Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.06.98 Council Packet COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR JULY 6, 1998 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVEAGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Dolly Newberg/Mary Stark - Sanitary Sewer Backup Issues b) Mike Sibley - Growth Management Issues c) Jason Elias - Storm Sewer Issues 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes 6/15/98 (Regular), 6/16/98 (Special) b) Appointment Recommendation - Administration c) Billiard Permit Application d) Request to Waive Fees - Transient Merchant Permit - Farmer's Market e) Adopt Resolutions Approving Gambling Premise Permit Application f) Acknowledge Sale of Used Equipment - Park and Recreation g) Capital Outlay Purchase - Park and Recreation h) Adopt Resolution Amending Building Re-inspection Fees i) Capital Outlay Purchase - Fire Department j) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) Adopt Resolution - 2nd Street Parking Lot (Supplemental) 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Adopt Resolution - Charleswood Final Plat b) Adopt Resolution - Charleswood Development Contract c) Dakota County C.I.P. - City Recommendations d) Draft Dakota County Transportation Policy Plan Update e) Castle Rock Township Comprehensive Plan Amendment - City Comments f) Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer - Fairhills Extension 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Development Issues b) Randall House Demolition c) Downtown Streetscape Project - Neighborhood Meeting Feedback Action Taken J. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Weed Complaints b) Kuchera Entrance Trail Damage c) St. Paul Train Whistles - Discussion 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Water Shut-off Policy - Revision 14. ADJOURN TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: John. F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: July 6, 1998 It is requested that the July 6, 1998 agenda be amended as follows: AWARD OF CONTRACT Add 9 (a) Adopt Resolution - 2nd Street Parking Lot It is recommended that the award of the contract be deferred until the July 20, 1998 meeting. Respectfully submitted, 7j!~ ~EW City Administrator CitlJ. of Farmington 325 Oak Street · Farminfton, MN 55021, · (612) 1,63.7111 · Fax (612) 463.2591 TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administratorj&E- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Award Contract - 2nd Street Parking Lot DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Bids were received for the 2nd Street Parking Lot on Thursday, July 2nd, 1998. DISCUSSION It is recommended at this time to delay the award of contract for this project until the July 20, 1998 City Council meeting. The railroad has given verbal approval for the parking lot easement over the railroad property but written agreement is pending the finalization of the legal description being prepared by the City's surveying consultant. It is staffs opinion that it is in the best interest of the City to obtain the easement agreement in writing before awarding the contract for the project. The bids for the project came in slightly higher than estimated and staff will be looking for ways to reduce the cost of the project before bringing the contract for award on July 20. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ~Jn~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer I CitlJ of FarminiJ.ton cc: file 325 Oak Street · Farmint}ton, MN 5502~ · (612) ~63. 7111 · FaJr (612) ~63.2591 fot:0 TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Backup Claim - Resident Service Complaint DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION At the June 15, 1998, Mrs. Dolly Newburg and Mrs. Mary Stark forwarded complaints to Council regarding a sanitary sewer back-up that occurred on May 15, 1998. Mr. and Mrs. Newburg submitted a written statement to Council at the June 15, 1998 meeting alleging that the City was negligent in its handling of her claim situation, that the damage her home sustained was in fact due to the City's negligence, and that City staff who responded to her situation were unprepared, technically inept and essentially misled her in terms of City liability and damage compensation. Mrs. Stark made a number of verbal statements at the meeting similar to those expressed by Mrs. Newburg, and indicated that the insurance investigator did not have enough facts to properly assess the true cause of the sanitary sewer back-up. As it is the City's policy to thoroughly and objectively investigate allegations that are made by City residents regarding City services, this memorandum will serve to address these concerns and provide citizens with a final administrative outcome. In arriving at this outcome, City staff involved in this situation have been interviewed and have submitted written statements (attached). City staff will also be in attendance to respond to any questions by Council and affected City residents regarding this situation. A representative from the City's insurance carrier will also be in attendance to respond to any questions, and will provide Council with an opportunity to discuss the process used by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) in the investigation of sewer backup claims. DISCUSSION In review of the very serious allegations made by Mrs. Newburg and Mrs. Stark, staff from Department of Public Works, Street and Utility Division and Engineering Division, and Finance Department were interviewed by my office and have submitted written statements. Executive Summa" ofKev Issues a) Alleged Employee Statements of City Liability Regarding Damage and Compensation From interviews with the Finance Director Roland, City Engineer Mann and staff that responded to the resident's home, City staff adamantly deny indicating that any authorization was given to Mrs. Newburg regarding cleaning bills, hotel accommodations, or City financial liability for damages to her property. As the City's Risk Manager, Finance Director Roland is well versed on City liability issues and damage claims. It was conveyed to Mrs. Newburg and Mrs. Stark that any decisions regarding damages and/or reimbursements would be made by LMCIT, and that the City was not in a position to either approve or disapprove her actions as it related to her claim. In general insurance and legal terms,' for the City to be I CitlJ. of Farminf/.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmintjton, MN 5502~ · (612) ~63.7111 · Fax (612) ~63.2591 Mayor and Council Members Insurance Claim - Citizen Complaint Page 2 of5 liable, three conditions must be met: 1) a showing of negligence on the part of the City; 2) damages must result from such negligence; and 3) the damages must be in an area where there is no immunity in the liability. Based on the findings of the investigation, LMCIT found no liability on the part of the City. Mr. Wierke, Acting Streets and Utility Supervisor, indicated that he never authorized any type of financial expenditure on behalf of the City and that, in terms of clean-up costs, he provided Mrs. Newburg with the names of City staff she would have to talk with on Monday, May 18, 1998 regarding the filing of a claim. Mr. Wierke further added that he never indicated to anyone that the City would be responsible for damages to the resident's home, but indicated that the resident had the right to submit a claim to the City for damages. Accordingly, Mrs. Newburg contacted the Director of Finance on May 18, 1998 to discuss the filing of her claim. b) Alleged Unsatisfactory City Staff Performance From interviews with a majority of the line employees who responded to the sewer back-up at both ofthe residents' homes, as well as other lift stations throughout the City, it is clear that City crews did everything within their power to respond in a timely and appropriate manner. According to City staff who were paged to this particular lift station, it took a total of approximately 45 minutes to respond, layout the 1/4 mile of hose, and pump out the lift station. Mr. Wierke indicated that both Mrs. Newburg and Mrs. Stark were grateful for the quick response, and, in fact, expressed their appreciation in no uncertain terms. According to Mr. Wierke, Mrs. Newburg's basement was already flooded by the time City crews arrived. According to a brief conversation he had with Mrs. Stark, the damage to her home was characterized by Mrs. Stark as being minimal. It was indicated at the time by Mrs. Stark that she was uncertain as to whether she would file a claim, and if she did, it would be after she returned from a planned vacation. According to the other City staff, very little conversation was held with the residents other than that this was a very unfortunate incident. Another City supervisor at the scene of the sewer back-up, Mr. Benno Klotz indicated that he felt City staff did a very good job at the lift station site, and that given the power outage, the storm itself, and the construction on Pilot Knob road, that the City's response was very timely, organized and efficient. In particular review of staffs response time, the functioning of the City's paging system and the manner in which City staff characterized the handling of this situation, I believe that staff responded in an appropriate manner. In light of the many environmental factors influencing the City's response, staff actions were all the more impressive and demonstrated a high level of commitment to customer service and professional public service. The City, through its employees, will continue to commit itself to high-quality, efficient and cost- effective services. While any response situation can lend itself to self-evaluation and critical review in terms of improving upon past performance, the City will continue to endeavor to review opportunities for improvement in all areas of public service delivery. c) Alleged Non-Performing City Equipment Sewer Hoses According to City staff that responded, hoses used to pump out the lift station were not full of holes, nor was sewer effluent spraying on vehicles or pedestrians. There was, according to several staff members, Mayor and Council Members Insurance Claim - Citizen Complaint Page 3 of5 one hole approximately 3 feet from the pump. This hole was taped shut with duct tape generously provided by a resident. According to Benno Klotz, another hole was caused by a private vehicle driving over the hose which punctured the line in disregard of City staff at the scene. The Public Works Department has replaced these hoses as of this date. Sewer Pump Battery City crews did indicate that the generator's battery was dead, but that it was quickly started by a City vehicle using City-owned jumper cables. While the connector on the pump was initially missing, it was picked up by a second City vehicle already on the way to the resident's homes. It was emphasized by City staff that this did not, in anyway, delay the City's response since the connector was obtained as City staff was still laying out hose. Back-up Generator While the City residents in question claim that a back-up generator should have been available, this would not have prevented the damage to the resident's basement as the sewer back-up had already occurred. What a back-up generator would have eliminated would have been the time to layout the 1/4 mile of hose. However, even this action would not have prevented the consequential damage to the resident's basement as sewage was already in the basement upon staffs arrival. Finally, according to LMCIT which deals with a multitude of sewer back-up situations throughout the metropolitan area, portable back-up generators, do not prevent sewer back-ups in many extraordinary situations. City staff is in the process of evaluating the type of back-up generator most appropriate to the operational needs of the City, and will be purchasing an appropriate type generator(s) in the very near future. It should be emphasized that while a back-up generator is desirable from a work practice standpoint, LMCIT does not recognize the lack of a back-up generator as either a negative or positive contributing factor in a sewer back-up. Consequently, this component, from an insurance perspective, has a neutral effect on City sanitary sewer operations and/or liability issues. Lift Station Operation According to City Engineering review of lift station design capacity in the Fair Hills Subdivision, the Fair Hills lift station is more than adequate to meet and handle the level of sewer flow originating from new homes in the Fair Hillsrrroy Hills area. Consequently, the failure of the lift station cannot be attributed to improper design or capacity issues. Ostensibly, the failure of this lift station is more than likely associated with the power outage which by itself caused the lift station to trip the alarm in about 35 minutes. This time frame also caused other City lift station alarms to go off around the City at about the same time suggesting that the Fair Hills alarm time frame was similar in duration to other lift stations. It should be noted that only two homes in the entire City experienced a sewer back-up. While heavy rains can and do infiltrate lift stations at times, the City takes every reasonable step possible to assure that the source is identified and eliminated. This, in itself, does not suggest that the City is negligent when storm water overwhelms even the strictest lift station design criteria. However, with the power outage as the controlling variable, the net effect was that the lift station was unable to function causing at some point a sewer back-up. Mayor and Council Members Insurance Claim - Citizen Complaint Page 4 of5 As previously mentioned, Staff will be reviewing the possibility of extending the Middle Creek Sanitary System to the Fair Hills area, and eliminating the lift station altogether. Again, even with extension of a sanitary sewer main into the Fair Hills area, there is no guarantee that sewer back-ups will be entirely eliminated. d) Alleged Insurance Investigation Deficiencies According to conversations I have had with the LMCIT insurance investigator, it would appear that an adequate and appropriate investigation was conducted on this matter. LMCIT has indicated that they have had numerous conversations with both Mrs. Stark and Mrs. Newburg throughout the course of their investigation. In addition, Finance Director Roland has indicated that she has had numerous conversations with Mrs. Newburg and has provided her with previously requested information. While the LMCIT's final position on claim payment denial can certainly be distressing to affected City residents, a review of the LMCIT investigation process, the information obtained and considered, and the fact that power outages are essentially beyond the control of the City, the outcome of their investigation appears appropriate. e) Alleged Lack of Public Information on Sewer Back-Ups In review of past City efforts to educate City residents on sewer back-ups, it would be unreasonable to suggest that City was negligent in this regard. It is my understanding that the City has in the past published information and provides information to residents on an as needed basis or upon request. It is unfortunate that sewer back-ups occur, but the reality of the situation is that this City or any City, for that matter, cannot guarantee elimination of future sewer back-ups. The City can and does make diligent efforts to educate the general public on system failures. In the final analysis, the responsibility for properly insuring a private residence remains with the property owner, not the local unit of government. While the City can certainly make every attempt possible to educate its citizens on a variety of issues relative to private property ownership within the community, the ultimate responsibility remains with owner of the subject property, not the City. RECOMMENDATION In review of the information presented to my office through a variety of sources, it is strongly recommended that no Council action be taken in this matter. The LMCIT is the authorized insurer for the City in these types of matters, and their decision to deny the claims should remain intact. I have contacted a number of other cities and private utility companies regarding their policies on the processing of insurance loss claims. It would appear that while Councils are generally free to compensate residents for losses, this practice sets a very dangerous precedent in terms of City liability, past and future claim issues and the inappropriate use of public funds. Paying a claim when the City is found to be not liable by the insurance carrier is a questionable use of public funds in that it may constitute a gift. In addition, the Council would also need to consider the long-term impact on City funds and rates as these claims inexorably would come from other utility rate payers. Finally, in terms of policy, how would the City deal with both past denied claims and future claims. Another aspect to consider is that the City is essentially operating a publicly-owned utility. Dakota Electric, as a public cooperative is also owned by its voting members, and treats all claims in a manner Mayor and Council Members Insurance Claim - Citizen Complaint Page 5 of5 very similar to that of the City, with the exception that their Board of elected members do not become involved in membership insurance claims. Once reviewed by Dakota Electric staff and submitted to their insurance carrier, the decision of the carrier stands unless the member pursues litigation. In any case, the Dakota Electric Board, as a matter of policy, does not involve itself in insurance claim matters preferring to keep the process as politically neutral as possible. The Council may wish to consider a similar policy. In the final analysis, affected City residents have the legal right to take action against the City and litigate for damages. Again, this type of action would be covered and defended by the LMCIT with any litigated damages paid through the City's insurer. Should such action occur, the Council is advised to limit any such discussions with the affected residents. J n F. Erar ity Administrator File Attachments Cc: Mrs. Newburg Mrs. Stark Douglas Gronli, Claims Manager, LMCIT Bill Wierke, Acting Street and Utility Supervisor Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor Street and Utility Division Maintenance Staff FROM: Mayor & Council~2!':ers City Administrat07<:..--- Robin Roland Finance Director TO: SUBJECT: Response to Citizen Comments - Dolly Newberg and Mary Stark DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION At the City Council meeting June 15, Mrs. Dolly Newberg expressed her dissatisfaction with the City's handling of the sewer back up which occurred at her property on May 15, 1998. Mrs. Stark was also present at that meeting and expressed similar feelings. Both residents were upset with the City's insurance carrier determination of no City liability in the incident and the City's subsequent refusal to pay for the clean up/damages to their respective property. DISCUSSION Events often occur where a citizen incurs a loss and looks to the City to pay for it. These events range from sewer back ups to water main breaks to a fall on a sidewalk where some one is injured. A claim is made to the City for damages. The City carries liability insurance with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust and so submits that claim to the insurance carrier. LMCIT has claims adjusters who are well versed in the areas of City liabilities. An adjuster is assigned and thoroughly investigates the claim. After the investigation, a claim is either paid or denied. In all cases, the issue is "ls the City legally liable for these damages?" For the City to be liable, three conditions must be met: . The City must have been negligent. It must have done something it should not have done or failed to do something it should have done. . The damages must be caused by the City's negligence. . It must not be in one of the areas where the City is immune from liability. In the case of the sewer back up which occurred on May 15, 1998, the City was not found liable. That is, the sewer back up was determined not to have occurred due to City negligence. Brian Horsch of LMCIT did the investigation of both the Newberg and Stark claims and responded to the residents both in verbal and written form on June 1, 1998. Prior to his final determination of liability, Mr. Horsch had extensive conversations with Mrs. Newberg and City staff during his investigation. submitting her claim as soon as possible to LMCIT and that an adjuster would be in contact with her. She asked what she should do about the clean up. I told her that the City would pay for the damages only if the insurance company found that the City was responsible for the sewer back- up. I submitted the claim to LMCIT before noon on May 18th and asked that it be expedited. I received a call later that afternoon from Blue Ribbon Cleaning service, asking that I authorize cleaning and repairs to the Newberg property; that the City would be responsible for the bill. I reiterated to the Blue Ribbon employee that only the home owner could authorize that and that the City would only pay if found to be liable by the insurance carrier. My final conversation with Mrs. Newberg on June 1st occurred after she received the verbal denial via telephone from Mr. Horsch. She said "Who's going to pay these clean up bills now? Should I send them to you?" I explained that due to Mr. Horsch's determination, the City would not be paying the bills as the City was not responsible for the sewer back up due to the absence of any negligent actions on the part of the City. She was very upset and continued to insist that the City pay for the damages. My nine years in City government finance have involved me with numerous sewer back up situations. The situation is always handled the same way. The homeowner must do what a prudent individual would do to secure and preserve their property, regardless of whether the City will pay for it or not. Many homeowners are covered by their household insurance or carry additional sewer back up coverage. Others do submit a claim to the City and, sometimes the City is found responsible for the damage and must pay. In any case, City employees do not admit to responsibility for payment of a claim unless the insurance carrier makes that determination. As the City's Risk Manager, it is my responsibility to receive resident claims, submit them to the insurance carrier, assist in any way necessary in the investigation and suggest improvements to operations to prevent recurrence of claims. Although I attempt to be considerate of each claimant, my inability to approve payment of every claim against the City should not suggest that a resident's claim was handled in a callous or unfeeling manner. ACTION REQUIRED For Council's information. Respectfully submitted, ~~RJ Robin Roland Finance Director cc: Mrs. Dolly Newberg Mrs. Mary Stark GOVERIltIIltG YOUR CITY When LMCIT Denies A Claim water main breaks and your city's sewer system backs up into several homes causing ma- jor damage. Or someone falls and is injured on a city side- walk. Or a tree falls in a wind storm and damages a car. A citizen has a loss and is looking to the city to pay for it. Your city has liability coverage through LMCIT, so you report the claim to LMCIT -and the claim is denied. City officials quickly hear from angry citizens de- manding to know why LMCIT won't pay for such losses and what the city is going to do about it. No one enjoys telling a citizen, "The city is not responsible for your damages because your problem was not caused by city negligence. We're sorry, but you're on your own." But if we apply the standard oflegalliability, sometimes that's exacdy what we have to say. When LMCIT denies a liability claim, it is usually not an issue of cover- agt.>--i.e., whether or not the city's LMCIT liability coverage covers the claim. Rather, the issue is liability: Is the city legally liable for these damages? In general, for the city to be liable for someone else's damages, three condi- tions must be met: . The city must have been negligent. That is, the city must have done something it should not have done, or failed to do something it should have done. . The damages must have been caused by the city's negligence. . It must not be one of the areas in which the city is immune from liability . Ultimately, evaluating and deciding on liability is what the court system is for. If a claimant disagrees with LMCIT's denial of a claim, the claim- ant can bring the issue to the courts. If that happens, it's LMCIT's responsibil- MAY 1998 By Peter Tritz and :\1ary-.'\ilargaret Larmouth ity to pay tor the cost of defending the city. And if the courts decide the city is liable, it is LMCIT's responsibility to pay the damages awarded against the city. Politically, it would sometimes be easier to simply pay the damaged party, even though the city isn't legally liable for that payment. However, there are at least three good reasons for LJ\;lCIT not to do so: . The funds LMCIT uses to pay claims are public fimds. Because we are deal- ing with public funds held by LMCIT in trust. we have a duty to ensure those tunds are paid our only when legally owed. To do otherwise would amount to making a gift of those public funds to a private individual. '!MelT is here to help. Dealing with a denied claim can be a difficult process, especially in times of community hardship." . The funds LMCIT uses to pay claims really belong jointly to all LMCIT member cities. Each member city righttully expects that LMCIT will pay those tunds out only if the money is legally owed. . We also have to be concerned about setting a precedent. If LMCIT were to make a payment on one such claim to one person in one city, LMCIT would have to be prepared to do so for every claimant in every member city faced with a similar situation. Paying denied claims from city Jimds. City ot1icials sometimes want to pay a claim denied by LMCIT out of city tunds. They may feel it is the city's responsibility to take care of its citizens, regardless oflegalliability, or they may ~ * simply and understandably feel sympa- thy for the claimant's situation. Obvi- ously, the city council is responsible for the city's funds, and has the power to decide when and how those funds should be spent. But while it is clearly the council's call, the city also needs to think about some of the same issues LMCIT has to consider. One important question is whether this is an appropriate and au- thorized use of city funds. We suggest cities discuss this with their city attor- ney before making payments in these circumstances. Another important issue is the pre- cedent the city would set by making a voluntary payment in a particular case. Once the city makes a payment in one circumstance, it is very difficult not to do so for the next citizen who faces a similar circumstance. While it is up to the council to de- cide what to do, in many cases a better solution may be to focus on solving the problems that have resulted in claims against the city, and to provide citizens with the information they need to protect themselves from loss. LMCIT is here to help. Dealing with a denied claim can be a difficult process, especially in times of commu- nity hardship. For a more detailed dis- cussion of this issue, please refer to the LMC Web site (specifically at www. lmnc.org/lmcit/ claimdenied.htm) or the LMC fax library at (612) 215-4039, document 66270. If you have any questions about the information con- tained in this article, or any other con- cerns related to LMCIT, please contact Doug Gronli, Tom Grundhoeter, or Pete Tritz at (612) 281-1200 or (800) 925-1122. I" Peter Tritz is administrator of the League of Minnesota Cities Trust. Mary-AJargaret Larmouth is member relations coordinator with the League of Afinnesota Cities. MINNES()T.~ ClrIES 1 3 TO: Mayor, Counc~e~bers, City Administrator'1~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Dolly Newberg/Mary Stark Sanitary Sewer Backup issues DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION At the June 15th City Council meeting, Mrs. Dolly Newberg and Mrs. Mary Stark brought forth complaints to the City Council regarding a sewer backup that occurred May 15, 1998. This memo is forwarded to Council to address the issues raised by Mrs. Newberg and Mrs. Stark verbally and in Mrs. Newberg's letter to Council. DISCUSSION Timeline of Events Following is a time line of the events that occurred on the evening of May 15th in regards to the sewer backup and the City's response. Also refer to the attached, signed statement by the staff that responded to the situation. 4:25 pm. - High level alarm for the Fairhills lift station goes off. Ben Van Blarcom and Bill Weierke are contacted by Lena Larson and informed of the alarm. 5:00 - 5:15 pm. - The crew gathers equipment, goes to the Fairhills and Pine Knoll Lift stations. 5:15 - 5:30 pm. - Ben Van Blarcom. and Bill Weierke arrive at the Fairhills lift station, sewage was coming out of the manhole. The rest of the crew arrives and begins to set up to pump the lift station. 5:30 - 5:45 pm. - Started pumping sewage down in the lift station. Lift station alarm system and response Questions have been raised regarding the alarm system on the lift station and timing of notification. It has been indicated that the power went out at approximately 4:00 pm on May 15th. The alarm system for the lift station is not actuated by a power failure. The alarm is CitlJ. of Farmint).ton 325 Oak Street. Farmington} MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fax (612) 463-2591 actuated by a high water level. The alarm received by the City for the Fairhills lift station at approximately 4:25 pm was for a high water level. It could be reasonably concluded that the delay between the time the power went out and the time the alarm was received corresponded to the time it took for the sewage level in the lift station to rise to the high water alarm level. The alarm was working the evening of the 15th, it was being monitored and the appropriate personnel were notified when the alarm went off. Questions have been raised regarding how the response to the alarm system works. When an alarm goes off during business hours, (as was the case on May 15th), staff at City Hall notifies the appropriate personnel and the problem is investigated and resolved. In the case that an alarm goes off after hours, Trans Alarm pages the staff member that is on pager duty. The person on pager duty investigates and resolves the situation or if necessary contacts the appropriate personnel for help in resolving the situation. The amount of time it took to respond to the scene has been questioned. It is stated in the policy regarding pager duty, "A page must be answered within 5 minutes and the individual on pager duty should be able to respond to the scene within 20 minutes." In the situation that existed on May 15th with multiple emergencies, the power out in a major portion of the City and downed power lines blocking roads, the response time to the scene was justified. Operational Issues Questions have been raised regarding several circumstances that occurred during the response to the situation on May 15th. The issues regarding the hoses, the jumper cables, hose connector and leaks in the hose have been addressed in the attached memo from the staff that responded to the situation. To reiterate: I) The crew did have jumper cables and the battery for the pump was jumped and the pumps were started quickly. 