by the project is approximately 24.3 acres in size and is located in the northeast
portion of the site. As described in the EA W, this forested area dominated by American elm and
burr oak with an understory of common buckthorn and prickly ash. Given the invasive species
dominating the understory, this forest stand appears to have been historically grazed. The project
has been designed to preserve about 40 percent of the forested area (see EA W Question 10).
The SWCD states that most of the tree loss appears to be due to mass grading, especially in the
east-central portion of the site, as opposed to road construction. Mass grading is necessary to
achieve acceptable vertical profiles on roadways within the site. Substantial cuts and fills are
needed in many areas to. meet engineering standards and City requirements with regard to
roadway gradients. In addition, the depth of excavation required to install utilities beneath these
roadways contributes to the need for mass grading. Given the amount of grading that is
necessary, the City believes that it has already maximized the percentage of trees being
preserved.
3. EA W Item 12 - Wetland Buffers
The SWCD acknowledges that no direct wetland impacts will occur. The SWCD states that
buffers do not appear to be provided at various locations adjacent to DNR wetland #353W as
required by the City's wetland ordinance. The SWCD states that they discourage using average
buffer widths but would rather see a contiguous buffer of at least 50 feet around the entire
boundary of the subject wetland. The City's wetland ordinance categorizes this wetland as
"Protect" which requires a minimum buffer width of75 feet.
As required by City wetland ordinance, the project proposer will be retaining a 75-foot unmowed
buffer around Minnesota Public Waters Wetland 353W, which is the only jurisdictional wetland
located on the site. The SWCD has indicated that it discourages buffer "averaging". However,
since the minimum and average buffer widths are identical, no buffer averaging will take place.
Also, compliance with the city's buffer ordinance will represent a substantial improvement over
existing conditions, as no buffers currently exist and the wetland is subject to direct inputs of
untreated agricultural runoff. No formal buffers are proposed around the stormwater ponds,
since the ponds serve the same purpose as buffers (i.e. to pre-treat stormwater prior to its
discharge to downstream water bodies). The City has no buffer requirement for stormwater
ponds. One of the stormwater treatment ponds will encroach into a wetland buffer; however, this
type of encroachment has been acceptable to the City in the past because the pond serves the
same purpose as the buffer that surrounds it.
One minor encroachment into the required wetland buffer will be necessary at the site access
point on Akin Road. This encroachment is unavoidable in that the intersection already exists and
cannot be relocated. City ordinance currently provides for exceptions in these buffers for roads,
trails, and related infractructure.
4. EA W Item 16 - Custom Versus Mass Grading & BMPs
The SWCD states that custom grading, as opposed to mass grading, will have stormwater,
wildlife, erosion and sedimentation benefits, and that grading slopes steeper than 12-18% is not
recommended. The SWCD also recommends BMPs such as project phasing to mlrumlze
exposed soil, preserving existing vegetation and the use of temporary cover and mulch. The
SWCD states that it will review the proposed erosion and sedimentation controls as preliminary
plats are submitted to determine compliance with NPDES and City requirements. As stated in
the EA W, it is important to note that the project site is currently cultivated on an annual basis
and that there are no erosion and sedimentation control measures in place. The erosion control
measures that will be installed and maintained during and after construction of the Vermillion
Grove project and final landscaping will represent a substantial improvement over existing
conditions. The City and project proposer will work with the Dakota County SWCD during the
preliminary plat approval process to ensure that the erosion and sedimentation concerns of the
SWCD are adequately addressed.
See Response No.2 above regarding custom grading. Slopes between 12 and 18 percent cannot
be totally avoided in grading the Vermillion Grove site. Due to the highly variable topography,
avoiding such areas would render a significant portion of the site unusable.
The specific BMPs referenced by the SWCD will be implemented during construction of the
project. The BMPs are: (a) project phasing to minimize exposed soil, (b) preservation of
existing vegetation to the degree possible, and (c) the use of temporary cover in scarified areas
that will be left exposed for short periods during construction.
5. EA W Item 17 - Outlet for DNR Wetland #353W, Hydrologic Analysis, LID Measures &
Flood Calculations
The SWCD states that it is their understanding that the SWMP calls for an outlet for DNR
wetland #353W. The SWMP does call for such an outlet, which will be installed in conjunction
with the nearby Murphy Farm development. The wetland and water body classification system
described in the SWMP designates DNR wetland #353W as a "Protect" basin. The respective
water quality and quality protection strategies for such basins are: (1) to maintain HWL bounce
at or below existing conditions for a 1 DO-year storm and (2) limit phosphorus loadings. The size
(12 inches) and invert elevation (908 ms1) of this outlet have been defined by the SWMP and
have been set to limit the water level fluctuation in this wetland to 1.5 feet in a 1 DO-year storm
(i.e. 909.5 msl). This represents the pre-development condition. In all cases, the proposed
Vermillion Grove development will meet or exceed the standards set forth in the SWMP.
The SWCD further states that since this site will drain to the DNR wetland and then to Middle
Creek and the Vermillion River, water quality and quantity impacts of this project should be a
central consideration. The City agrees with the SWCD's statement and these impacts have been
addressed in the design of the Vermillion Grove development in accordance with the City's
SWMP. As described above, the management regime the SWMP dictates for DNR wetland
#353W is oriented specifically toward minimizing water quantity and quality impacts to this
wetland.
The SWCD suggests the use of Low Impact Development (LID) practices as a way to design the
project in a manner that mimics the site's natural hydrologic regime. While the City will work
with the project proposer to continue to explore methods for further reductions in impervious
coverage on the site, an LID approach would require a major redesign of the project. Also, LID
measures are not required under any of the regulatory programs to which the Vermillion Grove
project is subject. Some LID measures (e.g. infiltration basins) continue to be experimental in
nature and have elsewhere exhibited performance and maintenance problems in the past,
particularly in areas with fine-textured soils. The City believes that it has adequately addressed
stormwater quantity and quality issues through strict compliance with the design parameters set
forth in the SWMP.
The SWCD asks for clarification with regard to whether the calculated flood elevations for DNR
wetland #353W include the runoff from the Murphy Farm site. As dictated by the SWMP, the
portion of the Murphy Farm site that drains to DNR wetland #353W has been considered in
calculating the 100-year high water level for that wetland. The sizing of the outlet and the
projected high water level elevation have been dictated by the SWMP.
6. EA W Item 19 - Steep Slopes and Erosion Control
The SWCD states that the site's silty soils, combined with steep slopes, present potential erosion
and sedimentation problems. For the past several decades, most of the site has been used for
agricultural crop production. As such, no measures for water quality improvement such as
buffers or stormwater ponds are in place. Thus, sediment-bearing stormwater from cropland
moves downslope into DNR Wetland #353W without no treatment or attenuation. The proposed
project includes the construction of six stormwater ponds designed to meet NDRP criteria. This,
in combination with the City's wetland buffer requirements, will improve the quality of the
runoff water substantially when compared to the untreated agricultural runoff that has been
generated at the site for decades.
7. EA W Item 29 - Related Actions EIS, Connected & Phased Actions, Alternatives and
Cumulative Impacts
The SWCD suggests that Vermillion Grove and other residential developments should be
considered "related" for purposes of environmental review because these developments all drain
to Middle Creek. The EQB Rules provide that "[a]n RGD may prepare a single EIS for
independent projects with potential cumulative environmental impacts on the same geographic
area if the RGD determines that review can be accomplished in a more effective or efficient
manner through a related actions EIS (Minn. Rules 4410.2000 subpart 5; emphasis supplied). As
clearly stated in the EQB rules, RGDs are not required to prepare a related actions EIS. Rather, a
related actions EIS is an option an RGD may utilize if, in its discretion, it believes that it would
increase the efficiency and effectiveness of environmental review. The City of Farmington has
made the determination that separate EA Ws for the developments referred to by the SWCD will
provide for adequate environmental review.
The SWCD suggests that, even though combining the projects in the area surrounding
Vermillion Grove would "far exceed EIS thresholds", an acceptable alternative approach would
be to conduct a detailed assessment of runoff volumes from the Vermillion Grove and Murphy
Farm for a variety of scenarios. First, there is no basis in the EQB rules for combining the
Vermillion Grove development with other developments in the area for determining whether EIS
thresholds are met. Vermillion Grove is not a "connected action" with respect to any of the other
developments in the area. Vermillion Grove does not: (1) directly induce any other projects in
the area, (2) is not a prerequisite for any other project, and (3) is fully justified in and of itself
(see Minn Rules 4410.0200 Subpart 9b). Neither is Vermillion Grove a "phased action" with
respect to any other neighboring project, since none of the other projects are proposed by the
same proposer (see Minn. Rules 4410.0200 Subpart 60). These are the only two criteria
contained in the EQB rules for the mandatory combining of projects for purposes of determining
whether an EIS threshold is met.
A detailed assessment of runoff volumes from Vermillion Grove has been conducted in
developing the plans for Vermillion Grove. The hydrologic investigation prepared for the
project has been forwarded to the commenting agencies for review. That hydrologic analysis is
consistent with the assumptions and requirements of the Farmington SWMP; accordingly, water
quantity impacts of the Vermillion Grove development have already been adequately analyzed.
Since the project design follows the accepted design parameters set forth in the approved
SWMP, the City sees no purpose in conducting supplemental analyses of other scenarios that are
not elements of the project being proposed. Finally, the SWCD suggests that the various
scenarios they want assessed should be compared to "infrastructure/development costs and
environmental benefits". Requirements for such analysis are not contained in the EQB Rules.
The SWCD correctly observes that the EA W needs to consider "cumulative impacts".
Cumulative impacts are defined as "...the impact on the environment that results from
incremental effects of the project in addition to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable
future projects regardless of what person undertakes the other projects" (Minn. Rules 4410.0200
Subpart 11). However, in determining the potential for significant environmental effects and the
need for an EIS, the EQB rules do not require an analysis of past projects. Rather, the required
analysis of cumulative impacts is limited to "...related or anticipated future projects" (Minn.
Rules 4410.1700 Subpart 7B). As stated above, Vermillion Grove has no "related" projects, as
that term is defined in the EQB rules. The only anticipated future project that is in near enough
proximity to Vermillion Grove to warrant cumulative impact analysis is the Murphy Farm PUD.
Accordingly, the City is supplying additional information relating to the cumulative effects of the
Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm developments (see Exhibit A attached).
Dakota County Office of Planning
In their letter of June 1, 2000, Dakota County staff concurred with other commenters with regard
to the need to assess the cumulative impacts of the Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm projects
and suggest that this be done through a related actions EIS or an Alternative Urban Areawide
Review (AUAR). See response 7 to the Dakota County SWCD as to the need for a related
actions EIS or an AUAR. All other comments submitted by the county relate to the Murphy
Farm project.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
In their letter of May 17,2000, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources listed a number
of concerns. These concerns are individually itemized below, and which are followed by the
City's response:
1. EA W Item 29 - Effects of Cumulative Impacts
See response number 7 to Dakota County SWCD.
2. EA W Items 12 and 17- Outlet for Minnesota Public Water Wetland #353W
See response number 5 to Dakota County SWCD.
3. EA W Item 11- Wildlife Habitat Impacts
The City concurs that reductions in wildlife habitat generally equate to reductions in wildlife
populations and/or diversity.
4. Use ofthe AUAR process
The City recognizes the potential benefits that the AUAR process can afford with regard to the
comprehensive consideration of potential environmental impacts in a geographically defined
area. However, use of the AUAR process is optional. The City of Farmington made the
determination at the outset of the environmental review process for Vermillion Grove and
Murphy Farm that separate EA Ws would provide adequate impact analysis for each project.
Accordingly, the City agrees with the DNR that it is too late for the AUAR process to be used on
either the Vermillion Grove PUD or the Murphy Farm PUD projects, but is in the process of
reviewing the suitability of using the AUAR process for expected future development for other
large tracts ofland. While much of the City's study of use of the AUAR process will be based
on the outcome of the Environmental Quality Board's Generic Environmental Impact Statement
on urban development, the City currently plans to use the AUAR process prior to development of
the Genstar Orderly Annexation Area to the northwest of the current City boundary.
5. EA W Item 11- Impacts to Woodland Resources
The City concurs that the forested acreage on the site will be reduced from 24.3 acres to 9.6
acres, a decrease of 60 percent. These figures are provided in the response to EA W Question 10.
6. EA W Item 8- DNR Permits
The Vermillion Grove project does not require any work below the OHWL of DNR wetland
#353W, as the planned outlet for this basin will be done in conjunction with the Murphy Farm
project. The EA W for Vermillion Grove properly identified the potential need for a temporary
water appropriation permit to allow for construction related de-watering. The City is aware of
past problems in the watershed regarding appropriation permits, and will take steps to make sure
that DNR permitting procedures are followed.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
In their letter of May 17, 2000, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency listed a number of
concerns. These concerns are individually itemized below, and which are followed by the City's
response:
1. EA W Items 12 and 17- Stormwater Impacts
With regard to DNR wetland #353W, see response number 5 to Dakota County SWCD. The
project proposer is complying with the NPDES stormwater management program as it is
presently configured. The project proposer will work with the SWCD and the City of
Farmington to ensure that adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures are implemented
and maintained. With regard to wetland buffers, see response 3 to the Dakota County SWCD.
2. EA W Item 29- Related Actions
See response number 7 to Dakota County SWCD.
3. EA W Item 29- Cumulative Impacts
See response number 7 to Dakota County SWCD.
4. AUAR Process
See response number 4 to the Minnesota DNR.
Metropolitan Council
In their letter of June 1, 2000 the Metropolitan Council indicated that the EA W was complete
and accurate with respect to regional concerns and that the EA W does not raise major issues of
consistency with Metropolitan Council policies. They indicated that no EIS should be required
for the Vermillion Grove PUD.
EXHIBIT A
CUMULATIVE IMPACT SUMMARY
VERMILLION GROVE pun & MURPHY FARM pun
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
This summary is provided to address the potential cumulative environmental impacts of
the Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm PUDs in Farmington, Minnesota.
Land Use
Both the Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm projects will convert agricultural land to
residential use. The areas affected by these projects have been zoned and guided by the
City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan for such use. Accordingly, the land use
impacts of these projects have been anticipated and planned for by the City of
Farmington. The Metropolitan Council has reviewed the EA Ws for each project and
concluded that both documents are complete and accurate with respect to regional
concerns and that neither raises major issues of consistency with Metropolitan Council
policies.
Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources
No threatened, endangered or special concern species will be affected by either project.
Both projects involve the conversion of farmland and woodland habitats to residential
use. Common farmland wildlife species inhabit both parcels. Habitat conversion is
expected to reduce the populations and/or diversity of some species in favor of other
species that are adapted to suburban land uses.
No fisheries habitat will be eliminated due to either of the projects. Both projects drain to
Middle Creek, which is a tributary of the Vermillion River. Middle Creek is described in
the City of Farmington Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) as a warm water
fishery. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has not designated either
Middle Creek or the reach of the Vermillion River it drains to as trout stream.
Physical Impacts of Water Resources
A total of 0.49 acre of partially to effectively drained wetland will be filled for the
Murphy Farm project. The jurisdictional status of this wetland is questionable due to the
presence of a drainage ditch through the basin. Compensatory mitigation is being
provided on-site. The Vermillion Grove project will not result in the filling of any
jurisdictional wetlands. Accordingly, the cumulative wetland fill associated with the two
projects is 0.49 acre. The Murphy Farm project will include an outlet structure for DNR
Wetland #353W in accordance with the City of Farmington Surface Water Management
Plan (SWMP). The size and invert of this outlet has been established by the city so as to
maintain water level fluctuations at pre-development levels. A DNR permit will be
required for this outlet as part of the Murphy Farm project.
Cumulative Impact Summary
Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm PUDs
Farmington, Minnesota
Page 2
Water Use
Both projects will be connected to City of Farmington water service and adequate
capacity is available on the system to supply both projects.
Erosion and Sedimentation
Both projects have been designed to meet the erosion and sedimentation control
requirements of the City of Farmington and the policies of the Vermillion River Water
Management Commission (VRWMC).
Water Quality, Surface Water Runoff
The water body receiving stormwater discharges from the Vermillion Grove and Murphy
Farm project sites is DNR wetland #353W, which is classified as "Protect" under the
SWMP and the Farmington wetland protection ordinance. Under existing (pre-
development) conditions, this wetland is subject to significant inputs of sediment,
nutrients and agricultural chemicals due to the surrounding cultivated land use and lack
of stormwater treatment measures. Wetland #353W currently receives no protection
through vegetated buffers, stormwater treatment ponds or Best Management Practices
(BMPs), all of which are required to be implemented as a part of the proposed residential
developments. The stormwater management designs of both the Vermillion Grove and
Murphy Farm PUDs have been developed to substantially improve existing conditions
and will fully comply with the requirements of the City of Farmington SWMP. Given the
wetland's classification, the SWMP strictly limits phosphorus loadings and water level
fluctuations that would result from upgradient development. Given that these two
projects will fully comply with these strict requirements, the cumulative water quantity
and quality impacts of the two projects on DNR wetland #353W are expected to be
positive rather than adverse.
With the installation of an outlet on DNR wetland #353W, surface water from the two
projects will be discharged into Middle Creek and ultimately into the Vermillion River.
Like DNR wetland #353W, the affected reaches of these streams are currently
unprotected from water quality and sedimentation impacts from surrounding agricultural
uses. Surface water emanating from impervious surfaces on the two project sites will be
ponded in NURP ponds prior to release to DNR wetland #353W and ultimately to Middle
Creek. The characteristics of the outlet from DNR wetland #353W to Middle Creek that
are specified in the SWMP have been developed by the city based on modeling of both
the quantity and quality of the surface water to be discharged downstream. Accordingly,
the cumulative impacts of the two projects on the hydrology and water quality have
already been addressed in the SWMP.
Cumulative Impact Summary
Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm PUDs
Farmington, Minnesota
Page 3
Water Quality Wastewaters
Both projects will be served by Farmington's municipal sanitary sewer system. Adequate
capacity exists on the system to serve both projects.
Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions
Neither project site encompasses any known geologic hazards. Erodible soils on both
sites will be addressed through the measures described in the EA Ws and to be included in
the erosion control plans for the projects (which are subject to review and approval by the
city and other agencies).
Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes and Storage Tanks
Phase I Environmental Assessments for the two projects identified no potential
contamination or other environmental conditions that warrant additional investigation or
remediation.
Traffic
The traffic analyses for Vermillion Grove or Murphy Farm identified specific design
recommendations for roadways and intersections serving the two sites. No traffic
movement conflicts or capacity problems were identified that will not be addressed by
plans contained in the City-proposed Akin Road Improvements plan. Each traffic
analysis used 2020 traffic volume projections, thereby anticipating future development in
the area in its assumptions.
Vehicle-Related and Stationary Source Air Emissions
Due to the relatively low trip generation associated with the two projects and the absence
of roadway and intersection capacity problems, no vehicle-related air quality problems
are anticipated. No significant stationary sources of air emissions will exist on either site.
Odors, Noise and Dust
Due to the relatively low trip generation associated with the two projects and the absence
of roadway and intersection capacity problems, no traffic noise problems are anticipated.
The projects will both generate construction noise and dust from earth-moving machinery
but these effects will be temporary and controlled by proper muffling of equipment and
standard dust control measures. No odor producing land uses are planned for either site.
Cumulative Impact Summary
Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm PUDs
Farmington, Minnesota
Page 4
Nearby Resources
The peninsula on the Murphy Farm site between the lobes of DNR wetland #353W was
identified as a site of potential cultural significance. This peninsula will not be developed
and will be dedicated to the City of Farmington for its long-term protection. The upper
reach of the Vermillion River is a DNR-designated trout stream. However, this reach lies
entirely upstream from the point where stormwater from the two projects will discharge
into the river.
Visual Impacts
The two projects are not expected to have adverse impacts to scenic views or vistas,
either individually or cumulatively.
