HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.17.98 Council Packet
COUNCIL MEETING
REGULAR
August 17, 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) New Employee Introduction - Police Department
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments)
a) John Richardson - 300 First Street Property Concern
7. CONSENT AGENDA
a) Approve Council Minutes 8/3/98 (Regular)
b) Approve Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting Date
c) School and Conference Request - Finance Department
d) School and Conference Request - Fire Department
e) Adopt Resolutions - Acceptance of Private Development Projects
f) Adopt Resolution - Approving Election Judges for 1998 Primary
g) Quarterly Building Permit Report
h) Budget Reappropriation - Fire Department
i) Capital Outlay Request - Fire Department
j) Prairie Creek Punch List Update
k) Approve Bills
1) Adopt Resolution - Gambling Premise Permit - Supplemental
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. AWARD OF CONTRACT
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) Adopt Resolution - Glenview Townhomes Final Plat & Supplemental
b) Adopt Resolution - Glenview Townhomes Development Contract-
Supplemental
c) Adopt Resolution - Bristol Square PreliminaryIFinal Plat
d) Adopt Resolution - Bristol Square Development Contract - Supplemental
e) Ash Street Environmental Contamination - Update
f) Heritage Development - Street Cleaning Requirement Concerns
Action Taken
,.
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Prairie Creek 3rd Addition Citizen Petition - Update
12. NEW BUSINESS
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
14. ADJOURN
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: August 17, 1998
It is requested that the August 17, 1998 agenda be amended as follows:
CONSENT AGENDA
Supplement 7(1)
Adopt Resolution - Approving a Gambling Premise Permit
Outreach Group Homes, an organization from Red Wing, Minnesota is
requesting a Gambling Premise Permit at Farmington Lanes.
PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Supplement 10 (a)
Update
Supplement 10 (b)
Supplement 1 O( d)
John F. Erar
City Administrator
Adopt Updated Resolution - Glenview Townhomes Final Plat
A meeting with the Developer on August 14, 1998 resulted in changes to
contingencies for the Glenview Townhomes & Commercial Plat Resolution.
Adopt Resolution - Glenview Townhomes Development Contract
Requesting Council approve the execution of the Glenview Townhomes &
Commercial Development Contract and adopt a resolution authorizing its
signing, contingent upon approval by the Engineering Division and City
Attorney.
Adopt Resolution - Bristol Square Development Contract
Requesting Council approve the execution of the Bristol Square Development
Contract and adopt a resolution authorizing its signing, contingent upon
approval by the Engineering Division and City Attorney.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmington.mn.us
71
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~
FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Service Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution approving a Gambling Premise Permit
DATE: August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
Outreach Group Homes, an organization from Red Wing, Minnesota, is requesting a Gambling
Premise permit at Farmington Lanes.
DISCUSSION
To obtain a Minnesota Gambling Permit, an organization must first obtain a resolution from the
City, granting permission for gambling to occur at a specific location. Outreach is requesting to
be added to the agenda as a supplemental item to assist Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street, in
maintaining gambling activity within the month of September.
BUDGET IMP ACT
None.
ACTION REQUIRED
Adopt the attached Council Resolution approving a Premise Permit at 27 5th Street.
Respectfully submitted,
~l~~~
Karen Finstuen
Administration Service Manager
Proposed
RESOLUTION NO. R
APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL
GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR
FARMINGTON LANES
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Farmington, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th day of
August, 1998 at 7:00 p.m.
Members present:
Members absent:
seconded the following:
Member
introduced and Member
WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.213, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue
or renew a Gambling Premise Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said
permit; and
WHEREAS, Outreach Group Homes, Redwing, Minnesota, has submitted an application for a
Gambling Premise Permit to be conducted at Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street, for Council
consideration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling
Premise Permit for Outreach Homes be conducted at Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street is hereby
approved.
This Resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
17th day of August, 1998.
Mayor
Attested to this _ day of
, 199_
City Administrator
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
Lease for Pull-Tab, Paddlewheel, Tipboard, and/or Raffle Activity - LG221
N~e of Legal Ow!1r of Premis~ Street Address City Zip Daytime Phone
P \ <-K- ate +& 7 s1i~ 0 ((0.,2-) %
Name of Lessor Street Address Zip Daytime Phone
(If same as legal owner, write in "SAME")
Na~ Leased Premises Street Address
rA. u.. ~ 7 sJfl s+
me of organization leasing the premises)
Rent Information
· Total rent cannot exceed $1,000 per month for all
non-bingo activity for this premises.
· For bingo activity, use lease form LG222.
· For pull-tab dispensing machines, use lease form
LG223.
City
Zip
.,J "IT 0 7.-~
no. of organization
l3Y
( )
Daytime Phone
( ~ 12.) L/k!rlt/f
Daytime Phone
( )
o
. An organization may not pay rent to itself or to
any of its affiliates for space used for the conduct
of lawful gambling.
Rent to be paid per month $
(If no rent is to be paid, indicate-O-)
DO
I DoC, -
Sketch and Dimensions of Leased Area
Sketch: For all areas being leased for the conduct
of gambling and storage of gambling product at this
premises, attach a sketch (drawing) showing: (1) the
leased area(s), and (2) the dimensions.
Dimensions
The leased areas are:
;L
31
feet by
feet by
feet by
feet by
feet by
d-
.3
Storage
Storage
;}.-
d-
g
square feet.
square feet.
square feet.
square feet.
square feet.
square feet.
feet for a total of
feet for a total of
feet for a total of
feet for a total of <../
feet for a total of ~
Combined total----J ~
Lawful Gambling Activity
Type of gambling activity that wilt be conducted at this gambling premises. Check all that apply.
L Paddlewheels Lpull-Tabs ..K..Raffles LTlpboardS
Term of Lease Amended L-.ase Only
The term of this lease agreement will be concurrent with the
premises permit issued by the Gambling Control Board,
unless terminated sooner by mutual consent of the lessor
and lessee.
If this is an amended lease showing changes occurring dur-
ing the term of the current premises permit. write in the
date that the changes will be effective ---1---1_.
Both parties that signed the lease must initial and date all
changes.
Questions on this form should be directed to the Licensing
Section of the Gambling Control Board at (612) 639-4000.
This publication will be made available in altemative format
(Le. large print, Braille) upon request. Hearing impaired
individuals using a TTY may call the Minnesota Relay Service
at 1-800-627-3529 and ask to place a call to (612) 639-4000.
The information requested on this form will be used by the
Gambling Control Board (Board) to determine your compliance
with Minnesota statutes and rules governing lawful gambling
activities. All of the information that you supply on this form
will become publiC information when received by the Board
except, if required, your Social Security number, which remains
private.
Page 1 of 2
Rev. 8/97
Lease for Pull-Tab, Paddlewheel, Tipboard, and/or Raffle Activity - LG221
I LESSOR PROHIBITIONS I agents are found to be solely 4. The lessor shall not modify or
Management of Gambling responsible for any illegal gambling terminate this lease in whole or in part
Prohibited conducted at that site that is due to the lessor's violation of the
prohibited by Minnesota Rules, part provisions listed on this lease.
The owner of the premises or the lessor 7861.0050, subpart 1, or Minnesota
will not manage the conduct of gambling Statutes, section 609.75, unless the Arbitration Process
at the premises. o~nization's ag~ntsre~J?Onsible for The lessor agrees to arbitration when a
Participation as Players Prohibited the Illegal gambling activity are also violation of these lease provisions is
agents or employees of the lessor. alleged. The arbitrator shall be the CRG.
The lessor, the lessor's immediate family, .
d bl' I 4. The lessor shall not modify or
an any agents or gam Ing emp oyees terminate the lease in whole or in part IACCESS TO PERMITTED PREMISESI
of the lessorwill not participate as players because the organization reported to .
in the conduct of lawful gambling on the a state or local law enforcement State of Minnesota and Law
premises. authority or the board the occurrence Enforcement
Illegal Gambling atthe site of illegal gambling activity The board and its agents, the
1. The lessor is aware of the prohibition in which the organization did not commissioners of revenue and public
against illegal gambling in Minnesota participate. safety and their agents, and law
Statutes, section 609.75, and the Other Prohibitions enforcement personnel have access to
penalties for illegal gambling the permitted premises at any
violations in Minnesota Rules, part 1. The lessor will not impose restrictions reasonable time during the business
7861.0050, subpart 3. on the organization with respect to hours of the lessor.
providers (distributors) of gambling-
2. To the best of the Iessor's knowledge, related equipment and services or in Organization
. the lessor affi,,!"s that any and all the use of net profits for lawfut The organization has access to the
games or deVices located on thEt purposes. permitted premises during any time
premises are not being used, and are 2. The lessor, the lessor's immediate reasonable and when nece~sary for the
not capable of being used, in a family, and any agents or employees cond.uct of lawful gambling on the
manner that violates the prohibitions premises
against illegal gambling in Minnesota of the lessor will not require the .
Statutes, section 609.75, and the organizatio~ to perform any action I LESSOR RECORDS MAINTAINED I
penalties for illegal gambling that would violate statute or rule. . .
violations in Minnesota Rules, part 3. If there is a dispute as to whether any The lessor s.hall maintain a reco~d o.f all
7861.0050, subpart 3. of these lease provisions have been money received from the ~rganlzatlon,
violated, the lease will remain in effect and make. the record avadab~e ~o the
3. Notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, pending a final determination by the board and its agents, ~e commiSSioner.::
part 7861.0050, subp. 3. an ComplianceReviewGroup(CRG)of ofrevenueandpubhcsafetyandthel~
organization must continue making the Gambling Control Board. agent~ u~on demand.. The record shah
rent payments, pursuant to the tenns be maintained for a penod of 3-1/2 years.
of the le:;!l~e, if the organization or its
OTHER OBLIGATIONS AND AGREEMENTS - Attachment
All obiigations and agreements between the organization and the lessor are contained in or attached to this lease.
(Attach additional sheets if necesscuy. Any attachments to this lease must be dated and signed by both the lessor and
the lessee.)
This lease is the total and only agreement between the lessor and the organization conducting lawful gambling activities
other than bingo and pull-tab dispensing devices. There is no other agreement and no other consideration required between
the parties as to the lawful gambling and other matters related to this lease. Any changes in this lease will be submitted to
the Gambling Control Board ten days prior to the effective date of the change.
Page 2 of 2
Rev. 8197
, . ' .
Minnesota Lawful Gambling
PreITlise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2
Gani1?l tilg :~ank'~ Lllic-flff(!{;:;:;{'d1lliriS}'!.:':.,': ...... ..' /.'.:....:7.... .....:::7:)'('::..;.:::.:::.::::::..::.:.::::.':;:::.:...'; .":::'.::"::" :,.:.:.>:~. ._
~- nk Name . Bank Ac.count Number
c:X/JAve(;,.~..L 7l#'t /.f4'RtA- ,S079?'19CJ~ Co&3------
sank Address .&"C'.~ City State Zip
.,7~~,ii,~i~j~4~Mt~~i~~~"~~mi\l=ilf~;Jt2'-_=--
. a~e" . n::ss I e
L!o/S~ /..AH~cK_ /760,e'-'/'_~. ~.j'W/'-5 M--'
La.. t; < eLl '-' tp~ t! J__., / "760 I'e/Z..// cL L0c! Gv..::. d~,J /f ~ L t_J'!:::t~r
0e6M k~~ -.LSSJ Ilfl;{ L# C-<.v~~'~ n-.~ GA-ohl-:J2
1\1ii~~~!~'~4tlf'l!iif~'jiA.;I._B.il[f;;~;i.i~]~?
'GambiingSite AllthorlzatJon ,I am the chief executive oHr~r of the . -- ",ilion;
I he(l~by cansanlthat IocaJ la..... enforcement officars, the ,I assume full responsibility for the fa;l 2.'1(; ,-..vfulopera.
board or agents of the board, or the rommissioner of tion of al\ actjv~jes to be conduded:
revenue or public safety, or agents of the commissioners, ,I will familiarize myself with thA laws of Mo, .nesota
may enter the premises to enforce the law. govern;n9 [a.....iul gambling. :les of jhe board and
Bank Records Information agree. if licanssd. to abide L,.Gsa la.....s and rules.
The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of the including amendments io them;
gambring accolJnt whenever necessary to ful'fill .any .changes in applicJ.tion information will be suf;:;:prf.'::i:
rquirements 01 current gambling rules and law. to the board and local unit of government "'i,~hin 10 ,~ay~
Oath of the c~a"ge: and
f declare that: -I understand that failure to provide required information
./ have read this application 3r"id all information submittod or providing lalse or misleading information may resuit in
to thl,? board is true, accurate aM complete; the denial or revocation at the :;censa.
-all o,;'Gr required information has been fully disclosed; __'__
Signature ot chief executive officer Date
~~~~~'~~Eri~>>[~~'iij".;;;;;;; -~4~4~\%,;""-.-,._.,,
. '" .. . 4. J:....s....qp,v of :he l~gllm~ of Clovernmenr~ r~sol~Jc/"l .iill.:
1. fhe city 'musl sign thiS appltcatlor, It the gambling prem- QL~g thi~ aooEcali9n mu~t be attached to.rhl.~.im.R}i~~qti.Q.c
IS,,$ is located within city limits. . .. .. 5. It this appficaticn is denied by the local unit of governrr
2. The county "AND township.' must $~n this appi:catlon if it should riot be submitted to the Gambting Conlrol Board
the gambling promises is Iccated w;-:hin a tow~ship.
3. The local unit go....ernmar.t icity or county) must pass a
resolution spe-:;,nca:ry appro'.ing or denying this app!k::~'ion.
Assf M'7
Township: By si]nature below. the township acknowledg,
that the organ;zalion is applying for a premisas permit win-
township limits.
~HY:_..~~_..Q,?unJy~~___________ ._..___~wn..~b!.P~' _'_____ ___ __.. __.___
Ct:;;t:rFa.rrh I>:'~b___ __-+-="h'~:~~_-c '____~----- ___ __
E'~"I-Di~; (q 3 -~i;;~:~'~~P:;O~'~:"~ ~~"Ql'i' 0.,; :~~i~d ~_
- -_._--_.__._~---~---- --
qeler 10 the instructions tor required at1achme,lts.
,illo: Cambllng C"nlrol Board
ROIJ"w~ PIau $<)ulh, 3rd Floor
1711 W. County Road e
Aose...l1le, MN 55113
lG214(ParI2)
(Re-v,r.('\ir'91)
.-~- .~..
Minnesota LawfUl Gambling
l'remises Permit Application - Part 1 of 2
I FOR 00,'. R.O- uc.c.O-N.L'r
..-..--.----..-..- "---.-
BASE 1# _.____.._ "_
?P ;: _'__"___U"'__
I FEE.
-'-'---
CHECK______._
INITIALS
DATE
L3214
(I.-n,,,, 1 \
o
Rant-wal
Organization base l;cense number
Class of premisas ~rmit
(check one)
o A ($400) Pull-tabs, lip boards. paddlewheels. raff.es, tiingo
!l( S ($250) pun-tabs. tipbcards, pad::'1e.....h~ls. ratrles
premises per:7'.'t r1'...rr.o.er
~
New
[J C (.S200~ ~rgo cnlY
o 0 ($150) RaW..es only
.. .,. ~., ~...."~...",,,,,,'~'n"". .<.,.,;...............-'...~'.. ." .. . "... ." ........... '."_:.:-';' .""'. .:."..:....~.-:....'.~..'::...;n. "'::':':,;::::?::,~::;.;';"::-~::::":':";-:':':"
'Jrga~a lioh .Iif[orma.ti~:". :...:":.. '. ':i.~:.. ~ . .... .:::' .' .., .:. '. ......::.:._:<::..:.::::._::._..~~.:.:......::..;:.:}::):/@i;{C;::::::::::Xi:).>,.i:=::,::'::;...............::...:.
..-.a.:.._ _'.........,;............_____-..:.:...o.-----..;.~.. .-_ -- _ ---
Name of Organization
_DUTJ?etfU.L-__S/ x 4ute ~ _~___ __ ._____ __h____.___.___. ____________
BUSII~o?SS Adrjress ot CX~ani1.atiOn .. Street 0( P. ~ &lx (Do nol use the address oi your gamblinG i~aJlager)
l~~__.J{&.!~._U ~\)~&!.i6 4?~ __$i.fYV8_.____/lMJ~;f _________ __
City /7 ~ _ _ /..:. . Stare Zi~ Co?e. . County I Daytime prlone nurncu
__k:~N..._~~~---_-- /11 /1/ _____ s-~yVf- ___.t1/{/q!!?!____l 16/Z)7sY:?:S~~
Name ;:}?,! executlve~r (caMo~;;ur gambling manager) c.~e. o. I ~~e ;;.;; nl.!i11l:-;
t3Tn'gD-6C~ns U~Sr.l..t2. -------------------- -:..-..------.-..
!.: applying for a class A or C penr.Jt. fill in days and begInning & endir,g hours of bingo occasions:
No more than S(:ven bingo occasions may be conducted by yo<..:r organlzation per week.
D:l)' BeglLUUng/i::nding Hours Day Bc:ginning/EndL'1g Hours Day Seglnrung /EndlI1g Hours
__.___ to__.____
_____to______
to__ _
_...__to____.__
___to__._
__to
.___to_________
Ifbingo will not be conducted. check here
D
.Gambli.Hg:~Ci1i~.9}~.Wo.?05a't-fq#......U..:..:.::...::-::........:.........:/iH.:..............':.:...........1.....}......::.:,,::.:'-:...:;:.:,..::..<..:.:/:.....>...... .......
N~--;r-eSt3DT;~hmenlwFere-g;;nltJingN!lI be conducted S~t AddressToo-nct usetz.STORlce box nuil1'Oe(~---'
_t:..f5_~I}~.""ie_N L-<T~e_s___. _______.._____h~___S-tj_._ 5 L_____ ~, ~~../ /11~s.~'?)
Is :he ?remises 1.5Ca~ed witnln city limits? Z Yes CJ No If no. is township CJ Q(gamzr:.d 0 unorganized CJ unlncorpora\ec
City-~d-E~~nty ";;:her~g'~bii.~-g pemi~~-i;l~t~:dORTownshjp and County where gambling p;-~-~;;-;';~';s located if ;utsioo 01 city h~~~' .
~~1f~~;;,p"mi;e;--_LDc~L ~----- r,:,,/--- Zip Code --
JJI (.., k::__J.~.lS .._ __ _.__~_J..._S-.~ S,- ~,ktinl ,t11Y~ ~.___~X_~~~_<-L-._
Does your organization OW.1 tf-te building where tlo gambl:ng ......:11 be conducted? L.."l -rES ~O
It no a:t.acn the fotlowi~g:
. a copy of the ~asa (lcrm LG202) with !arms for at leas: ooe year.
. a xPI of a ske:ch 0/ the noor ~1aI1 wj~ oi;nensior.s. Si10""';"g wr,a! pcrtion is Ceing leased.
A lease and 5k.,ICh aro nc! required k'J( Class 0 applications.
:~d'~rt:.s:sgf~ig~&..~..E ric'eo(g~i1;iirig~e-q~-Errierif.~%_~t~ ~b~;r~G:~eci' ....
l..1~O
Address
f€ fL {leL..
City State Zip code
A~< ~J ~ I~ 5 (Ylv ~b~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
lOa.,
It.fd~-fe
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator :Jlt'
Revisions to Contingencies for Glenview Townhomes
and Commercial Final Plat
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
The Developer for Glenview Townhomes, Mr. Tim Giles, requested a meeting with City staff on
August 14, 1998 to discuss contingencies for the Glenview Townhomes & Commercial Plat.
Attendees at the meeting included Mr. Giles; his Attorney, John Wagner; and his engineer, Bruce
Bullert. Dave Olson, Community Development Director and Joel Jamnik, City Attorney
attended on behalf of the City.
DISCUSSION
The discussion concerned contingencies # 1 and #2 in the original staff memo to the City Council
for August 17th. In the original memo, the resolution of the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road
issue requires the Developer "to agree to waive any and all objections to the assessments for the
construction of the frontage road as determined by the City Council, including the claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to all properties within the project area."
In the meeting with City staff, the Developer proposed an additional resolution to the frontage
road improvements. For every townhome unit up to 45 units, the Developer will deposit $1000
per unit into an escrow for the frontage road improvements. After the 45 building permits have
been issued, and if MnDOT has not entered into a cooperative agreement to improve the frontage
road, the Developer will provide the full payment or a surety for the costs of the frontage road
improvements based on the estimated final project costs.
The City will continue to pursue a cooperative agreement with MnDOT and make a reasonable
effort to assess or otherwise collect from other benefiting properties. If these devices or other
remedies do not provide the required funding for the frontage road after the 45th building permit,
the City may assess the full costs of the frontage road improvements to any or all lots created by
the Plat. Meaning that before issuance of the 46th building permit, a cooperative agreement
from MnDOT or a surety from the Developer must be submitted to the City.
On an interim basis, the Developer will install additional pavement at the intersection of the
frontage road and Trunk Highway 3 to allow for safer traffic movements for the residents of the
initial 45 units. All of the roadways within the development will be installed in the initial
construction of the development and phasing of the units will be varied.
Contingency #2 in the original memo, stated that the frontage road be constructed in 1999. At
the meeting, the Developer proposed that the City construct the frontage road in accordance with
the language in paragraph 2 (C) in the Development Contract, within two years from the
execution of the Development Contract, unless the parties agree to a different time frame by a
written amendment to the Development Contract. The addition of two years rather than one will
allow the City and the Developer to continue to pursue a cooperative agreement with MNDOT.
The City was amenable to the proposed revisions because the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road
will be improved and the City does not incur any costs for the improvements.
ACTION REQUESTED
City staff recommends approval of the Glenview Townhomes and Commercial Final Plat
contingent upon the following:
1. The Developer pays $1000 per building permit issued for each of the first forty-five
townhome units, said amount to be held by an escrow agent mutually agreed to by the parties
for the purpose of paying a portion of the Developer's obligation for necessary
improvements to the east frontage road along Trunk Highway 3. Interest on the escrow
account will be payable to the Developer. No additional building permits will be issued for
any other units beyond the initial forty-five until the Developer provides full payment or a
surety acceptable to the City for the full amount of the costs of the frontage road
improvements based on the estimated final project costs. The City will continue to pursue a
cooperative agreement with MnDOT in anticipation that MnDOT will participate in some
portion of the costs to improve the frontage road. The City agrees to make reasonable efforts
to assess or otherwise collect from other benefiting properties. In the event that the City is
unable to impose or collect from other properties, then Developer shall pay the full cost of
the improvements. In addition to any other remedies for default by the Developer, the City
may assess the full costs of the frontage road improvements to any or all of the lots created
by the Plat. The improvement of the frontage road is hereby agreed by the parties to confer
special benefit to the Plat, and the Developer and any successors or assigns, waive any
procedural or substantive objection to assessments for the construction of frontage road,
including any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
2. The City shall construct the frontage road along Trunk Highway 3 in accordance with
paragraph 2 (C) in the Development Contract, within two years from the execution of the
Development Contract, unless the parties agree to a different time frame by a written
amendment to the Development Contract.
3. That the City Engineer approves the resolution of engineering issues and compliance with
any required revisions to the construction documents.
4. That Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development
Contract and approval of the construction plans by the Engineering Division.
Respectfully Submitted,
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING FINAL PLAT AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT
GLENVIEW TOWNHOMES & COMMERCIAL FINAL PLAT
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington,
Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th day of August, 1998 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following:
WHEREAS, the final plat of Glenview Townhomes & Commercial is now before the Council for review
and approval; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing ofthe Planning Commission was held on the 24th day of February, 1998
after notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City and proper notice sent to
surrounding property owners; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the preliminary and final plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by
municipal service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above fmal plat be approved and that the requisite
signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the fmal plat with the following stipulations:
1. The Developer pays $1000 per building permit issued for each of the first forty-five townhome units,
said amount to be held by an escrow agent mutually agreed to by the parties for the purpose of paying
a portion of the Developer's obligation for necessary improvements to the east frontage road along
Trunk Highway Interest on the escrow account will be payable to the Developer. No additional
building permits will be issued for any other units beyond the initial forty-five until the Developer
provides full payment or a surety acceptable to the City for the full amount of the costs of the frontage
road improvements based on the estimated final project costs. The City will continue to pursue a
cooperative agreement with MnDOT in anticipation that MnDOT will participate in some portion of
the costs to improve the frontage road. The City agrees to make reasonable efforts to assess or
otherwise collect from other benefiting properties. In the event that the City is unable to impose or
collect from other properties, then Developer shall pay the full cost of the improvements. In addition
to any other remedies for default by the Developer, the City may assess the full costs of the frontage
road improvements to any or all of the lots created by the Plat. The improvement of the frontage road
is hereby agreed by the parties to confer special benefit to the Plat, and the Developer and any
successors or assigns, waive any procedural or substantive objection to assessments for the
construction of frontage road, including any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the
property .
2. The City shall construct the frontage road along Trunk Highway 3 in accordance with paragraph 2 (C)
in the Development Contract, within two years from the execution of the Development Contract,
unless the parties agree to a different time frame by a written amendment to the Development
Contract.
3. That the City Engineer approves the resolution of engineering issues and compliance with any required
revisions to the construction documents.
. . .. ,/I
4. That Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development Contract
and approval of the construction plans by the Engineering Division.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of
August, 1998.
Mayor (Acting)
Attested to the _ day of August, 1998.
City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
IOh
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~
FROM: David L. Olson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Glenview Townhomes & Commercial Development Contract
DATE: August 17,1998
INTRODUCTION
The Development Contract for Glenview T ownhomes & Commercial has been drafted in
accordance with the conditions presented at the August 17, 1998 City Council meeting
and a subsequent meeting with the Developer and his engineer and attorney and the City
Attorney and the Community Development Director.
DISCUSSION
The rationale for the changes from the previous recommended conditions of approval is
described in the supplemental memo for the Final Plat as prepared by the Planning
Coordinator. The Glenview Townhomes & Commercial Development Contract requires
the following conditions to be agreed upon:
1. the Developer enters into the Development Contract; and
2. the Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement; and
3. the Developer pays $1000 per building permit issued for each of the first forty-five
townhome units, said amount to be held by an escrow agent mutually agreed to by the
parties for the purpose of paying a portion of the Developer's obligation for necessary
improvements to the east frontage road along Trunk Highway. Interest on the escrow
account will be payable to the Developer. No additional building permits will be
issued for any other units beyond the initial forty-five until the Developer provides
full payment or a surety acceptable to the City for the full amount of the costs of the
frontage road improvements based on the estimated final project costs. The City will
continue to pursue a cooperative agreement with MnDOT in anticipation that
MnDOT will participate in some portion of the costs to improve the frontage road.