2) A leak in the hose did occur near the pump, but a plastic pail was held over the leak until it was duct taped and at no time did sewage from that leak spray onto passing pedestrians or cars. Subsequently, a car did run over the hose that crossed the street up the road from the lift station and caused a split in the hose. There is an emergency plan for situations such as occurred on the 15th. The City staff knows how to respond to situations such that occurred on the 15th and they responded appropriately on the 15th. The lift station backup in January occurred at a lift station in Pine Knoll, in a different part of the City and was the result of an equipment malfunction, not a storm or power outage. Storm Water in the lift station Questions have been raised regarding the possibility of storm water present in the lift station on the night of May 15th. According to observations from City staff, there was evidence of storm water in the lift station. Leaves were observed in the wet well. Faced with this evidence, staff has continued to search for possible sources of inflow into the sanitary sewer system tributary to the lift station. One source of inflow to the system was identified during a more recent storm event, was plugged and will be permanently corrected. It would be conjecture as to whether this identified source of inflow was a source of inflow on the night of the 15th. Capacity of the Fairhills lift station Questions have been raised regarding the capacity of the Fairhills lift station. Based on the pumping records for the lift station, the lift station is operating significantly under capacity, Responsibility for Damages It has been stated that City personnel indicated to the residents involved that the City would pay for the damages caused by the sewer backups. As stated in the attached memo from the staff involved in the response to the backup, at no time that night or any time subsequent to that night did Bill Weierke or any of the crew tell Mrs. Newberg, Mrs. Stark, any other resident or any elected official that the City was responsible for the damage, that the City would pay for the damage or that the residents had been told that the City would pay for the damage. Backup Generators The City is currently in the process of receiving quotations for backup generators. In the case of the January backup of the lift station in Pine Knoll, a generator would not have helped the situation and did not indicate a need for a generator since the problem was due to an equipment malfunction, not a power outage. ACTION REOUESTED F or council information. Respectfully submitted, ;km~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer attachment cc: file Dolly Newberg Mary Stark TO: Lee M. Mann, P .E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: Bill Weierke, Tom Jensen, Tom Hemish, Ben Van Blarcom SUBJECT: Newberg/Stark Sewer Backup DATE: June 30, 1998 INTRODUCTION At your request, this memo has been prepared to document the events that ocurred on the evening of May 15, 1998 regarding the sewer backups at the Newberg and Stark residences. DISCUSSION The evening of May 15, Ben Van Blarcom was on pager duty. At approximately 4:25 pm., the high level alarm for the Fairhills lift station went off. Ben Van Blarcom and Bill Weierke were contacted by Lena Larson at City Hall. Bill then called in Tom Jensen, Tom Hemish and Benno Klotz. At approximately 5:00 pm., Tom Jensen, Tom Hemish and Benno Klotz went to the garages to pick up equipment. Bill Weierke and Ben Van Blarcom met at City Hall and went directly to the Fairhills lift station. After a 5 - 10 minute delay due to fallen power lines, Ben Van Blarcom and Bill Weierke arrived at the Fairhills lift station between 5:15 and 5:30 pm. At this time, the sewage was already coming up out of the manhole. At this time it was apparent that the crew needed more hose in order to pump the lift station. Additional hose was obtained from the contractor on the CSAH 31 project. When the crew began laying out the approximately lf4 mile of hose, it was discovered that the hose connector for the pump was at the shop. The connector was retrieved as the hose was being laid out, therefore, no time was lost. The crew attempted to start the pump and realized the battery was dead. Jumper cables were obtained from Ben Van Blarcom's truck one-half block away and the pump was started. The pumping started between 5:30 - 5:45 pm. When the pumps were started, it was discovered that there was a leak in the hose approximately 3-feet from the pump. A plastic pail was held over the leak until the hole was duct taped with tape obtained from a resident. At no time was sewage spraying on people or cars from this leak. Shortly thereafter, an individual in a car, after being directly informed by Ben VanBlarcom not to drive across the hose in the street, drove across the hose in the street causing a split in the hose. It took approximately one hour to pump down the lift station. CitlJ. of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street · FarmintJton, MN 5502~ · (612) ~63.7111 · Fa/( (612) ~63.2591 Bill Weierke had a discussion with Mrs. Newberg regarding the backup. Bill told Mrs. Newberg that she needed to go ahead and do what she had to do to get the mess cleaned up, and that she could submit a claim to the City on Monday morning. At no time that night or any time subsequent to that night did Bill or any of the crew tell Mrs. Newberg, Mrs. Stark, any other resident or any elected official that the City was responsible for the damage, that the City would pay for the damage or that the residents had been told that the City would pay for the damage. These are the events as they occurred on the evening of May 15, 1998. We will be happy to answer any further questions at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, f3v..M~ Bill Weierke Acting Street and Utility Supervisor .---;o--,~ ~ 'J-lr""I Tom J sen Irumce worker Tom Hemish Maintenance Worker ~~ Ben Van Blarcom Maintenance Worker ~K# Benno Klotz Solid Waste Supervisor cc: file bb TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administratorp- FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Citizen Comments/ Mike Sibley DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Mike Sibley of 5681 193rd Street West expressed several concerns regarding growth management issues in the Farmington. DISCUSSION Mr. Sibley expressed both specific concerns regarding surface water management issues regarding specific ponds in the vicinity of 195th Street and also an overall concern whether Farmington is in a position to handle the current and projected growth that is anticipated. In regards to the specific surface water concerns, the City adopted a Surface Water Management Plan in late 1997 that addresses overall surface water management issues for the entire City. Specifically, the construction of the Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer later this year will provide an outlet for the existing storm water pond on the south side of 195th Street which is connected to several of the ponds on the north side of 195th Street. Regarding overall growth management issues, the City of Farmington in the last 18 months has implemented a number of initiatives to better prepare the City to handle the anticipated high levels of development activity. One of the first actions was to create a department of Community Development which combined the Planning, Building Inspection, and Development Services functions into one department. This has provided better coordination and communication between these functions and which has also resulted in better communication and coordination with City engineering staff. Second, a number of the City's development policies have been reviewed and revised as necessary and new policies put in place in areas where policies did not previously exist. Examples of this include the as-built survey requirement that was implemented last year, the erosion control measures that have been implemented and the recently approved turf establishment policy on new single family home construction. The City Engineering Division is also reviewing and updating its standards for new developments. I CitlJ. of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street · FarmintJton~ MN 5502~ · (612) ~63-7111 · Falf (612) ~63-2591 Finally, the City is guiding and planning the areas for future development for the next 5- 10 years through the recently approved Comprehensive Plan Amendment and MUSA expansion and will be planning and designating areas for future development for the next 20 years through the Comprehensive Plan Update that will be completed during the second half of this year. In summary, while development activity is expected to continue at a fairly high level in the City of Farmington for the foreseeable future, and while there are and will be ongoing challenges for the City to deal with this level of development activity, the policies, procedures, and ordinances are in-place to meet this challenge. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. David L. Olson Community Development Director cc: Mike Sibley, 5681 193rd Street West be TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Jason Elias - Storm sewer issues DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION At the June 15th City Council meeting, Mr. Jason Elias brought forth issues regarding the extension of the storm sewer pipe to the ponding area adjacent to his back yard in the Fairhills Addition south of 193r Street. DISCUSSION Mr. Elias indicated dissatisfaction with the way the pipe extension project was handled. Following is the time line that took place in regard to the project: July 25, 1997 - Discovery by engineering staff that the pipe was buried, subsequent to a rainfall event that caused concerns to residents living adjacent to the pond north of 193rd Street. August 20, 1997 - City receives estimates from Contractors to extend pipe. September 2, 1997 - Council authorized staff to extend pipe. September 17, 1997 - Work on storm sewer pipe began. October 4, 1997 - Contractor came in to grade for final sod placement. October 10, 1997 - Final sod placed. As indicated by the dates above, the project was completed in a timely manner. In addition, staff coordinated very carefully with the residents affected by the project to resolve any issues that arose. ACTION REOUESTED F or information only. I Citl}. of FarminlJ.ton 325 Oak Street · FarmingtonJ MN 5502~ · (612) ~63.7111 · Falf (612) ~63.2591 Respectfully submitted, ;kJ11~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file Jason Elias July 30, 1997 RE: Rear Lot Drainage Utility Easement (Block 1 - FairHills Third Addition) Dear Resident, Recently we discovered that a storm sewer control structure located on lot 2 of block 1 (see attached map) is buried over with four feet of soil. This structure, constructed in 1981, serves as an overflow for the pond directly north of 193rd Street West. This structure will be uncovered on August 18, 1997 unless a major rainfall warrants this sooner. It is expected that during normal rainfall conditions this pond will contain less than one foot of water. The orange stakes that have been placed in your backyard represent the water elevation that this pond could raise to during a heavy storm. Therefore, it is advised that all sheds, tables, gardens or other landscaping below these stakes be moved to a location above them prior to August 18, 1997. The City's Engineering Department is looking into the possibility of extending this storm sewer structure down closer to the ponds edge, If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 463-1602, Sincerely, W 7 1/ { //~..:JJI\ . JJ.>c<L David R. Sanocki Civil Engineer D RS/ll cc: file John Erar CitlJ of Farmin'Jton 325 Oak Street. Farmington, MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fa/( (612) 463-2591 .! . \. I / / - ./ --.- --------- / \ .L.\J(~~ CJ r "-t :~) (.'j ~.:l \ \ )0 - . 'll ZO"gel - i'91 I I' I ':~ :en ;; 11f\, '.0 . C\J en :0' If\ '0 " 1'0 I :z . -.J lel>z\ \ \ \ . - " "';" ... /- .' ~. ""-- - ~ .;'" ..... ""- ....} .' ~.'," .. " '- "........ ", / '. / / ,:,-. / ....-:. '" / :~l./ / "..~ .. / .....-- , ....... / , .........: ;~(/ / "-. '. .- . . ......". ....... ....... '. . -.;. . ....... '...... '....... ~ :> o ...~.... ..... '....... /, , ~4 " ... "$ 04 ....... . .... N ,., <D o <'\l -, w I -8 .~ o _ en 0 ~ ~ ..\ ". '.. 33/60 -.-_ 217.92 --- .,.j . .... to? . C\J C\J ..- /:- \ N 87043'11"E 196.26 . C. If\ C\j .n 0 If\ ., l'"' 'N s ," , ~ . 'r.; .. .. t" September 15, 1997 RE: Storm S~wer Extension (Fair Hills - Farmington) Dear Residents: The City Council has approved the storm sewer extension project that would extend storm sewer pipe closer to the low area of the drainage and utility easement (see attachment). There will be no costs accessed to the residents for this project. Work is scheduled to begin Wednesday, September 17, 1997 weather permitting. It is expected that once work begins the project will take approximately one week to complete. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at 463-1602 SinCereltyJ k.,/U David R. Sanocki Civil Engineer cc. File John Erar, City Administrator Lee Mann, City EngineeringfPublic Works Director CitlJ. of FarminfJ.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmington, MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fa/( (612) 463-2591 / /.~ I t I .~"'... '-' ,~. "-?' ( ..... .....,' i _.i.. I \ \ \ \ ~ --- i-', .'-"T' ~-~ ~ . ;-' - .~ ~~~ ~~ .-r ~ ,:.... ~ ".~.~., ~ ~\ ~ ~ ~O ~ ~ ---------1 ---...... o ... ."-"02: ~c:?: a) '1 . I" t> a) (; In ,... ~-~q ~O o -~ ~ -:~:.. .' . .... .-- '. ..-' .~ .,.... to Q: (~~::.. ,:....::.. ~r.: ..... o _ ...12 o "N _ _'_'_~_"_'_'_-O~~~gi;. .n -A 00 - ..".. .. 0\ ...... 0\ N 53030'37 E... ,/ . \ _ 233.90- - - --- -- -- --- -- ~-;:\OOO'34" r 10.6\ <'0'- . ~. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ . .A~ \ \ \)~" :-..... .::~c. :...L. \ -'" ~ LJ: \ \ \ \ \, ./ \...... , . ~ :..~..~ '00 .- " 0''- oS> ,.' -~Q- . / \ "".o:r II Q::' / / / ~o " / / / / i / October 10, 1997 RE: NEWLY PLACED SOD. Dear Residents, The City of Farmington has laid sod in the easement area in your backyard. The City staff would appreciate your assistance in watering this newly placed sod. We also appreciate your patients with this storm sewer construction project. If you have any questions please call Dave Sanocki at 463-1602 or Jerry Auge 463- 1607 with the City of Farmington Engineering Division. SioceJt 1-/ Dave Sanocki City of Farmington Engineering Division 7a. COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR June 15, 1998 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 P.M. '.. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Gamer, Strachan. Members Absent: None. Also Present: City Administrator Erar, Attorney Joel Jamnik, City Management Team 4. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by Gamer, second by Cordes to approve the agenda, APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS -None. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS- . Dolly Newberg, 5680 W. 193rd St. passed out a letter (entered as official document) concerning the sewage back up in her basement as a result of a power outage which incapacitated a lift station. Her claim was submitted to League of MN Cities insurance, but denied because the City was not found negligent. Rather the situation was ruled as an "Act of God." Ms. Newberg presented her facts, and asked for compensation for the damages and to make the necessary changes to the area sanitary sewer system/lift station to prevent this from ever happening again. Administrator Erar assured Ms. Newberg that the City will respond in writing to any statements that had been made. Also, a representative from the League's insurance will be invited to the next meeting, July 6, 1998. . Mike Sibley, 5681 193rd St. commented on the excessive amount ofponding water in the area of Fair Hills which he attributes to the increasing development of the surrounding area. Sibley asked if there could be sewer contamination in these ponds and questioned how much forethought has gone into the City's growth. He also asked the Council to consider the feasibility of extending the new trunk storm sewer (Charleswood Project) to the area of the ponds in Fair Hills to prevent their flooding potential. Administrator Erar said staff will address these questions at the next meeting. . Mary Stark, 19380 Eureka Ave., who also experienced a sewer back up on May 15th, reported that stormwater was mixed into the sewage and asked why. She feels that the City is responsible for taking whatever measure necessary so that this doesn't happen again. . Jason Elias, 19267 Euclid Path, expressed his frustration with the slow reaction by the City in handling a storm drainage pipe between two ponds that was inoperable because it had been inadvertently buried. He urged the City to handle this recent problem (effectiveness of the lift station and storm sewer ponding in Fair Hills) in a timely fashion. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Gamer, second by Strachan to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes 6/1/98 (Regular) b) Approved Certification of 1999 Local Performance Aid c) Approved the Drafting of Northern Natural Gas Easement Request d) Approved Bills. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS - none. 6/15/98 Minutes Continued Page 2 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT a) Middle Creek Construction Contract Director of Public Works/City Engineer Mann presented the five bids received for the construction of the Middle Creek Area Trunk Sanitary Sewer and the Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer. Latour Construction, Inc. submitted the low bid of$I,089,607,15. MOTION by Cordes, second by Gamer to adopt RESOLUTION R57-98 to Award the Contract for Project 98-14, Middle Creek Area Trunk Sanitary Sewer, and Project 98-15, Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer to Latour Construction, Inc, APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS a) Water Reservoir Logo Update Public Works Director/City Engineer Mann stated that the Water Board has provided for the lettering (FARMINGTON) to be painted on the new water reservoir on I95th Street. If a City logo were to included in the painting contract, it would have to be determined soon, A simple black & white logo could possibly cost approximately $ I 0,000 and a multi-colored logo would cost approximately $50,000, The Water Board has decided not to fund the painting of a logo. It was the consensus of the Council that having the logo on the reservoir was not necessary, but that simple, low contrast lettering should be sufficient since it is in a residential area, b) Comprehensive Plan Update Process - Update Community Development Director Olson reported on the process so far. Over thirty-five interviews have been held; two visioning workshops are scheduled whereby public input will be sought. These visioning workshops will be designed and facilitated by Brimeyer Consulting firm. The first workshop will be held Wednesday, July 8th, 6:00-9:00 p.m" and the second one is scheduled three weeks later, Wednesday, July 29th, The workshops will be promoted in the area papers and the City newsletter. c) Cable Franchise Negotiations - Update Administrator Erar updated the Council on Marcus Cable franchise negotiations. There are three issues that need to be considered: 1) PubliclEducationlGovernrnent (PEG) Fees and the implementation of such a fee within the new franchise agreement; 2) Forming a more formal relationship through the enacting of a Joint Powers Agreement with Apple Valley and Rosemount; 3)Providing for a capital grant within the franchise agreement that would originate out of the current operating revenues and expenses, with no increase in subscriber rates. These capital grant fees would be used to underwrite new audio-v ideo-recording equipment installed in the Council Chambers. MOTION by Gamer and second by Fitch to approve incorporating the authority to impose PEG fees with the Cable Franchise Agreement, and forming a Joint Powers Agreement with the cities of Apple Valley and Rosemount. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. d) Environmental Contamination - Ash Street Storm water & Sewer Issues Gene Thurmes, 520 Ash St., expressed his disgust at what appears to be sewage contaminated water standing in the ditch along Ash Street (520-608 Ash St). Reporting his observations has resulted in an investigation by City staff and Dakota County Environmental Management. Tests have confirmed that high levels of coliform bacteria were present in these storm water drainage ditches, implicating septic system failures in the Castle Rock Township fringe area south of Ash Street from the fairgrounds to Fountain Valley Golf Course. Justin Grabowksi, 608 Ash St., questioned the possibility of hose leaks when the nearby lift station was pumped during the last two storms. The City is checking the integrity of the lift station connections to make sure no leaks are occurring. The County will conduct a septic survey to ascertain which private septic systems are failing, The contamination of private wells is of major concern. Discussions at the June 9, 1998 meeting emphasized the need to look at a long-term solution, A special joint meeting of City and Township representatives is scheduled for June 16, 1998. It should be noted that a feasibility study was conducted in 1995 for streetand utility improvements in this area, but the project came to a halt because not all parties were willing to afford the expense. Now that groundwater contamination is an issue, the problem will have to be dealt with collectively. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) County Road 72 Feasibility Report City Engineer/Public Works Director Mann presented the feasibility of reconstructing C,R. 72 from Trunk Highway 3 to the FarmingtonlEmpire Township border, Dakota County has expressed an interest in turning this portion of the road 6/15/98 Minutes Continued Page 3 back to Farmington, and participate fmancially in a street improvement project within the City limits as part of the tumback agreement. MOTION by Gamer, second by Fitch to adopt RESOULTION R58-98 Accepting the Feasibility Report and Scheduling a Neighborhood Meeting for Project No. 98-21, County Road 72 Street and Utility Improvements. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS- None. 13. ROUNDTABLE a) Hickory Street Drainage Update: Council member Fitch: City Administrator Erar: Parks and Recreation Director Jim Bell: Community Development Director Olson: Mayor Ristow: Lee Mann reported that he is waiting for a reply from MnDOT granting permission to discharge stormwater to the median on Hwy, 3 from Hickory Street between 7th and 8th Streets. C.R. 31 is progressing nicely, Gateway signs are in and lots of positive comments heard. Are there any plans for anything on the backside? Reiterated that the purpose of the Council's policy of responding to citizen comments in writing is to keep the emotions at a reasonable level. This policy is not to be interpreted as a cold and callous attitude, nor as a sign of disrespect. Landscaping will be placed around the gateway signs, eliminating the possibility for any message on the backside for now. The Industrial Park will be advertised in various publications, thus increasing marketing efforts in this area. Demolishing the fIfe-gutted house on 1st and Elm will be a long and slow process since it is a foreclosure situation, However, the house is secured and is more of an aesthetic problem than a health/safety hazard. The Thelen house near the hospital is scheduled July 1. Reports tall grass and weeds growing at Larch St. & 9th St.; on the path at Larch; also on the west side of 2nd St. at 2nd and Walnut. Complaints received on Kuchera Entrance being in bad shape all the way to Rambling River Park; reports of a washout with concrete slab exposed near railroad bridge. Cushman Motorcycle Club is in town this week, MOTION by Cordes, second by Gamer to adjourn at 9:20 P,M, APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Jeanne Stanek Secretary 7CL, SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL MEETING Special Meeting Minutes June 16, 1998 The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p,m. Council members present included Lacelle Cordes, Bill Fitch, Steve Strachan. Council member Don Gamer was absent, but did submit a written statement concerning his opposition to Castle Rock's proposed industrial park development and general concern with ground water contamination. Also in attendance were County Commissioner Joe Harris and the Castle Rock Township Board represented by Chairman AI Angus. A meeting agenda was adopted by the City Council. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the recent findings by Dakota County that standing water in the storm water drainage ditch located at the intersection of Ash Street and 6th Street was contaminated with fecal coliform bacteria at significant levels. A number of issues were discussed concerning the possibility that private septic systems were failing in the township, the possibility of a City lift station force main leak and options relative to the resurrection of the Ash Street Reconstruction Project and Prairie Waterway nn projects were also discussed. Representatives from all three jurisdictions were concerned about the implications of ground water contamination in the area and decided that Dakota County Environmental Services Department would test all private septic systems in the area extending from the Dakota County Fairgrounds to the west and to the township golf course east of Highway 3. It was discussed that identifying the source of the contamination was the first priority and then discussing both short-term and long-term solutions should come next. Extensive conversations were held regarding the type of private systems now serving township residents. Commissioner Harris indicated that if contamination was occurring it would need to be stopped within the provisions established under the County Ordinance regulating private septic systems. Mayor Ristow indicated his desire to move into a more long-range solution that would permanently resolve long- standing concerns of environmental contamination. Castle Rock Chairman Angus indicated his willingness to work with the City, but maintained his desire to retain township property that would serve as the holding pond as well as having the township manage the construction of the third phase of the Prairie Waterway. Township and City residents attending the meeting expressed their support of taking some action to permanently resolve this situation, including the extension of municipal services into this area. Another meeting was scheduled to review testing results on July 7, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. at the Farmington City Hall Council Chambers. Meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Re~p~tful~y;;submitted, '-}-If;t-/~~ .John Erar / City Administrator 7b TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Department of Administration DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of the Executive Assistant in the Administration Department has been completed. This appointment fills an existing vacancy in the department. DISCUSSION After a thorough review of applicants for this position by an interview panel consisting of staff from various departments, an offer of employment has been made to Ms. Cynthia (Cindy) Muller, subject to ratification by the City Council. Ms. Muller has been working as a professional administrative secretary in the private sector since 1980. Her most recent experience as a Sales Administrator providing executive and administrative support to senior level management at Rosemount Office Systems. Prior to that position, Ms. Muller worked as an International and Senior Secretary for Solvay Animal Health Center since 1980 providing a broad range of secretarial, clerical and client support services. Ms. Muller has significant experience in administrative and secretarial support, has advanced computer/technical skills and a strong business-oriented approach in providing quality customer service. Cindy will be a welcome and valuable addition to the Administration Department team. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 1998 Budget. RECOMMENDATION Ratify the appointment of Ms. Cindy Muller as a full-time Executive Assistant effective July 7, 1998. Respectfully submitted, /) 9~ 1.1e- ..@; :/ u~ lphn F. Erar ttity Administrator I CitlJ of FarminlJton 325 Oale Street · Farmington, MN 5502~ · (612) ~63-7111 · FaJf (612) ~63-2591 7~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Service Manager SUBJECT: Billiards License Application DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION James Powell d.b.a. Farmington Billiards has sold the business to Rodney Cassedy. DISCUSSION Mr. Cassedy will retain the name Farmington Billiards and will continue to operate at 933 8th Street. Farmington Billiards will operate a total of 17 tables. Police Chief Siebenaler has performed a background check and approved the application for submittal. BUDGET IMPACT A license fee of $370.00 and initial investigation fee in the amount of $150.00 were received with the application. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the application from Rodney Cassedy for a Billiards Parlor at 933 8th Street, and welcome him to the business community. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Service Manager I CitlJ. of FarminiJ.ton 325 Oaft Street · Farm;n(jton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fax (612) 463.2591 CITY OF FARMINGTON BILLIARDS LICENSE APPLICA nON 1. BusinessName: J=c;...( If\. ~>"\j1bN 13~ I J: c.f'dJ' Business Address: q 3 3 ~ ~ .s 1: (Street) 2. Ownership: Proprietorship_ Owners Name: C. f/sse..dt (Last) Pannership % Corporation)oo % %dJ..'-"i'J . ", (First) &e~e ( Middle) Address: 3600 t: tA. / C 010.) w- .j fc..,ja.N fYI/I S.f;/a.3 , Date ofBinh: g- )"/ sg Telephone: }I G/~.I1S6' '16Y.J ... 6).J. - d4~- '1.3'g.5 Month Day Year 3. Are you presently licensed in another Community'! _ Yes .;- No If Yes. Please list -+. Names of Associates in Business: 5. Have you ever been denied a Billiards License! _Yes y ~o If Yes. Please explain 6. Have you ever been convicted of an alcohol or drug related offense'! _Yes r ~o 7. List any training or related experience: 7 ye or J l", pJ_ "...... , .:) t- ;& II; .,..rI.~ 6",~'. ,ol...sJ 8. Number of Tables'! ~JsA ~\) Coin Operated? ~ =: 11 ToTtt ~ 9. Attachments: _Partnership Agreement IIf Applicable) _Certiticate of Trade Name (If Applicable) _Certificate of Incorporation l If Applicable) _ Corporate By Laws (If Applicable) _ Certiticate of Authority tIf Applicable) Disclaimer: I hereby certify that all statements made in this application are true and complete and understand that any misstatements or omissions of material facts may result in disqualification or denial of license. Date: 6, -=> Ir <7 ~ Signature: ~ Title: ~~ ...... Disapproved_ Notary For Use by City Officials ~ #.f) Application received with feeofS 27b :mdInvestigativefeeofS IS~ on 9"~ Z to .19t? g Approved by the City Council on day of .19_. 7d TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administratorf'jE/ FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Service Manager SUBJECT: Transient Merchant License - Chamber of Commerce DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Chamber of Commerce is requesting the City Council waive the fees for a Transient Merchant License for a Farmers Market. DISCUSSION In 1997 the Chamber of Commerce established a Farmers Market in the parking lot of the Farmington Library. The Chamber feels this venture was successful in providing a market for local farmers to sell their produce, along with bringing customers to Farmington to shop. It is their hope that the market will continue to grow and become more prosperous. The Chamber is requesting a permit for the period of July through October and will continue to coordinate and manage its operation, advertise and secure insurance coverage. BUDGET IMPACT A Transient Merchant License is $50.00 per quarter and $25.00 issuance fee. The Chamber is requesting the fees be waived as in 1997. ACTION REQUIRED The license application does not require City Council approval. It is recommended the fee be waived for the months of July, August, September and October. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Service Manager I CitlJ of Farmint}ton 325 Oak Street · Farmin9tonl MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fax (612) 463-2591 7e TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Service Manager SUBJECT: Gambling Premise Permits DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Farmington Youth Hockey is requesting Gambling Premise Permits at the Longbranch Saloon and Eatery and 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. Farmington Youth Hockey is requesting a premise permit to conduct gambling at the Long Branch Saloon and Eatery, 309 3rd Street and Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUIRED Adopt the attached resolutions approving a Premise permit at 309 3rd Street and 27 5th Street. Respectfully submitted, q{~ ~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Service Manager I CitlJ. of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmint}.tonl MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fax (612) 463.2591 RESOLUTION NO. R -98 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR LONGBRANCH SALOON AND EATERY 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 6th day of July, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: 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, the Longbranch Saloon and Eatery, 309 3rd Street, has submitted an application for Gambling Premise Permit to be conducted at 309 3rd Street, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Premise Permit for the Longbranch Saloon and Eatery be conducted at 309 3rd Street is hereby approved. This Resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 6th day of July, 1998. Mayor Attested to this 6th day of July, 1998 City Administrator RESOLUTION NO. R -98 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 6th day of July, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: 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, Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street, has submitted an application for Gambling Premise Permit to be conducted at 27 5th Street, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Premise Permit for Farmington Lanes be conducted at 27 5th Street is hereby approved. This Resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 6th day of July, 1998. Mayor Attested to this 6th day of July, 1998 City Administrator 7f FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator1~ James Bell Parks & Recreation Director TO: SUBJECT: Acknowledge Sale of Obsolete Rear Load Packer Truck DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Solid Waste Division has a 1984 L8000 Ford rear load packer. The Division would like to sell this old truck. DISCUSSION This truck is not being used due to the contracting out of the recycling and special pickups. It is over 14 years old and has 158,000 miles on it. Several companies were contacted and the following bids were received: 1. Landfill Recovery 2. Midwest Packer Parts 3. M. Banks - Lakeville $2,480.00 $1,800.00 $1,650.00 BUDGET IMPACT The proceeds will be returned to the Solid Waste fund. RECOMMENDATION Acknowledge the sale of the rear load packer truck to Landfill Recovery for $2,480.00. Respectfully Submitted, ~1 -~-fi James Bell Director of Parks & Recreation CitlJ. of FarminfJton 325 Oak Street · Farm;ntjtonl MN 55024 · (612) 463-7711 · FaJr (612) 463-2591 1J' . dJ,.. b ~JJJ ~ (t!J6.tJ6 jf; f1 {)vi ~, vJjj~~ LJ/1//;/0:5 · . To; .Mfdweat Packer Part. & Sal.a 3723 Denmark Ct. W. Eagan. MN 55123 City Of Farmington Attn; Ben Clatz In Regards to Bid on The 1984 Ford L-8000 wi Refuse Packer In your Yard I bid $ 1800.00 This Day 6-18-98. Hidwest ~.. -~{ Tenquist J ~ 7 @ LANDFILL RECOVERY SYSTEMS, INC. ft \.., WITH OVER 35 YEARS EXPERIENCE 24335 Chippendale Avenue West Phone 612.463.2635 Farmington, Minnesota 55024 Fax 463.8974 6/18/98 BID PROPOSAL TO: CITY of FARMINGTON IN REGARDS TO A 1984 FORD 8000 CAB AND CHASSIS, WITH A 1986 PACKMORE GARBAGE COMPACTOR. GOING ON SEALED BID AS ONE UNIT, AS IS WHERE IS. LANDFILL RECOVERY SYSTEMS BID IS AT $2480.00 (TWO THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS.) CASH PAID IF AWARDED SAID BID. ------- ?J TO: Mayor, Councilmembers City Administrator 1~ James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Purchase - Parks Department DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Purchase of budgeted vehicle in the Recreation Programming Division. DISCUSSION A mini van was budgeted in the 1998 budget for transporting equipment and staff to the various programs throughout the City. The specifications for the van are attached. Price quotes have been received for the van. K&KAuto Belzer's Air Lake Ford Dakota Motors 1995 Dodge Caravan 1995 Dodge Caravan SE 1994 Dodge Caravan 1994 Dodge Caravan 41,400 miles 71,000 miles 55,000 miles 49,500 miles $9,900,00 * $9,999,00 * $10,397,00 ** $8,500.00 ** * cost does not include tax and license. ** Did not meet minimum specifications, BUDGET IMPACT The purchase of the van from K & K Auto is within the $12,431 that was budgeted in 1998. The cost of the license is additional. ACTION REQUESTED For Council information only, Respectfully submitted, ~;o-6~ I CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street · Farmintjtonl MN 55024. (612) 463.7111. Fa/( (612) 463-2591 James Bell Parks and Recreation Director 1998 Recreation Vehicle Specifications . Mini Van . 1995 or newer . 6 cyl. 3.0 L Engine . Auto 4-Speed Transmission . 7 Passenger Seating . AM/FM Stereo . Air Bags . Restraints . Power Brakes . Power Steering . Rear Window Wiper . Air Conditioning . Rear Window Defroster vanspec 7i TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrato~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Re-inspection Fee for Temporary Certificates of Occupancy DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City has been receIvmg a number of requests for Temporary Certificates of Occupancy (COs) for newly constructed single family homes. DISCUSSION In the past the City has not issued Temporary COs for homes that are completed after June 1st. Recently builders have been claiming that weather conditions (primarily recent rain events) have prevented them from completing final grading and submitting as-built certificates of survey prior to scheduled closing dates. The as-built survey requirement that was implemented last summer now requires builders to submit an as-built survey to the City at least four days prior to requesting a final inspection and Certificate of Occupancy. With the recent amount of rain that has been experienced , builders are indicating that are have difficulty completing final grading and submitting as-built surveys prior to the scheduled closings on the sale of the homes they are currently completing. They are requesting that temporary COs be issued similar to what is done in the winter months which would allow the closing to take place and the home to be occupied, and allow additional time (staff is recommending no more than 30 days) for the final grading to be completed and as-built surveys to be submitted. Staff is recommending that 30 clay temporary COs be issued in the summer months only in cases where the weather has prevented final grading to be completed by the scheduled closing date subject to the following conditions: 1) A additional $500 surety is collected (which would bring the total to $2,000) to ensure timely completion of the final grading. This amount would be refunded upon approval of an as-built survey. 2) A $50 re-inspection fee is charged for an additional inspection. I CitlJ. of FarminfJ.ton 325 Oak Street · FarmintJ.tonl MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fax (612) 463.2591 BUDGET IMPACT . The additional inspection fee should cover the additional staff costs associated with allowing Temporary COs to be issued in the during the summer months. ACTION REOUESTED Authorization to collect the additional $500 surety and adopt a resolution to establish the $50 re-inspection fee for Temporary COs issued during the summer months for weather related delays in completing fInal grading. avid L. Olson Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO. R Temporary Certificates of Occupancy Inspection Fee Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City on the _ day of 199 at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Gamer, Strachan The following members were absent: None Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, the City has determined that additional building inspections will be required as a result of temporary Certificates of Occupancy for single family homes which are requested between June 1 st and approximately November 1 st of any year ; and WHEREAS, an additional re-inspection fee should be collected to cover the staff costs associated with re-inspecting homes for which temporary certificates of occupancy were issued; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a re-inspection fee of $50 be established for temporary Certificates of Occupancy issued for single family homes issued between June 1 st and approximately November 1 st of any year. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the day of , 199_. Gerald Ristow, Mayor Attested to this day of , 199_ SEAL John F. Erar, City Administrator 7,. TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Request - Fire Department DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department is requesting the purchase of five new Minitor II voice pagers. DISCUSSION Staff has received quotes for five new Motorola Minitor II Stored Voice Pagers with case, charger and 5 year extended warranty from Ancom Communications. Ancom is the area assigned distributor of Motorola products, they are also the holder of the Minnesota consortium pricing for Motorola Products. The new pagers will replace our older pagers and add the feature of stored voice for recall. BUDGET IMP ACT The cost of the five voice pagers is $2459.18 and is included in the 1998 budget. ACTION REQUIRED This is for your information only. Respectfully submitted, ~~J~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief I CitlJ. of FarminiJ.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmint}tonl MN 550211 · (612) 1163.7111 · Fax (612) 1163.2591 COUNCIL REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING ON JULY 6" 1998 VENDOR 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL <*> ABH PROPERTIES <*> ADOLPH KIEFER & ASSOC. <*> AERIAL COMMUNICATIONS INC <*> AFLAC <*> AIRTOUCH CELLULAR <*> AL'S LOCK AND KEY <*> ALCORN BEVERAGE CO. INC. <*> AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC <*> ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC <*> APACHE HOSE & BELTING INC <*> AQUA LOGIC INC <*> ASPENWALL TREE SERVICE INC <*> AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES <*> BELL, JIM <*> BRAUN PUMP & CONTROLS <*> BREEZLEY, JIM <*> BROECKERT, VALORIE <*> BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES <*> BT OFFICE PRODUCTS INTERNATION <*> CALVIN, DAVE <*> CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01-JUL-1998 (10:05) 7' J ACTIVITY CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION POLICE ADMIN PROF SERVICES 1,740.00 OH 1,740.00* SEWER OPEATIONS EQUIP MAINT/RENT 100.00 OH SOLID WASTE EQUIP MAINT /RENT 1,500.00 OH STREET MAINT EQUIP MAINT/RENT 290.00 OH 1,890.00* SWIMMING POOL EQUIP MAINT /RENT 160.84 OH 160.84* ADMINISTRATION UTILITIES 59.01 OH COMM DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES 42.72 OH SEWER OPEATIONS UTILITIES 18.59 OH SOLID WASTE UTILITIES 46.22 OH STREET MAINT UTILITIES 18.60 OH WATER UTILITY UTILITIES 18.59 OH 203.73* GENERAL FUND MEDICAL INS 226.40 OH 226.40* BUILDING INSPCT UTILITIES 60.56 OH INVESTIGATION UTILITIES 25.62 OH PATROL SERVICES UTILITIES 237.68 OH POLICE ADMIN UTILITIES 13.88 OH Police Forfietur OPER EQUIP PURCH 256.02 OH 593.76* BUILDING MAINT EQUIP MAINT /RENT 432.70 OH 432,70* LIQUOR MERCH FOR RESALE 14,532.35 OH 14,532.35* WATER UTILITY DUES & SUBSCRIP 100.00 OH 100.00* RESCUE SQUAD OPER EQUIP PURCH 999.19 OH 999.19* SEWER OPEATIONS OPER MAT & SUPPL 2,799.84 OH 2,799.84* SWIMMING POOL OPER MAT & SUPPL 258.42 OH 258.42* TREE MAINTENANCE PROF SERVICES 1,171.50 OH 1,171.50* POLICE ADMIN EQUIP MAINT /RENT 186.03 OH 186.03* ICE ARENA OPER MAT & SUPPL 26.42 OH 26.42* SEWER OPEATIONS PROF SERVICES 582.25 OH 582.25* GENERAL FUND LESSONS 20.00 OH 20.00* Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL 8.00 OH 8.00* SOLID WASTE PROF SERVICES 3,779.80 OH 3,779.80* ADMINISTRATION OFF & PAPER SUPP 1,045.15 OH 1,045.15* ESCROW FUND ESCROWS PAYABLE 1,500.00 OH 1,500.00* ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES 229.35 OH BUILDING INSPCT PROF SERVICES 120.00 OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR ACTIVITY 01-JUL-1998 (10:05) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CAMPBELL KNUTSON <*> CANNON CONSTRUCTION <*> CANNON HOOD & DUCT CLEANERS IN <*> CAP AGENCY <*> CARLSON TRACTOR & EQUIPMENT CO <*> CRIEF SUPPLY CORPORATION <*> COLLEGE CITY BEVERAGE INC <*> CONOCO <*> CONSTRUCTION MARKET DATA <*> CREATIVE CRAFTS INTERNATIONAL <*> CRYSTAL CAVE <*> CUSTOM COMPANIES, TRE <*> cy I S UNIFORMS <*> D & J GLASS INC <*> D & 0 PROPERTIES <*> DAKOTA COUNTY FINANCIAL SERVIC <*> DAKOTA COUNTY LUMBER COMPANY <*> DAKOTA COUNTY RECORDER <*> DAKOTA COUNTY TECHNICAL COLLEG <*> DAKOTA COUNTY TOWING <*> DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION COMM DEVELOPMENT PROF SERVICES DEVLPR CAP PROJ PROF SERVICES ENGINEERING SERV PROF SERVICES GEN ACCOUNTING PROF SERVICES LEGISLATIVE CTRL PROF SERVICES PERSONNEL PROF SERVICES PLANNING/ZONING PROF SERVICES POLICE ADMIN PROF SERVICES SEWER OPEATIONS PROF SERVICES TREE MAINTENANCE PROF SERVICES ARENA TEAM ROOM SENIOR CITIZEN Senior Center PARK MAINT POLICE ADMIN LIQUOR FIRE SERVICES PATROL SERVICES SOLID WASTE CONSTRUCTION EQUIP MAINT/RENT PROF SERVICES EQUIP MAINT/RENT OPER MAT & SUPPL MERCH FOR RESALE TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS MIDDLE CREEK TRU PRINT & PUBLISR Recreation Prog Recreation prog SOLID WASTE FIRE SERVICES OUTDOOR ICE LIQUOR GENERAL FUND ICE ARENA PLANNING/ZONING FIRE SERVICES PATROL SERVICES BUILDING MAINT EMERG MGMT SERV FIRE SERVICES SEWER OPEATIONS OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL EQUIP MAINT/RENT BLDG MAINT & RNT CHILD SUPPORT OPER MAT & SUPPL PROF SERVICES SCHOOL & CONF PROF SERVICES UTILITIES EQUIP MAINT/RENT TRANSPORT COSTS UTILITIES 180.00 716.00 424.00 20.00 1,972.50 635.00 70.00 4,106.56 40.00 47.50 8,560,91* 41,800.00 41,800.00* 175.73 175.73* 1,440.54 1,440.54* 74.91 74.91* 93.46 93.46* 12,476.15 12,476.15* 33.68 43.35 373.71 450.74* 203.00 203.00* 53.52 53.52* 193.50 193.50* 124.64 124.64* 300.99 300,99* 359.23 359.23* 2,939.78 2,939.78* 61.52 61. 52* 73.60 73.60* 107.50 107,50* 570.00 570.00* 100.00 100.00* 13.14 5.33 364.92 135.76 OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OH OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR 01-JUL-1998 (10:05) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION <*> DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO <*> DUEBERS DEPT STORE <*> EARL F ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES <*> ELECTRO WATCHMAN INC. <*> EMERGITEK CORPORATION <*> ERAR, JOHN <*> FARMINGTON BAKERY INC <*> FARMINGTON COMMUNITY EDUCATION <*> FARMINGTON EMPLOYEE CLUB <*> FARMINGTON INDEPENDENT <*> FARMINGTON PRINTING INC <*> FARMINGTON, CITY OF <*> FEDERAL EXPRESS <*> FEDERAL RESERVE BANK <*> FLEET FARM <*> FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE COMP <*> FRANCISKOVICH, JOE <*> FRANKLIN QUEST SIGNAL MAINT UTILITIES 2,581. 79 OH SOLID WASTE UTILITIES 57.95 OH WATER UTILITY UTILITIES 751.74 OH 3,910.63* FIRE SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL 3,377.37 OH 3,377.37* POLICE ADMIN OPER MAT & SUPPL 4.04 OH SWIMMING POOL OPER MAT & SUPPL 17.50 OH Senior Center OPER MAT & SUPPL 16.31 OH 37.85* STREET MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL 260.38 OH 260.38* LIQUOR EQUIP MAINT/RENT 166.68 OH 166.68* FIRE SERVICES EQUIP MAINT/RENT 67.66 OH 67.66* ADMINISTRATION TRANSPORT COSTS 246.02 OH 246.02* ADMINISTRATION OPER MAT & SUPPL 33.18 OH PLANNING/ZONING MISC 9.00 OH 42.18* RECREATION PROGR PRINT & PUBLISH 1,916.98 OH 1,916.98* GENERAL FUND EMPLOYEE CLUB 48.00 OH RECREATION PROGR OPER MAT & SUPPL 60.00 OH 108.00* BUILDING INSPCT PRINT & PUBLISH 27.00 OH HRA/ECONOMIC DEV PRINT & PUBLISH 79.60 OH PERSONNEL PRINT & PUBLISH 35.00 OH SOLID WASTE PRINT & PUBLISH 125.65 OH 267.25* ADMINISTRATION PRINT & PUBLISH 25.03 OH RECREATION PROGR OFF & PAPER SUPP 45.69 OH 70.72* ADMINISTRATION TRANSPORT COSTS 94.50 OH BUILDING INSPCT SCHOOL & CONF 22.10 OH ENGINEERING SERV TRANSPORT COSTS 25.56 OH GENERAL FUND PETTY CASH 320.00 OH PLANNING/ZONING TRANSPORT COSTS 8.82 OH POLICE ADMIN PRINT & PUBLISH 12.16 OH PUBL SAFE PRGM SCHOOL REIMBURSE 3.18 OH SWIMMING POOL OPER MAT & SUPPL 35,76 OH 522.08* HRA/ECONOMIC DEV MISC 19.00 OH RECREATION PROGR OPER MAT & SUPPL 13.75 OH 32.75* GENERAL FUND SAVINGS BONDS 25.00 OH 25.00* PARK MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL 75,90 OH 75.90* GENERAL FUND MEDICAL INS 411.70 OH 411.70* Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL 272.00 OH 272.00* ADMINISTRATION OFF & PAPER SUPP 112.25 OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR <*> FRITZ COMPANY INC <*> FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS <*> GALL'S INC <*> GARVEY CONSTRUCTION INC <*> GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS COMPAN <*> GOLD STAR PRINTING INC <*> GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC <*> GRENGS, BRENT <*> GRIGGS COOPER & CO <*> HAIDER, TONY <*> HAMMER, ED <*> HASSLER, CHARLOTTE <*> HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP <*> HEALTHPARTNERS <*> HOFFBECK TRUCKING INC <*> HOMES BY CHASE <*> HYDRO SUPPLY CO <*> I.T.L. PATCH COMPANY <*> ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 <*> IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS <*> INSTANT TESTING COMPANY <*> INTERSTATE BATTERY TWIN CITIES ACTIVITY LIQUOR 01-JUL-1998 (10:05) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM MERCH FOR RESALE COMM DEVELOP UTILITIES COMMUNICATIONS UTILITIES COUNTY ROAD 31 UTILITIES ICE ARENA UTILITIES LIQUOR UTILITIES RECREATION PROGR UTILITIES SEWER OPEATIONS UTILITIES SOLID WASTE UTILITIES WATER UTILITY UTILITIES PATROL SERVICES POLICE ADMIN STATE AID CONST GENERAL FUND POLICE ADMIN SEWER OPEATIONS WATER UTILITY Recreation Prog LIQUOR Recreation prog Recreation prog GENERAL FUND WATER UTILITY GENERAL FUND DEVLPR CAP PROJ ESCROW FUND WATER UTILITY PATROL SERVICES GENERAL FUND ADMINISTRATION DEVLPR CAP PROJ LARCH STREET FIRE SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER EQUIP PURCH ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PRINT & PUBLISH PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL MERCH FOR RESALE OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL ADMISSIONS PROF SERVICES MEDICAL INS PROF SERVICES ESCROWS PAYABLE OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL ICMA OFF & PAPER SUPP PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES EQUIP MAINT/RENT 112.25* 1,504,97 1,504.97* 29.86 1,974.60 17.04 29.86 310.76 5.27 261.81 29.86 41.33 2,700.39* 59.96 44.47 104.43* 1,800.00 1,800.00* 1,110.20 1,110.20* 282,23 282.23* 346.59 346.58 693.17* 255.00 255.00* 6,136.68 6,136,68* 272,00 272.00* 105.00 105,00* 25.00 25.00* 3,553.97 3,553.97* 13 , 116 . 04 13,116.04* 2,882.50 2,882.50* 1,500.00 1,500.00* 232.70 232.70* 127.48 127.48* 3,643.74 3,643.74* 119.77 119.77* 190.00 190.00 380.00* 221.41 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR ACTIVITY 0~-JUL-~998 (~0:05) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM <*> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J & T LIGHTING*RECYCLING <*> J P DEVELOPMENT <*> JAHNZ, JOE <*> JENSRUD, BETTY <*> JG WEAR <*> JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR COMPAN <*> KELLY ELECTRIC INC <*> KEYLAND HOMES <*> KINKO'S INC <*> KOEPNICK, BRIAN <*> KWIK TRIP <*> LA VERNE I S PUMPING SERVICE <*> LABOR RELATIONS ASSOCIATES INC <*> LAKEVILLE PUBLISHING INC <*> LAKEVILLE SENIOR CENTER <*> LAKEVILLE, CITY OF <*> LAMPERTS <*> LANDFILL RECOVERY SYSTEMS <*> LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES <*> LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INS ICE ARENA SOLID WASTE ESCROW FUND SOLID WASTE GENERAL FUND Recreation prog SWIMMING POOL LIQUOR ICE ARENA PARK MAINT SWIMMING POOL ESCROW FUND GEN ACCOUNTING Recreation prog FIRE SERVICES FLEET MAINT SERV PARK MAINT PATROL SERVICES SEWER OPEATIONS SOLID WASTE STREET MAINT WATER UTILITY EQUIP MAINT/RENT PROF SERVICES ESCROWS PAYABLE EQUIP MAINT/RENT LESSONS OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL MERCH FOR RESALE BLDG IMPROVEMENT OPER MAT & SUPPL EQUIP MAINT/RENT ESCROWS PAYABLE PRINT & PUBLISH OPER MAT & SUPPL TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS DEVLPR CAP PROJ PROF SERVICES PERSONNEL PROF SERVICES HRA/ECONOMIC PERSONNEL SOLID WASTE Senior Center FIRE SERVICES PATROL SERVICES POLICE ADMIN SOLID WASTE GENERAL FUND DEV PRINT & PUBLISH PRINT & PUBLISH PRINT & PUBLISH OPER MAT & SUPPL PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL SPEC ACT SUPPL LELS UNION DUES EMPLOYEE EXPENSE PAYROLL EXPENSES ESCROW FUND PROF SERVICES 221.4~* 299.80 66.8~ 366.6~* ~,500.00 ~,500.00* 350.00 350.00* 20.00 20.00* ~,696.75 360.30 2,057.05* ~O,642.8~ ~0,642.8~* 5,469.00 ~96.00 48.00 5,7~3.00* ~,500.00 ~,500.00* 334.52 334.52* 119.00 ~~9.00* 67.19 ~2.06 332.~2 294.57 27.90 3~.79 555.98 ~08.88 ~,430.49* 375.00 375,00* ~,026.00 ~,026.00* 2~5.88 ~33.64 ~81. 71 531.23* 245.00 245.00* ~,732.39 3,442.77 5,~75.~6* 9.67 9.67* ~,500.00 ~,500.00* 99.00 99.00* 9,493.75 23,496.50 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OR OH OH OH OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR ACTIVITY 0~-JUL-~998 (~0:05) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM <*> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OH LITTLE TlKES COMMERCIAL PLAY S <*> LOCAL GVMT INFO SYSTEMS ASSN. <*> LUDWIG, HUBERT <*> MAJERUS, JACK <*> MANDERS DIESEL REPAIR INC <*> MARQUETTE BANK - LAKEVILLE <*> MAXI-SWEEP INC. <*> MC NAMARA CONTRACTING INC. <*> MCNEARNEY, ROBERT <*> MEDICA <*> METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIORNME <*> MILLER, MICHAEL J <*> MINNESOTA AFSCME COUNCIL #~4 <*> MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT <*> MINNESOTA ZOOMOBILE <*> MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH <*> MN GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS <*> MN REAL ESTATE JOURNAL <*> MOE, CLIFF <*> MOODY, ANTON <*> MORE 4 <*> MOTOR PARTS SERVICE CO INC <*> PARK IMPROVEMENT OPER EQUIP PURCH BUILDING INSPECT GEN ACCOUNTING MIS PAYROLL PROF PROF PROF PROF SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES LIQUOR BLDG IMPROVEMENT Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL SOLID WASTE TRANSPORT COSTS CAPITAL ACQUIS DEBT INT SWIMMING POOL EQUIP MAINT/RENT STREET MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL ESCROW FUND ESCROWS PAYABLE GENERAL FUND MEDICAL INS SEWER OPEATIONS MCES FEES GENERAL FUND SEWER OPERATIONS USER FEES AFSCME UNION DUE WATER UTILITY OPER MAT & SUPPL PARK IMPROVEMENT SPEC ACT SUPPL USER FEES WATER UTILITY GEN ACCOUNTING HRA/ECONOMIC DEV MISC Recreation prog Recreation prog BUILDING INSPCT ENGINEERING SERV ESCROW FUND PARK MAINT POLICE ADMIN BUILDING MAINT PARK MAINT PATROL SERVICES STREET MAINT SCHOOL & CONF OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL TRANSPORT COSTS OPER MAT & SUPPL EQUIP MAINT/RENT TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS 32,990,25* ~5,087.~9 ~5,087.~9* 436.37 964.2~ 414.38 362.83 2,~77.79,0 914.00 9~4.00* ~H.OO ~~9.00* 48.~4 48.~4,0 ~,~88.63 ~,~88.63,0 55.92 55.92* ~,~20.34 ~,~20.34* 3,000.00 3,000.00* 5,942.00 5,942.00* 40,~24.58 40,~24.58* 46.~4 46.~4,0 387.30 387.30* 99.7~ 99.7~,0 225.00 225.00* 4,072,00 4,072.00* 90.00 90.00* 900.00 900.00* 272.00 272.00* 2~2.63 2~2.63,0 13 .5~ ~26.~7 31. 96 43.97 87.66 303.27* 4.14 2.0~ 303.89 11,67 32~.7~,0 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR ACTIVITY 01-JUL-1998 (10,05) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM OH -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MPH INDUSTRIES INC <*> MURPHY, JAMES <*> MVTL LABORATORIES INC <*> NAPA <*> NATROGAS INC. <*> NEENAH FOUNDRY COMPANY <*> NORTH STAR BARBERSHOP CHORUS <*> NORTHERN HYDRAULICS INC <*> NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY <*> OHLIN SALES INC <*> OPSAHL, MARK <*> OVERHEAD DOOR CO. OF THE NORTH <*> PEOPLES NATURAL GAS <*> PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC <*> PJS AND ASSOCIATES INC <*> POLFUS IMPLEMENT INC. <*> PRECISION APPRAISALS & <*> PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS PATROL SERVICES PERSONNEL WATER UTILITY BUILDING INSPCT BUILDING MAINT FIRE SERVICES PARK MAINT SOLID WASTE STREET MAINT STREET MAINT SEWER OPEATIONS EQUIP MAINT/RENT SCHOOL & CONF PROF SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS EQUIP MAINT/RENT TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL PARK IMPROVEMENT SPEC ACT SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL STREET MAINT BUILDING MAINT EMERG MGMT SERV ICE ARENA IDEA SCHOOL FIRE SERVICES Recreation prog BUILDING MAINT UTILITIES EQUIP MAINT/RENT UTILITIES UTILITIES EQUIP MAINT/RENT OPER MAT & SUPPL EQUIP MAINT /RENT BUILDING MAINT UTILITIES FIRE SERVICES UTILITIES HRA/ECONOMIC DEV UTILITIES ICE ARENA UTILITIES LIBRARY SERVICES UTILITIES LIQUOR UTILITIES OUTDOOR ICE UTILITIES SENIOR CITIZEN UTILITIES SEWER OPEATIONS UTILITIES STREET MAINT UTILITIES SWIMMING POOL UTILITIES WATER UTILITY UTILITIES LIQUOR FIRE SERVICES MERCH FOR RESALE SCHOOL & CONF PARK MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL STORM WATER UTIL OPER EQUIP PORCH GENERAL FUND EXCHNG BANK BLDG PROF SERVICES PERA LIFE INS 209.35 209.35* 184.86 184.86* 42.00 42.00* 94.79 1.55 126.52 102.14 47.45 295.38 667.83* 159.75 159.75* 198.89 198.89* 200.00 200.00* 219.95 219.95* 3,076.37 6.28 1,052.80 966.97 5,102.42* 62.70 62.70* 255.00 255.00* " 177.65 177.65* 348.70 39.07 28.44 71. 