HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.04.99 Council Packet
COUNCIL MEETING
REGULAR
October 4,1999
Action Taken
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments)
a) Traffic Concerns - Mr. Rich Pietsch
b) Traffic Concerns - Mr. Tony Cassens
c) Traffic Concerns - Mr. Erwin Hagen
d) Traffic Concerns - Mr. Al Corrigan
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4. APPROVEAGENDA
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
a) Proclamation Recognizing VFW 100th Anniversary
7. CONSENT AGENDA
a) Approve Council Minutes (9/20/99) (Regular)
b) Adopt Resolution - Accepting Safe and Sober Grant
c) Adopt Resolution - Disposal of Obsolete City Equipment
d) Adopt Resolution - Accepting Donation to the Senior Center
e) Adopt Resolution - Approving Grant Application Metropolitan Regional Arts
Council
f) Appointment Recommendation - Community Development Department
g) Approve Bills
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a) 1999 Sealcoat Project Assessment Hearing
b) Adopt Resolution - Levy Certification Rate Increase
R92-99
12. NEW BUSINESS
a) Nelsen Hills 2nd Addition - Infrastructure Issues
9. AWARDOFCONTRACT
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) CSAH 31 Fence Project Request
b) Set Workshop Date - Parking Issues
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Approve Findings of Fact - Bible Baptist Church Appeal
b) Annexation by Ordinance - Benham Property
c) Henderson Storm Sewer Project - Neighborhood Meeting Update
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
a) Traffic Counts on CSAH 50 and Pilot Knob Road
b) 208th Street Traffic Concerns
c) Speed humps
14. ADJOURN
15. EXECUTIVE SESSION - PENDING LITIGATION
a) Hwy 3 Frontage Project
b) Progress Land Company
c) 821 3rd Street Enforcement Action
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
5~
TO:
Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM:
John F. Erar
City Administrator
SUBJECT:
Proclamation Recognizing VFW 100th Anniversary
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
September 29, 1999 was established as VFW day, recognizing the 100th Anniversary of the Veterans of
Foreign Wars of the United States.
DISCUSSION
Founded in 1899 by veterans of the Spanish-American War, the VFW is dedicated to serving all of
America's Veterans and their families. All individuals, schools, businesses, churches, and civic
organizations are urged to proudly display the Flag of the United States of America and participate in
programs honoring the VFW and all of ~erica's 26 million veterans.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
ACTION REOUESTED
Proclaim September 29, 1999 as VFW Day.
Respectfully submitted,
~/ ~ "
(' , ~ [;L-d--U
/ e-J
John F. Erar
City Administrator
~ ~NIVEltr
~~~ ~r
VFW 100th Anniversary
Commemorative Year
1999 (Proc{amation
Whereas)
Born in the fires of a revolution and tempered by civil war and foreign conflicts, the United
States of America today embodies the highest ideals of freedom and democracy, and
Whereas}
For over two hundred years millions of Americans have answered our nation's call to
defend our freedoms and our democratic form of government against all enemies, and
Whereas}
Such service has required sacrifice, hardship, endurance, dedication, bravery, courage and
the highest level of patriotism; those who have served our country deserve special
attention, now
71ierefore}
I, Gerald Ristow , Mayor of
the city of Farmington , do hereby
call upon all my fellow citizens to recognize the 100th Anniversary of the Veterans of
Foreign Wars of the United States and establish September 29, 1999 as VFW DAY.
Founded in 1899 by veterans of the Spanish-American War, the VFW is dedicated to
serving all of America's Veterans and their families. Further, I urge all individuals,
schools, businesses, churches, and civic organizations to proudly display the Flag of the
United States of America and participate in programs honoring the VFW and all of
America's 26 million veterans. Freedom isn't free, and these are the men and women who
paid for the freedom all of us enjoy today.
~o~
(Mayor)
M- a-L/- /999
(Date)
r~~~
~ September, 1999
t i
, (
, ~
, (,."
, <
~ TO: Quartermasters J
~,'" t
,~ t
, FROM.. Department Headquarters t
~ t
, t
~ ,
,t (,'
~ ~
, ?
, t
~ ?
, ?
~ t
~ PLEASE see that your Post Commander I
l i
~ receives the Proclamation on the reverse J
~ ?
~ t
, side and that it is taken to your local Mayor J
~ t
t t
\ ?
~ as soon as possible. J
~ ~
~ J
~,.,... Thank you! I
"~ ,
, ,
~ i
, ,
, ?
, ,
V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(j!t~4~~~~~~~~~?
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
~t::L
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers and
City Administrator~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
TO:
SUBJECT:
Traffic Concerns
Mr. Rich Pietsch
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION / DISCUSSION
During the Citizen's Comments portion of the September 20th Council meeting a question was raised
concerning the possibility of installing a stop sign at the intersection of Upper 182nd Street and Euclid
Street. The purpose of the stop sign would be to slow down traffic coming down the hill, eastbound
through residential areas.
Sound traffic management techniques do not support the placement of stop signs to control traffic speeds.
Speeding is largely an enforcement issue. The placement of stop signs generally leads to the substitution of
one violation, Le, speed, with another violation, stop sign.
Staff recommends that no stop sign be placed at the intersection at this time. The area will be added to the
list of neighborhoods for extra patrol with a focus on traffic speeds eastbound down the hills on Upper
182nd St at Euclid St.
ACTION REQUESTED
Information only.
Respectfully submitted,
~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
cc: Mr. Rich Pietsch
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
r:,/;
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and
City Administrator ~
FROM: Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
SUBJECT:';' Traffic Concerns
Mr. Tony Cassens
DATE: October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION / DISCUSSION
During the Citizen's Comments portion of the September 20th Council meeting a concern was expressed
regarding school bus stop arm violations in the area of Upper 1 82nd Street and Euclid Street. The resident
requested monitoring of the school bus stop at that location for purposes of stop arm enforcement.
State law provides a school bus driver the unique ability to file a complaint with the police department
regarding stop arm violations. The driver reports the date, time and location of the violation along with a
license plate number. Once notified, the police department verifies the license number and vehicle
description then issues a ticket to the registered owner of the vehicle.
The Farmington Police Department and Marshall Bus Lines have an established procedure to expedite that
enforcement process using a complaint form submitted via fax. This process has proven itself successful
during the time it has been in place.
In the event that a driver reports an area that is particularly prone to violations or has a repeat violator but is
unable to obtain a license number the police department will monitor the area. As of this report there is no
significant pattern of stop arm violations at Upper 182nd St and Euclid to warrant specific monitoring of
the area.
The police department will however, be monitoring bus driver stop arm violation reports from the area for
any emerging pattern and will respond accordingly.
ACTION REQUESTED
Information only.
Respectfully submitted
~',<
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
cc: Mr. Tony Cassens
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
&,~
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers and
City Administrator ~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
TO:
SUBJECT:
Traffic Concerns
Mr, Erwin Hagen
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION I DISCUSSION
During the Citizen's Comments portion of the September 20th Council meeting a concern was raised about
rolling stop sign violations at 190th Street and the new alignment of County Road 31.
The reporting person was advised that if a violation was observed a license plate number could be
forwarded to the police department and the vehicle owner would be notified appropriately. Unfortunately
no police authority has been granted to the citizen in this instance, as is the case in school bus stop arm
violations, so no tickets can be issued but advisory letters or phone calls may be used to gain compliance.
Staffhas been in frequent contact with the Dakota County Highway Department regarding this intersection
and a study has been completed.
ACTION REOUESTED
Information only.
Respectfully submitted,
S2~~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
cc: Erwin Hagen
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
~J
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers and
City Administrator W
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
TO:
SUBJECT:
Traffic Concerns
Mr. Al Corrigan
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION I DISCUSSION
During the Citizens Comments portion of the September 20th Council meeting a concern was raised about
the continued violation of passing on the shoulder in the area of Akin Road south of 1 95th Street. The
citizen requested that additional signs be posted to advise drivers that passing on the shoulder is prohibited.
Staff contacted the Dakota County Highway Department to request additional signage. The Highway
Engineer informed staff that under normal circumstances no such sign would be considered, however in
light of the fact that the Farmington Police Department is "the only agency in the County that rigorously
enforces the statute" and in consideration of the future turnback of Akin Road to the City the request would
be granted.
Staff will be working with the County Highway Department on the actual placement of the No Passing on
Shoulder sign.
ACTION REOUESTED
Information only.
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
cc: Mr. Al Corrigan
~
COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR
September 20, 1999
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3.
ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Also Present:
Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Strachan, Verch
None
City Administrator Erar, City Attorney Jamnik, City Management
Team
4. APPROVE A GENDA
MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
a) Introduction - Ehlers & Associates
Ehlers & Associates has been selected as the new financial advisor for the City.
Mr. Rusty Fifield, of Ehlers & Associates, was in attendance and introduced to
Council.
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS
a) Traffic Concerns - Mr. Tom Poseley
Mr. Poseley had expressed his concerns at the September 7, 1999 Council
Meeting regarding the intersection at 190th Street and CSAH 31. Staff has sent a
response to Mr. Poseley.
