Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.20.99 Council Packet COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR September 20, 1999 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVEAGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Introduction - Ehlers & Associates 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Traffic Concerns - Mr. Tom Poseley 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (9/7/99) (Regular) and (8/18/99) (Special) b) Approve Infrastructure Improvements - Linden Street c) Adopt Resolution - Authorize Disposal of Obsolete City Equipment d) Adopt Resolution - Approve Application Landfill Abatement Funding e) Adopt Resolution - Accept U.S. Justice Department COPS Grant f) Approve Agreement Amendment - Police Dispatch Services g) Approve Joint Powers Agreement East Metro Narcotics Task Force h) Approve Assessment Agreement/Sewer Hook-Up - CR72 Project i) Capital Outlay - Parks and RecreatiQn j) Capital Outlay - Fire Department k) School and Conference - Fire Department 1) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Variance Appeal- Bible Baptist Church 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve Proposed Agenda - Legislative Meeting b) City 2020 Comprehensive Plan - Met Council Review Update 2. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Ordinance - Grading Permits b) Authorize Negotiations - Township Fire Contracts c) Consider HRA Board Composition . Action Taken 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) CSAH 31 Street Light Concerns 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 5~ FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Robin Roland, Finance Director TO: SUBJECT: Introduction of F.inancial Advisor - Ehlers & Associates DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Request for Proposals process for a new financial advisor for the City of Farmington has been completed with the selection of Ehlers & Associates. DISCUSSION Staff received three proposals for financial advisory services and interviewed all three firms. Each firm interviewed offered strong reasons to select them; technical support, financial expertise and personal service. Ehlers & Associates were chosen as the City's fiscal advisor because of their innovative financing ideas and the strength of their experience in economic development. Some of Ehlers other clients include Inver Grove Heights, Maple Grove, Hopkins, Champlin, and St. Louis Park. These cities have grappled with the same issues that Farmington does; growth, facilities, infrastructure and redevelopment. ACTION REQUIRED For information only. Rusty Fifield of Ehlers will be present at the meeting for formal introduction to the City Council. Respectfully submitted, ##J Robin Roland Finance Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 0a-- TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: SUBJECT: Traffic Concerns - Mr. Tom Poseley DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION At the September 7; 1999 City Council meeting, Mr. Tom Poseley, 18914 Euclid Path, brought to the Council's attention his concerns regarding the safety of the intersection at 190th Street and CSAH 31. Mr. Poseley's wife had recently been involved in an accident at this intersection. Mr. Poseley inquired as to whether a traffic signal could be installed at the intersection. DISCUSSION Modifications to the traffic control along CSAH 31 are under the jurisdiction of Dakota County. However, City staff has been in contact with Dakota County regarding safety concerns raised by residents of Farmington since the new alignment was opened. The County has indicated that studies are underway to determine if warrants are met for traffic signals at various intersections along CSAH 31, including the intersection at 190th Street. If warrants for a signal are met at an intersection, Dakota County will schedule a signal project, based on priority. Intersections in the County that most warrant a signal will get highest priority. A signal project that is initiated in this way will be funded per the County's cost sharing policies of 50% County participation, 50% City participation. If an intersection does not warrant a signal, yet the County projects that warrants will be met in the future, the City may be given permission by the County to install a signal at the City's cost. In the future, when warrants are met, the County would retroactively participate in 50% of the costs of the signal. City staff will continue to be. in close communication with Dakota County regarding all of the traffic related concerns regarding CSAH 31, including the intersection at 190th Street. Staff will report back to Council when the results of the traffic studies being currently conducted by the County are available. BUDGET IMPACT None at this time. ACTION REQUESTED F or information only. Respectfully submitted, ~m~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file Mr. Tom Poseley l~ COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR September 7,1999 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 Councilmember Strachan pulled item 7a) Council Minutes 8/16/99 so he could abstain from voting. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Proclaim Pollution Prevention Week September 20-26, 1999 was proclaimed Pollution Prevention Week. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Tom Poseley, 18914 Euclid Path, stated his wife was in an accident at 190th Street and Pilot Knob Road. He would like to see something done with that intersection. He talked to the Dakota County traffic manager and was told a study had to be done and maybe something could be done in two years. Mr. Poseley stated he would like to see something done before someone is killed. Staff stated the Police Department is sending every accident report to the County Highway Department. Unfortunately, accident experience is what it will take to have something done. The City needs County permission for any type of traffic control. An increase in the number of accidents, amount of traffic, and number of requests are the things that could warrant a study. Staff will send a response to Council and Mr. Poseley, and also suggested Mr. Po seley should contact the County Commissioner. a) Mr. Dick Graelish - Sidewalk Reconstruction Concerns Mr. Graelish was happy with the response from staff. b) Everest Path Speed Survey Mr. Brad Beggs, inquired as to the results of the survey and the times the survey was conducted. Councilmember Strachan asked if staff can do some direct patrol in that area. Staff replied numerous hours have been spent patrolling the area and Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 1999 Page 2 with minimal results. Mr. Beggs stated he was not interested in a study, he would like tickets written to stop the speeding. Councilmember Cordes replied the study was done to see if some type of traffic control was warranted. The study showed it was not. Staff stated regardless of the number of tickets j ssued, there will be violators. Mr. Beggs would still like a stop sign. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to approve the Consent Agenda with item 7a) pulled, as follows: b) Acknowledged City participation in County Auction c) Acknowledged Customer Satisfaction Report (The Mayor complimented Staff for the high percentage marks for customer satisfaction) . d) Received information on trail maintenance - Parks and Recreation Department e) Authorized 1999 audit engagement - Finance Department f) Received information on schools and conference - Fire Department g) Approved bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. a) MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve Council Minutes (8/16/99) (Regular). Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Verch. Abstain: Strachan. MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Autumn Glen Conditional Use Permit - Grading Permit Arcon Development has submitted a grading plan for the proposed Autumn Glen residential development. The Developer proposes an overall development of 153 single-family residential lots on approximately 102.86 acres of land east of the Akin Park Estates and Limerock Ridge subdivisions. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit upon conditions that the construction start time begin no earlier than 8 a.m. on Saturdays and 7 a.m. Monday through Friday. The permit is also contingent on approval of the grading plan by the City Engineering Division; the Developer grades the site prior to approval of street and utility construction plans at the Developer's own risk; the permit is not valid and grading cannot commence until the required surety is posted and the appropriate fees are paid by the Developer; all of the information required by the Excavation, Grading and Mineral Extraction Information Sheet should be submitted prior to City Council approval of the permit. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Excavation, Grading and Mineral Extraction for Arcon Development, Inc. contingent on the above items. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 1999 Page 3 b) Annexation by Ordinance - Benham Property The City has received an annexation petition from Lowell and Janet Benham to annex approximately 1.88 acres currently in Empire Township. The subject property is completely surrounded by land within the municipal limits which is one of the requirements of Minnesota Statutes for annexation by ordinance. Staff has concerns with the condition of the property in regards to the type and extent of non-operable equipment and items currently stored on the property. The City would also like to determine the status of the existing Individual Sewage Treatment System on the property to determine whether it complies with the City's ISTS ordinance requirements. Staff recommended that the public hearing on the annexation petition be closed, but that action on this request be continued for 30 days, pending review of specific site issues. Mr. Tim Giles, Glenview Townhomes, inquired what will happen to the frontage road when property is annexed. Staff replied the City will have to look at options of running the frontage road to County Road 72. Currently the agreement with MnDOT states the frontage road will be closed off, so the road will have to be reconflgured to make the intersection meet the required safety standards. Mr. Ed Humensky, 70t!- Main Street, asked what the City's long term thoughts are on development of the property. He stated it is a dangerous intersection and the speed of traffic is increasing. He would like to know if it will be zoned for business or commercial. The Mayor stated this hearing is only for annexing the property into the City and this issue will be addressed at a later time. MOTION by Strachan, second by Cordes to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. The issue will be brought back to the October 4, 1999 Council Meeting. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Adopt Resolution - Autumn Glen Preliminary Plat Arcon Development has submitted a Preliminary Plat for the proposed Autumn Glen residential development. The Developer proposes 153 single family lots on approximately 102.86 acres east of the Akin Park Estates and Limerock Ridge subdivisions. The property is zoned R-1 Low Density Single-family residential and requires a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet and a minimum lot width of 75 feet. The Developer is proposing house and lot packages with values between $140,000 to $200,000 'with a mixture of full basements, full walkout, split-entry and split-entry walkouts. Arcon Development has requested that the City convey Outlot D to Arcon so the outlot may be used for future homebuyers. Outlot D was conveyed only to be used by the City exclusively for the installation of Trunk Sanitary Sewer. The Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 1999 Page 4 City will need to convey the outlot back to the State and the State will need to reconvey the outlot back to the City and eventually to Arcon for future lots. The topography on the property is relatively flat in the central and eastern portions of the site, while the western edge of the site consists of slopes over 20% in grade. Staff determined that the ridgeline should be designated as an outlot on the plat and dedicated to the City in order to protect the slope and vegetation in this area. . MOTION by Soderberg, second by Strachan to adopt RESOLUTION R83-99 approving the Autumn Glen Preliminary Plat contingent on eight items listed in the resolution. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Planning Commission Appeal - Bible Baptist Church The Bible Baptist Church submitted a letter indicating their intention to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission at their August 10, 1999 meeting. The Planning Commission approved a variance for a sign to be located within the required setback of Akin Road, but included limitations on the height of the proposed sign and restricted the hours the sign could be lit. A public hearing to consider this appeal has been scheduled for the September 20, 1999 City Council meeting. c) Request to Modify Conditions of Approval- East Farmington 5th Addition Final Plat Sienna Corporation has submitted a letter requesting approval to modify one of the conditions contained in the resolution approving the Final Plat for East Farmington 5th Addition. This condition prohibited occupancy of any of the lots in the 5th Addition until the grading and utility work is completed for Outlots D,E,F, and G. Both Sienna Corporation and several builders are seeking occupancy of these newly constructed homes in the 5th Addition prior to the completion of grading and utility work in the 6th Addition. The completion of grading work and utility work for the 6th Addition is approximately 60 days behind schedule. Staff supported occupancy of interior lots with street access onto Walnut Street, but grading activity would be in the rear yards or adjacent to them. Staff was opposed to recommending occupancy of the comer lots due to concerns associated with access, resident parking, and grading and utility work not yet completed on 1ih, 13th, and 14th Streets. This would be a deviation from the City's policy of requiring improved streets for access to occupied homes. Mr. Rod Hardy, Sienna Corporation, stated there are three conditions they are faced with. There are houses that access Walnut Street. There are five other houses, two of which access and have utilities from Walnut. The other three houses access off the side streets. His purpose was to strongly petition for occupancy for the interior lots, to comment on conditions of the comer lots, and to find a solution for the third party buyer. The side streets contain class 5 material Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 1999 Page 5 to provide access to the homes. However, when the final road is put in, there will be a period of time when the driveways cannot be accessed. Mr. Tim Giles, T.C. Construction, stated the City approved the model homes, correct? By approving the model homes a Certificate of Occupancy is granted in order to show them. By not being able to access the garage, the garage is limited to storage. All the front doors abut Walnut and all meet safety standards. These homes have been sold and the owners have no where to go because of the closing date. The clients are willing to sign a document saying they will not use the garage. Staff replied the homes were approved as models and not designed for occupancy. The builders and realtors should not have sold the property. The realtors put their clients at risk by sellinE the homes. Staff inquired when the utilities and first lift will be installed on 12 ,13th, and 14th Streets. Mr. Hardy replied the schedule says between October 11-18, 1999. Staff replied schedules are pieces of paper they do not set a specific time frame. Those roads could be dirt until next spring. Other homes abutting these streets could be constructed and other developers could come to Council saying you allowed the comer lots t{) be occupied knowing their driveway access would be to a dirt road. During the time the driveways cannot be accessed, the cars will be parked on Walnut Street. Councilmember Cordes stated she is concerned with the three comer lots on 13th and 14th Streets. She asked what would Council do ifthe lots are not finished? Mr. Hardy replied they are under contract and the City has a Letter of Credit covering those improvements. He advised at the time of occupancy the builder post $2700 with the City which would cover the cost of putting in the curb and paving so the owners have access. The cost would cover paving half the road with curb and gutter. Councilmember Cordes stated there have been contractors and builders coming to Council asking them to change the contracts. She is willing to allow occupancy because she feels sorry for the owners, but she does not want to see this happen again. Mr. Hardy replied we are in this as partners and things change all the time. Mr. Charlie Unger, Realtor, was there to represent his client. The client has no where to go if they cannot get in the house. They understand there will be construction around the home. Mr. Unger stated he had no knowledge of the situation and understood the builder had no knowledge until late last week. The closing is set for September 23, 1999 and if occupancy is not allowed, they do not have money to go somewhere else. Mr. Paul Yowsie, Realtor, also has clients ready to move in. He inquired if the clients could talk with the staff members. The Mayor replied if this is agreed on, it would need to be done legally to protect the City with some type of surety. Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 1999 Page 6 The City Attorney stated the City can get close to eliminating the risk, but cannot eliminate the risk entirely. A babysitter, or anyone who comes to the home has not signed the waiver. If they should fall, or a car is damaged by equipment, a suit could be filed against everyone. MOTION by Strachan, second by Cordes to approve a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Block 1 Lots 1 and 2; Block 2 Lots 1,2,3; Block 3 Lots 2,3,4 with a signed waiver. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Strachan, Verch. Voting against: Soderberg. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Cordes, second by Strachan to approve a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Block 2 Lot 4; Block 3 Lots 1 and 5 with a signed waiver and a surety calculated by the City Engineer. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Strachan. Voting against: Soderberg, Verch. MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Consider Utility Easement Agreement - Arcon Development An agreement has been prepared with Arcon Development to allow the City to initiate condemnation of the easement on land owned by Progress Land Company to allow access to the City's trunk sanitary sewer line. Arcon Development agrees to reimburse the City all costs associated with condemnation of the subject utility easement. Arcon has tried to contact Progress Land, but has received no response. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg authorizing execution of the agreement between Arcon Development to allow the City to proceed with condemnation of the necessary easement on land owned by Progress Land Company. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Castle Rock Township - Revised Joint Powers Agreement As a result of further discussions with the City Council and Castle Rock Township representatives, the Joint Powers Agreement was amended with the deletion of language in the declaratory section of the agreement and has been signed by Castle Rock. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adopt the revised Joint Powers Agreement, which will authorize the initiation of work on the new project feasibility report. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Request for Filing Deadline Extension - Oak Place Townhomes Final Plat City code requires the developer record a final plat with Dakota County within 75 days of approval by the City Council. Mr. Colin Garvey, developer for Oak Place Townhomes has requested a time extension for recording the plat to December 31, 1999 to allow time to resolve an easement issue. MOTION by Cordes, second by Verch to approve the time extension for recording the final plat for Oak Place Townhomes until December 31,1999. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 1999 Page 7 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Preliminary 2000 Tax Levy/Set Date - Truth in Taxation State statutes require a preliminary tax levy to be certified to the County by September 15, 1999. The proposed Tax Capacity Rate remains at 32%. Staff proposed the Truth in Taxation public hearing be held as part of the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on December 6, 1999. MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R84-99 certifying the 2000 Preliminary Tax Levy to Dakota County and establishing December 6, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. as the City of Farmington's Truth in Taxation hearing for Tax Levy collectible in 2000. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Consider Draft Council Policy - Council Workshops Council directed staff to draft a proposed policy on workshop purposes and protocols. It was determined that a formal policy on workshops was desired to establish some general guidelines relative to the scheduling, need and purpose of these special work sessions. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to adopt the Council Workshop Policy. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE' a) Farmington Townhomes - Site Control Issues An issue was raised concerning a possible rat infestation in the barn located on the proposed townhome site. Residents were concerned about rats being relocated to adjoining property as a result of the demolition of the barn. Upon investigation, no infestation was found. b) Joint City-School District Meeting (verbal) It was decided to have the meeting after February, when the school has concluded their Growth Planning Task Force. Councilmember Strachan: The first meeting of the Growth Planning Task Force will be September 15, 1999. If anyone has any input they should let him know. Councilmember Cordes: The house on the comer of Ash and 6th Streets has weeds in the ditch and asked who is responsible. Staff replied that is the owner's responsibility. A notice will be sent. Councilmember Verch: Thanked the Police Department for assistance with a traffic fatality. At the intersection of Pilot Knob and 190th, people still stop on Pilot Knob thinking there is a stop sign. He also inquired about lights between 187th and Elk River Trail. Missie Kohlbeck, was congratulated on her award for distinguished young citizens. City Administrator Erar: Regarding the Neilan property, staff has had conversations with property owners across the street, who were told the Neilan property would be brought into MUSA. The Neilan property has not been brought into MUSA and will not be for 5-10 years. Owners that are being forced to update their failing septic systems, Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 1999 Page 8 should not depend on the property across the street to provide sanitary sewer through MUSA. He was contacted by a resident regarding a snowmobile task force. Last winter a report was established stating the number of snowmobile incidents was minimal. A task force has not been established. Jim Bell stated the only problem is along Akin Road. Staff will meet with the Sno- Tigers in October to discuss the situation. Community Development Director Olson: Hosmer Brown now owns the Riste building. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Strachan to adjourn at 10:30 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~ -..L' /'- )-77. ~~ l /cY,t--C---,;;L"'c:c<,-- ~-eec:,<-, r::/ . Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant MINUTES COUNCIL WORKSHOP PROPOSED 2000 BUDGET AUGUST 18, 1999 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg Members Absent: Strachan, Verch Also Present: City Administrator Erar, City Management Team 2. ADOPT WORKSHOP AGENDA MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adopt the agenda as presented. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. PROPOSED 2000 TAX LEVY/TAX RATE Finance Director Roland reviewed with Council how the tax rate is computed and the estimated 2000 Tax Capacity Rate of 32.0%. It was indicated that the proposed tax capacity rate marks the third consecutive tax rate decrease the City will experience since 1998. 4. REVIEW OF GENERAL FUND REVENUES Revenues projected to be approximately $4,250,095 for the year 2000 budget were discussed. The City Administrator informed Council that funds remained in the proposed budget for the continued ownership of the Dakota County Library building, in the event the building is retained by the City. It was indicated that should the transfer occur, adjustments would be made in the budget with the difference in expenditures being applied to fund balance. 5. 2000 PROPERTY TAX IMPACT REVIEW Four local properties have been studied since 1995 to determine changes in market value and property taxes paid over time on differently valued properties. The conclusion of this study indicates that even as property values increase, City taxes paid have decreased. Staff indicated that one conclusion that can be drawn from this analysis suggests that new development is paying for itself, and is not proving to be a financial t~x burden on existing properties. 6. PROPOSED 2000 BUDGET PRESENTATION The 2000 budget was developed in keeping with the Council budget guidelines: . A commitment to maintain the 2000 Local Tax Capacity Rate at the same level as in 1999 (33.1 % in 1999 to 32.0% in 2000). . A fiscal goal that works toward establishing the General Fund Balance at no less than 25% (from 19.38% in 1999 to 22.35% in 2000). . A commitment to maintain the 1999 Debt Service Levy at no more than 25% (2000 budget is maintained at 20.9%). . A comprehensive review of the condition of capital equipment to ensure the most cost-effective and consistent replacement schedule (the 2000 budget recommends approximately $1,031,292 in new or replacement equipment). . A team approach that encourages strategic planning to meet immediate and long-term operational infrastructure and facility needs. . A management philosophy that actively supports the implementation of Council policies and goals and recognizes the need to be responsive to changing community conditions and concerns. 7. CITIZENS JURY ON PROPERTY TAX REFORM City Administrator Erar informed Council of the Citizens Jury on Minnesota Property Tax reform which is sponsored by the Department of Revenue and with the support of Governor Ventura. Findings from the Citizen's Jury suggests that local government shift their reliance from the property tax to user fees and charges for specific City services. Furthermore, the Citizen's Jury found that the state tax system should continue to provide state aids to local government as funding mechanism to help underwrite local government services. 8. COUNCIL REVIEW AND DISCUSSION Council discussed the budget calendar, the pros and cons of a bi-annual budget, proposed uses for the Ice Arena during the off-season and the retirement of bonds. It was pointed out that resident's sewer rates will again be reduced in 2000. Councilmember Cordes thanked staff for their diligence in following Council guidelines, keeping taxes down while insuring that services are maintained. The City's budget information presented to the Council can be found on the City's web site at www.ci.farmington.mn.us. Council concluded that the budget as presented was thoughtfully considered and adhered to Council budge~ guidelines and policies. Finance Director Roland indicated that the preliminary tax levy would be presented to Council at their September 7, 1999 Council meeting. 9. ACTION ITEMS None. 10. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us l) TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administratnr~ FROM: Jerry Auge, Jr., Civil Engineer I SUBJECT: Approve Infrastructure Improvements - Linden Street DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to citizen complaints regarding sewer smells and subsequent review of two sanitary sewer manholes north of Linden Street, Engineering staff has solicited quotations to rehabilitate the two subject manholes (see attached map for location). DISCUSSION The City has an existing trunk sanitary sewer main that runs north of the intersection of 5th Street and Linden Street to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) trunk sanitary sewer. Along this sewer line there is a series of six (6) manhole structures, of which two manholes (#1 and #2 shown on the map), are severely deteriorated and have roots protruding through the cracks and joints in the manholes. Also, the top section of manhole # 1 has an area of exposed reinforcement bars that needs to be repaired. Both manholes currently provide an avenue for inflow and infiltration into the sewer system, which increases the City's cost for sewage treatment. It is proposed that both sanitary 'sewer manhole structures be rehabilitated. BUDGET IMPACT Infratech Infrastructure Technologies, Inc has submitted a quotation for rehabilitation of the manholes in the amount of $3750, which would be funded through the sanitary sewer fund. This type of rehabilitation work is very specialized and there are only three companies that the City would consider for the work. All three companies were asked to provide a quote for the work, however only one company submitted a price. That fact notwithstanding, it is staff s opinion that the price quoted for the work is reasonable. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the expenditure of $3750.00 and authorize staff to execute a contract with Infratech Infrastructure Technologies, Inc. for the sanitary sewer manhole rehabilitation work. Respectfully submitted, Jerry e, Jr., P.E. Civil Engineer I cc: file "...~......_.~ I ,~. . r . I I , , . I , , .' , , . , , . ,- .,..... . '. _ .. II ~. ~ " l,;, '(, Iq ~J q ~ ~.. f ,"' '\. t " \ " t". ;" " II) ~ " ~ 87 ~ ~ 'II tc\ ~ l\ .... ~ ,..Jl <\ ~ ,.... , City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /c TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager FROM: SUBJECT: Authorize Disposal of Obsolete City Equipment DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION Staffhas determined that certain computer equipment is obsolete and must be disposed of. DISCUSSION Minnesota Statutes and Farmington City Code regulate the disposal of City equipment. It is proposed the equipment be displayed at the Senior Center from October 6-8, 1999 during regular business hours, and on Saturday, October 9, 1999 from 11 :00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. The Senior Center will be hosting a Chili luncheon on this Saturday that typically brings in a large number of people. A public notice will be posted and published in the Farmington Independent. Bid forms will be available for interested buyers to submit their offer as a sealed bid. The bids must be submitted by 2:00 p.m., Tuesday, October 12, 1999, at which time they will be opened and the highest bidders will be notified, This process has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. BUDGET IMPACT Proceeds will be deposited in the revenues portion of the 1999 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the proposed Resolution approving the disposal of obsolete or surplus City equipment and personal property. Respectfully submitted, LtJ~ 5~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager 2 PROPOSED RESOLUTION No. R- Approving the Disposal of Obsolete or Surplus City Equipment and Personal 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 _th day of 1999 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: seconded the following: Member introduced and Member WHEREAS, the City of Farmington, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ~ 412.211, is authorized to acquire and sell or otherwise dispose of such real 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 the City Code, has determined that certain equipment and personal property, further described in Exhibit 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 sale or disposal of the equipment and personal property described in the attached Exhibit A, by highest sealed bid, all unpurchased items will be disposed of by appropriate method through the Solid Waste Division, and directs the City Clerk to publish notice of this resolution and to provide additional public notice in conformance with city and state statutory requirements. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the day of , 1999. Mayor Attested to the day of ,1999. City Administrator SEAL 3 EXHIBIT A Various computer monitors, keyboards, printers and other peripheral devices. 4 ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS Sealed Bids will be received by the City of Farmington, Minnesota, in the City Hall at 325 Oak Street until 2:00 p.m. CDST on Tuesday, October 12, 1999, at which time they will be publicly opened and read aloud for the purchase of: Various Computer Monitors Keyboards, Printers and Other peripheral devices All equipment is being sold as is. Bid forms may be acquired and equipment may be viewed at the Farmington Senior Center, 431 3rd St., during regular business hours, Wednesday October 6 through Friday, October 8,1999 and Saturday, October 9, 1999 from 11:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. The highest bidder of each piece of equipment will be notified, and upon receipt of payment, may take possession of equipment. John F. Erar City Administrator/Clerk 5 8-9-5 8-9-6-1 vital component parts and does not display a license plate currently valid in Minnesota or any other state or foreign country, it shall immediately be eligible for public sale pursuant to Section 8-9-4-2, and shall not be subject to notification. reclamation, retention by the City or title provisions specified herein. (Ord. 088-201. 6-6-88) 8-9-6: DISPOSAL OF CITY PROPERTY: At such time as it is necessary to dispose of City property, the City Clerk shall determine if said property is salable or should be disposed of. The City, at the following Council meeting, shall provide the City Council with a list of items that are not salable. The City Council shall authorize the disposal of the property and the City Clerk shall dispose of the items in any manner deemed appropriate. At such time as it is necessary to dispose of salable City property, a list of said property shall be made and become part of a resolution authorizing the sale of City property. Upon the adoption and publication of the resolution authorizing the sale of City property. a notice of the public sale shall be published in the official City newspaper. Any property not sold at the public sale may be disposed of by the City Clerk in any manner deemed appropriate. (Ord. 091-240, 2-4-91 ) 8-9-6-1 : DEPOSIT OF NET PROCEEDS: The net proceeds of the sale of City property shall be deposited In the City's General Fund. (Ord. 088-201, 6-6-88) 491 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ct.farmington.mn.us lei TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrato~ James Bell Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Approving Submittal of an Application for Landfill Abatement Funds from Dakota County DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION Dakota County has provided landfill abatement funding assistance to communities in Dakota County since 1989. DISCUSSION Dakota County Board Resolution No. 88-651 states that the County's portion of funding of recycling implementation and operating costs incurred by cities and townships will be through performance based funding. Communities over 5,000 population are eligible to receive a $5,000 base per community plus $1.60 per household, based on 1998 household estimates. BUDGET IMPACT The year 2000 maximum reimbursement for Farmington is $10,850. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached resolution approving submittal of a grant application to Dakota County. Respectfully Submitted, ~~~ James Bell Parks and Recreation Director RESOLUTION NO. R -99 APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR LANDFILL ABATEMENT FUNDING ASSISTANCE 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 20th day of September, 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, according to Dakota County Board Resolution No. 88-651, Dakota County presently provides funding assistance for landfill abatement activities based on performance based funding; and, WHEREAS, the City presently has an integrated resource recovery system of which curbside pickup of yard waste and recyc1ab1es are major components, and would be eligible for funding under the County program. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for Dakota County Landfill Abatement Funding Assistance, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to execute and forward the application for Landfill Abatement Funding Assistance. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 20th day of September, 1999. Mayor Attested to the 20th day of September, 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 /e FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator~ Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police TO: SUBJECT: Resolution accepting Justice Dept. COPS Grant DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION /DISCUSSION The City of Farmington has been awarded a U.S. Justice Department Grant for Community Oriented Police Services (COPS). In order to receive the grant the city must accept the award in the form of a City Council Resolution. . This Grant will be used to hire a full time police officer in April of2000. The grant has been included in the 2000 budget for which formal approval is pending. Under normal circumstances the resolution accepting the award would wait until formal adoption of the budget however in this case the U.S. Justice Department requires the resolution now to avoid loss of the award. BUDGET IMPACT The grant is in the amount of $75,000.00 over three years beginning in 2000. The 2000 budget reflects a $35,000.00 wage and benefit contribution from this federal grant. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution. Respectfully submitted, Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police RESOLUTION NO. R_-99 ACCEPTING JUSTICE DEPARTMENT COPS GRANT 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 20th day of September 1999 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Farmington Police Department practices the concept of Community Oriented Policing; and, WHEREAS, the United States Department of Justice administers hiring grants to police departments participating in Community Oriented Policing under the Universal Hiring Program; and, WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Farmington to hire police officers to keep pace with growth and development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington accept the Community Oriented Policing Grant under the Universal Hiring Program in the amount of $75,000.00 as awarded to the City by the United States Department of Justice. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 20th day of September 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 7,( FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Robin Roland, Finance Director TO: SUBJECT: Approve Agreement Amendment - Police Dispatch Services DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington's current agreement with the City of Lakeville for police dispatching service expires on December 31, 1999. An amendment is proposed which would extend this agreement until December 31, 2002. DISCUSSION The original Joint Dispatching Agreement was signed on July 2, 1984 and the agreement was amended once before, on August 15, 1994. The agreement outlines how charges for dispatching services are billed to the City of Farmington. The 1994 amendment included a five year plan to reimburse Lakeville for the costs of upgrading and replacing dispatch equipment. The proposed second amendment calls for a similar reimbursement of recent capital equipment costs over the three years of the extended contract. Other components of the proposed amendment include billing procedures and County 911 reimbursements. A copy of the proposed amendment is attached. BUDGET IMPACT The cost of the contracted dispatching services is included in the Proposed 2000 Budget which Council reviewed in August and approved at the last council meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the Second Amendment to the Farmington-Lakeville Joint Dispatching Agreement as presented. Respectfully submitted, /&;:'RJ Robin Roland Finance Director SECOND AMENDMENT FARMINGTON - LAKEVILLE JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of , 1999, by and between the CITY OF LAKEVILLE, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Lakeville") and the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Farmington"). Recitals A. The parties have previously entered into a Joint Dispatching Agr~ement dated July 2, 1984, and amended Auqust 15, 1994 ("Agreement"). B. The parties desire to amend the Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants the parties agree as follows: 1. The Agreement shall remain in full force and effect except as specifically amended by this Second Amendment. 2. Paraqraoh 6 of the Aqreement is amended bv addinq the followinq at the end of the current oaraqraoh: "Lakeville aqrees to bill Farminqton accordinq to budqeted service exoenditures. Lakeville shall. bv Julv 1 of each vear orovide Farminqton with budoet estimates for the subsequent year. Anv costs incurred in excess of the budoeted costs will be billed in the subsequent vear and will be paid bv Farminqton in full in coniunction with the first quarter billino and oavment. 3. Paragraph 9 of the Agreement is amended to read: "This Agreement shall be in effect from the 1s1 day of January, 1985, through the 31s1 day of December, 2002. 4. Paragraph 10 of the Agreement is amended to read: "Either party may terminate this Agreement prior to December 31, 2002, by notifying the other party in writing of its intention to terminate the Agreement at least (6) months in advance of the termination date. If Lakeville terminates the Agreement, the balance of the equipment cost due to Lakeville not then due and owing under Paragraph 12 of the Agreement shall be cancelled. If Farmington terminates the Agreement, the balance due to Lakeville under Paragraph 12 shall not be cancelled and payment shall be made in accordance with the Agreement. 5. Paraqraoh 12 of the Agreement is amended BY aEldiR!'j P.:II:a!'jF3~f:1 12 to read: "Farmington shall reimburse Lakeville $62,019.00 with 5.5% interest per year on the unpaid balance in accordance with the schedule as shown below for its share of costs incurred by Lakeville to upgrade and replace certain dispatch equipment. Farminoton shall have the ootion of ore-oavinq the orincioal amount at anytime with no interest oenalty. " Date Principal Interest Total Balance July 1,1999 62,019.00 July 1, 2000 19,576.55 3,411.05 22,987.60 42,442.45 July 1, 2001 20,653.26 2,334.33 22,987.60 21,789.19 July 1, 2002 21,789.19 1,198.41 22,987.60 6. Paraaraph 13 shall be added to read: "Dakota Countv is authorized to remit Farminaton's share of the Enhanced 911 Service Funds directlv to the Citv of Farminaton. The Citv of Lakeville will remit to the Citv of Farminaton E-911 funds collected from 1994 to 1998 in the amount of $12.993.46." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have this day and year above written caused this to be executed by their proper city officials after Council authorization thereof. CITY OF LAKEVILLE CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Its Mayor By: Its Mayor And: Its City Clerk And: Its City Administrator/Clerk And: Its Chief of Police And: Its Chief of Police City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ?5 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator ~ FROM: Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police SUBJECT: Joint Powers Agreement Dakota County Narcotics Task Force DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION I DISCUSSION The City of Farmington and in particular the Farmington Police Department have been members of the East Metro Narcotics Task Force for over 10 years. This is a task force comprised of officers from approximately half of the police departments in Dakota County. During this same time period there has been a second narcotics task force called the South Metro Narcotics Force serving the remainder of the County. It has been the experience of these two investigative units that the problem of narcotics is not restricted by jurisdictional lines. Narcotics traffic is in fact highly mobile here, statewide and nationally. Based on this pattern it is not practical to operate two independent investigative units with the potential of overlapping investigations. All of the cities in Dakota County, in cooperation with their respective City Attorneys and the Dakota Attomey's Office have prepared a Joint Powers Agreement which provides for the staffmg and funding of the new combined Dakota County Narcotics Task Force. These staffmg and funding sources remain much the same as those used in the two previous units but have now been combined. The major difference lies in the fact that assets seized under the new agreement will be used to offset the cost of operating the Task Force. Under the previous agreement the local agencies received a portion of the assets seized to offset local costs. The Farmington Police Department participates in a part time capacity under the current East Metro Agreement and would remain part time under the new Dakota County Joint Powers Agreement. BUDGET IMPACT There is no budget impact as a result of this Joint Powers Agreement. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the attached Joint Powers Agreement for participation in the Dakota County Narcotics Task Force. . 2000 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT DAKOT A COUNTY DRUG TASK FORCE The parties to this Agreement are units of government responsible for the enforcement of controlled substance laws in their respective jurisdictions. This Agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes 471.59. NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned governmental units, in the joint and mutual exercise of their powers, agree as follows: 1. Name. The parties hereby establish the Dakota County Drug Task Force. 2. General Purpose. The purpose of this Joint Powers Agreement is to establish an organization to coordinate efforts to apprehend and prosecute drug offenders. 3. Members. The members of this Agreement shall consist of the following units of government: City of Apple Valley City of Burnsville City of Eagan City of Farmington City of Hastings Dakota County City of Inver Grove Heights City of Lakeville City of Rosemount City of South S1. Paul City of West S1. Paul 4. State and Local Assistance for Narcotics Control Program. The City of Burnsville, acting on behalf of the Dakota County Drug Task Force and its members, shall apply for funding under the State and Local Assistance for Narcotics Control Program ("grant funds"). The Burnsville City Manager shall be the "authorized official" as defined in the general policies and procedures for the program. 5. Administrative Board. 5.1 The governing board of the Task Force shall be a Board consisting of twelve members. The police chief or sheriff of each party shall appoint one board member to serve at the chief's or sheriff's pleasure. The Dakota County Attorney shall appoint one board member to serve at the County Attorney's Page 1 pleasure. Board members appointed by the police chiefs and sheriff must be full-time supervisory peace officers of the jurisdiction or office that appoints the Board member. 