Infrastructure and Public Services
Adequate infrastructure and public services are in place to serve the cumulative demand
of the Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm PUDs.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
500 Lafayellc Road 10
51. Paul. Minnesota 55155-40_
May 17, 2000
D~@~D'iYl~ln
MAY 2 5 am '~
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator
Planning and Zoning Division
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024-1358
RE: Vermillion Grove Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W)
Dear Ms. Smick:
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EA W for the Vermillion Grove PUD
project. We offer the following comments for your consideration.
The May 1,2000 edition of the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) publieation EQB Monitor noticed a
project that is immediately adjacent to the Vermillion Grove P.U.D. site called Murphy Farm P.U.D.
These two projects share a common border and will be implemented under similar time frames. Item 29,
Cumulative Impacts, requires consideration of the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated
future projects when determining the need for an environmental impact statement (ElS)." The answer
provided to Item 29 in the EA W, which offers that the Vermillion Grove P.U.D. is not a connected or
phased action of other projects, is an inadequate response on the issue of potential cumulative impacts.
As the designated Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for both EA Ws, a burden is clearly evident for
the relevant environmental analysis to examine the broader picture associated with any related projects,
especially the Murphy Farm P.U.D.
Consideration of related projects is especially important in this instance because runoff generated by the
Vermillion Grove P.U.D. will discharge to State Protected Wetland #19-353W (Items 12 and 17).
Although the EA W correetly notes the wetland exhibits an ordinary high water (OHW) level of908.7',
the document does not indicate that this is a landlocked basin, which means that the wetland has no
associated natural outlet. Past experience indicates that the routing of storm water to basins without
outlets can present substantial environmental and legal problems. The high water runout elevation for
basin #19-353W is 4.5 feet above the OHW and appears to be located on the Murphy Farm P.U.D. site.
Although not discussed in the Vermillion Grove P.U.D. EA W, it appears that a culvert is planned on the
adjacent Murphy Farm P.U.D. site; [reference Exhibit F, Murphy Farm P.U.D. EA W].
The Vermillion Grove P.U.D. EA W does not adequately portray how the projeet might affect State
Protected Wetland #19-353W. The project evaluation should include identifieation of actions being taken
for the Murphy Farm P.U.D. as well as describe how these actions might avoid or minimize adverse
impacts to #19-353W. It is important that consultation with DNR occur on this matter; Peter Leete, DNR
Area Hydrologist, can be contaeted at (651) 772-7910 to discuss relevant issues.
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 · 1-888-646-0067 · TrY: 651-296-5484 · 1-800-657-3929
An Equal Opportunity EmplDyer
Who Values Diversity
A. Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
"'tv Minimum of 10% post-Consumer Waste
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator
May 17,2000
More broadly, Item 29 should specifically acknowledge the Murphy Farm P.U.D., and any other projects
occurring in the vicinity, and how these projects in total may result in adverse impacts to natural
resources, infrastructure, or public services. Both Minn. Rules part 4410.1700, subp. 7C and Minn. Rules
part 4410.2000, subp. 5 address the issue of considering eumulative impacts. We cite these rules to alert
you that the Minnesota Environmental Review Program anticipates circumstances where cumulative
impacts across multiple projects are determined to be potentially significant. If your examination of
cumulative impacts does identify potentially significant issues, then preparation of a related actions EIS
may be the means to accomplish the necessary evaluation of impacts and mitigation.
The rapid growth situation being faced by the City of Farmington is not unique within the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Region. Although too late for use in either the Vermillion Grove P.U.D. or the Murphy
Farm P.U.D. projects, DNR has been encouraging RGUs to consider use of the Alternative Urban
Areawide Review (AUAR) process to address how future development will affect the land base. If
development within the MUSA is as definite as it appears, the AUAR process ean provide a number of
benefits to the City as an RGU and to project proposers and reviewers alike.
The AUAR process allows for the comprehensive consideration of the potential environmental effects
within a geographically defined study area. It ean cover multiple known or future projects in one process.
Potential impact areas, and measures available to prevent these same impacts, are identified and
incorporated into an adopted Mitigation Plan that applies. to the study area. Once the AUAR process is
complete, projects that meet the assumptions of the AUAR are exempt from project-specific
environmental review and may proceed directly to permitting. Most important, future project proposers
understand up front what will be required, either in project designs or applicable approvals, to conduct
projects within the study area such that significant environmental effects are prevented.
DNR supports use of the AUAR process and is willing to assist RGUs in seoping issues of potential
natural resource concern. Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff for further DNR perspective on the
AUAR process if desired; he can be reaehed at (651) 296-9229.
Item lla eorrectly notes that project-related habitat change, which is occurring as a function cover type
conversion, will result in changes to wildlife populations that survive at the site. Species less capable of
surviving in the manicured eonditions typieal of this type of development will be replaced by species
more tolerant of human-dominated habitat. These species, such as robin, erow, and rabbit are becoming
increasingly common in the Twin Cities area. Intolerant wildlife species, such as the red fox as noted in
the EA W, will be displaced by the project into adjacent habitat if available. Displaced wildlife will
compete with existing populations where the result of this competition will be an overall wildlife
population decline. The EA W should note that elimination of habitat results in the elimination of
wildlife.
Item 11 a also discusses how the project may affect woodland resources at the site. The EA W states:
"Some of the wooded areas in the northern, eastern and southwestern portions of the site will be impacted
by the proposed development." This charaeterization understates what will occur with the project
because approximately 60% of the site's wooded cover will be eliminated. Therefore, a more accurate
statement in the EA W would read "A maioritv of the wooded areas in the northern, eastern and...."
Regarding potential need for DNR permits, any work that occurs beneath the OHW of State Protected
Wetland #19-353W, including storm water outfalls, will require a DNR protected waters permit. Any
2
J
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator
May 17,2000
construction related temporary dewatering that exceeds 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per
year, will require a DNR water appropriation permit. Mr. Leete can be contacted for information on these
permit requirements.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. We look forward to receiving your record of
decision and responses to comments submitted on the EA W at a future date. Minn. Rules part
4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, require that you send us these documents within five (5) days of your
decision. Please contact Bill Johnson at the previously mentioned number if you have questions
regarding this letter.
Sincerely,
~yyS?~
Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor
Environmental Planning & Review Section
Office of Management & Budget Services
c: Kathleen Wallace
Con Christianson
Joe Oschwald
Peter Leete, Metro Area Hydrologist
Russ Peterson, USFWS
Jon Larsen, EQB
J. Michael Noonan, Rottlund Homes
#20000209-0002
VERMGROVE.WPD
3
t
~ MetropolitE-l Council
~ Working for the Region, Planning for the Future
May 23, 2000
David Olson
Community Development Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
RE: EA W - Vermillion Grove Planned Unit Development
City of Farmington
Metropolitan Council District 16
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 18240-1
Dear Mr. Olson:
Metropolitan Council staff have reviewed this environmental assessment worksheet (EA W) to determine
its adequacy and accuracy in addressing regional concerns, potential impacts that warrant further
investigation, and the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS). The project proposes the
development of a 123-acre mixed-use development. The staff review has concluded that the EA W is
complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with
Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional eoncerns. The following is an advisory comment
for your consideration:
The street and utility plan inelude concepts to reduee the amount of impervious areas, which
result in ereating less runoff. In addition to the methods ineorporated in the plan, please consider
consulting the book, Better site design: A handbook for changing development rules in your
community, by the Center for Watershed Proteetion. This handbook includes many examples of
methods that can be used to minimize runoff from the development site and to help protect water
resources downstream.
This will conclude the Council's review of the EAW. No formal action on the EAW will be taken by the
Council. If you have questions, please contact Ciara Schlichting, Prineipal Reviewer, at 651/602-1380.
i.
I
Sincerely,
~o~~
Director, Environmental Services
cc: John Conzemius, Metropolitan Council District 16
Eli Cooper, Director, MCCD Planning and Growth Management Department
Keith Buttleman, Direetor, MCES Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department
Riehard Thompson, Supervisor, Comprehensive Planning
Sandra Pinel, Sector Representative
Linda Milashius, Referrals Coordinator
Ciara Schlichting, Principal Reviewer
V:\LIBRAR Y\COMMUNDV\Schlichting\Misc\F A 18240-1 EA W .doc05/23/00
230 East Fifth Street St. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1626
(651) 602-1000
Fax 602-1550
TOO /TIY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 602-1888
An Equal Opportunity Employer
"'~,
~
( .,
,~I801:t
~ ~
II Ii
~~_r1
Minnesota Departnl_..t of Transportation
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road 82
Roseville, MN 55113
D ~ @ ~ D\Yl ~.r.:---~\l
I I '
I~ ; APR 2 UDI ,II II
u i ll!>>
April 20, 2000
Mr. David L. Olson
Community Development Director
City ofFannington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, Minnesota 55024
Subject: Vermillion Grove P.D.D. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Dear Mr. Olson:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the above-referenced EA Wand
has no comments, as this development does not directly impact state highway right of way.
Thank you for submitting this EA W to our agency. Please address all future correspondence for
development activity such as plats, site plans, environmental reviews, and comprehensive plan
amendments to:
Sherry Narusiewicz
Mn/DOT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Feel free to contact me at (651) 582-1771 if should have any questions.
Sincerely,
~
Paul Czech
Senior Transportation Planner/Local Government Liaison
cc: MnlDOT Division File - C.S. N/A
MnlDOTLGL-D~otaCounty
An equal opportunity employer
DAKOTA COUNTY SOIL AND WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Dakota County Extension and Conservation Center
41 00 220th Street West, Suite 102
Farmington, MN 55024
Phone: (651) 480-7777 FAX: (651) 480-7775
Ms. Lee Smick
City Planner
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Ref.: 00-FRM-036
May 17,2000
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EA W) REVIEW FOR VERMILLION
GROVE P.D.D.
Dear Lee:
This letter is in response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) completed for the above-
referenced project which was submitted to our office for review and eomment. The proposed
development entails 330-340 mixed-residential units on 123 aeres in Farmington. The following
comments are submitted for your consideration:
Item 8: Permits and Approvals Required
1. Table 1.0 notes an "erosion and sedimentation control-permit" from the Dakota SWCD. The Dakota
SWCD reviews site plans and conduets site inspeetions for the City, but no sueh permit requirement
exists.
2. While the Vermillion River Watershed Management Organization does not have direet regulatory
authority, the District reeommends the City and project proposer coordinate closely with the WMO to
ensure complianee with the WMO's draft watershed management plan.
Item 11: Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources
1. Has an inventory been eondueted to determine the number, size, and speeies of trees that will be lost
during site alterations? We cannot adequately assess the aetual impacts to fish, wildlife, and
ecologically sensitive resources without a more detailed assessment of the upland vegetation on the
site.
2. The EA W states "tree impaets have been minimized through the use of eurb and gutter design instead
of rural seetion." It appears most of the tree loss, especially in the large woodlot in the east-central
portion of the site, is because of mass grading. See Item 16 below for suggested alternatives to mass
grading this area to minimize tree loss and protect natural features on the site.
Item 12: Physical Impacts on Water Resources
1. The EA W states no direet wetland impaets will oecur.
2. The EA W further states the proposed projeet is in compliance with the City of Farmington's Wetland
Ordinance. However it appears a wetland buffer is not provided at multiple locations adjacent to
DNR wetland #353W as required under the City's wetland ordinance. The Dakota SWCD strongly
discourages the use of "buffer averaging" when determining eompliance with the wetland ordinance
as it defeats the goals of the plan. A eontiguous buffer around the entire perimeter of this high quality
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNllY EMPLOYER
Vermillion Grove EA W Cornlfients
OO-FRM-036
2
wetland system is one of the most effective method to minimize short and long-term adverse impacts
of the proposed development to the wetland. Buffer averaging severely diminishes the effects of
buffers as an entire wetland can be impaired by runoff from one non-buffered area.
3. See below for suggestions that would reduce the likelihood of indirect, downstream impacts.
Item 16: Erosion and Sedimentation
1. Mass grading is proposed. Custom grading portions of the site, especially those within wooded areas,
near wetlands, and above steep slopes, will greatly reduce construction-related erosion and
sedimentation. Reducing the amount of grading will also have tremendous stormwater (see below)
and wildlife benefits.
2. Avoid grading slopes steeper than 12-18% (recommendations varies depending on soil types and
existing vegetation).
3. In addition to standard erosion and sediment controls, the following BMPs are critical:
a) Projeet phasing to minimize exposed soil.
b) Preserve existing vegetation, especially adjacent to wetland resources and within natural
drainageways.
c) Use temporary cover extensively and regularly. Seed and mulch exposed areas that will be
exposed and idle for more than a week. Repeat as necessary.
4. The District anticipates reviewing the proposed erosion and sedimentation controls as the preliminary
plats are submitted to determine eompliance with NPDES and City requirements. Because of the
sites proximity to DNR wetland #353W, effective BMP selection, proper installation, and ongoing
maintenance will be eritieal to protecting water quality during and after construction.
Item 17: Water Quality and Quantity - Surface Water Runoff
1. Based on the City's stormwater management plan and utility plan for the Murphy Farm EA W, we
understand an outlet for DNR wetland #353W is proposed.
2. Because the site will ultimately drain through this very high quality wetland (Classified as Protect in
the ordinance) to Middle Creek of the Vermillion River and downstream streambank seour and
flooding concerns have been well documented, minimizing the long-term water quantity and quality
impaets of this development should be a central design eonsideration. If an outlet is not proposed,
then water quantity control is critical to minimize the stormwater bounce in DNR wetland #353W.
3. Accordingly, the SWCD recommends the use oflow impact development (LID) practices such as
impervious area reduction, infiltration BMPs, maintaining natural drainage courses, reducing clearing
and grading, and bioretention/infiltration. LID can achieve stormwater control through the creation of
a hydrologieally functionallandseape that mimics the natural hydrologic regime (LID Design
Strategies, Prince George's County, MD, January 2000).
Minimizing the post-development curve number (to reduce runoff volume) and maximizing time of
concentration (to reduee peak discharge rates) are critical design elements in the LID approach. This
can be achieved by providing runoff storage measures dispersed uniformly throughout the site's
landscape with the use of a variety of detention, retention, and runoff practiees.
The Dakota SWCD may be able to provide finaneial ineentives to support ineorporation of LID
concepts into the development plans.
4. Please clarify if the calculated flood elevations for DNR #353W include expeeted runoff from the
proposed Murphy Farm PUD.
Item 19: Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions
High silt contents of the site's soils and steep slopes create conditions conducive to severe erosion and
sedimentation. See comments above regarding erosion and sedimentation eontrol.
Vermillion Grove EA W Comlnents
OO-FRM-036
3
Item 30: Cumulative Impacts
As stated in the EA W, MN Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B, the RGU must consider the
"eumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects." This does not require the projects
be submitted by the same proposer to be considered ''related or anticipated." Adjacent residential
developments that ultimately drain to the same tributary (i.e. Middle Creek of the Vermillion River),
should be considered "related." Combining Vermillion Grove, Murphy Farm, and Charleswood (not to
mention other nearby ongoing and proposed developments such as Autumn Glen and Riverbend), create a
seenario that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The cumulative impacts of
these and other proposed developments that drain to the Vermillion River justify completing additional
review and, more importantly, implementing innovative storm water management practices and design
approaches to minimize the short and long term adverse impacts of these land alterations.
Even though combining these projects far exceeds EIS thresholds, the Dakota SWCD prefers an
alternative approach. We suggest conducting a detailed assessment to determine runoff volumes from
two of the proposed developments (Vermillion Grove and Murphy Farm) for a variety of scenarios -
including scenarios that fully embrace the LID approach. The results of these scenario assessments
should then be eompared to infrastructure/development costs and environmental benefits. Lastly, the
aesthetic, environmental, and wildlife benefits should be included in the fmal assessment to determine
what practices and designs should be pursued.
The Dakota SWCD offers to assist in this effort, including but not limited to providing potential cost-
share funds for the hydrologie analysis. We may also be able to provide cost-share for implementation
and monitoring of LID concepts.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding this letter, you can reach either of us at (651)
480-7777.
Sineerely,
~ ;Jd~
Brian Watson
District Manager
~~
Urban Conservationist
ce: Brian Watson, Dakota SWCD
Suzanne Savanick, SWCD Supervisor District II
Gerry Stelzel, Vermillion River WMO
Jay Michels, MPCA
Judy Sventek, Met Council
PatLynch,MDNR
Lisa Ring and Kurt Chatfield, Dakota County Office of Planning
e MONTGOMERY WATSON
May 4, 2000
Mr. David Olson, Development Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak St.
Farmington, MN 55024
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) for Vermillion Grove
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.)
Dear Mr. Olson:
I have reviewed the EA W for this project as the engineer for the Vermillion River
Watershed Management Commission (VRWMC) and offer you the following comments:
1. The water discharge rate and water quality policies stated in the EA W are consistent
with the City's Stormwater Management Plan and therefore are consistent with the
Commission's draft Watershed Management Plan.
2. In the draft plan the Commission has adopted a policy of infiltrating the first OS' of
precipitation where appropriate. Please investigate the applicability of infiltration to
this project.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EA W.
S incerel y,
MONTGOMERY WATSON
c:k~
Ed Matthiesen, P.E.
cc: Jerry Stelzel
Laura Jester
Waterford Park
505 U.S. Hwy. 169
Suite 555
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441
Tel: 612 593 9000
Fax: 612 593 9975
Serving the World's Environmental Needs
Office of Planning
Lynn Moratzka,AICP
Director
Dakota County
Western Service Center
14955 Galaxie Avenue
Apple Valley, MN 55124
612.891.7030
Fax 612.891.7031
www.co.dakota.mn.us
o
Printed on recycled paper
with 30% post<onsumer waste.
AN EQUAL 0PPQR11.INI1"f EMPlOYER
~~
~1'f
June 1, 2000
Ms. Lee Smick
City Planner
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheets for the Vermillion Grove and Murphy
Farm PUDs
Dear Ms. Smick:
Dakota County staff appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the
proposed planned unit developments (PUDs) referenced above.
Dakota County staff offers the following comment regarding the Vermillion Grove
and Murphy Farm PUDs:
Overall, County staff agree with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's
assessment that the potential cumulative environmental effects of these two
developments, along with the other developments in this area, should be studied
further through either a related-actions Environmental Impact Statement or an
Alternative Urban Areawide Review. Dakota County staff also agrees with the
comments made by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and the
Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District regarding stormwater run-
off, wetland impacts, and erosion control. In addition, County staff is also
concerned about groundwater protection, and refers city staff to the water quality
comments (No.1 beginning below) for the Murphy Farm PUD.
Dakota County staff offers the following suggested changes and comments
regarding the Murphy Farm PUD:
1. Page 17, Item 17 - Water Quality, first paragraph: The EAW states that the
"proposed project is not expected to significantly alter the quantity or quality of
site run-off." County staff believes that an alteration from 0.1 acres of
impervious surfaces to 55.6 acres constitutes a potentially significant change in
the quantity of site run-off. If the amount of site run-off will not change
significantly because of the proposed stormwater ponds, then this should be
stated as the reason why. The statement alone, begs the question, and without
an explanation would seem to be untrue.
Whereas the proposed stormwater ponds could help "protect receiving waters
from (the typical suburban residential chemicals in the site) run-off," the other
concern in this area of the County is the fact that this is a "High" (weeks to
years) geologic sensitivity area. In addition to protecting receiving waters, the
stormwater ponds should be constructed to protect groundwater from possible
danger of contamination. On page 18, a statement is made that the "final design
and construction standards (of the stormwater ponds) will conform to the City of
Farmington's requirements." The final design should also take into
consideration the protection of groundwater. There are some areas in the
County where natural infiltration of surface water would not be recommended,
because of the danger of groundwater contamination. Is this one of those
areas, and if not, how was that conclusion reached?