Mr. Dick Graelish, 1020 3rd Street, thanked the Police Department for assisting his friend.
Mr. Richard Pietsch, 5624 Upper 182nd Street, had a traffic concern in Hill Dee. He
would like to see speed bumps or stop signs on Upper 182nd Street by Euclid Street. Cars
are speeding and racing down' the hill. He is concerned children will be hit. The Police
Department will investigate and respond.
Mr. Erwin Hagen, 19643 Akin Road, stated they were in the left turning lane on Pilot
Knob and a car went through the stop sign on 190th Street. He wanted to document the
situation.
Mr. Tony Cassens, 5638 Upper 182nd Street, stated in addition to what Mr. Pietsch stated,
when the school bus is stopped, cars are going around the stop arm on the bus. He is
Council Minutes (Regular)
September 20, 1999
Page 2
concerned about children having to cross the street. The Police Chief replied the school
bus driver can report the stop arm violation and a citation will be issued.
Mr. Al Corrigan, 19715 Akin Road, is concerned about cars passing on the right on Akin
Road. He realizes the road is still owned by the County, but would appreciate anything
that could be done. The Police Chief replied there are no passing on shoulder signs on
Akin Road.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
a) Approved Council Minutes (9/7/99) (Regular) and (8/18/99) (Special)
b) Approved Infrastructure Improvements - Linden Street
c) Adopted RESOLUTION R85-99 authorizing disposal of obsolete City
equipment
d) Adopted RESOLUTION R86-99 approving application landfill abatement
funding
e) Adopted RESOLUTION R87-99 accepting U.S. Justice Department COPS Grant
t) Approved agreement amendment - police dispatch services
g) Approved Joint Powers Agreement East Metro Narcotics Task Force
h) Approved Assessment Agreement/sewer hook-up - CR72 project
i) Received information capital outlay - Parks and Recreation
j) Received information capital outlay - Fire Department
k) Received information school and conference - Fire Department
I) Approved bills
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a) Variance Appeal- Bible Baptist Church
The Bible Baptist Church has filed an appeal to the decision of the Planning
Commission to grant a sign variance to permit a new church sign to be located
adjacent to the church's parking lot at 19690 Akin Road. The initial request was
for a six foot x ten foot sign to be located on a five foot base. This variance
request was denied as a result of a 2-2 vote by the Planning Commission. The
current variance requested by Bible Baptist Church was to allow for a five foot x
eight foot sign on a three foot base to be located fifty feet from the center-line of
Akin Road and that the sign be internally illuminated.
The Planning Commission voted to approve a variance subject to the following:
The size of the sign be limited to five feet x eight feet.
The maximum height of the sign be limited to six feet which would reduce the
height of the base to one foot.
Illumination of the sign would be permitted between the hours of7:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m.
The sign be placed no closer than fifty feet from the centerline.
Council Minutes (Regular)
September 20, 1999
Page 3
The ordinance does allow for a sign size of75 square feet. The ordinance also
calls for setback requirements of 50 feet. The proposed sign is ten feet off the
right-of-way. With the sign size they are requesting, which is 50 square feet, they
are encroaching on the setback requirement and on the requirement that prohibits
the illumination of sig~s in residential areas.
Mr. John O'Sullivan, Chairman of the Deacons and a Trustee of Bible Baptist
Church, stated the church is petitioning to overturn the Planning Commission's
sign variance decision. He stated the restrictions placed on the church are not
consistent with the current sign ordinance and previously granted variances for
other illuminated signs. The current sign was damaged by a hit-and-run car and
since then, the church has been investigating different types of signs. The
Church's appeal is requesting:
Unrestricted illumination of the proposed sign.
A sign size of five feet by ten feet.
A minimum sign base of three feet.
The $150 appeal fee be waived.
Mr. O'Sullivan gave a presentation showing where the sign would be placed and
the type of sign requested. Regarding illumination, the church is proposing to
install a back lit sign to make it more aesthetically pleasing and reduce glare. It
would be lit all night, as their current sign is. The sign would be a double-faced
sign, with eight-inch letters to allow the sign to be read from Akin Road at a
speed of 50 mph. The placement is north of the current sign, and below the grade
of the road. The Mayor was concerned with the placement being too close to the
fire hydrant. Mr. O'Sullivan stated there would be no problem with moving the
sign over a few feet, as it would still be below the grade of the road.
Mr. Bruce Connor, 5170 192nd Street, stated he was instrumental in installing the
current sign. The sign was installed at the current location due to trees, but the
location is poor. The trees have now been removed so the location could be
moved over. The requested sign is smaller than the current sign. The Planning
Commission's main concern was the height of the sign. The commission assumed
the sign was one foot higher than the grade ofthe road, when actually it is lower
than the road. The Middle School now uses larger letters on their sign so it can be
read from the road.
Mr. Marv Wier, 808 3rd Street, asked if cars on the road coming from both
directions can see cars in the driveway for the sign. The church has done a study
and staff also investigated the situation and found no sight problems.
Mr. Tom Hoyer, 19687 Akin Road, asked what the wattage of the bulbs is and the
type of bulbs. The sign is largely a white sign with black letters. Perhaps it could
be done more aesthetically and not so glaring. Residents do not want an
obnoxious sign across'the road from them. The church has been given a variance
concerning the setback from the road. It is ok to give the church an inch, but not a
Council Minutes (Regular)
September 20, 1999
Page 4
mile. He would like it investigated further. Councilmember Strachan asked Mr.
Hoyer's opinion of the current sign. Mr. Hoyer stated he felt the current sign is
fairly obnoxious and is quite a ways from his house. He thinks the sign could be
done more pleasing and more friendly to the neighbors. Councilmember Cordes
asked if the wattage of the bulbs can be restricted. Staff replied exterior lighting
is based on how far the light will be cast, and that information is not available on
this sign.
Mr. Al Corrigan, 19715 Akin Road, thought an agreement was reached with the
Planning Commission. Asking for a height of eight feet is obnoxious. It is
impossible to tell it is not a church. If they want the sign lit, leave the current sign
there, as that has been approved. He has looked at other church signs and they do
not have so much information on them, and the highest is 6' 4", all others are
smaller and shorter.
Mr. John O'Sullivan stated they currently use a direct light that is on all night.
They have the same type of lighting for the American and Baptist flags. The
church wants something more aesthetically pleasing that does not have a lot of
light spill over. They would like something similar to the schools. The appeal is
not so much about illumination, but being consistent and reasonable with what is
already in the community. The Mayor replied he is sure if anyone in the future
should have a problem, the church is there to accommodate, not make enemies.
Mr. O'Sullivan replied that is correct, they are a church. Councilmember Strachan
stated there are two ways to go at this. It is one thing to impose something from a
governmental entity and the second is that it is a church and they want to be a
good neighbor. He agrees with Mr. Hoyer, that he would not want a buzzing sign
next to his home either. However, as a church he would like some assurance that
that is not going to happen. Mr. O'Sullivan stated if the Middle School sign is not
offensive to the neighbors, then this sign should not be either. Councilmember
Soderberg stated in driving around the community, he has noticed back lit signs
are more appealing than spot lit signs. The Middle School sign actually casts a
shadow into the ditch. The white part of the sign being requested by the church is
approximately 3 1/2 feet and it sits below the grade of the road.
Mr. Erwin Hagen, 19643 Akin Road, stated the church is very well lit and the
parking lot, which it should be. But he sees no reason to have the sign lit all
night. If people are interested, they will look at the sign even if it is 10 feet off
the road. He would lil}e to see the sign further off the road and not lit all night.
No one is interested in the sign at midnight.
Mr. Al Corrigan, 19715 Akin Road, stated the size of the letters was brought up
and the letters being too large for an eight foot sign and the speed limit being 50
mph. A sign will be put in for a number of years based on a 50 mph speed limit
which we assume will be lowered and the letters will be designed for 50 mph.
Council Minutes (Regular)
September 20, 1999
Page 5
MOTIQN by Strachan, second by Soderberg to close the Public Hearing. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Strachan asked City Attorney Jamnik the placement in terms of
the fire hydrant can be made a condition of any approval of the appeal. Can the
illumination be reviewed at a predetermined point in case residents do have a
problem? City Attorney Jamnik replied it has to be addressed at the time of
issuance. An approval cannot be conditioned on subsequent approvals or
objections by neighbors. Councilmember Strachan asked if Council cannot say
that in the judgement of the City Engineer or Councilmembers that we can place a
time restriction at that point if necessary. Attorney Jamnik replied no, because the
conditions are being s<;t at this point. With a six-month review and then
modifying the terms and conditions, for instance, if the church undertook the
improvement at a considerable expense, he does not know how that would be
effectively enforced to withstand a challenge. The Mayor asked if there was
anything in the ordinance addressing this issue. Attorney Jamnik replied if the
applicant agrees to accommodate neighbors subsequently, that is one thing. But
to put it as a term and condition of the variance does not work very well.