62 140.64 22.99 7.46 52.31 23.45 23.94 7.46 23.17 789,25* 5,748.78 5,748.78* 196.90 196.90* 156.72 5,269.62 5,426,34* 2,000.00 2,000.00* 10,288.02 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR ACTIVITY 01-JUL-1998 (10:05) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM <*> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS CO <*> RATZLAFF CONSTRUCTION <*> RENNER & SONS, E. H. <*> RENT 'N' SAVE PROTABLE SERVICE <*> ROBERT CLARK CONSTRUCTION <*> ROLAND, ROBIN <*> ROSEMOUNT SAW & TOOL <*> ROTONICS MANUFACTURING INDUSTR <*> S & S WORLDWIDE <*> SAINT PAUL PIONEER PRESS <*> SAUBER PLUMBING & HEATING CO. <*> SAVOIE SUPPLY CO. INC. <*> SCHMITTY & SONS SCHOOL BUSES <*> SKB ENVIRONMENTAL INC <*> SNAP-ON TOOLS <*> SOUTH SUBURBAN MEDICAL <*> ST CROIX COUNTY <*> STAR TRIBUNE <*> STARR AUTOMOTIVE <*> STATE CAPITOL CREDIT UNION <*> STERLING CODIFIERS INC <*> SUBWAY SANDWICHES & SALADS <*> SUPERAMERICA LIQUOR ESCROW FUND WATER UTILITY PARK MAINT ESCROW FUND GEN ACCOUNTING MERCH FOR RESALE ESCROWS PAYABLE EQUIP MAINT/RENT UTILITIES ESCROWS PAYABLE SCHOOL & CONF PARK MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL TREE MAINTENANCE EQUIP MAINT/RENT SOLID WASTE Recreation prog PERSONNEL SENIOR CITIZEN SEWER OPEATIONS SWIMMING POOL Senior Center SOLID WASTE SWIMMING POOL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL PRINT & PUBLISH EQUIP MAINT/RENT OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES FLEET MAINT SERV OPER EQUIP PURCH SEWER OPEATIONS OPER EQUIP PURCH PATROL SERVICES PERSONNEL GENERAL FUND PERSONNEL PARK MAINT GENERAL FUND ADMINISTRATION Recreation prog PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT PRINT & PUBLISH TRANSPORT COSTS ST CREDIT UNION PROF SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL BUILDING INSPCT TRANSPORT COSTS ENGINEERING SERV TRANSPORT COSTS FIRE SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS PARK MAINT TRANSPORT COSTS PATROL SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS 10,288.02* 947.03 947.03* 3,000.00 3,000.00* 9,529.68 9,529.68* 430.92 430.92* 1,500.00 1,500.00* 675.00 675,00* 36.00 31.50 67.50* 1,706.00 1,706.00* 214.31 214.31* 108.90 108.90* 184.78 84.52 269.30* 158.05 158.05* 1,083.00 1,083.00* 172.00 86.00 258.00* 1,201.61 1,201.60 2,403.21* 89.50 130.00 219.50* 216.34 216.34* 504.00 504.00* 12.00 12.00* 2,104.16 2,104.16* 172.50 172.50* 28.42 28.42* 117.78 11.16 31.29 9.35 789.39 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR ACTIVITY 01-JUL-1998 (10:05) DESCRIPTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM SUPERAMERICA <*> T C CONSTRUCTION <*> TAYLOR, BETSY <*> THISWEEK NEWSPAPERS <*> THOM, DAVID D. <*> THOROUGHBRED CARPETS <*> TOLL GAS AND WELDING SUPPLY <*> TOTAL CARE CLEANERS <*> TREVIS TRANSMISSION <*> TROPICAL POOLS <*> TUXALL UNIFORM & EQUIPMENT INC <*> UHL CO. <*> UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE <*> UNITED WAY FUND OF ST. PAUL AR <*> UNITOG RENTAL SERVICES <*> UNUM LIFE INSURANCE CO OF AMER <*> US WEST COMMUNICATIONS <*> USA WASTE SERVICES INC <*> VALLEY PLUMBING <*> VANGUARD CRAFTS <*> VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER <*> WELCHLIN COMMUNICATION STRATEG <*> WELCOME FRIENDS <*> SOLID WASTE STREET MAINT ESCROW FUND TRANSPORT COSTS TRANSPORT COSTS ESCROWS PAYABLE Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL HRA/ECONOMIC PERSONNEL SOLID WASTE DEV PRINT & PUBLISH PRINT & PUBLISH PRINT & PUBLISH Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL LIQUOR BLDG IMPROVEMENT SOLID WASTE OPER MAT & SUPPL POLICE ADMIN OPER MAT & SUPPL SOLID WASTE SWIMMING POOL TRANSPORT COSTS EQUIP MAINT/RENT PATROL SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL LIBRARY SERVICES EQUIP MAINT/RENT COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL FUND FLEET MAl NT SERV SOLID WASTE STREET MAINT GENERAL FUND GEN ACCOUNTING MIS SOLID WASTE GENERAL FUND PRINT & PUBLISH UNITED WAY OPER MAT OPER MAT OPER MAT & SUPPL & SUPPL & SUPPL MEDICAL INS UTILITIES UTILITIES PROF SERVICES PLUMB/HEAT PERM I Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL STREET MAINT PERSONNEL SENIOR CITIZEN RISTOW STRACHAN APPROVALS: OPER MAT & SUPPL PROF SERVICES SPEC ACT SUPPL GAMER. CORDES 104.38 OH 85.25 OH 1,148.60* 4,500.00 OH 4,500.00* 18.00 OH 18.00* 267,82 OH 803.46 OH 74.47 OH 1,145.75* 255.00 OH 255.00* 1,958.13 OH 1,958.13* 5.58 OH 5.58* 36.10 OH 36.10* 2,071.50 OH 2,071. 50* 31.94 OH 31.94* 281.70 OH 281. 70* 290.00 OH 290.00* 1,000.00 OH 1,000.00* 25.00 OH 25.00* 27.21 OH 81.63 OH 163.26 OH 272.10* 221.10 OH 221. 10* 149.75 OH 149.74 OH 299.49* 6,341.54 OH 6,341.54* 65.00 OH 65.00* 73 .96 OH 73.96* 145.99 OH 145.99* 900.00 OH 900.00* 31.95 OH 31.95* 376,454.26* <*> FITCH /Do-> FROM: Mayor, Councilme~rs, City Administrato~ Lee Smick, !It () Planning Coordinator uY TO: SUBJECT: Charleswood Final Plat Approval DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Charleswood development will consist of 83 lots on 32.29 acres located to the south of 195th Street (County Road 64) and to the west of the proposed Pilot Knob Road expansIOn. DISCUSSION The development originally consisted of 110 lots at the preliminary plat stage, however, the Developer reduced the number of lots to 83 lots because of changes in the housing market. The property is zoned R-3 planned-unit development single-family residential. The maximum lot coverage for an R-3 Single-family zone is 25%. The minimum lot size for the development is 10,000 square feet. The smallest lot is 10,000 square feet while the largest is 20,533 square feet and the average lot size in the development is 12,100 square feet. Lot widths in the development range from 70 feet to over 120 feet. The developer has proposed minimum setbacks slightly different from the City guidelines: Front Yard: Street Side Yard: House Side Yard: Garage Side Yard: Rear Yard: 20 feet 20 feet 10 feet 5 feet 20 feet The development will contain two accesses to the north onto 195th Street. Street widths will measure 32 feet from curb to curb within a 60 foot right-of-way. The street patterns will be curvilinear and continue in the same fashion as the developments to the north. The Metropolitan Council approved the MUSA expansion in February of 1998 allowing this project to continue past the preliminary plat stage. The Charleswood preliminary plat CitlJ of Farmint)ton 325 Oak Street · Farmington, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fax (612) 463.2591 was approved February 10th at the Planning Commission and February 17th at the City Council. The City Council approved a conditional use permit for grading for the development on June 1 st to allow the Developer to grade 36.16 acres on the site. . The City Planning Coordinator and City Engineer have reviewed the Final Plat and have determined the following: 1. The Water Board needs a lot in this plat for a future water supply well. Lot I Block 1 has been identified as being most practical for both the City and the Developer. It is understood that if the City obtains this lot, the Developer will be compensated for the lot. The amount of compensation will be negotiated and the transaction will be a part of the Development Contract. 2. 195th Street (County Road 64) will need to be improved as part of this project. The improvements will need to be constructed as a City or County project, with the Developer participating in the costs of the improvements. The terms of the Developers participation in the costs of the improvements will be a part of the Development Contract. 3. The major engineering issues on the site have been resolved. 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. 4. The Developer reimburses the City for all engineering, administrative, legal and SWCD costs. 5. The Developer agrees to furnish the City one (1) reproducible and one (1) eight and one-half inch by eleven inch (8 W' x 11") reproducible copy of the filed plat in accordance with Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3 (E) of the City Code. ACTION REQUESTED Recommend approval of the Charleswood Final Plat subject to the conditions identified in the attached Engineering Division's June 5th letter. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING FINAL PLAT AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT CHARLESWOOD 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 6h day of July, 1998 at 7:00 P,M, Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the fmal plat of Charleswood is now before the Council for review and approval; and WHEREAS, a public hearing ofthe Planning Commission was held on the 13th day of January, 1998 after notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City and proper notice sent to surrounding property owners, and said hearing was continued to February 10, 1998; 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: 1. The Water Board needs a lot in this plat for a future water supply well. Lot I Block 1 has been identified as being most practical for both the City and the Developer. It is understood that if the City obtains this lot, the Developer will be compensated for the lot. The amount of compensation will be negotiated and the transaction will be a part of the Development Contract. 2. I95th Street (County Road 64) will need to be improved as part of this project.. The improvements will need to be constructed as a City or County project, with the Developer participating in the costs of the improvements. The terms of the Developers participation in the costs of the improvements will be a part of the Development Contract. 3. The major engineering issues on the site have been resolved. 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. 4. The Developer reimburses the City for all engineering, administrative, legal and SWCD costs. 5. The Developer agrees to furnish the City one (1) reproducible and one (1) eight and one-half inch by eleven inch (8 Yz" x II") reproducible copy of the filed plat in accordance with Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3 (E) of the City Code. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 6th day of July, 1998. Mayor Attested to the _ day of July, 1998. City Administrator TO: Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public W orkslCity Engineer SUBJECT: Charleswood Final Plat DATE: June 5, 1998 The engineering staff has reviewed the Charleswood Development plans relative to final plat issues. Engineering staff recommends approval of the plat with the following comments: 1. The Water Board needs a lot in this plat for a future water supply well. Lot I Block 1 has been identified as being most practical for both the City and the Developer. It is understood that if the City obtains this lot the Developer will be compensated for the lot. The amount of compensation will be negotiated and the transaction will be a part of the Development Contract. 2. 19Sth Street (County Road 64) will need to be improved as part of this project. The improvements will need to be constructed as a City or County project, with the Developer participating in the cost of the improvements. The terms of the Developers participation in the costs of the improvements will be a part of the Development Contract. 3. The major engineering issues on the site have been resolved. 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 Respectfully submitted, ~)11~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file I CitlJ, of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street. Farminijton, MN 55024. (612) 463-7111 · FaJr (612) 463-2597 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ (j ..' ...~ ..,II.. nlll ,u- .... }:4 ~,I IIj rh II' Jlt .1. .~. ij1l !i ,1' I' 11 : U q' UJI ,.. I I~S 1iI,11 or... "" "" -, 0/. -.......-'\ "'..........._ ~4.tI'~1 3 .1Z.'y" N It A WI ~ ~ t ~ I 1 ~ ... r ~ I ~ 1 .. . R ! ~ "'.'" . ,.. Vt""..,..,....,..........., J.slUT.- N I leOll'I Jf:~:'''!.W ~.#" 'liaj :..,~ 1!.'1 iii" J !~ 1~ ) ~J I I.. I ~I" ! ! ! !1 J ..' ... f~~ ,'...s '.~;1 ..~ ~ ) ~ II .. ... tlol S" M a ::h II i' ~t , , 8 ~.. ~ :z ~ ... ~, ( "II ..... .. ~I .ell j 111 ~ ~.. V 16 #~II9I ~9v ZI9 ~.LS3MOIN ~.LSN::I!) It ~ I S ! I ... 1 . S ~ ~ . .. 8 4 ~ , ..-' Q,- c ~J . . ~ if .. Il J q. ., ::: 1. If " . ~ I ".a ",! .n~' _ .. ,.....ar."~~""........__.'\ ...,1 ~'~/rl :J .ft...... N ..." 11-; ,,( I!-!= __II. lilT., ,.......... - ------.;..a---' ,'/... ,~/ ,'1.' ..,.. ;:.' . ..;.,-, ,',". /l' /i/ .'i~j ,"~:' .il /;y ~I ../..'#,. ~ ,f' · .I,"i ..., '::0,,7 1'-,'1 ,.~,:/ I .' I~~ I /1.1 I .'11 ' :',,'/ iF 'e ..1 I I i~ ......::. \ ,. ./: " 1 .~ ... /:~! ...., -:~~i~:f , ,;1 ; ::;- :.-': i.,' :--:.~}~}~,-~- . II \ ,'I, j .J ,,.' ',;:/ ~:. ..~ .JX' , '.~ . ..;::~r";: ./ fl,if.; Ii ...,. I, /.~ (lit '\~:j .:i/ ':lj /.~;' .~ ~~ . 'I ~ /;r ..... _t "":,,,,"- 7*:','-."1- /,-- /1/ .. ;f II · J · . . .~ .. · II : ~ : ~ 1'2 ~ . t. I ~ -, 4 i) ", ~ ~ ~ II .. ... , ~ : ~ 'I : ~ J t ...- ........ . i ...~ ..... <If ,. 8 i , j! "':i' 9t:vI .. ... ?fI....,. ... ... . 1.0I.P..-" \ ,.,.It ~~. .;~l all' 1Il ~ . t; l II ... A ~ i ~ . 8 , ~ ~ I ..- I p 'v'.. i .-' .....: (.-......- :........"""...,....~ - - i.. ,,,..... - - T - - ~- -- "~,, IT ~ v. .z ..,... ...-.' ~--- "', t;r '~Id ,.c d a1.!1 .,,1 a: ~ ::l ;( ~ II I , ~ " , ;..;" r"I.Il.'lI/ II --!..:t: - ---r:;: ,:/- ~ :~I 3~! _., 96-9 -9 .LSdMOIN ~V.LSN3!):A8 lN3S Q o <:) 3t .t I ~~~ ..... an Q:l ~ o V /~ #~1191 ~9v G19 ..., - 1Il ~I l ~ . iJ 1 i J I P' I I I ~u I 1 !! 1 Ii: c I i*=' D5 - ---..I ! HI ... ."", "---l" t flI t : _I 1 111-4 .ofj J I !f: I I 11~' I I __ l~'..JratII. ~ ~ a I I e: ~ !Ta fa14 "~ i~"t ~Il th ;1' 1"1 11.. "a. .I)l! Illl .11"11 illt 1 . ~ . . " J. J ,- ~ ,.. :t~ ~\ .... ~t ~; ~I l~ h . u I ~ II !oJ .! e.. "II I. -,'-- ," :t B 1 :i j I :rf I ~. 1 II I ; t -~ S-I! tA I. I II -----. ."" "..- -- -- ..~ -. -- --"" ..- ---, ~." I ., ff .ff ~ .. (AI ".1.8 IU$(iI) rP 'ON GI . --- ,,',eU 11' ..., ....... .... ~ .. ...., . ~:'!i 1I~~6~) ,.9 .Ot.': .a~ U.. ., . (',~i . J I . I -r::I/ACt':JJ. ....lS3MaIN ~lSN3D · 91:vl · 96-8 -9 · lS3MO I N ~ lSN3D: Ag OOS Q" .i !f 1 li~ :r I I J'i ~j I I ..... ,,~'J. I ..... .. e1l I I 'U El J .! hi >j;' I . ~ I .:~ ~..1 !~ ; ~i .. I '!oI....... :i! c . I ~p I 1;1. 11 ,- J \... Z .... t I f ." . . i 4=F-:~l ! 1& ~- J lit ,. ill I .:t tt; .. I '---1 fi J. ~ ~. ,Ii . 1- I r. ~l b I ~ ~ ;~ .iJ. :1 i I ~]l_ SI ! ",~ ill- l ::!~ J j II I It i'l~ !I,~ f I JI- h I .u ~Il I .. it "In I III J ,U ! Ild .. I 1 I ~ I Q 0 0 ~ i . ~ ....: I,q.. Ii ~ ! \') ~ (.) I/) t- l' " ... ;0.- I/) i~ . I' .. a, I P) 1<< , I ~ c. ~ I ~ :JJ1 iJN(HI .1 .- - ~- - ......;;;;;-- III tit ~ I, << ,. ..----, r--" ......., I "'-'-1 r----' ,__811_, I II II J I II I I II II II II I '\ , .11 .11 .1 I "" , I Cl I. 1II1 ill. f- .1. .. Q ~ !; ~ l~ .. 1~ " HI- - r. I II II , I 1 , I " I .11 'II .11 '"' I I II I: "- II II JI I , II " 'I ____J L______J l.., _.J 1..___ _J ",.___~ 1..._ -.- _.- ....-_"'__1!. " . (M 'JJ1 H1$<<) ,g "ON OJ l:X) II I --- ('p'IS'" ~ .."""'...,......~ 3 .W.I.'''' N --- I . (~~t ..... H1.~6 :.1 .,-[: "1',.' 'C~ '~- . ....~ ~.. "'., I r---'----' '. I nt/tIC$. II ij I tJ r----- i.':1 ., 1\: I 7iflIAO.':Jl ~ /~ #:1191 S9~ G19 ....lSdMOI N ~v lSNctD LI:rl : 9{)-9 -9 lSdMOIN ~VlSNctD:A9 lNdS TO: City Planning Commission FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Continued Hearing - Charleswood Schematic PUD Amendment! Preliminary Plat and Plan Approval DATE: February 10, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission continued the public hearing on this item at the January 13, 1998 to allow a number of concerns and issues to be addressed. The following is a description as to how these issues were addressed. Several of the issues were related to the overall Schematic Plan for the entire PUD and several were related to the first phase which is seeking Preliminary PUD and Plat approval. DISCUSSION Schematic PUD Amendment County Requested Traffic Study - A traffic study has been completed by Genstar and is currently being reviewed by City and County staff. The final version was received by City on Friday, February 6th and is attached. Since this is a County requirement, their acceptance of the study will be a recommended condition of the preliminary plat approval. Right of Way Issues - Genstar has had additional discussions with County regarding this issue. Genstar is agreeable to the dedication of the additional 15' easement along CSAH 31 for a future trail. They are also resolving the issue of the purchase or swap of land be acquired by the County from Mr. Murphy and Mr. Wenzel. Obtaining this land to provide for the needed c~e~o~s }p CSAH 31 should also be a condition of the preliminary plat approval,... 'This" addl~aJ. land is needed to provide the southerly connection to CSAH 31 which was recommended by staff. It is also the intention of the City and the developer that this connection will line up the extension of 203rd Street which will be extended by BDi Development as part of their development of the Bernard Murphy property on the west side of the new CSAH 31 I CitlJ. of FarminiJton Environment Assessment Worksheet - Genstar's engineer has completed an EA Wand it is currently in its 30 day review and comment period. Any findings that may be presented and adopted by the City will have to be addressed in the Final Plat. 325 Oalc Street · FarminlJtonJ MN 5502~ . (6 72) ~63.77 77 · FaK (6 72) ~63.2597 MUSA - An update of the status of the MUSA expansion for this area will be presented at the meeting on February lOth. Preliminarv PUD PlanlPreliminarv Plat Issues (First Phase) Improvement of 195th Street - City staff and representatives of Genstar did discuss this issue with County Highway Department staff. The County is willing to pay 55% of the improvement cost of this section of road. Genstar and the City will have to determine how the balance of the improvement cost is funded. The County was optimistic that the improvements could be done yet this year and the work could be performed by a County or City contractor. Improvement of this street is also a condition of the approval of this plat. Sidewalks and Trails - Genstar has indicated that they are willing to install sidewalks along the local or neighborhood collector streets in the development as well as install a trail at the location shown on the Concept (Schematic) Plan. The cost of trail will be credited towards the Parkland dedication requirements for the development. Stub Streets - There are several streets that are shown to be terminate at the phase line. The Developer will be required to either provide temporary turnarounds at the end of these streets or has indicated that they may choose to drop the stub portions of these streets at the final plat stage. Engineering Issues and Concerns - All of the issues that were identified by the City Engineer is his memo dated January 8, 1998 will need to be addressed before the Final Plat approval or during the preparation of the plans and specifications for the construction of the public improvements in this subdivision. Approval of preliminary plat will need to be contingent on the City Council ordering the Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer Project. ACTION REOUESTED Recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Schematic PUD for Charleswood and recommend approval of the PUD Preliminary Plan and Preliminary Plat for the first phase of the development subject to the conditions contained in this memo as well as the City Engineer's memo dated 1/8/98. To: Farmington Planning Commission From: Dave Olson, Community Development Director and Michael Schultz, Planning Division Date: January 13, 1998 RE: Charleswood Schematic Amendment and Preliminary Plat Approval Planning Department Review Applicant: Genstar Land Company Midwest 11000 West 78th St., Suite 201 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (612) 942-7844 Referral Comments: 1. City Engineering Division 2. Dakota County Plat Commission 3. Soil and Water Conservation District Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Schematic Layout 3. Existing Conditions 4. Preliminary Plat 5. Preliminary Grading Plan 6. Preliminary Planting Plan Schematic P.D.D. Plan Amendment Proposed Amendment: The developer has made changes to the schematic plan concerning the road layout and design per City Staff recommendation. A south road off of future CSAH 31 / Pilot Knob Rd. has been added for emergency access and traffic flow purposes into the development. This road eventually will align with the proposed intersection on Co. Rd. 31 and tie in with proposed development on the east side of the road; which will run through the Pine Knoll neighborhood and to Akin Rd. I CitlJ. of Farmin9ton 325 Oalc Street · FarmintJton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fax (612) 463-2591 Preliminary Plat for Phase I Proposed Development: Location of Property: Area Bounded By: Existing Zoning: Lot Coverage and Sizes: Setbacks: Streets and Accesses: The first addition of the Charleswood PUD proposes 110 single-family lots on 41.5 acres. Density level will be 2.65 units/acre. . SW comer of future County Road 31 and 195th Street West (south of Troy Hills and Akin Park). Single-family residential development to the north, PUD. designated high density residential / commercial and medium density / high density residential land to the east (also part of the Charleswood PUD), continued single-family residential to the south and agricultural land to the west. R-3 Planned Unit Development The maximum lot coverage for an R-3 Single- family zone is 25%. The minimum lot size for the development is 10,000 sq. ft. The smallest lot is 10,000 sq. ft., the largest is 18,170 sq. ft. (lot breakdown shown below) Lot widths in Phase I (measured 20 feet from the front property line) range from 70 feet to over 130 feet. All attempts have been made to make bluff lots 80 feet wide at a point 30 to 35 feet from the front property line. Lot Sizes Total in Phase I 10 to 11,999 sq. ft. 48 12 to 13,999 sq. ft. 46 14 to 15,999 sq. ft. II 16,000+ sq. ft. 5 The developer has proposed minimum setbacks slightly different from the City guidelines: Front Yard: 20 feet Street Side Yard: 20 feet House Side Yard: 10 feet Garage Side Yard: 5 feet Rear Yard: 20 feet The Phase I site will contain two accesses to the north onto 195th St. W. Street widths will measure 32 feet from curb to curb within a 60 foot right-of- Water & Sewer: Sidewalks: Topography: Wetland: Flood Plain: Developer Added Amenities: way. The street patterns will be curvilinear and continue in the same fashion as the developments to the north. There are no cul-de-sacs within this first phase. See attached City Engineer Comments Sidewalks or trails will be recommended along all local collector routes per City Code requirements. Site topography is generally rolling except for some steep bluff areas along the easterly site boundary overlooking a small valley running between the low / medium density residential parcel and the medium / high density residential parcel and along the southeastern boundary of the low / medium density parcel over looking the wetland area. Elevation changes range from 910 in the southern wetland area to 970 in the northwestern most portion of the site. Wetland areas do exist within the PUD but are not found within the first addition of development. The flood plain does not effect the first phase of this development. The developer has attempted to keep all development out of the flood plain areas within the PUD. Entrance monuments and medians are proposed to be constructed at all entrances to the project. These monuments will serve as the gateway to the project. The Everest Path entrance will contain a center median and be landscaped. The developers intentions are to complement the monuments and alert vehicle drivers that they are entering a residential area. These amenity items will be maintained by a home owners association. Landscaped cul-de-sac islands are also proposed to be constructed in the center of all cul-de-sacs. These too will be maintained by a home owners association. The City is currently reviewing this proposal; there are no cul-de-sacs proposed for the first phase of development. Parkland and Trails: The Farmington Park & Recreation Board reviewed the proposed locations of parks on the site at the schematic plan level and has initially approved the locations. The developer has stated that they would install playground equipment in the parks to complete the park and would designate this contribution as their park dedication requirement. The Parks & Recreation Board has agreed to this dedication. The City will be requiring that the developer construct the trails and be credited that cost toward their park dedication. Additional Comments This area of development has been identified as part of the City's application to the Metropolitan Council for additional MUSA. The City will need to construct a trunk sewer line to service this area of the city. Final plat for the first phase of Charles wood will not occur until MET Council has granted the City the additional required MUSA. Westwood Professional Services are completing the required EA W (environmental assessment worksheet) for the development and will be finalized within the next several months. ., Recommendation Staff is recommending that the public hearing be opened and that comments from both the public and Commission members be taken. However based on the number of issues that have been identified by City, County and Soil and Water Conservation District staff, we along with the developers, recommend that the public hearing be continued to the February 10th Planning Commission meeting to allow time for these issues to be addressed. TO: David Olson, Community Development Director FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Engineering Review for Charleswood DATE: January 8, 1998 The engineering division has completed the review of the plans submitted by Genstar Land Company for Charleswood. Following are comments regarding the engineering issues that need to be 'resolved. General/Schematic Plan 1. Dakota County is requiring submittal of a traffic study delineating the projected traffic that will be generated by the development. City approval of the plat will be contingent upon the satisfaction of Dakota County requirements for the plat. 2. The concept land use plan shows access points to the proposed CSAH 31 through property not currently owned by Genstar. It is recommended that this situation be resolved before final plat approval. 3. An additional I5-feet of right-of-way will need to be dedicated along the proposed CSAH 31 for the purpose of future widening and trail construction. The County will need to be contacted to find out if a right-of-way dedication will be required along I95th Street. 4. The paved portion of I95th Street currently ends at Everest Path. I95th Street will need to be paved to the westerly boundary of the Genstar property. It is recommended that discussions be initiated with the County regarding this issue. 5. The southerly east-west road that provides access to the proposed Pilot Knob Road will require wetland and floodplain mitigation. There is ample opportunity on this site for mitigation. A trunk watermain will need to be routed along this alignment when it is constructed. 6. Staff has reviewed the southerly road connection to the property to the west of Charleswood and at this time it appears that this one connection is sufficient to serve the property to the west, however, in the future when the southwest comer is platted, this issue may need to be revisited. 7. It is recommended that Genstar sign an agreement waiving any and all procedural and substantive objection to the assessments for the construction of CSAH 31 including any claim CitlJ. of FarminfJ.ton 325 Oak Street · FarmintJton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fax (612) 463.2591 that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property. The property would be assessed for the CSAH 31 realignment through the Development Contracts. . 8. It will be necessary to designate several well sites throughout the project Plat The plans submitted for the plat are preliminary and a detailed engineering review will be performed when construction plans are submitted. Refer to the City of Fannington Submittal Checklist for Subdivisions when submitting construction plans. Review of construction plans cannot commence without a complete submittal. The construction plans will need to be substantially complete before final plat approval. The following comments are based on the preliminary plans and other issues may be raised during construction plan review. Construction Plans will need to be 24" x 36". Streets 1. The streets need to meet the design criteria as set forth in the City's Standard Engineering Plates and the City's Development Manual which includes a 30 mph design. The first curve on Street C and the curves on Street G as well as curves in other phases of the project do not appear to meet the 30 mph design criteria. 2. It appears that it may be desirable to extend Street "F" to the cul-de-sac to eliminate a phase line and avoid future construction debris tracking onto Street "F" during the construction of the cul-de-sac. 3. The Developer has requested that the street widths in the project be narrower than current City Standard. Per City standard, the extension of Everest Path and Street B would be 38-feet wide and the remaining streets would be 32-feet wide. Under the Developer's proposal, Everest Path and Street B would be 32-feet \\-ide and the remaining streets would be 28-feet wide. Staff has spent a considerable amount of time reviewing whether or not the City should allow narrower streets. The following factors were considered in making a recommendation: · The trend in communities around the Metro area is towards narrower streets. Lakeville builds residential neighborhood streets and neighborhood collectors both at 32-feet wide. · Narrower streets tend to encourage slower speeds. People tend to drive at a speed that reflects their comfort level. The wider the street, the more comfortable it is to go faster. It is desirable to keep the speeds in residential neighborhoods down. · A narrower street will save cost to the City and adjacent property owners in the future. A narrower street will cost less to seal coat and reconstruct. 2 . The developer is proposing to keep the right-of-way of the streets at 60-feet, which is lO-feet wider than required for a low volume residential street and standard for a high volume residential street. Narrowing the streets while keeping or increasing the right-of-way width will provide more green space. . Narrower streets will require less plowing and the wider boulevards provide for more snow storage. . It could be argued that wider streets would provide more room for pedestrians and bicyclists, however, if there is a corresponding increase in the speed of the traffic with a wider street, that benefit may be canceled out. A sidewalk is required on one side of the higher volume residential streets which provides a safer pedestrian area. Staff recommends that the streets in the project be 32-feet wide for both the low volume and high volume residential streets. It is not recommended to allow 28-foot wide streets. It is staffs opinion that parking needs to be allowed on at least one side of the street and a 28-foot wide street with parking on one side would be too constrictive. The benefits of narrower streets as outlined above is the basis for staff s recommendation to allow the high volume residential streets to be 32-feet wide rather than 38-feet wide per current City standard. 4. Temporary turn-arounds need to be provided at the dead-end streets for fire and snow removal vehicles. 5. Everest Path on the north side of 195th Street needs to be shown. ~ 1. The trunk sewer location sho\\TI on the plans will need to be revised to show the alignment proposed in the feasibility study. The alignment on the plan is shown east of the alignment that is currently being proposed. 2. Before approval of construction plans, an overall plan of the sewer system for the PUD will need to be submitted. Water I. The water connection sho\\n north of 195th at Everest does not depict the existing watermain as shown on City base maps. The connection cannot be made as shown. 