The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09.21.98 Council Packet COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR September 21, 1998 6:30 P.M. CHAMBER/COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVEAGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Proclaim Minnesota Manufacturer's Week October 12-16, 1998 b) Proclaim Pollution Prevention Week September 21-27, 1998 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes 9/8/98 (Regular) b) Approve City Participation in County Auction c) School and Conference Request - Police Department d) Appointment Recommendation - Public Works Department e) Authorize 1998 Audit Engagement f) Capital Outlay Purchase - Fire Department g) Authorize Facility Improvements - Park & Rec Department h) Authorize Tower Removal- Park & Rec Department i) Adopt Resolution - Participation in Liveable Communities Act - 1999 j) Approve Change Order - Pool Bath House/Rambling River Park Restroom k) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Approve Conditional Use Permit - Nelsen Hills 7th Addition Grading Permit 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Submittal of 1999-2003 CIP b) Adopt Resolution - Accept U.S. Justice Department COPS Grant c) Adopt Resolution - East Farmington PUD Amendment d) St. Michael's City Fee Waiver Requests 1. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Set 1998 Sealcoat Assessment Hearing Date b) Prairie Creek 3rd Addition Citizen Petition (Supplemental) c) Ash Street Project Committee Update Action Taken 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Sanitary Sewer Rate Analysis 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN Sa- " City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager SUBJECT: Proclaiming October 12-16, 1998, Manufacturers Week DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION Minnesota Public Officials are asked to recognize the importance of manufacturing in our economy and to pay tribute to the thousands of Minnesota Manufacturers by proclaiming October 12-16, 1998 as Minnesota Manufacturer's Week. DISCUSSION Manufacturing has the largest total payroll of any business sector in Minnesota and produces $27.1 billion for the state economy. Manufacturing exports brought nearly $9.53 billion into the Minnesota economy in 1997 and provides high skill, high wage jobs contributing to Minnesota's high standard of living along with providing nearly $216 million in corporate income taxes. BUDGET IMPACT None ACTION ReQUIRED Adopt the attached proclamation. Respectfully submitted, (j/iLu.-- ~.~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Service Manager Manufacturing has the largest total payroll of any business sector in Minnesota. Providing $16 billion in 1996 wages, and Manufacturing produces $27.1 billion for the state economy and is the largest single share (19.2%) of our gross product, and Manufacturing exports brought nearly $9.53 billion into the Minnesota economy in 1997, and Manufacturing provides high skill, high wage jobs which significantly contribute to Minnesota's high standard of living and economic vitality; and Whereas: Manufacturing contributed nearly $216 million in corporate income taxes in Minnesota, more than any other business sector, and almost 28 percent of total corporate income taxes in 1998; Whereas: Whereas: Whereas: Whereas: Minnesota Manufacturers Week ~\\nTA ,'\. ~ N4# Q"" ~ " c:::::: =a ..... =t:r ~ ~~ '\~ ~ ~ ~ - OCTOBm 12-16 -(--9 . ,\\\\RLO 98 cP + /./ ;JIJ~ Now Therefore, I, Gerald Ristow ,Mayor of Farmington Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the week of October 12,16, to be City of Farmington , Minnesota Manufacturers Week In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Great Seal of the City of Farmington Minnesota to be affixed at the City Office this Twelfth day of October, OneThousand nine hundred and ninety,eight. ~ (;JJ;'..2J Mayor City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.c:i.farmington.mn.us 5b TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Proclaim Pollution Prevention Week September 21-27,1998 DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION & DISCUSSION September 21-27, 1998 has been declared Minnesota Pollution Prevention Week. To promote this, there was a Pollution Prevention Day with speakers and entertainment for the fourth graders of the Farmington School District on September 16. ACTION REQUESTED Proclaim the week of September 21-27, 1998 to be Pollution Prevention Week in Farmington. Respectfully submitted, ---L- \=SsSl James Bell Parks and Recreation Director .. City of Farmington Proclamation WHEREAS: The people of Farmington take great pride in our City's natural beauty and sup- port a clean and safe environment; and WHEREAS: Pollution prevention, also known as source reduction, is a progressive approach that eliminates or reduces pollution at its source; and WHEREAS: Pollution prevention is the most environmentally sound method of protecting our natural resources; and WHEREAS: Pollution prevention can increase industrial and resource efficiency, save partici- pating organizations time and money, and also create a more sustainable economy; and WHEREAS: Pollution prevention measures can improve environmental conditions and the health and safety of workers in the workplace while increasing commercial com- petitiveness; and WHEREAS: Through increased use of pollution prevention, Farmington can meet the chal- lenge of having an ecologically healthy community and a vigorous business envi- ronment for its citizens; and WHEREAS: Pollution Prevention Week will be observed by state governments and other organizations throughout the nation and this recognition is an opportunity for government to work together with business, industry, environmental groups, community organizations, and citizens for a prosperous and sustainable future; NOW, THEREFORE, I, GERALD "DIGGER" RISTOW, Mayor of the City of Farmington, do hereby proclaim September 21-27,1998 to be Pollution Prevention Week in the City of Farmington and encourage all citizens to join in this observance. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Farmington to be affixed on the twenty-first day of September, 1998. L1~ {]~ Mayor 7~ COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR September 8,1998 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, Fitch, Gamer, Strachan None City Administrator Erar, Attorney Joel Jamnik, City Management Team 4. APPROVE A GENDA MOTION by Gamer, second by Cordes to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS Paul Speiker was recognized for 25 years of dedicated service with the City of Farmington in the Solid Waste Division of the Parks and Recreation Department. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Fitch, second by Gamer to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes 8/17/98 (Regular) and 8/19/98 (Special) b) Adopted RESOLUTION R82-98 accepting Police Department donation c) Adopted RESOLUTION R83-98 approving application for landfill abatement funds d) Adopted RESOLUTION R84-98 accepting private development project closeout e) Adopted RESOLUTION R85-98 accepting Troy Hills Development Contract Addendum f) Approved contract - water meter reading services g) Approved school and conference request - Community Development h) Accepted revision to Ice Rental Contract i) Approved bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT Council Minutes (Regular) September 8, 1998 Page 2 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Acknowledge Development Approval Process - Revision The Planning Division has revised the Development Approval Process Policy in order to provide a more streamlined process for reviewing development plans and has created a detailed step-by-step approach to track the development through the process. The following revisions were made to the Revised Development Approval Process Policy: 1) The process is divided into two options. Option 1 is when the preliminary and final plat is filed separately. Option 2 is when the preliminary and final plat is filed simultaneously. City staff determines which option can be pursued. 2) For all submittals to the City, including schematic plan, preliminary plat, final plat or other required documents, City staff will inform the Developer by fax and mail if any items are missing from the submittal within 5 working days after the submission. 3) Any required information such as an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, Floodplain Study, MUSA approval or other information required by outside agencies should begin before or shortly after the schematic plan submittal and must be completed before the preliminary plat is scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission. 4) When the preliminary and final plat is filed separately, the time frame for review by City staff for a schematic plan is three weeks. City staff has five weeks to review the preliminary plat and schedule a public hearing at the Planning Commission and staff has three to four weeks to review the final plat and schedule a meeting at the Planning Commission. 5) When a preliminary and final plat is filed simultaneously, the time frame for review by City staff for a schematic plan is three weeks. City staffhas five weeks to review the preliminary and final plat and schedule a public hearing at the Planning Commission and staff has four weeks to review the preliminary and final plat and schedule a meeting at the City Council. 6) Engineering construction plans need to be substantially complete as determined by the City Engineer before the City Council reviews preliminary and final plat. 7) The Developer has 75 days after final plat approval to record the plat. 8) The Developer may begin grading of the site once the Development Contract is executed. No building permits will be issued for construction of any structure on any lot on any plat until the City has received evidence ofthe plat being recorded by Dakota County. The purpose of these revisions is to develop a good working relationship between the City and the Developer so both parties have the necessary information when needed. This process has been reviewed by the BA TC. b) Proposed Orderly Annexation Agreement Empire Township - Set Workshop Date The Farmington/Empire Joint Planning Board has recommended that a draft orderly annexation agreement be explored to address joint planning and annexation issues. Dean Johnson, the Planning Consultant for Empire has prepared a draft agreement to identify areas that are appropriate. This includes the area east ofTH 3, south of County Road 66 and north of TH 50 up to one mile east of the current City limits. In Council Minutes (Regular) September 8, 1998 Page 3 exchange for this area being identified as an orderly annexation area, the remainder of the Township would be designated as Commercial Agriculture with the exceptions noted in paragraph 6 of the agreement for a period of 10 years. Discussions have also included the expansion of the area identified as the Rural Center by the Township. This expansion could include an additional 160-300 homes. This is an attempt by the Township to bring the agreement up for review by the City Council. The Township is waiting for the outcome to proceed with their comprehensive plan process. MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes to set a Council Workshop date for September 16,1998 at 7:00 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Public Towing Contract - Set Workshop Date In January 1998, the City Council awarded the municipal towing contract. At that time the Council requested that a workshop be set up later in the year for the purpose of discussing the issues surrounding that contract. The issues involved in the discussion would include the following: 1) Location of contractor and impound lot. 2) Duration of contract. 3) Language changes. MOTION by Gamer, second by Fitch to set a Council Workshop date for September 23, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. d) Citizen Petition Oak Street Parking Request The City received a petition from the commercial residents along the south side of the 200 block of Oak Street in downtown Farmington. The petition requests that 15- minute parking restrictions be imposed from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. along the south side of the 200 block of Oak Street. Business owners would like this time limit to satisfy the needs of their customers. It is anticipated that 4-5 signs would be installed for a total estimated cost of approximately $175.00. Funding for these signs is available in the 1998 budget. MOTION by Gamer, second by Strachan authorizing the parking restrictions as requested and order the placement of signs describing those restrictions. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. e) Dakota County of the Future - Conference Summary A report was given to Council which is the culmination of a long-term effort to identify issues affecting the future vision of Dakota County from a variety of socio- political and economic perspectives. One significant finding indicates that the growth of the labor force in the County will actually be higher than the actual population growth. The implications of this finding suggest the need for regional transportation access, affordable housing opportunities, and continuing emphasis on work force training and educational opportunities. f) Castle Rock Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Agency Clarifications An article in the August 20, 1998 Farmington Independent inaccurately stated the City's actions regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Council Minutes (Regular) September 8, 1998 Page 4 proposed CommerciallIndustrial area in Castle Rock Township. The article indicated that the City requested the Met Council extend the review period for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to October 9, 1998. The fact is the City Council authorized comments to be submitted to the Met Council on July 6, 1998 which stated the City's concerns with the proposed amendment. No request was made by the city relative to extending the review period. Other issues identified in the article relative to comments made by Township representatives regarding reasons for the delay and approvals by outside agencies are also questionable. The City has been informed by the Met Council that a number of issues are still under review. The Met Council extended the period by which they are required to make a decision to allow additional time for several issues to be further clarified. This clarification was published in the August 27, 1998 Farmington Independent. g) Accept Community Profile and Comprehensive Visioning Statement Steve Schwanke ofRLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. gave a presentation on the Community Profile and Comprehensive Visioning Element. He discussed the visioning process. The seven vision points are as follows: 1) Downtown, 2) Connection, 3) Value Received for Taxes, 4) CommerciallIndustrial Base, 5) Quality/Controlled Growth, 6) Public/Semi-Public Uses, 7) Environmental, 8) Planning for a Greater Community. The presentation concluded with a determination of "Where do we go from here." The City Council along with the Planning Commission will play an important role through the Comprehensive Planning process by providing review and recommendations of each of the Comprehensive Plan elements within the next few months. MOTION by Gamer, second by Cordes to accept the Community Profile and Community Visioning Elements for the Comprehensive Plan. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Hickory Street Storm Water Drainage Project - Feasibility Report Council had authorized staff to review the feasibility of installing a storm water lift station on Hickory Street. Council was given drawings and cost estimates for a storm sewer lift station that would pump water from Hickory Street to the median in Truck Highway 3. From a construction standpoint, the lift station is feasible. Based on the City's special assessment policy, the cost and implications of the lift station and related improvements, it is staffs opinion that the project is not financially feasible from an economic standpoint. The project as proposed was tabled by Council due to cost and other undesirable project elements. Council requested that the entire project, referred to as the Henderson Storm Sewer Project, be revisited in the 1999-2003 CIP. b) Adopt Ordinance - Amending Gambling Regulations At the August 3, 1998 Council Meeting, the City Council requested that the City Code be updated to reflect current state law concerning lawful gambling. Pursuant to Council Minutes (Regular) September 8, 1998 Page 5 the City Council's request, a draft of a proposed ordinance revising the City Code concerning lawful gambling was submitted for review by the Council. Staff proposes to delete the following Code provisions that are more restrictive than state law: 1) Requiring a separate surety bond to the City as well as to the state. 2) Prohibiting the payment of compensation to gambling employees. 3) Requiring duplicate records and reports. 4) Limiting the maximum daily total prizes to $1,000, individual pull- tab winners to $150, and annual prize limits to $35,000. Staffis proposing the following two new or additional requirements on gambling organizations operating within the City: 1) Require payment of a nominal investigation fee for premises permits. State law authorizes a maximum fee of $1 00, but the Police Chief has indicated that the Department should be able to conduct the investigation for $50. This new fee will not affect organizations currently operating within the City unless they propose to move their activities to a new location. 2) State law authorizes local governments to adopt limited restrictions on where the proceeds of charitable gambling are spent. It was suggested that a 50% trade area spending requirement be adopted. This requirement could potentially affect organizations currently operating within the City. Staff suggested that a meeting be scheduled with gambling organizations and that the Council delay final adoption of the ordinance until the September 21, 1998 or October 5, 1998 Council Meeting. c) Middle Creek Sanitary Sewer Line Extension - Fairhills At the July 6, 1998 City Council meeting, Council authorized staff to request a quotation from the contractor for the above referenced project to extend the sewer in order to eliminate the Fairhills lift station. The cost submitted by the contractor is within the project budget. MOTION by Cordes, second by Gamer authorizing the change order for the sewer extension to the Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. d) Citizen Petition Prairie Creek 3rd Addition - Set Workshop Date At the July 20, 1998 City Council meeting, several citizens that reside in the 3rd Addition of Prairie Creek brought a petition forth requesting that the City perform a feasibility study in order to identify solutions to drainage problems they are experiencing. Staff has analyzed the existing storm sewer system in the Prairie Creek 3T and 4th Additions and has identified options to improve the storm water drainage in the subject area. The cost implications are still being reviewed and staff recommends that the issues be presented at a Council workshop for discussion. MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes to schedule a Council Workshop for September 16,1998 at 7:00 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. e) Heritage Development Issues - Builders Association Response At the August 17, 1998 Council Meeting, Council discussed a letter written by Mr. Thomas Bisch of Heritage Development. It was Council's desire that the Builders ! , , . Council Minutes (Regular) September 8, 1998 Page 6 Association of the Twin Cities be contacted in writing regarding their response to what was identified as an inappropriate communication by Heritage Development. Mayor Ristow, on behalf of the Council, transmitted a letter to BA TC on August 18, 1998 articulating Council's concerns. Both the Mayor and the City Engineer have been contacted by Mr. John Dobbs, Heritage Development, and apologies regarding Mr. Bisch's letter have been received. 1) Ash Street Project Committee - Meeting Issues Consensus of Council was not to allow the Township their own sanitary sewer system. Residents have prepared a letter to the MN Pollution Control Agency. A copy has been given to the City, but the residents will hold the letter until the end of September. Various meeting issues were discussed. Ifnegotiations are not going to reach an outcome, the same question remains - What is the City going to do? Residents will have to discontinue use of septic systems and put in holding tanks. All properties will have to upgrade. The cost of eliminating the lift station will be incorporated into the feasibility study. It was requested that a written report be provided by the Township within the next 2-4 weeks detailing whether all township properties could be upgraded, and include the cost of respective property system upgrades. It was discussed that this option would have to include all properties with failing systems in lieu of bringing in City sewer and, according to the County Ordinance, must be performed by an independent inspector/septic system installer. If the Fairgrounds lateral line lift station were eliminated, these costs would be proposed to be assessed against Fairground property. The elimination of that particular lift station would directly benefit the Fairground property as the lift station currently pumps sewer effluent from the Fairgrounds into the 2nd Street sewer line. Mr. Eugene Thurmes, 520 Ash Street, stated this project has been going on for years and that Council needs to take control. The next Ash Street Project Committee meeting is scheduled for September 8, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Preliminary 1999 Tax Levy/Set Date - Truth in Taxation State statutes require a preliminary tax levy to be certified to the County by September 15, 1998. This preliminary levy is used by the county to develop the proposed property tax statements issued to taxpayers in conjunction with the Truth in Taxation process. Once the proposed tax levy is adopted, the City Council may lower the levy, but cannot increase it. Dates must also be selected for the truth in Taxation hearings and included in the Preliminary Tax Levy resolution. The City Council was presented a copy of the Proposed 1999 Budget on August 3, 1998. The Tax Levy proposed as part ofthe budget is $1,741,465. The proposed Tax Capacity Rate remains at 32.50%. This represents the second annual reduction in the City's tax rate. MOTION by Gamer, second by Fitch to adopt RESOLUTION R86-98 certifying the 1999 Preliminary Tax Levy of$1,741,465 to Dakota County and establishing . . . . Council Minutes (Regular) September 8, 1998 Page 7 December 1, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. as the City of Farmington's Truth in Taxation hearing for Tax Levy collectible in 1999. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolution - Agreement with Dakota County - Electronic Voting System Dakota County has agreed to initially fund a new electronic voting system for use in the year 2000. Ownership will be retained by Dakota County and the cities will store and use the equipment. The City will give the existing voting equipment, which is obsolete due to the unavailability of parts, to the County as a trade-in for credit on the new system. The City will retain ownership of voting booths and other related equipment and supplies. Each City will pay to Dakota County, 25% of the costs, 75% paid by Dakota County, in three equal annual installments beginning July 1, 2000 estimated at $3,195 per year for six machines. Farmington currently has three precincts, but is predicting five precincts by 2000. MOTION by Gamer, second by Cordes to adopt RESOLUTION R87-98 approving the agreement with Dakota County to arrange for the purchase, use and maintenance of an electronic voting system. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Animal Control - Hours of Operation Staff responded to an inquiry from Council regarding the hours of operation for the Contracted Animal Control service. The City of Farmington contracts animal control services with 4-Paws Animal Control. The contract calls for response to requests for service through the Farmington Police Department 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Councilmember Strachan: Appointed to Public Safety Facilities Task Force. Councilmember Gamer: 911 system. ALF Ambulance Board will be going to St. Paul to see their Councilmember Fitch: Progress is going well on Pilot Knob Road. Hopefully everyone's inconvenience and impatience will be rewarded. City Administrator Erar: The 1998 Joint Metro Meeting will be held September 24, 1998 from 2:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. .City Administrator Erar and Councilmember Gamer will attend. Police Chief Siebenaler: Mike McGwire just hit his 62nd home run. Mayor Ristow: The Mayor, City Administrator Erar, and City Engineer Mann took a train ride to Northfield for Operation Life Saver. Residents in other areas are also disturbed by loud train whistles at night. Police Officers also participated. They rode in the cab and discussed issues with the engineers. The '. ... Council Minutes (Regular) September 8, 1998 Page 8 engineers stated Farmington is the best city for train crossings. The Mayor has heard from City residents who believe Council should stick with the policy of assessments for sewer and water as it relates to the Township. Some residents have also inquired regarding cable TV. City Administrator Erar stated staff is working with Apple Valley and Rosemount on the issue. Meetings are ongoing and the city is waiting for a response from Marcus Cable on pending issues. Staff is looking at resolving the issue this year. The Mayor also stated the 2nd Street parking lot looks great. He then inquired as to the Eagles Club parking lot. Staff informed him a meeting will be held on September 11, 1998 to discuss the railroad spur line. Staff is looking at the end of October 1998 for completion. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Fitch, second by Gamer to adjourn at 9:45 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, j~~ ?r7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us 7b TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Service Manager SUBJECT: City Participation in County Auction DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION Dakota County is holding a public auction to dispose of surplus equipment and has asked if the City would like to participate. DISCUSSION The auction is scheduled to take place on Saturday, October 3, 1998, on the grounds of the Highway Garage on County Road 47 in Hastings. Items to be sold include three vehicles, bicycles, numerous items acquired through police confiscation and other surplus pieces of equipment. BUDGET IMPACT Proceeds from this auction will have a positive impact on the budget. The Auctioneer's commission is $65.00 per vehicle and 20% of the sale price for miscellaneous items. The City will receive a proceeds check minus commissions and fees shortly after the sale. ACTION REQUESTED Acknowledge the City's participation in the County Auction to be held October 3, 1998. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Service Manager City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7c FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator ~ Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police TO: SUBJECT: School and Conference Request DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION I DISCUSSION Police Department staff are planning attendance at four conferences. Each conference will be attended by a single officer. The fIrst conference is for a 4 day, multi-team, tactical training exercise. The training will be held on October 5-9 at Camp Ripley near Little Falls, Minnesota. The second conference concerns the Minnesota Training Conference for Narcotics Investigators. This two day training session will be held in Brainerd on September 29 and 30. The third conference is the Minnesota Crime Prevention Officers Conference to be held in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota on October 2-3. The conference is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The total cost of all three of the above conferences is $336.00. The fourth conference is a two day conference sponsored by the National Public Safety Training Institute titled "School Violence- Working Toward a Safer School Climate". Registration for this conference is $275.00. It will be held in Shoreview and will require no lodging. BUDGET IMPACT Due to the City participation in the South Metro Narcotics Task Force the Farmington Police Department receives a portion of the County narcotics forfeiture proceeds. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, these funds are set aside in a separate fund and must be used for unbudgeted Police Department expenditures. The total cost of the fIrst (3) three conferences is $336.00. Staff recommends that these conferences be funded through the police forfeiture fund and will have no impact on the Police Department operating budget. The fourth conference is budgeted and will be funded through the 1998 Budget. ACTION REOUESTED Authorize conference expenditure and attendance as described. Respectfully submitted, i ,.,----(, ~' \. - ".-.."",,,.. ,,......,",.., ,..",.... i, " . /' , y~'~~ . Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police r City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ld TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Public Works Department DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of the vacant Streets and Utilities Supervisor position has been completed. This appointment fills an existing vacancy in the Public Works department. DISCUSSION After a thorough review of applicants for this position by an interview panel comprised of the Director of Public Works, Director of Parks and Recreation and Human Resources Coordinator, an offer of employment has been made to Mr. William Weierke, subject to ratification by the City Council. Mr. Weierke has been working as the acting Streets and Utilities Supervisor for the last ten months and has served in this capacity on occasion over the last few years. Mr. Weierke has demonstrated the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary to fulfill the requirements of this supervisory position. Bill has been an invaluable resource to the City, and has contributed his hard work, knowledge and personal initiative in providing excellent service to the citizens of Farmington. Since assuming his position with the City in 1984, Mr. Weierke's familiarity with street maintenance operations, utility systems, snowplowing and the experience he has gained in all areas of street and utility activities will ensure a productive and efficient public service. Accordingly, Mr. Weierke is fully qualified to perform the duties and responsibilities of this supervisory position. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 1998 City Budget. ACTION REQUESTED Ratify the appointment of Mr. William Weierke as Street and Utility Supervisor effective September 22, 1998. ubmitted, ,., City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7e FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Robin Roland, Finance Director TO: SUBJECT: Engagement of Audit Firm for December 31, 1998 DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. has presented the City with its engagement letter for auditing services for the year ended December 31, 1998. DISCUSSION Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. satisfactorily completed its first year of Audit engagement with the December 31, 1997 Annual Financial Statements. Their proposal for the 1998 audit remains consistent with the services performed for the 1997 audit. BUDGET IMPACT KDV proposes a fee of$13,800 for professional auditing services of the December 31,1998 financial records. This 3% increase is consistent with their original engagement commitment. The Proposed 1999 Budget includes $14,000 for auditing services. ACTION REQUIRED Authorize engagement of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. for the December 31,1998 audit at a fee of $13,800. Respectfully submitted, /~ ~ ~ '. / ~4/0 Robin Roland Finance Director ~oV Kern, OeWenter, Viere, Ltd. Certified Public Accountants Alvin M. Kern Duane N. DeWenter Loren M. Viere Gerald A. Stover Keith W. Julson Dwayne B. Dockendorf David H. Hinnenkamp Christopher P. Shorba August 28, 1998 Ms. Robin Roland Finance Director City of Fannington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 We are pleased to confIrm our understanding of the services we are to provide to the City of F annington for the year ending December 31, 1998. We will audit the general purpose fInancial statements of the City of Farmington as of and for the year ending December 31, 1998. Also, the document we submit to you will include the following additional information that will be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the general purpose financial statements: 1. Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements The document will also include the following additional information that will not be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the general purpose fInancial statements, and for which our accountant's report will disclaim an opinion: I. General Fixed Assets Account Group 2. Supplementary and Statistical Information Throughout the remainder of this letter, references to Government Auditing Standards apply only if the City has received any federal funding; whereas references to the Single Audit Act of 1996, OMB Circular A-B3, OMB Compliance Supplement, major programs and grant agreements apply only if the City has received $300,000 or more of federal fInancial assistance. The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion as to whether the general purpose financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and to report on the fairness of the additional information referred to in the first paragraph when considered in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The objective also includes reporting on the City of Farmington's compliance with laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements and its internal controls as required by the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards; the standards for financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996; and the provisions ofOMB Circular A-133, and will include tests of the accounting records of the City of Farmington and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to express such an opinion and to render the required Single Audit reports. If our opinion on the general purpose financial statements or the Single Audit compliance opinion is other than unqualified, we will fully discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to express 220 Park Avenue South Po. Box 1304 St. Cloud, MN 56302 320-251-7010 FAX 320-251-1784 2 an opinion, we may decline to express an opinion or may not issue a report as a result of this engagement. The management of the City of Farmington is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of the controls. The objectives of internal control are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorizations and recorded properly to permit the preparation of general purpose financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that federal award programs are managed in compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements. In planning and performing our audits, we will consider the internal control sufficient to plan the audit in order to determine the nature, timing, and eA1:ent of our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the City's general purpose financial statements and on its compliance with requirements applicable to major programs. We will obtain an understanding of the design of the relevant controls and whether they have been placed in operation, and we will assess control risk. Tests of controls may be performed to test the effectiveness of certain controls that we consider relevant to preventing and detecting errors and fraud that are material to the general purpose financial statements and to preventing and detecting misstatements resulting from illegal acts and other noncompliance matters that have a direct and material effect on the general purpose financial statements. (Tests of controls are required only if control risk is assessed below the maximum level.) Our tests, if performed, will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on internal control and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed. We will perform tests of controls, as required by OMB Circular A-I33, to evaluate the effectiveness of the design and operation of controls that we consider relevant to preventing or detecting material noncompliance with compliance requirements, applicable to each of the City's major federal award programs. Our tests will be less in scope that would be necessary to render an opinion on these controls and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed. An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify reportable conditions. However, we will inform the governing body or audit committee of any matters involving internal control and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the entity's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the general purpose financial statements. We will also inform you of any nonreportable conditions or other matters involving internal control, if any, as required by OMB Circular A-B3. Identifying and ensuring that the City of Farmington complies with laws, regulations, contracts, and agreements, including grant agreements, is the responsibility of management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement, we will perform tests of the City's compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and agreements, including grant agreements. However, the objective of our audit will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with the standards referred to in the second paragraph. OMB Circular A-133 requires that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance 3 about whether the auditee has complied with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements applicable to major programs. Our procedures will consist of the applicable procedures described in the OMB's compliance supplement. The purpose of these procedures will be to express an opinion on the City's compliance with requirements applicable to major programs. Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will also require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and related matters. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amount and disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. We will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by error or fraud. As required by the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular A-B3, our audit will include tests of transactions related to federal award programs for compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements. Because of the concept of reasonable assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that a material misstatement may exist and not be detected by us. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect errors, fraud, or other illegal acts that are immaterial to the general purpose financial statements or to major programs. However, we will inform you of any material errors and any fraud that comes to our attention. We will also inform you of any other illegal acts that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential. We will include such matters in the reports required for a Single Audit. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to matters that might arise during any later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors. An audit of the general purpose financial statements performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards is not designed to determine whether the computer systems of the City of Farmington are Year 2000 compliant, or to provide any assurance on whether the City of Farmington has addressed all of the affected systems on a timely basis. Further, we have no responsibility with regard to the systems of vendors, service providers, or any other third parties. These are responsibilities ofthe City's management. However, we may choose to communicate matters that come to our attention relating to the Year 2000 issue. Management is responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us. We understand that you will provide us with such information required for our audit and that you are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of that information. We will advise you about appropriate accounting principles and their application and will assist in the preparation of your financial statements, but the responsibility for the financial statements remains with you. That responsibility includes the establishment and maintenance of adequate records and effective internal control over financial reporting, the selection and application of accounting principles, and the safeguarding of assets. Additionally, as required by OMB Circular A-B3, you will prepare the summary of prior audit findings. This schedule should be available for our review. We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we request and will locate any invoices selected by us for testing. The workpapers for this engagement are the property of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. and constitute confidential information. However, we may be requested to make certain workpapers 4 available to Cognizant or Grantor Agencies pursuant to authority given to it by law or regulation. If requested, access to such workpapers will be provided under the supervision of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. personnel. Furthermore, upon request, we may provide photocopies of selected workpapers to the Cognizant or Grantor Agency. The Cognizant or Grantor Agency may intend, or decide; to distribute the photocopies or information contained therein to others, including other governmental agencies. Our fee for these services will be at our standard hourly rates except that we agree that our gross fee, including expenses, will not exceed $ 13,800. Our standard hourly rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved and the experience level of the personnel assigned to your audit. