The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05.04.98 Council Packet COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR MAY 4, 1998 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Historic Preservation Week, May 10-16, 1998 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Dennis Walter, 18235 Euclid Avenue - CSAH 31 Right-of-Way Proceeds 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes 4/20/98 (Regular) b) Street Cleaning Contract - Private Developments c) Adopt Resolution Setting Bond Sale - Middle Creek Sanitary Sewer Project d) Adopt Resolution - Special Assessment Deferral e) Adopt Emergency Operations Plan - Revised t) School and Conference Request - Finance Department g) Acknowledge Settlement of Contractor Claim h) Solid Waste Disposal Agreements i) Certificate of Survey/Site Plan Requirements j) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Vacation of Easement - East Farmington 4th Addition 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) 1998 Seal Coat Project (Supplemental) 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Development Standards - Turf/Erosion Control Policies b) Comprehensive Plan Update Schedule c) Charleswood/Middle Creek Sanitary Sewer EA W d) East Farmington 5th Amendment to Development Contract 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS /-^ a) Adopt Resolution - Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer/Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer Plans and Specifications b) Metropolitan Council Approval - MUSA Land Trade 12. NEW BUSINESS Action Taken 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN TO: Mayor & Councilmembers ~ FROM: John. F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: May 4, 1998 It is requested that the May 4, 1998 agenda be amended as follows: AWARD OF CONTRACT Supplement 9(a) 1998 Seal Coat Project Four bids were received on Thursday, April 30th for the 1998 Seal Coat Project. Allied Asphalt submitted the low bid in the amount of $44,744. A staff memo is attached. Respectfully submitted, i1~ hn F. Erar City Administrator CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street · Farmintjton, MN 55024 · (672) 463-77 77 · Fa~ (672) 463-2597 1~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: 1998 Seal Coat Project DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City Council approved the plans and specifications for the 1998 Seal Coat Project at the April 6th Council meeting. Four bids have been received for the 1998 Seal Coat Project. DISCUSSION Allied Asphalt has submitted the low bid in the amount of $44,744. Based on this bid and including a 10% contingency and 27% for legal, engineering and administration costs, the total estimated project cost is $56,600. The estimate from the feasibility study was $75,700. Streets in Dakota County Estates 9th Addition, Akin Park Estates 2nd through 4th Additions, Nelsen Hills 3rd Addition, Prairie Creek 3rd Addition and Limerock Ridge will all be seal coated for the first time with this year's project. Akin Park 15t Addition and several downtown streets and alleys have not been seal coated in over seven years and are included in this year's project. BUDGET IMPACT The 1998 Seal Coat Project is included in the 1998 Capital Improvement Plan. Several developments in the project area have already been assessed seal coating costs through their respective development contracts. The property owners benefiting from the improvements to the remaining streets would be assessed for the project costs pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429 and the City's Special Assessment Policy. The remainder of the costs would be funded through the Road and Bridge Fund. The total estimated project cost for the 1998 Seal Coat project based on the low bid received is $56,600. The Council indicated at the public hearing on the project their intent to assess the benefiting property owners $55 per residential equivalent for the costs of the Seal Coat improvements. CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street. Farmington! MN 55024 · (612) 463-7111 · Fa~ (672) 463-2591 ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution: 1. Accepting the base bid of Allied Asphalt for $44,744 and awarding tlle project; 2. Directing staff to prepare the proposed final assessment roll utilizing a unit price of$55.00 per buildable lot. Respectfully submitted, ~Wl~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file t:l ~ 11 6 .. .~ .~ ~ .~ 'S ~ 'a "" 'S '& ~ lS .... t: 'ij ..... .. ~ <> ~ ~ oS '" .. ~ . ~ & . ~ .. ... il'! s:: ..s:: .... ~ .9 .g ~ .~ ~~ ClIO <:l"I <:l"I ~ ~= oOrr) ~~ ~~ ~rJ.) ~e 0= U~ ~Z ~O rJ.)~ ClIO~ ~5 ~ E-4 8 8 8 8 z ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 [g rn ~ ..0 00 ,.,.. , ~ ('l .... 0 ~ ~ ~ .... .... .... ~ lrl ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ,...: 0 '" ::> .... .... .... z 8 8 8 8 0 ~. g ~ ~ .... '" M ~ N ci ..; ~ ~ ~ ('l ::r: u ~ ~ ll. .... .... .... ~ ~ 8 0 8 ~ '" ... ~ ~ ,... 0 .... .... .... z 8 8 8 8 ..; 0 0 ... g '" '" 0: $ rn ... ,... ~ ~ .,; :i N '4 ~ N ~ ~ .... .... .... ~ u ~ '" 8 ~ 00 ~ 0\ 0 .... .... N .... .... .... z 8 8 8 8 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 '" '" ~ '" 0 "'. ll. ..0 ~ '" i 0 ~ N ~ !;; u :s .... .... .... ... lrl ~ '" 0 ~ ,... '" 00 S cooi 0 '" ::> .... .... .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f2 0\ .... N ~ c: ..9 c: c: OJ S S OIl 8 8 co co i5. i5. .:: .:: ~ B ~ co ~ u ~ ~ OJ 1>l OIl OIl OIl ~ .. co .E :;; il 3 0 t+:: S u '8 !l OJ lrl co 1>l ~ ~ ~ N ~ b ~ ..( ~ liS ~ Eo< 888~ 0";";0 v V') 0"0- ""' 00 f"1 \0 oO~cr)O\ .,jo V"l ~~~.~ 8~~~ ";0";00 OMN.q- N\OOO- ..0 .... ci 0\ .,jo "'. ~~~~ 8~~;; ..co\v1a\ O'\OON 0\1')\00\ vl~o\oO ... ... 6't ~ ~ .,. 8~~;;:: ";";000\ """ r- ...... lr) f-oo:t-NOO i";~oO ~~~.vt z~ 011- ~~e ~U~ ZC::>::;J ~t;e~ u ~ ~ _ ~~U~ z!2~ - OOb~ UUEo<~ I ~ ~ :i co ~ o (0) ~ ... ,... V)~ a~.-4 __~ tiz,,",Q <~;:'1iz :I!.. . io 0 E-3:!l,...lrl ~ug.~~ '" lU '" N 2 ~~ "" ,... M S\ 0\ It> ;; .,.,'" ~~:g8t:l ll.....z:r;jz i ~ ~ '" 0 .... lrl . '" lrl ~ .-g~~ ~q..9~'" ""'ll.U'" ... ci5 .... \C ~ It> Ii ~~ G,) . \0 ~ Q "gci5"'oz lU-sz't I:o:i~~~~ :E-..w"'~~ ~ ~.s,! ~ '" o ~ '" ;:'1i:I! ... .... ,... g Ii ... a- '" ~ Z fri ~ 0 V") ~ .- > Z .,., ~ g.<~9 u ~ . ~ ~ ~00t5~~ B~~:ctn lU 0 Q, ll.....~ C/) ...J X P [ r a> Eo< l"I.l o U Eo< U ~ ~ Proposed RESOLUTION NO. R -98 AWARD BIDS FOR PROJECT NO. 98-12 1998 SEAL COAT PROJECT PREPARE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ~ Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City on the 4th day of May, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 1998 Seal Coat project (in the streets shown on Attachment A), bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Contractor Total Base Bid Allied Blacktop ...... .................... .......$44,744.00 Caldwell Asphalt............................ ...$45,096.00 Astech Asphalt............... ................. ..$46,204.00 Bituminous Roadways ......................$48,540.00 ; and WHEREAS, it appears the firm of Allied Blacktop is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The base bid of Allied Blacktop, a Minnesota corporation for $44,744.00 is hereby accepted and awarded and the Mayor and Clerk and hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract therefore. 2. Staff is hereby directed to prepare the proposed final assessment roll utilizing a unit price of $55.00 per buildable lot. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of May, 1998. Mayor day of , 1998. Attested to the SEAL Clerk! Administrator ATTACHMENT A 185th Street Euclid Path Esquire Way Essence Trail Enhance Court Endeaver Avenue Embers Avenue Embry Avenue Eaglewood Trail Embry Lane Echo Lane 191 st Street I 92nd Street 193rd Street Encore Court Enchanted Court Enchanted Way Epic Court Ellington Trail 194th Street Elmwood Court Elsmere Court 2nd Street 4th Street 5th Street 6th Street 7th Street Oak Street Between 193rd Street to one block north of Epic Court and between Elk River Trail and Upper 183rd Street English A venue and Ember Avenue Englewood Way and Pilot Knob Streets English Avenue 187th Street W. to South End of Street Embers to Echo Lane Embry Lane and Echo Lane Embry Lane and Echo Lane Future Pilot Knob to east end of road Walnut and Elm Walnut and Elm Spruce and Elm Spruce and Elm Spruce and Elm 2nd and Hwy 3 8 5[~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administratorj7't FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Service Manager SUBJECT: Preservation Week, May 10-16, 1998 DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION Historic Preservation Week is May 10-16, 1998. DISCUSSION Attached is a proclamation declaring Preservation Week be celebrated in the City of Farmington and asking the citizens to join citizens across the United States to recognize and participate in observing this week. As part of the celebration, the Farmington Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) would like to recognize Gordon and Twylla Chant for the restoration of their home at 621 Oak Street and David Schreier for his contributions to the preservation of Farmington's history. HPC members Harbee Tharaldson and George Flynn will present the awards at the May 4, 1998 Council meeting. BUDGET IMPACT There will be no impact on the 1998 budget. ACTION ReQUIRED Adopt the attached proclamation and join with the HPC in congratulating the Chants and David Schreier in their accomplishments. Respectfully submitted, ~J;~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Service Manager CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street. Farmington! MN 55024 · (672) 463-77 71 · Fa~ (672) 463-2597 GOv TO: Mayor & Councilmembers City Administrato~ FROM: Robin Roland Finance Director SUBJECT: Citizen Comment - CSAH 31 Right of Way/Hill Dee Park DATE: May 4,1998 INTRODUCTION During the Citizen comments portion of the April 20, 1998 City Council meeting, Dennis Walter, 18235 Euclid Avenue, inquired about the Hill Dee park property affected by the CSAH 31 project. Mr. Walter questioned how the proceeds paid to the City for the right-of-way on the park property would be utilized. DISCUSSION It is the County's policy when acquiring right-of-way from a City to reimburse the City for costs that the City incurred to acquire the property. No reimbursement is paid for properties that the City did not purchase, such as property dedicated for parks, right-of-way or other purposes. The Hill Dee property falls in this category as the land was dedicated to the City as a park by the developer at the time of the development. As such, the City will not receive any proceeds for the 4,445 square foot highway easement and the 200 square foot temporary easement in the Hill Dee park. ACTION REQUIRED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ~~N/ "Robin Roland Finance Director cc: Dennis Walter CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street. Farmington, MN 55024 · (672) 463-77 7 7 · Fa~ (672) 463-2597 COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR April 20, 1998 tCL 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7 :00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Gamer, Strachan None City Administrator Erar, Attorney Andrea M. Poehler, City Management Team 4. APPROVEAGENDA . MOTION by Gamer, second by Fitch to approve the Agenda with the following changes: · Typographical error on Page 10 of the April 6, 1998 Council Minutes, Paragraph 11(b) - "APIF, MOTION CARRIED" was omitted. · Accept Supplemental Agenda requesting that the April 20, 1998 Council Agenda be amended to add the following items: => 6(e) "South Suburban Medical Center" under CITIZEN COMMENTS; and => 1 O( c) "Farmington Area Code Prefix Update" under PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS. · Add item 14(b) "Civil Litigation - Contractor Claim Update". APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Council Minutes (Regular) April 20, 1998 Page 2 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Proclamation Declaring Earth Day MOTION by Cordes, second by Gamer to proclaim that the City of Farmington will designate April 22, 1998 as Earth Day. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Dennis Walter, 18235 Euclid Avenue, questioned how the right-of-way proceeds for Hill Dee Park property would be utilized relative to the CSAH 31 project. City Administrator Erar indicated staff would prepare a written response to Mr. Walter within two weeks. a) Resident Comments - Judy Bryant - Development Improvements Council acknowledged. b) Resident Comments - James Gunderson - CSAH 31 Project Council acknowledged. c) Resident Comments - Rudy Garcia (Lime Rock Ridge) - Seal Coat Project Council acknowledged. d) Resident Comments - David Gerardy (501 Oak St.) - Seal Coat Project Council acknowledged. e) South Suburban Medical Center Lee Larson, CEO of South Suburban Medical Center (hereinafter "SSMC"), was in the audience (as well as four SSMC Board Members) and pleaded his case to Council for the sidewalk in question to be installed on the south side versus the north side of Elm Street. He noted that the Hospital Board opposed the installation ef sidewalk on the north side of Elm Street. John Curry, SSMC Board Member - Added that their main concern is the area at Highway 50 and Highway 3, since it is the major traffic route to the hospital. Dan Nicolai, SSMC Board Member - Studied the site and feels the proposed sidewalk on the north side would "look like a stretch of sidewalk going nowhere" and would be rarely used. It would also be a great expense to the hospital to maintain. Council Minutes (Regular) April 20, 1998 Page 3 City Engineer Lee Mann presented staffs position and reasoning for installing the sidewalk on the north side of Elm Street as follows: ~ Placing the sidewalk on the south side would introduce at least two to three additional pedestrian crossings along Elm Street. This includes forcing pedestrians to cross the frontage road and/or having to cross Elm Street at other undesignated crossings either on the curve of the street or at other points to access hospital property. ~ Placing the sidewalk on the north side of the property, on the other hand, would provide for a continuous pedestrian link between the East Farmington subdivision and the downtown area. It would also eliminate the need for any pedestrians to cross Elm Street at any point along the curve to access hospital property or to the downtown area. ~ Curb already installed along the north side of Elm Street is already designed for handicapped persons in wheel chairs. Without a sidewalk on the north side, disabled persons would have to cross Elm Street mid-block along the curve, that as a collector will be heavily traveled, exposing handicapped pedestrians to additional safety risks. ~ When additional facilities are constructed on SSMC property in the future, the lack of a sidewalk on the north side would force both employees and patients to walk on the street along the north side curb or to cross over to the sidewalk on the south side and then back over to the north side. ~ In terms of ambulances entering and exiting the private driveways, it is a far safer scenario to have pedestrians stay on the northerly sidewalk to walk across SSMC private driveway entrances. This, in turn, would avoid forcing pedestrians to cross Elm Street from the south side to the north side with ambulances driving back and forth on Elm Street. ~ All private property owners are required to shovel snow along public sidewalks. It was discussed with SSMC that they may wish to offer the property owner some type of arrangement to assist him in keeping the sidewalk clear. Further, as the sidewalk will be on public right-of- way, private property owners have no exposure with respect to someone tripping or falling on the sidewalk. ~ Snow storage on the boulevard would be no less or greater a problem than if the sidewalk were on the south side. ~ Placing the sidewalk on the south side would necessitate having to redesign the project plans adding additional cost and delay to project completion that is scheduled to be completed within the next two weeks. Council Minutes (Regular) April 20, 1998 Page 4 Mr. Mann further stated that since the road was put in, he has observed pedestrians walking on the street almost daily. It is also his understanding that hospital employees walk to work. It should be noted that a Conditional Use Permit was approved by the Planning Commission on May 13, 1997, with the former SSMC Executive Director, as well as the Hospital Board, agreeing to the plan requirements placing the sidewalk on the north side of Elm Street. Council approved the plans and specifications on June 16, 1997. It was further noted that the installation of the sidewalk on one side of Elm Street would be consistent with the City's Sidewalk Policy. Mayor Ristow asked Council for their opinion as to whether the sidewalk should be on the north side or the south side of Elm Street. The responses were as follows: Councilmember Cordes - north side; Councilmember Gamer - south side; Councilmember Fitch - agreed to send back to Planning Commission and look at changing sidewalk to the south side; Councilmember Strachan - south side; Mayor Ristow - agreed to send back to Planning Commission and look at changing sidewalk to the south side. Mayor Ristow indicated the main reason for agreeing to recommend installing the sidewalk on the south side is that the sidewalk would connect with an existing sidewalk on the south side of Oak Street to 9th Street. Councilmember Fitch requested that a letter be sent to the hospital confirming their request to change the location of the sidewalk. The letter should specifically state that in the event there are delays or additional construction costs, the hospital will be responsible for 100% of the costs as pel' the original Development Agreement. After lengthy discussion, it was decided by Council to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission with a recommendation to change the location of the sidewalk frOOl the north side to the south side of Elm Street. This item will be on the agenda at the next Planning Commission Meeting on May 12, 1998. Community Development Director David Olson indicated that regardless of whether or not the Planning Commission approves SSMC's amendment, the determination will end there, since the Planning Commission is the body that approves Conditional Use Permits. If rejected by the Planning Commission, SSMC would have to appeal directly to Council to overturn the Planning Commission's decision. Council Minutes (Regular) April 20, 1998 Page 5 City Administrator Erar indicated that the contractor must be notified immediately regarding the potential change and delay in construction. Citizen Marv Wier, 808 3rd Street, claimed Highway 50 has only one approved crosswalk between the stop light at Highway 3 and Akin Road. One crosswalk approved by the County is at 3rd Street. Pedestrians from the south side of Elm Street will cross Highway 50 and County approval will be needed to put in a crosswalk at that location. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Strachan, second by Gamer to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes 4/6/98 (Regular) b) Approved Agreements - Clean-up Day c) Approved Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation Department d) Adopted RESOLUTION R41-98 Approving Reimbursement of Expenditures - CSAH 31 e) Approved Agreement for Professional Service - Comprehensive Planning Consultant t) Acknowledged Release of Right-of-Way Proceeds - D & 0 Properties g) Approved School and Conference Request - Administration Department h) Approved School and Conference Request - Parks & Recreation Department i) Approved School and Conference Request - Fire Department j) Approved Compensation Adjustment - Administration Department k) Approved Appointment Recommendation - Community Development Department I) Approved Municipal Liquor Operations - Downtown Store Remodeling Project m) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT - None Council Minutes (Regular) April 20, 1998 Page 6 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) 1998 League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference (June 16-19, 1998 - Duluth, MN) City Administrator Erar suggested that all individuals interested in attending the Conference contact Executive Assistant Folie as soon as possible. b) City/County CSAH 31 Project Coordination Plan City Administrator Erar announced the Project Coordination Plan developed in anticipation of the CSAH 31 construction project. A telephone line established solely for this project will be answered by the Administrative Service Manager. The telephone number is 463-4141. c) Farmington Area Code Prefix Update City Administrator Erar provided Council with an area code prefix update. The City of Farmington will be placed in the 651 area code. A typographical error in City Administrator's April 20, 1998 memo was noted. At Paragraph 4(b), "February 28, 1998" should read "February 28, 1999" (as marking the official end of the permissive dialing period). 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Designate New MSA Mileage City Engineer Lee Mann outlined the annual street mileage report submitted to MnDot as required by the MSA Program to identify the amount of mileage the City may use to designate Municipal State Aid streets. Due to the City's growth, the City will be allowed to designate up to 1.23 miles of additional MSA routes this year. MOTION by Gamer, second by Cordes to ADOPT RESOLUTION R42-98 Establishing State Aid Highways. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Council Minutes (Regular) April 20, 1998 Page 7 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Various Public Works Department Issues City Engineer Lee Mann presented responses from the City's Public Works Department regarding the three issues brought forth during Council Roundtable discussions at the April 6, 1998 Council meeting. Mayor Ristow brought up the issue of street patching on Maple Street between 2nd and 3rd Street. City Engineer Lee Mann indicated he would ensure an appropriate staff response to remedy the problem. Mayor Ristow also requested that action be taken as soon as possible to temporarily remedy the drainage problems on Hickory Street and at 509 8th Street (Mrs. Anderson's back yard) until proper grading can be completed when the ground either dries up or freezes. Mr. Mann indicated that he would look into this request and get back to Council. Councilmemher Strachan: Pleased Mike Schultz was recommended for appointment as a full-time City Employee in the Planning Department. Councilmemher Fitch: Commented that preliminary work has begun on CSAH 31. Mayor Ristow: Received letter inviting Council and staff to Dakota Electric's Annual Meeting on April 23rd at the Farmington High School, 800 Denmark Avenue, at 7 :00 p.m. Mayor Ristow called/or a recess at 8:20 P.M. 14. EXECUTIVE SESSION Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:30 P.M. to discuss the following issues: a) Outcome of 1994 Municipal Board Decision - Attorney/Client Privilege b) Civil Litigation - Contractor Claim Update Council adjourned out of Executive Session at 9:32 P.M. Council Minutes (Regular) April 20, 1998 Page 8 15. ADJOURN Council adjourned from the Council Session at 9:33 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~ !l ~,'i1' cAGlLlJ J~~ Lori J. FolIe Executive Assistant TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator *- / Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer f1 b FROM: SUBJECT: Street Cleaning Contact - Private Developments DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION Staff has solicited quotes for street cleaning services in the private developments. DISCUSSION It is stipulated in all ofthe Development Contracts for developments in the City that the Developer is responsible to keep the streets clear of soil and debris. It has proven to be very difficult to enforce this issue and the amount of soils and debris in the streets is at times significant. The City has the right under the Development Contract to perform work and bill the costs to the Developer when there is a default by the Developer. Failing to keep the streets clean is a default of the Development Contract. The streets need to be kept clean for two main reasons. Firstly, if the streets are not kept clean, the soils will be washed into the storm sewer system and the ponds during the rainfall events. If the debris gets into a system downstream of the development, taxpayer dollars will need to be expended to clean the system and ponds. Secondly, staffhas received numerous complaints from residents due to the inconvenience of having to drive through streets that are full of mud. Staff has already notified the Developers in the City that the City is contracting for street cleaning services. The developments will be inspected on Tuesdays and Thursdays after 12:00 pm. Those streets that are not clean by 12:00 pm. on Tuesdays and Thursdays will be cleaned on the following day, (Wednesday and Friday), by the City's contractor. The cost for street cleaning services including an administrative fee will be billed back to the Developer. With this program in place, it will be entirely up to the Developer as to whether or not the City assists himlher with street cleaning. If all of the streets within a development are clean at 12:00 pm. on Tuesdays and Thursdays, the City's contractor will not be ordered to clean the streets in that development and the Developer will not be billed for street cleaning at that time. The only exception to this is if staff is made aware of a situation that needs to be addressed immediately and the Developer cannot respond as necessary. I CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street · Farmint}ton! MN 55024 · (612) 463-7171 · Fa~ (612) 463-2597 BUDGET IMPACT . The low quote for street cleaning was received from Hoffbeck Trucking (see attached). The cost to the Developer would include a markup for administrative time and would be $70/hour for skid loader work and $60/hour for pickup broom work. There would be no budget impact to the City. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached contract for street cleaning services by Hoffbeck Trucking by motion. Respectfully submitted, {;k 7J1 ~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file 1998 __ET SWEEPING BIDS RECEIVED BY 12:00 PM (NOON) April 3, 1998 SKID LOADER 2 PICK UP BROOM TOTAL 50.00 $ 110.00 $ 160.00 $ Page 1 42.00 $ 120.00 $ 162.00 $ 90.00 125.00 215.00 N/A N/A N/A 4/29/98 STREET CLEANING CONTRACT AGREEMENT dated this day of , 1998, by and between the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and HOFFBECK TRUCKING, INC., a Minnesota corporation ("Contractor"). IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL UNDERTAKINGS HEREIN, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Scope of Work. A. The City hereby engages Contractor to provide street cleaning services within private developments in the City. Contractor shall clean only those streets identified by the City Engineer during the 24-hour period prior to the scheduled cleaning date. B. Contractor will provide street cleaning services on those streets identified by the City Engineer every Wednesday and Friday, at a minimum. All street cleaning shall be performed during the hours of: 7:00 a.m. -7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Saturday C. In performing the work under this Agreement, Contractor shall use only those hydrants approved by the City for Contractor's use. The City shall provide Contractor with a water meter which Contractor shall use when obtaining water from City hydrants. Contractor shall not be charged for City water used in performing work under this Agreement. D. The City's Inspector shall verify that the work is completed to the satisfaction of the City. Contractor's failure to clean streets to the City's satisfaction and in a timely manner shall be cause for termination of this Agreement by the City without notice. Section 2. Equipment. A. Contractor shall perform the work required under this Agreement usmg the following fully operational equipment: 1) A 2-3 cubic yard Elgin Pelican street sweeper with double gutter broom sweepers or equivalent (pickup broom with water discharge); and 2) A skid loader. Each sweeper will be equipped with an anti-siphon device. Plastic brushes are acceptable. B. When requested by the City, Contractor shall furnish a complete statement of equipment condition and previous length of service on all equipment to be used in the Citywide(F)\Engineer\Street Cleaning Contract performance of the work under this Agreement. The City's Public Works Director or designee may reject any equipment used to perform the work covered under this Agreement. Section 3. Contract Term. Contractor shall commence services upon execution of this Agreement, and shall pursue the services diligently. This Agreement shall terminate on March 1, 1999. This Agreement may be terminated earlier by either party without cause upon thirty (30) days' notice to the other party, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. Section 4. Payment. A. The City shall pay Contractor a unit price per hour as follows: $50.00/hour for use of pickup broom with water discharge $60.00/hour for use of the skid loader B. The unit price per hour includes only time spent actually operating equipment and does not include downtime. The unit prices per hour shall cover all of the City's costs associated with the street cleaning. Contractor shall be responsible for all costs it incurs in the transportation and disposal of materials off-site. C. Application for payment shall be made monthly. Contractor shall invoice each development in the City separately. Upon approval ofthe invoice by the City, the City will remit the approved invoice amount directly to Contractor. Section 5. Documentation. A. Contractor shall be responsible for keeping and maintaining the following records on a daily basis. 1) The total number of cleaning hours per development for each piece of equipment identified in Section 2. 2) The number of dumps and estimated yards of debris per development. B. These records shall be submitted weekly to the City's Public Works Director or designee showing the dates, times and street locations where sweeping was done in each development. Section 6. Emere:ency Response. During the contract term it may be necessary to have contract work done on an emergency basis. Upon the City's request for additional work, Contractor shall respond to the City's request upon 24 hours verbal or written notice. If the City's Public Works Director or designee determines it necessary, the City may hire another entity other than Contractor for completion of the requested work. Section 7. Independent Contractor. The City hereby retains Contractor as an independent contractor upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Contractor is 2 not an employee of the City and is free to contract with other entities as provided herein. Contractor shall be responsible for selecting the means and methods of performing the work. Contractor shall furnish any and all supplies, equipment and incidentals necessary for Contractor's performance under this Agreement. The City and Contractor agree that Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Contractor or any of Contractor's agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of the City. Contractor shall be exclusively responsible under this Agreement for Contractor's own FICA payments, worker's compensation payments, unemployment compensation payments, withholding amounts, and/or self- employment taxes if any such payments, amounts, or taxes are required to be paid by law or regulation. Section 8. Extra Service. No claim will be honored for compensation for extra services or work beyond the scope ofthis Agreement without the written approval of the City. Section 9. Insurance. Contractor shall furnish the City certificates of insurance from insurers duly licensed with the State of Minnesota covering public liability insurance, including general liability, automobile liability and bodily injury liability in an amount of at least $500,000 for injury or death of anyone person in anyone occurrence; and bodily injury liability in an amount of at least $1,000,000 for injuries or death arising out of anyone occurrence. Property damage liability shall be furnished in the amount of at least $200,000. Contractor shall comply with all applicable insurance requirements of the Worker's Compensation Act. Contractor shall provide proof of worker's compensation coverage. The City shall be named an additional insured on the general liability policy. Section 10. Unsafe Conditions Reporting. Contractor shall promptly inform the City by telephone and in writing of any unsafe conditions on City streets or property discovered during the course of Contractor's duties, whether or not Contractor is able to remedy the unsafe condition. Section 11. Indemnification. Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees, of and from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, including costs and attorney's fees, arising out of or by reason of negligence in the execution or performance of the work or services provided for herein and further agrees to defend at its sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising hereunder. Section 12. Covenant A2ainst Contingent Fees. Contractor warrants that it has not employed any person to ~olicit or secure this Agreement for a commission, percentage, brokerage or contingent fee. Section 13. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Section 14. Notices. Pursuant to this Agreement, notices shall be hand-delivered or mailed as follows: 3 AS TO CITY: City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 AS TO CONTRACTOR: Hoffbeck Trucking P. O. Box 474 Lakeville, MN 55044 Section 15. Miscellaneous. A. Contractor may not assign or subcontract any of the services to be performed hereunder without the written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. B. This Agreement shall become effective only upon its execution by both the City and Contractor. This Agreement shall not be modified, amended, rescinded, waived or terminated without the approval in writing of the City. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. Dated: , 1998. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor And John F. Erar, City Administrator CONTRACTOR: Dated: ,1998. HOFFBECK TRUCKING, INC. By: Its: And Its: 4 TO: Mayor & Councilmembers City Administrator ~ FROM: Robin Roland Finance Director SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1998 DATE: May 4,1998 INTRODUCTION Funding is necessary to construct the Middle Creek Area Trunk Sanitary Sewer project, as described to the City Council in the feasibility study on February 17, 1998. The feasibility study identified a General Obligation Sanitary Sewer Revenue Bond issue as the source of this funding. DISCUSSION The bond issue recommended is $2,670,000 and the proposed sale date is June 1,1998. Bids for the bonds would be received by Juran & Moody on that date and the successful bidder would be authorized by the City Council at the Council Meeting that evening. The bonds will be dated June 1, 1998 and the proceeds would be available to the City for payment of the construction costs of this project within thirty days of the sale. BUDGET IMPACT A projected cash flow for these bonds is attached. As identified in the feasibility study, the debt service on these bonds will be funded through Sanitary Sewer Trunk fees, City Sewer Availability Charges and operating revenues from the Sewer Operations Enterprise Fund. ACTION REQUIRED Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the sale of $2,670,000 in General Obligation Sanitary Sewer Revenue Bonds on June 1, 1998. ReSpeCtfull~ s~~ed, 4/t~#J I · . Robin Roland Finance Director 'Ie CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street. FarminlJton, MN 55024 · (672) 463-77 7 7 · Fa~ (672) 463-2597 ~!88~~~~~a~~~q~t~;;;;;; i a~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~ Ullllllllllitllllll;l;;U;;;;;;d i t5 ~~!~~~~~~q~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~mOi!~!~=~~X!~S-~IOoooo~ ~ ..l!i. ."l. .1'\ a_ .. III ~ N~ -e e~ -~ a:!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i~~OO!!~li~!~la~~g~ooooo: ~1~8888888888888888888888 ~~~o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ooooo~ o ~:HI~!fHHH1~~~HI~~~ la ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~oooooooooooooooooooooa ~!l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~oooooooooooooooooooooa ! g ~ ; Ili!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~!!!!~~~~ i ~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ oooooooooooooooooooooa i g < ! !a~~; ; I ~ lei i:a i ~1t5 ~;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . ;: i ~ 'fHl~~i9~!i\~iii~~~ooooo Ei ~~~a t!:a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I ~~~ la ~~O ~t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ;~~~ g!>~~~~~~~~i\~~ll~~~ooooOEi 1~5 ~~fl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I 5~C1~ la I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~i\~~.l~~~ooooOEi ~Ea~~!l;;ig~~~*~~!:! ~ I ~ ~ ... ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ... I 0 ~ ~ ... ;ffl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .o...........~~~~ooooo ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8 6 lllllllllllllllooooo~ ~ B~~~~~!E!~~~~~~ ~ U ~!~~~~~i~~~I~~~~~~~~~~ a~~"'~ ~! ~ o _ .. ~ ~.. ..~ 51 "'''' ~ ~~~ ~ ;:j<~ ~~ai~ ~~~~I;; . .< ~~I ~e ; ~ .! ~ 4~sai ~~~~. ..~i:tJ~- ~ I ~ ii~ I < ~ 118 !:~O ~ ~"'R ii -:~ . = I~I~~ ~ -:~-:~... U> i~~~! ~ .. ~ ..~ J~~ ~'<" lilt) m4 ~::&i"~~~~ ~~ ~~~ .s ii S::&~~~ ;; 888 88888S: s:~ ~ 8 ioi o ~ ~~l~ N~ i i '" ... ~<t ~ ~ -~... i~ ~~ ~ ~ U U d d U !l 8 ,..... ~ ; o~e~! ~ i !~il~ i~ dU ~ ~8~1 ~~i~;~ ~ ~I~= il5Id~~ g ~ ! s.l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...... ~~3t)~ ~~~~3 ~ IlIi TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Adm inistrator t.1x- j Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: SUBJECT: Middle Creek Area Trunk Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Study, Project 98-14 DA TE: February 17, 1998 INTRODUCTION Transmitted herewith is the feasibility report for the installation of Trunk Sanitary Sewer in the Middle Creek area, Project 98-14, for your review. DISCUSSION This report has been prepared to determine the feasibility of constructing a trunk sanitary sewer line fro!TI the intersection of C.S.A.H. 50 and Akin Road to 195th Street at the south end of Eureka Avenue as shown on Figure 1. The project would serve the Genstar Property and also provide two sanitary sewer trunk stubs for future service to the West Central and Northwest Sewer Service areas of Farmington and possibly some eastern portions of Lakeville. An option is included to construct the northwesterly stub that would provide service to the Nordseth property to the west of the Genstar property. The proposed trunk sanitary sewer is in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan. The sanitary sewer trunk line extension will have adequate capacity to serve all land within the West Central and Northwest Sewer Service Areas as shown on Figure 2 in the report. This report provides detailed cost estimates, a financial review, plan views of the improvement area and a project schedule. BUDGET IMPACT The estimated total project cost of the improvement including the Nordseth Property Option is $3,010,000. If the Lakeville option is added to the project at Lakeville's request, all costs associated with that option would need to be financed by Lakevilleo:- As outlined in the feasibility study, there are three funding sources proposed that would be utilized to retire the debt service on the project. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge The Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge will continue to be charged against new developments on a per acre basis as in the past. It is proposed that this charge be raised from $1350 per acre to $1550 per acre based on the estimated construction costs for this proposed addition to the City's system. l CitlJ of FarminfJton 325 Oak Street · Farmington! MN 55024 · (612) 463.7117 · Fax (612) 463-2597 Cit)' Scwer Al'ai/abilit)' Cllarge The proposed introduction of a City Sewer A ,"ailability Charge (CSAC) would allow a charge to be collected from each new home or business throughout the City based on the SAC units that are calculated per the . Metropolitan Council's formula. For example, single family residences are assigned one SAC unit and commercial or industrial businesses are calculated based on usage and typically are charged several SAC units. It would be proposed that the City Sewer Availability Charge be set at $350 per SAC unit. This amount falls within the range of charges collected by other communities that staff has surveyed. If the new City Sewer Availability Charge is approved, the revised fee resolution will be presented to Council at the March 2, 1988 City Council meeting. Sewer Operations FUlld The balance of the annual debt service payments would be undenvritten from Sewer Fund operating revenues, which are currently resen'ed to pay for the maintenance and construction of "Sewers throughout the City. A detailed financial review of Sewer Operating Fund revenues and fund resen'es indicates more than adequate cash flow to fund this ponion of the projects debt sen'ice. The Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charges and City Sewer Availability Charges that are collected over and above anticipated debt sen. ice costs will reimburse the Sewer operating funds that are used for the initial construction of this project. A summary of the revenues and expenditures is presented as follows: Re\'enue Sources Annual Re\'enues Annual Expenditures Trunk Fee: $1550 x 96 Acres $150,000 City Sewer Availability Charge: $350 x 250 SAC units $88,000 Sanitary Sewer Operations Fund $49,000 Debt Service - Revenue Bonds $287,000 Total $287,000 S287,000 This funding scenario as presented is in accordance with Council's stated intent that new development in the City pay for itself. . '- Cost Estimates Cost estimates have been prepared for extension of the trunk line in the West Central Service Area. A summary of project costs are provided in this section with detailed cost estimates presented in the appendices at the back of this report. The estimates for the work are based on anticipated unit prices for the 1998 construction season. The ENR Index for January, 1998 is 5852. The cost estimates presented below include a fifteen-percent contingency and a twenty-seven percent allowance for engineering, legal and administration costs. Estimated Project Costs Estimated Construction Costs Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part A (403-309) $827,000 Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part B (309-304) $441,000 Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part C (307-111) $293,000 Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part D (309-308) $86,000 *Nordseth Property Option - Part E (304-301) $306,000 Su btotal $1,953,000 15% Contingency $293,000 27% Engineering, Legal, Administration $607,000 Estimated Construction Total $2,853,000 Other Estimated Costs Estimated EA W Cost $11,500 Soils Investigations $6,500 Survey $10,000 Miscellaneous $3,000 Subtotal $2,884,000 - - Bonding and Capitalized Interest $126,000 Total Estimated Farmington Project Cost $3,010,000 Lake,'ille Option $579,000 *These costs are associated with extending a sanitary trunk sewer line to service the Nordseth property . Farmington .\fiddle Creek Area 7 CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $2,670,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SANITARY SEWER REVENUE BONDS OF 1998 Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on May 4, 1998, at 7:00 o'clock P.M. at the City Hall in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (pages): RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $2,670,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SANITARY SEWER REVENUE BONDS OF 1998 OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer on May 4, 1998. Administrator Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $2,670,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SANITARY SEWER REVENUE BONDS OF 1998 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: Section 1. Pux:pose. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to issue its General Obligation Sanitary Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1998 in the principal amount of $2,670,000 (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapters 444 and 475, the proceeds of which will be used to finance various improvements to the municipal sanitary sewer facilities. Section 2. Official Notice of Sale. Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated (Juran & Moody) is hereby appointed as fmancial consultant to the City in connection with the sale of the Bonds. Juran & Moody, as independent financial advisers, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9) is hereby authorized to solicit bids for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a negotiated basis. Juran & Moody has presented to this Council a form of Official Notice of Sale for the Bonds which shall be placed on file by the Administrator. Each and all of the provisions of the Official Notice of Sale are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Section 3. Sale Meeting. This Council shall meet at the time and place stated in the Official Notice of Sale for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City. Upon vote being taken thereon, the following members voted in favor thereof: and the following members voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA $2,670,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SANITARY SEWER REVENUE BONDS OF 1998 (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) These Bonds will be offered for sale on sealed proposals on June 1, 1998. Proposals will be accepted until!! :00 o'clock a.m., at the offices of Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated, 1100 World Trade Center, 30 East 7th Street, St. Paul, Minnesota, at which time the proposals will be opened and tabulated for presentation to the City Council for action thereon at a meeting to be held at the City Hall at 7:00 p.m., on the same day. No proposal submitted can be withdrawn before the Council meeting. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated, as originally issued, as of June 1, 1998, will bear interest payable semiannually on each June 1 and December 1 to maturity, commencing December 1,1998, and will mature on December 1 in the following years and amounts: Year Amount Year Amount 1999 $125,000 2007 $185,000 2000 130,000 2008 190,000 2001 140,000 2009 200,000 2002 145,000 2010 210,000 2003 150,000 2011 220,000 2004 160,000 2012 230,000 2005 165,000 2013 245,000 2006 175,000 Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for any combination of serial bonds and term bonds so long as the amount of principal maturing or subject to mandatory redemption in each year conforms to the maturity schedule set forth above. Interest will be computed-upon the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months and will be rounded pursuant to rules of the MSRB. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION Bonds maturing in 2003 and later years will be subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option of the City, on December 1,2002, or on any interest payment date thereafter, in inverse order of maturity dates and by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) for Bonds maturing on the same date, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. MANDATORY REDEMPTION Any term bonds issued shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption in part prior to their scheduled maturity dates on December 1 of certain years, as more fully described in the Details of the Bonds section herein, at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. BOOK ENTRY ONLY The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, representing the entire principal amount of the Bond at maturity, will be registered in the name of CEDE & CO. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof or a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants ofDTC will be the responsibility ofDTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the Bonds with DTC. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes, in addition to revenues of the municipal sanitary sewer. The proceeds will be used to make various improvements to the City's sanitary sewer facilities. TYPE OF PROPOSAL Sealed proposals for not less than $2,629,950 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds must be mailed or delivered to Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated, the City's fmancial advisor, and must be received prior to the time established above for the opening of proposals. Proposals shall be accompanied by a good faith deposit (the Good Faith Deposit), in the form of a certified or cashiers check or bank draft payable to the City, or a Financial Surety Bond, in the amount of $53,400. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota. Such Financial Surety Bond must be submitted to Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated prior to the opening of proposals and must identify each underwriter whose Good Faith Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then the successful purchaser is required to submit its Good Faith Deposit in the form of a certified or cashiers check, bank draft or wire transfer as instructed by Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated not later than 3:00 p.m. on the next business day following the award. If such Good Faith Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy such Good Faith Deposit requirement and such amount will be deducted from the purchase price at the closing and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. The Good Faith Deposit will be retained by the City as liquidated damages if the proposal is accepted and the purchaser fails to comply therewith. Except as otherwise provided, the Good Faith Deposit will be returned to the purchaser at the closing for the Bonds. No proposal shall be withdrawn after the time set for opening proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for consideration of the proposals is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. The interest rates specified by underwriters shall be in an integral multiple of 5/1 00 or 1/8 of 1 %. In order to designate term bonds, the proposal must specify "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and "Years of Term Maturities" in the spaces provided on the Proposal Form. All principal payments scheduled to be made in and before the year specified as the "Last Year of Serial Maturities" shall be designated as maturity amounts of serial bonds; all principal payments scheduled to be made after the year specified as "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and through each year specified under "Years of Term Maturities" shall be designated as mandatory sinking fund redemptions of term bonds maturing in the year(s) so designated. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded to the underwriter offering the lowest dollar interest cost to be determined by the deduction of the premium, if any, from, or the addition of any discount to, the total dollar interest on the Bonds from their date to their final scheduled maturity. The City's computation of the total net dollar interest cost of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms hereof. REGISTRAR The City will appoint U.S. Bank Trust National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the paying agent which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the Registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond or any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS The City will designate the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b )(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, relating to the ability of fmancial institutions to deduct from income for federal tax purposes, interest expense that is allocable to carrying and acquiring tax-exempt obligations. "Qualified tax-exempt obligations" are treated as acquired by a financial institution before August 7, 1986. Interest allocable to such obligations remains subject to the 20% disallowance under prior law. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE In order to permit bidders for the Bonds and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Rule), the City will covenant and agree, for the benefit of the registered holders and beneficial owners from time to time of the outstanding Bonds, in the resolution awarding the sale and prescribing the terms of the Bonds, to provide annual reports of specified information and notice of the occurrence of certain events, if material. The City is the only "obligated person" in respect of the Bonds within the meaning of the Rule for the purposes of disclosing information on an ongoing basis. A description of the undertaking is set forth in the Official Statement. Failure of the City to enter into an undertaking substantially similar to that described in the Official Statement would relieve the successful bidder of its obligation to purchase the Bonds. The City has complied in all material respects with any undertaking previously entered into by it under the Rule. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at DTC. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney LLP of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no-litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal or equivalent immediately available funds. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relating to the City and the Bonds, and the Official Statement will serve as a nearly-final Official Statement as required by Rule 15c2-12 of the SEC. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2-12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting an official proposal therefor, the City agrees that, not more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds have been awarded a reasonable number of copies of the Official Statement and the addendum described above. The City designates said senior managing underwriter as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each participating underwriter. Any underwriter executing and delivering an official proposal form for the Bonds thereby agrees that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all participating underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring receipt by each such participating underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Copies of the Official Statement, proposal forms and any additional information may be obtained from the City's financial consultants, Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated, 1100 World Trade Center, 30 East 7th Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-4901 (1-800- 950-4666). Dated May 4, 1998. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL John Erar, Administrator 1J TO: Mayor & Councilmembers City Administrator~ FROM: Robin Roland Finance Director SUBJECT: Request to defer special assessment DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION Marshall and Caroline Hager, 20365 Eaves Way, are requesting that the City Council defer the special assessment on their property according to City Ordinance Section 1-14-2. DISCUSSION The special assessment outstanding on the property in question is for the Pine Knoll project. The total principal balance is currently $4,824 plus interest at 8% per annum. Mr. and Mrs. Hager meet the requirements for deferral under the City Ordinance. Once granted, the deferral is renewable every two years at Council's discretion. BUDGET IMPACT Deferral of principal and interest on this special assessment does not have significant financial impact at this time. Collection of the full assessment amount plus interest is assured at a later date under the stipulations of the ordinance. ACTION REQUIRED Adopt the attached resolution deferring the Pine Knoll special assessment for Marshall and Caroline Hager. ReSpeCtfUllY, sUbmitt~d'4 ~ Robin Roland Finance Director Citlj. of FarminlJton 325 Oak Street · Farmington! MN 55024 · (672) 463-7717 · Fa~ (672) 463-2597 Y/~/-7cP ~ ~ (?i:<t d F~/HzIrn ~ ~~iL# I. ~ ~ w~~ 41J(?dY7~. / 7/1 ~cd/~J tf?t~/.~-ec/ a:--- j)d'/l/~-r~ s-6;;d-~ /07 MSU//.L.. ?L/L t2--U..-. ~ ;(07 ~) {)c ~(j~,t& ~ CJ/0Ir;.) 0>--r7QJz... ~@ -hdn /-/~-.;:J ,b-l't?~ '7 . 4f d4S), ~'S d 5,;, 1/ /" 7J ~<J ~ i/(;7~ .~~ .. tJ~ ~ ~~ ~:;xta/~ 4~ crdmtv.!/s-M,FYvYi ais~ /.--;;<&y ~/~ <-J~J~~~~ ~ s-6~ .-LJ u-o ): /lJ ~, ~ c2A- ~ ~~ ~c:,/ (>~~/()~~ ~ ;d2ck,,;/Id ~ / 7':'1,/ vJ ,'"t:fA... . Cl.VI.-<.j ~7oJ/~1::s t<JL~J.. ~ L-6<:J --m Jf:jeIL/ WR- w~.uJ';t hd~ ~ r i3 rJ '-it ; s .;;::) ss -ess >>1 e-?7 r-. ~~,C fI~i/l~a~pr>t: 70/ ;nsA~V ~~tU~/V~ c:::::? 03 ~ s-- ;: c9//.es' W~ '1 ~~m/~m,J" si;3OJ)/ 0/ ~ - 5/6.3 'd3/~ PROPOSED RESOLUTION R - 98 RESOLUTION DEFERRING THE PAYMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF FARMINGTON Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council and the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City on the 4th day of May, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 435.193 authorizes the deferral of special assessments at the discretion of the City Council for exceptional and unique circumstances specified in law, ordinance or resolution, and; WHEREAS, the City of Farmington City Code Section 1-14-2 specifies the conditions and process for deferring special assessments by the City Council, and; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington has received and application for the deferral of special assessments in accordance with state law and city ordinances and has determined in its discretion that the deferral of special assessments is justified. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Farmington, hereby grants the deferral of special assessments for the following property and property owners upon the conditions stated herein. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION: 14-57600-032-05 PROPERTY OWNER: MARSHALL & CAROLINE HAGER 20365 EAVES WAY FARMINGTON, MN 55024 DURATION OF DEFERRAL: Two years from the date of this Resolution, renewable for an additional two years upon the filing of a new application prior to the end of the initial two year period. INTEREST RATE: 8% per annum. TERMINATION 8F DEFERRAL: Deferral of special assessments authorized under this Resolution shall terminate upon the occurrence of anyone of the following events: 1. The death of the property owner when there is no surviving spouse who is eligible for deferment. 2. The sale, transfer or subdivision of all or any part of the property. 3. The property loses its homestead status. 4. Failure to file a renewal application within the time prescribed in the City ordinance. 5. The property owners no longer meet the hardship requirements of the City ordinance. Property owners who have been granted a deferral under this Resolution have a continuing obligation to notify the City Clerk of any changes in their eligibility for deferment. Upon termination of deferral, all deferred assessments plus applicable interest will become immediately due and payable and the City Clerk shall notify the Dakota County Auditor and the Dakota County Recorder of the termination of deferral and whether payment of the sums in installment payments in accordance with the terms of the original assessment or upon other terms is allowed. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of May, 1998. Mayor Clerk/Administrator Attested to the day of ,1998. TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator~ le FROM: Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police SUBJECT: Emergency Operations Plan Revision DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington is required by both Federal and State Departments of Emergency Management to maintain an Emergency Operations Plan. While no Emergcrcv Operations Plan can specifically cover all possibilities associated with all possible disasters, it can pi 0\ I,;;;; a framework that will allow the City to effectively respond to a variety of such events. This Plan oL:l.ncs authority and responsibility for various functions of the City of Farmington in the event ofa Disdste Declaration. DISCUSSION Farmington's Emergency Operations Plan was originally written and approved in 1987. Since that time the Plan was revised by Council action in 1992. During the interim periods minor updates are made by the local Emergency Management Director. This current revision is intended to update the resource and technology aspects of the Plan. In addition this revision will comply with State and Federal guidelines for plan revision and reflect changes in authority and responsibility for various functions. The Plan Revision presents the opportunity for the local Emergency Management Director to update local officials on the authority for the Declaration of a Disaster and the mechanism of implementation of the Emergency Operations Plan. Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 12.29 a local unit of government may declare an emergency. In the event of a disaster, the Mayor may declare an Emergency for up to three days. This would be a local Emergency Disaster Declaration. Such a Declaration would result in changes in the chain of command and in the dedication of city resources. At the point of the Disaster Declaration the Emergency Management Director assumes responsibility for municipal operations and resources dedicated to disaster response and during the recovery after the event. That chain of command is outlined on page 2 ofthe plan. The fonnat of this Emergency Operations Plan as presented, is directed by both State and Federal authority. Prior to local ratification, the plan must first be approved by the County Emergency Management Director. This Draft has been approved by the County Director, Mr. Dave Gisch. Upon approval of the County Director the Plan must be approved by action of the City Council and must be signed by the Mayor. Once the plan has been approved, copies are distributed to all individuals or organizations who have Primary or Secondary responsibility for implementation of any portion of the plan. They, in turn will develop the secondary plans needed to fulfill their designated functions. In addition a copy will be supplied to the Dakota County Library for public use. CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street · FarminfJton, MN 55024 · (612) 463-77 7 7 · Fa~ (672) 463-2591 ACTION REQUESTED Approve Revision 2 of the City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan. Respectfully submitted, ~d52LL Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police DRAFT COpy Subject to Approval by Farmington City Council .. ,. M'..." - ..... il>i.. CITY OF FARMINGTON EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN '2. I " """ ~. City of Farmington Enl""~t9"":,i..i.-.l '-' Y"~J.."""':~"J."" =~:~~'~ Revisions: 2 /- .....=y....,':1 ,nr.,'11/()'J ~ A.6...1";'~... Revised 12/03/92 Revised 05/15/98 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Verification of Plan Approval The City of Farmington Emergency Operation Plan has been reviewed by the City Council and by the Farmington Emergency Management Director on this date. Mayor, Gerald Ristow Date Emergency Management Director Date Daniel M. Siebenaler ;'.'<tiII - "'" City of Farmington Emergency Operations Basic Plan Revision 2 .",:. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # FORWARD The basic purpose of this plan is to provide a guide for emergency operations. The plan is intended to assist key City Officials and emergency organizations to carry out their responsibilities for the protection of life and property under a wide range of emergency conditions. Although an organization may have the foresight to plan for unanticipated situations. such planning is of little worth if the planning is not reduced to written form. Personnel with intimate knowledge of unwritten plans may be unavailable at the very time it becomes necessary to implement them. A written plan will furnish a documentary record which can be referred to as needed. This documentary record will serve to refresh the knowledge of key individuals and can be used to inform persons who become replacements. Transfer of Office This document shall remain the property of The City of Farmington Upon termination of office by reason of resignation. election. suspension. or dismissal. the holder of this document shall transfer it to his successor or to the Farmington Emergency Management Director. Copy No. Assigned to: Position: Copy No. Assigned to: Position: Copy No. Assigned to: Position: Copy No. Assigned to: Position: Copy No. Assigned to: Position: .--~ ;Ji($!l .... City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Table of Contents Revision 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.