HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.06.95 Council Packet AGENDA
COUNCIL MEETING
REGULAR
NOVEMBER 6, 1995
7:00 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVE AGENDA
4. CITIZENS COMMENTS (5 minute limit per person for items not on agenda)
5. CONSENT AGENDA (All items approved in 1 motion unless anyone wishes an
item removed for discussion)
a. Approve Minutes - 10/10 (Special) ; 10/16 (Regular) ; 10/23 (Special)
b. Approve Topics for November Half Page Ad in Independent
c. Proclaim November 13-19, 1995 as Chemical Health Week
d. Approve Annual Salt Contract
e. Deny Installation of Stop Sign - 180th Street and Elgin Avenue
f. Approve Final Pay Estimate - Auto Sideloading Solid Waste Vehicle
g. Adopt Resolution Approving Annual Snow Removal Agreement with MnDOT
h. Approve Agreement with MnDOT for Traffic Signal Pre-emption
i. Approve Payment - Public Works 1 1/2 Ton Truck
j . Update on MSA Funding Status
k. Approve Payment to Water Board for Fees Relating to Project 93-15 - SE Area
Sanitary Sewer
PULL 1. Approve Budget Adjustments
m. Receive LMC Financial Needs for City Street System
n. Adopt Resolution Ordering Feasibility Study - Project 96-1 - Main Street
Improvements
o. Adopt Resolution Ordering Feasibility Study for Henderson Area Storm Sewer
System
p. Approve Capital Outlay Request - Fire - Washer and Extractor
q. Approve Trade In - Fire - Self Contained Breathing Apparatus
r. Adopt Resolution Accepting Donation for Beautification Committee
s. Approve 1995/1996 Snow Removal Policy
PULL t. Approve School/Conference Request - Fire - EMS Conference
u. Approve Joining Drug and Alcohol Testing Consortium
v. Cancel Public Hearing - 11/20/95 - TIF #11 - Lexington Standard
w. Approve Payment of the Bills
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS/AWARD OF CONTRACTS
a. 7:30 P.M. - Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Emma Pohl Sewer Service
b. 7:30 P.M. - Consider Petitions for Annexation - 213th Street
c. 7:30 P.M. - Consider Amending Nelsen Hills Farm PUD
7. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. John Tschohl Plat Outside of MUSA
8. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
a. Adopt Resolution Electing to Participate in the Local Housing Incentives
Account Program Under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act
b. Adopt Resolution Setting Public Hearing to Consider Assessments/Agreements
with Castle Rock Residents - Ash Street Improvement Project
c. Adopt Resolution Awarding the Sale of Bonds - Refinancing of Industrial Park
Revenue Bonds
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Fiscal Review/Adopt Resolution Order Plans and Specifications - Ash Street and
Phase III of Prairie Waterway
b. Approve Agreement with Architect for City Hall Remodeling
10. NEW BUSINESS
a. Update on Reservoir Siting
PULL b. Consider Request to Forgive Capitalized Interest - City Center Assessments
11. MISCELLANEOUS
12. REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONS, COMMITTEES, COUNCILMEMBERS
13. UPCOMING MEETINGS
14. ADD ON
15. EXECUTIVE SESSION
16. ADJOURN
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5b
Aj
Name: Karen Finstuen k
Department: Administration ,'
Yv
Date: October 27, 1995
Meeting Date: November 6 , 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Approve Topics for 1/2 Page Ad
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibilty DavP SrhrPi Pr
Referred To: (Name) Department
Department Heads
lah kitorti±C .
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ARTICLES FOR HALF PAGE CITY AD
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1995
The following are suggested articles for the City' s half page ad which
were submitted by David Schreier.
November 23, 1995 issue:
a) Brief article about Farmington' s first Thanksgiving
in keeping with the Thanksgiving holiday;
b) Snowmobile ordinance or another relevant issue;
c) Citizen Action Request Forms;
d) Continuation of volunteer services series - Parks
and Recreation Advisory Commission and CATV.
If you have any other suggested topics for this or future ads, Mr. Schreier
would appreciate your input.
44,0-
ah •
Karen Finstuen
Interim City Administrator
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5c
Name: Karen Finstuen
Department: Administration (
441)/
Date: October 27 , 1995
Meeting Date: November 6 , 1999
Category: Consent
Subject: Proclaim November 13-19 as Chemical Health week
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibilty Proclamation
Referred To: (Name) Department
Department Heads
Signature
SCHOOL
FARMINGTON SENIOR HIGH
IND. SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 92
ACCREDITED BY THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSN.OF COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS
"SPIRIT OF EXCELLENCE"
�- F HS _- .�'
'-' -...• -:-- - . 71-7-,-,.- :..- :.••1,f,.. ,_:., ,,,_, ---:=-1-4r- t' • • v. Thi--- -• F,_--...,-,-_,,.._
800 DENMARK AVENUE
FARMINGTON,MINNESOTA 55024-9002
TELEPHONE: (612)463-6500 CITY OF FARMINGTON
FAX:(612)463-2870
DR.THOMAS ROLLOFF,PRINCIPAL -' OCT Q
2 PVIR1 WE73, SST.PRINCIPAL
L. V 1
October 16, 1995 C
EIVE —I
Mr. Larry Thompson
City Administrator
325 Oak Street
Farmington,MN 55024
Dear Mr. Thompson:
The fifth annual Minnesota Chemical Health Week is being observed from November 13-19,
1995. It is a week that has been organized to heighten awareness of alcohol,tobacco and other
drug abuse through the integration of prevention endeavors during a focused time period. The
week continues the theme: Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Abuse Costs...Prevention Saves!
For the past several years, the Mayor and City Council have made a proclamation to state that
they support the prevention efforts during Chemical Health Week. The Farmington Chemical
Health Week Committee is hoping that they will be able to make the proclamation again. Would
you bring this to them for discussion? There is a sample proclamation enclosed for your
convenience.
Also enclosed is a copy of an article that was published in the MADD Newsletter and in the
Dakota Alliance for Prevention Newsletter highlighting prevention activities in Farmington.
There are also some additional ideas listed as to how to observe the week. Please distribute this
information to people that you work with and encourage them to become involved
Thank you for your help in this very important project. If you have any questions,please call me
at 463-6512.