2. Natural Open Space Impacts: The northeast corner of the proposed PUD
contains "natural open space" as shown dn District 3 Central Map 3.5 in the
City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. All of this designated natural open space area
would be lost to residential development. This appears to be inconsistent with
the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
3. MUSA Staging and Current MUSA: Map 4.1, in the 2020 MUSA Staging Plan,
shows that the southern part of the proposed PUD is not in the current MUSA,
but is proposed to be in the future MUSA. Table 4.1, in the 2020 MUSA Staging
Plan, in the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan shows that 60 acres of medium
density residential used will be allowed between 2000-2005. The proposed
PUD includes 490 attached units on 72 acres. This appears to be inconsistent
with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
4. Floodplain: Page 15 of the EAW states that, "...much of the southern portion of
the project site lies within the floodplain of Middle Creek...." The EAW also
states that "a study of the floodplain is currently being undertaken, which will
likely result in a change to the mapped floodplain in the project area (Exhibit C)."
What if the study concludes that most of the FEMA flood zone boundary is
correct? Will the City require that the project proposer amend the PUD and
remove the 1 O-unit villas proposed in the west end of the project that is in the
currently designated floodplain? Will the City notify affected agencies and units
of government of the results of the floodplain study and any changes to the
project?
5. Grading: Page 16 indicates that 144 acres of soil will be graded or excavated.
The total development acreage is 157 acres; 91.7% of the proposed developed
area needs grading. County staff does not view the significant amount of
proposed grading to constitute site sensitive design. Has site sensitive design
been a- factor in the proposed development of this site? If it has, County staff
would like to know how that is reflected in what's being proposed, especially
relative to the amount of proposed grading on this site. Dakota County
Comprehensive Plan 2020 Policy C4.1 supports efforts to "minimize disturbance
of natural grades and vegetation and encourage the use of existing topography
_ for natural drainage and infiltration to the extent possible."
6. The proposed roadway access points on CSAH 31 are subject to approval by
the Dakota County Plat Commission. The Dakota County Plat Commission will
also need to approve right of way dedication for land adjacent to CSAH 31.
,..-
7. We support the 203rd Street corridor depicted in the concept plan as an
important east/west route parallel to 195th Street and 20Bth Street. This street
is identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan as a major east/west route that
continues all the way to the Lakeville/Farmington border and perhaps beyond.
However, if this street is intended to be a major east west route, the City might
want to consider altering its design to remove individual residential driveways
and accommodate higher traffic volumes. Based on the City's Comprehensive
Plan, this road will presumably carry higher traffic volumes when land develops
to the west and the road is extended.
8. The roadway design within the proposed development provides good local road
connectivity. However, we are unable to assess the full impact of this
development and other adjacent development on transportation systems by
reviewing this EAW in isolation. An AUAR would allow us to do a more
comprehensive review of the cumulative impact of this development and
associated development that is occurring adjacent to Murphy Farm.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on these proposed PUDs. If you
have any questions, please call Kurt Chatfield at 952-891-7022.
Sincerely,
~ . .'ff
~~~ YJ;tv?~
~~::tzka, Director 2)
Office of Planning
c: Commissioner Joseph Harris
Brandt Richardson, County Administrator
Susan Hoyt, Physical Development Director
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
May 17,2000
Mr. David L. Olson
Community development Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
RE: Vermillion Grove Planned Unit Development (PUD) Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Dear Mr. Olson:
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staffhas reviewed the above-referenced EAW. We
are concerned about two specific issues. The first issue is impacts of stormwater runoff from this and
other developments in the area on Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Protected Water #353W,
which is immediately adjacent to the proposed development, and on North Creek, Middle Creek, and the
Vermillion River. The second issue is that of other residential developments, which we consider related
aetions, and the need for a related-actions Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or an Alternative Urban
Areawide Review.
Stormwater Impacts
We share the concern of the DNR that this eould have a very negative impact on DNR Protected Water
#353W. More importantly, the entire surrounding area is undergoing major conversion from agricultural
to residential land use, and it is unclear (at least from the EA W), how the resultant increase in
impermeable surfaces will impact water quality in PW #353W, Middle Creek, North Creek, or the
Vermillion River. We encourage the use of low impact development principles like added detention
through ponding, depressional storage and infiltration. According to the soils information, much of the
site is mapped as having well-drained soils with moderate permeability. Dakota County Soil and Water
Conservation District (SWCD) has received a $100,000 grant to develop low-impact development
principles throughout the eounty. We reeommend that the city and developers work with the SWCD on
developing a plan to match existing (pre-development) and post-development discharge rates and
volumes from the site to the wetland. As you may be aware, the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Program will require cities (including Farmington) to obtain
Stormwater Permits by March of 2003. Farmington has the expertise in the Dakota SWCD and even
some potential funding to anticipate the requirements of this National Permit program and avoid
expensive retrofitting of stormwater treatment. Rottland Homes, Inc. has an opportunity for generating
highly favorable publicity by demonstrating "smart growth" development.
We encourage developers and the city to work actively with the SWCD on development and
implementation of their construction stormwater and erosion control plans. Steep slopes and erodible
soils in the area make eonstruction phasing and the establishment of temporary or permanent cover as
required by the NPDES construction stormwater general permit doubly important. Similarly, it is very
advisable to observe wetland setback requirements and avoid averaging of setback distances to protect
wetland water quality and treatment capacity.
520 Lafayette Rd. No; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (651) 296-6300 (Voice); (651) 292-5332 (TTY)
St. Paul . Brainerd · Detroit Lakes · Duluth · Mankato · Marshall · Roehester . Willmar; www.pea.state.mn.us
Equal Opportunity Employer . Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers.
Mr. David L. Olson
Page Two
Related Actions
We are also presently reviewing the Murphy Farms PUD EA W, a project which abuts the Vermillion
Grove EA Won its southern boundary, and through which must flow any drainage from the Vermillion
Grove PUD (Via Wetland #353W). In addition, we recall a previous subdivision called Charleswood and
have been made aware of other developments (Autumn Glen and Riverbend) in the immediate area.
Under the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Rules, projects need not be proposed by the same
developers to be related. In determining whether a mandatory EIS is required on several related actions,
a Responsible Governmental Unit, such as Farmington, may prepare a single BIS if it determines that
such a review ean he more efficient than individual EISs (Mhm. R. 4410.2000, Subp. 5).
The EQB Rules also provide that the eriteria considered by a RUG, when determining whether an EIS has
the potential for significant environmental impacts (and whether an EIS should therefore be prepared)
include the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects." (Minn. R. 4410.1700
Subpart 7B.) We believe that this and other related residential developments do indeed have the potential
for significant impacts on the water quality ofDNR Protected Water #353W and Middle Creek and North
Creek and the Vermillion River. We therefore recommend that an EIS be prepared on this and other
related residential developments.
The MPCA understands the negative impact an EIS would have on project implementation schedules.
We therefore suggest that the eity consider preparing an Alternative Urban Areawide Review, pursuant to
Minn. R. 4410.3610. This would allow a mueh more timely proeess and, provided it employs an
adequate analysis, can accomplish everything that an EIS would aecomplish, in terms of identifying best
mitigative measures to for stormwater impacts.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to review this EA W. We encourage the proposers in their efforts to
design and build a residential subdivision with minimal environmental impacts. If you have any
questions about this comment letter, please contact me at (651) 296-8643.
Sincerely,
Eri~i2.~
Planner Principal
Operations and Planning Section
Metro District
EJK:gs
cc: J. Michael Noonan, Rottlund Homes, Inc., Minnesota Division
Jay Riggs, Dakota County SWCD
Curt Chatfield, Dakota County Planning Department
Jon Larsen, Environmental Quality Board
Jay Michels, Metro District, Community and Area-wide Program
Bill Johnson, DNR
~: l;;::;~I'~i\'~,~~:;;;:l;~;;~i'~;~:':~; :,'; '; .':;;t~:'J~7;",' - ,,':, '. .. :,;,"..:',~;::" . ' , ':" ",,:, :--." ' .
11
MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
Mr. Lee Smick
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024-1358
~: ;--....\ ; ~-.<. \ ;..---; "' - ."
'I ~l (_' ,-' --..- ,~
ml MAY I 0 /IDJ
l~i
May 9, 2000
i
L
Re: EAW - Vermillion Grove Planned Unit Development
Farmington, Dakota County
SHPO Number 1999-4149
Dear Mr. Smick:
Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the Environmental Assessment
Worksheet for the above-referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to
responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites
Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in
Minnesota Rules 4410.1600.
We appreciate the attention that has been given to cultural resources during the
planning of this project.
The EAW acknowledges our concern about the potential for archaeological resources
on the upland peninsula extending from the project area south between Wetland A and
Wetland B. The EAW indicates that the Vermillion Grove P.U.D. is not proposing any
disturbance to this area.
However, because the project involves a NPDES permit, it appears that Section 106
review issues need to be addressed. (Section 106 refers to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act, and is implemented in 36 CFR 800.) To address these
requ!J:ements, further information is needed about the future ownership of the peninsula,
.' .. as well as what type of strategy is in pace to ensure that culturai issues are taken into
account in the future.
Contact us at 651-296-5462 with questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
M-lo ~-1~~
~ennis A. Gimmestad
G Government Programs & Compliance Officer
cc: Keith Cherryholmes, MPCA
Mike Graham, Peterson Environmental
:H.5 KELLOGG BOLl,EHHD WEST / SU~T PU'L. Ml~NESOT.\ 55102-l906/ TELEPHONE: 651-296..6126
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS CENTRE
190 FIFTH STREET EAST
ST. PAUL, MN 55101.1638
May 23, 2000
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
Construction-Operations
Regulatory (00-04960-DAS)
Mr. David Olson
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, Minnesota 55024
Dear Mr. Olson:
We have reviewed information about a project of Arcon
Development, Inc. to discharge fill material in an unnamed
wetland in conjunction with the construction of the Murphy Farm
Planned Unit Development. The project site is in Sec. 25, T.
114N., R. 20W., Dakota County, Minnesota.
We believe that the applicant will need a Department of the
Army permit for this activity.
Because we must notify certain other agencies about your
project and provide them a reasonable opportunity to comment, our
review for most projects may take at least 90 days. The
applicant can help expedite this procedure if they --
* Fill out the application completely and specifically.
...
* Send accurate drawings, including smaller, 8 1/2 by 11 inch,
copies for our public notice.
* Please describe any alternatives considered when planning
the project. This consideration should include other
potential sites and other methods of accomplishing the
desired result. Our regulations often prevent issuance of
permits when there are less-environmentally-damaging
alternatives available. For instance, if the project
involves placing fill in a water or wetland, there may be a
way to accomplish the project purpose but without filling,
or without filling as large an area.
If the project would include any temporary placement of
excavated or fill material into a waterbody or wetland, they may
also. need authorization for that work. Be sure to include that
infor~ation in their permit application.
They may also need state, county, and/or city permits for
this project.
Please return this information as soon as possible. Replies
may be addressed to the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Branch, 190 Fifth Street East~ Saint Paul, MN 55101-1638. If we
Printed on 0 Recycled Paper
-2-
do not hear from the applicant within 30 days of this letter, we
will assume that you are no longer interested in obtaining this
permit, and we will close our file.
If you have any questions, contact David A. Studenski in our
St. Paul office at (651) 290-5370. In any correspondence or
inquiries, please refer to the Regulatory number shown above.
Sincerely,
~~ t{.~'
h
Char M. Hauger
Chief, Regulatory Branch
If(~ LOCAL - STATE - FEDERAl. WATER RESOURCE PROJECT NOTIRCAno-- I APPUCA110H FoRM
Va. tNa fonn to nodfy/apply to ~ U.s. Annv C of Enai....... Che Minne.ota o.penmem of ~aCL ;a.ocm:e.. end your local GovellVncftt Unit
of a propo.ed watarlwedand pro,ect << work whI, .My f. within their juriccrtedOft. lbc.. aoancaa. chouId ~.. you of their iuricdiction or P Ot
requirement. witNn .5 dav-. Some LGU'. may ".0 requlr. cubmlecion of their own epplc.don fonne. FiR oat-thi. form Completely and meal :~
wim pi...... map.. eto. to ..ch of Che agend..G.ted on the rcwrce of mc form. Keep. copy for your recorda. YOU MUST OBTAIN ALL REQUIR1ri'
, A\rncORIZA nONS BEFORE BEGINNING WORK.
~
( USE ONLY: LOU NUMBER:
MDNR NUMBER:
CORPS .NUMBa:
C. Applicant'c Name (Lact. Firct. M.I.) Authorized Agent. if cny Aree Code. Telephone
( )
Addre" (Streec. RFD. Box Number. City. State. Zip Code)
Location of propoaed project (attach drawina ahowino how to get to citel
-
COUNTY QUARTER SECTlON(., SECnONS(al No. TOWNSHIP(al No. RANGE(a' No. Lot. Block. Subdivision
FIRE No., BOX No.. OR PROJECT ADORESS NAME OF WA TERBOOY AFFECTED and NUMBER (IF KNOWNI
,. ESnMA. TED PROJECT COST: $ LENGTH OF SHORE AFFECTED (in ,fe~U:
.; '.,
"
"Y. VOLUME OF ALL OR EXCA V A nON (Cubic Yarda): (NOTE: You mey substitute dimensionsl
AREA FILLED OR EXCA V A TED IS Acre.. OR Squara Feet
v. TYPE OF WORK AND AREA (CHECK All THAT APPl YJ: a Access PAlli a 8ROGE a CUlvarr OD.w
o CONSTRUCT o DRAIN o exCAVATE o Ooac o RIPRAP o SAN08lANICET
Of!!:!: o REMOVE o REPAIR
o LAKE o SHOREUNE o WATERWAY o WETlAND
-
OTHER (DESCRIBE):
WETlAND TYPE(S) AND ACREAGE(S) PROPOSED TO BE RLlEDIDRAINED:
Attach applicable drawings. plans. and ASCS crop photoe. Include a de.cription of any propo.ed compensatory mitigation. Important: Identify
anv dicpocaland borrow areaa. Da.cribe'me won: below: how it would be done; whet equipment would be u~ed.". -
-
ll. . ..OJECT PURPOSE (why is tN. projact needed-whet benefits win it provide7): .'
-
'11. AL TERNA TIVES (describa any om.r cite. or methods that could be U~ed to achieve the purpose of your project while avoiding or minimizing
wetland/water impact.: Attach additional ah.ets. if neededl.
.; :~. OATES: Propoaed atart of activity: Propoaed completion:
(kientity any complated won: on an attached drawingl
". ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS (A~ach Ii.~ if moro than ~ol
Name Addres. City State Zip
PERMITS have boan roceived Contar an !D or "reedy epp(ied f<< (ontor an ~ from: DNR API.<< CQfft OF I:HGlta:ERs COUNTY
- -
_ TOWNICnY _ WATeRSHa:I Dcsmcr - MN Pou.1moN CoNm.cx. AGa4CY -
He. en archaeological cucvay of dM proJect .. b._ clonal If .o."by whom:
-co.by nocify 1ha I'edplcnu of chic form011ha proI4CC ,",p,ued ....... .c1eI NqUMt that I be ecMaacl of any permItc or o1h<< clctermlnedona
- f"'GJ-c lhat · muct obtain. . uncfentand 1het ~ whh w.xic be!_ .. ~ ecnhocizadona .. obf.elnacl may .ubfact 11M to FecI.at. State.
iJ<< toc.I edminic1lretivo. civI end/or crimIn.cI pancldaa.
~ ture of Per.on P1'opocino Project or Agent
DATe:
<:c < PLEASe CAReFulLY READ AND COMPLE'rI: BACK Of= FORM> > >
. ~:-,
l~.
INS ~ . .UCTIONS-PlEASe READ CARERlll Y
!II
A copy of this form. with copies of an plans. drawings. etc.. should be sent to each agency indicated below. Please check the
appropriate spaces below to show eVetyWhere you are sending this fann. &membtJr to kHP ~ copy for your rtICords.
loCAl. GoVBWMENT UHrT (lGUJ: city. county. or watershed management organization.
Specify the LGU to which you are sending the fann:
The local Sol.. ANO WATm CoHSfRVATION DISTRICT (SWCOJ for the pro;ect.
Specify the county SWCD:
WATERSHED DISTRICT (if one exists for the pro;ect areal.
Specify the Watershed District:
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT Of NATUW. RESOURCEs (MDNRJ regional office
U.S. ARMy CoRPS Of EHGlNems (ACOE). Send the ACOE copy to:
Department of the Anny. Corps of Engineers. St. Paul District..
AITN: CO-R. 190 Fifth Street ~ St. Paut, MN 55101-1638
t:!2m: The above agencies may provide a copy of your completed fann to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCAI.
MPCA water quality rules may apply to your prOPOSed Pro;ect.
A lTENTION (FROM USDAJ: Any activity Indudfng drafnage. dredging. fUUn~ leveling or other manipulations. Indudlng
maintenence. may affect aIandUS8('. ellQIbIIIty for USOA benefits undet the 1985 Food Security Act as amended. Check with
your local USDA office to request end complete Form AD-102~ prior to lnidaUng lIctfvIty.
IMPORTANT: Some agencies. including the Corps of Engineers and the MDNR accept this tann as a permit application fann. If
you wish this form to constitute an application to the Corps and/or MONR for any necessary pennits for your prolect please
carefully read the follOWing information and sign where indicated.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
A&-......:ation is hereby made for a pennit or permits to authorize the activities described herein. I certify that I am familiar with
the information contained in this application. and that to the best of my knowledoe and belief such infocmation is true.
complete. and accurate. I fucthet certify that I possess.the authority to undertake the proposed activities or I am acting as the
duty authorized agent of the applicant.
Signature of Applicant
I
Signature of Aoent
Date
Date
~: The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it
may be signed by a duly authorized agent If the information requested below is provided.
Agent's Name and tiUe:
Agent's address:
Agent's telephone: (_,
18 U.s.c. Section 1001 proWl.. thet: Whoewr. in MY IMnMr witHn 11M iuri-siction of MY dep~ or agency of The United State.
IcnowingCy and wiUfulty f.~fi... cone.... 0( ~ up by My Cride. ~ or dNce . metedel f~ or INk.. MY f..... ficddou. or
fraudufent .tatementc or replMenta1ionc or mlIlc.. Of u'" My f.... wddnq Of dOCClnMnt IcnowinQ came to conc.In MY t..... ficddouc. or
freudul.nt ctatement or cntty, eheIl be fined not more dwn .10.000 Of Impriconed not more tNnofiw ye..... or bod\. .
. \
SEE AlTACHMENT ABOUT MONR PERMIT FeES
J~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrat~~
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Akin Road Feasibility Report
DATE: July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
Transmitted herewith is the feasibility report for Akin Road Improvements.
DISCUSSION
The attached report discusses improvement options for Akin Road. Akin Road has been scheduled to
be turned back to the City in conjunction with the re-construction and re-alignment of CSAH 31.
Street Improvements
With the re-alignment of CSAH 31 complete and the impending turnback of Akin Road to the City,
an informational meeting was held on February 9, 2000. The purpose of the meeting was to elicit
resident comment and feedback regarding issues related to Akin Road in order to determine what the
residents would like done with the road. The issues forwarded to City staff at that meeting by the
residents are addressed in the report.
The street improvements discussed in the report include three options: 1) a bituminous overlay, 2) a
bituminous reclamation and overlay and 3) a full reconstruction. Each of the three options include
reconfiguration of the existing intersections and street lighting at the intersections and along the curve
between 190th Street and 193rd Street. In addition, options for trail construction, replacement of the
culverts at Middle Creek and a traffic signal at 20Sth Street are discussed. Associated project costs
are summarized below.
Traffic Analysis
The intersections at 193rd Street, 19Sth Street and 20Sth Street were reviewed for all-stop signs and
traffic signals. The data acquired for 193rd Street and 19Sth Street indicated that warrants for all-way
stop signs and traffic signals are not currently met. At 20Sth Street, warrants for all-way stop signs
were not met.
In regards to the traffic signal warrants for 20Sth Street, it was found that the peak hour signal warrant
was satisfied for one hour, while the four-hour warrant was not met. Based on the results of the peak
hour and four-hour analysis, it is unlikely that any of the other volume warrants would be met. The
accident warrant is also not met at this intersection. In the analysis of traffic signal warrants for 20Sth
Street, the "peak hour" warrant was satisfied. Based on these results, the City's traffic engineer has
forwarded the following analysis regarding the signalization of 208th Street.