The City agrees to make reasonable efforts to assess or otherwise collect from other
benefiting properties. In the event that the City is unable to impose or collect from
other properties, then Developer shall pay the full cost of the improvements. In
addition to any other remedies for default by the Developer, the City may assess the
full costs of the frontage road improvements to any or all of the lots created by the
Plat. The improvement of the frontage road is hereby agreed by the parties to confer
special benefit to the Plat, and the Developer and any successors or assigns, waive
any procedural or substantive objection to assessments for the construction of
frontage road, including any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the
property; and
4. the City shall construct the frontage road along Trunk Highway 3 in accordance with
paragraph 2 (C) in the Development Contract, within two years from the execution of
the Development Contract, unless the parties agree to a different time frame by a
written amendment to the Development Contract.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the execution of the Glenview Townhomes & Commercial Development
Contract and adopt a resolution authorizing its signing, contingent upon approval by the
Engineering Division and City Attorney.
o~#
David L. Olson
Community Development Director
--
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
- Glenview Townhomes & Commercial -
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Fannington,
Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th day of August, 1998 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. _ , the City Council approved the fmal plat of Glenview
Townhomes & Commercial contingent upon the following conditions:
1. The Developer enters into the Development Contract.
2. The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
3. The Developer pays $1000 per building permit issued for each of the fIrst forty-fIve townhome units,
said amount to be held by an escrow agent mutually agreed to by the parties for the purpose of paying
a portion of the Developer's obligation for necessary improvements to the east frontage road along
Trunk Highway Interest on the escrow account will be payable to the Developer. No additional
building permits will be issued for any other units beyond the initial forty-fIve until the Developer
provides full payment or a surety acceptable to the City for the full amount of the costs of the frontage
road improvements based on the estimated fInal project costs. The City will continue to pursue a
cooperative agreement with MnDOT in anticipation that MnDOT will participate in some portion of
the costs to improve the frontage road. The City agrees to make reasonable efforts to assess or
otherwise collect from other benefIting properties. In the event that the City is unable to impose or
collect from other properties, then Developer shall pay the full cost of the improvements. In addition
to any other remedies for default by the Developer, the City may assess the full costs of the frontage
road improvements to any or all of the lots created by the Plat. The improvement of the frontage road
is hereby agreed by the parties to confer special benefIt to the Plat, and the Developer and any
successors or assigns, waive any procedural or substantive objection to assessments for the
construction of frontage road, including any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefIt to the
property .
4. The City shall construct the frontage road along Trunk Highway 3 in accordance with paragraph 2 (C)
in the Development Contract, within two years from the execution of the Development Contract,
unless the parties agree to a different time frame by a written amendment to the Development Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The aforementioned development contract, a copy of which is on fIle in the Clerk's offIce, is
hereby approved.
2. The Mayor and Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to sign such contract.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Fannington City Council in open session on the 17th day of
August, 1998.
Attested to the _ day of August, 1998.
Mayor (Acting)
City Administrator
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
AGREEMENT dated this 17th day of August, 1998, by and between the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal
corporation (CITY) and Glenview Townhomes L.L.P., a Limited Liability Partnership (DEVELOPER).
1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for Glenview Townhomes and
Commercial (also referred to in this Development Contract [CONTRACT or AGREEMENT] as the PLAT). The land is
legally described as:
Commercial Parcel
The West 304.00 feet of that part of the North 14 acres of the S ~ of the NW y.. of the NW y.. of Section 32, Township 114,
Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota lying Southerly of the following described lines:
Commencing at the Northwest comer of said NW y.. of Section 32; thence S89050' 12" E, (assumed bearing) along
the North line of said NW y.. of Section 32, a distance of 59.45 feet; thence SO 1 038' 57"W, a distance of 500.32 feet to
a point on the southerly right of way line of the former Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company
and the easterly right of way line of State Trunk Highway No.3, said southerly right of way line being 50.00 feet
perpendicularly southerly of an parallel to the former main track of the aforementioned railroad company; thence
N740 15' 36"E along said south right of way line of railroad, a distance of 1430.00 feet; thence Sl50 44' 24"E, a
distance of 466.00 feet to the point of beginning of the lines to be described; thence S740 15' 36"W, a distance of
717.58 feet; thence N870 35' 18"W to the west line ofthe aforementioned NW y.. of Section 32 and there terminating.
Residential Parcel
That part of the North 14 acres of the S ~ of the NW y.. and that part ofthe N ~ of the NW y.. of the NW y.. all in Section 32
Township 114, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota lying Southerly of the following lines:
Commencing at the Northwest comer of said NW y.. of Section 32; thence S89050'12"E, (assumed bearing) along the
North line of said NW y.. of section 32, a distance of 59.45 feet; thence SO 1 0 38' 57"W, a distance of 500.32 feet to a
point on the southerly right of way line of the former Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company
and the easterly right of way line of State Trunk Highway No.3, said southerly right of way line being 50.00 feet
perpendicularly southerly of and parallel to the former main track of the aforementioned railroad company; thence
N740 15'36"E along said south right of way line of railroad, a distance of 1430.00 feet; thence Sl50 44'24"E, a
distance of 466.00 feet to the point of beginning of the lines to be described; thence S740 15'36"W, a distance of
717.58 feet; thence N870 35' 18"W to the west line of the aforementioned NW y.. of Section 32 and there terminating.
Except the West 304.00 feet of said North 14 acres of the S ~ of the NW y.. of the NW y.. of Section 32.
1
2. Conditions of Approval. The City hereby approves the plat on the condition that:
a) the Developer enter into this Agreement; and
b) the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; and
c) the Developer pays $1000 per building permit issued for each of the first forty-five townhome units, said amount to be
held by an escrow agent mutually agreed to by the parties for the purpose of paying a portion of the Developer's
obligation for necessary improvements to the east frontage road along Trunk Highway 3. Interest on the escrow account
will be payable to the Developer. No additional building permits will be issued for any other units beyond the initial
forty-five until the Developer provides full payment or a surety acceptable to the City for the full amount ofthe costs of
the frontage road improvements based on the estimated fmal project costs. The City will continue to pursue a cooperative
agreement with MnDOT in anticipation that MnDOT will participate in some portion of the costs to improve the frontage
road. The City agrees to make reasonable efforts to assess or otherwise collect from other benefiting properties. In the
event that the City is unable to impose or collect from other properties, then Developer shall pay the full cost of the
improvements. In addition to any other remedies for default by the Developer, the City may assess the full costs of the
frontage road improvements to any or all of the lots created by the Plat. The improvement of the frontage road is hereby
agreed by the parties to confer special benefit to the Plat, and the Developer and any successors or assigns, waive any
procedural or substantive objection to assessments for the construction of frontage road, including any claim that the
assessment exceeds the benefit to the property; and
d) the City shall construct the frontage road along Trunk Highway 3 in accordance with paragraph C above within two years
from the execution of this Agreement unless the parties agree to a different time frame by a written amendment to this
Agreement.
3. Development Plans. The Developer shall develop the plat in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be
attached to this Agreement. The plans may be prepared by the Developer, subject to City approval, after entering into this
Agreement but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract,
subject to paragraphs 6 and 31 G, the plans shall control. The required plans are:
Plan A - Final Plat
Plan B - Final Soil Erosion Control and Grading Plans
Plan C - Landscape Plan
Plan D - ZoninglDevelopment Map
Plan E - Wetlands Mitigation as required by the
Plan F - Final Street and Utility Plans and Specifications
The Developer shall use its best efforts to assure timely application to the utility companies for the following utilities:
underground natural gas, electrical, cable television, and telephone.
4. Sales Office Requirements. At any location within the plat where lots and/or homes are sold which are part of this
subdivision, the Developer agrees to install a sales board on which a copy of the approved plat, final utility plan and a
zoning map or planned unit development plan are displayed, showing the relationship between this subdivision and the
adjoining neighborhood. The zoning and land use classification of all land and network of major streets within 350 feet of
the plat shall be included
5. Zonine:/Development Map. The Developer shall provide an 8 1/2" x 14" scaled map of the plat and land within 350' of
the plat containing the following information:
a. platted property;
b. existing and future roads;
c. future phases;
d. existing and proposed land uses; and
e. future ponds.
2
6. Required Public Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following:
a. Sanitary Sewer Lateral System
b. Water System (trunk and lateral)
c. Storm Sewer
d. Streets
e. Concrete Curb and Gutter
f. Street Signs
g. Street Lights
h. Sidewalks and Trails
i. Site Grading and Ponding
j. Traffic Control Devices
k. Setting of Lot & Block Monuments
1. Surveying and Staking
m. Landscaping, Screening, Blvd. Trees
The improvements shall be installed in accordance with Plans A through F, and in accordance with City standards, ordinances
and plans and specifications which have been prepared by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City
and approved by the City Engineer. Work done not in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, without prior
authorization of the City Engineer, shall be considered a violation of this agreement and a Default of the Contract. The
Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council and other agencies before proceeding with
construction. The Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable
level of quality control to the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the
approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the
Developer's expense, have one or more City inspector(s) and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part time basis. The
Developer or his engineer shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers
with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. Within sixty (60) days
after the completion of the improvements and before the security is released, the Developer shall supply the City with a
complete set of reproducible "As Built" plans.
The Developer shall also supply the City with a 3.5" diskette containing the following information in an Autocad Release 12
compatible format (.dwg or .dxffiles):
- approved plat
- proposed utilities (storm sewer, water main, sanitary sewer)
- layer names should be self explanatory, or a list must be included as a key.
If the Developer does not provide such information, the City will digitize the data. All costs associated with digitizing the data
will be the responsibility of the developer.
7. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required public improvements by July 1, 2000. The Developer
may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the
security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases. An extension of the security shall be considered an extension of this
contract and the extension of the contract will coincide with the date of the extension of the security.
8. Ownership ofImprovements. Upon the completion of the work and construction required to be done by this Agreement,
and written acceptance by the City Engineer, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property,
except for cable TV, electrical, gas, telephone and private streets, without further notice or action.
9. Warranty. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor
material and faulty workmanship. The warranty period for streets is one year. The warranty period for underground utilities is
two years. The warranty period for the streets shall commence after the final wear course has been completed and the streets
have been accepted by City Council resolution. The warranty period on underground utilities shall commence following their
completion and acceptance by the City. All trees shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free for twelve
(12) months after the security for the trees is released. Any replacements shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the
time of planting. The Developer shall post maintenance bonds or other surety acceptable to the City to secure the warranties.
The City shall retain ten percent (10%) of the security posted by the Developer until the bonds or other acceptable surety are
furnished to the City or until the warranty period has been completed, whichever first occurs. The retainage may be used to
pay for warranty work. The City standard specifications for utilities and street construction identify the procedures for final
acceptance of streets and utilities.
3
10. Gradine: Plan. The plat shall be graded and drainage provided by the Developer in accordance with Plan B.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, the Developer may start rough grading the lots within the stockpile
and easement areas in conformance with Plan B before the plat is filed if all fees have been paid and the City has been
furnished the required security. Additional rough grading may be allowed upon obtaining written authorization from the City
Engineer.
If the developer needs to change grading affecting drainage after homeowners are on site, he must notify all property
owners/residents of this work prior to its initiation.
11. Erosion Control and Fees. After the site is rough graded, but before any utility construction is commenced or building
permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the
City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if it is determined that the methods implemented are
insufficient to properly control erosion. All areas disturbed by the excavation and back-filling operations shall be re-seeded
forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched and disc anchored as
necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not
comply with the erosion control plan and schedule, or supplementary instructions received from the City, or in an emergency
determined at the sole discretion of the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion
immediately, without notice to the Developer. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed
action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and the City's rights or obligations hereunder. If the
Developer does not reimburse the City for any costs of the City incurred for such work within thirty (30) days, the City may
draw down the letter of credit to pay any costs. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless
the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements.
The Developer is responsible for a $ 400.00 Erosion and Sediment Control fee (previously paid) based upon the number of
lots in the plat, plus inspection fees at the current rate of $45.00 per hour as charged by the Soil and Water Conservation
District. The Developer is also responsible for a Water Quality Management Fee of $ 728.00 based upon the number of
acres in the plat.
12. LandscaDine:. The Developer shall landscape the plat in accordance with Plan C. The landscaping shall be accomplished
in accordance with a time schedule approved by the City.
13. Phased DeveloDment. The plat shall be developed in one (1) phase in accordance with Plan A. No earth moving,
construction of public improvements or other development shall be done in any phase until a fmal plat for the phase has been
filed in the County Recorder's office and the necessary security has been furnished to the City. The City may refuse to
approve final plats of subsequent phases until public improvements for all prior phases have been satisfactorily completed.
Subject to the terms of this Agreement, this Development Contract constitutes approval to develop the plat. Development of
subsequent phases may not proceed until development agreements for such phases are approved by the City.
14. Effect of Subdivision ADDroval. For two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, no amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or removing any part thereof
which has not been fmal platted, or official controls, shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or
dedications or platting required or permitted by the approved preliminary plat unless required by State or Federal law or agreed
to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full
extent permitted by State law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan
(including removing unplatted property from the urban service area), official controls, platting or dedication requirements
enacted after the date ofthis Agreement and may require submission of a new plat.
15. Surface Water Manae:ement Fee. The Developer shall pay an area storm water management charge of $ 106,474.00 in
lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the
plat over a 10 year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment
shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any
time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA
429.081. Storm sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time
the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
4
16. Wetland Conservation and Mith!:ation. The Developer shall comply with the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act, as
amended, and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. The Developer shall pay all costs associated with wetlands conservation and the
Wetlands Mitigation Plan.
17. Water Main Trunk Area Charl!:e. The Developer shall pay a water area charge of$ 23,423.00 for the plat in lieu of the
property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a
ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be
deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time.
The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA
429.081. Water area charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time
the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
18. Water Treatment Plant Fee. The Developer shall pay a water treatment plant fee of $ 43,165.00 for the plat in lieu of
the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over
a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be
deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time.
The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA
429.081. Water treatment plant fees for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at
the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
19. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charl!:e. The Developer shall pay a sanitary sewer trunk area charge of $ 18,430.00 for the
plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in
the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The
assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or
prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any
claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available
pursuant to MSA 429.081. Sanitary Trunk Sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon
requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
20. Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay a park dedication fee of $ 27,775.00 in satisfaction of the City's park
dedication requirements for the plat. The park dedication fee shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a
ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be
deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time.
The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA
429.081. The park dedication fees for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the
time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
21. Sealcoatinl!:. In lieu of assessing sealcoating three years from completion of the road construction, the Developer agrees
to pay a fee of $ N/A for initial sealcoating of streets in the subdivision. This fee shall be deposited in the City Road and
Bridge Fund upon execution of this Agreement.
22. GIS Fees. The Developer is responsible for a Government Information System fee of $ 2,450.00 based upon the number
of lots within the subdivision.
23. Easements. The Developer shall furnish the City at the time of execution of this Agreement with the easements
designated on the plat.
24. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors, a license to enter the plat
to perform all necessary work and/or inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the installation of public
improvements by the City. The license shall expire after the public improvements installed pursuant to the Development
Contract have been installed and accepted by the City.
5
25. Clean UP. The Developer shall weekly, or more often if required by the City Engineer, clear from the public streets and
property any soil, earth or debris resulting from construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns. All debris,
including brush, vegetation, trees and demolition materials, shall be disposed of off site. Burning of trees and structures shall
be prohibited, except for fIre training only. The City has a contract for street cleaning services. The City will have the right to
clean the streets as outlined in current City policy. The Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for street cleaning costs.
26. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Agreement, payment of real estate taxes including interest and
penalties, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements in the plat and construction of all
public improvements in the plat, the Developer shall furnish the City with a cash escrow, irrevocable letter of credit, or
alternative security acceptable to the City Administrator, from a bank (security) for $ 897,796. The bank and form of the
security shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The security shall be automatically renewing. The term of
the security may be extended from time to time if the extension is furnished to the City Administrator at least forty- fIve (45)
days prior to the stated expiration date of the security. If the required public improvements are not completed, or terms of the
Agreement are not satisfIed, at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of a letter of credit, the City may draw down the
letter of credit. The City may draw down the security, without prior notice, for any violation ofthis Agreement or Default of
the Contract. The amount of the security was calculated as follows:
Grading/Erosion Control
Sanitary Sewer
Water Main
Storm Sewer
Street Construction
$ 124,875
$ 135,685
$ 194,420
$ 154,366
$ 163,748
Monuments
St. Lights/Signs
Trees
Sodding
Wetland Mitigation
$ 24,500
$ 27,500
$ 11,250
$ 3,000
$N/A
Two Years Principal and Interest on Assessments $ 58,452
This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security.
27. Responsibilitv for Costs.
A. The Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but
not limited to, Soil and Water Conservation District charges, legal, planning, administrative, construction costs, engineering,
easements and inspection expenses incurred in connection with approval and acceptance of the plat, the preparation of this
Agreement, and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting the development of the
plat.
B. The Developer, except for City's willful misconduct, shall hold the City and its offIcers and employees harmless from
claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development.
The Developer shall indemnify the City and its offIcers and employees for all costs, damages or expenses which the City may
payor incur in consequence of such claims, including attorney's fees.
C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Agreement, including engineering and
attorney's fees.
D. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not
paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days
shall accrue interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum. If the bills are not paid within sixty (60) days, the City has the
right to draw from the Developers security to pay the bills.
28. Trash Enclosures. The Developer is responsible to require each builder to provide on site trash enclosures to contain all
construction debris, thereby preventing it from being blown off site, except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
29. Existinl! Tree Preservation. The Developer will walk the site with the City Forester and identify all signifIcant trees
which will be removed by on site grading. A dialogue between the Developer and City Forester regarding alternative grading
6
options will take place before any disputed tree is removed. All trees, stumps, brush and other debris removed during clearing
and grubbing operations shall be disposed of off site.
30. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the
City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the
City, provided the Developer, except in an emergency as determined by the City or as otherwise provided for in this
agreement, is first given written notice of the work in default, not less than 72 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license
for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the
City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part.
31. Miscellaneous.
A. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors or assigns, as the case may be.
B. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold
to third parties.
C. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement.
D. Building permits shall not be issued prior to completion of rough site grading, installation of erosion control devices and
submittal of a surveyor's certificate denoting all appropriate monuments have been installed. Only construction of
noncombustible materials shall be allowed until the water system is operational. If permits are issued prior to the completion
and acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of
public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, its contractors, subcontractors,
materialmen, employees, agents or third parties. Normal procedure requires that streets needed for access to approved uses
shall be paved with a bituminous surface before certificates of occupancy may be issued. However, the City Engineer is
authorized to waive this requirement when weather related circumstances prevent completion of street projects before the end
of the construction season. The Developer is responsible for maintaining said streets in a condition that will assure the access
of emergency vehicles at all times when such a waiver is granted.
E. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Agreement. To be
binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City
Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not be a waiver or release.
F. The Developer represents to the City, to the best of its knowledge, that the plat is not of "metropolitan significance" and
that an environmental impact statement is not required. However, if the City or another governmental entity or agency
determines that such a review is needed, the Developer shall prepare it in compliance with legal requirements so issued from
said agency. The Developer shall reimburse the City for all expenses, including staff time and attorney fees, that the City
incurs in assisting in the preparation of the review.
G. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all City, County,
Metropolitan, State and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances
and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow
any construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City's demand, the Developer
shall cease work until there is compliance.
H. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. After the Developer has
completed the work required of it under this Agreement, at the Developer's request the City will execute and deliver a release
to the Developer.
I. Developer shall take out and maintain until six months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability
and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out
of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for
bodily injury or death shall not be less than $500,000.00 for one person and $1,000,000.00 for each occurrence; limits for
7
property damage shall not be less than $200,000.00 for each occurrence. The City shall be named as an additional named
insured on said policy, and Developer shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City prior to the City signing the
plat.
1. The Developer shall obtain a Wetlands Compliance Certificate from the City.
K. Upon breach of the terms of this Agreement, the City may, without notice to the Developer, draw down the Developer's
cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit as provided in paragraph 26 of this Agreement. The City may draw down this
security in the amount of $500.00 per day that the Developer is in violation. The City, in its sole discretion, shall determine
whether the Developer is in violation of the Agreement. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 30 hereof, this determination
may be made without notice to the Developer. It is stipulated that the violation of any term will result in damages to the City
in an amount which will be impractical and extremely difficult to ascertain. It is agreed that the per day sum stipulated is a
reasonable amount to compensate the City for its damages.
L. The Developer will be required to conduct all major activities to construct Plans A-F during the following hours of
operation:
Monday - Friday
Saturday
Sunday
7:00 A.M. until 7:00 P.M.
8:00 A.M. until 5:00 P.M.
Not Allowed
This does not apply to activities that are required on a 24 hour basis such as dewatering, etc. Any deviation from the above
hours are subject to approval of the City Engineer.
M. The Developer is responsible to require each builder within the development to provide a Class 5 aggregate entrance for
every house that is to be constructed in the development. This entrance is required to be installed upon initial construction of
the home. See City Standard Plate No. 362A for construction requirements.
N. The Developer shall be responsible for the control of weeds in excess of twelve inches (12") on vacant lots or boulevards
within their development as per City Code 6-7-2. Failure to control weeds will be considered a Developer's Default as
outlined in Paragraph 30 of this Agreement and the Developer will reimburse the City as defined in said Paragraph 30.
32. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its
employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified or registered mail at the following address:
Tim Giles
Glenview Townhomes, L.L.P.
1608 W. Highway 13
Bumsville, MN 55337
Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either and delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by
certified mail or registered mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address:
John F. Erar, City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
8
. .
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
By:
DEVELOPER:
Glenview Townhomes, L.L.P.
By:
SIGNA TURE PAGE
Gerald Ristow, Mayor
John F. Erar, City Administrator
Its:
Drafted by:
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, Minnesota 55024
(612)463-7111
9
. .
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(ss.
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, ofthe City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by the City Council.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(ss.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of
,19_
~ ,~
Townhomes, L.L.P. a Limited Liability Partnership on behalf of the limited liability partnership.
of Glenview
Notary Public
10
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
IOd
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~
FROM: Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator ~
SUBJECT: Bristol Square Development Contract
DATE: August 17,1998
INTRODUCTION
The Development Contract for Bristol Square has been drafted in accordance with the
conditions presented at the August 17, 1998 City Council meeting.
DISCUSSION
The Bristol Square Development Contract requires the following conditions to be agreed
upon:
1. the Developer enters into the Development Contract; and
2. the Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement; and
3. the Developer participates in the costs for the improvements to County Road 72
proposed in the feasibility report accepted by the City Council on June 15, 1998.
Currently, the City and Dakota County are negotiating an agreement to upgrade
County Road 72. The Developer will be responsible for his proportionate share of the
Street and Utility costs that Dakota County does not fund. The improvement of
County Road 72 is hereby agreed upon by the parties to confer special benefit to the
Bristol Square Plat. The City shall assess the costs of the improvements to County
Road 72 against the plat in accordance with the City's local improvement policy
based on the final project costs. The Developer and any successor's or assigns, waive
any procedural or substantive objection to assessments for the construction of County
Road 72, including the claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the execution of the Bristol Square Development Contract and adopt a
resolution authorizing its signing, contingent upon approval by the Engineering Division
and City Attorney.
Respectfu submitted,
~.~
Lee Smick, AICP
Planning Coordinator
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
- Bristol Square -
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington,
Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th day of August, 1998 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. _ , the City Council approved the final plat of Bristol Square
contingent upon the following conditions:
1. The Developer enters into the Development Contract.
2. The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
3. The Developer participates in the costs for the improvements to County Road 72 proposed in the
feasibility report accepted by the City Council on June 15, 1998. Currently, the City and Dakota
County are negotiating an agreement to upgrade County Road 72. The Developer will be responsible
for his proportionate share of the Street and Utility costs that Dakota County does not fund. The
improvement of County Road 72 is hereby agreed upon by the parties to confer special benefit to the
Bristol Square Plat. The City shall assess the costs of the improvements to County Road 72 against the
plat in accordance with the City's local improvement policy based on the final project costs. The
Developer and any successor's or assigns, waive any procedural or substantive objection to
assessments for the construction of County Road 72, including the claim that the assessment exceeds
the benefit to the property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The aforementioned development contract, a copy of which is on file in the Clerk's office, is
hereby approved.
2. The Mayor and Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to sign such contract.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day
of August, 1998.
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of August, 1998.
City Administrator
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
AGREEMENT dated this 17th day of August, 1998, by and between the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal
corporation (CITY) and Bristol Development Corporation, a Minnesota corporation (DEVELOPER).
1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for Bristol Square First Addition
(also referred to in this Development Contract [CONTRACT or AGREEMENT] as the PLAT). The land is legally
described as:
That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 32, Township 114, Range 19, Dakota County,
Minnesota, lying southerly and westerly of the following described line:
Commencing at the northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence southerly along the
east line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 245.36 feet more or less to its intersection
with a line parallel with and 516.00 feet southerly of, as measured at right angles to the centerline of the main track of
the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad; thence continuing south along said east line a distance of
379.50 feet to the point of beginning of the line to the be described; thence deflecting 90 degrees right and westerly a
distance of 1044.79 feet; thence deflecting 90 degrees right and northerly a distance of 85.28 feet more or less to its
intersection with said line which is parallel with and 516.00 feet southerly of, as measured at right to the centerline of
said Railroad; thence southwesterly along said parallel line a distance of 288.51 feet more or less, to the west line of
said Northeast quarter of the Northwest Quarter, said line there terminating.
Excepting therefrom the east 66.00 feet thereof. And also excepting therefrom the west 10.00 feet of the south 193.00
feet thereof. And also excepting that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 32, Township
114, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows:
Commencing at the northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence southerly along the
east line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 245.36 more or less to its intersection with a
line parallel with and 516.00 feet southerly of, as measured at right angles to the centerline of the main track of the
Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad; thence continuing south along said east line a distance of 379.50
feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence deflecting 90 degrees right and westerly a distance of
1044.79 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as point "A"; thence deflecting 90 degrees right and northerly a distance
of 85.28 feet more or less, to its intersection with said line which is parallel with and 516.00 feet southerly of, as
measured at right to the centerline of said Railroad; thence southwesterly along said parallel line with a distance of
288.51 feet more or less, to the west line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence south along said
west line a distance of 110.00 feet; thence northeasterly 288 feet more or less to said point "A"; thence easterly a
distance of 400.00 feet along the north line of the property; thence deflecting 90 degrees right and south a distance of
71.2 feet; thence along a line southeasterly 650.4 feet more or less to its intersection with the east line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence north along said line 156.80 feet to the point of beginning,
together with the property south and east of County Road No. 72.