Sincerely,
jacie54)
j&q — i/ AV/ 0 a
Gail Hoxie-Setterstrom
Member of Farmington Community Chemical Health Week Committee
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
MINNESOTA CHEMICAL HEALTH WEEK
Sample Proclamation
Minnesota
'I Chemicals l
Flealth.11
II Week
Ol.`OOACCO AMO 0 $ER
:AUG 9�SF 00010 '0EVE0T 00 SAVES
WHEREAS,over half a million Americans will die this year from alcohol,tobacco and other drug-
related causes;and
WHEREAS,every man,woman and child in America pays nearly$1,000 annually to cover the costs
of unnecessary health care,extra law enforcement,auto accidents,crime,and lost productivity resulting from
substance abuse;and
WHEREAS,every person in the State of Minnesota is affected by alcohol,tobacco and other drug
abuse;and
WHEREAS,prevention and treatment efforts have made major gains in reversing the trend toward
more and more alcohol,tobacco and other drug use;and
WHEREAS,the color red has been chosen to represent individual and community commitment to
efforts to reduce demand for alcohol and other drugs in our communities;and
WHEREAS,business,government,law enforcement,schools,religious institutions,service organiza-
' tions,neighborhoods,youth,senior citizens,and other individuals are encouraged to demonstrate their commit-
ment to help reduce and prevent alcohol,tobacco and other drug abuse by wearing and/or displaying the color
red during Minnesota Chemical Health Week;
BE IT RESOLVED,that November 13-19, 1995 be declared Minnesota Chemical Health Week in the
City of ;and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the honorable Mayor and the City Council of
support the activities sponsored by the Minnesota Chemical Health Week,MADD's
Red Ribbon Project,and D-Day and encourages the citizens of to participate in all
Minnesota Chemical Health Week activities and other alcohol and other drug abuse prevention efforts year
round.
usem'
/ Minnesota
/ :Chemical
Health--_
1 Week
Minnesota
Chemical
Health
\ _ Week How You Can Get Invoued
.uaM°,roacc°..°aee
°�"°..,f°°5 f'"f=, In Minnesota Chemical Health Week IMCHWI
Wear the color red on Wednesday, November 13
(MCHW used to be called "Red Ribbon Week")
Tie a red ribbon on your car antenna
Distribute free educational materials from DAP
(flyers, pamphlets, brochures) in your business,
church, workplace, city hall, agency, etc.
Find out what your local schools are doing for
MCHW and offer to help
Join or start a prevention coalition in your community
(see list of coalitions on page 1 of this newsletter)
FAR►�ur�, . , co y,. . (e ,ar.e,- •
Help DA promote it's message: "No Illegal Use or
Abuse of Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs"
Call the DAP office at 552-3114 to receive a free
copy of the MCHW Ideas Packet for 1)Communities,
2) Schools and/or 3) Churches and Other Faith
Communities
If you're a parent, discuss the hazards and
consequences of alcohol, tobacco and other drug
abuse with your children
Have a proclamation signed by your mayor or city
council (sample available from the DAP office)
Write a letter to the editor asking everyone to be
involved in prevention
For more ideas, see the opposite page article on all
the ideas Farmington has for MCHW
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5d
Name:
Tom Kaldunski
Department: Public Works
Date: October 27 , 1995
Meeting Date: November 6 , 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Approve Annual Salt Contract
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo/Contract - Tom Kaldunski
Referred To: (Name) Department
Karen Finstuen Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Jerry Bauer Public Wnrks
7/7/4L17Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ANNUAL SALT CONTRACT
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1995
Attached is a copy of the City's annual salt contract. This contract is between the City and Cargill,
Salt Division. The City picks up the salt at Cargills storage area. This is a removal of the contract
that has been used for many years.
This years price is $28.50/ton(f.o.b. sellers terminal) which compares favorably to last years price.
A higher quote for salt was received from Morton Salt Company. The City estimates a need for 125
tons in the 1995/1996 season. This material is purchased through the Public Works Department's
annual operating budget.
I recommend that the City Council approve this contract and authorize me to execute it.
Thomas J. Kaldunski, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
TJK/11
cc: file
Karen Finstuen
Wayne Henneke
TJK
Jerry Bauer
OCT-24-95 TUE 12 : 13 CARGILL SALT 6127424324 P. 02
CARGILL
SALT DIVISION
P.O. Box 5622
Minnespois, MN 55440
612/742-4310
800,225-8508
Tuesday,October 24, 1995
TOM KALDUNSKI
FARMINGTON,CITY OF
STREET DEPARTMENT
FARMINGTON,MN 55024
Dear TOM: .
Cargill Salt is pleased to submit the following quotation for your bulk salt requirements. This quote is firm September 1, 1995 through March
31,1996 but must be accepted within 30 days of the date of this letter.
Price Basis
Terminal product FOB Destination FOB Seller's Terminal Quentin/gone Payment terms
PCD - Bulk Deicing Salt $31.50 $28.50 125 Net 30 days
The above products)will be shipped from our stockpile in 22 ton truckload shipments within 3-5 working days from receipt of order(any
increase or decrease in the freight rate used to determine delivered price would be the buyer's account) To place orders,please call
(800)225-8508.
Please sign and return the terms and conditions on this document within 30 days with your estimated tons for the 95/96 deicing
season. This letter together with the signed terms and conditions will constitute a contract We cannot set up your account for
this year without the signed contract and your estimated tons returned to our office. Our fax number is(812)742-4324.
•Note: Buyer agrees to purchase 80%of the above estimated tonnage.Seller agrees to supply up to 120%of the above estimated tonnage.
"Note: My advance in applicable freight rates shell be for the buyer's account
If this contract is not accepted within 30 days of the above date It is null and void.
Above price shall remain firm until_MARCH 31,1996 ...
ADDITIONAL TERMS:The term"FOB SELLER'S TERMINAL'or"FOB DESTINATION",appearing under the heading"PRICE BASIS'
indicates only the transportation costs which are included in the price and is nota delivery term.Delivery shall in each case occur when Seller
places product in possession of shipper at Seller's terminal and title to and risk of loss of the product shall pass to Buyer at that time.Seller
warrants only that the products sold and Delivered pursuant to this contract shall meat Seller's published specifications. SELLER MAKES NO
OTHER WARRANTY,EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.Buyer shall have 72 hours after Delivery in which to give notice to Seller of a breach of the above warranty and
Seller shall have the privilege of replacing the non-conforming product with conforming product in a reasonable time if Seller and Buyer
cannot agree upon a mutually satisfactory settlement In no event shall Seller be liable to Buyer for special or consequential damages.Buyer's
failure to give timely notice as above required shall constitute a waiver of Sellers warranty and of Buyer's right to recover for breach thereof.
Seller shall be excused for failure to Deliver or for delay in Delivery occasioned by conditions beyond Seller's control Including,but not limited
to.Acts of God,fire,flood,windstorm acts of governmental authorities,strikes or other similar and dissimilar events not directly caused by
Seller's negligence.
