The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12.18.06 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a prom is ingfuture, AGENDA PRE-CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 18, 2006 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE AGENDA 3. CITIZEN COMMENTS 4. COUNCIL REVIEW OF AGENDA 5. STAFF COMMENTS a) Customer Service Team - City Calendar b) 2007 Workshops / Meeting Update 6. ADJOURN PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT Council workshops are conducted as an informal work session, all discussions shall be considered fact-finding, hypothetical and unofficial critical thinking exercises, which do not reflect an official public position. Council work session outcomes should not be construed by the attending public and/or reporting media as the articulation of aformal City policy position. Only official Council action normally taken at a regularly scheduled Council meeting should be considered as aformal expression of the City's position on any given matter. City of Fannington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 18, 2006 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Mr. Tom Ryan b) Response to Comments Ms. Kate Ekness - Police Department 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (12/4/06 Regular) b) November 2006 Financial Report - Finance c) Adopt Resolution - Approve 2007 Tax Levy and Budget - Finance d) Approve Storm Water Utility Adjustment Policy - Engineering e) Adopt Resolution - Approve Agreement with Dakota County, Elm Street Project - Engineering f) Adopt Resolution - Approve Agreement with Dakota County, 19Sth Street Project - Engineering g) Approve Contract for Platting the Nicolai Pond - City Attorney h) Adopt Resolution - Approve HPC Consultant Contract - Administration i) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Event Permit - Administration j) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration k) Approve Contract Four Paws - Police Department 1) Adopt Resolution - Non-Bargaining Cost of Living Increase - Human Resources m) Acknowledge Resignation Police Department - Human Resources n) Appointment Recommendation Engineering - Human Resources 0) Approve Park Name - Parks and Recreation p) Approve Draft Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line EA W - Planning q) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration Action Taken Information Received Information Received Approved Information Received R133-06; R134-06 R135-06 R136-06 R137-06 Approved R138-06 R139-06 Approved Approved R140-06 Acknowledged Approved Approved Approved Approved r) Authorize Plans and Specifications City Hall- Wold Architects s) Approve Bills t) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Event Permit - Administration (Supplemental) 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Ordinance - Approving 2007 Fee Schedule - Administration 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Approve Various Agreements - New High School Development - City Attorney b) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Bugbee Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and MUSA - Planning 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Fountain Valley Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning - Planning b) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Twin Ponds Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Plat, Wetland Conservation Act Permit - Planning c) Approve Agreement for 21 oth Street Right-of-Way - City Attorney d) Frontier Update - Administration (verbal) 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Set Joint Counci1JPlanning Commission Workshop - Planning b) Set Joint Council/Empire Town Board Workshop - Planning 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN Authorized Approved R141-06 Ord 006-566 Approved R142-06; R143-06 Ord 006-567 Tabled 1/2/07 Tabled 1/16/07 Approved Information Received 1/10/075:30 p.m. 1/23/07 7:30 p.m. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 18, 2006 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Mr. Tom Ryan b) Response to Comments Ms. Kate Ekness - Police Department 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (12/4/06 Regular) b) November 2006 Financial Report - Finance c) Adopt Resolution - Approve 2007 Tax Levy and Budget - Finance d) Approve Storm Water Utility Adjustment Policy - Engineering e) Adopt Resolution - Approve Agreement with Dakota County, Elm Street Project - Engineering f) Adopt Resolution - Approve Agreement with Dakota County, 19Sth Street Project - Engineering g) Approve Contract for Platting the Nicolai Pond - City Attorney h) Adopt Resolution - Approve HPC Consultant Contract - Administration i) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Event Permit - Administration j) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration k) Approve Contract Four Paws - Police Department 1) Adopt Resolution - Non-Bargaining Cost of Living Increase - Human Resources m) Acknowledge Resignation Police Department - Human Resources n) Appointment Recommendation Engineering - Human Resources 0) Approve Park Name - Parks and Recreation p) Approve Draft Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line EA W - Planning q) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration Action Taken Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 r) Authorize Plans and Specifications City Hall- Wold Architects s) Approve Bills Page 19 Page 20 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Ordinance - Approving 2007 Fee Schedule - Administration Page 21 9. A WARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Approve Various Agreements - New High School Development - City Attorney Page 22 b) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Bugbee Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and MUSA - Planning Page 23 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Fountain Valley Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning - Planning b) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Twin Ponds Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Plat, Wetland Conservation Act Permit - Planning c) Approve Agreement for 21 oth Street Right-of-Way - City Attorney d) Frontier Update - Administration (verbal) Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Set Joint Council/Planning Commission Workshop -Planning b) Set Joint Council/Empire Town Board Workshop - Planning Page 27 Page 28 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN Tom Ryan 208 Walnut St. Farmington, MN 55024 I am here tonight because I was watching the council meeting on TV and listening to the comments about the Elm St. project and the discussions about the assessments. Some background: In 1969 I bought a house on Walnut St. when I came home from the service. I kept buying houses on Walnut St., until I owned five of them between 2nd and 3rd streets. About 1987, rumors started to go around that the city was going to do Walnut St. from 2nd to Highway 3. I went to the city and asked about the project. They told me-Don't worry, it's a pipe dream, and it will never happen. In 1988, I got a letter saying the project was going ahead. NOW I worry about owning these five lots. Who is going to pay for what and how much are my assessments going to be? The city held a special meeting on the project assessments. Everyone living on Walnut S1. attended these meetings, to determine the assessments. None of the managers could give an estimate on the costs. I was the last one to speak, and since I owned so many lots, I asked the council to vote NO until they had a better breakdown on costs for all involved. One year later, the city started the Walnut St. project again, with not costs estimates. We the people on the street didn't know the city was applying for grants to pay for storm drains and curb and sidewalk. They were going to get paid twice-once by the grants and once by us. In 1990 the city said the project is going to begin in June and July and would be done before cool weather became a factor. They were blacktopping the street in a snowstorm, and we still weren't sure of the costs. Over a period of six months of going to council meetings, when it came time to talk about assessments, the council tabled the matter. At one of the meetings the city lawyer told the council they had to deal with this, because if the citizens took them to court they would win hands down. At one of the meetings we were told that they interest was higher than expected on the bonds-6- 7% It just happened that the lady from First St. projected worked for the bond company, and she was working on the Walnut St. project bonding for the company she worked for. She proceeded to tell the council that statement wasn't true-that the interest rate hadn't changed it was still 2 lIz-3% The project started in the summer of 1990. About three weeks later we found out that it was only going to cover two blocks. I asked why and was told that the 3 churches and one school stopped the project from going all the way to Hyg 3. BUT, now we found out that the city was going to run a storm drain line from 2nd and Walnut to the Railroad, go to the west side of the tracks, turn the pipe north and take it all the way to the creek. Some more costs we didn't know about. Finally, I got my assessment----$66,000.00 for my properties!!! I thought it was a typo!!! But, it wasn't. Even in 1990- this amount would cause a huge hardship on my family. I asked for a break down per lot. I owned two comer lots, on at 2nd and Walnut, on 3rd and Walnut. The city was double assessing all comer lots. After many meetings and talks, the assessment went to $48,000.00. About 500' from where I lived there were three bulk fuel distribution plants. So in the winter of 90/91 the fuel smell started coming out of the manholes. Hardees complained about the smell. The smell was terrible on 2nd st. In fact, it got so bad that the city had people down in the manholes-and closed off the pipe. I think it is still closed off. For 17 years the EPA and the city have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on this area, from mother wells to whatever you can dream up During the Walnut St. project, when they were digging the old street out, I stood ankle deep in fuel oil in the bottom of the ditch. I was told that I couldn't stop the construction progress, and to get out of they way or they would call the police. In my opinion, the reason the street was never fInished is because there was all ready something wrong with the two blocks that were done. I was told many times by Larry Thompson that I wouldn't be assessed again when the street project was finished. By the way-this summer about 6 people from EP A spent two months digging and removing soil and they are still monitoring wells. Thank you.---And yes, I am being assessed again, the alley is right behind my house. ,-- .__.~ ----- n w w w o · '" !?: !?: w '" co t co N 2l ~ ... g co ... N ~ yZ,OJ L H'VS:>r ~zo~ ozo~ ~zo~ ... ... ~ N ... OZO~ ... ... ~ZI> L~O~ [;IOJ L~O~ 9~0~ floll t~O~ ~ I>~O~ HO~ z~o~ 600~ z~o~ b o-q--j o~o~ 600~ 800~ O~I> soo~ soo~ 900~ soo~ 900~ ~oo~ ~oo~ OOO~ ~oo~ JoOO~ lS A~O)t:>IH lS A~O)t:>IH zoo~ tl ooo~ SZ6 tZ6 OZ6 ~Z6 O~ HI n6 ~Z6 9~6 U6 en t~6 m t~6 n6 0 806 0 806 806 t06 606 "T1 Z J006 0 J006 506 C c: 006 ~06 006 ~06 en vJd0~ ~ -t 006 lS H:>338 en ::I: I>Z8 ~) en n8 X OZ8 U8 -t ~Z8 OZ8 -t 808 9~8 t~8 J: 9~8 en J008 n8 H8 -t 808 808 608 w w,;o8 J008 '" N !:: w c c ... ... C N ... C N co 008 g c co ---- lS 31d'VlN OU 6~L OU N ... ~ c 9~L ~u ... 9~L UL "T1 9~L UL 9~L OU t~L "T1 OU t~L Z~L t~L Z~L t~L -t LOL J: 80L 60L 80L 60L -t 80L 60L 80L en JoOL ::I: ~ SOL -t JoOL SOL SOL :::0 JoOL SOL e!!.!. ~OL OOL ~OL OOL ~OL C OOL ~OL lS lSn:>Ol 9Z9 en ~ U9 SZ9 a9 -t 9Z9 SZ9 OZ9 ~Z9 OZ9 ~Z9 OZ9 tZ9 SCf/oo~ 9~9 U9 9~9 L~9 9~9 L~9 ~ t~9 Z~9 t~9 /)0Q Z~9 n9 t~9 ~ 609 809 I \l Co' !:: !:: ~ !?: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~09 M ~09 fit. N C. ... N g ... ... c g ootf/ c ... N co ---- --- lS lnNl'VM ZS /.. t,) Tf! Ifl/Z, w w w w OZS N N !:t ... ... c c ... w co ... ... ~ZS w 9~S ~S 90S 90S 19///Jll'710 6"Ot WlS JlOfT en !?: en en '" ZO!i N ... C C OOS .... .... .... .110 ~- C ~ C ... c NO g:~ --- lS 3:>n~dS !?: !?: en en en ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N C C ~ N C C ~ !:: ... W <D en ... ... w co en c ~ "T1 en -t ... "T1 0 ::I: "T1 c: ~ X -t ---- :;0 --- --- ", -t ::I: -t - ::I: 601> Ill> .-.. --- &'6 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator FROM: Brian A. Lindquist, Police Chief SUBJECT: Devney Accident Concerns DATE: December 18, 2006 On December 4, 2006, several questions and concerns about the Devney accident were brought to the attention of the City Council and city staff. This response is intended to address those issues. On July 27, 2006 at 8 :46 am, a vehicle traveling south on Pilot Knob Road in the area of 18ih Street, left the right side of the road, striking and fatally injuring Jacquelyn Devney, a city employee. Farmington Police, Farmington Fire and Rescue and ALF ambulance responded to the scene of the accident as directed. Upon arrival of the first officer on the scene, it was apparent that Ms. Devney had not survived the accident. Because of the resulting traffic fatality, The Minnesota State Patrol was contacted to investigate and reconstruct the accident. Following such an accident as this, the responsibility of the Farmington Police Department becomes that of support for the Dakota County Attorney's Office and the Minnesota State Patrol. The Farmington Police Department Investigators will collect all necessary evidence and statements and forward those items to the requesting agency. Because the accident resulted in a fatality, the Dakota County Attorney's Office now has jurisdiction over the case and is responsible for investigating the accident, determination of any criminal action and release of information. Shortly after the accident, Detective Sergeant Lee Hollatz and I met with the Devney's to ensure that they were informed of any and all information that the County Attorney's Office allowed for release. Since then, we have had several conversations with the Devney's and have assisted them in any way possible. The Minnesota State Patrol has completed the Traffic Accident Reconstruction and that information has been forwarded to the County Attorney's Office. The Farmington Police Department has also conducted several interviews at the bequest of the County Attorney's Office and that information has been forwarded. This was a tragic event that touched the lives of many people. The ultimate desire of everyone is to help ensure it doesn't happen again. RespecJfully submitted, ~ ~ / ~-tt-y Bnan A. Lindquist ;J''---c-.. Chief of Police cc: Kate Ekness 7a- COUNCIL MINUTES PRE-MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Acting Mayor Fogarty at 6:30 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson Soderberg Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Lee Smick, City Planner; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant 2. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by McKnight, second by Wilson to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. CITIZEN COMMENTS 4. COUNCIL REVIEW OF AGENDA Councilmember McKnight asked about the HPC consultant's contract and how the cost compares to 2006. Staff explained the $4,000 retainer is the same as 2006. The City pays the retainer up front. The hourly rate went from $50 to $65. Councilmember McKnight noted that either party may terminate the agreement with 30 days written notice, but yet we have paid the retainer up front. He asked if there was any provision for a refund of the retainer. It was agreed to pay the retainer monthly and add the provision regarding a refund. The contract will be brought back to the December 18, 2006 Council Meeting. Councilmember Pritzlaffhad a question regarding the November 27,2006 Council Workshop minutes. Regarding the easement acquisition contract for Flagstaff Avenue, he asked why the City is doing so much on the Flagstaffproject since it is a school project. This was to make sure the utilities are up to City standards. Staff explained the easement acquisitions are part of the construction project. The Settlement Agreement also specified the City takes the lead on the Flagstaff Avenue construction including any right-of-way acquisition, up to and including condemnation proceedings. Councilmember Wilson asked if the $66,980 is for all easement acquisitions. Staff explained that is for the consultant to do the work to acquire the easements. It does not include the payments to any of the property owners. City Attorney J amnik noted this is a City project. It is City-designed, City-controlled, and done with City contractors. The Council Minutes (Pre-Meeting) December 4,2006 Page 2 school is paying for it pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. It is a City project from design to completion. Councilmember Fogarty proposed items 11 a), b), and c) be moved to the consent agenda. 5. STAFF COMMENTS a) Farmington Ridge Plan City Planner Smick provided Council with the sketch plan for Farmington Ridge. The development consists of 13 lots north of Bible Baptist Church. Councilmember Pritzlaffhad a concern with access onto Akin Road. Councilmember McKnight had the same concern with the Traffic Engineer saying the situation is not ideal. If it is not ideal, why are we allowing it? Councilmember Wilson was concerned with transportation and the loss of trees. He liked the lot size. Councilmember Fogarty was also concerned with the loss of trees and the size of those trees. 6. ADJOURN MOTION by McKnight, second by Pritzlaffto adjourn at 6:43 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~;>r7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR DECEMBER 4, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Acting Mayor Fogarty at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Acting Mayor Fogarty led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson Soderberg Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Allen Wachter, Pat Hansen, Jay Clinkscales, Dick Hansen, Jackie Dooley, Brad Johnson, Oran Evans, Linda & Dan Williams, Bob McGregor, Dave Sender, David Marsh, Loren & Leann Schulz, Earl Teporten, Ed Samuelson, Bob Reuter, Marcea Vetscher, Glenn & Kim Friederich, Kate Ekness 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember McKnight pulled item 7b) Approve HPC Consultant Contract for consideration at the December 18, 2006 Council meeting. Councilmember Fogarty replaced the memo for lla) Cataract Relief Association Pension Request with a memo received from City Administrator Herlofsky. She also proposed moving items 11a), b), and c) to the Consent Agenda. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Ms. Kate Ekness, 20665 Dallas Avenue, addressed her comments to the City Attorney. She stated on July 27,2006 Jackie Devney was killed on Pilot Knob Road by a driver who fell asleep and the car left the road. It has been four months and Ms. Ekness wanted to know if there was more going on. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Wilson, second by McKnight to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (11/20/06 Regular) (11/27/06 Special) Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 2 b) Pulled Approving HPC Consultant Contract until December 18, 2006 c) Accepted Resignation Parks and Recreation Commission - Administration d) Approved Easement Acquisition Contract - Flagstaff Avenue Project- Engineering e) Received Information City Administrator Evaluation Summary - City Attorney f) Approved Bills g) Approved Cataract Relief Association Pension Request - Fire Department Councilmember Pritzlaff noted the pension benefit will increase by $400 to $3,750 and the City contribution will be $65,000 for 2007. He noted they had a four-year plan from the City Administrator and the Fire Department was also asked to develop a four-year plan. He would rather have seen a longer-range plan. However, he would gladly approve this and appreciated their service. h) Approved Change Order No. 1 Spruce Street - Engineering i) Approved Mill and Overlay Project Update - Engineering APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Truth-in- Taxation Hearing - Finance Finance Director Roland presented the 2007 budget highlights. Councilmember Wilson asked about the other category in revenues that shows a 237% increase. Finance Director Roland explained this is a capital outlay item which is a new siren to be constructed on the border of Farmington and Empire. The total cost is included in the expenditures which is $25,000. Halfis $12,500 which increases the amount shown for the other revenue coming from the township contributing to half the cost. Councilmember Wilson noted in expenditures there has been a staffing change in Community Development, so it is possible that there could be money that may not be expended. Finance Director Roland agreed. The money left would go into the fund balance. Councilmember Wilson asked if for every homeowner if the value of their home did not change, would the taxes be the same or decrease. Staff replied the City's portion would decrease. Councilmember Pritzlaff noted these are proposed numbers and Council has given a direction as to what number should be proposed for building permits. He asked what significant change that would have. Finance Director Roland replied if Council were to change any numbers on the revenue side, staff would have to make corresponding cuts to the expenditures to have a balanced budget. As the budget needs to be adopted by December 25, 2006 we would need to revisit the numbers and change the budget document before December 18, 2006. Mr. David Marsh, 204 1 st Street, asked where staff came up with the factual information of houses increasing 6% last year. He is a small contractor and would like to know where his house increased 6%. He has taken his life savings to put it into his business and he did not gain 6% on his property value. Weare paying an enormous amount. His taxes have increased in five years a huge Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 3 amount, not only because of the City but also the school board. If we have increased the tax base by 23%, he thought his property taxes for the City should be reduced by that same percentage because most people are not getting 23% increases in their pay raises on an annual basis. We have more taxation base, but we are also taking a bigger hit based on other parts of where our tax dollars are going. Would it not be fiscally responsible to take a hard look at that number and say our citizens are already getting a huge increase from the school? He does not agree that taxes will be dropped dollar for dollar on a 6% increase based on what was presented. Mr. Patrick Hansen, 5037 Upper 182nd Street, stated the taxes are getting out of hand. The last three years it was 28%, 22%, 19%. His house value has dropped 6% and when the new Riverbend addition comes in the value will drop more because he will have a lot of traffic going past his house. There are small lots and small garages and we cannot park on the streets in the winter. He has three vehicles which he has to have. There is not room in the garage for one car. His son has to park in the street or on the grass. The taxes keep going out of hand. It is time to look at what we need, not what we want. His paychecks have gone up 1 %,0%, 1 %,2% in the last four years. He does not get 9%, 19% or 28%. Ifhe did, he would not be here complaining. This has gone on long enough. We have to look at what we need, not what we want. Ms. Linda Williams, 5937 188th Street W, asked how the City figures the taxes. She has looked on the internet at homes for sale and some have more finished area than she does, and her taxes are higher than theirs. They were built the same year or newer, yet last year her taxes when up 18.9%, this year 7.4%. The value of her home was increased by $21,000. Homes are hard to sell and she does not plan on selling her home and does not plan on finishing her basement. She asked how the City can justify $21,000 when homes are not selling. Councilmember Fogarty noted the City does not set the value of the home, the County does. Ms. Williams stated still looking at the other homes for sale and seeing the square footage, her taxes are higher. She asked why that is. Finance Director Roland explained the County determines the assessed value on properties at the first of the year. Every year a property owner receives a card in January. The card will show the value of the home for 2008. The card gives options for meetings for residents to attend if they do not agreed with the value. Mr. Earl Teporten, 521 Oak Street, asked ifthere was information on the 800 mghz system. There is a 20% increase in the police and fire and asked how much is going to that system or how much it will increase police and fire protection. One of the biggest responsibilities a City has is to provide police and fire protection to its residents. There are times when he has watched fire engines stopped at the tracks while a building is burning. There is no fire presence this side of the tracks. Finance Director Roland stated the total budgets for police and fire for 2007 are $3.7 million. The increase to dispatch services, which is what the DCC will cover, is $158,000. The City has been paying Lakeville for the last Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 4 ten years for them to dispatch the police and fire. The City pays them $122,000 per year. Add $158,000 to $122,000 and come up with over $300,000 we are paying to the DCC for dispatch services in 2007. The 800 mghz allows police and fire agencies to speak to each other over a single wave length. In the long run this will improve police and fire coverage throughout the County. There are no additional police officers in 2007. The police department is at their staffing level they agreed to for a certain population. The second fire station has been built and when 195th Street goes through, there will be a way for the fire trucks to cross the tracks without being stopped. The DCC cost is pro-rated between cities based on several factors. There will be significant capital outlay required for 2007 for radios for police and fire which amounts to $340,000, hopefully through a grant. Mr. Kenneth Carlson, 3050 220th Street, stated his retirement pay has only gone up 3% per year yet his taxes have gone up $200 in one year. He feels there should be a senior citizens discount. Mr. Brad Hauge, pays taxes at 314 and 300 Oak Street, stated he bought buildings in town three and seven years ago and his taxes have gone up a tremendous amount, close to 100%. In addition he has an easement that has doubled his taxes on the two buildings. Instead of paying $2,000 a year he is paying $4,000 on one of the buildings. During this time he has not been able to keep the buildings rented. He has not been able to pass on those assessments on both buildings or the increase in taxes, $500-$600 per year. A new house may go up in value, an old building does not. He is currently buying buildings in other towns and he has seen comparable buildings. They are hard to rent here. His rent has not gone up in seven years, but his taxes and assessments have gone up. He is now in the red in his buildings. The second question is he works for a large company of 6500 employees. They have not given out a lot ofraises in the last four or five years even though things were booming. The average raise is 2.5%-3%. He asked what is the percent of increases that are given to City employees and managers. Finance Director Roland replied the City has contracts with two unions, three divisions. The police union has a three year contract which is settled at 2.75% for all three years. The AFSCME contract which is clerical, technical employees and public works employees was 2.75%. The increases to health insurance were partially offset by increases to the contribution to health insurance, but not fully. Mr. Patrick Hanson asked if each Councilmember could review the budget and bring it down. Councilmember Wilson noted there was a workshop and he did not feel they made as deep a cut as they could have in the building permit number. We put in a number of275, but does not feel the number will be at that point. Before the next meeting, he asked if staff could make phone calls to the builders to determine what they will be doing for 2007. He was still concerned with the 275. Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 5 Councilmember McKnight stated he had a similar concern with the building permit number. He said it in August and October and will say it again in December; that number is too high. We will have the school district revenue for the building fees, but that is just pushing off the hard decision for another year. He would like to see it bitten off in two years. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated these are proposed numbers and he would also like to look at the building permits and see if the number can be decreased and where that difference will be in the budget. Councilmember Wilson noted we have an $85,000 reduction that we have not expended yet in the Community Development area. We do not know what the goals will be for replacing that position, but that could be one area to be looked at as a delay in hiring. If we are at 175 permits by July, then things will be moving better than expected. That will be one source of revenue to cover losses. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolution - Heritage Landmark Designations - 500 Spruce Street and 520 Oak Street - Administration In 2005 Council approved the application process for a Certified Local Government Grant so the Heritage Preservation Commission could begin a designation project. The project was to designate six residential properties as Heritage Landmarks. The first two properties are the T.e. Davis House at 520 Oak Street and the Duff-Betzold House at 500 Spruce Street. The HPC has determined these properties meet the requirements for designation as Farmington Heritage Landmarks. Councilmember Wilson appreciated the work of the HPC and the property owners. Councilmember McKnight asked what impact the classification has on the neighbors as far as zoning, etc. Administrative Services Director Shadick replied it is an overlay zoning and the properties will be noted on the zoning map as heritage landmarks. HPC Consultant Robert Vogel, stated there are no direct effects in terms of regulation. It does not affect what a neighbor can do with their property. The effects are indirect and beneficial. Some neighbors will tend to invest more in their property. The zoning regulations do not affect adjacent properties any more than normal zoning regulations. It does not exempt the landmarks and it does not burden the neighbors. Mr. Earl Teporten, 521 Oak Street, stated Mr. Vogel made a statement he did not understand. He was a former member of the Heritage Preservation Commission and one of the advantages to having a house designated was that homes immediately near that home, if they were to be demolished, the house to be constructed would have to be in a similar style to compliment the landmark home. He lives across from the T.C. Davis House and there is an adjacent property that is non-conforming. He has been concerned that some day that property will be Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 6 demolished and what will go in there is of grave concern to him. Mr. Vogel replied there are two separate issues. One is the concept of neighborhood conservation which the Mayor has directed the HPC to develop a conceptual approach to doing that. That has not yet come to Council. That would create neighborhood scale landmark districts where the City would regulate in terms of the architecture for replacement buildings and for public structures located in these areas. What Mr. Teporten is talking about is a concept used in the downtown area in that when a new building on a vacant lot or a teardown and replacement structure, when the City is involved in the decision, the City needs to consider what it will allow to be built on the vacant lot or to replace the existing building, so it does not have a negative effect on one of the landmark properties that may be adjacent to it. This has only been applied in the downtown when it would devalue everything around it. With residential properties, the only time anything like that would come into play is if the City became involved in tearing down existing homes to put up a fire station for example. In order to follow its own policy, the City would have to be involved in the design with a building appropriate to a neighborhood with landmark properties. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated a year ago they were talking about if there is a house with this designation that neighbors with a deck for example that is tom down, they cannot put up a maintenance free deck. Mr. Vogel explained that is the discussion that lead to the Mayor's direction to come up with a neighborhood level preservation district. The City Planners are looking at this as an ordinance and how it would be implemented on a day-to-day basis. Under the existing ordinances and code there are no restrictions on adjacent property owners as far as what they can do with their buildings. There are restrictions with what the City can do in being a partner in redevelopment properties. MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by McKnight, second by Pritzlaff adopting RESOLUTION R131-06 designating the T.C. Davis House at 520 Oak Street and the Duff-Betzold House at 500 Spruce Street as Farmington Heritage Landmarks. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Elm Street Reconstruction Project - Engineering The proposed improvements for this project include the reconstruction of Elm Street and adjacent City streets, replacement of sanitary sewer and water main, and the addition of a storm drainage system. A neighborhood meeting was held on November 30, 2006 to convey assessment information to receive comments on the project. Elm Street is a former state highway and has been turned over to the County. It is now eligible for state turnback funds. The road improvements and a portion of the storm sewer improvements will be largely funded by the state turnback funds. The City will be responsible for funding the sanitary sewer, water mains, storm sewer improvements on the local side streets and the utilities in Elm Street and the local side streets themselves. Streetscapes and other improvements would be funded by the City. The County participates in the costs Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 7 for aesthetics improvements only in an amount up to 1.5% of the construction cost ofthe street costs. The total project cost is estimated to be $6,074,000. The City's portion of the total estimated costs is $3,353,500. The assessment policy indicates that the City funds 65% of reconstruction costs and assesses 35% ofthe project costs to benefiting properties. 35% of the City's roadway, lateral storm sewer costs for the project costs would be assessed on an area wide basis. The remaining 65% of these costs would be funded by the City. Water main lateral and sanitary sewer lateral costs would be assessed to those properties that are connected to those services on this project. It is proposed that the assessments for the water main and sanitary sewer be capped by the amount assessed for the Main Street project, specifically $1,500 for sanitary sewer and $1,500 for water main along Elm Street. The City cannot assess a property more than the benefit the property receives from the improvements. Up to $750 per residential unit in benefits could be supported by the properties. The commercial properties would be converted to residential equivalent units. The proposed estimated area wide assessment per REU is $486 for the roadway, streetlights and storm drainage. If the streetscape improvements are selected to be included in the project and if the Council elects to assess those costs as well,. the streetscape cost would increase the assessments by $117 to $603 per REU. The majority of residents at the neighborhood meeting were in favor of the project. Some of the concerns included Main Street residents being assessed again. The most significant comments were from business owners who were concerned about how the proj ect will affect their businesses and being assessed while they would receive a negative financial impact during the project. The majority of the people were in favor of the streetscape part ofthe project, however the willingness to pay the extra assessment was mixed. Councilmember Pritzlaffnoted they had discussed doing the project in two phases. City Engineer Mann replied further along in the design they will be looking at phasing the project and traffic routes to allow people to get downtown. Another neighborhood meeting will be held in the future. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated another concern brought to him was letting the contractor work longer days to speed up the length of time the project takes. City Engineer Mann stated the City does not have an ordinance that specifies the working hours on a project. The working hours are kept consistent with hours in private development projects. Hours are 7 a.m. - 7 p.m. weekdays, 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. on Saturdays, and no work on Sundays without approval. It is possible to open that specification on any project the City does. Councilmember Pritzlaffwould like to have the hours adjusted. Councilmember Wilson noted the project cost of$6.074 million is contingent on the bids received. The project will be bid next spring by the County. The County will be taking the lead on the project because of the turnback funds. They will also be designing the street work. The City will design the storm sewer, water main and sanitary sewer. Councilmember Wilson asked what if the City is notified that the lowest bid is $1 million more. Would the assessments be closer Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 8 to $750? City Engineer Mann replied depending on where the costs come in, if they are in the street area which are paid for by turnback funds, then it becomes a state and county decision on how to move forward. The breakdown of costs is significant as far as the assessments. Depending on where the costs are it could bring it closer to $750. Councilmember Wilson asked why a different individual is identified as the City Engineer. City Engineer Mann replied the engineer of record who will be signing the plans is the engineer that is put in the resolution. There are not that many projects where City Engineer Mann is part of the resolution, because there is another engineer who is doing the design and who will be signing the plan. Councilmember McKnight asked staff to verify the area wide assessment does not cross into the Ash Street area wide assessment area. City Engineer Mann confirmed that is correct. Councilmember McKnight had three business owners contact him emphasizing they would like the proj ect phased to help access to their businesses and asked City Engineer Mann to be an advocate for them when working with the County. He asked what other type of assistance the City will provide to help the businesses in terms of traffic routes. City Engineer Mann replied they will look at signage for the detours and make sure it will help people get to where they want to go. Staff has been talking about how to communicate to residents what will be going on in the downtown area. Staff is putting together a communication plan so there is an opportunity for every homeowner in the City to be aware of what is happening with the project and the best way to get downtown. Councilmember McKnight asked if the concrete in the streetscape area will be regular concrete, stamped concrete, or pavers. City Engineer Mann replied the proposal for the streetscape is to match the materials from the existing downtown area, the pavers and the concrete, and use the same set of materials. The patterns will not be the same as there are different parameters. A resident was concerned they are not as high a quality and would chip easier. Councilmember Fogarty asked about the borders of the streetscare area. City Engineer Mann replied the streetscape would happen between 4t Street and the railroad tracks. Staff is looking at decorative lighting all up and down Elm Street. If there are areas where a tree is dead or needs to be removed, staff will be looking at the trees all up and down the roadway as necessary. Mr. Brad Hauge, owns properties at 314 and 300 Oak Street, stated there was an assessment on 3rd Street about five years ago. When they tore up 3rd Street, they replaced the sewers, storm sewer and sidewalks. The assessment was to just the buildings downtown. He currently has assessments almost the same amount as his taxes on his buildings, about $3,200 per year for the building on the comer and a little less on the old theater. He noted the properties on Main Street were capped and some others. The downtown businesses were not capped. He has lO- Il years left to pay on the sidewalks. He heard the commercial buildings will be considered as residential and will be charged a residential amount. City Engineer Mann explained a typical lot in the City is 10,000 sq. ft. So for a commercial Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 9 property, the area ofthat property will be divided by 10,000 and equate it to a residential equivalent unit. If the property is less than 10,000 or slightly more, it would be one RED. If the commercial property is 20,000 sq. ft., it would be two RED's. Mr. Hauge stated that did not happen previously. The fairness of the projects are different. The people downtown are treated differently and we are still paying for that treatment. Recently they were told they will be assessed again, but most businesses have 10-11 years left to pay on a very large assessment. Now they will get another one~ He is having a hard time renting the buildings and has not been able to pass on the last assessment or the increase in taxes. There are a lot of empty buildings downtown. He requested the downtown businesses not be assessed, the ones that already have the $30,000 bills, and restructure the old assessment and spread it out also, or cap the amount. Downtown is struggling. We have lost businesses. He does not want to charge more, but he would rather have someone with a profitable business pay him what they can so he can make his tax payments. He spent tens of thousands of dollars to upgrade the two buildings with no return, Each time he got a permit, the county came to raise his taxes. He asked Council to do what they could for the businesses that have already been charged. Mr. Bill Vetscher, 309 Walnut Street, stated several years ago they did Walnut Street and it was to become an arterial so they paid quite a bit and it never became an arterial. This summer they paid for street maintenance. Then he got another assessment for 3rd Street, now there will be an assessment for Elm Street. He did not know what the basis is for the assessment area. If it is just the downtown, the assessment he will get for Elm Street is four times the amount for 3rd Street. He understood they were being assessed because it is an arterial street. The general public uses Elm Street. Weare passing a cost onto a small area. With the increase in property taxes, and the constant assessments for street repairs and upgrades, he asked Council to look for a more humane way to price them out of their homes. Mr. Earl Teporten, 521 Oak Street, asked how they do the assessments. Main Street was just assessed. Oak Street will be assessed for what is done on Elm Street. He asked how the assessment border is determined. City Engineer Mann replied the policy for arterial roadways started with the Pilot Knob Road project in 1999. Everyone ~ mile either side of Pilot Knob got an area wide assessment and all residential equivalent units received the same assessment. The Ash Street project went from the alley south of Walnut down to the southerly boundary of the City. The Elm Street project is from the alley south of Walnut to the north to the river. Akin Road had an area either side of Akin Road as well as the 195th Street project. Mr. Teporten asked how the distances were determined. City Engineer Mann stated there are arterial roads that go through the City and everyone within the City will be within the area wide assessment of one of those. Mr. Teporten stated Ash Street was a classic example of missing a target for completion dates. A lot of the residents liked not having the road completed, because there was no traffic. Elm Street will be different. People will lose their Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 10 businesses if the project is not completed on time or before. Is there any way to build in penalties in the contract to make sure they complete the project on time? City Engineer Mann replied there are ways to include penalties, but they can only address when the contractor is not performing. The penalties cannot address things that are outside the contractor's control such as weather, etc. Staffwill do everything possible to make sure the project is set up in a way to meet the deadlines. Councilmember McKnight stated the business owners have been very vocal about those same issues. They are being very clear with their concerns with staff and Council also. Mr. Teporten expressed concern about the access for EconoFoods and those businesses as there is no street. Ms. Jackie Dooley, 313 Walnut Street, stated in 1990 Walnut Street was done. At that time she was told to thank her lucky stars it was done now because this will be one of the main thoroughfares into town. They installed a 6 ft. storm sewer pipe. She asked why their neighborhood was having such a large storm sewer and changed the water flow. She was told she would be assessed for the 1990 project, but be thankful she would not have to be assessed for the Elm Street project. Ash Street and Elm Street were discussed 20 years ago. She was surprised to get the assessment because she did not think she would be assessed because of the Walnut Street project in 1990. Walnut was supposed to be like Ash or Elm Streets and the project was never completed. Mr. Dan Mingo, 24 Spruce Street, stated he is being assessed $603 next year for this project. In 2001-2002 tax period his taxes were $1800 a year. Next year his taxes will be $2900. That is $1100 in four years. Next year the taxes increased out of pocket, $21 a month. With the $603 that is a $75/month increase. Not even talking about the $603 worth of pain it will cause him with all the traffic going by, he asked someone at the neighborhood meeting what this project will do for him. He was told his property would increase by $500. He is paying $603 to make sure his property taxes go up by $500 the next year. There will be work done on Spruce Street and asked how the assessment process will work for that. When he moved in 23 years ago, he understood Spruce Street would be an arterial road to TH3. He asked if that is still part of the process. City Engineer Mann replied the City's thoroughfare plan does show Spruce Street being open at TH3 sometime in the future. As far as an improvement project on Spruce Street, that is the part in conjunction with the City Hall project. It would be the block between 3rd and 2nd Streets. That project will not be done next year. Mr. Mingo asked if the assessment process would be the same for Spruce Street. City Engineer Mann replied it would not, because for area wide assessments, the policy states each resident would be responsible for one area wide assessment. Mr. David Marsh, 204 1st Street, stated he used to have a nice quiet cul-de-sac. When the hardware store was built, the cul-de-sac was opened which created more cars. Then the City built a liquor store 1,000 ft. from his house. Imagine Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 11 living on this street during the construction. He is a small contractor and wanted to improve his house and make it a nice big classic downtown home. Through the City's planning he was told to do a survey, figure out elevations, he paid for a conditional use permit and without his knowledge the City rezoned his property in the 2020 comp plan because it was a natural flow of progression to the west. Three other houses on Elm Street were not rezoned. He paid for a conditional use permit, he has a street he cannot turn left or right out of in the morning or in the evening, he will have construction traffic, he has a 3-year old, he cannot rebuild his house or add to it because of the re-zoning and now the City wants to assess him on top of all the additional taxes. He can maintain his home, but he cannot do anything he wants, and the City wants to assess him another $500 to put up with this headache. Does the City understand they are assessing him for property that is worthless? The City is telling him it appreciated in value by 6% last year. He cannot sell it commercially because he cannot get the neighbors involved and he cannot sell it residentially, because who would want to buy the third largest lot in the City, but cannot do anything with it because it is zoned commercial. The river is in the back, so you also have the flood plain. He could change the flood plain if it was zoned residential through FEMA. He is sitting on worthless property that he will have 8,000 cars a day down his street because it is the only access to some ofthe businesses. There are four people on that end of 1 st Street and where do they sit? He was assessed $56 for sea1coating for a street he drives on twice a day. The City did not count the 45 semi's every morning at 7 a.m. in front of his house and he cannot get out of his driveway. He asked Council to think about it before they make a decision. City Administrator Herlofsky has been looking at rezoning his property and he appreciated that. He suggested turning the traffic between the dentist office and the grocery store. Cars are going 45 mph past his house when leaving the access to the movie store. Mr. Gale Sprute, 11 Oak Street, stated he attended the neighborhood meetings. He addressed the traffic flow that will be going down Division Street. He spoke with Tim Gross, Lee Mann and Joe Harris and was told it would work out. Mr. Sprute was referring to the blockage at the end ofHwy 50 and Division Street. Division Street will be used to move from Denmark and Akin. He will be back to talk more about traffic once the project starts because they said it would improve the situation. He had two other concerns involving money. It was regarding the area wide assessment. The boundary to the west is Division Street. He asked when hwy 50 was reconstructed and the new Rambling River bridge was installed and hwy 50 to Denmark about 10 years ago, who paid for that? Was it an area assessment at that time? Finance Director Roland replied it was not an area wide assessment. It was a different funding mechanism. The current policy for area wide assessments was not in place in 1996. Area wide assessments began with the Pilot Knob project in 1998. The funding for that portion of Elm Street was state and federal turnback funds and County funding. Mr. Sprute was stating there are two pieces of property to the west of Division Street that is not part of the area wide assessment, Dexterity property and Rambling River property. He inquired at the last neighborhood meeting why they are not included in the area Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 12 wide assessment and was told they will be part of the area assessment for the reconstruction ofhwy 50 from the Rambling River bridge to Denmark and Akin Road. That road was just improved 10 years ago. When a street is reconstructed what is the lifetime of a road. He thought it was 60-70 years. What will happen between now and that time? It has been mentioned there has been a change in the area assessment from a time back. What will happen in 50 years? He asked Council to consider changing the line from east of Division to the west to Division and Spruce to include those two pieces of property. He felt that would be fair. The citizens on the west side agree they should be part of the area assessment. His next comment involved the streetscape. The City has done a fine job in setting up a theme and he approved of the sidewalks downtown, and the monument at Vermillion River Crossing. With the streetscape for Elm Street, he felt it should be paid for the same way as the Vermillion River development. It should be ad valorum. When you assess for beautification, it is not an assessment that area wide citizens benefit from. It is a citywide benefit. If the City does an area wide expense, he is not for it because it is not fair. If it is done ad valorum he agrees with it. He asked Council to keep that in mind. The next part of the streetscape is he is paying $486 for the roadway, the streetlights which he does not understand because they are paying for streetlights with the streetscape, and the storm sewer. Ifresidents have to pay for the beautification of the sidewalk that is Y4 more of the bill they have to pay and it is not fair. That is $117 he is being asked to pay for beautification of a sidewalk. He was not complaining about the $486, that is infrastructure and he benefits from that. Everybody benefits from the beautification. If the $117 would come from all the citizens in the City, that would be fair. Councilmember McKnight asked how we paid for the first streetscape project in the downtown. Finance Director Roland replied it was done with a bond at the same time as County Road 72. The bonds were issued in 1999. The assessments were done against the downtown properties on an area basis. They had direct benefit as downtown businesses. The model was based on footage. The City was able to show direct benefit and that the increase to the property value was an amount equal to or less than the amount appraised for that increase to happen. Councilmember Wilson asked ifthere was a traffic re-route plan in place. City Engineer Mann replied there was a proposed plan at the neighborhood meeting. It has not been finalized as the plans for the project are not finalized. The County brought a plan where most of the traffic routing would be and people had an opportunity to comment. He did not hear any significant concern with the County's plan. The main issue is the signage and how people are directed through those areas. Councilmember Wilson asked if there will be adequate parking or if any will be lost. City Engineer Mann replied little if any parking is allowed along Elm. There may be some times on the side streets where there will be parking issues. He spoke with the owner of an apartment building and those issues will be worked out. Councilmember Wilson asked if there was a history of assessments on properties that are impacted by this project. Finance Director Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 13 Roland replied the downtown streetscape occurred in 1999. The 3rd Street mill and overlay took place approximately the same time. People on 3rd Street were assessed 35% for the cost ofthe mill and overlay. City Engineer Mann noted the slip lining of the sanitary sewer down 3rd Street was also part of that project. There was also the Main Street project. In the last 10 years the areas covered in this area wide assessment did not have other assessments. Ms. Dooley spoke of the Walnut Street project and the reason the project did not go forward was that it became a significant cost for the entire roadway. It was pushed off to a later date. Walnut Street is on the long term CIP for the City for 5-7 years from now. City Engineer Mann stated in 1994 Oak Street from 4th Street to TH3 was reconstructed. Councilmember Wilson asked if it would be possible to get assessments for residents in the downtown project area from 1990-2006. Staff will obtain the information. He agreed with Mr. Sprute's comment that the streetscape portion has a broader community benefit than just the downtown property owners. He would like that assessed to the larger population. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked regarding the detour route, if it would go down Denmark to Spruce or go over the bridge and go on Division. City Engineer Mann replied the intent would be to route the traffic down Spruce Street. How that is accomplished and to what levels the County is willing to go for signage, remains to be worked out. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated one of two accesses will always be open to EconoFoods and the other businesses. He asked when the Walnut project is scheduled in the CIP. He recalled it was 2008. Walnut Street is in far worse shape than other streets. If those people will also be assessed for this project, Council has discussed previously sending out notices two years in advance so people can budget for it. Finance Director Roland stated the City's CIP is a fluid document. It is a planning document. Because we put a project in 2008 that project could show up in 2009 or 2010 because of the items that come before it, or the projects that jump ahead of it due to urgency of the project. Flagstaff Avenue does not show up in the CIP, yet next year we will be constructing Flagstaff Avenue due to changes in circumstances. 2008 is a planning year. It is not etched in stone and as much as we want to keep residents informed, it is premature because you are making a future Council do a project by sending out the notice two years ahead of time. It is best to exercise caution as far as future projects. Councilmember Pritzlaff felt the notice could explain this is a plan and that it can change. It is to make people aware it is in the CIP. He was not comfortable waiting 6-12 months away from a project to say that is what we are going to do. It is just more communication for the residents and gives a longer notice time. Councilmember Fogarty wanted the streetscape done. It will be a terribly inconvenient project, but it is necessary. MOTION by McKnight, second by Wilson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. City Attorney Jamnik informed Council the project requires four votes. Councilmember Wilson stated he would like to receive the information he Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 14 requested prior to voting on the project and to find out how the financing would work if the streetscape were taken out. Finance Director Roland replied with regard to the bonding, we would have cash upfront out of the water and storm water funds which would help finance the project. We would bond for the rest of it, which would include the assessed portion, the road fund portion, and the sewer fund portion. Those three items come to $2.2 million. It would be a matter of what would be repaid and you would need to reduce the special assessment by the $79,000 so there would be $79,000 more that would need to be funded with other City funds. Councilmember Wilson stated that is the direction he would like to go. Councilmember McKnight asked what is the first year of payback for the bonds? Finance Director Roland replied assuming we do the project in 2007 and meet the November 30,2007 deadline, the first year of assessment would be 2008. If that deadline is not met, the first year of assessment would be 2009. Councilmember Pritzlaffwas comfortable with voting on the project. Councilmember McKnight was comfortable with moving forward. Funding options for the streetscape can be discussed in the next workshop. His concern was consistency. He does not want to slow the project down. Councilmember Wilson stated he would support the project. He would like to look at options for the assessment policy. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to adopt RESOLUTION R132-06 ordering the project and authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications for the Elm Street reconstruction project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember McKnight was in favor of the streetscape portion because this is a signature road for the downtown area. He is willing to look at funding options whether it is area wide or placed on the tax levy. He would like this discussed at the next workshop. Councilmember Wilson preferred the broader area, but it can be discussed at a workshop. Councilmember Pritzlaff agreed with the streetscape portion. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Frontier WiFi Presentation Ms. Melinda White, from Frontier Communications, gave a presentation on bringing a wireless network to the City. It would be available first to commercial businesses in the downtown and expand from there. Frontier would sell a monthly subscription to customers. City Administrator Herlofsky stated they are still working on the contract and exclusivity provision. Ms. White stated the process would be to obtain approval and bring in a network plan within 120 days. The City would provide input for access points for coverage. Another network Council Minutes (Regular) December 4, 2006 Page 15 provider would have their own access points at different locations. City Administrator Herlofsky noted he would like to see the network plan prior to signing an agreement. He will have a meeting with Frontier representatives to work on issues. b) Approve Equipment Shared-Use Agreement - Parks and Recreation Staff requested approval ofa Shared-Use Agreement between the City's Parks and Recreation Department and the School District's Buildings and Grounds Department. The agreement solidifies past practice of borrowing equipment back and forth between the two entities. The agreement included a list of equipment to be shared on an as needed basis. MOTION by McKnight, second by Wilson to approve the Equipment Shared Use Agreement with ISD 192. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: Attended the Safety Audit meeting and they are having a results meeting on December 12, 2006, at 1 :30 at the Empire Town Hall. She will not be able to attend this meeting. Staff did a great job on the City Calendar. Councilmember Wilson: Encouraged residents to continue making donations for Toys for Town. Councilmember Pritzlaff: He received the City Calendar in the mail and those who prepared it did a good job. City Administrator Herlofsky: The December 11 EDA meeting will not be held. He gave Council information on the Bonestroo engineering bills. This can be reviewed at a future workshop. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by McKnight, second by Pritzlaffto adjourn at 10:02 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, " ..' -c . .... c?;;/ {?~~~~:.- ;n 7 C<--~&: c/ . /Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant ~ f". "tJ Ql o ,;2: ~ 8 Ql cr: ~'#.'$.'#.'#.':$?'$.'#.?f!.'#. o.......mcoom..............LO(o LOtOMCOO(O (00""'" 0 ao...,:......:cot.ri~~~~ 1.()C'\I.......co.....com.......mc.o Ql o c: m Iii m omNLOr:::-OO<DCOLO LO.....<.o.......ONlOOOlM ............"'00<0.......0')<00> c'\r cD ci 0- cD ci 00- M- 00- N- N-ll).....L{)l.()..... NN <D C'\I -...... a c...,r M- '" '" .....0) "'IitLO.......aO"l;f'NN L/).....mNOCOlOmON ...,........COOOMNLONLO Iii LO-llictiMC!iooctim-m-a- Iii .......MN.......OCOO ~~ (; <D ,... ~"'''' "',... (; t- N -.i t- '" '" 0 0 ,... ~ 0 0 1O Ql Ql '" 0 0 '" N<DOmC:OOON....... .....LOO>NMLOomco > C\I..qOMO.......MO') > 0 o-.....-u:illi<<ia:i <<)-0')- 0 Z ~ ,... ~ "'~ Z '" LO"lt"'litLOO>NOMN..... ~ MCOOlONLOLONO'>N MNNCOM...,........OO>N 1) (1)- N-c.ri~Il'ia:iC'ioo-ci 1) 0 <D ~ ~~ "'~ 0 ~ '" ,... <0.....00.......00""0> ::;: .....ml.OCOO>LOmmco Mm.......<.O.................,.O>....... e cO m-.......-~aio:iNa:i~ e. Ql '" ~ ~ .....-NLO Ql en '" '" '" en '" N...,.CO<OOO<DNCO '" O('<")WNCDL()NO>I.{) '" OLOCO<OLO.......mmo g a> ~r-:r-:t--.-,...:CO-NrtiN g> '" '" ~ ~ '" '" ..:: ,... ..:: '" m"'litWOmOO"lOtNv 0 LOLOCO.......COOllONm....... ~ ~ OOOMM...................l.t)O>CO -5 ...: <<i-o:ico-I'--o-.....-oo-~o:ici " ;0 0 ,... ,...~~ "'<D ...., 1O ,... ...., e=- m E E " en a; Cl "tJ " m Ql c: " ...., 6' <D <D o '" e N CO<DOOCONONNCO <DOmNOCOll)LOmtO N<O......0> "'................,.m....... ,..: cDCD-LO-.....-co-......-co-ai en...... ('1')...... NID m_ ~ ::;; N N...... LO CD co 0 0............ 1O m COMNLOIJ')<Dmm 0 '" ......l.t)M...........LOO'>M 10 <D- cti,...:.....-C"iro--r--CO-f"-.- '" '" ~ ~ '" 1O ~ ::;; '" 1O m,... ,... ......C'O......ONNLO ;;; "'~o ......N.......LOLOO>"l::t mOOOO>M...,...........,.m....... 0 I'--I.O-m-co~-.:ia:i 00-..0 ~ <D '" '" ~ ",m '" ~ ..:: 9 ..:: '" '" m ::;; '" 1O <D cO <0 co...,.mC'O.......O.......NM IJ')OMNIOLOOC>>M O>MCOMv......NO>CO ~~CD-N~ai a:i__- o N__ N(x) '" '" .a Ql "- m <D o ...: <D '" cor-....r-....<omOONm ('<")__(X)~('<")1.l)<OO>N W1.l)O~Nr-....NO>O> cvi r--: r-....- w- a:i a:i a:i ci r-.... w ...... N__ '" '" c: m ...., o o ,... '" 1O "'- ~ N(x)OO('<")~ ~('<")1.l)(X)(X)~ W(X)......('<")N...... NN(X)- o>-r--: ~ "'''' o ~ ~~ 1O'" r--:c.ci <D '" --.. u C II ii III 'tl C :J "- '" <D~ 8-g "'m __owoooooo'" 001.l)000000I,() NW____OOO1.l)O>~ (X)-air-....-('<")-o-o>-l!'i('<")-",-cvi O>Nr-....(X)1.l)('<")N__~W N 0> ('<")~N ('<")f'--. ll'i ......- '" '" Iii (; t- c: o g o <J) Ql o Ql " c: Ql > Ql cr: Jg ,~ ~ oo c: C:: G> ~ E~~~ fh~ ~~5S~~ ~~~~ ~Q)S~~ ~8.~E~~~~~~ &r~~~~B~~~ c: .9 Cl c: .~ m "- '0 >- .. U c " o o o <( "tJ c: " "- "tJ Ql "tJ ;,R c: o ~ W ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ coO>I,()r-....~~ ONNM~M......Wr-....~OM<OCOCON......oa r-....N__(X)I,()~(X)~mm............NOI,() O)OO1.l)('<")r-....wwmCONI,() ~~~~~~~~~~d~~~d~~~~~~~~~~ .~ 000<000 (X) 00 (X) (X) (X) (X) 00 00 00 00 0> 0 (X)<OOOo)OOf'--.O>f'--. (X) <0 co Ql o c: m Iii m ~I,()Noo......m~(x)O>f'--.(,<")(x)OM<O",,,,~"""f'--.r-....NO>~O>MO""" OONOOO>Nf'--.Nf'--.......I,()......MOOO......<OOOf'--.<OI,()NMoo<OWM(X) ~~O............f'--.WNI,()Noo......('<")ooo>mf'--.......~N......<ON<OWl,()m Nr--:r--:Nm~c.ci~cir--:r--:c.cici ~-~ cvic.ci~a:ia:iooci~ -<0 ......M......~Nf'--.NN~~ ~ ~ I,() ............N~r-....(X)N ......N ~ ~ '" 1,()~(X)M......r-....~......~Noo<OI,()r-....Nm......O)O><O(X)('<")MO 0<0 ('<")OM......o('<")m<OI,()I,()~M~......M......MNOOf'--.O><Of'--.......O...... m~......o~maN......I,()~I,()(X)('<")r-....MOM......o~mor-....~o~ O~Nm~N~~OOM~cicvi~o~~ ~oo~~~ai~r--:oo ......N......1.l)r-....O......I,()W1.l)............('<") ~~('<") I,()(X)O~......OWNM ~ ............~......M......I,()~('<") ~ N ~ ...... ~__('<")......w ~ c.ci '" NMMI,()__N('<")('<")I,()1.l)Wmo>r-....I,()(X)1.l)(X)~NI,()W('<")<OO NO('<")f'--.Noor-....NN~mN..................('<")mN~1.l)('<")1.l)('<")Ow 1.l)<ON1.l)OO>('<")<01.l)('<").................. r-....or-.... m......~N('<")r-....('<") cviroO~~OOwNcvicvicvicim cvi~r--: cvi~o r--:oo~ ~...... ...... ('<")......M......M('<")N N ...... M ...... N ('<") ~ '" w(X)m(X)(X)~('<")Moo......O>1.l)o>......r-....r-....1.l)~1.l)or-....mo>......<o N......1.l)......m(X)(X)o01.l)......r-..........__1.l)O~NM~1.l)W......r-....~ ~N r-....r-....mm......ooM......1.l)O~O(X)r-....N......ooNm......roro cvioo ~wmw~~cvill'il!'iONw r--: ~cvici oor--: M ...... (,<,,)__(,<,,)__~M(,<,,) ('<") M...... ~......N '" r-..........m~O<O~NooOOO~N1.l)roo~ ooN~<ONmmNN(X)wooowmow ......N1.l)<ONM......1.l)('<")OONr-....(X)~N~ ~W~~cvil!'iNcvici~r--:c.ciw wci~ ......~ ...... ('<")......M......N......N N...... '" ......1.l)WW1.l)......~N~m(X)NOO......<O~~ r-....WI,()W('<")~......(X)<OMr-....O>........................N ~~NNOWM......1.l)ooM......N Nf'--.<o cviN oor--:c.ci~cvicvicviai~oo oo~ll'i ~ ...... M......M......f'--.NN ...... ...... ~ '" Or-....~ooMroo>O(X) ......1.l)ONr-....O>f'--.01.l) W............r-..........roNOD m o-cvi~mNNcvi 1.l) ...... M N1.l)OO <D ~r-....mooM1.l)O r-....1.l)......1.l)NO>~ oo......o~wr-....m N- cicviNr--:W ~ ...... ~ ('<") '" "- '" '" '" 1O '" <D_ ::;: 1O <<> 1O ~ N m !2 '" '" <D <0 m ,... o 1O !::!. ~- <D 1O '" ClO ~ ~ '" ~ <D '" N '" 1O ,... ::;: cO '" '" '" <OO>1.l)W............O~N('<")O<O('<") "I:tNM~O>Ot--1.l)......f'--.wO...... NN N......oo......('<")r-....<omr-....N "I:t-N- 1.l)-~M-......-mcimf'--.-......-cvi 1.l) N......~..-~..-1.l)oo..... ......t-<or-....O>f'--.NN1.l)......1.l)O~ M Noo('<")r-....oo1.l)(X).....OMOO Il) N Il)lOO 1.l)...... 1.l)OOO(X) 0 N "I:t- W N "I:t-......-c.ciro ai m- Il) ('<") ~ 1.l) 1.l) ro co ,... ,... '" Ql c: " ...., 0('<")......0> WNooOWOOONW('<")...... W ('<")<0 WW1.l)"I:t......<OWoo('<")Q('<")NO"l:t ......1.l) ('<")1.l)WN......('<")......O)"I:tO wow ~~ c.ci~~~c.ciNcvir--:r--:m N~m ~ ..- ('<")......('<")......Il)~N W......N '" r-...."I:t......<01.l)......1.l)~('<")Wf'--.WroO......NN N(X) r-...."I:t1.l)wl.{)......mwroO......I.{)NO ow ......0>0('<")............0>('<")00> 1.l)............ N~ c.ci~r--:cvi~Ncvi~~m ~cvicvi ('<") ...... M......('<")......('<")......N N N ~ '" O>lO......O(X)1.l)O>oo......~Wf'--.wrooow ......1.{) .....I.{)OOO(X)O>......NNm......M<O...... W~ O>"I:tO"l:tNO>NO............O>O>('<")N aici ~r--:ll'im~~cvicic.cici ci cvi ('<") ............('<")......M......W('<")('<") ('<") ('<") '" m ::;; ......M............OO1.l)......1.l)N......__O('<")ooOW...... O~ O......MO>......('<")N1.l)roO......N......O> w...... ~('<")......<O"I:tOWOONO N1.l)('<") ~a:i c.cir--:~r--:NNNNcir--: ~ooc.ci N ............~......('<")......I,()......N ('<") ...... '" .a Ql "- O>OO......W~MWNWMMOOLO 00...... ..................NLO......(X)......~~ ............ N1.l)W1.l)<oooO"l:tN...... ......-0>- ~cvi~~cvir--:cvi~~oo- N ...... ('<")......N......('<")ON ~ ....m<D mlO,... "'<Dm ~Ncvi ~ '" '" c: m ...., f'--.O>......NLO......O(X)('<")<oooo>om......lOO ......0> ~Mr-....~O>('<")............LO"I:t......01.l)('<") LOLO ~roW............N......O>('<")W ON"I:t ~oo N~r--:NNOOcvi~a:i~ ~~~ ......N ...... M......N......('<")......('<") N N '" ON~......WOO......OLl) ......r-....O>"I:t......wooo 1000>......W......LO......O'" ......-r--:m~......-......-......-lO-~ W ......NLO......~r-....N '" <O~NO>OI.{)LO 0> o>ro('<")~"I:tM~ 0> O>......wo<OoO> . 0>_ ~ ~N~-g~ 0 1O l.O............"I:tNCOoo MOW('<")NLOLO W('<")......('<")('<")"I:tD ~a:i..o~wco-cvi "I:tN...... ('<")......('<") ~~~8~ln~ r: LO......NNLO......OO I.{) lO-N-o-uic.cimN- m N............ N N ('<") 1O N......~WWNLO W1.l)O>M~NO 0(X)"I:t1.{)......~~ mLO-LO-OO-I,()-c.cicti '" '" '" O......CO~ooLOM LOO............LON~ ......O>CONI.{)O...... a:icvi~<O-......-Nro NN N......N <D~ 8-g "'m OO>O......(X)WO>O>('<")O>......~LOO(X)(X)1.l)O<O('<")ON(X)O>~O...... 1.l)NN......N............Mr-....OW......"I:tO~1.l)......O......COO('<")~M......M1.l) ('<")O>NNNr-..........LOCO(X)NW......NWM(X)L01.l)N<OCOM.....01.l)~ oo~m~ll'ir--:r--:a:ioocicvic.ci~uic.ci~a:i ci~uicticvicic.cir--:cvi com......f'--.............LO......('<")ro"l:tLO...... oo~...... ......O>............~LOMO<O "I:t N......"I:t......~......<OCO('<") "I:t N 1.l) ...... ~......~N...... ~ r--: '" c: c: >- Ql Ql ~ [5 8~ G> ~E oo~~ 5~i '~~ g~~~~ C:~(J u~.::.ooG>~ mcu~c:~g <J)I 5 ~~~ 8.o!~~~ ~jg~~~5 =G>i ~G>C: ~~E~B~ ~ E,~~~cuc:o ~~.::.ooc:~~ -C:UQ)CUC: .~ Q)cu~~~~~ ~~~5~c:~~!~~COO~& Q)~ ~~~m~g~~ ~~~=EcuEc:c:,-EQ)~oo~ BC:~Q)~cu~ ,-Q)oo ~'~~j~~s!~~~~~~Ef~'~~~g,~i~~~~ W~..::wuI~"-~mu~~~w"-cr:w~enenenz~mcr:t- <OO('<")"I:t......NNO......1.l)O......N~a......O......N('<")"I:tWONLO...... O..............................N('<")('<")('<")1.l)1.l)L01.l)W<Of'--.f'--."'......f'--.f'--.o>mmo ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ e Ql o 1O o o N o ~ "tJ c: " "- '" '" o ~ ...: ;0 6' <D <D o '" e '" r::: N ~ <D N 1O o cO '" ~ If) ;;; o <D '" '" 1O '" ~ 1O '" <0 m aJ~ ~ U; '" 1O ,... '" m U; m <D o ...: <D '" '" '" Iii (; t- .. u C II ii III 'tl C :J II. t 0_ ,,-,,- " " ",0 -"'8 ~~ :Ei.i: g~ s< ~ ..0 >ell) "0 Q) o ,~ ~ ~ Q) 0:: Q) o c: CO Cii m Cii o I- :oR o LO cD .... LO :oR ~ 0> cD o M :oR (0 <D c.; 0> :oR "I "I c.; ..... ~~:::R NmO aMa Ma)tO <Xl <Xl <Xl ~ ..... <Xl "I 0> :oR "- ~~ ~ .0: 0' t:' o ..... M ..... oi N ~ ~ ... ... o ..... o ..... M ..... m- c,f o "I ... ... o 0 <D "I ..... "I o. Ll'i <Xl "I ... ... o .... "I .n "I o <Xl ..... a> 00 M a "'tOCO C'\I T""O..- <0 moot'--- en- co-.r:f ~ ....... N.......v ER- &9-69-ER- o N a;j N <D<DN "I <Xl ~ <D<DM ~~-cs:i MN LO ~~ "I ..... c;;- O> 0> 0> 0 t--: ai !:1 ... ... M o LO ..... M "I o .... .... a;j <D M ... ... ER- fAo&9-ER- ... ... ~ co E E ::J en Qj Cl "0 ::J to o Q) Cl > o Z " o ~ Q) en g' <( .?;o ::J -, Q) c: ::J -, ~ ::;: g <( m ::;: .c Q) "- c: co -, o o <Xl. M o LO. 0> M .... .n LO ~ .... 00 M <D M ;: M M M M 00 ~ "I o "I 0> ..... <Xl <D 00 o 0> 0> '" a> 00 M 0> ..... .... :!: ..... ~ CD It) o 0> ~ ci CD ..... CD 0> ~ r:: '" It) CD a> LO CD ... o 00 "I ,.: 0> CD ;; ,.: ..... CD <Xl CD a;j o ..... M o M N 0.......... MOM <Xl 0 <Xl ci~~ ... ... ... o It) a. ..... M ..... ... ... ... "I .... ~ .n It) ~ o 0> It) ,.: tit tR-&9-ER- fit o "I N 0........ ~~N It)M<Xl NN~ ... ... ... o o M M "I ...... ... ... ... 0> "I <Xl -i It) ~ .... 0> "I -i ... ... ... <Xl ~ a> .... It) 0> <Xl <Xl <Xl <Xl "I ..... ~ ,....: 0 "I 0> It) ER- ER-ER-ER- fit .... ..... o .n LO aMM o It) It) a~~ NMu1 ... ... ... "I o M LO "I ~ ... ... ... "I It) "I a;j It) ... ... ... (; "I 0>. It) ~ .... "I o ..... ... ... ... ~ a;j .... 0> M a> ~ ;: 69- ER-ER-ER- 6'9- CD .... "I ci aCDCD <XlM~ OM.... ...--Cfi.r:f ~NM ... ... ... r:: ..... "I '" CD ~ ... ... ... "I CD o "I. <D M M ;: ... ... ... o <Xl CD -i .... <Xl ...... CD LO CD .... N M fit tR-tA-tR- fit LO 00 CD -i "I <Xl 0>"'" LO<Xl.... .....It)M CD- m CD- ~ LO ..... ... ... ... .... 0> LO o <Xl 0> N ... <Xl .... .... ~ o o a. ... ... ... '" <D 0> .n <Xl ~ -i <Xl CD ... ... ... o LO o 0 .... .... ari o. .... "I ER- tR-ER-ER- fit <D M......... CDMO> <Xl ~ 0> o.cio ~ "I M LO ..... CD "I CD ... ... ... 00 M <D <Xl CD. M ... ... ... ... ... ... "I o 0> a> CD o o .... ~ N CD M 0> ,.: M CD It) .n LO ,.: LO 0> "I .n LO CD"" 0 ........0> O>....M ~cs:i< N- (0- C"'i CD ... ... ... LO CD LO <Xl ..... 0> LO "I 11')- 1"--- 00. 0> 0> CD ... ... ... o M 0> LO -i ... ... ... ~ ~ ~ -i ..... ... ... ... ... ..... o ..... N ..... LO M -i "I <Xl N -i ffl- tR-ER-tR- 6't M 0> ~ LO<Xl'" CD....~ M....oo crimm ... ... ... M .n <D ;: ... ... ... ..... o ~ It) .... o a> CD .... "I -i fh ER- &9- fit 69- .... <Xl <Xl N M.....a ..... ..... LO N~"" ...j~tri ... ... ... ... ... ... "I "I .... 0> .... "I N LO "I "I .... LO M cD N- M <Xl CD ffl- ER-ER-ER- ... LO CD ..... "I. ~CD"'" CD 00 .... "I "I LO cD~"': ... ... ... 00 o CD 0> .... CD M. .... LO ui M ER- fftER-ffl- <<It- I.l) oc.ooo M m vO>("") It) ...,. .......""U') :!. .r:f ::- N tR- fft(fltfl 6ft c: o 0, c: .~ co "- '0 '" "" () CD~ 8-g "1m c: o ~ t; '" Q) Cl C ::J o o o <( "0 c: ::J "- o o o ci "I o CD g 0; ci ctJ~ .... <D ~ ... ... ... .. "0 C ::J "- .. ::J C .. > .. D:: iii U .~ Ul I'" =~ l! c: .. Q) > o Q) 0:: ~ J: < '" Q) ;; "" "0 c: Q) Q. X W o o o <Xl. ... ... ... .. <> c '" iii m "0 c ::J lL .. f .a ~ o lL .. ~ '0 lL '" Q) ::J c: Q) > Q) a:: o o o a;j '" l!! ::J "" "0 c: Q) Q. X W ... ... ... 00 0> '" .... It) M "I 0> <Xl .... .... CD- tri en M ..... ... ... ... 00 0> M o 0 o 0 o 0 CD- U')- ~ :; ... ... ... .. <> c '" ii m "0 c ::J lL '" c ~ .. c: E ~ .. Q) >0:: 2 ~ i!: '" lL '" Q) ;; "" "0 c: Q) Q. X W '" It) "I a;j '" ..... .. <> c '" ii m "0 c ::J lL ~ ;J l! ~ o c o :;:l '" f <> .. D:: o M o a;j 0> "I <XlNa MO>M LO....a 0:'- 0>- 00. LOMO> ~ ~ "I ER- ER- ER- ER- jug _0.. ~g () .- ~ E .~ .5 Q) ;;: en en aLO ;:;;: "I "I '" l!! '" ::J Q)"" ::J"O c: c: Q) Q) > Q. Q) X o::w ... N LO ci !:1 (i) ..... 0> ci ~ ~ ..... "I e iO 0> ~ a;j :!. iO "I o -i ~ ..... M CD ,.: "I ... <Xl LO. N "I .n !:1 (; '" ,.: ~ iO '" "I !!f o 0> It) ,.: .. <> c '" ii m "0 c ::J lL !I ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... N ll) co .... <Xl .... <Xl It) "I CD- ci Lri' M ~ ... ... ... ... ... ... '" Q) ::J c: Q) > Q) 0:: "I LO N .... LO .... .... ui "I N ~ .n .... ~ ... ... ... <Xl 0> ..... N "I (i) ;n. CD ~ "I 0> 0> a;j "I ... ... ... .... (; -i ~ "I '" .n It) :::. 0> <Xl .... .n ... ... ... o o o .n c;;- .... <Xl ~ It) ~ "I 0> <D ci LO ... ... ... ..... <Xl .n ,::: It) a;j o <Xl M "I .n "I ... ... ... ..... ..... "I -i "I cD o ~ a;j e "I CD a> <Xl -i ..... <Xl .n ... N CD ..... N ~ "I ... ... ... '" .... N "I N 8. ..... 0> .... -i M <Xl o CD ci M CD ;; a> M "I It) ~ "I o o ,.: .... .... 0> LO. o ~ ci ~ ;: o o LO N LO "I iO o It). ;; M a> "I M .. <> c '" ii m "0 c ::J '" l!! ::J "" "0 c: Q) Q. X W t 0_ Q.Q. ~ ~ ",0 -"'8 ~ ~ :!Li: lH !" " .. 0 "'" " Q) o ,2: ~ ~ Q) 0:: Q) o c: '" 0; al 0; o t- :oR fo '" ...; '" '" '" <Xl .... ... N ... ... ~ '" <Xl. '" '" M ... ... ';f- N I'- N o G) o I'- M o :s '" o w m M :oR N '" o;j I'- '" ~ .... N '" ... ... <Xl '" iii <Xl ~. ... ... :oR o ~ ;:::: ~ o M N ... N o I'- N <Xl O. ';f- <Xl '" ,..: I'- ... o I'- M '" ... ... ... <0 '" N M <Xl "'. ... ... :oR ~ N N <Xl <Xl '" ... o <0 '" o U; ",. <0 <0. :oR c:, ...; N '" '" m !e- ... ... m '" m <0 '" ... ... :oR <Xl o;j '" a o . '" U o Q) o > o Z "0 o Q) c: ::l ..., <( ro ::i; .0 Q) u.. c: '" ..., <00; 8-g Nal c: :8 ." o '" Q) o "E ::l o o o <( " c: ::l u.. <Xl o '" iii N '" ... <Xl o iii ;;; ... a '" w ... '" ... N <Xl ",. <0 '" ... ;:::: iii <Xl '" ... o '" '" o '" '" u; "'- u; '" ... ... ... '" N m ;;; ... ... ... <0 '" ~. co N ... ... ... <Xl <Xl m ... N ... ... ... o '" "'. ;;; N ... ... ... <Xl <0 o ... '" ... '" '" '" M ... ... ... '" ... N o N ... u; o N '" ... ... ;;; I'- o <Xl N ... '" <Xl '" W I'- ... N <0 <0 ,...: I'- ... <0 co N <Xl '" <0 N <Xl <0. ... '" N o ... M '" N ... '" <Xl. ~ '" N ... ... o II> ~ .... '" <Xl '" M '" '" II> <0 N o ,...: ~ ... '" '" <Xl iii o N ... '" '" "': a ~ ... .... '" .... ,...: co '" <0 .... M ;;; co '" ,...: I'- '" co '" co N .... .... N .... a ,...: ~ a co '" M a ... '" I'- .... '" co co W <0 ... ... ... N o "'. u; ~ I'- <0 I'- a iii a ... ... ... '" I'- N I'- '" N m a ... '" <0 <0 o a ... '" <Xl <0 iii '" ... <0 o I'- ,...: co ... I'- '" I'- W '" ... N co iii '" o '" co W '" I'- co '" iii a '" I'- N m a o '" N m co co '" m ;;l; M ... '" ~ iii '" '" M II> '" '" lO. m '" M II> co .... N M I'- '" M II> '" '" .... ,...: '" '" M II> I'- '" '" o '" '" M .... .... '" N M co ~ M '" .... N W I'- ",. .... ;::: N I'- ~ ",' co lO co W '" M .... '" ... N .... II> co lO co <0. '" II> '" '" lO iii co II> '" a "'. ~ II> I'- <0 W '" II> N co I'- W I'- lO '" I'- ,...: '" II> II> .... .... '" lO M '" ... II> II> <0 N <0 <X; I'- II> II> II> '" co 1'-' '" .... ... II> <0 co ...' '" .... ... II> co .... N iii '" II> ;:::: I'- ",' N II> I'- ... I'- W '" II> ;;; I'- W a II> lO I'- co o '" II> I'- I'- lO N '" N ~ N iii lO N a I'- '" iii ... N .... '" .... W N I'- a '" m <Xl <Xl .... o M ;: '" a N a '" .... I'- '" co <i '" .... .... a <0 1'-, co .... .... N co ;i .... .... o ;2; m '" '" .... '" .... '" co I'- a ",. lO lO .... '" M N .... ... II> N m ... .... '" '" .... N '" II> ... ... lO a co N N II> .... .... N I'- I'- II> II> .... '" '" M '" II> '" N "', N ... ;:::: I'- W '" II> '" a a. N ... o '" iii .... II> N '" lO cD N N '" '" M N .... '" W N a .... N a <0 "'.. ~ '" '" N m N N o '" "t II> ;::: '" m '" "t .... ~ N W .... "t .... o '" '" m ~ II> co '" "', ~ co ~, .... '" a '" o ~ .... I'- '" o W I'- ~ '" a '" iii I'- ~, '" .... ,...: co ~ u; I'- cD '" ~ '" a '" ,...: I'- :I~ .s c:: w a co lO a '" 0 co '" '" cti N- r--: a <0 <Xl co .... cri cri II> .... .... I~ c:: ~ o Q) .. > I'! Q) CD 0:: o :s '" '" ~ ::l '" " c:: Q) 0- x W CD U c:: II iii m ... c:: '" u. I'- a I'- W ... N M II> II> .... a a a o u;. '" Q) ::l c:: Q) > Q) 0:: "I ; CD C/) '" .... I'- iii a "'. '" ~ ::l '" " c: Q) 0- X W CD U c:: II iii m ... c:: '" u. <Xl a a o '" a N .... ... II> a a a ,...: m. '" Q) ::l c: Q) > Q) .so:: Ul ~ :!:! '0 Ul '" ~ ::l '" " c:: Q) 0- X W I'- ;;; cD co <0 CD U c:: II iii m ... c:: '" u. a o a o a '" II> II> .... '" Q) ::l c: Q) > Ci~ ~ E .s Ul <0 lO a iii '" '" '" ~ ::l '" " c: Q) 0- X W <0 co 1'-, m CD U c:: II iii m ... c:: '" u. :oR co ai 00 o I'- 00 1'-. I'- ... II> a '" ,...: <0 "'. ... II> I'- 00 o .... .... ;:::: I'- ,...: a .... N .... m .... N ... <0 00 .... o N II> <0 co iii I'- .... '" a '" M <0 ~ I'- N .... ... ... II> '" '" '" ,...: '" I'- II> II> 00 <0 '" N '" <0 .... N ... ... '" .... I'- 00 00 II> ... .... a a a iii ... 1'-. ... ... ... '" Q) ::l c: Q) > Q) 0:: "I .s ~ :oR m ~ co "" "- N I'- I'- M <0 N u; a m lO ~. '" '" ... .... '" N ... co a ;;; a ~. 10 ... <0 a N ;: '" '" <0 I'- 00 N ,...: I'- '" .... '" o LO I'- <i ... '" I'- '" iii '" '" ~ N '" <i lO I'- <i LO '" <0 m N N <0 LO ..... I'- '" I'- ..... ;;; ;;l; 00, ;::: 00 'If) ~ a. Q) () c:: ;: co C 0 CO 0 LL CO .... "C C) J: c:: C 111 :J .- ns LL E 0 LO ... 'C 0 CU s:: 0 LL :s N ..... LL . ~ 0 ~ (0 '" E ~ 0 E Q) 0 :J s:: Cf) N "<t 1ij 0 Q) . OJ C> U :J aJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EA- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c:i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c:i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ""'"- N.- O 00 <0 ""'" N N ""'" <0 00 EA- EA- EA- EA- EA- EA- EA- EA- ..... ..... ..... I I I I EA- EA- EA- a:)Uelea pun:l <:: o 0, <:: .~ '" u. '0 ,., '" C,) t: 0_ a. a. ~ ~ ",0 i'g c" o c ::EU:: U ~ ~ .. 0 ><en /c City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato(# Robin Roland, Finance Director FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Approve 2007 Tax Levy and Budget - Finance DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION The City Council adopted a proposed Tax Levy and budget for 2007 with Resolution R104-06 at the Council meeting on September 14, 2006. The Tax Levy and Budget must now be finalized in order that it may be certified to the County Treasurer/Auditor before December 27, 2006. DISCUSSION After the preliminary levy was adopted, a budget workshop was held on October 23rd for the Council to give input on the proposed budget. The required Truth in Taxation Hearing took place at the City Council meeting of December 4, 2006. Residents and other concerned citizens were able to attend and express their opinions on the proposed levy and budget. There being limited testimony, the hearing was closed without continuation. Certification of the Tax Levy and adoption of the 2007 budget and 2006 revised budget must now take place in order that tax revenues may be collected from all taxable property in Farmington. ACTION REQUIRED 1. Adopt the attached resolution setting the 2007 Collectible Property Tax Levy. 2. Adopt the attached resolution approving the 2007 Budget and Revising the 2006 Budget. Respectfully submitted, /7 /' (~1I-:D~~' , Robin Roland Finance Director RESOLUTION NO. R -06 ADOPTING THE TAX LEVY FOR THE YEAR 2007 COLLECTIBLE 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington is annually required by State Law to approve a resolution setting forth an annual tax levy to the Dakota County Auditor; and, WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes currently in force require certification of the tax levy to the Dakota County Auditor on or before December 27,2006; and, WHEREAS, summary details of the proposed budgets are contained in the budget submitted to the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Farmington, that the following sums of money be levied in 2006, collectible in 2007, upon the taxable property in the City of Farmington for the following purposes: Tax Levy General Fund Debt Service (see attached schedule) Fire Levy Gross Levy Less: Fiscal Disparities Net Levy $6,095,490 1,766,290 65,000 $7,926,780 (931,980) $6,994,800 This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor City Administrator 2007 BUDGET Summary of Debt Service Levy to be Attached and Become part of Resolution Total Levy Amount $ 235,743 17,913 60,000 456,438 165,221 231,275 100,000 334,300 165,400 $1,766,290 Fund Title Improvement Bonds of 2003A GO Refunding Bonds of 2004A Wastewater Treatment bonds of 1995 Public Project Revenue Bonds of2001A GO Capital Improvement Plan Bonds 2005C Improvement Bonds of 2005B Improvement Bonds of 2006A Certificates of Indebtedness 2004 Certificates of Indebtedness 2005 RESOLUTION NO. R -06 ADOPTING THE 2007 BUDGET AND REVISING THE 2006 BUDGET 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7 :00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington Ordinance Chapter 7, Section 1-7-3 requires that an annual budget be submitted to the City Council which accurately reflects the financial needs of the City organization; and, WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes require approval of a resolution setting forth an annual budget and tax levy to the Dakota County Auditor on or before December 27,2006; and, WHEREAS, Resolution R134-05 adopted the 2006 operating budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Farmington, that the 2007 operating budget shall be adopted and the 2006 operating budget shall be revised as follows: 2006 Revised 2007 General Fund Revenues: Taxes Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Fines & Forfeitures Other Revenues Transfers In Total $5,298,201 967,544 393,212 439,000 83,100 238,500 347,900 7.767.457 $6,160,490 906,200 370,000 452,000 79,000 257,000 290,000 8.514.690 Expenditures: Administration Human Resources/Information Tech Finance Community Development Police Fire Public Works Parks & Recreation Transfers Out Total 650,710 332,944 457,719 359,348 2,679,280 531,006 1,515,059 1,029,861 170,000 7.725,927 720,216 231,626 485,545 431,765 3,179,630 616,827 1,544,081 1,147,470 157,530 8.514.690 2006 Revised 2007 Other Funds Revenues: EDA General Fund 127,246 283,500 Police Forfeitures Fund 11 ,200 8,000 Park Improvement Fund 224,500 302,500 Recreation Operating Fund 261,854 260,030 Arena fund 272,750 278,500 Total Special Revenue 897,550 1,132,530 Debt Service Funds 2,800,442 2,827,081 Total Debt Service 2,800,442 2,827,081 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund 180,000 250,000 Capital Acquisition Fund 800,233 959,700 Road Const. & Maint. Fund 4,626,622 12,950,000 Municipal Building Fund 925 9,700,000 Private Capital Projects Fund 420,000 350,000 Storm Sewer Trunk Fund 220,000 200,000 Total Capital Projects 6,247,780 24,409,700 Liquor Fund 3,835,500 4,250,000 Sewer Fund 1,510,000 1,575,000 Solid Waste Fund 1,875,396 2,010,000 Storm Water Utility Fund 390,000 375,000 Water Fund 1,805,000 1 ,802,000 Total Enterprise Funds 9,415,896 10,012,000 Fleet Operations 213,190 212,610 Employee Expense 1,572,972 1,722,043 Information Technology 187,752 Total Internal Service Fund 1,786,162 2,122,405 Expenditures: EDA General Fund 131,544 43,400 Police Forfeitures Fund 4,000 8,000 Park Improvement Fund 435,000 590,000 Recreation Operating Fund 255,813 291,544 Arena fund 318,941 360,451 Total Special Revenue 1,145,298 1,293,395 Debt Service Funds 2,705,683 2,890,917 Total Debt Service 2,705,683 2,890,917 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund 150,000 Capital Acquisition Fund 1,021,848 861,279 Road Const. & Maint. Fund 3,969,638 12,320,000 Municipal Building Fund 234,118 8,786,000 Private Capital Projects Fund 450,000 350,000 Storm Sewer Trunk Fund 479,000 843,380 Total Capital Projects 6,304,604 23,160,659 Liquor Fund Sewer Fund Solid Waste Fund Storm Water Utility Fund Water Fund 2006 Revised 3,864,882 1,452,662 1,986,699 313,726 1,432.823 9,050,792 213,140 1,587,181 Total Enterprise Funds Fleet Operations Employee Expense Information Technology Total Internal Service Fund 2007 4,328,554 1,873,458 2,108,035 482,438 1.718.290 10,510,775 213,763 1,761,254 187.752 2,162,769 1,800,321 This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor City Administrator CllY OF FARMINGTON, MN Fund Balance January 1 REVENUES General Property Taxes Special Assessments Licenses & permits Fines & Forfeitures Interest Intergovernmental Charges for services Dedicated fees Miscellaneous Total Operating Revenue Bond proceeds Transfers in Total Revenue Total Available EXPENDI1\JRES General Government Public Safety Public Works Parks & recreation Economic Development Debt service Improvement projects Total Operating Expenditures Transfers out Total Expenditures Fund Balance December 31 ANNUAL BUDGET 2007 BUDGET SUMMARY FOR ALL FUNDS /H ..$p~~icll<. ...bebf Ge. . . . I . .. R~~~!J~< . ... $~,...jc:~ >~a:: ..ft~~~~) ...F~~it$ ~~pi'" ~t)J~~t HF@d~ l;~~~ri~l!/ ,",ln~ern~l $# Funds....... ........... . $ 1,296,230 $ 609,728 $ 1,794,393 $ 5,468,553 $ 10,877,321 $ 20,046,225 6,160,490 1,266,590 499,700 7,926,780 306,914 400,000 110,000 816,914 906,200 906,200 79,000 79,000 225,000 3,500 10,000 100,000 338,500 370,000 1,200,000 15,000 1,585,000 452,000 228,500 6,522,500 7,203,000 356,000 770,000 2,122,405 3,248,405 32,000 29,000 2,000 63,000 8,224,690 617,000 1,583,504 2,869,700 8,871,905 22,166,799 21,540,000 21,540,000 290,000 515,530 1,243,577 2,049,107 8,514,690 1,132,530 2,827,081 24,409,700 8,871,905 45,755,906 9,810,920 1,742,258 4,621,474 29,878,253 19,749,226 65,802,131 1,869,152 8,837,354 3,060,823 13,767,329 3,796,457 8,000 338,680 4,143,137 1,544,081 5,820,445 7,364,526 1,147,470 1,241,995 2,389,465 43,400 43,400 2,890,917 471,245 3,362,162 13,358,380 13,358,380 8,357,160 1,293,395 2,890,917 23,005,659 8,881,268 44,428,399 157,530 413,000 519,776 1,090,306 8,514,690 1,293,395 2,890,917 23,418,659 9,401,044 45,518,705 1 296 230 448 863 1,730,557 6 459 594 10,348 182 20,283426 1 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET GENERAL FUND FUND SUMMARY .......2004......... .........2005......... > 2006 <2006 ...2001........ ,... .... .... .... :::::::-. ;:::;:::; :::::;:.. , ,;:::::::; ......""" , ""...."". . ........,.,. . .......", , "."..,.." , ...."""" , "",.."",.. . .......,..,. , ......"", , ""....,." , ......""" . "",."",.. . ACTUAL> ActUAL AO()ptEo.H ReVI$~bH HAooPTebH :;:::: ,..::' ,'::::::: "".".",., . $ REVENUES General Property Taxes $ 3,536,994 $ 4,737,833 5,298,201 5,298,201 6,160,490 Licenses & permits 750,549 704,763 1,006,756 967,544 906,200 Fines & Forfeitures 89,480 73,951 83,100 83,100 79,000 Interest 353,504 185,193 225,000 225,000 225,000 Intergovernmental 407,551 370,169 350,000 393,212 370,000 Charges for services 417,357 475,420 439,000 439,000 452,000 Miscellaneous 65617 27 209 13500 13500 32 000 Total Operating Revenue 5,621 052 6574538 7415557 7419557 8 224 690 Transfers in: Private Capital Projects 100,000 100,000 100,000 Liquor Operations 30,000 34,750 36,500 36,500 58,000 Sewer 50,000 54,250 57,000 57,000 58,000 Storm Water 30,000 39,250 41,200 41,200 58,000 Refuse 50,000 53,500 56,200 56,200 58,000 Water 50 000 54 250 57 000 57,000 58 000 Total Transfers In 310000 236 000 347,900 347900 290,000 Total Revenue 5,931,052 6,810,538 7,763,457 7,767,457 8,514,690 EXPENDITURES Administration 571,666 636,381 650,710 650,710 720,216 Human Resources/Information Tech 236,149 292,081 332,944 332,944 231,626 Finance 401,210 414,661 457,719 457,719 485,545 Community Development 272,052 305,607 359,348 359,348 431,765 Police 2,134,640 2,534,282 2,679,280 2,679,280 3,179,630 Fire 457,576 490,752 531,006 531,006 616,827 Public Works 1,320,655 1,303,673 1,515,059 1,515,059 1,544,081 Parks & recreation 898 932 885 765 1 029861 1 029861 1 147,470 Total Expenditures 6 292 880 6 863 202 7 555 927 7 555,927 8357,160 Transfers out: Recreation operating 173 000 187 300 207 530 170 000 157 530 Total transfers out 173 000 187,300 207,530 170 000 157 530 Total Expenditures 6 465 880 7 050 502 7 763 457 7 725 927 8514,690 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures (534,828) (239,964) 41 ,530 Fund Balance beginning of year 2 029,492 1 494 664 1,254,700 1 254,700 1,296 230 Fund Balance end of year 1,494,664 1,254,700 1,254,700 1,296,230 1,296,230 2 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN <<?qp~ <NO.: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FUND BALANCE DEBT SERVICE FUNDS REVENUES 4011 General Property Taxes 4110 Special Assessments 4955 Interest Total Revenues EXPENDITURES 7110 Principal retirement 7120 Interest and fiscal charges Total Expenditures OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES 5105 Bond proceeds 5210 Transfers in 7310 Transfers (out) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures Fund Balance beginning of year Fund Balance end of year 2004) ..""..... . ..",.".. . ACTuAW 742,257 316,208 4,522 1,062,987 5,412,156 921,027 6,333,183 3,262,310 1,358,040 (81,480) 4,538,870 (731 ,326) 1,835,177 1,103,851 2p~$,} ACTUAL; 784,560 584,561 36,315 1,405,436 3,969,726 693,188 4,662,914 2,701,480 1 ,437,763 (285,982) 3,853,261 595,783 1,103,851 1,699,634 3 ... .......0........ <2Q . 6/ .....,."", , .........,. , A.bofJ"tett 776,703 355,000 4,000 1,135,703 1,790,875 909,981 2,700,856 1,395,686 1,395,686 (169,467) 1,699,634 1,530,167 .200&/H ,."""".. . """"". , ReStl$EPH 776,703 269,438 10,000 1,056,141 1,790,870 914,813 2,705,683 283,559 1,460,742 1,744,301 94,759 1,699,634 1,794,393 ANNUAL BUDGET .......2................... ,.. ..... >>007>> .........,." . ............. . A[)()~tISP 1,266,590 306,914 10,000 1,583,504 1,957,550 933,367 2,890,917 1,243,577 1,243,577 (63,836) 1,794,393 1,730,557 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS ... ... ......- \2p()4. < \ .... ....0.. .... ) <200$. ......~~~....... .......2007........ ... <205< . ............ .........,. . ............. . ......,...... . ,.,..""", , .,.,...,.", , ACTUAL ."ACTUAL ADQPT~P Ri!;ViSE:[) ADOPTeD .......... . ........... . $ REVENUES General Property Taxes 358,180 314,763 593,300 593,300 499,700 Special Assessments 823,958 1,631,729 380,000 450,000 400,000 Intergovernmental 116,229 678,645 1,155,000 1,676,055 1,200,000 Dedicated fees 490,706 1,498,354 1,200,000 710,000 770,000 Investment Income 551 51,545 - - - Miscellaneous 808 19,665 - 8,425 - Total Revenues 1,790,432 4,194,701 3,328,300 3,437,780 2,869,700 EXPENDITURES Communications projects 30,538 39,931 39,000 54,050 51,354 Supplies - 32,935 - - - Other services & charges 475,253 524,285 375,000 659,118 655,000 Capital Outlay - Buildings, Equipment 592,127 858,232 466,265 474,817 1,043,680 Capital Outlay - Construction 6,299,053 4,440,909 6,018,475 4,290,667 20,709,380 Debt service 328,748 449,262 420,199 420,952 546,245 Miscellaneous - - Total Expenditures 7,725,719 6,345,554 7,318,939 5,899,604 23,005,659 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES Bond proceeds 3,534,264 3,309,579 5,250,000 2,810,000 21,540,000 Transfers in - 561,664 - - - Transfers (out) (592,022) (418,730) (250,000) (405,000) (413,000) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 2,942,242 3,452,513 5,000,000 2,405,000 21,127,000 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures (2,993,045) 1,301,660 1,009,361 (56,824) 991,041 Fund Balance beginning of year 7,216,762 4,223,717 5,525,377 5,525,377 5,468,553 Fund Balance end of year 4,223,717 5,525,377 6,534,738 5,468,553 6,459,594 4 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET SANITARY SEWER TRUNK FUND FUND SUMMARY m~~~II~ M~ ... .... [IT 2()04 >20(}S> .. 2()O$ 20()$ ......2(}Ot..... ... .." : ~: ~:::.. . ::::) .... ..., ..,. ..... ... "" ... ..... .... "" .... .... ;:;:;:;. .. : :;:::;:;:; ,... "" ... . ... AcTUAL ........... . ,.."""" , ~EVlSEI) ............ . .......... . ....,."", , ............. . ... ACTUAL .. ~l)pptEO AAQP:'I'EI:) .....""" , """".., , REVENUES 4100 Special Assessments 79,000 214,800 80,000 40,000 100,000 4335 City SAC 1 08,660 94,710 200,000 1 00,000 100,000 4625 Dedicated Fees 5,527 136,951 100,000 40,000 50,000 4955 Investment Income 68 2,872 5350 Miscellaneous Total Revenues 193,255 449,333 380,000 180,000 250,000 EXPENDITURES Capital Outlay Professional services 8,418 Construction 92,605 Construction - Main Street 243,222 Construction - Ash Street 102,612 125,000 Construction - 208th Street 131,475 - Miscellaneous 113 Total Expenditures 446,857 125,113 131,475 - - OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES 5105 Bond proceeds 5210 Transfers in 7310 Transfers (out) (258,000) (264,080) (150,000) (150,000) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (258,000) (264,080) (150,000\ (150,000' - Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures (511,602) 60,140 98,525 30,000 250,000 Fund Balance beginning of year 639,860 128,258 188,398 188,398 218,398 Fund Balance end of year 128,258 188,398 286,923 218,398 468,398 5 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET CAP IT AL ACQUISITION FUND FUND SUMMARY COOS I ........ ~O(}4<. ...2ClO~ 20()6 2ClOE) .'//~OO1../ ~ : ~ ~: ~ :::- . : : : : : : : : ..,. ... ~:~:~:', . ):~::: ". .... .... ... .'. . ... .,......... , , ".,...,.,.. Ar#~P1"e~ """",.. . ..........."", , ,........,. , """....... . """"". . ..........."" . "......... , , ".......,.. REVlSeO ..........."", , . A<:TLJAL... ...ACTUAL ..........."" . ,<NP.",. ~:. . :: ~,~,: : ,:.:: < "" " " P:~9POSEI) >> ::: :'. :::::.' ::::= ........." , $ $ REVENUES 4011 General Property Taxes (Debt levy) 358,180 314,763 418,300 418,300 499,700 4011 General Property Taxes (Capital levy) 175,000 175,000 4404 Federal Grant 154,514 71,933 State Grant 4,653 5095 Cable Franchise fees 11,652 120,758 1 00,000 135,000 120,000 4955 Investment Income 483 6,371 5350 Miscellaneous 17,405 Total Revenues 370,315 618,464 693,300 800,233 619,700 EXPENDITURES 6400 Communications projects 30,538 39,931 39,000 54,050 51,354 6400 Other services & charges 2,286 24,553 35,000 60,000 6915 Capital Outlay - Building 28,158 6940 Capital Outlay - Vehicles 380,638 485,521 351,951 252,891 6950 Capital Outlay - Equipment 211,489 344,553 114,314 221,926 338,680 7010 Construction 17,333 244,753 12,029 7110 Principal retirement 289,273 355,815 375,000 375,000 435,000 7120 Interest and fiscal charges 39,475 43,332 45,199 45,952 36,245 Total Expenditures 971,032 1,566,616 960,464 1,021,848 861,279 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES 5105 Bond proceeds 1,474,820 727,263 340,000 5210 Transfers in 7310 Transfers (out) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 1,474,820 727,263 - - 340,000 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures 874,103 (220,889) (267,164) (221,615) 98,421 Fund Balance beginning of year (140,267' 733,836 512,947 512,947 291,332 Fund Balance end of year 733,836 512,947 245,783 291,332 389,753 6 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET CITY OF FARMINGTON CAPITAL ACQUISITION PLAN 2007-2011 Division Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Building Insp Pick up truck - replacement 30,000 Police Administration building lettering "FARMINGTON POLICE" 2,670 Police Administration Expand mens locker room 3,631 Police Administration Digital surveillance recorder & 4 cameras 16,745 Police Patrol Chev 1500 LS pickup (replace CSO suburban) 28,500 Police Patrol Snowmobile - 10,650 Police Patrol Squad repacements 98,400 Police Patrol Radar (replacement) 2,100 Police Patrol Light Bar (replacement) 2,100 Police Patrol Squad car digital video camera(s) 10,000 5,000 Police Patrol MAAG equipment 6,000 Police Patrol Bicycle and equipment 4,260 Police Patrol (2) Automated External Defibrillators 4,484 Police Patrol (2) X25 Tasers 3,022 Police Patrol K_9 Vehicle and dog 60,625 Police Patrol space saver mobile shelving 4,200 Investigations acoustic panels interview rooms(1) each year 1,540 Investigations Wireless security alarm 4,000 Investigations Unmarked Chev Impala police package 18,000 24,000 24,000 Emergency Management Outdoor Warning Siren--- 25,000 Fire station #1 bay area floor epoxy 27,500 Fire Install Manhole & piping for solids tank (station #1) 9,000 Fire Permanent signage Station #1 22,000 Fire hydroseal exterior station #1 7,000 Fire Refurbish quick response unit 25,000 Fire chief/asst chief vehicle 35,000 Fire Utility vehicle (truck) 30,000 Fire Fire pumper truck for Station #3 600,000 Fire 110 v exhaust fan (2) 2,400 Fire Handheld thermal imaging camera 10,650 Rescue assistant rescue chief vehicle 25,000 Rescue air bag lifting kit 16,125 Rescue Vehicle stabilization kit 10,000 Rescue 4X4 A TV w/ trailer 15,000 Rescue (4) water/ice rescue suits 8,000 Streets Truck, 1 ton w/dump box & plow 50,055 Snow Removal Truck, Snowplow 141,778 Natural Resources Truck, Chev landscaping w/stainless dump body 41,530 Park Maintenance Truck, 1.25 Ton w/ dump box 46,500 Park Maintenance Truck, .75 ton pickup w/tailgate lift 38,600 Park Maintenance laser leveler for ballfields 18,105 Park Maintenance millcreek turf tiger topdresser 23,400 Park Maintenance Snowplow for pickup truck 4,686 Park Maintenance JD Tractor model 5425 14,100 Park Maintenance front mount v plow for JD Tractor 14,380 Park Maintenance sprayer for toro workman 11,715 Park Maintenance Trailer to haul mowers 13,182 Park Maintenance 5600 turbo tool Bobcat 44,000 Park Maintenance Brush & understory mower 8,733 Park Maintenance Tree spade 30,885 Building Maintenance rambling river park shelter roof 12,000 Building Maintenance BEA vehicle sensor opener-CMF 7,668 Recreation Vehicle - Dodge Grand Caravan 24,313 Recreation Puppet Wagon 3,500 Recreation 15 passenger bus 80,000 Recreation Truck, Pick up (4x4) 23,800 Recreation Outdoor LED sign 35,000 General Fund Total 185,400 1,013,417 640,715 80,000 - Rambling Rvr Ctr Carpet replacement 4,000 Recreation Operating Fund Total . 4,000 - - - Arena building dehumidification system 115,000 Arena concrete floor & piping 350,000 Arena overhaul compressor #2 10,795 Arena 50 stall parking lot 125,000 Arena entrance vestibule 48,000 Arena cooling tower-building refrigeration system 46,950 Arena snow plow for pickup truck 4,686 I Arena Fund 10,795 689,636 . - - Fire Pumper engine w/75ft ladder 700,000 Police Patrol AVL for 8 squads 15,000 7 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET CITY OF FARMINGTON CAPITAL ACQUISITION PLAN 2007-2011 Division Descriotion 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Police Patrol (16) 800 MgHz car radios for squads 64,752 Fire (21) 800 MgHz handheld radios 55,913 Police Patrol Pagers, Radios (vehicle & portable) 800MgH 203,015 Capital Acquisition Fund 338,680 700,000 - - - City Hall (1) laptop (council) 2,450 City Hall Laserfiche software, scanner & server 48,850 Municipal Building Fund 51,300 - - - - Fire fire station #3 2,500,000 Fire Capital Projects - - - 2,500,000 - Sewer Truck, Pick up 38,350 Sewer Enterprise Fund 38,350 - - - - Solid Waste Truck, GMC C6500 wI hook attach 63,900 Solid Waste Vehicle, Automated Solid Waste 221,755 251,340 281,160 Solid Waste skid loader 37,275 Solid Waste rolloff container (4 in 2006, 1 in other years) 3,195 3,195 3,195 3,195 3,315 Solid Waste mesh cardboard container 3,408 3,515 3,621 3,728 3,834 Solid Waste Enterprise Fund 228,358 258,050 44,091 70,823 288,309 Fleet tire changing machine 3,727 Fleet Truck, Pickup w/air compressor 31,417 Fleet Internal Service Fund 31,417 3,727 - - - Information Technology (4) Toughbook laptops for PIMS 10,590 Information Technology (7) Toughbook laptops for squads (3/4) 14,409 19,214 Information Technology (20) computers + (16) computers from 2006 28,755 28,755 Information Technology new server 6,390 Information Technology HR laptop & docking station 3,000 Information Technology L-soft hardware software & firewall for listservs 19,170 Information Technology (12) COMPUTERS 19,164 Information Technology (3) color laserjet printers 10,863 Information Technology (2) laserjet printers 3,107 Information Technology (16) computers 25,560 Information Technology (2) servers 12,780 Information Technology color laserjet printer -2009 eng, 2011 fire 5,538 4,116 Information Technology (10) computers 15,975 Information Technology (36) computers 57,510 I IT Internal Service Fund 49,554 113,863 43,878 15,975 61,626 8 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET STREET CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE FUND FUND SUMMARY ConE <2004/ /200$ < >~AA 2006. .......2001......... ... ". :;:;::" " :::::;:: ...,.....,. . ""...,... , """""" , ,......""" , "........ , ..JIQ..... ACTUAl.. .ACTUAW ffiQ~()$E!P RliYlseo . ApOmp "........ . $ REVENUES 4100 Special assessments 488,547 599,903 200,000 200,000 200,000 4428 Intergovernmental - State 70,000 351,903 200,000 200,000 200,000 4450 Intergovernmental - Dakota County 46,229 167,575 449,122 1,000,000 4450 Intergovernmental - Other 955,000 955,000 4600 Dedicated fees 10,230 93,782 50,000 5,000 50,000 4955 Investment Income 5,844 5350 Miscellaneous 2,260 7,500 Total Revenues 615,006 1,221,267 1,405,000 1,816,622 1,450,000 EXPENDITURES Supplies 32,935 Other Charges and services 16,414 43,847 20,000 15,000 Construction Sealcoating project 124,154 146,614 72,000 143,832 140,000 Mill & Overlay project 750,000 Ash Street 1,720,029 3,086,773 405,806 Spruce SI. extension 91,282 171,972 2,494,000 2,700,000 208th Street 6,962 15,195 200,000 200,000 TH3 frontage road 18,333 Bridge - Meadow Creek 96,500 Main Street 2,495,086 279,119 195th Street East Extension 124,870 350,000 9,725,000 TH3 bridge expansion 59,680 Akin Road bike trail 39,784 Hill Dee Reconstruction 1,900,000 Elm Street 2,300,000 Miscellaneous 5,939 Debt Service Interest & financing charges 50,115 Total Expenditures 4,577,663 4,047,940 5,436,000 3,814,638 12,165,000 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES 5105 Bond proceeds 2,059,444 5,250,000 2,810,000 11,500,000 5210 Transfers in 7310 Transfers (out) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 1,825,422 2,952,666 5,250,000 2,655,000 11,345,000 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures (2,137,235) 125,993 1,219,000 656,984 630,000 Fund Balance beginning of year 2,376,373 239,138 365,131 365,131 1,022,115 Fund Balance end of year 239,138 365,131 1,584,131 1,022,115 1,652,115 9 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET MUNICIPAL BUILDING FUND FUND SUMMARY PPPffl NO> 20M . ...""... . .. ",.... A,CrUAW . .....2.0.0. .5...... . ... ... .. ... ... ... .. .. ACTUAL . <>200& ,."."."" , "."""" , ADOPTeD .....200$....... "",""" , """..". . ~12V1$eq .......2.0. .0.7. ........ .... ..... ,.. .... ..,. ..... ,.,. ..... Abc)P"~D . REVENUES 4955 Investment Income 5350 Miscellaneous 925 Total Revenues 925 EXPENDITURES 7010 Construction City Hall Professional services Construction Equipment & Furniture/Fixtures Miscellaneous First Street Garage Professional services 71 DO Debt Service Interest & financing charges Total Expenditures 17,506 173,618 305,000 7,701,000 705,000 60,500 75,000 234,118 8,786,000 17,506 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES 5105 5210 7310 Bond proceeds Transfers in Transfers (out) 9,700,000 (258,000) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 9,442,000 Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures (17,506) (233,193) 656,000 Fund Balance beginning of year 378,164 Fund Balance end of year 277,836 10 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET STORM SEWER TRUNK FUND FUND SUMMARY c::pp~ rillS:: 2,~~ 2005. 2QOft 20()6 .......2()Ot........ ". ,... ... ".. .... ..... .. .... : ::: : ~ :., . : : ~ : ~ : : ... .",. ,.. .,... ... .... ... ".. ,... ..... .. ... ... . ,.. .... ...... A~'I'LJAL """"'" , ~~VtS~~ AboP'I'kti << """"'" , NO> ACTUAL... . ."",.... , ADOPTeD REVENUES 4100 Special Assessments 256,411 817,026 1 00,000 210,000 1 00,000 Intergovernmental 4630 Dedicated Fees 17,732 416,399 350,000 10,000 1 00,000 4955 Investment Income 36,458 5350 Miscellaneous 55 Total Revenues 274,198 1 ,269,883 450,000 220,000 200,000 EXPENDITURES 7010 Construction Professional services 217,056 12,770 Storm sewer construction-Main Street 196,592 Storm sewer construction-Ash Street 1 ,085,440 150,000 Storm sewer construction-208th Street 295,000 Storm sewer construction-Spruce Street 176,000 267,000 Storm sewer construction-Mill & Overlay 212,000 Storm sewer construction-195th Street 473,000 Storm sewer construction-Elm Street 370,380 Miscellaneous Total Expenditures 1,499,088 162,770 471,000 479,000 843,380 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES 5105 Bond proceeds 5210 Transfers in 36,664 7310 Transfers (out) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) - 36,664 - - - Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures (1,224,890) 1,143,777 (21,000) (259,000) (643,380) Fund Balance beginning of year 4,430,085 3,205,195 4,348,972 4,348,972 4,089,972 Fund Balance end of year 3,205,195 4,348,972 4,327,972 4,089,972 3,446,592 11 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MN ANNUAL BUDGET PRIVATE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUND SUMMARY t;9Pi!; NOt ... ......2. O. .04... ........ "". .... , ". .... ",.,. .... ...ActuAL . ."",...... ......2.0.0. .5......... ... .... ... .... ... .... ... ... ACTUAL .........., , .......2. O. .O.j:t>.. :~:~:~:'. . ~:~:~:: ........... . ........... . APOP1'~q ......20...0. .&......... '" ,." ,., "'" .,. "" ... . ,.. ~~Vi$En .......2.0. .0.7. ......... "" "". '" "'" ",. ."" ,... ".... ~()~'I'Sp REVENUES 4610 Dedicated customer service fees 4955 Investment income 5350 Miscellaneous 336,905 635,754 400,000 420,000 350,000 753 Total Revenues 337,658 635,754 400,000 420,000 350,000 EXPENDITURES 6401 Professional services Engineering Administration & Legal 7420 Miscellaneous 205,429 8,144 401,482 41,633 300,000 20,000 320,000 30,000 320,000 30,000 Total Expenditures 213,573 443,115 320,000 350,000 350,000 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES & USES 5105 Bond proceeds 5210 Transfers in 7310 Transfers (out) (100,000) (100,000) (100,000) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and other financing sources over Expenditures 24,085 192,639 (20,000) (30,000) Fund Balance beginning of year 38,176 62,261 254,900 254,900 224,900 Fund Balance end of year 62,261 254,900 234,900 224,900 224,900 12 'lJ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator G FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Storm Water Utility Adjustment Policy DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION The City has in place a Storm Water Utility. Storm Water Utility charges are based on land use and a properties storm water impact relative to a typical single family residential lot. DISCUSSION Storm water utility fees for parcels of land are determined by multiplying the residential equivalent factor (REF) for a parcel's land use by the parcel's acreage and then multiplying the resulting product by the storm water utility rate. The REF co-efficient values for various land uses that are used in the REF calculation vary with the land used which relates to amount of impervious area. The REF co- efficient corresponds to the actual runoff co-efficient for the land use. In some circumstances, however, a particular property may have an actual runoff coefficient (based on how the property is actually developed) that is less than that depicted in the ordinance. For example, the land use of a property may be light industrial, but there may be more open space than is typical with light industrial properties. In this case it is likely that the actual calculated runoff coefficient for the property would be less (since there is less impervious area) than what is in the ordinance for light industrial. As such, the City Code allows the Council to adopt a policy whereby the City Engineer can adjust the storm water fees when it is appropriate based on the actual hydrologic conditions for a property. 8-10-4: CREDITS: The Council may adopt policies recommended by the City Engineer, by resolution, for adjustment of the storm water utility fee for parcels based upon hydrologic data to be supplied by property owners, which data demonstrates a hydrologic response substantially different from the standards. Such adjustments of storm water utility fees shall not be made retroactively. Staff has been approached with a situation that would most likely fit the above criteria. At this time staff would recommend that the Council adopt a resolution that would allow the review and Approve Storm Water Utility Adjustment Policy December 18, 2006 Page 2 adjustment of storm water fees as appropriate based on actual property conditions. Review of this issue for any particular property would need to be initiated by the property owner and the property owner would need to submit the engineering calculations for the City's review and concurrence. After it is established that a change to the fee is warranted, the adjustment would then be made with the Utility Billing division. BUDGET IMPACT Adopting the policy would allow for the adjustment of storm water fees as appropriate. It is not anticipated that there are a significant number of cases in the City where these adjustments would be made. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution allowing the City Engineer to review and adjust the storm water utility fee for properties where appropriate. Respectfully submitted, ~Yvt~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -06 APPROVING A STORMW ATER UTILITY ADJUSTMENT POLICY 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 9444.075 the City has adopted an ordinance providing that the municipal storm sewer system shall be operated as a public utility, and; WHEREAS, City Code section 8-10-4 provides that the Council may adopt policies recommended by the City Engineer, by resolution, for adjustment of the storm water utility fee for parcels based upon hydrologic data to be supplied by property owners, which data demonstrates a hydrologic response substantially different from the standards. Such adjustments of storm water utility fees shall not be made retroactively, and; WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended that the City Council adopt a policy providing for the prospective adjustment of storm water utility fees upon application of property owners who have provided hydrologic data that demonstrates a hydrologic response substantially different from the standards . NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Engineer is directed to prepare forms and procedures consistent with this Resolution to receive, evaluate and grant applications from property owners for adjustments or credits to their storm water utility fees based on hydrologic data that demonstrates a hydrologic response substantially different from the standards established by the City Code, or who have taken steps to significantly reduce the quantity of storm water runoff from their property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Engineer shall grant adjustments or credits pursuant to this Resolution only for properties that have demonstrated substantial reductions in stormwater runoff by providing for reductions in impervious surface equivalent to other classes of property under the City's fee schedule, on-site management of stormwater consistent with best management practices and the City's Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan, or other unique circumstances. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Kevan A. Soderberg Mayor Attested to the day of ,2006. Peter J. Herlofsky City Administrator Page 1 of3 CHAPTER 10 STORM WATER UTILITY 8-10-1: STORM WATER UTILITY ESTABLISHED: The Municipal storm sewer system shall be operated as a public utility pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 444.075 from which revenues will be derived subject to the provisions of this Chapter and Minnesota Statutes. The storm water utility will be part of the General Services Department and under the administration of the City Engineer. 8-10-2: DEFINITIONS: Residential Equivalent Factor (REF): One REF is defined as the ratio of the average volume of runoff generated by ten thousand (10,000) square feet of a given land use to the average volume of runoff generated by ten thousand (10,000) square feet of typical single-family residential land, during a standard one year rainfall event. 8-10-3: STORM WATER UTILITY FEES: Storm water utility fees for parcels of land shall be determined by multiplying the REF for a parcel's land use by the parcel's acreage and then multiplying the resulting product by the storm water utility rate. The REF values for various land uses are as follows: Lot Type Description REF Co-Efficients 1 Single- and Two-Family Lots * 2 Multi-plexes 0.60 3 Apartment and Condominiums 0.70 4 Downtown Business 0.95 5 Light Industrial 0.80 6 Heavy Industrial 0.90 7 Schools 0.90 8 Churches 0.90 9 Parks 0.25 10 Cemeteries 0.25 11 Railroad 0.40 12 Undeveloped 0.00 * For the purpose of calculating storm water utility fees, all developed and undeveloped single- family and two-family parcels shall be considered one REF. 8-10-4: CREDITS: The Council may adopt policies recommended by the City Engineer, by resolution, for http://66.113.195.234/MN/Farmington/docbar.htm 12/1312006 Page 2 of3 adjustment of the storm water utility fee for parcels based upon hydrologic data to be supplied by property owners, which data demonstrates a hydrologic response substantially different from the standards. Such adjustments of storm water utility fees shall not be made retroactively. 8-10-5: EXEMPTIONS: The following land uses are exempt from storm water utility fees: (A) Vacant, unimproved land. (B) Public streets and rights of way. 8-1 0-6: PAYMENT OF FEE: Statements for storm water utility fees shall be computed every three (3) months and invoiced by the Finance Department for each account on or about the first day of the month following the quarter. Such statement shall be due on or before the last day of the month in which the statement is mailed. Any prepayment or overpayment of charges shall be retained by the City and applied against any subsequent quarterly fees. Newly platted lots shall not be billed a storm water utility fee until the public improvements outlined in the developer's agreement have been installed and approved by the City Engineer. 8-10-7: RECALCULATION OF FEE: If a property owner or person responsible for paying the storm water utility fee questions the correctness of an invoice for such charge, such person may have the determination of the charge recomputed by written request to the City Engineer made within twelve (12) months of mailing of the invoice in question by the City. 8-10-8: PENALTY FOR LATE PAYMENT: Each quarterly billing for storm water utility fee not paid when due shall incur a penalty charge of ten percent (10%) of the amount past due. 8-10-9: CERTIFICATION OF PAST DUE FEES ON TAXES: Any past due storm water utility fee in excess of ninety (90) days past due on October 1 of any year may be certified to the County Auditor for collection with real estate taxes in the following year pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 444.075, subdivision 3. In addition, the City shall also have the right to bring a civil action or to take other legal remedies to collect unpaid fees. (Ord. 089-221, 9-5-89) 8-10-10: STORM WATER AREA CHARGE: No building permit, subdivision or rezoning or action by the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall be approved until the applicant has paid a storm water area charge for past, present or future storm water runoff facilities. Said charge shall be based on and used in accordance with the http://66.113.195.234/MN/Farmington/docbar.htm 12/13/2006 Farmington Storm Water Management Plan as amended. (Ord. 089-224, 12-4-89) http://66.113.195.234/MN/Farmington/docbar.htm Page 3 of3 12/13/2006 7e City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato\! FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Elm Street Project Joint Powers Agreement DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION Forwarded herewith is the Joint Powers Agreement between the City and Dakota County for the Elm Street Reconstruction Project. DISCUSSION The agreement details the responsibilities and cost sharing methodology between Dakota County and the City for the Elm Street project. The Joint Powers Agreement has been drafted in accordance with County policy and has been reviewed and found to be in order by the City Attorney. BUDGET IMPACT The cost sharing as outlined in the agreement is per Dakota County policy. The City's portion of the project financing will be as outlined in previous communications. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the agreement with Dakota County and authorizing the execution of the Joint Powers Agreement for the Elm Street Reconstruction Project. Respectfully submitted, ~m~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -06 APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH DAKOTA COUNTY FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF CSAH 50 (ELM STREET) Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council and the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, The City's and Dakota County's Capital Improvement Plans have indicated funding for the Elm Street (CSAH 50) Project, County project 50-05 in 2006, 2007 and 2008; and, WHEREAS, it is considered mutually desirable to reconstruct CSAH 50 (Elm Street) from Division Street to Trunk Highway 3 in Farmington, Dakota County; and, WHEREAS, the City of Farmington and Dakota County will share project responsibilities and jointly participate in the project costs associated with engineering, construction, signal revision, and right-of-way acquisition. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington enter into an agreement with Dakota County for the following purposes, to wit: To share project responsibilities and jointly participate in the project costs to reconstruct CSAH 50 (Elm Street) from Division Street to Trunk Highway 3 in Farmington in Dakota County as described in the agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officers be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor day of ,2006. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT DAKOTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING, RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION AND HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF DAKOTA AND THE CITY OF FARMINGTON FOR COUNTY PROJECT NO. 50-05 FOR THE Reconstruction of County State Aid Highway 50 (Elm Street) from Division Street to Trunk Highway 3 in Farmington, Dakota County. County Project No. 50-05 January 9, 2006 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the County of Dakota, referred to in this Agreement as "the County"; and the City of Farmington, referred to in this Agreement as "the City"; and witnesses the following: WHEREAS, under Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, subd. 1, two or more governmental units may enter into an agreement to cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties, and one of the participating governmental units may exercise one of its powers on behalf of the other governmental units; and WHEREAS, it is considered mutually desirable to reconstruct CSAH 50 (Elm Street) from Division Street to Trunk Highway 3, including traffic signal revisions in Farmington; and WHEREAS, revisions to the traffic control signal systems at the intersection of CSAH 50 and Third Street and the intersection of CSAH 50 and Trunk Highway 3 are necessary due to roadway construction; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) County Turnback Account funding has been programmed which will cover most of the costs for the reconstruction of CSAH 50, including revisions to the signal systems in Farmington; and WHEREAS, the County and the City have included this project in their Capital Improvement Programs and will jointly participate in the costs of said engineering, construction, signal revision, and right of way acquisition after applying MnDOT County Turnback Account funds. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that the County and the City will share project responsibilities; and after deducting MnDOT County Turnback funding, jointly participate in 2 County Project No. 50-05 January 9, 2006 the remaining project costs associated with engineering, highway construction, signal revisions, and related activities as described in the following sections: 1. EnQineerinQ. Engineering and contract administration costs for the roadway construction and signal revisions which are not fully paid for out of the MnDOT County Turnback Account shall be split based on the County's and City's share of the final construction costs. 2. Roadwav Construction Items. After deducting MnDOT County Turnback Account funding, the remaining construction costs of the following items shall be shared in the amount of 55% by the County and 45% by the City: a.) Clearing and grubbing; b.) Removal and salvage; c.) Grading, Base, and Surfacing; d.) Curb and gutter; e.) Retaining walls; f.) Turf establishment; g.) Pavement markings and signing; h.) Mobilization, field office and laboratory, and traffic control; i.) Sidewalks and bikeways; j.) Mitigation required by state and federal permits; k.) Storm sewer and other drainage facilities eligible for County State Aid funding based on contributing flows; I.) Replacing and restoring fences, landscaping, and driveways; m.) Centerline drainage culverts; 3 County Project No. 50-05 January 9,2006 n.) Reconstructing or adjusting sanitary sewer, storm sewer and detention ponds, watermains and appurtenances due to roadway construction; 0.) Relocating or adjusting privately owned utilities when not performed at the expense of the utility; p.) The County's share of water pollution control best management practices, based on contributing flows, meeting National Urban Runoff Protection (NURP) standards; and q.) Incidental items related to construction that are not specifically listed above. 3. Aesthetic Elements. Aesthetic elements for the project include landscaping, plantings, decorative pavements, or surface treatments. The County will participate up to 50% of the cost of aesthetic elements up to a maximum amount of three percent of the County's share of highway construction costs. Highway construction costs are determined prior to deducting MnDOT County Turnback Account funding, but exclude costs for items such as right of way, storm sewer, utilities, and ponding. The City shall be responsible for 50% of the costs of all aesthetic elements and 100% of the costs that exceed the County's maximum participation for aesthetic elements and shall be responsible for the maintenance of all aesthetic elements. 4. City Utilities. Except as stated in Sections 1, 2, & 3 of this agreement and after deducting MnDOT County Turnback Account funding, the City shall pay all other costs for new storm sewer, storm water ponding and other drainage facilities, sanitary sewer, watermains and appurtenances, and roadway lighting constructed as part of this project. Further, the City shall be responsible for maintenance of all such facilities after the completion of the project. 4 County Project No. 50-05 January 9,2006 5. Riqht-of-Wav. The County will acquire all permanent and temporary highway right of way, including relocations, and will acquire all right of way for sidewalk and trail construction, wetland damage mitigation and banking, drainage and ponding, and water pollution control best management practices for the project. After deducting County Turnback Account funding, the remaining reasonable costs of acquiring highway right of way, including right of way for drainage inlets and outlets, shall be shared in the amount of 55% by the County and 45% by the City. The City shall not be responsible for the cost to acquire right of way beyond the limits determined by the Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of State Aid to be necessary for this Project, unless specifically authorized by the City prior to acquisition. Upon completion of the project, the ownership of the drainage and ponding easements shall be transferred to the City. Any right of way costs for new sanitary sewer, water mains and appurtenances, and aesthetic elements outside of the right of way needed for the highway improvements shall be the responsibility of the City. 6. Siqnal Revisions. The County, by contract labor, shall revise the traffic control signal system at the intersection of CSAH 50 and Third Street and the intersection of CSAH 50 and TH3. The signal revision costs (after deducting MnDOT County Turnback Account funds) shall be shared in the amount of 50% by the County and 50% by the City. 7. Plans and Specifications. The County will prepare complete grading and paving plans and specifications for the reconstruction of CSAH 50, including revisions to the traffic control signal systems, consistent with State Aid design standards and the Dakota County Transportation Plan. The City shall be the lead agency for the preparation of plans and specifications for drainage, new sanitary sewer, water mains and services, decorative street lighting, and other municipal facilities. The County will incorporate the City's utility 5 County Project No. 50-05 January 9, 2006 plan sheets and specifications into the final bid documents. The City and the County shall approve the plans and specifications prior to advertising for bids. The County Board will award the contract for construction to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in accordance with state law. 8. Payment. The County will administer the contract and act as the paying agent for the costs of acquiring the required highway right of way, and for all payments to the Contractor. Payments to the Contractor will be made as the Project work progresses and when certified by the County Engineer. The County, in turn, will bill the City for the City's share of the project costs. Upon presentation of an itemized claim by one agency to the other, the receiving agency shall reimburse the invoicing agency for its share of the costs incurred under this Agreement within 30 days from the presentation of the claim. If any portion of an itemized claim is questioned by the receiving agency, the remainder of the claim shall be promptly paid, and accompanied by a written explanation of the amounts in question. Payment of any amounts in dispute will be made following good faith negotiation and documentation of actual costs incurred in carrying out the work. 9. Chanqe Orders and Supplemental Aqreements. Any change orders or supplemental agreements that affect the project cost participation must be approved by both parties prior to execution of work. 10. Final completion. Final completion of the construction project must be approved by both the County and the City. 11. Storm Sewer Maintenance. Upon acceptance of the project, the City shall be responsible for storm sewer maintenance and all other City utilities within the County right of way. 6 County Project No. 50-05 January 9, 2006 12. Sidewalks and Bike Trails. Upon acceptance of the project, the City shall be responsible for sidewalk and trail maintenance. 13. Pavement Maintenance. Upon acceptance of the project by the City and County, the County shall be responsible for all pavement maintenance within County right of way unless necessitated by a failure of a municipal utility system or installation of new facilities. 14. Subsequent Excavation. After completion of the project, and after expiration of the warranty period regarding repair, if excavation within the highway right of way is necessary to repair or install water, sewer, or other city utilities, the City shall restore the excavated area and road surface to substantially the condition at the time of disturbance. If the City employs its own contractor for the above described water, sewer or other utility repair or installation, the City shall hold the County harmless from any and all liability incurred due to the repair or installation of said water, sewer or other municipal utility including, but not limited to, the costs of repair as well as liability to third parties injured or damaged as a result of the work. If the City fails to have the highway properly restored, the County Engineer may have the work done and the City shall pay for the work within 30 days following receipt of a written claim by the County. 15. Rules and ReQulations. The County and the City shall abide by Minnesota Department of Transportation standard specifications, rules and contract administration procedures. 16. Indemnification. The County agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this Agreement and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions 7 County Project No. 50-05 January 9, 2006 of the County and/or those of County employees or agents. The City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this Agreement and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the City and/or those of City employees or agents. All parties to this agreement recognize that liability for any claims arising under this agreement are subject to the provisions of the Minnesota Municipal Tort Claims Law; Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. In the event of any claims or actions filed against either party, nothing in this agreement shall be construed to allow a claimant to obtain separate judgments or separate liability caps from the individual parties. 17. Waiver. Any and all persons engaged in the work to be performed by the County shall not be considered employees of the City for any purpose, including Worker's Compensation, or any and all claims that mayor might arise out of said employment context on behalf of said employees while so engaged. Any and all claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged on any of the work contemplated herein shall not be the obligation or responsibility of the City. The opposite situation shall also apply: the County shall not be responsible under the Worker's Compensation Act for any employees of the City. 18. Audits. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sec 16 C. 05, Subd. 5, any books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the City and the County relevant to the Agreement are subject to examination by the County or the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor as appropriate. The City and County agree to maintain these records for a period of six years from the date of performance of all services covered under this agreement. 8 County Project No. 50-05 January 9, 2006 19. Inteqration and Continuinq Effect. The entire and integrated agreement of the parties contained in this Agreement shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations or agreements between the City and the County regarding the project; whether written or oral. All agreements for future maintenance or cost responsibilities shall survive and continue in full force and effect after completion of the roadway and signal construction provided for in this Agreement. 9 County Project No. 50-05 January 9, 2006 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officials. CITY OF FARMINGTON RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: Public Works Director By Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: (SEAL) City Attorney By City clerk Date ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DAKOTA COUNTY RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: APPROVED AS TO FORM: County Engineer Assistant County Attorney By: Physical Development Director COUNTY BOARD RESOLUTION: No: 05- 681 Date: December 20.2005 Date: 10 7f' City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - 19Sth Street Extension to Trunk Highway 3 Project Joint Powers Agreement DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION Forwarded herewith is the Joint Powers Agreement between the City and Dakota County for the 19Sth Street Extension to Trunk Highway 3 Project. DISCUSSION The agreement details the responsibilities and cost sharing methodology between Dakota County and the City for the 19Sth Street project. The Joint Powers Agreement has been drafted in accordance with County policy and has been reviewed and found to be in order by the City Attorney. Paragraph 21 of the attached Joint Powers Agreement addresses the issue concerning the fact that the City is still working to finalize separate agreements with other funding partners for the project. Entering into this agreement at this time will allow for the City to be reimbursed from the County for eligible engineering costs expended thus far, yet does not obligate the City to complete the project if the separate funding agreements are not in place. BUDGET IMPACT The cost sharing as outlined in the agreement is per Dakota County policy. The City's portion of the project financing will be as outlined in previous communications. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the agreement with Dakota County and authorizing the execution of the Joint Powers Agreement for the 19Sth Street Extension to Trunk Highway 3 Project. Respectfully submitted, ~1Z1~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -06 APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH DAKOTA COUNTY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 19STH STREET EXTENSION TO TRUNK HWY 3 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council and the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, The City's and Dakota County's Capital Improvement Plans have indicated funding for the 19Sth Street Extension to Trunk Highway 3 (CR 64) Project, County project 64- 18 in the years 2006 - 2010; and, WHEREAS, it is considered mutually desirable to construct CR 64 from its current easterly terminus in Farmington easterly to Trunk Highway 3 in Farmington, Dakota County; and, WHEREAS, the City of Farmington and Dakota County will share project responsibilities and jointly participate in the project costs associated with engineering and construction of the project. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington enter into an agreement with Dakota County for the following purposes, to wit: To share project responsibilities and jointly participate in the project costs to construct CR 64 from its current easterly terminus in Farmington easterly to Trunk Highway 3 in Farmington, Dakota County as described in the agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officers be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor Attested to the day of ,2006. City Administrator SEAL JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT DAKOTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING, RIGHT OF WAY, AND HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF DAKOTA AND THE CITY OF FARMINGTON FOR COUNTY PROJECT NO. 64-18 FOR THE construction of future County Road (CR) 64 (195th Street) from one mile east of County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 31 (Pilot Knob Road) to Trunk Highway (TH) 3 in Farmington, Dakota County. County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the County of Dakota, referred to in this Agreement as "the County"; and the City of Farmington, referred to in this Agreement as "the City"; and witnesses the following: WHEREAS, under Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, subd. 1, two or more governmental units may enter into an agreement to cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties, and one of the participating governmental units may exercise one of its powers on behalf of the other governmental units; and WHEREAS, it is considered mutually desirable to construct a new segment of future CR 64 from Diamond Path, one mile east of CSAH 31 to TH 3 in the City of Farmington; and WHEREAS, the City desires to construct the improvements in 2007 in conjunction with the developer of the adjacent property in anticipation of County reimbursement in accordance with Dakota County Transportation Plan policies; and WHEREAS, the County will reimburse the City of Farmington for the County's share of the project costs, in accordance with adopted cost share policies, to the extent funds are budgeted by the County Board; and WHEREAS, County Project (CP) 64-18 is currently in the County's Capital Improvement Program Budget in 2006 for $610,000 in consultant services; and WHEREAS, the County Transportation 2006-2010 Capital Improvement Program has included funding in the amount of $5,490,000 for a partial payment for CP 64-18 in the years 2007,2008, and 2009; and 2 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 WHEREAS, County staff recommends including CP 64-18 in the 2007-2011 CIP if funds are available for pay back; and WHEREAS, County funds will be available for CP 64-18 when the project is included in the County's budget; and WHEREAS, the County will assume jurisdiction and maintenance of future CR 64 (195th Street) between Akin Road and Trunk Highway 3 by separate agreement at such time as the County determines it is appropriate to incorporate this segment of road into the County highway system. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that the County and the City will share project responsibilities and jointly participate in the project costs associated with engineering, highway construction, and related activities as described in the following sections: 1. Enqineerinq. The City will be the lead agency for all preliminary and construction engineering. Preliminary engineering costs will be shared in the amount of 55% by the County and 45% by the City. The costs for new sanitary sewer, water main and services, lighting and other municipal facilities shall be the responsibility of the City. Construction engineering (contract administration) costs for the roadway construction shall be split based on the County's and City's share of the final construction costs. 2. Roadway Construction Items. CP 64-18 consists of three segments. Segment 1 from Diamond Path to Deerbrook Path: Segment 2 from Deerbrook Path to Street A: and Segment 3 from Street A to TH 3. The construction cost for Segment 1 and Segment 3 shall be the responsibility of the City. For Segment 2 the construction costs of the following items shall be shared in the amount of 55% by the County and 45% by the City: 3 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 a) Clearing and grubbing; b) Removal and salvage; c) Grading, base, and surfacing; d) Curb and gutter; e) Medians f) Retaining walls; g) Turf establishment; h) Pavement markings and signing; i) Mobilization, field office and laboratory, and traffic control; j) Sidewalks and bikeways; k) Storm sewer and other drainage facilities eligible for County State Aid funding based on contributing flows; I) Multi-span two-lane bridge; m) North Creek channel rehabilitation n) Centerline drainage culverts; 0) Reconstructing or adjusting sanitary sewer, storm sewer and stormwater ponds, watermains and appurtenances due to roadway construction; p) Relocating or adjusting privately owned utilities when not performed at the expense of the utility; q) The County's share of water pollution control best management practices, based on contributing flows, meeting National Urban Runoff Protection (NURP) standards; and r) Incidental items related to construction that are not specifically listed above. 4 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 3. Aesthetic Elements. Aesthetic elements for the project include landscaping, plantings, decorative pavements, or surface treatments. The County will participate up to 50% of the cost of aesthetic elements up to a maximum amount of three percent of the County's share of highway construction costs (excluding bridges, ponds, and storm sewers). The County's share of aesthetic participation may not exceed the local cost share for aesthetics. The City shall be responsible for 50% of the costs of all aesthetic elements and 100% of the costs that exceed the County's maximum participation for aesthetic elements. Aesthetic elements are subject to clear zone and sight line requirements and may not hinder normal maintenance operations or degrade safety or operation of the highway. The City is responsible for maintenance of all aesthetic elements. The County reserves the right to remove non-maintained aesthetic elements and recover County aesthetic investment and removal costs from the City. 4. City Utilities. Except as stated in Sections 1, 2, & 3 of this agreement, the City shall pay all other costs for new storm sewer, storm water ponding and other drainage facilities, sanitary sewer, watermains and appurtenances, and roadway lighting constructed as part of this project. Further, the City shall be responsible for maintenance of all such facilities after the completion of the project. 5. Riqht-of-Way. The City in partnership with the developer in a manner consistent with applicable state laws and rules will acquire all permanent and temporary highway right of way, and will acquire all right of way for sidewalk and trail construction, wetland damage mitigation and banking, drainage and ponding, water pollution control best management practices for the project, new sanitary sewer, water mains and appurtenances, and aesthetic elements outside of the right of way needed for the highway improvements. Upon 5 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 completion of the project, the ownership of the permanent highway right of way needed for the operation and maintenance of future CR 64 shall remain in the name of the City until such time as the County shall take over jurisdiction and maintenance responsibility. Upon completion of the project, the ownership of the drainage and ponding easements shall remain in the name of the City. The cost of acquiring all necessary right of way for public improvements shall be the responsibility of the City. All necessary public right of way easements, however acquired, shall be recorded in the Dakota County Recorders Office prior to authorization for advertising for bids. 6. Intersection Control Construction. The County concurs with the City and Minnesota Department Of Transportation (Mn/DOT) recommendation that a roundabout may be the appropriate traffic control long-term for the intersection of CR 64 and Trunk Highway 3 at 190th Street. The long-term jurisdictional authority for 190th Street is Dakota County. This design will save the County the expected expense of constructing a signal in the future. Traffic signals on County highways are eligible for up to 50 percent County funds after subtracting federal and/or Mn/DOT normal share. The amount the County would contribute for the roundabout is $62,500 based on eligible County funds of an estimated signal construction cost of $250,000. 7. Construction Standards. All such construction, including traffic control, shall be accomplished in accordance with applicable State Aid and County standards, specifications, and policies to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. The County reserves the right to inspect construction materials and methods as needed. 6 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 8. Plans and Specifications. The City will prepare complete grading, paving, storm sewer, bridge, wetland mitigation, traffic control, and other municipal utility plans and specifications consistent with County design practices, State-Aid design standards, the Dakota County Transportation Plan, and the City's utility standards and specifications. County concurrence with the traffic studies, AUAR update, reports, plans and specifications is required prior to advertising for bids. The City Council will award the contract for construction to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in accordance with state law. 9. Payment. The City will administer the contract and act as the paying agent for the costs of acquiring all required rights of way, and for all payments to the Contractor. The City will act as the paying agent for all project payments. The City, in turn, will invoice the County for the County's share of the eligible project costs. The County will reimburse the City for the County's share of project costs by March 1 st of each year to the extent funds are budgeted by the County Board. If the County questions any portion of the City's invoice, the County will pay the remainder of the invoice, and submit to the City a written explanation of the items in question. Payment of any amount in dispute will be made following good faith negotiation and documentation of actual costs incurred in carrying out the work. 10. Chanqe Orders and Supplemental Aqreements. Any change orders or supplemental agreements that affect the project cost participation must be approved by both parties prior to execution of work. 11. Final completion. Final completion of the construction project must be approved by both the County and the City. 7 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 12. Storm Sewer Maintenance. Upon acceptance of the project, the City shall be responsible for storm sewer maintenance and all other City utilities within the County right of way. 13. Sidewalks and Bike Trails. Upon acceptance of the project, the City shall be responsible for sidewalk and trail maintenance. 14. Pavement Maintenance. Upon acceptance of the project by the City and County, the City shall be responsible for all pavement maintenance within highway right of way until such time as the County determines it is appropriate to incorporate this segment of road into the County highway system. At the time the County assumes jurisdiction and pavement maintenance of proposed future CR 64 the County shall be responsible for all pavement maintenance within County right of way. 15. Subsequent Excavation. After completion of the project, and after expiration of the warranty period regarding repair, if excavation within the highway right of way is necessary to repair or install water, sewer, or other city utilities, the City shall apply for a permit from the County and shall be responsible to restore the excavated area and road surface to its original condition at the time of disturbance. The City shall hold the County harmless from any and all liability incurred due to the repair or installation of said water, sewer or other municipal utility including, but not limited to, the costs of repair as well as liability to third parties injured or damaged as a result of the work. If the City fails to have the highway properly restored, the County Engineer may have the work done and the City shall pay for the work within 30 days following receipt of a written claim by the County. 8 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 16. Rules and Requlations. The County and the City shall abide by Minnesota Department of Transportation standard specifications, rules and contract administration procedures. 17. Indemnification. The County agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this Agreement and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the County and/or those of County employees or agents. The City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County against any and all claims, liability, loss, damage, or expense arising under the provisions of this Agreement for which the City is responsible, including future operation and maintenance of facilities owned by the City and caused by or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the City and/or those of City employees or agents, if applicable. All parties to this agreement recognize that liability for any claims arising under this agreement are subject to the provisions of the Minnesota Municipal Tort Claims Law; Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. In the event of any claims or actions filed against either party, nothing in this agreement shall be construed to allow a claimant to obtain separate judgments or separate liability caps from the individual parties. 18. Waiver. Any and all persons engaged in the work to be performed by the County shall not be considered employees of the City for any purpose, including Worker's Compensation, or any and all claims that mayor might arise out of said employment context on behalf of said employees while so engaged. Any and all claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged on any of the work contemplated herein shall not be the obligation or responsibility of the City. The opposite situation shall also apply: the County shall not be responsible under the Worker's Compensation Act for any employees of the City. 9 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 19. Audits. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sec 16 C. 05, Subd. 5, any books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the City and the County relevant to the Agreement are subject to examination by the County or the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor as appropriate. The City and County agree to maintain these records for a period of six years from the date of performance of all services covered under this agreement. 20. InteQration and ContinuinQ Effect. The entire and integrated agreement of the parties contained in this Agreement shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations or agreements between the City and the County regarding the project; whether written or oral. All agreements for future maintenance or cost responsibilities shall survive and continue in full force and effect after completion of the roadway provided for in this Agreement. 21. Proiect TiminQ. It is understood that if the City's funding partners for the City's portion of the project costs withdraw their commitment to fund their portion of the project costs, that neither party will be compelled to complete the project until such time that the funding issues are resolved. 10 County Project No 64-18. December 13, 2006 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officials. CITY OF FARMINGTON RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: Public Works Director By Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: (SEAL) City Attorney By City clerk Date DAKOTA COUNTY RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: APPROVED AS TO FORM: County Engineer Assistant County Attorney By: Physical Development Director COUNTY BOARD RESOLUTION: No: 06-58 Date: January 31,2006 Date: 11 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~ TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator (5" Joel Jamnik, City Attorney FROM: SUBJECT: Request to Approve Contract with Sunde Land Surveying, LLC for platting of property as part of the Ash Street Project. DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION As part of the Ash Street Project and other developments in the Southeast part of the City, the City obtained permission to enter property owned by Castle Rock Bank for the purpose of constructing a stormwater pond. General terms of the agreement between the City and Bank: have been reached and presented to Council previously. DISCUSSION Originally, the City proposed to acquire only a drainage easement for the pond but the owners instead indicated a preference to sell all interest in the property encumbered by the pond to the City. This change would not affect the other terms of the transaction, but does pose some difficulty given the number of separate parcels involved, the location of the property within the Township, and problems with legal descriptions and existing surveys of the area. In order to resolve these difficulties and to facilitate the completion of this transaction, City staff and the Bank's officials have determined it would be in the best interests of both parties if the ponding area and the bank: site would be platted. Toward that end, the City Public Works Director has obtained the attached proposal from Sunde Land Surveying for the surveying and platting work estimated at $9,950.00. Castle Rock Bank: has agreed to pay one-half of the platting costs, which will be deducted from the purchase price of the pond parcel or otherwise paid at closing. BUDGET IMPACT The City's share of the project costs would be funded out ofthe Ash Street Project Fund. ACTION REQUESTED By motion approve the proposal from Sunde for surveying and related work for platting the afore- mentioned property Respectfully submitted, ~...~.(~'Y</~ ,'---,,/ V'~ ~/ ~ Joel J. Jamnik City Attorney cc: file II Sunde Land Surveying, LLC John K. Barnes, P.L.s., Principal Mark S. Hanson, P.L.s., Principal Scott J. Soukup, P.L.s., Principal October 19, 2006 CITY OF FARMINGTON 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 "REVISED PROPOSAL" Attention: Mr. Lee Mann Re: Platting in Farmington for Property at State Trunk Hwy. 3 & State Trunk Hwy. 50 Farmington, MN Dear Lee: This letter/proposal is in response to your request for a cost estimate for the surveying and platting work on the above referenced property. This letter will also serve as an outline of the steps necessary to plat the above referenced parcel. Following are the normal steps necessary to perform this work: 1.) RESEARCH & ANALYSIS WORK: If this proposal is approved by you, we may have to perform some additional research work on the site prior to the time our field crews would be dispatched for the onsite survey work. This would involve obtaining additional information from MNDOT and the Dakota County Government Center. 2.) BOUNDARY & LOCATION SURVEY: Our field crew would be dispatched to the site to perform and complete a survey of the entire site to be platted. All exterior property corners would be monumented in accordance with Chapter 505.32 of the Minnesota State Statutes. Only the main features of the buildings and parking lots would be located on and adjoining the property A base map would be prepared portraying the boundary information located on the site by our survey field crews and all the information collected. Our cost to peiform this work: $4,950.00 NOTE: From previous work we are aware that there are discrepancies between the physical location of the highway versus its described location. Some parcel descriptions may also create gaps or overlaps with the subject property. Because of this, we can not give an estimate for additional work that may need to be performed to correct these problems. This work will be performed on an "hourly rate basis". 9001 East Bloomington Freeway (35W) - Suite 118 -Bloomington Minnesota 55420-3435 952/881-2455 - Fax: 952/888-9526 E-Mail: info@sunde.com City of Farmington October 19, 2006 Page 2 3.) PRELIMINARY PLAT: The Preliminary Plat would be prepared using our base map and would portray all the information required by the Township of Castle Rock. Copies and/or disk with drawing file would be supplied to you for submittal to the Township. Our cost to perform this work: $1,200.00 This cost does not include the filing fees, if any, at the Township of Castle Rock which would be your responsibility. NOTE: 4.) PRELIMINARY APPROVALS: If our representation is required at any public meetings required for the platting approval, this would be on an "hourly rate" basis. 5.) FINAL PLAT: After the approvals are achieved from the Township of Castle Rock and after the receipt of a current title opinion or title insurance commitment, the Final Plat would be prepared. After the Final Plat is checked by the Dakota County Surveyor's Office, etc., the final mylar documents of the Final Plat will be made at Franz Engineering Reproductions, Inc. (a reproduction company). All work on the Final Plat would be done in strict accordance with Chapter 505 of the Minnesota State Statutes. Our cost to perform this work (including mylars): $2,200.00 NOTE: It will be necessary at the time of the Final Plat that we be supplied with a current title opinion or title insurance commitment for the property. A copy of this would be sent to the City Attorney and a copy to Sunde Land Surveying, LLC. It is understood you will provide a check for the plat checking fee for the Dakota County Surveyor's Office. The check would be made out to the DAKOTA COUNTY TREASURER. We would alert you to the amount and when this check would be needed. NOTE: City of Farmington October 19,2006 Page 3 6.) FINAL SIGNATURES: The final copies of the Final Plat would be signed by the fee owners of the property and the mortgage company, if any. You will be responsible for obtaining those signatures. We would also sign said plat and all signatures would be notarized. The mylar would then be delivered to the Township for final approval and signing by them. Lastly, the plat would be recorded at the Dakota County Government Center by you or your representative and the platting process would be complete. 