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. The above fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary, we will discuss it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. If the City of Farmington receives $300,000 or more of federal financial assistance, which would subject it to the Single Audit Act of 1996, we will negotiate a fee with you. Fees for these engagements typically vary between $500 and $1,500, depending on the type of program. Government Auditing Standards require that we provide you with a copy of our most recent quality control review report. Our 1996 peer review report accompanies this letter if Government Auditing Standards are applicable and if you have not received a copy of our peer review report in a previous year. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of Farmington and believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us. Sincerely, ) David Hinnenkamp Certified Public Accountant RESPONSE: This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Farmington. By: Title: Date: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ?,f " TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrato~ FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Purchase - Fire Department DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department needs to purchase ten 100-foot sections of 5-inch Angus hi-volume fire hose. DISCUSSION This purchase will allow the Fire Department to add to our existing 5-inch fire hose on our apparatus. This large diameter, hi-volume fire hose serves as a portable water main in incidents where fire hydrants are a considerable distance from the location of the fire. For example, TownsEdge Shopping Center. Front Line Plus was awarded the bid for 4-inch and 5-inch fire hose for the Minnesota Fire Agencies Purchasing Consortium, which we are a member of. No other bids were requested. In accordance with the Minnesota Department of Revenue Sales Tax Sheet #135, this purchase is tax exempt. BUDGET IMP ACT The adopted 1998 budget includes funding for this purchase. ACTION REQUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, KLv- K~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief . , "<, REQUEST FORM CAPITAL OUTLAY PURCHASES DEPARTMENT ~vl~ <- L/ ORIGINAL/ADJUSTED 19.2K. BUDGET: . $ ~OOO, f.(j AMOUNT REMAINING AS OF DATE OF REQUEST: $ S;(J{)tJ~L{) , QUOTATIONS RECEIVED: ~ .' 1. VENDOR t="'Alwv+id~ rL.. ~/RfSC.~TE !3P#tr AMOUNT $'j7M2'1 2. VENDOR rJ 1/+ - DATE AMOUNT $ "ATTACH QUOTATIONS, ~F VERBAL QUOTES, EXPLAJN JELOW '. j. . ~.M~EN1.S: ~, :;;',.1 p~ NM,fUJtJ.&k V).~,a.;,o.c(~ ~Na.JS-~/ \- '~, \jJJ'\.l ~. W 'I ~, p~ V l/;r\.S61, ':t:; ~-"':-;;f1AdL wv~ JfI~ . '172JNW! ~ /3S ~ ~t~~ w f'<;cE~;;;- TURE DATE FINANCE DIRECTOR SIGNATURE DATE TO: THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL I RECOMMEND THE ABOVE REQUEST BE APPROVED. SIGNATURE OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR . . DATE 19_ ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON THE DAY OF (A:,rROVED) (NOT APPROVED) FILE: CC: . of . ' M ~~;ta Fire Agencies Purchasing Consortium MF APC COMMITTEE: ITEM: AWARDED TO: CO NT ACT: PHONE: Toll Free FAX: CONTRACT #: DELIVERY: TER;\lS: BID A \V ARD SHEET Hose CHAIRPERSON: PHONE: Don Kruger 612-736-4436 Fire Hose Front Line Plus Fire & Rescue 8004 Aetna Ave. NE Monticello, MN 55362 Tom Green 612-295-3650 300-879-3 [77 HS697 -2 DESCRIPTI9N AND COST OF ITEM(S) ANGUS YHV-STORZ - LARGE DIAMETER HOSE $ 377,00 per section $ 476.00 per section Page I of I 4 inch. 100 foot sections 5 inch. [00 foot sections -R- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /5 TO: FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administratorft James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Authorize Facility Improvements - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION The roofs at the pool bath house and park garage are in deteriorated condition and are in need of replacement. DISCUSSION The flat roof area on the south end of the park garage is leaking and is funds are available in the 1998 City Budget. Staff has received quotes to replace this portion of roof with a robber membrane system. The pool bath house roof also is leaking. While this roof repair was not budgeted for in the 1998 budget, staff is proposing to use savings resulting from the elimination of a balance tank in the filtration system. Staff was able to avoid the purchase of the balance tank by employing alternate methods to achieve the desired operational outcome. Staff is recommending that a portion of the $12,780 budgeted for the balance tank be used to replace the bath house roof. Two valid quotes were received and reviewed by staff. Staff asked the contractors to install a new robber roof for the pool bathhouse and park garage. The following are the quotes: Contractor 1. All Systems Roofing 2. Ludwig Roofing Park Garage $ 3,915.00 $ 6,660.00 Bath House $ 4,165.00 $ 6,612.00 BUDGET IMPACT The funding for the park garage is within the $6,923 amount that was budgeted for in 1998 and the pool bath house quote is within the available $12,780. RECOMMENDATION Authorize staff to proceed with the roof repairs on the park garage and pool bath house, and award the roof repair work to All Systems Roofing. Respectfully submitted, ~~ 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 /4 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrat0l1~ James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Authorize Tower Removal - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION The tower on the former Frontier Property which the City recently purchased needs to be removed, due to public safety concerns. DISCUSSION When the City purchased the property from Frontier Communications, the tower was included in the land acquisition. This tower is no longer being used and would require considerable capital outlay to bring up to operating standards. Staff indicated to Council in the June 1, 1998 memo that quotes would be obtained for the removal of the tower. Three valid quotes were received and reviewed by staff. Staff asked the contractors to dismantle the tower and stack the metal on site to be sold for scrap by the City. The following are the quotes: Contractor Tri - State Erection, Inc. Tim's Tower Service, Inc. Tower Systems, Inc. Removal Cost $ 14,550.00 $ 16,995.00 $ 23,019.00 BUDGET IMPACT The funding for the tower removal will be appropriated from the Park Improvement Fund. RECOMMENDATION Authorize staff to contract with Tri - State Erection to remove the tower on the newly acquired property. Respectfully submitted, -L~~ 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 and Councilmembers City Administrator'l?c- FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Participation in Livable Communities Act - 1999 DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City Council is required to adopt a resolution if it wishes to participate in the Metropolitan Council Livable Communities program in 1999. DISCUSSION The City of Farmington has participated in Livable Communities since the program was created. By participating in the program the City agrees to establish affordable and life cycle housing goals. Participation in the program allows the City to be eligible for possible funding for projects under the Tax Base Revitalization account, the Livable Communities Demonstration Account, and the Local Housing Incentives Account. It also makes the City eligible for grants or loans for cleanup of certain polluted sites. BUDGET IMPACT Unknown at this time. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt attached resolution electing to continue participation in the Livable Communities Act for calendar 1999. Respectfully s~~ David L. Olson Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO. R_-98 RESOLUTION ELECTING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATING IN THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT PROGRAM UNDER THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT CALENDAR YEAR 1999 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of F armington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 21 st day of September 1998 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (Minnesota Statues Section 473.25 to 473.254) establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which is intended to address housing and other development issues facing the metropolitan area defined by Minnesota Statutes section 473.121; and, WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund, comprising the Tax Base Revitalization Account, the Livable Communities Demonstration Account and the Local Housing Incentive Account, is intended to provide certain funding and other assistance to metropolitan area municipalities; and, WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality is not eligible to receive grants or loans under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund or eligible to receive certain polluted sites cleanup funding from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development unless the municipality is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under the Minnesota Statutes section 473.254; and, WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act requires the Metropolitan Council to negotiate with each municipality to establish affordable and life-cycle housing goals for that municipality that are consistent with and promote the policies of the Metropolitan Council as provided in the adopted Metropolitan Development Guide; and, WHEREAS, each municipality must identify to the Metropolitan Council the actions the municipality plans to take to meet the established housing goals through preparation of the Housing Action Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council adopted, by resolution after a public hearing, negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for each participating municipality; and, WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality which elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program must do so by November 15 of each year; and WHEREAS, for calendar year 1999, a metropolitan area municipality that participated in the Local Housing Incentive Account Program during the calendar year 1998, can continue to participate under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254 if: (a) the municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15, 1998; and (b) the Metropolitan Council and the municipality have successfully negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the municipality: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City of Farmington hereby elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act during the calendar year 1999. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 21st day of September 1998. Mayor Attested to the 21 st day of September 1998. 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- <.J TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ FROM: James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Approve Change Order - Municipal Pool/Rambling River Park Restrooms DATE: September 21,1998 INTRODUCTION During the reconstruction of the pool bath house, the architect and staff identified the need to make changes in the plans for the bath house project. DISCUSSION The original construction plans of the pool bath house were not as built plans, therefore the current construction plans had to be modified as demolition took place. The architect and staff made numerous changes as the contractor performed their work. Staff informed Council of the major changes as they occurred and as the time line allowed, however certain items had to be done immediately. This final change order reflects these changes. Examples of these changes are electrical line replacement, additional electrical outlets, sewer line replacement and door closures. BUDGET IMPACT The changes requested will increase the cost of the project by $1,040.00. The additional funding for the change order will come from CDBG funds. ACTION REQUESTED Council approval of final change orders on the pool bath house and Rambling River Park restrooms. improvements. Respectfully submitted, ~c---- ~~ 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 2?a..., TO: Mayor and Council Members City Administrator 'fie FROM: Michael Schultz flJ{? Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use/Grading Permit Application- Heritage Development DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION Heritage Development has applied for a conditional use/grading permit for grading work to occur within the 7th Addition ofthe Nelson Hills Farm development. DISCUSSION City Council approval is required for all conditional use permits involved with grading, excavation and mining. Heritage Development is seeking the permit to begin rough grading work within the 7th Addition and, to perform needed grading work within the 5th and 6th Additions. The amount of area to be graded with the 7th Addition totals 23 acres and is contiguous with the 5th and 6th Additions. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 25, 1998 and voted to continue the hearing to the September 8, 1998 meeting due to concerns regarding the amount of outstanding punchlist items within the development (see attached memo dated September 8, 1998 to the Planning Commission, memo from Lee Mann dated August 19, 1998 and the minutes from August 25, 1998). The Planning Commission at the September 8, 1998 meeting voted 4 to 1 to forward the application to the City Council for approval of the permit contingent on the following: 1. The developer grades the 7th Addition at his own risk. Future review of the street and utility plans for the 7th Addition may require adjustments to the grading. 2. Approval for the permit is contingent on approval of the grading plan by the City Engineering division. 3. The permit is not valid and grading cannot commence until the required surety is posted and the Developer pays the appropriate fees. 4. 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. 5. That the developer does everything within reason to have grading completed this year within the ih Addition (weather permitting). BUDGET IMPACT There is no foreseen budget impact. ACTION REQUESTED To approve the conditional use/grading permit for Heritage Development based on the contingencies established by the Planning Commission. CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Conditional Use Pennit # Applicant Name: Heritage Development Company 1. PERMIT. Subject to the tenns and conditions set forth herein, the City of Farmington hereby grants a conditional use penn it for the following: Conditional Use Penn it for Excavation, Grading and Mineral Extraction (Chapter 3 Section 22 of City Code) 2. PROPERTY. The pennit is for the following described property ("subject property") in the City of Fannington, Dakota County, Minnesota: Outlot B of Nelsen Hills Fann 6th Addition found in SEY4 of Section 14, Township 114, Range 20, City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota. 3. CONDTIONS. The penn it is issued subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer grades the 7th Addition at his own risk. Future review of the street and utility plans for the 7th Addition may require adjustments to the grading. 11. Approval for the permit is contingent on approval of the grading plan by the City Engineering division. 111. The permit is not valid and grading cannot commence until the required surety is posted and the Developer pays the appropriate fees. VI. 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. v. That the developer does everything within reason to have grading completed this year within the 7th Addition (weather permitting). 4. TERMINATION OF PERMIT. The City may revoke the permit following a public hearing for violation of the terms of this permit. 5. LAPSE. If within one year of the issuance of this permit the allowed use has not been completed or the use commenced, this permit shall lapse. 6. CRIMINAL PENALTY. Both the owner and any occupant of the subject property are responsible for compliance with this conditional use permit. Violation of the terms of this conditional use permit is a criminal misdemeanor. Dated: , 19 CITY OF FARMINGTON BY: Gerald Ristow, Mayor (SEAL) AND: John F. Erar, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19_ by Gerald Ristow, Mayor and by John F. Erar, City Administrator, of the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority by the City Council. Notary Public Drafted by: Campbell Knutson Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 (612) 452-5000 2 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Plan nine Division Review Applicant: Nature of Request: Referral Comments: Attachments: Location of Grading: Size of Grading Area: Area Bounded by: Zoning: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Planning Commissioner Members Michael Schultz Associate Planner Conditional Use Permit- Grading & Excavation- Heritage Development September 8, 1998 Heritage Development 450 E. County Road D Little Canada, MN 55110 Allowin~ grading and removal of soil within 7 addition of Nelson Hills Fann for supply of fill within the 6th addition 1. Lee Mann, City Engineer/Public Works Director 1. Punchlist letter dated August 31, 1998 for Dave Sanocki 2. Location Map 3. City Ordinance- Section 3-22: Excavation Grading and Mineral Extraction 4. Grading Information Sheet 5. Grading Application 6. 7th addition site plan 7. May 12, 1998 minutes- Genstar Grading CUP North of 190th St West and the Troyhill development and south Explorer Way (see attached map). 23 acres (7th addition portion only) Agriculture on the west, existing single- family development to the south and north, future single-family to the east. R-l (Nelson Hills 7th addition) Comprehensive Plan: Low Density- Residential Current Land Use: Agriculture/Open Additional Information Heritage Development is seeking the conditional use/grading permit to begin grading work in the 7th Addition and to complete grading work that is needed within the 5th and 6th Additions due to a lack offill. The Nelson Hills Farm 6th Addition Plat was approved on 01/14/97 at the Planning Commission and at the City Council on 02/03/98. It is not known when the 7th Addition plat will be submitted to the City. The 6th Addition has 42 single-family lots platted, while the 7th Addition proposes 67 lots. The last grading permit the City issued was in June of this year to the Genstar Land Company for the First Addition of the Charleswood development. Though this process has not been typical in the platting or residential development, City staff feels that with properly established agreements and/or sureties, the City will be able to effectively protect the overall completion of the development. Attached is a letter dated 8/31/98 from Dave Sanocki, Civil Engineer, updating the status of the punchlist items for Nelson Hills Farm. Also, Mr. Sanocki will be in attendance to report to the Commission of the August 31st meeting between residents, Mr. Bisch and City Staff. Action Requested The Planning and Engineering staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the grading permit and forward it to the City Council for their review based on the following conditions: 1. The Developer grades the 7th Addition at his own risk. Future review of the street and utility plans for the 7th Addition may require adjustments to the grading. 2. Approval for the permit is contingent on approval ofthe grading plan by the City engineering division. 3. The permit is not valid and grading cannot commence until the required surety is posted and the Developer pays the appropriate fees. 4. 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. Michael Schultz Associate Planner cc: Tom Bisch, Heritage Development City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Nelsen Hills 7th Addition, Grading Conditional Use DATE: August 19, 1998 Heritage Development has submitted an application for a grading permit for the 7th Addition of Nelsen Hills Farm. This request is being made in advance of the platting of the 7th Addition because the completion of the 5th and 6th Additions is dependent on the completion of the ih Addition. The Developer's design for the Nelsen Hills subdivision is proposed to balance from an earthwork standpoint, and thus it is necessary to grade the 7th Addition in order to finish the 5th and the 6th. ~. - , The engineering division is currently in the process of reviewing the grading plan for the 7th Addition. It is the recommendation of the engineering division that the application for a conditional use permit for the grading of the 7th Addition be approved with the following conditions: 1. The Developer grades the 7th Addition at his own risk. Future review of the street and utility plans for the ih Addition may require adjustments to the grading. 2. Approval for the permit is contingent on approval of the grading plan by the City . engineering division. 3. The permit is not valid and grading cannot commence until the required surety is posted and the appropriate fees are paid by the Developer. 4. All of the information required by the Excavation, Grading and Mineral Extraction Info Sheet should be submitted prior to City Council approval of the permit. Respectfully Submitted, ~)?1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file ~. ~Z~I:~~O^M~ie~ , \ ~ (f"tit,O^) b) That the sign be counted toward the aggregate square footage allowed for promoting development projects; c) The applicant apply and pay appropriate fees for a sign permit identifying the placement of the sign, meeting sign setback and size requirements and does not conflict with the off-premised sign for Pine Ridge Forest; d) The developer wait 15 days upon approval to erect the off-premise sign. second by Larson APIF, MOTION CARRIED. *~ Planner Schultz introduced to the Commission the conditional use/grading permit application from Heritage Development for the 7th Addition of Nelson Hills Farm. Schultz stated that Heritage is seeking the permit to begin grading in the 7th Addition and to also complete work in the 5th and 6th Additions. Schultz continued by outlining the location of the grading area and the details of the permit for the Commission and residents present within the audience. Questions were raised concerning erosion control and completion of the grading. Engineer Mann stated that the erosion control is a requirement and that if the grading were to cease that the City would hold the developer to completing or restoring the area. Commissioner Schwing asked how long will the grading take. Bob Wiegert, developers engineer, stated it would take one (1) to two (2) months. Schwing questioned Tom Bisch, Heritage Development, concerning outstanding punchlist items within the development and why they haven't been completed. Bisch responded that some of the items are landscape related and that both the grading and the punchlist would be completed simultaneously. The Commission, Engineer Mann and Mr. Bisch continued to discuss issues related to the outstanding punchlist items. Chair Schlawin questioned when the sidewalk running along 190th St would be completed to the trail. Mr. Bisch responded that it is their intention to have it completed by this fall. Commissioner Schwing asked when grading would commence. Mr. Bisch replied Monday if possible. Commissioner Lye asked if silt fence would be in place. Bisch replied yes, it is part of the requirements. Bisch explained that the reason for the grading permit is to complete needed work with the 5th and 6th phases of the development. Schlawin asked about wind blown erosion control. Bisch stated that the area would be seeded. Steve Hoeg, 18705 Everest Path, voiced concern about the poor condition of the pond located at Everest Path and Explorer Way. Mr. Hoeg also questioned when the completion date of that pond would be when he was told it would be the end of June. Mr. Bisch responded that he has been in contact with City Engineer Sanocki concerning that pond and that the condition of that pond will be improved with the grading of the 7th Addition. Russ Swanson, 18695 Everest Path, voiced concern about the lack of a constant water level of the pond. Tracee Aube, 18639 Explorer Way, added the same concerns of the water level of the ponds. Engineer Mann explained the leveling pipe located between the two ponds and how it effects the water levels. The Commission and Mr. Bisch continued to discuss at length the issues concern with the Nelson Hills Farm development. The Commission asked when the punchlist items will be completed. Engineer Mann stated that there is a deadline of September 20th to have the engineering items completed. MOTION by Schwing to close the public hearing, second by Rotty. YES- None; NO- Rotty, Ley, Larson, Schlawin, Schwing. MOTION by Schwing to continue the public hearing to September 8 Planning Commission meeting, second by Ley. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Pt:^&t\ ~ q-Z2-1'iS ?\OJ\;:',\ ~M^^' ~ .'on ~ '. ' . . . Location Map of Heritage Development Conditional Use/Grading Application Proposed Grading Are Future Nelson Hills 7th 1000 I Scale o 1000 2000 Feet I N W+E s " 'J 8 9 l: 1J 8 o~c 5 J 4 ..", 1J 9 8 7 6 2 ExCEPrIONAL TRAIL n 4 3 2 I 7 20 19 9 it 8 7 . '~-..-.....,-: .'.;.:.1.'.......-... . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lOa.. TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: 1999-2003 Capital Improvement Plan - Set Workshop Date DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION Annually, the City Council is presented with a draft Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifying proposed projects to be completed over the next five fiscal years. Projects proposed in 1999- 2003 are subject to additional Council review and multi-step process requirements pursuant to the CIP Project Development and Process Authorization Schedule. DISCUSSION Council will receive the Draft 1999-2003 CIP at the September 21, 1998 meeting. The proposed Capital Improvement Plan totals $34,382,886 over this five-year period. Projects are proposed to be funded from a variety of sources including City levies, Special Revenue Funds, Enterprise Funds, State grants, special assessments and issued debt. This document should be viewed as a strategic planning tool, not as a budget. Expenditures are estimated using the best information available at the time of its presentation, and are subject to change upon further project review and cost analysis. In light of the need for Council to further review and scrutinize the various projects contained within the draft CIP, a Council workshop is recommended to address Council members concerns and issues. ACTION REQUESTED Schedule a Council Workshop to review the 1999-2003 CIP for Tuesday, October 27, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Respectful~mitted, #'<00 ,- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lOb TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator~ Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police FROM: SUBJECT: Resolution to Accept Grant Police Department DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION I DISCUSSION The Farmington Police Department applied for and received COPS Fast Grant from the United States Justice Department. This Grant is part of the Clinton Administration pledge to add 100,000 new police officers to the street across the United States. This Grant is in the amount of $75,000 over a three year period. This is the second such grant received by the Farmington Police. The officer approved under this grant is proposed in the 1999 City Budget. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution accepting the U. S. Justice Grant in the amount of $75,000. Respectfu~z~ttiP." I, ~~~ Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police PROPOSED RESOLUTION ACCEPTING U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 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 Civic Center of said on the 21st day of September, 1998 at 7:00 PM. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, The City of Farmington has a strong interest in maintaining Law and Order; and WHEREAS, The Farmington Police Department applied for a grant from The United States Justice Department; and WHEREAS, The US Justice Department proposes to award a COPS Fast Grant to the City of Farmington in the amount of $75,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby accepts the COPS Fast Grant from the United States Justice Department in the amount of $75,000. Mayor Attested to the _ day of September, 1998 City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us IOd TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator 'J&'7-- FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: St. Michael's Church Fee Waiver Request DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION St. Michael's Catholic Church has submitted the attached letter dated August 31, 1998 requesting that the storm water management fees and park land dedication fees be waived or reduced for the new church being developed at the intersection of Ash Street and Denmark Avenue. The following is a review of this request. DISCUSSION Park Dedication Fees This issue was discussed by the Park Board at their September 2, 1998 meeting. The attached memo from Director Bell and minutes of the meeting describe the action taken by the Park Board. The recommendation of the Park Board was that the Park Dedication Fees for this project be based on the Commercial / Industrial Rate of 5% of the fair market value of the land rather than the Residential Rate of 12.5 % of land or the cash equivalent. This translates into a reduced contribution of $4,310 (11.64 acres x $7405 per acre x 5%) for the cash dedication at the Commercial/Industrial rate. This Commercial/Industrial amount is based on 5% of the Assessor's estimated market value of the acres that are being platted. This represents a reduction of $38,190 in Park Dedication Fees. Under City policy, property which is platted is required to pay a Park Dedication fee. Surface Water Management Fees The attached memo from City Engineer Mann outlines the justification and rationale for determining the amount to be charged for surface water management fees. Since the Church is currently proposing to plat as outlots approximately 10.35 acres of their 20.21 acre site, these outlots would be exempt from any fee calculation. Outlots C, D, E would be exempt from both the Park Dedication and Surface Water Management fees. Outlot A Outlot A would be included in the fee calculation, however a credit would be applied for the ponding facility to be constructed on Outlot A since it reduces the size of future needed trunk facilities. Outlot B Staff is recommending that Outlot B not be permitted to be platted as an outlot since improvements will be constructed on this lot, and it will serve as a portion of the required front yard of this facility. The issue that remains is whether the rate to be charged for the Surface Water Management Fee should be at the Commercial Rate of $0.2384/square foot or the Low Density Residential Rate of $0.1117 / square foot. The Commercial Rate is slightly more than twice the Low Density Rate mainly for the reasons stated in City Engineer Mann's memo. The Church indicated in their letter that the City had previously charged Bible Baptist Church the Residential Rate as opposed to the Commercial Rate. Staff was able to locate a memo from former Public Works Director Tom Kaldunski dated April 5, 1993 which verified that this was in fact done. Other than indicating that this was the decision of the Development Committee, no other justification was given. There was also a reference made to the South Suburban Congregate Facility that was approved in 1994. In this particular case, the City Council waived the Surface Water Management Fee entirely. The one significant difference with this project is that it apparently was also considered for CDBG funding which meant that the housing was considered to benefit low and moderate income persons. While there are certainly a number of community-wide benefits realized from St. Michael's building a new facility, the project is not considered eligible for any types of federal (Le.CDBG) or local (Le.TIF) financial assistance. It is this difference that distinguishes these two situations. In conclusion, there does appear to be a precedent for reducing the amount of Surface Water Management Fees to the low density residential rate for a church development in the past. However there is no documented rationale for this action. In addition, there does not appear to be a precedent for waiving the fee entirely. Staff is reluctant to recommend approval of waiving this fee entirely as other tax-exempt or non-profit organizations may pursue the same type of fee waiver request seriously impacting City finances in the storm water management area. U sing the residential rate in storm water calculations is somewhat questionable, as the church facility will be developed more as a commercial/institutional site, with large areas of impermeable surfaces that will generate storm water run off similar to that of other commercial / institutional type developments. BUDGET IMP ACT Any fees that are waived or reduced will reduce the amount of funds available in the both the Park Improvement Fund and the Surface Water Management Fund to construct needed facilities in the future. The estimated Surface Water Management Fee for the area currently being platted (including proposed Outlots A and B) using the Commercial rate would be approximately $120,878. This amount could be significantly reduced when the credit for ponding facilities to be constructed on Outlot A is determined. If the Low Density Residential were used, the fee would be $56,636. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Council acceptance of the Park Board's recommendation to reduce the Park Dedication Fee to 5% of the estimated land value of the St. Michael's Church development. This will effectively reduce the fee by $38,190, and would be consistent in how this type of development has been treated in the past and will be treated in the future. 2. In light of the commercial/institutional development of this site, it is appropriate to recommend and apply the Commercial rate for storm water generation to this development. Council consideration of the request by St. Michael's Church should factor in the long-term implications of either waiving or reducing the rate to Low Density as it relates to future requests by tax-exempt and/or non-profit organizations. As indicated by the City Engineer, the storm water management fees could be significantly reduced through credits given for the on-site pond. In this manner, the City could defend any reduction of fees in terms of future requests under a consistent basis. Respectfully submitted, ~~ DaVid L. Olson Community Development Director cc: (Rev.) Eugene A. Pouliot, Pastor Bill Beckfeld, Building Committee Co-chair . , -^ CHURCH OF SAINT MICHAEL COpy, 421 Walnut Street P.O. Box 227 Farmington. MN 55024 612/463-3360 Fax 612/463-2339 August 31, 1998 Mr. John F. Erar City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington MN 55024 Dear John: Weare writing to explain why we feel the storm water management fee and the park land dedication fee should be waived or reduced. Allow us to begin by defining ourselves as a church community since at issue, in part, is a debate as to whether our facility is to be considered residential or commercial. The dictionary definition of commercial is "prepared, done or acting with emphasis on salability, profit or success". This definition does not fit our self understanding. Weare not building a facility in which to sell a product; nor are we a profit seeking entity. We do strive for success, though not in a commercial sense. Two precedents have already been established in the city for both waiving and reducing the storm water management fee. First, the fees for the new Bible Baptist Church were initially set at the commercial rate and subsequently reduced to the residential rate. For that congregation, the commercial rate was $ . 16/square foot and the residential rate was $ .08/square foot. Second, the fees were waived for the congregate care facility, a not-for-profit entity like St. Michael's Church. Weare requesting that the storm water management fee be evaluated and possibly waived. It should be noted that the land upon which we propose to build is currently discharging storm water into the ditch system at a rate of eight CFS. Our new facility will discharge storm water at a rate of no more than one CFS. Hence, we are retaining virtually 99% of the storm water on site. Mr. John F. Erar, page 2 We have asked for an outlot on the northwest corner of the property for future development. This portion of the property must now be used for ponding requirements. Therefore, we feel that any fees relative to that portion should be waived due to the city's restrictive requirements to retain our storm water. We also believe the park land dedication fee needs to be waived due to the fact that we are . _providing a facility used by the public. Our building will include recreational space which will be available to all, particularly youth, as well as social and meeting space. This is in keeping with our long-standing practice of making all feel welcome. In addition, historically as a matter of policy this church has permitted community organizations to use our buildings at no cost. A church campus, as you know, enhances the environment of any city. It is a place of rest and re-creation for the human spirit. Churches provide cities with a sense of history, community, architectural, artistic and cultural beauty, and, in this case, plenty of green space. Besides welcoming all to our grounds and building, St. Michael's parish is the spiritual home offully one third of Farmington's population. Please consider taking a new look at the park land dedication fee. Thank you for your consideration of these requests. Sincerely, (Rev.) Eugene A. Pouliot Pastor Bill Beckfeld Building Committ~e Co-chair City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Dave Olson, Community Development Director FROM: James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: St. Michael's Church - Park Dedication Fees DATE: September 11, 1998 INTRODUCTION St. Michael's Church has requested the City waive the park dedication fees for the new church plat. DISCUSSION Current park dedication requirements are that 12 1/2 % of the plat or cash equivalent be dedicated for parks. St. Michael's Church has requested that the requirement of 2.5 acres or $42,500.00 be waived. The Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the plat and indicated that a cash dedication is appropriate at this time ( see the attached minutes of the 9/2/98 meeting). Members reviewed different options and concluded that the church could be recognized as an institution and could be charged dedication fees at the commercial / industrial rate of 5 %. Therefore the Commission recommends that Council accept a cash dedication of 5 % of the fair market value of the land. The Commission is not interested in developing a park on the St. Michael's Church Plat outlot. ACTION REOUESTED Forward the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation that the park dedication fees not be waived to the city council. Respectfully submitted, J~ tS,jfl 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: David L. Olson, Community Development Director FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: St. Michaels Church Surface Water Management Fees DATE: September 16, 1998 The purpose of this memo is to address various issues raised in the August 31 letter from St. Michaels Church requesting a reduction or waiver of surface water management fees. The purpose of the surface water management fee is to provide funding for the trunk storm sewer improvements proposed throughout the City as identified in the City's Surface Water Management Plan that has been adopted by the City Council. The policy of charging a surface water management fee allows the City to require that development share in the costs of the trunk storm sewer system improvements that are necessary to convey runoff generated by development. The surface water management fee is determined through the following process. The total cost of the trunk storm sewer improvements to be constructed in the future is estimated. Then the total acreage of the developable area in the City, weighted for the land use (which accounts for the differing amounts of runoff that is generated by different land uses) is divided into the estimated cost and a fee per square foot is determined. The surface water management fee is delineated in the City's fee resolution and applied to all new development and redevelopment in the City. The determination of the surface water management fee rate that is charged to a particular site is based on the land use proposed for that site. Specifically, the rate is related to the amount of impervious area on the site. A site that is developed with the amount of impervious area that is typical of commercial development will have more impervious area and will generate more runoff than a residential development. Those land uses that generate more runoff are required to pay higher fees, since they are