The installation of all-way stop control or traffic signal control is predicated upon meeting warrants
as provided in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD). Satisfaction
of one or more of the specified warrants is considered necessary in order to consider further the
installation of such intersection control.
Further analysis in the form of a Signal Justification Report (SJR) should be undertaken before a
control decision is made. The MMUTCD states "the satisfaction of a warrant or warrants is not in
itself justification for a signal. Information should be obtained by means of engineering studies and
compared with the requirements set forth in the warrants." Engineering judgement is required in the
form of engineering studies to determine if the signal will improve the overall safety and operation of
the intersection.
The one-hour warrant is the easiest of the signal warrants to satisfy. If this is the only warrant that is
satisfied, considerable care needs to be exercised in determining whether a signal is installed as other
hours of the day need to be considered.
The four-hour warrant, if satisfied, means that volumes are higher for a time period longer than just
one hour and the warrant is "stronger" in terms of helping to make the decision as to signalization.
The volume requirements for the four hour warrant are lesser than the one hour warrant.
The function of a traffic signal is to positively assign vehicular, and pedestrian, right-of-way. A
traffic signal will, in many instances, increase the delay to the motorist especially on the minor leg of
an actuated signal. Such delay needs to be kept in mind when attempting to make the decision as to
signalization.
The volumes, for one hour, meet the peak hour warrant at Akin Road/208th Street. As a part of the
engineering studies and judgment that is a part of the further analyses, it is appropriate to discount a
portion of the right turn vehicles from the volume counts. This is done because a right turn at an
intersection is generally not affected by whether the intersection control is a signal or a stop sign. If
we decrease the right turn volumes, counted during the time periods when the intersection count was
taken, by 50 per cent at the intersection, the case can be made that a signal is not warranted and not
necessary at this time.
From the standpoint of intersection traffic operations, it appears as though there is a time period when
the volumes peak and those peaks are associated with the schools start and end time periods. These
peaks are fifteen to thirty minutes in length and do cause some delay for vehicles desiring to turn left
from 208th Street to Akin Road. The method of handling this has been to utilize bus company
personnel to stop Akin Road traffic and allow the left turns to be made. This is a very effective
method of handling these short peaks.
The question has been raised as to whether school buses should be allowed to utilize an emergency
vehicle pre-emption (EVP) device in order to control the signals. It is recommended that school
buses not be allowed to utilize EVP devices as these need to be reserved for emergency vehicles and
there is no reason why buses need to be in a hurried state to complete their trips. There may even be
some sort of state statute that limits the use ofEVP to emergency vehicles only.
BUDGET IMPACT
The project costs associated with the improvement options presented in the report are summarized in
the following table.
IMPROVEMENT OPTION ESTIMATED PROJECT
COST
Option 1 - Bituminous Overlay $742,200
Option 2 - Reclamation and Overlay $1,385,300
Option 3 - Reconstruct Urban Section $4,264,200
South Trail Segment Option $75,600
Preserve Trail Segment Option $166,200
North Trail Segment Option $355,200
Bridge Culvert Improvement Option $389,400
Traffic Signal @ 208m Street Option $210,000
The total cost of the project will be dependent on the options that are chosen for implementation. The
City has requested that Dakota County participate in the costs of improvements to Akin Road as part
of the turn back of the road to the City. Dakota County's policy on project participation splits the
eligible project costs between the County (55%) and the City (45%). Storm sewer costs are allocated
using the State's cost sharing formulas.
The City's share of the costs would be financed through municipal bonds. The debt service for the
bonds would come from special assessments per the City's special assessment policy and the
appropriate City Funds. A detailed financial analysis including estimated special assessments to
benefiting properties will be presented in the future at the improvement hearing on the project.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached resolution accepting the feasibility report and authorizing the scheduling of the
neighborhood meeting. The residents in attendance at the neighborhood meeting in February
requested that the Council attend the neighborhood meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
~>>l~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
RESOLUTION NO. R -00
ACCEPTING FEASBILITY REPORT
PROJECT 00-05, AKIN ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of
Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 3rd day of
July, 2000 at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following resolution:
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Council approval of the 2000 Capital Improvement Plan, a
report has been made by the City's Consulting Engineer with reference to the following
improvement:
Pro;. No.
00-05
DescriDtion
Akin Road Improvements
Location
CSAH 50 to 190th Street ;and,
WHEREAS, this report was received by the City Council on July 3rd, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is
necessary, cost effective, and feasible.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Farmington,
Minnesota that:
1. The Council accepts said report.
2. Staff is hereby directed to schedule a neighborhood meeting.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session
on the 3rd day of July, 2000.
Mayor
Attested to the
day of
,2000.
City Administrator
SEAL
Report for
Akin Road Improvements
Farmington, Minnesota
July, 2000
File No. 141-99-123
~ Bonestroo
_ _ Rosene
~ Anderlik &
1 \/1 Associates
Engineers & Architects
July 3, 2000
Sonestroo. Rosene, Anderlik and Associates. Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity
Employer and Employee Owned
Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo. P.E. . Marvin L. Sorvala, P.E. . Glenn R. Cook. P.E. .
Robert G. Schunicht, fIE. . Jerry A. Bourdon. fIE.
Senior Consultants: Robert W. Rosene. fIE. . Joseph C. Anderlik, PE. . Richard E. Turner. fIE. .
Susan M. Eberlin. C.P.A.
Associate Principals: Howard A Sanford, fIE. . Keith A Gordon. PE. . Robert R. Pfefferle. PE. .
Richard W. Foster, PE. . David D. Loskota. PE. . Robert C. Russek, AI.A. . Mark A. Hanson. PE. .
Michael T. Rautmann, fIE. . Ted K.Field. PE. . Kenneth P Anderson. PE. . Mark R. Rolfs. PE. .
David A. Bonestroo, M.B.A. Sidney f' Williamson, PE.. L.S. . Agnes M. Ring. M.B.A. . Allan Rick Schmidt, PE.
Offices: St. Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester and Willmar. MN . Milwaukee, WI
Website: www.bonestroo.com
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Re: Feasibility Report
Akin Road Improvements
Our File No. 141-99-123
Dear Mayor and Council:
Enclosed for your review is our Report on the Akin Road improvements for the area located between Pilot Knob
Road and CSAH 50.
This report describes options for improving Akin Road. The street improvements are necessary to provide a safer
corridor for the existing and proposed developments along Akin Road. Cost estimates for the proposed
improvements are presented in the Appendices.
We would be pleased to discuss this report further with the City Council or City staff at any mutually convenient
time.
Respectfully submitted,
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK AND ASSOCIATES, INe.
~W~~
Thomas P. Kellogg, P.E.
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered
Professional n ineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
;f'7
Glenn R. Cook, P.E.
Date: July 3. 2000
Reg. No. 9451
2335 West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113. 651-636-4600. Fax: 651-636-1311
Table of Contents
Page No.
Letter of Transmittal
1.
Table of Contents
2.
Introduction
3.
Discussion
3.
Cost Estimates
9.
Project Financing
10.
Conclusions and Recommendations
10.
Appendix
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Cost Estimates
Memorandum from Shelly Johnson
Akin Road Improvements
2
Introduction
This report presents the analysis of the existing conditions and a determination of the feasibility
of improving Akin Road between CSAH 50 and CSAH 31 (Pilot Knob Road) as shown on
Figure 1. Akin Road exists as a two lane paved rural section roadway with a posted speed limit
of 50 miles per hour. The existing street consists of 12-foot wide paved driving lanes and 8-foot
wide paved shoulders. The existing right-of-way is 100 feet wide.
The County has previously reconstructed the north and south ends of Akin Road. Approximately
12,500 feet of Akin Road lies between these reconstructed segments and is the focus of this
study. The proposed street improvement alternatives and typical sections are shown on Figures 2
and 3. Costs for the proposed improvement alternatives and the proposed financing mechanisms
are presented in this report.
Discussion
Background
Akin Road is designated on the City's Municipal State Aid Street System and is classified as a
major collector roadway on the City's thoroughfare plan. It is one of two major north-south
collector roadways in the City. The function of a collector roadway is to collect traffic from local
streets and connect to arterial roadways. Several existing and two proposed neighborhoods access
Akin Road to connect to the arterial roadways at the north and south ends of Akin Road. Schools
are located east of Akin Road on 208th Street and west of Akin Road on 195th Street.
Akin Road was originally constructed with a gravel surface in 1934. The road was reconstructed
in 1966 and paved with a bituminous wear course in 1967. The intersection at CSAH 50 was
reconstructed in 1974 and again in 1995. The northerly intersection of Akin Road and Pilot Knob
Road was reconstructed in 1998. Akin Road was overlayed with a bituminous wear course in
1989. The existing street section is rural with ditches and no storm sewer.
Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31) was recently realigned and reconstructed between the north end of
Akin Road and CSAH 50. Akin Road served as the Pilot Knob alignment prior to the
realignment of CSAH 31.
With the re-alignment of CSAH 31 complete and the impending tumback of Akin Road to the
City, an informational meeting was held on February 9, 2000. The purpose of the meeting was to
elicit resident comment and feedback regarding issues related to Akin Road in order to determine
what the residents would like done with the road. The issues forwarded to City staff at that
meeting by the residents are summarized below.
Akin Road Improvements
3
In regards to Akin Road, the residents that provided comment would like to see:
. A decrease in the speed limit.
. An imposition of weight restrictions to limit truck traffic.
. A reduction of traffic congestion at 208th Street and Akin Road
. The installation of stop signs and/or stop lights at 193rd Street, 195th Street and 208th Street.
. The installation of crosswalks to reduce the need for school buses and increase pedestrian
safety.
. The diversion of traffic from Akin Road to the new alignment of CSAH 31.
. The construction of turn lanes, especially left turn lanes at the intersections.
. The installation of school speed zone signs and local traffic only signs.
. The installation of street lighting on the curve between 193rd Street and 190th Street.
. A bike trail along the road.
. The banning of snowmobiles along Akin Road. *
. Increased police patrol along Akin Road especially at 208th Street. *
. Police use ofCSAH 31 for answering calls in the northerly area of the City.*
All of the issues forwarded with the exception of the asterisked items are discussed in this report.
The snowmobile and police patrol issues by their nature need to be addressed in a separate
forum.
Existing Conditions
The existing Akin Road street surface is approximately 40-feet wide with two paved 12-foot
driving lanes with 8-foot paved shoulders and 2-foot gravel shoulders. Record plans indicate that
there is approximately 14-inches of gravel base and 3 ~-inches of bituminous surfacing on Akin
Road. The drainage along the roadway is directed to ditches. Akin Road is presently in fair to
good condition with some signs of surface distress. The existing surface of Akin Road is marked
with transverse cracks every 50 to 100 feet. Longitudinal cracking is present near the centerline
of the roadway in some locations. In most cases the transverse cracks extend to the edge of the
paved shoulder. There is little evidence of surface settlements or potholes. The lack of vertical
deflections in the roadway suggests that the subgrade is stable and sound. No soil borings have
been taken at this time.
The existing bridge on Akin Road across Middle Creek was constructed in 1934. The bridge
consists of 5-76 foot long corrugated steel culverts (CSC), two of which are stubbed through two
concrete box culverts. A 1995 Dakota County Bridge inspection report indicates that the culverts
are in fair condition showing some signs of cracking, scaling and rust. The three CSC's parallel
to the concrete box culverts show some signs of sagging in the middle. The bridge inspection
report indicates "no structural distress and the bridge is considered safe for all legal loads under
current traffic conditions".
A hydraulic analysis indicates that the existing culverts will not completely convey a 100-year
storm event. The analysis shows that approximately 400 feet of Akin Road will overtop by 1.1
feet during the 100-year event. The existing culverts would need to be replaced to eliminate the
street flooding during the 100-year storm event.
Akin Road Improvements
4
Twenty-four hour traffic counts were conducted on Akin Road and CSAH 31 in March of this
year. These counts indicate that the 24-hour volume on Akin Road is 6300 vehicles and the 24-
hour volume on CSAH 31 is 3000 vehicles. The average daily traffic (ADT) on Akin Road in
1996 (before CSAH 31 was extended to CSAH 50) was 9000 vehicles per day. The traffic counts
completed in March of this year indicate that approximately 33% of the traffic has already been
diverted from Akin Road to CSAH 31. It should be noted that these traffic counts were
completed prior to the installation of the traffic signal at the intersection of CSAH 31 and CSAH
50. The signal at this intersection is now in place and operational. This traffic control
improvement will enable southbound traffic on CSAH 31 to negotiate a left turn onto CSAH 50
in a safer manner. It is anticipated that the traffic control improvements at CSAH 31 and CSAH
50 will divert additional traffic from Akin Road to CSAH 31.
Street Improvements
Three structural street improvement options are presented in this report. All three options are
summarized briefly below and their associated costs include the intersection improvements
outlined following the summary of the three options. The proposed layout of Akin Road is
shown on figure 2. The typical sections for each of the improvement options are shown on
Figure 3. Itemized cost estimates for the improvements presented are included in the Appendices
of this report.
Option 1: Bituminous Overlay
This option includes milling and patching of the existing transverse cracks. The cracks would be
milled to full depth approximately I-foot in width. The milled areas would then be patched to
full depth with a bituminous base course. The purpose of the milling and patching is to minimize
reflective cracking through the new bituminous surface. The roadway would then be paved with
1 W' of bituminous wear course.
Option 2: Bituminous Reclamation and Overlay
In this option the existing bituminous surface would be reclaimed or ground up and mixed with
the existing gravel base. The surface would then be shaped and compacted. Two lifts (3-inches of
bituminous base course and 1 ~ -inches of bituminous wear course) would then be placed over
the compacted aggregate base.
Option 3: Reconstruct Urban Section
This option would provide for the complete reconstruction of the roadway and installation of
concrete curb and gutter. The existing street section would be removed and the aggregate base
replaced as shown on Figure 2. Storm sewer would be installed along the length of the project
and existing ditches would be filled to provide positive drainage to the street where possible.
The installation of storm sewer creates the need to provide for water quality ponds. This report
identifies two storm sewer discharge points as shown on Figure 2. Water quality ponds would
need to be located near these discharge points. Additional easements and lor right-of-way will be
need to be acquired to construct these ponding areas. Lump sum costs for the construction of
these ponds has been included in the cost analysis of this report. No costs have been included for
the acquisition of easements or right-of-way.
Akin Road Improvements
5
Intersection Improvements
Exclusive turn lanes and bypass lanes are proposed as part of the improvements. Details for
specific intersections are shown on Figure 2 and outlined below. The intersection improvements
as described below are included in the cost estimates for the three structural street improvement
options summarized above.
208th Street: North bound traffic would be provided a through lane and an exclusive right turn
lane. Southbound traffic would be provided a through lane and an exclusive left turn lane. Center
medians for north and south bound traffic would be striped on the roadway.
Murphy Farm Development Access: This is a proposed future intersection located south of
Eaves Way and north of 20gth Street. The proposed roadway would access Akin Road from the
west. Proposed Akin Road improvements include an exclusive southbound right turn lane and a
northbound bypass lane.
Eaves Way/203rd Street: Due to the relative closeness of these two intersections the proposed
improvements are inter-related. A continuous exclusive northbound left turn lane would be
provided beginning south of Eaves Way to 203rd Street along with North and south bound
through lanes. Exclusive southbound right turn lanes would be provided at Eaves Way and 203rd
Street.
Dunbar: Proposed Akin Road improvements include an exclusive southbound right turn lane
and a north bound bypass lane.
Vermillion Grove Development Access: This is a proposed future intersection located south of
19Sth Street and north of Dunbar. The proposed roadway would access Akin Road from the west.
Proposed Akin Road improvements include an exclusive southbound right turn lane and a
northbound bypass lane.
19Sth Street: 19Sth Street currently accesses Akin Road from the west. The City's thoroughfare
plan shows a future easterly extension of 19Sth Street to TH 3. Proposed improvements to Akin
Road provide for this future roadway extension. North and southbound traffic would be provided
with exclusive right and left turn lanes.
194th Street: Southbound traffic would be provided with a through lane and an exclusive left turn
lane. North bound traffic would have a through lane and an exclusive right turn lane.
193rd Street: North and southbound traffic would be provided with exclusive right and left turn
lanes.
Middle Creek Bridge
Preliminary design indicates that the proposed reconfiguration of the intersection at 20gth Street
extends into the bridge section across Middle Creek. It appears that Akin Road may need to be
widened slightly at this crossing due to the proposed reconfiguration of the roadway and a
proposed retaining wall on the east side of the roadway needed for the trail construction. Existing
Akin Road Improvements
6
guardrails on both sides of the bridge will need to be relocated. These improvements have been
included in the cost estimates. The cost to replace the culverts in order to convey the 100-yr
storm event with no flooding of Akin Road is also included in the appendices.
Shared Use Trail
The provision of a shared use trail along Akin Road was discussed at the informational meeting
in February, 2000. Costs associated with the construction of the trail from 20Sth Street to a point
2700 feet north were previously identified in the Farmington Preserve Trail Feasibility Report
(June, 2000). The trail section as proposed in that report is 10 foot wide with a paved bituminous
surface and a centerline stripe to provide for two-way traffic. The costs for this segment are
included in the Appendices.
Two additional trail segments were studied in this report. The south segment would be
constructed from CSAH 50 northerly to 20Sth Street. The north segment would begin at the
northerly terminus of the Farmington Preserve Trail and continue northerly to Pilot Knob Road.
Both segments would be located along the east side of Akin Road approximately 3S-feet east of
centerline. The north and south segments would be constructed to the same section (6-inches of
aggregate base and 2-inches of bituminous wear course) as proposed for the Farmington Preserve
Trail. Costs for the north, south and Farmington Preserve trail segments are included in the
Appendices.
Traffic Analysis
Several of the resident issues summarized previously in this report required traffic analysis.
Attached is a memorandum prepared by the traffic engineer which provides analysis of the
various transportation related issues raised by the residents. The results of the traffic engineer's
analysis are summarized as follows:
Reduction of Speed Limit
The speed limit along Akin Road is currently set at 50 miles per hour (mph). The Minnesota
Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has the statutory authority to set speed limits. Once the
City has accepted jurisdiction over Akin Road, the City will request that MnDOT conduct a
speed study to determine if the speed limit can be reduced. The timing of the request to MnDOT
will coincide with city acceptance of the road and completion of the studies will be dependent on
MnDOT scheduling.
Limitation of Truck Traffic
A vehicle classification count was conducted to determine the type and volume of truck traffic
that currently uses Akin Road. The count indicated that truck volumes comprised less than two
(2) percent of the volume counted during the count period, which is not considered excessive.
The truck volumes consisted of mostly delivery type trucks. The counts and observations over
time indicate that excessive truck volumes are not using Akin Road. The roadway is a major
north-south collector that should continue to allow truck traffic.
Akin Road Improvements
7
Reduce Congestion at the Intersection of Akin Road and 208th Street
In regards to this intersection, the resident input received suggested that an all-way stop or traffic
signal be installed at this intersection.
The installation of all-way stop control or traffic signal control is predicated upon meeting
warrants as provided in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD).
Satisfaction of one or more of the specified warrants is considered necessary in order to consider
further the installation of such intersection control.
Volume warrants for all-way stop control were evaluated and it was found that all way stop
control is not warranted at the 20gth Street intersection. In regards to the traffic signal warrants, it
was found that the peak hour signal warrant was satisfied for one hour, while the four-hour
warrant was not met. Based on the results of the peak hour and four-hour analysis, it is unlikely
that any of the other volume warrants would be met. The accident warrant is also not met at this
intersection.
Further analysis in the form of a Signal Justification Report (SJR) should be undertaken before a
control decision is made. The MMUTCD states "the satisfaction of a warrant or warrants is not
in itself justification for a signal. Information should be obtained by means of engineering
studies and compared with the requirements set forth in the warrants." Engineering judgement is
required in the form of engineering studies to determine if the signal will improve the overall
safety and operation of the intersection.
Traffic Control at 193rd Street and 19Sth Street
In regards to these intersections, the resident input received suggested that all-way stops or traffic
signals be installed at these intersections.
