The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05.01.00 Council Packet COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR May 1, 2000 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVEAGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Letter of Appreciation - Mr. Marv Wier 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Citizen Concerns - Riverside Estates Development Proposal b) Citizen Concerns - Municipal Pool c) Citizen Concerns - Traffic Control Esquire Way - Update 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (4/17/00) (Regular) (4/19/00) (Special) b) Approve Gambling Premises Permit - Civil Air Patrol c) Approve Fire Protection Agreement with Surrounding Townships d) Authorize Advertisement for Bids - Fire Department e) Consider Resolution - Accepting Donation from Dakota Electric f) Council Review of Administrator Performance g) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) Consider Resolution - 2000 Sealcoat Project 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Consider Resolution - East Farmington 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat b) Consider Resolution - Autumn Glen Final Plat c) Consider Resolution - Autumn Glen Development Contract d) Update Minnesota State Building Code Amendment e) Acknowledge Charter Communications Rate Increase 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Consider Public Facilities Task Force Recommendations 12. NEW BUSINESS Action Taken Presented Informatiem Received Continued to 5115/00 I1iformation Received ApIJroved R28-00 Approved Authorized R29~OO Information Received AIJP70ved R3()..00 Plat Approval..R31-QO Eminent Domain- Tabled to 5/15100 R31-00 R33-0J} 11iformation Received Information Received Approved 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN 5~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us May 1,2000 Mr. Marv Wier 808 3rd Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Mr. Wier: On behalf of the City Council and staff I would like to thank you for your dedicated service to the Water Board from February 5,1990 to May 31, 2000. Serving on the Water Board is a volunteer effort which requires a great deal of time, especially during these changing times and with the significant growth that is being experienced in Farmington. The site acquisition and construction of the City's 1.5 million gallon reservoir, the addition of Well #5 and SCADA system and the switch to radio read water meters, involved numerous meetings which demanded a substantial contribution on your part, and we sincerely thank you for your valuable input and time. On behalf of the City Council, citizens and community, we wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors. Sincerely, ~CJ~ Gerald Ristow Mayor cc: City Council j C+-< ~ 0 ..... ~ j ""' tS - e '" u - Q) :E ~ ~ ""' ~ :s .s 8 0 ~ ] ~ .,g E-4 .~ ] ~ ~ u ~ ~ Q) >. ~ = ..0 - .s ta '8 E-4 ..... bI) ~ s::: ~ u 0 ~ 8- u 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s::: Q) ~ 8~ >. ~ .~ - u OJ u ~ ~ ..... ~O C,) - ~ ..... .g ~ .- - r: C+-< OE-4 ~ C+-< 0 0. 0 OJ ] .s u~ c ""' Z r:/J ]~ ~ ~= ~ ..... 0 Q) ~ ~ =t:l ~~ U ~ t;i t;i ..... E-4C .s ~ 0 OJ tE 0 ~~ ] ~ =E-4 bI) ~~ C+-< ~ .~ ; ~ E-4~ 0 as ..... ~ 0 - ] ~ 0 a:l ~ ..... ~~ ~ OJ~ ""' ~ 8' ~~ f:i~~ CZl ~ Cl ~ Q) '9 -d' t;i ..... ~~~ .s ~ OJ ~ g'~ t ~~ o~ ""' . ~ ~ =u ~~ ~ V)~ .s ...c: s::: C+-< E-4Z ~ 0 u 0 0 ~~ ~~~ ; OJ .s :Eb'o 'E c;,:,CZl U OJ..d ~.! O~ u ~ 0 ~~~ ] ~;..a u E-4t:l ~ Q) ~ ~ 0-5 -= ~O ..... Q)~ Q) ] - .- 0 - 0= ~~ gf~ 0. ""'.= -e go ~~ >Z ~~ ..... ~~ Z .- ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ [ N ~C ~ .- - 5 51 O'C "'~ ~ '0 ..: ;> Q) ] ~~ ~ Q) as 0. 0 ..... ~ >< 0= 0 C,) ~ ..... Q) Q) ~~ ~ ~ OJ - ~ ~bI) ~ ~ p::: ~.= ~ ~ o Q) ta =~ ~ co..o == ""' ~ ;> ~ Q) 0 Q)..... ~ ~~ ~ 01 t;it;i :E 01 ...c: - ~.s C+-< ~O - ~ 0 "' 10 .s~ s::: ~~ ~ ~ 0 0 ..... ~~ s::: e - ~ '8 o bI) bI) ~~ 13 .~~ 0 O~ ~ u ~ t~ ~ ~Z s::: s::: ~ ~O C 0 ~.~ ..... u CZl 00 "' ..... ~E-4 CZl ..... s::: CZl ..... CZl t: U~ < < ~ < Q) =c;,:, ~ . ZO ~'i ~ ~] ~~ E-4~ ~8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~.~ ~[ 0< ~ ]~ Z~ ~~ CZl~ Embry Ave Neighborhood Watch Speed Violation Agenda Problem: Automobiles are frequently and excessively speeding on Embry Ave in Farmington. Often the speeds exceed over 40MHP causing great danger to the citizens and young children in the neighborhood. Licensed drivers that are breaking the speed limit laws are causing life-threatening situations and it is a matter of time before a fatality or a violating licensed driver causes injury. 1 . No Speed Limit Signs: There are no speed limit signs posted informing the drivers of the speed limit laws on Embry Avenue. 2. Too Much Traffic: The through traffic on Embry Avenue is far to excessive and needs to be re-routed. The volume of traffic going through Embry Avenue is not acceptable for the Citizens of Embry Avenue. 3. Low Police Presence: The lack of police officers and resources in the City of Farmington is preventing the Citizens of Embry Avenue to live safely. Liability: Due to the lack of posted speed limit signs and in the event of a fatality or injury by an unlawful speeder, the citizens of Embry Avenue will hold the City of Farmington liable in addition to the unlawful driver unless preventative measures are taken by posting speed limit signs or other methods deemed acceptable by the citizens of Embry Avenue. Objective: It is the Embry Avenue Neighborhood Watch's objective to prevent unsafe driving on our neighborhood streets. The citizens of Embry Avenue will not wait until a fatality or injury occurs to take action. Solution: The citizens of Embry Avenue in Farmington propose several solutions to the City of Farmington to execute and implement that will reduce the risk of fatalities or injuries as a result of excessive speeds. Short Term: 1. The citizens of Embry Avenue want speed limit signs posted every 1000 feet or in accordance with city standards. 2. The citizens of Embry Avenue want a minimum of two signs posted on Embry Avenue warning drivers of small children at play. 3. The citizens of Embry Avenue want a police offer patrolling, using Radar, on Embry Ave between the hours of 6:30am and 8:30am and 3:30PM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday continuously for several weeks. Long Term: 4. The citizens of Embry Avenue want to have "Snow Plow Friendly" speed bumps installed every 2000 feet on Embry Ave to detour unlawful speeders. 5. The citizens of Embry Ave want at least 25% of the traffic to be re-routed from Embry Avenue. One suggestion is to close off the top of Embry Avenue. 18961 Embry Avenue Farmington, MN 55024 May 1, 2000 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 To whom it may concern: It has been brought to our attention that there will be a meeting taking place the evening of May 1, 2000 regarding the speed limit violations on our street. We are unable to attend and would like to express our concern in writing. We have serious concerns for our child, our neighbors' children, and the stream of unsupervised children who ride their bikes and rollerblade down our street everyday. We have witnessed several near-miss accidents and feel that unless a permanent solution is found, that it is only a matter of time before a child is seriously injured or killed. We would like to recognize that the City of Farmington has made an effort by occasionally placing a patrol car on our street to deter speeders, however, the benefit of this lasts only as long as the patrol car is in place. Drivers speed down our street at dangerous, even reckless levels on an hourly basis during the daytime and evening hours. It is not just an occasional teen-aged driver out joyriding. It is drivers of all ages, including school buses and construction trucks. We are requesting the initiation of permanent action, such as speed bumps to ensure our children's safety, particularly in the "blind" areas near the top and bottom of our block when the hill begins and ends. Drivers will have no choice but to slow down. We would also like to note that other communities, such as Apple Valley have taken similar action on streets where children are in danger. Sincerely, V-'r(\ktff~ ~CUL~~ Matthew and Teresa Dietrich City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~Ci.J TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrato~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Citizen Concerns - Riverside Estates Development DATE: May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION Several residents addressed the City Council. at the April 17, 2000 meeting during Citizen Comments regarding concerns involving a proposed multi-family development east of Riverside Estates at the end of 207th Street. DISCUSSION Ms. Kathy Bettinger of 4422 207th Street was the spokesperson for a number of Riverside Estates residents in attendance at the April 17, 2000 City Council meeting. Ms. Bettinger voiced concerns on behalf of the residents regarding a proposed multi-family development by Jack Benedict. The concerns primarily were in regards to the fact that the only access for this site would be from the end of 207th Street which would increase the level of traffic on this street. In addition, because of the relatively high water table, the lowest level of the building, which would include underground parking, would be partially above ground, and possibly result in a three-story building adjacent to their rear yards. Mr. Benedict has met with staff several times over the last three months to discuss his development concept for a proposed Senior Condo project for this site, which is approximately five acres in size. The development concept is for a three-story building containing 45-50 units with underground parking. Mr. Benedict, his engineer and architect are reviewing the issues associated with wetlands, floodplain, gas main, and electric lines adjacent to or part of the site. The history of this area is that it was rezoned to R-3 Medium Density Residential in 1981. The area rezoned included areas on the north and south side of 20Sth Street. In 1993 when the plat for Riverside Estates was approved, that portion of the site was rezoned to R-l as a condition of the plat approval. Discussion took place during the Planning Commission review of the plat in 1993 regarding making the turnaround at the end of 207th Street permanent and providing future access to the property to the west. While no formal applications have been filed, City staff has done some preliminary analysis of the project proposed by Mr. Benedict. The following preliminary findings have been made: . The proposed density of 45-50 residential units is permitted under the current R-3 zoning. . The only access to the site that meets traffic engineering guidelines is from 207th Street. The traffic volumes that are projected to be generated by the current proposed project could be accommodated by 207th Street which is considered a local street. (see attached memo from Traffic Engineer Shelly Johnson dated April 19, 2000.) The following issues will need further review prior to or during the preliminary plat review process: . Wetlands on the site will have to be delineated and a determination made whether the required buffer width can be maintained (see attached memo from Water Resource Specialist John Smyth dated April 19, 2000). . The impact of the development on the floodplain for the Vermillion River will have to be determined. A previous floodplain analysis prepared by Barr Engineering will be re-submitted to the City by the Developer. . No plans have been submitted at this stage in the process as to how the surface water runoff will be addressed on this site. . Comments will be obtained from both NSP and Enron regarding the proximity of this project to the overhead electric lines and underground gas mains. The review process for the Preliminary Plat application will require a public hearing at the Planning Commission with a 10 day mailed notice provided to property owners within 350 feet of the proposed development. After the public hearing, the Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council. The Council will then take formal action on the Preliminary Plat assuming all conditions, including those listed above, have been adequately addressed and resolved. Based on the outcome of the Preliminary Plat, an application for Final Plat will be reviewed by both the Planning Commission and City Council, however, public hearings are not required for the Final Plat. The Developer may seek to combine the Preliminary and Final Plat review process. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Consistent with the City's Development policies, this information will be referred to the City Planning Commission for consideration. 22SU~ ~ David L. Olson Community Development Director -- Cc: Kathy Bettinger, 4422 207th Street W. Todd Arey, 20651 Devonshire Avenue Jack Benedict Planning Commission , , CzJ??~ C:?~ . </~;>~o Mr. Mayor. Council Members. I would like to read to you our combined statement. We, as concerned citizens of Riverside Estates come before you this evening to bring attention to the proposed development of a piece of property next to our neighborhood, on the comer of Akin Road and 208th street. The developer, Jack Benedict, is proposing to build 42 to 45 Senior Condo's. The proposed building site has on its borders three large gas pipelines, high line wires and wetlands. Which means that there is very little usable land to build on, in the first place. We have been told that the City will not grant access to this property from Akin Road or 208th street. We agree with the City on this. However, the developer is proposing to access these Senior Condos through the cul-de-sac at the west-end of 207th Street - right through our neighborhood. We disagree with allowing the developer to do this. Our first issue with this is that when we built our homes, the Builder (Brian Budinski) and the Realtor there at the time, promised us that there was no way anybody could ever build on that piece of land because there was no way to get to it. Except maybe through the cul-de-sac and over the pipeline and they assured us that that wasn't going to happen. We understand that Realtors and Builders sometimes lie in order to sell houses. We also understand that plans, over time, change. We don't expect them to be held responsible for the changes that are inevitable as a result of the passage of time, but we DO expect and DO hold them responsible for the lies they tell, and this one, affects us all. Second, the families that built their homes on the cul-de-sac, built there because cul-de-sac's are quieter, less traveled, and a safer place for their children to play. If the developer is allowed to proceed, this quiet cul-de-sac would see ten times or more the amount of traffic then before. Seniors would either be driving and / or being transported by shuttles or relatives to shop, to attend appointments or other events. They would always have to drive or be driven, because there are no conveniences with in walking distance. This cul-de-sac would no longer be quiet, or less traveled or a safe place for their children to play - not any more. , ; Lastly, regardless of the builder's assurances that the proposed building would look nice, it, in our opinion, will still negatively effect our property values - especially in and around the cul-de-sac. Even the builder, when pressed for a response, indicated that he would not want this building next to his house either. The builder also mentioned that all we would see from our homes are balconies and gardens, no parking lots. All parking would be underground. Our response is: "Are the senior's friends and relatives going to park underground too?" We don't think so. Because of the water table in that area, we believe the proposed underground parking, would not be so "underground." It would in fact, be sticking halfway out of the ground and no amount of berming or additional fill brought in could hide it. Regardless of the methods to hide it or to make it blend in, a structure that tall, two stories, plus the underground parking, would still "stick out like a sore thumb" next to our neighborhood. In conclusion, we do believe that, if built, there are probably seniors that would want to live there, sandwi~~d between the high line wires and the three gas pipelines, near the TI~~(n~y School, with all of it's activity and congestion, and far away from any conveniences needed for senior life. We believe that there is probably a better use for this land. Maybe a neighborhood park, where children could play and families could come together, not something that would create ill-will and tear our neighborhood apart. We thank you for your attention in this matter and seek your wisdom and guidance for a peaceful and cooperative resolution to our issues. Thank you. ^ N a. c :E mc c: CD -- ... C:<( o en N CD C:'" C ... en ILl CD " -- . en ... CD > -- a.::: ..." c: -- E .... C LL. .... o >- ... -- U "0 c: Q) C> Q) -I ~ ~ 1: tii CD .~ [ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ E ~ ~ 5li:ll(i)8 a. ~ ~ !4J~0~_ ~::::::-_'- _D..E'en ~ 0 c uo.!!'2~!>:- __f/J:]'-o.9: r:Do....:J-f.P~<P ~ ~~r:ll ~€1ii>:.Eu:~'O.~C ~'8 ~ =='Otiir:ll~~~~tii'02!CDE~O ~ ~~S~~~=~~~~CO.~ ~ ~'~'~-cm.9c80c-~~~~<P ~OaaECDCDCDO OCD~a.OCD~~ SE<<~~~zoU:U:~~~~~~~i ~5~~~~~~~~~~-g~~~~m Oa~<mmmmu~~~~~~~~~~ ';:~ nII~.;~I.tUl.rnnnf'1l\l. <.~UE~ ~UJW~ ~ Z.~ ~ D.", ".~ ;.~.:. . . l' . ~:;;~:- ~ :',,-,>; ~ I < ~ I = Memo .11. Bonestroo e Rosene 'WiW Anderlik & 1 \11 Assodates Englneer$ & ArchItects Project Name: Riverview Estates Family Apartments Client: City of Farmington File No: 141GEN To: Lee Smick, AICP - Planning Coordinator Date: 04/19/00 From: John Smyth, Water Resource Specialist Re: Wetland Review Remarks: The proposed Riverview Estate Family Appartments are adjacent to Middle Creek. There are likely wetlands located along the fringe of this creek. The legend on the Site Plan map currently does not include a wetland boundary. Wetlands should be delineated and mapped on the site plan. A wetland delineation report should be submitted to the City for Review. The development appears to be adjacent to Wetland F-W8.10. This wetland has a Manage 2 classification. The main Wetland Ordinance Requirements for a Manage 2 wetland are summarized in the table below. Summary of Wetland Impacts and Main Ordinance Requirements Farmington Wetland Classification Average Buffer Minimum Buffer Structural Setback Classification Map ID Width from Width from from delineated delineated delineated wetland wetland edge wetland edge edge F-W8.10 Manage 2 25 Feet 20 Feet 30 Feet General Buffer Area Requirements ~ The clearing and removal of vegetation in the buffer area is prohibited, except for selective clearing and pruning, of individual trees and shrubs which are dead, diseased, noxious weeds, or hazards (10-9-7 (E)). ~ The buffer areas, or portion thereof, that are not vegetated or have been cultivated or otherwise disturbed within ten (10) years shall be replanted and maintained according to the Wetland Protection Ordinance Section 10-9-7 (C). Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. o st. Paul Office: 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 Phone: 651-636-4600 Fax: 651-636-1311 o Milwaukee Office: 1516 West Mequon Road Mequon, WI 53092 Phone: 262-241-4466 Fax: 262-241-4901 o Rochester Office: 112 ih Street NE Rochester. MN 55906 Phone: 507-282-2100 Fax: 507-282-3100 o Willmar Office: 205 5th Street SW Willmar, MN 56201 Phone: 320-214-9557 Fax: 320-214-9458 o St. Cloud Office: 3721 23m Street S St. Cloud, MN 56301 Phone: 320-251-4553 Fax: 320-251-6252 .w -- 1\11 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates BonestrOQ, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer Principals: Otto G. BonestroQ, P.E. . Joseph C. Anderlik, P.E. . Marvin L. Sorvala, P.E. . Glenn R. Cook, P.E. . Robert G. Schunicht. f'E. . Jerry A. Bourdon, P.E. . Robert W. Rosene, P.E., Richard E. Turner, P.E. and Susan M. Eberlin, C.P.A., Senior Consultants Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford, f'E. . Keith A. Gordon, f'E. . Robert R. Pfefferle, f'E. . Richard W. Foster, f'E. . David O. Loskota, P.E. . Robert C. Russek, A.I.A. . Mark A. Hanson f'E . Michael T. Rautmann, f'E. . Ted K.Field, P.E. . Kenneth f' Anderson, f'E. . Mark R. Rolfs, f'E.; . . Sidney P. Williamson, f'E., L.S. . Robert F Kotsmith . Agnes M. Ring. Allan Rick Schmidt, f'E. Offices: St. Paul. Rochester, Willmar and St. Cloud, MN . Milwaukee, WI Website: www.bonestroo.com Engineers & Architects Memorandum TO: Lee Smick FROM: Shelly Johnson DATE: Aprill9,2000 RE: Riverside Estates Senior Condo Project - Traffic Analysis Our File No. l41-Gen The project is proposed to consist of a 50-unit, 3-story senior condo building. Underground and surface parking are proposed to be provided. The project site is the northeast corner of the intersection of Akin Road and 208t Street. The project site has single family homes to the east. Trips generated by the proposed development are shown below: Estimated Traffic Volumes Land Use Size A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Daily In Out In Out (2-Way) Residential Condo 50 Dwelling Units 5 20 20 5 295 It should be noted that the trip rates used for the land use, as taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication titled Trip Generation, 6th Edition, 1997, are those for a residential condo land use. The ITE publication does not contain trips for a condo project that is for seniors. It can be expected that the volumes could be slightly less than those indicated above, especially if some of the units are occupied by retirees or do not have more than two persons per unit. In order to be conservative, the trips shown in this memo are used for the analysis. The access to the site, as shown on the site plan dated April 4, 2000, is from 20ih Street. Presentl~, 207th Street is a cul-de-sac that extends from Devonshire Avenue. Traffic would then use 207 to Devonshire, then proceed to 208th Street. An alternative access that has been considered would be to provide a connection from the site parking lot, then southerly to 208th Street. This would place this access approximately 150 feet east of Akin Road. This access is not recommended for the following reasons: 2335 West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 · 651-636-4600 · Fax: 651-636-1311 Memorandum Page 20f2 April 19, 2000 o 20Sth Street and Akin Road are both major collectors on the City Thoroughfare Plan. In the future, 20Sth will extend west from Akin Road and will also bridge over the rail trackage by the elementary school and connect to TH 3. Access located along a major collector 150 feet from another major collector will create safety problems for vehicles turning in/out of the access. o As volumes increase on these roadways, there may be a need to provide a left turn lane for westbound traffic on 20Sth Street at Akin Road. The left turn storage for such a turn lane would extend past the access opening causing traffic to turn through a left turn lane to negotiate left turns in/out of the property access. There may be times when vehicles are occupying a 20Sth Street left turn lane and traffic turning left in/out of the driveway could not do so. o Access control guidelines indicate that having an access closer than 500 feet to the intersection oftwo major collectors should be avoided whenever possible. This is for reasons of reducing congestion and maximizing safety. o It should be noted that Dakota County guidelines call for limiting access to one-eighth mile along major collector facilities. Even though 20Sth isn't a county roadway, the access guideline is applicable. In summary, we would recommend that access to the project should be from 20ih Street. This will add 200 to 295 vehicles per day to 207th west of Devonshire, but the volumes will still be well within the realm of local street guidelines. The access to 207th will also provide a more safe situation along 20Sth Street, which is a major consideration as it is a collector roadway. t r' p 33 CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDIRANCE NO. 093-308 An Ord~ce Amending the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map by Rezoning the Plattted kea 0} Riverside Estates from R-3 High Density Residential to R-I Low Density THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: Title 10, Chapter 2, Section 8, shall be amended by adding the following: Ordinance No. 093-308, adopted the 7th day of June, 1993, rezones the platted area of Riverside Estates, a 17.7 acre tract bounded on the south by 208th Street, on the west by a pipeline easement and the north and east by unplatted land, from R-3 High Density Residential to R-1 Low Density Residential. time in the day After adoption, signing and attestation, this ordinance shall be published one the official newspaper of the City and shall be in effect on and after following such publication. SECTION II: Enacted and ordained the 7th day of June, 1993. SEAL CITY OF FARMINGTON ~L :M ~-I~ .~~ fffI kl nistr or ArrEST: ~~ ~ Approved as to form the ~ 0 day , 1993. Published in the Farmiugtou Independent on th~~ay Of~~. 1993. J:.L.cUUU.llg I..OIDl1USSJ.on ~'U.LlUI.O:l:i - oJl"'J - rage ~ ~rl"'~"/ ~~~s,~ ~:1~ _ .;'Ier 11'3 _., __ ._. ...<\.! I. ((}) Lj 1'- /,-\::=-....:...,0) (.Ol\ \\ 17~ I [i . .. ", '--'/ !. i'-';! ' I Jl ) ') \ V / C, that future'stoi'agecapacity v~ery likely win De neeaed u no specific proposal has been presented. Member Rotty asked about future setbacks for expanded facilities. City Planner Tooker said that Planning Commission policy allows existing uses to expand utilizing building setback lines already in place. However, these are handled by specific variance requests. HOTION by Rotty, second by Gramentz to close the ; public hearing. APIF, KOTION CARlUED. HOTIOB by Gramentz, second by Thelen to recommend that the City Council zone the 13 acre Wausau Supply property I-I Light Industrial. APIF. !lOTION CARlUED. ~7. Chair Hanson reopened the continued public hearing for Riverside Preliminary Plat which had been originally requested by Jack Benedict. The plat is situated in the north one half of the swl of the swl of Section 30, immediately north of . the Middle School currently under construction on 208th Street. It contains 50 lots on approximately 20 acres of land. The platting process has been delayed while the developer secured both flood plain and wetlands data. This information is now available and it has resulted in the elimination of two lots which are now described as an outlot which will become part of the City wetlands by dedication. It was pointed out by the staff that the plat drawing does not include a flood fringe line. This will need to be added to determine which, if any, of the lots will need conditional use approval prior to construction of housing. The City Planner said that the plat has not been reviewed in detail by the City Engineer since the revised plan was late in being submitted to staff. However, there have been enough conversations between the City Engineer and the developer's engineer to suggest that the revised plan will work. The largest unresolved question about the plat is that it has not yet been reviewed by the DNR, the Corps of Engineers or the Board of Water Resources, each of which must sign off on the plat before it can be completed. City Planner Tooker indicated that currently the underlying zoning is R-3 High Density. If the plat is approved by the City Council, the zoning should be changed to R-l Low Density. erefore, any recommendation for approval should also include a recommendation for the land to be rezoned. The Commission also discussed the staff recommendation L_ that the cul-de-sac 'at the west end of 207th Street West shall be permanent and ~ on the east side of the gas line easement within the plat. The developer said that as long as the opening onto the property west of this plat is wide enough to provide access, he did not have a problem replacing the temporary turn around on the easement ith a permanent turn around. City Planner Tooker presented a revised planting plan for street trees within the plat which would add some density to plant materials and introduce the concept of clustering like species~' HDTION by Gramentz, second by Schlawin to close the public hearing. APIF. HOTIQR CARlUED. !lOTION by Thelen, second by Gramentz to forward the preliminary plat to the City Council with the recommendation that it shall be approved subject to satisfaction of the requirements of the City Engineer, the Planner, the Soil and Water Conservation District, the DNR, the Corps of Engineers and the Board of Water Resources, and identification of the flood fringe area within the plat. The recommendation further requests that the City Council set a public hearing for rezoning the land area within the plat from R-3 High Density to R-l Low Density. VOTDlG FOR: Graaentz. Hanson, Ratty. Thelen. VOTDlG AGAIlfST: Schlawin. HOTION r.ARRTlm. 8. Chair Hanson opened the public hearing advertised for 8:00 P.M. requested by Radian Corporation for the FAA Center to build a day care center at the west end of Locust Street. City Planner Tooker outlined the proposal based upon materials submitted by Radian Corporation. The use will require both a variance and a conditional use permit. Questions by the Commission focused upon the number of children to be served by the day care and whether or not the parking lot would be large enough to serve the use being proposed. Member Gramentz said that the building design is being used in several projects by the FAA and he anticipates that the parking is adequate for the use. Member Hanson is disturbed by the building design and ....,_._-'-'~,.,-,._-.._- ~-e.