2. The water main on the west side of the site will need to be extended and looped into the 16-inch main on the north side of I 95th Street. 3 3. Hydrant coverage appears to be adequate, subject to the fire department's review. Hydrant finders will be required on all Hydrants. 4. Valves will need to be added on the construction plans. To isolate any line, a maximum of three valves should be shut off affecting a maximum of 10 homes. Grading I. An overall grading concept for the entire low/medium density part of the development will need to be submitted prior to construction plan approval. 2. A legend with type of house style and grade difference for garage floor to walkouts or lookouts need to be on the plan. 3. Contours need to be shown to a minimum of ISO-feet into adjacent property or to the centerline of the adjacent street. 4. Lot dimensions and elevations at lot corners will need to be on the plan. 5. Existing and proposed easements need to be shown on the plans. Drainage should be directed along lot lines within drainage and utility easements. Any drainage that flows from one lot onto an adjacent lot must be within a drainage easement. 4f * 6. Emergency overflows must be established for catchbasins in the street and rear lots. Areas along rear lot lines which are below the emergency overflow elevation need to be designated as a drainage easement on the fmal plat. Emergency overflows should be labeled and shown with spot elevations and drainage arrows. '.~ 7. Emergency overflow elevations for catchbasins and ponds shall be a minimum of I-foot below the lowest surrounding floor elevation. 8. Any issues raised by the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District will need to be addressed. Storm Sewer 1. All requirements set forth in the Surface Water Management Plan for developments and design will need to be met. 2. Ponding and pipe sizing calculations will be reviewed when the full submittal is received with the construction plans. 4 3. Catchbasin spacing shall not exceed 400-feet on any road or swale and water shall be picked up before it enters an intersection. Catchbasins need to be added at the end of all stub streets to control erosion and protect the road from washouts. 4. The storm sewer in block 4 should be re-routed so that street drainage is not routed though the backyards of block 4. 5. Ordinary high-water elevations must be shown for all wetlands. If the ordinary high-water elevation has not been established, provide the normal water elevation with a date indicating when the water elevation was shot. High-water and Normal water levels are needed for the pre and post development conditions for the existing pond south of 195th Street. The line around the existing pond south of 195th Street needs to be clarified. 6. The northeast pond, pond F-P5.1O, will need to be two-celled. There is a substantial amount of runoff from the north that is routed through this pond. If the runoff from the project is routed directly into the main pond, the water quality benefits will be minimal since the detention time of the water will be short. 7. The outlet from pond F-P5.1O and the piping to pond F-P5.12 will need to be constructed in conjunction with this project. Pond F- P5.1 0 does not currently have an outlet. The additional runoff generated from this development could potentially cause flooding in the development to the north. 8. The design of the outlet for the westerly pond will need to incorporate adequate erosion control measures and will need to be designed in such a way as to fit in with the trunk line proposed for that area. The adjacent property owners will need to be contacted and any issues surrounding the concentration of this runoff onto their property (if any) will need to be addressed. It should be noted that the City is currently in the process of updating the Standard Detail Plates and the updated plates will need to be incorporated in the construction plans. Respectfully submitted, ~7n~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file 5 /Oh FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ () Lee Smick, ()()I Planning CoordinatoiJ TO: SUBJECT: Charleswood Development Contract DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Development Contract for Charleswood has been drafted in accordance with the conditions presented at the July 6, 1998 City Council meeting. DISCUSSION The Charleswood Development Contract requires the following conditions to be agreed upon: . the Developer enter into the Development Contract; . the Developer provide necessary security in accordance with the terms of the Agreement; . the Developer signs the Development Contract; . the Developer participates in the costs for the construction of 19Sth Street adjacent to the plat. It is understood that Dakota County will participate in the funding of the construction per their transportation policy, The Developer shall be responsible for the remainder of the costs of the construction; and . the Developer provides a lot for a future water supply well. It is understood that the Water Board will negotiate with and compensate the Developer for the provided lot. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the execution of the Charleswood Development Contract and adopt a resolution authorizing its signing, contingent upon approval by the Engineering Division and City Attorney. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator I CitlJ of FarmintJ.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmington, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fait (612) 463.2591 RESOLUTION NO. APPROVlNGDEVELOPMENTCONTRACT - Charleswood- 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 6th day of July, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introd~ced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. _ , the City Council approved the final plat of Charleswood contingent upon the following conditions: I. The Developer enters into the Development Contract. 2. The Developer provides necessary security in accordance with the terms of the Contract. 3. The Developer signs the Development Contract. 4, The Developer participates in the costs for the construction of 19Sth Street adjacent to the plat. It is understood that Dakota County will participate in the funding of the construction per their transportation policy. The Developer shall be responsible for the remainder of the costs of the construction. S. The Developer provides a lot for a future water supply well, It is understood that the Water Board will negotiate with and compensate the Developer for the provided lot. 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 6th day of July, 1998. Mayor Attested to the _ day of July, 1998, City Administrator DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AGREEMENT dated this day of , by and between the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation (CITY) and Astra Genstar Partnership, L.L.P., a Limited Liability Partnership (DEVELOPER). 1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for Charleswood (also referred to in this Development Contract [CONTRACT or AGREEMENT] as the PLAT). The land is legally described as: That part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 114, Range 20, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying northerly and westerly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the northwest comer of said Southeast Quarter of Section 23; thence South 00 degrees 07 minutes 43 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of said Southeast Quarter of Section 23, a distance of 1008.99 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 89 degrees 52 minutes 17 seconds East, a distance of 238.55 feet; thence North 54 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of I 1 1.58 feet; thence South 30 degrees 34 minutes 34 seconds East, a distance of 182.07 feet; thence South 59 degrees 25 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of 18.00 feet; thence South 30 degrees 34 minutes 34 seconds East, a distance of 195.00 feet; thence North 59 degrees 25 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 525.00 feet; thence North 30 degrees 34 minutes 34 seconds West, a distance of 58.12 feet; thence North 60 degrees 35 minutes 59 seconds East, a distance of 280.07 feet; thence southeasterly, along a non-tangential curve, concave to the northeast, having a central angle of 4 degrees 32 minutes 04 seconds, a radius of 657.94 feet, for an arc length of 52.07 feet, the chord of said curve bears South 31 degrees 40 minutes 03 seconds East; thence North 56 degrees 03 minutes 55 seconds East, not tangent to said last described curve, a distance of 199.53 feet; thence south 45 degrees 32 minutes 56 seconds East, a distance of20.11 feet; thence North 44 degrees 27 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 135.00 feet; thence South 45 degrees 32 minutes 56 seconds East, a distance of 46.86 feet; thence North 44 degrees 27 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 210.00 feet; thence North 45 degrees 32 minutes 56 seconds West, a distance of 266.96 feet; thence North 55 degrees 13 minutes 27 seconds West, a distance of204,60 feet; thence North 00 degrees 22 minutes 05 seconds West, a distance of261.14 feet to the north line of said southeast Quarter of Section 23 and said line there terminating, 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 @ the Developer participates in the costs for the construction of 195th Street adjacent to the plat. It is understood that Dakota County will participate in the funding of the construction per their transportation policy. The Developer shall be responsible for the remainder of the costs of the construction that the County does not participate in. The improvements to 195th Street will be constructed under a separate contract between the City and the County. ; and @ The Developer reserves Lot I, Block I for purchase by the Water Board for a future water supply well. The cost to the Water Board will be negotiated between the Water Board and the Developer. 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 - Zoning/Development Map Plan E - Wetlands Mitigation as required by the Plan F - Final Street and Utility Plans and Specifications 1 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. Zoninl!/Development Map. The Developer shall provide the City 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 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 eng~eer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance~n 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. 2 8. Ownership of Improvements. 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 fmal 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. 10. Gradine: Plan. The plat shall be graded and drainage provided by the Developer in accordance with Plan B and the approved grading conditional use permit approved June I, 1998, 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 ~EJX. the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion immediatel~e City will endefvor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developdr'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 $ 425.00 Erosion and Sediment Control fee 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 $ 1615.00 based upon the number of acres in the plat. 12. Landscapine:. 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 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 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 fInal 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 3 to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent pennitted 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 Manag:ement Fee. The Developer shall pay an area stonn water management charge of $ 130,809.00 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. Stonn 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, It is understood that the Developer will be constructing a portion of Pond F-P5.1O, a trunk facility as identified in the City's Surface Water Management Plan. The Developer will be credited for pond construction when the cost of the pond construction is agreed upon between the City and the Developer, 16. Wetland Conservation and Mitig: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 Chare:e. The Developer shall pay a water area charge of $ 50,114.00 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 $ 39,010.00 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 Chare:e. The Developer shall pay a sanitary sewer trunk area charge of $ 50,050.00 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, ~h~ 20. Park Dedication. The DeveloPer shall pay a park dedication fee of $ 60,544.00 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 4 429.081. 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. It is understood that the above Park Dedication Fee or a portion thereof my be credited or returned to the Developer upon the City's acceptance of land dedicated in future phases. 21. Sealcoatin2. In lieu of assessing sealcoating three years from completion of the road construction, the Developer agrees to pay a fee of $ 4565.00 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. ~2. GIS Fees. The Developer is responsible for a Government Information System fee of $ 2,075.00 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. Outlot A will be dedicated to the City. 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 shall have the right to clean streets per 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 $ 1,204,266. 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 for any violation of this Agreement or Default of the Contract upon compliance with the notifIcation process in Paragraph 30. The amount of the security was calculated as follows: GradinglErosion Control $ N/A* ~uments $ 20,750 Sanitary Sewer $ 257,500 ........, St. Lights/Signs $ 37,500 Water Main $ 196,250 Blvd. Trees $ 22,500 Storm Sewer $ 212,500 Blvd. Sodding $ 13,750 Street Construction $ 345,000 Wetland Mitigation $ N/A Two Years Principal and Interest on Assessments $ 98,516 This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. * Security for the grading portion of the project has been furnished through the grading permit issued previous to this agreement. 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 5 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 hannless 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. ..f: 2~~ures. 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! Trees. 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, ~, 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, material men, 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. 6 f- F. The City has determined through the B~~ion of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet that an Environmental Impact Statement for the project is not required.~wever, if 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. 1. The Developer shall obtain a Wetlands Compliance Certificate from the City. K. Upon breach of the terms of this Agreement, the City may draw down the Developer's cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit as provided in paragraph 26 and 30 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. 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. 7 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: Mr, Peter Gualtieri Genstar Land Company Midwest 11000 West 78th Street Suite 201 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 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: SIGNATURE PAGE Gerald Ristow, Mayor John F. Erar, City Administrator DEVELOPER: Astra Genstar Partnership L.L.P. By: Genstar Land Company Midwest By: Peter Gualtieri Its: Managing General Partner Drafted by: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 (612) 463-71 I I Its: Vice President 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 , a corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. , 19_by , the of Notary Public 10 jOe TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Dakota County CIP - City Recommendations DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Dakota County has requested the City's input in preparing the County's 1999-2003 CIP. DISCUSSION Currently, the following projects in Farmington are in the 1998 - 2001 County CIP: . 1999: . 2000: . 2001: . 2002: None. CSAH 50, Division to TH 3, Est. City cost = $500,000 None. None. The following projects are in the County CIP but are unscheduled: . CSAH 31, from TH 50 to CSAH 74 . CR 64, from CSAH 31 to TH 3 . CR 64, from CSAH 23 to lf4 mile west of CSAH 31 . CSAH 74, from RR tracks to TH 3 . CSAH 31, traffic signal at 195th Street . CSAH 31, traffic signal at CSAH 50 . CSAH 50, traffic signal at 1 st Street . CSAH 50, intersection improvements at 3rd Street I CitlJ. of Farmin9ton 325 Oak Street · Farmin9ton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fa}l.' (612) 463-2591 Staff has reviewed the CIP and recommends that the Council request that the following projects in Farmington be scheduled in the County's 1999 - 2003 CIP: . · 1999: CR 64, 14 mile west of CSAH 31 to CSAH 31. This project is requested due to the Genstar Development and Genstar would fund the City's share of the costs. . 1999: CR 72, TH 3 to easterly City limits. This project would be part of a turnback agreement between the City and the County, the feasibility report for which has already been before Council. . 2000: CSAH 50, Division to TH 3. This project is currently in the County's CIP. · 2000: CR 64, from CSAH 31 to TH 3. This project is necessary for the development of the Malinsky property and ultimately to provide a vital east-west corridor between CSAH 31 and TH3. The agreement between the City and the County would need to acknowledge that the City would participate only in the costs of the improvements within the City. It is recommended that the Council request that the unscheduled projects remain on the list. BUDGET IMPACT It is currently the County's policy that the costs of the roadway improvements are split 55% County and 45% City. The estimated City participation for the Elm Street project in 2000 is $500,000. The City participation in the remainder of the projects is yet to be determined. ACTION REOUESTED Authorize staff to forward the recommended requests to the County for preparation of the Dakota County draft 1999 - 2003 CIP. Respectfully submitted, ~J11~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file DAKOTA COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 14955 GALAXIE AVENUE. 3RD FLOOR DAVID L. EVER OS, P.E. COUNTY ENGINEER (612) 891-7100 Fax(612l891-7127 APPLE VALLEY. MINNESOTA 55124-8579 May 15,1998 Lee Mann City Engineer City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 SUBJECT: Dakota County Highway CIP 1999-2003 Dear Mr. Mann, Dakota County is currently developing the 1999-2003 Highway CIP. Attached is a copy of the County Highway Department's 1998-2002 CIP. Please review this CIP and return your comments for developing the 1999-2003 CIP by June 30, 1998. This will allow our staff until the middle of July to prepare a draft CIP for submittal to the County Board. This draft will then be sent to each City for review and comment during the months of August and September, I hope that this time frame allows you enough time for staff and City Council review. If you have questions or need explanation on some portion of the current CIP, please feel free to call me at 891-7104. Si"]di/JL Lezlie A. Vermillion Transportation Engineer Ene!. cc: Lou Breimhurst, Physical Development Director Dave Zech, Acting Dakota County Engineer Printed on recycled paper, 20% post-consumer o AN EaUAl OPPORTUNITY EMPlOYER N 8 N co Slco _0> n.= -.. u., ~8 ~ Cl ~ >.. "en Zo 5u u ~en 3:S!! W:l Xu.. ~ X' <.. ..~ ....0 ~u <0:: c::o Clu. Oen <~ w- 1-1- ~~ 0.... <:l e!~ <. ..I- enen ~~ ~~ ritri ... .. :::JW <.. c::< WI- filen u.. >W 1-0:: o~ en ciln "0 ~() Z .....0 ()~ wn. ..,- 00:: o::() n.en W o 5" ~ o 0:: u.. ;:: z W :!: Cl W en iii > < Z ::; Q. ,3~ ",w. "'.....'" -.~ J:: ;;t-~ a:OU wZ m< ::ElIl ~~~ WWa: ~!u wO u..... z4! <",on 4!s:~ m_... o < o 0:: () W .., O. erO Q.Z 0:: < W > ~ ~_::: 01' ::-_~-_:::- ~::.::.:::..::..::.::. c;; =-=.:.:. ~~~ gcicri ,..8:2 ol/i": .. .. .. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~O~NG N~M~ ~~'ici~' N .... U') 10 _ ('I') N . N ." ......C"'I....... 1")"'-- .. .._-.. riMW.... _'"tit..: .... tit .... a~~~~~~a~aaaaaaaa aa lii~:q g8 ~ V't.... lilt - - .. ... ... ~~ o ~ .. OOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ......~M.................................... o ... .. ~ ~ roi ... 000~0~00~00000080 ...... .... ...... tit............ .. ... ~.n II'i oj lS:n:;; ;:Ii .: tit .... .. ooooo~oo~oo~ooo~o ....tIt....~....~......!......~.. ~ ~ g ~ ('1'). tit .. M ... OO~OOOOOO~~,..~OOOO .... .................. - ............ '" ~ S~!~ M ...,. tit ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ lCiott'J.f'l'if"iIli...... Ilit"i ,..: ri t::~~~;;s~ ~~ ~ ~ ....: _- ..".....: ... tit tit lilt tit tilt ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ g2g2gg2~gg2~2g2~2 ....~~~..N~...C~~N~..~~~ ':~f'I'i ~...~......... .:.:.: MMM tit.,. tit ...... >- z w ::E w w a: ~ ~ :i ~..... W 5!E ~~www > ~~.> U~ ~~>>> o~~ ~~..< QWwwz<<< ~~~@~~~~~~w~S~~~~~ .ooo<a:uoo oa:o>-OOO ZOU>-~ u>wzm%~uuo ~~~o!Ew~~ozwwwa:~~~ 4!wwww~~ww~::E~::E~WWW ~zzz~.....",zzz::;.....::;~%Zz w~~~~~~~~~~&~o~~~ Z~~""'~""''''N...~~~~UNNN on ~ on on '" '" 0 ~ t= :r ~ z iii 1il:iJ:: m '" . ul-::E I- -:! 0 i!= '!5a:< W '" :tv) ~o I~Z~J:C")_~ _N.... 1-0 m ~ ::Ec~ 01- "'J::'" ,.r;:.~ ~ III i!=i!=lIl a:<~ ~~~ia:5~~~~~w~0~~lIl <a:. z. O\,)J:: lIlO-""U a:Uo~J::Zui' . <Iii ao_....ao. ~ ~ :: :: ~ ~'~ :! ~ ~ . ~ ..; ~ i ~ f: ~ui~~<~~55~~~i<BB5 II>II>;!l'Hl;;;;;; ::;1il1il~:Slil 2 ~~~~~~~;;;~~~~~~~~Z BBBB~~B5~~~BB~5B5 ~~~~~;~q~~~~~;~qq ~~~~~;;;;;;;;;~IilIil~~~~2Z 00 ~ momemoomomcmoooom s:~~~~~g~g~~s:~~~s:~ -~--------------- EE ~ ~ ~.~ gg~1i _.....("11 ... ... _N !2.::. ~ Ii ... ~~~~~~~~ 2~g~'g;;g2 CIIS"_f")___Gl5 . M.'" Milt ... ~ o 0 00000000 01 51 .. tilt ....,.......w.... MIl ~ roi ;;; .. 00 ... ... 00 ...... 00 .. ... oo~o .....~... o ... ;; ~ ~ ~.~ . '0 . 5!~,..~ ~("'llMN ...... ... ~~~~ 8'2g~ ...CWSN..,. tilt.. tilt tit uiui a: a: ww ~~ 00 ZZ <<Ill .......... ..... <<< ZZZ lillillil o a: w III 8 III 0 ita 0 !!l w<IIlW 0 ~~~ar!!a: Ul:~g:~~ ~ow4!e:~ ~~lllsiSjg ~;:~iiiOlll I-I-I-O~O <<<~>=~ III lil~lil ~~::9s~f}j B555~5 11>...'" N__ .0';''':' "'...- tOO"" ~~~~ o .. o .. 00000000 ...MtIt.......... o ... o .. 00000000 ...,...,.M.,.....,.,... o .. o .. 00000000 ...,................ o .. 00000000 ...MMa.......... o .. 00000000 ...........,......... ~ g .. ~~~~~~~~ 2~g;:;'g;;g2 cP)M_r')_M_CiS ~ ...tIlt ..... ... Q. ~ a: w ll. q ~ !E ~ ::Effi ~ III ww w ti ~~ . 13 O!!l ~~lIl!Z Ii; a: !Zw.....w ~ Z g:~w~~~ U S ~~~~~X! !i < -a:OwQ.~ < 8 ::EO<::E~m ;: ..... S ~1i;~1lJ>;!i ~ \l; <~::Ea:~~lIla: !f u lIlo!Ziil ~:oo:~ III ~ ~zw~l5z!c!>-o >- l!: .....<~w a:m a: III ffi~w>a:~ozu ~ z III Q.!2I:a:lIl - 0 l5~~i3a:<~5! IE ~ < ~ '" ! g !!!!!!!! il if il il ~ ?; ;;i ~ ... z o iii w o '" s: ~ ; ~ o ci '" .. roi ;; N ,.. o ~ ..; ... il ~ o ... ;; o ... 8 ~ ... ~ ... '" :ll ..; '" ... .. .. ,.. ~ 1ii ... ,.. c;; ~ ... ~ ,.; ... ~ ... .... "" o ,.; ... o roi '" ... '" ~ ;;; a: w m ::E W U ~ III W o Z < ..... < m N 8 N . co ;m S:~ u.., >-0. <0 ~ J: o :E ~~ ZCll ::>0 OU U ~CIl ~~ w::> ~II.. iii ~~ I-CIl Z ....0 ~u <0:: 0::0 011.. OCll <~ w- ~I- <~ lnJ: 0.... <::> w< ~Q. <. ~I- CIlCll :tw 0::1- w~ filCll II.. ~w u~ CIl ~~ ~CIl 00 ~u z ~Q UI- wQ. ..,- 00:: o::U Q.CIl w o 6' ~ 0:: II.. ;:: Z w :i: o W III "'~ ~~ :-~ ...... 1r0 W~ ::EUl W...X uz< WWUl C::EU Ul.....J wo< u..JQ. %~g <2Z ~lS:;:) 11l_::E o ~ 0:: U w .., O. 0::0 Q.Z 0:: < W >- NN ::;:g g~ _N ~. vi ...... e ~ ~ ~e 22~2~2~~2~2 ~ ~ ~lii ~ .. .... fI')_ 0 ... ... -- .,. ... .. ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~g ~lii lii~ lii ..... .... tilt.. ... ~~ o' ... .. OOS:!OOOOOOOO "'M~"tlIt""'M""tlIt o ... ;;; ~~ .. 00000000000 M.........._..."'.. ;~~ ~2lii "'~.... tilt rt'J-- .. ~~~~~~~2~~~ g..: g lii lii lii ("IrIS ..." .... V) .,:w ..: tit tit.. ... ... 2~ ~ ~ ~ .. 00 .. .. 00 ... .. 00 .. .. ~~ ori '" ... s:lOOOOOO~OOO 00 0 ~"--"""t:StIJl..4llt .... tit l ~ ..; ..; ... .. ~~~~~~~~ ~~ g!iliig~liiy:i2 ~lii c5...&I')CO"liF_f'6 at... _-"__-tllttlt_-.. .... .. ... ... ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~g~' "':ri':"'-":":f'!,iciM ri_- .,.........,......... ..... <Ill < Z ~~ ~.. Q ZlD ,.:zliilii ..J...WOWlrOUlWZS <uzWz;;lWzzo 1r;:)<Q<0QO<u ;:):;~>~w>u..Jww IrIO"'C"'ZCW...a:1r wZIii'w":~w:;":ww zo ZUlZZ::!UlZZ ~lii5~5!5~"!6~~ ...lI:u...u.........u...... o :8 ~ ;; 5 ~ ~ ~ fl U ::E . 10'" o! '" 10 ... Cb fI);:: ~~::&: 2i:~.;~f')d&lw:i;: ~~~~5~~~~~~ ~~~~,:.~a:.:~....~ GO..JGOz......u...,~, ~!:!:l!~~~H~~~ B~i:!flfl~fli:fli: ~~ ~:::~ ~::! xx"'x:rx"''''x'''x IIII(<N<<<....CC)< flf.l5flljlj55f.l5lj ::~~~Q;:::~S2~ .... ..0.:............0......... N~NfI')C').......C),... ~~ iii""; '" .... ...... ... ~~ ~g -'" ...... ..J < Z o iil !.l ... ... < II: ... Ul Ul ... w'" bl >u ... ii:!!/UlO g~o!!: z!l.<O <..JC:Z ..J<!Zii: XZoii: ~~ulO <fil~fil Li:!ZLi: ",@:c@ X!l.!l.!l. <UlCUl UlZZZ u::><::> ... ,;, ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ .,:_.......,.M ... o ... 000000 .,..,....."'.. li)' iDii'iD 000 .. ... ... 000 ... .. .. s:loo 15...... ~ ... ~~~ g~~ ...... .... "''''ri ... ..~ 10...... 5~g utsl!: __Ul UlUle ww 00 ~ ~ W !l.l3 !5~r:: il5!Z~ Ul::>:C !f~g ~1ll..J UlOQ. ~a:2 OOUl ww>- ~~~ ......::E ..J..J_ <<Ir UlUl!l. III~!~!~~~~ !~ ~ !~!!!! ~~! o ... ~a~ii~ o ... 000000 ...."'.,..... o ... 000000 tlttlttlttlttltM ~~~ 2~~ -....... "''''N ... 000 R' tIltMM ~ i ... 000 '" ... .. 000000 5<00 S< .........,... c:sM.,. c:s g ~ ; 0; ... o ... 000000 ..tlltMtllt..... ~ lii ... ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ _-tlt.,... "".,. ... Q. ~ II: W !l. Q o i: II: fIlW t3~ !!/!f1ll!Z Iii OW~W 8z !!:~!!!~ bl!Z~::! ~ -w!l.::> < ::E::E~lD ~ ~lll>-~ ir ~~~II:~ffi >-~IL~ui: SiDoz~o ffill:!r2j~t.i ~~~~~~ ~ ~ - ... ~ o : ... o ... ~ ..: ;;; ori ... ~ ri .... .... iii ... ~ ~ C> ori .., ... a ::> ~ 8 ..J < o ... ~ !"i 0.... :;;:3 ....... Nori e'" 000520 MtltMts" ori .... ... ~~~~~ lii~g~ tlt tilt tit tit ~~ o ... ;;; 02000 M~"'M'" o ... ;;; ~2 .. 00000 "'tlttlt.... i~ ~~ !!..-) ... ~~~~~ Ilillici .... -.... .......... ..: --.. ...... aaa~~ aa g~ _-N ...... ~~~~~ 1I'i~-c:i~. ........ .... .......... _-_-MM ...... ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ,..;,..;.:..:,..; MtltMMM w ::E > '0 oowill: ~~~~~ >>..Jw:':: Cc"'a:~ ~~~~~ S~o~1I: ....u....~ ~ I~ :-~ ...... 1r0 wZ 11l< ::EUl ~ffi ~::E ::10 u::l ~< ~~ ... .... x < 11 Iii ~~&tl')~ x "xj!:Ul <~"'o:r U) . . ~ ~ ~;:;::,.:8 "'XXIll~ "'<<>'" i:l3fli5! ~~::t5l~ xxxxx <<<<< UlUlUlUlUl uuuuu :;:~~~... . ,. q liilliil::l :R ~~ ~lii _N ...... 00 ... ... 00 ... ... 00 ... .. 00 ...... ~~ y:i~ _N ... ... ~~ lii~ N ... ... .. ..J < Z !2 ~ W Z ~ Z II: ~ Ul Ul ... ... u u W Iii !!/Ul a ll!~o!!: tii~~~ C<"'- ~z5ll! ~~utii :Cfil~fil ~~~ -~~~ -UlOUl II:ZZZ U::><:J ... ~ lii ... ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ _-tltM_tltM ... ~ 000000 MM_"'MM o ... 000000 M"M_M... o ... 000000 tIlt"'''''''tllttlt o ... 000000 tlttlttlltMMtlt o ... 000000 .,. .,. .. tilt tlt .. o ... 000000 tltMMMMtIIt ~ o '" .. ~~~~~~ ggliigs'g ....---CD --...,.....,... ... !l. ~ II: W !l. o o i: a: Ullll u~ ~ !!/~CI)!Z Ul OW..Jw ;:< ; !!:~~~ ts 2 u!Z~::! ~ :c !!!w!l.::> < g ::E::E~lD ~ ..J Olll>-~ ir !I; ~!5~ll!Ulffi ~ ~11l...liilSx ~ S~oz~o Ir a:ll!!r2jZ" < ~!l:!2t:!5~ ~ OUII:<~"" !l. ~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ o ... o ... o ... ~ ori ;;; ... ~ ... g l!: ~ U ~ ~ W fIl ~ ~ ~ ori ;;; ... 6' ;;; ~ ~ e ~ ori 8 .; ... ~ ~ ori ~ ... o ... ~ o ... ;;; o ... o ... ~ ... ~ i' ri ... p;- C> '" ",. .... GO e ~ o ... o ri ... ~ "," II: .... ... ~ ori .... ori ;;; ~ ... U ::> II: Iii Z o U ..J < ... o ... ~ ~ ~ a: W I1l ::E W U W C Ul w !i < ..J < I1l N 8 N CD 81111 ~c u~ >0, <0 ~ J: ~ ~... zm ;:)0 0(.) (.) ~m ~~ W;:) ~IL lii ~...: ...m -'z wO >(.) <0: 0:0 OIL Oen <0 W~ ...... <en t;~ 0-, C(;:) ~a: <. ...... men :Jw <... 0:< w... @en IL ~~ u~ en -'... <m "'0 ~(.) z ...0 (.)i= WQ. ao: 0:(.) Q.en w o 5' ~ 0: IL j::" Z w ~ o w II) ~ 0: (.) W .., O. 0:0 Q.z ~ w > ~~ "'.... ci~ "'.. "'... "':16 e" :i:~ o ... .. 000 .. .. .. ~:i: .. 000 .. .. .. ;~ ~~ !!.c-'i .. ~~5: :;ig ..-. .. ~5:~ ~ ~. .. N .. ~~5: do. ....... ..~ .. ~~~ gg~ ...."'l:S tilt ('\4. N- .. .. ~~ -'~ ...>- 0:0 wZ 1Xl< ~en w... OZ WW O~ m'" wO ~:J -< <- ~~ ~ w Z ~ w 0 000: ~~~ w>lIo: ZOU <w< oJZIXl ~S~ ~..~ ... 0: U z 15~ O-Iii 8":'w ~"lr$ U~~ iSU>- .uj8 ~:E~ IS!! 0;0;:8 :I::I::I: <<< en en en UUU .......... "'r"'r'i' 0;0;:8 ~~~ !!!. ~ ::. 000 .. .. '" 020 "'l:S'" o ... .. o '" ~ ~ '" '" ~ :;i ... '" en en t3 t3 w !!/lI)6 ~tilE ~~~ ~~g; oao: Iii Iii fil~fil ~~~ ~~~ mOll) ZZZ ::><;:) ~ ~ sf '" .. ~~~'~~I ~ ~~~~~ ~ .:"'---- fI)" '" .. ~ sf .. o .. a:i:aaa~ ~ ~ .. o ... o ... o '" ~a~aa~ o ... o ... a~a5:ail o ... aaaa~~ o ... o ... s:aaas:~ ~ o' :8 N ... o .. aaaaa~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ ~. ... ~-~'~~~I ~ ~~~~~ ~ _-tllt..__ rD '" '" ll. lIS 0: W ll. q o Z G: lI)lll ~; ,.; ""~en~ ~ OWoJW 8 lte~~ bi~~l:1 ~ -wOo;:) < ~~~1Xl ~ il'i ~lll>-~ ~ ~ ~;~~Si ~ SijjO~~O Iii O:o:!i:OZti Z ~!U21:~!!! a oua:<~~ oJ < ... ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ;;; o '" o .. ~ o .... ... ~~ ~g ...... "'iii .. ~~ 00 :: .. ... ~a ... ;~ ~~.. .:rr; .. ... -~ ~~ ~~ 0:0 1lI~ ::ell) W!Z lrlw o::e en'" wO uoJ ~~ oJ'" ~~ ~ o ... o ... o .. o .. ~ iii .. ... .. ~ .; Ii '" ~ g ... .. ~ ~ ... w 8 G: ! lI) 5 ld 0: w 8 G: IXl on ... .... en III t3 l3 w !!/U)6 ~tilE ll.<0 oJo:z <~o:: zaG: ~ Iii oio !!!I=!!! 13~l3 ~~~ enoen zzz ::><;:) o ... :I: < B ~ o ... ~ ~ ~ ~ sf '" ... ~ sf .. ~~~~~'I ~~~~~ ..,:........,. ... o .. o .. aaaaisr o .. o .. aaas:s:~ o .. o .. iaaia~ o ... o '" aaaaa~ o .. o .. s:aaaa~ ~ ~ ... .. o .. s:aS:ia~ ~ o ... ... .. ~ sf '" ~~~.~~~ ~~~~~ -....-...,. .. ll. lIS 0: W ll. o ~ G: IIlW o~ wO ... Iii 6ffi~ffi z lEE~~ 8 bi!Z~l:1 ~ -wOo;:) < ::e::e~1Xl ~ olll>-~ ~ ~!!:~ll!U)0: U).J>>-~W ~~",wui:: ..Jijjoz~o O:o:!i:15z' ~&~~~~ NNNNNN ~~~~~~ ~ o ... ~ iii .. ... .. ~ .; ; ... ~ ..- U; '" ~ o ... ... iii .. z o ;:: U ::l 0: ... en z 8 oJ < ... o ... ... ~ ~ g ... ri ... :R ... iii :! ri '" 8 N ... ... ift ... .... '" .. o ... 8 ~ ii .. o '" ~ g ... '" 8 ~ ~- ... .. ~ .. 8 g i ;;; ... ;;; m ... ri .. 8 ~ iii l::! ~ '" a ... ; ..' III ,.: '" 8 g ... co ~ '" 8 N ... .. ti ... ,.: 01 .. ~ 0; 0: w IXl ~ W U w o en w g < oJ < IXl oJ < ... o ... 