Councilmember Soderberg stated in the ordinance for illuminated signs, it does
state they have to comply with glare standards for exterior lighting. This
particular sign does comply with that standard.
MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg to approve the appeal of the church,
overturning the decision of the Planning Commission, with consideration of the
fire hydrant. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Strachan. Voting against:
Verch. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION by Cordes, second by Strachan to deny the request to waive the appeal
fee. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Strachan, Verch. Abstaining: Soderberg.
MOTION CARRIED.
9. AWARDOFCONTRACT'
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Approve Proposed Agenda - Legislative Meeting
Council has scheduled a special meeting with the City's legislative delegation on
October 6, 1999 to discuss several issues and concerns affecting local
government. A proposed agenda was reviewed and Council will respond to staff.
b) City 2020 Comprehensive Plan - Met Council Review Update
The City received a letter from the Metropolitan Council concerning the
completeness of the Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update. Sections
requiring additional information include aviation, housing, transportation, surface
Council Minutes (Regular)
September 20, 1999
Page 6
water management, sewers, water supply plan and land use and implementation.
Planning and Engineering staff will compile the requested information.
12. NEW BUSINESS
a) Adopt Ordinance - Grading Permits
A proposed ordinance amendment was prepared that would eliminate several
procedural redundancies in the case when Developers request a conditional use
permit for grading subsequent to preliminary plat approval. Obtaining a
conditional use permit for grading requires an additional step in the development
approval process by requiring a public hearing for the Conditional Use Permit, in
addition to the public hearing required for the Preliminary Plat. If the Developer
does not obtain a Conditional Use Permit, he is required to wait until the
Development Contract is in force before grading. Grading approval could be
considered during the public hearing for the preliminary plat. Conditions
included for the preliminary plat to allow grading would include approval for the
permit is contingent on approval of the grading plan by the City Engineering
Division and that the Developer grades the site prior to approval of street and
utility construction plans at the Developer's own risk. The Planning Commission
recommended to continue to allow opportunities for conditions to be set on the
plat and grading plan. They also suggested to separate the comments for the
preliminary plat and grading plan in both the staff report and during the
discussion period at the Planning Commission and City Council in order to insure
that both topics are discussed thoroughly. MOTION by Soderberg, second by
Verch adopting ORDINANCE 099-437, amending Title 3, Chapter 22-
Exemptions from Excavation Permits with the above conditions. APIF,
MOTION CARRIEl).
b) Authorize Negotiations - Township Fire Contracts
At the Council Goal Setting Workshop, Council agreed to revising the Township
Fire Contracts to address additional factors in the charging formula. The formula
uses the actual costs incurred by the City of Farmington for fire and rescue
operations for a given year, a constant for depreciation of buildings and
equipment, the actual number of calls and the tax capacity valuations for the
covered areas. Representatives of the townships have expressed an interest in
redefining the formula to include other components, such as population.
MOTION by Strachan, second by Cordes authorizing the Finance Director to
negotiate with township representatives to modify the fire contract charging
formula. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
c) Consider HRA Board Composition
Mayor Ristow and Councilmember Cordes have announced their intention to
resign their appointments to the HRA Board effective December 31, 1999. It was
also suggested that Council consider whether to further reduce the number of
Councilmembers that serve on the HRA Board. Council was asked to consider
whether it wishes to further modify the composition of the Board to include
additional citizen appointments. The options would be to reduce the Board
Council Minutes (Regular)
September 20, 1999
Page 7
positions held by the Mayor and/or Council from two to one or two to zero.
MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to amend the ordinance to include
one Councilmember and one additional citizen. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
a) CSAH 31 Street Light Concerns
The Council had inquired as to the possibility of installing street lights along
CSAH 31 in the vicinity of 187th Street. Staff is continuing to research this issue
with the County and will update the Council as information becomes available.
Councilmember Strachan: Had the first School District Task Force meeting
Wednesday and it went well. The Farmington Comprehensive Plan will be presented at
the next meeting.
Councilmember Soderberg: Noticed counters on Pilot Knob and Akin Road and County
Road 50. He asked if results of the traffic study have been received. City Engineer
Mann replied the County placed the counters, and there are other components to the study
that need to be considered before results are final.
A citizen living north of the Middle School expressed her thanks to Lee Mann and Jerry
Auge for a crosswalk from the development to the Middle School. However, since then
there have been violators of the crosswalk. The citizen asked if speed limit signs could
be posted or have the speed reduced. A patrol car was also requested during the times
school is out.
Councilmember Verch: He noticed Bumsville had speed humps three feet wide.
He was wondering if staff could contact Burnsville to see how they work. Staff will
investigate.
City Administrator Erar: The Cable TV Joint Powers Agreement with Apple Valley
and Rosemount has been approved by both cities. They will be moving forward with
posting the coordinator position.
Community Development
Director Olson: A groundbreaking has been scheduled for September 23,
1999 for Dalsin Manufacturing.
14. ADJOURN
MOTION by Cordes, second by Strachan to adjourn at 9:30 p.m. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. .
Respectfully submitted,
C ' :;/'" .d~
i ',,/ r? c..:.-e:~
_7//' ...2'%0_ '?--? ~u
~
Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
/)
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers and
City AdministratorW
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
TO:
SUBJECT:
Safe & Sober Grant
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION / DISCUSSION
The Farmington Police Department and the Lakeville Police Department have made a joint application to
the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety for a Safe & Sober Grant for the
period from October 1, 1999 through September 30,2000.
The purpose of a Safe & Sober Grant is to promote a variety of traffic safety measures including education
and enforcement activities. It will also allow for the purchase of additional equipment to complete these
activities. The "joint" nature ofthe grant application is in recognition of the fact that Farmington and
Lakeville share a common customer base and highway system. It makes sense, therefore that we should
combine our activities to achieve common goals,
Staff has been notified that the grant application has been approved in the amount of $30,000.00. Of that
total the City of Farmington will receive $18,000.00 and the City of Lakeville will receive $12,000.00.
The State requires that only one agency act as the Fiscal Agent in administering a joint grant. Staff of the
two cities have agreed that Lakeville, with its larger staff, is in a better position to administer the funds, at
no cost to the City of Farmington.
ACTION REOUESTED
Adopt the attached Resolution accepting the Safe & Sober Grant from the Minnesota Department of Public
Safety, Office of Traffic Safety.
Respectfully submitted,
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
RESOLUTION NO. R -99
Accepting a Safe & Sober Grant from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting ofthe City Council of the City of
Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 4th day of
October, 1999 at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following:
WHEREAS, The Farmington Police Department promotes the concept of Traffic Safety; and
WHEREAS, The Minnesota Department of Public Safety administers Safe & Sober Grants to
departments with a goal promoting traffic safety; and
WHEREAS, It is in the best interest of the City of Farmington and in particular in the interest
of its citizens to actively pursue traffic safety measures.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington enter into a joint grant
agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety and the
Lakeville Police Department for the project entitled Safe & Sober Communities during the
period from October 1, 1999 through September 30, 2000.
The Farmington Chief of Police is hereby authorized to execute such agreements and
amendments as necessary to implement the project on behalf of the Farmington Police
Department.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chief of the Lakeville Police Department is hereby
authorized to be the fiscal agent and administer this grant on behalf of the Farmington Police
Department.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the
4th day of October, 1999.
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of
1999.
SEAL
City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7e,
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers and
City Administrator ~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
TO:
SUBJECT:
Disposal of obsolete property
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION I DISCUSSION
Staff is requesting Council authorization to dispose of obsolete property currently held by the City. At its
regular meeting of September 19, 1999 the Council authorized the sale of obsolete but useable items at
public auction. In addition to those items sold at auction the City stores property that is obsolete but is not
suited for public auction.
The Police Department has forfeited a number of vehicles over the past year. Several of those vehicles
have been sold at auction. Two of those vehicles are not in operating condition and have little or no value
at auction, Staff is requesting authorization to dispose of the vehicles at an auto salvage yard.
Over the course of the past 7-8 years the Police Department has accumulated a large number of uniform
pants and shirts. These uniform items are worn to the degree that they are unacceptable for use as uniform
apparel. While these items are unacceptable as police uniforms they may be usable for other purposes.
Staff is requesting permission to donate a number of used uniform pants and shirts to the Veteran's
Administration through the Minnesota Veteran's Home in Hastings. Residents of the facility will in turn
repair, alter and reuse the clothing items.