5.2 Board members shall not be deemed employees of the Task Force and shall not be compensated by it. 5.3 In January of each year, the Board shall elect from its members a chair, a vice-chair, a secretary/treasurer, and such other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. The Board may adopt rules and regulations governing its meetings. Such rules and regulations may be amended from time to time at either a regular or a special meeting of the Board provided that at least ten (10) days' prior notice of the meeting has been furnished to each Board member. The Board shall operate by a majority vote of all members present. A quorum of nine (9) members shall be required for all meetings. 6. Powers and Duties of the Board. 6.1 The Board will formulate a program to carry out its purpose. 6.2 The Board will coordinate intelligence between the members and the Task Force. 6.3 The Board shall appoint and supervIse the Agent-in-Charge of the Task Force. The Board may appoint and supervise an Assistant Agent-in-Charge of the Task Force. This appointment will be with the concurrence of the agent's member agency. 6.4 The Board may cooperate with other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to accomplish the purpose for which it is organized. 6.5 The Board may make contracts, incur expenses and make expenditures necessary and incidental to the effectuation of its purpose and consistent with its powers. 6.6 The Board shall cause to be made an annual audit of the books and accounts of the Task Force and shall make and file a report to its members which includes the following information: (a) the financial condition of the Task Force; (b) the status of all Task Force projects; (c) the business transacted by the Task Force; and (d) other matters which affect the interests of the Task Force. Page 2 6.7 The Task Force's books, reports, and records shall be open to inspection by its members at all reasonable times. 6.8 The Board may recommend changes in this Agreement to its members. 6.9 The members may not incur obligations or enter into contracts that extend beyond the term of this Agreement. 6.10 The Board will purchase liability Insurance which shall be payable from Task Force funds. 6.11 The Board may receive real or personal property by grant, devise, or bequest for the use of the Task Force. 7. Finances. 7.1 The members intend to fund the 2000 cost of operation of the Task Force totaling $688,630.00 as follows: (1) $275,000.00 from 2000 grant funds, and (2) $413,630.00 in matching funds from member cities and County. Matching funds shall fund the continued cost of maintaining the replacement officers for the full-time officer assigned by some members to the Task Force. Additional matching funds shall come from forfeiture funds, and $10,000.00 from the Dakota County Sheriff's contingent fund for drug and alcohol investigations. All funds will be spent in federally authorized program areas. 7.2 The Task Force's funds may be expended by the Board in accordance with this Agreement in a manner determined by the Board. The Board shall designate the City of Burnsville to act as depository for the Task Force's funds. In no event shall there be a disbursement of Task Force funds from the City of Burnsville depository without the signature of the Task Force Secretary/Treasurer, or the Chairman in the absence of the Secretary/Treasurer. 7.3 The Board shall receive a monthly financial report of all expenditures and receipts, and current fund balances from the secretary/treasurer. 7.4 The members shall contribute their grant funds and required matching funds to operate the Task Force. The required matching funds will be used to pay the 2000 salary and benefits of the full-time officer hired to replace the officer assigned to the Task Force by some members. 7.5 The Board shall adopt a budget based upon grant funds, member matching funds and money made available from other sources. The Board may amend the budget from time to time. 7.6 The Board may not incur debts. Page 3 7.7 The Task Force's obligation to reimburse members for any expense, furnish equipment, and the like is contingent upon the Task Force receiving at least $275,000.00 in grant funds in 2000. If grant funds less than that amount are received, the Board may reduce the level of expense reimbursement and cut back on equipment and other purchases otherwise required by this Agreement. 8. Agent. 8.1 Each member shall assign one experienced, licensed peace officer to serve on the Task Force as follows: Dakota County City of Apple Valley City of Burnsville City of Eagan City of Farmington City of Hastings City of Inver Grove Heights City of Lakeville City of Rosemount City of South S1. Paul City of West S1. Paul Five (5) Full Time Equivalent (FTE) One (1) FTE One (1) FTE One (1) FTE One Seventeen-Hundredth (.17) FTE One Half (.5) FTE One (1) FTE One (1) FTE One Quarter (.25) FTE One Half (.5) FTE One Half (.5) FTE 8.2 Agents shall not be employees of the Task Force. Agents shall remain employees of the member that has assigned them to the Task Force and shall be paid by that member, not the Task Force. 8.3 Agents will be responsible for drug investigation, including intelligence management, case development, and case charging. Agents will also assist other agents in surveillance and undercover operations. Task Force agents will work cooperatively with assisting agencies. 8.4 Agents will be supervised by the Agent-in-Charge or, in his/her absence, by the Assistant Agent-in-Charge. 8.5 The member appointing the Agent shall furnish the Agent a weapon and a vehicle and pay any lease payments, insurance, maintenance, and operating costs of the vehicle. 8.6 The members shall maintain the officer posItIonS hired to replace the officer assigned to the Task Force, or maintain the Full Time Equivalent staffing assigned to the Task Force 'as shown in 8.1. Page 4 9. Agent-in-Charge and Assistant Agent-in-Charge. 9.1 From the full-time Agents assigned by members, an Agent-in-Charge shall be appointed by the Board and serve at its pleasure. The Agent-in-Charge must be a full-time, licensed supervisory peace officer of a member. The Agent-in- Charge shall remain an employee of the member city or County. 9.2 The Agent-in-Charge shall be in charge of the day-to-day operation of the Task Force, including supervising the Task Force's assigned personnel, subject to direction received from the Board. The Agent-in-Charge is responsible for staffing, scheduling, case assignment, case management, record keeping, informant management, buy fund management, petty cash management, and intelligence management. The Agent-in-Charge will be responsible to keep the Board updated as to the Task Force's activity, which would include major case development within member jurisdictions. The Agent-in-Charge will supervise the drafting and execution of all search warrants initiated by the Task Force Unit and will work cooperatively with the agencies with venue over the case. The Agent-in-Charge will be responsible for all buy fund monies and petty cash funds and will provide Board members with a monthly accounting of all funds disbursed and a written summary of activity with the unit. 9.3 The Agent-in-Charge may exclude Agents from further Task Force involvement subject to review py the Board and approval of the member that assigned the Agent to the Task Force. 9.4 From the Agents assigned by members, an Assistant Agent-in-Charge may be appointed by the Board, with the concurrence of the Agent's member agency, and serve at the Board's pleasure. The Assistant Agent-in-Charge must be a full-time, licensed peace officer of a member and shall be paid a supervisor's salary by that member agency only during that time that the Agent-in-Charge is absent. The difference between the rate of pay, if any, the Assistant Agent-in- Charge would normally have received from the member agency and the rate of pay for the member's first line supervisor, however, will be paid by the Task Force to the member agency. The Assistant Agent-in-Charge shall remain an employee of the member city or County at all times. 9.5 The duties, responsibilities and authority of the Assistant Agent-in- Charge, while the Agent-in-Charge is absent, shall be the same as the Agent-in- Charge as described in paragraph 9.2. 10. Forfeiture, Seizures and Fines. Items that are seized by the Task Force may be used to support Task Force efforts. The use of these items must be approved by the Board. In the case of Federal forfeiture actions, established Federal Rules shall be followed. All remaining forfeited items shall be divided among Task Force members in proportion to the "full-time equivalent" contributions of each member of this agreement as set forth at paragraph 8.1 Page 5 herein. Fine or restitution monies ordered paid to the Task Force by Court Order shall be used to offset equipment or operating costs of the Task Force not funded by grant or matching funds. 11. Headquarters. The Task Force is physically located in separate offices at the City of Burnsville and Dakota County Sheriff's Office, which is provided at no cost to the Task Force. All utilities, including electricity, heat, air conditioning, and the like shall also be furnished to the Task Force without cost. 12. Indemnification. Each member shall fully indemnify and hold harmless the other members against all claims, losses, damage, liability, suits, judgments, costs and expenses by reason of the action or inaction of its employees assigned to the Task Force. This agreement to indemnify and hold harmless does not constitute a waiver by any member of limitations on liability provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. 13. Duration. 13.1 This Agreement shall take full force and effect when all eleven potential members, listed in paragraph 3 of this Agreement, sign it. All members need not sign the same copy. The signed Agreement shall be filed with the City of Burnsville, who shall notify all members in writing of its effective date. With the exception of paragraph 4 of this Agreement, implementation is also contingent upon receipt of grant funds. Prior to the effective date of this Agreement, any signatory may rescind its approval. 13.2 This Agreement shall terminate on December 31, 2000, unless extended by further written agreement of the parties. 13.3 This Agreement may be terminated at any time by the written agreement of 6/11 of the members. 13.4 Upon termination of this Agreement, all property of the Task Force shall be sold or distributed to the members in proportion to the "full-time equivalent" contributions of each member of this Agreement as set forth at paragraph 8.1 herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing bodies, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statutes 471.59. Page 6 Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Page 7 CITY OF LAKEVILLE By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF APPLE V ALLEY By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF BURNSVILLE By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF EAGAN By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF FARMINGTON By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Approved by the City Council Page 8 CITY OF HASTINGS By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF ROSEMOUNT By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF SOUTH ST. PAUL By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature CITY OF WEST ST. PAUL By Date of Signature Attest Date of Signature Approved by Dakota County Board Resolution No. Dakota County Attorney's Office Dakota County Judicial Center 1560 Highway 55 Hastings, Minnesota 55033 Telephone: (651) 438-4438 K/K 99-146 Page 9 COUNTY OF DAKOTA By Don Gudmundson, Sheriff Date of Signature By As lstant County Attorney Date of Signature 7/l/...,t~r Approved as to Execution by By Assistant County Attorney Date of Signature City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ?4 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Assessment/Sewer Connection Agreement - CR 72 Project DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION Brad and Linda Bauer, 3273 213th Street West (formerly County Road 72), have petitioned connection to hook up to the recently installed sanitary sewer in 213th Street. DISCUSSION Due to the fact that the assessment hearing for the CR 72 project has not been held, it is necessary for the City and the Bauer's to enter into an assessment agreement before the Bauer's can be allowed to connect to the sanitary sewer. Under the terms of the agreement, the Bauer's agree to be assessed for the County Road 72 assessments and waive their rights to object to the assessments. The Bauer's have signed the attached agreement and they have begun to make arrangements for connection to the sanitary sewer. It is their desire to complete the connection before the restoration of the boulevard commences. The agreement allows iinmediate connection to the service stub out at the property line. However, the sewer service may not be physically connected to the home until the testing of the sanitary sewer line is completed, the sewer line has passed the testing requirements and the City has provided the Bauer's with written authorization to proceed. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Acknowledge and approve the attached Assessment/Sewer Hookup Agreement between the City and Brad and Linda Bauer. Respectfully submitted, ;:::YJ1~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file (Reserved for Recording Data) ASSESSMENT/SEWER CONNECTION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") made this day of September, 1999, by and between the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") with offices at 325 Oak Street, Farmington, Minnesota, and Bradley O. and Linda F. Bauer, husband and wife ("Owners"). Recitals: The Owners own the real property located in Dakota County legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, also with the Parcel Identification Number of 140320009026 and a street address of 3273 213th Street West, Farmington, MN 55024 ("Subject Property"). The Subject Property shall be assessed costs, fees and charges associated with the reconstruction of 213th Street from Trunk Highway 3 to the easterly City limits ("Improvements ") including the provision of sanitary sewer service to the subject property. The Owners have requested to be allowed to hook up to the City's sanitary sewer system prior to completion of the project and the final assessment hearing. Execution of this agreement allows the Owners to connect a service line for the subject property to the City provided sewer service at the property line. Actual construction of the connection cannot commence until a sewer connection permit is issued by the City. Final connection of the service line to the house and discharge of sewage to the City's sanitary sewer system may not occur until the sanitary sewer has been tested and City has provided the Owners with written notification to proceed with the final connection. NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS SET FORTH HEREIN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: The Subject Property shall be assessed by the City for the Assessments. The total Assessments shall be determined subsequent to construction of the Improvements. Payment of the Assessments shall be made over a period of fifteen (15) years, accruing interest at the rate of six and 5/10 percent (6.5%) per annum. The estimated assessment amount for the sanitary sewer is $6200. The fmal assessment amount will be determined subsequent to the completion of the improvements. In addition to the sanitary sewer improvement assessment amount, sanitary sewer hookup fees that need to be paid include the Metropolitan Council SAC fee - $1050, the City SAC fee - $350, and a sewer connection permit fee - $55. The hookup fees are typically paid at the time of sewer connection permit issuance, however, the hookup fees may be assessed if so desired by the Owners. Execution of this agreement by the Owners authorizes the City to assess the hookup fees against the Subject Property if the Owners do not wish to pay the hookup fees at the time of sewer connection permit issuance. The Owners, by signing this Agreement, acknowledge that all procedural and substantive objections to the Assessments are hereby waived unconditionally, such waiver includes any rights of Owners, their successors or assigns to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the Subject Property. The Owner further waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to M.S.A. ~ 429.081. CITY OF FARMINGTON: By: Gerald R. Ristow, Mayor By: John F. Erar, City Administrator/Clerk OWNERS: BY:~~~ / Bradley Bau By: ~J~ Linda F. Bauer 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of September. 1999. by GERALD R. RISTOW and by JOHN F. ERAR. respectfully the Mayor and City Administrator/Clerk of the CITY OF FARMINGTON. a Minnesota municipal corporation. on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of September, 1999, by Bradley O. Bauer and Linda F. Bauer, husband and wife. ~ 11 C }~iJjA- Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: SUSAN J. MILLER NOTARY PUBUc-MINNESOTA MY COMMISSION eXPIRES 1-31-00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association Attorneys at Law 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 Telephone: (612) 452-5000 JRW 3 EXHIBIT "A" to ASSESSMENT/SEWER CONNECTION AGREEMENT DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY The West 90 feet of the East 174.44 feet of the south 6 acres of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 32, Township 114, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota. 4 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~' TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~ James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: September 20,1999 INTRODUCTION The 1999 Budget authorizes the purchas.e of trees for the Prairie Waterway and the grading of Lake Julia Park in the Prairie Creek Addition. DISCUSSION This year's tree planting request will be the third year of the planting plan for the Prairie Waterway. Plantings, consisting of eight different species, will be planted primarily on the northern end of the area east of Park Place. The grading of Lake Julia Park in Prairie Creek will be done in two stages. This fIrst stage will grade and seed the area on the south side of Lake Julia. Staff determined that the area to the north, along the pond outlet, needs extensive grading and has been placed in the 2000 - 2004 C.I.P. The Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed this plan. BUDGET IMPACT Staffhas received quotations and the lowest average price ($172.00) for the required trees was submitted by Midwest Landscapes. Staff will order the appropriate number of trees to stay within the $10,000 budget. Staff received two valid quotes and recommends the low quote from Hoffbeck Trucking to perform this work. They are as follows: Hoffbeck Trucking Gilmer Excavating $8,492.00 $18,150.00 ACTION REQUESTED This is for information only. Respectfully submitted, ~~b~ James Bell Parks and Recreation Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Purchase - Fire Department DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION/ DISCUSSION The Fire Department is planning to paint the exterior areas of the Fire Station. This would include pressure washing and painting of the garage doors, service doors, red stripe, guard posts and lettering. The overhead garage doors will be painted light gray to blend in with the existing color of the Fire Station. A low quote has been received from M & S Painting and Decorating in the amount of $1 ,560.00. BUDGET IMPACT Approved in the 1999 Capital Outlay Budget. ACTION REQUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, k~LL_ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief ~. ~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7J TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrato~ Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief FROM: SUBJECT: School and Conference - Fire Department DATE: September 20, 1999 . INTRODUCTION The Fire Department is planning the attendance of nine Rescue Squad personnel at the Emergency Medical Technician Training, October 6-21, 1999, at the Farmington Fire Station. DISCUSSION Rescue Squad personnel are required to attend refresher courses in Emergency Medical Technician Training. The class is being offered by EMED of Eagan. BUDGET IMPACT Funding is provided in the 1999 Budget. ACTION REQUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ~U- Ken Kuchera Fire Chief 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 ~ David L. Olson Community Development Director FROM: SUBJECT: Appeal of Bible Baptist Sign Variance DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Bible Baptist church has filed an appeal to the decision of the Planning Commission (Board of Adjustment) 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. DISCUSSION The variance requested by Bible Baptist Church was to allow for a five foot (5') x eight foot (8') sign on a three foot (3') base to be located fifty feet (50') from the center-line of Akin Road and that the sign be internally illuminated. This variance was actually the second request for a variance by Bible Baptist Church. The initial request was for a six foot (6') x ten foot (10') sign to be located on a five foot (5') base. This variance request was denied as a result of a 2-2 vote by the Planning Commission at their July 13, 1999 meeting. A public hearing on the revised request was held on August 10, 1999. After completion of the public hearing, the Commission voted to approve a variance subject to the following: . The size of the sign to be limited to five feet (5') x eight feet (8') as requested. . The maximum height ofthe sign be limited to six feet (6') which would reduce the height of the base from the three feet (3') being requested to one foot (1 '). . 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 (50') from the centerline as requested. The restrictions or modifications placed on the variance approval took into account the concerns expressed from residential property owners living across Akin Road from the Church. The basis of the appeal is explained in the attached submittal from Bible Baptist Church. They are seeking the following: . Grant unrestricted illumination of the proposed sign. . Grant the requested sign size of five feet (5') by ten feet (10') . Grant a minimum sign base of three feet (3') BUDGET IMPACT The Church is also seeking a waiver of the $150 fee for the appeal which has already been paid. While this is not a typical request it is provided for in the City's ordinance. The filing fee is intended to cover the costs associated with publishing and mailing the notice of public hearing as well as staff time spent reviewing the request and preparing the staff report. Those costs have already been incurred for this appeal request. ACTION REQUESTED The Council options include the following: 1) Affirm the decision of the Planning Commission which allows for five feet (5') by eight feet (8') with maximum height of six feet (6'), and a setback of fifty feet (50') from the centerline of Akin Road. The Planning Commission approval also restricted the hours the sign could be illuminated to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. This would require a simple majority vote. 2) Overturn and/or modify the decision of the Planning Commission. The Council can modify the variance that was previously approved or approve the variance request currently being sought by Bible Baptist. In either case, Council should incorporate findings which support the decision. These findings will then be prepared by staff and brought back to Council for approval at the next Council meeting. Any decision to modify or overturn the Planning Commission's decision will require a 4/5th's vote of the Council. 