0: < W >- W > ii: i .. ~.. 1- u! -.. a 9:1 u" ~s ; u u ~.. ~~ "... !ii N l ! ! 1 rl " 'I .. . ...:1 i ci .. i~ E I: ! "". . ii! ; i t. i ! I L f I l t~ ~; ~ :I I: f! ; i t i =1 I i.J h ! i H~ 11 i I HI H : j a! H Ii . ~ i i1i ... . Sj Ii. t .~ i 11 il!if! i~ S st J;lIPlI .1 .;! lif"t; ta I fi ~t~i2!i !! t!sit fift!:! It lIt': i'~Pl":i~ .t!~ Ifl!] ~lli!l .. ~81 NJO J. "1 i ~;tl! !ri fif Ii J ."llf j'll!u!i i~ ! il~ii f~i:iil ;i 1 i .f!i~" ! JJi~ii ~!i Ii~ liliijl ;fl!I!=i rfl Si8~ !:lii iilfif~; .E: Ifi If.hp~ Ii ~!~!!I Hi. iJ;= fi{lil iii.I.~ j:I"i=i.l!tl~!:t!l!i'l Iii != ~~f!'Il' Ifl~:.!.:!E ;'11 ~.~I; .='.S<<E,..~~~.6 .s u~~ ~u..~rv.i~:...tJ ~@ t~f.;lJltii~ ti::: f !ii ;; .i~"fli. i"~ "~15IIH.!E r~. w a~llliC.f.~; %1:1:~: ,. i e€EieE€iEgg~~~~g~ggg ~~! ~,..: :~ ~u <c co 0... 0" ~~ ~i ~~ ...... :e. M; ~.. c:e ~;. .. ... ~lii g8 ..~ u. ..... aae ell! ..... o f c I .. .. o ~ " u .. o. f2 ~ .. I i I ! i, i I I II ~ ;~ ~ ~ ..i !~i.~ ~ ~~ z iWw~o 5 ~ ~i~.wc~~~_~~~6. -- ~ !~~il~;lllliJj~iill~I~~I;lil~11 ~ ~ II ~ ~~~~~~ w....,~~..,~ U~P~~HHH~ hLJfdBH~~ ~ I i : )0- ~ w, ~ .~S I~~~~ ~~~!wwuw5 ~~ i !~~i~i~~~I~iil~~~~~iiiii~~i~liill!!i!iliiilli~ ~ ~ i . z I L ..1 I i ~ " " i!~ ili~ !!~i~ ~!!I~ i i . ~I ~giggigl:g:i~I:~i::~~llllllllllllglglllllll~~ ~W!uu~.~~u~g!~~ . .~~ggwwwwwwWWWWWW.W.WWWWWWW~1 ~~;~~;~~~~B~i~i~~~B'I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ :: ~ ~. g :: ~ ~ = : I~ ~ l!: I: 0 I: J: l:i :i I:{ r;_!. ~ ~ i ~ ~ oft 6 S II J:.. ... ~ ..... ~= u: ~ Ii A 1:1: _:= ~" ~~ ~ i; ~~=Aa~~= ~~ i-~;o 18 .~~ i . ~~~ ~i~. :: .~~I ;~c ;. z~cc x.~~ ....us.., ~ ....> .. ~ "l~.. ~ i~ g'~~~i~~=sl~~I:~:~~ ..~~:. .=..$~~.;. ~~= W I:A I.U- u-5~;; __A -ix ~& x xx O. i ~ ..- ~ ~i~i~~i! ~5~e~~~~i!i.~:~~~~~~~~~~~~!~~.~~~~~~~ _ ..u~uw..uc ......cccccuuulccccccccccccccccccccccccc .~.==x .--" ;;1:: :._~ I;==~==:=;:;; II:: ~ !!!!!!~!!a!::!!!!!~~;!!!!~!!!!!!!!!!!!!;;;;!!!! c uuuuuuuuuuu~uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu I II I II I I lOci TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Draft Dakota County Transportation Policy Plan - Update DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Dakota County has developed a draft policy plan document regarding proposed regional transportation issues and projects. This draft document has been submitted to all Dakota County cities in an attempt to encourage feedback and engage affected communities on proposed transportation projects with their respective communities. The City appreciates the opportunity to comment on proposed County policies and projects. DISCUSSION Several key issues have been discussed with County Highway Department staff as it relates to City transportation concerns. . The County's intention to designate CR 64 (19Sth Street) as an East-West Corridor. This collector would extend from CSAH 9 (Dodd Boulevard) to the east, and west to TH 3 intersecting at Pilot Knob Road. County staff has indicated in previous conversations that it would be their intention to fund 100 percent of the cost in the township's jurisdiction including the railroad overpass. Ostensibly, funding solutions would include any grants or state funds the County could obtain to help underwrite the costs. . Extending from CR 60, a new east-west alignment from CSAH 9 (Dodd Boulevard) to CSAH 31 will allow residents from Farmington and Lakeville to access 3SE reducing travel time by approximately 2 miles. . The extension of CSAH 31 from 50 to CSAH 74 (Ash Street). . In addition, Dakota County staff have indicated their willingness to discuss and consider County financial participation in the construction City collector routes. While no commitment has been made regarding this issue, it would appear that the County recognizes that City collectors have the effect of reducing overall traffic congestion on County collectors, and decrease the need to some extent in constructing new and/or reconstructing existing County collectors. As this change in policy would have a profound financial impact on 208m Street and eventually the reconstruction of Flagstaff Avenue as a north-south City collector, I will be participating in a group manager/administrator effort to advance this I CitlJ. of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmington, MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fa~ (612) 463-2591 initiative. It should be noted that any change in the County's policy will not be retroactive, and, at this time, discussions are in very preliminary stages. . Finally, please find key sections of the Draft County Transportation Policy Plan attached to this memorandum that may be of general interest to Council. If Council members would like the entire draft document, please contact me. BUDGET IMPACT Unknown at this time. ACTION REOUESTED Council review and comment on Dakota County's draft Transportation Policy Plan document. Respectfully submitted, dJv~ Ii?!: : ~ Erar City Administrator ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT DAKOTA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN: SUMMARY The Dakota County Transportation Policy Plan is the transportation component of the Dakota County Comprehensive Plan, DC 2020. This plan examines the evolution of transportation in Dakota County, existing transportation facilities and development, and projects facility and service needs to the Year 2020. It identifies the policies that will guide the continued evolution and development of the Dakota County transportation system to meet future needs. The Transporlation Po/icy Plan is an update of the Dakota County Transportation Plan that was adopted in 1982. (A draft revision to the initial Plan was prepared in 1991, but was not adopted.) The revised Transportation Po/icy Plan will provide recommendations for future improvements to the system of roadways and bridges, transit, and bikeways and walkways that serve the people of Dakota County. In addition, rail, water, and air transportation are addressed. In November 1996. the Board of Commissioners adopted a series of Transportation Plan Policies. These Po/icies provide the basic guidelines for the Transportation Policy Plan. VISION The Transportation Policy Plan envisions an integrated, multi-model transportation system that will connect people to work and one another by safe travel on routes with minimal congestion and that will provide a choice of options in the mode of travel to reduce automobile travel demand, especially during peak periods. Further, the Transportation Po/icy Plan envisions a transportation system that is efficient and effective in the movement of goods to maintain the economic vitality of Dakota County. Dakota County will provide and maintain roads and bridges that conned state and regional roadway systems with cities and major activity centers. Multi-use bikeways (including pedestrian use) will be a part of this system, Improved transit infrastructure and expanded transit options will be promoted. These transportation systems will be provided and maintained to enhance the safe travel and mobility of County residents, to meet the needs of County businesses and business development, and to allow for flexibility in individual travel mode choices. The transportation systems provided by Dakota County will be as safe as practical. In the development and maintenance of these systems, Dakota County will be sensitive to the environment and considerate of the natural resources that they impact. Decisions about our transportation systems will be made in partnership with cities and townships and in coordination with the state and the region. Proposed projects will be open to the comments and concems of residents and business people whom they affect. BACKGROUND ... The Dakota County highway system consists of over 436 center-line miles of roads, with over 1,058 lane-miles. Over three-quarters of the roads are bituminous surface roadways, although over 20 percent are still gravel. Over 750 million vehicle miles of travel currently is accommodated on the system, with less than 0.5 percent of the entire system operating at unacceptable levels of congestion (i.e., level of service E of F). The average commuting time reported by residents is between 17 and 18 minutes, which over 80 percent of commuters find to be about equal to or better than their expectations (1997). During the next 25 years, traffic on Dakota County roads is expected to increase from about 750 million vehicle miles per year to nearly 1.35 billion vehicle miles (79 percent). Without an expansion of the roadway system or the introduction of methods which reduce the number of automobile trips, based on regional estimates, the average commuting time will double from about 17 minutes to about 35 minutes for trips to regional locations. 6/12/98 3: 50 PM Agenda Page No. The growth in traffic will result in significant deficiencies in the ability of roads in Dakota County to carry this traffic. The number of miles of County roads with unacceptable levels of congestion will increase from less than 0.5 percent of the system (about 2 miles) to near1y 9 percent (over 38 miles) over the next 20 years without expansion of the system. Major parts of CSAH 42 where there are now four lanes will require six lanes to effectively convey the expeded volume of traffic; eight lanes will be needed west of 1-35E to the County line. CSAH 23 (Cedar Avenue) in Apple Valley will reach eight lane needs, with six lanes required south to CSAH 9 (Dodd Boulevard). Stretches of CSAH 31 (pilot Knob Road) and CSAH 32 (Cliff Road) in Eagan will need six lanes to handle projeded travel growth. In all, over 23 miles of new six- and 8-1anes roads will be needed to carry expected increased travel in Dakota County if no other options for reducing travel demand are successful. (Additional needs for new 3- and 4-lane roadways also exist, totaling about 58 miles.) The costs - both economic and political - of expansions to meet projected deficiencies will be high. The continued growth of Dakota County, safety considerations, and improvements in operation of the roadway system will require new alignments and realignments of existing roadways. Over 28.5 miles of such changes have been identified to meet projeded needs. Issues have emerged with respect to the major function of certain roadways (e.g., TH 3, TH 13 between CSAH 32 and TH n (Cedar Avenue), and CSAH 42); jurisdiction (i.e., the "tumback- of roads from the state to the County or from the County to cities); and design. Transit provides an alternative means of transportation which can help reduce congestion. However, transit use will need to grow substantially to have a measurable impact. Only about 10 percent of County residents report using public transit for commuting to work or for transportation to shopping even on an occasional basis; only about 4 percent consider themselves to be "frequent" users (1997). (The most recent infonnation on carpooling is in the 1990 Census, where about 11 percent of County residents reported that they use carpools to get to work). For transit to playa major role in reducing the number of vehicle trips on County roads, significant effort will be required. Even with this effort. transit can be expeded to address only a limited share of future transportation demand in Dakota County. ACHIEVING THE VISION The Transportation Po/icy Plan focuses on a range of proposed strategies and policies to meet future transportation needs in Dakota County. The primary strategies are: .. . Preserving the investments that Dakota County has made in its roadway system (e.g., preserving existing roads through pavement resurfacing, reconditioning, and replacement; bridge repair and replacement; and other repairs to the physical elements of the transportation system). . Managing the existing system to increase its efficiency and to delay the need for .xpansion of the system wherever possible. Dakota County will significantly increase its involvement in transit alternatives and transit support (e.g., dedicated transitways and authorized bus shoulder use). Alternatives to manage Mure growth in road use include transportation system management (e.g., coordinating traffic signals and access management), travel demand management (e.g., carpooling or telecommuting), use of intelligent transportation systems (e.g., SMART DARTS), and jurisdictional reassignments. . Transportation alternatives. Transportation alternatives include transit (e.g.. bus, rail, or carpooling), bikeways, and walkways. The role of the County in providing transportation alternatives in order to provide choices in transportation modes and to reduce congestion on the existing roadway system will be significantly expanded. . Improving the system to address emerging deficiencies, including reconstrudion of some roads on new alignments or the realignments of roadways. A major deficiency for the future is the absence of a southem eastlwest principal arterial roadway to accommodate the projected growth in central Dakota County. Planning for a new principal arterial is proposed. . Expanding transportation corridors as necessary to address future road capacity deficiencies and to increase the capacity of the roadway system to meet future needs. Over 81 additional miles of expanded roadway have been identified to meet deficiencies that will result from increased traffic volume by 2020. There will be a continued need to invest in the continued improvement and development of the road infrastructure in Dakota County. Financing needed preservation. improvements, and expansions of the County system will be a major issue for the County, with costs expected to exceed $500 million over the next 22 years. Policies and strategies for funding are included the proposed Transportation Policy Plan. 6/12/98 3:50 PM h:ljcd6-9-tran.doc Agenda Page No. County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 42 plays a pivotal role in the future of transportation in Dakota County. Currently, it is the only east-west principal arterial roadway in Dakota County south of 1-494. A special study of CSAH 42 was undertaken as part of the County's Transportation PoRey Plan development and itS findings and recommendations are incorporated in the Plan. [The CSAH 42 Corridor Study will be complete in August 1998. Its recommendations will be incorporated at that time.] Policies and recommended actions that will guide the County's actions to achieve itS vision are outlined in the Transportation Policy Plan. These include: . Participation in financing transportation projects. . Preservation and maintenance of County roads. . The preservation and protection of the environment in building roads. . The design and construction of County roads. . The preservation and acquisition of right-of-way for roads. . The classification of roads by their function. . Jurisdictional responsibilities for roads and the transfer of jurisdictional responsibilities. Proposed future directions in transit, bikeways, walkways, and other transportation alternatives are defined. DAKOTA COUNTY 2020: FUTURE NEEDS The Dakota County 2020 Transportation Policy Plan identifies policies to preserve existing roads and to manage the existing roadway system to improve its efficiency in carrying traffic. It recommends new initiatives in transit. As these changes are implemented, future roadway needs will be continually evaluated. However, if growth continues as forecast, the Dakota County Transportation Policy Plan projects that over 28.5 miles of new road alignments (or realignments of existing roadway) will be necessary to maintain safety and the efficient flow of traffic and nearty an additional 51 miles of roadway will be expanded to meet growing traffic demands. 1. Potential New Alignments of Existing Roads Potential new roadway alignments and realignments are shown below and on the accompanying map. (Additional infonnation is at Table 1 in Attachment 3.) Potential new alignments and realignments total about 28.5 miles of roadway. They indude both eastJwest and north/south changes. The potential new alignments/realignments are: EastlWest Alignments . CSAH 32 (Cliff Road/11 Olh Street) from CSAH 71 (Rich Valley Boulevard) to TH 52/55 in Inver Grove Heights, a total of 1.6 miles. (This segment is included in the County's Capital Improvement Program for 2000.) . CR 46 from CSAH 31 to TH 52 and CSAH 48 from TH52 to the east limits of Coates, a total of 8.5 miles. (This segment is included in the County's Capital Improvement Program for 1999.) . CR 60 from CSAH 9 (Dodd Boulevard) to CSAH 31 (Pilot Knob Road), a total of 3.6 miles. . CR 62 from CR 79 extension to CR 81, a total of 1.0 mile. . CR 64 west from CSAH 31 to CSAH 9 and east from CSAH 31 to TH 3, a total of 4.3 miles. . CSAH 70 from CSAH 23 (Cedar Avenue) to CSAH 50, a total of 0,6 miles. NorthlSouth Alignments . . I ~ . . . . CSAH 5 from TH 13 to CSAH 32, a total of 1.3 miles. CSAH 5 south of CSAH 70, about 1.0 mile. Extension of CSAH 31 from CSAH 50 to CSAH 74, about three-quarters a mile. CR 33 from CR 46 to CSAH 42, a total of 1.0 mile. (This segment is included in the County's Capital Improvement Program for 1999.) CR 71 from CR 79 (190lh Street) extension to CSAH 42, a total of 4.5 miles. Extension of CSAH 73 to extension of CSAH 32 in Inver Grove Height, about 0.5 miles. . In addition, a study is underway to detennine the need for a connection of segments of CR 28 (Yankee Doodle Road) in Eagan and Inver Grove Heights. The City of Eagan is leading this study. If the connection were appropriate, it would cover about 1.6 miles. (It should also be noted that the southern bypass route for Hastings that is included in the east-west alignment above requires further evaluation by the affected agencies to detennine the appropriate alignment for the bypass.) 6/12/98 3:50 PM Agenda Page No. l ~~ ~ -- .[.;l. I')"' ~- I NININGER TWP ~ ~~ e-li L" ......l/~t I ) U- - c --: Y. I VERMILLIO TWP I i MARSHAl TWP t!I; RAVENNA P r- ~ -'" ! \ f--' / I \ ~: (00 ~ 1l ~ ! CASTLEROCKTW: ~n ! \=:, --~~.:p- -G 1 ~"i I /1 ~ - ,...., 1'1 / I .. 1 I I V HAPT TWP (..) I ~ ~ ~ ~ T i 00 I r ~ }if! I.ANOOLPH TWP ~ ~\OO I / lltAlloor.W. rA RFOROTWP//'~_~/. ~ ! . 'A. SCIOTA TW I I . i ~ LJ ! tf ... UL'tD/OLEY ./... ~ T"'~ ~ n l? ~'F'" '~ ~;.." \l.. ~IIOT~~.~ I ""r ,..L' .~~ 2 J:~. J,;;" I.. ..~ , {OJ - .,..::') .... ....."rif,"'l)f~ T PAUL Scale in MU.. J -. - ~ HTS --- jfJ' r~' \' .~~ 1"~ / cp ~.~ - ~ ' % ( ~"'"'Y'~~) '" ~ ~/ l>\ G~ -/ /!~) ~ ~ I 'n ~ t r-fiil ,.~~ : /J_____f-1_ --tL----h- '- -. ~V~~/ ~-...-~~!) h ~~-: ~ l/ Y........ I" AP LE VALLE 1 -::... I ~ ;><J ~ i ~ n", EMOUNT f~' ..... J ./ (, ~ '); .so V > I. --\--'---"........... I /' I. \ I y (.';) '..... V LAKE' ILLE V j ~I-- ....r.;j'\ \ fi --'" ;-- - I- '1 EMPIRE TWP ~~g \ N + o .-.- 1 \ '1: TeS l , j I ~ I ..... c '" ! _ ~ I ' ~e \t. ~ I ._.\ I. I...li""" ""' I FARMINGTON 'I!:h -'" i'" ~ , .!!. 3'1-___-1....-- '-1~~ ~ "" ...... " - EUREKA rwp J ~ I ~ 1 \ 'r) 4>--1 ~ , ;~ ~ I GREENVALE TWP ..... ~') ~ - .. Prepered by: Dakota County OtIlca of Pfenning Source: Dakota County ~.'.' ~ N New Alignments .... Alignment Study Underway N Major Roads N Local Roads / \ / Municipal Boundary N County Boundary Water i I I I I ~ I [" ~ I I (" ~ l ,- --I L ;"1 DOU LAS TWP .. .. Roadaymbol Legend o County o County _ Aid eln_- o S1a_ HIg_y o U. S. Hlgllwey Dakota County Transportation Plan (DRAFT) Map: _ Proposed County Road New Alignments June 1998 The new alignment of CSAH 31 from CSAH 50 to the CSAH 31 old alignment is considered to be complete for the purposes of the Transportation Plan. A southem bypass alignment for the City of Hastings requires additional evaluation by the City, the County, Marshan Township, and MnDOT before an alignment is suggested. The consideration of such an alignment is suggested in the TH 61/316 Conidor Study. However, the jurisdiction for this roadway is a centra! issue. If the alignment stretched from TH 316 to CSAH 48, it would cover about 3 miles. A preliminary estimate for the costs of providing new alignments and making the realignments proposed is $71.3 million (in 1997 dollars). 2. Potential Expansions of the County Road System Potentially needed expansions of County roads are shown in Table 2. (See Attachment 3.) Table 2 also indicates the time period in which the expansion is likely to be required and the potential cost (In 1997 dollars) of the expansion. In summary, Table 2 indicates that: . Nearty 17.5 miles of new six-lane and about 6 miles of new eight-lane roads could be necessary in Dakota County over the next 25 years, at a cost of $123.9 million in today's dollars (1997). . Over 58 miles of new four-lane (including a small amount of 3-lane) roads will be needed over the next 25years, at a cost in today's dollars of $143.6 million. . Of the about 81.5 miles of new roads, about 15 miles will be needed before the tum of the Century; about 7.5 miles between 2001 and 2010, and about 49 miles between 2011 and 2020. 3. Fiscal Implications of Future Needs Assuming a minimum annual growth in construction costs of two percent per year, over the next 25 years, Dakota County can expect need to spend in the neighborhood $350 million for road projects that will expand the capacity of the County road system. In addition, an estimated $95.7 million will be needed to provide funds for new alignment and realignments and about $62.9 million will be needed for maintenance and preservation of existing roads (including such things as overtays, traffic signals, striping, and pavement management). The continued growth of County levy for roads and bridges at four percent per year would not be sufficient to cover the projected growth in needs. The average annual deficit for the planning period is estimated at about $0.9 million. (It should be noted that all or parts of nine projects identified for future work are in the County's 1998-2002 Capital Improvement Program. Further, additional costs of maintenance of the County road system, such as the purchase of bituminous and gravel materials and signal and sign materials are included in the operating budget.) 4. Transportation Alternatives A strong emphasis on transit to reduce or delay the need for expansion of roads is included in the Transportation Policy Plan. To guide Dakota in meeting the challenge of meeting transit needs, a vision for transit in Dakota County is created. This vision is the creation of an integrated transit system that provides safe, timely, and efficient connections between communities, activity generators and employment concentrations. (A "transit system" is defined as all forms of sharing rides.) To achieve this vision, twelve goals and related policies and strategies for achieving these goals are established. The goals are: I ~ . Meeting transit needs of the transit dependent population in the County. . Unking transit and land use decision-making. . Matching transit services to needs of each area of the County. . Working with employers to better manage travel demand. . Taking a strong regional role in transit discussion and decision-making through the Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority. . Increasing the visibility of transit. . Assuring coordination and integration of all modes of travel. . Providing a .seamless. transit system in Dakota County. . Creating fully accessible transit services. . Using technological advances to reduce travel demand and improve transit. . Providing for transit safety, security, and reliability. . Securing dedicated transit funding. 6112/98 3:50 PM Agenda Page No. h:ljcd6-~n.doc ~ ....-..ey ~ __ -:- I ~m n ~ ,n, 01 'II ~';... \\. J:"~~J T""r ~~ ~. J't .. r... 2 0 2 ("l":' ~ ~ S~ T PAUL , Scale .n MD. ' 1 HTS /- ""'- ~ r-J /~, ()~ S:. ~ \t I- /YJ~~" J'LI ~~ % i · E( "1"~~;A ) ~ ~ ~/:~~~ ~ /:.J. I.. J '!!'J ~ /.If r ~ , I...;' ~ "'f"l _.~" I /r___ -r- __/-L_--k_..... __ ~ ;i~ ~/:'r- _(if".;) ~~~ i ~: /-!""" ~., ~ , (" of .y). I" AP LE VALLE (.. "!. IjJT j\.. I( I (,,~ I ROl EMOUNT ./ -'j""" ~3-----1 -~ , ss I / . j '-e i :--~ ! .)i0 l I "V ( · ,NININGERTWP ~ ~~IGS ?-li .... ) I I : :- -, ~: ."" .....V ~r---' I - - - , ~ 1.0-,._... ~,,! ~ · - .:.:.~ ~T1!T~; "" I. i.}- _ C. -- i .. ~ LAKElILLE ~ ; -vgo - I! "",- r- i VERMILLIO TWP Y I \ J!j _._- - ~ E : ( " I MARSHAll TWP l3 ~ ~ . ..'2>~+....: MPIRETWP: r _ ~ ; .. ~ RAVENNA P , ~. .~... ~,..~tl.~...' \ ,__ V" I ""\.. ~-LJ- l.j '"' r- it. ..' \G \.. 1'-) "" ;FARM~TON" Ail I / : I ~I---- _L__~"!...~ J.:= 1:3 :: i ~-t1-~-)--- ~ ~ CASTlE ROCK TWP 'i. I I ~ l"!!l ~ I __~1IIl 8- ~ jHA.., I EUREKA rwp ~" ..,,- ..!!.. / ~; - ..1iO\.. .II / · ~ ;~ -w ~, I / g" ,,) , t" ~., ~ I !~ "'j'" ~ ~ I , . vr , i J (ss) f! '.--l-, "'NOOLPH TWP ~ ~ i j. /. :lWInnd1.r.' ~ \ :WA\,>RFOROTWPVV-" ! ~ ! 4J V SCIOTA TWI ! I I i J. ~ ! .4 I ~ ~l<ol> I N + N Expansion Needs N Major Roads /\I Local Roads / \ / Municipal Boundary N County Boundary Water I I . ~ '-: '.; ...... New Alignments -- I , . ~ [s.) (0, ~ f I' I .~ ~ I .- --I L -' OOU LASTWP .- (os GREENVALE TWP ~L~ ..t,;l. ~ymboIL~ o County o County Stel. AId e Inters... a Ste.. High..., ~ o U, s, HIg/lwIo, Prepered by: Oakolll County otIIc. of Planning Sourc.: Oekolll County jJ Dakota County Transportation Plan (DRAFT) County Road Expansion Needs, 2020 Map: _ June 1998 5. Classification of Roadways The proposed Transportation Policy Plan also recommends several changes in the functional classification of roads In the County. Roads classified as .principal. or .minor arterials. are eligible to receive federal funds. These roads also are a primary focus of policies to manage access to increase safety and promote mobility on the County system. A County road must be classified as a .collector" in order to be eligible to receive state funds. Dakota County historically has had a lower share of its roads classified as .collectors- than are suggested for a sound balance among functional classifications of roads in a county system. The proposed changes in classifications include: Principal Arterials . TH 149/TH 3. TH 149 and TH 3 are classified as minor arterials in Dakota County. The Board of Commissioners previously has supported the inclusion of these roads as a principal arterial. The Metropolitan Council has opposed a change in designation and has not included the change previously advocated by the Board of Commissioners in the Transportation Policy Plan for the Region. The objective of a recommendation to include TH 149 from its intersection with TH 55 in Eagan south to its intersection with TH 3 in Inver Grove Heights and TH 3 from its intersection with TH 149 south to its intersection with CSAH 42 in Rosemount (8.7 miles) as a principal arterial is to improve the spacing between east-west principal arterials in the County. The east-west distance between TH nand TH 52/55 is approximately nine miles. TH 3 is approximately 4 % miles east of TH 77 and approximately 4 % miles west of TH 52/55. Non- freeway principal arterial guidelines provide for spacing at 3 to 6 mile intervals in developing areas. As a principal arterial, TH 149rrH 3 would connect two existing principal arterials (TH 55 and CSAH 42). The three most rapidly growing communities in Dakota County - Rosemount, Lakeville, and Farmington - would be served by this principal arterial. It would support trips from central Dakota County to destinations such as the Mall of America and the Twin Cities International Airport and to jobs in the City of St. Paul and the eastern half of the Metropolitan Region. . TH 13 between CSAH 32 (Cliff Road) and TH 77 (Cedar Avenue). TH 13 is a principal arterial from the Scott County line to Cliff Road in Eagan. The extension of TH 13 as a principal arterial by about 2 miles to its intersection with TH n would provide a connection between two principal arterial routes (i.e., TH 131CSAH 32 and TH 77). It would further connect Dakota County residents with the Mall of America and the Twin Cities International Airport (major metropolitan centers and regional businesses). Minor Arterials . CSAH 9 (Dodd Boulevard). CSAH 9 between the County bQrder and CSAH 60 (18Sth Street) is a collector. This 7.7-mile route is proposed to become a minor arterial. . CR 11. CR 11 between CSAH 42 and TH 13 is a total of 3.5 miles. This. segment of road is now classified as a collector. It is proposed that this roadway become a minor arterial. . CR 28 (Yankee Doodle Road). CR 28 for 1 mile between Cahill Avenue and CSAH 56 is a collector. It is proposed that this segment become a minor arterial. . CSAH 60. Between the County border and CSAH 23 (Cedar Avenue), CSAH 60 is classified as a collector. It is proposed that this 5-mile stretch be reclassified as a minor arterial. I >~ . CR 62. CR 62 from its intersection with TH 316 in Ravenna Township to its intersection with CSAH 47 in Vennillion Township (6.7 miles) is a collector. This route is proposed to become a minor arterial. . CR 64. Between CSAH 23 and TH 3, CR 64 is classified as a collector. This 4-mile stretch is proposed to be reclassified as a minor arterial. . CR 64. Another segment of CR 64 - the 1,2 miles between Holyoke Avenue and CSAH 23 - also is classified as a collector and proposed to be reclassified as a minor arterial. . CR 79. For its 11.9 miles between CSAH 47 and CR 46, it is proposed that CR 79 be reclassified as a minor arterial. 6/12198 3:50 PM Agenda Page No. '" UlYDILIy/" ~ -:--. I ~.~ ~ ~ ,n, 'll ~~ \l.. ~DOT~~f4:r- '~L)~ 2 ftI' Ji-f J .- ~l , /" ~ ~......... ':':? TPAUL I 1UNf"') ~ 'Q , HTS ~ I'- "1 r:r- /~I 0........ ~ ~~ ~(\- /p~~ ....1 fi %1 ( .!!. ~rJ INV....r~'e.HI~ , ~ j;' ~ ",1.1>( ~~ ~ I ..../ ~"i " - ~ ~ (U ~ -""H i,/'r' -- /1 _\= 1 -..r;';1. "i---I-r --1-1..---- ---.... .- ---- A~ (f,... -@''\1) ,;) ,~r ~:~ ~ J YJ' AP LE VALLI ,J ~ ""--€> 55 II ? .~. .- I' { I I" i ... ROl EMOUNT ./ - I ---. __ ~ i r.. I _..Ji1. 1 , r- -.!...;" / I r' u.~;~! ('J l'0 l..,! -$ V-:li ( .- __ 11' NININGER TWP .t1. _ V ~~- L' ,..-..... r---~.. I ---.-l!" \...,.....A- ~_ _ \ /~( t l: _I..... I ) Li .... ~" I .. I ...: \~:' I ! LAKE' ILLE . '.0 , -@ :- ~ V VERMILUO TWP Y \ r _.___..J . , i ,1 )J.. I ~ " EMPIRE TWP . . u I MARSHAl TWP ',II RAVENNA llll . ..,23 , "-" 11 4' \ ~~gh.t*.<.v' ~. \\ ~-v i ~ [. ;l,:y I '""' J FARMINGTON ~ '^- -/-: I ~ _ n s, j :.