A complete list of items to be disposed of is attached on Exhibit A.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the disposal of obsolete property.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Daniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
PROPOSED
RESOLUTION NO. R -99
Approving the Disposal of Obsolete City 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 4th day of
October, 1999 at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following:
WHEREAS, The City of Farmington, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 412.211, is authorized to acquire
and sell or otherwise dispose of such real property and personal property as its interests; and
WHEREAS, The City of Farmington has adopted City Code Sections 8-9-6 and 8-9-6-1 which specify
the procedures to be followed in disposing of property no longer needed by the City; and
WHEREAS, The City Clerk, as required by City Code, has determined that certain equipment and
personal property, further described in ~xhibit A, attached hereto, are no longer necessary for City
purposes and that it is in the City's interest to sell or otherwise dispose of said property; and
WHEREAS, The City Council, pursuant to state statute and city code has reviewed the City Clerk's
determinations and recommended actions,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Farmington hereby
approves the donation of personal property described in the attached Exhibit A, as obsolete and unusable
uniforms, to the Veteran's Administration, Veteran's Home at Hastings, MN.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Farmington hereby approves the
sale of equipment as described in the attached Exhibit A, as inoperable motor vehicles, to a properly
licensed auto salvage yard for appropriate disposal.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of
October, 1999.
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of
1999.
SEAL
City Administrator
EXHIBIT A
Obsolete or Unusable Uniforms
30 Pairs of dark blue trousers
9 Shirts
Inoperable motor vehicles
1985 Ford pick up, VIN
1988 Dodge Omni, VIN
1FTDF15Y 4FPB37494
IB3BZ18D5JY173836
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
?d
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~
James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director
Adopt Resolution Accepting Donation - Senior Center
October 4, 1999
A donation has been received at the Senior Center from the Faith United Methodist Church Women's
Group.
DISCUSSION
The Faith United Methodist Church Women's Group has donated $100 to the Senior Center Meals on
Wheels Program.
Staffwill communicate the City's appreciation on behalf of the Council to the Faith United Methodist
Church Women's Group for their generous donation.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached resolution accepting the donation of $1 00 to the Meals on Wheels Program from the
Faith United Methodist Church Women's group.
Respectfully submitted,
~6A
James Bell
Parks and Recreation Director
RESOLUTION No. R -99
ACCEPTING DONATIONS TO THE SENIOR CENTER
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 4th day
of October, 1999 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member ------ introduced and Member ----- seconded the following:
WHEREAS, the Faith United Methodist Church Women's Group has donated $100 to
be used for the Meals On Wheels Program at the Senior Center; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to accept such donations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby
accepts the generous donation of$100 from the Faith United Methodist Church Women's
Group to be used as stated above.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session
on the 4th day of October, 1999.
Mayor
Attested to the 4 th day of October, 1999.
City Administrator
SEAL
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7e.
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers .and City Administrator~
FROM: Renee Brekken, Recreation Program Supervisor J~
SUBJECT: Approve Grant Application for the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council
DATE: September 23, 1999
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
Farmington Parks and Recreation Department in cooperation with Lakeville Parks and Recreation
Department would like to apply for a grant in the amount of $2,000 - $3,000 from Metropolitan
Regional Arts Council. Farmington and Lakeville have applied for and received grant funds in 1998
and 1999 for the Awaken to the Arts Performance Series. The grant application for the year 2000 is
requested to fund arts workshops and performances.
The Metropolitan Regional Arts Council serves organizations, art projects and arts audiences in the
seven county metropolitan area through programs and services that provide people with opportunities
to engage in the process of creating art as well as opportunities to enjoy the artistic accomplishments of
others.
BUDGET IMPACT
Metropolitan Regional Arts Council funds must be matched dollar for dollar. At least 20 percent of the
match must be in cash. Cash sources may include general operating funds, past surpluses, donations,
and earned income or revenue raised specifically for the project. The remaining match may include
cash and/or in-kind goods and services.
ACTION REOUIRED
Adopt a resolution authorizing application for the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council grant.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Renee Brekken
Recreation Program Supervisor
RESOLUTION NO. R -99
APPROVAL OF GRANT APPLICATION
FOR THE METROPOLITAN REGIONAL ARTS COUNCIL
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 4th day of October
1999 at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following:
WHEREAS, Farmington Recreation along with Lakeville Recreation would like to apply for a
small grant in the amount of $2,000 - $3,000; and,
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council serves a diversity of organizations, arts
projects and arts audiences in the seven-county metropolitan area through programs and services
that provide all interested people, in their own and other communities in the region, with
opportunities to engage in the process of creating art as well as opportunities to enjoy the artistic
accomplishments of others; and,
WHEREAS, the grant money will go to fund arts oriented workshops and performances in
Farmington and Lakeville during the year 2000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the grant application for the Metropolitan
Regional Arts Council is hereby approved.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
4th day of October 1999. .
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of
1999.
City Administrator
SEAL
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7f
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM:
Robin Roland, Acting City Administrator
SUBJECT:
Appointment Recommendation - Community Development Department
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time Fire Marshall/Building
Inspector in the Fire and Community Development departments has been completed,
DISCUSSION
After a thorough review of qualified applicants for this position by the Fire Department, Community
Development Department and Personnel Office, an offer of employment has been made to Mr.
Bradley Schmoll, subject to ratification by the City Council.
Mr, Schmoll is currently employed as a part-time Deputy Fire Inspector for the City of Brooklyn
Park. He has been part owner of a construction company for the past ten years. Mr. Schmoll is in
the process of obtaining his Associate Degree in Fire Science and Fire Protection and has
completed numerous other fire related classes and certification.
BUDGET IMPACT
Funding for this position is authorized in the 1999 Budget.
ACTION REQUIRED
Approve the appointment of Mr. Bradley Schmoll as a full-time Fire Marshall/Building Inspector
effective October 18, 1999.
~~~
Robin Roland
Acting City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
?fa....,
TO:
Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator ~
Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
FROM:
SUBJECT:
1999 Seal Coat Project Assessment Hearing
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
The City Council scheduled the 1999 Seal Coat project assessment hearing at the August 16,
1999 City Council meeting.
DISCUSSION
The 1999 Seal Coat project has been completed. Streets in Dakota County Estates, Deer
Meadows 1 sl and 2nd and areas in downtown Farmington were seal coated with this year's project.
All affected property owners have been notified as to the date and time of this public hearing and
that final assessments may be adopted at the public hearing pursuant to M.S. 429.
BUDGET IMPACT
The total project cost for the 1999 Seal Coat project is $51,428.55. At the April 5th Council
meeting, Council directed staff to prepare the assessment roll allocating 50% of the project costs
to the benefiting properties not to exceed a unit price of $60.48 per buildable lot. Per Council's
direction, staff has calculated the proposed assessment amount for the 1999 Seal Coat project to
be $55.55 per buildable lot. The total amount to be assessed to benefiting properties is
$20,775.70. The City's portion ofthe project cost is $30,652.85 and will be funded through the
Road and Bridge fund.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached resolution adopting the assessment roll for the 1999 Seal Coat project.
Respectfully Submitted,
';km~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
RESOLUTION NO. R -99
ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR PROJECT 99-12
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the City Council and the City of
Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 4th day of
October, 1999 at 7:00 p.m.
The following members were present:
The following members were absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following resolution:
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given by the Council, the Council has met and heard
and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for the following improvement:
Project No.
99-12
Description
Street Seal Coating - Oil and Aggregate
Location
See attached list of locations
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FARMINGTON,
MINNESOTA:
1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, is
hereby adopted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named
therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the
proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of
one year, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in
January, 2000 and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.5% per annum from the date of the
adoption of this assessment resolution until December 31, 1999 . To each subsequent
installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property,
with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest
shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this
resolution; and s/he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire
amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the
year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15
or interest will be charged through December 31 ofthe next succeeding year.
4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County
Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessments shall be
collected and paid in the same manner as the other municipal taxes.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
4th day of October, 1999.
Mayor
Attested to the 4th day of October, 1999.
SEAL
City Administrator
City of Farmington
1999 Seal Coat Project
Project 99-12
Areas proposed to be assessed are adjacent to the following streets:
Street
180th Street
Embers Ave.
Ely Ave.
Empire Trail
180th Ct.
Upper 182nd Street
Emerald Trail
Oak Street
Spruce Street
Walnut Street
Locust Street
Maple Street
Beech Street
Division Street
1 st Street
2nd Street
4th Street
Location
between CSAH 31 and Ellice Lane
between Emerald Tr. and 183rd Street
between CSAH 31 and Ellice Lane
between 180th Street and Embers Ave.
between Division and 1 st Street
between Denmark/CSAH 31 and 2nd Street
between Division and 4th Street
west of 3rd Street
between 1 st and 4th
between 2nd and 3rd
south of CSAH 50/Elm Street
between Maple and Walnut
between Maple and Walnut
September 20, 1999
City of Farmington
City Hall - Special Assessment
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Attention: Farmington City Clerk/City Administrator
In. Re: Seal Coat Project 99-12
Parcel 148395024001
Dear Mr. John F. Erar:
I am in receipt of the proposed assessment for seal coating
certain city streets. I would like to say, "Enough is Enough".
The City of Farmington is continually assessing property owners
for work on public streets which is clearly a "general
maintenance function" and should be I;.aid by taxes already
collected, not by special assessments. These are public streets
that are traveled extensively by residence of Farmington and
outsiders not exclusively by adjacent property owners
We pay property taxes of which a portion is allocated to
maintenance and repair of City Streets. According to the
Minnesota Constitution, a Special Assessment against a property
owner must benefit and increase the value of that property.