--------------- TABLE OF CONTENTS BASIC PLAN 1. Reason for Plan ----------------------------------------------------- II. Purpose of P lan------------------------------------------------------ III. Legal Basics and References-------------------m---------------- I \T . Organizati on --------------------------------------------------------- Cl1art f\----------------------------------------------------------- V. Direction and Control---------------------------------------------- VI. Emergency Responsibility f\ssignments------------------------ Cl1art 13---------------------------------------------------------- - VII. Operations Policies------------------------------------------------- " VIII. Support f\. National Guard --------------------------------------------- B. State and Federal Agencies------------------------------- ;.i ~ IX. Plan Updating and Distribution------------------m-------------- '"''',... t L ANNEXES A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. Warning and N otificati on-------------------------------m-------- Direction and C ontro I----m---------------------------------------- Emergency Public Information------------------------------------ S earcl1 and Rescue-------------------------------------------------- Heal th / Medi cal----------------------------------------------------- Evacuation and Traffic Control------------------------------------ Fire Protecti on------------------------------------------------------- Damage f\ssessment ------------------------------------------------- -i- 1/:,<, PAGE No. ') .;.. 3 ..., -' 4,5 6 6 7 7.8 TAB A B C o E F G H - City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Table of Contents Revision 2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "".. Table of Contents ~ continued) ANNEXES TAB I. C ongregate Care----------------------------------------------------- [ J. Debris Clearance----------------------------------------------------- J K. Utilities Restoration------------------------------------------------- K L. RadiologIcal Protectlon--------------------------------------------- L M. Hazardous Materials------------------------------------------------- M Supplemental Information ~ !,'_<M - i i - /i;". City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Basic Plan Revision 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ,,- I. Reason for Plan Tornadoes. floods. blizzards and other natural disasters can afTect the City of Farmington. In addition, major disasters such as train wrecks. plane crashes, explosions. accidental releases of hazardous materials and enemy attack pose a potential threat to public safety in Farmington. An emergency plan is needed to ensure the protection of the public from the effects of these hazards. ~, II. Purpose of Plan The City of Farmington has many capabilities and resources which could be used in response to any major disaster. These include the facilities. equipment, manpower and skills of both government and non-government professions and groups in Farmington. The purpose of this plan is to ensure the effective. coordinated use of these resources so as to: r A. Maximize the protection of life and property. B. Ensure the continuity of government. C. Sustain survivors. D. Repair essential facilities and utilities. III. Legal Basis and References A. Public Law 920, as amended. B. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 12, as amended. C. City of Farmington, Ordinance No. 2-1-2 thru 2-1-6 Charter date: February 23, 1881 Amended date: April 12, 1894 City Code date: December 7. 1970 I!I"- h IV. Organization Existing government is the basis for emergency operations. That is, government agencies will perform emergency activities related to those they perform on a day-to-day basis. City organization and inter-relationships are shown on Chart A of this basic plan. - 1 - .,'iIl ~>:'II! City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Basic Plan Revision .2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CITY ORGANIZATION AND INTER-RELATIONSHIPS MAYOR / CITY COUNCIL ~ EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR .~ CITY ADMINISTRATOR POLICE DEPT FIRE DEPT CITY ENGINEER ADMIN ASSIST PLANNING DIRECTOR FINANCE DIRECTOR PARK & REC. DIRECTOR 911 Services Inspections - 2 - ".. """JI! City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Basic Plan Revision 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Y. Direction and Control The direction and control of government operations from a centraL protected facility with adequate communications and key personnel is essential to the conduct of emergency operations. The Mayor is responsible for the declaration of an emergency. Once an emergency has been declared in the City of Farmington. the Mayor will delegate authority to the City of Farmington Emergency Management Director to provide over all direction and control of City Government resources needed to respond to a disaster. The Emergency Management Director will cooromate all aspects of this plan. The City Emergency Management director will also serve as a liaison with the Dakota County Emergency Operations Center. Direction and control of the city's response to a major disaster will take place from the Fannington Emergency Operating Center (EOC). Under normal circumstances the City EOC will be located at 325 Oak St. Farmington. MN 55024 ] (For additional EOC information such as staffing, communications, etc., refer to Direction and Control Annex to this Plan.) ~ VI. Emergency Responsibility Assignments A. A summary of the City of Farmington emergency responsibility assignments, by function, is shown on Chart B. Heads of various city government departments and agencies will be responsible for carrying out the assignments shown on this chart. B. Responsibilities have been assigned a code letter: "P" "s" or "'C". 1. "P" indicates primary operational responsibility, which means the official or agency is in charge of and responsible to make provisions for. that function. 2. "S."...indicates support responsibility, which means the agency so designated will, if possible. support and assist the official or agency designated primarily responsibility. 3. "C" indicates coordination responsibility, and is assigned when several agencies have support capabilities but no specific official or agency has obvious primary responsibility. This will be especially true when non-government agencies are involved. - 3 - "'" - City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Chart B ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... EMERGENCY RESPONSIBILITY ASSIGNMENTS Code .'p" = Primary. "S" = Support. ..C' = Coordination FUNCTION RESPONSIBLE CODE AGENCIES 1. Declaration Mayor P City Administrator S ~ \Varning and Notification Farmington Police Lakeville Police Dispatch National Weather Dakota Co. Sheriff FAA (Mpls Ctr) P L S S S S 3. Direction and Control Farmington Police Lakeville Police P S 4. Emergency Public Information PIO Admin. Services Marcus Cable KDWA Radio KDHL Radio F gtn Independent P S S S S S (Page C-l) 5. Search and Rescue Farmington Fire P Dakota Co. MAAG S Lkvll. Canine S South Suburban P Med. Ctr. (SSMC) South Suburban S Med. Clinic River Valley Clinic S ALF Ambulance S Farmington Rescue S Farmington Police P DCSO S State Patrol S Mutual Aid Depts S Farmington Fire S -~- 6. Health and Medical .,j. 7. Evacuation and Traffic Control b'. Basic Plan Revision ::: REMARKS - ~. Cit\" of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Chart B Basic Plan Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------.--------------------------------------------- s. Fire Protection q Damage Assessment 1 o. Congregate Care 11. Roadway Debris 12. Debris (General) 13 . Utilities Restoration Farmington Fire Lakeville Fire Apple Valley Fire Rosemount Fire Northfield Fire p S S S S City Engineer P Building Inspector S State Patrol Air Wing S Red Cross S F ire Marshal S Park & Rec. Dir. S Park & Rec. Dir. P Red Cross S Salvation Army S City Engineer P Dakota Co. Hwy S MnDOT S Park & Rec. Dir. P City Engineer S Private Contractors S NSP P Dakota Electric P Peoples Nat. Gas P Northern Natural Gas P Frontier Telephone P Northwestern Bell P Marcus Cable S 14. Radiological Response State Patrol P 15. HazMat Response Fire Department P MN Haz Mat S Mutual Aid Fire S - 5 - tN" Red Cross and Salvo Army have disaster teams. Red Cross and Salvo Army are prepared to coordinate and supervise large numbers of volunteers used in clean up operations. Heavy equipment & Street Sweepers from private sector. p ~',1i; City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Basic Plan Revision :2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .... VII. Operations Policies .. A. Protection of life and property during an emergency is the primary responsibility of government at all levels. B. In an emergency affecting more than one political jurisdiction. officials of all jurisdictions involved will coordinale their serVices to the maximum extent possible, with priority on elimination and prevention of life threatening situations. C. The Dakota County Emergency Management Director will assist in providing resource coordination between government agencies and the private sector. D. City government resources must be utilized to the maximum before state or federal assistance will be made available. E. Each agency, department or service of city government will provide for the maintenance of records associated with their primary and support services during an emergency. These records should include but not be limited to, work hours, equipment hours. supplies and materials consumed, injuries to personnel and damage to public facilities and equipment. , . VIII. Support A. National Guard I. Overview When a natural disaster or other major emergency has been declared and is beyond the resource capabilities of the City of .Farmington. support from National Guard units may be available. Only the Governor. as Commander-in-Chief of the Minnesota National Guard. has the authority to activate the Guard. The purpose of the activation is to ensure the preservation of life and property and to support civil law enforcement agencies. a. National Guard assistance will compliment and not substitute for city participation in emergency operations response. - 6 - ... ,'. City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Basic Plan Revision :2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- b. If made available, National Guard personnel remain under military command at all times. but \\"ill support and assist city forces in the accomplishment of a specific task or tasks. 1. Request Procedure In the case of the County and all cities not of the First Class. including the City of Farmington, the Sheriff must submit a request for assistance to the Governor' s Office. B. State and Federal Agencies I. A summary of state and federal response programs available to local governments which are experiencing or have experienced a disaster is contained in Disaster Response and Recovery: A Handbook for Local Government. This document was developed by the Minnesota Division of Emergency Services (DES) and id on file with the Dakota County Emergency Management Director. The County Emergency Management Director can be contacted by pager through the Dakota County Sheriff's Office. 437-4211 1. Information and assistance in securing state or federal support may be obtained by contacting the Dakota County Emergency Management Director at the number listed above, or in the event of no local response, the State Duty Officer at (612)-649-5451 or 1-800- 422-0789. IX. Plan Updating and Distributing A. For purposes of this plan. the City of Farmington Emergency Management Director shall serve as the planning coordinator. As such the director will have overall authority and responsibility for maintenance and implementation of this plan. B. This plan will be reviewed and updated to ensure accuracy of information as often as necessary. but at least every two years. The Farmington Emergency Management Director will be responsible for ensuring that this updating occurs in accord with the schedule and procedures established by Minnesota Division of Emergency Services. (See Bulletin No. 85-1) - 7 - It,;", ~", :w; City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Basic Plan Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In order to carry out this task the local Director may request assistance from the Dakota County Emergency Management Director. Actual revisions to this plan must be approved by the Dakota County Emergency Director and by vote of the Farmington City Council. C. 1111S plan \Vlll be UlSlflouteu to alluepanments of the City of farmingluH and agencies which have primary emergency assignments in the event of disaster declaration in the City of Farmington. A plan distribution list will be maintained by the Emergency Management Director as part of this plan. (See distribution list at front of this document.) - 8 - .... C i ry 0 f F armmgton Emergency Operations Plan Annex i\ Warning and NotitIcation Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .... 'h I. Purpose To provide and overview of the responsibilities and the procedures whereby the notification of key city officials and the warning of the general public are accomplished. II. Responsibilities A. The Dakota County Sheriffs Office is the Dakota County Warning Point. The County Warning Point is responsible for relaying warnings to the Farmington Police Department which, in turn. serves as the City Warning Point. B. As the City Warning Point, the Farmington Police Department is responsible for ensuring that all warnings and notifications which it receives are handled properly. C. Upon receipt of a warning, the City Warning Point is responsible for: 1. Activating the city's outdoor warning system. 2. Notifying key city government officials. 3. Notifying certain private and public facilities. (Hospitals. Nursing Homes, Schools, etc.) r- ~ ; Ir.... (For specific information on who is to be notified and how. see the city of Farmington Warning Plan.) A-I .....~ p ~ ~~ity of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan ,'\.nnex 13 Direction and Control / EOC Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It'. 1. Purpose To describe how the direction and control of the City of Farmington response to a disaster will be accomplished. II. Responsibilities A. The Mayor is responsible for the Declaration of an Emergency within the city either independently or upon recommendation of the Emergency Management Director. In order to ensure a timely emergency response. in the absence of the Mayor. the line of succession of authority is as follows: p'"" Mayor: (Elected) Acting Mayor: (Annual Appointment) City Administrator: (City Council Appointed) Emergency Management Director Gerald Ristow Don Gamer John Erar Dan Siebenaler B. The Mayor will delegate authority to the Emergency Management Director of Farmington to be responsible for providing overall direction and control of the city government resources involved in the response to a disaster and to coordinate all aspects of this plan. In order to ensure a timely emergency response the line of succession to the Emergency Management Director is as follows: Director: Deputy Director: City Administrator: Daniel M. Siebenaler. Police chief Lee Mann. City Engineer John Erar III. City of Farmington, Emergency Operating Center ~r~ Direction and control of Farmington's response to a disaster will be carried out at the Farmington EOe. The EOC is located at the Farmington City Hall building at 325 Oak St. Farmington, MN 55024. If for some reason the EOC is not usable at the time of a disaster declaration. the Farmington Fire Department building will serve as the alternate EOC. B-1 ,,>'. ... L ity of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan /\nnex B Direction and Control / EOC Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... " A. Criteria for activation of the EOC The EOC will be fully activated and stat Ted upon the occurrence of a disaster in the City of Farmington and a declaration of that disaster by the responsible authority. The EOC may be partially activated in response to a threat or potential threat to the safety of the citizens of Farmington at the discretion of the Emergency Management Director. B. Responsibility for EOC Activation In the event of a major disaster, EOC Staff would be expected to report automatically and immediately to the EOC. However, the Farmington Emergency Management Director is responsible for ensuring that the EOC is activated according to the criteria discussed above. C. Staffing the EOC The Staffing list for the Farmington EOC is on tile with the Farmington Emergency Management Director. Each department, division or agency which is delegated primary responsibility for operations in the Basic Plan is responsible for ensuring that a representative is assigned to the EOC and is familiar with the duties he / she is expected to perform at the EOC. D. EOC Equipment and Supplies ... The Farmington Emergency director is responsible for ensuring that the EOC is operational, that the necessary maps, displays, tables and chairs, communications equipment, message logs, etc. are on hand and available for use. All resources of the City of Farmington shall be made available for this.purpose and distributed according to need. Resources unavailable at the time of a disaster declaration will be made available through mutual aid agreements or purchase at the direction of the Emergency Management Director or his delegated responsible authority. B-2 ~ City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex B Direction and Control;' EOC Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E. Communications Capability of the EOC I. Farmington EOC to other municipalities within the Dakota County. 2. Farmington EOC to the Dakota County EOC. 3. Farmington EOC to South Suburban Medical Center. 4. Farmington EOC to state and regional EOCs. 5. Farmington EOC to City Department field units. 6. Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service. (RACES) F. The City of Farmington has vehicles which can be dispatched to the scene of a disaster. These vehicles have the capability of communicating with all necessary points of contact by way of radio and cellular telephone services. Response vehicles not equipped with either of these devices will be so equipped before responding to the scene of any disaster. G. The Farmington EOC has an emergency (back-up) power source. IV. Supporting Documentation The following support materials are kept on file as described and in the office of the Emergency Management Director. 1. Resource Manual for lists of equipment and supplies. (Department Heads) ,., RACES radio Plan. (Office of the Dakota County Emergency Management Director) .., .). EOC operating procedures. V. AuthenticatioR Date Signature Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler B-3 r\y City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex C Emergency Public Intormation Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W',. I. Purpose f '~ 1 ~. To provide an overview of how emergency public information will be disseminated in the event of a disaster declaration. II. Spokesperson(s) The only official authorized to serve as the Public Information Officer for the City of Farmington is the Emergency Management Director. In the absence of the EMD the Deputy Emergency Management Director shall act as the PIO. In the absence of both the Director and Deputy Director the City Administrator may act as PIO or appoint an alternate PIO. The individual designated as PIO shall be given access to all information necessary to carry out their role as PIa for the City of Farmington. III. Policies and Procedures A. If it becomes necessary to establish a news brieting room, a meeting room in City Hall will be used for this purpose. News media personnel would be asked to report to this facility. Information will be released to media only through this facility. B. In the event a protracted disaster I emergency, news releases would be issued on a regular basis and otherwise as needed to meet the health and safety needs of the citizens of Farmington. C. Emefl~ency public information would be disseminated through the following radio and lor television stations: (Listed alphabetically) 1. KDHL ^;;.. KDWA 3. KSTP 4. WCCO AM 1460 AM 1500 AM 830 AM 5. KARE TV 11 6. KMSP TV 9 7. KSTP TV 5 8. Marcus Cable 9. WCCO TV 4 C-l 1"_ City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan . \mlex ,~- Emergency Public Information Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IY. Support Documents Public information policy and supplements for release of information to radio. TV ~md newspapers are on file in the office of the Farmington Emergency Management Director. Y. Authentication ----------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ Date Mayor. Gerald Ristow ------------------------------------------------------ Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler ...... C-2 ~,Jv - City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex 0 Search and Rescue Revision :2 ".. I. Purpose To describe how search and rescue would be accomplished in the City of Farmington following a disaster. II. Responsibility Within the City of Farmington. the primary responsibility for search and rescue belongs to the Farmington Fire Department Rescue Squad. Back up assistance for Farmington Fire is Mutual Aid from tire departments from surrounding municipalities and the Farmington Police Department. III. Supporting Agencies / Organizations A. Minnesota State Patrol Helicopter would be the primary resource in conducting air search operations. Activate through MN State Patrol. B. The Civil Air Patrol may be available as air support in search operations. C. The Dakota County Mutual Aid Assistance Group (MAAG) may be activated for ground search and rescue operations. Activate through Apple Valley Police Department. D. The following volunteer organizations would be available to assist with major search operations: I. Dakota County Mounted Patrol. through Sheriff s Office. 2. Farmington Sno- Tigers through Gary Smith. 463-8045 3. Southern Dakota County Sportsman Club. 463-3464 IV. AuthenticatioD ------------------------------------------------------ Date Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler ."''111- D-1 Ii;'. City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex E Health / Medical Revision :2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. Purpose To provide an overview of how the health / medical care needs of patients would be met in the event of a disaster. ll. Primary Responsibilities A. Injured or ill patients requiring hospital care would be transported to the primary medical facility in Farmington. South Suburban Medical Center. If the number of patients, or a patients medical condition requires the use of other facilities, those facilities shall be determined by the medical authority of SSMC or at the specific request of the patient. If other facilities are required due to damage, overcrowding or other reasons the following hospitals would be used: f':'" 1. Fairview Ridges HospitaL Burnsville, MN 2. Regions Medical Center, St.Paul. MN B. Primary ambulance services would be provided by ALF Ambulance Service. Ambulance services would be used to transport patients to primary care facilities. If additional ambulance services are needed due to excess demand, the need for more rapid transport or the inability of ALF to respond the following services may be used. 1. Life Link Helicopter 2. Mayo Helicopter 3. North Air Care 4. Burnsville Fire Service, Ambulance 5. Hastings Fire Service, Ambulance 6. Others Services designated by ALF C. First Responder Services would be available to First Aid to victims of the disaster suffering from minor injuries or illness. Services will be provided by the Farmington Police Department and the Farmington Fire Department Rescue Squad. D. Emergency Mortuary Services associated with the disaster would be the responsibility of the Dakota County ivledical Examiner. E-l .'4 City of Farmington . ~ Emergency Operations Plan Annex E Health / Medical Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'r'" E. Serious potential or actual health threats (epidemics. food and/or water contamination. etc.) associated with the disaster would be the responsibility of the Dakota County Health Department. F. Inquiry and referral services would be provided to supply information on victims, patients and missing persons through a central contact point. Inquiry and referral services would be provided by the Red Cross and/or the Salvation Army. III. Coordination If a serious disaster resulting in multiple casualties occurs in the City of Farmington overall coordination of the various health! medical organizations response to the disaster would take place at the Farmington EOC. SSMC and ALF Ambulance Service are equipped with radio communications and cellular communications equipment and can therefore communicate among themselves and the EOC. IV. Supporting Plans and Personnel A. SSMC maintains a disaster plan. B. SSMC and ALF Ambulance Service have established procedures regarding referrals to other hospitals for injured or ill for patients. !' '~ ~, L.. C. ALF Ambulance has entered into Mutual Aid Agreements with Bumsville Fire Department Ambulance Service. Health East Ambulance Service. Hastings Fire Department Ambulance Service. Northfield Ambulance Service and New Prague Ambulance Service. D. The He.alth / Medical Resource Appendix contains lists of pharmacies, sources of medical supplies. Doctors. Hospitals. Ambulance Services and health support services. V. Authentication Date Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler E-2 - j , City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan :\nnex F Evacuation and Tratlic Control Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - i " I. Purpose To outline how evacuation and traffic control would be carried out if they are required due to a disaster in Farmington. II. Responsibility Within the City of Farmington. the Farmington Police Department would be responsible for coordinating any large scale evacuation that might be associated with a disaster. Back up assistance would be available from the Dakota County Sheriffs Office, State PatroL Mutual Aid Agreements and the Farmington Fire Department. III. Procedures A. Residents to be evacuated would be notified of the need to evacuate by the Farmington Police Department via radio. television, and public address system. B. In order to ensure public safety and prevent loss of property. law enforcement personnel would establish traffic control points (if needed) as designated by the Police Chief or his Designee. C. Mobility impaired individuals. unable to evacuate themselves would receive assistance from Marschall Bus Lines by calling a central contact point publicized with evacuation notification. IV. Resources Available Note that if personnel are used in a support service who are not familiar with the City Geography additional local personnel will be required as escorts. A. ALF Ambulance Service. or a Service designated by them. would be available to transport non-ambulatory individuals. F-l ... ,- City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex F Evacuation and Trame Control Revision 2 B. Marschall Bus Lines could provide buses. if needed. to assist in the evacuation process. C. Farmington Fire Department personnel would be available if needed in any support services. V. Authentication Date Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler F-2 .". ",-,.,* City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex G Fire Protection Revision :: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .;.\M 1. Purpose To summarize how tire protection is provided in the City of Farmington. II. Responsibility Fire protection in Farmington is provided by the Farmington Fire department. This is a volunteer tire department. which has approximately thirty-six (36) members. III. Mutual Aid Agreements . The Farmington Fire Department participates in a mutual aid agreement that involves the following other tire departments: 1. All fire departments in Dakota County. Written mutual aid agreements exist and are on tile with the Fire Chief and City Hall. IV. Communications Capability Farmington tire department vehicles are equipped with the following radio communications equipment and frequencies. 1. Farmington Fire 9. Burnsville Fire/ Police ~',~ 2. Statewide Fire 10. Mendota Heights /W. St. Paul .,!Ii " Truck to Truck 11. So. St. Paul Fire .). 4. Dakota Co. Sheriff 12. Cannon Falls Fire 5. Fgtn / Lkvll Police 13. Eagan Fire 6. Lkvll Fire 14. Statewide Police 7. A V Police 15. Regional/ SSMC 8. Scott Co. / New Market Fire 16. Portables Only V. Authentication t<... ------------------------------------------------------ Date Farmington Fire Chief Ken Kuchera G-l - ('ity of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex H Damage Assessment Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ..,. , 1. Purpose . ., To provide an overview of how damnQ:e assessment would be accomplished in the City of Farmington following a disaster. II. Responsibilities A. The Farmington City Emergency Management Director is responsible for: I. Developing and maintaining a damage assessment "team" composed of municipal and / or private agency representatives. 2. Maintaining an up to date listing of damage assessment personnel. 3. Maintaining the procedures to be followed for damage assessment. 4. Coordinating the damage assessment process (following the occurrence of a disaster.) B. City Government officials who, depending upon the nature of the disaster, would participate in a damage assessment effort: 1. City Engineer / Public Works Director 2. City Building Official / Inspector(s) 3. Fire Marshal 4. Fire Chief 5. Park and Recreation Director C. County Government Officials who would potentially participate in a damage assessment effort: I. County Emergency Management Director 2. County Engineer 3. , ..county Assessor 4. County Social Services Director H-1 ,,:-'* City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex I Congregate Care Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. Purpose To describe how the congregate care (emergency housing, feeding, clothing and counseling) needs of the City of Farmington residents would be met in the event of a disaster. II. Responsibilities ~ A. The City of Farmington, St. Paul Chapter of the Red Cross and the Salvation Army along with private sector agencies are responsible for ensuring that the congregate care needs of disaster victims are met. .., J. Emergency housing -- Emergency feeding---- Emergency clothing--- Counseling ------------- Red Cross* Red Cross/ Salvation Army Red Cross/ Salvation Army Red Cross 1. ') 4. B. Additional Responsibilities 1. 2. Registration of Victims Inquiry and Referral (Regarding disaster victims) Red Cross Red Cross * Or other agencies at the direction of the Red Cross. r III. Coordination of Congregate Care 'l' -+ The Red Cross would be responsible for providing overall coordination of congregate care functions. In order to facilitate this coordination, the City Administrator would provide a representative for the EOC to act as liaison to the Red Cross. IV. Facilities The Farmington Senior Center shall be made available as a relief center to the Red Cross. 1-1 11:\,',,,, .... City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex J Debris Removal Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .,. CONTRACTED SERVICES The primary responsibility for clean up operations in the City of Farmington after a natural disaster will be held by the Farmington Public Works Department. It is recognized that in order to ensure a proper response, some events will require additional resources. The following list of contractors has provided after hours contact numbers and a list of equipment available in the event of a natural disaster in the City of Farmington. ...~. In order to ensure a timely and responsible solution to a natural disaster, All contractors performing work in the City of Farmington as part of a clean up operation after a natural disaster shall be registered with the City Emergency Operations Center. At the time of registration, they will provide proof of proper license and insurance associated with their area of expertise. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Farmington Bill Weierke 463-3553 (Home) Equipment available. Dump Trucks, Backhoe, Front end loader, skidster, Jack hammer Darrel Gilmer Excavating 463-7273 Answering Service and two-way radio communications. Equipment available. Back hoe, Large Dozer, Dump trucks, Skidster ~-l ~ Freidge's Excavating 469-2996 John Freidge's 469-1847 (unlisted) Equipment available. Full line of Dozers, Back hoes, Scrapers, skidsters, etc. I Hoffbeck Trucking 469-2199 Bill Hoffbeck 469-1718 Alternate 463-2199 Equipment available. Trucks, Back hoe with clam. Full line of equipment. Authentication Date Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler J-l "." ..... (it\" of Farmington . ~ Emergency Operations Plan /\nnex J Debris Removal Revision 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .'''' SAND. GRAVEL, DIRT: (Supply, move, remove) Independent Black Dirt 463-2271 John Erickson 432-7132 471-9560 (After hours) Fischer Sand and Gravel Steve Hedberg 423-5320 476-8022 (Home) Hedberg Aggregates ------------------------------------------------------------------- TREE SERVICES .-\fter a natural disaster, the primary goal of the City of Farmington regarding trees, is the rapid removal of debris from roadways to facilitate other responses. In addition the City will endeavor to provide responsible, professional, insured resources to the residents of Farmington. " Aspenwall Tree Service 463-8337 Speight Tree Service 463-4419 H & H Tree Service (507)-645-6901 Clark's Stump Removal 469-3607 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- STREET SWEEPING 1\ Restoration of essential services is hampered when debris on roadways includes objects capable of causing fl.a1. tires. A critical function. immediately after removal of large debris is clearing affected streets of such objects by sweeping. Farmington Public Department will hold primary responsibility for this function. The City does recognize the need to call upon other resources in the event of a large scale disaster. The Public Works Department shall maintain a list of street sweeping resources available for call. This list may include other municipal resources as well as private contractors. J-2 .". Cit\" of Farmington . ~ Emergency Operations Plan Annex K Utilities Restoration Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .'" I. Purpose To provide an overview of how utility services would be restored following a disaster in the City of Farmington. II. Responsibilities r :1 ~ .. The following government agencies and lor private sector organizations are responsible for providing utility services for the City of Farmington. A. Electric Service, Northern States Power, Dakota Electric Association. B. Gas Service, Peoples Natural Gas, Northern Natural Gas, William's Brothers Pipeline Company, Minnegasco C. Telephone Service, Frontier Communications, Northwestern Bell, U S Sprint. D. Sewer and Water Utilities, City of Farmington E. Other, Marcus Cable. (Uses utility poles) III. Service Restoration A. Electrical Service I. NSP 2. Dakota Electric Assoc. 1-800-641-4400 463-6286 B. Gas Service I. People's Natural Gas 2. Northern Natural Gas 3. William's Pipeline Co. 4. Minnegasco 423-5900 463-7126 1-918-588-3200 372-5050 K-l City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex K Utilities Restoration Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- c. Telephone Service I. Frontier Communication ') US Sprint (Fiber Optics) 3. US West Communications 435-6699 1-800-521-0579 1-800-573-1311 D. Sewer and Water Utilities City of Farmington. Public Works Department Pager 640-0667 Cellular 889-6564 ..... E. Other 1. Marcus Cable Television 432-2610 V. Authentication ------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------- Date Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler K-2 *,"',i/I; ~ . City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex L Radiological Protection Revision :2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .. I. Purpose It is recognized that emergency situations could develop in which the City of Farmington residents could be exposed to hazardous radiological materials. Plans are needed to coordinate the response and recovery efforts of the City of Farmington to potential transportation accidents, industrial accidents, laboratory radiation incidents, military accidents or war. The purpose ofthis annex is to elaborate upon this function. II. County Radiological Protection Organization A. City Emergency Management Director B. City Radiological Officer C. Self Protection Monitors, shelter Radiological Monitors, Radiological Plotters, Radiological Analysts, and Radiological Response Team. The City of Farmington Emergency Management Director reports to the Mayor. In the event of an emergency posing a potential radiological threat, the Emergency Management Director shall activate the Farmington Radiological Protection Plan by contacting the Dakota County Emergency Management Director. III. Responsibility The City of Farmington Radiological Protection Plan has the responsibility to assure that the skills and knowledge, data and information (e.g. radiation readings, damage reports, exposure estimates), and materials needed to minimize the etIects all radiological hazards in Farmington are available and utilized in time of emergency. Normally, Farmington will call upon the expertise or the Radiological Control Section of the Minnesota Department of Health for radiological expertise. instrumentation, guidance, decontamination and medical evaluation. L-l It}'.,. .!'8i>>o City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex L Radiological Protection Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If'!' A. Radiololjical Protection System Development and Maintenance i:.. The Farmington Emergency Management director is responsible for ensuring that a radiological protection system is available through County State and Federal resources. These resources can provide and operational system that can function to minimize the effects of radiation hazards in Farmington. .',~ B. Radiological Operations The Farmington Radiological Protection Plan is responsible for extremely localized radiological operations. Operations will take various forms, depending upon the emergency. The Farmington City Emergency Director will advise county officials which operations are necessary and appropriate. A series of actions might include: I. Assessment 2. Sheltering 3. Decontamination 4. Inventory of radiological protection equipment. Date Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler L-2 .J. - . ~ City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex L Radiological Protection Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachments: (On file in the Dakota County Emergency Management Director's Office. 1. Radiological Emergencies A. Local Radiological Emergencies 1. Transportation Incident Involving Radiological Materials. 2. Radiological Fixed Facility Incident. 3. Military Transportation Accident Involving Radiological Materials B. Widespread Radiological emergency C. Nuclear Power Plant Incidents (if applicable see Dakota County Emergency Response Plan for Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plant.) ') Sheltering 3. Decontamination and Recovery 4. Inventory of radiological protection equipment. (See Dakota County Resource Manual) Date Dakota County Emergency Management Director David Gisch Date Farmington Emergency Management Director Daniel M. Siebenaler L-3 ... ..-. City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex M HazMat Response Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- F ARMINGTON FIRE DEPARTMENT HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RESPONSE - STANDARD OPERATION PROCEDURE - I. Definition A. Hazardous Material Any substance or material in a quantity or form that poses an unreasonable risk to health, safety and property. .'.,.. B. H.I.R.T. - Hazardous Incident Response Team II. Task A. The primary concern of the Farmington Fire Department is to protect lives and property from fires, explosions or uncontrolled leaks / spills of hazardous materials (liquids, solids or vapors). B. Fire Department control of incidents shall end when stabilization has been accomplished. Stabilization means that there is no longer a threat to life or an imminent hazard to property. I!!'l III. Notification A. Each firefighter has a monitor pager and will be alerted by dispatch. Dispatch will activate the pager system and announce the type of incident and location. B. "First In" units and / or personnel may request special response of H.I.R.T. at the discretion of the senior firefighter / Officer. IV. Fire Departmetlt Operations A. "First In" units / personnel must be alerted to the possibility of a hazardous materials problem, when responding to an incident. The exact nature of the problem must be determined. In some cases there can be more than one problem. This data collection phase or "size up" must be made early. Once the above has been done, the first in units / personnel will notify all remaining response units of the hazardous situation. M-l ~'-. - I' City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex M HazMat Response Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \'. General Precautions A. When responding, try to approach the site from up wind and up hill. B. Isolate the scene of the incident and surrounding area to at least 1000 feet. (This distance may be increased as the incident requires.) C. Never drive through any spilled material. through a vapor cloud or smoke. r- , D. Only needed personnel shall enter the scene. (Stay out of vapor, smoke or spill. ) \ II . E. Protect emergency response personnel and equipment from contaminants. Always use full protective gear including, but not limited to S.C.B.A. (Self contained breathing apparatus). F. Detain and isolate any persons and equipment that have contaminated by exposure to hazardous materials. G. Do not permit anyone to touch anything unnecessarily or retain as souvenirs any objects found in the incident area. VI. Priorities A. Life Hazard 1. Can we safely approach the scene? 2. Is anyone trapped? .., .). Should traffic be diverted? ~... .~ ~ t~ 4. Will further excavation be necessary? B. Property / Environmental concerns I. Can rescue, protection of endangered buildings and vehicles be accomplished with minimum risk to firefighters? 2. Are waterways, storm sewers or sanitary sewers affected? M-2 ~>w City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex M HazMat Response Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. Attack / Withdraw Decision This decision is based on a number of factors and is a most critical decision. The immediate factors to consider are: 1. 2. r"-'~ 3. 4. 5. 6. The magnitude of the incident. Should H.I.R.T. be called. The conviction that the outcome can be favorably altered by the action taken. Proper protective gear. Proper equipment. Proper personnel resources available. The Fire Ground Commander (FGC) will determine what is needed to control the scene. H.I.R.T. will consult with the FGC in regard to ongoing strategy. Additional personnel will be called out if evacuation is needed. VII. Clearing the scene When the emergency is terminated, retreat to the isolation area. Do not return equipment back into service until H.I.R.T. checks out equipment and personnel to determine exposures and necessary decontamination. VIII. Follow up Immediately upon return to the station, the Fire Ground Commander shall complete a detailed written report of the HazMat incident and related activities. This report shall be submitted to the Fire Chief as soon as possible. IX. Record keeping All responding.personnel involved with a HazMat incident shall be documented, including detail about their level of involvement. X. Mutual Aid to,*, The Farmington Fire Department has mutual aid agreements with neighboring tire departments to render aid to each other as needs dictate and local situations allow. M-3 1". jil City of Farmington Emergency Operations Plan Annex M HazMat Response Revision 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- r' L XI. Authentication --------------------------- Date !!"- 1 ~. et..ij, M-4 ~;~ .. Farmington Fire chief Ken Kuchera 1f TO: Mayor & Councilmembers City Administrator~ FROM: Robin Roland Finance Director SUBJECT: GFOA National Conference Attendance DATE: May 4,1998 INTRODUCTION Attendance at the National Government Finance Officers Association Conference, June 28, through July 1, 1998 in San Francisco, California is being planned. DISCUSSION This conference is an annual national gathering of government finance professionals from the United States and Canada. Speakers, sessions and roundtable discussions cover topics including Budgeting, Long-term Financial Planning, Investing Public Funds and Capital Financing Strategies. This conference qualifies as continuing professional education for finance officers. BUDGET IMPACT As the City Administrator will not be attending the annuallCMA conference, adequate funding is available in the budget for conference registration and lodging. ACTION REQUIRED For information only. 7;)1/ . Robin Roland Finance Director CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street · FarminlJton, MAl 55024 · (672) 463-77 7 7 · Fa~ (672) 463.2597 REQUEST FORM SCHOOLS/CONFERENCES/TRAINING DEPARTMENT_6~~~________ DATE OF CONFERENCE_jd~~/_~l~~_ Ft~om To . LOCATION____!i~~~~~~_~-~~~_~-________________ EMPLOYEE(S) ATTENDING: 1)_~~~~~_~~_~_____________________ ,~ 2) 3) TYPE OF CONFERENCE_~!>t1~~_~~_~~9!!~_~~~~:___ TOPICS l)_€L~_~_~_~~~V~~~____________________ ;~=~~i=~~rw~=~~~~~~=~i~l~l~) · METHOD OF TRAVEL____~___~_~_______________________________ c' * Amount Provided in Adjusted . 19.9.&. Bud get $ _________.__ Amount Request $___________ Amt Remaining $___________ 1) Travel $_______________ 2) Registration $__a~5LeQ_ 3) Room $-_________~~~Q!L 4) Meals $________________ 5) Other Expense $__------ ,// - ./1-1 ------------------- -------- ~~------- ------- Department Head Date Finance Director Date .~ t\c..\o\l^I~\-r~Ot\., d'\v;~l1'N:.~ bt (.eaJlOl~.eJ.-\:O f\VlaACL~+Me~. ..~' TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL I RECOMMEND THE ABOVE REQUEST BE APPROVED. CITY ADMINISTRATOR Date ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON THE ______ DAY OF __________________, 19 ..... (APPROVED) (NOT APPROVED) Rev 9/86 FROM: Mayor and Councilniembers and John F. Erar, City Administrator 1f. Joel Jamnik, City Attorney '13 TO: RE: Resolution of S.M. Hentges Claim/ Pine Knoll Project 88-4 DATE: May 4, 1998 Introduction S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. commenced a lawsuit against the City on January 22, 1998, claiming additional payment of $30,156.10 for materials and services provided on the Pine Knoll project. Following a legal and [mancial analysis of the claim, the attorneys for the two parties have reached a tentative settlement of $9,999.99. S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. has indicated that the settlement is acceptable to them. The City Council is now requested to ratify or reject the tentative settlement. Background In 1994, the contractor on the Pine Knoll Sanitary Sewer Improvement and Road Reconstruction Project, S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc., filed a claim requesting additional compensation over and above the bid price for dewatering and gravel bedding. The City denied the claim. After negotiations between the contractor and the City failed to resolve the claim, the contractor filed the subject lawsuit against the City in January 1998. Legal Analysis When I inherited this file from Dave Grannis in mid-March, he and I discussed the merits of the claim, and the City's position regarding possible settlement. My independent review of the file and of Minnesota law regarding changed conditions claims confirmed the conclusions of Mr. Grannis. The cases turn on an evaluation of whether there were in fact changed conditions, unforeseen problems, or unexpected events which caused additional costs to be incurred. If there were, the risk of these extra costs are usually the responsibility of the owner, or at best are shared with the contractor in an equitable allocation. In limited circumstances, contract or bid document provisions which clearly place the risk of loss on the contractor are upheld. The present claim would be determined on an analysis of the contract provisions which stated that a high water table and difficult soil conditions may be present and 61842 Citlj of Farmington -1- 325 Oak Street. Farmington, MN 55024 · (672) 463-77 77 · Fax (672) ~63-2597 that it was the responsibility of the bidders on the project to evaluate the site and determine subsurface conditions. One additional fact in the Hentges claim involves the timing of the project and in particular what effect a delay in starting the project had in causing the additional costs. Budget Impact Analysis The defense, or prosecution, of any lawsuit is expensive, and we do not have a loser pays system. Costs and fees could exceed $20,000.00 on a fact intensive claim such as this even if the City prevails. These high costs compel both parties involved in the dispute to settle or to pursue alternative dispute resolution processes. Given these costs, a possible settlement for an amount under $10,000.00 makes good economic sense. Recommendation While the Council must evaluate the lawsuit from all public policy aspects, a legal and financial analysis of the proposed settlement causes me to recommend that the Council accept and ratify the tentative settlement of this lawsuit for a total amount, paid by the City to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc., of $9,999.99. Respectfully submitted, CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association g~~ oel J. . City Attorney JJJ:cjh 61842 -2- lh TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator -%-- FROM: James Bell, Parks & Recreation Director SUBJECT: Solid Waste Disposal Agreements DATE: May 4,1998 INTRODUCTION Staff has reviewed the renewal of the landfill agreement with Edward Kraemer & Sons, now USA Waste of Minnesota in Burnsville. DISCUSSION Since July of 1997, the City has had a landfill agreement with Edward Kraemer & Sons. Staff has had discussions with representatives from USA Waste of Minnesota and BFI's Pine Bend Landfill. Disposal agreements have been received from both organizations. Both facilities are MPCA approved "superior" disposal facilities. If the City does not have an exclusive agreement with either landfill, the Solid Waste operators have flexibility in choosing the site with the best vehicle access. The ability to deposit waste into more than one landfill will result in less wear and tear on vehicles because the landfill with the best access will be utilized. It will also minimize waiting time. BUDGET IMPACT Tipping fees have been slightly reduced due to the discontinuation of the Dakota County surcharge. The City will be able to maintain its current rate structure by implementing these changes. These changes have been reviewed with Ben Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor, and it is his feeling that these changes in operation would be beneficial to the Solid Waste Division. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council approve Disposal Agreements with USA Waste of Minnesota and Pine Bend Landfill, Inc. Respectfully Submitted, ,Jo.-_~~j ~&Q James Bell Parks & Recreation Director I CitIJ of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street. FarminlJton, MN 55024 · (672) 463-77 77 · Fa~ (672) 463-2597 7/ TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator9~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Certificate of Survey / Site Plan Requirements DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington has been requiring Site Plans and Certificates of Survey with all building permit applications for new construction for a number of years. The City is now simply documenting the requirements for these Site Plans/Certificates of Survey. DISCUSSION While the City has been requiring Site Plans/Certificates of Surveys for a number of years, we have not had a documented list of the specific requirements of what information is to be included on Site Plans/Certificates of Surveys. The attached document simply lists the requirements that informally have been in place for some time. A builder recently inquired as to the basis by which the City requires Site Plans/Certificates of Surveys for a new building permit, and thus this will document the City's requirements for building permit applications. Copies of these requirements will be provided to all builders and surveyors that are doing work in Farmington. BUDGET IMP ACT None ACTION REOUESTED This is for information only. A copy of these requirements will be color coded and forwarded to Council for inclusion in the City's Development Process Manual. Respectfully submitted, ~~ vld L. Ison Community Development Director - CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street. Farmington, MN 55024. (612) 463-7777. Fa~ (672) 463-2597 City of Farmington Site Plans/Certificates of Survey The City of Farmington requires Site Plans/Certificates of Survey prior to issuance of building permits. The following requirements will assist in prompt review and approval of the building permits. 1. Lot line dimensions and bearings. 2. The street, street name and address on which the lot fronts. 3. North arrow. 4. Show all easements and label. 5. Locations and elevations of all ponds/lakes/low areas adjacent to property. 6. Denote normal and 100-year high water level of ponds and lakes (check with developer or Engineering division for elevations). 7. Property legal description. 8. Site Plan/Certificate of Survey shall be drawn to scale. 9. Square footage of lot. 10. Proposed building location(s) showing dimensions from all lot lines. 11. The garage floor, walkout, top of block, lowest floor elevations and finished ground elevations around perimeter of house. 12. Dimensions (size) of all proposed structures including footprint of house and garage square footage. 13. The proposed driveway location, width of driveway at curb(include wings) and property line, type of surfacing. 14. Proposed locations of well and or septic system with a spot elevation at the septic system location, if applicable. 15. All existing and proposed lot corner elevations, Note: front corner elevations of lot should be a 2.00% grade from top of curb, see City of Farmington Standard Plates. Back corner lot elevations shall be according to grading plan. 16. The elevation at the center of the drive way at the curb (The garage shall be a minimum of 18" or .5%, whichever is greater, above curb. Maximum driveway grade shall be no more than 12%.) 17. Proposed drainage arrows and/or grade contours. 18. Proposed spot elevations of finished grade around all the structures (include high point elevations in swales). 19. Builder and/or owner of house. 20. Type of house being built on lot. 21. The proposed utility locations. If curb stop is located in driveway Neenah #R-19l4-B casting is required over curb stop. 22. All existing structures and utilities (existing buildings, high-pressure gas main, hydrants, storm culvert, catch basins etc.). 23. Land surveyors stamp and sigpature with address/phone number. 24. All other lot improvements. 25. Adjacent lot information, i.e. elevations if structure is built or iflot is vacant. 26. Retaining walls with proposed spot elevations at top and bottom of wall. Slopes on lots shall not exceed 3:1. 27. Proposed silt fence locations. 28. Two copies submitted. Site Plan/Certificate of Surveys not in compliance with the City's requirements will be returned and the permit will be held until all required information has been submitted. Proposed erosion control measures should be in accordance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Best Management Practices. Revised 04/29/98 COUNCIL REGISTER Council Meeting on May 4, 1998 VENDOR ACTIVITY 30-APR-1998 (11:52) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT 1- CK-SUBSYSTEM ~ 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OH <*> A & B AUTO ELECTRIC INC <*> ABH PROPERTIES <*> AERIAL COMMUNICATIONS INC <*> AFLAC <*> AIRLAKE FORD MERCURY <*> AIRTOUCH CELLULAR <*> ALCORN BEVERAGE CO. INC. <*> AMAI/PADGETT - THOMPSON <*> AMERICA I S SPORTING CLUB <*> ASHER CHIROPRACTIC OFFICE <*> BARTON SAND & GRAVEL CO <*> BON APPETITE <*> BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK INC <*> BRADLEY AND COMPANY <*> BT OFFICE PRODUCTS INTERNATION POLICE ADMIN STREET MAINT SEWER OPEATIONS SOLID WASTE STREET MAINT ADMINISTRATION COMM DEVELOPMENT Sl"Wt"" ""PEATIONS SOLID WASTE STREET MAINT WATER UTILITY GENERAL FUND PARK MAINT PATROL SERVICES SOLID WASTE BUILDING INSPCT INVESTIGATION PATROL SERVICES POLICE ADMIN LIQUOR PERSONNEL Recreation Prog SOLID WASTE STREET MAINT Senior Center 2ND ST PARKING COUNTY ROAD 31 DEVLPR CAP PROJ ELM ST EXTENSION ENGINEERING SERV G.I.S. MIDDLE CREEK TRU SEWER OPEATIONS STATE AID CONST STATE AID STREET STORM WATER UTIL STREET MAINT WATER UTILITY SENIOR CITIZEN ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL EQUIP MAINT/RENT EQUIP MAINT/RENT EQUIP MAINT/RENT UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES MEDICAL INS TRANSPORT COSTS VEHICLE PURCHASE TRANSPORT COSTS UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES MERCh ,"OR i<.l::SALE PROF SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL PAYROLL EXPENSES OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES SPEC ACT SUPPL OFF & PAPER SUPP 700.00 700.00* 135.00 135.00* 100.00 1,500.00 290.00 1,890.00* 59.34 47.48 18.28 104.06 18.28 18.27 265.71* 204.80 204.80* 58.02 19,567.00 7.97 19,632.99* 30.28 13 .60 98.61 7.59 50. .i,~24.~11 7,424.97* 139.00 139.00* 20.00 20.00* 85.00 85.00* 847.01 847.01* 66.50 66.50* 655.89 3,213.91 14,513.62 170.46 4,550.00 70.00 35,117.61 353.44 290.50 976.69 3,192.44 980.00 1,106.00 65,190.56* 100.00 100.00* 510.71 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH ";~1 OH OR OH OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OH OH OR OR COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR <*> CAMAS <*> CAMPBELL KNUTSON <*> CAP AGENCY <*> CEEF/MOUNTAIN DEW DAYS <*> CHANHASSEN DINNER THEATRES <*> CLASSES GALORE <*> COLLEGE CITY BEVERAGE INC <*> COMPUTER CHEQUE OF MINNESOTA I <*> D & 0 PROPERTIES <*> DAKOTA COUNTY TREASURER/AUDITO <*> DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION <*> DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO <*> DELEGARD TOOL CO <*> DICKSON <*> DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES <*> DUEBERS DEPT STORE <*> DULUTH CONVENTION & VISITORS B <*> ACTIVITY STREET MAINT ADMINISTRATION ARENA TEAM ROOM BUILDING INSPCT COMM DEVELOPMENT DEVLPR CAP PROJ ENGINEERING SERV GEN ACCOUNTING LEGISLATIVE CTRL LIQUOR PLANNING/ZONING POLICE ADMIN SEWER OPEATIONS STATE AID STREET Senior Center LIQUOR Senior Center Recreation prog LIQUOR LIQUOR LIQUOR GEN ACCOUNTING EMERG MGMT SERV SIGNAL MAINT FIRE SERVICES 30-APR-1998 (11:52) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM OPER MAT & SUPPL PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PRINT & PUBLISH OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL MERCH FOR RESALE MISC BLDG MAINT & RNT PROF SERVICES EQUIP MAINT/RENT UTILITIES EQUIP MAINT/RENT WATER UTILITY FLEET MAINT SERV OPER MAT & SUPPL OFF & PAPER SUPP ADMINISTRATION PERSONNEL BUILDING MAINT ICE ARENA LIQUOR POLICE ADMIN Recreation prog Senior Center SCHOOL & CONF SCHOOL & CONF OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL ADMINISTRATION SCHOOL & CONF LEGISLATIVE CTRL SCHOOL & CONF 510.71* 126.18 126.18* 2,562.32 209.29 45.49 118.29 222.60 336.65 54.60 442.72 91. 00 81.90 1,435.00 860.00 18.20 6,478.06* 1,861.61 1,861.61* 125.00 125.00* 100.00 100.00* 125.00 125.00* 6,595.05 6,595.05* 109.88 109.88* 2,939.78 2,939.78* 25.00 25.00* 5.33 2,169.83 2,175.16* 25.80 25.80* 112.50 112.50* 36.00 36.00* 400.00 322.43 722.43* 10.83 5.43 3.60 5.05 12.01 12.55 49.47* 79.87 229.50 309.37* 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 30-APR-1998 (11:52) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OH ERAR, JOHN <*> EUROTHERM RECORDERS INC <*> FAIRVIEW RIDGES HOSPITAL <*> FARMINGTON EMPLOYEE CLUB <*> FARMINGTON INDEPENDENT <*> FARMINGTON PRINTING INC <*> FARMINGTON, CITY OF <*> FEDERAL RESERVE BANK <*> FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF FARMING <*> FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE COMP <*> FRITZ COMPANY INC <*> FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS <*> FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS INC <*> GARDNER HARDWARE CO <*> GOLD STAR PRINTING INC <*> GOPHER SIGN CO <*> GOPHER STAGE LIGHTING INC <*> ADMINISTRATION WATER UTILITY POLICE ADMIN GENERAL FUND ADMINISTRATION PERSONNEL TRANSPORT COSTS OPER MAT &: SUPPL PROF SERVICES EMPLOYEE CLUB PRINT &: PUBLISH PRINT &: PUBLISH STATE AID STREET PRINT &: PUBLISH -"'~n'" T ~~~ PERSONNEL RECREATION PROGR SENIOR CITIZEN SEWER OPEATIONS SOLID WASTE STORM WATER UTIL TREE MAINTENANCE PRINT &: PUBLISH OFF &: PAPER SUPP PRINT &: PUBLISH PRINT &: PUBLISH PRINT &: PUBLISH PRINT &: PUBLISH PRINT &: PUBLISH ADMINISTRATION PRINT &: PUBLISH BUILDING INSPCT SCHOOL &: CONF ENGINEERING SERV SCHOOL &: CONF PARK MAINT TRANSPORT COSTS PATROL SERVICES SCHOOL & CONF RECREATION PROGR TRANSPORT COSTS SOLID WASTE SCHOOL & CONF GENERAL FUND SOLID WASTE GENERAL FUND LIQUOR COMM DEVELOP COMMUNICATIONS COUNTY ROAD 31 ICE ARENA SEWER OPEATIONS SOLID WASTE WATER UTILITY COMMUNICATIONS FIRE SERVICES POLICE ADMIN STREET MAINT ICE ARENA SAVINGS BONDS DEBT PRIN MEDICAL INS OPER MAT & SUPPL UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES BLOG MAINT &: RNT PRINT &: PUBLISH OPER MAT &: SUPPL OPER MAT &: SUPPL 200.00 200.00* 64.41 64.41* 98.00 98.00* 46.00 46.00* 21. 60 15.00 21. 25 90.25* 30.35 130.46 135.26 12.42 12.43 12.43 93.19 426.54* 2.50 7.30 11. 81 10.00 31.44 5.00 13.23 81.28* 25.00 25.00* 34,213.44 34,213.44* 406.42 406.42* 1,324.03 1,324.03* 30.14 1,922.18 188.53 30.14 264.33 30.14 41.74 2,507.20* 70.72 70.72* 385.00 385.00* 108.63 108.63* 219.49 219.49* 342.83 342.83* OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH un OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH COUNCIL REGISTER VENDOR GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC <*> GRIGGS COOPER & CO <*> HAPPY HARRY I S FURNITURE <*> HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP <*> HAYES, DON <*> HEALTH PARTNERS <*> HENTGES AND SONS INC, S.M. <*> HOLLATZ, LEE <*> HYDRO SUPPLY CO <*> ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 <*> IKON CAPITAL <*> INT'L CITY/COUNTY MGMT ASSN <*> INTERNATIONAL PERSONNEL MGMT A <*> JIRIK SOD FARMS INC <*> JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR COMPAN <*> LAKEVILLE PUBLISHING INC <*> LAKEVILLE, CITY OF <*> LAMBERTY ELECTRIC INC <*> LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES <*> LAWSON PRODUCTS INC <*> LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES - P <*> LEHMANN FARMS INC <*> LERN <*> LOCAL GVMT INFO SYSTEMS ASSN. <*> ACTIVITY SEWER OPEATIONS WATER UTILITY LIQUOR SENIOR CITIZEN 30-APR-1998 (11:52) DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES MERCH FOR RESALE EQUIP MAINT/RENT RECREATION PROGR SCHOOL & CONF WATER UTILITY OPER MAT & SUPPL PARK MAINT GENERAL FUND SEWER OPEATIONS PATROL SERVICES WATER UTILITY GENERAL FUND ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION PERSONNEL SNOW REMOVAL LIQUOR PERSONNEL FIRE SERVICES PATROL SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS MEDICAL INS MISC OPER MAT & SUPPL OPER MAT & SUPPL ICMA EQUIP MAINT/RENT DUES & SUBSCRIP DUES & SUBSCRIP OPER MAT & SUPPL MERCH FOR RESALE PRINT & PUBLISH PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES GENERAL FUND FLEET MAINT SERV HVY EQUIP PURCH LELS UNION DUES FLEET MAINT SERV OPER MAT & SUPPL ADMINISTRATION SCHOOL & CONF LEGISLATIVE CTRL SCHOOL & CONF LIQUOR RECREATION PROGR DUES & SUBSCRIP MERCH FOR RESALE BUILDING INSPECT GEN ACCOUNTING MIS PAYROLL PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES PROF SERVICES 154.88 154.87 309.75* 6,105.89 6,105.89* 403.64 403.64* 350.00 3,052.59 3,402.59* 39.06 39.06* 12,707.64 12,707.64* 9,999.99 9,999.99* 23.00 23.00* 463.13 463.13* 3,638.74 3,638.74* 287.89 287.89* 545.47 545.47* 222.00 222.00* 24.00 24.00* 6,560.37 6,560.37* 71. 96 71. 96* 1,655.88 3,311.74 4,967.62* 400.00 400.00* 148.50 148.50* 53.81 53.81* 146.00 250.00 396.00* 52.10 52.10* 95.00 95.00* 425.54 940.28 531. 