SELLi_R IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER,AND ISA GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR Therefore this contract is subject to the
rules and regulations imposed upon contractors and subcontractors pursuant to 41 C.F.R.Chapter 60 and 61,as well as Executive Order
12800 and the interim enforcement regulations found in 29 C.F.R.Part 470.Unless this contract is exempt by regulations issued by the
Secretary of Labor,there is incorporated herein by reference:the equal employment opportunity clause contained in 41 C.F.R Section 60-
1.4;the affirmative action clause contained in 41 C.F.R. Section 60-250.4 and 61-250.10 both relating to the employment of disabled veterans
and veterans of the Vietnam Era;the affirmative action clauses contained in 41 C.F.R.Section 60-741.4 relating to the employment of
handicapped persons;end the requirement to prominently post notices to employees as contained in 29 C.F.R.Section 470.2.
Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. We are looking forward to supplying your salt needs. /
CARGILL.,INCORPORATED(Seller) ACCEPTED(: er) / 1/
By CIL. H eeJ M,/ -
By Phil Kna
.
(AA)i)p Phone No, 61 Z- - (f( 3 —7fif OA/ /G
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5e
Name: Tom Kaldunski
Department: Public Works
Date: October 27, 1995
\
Meeting Date: November 6 , 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Deny Request for Stop Sign - 180th Street and Elgin Avenue
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo - Tom Kaldunski
Referred To: (Name) Department
Karen Finstuen Administration
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Dan Siebenaler Police
Jerry Bauer Public Works
/7/ 417
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR STOP SIGN
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1995
The City has received a request for the installation of a stop sign on 180th Street at Elgin Avenue.
Attached is a map which indicates existing signs and traffic volumes in the area (205 vehicles per
day).
The Police Department has conducted a survey of traffic speeds in the area and have not
determined any major pattern of excessive speeds. No pattern of accidents is evident either (see
Dan Siebenaler's memo).
The City utilizes the Minnesota manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices to determine if a stop
sign is warranted. Attached is a portion of this manual regarding stop signs.
This intersection does not meet the warrants for a stop sign. Therefore, it is my recommendation
that the Council deny this request.
Thomas J. Kaldunski, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
TJK/11
cc: file
Karen Finstuen
Dan Siebenaler
TJK
Dave Herman
MEMO TO: Mayor and Council
SUBJECT: Stop Sign Request
DATE: November 1, 1995
I have been requested to review the intersection of 180th Street
and Elgin Avenue. In a visual inspection of the area, I find it to
be an unobstructed intersection. That is, there is no visual or
sight line problem with the intersection.
A review of our records show no indication of accidents at that
location.
A brief speed survey conducted in the area shows no dramatic
problem due in part to the stop sign two blocks away.
At this point, I would not recommend the installation of the stop
sign at 180th Street and Elgin Avenue.
S /
Yi , ,
'aniel M. Siebenaler
Chief of Police
DMS/m
• \ •
STOP
\-. / 4-WAY] {ALL WAY,
RI-1 R1-3 R1-4
30"x 30" 12"x 6" 18"x 6"
2B-4 Stop Sign (RI-1)
STOP signs are intended for use where traffic is required to stop. The
STOP sign shall be an octagon with white message and border on a red
background. The standard size shall be 30 x 30 inches. Where greater
emphasis or visibility is required, a larger size is recommended. On low-
volume local streets and secondary roads with low approach speeds, a 24
x 24 inch size may be used.
At a multiway stop intersection (sec. 2B-6), a supplementary plate •
(R1-3) should be mounted just below each STOP sign. If the number of
approach legs to the intersection is three or more, the numeral on the
supplementary plate shall correspond to the actual number of legs, or the
legend ALL-WAY (R1-4) may be used. The supplementary plate shall
have white letters on a red background and shall have a standard size of 12
x 6 inches (R1-3) or 18 x 6 inches (Rl-4).
A STOP sign beacon or beacons may be used in conjunction with a
STOP sign as described in section 4E-4.
Secondary messages shall not be used on STOP sign faces.
2B-5 Warrants for Stop Sign
Because the STOP sign causes a substantial inconvenience to motorists,
it should be used only where warranted.A STOP sign may be warranted at
an intersection where one or more of the following conditions exist:
1. Intersection of a less important road with a main road where
application of the normal right-of-way rule is unduly hazardous.
2. Street entering a through highway or street.
3. Unsignalized intersection in a signalized area.
4. Other intersections where a combination of high speed, restricted
view,and serious accident record indicates a need for control by the STOP •
I
1
. . 1
II
n- •
w•
1
!
e
,4
s }. (g-2.e . •i
. 1 f o 114
- 0 6a., aA. 0- a s
. � a' t_o �- ch . - M N m
F 2 a II aN M ' etci M s ._
I . cls ----
1
F
. sh.:. c.,v wIll z 1... z Li Jkaa mac . \
— ( t• INo—‘70,,vommos unni,.....„mgril--- . .4 ii.."..? 1 a
WTrImit
t '�
_
&0.-w \JAR/Zr,In.. 7'4 i 411.41 ."- . :. -2 ..-^%. to ,,<.•
. A _,_, _
, Mill. A. 1111 i .-,,,..- 1 .:-. el
V AV- EII^ I•r �� r i C -- --- ' •
,,,,i ___ 03
- In
fr '�� ,,'
211.1 ZSIVII t#°0^,1 min
min
o
ini1 VI 3 1 \3 , � NI*1r03 t . r - . am • IF
�i. �\
V BONN 101id -all d.......\• .
r
.94*' IV ..,
=z 0113 3 —' ■■ ' .
CO Ell _W .�
Jio I/ ' y0 'y M
%
Z _
I On��. I r
Y M *i1 • ASI
5%*ct al . 4 .C--.-.
S7
J``��,� N'3 AV • 1 a
oLio o, _ 3 A o W
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5g
Name: Tom Kaldunski ,
1 /
Department: Public Works
Date: January 17, 1995
MeetingDate: February 6, 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Adopt Resolution Amending Resolution R1-95 - Amending GIS Fees
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibility Resolution/Fee Schedule - Jay Kennedy
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Jay Kennedy Public Works
1:41‘12"1
Signature
PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R -95
AMEND RESOLUTION R1-95
ESTABLISHING RATES FOR G.I.S. MAPS
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Farmington, Minnesota was held in the Civic Center of said City of the 6th day of February, 1995
at 7:00 P.M..