I believe this assessment is illegal and that it is the taking
of money from a few without adequate compensation.
4: p;'~
Diane L. Phillips
506 Timber Court
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
CC: Farmington Independent
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
. www.ci.farmington.mn.us
~b
FROM:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~
Robin Roland, Finance Director
TO:
SUBJECT:
Adopt Resolution - Levy Certification Rate Increase
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
The State Legislature passed a law during the 1999 Session, which mandates that all Cities and
Counties must pass a resolution if their proposed 2000 tax levy is a dollar amount higher than that
rate calculated by the County Auditor/Treasurer using a prescribed formula,
DISCUSSION
The prescribed formula calls for the calculation of what the City of Farmington's tax levy rate
would be if the dollar levy amount does not change but the taxable base does.
The City of Farmington passed a 2000 preliminary net levy on September 7,1999 of $1,816,068.
This dollar levy is a 4.3% increase over the 1999 net levy. However, since there is more taxable
value in the City in 2000, due to the household and market value growth, this dollar levy results in
a reduction of the Tax Capacity Rate from 33.07% to 32.00%.
As the community grows, increased revenues from the tax levy are necessary to provide the
services all residents require from their City. Despite the increase in revenues, households in
Farmington will experience lower City taxes in 2000 due to the expansion of the tax base,
BUDGET IMPACT
None. The City Council adopted the preliminary tax levy and set the Truth in Taxation hearing
with Resolution R84-99. This subsequent resolution does nothing to change the previous
resolution.
ACTION REQUIRED
Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the County Auditor to certify a property tax rate higher
than that rate computed under Minnesota Statute 2048.135.
~#/
Finance Director
RESOLUTION NO. R -99
AUTHORIZING A TAX RATE INCREASE FOR THE 1999 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2000
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City on the 4th day of October, 1999
at 7:00 P.M..
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member introduced and Member seconded the following:
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Farmington, County of Dakota,
Minnesota, that the county auditor is authorized to fix a property tax rate for taxes payable in the
year 2000 that is higher than the tax'rate calculated pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 2048.135 for
the city for taxes levied in 1998, collectible in 1999.
Adoption of this resolution does not prohibit the city from certifying a final levy that will result in no
tax rate increase or a tax rate decrease.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
4th day of October, 1999.
Mayor
City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
IO~
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~
FROM:
Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
CSAH 31 Fence Project Request
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
Staff has received inquiries from residents along CSAH 31 regarding the installation of a
fence along CSAH 31.
DISCUSSION
In 1997 and early 1998 before the construction of the CSAH 31 project began, the City
indicated to the residents in attendance at the public hearings and neighborhood meetings
that the City would be willing to look at doing a fence project along CSAH 31. The
project costs of any fence installed would be the responsibility of the benefiting property
owners. At that time, there was little interest indicated for such a project.
In the last couple of weeks, staff has received numerous calls from residents that live
along CSAH 31 that have interest in a fence project. Based on the apparent resident
interest, it is staff s recommendation that a neighborhood meeting be held with interested
residents to determine if the residents wish to petition the Council to initiate a fence
project. If a project of this type were to go forward, all of the project costs would be
assessed directly back to the benefiting property owners and therefore, all property
owners wishing to be part of the project would need to sign an assessment agreement.
BUDGET IMPACT
None at this time.
ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize staff to hold a neighborhood meeting with property owners along CSAH 31
north of 195th Street to discuss a possible fence project.
Respectfully submitted,
;b !Yl~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farminl:ton.mn.us
/06
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato4.l
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Set Workshop Date - Parking Issues
DATE: October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
Staff respectfully requests that a Council workshop be scheduled to discuss various
parking issues in the City.
DISCUSSION
As the City has grown significantly in the past few years, the operational difficulties
associated with on-street parking, especially during snow emergencies, have negatively
impacted various City operations. At the workshop, staff will present the issues to
Council and outline the problems being experienced. Staff will also present possible
legislative solutions to the issues for Council's review.
BUDGET IMPACT
None at this time.
ACTION REQUESTED
Consider October 27 and 28, 1999 as possible dates for the parking issues workshop and
set date.
Respectfully submitted,
~yYz~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
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: David L. Olson
Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Adopt Findings of Fact - Bible Baptist Church Sign Appeal
DATE: October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
Staff has prepared the attached findings of fact for the approval of Appeal filed by Bible
Baptist Church of the August 10, 1999 decision of the Planning Commission regarding a
variance from the setback and illumination requirements for church signs in the R-I
Zone.
DISCUSSION
The Council's action to grant the appeal was contingent on the adoption of findings of
fact in support of their decision. The attached findings can be adopted as prepared or as
revised by Council.
Residents in the vicinity of the Church have also submitted the attached written response
to the previous Council decision. This response requests that the Council reconsider its
previous action to grant the appeal.
Under Robert's Rules of Order, one ofthe Councilmembers on the prevailing side would
need to make a motion for reconsideration of the previous action. The motion could be
seconded by anyone on the Council. If this motion were to be approved, Council would
have to schedule another public nearing and provide required notice before reconsidering
their previous decision.
BUDGET IMPACT
None
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the prepared Findings of Fact in support of the granting of the appeal filed by
Bible Baptist Church.
~t??'~'
~~-~
Community Development Director
cc: Bible Baptist Church, Attn Bill Veeniga
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
INRE:
Application of First Bible Baptist Church
For a Variance from Sign
Setback and Illumination Requirements
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
On September 20, 1999, the Farmington City Council met to consider the
application of First Bible Baptist Church for a variance from the Sign Setback and
Illumination Requirements in the City Code in conjunction with the Church's proposed
replacement of their existing sign. The hearing was conducted following an appeal by the
Church of the City Planning Comri1ission' s approval of a variance for the proposed sign
conditioned on the following. The Church's request to the City CouncIl on its appeal was
for the Council to overturn the Commission's decision and to issue the variance as
requested by the Church in its application, thus allowing a 3 ft. base, 24hr. illumination,
and a setback of 50 ' from the centerline of Akin Road..
The City Council conducted a public hearing on the appeal and the proposal preceded by
published and mailed notice. The applicant was present and the Council heard testimony
from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The proposed sign will be an improvement from the existing sign as it will be
illuminated internally rather than using external spot lights.
2. The size of proposed sign is 50 square feet which is a reduction in square
footage from the existing sign which is 60 square feet.
3. There are currently provisions in the Zoning Code that address glare problems
that may result from illuminated signs.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
BY:
Its Mayor
ATTEST:
Its Administrator
RESPONSE TO COUNCIL REGUARDING DECISION
FOR SIGN VARIANCE FOR
BffiLE BAPTIST CHURCH
SITUATION
Deacons, Trustees and congregation of the Bible Baptist Church disagreed with the
decision of the Planning Commission at the August 10, 1999 meeting about a new sign
size, illumination, base height and they requested the City Council to overturn their
decision even at the opposition of all the neighbors. We find it hard to believe that the
Council would not listen to the people who will be most effected by their decision. The
neighbors are the ones who have to live with this sign every day and night, not just when
you come and go from church. The council also put aside the problem that could be
involved with the fire hydrant that is located close to the sign location. They would look
at it later, The question was brought up as to how bright the sign would be, Neither the
church nor the council was able to answer this question. It was stated that if it is a
problem it could be looked at. This does not give the neighbors much satisfaction. Why
shouldn't the neighbors have the same opportunity to review and rebut what the Church
has to say about the new sign just as the city says they have. The council has granted
variances to the Bible Baptist Church without any consideration to the neighbors.
FACTS TO CONSIDER
Why is it necessary to have the sign so close to the road? Is it just because they have their
parking lot design the way it is and wouldn't allow for the sign to be off the road the
required distance? Maybe they could change their parking lot so the sign could be back
off the road the required 50 feet from the edge of the road instead the 50 from the center
of the road as they requested. Just because they had a variance for the old sign to be 50'
off the center of the road does not mean they automatically should be granted the
variance on distance from the road for a new sign in a different location.
The regulation on illumination should not automatically be transferred from one sign and
location to another sign in a different location. They base that argument for allowing the
sign to be illuminated all night on the fact that they could before. Just how many people
are driving after 10:00 PM looking for a church? Also with the lights that they leave on
in the church and the parking lot it would be heard not to realize that it is a church. If the
design of the part of the sign that reads Bible Baptist Church is done right, the lights in
the parking lot could make it possible to read this at all times.