All way-stop warrants were not met at these intersections. Peak hour, four-hour and accident
warrants for traffic signals were not satisfied at these intersections.
Installation of Crosswalks and School Speed Zones
There are not any crosswalks on Akin Road near the two schools in the vicinity of Akin Road. A
crosswalk could be necessary if the school at some time in the future has students cross Akin
Road as a designated walk-to-school route. If that were to occur, a school crosswalk could be
addressed.
The need for a school speed limit along Akin Road would be predicated on when and/or if an
intersection along Akin road were to be established as an official pedestrian school crossing.
Local Traffic Only Signs
"Local Traffic Only" signs will not deter traffic from using Akin Road. It is a major collector
street that provides an important north-south travel route in Farmington.
Akin Road Improvements g
Cost Estimates
The project costs for these improvements are outlined in this section. Estimated construction
costs have been provided for the trunk water main improvements. The itemized cost estimates
are provided in the appendix. Cost estimates for this report are based on 2000 construction costs
and can be related to the June, 2000 ENR Construction Cost Index of 6238. A summary of the
estimated costs for the proposed improvements is presented below. The following project costs
do not include costs for easement or right-of-way acquisition.
Estimated Project Costs
IMPROVEMENT OPTION ESTIMATED
PROJECTCOST
Option 1 - Bituminous Overlay $742,200
Option 2 - Reclamation and Overlay $1,385,300
Option 3 - Reconstruct Urban Section $4,264,200
South Trail Segment Option $75,600
Preserve Trail Segment Option $166,200
North Trail Segment Option $355,200
Bridge Culvert Improvement Option $389,400
Traffic Signal @ 208th Street* $210,000
*If warranted
Akin Road Improvements
9
Project Financing
The total cost of the project will be dependent on the options that are chosen for implementation.
The City has requested that Dakota County participate in the costs of improvements to Akin
Road as part of the turn back of the road to the City. Dakota County's policy on project
participation splits the eligible project costs between the County (55%) and the City (45%).
Storm sewer costs are allocated using the State's cost sharing formulas.
The City's share of the costs would be financed through municipal bonds. The debt service for
the bonds would come from special assessments and the appropriate City Funds.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The proposed improvements described in this report are feasible as they relate to general
engineering principals and construction procedures. The feasibility of the project as a whole is
subject to a financial review. The improvements are necessary to provide a safer transportation
corridor for the existing and proposed developments along Akin Road. The improvements
proposed are cost effective based on proven methods for street, trail and storm sewer
construction. Based on the information contained in this report, it is recommended that:
1. That this Report be adopted as the guide for Akin Road street improvements.
2. That the City conduct a legal and fiscal review of the proposed project.
3. The following tentative schedule be implemented for the project:
Receive Feasibility Report/Authorize neighborhood July, 2000
meeting
Hold neighborhood meeting July/August 2000
Meet with Dakota County/Negotiate Turnback Agreement August 2000
Authorize Public Hearing/Set Date September 2000
Hold Public Hearing/Authorize plans and specifications October 2000
Approve Plans and Specifications/Authorize February 2001
advertisement for bids
Accept bids/Award Contract March 2001
Begin Construction June 2001
Complete Construction October 2001
Akin Road Improvements
10
Appendix
f-l Ll
1111" ,iJ~_b
'~~r_ 'J
~.~- ~
I '~ r PROJECT LOCA TIOr~
~, . / \
.. ~ \\~
L1V 195TH ST, T \ V
\LEVATEO~ l;f !
~ \""0. 2 ~ \ ~! r 11111> "
\ "\\ ~1I~k
~'I ~ IIltIL r-l
~ l~~~ -- ~.
~~ >; If..L: IoM~
7" U V~^
2 -0 ~ 1\ 01V ZiffiffiB t lI:...... ." L J
~ 1\ ~ i~ ~
o ~
~ 209TH T. 209TH ST. ~
~ ~ -1 r_l--0 ffJ ~ I ~ r
~ ..: ~ " ~ '-1 /./ ~ ~ ~..J ~
lJi ;;~ ~ "" ~ 7.~ ~ 1
:J ~ ~I ~III ..J """TV ""172
M ,;
~ "
\'
\
W
::J
Z
W
~
...
...
<(
t-
'"
L;J
<(
..J
...
W---1
[ r---r
I I
r,lr
LIV
~
w
COUNTY RD, 50
I
~ ~
<(
J
Ir
Ifdj IL
-zr-
.....,J
71r
vi\.....
"
'"
<(
::E
Z
~ :i Ii G
l..,
I ~ _
I.T "Gmwr C n
I LbL~ ~"1 II ,- ~"'--
" L
m
~~ c:: I irrnrr
J.llIJ.>' - LPiJ
CHY or To\ltMDlGT
!:\JItElCATINNSH1P
220TH ST EET \JEST r-r1
~
~ /U
II
~k
::;l n ~/
~~
~
lJ
I
Il-n
r
LOCATION PLAN
o 1/4mile
1.........1
Scale In feet
1/2mile n B t
. ones roo
Rosene
R Anderlik &
'\J' Associates
Engineers & Architects
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
AKIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
FIGURE 1
14199123F01.DWG
6/2000
141-99-123
/
/,
//,/
-----------------.....; (
------- ---.. --- ----- ----:::: ~ i
i ~ q
i rr'I ~ i ~
i - ~~ i )> >
-z. ::0
F;; t ^ rr'I
- (f) Z 0
..., i
.... ?J C!. ;ti !=? z c
i VI
~ 0 (f) I"'l rr'I
::0 :J: I"'l i ~
% b > -t t :::0
>
> Al r 0 ;=
I"'l G'5 i
% 1:1 )>
rr'I :J: i
;ti -t 0
> !
r=
/
- .J?
L__.
-....._--~
'-
"\---:1:::::::~:::::::>
-::::::::::-
...... ..
-....:::::
~
::0
%
.......----j
,//'''"... ;
, ,
, r
I
L.
r...--------1
c
,
!
1.._ _____
I
i
i
J
I
i
i
J
I -
i
);>
^
2:
;)
o
-J>
o
r --_
f ..........
,
,
l.._ ___
r- ---
!
1.._ ____
q
r.--.~
: >
; (,.--~
:: c
;l c
;1 ~
/ ,
- ::::/
. -- -
L- -..--
~- ---
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
L_ ________,
rOo ------__J
i
!
'-
J \
/ /""\'\
,./,/ ,/)
_::-:::.."
i
i ' -
i
tOrr'l
.-________"____ ------- ::0 9
________h___J;j'h_____ ~ r---
~ ~~~_..
~ ~VI
~ ...~
o
::I
o
%
...
>
%
rr'I
i
i
\
VI
n
Q
ii"
:r
o
, ,
, ,
t\ \
'.. ........
,......::-.::::::--
...
co
!l
VI\lrr'I
rr'I::O%
i!lIlo
rr'lrr'IO
%::00
....j$j~
-
o
J
/
~?5
"'::1
r---.----...-...-~.-..-.
~a
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
AKIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
Nil
FIGURE 2
I HEREBY comFY _T THIS PIAN, lIPEClFIC411ON, OR REPORT
WAS PREPNIED Ill' lIE OR UNDER lit ClRECI' SUPEIMSION
AND _T I All A DULY LICENSED PllOFESSlONAL ENGINEER
UNDER THE l.AWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
~~
...-- r-- : i
......, I .
/ ~~~ti '<, i
'f',T ""'- 'i
i
i -
i
!
l/~\
/.' ))
/1.:_.1:,,)
-----
_____________. _____-11 ~ ~
________h___J;j'______~~ r---
~ ~~~---
.... ~VI
lij ...~
% C
o
::I
~
.----- --
>
%
rr'I
,
,
, ,
l, \
'.. ...,....
,......:-.:::::::::- --
----------....---...
VI\lrr'I
rr'I::O%
Qrr'lO
S:;VlO
rr'I~o
%<%
....rr'lVI
~?5
... ::I ___----
--------~-_.-.---
r----
\
...... ..)
--
------.-------------------------
i
i
i
t
i
i
i
t
i
i
" + -
i
i
i
+
_J--\
\
----......,~"
',~",
"<:' ....
'-
--......:~::..............
--
---
___J L___
r...............
+
i
i
i
+
i
i
i
+
i
i
i
+
.----. I
---<::::A:z::::::________
jt.v -- --
--------::::::::::::::::::::::-
- ---..............-
-'I -
L..................
MIDDLE CREEK
. fl. Bonestroo
~ Rosene
8 Anderllk &
. \J' Associates
Ent/iM8fS & -
VI\laJ
rr'I::Orr'l
Qrr'lQ
~Illz
%::00
....j$j~
~VI
>~
-c
"'0
::I
o
%
F;;
~
~
::0
%
...
>
%
rr'I
::0
~
....
~
::0
%
-
q
VI
:I:
>
::0
rr'I
o
c
III
~
>
;=
aJ
rr'I
Q
Z
VI
~
rr'I
rr'I
....
o
~
VI
~
C
o
::I
o
%
RD. 50
-- ----------- -- -- ------- ---- --
l'\~
~~
i'
I
SUR\IEY
DRAWN MolB
DESIGNED
-
DATE
COMW. 141-99-123
CATE
DATE REO. NO.
OIllNESlllllO, IIDSENE. AlIlERUK a _ INC. 2000
\141\ 14199123\CAO\DWG\ 141TRAmCTOPO.OWG
.
~
'0
.
.
i
\
i
\
~:::::::'\
\<>\
\\\\
\'
,
) /
I '
j /
.. I
::::-..::~::.::........ .
'-_.."
,-----
f :'--------....
-'-
-- -5
.- >>
.::0
15
---.---------~~~~~~i~~~~~~~_
z
o i
o i
i
I
i
i
i
T
i
i
-I
...............:::)
...
rr'I
~
-
q
VI
:I:
>
::0
rr'I
o
C
VI
rr'I
,
.
,
'.
\, "'.....
\ \.
\ '\ ....'"
. ' .
....'" \, .......
". \ ....
"'\. '\ ........
. ' .
..... \, ......
....... \. ......
...... \ ....
...... '\ .....
\\ \
, \
----_...~.:.::-.:=:".::::::::::...
(
___J
::0
Z
>
'-
~
>
;=
"
.... _.../ /
!
............._-J
i
i
i
~
i
i
i
~
i
i
i
~
i
i
i
~
i
i
i
;0
o
)>
o
>Q!
z~
rr'I....
~
::0
Z
,....-:-:.::::--=:---
'''-''';,....
,^.. '. ,"
\ 'J,/
, '
\ I
I I
, I
l '
....../
-----...
------
VI 0 i
n
Q
ii" /
5'
...
co 8/'V
!l
1
N
0
0
N h FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA a Bonestroo
Rosene
, AKIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS i\i Anderfik &
..
..
I Associates
N ~fj
FIGURE 2 EnglfIBWS & A_
-J7
L_____.
................-----
DATE REG, NO,
. _ IlOSEIE. NIlEIIUIC It ASSlCIAlES, INC. 2000
SUR\/EY
DRAWN
OESIGIIED
APPROVED
DATE
COM". 141-H-123
REViSION
DATE
I HEREB'( CER11FY THAT ntS PlAN. SPtCIFlCA11ON, OR REPORT
WAS PIlEPNIED Ill' lIE OR UNDER In' DIRECT S\JPEIMSION
_ _r I All A DULY LICENSED PllOFESSlONAL ENGINEER
UNDER THE l.AWS OF THE STATE OF _ESllTA.
...,e
\ 141 \ 14199 12.l\CAD\OWG\ 141TRAFflCTOPO.OWG
CL ROW
ROW
ROW
I
; I
50'
50'
I
II.. :
i
i
i
i
,
I
j
i
i
i VARIES 2 0'-12' 12' 0'-12' 12' 0'-12' 2' VARIES 10' 11'
i
i RT LAN~I LANE LEFT TURN LANE RT LANE? TRAIL i
, BYPASS BYPASS I
LANE
~.
~
2%
-+t--
PAVED
SHARED USE TRAIL
2" BIT. WEAR
6 II CL.5 AGG.
1 1/2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE
3 1 /2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE (EXISTING)
14" GRAVEL BASE (EXISTING)
DETAIL
NO SCALE
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
AKIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
FIGURE 3
n Bonestroo
Rosene
G Anderlik &
.IJ. Associates
Engineers & Architects
OPTION - 1
OVERLAY
141 TRAFFICTOPO.DWG
6/14/2000
141-99-123
50'
CL ROW
I
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
ROW
ROW
50'
I
.. !
VARIES 2 0'-12' 12' 0'-12' 12' 0'-12' 2' VARIES 10' ! l'
I
RT LAN~I LANE LEFT TURN LANE RT LANg TRAIL !
I
BYPASS BYPASS i
i
LANE
~.
bc."
i
I
I
i
i
b..\
I
i
~
2%
-+t-
SEE DETAIL
PAVED
SHARED USE TRAIL
2" BIT. WEAR
6" CL.5 AGG.
1 1/2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE
3" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE
RECLAIM 8" EXISTING SURFACE -
(3 1/2" BIT. WEAR, 4 1/2" GRAVEL BASE)
3 1/2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE (EXISTING)
14" GRAVEL BASE (EXISTING)
DETAIL
NO SCALE
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
AKIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
FIGURE 3
n Bonestroo
Rosene
G Anderlik &
. \J. Associates
Engineers & Architects
OPTION - 2
RECLAIM AND OVERLAY
141TRAFFICTOPO.DWG
6/14/2000
141-99-123
CL ROW
ROW
ROW
I
: ..
50'
50'
I
. ~
!
i
2' i VARIES 10' l' i
t
BLVD, TO FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB BLVD. TRAIL r
I
i
I
i
2 0'-12' 12' 0'-12' 12' 0'-12' 2' i
I
RT LAN~/ LANE LEFT TURN LANE RT LAN~/ i
I
BYPASS BYPASS i
i
VARIES
VARIES
LANE
2%
~
2%
[B618 CONCRETE I
CURB & GUTTER I
:;','1
2%
-
PAVED J
SHARED USE TRAIL
2" BIT. WEAR
6" CL.5 AGG.
1 1/2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE
3" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE
12" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE
12" SELECT GRANULAR BORROW
D [TAl L
NO SCALE
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
AKIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
FIGURE 3
Jl]J Bonestroo
Rosene
G Anderlik &
. \j. Associates
Engineers & Architects
OPTION - 3
URBAN RECONSTRUCTION
141 TRAFFICTOPO
6/14/2000
141-99-123
Appendix
City of Farmington
Akin Road
Street Improvements
File Number 141-99-123
Preliminary Cost Estimate for Option 1- Overlay
Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Price Est. Cost
Mobilization LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000
Traffic Control LS 1 5,000.00 5,000
Remove and reinstall guardrail LF 720 25.00 18,000
Common Excavation CY 2,500 6.00 15,000
Granular Borrow CY 1000 7.00 7,000
Select Granular TN 2200 10.00 22,000
Aggregrate Base, Class 5, 100% Crushed TN 2850 15.00 42,750
Crack Repair SY 1,100 12.00 13,200
Type 31 bituminous base TN 450 35.00 15,750
Type 41, bituminous wear TN 5550 38.00 210,900
Bituminous material for tack coat GAL 2500 1.50 3,750
Saw Cut bituminous pavement LF 2400 2.00 4,800
Clear and grub LS 1 5,000.00 5,000
Right Turn Arrow EA 11 150.00 1,650
Left Turn Arrow EA 9 150.00 1,350
Through Arrow EA 4 150.00 600
Solid White Line LF 28,100 0.80 22,480
Dashed White Line LF 800 1.00 800
Double Yellow Line LF 12,500 1.25 15,625
F & I signs SF 115 25.00 2,875
Street lights (intersections) EA 11 5,500.00 60,500
Street lights (curve 193rd-190th) EA 10 4,500.00 45,000
Sod with 4" topsoil SY 1500 3.00 4,500
Seed with topsoil, mulch and fertilizer AC 1 1,500.00 1,500
Silt fence LF 500 2.50 1,250
Estimated Construction Cost $531,280
10% Contingency $53,128
Subtotal $584,408
27% Eng" Legal & Admin. $157,790
Total Estimated Project Cost $742,198
Appendix
City of Farmington
Akin Road
Street Improvements
File Number 141-99-123
Preliminary Cost Estimate for Option 2- Reclaim & Overlay
Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Price Est. Cost
Mobilization LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000
Traffic Control LS 1 5,000.00 5,000
Remove and reinstall guardrail LF 720 25.00 18,000
Common Excavation CY 2,500 6.00 15,000
Granular Borrow CY 1000 7.00 7,000
Select Granular TN 2200 10.00 22,000
Aggregrate Base, Class 5, 100% Crushed TN 2850 15.00 42,750
Reclaim Bituminous Surface SY 57300 2.00 114,600
Type 31 bituminous base TN 10800 35.00 378,000
Type 41, bituminous wear TN 5550 38.00 210,900
Bituminous material for tack coat GAL 2500 1.00 2,500
Clear and grub LS 1 5,000.00 5,000
Right Turn Arrow EA 11 150.00 1,650
Left Turn Arrow EA 9 150.00 1,350
Through Arrow EA 4 150.00 600
Solid White Line LF 28,100 0.80 22,480
Dashed White Line LF 800 1.00 800
Double Yellow Line LF 12,500 1.25 15,625
F & I signs SF 115 25.00 2,875
Street lights (intersections) EA 11 5,500.00 60,500
Street lights (curve 193rd-190th) EA 10 4,500.00 45,000
Sod with 4" topsoil SY 1500 3.00 4,500
Seed with topsoil, mulch and fertilizer AC 1 1,500.00 1,500
Silt fence LF 1600 2.50 4,000
Estimated Construction Cost $991,630
10% Contingency $99,163
Subtotal $1,090,793
27% Eng., Legal, & Admin. $294,514
Total Estimated Project Cost $1,385,307
Appendix
City of Farmington
Akin Road
Street Improvements
File Number 141-99-123
Preliminary Cost Estimate for Option 3- Reconstruction Urban Section
Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Price Est. Cost
Street Improvements
Mobilization LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000
Traffic Control LS 1 5,000.00 5,000
Remove and reinstall guardrail LF 720 25.00 18,000
Common Excavation CY 42,000 5.00 210,000
Granular Borrow CY 1000 7.00 7,000
Select Granular TN 45700 8.00 365,600
Aggregrate Base, Class 5, 100% Crushed TN 46300 13.00 601,900
Remove Existing Bituminous SY 57300 3.00 171,900
Type 31 bituminous base TN 10800 35.00 378,000
Type 41, bituminous wear TN 5550 38.00 210,900
Bituminous material for tack coat GAL 2500 1.00 2,500
B6.18 Concrete curb and gutter LF 24200 8.00 193,600
Concrete Valley Gutter LF 800 10.00 8,000
Driveway repair EA 52 750.00 39,000
Saw cutting bituminous Pavement LF 2400 2.00 4,800
Clear and grub LS 1 5,000.00 5,000
Right Turn Arrow EA 11 150.00 1,650
Left Turn Arrow EA 9 150.00 1,350
Through Arrow EA 4 150.00 600
Solid White Line LF 28,100 0.80 22,480
Dashed White Line LF 800 1.00 800
Double Yellow Line LF 12,500 1.25 15,625
F & I signs SF 115 25.00 2,875
Street lights (intersections) EA 11 5,500.00 60,500
Street lights (curve 193rd-190th) EA 10 4,500.00 45,000
Sod with 4" topsoil SY 11,100 2.50 27,750
Seed with topsoil, mulch and fertilizer AC 8.5 1,300.00 11,050
Silt fence LF 1600 2.50 4,000
Subtotal Street Improvements $2,424,880
Storm Sewer
12" RCP Storm Sewer LF 3200 $26.00 $83,200
15" RCP Storm Sewer LF 2400 28.00 67,200
18" RCP Storm Sewer LF 2800 32.00 89,600
21" RCP Storm Sewer LF 5600 38.00 212,800
24" RCP Storm Sewer LF 660 42.00 27,720
21" RCP FES in place EA 1 1,500.00 1,500
24" RCP FES in place EA 1 1,800.00 1,800
2' x 3' catch basin EA 29 1,500.00 43,500
4' diameter catch basin manhole EA 29 2,000.00 58,000
Water Quality Ponds LS 1 39,200.00 39,200
Rip Rap CY 60 50.00 3,000
Subtotal Storm Sewer $627,520
Estimated Construction Cost $3,052,400
10% Contingency $305,240
Subtotal $3,357,640
27% Eng. Legal & Admin. $906,563
Total Estimated Project Cost $4,264,203
Appendix
City of Farmington
Akin Road
Street Improvements
File Number 141-99-123
Preliminary Cost Estimate for South Pathway
Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Price Est. Cost
Clear and Grub LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000
Relocate signs LS 1 300.00 300
Common Excavation CY 1000 9.50 9,500
Select Granular TN 900 10.00 9,000
Aggregrate Base, CL. 5 TN 900 13.00 11,700
Type 41 bituminous wear (path) TN 250 50.00 12,500
Pedestrian curb ramp EA 3 150.00 450
4" solid line, white epoxy LF 1850 0.70 1,295
Seed w/topsoil, mulch & fertilizer AC 0.5 3,000.00 1,500
Sod w/4" topsoil SY 2500 2.50 6,250
Silt Fence LF 300 2.00 600
Estimated Construction Cost $54,095
10% Contingency $5,410
Subtotal $59,505
27% Eng., Legal & Admin. $16,066
Total Estimated Project Cost $75,571
Appendix
City of Farmington
Akin Road
Street Improvements
File Number 141-99-123
Preliminary Cost Estimate for Preserve Trail (Part A) Pathway
Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Price Est. Cost
Clear and Grub LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500
Remove CMP or RCP culvert LF 120 7.00 840
Relocate mailboxes, signs, etc. LS 1 400.00 400
Salvage and reinstall guardrail LF 360 25.00 9,000
Remove and transplant trees EA 6 250.00 1,500
Silt fence, preassembled LF 1000 1.50 1,500
Common excavation (EV) CY 2800 9.50 26,600
Granular borrow (CV) CY 500 10.00 5,000
Aggregate base, CI. 5 100% crushed (walk) TN 1500 13.00 19,500
Aggregate base, CI. 5 100% crushed (drive TN 30 13.00 390
Type 41 A bituminous mixture for walk TN 400 50.00 20,000
18" CMP storm sewer, 16 gauge LF 240 20.00 4,800
18" CMP flared end section EA 16 150.00 2,400
4" solid line, white epoxy LF 2800 0.70 1,960
Modular block retaining wall SF 450 15.00 6,750
Seed w/topsoil, mulch & fertilizer AC 2 3,000.00 6,000
Sod w/4" topsoil SY 1900 2.50 4,750
4' high wood fence LF 150 20.00 3,000
Wood fiber blanket SY 350 2.00 700
Class 3 rip rap CY 30 45.00 1,350
Estimated Construction Cost $118,940
10% Contingency $11,894
Subtotal $130,834
27% Eng., Legal & Admin. $35,325
Total Estimated Project Cost $166,159
Appendix
City of Farmington
Akin Road
Street Improvements
File Number 141-99-123
Preliminary Cost Estimate for North Pathway
Item
Clear and Grub
Relocate mailboxes, signs, etc.