The following members were present:
The following members were absent:
Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington has by authority the right to establish
G.I.S. map fees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that revised service fees should be established for
G.I.S. maps.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington that
the following fees be adopted for G.I.S. maps:
County City Total
Digitial Data (DXF/Autocad Format) $534/mb $20/mb $554/mb
Hard Copy Map Sales
1/2 Sec. - Property Only $ 10.00 $ 5.00 $ 15.00
1/2 Sec. - Property and Planimetric $ 50.00 $ 5.00 $ 55.00
1/2 Sec. - Property/Planimetric/Contour $150.00 $ 20.00 $170.00
1/8 Sec. - Property/Planimetric/Contour $ 40.00 $ 5.00 $ 45.00
1/2 Sec. - Aerial Photo (1"= 200') $ 6.00 $ 0.00 $ 6.00
Old Section and 1/4 Section $ 5.00 $ 0.00 $ 5.00
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
6th day of February, 1995.
Mayor
Attested to the day of ,1995.
SEAL Clerk/Administrator
49
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5i
Tom Kaldunski I �
Name:
f-�
Department: Public Works ! '�
\1
Date: October 27, 1995
Meeting Date: November 6, 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Approve Payment for Equipment Purchase - Public Wnrks Ha1 f mon
Truck
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibilty Payment Voucher/Inspection Form
Referred To: (Name) Department
Karen Finstuen Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Jerry Bauer Public- Wnrks
Todd Reiten Public Works
7-Z--11/(1/21
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: APPROVE PAYMENT FOR 1-1/2 TON TRUCK
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1995
The City has received it's new 1-1/2 ton 4x4 truck. This vehicle was purchased through the 1994
budget. Attached are the payment vouchers and inspection forms. The vehicle will be on display
at City Hall prior to the November 6, 1995 meeting.
It is my recommendation that the City Council authorize payment of$11,236.57 to Crysteel
Equipment Company for the dump body, hoist and plow and sander, and $22,122.00 to Iten
Chevrolet for the truck.
Thomas J. Kaldunski, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
TJK/11
cc: file
Karen Finstuen
Wayne Henneke
TJK
Jerry Bauer
INSPECTION FORM
•
DATE 1 S
PROJECT NO, CONTRACT NO,
PROJECT DESCRIPTION P ck,T
0„„j
I HAVE THIS DATE INSPECTEED THE WORK PERFORMED ABOVE BY
k1 CV\ kr-Ck--\ �� k `( �. PRIME CONTRACTOR
IN MY OPINION HE HAS SUBSTANTIALLY FULLFILLED THE TERMS OF HIS CONT—
RACT AS TO APPARENT WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS AND I RECOMMEND THAT A
CERTIFICATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED TO THE CON—
TRACTOR FOR HIS EXECUTION ,
I FURTHER RECOMMEND THAT UPON RECEIPT OF SUCH CERTIFICATE A FINAL
PAYMENT BE MADE TO THE CONTRACTOR .
(NAME)
brae_\ \rIk e 5 S r+r u` SGI((T I T L E)
1 (c2,`S -
(DATE)
MOTION BY SECOND BY
THAT ABOVE RECOMMENDATION IS HEREBY APPROVED , MOTION CARRIES THIS
DAY OF 19
CC: Engr or Proj Mgr
Contract File
Ins. Co. CLERK
PAYMENT VOUCHER
Date 11/1/95 Voucher No. 1 (final)
Contract No. Description Dump Body, Hoist, Plow and Sander
Contractors Name Crysteel Equipment Co.
Contractors Address 1130 - 73rd Ave. NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Amount of Contract $11,236.57
Increases to Contract 0.00
Total of Contract 11,236.57
Percent of Contract Completed 100%
Total Value of Work Completed 11,236.57
Retained (0 %) Percentage 0.00
Total Previous Payments 0.00
Net Payment this Voucher $11,236.57
I hereby recommend payment of the above net amount.
Place Voucher Stamp Here Name
Title Public Works Director/City Engineer
Invoice Voucher
Date 11/1/95
P.O. No.:
Rec'd By: Starting Date
Price OK: Total Time Allowed*
Acct. No.: Total Time Used to Date
Percent of Time Used
Posted By:
Paid By: *If not in work days, project to completion date.
Date:
Chk. No.:
Approved for payment by the City Council this day of , 19
Clerk/Administrator
Distribution: Contractor
Auth. Officer
Contract File
Approved for Payment by:
Thomas J. Kaldunski, P.E.
Crysteel Equipment Co.
Interim Clerk/Administrator
Mayor
PAYMENT VOUCHER
Date 11/1/95 Voucher No. 1 (final)
Contract No. Description 4 X 4 Diesel Pickup - Alternate "A"
Contractors Name Iten Chevrolet
Contractors Address 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard
Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
Amount of Contract $22,122.00
Increases to Contract 0.00
Total of Contract 22,122.00
Percent of Contract Completed 100%
Total Value of Work Completed 22,122.00
Retained (0 %) Percentage 0.00
Total Previous Payments 0.00
Net Payment this Voucher $22,122.00
I hereby recommend payment of the above net amount.
Place Voucher Stamp Here Name
Title Public Works Director/City Engineer
Invoice Voucher
Date 11/1/95
P.O. No.:
Rec'd By: Starting Date
Price OK: Total Time Allowed*
Acct. No.: Total Time Used to Date
Percent of Time Used
Posted By:
Paid By: *If not in work days, project to completion date.
Date:
Chk. No.:
Approved for payment by the City Council this day of , 19
Clerk/Administrator
Distribution: Contractor
Auth. Officer
Contract File
Approved for Payment by:
Thomas J. Kaldunski, P.E.
Iten Chevrolet
Interim Clerk/Administrator
Mayor
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5j
Name: Tom Kaldunski
Department: Public Works Yfj
P
Date: October 27, 1995
Meeting Date: November 6 , 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Receive Update on MSA Funding
Explanation: I will provide an update on the status of MSA
funding. The Council should direct staff to prepare a new
5 Year MSA CIP - 1996 to 2000 .
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo - Tom Kaldunski
Referred To: (Name) Department
Karen Finstuen Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Jay Kennedy Public Works
f4j/ed14,
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON MSA ACCOUNT
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1995
I have received the MnDOT report which outlines the Municipal State Aid System and allocations
for 1996. This memo will update you.
The City of Farmington currently has 8.72 miles of roads on the M.S.A. system. Attached is a
map showing the designated miles. This is an increase of 0.41 miles from 1994. It is anticipated
that the City will be able to designate additional M.S.A. routes in 1996 due to growth. It is in the
City's best interest to designate as many miles as allowable to maximize the City's M.S.A.
funding.