contributing more runoff to the trunk storm sewer system than the land uses that generate less runoff. In the case of St. Michaels Church, the proposed improvements will generate runoff at a rate comparable to commercial development, therefore, under current City policy, the Church would need to be charged the surface water management fee at the commercial rate. In the design of the site, the Church will be required to minimize the rate at which the storm water runoff leaves the site but the volume of runoff generated from the proposed improvements will still be greater than the volume of runoff generated from the existing conditions. In other words, the site will be adding additional runoff volume to the system but more slowly and for a longer time than currently occurs from the existing use ofthe property. There are two main purposes for requiring ponds with development. One is to control the rate of storm water discharge and the other is for water quality purposes. In developments throughout the City, credit is not given for ponds that are not identified as trunk facilities and are primarily used for water quality purposes. The area that these ponds occupy is included in the calculation of the surface water management fee. The reason for this is that the fee is determined by dividing the estimated trunk improvement costs by the developable area in the City with no account for water quality ponds. If an estimate of water quality ponds had been taken into account in determining the fee (i.e. removing an estimated area that would represent the area of possible future water quality ponds), the fee would naturally have to be higher per acre (since there would be less acreage). The accuracy of the fee could also be less since another estimate would have been introduced. The Surface Water Management Plan indicates that the runoff from the proposed Church site is to be routed to the east to a trunk pond that would ultimately discharge to the storm sewer proposed to be constructed in Ash Street. Due to the timing of the Church project and the fact that the storm sewer in Ash Street is not in place at this time, the storm water runoff will need to be routed to the north through the ditches along Denmark A venue and ultimately to the Vermillion River. In order to allow the drainage to be routed to the north, the Church, as indicated previously, will be required to provide rate control with the ponds on the site. Therefore, the Church's ponds will to some extent be acting as trunk facilities. The trunk pond to the east, where the runoff was planned to go, will be able to be reduced in size since the Church's runoff will not be routed to that pond. A surface water management fee credit will be determined during the review of the project to take into account that the Church will be constructing ponds that partially function as trunk facilities. Allowing a credit for developer constructed trunk facilities is in accordance with current City practice, not only in regard to storm sewer improvements, but also sanitary sewer and water main improvements as well. Respectfully Submitted, ~/J1}Y!~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file -">,~,;,:,,-~.,.,,,- 7~ 1EM0 TO: LARRY THOMPSON SUBJECT: BIBLE BAPTIST CHURCH DATE: APRIL 5, 1993 This memo is a follow up to our meeting and discussions with representatives from Bible Baptist Church regarding various fees as outlined in my March 30, 1993 memo ta you. Upon review of the project it was determined that the Development Committee had previously determined that fees for Bible Baptist would be based upon the resi- dential zoning of the site. A letter ta that effect was sent earlier. Therefore, the following fees from my March 30th memo should be adjusted: Storm. Water Manageaent 2.5 acres x $0.082/square foot = Less Credit $8,929.80 [1,719.01] $7,210.79 Water Quality Management Fee 2.5 acres x $17/acre = $42.50 1JL/ J{fL/ Tom Kaldunski Public Works Director cc: file Development Committee Bible Baptist Church TJK/mh . "="1 "'-~ .~. . Council Minutes - 7/5/94 - Page 3 Cm. Orr: Are the Westview Townhomes assessed? Eng. Kaldunski: Yes. MOTION by Ristow, second by Orr to close the hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Galler, second by Rotty to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R85-94 approving the assessment roll for Project 94-3 (1994 Sealcoat) as presented. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. Sanitary Sewer Repair Policy (Memo dated June 30, 1994) Engineer Kaldunski presented the proposed policy. Comments/Questions: a. Transposition on Paragraph 10. b. Typos on Paragraphs 12 and 13 (water should be sewer) c. City Engineer or "designee". d. Clarification of routine maintenance versus major maintenance under Paragraph 6. e. Caveat that the policy does not apply to street reconstruction projects. MOTION by Orr, second by Kuchera to adopt the Council policy on Sanitary Sewer Service Repair with the minor modifications noted. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 13. South Suburban Medical Center - Request to Waive Impact Fees (Memos dated July 1, 1994). It was the recommendation by Administrator Thompson to waive the impact fees under the jurisdiction of the City which are not "pass through" fees. Questions were raised regarding the impact of the Revenue Bond issue which would make the City's G.O. issues non bank qualified. Administrator Thompson noted that the Council could adjust the assessment rolls and it would have no impact on City finances as long as the hospital agreed to reimburse the City for higher interest rates. Discussion also focused on the use of CDBG funds. Councilmember Galler suggested the Council waive its impact fees and give a $75,000 grant (CDBG) and a $35,000 loan in 1995 (CDBG) providing that the City and hospital can keep their bonding needs under $10,000,000 in 1994. Councilmember Orr disagreed with the $35,000 CDBG loan because of commitments to the Exchange Bank Building. MOTION by Galler, second by Orr to approve the following concept: a. Waive the impact fees that are not "pass through". b. $75,000 CDBG Grant in 1994. c. $35,000 CDBG loan in 1995 (20 year amortization with a 10 year balloon) d. South Suburban to pick up the differential in bond interest rates if the bonds are non bank qualified. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. August 16, 1994 Dennis Zylla Northco Real Estate Services Suite 110 1201 Marquette Avenue ~1inneapolis, r-.1N 55403 RE: South Suburban Congregate Care - City Fees Dear Mr. Zylla, Per your request, the following is a list of City Development Fees relating to the South Suburban Congregate Care Facility: f1 1. ~{Y ..., .J. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. :d~ Surface \Vater Management Fee - S25, 396.64 (Waived) Watermain Trunk Area Charge - S6,040.95 (No action taken by the \Vater Board - remains due.) Erosion and Sediment Control Fee - $201.75 (Pass thru fee to SWCD - remains due.) \Vater Quality Management - $86.25 (Pass thru fee to SWCD - remains due.) Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge - $4,140.00 (Waived) MWCC SAC - $800/SAC Unit - Will not be calculated until permit application is com pleted- (Pass thru fee to M\VCC - remains due) Sewer Benefit Charge - $1,000.00 (\Vaived) Sewer Connection Permit - $45.00 (Waived) Sewer Stub Out Charge - $800.00 (\Vaived) \Vater Connection Permit - $45.00 (\Vater Board has not taken action - remains due.) \Vater Reserve Capacity - $2,093.00 (Water Board has not taken action - remains due. Fee (ftr' i'S based on 2" water service - actual charge subject to actual size of service.) 1 e. Duilding Permit - Based on UBC Schedule - Will not be calculated until permit applica- tion is completed. (Waived.) 13 Building Permit State Surcharge - Based on Building Permit fee - \Vill not be calculated until Building Permit Appllication is completed. - (Pass thru to State - remains due.) 14. Parkland Dedication - $10,625 (Waived.) In addition a Wetlands Alteration Permit would be required if any wetland is impacted by the project. The fee is $75.00 plus staff review time, which would be waived. Also, it should be noted that the SAC, Building Permit, and State Surcharge Fees are not calculated until the actual permit application has been completed. If you need further assistance regarding these two fees, please contact John Manke. If you have any further questions, please contact me. Yours truly, Larry Thompson City Administrator l' cc: Tom Kaldunski Charlie Tooker John Manke Karen Finstuen Mayor and Council Water Board file --J V1I, . w~UU\ al~ U/lIl ~ · tlllUttUCg~ mt\ !J!JU:!4 · (6/2) 463-7111 ~ . . CHURCH OF SAINT MICHAEL 3: ~ 0: , Z ~ >- , tC u Lu co "- 0 :r .< 3: Z LL C) <'\J UJ " . 3: It) ~ LL 0 (T') w ru 3 0 -1 0 >- z U1 W 3: It) (T') CD (T') (T') .... NW CORNER OF Wl/2 OF NW1/4 SEC.E-TI13N-RI9 DAKOT A ::OUNTY C. 1. M " 642.97 I S89'47'29"E ORTH I I' " F , fl L N C'r WI 2 0 NWL 4 OF SEe f. T I- ", 83. 00" i ::-_} ':::J CiS.A.H. NO. 74 (220TH STREET WEST) (""..) C"J ~ :.> , 33 , - --- -- ..- - - - - - -- - , -- 1 -- -- - -- -- -- -- ~-5 'if 130 00 i ! LL 1 CJ , W I -" :g~OUTLOT n h n 16 0 'J 'f ~ OUTLOT A " ~:.J i , "'" ,0 - :>, ::>- c '" tn tn. 8 ~: - (""-j ~I , !.......o @ 1 0 I , 0 CJ1 : ! U1 ::::l ~ .1_ ~,'8 35 S89'4~'29"E 190 DC J Z - - - .- "- - n -. UJ I -- - . - ,,- -- > , S89'47'29"F <( I I I ~ I C\J a: :OJ oct I % I.n, ..D' Z u, 'D! ,T) UJ i ~~'! at - e ~ -'J :T) "- LOT 1 a:o ~i IT 1'1 , I ~, , G: , I 3! I LI U.J I Q. BLOCK 1 t I -. 201 .. .. -" -. -- -. 33 1 - fJB9' ,1; I 190_, CO : I ..J"W ! - i ! ! I N89'47'29"W , I UJ I , i ' , i ~ (::) 'D' I I :() III lL! , i~.. t -" :....., ! !lJ' :OUTLOT rd ,0 Cd C.J I 'r--. 1 C <. !.~... OUTLOT C) , : 0 ! ::>, t~ LD "Ji 0 'D' 0.: ' ! -", ia I ,1"':- I C\J 0 :Jq~. 47' 2t...('w ! I ' :r I cD ;C) . JU_ , ' Cd : --. -.. j , .. ..- , k ! 44 430 31 1'10 00 -- -- -- -- -- - - -- , .- -- .J -.- .- -.- .- - -.- -- : 62C j 1 N89'47'2Q"W I Z 1 w ::;: , LU 1 U1 ~ <t (T) , LLI 1 >- z , <t 0 ~ I Z ::;: ;~ ! C a: oct 1..1.': I 3: 0 00 ~I a: c.) r.l... , OUTLOT E r\JU1 :::'1 >- It'--W I- "'"';:; '" Z I ,- I co ::::l , z 0 I 0: U lL! : t- o: : 0 ! z ! : >- 0 I t 0 I lL 0 I rr, ! a CDI {T1 I i (T1 -I - 625.94 - - .. -- - -- n - -- - - - - -- -- -- - --.- n - -- ..- J 83.00 1,4 SOUTH - L [t~E OF THE NORTH 1338.54 FEET OF 'HE Wl/2 OF NW1/4 658.94 N89'47'29"W 115rHIl9w 'f 3: Z lL -, 0) ~ U' I ~ lL o ~. C, J.J L ::; 0', u, L0 <t UI L.I.! I >- ',1- o ~ .J (tj u.: 3: .' UJ . ...... o ...... .... o o U) OJ (T') CD (T') (T') .... Dr a llli1QP IlPlnq 10. stll't"l ,~ l00lcate< '\1lI" norU 5P<:t lOn I bPal I nq ( o OPKlt ftl c ~ 1..1cen9E' . o ~ seAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us !/a TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Set 1998 Sealcoat Assessment Hearing Date DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City Council awarded the 1998 Seal Coat project at the May 4, 1998 City Council meeting. DISCUSSION The 1998 Seal Coat project has been completed. Streets in Dakota County Estates 9th Addition, Akin Park Estates 1 st through 4th Additions, Nelsen Hills 3rd Addition, Prairie Creek 3rd Addition and Limerock Ridge and several downtown streets and alleys were sealcoated with this year's project. BUDGET IMP ACT The total project cost for the 1998 Sealcoat project is $54,678.24. At the May 4th Council meeting, Council directed staff to prepare the assessment roll utilizing an assessment of $55 per buildable lot. The total amount to be assessed to benefiting properties is $18,700. The City's portion of the project cost is $35,978.24 and will be funded through the Road and Bridge fund. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution declaring the costs to be assessed and setting the assessment hearing for October 19, 1998. Respectfully Submitted, Oi- J11 ~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R - 98 ACCEPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PROJECT NO. 98-12- 1998 SEAL COAT Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City of the 21 st day of September, 1998 at 7:00 P.M.. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution. WHEREAS, a contract has been let (costs have been determined) for the following improvements: Proiect 98-12 ; and Description 1998 Seal Coat Project Location various - see Attachment A WHEREAS, the total cost for the improvement is $54,678.24 and the portion of the cost for such improvement to be paid by the City is hereby declared to be $35,978.24 and the portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $18,700 ;and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 46-98 of the Council adopted on the 4th day of May, the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the costs of said improvements ;and WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in the clerks office for public inspection. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. A hearing shall be held in the Council Chambers in City Hall on the 19th day of October, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. to act upon such proposed assessment at such time and place and all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and the clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. The clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearings. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time, prior to certification of the assessment to the County auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the Clerk/Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged ifthe entire assessment is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of the assessment. Assessments shall be payable in one installment extending over a period of one year, the installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 1999, and shall bear the interest rate of 8% per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 21st day of September, 1998. Mayor Attested to the day of ,1998. Clerk! Administrator SEAL . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: John. F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: September 21, 1998 It is requested that the September 21, 1998 agenda be amended as follows: UNFINISHED BUSINESS Supplement 11 (b) Prairie Creek 3rd Addition Citizen Petition The City Council held a workshop to consider staffs initial findings regarding drainage issues in the Prairie Creek 3rd and 4th Additions. A staffmemo is attached. John F. Erar City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lib TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: SUBJECT: Prairie Creek 3 rd Addition Citizen Petition - Workshop summary DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION At the July 20th City Council meeting, several citizens that reside in the 3rd Addition of Prairie Creek brought a petition forth requesting that the City perform a feasibility study in order to identify solutions to drainage problems they are experiencing. DISCUSSION On September 16, 1998, the City Council held a workshop to consider staff s initial findings regarding drainage issues in the Prairie Creek 3rd and 4th Additions. In regards to the issues presented, the Council, through consensus, authorized the following outcomes: 1. The Senior project team (City Administrator, the Finance Director, the Community Development Director, the City Attorney and the City Engineer), is to meet with the Developer of Prairie Creek in the next three to six weeks to discuss the issues and determine a plan to resolve the issues identified at the Council workshop. 2. A project that would resolve the issues identified is to be added to the draft of the CIP and brought before Council on September 21, 1998. (This project has been included in the 1999-2003 CIP). 3. The Senior project team is to review possible funding mechanisms for the project. The funding options will be presented with the feasibility report, if the preparation of the report is authorized. 4. Identify an appropriate loss control strategy relative to City project funding costs. .. BUDGET IMPACT The budget impact of addressing the storm sewer and drainage issues in Prairie Creek 3rd and 4th would be determined when a feasibility report for any improvements to the area is presented to Council. The preliminary estimate provided to Council at the workshop has been included in the CIP document. ACTION REQUESTED This memo serves as a summary of the workshop. Authorize project actions as presented through a Council motion. Respectfully Submitted, ;;t;m~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file Steve Jones c' City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us lIe.. TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Ash Street Proj~ct Committee - Update DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION City committee representatives met with Township representatives on September 9, 1998 to continue discussions relative to the provision of municipal services to township properties with failing septic systems. DISCUSSION In summary, the following actions taken by township representatives at this committee meeting were as follows: · Township committee representatives held a hand vote regarding the question of whether township residents preferred to privately update their own failing systems. Essentially, the question forwarded by township representatives to attending township residents was "do you want to pay $4,000 for a septic system upgrade or $14,000 to $18,000 for City services"? Based on the number of hands raised, the township committee decided to pursue private septic system upgrades. · Township representatives indicated that they had received approximately 17 responses out of 34 affected township residents characterizing the subject property's ability to sustain a private septic system upgrade. Information provided, however, did not include specific costs, and did not identify the type of septic system upgrade the property could accommodate. As mentioned in previous correspondence, the installation of a holding tank is probably the least desirable option in comparison to a fully functioning septic system or City sewer services. · Township representatives confirmed that compliance letters had already been sent out to residents with failing systems notifying them of the 10 month upgrade requirement. It is interesting to note that compliance letters were sent out prior to any final agreement being reached on municipal services by the two jurisdictions. · It was also confirmed by the Township that they would take all steps necessary to ensure total compliance, and that they would provide the City with a status report on compliance outcomes. Mayor and Council Members Ash Street Project Committee - Update Page 2 of2 · Discussion was held on bringing the issue of whether Ash Street should be overlayed, without any type of general storm sewer improvements or reconstructed with storm sewer improvements that would include the construction of Phase III of the Prairie Waterway, to the respective full bodies. On this particular issue, Council will need to determine which option to choose. If Council selects Ash Street Reconstruction as its preferred option, a feasibility study would then need to be prepared. It was discussed at the committee meeting, that the City and Township would equally share in the cost of a new study to be performed by a mutually agreed upon third party engineering firm. BUDGET IMPACT Anticipated costs to participate in a feasibility study detailing storm sewer improvements to be made in conjunction with Ash Street Reconstruction, that would also include the construction of Phase III of the Prairie Waterway, could range in the vicinity of $10,000 to $20,000 per jurisdiction. This cost estimate assumes the Township would equally participate in the preparation of a new study. Funding for the City's share of this non-budgeted expenditure would be appropriated from the City Storm Sewer Improvement Fund. As Council is aware, special assessments would underwrite a portion of the City's cost for road reconstruction and storm sewer improvements pursuant to City policy. It is staffs understanding that the costs for overlaying Ash Street would be underwritten entirely by Dakota County resulting in no cost to the City. The overlay of Ash Street does not include any type of storm sewer improvements. ACTION REQUESTED Council determination of the desired type of road improvements to be made on Ash Street. Council's decision would then be forwarded to the Castle Rock Township Board. Joint City- Township approval would, of course, be necessary to move the Ash Street Storm Sewer Improvement Feasibility Study forward. Respectfully ~' 4t~ fOO F. Erar Cc: Castle Rock Township Board Commissioner Harris, Dakota County Lou Briemhurst, Director of Physical Development, Dakota County City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 120- ,. FROM: Mayor, Council members, City Administrato~ Robin Roland, Finance Director TO: SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Rate Analysis DATE: September 21, 1998 INTRODUCTION Over the last year, the City Council has requested that staff explore the option of charging City sewer customers based on the volume of water consumption rather than the flat rate charging method which is currently in place. DISCUSSION The City of Farmington currently charges its residential sewer customers a flat rate of $65.30 per quarter for sewer service. This is unique among metro communities. Most communities charge for sewer service based on the volume of water consumption, on the theory that consumers should pay for the quantity of wastewater their household or business actually generates. As with refuse, the more waste generated, the more cost incurred. The City of Farmington currently charges commercial/industrial sewer customers in this fashion. Winter quarter is used as the base for the maximum quarterly charge an individual residential account would generate throughout the calendar year. The assumption is that any and all water used by consumers from January to March goes into the sanitary sewer system, and not onto the lawn or into the street. Therefore, this usage is set as the maximum charge a household would incur for any subsequent quarter in that given year for sewer service. For example, a household with 30,000 gallons of water usage during the winter quarter would be charged for no more than this amount of usage each quarter throughout the year, even if consumption exceeded this base quarterly figure. This approach is consistent with other surveyed communities. Staff proposes that the City establish a three year phase-in for residential sewer rates. For the first year, a base fee of $28 per quarter for up to 10,000 gallons of water usage, and a rate of $2.20 per 1000 gallons of water after the first 10,000. The second year base fee would be $25 and the third year base fee would be $22. The average residential customer in the City uses 20,000 gallons of water in winter quarter. The following chart shows the effect of these proposed rates on an average customer's sewer bill with the average winter quarter consumption of 20,000 gallons: Year Base (first 10K) Usage> 10K @ Total Charge/Qtr Change from 2.20 per 1000 current qtr fee* 1999 $28.00 $22.00 $50.00 ($15.00) 2000 $25.00 $22.00 $47.00 ($18.00) 2001 $22.00 $22.00 $44.00 ($21.00) * Anticipated customer savings on a quarterly basis. Actual savings will vary based on residential consumption. A rate analysis of surrounding communities is attached with this memo. BUDGET IMPACT Setting the rate for sewer service in this scenario requires an analysis of revenues necessary to cover annual costs for sewer operations. For the 1999 budget year, operating expenditures, including debt service and depreciation, will total slightly less than $800,000. Revenues generated must therefore be sufficient to support this level of expenditures. The proposed charging strategy meets this revenue requirement, using the current number of residential and commercial/industrial sewer customers. A proposed sewer fund budget is attached. Although this change in charging strategy will initially result in collecting less revenue in 1999 than in 1998, the sewer operating retained earnings would still increase by a modest amount in 1999. Subsequent to 1999, with the growth of 300 households a year, revenues should increase accordingly, to cover increased operating expenditures. Rate analysis would take place each year during the budget process and the base rate reduction would be dependent upon adequate revenues to support sanitary sewer operations. Using this conservative approach, the City could decide to defer any subsequent rate reduction if revenue projections did not meet the fund's financial needs. ACTION REQUIRED It is staffs recommendation that Council adopt the proposed residential sanitary sewer base rate of $28 for the first 10,000 gallons of water used and $2.20 per 1000 gallons of water over the 10,000 gallon minimum usage; winter quarter to be used as the base quarter to affix the maximum quarterly charge for the year. This rate would take effect with the fourth quarter billing in 1998 (billing date 12/31/98). Staff would bring forth subsequent rate reductions in 2000 and 2001 under separate cover. If Council prefers, in light of the significant change to the rates and revenues outlined above, they may wish to schedule a workshop to review the information more extensively. Sewer rates could be an additional workshop topic on October 27th in conjunction with the review of the CIP. Respectfully submitted, /I~~-c/ Robin Roland Finance Director Sanitary Sewer Rate Comparisons September 15,1998 quarterly rate per ~ base rate 1.000 aallons Apple Valley $ 16.74 $ 1.60 first 10,000 gallons 1.65 10,000-15,000 gallons 1.70 15,000-35,000 gallons 2.05 over 35,000 gallons Burnsville 31.20 1.80 over 10,000 gallons Eagan 20.90 1.87 over 10,000 gallons Hastings 1.50 2.25 minimum 15,000 gallons Inver Grove Heights 16.14 2.04 over 6,000 gallons Lakeville 3.20 2.22 minimum 5,000 gallons Rosemount 19.10 1.35 no minimum U) C) Z Z 0:: <C W C W Z ~ W 0:: Z C o Z t- <C C)CU) ZZw i:JU) o::LLZ <co::W LLWo.. LL3=>< o w W~ ~U)ffi - :J o Z W > W 0:: LL o t- Z w ::E w t- ~ U) c W mU) mO mo.. '1""0 0:: 0.. c W CQt- m<C m::E 'l""j:: U) W ...I .....<C m:J mt- '1""0 <C ...I <D<C m:J mt- '1""0 <C o o o o 00 00 ~ o o o lli ('I) o ..... ~ ('I) 0 .....0 NO rilli 00 o ..... ~ o o o 1.0 N o o o lli N '=t('l)O O'=tN ('1)0'>1.0 ..,fricO NN('I) ..... ..... 0'> '=tI.OCIO ..... .....('I)N 00 O'>'=tN ri riri"": ..... .......... 0 00 0'> ~ ::E w t:: l/) :J o l/) l/) Q) CD Q) c: ~~~iiiJl1 CD ... c: ~ ~ ~~g~~ o o o lli o 0'> .....('I)CIONO ..........<01.01.0 N 00 1.0 0<0 llicilliri..,f 1.0 1.0 ..... <0 ..... o o o ci <0 o .....<0000'>0 00<0<01.0 '=to'=t1.O'=t "":..,flli..,flli 1.O'=t 0 <0 ..... ..... O'=t'=tClO<O .....'=t<O.....O'> N<ONN('I) cilliC\ir--:-lli '=t..... N'=t <0 ..... ('1)0('1) <0 .....0'><0 N 1.00N 0'> "":..,f"": cO '=tN <0 '=t '=t (ij - o t- l/) ~ Q) o .2 .- c: c: Q) >- /Een ~ -IllS :J :gl/)l/)O c:Q)Q)- o 0)= ro ~ ro 2: =5.. Q) .c :J ro Oc..Uenu 19 o I- o 1.0 ('I) ci 0'> ..... o 1.0 1.0 i ('I) '=t N ..... - ..... 0'> ('I) N o ('I) '=t- ('I) '=t l/) Q) l/) c: Q) c.. >< W - ... Q) "0 c: :J - ... Q) > o l/) Q) :J c: Q) > Q) 0::: --- 1.01.00 aNa ('I) 00 00 r--:-llioi 1.0-- - --- 1.0 0 0 1.000 o ..... 00 "":cOoi !:!!."'-"''''-''' it) 1.0 o ci e - .....0 '=to ..... 0 cOlli o'=t .....- c: 'u c: ftl c: u:: ... CD .c - o - '5 Q) c:005 ~ i'~ 1ii ~ ~ /E '0 l/) l/) _ ~ c: c: .0 c.. ~ ~ Q) Q) 1-1-00 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 o ..... - ~ ..... '=t_ O'> - ...- Q) l/) .c 5l O:J - (ij l/) ~ ~ :J o en 0) c: '0 c: ro c: u: - o ('I) 0'>_ N ..... - - 1.0 1.0 0'> cO <0 - 6' ..... <0 ci <0 - ('I) ('I) ..... ..... 1.0 <0 ..... ..... ri <0 o <0 ('I) ..... ..... 00 ..... ..... ..... ..... N ..... cO ..... ..... <0 ..... ..... ri <0 0_ ..... ..... o <0 lli '=t '=t ..... N ..... cO ..... ..... - 00 N '=t ci '=t - ..... o <0_ 1.0 '=t '=t 0) c 'c c 'm CD m .n C) c 'c ... ftl W 'C CD C S ~ ... ftl CD > .... o 'C c: W .n C) c 'c ... ftl W 'C CD c: 'n; - CD 0::