3) Council should also act on the request to waive the $150 Appeal filing fee. Respectfully submitted, David L. Olson Community Development Director cc: Bible Baptist Church, Attn: Bill Veeninga Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision Regarding the Bible Baptist Church's Request for Sign Variances Situation The Deacons / Trustees of Bible Baptist Church on behalf of the congregation are petitioning the Farmington City Council to overturn the Planning Commission's decisions regarding sign variances granted on August 10th, 1999. The restrictions placed on the church are not consistent with the current sign ordinances and previously granted variances for illuminated signs. It is our position that the Planning Commission did not grant reasonable, consistent variances to the church and in so doing created hardships for the church. It is the church's intent to improve the quality of the signage currently used on our property. Our current sign was damaged by a hit and run driver in June of 1998. Since that incident the church has investigated various sign designs as well as the criteria for the optimum sign to communicate the church's activities to the community. This is how we determined the overall size and features of the sign we sought to gain variances for. Illumination Our first and primary concern is in regard to the regulation of the time which the sign may be illuminated. Currently there are no restriction on place on the illumination of our existing sign. Our proposed sign was and is designed to eliminate the glare commonly associated with the floodlights that are currently used to illuminate the existing church sign. We intend to install a back-lit sign, which is designed to be more aesthetically pleasing. The back-lit feature allows good illumination while reducing the amount of glare given off by the sign. Many examples of this type of signs can be found around the city (see attachment). The Farmington Middle and High School are two such examples, both of which were granted an illumination variance with no restrictions on the hours of illumination. Our desire is that we be allowed to provide the community with a sign that has good aesthetics and is not time regulations as a condition of use. We base this on the Planning Commission's past history in granting this type of variance to other applicants. Sie:n Size In addition to illumination, we disagree with the restriction imposed on the church regarding the size of the sign. Current ordinances allow churches up to seventy-five (75) square feet (Ord. 086-173) in any district. Our current sign is sixty square feet and our proposed sign based on its proposed location is fifty (50) square feet. Much thought and research has been put into determining what size would be required to clearly communicate a message to those passing by at the current posted speed limit. Although we are aware Akin Road will be turned over to the city at some time in the future, we do not anticipate a reduction in the speed limit for Akin Road for many years. The speed limit was a significant factor in our decision on the overall size of our sign. The sign size was determined by the most appropriate letter size that could safely be read based on the duration of time the car occupants would be able to see the sign. Our research indicated that at fifty-five (55) miles per hour an eight inch (8") letter is readable for five (5) seconds Page 1 of3 09/16/99 Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision Regarding the Bible Baptist Church's Request for Sign Variances Sign Size (cont.) versus only three point seven (3.7) seconds for a six inch (6") letter. We conducted a test to determine which size letter was the easiest to read at the posted speed limit. The result confirms the finding of independent research provided by the sign's manufacturers, which were considered, for this project. The six inch (6") letter was unreadable at the posted speed limit, however the eight inch (8") letter was easily read. Hence we choice to go with the eight inch (8") letters, thus necessitating a larger sign to communicate information regarding special events, service times, and other information of interest to the community. Just to set the record straight, one eight inch (8") letter is approximately four (4) to five (5) inches wide. An eight foot (8') sign only allow ninety inches (90") of text or eighteen (18) spaces including blank spaces. Not much room by any standard to communicate a meaningful message. This is why we are requesting your consideration to allow us to pursue a five foot (5') by ten foot (10') sign for our use. Sign Base Heie:ht The Planning Commission also rendered what we feel is a completely unreasonable decision regarding the height of the sign base. The commission choose to restrict the base height to just one foot (1 '). This restriction places another hardship on the church. The sign is designed with a locking cover, which is hinged at the base of the sign header as illustrated in your packet (attachment). In order to change the sign we would have to literally get on our hands and knees to change the sign copy. When this issue was challenged by the church's representative the commissioner who proposed the base height suggested that the sign be modified to open from the top down, which is totally unacceptable. This suggestion would require the individual to reach over a four foot (4') cover to change the lettering. This does not seem very practical or logical to the church. None of the signs which where reviewed for this project offered this type of construction. Another point that was brought up by the church representative was the fact that the proposed sign placement was below the grade of Akin Road. The staff member of the city and a neighbor of the property stated that the site was at or above grade. This however is not the case, unfortunately both individuals are incorrect as is demonstrated by the enclosed photos. Therefore we request that the proposed height of three foot (3') be granted to allow the sign to be placed slightly above the grade of Akin Road. Fee Pursuit to the options available to the council, we respectfully request that the fee related to this Public Hearing be waived. The council has the authority to grant this waiver per the established ordnance regarding permits (4-3-5b). Your action to affirm the waiver would be greatly appreciated. We have paid the fee for the original Planning Commission hearing and for the permits required to erect a new sign. Page 2 of3 09/16/99 Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision Regarding the Bible Baptist Church's Request for Sign Variances Summary of Requests In summary Bible Baptist Church is petitioning the council to affirm the following: 1. Grant unrestricted illumination of the proposed sign. 2. Grant the requested sign size of five foot (5') by ten foot (10'). 3. Grant a minimum sign base height of three foot (3'). 4. Grant a waiver for the application fee for this Public Hearing per the ordinance. Mr. Mayor and Council Member, thank you for your careful consideration of this issue on the behalf of the congregation of Bible Baptist Church. Respectfully Submitted, The Deacons / Trustees of Bible Baptist Church 19700 Akin Road Page 3 of3 09/16/99 w~ 4: ()a.. Z ~ -0 &~ .- <(~ ( J '--' w'-O :J: - >:CL. (/)~ :J: <(.n E:~ (.) (.) Q~ r ...- l (,/') .. ~ ~<( a: LJ.J'<' > a: z - r 0=::0 <( 0 i- 00 u..:l r , :::> 3: u 3:0 W 2- :J: - ,.... r en r-- (/'] (.) a: ~ ::) 0 c >- z ;: ::--= W SJJ:;; :...~ LL ''7. ;. :; ~t.~ ~ 0 = p :.. a: ~ ~ ~. I2 '-~';:1:;: C LL Z <( w w a: () - > --:.1 W 0 Ct:. ; , 0 w ()~ <n2 ..... 0 :J: - 0.- , LL >c.. O<J) :I::?E 00- ......!J) u<( I- <(0 _-c 00 ;: :s: d: (/)U') tJ) .. Q~ .n ---- >- ~:J: W'" -(300) Z U) >- -(])Q) 0.0-. <.!)-- 0 ._ i? u Z w Q)-- ..eQ) => ~ \; .Q) E 00 en :2~i= CU(/cj1+ -f!cp W:5+ ~ . "....-I bJ). ~ ~ ."....-1 0 ~ .~ 8 .~ .b ~ ~ cd ~ ~ bJ)S d) 0 Q)~ ~ ."....-1 tn ~ g] .......-I cd Q) ~ .,.0 . "....-I ~S .......-I ~ ~;::= cd ."....-1 o ..., ~ ~ ."....-1 ;:> ~ Q) bJ) ."....-1 ~ rf'l 0 .~ ~ Q) .~ bJ)~ cd~ ~ bJ) · ."....-1 Q) rJJ ~ ~ 0 Q) ~ t="'O ~ a u~ ~ o .~ ~ u o ~ Sn .~ rJ:J "'0 C) rJ:J o ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ~ C) ~ o rJ:J ~ cd rJ:J .~ ~ o .~ ~ u o ~ ~ . 00"'0 .~ cd rJ:J 0 "'O~ ~ ~ o .~ ~~ ~~ C) C) ~~ (U bh ~ C) o Z~ ~ on 01"""""1 lZ) Q) ~ ~~~ Q)~ ~ t 0 o~ Q) ~ lZ) J::; 0 01"""""1 Q) ~ t:: ~~o ~ g ~ s::::= ~ o c\S lZ) t::::= ~ 2 o~ s Q) lZ) Q) ~ 01"""""1 ~ ~~~ lZ)~~ on 0 ~ 0 Q) 01"""""1 Q) lZ) ~ ~ ,.-ot J::; c\S .,- Q) ~ Q) lZ) on ~ c\S~~ J::; ~ ~ ... ~ . M in ::::= 0& ~Q)Q)~ Q)~ ~ lZ) ~~lZ)~ Q) 0 c\S a ~ ~ .o~ ff..Q~'S ~ ~ 01"""""1 0 ~ gp~.s ~ 8 0> o~ BACK - LIT CUT-AWAY SIDE VIEW SINGLE FACE DOUBLE FACE Name Header( s) Light Bulbs o o Message Board(s) o @ Q~ ~u 00 -.1-.1 u~ Q:: o o Q ~ ~ 8: o ~ L&.. ~ CI) c CD 01 '0 .;;; o CD .Q:E 0101 .E C a. '0 0'- ~ .0).. CD -. o C '0..0 CDO:U t l!! CD OCD_ 0.:= e o.CDD,. :J- o Q) E Q),c0 O'Q1j 0C"O (5 '0> Co OC;:> '00'0 'OJ: CD CDOO) 1: .! 0) :J .- :J 0,cQ: E ~a .c 0 o E :J ... ;;:: 0 ).., '00. .. 0 :J ... ii;o. c: ~ o >- -.I ~ ~~ ~~ ::;)0 00 LLI.... CI) LLI ~~ Ci)- ::):t: ....Q:: ~O Ll.iO Q "tJ ! 0 ::J _ o -CD CD~E o 0 CD !.Q:E o .. 0 0CD_ o :0 0) . o E C CD "O.a:;e CD)..OO ~.o.Q.t: E "0 "0 ::J C c: _ 0 - 0 _ E:Jt :J"'- -0"0 ~CO "0= CD .!'io o - CD C.c . ....0=.. e .;;; ~ e o.:JOI- ......0= 'Q)><-'i U)CDO 1. 2. Illuminated Si2ns In districts other than ''B'' or "f' Farmington Middle School - installed 1992 4200 208th St. W. base: 3 '6" x 22' x 9'8" sign: 10'6" x 17'8" (on top the base) backlit-no time restriction Zone: R-3 Farmington Sr. High School - installed 1995 800 Denmark Ave. base: 3' x 22' x 9'8" sign: 10' x 17'8" (on top the base) backlit-no time restriction (on timer for energy management) Zone: R-2 3. Trinity Hospital (South Suburban Medical Center) - installed 12/9/97 3410 213th St. This property has 2 signs sign 1: (in front of the North entrance) 5'8" high x 7' wide. (illuminated top portion 3'6" high x 7' wide) backlit-no time restriction Zone: R-l *** sign 2: (SE oorner of intersection at Hwy:> & 213th St.) 10'5" x 49" backlit-no time restriction 4. Trinity Care Center (South Suburban Care Center) - installed 1997 3410 213th St. 5'8" high x 7' wide. (illuminated top portion 3'6" high x 7' wide) backlit-no time restriction Z~: R-1 5-; Trinity Terrace-(South Suburban Terrace} - installed 1997 3330 213th St. 5-'8" high x 7' wide. (illuminated top portion 3'6" high x l' wide) backlit-no time restriction Zone: R-1 6. Federal Aviation Administration 512 Division St. base: 2' x 14'6" x 26" sign: 4' x 8-'8" (on top of bases) backlit-no time restriction 7. Farmington Recreation , _&., Illuminated Siv:ns In districts other than- "8" ~r 'T' Spruce and Denmark (SE comer) 5'7" x 7'10" (on top of 7'5" steel legs-total sign height 13') backlit-no- time restriction Zone: F-I S. Falkowski Dental-Health Center - installed 6/24/97 916 8th Street l' high base, l' high x 6' wide backlit-no time restriction Zone: R-2 9. Orthodontic Care Specialists 310 Division St. 2 signs, form a 90' angle & connected at the comer, Isign faces North, 1 sign faces East 4' x 6-' (each sign) set upon a landscaped-berm of approx. 20' x 20' backlit-no time restriction Zone: R-2 10. White Funeral Home 90 1 3rd St. e' high x 5' wide (16" base) backlit-no time restriction (timer for energy management) (shuts off at 11 p.m. ror energy conservation-their choice) Zone: R-2 11. Rivers Edge Dental Clinic 213 1st. St. S' x 6' (on top oflandscaped berm) directional spotlights-no time restriction ZonE;: B-2 BOte: This sign faces intersection of Elm & First, 3-comers of which are zoned R-2 12. Barbara Ackerman Accounting 513 Third St. base: 1-9" x 6' x 3' sign: 5'3" x 5'5" (on top of base) directional florescent lights-no time restriction Zone:J!1: {3-;2. 13 . Faith United Methodist Church 710 8th St. " _.&'., Illuminated Signs In districts other than '"8" 9r'T' 6'6" high x 9' wide, (illuminated area 4' high x 9' wide) backlit-no time restriction Zone: R-2 14. Christian Life Church of the Assemblies of God 6JOO 212th St. W. 9'6" high x 20' wide (landscaped with shrubs and flowers) directional spotlights-no time restriction (timer for energy management) (shuts off at 11 p.m.-their choice) Zone: A-I 15. First United Presbyterian Church 625 Heritage Way This property has 2 signs sign 1: (West side of driveway) ~ installed 1996 base: 16" x 12' 6" x 5' - landscaped with flowers and shrubs sign: 5-' x 6' - on top of base backlit-no time restriction (timer for energy management) (shuts of at 10 p.m.-their choice) Zone: R-1 *** sign 2: (East side of driveway) base: 12" x 20'6" x 8' - landscaped with flowers and shrubs sign: 4' x 12'8" - on top of base directional spotlights-no time restriction Zone: R-1 16. Trinity Lutheran Church - installed 1999 (still under construction) 600 Walnut St. 62" x 84" backlit-restricted - no illumination after 10 p.m. or before 7 a.m. Zone: R-2 Note: This sign is a reconstruction of a previous sign. The previous sign was illuminated without restriction. August 10, 1999, Planning Commission granted setback variance and illumination variance with restricted hours of illumination. 17. Bible Baptist Church - installed 1994 19-700 Aitkin Road 6' high x 10' wide on 2 steel support posts directional spotlights-no time restriction Zone: R-1 ., -~., -. 4. August 10, 1999 Planning Commission Minutes Commissioner Larson replied that that is beyond the control of the Planning Commission a that it is a responsibility of the Police Department and City Council in which they wou need to review the possibility. Commissio er Larson asked if the Fire Chief has reviewed these plans? Plan r Smick replied that he as not because some of the revisions were only recently su Itted but he is scheduled to re 'ew them. Larson questioned the idth of the narrowest section of the driv ays. Mr. Sherman did not know the exact dista e but estimated twelve feet (12') e added that the driveways were not designed for passa of more than two cars. Chair Rotty asked if the Commissio were none. There Chair Rotty commented th he believes the that to developer has made the necessary changes to the site plan d addressed the concerns of t Commission and neighbors and feels comfortable fo arding it to the City Council for app val. APIF, second by Dougherty to close the MOT N by Larson, second by Dougherty to forward a recommendation approve the Fa mgton Townhomes Preliminary and Final PlatlFinal PUD along wit ite plan r ision #4 to the City Council contingent upon final engineering and MNDOT ap APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Chair Rotty introduced the variance application for Bible Baptist Church. Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz stated that the applicant has made revisions from their initial proposal but are still seeking a forty-foot (40') variance to the required fifty-foot (50') front yard setback and also a variance for an illuminated sign within a residential zoning district. Schultz stated that the applicant now requests an 8' by 5' interior illuminated sign placed on a 3' base, for a total height of 8' . Schultz informed the Commission that the church has received a previous variance for their existing illuminated fifty square foot sign. The Associate Planner indicated that the property meets all criteria to grant a variance. Rotty requested any additional comments from the applicant. Bill Veeniga of Bible Baptist Church introduced himself to the Commission. Mr. Veeniga informed the Commission that the revisions come after research was completed on church signs relating the size, area and placement of a sign to attracting new parishioners. Rotty requested any comments or questions from the public. 2 August 10, 1999 Planning Commission Minutes Al Corrigan, 19715 Akin Rd, voiced his concern with the need for that size of sign when other churches in surrounding communities don't compare in height and area, coupled with the parking lot lighting, that passers-by couldn't mistake it for anything else. Mr. Veeniga responded that most of the churches mentioned are located in other communities and added that the proposed sign would permit messages and present a good appearance ofthe church. The lighting in the parking lot is necessary for security. Mr. Corrigan agreed that the church is a good neighbor but pointed out that the grade at which the sign is proposed to be place will appear well above the road level. Mr. Veeniga disagreed with Mr. Corrigan's analysis and added that if the sign height were to be lowered it would be hindered by snow. Chair Rotty asked if staff had the opportunity to inspect the site? Schultz replied that he has been to the location and that the grade at the location of the proposed sign is near grade or slightly above grade where the sign is proposed, but rises as you travel north. Chair Rotty asked Mr. Corrigan if his concern with the sign is the area, placement or height? Mr. Corrigan replied that it's the height of the sign. The Commission discussed the issues brought forth by the residents. Commissioners did not have any concerns to the proposed sign area, but did voice concern toward the illumination and height. The Commission suggested that the sign be placed on a timer and recommended that the sign be placed on a lower pedestal. MOTION by Larson, second by Dougherty to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Larson, second by Dougherty to approve the sign variance based on the following: a) Size of the proposed sign 5' high x 8', 40 square feet b) Maximum total height of6' c) Illumination of the sign is permitted between the hours of 7 A.M. and lOP .M. d) Sign may be placed no closer than 50' from the centerline of Akin Road. Contingent upon resubmittal of sign diagram and site plan. APIF, MOTION APPROVED. Chair Rotty opened the public hearing for a variance request from Trini eran to encroach within front yard setbacks and illuminate the sign . ill a residential zoning dlS . . air Rotty asked the applicant if they had any additional comments. 3 July 13, 1999 Planning Commiss' on utes MOTION by Ley, s nd by Johnson to close the lic hearing. Roll Call: YES: Rotty, Ley, Johnson; NO: n e; ABSENT: Larso ougherty. MOTION CARRIED. care of any problems that may arise from the gravel base such as dust. ifthe icant had a problem with that contingency? Mr. Cordov sponded that he did not. 1. Pave the parking lot a g Spruce Street an vide landscaping in order to fulfill the requirements 0 e 1993 approval; 2. Screening shal e provided within the expansion area within the posed chain link fence; 3. Installa' n of landscaping along Oak Street at the north side the property is req . ed. A landscaping plan needs to be submitted and approved by . I Call: YES: Rotty, Ley, Johnson; NO: none; ABSENT: Larson, OTION CARRIED. > 4. Chair Rotty introduced the variance application for Bible Baptist Church. Planner Schultz presented the staff report. Schultz stated that the applicant is seeking forty-foot (40') variance to the required fifty-foot (50') front yard setback and also a variance for an illuminated sign within a residential zoning district. Schultz informed the Commission that the applicant had received a variance in 1994 for both setback requirements and illumination of the sign. Schultz stated that the only difference is that the sign is slightly larger, 6 feet by 10 feet on a 5-foot base and is interior lit. The sign is proposed to be located north of the driveway. Schultz added that the property meets all criteria to grant a variance but is concerned about the proposed height of the structure and recommended approving an eight-foot freestanding sign. Rotty requested any additional comments from the applicant. Louis Camacho, representing Bible Baptist, requested that the Commission consider allowing a nine-foot sign because of the need to allow room at the ground level to replace lettering. Chair Rotty asked for any clarifying questions from the Commission. The Commissioners agreed to wait after resident comments. Rotty requested any comments or questions from residents. Troy Corrigan, 19691 Akin Rd, stated that a sign of this size and to be illuminated would be inappropriate for this area. Chair Rotty - "Would (the sign) be on a timer?" Schultz replied that had not been clarified during discussions. Mr. Camacho added that he assumed it would. 2 July 13, 1999 Planning Commission Minutes Chair Rotty - "Why does the sign need to be illuminated?" Mr. Camacho responded that because of previous accidents to the existing sign and for visibility and recognition by passing motorists. Commissioner Johnson responded that the sign being illuminated on Akin Road along with the lights in the parking lot does not seem to detract from the neighborhood. Commissioner Larson suggested installing a timer on the sign to avoid having it illuminated all night. Commissioner Ley voiced concern with the size and height of the sign in a residential area. Chair Rotty agreed and thought the staff recommendation of eight-feet was appropriate. MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to approve the sign variance for an 8- foot tall illuminated sign to be placed 10- feet from the front property line. Roll Call: Yes: Johnson, Rotty; NO: Ley, Larson. MOTION DENIED. MOTION by Rotty, second by Johnson to direct staff to begin reviewing the current sig ordinance and to update the ordinance by comparing it with adjacent commun' . s. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Chair Rotty opened the public hearing for a variance request from Vermillion River Trail for the property located at 300 151 Street. Ass iate Planner Schultz presented the staff report t he Commission. Schultz indicat that the applicant is seeking a 6- foot varianc long Elm Street and a 10- foot variance a 151 Street to enable the applicant to u . ze the existing foundation in order to move a ram r onto the site. Schultz remind the Commission that the applicant has already been gran a conditional use permit pecial exception permit and a variance at the June 8, 1999 Plan' Commission m ing to move an existing duplex rambler onto a smaller than minimum Chair Rotty asked i e applicant was present. to attend becaus f other business. ltz stated that the applicant is unable or any comments or questions from the public. Mr. . hardson, 35 Elm Street: Would the driveway off Elm Street b anner Schultz replied that the driveway would be closed off and that it and agreed upon by the applicant at the previous meeting. 3 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: City Planning Commission /\ ~ · ~r. Michael Schultz, Associate Planner Jl / FROM: SUBJECT: Variance - Lighted sign within residential zoning district / front yard setback DATE: August 10, 1999 INTRODUCTION Bible Baptist Church has re-applied for a variance to locate a new freestanding illuminated sign within the front yard setback in a residential zoning district. Planning Division Review Applicant: Bible Baptist Church 19690 Akin Road Farmington, MN 55024 Attachments: I. Location Map 2. Pictures of Existing Structure 3. Applicants Site Plan 5. Sign Diagram 4. September 13, 1994 Planning Commission minutes Reference: 1. 10-8-6: Variances 2. 4-3-1: Signs; Billboards Proposed Sign Dimensions/Area: 5' x 8' with a 3' base/40 sq. ft. Subject Property: 19690 Akin Road Current Zoning: R-I (Low Density) Surrounding Zoning: R-I (Low Density) surrounds property except for C-I (Conservation) located behind property. Comprehensive Plan: Public/Semi-public Current Land Use: Public/Semi-public Surrounding Land Uses: Single-family and Public/Semi- Public (Akin Elementary) DISCUSSION Bible Baptist Church has reapplied for a variance to place a free standing illuminated sign in a residential zoning district and to encroach within the required front yard setbacks for signs. The applicant was denied a variance at the July 13, 1999 Planning Commission meeting based on the overall size and height of the sign in relation to the proximity of the roadway and concerns of the sign being illuminated continuously through the night. According to the zoning code illuminated signs are not permitted within Agricultural, Conservation and Residential zoning districts as outlined in 4-3-2 (B) 1 of the Zoning Code. Also no sign shall overhang any public right-of-way as specified in 4-3-2 (B) 7. The Zoning Code specifies that signs are considered a structure, which would apply yard and height regulations as defined in the Zoning Code. The applicant would be required to have a fifty (50) foot setback from their property line, placing the sign within the parking lot. Bible Baptist Church was granted a variance to locate their current sign fifty (50) feet from the centerline of Akin Road rather than fifty (50) feet from the right-of-way line in September of 1994 (see attached minutes). The sign is currently located on the south side of the driveway entrance. The existing sign located on the south side of the driveway is approximately 50 square feet and 7 feet tall (at center of sign). The replacement sign is proposed to be 40 square feet (5 feet by 8 feet) and 8 feet tall (including the 3-foot base). Although the sign ordinance does not make reference toward types of uses within residential zoning districts; staff suggests that the Commission follow the guideline outlined in 4-3-3 (B) 3 that describes any freestanding sign six (6) feet in height be located ten (10) feet off the property line in business zones. Staff feels that freestanding signs within residential zoned areas should be regulated in height, which is not clearly regulated within the current sign ordinance. The Commission has established recent precedence granting variances for illuminated signs within residentially zoned districts. Those cases include: . 