The size of the sign should also be reconsidered. Their argument is that it is difficult to
read the message on the sign at 50 miles per hour if the letters are not 8" high. They also
say that if the sign were smaller the length of the message would have to be shorter,
Maybe they should figure out messages that could get the point across in fewer words
which would also be easier for people to read and understand while they are traveling 50
miles per hour. The road in that area also has two cUrves and seven driveways coming out
on the road. Maybe reading a message is not the right idea for that area because of traffic
1
safety. The argument about the size of the letters was also based on the size of the letters
at the Middle School. The sign at the Middle School is off the road more than the
required 50' from the edge of the road as well as there is a turning lane to the school
which sets the sign back further. The sign at the Middle School is back approximately 82'
from the middle of the road and sign location the church wants would be approximately
34' off the center of the road. It is understandable that the sign would be easier to read if
it is closer to the road thus smaller letters would be readable, They conducted tests and .
research that told them that an 8" letter is easier to read than a 6" letter and we're sure a
10" letter would also be easier yet to read. Again realize that the neighbors have to put up
with this sign all the time not just when you are at church.
The height of the base is based on the argument that the sign opens from the bottom and
it would be difficult to change the message in the sign. For that reason the neighbors have
to put up with a sign that is sticking up in the air 8', The main purpose of a base is to
have something to mount the sign to. The base that was approved by the planning
commission was adequate for that purpose. Maybe they should work with a sign
company that could come up with a way to make changing the message easier for them.
There is another consideration on the sign that has not been discussed to any extent, That
is safety, Safety was briefly talked about as far as the traffic entering and exiting the
church lot. We still wonder if a sign that is 12 feet long and eight feet tall doesn't block
the view of the road for south bound traffic as well as south bound traffic does not have
the ability to see someone exiting as well as they should. Another consideration of safety
is the base, Everyone who lives along this part of Akin road has replaced their mailboxes
many times over the years, We have all had cars leave the road and hit our mail boxes
and in fact come well into our yards. These accidents have happened during the night as
well as during the day by young under experienced drivers. The county suggests mail box
posts that will break away without causing a lot of damage to the car or injure driver, The
church has said that safety is a concern of theirs. They want it safe for people visiting the
church when they enter and exit their lot. They should also consider what would happen
if a driver leaves the road, comes across their property and hit their sign that is only a few
feet off the road right away and the grade is almost flat at that point of the ditch. The
construction of a three feet tall sign base in this area could be a real safety hazard.
The comment was made at the Planning Commission meeting that the grade at the new
sign was almost the same as the road grade, This was not correct, but it is only l' 10"
below the grade at the edge of the road. The base of the old sign at its highest point is 3'
2" below the grade at the edge of the road. They stated that based on the elevations of the
grade and the size of the signs that it would be almost the same appearance. This is not
quite true as the new sign in the approved size of sign and base will be 6' 2" above the
road grade and the old sign is only 3' 1 0" above the road grade, This makes the new sign
2' 4" higher than the old one, "Regardless of the road grade the sign as approved will set
up 8'0" above the ground which is awful large for the area and that close to the road.
It has also been stated that the new sign approved at 10' by 5' (50-sq. ft.) would be
smaller than the old sign that is 60 sq. ft, The message area on the old sign is 10' by 5'
(50 sq. ft.) the same as the one that was approved. It is not any smaller as stated. Also if
2
the entire area that the old sign takes up is considered it would be 10' 8" X T 4"
including the average area that is below the sign that acts as a base it covers 78.2 sq. ft.
The new sign as approved is to be 10' 0" X 8' 0" including the base so it covers an area
of80 sq. ft. This makes the new sign in fact larger than the old one,
They presented pictures of the old sign and of the proposed location for the new sign.
These pictures were taken form a location that was deceiving to the actual conditions and
locations as they do exist and would exist with the proposed sign. The council had no
options but to believe that the pictures were correct in showing what the view would but
they where in fact not correct,
They used the High School sign and the Middle School sign illumination policy as part of
the argument for them to continue to keep the lights on in their sign all night. The fact is
that there are no homes right across the street from these signs and they are back off the
road the required distance. The school is also a public building and more people have a
need to know about the school than a church.
In reviewing the 17 examples the church furnished for square footage size of signs there
are only three signs that are bigger than the sign the church wants, They are the two
schools and the Christian Life Church. All three of these do not have homes as close as
the homes are to the sign that the church wants. As far as sign height including base goes
of the 17 examples there are only 7 that exceed TO", Two of these are school signs, one
is the Farmington Recreation sign, one is the Christian Life Church which all of these are
away from residences. The other three are between T 4" and 8' 0",
We feel the council should reconsider their decision to overthrow the decisions of the
Planning Commission and review the facts as they really are. Some of the thing presented
to the council are not the way they seem. It would also help to review the site and
consider how readable the sign would be at the size approved on the base that was
approved by the Planning Commission. The lighting issue as approved with lights off at
10:00 PM and on at 7:00 AM should also be upheld.
We feel the sign as approved by the Planning Commission, (8')eight foot long and (5')
five foot high and on a (1 ')one foot high base would not be offensive to the neighbors or
the neighborhood and would allow the church to put out their message to everyone
passing by. The lighting of the sign from an internal means with the lights allowed to be
on from 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM would give the church the light they need and not effect
the neighborhood.
The Council should also look at the entire sign ordinance for residential areas and also
reconsider the 75 square feet allowed for by a church sign. Lighting of a sign in
residential areas all night long' doesn't seem fair to homeowners in the area of the sign.
3
Allan Corrigan
19715 Akin Road
Farmington, MN
Erwin Hagen
19643 Akin Road .
Farmington, MN
~tf~
l:'l~ t:?t/. ~~
Troy Corrigan
19691 Akin Road
Farmington, MN
Tom Hoyer
19587 Akin Road
Farmington, MN
Dale Pettis
19735 Akin Road
Farmington, MN
4
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
lib
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
City Administrator ~
FROM: David L. Olson
Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Annexation Petition - Benham Property
DATE: October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
The City Council held a public hearing on this annexation petition on September 7, 1999
and the public hearing was closed. However action on this request was continued for 30
days to allow for a review of the condition of the Individual Sewage Treatment Systems
(ISTS) on the property as well as the extent of the exterior storage of equipment and
other items on the property.
DISCUSSION
City staff inspected the two ISTS(s) on the property on Friday, September 24, 1999.
Based on the results of this inspection, both systems would be considered failed systems
and one may be classified as an imminent threat. As a result, if the City annexes the
property, the property owner would be required to bring the system into compliance
within 30 days or 10 months depending whether the ISTS was classified as a imminent
threat or a failed system.
The other issue that was discussed with Mr. and Mrs. Benham was the exterior storage of
equipment and other items. They indicated they would not be able to remove equipment
from the property until they sold it and purchased another property. To date, they have
received no offers to purchase the property.
Mr. and Mrs. Benham were informed of the City's requirements regarding this ISTS if
this property were to be annexed to the City. They indicated that it would make sense for
them to wait until they had a purchase agreement and make annexation of the property a
contingency of the purchase agreement. This was the arrangement used on other
properties in this area that were in the Township and sold.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
ACTION REOUESTED
Acknowledge Mr. and Mrs. Benham's request to withdraw their petition for annexation at
this time.
~
avid L. O~
Community Development Director
cc: Lowell and Janet Benham
Gil Anderson, Edina Realty
'I
I
~
(1)
c. ~
0 I-
(j)
~ I
~ I-
M
.-
N
""-
N
t-
~
ca ()
.c
c:
(1) -
m
TRUNK HIGHWAY 3
I-
(j)
~
o
--I
--I
~
I-
(j)
W
Z
a::
~g-
~ -g :;E
"C:::l-
C 0 Q)
:::lID e
O<(ro
ID 0..
(j)
~::l~
O:;EO
'''<iJ
,/
........
..
I-
(j)
Z
~
~
I-
(j)
::?:
--I
W
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.c:i.farmington.mn.us
/ Ie,
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Henderson Storm Sewer Project - Neighborhood Meeting Update
DATE: October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
Staff held the neighborhood meeting for the Henderson Storm Sewer Project on
Wednesday, September 29, 1999.
DISCUSSION
Several of the affected property owners were present at the meeting and had the
following comments after staffs presentation of the project:
Roger and Shirley Wood, 816 Maple Street. - The Woods asked why previous developers
adjacent to Hickory Street (between 7th and 8th) could not be held responsible for creating
the problem. Why can't the storm sewer be routed down to Ash Street? They are upset
that the project is titled the Henderson Area Storm Sewer Project, it should be named the
Hickory Storm Sewer Project. They also feel that the proposed project is not the best
solution to the problem and that a more creative solution needs to be identified. They are
riot in favor of the project.
John Ristow, 913 9th Street - Mr. Ristow indicated that he agreed with Roger and Shirley
Woods comments. In addition, he stated that the water problem in Henderson is caused
by the water that comes from Sunnyside and is routed under Trunk Highway 3 easterly.
He stated that there used to be culverts that went from 9th and Hickory to Trunk highway
3. He stated that since the residents were not assessed for the catch basins that were
installed at 10th and Hickory, he should not be assessed for this project. He is not in favor
of the project. Subsequent to the meeting Mr. Ristow also indicated that the majority of
the homeowners that would be assessed for this project are senior citizens and the
assessments would cause hardship for them.