Common Excavation
Granular Borrow
Aggregrate Base, CL. 5
Type 41 bituminous wear (path)
Pedestrian curb ramp
4" solid line, white epoxy
Seed w/topsoil, mulch & fertilizer
Sod w/4" topsoil
Wood fiber blanket
Silt Fence
Unit
LS
LS
CY
CY
TN
TN
EA
LF
AC
SY
SY
LF
Est. Quantity Unit Price Est. Cost
1 $3,000.00 $3,000
1 800.00 800
1500 9.50 14,250
4600 10.00 46,000
4500 13.00 58,500
1250 50.00 62,500
70 150.00 10,500
9300 0.70 6,510
2 3,000.00 6,000
12400 2.50 31,000
7100 2.00 14,200
500 2 1,000
Estimated Construction Cost $254,260
10% Contingency $25,426
Subtotal $279,686
27% Eng., Legal & Admin. $75,515
Total Estimated Project Cost $355,201
City of Farmington
Akin Road
Street Improvements
File Number 141-99-123
Preliminary Cost Estimate for Middle Creek Bridge Improvements
Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Price Est. Cost
Cmp. culvert removal LF 320 $15.00 $4,800
Conc. culvert removal LF 80 50.00 4,000
10' x 6' Conc. box culvert LF 90 410.00 36,900
10' x 6' Conc. end section EA 2 6500.00 13,000
8' x 5' Conc. box culvert LF 180 350.00 63,000
8' x 5' Conc. end section EA 4 6000.00 24,000
Muck excavation CY 3000 12.00 36,000
Common excavation CY 2000 5.00 10,000
Aggregate bedding CY 150 10.00 1,500
Lean Clay (CL) backfill CY 4600 12.00 55,200
Granular backfill CY 700 12.00 8,400
Remove bituminous pavement SY 900 3.00 2,700
Type 41 wearing course TN 100 50.00 5,000
Type 31 base course TN 200 50.00 10,000
Aggregate base, Class 5 TN 300 10.00 3,000
Seeding AC 0.5 2500.00 1,250
Estimated Construction Cost $278,750
10% Contingency $27,875
Subtotal $306,625
27% Eng. Legal & Admin. $82,789
Total Estimated Project Cost $389,414
~ Bonestroo
_ _ Rosene
~ Anderlik &
. \I. Associates
Engineers & Architects
Bonestroo, Rosene. Anderlik and Associates. Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Equal opportunity
Employer and Employee Owned
Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo. PE. . Marvin l. Sorvala, PE. . Glenn R. Cook, PE. .
Robert G. Schunicht, PE. . Jerry A. Bourdon. PE.
Senior Consultants: Robert W. Rosene, PE. . Joseph C Anderlik, PE. . Richard E. Turner, PE. .
Susan M_ Eberlin, CPA.
Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford. P.E. . Keith A. Gordon, PE. . Robert R. Pfefferle, PE. .
Richard W. Foster, PE. . David O. loskota. PE. . Robert C Russek. A.lA. . Mark A. Hanson. PE. .
Michael T. Rautmann, P_E. . Ted K.Field, PE_ . Kenneth P Anderson, PE, . Mark R. Rolfs, PE. .
David A. Bonestroo. M.B.A. . Sidney P Williamson, PE., l.S. . Agnes M. Ring, M.B.A. . Allan Rick Schmidt. PE.
Offices: St. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester and Willmar, MN . Milwaukee, WI
\M:bslte: www.bonestroo_com
Memorandum
FROM:
Lee Mann
Director of Public Works
Shelly Jolmson -6<B
TO:
DATE:
June 6, 2000
RE:
Akin Road - Response to Transportation Related Comments
Received From Public Input Meeting
Our File No. 141-99-123
On Wednesday, February 9, 2000, the City of Farmington hosted a public informational meeting
with regard to issues relating to Akin Road. The meeting purpose was to receive public input
with regard to Akin Road issues. All comments received were summarized in a memorandum
prepared by staff. Certain comments/issues required analysis in order to be responded to and to
be a part of the process leading to the development of improvement plans of Akin Road. This
memorandum provides the analysis of the various transportation-related comments. The
comments were summarized in the meeting minutes and are responded to below using the
summary groupings from those meeting minutes.
1. Decrease the Speed Limit
The Akin Road speed limit is 50 miles per hour. As stated at the public input meeting, the
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has the statutory authority to set speed
limits. The city will request that MnDOT conduct a speed limit study along Akin Road to
determine if a speed limit of 50 miles per hour should be retained or changed. The timing of the
request for speed studies will coincide with city acceptance of the road and will be dependent
upon MnDOT work schedules.
2. Limit Truck Traffic
In order to determine the type and volume of truck traffic that presently uses Akin Road, a
vehicle classification count was conducted along the route. This count allows for determining
the volume and type oftrucks presently using the roadway. The count, conducted on April 25,
indicated that truck volumes were not excessive and that they comprised less thantwo percent of
the volume counted during the count period. The majority of the truck volumes were local
delivery type trucks. This did not include delivery vans.
The count and our many observations indicate that excessive truck volumes are not using Akin
Road. The roadway is a major north-south collector that should continue to allow truck traffic.
2335 West Highway 36. St. Paul, MN 55113. 651-636-4600 · Fax: 651-636-1311
Memorandum
Page 20f5
June 6,2000
Should, for some unknown reason, the truck volumes ever appear to increase, additional study
would then be warranted.
3. Reduce Congestion at Intersection of Akin Road and 208th Street
Comments were received regarding the congestion at Akin Road and 208th Street. The public
input centered on requests for all-way stop or traffic signal control.
The installation of all way stop control or traffic signal control is predicated upon meeting
warrants as provided in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MMUTCD). Satisfaction of one or more of these warrants is considered necessary in order to
consider further the installation of such intersection control. Traffic volume counts and
intersection accident data are required in order to measure the values against the control
warrants.
Intersection turning movement traffic counts were conducted at the intersection from the hours
of7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on April 18, 2000.
Accident data for the most recent three-year time period was obtained from the Farmington
Police Department.
The results of the traffic count indicate that the peak hour signal warrant, which is the "easiest"
of the warrants to satisfy, was satisfied for one hour. A four-hour warrant is not satisfied. Count
data for a 13-16 hour period would be needed to find out if any other volume warrants are
satisfied. Given the results of the peak hour and four-hour analysis, it is expected that other
volume warrants would not be satisfied. Volumes warrants for all way stop control were
evaluated and it was found that all way stop control is not warranted at the 208th Street
intersection.
The accident data for three years indicates the following accidents and accident types at the
intersection.
Year of Accident
1997
1997
1998
1998
1999
1999
Accident Tvpe
Rear end on 20gth Street
Rear end on 20gth Street
Rear end on 208th Street
Vehicle out of control on Akin
Rear end on Akin bypass lane
Vehicle backing from driveway
The accident warrant is satisfied when five or more reported accidents, of types susceptible to
correction by traffic signal control, have occurred within a 12-month period. The accident
warrant is not satisfied at the Akin Road intersection with 208th Street.
Memorandum
Page 30f5
June 6,2000
While the peak hour volume warrant is satisfied for traffic signal control, this does not mean that
a signal would be the recommended control. The MMUTCD states "the satisfaction of a warrant
or warrants is not in itself justification for a signal. Information should be obtained by means of
engineering studies and compared with the requirements set forth in the warrants." Further
analysis in the form of a signal justification study should be undertaken before a control decision
is made.
4. Install Stop Signs or Signals at Intersections of Akin Road with 193rd Street and 19Sth Street
Public comment was received indicating that all-way stop control or si~nals should be
considered at the intersections of Akin Road with 193rd Street and 19S Street. As discussed in
item 3 above, traffic counts and accident data is required. Traffic counts were conducted at the
intersections of Akin Road with 193rd and 19Sth Streets from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from
2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on April 19 and 20, 2000. Accident data for these two locations was
obtained from the Farmington Police Department.
The traffic count data indicates that neither the peak hour or four-hour signal warrant was
satisfied at either intersection. All-way stop control warrants weren't satisfied at either location.
The reported accident totals, for three years, were as follows:
Intersection
Akin Road and 193r<l Street
Akin Road and 19Sth Street
Akin Road and 19Sth Street
Akin Road and 19Sth Street
Year
1998
1998
1998
1997
Accident Tvpe
Vehicle out of control
Rear end on Akin Road
Rear end on Akin Road
Left Turn Accident
Neither of these intersections has accident experience that satisfies the accident warrant for
traffic signal control.
5. Install Crosswalks to Reduce Need for School Buses and Increase Pedestrian Safety
There aren't any school crosswalks along Akin Road near the two schools that are in the Akin
Road vicinity. The decision as to when a crosswalk is necessary would be predicated upon the
school having students cross Akin Road as a designated walk to school route. Should that occur,
a school crosswalk could then be addressed.
6. Divert Traffic From Akin Road to CSAH 31
Comments were provided that indicated a desire to reduce the traffic volume on Akin Road by
diverting the traffic to CSAH 31.
A mechanical traffic count was conducted on Akin Road and on CSAH 31 in order to present
data with regard to daily volumes on those roadways. These counts were conducted on Monday
and Tuesday, March 28 and 29, 2000. The results of the counts are tabulated below.
'.
Memorandum
Page 40f5
June 6,2000
24-Hour 24-Hour
Roadwav Northbound Southbound 24-Hour Total
Volume Volume
Akin Road 3,416 2,919 6,335
CSAH 31 1,326 1,746 3,072
The 1996 daily traffic volume on Akin Road, before CSAH 31 was extended to CSAH 50 on its
present alignment, was 9,000 vehicles. The 24-hour count conducted in March indicates that
approximately 33 percent of the traffic has already diverted from Akin Road to new CSAH 31.
A traffic signal is now operational at the intersection of new CSAH 31 with CSAH 50. This will
enable southbound traffic to negotiate a left turn at the intersection in a more safe manner. This
traffic control improvement should divert some additional traffic from Akin Road to new CSAH
31. The year 2020 traffic forecast for new CSAH 31 is 9,000 vehicles per day and 11,000
vehicles per day on Akin Road. Akin Road has experienced a decline in volume due to the
provision of the new CSAH 31 alignment. Future projections, as the areas continue to grow, will
see an increase in traffic on both CSAH 31 and Akin Road. The 2020 projection for Akin Road
will be slightly higher than 1996 volumes.
Akin Road, a major collector street on the city thoroughfare plan, will continue to play an
important role for the movement of north-south traffic through the city. It is one of two major
north-south collectors in the city. The route must be retained as a major collector in order that
future north-south travel is not restrained by the absence of north-south routes. The presence of
new CSAH 31 will attract sufficient trips so that additional attempts to divert traffic, by limiting
the ability of Akin Road to act as a major collector, should not be a primary goal of
reconstruction of the roadway.
7. Construct Turn Lanes at the Intersections
Comments were made that turn lanes needed to be provided along Akin Road. The feasibility
report will contain an alternative that provides for exclusive left and right turn lanes at public
street intersections with Akin Road. An alternative to an exclusive left turn lane would be the
provision of a bypass lane at "T" intersections. A bypass lane is less costly to construct than a
left turn lane and can be used where left turn volumes are minimal.
8. Install School Speed Zones Along Akin Road
There isn't any need to consider school speed limits along Akin Road until, and/or if, an Akin
Road intersection were to be established as an official pedestrian school crossing.
Memorandum
Page 5015
June 6,2000
9. Install Local Traffic Only Signs on Akin Road
Local traffic only signs will not deter traffic from using Akin Road. It is a major collector street
that always has and will continue to provide an important north-south travel route in Farmington.
As a major collector, it will be called upon with new CSAH 31 to provide for north-south travel
in and through the city.
10. Provide Trail or Sidewalk Along Akin Road
Provision ofa trail along Akin Road will be one of the elements of design alternatives provided
in the project feasibility report.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
lib
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Authorize Orderly Annexation Agreement
DATE: July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
As previously discussed with Council, a Joint Resolution Providing For Orderly Annexation and
the Exercise of Joint Powers has been prepared by the City Attorney. This agreement calls for
the transfer of the sanitary sewer line servicing properties on the southside of 209th Street to the
City. At a previous Township meeting, the Board also indicated that the City should contact the
two properties on the eastside of Highway 3 to determine their desire relative to the provision of
City water services.
DISCUSSION
Please find attached a draft Orderly Annexation Agreement that provides for the transfer of the
township sanitary sewer line in question. This agreement has been transmitted to the Empire
Township Board and will be reviewed at their July 11,2000 Board meeting for approval.
The City has made preliminary contact with the two properties on Highway 3 and is awaiting
their response. As discussed, it would be the City's intention to treat these two properties on
Highway 3 in a fashion similar to those township properties on 209th Street.
BUDGET IMPACT
The agreement provides, in accordance with state statute, a declining scale of property tax levy
payments to Empire Township for the properties annexed to the City. In addition, the City is
proposing to equally share in the cost of maintaining manhole 40 as it relates to the repair,
replacement and maintenance of the sanitary sewer line on 209th Street.
ACTION REOUESTED
Consider the adoption of the attached Joint Resolution Providing For Orderly Annexation and
the Exercise of Joint Powers agreement. Should the properties on Hwy 3 choose to annex into
the City for purposes associated with the provision of City water services, Exhibits A and B can
be modified to reflect this change administratively. Should you have any questions prior to the
meeting, please feel free to contact me at your convenience at 463.1801.
Respectfully submitted,
JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 2000-1
TOWN OF EMPIRE AND CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY
A JOINT RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR ORDERLY
ANNEXATION AND THE EXERCISE OF JOINT POWERS
WHEREAS, Empire Township (the "Township") and the City of
Farmington (the "City") desire to plan appropriately for growth and
development in each community; and to provide for the efficient delivery of
public services to residents of both political subdivisions, and
WHEREAS, the Township and City acknowledge it is in the best
interests of the residents of each community to work cooperatively in the
planning and development of the areas abutting the common borders of the
communities and to align and/or realign services as necessary to provide for
the efficient delivery of public services to areas affected by boundary
adjustments, and;
WHEREAS, certain areas currently outside the City of Farmington
have indicated a desire to annex to the City to more fully avail the properties
of municipal services, thus necessitating a change in the delivery of current
municipal services including, in particular, the delivery of sanitary sewer
service, and;
WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. ~414.033 authorizes orderly annexation
agreements, and Minn. Stat. ~4 71.59 authorizes two or more governmental
units to enter into agreements to jointly or cooperatively exercise any power
common to the contracting parties or any similar power
WHEREAS, the governing boards of both the Township and the City
have concluded that, following annexation of the properties, continued
sanitary sewer service to the affected area can best be accomplished through
the cooperative and joint efforts of the Township and the City
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Township and City
agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. The Township and City hereby establish an Orderly Annexation
Area ("OAA") as authorized by Minnesota Statute ~414.0325,
Subdivision 1, as shown on the attached Exhibit A and legally
described on Exhibit B.
2. Properties located within the OAA, shown on Exhibit A and
described in Exhibit B, shall be immediately annexed to the
City without contest by the Township upon adoption of this
joint resolution and filing with the State of Minnesota, Office of
Strategic and Long-Range Planning, as provided by law.
3. Upon approval by the respective governing bodies of the City
and the Township, this joint resolution and agreement shall
confer jurisdiction upon the State of Minnesota, Office of
Strategic and Long-Range Planning so as to accomplish the
orderly annexation of the lands shown on the attached Exhibit
A and legally described on Exhibit B in accordance with the
terms of this j oint resolution and agreement.
4. The City and the Township mutually state that no alteration by
the Office of Strategic and Long-Range Planning to the OAA
boundaries, as shown on Exhibit A and described in Exhibit B,
is appropriate or permitted.
5. The City and the Township mutually state that the annexation
will not affect electric service delivery, and that the current
population of the affected area is _'
6. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 9414.035 the Parties have determined
the tax rate of the City on the area annexed shall be increased in
substantially equal proportions over not more than six years to
equality with the tax rate on the property already within the
City. The appropriate period, if any, shall be based on the time
reasonably required to effectively provide full municipal
services to the annexed area.
7. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 9414.036, upon annexation the City
shall reimburse the Township for the taxable property annexed
as part of this proceeding in accordance with the procedures
specified in Minn. Stat. 9414.033, Subd. 12. Property taxes
payable on the annexed land shall continue to be paid to the
affected town or towns for the year in which the annexation
becomes effective. If the annexation becomes effective on or
before August 1 of a levy year, the municipality. shall levy on
the annexed area beginning with that same levy year. If the
annexation becomes effective after August 1 of a levy year, the
town may continue to levy on the annexed area for that levy
year, and the municipality may not levy on the annexed area
until the following levy year. In the first year following the
year when the municipality could first levy on the annexed area
under this subdivision, and thereafter, property taxes on the
annexed land shall be paid to the municipality. In the first year
following the year the municipality could first levy on the
annexed area, the municipality shall make a cash payment to
the affected town or towns in an amount equal to 90 percent of
the property taxes distributed to the town in regard to the
annexed area in the last year the property taxes from the
annexed area were payable to the town; in the second year, an
amount equal to 70 percent; in the third year, an amount equal
to 50 percent; in the fourth year, an amount equal to 30
percent; and in the fifth year, an amount equal to ten percent.