12/9/97 - South Suburban Medical/Trinity Lutheran Hospital for 3 illuminated signs; . 6/24/97 - Dental Health Center - 4 x 6 illuminated sign along Trunk Highway 3. Staff feels that the property meets the criteria established within the City Code in that: . Literal enforcement of the City Code would result in undue hardship due to the required fifty (50) foot minimum front yard setback makes placement of a structure difficult due to the existing facilities; . The topography and natural resources found on the property made it difficult to position the church along with the required parking to meet the required setbacks for placement of a sIgn; . The hardship is caused by the adopted minimum front yard setback provisions of the Zoning Code and was not brought on by actions of the person having interest in the property; · The variance observes the spirit and intent of the Code and produces substantial justice that is not contrary to the public interest; . The variance will not effect a lower degree of flood protection. It is staff s conclusion that a variance is required for placement of the sign because of undue hardship brought on by the requirements of the City Code and that by following such guidelines the sign would be required to be placed within the parking lot area of the church. ACTION REQUESTED Staff recommends the Commission approve the variance to locate an 8-foot tall, 40 square foot, freestanding illuminated sign 50 feet from the centerline of the Akin Road right-of-way contingent upon: 1. The applicant submits a revised sign plan indicating exact dimensions and placement of sign on the subject property. Respectfully SZb 2'tt fd,? / /f ,", i '~~::1:2:f Associate Planner r cc: Bible Baptist Church m Q) L.. <( Q) o c: m L.. ..... c: W .s:::. o L.. :J .s:::. () <lz ..... UJ +:A 0- m m Q) - ..c .- m . --"" J ~ I ~JaWD.lV'_ .......r:...~.IC..~..r......... .1ti_= ~J.tEr=r- . I"ir~H_'" MU '\, PROPOSED SITE PLAN ~ NORTH ..... . T - j.., 1$ VJ Z o -. r/1, ~ >: """"'" ~ u. Z - ~ VJ .0' -"----" ""'-. / . "';'!oOJ: i ;<-loC! ()' "i . I.t) C ' : cO co .., , ,'," i -0 "'11:1' \II i ~:.;;:! 0 : O' <-i'11:C! -~; I .- C\I ":U~N .....::-: CI) I : .... : c:: -"'I I . .: , 0 "V en ,.j , .- en "ii\ ",; I 1i...! C '00 C , I Q. Q. :0'0>- · I.t) c:: 0') .-0 ... '-::JCD ;~ 20 -<....... CD CD 'OQ.e 021= :?:~ ! ~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington. MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.fal1Din~on.mn.us TO: City Planning Commission rj) Michael Schultz, Associate Planner OJ FROM: SUBJECT: Variance - Lighted sign within residential zoning district / front yard setback DATE: July 13, 1999 INTRODUCTION Bible Baptist Church has made application for a variance to locate a new freestanding illuminated sign within the front yard setb~ck in a residential zoning district. Planning Division Review Applicant: Attachments: Reference: Proposed Sign Dimensions: Subject Property: Current Zoning: Surrounding Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: Bible Baptist Church 19690 Akin Road Farmington, MN 55024 1. Location Map 2. Pictures of Existing Structure 3. Applicants Site Plan 4. Septemberl3, 1994 Planning Commission minutes 1. 10-8-6: Variances 2.4-3-1: Signs; Billboards sign area 6' x 10' with a 5' base 19690 Akin Road R-l (Low Density) R-1 (Low Density) surrounds property except for C-l (Conservation) located behind property . Public/Semi-public , Current Land Use: Public/Semi-public Surrounding Land Uses: Single-family and Public/Semi- Public (Akin Elementary) DISCUSSION Bible Baptist Church has made application for a variance to place a free standing illuminated sign in a residential zoning district and to encroach within the required front yard setbacks for signs. According to the zoning code illuminated signs are not permitted within Agricultural, Conservation and Residential zoning districts as outlined in 4-3-2 (B) I of the Zoning Code. Also.no sign shall overhang any public right-of-way as specified in 4-3-2 (B) 7. Signs also are considered a structure in order to apply yard and height regulations as defined (see below sign definition) in the Zoning Code. The applicant would be required to have a fifty (50) foot setback from their property line, placing the sign within the parking lot. Signs are defined in the Code of Ordinances as: "Any written announcement, declaration, demonstration, display, illustration, insignia or illumination used to advertise or promote the interest of any person or persons when the same is displayed or placed out of doors in the view of the general public, or a pylon exterior wall or building surface. A sign shall be considered as a structure or part of a structure for the purpose of applying yard and height regulations except as herein stipulated." Bible Baptist Church was granted a variance to locate their current sign fifty (50) feet from the centerline of Akin Road rather than fifty (50) feet from the right-of-way line in September of 1994 (see attached minutes). The sign is currently located on the south side of the driveway entrance. Although the sign ordinance does not make reference toward types of uses within residential zoning districts; staff suggests that the Commission follow the guideline outlined in 4-3-3 (B) 3 that describes any freestanding sign six (6) feet in height be located ten (10) feet off the property line in business zones. The Commission may also want to consider limiting the height of the sign to eight (8) feet (including the base). Staff feels that freestanding signs within residential zoned areas should be regulated in height, which is not regulated within the current sign ordinance. The Commission has granted recent variances for illuminated signs within residentially zoned districts. Those cases include: · 12/9/97 - South Suburban Medical/Trinity Lutheran Hospital for 3 illuminated signs; · 6/24/97 - Dental Health Center - 4 x 6 illuminated sign along Trunk Highway 3. Staff feels that the property meets the criteria established within the City Code in that: . Literal enforcement of the City Code would result in undue hardship due to the required fifty (50) foot minimum front yard setback makes placement of a structure difficult due to the existing facilities; . The topography and natural resources found on the property made it difficult to position the church along with the required parking to meet the required setbacks for placement of a sign; . The hardship is caused by the adopted minimum front yard setback provisions of the Zoning Code and was not brought on by actions of the person having interest in the property; . The variance observes the spirit and intent of the Code and produces substantial justice that is not contrary to the public interest; . The variance will not effect a lower degree of flood protection. It is staffs conclusion that a variance is required for placement of the sign because of undue hardship brought on by the requirements of the City Code and that by following such guidelines the sign would be required to be placed within the parking lot area of the church. ACTION REQUESTED Staff recommends the Commission approve the variance to locate an eight (8) foot freestanding illuminated sign ten (10) feet from the property line contingent upon: 1. The applicant submits a revised sign plan indicating dimensions and placement of sign on the subject property. Staff recommends to the Commission to initiate a review of the current sign ordinance and obtain ordinances from adjacent communities. The existing sign ordinance is at times difficult, outdated and inflexible. The Commission will hear at least two additional sign variances for churches during the next several months. Michael Schultz Associate Planner cc: Bible Baptist Church o 'fJ b. that granting a variance would not be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare; and c. the variance is to correct inequities resulting f~om extreme physical hardship. VOTING FOR: Barmel~nk, Thelen, Gramentz. OPPOSED: None. ABSTAIN: Schlawin. MOTION CARRIED. 5. Chair Schlawin opened the :public hearing advertised for8:1SP.M. as requesteci by Bible Baptist ,Church ,for a variance to the setback regulations for signs along County Road 31. The ordinance requires that all struct\lres maintain a setbaqk of 50 feet,from the highway right .of way. The church parking lot is closer tl1an 50 feet and.tl1eY would like to place the sign between the parking lot and the County Road. . Chair Schlawin asked about lighting for the proposed ,signaIld indicated a conCern about light shining onto the public right of way. Members Gramentz and Thelen, were ,interested in the size of the, sign. Richard Ozment said that light would not be a :problem beca\lse the sign is lower than the road surface and he also said that the. size is smaller than permitted <by ordinance. :l(OTIONby. :Harmel ink, " secoIld.J?y Gramemtz to close the public hearing. APIF, JlQTIONCARRIJm).:I(C:>T:tO" by Harmelinkis~Oonci bYGrament~to.approve the variance to ,thE;! setbaok J::"equirements.of the zoning ordinance because. of special conditiQIls On the lot which requiredbuildingthech\lrch and associateci. :parking lotin the northwest corner close to. the Publio right of waY., 'I'hesign will be placed 50 feet from the centerline of the :roCid rather than 50 feet from the right of way line,. APIF, MQTION CARRIED. 6. The City Planner introduoedan informal request from Harris Thompson to build a 40 x46 or 1840 square foot9'aragE;! tqstore two milk trucks at 216J.2 Chippendale Avenue in Farmington. The maximum size.for an,accessory storage building is 1000 square feet and. the Commis sion has not, in, the ,,:past, granted a.ny variances to thissect,ion of the Code. The lot is large but it potentially will have adjoining lots in the proposed. East Farmington neighborhood that are relatively small. Following a general discussion by the Conunission, it. .wa,S~l1e consensus that a 1000 square foot building likely would be approved through the conditional use process but that anything larger wouldIiot be approved. 7. City Planner Tooker introduced an informal discussion of a variance request from Performance Industrial Coatings, Inc. (PIC) to build a driveway which is 'forty feet wide at the curb on Edmonton Avenue. The request would have had a hearing advertised but the application was misplaced. In order for the curb breaking to be authorized, the staff needs to know that when a public hearing is advertised, the Commission would grant a variance. The justification for a wider than 32 foot width involves the products being painted, which are light poles manufactured by Lexington Standard. As a clarification, Lexington Standard was granted a similar variance when it was developed. If the Commission agrees informally that a 40 foot opening is acceptable, the hearing will be scheduled during the regular October meeting. I I I , Clty of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /4 TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Legislative Meeting - Consider Proposed Agenda DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION Council has scheduled a special meeting with the City's legislative delegation on Wednesday, October 6, 1999 to discuss a broad nt1mber of issues and concerns affecting local government. DISCUSSION In preparation for this upcoming meeting, a tentative agenda has been developed for Council consideration and approval. In addition, staff will be including a variety of research data and legislative information in support ofthe City's various positions for the 2000 Legislature. Council may wish to discuss this proposed agenda and add additional items as appropriate. ACTION REQUESTED Consider the attached agenda for approval. Upon approval, copies of the approved agenda will be transmitted to the City's legislative representatives. bmitted, ohn F. Erar City Administrator File State Senator Pat Pariseau State Representative Mary Liz Holberg State Representative Dennis Ozment Special Council Meeting Meeting,with Legislative Delegation City Council Chambers Wednesday, October 6, 1999 - 7:00 p.m. TENTATIVE AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Agenda 3. Local Government Finance a) Tax Levy Limitations b) State Aids c) Sales Tax Repeal d) Reverse Referendum e) Limited Market Value t) Tax Rate Increase Authorization Law 4. Introduction of Legislation Affecting Local Government a) State Mandates b) Legislation Affecting City Interests c) Cable Franchise Fees d) Special City Legislation e) Overall Communication Issues 5. Growth Management - Issues and Concerns a) Smart Growth Principles b) Annexation Legislation 6. Public Safety Legislation - Issues and Concerns a) Stop Light Cameras b) Residential Speed Limit Authority 7. City/State Relationship - Improvement Strategies 8. Open Forum 9. Adjourn City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.ianninifon.mn.us TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: John. F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: September 20,1999 It is requested that the September 20, 1999 agenda be amended as follows: UNFINISHED BUSINESS lla Approve Proposed Agenda - Legislative Meeting Attached is supplemental information regarding the Legislative Meeting Agenda. Respectfully submitted, John F. Erar City Administrator CITY OF FARMINGTON POLICY POSITION PAPER LEGISLATIVE ISSUES WORKSHOP Wednesday, October 6, 1999 -7:00 p.m. 3a) TAX LEVY LIMITS City Position: The City strongly opposes levy limits and urges the legislature to not re-enact them for 2000 or beyond. Cities, in general, must have the ability to address and respond to local tax and spend issues at the local level. The City also opposes the imposition of artificial mechanisms such as valuation freezes, payroll freezes, super majority requirements for levy, or other limitations to the local government budget and taxing process. Local elected officials are directly accountable to their constituents, and need flexibility to respond to changing community dynamics and needs without state imposed restrictions. Legislation Delegation Position: 3b) STATE AIDS City Position: Local Government Aid (LGA) is a necessary, state-raised resource to supplement local property taxes. Therefore, the City supports its continuation with an annual inflation index, along with additional state resources to further reduce the reliance on the property tax. In addition, any LGA formula changes considered by the legislature must have a positive impact on the metropolitan area. The Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA) equals about 40 percent of the total local aid and should be continued as part of the local fiscal relationship, with an inflation or increased household growth factor restored for cities. The City strongly opposes the conversion of city HACA to school aid. It should also be pointed out that the Citizens Jury on MN Property Tax Reform concluded and strongly supported that state aids should continue to flow to cities, counties and school districts. Legislative Delegation Position: 3c) SALES TAX REPEAL City Position: The legislature should reinstate the sales tax exemption for all local government purchases without requiring a reduction in other aids. Cities, counties and townships will pay more than $80 million this year to the state on purchases for items like road maintenance equipment and wastewater facilities. With what? Taxes they collect from the state's property tax payers. This sales tax on local government purchases was imposed in 1992 when the state faced a severe budget shortfall. With the state clearly in the black, this tax is simply unnecessary, causes higher property taxes and user fees, and only adds more to the surplus. The City would like to thank legislators for their past support of repeal efforts, and appreciate their continuing support to enact a final repeal of this legislation. Legislative Delegation Position: 3d) REVERSE REFERENDUM City Position: The City strongly opposes any attempt to institute a reverse referendum provision. Local government officials are elected to make decisions in the best interests of their constituencies. This includes decisions that sometimes result in tax increases that fund needed local government services. Allowing each taxing decision to be effectively "second guessed" would create a profound obstacle in the policy-making process, and jeopardize the ability of locally elected officials to make n'eeded, but unpopular decisions. The ballot box already provides for the removal of elected officials. Legislative Delegation Position: 3e) LIMITED MARKET VALUE City Position: The City strongly opposes further extension of artificial limits in valuing property at market for property taxation purposes. Limiting market value increase on existing property to a non-market index or set rate will cause various property tax system problems. Similar properties will be taxed differently if new or sold and improvements will be discouraged. Tax shifts will occur mainly on lower valued homes and the ability to issue bonds may be adversely affected. Finally, it will be politically difficult as well as costly to persons owning long-term capped properties when it becomes necessary to sunset due to vast differences in tax liabilities for like properties. The City believes that enhanced targeting for special circumstances such as low-income persons better serves the tax system. The free market, not a legislatively mandated one, should be the primary determinant in the assignment of housing values for property taxation purposes. Legislative Delegation Position: 3f) TAX RATE INCREASE AUTHORIZATION LAW City Position: A recent change by the 1999 legislature compels cities to adopt a resolution citing increases in their total tax levy. This requirement is in addition to Truth-in-Taxation hearings, publication and disclosure statements, as well as a myriad of other taxpayer notification provisions already in the law. Furthermore, this legislative mandate ignores differing circumstances in a community's growth rate where population increases require cities to spend more to provide the same level of service. In Farmington's case, while the total levy will increase by approximately $90,000 in the year 2000, the City's tax capacity rate (TCR) will actually decrease. The City suggests that the TCR is a much better indicator of the relative tax burden that City spending confers on taxable property. The City would urge repeal of this new legislative requirement. Legislative Delegation Position: 4a) STATE MANDATES City Position: The City opposes any legislative mandates that do not include supporting state funding. While the City acknowledges the need for the legislature to take a leadership role on state and regional issues affecting the health and welfare of communities in general, the costs of implementing these legislative directives should not fall solely on local government. Statewide mandates should not be enacted unless full funding is provided or a permanent stable revenue source is established. Cities should be given flexibility in implementing mandates to ensure their cost is minimized. Legislative Delegation Position: 4b ) LEGISLATION AFFECTING CITY INTERESTS City Position: The City is requesting that any legislation authored or sponsored by a member of the City's Legislative Delegation that may affect local government interests, adversely or otherwise, be communicated to the City Council. This will allow the City time to review and comment on the proposed legislation. The City would encourage its state representatives to contact local officials for information and feedback on particular issues brought to their attention by our common constituencies. Legislative Delegation Position: 4c) Cable Franchise Fees City Position: The City opposes any legislative efforts to change current law that would effectively redirect local franchise fees to the state and significantly weaken local regulatory control over cable franchise activities. Cities utilize franchise fees to conduct a host of local regulatory actions relative to rights-of-way, subscriber complaints, local cable commission activities as well as underwrite a variety of activities associated with public information access. Legislative Delegation Position: 4d) SPECIAL CITY LEGISLATION City Position: See attached communication from the City Attorney. 