~""- \Z-efOc +- - 3lq) <t~ Recommendation Forward the preliminary plat to the City Council with the recommendation that the plat shall be approved contingent upon comments made by the staff and others who have reviewed it and extend the life of the preliminary plat up to two years for Phases 2 and 3. b. 7:30 P.K. - Zoning Requested by Wausau Supply Company The management of Wausau Supply Company has requested I-I Light Industrial zoning for the entire 13 acre site which was annexed to the City by Ordinance of the City Council. The reason for the industrial category is to assure the least restrictive land use possible for the site. This is consistent with the property across Trunk Highway 3 which also is a lumber company which is zoned Industrial. Dakota County Lumber is interested in business zoning primarily because of the setback requirements for industrial uses. However, an analysis needs to be under- taken for the entire Highway 3 strip before individual business uses are sanctioned. Recommendation Forward a recommendation to the City Council endorsing the request by Wausau Supply for I-I Light Industrial Zoning. ;> c. Continued Hearing - Riverside Addition Prel:iJdnary Plat The developer has established locations of both the flood plain and wetlands on site. This study has resulted in a slightly revised plat that now has an acre of wetland set aside on which development will not occur. In 10-9-5 (B), it states that whenever a wetland is located on land being subdivided, the subdivider shall dedicate such wetland to the public for improving, maintaining or protecting the area for drainage, water quality enhancement, or other purposes. Because the wetlands ordinance is new, it is difficult to determine if this wetland area needs to be dedicated. The developer has indicated that he would not object to such a dedication. Other comments made earlier on this plat include moving the temporary gravel turn around off of the pipeline easement and converting it to a permanent paved turn around east of the pipeline. The only purpose of this road is to provide access to approximately one acre of buildable land west of the plat. If a temporary gravel turn around is accepted, the City will have seriously compromised its design standards. A paved street that cannot be extended will have been left without a permanent solution. Another comment made when the plan was first introduced involves the four corner lots in blocks 5, 6, and 7. Because of the 20 foot wide side lot easement, each of these lots had only a 45 foot wide area for housing. The developer has extended the plat by 10 feet to the east, creating 92 foot width lots and 60 feet within the building envelope. Recommendation Forward the preliminary plat of Riverside to the City Council with the recommendation that it should be approved subject to comments provided by the staff. d. 8:00 P.K. - Conditional Use and Variance Requested by the FAA for a Day Care Facility A day care facility serving more than 14 persons is listed as a conditional use in the R-2 District. As indicated in 10-8-5 (C), a conditional use shall be 177 I , J:- ..1 CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 081-114 An Ordinance amending the Zoning District Map THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I Title 10, Chapter 2, Section 4(B) of the City Code is hereby amended by adding the following: 25. Ordinance No. 081-114 adopted the 16th day of March, 1981 rezones from R-l, Suburban Residential to R-3, Multiple Dwelling the following described lands owned by Mr. and Mrs. O.T. Nordseth: Pro- posed plat of Riverside Addition. Enacted and Ordained this I&~ day of O'YItLce..h- , 19.-RL. ATTEST: ('MCLu-~. J~ SEAL CITY OF FARMINGTON B~~ BY r/?.dI.~-: Mayor Published in If.. Tj;... day of \{", the '7\' (\. I . ?A- _.J-+. ... '/ '<.fiA~ Cyr;r'~ d. __ ...1, ~ ~newspaper on the , 19-.iL 00 00 "" u ~ Q.. ..J <: ~ >00 0"0 IX~ Q..:= Q.. = <:.c E- = z~ "" eo: ~a: Q.."; o = ..J .- ""roo. >"0 "" ; Q 1 ; z .5 o = E-= C,j ~ z~ ~- IXZ <0 roo._ roo.E- OQ.. >0 !: u ;:; ~.E ~ 5 oil ~ 'g '2 gf>'~ 'E ::s ~ a'c e.- 0: Q.. .- - 0: _ a ~ ,,",::CQ..~..!!!a o ::s 0 0. 0 .~ 8~:: 5 cU::C 0';: ._ .9"{ij ~ eo :::So. O~n"''''== ;z ..... 0.'- .-'- '" .5 '" a a 2 "0 . [;;;>.a= 0:0 "'~O:o~;:;-'.c :c "0 U l5.- ;>. J!l~"'5 's 0 t8 or;; .~ .c r- ~.~ 5 ~ 1._ a.;;; ... &j ~ a .~ 8.. c...c 0 a o ;>..<::: U .c Q)[;;a~~ ~ .5 =.- ~ oa~2g :=.5..!!! 0 ~e-Q.. 0. o - ~ c.. a o u 1:::: z:'g en ~ E'e .o'~ OIl = ~.- >.5.g ~EU~=~ .~ 0. _o.J U = .- ;> B "Q '';::..!!! a ~~~O:Q..a o::>;:a;>.o ...-i ~ 's ~ .c U a~ 81 .g.~ ~ ~ 0: "0 "0 ~ a S .A '> ~ ~ 1 e ~ ~ = = - l::.9.9 a8&j~ .g a(j E'S en=<8.g . 0: = '" N c..'- cIi = . Oil ~ .c "0 o 'C ~ 0. "0 .c = - 0: .~ ~ J!l cIi ~'s ~ g .- ... a '" t) B tU .~ ~ ~.!:: ~ a"O::s- 0: .9 g'~ :-8 ~ :: ~ =~Uo. - t;.~ o ... 0. '" .g ~ u .- c..a; ~ u .,.c .- 0 ,..- ~:o ~a ., u ~.a u u ~.Q :: """;:: ~ 13 E 'u ::l ,- ~~ '" ~ .S ~5 ~ .- ., ... ~ &. ~ ~ .c .- '- ,. . ~ 8 ....~ ... 'g .~ .0 =.~ a <8 ::c ~ &j 'u .- 0 .. c. Zl :::s "O.~ c: &j U 0..2 ~ = ':"0 -g 2l Q: E' ~ ~ ~ E ~ a '; U O:"O_......~~=-.o = ~.- ~ 0 e a 0 ~.- ~ ~ g ~~ 0Il~'';:: aU ~ ::s ~ ~ 0: > 0: ~ ~ 0'> 0 ... "0 -: e.~.!:: -5 ~u o.'-.~ 0."O::s ... o.~""''''~o,;>. ~ ... 0.5 "0 e .c 0. '" ~] : OIl'> ~ = .5 ~ <8 .g 'g =="00:::s =0="00 ..!!!.;;; 0: ~ U Q.. .~ &j a .0 . a - a - oo,a=oU o ~ u Ut2~ ~ II ~". ... .- OIl ~ - g,a =~~~ ~.cOllO,,",o:O: ...::l =0; 0"0-0.-: c.. en._ s.... ....... .."" ~"g2.9~gc~ go 0: ~ ~ 2 ~.5 l5.0. - &j -.- ~ ~ - 0 "0 ~o. :.c_- .5 0: ~ 0._ (5 o 0; 0 -5 .~ ~ = U .- 0. oOt;:: ~ .~ ""' _ 0 = a: .0 g .8_ .~ 'g >-'- 0: - c.. [;;Uo;~S5lo = >-cc E o.~~ ._.c I '';:: ::l .. '" .5 "0 _ >- I 0; .- - Q).- ~ :>....... e~g"O~o..!!! Q.. .~ ::s 0 'Oil l5. 0. ....:~UON~O'(5 ,-... -.c~"", ~ ~ c2 .2 ~ z: _._ > c.. "'(5ue;>. 0Il0.;0Il[;; .5 ~ 0 = = = ... U'N'- = ~ ~'c.5 tU...CCO- Q: 0:.- a e ,'" @'U a 0. .... 0. ::l ""' '" 0 3 ~ o u ~.- "" g ~ .~ U-"=U uuc.. ... u ~~ == -g~ E 'u as ~ ~ ~ .S a: .~~ ""c "'.- ShE .5 ~ c Ol)'" '" u c.. c.. .Q ~ 0.0 ~c; .5 E~-g ~a;O c.. c.. "" o '" c 1)cee ;> 0 ~ ~ c.._ ..... ::l c.. ... .~ ~ .~-g ]- W"O &jo=~~o;d) ->-==> t;:: Q.. 0: ~ 0 d) 0Il._ 0; ::;E Q: .;;; 0 .5 "5 .5 >- ""'.~ 0 'E u t.t...c;::E';8-5 "0'- E <l,) ~.- ~~~o"''''~ _=.cu~", .;:pU Q) <8 '" ... "0 '" ~ = s.....!:: I:J) ~ ::s &j .;;; gog'c.."O _ ....._ c ~=~o: ~0:t;::J!l o~"'~ '''Od)C l"'\'> ~ :; - e g 0. "0 e d) ..... [~ .2E ~ 0 ~U o .. - S (5 ~"O"'" .9 E ~ 0: 0. ~ "O'u 0 0- = .... ;> Q)o.~:;e ;>.~ 0: 0 0. ~t)-Uo. O~~.oO: t.- r.n._ Ne=U _ 0 0 U u ~ <i::t) a(j E! E!.~ .~ ~ ~.~ g c:.su~~ = '" - C 0: OIl = - "0 Q:=d)5d) ---.- E "'" > o ~ 0..5'8 U~.9...~ _ 'Oil ~ ~ ... -~~~ - = ~ ti a.E! Be d) 0 ~U o ...: ~ 0. o Q) > ~ o u &j "0 OIl = '';:: d) ~ a '" u - o = ~ o * o ~ 52 <"l o :> ~ OPTION 1 Preliminary and Final Plat Filed Sevaratelv Development Approval Process The entire development approval process for acting upon a preliminary plat for proposed developments in the City of Farmington is allowed a 120-day review period following delivery of a completed application in compliance with Section 11 Chapter 2 of the City Code. An extension of this time period is allowed if agreed to by the applicant, if required to complete an environmental review process or if other governmental permits or approvals are required. If an extension has not been agreed to or if there is no pending environmental review, the Planning Commission has a 70- day time period to review, comment and make recommendations to the City Council concerning the preliminary plat, and the City Council has the balance of the 120 days to review, comment and make recommendations concerning the preliminary plat. . The review period does not begin until the completed application is delivered in compliance with Section 11 Chapter 2 of the Subdivision Ordinance and is determined to be complete by the Planning Coordinator and City Engineer. . After preliminary plat approval by the City Council, the Developer must submit the final plat within 100 days after its approval, or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void. A request for a time extension must be submitted in writing and approved by the City Council. A request for a time extension of 90 days is allowed once in the preliminary plat process. The following steps outline a typical development process when the preliminary and final plat for a proposed project is filed separately. Depending upon review issues, this process and time frame may be altered as required and appropriate. Step 1: An initial meeting with staff to determine project requirements and possible issues. This meeting serves as a mechanism for the Developer to become aware of City development ordinances and standards. . Staff prepares development approval schedule, discusses checklist and informs Developer of associated fees involved in development process. . City staff determines if the preliminary and final plat shall be reviewed separately in the review process or simultaneously. Step 2: Submit schematic plan and corresponding information. The Developer submits a complete schematic plan to the Planning Coordinator along with other pertinent information prior to the review of the project by the Planning Commission. . City staff will inform the Developer if documents are missing in the submission package and will notify the Developer by fax and mail within 5 working days after submission. Rev. 02/09/00 1 . If the submission is incomplete, the Planning Coordinator will return the submittal to the Developer at the end of the 5 day submission review period and the schematic plan will not be scheduled for review by the Planning Commission. . If all schematic plan information has been submitted, the Developer will be notified by fax and mail at the end of the 5 day submission review period and review of the preliminary plat by City staff commences. . Any additional outside agency review which may be required such as an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W), Floodplain Study or MUSA approval by the Metropolitan Council should begin before or shortly after the submission of the schematic plan may extend the time frame in the approval process. These approvals are required prior to scheduling a public hearing for the preliminary plat by the Planning Commission. Step 3: Review of schematic plan by Development Committee, City Staff and Planning Commission. . The Planning Coordinator reviews the schematic plan with the Development Committee and other appropriate City Staff to provide staff the opportunity to become familiar with the project and generate review comments. . The schematic plan is also sent to the Parks and Recreation Commission, Water Board and Housing and Redevelopment Authority, if applicable, for review. This gives the Developer the opportunity to receive feedback from all groups prior to the Planning Commission meeting. . After review comments have been received, the Planning Coordinator will forward the comments to the Planning Commission. . Time Frame: A minimum of three weeks is required to review the schematic plan and schedule a review at a Planning Commission meeting. Meeting 1 - Schematic Plan is reviewed at Planning Commission meeting. . The Planning Commission makes comments and recommendations to the Developer concerning the schematic plan. The Developer should make the appropriate changes to the plan prior to the preliminary plat being presented to the Planning Commission. Step 4: The Developer submits the preliminary plat to Planning and Engineering staff with schematic plan review comments addressed and all required information along with payment of fees. Rev. 02/09/00 2 . The 70-day time limit "begins for the Planning Commission to act upon the preliminary plat following delivery of a completed application in compliance with Section 11 Chapter 2 of the City Code and is determined to be complete by the Planning Coordinator and City Engineer. . The Developer shall submit the following documentation prior to the scheduling of a public hearing before the Planning Commission: a) an application for preliminary plat, b) fifteen (15) copies of the plat, c) five (5) 11" x 17" copies of plat, d) five (5) copies of supporting documents including utility layouts, e) an abstractor's list of property owners living within three hundred fifty feet (350'), and t) filing fees and surety as specified in the City's annual fee schedule shall be paid prior to scheduling a public hearing before the Planning Commission. . The preliminary plat submittal must contain all of the information required in Section 11-3-2 of the Subdivision Ordinance in order for the Planning Commission to act upon the preliminary plat. . City staff will inform the Developer if any items are missing in the submission package and will notify the Developer by fax and mail within 5 working days after submission. . If the submission is incomplete, the Planning Coordinator will return the submittal to the Developer at the end of the 5 day submission review period and the preliminary plat will not be scheduled for review at the Planning Commission. . If all preliminary plat information has been submitted including filing fees, number of copies, etc., the Developer will be notified by fax and mail at the end of the 5 day submission review period and review of the preliminary plat by City staff commences. . Major engineering and planning issues must be addressed before the preliminary plat is reviewed at the Planning Commission level and forwarded to the City Council for reVIew. . Any required Environmental Assessment Worksheet, Floodplain Study or other studies required for the project must be completed and approved by the external reviewing agencies and approval processes before the 70-day time limit begins and the preliminary plat may be acted upon by the Planning Commission. . Time Frame: A minimum of five weeks is required to review the preliminary plat and schedule a Public Hearing at the Planning Commission. Step 5: Notice of Public Hearing is published 10 calendar days prior to Planning Commission hearing date for preliminary plat review as required by Minnesota State statutes. Rev. 02/09/00 3 . After City staff has determined that the preliminary plat may be scheduled for a public hearing by the Planning Commission, the Planning staff will distribute the preliminary plat to affected agencies, jurisdictions, and utilities to request comments. The above-mentioned groups have approximately three weeks to submit comments concerning the preliminary plat to the Planning Coordinator. . Notices are mailed to properties on the abstractor's list to be provided by the Developer and an affidavit of mailed notice is filed as required by Minnesota State statutes. Meeting 2 - Preliminary Plat is reviewed at Planning Commission Public Hearing. . Upon action, the Planning Commission makes a recommendation for the approval or denial of the preliminary plat and forwards the recommendation to the City Council. Step 6: Planning staff prepares report for City Council summarizing review of preliminary plat and schedules review at City Council meeting. . Comments from the Planning Commission meeting are incorporated into the City Council report and the preliminary plat must reflect any changes required by the Planning Commission. Meeting 3 - Preliminary Plat is reviewed at City Council meeting. Step 7: Preliminary plat is reviewed by City Council. . The City Council has the balance of the 120 days to review the preliminary plat following the delivery of a completed application as required by Minnesota State statutes. The public may ask questions or voice concerns at the City Council meeting. ~::"Upon approval of the preliminary plat, the Developer may upen.submission of an approved. grading. plan: ,-,,' '.,.- ...... ..', ...................., .. ", .,........._-............... .. , "" -"-,' .. .. - -"",,-,,-,",,'- .. ,'., ',. .. .. .-.',.. .".: ---";".-,,,:,:::,::,,',:,",,-"-"'-- ... ...._._,-,,,:,-,-,,,,,..,,,-,-;,,-,-_._....(..... :"."."""",'/,.",,,,"~,. Step 8: Developer prepares final plat and submits to Planning Coordinator along with payment of fees within 1 00 days of approval of preliminary plat by City Council. . The developer submits a final plat by providing twelve (12) copies of the fmal plat and three (3) copies of all engineering construction drawings. . The final plat must contain all of the information required in Section 11-3-3 in order for the Planning Commission to act upon the final plat. City staff will inform the Developer if any items are missing in the submission package and will notify the Developer by fax and mail within 5 working days after submission. Rev. 02/09/00 4 . If the submission is incomplete, the Planning Coordinator will return the submittal to the Developer at the end of the 5 day submission review period and the final plat will not be scheduled for review by the Planning Commission. . If all [mal plat information has been submitted including filing fees, number of copies, etc., the Developer will be notified by fax and mail at the end of the 5 day submission review period and review of the final plat by City staff commences. . City staff reviews the final plat and engineering construction plans before it is reviewed at the Planning Commission. The Planning and Engineering staff reviews and prepares agenda report materials on the plat. . Time Frame: A minimum of three to four weeks is required to review the final plat and schedule a meeting at the Planning Commission. Meeting 4 - Final Plat is reviewed at Planning Commission meeting. Step 9: Planning Commission reviews final plat and forwards recommendations to City Council. . Engineering construction plans need to be substantially complete as determined by the City Engineer before the City Council reviews the final plat. Meeting 5 - Final Plat is reviewed at City Council meeting. Step 10: Final plat is reviewed by City Council - Upon approval, resolution provides for acceptance of all agreements for improvements, public dedication and other requirements indicated by City Council. . City Council adopts resolution approving and authorizing signing of plat contingent upon preparation of Development Contract. Step 11: Community Development/Planning and Engineering staff draft Development Contract after information is received from the Developer. . Developer prepares cost estimates for required developer improvements and City Engineer prepares the amount of financial guarantees for Development Contract. . After preparation of agreement, staff forwards the draft Development Contract to the City Attorney for approval. . After approval by the City Attorney, staff forwards the draft to the Developer for review, comment and, if necessary, to arrange for a meeting to work out unresolved Issues. Rev. 02/09/00 5 Step 12: Development Contract is placed on consent agendafor City Council to approve. Meeting 6 - Development Contract is reviewed at City Council meeting. Step 13: Developer provides all required fees, final plat documents and signs Development Contract. . Developer provides all required fees, final plat documents, including one full size and one 8 1/2" x 11" mylar of final plat, and signs Development Contract. . Three copies of the Development Contract shall be submitted to the City. Step 14: Final plat is signed by Mayor and Chair of Planning Commission and released to Developer for recording along with certified Development Contract. . The Developer has 75 days after final plat approval by the City Council to record the final plat with the Dakota County Recorder or the previous approval is considered void. The Developer may request a time extension for recording the final plat if submitted in writing, which will be reviewed by the City Council. A request for a time extension may be allowed once in the final plat process. . No building permits shall be issued for construction of any structure on any lot on the plat until the City has received evidence of the plat being recorded by Dakota County. Rev. 02/09/00 6 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 0b TO: Mayor, Couneilmemben, City Administrato~ James Bell, Parks and Reereation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Citizen's Coneerns - Munieipal Pool DATE: May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION At the Aprill?, 2000 Council Meeting, residents expressed concerns regarding the introduction of ticket books in place of season passes at the Swimming Pool. DISCUSSION In addition to the residents that expressed concerns at the Council Meeting, staffbas received additional calls from concerned residents. A composite of the issues presented by the residents is as follows: . Go back to the season pass system. . The cost to large families is too great in order to use the pool as frequently as under the pass system. . Non- residents using the pool with resident passes and are not required to show identification. . User flexibility and convenience bas been lost. . Employees need to monitor the user and admission collection more closely. . The Zoo and other pools have passes. . Curtail sneaking in by requiring a picture ID. . Could a ticket be used for both sessions? The individual and family pass system of past years was abandoned in lieu of the ticket books to enable staff monitoring of patrons and a fair and equitable means of charging residents for the service. As the City bas grown it bas become harder for staff to recognize who is using the family passes. Identification has been suggested as a means for staff to monitor pass usage, however identification system also has its problems. Patrons need to have the identification with them at all times and be visible to staff. What happens when patrons lose identification or have been dropped off at the pool and do not have it in their possession? Typically, large families and neighborhood residents living close to the pool benefit more from the pass system than do smaller families and residents from other areas of the City. In some cases, patrons with season passes have been paying as little as 11 cents per session. The use of ticket books is intended to create a fair system for all swimmers and families regardless of family size and to ensure appropriate recovery of operating costs. The cost of the operation of the swimming pool has become an issue as residents ask that their taxes be lowered and City services be paid with user fees rather than general levy taxes. The labor, chemicals and heating costs associated with operating the pool continue to rise and need to be offset with increased user revenues. The Municipal Pool, as a business unit, needs to reduce its reliance on general property taxes and charge the appropriate users of the service to ensure adequate recovery of operating costs. However, user revenues will never reach a point of totally offsetting the operating costs at the Swimming Pool, given the need to remain affordable to facility users. After reviewing resident concerns regarding the adopted Swimming Pool admission schedule, staff proposes to add additional features to the current ticket book admissions. They are as follows: . "Deal of the Century" - Purchase 10 books at the regular price at one time and get 5 books free. Cost of individual admittance will be reduced to $1.00 for residents, with a higher cost for non-residents. . Purchase 5 books at the regular price at one time and get 1 book free. Cost of individual admittance will be reduced to $1.25 for residents, with a higher cost for non-residents. . Hand stamps have been used to allow patrons to go out into the park during a session. The hand stamps will be used to allow patrons back into the evening session with no additional cost. One fee would be required for both sessions on a single day. . Unused tickets could be carried over for use for one subsequent season. In terms of ensuring the appropriate pricing of coupon books for resident vs. non-residents, staff will check identification for residency purposes. ACTION REOUESTED Retain the current ticket book system of admissions to the Swimming Pool and consider approval of the above marketing features to the ticket book sales. If approved, a new notice would be sent to al11999 season ticket holders. Respectfully submitted, ,j1~c-~ <3~ {/ James Bell Parks and Recreation Director cc: Laura Pierce John Gilbertson Jeff Thelen Memorandum To: From: Date: Re: Jim Bell, Parks and Recreation Director Renee Brekken and Joy Lillejord, Rec. Program Supervisors"",~ ~ April 20, 2000 Pool Admission Fees for 2000 As the attached documentation indicates, we have had several calls regarding the discontinuation of pool passes for 2000. The majority of the people who have called in have indicated that due to their frequent use of the pool, or the # of members of their families, or both, they will pay significantly more to use the pool with the ticket book system as opposed to the past season pass system. They also liked seasonal pool passes for the convenience. Background Information: Regular daily admission per session is $2.00, $1.00 if 42 inches or under. 1999 Season Pass Rates - Resident: Individual $50.00, Family $75.00 Nonresident: Individual $95.00, Family $125.00 2000 Ticket books - Resident: 10 tickets for $15.00 Non-residents: 10 tickets for $18.00 In an effort to give the frequent pool users an additional discount, we are proposing the following options for the pool admission fees for 2000. 1. "Deal of the Century" - If purchasing 10 ticket books (100 tickets) at one time, purchaser will receive 5 books (50 tickets) free. This will bring the admittance fee per visit down to $1.00. 2. Ifpurchasing 5 books at one time, purchaser will receive 1 book (10 tickets) free. This will bring the admittance fee per visit down to $1.25. 3. The hand stamps in the past have allowed patrons to come and go during the same session without an additional admittance fee. It is proposed to have the stamps allow admittance back into the evening session with no additional fee. Patrons would only have to pay one admittance fee for both sessions on a single day. 4. Another letter would be sent to the 1999 season pass holders with this information and would include a free ticket book (10 tickets). In addition, we are open to conducting further research on this topic for 2001 or future years. Swim lesson sign up date is May 13. If a decision is made prior to May 13, we can advertise the new options at the swim lesson sign ups. Your consideration of this proposal is appreciated. 120 individuals or families held season passes in 1999. 4/5 - letters sent out to all 1999 season pass holders regarding ticket books. 2 letters returned with no forwarding addresses. 16 complaints as of 4/19/00. At least 10 were season pass holders in 1999. Record of Complaints - reaarding new ticket books for Dool 4/5/00 John Gilbertson* Family of 7 Figured that last year he went to the pool for about 30-some cents per visit per person. With this year's proposal, it will be much more expensive for a large family such as his. Would like to see a family discount or large ticket purchase discount. 4/5/00 Rich Schimmel* Family of 5 Will have to pay about $225 this year for what a family season pass of $75 last year purchased. Significant impact on their family due to their frequent use of the pool. Would like to see the same season pass system as last year with perhaps a # associated to each family for more ccountability. Suggested every 7th person be double checked with ID or specific family lformation. 4/5/00 No Name Would like to see a more automated system such as what is currently used for the school lunch programs where the people punch their # into a computer pad and that amount is taken off of that family's balance. Thinks the tickets will be hard to keep track of. 4/10/00 Brenda Hunter* Says they cannot afford it without season pass. They live near the pool and her kids would just come home when the pool was too crowded or to eat and then go back later. They will not be able to do this with the new ticket system. The old system was more flexible. 4/10/00 No Name Figured that it would cost her family between $500 - 600 dollars for the whole summer (4 children, 2 adults). Thinks that it is unfair and would like to see the old system updated (require identification for all swimmers). She felt that they were being punished. 4/11/00 Don Shannard Family of 7 Vithout season pass, it is too much $. He wonders whose best interest this is in. He has 5 children. 4/12/00 Kathy Ellis* Family of 9 $75 season pass fee was reasonable. If they want to go to the pool this year it will cost over $800 for their family. They live just 2 blocks from the pool. She thinks they would be better off to join a health club or YMCA for this much $. Has been here just over a year. Suggests photo IDs for all season pass holders. 4/12/00 Karla Linna 952-460-8307 Would like to see either the season pass or a discount for bulk purchase of tickets. Thinks it will be expensive for her family otherwise. 4/12/00 Chad Thelen*, Matt Mahowald* and Tony Peterson (Youth) They think the new ticket system is unfair, is too much $. They suggest using picture ID cards instead with the old pool pass system. 4/12/00 Sandy Thelen* Has 3 children 463-4414 Very disappointed with the new ticket system. Would like to see a season pass system with IDs "or each patron. She checked into the cost and it is just $2.00 per person. It will cost her 300 - 400 to use the pool this year - if they go at all. She would rather support an increase in the cost of a season pass. 4/13/00 Brenda Hunter* (2nd call) Has 3 children 460-6429 Would like season pass reinstated. Thinks it offers great benefits to the community. Would like to see a ID badge used to recognize all season pass patrons. The school currently has an ID badge maker. Brenda checked with Ted Dau who says it costs between $1.50 - 3.00 per badge to make them. Says the school may be willing to let us use or rent the ID maker. She works at the school and would be willing to pursue this option. Their family would have to pay $400- $500 to use the pool at the same frequency as last year. If money is the issue, raise the cost of the season passes. She thinks vandalism in the area will increase if youth cannot afford to use the pool and then would not make good use of their time. Brenda has checked and found that Northfield, Cannon Falls, Eagan and several other communities offer season passes and if Farmington does not offer season passes this year, they will probably go elsewhere. She would definitely like this looked at! 4/13/00 Kate Ekness* 460-6429 Called regarding new tickets. She has currently had a family pass and enters the pool to watch er grandchild swim. She was inquiring if she would have to pay admission each time she enters the pool since she is not swimming and there would be no season pass. 4/14/00 John O'Reilly* 463-3088 Frequent pool user. Really liked the pool pass system as it was much more economical for them. The new ticket books would have a significant financial impact on his family's use. 4/19/00 Melanie Tharalson 463-4174 Has not had a season pass but was planning to purchase one this year. Thinks the new ticket books will be expensive and suggests having the season passes with IDs for season pass holders. 