M.S.A. allocations are determined by two main factors;
1) Estimated population
2) Street construction needs
The State demographer has estimated the City of Farmington's 1994 population at 6.870. This is
an increase of 930 over the 1990 census of 5,940. This estimate will be revised annually due to
the growth. The current population is estimated to be over 8000. The population apportionment
for 1996 is estimated to be $94,607.00. The City of Farmington benefits from this new state aid
rule allowing the use of population estimates by receiving $9,015.00 more in state aid.
The City of Farmington's M.S.A. street construction needs increased to $7,550,347.00 in 1995.
A net increase of$499,825.00 due to the additional designation. This represents a 7.1% increase
in needs. Based on these needs, the City will receive a needs apportionment of$176,660.00 for
1996.
The total M.S.A. allocation for the City of Farmington which will be available on January 1,
1996, is as follows;
population apportionment $94,607.00
needs apportionment $176.660.00
$271,267.00
This represents a 5.9% increase over the 1995 allocation of$256,149.00.
The City's current M.S.A. account balance as of 9/1/95 is $567,055.00. On January 1, 1996, this
will increase to $838,322.00. It should be noted that the M.S.A. system is set up to encourage
the use of these funds on a regular basis. The City will receive negative adjustments if the
balance remains too high. This occurs when the balance exceeds two times the annual allotment.
The City would receive more funding by utilizing it's M.S.A. funds. The City's 1996 C.I.P. will
provide many opportunities to reduce the M.S.A. account.
If you have any questions on this matter, please contact me.
Thomas J. Kaldunski, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
TJK/11
cc: file
Karen Finstuen
Wayne Henneke
TJK
di ..�,.> 6---'-'[ ,'
LEGEND
3 r_..9Erie L
���-_� •' omirrE
111 1 rp9 � m CITY MSA STREETS
\*4.,,.\), Ei'' ,.(--Pre\ i
6
NI'
, (‘ & IZ. s\e„
":'..'\''NI 6 6 ,
t L
Tg' ' °IgNi
IW1
. i 1 i
ri,
I U[_'
. V\
ci) f,
h o
€ €
_If
I
11
f
.
=MY RD.50
iL
`I ! � v fgyp, '
1 B®8'
IE JHA
i . ' _ E D®O^ CEA
CE
! . r� _R r,r,�
Ii/ n n ,.
., i , .-41 0
CITY OF FARMINGTON
�,E._)
DESIGNATED MUNICIPAL STATE AID
STREET SYSTEM i ,..0:"
EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 1, 19951 500 I 1 i 1 1 s '
DRAWN DY, JCT 0 1000 2000 3000 �r
DATE. 11-1-95 I J�\MAPS\SWRDUTE.DWG SCALE 3 l
1
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5m
Name: Tom Kaldunski
Department: Public Works
Date: October 27, 1995
Meeting Date: November 6, 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Receive LMC Finance Needs for City Street System
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo/Study - Tom Kaldunski
Referred To: (Name) Department
Karen Finstuen Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Jay Kennedy Public Works
Jerry Bauer Public Works
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: FINANCIAL NEEDS REPORT BY CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF
MINNESOTA (CEAM) AND MnDOT
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1995
Attached you will find a report that was prepared in cooperation by the CEAM and MnDOT.
This organization hired a consultant to complete the study. It is for information only. The main
focus of the report is to identify that Minnesota's street needs are not being met through current
funding. It is necessary for more funding sources to be developed.
Another important aspect of this report is table 1 on page 5 which outlines an optimum street
improvement cycle. The City of Farmington utilizes a very similar cycle on it's projects. It is
important that the City continue it's seven year cycle on seal coating. One aspect that needs to be
explored by the City of Farmington is the use of more mill and overlay projects. I will do some
research on this issue in the future and report the finding to the Council.
Thomas J. Kaldunski, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
TJK/11
cc: file
Karen Finstuen •
Wayne Henneke
TJK
Jay Kennedy
Jerry Bauer
April 3, 1995
Mr. Chuck Winkelman
President
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
3490 Lexington Avenue North
St. Paul, Minnesota 55126
RE: FINANCIAL NEEDS—MINNESOTA'S CITY STREET SYSTEM
Dear Mr. Winkelman:
As we approach the season when new frost heaves and potholes start to appear
in our street and highway system, we are reminded that all is not well with this
important element of our infrastructure. It is clear from the bumps and holes in
our streets that we are not able to keep up with the need to reinvest in our city
street systems. The City Engineer's Association of Minnesota and the State Aid
for Local Transportation Division of the Minnesota Department of Transportation
have just completed a joint study relating to the street and highway needs in
Minnesota cities. While the study was intended to explore in a preliminary way
the application of life cycle costing techniques to reflect needs, it also provides
general information on the municipal needs across the state. The report does
provide a snapshot of where we are in terms of reinvesting in this important
system. The report documents the fact that at the current funding levels we are
clearly in trouble in terms of catching up with deferred capital maintenance and
the continuing deterioration of city streets.
The Mn/DOT study was undertaken as a preparatory step toward reviewing how
Municipal State Aid funds are allocated. The study was conducted in
cooperation with the City Engineer's Association of Minnesota and involved a
survey being mailed to all 836 cities in Minnesota.
This study is a preliminary look at how needs are distributed among all cities in
Minnesota (note: there are approximately 130,000 miles of roads and streets in
Minnesota. This study only looked at the 15,959 miles of city streets.) The
study also examines alternative methodologies for needs calculations. One of
the important products of the study, however, is an estimate of the total financial
needs for all city streets in Minnesota over the next 20 years.
Mr. Chuck Winkelman -2 - April 3, 1995
A key assumption in the study is that street pavements and their subbase or
foundations have an optimal life cycle of 50 years and must be periodically
maintained. The trend nationally has been to extend life cycles of existing
streets by investing in capital maintenance programs. Eventually, failure to
maintain city street systems could result in streets which cannot safely or
adequately serve users, and even deterioration that reduces the value of
adjacent homes and related land uses.
The study shows that almost 30 percent of city streets in Minnesota were built
before 1955 with 43 percent in cities under 5,000 population. Given this age
characteristic and the assumption that streets need to be on a 50-year cycle, we
should be spending about $650 million this year to keep up with maintenance
reconstruction and new construction of city streets. Over the next 20 years, we
should be spending about $12.3 billion on our city street system. Table 1 shows
how these numbers are broken down by city population and need category.
Note that the Municipal State Aid Street Category includes the needs on the 20
percent of the mileage (in cities of 5,000 population and over), eligible for state
fuel tax and license fee revenues.