4e) OVERALL COMMUNICATION ISSUES City Position: While many respected polls suggest that local government is still the most trusted level of government, significant communication issues continue to emerge between State and Local government. The need to maintain a mutually respectful, and productive relationship is especially important in terms of how the average citizen perceives their government in general. Consequently, as state and local go~ernment serves similar constituencies, the need to build bridges in terms of a common base of understanding is of critical importance. Legislated solutions to local concerns should be the last step in the process.. . communication and seeking a better understanding of the circumstances and challenges facing both levels of government should be our first (see attachment). Sa) SMART GROWTH PRINCIPLES City Position: The City supports Metropolitan Council "Smart Growth Principles" as adopted (attachment). The City would contend that non-municipal growth occurring in unincorporated fringe areas outside the regional blueprint is contrary to smart growth principles, and contributes to urban sprawl. Smart growth principles recognize the need to properly plan urbanized development to ensure optimum use of limited environmental resources, and provide for cost- effective solutions to infrastructure support needs. Legislative Delegation Position: 5b) ANNEXATION LEGISLATION City Position: The City strongly opposes any legislation that would alter current annexation by ordinance laws. The City supports legislative findings contained in M.S. 414.01 that cites municipal government as the most efficient and appropriate form of government for intensive residential, commercial, industrial development. Cities must have the ability to annex adjoining property to ensure compatible urban design standards; the continuity of appropriate land use and zoning controls; the preservation of clear urban-rural boundaries; and avoid the premature development of agricultural lands. Restrictive annexation policies prevent the formulation of efficient, strategic long-term regional land-use planning that lead to environmental degradation, inadequate transportation planning, urban sprawl, duplication of local government services, and premature conversion of farm land. Legislative Delegation Position: 6a) STOP LIGHT CAMERAS City Position: Statistics show that intersections controlled by stop lights experience a higher rate of crashes than uncontrolled intersections. Crashes at controlled intersection are the result of stop light violations. The best way to control violations is by a managed enforcement and education campaign. The educational aspect is best utilized on repeat or local drivers. The educational value in stoplight enforcement is diminished due to the transient nature of traffic using the State and County highway systems. Continuous enforcement is not a practical option due to limitations of police resources. The availability of stop light cameras statewide would make drivers think twice before willfully violating a stop light. Legislative Delegation Position: 6b) RESIDENTIAL SPEED LIMITS City Position: Cities have received numerous complaints about cars traveling too fast even though they are not exceeding 30 MPH residential speed limits. Studies show typical residential speed to fall between 22-24 MPH which appears to be an acceptable rate to most residents. In an effort to curb urban sprawl by higher use of urban property cities are developing smaller residential lots with narrower streets. This creates an even larger concern over "speeders" in residential areas. Statutory authority to allow a 25 MPH residential speed limit would greatly assist local authorities in promoting safer driving speeds. The 25 MPH residential speed limit is also in compliance with Department of Transportation guidelines setting speed limits at the speed at which most drivers are comfortable (22-24MPH). Enforcement in each ofthese areas is diminished by the State of Minnesota Quota Law prohibiting Chief Law Enforcement Officers from directing officers to wrice tickets. I do not dispute that Law but law enforcement needs an alternative to ordering the issuance of tickets. Legislative Delegation Position: 36 CITIZENS JURY ON MINNESOTA TAX REFORM Minnesota State Capitol and Minnesota Department of Revenue August 2-6, 1999 What role should the property tax play in financing local governments? Recommendation Statements: In response to charge question number one, we recommend: . Less reliance on property tax across the board. . Minimal changes in the use of local sales taxes . NOT to create a new tax in the form of a local income tax . State aid should playa greater role in funding schools . More reliance on fees & charges across the board. . An increase in state aid due to increasing state mandates . A direct connection between fees & charges and the services Through this process, there has been a realization that by reducing property tax, there is a shift to other taxes (local sales, fees & charges, and state aid) but we are hesitant to add any new taxes. After the education that we have received, we understand the importance of educating the public about property taxes and related issues. Source: Citizens Jury on Minnesota Property Tax Reform '. I/tL LMC 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 phone: (651) 281-1200 · (800) 925-1122 Fax: (651) 281-1299 · roD (651) 281-1290 Lu.g..e of Minn880ta Citi88 Citill8 promoting excellence STATE MANDATES TO MINNESOTA CITIES PERSONNELIEMPLOYEE RELATIONS Pay equity. implementation and reoorting (M.S.471.991-99) - Personnel costs have been substantially increased by the state requirement that cities and other local governments conduct job evaluation studies, report on implementation, and meet equitable compensation standards as defined in rule and measured by a volatile computer software program. Recent developments complicating the issue have been an increase in actual and theoretical reverse discrimination lawsuits, the administration of the penalty provision by DOER, and a proposed lower limit on local compensation. Workers' Compensation (M.S. 176) - Cities are responsible for enforcing state requirements for workers' compensation for local contractors and licensees. Public pensions - Basic and Coordinated plans (M.S.353) - Cities are mandated to participate in the state Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA), that requires city employer contribution rates of 10.73 percent for Basic plan members and 4.48 percent for Coordinated plan members. Continuation of health and life insurance coverage (M.S.62A.17 and M.S.61A.092) - Cities must comply with a state requirement to offer continued health and life insurance coverage following voluntary or involuntary termination. Prevailing wages paid on public contracts CM.S.177.41 and A.G. Op.415cl) - The state's Davis- Bacon requirements (prevailing wage requirements), as interpreted by the Attorney General, substantially increase the costs of city contracts. Veterans preference (M.S. 197.447. 455. 46. 48. 481 and 192.26) - Cities are required to give preferential treatment to veterans for hiring, protection from discharge, fullypald leave while challenging any discharge or disciplinary action, and full salary for up to three weeks for all city employees serving in the military reserves or on active duty. Mandatory Binding Arbitration (M.S. 179A.16. .18) - Employee classes such as peace officers and firefighters are not allowed to strike. Rather, cities are mandated to comply with the compensation and benefit determinations of an appointed arbitrator, even if the elected representatives of the city's residents determine that a strike would be preferable. In 1999 the law was changed to require final-offer-total-package arbitration for firefighters. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMA TIVE ACTION EMPLOYER PUBLIC SAFETY Peace officer standards and trainine: (POST) (M.S.626.84-863 - Cities are required to assure that their public safety personnel complete mandated preservice and continuing in-service training to maintain licensed law enforcement officer status. Most recently, police pursuit training requirements (1999) and increased training for part-time peace officers (1999) Temporary detention facilities/detoxification centers - City facilities for temporary holding of persons who have been arrested must meet state standards for the building and its maintenance. Confined space entry - State and federal standards are imposed for situations where a confined space (such as a manhole) is entered. For example, there is a requirement that a minimum of two employees are present whenever a confmed space is entered (OSHA). Animal control (M.S.346. 347) - State regulations set standards for facilities used for animal control, procedures for apprehending animals, and minimum holding periods. "First responder" and firefie:htine: by city employees on state hie:hways - State reimbursement for these public safety services does not adequately cover the costs of performing these servIces. 800 mee:ahertz radio system (M.S. 473.891-.905) - Regional public safety mdio communications system for which metro-area cities must implement plans by 1997 Ambulance stuffine: and equipment requirements - Governed by the Emergency Medical Services Board ~, most recently changed in 1999. ENVIRONMENT Wastewater treatment standards - State requirements exceed those set by the federal government for many standards affecting wastewater treatment. Extensive and complicated reporting requirements are mandated by the pollution control agency (PCA). Wetlands - The Wetland Conservation Act must be administered by a city, county, or other local government unit. ..,-.' Solid Waste Manae:ement - State law specifies the existence and parameters of local recycling programs, waste collection practices, etc. Drinkine: water standards - State and federal regulation of drinking water requires frequent testing and reporting to assure adherence to standards. Surface water management organizations or plan eM.S.1 03) - Cities are required to participate in the development and costs of a comprehensive water management plan. 2 Waste distlosal facilities epCA Rules) - State and federal regulation mandates most aspects of waste to energy facilities and sanitary landfills. Hazardous substance transportation eM.S.221 and federal SARA) - State and federal regulations govern the transportation of hazardous substances. Cities are required. to select routes for transport, and police those routes, even though they are frequently not city streets. Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act (M.S.144.411-17) - Cities are required to comply with and enforce the act within their public buildings. PLANNING Land use planning (M.S.473H) - Cities in the seven-county metro area are required by the state to have a comprehensive land use plan. Laws 1995, Chapter 176 requires all city plans to be updated by 12/31/98. State zoning standards (M.S.463.365) - Local zoning decisions for ~anufactured homes, group homes, earth-sheltered homes, etc., are limited by the state. Uniform building code NBC) (M.S.13) - Cities are required to adopt and enforce a state uniform building code which regulates heating, ventilation, energy conservation, electric, fire standards, and plumbing. Handicap accessibility is one of the requirements which must be assured for public buildings. Cities no longer receive excess building code fees to help train local officials. Flood plain management (M.S. 104.04) - The commissioner of natural resources is authorized to require and approve local government reporting on flood plain management ordinances. Costs associated with imposing local ordinances are usually borne by the local government. Flood insurance (M.S.104.08) - The state requires that all local governments subject to recurrent flooding participate in the national flood insurance program. Shoreland regulations eM.S.1 05.485) - The commissioner of natural:resources is authorized to require and approve local government reporting on shoreland management ordinances, and monitor ongoing land use in the vicinity of the shoreland. .0- TRANSPORTATION Municipal state aid roads (M.S.162.09 and MnDOT rules) - Cities must comply with standards in order to receive reimbursement for funding for construction and maintenance of certain roads. These standards often result in "overbuilding" city streets. Many items, such as full signals, landscaping, pre-engineering, and certain legal costs are not eligible for compensation. 3 Computer requirements (Dept. of Transportation) - MnDOT's Office of State Aid requires that cities receiving municipal state aid must purchase, and may only use, Mn DOT specified network computer hardware and software. GENERAL GOVERNMENT/RECORD KEEPING Bleacher Safety - Minnesota session laws 1999 Chapter 250 establishes safety requirements that apply to all bleachers over 30 inches above grade or the floor below. By Jan. 1,2001, municipalities will be required to provide the comttrissioner of administration with a signed certification of compliance prepared by a qualified and certified building official or state licensed design professional that certifies the bleachers have been inspected, are in compliance with the safety requirements, and are structurally sound. Minncor (M.S.16B181) - A 1998 law change will require the state and all political subdivisions to purchase only from MINNCOR when purchasing the products MINNCOR produces. This requirement is effective the year 2000 if the state and political subdivisions fail to meet a purchasing quota - the quota has not yet been established. Non-visual technology - A 1998 law mandates the state and all political subdivisions to require all technology hardware and software purchases and upgrades to satisfy non-visual technology standards that exceed the America Disability Act (ADA) requirements. This mandate requires the purhcase of tehcnology that is either not yet available on the inarket or is cost prohibitive. Some believe that common purchases of pagers, lap top computers, cell phones, Microsoft Office applications, Lotus, GIS and more violate the letter of the law. Street lighting (M. S .216C.19) - State law requires all new and replacement lighting for street and parking lot lighting to meet energy efficiency standards adopted by the Department of Transportation. Lamps with initial efficiencies of at least 70 lumens per watts, such as high pressure sodium or metal halide lamps, are required; mercury vapor lamps may not be used. Conducting elections (M.S.205) - State requirements determine when and how cities conduct elections. These laws apply to: regular and special elections; 'elections for county, state, federal, city and some school races; the timing of the election; publication and posting of the election; the hours that polls must remain open; the number and salaries,~f-election judges; state-certified voting equipment; time lines for testing of voting equipment; preparation of ballots; absentee ballot procedures; and same-day voter registration. State record retention schedule (Dept. of Administration) - State regulations determine what records cities must keep and for what length of time. Requirements include storage time ranging from three years to infinity. Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (M.S. 13) - Nearly all government data is to be considered to be public and access and reproduction of this information is required. The costs and fees charged for this data is minimal and limited. 4 Open Meeting Law (M.S.471.70S) - Cities are required to open all of their meetings to the public. There are specific requirements for meeting notices, agendas, and minutes. . Unlike violations of the law by the Legislature, city officials may and have been sued for alleged violations. Competitive bidding (M.SA71.345 and M.S.429.041) - The uniform municipal contracting law contains extensive regulation of the requirements for the advertising of and bidding on municipal contracts. Examination of bonded public employees (M.S.574.23) - An examination process is required whenever there is a change in the personnel for city clerks and treasurers. Summary budget statement publication eM.SA 71.6965) - Annual publication of the summary budget must include information relating to anticipated revenues and expenditures in a design so that a comparison may be made between the current and budget years. This must be published in the official newspaper of the city. Home rule city charters (M.S.41 0) - State regulations are provided for the framing, adoption, and amendments to the charter, and the operation of the charter commission. Municipal liquor store reporting requirements (M.S.471.698S) - State reporting requirements for financial statements from municipal liquor stores, hearings mandated if store shows loss in any two of three consecutive years. Annual Tax Increment District Reporting: Requirements (M.S. 469.175) - Comprehensive and detailed annulll.r:eports of each TIF district are required and they must be provided by cities to County Board(s), County Auditor(s), School Board(s), and the State Auditor. Securing vacant buildings (M.S. 463-251) - Notice must be sent to the owner or owner's agent, the property taxpayer of record, holders of mortgage or sheriffs' certificates, and the neighborhood association in the metro area. REVENUE CONSTRAINTS HACA - A reduction in HACA to fund the mandate costing legislation enacted inth(} 1997 Omnibus Tax Bill, Chapter 231, Article 11, Sec.6. Tax exempt property - Many properties in cities are defined by state statute as exempt from property taxes imposed by the city. The use and nature of these properties frequently increase city costs (police and fire protection, road maintenance, street lighting, etc.). Examples include: state institutions, such as universities, hospitals, corrections facilities, and other state-owned properties. " 5 Limitations on local special assessments (M.S.429) - Statutory restrictions are imposed on the uses, notices, hearings, bidding, contracts, apportionment of cost, assessment procedures, and collection of special assessments. Local improvement requirements (M.S. 429.031) - Feasibility reports must contain information showing the need and cost effectiveness of the project. Limitations on maximum penalties and fine (M.S.609.033-0391 - Statutory restrictions are placed on allowable penalties and fines for ordinance violations, and petty and gross misdemeanors. Truth in taxation (M.S.275.065) - State law requires cities to provide prenotification of property tax changes, newspaper advertisements, multiple special hearings, and compliance with state rules. Cities must certify a proposed levy amount and, with few exceptions, are not allowed to increase this amount. Cities must also pay a proportional share of the counties' costs of preparing and mailing parcel specific notices. MISCELLANEOUS State sales and MVET on city purchases - Cities are required to raise, through property taxes or fees, adequate revenue to pay the 6.5 percent sales tax on most city purchases of goods and services. In addition, they must pay the motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) on vehicles such as road maintenance vehicles, plows, dump trucks, etc. Grandfathered contributions to regional libraries (M.S.134.34) - The state requires that once a city participates in funding a regional library , the minimum contribution made may not be reduced. This ~dfathers in any contribution increase. Ordinance copies to law libraries (M.S. 415.021) - Cities are required to furnish copies of any ordinances they adopt to the local county law libraries and do not receive reimbursement for reasonable copying charges unless they make a request to the library. 8/99 6 CAMPBELL KNUTSON LId Professional Association Attorneys at Law Thomas J. Camphell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Suesan Lea. Pace (651) 452-5000 Fax (651) 452-5550 Joel J. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehler Matthew K. Brokl* John F. Kelly Matthew J. Foli Marguerite M. McCarron September 17, 1999 ~:Also licensed in \)?iscomin Mr. John Erar City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 Re: Hill Dee Addition Our File No. 4976/028 Dear John: As we discussed on Monday morning, we have an unresolved issue that our legislative delegation could help us with; involving a 1993 conveyance of land by the City to a private property owner. By warranty deed the City conveyed title in the west 40 feet of Lot 5, Block 2, Hill Dee Addition to the abutting landowners. The property conveyed, however, was not held in fee by the City; the State of Minnesota had a reversionary interest in the property. Clearing the title requires obtaining a conveyance or release from the State of Minnesota. The enclosed materials describe the matter more fully. I propose we ask our legislative delegation for their assistance in resolving this matter when we meet on October 6. Very tlUly yours, Campbell Knutson Professional Association ~. . J amnik JJJ:cjh Enclosure cc: Ms. Judy Alexander - Burnet Title Suite 317 · Eagandale Office Center · 1380 Corporate Center Curve · Eagan, MN 55121 ...... Lf~ " LMC lletin L-g_ 0/ Minnuota Citiu Cilia prmnoting lI%UntnU>> Numher27 September 1, 1999 County Commissioner's letter evokes legislative response Local officials meet with House and Senate leadership fI Gary Carlson A letter penned shortly after the close of the 1999 legislative session by Stearns County Commissioner Rose Arnold prompted legislative leaders from the House and Senate to call a meeting with representatives oflocal units of government to discuss the sometimes strained relationship be- tween the state and local government officials. In her letter, Commissioner Arnold, the current president of the Association of Minnesota Counties, expressed concerns about the "rhetoric that some legislators are using in talk- ing about local government officials and the governments they serve," Com- missioner Arnold went on to state that she believes "too many legislators have suggested in the strongest terms that local officials can't be trusted, are irresponsible in their spending deci- sions or, at some points, legislators have suggested that we are somehow dishonest," Commissioner Arnold admitted that sometimes local officials are also guilty of similar rhetoric when talking about state officials. However.she stressed that "as leaders, we have a responsibility to do everything within our power to bring a higher level of debate and respect for the vital role that we play with the system.." At the request of Senate Majority Leader Roger Moe (DFL-Erskine), House Speaker Steve Sviggum (R- Kenyon) ,Senate Minority Leader Dick Day (R-Owatonna), and House ! . Minority LeaderTom Pugh (DFL- South St. Paul) ,leaders from the statewide local government associations met to discuss the relationship between local government leaders and state legislators, LMC President Susan Hoyt,city administrator of Falcon Heights, and LMC Executive DirectorJimMiller represented the League. Representatives from the Minnesota Association of Counties, the MinnesotaAssociation of Townships, and the Minnesota School Boards Association also attended. During the conversation, House Speaker Steve Sviggum suggested the House and Senate host an open house for local officials prior to the 2000 legislative session.The open house would allow legislators to meet local officials from their district as well as local officials from around the state. Through interaction and communica- tion, Rep. Sviggum suggested that state and local relations could be enhanced. In a follow-up letter, Sen. Moe thanked the attendees for raising the concerns and for working with the Legislature to improve Minnesota gOllernment at every level. Moe went on to state that the House and Senate would continue to pursue a local government open house, LMC President Sue Hoyt and League staff will follow up with House and Senate leadership to assist in organizing an open house for local government officials, Stay tuned. t' Cities Week '99: "Harvesting a Bright Future," Oct. 10-16 LAura Petersen With fall just around the corner, Cities Week can't be far behind. The League is sponsoring another week celebrating city government and encouraging citizen involvement October 10-16, This year's theme is "Harvesting a Bright Future." Cities Week is an annual opportunity for cities to celebrate our communities and the hard work and dedication citizen volunteers and staff put into building the places we call home, It also is a time to reach out to citizens and remind them that they play an essential role in their local governments, from helping in planning efforts to hold- ing office to simply understanding the government that's closest to the people. By Sept. 17, city administrators and clerks will receive a mailing including a hard (paper) copy of the theme and logo that can be copied and used in your city's cel- ebrations,The packet also will include suggestions for celebrating Cities Week and draft press releases to customize for your city. However, the League will not provide the balloons or posters as we have in preVIOUS years. Watch your mail and plan to celebrate Cities Week '99! t' ~ 5 S: o ! c' a ~ -0 ro ~~~, ..........I'D ~~a 88/"\ I' I Q ..........c Wl.J1= W-l>-I"l ~ .?? :: ;:ol"l o 0 0-= (\l S' ;:l.1"l ~F. ~~ N 0 ~:r ::l ::l (\l", ~.? f'( 0' [ '-J:l '-J:l '-J:l U1 ~ 8* '~ g" ~ o-c:c: l[~ ~ s. :: :.:._0 11) 1,0 ii!" "5. ~~ ~ ~ ~ C:;<:;'c: (3 i1i \II :E ~~ So c: 0 l.n~~ ;if ::::..:. I.r'I ~ \:l~PJ::;1 ~ ;::;" =' c.J ^":ro..::l , VI ~'=C\:l ::loo VI 0 o...:rl'll::+ I ,..... OJ 5: Q1 ~ ~. I'll =\:l 0 VI' ~ ::l , ("') ::l ("') ("') tlJ 0.. 0 o .....I'll 0 3-g~a.. 3 0 ..... -. C = ~ iil ~ d5 !!l, (i) , ... 0... ~ VI :;:!, ::E ;::.: 6- g. ;:;: !:; Ul :::r o-:!. ~\:l ~ tlJ =+: ?i' n o ::l 00 I'll VI ... o' ::l -Vlo...Vl ~ S' (t) ~ ~ ;;) (i; .:0' VI ~ 0- ("') -. \:l 0 ~ ~ 3 3 ~001'll3 I'll ::l I'll -"'C .C"'" .... tlJ ~ a, ~Q:::. 5' 00 -, 00 0- 5- -Oc 9. x... ;a. VI '.... , iii' C 0... c:;1 a-('I)-, tlJ < 00 ::l ~I'll o...o(i) I'll "0 0... VI 3 00' I'll ::l ::l ;a @ VI ~ ::l 'S'o' ~. 5-0-~ ~ @ 0' O"'::l.... ~ ~ ~, ~ X o-I'll 'I'll 9-. ::; C I'll VI .... (!) ;:;"Cl~:E :ra(\lDl {:l:f~~ ~:rg:: ? O'n'~ ~~fB'1"l o '" /'"l 0 ..... -:r3 ~,~g 3 3..1>> 0'6 ~5.~~ o :r 0 .... '/'"l 0 ::l 0 o ~ ~2 3<:r3 ~rti~'" Vle: Q -3 ~. ::l ~ ::l 3 ;:l. 0Cl I>> ^' (\l . /'"l '" -, /'"l :> Dl Cl.. C'l 0:r~0::;!lI'DI'D 3 ~ e: 3 (\l -.< - "0 )2 (\l 3-::l 0 ~-. ..... ,. '" 0. = 0 = ~ ~ /'"l ~'-< :r "tl ~ (\l C 03 -, 0 Dl 3 - ::l..... OC_I'D~ '" /'"l (\l ::l ..... '" = Cl.. ~. 0 e: 3 !:!'.a ;;:_. 3"?(\l-<:"tlI'D= "03 (\l ol"l'< ii> ;? =, /'"l .. -. 0 ::l 5 ;:l. ::l g !jj ~. C , ;:;" ('i' ~ ::l Vl g .. -<.. 'i5' ~ !:!, 3 '" a. ~~:ro~~~ O(\lgj.....-Cl..O ciil ;5' 0. "2.. C'l "tl :. '!":r(\ll>>o!io ~~~5~:r~ 3 "'S!, 0' ;5' :r 0' 6l ::l"OOCl. ..:r 0Cl 3 oS. ....(\l o ;a /'"l 0. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,Vl3 C'l ::;I o (\l <: ~ <: '<..... .. 'A. .3 ~ <: <: <: rn I>> 0 ~ 3O'~' ~~~;:l.