4/19/00 Diane Dau* 463-7638 Really liked the season passes for the convenience. Would be willing to pay twice the cost of a season pass to keep the season pass rather than having the ticket books. She thinks the ticket books will be a pain. *Name identified on 1999 season pass labels. ~otes from Council Meeting on April 17. 2000 Ms. Laura Pierce, 19471 Evening Star Way, was recently informed there will no longer be summer public pool passes. She would like to see this reviewed to see if summer passes could be reinstated, especially for larger families. She has noticed many residents from other cities using the Farmington pool that have purchased Farmington resident pool passes, and have not been asked for identification as to where they live. She was concerned that she pays taxes in Farmington, yet non-residents were able to benefit from this. Mr. John Gilbertson, 3405 203rd Street W., stated he is not a Farmington resident, but is also concerned about the pool passes. He has a large family and going to the pool would be very expensive. He knows several other Farmington families that were also upset with not having pool passes. As a non-resident, they already pay more, but he feels it would be worth it to double the price for non-residents and make them prove who they are and reinstate the pool passes. The pass is more convenient than the ticket books. Mayor Ristow stated he has also received concerns from Mr. Jeff Thelen, 616 Lower Heritage Way, regarding the cost. Councilmember Soderberg asked if there was an arrangement for people who come in the morning and come back later in the day. Staff replied there is not, and 'ill be included in staff's response. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Cc TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Traffic Control, Esquire Way - Update DATE: May 1,2000 INTRODUCTION At the April 17, 2000 City Council meeting, several residents in the Nelsen Hills subdivision petitioned the City to review the intersection of Esquire Way and Essence Trail in regards to traffic safety issues. DISCUSSION Staff is in the process of completing the analysis of this intersection and will forward recommendations to Council at the May 15 City Council meeting. BUDGET IMP ACT None at this time. ACTION REOUESTED F or information only. Respectfully submitted, ~)r;~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file Steve COITaro ~ COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR April!7, 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, Soderberg, Strachan, Verch Cordes City Administrator Erar, City Attorney Jamnik, City Management Team 4. APPROYEA GENDA MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Ms. Kathy Bettinger, 4422 207th Street W, stated the residents of Riverside Addition are bringing to Council their concerns regarding a development on the corner of Akin Road and 20Sth Street. The developer, Mr. Jack Benedict, is proposing to build 42-45 senior condos. The proposed building site is bordered by 3 large gas pipelines, high line wires and wetlands. The proposed access is through the cul-de-sac at the west end of207th Street. When residents built their homes, they were assured nothing would be built on that land as there was no way to get to it. Residents built on the cul-de-sac because they are quieter and safer for children to play. Traffic would increase due to transportation for seniors. The builder mentioned all parking would be underground. Because of the water table in that area, the proposed parking would be sticking half way out of the ground and no amount of berming could hide it. The residents feel the land could be better used for a neighborhood park. Mr. Todd Arey, 20651 Devonshire A venue, stated they do not have a petition, however, several members of the neighborhood are in attendance to support this. Councilmember Strachan inquired as to the status of the proposed development. Staff replied no formal applications have been made at this point. The City has met with the developer on his concept for development of this property. A senior condo is being explored by Mr. Benedict. This is consistent with the property's current zoning. Staff will respond to the residents. Council Minutes (Regular) April 17, 2000 Page 2 Ms. Laura Pierce, 19471 Evening Star Way, was recently informed there will no longer be summer public pool passes. She would like to see this reviewed to see if summer passes could be reinstated, especially for larger families. She has noticed many residents from other cities using the Farmington pool that have purchased Farmington resident pool passes, and have not been asked for identification as to where they live. She was concerned that she pays taxes in Farmington, yet non-residents were able to benefit from this. Mr. John Gilbertson, 3405 203rd Street W, stated he is not a Farmington resident, but is also concerned about the pool passes. He has a large family and going to the pool would be very expensive. He knows several other Farmington families that were also upset with not having pool passes. As a non-resident, they already pay more, but he feels it would be worth it to double the price for non-residents and make them prove who they are and reinstate the pool passes. The pass is more convenient than the ticket books. Mayor Ristow stated he has also received concerns from Mr. Jeff Thelen, 616 Lower Heritage Way, regarding the cost. Councilmember Soderberg asked if there was an arrangement for people who come in the morning and come back later in the day. Staff replied there is not, and will be included in staffs response. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Verch, second by Strachan to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (4/3/00) (Regular) and (4/5/00) (Special) b) Approved Assessment/Sewer Connection Agreement - County Road 72 c) Accepted Customer Service Response Report d) Accepted Letter Requesting Skate Park e) Accepted Quarterly Building Permit Report t) Acknowledged Resignation - Authorized Notice of Water Board Vacancy g) Ratified Appointment Recommendation - Parks and Recreation Department h) Adopted RESOLUTION R22-00 Authorizing Street Lighting Contract- Downtown Streetscape Project i) Received Information on Capital Outlay - Administration Department j) Received Information on Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation Department k) Adopted RESOLUTION R23-00 Designating MSA Mileage I) Approved Police Joint Powers Agreement Amendment m) Received Information on School and Conference - Administration Department n) Received Information on 2000 Partnership Minnesota - Governor's Commendation (Councilmember Soderberg commended Karen Finstuen and staff/or the fine work in submitting this application. He stated this is the way governments should work together to get things done). 0) Received Information on Tree City USA Designation p) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Consider Resolution - Easement Vacation East Farmington 7th Addition The Developer for East Farmington has requested that the City vacate the existing 20-foot wide drainage and utility easement on Lot 5 in Block 3. A 36-inch storm Council Minutes (Regular) April 17, 2000 Page 3 water pipe currently exists within the easement. The Develojer proposes to remove and relocate the storm water pipe elsewhere in the 7 Addition, thereby rededicating a new drainage and utility easement in the platting process. The new location of the pipe will connect with the storm water pipe in the Henderson Addition. The cost will be paid by the Developer. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Verch to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Verch to adopt RESOLUTION R24-00 vacating an existing drainage and utility easement by removing the existing 36- inch storm water pipe and relocating it within a newly dedicated easement upon engineering approval within the East Farmington 7th Addition on Lot 5, Block 3. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT a) Consider Resolution - Audio Visual Equipment - Supplemental Sealed bids for the Audio Visual equipment, installation, and technical services as required for multi-media presentations and cable telecasting in the City Council Chambers, were opened on April 17, 2000. The low bid received was from Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. in the amount of $85,240.00. The equipment will be installed within the next 30-45 days. MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R2S-00 accepting the bid and awarding the contract for Audio Visual equipment, installation and services to Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Authorize Use of Eminent Domain - 2000 Trunk Water Main Project The Water Board has put plans out to bid for the 2000 Trunk Water Main Project. The westerly portion of the project consists of installing trunk water main along the new alignment of CSAH 31 from I 95th Street to CSAH 50. The easterly portion of the project extends two mains to the Sprute Severson property, one along Trunk Highway 3 and one along the SE Trunk Sanitary Sewer. In order to insure that the easements can be acquired in a timely manner to allow for the construction of this project, the Water Board requested Council authorize staff to proceed with eminent domain proceedings, if it becomes necessary. The majority of property owners have indicated a willingness to work with the City on the project. Eminent domain will expire when the project is completed. MOTION by Strachan, second by Verch adopting RESOLUTION R26-00 authorizing staff to commence with eminent domain proceedings for the 2000 Trunk Water Main Project. This procedure will be utilized only as necessary to allow the project to move forward as needed. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Consider Resolution - East Farmington PUD Sienna Corporation is proposing the final phase of the East Farmington development with the 7th Addition. The Developer proposes 68 single-family lots in the 7th Addition preliminary and final plat and the elimination of the 8th Addition that included 44 multi-family units. The multi-family units that are shown on the original PUD would be replaced with a City Park on Outlot E. Council Minutes (Regular) April 17, 2000 Page 4 The Developer proposes the following amendments to the East Farmington PUD: 1. Redesignate the temporary pond to a permanent pond in Outlot S East Farmington 1 st Addition and increase its size to be incorporated into the Prairie Waterway. 2. Remove the multi-family (units) land use identified in Outlot R East Farmington 1 st Addition. 3. Relocate the City Park from Outlot S East Farmington 1 st Addition to Outlot R East Farmington 1 st Addition and replat as Outlot E East Farmington7th Addition. 4. Reduce the number oflots in the East Farmington 7th Addition Block 5 from 17 to 10 lots. Regarding the removal of the multi-family land use, the obligations of the City for the Livable Communities Act will be met with the recent approval of schematic PUD plans for Vermillion Grove, Murphy Farm and Tamarack Ridge, which include approximately 690 multi-family units. The Developer's park dedication requirements will be met by relocating the City park to the newly platted Outlot E. Block 5 of the 7th Addition has been reduced from 17 to 10 lots because of the expansion of the pond to the south into Block 5. MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R27-00 amending the East Farmington Schematic PUD as stated above. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Consider Sprute/Severson Annexation Petition - Schedule Public Hearing The City has received a request from Katherine Sprute Severson and Charlotte Severson Oliver to annex 6.67 acres on the north side of County Road 66. This property has been petitioned for annexation to allow for the development of a stormwater pond to serve the property being developed by James Development on the south side of County Road 66. MOTION by Verch, second by Soderberg to schedule a Public Hearing for June 5, 2000. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. d) Consider Eureka Township Fire Contract Reimbursement Request Ms. Cheryl Schindeldecker, Chair of the Eureka Town Board has submitted a request for a refund of fire contract fees that the Township overpaid in 1996 and 1997. In computing the Fire service charges for these years an error occurred associated with the tax capacity value for Eureka Township. Instead of using the tax capacity value for only those selected sections of Eureka stated in their contract, the total tax capacity for the entire Township was used. This resulted in Eureka being over charged in 1996 by $11,549 and in 1997 by $13,029. As the fire contract formula is dependent on percentages, the decrease to Eureka's respective portion results in increases to the other three entities. Empire and Castle Rock Townships have been contacted with a request to pay the amounts identified as underpayments for 1996 and 1997. MOTION by Verch, second by Soderberg authorizing Eureka Township's Fire Contract reimbursement request. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. e) League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference - Update The annual League of MN Cities Conference is scheduled to be held in St. Cloud from June 13-16, 2000. Council Minutes (Regular) April 17,2000 Page 5 t) Resident Petition - Westlyn Court Parking Restrictions Request Staff received a petition from the residents ofWestlyn Court requesting placement of signs prohibiting parking in the court during school hours. The high school students are parking in the court in order to circumvent the need to obtain a parking permit in the high school parking lot. Mr. Ted Schoonover, 908 Westlyn Court, stated students are cutting through properties, littering, and smoking behind the homes. Parking after school hours is not a problem, as the students do not have to pay to park in the parking lot. Another resident stated when the signs were installed at Westwood Court, the students parked in Westlyn Court. He suggested installing signs in the next court to prevent this from happening. Staff replied it is important to receive a petition signed by all residents, before installing signs in the next court, as no parking would also affect them. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Verch authorizing the installation of the IINo Parking During School Hoursll signs in Westlyn Court. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. g) Citizen Petition - Nelsen Hills Residents Staff received a resident petition regarding stop signs at the intersection of Esquire Way and Essence Trail. Staff previously responded to one of the concerned residents regarding this issue. Based on the previous analysis performed last year at Everest Path and Esquire Way, staffhas indicated that stop sign warrants would not be met at the intersection of Esquire Way and Essence Trail. Mr. Steve Carraro, 18775 Essence Trail, stated a request was submitted for a slow traffic sign. He took offense to the City's response of encouraging children to play in the yard, and being accompanied by an adult when riding in the street. The bottom line is the safety of the children. He stated rules are made to be broken and if the intersection does not meet warrants for a stop sign, can a sign be installed anyway. Staff replied they will have to look for circumstances to justify doing this. Mr. Randy Leeman, 18649 Esquire Way, stated traffic needs to be slowed down on Esquire Way, as Essence Trail is downhill from Daisy Knoll Park. He would like two stop signs on Esquire Way. Mr. Scott Ericksen, 18614 Esquire Way, stated the traffic needs to stop on Esquire Way so residents can cross the street to the park. Mr. Corby Manes, 18609 Esquire Way, stated there are several more children in the area now than when the request was submitted in 1997. Council Minutes (Regular) April 17 , 2000 Page 6 MOTION by Verch, second by Soderberg authorizing the City's traffic engineer to review the intersection at Esquire Way and Essence Trail. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Strachan: He acknowledged Mr. Marv Wier for his service on the Water Board. Mayor Ristow: Inquired as to the progress on 1 st Street and Elm Street. Staff replied after a conversation with the property owner, the fencing has been restaked. It is still Mr. King's intent to move a house on the property and he has been working with his finance people. It is possible Mr. King will be coming to the Planning Commission with a request for extension on the CUP. Mayor Ristow stated the City has been more than patient. He needs to clean it up. There have been numerous communications with Mr. King to move the process along. Mayor Ristow also stated there will be an awards ceremony at North Trail Elementary April 18, 2000. Mr. Steve Carraro, 18775 Essence Trail, had a question regarding the seasonal parking ordinance. He stated it was 55 degrees, he left his car parked in front of his house and received a ticket. He wanted to know if tickets were being issued with such good weather. Mayor Ristow stated the Council will be reviewing the ordinance, but they are trying to stay consistent with all situations. 14. EXECUTIVE SESSION -Administrator's Review Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 7~~?Y7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING JOINT CITY COUNCIL-HRA BOARD MEETING CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS April 19, 2000 - 7:00 p.m A special Council Workshop was held in conjunction with the Farmington Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the Public Facilities Task Force on April 19, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. Prior to the start of the meeting, a public information meeting was held beginning at 6:00 p.m. until the joint workshop was convened at 7:00 p.m. Council members present: Mayor Ristow, Councilmembers Cordes, Soderberg and Strachan. Member absent: Verch HRA members present: Chairperson Arey, Boardmembers Soderberg, Matheson, Flaherty. Member absent: Lamb Public Facilities Task Force present: Chair Sapp, Vice-Chair Cordes, Members Flaherty, Gerten, Heman, Matheson, Oswald and Erar. Members absent: Gunderson, Kimmerling, Miller, Rotty. Others present: Administrator Erar, Finance Director Roland, Public Works Director Mann, Chief Siebenaler. The Special Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow. Chair Arey called to order a special meeting of the HRA. The Council Workshop Agenda was adopted. Mayor Ristow welcomed the participants to the meeting and asked those in attendance to introduce themselves. Mayor Ristow indicated the purpose of the meeting was to review the final report of the Public Facilities Task Force and to discuss their recommendations regarding City facilities. Mayor Ristow asked administrator Erar to present the final report. Erar began the presentation by recognizing Task Force Chair Sapp and members of the group. Chair Sapp indicated he was very pleased with facility planning efforts and felt that the Task Force had done a very thorough job in reviewing City building needs. The final report was presented using a computer aided multi-media projector. At the conclusion of the presentation, cost estimates for the Law Enforcement Center (LEC), Central Maintenance Facility (CMF) and City Hall remodeling were presented, with the total project budget for the CMF and LEC estimated at $7.6 million. The remodeling of the City Hall was estimated at approximately $722,000. At the conclusion of this presentation, Finance Director Roland presented information on project financing and indicated that in accordance with Task Force recommendations, a lease revenue bond was the most appropriate funding mechanism. Chair Arey asked a number of questions regarding the HRA's role in issuing the bonds and how the bonds would be paid for by the City. Director Roland indicated that the debt service would be annually appropriated for during the City budget process, and that state statute did not allow the City to issue these types of bonds directly. A general discussion was held at the conclusion of this portion of the meeting, with a variety of comments and questions focusing on City finances, long-term debt implications, effect on the City tax rate and extensive discussions regarding the City's fiscal assumptions and financial Performa. Mayor Ristow indicated that the need for the recommended facilities as identified by the Task Force was unquestionably necessary. The Mayor pointed to the fact that the Council chambers is inadequate for large meetings and needs to accommodate residents. Councilmember Cordes indicated her wholehearted support for the facilities as recommended given her involvement in the process and tour of existing facilities. Councilmember Soderberg indicated that his review of the City's financial data and assumptions suggested that the Task Force and staff had done a very thorough job. Councilmember Strachan indicated that the process established a fundamental need for the facilities, and that the City should produce a design that was considerate of both functional needs and budgetary limitations. Erar indicated that the design of facilities would incorporate elements of attractiveness, durability and functionality consistent with the City's commitment to customer service, but in accordance with budgetary guidelines. The HRA indicated their unanimous support for the facilities, as recommended and their role in issuing the bonds as recommended by the Task Force. It was noted that Board members Flaherty and Matheson participated in the process and were able to represent the interests of the HRA in the process. Mayor Ristow indicated that several action items were necessary to move the process forward. This included approving Requests for Proposals for a Construction Manager and Project Architect(s), approving the issuance of Lease Revenue Bonds and recommending that the HRA issue the bonds, the HRA will address this issue at their next meeting, and that signage be installed at the City site identifying the future construction of the LEC and CMF. Council indicated their consensus that these items should be placed on the May 1, 2000 Council agenda. The Mayor and Council extended their appreciation and gratitude for the hard work of the Task Force in this process, and acknowledged that the process included resident input in the final outcome. Chair Sapp acknowledged the Council's appreciation and thanked the Council and Task Force for the opportunity to serve as Chair in this very important process. Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. J F.Erar ity Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator~ FROM: Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager SUBJECT: Approve a Gambling Premises Permit - Civil Air Patrol DATE: May 1,2000 INTRODUCTION The Civil Air Patrol is requesting a Gambling Premises Permit at Farmington Lanes, 27 Sth 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. The Civil Air Patrol is requesting approval to conduct gambling activity at 27 Sth Street. The appropriate application and fees have been received and the application has been reviewed by the City Attorney. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REOUESTED Consider the attached Resolution approving a Gambling Premises Permit at 27 Sth Street. Respectfully submitted, Y{vu--- ~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager RESOLUTION NO. R -00 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR CIVIL AIR PATROL 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 1st day of May 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, the Civil Air Patrol has submitted an application for a Gambling Premises Permit to be conducted at 27 5th Street, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Premises Permit for the Civil Air Patrol to be conducted at 27 5th Street, is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 1st day of May 2000. Mayor day of 2000. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7c.- TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administra~ Robin Roland, Finance Director Approve Fire Protection Agreements with Surrounding Townships May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION At the City Council Goal Setting session on April 29, 2000, staff presented revised Township Fire Protection Agreements. DISCUSSION Each of the fire service contracts have been updated to reflect a revision of the formula as weD as to bring the contract language into compliance with current legal requirements. The Townships have indicated that the overall formula works very well in assigning the appropriate costs to the respective users. The formula's single revision involves including interest and carrying charges (associated with debt issuance) in the depreciable cost of any assets which are purchased with G.O. Bonds. Depreciation charges in the Fire Contract formula are the way the townships contribute to the long term costs of equipment and facilities. If the interest and carrying charges are not included in the base depreciation cost, City residents bear 100% of that cost. As revised, the formula distributes that burden equitably. Once the revised agreements are approved by the City Council, the Townships will be sent the appropriate copy for their signature. Staff will attend the respective Township Board meetings to discuss the revised agreements and answer any questions. BUDGET IMPACT Revenues from the Fire Protection Agreements with Eureka, Empire and Castle Rock Townships are budgeted annually in the General Fund. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the Township Fire Protection Agreements as updated and revised. ResP8-dfu11y submitted, /!6#J Finance Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street. Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lei TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Authorize Advertisement for Bids - Fire Department DATE: May 1,2000 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department has completed the preparation of bid documents for the new Fire Pumper Truck authorized in the 2000 Budget. DISCUSSION The preparation of bid documents has been completed by the Department's Truck Committee and reviewed by the City Attorney and this office. Council should be aware that the Fire Department has been authorized to send two (2) members of the Department's Truck Committee to the manufacturer's facility at the pre-construction meeting and at the pre-paint stage for a total of two trips. The purpose of the first trip is to meet with the manufacturer to review blueprints and address apparatus design and equipment placement issues. While the second trip is to inspect the apparatus at the pre-paint stage to ensure compliance with bid specifications and to resolve any issues associated with final apparatus design prior to final painting. Costs associated with travel to the manufacturer's facility will be expensed out of the approved capital equipment budget, and shall be in conformance with City travel and reimbursement policies. It should be noted that all vendors must provide a bidder's bond, be a member of the Fire Apparatus Manufacturer's Association, provide a minimum of ten (10) references and warrant the apparatus for a period of two (2) years. At the time of final delivery, the apparatus will be driven to the City and will be thoroughly inspected by department personnel prior to formal acceptance. The City Attorney has reviewed the attached Information for Contractors and has indicated his approval of the bid advertisement process. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this vehicle was approved in the 2000 Budget. ACTION REOUESTED Consider authorizing the Advertisement for Bids for the purchase of a new Fire Department Pumper Truck. Respectfully submitted, ~ 1 hn F. Erar file ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS The City of Farmington, Minnesota is seeking sealed competitive bids from reputable manufacturers of fire apparatus in accordance with detailed information and specifications available from the City for: One Fire Truck, triple combination pumper, 1500 ganon per minute, hosebody, booster tank, and an other appurtenances in accordance with the specifications and information prepared by the City. The City of Farmington will receive sealed bids on equipment/apparatus meeting the specifications and terms, due no later than 4:30 p.m., Tuesday, May 30, 2000, containing all required information, bid bonds, and related requirements. The City reserves the right to reject any or all Bids when such rejcction is in the interest of the City and to reject the Bid of a Bidder who, in the judgement of the City, is not in a position to perform the contract. To be published: Farmington Independent Construction Bulletin Information for Contractors City of Farmington, Minnesota Sealed proposals are desired from reputable manufacturers of automotive fU'C apparatus in accordance with these specifications and with the advertisement, a copy of which is attached, for the piece of apparatus as follows: One Fire Truck, triple combination pumper, 1500 gallon per minute, hosebody, booster tank, and all other appurtenances in accordance with the following: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Each bid must be accompanied by bidders accurate written and detailed specifications covering the apparatus and equipment which it is proposing to furnish and to which the apparatus furnished under the Contract must conform. It is the intent of these specifications to cover the furnishing and delivering to the city, complete apparatus equipped as specified. Minor details of construction and materials where not otherwise specified are left to the discretion of the Contractor who shall be solely responsible for the design and construction of all features. Such details and other construction not specifically covered herein or not at variance with these specifications should conform with specifications as outlined in Booklet No. 1901 dated February 1996 and any changes or additions made to these specifications since that date, by the National Fire Protection Association and approved by the International Association of Fire Chiefs. The apparatus shall further conform to all the standards of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) 121. All specifications herein contained are considered as minimum. Some items have been specified by brand name or model number. These have been carefully selected because of their reliability, compatibility with present equipment, and local availability of parts. The apparatus being furnished under these specifications shall conform to all of the requirements of all Chapters of Booklet 190 I. Any test equipment required or expense incurred for the Certification Tests shall be borne by the Contractor supplying this equipment. Exceptions taken in areas other than listed above must be listed on a separate page and marked "Exceptions to Specifications". Every exception taken shall be listed as to page number and plIl'Il&I'aph. Failure to provide the required exception list with the bid proposal will be cause for rejection of that proposal. RELIABILITY OF CONTRACTOR: Contractor shall furnish satisfactory evidence that he or she has the ability to design, engineer, and construct the apparatus specified and shall state the location of the factory where the appartus is to be manufactured and tested. A minimum of 10 (ten) references of Fire Departments who have purchased similar apparatus within the last 3 (three) years is to be provided with the Bidders proposal. List shall include customer's name, address, date place in service, and a current contact with phone number. Proposals will only be considered which are submitted by full time fU'C apparatus manufacturers who are current members of the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Association (F AMA). F AMA is a non-profit organization designed to keep fU'C truck manufacturers abreast with the latest technologies and governing standards, and to act as a liaison to the IAFC and NFP A. Bidder shall include evidence of their affiliation to F AMA in the bid proposal. WARRANTY: As a condition of the acceptance of the apparatus, the Contractor shall furnish the followina Warranty: 1 We wamnt each new piece of Fire and Rescue Apparatus to be free from defects in material and workmanship under nonnal use and service. Our obligation under this warranty is to provide unlimited "Bumper - to - Bumper" coverage. All parts and labor required to place the apparatus back into standard working order is the responsibility of the Bidder. The Bidder shall have or designate an authorized repair facility within a tOO-mile radius of the Fire Department. This warranty shall cover a period of time of two (2) years beginning at the time that the department takes delivery of the unit. The water tank (Booster Tank) is to carry the Tank Manufacturer's unconditional Lifetime Warranty against any leaks or destruction due to cracks or corrosion caused by nonnal use of the same. This warranty extension required the yearly examination of the tank interior, with irregularities being reported to the factory immediately. The factory will repair or replace, as the Company may elect, the tank and/or its components. This warranty will not apply: 1. To nonnal maintenance services or adjustments. 2. To any vehicle which shall have been repaired or altered outside of our factory in any way so as in our judgement, to affect its stability, nor which has been subject to misuse, negligence, or accident, nor to any vehicle made by us which shall have been operated at a speed exceeding the factory rated speed, or loaded beyond the factory rated load capacity. 3. To commercial chassis and associated equipment furnished with chassis, signaling devices, generators, batteries, or other trade accessories in as much as they are usually warranted separately by their respective manufacturers. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, expressed or implied all other representations to the original city and all other obligations or liabilities, including liabilities for incidental or consequential damage on the part of the Company. We neither assume any other warranty or liability on the Company's behalf unless made or assumed in writing by the Company. SERVICE INSPECTION: After delivery the contractor shall arrange for a factory service representative to perfonn two (2) complete service inspections at a period of time eleven (II) months and at twenty three (23) months from the date of delivery. CARRYING CAPACITY: The GAWR, and GCWR or GYWR of the chassis shall be adequate to carry the fully equipped apparatus including full water and other tanks, the specified hose load, unequipped personnel weight (The unequipped personnel weight shall be calculated at 200 lb. per person times the maximum number of persons to ride the apparatus as specified.), ground ladders, and a miscellaneous equipment allowance of2000 Ibs. FAILURE TO MEET TESTS: In the event that the apparatus fails to meet the acceptance test requirements of the initial trial, a second trial may be made at the option of the Contractor, within thirty days of the date of the frrst trials. Such trials shall be final and conclusive and failure to comply with these requirements shall be cause for rejection. Failure to make such changes as the city may consider necessary to confonn to any clause of the specifications within thirty days after notice is given to the Contractor to make such changes shall also be cause for rejection of the apparatus. ALTITUDE REQUIREMENTS: The apparatus shall be designed to meet the specified rating at 2000 feet altitude above sea level. ACCEPTANCE TESTS AND REQUIREMENTS: Acceptance tests on behalf of the City shall be prescribed and conducted prior to delivery or within 10 days after delivery, by the manufacturer's representative in the presence of such person or persons as the City may designate in the requirements for delivery. 2 The apparatus, loaded with a full complement of hose and personnel, a full water tank, and equipment as specified in "Carrying Capacity" on this page, shall meet the tests on paved roads, dry and in good condition. Tests shall be on the basis of two runs; in opposite directions over the same route, the engine not operating in excess of the manufacturer's maximum RPM. From a standing start, through the gears, the vehicle shall attain a true speed of 35 mph within 25 seconds in the case of pumpers. and a true speed of 55 mph within 60 seconds. The vehicle shall attain a top speed of not less than 62 mph. The apparatus, when fully equipped and loaded per "Carrying Capacity", shall be capable of the following performance on drylleveVpaved roads in good condition: From a standing start the vehicle shall attain a true speed of 35 MPH within 25 seconds. From a steady speed of 15 MPH the vehicle shall accelerate to 35 MPH within 30 seconds (without moving gear selector). The vehicle shall attain a minimum top speed of 50 MPH. The apparatus shall be able to maintain a speed of at least 20 MPH on any grade up to and including 6%. Specified acceleration tests shall consist of two runs in opposite directions over the same route. A total of five (four with SCBA's) seating positions to be provided, "Fully Enclosed", with approved seat belts. Two seating positions to be located inside front cab and three inside crew cab. The service brakes shall bring the fully laden apparatus to a complete stop from an initial speed of 20 MPH in a distance not exceeding 35 ft., on a substantially hard level surface road free from loose material, oil, or arease. Manufacturers pump test and Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., Certification tests shall be conducted by the apparatus manufacturer in accordance with requirements of NFPA # 190 I. A Certificate of Testing shall be furnished to the City, both for the Manufacturer's Preliminary Tests and the ULI Certification Tests. Responsibility for the apparatus and equipment shall remain with the contractor until acceptance by the city. The Manufacturer must supply at the time of deliver, at least two copies of: I. Engine manufacturer's certified brake horsepower curve showing the maximum no-load governed speed. 2. Manufacturer's record of pumper construction details, per NFPA 1901. 3. Manufacturer's Run-In Certification with preliminary test results. 4. Pump Manufacturer's Certification of Hydrostatic Tests. 5. Pump Manufacturer's Certification of Pump Test Results. 6. The Certification of Inspectionffest of Fire Department Pumper by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. 7. Weight documents from a certified scale showing actual loading on the left front axle, right front axle, left rear axle, right rear axle, and overall vehicle (with the water tank full but without personnel, equipment, and hose) shall be supplied with the completed vehicle to determine compliance with NFPA seetion 3-1. 8. At least two copies of the complete operation and maintenance manual covering the completed apparatus as delivered including the pump, emergency lighting and sirens, portable fare pump, portable or buih-in generator, or other furnished accessories. 9. Wiring diagrams of electrical systems, installed by apparatus manufacturer. Diagrams must be "vehicle specific", describing all electrical functions. 10. All production drawings of individual fabricated apparatus body and tank parts. Prints shall include all dimensional information and material lists to allow reproduction of any body part by a qualified fabrication shop. II. A "Delivery Manual", consisting of a 3-ring notebook type binder with reference tabs for each section, shall be furnished to include the following items: individual component manufacturer instructions and parts manuals, warranty forms for body, warranty forms for all major components, warranty instructions and 3 format to be sued for compliance with warranty obligations, routine service fonns/publications, and technical publications or training guide for major components. 12. A certified noise level test shall be prefonned on the specified vehicle with noise level test results provided to the City. Test is to be conducted on the actual apparatus being provided by the bidder not results of a like apparatus. Testing procedures are to be as per NFP A recommendations. NOTE: Exceptions to the above requirements will not be acceptable. A test data plate shall be provided at the pump operator's position which gives the rated discharges and pressures together with the speed of the engine as is detennined by the manufacturer's test for this particular unit. Plate shall also include delivery date, pump serial number(s), original Customer, and the apparatus manufacturer's serial number. The contractor shall affix a permanent plate in the driver's compartment specifying the quantity and type of the following fluid use in the vehicle: 1. Engine Oil 2. Engine Coolant 3. Transmission Fluid 4. Pump Transmission Lubrication Fluid S. Pump Primer Fluid 6. Drive Axle Lubrication Fluid 7. Air Conditioner Refrigerant 8. Power Steering Lubricant 9. EquipmentlLadder Rack Fluid 10. Generator System Lubricant All nameplates and instructions plates shall be metal or plastic with the infonnation pennanently engraved, stamped, or etched thereon. Metal nameplates to be installed with plated screws. All nameplates to be mounted in a conspicuous place. NOTE: Exceptions to the above requirements will not be acceptable. DESIGN: The design of the equipment shall be in accordance with the best engineering practices. The equipment design and accessory installation shall permit accessibility for use, maintenance, and service. All components and assemblies shall be free of hazardous protrusions, sharp edges, cracks or other elements which might cause injury to personnel or equipment. NOTE: Where "nibbled" or non-continuous cutting methods are used to machine the body material, all edges shall be reworked/machine smoothed for injury prevention and appearance reasons. All oil, hydraulic, and air tubing lines and electrical wiring shall be located in protective positions, properly attached to the frame or body structure and shall have protective loom or grommets at each point where they pass through structural members. Parts and components shall be located or positioned for rapid and simple inspection and recognition of excessive wear or potential failure. Whenever functional layout of operating components detennines that physical or visual interference between items cannot be avoided, the item predicted to require the most maintenance shall be located for the best accessibility. Cover plates which must be removed for component adjustment or part removal will be equipped with disconnect fastenings or hinged panels. Drains, filler plugs, grease fittings, hydraulic lines, bleeders and check points for all components will located so that they are readily accessible and do not require special tools for proper servicing. Design practices shall minimize the number of tools required for maintenance. 4 All components shall be designed and protected so that heavy rain or other adverse weather conditions will not interfere with normal servicing or operation. All aluminum used in construction of apparatus, manufacture shall state grade and thickness. All specified stainless steel shall be type 304, 2-B on exterior painted panels and #4-brushed where specified for pump panel overlays and interior compartment panels. All specified 4-way aluminum tradeplate shall be ''polished'' treadbrite or equal type 3003 of specified thickness. All specified fasteners shall be zinc plated button socket head cap screws or Phillips head stainless steel cap screws. All nut fasteners to be, SAE Grade 5 or greater, self-locking, designed to prevent loosening. Substitution of lighter gauge stainless steel, galvanneal, or aluminum materials will not be acceptable. No substitute will be acceptable to stainless steel where specified. NOTE: Lighter gauges of specified materials will not be acceptable, stainless steel body fabrications shall be minimum 12-gauge nominal thickness. Since all custom manufacturers have the ability to shear, brake, weld, and drill holes as these specifications require - all basic requirements must be complied with. Aluminum can not be substituted for any specified stainless fabrications. Welding shall not be employed in the assembly of the apparatus in a manner that shall prevent the ready removal of any component part for service or repair. All steel welding shall follow American Welding Society 01.1-96 recommendations for structural steel welding. All aluminum welding shall be done to American Welding Society and ANSI 01.2-96 requirements for structural welding of aluminum. Flux core arc welding shall use alloy rods, type 7000, American Welding Society standards A5.20-E70TI. The manufacturer is required to have an American Welding Society certified welding inspector in plant during working hours to monitor weld quality. All electrical wiring will be of a multicolor-coded tYPe, or other wise marked along the entire length of wire. No exception will be made for single colored wire marked on simply marked on either end. Prior to the construction of this vehicle, various chassis attachments such as: battery boxes, air reservoirs, air dryers, fuel separators, mufflers, tailpipes, filters, fuel tanks, and other bolt-on frame attachments shall be removed and relocated to permit full utilization of the chassis for equipment compartments. All above specified components, where possible, shall be mounted on inside of chassis frame rails thus providing maximum compartmeotation. Prior to assembly and installation of apparatus body components, the chassis frame, springs, axles, steering arms, and entire body sub frame assembly shall be vinyl washed primed, zinc chromate primed, and acrylic urethane painted to match exterior body color. To insure the City a source of service and parts over a 20 year anticipated life of the apparatus; the Bidder shall provide factory authorized service, and testing facilities within a 250 - mile radius of the Fire Department. This same facility must stock a complete line of all fire fighting equipment and parts for this apparatus. Records as to the purchase source for all auxiliary components of the specified apparatus shall be available to City upon request. This purchase information shall include manufacturer name, model number, authorized distributor, current part number, and special installation instructions. PRE-CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-PAINT MEETINGS Bidder shall arrange for a "Pre-Construction Conference", to be held at the manufacturer's facility, at which time all fmal designs and equipment mounting locations will be approved. Two (2) representatives from the Fire Department Truck Committee shall attend this meeting, with the costs of travel, lodging and meals to be paid by the City in accordance with City policies. Bidder shall not include any such costs within their respective bids. The bidder shall be responsible for ensuring that blueprints, specialized personnel and documents necessary to adequately review and approve the fmal design of the apparatus are available at this meeting. Any changes to original proposa1 specifications, as approved at the Pre-Construction Conference, shall be noted on a "revised specification", provided by the manufacturer and transmitted to the Fire Department Truck Committee within five working days after Pre- Construction Conference. 5 The Fire Department Trock Committee shall also be entitled to inspect the apparatus at the Pre-Paint stage at the bidder's factory location. Two (2) members of the Trock Committee shall be authorized to travel to the factory. The bidder shall be responsible to coordinate the date and time of the inspection with the Fire Department Trock Committee. The costs associated with transportation, lodging, meals of the two designated Trock Committee representatives shall be paid by the City, in accordance with City policies, and shall not be added to the cost of the vendor's bid. Bidder shall indicate the intention to provide the City with the right to inspect the vehicle at the pre- paint stage in the manner described in the proposal packet. APPARA rus SIZE: Total overall length of apparatus shall not exceed 31 ft. 6 in., highest point of apparatus shall not exceed 126 inches, total overall width of apparatus shall not exceed 101 inches, chassis wheelbase shall not exceed 186 inches, and GVWR shall be at least 42,000 Ibs. PROPOSALS: All bids must be signed by an authorized employee or representative of the manufacturer of the apparatus being proposed. Bids signed by a sales representative shall be declared informal and will be rejected. Each bid must give the full business address of the manufacture. Bids by a Corporation must be authorized and signed by the President. Same signature is required on specified Bid Bond. A Bidders Bond in the amount of IO'A. shall be furnished with each Bid Proposal, written by a Corporate Surety, payable to the City of Farmington. This Bond is to insure that the Bidder will enter into a contract for the equipment as per the following detailed specifications with NO EXCEPTIONS. Bidder shall specify number of working days for competed delivery of the apparatus, from date of bid acceptance. In order to eliminate interest and handling charges for the chassis portion, the customer will ''pre-pay'' the chassis portion upon its receipt at Bidder's factory. This amount is to be identified in the Bid Proposal. All Bidders shall be required to detail, in exact terms, the payment for said apparatus in their own "Fire Apparatus Proposal" . Bids may be withdrawn by certified mail or telegraphic request from Bidders prior to the time fixed for opening. Negligence on the part of the Bidder in preparing the Bid Proposal confers no right for the withdrawal for the Bid after it has been opened. No Bidder may withdraw their Bid after the time set for the opening thereof. All Bidders shall furnish complete "Proposal Specifications", printed on their own stationery, copies of reproductions of these "advertised specifications" can only be used as an attachment to the proposal specifications, for comparison/compliance purposes. All Bid Proposal Specifications must be in the same sequence as these Advertised Specifications for ease of comparison. Any bid not in this sequence will be disregarded and rejected. Each Bid shall be submitted with a complete detailed print of the apparatus as is specified. The print shall be to scale, minimum of I inch = I 0 inches, of the exact apparatus being proposed, and not a stock print of a similar unit. The print shall have complete views of the left side with chassis cab, right body side with chassis cab, rear of body, and top view of the chassis cab area. The print shall include all of the following items: compartmentation with dimensions and door hardware, hosebed arrangement with dividers and grating material, emergency and standard lighting fixtures and location, all exterior 4-way treadplate pattern areas, pump panel lay out with gauges and pump controls, discharge outlets - location and cap style, cross-lay hosebeds with roller assemblies, suction inlets - location and cap style, generator and location, electric cord reels and location, deluge device and location, hand rails and location, tow hook and cubby, mechanical siren and location, hand operated Il0v quartz flood lighting and location, body access steps and location, interior compartment shelving and location, roll-out trays, water tank with sump/fill tower/interior baftles, and other necessary detailed features so as to provide a "picture" for the proposed apparatus. All submitted drawings shall become a part of the proposal, failure to submit the required prints, with the sealed bid proposal, will cause immediate rejection of the proposal and bid. Quality of drawing will be considered in determination of most qualified Bidder. All dimensions are subject to a +/- y.. inch tolerance. 6 It is the intent of the City of Farmington to receive proposals on equipment/apparatus meeting the attached detailed specifications and all submittals or bid proposals shall so state on the Bid Proposal Page, followed by a detailed "Letter of Exceptions" listing the areas of non -compliance and equipment being submitted. The City of Farmington reserves the right to reject any or all Bid Proposals and purchase the equipment it prefers. Each Bidder shall be prepared, if so requested by the City, to present evidence of his design experience! capabilities and manufacturing ability to carry out the terms of the contract. The materials specified are considered absolute minimum. Exceptions will not be accepted or permitted since all raw materials of the specified type are available to all manufacturers. Since all custom manufactures have the ability to shear, brake, and weld, as these specifications require - all basic requirements must be complied with. No exceptions will be taken for stainless steel material and specified thickness, since it is available to all firelrescue manufactures. Award of Contract: The contract will be awarded, as soon as possible to the most "Responsible Bidder", provided their Bid is reasonable and it is in the best interest of the City of Farmington . The City reserves the ri&llt to waive any formality in bids received once such waiver is in the interest of the City. Also to accept any item in the Bid, found to be of superior quality or otherwise preferred by the City. The competency and responsibility of Bidders along with content of proposal specifications and accuracy/quality ofproposa1 drawing will be considered in making the award. The City reserves the right to reject any or all Bids when such rejection is in the interest of the City and to reject the Bid of a Bidder who, in the judgement of the City, is not in a position to perform the contract. The City does not, in any way, obligate itself to accept the lowest or any Bid. Prior to award, the Bidder will meet with purchasing officials (at City's location) to personally discuss all facets of these specifications to insure a complete and satisfactory understanding of the City's specifICations and the Bidder's proposal. The only person authorized to approve change orders that result in a change that will increase the cost of the apparatus is the City Administrator, upon consultation with the Fire Chief. Delivery: The maximum period for construction of the vehicle shall not exceed 180 working days and shall include the time required for delivery of the chassis to the apparatus manufacturer. The contractor will not be held liable for delay of delivery caused by accidents, sUikes, floods or other events not subject to their control. The completed unit shall be delivered to the city with full instructions provided to Fire Department personnel on operation, care, and maintenance of apparatus at the city's fire station. Payment for the apparatus shall be made within five (5) working days of delivery. The apparatus will not be left at city location without full acceptance or prior agreement between the City and the Bidder. Final delivery price shall not include any Local, State, or Federal taxes. The Bidder shall not be liable for any State or Federally mandated tax or program after the sale of this apparatus. Apparatus, to insure proper break in of all components while still under warranty, shall be delivered under it's own power, rail or truck freight shan not be accepted. Delivery Engineer: Delivery shall be performed by a factory trained Delivery Engineer only employed by the Bidder. Delivery Engineer shall remain in the community a reasonable time for training of Fire Department personnel and making normal adjustments. Delivery shall include, but not limited to: A. Transportation of the fire apparatus. 7 B. Conducting day and/or evening classes for instroction of Fire Department personnel and Drivers for operation. The Delivery Engineer shall be factory trained, fully capable of conducting informative classes on the complete operation of the vehicle. This means familiarity with engine, running gear, and transmission, driving skill, as well as handling of pump equipment and all controls. The Delivery Engineer shall set delivery and instroction schedule with the person appointed by City, recognizing the need for either daytime or evening classes. Advance notice of at least one (I) week will be given, advising the specific day on which the new apparatus will arrive. The Bidder shall make all housing arrangements for the Delivery Engineer and provide him/her with transportation to and from lodging and nearest available airport or rental agency (if it applies). The costs of all housing and other living expenses are to be paid by the Delivery Engineer. 8 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /e- TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City AdministratorfL James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Accepting Donation From Dakota Electric DATE: May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION Adopt resolution accepting a donation from Dakota Electric. DISCUSSION Dakota Electric annually donates a tree in conjunction with Arbor Day to Cities in their service area. Denise Rotty of their office has notified staff that the company again donated a Red Maple to the City. Staff planted this tree as part of the annual Arbor Day activities. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution accepting the donation of a Red Maple from Dakota Electric. Respectfully submitted, ~Bfi James Bell Parks and Recreation Director PROPOSED RESOLUTION No. ACCEPTING DONATION FROM DAKOTA ELECTRIC 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 1st day of May, 2000 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, Dakota Electric has donated a Red Maple tree to the City; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to accept such donations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby accepts the donation This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 1st day of May, 2000. Mayor Attested to the day of May, 2000. City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington. MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7-f TO: John F. Erar, City Administrator FROM: Mayor and Council Members SUBJECT: Council Review of Administrator Performance DATE: May 1,2000 In recognition of your four-year anniversary on March 18, 2000 with the City of Farmington in your position of City Administrator, it is both appropriate and timely for Council to consider your performance and make any necessary adjustments in your compensation. In review of an appropriate step increase and in recognition of your tenure with the City, the Council conducted a formal performance evaluation on April 17, 2000 during a closed Executive Session. Performance criteria reviewed by Council included organizational management; fiscal/business management; program development; Council relationship; long-range planning and other relevant factors contained within the formal review document. The outcome of this review, on average, met or exceeded Council's expectations in every performance category. Council's review comments and remarks were unanimous in that they reflected appreciation and satisfaction with your performance over the last 12 months. It is Council's understanding that your annual compensation has not been adjusted relative to your performance since your last performance review 12 months ago. In review of factors such as size and complexity of the organization; budgeting; staffing; City services provided; population; growth management issues and position responsibilities, the Council has determined that a step increase based upon your performance and tenure in the position is appropriate given your responsibilities as City Administrator, City Clerk and as Director of Information Technology. In particular, Council supports the need for you to continue your professional educational requirements as member of state and national local government management associations and is receptive to your attending a senior executive training program in July of this year. In light of this information, Council also feels it is both financially responsible and prudent in terms of the benefits the community has realized over the last four years from your specific areas of expertise, to offer you a tl1ree percent step adjustment over your current salary of $76,713. This represents an increase of $1.11 per hour over a forty-hour work week. As you do not receive overtime for any hours worked over 40 hours per week, no additional costs to the City are anticipated by this increase, with the exception of payroll taxes John Erar, City Administrator Council Review of Administrator Performance Page 2 of2 ACTION REOUESTED Approval of these adjustments in your compensation shall be adopted upon acceptance by Council, and shall be effective retroactive to April 1, 2000. Congratulations on ajob well done! On Behalf of the Farmington City Council, ~(j~ Mayor Jerry "Digger" Ristow City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 9a-, TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: 2000 Seal Coat Project DATE: May 1,2000 INTRODUCTION The City Council approved the plans and specifications for the 2000 Seal Coat Project at the March 20th Council meeting. Four bids were received for the 2000 Seal Coat Project. DISCUSSION Allied Blacktop Co. has submitted the low bid in the amount of $85,786.00. Based on this bid and including a 10% contingency and 27% for legal, engineering and administration costs, the total estimated project cost is $119,900.00. The estimate from the feasibility study was $131,600. The streets in Nelsen Hills 4th and 5th Additions, Troyhills 1 st through 4th Additions, Industrial Park 1 st and 2nd Additions, East Farmington 1 st and 2nd Additions, Prairie Creek 4th Addition, and Elm Street east of Highway 3 are due to be seal coated for the first time. Several downtown streets have not been seal coated in over seven years and are proposed to be included in the project this year. The downtown areas include: Linden Street, Willow Street, Pine Street between Third Street and Highway 3, Third Street between Elm Street and Pine Street, Fourth Street between Elm Street and Willow Street, Fifth Street between Pine Street and Linden Street, Seventh Street between Pine Street and Linden Street, Honeysuckle Lane, Second Street between Ash Street and Maple Street, and Hickory Street between Second Street and Third Street. The alley between Fourth Street & Fifth Street and Spruce Street & Walnut Street is also part of this years project. Seal coating will start after Mountain Dew Days (June 23 - 25) and be completed before the Dakota County Fair (August 7 -13). BUDGET IMPACT The 2000 Seal Coat Project is included in the 2000 Capital Improvement Plan. Several streets in the project area have already been assessed seal coating costs through their respective development contracts. The property owners benefiting from the improvements to the remaining streets would be assessed for the project costs pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429 and the City's Special Assessment Policy. The remainder of the costs would be funded through the Road and Bridge Fund. The total estimated project cost for the 2000 Seal Coat project based on the low bid received is $119,873.00. The Council indicated at the public hearing on the project their intent to assess the benefiting property owners 50% of the project costs, which was estimated to be $60.42 per residential equivalent unit in the feasibility report. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution: 1. Accepting the base bid of Allied Blacktop Co. for $85,786.00 and awarding the project; 2. Directing staff to prepare the proposed final assessment roll allocating 50% of the project costs to the benefiting properties. Respectfully submitted, ~ ')/}1 ~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R AWARD BIDS FOR PROJECT NO. 00-06 2000 SEAL COAT PROJECT PREP ARE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL 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 1st day of May, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 2000 Seal Coat project (in the streets shown on Attachment A), bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Contractor Total Base Bid Allied Blacktop Company.................$85,786.00 Pearson Brothers, Inc. .......................$86,414.40 Bituminous Roadways ......................$90,654.00 Astech Asphalt ................................$101,100.00 ; and, WHEREAS, it appears the firm of Allied Blacktop Company is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The base bid of Allied Blacktop Company, a Minnesota corporation, for $85,786.00 is hereby accepted and awarded and the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract therefore. 2. Staff is hereby directed to prepare the proposed final assessment roll allocating 50% of the project costs to the benefiting properties. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 1st day of May 2000. Mayor Attested to the 1st day of May, 2000. SEAL City Administrator ATTACHMENT A Streets Everest Path Explorer Way Explorer Court Exodus Avenue Esquire Way Essence Trail Englewood Way ExcaUbur Trail Everest Path 19dh Street Everest Court Everglade Path Everest Trail Evenston Drive 19 r/ Street W. Evening Star Way Evening Star Court 193rd Street W. 18th Street W. Easton Avenue Easton Court Eaglewood Trail Oak Street Spruce Street Walnut Street Locust Street Larch Street Ninth Street Tenth Street Eleventh Street Elm Street 20ffh Street 21 dh Street W. Eaton Avenue 21 th Street W. Edmonton Avenue Linden Street Seventh Street Fifth Street Fourth Street Third Street Pine Street Main Street Second Street Honeysuckle Lane Hickory Street Willow Street Alley Location Between 18lh Street W. & 18ffh Street W. between Exodus Circle & Esquire Way between Everest Path & Euclid Path between Esquire Way & Euclid Path between Everest Path & Euclid Path between Eaglewood Way & Everest Path between 19dh Street W. & 195/h Street between Everest Path and Euclid Path west of Eureka Avenue east of Embers Avenue east of Embers Avenue between Ninth Street and Eleventh Street between Ninth Street and Eleventh Street between Ninth Street and Eleventh Street between Ninth Street and Eleventh Street between TH 3 and Eleventh Street between Oak Street and Larch Street between Oak Street and Larch Street between Oak Street and Larch Street east ofTH 3 between Linden Street and Willow Street between Linden Street and Pine Street between Elm Street and Willow Street between Elm Street and Pine Street between Third Street and TH 3 between Third Street ad Fourth Street between Maple Street and Ash Street between Second Street and Third Street between Fourth Street and TH 3 between Fourth & Fifth Street and Spruce & Walnut Street '-= 9 = == ~= u~ ~= ON g:~ ~~ -<-< Oz Uo ~tI:l ~8 00.=:1 =r-t 80 NZ ~ 0 b'tJE= .~ -< ell ;5 r-t=:l ""'-< Q ~ .... ;<:::::: U ~ ~ .", ~ 'S ~ .::J .., :s ~ '5 :c; 'S 'E- S .~ "5 t) <.> .g ~ ~ ~ ~ ..., ..... Z fjJ Z :I:~~ f;l<:[;:i E-<S: ~~ '> !Q '" Z o Vl gsr.fJffi O>-E-< 2S~[;:i :::Eo ;:::><: E-<O Iii": !:: Z ;:::> Z o Vl ~ffi ~~E-< ~i:~ i:ii~ t>.~ Z o in t>.Z oO~ ~~~ ...lu~ ...l<: <:...l ~ ~~ r.fJE-< ~O' 888 cicici r-co.,., COO>N "";lI'i'rri' .,., .... '" '" '" E-< Z ;:::> 888 .,., . . ~~:g '" '" '" 888 ci ~ ~. r-co co r- "";\oN .,., '" '" '" '" ~?:l8 o . . ..,., 0 - -.... '" '" '" 8~8 ~g~ 0> .,., co ~~N .... '" '" '" '" E-< Z ;:::> ONCO .,., _ co 0> . . . .,., r- 0-"" '" '" '" 888 M~d co .,., .,., co-r- O~....; .,., '" '" '" '" E-< Z ;:::> ;;;:128 o . . . "'.,., - - '" '" '" '" 800 N.,., ........ O("ri .... E-< Z ;:::> " ~ ~ ~ bO :::E ~ !:: '@ ~ ~ ui:>:i:>: c; .S .5 ~ ~ ~ cE e e ~ ~ ~ ~<:<: :::El<i'E ",8!5 50;'8 .) Jl :::E NN .- -<-< ~u..u.. o o @ ~ o 8 g .... ,..; = - 8 '" s:El~8o t>.-Z:2z ...j1!J:::ErAO ~ . \0 ~ ~o~~~ ""'~u'" ~ '" 8 ~ o co. cn~ """ .... e l/').-4 ~"z~o ::I!-<:::E.2.~ S ~ .0" ~ ~ O~8.N~ ~O~-l/') ~,,\O co .~ N:::E '" ~ ~ - .... ~ co r- 8ci5~N ~~~~o lfozd:~ -.:::Er-~ ~~ oJ. Ii< ~otil.Ol.t'l ~~~r--- ...l '" 8 .... ~ iii co .0 .l!l 'C :0 = o '" 0> ~~~ t;; Q.) It') I.() .- > Z f;; 0 g.<::::E9~ c.:5! .~~ :::Eco...:'tli< ....80~V"l ~8~\O --:::E Q i:Q ...l <: E-< o E-< City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /Oa-- TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrat~CJe Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator FROM: DATE: May 1, 2000 SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - East Farmington 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat INTRODUCTION Sienna Corporation is seeking Preliminary and Final Plat approval for the 7th Addition Plat of East Farmington. The East Farmington 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat is located south of the 6th Addition, east of the Henderson Addition residential development, west of the Prairie Waterway and north of TH 50. The streets proposed in the 7th Addition include Eleventh, Twelfth, Thirteenth, and Hickory. DISCUSSION Sienna Corporation proposes the final phase of the East Farmington PUD development with the 7th Addition. The Developer proposes 68 single-family lots in the 7th Addition preliminary and final plat. Recent City Council Approvals The City Council has recently approved a PUD amendment and an easement vacation for the 7th Addition on April 17, 2000. The PUD amendment approval included the following: 1. Redesignate the temporary pond to a permanent pond in Outlot S East Farmington First Addition and increase its size to be incorporated into the Prairie Waterway. 2. Remove the multi-family (units) land use identified in Outlot R East Farmington First Addition. 3. Relocate the City Park from Outlot S East Farmington 1st Addition to Outlot R East Farmington 1 st Addition and replat as Outlot E East Farmington 7th Addition. 4. Reduce the number of lots in the East Farmington 7th Addition Block 5 from 17 to 10 lots. The City Council also approved an easement vacation for an existing drainage and utility easement involving the removal of an existing 36-inch storm pipe and relocating it within a newly dedicated easement within the East Farmington 7th Addition on Lot 5, Block 3. Lot and Block Configurations All proposed lots in the 7th Addition meet the requirements of the R-2 zoning district requiring a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet and minimum lot width of 60 feet. The Developer proposes 3 blocks (1, 2, and 4) of 17 single-family lots along Larch and Maple Streets and 7 lots in Block 3 along Eleventh Street backing up to the Henderson Addition to the west. With the approval of the PUD Amendment by City Council on April 17, 2000, the Developer proposes Block 5 at the intersection of Maple and Twelfth Streets, which consists of 10 lots rather than the typical 17 lots. This block configuration allows for a private passive park behind the homes and the rest of the block consumed by pond expansion for the Prairie Waterway. The most southerly lots of the 7th Addition include a City Park west of Twelfth Street and the proposed permanent pond on the east. Henderson Addition Issues At the March 14,2000 Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Rod Hardy from Sienna Corporation met all of the requests that the Henderson Addition residents expressed as concerns at the February 22,2000 neighborhood meeting. The following is a list of concerns that Sienna Corporation agreed to meet at the March 14, 2000 Planning Commission meeting: 1. The developer proposes 7 lots along 11 th Street in Block 3 of the 7th Addition rather than the 11 lots previously proposed. This will allow the lot lines between the East Farmington addition to line up more closely with the existing lots in the Henderson addition. The Henderson Addition lots are 115 feet in width while the proposed 7th Addition lots will be 85 feet in width. Additionally, the square footage of the lots in the 7th Addition will increase from the typical 6,000 to 8,000 square feet to approximately 11,305 square feet to coincide with the larger lots in the Henderson Addition. 2. The developer will install landscaping along the rear lot line of the 7 lots in Block 3 of the East Farmington 7th Addition in order to selectively screen the Henderson Addition. llh Street Right-of Way Easement Issue - John & Geraldine Jolley, 1004 Maple Street At this time, approximately 15 feet of the easterly portion of the property at 1004 Maple Street exists in the 11th Street right-of-way. John & Geraldine Jolley own the property. Sienna Corporation has been dealing with the owners of 1004 Maple Street for the past six weeks in order to acquire the 15 feet of right-of-way required for 11 th Street as stated in the attached letter from Mr. Rod Hardy dated April 26, 2000. Also attached is the original proposal from Sienna Corporation to Mr. & Mrs. Jolley dated March 8, 2000 proposing a land swap. This proposal requested that Sienna Corporation acquire the 15 feet of right-of-way on the easterly portion of the Jolley property in exchange for an additional 35 feet platted to the Jolley property on the southerly portion of the lot in Outlot C of the East Farmington 7th Addition plat. The Developer also proposed to remove or relocate buildings within the proposed right-of-way for other locations on the Jolley property, remove or relocate or reinstall the trees within the right-of-way, and credit the Jolleys' with cash to install plantings or a fence on their property (see attached map). 2 The 11th Street right-of-way was platted in the East Farmington I st Addition approved on December 19, 1994 (see attached) and illustrates the 50-foot wide drainage and utility easement for the continuation of 11 th Street to the south. At the March 14, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, the issue of the 11 th Street right-of-way was discussed. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the East Farmington 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat on April 11, 2000. At this time there has been no agreement reached between Sienna Corporation and Mr. & Mrs. Jolley. Therefore, Sienna Corporation has submitted a letter to the City on April 26, 2000 to request City condemnation of the IS-foot right-of-way along the easterly portion of 1004 Maple Street. Attached is Section 6.4 of the East Farmington PUD Development Contract approved on December 19, 1994 allowing the Developer to request the initiation of the City's power of eminent domain to acquire "other development property" so that it may be integrated into the development. In the attached letter from Sienna Corporation dated April 26, 2000, Sienna hopes to reach a resolution by the May 1,2000 City Council meeting, however, if this is unachievable, Sienna Corporation requests City participation in acquiring the IS-foot right-of-way along the easterly portion of 1004 Maple Street. Therefore, Sienna Corporation seeks to plat all the property currently owned by Sienna in the 7th Addition and that Lots 9 and 10 of Block 2 will not receive any building permits until the proposed easement or right-of-way that fronts these lots on 11 th Street has been deeded to the City. City staff recommends the approval of the East Farmington 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat with the following conditions: 1. Lots 9 and 10 Block 2 will not receive building permits until the proposed easement or right- of-way that fronts these lots on 11 th Street has been deeded to the City. 2. 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. The City Attorney has reviewed the above request and recommends approval of the East Farmington 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat with the above-mentioned conditions. ACTION REQUESTED Consider two motions; 1) Consider a resolution approving the East Farmington 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat contingent on the above-mentioned conditions. 2) Consider authorization to commence eminent domain proceedings with a 90-day quick take for the 15 feet of right-of-way on the easterly portion of 1004 Maple Street if a resolution to the acquisition ofthe right-of-way is not finalized by May 1,2000. 3 Respectfully submitted, ~~.~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Rod Hardy, Sienna Corporation Jim Sturm, James R. Hill John and Geraldine Jolley 4 RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT EAST FARMINGTON 7TH ADDITION 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 151 day of May, 2000 at 7 :00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Developer has filed an application for preliminary and fmal plat review and approval of East Farmington 7th Addition; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the 14th day of March, 2000, preceded by 10 days' published and mailed notice, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the preliminary and fmal plat at its meeting held on the 11th day of April, 2000; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by municipal service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above preliminary and fmal plat be approved and that the requisite signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the final plat with the following conditions: 1. Lots 9 and 10 Block 2 will not receive building permits until the proposed easement or right-of-way that fronts these lots on 11 th Street has been deeded to the City. 2. 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. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 151 day of May, 2000. Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 2000. City Administrator RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City 0 the 1 st day of May, 2000 at 7 :00 P.M. Members Present: Members Abset: seconded the following: Member introduced and Member WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington does hereby determine that it is necessary and for a public use and purpose to acquire the property described on the attached Exhibit "A" for permanent easements for public roadway, utilities, drainage, sidewalk and trail way and temporary easements for temporary construction purposes in connection with construction of 11 th Street right-of-way necessary to serve the East Farmington 7th Addition; and WHEREAS, Developer has made offers to acquire the real property interests from the landowners; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that development and construction conditions related to development of the area make it necessary to acquire title to, and possession of, the subject property as soon as possible in order for development to proceed in an efficient, cost effective and expeditious manner; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota: I. That the City Attorney is authorized to commence eminent domain proceedings pursuant to Minnesota Statute Chapter 117 to acquire the real property interests described on the attached Exhibit "A" if the Developer is unable to acquire said real property interests through direct negotiation by May 1, 2000. 2. That the City Attorney is authorized to acquire the necessary real property interests pursuant to the "quick take" provisions of Minnesota Statutes S 117.042. 3. That the Mayor and the City Clerk are authorized to execute all documents necessary, in the opinion of the City Attorney, to effect the acquisition of the necessary property interests. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 1 st day of May, 2000 Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 2000 City Administrator 1 z o t- O o <( I t- Z W "> U CJ) Z ~ Z ~ 0: <( Ll.. ~ <( W !l 01 ~~ eo ~~ "b t! a .~ 8 o ~ e--5 <3.s f' !l~ en .;;: ~[ a ri~ ~i gj ill d."'" '" '" .s ~A b<2 ~~ .... .. ~ ~.~ o ~ 0 lQ ~ - ",oJ! c...!~ ::l =.~ <(g::E ~e'C: ~ ~~ ~ '.)lJ') '"' " "'" ~ o ;.- r.l ~ ;:> <J1 ;.- I- Z is U -<: ~ -<: o ~ 'll > o !l. li' i .&> ~ " -= ';1 1S. :g of ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~g ",0 'ON ci ... 00 ,... " o tl ~ '" B ~ ~~ ~~1~;! .8BG;!$:;j~ .C <l!:..a.s '" ~ 0:.1 ('lI 11)_ s] ill .$ l'.li 0 ~ "I:j.!!! - III ; e-.!S1l ~ QJ.l'! 0..:= =._ ; e- ~] ~.B ~ ~ 0.;5" ~~:;-5 .LO~H':: oS ;::.;;l := tE tt ~-Si$"'OOCLJ-a. .iz~].s;l :O~~ti~~ iiEg~-5a~ 1JOt:~.;.<~.!! ~~ 3 8! i!: ! b: ~ Ii ij,gfl rJl f- Q)';: iU "'::I ~ffi~~-8~.! .!>s>",.....o _I.1J,t;;J!tO,S";; i"'''lO"'''-'' -5;z'iiiIi!i~~ <1:'0 "e"", ii, ij r ';1 ~ '" lL.e ,,~-5.~Ji1il! i~ ~'~.5 ~1 ~~Ul1a"i05l:: =0.."",-5"~ Z...: o f-o 'S! g o.."'d ~ t ~ '+-< ~ >. ~ ,g lJt.t.i 0 coOP tb'S 0. l'.l5'O hi] :;_~~8~Jl ].[~i~~s 3~~]~~~ l]i 8~ Q ~ ;it:: .s tilO o .~,~ ;o.t; ~.ge: ~ := ~ "o:z ~~o . 0 !3 ~ iz E';12 0-5<>: ~"'O~ b!iib ~ ~~ G:;~ ~!l.~ 13::E. '2 z bll -!i-= ::Eo:: ~UJ; 0..~8 b~o ~o&: W'i-e <::~g o oS " ""--5 6 .a~ ~ 6'f ij", ~ " i7i~ ~8 ~~ o !>, CD >, CD ~ is ~~ ~~ ",- l~ ...J ~ 6'~ r~ o.~ ~ ~ ]i :>: Ji B ~ 'E o g ;i o E o o -<: of! ~ ~ U e ~~ :z ~~ ~ g Ou 15e iH <(0 0....., o ~j "'~ .!S cii 0"2 11 8 o ~ ~ I- is ;:> -<: ~ ~ :;J ~ ~ I- ;.- I- Z is U -<: 15 :>d -<: o I-- " '" " ..-"'" <iI~ ~ !l " ~ ] ~ 0. _ ~i 8 go "'di ~"'" ~ 88 ~-~ -8 ~ .j l~ ~"'" -5." ~i Ii ~~'+-< "00 ~E~ ~21 ra<( ~:>: -I-- ~:Zm -5~:s ';1"'"", -5"'~ .?;>:z~ '13 0 5 ~!3.!! ~~ ~ ~""tl ~~] ~ 15 '" '" :z :z ~tI.. 0..0 0;'- I-- ~~ ~8 a...,: ~B 11 1: Jl::l e ~ 0 e r: ~ e .2:E 25' ""'~ 1},~ ]", ~"'" .B ~ d" ;~ Jlo. !:Iu "'"'" '€o ~~ m " "\...0 ~o" ~o ~g i'l 1\ ~ ~ " So :.a~ " e ~::E !:l ;.; n ~8 b" ~i UCl ~ e.,.; 08 raN .~ ;:; ~~ bii ~~ U ra .~ ll" '" " '5 e e o U " ::;: It " o .~ .. ~ ~ ~~ I~ C1~ 1:;; ~ ii o ~ '" e ~:E ~~ ~8 ..~ ::~ rao ;. . -g~ ~ f ~<>: -5 . ....~ 0::: ~g~'S~~3 ~ ~~.3.!oo~l.s ~ Q)\Oto...",~ ~.[]~~~~~ ffi ] ~ ~ ~ ! .5 Oii ~]GI~~~:S:d ("";e~lP~':~~ .:.l~-e-5"_",,, ]-50"O~.s-5"", (%)2~ 01.1"l'3'-~ "'..!! r""" 0 " -: .S ...' ';J c!: ~ ~ ... ~ '-. '" 0 .... ll.l .38~~~d'll~ ~ g.S.J:J O:.::l ~.o o s' :a rc; -a ~ ~'5. 9io~-~'~ii:l t;; 8'1 11.I.;i lLJ := - "'0 to... Oe,,8.1ijlll'.l-o ~~] 11.1 lU.s ~.!.s ~ .~-5"'-=-5~8. ~ ~ " B~~ 7!! m ~ S r..-5Q;'.z:I~:t~-s 11.1 ~ ~~ 8].~ ~ ~ ..s ? ~ g lU 8. ~ ~...!! 1; ~ >.~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ g'i1i.:Ji~'il ~~ ~Q~~-b"~.seR e~~l!i1:.9n eCl"!l~,,_-5i:! <3~.!l~.Ij.!l~.:.:g N ~ "'" ~ lH ;~ t:~ ~ r.l ~ U ~ c " O";l ""'"'" !5 l'.l ~ ~ ~"'" <2 ii ~~ !I e"'" I 8~ -5 "0 ~ I~ " Po ~1;i6 "d -58 .s N 'll' :a l'.l ;. ;, I 01 ~~ f~'ll is ~ ~ .l1.~ 8 _~e ;.- I- Z 8 U ...: b :>d -<: o " z II e " g o i ;; ...: I- o '" r.l Z Z S1 z o I- o Z ~ -<: ~ ~ o z o ~ ::E ~ u o z Z z -<: ...l ... i ~ ~ ~g ~g J .... o b .0 ~ I ".... .8 ~ J~I .r ~ c:~ ~ 0 -5...,- o ~l 11 '" :d 0." 0." <e :>:~b ~-5", t1.ltfi ~e"S! Vlt2: ~ ~ ~l bl!] z~~ ~ c..,g <>:~- <(~..! 0.. .0. f-oi~ ~ &. g "'" l'.l -5 ~ o 0 'll--= :g~; c..~ .8 ].Ij~ 1Jl ~ ~~ .5 ~..g ;: .8~~ B]1 ~ m 0 " ~ ~ ~O'" :~ 1 -5ara>- "":z,a"i! ~Q-5~ ~t::rfl> ;~ ~ ~ :>:<-50. ~ 8 ~ e- :2 U ~ " .s 1~ aN. .2 ~ .", e e. 8 l! h ::;i;' fl e. ~j u ~ ~~ ~ 0 ~l H. ':lO o .~ ~ 1)' ","'" :>:~ ~ 'In '" ~ gj~ ~j; ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1If~ -g~ ~~ ~8 Oe Uo 'il o -<: I-- o '" .. z z SE z o I- o Z ~ :: ~ o ...J U ~ o U ;.- I- U " o .~ ~ o U ~ 0:; 'g ;, <Ii .i!l 'il ~ U .~ U " -5 o o g .... o .a:[ I~ e ~g: l5i ';1 ~ -5 ~ <I:'~ e::E ~~ l~ 0] ""'.... _ 0 >, CD ~ ::;; ~ '"0 <( !3 '" '" z Z :@tl.. 0..0 0;'- ~~ <(:;J 1--0 ",U " o .~ I ~ :g ~ " .... e ] ~.!!~ ~ ~ ! .~ i e. ~ ~ .- '0 ~ i1 J ~ .~ .g "" ~ ~,,~ ~.&>u .2 .~ G) g 5 r:??Vi ..... o " .g ...~ ~ l"- I .x: :L ~ ----, /~ .....= u '" ~ E o z J'l"'; 08 mN .~~ ::E.~ t!! ell .~ '" " o Ii E ~ U " ::E o z jl I" . ~ a:~ ml ~ <( "') z o ..... o o <( :r: ..... z u > w en z o d z ~ a: <( u. ..... en <( w z I I I I ______-1 ~~r~;j~s 0 LJ I .. ,-) -] I , IILJ I '" I 1...L.-,'Lj_J....I...(~lI '.1- -------, I I I I I () t: () () <( ~~ I:) 1~-~~~i~.iS 8 lJ I _1"'-.] A ^ I I I...L_J I_JI y \...1.. ------l I I I I I I I I I I I I ------~ I [~ I () I :f I ______-.1 () t~ ?~ :.-'~ f- (n <( toj ~=~~~-~~::!~s 0 LJ ! "'-.' ^ -]-,-) on "...1..I"'.J'\.J LJ -------, () () () L'J (;) () t~ 9~ L,_ ,- (;) ,,5 (\ - ~ - L,J L,J fj:::: ~- (/) ~ ) G:::: < c, " ~ o N :E "'l'""Illlnr1\.J 1~'Il' h,AI('''II\J\I\IV' I~VI..J...l"-'U Y ...L"';l:!'.-J !'1V.....,J"'" ,C'v."".J r oo.or,- - 81 g' '<t /~.. <(>1 o.fJ.~ ~.7 L~..!!:!.~~_-/" ".~,(.p V: r ooov .., ~~ 30: 1 }o'1 1 0, ~: U1 ~:'8 to g, 2, ~I ~ : ,I (Ill ~____J Lo 00'09- _..J OO-li9 ..'nl"n,.,w I~V'"",,'U'-JY NOUIOQ't lSt:lIJ NOl::1Nl~J IS'l'3 '0 101100 j() 3tfl11SY3-___" t OO-Or-, I , ~w , I~ 0' :~ " ~: 1~ -I I I I , L_Oo-:or_..J [~I~ ~:I l,l I."/-~::;J ~'L~=~~:':"=-::J r- I 0::: ~ ":'S';'3 M.I~.6o.00s I I I I // s. ~ ~8 S~j=~ 8~ ~=~ ~~ w z ::J ~ :>! ~ t:: III is il ~ -------r-.,----- I (j z ~I In . ~ a:.. ~ ml ~ ~ = <( ;"') e: :c ~ l'! <' v::' .,), ~ rn ~ ; ~ i I ~ ~ N M :z; o i= fJ rn ~ " ~ I!! ~5w~~ z ~. i:?~j;~~ 0 oz '" 0 ~g~g~ " lZ'E w ~.. ::'8m ::> i!<'[G S3~~~. ::' zm <N ~tn,\'l ~~~...:~~ z ~~ ~~~ w ~ '-'0 ~~~~~g ~ %z ~~!i g ~~ ~~~ muzlfl., z ..- S~E 5~~'~-:j ~ -~ ~~~t;o~ .", ~~ 8 % %0 ~ Uw "'~ ~ tn~~~~m z~ ~~~ gg~~~~ -", N< .< 5oj~~~ ::, ::,~ ~o~ ~ ~...- 01- ..,... ~~~~~~ ~lX ~o I ~~~ ~ Ow ~~g~~~ ~~ 0 . 0 0 z f(! ~ ~ VI ~ >- g~ ~2: <Ii 1:,:0 ~~ :~ 0< ~ < o~ ;t ~~I- ......,...: wzW o~ g~~b(~~ '<~I:ii~ ~~~ffi~~ ~5~5~i ;:~~~~~ w-<w<l:1/I t'~vi~cit.n lD~~:;)~<[ ~i~~~~ lDO-l~~:J . I .'-1 I . I _1___-, --r- ---, I I .'-1 I . z o I- o o <t: :c > w en z ~ z ~ a: <t: u. I- en <t: w wZ Z Z 0 ~ww ~ Z "~I ~ ~,,~ "'Z ~ 0 ~i ~O~ ~ ~.; In::::!;~ ~~~ ~ ~ zm Z'" "'~'" ",N ~. ~~ ~~~ ",m z I-.t:)~ W '" ~ <>0 I 1'1 ~~~:}~~ " IZ ~ ~ ~~ ~<OQ.-Z ~ a: VlUZUht Z .'" 1'1 6~~~:~ 0 -~ mi Q);~I.&.:J:oi ~ '", ~Ol-OU>- I IO Vl~~~!!tt1 U Uw g Z'" ~g~~~~ N ~~ ~ "- :::-~ ~oj~~~ ~ "'~ <( ~~~~j; "'IX ""') 0 ~~ ~~g~~~ ~ 0"- J;l . 0 0 Z r-'-- -.~~~=~~ I ! ! \r i = = , I ~ :::"i\ t- I l._ \\ 0:: CL !12DI. oa:: .1 r:::. J r.~:~_:..' " 'J U-j ~ ~ . OZ fzl ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ '" ~~~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ '" ..." :[<;1 '" t;; ~ w 0:1 ~~~ , ~ ~ 1-0- Z ~ 15 I " ~~~~ ~G:~ .,-1 t 0 >- I ~~~~ ~~~ h 0 Po S~ . I ~ Z<>W lil (\ _1___-, g ~~~! o~m ~ z: - ~il: ~ S~8 --r- ---., w ~t3~~ ~~s ~~ I w vi~OVl ~ "'~ ~ g 0 i:jo I '" ~::l~4( ~~~ ~ ~~ .'-1 <> ~~~~ I Z .'" N ~~ , w g!f~~ ",0", M O~ '" ,,~ - ~ox :z: ~~~ 0 Ii f:: {.) fzl rn U_U-'r~<----- , -:' I ~ ~ is i {.) !> ~ ,;~~ .~::' r 'ON A"'MI-OIH 14Nntu 11"'15 / I I I , I I I I \ \ \ \ \ " -oJ., ~~G:":':~C:'; lS~L~ ~~81~)~~::^:~:!';.1 1.S';':1 I '" 1-1 ~I 1-1 en gl~ ~II I r I I I., I I r - '.",,60.00' - . 1 I I ~: N ~l 11 "'I ,...) ~ l__ 1'.1'1'''02'. . . J i: ~ i OO'Oll ~ 0 gl t") ~ ~ ~__~.~Z~~O~S___J "' I" OtfOfl- - ~ g: ~ ~: <D~ _ _ ~:!~6~O~~ _ _ j ~ -- OO'o"tr - ~ ~l -7' 10 ?' ~: (5 frf/ /~.~' l.. -::.-M.:.I~6,QoQP~ /.{i'OfJ V 1 1'<,-1' 8 I : ~~: 10 ,.... ~I 16 -I ,~ , , , I.--Nl";f"" ...J rCJ oo"OV -, I () 1-'1 gl <( ~I g: tO~: II l'P Lo-Oo'OQ--' WI ~I ~I I., -"- " "'0 ~ /)0 M~lt.6o.ooS ~ oo'oy-, :,., L{): I'" gl r.~ co gl ,; I , r , I ....-061)r-~ r 00'S9 I I I Iw I :~ OJ ~: If;: ~I I~ ~I I I L____J 00'S9 ---00.0\:9--- M.60.to.OOS OOOSt ~ "'0 ~;;l o o f: C) () .( f- (.'1 G:: [.: g ~ I I~ I- 0'" 0'" :liil .", I", ,% I o ~~ G~ .( L'_ OOOi-t f. (.') <( LtJ r - 00"09 I I I :t; I ~ t~ 0 ~: ~ :' :;: ; .- I I I L_-OO'OV-o~ M.IZ.60.00S ---69'9%--- LS"V,", W I- o r:! ::l o , , ----------., I I I I L NOI!100V lS~1j NO!~NI"Wf'J - - !S't] 0 !ouno JO 3NI1 !S3\'. o f: () () .( G::: I. (.') iX l,: I. () o t~ f::' :) () ,j,: .( l'_ f - (.'1 .( llJ 6Z'SLZ--- M.60,to.OOS .' r\J,-:\{J1'" ~v o -" "'. , 8 \ ~( ~ I -. c. -,- 0 -~ '" ~ ...." -,- -~ I :~~.::: ~~ :;;~ ~~ :) rmO::: : %~- ld ~. <( ~. (/) l I I I I I RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT EAST FARMINGTON 7TH ADDITION 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 1 sl day of May, 2000 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Developer has filed an application for preliminary and final plat review and approval of East Farmington 6th Addition is Hew Berere tHe Cel:lHeil fer re';iew <md ltflf:lreval; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing oftHe PlaHHiflg; CelfllflissieH v;as Hela on the 14th day of March, 2000, preceded bv 10 days' published and mailed notice, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon; after Hetiee ef #ie same '.vas fll:lBlisHea if! #is effieial Rsv;sflltfler efthe City <md pf0per Rotiee seRt tEl sHlTeHildiRg; flref:lerty eV;Rers; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission City CeHReil reviewed and recommended approval of the I preliminary and fmal plat at its meeting held on , 2000; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by municipal service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above preliminary and final plat be approved and that the requisite signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the final plat with the following conditions: 1. THe East FarlflingtoR 711t f.aaitieR Preliminary ana FiBal Plat eElRsists ef all f:lref:lerty e'A'Rea by 8ieflBa CorperatiElR. ;;hLots 9 and 10 Block 2 will not receive building permits until the proposed easement or right-of-way that fronts these lots on 11 th Street has been deeded to the City. 3.Proeeea with the 39 aEty BEltiee ef v,Titten regHest ffEllfI the Deyelofler tEl f:letition the City tEl iRitiate its elfliHeHt dOlflaiH ]3ev;ers tEl aequire tHe 15 feet ef rigHt of way OR tHe easterly pettieR Elf 1004 Maflle 8treet if a resell:ltioR setweeH 8isHHa CElrporatioR aRd My. & Mm. Jelley is Het fiHalized BY May 1,2000. 4,.L 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. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 1 sl day of May, 2000. Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 2000. City Administrator APR-26-00 WED 05:16 PM SIENNA CORP FAX NO. t P. 02 ~ SIENNA cor~pORAIION Suite 608 . 49<'10 Viking Drivo . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 . 612 835-2808 .... .. __h.--' '."rAx:6i?