7.) FINAL IRON MONUMENTS: Our survey crew would be dispatched to the site to set all lot comers 1ll accordance with Chapter 505.32 of the Minnesota State Statutes. Our cost to perform this work: $1,600.00 It is, therefore our proposal to perform this work on an hourly rate basis and extend to you the estimated cost of $9,950.00. At first glance, the platting process appears to be quite complicated but we would be available at all times to assist you in any way. Due to the fact the time period from the beginning of this project to the end might take 3 months, more or less, we would send you an invoice at the end of each month and upon completion of the project. This time period will begin as soon as you authorize us to proceed with the survey platting work. The costs given in this proposal are estimated on a time and materials basis as closely as possible. If the costs given in this proposal should vary due to changes in the scope of the work, we would notify you before proceeding with any additional work. Additional work will be done on a time and materials basis. All invoices will be directed to the recipient of this Proposal unless otherwise instructed. We hope your attention regarding the payment of this fee will be given prompt consideration due to the direct costs such as salaries, reproduction work, etc. Invoices will be sent on a monthly basis and payment is expected upon receipt of said invoice. We have placed an "Acknowledgment" on the attached sheet which explains our payment policy. It also specifies the terms on which this Proposal is based as well as the method of payment for our services. Formal authorization to proceed with this work must be received prior to the commencement of our work and/or release of any survey documents, by signing the "Acknowledgment" and returning a copy to us. City of Farmington October 19, 2006 Page 4 After you have had the opportunity to review the contents of this Proposal, please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this Proposal to you. We at Sunde Land Surveying, LLC. look forward to working with you on this project. We hope to here from you soon. Yours Very Truly, SUNDE LAND SURVEYING, LLC. ~/~ Scott J. Soukup, P.L.S. Sf. Vice President/Principal Attachment H:\ winword\proposal\F armington- 2 .doc Sunde Land Surveying, LLC. 9001 E. Bloomington Fwy. - Ste. 118 Bloomington, MN 55420 Phone: 952/881-2455 Fax: 952/888-9526 "PAYMENT POLl Cyj,0041200404712004047FIMFIP10192006.dOC All invoices for professional fees and project expenses are due upon receipt. It is also understood that payment for professional services is not contingent upon land closings, payment from others or city approvals. Invoices which are unpaid after fifteen (15) days are considered past due. Invoices which remain unpaid for thirty (30) days are considered delinquent. On all delinquent accounts, a finance charge of 1.5% per month will be computed on the balance due. If payment is not made within sixty (60) days, we retain the right to discontinue services until arrangements are made to make payment. If we file for account collection, all legal fees will be the responsibility of the party signing below. This will include attorney's fees, filing fees and all court costs incurred. If a retainer statement is required, we will commence our surveying services when payment of the retainer amount is received. Questions concerning fees can be discussed in confidence at any time during our normal business hours. The Client agrees to pay Sunde Land Surveying, LLC. in full for the performance ofthe specified work. "ACKNOWLEDGMENT" We have read the foregoing proposal and policy concerning payment of fees and expenses of Sunde Land Surveying, LLC. dated October 19, 2006 fully understand it and agree to hire Sunde Land Surveying, LLC. to perform the services at the estimated costs quoted with the understanding that payment will be made per the above policy. It is also understood that payment for professional services is not contingent upon land closings, payment from others or approvals from City or other agencies. Ordered By: (Company and/or Person Ordering this Work) (Print or Type Name) (Street Address) (City, State, Zip) Phone: Fax: Billing Information: (Company and/or Person Responsible for Payment of Work) (Print/Type) (Billing Address) (City, State, Zip) Phone: Fax: * Purchase OrderlFile #: (Client Reference P.O. # or File # for Project(s)) Signed By: (Print/Type Name) (Responsible Party) (Signature) Dated this day of ,20_ * We now accept Visa, Master Card & Discover 717 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator (j' FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Historic Preservation Consultant Services DATE: December 18, 2006 ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the resolution approving the contract for Historic Preservation Consultant Services. DISCUSSION Attached is a proposed contract for historic preservation consultant services with Robert Vogel and Pathfinder CRM, LLC. The contract is for the period of January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007 and establishes an annual retainer fee and an hourly wage for historic preservation services provided. This contract is required to establish an hourly wage, for in-kind services Mr. Vogel may provide in conjunction with Certified Local Government Grants. The grants are used to further the exploration of historic sites in Farmington BUDGET IMPACT The consultant fees are included in the proposed 2007 budget. Respectfully submitted, ~ Il.'''ad'-c~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -06 APPROVING THE CONTRACT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT SERVICES 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has in the past applied for a CLG (Certified Local Government) Grant; and, WHEREAS, this contract is required to establish an hourly wage which will be used for in-kind services provided by Mr. Vogel in conjunction with the grant; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Vogel will be paid $4,000 to be paid quarterly beginning January 2007; and, WHEREAS, the grant will be used to designate historic sites throughout the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby approves the Contract for Historic Preservation Consultant Services. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December 2006. Mayor Attested to the _ day of December 2006. City Administrator SEAL CONTRACT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT SERVICES CITY OF FARMINGTON THIS CONTRACT made and entered into as of this 4th day of December 2006, by and between the City of Farmington, Minnesota, herein referred to as the "City," and Robert C. Vogel, doing business as Pathfinder CRM, LLC, herein referred to as the "Consultant." WITNESSETH THAT WHEREAS, the City is desirous of retaining professional historic preservation services on as as-needed basis, and; WHEREAS, the Consultant is a qualified historic preservation professional. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter contained, it is agreed by and between the City and the Consultant as follows: I. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Consultant will provide the following services on as as-needed basis as determined by the City Administrator: A. Advise the City on matters relating to historic preservation planning and the identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment of historic resources; B. Attend up to six public meetings of the Heritage Preservation Commission and/or the City Council, upon the request of the City Administrator; C. Provide public information, education, and technical assistance to owners of properties designated or determined eligible for designation as Farmington Heritage Landmarks; and D. Review development plans and applications for city permits to determine their impacts on significant historic resources. II. COMPENSA nON A. The City will pay the Consultant to provide the services outlined in A, B, C, and D above, four thousand dollars ($4,000.00) to be paid quarterly beginning January of the year 2007. B. The City may pay such additional Consultant compensation at the rate of sixty-five dollars ($65.00) per hour for additional work which may be specifically authorized by the City Council. III. COMMENCEMENT AND TERMINATION This contract shall run from January 1, 2007, until December 31, 2007. The contract may be renewed upon a passing motion by the City Council. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, either party may terminate the contract on thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. N. TINDEPENDENTCONSULTANTSTATUS The Consultant is an independent contractor and is not a City employee. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties have set their hands on this 4th day of December 2006. CITY OF FARMINGTON BY: Kevan Soderberg, Mayor BY: Peter J. Herlofsky, Jr., City Administrator BY: Robert Vogel, Consultant City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmin~on.mn.us ~' TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator r? FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Gambling Event Permit - Knights of Columbus Council #2400 DATE: December 18, 2006 ACTION REQUESTED Consider the attached Resolution granting a Gambling Event Permit to the Knights of Columbus at St. Michael's Church, 22120 Denmark Avenue, on January 20,2007 and November 17,2007. DISCUSSION The Knights of Columbus Council #2400 is requesting a Gambling Event Permit for a Bingo event. Per State Statute 349.166 and pertinent City Code, a Gambling Event Permit must be issued by the City for this type of event. An application has been reviewed and the appropriate fees received. BUDGET IMPACT Gambling fees are included in the revenue estimates of the budget. Respectfully submitted, ~1I,Pc4~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -06 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS #2400 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 18th day of December 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.166, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue or renew a Gambling Event Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said permit; and, WHEREAS, the Knights of Columbus #2400 have submitted an application for a Gambling Event Permit to be conducted at S1. Michael's Church, 22120 Denmark Avenue for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Event Permit for the Knights of Columbus #2400 to be conducted at S1. Michael's Church, 22120 Denmark Avenue, is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December 2006. Mayor day of December 2006. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street. Farmin2ton. MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7, , 'J TO: Mayor, Councihnembers, City Administrator r;; FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Knights of Columbus Council #2400 DATE: December 18, 2006 ACTION REQUESTED Approve the attached application for a Temporary Liquor License for the Knights of Columbus, 22120 Denmark Ave., for January 20,2007. DISCUSSION The Knights of Columbus Council #2400 is requesting a Temporary on-sale Liquor License for a Bingo event, to be held January 20, 2007. This event will be held on S1. Michael's Church property located at 22120 Denmark Ave. Per State Statute, a Temporary Liquor license must first be approved by the City and then forwarded to the State for approval. BUDGET IMPACT A City fee has not been established for a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License. Per the Liquor Control Commission, the State of Minnesota waives all fees for Temporary Liquor Licenses for non-profit organizations. Therefore, no license fee is proposed at this time. Respectfully submitted, \ )~d~ /1- dl tei dt..ct Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director Minnesota Department of Public Safety 444 Cedar St-Suite 133 St. Paul, MN 55101-5133 .LA~lcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (651)296-6439 TDD (651)282-6555 APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE CITY DATE ORGANIZED r BUSINES ( ) TYPE OF ORGANIZATION D CLUB DCHARITABLE QfuELIGIOUS DOTHER NONPROFIT ADDRESS ADDRESS ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME ADDRESS Location where license will be used. If an outdoor area, describe ;) '9- 12. () D...e.~"'Y"M. "- yo I< A /) k F u ... l'Vl I ?f L0/7 1'Yw1 ,--~/:aJAe-.f../~ -t3/"?YC> . Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor services? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service. IV (\ Will the applicant carry liquor liability insurance? If so, the carrier's name and amount of coverage. (NOTE: Insurance is not mandatory.) APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITTING TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT CITY/COUNTY DATE APPROVED CITY FEE AMOUNT LICENSE DATES DATE FEE PAID SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement Director Note: Do not separate these two parts, send both parts to the address above and the original signed by this division will be returned as the license. Submit to the city or County at least 30 days before the event. PS-09079 (6/98) City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7,t TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator @- FROM: Brian A. Lindquist, Police Chief SUBJECT: Animal Control Contract 4 Paws DATE: December 18,2006 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington currently uses The 4 Paws Animal Control Service to respond to all animal complaints. There has never been a formal contract between 4 Paws and The City of Farmington. This will help detail the service to be provided and control costs. DISCUSSION Over the past several years, the police department has experienced an increase in calls for service related to animal control issues. Du~ to the experience, equipment and facilities necessary to efficiently and effectively handle animal control issues, it was cost effective to contract with an animal control service. Contracting for this service has allowed officers to manage their time more effectively and deal with issues more related to law enforcement. BUDGET IMPACT 4 Paws has provided animal control services to the City of Farmington on a per call price structure. The current 2007 budget has $22,600 budgeted for animal control. The proposed contract will cost the city $1,500 a month or $18,000 a year. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the contract between The City of Farmington and 4 Paws Animal Control Service. Respectfully submitted, ~ /1 Z;~-v' ~/~ /? ~7---/ Brian A. Lindquist Chief of Police Nov 20 06 02:4010 Four Paws 9527076967 p. 1 (Exhibit A) 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL 952-894-9065 11/20/06 To: Brian Linquist/Farmington Police Dept. From: Curt Finch/4 PAWS Animal Control Thank you for the opportunity to submit a proposal and a bid for providing animal control service to the City of Farmington. Our Animal Control service includes: -24 hour coverage every day of the year, -patrol as needed based on calls and complaints and need for visibility, -phones answered by real people at all hours for customer convenience, -reasonable response times, -compassion and quality care for all animals, -enforcement of City animal control ordinance, as currently written, within the parameters of the powers assigned our service by the City. Costs:$1,500 per month- no additional costs for city/county except for applicable sales and use taxes which would be paid directly to the State or collected for the State by our service. Owners claiming animals would be charged for boarding, vet care, and pick up fee payable to Animal Control. This monthly charge would be applicable for any duration -from 1 month to 48 months for the City ordinance, as currently written. Our company prides itself on providing quality service for the animals, the people, and the police/governments involved. We hope you will give our service a chance to continue to work with your City. Thank you/ Curt Finchj4 PAWS Animal Control Nov 20 06 02:4010 Four Paws 9527076967 10.2 AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES This agreement is made on the 1st day of January, 2007 between the City of Farmington, Minnesota (hereinafter "City") and 4 PAWS Animal Control (hereinafter "4 PAWS") whose business address is 520 Harold Drive, Burnsville, MN. 55337. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of consultants to provide a variety of services for City projects. That policy requires that persons, firms or corporations providing such ser- vices enter into written agreements with the City. The purpose of this agreement is to set forth the terms and conditions under which $ PAWS Animal Control Service will provide animal control services and act as Animal Control Officer to the City as outlined in this Agreement, hereinafter referred to as the "Work." RECITALS WHEREAS, the City requires the services of an Animal Control Officer for public safety reasons; and, WHEREAS, 4 PAWS has provided a proposal for providing this service which has been accepted by the City; NOW, THEREFORE, based on the mutual promises and consideration provided herein, the sufficiency of which is not disputed, the parties agree as follows: 1. Recitals: The Recitals set forth above are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. 2 Scope of Work. The Scope of Work is setout in one document, (Exhibit A.). Exhibit A is incorpo- rated by reference herein as if fully set forth. Read together Exhibit A and this Agreement collectively constitute the "Contract Documents" and define the Work the Animal Control Officer will perform on behalf of the City. 3. Time for Performance of Services. The Animal Control Officer shall perform the services de- scribed in the Contract Documents within the timeframe specified therein unless otherwise agreed upon in writing. 4. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Animal Control Officer $1,500.00 per month for the period of which the service begins and for 24 months or for as long as the service is provided. Such amounts will be paid monthly no later than the 15th of each month for the preceding month. Nov 20 06 02:4110 Four Paws 9527076967 10.3 In addition to the above payments. not to exceed fees set forth above, the Animal Control Officer may seek reimbursement for reasonable out-of':'pocket expenses directly associated with work expressly requested by the City. A. Any changes in the scope of the Work, as described and defined in the Contract Documents, which may result in a change in the compensation due the Animal Control Officer shall require prior written approval by an authorized representative of the City or by the City Council. The City will not pay additional compensation for services that do not have prior written authorization. B. Special Consultants may be utilized by the Animal Control Officer when required by the complex or specialized nature of the Work and when authorized in writing by the City. C. City agrees to pay Animal Control Officer for extra services by the Animal Control Officer or Special Consultants when authorized in writing by the City. 5. The City agrees to provide the Animal Control Officer with the complete information concerning the Scope of the Work and to perform the following services: Access to the Area. Depending on the nature of the Work. Animal Control Officer may from time to time require access to public and private lands or property. As may be necessary the City shall obtain access to and make all provisions for the Animal Control Officer to enter upon public and private lands or property as required for the Animal Control Officer to perform such services necessary to complete the Work. Consideration of the Animal Control Officer's Work. The City shall give thorough consideration to all reports and other documents presented by the Animal Control Officer, and shall inform the Animal Control Officer of all decisions required of City within a reasonable time so as not to delay the work of the Animal Control Officer. Standards. The City is relying on the Animal Control Officer to provide and advise the City with information on any standards or criteria, induding but not limited to. any and all animal control services. City's Reoresentative. The Police Chief, or his designee, shall interface with the Animal Control Officer with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement. The City's representative shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information. interpret, and define the City's policy and decisions with respect to the services provided or materials, equipment, elements and systems pertinent to the work covered by this Agreement. 6. Method of Payment. The Animal Control Officer shall submit to the City. on a monthly basis, itemized bills for animal control services performed under Section 4 of this Agreement. Bills submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. A. Proqress Payment. For work reimbursed on an hourly basis, the Animal Control Officer shall indicate for each employee. his or her name, jOb title, the number of hours worked, rate of pay for each employee, a computation of amounts due for each employee, and the total amount due for each project task. Animal Control Officer shall verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, if permitted in Exhibit A. the Animal Control Officer shall provide such documentation as reasonably required by the City. R:\ST ANDARO AGREEMENTS\4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL AGMT.OOC 2 Nov 20 06 02:4110 Four Paws 9527076967 10.4 B. Abandoned or Suspended Work, If any work performed by the Animal Control Officer is abandoned or suspended in whole or in part by the City, the Animal Control Officer shall be paid for any services performed on account of it prior to receipt of written notice from the City of such abandonment or suspension, all as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and inco,rporated herein by reference. 1. Project Manager and Staffing. Curt Finch shall serve as the Animal Control Officer. 2. Standard of Care. All Work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be in accordance with the standard of care in Scott County, Minnesota for services of the like kind. 3. Audit Disclosure. The Animal Control Officer shall allow the City or its duly authorized agents reasonable access to such of the Animal Control Officer's books and records as are pertinent to all services provided under this Agreement. Any reports, information, data, etc, given to, or prepared or assembled by, the Animal Control Officer under this Agreement which the City requests to be kept confidential shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval. All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, and reports prepared by the Animal Control Officer shall become the property of the City upon termination of this Agreement, but Animal Control Officer may retain copies of such documents as records of the services provided, 4. Term. The term of this Agreement is defined in the Contract Documents. 5. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party by seven (7) days' written notice delivered to the other party at the address written above. Upon termination under this provision if there is no fault of the Animal Control Officer, the Animal Control Officer shall be paid for selVices rendered and reimbursable expenses until the effective date of termination. If however, the City terminates the Agreement because of the Animal Control Officer has failed to perform in accordance with this Agreement, no further payment shall be made to the Animal Control Officer. 6. Subcontractor. The Animal Control Officer shall not enter into subcontracts for services provided under this Agreement except as noted in the Scope of Work. without the express written consent of the City. The Animal Control Officer shall pay any subcontractor involved in the performance of this Agreement within the ten (10) days of the Animal Control Officer's receipt of payment by the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. If the Animal Control Officer fails within that time to pay the subcontractor any undisputed amount for which the Animal Control Officer has received payment by the City, the Animal Control Officer shall pay interest to the subcontractor on the unpaid amount at the rate of 1.5 percent per month or any part of a month. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10, For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the Animal Control Officer shall pay the actual interest penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Animal Control Officer shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney's fees, incurred in bringing the action. 7. Independent Consultant. At all times and for all purposes herein, the Animal Control Officer is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Animal Control Officer an employee of the City. 8. Non-Discrimination. During the performance of this Agreement, the Animal Control Officer shall not discriminate against any employee or applicants for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, or age. The Animal Control Officer shall post in places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this non-discrimination clause and stating that all R:\STANOARO AGREEMENTS\4 P.4.WS ANIMAL CONTROL AGMT,QOC 3 Nov 20 06 02:4110 Four Paws 9527076967 10.5 qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment. The Animal Control Officer shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. 9, Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement, nor any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party, 10. Services Not Provided For. No claim for services furnished by the Animal Control Officer not specifically provided for herein shall be honored by the City. 11, Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion hereof is, for any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Agreement. 12. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein. 13. Compliance with Laws and Regulations, In providing services hereunder, the Animal Control Officer shall abide by all statutes. ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the provisions of services to be provided. The Animal Control Officer and City, together with their respective agents and employees, agree to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 13, as amended, and Minnesota Rules promulgated pursuant to Chapter 13. Any violation of statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the services to be provided shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. 14. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 15. Indemnification. Animal Control Officer agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from any liability, claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from a negligent act or omission (including without limitation errors or omissions) of the Animal Control Officer, its agents, employees, or subcontractors in the performance of the services provided by this Agreement and against all losses by reason of the failure of said Animal Control Officer fully to perform, in any respect, all obligations under this Agreement. 16, Insurance. A. General liability. During the term of this Agreement, Animal Control Officer shall maintain a general liability insurance policy with limits of at least $600,000 for each person, and each occurrence, for both personal injury and property damage. This policy shall name the City as an additional insured for the services provided under this Agreement and shall provide that the Animal Control Officer's coverage shall be the primary coverage in the event of a loss. The policy shall also insure the indemnification obligation contained in Paragraph No. 21. A certificate of insurance on the City's approved form which verifies the existence of this insurance coverage must be provided to the City before work under this Agreement is begun, R:\STANDARD AGREEMENTS\4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL AGMTDOC 4 Nov 20 06 02:4110 Four Paws 9527076967 10.6 B. Worker's Compensation. The Animal Control Officer shall secure and maintain such insurance as will protect Animal Control Officer from claims under the Worker's Compensation Acts and from claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage which may arise from the performance of Animal Control Officer's services under this Agreement. c. Personal Liability Insurance. The Animal Control Officer agrees to provide to the City a certificate evidencing that they have in effect, with an insurance company in good standing and authorized to do business in Minnesota, a professional liability insurance policy. Said policy shall insure payment of damage for legal liability arising out of the performance of animal control services for the City, in the insured's capacity as the Animal Control Officer, if such legal liability is caused by an error, omission, or negligent act of the insured or any person or organization for whom the insured is legally liable. Said policy shall provide an aggregate limit of $1,000,000. 23. Records Access. The Animal Control Officer shall provide the City access to any books, documents, papers, and records which are directly pertinent to the specific contract, for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions, for three years after final payments and all other pending matters related to this contract are closed. 24. Ownership of Documents. All plans, diagrams, analyses, reports and information generated in connection with the performance of the Agreement ("Information") shall become the property of the City. The City may use the Information for its purposes and the Animal Control Officer also may use the Information for its purposes. Reuse of the Information for the purposes of the work contemplated by this Agreement ("Work") does not relieve any liability on the part of the Animal Control Officer, but any reuse of the Information by the City or the Animal Control Officer beyond the scope of the Project is without liability to the other, and the party reusing the Information agrees to defend and indemnify the other from any claims or liability reSUlting therefrom. 25. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Executed as of the day and year first written above. CITY Of FARMINGTON 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL 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 Administrat(1r Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director \J FROM: SUBJECT: Cost-of-Living Adjustment for Non-Represented Employees DATE: December 18,2006 INTRODUCTION The City typically approves cost-of-living adjustments for non-represented employees. These adjustments would take place effective January 1,2007. DISCUSSION Cost-of-living adjustments for non-bargaining employees have been reviewed and are proposed at two and three-quarters percent (2.75%) effective January 1, 2007. Non-bargaining employees for purposes of this cost-of-living adjustment include confidential and non-represented employees. Additionally, the City contribution for group insurance is proposed to change at $720.00 per month. This increase is appropriate based on the negotiated settlements received by bargaining employees. All other employees belong to collective bargaining units which require the City to formally negotiate changes in the terms and conditions of employment through the collective bargaining process. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for the cost-of-living and insurance contribution increase is included in the 2007 City Budget. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the Cost of Living wage adjustment effective January 1, 2007 for non-represented City employees. Respectf\llly sub~tted, ~ ' ' /1 ) . t.. '.j,/. / .> /,', I .' i. '- jc L-C Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file RESOLUTION No. R -06 APPROVING COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENTS FOR ALL NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2007 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: WHEREAS, cost-of-living adjustments for non-bargaining employees are in order to recognize annual inflationary increases in cost-of-living standards as measured by regional economic and market-based indicators; and, WHEREAS, the annual percentage adjustments of two and three-quarter percent (2.75%) effective January 1, 2007 are within the expenditure guidelines established in the 2006 Budget; and, WHEREAS, the City shall contribute a flat rate amount for health, dental and life insurance. This rate will be $720.00 per month for 2007. WHEREAS, non-bargaining employees are defined as those public employees not formally represented by an exclusive bargaining group as defined under Minnesota Statute. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves cost-of-living adjustments of two and three-quarter percent (2.75%) effective January 1, 2007 for all non-represented employees. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor day of December, 2006. 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 7m TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and City AdnUnistrator@ FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Acknowledge Resignation - Police Department DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION The City has received notification from Ms. Melanie Frost of her resignation from her position as Administrative Support Technician in the Police Department. DISCUSSION Ms. Frost has been employed with the City since March of 2006. Her resignation is effective December 4, 2006. The City has appreciated her commitment to the organization and wishes her well in her future endeavors. ACTION REQUESTED Acknowledge the resignation of Ms. Melanie Frost effective December 4, 2006. Respectfully Submitted, hi /', !j' -A" , , ", / ' / . ' ",:c/" ,,' , , /' r .- U vG.'v" L,{.fJ/-t'" j//( ,I Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: Personnel file City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7n TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and City Administrato~ FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Public Warks Department DATE: December 18,2006 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of the full-time Assistant City Engineer to fill the vacant position in the Public Works Department has been completed. DISCUSSION After a thorough review by the City Administrator, Public Works Department and the Human Resources Office, an offer of employment has been made to Mr. Kevin Schorzman, subject to ratification by the City Council. Mr. Schorzman has a Bachelor's Degree in Engineering and was most recently employed with the Kansas Department of Transportation as an Area Engineer. He has supervisory experience, has his professional engineering license and meets the qualifications for this position. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the appointment of Mr. Kevin Schorzman as Assistant City Engineer in the Public Works Department effective on January 3, 2007. Respectfully Submitted, '1 /1 V ,....} ':-)~<~/v<,,,..;,";Lu'C.. ~'-t'/~ '... l " Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: Personnel file )eJ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administr~foW Randy DIstad, Parks and RecreatIOn DIrector \!;j FROM: SUBJECT: Approve Park Name DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) members are responsible for choosing and recommending names for City parks to the City Council. DISCUSSION At the December 6, 2006 PRAC meeting a discussion occurred about renaming Diamond Park, which is a 4 acre park in the Parkview Ponds Development. When this park was originally named, it was intended for the park to be combined with a softball complex that was to be created as part ofthe Mystic Meadows development. However when the future Diamond Path Road was constructed, it became separated from the future softball complex planned in the Mystic Meadows development. Since this has occurred, PRAC members felt it was more fitting to include this park area with the Farmington Preserve Park area to the west of the Parkview Ponds development. The main reasons for combining the two park areas and giving it one name are: 1. The two park areas are connected together by trails and land containing storm water ponds. 2. It provides for an opportunity to have both active and passive areas within one park creating a more diverse park. Attached is a park map identifying where Farmington Preserve and Diamond Park are located. BUDGET IMPACT There is no budget impact with renaming this park area. Diamond Park and Farmington Preserve are both undeveloped parks and currently do not contain any park signs. A master plan for the Farmington Preserve (including the Diamond Park area) has been shown in the 2007 Park Improvement Fund budget. ACTION REQUESTED By motion approve combining the Farmington Preserve and Diamond Park areas into one park called Farmington Preserve. ~esP/fnllYSnbmitt~,d, _ /} f'1, {"'" '<; j);dz-j/ Randy Distad Parks and Recreation Director . City of Farmington Existing Parks, 'Open Space & Trails ('-"-"-"-"-" i i I ! r'-"-"j . i ! i I i ! i i ! . o if I _1._.._..__._.. Existing Trail Existing Sidewalk 1'\/ Municipal Boundary _ Existing Parks & Open Space _ ISO 192 Property . Updated November 5. 2004 Updated November 28. 2005 ModIfied May 4. 2006 ModIfied July 19. 2006 ModIfied September 29. 2006 - 0.5 I Miles City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7;0 TO: Mayor, Council Members, i ) V City Administrato/>>- v 60 Lee Smick, AICPl9' City Planner FROM: SUBJECT: Approve Draft Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line EA W DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION A draft of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) for the Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line was delivered to City Hall on Wednesday, December 13, 2006, and is now ready for review and comment by the City Council. DISCUSSION Lisa Fay of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates has coordinated the consulting work that was required for the preparation of the Draft EA W. Minnesota Environmental Review Rules 4410.4300, subpart 18A identifies the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for this project. The City of Farmington is proposing to construct ~6,800 feet of trunk sewer line along Flagstaff Avenue to serve the new Farmington Area High School and other future development in the area, including a portion of Lakeville. The trunk line will consist of segments of 24- and 30-inch pipe or 27- and 33-inch pipe. The alignment of the trunk line will begin at an existing MCES Interceptor south of CSAH 50 and will extend northward along Flagstaff Avenue to 200th Street. The trunk line will be constructed entirely within future road right-of-way and will be coordinated with the road construction of Flagstaff Avenue. The Draft EA W is being recommended for approval by the City Council and staff requests that the Council authorize its distribution to reviewing agencies. If the City Council approves the Draft EA W, it will be sent to the MPCA for review and comment. Upon approval by the MPCA, they will submit an EA W notice to the EQB and distribute copies of the EA W to agencies on the EQB EA W Distribution List for a 30-day comment period. After the comment period, the MPCA will prepare Response to Comments and Findings of Fact/Record of Decision. The notice of the decision will be submitted to the EQB for publication and the final documents will be distributed to the agencies on the EA W Distribution List. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Review Draft of EA W [Environmental Assessment Worksheet]. 2. Ask questions (if any) and/or seek clarifications (if needed). 3. Approve the Draft EA W, either (a) as is, or (b) with any additions, deletions or revisions suggested by the City Council and authorize its distribution to the MPCA. Respectfully Submitted, ....~- .....-'- <4h C. t:>~. Lee Smick, AICP City Planner If ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FLAGSTAFF AVENUE TRUNK SEWER LINE Responsible Governmental Unit: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Project Proposer: City of Farmington Prepared by: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency City of Farmington Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates, Inc. Dated: December 13, 2006 . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to preparers: An electronic version of this Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) form and a fact sheet on preparing one are available at the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Web site http://www.pca.state.mn.us/programs/envr_p.html. A booklet, EAW Guidelines, is also available at the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Web site http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/review.htmlor by calling (651) 296-8253. The EA W provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EA W is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared, The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for - but should not complete - the final worksheet. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. The complete question as well as the answer must be included if the EA W is prepared electronically, Note to reviewers: The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects, This EA W was prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU), to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. The project proposer supplied reasonably accessible data for, but did not complete the final worksheet. Comments on the EA W must be submitted to the MPCA during the 30-day comment period which begins with notice of the availability of the EA W in the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) A1onitor. Comments on the EA W should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that are reasonably expected to occur that warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS, A copy of the EA W may be obtained from the MPCA by calling (651) 296-7398, An electronic version ofthe completed EA W is available at the MPCA Web site http://www.pca.state.mn.us/news/eaw/index.html#open-ea w, 1. Project Title: Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line 2. Proposer: City of Farmington 3. RGU: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Contact Person Lee Mann Contact Person and Title Director of Public Works and Title Address 520 Lafayette Road North Address 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Phone 651-463-7111 Phone Fax 651-463-2591 Fax E-Mail Imaonicici.farmingtol1.I11Il.lIS E- Mail 4. Reason for EA W Preparation: EIS Mandatory Scoping EA W X Citizen Petition RGU Discretion Proposer Volunteered If EA W or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and name: 4410.4300, subpart 18 Wastewater and Sewage Systems p-ear1-04 TDD i ti,r hearing and speeeh impaired onl\) (65 I) 282-5332 Pnnlt!d Oil n.!L~n'li.!d paper L'()I1/(lin;ng jIVX)/i'herskon! paper recTcll.!d h}' ,--'OIl.\'llInf.!r.'; 5. Project Location: County Dakota City/Twp Farmington 22,23,26, Township 27,34,35 114 North Range 20 West 1/4 1/4 Section Attachments and Figures for the EA W: Attachments: Attachment I Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program Response Letter, dated August 25, 2006. Attachment 2 Overview of Minnesota's NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater Permit (MPCA Publication, November 2005). Attachment 3 Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office Response to Inquiry, dated August 7, 2006. Figures: Figure I Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 General Site Location Site Location (USGS Topographic Map) Proposed Trunk Sewer Alignment Project Service Area Wetland Delineation National Wetlands Inventory DNR Public Waters Inventory/FEMA Floodplain Dakota County Soils 6. Description: a, Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. The City of Farmington is proposing to construct ~6,800 feet of trunk sewer line within Flagstaff Avenue to serve the new Farmington Area High School and other future development in the area, including a portion of Lakeville, The trunk line is anticipated to carry average daily flows of 0.045 MGD initially, and 3.56 MGD ultimately. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. The City of Farmington is proposing to construct -6,800 feet of trunk sewer line along Flagstaff Avenue to serve the new Farmington Area High School and other future development in the area, including a portion of Lakeville, The trunk line will consist of segments of24- and 30-inch pipe or 27- and 33-inch pipe. The line is anticipated to carry 0,045 million gallons per day (MGD) initially, and 3,56 MGD ultimately (average daily flO\vs), Figures L 2 and 3 depict the location and alignment of the project: Figure 4 depicts the service area for the project. Flagstaff /\venue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington, \itN Ei1\ ironmental Assessment Worksheet .:? The alignment of the trunk line will begin at an existing MCES Interceptor south ofCSAH 50 and will extend approximately 6,800 feet northward along Flagstaff Avenue to 200th Street. The trunk line will be constructed entirely within future road right-of-way and will be coordinated with the reconstruction of Flagstaff Avenue. Permits will be obtained in conjunction with the road project. Initially, the proposed line will serve only the new Farmington Area High School. Flows are expected to be 0.037 MGD when the school opens in 2008. At full capacity of the school (anticipated by year 2017), flows are expected to be 0.045 MGD. The City's Comprehensive Plan does not provide for other development in the area until after 2020. Most of the land in the project area is designated Urban Reserve. Existing properties in the area will be required to maintain their on-site individual waste treatment systems. At full build-out of the service area, average flows in the trunk line are anticipated to be 3.56 MGD. Because of the high groundwater table in the city, the City of Farmington regularly monitors its sanitary sewer system for Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) into the system. As part of the City's efforts to monitor the I & I, a metering structure is proposed upstream of the connection to the MCES Interceptor to measure the flow volumes generated by the new high school and the future service area. The City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan (CSSP) shows an 8-inch pipe extending north near the Farmington/Lakeville border. The proposed trunk sewer replaces the 8-inch line. The proposed line will enable the City to adjust sewer service district boundaries for future development areas and will allow flexibility in development densities, The trunk sewer will eventually serve approximately 749 acres of Farmington (see Figure 4). In the future, it may also serve approximately 1,345 acres of Lakeville (see Figure 4), described as the Farmington Outlet in the City's CSSP. Construction of the trunk line will involve grading, excavation, backfilling, potential de-watering, and re-vegetation activities. Equipment to be used will include standard construction machinery such as trucks, backhoes, graders, compactors, bobcats, cranes, loaders, compressors, and possibly de-watering pumps. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin summer 2007 and be completed by fall 2008. c. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The proposed Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line will be needed to convey future wastewater flow from a new high school and future development within a 749-acre area of Farmington (see Figure 4). Eventual beneficiaries of the project will include the school, residents and business operators in this area. d. Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots planned or likely to happen? [8JYes DNo If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, time/ine and plans for environmental review. Local sewers within future planned developments will be constructed as needed to connect with the Flagstaff Avenue trunk line after construction of the trunk sewer is complete, The locations of these future local sewer lines have not been determined yet. The locations will depend on street layouts, and where and when development occurs yvithin the service area, Sewer extension permits must be obtained from the MPCA for the connecting sewer lines, e, Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? DYes C8J No (fyes, briefly describe the past development. timeline and any past environmental review, Flagstaff i\ wnLle Trullk Se\\ er Line Farmington, i\.1\.i FllY ironmental Assessment Worksheet ) The Flagstaff Trunk Sewer Line is not a subsequent stage of an earlier project. However, the timing of the proposed sewer has been adjusted due to a proposed school project. The new Farmington High School project was reviewed in an EA W noticed in the July 3rd, 2006 issue of the EQB Monitor. The 30-day public comment period ended August 2, 2006, A Negative Declaration on the need for an EIS was issued August 21, 2006 at a Farmington City Council meeting, 7. Project Magnitude Data Total Project Area (acres) 19.85 acres or Length (miles) 1.29 mile (- 6,800 feet) Number of Residential Units: Unattached 0 Attached 0 maximum units per building NA Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Building Area (gross floor space): total square feet 0 Indicate area of specific uses (in square feet): o Manufacturing Other Industrial Institutional Agricultural o o o o Office Retail Warehouse Light Industrial Other Commercial (specify) . Building height NA o o o o If over 2 stories, compare to heights of nearbybuildings NA The approximate length and total project area of the proposed project is indicated above, and has been estimated using approximate construction limits (temporary construction easement/temporary area of disturbance ). 8. Permits and approvals required. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and financial assistance for the project Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans, and all direct and indirect forms of public fmancial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Fmancing and infrastructure.. ..... Unit of Government Tvpe of Application Status U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland/Water Project - Public Linear Application to be submitted Utility Project (GP/LOP-98-MN- Section 404 Activities in Minnesota) Minnesota Pollution Control Review and approval of Construction Application to be submitted Agency (MPCA) Plans and Specifications MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Application to be submitted Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for discharge of storm water during construction activities MPCA Sewer Extension Permit Application to be submitted Minnesota Department of General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary Application to be submitted Natural Resources (DNR) Water Appropriations, if needed by construction contractor if more than 10,000 gallons per day of water is appropriated Flagstaff A venue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington, MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet -+ Minnesota Department of Health Water Well Permits Application to be submitted (if dewatering wells are necessary) Metropolitan Council Farmington Comprehensive Plan Approved Amendment Permit to Connect to MCES Sewer Application to be submitted System Dakota County Transportation Permit for Utility Construction on Application to be submitted Department County Highway Right-of-Way Vermillion River Watershed Joint Review and approval of land alteration Application to be submitted Powers Organization plans, erosion and sediment control pending adoption of (VRWJPO)* plans, grading plans, stormwater standards and rules management plans, etc. City of Farmington Permit for wetland impacts and Application to be submitted mitigation per the Minnesota Wetland (to be coordinated with the Conservation Act (WCA) proposed Flagstaff Avenue (to be coordinated with the proposed reconstruction project) Flagstaff A venue reconstruction project) *The VR W JPO was formed in November 2005 and published Draft Rules in May 2006 that are anticipated to be adopted in December 2006, The rules address standards. policies. and permits regarding tloodplains. wetlands. buffers. stormwater management. drainage. and agricultural production, 9. Land use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Land use adjacent to the proposed Flagstaff A venue Trunk Sewer Line consists of rural residences and farmsteads, cropland, and feed lots. The new Farmington High School is proposed west of Flagstaff between CSAH 50 and 200th Street. Construction of the school is scheduled to begin in 2006 and be complete in 2008. Wetland and small wooded areas are also present along or near the alignment. A tributary to the Vermillion River is near the southern end of the proposed alignment where it connects to the existing MCES sewer. Other small creeks or ditches are also present in the area; a few of them extend across the corridor. The project is located in a rural area, where most of the land (other than the new high school site) is currently in urban reserve. The project will serve only the high school initially, but in the future, will also serve other areas as development occurs in portions of Farmington and Lakeville (see Figure 4), The proposed project is compatible with existing and proposed land uses in the area, An internet search of MPCA records for contaminated properties in the project area was conducted using the MPCA "What"s in My Neighborhood.' search program, Eight sites with contamination were identified in the city of Fannington, The nearest one is approximately one mile east of the project corridor. Due to the distance of the project corridor from the sites ofknO\vn contamination. it is unlikely that it \vould be impacted by the contamination, Flagstaff A venue Trunk Se\\er Line Farmington. M~ Environmental Assessment Worksheet ;;; Although contamination is not known to be present in the project area, it is likely that chemical substances and petroleum products have been and continue to be used and stored at the agricultural properties along the corridor. If unanticipated contamination is encountered during construction, the State Duty Officer would be notified and work would be ceased until direction from the MPCA has been received, 10. Cover Types. Estimate the acreage ofthe site with each of the following cover types before and after development: Types 1-8 wetlands W oodedlforest Brush! grassland Cropland Before 0.03 ac 0.80 ac 7.3 1 ac 1.93 ac After 0.03 ac 0.80 ac 7.31 ac 1.93 ac Lawn/landscaping Impervious Surfaces Other (feedlots) Before 0.62 ac 8.66 ac 0.50 ac After 0.62 ac 8.66 ac 0.50 ac TOTAL 19.85 ac 19.85 ac *Estimates are based on the temporary construction easement (area of temporary disturbance) which varies in width along the corridor. 