~ ......... ,.a. ~ i j \" "J ___L,___ r-I ' __ __1-_'__ ,.J ~ l;J ..... I ~ 1.. /I<. CASTLE ROCK TWP 1.. I ~ '^- I NEW",illll : ': }. ~I ~~~ . ! ~ I I I' \ , .. I ~ jif k....OOLPH TWP '" ~ lurl "",,", \ r1RFORDTWP // ~ f, ~ ~ (] !.SCIOTA TWF I I- I ! '. ~ Li ! G) N + o 1\1 Principal Arterial N Minor Arterial Colledor Road I i I I . ~ I ~ J. 1 1 Scale ,n Mil... I \ I Municipal Boundary N County Boundary Water ...... Future Minor Arterial j , I I I-- ~ , J _ EUREKA TwP ,,) r \ $ /I<. ,!!, I I I...... j.e. j I I I-I-, I ._1 OOU LASTWP __I ~..) GREENVALE TWP 'O"G) G. --Gr RolIdaymbol Legend o County o County State AId e In__ a Statt Hig_, OU"S"~, .. Pr.pered by; Oakota County OfIlce of Planning Sourc.: Oekota County ~.; ~ Dakota County Transportation Plan (DRAFT) Proposed Changes to Functional Classification Map: June 1998 . CR 81. The 3.8 miles between CSAH 66 and TH 52 (Coates) is proposed to be classified as a minor arterial. It currently is a colledor. . CSAH 85. CSAH 85 from its intersedion with TH 55 in Nininger Township south to its intersedion with CSAH 86 in Randolph Township is a colledor. This 14-mile route is proposed to become a minor arterial in the County system. Collectors . CSAH 5. The 1-mile of CSAH 5 between the Scott County border and CSAH 70 is now a local street. It is proposed to be reclassified as a colledor. . CR 8. County Road 8 between CSAH 14 (Southview Boulevard) and TH 52 is proposed to be included in the Dakota County roadway system as a collector. This 1.2-mile segment is now a local street. . CSAH 50. CSAH 50 between Holyoke Avenue and CSAH 23 - 1.5 miles - is now a minor arterial. It is proposed to be reclassified as a colledor because CR 64 is proposed to be the minor arterial. . CSAH 59. CSAH 59 between the Rice County border and CSAH 47 is a local street. This 3.6-mile segment is proposed to become a colledor. . CSAH 71. The short stretch (0.9 miles) of CSAH 71 between TH 3 and TH 149 is proposed to be reclassified from a local street to a colledor. . CR 90. The 5 miles of CR 90 between the Scott County border and CSAH 23 is proposed to be reclassified from a local street to a colledor. . CSAH 91. Between TH 316 and CR 54 (3 miles), CSAH 91 is a local street. It is proposed that this segment of road be reclassified as a colledor. . CR 91. CR 91 in Douglas Township between the Goodhue County border and TH 50 is proposed to become a COlledor route. This 4.6-mile segment is now a local street~ . Flagstaff Avenue. The 1-mile between 1701tt Street and CR 46 is proposed to be reclassified from a local street to a colledor. . CR 58/170tlt Street. Between Flagstaff Avenue and TH 3, the 3 miles of CR 58/170th Street is proposed to become a colledor. It is now a local street. . Three additional issues related to principal arterial status of County roadways have been considered in the Transportation Policy Plan. . The continuation of CSAH 23 (Cedar Avenue) south of CSAH 42 as a principal arterial. The Transportation Policy Plan does not include this recommendation within the current planning horizon, but encourages the Cities of Apple Valley, Lakeville, and Fannington to plan for provide for access spacing consistent with principal arterial status. ... . The continuation of CSAH 32 (Cliff Road) east of I-35E as a principal arterial. Principal arterial status for this roadway might be appropriate if the road conneded to Washington County. However, a major river crossing would be required to link roads in the two counties. The Transportation Policy Plan recommends a study of the river crossing issue, but does not envision such a river crossing within the planning horizon of the Plan. (CSAH 32 was a principal arterial in the 19705, but was designated as an -A- minor arterial when CSAH 42 became a principal arterial.) Spacing between CSAH 42 and 1-494 supports the concept of CSAH 32 as a principal arterial. . New Principal Arterial. There is no east-west principal arterial route in Dakota County south of CSAH 42. However, between 1990 and 2020, over one-half of the expeded population growth in Dakota County will occur south of CSAH 42. Coupled with the growth in Scott County and the need for connections between the County's south of CSAH 42, suggests the need to plan for a new principal arterial route south of CSAH 42. 8112198 3:50 PM h:'fcd6-9-tran.doc Agenda Page No. While devetopment of this route may not occur within the planning horizon, land values driven by expected growth will continue to increase the costs of right-of-way if action is not taken to preserve a future corrtdor. Dakota and Scott Counties, the Cities of Lakeville and Farmington, and Empire Township should work to preserve a route south of CSAH 42 - e.g., the CSAH 601185111 Street or the CSAH 70 (215111 Street) corrtdor- for a future principal arterial route In southern Dakota County and Scott County. The Transportation Plan proposes that Dakota County adopt of -Official Mapping Ordinance- as an Initial step toward developing a tool to preserve a corrtdor, in cooperation with the affected cities and townships. 6. Additional Considerations to Meet Future Needs The proposed Transportation Policy Plan recommends a number of jurisdictional changes, Including changes in County State Aid Highway status, adding near1y 54 miles to the County CSAH system, and continues the tumback program initiated by the Board of Commissioners in 1984 and revised in 1994. In examining altematives to Increased automobile travel, the proposed Transportation Policy Plan highlights Initiatives to devetop a Cedar Avenue Transitway, using a $500,000 appropriation from the 1998 Legislature, and planning for potential commuter rail routes. A proposed new funding policy provides for the use of County funds for transit projects under certain conditions. Finally, the proposed Transportation Plan identifies deficiencies on the Trunk Highway system in Dakota County. A particular focus is given to major bridge needs, including the 1-494 Wakota Bridge, the 1-35E Lexington Avenue Bridge, and the TH 61 Bridge at Hastings. The importance of the TH 52 Lafayette Freeway Bridge to Dakota County is identified, although this Bridge is not in Dakota County. Growing congestion on the TH 77 Cedar Avenue Bridge is identified as a concem. Non-river crossing issues including the 1-35 Interchange with TH 70, the Duckwood interchange in Eagan, and the interchange at CSAH 42 and TH 52 are noted. .... 6/12/98 3:50 PM Agenda Page No. MAJOR TRANSPORTATION PLAN ISSUES: MEETINGS WITH CITIES ISSUE PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOMMENDA nON 1. Functional Classifications - . Should TH 3 be a principal arterial? What is This issue needs to be brought back to the Board. the appropriate classification of TH 149? They have a resolution supporting. Staff consensus is that it will be difficult to meet the standards. There is a need to consider a principal arterial in this part of the County; need to study which roadway is most appropriate. Included in draft plan based on previous Board position. . Should TH 13 between Cliff Road and Cedar County staff supports and has conveyed this Avenue be a principal arterial? (Eagan) position to Met Council. Creates regional connections. (Eagan would like to extend to Yankee Doodle Road or TH 55.) . Should CSAH 5 be an "A minor" arterial? Yes. The existing classification should be retained. (Bumsville) . Should CSAH 30 be classified as a collector? Appropriately classified now (minor arterial). (Eagan) Provided connections to 3 principal arterials and maintains spacing. . Should CSAH 32 be a principal arterial, Principal arterial status might be appropriate if particularly if extended to HR 52? (IGH) extended to Washington County. Would require a river crossing and is not likely within 25 years. Possible study of river crossing alignments. (CSAH 32 was a principal arterial in the 1970s; dropped when CSAH 42 was added.) . Should CR 43 become a collector (in This is appropriately a collector, The existing conjunction with tumback of TH 3)? (Eagan) classification should be retained, although this might best be a city street. . Should designation of CSAH 45 as a scenic CSAH 45 should be turned-back to Lilydale. roadway be considered? (Mendota Heights) . Should Cedar Avenue (CSAH 23) be a If Cedar Avenue is not a principal arterial, the cities principal arterial? should be encouraged to plan for access spacing consistent with the spacing for principal arterials. 2. New Alignments/Reallgnments . Should there be a connection between CSAH 5 This was supported in the 1992 proposed plan. and CSAH 321 (Bumsville) Shows up in the regional system. Support. . Should the segment of CSAH 5 south of CSAH The County supported this realignment as part of 70 be realigned with Kensington Blvd? the interchange reconstruction and continue to (Lakeville) support it 1 ... . If TH 3 is turned back to the County. should If TH 3 is ever turned-back to the County, the turn CSAH 73 be turned back to Inver Grove back of CSAH 72 would be considered Heights? . Should Emery Avenue between CR 48 and No. No continuity with other roads. Building CR 46 CSAH 42 become a County road? relieves the need. 4. Design . What alternatives should be considered to Issue is what alternatives will be considered to avoid 6-lane needs on CSAH 31 south of avoid six- and eight-lane needs, if any. Need Duckwood? direction from Board. . What alternatives should be considered to Issue is what alternatives will be considered to avoid 6-lane needs on CSAH 32 between 35E avoid six- and eight-lane needs. if any. Need and CSAH 31? (Eagan) direction from Board . Will 4-lane road be sufficient for CR 46 Issue is what alternatives will be considered to between Highview and Cedar? (Lakeville avoid six- and eight-lane needs, if any. Need believes 6-lane right-of-way will be difficult to direction from Board. obtain) . Are 2 lanes sufficient for the segment of CSAH Addressed in draft plan as an alignment issue. 5 south of CSAH 70 in Lakeville? . Should CSAH 9 between CSAH 50 and CSAH No. Two lane section matches forecast (8-9,000 70 be 4-lane undivided? (Lakeville) ADT). No need for 4-lane undivided at this time. . Should the segment of CSAH 23 south of Currently being designed. This will be a designed CSAH 70 be 4-lane undivided? (Lakeville) project before the plan is completed. . Should design of CSAH 26 in Inver Grove The City of Inver Grove Heights needs to decide Heights be reconsidered based on city what it wants for the roadway. Consider as part of comments? project. . East of Cahill to Concord, is CR 28 deficient as Projected as 3- or-4lane needs (4-lane undivided). a 2-lane roadway? (lnver Grove Heights) . Is there a need for 4-lane undivided road on 20-year forecast does not support. even with CSAH 32 east of TH 3? (Inver Grove Heights) construction of TH 52. Might reach 3-lane. However, broader issue is if this should function as a major eastlwest road. If connected. might meet 4-lane undivided needs. Should be shown same as in Eagan. . Should right-of-way be preserved for a 4-lane Numbers do not support now. but consider divided segment of CSAH 31 north of CSAH additional right-of-way as need develops. 50? (Farmington) . Is there a need for 4-lane undivided road on Yes. as shown on map. CSAH 32 east of TH 3? (Inver Grove Heights) . Should CR 64 between Holyoke and Cedar be Yes. County will upgrade for 4-lane undivided. Will 4-lane undivided? (Lakeville) be done after turnback of TH 50. 3 7. General Policy issues . Should Dakota County consider building 6- and Requires direction from the board of 8-lane roadways? What demand management Commissioners. Various strategies to reduce techniques should be considered to avoid demand added to draft plan. having to build 6- and 8-lane roadways? (Example: CSAH 31 south of Duckwood in Eaoan) . Is there a need for a principal arterial south of Requires direction from the Board of CSAH 42? (Farmington) Commissioners. Proposed in draft plan. . Should Dakota County consider using County This issue is related to the 6- and 8-lane road issue funds to construct city streets which would serve and requires direction from the Board of as relievers for County roads (e.g., the commissioners. Not in draft plan at this time. "Duckwood ring route" in Eagan)? . Should the presentation of the Transportation The Board of Commissioners will not be asked to Plan be delayed until the CR 42 Corridor Study approve the Transportation Plan until after the is completed? (Burnsville) completion of the Corridor Study (assuming Corridor Study timetable is followed). Board likely will be asked to approve draft for Public review prior to completion of Corridor Study. however. . Should state road system issues be included in Reflect State and Regional transportation Plan the County Transportation Plan; (e.g. CSAH positions. Consider how to deal with MnDOTs 42/TH52 interchange)? Trunk Highway co-op program. . Should the Transportation Plan include a new Recommend for study, but not included in priorities river crossing on either CSAH 32 or CR 28 for the 25-year plan. alignments between Inver Grove Heights and Cottage Grove? N:\Dept\Planning\Majortransissues ... 5 IDe TO: Mayor, Councilmembers City Administrat~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Propose Castle Rock Twp. Comprehensive Plan Amendment DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington has recently received a copy of a proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Castle Rock Township which has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council. The proposed plan amendment involves the commercial/industrial park in Section 5 south of Trunk Highway 50 adjacent to Fountain Valley Golf Course. DISCUSSION The proposed amendment proposes to change 14.7 acres from "Rural Residential" to "Commercial" to allow for the development of the commercial properties to be developed on four parcels totaling 12 acres in Section 5. The proposed amendment would increase the size of the commercial area that was shown on an earlier Plan Update that was submitted and approved by the Met Council in December of 1997. It is interesting to note that the Castle Rock Town Board had not yet adopted this earlier Plan Update. The Township is now proposing to have the Commercial area extend a quarter of a mile south as opposed to an eighth of a mile south of TH 50 so as to include all of the proposed commercial / industrial park. In review of the current Township Plan Amendment, a number of issues suggest that this proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not appropriate at this time. They are listed as follows: => The Met Council's approval of the Castle Rock Comprehensive Plan Update in December of 1997 was conditioned on the Township implementing a program for the maintenance and inspection of individual on-site sewage treatment systems (ISTS) and the submittal of a local watershed management plan. According to the proposed amendment, both of these requirements will be met by 12/31/98, however this will be after the commercial / industrial development has been approved. A map included in the Township's Comprehensive Plan update approved by the Met Council in December of 1997 identifies the area in question to have a high sensitivity to aquifer pollution. Approving the establishment of additional commercial/industrial uses utilizing ISTS would not be in the best interest of the City or the Township. This is of particular concern to the City given the recently discovered I CitlJ of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmintjton, MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fa~ (612) 463-2591 significantly high levels of sewage contamination of surface water in the drainage ditches in the vicinity of Ash and Sixth Street which is west of the proposed amendment. The source and extent of this contamination is still being determined by Dakota County Environmental Services. To allow an additional 50,000 square feet of commercial and industrial development that would utilize ISTS to handle both sewage and potential industrial type waste could compound an existing problem situation in this area. ~ Secondly, a portion of the area included in this proposed amendment includes an area proposed for stormwater ponding in the City's Stormwater Management Plan. The review of the proposed commercial/industrial development by the Vermillion River Watershed Management Organization (VRWMO) indicate that significant errors have been made in the calculations for the proposed on-site ponding. The VRWMO also suggests that the City and the Township take a coordinated look at the economic implications if this area is unavailable for stormwater ponding. To date this has not taken place and if commercial development is allowed as proposed, it is not known where or how storm water ponding would be provided in this area. Allowing commercial/industrial development of this property, which involves property critical to the stormwater management of the area, prior to the adoption of the Township's surface water management plan would at the very least be premature, and certainly could cause or exacerbate long-term drainage issues. ~ Finally, it would seem as though this proposed amendment is being done somewhat "after the fact." The conditional use permits were previously approved by the Township Board of Supervisors. Obviously it would have been preferable to comment on a proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment prior to the conditional use permits being approved. BUDGET IMPACT Unknown at this time. ACTION REQUESTED Authorize the submittal of City Comments stated in this memo along with any other concerns the City Council may have to the Metropolitan Council. These issues will be taken into consideration by the Metropolitan Council in their review of this requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment by Castle Rock Township. suz# David L. Olson Community Development Director CC: Alyn Angus, Town Board Chairman Jeff Connell, Resource Strategies Proposed Plan Amendment Castle Rock Township c$d ~..-1 "'1~~C ,'0. / ,.4. ~ I .--J : ! 1> ~ ~ o - - = ; Co> ? 24 .eo ..c '" .~ ~ r . ~() I: ~ Co> 278th 0 0.5 Miles N i i~ i I I I \ , \ \ ", '-- CSAH 86 1 . PubliclInstitutional 0 Floodplain I i Rural Residential . Wetland . Commercial . Public/Recreation ~ Proposed i! Agriculture Commercial Area r--l U City of Farmington J. Town Hall h.&~ :::=s V CORPORATION i I J / I ,. //' -~ <<I}) MONTGOMERY _TSON June 18, 1998 Mr. Alyn Angus Castle Rock Township PO Box 6 Farmington, MN 55024 SUBJECT: Peltier Property, Northwest 1,4, Section 5, Castle Rock Twp. Dear Mr. Angus: The above-referenced commercial/industrial development has been forwarded to us for review on behalf of the Vermillion River Watershed Management Organization. The President, Dennis Miranowski, requested that we review the site and provide our comments to both Castle Rock Township and the City of Farmington. The VRWMO does not have a regulatory program in place for reviewing individual site developments but will occasionally review specific developments if requested by one or more of the member communities. Therefore, these comments are provided in an advisory capacity and a permit will not be required from the VRWMO. 1. The drainage calculations submitted do not accurately reflect on-site drainage. The landowner should be required to revise and correct mistakes in their computations. Current calculations address only a very small percentage of the entire tributary area to the existing pipe under Highway 50. In addition, incorrect values were utilized for rainfall depth/intensities, curve numbers, and weighted curve numbers. The pond storage volume calculations did not incorporate influent to the pond and only addressed runoff volumes. The storage volume in the pond was incorrectly calculated as well. 2. The VRWMO is aware that this site is located immediately adjacent to a storage area which is identified in the Farmington Stormwater Management Plan which could be utilized by Castle Rock Township. We are recommending that the township and the city take a coordinated look at the economic implications if this area is made unavailable for stormwater ponding. If you would like the VRWMO to be involved in these discussions, please contact Dennis Miranowski at 593-2410. Waterford Palk 505 US Hwy. 169 Suite 555 Minnp.<1polis. Minnesota 55441 Tel. 612 593 9000 Fax: 612 593 9975 Serving the Warld's Ellvlfonmelllal Neerls Mr. Alyn Angus -2- June 18, 1998 H you have any questions regarding the content of this letter or a review of the calculations please contact me directly at 595-5275. Sincerely, MONTGOMERY WATSON 9~'~ fOt(. Steven C. Woods, P.E. Engineer to the VRWMO ~L~JfgaVIE~ JOiJ 19 1998 .,. I :bt cc: David Olson, Community Development Director City of Farmington SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION A. Sponsoring Governmental Unit: Castle Rock Townshio Name of Local Contad Person: Alvn Anaus. Town Board Chair Address: 2806 225th Street Farminaton. MN 55024 Telephone Number 463-3182 FAX Number NA Internet Address (if applicable) NA Date of Preparation June 9. 1998 B. Type of submittal o Overall plan revision or update or 0- Plan amendment Name of amendmentlbrief description: TH SO/Sec. 5 Commercial Oistrid ExDansion Land use change (describe): Transfer aporoximatelv 14.7 acres from Rural Residential to Commercial Size of affeded area (in acres) 14.7 acres MUSA Expansion? X No 0 Yes. If yes, size of expansion (in acres) Other (Please describe) C. Please attach seven (7) copies of the following: 1. Completed Information Summary for Comprehensive Plan Revisions and Plan Amendments (this form) 2. The proposed plan revision or plan amendment. 3. A city-wide rnap showing the location of the proposed change(s). 4. The current plan map, indicating area(s) affeded by the revision or amendment. 5. The proposed plan map, indicating the subjed area(s) of the revision or amendment. D. What is the official local status of the proposed plan revision or amendment? (Check all that apply.) If a report regarding this plan revision or amendment was prepared for the local Planning Commission or City Council please include one (1) copy of that report along with the submittal package. o Aded upon by planning commission (if applicable) on date. Approved by governing body. contingent upon Metropolitan Council review on a Considered, but not approved by governing body on June 9.1998 o Other (please describe) E. List adjacent local governmental units and other jurisdictions (school distrids, watershed districts, etc.) to which copies of the plan revision or amendment have been sent, and the date the copies were sent to them. (Required by Minn. Stat. 473.858, Subd. 2). City of Farminaton: Townshios of Emoire. Eureka. Sciota. Waterford and Hamoton: ISO # 192 . ISO #659. ISO #195. Dakota County. Sent on 6/11/98. 5. Is this proposed land use change located adjacent to a principal arterial or aA" minor arterial? ONo )i(Yes. . please describe site access to the arterial, and whether location and spacing of the access is consistent with Access Spacing Guidelines. Prooosed access will conform to State and County auidelines. Future access. when development may be proposed. will also be reouired to be consistent with State and County Access Spacina Guidelines. The Township Comprehensive Plan addresses access spacina in its Transportation Policies (P. 28). 6. Does the proposed plan revision or amendment positively or negatively affed pedestrian or bike systems? ~No DYes. . please describe the effects B. Wastewater Treatment 1. Total flow for community based on existing plan: year 2000: NA million gallons/day (mgd) year 2010: NA million gallons/day (mgd) 2. Total proposed flow for community, based on plan revision or amendment: year 2000: NA million gallons/day (mgd) year 2010: NA million gallons/day (mgd) 3. If community discharges to more than one metropolitan interceptor, indicate which interceptor will be affeded by the revision or amendment. 4. Will flows be diverted from one interceptor service area to another? ~No DYes. . if yes, describe the change and volumes (mgd) involved 5. Is any wastewater flow an intercornmunity flow to an adjoining community's sanitary sewer system? ~No DYes. . if yes, enclose a copy of the inter-community agreement. 6. Has the community adopted a comprehensive program for the management of on-site septic systems? g No, See below DYes o Not Applicable. . please explain A manaaement proaram and policies will be completed in cooperation with all townships in Dakota County and Dakota County Environmental Manaaement as part of the updates of the Comprehensive Plans to be completed bv 12/31/98. 2. For residential use arnendments: a. Number of residential dwelling units and types (single. multi-family) involved under existing plan under proposed revision/amendment b. Density under existing plan under proposed revision/amendment c. Anticipated change in the number of students in the school system under existing plan under proposed revision/amendment 3. For commerciallindustriallinstitutional use amendments: a. Square footage of commercial structures under existing plan -0- under proposed revision/amendment. Current orooosal consists of about 8.000 sa. ft. in the area orooosed for addition. Unknown for remainder of the area. as there are currentlY no orooosals for develooment. b. Square footage of industrial structures under existing plan -0- under proposed revision/amendment. Current orooosal consists of about 43.000 sa. ft. in the area orooosed for addition. Unknown for remainder of the area. as there are currentlY no orooosals for develooment. c. Square footage of institutional structures under existing plan -0- under proposed revision/amendment. none anticioated d. Number of employees under existing plan -0- under proposed revision/amendment. 2 - 3 with existina orooosed warehouse and commercial ooeration encomDassina about six acres of the area orooosed to be added. Unknown for remainder of the area. as there are currently no orooosals for develooment. c. Housing 1. Will the plan revision or amendment affect the availability of affordable or life-cycle housing in your community? ~No (skip to D Environmental Resources) DYes. . please describe D. Environmental Resources 1. Will an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) be prepared for the plan revision or amendment? 1!( No /[JYes. . if yes, what is the schedule for completion of the EAW? IV. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM A. Will the plan revision or amendment require changes in zoning, subdivision, on-site sewer ordinances or other official controls? DNo ~ Yes If yes, when? Followina Met Council aDDroval. Describe proposed changes: Revise zonina maD to reflect the eXDanded commercial district. B. Has your community adopted a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to implement the initial stages of the proposed plan or plan amendment? aNo; no public improvements proposed at this time. D 'yes If yes, what changes will be needed in your community's Capital Improvement Program to implement the plan revision or amendment? ODD IVI TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator~--- / FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer- Fairhills Extension DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION The Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer Project was awarded at the June lSth City Council meeting. DISCUSSION The bids for the sanitary sewer project came in well under the estimated costs. It is recommended that an extension of the trunk sewer to the north of 19Sth street through the Fairhills area be considered (see attached preliminary plan). The extension of the sanitary sewer to the north would allow for the elimination of the Fairhills lift station. BUDGET IMP ACT It is recommended that this work be change ordered to the Middle Creek sanitary sewer project. By law, change orders to the project cannot exceed 25% of the bid amount. 25% of the bid amount for the Middle Creek sanitary sewer project is approximately $270,000. The anticipated cost for the sewer extension is well within this amount. The additional cost of the extension would also be well within the project budget and the bond proceeds obtained for the project. The actual cost of the extension would be brought to Council at the time approval of the change order is requested. ACTION REQUESTED 1) Authorize staff to request a quotation for the Fairhills sanitary sewer extension from the Contractor for the Middle Creek sanitary sewer project; and 2) If cost estimates for this project remain within the 25% cap, authorize staff to notify and negotiate with the affected property owners in the proposed project area. This would include negotiating temporary easements as required and appropriate. I CitlJ. of Farmint}ton 325 Oale Street. Farmint}ton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fa/f (612) 463.2591 Respectfully submitted, dkm~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file ..--......---..-.t...........-...-. ..-..............j..........--...-.. --..---.......---t:............... ----......-...... i i IlQ :o~ ; ; II' if!! ~ , : , J: i II ;I'TI~ i "~ ;~ I : Iln !oO> ; 13+13 . II :;i\ '" ;;; .---938-4----: . - X. INV. 1 r,,== ~=-l 10 g ...---.....'---...r~jg~~~:.. ~':---g:r---t""--ot-,'" .S---....Tt'...--..---..... ....---...------. i 1 9. I ;;r] \; . . 4>- I n I' 1 12+58 i S'i~ i -ci i ~ 939.8 ; n I . I ,,!:' ~~~:~t ~~s F -=:ou"1 i 'I j' . :, I . , * ....!H~,~....+..------....--..- ........___......-/-.______......1. . ......-----------+..-)----....--- ---.--.-------... o! i ~: i I i ; '! II . i I 940.0 i 1 ~. i I ~ ; 10+11 i ~ ....!1_.}_9.J.___L~?~::'!__~____ ___........___....1....... o , o 929.8 I I; o I: 11 . I ; ; / i + .......--,L-.....j...----......---. ---...------...- ,! / 1 ( i I i I: f ; mm m~....mTmmmmmmmm i ~ ; , \JI . . '" 6 ...!1}.?,~...+_..........__.... .....-.---.....-.t.......~.. o i 1 i I 929.9 . . ... Ul " . 0 1 \0' . , g::,:mimmmm mmmm.mr~ .mmmmmmlmmm..m _.mm N '-f 9.30.6 ! i I 1 o ..----........-..!"------.------... ...-----..........!---... . ---....-- r...........---..f.....--..---..--. ....---.....--.... 0: 'I I: : i 7+72 if! it:; .,.. I 9.30.5 ! ll! i io i . !~ '"' 930.3 i i n g m,:,:rmm mmm_Ji I !l;(".":> ~: ~ ....~~p---L----..---.--.. ___..____..__..~L. 8 1 01 944.8 i il .u______ _UUn_____..........____......u _._oun__.._... \ \ ~ i :ti ,...j gj , N' \JI 944.0! i 6 ......--------....:...------...---... ---........--....t.. o 1 4+82 i 1921.0 J 944.1 i , !.. j 0: . : + 944.9 1 ~ 1 g ~,msrmmmmmII ~ .___.~}~,~....L2:t.9.8....... ___.___....._____ 8 919.86 tl. I r , I I I , '" , I. I I .------,---1. I I I I I I I I 1 , I ;/ , I " '..1= ..==':.=.:.~.....1___..____ ..__...___...___. . , I i' ~ / i I i : I I I : if" I I?< 9.37.1 '" 9.35.1 ~ 6 --..------------.t--....---------.. .---.-------lJt.. o i !. ; 0 93.3,4 i ~ I !cr I I ; . { I'..., : :f6 I i ......__.1...1..... --------L_____~----...........-- __................ : : J 1 I I : I I ( 1 I i o o L. ~:::':I....mmm mmm..~.. 'mmm.. .....mjmmmmmmm ~ ....