1
2. Conditions of Approval. The City hereby approves the plat on the condition that:
a) the Developer enters into this Agreement; and
b) the Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; and
c) the Developer participates in the costs for the improvements to County Road 72 proposed in the feasibility report accepted
by the City Council June 15t\ 1998. Currently the City and Dakota County are negotiating an agreement to upgrade
County Road 72. The Developer will be responsible for his proportionate share of the Street and Utility costs that Dakota
County does not fund. The improvement of County Road 72 is hereby agreed by the parties to confer special benefit to
the Bristol Square Plat. The City shall assess the costs of the improvements to County Road 72 against the plat in
accordance with the City's local improvement policy based on the fmal project costs. The Developer and any successors
or assigns, waive any procedural or substantive objection to assessments for the construction of County Road 72,
including any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
3. Development Plans. The Developer shall develop the plat in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be
attached to this Agreement. The plans may be prepared by the Developer, subject to City approval, after entering into this
Agreement but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract,
subject to paragraphs 6 and 31 G, the plans shall control. The required plans are:
Plan A - Final Plat
Plan B - Final Soil Erosion Control and Grading Plans
Plan C - Landscape Plan
Plan D - ZoninglDevelopment Map
Plan E - Wetlands Mitigation as required by the
Plan F - Final Street and Utility Plans and Specifications
The Developer shall use its best efforts to assure timely application to the utility companies for the following utilities:
underground natural gas, electrical, cable television, and telephone.
4. Sales Office Requirements. At any location within the plat where lots and/or homes are sold which are part of this
subdivision, the Developer agrees to install a sales board on which a copy of the approved plat, fmal utility plan and a zoning
map or planned unit development plan are displayed, showing the relationship between this subdivision and the adjoining
neighborhood. The zoning and land use classification of all land and network of major streets within 350 feet of the plat shall
be included.
5. Zonine:/Development Map. The Developer shall provide an 8 1/2" x 14" scaled map of the plat and land within 350' of
the plat containing the following information:
a. platted property;
b. existing and future roads;
c. future phases;
d. existing and proposed land uses; and
e. future ponds.
6. Required Public Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following:
a. Sanitary Sewer Lateral System
b. Water System (trunk and lateral)
c. Storm Sewer
d. Streets
e. Concrete Curb and Gutter
f. Street Signs
g. Street Lights
h. Sidewalks and Trails
i. Site Grading and Ponding
j. Traffic Control Devices
k. Setting of Lot & Block Monuments
1. Surveying and Staking
m. Landscaping, Screening, Blvd. Trees
2
The improvements shall be installed in accordance with Plans A through F, and in accordance with City standards, ordinances
and plans and specifications which have been prepared by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City
and approved by the City Engineer. Work done not in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, without prior
authorization of the City Engineer, shall be considered a violation of this agreement and a Default of the Contract. The
Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council and other agencies before proceeding with
construction. The Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable
level of quality control to the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the
approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the
Developer's expense, have one or more City inspector(s) and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part time basis. The
Developer or his engineer shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers
with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. Within sixty (60) days
after the completion of the improvements and before the security is released, the Developer shall supply the City with a
complete set of reproducible "As Built" plans.
The Developer shall also supply the City with a 3.5" diskette containing the following information in an Autocad Release 12
compatible format (.dwg or .dxffiles):
- approved plat
- proposed utilities (storm sewer, water main, sanitary sewer)
- layer names should be self explanatory, or a list must be included as a key.
If the Developer does not provide such information, the City will digitize the data. All costs associated with digitizing the data
will be the responsibility of the developer.
7. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required public improvements by July 1, 2000. The Developer
may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the
security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases. An extension of the security shall be considered an extension of this
contract and the extension of the contract will coincide with the date of the extension of the security.
8. Ownership ofImprovements. Upon the completion of the work and construction required to be done by this Agreement,
and written acceptance by the City Engineer, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property,
except for cable TV, electrical, gas, and telephone, without further notice or action.
9. Warranty. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor
material and faulty workmanship. The warranty period for streets is one year. The warranty period for underground utilities is
two years. The warranty period for the streets shall commence after the final wear course has been completed and the streets
have been accepted by City Council resolution. The warranty period on underground utilities shall commence following their
completion and acceptance by the City. All trees shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free for twelve
(12) months after the security for the trees is released. Any replacements shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the
time of planting. The Developer shall post maintenance bonds or other surety acceptable to the City to secure the warranties.
The City shall retain ten percent (10%) of the security posted by the Developer until the bonds or other acceptable surety are
furnished to the City or until the warranty period has been completed, whichever first occurs. The retainage may be used to
pay for warranty work. The City standard specifications for utilities and street construction identify the procedures for fmal
acceptance of streets and utilities.
10. Gradinl!: Plan. The plat shall be graded and drainage provided by the Developer in accordance with Plan B.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, the Developer may start rough grading the lots within the stockpile
and easement areas in conformance with Plan B before the plat is filed if all fees have been paid and the City has been
furnished the required security. Additional rough grading may be allowed upon obtaining written authorization from the City
Engineer.
If the developer needs to change grading affecting drainage after homeowners are on site, he must notifY all property
owners/residents of this work prior to its initiation.
3
11. Erosion Control and Fees. After the site is rough graded, but before any utility construction is commenced or building
permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the
City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if it is determined that the methods implemented are
insufficient to properly control erosion. All areas disturbed by the excavation and back-filling operations shall be re-seeded
forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched and disc anchored as
necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not
comply with the erosion control plan and schedule, or supplementary instructions received from the City, or in an emergency
determined at the sole discretion of the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion
immediately, without notice to the Developer. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed
action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and the City's rights or obligations hereunder. If the
Developer does not reimburse the City for any costs of the City incurred for such work within thirty (30) days, the City may
draw down the letter of credit to pay any costs. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless
the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements.
The Developer is responsible for a $ 350.00 Erosion and Sediment Control fee (previously paid) based upon the number of
lots in the plat, plus inspection fees at the current rate of $45.00 per hour as charged by the Soil and Water Conservation
District. The Developer is also responsible for a Water Quality Management Fee of $ 211.00 based upon the number of
acres in the plat.
12. Landscapinl!:. The Developer shall landscape the plat in accordance with Plan C. The landscaping shall be accomplished
in accordance with a time schedule approved by the City.
13. Phased Development. The plat shall be developed in one (1) phase in accordance with Plan A. No earth moving,
construction of public improvements or other development shall be done in any phase until a final plat for the phase has been
filed in the County Recorder's office and the necessary security has been furnished to the City. The City may refuse to
approve final plats of subsequent phases until public improvements for all prior phases have been satisfactorily completed.
Subject to the terms of this Agreement, this Development Contract constitutes approval to develop the plat. Development of
subsequent phases may not proceed until development agreements for such phases are approved by the City.
14. Effect of Subdivision Approval. For two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, no amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or removing any part thereof
which has not been fmal platted, or official controls, shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or
dedications or platting required or permitted by the approved preliminary plat unless required by State or Federal law or agreed
to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full
extent permitted by State law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan
(including removing unplatted property from the urban service area), official controls, platting or dedication requirements
enacted after the date of this Agreement and may require submission of a new plat.
15. Surface Water Manal!:ement Fee. The Developer shall pay an area storm water management charge of $ 36,396.99 in
lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the
plat over a 10 year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment
shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any
time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MS
429.081. Storm sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time
the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
16. Wetland Conservation and Mitil!:ation. The Developer shall comply with the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act, as
amended, and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. The Developer shall pay all costs associated with wetlands conservation and the
Wetlands Mitigation Plan.
17. Water Main Trunk Area Charl!:e. The Developer shall pay a water area charge of $ 8,313.40 for the plat in lieu of the
property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a
ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be
deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time.
4
The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MS
429.081. Water area charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time
the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. A credit of $15,940.00 will be given to the Developer for Water
Main Trunk oversizing within the plat. The result is a net credit of $7,627.00 which will be credited to the Developer in
future phases of the project.
18. Water Treatment Plant Fee. The Developer shall pay a water treatment plant fee of $ 20,370.00 for the plat in lieu of
the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over
a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be
deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time.
The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MS
429.081. Water treatment plant fees for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at
the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
19. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charl!:e. The Developer shall pay a sanitary sewer trunk area charge of $ 6,541.00 for the
plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in
the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The
assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or
prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any
claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available
pursuant to MS 429.081. Sanitary Trunk Sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon
requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
20. Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay a park dedication fee of $ 8,967.50 in satisfaction of the City's park
dedication requirements for the plat. The park dedication fee shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a
ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at eight percent (8%) per annum. The assessment shall be
deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time.
The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MS
429.081. The park dedication fees for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the
time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into.
21. Sea1coatinl!:. In lieu of assessing sealcoating three years from completion of the road construction, the Developer agrees
to pay a fee of $ N/ A for initial sealcoating of streets in the subdivision. This fee shall be deposited in the City Road and
Bridge Fund upon execution of this Agreement.
22. GIS Fees. The Developer is responsible for a Government Information System fee of $ 1,150.00 based upon the number
of lots within the subdivision.
23. Easements. The Developer shall furnish the City at the time of execution of this Agreement with the easements
designated on the plat. These include: Outlot A, Outlot B, Outlot N, Lot 9 Block 1, Lot 19 Block 2, Lot 8 Block 3, Lot 10
Block 4.
24. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors, a license to enter the plat
to perform all necessary work and/or inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the installation of public
improvements by the City. The license shall expire after the public improvements installed pursuant to the Development
Contract have been installed and accepted by the City.
25. Clean UP. The Developer shall weekly, or more often if required by the City Engineer, clear from the public streets and
property any soil, earth or debris resulting from construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns. All debris,
including brush, vegetation, trees and demolition materials, shall be disposed of off site. Burning of trees and structures shall
be prohibited, except for fire training only. The City has a contract for street cleaning services. The City will have the right to
clean the streets as outlined in current City policy. The Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for street cleaning costs.
5
26. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Agreement, payment of real estate taxes including interest and
penalties, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements in the plat and construction of all
public improvements in the plat, the Developer shall furnish the City with a cash escrow, irrevocable letter of credit, or
alternative security acceptable to the City Administrator, from a bank (security) for $ 546,408. The bank and form of the
security shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The security shall be automatically renewing. The term of
the security may be extended from time to time if the extension is furnished to the City Administrator at least forty-five (45)
days prior to the stated expiration date of the security. Ifthe required public improvements are not completed, or terms ofthe
Agreement are not satisfied, at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of a letter of credit, the City may draw down the
letter of credit. The City may draw down the security, without prior notice, for any violation of this Agreement or Default of
the Contract. The amount of the security was calculated as follows:
GradinglErosion Control
Sanitary Sewer
Water Main
Storm Sewer
Street Construction
$ 97,013
$ 102,946
$ 121,494
$ 94,120
$ 80,341
Monuments
St. Lights/Signs
Blvd. Trees
Blvd. Sodding
Wetland Mitigation
$ 11 ,500
$ 7,500
$ 11,250
$ 975
$N/A
Two Years Principal and Interest on Assessments $ 19,269
This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security.
27. Responsibility for Costs.
A. The Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but
not limited to, Soil and Water Conservation District charges, legal, planning, administrative, construction costs, engineering,
easements and inspection expenses incurred in connection with approval and acceptance of the plat, the preparation of this
Agreement, and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting the development of the
plat.
B. The Developer, except for City's willful misconduct, shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from
claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development.
The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages or expenses which the City may
payor incur in consequence of such claims, including attorney's fees.
C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Agreement, including engineering and
attorney's fees.
D. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not
paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days
shall accrue interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum. If the bills are not paid within sixty (60) days, the City has the
right to draw from the Developers security to pay the bills.
28. Trash Enclosures. The Developer is responsible to require each builder to provide on site trash enclosures to contain all
construction debris, thereby preventing it from being blown off site, except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
29. Existinl!: Tree Preservation. The Developer will walk the site with the City Forester and identify all significant trees
which will be removed by on site grading. A dialogue between the Developer and City Forester regarding alternative grading
options will take place before any disputed tree is removed. All trees, stumps, brush and other debris removed during clearing
and grubbing operations shall be disposed of off site.
30. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the
City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the
City, provided the Developer, except in an emergency as determined by the City or as otherwise provided for in this
agreement, is first given written notice of the work in default, not less than 72 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license
6
for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the
City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part.
31. Miscellaneous.
A. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors or assigns, as the case may be.
B. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold
to third parties.
C. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement.
D. Building permits shall not be issued prior to completion of rough site grading, installation of erosion control devices and
submittal of a surveyor's certificate denoting all appropriate monuments have been installed. Only construction of
noncombustible materials shall be allowed until the water system is operational. If permits are issued prior to the completion
and acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of
public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, its contractors, subcontractors,
materialmen, employees, agents or third parties. Normal procedure requires that streets needed for access to approved uses
shall be paved with a bituminous surface before certificates of occupancy may be issued. However, the City Engineer is
authorized to waive this requirement when weather related circumstances prevent completion of street projects before the end
of the construction season. The Developer is responsible for maintaining said streets in a condition that will assure the access
of emergency vehicles at all times when such a waiver is granted.
E. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Agreement. To be
binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City
Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not be a waiver or release.
F. The Developer represents to the City, to the best of its knowledge, that the plat is not of "metropolitan significance" and
that an environmental impact statement is not required. However, if the City or another governmental entity or agency
determines that such a review is needed, the Developer shall prepare it in compliance with legal requirements so issued from
said agency. The Developer shall reimburse the City for all expenses, including staff time and attorney fees, that the City
incurs in assisting in the preparation of the review.
G. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all City, County,
Metropolitan, State and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances
and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow
any construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City's demand, the Developer
shall cease work until there is compliance.
H. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. After the Developer has
completed the work required of it under this Agreement, at the Developer's request the City will execute and deliver a release
to the Developer.
I. Developer shall take out and maintain until six months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability
and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out
of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for
bodily injury or death shall not be less than $500,000.00 for one person and $1,000,000.00 for each occurrence; limits for
property damage shall not be less than $200,000.00 for each occurrence. The City shall be named as an additional named
insured on said policy, and Developer shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City prior to the City signing the
plat.
J. The Developer shall obtain a Wetlands Compliance Certificate from the City.
7
K. Upon breach of the terms of this Agreement, the City may, without notice to the Developer, draw down the Developer's
cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit as provided in paragraph 26 of this Agreement. The City may draw down this
security in the amount of $500.00 per day that the Developer is in violation. The City, in its sole discretion, shall determine
whether the Developer is in violation of the Agreement. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 30 hereof, this determination
may be made without notice to the Developer. It is stipulated that the violation of any term will result in damages to the City
in an amount which will be impractical and extremely difficult to ascertain. It is agreed that the per day sum stipulated is a
reasonable amount to compensate the City for its damages.
L. The Developer will be required to conduct all major activities to construct Plans A-F during the following hours of
operation:
Monday - Friday
Saturday
Sunday
7:00 AM. until 7:00 P.M.
8:00 A.M. until 5:00 P.M.
Not Allowed
This does not apply to activities that are required on a 24 hour basis such as dewatering, etc. Any deviation from the above
hours are subject to approval of the City Engineer.
M. The Developer is responsible to require each builder within the development to provide a Class 5 aggregate entrance for
every house that is to be constructed in the development. This entrance is required to be installed upon initial construction of
the home. See City Standard Plate No. 362A for construction requirements.
N. The Developer shall be responsible for the control of weeds in excess of twelve inches (12") on vacant lots or boulevards
within their development as per City Code 6-7-2. Failure to control weeds will be considered a Developer's Default as
outlined in Paragraph 30 of this Agreement and the Developer will reimburse the City as defmed in said Paragraph 30.
32. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its
employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified or registered mail at the following address:
Jim Allen
Bristol Development Corporation
12433 Princeton Avenue
Savage, MN 55378
Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either and delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by
certified mail or registered mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address:
John F. Erar, City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
8
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
By:
DEVELOPER:
Bristol Development Corporation
By:
SIGNA TURE PAGE
Gerald Ristow, Mayor
John F. Erar, City Administrator
Its:
Drafted by:
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, Minnesota 55024
(612) 463-7111
9
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(ss.
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 granted by the City Council.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(ss.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of
,19_
~ ,~
Development Corporation, a corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation.
of Bristol
Notary Public
10
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
ba-
..
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
City Administrator~
FROM: David L. Olson
Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Citizen Comments - 300 1 sl Street
DATE: August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
John Richardson inquired at the last City Council meeting as to the status of the property
at 300 1 sl Street. The following is an update of the status of this property.
DISCUSSION
This is the rental property located at the corner of 1 sl Street and Elm Street that was
severely damaged by fire the past winter. The present owner of the property is Mel
Neumann who lives in Apple Valley and owns this property as a rental property. Mr.
Neumann has previously cooperated with the City regarding requests to secure the house,
remove debris from the property, and periodically cut the grass. Since the fire, however
the length of the grass has come very close to being a violation of the City's weed
ordinance.
The future ownership of this property is currently uncertain due to complications
associated with delinquent property taxes. The City has been informed that a private
party has recently purchased the outstanding mortgage on the property from a lending
institution. However this party recently became aware of the extent of back taxes owed
on the property which now totals in excess of $12,000 including penalties. This party,
upon learning of the tax situation, now is unwilling to pursue or accept assignment of the
property ownership because of the responsibility for back taxes that accompany
assignment of the property. He is presently attempting to cancel his previous purchase of
the outstanding mortgage.
Dakota County has indicated that they would commence tax forfeiture proceedings in
1999 since at that point the property will have been tax delinquent for four years which is
the requirement for non-homesteaded property. The owner of the property would have a
"
one year redemption period after this process has commenced which means the property
would not become available as a tax forfeited property until sometime in the year 2000.
If there is still a mortgage outstanding during the one year redemption period, it is quite
possible that the lender would pay the outstanding taxes rather than let the County gain
control of the property.
It would appear that the City has several options available from which to choose at this
point. They include:
. The City could issue a written order under MS 463.17 to the property owner and lien
holder for the property indicating the necessary repairs or demolition required and
provided a reasonable period of time for the owner or lien holder to complete this
work. As part of this written order, the City would state that it would seek a motion
for summary enforcement from the District Court if the required corrective action is
not completed within the specified time. If the City's motion for summary
enforcement is granted by the Court, the City could have the work completed (which
would likely be demolition) and assess the cost against the property.
Based on the bids that were recently obtained for demolition of the Thelen house
adjacent to SSMC, the demolition costs could range between $4,000 and $6,000. In
addition to the actual demolition costs, the City could incur additional legal and other
costs of up to $6,000 according to the City Attorney. The City would have to
recognize that it may be several years before the costs for the demolition would be
paid along with other back taxes. It should also be noted that the private party that is
attempting to cancel his purchase of the mortgage for this property has indicated he
would be willing to proceed with the demolition of the structure if he is unsuccessful
in canceling his purchase of the mortgage.
If the City did complete the demolition and the property did become tax forfeited, the
City would have the first opportunity to acquire the property from the County if the
County determined that they had no public use for the property. The likely cost of the
acquisition would be the amount of back taxes.
. The City or more likely, the City HRA could become involved in the attempt to
purchase this property. The outstanding mortgage amount is reportedly in the range
of $30,000. The payment of the full outstanding mortgage amount would not be
recommended since this along with the back taxes and the cost of the demolition of
the structure would result in a total cost of $52,000 to $54,000 for a 9032 square foot
lot.
. Finally, the City could choose not to do anything and allow private market forces to
determine the outcome the property. This choice would result in the property
remaining as-is with the potential for final resolution occurring within the next 6 to 12
months or longer.
BUDGET IMPACT
There are no funds budgeted in the 1998 or 1999 Budgets for the demolition of this
structure. If this becomes a project in which the HRA is to be involved in relation to the
redevelopment of the property or as the owner of the property, it is possible that HRA
Special Revenue Funds could be utilized for the demolition cost.
ACTION REOUESTED
If the Council so desires, the City could proceed to notify both the current owner and lien
holder of its proposed intent to pursue abatement of the unsafe and hazardous conditions
of this property through MS 463 unless the existing conditions are not voluntarily abated
within 30 days. If the renovation or demolition has not occurred within this determined
time frame, the Council should contact the HRA Board to determine whether the HRA
would be willing to expend HRA Special Revenue funds to underwrite the legal and
demolition costs to have the condition of the structure corrected.
Respectfully submitted,
avid L. Olson
Community Development Director
cc: HRA Chair and Board
Mel Neumann
Lien Holder
John Richardson
,Minnc;:sqta Statutes 1997, 463.17
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.uslst97/463/17.html
Minnesota Statutes 1997. Table ofChaoters
Table of contents for Chapter 463
463.17 The order.
Subdivision 1. Contents. The order shall be in
writing; recite the grounds therefor; specify the necessary
repairs, if any, and provide a reasonable time for compliance;
and shall state that a motion for summary enforcement of the
order will be made to the district court of the county in which
the hazardous building or property is situated unless corrective
action is taken, or unless an answer is filed within the time
specified in section 463.18.
Subd. 2. Service. The order shall be served upon the
owner of record, or the owner's agent if an agent is in charge
of the building or property, and upon the occupying tenant, if
there is one, and upon all lien holders of record, in the manner
provided for service of a summons in a civil action. If the
owner cannot be found, the order shall be served upon the owner
by posting it at the main entrance to the building or, if there
is no building, in a conspicuous place on the property, and by
four weeks' publication in the official newspaper of the
municipality if it has one, otherwise in a legal newspaper in
the county.
Subd. 3. Filing. A copy of the order with proof of
service shall be filed with the court administrator of district
court of the county in which the hazardous building or property
is located not less than five days prior to the filing of a
motion pursuant to section 463.19 to enforce the order. At the
time of filing such order the municipality shall file for record
with the county recorder or registrar of titles a notice of the
pendency of the proceeding, describing with reasonable certainty
the lands affected and the nature of the order. If the
proceeding be abandoned the municipality shall within ten days
thereafter file with the county recorder a notice to that effect.
HIST: 1965 c 393 s 3; 1976 c 181 s 2; 1986 c 444; lSp1986 c 3
art 1 s 82; 1989 c 328 art 6 s 9
Copyright 1997 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
1 of 1
8/13/9810:14 AM
\ .
. ,
]
l ~
IoL- ] ~
--:3' CIl 1
~~l
c:,) ~ ..
l,
~
''"72
,~
.~
'-:"'\
'~. V
.\.. \
\'-'~
~
'f..
-:2. c
- Pa
~ 0
\lJ Q..:.
~
-
-
t'"
~
\)
2 ,
~ M
~
VI ~
-
..) \()
Cl
~ In
~
<.
-
t
~
N
rv1
N
-
-==
..
.......
..
..
-
.J:
-!:
i
..
-
-:
-
--=
=t
-
-
..
-:
..
:i
...,
...
......
-~
~
......
::
~
..e
-t;
:;
I
I
..)
\ .. .\ ,
L2~e- 4
3J7's- ~Pf--;,t;,,, 4~--Ar/
j7':~0.U74 ~/f/ 5302~
C::~1 Lc<r-/ ~ ~<'- c'r'?
jJ~ f:: & ~L /VI 7 /,t~, ;C;~7 .
'r- /Y/? /P?~~ ~r-
~vC-
COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR
August 3, 1998
k
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was caIled 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 (arrived at 7:50 p.m.)
None
City Administrator Erar, Attorney Joel Jamnik, City Management Team. Dan
Siebenaler and Lee Mann were absent.
4. APPROVE A GENDA
MOTION by Gamer, second by Cordes to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
. Proclamation declaring the importance of arts in the community presented by the Mayor to the
Farmington Area Arts Network.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Concerns brought up at the July 20, 1998 Council meeting by Cheryl Retterath, 19232 Evenston
Drive, regarding erosion control were noted and have been addressed by Staff.
Outcome of the meeting with Farmington Area Arts Network members was noted.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION by Cordes, second by Gamer to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
a) Approved Council Minutes 7/20/98 (Regular)
b) Adopted RESOLUTION R68-98 accepting an easement for Northern Natural Gas.
c) Adopted RESOLUTION R69-98 awarding contract to Dick'sILakeville Sanitation for residential
and commercial recycling.
d) Approved appointment of Gary Deutschle as a full-time Police Officer effective August 10, 1998.
e) Approved Capital Outlay for Fire Department for airbags, ropes, and miscellaneous rescue and
repelling equipment.
f) Approved amendment to the Fire Relief Association by-laws increasing the annual pension benefit
to $2,000 effective January 1, 1999.
g) Approved bills.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. AWARD OF CONTRACT
Council Minutes (Regular)
August 3, 1998
Page 2
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) Adopt Resolution - St. Michael's Church Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Mr. Robert Adelmann, 22553 Denmark Avenue, is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
from the existing Industrial land use designation to Low Density Residential for 20 acres at the
southeast intersection of Denmark Avenue and Ash Street. St. Michael's Catholic Church is
proposing a 44,000+ square foot church facility on a 9-acre campus with future expansion of the
campus of up to 20 acres. The Planning Commission reviewed and approved the Comprehensive
Plan Amendment from Industrial to Low Density Residential for the 20 acres at a public hearing on
July 14, 1998. MOTION by Gamer, second by Fitch to adopt RESOLUTION R70-98 approving
the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Industrial to Low Density Residential for 20 acres at the
southeast intersection of Denmark Avenue and Ash Street, subject to the Metropolitan Council's
approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
b) Adopt Ordinance - St. Michael's Church Rezoning
An application has been submitted by Mr. Robert Adelmann, 22553 Denmark Avenue, to rezone 20
acres of his property from the existing 1-1 (Light Industry) zoning designation to the requested R-l
(Low Density Residential) at the southeast intersection of Denmark Avenue and Ash Street. The
proposed R-l (Low Density Residential) designation is being requested to provide for the location of
the new St. Michael's Church facility, which was approved as a Conditional Use on July 14, 1998 by
the Planning Commission. St. Michael's Catholic Church is proposing a 44,000+ square foot church
facility on a 9-acre campus with future expansion of the campus of up to 20 acres. MOTION by
Gamer, second by Cordes to adopt ORDINANCE 098-415 approving the rezoning of the Robert
Adelmann/St. Michael's Catholic Church property from I-I (Light Industry) to R-l (Low Density).