Erna Luchek, 822 8th Street - Ms. Luchek is concerned that the project could cause
flooding to her property. She asked what the storm sewer cost to the residents in East
Farmington is. She doesn't feel she should be assessed for water that is being picked up
on Hickory. She is against the project but is also afraid that if the project is done in the
future it will cost her more.
Stacy Bauer, 900 Maple Street - Ms. Bauer asked why the storm sewer couldn't be
routed up ih Street. She is against the project.
Bernice Ryan, 816 8th Street - Ms. Ryan is against the project, she does not have a water
problem and feels that there are less expensive ways to resolve the problems.
Audry Regenscheid, 900 9th Street - The only problem she has is water coming off the
Farmington Mall. She is against the project as proposed.
Bernice Groves, 809 9th Street - She has no water problems and is not in favor of the
project.
Orville Swenson, 1007 ih Street - Mr. Swenson is not in favor of the project.
Harold Wieben, 805 9th Street - Mr. Weiben stated that he does not have a water problem
in his basement and is not in favor of the project.
Evadine Nielsen, 808 9th Street - She stated that she has no water problem and is against
the project.
Staff's response to several ofthe issues raised is as follows:
Why can't the storm sewer be routed up 7th Street to Walnut? There isn't enough
grade to run a storm sewer up to Walnut along ih Street.
Why can't the storm sewer from 8th and Hickory be routed down to Ash Street
when that project occurs? It may be possible to route the storm sewer to Ash Street
once storm sewer is constructed there, however, it is very questionable as to when or if
the Ash Street project will commence. Second, the proposed storm sewer is not only
addressing the low point at 8th and Hickory, but also TH 3, the pond at the Farmington
Mall, the area behind the Farmington Mall and the intersection of 9th and Hickory. Third,
the assessments to the benefiting properties would likely be higher with the option of
routing the storm sewer to Ash Street, since there would be more lateral line and MnDOT
would be participating in less of the project.
Why can't the City make the previous developers who were responsible for creating
the problem pay for the project? It is staff s understanding at this time that the City
would not be successful in that endeavor. The City Attorney will be consulted for an
opinion on this matter and Council will be updated at the meeting.
What is the cost of storm sewer to the new residents in East Farmington and other
new developments? In new developments, the cost for storm sewer can range from
$2,000 to $3,000 per home (unit). The estimated assessment amount for storm sewer in
1997 for the Main Street project was $4383 per unit.
BUDGET IMPACT
None at this time.
ACTION REQUESTED
Council consideration whether or not to move forward with the project and schedule a
public hearing. If the Council decides to move forward with the project, a public hearing
will be scheduled and a resolution will be brought to Council on October 18, requesting
that MnDOT participate in the project costs.
Respectfully submitted,
~l11~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ct.farmin2lon.mn.us
/0(0-
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Nelsen Hills 2nd Addition - Infrastructure Issues
DATE: October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
During the investigation of a recent sewer backup in Nelsen Hills Farm 2nd Addition, it has
been determined that a length of sewer pipe in Euclid Path needs to be removed and replaced.
DISCUSSION
The Public Works Staff was notified of a sewer backup at 18855 Euclid Path on Thursday,
August 26, 1999 at 10:45 am. This property is located in the Nelsen Hills 2nd Addition
development.
In the course of investigating the problem, City staff unplugged the blocked sanitary sewer
main between Manhole 5 (second manhole south of Englewood Way) and Manhole 4 (3rd
manhole south of Englewood Way, see attached map). City stafflamped the sewer line in an
attempt to ascertain why the blockage occurred. Lamping consists of visually inspecting the
sewer line by shining a flashlight down the pipe and looking to see if the problem is apparent.
The lamping operation was unsuccessful in helping to determine the cause of the blockage.
The City's pipe televising contractor was then hired to televise the section of pipe between
Manhole 5 and 6. The main sanitary sewer line between Manhole 5 and 6 was televised on
September 1, 1999. Pipe Services Corporation submitted a video tape and report to the City
dated September 2, 1999. City staff reviewed the video tape and report on September 9,
1999. It is apparent on the video tape that the sewer pipe has a severe sag between Manhole
5 and Manhole 6. This sag must be repaired in order that the sewer line can operate as
required and minimize the potential for future sewer backups.
In order to repair the sewer line, the entire length of sewer pipe between the subject manholes
will need to be removed and replaced. This operation will necessitate removal and
replacement of the bituminous street section in the repair area. The curb and gutter will be
kept in place. It is estimated that the work will take approximately 4 working days to
complete. Staff will notify and coordinate with the residents along the affected area before
and during construction.
BUDGET IMPACT
Staff has solicited a quotation for the work from Redstone Construction Co., the Contractor
for the Prairie Creek project. Up to 25% of the contract amount of a project can be change
ordered to that project without the need to go out for bids. The quotation that staff received
from Redstone for the sewer repair is in the amount of $64,448.20, which falls within 25% of
the original contract amount.
If the project were put out to bid, there is a possibility that the construction cost for the repair
could come in lower than the quotation received by Redstone. However, the cost of the staff
time necessary to put the bid documents together would add to the project cost. In addition,
it is unlikely that the project could be completed this fall and would have to wait until spring.
If the repair is not done until spring, City crews will need to closely monitor the sewer pipe in
order to insure that it is kept clean, to minimize the potential for additional sewer backups.
Several hours a week will be spent by City staff checking and cleaning the sewer, also adding
to the project cost. With the additional staff costs factored in to the option of putting the
project out to bid, it is staff s opinion that the total costs of the two repair options would be
similar.
In addition, liability for the City is a concern. If the repair is not undertaken this fall and a
sewer backup were to occur in spite of the City's efforts, the City would most likely have
increased liability for damages.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City contract with Redstone Construction for the sewer
repair on Euclid Path and thereby complete the repair this fall. The cost for this repair will be
funded out of the Sanitary Sewer Fund.
ACTION REQUESTED
Council approval of the change order to the Prairie Creek Storm Sewer Project in the amount
of $64,448.20 to Redstone Construction Co. for the repair of the sanitary sewer on Euclid
Path.
Respectfully submitted,
~h1~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
N
I~ELSEN HILLS
9 30 99
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmin2lon.mn.us
8a-
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~
Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Traffic Counts on CSAH 50 and Pilot Knob Road
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
Council has requested that staff contact Dakota County regarding the results of the recent
traffic studies that were performed for CSAH 31.
DISCUSSION
The Countr studied six intersections alon~ CSAH 31; CSAH 50, 195th Street, 193rd
Street, 190t Street, Elk River Trail and 180 Street. The County's findings indicate that
the intersection with CSAH 50 meets warrants for a traffic signal. None of the other
intersections meets warrants for a signal at this time. Based on the data obtained, the
County indicated that it is likely that the intersection at Elk River Trail will be the next
intersection along CSAH 31 to warrant a signal.
The County has indicated that the installation of a signal at CSAH 50 and CSAH 31
would be included in the County's CIP for 2000 at the City's request. Staff has
forwarded a letter to the County requesting that the traffic signal at CSAH 50 and CSAH
31 be included in the County's CIP for next year.
BUDGET IMPACT
The estimated cost of the traffic signal at CSAH 50 and CSAH 31 is $170,000. The City
would be responsible for 50 % of the cost or approximately $85,000. At the time the
project is to go forward, the City will need to sign an agreement with the County for the
installation of the signal. It is staff s understanding that the City's share of the costs for
the signal would be eligible for funding through the City's Municipal State Aid account.
ACTION REQUESTED
For information only.
Respectfully submitted,
XM~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ct.farmin2lon.mn.us
/3J
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: 20gth Street Traffic Concerns
DATE: October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
At the September 20, 1999 City Council meeting, several traffic concerns regarding 20gth
Street and the Middle School were forwarded to staff.
DISCUSSION
The traffic concerns forwarded to staff have previously been identified by a group
representing the school. The crosswalk issue, the school speed zone issue and the request
for a traffic signal on Akin Road at 20gth Street were discussed at a meeting held on July
26, 1999, between City staff and representatives from the school. Pursuant to the
meeting, the crosswalk was installed before school started.
It has been indicated by representatives from the school that vehicles are not stopping for
pedestrians in the crosswalk. In addition to additional enforcement by the police
department as schedule allows, staff will include an article in the newsletter reminding
citizens of traffic law in regards to pedestrians in crosswalks. Staff will also review the
existing signage for possible modifications.
Traffic studies need to be completed in order to address the school speed zone and traffic
signal issues. Traffic studies regarding these issues would need to be funded by the
School District. Staff will be meeting with representatives of the Middle School on
October 7th in order to review the issues and outline a plan to move forward with the
traffic studies.
BUDGET IMP ACT
None at this time.
ACTION REQUESTED
For information only, staff will bring the issues back to Council subsequent to the
October 7th meeting with school representatives.
Respectfully submitted,
~)r;~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ct.farmin2lon.mn.us
13c
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~
Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Speed Humps
DATE:
October 4, 1999
INTRODUCTION
At the September 20, 1999 City Council meeting, Council requested that staff research
the use of speed humps as an option to address speeding concerns in the City. Burnsville
was cited as an example of a City that has speed humps in place on several residential
streets.