90 353.82 2,251.54* 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 30-APR-1998 (11:52) ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM OH -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT <*> MANDERS DIESEL REPAIR INC <*> MEDICA <*> METROPOLITAN AREA MANAGEMENT A <*> MINNESOTA AFSCME COUNCIL #14 <*> MINNESOTJI, POLI,UTION CON'1'ROL AG <*> MINNESOTA, STATE OF <*> MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH <*> MN REAL ESTATE JOURNAL <*> MN STATE BOARD OF i:.LLCTR:iCIl"i <*> MORE 4 <*> NORDVIK, WILLIAM <*> NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY <*> NTFC CAPITAL CORPORATION <*> PELLICCI HARDWARE & RENTAL <*> PEOPLES NATURAL GAS <*> PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC STREET MAINT EQUIP MAINT/RENT SOLID WASTE EQUIP MAINT/RENT GENERAL FUND MEDICAL INS ADMINISTRATION SCHOOL & CONF GENERAL FUND AFSCME UNION DUE BUILDING INSPCT TRANSPORT COSTS FIRE SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS MIDDLE CREEK TRU PROF SERVICES PARK MAINT TRANSPORT COSTS PATROL SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS STREET MAINT --- ---'- ----- PATROL SERVICES UTILITIES MIDDLE CREEK TRU PROF SERVICES WATER UTILITY DUES & SUBSCRIP COMM DEVELOPMENT DUES & SUBSCRIP HRA/ECONOMIC DEV PRINT & PUBLISH 3UI~D:l:: :~:.sPEC'~ OPER l-ll'iT & SUPPL BUILDING MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL ENGINEERING SERV PROF SERVICES FIRE SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL POLICE ADMIN OPER MAT & SUPPL Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL SENIOR CITIZEN SPEC ACT SUPPL Senior Center OPER MAT & SUPPL TREE MAINTENANCE OPER EQUIP PURCH EMERG MGMT SERV ICE ARENA SIGNAL MAINT SWIMMING POOL EQUIP MAINT/RENT UTILITIES PROF SERVICES UTILITIES COMMUNICATIONS UTILITIES ENGINEERING SERV OPER MAT & SUPPL FIRE SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL PARK MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL POLICE ADMIN OPER MAT & SUPPL Recreation prog OPER MAT & SUPPL Senior Center OPER MAT & SUPPL OUTDOOR ICE PERSONNEL UTILITIES PRINT & PUBLISH LIQUOR MERCH FOR RESALE 26.08 26.08* 140.69 140.69* 9,268.75 9,268.75* 16.00 16.00* 363.30 363.30* 8.00 8.00 240.00 72.00 8.00 :~ ,00 360.00* 270.00 270.00* 150.00 64.00 214.00* 69.00 500,00 569.00" 50.CO* 25.63 34.50 48.11 122.41 13.83 42.02 167.91 454.41* 1,350.00 1,350.00* 6.28 1,245.07 3,021.96 90.78 4,364.09* 422.91 422.91* 7.24 92.48 72.48 4.76 20.38 11. 90 209.24* 7.46 734.91 742.37* 3,414.35 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OF 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 <*> PITNEY BOWES <*> PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS <*> QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS CO <*> REALTY SIGN COMPANY <*> RIVER VALLEY CLINIC <*> ROLAND, ROBIN <*> ROSEMOUNT SAW & TOOL <*> RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO <*> SAM I S CLUB <*> SAUBER PLUMBING & HEATING CO. <*> SAVOIE SUPPLY CO. INC. <*> SEARS <*> SKB ENVIRONMENTAL INC <*> SOUTH SUBURBAN MEDICAL <*> ST CROIX COUNTY <*> ST PAUL, CITY OF <*> STAR TRIBUNE <*> STARR AUTOMOTIVE <*> STATE CAPITOL CREDIT UNION <*> STEICHEN'S <*> SUPERAMERlCA <*> TOLL GAS AND WELDING SUPPLY <*> TROPHY HOUSE, THE <*> UNIFORMS UNLIMITED <*> UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 30-APR-1998 (11:52) ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM 3,414.35* ADMINISTRATION EQUIP MAINT/RENT 709.89 OH 709.89* GENERAL FUND PERA 10,007.95 OH 10,007.95* LIQUOR MERCH FOR RESALE 817.77 OH 817.77* POLICE ADMIN OPER MAT & SUPPL 229.50 OH 229.50* RESCUE SQUAD PROF SERVICES 13.00 OH 13 .00* GEN ACCOUNTING TRANSPORT COSTS 44.10 OH 44.10* TREE MAINTENANCE EQUIP MAINT/RENT 27.00 OH 27.00* STREET MAINT EQUIP MAINT/RENT 114.76 OH 114.76* LIQUOR OPER MAT & SUPPL 135.00 OH 135.00* WATER UTILITY OPER MAT & SUPPL 14.11 OH 14.11* SWIMMING POOL OPER MAT & SUPPL 135.95 OH 135.95* FIRE SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL 489.05 OH 489.05* ARENA TEAM ROOM PROF SERVICES 129.00 OH SOLID WASTE PROF SERVICES 2,568.50 OH 2,697.50* FIRE SERVICES PROF SERVICES 68.00 OH 68.00* GENERAL FUND CHILD SUPPORT 158.52 OH 158.52* STREET MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL 335.74 OH 335.74* PERSONNEL PRINT & PUBLISH 583.00 OH 583.00* FIRE SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS 166.00 OH 166.00* GENERAL FUND ST CREDIT UNION 2,104.16 OH 2,104.16* Recreation Prog OPER MAT & SUPPL 852.89 OH 852.89* BUILDING INSPCT TRANSPORT COSTS 83.25 OH PARK MAINT TRANSPORT COSTS 37.43 OH PATROL SERVICES TRANSPORT COSTS 830.69 OH SOLID WASTE TRANSPORT COSTS 50.00 OH STREET MAINT TRANSPORT COSTS 210.43 OH 1,211.80* SOLID WASTE OPER MAT & SUPPL 5.58 OH 5.58* FIRE SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL 79.88 OH 79.88* PATROL SERVICES OPER MAT & SUPPL 31. 95 OH 31. 95* COMMUNICATIONS PRINT & PUBLISH 1,000.00 OH COUNCIL REGISTER 30-APR-1998 (11:52) VENDOR ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION CHECK AMOUNT CK-SUBSYSTEM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <*> 1,000.00* UNITED WAY FUND OF ST. PAUL AR GENERAL FUND UNITED WAY 25.00 OH <*> 25.00* UNITOG RENTAL SERVICES FLEET MAINT SERV OPER MAT & SUPPL 9.52 OH SOLID WASTE OPER MAT & SUPPL 28.54 OH STREET MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL 57.08 OH <*> 95.14* UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA PARK MAINT MISC 7.00 OH <*> 7.00* USA WASTE SERVICES INC SOLID WASTE PROF SERVICES 15,966.01 OH <*> arc ,." -~ VAUGHN DISPLAY & FLAG BUILDING MAINT OPER MAT & SUPPL 214.77 OH <*> 214.77* VISIONARY SYSTEMS LTD FIRE SERVICES SCHOOL & CONF 560.00 OH <*> 560.00* VOSS LIGHTING SENIOR CITIZEN EQUIP MAINT/RENT 54.89 OH <*> 54.89* WEST WELD SUPPLY CO FLEET MAINT SERV PROF SERVICES 56.56 OH <*> 56.56* XEROX CORPORATION ADMINISTRATION EQUIP MAINT/RENT 59.50 OH <*> 59.50* 274,364.71* <*> APPROVAL c: . RISTOW GAMER STRACHAN FITCH CORDES TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Lee Smick, f)/n Planning Coordinator ~ FROM: SUBJECT: Vacating a Drainage and Utility Easement in East Farmington DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION The proposed vacation is located at the northeast comer of Elm Street and Twelfth Street in the East Farmington 4th Addition. The proposal consists of vacating a drainage and utility easement. DISCUSSION The Developer for East Farmington has requested that the City vacate the drainage and utility easement as shown on the attached information. The intent of this easement was to protect an existing wetland area located at the northeast comer of Elm Street and Twelfth Street in East Farmington 4th Addition. Due to the need for filling this area with redesign of the 4th phase, this easement needs to be vacated. The lots affected by the easement would be unbuildable if the easement is not removed. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the proposed vacation of the drainage and utility easement, contingent on the approval of a wetland alteration permit. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt a resolution to vacate the drainage and utility easement located at the northeast comer of Elm Street and Twelfth Street in the East Farmington 4th Addition, contingent on the approval of a wetland alteration permit. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator ?SOL I CitlJ. of FarminiJton 325 Oak Street. Farmington, MN 55024 · (612) 463-7777 · Fa~ (672) 463-2597 RESOLUTION NO. VACATING A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT IN EAST FARMINGTON . Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 4th day of May, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington has received a request to vacate the following described as a drainage and utility easement: Commencing at the northwest comer of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 48 minutes 06 seconds East, assumed bearing along the north line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, 374.68 feet; thence South 0 degrees 09 minutes 21 seconds West 262.18 feet to the point of beginning of the easement to be herein described; thence continue South 0 degrees 09 minutes 21 seconds West 175.01 feet; thence South 89 degrees 50 minutes 39 seconds East 95.11 feet; thence North 0 degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds West 153.59 feet; thence North 76 degrees 45 minutes 02 seconds West 94.66 to the point of beginning. ; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 4, 1998 to consider the vacation of said drainage and utility after proper publication and notification, at which time public comment was heard thereon; and WHEREAS, it is determined that said drainage and utility easement is no longer necessary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above described public drainage and utility easement are hereby vacated contingent on the approval of a wetland alteration permit. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of May, 1998. Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 1998. City Administrator PErITtOR TO VAC6ts East rarminqtcn First Addition "., -ch. \1Dd....raipd c\tllert af ne~d of 100 perQent of the. prope-rty abUtf.UlI upcm Twelft.h Street locaud wil:biD the City of tarminston. CO\lnt:y of Dai.ota, State. of HiDnesol:,I, hereby petition tha C1~Y CQUDcil of tbe City of FarmiQ~oP. COUDt7 of Dak6ta, S'tar.e of lUnn8$Ota, to vacal:e the drainaqc and utility eaSII!ll1\6)'lt legally d~3&:.'l'ibed as: ThQ dra1nage and utility eagement as platt~d a~~ dedica~ed in Ou~lo~ O. East: ~cr.4"'.Ll!yt:on First Addition, according to tha recorded plat thQreot, Dakota County, M1nnesot., and Eaement No. 1 as de=:lcri.b64 in the Development Contrace, recoraed as Document Number 12J1Jaa. ~ 1. Mue" :Date - 4940 Viking Drive 1608 Minnea~olis, MN 55435 TOTAL p.e2 EXHIBIT A "Easement 1" of Exhibit C of Developer's Contract to be Released A perpetual easement for drainage and utility purposes over, under and 'across that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 32, Township 114, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 48 minutes 06 seconds East, assumed bearing along the north line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, 374.68 feet; thence South 0 degrees 09 minutes 21 seconds West 262.18. feet to the point of beginning of the easement to be herein described; thence continue South 0 degrees 09 minutes 21 seconds West 175.01 feet; thence South 89 degrees 50 minutes 39 seconds East 95.11 feet; thence North 0 degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds West 153.59 feet; thence North 76 degrees 45 minutes 02 seconds West 94.66 feet to the point of beginning. I I .. I ... "... '", _.... ." .0."" -l---t I'" ..,."..H)ou .r..")SM.IO ""&\',J - II ~ ~O' I '/'" _. _ .:;,7.' _.,: : .,". 'un 'lr 'Ql:lJ\ JO .t..", JI4a 10 "1 ""..; ,..- ";.:"': )s, i"ll 10 101' ot~ ou...,. k JO:P~ to"lOi--__..J '# I)UOOC<< II..) '" JO IllJ 'Po. Z 0000&: 'U__ Jill ~ )!<orl,...,) ", 3..l~.6o.00N I ,f:g I ~ '-;'w.. I \ ---09'm --~ --" ~/_- __M':~6~.r~__ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ o : ~I , : : ",'DO : " ..h, .... " ,:~ ......,--:. .... r;' 133~lS HlN331~nO.:l : \ 133Hl..S 1,.,0:__ ::: : : :::: I:~ ::~ f' :~ 'f-=-=-r r: -_.. _. ~-:-:--.-:,:.i.o.I~--w.o.;l.":"~:.8 ~,:.:-;8 ---:: ~H1.~~33l~~C'::~ I I I. I I () g;t' I L_,!,tL'~~_J 'I 1- - - - _. /' ~ 1"": ~ .1 ~ t., I t - ~,~ I '" -MOOt _, "'!":""'!..'M__, r_~'Ji._, r_l~v.!._, r-~u.!-, r-'!:!'!~-" O'i ,'~ I; ~ 88. I. ~ · f.: ~ 1O ~~:;: ~. ~ \0 ...!... ~:\;, I~ I,~.~ lOr r IOl n:' 8: ~ : ~. : ~. ~ ~ :. ; ~ 0...1 ;~ '.' " I ,: :: I;:' .c - l~i ~::;I -.co r.o I gt t:' 81 .:;. (;;'. Q) j!n... I I 'I - - ~lf.. :51-1 ,- 1-' I ': .,.,~: ~ .f.O l?1 Qt ,.... 21 r.c ex) .~ ~ :~ ,f.I,;Um, I It 'I ~ ~ ,L_~:I!:~~_-, q 1 lot -II:: ""i; fUll': 1 ~~ i \ ~I L__-.J L---ff : rJ:: :1~~ : r--6)-tiOt---, lJ.fr..~J t 1 I" -l r- .J L~~~'l.'\J t~ I~ ',~ ;llf(\OOS ..'':.~;. I ~(N ~S~ I:! :~ I . ~-Oo1l--)~~'..~-:t! ~~ : _t&\1;~ ~g..~'tf ... -Du~-' .:;I s:: (JO~fjl 00&1 f. 1 :"'_ \ I ,- Ol ,- &:1: ~ ~'l.~") '"'" W"~I . _ I,i11{...1 0 :~ ~i ~ ~ r--i ~---: l.;:...__~::~~no:..L _-1 L_M-"I~,It(l,~_-, I ~IL()"" 5 \/L~l,!"~~j(__:)__,~ -...... I~ ;.:~ I! ~ T - -, ,- - 1 - -:.0. -!"lS! - '- -:~. OO~I--' 1, -', l" :Wl_~ - ~ \It; U ~ c - - ~..~.t!)'C.,;o_ - J ;:0.. 'f //~/: ~: 1 1 ~i - eo- - - - - r. ~ I; ~ :;-; -ww7 - - -, n~ !~ t- ~ J ~~ r - (0)011- - - , ,~. .vI . ~~ ~~. ~~ :~,.. ,. ,,~'ll 8,~~ ...."'"' ~"jl...:.O (. :8,_::: :' ~~: '41,:' ~I ""f,,-'~' "~<. ""'0 ()-!'2L_~'!""~s_.J -"'r. :tt"; '-J ~1!"'='...J t"',~() ,~' w.w I'" _0:' I '.'., N ~,' u .. ~ -' ..... ..: :;t ~~fr) t;. ',', ~', - i<~ F --~; r -'()OlSen -, , L-.-_l...!l..fq.pQI.i_.J ~~::l ... L_._.;~.IL~..cms__J c ~- t! ~-... I,,() IS". r-C""W'o.!i---p,l A 0 18.:-:')-00'01'---.1" ~~ 't I 1 I:..........,: f:) 5. ('s I~ = 1:"(~Jti 3'ltl_ ~1 "\Jll60.DON I,',"() N I:, 1~ It". _.IUCl.OO~ oo.~ 1 ..~.~~ I I~-: W JI N ..'l~!J '....MI.... .._ ~~ ':', " L.1IStt_1 L-,,!(I'_.J -'\ ..~ir('l () L .,.._____J ')~O:: I. l' .-1 '-tlCl\ll....1 tJo~:.~..!I,.t.~.1",Jf.W.'l'\J~ r-';r7 1 r-~Oi-l r-QO'5l-'1 t, 0Cl(u: , 1- ~O;'" ()l I- LJ.!.l,V\!lD!.(~_.~~.'li1.:onll' I I ,... .. I , , I I I I 1 I I I (I) r onl '1 ( , I. 1 I. "~"'1 r cki " 1 I ~,- ('" J ~ I ~ I ~ ! 1.:: I ~ I ~ 1 I '. ~ ~~ U') ~ t_~ : '. I ~ _ Bl I~ U') 81 L; ~ SI I~ :2 81 ~ N 18 s' ~I ~ ~ U) 0 (;. _ gl ~:! ~ r r') :~ I I.... -. ~:~ - ~~ ~ - ~: :5 t.: ,: - :~ 51 ;.i~ - :1, C - =: I' I I:: r., t - I" 1/ , I I I I I I 1 .... I , I ~ 1 I I 1 I I"} I r ~~ L_,.r7-J L-i~):-J l_.-;;:.5f_J L_l\j_.;j_J L-MllT'..J L,,,j;r-J l_';;-r,T-J L_,;;;",_J L-,.;fto7-J L-~Ci--' I I ;~--:: ~- 'l~ Ilontl__ H 18 ~_:::C; " I ~~ - - ---=-...,r-133~lS - -;-'-- ~f;--:-- - --...",_oHlN33i~iHl- - -,~ --I ~~ ' 8 "'N'Q 1.-----. () r-"!'.i-, r-~'!!-' 1-~~-1 r-I!!?'!!-'I r-....?..I~, : r~u.!.-, r-';"~-(lt., r.!-"~!..' r-"':'''t., r..!4!!.t..1 ,-~.!!."-, .fl I c( 1 I I I , I I , t I I, I I I r I I I 1 I I w I 01 o 0' S' ~ ~ I~ ~ ,~ ~ ' ''''I'' 8' ~ r;, ~ r;, ~ r,; ~ t~ ~ ~ '~ I Z ~ ,~CO S' ~ ..... !lo Iii CO f. ~ 0> f. ~ 0 ,; " 10 g. ~ CO !; ~ ..... !lo t.; CO r. ~ 0> ~. }l 0 " I , l'" l ~I -; .; "I :; .., ,; ~, C1 - :.' -:.., ~ -I :! ", a .:: k~ ..; 5 - :- I ~: t_~!E_J t_,!Oo~_J ~ ~!l_J L_EO.!'_J L_OO_Oi_J I L.~O!~ ~_ro.P!..~ ~_oo.:.~J ~_oo_O!_J ~_oo';..:.';~ >_~~J I ' . N r "tJo~.-1 r -w"\.~ -1 ...,:~.o:J.." r cilO!it- - -, I r ~r6i - - -, ""T J.,.r.'toett::. r J.,fjfu; - '" ~:_.. Ot,... 1....ll.6Q.OOl11...ll.6CI.~ I ....----_____!,p. ..';....1oOOS I~ -.... I ..I..t.t~1JOS 81 \ '8 :) ~ I 1 ",~II V 0' Z ~:: I~ -~ ~: 'lit ': ~ "'--____..."":g:: :;. I () : ~ ,~ : ~: ~,~ 1.~{'..1l..,.0j!S_ J ~ L __M_':.t_orn _ _J I,' 0 L ).1t.~q,.._..J ~ ) l ~ J L .J :-;,:. A' r - t'!iHo - - ! I,..JW r - --c.aooi - -.., '.' ' '; , r - - tit 001- - , , :\ - - - - - -~ ~ ~ t -"""'" }" e ~ ~' I ... - ~ ~ t- . I ..11....... ..,......... ~~('J ~ - G~"') N ,':. ~~' "" 8' ;,~ <. 0 ~:. 'g N " ~'\. 00", 10 :::0 ~ I-- ...~ Ci. _ .. f _ "" '.',' .... ".', ',;~. ~~ ..J () ,,:.1;;1- - _ I. R .. c( 0 r:) r,' '"'0 ,-. 'h ..... 1'"0 ' r--~' r:---, ~i:",,: ~ ij~ ." L_~..IL6':\~l_J ~}; '1___1.~;'~'~_J' ?;. => ~J: I ..'.II.~'!!S__I 01 ~." ,'-- al!,:J - _ -- r.--..~,---, f-I' r-(-.'h~.~,--, Co~ 0.,... f~' ~A:_ _-, I ~) -, 1:, , ::, ~ ~, ....)1 " 'lo --, 8" I ::. --, , "I U ;0, I t') -I i 0 la - ~ ::? :~ () ;I~.j N 01 .....' \ r= ICe):2 ~ ~.~~ ~~&~t"JL-",~ "'~i~';J1 r_.~'~~ J" -~ M:i4~ ~ \.. J"f;.~' r ~'lrt~~_}.~ J r-ii.;--' r -ilUOI 1 I -oaw - 1 r -oow -I r-gjc;--l u I'~ I-loo," r -ui.,,,- j r .w..... 1 I .,,:)''" 1 I 1IO~ 1 I" I.IJ"-' : : ~ : ~ ~ ~ -- - f ~ - i 't:; : ~ : ~ : ~ : :.. : ~ : I 31 So t'l 1iI ~ '" a'l 81 ,:: ,. 81 Ill':: co 8> ,:: ..... !:i ,:: co go ,::. lit..... ~, - 8> ~ ~ E1,;l ~ ~ ~ ~ go ill"''' 'fl....- go ~ _ !il ~ - !II I/< - go ,; ~ f,I III _ .: ", " 0; " 0; ," e " 0; - r 9 -: " -, 0:; " ,& -, S " 0; ., 0;, ',~ t , I I I I 1 I 1 I I 3 1 I , I I , 1 I 1 I I 8L-:.7_.' L_;.;;;;_J l-l:i/-J l_,.n.._J I_-""N~ '1'~ '-....;;;'-, L_",_.._.I l::'.:~"L~..o,,;,'J '-,....J L;;.",;,Jf; I '1 '-'JIl61(-- ~ __I ~~ ,'" ~~c...:,,~.:':" ~ I i~~~'-1:33?;11S [-'----:-;:;u..o..-f-- ---U'''--~-\Hljj3.,\l---- 9 --.J --- ~t .GL -- , M.lt,6o.00s I I I I <5 ------i:'--- Z t:'~~ ~ ~i ;?'% z ~ ~o~ j- . <z 5 ~!g ~ .. I .. '" Ege ~ ~ ~ ~ :'; z " ~ a()~~'t' ~at; ~ ~ It: ~ :....;,lolF . ,', .). S! ... , ~~~55 \1h:5 ~ ....~~t.. ~ .', ~ I ~ '1 en I: 01-: - ~Vt<cr=@ ~!:t c.;':HI.L~'; : g~ :~~5~ ~~fi~~' ~ ~ W . , :~tI~ ~...- . x ~ ::E ' . ~i~l;5~ o~ 0 ___..____.J --.... )oiS la~ ~ ! ~~ ..o~cz ~e ;., ::l;'l~ <( "-r-' loJ....c!t- ~tt1!~w c~ '----1 l:'u~~(lf ~l~~~ lI)~tl/::,~~ u l'! l! .., ...< ~ili,!.~ ~g~~~: ;;;~ 3 ~ "Q ~ 'Cf.1.. ~~ 5~ .,-. ~SE~~ ~5~a~ .g~~!~s n '" ...... ~ ~~ , < III c.... a: ~~;n~: c~ " " 1,< ~25';~~& <.>2 ~ Z ~~~~Vt ~~~;.~~; . ... ~ .0'4 A'tMIObi WI r II) :z: 1\ - e ~.. ~- i: ~~ ....A111""U 1..'..11....1......""''' 1. S;S ~_-~ ...1,,", I C't.III...."'U , I..V..L...~I...'r ,I.:! y_~ z o I- o o <( I b: ::> o LL Z ~ Z ~ a: u: I- 00 <( W " ...I^II I""'J , ... \,..11..... I\..J "'" Y ~s~::; "'fr. 1 ".. IIIAI' I\J_I I 'lfV.L...~1 'If I' H~ Y...J , ::'j~ ..&._"..J ':'S'v'3 ~- L'J LoJ u::: ~- 1:) -~ "- o t: o o c( o Ij::: r: L_____. . 1.33~lS ~ H1.~~331.~:Hl i -~ "- o ~~ -~ <- G:: ,c( -'- v =c o ~ - In ; C. -'~ I I I I I I L______ 1.33~1.S !! LJ I _,.,,",:, a. I I ......, I-I"u.. GO r------ I ~5 I -. f: I C) i) .- 0 I t~ .( -. I ;~ () ~- ..~ ..., It.') n::: ~= <( c ( ::: I td LI_ ..- 10 N 0-- o <J ~ LJ I I 3..ll,60000N - - 06'9L~--- If) N _N~" -~ --- 133tJ1S 06TL OO'OL OO.OL OO.OL OO.OL r----l r----l r----l r----l ,-----, I I I I , I I 1 I I <1 01 01 ~~ 01 ~~ 01 r~ 01 r~ 10 ~I ~I r~ ('0.. ~I r~ ro ~I r~ (j) ~I r~ 0 I~ ~I (Q 0 I~ 0 I~ 0 I~ 0 I~ 0 SI SI SI SI 0r- IS 1 I Iffi I I~ 1 Ie;: I I~ I <1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 \ L _ 96.rL_ J L _ OO'OL_ J L _ ~O.OL_ J L _ ~O.OL___ J L ~o'o~ .-J , [ oo.s9-l ,Mull,60000S I <J }'.l 01 L() ~ol Lt"!\ CoLt"!\ N vN 011 (nOli co <J ~__~J N Mull.60.00S o OO'S9 N B6TZl Mull.60000S ",.---:--- . V --__ I- Z w :::i: }'.l~ to<( Ow Co>-L :tl-,-- Ol- IX)~(r) (/) ::> ) --- 0<1 oZ ..... 0< I I I 1OwL-l IX)<;l ....<( Z <i: a::: o f\ \ [""O<YG91 I Mull.60000S I I ..q- 01 I ~I , Oll L___~ o N MulZ.6 )oOOS 00;9 0 N r-- }'.ll ~--I 01 ~oI I 01 If) IX) If) If) NI ....... ;tNI I C'il en, . \,... ~Oll I t"') en I I VI I I I LM..ll,60000S I LM..ll,€O.OOS I ...Q0'';;9_ ..J _OO'<;~ -' <J <1 r U.tL ~ I I I I 81 8/ 81 or- 8\ ...., .-, <J I I L____J 6l.tL <J <1 8 ci v -- I 0 \<1 ~ I ~ "" - r JO.OL l I I LW I L~ 81 I~ ~ 81 I~ ..., (/) I I L _, Jl";; - - J 'JO.OL 133t11S r - - OO.OOl- - , 10 Mull,GOoOOS 10 I~ or- Id ItO or- I to L I- -M, ~60000S_ -.J <( ~- (/) lJ ::: r _..J OO.OOl- -, 101-- C\I 10 I~=) or- I~ ItO ( ) I to L _ !b ~60000S_ -' I 1-- 0 o () ci o _..J .... 1-- =) 1 () Z o i= o o <( l- (/) ~ G: ""'Ill::: Z I""":::: o I....J t; w IW Z . :ieno 8 a:::!'1o .n <( O. <0 1J..~5S I-~~ ~ (/) I w II o o o o <0 o o o <0 I I L_ W I eno !'10 o. If)lf) o IX) en'- IX) (/) ~ o ....J ~ ::) o r - - OO'OOl--' 10 1'0 10 I- I~ ~ I~ g 1<0 Mull.60000S I <0 ~ L _ _ OO'OOl_ _ -.J 0 IJ.. o LJ I I i - ll.6L~ - - I 3..ll,60000N o z <( ...J f-- W 3= o v o -t ~ I :J ~jgZ ~, ~ .1 C/J \ . i5/ ----. - [) (A. TO: Mayor, Coun~ers, City Administrator Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: SUBJECT: Development Standards-Turf /Erosion Control Policies DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION Staff has put together a policy on Turf Establishment for newly constructed homes and commercial buildings in the City. Also, revisions to the Lot Development erosion control policy that was put into place last fall are presented. DISCUSSION Last year, several policies and procedures were put into place to address drainage and erosion issues. The requirement for an as-built certificate of survey was instituted in order to help insure that lots in a development are graded per the approved grading plan for that development. That document also helps identify the responsible party if a drainage issue is brought to the City's attention in the future. The requirements for silt fence around the lot and a rock construction driveway during construction of the home were instituted to control erosion so that erosion does not cause drainage problems on adjacent property and to help keep the mud off of the street. Turf Establishment Policy Another issue that has been identified and needs to be addressed is turf establishment requirements for new homes. Currently, the City does not have a policy requiring that turf be established within a given time frame after completion of home construction. So, once the as-built certificate of survey is complete and the certificate of occupancy is issued, a homeowner could wait years before turf is established on his or her lot. There are currently several lots in Farmington that have been occupied for over a year and the yards are still "'are soil, turf has not been established. In a couple of instances, the yards erode into the street with every rainstorm. If turf is not established in a timely manner, the soils in the yard will erode into the drainage swales and possibly cause future drainage problems. Attached is a Turf Establishment Policy. This policy will require that the front and side yard and drainage and utility easements be sodded before a certificate of occupancy will be issued on a new home. It is understood that adverse weather conditions and winter will affect the ability of a builder to sod before the certificate of occupancy is issued. Currently the City holds a $1500 surety for grading and the As-Built Certificate of Survey on each lot until the certificate of occupancy is issued. This surety would also cover the sod if a temporary certificate of occupancy needs to be issued because the sod cannot be placed due to weather. If the sod is not installed in the required time frame, the City could use the surety and install the sod. I CitlJ. of FarminlJ.ton 325 Oak Street. Farmin(jton, MN 5502~ · (612) ~63.7111 · Fait (612) ~63.2591 Most of the surrounding communities have a turf establishment policy in place similar to the one presented here. Lot Erosion Control Currently, the City's Lot Erosion Control Policy requires that a builder install silt fence around the entire lot and install a rock construction entrance prior to the footing inspection. The purpose for this is to control erosion on the lot and keep the mud out of the streets. At this time, it has been determined by staff that some refinements to the policy and process are necessary. Attached are the revised erosion control requirements. The engineering division will now be reviewing all site plans before issuance of building permits. During the site plan review, engineering staff will determine where the silt fence needs to be installed on the lot. It is not always necessary to put silt fence around the entire lot and the issue of keeping the streets clean will be resolved with the City contracting for street cleaning services. The required silt fence will be identified on the site plan so that the builder will know where to install it. The erosion control measures will need to be installed before construction begins. Prior to the scheduling of the footing inspection, the engineering division will inspect the erosion control on the lot. The footing inspection will not take place until the erosion control on the site is approved by engineering. The temporary rock construction entrance will be required immediately following the backfilling of the foundation instead of prior to the footing inspection. If at any time the erosion control requirements are not in compliance on a lot, a stop work order will be issued on that lot. Implementation These policy changes will go into effect June 1, 1998. It is intended that these new policies will be reviewed with developers and builders prior to formal implementation. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Color coded copies of these new policies will be forwarded to Council for inclusion in the City's Development Process Manual. Respectfully submitted, ~Yn~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file TURF ESTABLISHMENT POLICY The purpose of the Turf Establishment Policy is to prevent erosion control problems on newly constructed residential and commercial lots. The builderlhomeowner is required to install sod before the final Certificate of Occupancy is issued. It is the responsibility of the owner to establish turf in the area where sod is not required. Any erosion that occurs into City drainage and utility easements is the responsibility of the property owner. If the City has to clean the drainage and utility easements due to erosion from an owner's property, the City will bill the property owner the costs to clean the affected easements. Seeding of the lot should occur within 60 days of the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy. In periods of adverse weather conditions between October 16th and April 31st, a temporary Certificate of Occupancy will be issued, but the installation of sod must be completed on or before June 1 st. No temporary Certificates of Occupancy will be issued in the Spring, after May 1st through October 15th. In the case of adverse weather conditions where it is not possible to install sod before fmal inspection, a temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued upon receipt of a re-inspection fee and signed agreement that sod will be installed within 30 days of its issuance. The City currently collects a surety for an As-Built Certificate of Survey before any building permit is issued. The surety is returned when the as-built certificate of survey and sod requirements has been approved. If these requirements are not met, the surety will be used to either complete the As-Built Certificate of Survey and/or complete the installation of the sod and seed. Minimum turf establishment requirements will: 1. Prevent soil erosion from newly disturbed lots where siltation may wash into streets, stormwater ponds, storm sewers and on to adjacent properties. 2. Provide greenery to visually soften barren soils, paved areas and buildings. 3. Encourage the preservation and stabilization of adjacent wetlands by protecting aquatic plants from siltation or protect other natural habitats. 4. Maintain property values. 5. Generally enhance the quality and appearance of developed properties and protect the value of surrounding neighborhoods and thereby promote the general welfare ofthe City. The attached standard detail demonstrates the mlllimum standards of the Turf Establishment Policy and are as follows: 1. Sod shall be installed from the roadside edge or the unpaved right-of-way to the back comers of the furthest-most building. 2. All easements shall be sodded to cover the entire easement width and length. 3. Any remaining disturbed areas not mentioned above may be seeded. Revision 04/28/98 4. Silt fences must be maintained throughout the construction period until new vegetation is established. 5. Turf slopes in excess of 3: 1 are prohibited. Revision 04/28/98 I I TURF ESTABLISHMENT POLICY ~ G,\STANDARD PLATES\GEN LOT I STREET --, I I I I .J SOD SHALL BE 6' OR THE WIDTH OF THE EASEMENT, WHICHEVER IS GREATER I ~OD SHALL BE 6' OR THE WIDTH OF THE EASEMENT, WHICHEVER liS GREATER I I I I L 6' LOT 3 ~ ~ = MIN. MANDATORY SODDED AREA I: .. : .. : .. :1 = BACKYARD MAY BE SEEDED STANDARD DETAILS TURF ESTABLISHMENT POLICY Lost Revision: Mar. 1998 City Plate No. ( FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA ) GEN- ~ City of Farmington Erosion Control Requirements Drafted 4/29/98 According to studies of non-point urban water pollution, erosion and transport of sediment off of unprotected construction sites is in many cases the leading contributor to pollution in lakes and rivers. Cities and counties nationwide have instituted measures to combat this problem by encouraging builders and developers to follow erosion control "Best Management Practices". It is the City of Farmington's goal to work with builders and developers to insure that erosion is controlled and minimized on all construction sites. In order to achieve the most cost-effective protection of surface water, Farmington has an ongoing erosion control program. The program outlines minimum steps that will be required on building sites where bare soil is exposed. Due to the diversity of building situations encountered, each site will be individually evaluated and where additional measures or variances are needed they will be specified at the discretion of the City Engineering Division. 1. All grading plans and building site surveys will be reviewed for effectiveness of erosion control measures in the context of the site topography and drainage. If plans or surveys do not specify erosion control, these measures will be described on the plans or surveys by the City's Engineering Division based on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's "Best Management Practices". Plans and surveys with erosion control specified are then returned with the permits. 2. Silt fence is required to control erosion on all sites. Silt fence requirements are as follows: · The builder is responsible for properly installing erosion control before construction activity begins. An erosion control inspection must then be scheduled and passed at least 24 hours before a footing inspection will be done. · Engineering will perform follow-up inspections on a regular basis to insure erosion control measures are properly installed. The builder is responsible to maintain the silt fence during the construction process. · The City inspector or engineer will retain the right to require additional silt fence at any time to ensure that erosion does not occur. · Silt fence/hay bales will not be required when the ground is frozen as determined by the city. Silt fence shall be installed in the spring when the frost is out as determined by the city. If silt fence is not installed correctly after an inspection by the City in the spring, it will be installed at the builder's expense. Costs associated with having silt fence installed will be subtracted from the as-built/erosion control surety. 3. Temporary rock entrances are required on every construction site and are required after backfilling of foundation. Requirements for temporary rock entrances are as follows: · Installation of rock entrances will be required after backfill of the foundation. If the rock entrance is not installed immediately after backfilling, a stop work order will be given until the rock driveway is installed. Rock driveways will also be required during the winter months after backfill of the foundation. 4. In cases where builders are in noncompliance with erosion control, the City will issue stop work orders until erosion control measures meet City requirements. 