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
c) Adopt Resolution - Robert Adelman Comprehensive Plan Amendment
An application has been submitted by Mr. Robert Adelmann, 22553 Denmark Avenue, to amend the
Comprehensive Plan from Industrial to High Density Residential for 45 acres located at the southeast
intersection of Denmark A venue/CSAH 31 and Ash Street. The Planning Commission reviewed,
but recommended denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment at a public hearing on July 14,
1998. Reasons for denial are: 1) almost all of the 45 acres is currently located outside of the current
MUSA boundary; 2) the city is currently undergoing a Comprehensive Plan update and this
possibility could be further examined during that process; 3) this property still maintains the
potential for an Industrial land use due to its proximity to an active rail line. Mr. Mike McCain,
Attorney for Mr. Adelmann, found it best to withdraw the request stating the amendment could be
reviewed during the overall plan update. A formal letter stating withdrawal will be sent to the City.
d) Adopt Ordinance - Robert Adelmann Rezoning
Mr. Mike McCain, Attorney for Mr. Adelmann, withdrew the request.
e) Adopt Resolution - Glenview Townhomes Final Plat
The Mayor stepped down from his seat at the table. The Glenview Townhomes & Commercial Final
Plat was brought forward to the City Council for approval. The property is located east of Trunk
Highway 3, north of County Road 72, and south of the Wausau property. Mr. Tim Giles, Developer
for Glenview Townhomes, is proposing an 89-unit townhome development on 11.89 acres. During
. I
Council Minutes (Regular)
August 3, 1998
Page 3
the construction of Glenview Townhomes, the Developer has proposed that no construction traffic
access the Bristol Square development, therefore requiring that Glenview construction traffic be
routed to the Trunk Highway 3 Frontage Road. The Developer will utilize the Trunk Highway 3
Frontage Road by constructing the interior street system in Glenview at one time rather than phasing
the project from the east end of the site to the west as originally planned. There are three possible
scenarios for funding the frontage road improvements: 1) require Mr. Giles to pay for the
improvements to the frontage road because his development will generate the most traffic from the
land uses along the roadway; 2) the City includes the project in the 1999 CIP and assesses Mr.
Giles, Wausau Supply Company and other benefiting properties for the costs of the improvements;
3) the City includes the project in the 1999 CIP and MNDOT provides funding assistance through
the cooperative agreements program. The earliest the project could be included in MNDOT's
program is fiscal year 2000, which would allow construction after July 1, 1999. City staff
recommends approval of the Glenview Townhomes and Commercial Final Plat contingent upon the
following: 1) the resolution of the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road issue with MNDOT, Mr. Giles
and Wausau Supply Company. The Developer must agree to waive any and all objections to the
assessments for the construction of the frontage road as determined by the City Council, including
the claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to all properties within the project; this would
include the Wausau property; 2) that the frontage road be constructed in 1999; 3) that the City
Engineer approves the resolution of engineering issues and compliance with any required revisions
to the construction documents; 4) that Final Plat approval is contingent upon the preparation and
execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans.
Eighteen names were inadvertently left off the abstract mailing list, notifying residents of the
development project. Jill and Jackie Frankie, 3359 213th Street, expressed several concerns to
Council regarding not being notified of the development, as the back of their property aligns with the
proposed development. They requested a 2-week delay in the Final Plat approval so the residents
could be better informed regarding the development. Mr. Tim Giles, T.C. Construction, felt costs
should be borne by all parties on the frontage road improvement. Mr. Giles stated the project has
been underway for a year and they would like to move forward. Residents of 2 13th Street were at
previous development meetings. Staff informed Council that resident issues could be addressed on
the construction plan. Council stated a 2-week delay would not cause a delay in the project, as the
Development Contract is still under review. MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes to table Final
Plat approval until the August 17, 1998 Council Meeting. Voting for: Cordes, Gamer, Fitch,
Strachan, MOTION CARRIED.
t) Proposed 1999 City Budget - Distribution
Staff presented the 1999 Budget to Council. MOTION by Fitch, second by Gamer to accept the
Proposed 1999 Budget and to schedule a Council workshop to review the budget on Wednesday,
August 19,1998 at 6:30 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
g) Dakota County Environmental Testing Report Presentation
Ron Spong of the Dakota County Environmental Management Division of the Department of
Physical Development presented the results of the County's Preliminary Investigation and Site
Assessment of an area in Northeast Farmington. The process started three years ago with data from
various sources. The sites were prioritized and grouped into clusters. More than one source of
, .
Council Minutes (Regular)
August 3, 1998
Page 4
contamination was found, however there is no cause for concern to Farmington. Shallow wells 1/4 -
1/3 mile south of the Vermillion River 25 - 60 feet deep, of sand and gravel formation appear to be
impacted. Wells with bedrock formation were also found to be contaminated. The department is
looking closely at Elm Park Dump. Two contaminants were found at the property at 201 Fourth
Street, one containing a probable cancer causing substance. However, treatment methods can
remove contaminants. Eleven sample probes were installed from 201 Fourth Street to the corner of
Oak Street. Results will be available in 3-4 months. Arsenic and Manganese were also found in
some wells. City of Farmington and Empire Township community wells are not affected. The
Mayor inquir~d as to why Farmington was being looked at. Mr. Spong stated contaminants were
coming from disposal sites in Farmington. Mr. Spong will keep the City informed of the process.
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(The order of agenda items was changed to accommodate the audience).
b) Consideration of Non-exclusive Natural Gas Utility Franchise Ordinance
Mr. Arne Hendrickson, Program Manager, Local Government and Economic Development of
Minnegasco, contacted the City to inquire if the City would consider a second gas franchise
ordinance for Minnegasco to service the new Genstar development, Charleswood. In the course of
discussions with Minnegasco, staff contacted Peoples Natural Gas to advise them of Minnegasco's
request and the City's review of the potential issues involved with two natural gas providers in the
municipality. Staffhas had meetings with both Minnegasco and Peoples to discuss issues of mutual
concern to all parties. There are three principal issues involved with allowing a second natural gas
franchise in the City: public safety, competition, and excess capacity. The public safety issue
revolves around the dual piping of gas service into the community. Competition and the potential
for lower natural gas prices for the consumer was explained by the Finance Director. Residents
would not be able to choose between the two gas companies as the developer would determine the
natural gas vendor for that development. Mr. Arne Hendrickson stated Minnegasco would not do
dual piping. They are looking at new developments only and would like Council to consider the
franchise. Mr. Dave Perron, Peoples Natural Gas, stated they have served Farmington since 1930
and would like Council to leave the situation as is. Councilmember Strachan stated Peoples
employees are local residents and response time is a factor. MOTION by Gamer, second by Fitch
to deny a second nonexclusive natural gas franchise to Minnegasco. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
a) Draft Train Whistle Ordinance
The draft ordinance is modeled after the ordinance recently adopted by the City of St. Paul. The
only difference between the draft and the St. Paul ordinance is that the draft would only limit rail
company practices between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. MOTION by Gamer, second by
Cordes to amend and adopt ORDINANCE 098-416 as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
MOTION by Fitch, second by Gamer to amend and adopt RESOLUTION R71-98 as deemed
appropriate by the City Council. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
t
c) Set Joint Council/Planning Commission Workshop Date
It has been determined that scheduling a joint City Council/Planning Commission workshop would
be beneficial for both bodies to discuss development issues of mutual concern. Proposed meeting
. ,
Council Minutes (Regular)
August 3, 1998
Page 5
dates are September 2, 1998 or September 9, 1998. Staffwill contact the Planning Commission and
advise Council at the August 17, 1998 Council Meeting.
d) Ash StreetlPrairie Waterway III Project Committee - Update
Castle Rock Township believes that if the sewer line is run east ofHwy 3, that they should be able to
pay for that portion through a joint powers agreement, and that township properties be allowed to
hook up without being annexed to the city. The Township is saying because the City allowed the
Fair Board to hook up that there is precedence and the City should now allow a developing township
the same courtesy of hook up. The City sees these as two very separate issues, primarily because of
residential and commercial development issues. Councilmember Fitch stated this is not an item for
negotiation. The policy of annexing townships to hook up to sewer lines has been good enough in
the past, and should be good enough for future citizens. Council agreed to stay with the policy. A
Project Committee meeting will be held August 26, 1998 to discuss the issue further.
12. NEW BUSINESS
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
a) Storm Water Drainage Issue East Farmington
Council received update memo from Staff.
b) Hickory Street Update
Council directed staff to devise a plan to drain storm water out to the Highway 3 median. MNDOT
has given initial approval for drainage access.
c) Sunnyside Lift Station - Pumping Operations
Staff informed Council that at no time has sewage been pumped into Ash Street storm water ditches.
The Sunnyside lift station has been pumped several times due to maintenance operations and power
outages. The sewage has been pumped to the sanitary sewer manhole in the alley between 6tti and 7tl1
Street north of Ash Street.
John Richardson, 35 Elm Street - Residents want the house at 300 First Street torn down or residents
will not pay their taxes. Staff will prepare a response for the August 17, 1998 Council Meeting.
Councilmember Fitch: Commented that storm water ponding areas appeared to be working well.
Thanked staff for getting fans for the Council Chambers. Detours for CSAH 31 are confusing. Asked
whether County could put up detour signs. Karen Finstuen replied that signs were not put up as they
would encourage traffic to go through the area rather than detour around the area.
Attorney Jamnik: City was approached for a gambling permit from an out oftown charitable
gaming organization. According to existing city ordinance, they could not operate in the city due to
certain city requirements. Council directed the City Attorney to draft an ordinance amending gambling
requirements.
. . . 4'
Council Minutes (Regular)
August 3, 1998
Page 6
Community Development
Director Olson: Thanked everyone for participating in Visioning Sessions.
14. ADJOURN
MOTION by Gamer, second by Fitch to adjourn at 10:28 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
r~/7?~
Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7.6
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
City Administrat01~
FROM: David L. Olson
Community Development Director
SUBJECT: City Council/Planning Commission Workshop Date
DATE: August 17,1998
INTRODUCTION
The City Planning Commission was asked to choose from two possible dates for a
workshop to discuss issues of mutual concern between the City Council and Planning
Commission.
DISCUSSION
The two dates the City Council identified were Wednesday September 2nd and
Wednesday September 9th. Both of these dates were acceptable to the four Planning
Commissioners that were in attendance at the August 25th meeting.
Therefore since the September 2nd date was the first choice of the Council, this will be
the workshop date. The workshop will start at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September rd
and will be held in Council Chambers of City Hall.
It was also requested that a list of issues to be discussed be incorporated into an agenda
which gets distributed prior to the meeting. Councilmember Fitch and Chairperson
Schlawin will identify the issues to be discussed by the respective bodies. These ag~nda
issues should be forwarded to City staff for processing by Wednesday, July 29th and will
be distributed to attending members.
BUDGET IMPACT
None
.. "
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve September 2nd at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for the joint City Council -
Planning Commission workshop date.
Respectfully submitted,
."~#
David L. Olson
Community Development Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7c
FROM:
Mayor, City Council, City Administrato~
Robin Roland, Finance Director
TO:
SUBJECT: GFOA Conference Attendance
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
Attendance at the Minnesota Government Finance Officers Association Conference, held
September 23-25, 1998 at the Radisson Arrowwood in Alexandria is being planned.
DISCUSSION
This conference is an annual event for Government Finance Officers within the state organization.
Conference events include sessions on Financial Reporting, Internal Control, Bond Structuring,
Performance Budget Aid, and TIF reporting, as well as several others. It qualifies as continuing
education for professional finance personnel.
BUDGET IMPACT
The adopted 1998 budget includes funding for this conference.
ACTION REQUIRED
For information only.
;i:~
Robin Roland
Finance Director
..
REQUEST FORM
SCHOOLS/CONFERENCES/TRAINING
DEPARTMENT jj'~~_____.__ DATE OF CONFERENCE_'ll~a./ _.~~~f>
Fl"~om To
;t.
"I.
LOCAT IO~l\u.~_~Q-I__~~~~-~~--------------'--
EMPLOYEE(S) ATTENDING: 1)__~iU~_~~~----_----_-_------
2)
3)
----------------------------------
----------------------------------
TYPE OF CONFERENCE____~I~~~_(~'\~~~Ji'!_i~_Qt!;_c.e.a. ~N.
TOPICS 1) ___~~~_.____________________________.___._____
2) ___~y.f!..._~~t:\.k_____________________________ C )
3)
--------------------------------------------------
METHOD OF TRAVEL_____.___~______________________________
(,
Amount Provided in Adjusted
19~6 Budget $__~~QD__
Amount Request $__~iJ~.~_
Amt Remaining $____~~QCL
1) Tt~avel $
2) Registrati~~-$==iqs~=
3) Room $__________6::l.;?_.Q9_
4) Meals $________________
5) Other Expense $_~______
Department Head Date
#~_____ _~ti1K
Finance Director Date
~...
-----------------------------------------------------------
TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL
i,
I RECOMMEND THE ABOVE REQUEST BE APPROVED.
--------------------------
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
--------------------------
\
;f
Date
ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL
ON THE ______ DAY OF __________________, 19
(APPROVED)
(NOT APPROVED)
Rev 9/86
"
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
7d
TO: Mayor, City Council, City Administrato~
FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Conference Request
DATE: August 17,1998
INTRODUCTION
The Minnesota State Fire Chiefs Association Annual Conference will be held October 14-18,
1998 at the Lake Superior College Training Center in Duluth.
DISCUSSION
This is the Annual Minnesota Fire Chiefs Conference. It provides the Chief Officers with the
opportunity to stay current with the changes and new developments in the fire service.
BUDGET IMPACT
The adopted 1998 budget includes funding for this conference.
ACTION REOUIRED
For information only.
Respectfully submitted,
L~U<--
Ken Kuchera
Fire Chief
t
i
REQUEST FORM
SCHOOLS/CONFERENCES/TRAINING
TYPE OF C
TOPICS 1)
METHOD 0
Amount Provided in Adjus~d
199~ Budget $~~~~L___
t1 80
Amotlrlt Request $__il/lf).!.___
Amt Remaining $___________
1) Tt~avel $ IOtf).ov
2) Registrati~~~-$~=..2i3fJ2~~
:3) Rc.c.rn $ __~ ~______
4) Meals $--/4~ ~_________
5) Other Expense $__::::__
~ll~",-__ _~Al'li
Department Head Date
Finance Director Date
-----------------------------------------------------------
TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL
I RECOMMEND THE ABOVE REQUEST BE APPROVED.
--------------------------
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
--------------------------
Date
ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL
ON THE ______ DAY OF __________________, 19
(APPROVED)
(NOT APPROVED)
Rev 9/86
M5FCA Conference Workshops
C01~fere"ce Committee Note:
This .rem; the cOl!{erence Ivill (~fJer
five separate tracts for education
options. Students may choose one
tract on Thursday afternoon Fom 1-
5 p.m. and a second tract on Friday
morningf1mn8 a.m. - 12 p.m.
The prq{essirmal development tract
is (~trered both days by the same
inst/"llctors, howevel; each sul~iect
matter is dUrerem and participants
may choose their classes by subject
maffel:
The symposium is for all partici-
pams on Friday from 1-5 p.m.
Special
Pre-conference
Workshop
Responding and surviving major
incidents
Preparing your department to
respond and survive a major
tragedy/disaster requires more than
just your training program.
Survival includes the building of
support between all the department
personnel and support within the
families of the department. This
class will discuss ways to build a
strong family and to survive a
major tragedy/disaster and still
remain a healthy department.
Instructor: Reverend John Hammack
Rev. Hammack's career and
involvement in
the area of
emergency ser-
vices began in
1953 when he
was a volun-
teer firefighter
and served on
the ambulance
in Beaver Bayl
Tofte area of
the North
Shore. In 1989
_ while leading a
Duluth cOllgre-
gation, he at-
tended the first meeting of the Head
of the Lakes Incident Stress
Program.
For the past three to four years,
he has tauRht more classes than
anyone in the region regarding
handling the stress of emergency
se11lice.
Thursday
Workshops
Public safety:
Disasterlhazmat responses
Instructors: Department of Emer-
gency Management (OEM) Staff
Special interest:
Fire chiefing should be fun
Itlsh'uctors: Coon Rapids Chief Tim
Farmer,
FIRE/EMS Staff
OEM Staff
MSFCA OSHA Committee
Current topics:
Department of Natural Resources and
new nozzle technology
Instructors: Gene Mannelin, DNR
Manufacturer Representative
After the Fire:
Fire chief's role in arso~ fires
Items discllJSsed:
· Role of the chief in determining
the origin and cause of fire,
· Impact of NFPA 921 and NFPA
1033 on fire departments. and
. Evidence issues and the fire
department.
Keynote speaker: State Fire Marshal
Torn Brace
Instructor: Robert Whitemore, CPl.
Ward & Whitemore .
For over 20 years, Robert
Whitemore, CFI, has devoted his
professional career to the investi-
gation, origin, and cause determi-
nation of fires throughout the
United States and Canada. He
started his career at a municipal
fire department in Nebraska.
Following his fire service career,
Whitemore was with a national law
firm where as chief investigator, he
supervised a staff of investigators
throughout the United States. He
was actively involved in major
investigations, some of the notable
being the MGM Grand in Las
Vegas, NV, Northwestern National
Bank in Minneapolis, MN, Illinois
Bell Telephone Switching Statiml,
Hinsdale, IL, One Meridian Plaza,
Philadelphia, PA, and the World
hade Center in New York, NY.
/n addition to his work experi-
ence, Whitemore has been extreme-
ly involved in professional fire
organizations. He has served on
the Board (~f Directors of the
International Association of Arson
Investigators and was president
from /993-94.
Professional development:
Ethics in the public sector
Instructors: Dan and Anne Fabyan,
The Fabyans are management
trainers with a unique combination
of fire service experience in opera-
tions, management and training.
Anne was Metro Dade County
(FL) Fire Department Assistant
Director v,,;th direct responsibility
for all administrative services
within the department. Prior to her
association with Metro Dade, she
served as the National Fire
Academy Assistant Superintendent,
where she directed the executive
development curriculum.
Dan retired as the Miami (FL)
Fire Department Deputy Chief of
Operations after a 26-year career. -'..
He directed the Fire Suppression,
Rescue and Training Divisions of
the department. His innovative
management techniques led to a
United States Fire Administration
grant to attend the Harvard
University Program for senior
executives in state and local gov-
ern/1/el1t.
717ey also are actively involved in
tIle National Fire Academy's
Executive Fire qftlcer Program as
faculty members, course develop-
ers. al1d applied research project
evaluators.
Friday
Workshops
Public Safety:
1998 Uniform Fire Code Update and
NFIRS Update
Instructors: Jon Nisja and Ernie
Scheidness, Minnesota State Fire
Marshal's Office
Special interest:
Innovative fire prevention programs
Instructors: MSFCA & Minnesota
State Fire Marshal's Office
Current topics:
Training issues and recruitment/pro-
motions
Instructors: Harry Brull, Personal
Decisions Inc. President and Don
Beckering, FIRE/EMS Center
After the fire:
Legal issues at the fire scene
Items discussed:
· Legal issues concerning the fire
scene.
. Legal issues surrounding the han-
dling of evidence, and
. Arson, fraud, and the fire scene.
Speakers: Jon Hanson, Hanson,
Lulic & Krall,
lon has OI'er 24 years of experi-
ence in fraud litigation and will
provide helpful hints for day-to-
day survival ill a changing legal
jungle.
Tim Blakely, Hanson, Lulie &
Krall,
Tim has H'orked with manv insur-
ance agencies and municipalities
concerning insurance fraud.
Professional development:
Problem solving
Instructors: Dan and Anne Fabyan
Symposium:
Gettysburg- The challenge of leader-
ship remains
Were the outcomes of the Battle
(~f Gettysburg due to great leaders
leading or because skilled and
capable soldiers fought dearly for
a cause? Leading organizations in
today's complex environment with
all of its associated challenges and
conflicts is in many ways similar
to the characteristics of a battle.
Today's organizational and per-
sonal challenges demand many of
the same leadership skills exhibit-
ed at Gettysburg.
Analyses of leadership from the
past becomes a teaching tool for
understanding and managing
human resources in contemporary
situations.
Instructor: Charles Burkell, Burkell
& Associates
Burkell & Associates is a man-
agement and organizational assis-
tance consulting firm. Charles is
currently the proRram chair for
executive development at the
National Fire Academy in
Emmitsburg, Maryland.
Mind over media
The program content takes a pos-
itive approach in showing you
how to build a constructive work-
ing relationship with the media.
Equally important, the presenta-
tion will show you how to improve
your communication skills in all
areas of your professional and per-
sonallife.
Instructor: Bill Berg
Bill Berg is a 30-year broadcast-
ing veteran who hosted Chicago:5
# I rated afternoon talk show on
WGN Radio for 10 years.
His presentation has been enthu-
siastically received by: the Illinois
Fire Chiefs Assoication, the
International Fire Chies Associ-
ation (Great Lakes Division), the
Northern Illinois Alliance of Fire
Protection Districts, the Pleasant-
view Fire Protection District, the
Will County Emergency Manage-
ment Agency. the Wisconsin Fire
Chiefs Education Association, the
City (~f Faribault, Minnesota
Emergency Services Officials. the
Michigan Fire Chiefs Association
and the Saginaw Michigan Fire
Department Management Training
Personel.
Partner's
Program
Building strong family support
Surviving after a major tragedy/
disaster requires strong family sup-
port. This class_ will discuss ways
to build a strong family and to sur~
vive a major tragedy/disaster
Insf111ctor: Reverend John Hammack
1998 MINNESOTA STATE FIRE CHIEFS
ANNUAL FALL CONFERENCE
OCTOBER 14-18, 1998 - DULUTH, MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT NAME:~~~ ~ CHIEF'S NAME: ~~"-
DEPARTMENT ADDRESS: ?,:25' Da)C S+-
CITY: ---.J=ii/\ ~ STATE: mrJ. ZIP: ~S{)dr/
REGISTRANT LAST N : . lAC kA. FIRST NAME: Ke-:
RANK: C h eef SPOUSE/GUEST NAME: t;~'LA- kuc.kr"'-.
HOME ADDRESS: J:5 J 7 ;:;;"'1 tJ i.P-~J ~ Vl.. SOCIAL SECURITY #: if 7/ - 5:.;J -7 t' t t'
"---- ... J . (Needed for wor~.s?op credit) ,;-t"" ~/
CITY: t=OA 4 It'~ _ STATE: Mrv ZIP: ..::>....) tJ dV
, I
WORK PHONE #: 6Si - l;tJ-7""c? 1/ HOME ~HONE #: hS/- r/b3 - ~ t7/
REGISTRATION FEE: $135.00
GUEST/SPOUSE ATTENDING: LUNCHEON ~ / NO
BANQUET ON SATURDAY Y!J / NO
GREAT LAKES LUNCHEON & MTG (MEMBERS): YES / (i) $ 10.00
Pre-registration is strongly encouraged. The registration fee is $135.00 per
registrant. Add $10.00 if attending the Great Lakes Luncheon.
WORKSHOP REGISTRATION
I will be attending the Pre-Conference Workshop "Responding and Surviving
Major Incidents" (Thursday, October 15, 1998, 10-12 a.~.
YES NO
PLEASE REGISTER ME FOR THE FOLLOWING WORKSHOPS (MARK C OICES #1, #2 and #3 for
each day) - See enc1.osed Conference Workshop Summary
Thursday
Friday
Public Safety
~ Special Interest
Current Topics
After the Fire
___ Professional Development
Public Safety
~ Special Interest
~ Current Topics
-f- After the Fire
___ Professional Development
Make your check payable to FIRE CHIEFS' CONFERENCE. Please mail
your registration form:
Lake Superior College Training Center
11501 Hwy 23
Duluth, MN 55808
Please make a copy of the registration form for additional attendees from your
department. Schedule of events is enclosed and published in the
September/October Minnesota Fire Chief Magazine.
QUESTIONS: Lake Superior College: 800-232-8573 Duluth Fire Dept: 218-723-3280
1998 MINNESOTA STATE FIRE CHIEFS
ANNUAL FALL CONFERENCE
OCTOBER 14-18, 1998 - DULUTH, MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT NAME: 0("'1111-",,, r;re 1k,et CHIEF'S NAME: ~
DEPARTMENT ADDRESS: ~~d ~ Oct K 5J- ;I
CITY: Fqr (V\ I N ,?j...~ ,...
koclefl:j
,
REGISTRANT LAST NAME: f/.sclbach
RANK: ~. CJ~{~p
SPOUSE/GUEST NAME:
STATE: f"\()J ZIP: ~4
FIRST NAME:~o.rK
-
cJa/lJe..,
HOME ADDRESS: 63~~ l.J~ J${:}r'.e:!l'~
CITY: Fa /' /"\ / ~ 7'~~
WORK PHONE #: LW8 J 435-'6'1&0 HOME PHONE #:
SOCIAL SECURITY #: 473 - 66-c:t:B/
(Needed for workshop credit)
STATE: fr\.,J ZIP: 55~4
651 -- <-.1~15C>
REGISTRATION FEE:
$135.00
GREAT LAKES LUNCHEON & MTG (MEMBERS):
Pre-registration is strongly encouraged.
registrant. Add $10.00 if attending the
r:iiiY NO
7:!!!)/ NO
YES / (f;?)
The registration fee is
Great Lakes Luncheon.
$ 10.00
$135.00 per
GUEST/SPOUSE ATTENDING: LUNCHEON
BANQUET ON SATURDAY
WORKSHOP REGISTRATION
I will be attending the Pre-Conference Workshop "Responding and Surviving
Major Incidents" (Thursday, October 15, 1998, 10-12 a.m.)~
~ YES NO
PLEASE REGISTER ME FOR THE FOLLOWING WORKSHOPS (MARK CHOICES 111, 112 and 113 for
each day) - See enc~osed Conference Workshop Swmnary
Thursday
Friday
~ Public Safety
Special Interest
~ Current Topics
~ After the Fire
Professional Development
Public Safety
-1- Special Interest
~ Current Topics
~ After the Fire
___ Professional Development
Make your check payable to FIRE CHIEFS' CONFERENCE. Please mail
your registration form:
Lake Superior College Training Center
11501 Hwy 23
Duluth, MN 55808
Please make a copy of the registration form for additional attendees from your
department. Schedule of events is enclosed and published in the
September/October Minnesota Fire Chief Magazine.