So how are we doing in terms of maintaining and reinvesting in our city street
infrastructure? According to the Minnesota Office of the State Auditor, cities
spent $549 million in 1993 on city street and highway projects. It is their second
highest local spending priority, ranking just behind public safety. Combined
federal and state revenues, about $88 million per year, cover only 16 percent of
total city street and highway expenditures. On the portion of the system eligible
for state aid, we need to be spending about $118 million annually and we have
only $81 million (about 69 percent). New subdivision street construction
probably has its own source of revenue through developers and builders.
Routine maintenance is probably funded adequately but we are falling short in
the capital maintenance and street reconstruction area, about $100 million per
year.
While the study was not intended to develop a formal needs estimate or financial
alternatives, it does support previous efforts by City Engineers to alert decision-
makers of the need for new revenues to forestall a "crash" for Minnesota's city
street system. The 9 percent portion of the state fuel tax and license fee
revenue, which are only available to cities over 5,000 population, and the
property tax mechanism, simply are not adequate or acceptable for keeping
pace with our total street reconstruction needs. Mechanisms for building
sophisticated street facilities such as major intersections and freeway
interchanges have been restricted by the Legislature (e.g., Tax Increment
Financing).
Mr. Chuck Winkelman - 3 - April 3, 1995
With respect to keeping up with investment in infrastructure, someone said, "pay
me now or pay me a lot more, later.° These needs do not go away and indeed
escalate exponentially if not taken care of on a regular, planned basis.
Transportation accessibility and mobility forms the foundation for the quality of
life in Minnesota cities. Without safe and efficient roads and streets to serve our
community neighborhoods and businesses, everything else is proportionately
disadvantaged. •
This report becomes a good foundation for future-discussions of investment
needs for city streets. We look forward to working with you on this ongoing
challenge to our cities.
cerely,
( i /
/ .
Davi• . Sonnenberg
President
CEAM
Attachment: Mn/DOT Study
I
in
Q)
co
N
CO
'-- 0 T' ti O N
O 0) 0) '- coec
as
0
C
asE
O)
moa)i
< 0)
C
co
>- I Ld) O 0) N CO co O a
U > -C CY) 0) O V. C
ir CC C o
as ,_
V a)
>
C� 0 `° u)
▪ O a) a)
le ,O U. 0 co, N C
en
WZ U0 6 �;
Z
W O c E
CL
0 0
F— Q 0C
CO 1-- 0 a)
WIX
s a)
O O
0 C o) o
U cn 1 O o C N
aZ = o 0
0.
i... Ilt " E
O 1— 1 ca
Cl)co
vi
>- c 0) r r N d vii t
F- N •'ct N 0) •5 E
co ZV N co, 6 00
W Z F— o a) c 53
cNi
20 U . cou,
j} LL Z C 7 N
O cZ N •a) d
G C C_ a V?
2= Q Z _ C CQ a) 6
U U Q
= W Q N ccoL ::
L w+ al
ZQ o 0La
to J CWj U j 0 ci
W a CO i C N .2-
0 7 M y C
CC W W Z U N C N N (� .7 -20c02
CO Z j Cu co) -a
L co � NMet LO
F— LL OC 2 ce m co Z
4
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM)
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY
SUMMARY
MARCH, 1995
STRGAR-ROSCOE-FAUSCH, INC.
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 1
METHODOLOGY FOR NEEDS DETERMINATION 2
MAINTENANCE NEEDS 4
RECONSTRUCTION NEEDS 8
NEW STREET NEEDS 9
BRIDGE NEEDS 11
SAFETY AND CAPACITY NEEDS 11
CURRENT FUNDING 12
SUMMARY OF NEEDS STUDY 13
.
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The City Engineers Association of Minnesota (CEAM) and the Minnesota
Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) State Aid for Local Transportation
Division undertook a study of the needs on the city street system in Minnesota.
The study included a survey of all cities in Minnesota to gather information on
the current size and age of the local street system. The survey data was then
applied to a life cycle model reflecting routine maintenance, capital maintenance
and reconstruction costs over a 50 year roadway life. From this effort, needs
estimates were developed for the current year as well as the cumulative needs
over the next 20 years.
The study was conducted in such a way to clearly differentiate the needs for
cities of different size. Cities with population under 5,000 generally must use
only local funds for most of their projects, while cities 5,000 population and over
use local funds and participate in the Municipal State Aid program administered
by Mn/DOT.
While the study was intended to explore in a preliminary way the application of
life cycle costing techniques to reflect needs, it also provides general information
on the needs across the state. Needs of individual cities are not presented. To
develop more refined estimates, it would be necessary to incorporate additional
cost differences that may arise because of such things as city size, geographic
location, pavement type, soil condition, etc.
1
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
METHODOLOGY FOR NEEDS DETERMINATION
1. A survey of all cities in Minnesota was undertaken in an effort to identify
the age of the current city street system. 836 surveys were distributed.
332 surveys were returned and tabulated, which represents a return rate
of 40 percent. Some of the survey highlights include:
• 70 out of 118 cities with population 5,000 and over responded (59%)
• 262 out of 740 cities with population under 5,000 responded (35%)
• 11,273 miles of streets were reported on the surveys. This
represents 71% of the total of 15,959 miles
• 1,741 miles of MSA streets were reported. This represents 69% of
the total of 2,526 MSA miles
2. Results from the survey were factored to represent the total city street
miles in Minnesota (15,959). The age distribution was identified for
streets 42 feet wide or less, and for streets wider than 42 feet.
3. An optimum life cycle of 50 years was developed for typical city streets.
This indicates that following initial construction, regular maintenance
activities should be able to keep the street functioning for 50 years.
Following that, full reconstruction would be necessary.
4. The annual cost for maintenance and construction activities was
determined for streets less than or equal to 42 feet wide and for streets
wider than 42 feet, and for cities under 5,000 population and 5,000 and
over.
5. The factored street miles were proportionately distributed to each year
within the age interval depicting construction. The annual cost for
maintenance was applied to the number of street miles in each age
category to determine the current year maintenance needs.
6. The current year reconstruction needs were determined by applying unit
costs to a percentage of the total street miles. Based on the 50 year life
cycle, 2 percent of the total system should be reconstructed each year.
However, for the oldest roadways, which are characterized by low traffic
volumes, only 1 percent are assumed to be reconstructed each year as
the actual life cycles may tend to exceed 50 years.
2
1 ' r
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
7. The current year needs for new streets is the appropriate construction
unit cost based on street width applied to the number of new street miles.