5. Streets should be cleaned and swept whenever tracking of sediments occurs and before sites are left idle for weekends and holidays. If streets are not kept clean, the City will arrange for a private contractor to clean streets and will bill the cleaning costs to the Developer. Questions and comments may be directed to the City of Farmington Engineering Division at 463-1600. IDb TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update Schedule DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City Council authorized retaining the firm of RLK-Kuusisto and Jim Brimeyer at the April 20th Council meeting to assist the City in the update of its Comprehensive Plan. DISCUSSION City staff met with Steven Schwanke of RLK and Jim Brimeyer of the Brimeyer Group on April 27, 1998 to discuss a proposed project schedule prepared by City staff. A copy of this schedule is attached. It was agreed that while this schedule is ambitious, it is the schedule we would need to follow to complete the Plan update by the end of the year. Based on the number of public meetings that are proposed and depending on the amount and nature of public input received, additional time may be required to complete this important project. The Met Council has already indicated informally that requests for extensions to the December 31, 1998 will be considered. It was discussed and recommended that the annual City Council / City Board and Commission meeting be scheduled after the first of two "Visioning Workshops" to be held in June. Upon completion, the annual meeting would be scheduled. It is likely that representatives of a number of the City's Boards and Commissions will be participating in the interviews as well as the Visioning Workshop(s). BUDGET IMPACT The cost of the consulting services is being funded by grants that were received by the Met Council, Dakota Electric and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. CitlJ, of Farmint}.ton 325 Oale Street. Farmington, MN 55021, · (612) 1,63-7111 · Fal( (612) 1,63-2591 ACTION REQUESTED This is for information only. Respectfully submitted, ~~ David L. Olson Community Development Director PROPOSED TIME LINE FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS Task . Hire Consultant . Project Initiation Clarify Responsibilities Refine Scope of Services Establish preliminary meeting schedule Begin discussions of key issues Execute a consultant contract for project Product: Clarified Schedule, Contract Signed . Comprehensive Plan Schedule Update at City Council . Comprehensive Plan Schedule Update at Planning Commission . Community Profile Data gathering of population, households, etc. Assemble info on transportation, natural resources and Public facilities City provides base map for land use mapping One visual inspection tour Product: Community Profile . Community Visioning Personal interviews with community leaders Two Days Visioning Workshops Two Days Product: Shared Community Vision . Policy Statements & Future Land Use Plan City staff will work in conjunction with consultant to finalize Land Use Plan Joint meeting with City Council & Planning Commission Make Revisions from meeting Date April 20, 1998 April 27, 1998 May 4, 1998 May 12, 1998 April 28 - June 1 June 1, 1998 June 1 - July 10 June 29 - Draft July 10 - Final July 10 - Sept 11 September 16,1998 Sept 17 - Oct 2 Product: Policies and Land Use Plan . Neighborhood Meetings Product: Neighborhood Review of Plan . Draft Comprehensive Plan City staff will work in conjunction with consultant to finalize Comprehensive Plan Present Draft to City Council & Planning Commission Make Revisions from meeting Product: Comprehensive Plan . Planning Commission & Public Review . City Council Review . City Council Approval Product: Comprehensive Plan . Metropolitan Council Submittal **Due Dates shown in bold October 2, 1998 Oct 3 - Oct 16 June 29 - Oct 21 October 28,1998 Oct 29 - Nov 18 November 18, 1998 November 24,1998 December 7,1998 December 21, 1998 December 31, 1998 10 c FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~}t Lee Smick, Planning Coordinato TO: SUBJECT: Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer EA W Record of Decision DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) was prepared for the Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes. DISCUSSION The EA W is a brief document prepared in a worksheet format which is designed to rapidly assess the environmental effects which may be associated with a proposed project. The EA W serves primarily to aid in the determination of whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is needed for a proposed project; and serves as a basis to begin the scoping process for an EIS. The EA W review is triggered because of the expansion of the sanitary trunk sewer line and the 250 or more unattached units within the Charleswood PUD. In the EA W process, the Environmental Quality Board assigns the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) in verifying the accuracy of environmental documents and complying with the environmental review processes in a timely manner. The RGU for the Charleswood PUD is the Farmington City Council, while the RGU for the sanitary trunk sewer was the Pollution Control Agency (PCA). By combining the projects into one EA W review on March 18, 1998, the PCA approved the Farmington City Council as the RGU for the entire project. Therefore, the Record of Decision is approved by the City Council through a resolution. -. - Five written comments were received by the City concerning the EA Wand those agencies included: Minnesota Department of Transportation, Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Metropolitan Council and the Vermillion River Watershed Management Organization. From the comments, the RGU prepares a response to each to establish a Record of Decision. Based on the EA W, the response to comments and the Findings of Fact, the Record of Decision concludes the following: I CitlJ. of FarminiJ.ton 325 Oak Street. Farm;nfJton, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fa!( (612) 463.2591 1. The EA W was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 t 4410.1700 (1997). 2. The EA W satisfactorily addressed all of the issues for which existing information could have been reasonably obtained, 3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects, 4. The City makes a "Negative Declaration," and 5. An EIS is not required. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt a resolution to approve the Record of Decision for the Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer. Respectfully submitted, ~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION FOR THE CHARLESWOOD PUD AND MIDDLE CREEK SANITARY TRUNK SEWER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) APRIL 1998 RGU City of Farmington Mr. David L. Olson Community Development_Director 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Phone (612) 463-1860 Fax (612) 463-2591 PROPOSER Astra-Genstar Partnership, LLP Mr. Steven P. Juetten Development Manager 11000 W. 78th St., Suite 201 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone (612) 942-7844 Fax (612) 942-8075 TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE FARMINGTON CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 4,1998 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION FOR THE CHARLESWOOD PUD AND MIDDLE CREEK SANITARY TRUNK SEWER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) APRIL, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I NT RODU CTION .................................. ............................................................ .......................... 1 COM M ENTS REC EIVE D....................................................................................... ................. .... 1 RESPONSE TO COMM ENTS .. ......................... ... .......... ............................................................ 1 Minnesota Department of Transportation ...........................................................................2 Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District ........................................................ 2 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources ..................................................................... 3 Metropolitan Cou nc i I............................................................................................................. 4 Vermillion River Watershed Management Organization .................................................... 5 FI N DI NGS OF FACT ............................................................. ..................................................... 7 Criteria Used in Deciding Whether the Project has the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects (Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7) ........................................... 7 Criteria A: Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects ...................................7 Criteria B: Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects .............7 Criteria C: Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation .................7 Criteria D: Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled........ 8 RECORD OF DECIS ION................................................................................................ ............ 9 PAGE 2 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) INTRODUCTION An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) was prepared for the Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer pursuant to Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.4300 Subp. 18.A and Chapter 4410.4300 Subp. 19.D. The EA Wand the respective comments have been reviewed in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.1700 to determine if the project has potential for significant environmental effects. This document includes responses to comments received by the City of Farmington, the Findings of Fact supporting the decision, and the Record of Decision indicating an Fm.';"0nm""h11mp1ct ~tatement (FTS) is not necessary for this project. The EA W was completed and distributed on March 18, 1998 to all persons and agencies on the official Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested parties. The notification was published in the EQB Monitor on March 23, 1998, initiating the 30-day public comment period. The comment period ended on April 22, 1998. COMMENTS RECEIVED Five written comments were received by the City prior to the April 22 deadline. Comments were received from the following sources: . Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) - letters dated Mach 3 and March 26, 1998 . Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) -letter dated April 21, 1998 . Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) - letter dated April 20, 1998 . Metropolitan Council (Met Council) - letter dated April 13, 1998 . Vermillion River Watershed Management Organization (VRWMO) - memo dated April 20, 1998 Copies of the written comments are attached to the end of this document. Two of the five commentors (Met Council and DNR) stated that preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not warranted for this project. One commentor (Mn/DOT) stated that the EA W is acceptable and another (SWCD) stated that the proposed projects do not appear to have the potential for severe environmental effects. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The following responses to comments are arranged according to commenting agency. Comments and responses are further divided by Charleswood PUD and the Sanitary Trunk Sewer subheadings. Many responses are confined to subsfantive issues that "address the accuracy and completeness of the material contained in the EA W, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation before the project is commenced, and the need for an EIS on the proposed project," as set forth under Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.1600. Comments and recommendations that do not address these areas have been duly noted for the record and may not be specifically addressed in the responses. PAGE 1 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Minnesota Department of Transportation Charleswood PUD MnlDOT did not have any comments related to the PUD portion of the EA W. They indicated that the EA W is acceptable and commented on future connections of 19Sth Street West and 20Sth Street West to Trunk Highway 3. Response: Comments on future connection of 195h Street West and 20B'h Street West to Trunk Highway 3 have been noted for the record. This issue will be addressed under the City of Farmington Thoroughfare Plan and is not directly relevant to the EA W Sanitary Trunk Sewer MnlDOT commented that the proposed trunk sewer project is not adjacent to MnlDOT right-of- way and that traffic impacts will not significantly affect the state highway system. Response: So noted for the record. Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District Charleswood PUD The SWCD stated that it is unclear from the EA W what activity would cause 0.6 acres of wetland impact. The SWCD also stated that they support the City of Farmington's Floodplain Management Ordinance and the Vermillion River Management Plan Policy 2.4, and thus they discourage any activities within the 100-yr. floodplain. Other comments pertain to recommendations for erosion control and surface water runoff treatment. Response: As stated under Item 12, page 10 the EA ~ "Development associated with the east- west street connecting to Pilot Knob Road in the central portion of the site will involve approximately 0.6 acre of wetland fill in Type 1/2/6 wetland dominated by reed canary grass, willows, and farmed hydric soils." This proposed east-west street is shown on Exhibit 2 as the southern most streets within the PUD. As stated under Item 14 of the EA ~ the project will be consistent with the floodplain regulations of the FEMA, the DNR, and the City of Farmington Floodplain Ordinance. Any fill placed in the flood fringe or the general floodplain district will not increase the flood (100 year frequency) elevation by more thaa. O. 5 feet or cause an increase in flood damages to the reach affected. Prior to placement of any fill within the flood fringe or general floodplain, a conditional use permit must be obtained. Conditional use permits will only be issued upon demonstration that increases in flood stages do not exceed the standards noted above. A Letter of Map Revision or Amendment (LOMR or LOMA) from FEMA may also be required to ensure that the FEMA floodplain map is updated to coincide with the revised floodplain delineation. The ordinance allows development of flood fringe areas provided that structures are elevated at least one foot above the flood. PAGE 2 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Sanitary Trunk Sewer The SWCD made no comments or recommendations concerning the sanitary trunk sewer portion of the EA W. Response: No response is necessary. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Charleswood PUD The DNR had no comment on the Charleswood PUD portion of the EA W. Response: No response is necessary. Sanitary Trunk Sewer DNR comments for the Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer relate to construction methods and erosion/sediment control practices. Responses are listed according to numbered items in the MN DNR comment letter dated Apri120th 1998. Cvmment 1. Corridor selection should avoid critical wildlife use areas, including wetlands, waterfowl concentration areas, major flyways, etc. The DNR indicated that the proposed corridor alignment meets this requirement. Response: So noted for the record Comment 2. Impacts to wetlands should be avoided, or if unavoidable, minimized to the extent possible. Wetland impacts should be evaluated under sequencing requirements ofthe WCA. Response: The proposed sewer alignment has been designed to avoid crossing wetlands and watercourses as much as possible. The crossings of Middle Creek both occur at existing or proposed road crossings. Wetland crossings are also made at existing or proposed roads. Because the sewer alignment generally follows the topographic features of the Middle Creek floodplain, some crossing of wetland does occur; however, these crossings generally occur only where slopes rise quickly from the wetland edge, leaving little room to place pipe other than at the wetland edge. Wetland impacts at all wetland crossings will be minimized to the extent possible by keeping the width of the trench and area of disturbance as narrow as possible, by restoring the original profile with o[g&jnic soil and by seeding the disturbed area to a native seed mix. MN Rules 8420.0122, Subpari3 (B) states that a wetland replacement plan, normally required as pari of wetland sequencing, is not required for projects covered by Nationwide Permit Number 12. Comment 3. Construction in wetlands should be completed during low flow conditions and should not occur between April I to July 15. Response: Wetland crossings will be completed during the lowest flows possible. Because construction is expected to stari prior to July 15h, it is anticipated that some wetland crossings may occur earlier than this date. Should high flow conditions develop during construction, work PAGE 3 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) within wetlands or watercourses will be temporarily suspended until normal flow conditions return. City Staff in consultation with the on-site construction inspector will make this determination. Comment 4 & 5. Pipe should be installed such that it does not increase surface water drainage (into wetlands or streams). Minimize removal of vegetation, apply erosion and sediment control BMP's and revegetate areas of disturbance following grading. Response: As detailed under Items 12 and 17 of the EA ltV, diversion trenches, silt fences and other best management practices will be employed to intercept surface water runoff and divert it away from the pipeline corridor. All disturbed soil will be mulched and seeded to a native seed mix to reestablish a vegetative groundcover as quickly as possible. At stream crossings, the width of disturbance will be minimized as much as possible. Comment 6. Wetlands should be restored to their pre-construction state as quickly as possible following construction. Response: Page 12, paragraph 10 of the EAW describes in detail wetland restoration required at all wetland crossings including grading and replacement of organic soil. Comment 7. & 8. Trench excavations should be backfilled or enclosed in a fence at the end of each day to prevent wildlife from becoming trapped. Prior to backfilling or placement of pipe, trenches should be inspected for presence of wildlife. Response: Trench excavations will either be backfilled or enclosed in fencing at the end of each workday to prevent wildlife from becoming trapped in open trenches. Trenches will be inspected for wildlife prior to installing pipe or backfilling. Comment 9. Purple Loosestrife should not be introduced to the construction site from seed, vegetative material or contaminated soil transported to the site on construction equipment. Response: During construction, the site will be monitored for the presence of purple loosestrife. Should purple loosestrife be detected, the DNR will be contacted for proper control methods. Metropolitan Council Charleswood PUD Met Council indicated that 80 acres within the proposed PUD is outside the MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Service Area) and is not anticipated to urbanize or receive metropolitan services in the foreseeable future. Met Council also noted that the proposed development density is consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy. Council staff strongly recommended that the City request a letter or map revision or amendment from FEMA as mentioned in the EA W. Response: As indicated in the EAltV, the project proposer has not prepared any development plans for the 80 acres located outside the MUSA. It is anticipated that any future development applications for this area will not be filed until at least three years after construction of the PUD is commenced. The City of Farmington will not approve any development proposed in the area outside the MUSA until the MUSA line has been expanded in coordination with Met Council to encompass this area. The City of Farmington will work with the developer to consider requesting PAGE 4 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) a Letter of Map Revision or Amendment (LOMR or LOMA) from FEMA to ensure that the federal floodplain map is updated to coincide with the revised floodplain delineation. Sanitary Trunk Sewer The Metropolitan Council requested that an intercommunity agreement between the Cities of Farmington and Lakeville be submitted to MCES prior to sewer service being extended to the Farmington/Lakeville boundary. The Metropolitan Council also indicated that Segments D and E and a major portion of Segment A would be located outside the approved MUSA boundary and that the City would need to amend their Comprehensive Plan prior to construction. Response: The City of Lakeville has requested that no additional sewer capacity be provided to their City as part of this project (Copy of letter attached). For this reason, Segment E, as shown in Exhibit 2-2 will no longer be completed. The Metropolitan Council correctly identifies Segment D as being located outside the City MUSA. This segment is identified in the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Sewer Plan and is being constructed in conjunction with the extension of Pilot Knob Road (G.S.A.H. 31). Completing construction of these two projects at the same time will reduce construction cost and environmental impacts by avoiding two separate crossings of the Vermillion River. Segment D will not provide immediate service to areas outside the MUSA, but will be extended in the future as the MUSA is expanded and the City Comprehensive Plan amended. The Metropolitan Council also correctly notes that portions of Segment A are located outside the MUSA. The alignment of Segment A was chosen due to topographic considerations. Most of this alignment follows a natural drainage-way (Middle Creek), providing gravity flow to the Empire Township Treatment Plant. Vermillion River Watershed Management Organization Charleswood PUD The VRWMO commented that the proposed mixture of low, medium, and high density residential and commercial land uses differ from the low-density residential land use identified in the City of Farmington Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). VRWMO pointed out that this discrepancy could possibly create further flooding and water quality concerns. VRWMO also indicated that the EA W only addressed one of the three ponds identified on the site in the SWMP, and that the affect ofthese ponds should be explored further. VRWMO stated that the proposed PUD does not comply with the basic goals and policies outlined in the SWMP, including: (I) permanently protecting surface water impoundments through easements and adopting policies and standards in accordance with the local watershed management plan, and (2) restricting encroachment into the lOO-year floodplain and prohibiting the filling of wetlands through local protection ordinances. Response: The comment memo from VRWMO referenced the Prairie Creek East Residential Development with respect to "further flooding and water quality concerns, " suggesting that these comments were meant to pertain to another EA W that was recently distributed by the City of Farmington. As indicated under Item 18 of the Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer EA w: "proposed stormwater ponds will be designed to reduce peak runoff rates and meet all requirements of the City of Farmington Surface Water Manaaement Plan (September, 1997)." Consequently, as indicated ih the EAW: 'The proposed project is not expected to significantly increase the quantity or decrease the quality of site runoff." PAGE 5 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) The Land Use Map in the City of Farmington SWMP does show "High Density" and "Business" land uses in the northeastern portion of the Charleswood site. The City has determined that the project is consistent with the amended Comprehensive Plan and Zoning regulations, and no differences in land use have been identified. Item 18 of the EA W discusses the details of two ponds that have been designed for the first phase of development. The EA W then states that the construction of two additional ponds is expected for subsequent phases of development. Regardless of the ultimate size and location of these two additional ponds, they will be required to meet criteria for stormwater quality and quantity as specified in the SWMP. As with most developments, all ponds and wetlands will be placed under drainage easements, and outlots will be established that permanently protect ponds, wetlands, park areas, and floodplains. As stated under Item 14 of the EA VV, the project will be consistent with the floodplain regulations of the FEMA, the DNR, and the City of Farmington Floodplain Ordinance. Any fill placed in the flood fringe or the general floodplain district will not increase the flood (100 year frequency) elevation by more than 0.5 feet or cause an increase in flood damages to the reach affected. Prior to placement of any fill within the flood fringe or general floodplain, a conditional use permit must be obtained. Conditional use permits will only be issued upon demonstration that increases in flood stages do not exceed the standards noted above. A Letter of Map Revision or Amendment (LOMR or LaMA) from FEMA may also be required to ensure that the FEMA floodplain map is updated to coincide with the revised floodplain delineation. The ordinance allows development of flood fringe areas provided that structures are elevated at least one foot above the flood elevation. The 0.6 acres of wetland fill proposed for this project will require additional review by the City of Farmington under the Wetland Conservation Act and by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 the Clean Water Act. These permitting procedures, in addition to the City of Farmington's Surface Water Management Plan policies, provide protection for wetlands and will be followed for the proposed PUD. The City of Farmington has determined that the proposed Charleswood PUD concept complies with the policies of the Surface Water Management Plan. As detailed plans for each phase of the PUD are submitted, they will be evaluated for compliance with the City of Farmington Floodplain Management Ordinance and specific requirements for new developments and pond design in the Surface Water Management Plan. Sanitary Trunk Sewer The Vermillion River WMO correctly noted that no permanent wetland impacts would occur given that those exis~iug conditions will be maintained following placement ofthe Trunk Sewer pipe. The WMO also noted that a DNR Water Appropriations Permit would be required for dewatering. The Trunk Sewer would also need to be flood-proofed where it crosses floodplain areas. Response: Comments are noted for the record. Where dewatering exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or one million gallons per year, a DNR Water Appropriations Permit will be obtained. Where the Trunk Sewer crosses flood plains, manholes will be located above the 100-year flood elevation and/or constructed with a watertight casing. All pipes will be pressures tested for leaks prior to use. PAGE 6 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) FINDINGS OF FACT Criteria Used in Deciding Whether the Project has the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects (Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7) Criteria A: Tvpe. Extent. and Reversibilitv of Environmental Effects Finding: Primary environmental effects associated with the Charleswood PUD and the Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer include increased traffic, loss of cropland and wildlife habitat, about 0.6 acres of wetland fill, temporary wetland impacts and potential flood fringe encroachment. These effects will be mitigated and controlled through requirements of City ordinances, management plans, and permitting procedures. Most environmental effects associated with the Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer will be short-term temporary effects incurred during construction. These effects are reversible. Criteria B: Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Proiects Finding: The Charleswood PUD is in conformance with the approved City of Farmington Land Use Plan. The cumulative environmental impacts of related or anticipated future projects will be mitigated and controlled through adherence to the Land Use Plan and other policies and ordinances. The Charleswood PUD will be constructed in phases, and completion is expected in five years or more depending on market conditions. Approximately 181 acres within the site is currently designated as open space, and about 43.4 acres is identified as ..... ifher undete.''Jd future development or future development. It is anticipated that any future development applications will not be filed until at least three years after construction of the Charleswood PUD has begun. Assuming this becomes the case, future development applications will fall under a separate environmental review, as set forth under Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300 Subpart 1. If future development exceeds a mandatory EA W threshold and is separated from the PUD by at least three years, a separate EA W will be completed at that time. If future development is separated by at least three years from the PUD and does not exceed an EA W threshold, no future environmental review will be necessary. If future development is separated from this project by less than three years, this EA W will be amended before the future development proceeds. The Middle Creek Sanitary Sewer is a portion of the Farmington Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan that provides for long-range sewer service in anticipation of future projects. Criteria C: Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subiect to MitiQation Finding: Environmental effects on floodplains, wetlands, traffic, and water quality are subject to mitigation through requirements of local, state, and federal regulations, ordinances, management plans, and permitting procedures. The following permits and approvals are required for the projects addressed under the EA Wand these permitting and approval processes will provide additional opportunity to require mitigation. Unit of Government Type of Permit or Approval City of Farmington Final Plat City of Farmington Grading Permit City of Farmington Municipal Water Connection Permit City of Farmington Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit City of Farmington Certification of Wetland Replacement City of Farmington Building Permits PAGE 7 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Unit of Government Type of Permit or Approval Minnesota Department of Transportation Utility Permit Minnesota DNR Real Estate Bureau License to Cross Protected Waters Minnesota DNR Division of Waters Temporary Water Appropriation Permit U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Nationwide Permit 26 Minnesota Department of Health Site Plumbing Permit Minnesota Department of Health Watermain Extension Minnesota Pollution Control Agency NPDES Permit Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Criteria D: Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled Finding: The final factor the City must consider is the "extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of E/S's previously prepared on similar projects" (Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (0)). The City's findings are set forth below. 1. The proposed projects are reasonably similar to other PUOs and sewer extensions recently developed in outlying suburbs. Other projects of similar scope, accompanied by similar studies, stormwater ponding, and other mitigation, have, in general, successfully mitigated potential off-site environmental impacts. 2. The EA \Iv, in conjunction with this document, contains or references the known studies that provide information or guidance regarding environmental effects, which can be anticipated and controlled. 3. Because the proposed projects fall short of the respective mandatory E/S thresholds, no E/S that addresses a similarly sized projects is available at the City of Farmington. 4. In light of the results of environmental review and permitting processes for similar projects, the City of Farmington finds that the environmental effects of the project can be adequately anticipated and controlled. Based on the original EA W, comments received from agencies, the responses to comments, and the criteria above, the City of Farmington finds that the Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer projects do not have the potential for significant environmental effects and do not require the preparation of an EIS. PAGE 8 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) RECORD OF DECISION Based on the EA W, the response to comments, and the Findings of Fact, the Farmington City Council, the RGU for this environmental review, concludes the following: 1. The EA W was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700 (1997), 2. The EA W satisfactorily addressed all of the issues for which existing information could have been reasonably obtained, 3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects, 4. Based on a review of the record prepared in this matter, the City makes a "Negative Declaration," and, 5. An EIS is not required. PAGE 9 Resolution No. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CHARLESWOOD PUD AND MIDDLE CREEK SANITARY TRUNK SEWER ENVIRONMNENT AL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EA W) FINDING NO NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT STATEMENT (EIS) WHEREAS Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300 Subp. 18.A. and Subp. 19.0 require that an EA W be prepared for: (1) expansion of a municipal sewage collection system that increases average daily flow by 1,000,000 gallons per day or more, and (2) construction of250 unattached units or 375 attached units in a City within the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area that has adopted a comprehensive plan under Minnesota Statutes, respectively, WHEREAS Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700 Subp. 9 requires that multiple phases be considered as a single project; and WHEREAS On March 18, 1998, an EA W was completed for the: (1) Charleswood PUD, and (2) Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer, which are ultimately planned to include: (1) about 90 townhomes, 35,000 square feet of commercial development, 400 townhome/apartment/ condominiums, 284 single family homes, and (2) 20,569 feet gravity flow sewer to serve 2,720 acres of new development in the City of Farmington and Lakeville; and WHEREAS On March 18, 1998, copies of the EA W were distributed to all persons and agencies on the official Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested parties; and WHEREAS On March 23, 1998, the EA W was publicly noticed in the EQB Monitor, commencing the 30-day public comment period; and WHEREAS A press release or legal notice was submitted for publication in the Farmington Independent newspaper to announce the completion of the EA W, its availability to interested parties, and the process for submitting comments on the EA W, and WHEREAS, The 30-day comment period ended April 22, 1998 at 4:30 p.m. and the City of Farmington accepted and responded to all written comments received, which are hereby recognized as part of the record; and WHEREAS None of the comments received recommended preparation of an EIS; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The EA W was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.1000 to 4410.1700 (1997), 2. The EA W satisfactorily addressed all of the issues for which existing information could have been reasonably obtained, 3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects, 4. Based on a review of the record prepared in this matter, the City makes a "Negative Declaration," 5. An EIS is not required, and 6. The City of Farmington is directed to maintain a Record of Decision including the Response to Comments on the EA Wand to notify in writing the project proposer and the EQB. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day May, 1998. Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 1998. City Administrator .~ ~=~~:!~~~o~~~n~~~e~~~re April 13, 1998 Mr. David L. Olson Community Development Department City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 p m:ClEoYm:~ APR 17 1998 L:;J' - RE: Charleswood Planned Unit Development and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet Metropolitan Council District 16 Referral File No. 16709-2 Dear 'Mr. Olson: Council staff has conducted a review of this environmental assessment worksheet (EA W) to determine its adequacy and accuracy in addressing regional concerns. The staff review has concluded that the EA W is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. However, staff provides the following comments for your consideration: Item 5 - Project Location The northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 25 (40 acres) and the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 26 (40 acres) are not within.the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Land outside the Farmington MUSA as agreed to by the Council on February 26, 1998 is not anticipated to urbanize or receive Metropolitan services in the foreseeable future. Item 6 - Description Charleswood PUD Development of about 804 housing units on approximately 215 acres yields an overall density of 3.74 units per acre, which is consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy. Middle Creek Sanitary Sewer The EA W indicates that the M1ddle Creek Trunk Sewer will be designed with the capacity to serve approximately 1,586 acres of property located within the City of Lakeville. Prior to the sewer extension being approved, the City should submit a copy of the intercommunity agreement to the MCES to be included as part of the Comprehensive Sewer Plan. Segments D and E of the trunk sewer would provide sanitary sewer service to areas of the City currently located outside ofthe approved MUSA boundary. For this reason, these segments of the trunk sewer can not be constructed until the City amends its comprehensive plan. A major portion of segment A of the trunk sewer is being constructed in that portion of the community currently located outside of the MUSA boundary. For this reason, those areas that may ultimately be 230 East Fifth Street St, Paul. Minnesota 55101-1634 (6121291-6359 Fax 291-6550 mD/TIY 291-0904 An Equal Opportunity Employer Metro Info Une 229-3780 David L. Olson April 9, 1998 Page 2 sewered by this trunk sewer but that are currently located outside of the MUSA shall not be assessed for sanitary sewer service. Item 14 - Water Related Land Use Management Districts Most of the southern half of the site is zoned as F-3 or general floodplain district, which corresponds to the unnumbered A Zone (area of 100-year flood) on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of Farmington. Boriestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates conducted a more detailed study as part of the City of Farmington's Surface Water Management Plan, and identified 910.5 as the 100-year flood elevation for the project area. According to the EA W, the project may involve some fill within the flood fringe, but the project will be consistent with the flood plain regulations ofFEMA, MDNR, and the City of Farmington. The detailed flood elevation analysis must be approved by the City prior to development. Council staff strongly recommend that the City request a letter or map revision or amendment from FEMA as mentioned in the EAW. Exhibits 1-2, 2, 2-2,3, 4, 5,5-3, and 7 - Maps On February 26, 1998, the Metropolitan Council voted to expand the MUSA by 824 developable acres in Farmington. The proposal submitted by the City of Farmington contained a map showing three areas to be added to the Ml.JSA. Although the map dcsnibtd the proposed land uses within the three areas as "possible land uses subject to change," the boundaries of these areas are not subject to modification. The approximately 80 southern acres on Sections 25 and 26 of the proposed Charleswood PUD are outside the City of Farmington MUSA. This area is not expected to be urbanized and that fact should be reflected in the maps. Similarly, areas outside the MUSA crossed by or that could be served by the Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer should be identified as outside the MUSA. This will conclude the Council's review of the EAW. No formal action on the EAW will be taken by the Council. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Alex-Edmund DaHinten, principal reviewer, at 602-1617. Sincerely, Helen Boyer Director, Environmental SerVices Division I~ cc: Terrence F. Flower, Metropolitan Council District 16 Keith Buttleman, Director, MCES Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department Richard Thompson, Supervisor, Comprehensive Planning Joe Mulcahy, Don Bluhm, MCES; Phyllis Hanson, Parks Kevin Roggenbuck, Chauncey Case, Transportation Lynda Voge, Audrey Dougherty, Alex-Edmund DaHinten, OLA FA167092.DOC (I; ",.- Minnesota Department of Transportation C fit ~ ~ J~.r~e~ J;.. tit ,1C~ 1 .~r.I"''' eAJ Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road 82 Roseville, MN 55113 March 26, 1998 David Olson City of Fannington 325 Oak Street Fannington, MN 55024 Dear David Olson: Subject: Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Fannington, Dakota County The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the Charleswood PUD and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W). A letter was sent March 3, 1998 regarding the Charleswood PUD proposal. We have recently reviewed the Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer proposal and have determined that it is not adjacent to Mn/DOT right of way and that traffic impacts of the proposal will not significantly affect the state highway system. Please contact me at 582-1383 with any questions regarding this review. Sincerely, ~~ Lisa Christianson Transportation PlannerlLocal Government Liaison c: Gerald Larson, Mn/DOT Environmental Coordinator An equal opportunity employer 'LI\ \!~ ~.!I Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road 82 Roseville, MN 55113 David Olson City of Fannington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 o 1E<CIEDVIETI " MAR -6 IJD8 U J March 3, 1998 Dear David Olson: SUBJECT: Charleswood Planned Unit Development MnlDOT Environmental Review EA W98-005 West ofTnmk Highway (TH) 3, North ofCSAH 50 Farmington, Dakota County C.S. 1921 The Metro Division of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnIDOT) has reviewed the Charleswood Planned Unit Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) for impacts to the state highway system. We find the EA Wacceptable. We strongly encourage the city to continue coordination with Dakota County, Empire Township and MnlDOT to ensure that 195th Street West and 208th Street West provide future connections to TH 3 as identified in the City's Thoroughfare Plan. We also strongly recommend that the city limit future direct land access to TH 3 by promoting internal circulation accessing 195th Street West and 208th Street West. This letter represents the transportation concerns ofMnlDOT Metro Division. Other environmental concerns raised by a wider MnlDOT review may be forwarded to you in a separate letter. Please contact me at 582-1654 with any questions regarding this review. Sincerely, Scott Peters Senior Transportation PlannerlLocal Government Liaison c: Gerald Larson, MnlDOT Environmental Services An equal opportunity employer e 1DrniOMERY___ To: Vermillion River Watershed Management Commission Board of Managers Date: April 20, 1998 From: Cynthia Adams Reference: Subject: Charleswood Planned Unit Development and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) Review OVERVIEW The Vermillion River Watershed Management Commission (VRWMC) has received for review and comment the Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EA W) for the Charleswood Planned Unit Development and Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer. The EA W was reviewed for compliance with the goals and policies of the Vermillion River Watershed Management Plan and the Farmington Stormwater Management Plan. Charleswood Planned Unit Development The Charles wood Planned Unit Development is a 396-acre site with 143 acres of on-site wetlands (Figure 1). Proposed development includes 14.4 acres of commercial high density residential, 31.6 acres of high to medium density residential, 14.7 acres of medium density residential, 110.8 acres of low to medium density residential, 9.0 acres of possible future development, 34.4 acres of an undetermined future development, and 181.1 acres of open space. Development would result in an increase in impervious surface from 0 acres to 66.8 acres. Approximately 3.5 acres of stormwater ponding will also be created to serve the development. Wetland impacts include 0.6 acres of Type I wetland fill. Much of the south half of the site is Zone A floodplain (FIRM maps). The Farmington Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) has indicated a lOO-year elevatiQll of 910.5 for this area (Figure 2, ponds F-P5.12 and F-P6.4). Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer The Middle Creek sanitary trunk sewer will serve approx.imately 2,720 acres in Farmington and 1,586 acres in Lalceville, which includes the proposed Charleswood PUD and future developments. The area impacted by the construction of the sanitary trunk sewer is 48 acres, 11.5 acres being wetlands. Approx.imately 20,569 linear feet of pipe will be placed. CONCERNS Charleswood Planned Unit Development The proposed site for the Prairie Creek East Residential Development is currently used for agricultural purposes. The future land use indicated in Farmington's SWMP is low density residential and floodway/undevelopable lands. Under proposed developed conditions land use will vary from primarily low density residential lots to commerciallhigh density residential. This differs from the land use used in Farmington's hydrologic model, possibly creating further flooding and water quality concerns. The Charleswood PUD EA W specifies that most of the southern half of the site is Zone A floodplain as shown on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Rood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of Farmington, dated March 1, 1979. Base elevations and floodway and flood fringe areas have not been determined by FEMA. The EA W indicates that the existing floodplain delineation will be analyzed in more detail as required by city ordinance. This analysis will result in the determination of the floodway and flood fringe. The floodway is not proposed to be filled or developed; however, flood fringe fill may result. The EA W plans to expand an existing storm water pond along the northern property border and create three additional storm water ponds. The northern pond will be expanded to an area of 2.2 acres at a high water level (HWL) of 932, with a dry storage volume of 40.5 acre f::c1. Tl<s pond is identified in Farmington's SWMP as pond F-P5.1O (Figure 2). It is proposed by the SWMP to have an area of 6.9 acres at an HWL of 932, with a dry storage volume of 39.2 acre-feet. The SWMP identifies an outflow of 10 cubic feet per second (cfs) through a 12-inch pipe. This stormsewer eventually will flow into pond F-P5.12, which has a proposed HWL of 910.5 and a discharge of 16 cfs through a 36-inch culvert. This culvert will flow to pond F-P6.4, assuming the future extension of CSAH 31 to CSAH 50. Pond F-P6.4, occupying a significant portion of floodplain, has an existing area of 128 acres at an HWL of 909.1. Under ultimate development, the area will be 201.5 acres at an HWL of 910.5, with a peak outflow of 610 cfs through 2-12' x 5' culverts. The Charleswood PUD does not specify the proposed discharges from the site or proposed ponds. It also addresses only one pond out of three identified in Farmington's SWMP. How the development will affect these ponds should explored further. Described above are the more detailed concerns with this project. On a broader scale, the project does not comply with some of the basic goals and policies outlined in the Farmington SWMP. These include: 2.1.1 Policy 9. "Permanently protect surface water impoundments and drainage systems by requiring the dedication of land an/or protected easements as required" (page 15). 2.1.1 Policy 10. "Adopt all the pertinent policies within the local watershed management plans" (page 15). -2- 2.1.4 Policy 2. "Adopt ordinances and standards in accordance with the local watershed management plan designed to protect the wetlands" (page 18). These policies coincide with those set forth in the Vermillion River Watershed Management Plan (VRWMP). 2.3 "Members should restrict encroachment upon the floodway area of the lOO-year floodplain through local ordinances." 2.4 "Members should prohibit encroachment, without acceptable mitigating actions that will reduce the storage capacity of the floodplain or create hazardous velocities. " 2.5 "All site areas below the lOO-year floodplain elevation, after local member approval of allowable encroachments, shall be preserved and dedicated for flood storage by means of granting an appropriate easement to their respective municipality or town." 2.6 "For new development or redevelopment in the floodway fringe, members should allow only: Structures that have been floodproofed or will not be subjected to damage, and Public recreational facilities." 4.9 "Prohibit the filling and drainage of wetlands or waterbodies through local wetland protection ordinances" (Vennillion River Watershed Management Plan, pages V-20 to V-21 and V-28). The project proposes to limit floodplain fill but they do not address the fact that encroachment into the floodplain should be limited and easements granted. While all the details of the project are unknown at this time, the idea and scope of the project does not comply with the overall goals and policies set forth in the local management plans. Middle Creek Sanitary Tnutk Sewer Construction of the Middle Creek sanitary trunk sewer will involve crossing many wetlands, including Middle Creek. a DNR protected wetland. No wetland impacts are proposed as existing conditions wUI be maintained. Since the alignment of the sanitary sewer will cro~s wetlands, it is anticipated that dewatering wells might be installed. If they are, the EA W indicates that they will be abandoned in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health water well code. A DNR water -3- appropriations permit will be obtained if the volume of water is large enough to necessitate a permit. The EA W also indicates that some floodplain will be crossed as a result of sewer alignment. No fill is propose and the City of Farmington's Aoodplain Management ordinance requires that all public utilities be floodproofed in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code. CONCLUSIONS The following items need to be further addressed regarding the Charleswood Planned Unit Development. I. Proposed land use identifies low density residential to commerciallhigh density residential lots. This differs from the land use identified in Farmington's SWMP as low density. 2. Further analysis to determine the floodway and flood fringe is indicated and no flU is planned to be placed within the resulting floodway. There may be fill placed in the flood fringe. It is recommended that the resulting floodway and flood fringe undergo interagency review. Subsequently, a Letter of Map Revision should be filed with FEMA. 3. The Charles wood PUD does not specify the proposed discharges from the site or ponds. It also addresses only one pond out of three identified in Farmington's SWMP. How the development will affect these ponds should explored further. 4. The overall concept of this project differs from the floodplain management goals and polices established in Farmington's SWMP and the VMWMP. Given the lack of a regulatory program at the WMO level, all significant regulatory constraints will need to be enforced by the City of Farmington. -4- )'-/ ':~/~ ~ .....;.:----: ! """~ .",.- \ -./ . . '-'" ". -. "- "Jgr ~.~~ ) / .:li'i::.~ i ,.ACltrlC-. ~.=!.~-------- .lIe ../ ~." i4 0';""" t-. ~\#,--~,~,\, - _ _ Pit - . ,f/' " I ~ ' . / ' .0. J- " : ,/. - . ,/ / t"" -..::...::t... - - - - --...... "'/'.-- , I " .. ....,].... - ...... .,/./ ! I .. /_~; . ,/ -.'.- 2' ,,-;. ~ -- ~-.J.. ..- -i - l' ...-.-....... -- . t .-', _ :,., -- UII ~Id'o ..,...., ----~-----~---------~.--.. /" ,'J4 -........;. .-- f j .'-.. 1'5 j'" I I : ~~.a F Alt'M I.N.GTOl\ :-4IM --906l '36-/ I ,-- -:---'---j ; ~~ ,. ! ...,- -. , , " <:OIll"Ja" n. , us 9"" .~ " . ;.::-- . IIY , . \ IJ 9~"/ lOT . t7 ;J :--.... t I ".{/ ~\ / I ( I 1/ ..,1. ,I I . .. . I, .."., I II .>>.-= '"",- ~JO - , . MONTGOMERY WAlSON .~l"G"C'~ ~-_.... R E K A --- 3 .: . -t.....,J 2. :;.~l~~. . .....-.: N . ,---... ~f Figure 1 1"=2000 ..... F-AJ.6 - J ~: !....~~,~'.~...~; t-~:\ ~_.j.:!S-J:p..o,.,\ --:'!P' .~ . - . ~- ::::-=:"-.:.~~:.' ~::: r-' !-I-! : : -"\ ~-~-:; l;":'~';.~' -'$1'" ::1 '\..; -':-P5.7 ::-: r-~,-:.. '-j-: ._ ~., -;~--~.~. ..-<~. ""--ft. ........ . ..'1...... ...... . ~.'..~.,..., . \ ;:'..1 - _;', :-:'A '..:' .' , ~.r-'.i.' ... . /-' . _ -1:1 -: - - . .' c.~ .~_J' .~. __ '.:r '.-: \' ;.-< ::"';"';;'-r-'>.'~' J" t~.f"'..... -;.",,, '~I Ii - , -. .u.~ .: ,~::!i~"'::':-.::- .- _ . Ii ., -..,. ,.._~1- ,,'...d'7iC1!'\-";" - ... . ......' I D:.~ ....._.....;.....~.i.:.....~, I.. .......,.:.-:. iCJ!~ ,,:. ~ r~,~r:-a-i.-:r -; . . ,,----. -"-- '.-1 ~ -, p.'. '. ~/. -- \.::.-L.J' -AS 8- - - --. &:,-..=\o..~ - / ,. ......- ----- ~ , " ~... ~', . ~ J .' I". . ~..'. -. ". . ,-" . ~ i, i . . : . .:: ;.".. .../ ; W '.. - . I . ....! ..19:5.th..St ' w -.~. .,.. - " .~=~ .: '. - , '. _._~.' . --. _~...~ :_ . '-J'._ _~__::..:....,..;.~;' . :.----= ,. . ..-!'....... - _ - ',' -. ~ 1 ......., ....\~_ . "-.' - -:\ I . ~______~ , '-. i.. "'J- t-AS.9 \ .;j' - - . F-A8.~ -., --.. - !i \ !\. -"" ,..~_':' I ! · " .-....j- :.~'.. .; , F-A 7.1 - -. ...... . ~,. _ . -.,. ... J - ,.. . ,--': . · ,'. -/ .. '. . .... . / ....... \~" '. -- \.!~ r ~~ , ..:~~\:---~)... - ~ ....\\\\. I " - - : ~\h . Ii' \ - :1"1 , :i If . ,: 'I 1.W! ~:A5~l~::... ...;.....: ,". ilI/j_...o' '_ .... .'. ! il/i ~: '. "'.- .. \" , :.j!. / - --. " '. r"'" ..., ..... -: ~ -~1r / .". ,. --~. ~ .~. . . ..:.~~ . ,.... :-" ,.,. -.' ~ ;}J:. ~ . ~: :...:-t '. "j . .~. j- ..' ..~~...~:-!._f. ~-f; i,.~.. . -. ~..- .. .-.... .'- .'1 ~ ,'..~ - "iI. . \'." . . 10_ .'- - r.r-- . ".(-"' .\. I ", '-'1' ~- .; \ I: .1 :': ,..:: . " ~1.'3 i -I-1 '1" :. Ilij -.:: -'-..._' './,: ~r: ~ L-'( 'I.fi!. : "\ >.:-~-. . .~O-p; ~ . '<1- . ": -: ;~.r"""....1.. I .' ._.. ,.... .; '. ....ToI " : "-;..~. . . -. -, "". '.-I"-'-~ M I '- . '.-,' . ~. . --:- ., ;.-"tc~ , ;-":~7.-:":" \ ...: ': . ...... ',::' .."--~\.'" ... s , -.' - ...... \ ".:' '\.:.~'. ~ ~ - :-.: i ~ . )'- . -Af.6.. . . . 1- ~~- ',.'t ..I ............ I - -...... '-~ .. .! F-P7:'S . . r--~ ~IC;;. i '. ! '~. I' _ I .' . " . i ~ F-A7.5: _. _-,J - . .' ~~--.--- . .. ___~cn._.___. --.-.---.-'---t.-~_.-:-~~-- , }u , i: :.-l ~~: I" L --' --!-., . .' d ..:.-- .' :.~--' ".~_>,/ 11'1 I F-A7.l;O'-ir-.: ;: ':L- . ; ;"'_.:; :il~ ; ..___.-'--~--- ~:-:'::t' "-J. :'f.t::::::X'i~~ i"-r~A'K~:~'~ __j-L~-;~~~~ .~ - . - _~ HZ _ -:__~:::;; ,,,- ---.-..__ =_.~_____ .:----,. J \ - -- , ..' .' ') .'!I;,;, j ;.- . I \ 'J"!" ".. . r:.... I ! .i . 1 , . / ~I;... -. '-; -' ' "~" -' .,.._'-'~..- . . - ~ . .... ..-\4.-1 F-P4.T . 121.0 I 124~O I"" _' - - _, I.:,: .:r-- .._....__.~?-.. /* --- ..- -. - - _.- - .. ... .. --.-.-- -" - -. -.---- -.. .----....... . - . <8 MONTGOMERY WATSON MmrN'a~ ~ .,' 1"=1000 Figure 2 DAKOTA COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Dakota County Extension and Conservation Center 4100 220th Street West, Suite 102 Farmington, MN 55024 Phone: (612) 891-7777 FAX: (612) 891-7775 April 21, 1998 D IECIED'VlEn " APR 22 Il98 U ::I Ref: 97FRM055 Mr. David Olson Community Development Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024-1358 RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) REVIEW FOR THE PROPOSED CHARLESWOOD PUD AND MIDDLE CREEK SANITARY TRUNK SEWER LOCATED IN THE SE V.. OF SECTION 23 AND N V2 OR NE % OF SECTION 26, T114N, R20W, CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA Dear David: This letter is in response to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) completed for the above- referenced project which was submitted to our office for review and comment. The proposed PUD entails approximately 90 townhomes, 35,000 sf of commercial development, 400 apartment units, 284 single family homes, 181 acres of open space, and 43 acres of potential future development. The Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer involves 20,569 feet of gravity flow sewer. The following comments are submitted for your review and consideration: CHARLESWOOD PUD Item 12: Physical Impacts on Water Resources 1. The project proposes approximately 0.6 acres of wetland fill and 0 to 1.33 acres of potential wetland excavation. The Dakota SWCD will provide additional comments during the wetland replacement plan application process. 2. It is unclear from the exhibits and descriptions within the EA W what activity is causing the 0.6 acres of wetland fill. The sequencing discussion submitted with the wetland replacement plan application must clearly show that efforts to avoid and minimize wetland impacts have occurred and that replacement is the only viable alternative. 3. Tremendous wetland restoration and stormwater management opportunities exist in the southern portion of the site. The Dakota SWCD anticipates working closely with the City, developer, and other interested parties to, ,!!aximize the restoration, enhancement, and management of this area. Item 14: Water....elated Land Use Management Districts The Charleswood PUD appears to show fill within the 100-yr floodplain identified in the City of Farmington's Surface Water Management Plan (elevation 910.5 feet). The Dakota SWCD supports the City's Standards for Floodway Permitted Uses in the Floodplain Management Ordinance, Section 10-10- 4.B.2, which state "The use shall not obstruct flood flows or increase flood elevations and shall not involve structures, fill, obstructions, excavations, or storage of materials or equipment." The floodway is defined as the watercourse and adjoining floodplain necessary to convey the regional, or 100-yr, flood. Further, the Vermillion River Watershed Management Plan Policy 2.4 states "Members should prohibit AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1- :;. .' . .- encroachment. without acceptable mitigating actions that will reduce the storage capacity of the floodplain. . II Accordingly, the Dakota SWCD strongly discourages any activities within the lOO-yr floodplain. Item 17: Erosion and Sedimentation 1. Numerous steep slopes exist on the site. The Dakota SWCD encourages site design and grading practices that work with existing topography to the extent possible. 2. Proper implementation, consistent monitoring, and maintenance of all erosion control measures are important to minimize erosion on this construction site. Item 18: Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff The EA W correctly states the site is not upstream from a DNR designated trout stream. However, downstream waters are known to support a cold water fishery. Therefore the Dakota SWCD recommends the use of on-site storage, vegetated stormwater conveyance channels, and other infiltration BMPs to maximize infiltration and minimlze runoff temperatures to the extent possible. MIDDLE CREEK SANITARY TRUNK SEWER The Dakota SWCD has no comments or recommendations concerning this portion of the EA W. CONCLUSIONS The proposed projects do not appear to have the potential for severe environmental effects and most adverse impacts can be anticipated and controlled. If you should have any questions or comments regarding this letter, call me at (612) 891-7779. Sincerely, ~ Urban Conservationist cc: Dennis Miranowski, Vermillion River WMO Eric Evenson, Dakota County Office of Planning Rob Bouta, Westwood Professional Services Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul. Minnesota 55155-40_ 10 o IEC~ll~~1i\\1 "l APR 2 3 b:iD . April 20, 1998 David L. Olson Community Development Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 I J RE: Charleswood PUD & Middle Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Worksheet (BA W) Dear Mr. Olson: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EA W for the listed project. We offer the following comments for your consideration. The project description in Item 6 discusses the construction methods and timing for sanitary sewer installation. We offer the following standard recommendations for projects of this kind: 1. Corridor selection should avoid critical wildlife use areas, including wetlands, waterfowl concentration areas, major flyways, roosting, f<:eding, and breeding areas. Because the proposal concentrates construction predominantly within the highway right-of-way, this recommendation is already met. 2. Impacts to wetlands and streams should be avoided, or if unavoidable, minimized to the extent possible. Review of Exhibit 5-2 shows wetland incursions, some of which, based on limited information, appear to be avoidable. These impacts must be evaluated under the sequencing requirements of the Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA). 3. Construction in wetlands should be conducted during low-water periods, and as such should not occur from April I to July 15. This is the preferred season for construction in wetlands and wannwater streams. 4. Steps should be taken.tg ensure that the laying of pipeline does not lead to surface water drainage. 5. When crossing streams, the amount of streamside vegetation removed must be kept to a minimum and should be restored immediately following completion of work at the site. Disturbed areas should be re-seeded with native plant species. Strict sedimentation and erosion control procedures should be followed at these crossings, including use of filter fabric, straw bales, mulch, and silt fence. DNR Infonnation: 612-296-6157. l-llOO-761i-6000 . TrY: 612-296-5484,1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Emplnyer Who Values Diversity ft Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a "', Minimum or Ill% Posl.l'<,nsumer Waste David L. Olson, Community Development Director April 20, 1998 6. Wetlands should be restored to their pre-construction state as quickly as possible following construction. The soil profile within the wetland area should be replaced as close as possible to the original state, i.e., the organic topsoil materials should be placed on top during backfilling. 7. Trench excavations should be backfilled or protected at the end of each work day. Plastic snow fence or silt fence should be erected to prevent turtles or other wildlife from entering open trenches. 8. In respect to recommendation 8, trenches should be visually inspected prior to lowering-in of pipe and also prior to backfilling, to ensure the trench is free of any turtles or other wildlife that may have entered them. 9. Purple loosestrife (Lythrum Salicaria) is considered a noxious weed. Efforts should be made to avoid spreading the plant and special attention should be given to reducing the possibility of disseminating seeds in the spoils or on soil that may accumulate on construction equipment. Locations of purple loosestrife should be reported to Luke Skinner, DNR Purple Loosestrife Coordinator, at (612) 297-3763. Thank: you for the opportunity to review this project. The preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required in our opinion. We look forward to receiving your record of decision and responses to comments. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, require you to send us your Record of Decision within five days of deciding this action. Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff at (612) 296-9229 if you have questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, ~~ E:?~ Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Environmental Review and Assistance Unit Office of Management and Budget Services c: Kathleen Wallace Con Christianson Bret Anderson Lynn M. Lewis, USFWS Gregg Downing, EQB Steven P. Juetten, Astra-Genstar Partnership, LLP #980282-01 CHARLES.WP7 2 ". April 24, 1998 Mr. Lee Mann, P .E. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer Oversizing Dear Mr. Mann: On March 18, 1998, at a City Council Work Session, I presented our previous discussions regarding oversizing of Middle Creek trunk. sanitary sewer in Farmington to accommodate future flows from the City of Lakeville's Farmington Outlet Sanitary Sewer District. Prior to making any commitment, the City Council instructed staff to survey the affected property owners who would benefit from this improvement. Attached is a packet of information that was sent to all property owners in the Farmington Outlet Sanitary Sewer District. Sixty percent (60%) of all property owners responded with all but two indicating they were not in support of the oversizing of the sanitary sewer or to financing their portion of cost if the sewer was oversized. Based on the results of the survey the City will not request any oversizing of the Middle Creek sanitary sewer through Farmington to accommodate the City of Lakeville. The City is currently updating its Comprehensive Plan and the Farmington outlet area is proposed to remain rural agricultural preserve and lie outside of the year 2020 MUSA. With so many unknowns to the long range future of this district, we could not justify the significant expenditure today for unknown development potential 20 years from now. Thank you for your time ana effort in keeping Lakeville abreast of the Middle Creek Interceptor Sewer Project. City of Lakeville 20195 Holyoke Avenue. Lakeville, MN 55044. (612) 985-4400. FAX 985-4499 Ruy<kd pdfNr. Joy ink '. Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer Oversizing April 24, 1998 Page Two There has been excellent communication in regards to this issue with the City of Farmington. Please call if you have questions. Sincerely, CI!-Y~AKEVILLE ~/ ,/ /~~ .. eith H. Nelson, P.E. City Engineer KHN/mjl Attachments c: To All Property Owners in the Farmington Outlet Sewer District Mayor & City Council Robert A. Erickson, City Administrator Michael Sobota, Community and Economic Development Director Leslee Gustafson, Special Assessment/Property Data Clerk Dennis Feller, Finance Director John Erar, Farmington City Administrator Don Bluhm, MCES .