QUESTIONS: Lake Superior College: 800-232-8573 Duluth Fire Dept: 218-723-3280
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmington.mn.us
7e..
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~~
FROM: David R. Sanocki, Engineering Division t::t-
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolutions - Final Project Closeouts
DATE: August 17,1998
INTRODUCTION
The improvements outlined in the Development Contracts for Deer Meadows 1 st Addition, Deer
Meadows 2nd Addition, Dakota Meadows Townhomes and East Farmington 1 st Addition have been
completed.
DISCUSSION
The Deer Meadows 1 st Addition Development Contract was signed on August 28, 1995 between the
City and Crystal Ridge Development Company. The completion date for this project was November
30, 1996. The project was substantially complete when the wear coarse was placed in August of
1996. The warranty period expires in August this year. Several minor punch list items were
completed during June of this year.
The Deer Meadows 2nd Addition Development Contract was signed on August 5, 1996 between the
City and Crystal Ridge Development Company. The completion date for this project was October
31, 1997. The project was substantially complete when the wear coarse was placed in August of
1997. The warranty period expires in August this year. Several ongoing minor punch list items
were completed during July of this year.
The Dakota Meadows Townhomes Development Contract was signed on May 6, 1996 between the
City and T.e. Construction. The project completion date for this project was May 31, 1997. The
project was substantially complete when the wear coarse was placed in August of 1997. The
warranty period expires in August this year. Several ongoing minor punch list items were completed
during June of this year.
The East Farmington 1 st Development Contract was signed on March 28, 1995 between the City and
Sienna Corporation. The project completion date for this project was July 1, 1996. The project was
substantially complete when the wear coarse was placed in August of 1997. The warranty period
expires in August this year. Several ongoing minor punch list items were completed during July of
this year.
BUDGET IMPACT
None
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached resolutions accepting the street and utility improvements for Deer Meadows 1 st
Addition, Deer Meadows 2nd Addition, Dakota Meadows Townhomes and East Farmington 1 st
Addition.
Respejj;i V
David R. Sanocki
Engineering Division
cc: file
RESOLUTION NO. R -98
ACCEPTING DEER MEADOWS 1ST ADDITION
STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 95-10
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meetin~ of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota
was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17 Day of August, 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, pursuant to a written contract signed with the city on August 28, 1995, Crystal Ridge Holding
Company, Burnsville, Minnesota has satisfactorily completed the requirements of the developers agreement for
Deer Meadows 1 sl Addition.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota that the
work completed under said agreement is hereby accepted by the City.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of August
1998.
Attested to the
day of August, 1998.
Mayor
SEAL
City Administrator/Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. R -98
ACCEPTING DEER MEADOWS 2nd ADDITION
STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 96-19
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meetin~ of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota
was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 171 Day of August, 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, pursuant to a written contract signed with the city on August 5, 1996, Crystal Ridge Holding
Company, Bumsville, Minnesota has satisfactorily completed the requirements of the developers agreement for
Deer Meadows 2nd Addition.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota that the
work completed under said agreement is hereby accepted by the City.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of August
1998.
Attested to the
day of August, 1998.
Mayor
SEAL
City Administrator/Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. R -98
ACCEPTING DAKOTA MEADOWS TOWNHOMES
STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 96-16
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 17th Day of August, 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, pursuant to a written contract signed with the city on May 6, 1995, T. C. Construction, Burnsville,
Minnesota has satisfactorily completed the requirements of the developers agreement for Dakota Meadows
Townhomes.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota that the
work completed under said agreement is hereby accepted by the City.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of August
1998.
Attested to the
day of August, 1998.
Mayor
SEAL
City Administrator/Clerk
. , . .
RESOLUTION NO. R -98
ACCEPTING EAST FARMINGTON 1sT ADDITION
STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 93-6
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota
was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th Day of August, 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, pursuant to a written contract signed with the city on March 25, 1995, Sienna Corporation,
Minneapolis, Minnesota has satisfactorily completed the requirements of the developers agreement for East
Farmington 1 sl Addition.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota that the
work completed under said agreement is hereby accepted by the City.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of August
1998.
Attested to the
day of August, 1998.
Mayor
SEAL
City Administrator/Clerk
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
7f
.
\,
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~
FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Service Manager
SUBJECT: Appointment of Election Judges - Primary Election
DATE: August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
The Primary Election is September 15, 1998.
DISCUSSION
The attached resolution appoints judges and designates polling places of Precincts 1, 2, and 3 for
the primary election.
BUDGET IMPACT
Election costs are included in the 1998 budget.
ACTION REQUIRED
Adopt the attached resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Karen Finstuen
Administrative Service Manager
RESOLUTION NO. R
APPROVING LIST OF ELECTION JUDGES AND DESIGNATING POLLING PLACE
FOR
PRIMARY ELECTION OF SEPTEMBER 15, 1998
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 the 17th day of August, 1998 at
7:00 P.M.
The following members were present:
The following members were absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following resolution:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following list of election judges be approved
for the Primary Election to be held September 15, 1998.
Precinct 1
Eileen Sauber
Norma Lord
Florence Mohn
Arlene Gramentz
Dolores Johnson
Dennis Sullivan
Precinct 2
Gretchen Bergman
Karen Pietsch
Kim Soderberg
Jeanne Stanek
Mary Swanson
Lauretta Schneider
Precinct 3
Betty Raveling
Shirley Sauber
Lois Lotze
Joan Shea
C.J. Simones
Nancy Maxwell
Patrick Hansen
Information
Pat White
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the address of the polling place for Precincts 1, 2 and 3 shall
be as follows:
Precinct 1 - Senior Citizen Center - 431 Third Street
Precinct 2 - Senior Citizen Center - 431 Third Street
Precinct 3 - Akin Road Elementary School - 5231 195th Street West
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th
day of August, 1998.
Mayor
Attested to the _day of
, 1998.
SEAL
Clerk! Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
?J
TO:
Mayor and Councilmembers
City Administrator ~
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Quarterly Building Permit Report
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
The Planning and Building Inspection Divisions have tabulated the quarterly building report for
the period from April 1, 1998 to June 30, 1998.
DISCUSSION
During this period, 76 single-farnily units and 2 twin home permits were issued for a total of78
new housing permits during the second quarter. During the same period last year a total of 85
single- family permits were issued, a decrease of 7 units over the same quarter.
From January I, 1998 to June 30, 1998 a total of 153 housing permits have been issued; they
include 151 single-family homes, 2 twin-home units, and no multi-family housing units. The
value ofthe residential construction has totaled $15,800,401. The 153 permits are 24 ahead of
the midyear count of 129 permits issued in 1997, at this rate it is projected 302 new housing
permits will be issued for 1998.
A total of383 building permits have been issued through the second quarter at an estimated
valuation of$32,396,761, this includes the new middle school project valued at $15,561,400.
ACTION REQUESTED
This memo is for information only.
Michael Schultz
Associate Planner
j""
.-1
~x
3;:)
1 :, " " .~~ i
1i I
1 J 11
'I
I , 8 I
JU . I i
J
t !
l.- i' ! i i f 1
1~ ~, J
. }
..
l ~ ! ! 11
~ ~ " .', ~
II "
.. 18 ill ... ~ .' :a ::',:<:: ~ l:! ~ ~ !
..
.. ... ... .. IN N"; .. ... ...
IJ ,
... ~ a ., '*' ~, ... ~ 1;1 ill ! ~
:!i ~ .. ~ lil .. N ... ~
.'
I , ,,'
I ~ I I ~ ~ ~ .,. .,. .,. ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I .,. ~ l1. .,. ~ ~ l1. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i , I I
~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ Ie::: N ll!
"",..
f) , " '1'
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ l1. ~ .,. I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:, ~ C ~ ! ?i~ I I ~ I ~ I ~ S l1. ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ .. :8, .
.. ~ lil ... ..
'l5 :
~ ,: ,i."
~ ~ ~ 9! (i! - o _ N ~ ~ 51 11! III - o N N N ~ N Ii; .. ~ 1;1 ~ .. ~ 0; 000 ~ :!! o co ~ ! ~ ~ ~
Ii .. ... ..
,
i,'
i "
il " i, ,
0 0 o 0 0 '" .. N ~ o 0 o ~ 0 ~ .i ... ... .. ... ... o 0 N ! 'i ::: :a Ii! ~ !1l l ~ l;: r:: ~ l:l l:l ~ ~ , o 0
.. .. ... ... N .. N .. - ~
J ,., "
~ ii' " ij
h ~: ,
.. B ~ ~ ~ 0 .. ~ ~ :8 ~ 51 ~ III Ie ... .. Ii! l<l .. N 10 .<<t ",' ... ~ ~. Ii! l ~ ., ~ 51 ::l ~ 0 ~ ! ~ ~
i e ... '" .. ... N ... .. ., '" .. 0;
11 i
15 r
...
f t f f i i f f b II li! t '" f f f I I II J t 'II '" f f j I I
~ ~ i I ) fl ~ '" '" l J i i J I
'l5 J t t I i i I t i i I t i i
! iij 1Il f ~9
1Il 0; 1Il 1Il 1Il
o 0 0 ~ ~ ~ i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 1Il 1Il ~ ~ o ... ~ 0 1Il 1Il ~ ~ d;
::> ~ ~ ~ y, ~ g ~ t <<
~ ~ ... ~ 0. 0. d:
<< '" ~ ., I 1
i.
. 1 I
;!! ~ Ii
i I i ~ ~ Ii [ ~ i 8 li ..;: li 5 I i
1 .
1 t I ;!! ~ I ~ i ! ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ! ! ! ! ~ t Ii ! i I
~ 'Ill ;ll , ~ ,I ~ ! I ~ ..
;!! ~ t t J Ii 4 f , ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , J ! ~ .. e dl
i i J I I I ~ u. u. u. u. :. u. u. u. ~ ! ] t J J i ~ ~ ~ i ~ J .s: t
11 i i ! '" J ~ ~ ~ ~ .. .I ~ ~ ~, t IlJ J ! 5 M
I I ! :f ) t ~ ! f ;\!
! i I ... ... :. u. u. Ii Ii 1 I i Ii : i j' . . I j : & f I ~ :! I
~ 11 1 ! .. 11 1 'Ill ~ ! j ~ j ~ ~ ~ I i l t ! IE ~ e- I!
dl OJ dl dl OJ oB ... '" 0. 0.
c:
.2 !2
~cs;
:g~
0000 0 0000 0
0000 ~ 0000 ~
Scicici..... ..... S<<"'>ciocO .....
......_0 00 ClO ClO ~=OOO..... N
0) 10 O. O. 10 0). ~. 0) 11:1 CO. ("). O. "'. cq,
O)::l~O<O(") ~ ~<OClO(,,)'" 10
.....(ij~IO(")(") <0 ....1I:I"'~....ClO N
> ~. ..... O. ClO. "II: > 10 .ClO.~ 0)
~ <0..... N (")........<0 ri
..... N (") ~
(") N<O 0) 0 ~IO~N 10
.a <0 (") ..... ~(")(") '" ~
en 'E ..... N ~. (") N <0
0) .... 0) E
..... 0) .... ~
a.. D-
O 00 0 0000 0
0 00 0 0000 ~
l::: . I cioi oi S~cicicO
00 N
0=0 010 10 10=000(") ~
0) 11:1 CO. OCO <0 0) 11:1 ~. O. O. "'. ....
O)::l", rio)' c:i O)::lN"'~O ~
....(ij~ 10 0 10 .... (ijIOClO<ON N
N~ ~ > ClO. '" 10. 0). .....
> . ui
~ .... O)N.....N '"
N (")
"'0....0) '" 0) <OION N
~CO CO (") 1/)0 (") N '"
O. .... N IO:!:(") N 10
~E 0) E
.... Q) ~ 0)
a.. a..
0000 0 0000 0
0000 ~ 0000 ~
l::: . . . . slrioolri
00 0000..... ..... 0
m 0).-00"'(") 0 ~:pNgO"" ~.
ClO 10 "'. O. ~ CO. 0 O)~"" oco
m 0)::l0)(")0)'" o. 0) ~c:iecirn '"
T'"" ....(ijNNO~ .... ....'ijO)COOO) '"
0 >N. f'oo:.~. ~. > "'. ~. co. ("). ~.
10 .... .... ClO ~<ON"" 10
c:: ..... N (")
0 .......
.....00 0) ..... (")CO 0) g~co(::: ClO
~m I/) '" N 0 CO
0) - ..... N ~~N .... ~
. _ T'"" ClO 'E mE
E ~ 0) .... 0) ....
..... Q) ....Q)
'- a.. a.
CO CO
LL. E
- E 0000 0 0000 0
0 0000 0 0000 ~
l::: . . " . oi SOOO""":
>:::J 0001O~ '"
~cn ClO."OO"'.... co (").,,<OOClO.... 10
co IV 0). q, ("). C"l 10 O)IV.....ON....... 10.
U Cl m::lO)(")IOClO ~ O)::lClOO<OO) (")
....'ij~ON'" .....(ijIO(")IOClO (")
c:: >"'.....~~ '" >~..........'" 10_
~ '" tIS 0 N (")
..... .....
:::J "'NO~ (") '" ..... 10 (") <0
CO J!3.... ..... .... ~ J!3 ..... (") 10
ClO .- .... .... N (") 'E ..... ..... N ....
co E 0) -
m .... 0) .... 0
.... 0) .... 0) "C
a.. a.. l:::
N
0000 0 gooo ~
0000 ~ 000
l::: . . . . 50cioN
00000 0 ~
"'._000~ ~ N:pgOIO~
ClO 10 0 O.<O.ClO ~ m IV . q, l'!. l'!. (")
O)::l.....oo..... ri ~NO"'~ ..;
.....'ijOO)(")N ~ ....11:1....(").....10 ....
>O)(")ClO.~ 10. >("). (")'" ~
~ 10 ..... <0 ,..:
.....
ClO ClO <O~ <0 ~....(")o co
I/) '" ..... ..... ..... J!3 ~ N
'" - .... N N
'E N'- .....
ClO mE
0) .... ~Q)
..... 0)
a.. a.
l:::
o
-
Cl
l:::
'E
....
IV
LL
-
o
~
<3
-
I/)
_ l:::
'E ~
W - ::l
o..:m_-g
...-. C"2::::
o~i'E....
Q) 'iil E E 0)
g;0)~0:5
1-0::..:::00
-
I/)
_ l:::
'E ~
w(ij -6
0..'E:!:l:::
'OO)l::::::::
"Ci'E....
0) "iil ." E 0)
g;0)~0:5
1-0::..:::00
U)
-'
~
o
I-
U)
-'
c(
I-
o
I-
0 0 0 0 0
~ 0 0 0 ~
5 .... 0 0 0 ....
co." 0 0 0 ~ <0
mIV N N ~ "'-
m2 .... 0)' ui 0)' ~
....IV .... ClO (") 10
> <0. .... <0. m (")
10 10 N
.... .... (")
.... N N en ~
ClO~ 10 N ClO
.... N (")
mE
m ....
....0)
D-
o 0 0 0
0 0 ~ ~
l::: I
10 0 .... <0
'" .2 '" 0 10 N
0)10 ClO 10 ~ 0
0) ::l <0. 0)' ~ ri
.....(ij (") ClO 10
> ClO. 0) <0. ~.
10 N 0)
N N
10 0 (") co CO
I/) ~ ..... <0
",:!: N N ~
O)E
0) ....
.... 0)
a..
"iii
- l:::
'E ~
.... ::l
O)(ij "C
0..." :!: l::: U)
_ l::: l:::::::: -'
o~i'E .... ~
0) 'iil E E 0)
g;Q)::l0:5 0
1-0:::200 I-
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7h
FROM:
Mayor, City Council, City Administrator{ftC/
Robin Roland, Finance Director
TO:
SUBJECT: Non-budgeted Emergency Repair - Fire Department
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
The Fire Department's 1994 Pumper Truck required emergency repairs which were not foreseen
as part of the 1998 operating budget.
DISCUSSION
During the course of routine annual maintenance, problems were discovered with the pumper
transmission. The potential for damage due to the failure of the pumper's pilot bearing was
significant and immediate repairs were required. Although the pumper is fairly new (4 years old),
the warranty on the transmission from the manufacturer did not cover the repairs.
BUDGET IMPACT
The anticipated cost of the repairs is $4,000 and was not budgeted for in the 1998 operating
budget. This will require an adjustment to the Fire Department's expenditures in the revised 1998
budget to be presented to Council in November.
ACTION REQUIRED
For Council's information.
~4Z~
Robin Roland
Finance Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
;;.
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator1~
FROM: Ken Kuchera
SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Purchase - Fire Department
DATE: August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
The Fire Department needs to purchase 2100 gallon, 17 oz. Hyplon Fold-a- Tanks.
DISCUSSION
The purchase of the quoted Fold-a-Tanks will replace two of our existing tanks which are
damaged beyond repair. Over the years, from being used countless number of times, the fabric
has deteriorated from wear and tear contributed to the cracking of the fabric.
We utilize these tanks routinely during rural responses when we have to empty the contents of
our tankers into the Fold-a- Tanks. This allows us to continue our transporting of water to the
scene of the fire.
BUDGET IMPACT
The adopted 1998 budget includes funding for this purchase.
ACTION REOUESTED
For information only.
Respectfully submitted,
~li",-
Ken Kuchera
Fire Chief
,~
REQUEST FORM
CAPITAL OUTLAY PURCHASES
DEPARTMENT
~~
.
DATE
3)7/c;;y
J
ITEM(S).TO
AMOUNT REMAINING AS OF DATE OF REQUEST:
$ J;2Sdo
:;LStOCJ
QUOTATI ONS RECE I VED: ::
I. VENDO~""'-~ 5-.~~ DAlE ~j; /~ 9
2. VENDOR OIAi-J$ S5..~ ,. .' YlC' DATE '1./ (p Jtl Y
~ATTACH QUOTATIONS, IF VERBAL QUOTES, EXPLAIN BELOW
AMOUNT $ ~c;;2~ j ~~
AMOUNT $ ~qt;, .5'7
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
C~~~:: :l' n A J), ~' J () r ,., ~/)"'A_/\ I
T'~~' .~'- U~-'eY ~ }'~r" Dlkvk:o ZjrJAJj f5<<f"
rg/6/1~
DATE FINANCE DIRECTOR SIGNATURE DATE
TO: THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
I RECOMMEND THE ABOVE REQUEST BE APPROVED.
SIGNATURE OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR
. .
DATE
ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON THE
DAY OF
19_
(A?f"'ROVED)
(NOT APPROVED)
FILE:
CC:
"-..;'~ '.-"'i
DiAl\iko EMERGENCyEQuiPMElvrCO.
"~
o PQBox248- SNYOER.NE.6S664-D248- SOO-2QS.9014
. 0 BOSN.10'" ST. -SAUNA, KS 67401-293S - S00-541:9111
04.565 W.77"'Sr. -EoINA. MN,55435-5009. Soo..24&9014
PROUOL.ySEFiVlNG: NE, KS.P!fN,IA. SD.OKANo MO
-if
".
'QUor*T1ON.....
Q#LII .;."92,98
...,-~ --.
"'Please 'refertQ ~uOWioonu~';;,
on your purcha~,o/;de(:a'iid i~'f;,'
''''W!'E'~. MS .NE1'30DAYS: QIJ,OTATION GOOD FOR 30 DAYS. UNLESS SPECIFIED FOR_DAYS,
I' j n . THEREAFTER QUOTA TION W1LL~faE ADJUSTED BY ACTUAL %,.OFINCREASE.
c::g.L..JOT.A.TI;CJ .~."
-\~-.
CUSTOMER,pOPY
~ " .~)8/06/98 16: 28 FAX 3193520i50
, \
GARY L BOORO~l
.- '.
~OOl
-......
\
,
I-
I
I
I
!
i
QUOTATION
Clarey's
SAFETY EQUIPMEN7; INC.
1215 TrH STRE::::T N.W.. ROCHESTE?, MN 55901
I
TO
--,
,
I
M"'~(''''-1-t,- h'''''<( ;)~I'I-.
r-; V" h1 ~ "'- i ~ '" I ys-1l1..
l Telephone:
i
---1
We am plQa;;Qd to ql,lotEl as 10110<'.1$. Your inquiry
. ~~;~--r~----- Description
~
/t/lle.. /~ '1
;)
H fl,- n 1
~.,k.J
)./00
f
~_./~
5~F)
\
i
I
i
I
I
'\ -~. ,I
ii
II
II
II
II
:1
il
~i'..1
\ 'i
Ii
'I
"
il
i
i
!
I
'-
<"'
i
I SAFETY IS OUR BUSINESS
I lOCAL -'1_507.289_6749
l IN MINNESOTA 1-800-558-8009
,~UT-OF-STATE WATTS '-BOO~624-5526 By_.
i-cSCE163Q.2M.',.97
I
j Inquiry No
i
I
i Date
I
i Terms !IJ -t (- ~
I ----------.---
! !='rices quot~rs
! EO.B. ...- ~ 7
i
: l Delivary
Ii
II
;7-~._' ,
" Price
'I
I:
"
ii
I,
'I
II
I:
'1
f3.. & - r e
Amour.t
18lfD~ I 1918.~
!
I
I
I
jc;O- ~V I
I
)
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
-0'
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~
FROM: David R. Sanocki, Engineering Division 'P-
SUBJECT: Prairie Creek Punchlist Status
DATE: August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
Progress Land Company has recently completed a number of punchlist items in Prairie Creek 151
through 4th Additions.
DISCUSSION
Progress Land Comgany has hired Arcon Construction to complete utility punchlist items in Prairie
Creek 15t through 4 Additions. Arcon Construction met with City staff and began utility punchlist
work the week of July 20, 1998.
Progress Land Company has hired Ryan Contracting to complete all concrete related punchlist items
in Prairie Creek 151 through 4th Additions. Ryan Contracting met with City staff and began concrete
punchlist work the week of August 10, 1998.
It is anticipated that by the end of August that only grading and landscaping related punchlist items
for Prairie Creek 15t through 4th Additions will remain.
Staff will be meeting with the Developer to discuss the remaining punchlist items and other issues
left on the project (see attached letter). Staff will then determine the appropriate refund of the
Developers letter of credit at this time.
BUDGET IMPACT
None
ACTION REOUESTED
For information only
Respectfully submitted,
/lad iLL
David R. Sanocki
Engineering Division
cc: file
.
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
July 23, 1998
Mr. Warren Israelson
Progress Engineering
6001 Egan Drive
Suite 100
Savage, MN 55378
RE: Prairie Creek Third, Fourth Addition Issues
Dear Mr. Israelson:
There are several issues regarding the above referenced projects that need to be
addressed.
I. The first issue is in regard to the grading plan for the Third Addition that was the
subject of the letter to you dated April 29, 1998 (see attached letter). The grading on
the project does not coincide with the approved grading plan.
2. The second issue is in regard to the rock wall that was constructed along the hill west
of Embry A venue. Due to staff and resident concerns, the wall has been inspected by
a structural engineer and various concerns have been raised (see attached memo).
3. In the Fourth Addition, issues have been raised regarding the floor elevations in
relation to the pond elevations. This issue may affect the design of future phases of
Prairie Creek.
These issues need to be addressed as soon as possible. Please call me at your earliest
possible convenience so that a meeting can be arranged to discuss these issues.
Sincerely,
~/11~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public works/City Engineer
cc: file
John Erar, City Administrator
Dave Olson, Community Development Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmington.mn.us
/0/1-
SUBJECT:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~-
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator [XX!
Glenview Townhomes and Commercial Final Plat
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
A neighborhood meeting was held on August 11, 1998 concerning the proposed Glenview
Townhomes & Commercial Final Plat as requested by the City Council at their meeting on
August 3, 1998. Property owners within a 350-foot radius who did not receive notice of the
public hearing on February 24, 1998 were allowed to discuss concerns and issues related to the
proposed development at this neighborhood meeting.
DISCUSSION
The meeting was held at the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting due to staff and
resident availability, expediency of holding a meeting before the August 17th City Council
meeting and the opportunity for the Planning Commission to hear concerns of the property
owners, which is part of the Commission's role as an advisory board to the City Council. The
neighborhood meeting was intended to allow property owners to ask questions regarding the
proposed development. However, it was not the intention to "re-open" the public hearing. The
Planning Commission's role along with City staff was to forward any comments to the City
Council for the August 17th City Council meeting.
The City Attorney offered an opinion concerning the legality of holding the neighborhood
meeting at a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Jamnik stated "that it is
both legal and appropriate for the Planning Commission to forward neighborhood comments and
concerns, as well as any new concerns or recommendations from the Planning Commission
members, to the Council for their review/consideration." However, he also stated "that the
Planning Commission should refrain from ignoring their previous review of the proposal."
Therefore, Mr. Jamnik's opinion concluded that "the Planning Commission should conduct the
meeting as they always do, in a fair and impartial manner with sensitivity to the rights and
opinions of all parties within the framework provided by the City's official controls and
development standards."
Neighborhood Meeting Results
The neighborhood meeting was held with eight property owners in attendance along with the
Developer's engineer and City staff. The following are recommendations from the Planning
Commission as generated by the property owners concerning the Glenview Townhomes &
Commercial Final Plat:
I. Recommend an appropriate buffer between the Glenview property and single-family homes
along 213th Street, especially in the area of the emergency access roadway.
2. Require the Developer to contain snow on the Glenview property when snow removal is
needed, especially in the area of the emergency access roadway.
3. Request Developer restrict foot traffic between the Glenview property and the single-family
homes along 213th Street.
4. Re-address the County Road 72 Feasibility Study to review the feasibility of locating a
sanitary sewer line along the shared property line between Glenview Townhomes and the
single- family homes along 213th Street to allow for sewer hook-up for the single-family
homes.
Each recommendation is discussed below in detail.
Buffer Requirement
The City Code does not require a screening or setback buffer when residential properties abut
each other and allows pavement to be installed up to the property line. However, the residents
along 213th Street feel that additional screening should be provided either through additional
trees or fencing, especially in the area of the emergency access roadway abutting the residences.
The length of the roadway in this location is approximately 250 feet and is located 3 feet from
the property line.
Two options exist for screening the emergency access roadway, and they include I) locating a
six foot fence on the property line; and 2) locating trees in the backyards of the two property
owners affected by the roadway because trees could not be located on the Glenview property to
provide the screening requested by the residents.