The municipality and the affected township may agree to a
different payment.
8. The Parties agree that, upon annexation of the lands shown on
the attached Exhibit A and legally described on Exhibit B
ownership of all public utilities serving those lands shall
transfer from the Township to the City without further action or
consideration. The City shall thereafter assume all ownership
and responsibility for the repair, maintenance and upgrade of
the public sanitary sewer facilities serving those properties in
the annexed area. The sanitary sewer facilities to be transferred
to the City shall be the sanitary sewer line from Manhole 40 in
TH 3 to and including Manhole 43 at 209th and Cantata Avenue
(Manhole numbering per record plans of Empire Township
dated .) The Township will retain ownership and
maintenance responsibility for Manhole 40, but the City agrees
to reimburse the Township fifty percent (50%) of the
maintenance, repair, and replacement costs of Manhole 40 at
TH 3 upon submittal of a bill by the Township to the City and
audit by the Council.
9. The Parties further agree that the City may continue the existing
connection of the affected properties to the Township sanitary
system. The Township shall bill the City for sanitary sewer
service on the same basis as other Township customers, and the
City shall bill the owners of the properties so served based on
the City sanitary sewer charges.
10. Having designated the area illustrated on Exhibit A and
described in Exhibit B as in need of orderly annexation, and
having provided for all of the conditions of its annexation
within this document, the parties to this agreement agree that no
consideration by the Office of Strategic and Long-Range
Planning is necessary.
11. The parties may amend this joint resolution by mutual consent
at any time.
Approved and Adopted
this _ day of ,2000.
Approved and Adopted
this _ day of , 2000.
EMPIRE TOWNSHIP
CITY OF FARMINGTON
Chair
Mayor
Clerk
Administrator
Ll.l CD CD CD CD CD CD CD
z.~ CD II) II) II) II) II) II) II)
~ II) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H
r:Q 0 CO t-- CD II) ..qo (If') N
H 0)
::r:: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
:x:: ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ril 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0) 0) en 0) en 0) 0)
0) N N N N N N N
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 N N N N N N N
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
en J: =It =It =It =It =It =It =It =It
Q) Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
.-
~ - - - - - - - -
Q) C) a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a.
c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 <C m 0 c W Ll- e> J:
s.. - - - - - - - -
a. u. Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
c: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
s.. s.. s.. s.. s.. s.. s.. s..
0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
.- w a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a.
~
-
~ ::i
c: 1-, r
c: CJ) C !
<C J:, i
~ I-i 0 !
Q) 0)' !
Q)
s.. OJ m i
~ Nl t
en I
.c !
~ i
en ,
i
0 j <C
N
. _.. _,,_.J
TRUNK HWY 3
~ 006/009
06129/00 13:30 FAX 651 452 5550
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
------
EXHIBIT "B"
Parcel A - PIN #120290009056
The West Three Hundred Fifty-three feet (353') of the North One Hundred
Fifty-five feet (155') of the South Six Hundred Sixty-five feet (665') of the
South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section Twenty-nine (29),
Township One Hundred Fourteen (114), Range Nineteen (19). according to
the Government Survey thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota.
(['orrens Property)
Parcel B .... PIN #120290008056
All that part of the West Four Hundred Forty-nine and two-tenths feet
(449.2') of the North One Hundred Ninety feet (290') of the South Six
Hundred Sixty-five feet (665') of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter
of Section Twenty-nine (29), Township One Hundred Fourteen (114),
Range Nineteen (19), excepting the West Three Hundred Fifty-three feet
(353') thereof, all according to the Government Survey thereof, Dakota
County, Minnesota. (The foregoing being measured from the monument
designating the Southwest corner of said section as described in Document
No. 207921 filed May 11, 1950. in the office of the Register of Deeds
within and for Dakota County, Minnesota.)
(Abstract Property)
Parcel C -- PIN 11120290007056
The East 80.00 feet of the North 190.0 feet of the West 529.2 feet of the
South 665.0 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter, Section
Twenty-nine (29), Township One Hundred Fourteen (114), Range
06/29/00 13:31 FAX 651 452 5550 CAMPBELL KNlITSON
---------------
III 007/009
Nineteen (19), according to the Government Survey thereof, Dakota
County Minnesota.
(I' orrens Property)
Parcel D -- PIN #120290006056
The East 60.0 feet of the North 190.0 feet of the West 589.2 feet of the
South 665.0 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter. Section 29,
Township 114. Range 19, according to the U.S. Government Survey
thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota.
(Torrens Property)
Parcel E -- PIN #120290005056
The East 80.0 feet of the North 190.0 feet of the West 739.2 feet of the
South 665.0 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section
Twenty-nine (29), Township One Hundred Fourteen (114), Range
Nineteen (19), according to the Government Survey thereof, Dakota
County, Minnesota.
(Iorrens Property)
Parcel F -- PIN #120290004056
The East One Hundred Fifty feet (150') of the North One Hundred Ninety
feet (190') of the West Nine Hundred Two and seven-tenths feet (902.7')
of the South. Six Hundred Sixty-five feet (665') of the Southwest Quarter of
Section Twenty-nine (29), Township One Hundred Fourteen (114), Range
Nineteen (19), Dakota County, Minnesota.
--.-
~6/29/00 --=.:.: 31 FAX 651 452 555~_~MPBELL KNUTSON
~ 008/009
Parcel G - PIN #120290003056
The West Eighty feet (80') of the East One Hundred Sixty feet (160') of
the North One Hundred Ninety feet (190~) of the West Ten Hundred Sixty-
two and seven-tenths feet (1062.7') of the South Six Hundred Sixty-five
feet (665') of the Southwest Quarter of Section Twenty-nine (29),
Township One Hundred Fourteen (114), Range Nineteen (19), according to
the Government Survey thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota.
(Iorrens Property)
Parcel H ... PIN #120290002056
The East 80 feet of the North 190 feet of the West 1062.7 feet of the South
665 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section Twenty-
nine (29), Township One Hundred Fourteen (114), Range Nineteen (19),
according to the Govenunent Survey thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota.
AND
Commencing at the Southwest comer of Section 29, Township 114, Range
19 , West of the Fifth Principal Meridian; thence north along and parallel
with section line 665 feet; thence east and parallel with section line 1828.3
feet; thence south and parallel with section line 554 feet to the Chicago.
Milwaukee and St. Paul right-of-way; thence westerly along said right-of-
way to the intersection of the section line along the south side of said
Section 29; thence west and parallel with section line to the place of
beginning and containing 27.50 acres, more or less, all in the South Half
of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 114, Range 19 West of
the Fifth Principal Meridian, according to the Government Survey thereof,
Dakota County, Minnesota.
Excepting therefrom the east 699.6 feet of the north 190 feet of the west
1828.3 feet thereof; and also excepting therefrom the east 310 feet of the
west 1062.7 feet of the north 190 feet thereof; and also excepting
therefrom the east 80 feet of the north 190 feet of the west 739.2 feet of
06/29/00 13:31 FA~~5~5~5~__CAMPBELL KNUTSON
-----
~ 009/009
the south 665 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section
29, Township 114, Range 19, according to the Government Survey
thereof; also excepting the east 96.2 feet of the west 449.2 feet of the north
190 feet thereof; also excepting therefrom the west 353 feet of the north
155 feet of the south 665 feet thereof; also excepting therefrom the west
605 feet of the south 216 feet of the Southwest Quarter, all in Section 29,
Township 114, Range 19, according to the Government Survey thereof;
also excepting therefrom the east 80 feet of the north 190 feet of the west
529.2 feet of the south 665 feet of the South Half of the Southwest
Quarter; and also excepting therefrom the east 60 feet of the north 190 feet
of the west 589.2 feet of the south 665 feet of the South Half of the
Southwest Quarter, Section 29, Township 114, Range 19. according to the
Government Survey thereof. Also excepting therefrom the east 699.6 feet
of the west 1828.3 feet of the south 475 feet of that part of the South Half
of the Southwest Quarter lying northerly of the right-of-way line of the
Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railroad, in Section 29, Township 114,
Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota. Also excepting part of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 114, Range 19, Dakota
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of
the west line of the said Southwest Quarter with the north line of the south
356 feet of said Southwest Quarter; thence north along the west line of the
said Southwest Quarter 154 feet; thence east, parallel with the south line of
the said Southwest Quarter 353 feet; thence south, parallel with the west
line of the said Southwest Quarter 35 feet; thence east, parallel with the
south line of the said Southwest Quarter 27 feet; thence south, parallel with
the west line of the said Southwest Quarter 119 feet, more or less, to the
north line of the south 356 feet of said Southwest Quarter; thence west,
along said north line of the south 356 feet, a distance of 380 feet to the
point of beginning. Also excepting the west 380 feet of the north 140 feet
of the south 356 feet of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township
114. Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota.
(['OTTens Property)
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
/~cv
TO:
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administra~
Robin Roland, Finance Director
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Township Fire Service Contract - Capital Depreciation Charges
July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
Upon review of the Township Fire Service Contract billings, an issue has been identified with
respect to the Capital Depreciation Charges in those billings.
DISCUSSION
The formula used to determine Township Fire Service charges since 1982 has remained
essentially the same. The formula calls for the use of the actual expenses of the fire departmenfs
operations combined with an appropriate depreciation component as the basis for service
charges. Equipment (in the formula) is to be depreciated over 20 years and Buildings are to be
depreciated over 25 years.
In fact, research has determined that since at least 1991, actual application of this formula has
depreciated Buildings over a 40 year period. The result has been an underpayment (according to
the formula) in each of the years by the respective entities. A chart reflecting these
underpayments is attached.
BUDGET IMPACT
Revenues from Township Fire Protection agreements have not been collected at the level allowed
by the Contract for at least the last nine years.
ACTION REQUIRED
Authorize back billing of the townships for their respective underpayments as outlined on the
attached chart.
4Z#/
Robin Roland
Finance Director
z
o
~
U
W
0:::
a..
w
o
I-
~~
'0)
, ....
, I
60;
(0)
w....
0:::
~
u..
o
en
(i)
~
c(
z
c(
...II
~
f2
il
'#.'#.cJe.f1.
OC")'VC")
,...........0
('1)00)"":
.... ,...
ml
'#.cft.?fl.,*
~~U')lO
100)0).
,...
~I
'#.'#.'#.'#.
10 CON 10
....N,...CO
0('1) cO"":
........ co
il
tf.tf.'#.'#.
g;l;:8N
1000('1)
........,...
101
I
....
'#.'#.#.f1.
0000
COIC)COC")
cO"': ('I) cO
........CO
!I
tf.~~'#.
8NC08
('1)0)"":0
.... ,...
i!1
tf.tf.tf.'#.
0000
....'V'V....
lOcO"':"":
........CO
!I
JII'#.'#.'#.'#.
a~~~~
",...N'V'V
at ........CO
0::
lD
,5:~~~~
~OOOO
_,... CO CO,...
~cO~~~
I::
I::
q:
;
Q,
&
s
i
~
l .l' C
~ & i
~J u e.5
'ii ~i'~~
0:: WOW&\!
!I
008
00
N cO .
N ,... 10
0) co ~
oi~ ....
.... C") ....
888
('I). ...:
J:2 10 ~
a;~ ~
.... C") ....
888
('I). ...:
J:2 10 ~
a)"": .".:
.... C") ....
888
('I). ...:
J:2 10 ~
0)"": ~
.... C") ....
888
No)"":
........ 0
C")o ,...
rO..,f iii
N'V ....
888
~~ ~
..,f r-: M
NC") ....
888
~~ ~
..; r-: M
NC") ....
~.~~l
'V"" C")
NC") ....
888
8 ~ ,;
'V"" ~
..; r-: M
NC") ....
CD
Co)
i
"'010
~'VN
~@@
'ticc
....00
0:0=:0=
C\l C\l
I:: '(j'~
.2 !_
.... c. C.
.!G)G)
~ '1:' '1:' ~
Q.,~~c
EiZ'6 !
00 '5 '5 ~
CD CD '1:'
8
o
;l;
cD
....
....
,...co,...
C")....,...
100.
co,.......
C")coo
rOMM
.... ....
o'Vo
C")O)CO
NON
~~~
.... ....
....COC")
IC)....CO
"':cOo)
O),...N
co ..... .....
.... ....
~~U')
"':NN
0,...C")
C'It~q
........ ....
o co C")~
....CON
('1)0)0)
co 10 'V
co N.N
.... ....
~ ~ ~~
o co....
~~N
No)o)
C")'VC")
"":o)N
~~.a
........ ....
~~~
"':"':('1)
COO)N
co.... 10
N~
~~.~I
.... .... ....~
0) 0) C")~
C")IC)N
10 0 i'
0)....
co ,....
.... ....
....
i
~
ca
e.
.g
S
0) ti
,I:: 0
:::C\lcr::e
~.l'~._
gJ~-=~
O::wuw
o
C")
g
N
iii
C")
C")
co
10
~
N
C")
C")
~
N
~
8
co
M
o
N
N
,...
....
M
N
....
?i
0)
..,f
o
N
~
..;
re
~
..,f
co
,...
~
..,f
....
N
g
'V
..;
FO Et."1ULA
FA.:t.'1!NGTON, Mnr~rESOTA
A..'iNUAL FIP-Z REPORT
A. FORMULA
A = (c
E
.;. 20 .;.
x
(u ~ V )
- ACTUAL CHAAGE
PRIOR 12 MONTRS
PMENT COSTS
NO , BOILDING
INS., ETC.
v - PERC~T OF TA..U.BLE T.\X
- TAXABLE TAX CAl'ACITY
AREA
B. FORMULA CRJ:TERIA
C - OPERATING COSTS T.~~EN FROM THE CITY'S BOOKS ON A CASH BASIS
EXCEPT FIRE FIGETERS SALAP~ES ~~ICH ARE ON A..~ ACCRUAL BASIS.
CAPITAL OUTUY EXPE~iDITUP.ES FOR EACH r.:.Aj, ARE NOT INCLUOED
HERE am ARE ADDEO TO PLA.'iT OR EQUIPMENT LISTS AT THE ENO OF
. EACH YEAR FOR DEPRECIATION PURPOSES.
E - EQUIPMENT COSTS AP~ BASED ON THE ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT VALUE
OF &'l ITEM. TEE ESTIM..l\.TED REPLACE~NT COST IS P.,E-COMPUTED
A..'iNUALLY BY TEE FIR! DE:PA..~TMENT AND FIN&'lCE DIRECTOR UNTIL
THE IT~~ IS NO LONGER IN SERVICE.
P _ LAND &'iD BUILDING COSTS A..~ BASED ON TEE ACTUAL NUMBER OF
SQUA..~ FEET CU~NTLY BEING UTILIZED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THE VALUE PER SQUAP-Z FOOT IS TEE ESTIMATED CUR..~NT M.,1\.R.~ET
VALUE OF L&'iD AND CON?'!'RUCTION COSTS WIT~IN TEE CITY CF FA.~
U - TEE PERCENT OF RELATIVE USAGE BY ALL SERVICE USER GROUPS IS
BASED ON THE NUM3E? OF ~~'i-HOURS ACTUALLY EX~ENDED PLOS THE
NUMBER OF ACTUAL EQUIP~~NT-HOURS USED TIMES A FACTOR OF 25.
NON-CONTRACTED AP.zAS A..~ PICKED U? BY ALLOCATING COSTS TO
ALL OTHER USER GROUPS.
v - THE PERCENT OF T~XAELE TAX CAPACITY IS BASED ON THE Y~~ THE
FIRE SERVICE WAS PROVIDED.
G999 ~
ANNUAL FIRE REPORT
TABULATION OF ACTUAL COSTS -1999
SPECIAL LEW 50,000
OPERATING COSTS:
SALARIES 69,847
BENEFITS 8,755
UTILITIES 10,378
FUEL & LUBRICANTS 11, 1 07
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,212
SUPPLIES & UNIFORMS 15,575
PRINTING & PUBLISHING 169
SCHOOLS & CONFERENCES 9,691
BUILDING MAINT & RENTAL 4,381
EQUIPMENT MAINT & RENTAL 6,888
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,131
EMERGENCY DISPATCH 27,972
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS 171,106
EQUIPMENT COSTS:
TOTAL CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 1,337,851
@20YEARSTR LINE DEPRECIATION 20
1998 EQUIPMENT DEPRECIATION 66,893
LAND & BUILDING COSTS:
BUILDING 796,894
LAND 32,000
TOT~ LAND & BUILDING COSTS 828,894
(@40 YEAR STR LINE DEPRECIATION V
1999 DEPRECIATION COSTS 19,922
SUBTOTAL 307,921
UNALLOCA TED COSTS @ 10% 28,800
TOTAL COSTS TO BE ALLOCATED 336,720
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmin~on.mn.us
/c?b
TO:
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~
Robin Roland, Finance Director
SUBJECT:
Authorize Lease Agreement - 517 First Street
DATE:
July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
The Public Works department requires additional vehicle storage and operational facilities in the
interim period before the new Central Maintenance Facility is completed. Space has been located
at 517 First Street, in close proximity to the current facility, and may be leased to accommodate
the current need for additional space.
DISCUSSION
Staff has negotiated the lease of the 15,000 square foot building at 517 First Street for the 18
month period commencing August 1, 2000. Mr. Kenneth Hanson, the owner of the building, has
agreed to lease the premises to the City at a rate of $6,000 per month. Mr. Hanson would be
responsible for the insurance and the property taxes on the building; the maintenance of the lawn,
the building and all building components. The City would be responsible for the utilities (water,
sewer, refuse, electricity, and gas) and the snow plowing of the facility.
In order to most efficiently utilize this additional space, staff proposes to move all public works
equipment and activity (excluding fleet operations) from the current City garage to the leased
building and to move the solid waste operations into the City garage facility. In doing this, the
building currently leased by Solid Waste would no longer be used and that lease would be
terminated.
An additional benefit of this proposed action would be acquisition of adequate secure storage for
the Police Department's forfeited vehicles.
BUDGET IMPACT
The lease expense for facilities is currently $2,000 per month at the Solid Waste building and
therefore, with the termination of that lease, the net increase for leased space would be $4,000 to
all City operations. As leased space is budgeted to several different funds, the net effect to the
General Fund budget would be an increase of $1,400 per month or $7,000 for the remainder of
2000. This increase would be _accounted for at the time of budget re-appropriations in November.
ACTION REQUIRED
Authorize the attached lease for the building at 517 First Street for use by the Public Works
department.
Respectfully submitted,
~J
Robin Roland
finance Director
LEASE
LEASE made this day of , 2000, by and between the
CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and KENNETH
HANSON, a single person ("Landlord").
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS, THE PARTIES
AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. LEASED PREMISES. The City leases from the Landlord the property and
approximately 15,000 square foot building located at 517 First Street, Farmington, MN 55024,
Dakota County, Minnesota, which is legally described as follows:
Lots 5, 6, and 7, Block 6, Town of Farmington ("Premises").
2. USE OF LEASED PREMISES. The Premises shall be used to house and operate
the City's public works functions as may be determined by the City.
3. TERM. The City hereby leases the Premises for a period of eighteen months,
commencing on August 1,2000 and ending at midnight on January 31,2002 ("Initial Term").
Thereafter, this Lease shall renew automatically for two-month periods ("Renewal Terms"), until
either party terminates the Lease by giving the other party sixty (60) days advance written notice.
("Renewal Terms") unless a party notifies the other party of their intention not to renew the
Lease at least sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term or the first Renewal
Term.
4. RENT. The City shall pay the Landlord rent of $6,000.00 per month payable in
advance on or before the fifth day of each month.
5. TAXES. Landlord shall pay all real estate taxes on the Premises if this Lease should
cause the property to be taxed. Evidence of payment of real estate taxes shall be transmitted to the
City within 30 days of payment deadline.