~lII:'" 5 "0 ~ ~ ~, ~ re Q~] ;:;" 3 (n -3' :;, ~ r=l 0 Cl S!: -< gj :r. _ (\l ::!,::i-:f (\l ~. :::l:......::J:;;:rt:lo- ............ (\l _,O'c:l ' -a c: o-:r::l Cl.. :f '" 8" 1"\ -:;, -< I>> (\l -. ",~:;,Oll>~^'''''':f~ "O(\l"l:l3i51"\~3"'c I>> '" 0 I>> ~ 0 -'I>> I>> ~ "0 ~ ~ ::l 1"\ 3 ::l -'::l -. ~ v>n 0.0' 0Cl Q o.g ~ ~ 03 ? ;5'::l ;5'Dl (\l ~~0"""C" "0' "'< ,0 o 5" '~ ~ 3 s. fSn ;:l.~~Vl 0.~0Cl ~ g'3 :r a~::s~ ~~~- :ro-o ~ e: ~ ..... '~::l Clm~ VlVl-nzm I>> ..... X ~ !:;' rtl ::!. t"D c.. =,0"0 I>>(\l(\l.....c o - ............::3 t") ~::l~Q, ro:ro.:fODl ,(n ~ :r (\l 3 0Cl (\l '" ..... - "3- (\l-< 0^,I'D ~ Vl Z ~ q ;5' ~ ...., ..... '<0 ~3~~0;:;:~~.gJc a ~:f '" 8 '" 0 ;5'0 ~ ~ Q;:;:c: :::I:l!i::l.?-~ ...Q^'rn g~ 0 rn ~ ~ ;:r- 0 3 0 ;:::. o' 5 sa Q:i -n Q :f.. (\l -, 0 :;, n I>> -, 0 O'c:l :r 3 ~oa ~ ~ ~ ii>;: C"' -,' Ol '" ~ C"':r Z(\l::l _-;:o-iii'(\l (\liiliil C:(\l--,Vl 7~", roOCl"'.....3 <: '" 0 "l:l -, l.J1 0 O(\l..... ::!0.....3~ ~(\l II> :;"::l' ;:l. "=V1 .:':'~~oC') ,e3 ~Cl':-'oa ~~a.....o:f a. ~8:r :r~ . . ("') r- o (!) C tlJ ;a"S, -, .... I'll 0 tIloo . 0:9, ::l 00 8' tlJ 0... Qj' ("') I'll ;a tIl r- ("') tlJ tlJ .... ::;~ ~ J, I'll("') 0...$IJ .... - C I'll .... tIl ~c :::ro- o 9-: C < ~. tn' ::l -. 00 0 , ::l ,VI ~ ,~ !tr. ~ 0...00 I'll S- 3 I'll !:a 15 a 0... ("') tlJ o ::l C 0... ;a C ii)' ~ ~"O PJ ::l ::l ::l 00 .'-"',"-: g. ~, (i;-.< --, o - "0 ~ ~ 6- ::l (!) .... ::l tlJ !!l. ..... ..... ...-< :::r I'll -- :;:!, ::l 00 ~ Qj' n -'8 ~ 3re ~::; ~ ~ ~ ~ ::l .... 0...0- ~ ~ ~ .!, I'll C !4 tJ 0' ;;: ? 0 C ::l 0... tlJ ~ tIl a ::l ac (!) ..... . ::!'Jo , ao- '^' :r .... o..z o I'll rn ::E ::l, 0... .....I'll "0 < tlJ I'll -<'0 Mo' "0 tIl 3 ::E I'll tlJ ::l -< ... . ... :r ~ C .... 0- tlJ. ::l 0... I'll tIl 00' ,::l 8 ~ ~ 3 ::E ::E 3::l:::r o -- 0 ::l ~ 3 V'I ~ (t) ~ 2 VI '(i) 0. ~ - 3 e:. 0... ("') ;;) 0- s; ("') C vr 0 !!l. , ~ 15 , tIl ~x; tlJ VI ;;)"0 ~ 3 o .... (!) o "0 I'll ::l . ,~ :J :J :J tl.l ;::;: !:!'. 'Qj' 0 ^.... .... <' ai ('t) V> '< :r tl.l ~ :J ('t) a. 0" 0 ('t) n ('t) tl.l :J. ~ tl.l ^C: 0 :J "0 n :r ~ ('t) 0.. - V'l "0 :J ~ t: ('t) t"+ tl.l :r ~ z ('t) ~ '- ('t) ~ U'l ('t) '< tl.l. ,:J 0.. ("') )> I'll 0- ::l tlJ ~::l ~o... ("') 0 _. ::l =, 3 I'll I'll ~ ::l ... C VI I'll o 0 -- -- S- Q) I'll 5- ~3:V\ ~ Q 3 [ I'll OJ N' 8 ~ ~-5" C tlJ ""t a-o.o ~ ~~ o 6-::r ii3 "0 3 I'll ::l r"' 3'''' ~-a -, ""t a, OJ @.~ 1:)(1) ..-a :::r Q .. tlJ tIl!~ :::r - nl S>>s>> ::s::s f a.=- ~ Q :e ~ S>> :::r rea-s>> rn Q ..... f S. (I) ,* 3 tIl _. ~.....s>> ~' .. ,... tl.l ro ' CJ'l tl.l 0 0.. 3 '< ('t) 0"CJ'l ('t) 3 :J tl.l QQ ;::+ n tl.l ~ ,~. ('t) 0.. o c: ~ CJ 8 ~ t"+ :r 3 ('t) 0" ~ o c: t"+ ~ ::T' ('t) V'l tl.l .... ('t) Vl "0 03 ~ 3 tlJ ::l -< ~ n I'll ~ :r: I'll ;;) . tIl' ~ tl.l :J 00 ('t) o ...... ~ CJ'lOO ~ l ~ t"+ C) (3 ~ t"+ ::T' ::J t"+ ('t) ~ ~ ('t) ~ t"+ ('t) 0.. "0 ('t) n ('t) V'l ~ ('t) n o 00 :J N ('t) V'l tl.l ~ ::T' o ('t) . :E :r OJ ,.... '< o t: n OJ :::s a. o 5ci ...... ~ ('t) ::J 0.. '< 0.. It) < It) o "0 3 ('t) :J :- - CJ'l ('t) ('t) "0 tl.l ::J It) ~ - tl.l :J 0.. 00 ~ It) It) :J 0" It) ;::;' Y' tl.l :J 0.. 3 o ~ (t) "0 (t) o "0 (t) I II :I I c: c: :I I: .. . . ~?C~?C~~ ~,~~~!~ 0' ;; ~;- ~'g ;: <' !U 0 Vl 3 <' ~ 8 ; ~ a, ~a:3c,o ....::l ... 0 ;;;; [~~ o Q -< 5' 3 "0 ::l 3 Q rn C ~ ~ ~: o' tlJ ii)' ::l tIl . ~ ~ ~ ~ :3 tlJ :::J ... ~ 0' I'll ::l X):>cr ... - Q3 tlJ ......::l -.("') g I'll . 0 o .... ~ ~ ::l ::l I'll VI ~ 5b MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 414 . Policy Statement "The Legislature finds that: (1) sound urban development and preservation of agricultural land and open spaces through land use planning is essential to the continued economic growth of this state; (2l municipal government most efficiently provides governmental services in areas intensively developed for residential, commercial, industrial and governmental purposes; and township government most efficiently provides governmental services in areas used or developed for agricultural, open space, and rural residential purposes; (3) the public interest requires that municipalities be formed when there exists or will likely exist the necessary resources to provide for their economical and efficient operation; (4) annexation to existing municipalities of . unincorporated areas unable to supply municipal services should be facilitated; and (5) the consolidation of municipalities should be encouraged. The Minnesota municipal board is empowered to promote and regulate development of municipalities to provide for the extension of municipal government to areas which are developed or are in the process of being developed for intensive use for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, and governmental purposes or are needed for such purposes; and to protect the stability of unincorporated areas which are used or developed for agricultural, open space and rural residential purposes and are not presently needed for more intensive uses; and to protect the integrity of land use planning in municipalities and unincorporated areas so that the public interest in efficient local government will be properly recognized and served." [Emphasis added.] Minnesota Statutes, Section 414.01. '. , City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us .J~a-, TO: Mayor, Council Me~s, City Administrator'\Jiv 0 Lee Smick, AICP V Planning Coordinator FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Ordinance Amendment - Grading Permits DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION Attached is a proposed ordinance amendment that would eliminate several procedural redundancies in the case when Developers request a conditional use permit for grading subsequent to preliminary plat approval. DISCUSSION The attached ordinance proposes to amend Title 3, Chapter 22 of the Farmington City Code concerning Exemptions from Excavation Permits. The proposed amendment will allow the grading of a property after Preliminary Plat approval and when the conditions of Section 3-22-4 (1) (I) are complied with by the Developer. Within the past year there have been three developments that have requested grading of the property immediately after the Preliminary Plat was approved (Nelson Hills 7th Addition, Charleswood, Autumn Glen). In those cases, the Developer was required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit/Grading and Excavation Permit. 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 Conditional Use Permit is not applied for, the Developer is required to wait until the Development Contract is in force before grading. Since developments are reviewed at a public hearing for the Preliminary Plat, the grading approval could be considered at the same time. The following conditions would be included for the preliminary plat to allow grading to commence on a site: I. Approval for the permit is contingent on approval of the grading plan by the City Engineering Division. Construction shall not commence until the grading plan is approved and signed by the City Engineer, the applicable fees are paid, the required surety posted and the Excavation, Grading and Mineral Extraction Information sheet submitted and approved. 2. The Developer grades the site prior to approval of street and utility construction plans at the Developer's own risk. Issues may be identified during review of the street and utility construction plans that may require adjustments to the grading. The Developer will be responsible for any such changes that may be required. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment at their September 14, 1999 meeting and had the following recommendations: 1. Continue to allow opportunities for conditions to be set on the plat and grading plan (i.e. grading hours, etc.). 2. 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. With the above recommendations addressed along with the conditions set in Section 3-22-4 (1) (I), the Planning Commission forwards a positive recommendation to the City Council concerning the proposed amendment to the ordinance. This procedure, as proposed, is similar to procedures in place in other communities throughout the metro area. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the amendment of Title 3, Chapter 22 - Exemptions from Excavation Permits with the above conditions. Respectfully Submitted, /)-/pc:J ~~'~) Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 3, CHAPTER 22 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE CONCERNING EXEMPTIONS FROM EXCAVATION PERMITS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 3-22-4 of the Farmington City Code is amended by adding a new subsection (I) to read as follows: (I) Excavation or grading authorized by the Public Works Director following preliminary plat approval under the City's Subdivision Ordinance and prior to final plat approval, provided the excavation and grading activities are consistent with plans submitted and approved by the Public Works Director, the applicant has paid the applicable fees and provided adequate surety in an amount and form approved by the Director of Public Works, and the applicant complies with any other reasonable conditions imposed by the Public Works Director. The Developer of a Plat assumes all risk involved with grading a site before Final Plat and Street and Utility plan approval. Any changes to the grading of a site including any corresponding costs necessitated by the resolution of any design issues identified during the approval process of the Final Plat and Street and Utility construction plans, are the sole responsibility of the Developer. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this Farmington. day of , 1999, by the City Council of the City of CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor ATTEST: Approved as to form the day of ,1999. City Attorney Published in the Farmington Independent the day of ,1999. 3-22-1 ) 'SECTION: 3.....22- 1: 3-22- 2: 3-22- 3: 3.....22- 4: 3__22- 5: 3-'-22- 6: 3-"-22-- 7: 3-22-8: 3--22__9: 3--22-1 0: 3-22-11 : 3-22-12: , 3-22-13: 3-22-14: 3-22-15: 3.....22-'-16: 3-22-2 CHAPTER 22 EXCAVATIONS AND MINING Purpose and Intent Definitions Permit Required Exemptions From Permit Requirements Applications for Permits; Procedures, Contents of Applications CouncilR~vi~w and Approval of Overall, Plan; Function of Renewable 'Annual Permits Termination of Permit Annual Permits; Renewal; Conditions Issuance.ofPermiflmposes NO. LiabiUtyonCityand Relieves the Permittee of. No Responsibilities, etc. Fees Pel'formanceil3ondorlrf'~vopable Letter of Credit Standards -Extraction Site Location Fencing " ' Appearance and Screening . at the, Extrac:tion Site Operations; . Noise; Ho~rs; Explosives;, Dust; Water Pol.lution; Topsoil Preservation Rehabilitation Standards 3-22-1: PURPOSES AND INTENT: The purpose of this Ordi.hanceis to promot~ the health, safety. and welfare of the community and to establish ,reasonable uniform limitations, standards, safeguards. and controls for excavation and mining within the City. 3~22-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words, terms and phrases shall have the follOWing meanings respectively ascribed to them: MINE or EXCAVATION: A. Any excavation made by the removal of the natural surface of the earth, whether sod, dirt, soil, sand, gravel, stone, or other matter, creating a depression or depressions. These provisions previously supplemented 772:480;883;584:686;789;891 1092 _...~ City o{ Farmington 3-22-2 3-22-4 Mine or Excavation (cont. ) B. Any area where the topsoil or overburden has been removed for the purpose of mining earthly deposits or minerals. yet the area has remained idle since the topsoil removal. C. Any area that is being used for stockpiling, storage, and processing of sand, gravel. black dirt, clay and other minerals. OVERBURDEN: Those materials whiCh. lie b~tween th~ surface of the .,' earth and material deposit to be extracted. REHABILITATION: To renew land toself-sustail1ing long tarrtl use which, is compati~le\Vith contiguolJsland uses., pr~sent ..and., futur~,. iOa.ccordance with the standards set forth in this Chapter. Th,at~o~iian.oftheQverbUrderl Which Hes closesttothe earth'$ surface and !;upports the growth of veg~tatic:m. TOPSOIL.: 3+22-3: PE:RMITREOUIRE[):Except '... asot~erWise provided in this Chapter, it shall be unlawful for anyone to operate a mine or "e)(c~v~te withoulhavingfirstobtained 'aWritt~npenTlif from the ."City ~uthorizi~~ ,the same in ", accordance , with" this/,Chapter. Mining ,. .flnd f;!xcavation ,. op~rations .thflt,. predate. this ,Chapt,er. that do.. not . have a permit s;hall, obtain a. permit.within !;i.x (6) .mpnthsafterthe adoption",otthis Chapter. Current permit holders shall come into compliance with the terms of this, Chapternola.te.rthan the time.their a.f1nualpermitis 'renewed. X' 3-22-4: EXEMPTIONS FROM PERMITREQUIREMt;NT$:Thefollow- Jk ing activities do not require a permit under this Chapter: '/1< (A) Excavation for a,foundation, cellar' or baSement of a building if a, building ,permit has been issued. ~ch~/1 ~/ (B) Grading a lot in conjunction with building if a building permit has been issued. ' (C) Excavation by the Federal, State, County or City government which 1092 City of Farmington ) J( j 3-22-4 (0) (E) (F) (G) 3-22-5 is integral to construction or maintenance of roads, highways or utilities. Curb cuts, utility hookups or street openings for which another permit has been issued by the City. Excavation of less than one thousand (1,000) cubic yards in a calendar year. Excavation of less than one hundred (100) square feet of surface area in a calendar year. Sxcavationor grading for agricultural purposes. (H) Excavation or. grading in accordance with development contract approved under the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Jf the development contract requires that a letter of credit or other security be posted, the letter of credit or other security must be posted before any , ",.., "~ '.",,',., ,.',.,",'",.,' excavation takes place. (Ord. 092-278, 8-34992) 7[< 3-22-5: APPLICA TI()NSrOItPERMJTS; PRQCEDtJRES, CON- TENTS OF APPLICATIONS: (A) AhapPlicationfor .~rnineorexcavati()n perrnitshallbeprocessedin accordance with the same proce(jures and requirements specified in the City Code relating to conditional use permits. However,< the l1earingsl1all . beheld by .t~e ,City Council. following a .. revieYi ,and recommendation from the Planning Commission. ,All applications dealing with land in. flood 'plains~hall als~ pomply with requirements listed in Title 10, Cl1apter10, of this code. (Ord. 096-375, 7-1-1996) (8) An application for a mine or excavatio." perrnit shall contain: 1. The name and address of the operator and owner of the land. 2. The correct legal description of the property where the . activity is proposed to occur. 3. A certified abstract listing the names of all landowners owning property within three hundred fifty feet (350') of the boundary of the property described above. 4. Specifications of the following, using appropriate maps, photographs and surveys: City of Farmmgton 597 3-22-5 3~22-5 (a) The physical relationship of the proposed designated site to the community and existing development; (b) Site topography and natural features including location of watercourses and water bodies; (c) The description and quantity of material to be excavated; (d) The depth of water table$ throughoutthe area. 5. The purpose of the operation. 6. The estimated tilTlerequired to complete the operation. 7. The plan of operation,including processing, '.., natUre, of. the ; \ processing and equipment, location of the plant, sOlJrceofwater, disposal of water and reuse of water. 8. DesiredhalJlroutestoand from the site. 9,.jheplans.for dniinage, water erosion control,s$dirnentation and dust co i"\t ro I. to.. A. rehabilitation. planprovicedfor the Orderly and continuing rehabjlitationofaU disturbed land. Such plan, shall illustrate, using photograph maps and surveys whereappropriate,thef0110wing: fa) The 'contour of land . prior to 'excavation" if, iavaHable, after oOrTIpletionof excavation and 'after completion of rehabilitation; (b) Those are.as olthe site to be used fOfstorage>()f tops'oil and overburden; , (c) A schedule setting forth the timetable for excavation of land lying within th,e extraction facility; (d) A timetable for the rehabilitation of land lying within the excavation facility shall be submitted to the City well in advance of the cornpletionof excavation activities; (e) The slope of all slopes after rehabilitation, based upon proposed land uses, and description of the type and quantity of plantings where revegetation is to be conducted; and 597 City of Farmington 3-22-5 3-22-5 (f) The criteria and standards to be used to achieve final , rehabilitation as well as intermittent stabilization. 11. A statement identifying the applicant's program td insure compliance with the permit conditions, method of resppnse to complaints' and resolving conflicts that may arise as a result of complaints. 294 City of Farmington , 3-22-6 3-22-6: 3-22-8 COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF OVERALL PLAN; FUNCTION OF RENEWABLE ANNUAL PERMITS: (A) A public hearing shall be held before the Council on each permit application. Notice of the hearing shall be published by the Clerk at least ten (10) days before the hearing. The City Council shall review the permit application and shall approve the permit if it is in compliance with this Chapter, the City's Zoning Ordinance, and other applicable laws, ordinance$, and regulations. The Council may attach conditions to the permit '., approval to. promote safety Clnd prt3vent ,nuisance conditions. The rehabilitation plan , shall only be ClPprovedifit is consistent with, the. uses allowed in the Citts Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. (B) I \, 3-22....7: Implemt3ntationoftheoverall plan shall be by m~ansofrel'lt3Y1abJe Clnnu~1 ipermit. . The purpose .otthe renewable permit h~. to .ct$sure compliance withthelongerrctnge overall plan and tor~tain theabiHty to modify existing or. to attach new conditions in a(:cordance with phangingcharacteri$tlcs ,()f " the, site or its surroundlrg$. The, City A" d",m",.ini,s",tra,t,o" r", "a,fte, r, c,o" n,su, I,tati, 0, n" .,."w,i,th ap,p"ropriate C""i,tys".t",a"ff""", "m",.""a",y"" i$$uerenewal, ."liCen$esLJP()rls~tisfactory prootqtqofTlplianceV!ith thisC.haptt3r.)t the9ity,6.gf!1,i2i~tralordenie$..."El.., ren~wal UC811$e,the appliqantmayappealthedt3cisionto the City Cquncilby filinQa notice,ot appeal.with .the CityRlerkwithintefl (10) days afterJheCity Administrator denit3s tht3 permit. TERMINATION OFPEBMIT: (A) The,ilTIatt3fial, exc8vationperfT1it .rnaybetenninatedfqr violEitiqn,of this9hapter, or any conditions of the permit. No permit m~ybe tt3rrninateduntilth~City Council has heldapublichea.ring t() dt3termine, whether. the ,'. permit shall be terminateti.\ at Ylhich .' time the operatorshallbeaffonjed an opportunity to contest the termincttipn. The. City Council may e.stablishce.rtainconditions,which.ifnot compllt3d with, will re$u!tini.mmediate suspension of operations until the public hearing to consitiertermination of the permitcan,be held. (B) It shall, be unlawful to. conduct mineral' extraction or excavatibnafter a permit has been terminated. 3,-22-8: ANNUAL. PERMITS; RENEWAL; CONDITIONS: (A) Application for renewal of an annual permit shall be made sixty (60) days prior to the expiration date. If application for renewal is not 1092 City of Farmington 3-22-8 3-22-11 A) made within the required time, all operations shall be terminated and reinstatement of the permit may be granted only upon compliance with the procedures set forth in this Chapter for an original application. (B) A permit may be approved or renewed subject to compliance with conditions in addition to those set forth in this Chapter when such conditions are reasonable and necessary to ensure compliance with the requirementsandpIJrpose of this Chapter. When such conditions are establiShed. they shall ,be set forth specifically in the ,permit. Conditions, may,among. other" matters, limit the size,kind or character of the proposed, operation, , ,require the constructionaf structures, require, thestaging9f extraction .over a time period. require the, alteration of. the site design to ensure compliance with the standards. require. the provision of ,a performance bond by the operator to ensure compliance with these regulations intl1isChapter '" or other similar requirements. 3-22--9: ISSUANCEOFiPe~MIT1MPOSESNotIA~ILITYPNCITY AND ' RELIEVE~PEFUv1I.TTEEOF NORE$PONSI~ILITIE$, eTc.: Neither the JSSIJancf;tota '. p~rrnit under ,this ,Chapter, nor 9Qmpliance "with.thecondi.tionsthereoforwiththeprovisions ofJhis Chaptc:ushall relieve any person frOm any responsibility otherwise imposed by 'law for damaQeto. persons or property;norshal.Ltheissuance of any permit under this Chapter serve to <imPose a liability onme · City, its officers or, employees for any Injury or damage tapersons. or property. A permitissued pursuant to this Chapter does not relieye,.th~permittee, of the responsibility of securing and corllpIYing""it~anYQtherpermit WtliCh may be reqIJiredby any other law,ordinanceorregulation. 3--22-10: FEES: ..ftJ. schedule of feeS for the examination ,afld approval.of FlPplications for permits under this Chapter and theinspec.tion Of operations , for . compliance with ,the " conditions . of it his Chapter and ,the permit '.shall be determined by resolution of the City Council, which may, from time to time. 'change such schedule. Prior to the approval and issuance or renewal, of any permit under thi.sChapter, such fees Shall be paid to the City and deposited to the credit of the General Fund. 3....22....11: PERFORMANCE BOND OR ,IRREVOCABLE lETTER OF CREDIT: ,Prior to,the approval and issuance of a permit, there shall be executed by the operator and submitted to the City Administrator,- an agreement to construct such required improvements, to dedicate such 1092 City of Farmington ) 3-22-11 3-22-14 property or easements, if any, to the City and to comply with such conditions as may have been established by the City Council. Such agreement shall be accompanied by bond with surety or condition acceptable to the City Administrator in the amount of the established costs of complying with the agreement. The aforesaid agreement, bond or letter of credit shall be provided for guaranteeing completion and compliance with the conditions set forth in the permit within the time to be approved by the City Council. The adequacy, conditions and acceptability or any bond or letter of credit hereunder shall be determined by the City Administrator., The adequacy of the bond, or letter of credit shall ,be reviewed ,annually by the City. The City may dir~ctthe amount of the bond or letter of creditb~ increased to reflect inflation or changed conditions. 3:-22-'-12: STANDARDS-EXTRACTION SITE LOCATION: Operations permitted, under this' Chapter shall not . be. conducted within: " (A) Fifty feet ,(50') of an existing street or highway; (J:H Thirty feet (30') of the right of way 01l;in eXistil1QP4blicutility; ......: ,"", ..... ., (C) FiftYfElef(50') ofthebijul1daryofanyizone Wheresuchopetati(,')l1s arenotpermitted;(Jr (D) Thirtyfeet(30')Ofth.eboundaryof ,an adjoining property not in mining use; or as directed by the City Council. 