Snow Removal
Residents are concerned that snow will be pushed onto their property along the emergency
access roadway. The Developer should determine and explain how snow will be removed in this
area and insure that all snow is contained on the Glenview Townhomes property as required by
City Code.
Restrict Foot Traffic
Residents along 213th Street are concerned that residents of Glenview Townhomes will access
through their property to proceed to 213th Street. Fencing the length of the Glenview
Townhomes property was mentioned, however, the Spruce trees that are shown on the landscape
plan would need to be removed because of their low growing habits. There is a distance of
approximately 30 feet between the property line and the buildings and deciduous trees could be
located in place of the Spruce trees, however, once again, there is no requirement in the City
Code for the screening/buffering of abutting residential properties.
Re-address County Road 72 Feasibility Report
All of the homes along 2l3th Street are presently on septic systems with two properties residing
in Empire Township. There would be a desire to connect homes within the City to a sanitary
sewer line in front of these homes with the possible reconstruction of County Road 72.
The residents requested that the Feasibility Report be re-addressed to review the possibility of
locating the sewer line along the back property line of their homes since the septic systems are
located in the backyards. However, with the location of the sanitary sewer line in the backyards,
the line would have to be installed along the shared property line with Glenview Townhomes.
The City Engineer has determined that a 20-foot easement would be required with 10 feet on
each side of the property line to allow access for maintenance and repairs. This would cause the
buffer requests made by the residents to not be achievable because trees and fencing would need
to be removed when repairs to the sewer line are required.
The City Engineer addressed the questions concerning the feasibility study at the neighborhood
meeting and informed them of an upcoming meeting concerning County Road 72. However,
since the road project is not associated with the Glenview Townhomes development, discussions
of re-addressing the feasibility study should be discussed at the County Road 72 neighborhood
meeting.
Since the Developer for Glenview Townhomes, Mr. Tim Giles, was not at the neighborhood
meeting on August II th, questions remain on how the Developer will address the
recommendations by the Planning Commission. The Developer should discuss the remedies to
the recommendations at the August 17th City Council meeting, which might involve additional
contingencies to the final plat.
The contingencies to the final plat remain the same as those discussed at the August 3rd City
Council meeting. The contingencies included I) the resolution of Trunk Highway 3 frontage
road financing issues, 2) the frontage road being completed in 1999, 3) the City Engineer
approving the resolution of engineering issues and 4) final plat approval contingent upon the
preparation and execution of the Development Contract.
City staff received a revised resolution drafted by the Developer's Attorney on August 12th. The
resolution recommends revisions to the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road contingency addressing
Developer financing of these improvements. The significant change deals with the funding of
the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road. The Developer's Attorney has stated that the Developer pay
its pro rata share of assessments if the frontage road is upgraded within 3 years from the date of
the signed resolution, by escrow, bond or other appropriate means. This is contrary to the
recommendations by City staff, and Council policy on new development costs, which require the
Developer to waive any and all objections to the assessments for the construction of the frontage
road, including the claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to all properties within the
project area.
City staff has noted the revised resolution from the Developer, however, staff recommends that
the contingencies remain as stated in the resolution on August 3rd. Any additional contingencies
to be included in the resolution, as determined at the August 17th City Council meeting, can be
added relative to issues raised at the neighborhood meeting.
ACTION REQUESTED
City staff recommends approval of the Glenview Townhomes and Commercial Final Plat
contingent upon the following:
1. The resolution of the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road issue with MNDOT, Mr. Giles and
Wausau Supply Company. The Developer must agree to waive any and all objections to the
assessments for the construction of the frontage road as determined by the City Council,
including the claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to all properties within the
project area.
2. That the frontage road be constructed in 1999.
3. That the City Engineer approves the resolution of engineering issues and compliance with
any required revisions to the construction documents.
4. That Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development
Contract and approval of the construction plans by the Engineering Division.
Respectfully Submitted,
1
()~~
Lee Smick, AICP
Planning Coordinator
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING FINAL PLAT AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT
GLENVIEW TOWNHOMES & COMMERCIAL FINAL PLAT
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington,
Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th day of August, 1998 at 7 :00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following:
WHEREAS, the fmal plat of Glenview Townhomes & Commercial is now before the Council for review
and approval; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing of the Planning Commission was held on the 24th day of February, 1998
after notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City and proper notice sent to
surrounding property owners; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the preliminary and final plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by
municipal service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above final plat be approved and that the requisite
signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the final plat with the following stipulations:
I. The resolution of the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road issue with MNDOT, Mr. Giles and Wausau
Supply Company. The Developer must agree to waive any and all objections to the assessments for
the construction of the frontage road as determined by the City Council, including the claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to all properties within the project area.
2. That the frontage road be constructed in 1999.
3. That the City Engineer approves the resolution of engineering issues and compliance with any required
revisions to the construction documents.
4. That Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development Contract
and approval of the construction plans by the Engineering Division.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of
August, 1998.
Mayor (Acting)
Attested to the _ day of August, 1998.
City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator I/L.
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator 9&
August 3, 1998
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Glenview Townhomes and Commercial Final Plat
INTRODUCTION
The Glenview Townhomes & Commercial Final Plat is brought forward to the City Council for
approval. The property is located east of Trunk Highway 3, north of County Road 72 and south
of the Wausau Property.
DISCUSSION
Mr. Tim Giles, Developer for Glenview Townhomes, is proposing an 89-unit townhome
development on 11.89 acres. The proposed commercial area consists of 2.41 acres and is zoned
B-1 and the proposed residential area consists of 9.48 acres and is zoned R-3 with a density of
9.39 units/acre which falls below the maximum density of 14 units/acre allowed in an R-3 zone.
The proposed commercial area is located at the west end of the property along the frontage road
of Trunk Highway 3.
The site is bounded by single-family development to the south (facing away from proposed
development), commercial warehousing to the north and the proposed Bristol Square
Townhomes development to the east and the Trunk Highway 3 Frontage Road to the west.
Private streets for the development are proposed to be 24 feet in width and constructed with curb
and gutter. A 16-foot connecting travelway at the southwestern edge of the property connects
two 24-foot roadways in order to provide adequate circulation for emergency vehicles.
The project is west of and will be interconnected with the proposed Bristol Square Townhome
development. This will allow traffic to access both sites at numerous locations. However, during
the construction of Glenview Townhomes, the Developer has proposed that no construction
traffic access the Bristol Square development, therefore requiring that Glenview construction
traffic be routed to the Trunk Highway 3 Frontage Road. The Developer will utilize the Trunk
Highway 3 Frontage Road by constructing the interior street system in Glenview at one time
rather than phasing the project from the east end of the site to the west as originally planned.
MNDOT has reviewed the information forwarded by the City regarding improvements to the
frontage road and has indicated a willingness to consider the frontage road improvements for
eligibility as a cooperative agreement project. This would include improvements at the
intersection of Trunk Highway 3 and Willow Street. The design would realign the frontage road
easterly after the intersection to allow for better sight and stacking distance for frontage road
vehicles, similar to the geometrics at Elm, Spruce or Larch intersections along trunk Highway 3.
Additional property would need to be acquired from Wausau Supply Company to accomplish the
desired layout. There are three possible scenarios for funding the frontage road improvements:
1. Require Mr. Giles to pay for the improvements to the frontage road because his development
will generate the most traffic from the land uses along the roadway. Mr. Giles has stated that
he supports the frontage road improvement and agrees to pay his proportionate share of the
cost; however, he feels that the cost should be born by all affected and benefiting properties
(see attached letter), not just his development.
2. The City includes the project in the 1999 CIP and assesses Mr. Giles, Wausau Supply
Company and other benefiting properties for the costs of the improvements. Wausau has not
expressed interest in this project to date and, therefore, condemnation for the right-of-way
may be necessary.
3. The City includes the project in the 1999 CIP and MNDOT provides funding assistance
through the cooperative agreements program. The earliest the project could be included in
MNDOT's program is fiscal year 2000, which would allow construction after July 1, 1999.
The proposed project would be evaluated along with all other applications and it is not
guaranteed that MNDOT will select the project for the 2000 fiscal year. The remainder of
the costs not funded by MNDOT would need to be assessed to the Glenview project, Wausau
or both.
The frontage road issues have not been resolved at this time, and final plat approval should be
contingent upon the resolution of the funding issues for the frontage road by the City Council.
The Engineering Division has reviewed the construction plans and has requested numerous
revisions. Therefore, the final plat approval should be contingent on the resolution of
engineering issues and compliance with any required revisions to the construction plans.
ACTION REQUESTED
City staff recommends approval of the Glenview Townhomes and Commercial Final Plat
contingent upon the following:
1. The resolution of the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road issue with MNDOT, Mr. Giles and
Wausau Supply Company. The Developer must agree to waive any and all objections to the
assessments for the construction of the frontage road as determined by the City Council,
including the claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to all properties within the
project area; this would include the Wausau property.
2. That the frontage road be constructed in 1999.
3. That the City Engineer approves the resolution of engineering issues and compliance with
any required revisions to the construction documents.
4. That Final Plat approval is contingent upon the preparation and execution of the
Development Contract and approval of the construction plans.
ReSP~d, ~,4
Lee Smick, AICP
Planning Coordinator
f,ft
I~J
1-+
fllft
e),
I II
I ~
ril ~" ~ ~
-=f-!~ II J i~d. ~ --- I' ·
I~I ~~~! I I - - -I ~ , II
I ~b I i2;; !~ I ~ 1--1>-! I !~;Iil
I ~lif; :~: ~i L ~ --1- _li~ -g ~~~
.. . eli g ~3;; c1i! I I I I lili~1
~ I ~ I _~33 311 I 1: ~ Ii!=li
~\\,\~\~.\~ .. 1!m; ~ L I i I I~~ii
~~ .. !i!il.. ~ ..... J _ _ ~ I~.h
\ ~ ,;i~!I
~
~
Cj
~
~
a
\..)
~
~
~
~
~
a
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
\
I
I
\
I
,
\
I
,
\
I
I
\
I
I
\
I
I
\
I
I
~I
~
~f
I,
I
\
\
\ ~i
\ I
\
: '\
I! ...... 1
t;;!.!l I
~~.. U _I .tf.tt;~~~
j~ MM ~ ....
- - --'\.--- - -
a lOllno
=. ......LOO..
~~~"'..I
s
. ~
~; ~
.
~
o
-...11"-.-.....
t 'ON A en.. .10 "&'10.. -...m
V llHlllH lINIlIII Nil
LI"COt ...zc.n..ool
1C'~.tll"KlOtll""_."'"""
1C CONSTRUCTION, INC.
"Commitment to Excellence."
Marc,h 31, 1998
Mr. David Olson, Community Development Director
Mr. Lee Mann, City Engineer
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Fannington, MN 55024
Re: GJenvtew Townhome/Commercial Development
Dear Sirs:
The proposed Glenview TownhomelCommercial Development accesses the existing frontage
road on the we~t end of the project. Recent discussions with the City of Farmington, MNDOT
and myselfhave identified increased traffic and potential problem! with the current frontage
road configumtions at the adjoining streets. Discussions have explored a1terna~ive rrontage road
improvements to address this increase in traffic.
The improvement of the frontage road and redesign of the connecting intersections is an integral
part of the commercial and/or industrial sites along this frontage road. The frontage road
is also an important link for traffic ciculation for the proposed Glenview To\vnhome and
Wexford Square developments. I support the frontage road improvement project and agree to
pay my proponionate share of the cost; however, I feel the cost should be born by all affected
and benefiting properties. Further I would encournge the City of Fannington to initiate a
cooperative agreement with MNI)OT to provide fWlding for this project and minimize the local
cost tlhare for this project. Additional local funding may need to be explored to anist in the
completion of the frontage Toad improvement.
If you should have any questions please feel free to contact me at.
Sincerely,
~~~\
Tim Giles
f T.c. CONSTRUCTION
cc: Bruce R. Bullert, Community Partners Designs, Inc.
"...
TO:
City Planning Commission
FROM:
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator
DATE:
July 14, 1998
RE:
Glenview Townhomes and
Commercial Final Plat
Plannin~ Department Review
Applicant:
Tim Giles
TC Construction
8343 210th St. W.
Lakeville, MN 55044
(612) 808-1317
Engineer:
Bruce Bullert
Community Partners Designs
405 Division Street
Northfield, MN 55057
(507) 645-6044
Referral Comments:
1. Lee Mann, City Engineer
Attachments:
1. Glenview Townhomes and
Commercial Final Plat
2. Letter from Mr. Giles
Location of Property:
East of Trunk Hwy. 3 and north of Co. Rd.
72 and south ofthe Wausau Property (SlIz of
the N'i4 of the NW'i4 of Section 32,
Township 114 N, Range 19 W)
Size of Property:
11.89 acres
.....
Number of Units / Density:
89/9.39 VA (units per acre)
Existing Zoning:
B-1 (Limited Business)
R-3 (High-Density Residential)
Comprehensive Plan:
Commercial, High Density Residentia
I
CitlJ. of FarminiJ.ton
325 Oak Street. Farmintjton, MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fax (612) 463-2591
Surrounding Land Uses:
The site is bounded by single-family
development to the south (facing away from
proposed development), commercial
warehousing to the north, undeveloped open
space to the east (currently proposed
rezoning to R-3). Across Trunk Hwy. 3 are
single- family residents.
Current Land Use:
Undeveloped Open Space, Car Sales Lot,
and LP Gas Distribution Facility
Terrain:
Topography on the site is quite flat with
little or no elevation change
Project Description:
Glenview Townhomes is a proposed 89-unit
private townhome development located on
the east side of the City. The developer is
not proposing to phase the development at
this time. The commercial area on the west
will be either sold and/or developed by Mr.
Giles.
Additional Comments:
Glenview Townhomes is proposing an 89-unit private development along with a
proposed commercial area on 11.89 acres. The proposed commercial area consists of
2.41 acres and is zoned B-1 and the proposed residential area consists of 9.48 acres and is
zoned R-3 with a density of 9.39 units/acre which falls below the current requirement of
14 units/acre in an R-3. The proposed commercial area is located at the west end of the
property along the frontage road of Trunk Highway 3.
Private streets are proposed for the development and are measured at 24 feet in width and
constructed with curb and gutter. A 16-foot lane at the southern edge of the property
connects two 24- foot roadways in order to provide adequate circulation for emergency
vehicles.
At the June 23, 1998 Planning Commission meeting, discussions concerning the traffic
flow of construction vehicles between Glenview and the adjacent Bristol Square
development surfaced at the schematic plan presentation for Bristol Square. Initially,
both developments contracted the same engineer, therefore, initial design of the projects
showed them phasing from the shared property line. This allowed construction access for
Glenview to move through the Bristol Square development and access onto County Road
72. However, conditions have changed with the hiring of a new engineer for Mr. Allen,
Developer of Bristol Square. At the June 23rd meeting, Mr. Allen stated that he is against
allowing any construction traffic from Glenview to access through his development to
reach County Road 72. His reasons include the following:
1. Additional construction traffic from the Glenview development may cause increased
wear on the roadway system in Bristol Square that Mr. Allen would have to incur.
2. Marketing the Bristol Square site might become more difficult with construction
traffic from Glenview accessing the site.
However, Mr. Allen insured the Planning Commission that the interconnection of the two
developments was important for the movement of traffic, but while the developments
were being constructed, construction traffic from Glenview would not be allowed.
Therefore, City staff recommended that a meeting be set up with Mr. Giles immediately
to determine a different access for the Glenview construction traffic. A meeting was held
on June 29, 1998 where Mr. Giles stated that he would not access the Bristol Square site.
He will utilize the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road by constructing the interior street
system in Glenview at one time rather than phasing the project from the east end of the
site to the west as originally planned.
MNDOT has reviewed the information forwarded by the City regarding improvements to
the frontage road and has determined that the frontage road should be improved at the
intersection of Trunk Highway 3 and Willow Street. This design would realign the
frontage road easterly after the intersection to allow for better sight and stacking distance
for frontage road vehicles. Additional property would need to be acquired from Wausau
Supply Company to accomplish this improvement. The improvement would be similar
the one constructed at Trunk Highway 3 and Elm Street completed earlier this year.
There are three possible scenarios for funding this improvement:
1. Require Mr. Giles to pay for the improvements to the frontage road because his
development will generate the most traffic from the land uses along the roadway. Mr.
Giles has stated that he supports the frontage road improvement and agrees to pay his
proportionate share of the cost; however, he feels that the cost should be born by all
affected and benefiting properties (see attached letter).
2. The City approves of the project in the CIP and assesses Mr. Giles and Wausau
Supply Company. Wausau has not expressed interest in this project to date and,
therefore, condemnation for right-of-way may be a necessity.
3. The City approves of the project in the CIP and MNDOT provides funding assistance,
which would have to be placed in MNDOT's CIP and listed on a needs basis by
MNDOT. The soonest the project could be included in MNDOT's program is fiscal
year 2000, which would allow construction after July 1, 1999. The remainder of the
costs not funded by MNDOT would need to be assessed to the Glenview project,
Wausau or both.
As illustrated, the frontage road has not been resolved at this time, and final plat approval
should be contingent upon the resolution of the frontage road funding issues by the City
Council.
Requested Action:
City staff recommends approval of the Glenview Townhomes and Commercial Final Plat
contingent upon the following:
1. The resolution of the Trunk Highway 3 frontage road issue with MNDOT, Mr. Giles
and Wausau Supply Company.
2. The frontage road being completed by 1999.
3. All major engineering issues have been resolved and Final Plat approval at the City
Council will be contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development
Contract and approval of the construction plans.
TO: Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E.,
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Review of Final Plat for Glenview
Townhomes
DATE: July 10, 1998
The engineering staff has reviewed the Charleswood Development plans relative to final plat issues.
Engineering staff recommends approval of the plat at the planning commission level with the
following comments:
1. It is recommended that final plat approval be contingent on the resolution of the frontage road
issues and construction of the project in 1999.
2. Easements need to be granted to the City for all public utilities.
3. Final plat approval at the Council level will be contingent on the preparation and execution of the
Development Contract and approval of the construction plans by the engineering division.
Respectfully submitted,
'd 7J1~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
I
Citlj. of FarminfJ,ton 325 Oak Street · FarmintJton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fa!: (612) 463.2591
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
JOe
FROM:
Mayor and Councilmembers,
City Administrato~
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator pY
TO:
SUBJECT:
Bristol Square First Addition Preliminary & Final Plat
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
Bristol Square is located to the east of the proposed Glenview Townhome development,
south of Wausau Supply Company, west of County Road 72 and the Prairie Waterway
and north of County Road 72 and the East Farmington single-family residential
development. The entire site contains 19.7 acres with the Developer platting 42 units in
the First Addition on 4.09 acres and providing outlots for the remainder of the property in
an R-3 zone.
DISCUSSION
The Bristol Square development is a private development which will be maintained by a
homeowners association. The First Addition of Bristol Square consists of the platting of
42 units on 4.09 acres located at the southwest comer of the property directly north of
County Road 72. The remaining property will be platted as 14 separate outlots. The
overall plan for the development proposes 173 townhome units on 19.7 acres yielding a
density of 8.8 units/acre, falling well below the maximum density of 14.0 units/acre
allowed in the R-3 Zoning District.
The First Addition shows access to County Road 72 from Twelfth Street. The proposed
plan will contain four accesses. Two accesses from the south intersect with County Road
72 and line up with Twelfth and Thirteenth Street in the East Farmington subdivision.
The third access is from the west connecting the Glenview Townhome development. The
fourth access is to the east and intersects with County Road 72.
The streets throughout the development will be private and will be 24 feet in width with
curb and gutter. The 16-foot fire lane that connects Pine Street and Prairie View Trail at
the western edge of the property allows for adequate circulation of fire vehicles. No
parking along any streets is allowed in the development. The Developer proposes 94 off-
street parking spaces in addition to the 2-car garages and space for 2-cars parked in the
driveway of each unit.
County Road 72, which surrounds the entire property, is being reviewed by the City and
County regarding the feasibility of upgrading the road to collector status and turning the
road back to the City of Farmington to the City limits and Empire Township beyond the
City limits. The proposed Dakota County Roadway Functional Classification System
shows the road as a collector street. A feasibility report for upgrading the street, water
main and sanitary and storm sewer improvements was completed on June 8, 1998 and
indicates the estimated total project cost is $1,474,200. It has yet to be determined the
amount of construction and cost the Developer of this project will incur along with the
Developer of East Farmington to share in the upgrade of County Road 72. However, the
share will be somewhat equal while the County is also considering participating
financially in the street improvement project within the City limits as part of the turnback
agreement.
The improvement of County Road 72 must be agreed by the Developer to confer special
benefit to the Bristol Square plat. The City shall assess the lots created by the plat in
accordance with the City's local improvement policy based on the final project costs.
The Developer or any successors to the project are required to waive any procedural or
substantive objection to the assessments for the construction of County Road 72,
including the claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
The City Engineer and Planning Coordinator met on August 5, 1998 with Jim Allen and
Rod Hardy (Sienna Corporation), developers for Bristol Square and East Farmington
respectively, to discuss utility issues concerning County Road 72. At the meeting, it was
determined that Sienna Corporation will install the proposed utility improvements within
the street right-of-way this fall for purposes of expediency. It was acknowledged that the
three benefiting properties, Bristol Square, East Farmington and South Suburban Medical
Center would need to arrive at an agreement for sharing the costs of the improvements.
The attached letter from Lee Mann, City Engineer, outlines the meeting in further detail.
The Engineering staff has reviewed and recommends approval of the final plat contingent
upon the resolution of item listed in the attached memo from the City Engineer.
ACTION REQUESTED
Recommend approval of the Bristol Square - First Addition Final Plat subject to the
following conditions:
1. The improvement of County Road 72 must be agreed by the Developer to confer
special benefit to the Bristol Square plat and must waive any objection to the
assessments for the construction of County Road 72, including the claim that the
assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
2. Easements need to be granted to the City for all public utilities and need to be shown
on the plat.
3. The right-of-way for County Road 72 needs to be verified and depicted correctly at
the southeast corner of the site in the area of the curve on the County road.
4. The location and funding of a trail along the northern and eastern edge of the site on
City property needs to be coordinated with the Parks and Recreation Director and the
Developer.
5. Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the
Development Contract and approval of the construction plans by the Engineering
Division.
~y~
Lee Smick, AICP
Planning Coordinator
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT AND AUTHORIZING
SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT
BRISTOL SQUARE FIRST ADDITION
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington,
Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th day of August, 1998 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following:
WHEREAS, the preliminary and final plat of Bristol Square is now before the Council for review and
approval; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing of the Planning Commission was held on the 28th day of July, 1998 after
notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City and proper notice sent to
surrounding property owners; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the preliminary and final plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by
municipal service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above final plat be approved and that the requisite
signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the final plat with the following stipulations:
I. The improvement of County Road 72 must be agreed by the Developer to confer special benefit to the
Bristol Square plat and must waive any objection to the assessments for the construction of County
Road 72, including the claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
2. Easements need to be granted to the City for all public utilities and need to be shown on the plat.
3. The right-of-way for County Road 72 needs to be verified and depicted correctly at the southeast
corner ofthe site in the area of the curve on the County road.
4. The location and funding of a trail along the northern and eastern edge of the site on City property
needs to be coordinated with the Parks and Recreation Director and the Developer.
5. Final Plat approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development Contract and
approval of the construction plans by the Engineering Division.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of
August, 1998.
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of August, 1998.
City Administrator
~
~I
~ J
~ : } .
1!' " ~ 0
~ >. 6~
~ j j'
~ i B
1 : J
z
o
I-
-
o
o
<(
15g
.Ii
.'lj~
~H
ili!
H~
~~I
il ~ G 0
~ o. ~I 2
~~~
~: ~~ I
!~p ~
lIif ;]
.~~i
;U~~
~~~ ~
a;~
~~~~
j"i!
eh~
U~~
~~la
~ Gk~
HI:
"!]
l~~:
j 0'11
"r If
~~i2
~~ ~G
~..~
3ll"~
!Iii
~
~
"
i
J
~
j~
~i i
I
h !
~
s
~
~
e
~
~B
I
~ )
~
.
! .
i H ~
i j 1
~
g
I
j
~
f
~
M
i
!
I
I~
Hi
! 0
3l!
~I
~~
~ H
~~n
~~U
ni3
~
~
o
t-
en
0::
lJ...
W
0::
<(
::::>
o
en
" ~ ~!ji~i ~ ~!j~i3;~~~
~.! j :~~_~; ~ :~~~fil=~et
i ~~;!~& j ~lia~il~~l
~ ~ ~I~~~~ = ~ ~!rl s~3i
i = j.n~~ ~j )li~~H~B-
~ i i~i~~~ ]~ ~~i~~i.gJf
I << ikgEi~ ~I ikgOBli3~l
1!' - ~l.~.'lE I~ ~~.!.~~!i~
I ~ !:i;l~ !j !:i~~~~9!1
8 ~ "~1!'I. 8 r~~ ~=..~
~ ~~]!! si .~]iiii~j~B
~ " "~i~i3 ij "~i'!]" i!
I i !;~t~l ~~ !:~l:~I.j~
! i ~~~Pi ~l ~~~;:~~iki!l
~ li~iiir!j li)ij~;i!~
f ! t~~~ti ~~ t~~~~hHi
i ~ -:jl~lj l! -:]fk~~~.i
i j i~~3jt! ~~ i~i~tBl~ii
i ~ "J~!~~~~. 1.~~~ID:j~
. ~ I~~_~~S ~j ~~~~~SIR~
J! I ~!lliJI~ i; ~~f~ll~!;1
~ ~~~ ~~ f~ ~~~Ji ~~J
. ~aE!~s =M ~a~ IV I
i i AJta~~J ~~ AJt~~~~!.
i I Jij6~i~i ~~ l~6]lia!i~
"i i&~~~~~ Joa i&~~31i~~~
11 ~ i!iiil~ I i!i;il;f!i~
~I ~ ~;ii~a!!~ ~;il~~&~I")
~; i- 1~~~~lj ~~ I~~~I~!J!II
ii I! J~;"l~! Ii li;III~-li~
~ - ~ g~;:h i ~I ~1i~a3 lhl
~U ~ !a~ ~ ft ~a~'~8~!