6. UTILITY AND OTHER SERVICES.
a. Utilities. The City shall provide at its expense water, heat (natural gas),
electricity, telephone, sewer, and waste removal services to the Premises. The
City shall not be liable in damages or otherwise for failure to furnish such services
where failure or interruption is due to causes beyond the City's reasonable control.
b. Snow Removal. The City shall be responsible for all snow removal on the
Property .
7. MAINTENANCE OF PREMISES. Landlord agrees to maintain the lawn,
building, roof, furnace, electricity/lights, doors, and other building components in accordance
87317.04
Rev:6128/00
with State of Minnesota Building Code Requirements. The City shall at all times keep and
maintain the Premises in a neat, clean and sanitary condition.
8. ALTERATIONS, ADDITIONS, AND IMPROVEMENTS. Any proposed
alterations, additions, or improvements to the Leased Premises and any Utilities to be installed
shall be reviewed and approved by the Landlord and the City shall obtain and pay for all
alterations, additions and improvements and shall acqure any necessary government approvals
and permits.
9. CASUALTY. In the event of a fire or other casualty affecting the Premises, the
City shall immediately give notice thereof to the Landlord. If the Premises, through no fault of
the City, its agents, employees, invitees or visitors, shall be partially destroyed by fire or other
casualty so as to render the Premises untenantable, the rental herein shall abate thereafter until
such time as the Premises are made tenantable by the Landlord. In the event of the total
destruction of the Premises without default or neglect of the City, its agents, employees, invitees
or visitors, or if from such cause the same shall be so damaged that the Landlord shall decide not
to rebuild, then all rent owed up to the time of such destruction or termination shall be paid by
City and thenceforth this Lease shall cease and come to an end.
10. INSURANCE.
A. The City covenants that at its own cost and expense it will purchase and continue
in force, in the names of the City and the Landlord, general liability insurance against any and all
claims for injuries to persons or damage to City property occurring in, upon or about the
Premises resulting from the City's use of the Premises, during the term of this Lease, or any
renewal thereof, such insurance to be in an amount not less than One Million and Noll 00 Dollars
($1,000,000.00) for injuries to persons in one accident, not less than One Million and No/lOO
Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for injury to anyone person, and not less than One Million and Noll 00
Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for damage to property. Such insurance shall be written in a company
or companies authorized to engage in the business of general liability insurance in the State of
Minnesota, and there shall be delivered to the Landlord customary certificates evidencing such
paid-up insurance, which certificates are to be issued by the insurance companies and which
certificates shall further provide that such general liability insurance may not be cancelled unless
the Landlord is notified in writing ten (10) days prior to any such proposed cancellation. The
City shall also purchase and continue in effect motor vehicle insurance covering damages to
motor vehicles while stored on the Premises. All insurance required hereunder shall remain in
force for the entire life of this Lease and proof thereof shall be provided to the Landlord prior to
commencement of this Lease.
B. Landlord shall obtain and carry liability insurance in such minimum amounts as
the Landlord deems necessary to cover injuries to damages to the Leased Premises during the
term of this Lease. Landlord shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any liabilities,
damages, claims, fines, penalties, costs and other expenses including all attorneys' fees, which
may be imposed on the City by reason of damage to the Leased Premises. Such insurance shall
be written in a company or companies authorized to engage in the business of general liability
insurance in the State of Minnesota, and there shall be delivered to the City customary
87317.04
Rev: 6128/00
2
certificates evidencing such paid-up insurance, which certificates are to be issued by the
insurance companies and which certificates shall further provide that such liability insurance
may not be cancelled unless the Landlord is notified in writing ten (10) days prior to any such
proposed cancellation.
11. INDEMNIFICATION. Subject to the liability limits set forth in Minn. Stat.
Chapter 466, the City shall indemnify and save harmless the Landlord against all liabilities,
damages, claims, fines, penalties, costs and other expenses, including all attorneys' fees, which
may be imposed upon, incurred by or asserted against the Landlord by reason of all of the
following: (a) any use or condition of the Premises or any part thereof by the City; (b) any
personal injury or property damage resulting from the City's use of the Premises; (c) any
negligence on the part of the City, its agents, contractors, licensees or invitees; (d) any failure to
comply with any requirement of any governmental authority; (e) any prosecution or defense of
any suit or other proceeding in discharging the Premises or any part thereof from any liens,
judgments or encumbrances created upon or against the same or against the City's leasehold
estate; (f) any proceedings in obtaining possession of the Premises after the termination of this
Lease by forfeiture or otherwise; (g) any litigation commenced by or against the City to which
the Landlord is made a party without any fault on the part of the Landlord; (h) any response
costs, other damages and expenses (including attorneys' fees) which may be imposed upon,
incurred by or asserted against the Landlord by reason of the use, release, threatened release or
disposal of Hazardous Wastes (as defined herein) at the Premises; and (i) any failure on the part
of the Landlord to perform or comply with any covenant or agreement required to be performed
or complied with by the Landlord hereunder.
12. CONDEMNATION. If the Premises shall be taken or condemned for any public
purpose to such extent as to render the Premises untenantable, this Lease shall, at the option of
either party, forthwith cease and terminate. All proceeds from any taking or condemnation of the
Premises shall be awarded to the Landlord. Sale of all or part of the Property or Premises to a
purchaser with the power of eminent domain in the face of the exercise of the power, shall be
treated as a taking by condemnation.
13. TAXES. The City shall pay any personal property taxes assessed on, or any
portion of such taxes attributable to its use of the Premises. Landlord shall pay when due all real
property taxes and all other fees and assessments attributable to the Property.
14. SUBLEASE OR ASSIGNMENT. The City may not, voluntarily or by operation
of law, assign, mortgage, pledge or otherwise transfer this Lease without the prior written
consent of the Landlord. The prior written consent of the Landlord to any such proposed
assignment or transfer shall not be unreasonably withheld. The City shall not have the right to
sublease without prior written consent by the Landlord. The prior written consent of the
Landlord to any such proposed sublease shall not be unreasonably withheld
15. LIENS. The City will not at any time permit any lien to stand against the
Premises for any labor or material furnished to the City or claimed to have been furnished to the
City or to the City's agents, contractors or sublessees in connection with work or character
performed or claimed to have been performed on the Premises by or at the direction or
87317.04
Rev:6128/00
3
sufferance of the City.
16. DEFAULT. In the event that the City shall fail, neglect or refuse to keep and
perform any of the covenants, conditions, stipulations or agreements herein contained and
covenanted and agreed to be kept and performed by it, and in the event such default shall
continue for a period of more than thirty (30) days after notice thereof in writing given to the
City by the Landlord, the Landlord may, at its option, at any time after such default or violation
of condition or covenant, take possession of the Premises. Provided, however, that if the cause
for giving such notice involves the making of repairs or other matters reasonably requiring a
longer period of time than the period of such notice, the City shall be deemed to have complied
with such notice so long as it has commenced to comply with said notice within the period set
forth in the notice and is diligently prosecuting compliance with this notice, or has taken proper
steps or proceedings under the circumstances to prevent the seizure, destruction, alteration or
other interference with the Premises by reason of non-compliance with the requirements of any
law or ordinance or with the rules, regulations or directions of any governmental authority as the
case may be.
17. QUIET POSSESSION. Ifthe City shall pay promptly when due the rentals
herein agreed to be paid, and shall faithfully keep, abide by and be bound by the conditions and
agreements of this Lease and perform the covenants hereof, the Landlord warrants to the City the
quiet, peaceful and undisturbed possession of the Premises during the full term of this Lease.
18. TITLE. The Landlord covenants that it has full right and lawful authority to
enter into this Lease for the full term aforesaid and that it is lawfully seized of the Premises.
19. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. All personal property belonging to the City including
all motor vehicles located on the Premises shall be there at the risk of the City or such other
person only, and the Landlord shall not be liable for any damage thereto and the City waives all
claims against the Landlord for damages to persons or property sustained by the City or any
occupant of the Premises.
20.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
a.
Hazardous Substance. As used herein, "Hazardous Substance" shall mean any
substance, element, compound, solution, mixture or combination thereof which
because of its quantity, concentration or physical, chemical or infectious
characteristics presents, may present or could present danger or potential danger
for damage, injury or illness to health, welfare or to the environment, including,
but not limited to: (i) those substances which are inherently or potentially
radioactive, explosive, ignitable, corrosive, reactive, carcinogenic or toxic, (ii) the
following: asbestos, urea formaldehyde, polychlorinated biphenyls, nuclear fuel
or materials, chemical waste, radioactive materials, known carcinogens and
petroleum products, and (iii) other substances or materials which are defined as
hazardous substances or which are included under or regulated by any local, state
or federal law, rule or regulation pertaining to environmental regulation,
contamination or cleanup, including without limitation the Comprehensive
87317.04
Rev:6128/00
4
Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, 42 V.S.C. ~ 9601, et
seq. ("CERCLA"), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 ("SARA"), 42 V.S.C. ~~ 9601-9675, the Federal
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 ("RCRAn), the Minnesota
Environmental Response and Liability Act ("MERLA"), Minn. Stat. Ch. 115B, or
any other state or federal super lien or environmental cleanup statutes, laws,
ordinances or regulations, all as the same may be amended from time to time.
b. City's Responsibility. The City hereby covenants, represents and warrants to the
Landlord that at all times during the term of this Lease, or renewals thereof, the
City shall not manufacture, process, distribute, use, produce, treat, store, dispose
or allow to be present any Hazardous Substance in or about the Premises, other
than those materials that may be deemed Hazardous Substances, but are needed to
run the everyday business in which the City is engaged, including without
limitation oil, gasoline, antifreeze and other fluids used in the operation and
maintenance of motor vehicles. The City further covenants and agrees, that it
shall promptly comply, at the City's sole cost and expense, with all laws, orders,
rules, regulations, certificates of occupancy or other requirements as the same
now exists or may hereafter exist, be enacted, amended or promulgated, by any
federal, municipal, state court or other governmental or quasi-governmental
authorities, and/or any department or agency thereof relating to the presence of
any Hazardous Substance in or about the Premises resulting from the City's use of
the Premises. All covenants, representations and warranties herein contained
shall be deemed to be continuing and shall survive the termination of this Lease.
c. Indemnification.
1) The City hereby indemnifies and holds harmless the Landlord, its
successors and assigns, its employees and agents, against any and all liability ,
loss, claim, damage or expense (including fees for attorneys, paralegals,
consultants and experts, and disbursements) due to the breach by the City of any
of the warranties, representations and covenants contained herein, or due to any
violation by the City of environmental laws or any governmental or judicial
claim, order or judgment with respect to the cleanup of any Hazardous Substance
at or with such law, order, rule, regulation, certificate of occupancy or other
requirement referred to herein or any adverse effect which results from the
presence of any Hazardous Substance in or about the Premises resulting from the
City's use ofthe Premises. Included within the indemnity herein provided is
indemnity against the presence of Hazardous Substances on, in or under the
Premises, specifically including any necessary cleanup of such Hazardous
Substances resulting from the City's use of the Premises. This indemnification by
the City of the Landlord shall survive the termination of the Lease.
2)
time:
To the best of the Landlord's knowledge, no entity or person has, at any
87317.04
Rev: 6/28100
5
i. "released" or actively or passively consented to the "release" or
"threatened release" of any Hazardous Substance (as defined below) from any
"facility" or "vessel" located on or used in connection with the Premises; or
ii. taken any action in "response" to a "release" in connection with the
Premises; or
111. otherwise engaged in any activity or omitted to take any action which
could subject the Landlord or the City to claim for intentional or negligent torts,
strict or absolute liability, either pursuant to statute or common law, in connection
with Hazardous Substances (as defined below) located in or on the Premises,
including the generating, transporting, treating, storage, or manufacture of any
Hazardous Substance or hazardous materials (as defined below). The terms set
within quotation marks above shall have the meaning given to them in the
Comprehensive Environmental Response and Liability Act, 42 V.S.C. Sec. 9601
et seQ., as amended ("CERCLA") and any state environmental laws. "Hazardous
Substances" means hazardous waste, toxic substances, formaldehyde, urea,
polychlorinated biphenyls, asbestos, petroleum, natural gas, synthetic gas usable
for fuel or mixtures thereof, any materials related to any of the foregoing, and
substances defined as "hazardous substances", "toxic substances", "hazardous
waste", "pollutant", or "contaminant" in CERCLA, Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act as amended, 41 V.S.C. Sec. 9601 et seq., the Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act, 49 V.S.C. Sec. 1801 et seQ., the Clean Water Act, 33 V.S.C.
Sec. 1251 et seQ., any state laws regarding environmental matters, or any
regulations promulgated pursuant to any of the foregoing statutes.
The Landlord shall indemnify the City, its successors and assigns, against, and
shall hold the City, its successors and assigns, harmless from, any and all losses,
liabilities, claims, fines, penalties, forfeitures, damages, administrative orders,
consent agreements and orders, and the costs and expenses incident thereto,
including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees, consultants' fees and
laboratory fees, which may at any time be imposed upon, incurred by or awarded
against tht1 City as a result of or in connection with the breach of any of the above
representations and warranties or due to any governmental or judicial claim, order
or judgment with respect to the cleanup of any Hazardous Substance at or with
such law, order, rule, regulation, certificate of occupancy or other requirement
referred to herein or any adverse effect which results from the presence of any
Hazardous Substance in or about the Premises that is not a result of the City's use
of the Premises. Included within the indemnity herein provided is indemnity
against the presence of Hazardous Substances on, in or under the Premises,
specifically including any necessary cleanup of such Hazardous Substances not
resulting from the City's use of the Premises. This indemnification by the
Landlord of the City shall survive the termination of the Lease.
21. SURRENDER UPON TERMINATION. Vpon termination of this Lease,
whether through expiration or otherwise, the City shall quietly surrender and deliver up the
87317.04
Rev: 6/28/00
6
Premises in the condition they were in at the commencement of the term thereof, or as they may
have been improved, subject to the exceptions herein set forth and ordinary use and wear and
damage by the elements excepted.
22. RIGHT TO INSPECT. Following reasonable notice from the Landlord to the
City, the Landlord and his agents shall have free access to the Premises during all reasonable
hours for the purpose of examining the same and to ascertain if they are in good repair, to make
reasonable repairs which the Landlord may be required to make hereunder and to exhibit the
Premises to prospective purchasers or tenants.
23. WAIVER. One or more waivers of any covenant, term or condition of this Lease
by either party shall not be construed by the other party as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the
same covenant, term or condition. The consent or approval of either party to or of any act by the
other party of a nature requiring consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive or render
unnecessary consent to or approval of any similar act.
24. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES. Nothing contained in this Lease shall be
deemed or construed by the parties hereto or by any third party to create the relationship of
principal and agent or of partnership or of joint venture or of any association whatsoever
between the City and the Landlord, it being expressly understood and agreed that neither the
payment of rent nor any act of the parties hereto shall be deemed to create any relationship
between the City and the Landlord other than the relationship of tenant and landlord.
25. GOVERNING LAW. The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern the
validity, performance and enforcement of this Lease.
26. SAVINGS CLAUSE. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this
Lease shall not affect or impair the validity of any other provision.
27. SECTION HEADINGS. The section titles herein are for convenience only and
do not define, limit or construe the contents of any paragraph or provision hereof. Whenever the
singular is used, the same shall include the plural.
28. NOTICE. All notices and requests which may be given or which are required to
be given hereunder shall be sent by United States Mail, postage prepaid, certified with return
receipt requested as follows:
IF TO THE CITY:
Robin Roland, Finance Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, Minnesota 55024
IF TO LANDLORD:
Kenneth Hanson
717 Third Street
87317.04
Rev: 6/28/00
7
Farmington, Minnesota 55024
29. BINDING EFFECT. Each and all of the terms and conditions of this Lease shall
extend, apply to and firmly bind the heirs, successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands all on the day and
year first above written.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
BY:
Gerald R. Ristow, Mayor
(SEAL)
AND
John F. Erar, City Administrator
Kenneth Hanson
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
,2000, by Gerald R. Ristow and by John F. Erar, the Mayor and City
Administrator of the City of Farmington, on behalf of the City and pursuant to the authority
granted by its City Council.
Notary Public
87317.04
Rev: 6/28/00
8
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2000, by Kenneth Hanson, a single person.
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, MN 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
AMP
87317.04
Rev: 6/28/00
9
I-
en
w
t)
:::>
~
a...
en
~z
1S 1S ~
I-
en
I-
:::>
z
-.J
~
S
E
~
ctS
(j)cu..
Q.)o~
~ (/) Q.)
....cQ.)
(/)ctS~
enI(/)
~..c"'C
r---....~
cC">
U:;ffir---
cn~r::
en i...: ..
Q.) Q.) en
~ c en
"'C~Q.)
"'C>~
<(0"'C
~ "'C
t~<(
Q.)Q.)~
o..o..Q.)
o 0 c
~ ~ 3:
a.. a.. 0
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
/3a...,
TO:
Mayor, Councilme~~;s and
City Administrator'f-
FROM:
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
SUBJECT:
Jake Braking
DATE:
July 3, 2000
INTRODUCTION
Staff has been directed to research a Jake Braking Ordinance for the City of Farmington.
DISCUSSION
Jake Braking is the term used to describe a method of slowing down a semi-tractor using a device attached
to the engine rather than the actual wheel brakes. The "Jacob's Brake" is a commercial brand name for one
such device.
The Jake Brake works by reversing the compression on the vehicle engine thereby slowing the engine and
in turn the transmission. The end result is the overall rapid slowing of the vehicle. The sound associated
with the use of a Jake Brake is a loud muffler noise that may be described as popping. A similar noise can
be generated by the rapid downshifting of a semi-tractor. The difference is that in downshifting, the wheel
brake is also used.
Jake Braking is generally used in two applications. The fIrst application is in areas of downhill grades.
The Jake Brake is used to slow the truck and save wear and tear on the wheel brakes. This application is
commonly seen in Minnesota in areas approaching the St. Croix and Mississippi Rivers valleys or headed
into Duluth.
The second application is emergency stopping or the need to stop suddenly because of unanticipated
changes in speed zones or stop lights/stop signs. This application is the one most likely to be occurring in
Farmington. As trucks approach the reduced speed zone on Highway 50 or the lights change at Highway 3
intersections, trucks may use Jake Brakes to slow down rapidly.
Staff has conducted research into local Jake Braking ordinances. The City of Sleepy Eye enacted a Jake
Brake ordinance in the Fall of 1999. Signs were ordered to post at the entrances to the City. The MnDOT
TraffIc Division prohibited the use of "No Jake Braking" signs on State Highways. Staff contacted the
MnDOT TraffIc Division and learned that a lawsuit was threatened by Jacobs Brake Company for the
discriminatory use of their company name. As a result, MnDOT prohibits those signs and recommends the
use of a reduced truck noise ordinance to accomplish the same goal.
The City does have the right to prohibit excessive truck noise by local ordinance as a misdemeanor. Upon
adoption of the ordinance the City could post a regulatory sign advising "No Excessive Truck Noise." This
sign may promote some voluntary compliance by truck drivers. In order to enforce the ordinance an
, officer would have to witness the violation. It is staffs understanding that witnessing the violation
involves hearing the excessive decelerating muffler noise associated with a specific truck.
A second option in reducing Jake Braking is the relocation of current speed limits. If, as suspected, Jake
Braking is occurring in response to changes in speed zones within the City limits, a short distance from
stop lights then, theoretically moving the reduced speed limits to the edge of the City would slow trucks
prior to reaching a populated area and long before the stop light. This action would require cooperation
from the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
It should be noted that the use of Jake Brakes cannot be completely eliminated. The use of Jake Brakes in
an emergency stopping or collision avoidance situations may still occur.
ACTION REQUESTED
At this point Council has three options.
. Maintain the status quo with no change in the current situation.
. Pursue the relocation of speed limit signs through MnDOT to slow trucks further from populated
areas.
. Direct staff to develop an ordinance to prohibit excessive truck noise.
Respectfully submitted,
~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police