The number of new street miles was determined by examining the growth
of street miles over the past 45 years.
8. The current year needs for bridges were determined from information
supplied by Mn/DOT. The bridge needs are based on the current State
Aid Division estimate for cities over 5,000 population and an additional
Mn/DOT analysis of the cost to replace deficient bridges in the smaller
communities. Needs for bridge construction over various time frames
were reconfigured to represent annual costs.
9. The current year safety needs were determined by applying a fixed
percentage (5 percent) to the annual maintenance cost. The current year
capacity expansion needs are assumed to be associated with only the
MSA system. Each year, 1 percent additional capacity will be needed for
the MSA system (for traffic lane and parking lane additions). A modified
unit cost was applied to these miles to generate the construction cost for
additional capacity.
10. The total current year needs are the sum of the individual components.
11. The needs over the next 20 years are determined in a manner similar to
the current year needs. A slight difference occurs in the determination of
maintenance needs as the distribution of street miles in the age
categories are assumed to get progressively older and thereby incur
different costs as they go through their life cycles. Each year's needs are
determined individually and then summed to get the total needs over
20 years. A modification is also made to the method for determining
needs for new streets. The growth rate in terms of the amount of new
streets each year is assumed to slow down beginning in 5 years. This is
related to the trend depicted over the past 15 years, as shown in Figure 3.
3
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
MAINTENANCE NEEDS
An optimum life cycle was determined for city streets. It was assumed that a
50-year cycle would be appropriate for most city streets if regular maintenance
activities were completed. The cycle of improvements along with current year
costs for the improvements is presented in Table 1. This table presents the
costs for streets 42 feet wide or less and for those over 42 feet wide. The
annual maintenance cost includes the following major activities:
1. Pavement maintenance and repair
2. Roadside and drainage work
3. Snow and ice control
4. Traffic services
5. Street sweeping
For years beyond year 1, annual maintenance costs were also included for the
new streets added each year.
Tables 2 and 3 along with Figures 1 and 2 present the factored survey data that
fed the capital maintenance cost determination. The data is presented for cities
5,000 and over and under 5,000. The miles in each interval is derived from the
survey information which was factored to represent the total city street mileage
of 15,959 miles.
The street miles in the interval constructed prior to 1955 received special
attention. It was felt that this group would incur annual maintenance cost per
mile at half the amount applied to the other intervals as these streets were
predominantly low volume.
Needs Summary
Cities Cities
Over 5,000 Under 5,000 Total
• First year needs (million) $162.4 $29.2 $191.6
• 20-year needs (billion) $3.11 $0.60 $3.71
4
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
TABLE 1
OPTIMUM STREET IMPROVEMENT CYCLE (Based on 50-Year Life)
UNIT COSTS PER MILE OF STREET
Streets Streets
Age of Street 42 feet or less Over 42 feet wide
1 year : Build Roadway $1 million (5,000& over) $1.5 million (5,000 &over)
$0.6 million (under 5,000) $0.9 million (under 5,000)
2-6 years : Annual Maintenance $5,000 per year(5,000&over) $7,500 per year(5,000 &over)
$4,000 per year(under 5,000) $6,500 per year(under 5,000)
7 years : Annual Maintenance 50% of regular rate 50% of regular rate
Seal Coat $25,000 $30,000
8-13 years : Annual Maintenance $5,000 per year(5,000 &over) $7,500 per year(5,000 & over)
$4,000 per year(under 5,000) $6,500 per year(under 5,000)
14 years : Annual Maintenance 50% of regular rate 50% of regular rate
Seal Coat $25,000 $30,000
15-19 years : Annual Maintenance $5,000 per year(5,000 &over) $7,500 per year(5,000 &over)
$4,000 per year(under 5,000) $6,500 per year(under 5,000)
20 years : Annual Maintenance 50% of regular rate 50% of regular rate
Overlay $150,000(5,000 &over) $200,000 (5,000 &over)
$100,000 (under 5,000) $130,000 (under 5,000)
21-26 years : Annual Maintenance $5,000 per year(5,000 &over) $7,500 per year(5,000 &over)
$4,000 per year(under 5,000) $6,500 per year(under 5,000)
27 years : Annual Maintenance 50% of regular rate 50% of regular rate
Seal Coat $25,000 $30,000
28-34 years Annual Maintenance $5,000 per year(5,000 & over) $7,500 per year(5,000 & over)
$4,000 per year(under 5,000) $6,500 per year(under 5,000)
35 years : Annual Maintenance 50% of regular rate 50% of regular rate
Mill and Overlay $250,000 (5,000 & over) $300,000 (5,000 & over)
$150,000 (under 5,000) $180,000 (under 5,000)
36-41 years : Annual Maintenance $5,000 per year(5,000& over) $7,500 per year(5,000 & over)
$4,000 per year(under 5,000) $6,500 per year(under 5,000)
42 years : Annual Maintenance 50% of regular rate 50% of regular rate
Seal Coat $25,000 $30,000
43-50 years : Annual Maintenance $5,000 per year(5,000 & over) $7,500 per year(5,000 &over)
$4,000 per year(under 5,000) $6,500 per year(under 5,000)
51 years : Annual Maintenance 50% of regular rate 50% of regular rate
Reconstruct $1 million (5,000& over) $1.5 million (5,000 & over)
$0.6 million (under 5,000) $0.9 million (under 5,000)
Note: All costs in 1995 dollars.
5
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
TABLE 2
CITIES 5,000 AND OVER: AGE DISTRIBUTION OF STREETS
Years Roadway Built Miles % of Total
Before 1955 3,178 25.4%
1955-1960 444 3.5%
1961-1965 763 6.1%
1966-1970 1,835 14.7%
1971-1975 1,168 9.3%
1976-1980 1,513 12.1%
1981-1985 1,102 8.8%
1986-1990 1,310 10.5%
1991-1994 1,196 9.6%
Total 12,509 100.0%
TABLE 3
CITIES UNDER 5,000: AGE DISTRIBUTION OF STREETS
Years Roadway Built Miles % of Total
Before 1955 1,494 43.3%
1955-1960 177 5.1%
1961-1965 187 5.4%
1966-1970 273 7.9%
1971-1975 212 6.1%
1976-1980 271 7.9%
1981-1985 196 5.7%
1986-1990 247 7.2%
1991-1994 393 11.4%
Total 3,450 100.0%
Total Mileage 15,959
6
CEAM Needs Study
Figure 1
Age Distribution of Mileage
Cities Over 5000 Population
3500
3000 �.
I I
2500 — I
N 2000 -
-
1500
1000 _..