~~ ~~ ~~~liIJ ~ ~~!ljiad~~l
~~ ~! ~~~~~~: ~ v~~~e~3:~li
~I !~ J!J;~fj: i~ ~j~j;~j~~j~;f
h h h~~is h DhH~~~~~
..J
o
t-
en
0::
CD
~
~
~
l
J
~
f s ~
!
~
~
g
.!I
~
I
i
~
~
~ I
I ~
I 8
.~ ~
; I
i !!
~
~ 1
! !
j B
~~ i
il !
h 1 ~
J~! I
~~ - !!
~J ~
;~ I
d!
Ii ~
i: I
HI;
H ~ i
!1 ~i J
a~ i~ j
:~ JIB
1 i
Ij:~ I
H ~g ~
.=~
.~
: II
I ! ~~
~ i H
~ ~;i
i l; ~
I J If
: J!:I
ii i~
d
jf
ai
Il
II
.~
ij
~~
~~
~~
~'
~
!11.
~l~
~r
~i
~i
~~
~
~
j
~
~
w
!
~
~
~
.'li
:i
p
iJ
I.
I]
;J
II !1
~~ III
~! ~I
~
.
J
J
]~
~~
:11
.'l
lfi
" 5)
~w
Ii
~~
h
~.
! i:
n
"~
I
1
a
ii
.
~
I
i
~
w
J
~
~
8
G
!
~
~
S
!
J
j
J
i-
fi ~
" I
! ~
j ~ ..
J ! )
~
c;{
Q.;
o
u
01
c:
.~
::..
5
U)
~
~
z
o
-
I-
-
o
o
<(
I-
(j)
0::
-
lJ...
W
0::
<(
::::>
o
(j)
-1
o
I-
(j)
0::
CO
jO ./IMN ilK! ..10 toll 1M JH.J..40 3NI' J.$'f] IHJ...J'
.,-..n"n ).. _t N :I (;:1
-.., , "OJ'J ...l\:ia~
(~ L. . "Ll ocr.. .LS'tl JlU,jQ i1~. ~s;; ___
h-Mulg .60 .0$
1/ f
~.~! ....--:
I
!
i
i
j
i
,ua. ~_..
, .; i .
_b~1 l
G:; II
, L....
-(1---
!!:.~~_t
'.'~l _h _.
,
i
I
i
I:
i~
I
1
I
I
\-------M:Z&:il:Ci&J
ot.~!._ I
I'l
i .1
~~.. !~ ~l
.1.01.1.00 4f.;'\~ !=:i
~'...j 1:!
..--..-.---.-.-.......t--:i....
...
o
.)
...
?
o
~
8~o-ld
-. ~ i i~
ril z Lp-"
-g~~
'j II:li
~U~d
o .0
,...+:..;._n__
.. : t<~
~ f ~~
~ 3;
~ ;/
j j j
i f.ll
t"'7~~
........~.-
o
,
!
___ M.I~,.O~ON
...."% - .- ,
i01J.nO ,
K'os;Z-u -.
-t-----_...
I
J
v
.-.1..111,60.0&
i
i i
J ;Z i
I
i
i
i .
j ~
I ;,
i ~
!
:
g
1
.I. 0 1.1. 0 0
,
,
..
~
N
J!!
~
.,
,
~~'~~C?ifS_ ~\
...
i~
I- i~ -~J
0 '"
oJ
I-
:>
0
<
Q
,-,
: ~ 0_- (
,~ <..
8~ t
..I .~
.. i
!.~
..t f
Zt
~ (J
~
~: ~
..,
~i t
0 ~
I ~ <(
z 'J
i 0::
.s- . ~ 18
i~
,.
oo].lli,SO .ON
.1.01.1.00
v
.olC,60.0S
50'US: -
--.." :~-~...
.L,"f
.e~l i ~
"! I. k
. i; ~ ~
I :
i
i
..-..i........ I
0, O["""u .-....:.)'
-t\-.------
-r.
...
..
..
..
.,
..;~~
'<l'"
"
....c.i
I- o~
-'.
....
0 :>:
O.
-'
...
-
:>
0
-,J.
,^'
I '"
I~ "'",
10/
I
i! _y~
.. Iii_ ~ ~ /~~
~ . E / ~,
en i _ ~ /
:: I " ------.,/
! I /
~I i/
\/
I
I I ..
M.I,.~...3_~.. \ I 0
---- ~:=J
\
\
'-
~
,-'
('
18.1.0" OOOfl
.
z i
-
~
"J J.01J.IlO
Il~ ~
~! Ii
~ ~iI'
~ ~1 i
-.4')~ ~
~!~.oM ____l!~~!I....
9
...
- 0
--~ tl ~~
i? I ~
~.r i~ l
., 10 .
,. I
.....__................J :c:
.1.01.1. 0 0
...-.........u
09 'LOg _n
--~-~:~: ~1....:~"NiH.UIH/I~N 1H.L.60 iNn UlM. iK1
~
<~U f'
" s~~ ! ~ ~
~!I iht~t i
II! ~~.~Wg.
;~-"1.~3~~ i~
~H.U ~I
r
l'
. ~
~"n
,,- ~ .
g::;~: I
~; I
, ~ ~ !:
B... .1
~NN'. :,
" "
0.. 1:
I !
,
. '
g: ~ '
~ ~ I
Z i :
-" '
~ I
< '
I '
,
,
I
~~ -- i
, '
_ ~__ __J_
i i
; !
~
:J o~.
~ ~_ i;
:c ,.
!:l. _!
0:: ",-- -
"
II
!
>1
~
!;
,
,
,
,
\
,
,
i,
-\
09"""(:
61 ~J}\ .~,~7;)~a~8~;~o~]Hl
o lNl11SJ^ 3tH
, ~ ~
~~ ~~ i e
.. ~~ ~ .
i~ ~a ~~ ~~
~~ .!~.~ Wi ·
13j ~~I!:: ~'" t; ~
;" ;;Ii; -i _6 ~
W~ ~~~"~ "i ~
~I ~;~ ~;" ~~. ~
... a i'" I,..b I ~
~ .~ <s" ~s~ ~"~ ~
~~ ~~iI~~.>o..
;0 ~.a ~.~ _i~_
I') .. il
~c
~r
g;
i~
"~ I
~~
~~
~<
~~
Q: ~t
,kg
\
,
,
,
,
I
I
I
,
I, I
\.1"...
l~l!:~J
I
I
I
I
I
I
L
1i
"
II
-t I
:1
I
,I i
J1' :
, it:
~I ~:
I!'
'I !i
f -I
. ,
.j _.1-_
I I): I
i!~;
, (1)1
, ,
. II
I t- i
, ('),
OJ
,
~i
~~
,-
I
I
,
I
,
,
I
,
I
o
Z
~
~
o
'"
<l.
~I 0 I
ok Z f/l
~ ~ '0
~ ~ N
V> '
I
w
"
<=
~
w
w
iJi
~
~
~
~
:i
<l.
~
S;'
~
~
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L
~~'"
'" j~~~
i i3~tJ~
o !;;5l~f3
~o"'::::
ue~
::::
~,I 1-
~ ~ I; @
~ ~ ~
ill I
d\1 ~~I
~ ide gl'~;
g ~ii all ~
~ i~!& a:1
~ l~!I ~~
'I"!: ~I<!~
i ~~ \0
_i!!' .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\J
~ ~
~ ~
g~ ;oo~
~~ ~~~
~ ~~ ~~~
w ~"l o~~
~ ~~ ~~~
"-l...:i !:;:l;ioo
~~ ~~~
~o:i;~~
~U~u~
- ~
~
~ ~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmington.mn.us
TO: Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Final Plat Review - Bristol Square Townhomes
DATE: July 23, 1998
Engineering staff has reviewed the final plat for Bristol Square and recommends approval
of the final plat at the City Council level contingent upon the resolution of the following
issues to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and City Engineer:
1. The dedication of easements on the plat needs to be clearer. In addition, the easement
for the sanitary sewer along the west edge of the property needs to be shown on the
plat. The dimensions need to be shown for the two drainage and utility easements
shown for ponding purposes.
2. The dimensions of the phase line for phase one need to be provided; if it is not
appropriate to show the phase line on the plat, a document should be submitted that
can be attached to the Development Contract to clarify the area covered by the
Development Contract.
3. The right-of-way issue at the southeast comer of the property still needs to be
resolved. The existing roadway (County Road 72) cuts across the southeast comer of
the plat.
4. The Developer needs to agree to be assessed for costs related to improving County
Road 72 (streets and utilities) and waive any objections to assessments for those
improvements, including the claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the
property.
5. Final plat approval should be contingent on the preparation and execution of the
Development Contract and approval of the construction plans by the Engineering
Division.
Respectfully Submitted,
~fJ1~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
August 7, 1998
Mr. Rodney Hardy
Sienna Corporation
Suite 608
4940 Viking Drive
Minneapolis, MN 55435
The utilities discussed would be installed along Co. Rd. 72 adjacent to East Farmington
41h Addition, Bristol Square Townhomes and South Suburban Medical Center property.
All properties would benefit to various degrees from the proposed utility improvements.
The following points and conclusions were made at the meeting:
Mr. Jim Allen
Allen Homes Corporation
12433 Princeton Avenue
Savage, MN 55378
Re: Meeting summary, Utility installation in County Road 72
This letter serves as a summary of the meeting held on August 5, 1998 regarding the
installation of utilities in County Road 72.
. It was decided that for purposes of expediency, Sienna Corporation would install the
utilities with their contractor, rather than petition the City to install the improvements
and assess the costs back to the benefiting properties.
. It was acknowledged that the three benefiting properties would need to arrive at an
agreement for sharing the costs of the improvements. It was requested by the
developers that the City staff, as an objective third party, formulate a proposed cost
split for the benefiting properties. It was further acknowledged that South Suburban
needs to be contacted regarding this procedure for their concurrence. Future meetings
regarding these topics will include a representative from the Medical Center.
. It was acknowledged that a permit would be necessary from Dakota County before
the improvements could be installed.
. The timing of the road improvements was discussed. City staff indicated that the City
had requested that the County include the improvements to County Road 72 in the
County's 1999 CIP. The improvements are proposed to be part of a tumback
agreement between the County and the City. Staff will provide the developers with a
copy of the City's request to Dakota County to include the project in their 1999 CIP.
Attached is a copy of the City's request letter to the County. If you have any further
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call me @ 651-463-1601.
Sincerely,
;LYh~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public works/City Engineer
attachment
cc: Lee Larson, South Suburban Medical Center
Dave Olson, Community Development Director
Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator
Rick Osberg, James R. Hill, Inc.
Steve Albrecht, William R. Englehardt Associates, Inc.
.,
From:
Farmington Planning
Commission
Lee Smick, Ib f}
Planning Coordinator~
To:
Date:
July 28, 1998
RE:
Bristol Square First Addition
Preliminary & Final Plat
Plannine: Division Review
Applicant:
Allen Homes Corporation
12433 Princeton Avenue
Savage,~ 55378
612-894-1473
Referral Comments:
1. Lee Mann, City Engineer
Attachments:
1. First Addition Preliminary & Final Plat
2. Preliminary Plat for Overall Development
3. Site Plan for Overall Development
Proposed Development:
The plat for First Addition will consist of 42 units
located at the southwest comer of the property
directly north of County Road 72. The remaining
plat consists of 14 outlots. The overall proposed
development consists of 173 townhome units on
19.7 acres creating a density of8.8 units/acre in an
R-3 zone. This falls below the maximum density
requirement of 14.0 established in the R-3 zone.
Location of the Development:
Located to the east of the new Glenview Townhome
development, south ofWausau Supply Company,
west of County Road 72 and the Prairie Waterway
and north of County Road 72 and the East
Farmington single-family residential development.
.....
First Addition Area Bounded By: Townhouse development to the west, north and east
and single-family residential to the south.
Existing Zoning:
R-3 High Density - Townhouse
I
CitlJ of FarminfJ.ton 325 Oalc Street · FarminfJton, MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fax (612) 463-2591
The property is quite flat and generally drains
towards the southeast corner of the site. There is an
existing man-made pond on the site that is not
designated on the Wetland and Waterbody
Classification Map, therefore, no protection or
mitigation procedures are required for the pond. An
existing house is located at the southwest comer of
the site, in the First Addition, that will be removed.
Existing Conditions:
Proposed Coverage for
Overall Development:
Proposed Coverage
Townhomes (171)
Driveway/Sidewalk
Off-street Parking
Streets
Trails
Stormwater Pond
Open Soace
Total Area
Impervious Surface
Area (S.F.)
188,100
105,836
13,563
119,867
18,560
23,522
386.674
858,132
469,421
% of Total
21.9
12.3
1.6
14.0
2.2
2.7
45.2
54.7
The proposed plan will contain four accesses. Two
accesses from the south intersect with County Road
72 and line up with Twelfth and Thirteenth Street in
the East Farmington subdivision. The third access
is from the west connecting the Glenview
Townhome development. The fourth access is to
the east and intersects with County Road 72.
Twenty-four foot wide private streets are proposed
in the development with curb and gutter required.
A sixteen-foot fire lane is located at the west end of
the property to connect two dead end streets and
allow adequate circulation for fire vehicles.
Streets and Accesses:
Sidewalks are not required in the private
subdivision, however, bituminous trails will be
located throughout the subdivision and will connect
with existing trails in the Prairie Waterway trails
system.
Sidewalks:
Topography:
The site topography is quite flat throughout the site
and generally drains to the southeast.
Wetland:
No wetlands exist on the site. An existing man-
made pond located at the western end of the site is
not designated as a wetland, therefore, the developer
proposes to fill the pond.
Flood Plain:
There is no flood plain that effects this property.
Parkland and Trails:
The Parks and Recreation Commission met on May
13, 1998 to discuss the proposed development and
parkland requirements (see attached May 13th
minutes). The Commission approved the
acceptance of approximately 0.7 acres ofland at the
southeast corner of the site and cash in lieu of land
on the condition that the City is unable to purchase
parkland on the east side of the Prairie Waterway.
Ifthe City can purchase this property, the developer
will pay cash for the approximate 0.7 acres and will
be able to construct three additional townhome units
in this location. The Developer will also be
required to install a trail on City property north of
the subdivision to connect with Prairie Waterway
trails to the east. The Developer will receive a
credit for parkland dedication fees from the
construction of the trail.
Additional Comments
The Bristol Square development is a private development which will be maintained by a
homeowners association. The First Addition of Bristol Square consists of the platting of
42 units on 4.09 acres located at the southwest corner of the property directly north of
County Road 72. The remaining property will be platted as 14 separate outlots. The
overall plan for the development proposes 173 townhome units on 19.7 acres yielding a
density of8.8 units/acre, falling below the maximum density of 14.0 units/acre.
The First Addition shows access to County Road 72 from Twelfth Street. The streets
throughout the development will be private and will be 24 feet in width with curb and
gutter. The 16-foot fire lane that connects Pine Street and Prairie View Trail at the
western edge of the property allows for adequate circulation of fire vehicles. No parking
along the streets is allowed.
County Road 72, which surrounds the entire property, is being reviewed by the City and
County on the feasibility of upgrading the road to collector status and turnIng the road
back to the City of Farmington to the City limits and Empire Township beyond the City
limits. The Proposed Dakota County Roadway Functional Classification System shows
the road as a collector street. A feasibility report for upgrading the road was completed
on June 8,1998 and indicates the estimated total project costs is $1,474,200. It has yet to
be determined the amount of construction and cost the Developer of this project will incur
along with the Developer of East Farmington to share in the upgrade of County Road 72.
However, the share will be somewhat equal while the County is also considering
participating financially in the street improvement project within the City limits as part of
the tumback agreement.
The improvement of County Road 72 must be agreed by the Developer to confer special
benefit to the Bristol Square plat. The City shall assess the lots created by the plat in
accordance with the City's local improvement policy based on the final project costs.
The Developer or any successors to the project are required to waive any procedural or
substantive objection to the assessments for the construction of County Road 72,
including the claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
The Developer is proposing two stormwater detention ponds for surface water runoff that
will be part of future phases and will connect through the central portion of the site. The
northern pond will have overflow capabilities into the Prairie Waterway to the north.
The attached comments by the City Engineer require utility easements to be shown on the
plat. Verification and depiction of the right-of way for County Road 72 in Outlot J must
be shown correctly and the trail on the northerly edge of the plat needs to be coordinated
with the Parks and Recreation Director to show appropriate the easements. The
Developer must address these comments before the Development Contract is approved at
the City Council.
Recommendation
Contingencies to the approval of the Bristol Square Preliminary & Final Plat - First
Addition are as follows:
1. The improvement of County Road 72 must be agreed by the Developer to confer
special benefit to the Bristol Square plat and must waive any objection to the
assessments for the construction of County Road 72, including the claim that the
assessment exceeds the benefit to the property.
2. All engineering requirements and the Surface Water Management Plan must be met.
3. Easements need to be granted to the City for all public utilities and need to be shown
on the plat.
4. The right-of-way for County Road 72 needs to be verified and depicted correctly at
the southeast corner of the site in the area of the curve on the County road:
5. The location of the trail along the northerly edge of the site needs to be coordinated
with the Parks and Recreation Director and the appropriate trail easements need to be
shown on the plat.
6. Final Plat approval at the Council level will be contingent on the preparation and
execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans by the
Engineering Division.
Approve and forward the Bristol Square First Addition Preliminary & Final Plat to the
City Council contingent on the above stipulations.
~ I. I-If
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: Bristol Square Townhomes
DATE: July 23, 1998
The engineering staff has reviewed the submitted plans for Bristol Square relative to
preliminary and final plat issues. Engineering staff recommends approval of the Plat at
the Planning Commission level with the following comments to be addressed before City
Council approval:
1. Easements need to be granted to the City for all public utilities and need to be shown
on the plat.
2. The right-of-way for County Road 72 needs to be verified and depicted correctly at
the southeast corner of the site in the area of the curve on the County road.
3. The location of the trail along the northerly edge of the site needs be coordinated with
the Parks Director and the appropriate trail easements need to be shown on the plat.
4. Final plat approval at the Council level will be contingent on the preparation and
execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans by the
engineering division.
Respectfully Submitted,
~m~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
----- - - ------ ----
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
IDe
TO:
Mayor and Council Members
FROM:
John F. Erar, City Administrator
SUBJECT:
Ash Street Contamination - Update
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
A recent exchange of correspondence with Dakota County officials relative to interpretations of both state
law and county ordinances on Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) has prompted this update to
the Council (see attachments).
DISCUSSION
Over the last two weeks, discussion with Mr. Louis Breimhurst, Director of Physical Development with
Dakota County, has occurred relative to the statutory definition of what constitutes an "imminent threat to
public health or safety." According to 1997 State Statutes, the defmition of an imminent threat to public
health or safety included "cesspools". A copy of a letter to Mr. Breimhurst, that included a legal opinion
from the City Attorney confirming the 1997 Statute, requested that the County simply acknowledge this
threat to public health and publicize this information to the general public.
On Thursday, August 6, 1998, the City received a letter from Mr. Breimhurst indicating that a recent
change in the 1998 Law, signed into law in April 1998, removed cesspools from the definition of
imminent threats. This change was verified by viewing the State Legislature's web site and locating the
specific chapter and section. It should be noted that this change has not yet been codified into state law,
and as a result these changes were not readily available to City staff.
In review of this statutory change, the Legislature added cesspools to section (f) in the same subdivision
(Sa) of M.S. 115.55 defming all cesspools as failed systems, and requiring all cesspools to "be upgraded,
replaced, or its use discontinued...". Consequently, this recent statutory change, previously undisclosed to
the City during the course of these joint negotiations, mitigated the previous effect of the 1997 law
relative to imminent threats. According to the MPCA, the 1998 legislative removal of cesspools as an
imminent threat was prompted more by political considerations associated with the time frame (30 days)
of replacing cesspools vs. 10 months for other types of failing systems.
In speaking with a representative from the MPCA, it is my understanding that cesspools are identified as a
known source of groundwater contamination, and the agency continues to view this type of contamination
as a public health threat. Under existing state statute, sewage discharges to surface water are considered
an imminent threat given the fact that contaminated groundwater eventually makes its way into the water
table, and inexorably into surface water.
Mayor and Council Members
Ash Street Contamination - Update
Page 2 of2
In terms of the Ash Street stormwater ditch contamination, County officials have indicated that although
"a substantial portion of the ditch water is ground water," they stop short of identifying the surrounding
ISTS failures as more than just a "possible" cause. However, the fact that the County is stating "failing
ISTS" as one possible source suggests that some level of contamination is potentially being caused by
cesspools in the area. Accordingly, it has been the City's position that the likelihood of surface water
contamination originating from cesspools is a far greater possibility than any other source at this point.
As indicated in the attached letter dated August 4, 1998 to Mr. Breimhurst, the City strongly denies any
allegations that past City pumping of the lift station or any alleged leaks in the forced main are
contributing to on-going contamination in the storm water ditches. Both of these issues have been
thoroughly reviewed by operations staff and formally discounted as possible sources of contamination. In
terms of animal feces contamination, the County's own environmental staff person discounted this
possibility as an insignificant source of ditch water contamination. Consequently, failing ISTS are the
only confirmed source of contamination in this area.
ACTION REOUESTED
As Council has determined that negotiations with Castle Rock Township and the Fair Board should
proceed, the issue of whether an imminent threat to public health or safety exists should be deferred for
the time being.
It would be recommended that should negotiations fail to achieve desired Council outcomes that the
MPCA be contacted for an official agency opinion on groundwater contamination, and the potential
implications to public health. The Council may also wish to order an independent environmental
assessment to further study the contamination caused by failing ISTS in this area of the community and
the corresponding hydrological effects on surface water.
-
Attachments
Cc: Mr. Joseph Harris, County Commissioner
Mr. Brandt Richardson, County Administrator
Mr. Louis Breimhurst, Director of Physical Development
Mr. Gordon Wichteman, Castle Rock Township
Mr. Alyn Angus, Castle Rock Township
Ms. Darlene Grabowski, Citizen Committee Representative
Mr. Eugene Thurmes, Citizen Committee Alternate
Mr. Ron Thelen, Citizen Committee Alternate
Subd. Sa. [INSPECTION CRITERIA FOR EXISTING SYSTEMS.] (a)
An inspection of an existing system must evaluate the criteria
in paragraphs (b) to (h).
(b) If the inspector finds one or more of the following
conditions:
(1) sewage discharge to surface water;
(2) sewage discharge to ground surface;
(3) sewage backup; or
;::::J (4) a eesspool; or
~ any other situation with the potential to immediately
and adversely affect or threaten public health or safety,
then the system constitutes an imminent threat to public health
or safety and, if not repaired, must be upgraded, replaced, or
its use discontinued within ten months of receipt of the notice
described in subdivision 5b, or within a shorter period of time
if required by local ordinance.
(c) An existing system that has none of the conditions in
paragraph (b), and has at least two feet of soil separation need
not be upgraded, repaired, replaced, or its use discontinued,
notwithstanding any local ordinance that is more restrictive.
(d) Paragraph (c) does not apply to systems in shoreland
areas regulated under sections 103F.201 to 103F.221, wellhead
protection areas as defined in section 1031.005, or those used
in connection with food, beverage, and lodging establishments
regulated under chapter 157.
(e) If the local unit of government with jurisdiction over
the system has adopted an ordinance containing local standards
pursuant to subdivision 7, the existing system must comply with
the ordinance. If the system does not comply with the
ordinance, it must be upgraded, replaced, or its use
discontinued according to the ordinance.
~ (f) If a seepage pit, drywell, cesspool, or leaching pit
exists and the local unit of government with jurisdiction over
the system has not adopted local standards to the contrary, the
system is failing and must be upgraded, replaced, or its use
discontinued within the time required by subdivision 3 or local
ordinance.
(g) If the system fails to provide sufficient groundwater
protection, then the local unit of government or its agent shall
order that the system be upgraded, replaced, or its use
discontinued within the time required by rule or the local
ordinance.
(h) The authority to find a threat to public health under
section 145A.04, subdivision 8, is in addition to the authority
to make a finding under paragraphs (b) to (d).
e"o.,,~e.~ To 1'['1 k4N J M. s. II S"'. S~
"'1 .!
DAKOTA COUNTY
DIVISION OF PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT
14955 GALAXIE AVENUE
LOUIS J. BREIMHURST, P.E.
DIRECTOR
(612) 891-7005
FAX (612) 891-7031
APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124-8579
DEPARTMENTS OF -
. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
. HIGHWAYS
. PARKS
. SURVEY
. OFFICE OF PLANNING
August 3, 1998
John Erar, City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Dear Mr. Erar:
This letter is in response to our telephone conversation last Friday, July 31, regarding my letter to you of
July 23. Specifically, you asked if cesspools are included in the statutory definition of an "Imminent
Threat to Public Health or Safety."
The 1997 Minnesota Legislature added cesspools to the definition of Imminent Threat to Public Health or
Safety.l:Iowever, the 1998 Minnesota Legislature reversed this by removing cesspools from the statutory
definition]The Governor signed this into law on April 21, 1998. The Laws of Minnesota 1998, Chapter
401, have not yet been codified into Minnesota Statute 115. For your reference, the bill was Senate File
3353: ''The Omnibus Environment, Natural Resources, and Agricultural Supplemental Appropriations
Bill."
My letter of July 23, referenced State Legislation (1997), when it should have referenced State
Legislation (1998). However, the conditions listed in the letter, which constitute an Imminent Threat to
Public Health or Safety, are accurate according to current statutory law. We apologize for any confusion
that this may have caused you.
Please contact my office at 891-7001, if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
,
~~~~
Louis J. Breimhurst, P.E.
Physical Development Director
c. Joseph A. Harris, County Commissioner
Brandt Richardson, County Administrator
O:Walm:\FarmintonErarResponse2.doc
Printed on recycled paper, 20% post-consumer
o
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
" .
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
August 4, 1998
Mr. Louis Breimhurst
Director of Physical Development
14955 Galaxie Avenue
Apple Valley, MN 55124
Dear Mr. Breimhurst:
In review of your memo dated July 23, 1998 which was in response to questions my office had regarding
contamination issues as it related to failing septic systems within Castle Rock Township, I requested,
among other issues, clarifications concerning Dakota County's regulatory position and circumstances
constituting an imminent threat to public health or safety.
Your office indicated that the possible sources for fecal coliform bacteria contamination of ditch water
included 1) failing Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS); 2) existing contamination in the ditch,
such as animal feces or other debris; 3) a leak in the municipal sewer system and 4) a leak from temporary
pumping of municipal sewage from the lift station to the manhole. Your office further added that "a direct
link between the contaminated ditch water and failing sewage systems has not been established" even
though according to the County's own investigation "a substantial portion of the ditch water is ground
water."