11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources. a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any rneasures to be takentorninimize or avoid impacts. Wildlife species are likely to include primarily those species common to agricultural and developing areas. Toward the southern end of the project, wildlife species may be more diverse due to the proximity of the project to a creek that is a tributary to the Vermillion River. Wildlife species in the project area might include: fox, deer, muskrat, squirrel, rabbit, mice and other small rodents, geese, ducks, raptors, a variety of other common bird species, and small reptiles. Amphibians and small fish may also be present in ditches, wetland areas, and the tributary to the Vermillion River. Short-term impacts on wildlife will include the disruptive effects of construction, including excavation, stockpiling of soils and materials, noise, limited erosion and sedimentation, and vehicle movement. Habitat and individual animals will be destroyed by the actual excavation or placement of stockpiled earth or bedding, and tree/forest cutting. Surviving small species may be forced to leave their territories and compete with established individuals in other areas. Larger species may be forced to relocate to portions of their territories that are not impacted. Seasonal activities such as nesting may be disrupted or curtailed, depending upon the season of construction. The project itself will not permanently displace wildlife; however, urban development eventually enabled by the trunk sewer line will cause a shift in the species present. Species tolerant of urban areas will remain, while others less tolerant may be permanently displaced. Adherence to the comprehensive plan and storm water ordinances adopted by the City of Farmington and the Vermillion River Watershed JPO will mitigate storm water impacts resulting from development. It appears that construction through wetland areas will be necessary (see Figure 5), Typically, original grade contours would be restored after construction, and therefore, pre-construction drainage patterns would not be altered by the project. In addition, wetland vegetation would be restored by seeding with a native wetland seed mix. However, the proposed trunk sewer is being coordinated with the proposed Flagstaff Avenue reconstruction and the sewer will be constructed down the centerline of the road, Wetland impacts due to the road project will be permanent and therefore. restoration will not be completed for the impacts that would be caused by the sewer project. Ordinarily. a Certificate of Exemption for temporary wetland impacts would be obtained FlagstatT Avenue Trun,," Sell er Line Farm ington, M'i Environmental Assessment W orbheet 6 from the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (the City of Farmington) for the project. However, since the proposed sewer project is being coordinated with the Flagstaff reconstruction project, permitting for wetland impacts and mitigation will be completed through the road project. Construction through some small wooded areas will also be needed. Potential tree replacement will be negotiated with individual property owners during the easement acquisition process. Permits/approvals requiring mitigation measures include the MPCA NPDES General Permit for discharge of storm water during construction activities and the Vermillion River Watershed JPO approval of the Grading Plan and Sediment and Erosion Control Plan, These and other permits listed in Item 8 of this EA W will include specific mitigation measures to be provided for erosion and sediment control, storm water runoff, and potential wetland impacts. Measures will include erosion control best management practices such as use of erosion control blankets and prompt re-vegetation of disturbed areas. b. Are any state (endangered or threatened) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat, colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities on or near the site? 0 Yes ~ No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a.site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number. EROS 20070J81 Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program was contacted regarding the potential presence of threatened or endangered species, as well as other rare or sensitive biological resources in the vicinity of the project. According to the response received (see Attachment 1), there are no known occurrences of rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features within one mile of the project site, 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging, fill ing, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment) of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? ~ Yes 0 No If yes, identify water resource affected. Describe alternatives considered /:lnd proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. Give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory (PWI) number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI. Jurisdictional wetlands in the project corridor were delineated in August 2006. The delineated wetlands are shown on Figure 5; National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) wetlands are shown on Figure 6. It appears that construction through wetland areas will be necessary. Typically, original grade contours would be restored after construction, and therefore, pre-construction drainage patterns would not be altered by the project. In addition, wetland vegetation would be restored by seeding with a native wetland seed mix. However, the proposed trunk sewer is being coordinated with the proposed Flagstaff Avenue reconstruction and the sewer will be constructed down the centerline of the road. Wetland impacts due to the road project will be permanent and therefore, restoration will not be completed for the impacts that would be caused by the sewer project. Ordinarily, a Certificate of Exemption for temporary wetland impacts would be obtained from the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (the City of Farmington) for the project. However. since the proposed sewer project is being coordinated with the Flagstaff reconstruction project, permitting for wetland impacts and mitigation will be completed through the road project. [t does not appear that the sanitary sewer project \vill impact DNR public waters, shown on Figure 7, The nearest public water is the tributary to the Vermillion River which flows past the southern end of the Flagstaff A\enue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington, \1\1 En\ iron mental Assessment \V orksheet proposed trunk sewer alignment. The trunk line will connect to the MCES Interceptor in this area but will not impact the creek because the Interceptor is located on the north side of the tributary. Erosion control measures (silt fence, fiber blankets, prompt re-vegetation, etc.) will prevent or minimize impacts to the creek during construction. Dewatering may be necessary in some areas as discussed in Item 13. Discharge would be directed to sediment traps or vegetative buffer strips if the discharge is laden with sediment. A filter sock may also be used to trap the sediment and filter the water prior to discharge. If dewatering wells are needed, clean discharge from well point dewatering would be dissipated over the adjacent wetland areas located beyond the construction limits. The contractor would be responsible for obtaining permits from the DNR and the MDH for temporary water appropriations and temporary dewatering wells, respectively if needed. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Storm Water Construction Activity Permit will be obtained for the project, as required from the MPCA. As part of the permit, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control plans will be prepared and submitted, if required, to the MPCA. Erosion and sediment control plans will also be submitted to the Vermillion River Watershed lPO for review and approval as required. Approved plans will be implemented during and after construction as appropriate until site stabilization has been achieved. The sediment and erosion control plans will provide more detail as to the specific measures to be implemented and will also address phasing of construction, vehicle tracking of sediment, inspection of erosion control measures, and the timeframes in which the erosion control measures will be implemented (see Item 16for more information), Development enabled by the trunk sewer project will be subject to the WCA rules for replacement, as well as other permits and approvals required from the City, the MPCA, the Vermillion River Watershed lPO, and/or the DNR. Potential wetland or other surface water impacts associated with future development in the area will be addressed during the planning and permitting processes of the City, 13. Water Use. Will the project involve installation or abandonmentofany waterweUs, connection to changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? IZI Yes D No If yes , as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply affected,c~angestobe Tade, and water quantities to be used; the source, duration, quantity iandpurposeof any appropriations; ~dlU1iquewellnumbers and DNR appropriation ~rmitnumberstif known... Identify any existing and new vyetlsQn the site map. If there are no wells known on. site, explain. methQ<lologyused to determine. City water service has not yet been extended to the project area; all of the rural residences and farmsteads are served by individual private water wells. City water will be extended to serve the new Farmington High School but is not expected to be extended to serve existing properties or other development until such time that development is allowed. Currently most of the project area is planned to remain in agricultural use. The proposed trunk sewer project has the potential to affect water use in two ways: I) Construction of the trunk sewer line may require the relocation of existing wells to maintain isolation distances required by Minnesota Rules (Chapter 4725); and 2) Construction of the trunk sewer could require dewatering during construction. Water appropriation permits would be required for withdrawals of or greater than 10,000 gallons per day or 1.000,000 gallons per year. Flagstatl Avenue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 8 Separation Distance from Water Supplv Wells Information from the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) indicates that a minimum separation or "isolation" distance must be maintained between a well and a source of contamination to protect the well and the groundwater. The distance applies to the construction of new wells, and to the placement of contamination sources near existing wells. The well rules contain specific isolation distances from contamination sources such as petroleum tanks, chemical storage, and septic systems, including the most common contamination source encountered on building projects - sewers. A minimum separation of 50 feet must be maintained between a buried sewer and a well. This distance may be reduced to 20 feet if the sewer is constructed of cast iron or plastic pipe meeting the standards of the Well Code and the Minnesota Plumbing Code, and if the sewer has been successfully air-tested. The separation requirement applies to all buried pipes carrying sewage, both outside a building, and under the building floor. The separation applies not only to wells used to provide drinking water, but also to wells used for other purposes, such as irrigation. At this time, it does not appear that abandonment of wells identified in the project area will be needed due to the 50-foot separation requirement. However, a field survey will be necessary to accurately determine the distances of wells on adjacent properties from the trunk sewer line. Appropriate measures will be taken to maintain required separation distances, or if it is determined that water wells are present within minimum setbacks from the sewer alignments, they will be properly abandoned in accordance with MDH regulations. Dewatering during Construction Soil borings have been completed along the proposed project alignment. Measurable water levels were encountered in approximately 40% of the boreholes and ranged from 4 to 23 feet below grade. Water levels generally appeared in low-lying areas, or in the areas where borings were extended deeper. Where the underlying soils consist mostly of sands, the recorded water level provides a reasonably good representation of the ground water table at that time and location. However, when water levels are recorded within sand layers that are interbedded with otherwise slow draining soils, water may be held up or perched within the profile and not a true hydrostatic condition. In these areas, the water encountered is believed to be perched above regional ground-water levels. It is likely that perched water tables occur at or near the surface in areas of wetlands. Trench dams could be incorporated into the project, if necessary, to prevent unintentional draining of wetlands through or near which the alignment passes. The position of trench dams would depend on observed ground-water conditions. Soil borings will be used to identify perched wetlands created by horizontal confining layers that could be penetrated by the trench and drained. If necessary, a confining layer of low-permeability soils will be restored to maintain perched conditions. Temporary dewatering may be needed in some areas in order to place the trunk sewer pipe at the required depths. Dewatering wells would be placed by the construction contractor based on the evaluation of dewatering needed. It is not yet known if the volumes of water would be such that a permit from the DNR would be required. The threshold for the DNR Water Appropriation Permit is 10,000 gallons per day, or I million gallons per year. The proposed project may need a temporary permit -DNR General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary Water Appropriations. The threshold for this permit is also 10,000 gallons per day. Total gallons pumped cannot exceed 50 million gallons, and water appropriations must be completed within one year from the start of pumping. Where dewatering is necessary. discharge would be directed to sediment traps or vegetative butfer strips if the discharge is laden with sediment. A filter sock may also be used to trap the sediment and filter the water prior to discharge, If dewatering wells are needed, clean discharge from well point dewatering would be dissipated over the adjacent wetland areas located beyond the construction limits, The FlagstatT A venue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 9 contractor would be responsible for obtaining permits from the DNR and the MDH for temporary water appropriations and temporary dewatering wells, respectively if needed. To determine the likelihood that construction dewatering along Flagstaff Avenue would potentially impact nearby water supply wells, a search of the County Well Index (CWI) was conducted, along with assistance from staff at Dakota County. Wells identified in the area are listed in the table below. Private Water Wells Well ID Address Aq uifer Depth to Drop Pipe Water in Depth Well (feet) (feet) 124302 20861 Flagstaff A venue Prairie du Chien* 44 71 175870 6300 21th Street Prairie du Chien 19 84 401104 20080 Flagstaff A venue St. Peter* 67 90 434077 20970 Flagstaff Avenue Prairie du Chien* 45 75 490557 20970 Flagstaff A venue Prairie du Chien* 30 57 518805 20520 Flagstaff Avenue St. Peter* 70 126 526959 20602 Flagstaff A venue St. Peter* 65 105 540204 Flagstaff A venue (David Drift* 14 36 Olson property) 540320 20982 Flagstaff Avenue Prairie du Chien* 30 63 547274 20630 Flagstaff Avenue St. Peter* 50 84 585174 21615 Flagstaff A venue Dri ft 15 63 604371 20080 Flagstaff A venue Prairie du Chien* 70 129 * aquifer overlain by thick clay deposits (greater than 30 feet of continuous thickness) Using the assumption that dewatering will extend to a depth up to 50 feet from the land surface, the following two factors were analyzed for the study: I) Aquifer connection. The hydraulic connection between the aquifer the well pulls its water from and the water table had to be established. The connection is expected to be seen in areas where highly permeable sediments overlie the aquifer from the 50 feet below the land surface to the top of the aquifer. In instances for 30 or more feet of continuous clay were observed in geologic logs between 50 feet and the top of the aquifer, one can assume that the aquifer the well is using is not hydraulically connected to the water table.. .at least at the location of the well itself. A hydraulic connection may possibly exist in a nearby area where the clay layer is absent. 2) Depth of the pump, The depth of the pump below the land surface indicates whether dewatering to 50 feet is likely to draw the water table below the setting of the pump. A safety factor of20 feet was considered for this analysis, to take into account potential drawdown of the aquifer from the pump itself. Therefore, any well with a pump setting less than 70 feet is thought to have a greater potential to be impacted. Using these factors, only two wells showed a likely connection between the water table and the aquifer used by that well. Of these two wells, only one well showed a pumping setting less than 70 feet. This well is located at 21615 Flagstaff A venue. Note that three other wells have pump settings less than 70 feet. While it is assumed these wells are not in direct hydraulic connection with the water table aquifer, the potential exists that there is a "window" between the aquifer and the water table near the point of the proposed dewatering, As such. there exists a possibility that dewatering may impact these wells, In particular. the well on the David Olson property Flagstaff A venue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 10 has a pump setting of only 36 feet and has the greatest possibility of being impacted if the water table is in connection with the deeper drift aquifer. Impacts from the dewatering are expected to decrease at distances laterally away from the trenches. So while dewatering within the trench may reach 50 feet in depth, the depth of the dewatered water table may be significantly less 100 feet away from the trench. Also, there exists the possibility that there are other wells in the project area that are not part of the CWI and Dakota County inventory. If other properties are located along Flagstaff Avenue near the dewatering area, but are not listed above, the assumption should be made that these properties contain wells, 14. Water-related land use management districts. Does any part of the proje.ct involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? IZI Yes D No Ifyes,id~ntifythe district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. The project is not located in or adjacent to a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district. However, the southern part of the alignment extends within a shore land zoning district and 100- year floodplain associated with the tributary to the Vermillion River. The project is also located within the jurisdiction of the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization (VRWJPO). As indicated in Item 8, the VRWJPO was formed in November 2005 and published Draft Rules in May 2006 that are anticipated to be adopted in December 2006. The rules address standards, policies, and permits regarding floodplains, wetlands, buffers, stormwater management, drainage, and agricultural production. Land alteration plans, erosion and sediment control plans, grading plans, stormwater management plans, etc. for the project will be submitted to the VRWJPO for review and approval. The project will comply with VRWJPO requirements. 15. Water Surface Use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? DYes IZI No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. The project will not directly change the number of watercraft on any waterbody. However, it will eventually enable additional residential and other development in Farmington. It is possible that some of the residents might engage in boating activities on area lakes. 16. Erosion and Sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: 19.85 acres; 300,000 cubic yards. Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils And identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. Steep slopes are generally considered to be slopes greater than 12 percent. According to Dakota County soils information, two of the soils identified in the project area exhibit steep slopes, and both are indicated to be eroded: 963D2 Timula-Bold silt loams, 12-18% slopes, eroded; 963E2 Timula-Bold silt loams, 18-25% slopes, eroded (see Item 19 and Figure 8). The majority of excavated soil will be returned to the construction trench after placement of the pipe. Any excess soil will be disposed of in upland areas where sediment will not impact water resources or other sensitive areas, Soil erosion control practices will be implemented to minimize impacts to the Vermillion River tributary. wetlands. and other surface waters in the vicinity of the project. Best management practices vvill be observed, Construction practices will be managed to limit the duration of Flagstaff A venue Trun'- Sc\\er L inc Farmington, MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 11 exposed soil to wind and rain; disturbed areas will be seeded and stabilized as soon as possible after construction. Detailed temporary and permanent sediment and erosion control plans must be prepared in accordance with the MPCA NPDES General Storm Water Construction Permit. The erosion and sediment control plans and grading plans will also be submitted for review and approval to the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization as required. Measures will be implemented prior to the start of construction and will remain in place until site stabilization has been achieved. Regular inspection will ensure that measures implemented remain effective. In general, high flow areas will be protected with turf reinforcement mats. Any potential high flows from off site will be mitigated as they enter the construction site. Specific measures to be implemented may include the use of silt fence, rock construction entrance, check dams, biologs, sedimentation or stilling basins, erosion control blankets, and prompt re-vegetation of disturbed areas via seeding and mulch, A fiber blanket or hydraulic seed stabilizer may also be used. Erosion control and storm water management measures will be outlined in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prepared for the project. The SWPPP will be submitted, if required, to the MPCA for review and approval as part of the NPDES permit application process. 17. Water Quality - Surface-water RUDoff. a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoffbefore and after the project. Describe permanent . controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any storm-water pOllution prevention plans~. . As discussed above, the project will require an NPDES permit because it will disturb more than one acre of land. The NPDES construction site permit requires the submittal of an application completed by the owner and operator and the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) designed in accordance with the MPCA construction site permit Part III. The SWPPP includes both temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control plans. Attachment 2 contains an overview of the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit program and lists the program requirements, The proposed project will comply with NPDES requirements. The entity responsible for ensuring compliance will be specified in the permit. Because the sewer pipe will be buried, the quantity and quality of runoff before and after the project will not change significantly. Discharge from dewatering activities during excavation is discussed in Item 13 and will be conducted as stipulated in applicable permits and approvals (see Items 8, 13 and 16). b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; incIudemajor downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoffon the quality of receiving waters. Receiving water bodies in the vicinity of the proposed project include wetlands, tributaries to the Vermillion River, the Vermillion River and ultimately, the Mississippi River. As discussed in Items 12 and 16, appropriate erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented during construction, and runoff from the site will be minimized. Because the sewer pipe will be placed below grade, and because the disturbance caused by construction of the pipe will be temporary, permanent significant impacts to receiving water bodies are not anticipated to be caused by the sewer project. FlagstatT Avenue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 12 Vegetation will be restored as soon as possible after construction, Fiber blankets, mulch and/or hydraulic seeding will be used where necessary to ensure prompt re-vegetation, The SWPPP and NPDES General Permit for Discharge of Storm Water during Construction Activities will outline specific timeline provisions for re-vegetation, The contractor will comply with these time lines. 18. Water Quality - Wastewater. a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. The Flagstaff Trunk Sewer will initially serve only the new Farmington High School to be constructed on the west side of Flagstaff. The school property is depicted on the attached figures. Sanitary flows are expected to be 0.037 MGD when the school opens in 2008. At full capacity of the school (anticipated by year 2017), flows are expected to be 0.045 MGD, The City's Comprehensive Plan does not provide for other development in the area until after 2020. Most of the land in the project area is designated Urban Reserve. Existing properties in the area will be required to maintain their on-site individual waste treatment systems, In the future, the trunk line will serve a 749-acre area of Farmington and possibly a 1,345-acre area of Lakeville (see Figure 4). The trunk line is being sized to accommodate both areas. At full build-out of the service areas, flows in the trunk line are anticipated to be 3.56 MGD. The wastewater is expected to be within the range of normal strength domestic wastewater. b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems. The areas within Farmington and Lakeville to be served by the proposed trunk sewer do not currently have centralized wastewater treatment and collection service. As expected, an area relying on on-site wastewater treatment systems is not likely to be the location for high-strength wastewater generators. There are no permitees registered in the MCES Industrial Waste Permit Program in the project service area, nor are any otherwise known to exist. The flow conveyed by the Flagstaff Trunk Sewer system will ultimately be treated at the MCES Empire Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) located on the Vermillion River in Dakota County. The wastewater will be within the range of normal strength domestic wastewater. The discharge impacts will be relevant to the discharge permit of the Empire WWTP. c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary. Sanitary sewer waste will be conveyed by the Farmington Trunk Sewer to the MCES Empire WWTP, The Empire Plant is located on the Vermillion River in Dakota County and currently treats 9 MGD, according to a June 2006 Metropolitan Council Wastewater Services publication. The plant's capacity is 12 MGD and it is currently undergoing an expansion to double its capacity. The expansion is expected to be operational in 2007, According to the Metropolitan Council publication, treated wastewater from the expanded Empire Plant will be conveyed 12 miles for discharge to the Mississippi River at a new outfall pipe on the river in Rosemount. In this way. harmful impacts to the environmentally sensitive Vermillion River will be avoided, Particularly with the expansion, the Empire WWTP will have ample capacity to treat the tlows anticipated from the Fannington Trunk SeVier. Flagstaff i'.. venue Trunk Se\\er Line Farmington, \IN Environmental Assessment \Vorksheet 13 d. If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identity any improvements necessary. Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. Not applicable. 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions. Approximate depth (in feet) to Ground water: See below minimum; See below average. Bedrock: See below minimum; See below average. Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site . map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measUres to avoid or . . . .minimize environmental problems due to any of these hlmuds. In order to ascertain the geologic conditions at the site, the following Minnesota Geological Survey publication was reviewed: . Geologic Atlas, Dakota County, Minnesota, N.H. Balaban and Howard C. Hobbs, County Atlas Series Atlas C-6, Minnesota Geological Survey, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1990. According to the geologic atlas, surficial geology along the project corridor varies. At the southern end of the corridor, the sediments consist of floodplain alluvium deposits of poorly bedded, moderately well sorted sediments deposited by modem streams during flood stage. The sediments consist mainly of sand typically interbedded with organic-rich layers and buried soil. In the middle section of the project corridor, the sediments consist of mixed outwash deposits of sand, loamy sand, and gravel. Surficial geology in the northern third of the project corridor consists of loess deposits of uniform unbedded silt and fine sand mixed with clay. Grey calcareous till is present in other parts of the corridor. The till deposits consist of two undivided tills. The upper till is friable loam to fine sandy loam; the lower till is firm loam to clay loam. Because of extensive erosion, the lower till is at the surface in many areas, according to the geologic atlas. Information from the geologic atlas differs somewhat from the information collected from the soil borings completed by American Engineering & Testing (AET). Information gathered from the borings indicates the soils are more clay-like throughout the corridor. The uppermost bedrock unit in the northern third of the project corridor is the St. Peter Sandstone. In the southern two-thirds, the uppermost unit is the Prairie du Chien. The depth to bedrock is estimated to be 101-200 feet below grade for most of the corridor. The geologic atlas indicates bedrock is 201-250 feet below the surface in a narrow swath that crosses the corridor south of CSAH 50. Groundwater flow in both the glacial drift sediments and the bedrock aquifer (Prairie du Chien - Jordan aquifer) is indicated to be to the east. The depth to water varies along the corridor and is known to be shallow in wetland areas. Water was encountered at 40% of the soil boring locations at depths of 4 to 23 feet below grade. Two private wells in the project area indicate water is present in the drift material at 14 to IS feet below grade. Other wells in the area installed in the bedrock aquifers indicate water is present at 19 to 70 feet below grade. Environmental hazards such as sinkholes. shallow limestone formations or karst conditions are not known to be present in the area, Flagstaff A venue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 14 b. Describe the soils on the site, giving SCS classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discussany mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. Soils data for Dakota County are maintained as a SSURGO database by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. A brief description of soil mapping units occurring in the project area is provided below in the table below. A map of the soil unit locations is proyided as Figure 8. Soil Types Soil Unit Symbol Soil Name Permeabilitv Soecial Considerations 28 Ostrander loam, 1-6% Moderate Prime farmland slopes 2C Ostrander loam, 6-12% Moderate Farmland soil of statewide slopes importance 398 Wadena loam, 2-6% Moderate in loamy Prime farmland slopes mantle; rapid in sandy underlying material 418 EstheryilIe sandy loam, 2- Moderately rapid in Farmland soil of statewide 6% slopes loamy mantle; rapid in importance the underlying material 98 Colo silt loam, Moderate Hydric, prime farmland if occasionally flooded protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growmg season 129 Cylinder loam Moderate in loamy Prime farmland mantle; very rapid in the underlying material 76 Garwin silt clay loam Moderate Hydric, prime farmland if drained 2038 Joy silt loam, 1-5% slopes Moderate Prime farmland 208 Kato silty clay loam Moderate in the silty Hydric, prime farmland if drained mantle; rapid in the underlying material 2138 Klinger silt loam, 1-5% Moderate Prime farmland slopes 252 Marshan silty clay loam Moderate in the upper Hydric, prime farmland if drained loamy mantle; rapid in underlying sandy material 255 Mayer silt loam Moderate in the upper Hydric, prime farmland if drained mantle; rapid in the underlying material 2858 Port 8yron silt loam, 2- Moderate Prime farmland 6% slopes 285C Port 8yron silt loam. 9- Moderate Farmland soil of statewide 12% slopes importance 3018 Lindstrom silt loam, 1-4% Moderate Prime farmland slopes 320C2 Tallula silt loam, 6- I 2% Moderate Farmland soil of statewide slopes, eroded importance 411A Waukegan silt loam. 0- Moderate in the silty Prime farmland I ~o slopes mantle: rapid in the sandy underlying material Flagstaff Avenue Crunk Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet I:' 411B Waukegan silt loam, 1- Moderate in the silty Prime farmland 6% slopes mantle; rapid in the sandy underlying material 540 Seelyeville muck Moderately rapid Hydric 96302 Timula-Bold silt loams, Moderate -- 12-18% slopes, eroded 963E2 Timula-Bold silt loams, Moderate -- 18-25% slopes, eroded *Hydric soils were identitied using the Hydric Soils of Minnesota list, revised December 1995, Prime and important farmland soils information was obtained from the USDA NRCS Electronic Office Field Technical Guide at hllDI\\ \\\\.nrcs,usdJ,lU)\kchnical 'CrOLl!, Permeability information was obtained from the Dakota County Soil Survey (USDA SCS, 1983), In general, water moves through coarse textured soils at a faster rate than through medium or fine textured soils, Therefore, potential impacts to ground water from spilled chemicals would be expected to be greater in areas with coarse textured soils. However, many factors in addition to soil granularity can affect infiltration and percolation rates in soils. Some of these factors include: soil water content, soil frost, the temperature of soil and water, surface roughness, the nature of the soil pore openings, vegetative ground cover, and the degree of soil compaction. The groundwater sensitivity map from the geologic atlas indicates groundwater sensitivity to pollution in the project area varies along the project corridor. It is low in the northern part, low- moderate in the central part, and high in the southern part. Due to the nature ofthe project (sanitary sewer line), the potential for impacts to ground water is minimal. 20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks. a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation.<ldentitymethodand location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there isasource seParation plan; describe how the project ,will be modified for recycling. Ifhazardous wastejs generated, indicate if there is a hazardous ",asteminiIlli.ultion plan and. Joqtinehazar<l()llsw~t~ J~d.uction ~sS~~~J1l~n~~. Construction activities will generate waste materials. These materials will be disposed of by the contractor in accordance with applicable state and local rules and regulations, b. Identity any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present atthe site and identity measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. Ifthe use oftoxic or hazardous m.aterials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission. During construction, equipment and vehicles utilizing gasoline, diesel fuel, antifreeze, and oil will be used at the project site, Portable storage tanks of fuel may be temporarily located at the site during construction. Fueling of vehicles and equipment will be conducted away from sensitive areas. c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans. As discussed above, portable storage tanks of fuel may be temporarily located at the site during construction, Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Se~~er Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 16 21. Traffic. Parking spaces added: 0 Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): 0 Estimated total average daily traffic generated: NA Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and its timing: NA Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. A noticeable permanent increase in traffic will not occur directly due to construction of the project per se. The only increase in traffic resulting directly from the project would be that due to construction of the project, and that due to maintenance of the sewer line. During the construction process, construction vehicles will be utilizing county roads and local streets. Delivery of pipe, concrete and other materials will be restricted to the county roads where possible. In addition, tunneling under County Road 50 is not expected to result in major traffic impacts, although minimal traffic disruption, such as minor slow- downs, may occur during the short period of tunneling. [n the future, traffic in the vicinity ofthe project is likely to increase with increased urban development. Residential, commercial, and other types of development may be enabled as a result of the project, It is the purpose of the project to provide wastewater collection and conveyance for the new Farmington High School, but it will ultimately serve the areas of Farmington and Lakeville indicated on Figure 4. [t will be necessary for Mn/DOT, Dakota County, and Fannington to work together to provide appropriate roadway improvements and measures to mitigate traffic congestion, 22. Vehicle-related Air Emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed. Vehicle emissions directly associated with the project will not have a significant effect on air quality. However. residential and other development enabled by the construction of wastewater conveyance capacity may result in measurable, but not likely significant impacts, If traffic increases due to the enabled development result locally in future deterioration in levels of service and/or air quality violations, mitigative measures are available. These measures include roadway improvements, signal installation, and provision of alternative transportation choices. 23. Stationary Source Air Emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EA W Guidelines for a listing), any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides), and ozone-depleting chemicals (chlorofluorocarbons, hydro fluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. There will be no stationary source air emissions associated with the proposed project. 24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? IZI Yes D No [fyes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.) Dust and noise will be generated by equipment and machinery during construction, Odors may also be generated from construction equipment exhaust. Equipment will include trucks. backhoes, graders, Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sev~er Line Farmington, 'vi\! Environmental Assessment \Vorksheet 1~ compactors, excavators, bobcats, cranes, loaders, compressors, and possibly de-watering pumps. Dust may be controlled by daily cleanup of the construction site; water will be used to wet appropriate surfaces to reduce airborne dust when necessary. Noise and odor impacts from construction equipment will be controlled by restricting the hours of operation to daylight hours, or those permitted by local ordinances. The nearest receptors are farmsteads and rural residences along or near the proposed alignment. Average exposure times are estimated to be of short duration. As in any sanitary sewer system, there is potential for odors to form during operation of the proposed system. Hydrogen sulfide has the potential to form in sewage material under anaerobic conditions, and can produce a rotten-egg odor, particularly where flow turbulence releases gas from solution in the wastewater. This project is similar to most sanitary sewers in the metropolitan area, where slopes are mild and turbulence is low, which helps minimize the release of odors, The need for odor control is not anticipated for this project. However, if it becomes necessary in the future, there are a number of options to consider such as adding chemicals to the sanitary system to suppress growth of odor-causing bacteria, and filtering air ventilated from the sewer system through a biofilter or through a carbon filtration system. 25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? a. Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources? [8] Yes 0 No b. Prime or unique farmlands.orland within an agricultural preserve? [8] Yes. 0 No c. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? [8] Ves 0 No d. Scenic views and vistaS?. DVes.[8]No e. Other unique resources? [8] Yes 0 No Archaeoloe:ical. Historical. or Architectural Resources The Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was contacted regarding the potential presence of cultural resources in the project corridor vicinity. SHPO's review of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historic Structures Inventory did not identify archaeological sites in the project area, but did identify several historic structures in the vicinity (see Attachment 3). None of the historic structures appears to be located directly adjacent to the project corridor, so none would be directly impacted during the construction process. Indirect affects are also not anticipated as the sewer will be placed below grade. Prime or Unique Farmlands. Lands within an Ae:ricultural Preserve There are soils within the project area have been designated as important to farming (see table of soil types in Item 19). Currently, the project area (other than the new high school property) is zoned to remain in agricultural use. In the future however, it is likely that some ofthe agricultural land will be taken out of production. Development will be subject to the comprehensive plan and zoning regulations of the City of Farmington. Conversion of agricultural land to urban land is a consequence of population growth. Desie:nated Parks. Recreation Areas or Trails The trunk sewer line does not extend through any designated park areas, although it extends through or near areas designated as "natural open space" by the City's 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan map. The areas are associated with small streams or drainage ways that intersect the project corridor and the Vermillion River tributary near the southern end of the alignment. The Farmington Future Parks, Trails & Open Space Map indicates there is an existing trail along the north side of CSAH 50 that crosses the project corridor. In addition, a future bituminous bike trail is planned to extend through an area east of the project corridor. Flagstaff A venue Trun~ Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet IS Permanent impacts to these amenities are not anticipated as the project will be placed below grade. However, temporary impacts (such as noise, dust, and general disruption caused by construction machinery) may occur to users of the facilities during construction of the project. These impacts are expected to be short-lived and not significant. Scenic Views and Vistas The project corridor extends through an agricultural area of Farmington. Some wooded and wetland areas are present. There are no officially designated scenic views or vistas along the corridor. Due to the sub-grade nature of the project, any scenic views and vistas that might be considered present would not be impacted once construction has been completed. Other Unique Resources As discussed previously, a tributary to the Vermillion River flows past the southern end of the project corridor. Construction activities will not encroach on the creek as the proposed connection to the MCES Interceptor is on the north side ofthe creek. The erosion and sediment control measures and stormwater management practices to be implemented for the project will ensure that impacts to the creek are avoided or minimized (see Items 11, 12, 13, and 16), 26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? DYes ~ No If yes, explain. No such impacts are anticipated, 27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? ~ Yes D No If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain. The proposed project is subject to the City of Farmington Comprehensive Plan (February, 2000) and amendments thereto, the City of Farmington Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan (May, 1996), City ordinances, Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization (VRWJPO) rules, and Metropolitan Council plans for sanitary service. The service area (Figure 4) for the proposed trunk line includes approximately 749 acres of Farmington and 1,135 acres of Lakeville. The 1976 Metropolitan Land Planning Act requires local governments to prepare comprehensive plans and submit them to the Metropolitan Council to determine their consistency with metropolitan system plans. The local comprehensive plan is to include a sewer element addressing the collection and disposal of wastewater generated by the community. Further, under Minnesota Statutes S 473.513, local governments are required to submit a Comprehensive Sewer Plan (CSP) describing service needs from the MCES to the Metropolitan Council for its approval. These are known as Tier II plans. The CSP is broader in scope than the sewer element of the local comprehensive plan and provides detailed sewer system engineering infonnation. The CSP for Farmington outlines potential alignments and sizing for city trunk sewers, as well as connection points to the metropolitan interceptor system. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment was prepared by the City to allow for the extension of utility services to the school. The amendment has been approved by the Metropolitan Council. Prior to the amendment, utility services were not planned for extension to the project area until after 2020, Even with the amendment. development other than the school is not planned until after 2020, Most of the project area is Flagstaff Avenue Trunk SevIer Line Farmington. \;IN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 19 zoned Urban Reserve. With the amendment, the project is consistent with the City plans and ordinances to which it is subject. The project will comply with watershed VRWJPO requirements. The City review and approval process will regulate land use changes within the project service area, 28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? 0 Yes [8J No Ify~s,.. describe the new or additional infrastructure or.servicesneeded......(Note:an~.i?frastruc~tetha~isa cOnnected action witb;.respeet to the. project mliStbe assessedin>the E.AW;seeEtfJfQuideli"esf~r .. g~~i~.) Although the trunk sewer will not require additional infrastructure, future development within its service area will. Although not anticipated in the near future, as development of the area is proposed, other utilities and infrastructure, such as roads, collector streets, collector and lateral sewer lines, potable water distribution systems, storm water collection and treatment systems, schools (such as the new Farmington High School), police, and fire protection, and other urban services will be needed to service the area. Adherence to City development plans and ordinances will ensure coordination of infrastructure for enabled development. 29. Cumulative impacts. Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EA W in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or. . . discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s) elsewne~ on this form).. . Future residential and commercial development of the service area has been considered in the planning of this project. The trunk sewer has been sized to accommodate long-range wastewater flows after development of the area. The potential environmental impacts from future planned development will be mitigated through enforcement of local, state, and federal ordinances and regulations. Individual development projects may be subject to environmental review and the preparation of project-specific EA Ws or an Alternative Urban Areawide Review. Any sanitary sewer extensions will require a permit from the MPCA. 30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here,along\Vith any proposed mitigation. Environmental impacts other than those previously discussed in this EA Ware not anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 31. Summary of issues. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. The City must acquire the previously mentioned permits and approvals prior to proceeding with construction. Detailed plans and specifications must be reviewed and approved prior to construction. Issues identified in this EA W that may require additional investigation include: . Erosion and sediment control plans will be prepared and. if required, submitted for review to appropriate agencies prior to construction, . Proposed wetland impacts must be authorized by the LGU prior to impacting the wetlands, Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington, MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 20 RGU CERTIFICATION. I hereby certify that: . The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. . The EA W describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minn. R. 4410.0200, subps. 9b and 60, respectively. . Copies of this EA Ware being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Name and Title of Signer: Richard Newquist, Supervisor, Environmental Review Unit Environmental Review and Operations Section Regional Division Date: The format of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for EA W Guidelines, contact: Environmental Quality Board, 658 Cedar St., St. Paul, MN 55155,651-296-8253, or at their Web site http://www.eqb.state.mn.lls/reviev\.html . Flagstaff A venue Trunk Sewer Line Farmington. MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet 21 EAW ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program Response Letter Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Herit5'~O f:lA~~w~~aw8fc1esearch Program, Box 25 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-40__ Phone: (651) 259-5107 Fax: (651) 296-1811 E-mail: sarah.hoffmann@dnr.state.mn,us August 25, 2006 Ms. Lisa Fay Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Flagstaff A venue Trunk Sewer Line; Tl14N R20W Sections 22, 23, 26, 27, 34, & 35; Dakota County NHNRP Contact #: ERDB 20070181 Dear Ms. Fay, The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review, there are no known occurrences of rare species or native plant communities in the area searched. The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources, It is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, native plant communities, and other natural features, Its purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database, A county-by-county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Dakota County, Our information about native plant communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However, because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on-site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the project area, Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuses only on rare natural features, It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. If you require further information on the environmental review process for other natural resource- related issues, you may contact yom RegioT1~J Environmental As<;essment Ecologist, Wayne Barstad. at ((is I) 772-7940. An invoice in the amount of $70,75 will be mailed to you under separate cover within several weeks of the date of this letter. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. Sincerely, ~ Jo1jaR ff5/( Sarah D, Hoffmann Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator DNR Information: 651-296-6157 . 1-888-646-6367 . TTY: 651-296-5484 . 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportur1ity Employer .,. Printed Oil Recycled P,lper COr1taining a \.., Minimull\ or I Wfr Post.Consumel" Waste ATTACHMENT 2 Overview of Minnesota's NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater Permit Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Municipal Division Overview of Minnesota's NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater Permit Why - Although the quality of Minnesota's waters has improved, degraded and impaired waters still exist. Sediment-filled stormwater runoff is the leading source of pollution for Minnesota's surface waters by volume. Runoff can change both water quality and quantity affecting our water resources physically, chemically and biologically. Sediment levels in construction site runoff are typically far greater than levels from agricultural or forest lands. During a short period of time, construction activity can contribute more sediment to streams than can be deposited naturally over several decades, causing physical and biological harm to our waters. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that 20- 150 tons of soil per acre is lost every year to storm water runoff from construction sites. Many studies indicate that controlling erosion can significantly reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants transported by runoff from construction sites. What - Mandated by Congress under the Clean Water Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Program is a comprehensive national program for addressing polluted storm water runoff. The program regulates stormwater discharges from construction sites, industrial facilities and urbanized municipalities using NPDES permits. These permits require permittees to control polluted discharges. Water Quality/Stormwater #2-05, November 2005 The State of Minnesota regulates the disposal of stormwater by a State Disposal System (SDS) permit. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) administers both NPDES and SDS permits in Minnesota. Who - Owners and operators of construction activity disturbing one acre or more of land need to obtain an NPDES/SDS permit. Sites disturbing less than one acre within a larger common plan of development or sale that is more than one acre also need permit coverage. How - Regulated parties must develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and submit: . Completed application . $400 application fee Applications and other forms are available by calling 651-297-1457 or visiting www,pca.state,nm,lIs/water/stormwarer fstormwater-c,html. Construction may begin seven days after the application is postmarked for most sites. Sites that are more than 50 acres and discharging to outstanding resource value waters or impaired waters must submit their SWPPP and application at least 30 days prior to commencing construction. This fact sheet summarizes the requirements of Minnesota's NPDES/SDS General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity. Please review the permit itself for more detailed information. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Road North, Sl. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 (651) 296-6300, toll-free (800) 657-3864, TTY (651) 282-5332 or (800) 657-3864 This material can be made available in alternative formats for people with disabilities. * Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20 percent fibers from paper recycled by consumers. . q-stnn2-05 " ~,r.t!!~,:!.:~~!~.!()~I~t!()~,~,,:,~!~~I. ~!;!:'l1.c;Y",_ - Municipal Division Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan The SWPPP must be completed prior to submitting permit application and before beginning construction. Plans must: . Describe the nature of the construction activity . Address the potential for sediment and pollutant discharges from the site . Identify someone to oversee BMP implementation . Identify chain of responsibility for general contractor and owner . Identify temporary sediment basins, if more than 10 acres are disturbed and drain to a single point of discharge . Identify permanent storm water management system . Identify erosion prevention practices . Identify sediment control practices . Identify dewatering and basin draining practices . Identify inspection and maintenance practices . Identify pollution prevention management measures . Retain records . Describe the timing ofBMP installation . Location and type of temporary and permanent BMPs . Include standard plates and specifications ofBMPs . Include a site map identifying: . Existing and final grades . Dividing lines and direction of pre and post- construction storm water flow and drainage areas . Impervious surfaces and soil types . Location of areas not to be disturbed . Phased construction areas . Surface waters and wetlands within Yz mile that receive runoff from the site . Describe methods of final stabilization of exposed soil . Include any additional measures needed to protect special waters and for projects in Karst areas or in drinking water supply management areas . Include any additional measures necessary to comply with any total maximum daily load (TMDL) established for the receiving waters Water Quality/Stormwater # 2,05, November 2005 SWPPP amendments are required when: . Any change effects the discharge of pollutants . Inspections indicate ineffectiveness . General objectives or terms and conditions of permit aren't being met . A TMDL is established for the receiving water for the project and has a waste load allocation for construction activities 10+ acres disturbed at one time? Temporary sediment basins must: . Provide storage for a two-year, 24-hour storm, but no less than 1800 cubic feet per acre . Prevent discharge of floating debris . Allow for maintenance . Provide emergency overflow . Be built concurrent with start of soil disturbance . Consider public safety When site limitations don't allow for temporary sediment basins, you must use equivalent controls. Temporary basins are also recommended for projects with steep slopes or highly erodible soils. Permanent Storm water Management System When a project replaces vegetation or other pervious surfaces with one or more acres of cumulative impervious surface, Yz" of runoff from the new impervious surface must be treated by one of the following methods. See the permit for specific design requirements. . Wet sedimentation basin . Infiltration/filtration . Regional ponds . Combination of practices . Alternative method, pending MPCA approval. At least 90 days before the start of the project submit: . All calculations, drainage areas, plans and specifications . Two-year monitoring plan . Mitigation plan if alternative method fails Page 2 of 4 Overview of Minnesota's NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater Permit Program Minnesota Pollution Control Water Quality/Stormwater # 2,05, November 2005 Municipal Division Best Management Practices Erosion prevention practices must be installed in an appropriate and functional manner. Regulated parties choose which practices are best for specific sites. Prior to construction, they must identify areas not to be disturbed with flags, stakes, signs and so on. Possibilities include, but are not limited to: . Construction phasing . Vegetative buffer strips . Temporary seeding . Sod stabilization . Horizontal slope grading . Minimize land disturbance . Preserve trees and natural vegetation . Mulch or wood fiber blanket . Stockpile covers Within 200 feet of surface water? The permit limits the time exposed soils can remain unstabilized when they are within 200 lineal feet of a surface water. Sites must have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover. Slope Maximum Time unstabilized and unworked 7 days 14 days 21 days Steeper than 3: 1 10:1 to 3:1 flatter than 10: 1 Sediment control practices must minimize sediment from entering surface waters, curb and gutter systems, and storm sewer inlets. Regulated parties choose which practices are best for specific sites and practices must: . Be established down gradient before upgradiant land disturbance begins . Protect storm drain inlets . Control temporary soil stockpiles . Control vehicle tracking with stone pads, concrete, steel wash racks or equivalent . Remain until final stabilization Possible sediment control practices include: . Silt fences . Inlet protection . Check dams . Sedimentation traps and basins . Stabilized construction entrances Dewatering and basin draining must discharge to a temporary or permanent sedimentation basin whenever possible. Draining activities must: . Prevent erosion and scour . Disperse over natural rock riprap, sand bags, plastic sheeting or other accepted measures . A void nuisance conditions in receiving waters . Not inundate wetlands Inspections and maintenance are conducted by the owner, operator, or designee and must: . Occur every seven days . Occur within 24 hours of Yz" storm . Occur once a month on finally stabilized area . Be routinely recorded and kept with the S WPPP . Ensure the integrity and effectiveness of erosion prevention and sediment control measures . Repair or replace nonfunctional BMPs . Drain and remove sediment from basins . Inspect surface waters, drainage ditches and conveyance systems for sediment . Remove sediment deposits and stabilize any exposed soil during sediment removal . Inspect and clean vehicle exits . Ensure infiltration areas are protected Pollution prevention management measures include housekeeping practices that help prevent polluted runoff and include: . Proper collection and disposal of solid waste . Proper storage and disposal of oil, paint, gasoline and other hazardous materials . Establishing a specific truck washing site . No on site engine degreasing Final stabilization must be ensured by the permittee. This includes establishing a uniform perennial vegetative cover over 70% of pervious surface area. For residential construction only, permitees may establish temporary erosion protection and distribute the MPCA fact sheet, Sediment and Erosion Comro! tClr New Hmnemi'ners, to homeowners. Page 3 of 4 Overview of Minnesota's NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater Permit Program ~ ~~~.~.~~~!,,:!,~I,~-!~?!:, _~..?_~!!,~~~~~~<:y - Municipal Division Discharges to special waters Additional best management practices and enhanced runoff controls are required for discharges to the following special waters: . Wilderness areas . Portions of the Mississippi River . Scenic or recreational river segments . Lake Superior . Lake trout lakes . Trout lakes . Scientific and natural areas . Trout streams Additional best management practices include: . Temporary erosion protection or permanent cover over exposed soil with a slope of 3: I or steeper within three days after the area is no longer being worked . Temporary sediment basins that drain to a single point of discharge for five or more acres disturbed at one time . Permanent stormwater management system designed to treat 1" of runoff . I 00 linear feet buffer zone from special waters . Enhanced runoff controls . Temperature controls for discharges to trout waters Owner or operator changes? Subdivision . New owner or operator must submit a Subdivision Registration within seven days . May use previously developed SWPPP . May not make previously implemented BMPs ineffective Entire project . New owner or operator must submit an Applicationfor Permit Transfer/Modification within seven days . May use previously developed SWPPP . May not make previously implemented BMPs ineffective Page 4 of 4 Water Quality/Stormwater # 2,05, November 2005 Discharges to Wetlands Permitees must follow a wetland mitigative sequence if the project's stormwater discharge has the potential for adversely impacting (for example, excavating or permanently flooding a wetland to create a storm water pond) a wetland. Potential adverse impacts may be addressed by: . Permits or other approvals from an official statewide program (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, WCA etc.) . Use of appropriate measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate all adverse impacts Special situations The Minnesota NPDES permit does not replace or satisfy any requirements dealing with: . Environmental review . Environmental impact statements . Environmental worksheets . Federal environmental review . Endangered or threatened species . Historic places or archeological sites Overview of Minnesota's NPDES/SDS Construction Stormwater Permit Program ATTACHMENT 3 Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office Response to Inquiry Page 1 of2 Fay, Lisa From: Cinadr, Thomas [thomas,cinadr@mnhs,org] Sent: Monday, August 07,2006 11 :16 AM To: Fay, Lisa Subject: RE: Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Attachments: Historic,doc THIS EMAIL IS NOT A PROJECT CLEARANCE. This message simply reports the results of the cultural resources database search you requested. The database search produced results for only previously known archaeological sites and historic properties. Please read the note below carefully. For further information contact Kelly Gragg-Johnson by phone at 651-296-5462 or email at kelly.gragg-johnson@mnhs.org. No archaeological sites were identified in a search of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historic Structures Inventory for the search area requested. A report containing the historic properties identified is attached. The result of this database search provides a listing of recorded historic architectural properties that are included in the current SHPO databases. Because the majority of archaeological sites in the state and many historic architectural properties have not been recorded, important sites or structures may exist within the search area and may be affected by development projects within that area. Additional research, including field survey, may be necessary to adequately assess the area's potential to contain historic properties. With regard to Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EAW), a negative known site/structure response from the SHPO databases is not necessarily appropriate information on which to base a "No" response to EAW Question 25a. It is the Responsible Governmental Unit's (RGU) obligation to verify the accuracy of the information contained within the EAW. A "No" response to Question 25a without written justification should be carefully considered. If you require a comprehensive assessment of a project's potential to impact archaeological sites or historic architectural properties, you may need to hire a qualified archaeologist and/or historian. Please contact the SHPO by phone at 651-296-5462 or by email at mnshpo@mnhs.org for current lists of professional consultants in these fields. The Minnesota SHPO Survey Manuals and Database Metadata can be found at http://www.mnhs.org/shpo/surveylinventories.htm 8/7 /2006 Page 2 of2 Tom Cinadr Survey and Information Management Coordinator Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Minnesota Historical Society 345 Kellogg Blvd, West St. Paul, MN 55102 651-205-4197 (voice) 651-282-2374 (fax) -----Original Message----- From: Fay, Lisa [mailto:LFay@bonestroo.com] Sent: Friday, August 04,20064:36 PM To: Cinadr, Thomas Subject: Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Tom, We are assisting the City of Farmington with preparation of a draft EAW for the proposed Flagstaff Avenue Trunk Sewer Line, Please check your records to see if there are any cultural resources present in the vicinity of the project. Location information is below, Thank you! Lisa Location: Township 114 North, Range 20 West, Sections 22,23,26,27,34, and 35; Farmington, Dakota County, Lisa Fay Bonestroo & Associates 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 651-604-4866 8/7/2006 .... ... 0 ., ..Q <!) e OJ) = '" :z \0 r-- 00 0- 0 .;- V') Q.. N N N N ...., ...., .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... U U U U U U U U 0 -= :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 ~ ~ ., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -l -l > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..5 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 ~ 0 Q ~ ~ U Q. :c =: :z - ... 0 ::c ::c ::c ::c ::c ::c ::c ::c c. <Ii ":' ":' ":' ":' ":' ":' ":' ":' ~ V') V') V') V') V') V') V') V') 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 bh bh bh bh bh bh bh rJ:J 0: 0: 0: 0: C 0: 0: C c.;l '~ "g "~ '~ 'g 'g 'g "g rJ:J :;J '" '" '" '" '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u..l ~ '" '1 z u..l '1 '1 ... ~ Z ~ ~ u..l :i z u..l ~ ... u..l iZl iZl ~ iZl '1 z '" :i :i = z ~ '1 en u..l ~ 0' J:, Z Z iZl Z Z ~ en ... V') V') on V') .... .;- .... .... ., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., rJJ ., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lOll N N N N N N N N = '" =: Q. :! :! :! :! :! :! :! :! ~ E- - - - - - -ci -ci -ci -ci -ci Q) > > > > ;i ;i ;i as as as as > as Z c/5 c/5 c/5 "g "g "g "g "g rJJ 05 05 05 ';;: ";;: ";;: ";;: ";;: rJJ <!) <!) <!) <!) N ~ N ... ... ... ... ., ~ '" '" '" '" ... U =: N N N -l -l -l -l '" Q N 0 0 on 0 0 \0 -l Q) Q N .;- V') r-- r-- ...., 00 >< r-- 0 0 N \0 r-- 00 >< ...j..j -( V') \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 >< .~ ...c= = ~ 0 U - C'Jl ~ 0 .::li = ';;: ~ ~ '5 ., ~ Q ... ..:.= '" '" ~ -l \0 ............. 0 Q. Q. 0 ~ ~ .... i N :t :c r--^ ~ -( rJJ rJl 0 0 :z :z :z '" ;.- >- ~ ~ on ...j..j E0- =' E- O 0 -< r:f1 =: Z E- -0 -0 -0 -0 ,... -0 -0 ~ ;:l '" '" '" '" -" '" ;::, .~ > ~ ~ ~ .8 > ~ ~ '" ~ (5 0 ,... E ~ ~ ~ ~ t: ~ ;2 =: U .... E 0 ~ 5 Q. U ~ <i2 ..c <i2 <i2 U ..E :2 EA W FIGURES . . . -----_.--- g :~ ~ ~ ! rJ~~.~ 1 V3 ! 5 ~~ li1. r< ; tQcc",,,, I ~ i~.~ i ...Ii,. .. :4p,J'i: tr.. ~~i) ~ I I' I I I I L,____-;; ! I!! Iii ~h ~.; 0: .. z u..~ OC) ~~ -:E 00:: <C u.. ~ z :;:) o o ~ o ~ <C C ",,-. , '-, '--. ...."'..., "- "- ~. a ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ f ~ g z ~ ! ..J ~ a.J -;; ~ - ~ t Vi ~ ~ " ..J ~ l:: * ffi l:; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : Clolt"f ..----i e el ; .USGS Topographic Map City of Farmington Flagstaff Avenue Improvements K:\141\14104224\Cad\DwgIEAW Figures\USGS,apr o 1000 2000 Feet '1__........ '" "-., So ?O-___... ----, I I I ! Figure 2 ___----.J ~ w.. . fl. Bonestroo L.llRosene -=- AnderIIc & ~ Associates EngIneer. & AictritedJ PROJECT SERVICE AREA BY CITY o FARMINGTON o LAKEVILLE PROJECT SERVICE AREA FIGURE 4 n Bonestroo Rosene 8 Anderlik & .\J. Associates Engineers & Architects CITY OF FARMINGTON FLAGSTAFF AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS o 1 600 I I Scale In feet 2005 AERIAL PHOTO .~N"", w__':~\E ,. . .-::- AUGUST 2006 :; i :.. i (J'1~'~'4\Cod\Dwg\EAW FIGURES\EAW FIGURES.dwg PROPOSED TRUNK SEWER ALIGNMENT FIGURE 3 J[]j Bonestroo Rosene R Anderlik & 1\J1 Associates Engineers & Architects ":\ 141 \ 141 042?4\Cod\Dwg\EAW FIGURES\EAW FiGURES.dwg o 800 I I Scale In feet 2005 .A.ERIAL PHOTO .N,,~ W __. . -\ Ii ~ ' AUGUST 2006 CITY OF FARMINGTON FLAGSTAFF AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS .. WETLAND DELINEATION FIGURE 5 J[Jj Bonestroo Rosene 8 Anderlik & 1\J1 Associates Engineers & Architects CITY OF FARMINGTON FLAGSTAFF AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS o 800 &.\. 'W' AUGUST 2006 1.1.\ (pI 2:14 \Cod\Dw9 \EAW FIGURES\EAW FIGURES.dwg I I Scale in feet 2005 .A.ERIAL PHOTO . NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY FIGURE 6 . fl. Bonestroo ~ Rosene G Anderlik & 1\11 Associates EngIneers & ArchItects :' \ 1-11\ 14104224\Cad\Dwg\EAW FICURES\EAW FIGURES.dwg o 800 r--- I Scole In feet 2005 AERIAL PHOTO .,N__ W "._. E '\ ~ '. - .;/ .A.UGUSTJQOIJ CITY OF FARMINGTON FLAGSTAFF AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS DNR PUBLIC WATERS INVENTORY / FEMA FLOODPLAIN FIGURE 7 jf1j Bonestroo ~ Rosene ~ Anderlik & 1\J1 Associates Englneers & Archltects CITY OF FARMINGTON FLAGSTAFF AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS o '1400 r I Scole in feel ~-t" ~ f\UGUS; 200f' [{:\ 141 \ 141 04224\Cad\Dwg\EAW FICURES/EAW FIGURES,dwg 2005 AERIAL PHOTO DAKOTA COU NTY SOl LS n Bonestroo Rosene G Anderlik & .\J. Associates Engineers & Architects FIGURE 8 CITY OF FARMINGTON FLAGSTAFF AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS $,N .~ w :'~. '--. t E \.,,' .. - " AUGUST 2006 (j 800 r--- --'l Scale in feet 2005 AERIAL PHOTO ell I ,hI(; \i AW FIGURCS\EAW FIGURES,dwg . 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, City Administrato@- FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Farmington VFW Post #7662 DATE: December 18, 2006 ACTION REQUESTED Approve the attached application for a Temporary Liquor License for the Farmington VFW Post #7662, for the Farmington Charity Ball, January 27,2007. DISCUSSION The Farmington VFW Post #7662 is requesting a Temporary on-sale Liquor License for the Farmington Charity Ball to be held January 27, 2007. This event will be held at the S1. Michael's Church Social Hall located at 22120 Denmark Ave. Per State Statute, a Temporary Liquor license must first be approved by the City and then forwarded to the State for approval. BUDGET IMPACT The State of Minnesota waives all fees for Temporary Liquor Licenses for non-profit organizations. Therefore, the City has not established a fee for a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License. Respectfully submitted, , d!~ /I- J1Lad~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director //~<~. f~?"V.::,~(")~..~?,,~.f.<;:,;. 1'-,-' ..~..~'_. ljr.....~;. ~;;.'1'l..C;~, EI.i;{: ,","" fi'"'! :~i'\ g-< .~~ (!,~':~jJ ~"",- ~l! ""i: - -,^, "~~i':~~=~;;;"\.W ~ Minnesota Department of Public Safety tJ.lt""r\hr\l 'Anrl nr:lrnhl1nn- p.,,+r\....r"Pompnt Tli""'iTicinn 1. .l.....LVUJ...1.V..L U.1..1.U '-JU.l.1..LU.L.1.J..l5 ..l-JJ...L.LV.1.VV.1...L.1.V..L..l1l.. .Lj..L V..LLJ..L\JJ...L 444 Cedar St-Suite 133 S1. Paul, MN 55101-5133 (651)296-6439 TDD (651)282-6555 APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE TYPE OR PRINT INFORMATION NAME OF ORGANIZATION , yt71.-t ~ #PPb i5~- V FW, f'bii'l'e.>6 ~ STREf:~AD...?RESi! S:"F. N~E OF P.]RSON MAKING APPLICATION /';,6 J;J "~r=c:s i:;:::" 5L ~ DATES LIQUOR WILL BE SOLD :r ~J..S ;;2 7 - 6 -7 O~AT ON OFFICER'S NAME Kep , ~ElA9 ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME K:eru 1. L 8:> , Rf/.'36 tJ1 ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME STATE Jocation where license will be used, If an outdoor area, describe ? L/ "r!- ( ,H_8't.-L__ " .' ....-- v ~ ~ ~ /-/ 'Y7/7 . k~ r-:Af; /' = rl ......,.'"'"~, / - ".A'r< __ "'L<.-f",~ I Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor services? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service, Will the applicant carry liquor liability insurance? If so, the carrier's name and amount of coverage, (NOTE: Insurance is not mandatory.) APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITTING TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT CITY/COUNTY CITY FEE AMOUNT DATE FEE PAID DATE APPROVED LICENSE DATES SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement Director Note: Do not separate these two parts, send both parts to the address above and the original signed by this division will be returned as the license. Submit to the city or County at least 30 days before the event. PS-09079 (6/98) 7r City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers SUBJECT: Peter J. Herlofsky, Jr. /lOr City Administrator (f City Hall Construction FROM: DATE: December 14, 2006 INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION Attached is correspondence from Wold Architects requesting approval of Wold continuing with the project and moving into design development. With the schedule at the end of the year, we would like to postpone Wold's actual presentation until the second meeting in January. However, in order to keep the project moving smoothly we need authorization to move to the next step in the process. ACTION REQUESTED Authorize Wold Architects to approve design development and authorize completion of the contract documents. CMuller/Herlofsky/Council Memos/City Hall Construction llJ~LD ST. PAUL, MN ELGIN, IL TROY, MI DENVER, CO MINNESOTA OFFICE 305 ST, PETER STREET ST, PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 651.227,7773 FAX 651.223.5646 December 13,2006 WWW.WOLDAE.COM MAIL@WOLDAE,COM Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 Re: New City Hall Commission No. 062047 Dear Peter: Since Council approval of the Schematic Design Submittal dated August 21,2006 we have been working toward the completion of the Design Development requirements for the New City Hall. We have completed the Design Development effort for the New City Hall project. Attached to this letter is an updated budget for your approval. Weare requesting Council approve Design Development and authorize completion of the Contract Documents. We look forward to providing the City Council with a project update on January 18th, 2007. Thank you for you consideration of this submittal. Please call with any questions. Sincerely, WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS !f.-+~ John McNamara, AIA Associate Cc: Chris Ziemer, Wold Michael Cox, Wold WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Peter J. Herlofsky, Jr. City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: December 18, 2006 It is requested the December 18,2006 agenda be amended as follows: CONSENT AGENDA 7t) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Event Permit - Administration Approve a gambling event permit for the Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club. , Respectfully SUbmittj QJ~nl~~ Peter J. Hepofsky, Jr. /1, 7 City Administrator / . i ! ./ If City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato~ Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director FROM: SUBJECT: Gambling Event Permit - Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club DATE: December 18, 2006 ACTION REQUESTED Consider the attached Resolution granting a Gambling Event Permit to Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club at the Farmington American Legion, 10 N 8th Street, on January 20,2007. DISCUSSION The Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club is requesting a Gambling Event Permit for a raffle to be held at the Farmington American Legion. Per State Statute 349.166 and pertinent City Code, a Gambling Permit must be issued by the City for this type of event. An application has been reviewed, and the appropriate fees received. BUDGET IMPACT Gambling permit fees are included in the revenue estimates of the budget. Respectfully submitted, 'L ~ ,PI ;.. A-J?;)Jl It, ~'J'Ltl' dL<<: Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -06 APPROVING A MINNESOT A LAWFUL GAMBLING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR SOUTHERN DAKOTA COUNTY SPORTSMEN'S CLUB 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 18th day of December 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.166, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue or renew a Gambling Event Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said permit; and, WHEREAS, the Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club have submitted an application for a Gambling Event Permit to be conducted at the American Legion, ION 8th Street for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Event Permit for the Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club to be conducted at the American Legion, ION 8th Street, is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December 2006. Mayor day of December 2006. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL <?a.- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Adrninistrato(j FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Adopt Ordinance Establishing Fees - 2007 DATE: December 18, 2006 ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached ordinance establishing 2007 fees and charges effective January 1, 2007. DISCUSSION The Farmington City Council requires licenses, permits or other City approvals for certain regulated activities. As a condition of issuing these licenses and permits the City Council establishes fees, by ordinance, effective January 1,2007. Attached is the proposed ordinance listing fees, which were in effect in 2006, and includes recommended changes for 2007. All of the proposed changes to the Fee Schedule have been reviewed by the Management Team to ensure that City fees are equitable and comparable with other communities. BUDGET IMPACT Proposed changes in 2007 fees were taken into consideration during the preparation of the 2007 City Budget. Respectfully submitted, < J5yt~ Il McrcLcL Lisa Shadick Administrative Service Director CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA . ORDINANCE NO. 006- AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHARGES AND FEES FOR LICENSES, PERMITS OR OTHER CITY APPROVALS AND SERVICES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2007 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. FEES FOR LICENSES AND PERMITS. The City Council of the City of Farmington, pursuant to statutory authority or directive, requires certain licenses, permits or other City approvals for certain regulated activities, and as a condition of issuing these licenses and permits establishes the following fees, effective January 1,2007. LICENSE" GENERAL Animal License AMOUNT Do neutered or s a ed Do not neutered or s a ed License Enforcement Service Charge $25 per dog Late Registration Fee $2.00 Note: Pursuant to Ordinance 6-2-16 the owner shall pay an additional $25 as appropriate for 3rd dog and an additional $50 for 4th dog. Amusement Machines $15 per location and $15 per machine . Bed and Breakfast $25 Cigarette/Tobacco Sales Reinstatement after Revocation Annual - $50 1 st machine, $20 ea. additional $150 Initial Investigation Application/Renewal- $150/yr $100 plus Administrative Time per Fee Schedule Billiard Parlor Dog Kennel (3 or more dogs) Exception - New residents - see note under animal licensing above. Permitted in Agricultural zone only. $300/year Exhibition, Temp. Outdoor Explosives, Sale & Storage .Fireworks - Community Event $ 15/occasion $10/year $50 plus expenses Gambling License Premise Permit Investigation Fee Gambling Event $50 $50 $50 . Sales: Permit Issuance Fee Transient Merchant. Peddler. Solicitor $25.00 plus itemized amount below: $15/day; $50/ql:larter; $150/year $65.00 (per person) Annual: $45.00 (per person) Temporary Peddler Solicitor Saunas Taxi Driver Company Therapeutic Massage Business License Therapist Investigation Investigation (Therapist) Renewal Investigation LICENSE" LIQUOR Beer, Off Sale Beer, On Sale Beer, On Sale Temporary Display & Consumption Liquor, On Sale Investigation Fee Liquor, On Sale Club Liquor, On Sale Sunday Transfer Fee Wine, On Sale PERMITS" Special Annexation Petition Antennas & Towers $25/month; $250/year $15/day; $75/month; $125/year Annual Business - $5,000 Orig. Investigation - $300 Renewal Investigation - $150 $25 each $25/unit/year $50 (Includes 1 therapist) $50 $300 $200 $0 AMOUNT 2007 Billim! $75/year $200/year -0- $300/year $3,500/year Not to exceed $200 (Administrative Costs) $300/year $200/year $300 $300/year AMOUNT $250 + $20 per acre up to 10 acres, $5 per acre over 10 acres Uniform Building Code Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Conditional Use/Spec. Exception. Admin. Fee Excavation and Mining ~$450 $200 0-1000 cu yd. 1000-25,000 25,001-50,000 50,001-250,000 250,000+ (Grading Plans required + Staff Review Time) 2 $50 $150 $300 $500 * $1,000 * . 2008 Billim! $75/year $200/year -0- $300/year $3.500/year Not to exceed $200 . (Administrative Costs) Set by State Set by State $300 $300/year . . . . Filling* Landfills, Sludge Ash, Incinerator Ash, etc. Rezoning, Admin. Fee Sign Permit, Review Plans Street/Curb Breaking Subdivision \Vaiver, Adm. Fee Variance Request Appeal of Zoning Decision Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Vacation of Public R/W Fee $75 + stafftime Initial- $150,000 Renewal - $60,000/yr + $30/ton $WG$45 0 1. Estimated Value To $500 500.01-1000 1000.01-2500 Over 2500 80.00 2. Signs which need a conditional use permit must pay both the established sign permit fee, plus the conditional use permit fee. $20.00 30.00 60.00 Min. $350 surety + $70 inspection fee $ 125/stafftime $200 $150 $150 $200 Utility Const. Permit Fee, Review Plans $70 (Telephone, gas, cable, electric, telecommunications, etc.) Wetland Alteration Permit * Wetland Buffer, Conservation, and Natural Area Signs Future Through Street Sign Zoning Certificate, Verification of Zoning * - A Conditional Use Permit is Required Site Plan Review Sketch Plan Review PERMITS - BuUdin!! Building: Permit As Built Certificate Of Survey, Turf Establishment $250 + consultant review time Actual Cost Actual Cost $25 $-tOO$150 $150 AMOUNT League ofMN Cities 2003 Schedule (See Schedule n $2,000 Single Family Residential Lot surety for all buildings to be refunded after work is complete As-builts and Silt Fence/Erosion ControlTurflnspection .^~dd $100$200 + $60 re-inspection fee (includes 2 inspections each for grading and turf) 3 Temporary Buildings on Construction Sites Miscellaneous Inspections Window Replacement Roof Siding Garages All Basement Finish Roof/Siding Combo Permit $150 $50 . Gazebos - Freestanding $60 (59.50 + .50 state surcharge) $60 (59.50 + .50 state surcharge) $60 (59.50 + .50 state surcharge) See Schedule I See Schedule I $100 (99.50 + .50 state surcharge) See Schedule I Decks See Schedule I Building, Moving (Requires Special Exception in Addition to Fees Listed Below) - House - Garage - Surety See Schedule I o q 9,fc:> ~t? <i6O'~+ .50 state surcharge) (includes exhaust fans) IIt.lh bJ'?j r Porches Bathroom Finish Building, Demolition $150 + cost of utility locations $50 + cost of utility locations $10,000 Flat $100 (99.50 + .50 state surcharge) See Schedule I . Pools Ind. On Site Sewage Treatment Reinspection (After 2 Fails) $260 - ($40 County + $220 City) $4+$50 Plumbin2: Permits Heater. Water Softener $15 per state statute Residential New Construction Repair/Addition Reinspection $85 (84.50 + .50 state surcharge) $4+$50 (46.5049.50 + .50 state surcharge) $4+$50 Reinspection -l-% 1.25% of contract cost + state surcharge valuation x .0005) INCLUDES SPRINKLING SYSTEMS (Minimum of $50.00$100.00) $47 Commercial (contract Mechanical Permits Fireplace Residential Heating New Construction RepairlReplace Reinspection $4+$50 (46.5049.50 + .50 state surcharge) $85 (84.50 + .50 state surcharge) $4+$50 (46.5019.50 + .50 state surcharge) $4+$50 . 4 . . . Commercial Heating (contract Reinspection PERMITS - SubdivisionslDevelooments Review of Environmental Assessment Worksheet and Environmental Impact Statement, AUAR GIS Fees (Geographic Information System) *** Note Fee Calculation Formula on Page 6 Parkland Contribution +%1.25% of contract cost + state surcharge valuation x .0005) Minimum of $50.00$1 00.00 $47 AMOUNT Staff time, consultant review time New and Redevelopment *** $55/10t or $90/ac minimum Parkland and Trail Fees - All Residential Zones See Parkland Dedication Ordinance Parkland and Trail Fees - CommerciaVIndustrial Zones See Parkland Dedication Ordinance Park Development Fee - Residential, Commercial! Industrial Zones Plat Fees Preliminary Plat Surety Provides security to cover staff time in case a plat does not proceed. Fee is refunded upon signing a Development Agreement. Preliminary Plat Fee Final Plat Fee P.U.D. (Planned Unit Development) P.U.D. Amendment Surface Water Mgmt. Fee (Development) *** The Surface Water Management Fee funds the trunk storm water improvements identified in the City's Surface Water Management Plan. *** Note fee calculation formula on page 6. 2005 $16,335 per acre of land required to be dedicated for parks 2006 $16,825 $200/acre $750 base + $10/lot $300 $500 + $22/ac $300 $0.1377$0.1428 /sq .ft. - Residential, low density $0.2441$0.2531 /sq.ft. - Residential, high density $0.2939$0.3048 /sq.ft. - Comm./Industrial! Institutional Surface Water Mgmt. Fee (Redevelopment/Unplatted) - See Schedule A attached. *** Water Main Trunk Fee The Watermain Trunk Fee funds the trunk improvements identified in the City's Water Supply and Distribution Plan. 5 Area Charge (Development) *** Area 1A 1B 1C 1D IE IF 2A1 2A2 2B1 2B2 2C1 2C2 2D1 2D2 Remaining Undeveloped Area Unplatted Land Area Charge (per acre) $1,290.00$1.340.00 $1,845.00$1.915.00 $2,100.00$2.180.00 $1,880.00$1.950.00 $2,255.00$2.340.00 $2,130.00$2.210.00 $1,135.00$1.490.00 $2,250.00$2.335.00 $2,010.00$2.085.00 $2,370.00$2.460.00 $2,145.00$2.225.00 $2,105.00$2.495.00 $2,385.00$2.475.00 $2,465.00$2.555.00 $2,180.00$2.570.00 See Schedule B attached . Surface Water Qualitv Management The Surface Water Quality Management Fee is collected to fund future excavation of sediments deposited in sedimentation ponds. Residential (Single/Multi) Commercial/Indust/School/Other $75/acre $ 155/acre Water Treatment Plant Fee ~$645 /REU All parcels being developed are charged 1 REU minimum. Commercial, Industrial, Institutional developments and redevelopments are charged multiple REUs based on 1 REU = 274 gpd. Established in 1997, this fee will help fimd the future Water Treatment Plant Note: REU = Residential Equivalency Unit . Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge *** The Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge funds trunk improvements identified in the City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan. $1,930$2.000/ acre ***Fee Calculation Formula *** Fees shall be based on the gross area of the development, less floodways, and delineated wetlands. Credit for Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge See Schedule F MUNICIPAL SERVICES AMOUNT Sewer Metro Sewer Avail. Chg. (SAC) City Sewer Avail. Charge (CSAC) Lateral Connection Charge Connection Permit Lateral Equiv. Chg. Servo Connection Fee (Akin Road) Stub Out Charge User Rates - Residential (Based on Winter quarter) $1 ,550$1.675/single unit ~$435 $1,930$2.000 $70 each See assessment rolls $2,320$2.405 Construction Cost + Street Breaking Permit $27.00 1st 10,000 gallons $2.25/1,000 gallons thereafter . 6 - Metered Commercial . Reserve Capacity (SW 1/4 of Sec. 25) (See Asmt. Roll #144) Solid Waste Collection Storm Water Utility Sump Pump Ordinance Non Compliance Water Lateral Connection Charge Connection Permit Reserve Capacity Connection (WAC) fee funds future construction of Water Towers. 3/4 or 1" 1 1/4" 1 1/2" 2" 21/2" 3" 4" 6" 8" Water connection charge will not apply to fire sprinkler lines Lateral Equiv. Chg. (Pine Knoll) . Metered Rates Water Reconnection Fee Stub Out Charge Hydrant Usage Overhead Water Filling Station Meters Meter Testing Fee Penalties Late Payment Penalty Certification Fee Water Use Restriction Penalties 1st Offense 2nd Offense and subsequent during a calendar year CURRENT SERVICES $3.30/1,000 gallons (65.30/qtr min.) $1,290$1.340/acre See Schedule C attached $8.50/storm water unit/quarter $100/month added to sewer bill $1,325$1.375 each $ 70 each $715.00$775.00 $1,155.00$1.200.00 $1,670.00$1.730.00 $2,965.00$3.075.00 $3,990.00$4.140.00 $5,160.00$5.660.00 $11,845.00$12.285.00 $26,640.00$27.625.00 $47,365.00$49.120.00 See assessment roll #196 $10.80 + $1.07/1,000 under 25,000 $1.25/1,000 over 25,000 $70 Construction costs + Street Breaking Permit $2/1,000 gallons - $60 minimum $2/1,000 gallons - $29 minimum Actual Cost + (10% Commercial or ~SJQ} whiohever is less) $75 10% of current delinquent charge 10% of delinquent balance + interest $25 $50 AMOUNT . Personnel Hourly rates for staff time will be multiplied by a factor of 2.7, which includes salary, benefits, and organizational overhead charges. Specific rates available from Finance Department upon request. Censbll-ting Engincering fecs will he charged at Actual Cost plus 25% fer proccssing, accounting, and 8ycrhcad administfflti'.'c and facility l:i.SC charges. 7 Projects - Public The following engineering costs will be considered for estimating the total project cost for public improvement projects: Feasibility Report, Plans, Specs, Bidding, Staking, Insp., Supr. With Assessment Roll Total . 17% of Estimated Construction Costs* *For the purposes of bonding, engineering costs will be calculated based on the estimated construction costs. Administration Fees Legal Fees Projects - Private 5% of Actual Construction Cost 5% of Actual Construction Cost All other private developments will be charged for review and inspection based on staff time using current hourly rates as described above. A summary of staff review time for a proj ect will be forwarded upon written request of the developer. Erosion control inspection by the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District will be charged at the County's current rates. lfiJr~........................................................................................................................ Fire/Rescue Response (Non Contracted Services) $200/hour + Current Personnel rate per manhour Sprinkler System - New or Altered 1.5% of Contract Cost up to $10,000 (minimum of $50) 1 % of Contract Cost over $10,000 . Inspections: Day Cares Fire Alarm System - New or Alteration Tank: Removal $50 1.5% of Contract Cost up to $10,000 (minimum of $50) 1 % of Contract Cost over $10,000 $47 $15 $25 1.5% up to $10,000 1 % over $10,000 $65 per tank: Reinspection Flammable Tank: System 500 gallons or less 501-1000 gallons 1001 plus gallons Hood and Duct Cleaning Commercial Cooking Vent Systems Reinspection Fire Permit Processing MPCA Permit - 30 days (limited to 2 per year) Recreational Fire Permit - Annual $47 $47 $20 $10 False Alarms (after 3, per ordinance) Residential Non Residential $75 $150 $15 . Fire Report Fee Pire/Rescue Standby (Org. Request) Current hourly rate/person 8 . . Fireworks Establishments with mixed sales (fireworks sales as accessory item) Establishments selling fireworks only Tents and temporary membrane structures $100 $350 $40 ~~Jr}(S ~1l(J ~~~Jr~~ti()Il......................................................................................... Municipal Pool Rates Season Pass Rates: Individual Season Pass Family Season Pass Maximum 5 Family Members (immediate family members only) Each additional family member over 5 family members Punch Cards Unused punches expire at the end of the season. Regular Session Admission: Programs, Lessons Special Event Ice Arena Rates Open Skating Punch Card (new. expires on April 1 each year) Dry Floor Rental Open Skating (prime Time Session) (Tues. & Thurs. Lunch) Ice Time Prime Time 6:00 A.M. 9:45 P.M. 10:00 P.M. 10:15 P.M. 10:30 P.M. 10:45 P.M. 11:00 P.M. (Non Prime Time) Civic Arena Advertising Rates Full 4 x 8 Sheet One Year . Three Years 4 x 4 Sheet 9 $55.00$60.00 $130.00$135.00 $10.00 10 punches - $25 ($2.50/punch) 20 punches - $40 ($2.00/punch) $3.00 per person large and small pool Fees based on covering all direct costs Minimum or no fee charged 10 punches $25 7/1/06 - 6/30/07 $500/day + $150 Set-up/day $3.00/person $2.00/porson 7/1/06 - 6/30/07 $ 150.00/hr $ 115.00/hr $ 145.00/hr $ 140.00/hr $135.00/hr $130.00/hr $ 125.00/hr $ 120.00/hr 10/1/06 - 9/30/07 $425.00/yr $375.00/yr 7/1/07 - 6/30/08 $500/day + $150 Set-up/day $3.00/person $3.00/person 7/1/07 - 6/30/08 $155.00/hr $120.00/hr $ 150.00/hr $ 145.00/hr $ 140.00/hr $ 135.00/hr $ 130.00/hr $ 125.00/hr 10/1/07 - 9/30/08 $425.00$450.00/year $375.00$400.00/year One Year Three Years Ice Resurfacer One Year Three Years Puppet Wagon Performances Rambling River Center Annual Membership Fees Resident and Participating Townships Participating Townships are entitled to resident rates. Non-Resident Rambling River Center Rental Rates Rambling River Center Key Deposit Rambling River Center Fitness Room Membership Membership only available to Rambling River Center members who are age 50 and older. Annual membership runs January I-December 31. $275.00/year $250.00/year $275.00$300.00/year $250.00$275.00/year $650.00/year $600.00/year $100.00/performance $650.00$675.00/year $600.00/year . $8.00/person _ Indiyidual$1 O.OO/Individual $14.00leO\:lple Joint Spousal$15.00/Couple $15.00/person _ Individual$18.00/Individual $20.00/eouple Joint Spousal$25.00/Couple Ifmembership purchased from Nov I-Dec 31, then membership would be valid for the following entire year See Schedule G $50.00 $45.00$50.00 yearly resident $60.00 yearly non resident No couple's discount Ifpurchased from Nov I-Dec 31, then membership would be valid for the following entire year. . Fitness Room Non-Member One-Time Visitor Pass (new) $3.00 Rambling River Center Newsletter Advertisement Picnic Shelter Rates (Rambling River Park, Meadowview Park, Tamarack Park, Evergreen Knoll Park and Hill Dee Park) Events (weddings, large gatherings) in Parks Outdoor Field Use $50/year$60.00 for 2 inch x 1 inch ad space for one year $25.00 half day (7:00 a.m. until 2:45 p.m. or 3:15 p.m. until 11:00 p.m.) $40.00 full day $200.00 plus Insurance Certificate, portable toilet and garbage service costs See Schedule H ~lIlJli<<= ~()Jr}(S....................................................................................................... Billed at equipment rate listed below plus personnel rate for staff time. Staff time is billed at a 2 hour minimum. Equipment rates during regular work hours are billed at a one hour minimum; call outs after regular hours are billed at a two hour minimum. Pick Up Truck 5 yd. Dump Truck Front End Loader Sevier Rodding Machine Sewer Jetter Road Patrol (Grader) $25.00/hour $30.00/hour $75.00/hour $75.00/hour $75.00/hour $65.00/hour . 10 . . . Ind. Ford. Traetor Grader Backhoe +/ loader) Street Sweeper Air Compressor, Hammer, Hose Compacting Tamper Trash Pump Paint Striper Mower Skidster Router Blower Generators $65.00/hour $40.00/hour $65.00/hour $35.00/hour $15.00/hour $15.00/hour $30.00 /hour $60.00 /hour $30.00 /hour $30.00 /hour $12.00/hour $50.00/hour NOTE: All City equipment must be operated by a City employee J>>()Ii<<=~ ~~Jr~i<<=~s.................................................................................................. Billed at equipment rate listed below plus personnel rate for staff time. Staff time is billed at a 2 hour minimum. Equipment rates during regular work hours are billed at a one hour minimum; call outs after regular hours are billed at a two hour minimum. Subpoena Service Barricades $40 Residents - N/C if picked up and returned $5/day if delivered by Police Dept. False Alarms (after 3, per ordinance) Residential Non-Residential $75 $150 $20 Non Resident Fingerprinting . No charge for resident Accident Reports for Insurance Purposes Copy of Driving Record Investigative Case Reports Research Fee Photographs Driver's License Report (non residents only) $5 Resident - No Fee Non-Resident $5 $1 per page $20/hr - 1 hour minimum $5 per copy $5 per copy (license holder only) Squad * 2 hour minimum $25/hour * All Police units must be operated by Police Department Personnel. Tapes - Copy Audio VHS CD/DVD $25 $35 $35 Public Data - Offenders List $20/week 11 Pawn Shop Investigation $300 MISCELLANEOUS AMOUNT $75 .$3:OO1parcel x term of assessment, County fee . Ag Preserve Filing Assessment Roll Bonds - Surety Wetlands Excavation/FillinglMining Subd. Devel. Impr. Candidate Filing Finance Charge (Interest Rate) Returned Checks Mandatory Information Requests Weed Notice - Adm & Inspec. Calendar Advertising Rates 3./5 Per est. costs of code compliance Per est. costs of code compliance 125% of project cost $5.00 - (10,000-100,000 population) Bond Rate + 1.5% $30 Actual cost plus $.25/page $30 (2nd notice same growing season) $550/monthlv sponsorship $200/displav advertisement $100/phone listing Counter Sales Mylar Blue Line Copy Photo Copies Color Copies (8 1/2 x 11) Color Copies (1IxI7) Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Maps Comprehensive Plan Document Redevelopment Plan 2' Contour Map (Spec. Order) Flood Plain Map (copy of FEMA map) Flood Plain Map (other) Budget Surface Water Management Plan Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Water Supply & Dist. Plan Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan Engineering Guideline Manual Standard Detail Plates Assessment Roll Search (pending & levied) Individual Assessment Search FAX Machine Long Distance FAX Financial Audit VHS Tapes Audio Tapes CD/DVD Photographs $5.00 per copy $3.00 per copy (exc. 2' contour) $.25 each $.50 each $1.00 GIS Fees (See Schedule E) $40 $10 GIS Fees (See Schedule E) $5 $15 $30 $60 $40 $50 $50 $30 $50 $10 + .25/page $10 $.50/page Call costs ($5 min) + page chg. $30 $35 $25 $35 $5/copy . SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE AND CODIFICATION. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and shall govern all licenses, permits, and approvals for regulated activities occurring or undertaken in the 2007 calendar year. This ordinance need not be codified but may be attached to the City Code as an Appendix. ADOPTED this 18th day of December 2006, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. . CITY OF FARMINGTON 12 . . . Attest: SEAL Approved as to form the day of ,20_ By: Kevan Soderberg, Mayor By: Peter J. Herlofsky, Jr. City Administrator I' City Attorney Summary published in the Farmington Independent the day of ,20_. 13 SCHEDULE A . COMPREHENSIVE STORM DRAINAGE PLAN POLICY FOR DEVELOPMENTIREDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY BACKGROUND STATEMENT The Municipal Storm Sewer utilizes a fee structure for storm water improvements based on anticipated development. A parcel's contribution is determined by size and land use under the principal that a parcel should pay for past, present and future storm sewer improvements necessary to meet the needs of the parcel. The fees are set forth in the Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan dated September, 1985 as updated (Storm Water Area) and policy dated September, 1989 (Storm Water Utility). Storm water utility fees are based on size and land use on the basis that more intense land use pay a higher fee. Utility fees are paid by all developed property on a quarterly basis. Storm water area charges are paid at the time of development to help offset storm water improvements associated with the development of the property and are based by land use on a per acre rate. Presently, the Storm Water Area Charges only address developments associated with platting. Therefore, a policy is required which addresses development not associated with platting. When adopted, this policy will be incorporated as part of the Farmington Storm Water Drainage Plan. POLICY STATEMENT The purpose of this policy is to set forth the basis of fees and charges relating to past, present and future storm water improvements necessary to serve anticipated land use for development activities not related . to the platting of property. AFFECTED DEVELOPMENTS A. A Storm Water Area Charge shall be paid before any building or development permits are approved, or before any improvements are made to a City owned park, which significantly affects stormwater runoff. B. Storm Water Area Charges are not required for the following activities: 1. Building permits on platted property. 2. Residential or agricultural accessory structures or additions. PROCEDURE A. It is the responsibility ofthe property owner or his agent to present to the City Engineer or his designee the following information: 1. Site plan showing location of all existing and proposed buildings and other developments relative to property lines. B. The City Engineer shall calculate the Storm Water Area Charge as follows: 1. Undeveloped Property . a. The Engineer shall determine the area of development upon review of the site plan. The following minimum areas shall apply: 14 . . . Residential Commercial Industrial C-l, F-l, F-2, F-3 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 40,000 square feet 80,000 square feet b. The Engineer shall multiply the estimated area by the rate set forth in Table 3 of the Farmington Storm Drainage Plan as amended. 2. Redevelopment a. The Engineer shall determine the area of development and change in land use upon review of the site plan. The following minimum areas shall apply: Residential Commercial Industrial C-l, F-l, F-2, F-3 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 40,000 square feet 80,000 square feet b. Ifit is determined there is no change in land use classification as described in Table 3 of the Farmington Storm Water Drainage Plan, and the property has previously been charged the storm water area charge, no fee is to be charged. c. If it is determined there is a change in land use, the fee shall be calculated as follows: Area x (Existing Land Use Rate - Proposed Land Use Rate) = Fee If the fee is less than $0.00, no fee will be charged. 15 SCHEDULE B WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION PLAN FOR UNPLATTED PROPERTY BACKGROUND STATEMENT . The Municipal Water Utility utilizes a fee structure for water supply and distribution improvements based on anticipated development. A parcel's contribution is determined by the parcel's size and land use under the principal that a parcel should pay for past, present and future water system improvements necessary to meet the anticipated water needs of the parcel. The fee schedule set forth in the Farmington Water Supply and Distribution Plan dated June, 1988 as updated sets forth charges for water area and water hookups. The water connection fee is primarily used for present and future pumping and storage capacity and is based on type of land use. The water area charge is primarily used for past, present and future oversizing of mains and is set at a uniform per acre rate for future development. Also, the water area charge presently only addresses development associated with the platting of property. Therefore, a policy is required which sets forth fees for development not associated with platting. When adopted, this policy will be incorporated as part of the Farmington Water Distribution and Supply Plan. POLICY STATEMENT The purpose of this policy is to set forth the basis of fees and charges relating to past, present and future improvements necessary to serve anticipated land use for development activities not related to the development of property. AFFECTED DEVELOPMENTS A. A water area charge shall be paid before any building permit is approved, unless specifically exempted under Section B. . B. Water Area Charges for the following activities are not required: 1. Any building permits on platted property, except buildings on parkland platted after Jan. 1, 1995. 