~~.L~.... +00 8 918.97-10....;'(5'.--- ) Q 1:1 .........;1;..+............._.. .-.......----..... I ; >1 -...~ FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA MIDDLE CREEK FAIR HILLS LIFT STATION CONNECTION .. ~ .-. ~ "0 72 zl --z ",) I L_. --------- ---- t;; 17 ~.--......- 195T~8.m I ~ \ '--...---------..---.---.. 1J L_ o g;---'-' ''''''f I ~ DAIT .11. Bonestroo ~ Rosene G Andertik & 1\" Associates E~._ I HEREBY CERTln' tHAT THIS PlAN. SPECifiCATION. OR REPORT WIU PREPARED III ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPEIMSION AND THAT I AN A. OUl Y REGISTERED PROfESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER mE LAWS or THE STAT[ or IrdINNESOTA. MJB SU/MY DRAWN DESIGNED APPROVED DATE COl.4t.1 REVISION 6/16/98 DATE REG. NO. C18QNESTROO. ROSENE, ANOERUK . ASSOCIATES. INC. 1998 \ '4 1\ 14182\rHLFTSTADWC 14182 so 1/ tP TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Randall House - Demolition DATE: July 6, 1998 This issue was reviewed and discussed by Council at the September 2, 1997 Council meeting. At that meeting, Council approved two actions. The first action dealt with the potential demolition of the house and cost of such action in cooperation with South Suburban Medical Center (SSMC), and the second action supported the potential rezoning of the 4th and Main Street site to accommodate the house (see attachment). As the 4th and Main Street site had significant contamination issues, this site was discarded as a possible alternative. Mr. Randall since that time has attempted to find alternative sites within and outside the City, however, he has met with very little success. At this time, Mr. Randall is working with a potential buyer of the house, however, the status of these negotiations will not be known until July 2, 1998. Staff will provide Council with an update at the July 6, 1998 meeting. DISCUSSION At this time, the City and SSMC have renewed discussions regarding the demolition of the house. Notwithstanding Mr. Randall's ongoing attempts, three quotations for the demolition of the house have been received by the Community Development Department. It is my under- standing that the demolition of the house will occur no later than July 8, 1998 in order to facilitate the construction of the sidewalk on the south side of the Elm Street Extension. Ryan Construction has indicated that the earliest they can be on site would be the week of July 13, 1998. As mentioned above, the City has had recent conversations with Mr. Randall who is still attempting to find a suitable location for the house. While neither the City or SSMC have a particular desire to demolish the home, the Elm Street Extension project needs to be completed and the house needs to be either moved or demolished. A deadline of July 1, 1998 was established to facilitate this action by Mr. Randall or the City and SSMC would take actions to demolish the house. It should be noted that Mr. Randall is, at the time of the writing of this memorandum, working with a potential buyer of the house. If successful, Mr. Randall would incur any costs associated with moving the house from its present location. The City and SSMC would have to receive written confirmation from Mr. Randall by July 2, 1998, with the actual movement of the house CitlJ. of FarminiJ.ton 325 Oak Street eFarm;nijtonlMN55024 e (612) 463.7111eFaK (612) 463.2591 Mayor and Council Members Randall House - Demolition Page 2 of2 occurring by July 8, 1998. If these negotiations are successful, the City would notify the demolition contractor by July 2, 1998 that their services are no longer required. BUDGET IMP ACT Council had previously authorized sharing of costs relative to the expense of demolishing the house as well as compensating Mr. Randall for his house-moving costs to-date. It is anticipated that the City's portion of the expense will be approximately $6,500 at fifty percent (50%) of the total cost. Funding for this cost would be appropriated from the Road and Bridge Fund as an eligible street project construction expense. If Mr. Randall is successful in this latest attempt, neither the City or SSMC will incur any costs other than previous soil testing expenses at the 4th and Main Street site. ACTION REQUESTED As Council had previously authorized the joint funding of both the demolition of the house and the reimbursement of Mr. Randall for house moving, no action is necessary. The award of the demolition work to G.L. Contracting was made on the basis of the lowest of three quotations obtained by the Department of Community Development Re..spec~.IlY bmitted, 1 -1 {' , I! u-<{<;.' . )~ ohn F. Erar ity Administrator Cc: Mr. Lee Larson, Chief Executive Officer, SSMC Mr. Roger Randall ~e TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Jolm F. Erar. City Administrator SUBJECT: House Moving Permit - East Farmington DATE: September 2. 1997 INTRODUCTION At the August 18, 1997 Council meeting, a number of issues relative to the moving of an existing home into the East Farmington PUD was discussed. A number of citizens expressed concerns on the prospect of this home being moved into East Farmington. After considerable discussion, it was acknowledged that the moving of this home into the PUD was within planning, building and zoning requirements established under the City Code and that drainage issues associated with the development of site would be addressed. Notwithstanding, Council expressed concern regarding the appropriateness of this proposal and directed staff to ensure that all applicable standards were enforced. DISCUSSION In response to Council concerns, staff contacted Mr. Bob Johnson, Chief Executive Officer for South Suburban Medical Center (SSMC) and Mr. Roger Randall, the contractor and potential developer for the property in question, and conveyed Council's concerns regarding this proposal. After discussing various project issues with Mr. Jolmson and Mr. Randall. they have agreed to work with the City in researching other alternatives for the final disposition of the house in question. Mr. Jolmson has also tentatively agreed, subject to SSMC Board approval, to equally share in the costs of reimbursing Mr. Randall for costs incurred to date. and equally share in the costs of demolishing the home. Total costs are anticipated to be approximately $8.000 to reimburse Mr. Randall, and another $6,500 for housing demolition. Mr. Randall has indicated a desire to temporarily move the house onto the adjoining remnant lot out of the way of the road construction in hopes of fmding a new location. Mr. Randall has been informed, and has acknowledged, that this temporary move would be at his expense. One possible site for the home would be on a tax-forfeit lot located on 4th and Main Street. Several actions, however. would need to be taken prior to this site being considered suitable for residential redevelopment. If the 4th and Main site would be suitable. separate actions would need to be taken by the Planning Commission, City Council and the HRA Board. These issues include rezoning the site from R-3 to R-2, purchase of the tax forfeit site by the City HRA. and agreeing to sell the site to I CitlJ. of Farminf/.ton 325 Oalt Street · Farm;nf/ton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fa~ (612) 463.2591 II b TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator tjJe__ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Downtown Streetscape Project - Neighborhood Meeting Feedback DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Two neighborhood meetings were held regarding the downtown streetscape project, the Council Workshop on June 10, 1998 and the Chamber of Commerce meeting on June 24, 1998. The purpose of the meetings was to collect feedback from the downtown business owners regarding the project and narrow the options for the sidewalk. DISCUSSION The majority of the attendees indicated that something needs to be done with the downtown streetscape. The majority also indicated that they would like to see more than just plain concrete used for the sidewalk. Cost is an issue and concern was expressed regarding the assessment methodology. The option of neck-outs at intersections received mixed reactions. The cost of the neck-out design and maintenance issues were discussed. The options presented are outlined below with preliminary estimated costs. Base Option $721,000 Option A - Concrete with Pattern $748,000 $27,000 Option B - Concrete with Colored Concrete $776,000 $55,000 Option C - Colored Concrete $830,000 $109,000 Option 0 - Colored Concrete with Pavers $816,000 $95,000 Option E - Concrete with Pavers $762,000 $41,000 Option F - Pavers $803,000 $82,000 replacing the trees, and adding some landscaping and site amenities such as benches and drinking fountains. The options presented deal with the sidewalk treatment only. The trees, lights and amenities remain the same for all options. The options for the sidewalk presented include: concrete with a pattern, concrete with colored concrete, colored concrete, colored concrete with pavers, concrete with pavers, and pavers. Staff would like input from the Council as to whether or not to eliminate any of the options outlined above for inclusion in the feasibility report. BUDGET IMPACT The preliminary estimates are as outlined above and the financing is discussed in the attached memo to Council from June 10th 1998. A detailed analysis will be presented with the feasibility report when it is brought to Council. ACTION REQUESTED Direct staff regarding which options to include in the Downtown Streetscaping project feasibility report. Respectfully submitted, ;;k Pi ~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City AdministratO?- Lee M. Mann, P .E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: Robin Roland Finance Director SUBJECT: Downtown Street Lighting and Sidewalk Project - Workshop DATE: June 10, 1998 INTRODUCTION A workshop to discuss design options for the Downtown Sidewalk and Street Lighting project has been scheduled in order to provide direction to staff in preparation of a feasibility report for the above referenced project. DISCUSSION The Downtown Sidewalk and Street Lighting Project has been identified in the City's five-year CIP and includes sidewalk and street lighting improvements along Oak Street, 3rd Street and Spruce Street. The project has been split into two projects in the CIP, Oak Street scheduled to be done in 1998 and Spruce and 3rd to be done in 1999. For the purposes of the workshop, the projects are being addressed as one project. As stated previously, the project identified in the CIP includes the removal and replacement of the sidewalk and street lights in the project area. In addition, cost estimates for tree removal and replacement, additional landscaping and other site amenities are included for Council's consideration. The vast number of options that exist for the materials and design of a downtown streetscape is what has prompted staff to request this workshop. When the ClP was put together, it was assumed that the existing sidewalk would be removed and replaced with regular, non-decorative concrete sidewalk. As staff held discussions regarding the project at the point of initiating a feasibility report, it became evident that it was necessary to receive direction from the Council and input from downtown business owners regarding the options that are to be studied further. The cost estimate for the Base Option includes replacing the sidewalk with regular concrete sidewalk, installing new street lights and refinishing the existing cobra lights, removing and replacing the trees, and adding some landscaping and site amenities such as benches and drinking fountains. The options presented deal with the sidewalk treatment only. The trees, lights and amenities remain the same for all options. The options for the sidewalk presented include: concrete Cit9 of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmint}ton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fa~ (612) 463-2591 with a pattern, concrete with colored concrete, colored concrete, colored concrete with pavers, concrete with pavers, and pavers. Ms. Chris Behringer with Bonestroo and Associates will be present with examples of various options for review. BUDGET IMP ACT The preliminary estimated costs for the options presented are as follows: ~t/~~J!.2~j/:;Z~~::::F.:~.~ .~~:"'< . ,,'~'~. ~'.', . j~~: . m~1:mt-~;"cr::~~:J~~ _ __ l~~_:'.:':'" ;,' ~ ~,_1\.0. --":: .'~;l , 1 ~",;. . L - , _ ,_ - - ~,0J1 Base Option $721,000 Option A - Concrete with Pattern $748,000 $27,000 Option B - Concrete with Colored Concrete $776,000 $55,000 Option C - Colored Concrete $830,000 $109,000 Option 0 - Colored Concrete with Pavers $816,000 $95,000 Option E - Base Concrete with Pavers $762,000 $41,000 Option F - Concrete Pavers $803,000 $82,000 According to the City's Special Assessment Policy, 35% of the costs of the reconstruction of these improvements would be assessed to benefitting property owners. Based on the Base Option (the lowest cost option) and Option C (the highest cost option), the range of estimated special assessments and required City contributions are reflected below. Base Option Option C $253,000 $291,000 $468,000 $539,000 Potential Financing Sources The remaining costs financed by the City would equate to approximately $45,000 per year for 15 years. Sources for this annual contribution may be the Road and Bridge fund, the HRA Special Revenue fund and/or any proceeds from available tax increment financing. Anyone or a combination of these sources may be utilized to fund the portion of the project cost not covered by special assessments. ACTION REOUESTED Council's review and discussion of the information presented will result in direction for proceeding with the project. Respectfully submitted, ;;tM~ Robin Roland Finance Director Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file /20. TO: Mayor & Councilmembers City Administrator1:n..-- FROM: Robin Roland Finance Director SUBJECT: Water Shut-off Policy DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION At its meeting on June 22, the Water Board requested that the City Council give its concurrence on their decision to change the policy of water shutoffs. DISCUSSION Under current policy, any property 90 days in arrears of payment of their Municipal Services bill is notified by mail of their delinquency and the City's intent to shut-off water service for non payment of the bill unless payment is made (or payment arrangements are made). If no payment or response is received, a City employee posts notice at the property of the impending shut-off in 24 hours and the water is shut-off the following day if no action is taken by the property owner. Water service is restored to the property upon payment in full of the delinquent bill and payment of a $53 reconnection fee. Currently, an average of 300 shutoff notices are sent out each quarter. Of these notices, 125 properties are actually posted and 5 properties are shut-off for non payment. Preparation of the shut-off list, mailing of the notices, posting of the notices and handling of all related items now requires almost two full weeks of staff time per quarter including almost two full days of street and utility division staff time. The Water Board has considered that the cost of the current water shut-off policy will only continue to grow and has advised staff of their desire to discontinue the current policy. The alternative is to change to certification of delinquent utilities to property taxes. BUDGET IMPACT Certification of delinquent utilities to the property taxes guarantees the collection of the bill, with interest and an administrative fee, as part of the property's subsequent year taxes. This is a one year assessment which requires mailed notice and public hearing in November of each year. Council currently certifies those delinquent accounts which cannot have the water shut off, due to a variety of operational reasons. I CitlJ. of Farmint}.ton 325 Oak Street. FarminlJtonl MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Falf (612) 463-2591 ACTION REQUIRED City Council concurrence with the Water Board decision to change the water shut off policy effective August 1, 1998. :z:;pj Robin Roland Finance Director /30.. TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Weed Complaints DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION At the June 15th Council meeting, two complaints regarding weeds were discussed. DISCUSSION The two areas discussed at the June 15th meeting have been mowed. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REOUESTED F or information only. Respectfully submitted, d)1ll~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file CitlJ of FarminfJ.ton 325 Oak Street · FarminfJton, MN 550211 · (612) 1163-7111 · Fax (612) 1163-2591 /3b TO: Mayor, Councilmembers City Administrator~ I James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Kuchera Entrance Trail Damage DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Staff has studied the trail damage at Rambling River Park - Kuchera Entrance that was brought to staff attention by Mayor Ristow. DISCUSSION The trail was eroded west of the railroad underpass under the concrete portion of the trail. Little blacktop was damaged. This area has been a problem area before and will continue to be a trouble spot. However, Engineering and Parks staff reviewed the damage on June 16, 1998 and are reviewing options to find a permanent solution to remedy the situation. The Parks Maintenance staff repaired the damage the day after the Council meeting by placing rock and fill under the trail and in the washout. BUDGET IMPACT The cost of the fill and rock to repair the washout was minimal. ACTION REQUESTED For Council information only. Respectfully submitted, ~o--.%s~ James Bell Parks and Recreation Director I Citlj of Farmin9ton 325 Oak Street · Farm;n9tonl MN 5502~ · (672) ~63.77 77 · Fair (672) ~63.2597 /3c TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator 'IX- FROM: Joel Jamnik, City Attorney SUBJECT: St. Paul Train Whistles - Discussion DATE: July 6, 1998 INTRODUCTION Recently, there has been increased interest in exploring the possibility of adopting a local ordinance regulating the sounding of train whistles within the City. City officials from several cities met to discuss this issue at the recent League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference. Also, the City of St. Paul has recently adopted an ordinance providing that: No person shall sound or blow any whistle of any locomotive within the city limits, except as a warning of imminent and immediate danger to life or property. The sounding of any locomotive whistle shall be prima facie evidence that it was sounded by the engineer operating the locomotive. DISCUSSION There are two primary legal issues involved in regulating the sounding of train whistles. The first issue is whether the general police powers of cities to adopt ordinances that protect the health, safety and welfare of citizens has been pre-empted by federal or state regulation. The second issue is the question of possible liability arising out of the adoption of local ordinances. Preemption In 1994, Congress enacted and amended the High-Speed Rail Development Act, 49 U.S.C. ~ 20101, et seq. The High-Speed Rail Development Act, as amended in November 1994, directs the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate regulations requiring the sounding of a locomotive horn at every crossing. The High-Speed Rail Development Act contains provisions for exceptions to the requirement for audible warnings as well as for waivers and exemptions. The Secretary of Transportation is required to take into account local issues concerning grade crossings and current restrictions and safety records of each crossing in implementing regulations requiring audible warmngs. The Secretary has not, however, promulgated such regulations. Apparently, a draft of the rules is in internal circulation in preparation for issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking. During this process, the Transportation Department learned that they were required to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (no small task for 200 + cities nationwide). The EIS and rulemaking process may delay final federal action for another year or more. CitlJ. of FarminfJ.ton 325 Oak Street · Farmint)tonl MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · FaJr (612) 463.2591 Essentially the proposed rules provide that a City may not prohibit the sounding of train whistles at crossings, except a City may request that the use of train whistles be suspended if certain supplementary safety measures exist that compensate for the train whistle. Guard crossing arms are an example of what may be deemed satisfactory safety measures. Given the uncertain situation involving the adoption of the federal regulations, some local governments have decided to move forward and adopt local regulations. The railroads have argued that the High-Speed Rail Development Act preempts cities from prohibiting the use of train whistles. At least two federal courts have disagreed, concluding that until the Secretary of Transportation promulgates regulations requiring the sounding of a locomotive horn at every crossing, there is no federal law that preempts a municipality I s right to prohibit or regulate a railroad's use of audible warnings at a grade crossing. These court cases indicate that the amended High-Speed Railway Act of 1994 was the likely catalyst for the railroads' decision to resume sounding audible warnings despite ordinances. In addition to the foregoing argument, the railroads asserted that the cities were preempted by federal regulations requiring that lead locomotives have an audible warning device of specified capabilities. However, the courts disagreed holding that the regulation of the use of equipment is distinct from limiting the possession of the equipment or regulating the equipment itself. While these cases tend to support a municipality's regulation of railroad audible warning devices, it is only a matter of time before the Secretary of Transportation complies with the High Speed Rail Development Act and promulgates rules regulating the sounding of whistles or horns at grade crossings. Cities will have to regulate within the parameters established by the final rules. However, until the Secretary of Transportation promulgates such rules, it would appear that the City has the authority to adopt reasonable regulations regarding the sounding of train whistles. One note of caution: the case law on this subject has not involved the Minnesota courts, and consequently these decisions have no binding effect on Minnesota based litigation. Minnesota courts can, and in some notable recent cases have, departed substantially from the precedent established in other state and federal court systems. State laws may also form the basis for preemption claims. However, the state law requiring sounding train whistles or bells specifically exempts cities: Minn. Stat. ~ 219.567. Failure to ring bell. An engineer driving a locomotive on a railway who fails (1) to ring the bell or sound the whistle on the locomotive, or have it rung or sounded, at least 80 rods from a place where the railway crosses a traveled road or street on the same level, except in cities, or (2) to continue ringing the bell or sounding the whistle at intervals until the locomotive and attached train have completely crossed the road or street, is guilty of a misdemeanor. (emphasis added) In St. Paul, the train operator has indicated its intent to comply with the ordinance. Liability As mentioned at the beginning of this memorandum, the City of St. Paul has recently adopted a whistle regulating the sounding of train whistles. The City of St. Paul attorney's office reportedly stated that the City would not be found negligent in adopting an ordinance. In contrast, the City of Newport chose not to adopt an ordinance that completely bans the sounding of train whistles from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. The Newport city council expressed concerns regarding the City's liability in the event an accident occurs when a railroad engineer fails to blow the whistle in reliance on a City ordinance. The different opinions may be based at least somewhat on the differences in the ordinances. Newport was considering a complete ban while St. Paul's ordinance imposes a restriction only on routine or unnecessary soundings. Additionally, while the St. Paul opinion is focused on eventual liability or negligence, the Newport concern seemed broader in considering the costs of defending claims whether or not they are eventually successful. If a person is injured by a train within the City, and that person seeks to establish the fault of others for the injury, the existence of a city ordinance restricting the sounding of whistles will almost certainly form the basis of a claim against the City. If the injured person chooses not to sue the City, the railroad likely would, seeking another party to share in any damage award or settlement. The City (or more properly, its insurance provider) will have to defend that action, which could be quite costly. The defense of a claim, however, is not to be confused with the eventual outcome. In Minnesota cities enjoy substantial protections from negligence claims based on the passage of ordinances or other legislative acts. A municipal ordinance prohibiting the unnecessary ringing of bells and blowing of whistles on locomotives within corporate limits of city has been determined by the Minnesota Surpreme Court to be reasonable and valid. Larson v. Lowden, 204 Minn. 80, 282 N.W. 669 (1938). State law provides immunity from any claim based upon an act or omission of an officer or employee, exercising due care, in the execution of a valid or invalid statute, charter, ordinance, resolution, or rule. Minn. Stat. ~ 466.03, Subd. 5. Courts have also enunciated certain common law rules surrounding the elements of a negligence action, such as the "public duty doctrine", which provide additional protection from liability. Based on the law, the city ultimately should be found immune from liability. As stated, however, there may be substantial costs incurred in establishing this immunity. While most of the costs would likely be borne by the City's insurance carrier, some costs would undoubtedly spill over, as would the prospect of higher annual premiums based on claims experience. I hope this memorandum is helpful as the Council deliberates the merits of adopting a local ordinance regulating the sounding of train whistles. Respectfully submitted, \ .--1 /,""\ ", {; il' I I '{, j 0&...c( "-.j... -....0-,-, '~u Jo~l J. Ja~ iJ tLb City Attorney ~ ~ o ~ ~ t 00 O'l O'l ..... . O'l ..... ~ z ~ ....., ~ ot: Cl i:2 ~ . It) = ~ ~ ~ . ~ Z ~ ~ i:2 ~ ~ en .. - :s ftS Q. - tiS c -- -c ~ o .. Q. a- m en CD - ..... (/) -- .c 3= c -- as ... .... C ca .Q o .... CD ... ::s (/) ca CD E ~ c & ... CI) E LIJ CI.l CI.l ::: 0 == "0 J;l 0.5';' t:: .0 0 ~ ~ ~...... ... C'd C'd .S.... t::"::l 0 ~ '.:= ;:: ~ ~ ~ .E.... 0 t=... ...... fa M q;8 bD~UOCl.l ~.o~tl "0 'i:: t:::2~.g C'd o..c: ... Vl VlV)C'd M ..c:--6D 0.E t:: 1Il0Cl.l oCl.l~::l - bD ~-5:_i:::;E _Ill ~ VlVl_ot: "0;:: UI'--IIl.._ ... CI.l t:: ~ ...... C'd C'd C'd';: ...... "0 0 ~. CI.l ci U t:: 0.. c: "0 ~ U::; CI.l C'd 5 .~ :a = ::l ~ ~ c''O ~ 8 <3 ~ C; ~ ti CI.l- ~::l~ :J:....::l~ .o~ C'dVlOO..c: C:O<l) 1Il'.:='-U.-,:: "O~uCI.l c gf ~ CI.l.5 III ~ c: C'd CI.l ~ ~ 'Vi ~o:g 0.] c;; C'd e -5 ... ::: Cl .2!l:G CI.l U Cl @ ~ ~ ~ C'd... ..o"'Vi...o.. 80..'0 o..u]CI.lCl.l."'CI.lO .CI.lctl:G::: UCI.l;:::l..c:..c:c:.o"'IIl-"O-... c ... C'd E-< - CI.l 8 o..'E 0 CI.l ~ ...... ~]~; CI.lf;(l)CI.l<aUg:E~ t: ~.5 ~ ..c: ~ oS :J: "0 ~ ::l ~ 0 0 ci>"';.~ 0.."0 0 ~ ~ ...- ......t::V)u;::t:: -C'd..c: '3 ==u ";:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... ctlo::l tl...8 C'dIll"O 2'"5 ...;:.~~. CI.l ;:;gr(l) ... 0 .8 CI.l ~ ... Q).o C'd'''''' III ~u d~~E~ ~~& ~;:::l "O'-(l)'-OO .-.::...8 "'::l . (l)(l).....o-c: ...u,... C'd'-(l)t::lXlt::... - ..c:(l)~~ . (l)E-<"O ]ca(l) U..c: C'd ..... ;:.. U CI.l . -::: <;:...CI.l :J: ... ~ .... C'd t:: :> J::.... ~ C''-.::l 0"0 0 (l)'''''' 0 ~ ii; vi 'u ~"E ~ ~ U (l) U ~ .. en ... ....O...::lVl..c:....;>. "0 ih CI.l c: ..c: C'd .... c: .... (l) c:...... ..c: ~ G'u f-< ~ c: ~ 'u ~]:.: f-< t:: c: t:: c: CI.l'~'~ (l) C'd ~ 0 O~::lO..c:CIll..c: 0 ~. U J...4 o "V; "_ en .... U) V) ~ VJQ)u(/)~::::< ~~..... ::l ~ (l) ...... .0 "0 ". .... C'd o M CI.l C'd C'd .......... . - III bD .... 0 (l)..c: III Ill...... ::l C'd '.:= Q)...... .... .....8c:....CI.l.-.oIllCl.l~..c:::l 0'2 C'd 0 5 a)'.'" - (l) bD C'd ~ 0 ....ctl~V)c:~"3EEiiliic:-5 g 5 2. 's Iii ~ ~ &i' ~ ~ .~ ~ ~]E3 ~ ~~8~ ~ C; ..c: lXl ~ c: .... ~.;: ~ e ..c:c.== C'd-ci...."Ou;;... CI.l'''''' en C'd .S'a ~ (l) ctl (l) (l) ..c: U (l) ~ "E III c: ~ ~.~ ~>.....Q)~~ oQ.)Q)-- "0 ~ bDoS'''''' U ..c: 0 t3 CI.l lXl (l) ~ s..... ~"O <l.i:g: _ .... ......"0 f:::' c: ::J;"" Ci) ........ u....., "'..... bD 0 ... bD"'V C'dC:"''''"VC:-(l) ...... C'd c: ~ III C'd ;:. .. (l)......"O ~ ~ V) ::l :>.S (l) t:: C'd ~ S ~ (l) 1-0 ........ 0 0 C'd c:...... u.... U CI.l C'dU"'UI-o(l)"O(l).....C'd"O...,o 8 ~ c:.~ - ef C; f; 5 0. S.8 8 ~ (l) ~"O c: (l) ~..c: "0'''''' ~ (l) o J.;l (l).::: 0 lXl (l) CI.l ~ C'd ~ ~ ~ uC'd.oc: t::C:~;:..c:Vi....== 8 ...."0 (l) t=..c: CI.l Vl g == '6O::l U ...~C'd~00OSC'd_U(l)'08 o 0.. ...... - ..c: ::-' t:: - bD'" Z ... -t::+:lC:CI.l::lr>t::o ..c: == oS.~ C'd'~ 0 ~ 0 U....... U C;.~ ~ t:: t: 8 ~ ~ . U t:: q; (l) >...c: (l) 0 ~ Ill;>' "0 (l) ~ <I) <Jl ~ ~..c: e ... J;l o.~ @..c: ..... 8 g "'" . f-<... 0 8; ..c: E-< (l) ;:.. U ~ ~oo..o c: 8C'd(l) ::l _ c: <Jl U ...... 11/ "0 .0 .... ~ Q)~ j~ U... III V) ..c.., g ~ Q:::! c=S .~~ :.1:.... >os! alV) ~ >- ~~ ~l cU .~:;:: ci .~ 1J . ~ ~ ..... ~ ~ u -ci ....lJ'}t.nCUI-4..... HO '" "'"0.... bD(l),-A. 0 0 .8 C'd g.E ~ ~ ~ U 0 -e ~t=-eE-<~"'],o~] "'C;oC: ~.... "O..c: -..c::.oot::V;"Oc'"eo "'5b ....."'5b= C'd...... t:: .... O'(j) ...... ''''''...... U"O ~ ::l 0 l-L. c: CI.lC'd(l)c:(l)....c:..c:(l)~ .........c:::l:> e ..c:.... ...... '(j)"3 0 0 c: .=.... C'd ;;...c: C'd U o.'a 8 C'd bDtl.. ctl - A. C' 0.. ;:: ': CI.l.S-g "E B ...;...... C'd c: ... oS t:: Cd ::l c: V) U ;,. ctl.S. CI.l:C ... (l)..c:-32.o C'd ;:::'<Jl eo l'tS - bV::S u -...., (J)"- V)'Vi ::l C'd...... 0 0.."0 c::J: c: 0 A. ::l .... S (l)...... CI.l gr......1=; ...; 0' (l) 0 ::: ~..c: ...... C'd +:l V) bD U U C'd ... +:l - bD (l) c: c: bD'~ e ~ ~ C'd _ CI.l...... C'd c: .::l ... CI.l.o..c: t:: t::...... t3 <I) E V) u S f-< 8 il.::: t:: V; C'd S 2 S C; B ~ 3)'0.