-835..iocll Apri126,2000 Mr. John Erar City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Fannington, Minn 44024 Fax: 651-463-1611 Rc: City participatiun in the Acquisition of a ] 5' R.O.W. along east side yard of 1004 Maple Street for completion of 11lb Street in East Parmillgton Seventh Addition Dear Mr. ErST: Siennu Corporation has actively been attempling to acquire the above referenced property for the past 6 weeks. Unfortunately, to date, we have not yet reached a settlement satisfactory to the owner. We have acted in good faith and made offers that, we believe, far exceed any iinancial value of the property that is required to complete the I11h Street Right of Way. We shall continue OUT discllssions. However, to continue this project on the Council Agenda we hereby request that the city join in the negotiations and use its l'ole assisting in the acquisition of this properly. Any easement acquired wiH bo in the city's names. . 111is request is made pursuant to Arlicle 6.4 of the Raqt Farmington pun Agreement. Sienna agrees to reimburse the city for all costs incurred ill securing this right of way. We hope that a resolution may be reached prior to the council meeting on May 1, 2000. In any event the process must continue and we requcst that while negotiations continuo we proceed to finalize the rest of the platting and development contracting process. We would like to also suggest that we plat all the properly owned by Sienna in the Seventh Addition and that lots 9 and lOB lock 2 will not receive any building pemlits until the proposoo casement or right of way. that fronts these lots on 11lh Street, has been deeded to the city. Thank you for your consideration. - ~ .- I>. - Planners . m Developers II confrcictors - .. - ....-......-.. ---. ---..,.~ ~ -- I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I r I I I (f) lot layout, depth and width (g) building setbacks (h) street dedication requirements (i) the tenns and conditions of Section 12.1 hereof. (j) platting requirements. If the DEVELOPER requests a change to the PUD CONTROLS for a specific PHASE and the CITY grants the change, then the above restrictions do not apply for that PHASE. After the last day of the twelfth year from the date of execution of this PUD CONTRACT, the CITY may unilaterally, without the consent of the DEVELOPER or OWNERS, change the PUD ORDINANCE and other platting and zoning provisions with respect to the above matters. Absent such action, the PUD CONTRACT remains in full force and effect. 6.3 CHANGE OF PUD CONTRACT AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT. The CITY and the DEVELOPER of any respective PHASE as shown on the SCHEMATIC PUD PLAN may mutually change this PUD CONTRACT and DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT for that particular PHASE; the consents of the DEVELOPER and OWNERS of the land within other PHASES are not required to change the PUD CONTRACT and DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT for the PHASE being changed. ARTICLE 7 STREETS . 6.4 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY. Some of the other PHASES contain land, defined in the PUD CONTRACT as OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY, that is not part of the SUBJECT PROPERTY. To the extent that OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY become SUBJECT PROPERTY, then such OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY shall be governed by the PUD CONTROLS. If such OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY does not become part of the SUBJECT PROPERTY, then such OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY shall not be governed by this PUD CONTRACT. If the DEVELOPER agrees to reimburse the CITY for its costs, prior to execution of th~_ Court order granting possession of the property and provides financial assurance specified by the CITY for the reimbursement, the CITY shall within thirty (30) days of receipt of a written request of the DEVELOPER initiate and use its best efforts to complete the exercise of its eminent domain powers to acquire the OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY so that it may be integrated into the DEVELOPMENT. 7.1 DEDICATION OF STREETS. The SCHEMATIC PUD PLAN and the attached Exhibit G show the neighborhood colIector streets and frontage roads within the SUBJECT PROPERTY that will serve the EAST FARMINGTON PUD PROJECT. All such streets and roads shall be dedicated to the City upon the recording of the final plat for each Des 379&5.12 Draft 2/1/95 7 C.ORPORATION Suite 608 '.4940 Viking Drive . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 . 612-835-2808 FAX:612~835-7008 March 8, 2000 Mr. & Mrs. JohnE.Jolly 1004 Maple Street Farmington, :MN 55024-1423 fro:))-.@ 13; r~-.-Uc;:-.(\//' i.... II ~ l.5 \.-1 l~.:.. . .r . ---.""U U. ;~i MAR ..8.2.000 ...::!...I.'." L 'il: , }, I . . . . ';L"j -l [.../ J,:. Re: East Farmington Seventh Addition Extension of Eleventh Street Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jolly: As developers of the property adjacentto ybu, SiennaCorporation has applied for our seventh and final plat as part of our East Farmington P.U.D. A public hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday March 14,.2000. As part of this plat it is necessary that Eleventh Street be extended to a.ca1-de-sac below the corner of Hickory. The extension of Eleventh Street will require that the Easterly 15' of your property (beside your garage) be deeded to the city for street right of way. While only a portion (5' +) of the 15 feet will literally be in the new street the balance will be part of your side yard but owned by the city. As part of our responsibility under. our Agreement with the city ,.we are ch3rged with the task of providing YOll an alternative solution in return for your giving up title to this fifteen foot wide side yard. . Working with our engineers, the city planners, and our landscape company we would like to propose the following be offered to you in return ror the transfer or a strip or land 15' west along your east property line and comprising approximately 1716 sq. ft. Sienna Corporation will: 1. Deed to you an outlot along yoUr south property line measuring 35' by the length of your property (estimated at 134'). This would be a parcel of approximately 4695 sq. ft. 2. Remove or relocate any outbuildings that are on the eaSement to be transferred to the city. Continued on page 2 Planners . Developers . Contractors - \ ; ~ ... ,/ " " March 8, 2000 Mr. &-Mrs. John E..JoIly .' Page20f2 --:..,....--- Sienna will continued: , ' \ ' 3. Relocate _or remove imd replace any trees that the city deems must go. Any replacement will be- at a, location of your choice and of similar stock. However similar size cannot be guaranteed. A. The new y-ard.~ll be graded to match your existing yard.. Any existing fencing will be. relocated.', \ . . I 5. A credit of $2000 will be provided for additional planfugs or,screening of owner's choice. In the alternative; the owner will have the choice of receiving . the $2000 In_ cash and make their own ap:an~ements. . . We~ask that you review the e~closed drawing. Please feel free totalk'to Lee Smickthe Farmington City Planner. You may also, call me with any questions. Unfortunately I am out of th~ office until just prior. to 'th~ Public Hearing, but I will~e ,returning messages. . " - . , You need not make any decision until this project -has; had its public hearings. , Thank you for your time. /1 am ;- Sincet.:ely yours, ..... ~~..~.. Rodney D. Hardy n - - " I Vice President Encl. Cc: , . Ms. Lee Smick Mr. Jim Sturm /' -, . '\ '- tnt_tlt):XVi ttOI-Oe8(tlt)_ am: "'~ "Ot1~~1IlI.~"CIOIl: soo.t.l'IHnS I SH33N19N3 I SmNNV1d '~UI 'IIIH 'H sewer I _____J ------, I I I _____.J ------, I I I _____.J r---, r---, r---, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L___--' L___--' L___--' I I I ------~ I I I I --------i I ftKC ... 'Sr'OMlNtm '109 111'15 ~ ~ Ottt NOLLY30dHO:> YNN:iIS Ill. .LIB1HX3 J.0'1 J.N3:>vrav NOIJ.IaaY HJ.1. NO.L~NIrUIV~ .LSV:!l ~ 0 - >- lIJ ... 0 III CI ~I Z 0 m 0 z <lIJ "0:: i-' ~;:::. 0 ~~ c:~ l:;~ ~~ - in I <J:! <~ ~ :':z ~B 1Il~ ~~ .... It: 0.., 8 0 c:O lIJ 0 0 It: 0... It: lIJ m ;;; a. J: '" III I I L________.J I I L________J r- I I I L________ - ---, I I I N-I- ~ I!: III ~ 0- <( ::E r -, I I I I I I L________.J r---------, I I I I I I L________-' r---, r-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L___--' L__ r-------- I I I I L________-' ~ I I- W w I!: III ~ 0- <( r----- I I I :~ i I : I~ ~ I I I i I I I is I I ~------' L_____ x w ! 't ~;~.. i ~ I ~ ~J ~ I ~ 00 I b-~ I ~i I ..~ I ~ L _ _ _ _I~~ _ _ -1_ - -- ~ ~ ,~ o CD z -P- a; J!! o <0 II .t: u .5 I ,: . l~u ~ ~ ~ u: ~ ~ ~ Lf t5 <( w t=! Vi , Q ... i; ~ z I; g \3, 39 ... '~... "n ,zs ~ .110:' ~ ; ";"OS '\ ::110" 0; ~ ~~ ;~ l~ ~ .- ~a _r E~ l, .~ .~* iJ " \ I! .: OIOU' ....".O~.6af ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ,,,- ii:o lO~ ~~ ~ I r : r ~ ~ ::> l, ::~ ~!"'~ ~s_ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... :; c t ..J ... r i3 . . l, " I ~ 1(" n I ~ J "....:.... s .. I I :. '1' II.:. '0__." ~:; - ~~ ~ ~ o"l,.. .r I: ....... ,.. 1 __E+:=:-:- . :.:;;,[ 8 I o~ ~t ~.~~ ...W::i !~ .'! .~'iI: 8 '. ~!i'$ !a~1 s~~~ oa:~e ~ae~ ::;;tJll~ ~;~'!l 1Il~a:~ !~;I ~:!il~ Ol-t- 1 ._ ~I ~ . ~ i~~! ~ 0- ~ ~ ~~ i~~~ 0:' ~~" ~~. ggla '-~ ~~:f:;l~ lI'~w!li'~~ i6S~l!'!:::::t ~r6~~ -~' 6",~6I!>iI:~ .i'~I",~~ i~~i~.J,g ~ ~ . ; ~ ~~ ~ .J, li ~ T 0<;" l~ ,,' 5~ I~, l-y~i; !~ ,",,,,r i.'s~' !~~~!~ .Io.....c ~I;'!~ , r' . ~ .~i. . ;:9'", I ~ ~ ,~~~ :i ...,:~ ai~ '0 ~'" g~ -0 6~ z U 7 u ~ . U Z ".;- 7 ~ . ~ . U ~ ",r ~~ ~ ~ ref 'IC..J~..o,.,,,, J... fC"..I$ J"<. If J1S "-..S 1><. JO to": .S lID) JS~, ... -.. ::-:::JI:::t1 :.:~~~~.:. - - "'('U AYIIH!lIH'! 'S '" to,. : VI ;; ... C ..J ... i3 '" ... " OO~t ~ ...... ",6l (I~.68to t ,. <<'C).'J:)15 ~ .';.' l.,. ~ ',',..S~. 10 J~' "l~,. Lr I J I ';', .~, I ,> L___] " .< - - -Tl~;l I :; I \ ! ~: I I' I \! I }j! I - ~1-<"-1 s~ I I ~ I ~~ ~ itii G~ ~ f..- I~:; r~ :r .. , ... --< "" 9 I..~ ~ ,/-,- i ,- ... C ..J ~ .c -. oi =~ a ~ --._~_. - - ~- UJ,O'I:l)$'/:"S jOl,.IO "~I ,.. 110/: to 1.... ..,'Ot-" ... C ..J ... f! "'~:" ('.j ..J "Olll ~..( .0...... "- .... j>(j iO ,/. 15 JH. 10 ~'; ..,:~- - -; ~~ ,. r~~; ~ '-"'-:00 r~~ ~ :r- ~ ~~ ~ '..'. ... C ..J ~ l,j ... o z ).6(....."" '" lUl ~.:.. r/~!ll1u;J/) JM~ SJ 1011nO 'lj:'1i';;: fJ~i,~~ -,.;" JWlS/C . HI. 1)1.....11... jO\I"~ ~ I .f,( ....68 ~ ..''l _, lltOl ] .t./i.".68 S OJ" J ~. ..... r.1 II]H. 10 1/1 5 J... 10 .IJJ 00": o(l~ )of; JO 1'oi' "l~ ---- ----- -~--- -- ---- T--- ~ c :;~ .. i~ ~~ ~: ;'J h ... C ..J ... ~1C)l.o.P~J d. , " l~ ii ~J ~~1 ~ -l _Y!~;t. . .6~:;~~_.. ~}~,,~ \ ."r \0.;.,))5 jfJ , . ." 1M, IJ L ~L ~ ~ 15 l;~;/:'l::;~-' City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /()~ FROM: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator~ Michael Schultz Associate Planner TO: SUBJECT: Autumn Glen 1 sl Addition Final Plat DATE: May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION Arcon Development, Inc. has submitted Final Plat plans for the Autumn Glen development, located east of the Akin Park Estates and Limerock Ridge neighborhoods. The Final Plat of the First Addition contains 41 single-family lots. DISCUSSION Arcon Development, Inc. is seeking Final Plat Approval of the Autumn Glen 1 sl Addition. The Autumn Glen subdivision property is located east of Akin Park Estates and Limerock Ridge subdivisions and south of the proposed Prairie Creek East property. The lots within the 1 sl Addition are located mainly along Embers Ave and 193rd Streets until they intersect. The Preliminary Plat was approved at the August 24, 1999 Planning Commission meeting and the September 6, 1999 City Council meeting. Also approved along with the Preliminary Plat was a Conditional Use/Grading and Excavation Permit to allow commencement of grading of the property. The developer began rough grading work and tree removal on site late in September and has completed most of the grading work this spring. The Developer requested an extension to file for the Final Plat on November 15, 1999 (see attached letter). The area is currently bounded by single-family residential development to the west, proposed single-family residential to the north, parkland to the east and the proposed right-of-way for 195th Street to the south. The property is zoned R-l (Low Density) - Single-Family Residential. The overall development consists of 153 single-family lots on 102.96 acres yielding a density of 1.5 units/acre. Arcon Development has requested that the City convey Outlot 'D', located north of 193rd Street in Akin Park Estates, to Arcon Development to be incorporated into lots. However, Outlot 'D' was conveyed only for "Public Purposes", essentially for the use of the sanitary sewer. The City Council agreed on March 20, 2000 to convey the outlot back to the State to begin the process of conveying it back to the developer. The area is now shown on the Final Plat as both Outlot 'K' and Outlot 'J' (north and south side of 193rd Street). When Arcon Development gains control of this property it will be replatted to extend the rear lot on Lots 1 & 2 of Block 8 and subdivide two additional lots as part of both Outlot 'K' and Outlot 'L'. The landscape plan for the 1 st Addition complies with the permitted boulevard trees and planting requirements outlined in 10-6-14 (G) of the City Code. The boulevard tree species proposed within the development are Green Spine Linden (quantity - 29), Summit/Platmore Ash (38), Norway Maple (27) and Iron Wood (18). Engineering staff has completed their review of the plat and are requesting the following reVISIons: 1) Easements on Outlot A shall be changed to reflect storm sewer realignment along the north property line; 2) Outlots need to be removed after approval from the State of Minnesota for vacation of existing sanitary sewer on Outlot D (new Outlot K). The following are contingencies to the Autumn Glen 1 st Addition Final Plat: 1) All Engineering issues be resolved before signing of the Development Agreement; ACTION REQUESTED Consider a resolution approving the Autumn Glen 1 st Addition Final Plat contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans. Michael Schultz Associate Planner cc: Larry Frank, Arcon Development, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING FINAL PLAT AUTUMN GLEN 1ST ADDITION 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 1st day of May, 2000 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, an application meeting City requirements has been filed seeking final plat review and approval for fmal Autumn Glen I st Addition; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended City Council approval of the fmal plat at its meeting held on the 25th day of April, 2000; and WHEREAS, a public hearing regarding the proposed development was held by the Planning Commission on the 24th day of August, 1999 after notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City and proper notice sent to surrounding property owners; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by municipal service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the fmal plat be approved and that the requisite signatures are authorized and directed to be affIXed to the final plat conditioned on the following: I. Developer shall execute a Development Contract with the City specifying the Developer's obligations, and the City shall review and approve all required plans. 2. The Developer reimburses the City for all engineering, administrative, legal and SWCD costs. 3. The Developer agrees to furnish the City one (I) reproducible and one (I) eight and one-half inch by eleven inch (8 Yz" x II") reproducible copy of the filed plat in accordance with Title II, Chapter 3, Section 3 (E) of the City Code. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 1st day of May, 2000. Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 2000. City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.c:i.farmington.mn.us /oe, TO: Mayor and Council Members, City Administrat~~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinat FROM: SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Autumn Glen Development Contract DATE: May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION The Development Contract for Autumn Glen 1st Addition has been drafted in accordance with the approvals and conditions placed on the approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Autumn Glen 1st Addition Preliminary Plat on August 24, 1999 conditioned on the requirements below. The Planning Commission also approved the Final Plat on April 25, 2000. The City Council approved the Preliminary Plat on September 7, 1999 with the same conditions below and City staff recommends approval of the Autumn Glen 1 st Addition Final Plat on May 1,2000 subject to these following conditions: 1. The City and Developer enter into a Developer Contract; and 2. The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of Development Contract; 3. The Developer pays its apportioned share of costs for the construction of 195th Street. It is understood that Dakota County will be responsible for designing and constructing the improvements and will participate in the funding of the construction per their transportation policy. The Developer shall be responsible for the remainder of the costs of the construction apportioned by the County, City or other authority to properties abutting or adjoining the improvement, and any failure by the Developer, or its successors and assigns, to pay its apportioned costs shall constitute a breach or default under this agreement. At the Developers request, the City may, at its discretion, agree upon receipt of waivers or securities deemed necessary by the City, to assess the Developers apportioned cost for these specified improvements to any parcel within the development or currently un-platted property adjacent thereto, still owned or controlled by the developer, at the time of the request. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Development Contract for the Autumn Glen 1 st Addition. ACTION REQUESTED Consider resolution approving the execution of the Autumn Glen I st Addition Development Contract and authorize its signing contingent upon the above conditions and approval by the Engineering Division. ~l~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Larry Frank, Arcon Development RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT - AUTUMN GLEN 1ST ADDITION - 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 1 st day of May, 2000 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 83-99, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Autumn Glen and Resolution No. _ approved the final plat of the Autumn Glen 1 sl Addition contingent upon the following conditions: 1. The City and Developer enter into a Developer Contract; and 2. The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of Development Contract; 3. The Developer pays its apportioned share of costs for the construction of 195th Street. It is understood that Dakota County will be responsible for designing and constructing the improvements and will participate in the funding of the construction per their transportation policy. The Developer shall be responsible for the remainder of the costs ofthe construction apportioned by the County, City or other authority to properties abutting or adjoining the improvement, and any failure by the Developer, or its successors and assigns, to pay its apportioned costs shall constitute a breach or default under this agreement. At the Developers request, the City may, at its discretion, agree upon receipt of waivers or securities deemed necessary by the City, to assess the Developers apportioned cost for these specified improvements to any parcel within the development or currently un-platted property adjacent thereto, still owned or controlled by the developer, at the time of the request. WHEREAS, the Developer desires to enter into the Development Contract attached hereto which incorporates the terms and conditions of approval of the preliminary and final plat; WHEREAS, City staff recommends approval of the Development Contract NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The Development Contract for Autumn Glen 1'1 Addition, a copy of which is on file in the Clerk's office, is hereby approved; 2. The Mayor and Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to sign such contract. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 1 sl day of May, 2000. Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 2000. City Administrator DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AGREEMENT dated this th day of ,2000, by and between the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation (CITY) and Arcon Development, Inc, a Minnesota corporation (DEVELOPER). 1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for AUTUMN GLEN (also referred to in this Development Contract [CONTRACT or AGREEMENT] as the PLAT). The land is legally described as: The Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 114, Range 20 except the following three parcels: EXCEPTION No. I: That part thereof contained within the plat of AKIN PARK ESTATES, according to the recorded plat thereof. EXCEPTION No.2: All that part of the East half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 114, Range 20, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast comer of said Section 24; thence west, on the North line of said Northeast Quarter, a distance of 50.00 feet; thence south, parallel with the East line of said Northeast Quarter, a distance of 600.00 feet; thence southwesterly on a straight line a distance of 967.66 feet, more or less, to a point on the North line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24, distant 700.00 feet west of the Northeast comer of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence west, on the North line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 50.00 feet; thence southwesterly on a straight line a distance of 1393.21 feet, more or less, to a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter distant 1200.00 feet west of the Southeast comer of said Northeast Quarter; thence east, on the South line of said Northeast Quarter, a distance of 1200.00 feet to the Southeast comer of said Northeast Quarter; thence north, on the East line of said Northeast Quarter, a distance of 2639.00 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. EXCEPTION No.3: All that part of the East half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 114, Range 20, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24 distant 50.00 feet West of the Northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter; thence south, parallel with the East line of said Northeast Quarter, a distance of 600.00 feet; thence southwesterly on a straight line a distance of 967.66 feet, more or less, to a point on the South line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distant 700.00 feet west of the Southeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence west, on said South line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 50.00 feet; thence north, parallel with the East line of said Northeast Quarter, a distance of 1320.06 feet, more or less, to the North line of said Northeast Quarter; thence east, on said North line, a distance of700.00 feet to the point of beginning. 1 'j,.JJ. Also that part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 114 North, Rage 20 West lying northeasterly of the northeasterly line of Block 2, AKIN PARK ESTATES, according to the recorded plat thereof. Also Outlot B, LIMEROCK RIDGE, according to the recorded plat thereof. All lying northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the Northwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of Section 24; thence on an assumed bearing of South o degrees 23 minutes 29 seconds East, along the West line thereof, a distance of 1491.74 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 81 degrees 40 minutes 34 seconds East a distance of273.28 feet; thence North 84 degrees 24 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 126.96 feet; thence North 65 degrees 28 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 62.31 feet; thence North 80 degrees 21 minutes 33 seconds East a distance of 135.34 feet; thence North 7 degrees 49 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 32.28 feet; thence North 58 degrees 19 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 86.30 feet; thence North 28 degrees 58 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 56.68 feet; thence North 61 degrees 04 minutes 10 seconds East a distance of 138.27 feet; thence North 82 degrees 05 minutes 03 seconds East a distance of 85.67 feet; thence North 61 degrees 28 minutes 06 seconds East a distance of 136.33 feet; thence South 30 degrees 16 minutes 17 seconds East a distance of 89.15 feet; thence South 17 degrees 25 minutes 28 seconds East a distance of 45.62 feet to the South line of the North half of said Northeast Quarter of Section 24; thence North 89 degrees 55 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 876.12 feet to the East line of the above described property and said line there terminating. 2. Conditions of Approval. The City hereby approves the plat on the conditions that: a) the Developer enter into this Agreement; and b) the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. c) the Developer pays its apportioned share of costs for the construction of 195th Street. It is understood that Dakota County will be responsible for designing and constructing the improvements and will participate in the funding of the construction per their transportation policy. The Developer shall be responsible for the remainder of the costs of the construction apportioned by the County, City or other authority to properties abutting or adjoining the improvement, and any failure by the Developer, or its successors and assigns, to pay its apportioned costs shall constitute a breach or default under this agreement. At the Developers request, the City may, at its discretion, agree upon receipt of waivers or securities deemed necessary by the City, to assess the Developers apportioned cost for these specified improvements to any parcel within the development or currently un-platted property adjacent thereto, still owned or controlled by the developer, at the time of the request. 3. Development Plans. The Developer shall develop the plat in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Agreement. The plans may be prepared by the Developer, subject to City approval, after entering into this Agreement but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, subject to paragraphs 6 and 31 G, the plans shall control. The required plans are: Plan A - Final Plat Plan B - Soil Erosion Control and Grading Plans Plan C - Landscape Plan Plan D - Zoning/Development Map Plan E - Wetlands Mitigation as required by the City Plan F - Final Street and Utility Plans and Specifications The Developer shall use its best efforts to assure timely application to the utility companies for the following utilities: underground natural gas, electrical, cable television, and telephone. 4. Sales Office Requirements. At any location within the plat where lots and/or homes are sold which are part of this subdivision, the Developer agrees to install a sales board on which a copy of the approved plat, fmal utility plan and a zoning map or planned unit development plan are displayed, showing the relationship between this subdivision and the adjoining neighborhood. The zoning and land use classification of all land and network of major streets within 350 feet of the plat shall be included. 2 5. Zonin2/Development Map. The Developer shall provide an 8 1/2" x 14" scaled map of the plat and land within 350' of the plat containing the following information: a. platted property; b. existing and future roads; c. future phases; d. existing and proposed land uses; and e. future ponds. 6. Required Public Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following: a. Sanitary Sewer Lateral System b. Water System (trunk and lateral) c. Storm Sewer d. Streets e. Concrete Curb and Gutter f. Street Signs g. Street Lights h. Sidewalks and Trails i. Erosion Control, Site Grading and Ponding j. Traffic Control Devices k. Setting of Lot & Block Monuments 1. Surveying and Staking m. Landscaping, Screening, Blvd. Trees The improvements shall be installed in accordance with Plans A through F, and in accordance with City standards, engineering guidelines, ordinances and plans and specifications which have been prepared by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City and approved by the City Engineer. Work done not in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, without prior authorization ofthe City Engineer, shall be considered a violation of this agreement and a Default of the Contract. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council and other agencies before proceeding with construction. The Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the Developer's expense, have one or more City inspector(s) and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part time basis. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. Within sixty (60) days after the completion of the improvements and before the security is released, the Developer shall supply the City with a complete set of "As Built" plans as specified in the City's Engineering Guidelines. If the Developer does not provide such information, the City will produce the as-built drawings. All costs associated with producing the as-built drawings will be the responsibility of the Developer. Before the security for the completion of the utilities is released, iron monuments must be installed in accordance with M.S. ~505.02. The Developer's surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that the monuments have been installed. 7. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required public improvements by July 1,2000, in accordance with the requirements set forth in the City's Engineering Guidelines. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases. An extension of the security shall be considered an extension of this contract and the extension of the contract will coincide with the date of the extension of the security. 8. Ownership ofImprovements. Upon the completion of the work and construction required to be done by this Agreement, and written acceptance by the City Engineer, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property, except for cable TV, electrical, gas, and telephone, without further notice or action. 9. Warranty. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The warranty period for streets is one year. The warranty period for underground utilities is two years. The warranty period for the streets shall commence after the final wear course has been completed and the streets have been accepted by City Council resolution. The warranty period on underground utilities shall commence following their completion and acceptance by the City Engineer in writing. It is the responsibility of the Developer to complete the required 3 testing of the underground utilities and request, in writing, City acceptance of the utilities. Failure of the Developer to complete the required testing or request acceptance of the utilities in a timely manner shall not in any way constitute cause for the warranty period to be modified from the stipulations set forth above. All trees shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free for twelve (12) months after the security for the trees is released. Any replacements shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer shall post maintenance bonds or other surety acceptable to the City to secure the warranties. The City shall retain ten percent (10%) of the security posted by the Developer until the bonds or other acceptable surety are furnished to the City or until the warranty period has been completed, whichever first occurs. The retainage may be used to pay for warranty work. The City's Engineering Guidelines identify the procedures for final acceptance of streets and utilities. 10. Gradinl! Plan. The plat shall be graded and drainage provided by the Developer in accordance with Plan B. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, the Developer may start rough grading the lots within the stockpile and easement areas in confonnance with Plan B before the plat is filed if all fees have been paid and the City has been furnished the required security. Additional rough grading may be allowed upon obtaining written authorization from the City Engineer. If the developer needs to change grading affecting drainage after homeowners are on site, he must notifY all property owners/residents of this work prior to its initiation. This notification cannot take place until the City Engineer has approved the proposed grading changes. 11. Erosion Control and Fees. After the site is rough graded, but before any utility construction is commenced or building penn its are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if it is detennined that the methods implemented are insufficient to properly control erosion. All areas disturbed by the excavation and back-filling operations shall be re-seeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule, or supplementary instructions received from the City, or in an emergency detennined at the sole discretion of the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion immediately, without notice to the Developer. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and the City's rights or obligations hereunder. If the Developer does not reimburse the City for any costs of the City incurred for such work within thirty (30) days, the City may draw down the letter of credit to pay any costs. No development will be allowed and no building penn its will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. The Developer is responsible for Erosion Control inspection fees at the current rates. The Developer is also responsible for a Water Quality Management Fee of $ 1,080 based upon the number of acres in the plat. 12. Landscapinl!. The Developer shall landscape the plat in accordance with Plan C. The landscaping shall be accomplished in accordance with a time schedule approved by the City. Retaining walls with 1) a height that exceeds four feet or 2) a combination of tiers that exceed four feet or 3) a three foot wall with a back slope greater than 4 to 1 shall be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by a structural or geotechnical engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota. Following construction, a certification signed by the design engineer shall be filed with the City Engineer evidencing that the retaining will was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. All retaining walls that are part of the development plans, or special conditions referred to in this Contract that are required to be constructed, shall be constructed and certified before any building penn it is issued for a lot on which a retaining wall is required to be built. 13. Phased Development. The plat shall be developed in one (1) phase in accordance with Plans A-F. No earth moving, construction of public improvements or other development shall be done in any subsequent phase until a fmal plat for the phase has been filed in the County Recorder's office and the necessary security has been furnished to the City. The City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases until public improvements for all prior phases have been satisfactorily completed. Subject to the tenns of this Agreement, this Development Contract constitutes approval to develop the plat. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until development agreements for such phases are approved by the City. 14. Effect of Subdivision Approval. For two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or removing any part thereof 4 which has not been final platted, or official controls, shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications or platting required or permitted by the approved preliminary plat unless required by State or Federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by State law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan (including removing unplatted property from the urban service area), official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Agreement and may require submission of a new plat. 15. Surface Water Manaeement Fee. The Developer shall pay an area storm water management charge of$105,680 in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a 10 year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. Storm sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 16. Wetland Conservation and Mitieation. The Developer shall comply with the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act, as amended, and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. The Developer shall pay all costs associated with wetlands conservation and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. 17. Water Main Trunk Area Charee. The Developer shall pay a water area charge of$43,589 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. Water area charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 18. Water Treatment Plant Fee. The Developer shall pay a water treatment plant fee of $ 20,828 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. Water treatment plant fees for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 19. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charee. The Developer shall pay a sanitary sewer trunk area charge of$ 33,660 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. Sanitary Trunk Sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 20. Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay a park dedication fee of $ 0.00 in satisfaction of the City's park dedication requirements for the plat. The park dedication fee shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. The park dedication fees for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 5 21. Sealcoatioe;. In lieu of assessing sealcoating three years from completion of the road construction, the Developer agrees to pay a fee of $ 2,501 for initial sealcoating of streets in the subdivision. This fee shall be deposited in the City Road and Bridge Fund upon execution of this Agreement. 22. GIS Fees. The Developer is responsible for a Government Information System fee of $ 1,350 based upon the number of lots within the subdivision. 23. Easements. The Developer shall furnish the City at the time of execution of this Agreement with the easements designated on the plat. 24. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors, a license to enter the plat to perform all necessary work and/or inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the installation of public improvements by the City. The license shall expire after the public improvements installed pursuant to the Development Contract have been installed and accepted by the City. 25. Clean UP. The Developer shall weekly, or more often if required by the City Engineer, clear from the public streets and property any soil, earth or debris resulting from construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns. All debris, including brush, vegetation, trees and demolition materials, shall be disposed of off site. Burning of trees and structures shall be prohibited, except for fire training only. The City has a contract for street cleaning services. The City will have the right to clean the streets as outlined in current City policy. The Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for street cleaning costs. 26. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Agreement, payment of real estate taxes including interest and penalties, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements in the plat and construction of all public improvements in the plat, the Developer shall furnish the City with a cash escrow, irrevocable letter of credit, or alternative security acceptable to the City Administrator, from a bank (security) for $ 1,562,982. The bank and form of the security shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The security shall be automatically renewing. The term of the security may be extended from time to time if the extension is furnished to the City Administrator at least forty-five (45) days prior to the stated expiration date of the security. If the required public improvements are not completed, or terms ofthe Agreement are not satisfied, at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of a letter of credit, the City may draw down the letter of credit. The City may draw down the security, without prior notice, for any violation of this Agreement or Default of the Contract. The amount of the security was calculated as follows: GradinglErosion Control Sanitary Sewer Water Main Storm Sewer Street Construction $N/A $ 456,250 $ 312,500 $ 375,000 $ 287,500 Monuments St. Lights/Signs Blvd. Trees Blvd. Sodding Wetland Mitigation $ 10,750 $ 16,250 $ 26,250 $ 17,750 $N/A Two Years Principal and Interest on Assessments $ 60,732 This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. 27. Responsibilitv for Costs. A. The Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but not limited to, Soil and Water Conservation District charges, legal, planning, administrative, construction costs, engineering, easements, inspection and utility testing expenses incurred in connection with approval, acceptance and development of the plat, the preparation of this Agreement, and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting the construction for the development of the plat. B. The Developer, except for City's willful misconduct, shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages or expenses which the City may payor incur in consequence of such claims, including attorney's fees. 6 C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Agreement, including engineering and attorney's fees. In the event that the City receives claims from labor, materialmen, or others that have performed work required by this Contract, that the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment from the City, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant to Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon the letters of credit in an amount up to 125% of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Court, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine attorneys' fees pursuant to this Contract. D. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum. If the bills are not paid within sixty (60) days, the City has the right to draw from the Developers security to pay the bills. 28. Trash Enclosures. The Developer is responsible to require each builder to provide on site trash enclosures to contain all construction debris, thereby preventing it from being blown off site, except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 29. Existine: Tree Preservation. The Developer will walk the site with the City Forester and identify all significant trees which will be removed by on site grading. A dialogue between the Developer and City Forester regarding alternative grading options will take place before any disputed tree is removed. All trees, stumps, brush and other debris removed during clearing and grubbing operations shall be disposed of off site. 30. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer, except in an emergency as determined by the City or as otherwise provided for in this agreement, is first given written notice of the work in default, not less than 72 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 31. Miscellaneous. A. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors or assigns, as the case may be. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Agreement. B. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. C. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. D. Building permits shall not be issued prior to completion of site grading, utility installation, curb and gutter, installation of erosion control devices, retaining walls, site seeding, mulching, disk anchoring and submittal of a surveyor's certificate denoting all appropriate monuments have been installed. Only construction of noncombustible materials shall be allowed until the water system is operational. If permits are issued prior to the completion and acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents or third parties. Normal procedure requires that streets needed for access to approved uses shall be paved with a bituminous surface before certificates of occupancy may be issued. However, the City Engineer is authorized to waive this requirement when weather related circumstances prevent completion of street projects before the end of the construction season. The Developer is responsible for maintaining said streets in a condition that will assure the access of emergency vehicles at all times when such a waiver is granted. 7 E. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Agreement. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not be a waiver or release. F. The Developer represents to the City, to the best of its knowledge, that the plat is not of "metropolitan significance" and that an environmental impact statement is not required. However, if the City or another governmental entity or agency determines that such a review is needed, the Developer shall prepare it in compliance with legal requirements so issued from said agency. The Developer shall reimburse the City for all expenses, including staff time and attorney fees, that the City incurs in assisting in the preparation of the review. G. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all City, County, Metropolitan, State and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow any construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City's demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is compliance. H. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. The Developer covenants with the City, its successors and assigns, that the Developer is well seized in fee title of the property being final platted and/or has obtained Consents to this Contract, in the form attached hereto, from all parties who have an interest in the property; that there are no unrecorded interests in the property being final platted; and that the Developer will indemnify and hold the City harmless for any breach of the of the foregoing covenants. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Agreement, at the Developer's request the City will execute and deliver a release to the Developer. I. Developer shall take out and maintain until six months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury or death shall not be less than $500,000.00 for one person and $1,000,000.00 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall not be less than $200,000.00 for each occurrence. The City shall be named as an additional named insured on said policy, the insurance certificate shall provide that the City must be given 10 days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance and the Developer shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City prior to the City signing the plat. J. The Developer shall obtain a Wetlands Compliance Certificate from the City. K. Upon breach of the terms of this Agreement, the City may, without notice to the Developer, draw down the Developer's cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit as provided in paragraph 26 of this Agreement. The City may draw down this security in the amount of $500.00 per day that the Developer is in violation. The City, in its sole discretion, shall determine whether the Developer is in violation of the Agreement. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 30 hereof, this determination may be made without notice to the Developer. It is stipulated that the violation of any term will result in damages to the City in an amount which will be impractical and extremely difficult to ascertain. It is agreed that the per day sum stipulated is a reasonable amount to compensate the City for its damages. L. The Developer will be required to conduct all major activities to construct Plans A-F during the following hours of operation: Monday - Friday Saturday Sunday 7:00 A.M. until 7:00 P.M. 8:00 A.M. until 5:00 P.M. Not Allowed This does not apply to activities that are required on a 24 hour basis such as dewatering, etc. Any deviation from the above hours are subject to approval of the City Engineer. 8 M. The Developer is responsible to require each builder within the development to provide a Class 5 aggregate entrance for every house that is to be constructed in the development. This entrance is required to be installed upon initial construction of the home. See City Standard Plate ERO-09 for construction requirements. N. The Developer shall be responsible for the control of weeds in excess of twelve inches (12") on vacant lots or boulevards within their development as per City Code 6-7-2. Failure to control weeds will be considered a Developer's Default as outlined in Paragraph 30 of this Agreement and the Developer will reimburse the City as defined in said Paragraph 30. 32. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified or registered mail at the following address: Larry Frank Arcon Development, Inc. 7625 Metro Blvd., Suite 350 Edina, MN 55439 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either and delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified mail or registered mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: John F. Erar, City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 9 SIGNATURE PAGE CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor By: John F. Erar, City Administrator DEVELOPER: Arcon Development, Inc. By: Its: Drafted by: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 (651)463-7111 10 STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 by Gerald Ristow, Mayor, and by John F. Erar, City Administrator, of the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by the City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 by , the of Arcon Development, Inc, a corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf ofthe corporation. Notary Public 11 City of Farmington 325. Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us loJ TO: Mayor and CounciIwzmbers City Administrato~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Minnesota State Building Code Amendment - Update DATE: May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION A new state law regarding new energy requirements contained in the State Building Code became effective as of April 15, 2000. DISCUSSION New one and two family dwellings for which building permits are applied for after April 15,2000 will have the option of meeting one of two different energy efficiency standards. The two standards are Chapter 7670 (Category 1) homes and the second is Chapter 7672 (Energy Code). The Chapter 7670 or Category 1 requirements includes required mechanical ventilation systems for homes as well as more stringent requirements for sealing the home. While the cost impact of this option varies depending on who is providing the information, the range appears to be between a $2,000-$5,000 increase to the price of a new home. The Chapter 7672 or the new Energy Code option requires air exchangers and even tighter home construction techniques. This is the more restrictive option and is also the more costly to comply with. The cost of this option is between $1,000 to 2,000 higher than the Category 1 requirements. While either option certainly adds to the price of new home construction, this additional cost is supposedly being offset by homes being more energy efficient and increased health and safety standards for new homes. . ........ -.. - ----...----- BllDGETIMPACT While there will be additional time required by the City Building Inspection Division to enforce these new standards, there are no changes to building permit fees as a result of these requirements. ACI'ION REOtJqTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ~/- ~/ David L. Olson Community Development Director MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF COMMEitCE,: MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION . -.. , ........ -.. - .. - , . , . --' ., . --. MinnesotaR~sid~ntiat.. Energy.Code .Up~ate Summary of New <:.ode Requirements . ". ,.. ..,.. .' .. . . _.' -." Anew .~..nergy. r:.ode g(jes.Jnt(),effe~tforbuild;.n~. p."~' fmit applications subrrlittedafter April 14,Zooo. . .. . ' . ...- F()rde~chedoh~~' an~ ,tWo.family;R-3.oecupaney rf!S~~ntialbuildinp;the.foU()~ng. requirements ~pply:_.. . '" .', . ',.' '.." - .:',' ....., .. ."'. ' .. . .... " -t. . -. -, ,", .__' _ Opti()h'(~l: '. ........... .. .... . ...... ...... . . .... '..' . ..' .'. ..,. ~'......kc()ntra~tOr, or owner '.m~stc;omplYwith. the. pro'visigns 'of MirimisotciJfulesChapter , '767Qthap~pplyto'Categ()ry1'buj(dings~:~.. . ,'. .... ...".<' < "',..' ..~u.il~il1gs~tha.~l1av~'fU;el~~Ut(lill~equip~ent 9~in.g.non~~lidfu!\sf~r,~p~c~...heating.; . <servicew(ite,r;heating, .orhearthproductsrnustjns~ll.dired; vent., , poWer vent, or sea~edcQmbustiQn:equipment-. . . ','-..':':',,' ......... ...., . c'",,": ....... 6yjldings muSt-have a meChanical ventil~tioQ'~tem:WhicJ1 r~plaCe$i 'by dir~tof:.: , tlJdirect:-m~Cin.s,"aji-:trDm habitaf)le".t'ooms Wlth.outdoorair.' . i' -:: . '.,.. . ", . . .- If.any ~;nQl~)~>;chausfdevice. overJOO' cubi~:feet~r.mil1u,t~'(Ctm)i~,inS~Ued,'~aled, combustiQh- space-heating eqIJipment oran altern~tiyernak~~~p.alr'source ml,lstpe., useq.' , . ....... ..,. .",". ' ....., OptiQO (b): . ....,. ". ..... '. <" ...... .'. ..... '.' . .'.: · . A,contrac~()r prown'er must cOlJ1plywith Minn~ta Rules,C~aptet 7672., . . Other Requitemeots: '. . ..'..... '. .' '. . .... '. . . ....... ". ... . .,.... ....... ... . Alteratiollsand ~dditjons must comply either with MlnneSota Rules, Chapter 7670 or' - .withcMihnesota'RlJles, Chapter1672~": ", . . '. · Tryree orrndre attached dwelUngllnit$, three stories and les$ in hetght, must.coiTlPlY ..' '.' either with Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7670. or with MinneSQta Rules, Chapt~r7614.. . ,-., ". ".- "." ". . . for additional information, ortorecetveRequeSt fotlnterpretattonforms, con~ct the Enei'gy Information Center at,651-296-5175 (toUfreeat 1-800-657-3710) or the ~uUdin, Codes and Standards Divtsion at 651-205-4707. '. Requ,est for Interpretation forms may also be downloaded at www.commerce.state~mn.us. Responses to. current interpretations on the', . 'Minnesota Energy Code may also be. obtained at that site. 4100 Suite 200 - 12] 7th Place East - St Paul,Minnesota551O]-2]45 - (651) 296-7107-(65]) 297-1959 - (65]) 297-3067 TIT An equal opportunity employer Ventura signs compromise building code wysiwyg:1 1 4/http://www.startribune...w.cgi?template=session&slug=code 14 Y4V, t~" Th Technology t~!~~~2r2 ," 'Careers tC'Cl) c d &iliA; \ "r" ~ t;)r/ ~0r lof3 CLICK.IM lIOII ___OIl"'" KIDS' WIAlHIR 'QUUTlOII OF TH& WIIK Jim Buchta and Donna Halvorsen Friday, April 14, 2000 Star Tribune Two days before a long-debated new energy code was to go into effect, Gov. Jesse Ventura signed a compromise bill Thursday that makes building houses to the stringent new standard voluntary, not mandatory. The new law gives builders two standards for constructing homes. One standard, known in the building industry as Category 1, was added to the building code in 1994. It was designed to encourage builders to construct safer, more durable and energy efficient houses. In recent years, about 10 percent of Minnesota houses were built according to the Category 1 standard, which building experts considered an upgrade to the state's longstanding building code. The 2000 Legislature made further technical improvements to the Category 1 requirements. The second construction standard approved by the 2000 Legislature is identical to the requirements set to go into effect Saturday. It, too, has the goal of making houses more energy-efficient, long-lasting and safer. This standard is very specific in laying out what products should be used to meet the code and how they should be installed. If the Legislature had taken no action this year, the second construction standard would have been the state's requirement for new home construction. However, the bill embraced by the 2000 Legislature and Ventura gives builders the option of complying with that new standard or with Category 1, which some builders already have been using. Some builders and state officials said they supported the compromise to avoid a repeal of the new code, which was advocated by Sen. Fran Bradley, R -Rochester. "It ends up being a good compromise in the face of what was out there," said Kathie Pugaczewski, executive vice president of the Builders Association of Minnesota, referring to the repeal effort. "We don't want to go through another delay, or eliminating it or starting from scratch. I think it moves the entire industry forward." But some building experts say the Category 1 compromise doesn't go far enough in addressing important health, safety and durability considerations that are addressed in the energy code, which was developed during years of often contentious discussion among building experts, code administrators, builders and building officials. Key omissions listed 04/14/20009:58 AM Ventura signs compromise building code wysiwyg:/ /4/http://www.startribune...w.cgi?template=session&slug=code 14 Steve Klossner, a house diagnostician from Lakeland Shores, Minn., said key omissions in Category 1 are that it: Does not require carbon monoxide monitors. Requires ventilation, but does not require equipment to bring in fresh air equal to the amount of moist, tainted air that is vented out. "Now you can put any old bathroom fan in and call it ventilation?" Klossner said. Has no provisions for distributing fresh air to all the living areas, including the bedrooms. Klossner views Category 1 as the lower of the two standards in the legislation that passed this year. Under existing law, which expires Saturday, Category 1 was the higher standard. The energy code, a decade in the making, was to begin a new era in homebuilding. Instead of making the new stringent code compulsory, the Legislature and Ventura made it voluntary. Bradley said he heard objections from constituents who were concerned about housing affordability, so he introduced the repealer bill to ignite discussion on the code. Bob DeWitz, who has built starter homes in Rochester for 50 years, said he approached Bradley because regulation at all levels of government keeps pushing house prices up, and preventing some people from owning homes. The compromise "was the best we could do," DeWitz said. "I did a lot of work, and Mr. Bradley did a lot of work." Bradley acknowledged that estimates vary widely for the added costs of the energy code that was supposed to go into effect Saturday. However, he said, the compromise code that will take effect Saturday will increase per-house costs by about $2,000, instead of $8,000 under the more stringent standard. How will the new code affect people who want to build new houses? Gary Olson has been anxiously awaiting word about the code, because he plans to start building a house on 10 acres he owns west of Buffalo. He's already reached his $172,000 budget limit, and is concerned that he won't be able to afford to build the house if he has to pay $6,000 to $7,000 extra to meet the new energy code. That's the estimate that his builder gave him. "It'd probably bring it [the project] to a grinding halt," he said. Olson said he'll go to his township hall today to apply for his building permit before the new law goes into effect Saturday. He plans to install mechanical ventilation in his home for about $1,500. But, he said, judging from what he's heard, he thinks that houses are already well-built. Mechanical ventilation is a feature of the existing Category I standard that remains in effect as well as the more stringent standard that takes effect Saturday. Janet Streff, state Department of Commerce staff member, said the per house cost difference between the two code standards is only $1,000 to $1,200. . 