~ March 24, 1998 Dear Property Owner: The Metropolitan Council recently approved expansion of the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) for 824 developable acres in the City of Fannington (see attached exhibits). This means that sanitary sewer is now permitted to accommodate development Fannington is proceeding to extend a trunk sanitary sewer line northwesterly toward lakeville which could be oversized to accommodate future sanitary sewer flows from your area. Although your area is not anticipated to be expanded into the lVlUSA until after the year 2020 a decision needs to be made if the City should proceed with financing the oversizing of the sewer in Farmington today or wait until the time your area is brought into the MUSA and construct an alternative sewer with lift stations and force mains at a higher cost. This issue was discussed with the City Council on March 18, 1998. See my attached memo dated March 5, 1998 for more detail. The City Council would like to hear from you. If the City proceeds with the cost of oversizing for . . Fannington it would result ~ith an area charge to you of$365.00 per acre based on Farmington's cost estimate of oversizing at $579,000. The sewer would still need to be extended further in the future to bring it to the Lakeville border and future charges would result. from this extension. In addition the City could not guarantee that your area would come into the MUSA by 2020, as this decision must he approved by the Metropolitan Council. Please take your time in evaluating this letter and we would appreciate your comments with a return of the self addressed postcard within the next two weeks. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~TY F LAKEVILLE '~d/~ " ei H. Nelson. P.E. City Engineer KHN/mjl Attachments c: Mayor & City Council Roben A. Erickson, City Administrator Michael Sobota, Community and Economic Deve'opment Director leslee Gustafson, Special AssessmentlProperty Data Clerk Dennis Feller, Finance Director John Erar, Fannington City Administrator :f-m1mUSlltinnllr City of Lakeville 20/95 Holyoke A.\'enue · Lakeliille. MN 55044. (612) 985--1-100. FA.X 985-4499 Rn~1"IftJ fII'prr. R'~' ink 10& FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ Lee Smick, .f} /J Planning Coordinator~ TO: SUBJECT: East Farmington 4th Addition - Fifth Amendment to the Development Contract DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION A fifth amendment to the East Farmington Development Contract has been requested by the developer of the project to delete the attached drainage and utility easement for East Farmington. DISCUSSION The developer for East Farmington has requested that the City vacate the drainage and utility easement as shown on the attached information. The intent of this easement was to protect an existing wetland area located at the northeast comer of Elm Street and Twelfth Street in East Farmington 4th Addition. Due to the need for filling this area with redesign of the 4th phase, this easement needs to be vacated. The lots affected by the easement would be unbuildable if the easement is not removed. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the proposed fifth amendment to the Development Contract for East Farmington. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt a resolution to approve the fifth amendment to the East Farmington Development Contract deleting the exhibited drainage and utility easements, contingent on the approval of the vacation petition and the signing of the East Farmington 4th Addition Development Contract. Respectfully submitted, - ... ~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator I CitlJ. of FarminiJ.ton 325 Oalc Street. FarmintJtonl MN 550211 · (612) 1163.7111 · Fax (612) 1163.2591 RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING AMENDMENT #5 TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR EAST FARMINGTON 4tb ADDITION - PARAGRAPH 23 (EXHIBIT C) EASEMENTS Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 4th day of May, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington entered into a Development Contract for the preliminary plat of East Farmington Addition dated March 28, 1995 and recorded as Document No. 1271388; and WHEREAS, the City has entered into four Amendments to the Contract dated, respectively, June 5, 1995, July 5, 1995, September 5, 1995 and July 7, 1997; and WHEREAS, the City and Developer wish to further amend the Development Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Fifth Amendment to the Development Contract for East Farmington Addition is approved and the requisite signatures be authorized and directed to be affixed to the Fifth Amendment to Development Contract. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of May, 1998. Mayor Attested to the _ day of May, 1998. City Administrator ~" .. FIFTH AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT THIS FIFTH AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT, is made and entered into this day of February, 1998, by and between the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and Sienna Corporation, a Minnesota corporation ("Developer"). WHEREAS, City and Developer entered into that certain Development Contract dated March 28, 1995 and filed for record March 29, 1995 in the office of the Dakota County Recorder as Document No. 1271388, which Development Contract was amended by that certain First Amendment to Development Contract dated June 5, 1995 and filed for record July 26, 1995 as Document No. 1290606, and was further amended by that certain Second Amendment to Development Contract dated July 5, 1995, and filed for record August 25, 1995, as Document No. 1297223, and further amendment by that certain Third Amendmt';-,ttu DevelcFment Contract dated September 5, 1995, and filed for record October 4, 1995, as Document No. 1304345 and was further amended by that certain Fourth Amendment Development Contract dated July 7, 1997 and filed for record July 18, 1997 as Document No. 1433770, collectively ("Contract"); WHEREAS, City and Developer desire to further amend the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, City and Developer agree to amend the Contract as follows: 1. Easement 1 (which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and shown graphically as Exhibit 1) as described in Exhibit "C" of paragraph 23, entitled "Easements" is no longer required under the terms of the Development Contract and shall hereby be deleted from the Development Contract. Except as modified herein, the Contract shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Fifth Amendment to Development Contract as of the day and year first above written. CITY: CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow its: Mayor By: John F. Erar its: City Administrator DEVELOPER: SIENNA CORPO:$'ION . _ BY:~J;~" its: Vice President COUNTY OF ) )ss. ) STATE OF MINNESOTA The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1998, by Gerald Ristow, the Mayor and John F. Erar, the City Administrator of the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public ) - )ss. COUNTY OF ~Ul ) k..d The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this L day of Ycbn.\arlj ,1998, by Rodney D. Hardy, Vice President of Sienna Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. ~~ Not ublic STATE OF MINNESOTA , VIRGINIA A. SLIGH NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY ........31.2000 The instrument drafted by: , SIENNA CORPORATION 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 ~ll1neapolis/~ 55435 EXHIBIT A "Easement 1" of Exhibit C of Developer's Contract to be Released A perpetual easement for drainage and utility purposes over/ under and across that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 32/ Township 114, Range 19/ Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 48 minutes 06 seconds East/ assumed bearing along the north line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter/ 374.68 feet; thence South 0 degrees 09 minutes 21 seconds West 262.18 feet to the point of beginning of the easement to be herein described; thence continue South 0 degrees 09 minutes 21 seconds West 175.01 feet; thence South 89 degrees 50 minutes 39 seconds East 95.11 feet; thence North 0 degrees 55 minutes 58 seconds West 153.59 feet; thence North 76 degrees 45 minutes 02 seconds West 94.66 feet to the point of beginning. --_.,------ - .. ~ t:'~w!~ iS1!,' ... l~ ~ n ~ ~~i ~~~~i. .. It F.~2 ~:.:!~ f, . H~~~:! ~ " :-3~ ~ . L. :. ~l'.:ia i~~ :;:-;.; .'. e.; ..f. .. . f,;~,,",o l~3tl!: , -< E- t: It: ~!=t ;: ::I 2 J~~i~ " 41''''..' f'\ . . ;1!V 11- - Z :z: II ~.. I . ;~t~v ~:.i~:1 M 0 - i ~~ ............... ~s!;~ ~~s~w 5 ........., !~~~i:j ~~ " "'r" t:'~.at'( ~-D tJ h~ . '"'till: ~cle:; ~~=&ts:~ 9 ~.;, ,.- !R::;~! ~&,~~ S~'1'f..,. ~~ . . II ~ ... tl~..A.t) ... .......0 ..0.... '.< ~.:c;..: tI'A,;~;:~ ::.'" .. . Z.:'~5.... ~~i';i'J.; . __Il..- .~ .., .m ~:E.0j :d. ::i~.. "1 II I I .. I -tfl I ~ I o ",' fw.. : : ..... : :. ui.,....::~ ~,.. :. .... I:: 133~lSH.lN33H:nO.:l :.- I .r::r;__~~: I II I I :: ;:.r II', r-- I'" f-::-:-r:--'" 7;7:'".-:~:.:.o..;...--~\...:..-.~.:,.~-..r; ~ I I 1 1 I \. i !q I I to\ ,. '1"'. ...... '.. .'..1 : Z ,.,' ~ 'w~ J .~ ~ t,::,-- :~ ; ~=:~I":I::~ III rl_"'t....~-1 r-.~.'i.-, r-.~...i-, ,-~"~-) r _'t.:-_, o ,'!:: 'I:.. ~ :..88 ~....~: ~ "'f:!:: '.'..ID ;!:: ~..~: 1:S I~. U I \t:' I ~ : ~ : :. ' ~~ : L- ~ -' r ". I 14 ::'.:::, 4 _ ~ ~ ~ ~;I I.. a:) I: I ='1 U') t' ~ gt .; 1 C= .. ~ Q) .;. r- 10" : O:'~ I I 1 I I _ :.' ~i ~ 1 I- ," ';1 $;:: CO 7t ~ ...... ; rr CO 11~~ ~ I. _:\~I'IU; I II II ~~.IL._::I!'!-"!'_J II I.' -IQ "'1:; .....Ir I o ;~ ~ \,: ~.;;:. ::,::i: : ~~N ~~~. : ~--6l:'--:: 1 ~'~~:~~:'.!.."J r -,,;1 ~,,_~~:.,~.:-~:~~ o :~ I: It Po loll... UI.I'. fl, 1 ..1- \ I I- 1- I ;',: ~ . "~;-";l - -.':..~, ..oO ... ;..,:1..,,1' 0 I~ <( ~i to \ .--, r - --, l.. _-~:~::'''C:..1... _ J 1.. _ ....I~.~~_ J ~: ,":,,"" 10; \ J.:':......~...~~ _-_ _ ~ - :~ :c ~'I t ~ - ~ :- -: - -.... .....,!...u.: - ,- .... -:.:: i,,-il;:-= ~ - I j.rl~';::' I~:;:: :.~. _ ",' '~.~.;, ~ ~ ~ .f -. ,..:.'!'~-, , ~~ '1 I,~' I ..I' to'l !;."-e:r----,. - 5? I: ~ _ ,.-- ,,( ~ ~---..~!,---~ r- ~.:i ~ I~ I.: :: ~ e~ :::~ t- ::~, ," .I'.....~\ I"':: 0.>> ~I~.: .., t') ~ '::( :;Eq of... ~ Il 0: .. ...., t to ~ 1')"" '-1 0 ()~. l._~_ _._J r 'I:~ .".:~;, i= ~; :!.(.i....'v......__!~ ~: I:. "'~..,. I ':1 N I; I a;... ~~ ...J .._ to:: i-"-~S~I--' : \...._,e!c.!'-.'C".:__J ;,,,::=> ... -~ - ... ::J~.,~__.~ ',I:> I '1 I !Js, t::'I..C)- '~"..l-r:C'"\Jo.[,--..!:...{:I0 1,)~...1 ~.B I II I 0,' 0 (' ~ - 'I:'~~IW lIt. "'I:"o.OC'", o ..." \...,r~oot '_.lr,tn.t"Ctl \ .,,:'.c.~.J . -..~"t-~~ j: w l - N l"~J ......,.... ,.....:~.~~?.-,..~..:...'._.-:......~..:,~ LL 1:1~ II Ljl~_1 L_""'!'_.1 .1 "t" () L._......__.J ')~Q: I ,.1'.~. Otufi I -toO~,.., ....".-.... trt ~ r-W('-' r----1 r-iiiii-'I '..-..';-' '--lOot" ;;,. to- L.J.!.l.""'-.,.,....~.'.-;,,, 11 I I I.. Z t . I I ,",,01 I I II I I I. I (/) r-W-h--'" II 1 " I', "'~!r-""-' o I ~ f ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ r, ~ ;! ~: ~ ::? ~: ~ ~ :~ ~: 3: _ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ;: ~:': ~ I ~~ I') l~ 1-' -I "I r .: ..; "I Ii -1 := :';'1": -: G : IJ I :~ ~l~ - :. CJ ~~? ~-"'7-~ ~_,,,"_J ~-o7;;-l ~-iool"~-~ L._....;-J L',;-,,_J l_,:..;-_' ~-.;:".-~ .-.~.--JIL-,;...-J I Z ~- ::..._:: ~__)..:...~..I II M:"..- H. ~8 :.::--:C; :; ..._; I I ~-=;; - - -.~..-.:r-f33~lS . -.;- .':ii:S!~:-:of;--:-- - --''':'''~I-UN331~IHC- - - ~- -:-.:: ~~ ~ () 'r-':'-'-', r-\:!':!-, ,-"'"., r_""O,.., ,..-'~"~-. ~I ,...."'., ,.'';;!', r...."''-' r....c.~,I..':~., :-::'...,.;!!~ <( I (~ : : ~ : :. : :~ : :: : ';'1 ,:: : :. : ~; : :" : ~~ : : ~i LL jj~ I?' co ~: g ,... ~ ~ co ~ ~ C\ ~'o;; 0 ,;- ~, If) ~ ~ 10 ~ .. ,... ~ ~ co ~ "".~', co i' ~ 0 ,; I I I ~ ti It: ,., '. ,'. .. t; - I. ., "'. .. r. ," .' .. - I: I ""'I I I" 1= 10 ,~"= I t 101 ,.:: I':. I ~, I to 8.., ~ _ !H!_ ~ ~ _ !".!'_ ~ ~ _ :'.!'_ ~ ~ .1"1'_ ~ :.. _00"'_ ~ , :"".!'! ~ ~ ."'J'- ~ ~ .0>_,",- ~ ~ _oc.:,!. ~ ~ .".:~'.~ _ !'!:'J I - '.'~ oO ..... ,---;::,-=,,--, r--,~~,-.,' "'.I.... r-....lI. --, ... r "bco"l,-' r '"'W\t" I -..:.'lI.,l'<\ .......... I ~'\'U. \ J.ll.IoO.~""" t.. l.,~~~"" .. L5 ~: ~~ 1...r....~II...'....'" I !:--.------ \l "'::"" :$:: ~: ....~""!: ~/'___ ," _ ,. I :) I ~~ tr) ~~: v~:.~ ~ ~:r-'l.;~_~~ ~..~ _-_.:.'':t.?t'j _~; I, 0 - - -.. : _ l'~"5t~._~. o I; ~'J' 'L :'J' ;. _ r.-: - .~,- -, I -' r - ..... O. - _ _ h .' . . ,,".- -, ,) ~__E ---Po ~~._ < . _~vw IW' 0)_ , "\-...... ~ t ,~ ~: /; N :: 1.::,' .q- t'): l ~ 0 '" '. I ;~:~~ ...~,:"~ ::~L.! b f:~ :,! I"C) - ,.. ~..~~: r') :' ~~ ~.. -J () f: F(, ::. r--1-1 r---'~I ~1t,~ ~ '-J' .. :'_...'!.~!2._J \')i; 1.....t.I:~.~_J) i~. ~ ~"': . ...:.'!.~'!::_.I :J E:! 1"- ~' ~~ ::> t: '"--l'Oi'G.--''' ;:11 dfJ-IIC'IoG.--., ;::t 0.,.... : ':..-<<v..--" I ). N !~~: ~~:! 0 ~ ~ :~ ~~I ~: ~IS N !: '\ r: 't" ~ I"') I" 1_.I:,IAC:S1 1..lr""'~' : :- ..'~M."'" I. .1 ..I:.M.i"\ ... ...' \ I.I:.......I~' .:(.~;......1'Il)tf ~ L..rjl_J L__,:..'liL..J \ _.I~.':~?r1 "'_..~~__J \.__CJ}~__J ., ....:--.' ,-__l!?~'__j I :'-il;;-~:'-.al''''::-.':''' ;~-~iIIf-=~i~"cLi ';,': :-'ci.;~..oIl"I~"~";:: w-...:: .c~":rwi': I I .. I .... " t- 't' ...., I I t- I .. I toO f ,... I.... I I?" t' fo 9 ~ " ~ s: to> I: 1'.... 'I ~ ~ co ~ t"-""" ~ ,.. cD l'l a- V") ;=.., ,.. ::t - i:' ~ ,.... f;I..~ to ~ ~ V") e ~"C ~ I: \ ZL - 81 /0 _ ~ ; - ~ ; - " ~. _ ~ ~:! .:: ~I "I ti - " 'i - ,'"I'; - -I'; - I' 9 ~I"'" .1': 1 I) .. 'i ",.; ',.: .'1 I I 1 I , I I 1 I I I ~ I " 1'- , I 1 I 1 1 I t I I L-."'i"j_.1 l.-;';r;-J "-~.;;;1-J \._;:,;;,-~ 1_-r-:fl7~ I ~ I-;w..i;~'" L-co,:",:.,.1 1.,..:-...JI'--...t",....J \ -'c-~.J l..~"'M-' ~ , PI' :i ~;g " ":'G.~~~0 ~ t I - - ... -..' 'L'-:f...::..:.. ~ '\ W\~ : ~ t B3~lS ! -. -:-;:;r:.;-",..- ~...:~ '~;-.. --:-' ~ Hi.D3~~':- - -- -, . - J I I I I I , G" ",..<:aot A'.lal II >>_., ..n ".-so..,. 'f( oc:..:", I'" - 10 III."" ,c, .,. " ,... A )000' 1\" I ell .tH., 'u I~":I\ D t" ...')11 10 "1 I J\;.. II .;'1""'" -......,.. III Jo.n ....O...--_..J UIlt'\l"lJ'\1O 'I'.oth 10"1 Jlo k to l1f1oo* "'1 ~ N 111, eo !IN' .IU. ,... AI ""1 .,. J """ 3,,1~.6C.OON __ ,---Oif;C.....-. ,'" .....~ ;J.: ,19 ..........1 ~__ /oI.IZ.6o.00$ -- - 96'",.( --- 1S~~~:; .'^I''''''II.'''':V..' . .."".-\11.... "_ 'I.J .'^III"'I""'IW ...v..a..I......'-J'I --. st '9L --- .I\.lt.6U.m II ",^,II"rlIJ I,VI...I\,.J'-J y .:.~~~::; I ::,..J....' ..L_ Y..J "1r".I''''''II'''\''J I ''1V.4\II''1I, 'I~ ":J '- , -lo <.5 6 ~ ~ -H ... =:Is ~ I' . ~ ~ ~ a: " 'i (f) i ~;] W ~ ~ S w ~ I ~ i J .,. ~ ;, Z ~ ... r 01 ~ ... '>. ':"5';'3 - - -li3}1IS- -. 'H':'~~33.:.~~a.:: ~ .. ,----_. ~- l.J loJ n:: t- (,') -. ". () t: () () cC () .j~ I I .- ~- L_____. . ':'33~':'S s: H':'~~33l}j:}t~.:l ,-----0 -, 4. o ~~ -, 4. :E iJ: <C t,_ '.' :, o I. I:) ~~ ~." I I L______ 133~':'S ~ lJ I J",":,.l I 1'"",-, 1_" , u... .. r------ I g I ., f: I <) () ~~ 0 I ", ,,( -, I :: 0 . - . ~ -, I I:) ij' '.:': .( c( ::: I :,.J tl.. .- .ri N 0-- o . <J ~ 06.rL r----l 1 1 <J 01 01 ~I ~I ~I <D ~I 1 I <J I I L _ S6TL_ J r-oo.~9-l IM..l~.,60.0~S I <J · 01 L.() ~ol ll'!\ Co~1 N -rN 011 ~ 0'11 o::l <J ~__~J N M..l~.60.00S o OO.~9 N OO'OL r----l 1 1 w 1'01 01 r~ ~I I~ f' ~I I~ I I I L _ ~O.OL_ J EXHIBIT. 1 OO'OL r----l Iw I ~OI 01 r~ ~I I~ OJ ~I I~ I I I L _ OO.OL_ J L.J I I N , ,. _-+-:L_ -.......1\--- If) C'l I OO.OL r----l I I w ~OI 01 ~~ ~I I~ (J) ~I I~ I I 1 L _ ~O".52.L _ J OOOL 1---' I I l:.: rCl 10 ~2 IC! o 0 I~ --- I~ I~ I I I L 300~ ~ \ , z o i= o o <( I- CIl 0:: ~ 12 o ---3 t; IW z}'J1 :iOlo o::r>o <( 0 . l&.~~ I-~-r ~ CIl I W II o I- o F ::> o l&. o r . . .. .~.., ':O:~:f. .. ::::.:: :: ::;:;:::::3Q:~:C::::::::::::~:: :::::::::::::::;,:-.~;<;J^:::::::::: ;:;:: ~ 1 :~~~;~ .~~ :~../:;:~:;~~;~;~~~tt;i;~;{~:~ :: ~)~~{{lt. t:;:::::. ;:::: ::i LW ::;:~:..!:i. :i~i:i:~:i:~:i:i:i:~:i:i:::i::~:i:il;:. i:~~:i:;:~:;:~:;:;:;:;tii{:i:i: ~ l2 to i~;~f J~~tfW}tt;i~f :j;~~j~r~~irdii~~ ~ ~ I~ _ ::::;:~:: :;i~::::::::.',,:,,:::::::::::~:: ::: .,:::::::::.:,..:::::~;:;.::::I: . . 0 , .... ,',' ..... ............. II' ..... .'.. . - L :::::: ::::::;;a;;. :::ili;;:;:;:;:;:;:;::;;::::;:;:::;:::i:j:: :: '::. .:2=ill;:::;::::m;:::: - 0 GJ' :::::::::::::: .::::::::::",..:.::M:::i'i1':::::::::::::::::' ,:.::::::::':-:-i::G1=::::::::::::::: 1 . ;'X( II(V. . . ., .. . . . .'i'..... . EASEMENT 0" \ H " ~ ~ I t-ll.6L~-- --l -- - 3..lZ,60.00N I- o W -: 3: S6TlL \ ^\.ll,60.00S ,---..-- . v ---_ r-0059 1 ,M..l~.6IJ'00S I I ~ 01 1 "11 N I 0'11 L___~ o N M"ll.6:l.00S 00';;9 0 N <J r-- ~l ~ --I 01 ~OI I 01 ~I ~~I I ~I 011 . C"1 ~0'I1 I t"1 0'11 Vl <J I I I I LMM.l~.60.00S I LMMl~,CO.OOS I ....QO.C;;9_ .J _OO.<';<;L ---l r ll.tL ., I I I I 81 81 8\ ~ 8\ "'1 ....1 <J I I L____-1 6l.t[ <J <J 8 \ 0 f :-- \~ ~ I ~ -- r :lO.OL 1 I I Lw I l~ . 81 \~ ~ 81 I~ r"1 Vl I... I L_ ___J ~O.OL I- Z W ~ wW :Vl 10<( Ow Co >- I- ::-1- - 01- cO~(I') CIl ::I I / Cl < I OZ ..... 0<( I I I .nwL--1 cO<;> ...<( Z <( 0:: Cl " \ <( r o -1 r :::> o 1-- (/') G:::: r - -CO'OOl--' 10 /.\.ll,60,OOS 10 Ici r- I~ ItO r- II:> ~- L ~,\.S60.00S_ .J r =-...J- 6O'ool- --, 101-- ^-. 10 0-) I.~ 0 IIIl - ___ 1..-) (O() II:> L _ & \l,60,00S_ -1 I I L_ w . 0'>0 !"">o o. If) &0 o o::l 0'1.... o::l Vl r - - oo'oOl -: , 10 n 10 @ --- I~ ItO 1.\.ll,60.00S ItO L _ _ 00'001_ _.J I ~ - 0 o () c:i o r- =) Ie) o o c:i to o o III \.0 o o ci lO II ~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer, Charleswood Storm Sewer Plans and Specifications. DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION The plans and specifications have been prepared for the above referenced project. DISCUSSION Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer At the February 17ili Council meeting, the Council accepted the feasibility report and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for the Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer. This trunk sanitary sewer will serve the Genstar Property and ultimately provide for future service to the West Central and Northwest Sewer Service areas of Farmington. Two options that were presented in the feasibility study have been eliminated in this year's project. The option to serve the N ordseth property has been delayed at least until next year based on discussions with the developer indicating that the soonest he would want to develop that area would be in the spring of 2000. The other option that has been eliminated is the option to upsize the sewer in order to serve a portion of Lakeville. Staff received a letter from Lakeville's City Engineer statii!~ ~hdt Lakeville is not interested in participating in this project (see attached). Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer At the March 16ili Co~cil meeting, Council accepted the feasibility report and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for the Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer. This improvement provides an outlet for the northerly pond on the Genstar property. This project is combined with the sewer project since the construction is in the same area and it is more practical and most likely more cost-effective to have one contractor bid on both projects. Citl}. of FarminiJton 325 Oale Street. Farmington, MN 55024 · (612) 463.7111 · Fa~ (612) 463.2591 BUDGET IMPACT The estimated total project cost for the Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer is $2,670,000. The sewer project will ultimately be funded from sanitary sewer trunk funds. The debt service will be retired with a combination of sewer trunk funds, operating revenues and the newly adopted City Sewer Availability Charge as outlined in the feasibility report. The estimated total project cost for the Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer is $406,100. The storm sewer project will be funded using storm sewer trunk funds as outlined in the feasibility report. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution approving the plans and specifications and authorizing the advertisement of bids for the Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer and Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer project. Respectfully submitted, "d- }Jl ~Ul/~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file April 24, 1998 Mr. Lee Mann, P .E. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer Oversizing Dear Mr. Mann: On March 18, 1998, at a City Council Work Session, I presented our previous discussions regarding oversizing of Middle Creek trunk sanitary sewer in Farmington to accommodate future flows from the City of Lakeville's Farmington Outlet Sanitary Sewer District. Prior to making any commitment, the City Council instructed staff to survey the affected property owners who would benefit from this improvement. Attached is a packet of information that was sent to all property owners in the Farmington Outlet Sanitary Sewer District. Sixty percent (60%) of all property owners responded with all but two indicating they were not in support of the oversizing of the sanitary sewer or to financing their portion of cost if the sewer was .oversized. Based on the results of the survey the City will not request any oversizing of the Middle Creek sanitary sewer through Farmington to accommodate the City of Lakeville. The City is currently updating its Comprehensive Plan aIld the Farmington outlet area is proposed to remain rural agricultural preserve and lie outside of the year 2020 MUSA. With so many unknowns to the long range future of this district, we could not justify the significant expenditure today for unknown development potential 20 years from now. Thank you for your time and effort in keeping Lakeville abreast of the Middle Creek Interceptor Sewer Project. City of Lakeville 20195 Holyoke Avenue · Lakeville, MN 55044 · (612) 985-4400. FAX 985-4499 Rrc.vd~d pap~r. so)' ink Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer Oversizing April 24, 1998 Page Two There has been excellent communication in regards to this issue with the City of Farmington. Please call if you have questions. Sincerely, CI~~AKEVILLE ~./ ./ /~~ eith H. Nelson, P.E. City Engineer KHN/mjl Attachments c: To All Property Owners in the Farmington Outlet Sewer District Mayor & City Council Robert A. Erickson, City Administrator Michael Sobota, Community and Economic Development Director Leslee Gustafson, Special Assessment/Property Data Clerk Dennis Feller, Finance Director John Erar, Farmington City Administrator Don Bluhm, MCES Proposed RESOLUTION NO. R -98 APPROVE PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS PROJECT 98-14, Middle Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer PROJECT 98-11, Charleswood Trunk Storm Sewer Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City on the 4th day of May, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolutions No. R27-98 and RI6-98, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the following proposed improvement: 98-11 Description Install trunk sanitary sewer line to service the west central and northwest sewer service areas. Install trunk storm sewer line Location from the intersection of CSAH 50 & Akin Road to 195th Street at the south end of Eureka Avenue Pro;. No. 98-14 Charleswood Development adjacent to 195th S1. ;and WHEREAS, such plans and specifications are now before the Council for its consideration. WHEREAS, it is proposed to fund all or a portion of the cost of the improvement by using sanitary sewer trunk funds and storm sewer trunk funds. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: I. Said plans and specifications are hereby approved. 2. The Clerk shall cause to be inserted in the Farmington Indepl,";ndent and COIl:.lruction Bulletin and advertisement for bids for such project and that bids shall be received by the City until 2:00 P.M. on May 28, 1998 at which time they will be read aloud and considered by the Council at its June I, 1998 meeting and that no bid shall be considered unless accompanied by a bid bond, certified check or cash deposir equal to at least 5% of the amount of the bid. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of May, 1998. Mayor Attested to the day of ,1998. SEAL Clerk! Administrator ~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Adm inistrator {,'I-Jl- / Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer I I (l., FROM: SUBJECT: Middle Creek Area Trunk Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Study, Project 98-14 DATE: February 17, 1998 INTRODUCTION Transmitted herewith is the feasibility report for the installation of Trunk Sanitary Sewer in the Middle Creek area, Project 98-14, for your review. DISCUSSION This report has been prepared to determine the feasibility of constructing a trunk sanitary sewer line from the intersection of C.S.A.H. 50 and Akin Road to 1951b Street at the south end of Eureka Avenue as shown on Figure I. The project would serve the Genstar Property and also provide two sanitary sewer trunk stubs for future service to the West Central and Northwest Sewer Service areas of Farmington and possibly some eastern portions of LakevilJe. An option is included to construct the northwesterly stub that would provide service to the Nordseth property to the west of the Genstar property. The proposed trunk sanitary sewer is in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan. The sanitary sewer trunk line extension will have adequate capacity to serve all land within the West Central and Northwest Sewer Service Areas as shown on Figure 2 in the report. This report provides detailed cost estimates, a financial review, plan views of the improvement area and a project schedule. BUDGET IMPACT The estimated total project cost of the improvement including the Nordseth Property Option is $3,0l 0,000. If the Lakeville option is added to the project at Lakeville's request, all costs associated with that option would need to be financed by LakeviIJ~ As outlined in the feasibility study, there are three funding sources proposed that would be utilized to retire the debt service on the project. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge The Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge will continue to be charged against new developments on a per acre basis as in the past. It is proposed that this charge be raised from $1350 per acre to $1550 per acre based on the estimated construction costs for this proposed addition to the City's system. I Citlj of FarminlJton 325 Oak Street · Farmington, MN 5502~ · (6 72)~63.77 77 · Fax (6 72) ~63.2597 Cost Estimates Cost estimates have been prepared for extension of the trunk line in the \Vest Central Service Area. A summary of project costs are provided in this section with detailed cost estimates presented in the appendices at the back of this report. The estimates for the work are based on anticipated unit prices for the 1998 construction season. The ENR Index for January, 1998 is 5852. The cost estimates presented below include a fifteen-percent contingency and a twenty-seven percent allowance for engineering, legal and administration costs. Estimated Project Costs Estimated Construction Costs Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part A (403-309) $827,000 Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part B (309-304) $441,000 Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part C (307-111) $293,000 Sanitary Sewer Trunk - Part D (309-308) $86,000 *Nordseth Property Option - Part E (304-301) $306,000 Subtotal 51,953,000 15% Contingency $293,000 27% Engineering, Legal, Administration $607,000 Estimated Construction Total $2,853,000 Other Estimated Costs Estimated EA W Cost $11 ,500 Soils Investigations $6,500 Survey $10,000 Miscellaneous $3,000 Subtotal $2,884,000 - - Bonding and Capitalized Interest $126,000 Total Estimated Farmington Project Cost S3,010,000 Lakeville Option $579,000 *These costs are associated with extending a sanitary trunk sewer line to service the Nordseth property . Farmington .\fiddle Creek Area 7 Cost Estimates The project costs for these improvements are outlined in this section. The itemized cost estimates are provided in the appendix. The costs include 15 percent for contingencies and 27 percent for legal, engineering and administration of this project. Cost estimates for this report are based on projected 1998 construction costs and can be related to the March, 1998 ENR Construction Cost Index of 5875. Financing for the proposed project would come from the City's trunk storm sewer fund. A summary of the estimated costs for the proposed improvements is presented below. Estimated Project Costs Estimated Construction Costs Trunk Storm Sewer 274,300 15% Contingency $41,100 27% Engineering, Legal, Administration $85,200 Estimated Construction Total $400,600 Other Estimated Costs Soils Investigations $2500 Testing Services $2000 Street and Utility Crew Costs 1,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $406,100 Charles wood Trunk Storm Sewer Improvements 6 Project Financing The improvements proposed in this report are part of the Trunk Storm Sewer System. Per City policy, these improvements would be funded by the Storm Sewer Trunk fees paid by new developments. The Storm Water Trunk Fund currently has a balance that will allow the City to pay for the improvements proposed in this report without issuing bonds. Also, the Charleswood Development will be contributing to the Storm Water Trunk Fund as development occurs and their contributions will ultimately cover the costs of this project. CITY OF FARMINGTON REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES ANALYSIS STORM WATER TRUNK FUND 12131197 1997 FUND BALANCE BEGINNING S 1,177,697 OPERATING REVENUES USER FEES 129,378 DEDICATED FEES 475,909 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE 605,287 NON OPERATING REVENUES INTEREST 40,988 TOTAL NON-OPERATING REVENUE 40,988 TOTAL ALL REVENUE 646,275 EXPENDITURES: MAINTENANCE STORM WATER TRUNK 70,632 CONTRUC. i iON S IORM WATE;R TRUNK 39,004 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 109,636 OTHER FINANCING USES DEBT SERVICE 209,330 TOTAL OTHER FINANCING USES 209,330 TOTAL EXPENDITURES & OTHER FINANCING USES 318,966 INCREASE TO FUND BALANCE 327,309 FUND BALANCE END OF YEAR $ 1,605,006 Charleswood Trunk Storm Seli"er Improvements 7 -- II b TO: Mayor, Councilmembers City Administrator~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Met Council Approval / MUSA Land Trade DATE: May 4, 1998 INTRODUCTION The City Council previously authorized the submittal of an application to the Met Council to trade 31 acres currently included in the MUSA for 31 acres recently annexed in the area of TH 3 and Co. Rd. 72. DISCUSSION The Council authorized the submittal of this MUSA Land Trade at the April 6, 1998 Council meeting. The formal application was submitted to Met Council staff on April 10, 1998. Met Council staff completed their review and provided the City with a waiver letter, which was received by the City on April 24, 1998. The waiver letter is the indication that the Met Council will waive any further review and the City can implement the MUSA land trade immediately. Approval of MUSA for these areas will allow the developers of these properties to proceed with final plat applications. BUDGET IMPACT None ACTION REQUESTED F or information purposes only. ~~ DavId L. Olson Community Development Director I Citl}. of FarminiJ.ton 325 Oak Street. FarmintJtonl MN 55024 · (612) 463*7111 · Fait (612) 463*2591 I --- ~ Metropolitan Council ~ Working for the Region, Planning for the Future Mr. Dave Olson City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 April 23, 1998 Re: Comprehensive Plan Arnendment- City of Fannington- 31 Acre Musa Area Trade Metropolitan Council District 16 Referral No. 16248.6 Dear Mr. Olson: Metropolitan Council staffhas reviewed your comprehensive plan amendment received on April 13, 1998. The proposed plan amendment affects a 31-acre area and demonstrates service equivaI€mcy for sewer and transportation impacts, thus meeting the Council's principal land trade criteria. Staff finds that the proposed plan amendment is in conformance with metropolitan system plans, consistent with the Metropolitan Development Guide, and compatible with plans of other units of government. Therefore, the Council will waive further review and you may place the amendment into effect. The amendment, explanatory materials supplied and the information and submission form will be appended to the city's plan in the Council files. This concludes the Council's review. If you have any questions, please contact Linda O'Connor, principal reviewer, at 602-1098. Sincerely, ~ Richard E. Thompson, Supervisor Comprehensive Planning cc: Terrence F. Flowers, Metropolitan Council District 16 Carl Schenk, Sector Representative Don Bluhm, Jim Larsen, Ann Braden, Chauncey Case, Audrey Dougherty Lynda Voge and Linda O'Connor, Metropolitan Council Staff 230 East Fifth Street S1. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1634 (612)291-6359 Fax 291-6550 TDD/TlY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 229-3780 An Equal Opportunity Employer