2. Residential or agricultural accessory structures. PROCEDURE A. It is the responsibility of the property owner or his agent to present to the City Engineer or his designee the following information: 1. Site plan showing location of all existing and proposed buildings and other development relative to property lines. B. The City Engineer shall calculate the water area charge as follows: 1. The Engineer shall determine the area of development upon review of the site plan. The following minimum areas shall apply: Residential Commercial Industrial C-1, F-1, F-2, F-3 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 80,000 square feet 2. The Engineer shall multiply the estimated area by the rate set forth in Table 14 of the Farmington . Water Supply and Distribution Plan dated June, 1988 as amended. 16 . Solid Waste Rates * . . * Customers who overfill their containers more than 50% of the time during a quarter and do not request a level of service change will automatically be raised to the next level of service. SCHEDULE C APPENDIX A Solid Waste User Fee Schedule 30 allons 60 allons 90 allons 120 allons 150 allons 180 allons 210 allons 240 allons 270 allons 300 allons 600 allons 900 allons 1200 allons 1500 allons 1800 allons Sorts Tournaments (300 gallon container delivery included to one site $25.00 delivery charge per each additional site) S ecial Picku s Out of Cab Char e Staff Time Tern ora Discontinuance Fee Curbside Rec clin Services Return Collection Trip Charge (90 gallons or less Return Collection Trip Charge (300 gallons or less EXTRA BAG CHARGE (lids that do not appear to be closed at the time of collection or ba s outside of container) Private Hauler - Commercial Dumpster Annual Fee Rolloffs SW or construction/demolition ~2007 Rates 1-20 teams $120.00 21-60 teams $180.00 61-90 teams $240.00 90 teams or more will be addressed on an individual basis. $50 per hour additional labor charge if more than one dumping of garbage is required plus $20.00 per container d ed. ~2007 Rates Pass on char es from contractor er a eement. $5.00 er sto $60.00 /hour - Y2 hour minimum $30.00 Per contract $7.50/trip/container $20.00/trip/container 2 or more bags per occurrence - $2/bag-$4 minimum (bag equal to 13 gal. or tall kitchen bag) $100 $60/hour costs 17 SCHEDULE E G.I.S. FEES . County City Total Digital Data (DFX/Autocad Format) $535/mega byte $20 $554 Hard Copy Map Sales 1/2 Sec. - Property Only $ 10 $5 $ 15 1/2 Sec. - Prop. & Planimetric 50 5 55 1/2 Sec. - Prop/Planimetric/Contour 150 20 170 1/8 Sec. - Prop/Planimetric/Contour 40 5 45 1/2 Sec. - Aerial Photo 6 0 6 Old Section and 1/4 Section 5 0 5 Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Maps Black and White, 11" x 17" $ 0 $ 1 $ 1 Color, 11" x 17" $ 0 4 4 Color, C size (17" x 22") 0 8 8 Color, D size (22" x 34") 0 15 15 Color, E size (24" x 44") 0 20 20 Street Maps . City Street Map, D size, Black and White 0 5 2 City Street Map, Black and White 11" x 17" 0 1 1 City Street Map, D size, color 0 4 4 Special Requests See Engineering Department . 18 SCHEDULE F . TRUNK SANITARY CREDITS - SEWER DISTRICT 1 OCTOBER 27,1994 SEE MAP "A" PROJECT 71-25(A) Parcel #8 AssessrnenUAcre Trunk Sewer Fee w/Credit 1 1A 1B 1C 1D IE lEE $ 498 198 244 198 202 76 76 $1,432 $1,732 $1,686 $1,732 $1,728 $1,854 $1,854 Formula: Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fee - Previous Trunk Assessment 2003 Example (Area 1C) = $1,930$2.000 - $198 = $1,732$1.802 TRUNK SANITARY CREDITS - SEWER DISTRICT 3 OCTOBER 27, 1994 PROJECT 89-5 (A) . Name Pill Trunk Asmt AsmtJ Ac Sewer Fee w/Credit Dak. Co. 14-03600-012-05 $10,111 $ 2,022.20 $.00 S. Broske 14-03600-011-03 809 1,011.25 918.75988.75 Duo Plastics 14-03600-012-29 3,033 1,011.11 918.89988.89 Duo Plastics 14-03600-013-27 3,741 1,011.08 918.92988.92 FEI 14-03600-016- 29 3,033 3,033.00 .00 W. Berglund 14-03600-020-08 870 859.94 1070.061140.06 W &B Berglund 14-03600-015-29 26,906 859.94 1070.061140.06 B. Murphy 14-03 600-0 12- 2 7 40,445 1,011.13 918.87988.87 No. Nat. Gas 14-03600-019-08 74,721 1,906.15 ~93.85 S. Hammer 14-03600-011-05 60,667 2,022.23 .00 D&M Petersen 14-03600-010-33 80,889 1,011.11 918.89988.89 Formula = Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fee minus Previous Assessment 2003 Example (Petersen) = $1,930.00$2.000.00 - $1,011.11 = $918.89$988.89 NOTE: Trunk fees cannot be reduced below $0 - no refunds will be made on previous assessments. . 19 SCHEDULE G RAMBLING RIVER CENTER FEES AND PROCEDURES . Fee Class Definition: Class 1: City of Farmington Sponsored Events Class 2: Nonprofit, Community Service and Civic Groups Class 3: Residents of the City of Farmington and/or Rambling River Center Members Class 4: Nonresidents and/or Commercial Groups Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Base Fees No base fees No base fees Main Room $40.00 Main Room $80.00 Kitchen $25.00 Large Activity Room $30.00 Large Activity Room $60.00 Kitchen $25.00 Kitchen $50.00 Small Activity Room $20.00 Small Activity Room $40.00 Hourly Rate No Hourly Rate $-1400$12.00 per $W.OO$30.00 per hour $4Q,OO$50.00 per hour room maximum 2 hour rental Deposit $100.00 refundable $100.00 refundable deposit $100.00 refundable deposit deposit **Reservations should be made 30 days in advance. ** . All rentals require a damage deposit that will be returned when all equipment and rooms have been found clean and damage free. . . All reservations are made on a first come first served basis with priority given to Class 1 users. . All groups reserving space in the Farmington Community Rambling River Center must have current signed contracts. On-going contracts must be re-signed annually. . The City of Farmington reserves the right to terminate any contract due to groups causing damage to the facility, complaints logged from the surrounding neighborhood and any other item deemed to necessitate termination. Fundraisers: Class 2 groups requesting to hold a fundraiser will pay Class 3 fees if (1) there will be more than 50 people in attendance OR (2) the fundraiser will last 3 or more hours. . 20 SCHEDULE H . 2006 2007 OUTDOOR FIELD USE FEE SCHEDULE . Non-Tournament Outdoor Field Use Charges: Summer Outdoor Use Fee - Groups primarily $ 6.00 per participant serving local youth under 19 years of age. Calculated based on the number of registered participants as of the first day of scheduled practice Youth Groups not qualifying or choosing not to pay $ 25.00 per field per day the Seasonal Use Fee Adult Groups $ 25.00 per field per day Tournaments Outdoor Field Use Charges: Baseball and Softball Fields $ 25.00 per field per day (Fee includes use plus initial dragging, setting of the base path and pitching, and painting of foul and fence lines once each tournament) Soccer Fields $ 25.00 per field per day (Full size soccer fields may be sub-divided into small fields but are only charged per full size field. Any portion of a full size field constitutes use of that full size field.) Other Services and Fees Additional dragging baseball or softball fields $ 7.00 per field per dragging Soccer field lining $ 32.50 per hour for labor $10.00 per hour for painting equipment Cost of supplies Additional labor or materials requested by group At prevailing rates "Diamond Dry" $ 10 per bag Portable Toilets Arranged and billed to the user by the provider . 21 SCHEDULE I LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 2003 SCHEDULE . Building Value Range Fee Schedule $0 - $500.00 $25.00 $500.01 - $2,000 $25.00 for the first $500 $3.25 per additional $100 $2,000.01 - $25,000 $73.50 for the first $2,000 $14.75 per additional $1,000 $25,000.01 - $50,000 $413.00 for the first $25,000 $10.75 per additional $1,000 $50,000.01 - $100,000 $681.75 for the first $50,000 $7.50 per additional $1,000 $100,000.01 - $500,000 $1,056.75 for the first $100,000 $6.00 per additional $1,000 $500,000.01 - $1,000,000 $3,456.75 for the first $500,000 $5.00 per additional $1,000 $1,000,000.01 and up $5,956.75 for the first $1,000,000 $4.00 per additional $1,000 . *Changes per LMC report of 11/03/03 This fee schedule was developed cooperatively by members of the League of Minnesota Cities and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, with information provided by the State Building Codes and Standards Division. Residential Building Valuations Cost per Square Foot Single Family Dwellings - Type V - Wood Frame First Floor $72.66 Second Floor $72.66 Single Family Dwellings - Basement Finished Basements $19.70 Unfinished Basements $14.70 Crawl Space $7.54 Conversion (Basement Finish) $5.00 Garages Wood Frame $22.11 Masonry Construction $24.93 22 . Carport $15.11 Pole Building $14.60 Decks $15.00 Entry Covered Porches $25.00 Four Season Porches $72.66 Three Season Porches, Wood Framed $49.35 Gazebos, Wood Framed/Screened $49.35 . . 23 /OQJ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator@ FROM: Joel Jarnnik, City Attorney Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer Lee Smick, City Planner SUBJECT: Approve Various Agreements - New High School Development DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION Submitted for Council review and approval are several documents prepared by the District related to its construction of a new high school. DISCUSSION Staff continues to meet with District representatives on a regular basis. We anticipate bringing the Development Agreement for this project to the Council at its first meeting in January. The agreement details the responsibilities for improvements related to construction of the new High School. While it employs the standard template used for all of the City's development agreements, there are many provisions which are unique to this project. Additionally, the project's complexity requires City approval of additional documents, some of which must be approved prior to the Development Agreement in order to allow the District to close related real estate transactions on December 20, 2006. These documents include a special side agreement with the Christensen family for the stormwater pond that will be constructed on their property outside of the current school plat, an assignment of easement from the School to the City for this pond area, and a release of a portion of the District's Meadowview school site from the terms of that site's CUP and Development Contract. The District and the Christensen's will be executing other documents subsequently at their closing but at this time these are the only documents that need City approval prior to finalizing the Development Agreement. ACTION REQUESTED By motion approve the attached transactional documents detailed above. Respectfully submitted, (~/'--_]~CI~ Joel J amni)i// , ;,; --' - City Attorney cc: file SIDE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT has been entered into effective as of this _ day of ,2006, by and among INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 192, an independent school district under the laws of the State of Minnesota ("Grantee"), JAY P. and PATRICIA A. CHRISTENSEN, husband and wife (jointly and severally obligated hereunder and collectively referred to herein as "Grantors"), and CITY OF FARMINGTON, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota ("City"). WHEREAS, Grantee and Grantors are party to that certain Land Swap Agreement, dated as of November _, 2006 (the .Swap Agreement"); WHEREAS, pursuant to the Swap Agreement, Grantors have granted to Grantee a Permanent Easement, dated as of even date herewith (the "Easement"), on a certain parcel of land legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto, which Easement has, in turn, been assigned by Grantee to City, and accepted by City, pursuant to that certain Assignment, dated as of even date herewith, by and between Grantee and City (the Easement, as so assigned, hereinafter referred to as the "Assigned Easement"); and WHEREAS, each of Grantors, Grantee and City wish to memorialize certain agreements relating to the Assigned Easement and the "Easement Premises" (as that term is defined therein), all as more fully set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 1. It is acknowledged, by and between the parties, that the existing trees and shrubs located on the Easement Premises serve as a shelter belt or windbreak for Grantors' house located on land to the south of the Easement Premises. The District and the City each covenant and agree as follows: 1.1 Following construction of a storm water drainage basin and related improvements within the Easement Premises and Grantee's adjoining real property, Grantee shall replace or transplant the existing row of shrubs substantially in the location of the existing windbreak in accordance with the mutual agreement between Grantors and Grantee; and 1.2 Said trees and shrubs (following such transplantation or replacement, as the case may be) shall not be removed or harmed by or through the District or the City, respectively, without the prior written consent of Grantors. 2. City shall indemnify and hold Grantors harmless from and against any and all liabilities, losses, claims, damages and costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees) brought against or incurred by Grantors arising in connection with use of said Easement Premises by or through the City. Similarly, District shall indemnify and hold Grantors harmless from and against any and all liabilities, losses, claims, damages and costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees) brought against or incurred by Grantors arising in connection with use of said Easement Premises by or through District. 3. Any and all drainage structures, if any, to be located on the Easement Premises shall be constructed at or below the then existing grade of the Easement Premises. 4. This Agreement shall continue in effect, from and after the date of this Agreement, until the occurrence of the earliest of the following: 4.1 The date upon which no "Benefited Party" (defined below) owns Grantors' property located at 20861 Flagstaff Avenue, Farmington, MN 55024; or 4.2 The date of death of the last of the two Grantors to die. For purposes of the foregoing, the term "Benefited Party" shall mean Grantors or either of them, and any trust or other legal entity owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by Grantors or either of them, or in regard to which Grantors or either of them are beneficiaries, or any combination thereof. 5. None of the parties to this Agreement may assign this Agreement, or any of rights hereunder, without the prior written consent of aU of the parties hereto, which consent may be reasonably or unreasonably withheld in each party's sole discretion. 6. This Agreement shall be binding upon the City's successors and assigns in ownership of the Easement. 7. In case of any conflict between the terms and conditions of the Easement and the terms and conditions of this Side Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Side Agreement shall govern and control. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and among the parties hereto as of the day and year first set forth above. GRANTORS: GRANTEE: INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 192 Jay P. Christensen, individually By Patricia A. Christensent individually Its CITY: CITY OF FARMINGTON By Its EXHIBIT A Leoal Description An easement for drainage purposes over, under and across a part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 114 North, Range 20 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 27; thence North 00 degrees 21 minutes 16 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line thereof, 30.29 feet for the point of beginning; thence continue North 00 degrees 21 minutes 16 seconds East, along said west line, 55.15 feet; thence North 89 degrees 50 minutes 26 seconds East, parallel with the south line of the Northeast Quarter of said Southeast Quarter, 1020.00 feet; thence South 27 degrees 41 minutes 18 seconds East, 62.20 feet; thence South 89 degrees 50 minutes 26 seconds West, 1049.24 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 1.31 acres, more or less. N:\PL\CGC\546746.doc ASSIGNMENT OF EASEMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 192, a Minnesota independent school district ("Assignor"), hereby assigns unto the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Assignee") all right, title, obligation and interest in and to that certain Permanent Easement, dated December , 2006 (the "Permanent Easement"), by Jay P. and Patricia A. Christensen, husband and wife, as Grantor, and Assignor, as Grantee, relating to the real property in Dakota County, Minnesota legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto ("Land"). From and after the date of this Assignment, Assignee assumes the obligations of Assignor under the Easement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and among the parties hereto as of the day and year first set forth above. ASSIGNOR: INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 192 By Its ASSIGNEE: CITY OF FARMINGTON By Its RB 1435781-1 RIDER BEN:-lETT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of December, 2006 by Bradley L. Meeks, the Superintendent of Independent School District No. 192, a Minnesota political subdivision, on its behalf. Notary Public (Notarial Seal) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of December, 2006 by , the of City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on its behalf. Notary Public (Notarial Seal) 1435781-1 RB RIDER BENNETT CONSENT Jay P. and Patricia A. Christensen, husband and wife, having an interest in the Land, as legally described above, hereby consent to the terms of the Assignment of Easement. Jay P. Christensen Patricia A. Christensen STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of December, 2006, by Jay P. Christensen and Patricia A. Christensen, husband and wife. Notary Public (Notarial Seal) THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Rider Bennett, LLP 33 South 6th Street Suite 4900 Minneapolis, Minnesota (JDC) 55402 RB 1435781-1 RIDER BENNETT EXHIBIT A Leqal Description An easement for drainage purposes over, under and across a part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 114 North, Range 20 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 27; thence North 00 degrees 21 minutes 16 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line thereof, 30.29 feet for the point of beginning; thence continue North 00 degrees 21 minutes 16 seconds East, along said west line, 55.15 feet; thence North 89 degrees 50 minutes 26 seconds East, parallel with the south line of the Northeast Quarter of said Southeast Quarter, 1020.00 feet; thence South 27 degrees 41 minutes 18 seconds East, 62.20 feet; thence South 89 degrees 50 minutes 26 seconds West, 1049.24 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 1.31 acres, more or less. 1435781-1 A-1 RB RIDER BENNETT RELEASE THIS AGREEMENT has been entered into effective as of this _ day of December, 2006, by and among INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 192, a Minnesota political subdivision ("District"), and CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"). WHEREAS, District is the fee simple owner of those tracts or parcels of land situated in Dakota County, Minnesota, comprising approximately 133.95 acres, and legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "District Property"); and WHEREAS, District is party to a Land Swap Agreement, dated November 17, 2006, by and between District and Jay P. and Patricia A. Christensen, husband and wife ("Christensens") (the "Land Swap Agreement"), pursuant to which District agreed in part to convey to Christensens, and Christensens agreed in part to accept and receive, 18.4 acres of the District Property, all as legally described on Exhibit B attached hereto (the "District Swap Parcel"). WHEREAS, as a condition to Christensens acceptance and receipt of the District Swap Parcel, Christensens have required, certain releases of existing encumbrances on the District Swap Parcel, consisting of the following: (a) That certain Development Contract, dated November 19, 2001 (the "Development Contract"), by and between District and City, as duly recorded with the Dakota County Recorder, on May 22, 2002, as Document No. 1898506; and (b) That certain City of Farmington Conditional Use Permit Application, dated August 22, 2001 (the "Conditional Use Permit Application"), by ATS&R Architects/Engineers, as applicant, and Gregory F. Ohl, as owner, and approved September 27, 2001, by City, as duly recorded with the Dakota County Recorder, on November 1, 2002, as Document No. 1954529. WHEREAS, District and City have agreed to furnish such releases, all as more fully set forth below. RB RIDER BEN:-IETT NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 1 . Release of Development Contract. The Development Contract is hereby released in its entirety as an encumbrance burdening the District Property; and 2. Release of Conditional Use Permit Application. The Conditional Use Permit Application is hereby released in its entirety as an encumbrance burdening the District Swap Parcel. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Conditional Use Permit Application shall continue to encumber that portion of the District Property other than the District Swap Parcel. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and among the parties hereto as of the day and year first set forth above. DISTRICT: INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 192 By Its CITY: CITY OF FARMINGTON By Its 1435737-1 RB RIDER BENNETT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of December, 2006 by Bradley L. Meeks, the Superintendent of Independent School District No. 192, a Minnesota political subdivision, on its behalf. Notary Public (Notarial Seal) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of December, 2006 by , the of City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on its behalf. Notary Public (Notarial Seal) THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Rider Bennett, LLP 33 South 6th Street Suite 4900 Minneapolis, Minnesota (JDC) 55402 1435737 -1 RB RIDER BENNETT EXHIBIT A District Property All of Outlot B, SCHOOLHOUSE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota, EXCEPT the North 270.00 feet of the West 275.00 feet thereof. Containing 24.4 acres, more or less. ALSO: All of Outlots C, SCHOOLHOUSE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota, EXCEPT the South 726.00 feet of the West 600.00 feet thereof. Containing 28.95 acres, more or less. ALSO: All of Lot 1, Block 1, and Outlots A, 0, E and F, SCHOOLHOUSE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota. Containing 80.60 acres, more or less. 1435737-1 A-1 RB RIDER BENNETT EXHIBIT B District Swap Parcel The West 528.87 feet of Outlot B, SCHOOLHOUSE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota, EXCEPT the North 270.00 feet of the West 275.00 feet of said Outlot B. ALSO: That part of Outlot C, SCHOOLHOUSE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Outlot C; thence South 00 degrees 50 minutes 34 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the west line of said Outlot C, 805.19 feet to the north line of the South 786.00 feet of said Outlot C; thence North 89 degrees 39 minutes 06 seconds East, along said north line, 528.99 feet to the east line of the West 528.87 feet of said Outlot C; thence North 00 degrees 50 minutes 34 seconds East, along said east line, 588.80 feet to the northerly line of said Outlot C; thence North 67 degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds West, along said northerly line, 567.36 feet to the point of beginning. Containing in all, 18.40 acres, more or less. 1435737 -1 B-1 RB RIDER BENNETT /06 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, ~ City Administrator FROM: Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: Adopt Resolutions and Ordinance - Bugbee Property - 21030 Chippendale Court 1) Adopt Resolution for Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2) Adopt Ordinance for Rezone 3) Adopt Resolution for MUSA extension DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION / DISCUSSION The City of Farmington has initiated a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Rezoning of the property owned by Richard and Sarah Bugbee, located at 21030 Chippendale Court (Exhibit A). The subject property is 0.19 acres in size and contains a single-family residence occupied by the Bugbees. The owners of the property have petitioned for annexation due to the need to obtain City services (water and sanitary sewer) as the septic system servicing the existing residence is failing. The Municipal Boundary Adjustment Unit of the Office of Administrative Hearings [MBAU] formally issued the order for the boundary adjustment on November 21, 2006. Both the City Council and the Empire Township Board reviewed the petition for annexation and approved the annexation by joint resolution on October 24, 2006. The subject property was automatically zoned A-I per City Policy upon annexation. Section 10-4-3 of the City Code states the following: "Land areas which may be added to the city by annexation, merger or other means shall be classified A -1 agriculture until such a time that the city council may rezone the added territory to more appropriate classifications. " However, properties do not automatically get a Comprehensive Plan designation upon annexation. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning The City is suggesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Non-designated to Commercial and a zoning classification of B-1 (Highway Business). It is staff's opinion that even though the property is currently utilized as a single-family residence, the highest and best long-term use of the property is commercial. It should be noted that the surrounding properties that are currently within the City boundary have a Commercial comprehensive plan designation and a B-1 zoning classification, (please note zoning map attached as Exhibit B). The suggested zoning and comprehensive plan designation would give this property legal non-conforming status. This would allow the Bugbees to continue to utilize and maintain the structure on site as their personal residence. However, no additions to the existing structures will be allowed without the property conforming to the B-1 (Highway Business) zoning standards or without the granting of a variance. MUSA MUSA for this property is proceeding through the administrative review process, which allows for projects less than five (5) acres to be excluded from the full MUSA process. Staff is requesting that Council approve the extension of MUSA to the Bugbee property through the administrative review policy. Planning Commission At the Planning Commission meeting on December 12, 2006, the Commission recommended approval of (a) the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Non-designated to Commercial and (b) a Rezoning of the property from A-I to B-1 (Highway Business) contingent upon the following condition: 1. Subject to the Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment of Rezoning of the subject property and forward this recommendation onto the City Council. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Approve the attached Resolution granting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Non- designated to Commercial. 2. Adopt the attached Ordinance rezoning the subject property from A-I to B-1 (Highway Business). 3. Adopt the attached Resolution approving the extension of MUSA to the Bugbee property located at 21030 Chippendale Court. Respectfully Submitted, ~ '- T::::l/:;j,::f3:ant City Planner Cc: Richard and Sarah Bugbee eXltlBfT n. M J: ...: o .... ~ 0 J: .... "" WILLOW STREET RICHARD and SARAH BUGBEE PROPERTY 21030 Chippendale Court Bugbee Property 1 ~ Camp Plan Amendment from Non-Designated to Commercial Rezoning from A-1 to B-1 Current Municipal Boundary . . f ti J.. '1$ ru.L . I ~'"2 RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE BUGBEE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21030 CIDPPENDALE COURT 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City initiated a Comprehensive Land Use amendment for the Bugbee property, located at 21030 Chippendale Court, and depicted in the attached Exhibit A, and that said request proposes that the land use designation be changed from Non-Designated to Commercial; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the 1zth day of December, 2006 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 Planning Commission accepted public comments at the public hearing and recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Bugbee property, located at 21030 Chippendale Court, said amendment changing the land use designation from Non- Designated to Commercial; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Farmington hereby amends the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the Bugbee property, located at 21030 Chippendale Court from Non-Designated to Commercial. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor Attested to the _ day of December, 2006. City Administrator Exhibit A C") J: ...: o o .... ~ 0 J: .... ,... WILLOW STREET RICHARD and SARAH BUGBEE PROPERTY 21030 Chippendale Court Bugbee Property 1 , Comp Plan Amendment from Non-Designated to Commercial Current Municipal Boundary CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. An Ordinance Amending Title 10 of the Farmington City Code, the Farmington Zoning Ordinance, rezoning the property known as the Bugbee property. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 10-5-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended by rezoning the property legally described on the attached Exhibit A and depicted in Exhibit B from A-I (Agriculture) to B-1 (Highway Business). SECTION 2. The Zoning Map of the City of Farmington, adopted under Section 10-5- 1 of the Farmington City Code, shall be republished to show the aforesaid zoning. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage. Adopted this _ day of ,2006, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. SEAL CITY OF FARMINGTON MAYOR ATTEST: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Approved as to form the _ day of ,2006. CITY ATTORNEY Published in the Fannington Independent the _ day of ,2006. Exhibit A - Legal Description Lot 3 and those parts of Lots 4 and 5 lying easterly of a straight line drawn from a point on the north line of said Lot 4 distant 28 feet west of the northeast comer of said Lot 4 to the southeast comer of said Lot 5, all in Dooley Addition., according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Dakota County, Minnesota Exhibit B M J: .... o o .... ~ 0 J: .... t-- WILLOW STREET RICHARD and SARAH BUGBEE PROPERTY 21030 Chippendale Court Rezoning from A-1 to B-1 1 , _ Bugbee Property Current Municipal Boundary RESOLUTION NO. R - 06 APPROVING THE ADDITION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY RICHARD AND SARAH BUGBEE TO FARMINGTON'S METROPOLITAN URBAN SERVICE AREA 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City Council approved an Administrative Policy for Minor MUSA Extensions on November 3, 2003; and WHEREAS, the policy states that properties excluded from the full process may bypass the MUSA Review Committee and the Planning Commission and proceed directly to the City Council for its consideration due to the relatively low impact on City services; and WHEREAS, the policy allows some projects under five (5) acres to be excluded from the full process; and WHEREAS, the Bugbee property is located on the attached map and contains 0.19 acres ofland; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED that the City Council hereby accepts and approves staffs recommendation that the 0.19 acres owned by Richard and Sarah Bugbee be immediately included within Farmington's Metropolitan Urban Service Area [MUSA], subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor day of December, 2006. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL M J: .... o o .... ~ 0 J: .... "" WILLOW STREET RICHARD and SARAH BUGBEE PROPERTY 21030 Chippendale Court MUSA Extension 1 ~ _ Bugbee Property Current Municipal Boundary / I~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us FROM: Mayor, Council Mem?@brS' City Administrator . . Lee Smick, AICP , J City Planner TO: SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Fountain Valley Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and MUSA Recommendation DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION Colin Garvey and Bryce Olson have requested that the Comprehensive Plan be amended from Non-Designated to Low Density Residential, Low-Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Commercial, and Park & Open Space. They have also requested that the property be rezoned from A-I (Agriculture) to R-1 (Low Density Residential), R-2 (Low- Medium Density Residential), R-3 (Medium Density Residential), B-1 (Highway Business), and P/OS (Parks & Open Space). Mr. Garvey is also requesting that the City Council approve an extension of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) to the 161.83-acre property in question. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning applications at its meeting on November 14,2006. Please refer to the November 20,2006 staff report for reference. The Castle Rock/Farmington Planning Group met on December 13, 2006 to discuss the proposed commercial location on the plan. The representatives from the Township were not adverse to the location or proposal for the commercial land use. As required in the Orderly Annexation Agreement between Castle Rock Township and the City, the Township needs to consent to the commercial land use proposal. However, when the Castle Rock Town Board met on December 12, 2006, the need to consent was overlooked and no action was taken on these items. In order to comply with the OAA, the Castle Rock Town Board will meet at a special hearing on Monday, December 18, 2006 to take action. The Town Board will then submit the action taken to the City Council at its meeting on December 18th. Discussions at the December 13th meeting mainly concerned the medium density residential land use on the westerly right-of-way line of Biscayne Avenue. The Township felt that the medium density location was too abrupt of a land use change considering the single-family homes on large lots immediately to the east of the proposed medium density residential land use. At the December 13th meeting, the group came up with the following conditions for the Developer to abide by concerning the medium density residential land use: 1. The medium density residential land use is not constructed within 150 feet of the west property line of a Castle Rock Township residence that is located adjacent to Berring Avenue. 2. The City of Farmington requires a 20-foot setback for structures from the westerly right- of-way line of Biscayne Avenue. 3. The Developer of the Fountain Valley property agrees to screen to the best of his ability the medium density residential land use from the properties on Berring Avenue through landscaping. Berms may also provide screening if feasible. 4. The Developer of the Fountain Valley property researches design options to try to reduce the impact of the townhome buildings proposed in the medium density residential area. These conditions will be reviewed by the Town Board at its special meeting on December 18th. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the following actions upon receipt of a consent letter or final action of consent from the Castle Rock Town Board: 1. Amend the Comprehensive Plan from Non-Designated to Low Density Residential, Low- Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Commercial, and Park & Open Space subject to Metropolitan Council approval of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. 2. Rezone property from A-I (Agriculture) to R-1 (Low Density Residential), R-2 (Low- Medium Density Residential), R-3 (Medium Density Residential), B-1 (Highway Business), and P/OS (Parks & Open Space). 3. Approve the extension of MUS A to the 160-acre parcel. R.e.........s...p......e....~./.~.)"lly..__.."~-'7uitt.re..d........... '. ) /Jet)(~--;/ J.f~~.Smiclf~ICP <n City Planner cc: Colin Garvey RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOUNTAIN VALLEY PROPERTY 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, a public hearing of the Planning Commission was held on the 14th day of November, 2006 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 Planning Commission recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Non-Designated to Low Density Residential, Low-Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Commercial, and Park & Open Space, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above 2020 Comprehensive Plan be amended with the following stipulations: 1. The Fountain Valley property is amended from Non-Designated to Low Density Residential, Low-Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Commercial, and Park & Open Space. 2. Subject to Metropolitan Council approval of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Kevan Soderberg, Mayor Attested to the _ day of December, 2006. Peter Herlofsky, Jr., City Administrator CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. An Ordinance Amending Title 10 of the Farmington City Code, the Farmington Zoning Ordinance, rezoning the property known as the Fountain Valley Property. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SECTION 1. Section 10-5-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended by rezoning the property legally described on the attached Exhibit A from A-I (Agriculture) to R-l (Low Density Residential), R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential), R-3 (Medium Density Residential), B-1 (Highway Business), and PIOS (Parks & Open Space). SECTION 2. The Zoning Map of the City of Farmington, adopted under Section 10-5- 1 of the Farmington City Code, shall be republished to show the aforesaid zoning. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage. Adopted this _ day of , 2006, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. SEAL CITY OF FARMINGTON MAYOR ATTEST: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Approved as to form the _ day of ,2006. CITY ATTORNEY Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of ,2006. EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION The Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 113, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, subject to public road right-of-ways. Containing 161.83 acres. '" ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ " E i ~ ~ ~ J I i i ~/Z ~ ~ 0 I i . i . I ~ ~ ~ I 11001 ~ 2 ,: i ;i.~ i <II Aijg~ : j!; .~J, ! E ii~~ ! I ~ ~ " ~ i I.O~ ~ i i :;~ ~ i I~~ ~ , ~ , ~ :\ ~b ;: b~.1 G I I~~~ ~ ' ;i~g ~ : ~-~t ~~ 0 "7)~ I, "~.<' ~ ~ ,,,~<', --1a~ -~~. ~ ~/jI~,,> ~~/J/.h ~-Y/Y' y/ ill iU z >-" loJ ~ ~~ ;;~ zO <i'U >-<( z>- =>0 0>: "-<( o >- => ~ <( ---' to Z Z o N ! i ~ ~~N l~~ .!&~ ~~! ! f~I I ~N~ (f) i ~ t >- i ~ i 0::: . Z~ o (f) I ~ il O' II ~ Vl :j -,0::: w w ! 8 t ti I ~ ill III if" t'!; II tit III III tll Hi I l ex, p ,1'1 I i for-hPl1 cr/ OAIf ---~_."--- Acreage and Location 1. The attached map entitled "Exhibit A - Annexation Area" shall be the framework for annexation from 2006 through 2016 (inclusive). The map constitutes the Annexation Area, and denotes areas from which annexation may occur under this agreement. It is not necessary that all of the land constituting the Annexation Area be annexed within the time period set forth in this agreement. 2. The lands included within the 2006 through 2016 Annexation Area are designated for future urban development within the City. The Township shall oppose any efforts to include any of the lands within the Annexation Area into any governmental jurisdiction other than the City. Annexation Area 3. The City shall have the right to annex land within the Annexation Area during the period from the date of this Agreement though December 31, 2016. The annexation pace shall be consistent with the requirements and standards set forth in the Comprehensive Plan, and zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. 4. Annexation will be limited to property that is contiguous to the corporate limits of the City. 5. All annexations shall be subject to the prevailing Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and subdivision regulations of the City. 6. The Township will not file any objection with the MBAU concerning the City's annexation of any land within the Annexation Area described above, so long as the annexation complies with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. Comprehensive Planning: 7. The City will revise its Comprehensive Plan to address properties located within the Annexation Area. 8. (a) Except as provided in Paragraph 8 (b) or 8 (c), the Planning Commission and/ or the City Council of the City of Farmington shall not adopt an initial Comprehensive Plan designation for any property located within the Annexation Area, or subsequently modify, change, or alter in any way that initial Comprehensive Plan designation, without providing the Township with reasonable advance notice of (and a 2 reasonable opportunity to comment on) any such adoption, modification, change or alteration. (b) With regard to any proposed industrial or commercial use of property, the Planning Commission and/or the City Council of the City of Farmington shall not adopt an initial Comprehensive Plan designation for any property located within the Annexation Area, or subsequently modify, change, or alter in any way that initial Comprehensive Plan designation, without the consent of the Township Board, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. (c) With regard to any proposed medium to high density residential, industrial, or commercial use that is proposed to be constructed within 150' of the west property line of any Castle Rock Township residence that is located adjacent to Berring Avenue, the Planning Commission and/or the City Council of the City of Farmington shall not adopt an initial Comprehensive Plan designation for any property located within the Annexation Area, or subsequently modify, change, or alter in any way that initial Comprehensive Plan designation, without the consent of the Township Board, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. (d) With regard to any future development proposed to be constructed along the west property line of any Castle Rock Township residence that is located adjacent to Berring Avenue, the City will not obtain or require any permanent easements or rights-of- way from the owners of the Berring Avenue properties in question. Plannim! and Land Use Control 9. Pursuant to MN Statute 414.0325, MN Statute 471.59, and Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes, the parties agree that the City shall have the authority to exercise planning, land use, zoning and subdivision authority within the Annexation Area. Prior to the actual annexation of a parcel of property located within the Annexation Area, the City's exercise of such authority shall be limited to adopting a Comprehensive Plan designation for that parcel, which will not affect the parcels land use unless and until the annexation is complete. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the City and the Township, the zoning and use(s) of a parcel located within the Annexation Area, and the construction or modification of structures located thereon, shall be controlled by the Township's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, regulations and procedures until the annexation of that parcel has been completed. I I--:-::_.,-__-i 10. Intentionally omitted and reserved for future use. r-n...' 3 RESOLUTION NO. R_- 06 APPROVING THE FOUNTAIN VALLEY PROPERTY TO FARMINGTON'S METROPOLITAN URBAN SERVICE AREA 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the MUSA Review Committee met on October 18, 2006 and recommended that MUSA be extended to the 161.83-acre property; and WHEREAS, the Fountain Valley property is located on the attached map and contains 161.83 acres; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby accepts and approves the MUSA Review Committee's recommendation that the 161.83 acres known as the Fountain Valley property be immediately included within Farmington's Metropolitan Urban Service Area [MUSA], subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Mayor Attested to the day of December, 2006. City Administrator SEAL To: Farmington City Council From: Castle Rock Town Board Subject: Fountain Valley Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Request Date: December 18, 2006 The Castle Rock Board met on December 12, 2006 to discuss the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Request for the Fountain Valley property and no action was taken. From that meeting, information was disseminated to the Castle Rock / Farmington Planning Group at its meeting on December 13,2006. Per the Castle Rock / Farmington Orderly Annexation Agreement, Empire Township has the opportunity to consent to proposed land use in the OAA Annexation Area. Since the Fountain Valley property is in the Annexation Area, the OAA applies. The Castle Rock Township Board of Supervisors met at 5:30 p.m. on December 18 and voted to withhold their consent to the proposed changes to the Farmington comprehensive plan. The Board is attaching a document with suggestions that would make the comprehensive plan acceptable to the Township. Per Paragraph 8 (b) of the OAA, Castle Rock Township reviewed the location of the proposed commercial land use on the Fountain Valley property. Per Paragraph 8 (c) of the OAA, Castle Rock Township reviewed the proposed medium density residential land use upon the following conditions: 1. The medium density residential land use is not constructed within 150 feet of the west property line of a Castle Rock Township residence that is located adjacent to Berring Avenue. 2. The City of Farmington requires a 20-foot setback for structures from the westerly right-of-way line ofBiscayne Avenue. 3. The Developer of the Fountain Valley property agrees to screen to the best of his ability the medium density residential land use from the properties on Berring Avenue through landscaping. Berms may also provide screening iffeasible. 4. The Developer of the Fountain Valley property researches design options to try to reduce the impact of the townhome buildings proposed in the medium density residential area. TOWNSHIP OF CASTLE ROCK ,/ ~'~~~ By !///7Z-t< /-'. ~ ." /l...-r Its Town Board C r By'11Lti2-~ tW1.J.J1...- Its Town Board Clerk Housing Densities: The Castle Rock Board of Supervisors feels that allowing more than three houses per acre along the eastern most border of the property in question does not allow for a reasonable transition with adjoining properties. The property in question adjoins 2.5 acre to 5 acre lots currently in place just across the border in Castle Rock Township. Such a sharp transition to higher density housing has the potential to seriously and unfairly impact the property values of the existing residents. Defining the Farmington Comp Plan to designate no more than 3 homes per acre along the border will help smooth the transition and protect the property values of established residents. Requiring potential developers to include berms, trees, fences etc. was discussed in the joint meetings leading up to the signing of the OAA and were not deemed sufficient to establish a smooth transition. Commercial: Castle Rock Township (CRT) does not currently get any compensation at all for properties developed as commercial, and the Castle Rock Board of Supervisors takes issue with the revised Comp Plan that has increased the area designated as commercial within the property in question. In all the preliminary plans shown to CRT, the commercial zone was limited to 5-7 acres in the northwest corner of the parcel. Expanding the area designated commercial not only means CRT receives no compensation, which we feel is immanently unfair, but CRT will also loose the compensation that would have been paid if the designation were residential. The area previously defined as residential in preliminary plans was what formed the basis for the OAA's approval. There have been no significant changes in the few months since the OAA was signed driving the increase in commercial designations, other than the developer has requested it. To address this and future industrial/commercial designations, the Castle Rock Board of Supervisors is requesting to have the OAA amended to include a 25% tax rebate to Castle Rock along similar terms as that defined for the residential areas. This amendment will provide for a more reasonable OAA, allowing both jurisdictions fair compensation for all designation types. //b City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council M"e~, City Administrato~! Lee Smick, AICP City Planner FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Twin Ponds Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Plat, Wetland Conservation Act Permit DATE: December 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION The Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) has submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan from Medium-High Density Residential to Low Density Residential and Rezone property from R-4 (Medium-High Density Residential) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) in the southern portion of the Twin Ponds Addition. The CDA property is located west and north of the Executive Estates single-family development and is also located east of TH 3. The CDA has also submitted a preliminary and final plat for the Twin Ponds project and is requesting approval of its Wetland Conservation Act Permit. Please refer to the November 20, 2006 staff report for review of the plat. DISCUSSION At the November 20, 2006 City Council meeting, there were issues raised concerning the CDA project. The issues have been addressed below: 1. Give credit for park dedication fees for the CDA's private tot lot. The CDA agreed to pay a park dedication fee for the private tot lot. 2. Connect the CDA project to TH 3. Tollefson Development and the CDA have agreed to four issues that will be a condition of the plat (Exhibit A). Tollefson Development has agreed to dedicate a 60-foot wide right-of- way on the south side of its commercial property as shown on Exhibit B. Tollefson Development and the CDA have also agreed to construct a 30-foot wide rural section roadway to allow access to the existing frontage road. Tollefson Development and the City will also work with MnDOT to modify the existing access directly to the west in order to provide a safer access to TH 3 from the intersection at Centennial Drive (Exhibit C). Tollefson Development has also agreed to work with affected property owners to provide a permanent solution to the installation of the backage road on the western boundary of the CDA project. 3. Preparation of a Transportation Plan. MnDOT would like to meet with the City and Castle Rock Township to discuss development potential in the area between TH 50 and 225th Street. MnDOT sees the benefits of discussing long-range planning opportunities (such as the backage road concept) to improve access management in this vicinity, including the possibility of MnDOT's participation in funding such efforts in the future. Discussions concerning the need for additional right-of-way acquisition from Happy Harry's to the north of the CDA project to allow for the construction of the backage road have also occurred between Tollefson Development and the City. Further discussions on both of the above issues will continue in order to make commercial development and connections to TH 3 work cohesively. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Adopt a resolution to amend the Comprehensive Plan from Medium-High Density Residential to Low Density Residential on the southern portion of the property subject to Metropolitan Council approval of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. 2. Adopt an ordinance rezoning the property from R-4 (Medium-High Density Residential) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) in the southern portion of the Twin Ponds Addition. 3. Adopt a resolution approving the Twin Ponds Preliminary and Final Plat and the Wetland Conservation Permit contingent on the following items: a. Execution of the Temporary Road Agreement by Tollefson Development and the CDA. b. All comments from the Park & Recreation Department are met. c. All engineering issues shall be addressed and approval of construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division shall be required. d. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and submission of all other documents required under the Development Contract. Lee Smick, AICP City Planner cc: Dakota County Community Development Agency Tollefson Development RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TWIN PONDS ADDITION PROPERTY 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, a public hearing of the Planning Commission was held on the 14th day of November, 2006 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 Planning Commission recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium-High Density Residential to Low Density Residential and Rezone property from R-4 (Medium-High Density Residential) to R-l (Low Density Residential) in the southern portion of the Twin Ponds Addition, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above 2020 Comprehensive Plan be amended with the following stipulations: 1. The Twin Ponds Addition property is amended from Medium-High Density Residential to Low Density Residential and Rezone property from R-4 (Medium-High Density Residential) to R-l (Low Density Residential) in the southern portion of the Twin Ponds Addition. 