3-'22-43: FI:NClr\.JG:p\jringoPEtfa.tionswnich ha.vereceivedaperrnit under "this.' Chapter; >any'., area where · coHections of. water.are onea.ndone"halffee~(tY2')'.' ind~pth, orm()re, Or whEtre~xcavl;ition.sI9pE!S are steeper ',. than one1oot vertical to one andone..hall feet horizontal (1: 11/2), and any other areas where obvious danger to the public exists, shall be fenced when such . a ,situation hasexi~ted orwm exist fora period of five (5) working days or. longer. The City Engineer . shan, review · such fencing to assure its 'adequacy. He may waive this requirementorrequir,e additional mel;isures based on his judgment and the characteristics .01tl1e particular instances. As an ,.alternative" the City. Engineer may require perimeter fencing of the entire extraction site. 3-22-t4: APPEARANCE AND SCREENING AT THE EXTRACTION SITE: The following standards are required at the extraction site of any operation permitted under this Chapter: 1092 City of Farmzngton 3-22-14 3-22-15 (A) Machinery shall be kept in good repair. (8) Abandoned machinery, inoperable equipment and rubbish shall be removed from the site regularly. (C) All buildings and equipment that have not been used for a period of one year shall be removed from the site. (0) All equipment and, temporary structures shall be removed and dismantled ngtlater than ninety (90) days after termination of the extraction operation and expiration of the permit. (E) Where practical,stockpilesofoverburden and materials ',shall be used to screen the extraction. The,' side slopes of such stockpiles shall notex(:eed three to one (3:1). (F) \ The perimeter of the site shall be planted Or otherwise screened when suchisdetermined by the City Councilto'be necessary. (G)Existingtreean~ ..,groundcover.shall be preserv~dto]heextent feE:lsible,m~intained'" and. supplemented by .selective/ cutting, transplanting of trees, shrubsiand other ground cover along all setback areas. ' 3":'22---15: OPERATIONS; NOISE; HOVRS; EXPLOSIVES; ,DU~T; WATER. "PO~LUTI()N; TOPSOIL., PRESERVATION:, T~e follpvving operatinQ~tandardsshall'b~observed 'at the extraction site of ,any operation permitted under this' Chapter: (A) The . maximum. noi~elevel at meper'm~terof the $ite Sl'1all be within the Hmits, set by the Minnesota Pollution Control' Agency and the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. (8) Extraction and hauling operations shall be performed during only those times established by the City Council as part of the permit. (C) Operators shall utilize all practical means to eliminate vibration from equipment operation on' adjacent property . (0) Operators shall comply with all applicable City, County, State and Federal regulations for the protection of water quality, including the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Federal Environmental Protection Agency regulations for the protection of water quality. No 1092 City 0;' Farmington 3-22-15 3-22-16 D) waste products or process residue shall be deposited in any lake. stream or natural drainage system. All waste water shall pass through a sediment basin before drainage into a stream. "' (E) All topsoil shall be retained at the site until complete rehabilitation of the site has taken place according to the rehabilitation plan. (F) Operators shall use all practical means to reduce the amount of dust, smoke and fumes caused by the operations. 3-22-16: REI1ABILlTATIONSTANOAROS: The' following rehabilitation standards shall apply to the site of any operation permitted under this Chapter. (A) Rehabilitation shall be a continuing operation occurring, as quickly as 'possible after the extraction operation has 'moved 'sufficiently' into another part of the extrac m site. (13) All banks and slopes Shall be left.in accordance with the rehapilb- tationplan submitted with the permit application. (C) Slopes, Qraded ,areas and .backfUl areas.shall ,. be surfaced ,., with adequate topsoil~osecureand hold ground> cover. Such ground cover shall be tended as necessary until it is self..sustained. (0) AU water areas .re.sulting from excavation shallbeelirTlinatedupqn rehabilitation of . the. site.., In uniqueinstanceswhf3re the City Council has reviewed, proposals f,or water bodies.at th~ tiflle . qf approval, of the overall plan and has determined that such, would beapproprhlte as an qpenspape qrrecreationalamenityin s~bsegu~nt reusEtpf .the site, water bodies maybe permitted. ' . . ' (E) No .partof the rehabilitation area which is plal'lned, for uses other than open space or agriculture shall be at an elevation lower than the minimum required for connection to a sanitary or storm Sewer. (Ord. 092-278, 8..3-92) 1092 v'.,.. City of Farmington City of Farmington 325 O~k Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 1c1/; FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrat~ Robin Roland, Finance Director TO: SUBJECT: Authorize Negotiations Township Fire Contracts DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION At the April 24, 1999 Council Goal Setting Workshop, Council agreed to revising the Township Fire Contracts to address additional factors in the charging formula. DISCUSSION The formula currently used to determine charges for fire and rescue services to Castle Rock, Eureka and Empire townships has been in place since before 1981. 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 (man hours and equipment hours) and the tax capacity valuations for the covered areas, Representatives of the townships have expressed an interest in redefining the formula to include other possible components, such as population. City staff is interested in negotiating and possibly redefining the formula to best address future acquisition of fire equipment and facilities. BUDGET IMPACT Fees paid to the City of Farmington by the townships for the fire services provided are budgeted at $100,000 annually. ACTION REQUIRED Authorize the Finance Director to negotiate with township representatives to modify the fire contract charging formula. J?2RJ . Robin Roland Finance Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us I c1 C!- TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator ~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: HRA Board Composition DATE: September 20, 199'9 INTRODUCTION 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. DISCUSSION The City Council adopted the attached ordinance amendment on January 20, 1998 which reduced the number of Councilmembers that serve on the HRA Board from five to two. This amendment resulted in three citizens being appointed to the Board to staggered terms initially and five year terms thereafter. The Council also indicated that this change was intended to phase in the transition and that it was not advisable to replace the entire Board with new citizen appointees. The issue for Council's consideration at this point is whether it wishes to further modify the composition of the Board to include additional citizen appointees. The options would be to reduce the Board positions held by the Mayor and/or Council from two to one or two to zero. Staff would respectfully suggest the Council consider retaining at least one seat on the HRA Board to facilitate open communications between the two bodies. BUDGET IMP ACT None ACTION REQUESTED Council consideration and direction regarding the current ordinance which specifies the composition of the HRA Board and what changes, if any it wishes to make. Respectli By sub ~ //~ " ~-d ~ avid L. Olson Community Development Director cc: HRA Boardmembers CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 097-410 Amending Ttitle 2, Cbapter 8, Section 3 - Housing and Redevelopment Autbority THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: Title 2, Chapter 8, Section 3 - Housing and Redevelopment Authority - shall be amended by adding (underlined) and deleting (~) as follows: 2-8-3: Criteria Adopted: The following criteria are hereby adopted: (A) Members; Officers: The authority shall consist of five (5) members who shall choose from among themselves a chairperson and a secretary. (B) Designated Seats: ~ Two seats shall be held by sitting members of the City Council. The remaining seats shall be filled by citizens appointed by the Mayor and 'Wproved by the City Council. (C) Qualifications: Members shall be citizens of the United States and residents of the City. (D) Term~ of Office: ~ terms of Councilmembers shall be concurrent with City Council terms and shall expire at the same time as the members' Council term of office. The remaining three (3) members will be appointed to one (1). two (2), and three (3) terms initially. Subsequent appointments to the three (3) seats filled bv citizens will be for five (5) year terms. (E) Compensation: The authority shall establish the compensation to be paid members and the reimbursement for personal expenses within the limits prescribed in M.S..-\., 462,141 Minnesota Statutes 469 011. (F) Oath of Office: Prior to assuming the duties to which first appointed, each member shall take an oath of office. SECTION II: After adoption, signing and attestation, this ordinance shall be published one time in the official publication of the City and shall be in effect on and after the day following such publication. Enacted ~nd ordained the 15th day of December, 1997. SEAL City of Farmington Attest: ~ /1-1, J~~ ~(]~~ Mayor Approved as to form tbeJ.L5TL day of CLe-"..._ , 19..L[. "] /? / '; ( ~ /., i-<"A ~ ' . '- '-- ,'./ Ci Administrator ~ 17~ City or~ --_...~ Published in the Farmington Independent the Jqttcray of r...... '~~ ,1998' . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ct.farmington.mn.us 13CL TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: SUBJECT: CSAH 31 Streetlight Concerns DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION At the September 7, 1999 City Council meeting, the Council inquired as to the possibility of installing street lights along CSAH 31 in the vicinity of 1 87th Street. DISCUSSION Dakota County does not participate in the costs of street lights that are not part of a signal project. Street lights that the City wishes to install along CSAH 31 will need to be installed as a City project, funded by the City. In addition, the City will need to get approval from Dakota County to install street lights along the County highway. Staff is continuing to research this issue with the County and will update the Council as information becomes available. BUDGET IMPACT Unknown at this time. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ~/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.d.farmington.mn.us )/j TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator W Lee Smick, AICP y..(J Planning Coordinator FROM: SUBJECT: City Comprehensive Plan - Met Council Review Update DATE: September 20, 1999 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington received a letter from the Metropolitan Council on August 19, 1999 concerning the completeness of the Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update. The Metropolitan Council has requested that additional information be provided to certain sections of the plan before an in-depth formal review may commence. DISCUSSION The plan was submitted to the Metropolitan Council on July 31, 1999. When plans are received, a principal reviewer distributes copies of the plan to the technical staff for their initial completeness evaluation. The attached letter indicates that there are minor additions that need to be made to the Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update before an in-depth formal review of the plan may proceed. The following sections of the plan will require additional information: aviation, housing, transportation, surface water management, sewers, water supply plan and land use and implementation. The information required is currently being compiled and addressed by the Planning and Engineering staff and will be ready for submittal to the Metropolitan Council within a couple of weeks. However, the additional information required for the sewer chapter will likely take more time to complete the requested information. Staff will continue to update the City Council concerning the progress of meeting the completeness review. Once the additional information is compiled and included in the plan, staff will submit the revised plan to the Metropolitan Council. ACTION REQUESTED Information only. Respectfully submitted, /-:}~ r /) C-/?~ ~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator ~ Metropolitan Council ~ Working for the Region, Planning for the Future August 19, 1999 Mr. David L. Olson, Community Development Director CITY OF FARMINGTON 325 Oak Street Farmington MN 55024 Re: Comprehensive Plan Update -- City of Farmington Metropolitan Council District 16 Referral File No. 18022-1 Dear Mr. Olson: The Metropolitan Council staff has reviewed the materials submitted for the comprehensive plan update for the City of Farmington. We have found that some parts of the proposed comprehensive plan are incomplete, and we have suspended our in-depth review of the plan until we receive the information identified below. When plans come in to the Council for review, they are assigned to a principal reviewer who distributes copies of the plan to technical staff for their initial completeness evaluation and for formal review of the plan from their particular perspectives. Technical staff members reviewing plan elements represent each of the regional system planning areas: aviation, parks and open space, transportation and wastewater services. In addition, other staff members review the plans against environmental and housing policies of the Council. The principal reviewer coordinates those reviews, evaluates the plan against the statutory requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and the Regional Blueprint, and is responsible for writing up the review report on the plan that goes to the Council for action. The following are the completeness comments received on the Farmington plan update from the Council's plan review staff. Those staff members who have determined a portion of the plan to be incomplete are identified and their phone numbers provided in case you need to call them for clarification. Aviation (Chauncey Case 651-602-1724) The City of Farmington is within the influence area of Airlake Airport. The City is affected by the need to protect the regions general airspace from potential obstructions; the need to protect the Airlake airport airspace through participation on the joint airport zoning board; and protection of the "Farmington VOR", The city is not affected by any planning considerations concerning heliports or seaplanes, General Airspace Protection Protection of the region's airspace resource is part of the Aviation Policy Plan, The Farmington Plan has adequately addressed this element. Airlake Airport The Airlake airport is a reliever airport in the regional airport system and the Council approved the airports Long Term Comprehensive Plan (L TCP) in 1998, That plan includes expansion of a new south hangar building area, existing runway extension, and identification of a future crosswind runway expansion requiring land acquisition in Eureka Twp.. The city is not affected by aircraft noise impacts, 230 East Fifth Street St, Paul. Minnesota 55101-1626 (651)602-1000 Fax 602-1550 IDD/TIY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 602-1888 An Equal Opportunity Employer - 2 - runway land use safety zones, or other existing/planned airport development and operations. This situation is appropriately recognized in the city Plan. Off-Airport Aviation Facilities The Council has a concern that key parts of the regional aviation system that are located off-airport be adequately protected; one of these facilities is the Farmington VOR site. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) operates a radio navigation facility (Farmington VOR), near the intersection of 220th St. W. & Essex Ave. in Farmington & Eureka Township (see attached map), The navigation facility and an area within a 1,000 foot radius is usually controlled by the FAA under a lease agreement with the affected property owner(s). No structures should be permitted in this area. Other land use development, within approximately a half-mile radius of the navigation facility, can cause reflections of the radio signal, adversely affecting air navigation. The Farmington comprehensive plans proposed one- per-forty density in the rural area will help minimize the potential land use and airspace conflicts, Land use in this area should be conditioned on completion of an airspace review as discussed below, For implementing a protection policy for the VOR facility the comprehensive plan should include a graphic, and text reflecting the following action. Any proposer of development within the navigation facility protection area should be required to fill out and submit FAA Form 7460-2 requesting an airspace study of the proposal. Assistance with this form is available by contacting the FAA's Minneapolis Airports District Office at 612-713-4350. The Farmington Plan is not complete for review until protection of the VOR is addressed. Housing (Guy Peterson 651-602-1418) This section of the plan was found to be incomplete for formal review. Although it is unlikely that all residential development will occur at the maximum allowable density in each density category, it cannot be presumed that Farmington will not be able to achieve the housing diversification goals represented in its LCA housing goals. There are, however, two changes or additions that should be made to the plan to fulfill the Land Planning Act expectations regarding affordable housing. . Ideally, the housing element should include the specific LCA goals negotiated with the Council in 1995, and amended in 1998, as demonstrated by the enclosed table. But if this is not done, the plan should at a minimum be amended to specifically say that the city's affordable and life-cycle goals are its LeA goals and they should be referenced in an appendix or addendum. . Secondly, there appears to be no reference to the Dakota County HRA as the major, if not only, provider of housing assistance and rehabilitation programs in the city. The implementation section of the plan should also include acknowledgement that the City is a partner and collaborator with the County HRA in providing housing resources in the city and that the County's LCA Cluster Action Plan is the housing funding assistance plan for the city. Transportation (Kevin Roggenbuck 651-602-1728) This section of the plan was found to be incomplete for formal review. Two issues have been identified: . The plan does not include a forecast of population, households and employment by T AZ, nor does it provide a 2020 traffic forecast based on future development in Farmington, The method of traffic forecasting used in the plan bears no relation to future growth and development in Farmington, which is where future traffic will come from, - 3 - . The comprehensive plan includes a roadway functional classification map; however, there are some differences between the "A" minor arterial system shown in the city's plan and the system adopted by the Transportation Advisory Board. Transportation staff would like an opportunity to discuss these issues with Farmington. Parks and Open Space (phyllis Hanson 651-602-1566) This section of the plan was found to be complete for formal review. The City has done an excellent job of inventorying and planning for future parks in their community. Surface Water Management (Jack Frost 651-602-1078) This section of the plan wasfound to be incompletefor review and cannot be formally reviewed until the information identified below is provided or a date certain within the next several months can be identified when the ordinance will be adopted. . Page 109 of the plan indicates that the City has adopted a Title 7 Chapter 3 ordinance to manage Individual Sewer Treatment Systems (ISTS) within the City. The plan also states that the City has a three-year inspection program and has adopted 7080, etc. The Metropolitan Council would like to be provided with a copy ofthe City's ordinance managing ISTS. . The plan states on page 56 that the Metropolitan Council acted on the City's Local Water Management Plan (L WMP) in August 1997. However, that action recommended that the City adopt the appropriate ordinance to complete the LWMP. Again on June 22, 1998, the Metropolitan Council asked the City to send its local ordinances implementing its L WMP and the sediment and erosion control ordinance. To date, the Council has not received any ordinances indicating implementation of the L WMP or adoption of the Council's Interim Strategy for Nonpoint Source Pollution. Sewers (Don Bluhm 651-602-1116) This section of the plan was found to be incompletefor review. The following information should be submitted: . The plan identifies the 1996 Comprehensive Sewer Policy Planas part of the submittal. This document no longer represents our understanding of the sewer needs for the City and will need to be updated. Examples: the plan defines the sewer service area for the connection point to our interceptor at point 107 as DI-6,10. It is our understanding that this area has changed. The timing in the updated plan, Table 10.5 is also in error. The proposed trunk sanitary sewer map shows sewer services being planned to serve the City of Lakeville. It is our understanding that Lakeville is no longer proposing to have the City of Farmington provide them with this service, The sewer maps, text and appendices should be changed to show the proposed sizing of the trunk sewer system as currently understood. . The Metropolitan Council has established the following III goal for the City: The ratio of the maximum monthly sewage flow to the minimum monthly sewage flow should not exceed 1,66, The plan should acknowledge the goal and develop a five-year plan to reach this goal. . The plan indicates that the City has a proposed annexation area to the northeast and that they will require a fifth connection point to the metropolitan interceptor system. Neither report provides any information on this area. What is the proposed timing? How will the flow projections for the City - 4- for the next 20 years be affected? The MCES is currently studying the need for the next expansion of the Empire WWTP. This information may be critical to our study. Water Supply Plan (Jack Frost 651-602-1078) This section of the plan was found to be incomplete for formal review. The Metropolitan Council would like a copy of the City's water conservation plan adopted in 1997 and an update on its water supply data from 1996 to 1998 that was not included in the original water plan. Land Use and Implementation (patrick Peters 651-602-1617) This section of the plan was found to be incomplete for review. The following items need to be addressed prior to initiating formal review (referenced pages from Local Planning Handbook): . The plan does not contain a map of existing land use. (pg. 3.2) . Table 4.1 identifies the land use types and acres devoted to each type through year 2020, but it is unclear whether the acreages are gross or net. Acreages for each land use type should reflect both gross and net acreage, with net acreage excluding wetlands, parks, steep slopes and ROW in excess of 100' in width. . While the plan includes a MUSA Staging Plan table (Table 4.1), a 2020 Land Use Inventory table (Table 3.3), an Existing Land Use Inventory within Existing City Limits table (Table 3.1), as well as statements in the text regarding future land use demands and supplies, the plan does not provide information, such as is required in Worksheets A and B of the Local Planning Handbook, in a format that is conducive to accurate analysis of the land supply and future residential density. An updated version of Worksheet B is enclosed for the City's use. (pp. 3.2-3.5) Once the items identified above are received and evaluated, we will notify the city that our review of the plan has been restarted, and the 60-day review period will then apply. To facilitate your response to the outstanding issues, please contact the technical reviewers with any questions or clarifications, Supplemental material identified in this letter should be sent directly to Patrick Peters, principal reviewer, at the Mears Park Centre address, ~ Thomas McElveen, Director Housing and Redevelopment Enclosures cc: John Conzemius, Metropolitan Council District 16 Richard Thompson, Supervisor, Comprehensive Planning Patrick Peters, Sector Representative/Principal Reviewer, Office of Comprehensive Planning Technical Reviewers: Chauncey Case, Guy Peterson, Kevin Roggenbuck, Phyllis Hanson, Jack Frost, Don Bluhm il1l . ~ E. ' :~!: ~ M ~ ~ " e ~ ~ ... ~ : 0 g U 11'\ 0 - fC\ N ~ r-- 11'\ cs 0 ~ r-- N - ~ ~ - N " " M ... ~ '$. '$. ~ g ... . U 11'\ 00 00 0 ..... ~ ,.... V'I = 00 ,.... ,.... ~ N "l:t , , , - U ~ N ' \0 0 . , Z \0 ,.... ,.... r-- ,.... - . N - ~ 00 = \0 '-' . >< ~ e " '$. " "$. ~ ... z "$. "l:t g g - N ,.... ~ N ..... \C; - ..... ~ 0'1 r-- N V'I r-- N - - u - "i .c , u l'! u ." ~ "i ] .c ~ u ~ u - ~ 0 co l:I c ~ 0 "Vi ... ~ " b t:. . .. .e- c 5 ~ l:I 0 ~ .c Z ... ~ ~ --.: . u c; - u u ~ ~ .. ~ ~ tiO .. c c :; " ~ ::!: ~ f- ~ - - ., - .0 - u C'C ~ ~ 'E u - WI ~ ~ c - ., < ..J Q