DISCUSSION
F or the Council's information, speed bumps and speed humps are two different types of
design features. Speed bumps are 3 to 4 inches high and 1 to 3 feet long (shorter than the
wheelbase of an automobile). Speed humps on the other hand, are 3 to 4 inches high and
12 feet long (longer than the wheel base of an automobile). Speed humps are usually
placed 250 to gOO feet apart in order to be effective.
Staff contacted Burnsville regarding their use of speed humps. Based on discussions with
Burnsville staff, Burnsville's experience with and reasoning for installing speed humps is
as follows:
. The speed humps were installed to reduce cut through traffic. Several streets through
residential neighborhoods were being used as alternates to the parallel County Roads.
The speed humps have been effective at reducing cut through traffic. The installation
of the speed humps was petitioned for and paid for 100% by all residents that live on
the affected streets. The cost ranges from $250 to $300 per residence. If the speed
humps are petitioned to be removed in the future, the residents would again pay for
100% of the costs of removal of the speed humps.
. Speed humps have not significantly reduced speeds on the streets where they have
been installed. Some streets have seen a reduction in average speeds of 1-2 miles per
hour.
. The major maintenance problem occurs when there is a freeze-thaw-freeze situation
or a rainfall event in the middle of the winter. The speed humps inhibit drainage and
the last two winters, Burnsville experienced significant icing problems that they could
not remove in the areas adjacent to the speed humps. Snow plowing of speed humps
has not been a significant issue for Burnsville.
. The Burnsville Police Department and Fire Department are strongly opposed to the
installation of speed humps on public streets. Speed humps increase response time
and are seen as a detriment to emergency services. It was indicated that in some
situations, ambulances can't be taken over the speed humps.
. In Burnsville's experience, the speed humps have provided an opportunity (which has
occurred), for drivers (primarily teenagers) to get their vehicles airborne, which is
clearly a negative aspect of the device.
. Burnsville has speed humps on approximately 9 streets. Speed humps will not be
placed on hills or curves.
Following is a summary of Burnsville's policy on speed humps:
The City of Burnsville may install or remove speed humps by resident petition subject to
the terms of the Placement and Removal of Speed Humps policy, with the full project
costs to be borne by the benefited residents which include all residents that live on the
affected street.
Speed humps may be installed if warrants are met which include:
. Particular traffic volumes are met.
. 50% of surveyed motorists must exceed 30 mph or 30% exceed 35 mph or 50% of the
streets traffic is cut through traffic.
. The road must be less than 36 feet in width, have no more than 2 traffic lanes and
have a speed limit of no more than 30 mph.
. The street cannot be a collector or thoroughfare, must have an expected decrease in
traffic volume, cannot significantly increase traffic on adjacent streets or cause
congestion on area collectors or thoroughfares.
. Street must have a grade of 5% or less.
Speed humps will not be used in the following situations:
. Streets frequently used by emergency vehicles, streets that are immediate egress route
for Police or Fire stations, bus routes or intended truck routes.
. Areas of streets with sharp curves.
. Streets that immediately abut school or park property.
. Other situations as shown to be inappropriate by in-depth traffic studies.
The procedure for petitioning and assessments is outlined in the attached policy.
BUDGET IMPACT
None at this time.
ACTION REQUESTED
For information only.
Respectfully submitted,
~>>1~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
-SEP. 28.1999-. 5: 15P~'1
NO. 259
P.1/4
policy NO. 5.045
~CEM8NT AND REMOVAL OF. SPEED HUM~S
,
J:. PURPOSE AND NEED POR POLrcX
Many individual citizens and neighborhood groups have significant
concerns about, the volWlle and speed of traffic on their local
access streets. When these issues are raised, the
Parks/Planning/Public Works Department addresses the situations in
accordance, with the Uniform Manual. of Traffic Control Devices and
City practice: and the Police Department devotes traffic law
enforcement to the eKtent their resources allow. 'Lf these- efforts
do not Ci'dequat~ly address the conoerns, this policy makes it..
possible for citi~ens to petition the City for the instal~ation of
"speed humps"-. S)?eed humps are raised areas constructed on the
street surface, ~ intent of which is to cause motorists t~ reduce
the.ir speeds.. It is a1so conceivable that once installed,
residents may desire to have speed humps removed. The purposes ot
this policy are to provide f,or procedures to allow individuals or
groups to request installa'tion of, or removal of, speed humps, and
to establish a criteria and procedure for the City to evaluat.e
th"7se. requests.
I:I. POL:tCY
The City may install or remove speed humps by request, in ~ose
instances meeting the criteria and procedures of this policy.. The
cost for this work will be borne by the }:)enefitted resident.s
through the cityts special assessments procedure.
Speed humps may be installed in instange~ meeting the following
warrants:
1. The average traffic volume must be less than 1,500 vehicles
and more than 600 vehicles in a 24 hour period. (Average
annual daily traffic.) -
2. 50% of surveyed motorists must exceed 30 m.p.h. and/or 30%
must exceed. 35' m.p.h. ' .
or
Where 50% of the street's t~affic is cut-through traffic as
determined by traffic counts and ~raffic forecastinq tech-
niques.
.
3. The road must be less than or equal to 36 feet in width.
4. The road must have no more than two traffic lanes.
')
5.
The street must have a speed ~imit of no more than 30 ~.p.h.
SEP.28.1999 5:15PM
NO. 259 P.2/4
Policy Number 5.0~5
Page 2
6. The street must be a local. access residential street (not a
collector or thoroughfare) in a developed area.
., · . . Th~ road 1\\~st hay~ ,an exp~ct.ed ~ecrease. in 'traffic: ,volwile .and
that - decrease must not significantly increase traffic on
adj acent residential streets or create conges't:ion on area
collectors ot" thoroughfares. ....
8. Areas of streets for installation of humps must have a grade
ot 5% or ,less.
Speed humps shall not be used in the fallowing situat.ions:
1. St.reets frequently used by emergency vehicles.
.
2. Streets Whicii: function as the 'immediate egress routes from
fire and ambulance or police stations.
3 . Bus routes.
4. 'Intended trUck routes.
B.
5. Areas of streets with sharp curves.
6. Streets that immediately abut school property or park
property.
7., Any other situation where the usage of speed humps is shown to
be inappropriate by an in depth traffic study.
Speed hump removal requests will be considered ~ollowing the same
process as-speed hUmp. installation requests.
ZI]:. PROCEDOm;S
Requests for speed hump installation or removal will be processed
by the P~rks/Planning/Publio Works bepartment.
A. Reque~ts shall be submitted to the Parks/Planning/Public Works
Department in the form of a peti1:ion. Pet.ition fot'1ns will be
Supplied by the City at the Parks/Planning/Public Works
Department. The City Engineer will define the proj ect
petition district when the petition form is ,issued. The
district limits will detine the number of properties inVOlved.
Prior to pet.ition issuance, the' City Engineer will verify
compliance with the above warrants by the subject street.
The petitions will be c~rculated by project proponents. When
a support l~vel of at least:. 33 percent is achieved (as
determined on a dwelling unit basis; rental apartment'
buildings shall be recognized as one dwelling unit). the
petition Shall be returned to the City for evaluation/verific-
ation of signatures.
\
.)
SEP.28.1999 5:16PM
NO. 259
P.3/4
Policy Number 5.045
Page 3
c. If the City review confirms thai: the 1:h~eshold level of'
support has been achieved, a ballot-by-aail process will be
implemented for the same project district. Ballots will be
accepted until 12 working d.ays after the citY' mailing is made
as verified by post marks.
D. The Parks/Planning/Public Works Department will tabulate the '
results of the petition procelSs. 1:f a 60t level of the
proj ect. approval is achieved (again as calC11l.ated on a
dwelling unit basis: rental apartDlent buildings shall ,be
recognized as one dwelling unit), the City council will be
advised 'to commence a special assessments proc~dure in
accordance with Chapter 429 of the Minnesota statutes eMS
429). tTnretUfned ballots will be .q,ountad as being pD'DOsec:\ to.
the proposed 6.c1::Lon.
E. in accordance with MS 429, the city Council will conduct an
,improvement hearing to make a final determination on whether
or not t.o implement. t.he proposed work.
F.
ShoUld the project. be ordeX'ed in, the City w);ll implement
construction in accordance with MS 429. At the comple.tion of
construction, an assessment hearinq will be eonduc~ed.
Assessments will be allocate4 on ~'unit basis unless ~lternate
methods are approved by ~e city Council. .
-
10
xv. RESPONSXBILXTY
,The Parks/Planning/Public Works Department will be responsible for
t;he administration and implementat.ion of this, pOlicy with the
assistance of the finance department as it relates to special
assessments. .
"!! L AUTHORXTY
Administrative implementation of policy and powers reserved for the
city under state law, especially MS 429.
,
Submitted By
Date
f
Review By
.
Dat.e /b~::ie:r-~..