20f3 04/14/20009:58 AM Ventura signs compromise building code wysiwyg:1 1 4/http://www.startribune...w.cgi?template=session&slug=code 14 v . Under the stricter of the two standards, the consumer receives better-performing windows, some framing upgrades and increased safety with wood-burning fireplaces and stoves, she said. She said home buyers will have to ask for a house built to "Rule 7672" if they want to build to the highest standard possible. Mike Swanson, vice president of operations at Rottlund Homes, the state's largest home builder, said he has been impatient with delays in the final language of the code. He said many people who objected to the new code didn't have a good understanding of what it entailed. His company plans to build houses to the optional higher standard, but Swanson said he wants to take a second look at that decision after he studies the specifics of the new law. "In the short term, the new code is going to be a lot of work for builders and the building inspections department," Swanson said. "But in the long run for the builders, we're going to be building a more durable and higher-quality home." . Pat Hue1man, a University of Minnesota housing researcher and builder trainer, said the compromise is better than going back to what was required before, but that it doesn't go far enough in addressing concerns about health and safety. 'Really just a skeleton' "This new version is really just a skeleton in many ways and is going to require a great deal of additional effort and education to make it work successfully and provide adequate consumer protection," he said. In addition to concerns about ventilation safety, Huelman said that Category 1 doesn't address remodeling and multi-family construction. Klossner said the bill signed by Ventura "looks very benign, but it has some significant repercussions" for houses and their occupants. For one thing, the new standard allows wood-burning fireplaces. Klossner said that when wood fires die down, they give off carbon monoxide that can make people sick. "Safety didn't take as high a priority in the process as I would have liked to have seen," said Huelman. "This is going to cause a great deal of additional confusion and there are many more opportunities for something to go wrong. " - Staffwriter Karen Youso contributed to this report. , Return to top @ Copyright 2000 Star Tribune 300 04/14/20009:58 AM Charter COMM UN ICATIONS' A WIRED WORLD COMPANY Aprilll,2000 Mr. John Erar City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Mr. Erar; IDe Charter Communications has elected to make an annual adjustment to our rates for basic cable service and the cable programming basic service tier. While cable franchises are regulated at the local level, rates are set in accordance with FCC rules. This year's adjustment goes into effect June 1,2000 and is the result of our increased operating costs, programing and equipment costs, as well as our investments in new technology. The new rates will be adjusted by the following: Broadcast Basic Expanded Basic Basic and Expanded Hourly Service Charge Standard Converter Volume Converter Addressable Remote Non-Addressable Remote Home Terminal Digital Terminal Wire Maintenance Cable Connection Current Rates $ 11.15 23.75 34.90 27.49 1.80 1.80 .38 .38 3.55 8.95 .95 2.25 New Rates $ 11. 93 25.41 37.34 27.49 2.00 2.00 .38 .38 3.87 8.95 .95 2.25 Difference $ .78 1.66 2.44 .00 .20 .20 .00 .00 .32 .00 .00 .00 We have taken great strides this past year to improve our overall cable service including programming, customer service and system reliability. We strive to provide service and programming whose value is consistent with our regulated rates. We continue to support our "On Time Guarantee" program which pledges that if we miss a service call or installation-it's free, and our customer service representatives continue to train and utilize our PACE (Pursuing A Commitment to Excellence) program. We are also providing every single employee training in our WOW (Wiring our World) program, which enables our employees to grasp the Wired World vision of our leader, Mr. Paul Allen. We are also very proud that Charter Communications has received the Seal of Customer Service Excellence from the NCT A and are now recognized as one of the top service providers in our industry. 16900 Cedar Avenue' Rosemount, Minnesota. 55068 www.chartercom.com . tel: 612.432.2610 . fax: 612.432.5765 Page 2 We are also providing the newest technology in most of our communities, which enables our customers access to digital cable television, cable modems and extended viewing options that compare or exceed the value provided by most of our competitors. We are also planning a channel preview where we will provide approximately one week of each of three networks and we'll ask that the customer vote on their favorite. With those statistics, we'll have good information on what our customers are looking for when we launch additional channels. As you know, exciting new changes are taking place in our industry and Charter Communications is proud to be on the edge of this convergence. We pledge to you our commitment and service as we move in that direction. As competition in telecommunications grows, we at Charter Communications understand how important it is to offer our customers the best possible service at the best possible price. However, like every other business, we are faced with increased operating costs, which makes this adjustment necessary. Charter Communications still remains one ofthe lowest cost video providers available. Personally, I appreciate your understanding and patience as I undertake the management of this system and work to relocate my family to this area. It is a welcomed challenge and I enjoy working with you. Should you have any questions or need any additional information, pleases call me at (612) 432-2575 or my cell phone at (612) 817-6697. Best regards, t1I.uJI1I Ellen M. Martin Operations Manager /em City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us / fa,. TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Consider Public Facilities Task Force Recommendations DATE: May 1, 2000 INTRODUCTION A number of action items were presented for Council consideration at the April 19, 2000 Joint Council Workshop. At this workshop, the Council concurred that certain action items should be presented to Council at the May 1, 2000 Council Meeting for approval in order to move the facilities planning and construction process forward. DISCUSSION The following items are presented for Council review and approval: 1) Authorize Request for Proposals for Construction Management Services for the Law Enforcement Center (LEC) and Central Maintenance Facility (CMF). It is anticipated that a Construction Management firm will be hired first to assist in the selection of a project architect. Proposed Time Frame: . May 1, 2000 - Council authorization to issue RFP; . June 5, 2000 - Approve contract with Construction Management Firm 2) Authorize Request for Proposals for Architectural Services for the LEe and CMF. . May 1, 2000 - Council authorization to issue RFP . June 19, 2000 - Approve contract(s) with Project Architect(s). 3) Authorize the use of Lease Revenue Bonds for the LEC and CMF and approve the public financing process in support of this selected funding mechanism. l: 4) Approve by motion a recommendation of approval for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority to issue Lease Revenue Bonds. It is anticipated that the actual issuance and sizing of Lease Revenue Bonds will occur sometime after bids for the LEC and CMF arc received. The exact timing of bond issuance will be based on a variety of market factors to ensure the most favorable borrowing costs for the City. S) Approve the placement of signage on the proposed site denoting the future planned location of the LEC and CMF. As private development continues to occur in this area, the need to publicize the planned construction of these facilities becomes critical from a communications and public relations perspective. BUDGET IMPACT Capital project funds for each approved facility will be created to account for all related project expenditures. As was indicated, the preliminary project cost estimates for the Law Enforcement Center and the Central Maintenance Facility are anticipated to be approximately $7,600,000 that includes bonding costs. Fees associated with the hiring of a Construction Manager and Project Architect(s) will be accounted for within the capital project funds. In addition, costs associated with the installation of signage on the City site will be expensed to the project funds. ACTION REOUESTED Relative to items previously discussed with Council, the following actions are respectfully requested. 1) Approve the Request for Proposals for Construction Management Services (attached). 2) Approve the Request for Proposals for Architectural Services (attached). 3) Authorize the use of Lease Revenue Bonds for the LEC and CMF and approve the public financing process in support of this selected funding mechanism. At the time a final project cost is determined, bonds will be sized in accordance with project bids and presented to Council for review and final approval. 4) Approve by motion a recommendation of approval for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority to issue Lease Revenue Bonds. While the HRA will need to approve separate action authorizing the issuance of the bonds, a formal Council recommendation to the HRA is appropriate in terms of elected body support of this contemplated action. 5) Approve the placement of signage on the City site identifying the planned construction of the LEC and CMF. Expenditures associated with this capital item will be a capital project cost. Anticipated costs for signage is approximately 5500. Respectfully Submitted, REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ARCmTECTURAL SERVICES CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA The City of Farmington is considering building a 15,000 sq. ft. Law Enforcement Center and a 40,000 sq.ft. Central Maintenance Facility on a seventeen-acre site owned by the City. The building site is located at the intersection of 195th Street and Pilot Knob Road and currently houses a City water tower and No. 5 well building. The City seeks to obtain the services of an experienced architectural fIrm to help with this effort. The City seeks to employ a firm that exhibits the following characteristics: 1. Strong public project experience with recent examples of new similar municipal facilities. 2. Experience in site master planning. 3. An ability to demonstrate value, attractiveness and quality in design, and remain within project budget limitations. 4. A willingness to participate as a part of a project team that will include the owner and construction manager. The following information is provided to assist you in preparing your proposal: 1. Number of copies needed: 8 2. Due date: 4:30 p.m., May 26, 2000. Any postmarked proposals received after this date will be automatically disqualified from the selection process. 3. Projected project timetable: a. Appoint Project Architect(s) - June 19, 2000 b. Begin Project Design - June 26, 2000 c. Project Construction Start - May 2001 d. Anticipated Owner Occupancy - January 2002 4. Estimated building budget: Central Maintenance Facility Law Enforcement Center $ 3,842,250 $ 2,421,300 5. Mail proposals to: John F. Erar, City Administrator, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024, with each proposal clearly marked PROPOSAL FOR ARCIDTECTURAL SERVICES - CENTRAL MAINTENANCE FACILITY OR LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER. If making a proposal on both facilities, identify same. 6. If there are questions about the preparation of your proposal contact: John Erar, City Administrator at 651.463.1801 or Joel Jamnik, City Attorney at 651.452.5000. The City intends to select three to five finns for further consideration. Interviews with these firms will be held June 12-14,2000, with Council awarding a contract(s) to the selected firm(s) on June 19, 2000. The City may retain separate finns for each building project. However, proposers have the discretion to submit proposals on one or both projects, but must indicate whether architectural fees will be reduced if both projects are awarded to the single proposing firm. DISCLAIMER: This request for proposal is only a solicitation for information. The City of Farmington is not obligated to enter into a contract nor is it responsible for any costs associated with the proposals and interviews. FORMAT Interested firms should submit a proposal that contains the following: 1. FIRM BACKGROUND In this section present any information about your firm that you feel is appropriate. Include the size of firm, number of employees by job category, the areas of specialization for which your firm is recognized, and any key features that might set your firm apart. 2. EXPERIENCE List all police stations, central maintenance or public works facilities, completed by your firm over the last five years. For each of these projects, list the date of completion, the total square footage, total overall costs, the construction time frame, the project designer, and project manager. List any design awards won by your firm. Identify the project and date of award. 3. DESIGN EXAMPLES Present example floor Dlans for representative projects completed by your firm. Exterior photographs and descriptive information would also be helpful. Provide information, layouts, etc. that demonstrates your site planning capabilities. 4. APPROACH TO PROJECT DESIGN Describe how your firm will approach the design of the facility in terms of involvement by the owner. How will your firm approach the overall external design and landscaping attributes of the facilities. How will your firm approach internal facility design relative to functionality. durability, attractiveness and customer-oriented services. Proposers should indude ideas related to incorporating solid waste management operations (vehicles, equipment and sta1l) into the Central Maintenanee Faeility that will also be shared by other operating divisions of the City Public Works and Parks Departments. 5. PROJEer TEAM Identify the specific project team that will be committed to this project. If the proposer is selected for an interview, the project team committed to the project must be available for the interview. A statement of human resource commitment will be required by each proposer for the duration of the project. Identify any consultants who will be a part of this team, and identify their firm, experience and areas of expertise. Discuss how you will perform engineering services. Identify the key staff who be committed to the project, their qualifications, experience and specific areas of experience. 6. REFERENCES Include at least five references for recent (within the last 5 years) projects. Include contact persons, titles, telephone numbers and what their role in the process was. 7. ADDmONAL REQUIRED INFORMATION a. Does your firm carry insurance to protect clients from errors and omissions? In what amount? Does your firm carry professional liability insurance? Provide evidence in your proposal. b. Has your firm been the subject of litigation, mediation, or arbitration during the last five years? If so, give details of the issues and its resolution. Provide names of clients involved and contact names and telephone numbers. Involvement in litigation will not necessarily disqualify a proposer, however failure to provide accurate information will render the submittal as disqualified from further consideration. c. Has your firm ever been requested by a client to retire from a project? If so, present details. d. Each proposal must be signed by an authorized representative of your firm who can be held accountable for all representations. The Applicant Assurances Form attached hereto as Exhibit A must also be provided with the Proposal. 8. FEES In a separated sealed envelope, provide the following information. Assuming a total project cost as presented above, not including land or construction management fees for the Law Enforcement Center and Central Maintenance Facility, provide an estimate of your fee and the method of fee calculation for each project. List basic services included, list additional services and costs; and list reimbursables with applicable rates. Provide a "best guess" estimate ofwbat the reimbursable costs would be. Exhibit A Applicant Assurances The applicant hereby assures and certifies: 1. That the individual signing the assurance form on behalf of the individual, partnership, company or corporation named in the proposal possesses the legal authority to execute a contract for the proposed work. 2. That the finn(s) agree(s) to comply with all applicable federal, state and local compliance requirements. 3. That the finn(s) islare adequately insured to do business and perform the services proposed. OFFICIAL ADDRESS: (Name of Finn) (Authorized Signature) (Title) (Date) REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA I. Proiect DescriDtion Construction of a 15,000 sq. ft. Law Enforcement Center stand alone facility that would house a variety of law enforcement functions and activities to be specified by owner. Construction of a 40,000 sq. ft. stand alone Central Maintenance Facility that would house various City maintenance and operational functions and activities to be specified by owner. The City seeks to select an experienced construction management firm to manage and complete the above projects within a defined time schedule, within a prescribed budget, and within specific quality and program guidelines. The City also plans to contract with an architectural or engineering fIrm for architecturaVengineering (plans and specifications) services. This project is being coordinated by a Project Team consisting of the City Administrator and Department Heads. The City Administrator has been designated as the Project Team Coordinator and will be the principal liaison between the Project Team and the Construction Manager. From time to time, the Project Team will be augmented by various staff members and/or City consultants for specific tasks or reviews of matters within their areas of expertise. II. Schedule for Contractine: with a Construction Manae:ement Firm Council Approval of RFP - May 1, 2000 RFP's mailed and/or advertised - May 3, 2000 Last date for receipt of proposals - Friday, May 19, 2000 at 4:30 p.m. (postmarked submittals received after this date will be disqualified) Interviews held for selected proposals - May 23, 24, 25 or June 1, 2000 Contract awarded by City Council - June 5, 2000 III. Contract Between City of Farminsrton and Construction Manae:er The STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER (printed AlA Document B801) will be used as the basic contract for construction management services. The City of Farmington reserves the right to make additions to this AlA document as listed under Article 16 of this document. The City reserves the right to make deletions and modifications to this document which will be detailed in a supplemental document. In the event of any conflict between the terms and conditions stated in any amendments and those in any part of AlA Document 8801, the amended document shall supersede the AIA Document 8801 and shall govern in all respects. IV. Scooe of Work of the Construction Mana2er 1) Participate and advise the City in the selection of Project Architect(s) for both facilities. The City may, at its discretion, utilize the services of one or two project architects depending upon the capabilities, qualification and experience of the selected firm(s). 2) Assist in the development of project budgets from information provided by the Owner and Architect. 3) Communicate as needed with the City of Farmington Project Coordinator and on a regular basis with the Project Team concerning the status of the project. 4) Apply Value Engineering methods and processes, including direction in "constructibility" and "contractibility" decisions. 5) Design the management plan and strategy based on the Owner's project parameters. 6) Schedule project deliveries from design through construction. 7) Formulate contract conditions to facilitate the use of the construction management project delivery system. 8) Review contract documents prior to issuance for bidding on both City facilities. It is anticipated that the City will seek to contract with either one primary or two separate General Contractors to construct the two facilities. 9) Determine the divisions of work to facilitate the multiple bidding process. 1 0) Identify owner-direct purchase items. 11) Review designs during their development to ensure that facilities conform with City needs in terms of functionality, material quality and budgetary limitations. 12) Communicate with and assist the Project Architect(s) with bidding general contractors to clarify conditions and resolve discrepancies in bid documents. 13) Assist the Owner during the bidding process to ensure that the receipt of proposals is properly conducted. 14) Review bid proposals to determine if those being considered are complete and in the Owner's best interest. 15) Negotiate with the general contractor(s) on behalf of the Owner and in the best interest of the Owner. 16) Coordinate the signing of contracts and accumulation of required documents. 17) Organize and chair pre-construction meetings with the general contractor(s) and throughout the construction process to ensure compliance with owner facility requirements and in keeping with original or owner-approved revisions to bid specifications. 18) Develop and implement the construction schedule including the determination of divisions of work to facilitate the phasing of the project in relation to on-going operations of the City. 19) Coordinate with the general contractor(s) at the site on an as needed basis as directed by the City . 20) Organize and chair project and progress meetings with the general contractor(s). 21) Oversee, as necessary, general contractor systems for expediting material and equipment. 22) Establish and administer a project reporting system. 23) Work with appropriate City Finance staff to ensure appropriate general contractor payments for completed project work. 24) Coordinate and control construction support requirements for the project. 25) Assist the Owner and general contractor(s) with respect to any labor relations efforts connected with the project. 26) Prepare and implement the project's quality management program. 27) Administer contract changes and change order procedures. 28) Maintain and administer a tracking system for the Owner's cost accounting program. 29) Assist in the resolution of disputes arising from the performance of the general contractor(s ). 30) Monitor work site for safe working conditions. 31) Responsible for ensuring that all final building and site punchlist items are completed by the general contractor(s) prior to owner occupancy and final payment by the City. 31) Coordinate securing of all appropriate building permits. 32) Coordinate the administration and filing of warranties and guarantees. 33) Coordinate with general contractor(s) for all required inspections by the City. 34) Coordinate the submittals of Operating and Maintenance Manuals for Owner. v. Instructions to ADDHeants 1) Applicants must submit eight (8) copies of their proposal by 4:30 p.m., Friday, May 19, 2000. Any proposals not submitted by the date and time specified will be automatically disqualified. 2) Proposals should be mailed/delivered to: John F. Erar City Administrator City ofFannington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Questions concerning the RFP's may be directed to the above mentioned person at 651-463-1801. The package containing copies of proposals should be clearly marked "Construction Management Service Proposal for Central Maintenance Facility and Law Enforcement Center" 3) Proposers will not be pennitted to provide any of the architectural, construction or contracting services for this project. 4) The City shall not be liable for any expenses incurred by the proposer in preparing the proposal or making a presentation in its regard. 5) Proposals must provide the following information in this order: A. Business Orszanization How many years has your firm provided professional construction management services? What other services does your firm presently provide, besides professional construction management? If you provide construction services and/or architectural/engineering services, do you provide either or both of these services on projects where you serve as construction manager? Is your company currently involved in any litigation from past or current construction management projects over the last 10 years? If so, please provide detailed information. A statement indicating that your firm is not currently and/or does not expect to declare financial insolvency with respect to current business operations. B. Professional Organization How many people are in your organization? How many of these are assigned to full-time construction management activity? Of those listed above, how many are in-house personnel? A statement of commitment that your firm will provide the necessary qualified human and technical resources to meet the construction management needs of the City. C. List the number of in-house Construction Management personnel in the following categories and their years of experience in that area: Field Managers or Superintendents Project Administrators Resource Personnel Support or Administrative Personnel Principals Others D. List the technical level of the in-house Construction Management personnel by category as follows: Structural Engineers Civil Engineers Mechanical Engineers Electrical Engineers Value Engineering Managers Architects Architectural Engineers Field Supervisors Business and Management Computer Other E. List of professional and trade associations represented by in-house personnel in your organization. F. List the projects which your firm has completed over the original budget and/or over the' originally scheduled completion date and explain reasons for such results. Identify client contacts that the CitY may contact. Failure to include this information will result in proposal disqualification. G. Approa(:h!fo.SC6De~of.S-ettlces H. Construction Mana2ement ADDroach to this Proiect ," ".L I. Basis for Compensation Proposals shall include an estimate of your total fee for each project quoted as follows: Fee for Project Management Costs including personnel, overhead, and profit $..." ,CCh; ,. t"":' . ,... ~,' Fee for reimbursable expenses s \ ,",1ll 10-' .~ TOTAL LUMP SUM FEE ALL INCLUSIVE $ The above stated amount should represent the total cost of services to the City except as it may be modified by changes and negotiated in the scope of work. . The proposal shall also include your policy regarding fees for refSidding, change orders, and the cost of any additional services the City may request. The estimated project costs are as follows: Law Enforcement Center ./,', S ,.<, 2,421.aQO '. t Central Maintenance Facility {,...3,842,250 ~ .J. ',' ...,~. $ "f' ,~ ' A . ~ '.", (" Fixed fee to be negotiated for Constnlction ManageinetifS~ceS ;during design, bidding and construction, including on-site supervision. .- All construction support, general conditions and site support items to be procured by the CM after the CM firm has been selected. These items will '. be competitively bid by support vendors and paid direct via the monthly payment process. J. List of References A minimum of five each for: \, , Public Clients and Contacts (\\i;thjnlast 3 y..ears): , Trade Contractors '. ;~ J'.:,j",' . -:i,-Architects J! :. ' ..., ., K. ~ualifications and EX~S~'Jo~~di~~s._of the Finn who mav be Working on these Projects L. ,..' .::... : . ;.": ;:...;. ;;;~ .' ~ ~ }~-~-~,~: Any Additional Information Proposer Wishes to Submit VI. Seleetion Criteria Selection criteria will include proposer's approach to the scope of services, demonstrated previous experience in construction management with other public facilities, ,~gl~!i9JlitI_<?fthe applicant's construction lI\Pll4l8ement approach with the requirements of this specific project, cost control methods, fees, and demonstrated ability to effectively and efficiently mPllage the project within the Owner's stated requirements. , ,', '. ~:"r" .:' VII. Rie:hts Reserved . .~-'_. ' ~ ',. The City reserves the right to waive any irregularities in any proposal and to select the , proposal evaluated to be most advantageous to the City. Further, the City reserves the right to disqualify any proposal or to reject all proposals if it is deemed to be in its best interest. l\ i .:Tfre 6ity:shall not-be liable', for any expenses incurred by the proposer; including, but not '::,1,"1 'limited to, expenses associated with the preparation of the proposals. The City of Farmington reserves the right to reject any and all proposals or to request . additienil information from all proposers. Each' p'r6posal must be signed by an authorized representative of your firm who can be , held ,accountable for all representations. The Applicant Assurances Form attached hereto ~iJ L~ 'as Exhl6~tN muSt 'alSo be provided with the Proposal. , -.;;' .J " ",'._, ~j vi .}'~'!_ .-c~~,,1r.::' ~.'.;; t s~';' ,'. . ~'\-t,.~ :1'7' ~~ :J.t:: " ., .. 'Exhibit A Applicant Assurallees . , ~ -, .'. . , '. Th:eaj'JplicaDt hereby assures~ certifies: 1. ~~e ~dua1 ~iglungtbe assurance form on '~W'Of:the ~dividUal, p$1nerSlJiP, comPany or corporation named in the.proposal t:kJssesses the legal ~ority to execute a contract ~tOt'the proposed work. - 2. That~~ fum(s) agree(s}J9:Cotriplywith all applicdbie federal, state and lOcal quripliancerequitements. 3. ",.t the firi.t:t(s)islare~tUltely'insuredtodo b~ssand PefiomltJie:~c~prOpO~. OFFICIAL ADDRESS: (Name ofFirin) . , "',' - -.:'~' -, . .. " .' ....._.,. .0 . .~ .", ,-, "~:~,1:-<"'~;';~' ~.J~""'P . "1" <AuthoriZed Sigilature}. .oj.._.".:<<,' ~;.. <'J..,r- <\o..,_"~..,.. ....,..... ~ oJ . (Title ) ',"J',,,_ . ,,:'~'< ....... ~ (Date)