In response, I am troubled by the County's position on the possible sources of contamination. First, a
meeting held on July 7, 1998 attended by County, City and Township officials, I believe, addressed the
potential of contamination resulting from animal feces. The County's environmental management
supervisor, Mr. David Swenson, clearly stated that it was highly unlikely that animal or bird feces would
cause contamination to register at such high levels. It was my understanding that this particular category
of source contamination was discounted by Mr. Swenson as insignificant.
Secondly, in terms of a municipal sewer system leak, the City conducted a test of its forced sewer main
and concluded that the integrity of the system was intact. The City found no evidence that a leak from our
system was a contributing factor. This information was reported by the City Engineer at a subsequent
meeting in which you attended.
Thirdly, unsubstantiated citizen allegations of a hose leak from the temporary pumping of the lift station
were firmly disputed by the City at this meeting and no evidence whatsoever exists that the City
discharged sanitary sewer effluent into the drainage ditch. I am unaware of any County investigation to
date that supports these public allegations as well. In light of the fact that the City has firmly disputed
these two allegations, I find it unusual that the County continues to suggest that the City may be
responsible in some way for the contamination of ditch water.
In review of the County's position alleging potential City discharges or leaks, I seriously question the
appropriateness of using unconfirmed rumors or unsubstantiated allegations as the basis for forming an
, .
Mr. Louis Briemhurst
Environmental Contamination Issues
Page 2 of3
opinion on potential sources of environmental contamination. Is there a County policy authorizing the use
of unconfirmed information or highly questionable speculation to suggest that a local unit of government
or private entity, for that matter, may be contaminating the environment? If so, I would be interested in
receiving a copy of the County's environmental testing practices and specific criteria that the County uses
to form environmental assessments.
Based on confirmed findings, it would appear that the only sound basis for forming a preliminary
environmental assessment on potential sources of environmental contamination would be on actual testing
results ofISTS. In this regard, the County's own testing has concluded that of32 identified ISTS, 22 ISTS
were confirmed as failing. Further, the County has confirmed that these 22 ISTS are in fact cesspools. It is
also the City's understanding that cesspool systems as an ISTS are in violation of state environmental
laws as they are a confirmed source of ground water contamination.
It seems very curious that while the County has confirmed the failure of 22 cesspools, no link between
these cesspools and ground water contamination found in the ditches can be established, yet County
officials seem more than satisfied to use unsubstantiated information to identify the City as a "possible"
source of the contamination. It is even more interesting to note that the County refuses to even consider or
acknowledge that the likelihood of contamination in the ditches by cesspools is afar greater possibility--
as a known source of ground water contamination--than, for example, animal feces or less than credible
claims of City sanitary sewer system leaks or discharges.
Instead, the County continues to suggest that the likelihood of ditch contamination from sources other
than cesspools is just as great even when these other sources have been discounted by your own staff or
refuted by this local unit of government. In the final analysis, it would appear that the County is less
inclined to consider hard environmental data from actual testing as a basis for its position, and is more
willing it seems to consider less rigorously tested theories that appeal, for the most part, to superficial
political sensitivities.
At the July 7, 1998 meeting, and in my memo dated July 10, 1998, the question was asked whether this
situation constituted an "imminent threat to public health or safety." At the July 7th meeting, Mr. Swenson
indicated that this was not the case. In your written response, your office goes so far as to indicate that
"cesspools, by State Legislation (1997) are not considered an imminent Threat to Public Health or
Safety." In review of state law, our City Attorney is unsure as to how County officials have reached that
particular conclusion (see attached). ~ ~ /79g Cu~'&..~cn ;,~I ~ - /h
On Friday, July 31, 1998, we discussed this particular issue, and you indicated that the County made a
"mistake" and you would talk to Mr. Swenson. I indicated that Mr. Swenson, in his response to that
question, may have misinformed both public officials and audience members when he stated that this
situation did not constitute an imminent threat by definition ofthe County Ordinance at the July 7, 1998
meeting.
It seems very curious that your office and the Environmental Management De artment would not have
been aware of information co . d within a state statute that serve e very basis for the Coun '
ISTS Ordinance. As Mr. enson is the County's environment pert, how is it that he was un e of
this information and es he not have some professio responsibility to accurately di inate this
information? W actions will your office now n publicizing the fact that the C ty misinformed
citizens, pub' officials, and the general pu . as this was reported in the media), of this very important
informa' n? What liability does your office have due to the fact that it misrepresented environmental
laws to1the general public?
'.
Mr. Louis Briemhurst
Environmental Contamination Issues
Page 3 of3
I believe that this situation requires swift and immediate attention by your office to notify the general
public, residents and public officials of the true implications of this situation relative to cesspool
detection, ground water contamination and potential threats to the public's health or safety. Again, I am
not requesting that the County issue compliance orders during these on-going negotiations, but that it
simply acknowledge the facts--that ground water contamination caused by cesspools in the township is an
imminent threat to public health or safety.
()f.L
Ostensibly, given the fact that cesspools are the only confirmed source of ground water contamination
that the County resist any further attempts to suggest the City of Farmington in any way contributed to the
contamination of the drainage ditch. These suggestions by the County, without evidence or fact, are
irresponsible and unduly taint the reputation and credibility of this City's management and related
operations. Moreover, the introduction of these very questionable factors serve to only complicate what
should be an objective regard for the facts of this situation, and add unnecessary speculation and rhetoric
to an already difficult situation.
caA~(ri
Finally, it would seem only appropriate that the County publicly state that the link between ground water
contamination and failing septic systems is indeed a highly plausible ex lanation in this situation.
Moreover, it w ld seem only appro . e that your office final 1 that these fair do,
without stion, constitute . minent threat to pu' ealth or safety as y defined under
Mi ota Statute 115.55 an County Ordinance 10 as the ordinance references state law.
Lou, your continuing comments that unless people come into contact with contaminated ground water no
threat exists is not supported by state law, and ignores the fundamental legislative intent of the law
relative to acknowledgement of cesspools as a qualifying event in determining whether an imminent
threat exists. If your contention that contact with contaminated ground water is the County's "new"
standard for declaring an imminent threat that triggers enforcement of the ordinance, then that
interpretation represents a profound statutory weakening of existing law. Under state law, the County is
required under M.S. 115.55, subd. 7 to submit its ordinance to the Commissioner for comment in
circumstances where County standards are less restrictive than agency rules.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at 463-1801. I would urge your office to
take prompt action regarding this situation. Thank you in advance for your attention.
R.. eg. ",<Is, '1z8 _
t;" I~~t ---
- '. -.~
J F. Erar
/ ity Administrator
Cc: Mayor and City Council Members
Commissioner Joseph Harris
Mr. Brandt RichardsonJ County Administrator
Mr. Barry Schade, Director, Dakota County Environmental Management Department
Mr. Joel Jamnik, City Attorney
Mr. Lee Mann, City Engineer
Mr. David Olson, Director of Community Development
.'
CA}vfPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
Attorneys at Law
Thomas J. Camphell
Roger N. Knutson
Thomas M. Scott
Elliott B. Knetsch
Suesan Lea PeKe
(612) 452-5000
Fax (612) 452-5550
August 3, 1998
Joel J. Jamnik
Andrea McDowell Poehler
Matthew K. Brokl*
John F. Kell,.
Matthew J. Foli
Marguerite M. McC'lrmn
George T. Stephenson
V~i! IICt'md In \\'i\cllmm
Mr. John Erar
City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Re: Farmington/Ash Street
Dear John:
You asked that I review a letter you received from Louis J. Breimhurst dated July 23,
1998.
In his letter, Mr. Breimhurst stated that 22 of the 32 sewage systems surveyed as part
of the Farmington/Castle Rock Survey were found to have cesspools and they are considered
to be failing systems. He further stated that cesspools are not considered an imminent threat
to public health or safety pursuant to Minn. Stat. ~ 115.55 (Minn. 1997).
Please note that Minn. Stat. ~ 115.55 was amended by the Legislature in 1997 by
adding a new subdivision 5a which provides as follows:
Subd. 5a. Inspection criteria for existing systems. (a) An inspection of
an existing system must evaluate the criteria in paragraphs (b) to (h).
(b) If the inspector finds one or more of the following conditions:
(1) sewage discharge to surface water;
(2) sewage discharge to ground surface;
(3) sewage backup;
(4) a cesspool; or
(5) any other situation with the potential to immediately and adversely
affect or threaten public health or safety, then the system constitutes an
imminent threat to public health or safety and, if not repaired, must be
upgraded, replaced, or its use discontinued within ten months of receipt of
64784
Suite 317 · EaganJale Office Center · 1380 Corporate Center Curve · Eagan, MN 55121
.' .
.
.... .' ..
Mr. John Erar
August 3, 1998
Page 2
the notice described in subdivision 5b, or within a shorter period of time if
required by local ordinance.
The legislature has therefore classified the 22 sewage systems surveyed and found to
have cesspools as an "Imminent Threat to Public Health or Safety" requiring repair, upgrade,
replacement or discontinuance.
In spite of the County's efforts to avoid application of the law by referring to the
evaluation as a survey rather than an inspection, the 1997 legislature quite clearly classified
cesspools as an imminent threat to public health and safety and specified the necessary
corrective action.
Very truly yours,
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
~
: ~
Joel . . .
JJJ:cjh
64784
DAKOTA COUNTY
DIVISION OF PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT
14955 GALAXIE AVENUE
LOUIS J. BREIMHURST, P.E.
DIRECTOR
(612) 891-7005
FAX (612) 891-7031
APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124-8579
DEPARTMENTS OF -
. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
. HIGHWAYS
. PARKS
. SURVEY
. OFFICE OF PLANNING
July 23, 1998
John Erar, City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Dear Mr. Erar:
This letter is in response to your letter of July 10, requesting information on several issues involving individual
sewage treatment systems (ISTS) and wells in the south Farmington/Castle Rock Township area.
The following are responses to your issues.
(1) Results of the private wells testing and sewage systems survey will be summarized in a report soon to be
completed. Thirty-four property owners agreed to participate in the survey, while three property owners did not
participate. The only City residents that did not participate were Mr. and Mrs. Grabowski located at 608 Ash
Street. They have a septic system. Your City Inspector has been advised of the situation.
(2) The water level in the road ditch returns to its original level soon after pumping. Therefore, our conclusion is
that, in addition to some run-off water, a substantial portion of the ditch water is groundwater. The possible
sources for fecal coliform bacteria contamination of ditch water include the following:
. Failing ISTS
. Existing contamination in the ditch, such as animals feces or other debris
. A leak in the municipal sewer system
. A leak from the temporary pumping of municipal sewage from the lift station to a man-hole across Ash
Street when there was a power outage caused by a storm
The source of the contaminated ditch water has not been determined. Based on the survey results, a direct link
between the contaminated ditch water and failing sewage systems has not been established. If the
contamination was caused by failing sewage systems, which have on-going waste generation, we would expect
fecal coliform bacteria values to continue to stay high over time in the road ditch water. This has not been the
case. Similarly, a link between anyon-going municipal sewer system leaks and the contaminated ditch water
has not been established by your City's investigation.
(3) It is the intent of Minnesota Rules 7080.0010 to provide a framework for permitting and inspection programs to
be administered at the local level. Dakota County Ordinance No. 113, Section 212.9, states that municipalities
shall administer and enforce the applicable requirements of Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 and the technical
and administrative components of the County Ordinance within a municipality (city or township).
Each municipality adopts Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 and Ordinance No. 113 by reference and incorporates
them into their own ordinance. Each municipality provides for the administration and enforcement of their own
Municipal Sewage System Ordinance. This is exactly like a city adopting the State Building Code by reference;
the city thereafter enforces the standards as their own. A township or city does not technically administer or
enforce a County Ordinance; they enforce their own ordinance. As referenced in Ordinance No. 113, the
County can assist a municipality requesting assistance with the administration of their own local sewage
system ordinance.
Printed on recycled paper, 20% post-consumer
o
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
As a result of recent legislation, the majority of ISTS regulation was given to the local municipalities that
administer and enforce their own ordinances. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency trains, certifies, and
licenses alllSTS contractors and inspectors. Therefore, the remaining ISTS responsibilities for Dakota County
are to facilitate "as-built" and "pumper" record keeping, and to develop countywide standards that can be
adopted by all municipalities within the County.
The Farmington/Castle Rock Survey, as set-up by a joint meeting between the City of Farmington, Castle Rock
Township, and Dakota County, requested a fact finding survey for the purpose of problem solving, not for
regulatory compliance inspections. Therefore, Castle Rock Township, as the administrator of their Township
Sewage System Ordinance, is not under any obligation to require upgrades for failing sewage systems
discovered by the survey. Additionally, it was the consensus that all parties would work toward the appropriate
long-term solution using the facts gathered by the survey. Explaining this approach to the property owners is
basically what encouraged property owners to give permission for the survey.
(4) Dakota County plans to periodically test the ditch water in front of Thurmes and Tobias residences for fecal
coliform bacteria. We will start sampling on a two-week interval. Staff will test more frequently if the results are
high and less frequently if the results are low. The County does not currently plan to pump-out ditch water.
However, if fecal coliform bacteria results are high in the future, the County would recommend pumping ditch
water.
The County has added the three residents and the Dakota County Agriculture Building west of the railroad
tracks to the well and sewage system survey. No other groundwater sampling, other than ditch water, is
anticipated at this time.
(5) The initial test results indicated relatively high fecal coliform bacteria counts from the two ditches sampled on
Ash Street. We considered it to be an Imminent Threat to Public Health or Safety, even though we did not know
the cause of the contamination. As explained above in (2), the "link" between the contaminated ditch water and
failing sewage systems has still not been established. Continued ditch water testing may provide us with more
information that can improve our current understanding of the situation.
As set forth in Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 115.55, subdivision 5a, the conditions that constitute an
Imminent Threat to Public Health or Safety are:
. Sewage discharge to surface water
. Sewage discharge to ground surface
. Sewage backup
. Any other situation with the potential to immediately and adversely affect or threaten public health or safety
Of the 32 sewage systems surveyed, 22 were found to have cesspools and they are considered to be failing
systems. However cesspools, by State Legislation (1997), are not considered an Imminent Threat to Public Health
or Safety. Two additional systems failed because the separation distance from the bottom of the drainfjeld to the
water table was less than two feet, which is also not considered an Imminent Threat to Public Health or Safety.
Please contact my office at 891-7001, if you have any further questions.
~/7
./..4L.-......
LOUiS~. ~'~urst, P.E.
PhYSiC~~~~pment Director
c. Joseph A. Harris, County Commissioner
Brandt Richardson, County Administrator
Q;Walm:\F armingtonErarResponse
f
r
SEPTIC SYSTEM OWNER'S-CUIDE
Safety and Health
Why You Need Good
Wastewater Treatment
The septic system is designed for the specific site to treat all wastewater from a
residence. Proper treatment of wastewater reduces health risks to humans and
animals and prevents surface and groundwater contamination.
Risks to Human and
Animal Health
It is unhealthy for humans, pets, and wildlife to drink or come in contact with
surface or ground water contaminated with inadequately treated wastewater.
Inadequate treatment of wastewater allows bacteria, viruses, and other disease-
causing pathogens to enter groundwater and surface water. Hepatitis, dysentery,
and other diseases may result from bacteria and viruses in drinking water. These
disease-causing organisms may make lakes or streams unsafe for recreation. Flies and
mosquitoes that are attracted to and breed in wet areas where wastewater reaches
the surface may also spread disease.
Inadequate treatment of wastewater can elevate the nitrate levels in ground
water. High concentrations of nitrate in drinking water are a special risk to infants.
Nitrates affect the ability of the infant's blood to carry oxygen, a condition called
methemoglobinemia (blue-baby syndrome).
Risk of
Contaminating Water
A septic system that fails to treat sewage can also
allow excess nutrients to reach nearby lakes and streams
promoting algae and weed growth. Algal blooms and
abundant weeds not only make the lake unpleasant for
swimming and boating, but also affect water quality for
fish and wildlife habitat. As plants die, settle to the
bottom, and decompose, they use oxygen that fish need
to survive.
Many synthetic cleaning products and other chemi-
cals used in the house can be toxic to humans, pets, and
wildlife. If allowed to enter a failing septic system, these
products may reach groundwater, nearby surface water,
or the ground surface.
In the soil treatment portion of the septic system
(drainfield or mound), bacteria and viruses in the sew-
age are destroyed by the soil and microscopic organisms
that occur naturally in the soil. Nutrients are absorbed
by soil particles or taken up by plants. However, these
processes only work in soil that has air in it, that is not
S OUl'ce.: lAr.lvU'~,ry ..~. _ ~.I~",~ot.., Mt\l E"1fenS/tA ~u,ic~
3
. .
. '
.
,J.
~
t9
~
.
t~
IfI
~J
~
SEPTIC SYSTEM OWNER'S GUIDE
saturated with water. Near lakes, streams, and wetlands soil conditions may be
saturated. When the soil is saturated, biological breakdown will be incomplete and
nutrients will move much greater distances, sometimes hundreds of feet from the
drainfield or mound, and possibly into surface water. Even systems that appear to be
working well or that are in compliance with local design and installation codes may
allow nutrients or bacteria to reach the ground or surface water.
Safety Checklist
t/ Never enter the septic tank. The tank has a man-
hole for cleaning and inspection from the outside
only. The tank contains very little oxygen and has
high levels of hydrogen sulfide, methane, carbon
dioxide, and other life-threatening gases.
t/ Never use electrical lights, appliances, or tools in or
close to the water or wet ground near the septic
tank or drainfield. This can result in explosion or
electrical shock.
t/ Always remember that the liquid and solid contents
of the septic system are capable of causing infec-
tious diseases. After working on any part of the
septic system, always wash hands thoroughly before
eating, drinking, or smoking and change clothes
before entering a house, food store, restaurant, etc.
t/ Keep vehicles and other heavy equipment away
from the septic system. The tank and other compo-
nents may collapse due to weakness from corrosion.
t/ Never smoke near septic tank openings. Gases such
as methane that may be present are potentially
combustible.
t/ Keep children and other spectators away from the
septic system. when it is being cleaned or excavated.
t/ If there is a smell of sewer gases in your home,
immediately call a plumber or other qualified per-
son to identify the source and correct it. If the gas
smell is very strong, evacuate the building until the
problem is corrected and the gases are removed.
4
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
!LJ-(
TO:
Mayor and Council Members
Planning Commission Chair and Members
FROM:
John F. Erar, City Administrator
SUBJECT:
Heritage Development - Street Cleaning Requirement Concerns
DATE:
August 17, 1998
INTRODUCTION
The City Council and Planning Commission have received a letter from Mr. Thomas Bisch, Director of
Heritage Development of Minnesota, Inc., dated August 5, 1998, complaining of excessive street cleaning
requirements and citing the increasingly negative reputation of the City. Mr. Bisch also references that these
street cleaning requirements are in some form retaliatory by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, & Associates Inc.
(BRAA) for not receiving a full engineering contract and that street cleaning activities generate some type of
financial benefit to BRAA.
DISCUSSION
In response to Mr. Bisch's allegations, the following information is provided for Council and Planning
Commission review.
1. Requirements for street cleaning are identified in all City development contracts as the responsibility of
the developer. Failure by the developer to comply with these contract provisions allow the City to take
certain actions relative to privately contractingfor street cleaning services.
2. The City had previously notified all developers that the City would no longer be calling developers to
request that they clean subdivision streets. In the past, City staff was constantly calling developers in
response to citizen complaints regarding mud and debris on streets in new subdivisions. It was discussed
that this type of process was burdensome and an inefficient use of City resources to continually request
that developers clean streets when contractually all developers have the primary responsibility to ensure
that these standards are met.
3. The street cleaning dates identified by Mr. Bisch suggest that the City is taking this issue seriously. The
dates, on average, are approximately one week apart indicating that City staff are not being overly
aggressive in calling for private street cleaning services. Developers, in general, typically are required to
clean streets once a week, more if necessary, depending upon weather and soil conditions. It is obvious
that this developer, given the occurrence of City-ordered street cleaning dates, is not maintaining an
appropriate street cleaning schedule.
4. The inspection of streets in new subdivisions is not being performed by BRAA staff, but rather by City
engineering interns and inspectors. Consequently, BRAA does not in any way benefit from this type of
street cleaning activity. On several occasions, staff in other departments, including my office, has
requested that the Engineering Division take actions to facilitate the cleaning of certain streets
throughout the community. Therefore, the allegation by Mr. Bisch that BRAA is somehow benefiting
from this activity or is, in some form, retaliatory is both inaccurate and highly inflammatory.
5. Mr. Bisch's notion that retaliation is taking place due to the failure by BRAA to obtain a "full
engineering contract" is completely inaccurate. Under the Municipal Control Policy tabled by Council
Mayor, Council and Planning Commission
Heritage Development - Street Cleaning Concerns
Page 2 of2
last year, BRAA would have been one of potentially three engineering firms that could have been chosen
by a developer on a vendor list. Consequently, even if Council had adopted this policy, the selection of
BRAA would have been at the discretion of the developer. This type of accusation by Mr. Bisch ignores
some very basic facts, and unfairly, and somewhat maliciously, attacks the good name and character of a
highly reputable firm.
6. The cost to developers for City-ordered street cleaning services is well within reason and was based upon
the lowest service quote available to the City. A recent meeting with the BATC Task Force suggested that
the cost for City-ordered street cleaning services is very competitive in comparison to the actual costs
developers privately pay for the very same services. Developers at this meeting expressed no specific
concerns as it related to this topic
7. Mr. Bisch alludes to the fact that given the closure of Pilot Knob Road, and the use of residential streets
for detoured traffic that his firm is being unfairly charged for street cleaning services. The City only
charges private developers for street cleaning within subdivisions experiencing new construction activity
on developing lots or where significant soil erosion is occurring. Accordingly, sand and dirt build-up
attributed to detoured traffic and normal residential vehicle use are not billed to the developer.
Finally, the overall tone of Mr. Bisch's letter suggests that the City of Farmington may no longer be a good
place for his company to consider residential development. In this regard, it would certainly be prudent for
Heritage Development to re-evaluate whether this community remains a good fit with their corporate
philosophy.
The City, over the course of the last two years at the direction of the City Council, has taken great care to
balance the long-term needs of present and future City residents against the short-term development needs of
the private development community. Accordingly, contrary to Mr. Bisch's perceptions, the City actively
seeks out input from affected developers and builders, and has been successful in modifying and streamlining
a number of development process issues which have enhanced quality development standards for residents
and developers, alike.
It is regrettable that Mr. Bisch chose to express his concerns in such an adversarial and disparaging manner
directly to the Council and Planning Commission without any type of dialogue at the staff level. In the final
analysis, City requirements relative to private developer maintenance of public streets in new subdivisions is
a Council policy implemented by staff through private development contracts.
ACTION REOUESTED
For information only. If Council or Planning Commission members have any further questions, please feel
free to contact me at 463-1801 at your convenience.
J nF.Erar
/ ity Administrator
Cc: Mr. Thomas Bisch, Director, Heritage Development
Mr. John Dobbs, Heritage Development
Mr. Glenn Cook, Consulting Principal Engineer, BRAA
Karen Christofferson, Twin Cities Builders Association, 2960 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville,
MN 55113
.
AUG. -06' 98(THU) 15:01 DAKOTA ELECTRIC A
TEL:612-463-6191
P. 001
---1111 HERITAGE .
II DEVELOPMENT
To
OL SO,,",
Post-ir' Fax Note 7671
Co.
Phone N
Fax #
, -d.S'f I
Phone' If{,S- ~J.'
Fax #
August 5, 1998
City of Farmingtoo
Members of the Planning Commission aDd CouDcil
325 Oak Street
Far-mington, MN 55044
Dear Member of the Plannin& Commission or Council:
I am writing to you to discuss the ridiculous constant street sweeping requirements your staff has
been imposing in Nelsen Hills Farm. I have received notice that Nelsen Hills streets have been
swept on June 4, 11, 16,23 and 30; July 7,9, 16 and 21; August 4.
Some amount of mud and dirt is always a part of new residential development and absolute
control even after a project has been totany built out is not possible. Our company is working in
a dozen or so other communities and have never encountered a situation like this one.
Perhaps the City's staffbelieves that developer's come with unlimited funding for such items, or
enjoys the increasingly negative reputation your City is getting for high fees, excessive
engineering regulation, and ever changing punchlists.
From our prospective we have worked hard to build a decent subdivision and to work: with the
City, however it appears here that the Boonestro staff is simple trying for reprisals for having
recently not received a full engineering contract with the City.
Perhaps, the most annoying aspect of this street cleaning is the fact with Pilot Knob Road is shut
down for construction and Nelsen Hills Farm has become the bypass for this streets traffic. A
street which eveI)' property owner in Nelsen Hills has been assessed for, yet its the responsibility
this project to maintain streets at some unachievable pristine level.
I always tried to believe that common sense would prevail on this issue, but apparently not. It
certainly has become a great thing fOT the street sweeping contractor and Boonestro.
Sincerely.
~~
Thomas Bisch, Director
Heritage Development ofMinneso~ Inc.
450 EostCcuntyROOd D. LJrlIe Canada. MN 55117. PhOne: (612) 481-0017. FQI;: (612) 481-1518. Toll Free; (800) 644-0017
909 Blaclcstone Avenue. Waukesha. WI 53186 . ToI Free: (800)644-0011 . Phone: (414)322.4789
110 North Cherry, Suite 240 . Clothe. ICS 66061 . Toll Fl'ee: (800) 644-00 1 7 . Phone: (816)169-2054
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
//a,
TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato~.::....-
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Prairie Creek Third Addition Citizen Petition - Update
DATE: August 17, 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
Engineering staff has completed the field work necessary to evaluate the area in question
and several possible options have been identified that could potentially relieve some of
the drainage issues referenced in the resident's petition.
At this time, staff needs additional time to further analyze the options and meet with the
Developer in order to determine a recommended course of action. It is staff s intent to
bring recommendations back to Council at the first meeting in September.
BUDGET IMP ACT
Specific costs for the possible options have not been identified at this time. The area in
question is developed and construction of any additional storm drainage improvements
will most likely result in removal and replacement of existing yards and street
improvements. Therefore, the costs of any additional storm drainage improvements are
likely to be significant.
ACTION REOUESTED
F or Council information.
Respectfully Submitted,
~m~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
~