2. Subject to Metropolitan Council approval of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of December, 2006. Kevan Soderberg, Mayor Attested to the _ day of December, 2006. Peter Herlofsky, Jr., City Administrator CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. An Ordinance Amending Title 10 of the Farmington City Code, the Farmington Zoning Ordinance, rezoning the property known as Twin Ponds Addition. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 10-5-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended by rezoning the property legally described on the attached Exhibit 1 from R-4 (Medium-High Density Residential) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). SECTION 2. The Zoning Map of the City of Farmington, adopted under Section 10-5- 1 of the Farmington City Code, shall be republished to show the aforesaid zoning. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage. Adopted this _ day of ,2006, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. SEAL CITY OF FARMINGTON MAYOR ATTEST: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Approved as to form the _ day of ,2006. CITY ATTORNEY Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of ,2006. RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT AND WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT PERMIT TWIN PONDS 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 18th day of December, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the preliminary and final plat of Twin Ponds is now before the Council for review and approval; and WHEREAS, a public hearing of the Planning Commission was held on the 14th day of November, 2006 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 Council reviewed the preliminary and final plat and Wetland Conservation Act Permit for Twin Ponds; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Wetland Conservation Act Permit upon recommendation of the Wetland Conservation Act Technical Evaluation Panel, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by municipal service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED that the above preliminary and final plat of Twin Ponds be approved with the following stipulations: a. Execution of the Temporary Road Agreement by Tollefson Development and the CDA. b. All comments from the Park & Recreation Department are met. c. All engineering issues shall be addressed and approval of construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division shall be required. d. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and submission of all other documents required under the Development Contract. This resolution adopted December 18, 2006. Kevan Soderberg, Mayor Attested to the _ day of_. Peter Herlofsky, Jr., City Administrator TEMPORARY ROAD AGREEMENT ~XA Tollefson Development, Inc. (TDI) will work together with the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA), the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT), and the City of Farmington to dedicate and install the street connection from the CDA development across the southern portion of its commercial site, subject to the following: 1. TDI will dedicate 60 feet of right-of-way to the City of Farmington to accommodate a street along the southern portion of its site for a connection to the existing frontage road. This dedication will include a provision for the City to relinquish the right-of-way to TDI at the time that an alternate roadway is constructed to provide an access to the CDA development to Minnesota State Highway #3. 2. The City of Farmington and TDI will work with MNDOT on modifying the existing full access to Minnesota State Highway #3 and will explore appropriate compensation from MNDOT. 3. TDI and the CDA will cooperate on the installation ofa 30-foot wide rural section street along the southern portion of its site for a connection to the existing frontage road. 4. The City commits to working with TDI, the CDA and other affected property owners in the area on a permanent solution on the installation of a backage road on the western boundary of the proposed CDA development and connecting to Highway #3. - - - - -- i; L- -='~ - - - -=- -=- -=- -=- ~ I +k~ I I I I -------------- I I I I I I -![.----- ! -- ________ i I I I "I ~I ~ ",I --------- ~I ~ ~I ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ I ~ ~ I v; 1 I --------- I"' I 1 \ I I ~."~,,.,...1,; 'k .':'..,:'" I, 11'V'~1' =1. I I: ~~O I I +~I !I ~ I ~ I : ~M1~u~,rL~j- J~ QI I' .i ~ .., e (!) (.) .~ ~ ~ . :z: ~c18 ~ ~ 8 :z: en 05 sil ' ~ o=> Mull n ~ 1--0 :lo- a ~.= u u (!) ::I: ~C) J9 :::E ~~ e~ 00.... it . ~ ! ~ -::::!:- {5~ '~ClO . . .~~ ~~ B!.rJ ~ d. ~~ gj ... ... - i ILLLL . CI) en WL06 ~ '0'" I I S"L06 - 'n I II 1':0. ~ ;,~; I ~~R. = 915.1 \~J- ,/h-'h~ ~- 6."" 1"'06~'0'11 \ "iI !' o""1G IS"V06 =' '.n I \ ------- -- U"6L9 M~pc,to.OON I ,i'S~L _ ~ - 'S" -~~ ,=1 "'il - --f . il r ,:c:;'l I) '- T """'1- -- ""';'1' '.' \ -~f ...., .....rfi..'.~LJ':~:r...;,;.l1t >1--------1\ 0 I. 1'1 ;; 1,;[;1 t = )', d '.~ iii I~ ":~~ ~ I~ : ~ ." ..~~ 1 ~.~ '1~'\'\' \ Y ,,'l-------J ~. !ll"! a.. 0 . 2<'. \' Zi' -; ~ '. _~ \;n~;I~ ~~. ~ ~\ .01 ~___ '~;;(.y:;/~ ..l ' I:~I ~ - 'I' ". .('-~ ~2'_ii ~ '\ I'" E'. 2; ~I~ m--. !'='-~-~7' " \ ";, : I t'J~-<1 ,.-;1 70C : ~ I~ . ~ '" ~~ 1 ", \ I.', I [~!'l...... N .""~ b:h iill;:. I II ff ~ . 0' )J} IJX: ~r~ ;'1 f '<...... c\..;. : .;- .......:j>;.,(:.'.<'<'n/:>~ 'I'~rT I f, >q l~< = I 1 ~'" ':~ I [ I i~ r I ,m ~ -, ~I! ] ~i wr ~~ ',,~ "'" "'I J [)ll< ,n9 ~1 &'1 I. I I .' I I I I;. I I \'" I 1" /<i' - ------( I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ : I ,nIl 'd/.l,o'l:l... 'd.iJ.,O~ ., 1., ~ ~ '" " I I I I .'. LV .--- ....?y..~ .~ / t:J;0"J>" ~ / I I .,.,;,:"''':\'':. $~~.~-;'<'~ , / _ _ MO~ mSOdO~d . ,'j";-' ..r .. ~, ,/ -:C~- uu...--,_ .- -.-:-~- :~~'-:~:""-:::-::~:::;:':""::.~:~~:~~.""'~ ;.:/):/ /'?' t/ {L/C-------------~~u;~run~--------- ~{ /.---,f I /',1 I'~,~'rl '~:'~ ~-:~~~-~.,,:~~~:~- -- u~; m_ _mmm - =~~:-~ r- t 1{ / 1/ ffl . ij !:: I- I I~I ' r : ii,l. ii I n I <> [J ~ if' I ii it ii , I: I ~~.,~ ~. / '^ " "" " liYjl &:'-~~d~ .. I ii; 1: : ItiJ ~ ~~~r~ / ~ 1'5::: :: ; :I~I 1;& ~ v..''''~. <> ," -< ~I :i ~!: ~ ~ _ U:~ ,I ;:~ ~ ~!'b 7 h ~: Ii' ii ~ 1~ I I" ~j;1b;~"b ~ Q< : j : i: '~1 :1! I ( L,,<.'.~)d. w:Y \1. 1 > ~ :J ij!~ ~~ , I \ 4c--~ _=__u 00'" n-h-m'1mm;;~-,~_';.-i,. L I----t , --~, _ _._. _ _ _ _. _ _ _ ~ c-::-T ---" ~ - 'r:.lil~S -. "I-tll)" . 3OG3"-""'J50N>7"'----+--t;:;~?M~ -~ T . T ~ ~ \ OO'qf' I ~- . r I ~>--) - {-<~ OO"59l 3"pZ,po.o --v o ./ o o g 1.,1. . ~;; "dH ll:15i5E:[Ii (I, B L: [! [~ ~ .J ~ ~ ~ c ~.. g ~ ).~ .J , [t' ~< 0< ~< " ~ - .J< ,',;C 5591 "I ,.'-'.. \ "1 \ \ ~ ~...;-; ~ (i; ~ ~ ". tr~L ---'" //~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Joel Jamnik, City Attorney W FROM: SUBJECT: Approve Terms of Acquisition- 210th Street Right of Way Corridor DATE: December 18, 2006 BACKGROUND Staff has had several discussions over the past few months with Mr. Pat Regan regarding possible terms for the City acquiring from him the right-of-way ("ROW") easement necessary to extend 210th Street east of Highway 3. Negotiations have progressed satisfactorily to the point that staff is comfortable presenting the terms to the Council for its review and approval. The proposed terms of the acquisition include the following primary features: Payment by the City of $300,000 for the 2.2952 acres shown on the attached easement sketch along the southern part of Mr. Regan's property (Roadway Drainage and Utility Easement B). The proposed purchase price evenly splits the difference between the value placed on the land by the respective appraisers for the City and Mr. Regan. The City would not assess Mr. Regan's property for any subsequent improvements associated with the initial construction of210th Street or its intersection with Highway 3. Mr. Regan, or more precisely his property, would be subject to all customary and usual connection and permit charges for sewer and water service. The City would pay Mr. Regan $5,805.37 for previous utility easements he granted to the City as part of City Projects 93-15 and 00-07, as well as reimburse him $5,600 at closing for his appraisal costs for Easement B. The City EDA would contemporaneously agree to sell Mr. Regan Lot 3, Block 1 of Farmington Industrial Park 20Sth Street Addition. The lot, which is 3.45 acres, would be sold to Mr. Regan for $225,188, which reflects the standard price sought by the EDA for similar lots in the Industrial Park. Additional terms of that transaction would be made part ofa standard EDA contract for private development agreement including outlining the proposed use ofthe property, terms regarding the relocation ofMr Regan's building from the 210th Street site to the Industrial Park lot, compliance with all design and performance standards currently applicable to Industrial Park lots, and payment of all customary development fees and charges. 21(jh Street Right-af-Way December 18, 2006 Page 2 The terms and conditions of this part of the transaction are outlined in more detail in the staff memo attached hereto that was provided to the EDA members in connection with the EDA's meeting on November 13, 2006 (attached). ACTION REQUESTED Approve the proposed terms of the transaction to acquire a right of way easement for the extension of 21 Oth Street and direct staff and the City Attorney to prepare the documents necessary to effectuate the transaction. Respectfully Submitted, -;' J 'P .,---c;-":" ( //2.._~' &:r~ '__ ,,/ t../ c.t i~--- Joel Jamnik City Attorney cc: file 2 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: EDA Members FROM: Kevin Carroll SUBJECT: EDA-Owned Lot in Industrial Park (Regan Proposal) DATE: November 13, 2006 At the EDA meeting on August 28, 2006, the EDA members discussed the possibility of selling the last remaining EDA-owned lot in the Farmington Industrial Park to Mr. Patrick Regan. The EDA members indicated general support for the proposed transaction, contingent upon (a) the negotiation of an acceptable price and (b) Mr. Regan's willingness to agree to certain conditions or provisions. With regard to (a) above, Mr. Regan has advised the City Attorney that the staff proposal regarding a sale price ($1.50 per square foot, or $225,188) is acceptable. With regard to (b) above, Mr. Regan had previously indicated that the following conditions were acceptable to him: 1. The use of any building that he moves onto the site or constructs on the site, and the use of the land itself, would be consistent with the existing zoning. His still intends to use the property for bus garage storage and/or other activities related to the nearby Marschall Lines operations. 2. Any building moved onto the site or constructed on the site would comply with the applicable design standards. Mr. Regan plans to construct a foundation and some short masonry walls, place the existing building's framework on top of these new walls (in part, to elevate the ceiling and door heights to create more interior space), and then replace the existing exterior wall surfaces with materials allowed under the design standards (Hardiplank, presumably). 3. The requirements of the City Code and/or the design standards regarding landscaping and screening would be followed. Mr. Regan has indicated an intention to place a fence (or a combination of fencing and vegetative screening) along the south side of the property. 4. Mr. Regan would pay the same type(s) of City development fees (surface water management fees, etc.) that have been paid by other recent Industrial Park developers (Karrmann, Aerospace, Vinge). 5. Mr. Regan would agree that by a specified date acceptable to the EDA, he would improve the property by moving a building onto it or by constructing a building on it, subject to the building requirements identified above. Unless otherwise directed by the EDA, City staff will request that the EDA's attorney proceed with preparation of a draft of a Contract for Private Development, which the EDA can review at its meeting in December. cc: Mr. Patrick Regan 000 90 ~ V L 'ON T'O~d l''ilzzt 900C:;/Sl/SD 31"10 M"d 03t\0~ddV -ON '~>n gOal '::>NI '531VI::>05$\1 l!i' )t1l~30NV '3N350~ '00~lS3ND8QJ Wo:J'oo.qsiiNJoq'NI/MA S:PS.l/4:J.JV II SJiJauJf)u3 sa~epossv . [\. 1ll >t!IJapUV 9 auaso~ l1li' OOJ~saU08 , u, nET-9E9-1S9 :xeoJ 0091;>-9E9-1 S9 : auo4d Enss NW 'Ined '.5 9E AeM45!H .saM SEEl a:>!UQ Ined 'lS "8r NMV~O !:lWN3~VM 'I"i !:l3lJd :3~WN 1NI!:ld 'V10S3NNIYi ..:10 31"115 3Hl ~o SMVl 3H1 ~30Nn !:lO~nS aNVl mSN3:l1l Alna v 'IN I lVHl ONV NOISIMl3dnS 1:l3!:lIO ~ ~aNn ~O 3~ AS a3~d3!:ld SVM A3MlnS illOd3l:l !:l0 'NOUV:lI..:lI:l3dS 'NVld SIH1 1VHl A..:llill3:l A83!:l3H 1 03N~IS3a M"d W 0- ..-m - ex) I'- . 00 :.tN / 1'-"- Z '" " ~ r--_ t'")t'") "In'"-: at'") at'") o (/) / ~ . I WUI 0::0 00 wo::l OW zD..~ <l:f-L[) (/)ZO (/)w.q- ~N i):!w..- o (/) . ~~~ ex, .q- r0 o o W ex, t'") ex, ~ m ex) (/) /' --..J ~.-, "7 . ..... -<.0 00) .~ u1 . cr> 10 .... -Z- (NOll::>3!:l!:lO::> ~NIll3dS) 900Z '::>30 rL 'A3!:l --- >-......" ......... z ...... f-u... (/)0 <I: wo:: IW f-Z..- ::::J0::f- 000 (/)U..J , W Z..- :Jf- f-g (/) <l:u... wO o o N O::.q- wm ~m wcr> (/)ex) N >-..- 0:: <I: 0 -t=z z. <l:U (/)0 UO :Jo:: CDW ::::JD.. D..f- wZ OW ~C5 _ Ul 0<1: t'")W / ./ o o +-' Q) Q) 4- c o Q) o u U1 >-' f-o _Z ..J Fci ::::JO UO :Jo:: CDW ::::JD.. D..f- wZ OW ~C5 _ Ul 0<1: NW \ ' ;.~ \.. '...--~ ~ ~ -<' '...1' ...~ ,. - -, , '1,........).." ...- -' - 1 .~ ~ ~ "'","" <...- ~ - <...- ,. - -, \ ' ;.- \.. -" '... -' \ ~- \ , " ... , ,. - -, f..."''''' <..~ , ..., ~ , ~, - 1 _ .~ \ \..\~ .) " , J ...' LL o W Z :J F"- ::::Jf- 00 Ul..J / / >-0 f-z :J Fci ::::JO UO :Jo:: CDW ::::JD.. D..f- wZ OW"- _~L[) ~w~ - Ul t'") 0<1:..- NW..- J ~~"', Q' c:. 7"'-N ~'\5'^ ;) '\ w C) <( Z <( 0::: f-O>-<( z~t::f- (!., W --.J z Z<c ;;; F w f='.... >:J20 ~O ....W 0 o:::<COUJZ WOZ<(~ o....o:::<CW,-" " <I: LL0f- OZZ -W f-~~ Z_w -0Ul Ow <I: D..CDW "7 "10 "0 ........ '~6 . <.0 ~ .... -Z- -, 1 ..- ~, - ..... , T \ '..._1 \ ' \ \,..1. J \ \ _" - - ~ \ \ -..... - "" ~_' ~-j \ CD \ -, -, LL~!z I r' (... _ J ~ _ Jaw m '." z I (-~ L.-:'\ ....~~ I-z2J I/:'J.. ,-- \w~8~'1 ~I~ , ,D..CDW ~I~ , .' / \ z..- I : \ \ I ,B6'Zr h $f' on. \ M" ~r,or. LOS ./ ~ oON ^ VMH~IH )fNn~l ......... ;1 ~; SNOlldl~JS3a IN3VBS\f3 NOI1IOOV' Al~381l 3~ld~3 VIOS3NNlVi 'N01~NIViHv.:l .:10 AlIO z o l- e.. ~ () en w c f- o ..Jf- LLZ o~ o::W wU zZ o::W o~ u~ o f-U Ul wu... ~O If- f-Z ::::J_ 00 UlD.. I I / aJ .... Z w :!: w en < w > !::: ...J i= :J C Z < W (!) < Z < ~ C >' < s: c < o ~ en en Cl) e.c u+-' ro c "0 .- c"O ro 0 .... u Cl) Cl) en -g~3: :J 0 0 ....-"0 0 Cl)C..... > ro en o Cl) ro en~"O Cl) C Cl) en .0 o O'C o..enu .....- en :J +-' Cl) 0.. ~ "0 >-,. ......, ... :t:::+-,ro :pro15 ::J 0.. en "OroCl) C - ~ ro c._ Cl) .2 ~ O):t::: - ro"O >- c"Oc . co <3:: :J .... >- 0 Ot::U - Cl) ro >-.0 +-' ro.- 0 3:.....J~ "OCl)ro ro.: 0 00.._ O:::E(j; ....w"O o _.... ........-0 c~u Cl) U Cl) EOo::: Cl) co Z- en _ c ro...- :J w+-,o +-,OU C ......J Cl) Cl)......c co+-, rot::..... E ro 0 .... 0.. Cl) Cl) +-' u a.. ro'- ........c:t:: ......+-'0 f- o ..J LL o 0:: W Z 0:: o U f- (/) W ~ I f- 0:: o Z W f- <I: f- Ul LL o W Z :J >- <I: ~ I ~t'") I . f-O IZ ~>- 0::<1: f-~ UlI <I:~ WI I I / / Cl) 0)...- "0 ~ en c 0 .S: 0 ._ Cl) .- C'f) c ro 0) as :5 ......J c.c en en CenC+-'C >- Cl) .- t:: ..... "0 ro ro "0'- en .- ro~9,>ooc _+-,c.....JroE >.....,.....Z....O+-'.cO+-'Cl) 0) > Q)'CD _ Cl) U ~.Ql u ~ :S b N 'O"O.....OCl)CCl)W....Cl)W:J en c ....0 en +-' en 0 en Cl) +-' ...- +-' . - 0 en ro 0 "0 (j) Cl) +-' .c 0 c .....J U "0 "0 .- Cl):J . Ql.c . 0 >- +-,"'- c Cl) ...- ro Cl) .... c 0::: t:: a.. ro en en 0 .... en en.c 0) 'E- o > Cl) Cl) U :J Cl) 0) +-' Cl) enzCl)> 3::5 Cl)en:5c 0"00) ro _ :S 'O.c c en m.s: 0 :; ~ N W Cl) 0 ... 15 'E- 0) E E ro Cl) I'-- en Cl)C....c N Cl)Cl).cCl) .c :.:i (j) 0) Z "" en.....- I'-- U ~ :5 Cl) +-' >-Cl)0:: Cl)02 00 CI.O 00,. c ro..... .c en :J >- en Cl) . (j) Cl) 0) o S "- "0 +-' Cl) C -C Cl).c c.o ...... .s: 1- .- 0 ,,, +-' "" - '"" o I'-- ro +-' Cl) . -E Cl) ;:: . - ...- CX) c en ..... r---: en +-' 0, .c 0)"'- '0 +-' CX) . s: ro ~ 1.0 0) ffi Cl) 0) 15 Cl) 15 Cl) .3.c ~ O).c "- C..... "0 N C "0 ......J U t:: CO)OON-en ~ C"OOCD .- ro '" Cl) 0 "0 .- ..... . a; 0::: Cl) 0 I'-- Cl) 0 I'-- . - ro ro Z 0 .0 U O)r---: .c.... ..c ro en en "0 C c t:: 0) 0 t:: en .-..... Cl) C ~ 'co ro .- ~ 0 Cl) I'-- 0..... "0 0 U .- +-' en en ~.....O Z "0 en Z 0 ro Cl) ~ a..0 0'- .- Cl) C..... .....J 0)"0 :;:; Cl) - CX) +-' - C .;-.- .c "0 C ro C U"'- CX) ro...- .- en .....J +-' .- "00 8c+-'.c.c+-,.....JCl).c+.;'ro . CO ro c) ro 0 +-' +-' 0 +-' S +-' Cl) en en CCl)+-'.....J:JCl).....Jen :JCl)O ..... Cl)'C U .~ "0 0 C "0 ro en 0..... +-' o U ro C "0 .- (j) = .- W "0 (j) CX) +-' C Cl) ro roro c c.oCl) .... Cl) Cl) .c ro en Cl) en Cl) 0"0 . Cl) Cl) .c .0 +-' -..... U 0)..... .c u'co c.o ..... c+-'"o '-en 0 c CO+-' Cl) enC'f)O) o -' Cl)"O ro ,,, Cl) 0 '" 0 en "!. ~ ,., E Cl) ..... .c - ..... +-' 0) . U.... .oWC+-'roC+-,OC"'-~ +-' Cl) :J . C en :.:i +.;' Cl) :.:i Cl) ~ 0..... CX) en.o en U"O Cl) U ~ en - 0 ...- Cl)Eenenc.cCl)c:S Cl)roCl)..... 3::JroCl)Ot::.....Cl):JC'f)+-'Cl)UO .c Z +-,-"0 U 0 c.o.c 0 ~ :J U C Cl) :5 en c Cl) Z C'f) +-' (j) C'f) . s: c 2 U o >- ro.- en Cl) c:i .;- Cl) N E Cl) en c (j)~w~...-.c...-Cl).c"!. :S:C19 :> en Cl) C'f) +-' ...- ~ +-' ...- 0 . - en Cl) .c "0 .c en 0)..... .c ..... 0...- ro .- :S .Ql c +-' Cl) C 0 ~ :t::: 0 en +-' .;- "0 +-'I 0 c+-' 0 Cl) .3: Cl) Cl) 0 en ro ro u Cl) :J ro U 0 U Cl) ......J Cl) - .....,.llI:::c Q) E .!: '" c 0 Q) c 0,"0 > en '"", en Cl) E ..... ro"'- - ro .- > Cl) .S::J en U +-'..... ro +-' Cl) ro en > U ~ ~ ro 0 c .~ 0 .... .~ "0 en "0 > g Cl) enWC'f)~"o Cl) ~"O~'O 25 en E-ro2:2 ffi~_ro_g"O ro_.c (j;~-g E+-':Jro.......-+-'roc+-'+-'c.....o (j) c en 0) +-' en +-' ro en :J .... en U R ..... .-E..... Cl) 0 ro.~ 0 ro 0 0 0 Cl) '-' 0 0 "0 .....J W "0 +-' W (j) u...- en z o l- e.. ~ () en w c II < .... Z w :!: w en < w ~ :::i .... :J C Z < W (!) < Z < ~ C ~~ s: c < o ~ 0) en"'- en Cl) eO) U c ro ro "00::: c - ro€ .... 0 ~Z c~ :J...- ~...- Cl)o.. >.- o~ en c Cl) 3: en 0 8..... .... :IN 0..C'f) >-c :t:::o :S:.;::; ::>uen "O~3: c..... 0 ro 0 0 Cl)......... O)Cl)en ro t:: ro cro"O .- :J Cl) ~O.o o ... 'C _ en ~ >-Cl)Cl) ro3:"O 3:=2 - -g019 oz 0 0:::Cl)~ .....c c o+-'c '+- '+-- .- co~ Cl).... - ECl)>- t::+-' Cl) ro c en :J :J ro 0 0 W U +-'enro CCl)+-' Cl)3:~ c.cro Et::O .... 0 _ Cl)Zen a..Cl)Cl) <3:::SS I 1'-- ,,-' L.1._ I , r --, L.lJ L:::_ ,- 1-(\ ,-, L.1.J '-' ~ ,- I I U __J ,-- r- 0 ,-, 0 ---.J I 1 L_J L.lJ 1-' ---.J m , '- ' L_J L .1. _ < :1 " L.1._ ~ r I L.lJ +-' .~ .c 0) ..... 0) ...- -ro 0) C2 0 N C'f) .cC ~enen :; . a; :2 ~ I'-- Cl) Cl) ro.oroC.c~:5 0.. - en ro t:: 0) C 2 0) en 0 Cl).- ro 0 c.- Z "0 E -enO"O ,.,... CCl)-roCl)'-VO ocro uCX)C'f) :e c Cl) c) c.c Cl) "0'- U C Cl) t:: Cl) ...... ~ C '-.c 0 .... '"" Cl).... +-' 0) <3:: ~.c ro ._z Cl) >-~'... jg"O Cl)"O t:: c - Cl) U Cl):JC'f)"O,Qc"'- .00.... Cl).... Cl)0 .- U Cl) E U.c .c .....J .0 en +-' +-' 0, Cl) 2 E en:J Cl) +.;' :J C .... O:J "0 Cl) 0 .- .- ~ en c Q) (j) c 0.. ro Z ro .- ..... c Eo >-.;- ~ c.o ~'o, W _ ro ~ Cl) C'f) C Cl) - CD 3: W .c c:i Cl) CD "'-"O..c +-'...-..c..... ~.... 0) en ~...-+-' 0 U 0 .-"0..... +-'- +-' o U IcE '0 ffi.S: CDCl)~OCl)Cl).....O _0::: 5 ~ en UNa.. ...- >-.... en G3 c C'f) "0 +-' +-' I- ro. .- o c ...- "0 +-' 1.0 ro .....J :J Cl) C'f)._ en 0 en .....O-roenro:c...-O OU+-'Cl)enro.....+-' Cl) (j) +-' ..... 0 +-' Q; .c ..... :J 0 .;- Cl) Cl) E+-'O.!: 0) en U ~ o '0 Cl) E .S: G3 s CX) , , C C \U 0) '-' Cl) :.:i 0 c en en . +-' U C'f) .- "0 .- N en!E >- Cl) 0) C "0 C'f) ~0~~d38":'O ..c Cl) 0) ..... Cl) +-' Cl) :5..c.....Cl)OenenU O+-'O"O+-,OCl)C c+-' C >ro (j) . - ..c ...- . - ...- > +-' "0 0)0 0 en en en Cl) .... .- a.. "0 .- EOO:::=2Cl)2c"O +-,U"'O..c:JOro ro ~ ~ Z +-'.S: U .;- .....,..... wOE Cl) en '"", 0 - +-' en Cl) 'G"O Cl) ~ (j) "" 0) S C C .c .- Cl) 0 N +-'.....J.....en en Cl)roc>- Cl)en"O ECl)oro~Q)2c Et+=oS~0,~8 o c en..... 0 Cl)'- Cl) Uoroo...-"OEen bMPN',~JC [(-DU9Ul to" L \f ...... lL. o ...... "0 C ro ..... o en Cl) .... U <3:: N 1.0 0) N N .... o 4= 0- en 0) I'-- 0) 0) en 0) c c ro +-' C o U "0 C ro ..... o en Cl) .... U <3:: 0) 0) C'f) o .... o ~ 0- en I'-- C'f) I'-- ...- 0) C c ro +-' C o U / ,< q.. 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, : ik City Administrator (j' vJ Lee Smick, AICP City Planner TO: SUBJECT: Set Joint Council/Planning Commission Workshop DATE: December 18, 2006 Staff is requesting that Council schedule a workshop for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Patrick Boylan, Farmington's Sector Representative at the Metropolitan Council and Kurt Chatfield, Dakota County Office of Planning will make presentations at this meeting. Mr. Boylan will discuss the Met Council's Comprehensive Plan process and Mr. Chatfield will update the Council and Commissioners concerning the Dakota County Comprehensive Planning efforts. Two dates were discussed with the Planning Commission at its meeting on December 12,2006. The Commissioners are available on both dates allowing some flexibility for the City Council to finalize the schedule. The two dates for the Comprehensive Plan meeting are as follows: January 10, 2007 at 5:30 PM January 24, 2007 at 5 :30 PM The Council should set a Joint Council/Planning Commission Workshop for either date presented above. Staff is also proposing to set the Visioning Sessions on January 31, 2007 and February 7, 2007. Please review your calendars and let staff know if you are available on these dates. The meeting times will be set at the first City Council meeting in January. Respectfully submitted, Lee Smick, AICP City Planner Tentative Scheduling For 2030 Comp Plan Update Revised 11/30/06 Bv Item Responsibi litv/Status 1. Planning Commission/City Council Workshop Jan 10 or 24 Meet to discuss Met Council Comp Plan Requirements, Lee Smick Depends on Schedule, Process Met Council availability 2. Visioning Sessions J an 24 or 31 Introduction to Comp Plan Process, Review Existing Plan, Depends on SWOT comparison from Existing Plan to current results availability Feb 7 Summarize Visioning results 3. Neighborhood Meetings Feb 20 Meeting in northern section of City to discuss proposed Comp Plan Update Feb 21 Meeting in downtown section of City to discuss proposed Comp Plan Update Feb 22 Meeting in western portion of City to discuss proposed Comp Plan Update 4. Background - City of Farmington Mar 2 Policies and Objectives Mar 2 Regional Planning Designation Mar 2 Forecasts for growth 5. Land Use Plan Dec 20, 2006 Existing Land Use - Prepare map and calculate land use Lee Smick Tony Wippler Dakota Co GIS Feb 22 - Future Land Use Lee Smick April 9 Staff Feb 22- Stage Development Lee Smick April 9 Staff Mar 13 Discuss Land Use Plan with Planning Commission Lee Smick April 10 Planning Commission review of Land Use Plan Lee Smick K:\PLANNING\Comp Plan Update 2008\Schedule 113006.doc 1 April 16 City Council review of Land Use Plan Lee Smick Housing - affordable 492 units between 2011-2020 Resource protection (solar access, historic preservation) 6. Transportation April 17 - Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ) Lee Smick Jan 18,2008 April 17 - Highways and roads Shelly Jan 18 Johnson April 17 - Bicycles and pedestrians Lee Smick Jan 18,2008 Randy Distad April 17 - Special traffic situations Shelly Jan 18,2008 Johnson April 17 - Transit Tony Jan 18,2008 Wippler April 17 - Aviation Lee Smick Jan 18,2008 7. Water Resources April 17 - Wastewater Bonestroo Jan 18,2008 April 17 - Surface Water Bonestroo Jan 18,2008 April 17 - Water Supply Bonestroo Jan 18,2008 8. Parks and Open Space Parks and Open Space Randy Distad Trails Randy Distad 9. Implementation April 17 - Official controls Jan 18,2008 April 17 - Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Jan 18,2008 April 17 - Review and update official controls Jan 18,2008 April 17 - Submit official controls and CIP Jan 18,2008 K:\PLANNING\Comp Plan Update 2008\Schedule I 13006.doc 2 10. Planning Commission and City Council Review of draft 2030 update Feb 11,2008 Feb 18, 2008 PC review of draft 2030 update CC review of draft 2030 update 11. Submittal of 2030 Update Feb 19-Mar Finalize 2030 Update for submission to agencies and 11, 2008 adjacent jurisdictions Mar 12, 2008 Submit to agencies and adjacent jurisdictions 12. Planning Commission and City Council review of Final 2030 Update Aug 12, 2008 PC reviews Final 2030 Update Aug 18, 2008 CC reviews Final 2030 Update Sept 12,2008 Submit Final 2030 Update to the Met Council Bv Date Dec 13, 2006 Forecasts for growth Dec 13,2006 Existing Land Use - Prepare map and calculate land use Jan 10/24 Joint PC/CC Workshop - Meet to discuss Met Council Comp Plan Requirements, Schedule, Process Ian 24/31 Visioning - Introduction to Comp Plan Process, SWOT, Feb 7 Summarize Visioning results Feb 20 Meeting in northern section of City to discuss proposed Comp Plan Update Feb 21 Meeting in downtown section of City to discuss proposed Comp Plan Update Feb 22 Meeting in western portion of City to discuss proposed Comp Plan Update Feb 22- Future Land Use April 9 Feb 22 - Stage Development April 9 Mar 2 Policies and Objectives Mar 2 Regional Planning Designation Mar 2 Forecasts for growth Mar 12 Discuss Land Use Plan with Planning Commission April 10 Planning Commission review of Land Use Plan April 16 City Council review of Land Use Plan April 17 - Ian Transportation Analysis Zones (T AZ) 18,2008 April 17 - Ian Highways and roads 18 April 17 - Ian Bicycles and pedestrians 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Special traffic situations 18,2008 K:\PLANNING\Comp Plan Update 2008\Schedule I 13006.doc 3 April 17 - Jan Transit 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Aviation 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Wastewater Plan preparation 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Surface Water Plan preparation 18,2008 April!7 - Jan Water Supply Plan preparation 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Official controls 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Review and update official controls 18,2008 April 17 - Jan Submit official controls and CIP 18,2008 Feb 11,2008 PC review of draft 2030 update Feb 18, 2008 CC review of draft 2030 update Feb 19-Mar Finalize 2030 Update for submission to agencies and adjacent jurisdictions 11, 2008 Mar 12, 2008 Submit to agencies and adjacent jurisdictions Aug 12, 2008 PC reviews Final 2030 Update Aug 18, 2008 CC reviews Final 2030 Update Sept 12,2008 Submit Final 2030 Update to the Met Council Informational Key to Revisions Dates that are no longer valid K:\PLANNING\Comp Plan Update 2008\Schedule 113006.doc 4 /07 ./; City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator (J Lee Smick, AICP City Planner n .] /y ,./ FROM: SUBJECT: Set Joint Council/Empire Town Board Informational Meeting - Fairhill Annexations DATE: December 18,2006 The Empire Town Board and Planning Commission will meet on December 19, 2006 to discuss the annexation request for the remainder ofthe Fairhill property and the railroad property within the Fairhill development. It is anticipated that the Town Board and Planning Commission will agree on the annexations, therefore, staff needs to set a Joint Council/Empire Town Board Informational Meeting per State Statute. The informational meeting will be similar to the one attended by the Council in Castle Rock for the Fountain Valley annexation. Set a Joint Council/Empire Town Board Informational Meeting for January 23,2006 at 7:30 p.m. at Empire Township. Respectfully submitted ~k' AICP City Planner Values Statement Excellence and Quality in the Delivery of Services We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional and cost-effective manner. Fiscal Responsibility We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Ethics and Integrity We believe that ethics and integrity are the foundation blocks of public trust and confidence and that all meaningful relationships are built on these values. Open and Honest Communication We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees. Cooperation and Teamwork We believe that the public is best served when departments and employees work cooperatively as a team rather than at cross purposes. Visionary Leadership and Planning We believe that the very essence of leadership is to be visionary and to plan for the future. Positive Relations with the Community We believe that positive relations with the community and public we serve leads to positive, involved, and active citizens. Professionalism We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the development of our employees. R55CKSUM LOG23000VO COUNCIL MEETING ON DECEMBER 18, 2006 Vendor ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC. AFFINITY PLUS FEI)ERAL CREDIT U ALCORN BEVERAGE CO. INC. ALL STAR WIRELESS AMERICAN SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, ARCTIC GLACIER ICE ASLAKSON'S BLACKTOPPING SERVIC BAL TECHINC BARBAROSSA & SONS INC BEIKLER, JEAN BELLBOY CORPORATION BELZER'S CHEV/DODGElKIA, JEFF Business Unit SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS WATER UTILITY EXPENSE EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FIIND DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP PILOT KNOB LIQUOR PATROL SERVICES RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP PILOT KNOB LIQUOR EVERGREEN KNOLL PARK FIRE CAPITAL PROJECTS ASH STREET PROJECT ASH STREET PROJECT MAIN STREET HILLDEE RECONSTRUCTION DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP PILOT KNOB LIQUOR STREET MAINTENANCE CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Object Amount VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 836.91 OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 836.91 VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 3,347.66 5,021.48 CR~nIT IINION PAVARI ~ , 1'5 00 2,125.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,319.22 COST OF GOODS SOLD 20,249.00 21,568.22 CELLULAR PHONES 11.99 11.99 SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 280.00 280.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD 211.10 COST OF GOODS SOLD 269.45 480.55 OTHER CONSTRUCTION COSTS 862.50 862.50 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,900.00 3,900.00 CONTRACTS PAYABLE 7,004.21 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 5,008.60 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 21,511.53 33,524.34 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 420.00 420.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD 545.57 COST OF GOODS SOLD 2,896.65 3,442.22 VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 54.49 54.49 u; R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 2 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount BERRY COFFEE COMPANY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 55.05 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND COFFEE FUND 165.15 220.20 BORCHERT, PHYLLIS SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS RECREATION FEES - SENIOR CTR 50.00 50.00 BRIESACHER, WAYNE SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 18.33 18.33 BUGBEE'S LOCKSMITH BUILDING MAl NT SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7.99 7.99 CANNON RIVER WINERY DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 432.00 432.00 CATARACT FIRE RELIEF ~SSOC FIRE SERVICES EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 31,250.00 31,250.00 CATCO PARTS SERVICE SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 124.67 124.67 CERTIFIED APPLIANCE RECYCLING SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 577.48 577.48 CINTAS - 754 POLICE ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 173.60 STREET MAINTENANCE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 144.76 PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 290.27 BUILDING MAINT SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 21.83 BUILDING MAINT SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 82.16 SEINER OPERATIONS EXPENSE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 144.76 SEINER OPERATIONS EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102.76 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 269.12 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102.76 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 144.76 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20.56 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 144.76 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102.76 FLEET OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 296.34 FLEET OPERATIONS UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 129.07 2,170.27 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/200610:45:23 Council Check Summary Page' 3 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount CMIINC PATROL SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIES 135.85 135.85 CMI MAILING & MARKETING SVS BUILDING MAINT SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 129.00 SEWeR OPERATIONS EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 161 2R SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 161.26 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 32.25 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 161.26 645.03 CNH CAPITAL SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 206.10 206.10 COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 750.00 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,130.30 1,880.30 COLLEGE CITY BEVERAGE INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 16,019.05 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 20,600.06 36,619.11 CULLIGAN ULTRAPURE INDUSTRIES DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 13.90 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 13.90 27.80 DAKOTA COUNTY TREASURER G.I.S PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,141.00 5,141.00 DAKOTA COUNTY TREASURER/AUDITO SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 75.00 FLEET OPERATIONS TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 75.00 150.00 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,478.40 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 2,766.40 4,244.80 DICK'S SANITATION INC SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 22,669.14 22,669.14 DISTAD, RANDY RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 101.02 101.02 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 4 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount ENCOMM MIDWEST LLC WELL #8 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 52,714.74 52,714.74 EUREKA CONSTRUCTION INC SPRUCE ST EXTENSION CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 223,202.03 223,202.03 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 320.00 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 160.00 480.00 FAIRFIELD GLASS AND WINDOW INC LIQUOR OPERATIONS MN SALES TAX DUE 12.22- DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP BUILDING REPAIR SERVICE 100.11 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR BUILDING REPAIR SERVICE 100.11 188.00 FARMINGTON BAKERY INC ELECTIONS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 235.56 235.56 FARMINGTON EMPLOYEE CLUB EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND EMPLOYEE CLUB 89.46 89.46 FARMINGTON PRINTING INC ADMINISTRATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 965.96 SPRUCE ST EXTENSION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 19.17 985.13 FARMINGTON, CITY OF ELECTIONS MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 13.50 GENERAL ACCOUNTING MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 14.51 BUILDING INSPECTIONS TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 48.00 POLICE ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 11.57 PATROL SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 12.07 INVESTIGATION SERVICES OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 3.97 INVESTIGATION SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 20.13 123.75 FERRELL GAS PRODUCTS CO ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE FUEL 263.78 263.78 FIRE ENGINEERING FIRE SERVICES SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 29.95 29.95 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE SEWER OPERATIONS REVENUE SPEC ASSESS PREPAID TO CITY 438.78 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO Vendor FLANAGAN SALES INC FORCE /\MERIC.^. FOX, JASON FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS-ACCESS FUN SERVICES GERMONIGNAUT,BETH GRAFIX SHOPPE GRIGGS COOPER & CO Business Unit MEADOW CREEK 3RD SOLID I/\'ASTE; OPERATIONS PATROL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS POLICE ADMINISTRATION ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP PILOT KNOB LIQUOR SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS WATER UTILITY EXPENSE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY POLICE ADMINISTRATION FIRE SERVICES GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS WATER UTILITY EXPENSE PATROL SERVICES DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP PILOT KNOB LIQUOR CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 5 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Object Amount 438.78 BUILDING & STRUCTURE 25,200.00 25,200.00 "EHICLE SIIPPLlES & PARTS 1.?4!i ?Q 1,245.29 TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 22.46 22.46 TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE 2,451.60 1,876.23 50.70 308.95 308.94 507.13 50.70 152.12 5,706.37 TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE 337.23 143.06 143.05 623.34 MN SALES TAX DUE PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 203.08- 3,327.33 3,124.25 OUTSIDE PRINTING OUTSIDE PRINTING OUTSIDE PRINTING OUTSIDE PRINTING 1,075.23 1,075.24 1,075.23 1,075.23 4,300.93 VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 175.73 175.73 COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD 13,606.21 17 ,932.53 31,538.74 ./ R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 6 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount H&L MESABI CAPITAL ACQUISITION OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 200.30 200.30 HAPPY HARRY'S FURNITURE ASH STREET PROJECT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 17,134.15- ESCROW FUND DEPOSITS PAYABLE 22,000.00 4,865.85 HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY EXPENSE CHEMICALS 35.00 35.00 HEIKES FARMS INC ASH STREET PROJECT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 780.00 780.00 HERLOFSKY JR, PETER J ADMINISTRATION CELLULAR PHONES 25.00 ADMINISTRATION TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 37.26 ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 58.30 120.56 HOHENSTEINS INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 463.00 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,463.70 1,926.70 HOLLATZ, LEE INVESTIGATION SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 207.48 207.48 HOME DEPOT SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS BUILDING SUPPLIES & PARTS 53.22 53.22 HYDRO METERING TECHNOLOGY WATER UTILITY EXPENSE EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 29,293.68 29,293.68 HYDROVAC SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,725.69 2,725.69 ICERINK SUPPLY CO ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 1,859.88 1,859.88 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST -457 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND ICMA PAYABLE 4,586.92 4,586.92 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 1,315.22 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/200610:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 7 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount ADMINISTRATION RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT 4,485.42 5,800.64 INTERSTATE BATTERY TWIN CITIES WATER UTILITY EXPENSE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 144.42 144.42 INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, CITY OF RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 432.30 432.30 JACOBSON ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS 208th ST WEST PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,982.50 11,982.50 JESKA, CASSANDRA INVESTIGATION SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50.00 50.00 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR COMPAN DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 9,763.27 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 10,636.59 20,399.86 JOHNSON, DAWN RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 180.00 180.00 KEEPRSINC POLICE ADMINISTRATION UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 323.23 PATROL SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 1,030.94 1,354.17 KELLY ELECTRIC INC BUILDING MAINT SERVICES EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 78.75 SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 210.52 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 18.75 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 18.75 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 15.00 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 18.75 360.52 KLOTZ, BEN NO SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 30.00 30.00 LAMOTTE COMPANY WATER UTILITY MN SALES TAX DUE 9.71- WATER UTILITY EXPENSE EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 159.16 149.45 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND LELS DUES PAYABLE 259.00 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 8 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Un~ Object Amount 259.00 LINDQUIST, BRIAN POLICE ADMINISTRATION TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 19.17 POLICE ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 40.05 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 2,070.00 2,129.22 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 39.21 39.21 LOMAS, KIMBERLY DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 59.00 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 59.00 118.00 LONE OAK COMPANIES INC SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE POSTAGE 197.68 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS POSTAGE 197.68 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS POSTAGE 197.68 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE POSTAGE 197.69 790.73 M. AMUNDSON LLP DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 400.46 DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 50.70 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 46.80 497.96 MARK VII DISTRIBUTORS INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 6,474.88 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 4,538.18 11,013.06 MCNEILUS TRUCK & MFG CO SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 1,657.99 1,657.99 METRO GARAGE DOOR CO. POLICE ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 155.11 155.11 METROCALL INC PATROL SERVICES TELEPHONE 13.59 13.59 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SEWER OPERATIONS REVENUE SAC CHARGE RETAINER 50,638.50 50,638.50 MEYER, JIM RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 35.00 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/200610:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 9 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount 35.00 MINNESOTA AFSCME COUNCIL #5 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND AFSCME UNION DUES PAYABLE 729.89 729.89 MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOCIATION EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND MBA PAYABLE 10834 108.34 MINNESOTA ENERGY RESOURCES COR PILOT KNOB LIQUOR NATURAL GAS 48.66 48.66 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT WATER UTILITY EXPENSE EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 1,409.65 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 109.70 1,519.35 MINNESOTA SENIOR FEDERATION SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 50.00 50.00 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYS EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND HEALTH CARE SAVINGS PLAN 1,951.48 1,951.48 MINNESOTA, STATE OF FIRE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10.00 ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 10.00 SE\l\lER OPERATIONS EXPENSE SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 2.50 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 2.50 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 2.50 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 2.50 30.00 MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTE EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND CHILD SUPPORT PAYABLE 1,314.24 1,314.24 MN DEPT OF REVENUE EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND GARNISHMENT PAYABLE 277. 94 277.94 MN OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECHNO PATROL SERVICES TELEPHONE 74.00 74.00 MOODY COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND CHILD SUPPORT PAYABLE 175.00 175.00 MOORE MEDICAL CORP RESCUE SQUAD SERVICES OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 351.72 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 10 12/04/2006 - 12/1712006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount 351.72 MOTOR PARTS SERVICE CO INC SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 74.09 74.09 MUZAK - NORTH CENTRAL DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 56.98 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 60.23 117.21 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 135.00 FIRE SERVICES OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 997.61 1,132.61 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS ADMINISTRATION CELLULAR PHONES 96.95 HUMAN RESOURCES CELLULAR PHONES 54.23 BUILDING INSPECTIONS CELLULAR PHONES 167.59 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CELLULAR PHONES 41.17 PATROL SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 983.36 FIRE SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 216.92 ENGINEERING SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 233.64 PARK MAINTENANCE CELLULAR PHONES 264.73 BUILDING MAINT SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 92.38 RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 178.77 SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS CELLULAR PHONES 20.49 DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP CELLULAR PHONES 38.15 SEVllER OPERATIONS EXPENSE CELLULAR PHONES 135.90 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS CELLULAR PHONES 201.16 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE CELLULAR PHONES 135.90 FLEET OPERATIONS CELLULAR PHONES 54.23 2,915.57 NORTHERN DAKOTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATION TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 15.00 15.00 NORTHLAND CHEMICAL CORP BUILDING MAINT SERVICES CLEANING SUPPLIES 104.26 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 185.07 289.33 OFFICEMAX - A BOISE COMPANY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,564.22 1,564.22 OKIKIOLU, FOLASADE SEVllER OPERATIONS REVENUE ENTERPRISE SALES 214.99 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/200610:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 11 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount 214.99 OLSON, MARGIE SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 100.00 100.00 ORKIN EXTERMIN/'.TINC 'MATER "TILlTY EXPENSE PROFfSSIONAI !';FRVIr.F!'; 7150 71.50 OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY FIRE SERVICES BUILDING REPAIR SERVICE 108.95 108.95 PAUSTIS WINE CO. PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 845.00 845.00 PELLlCCI HARDWARE & RENTAL POLICE ADMINISTRATION OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 44.68 BUILDING MAINT SERVICES EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 176.97 BUILDING MAl NT SERVICES BUILDING SUPPLIES & PARTS 723.36 BUILDING MAl NT SERVICES CLEANING SUPPLIES 2.97 BUILDING MAINT SERVICES OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 12.76 SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS CLEANING SUPPLIES 27.27 SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 6.24 ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 10.53 ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE BUILDING SUPPLIES & PARTS 44.62 ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 16.68 1,066.08 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 4,533.79 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 4,683.37 9,217.16 PINE BEND LANDFILL INC SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 25,109.98 25,109.98 PIONEER PRODUCTS INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET MN SALES TAX DUE 43.20- FIRE SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 707.86 664.66 POLFUS IMPLEMENT INC. PARK MAINTENANCE VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 435.56 435.56 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND PERA PAYABLE 11,674.04 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND PERA 14,273.05 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 12 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount 25,947.09 QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS CO DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 4,165.47 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 5,569.92 9,735.39 R & R SPECIAL TIES OF WISCONSIN ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 51.30 51.30 R&R CLEANING CONTRACTORS INC. DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP BUILDING REPAIR SERVICE 20.42 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR BUILDING REPAIR SERVICE 27.98 48.40 RED WING, CITY OF SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 953.72 953.72 REISINGER, RUTH SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS RECREATION FEES - SENIOR CTR 50.00 50.00 RIVERTOWN NEWPAPER GROUP DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP ADVERTISING 70.00 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR ADVERTISING 70.00 140.00 ROC INC FIRE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 227.00 227.00 ROCHESTER ARBORISTS WORKSHOP GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 80.00 80.00 ROCHESTER MIDLAND CORPORATION BUILDING MAINT SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 291.49 291.49 SAFE KIDS CERTIFICATION PATROL SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 60.00 60.00 SAFE KIDS WORLDWIDE PATROL SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 120.00 120.00 SANDSTONE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 272.55 272.55 SENTRY SYSTEMS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 305.25 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 13 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount FIRE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 27.75 333.00 SPRINT PATROL SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 489.42 489.42 STATE MECHANICAL INC WATER UTILITY EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,726.45 6,726.45 STEPHENSON, TODD SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 67.49 67.49 SUNDGREN, MARK INVESTIGATION SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 531.62 531.62 SVL SERVICE CORPORATION BUILDING MAINT SERVICES EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 314.99 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 49.07 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 49.07 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 9.82 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 49.07 472.02 SYNERGY GRAPHICS ADMINISTRATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 22.43 22.43 TRI-COUNTY BEVERAGE & SUPPLY DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 140.00 140.00 TROPHIES PLUS PATROL SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 3.73 3.73 VERIZON WIRELESS FIRE SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 15.09 15.09 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER ICE ARENA OPERATIONS EXPENSE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 367.33 367.33 WACKER, MARILYN PATROL SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 8.00 8.00 WEBER, CHARLIE SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 79.82 79.82 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO Vendor WINE COMPANY, THE WINE MERCHANTS WlNGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE WOLD ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS IN ZAHL-PETROLEUM MAINTENANCE CO CITY OF FARMINGTON 12/14/20061 0:45:23 Council Check Summary Page - 14 12/04/2006 - 12/17/2006 Business Unit Object Amount PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 175.20 175.20 DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 470.81 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,043.52 1,514.33 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS VEHICLE TIRES 51.50 51.50 CITY HALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 31,030.47 31,030.47 DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 44.73 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 44.73 89.46 Report Totals 814,603.51 ~s: "". SeDERBERG . FOGARTY ~.. . MCKNIGHT : PRITZLAFF WILSON