500 —.. ......._.II 111111
01
Before 1955 1961- 1971-1975 I 1991-1965 1991-1994
1955-60 1966-1970 19761990 1966-1990
Year
Figure 2
Age Distribution of Mileage
Cities Under 5000 Population
1600
1400 I..
1200
1000
— 800 1.
600 —-. _..._.........__... ..- ........... .
400 —..
200 —..
III
0 I 11Before 1955 1961-65 ! I 1971-1975 I I 1991-1995 1991-1994
1955-60 1966-1970 19761960 1986-1990
Year
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
RECONSTRUCTION NEEDS
The reconstruction needs were determined by applying unit costs for streets 42
feet wide and less and for streets over 42 feet wide to a percentage of the
streets built before 1955 and in 1955 or after. The reconstruction unit costs are
as follows (expressed in 1995 dollars):
Streets 42 feet Streets Over
Wide and Less 42 feet Wide
Cities 5,000 and over $1.0 million per mile $1.5 million per mile
Cities under 5,000 $0.6 million per mile $0.9 million per mile
These costs include the full range of activities associated with reconstruction
including all base and surface work, utilities and drainage. Engineering costs
are assumed part of this cost. No additional right-of-way is assumed necessary
for these reconstruction needs although some additional right-of-way may be
needed for some projects.
The needs were determined by assuming that the roadway life-cycle was
50 years. Based on this assumption, it is necessary to reconstruct 1/50th or 2
percent of the system each year. The survey data used to construct the
roadway age profiles did not provide detailed information on roadways built prior
to 1955 as records were generally not available in many cities. Therefore, the
needs methodology treated the very old roadways (built prior to 1955) and the
newer roadways (built after 1955) somewhat different. For streets constructed
after 1955, it was assumed that during each year, 2 percent of the total miles
would be reconstructed using the appropriate unit costs. Streets constructed
before 1955 were determined to represent a different class of needs. Many of
these streets are characterized by very low traffic volume and it was assumed
that only 1 percent of these streets would need to be reconstructed each year.
The 50 year life cycle, then, is assumed to be the average condition. Some
roadways will be able to go well beyond that figure because of low utilization
while others may need to be reconstructed much earlier.
Needs Summary
Cities Cities
Over 5.000 Under 5.000 Total
• First year needs (million) $248.4 $40.9 $289.3
• 20-year needs (billion) $ 5.0 $ 0.8 $ 5.8
8
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
NEW STREETS NEEDS
The needs for new streets were determined by reviewing the recent history of
city population and street mileage. The survey of cities provided information to
evaluate change in population, change in street mileage, and change in street
miles per 1,000 population since 1950 (Figure 3). It appeared that the city
population and number of miles of city streets have been experiencing straight-
line growth. However, the rate of growth in population is increasing faster than
the rate of growth in miles. This is verified by looking at Figure 3, the number of
city street miles per 1,000 population, which has grown steadily from about 1.8
miles per 1,000 people in 1950 to about 4.4 miles per 1,000 people in 1995. It
appears that the rate of growth may have peaked in 1980 and has slowed down
the 1980s and 1990s. Based on this information, the following was assumed for
determining new street needs:
Years 1996 -2000 : 150 miles per year
Years 2001 -2005 : 125 miles per year
Years 2006 - 2015 : 100 miles per year
This results in a total of 2,375 new street miles constructed over the next
20 years (about a 15 percent increase). This increase is in-line with the State
Demographer population projections for the state which indicates an increase at
less than 1 percent per year over the next 20 years. The same unit costs that
applied to reconstruction were applied to new roads.
Needs for new streets were allocated between MSA and other streets for cities
over 5,000 population, based on the current program which allows 20 percent of
the city street system to be eligible for the MSA system.
In part, the financing of many new streets associated with new development has
been handled locally through assessments to the land owners, developers and
builders.
Needs Summary
Cities Cities
Over 5.000 Under 5.000 Total
• First year needs (million) $128.7 $20.7 $149.4
• 20-year needs (billion) $2.04 $.33 $2.37
9
t
I
y
i
gi
a
1
in i
i
CD 1,C O
x
7 0 1 Y
a. \1 {
0 i -CO x
0
•
L d) x
��Om 06 -rn
a II
L � u
CO 111M a
\ Y
O \
u
L
\ 1
co
1 (l) \� 4
a
tt \ I O
�� i OO) r
m LO `t LO M LC) N LC) 1
ccn N CO N r- 1
en
i a�doad 000 6 Jed laaJ4g to sa��w
Cl'
Q a
co
0) M
d
z 2
L;
co 1x
Ira
0 10
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
BRIDGE NEEDS
The bridge needs were determined using the following information supplied by
Mn/DOT State Aid:
• The bridge reconstruction needs over the next 35 years in cities 5,000
population and over was estimated at $84.3 million for existing bridges. This
is based on the current needs methodology.
• The needs over the next 15 years for bridges not currently constructed but
planned in cities 5,000 population and over was estimated at $10.6 million.
This is based on the current needs methodology.
• The bridge reconstruction needs for the next 10 to 15 years in cities under
5,000 population (to replace 79 bridges) was estimated at $11.7 million. This
needs estimate assumes that over the next 20 years, there will continue to be
future deficient bridges identified that require reconstruction. The rate at
which future bridges become deficient is similar to the current rate.
Needs Summary
Cities Cities
Over 5,000 Under 5,000 Total
• First year needs (million) $ 3.1 $ 1.2 $ 4.3
• 20-year needs (million) $62.0 $24.0 $86.0
11
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
SAFETY AND CAPACITY NEEDS
Safety needs projects are designed to eliminate safety problems along streets,
reduce conflict areas and improve intersection controls. Safety needs were
determined by applying a factor of 5 percent to the annual maintenance needs.
This represents a proportion in line with current expenditures.
Capacity needs are those projects designed to eliminate congestion and
bottleneck problems by adding roadway capacity in the form of traffic and
parking lanes. It was assumed that all capacity expansion will take place on the
MSA system. Based on the current 20 year MSA needs, it is estimated that a
20 percent capacity expansion in terms of through traffic and parking lanes is
necessary. This yields an annual increase of 1 percent per year in the total MSA
system (currently 2,500 miles). The cost of the annual capacity increase, which
amounts to 25 lane miles, is determined by applying a modified unit cost. The
full construction cost per mile of roadway in cities over 5,000 population for
roadways under 42 feet wide is $1.0 million per mile. For capacity expansion, it
was estimated that the unit cost would be $300,000 per mile as many of the most
expensive elements associated with initial construction would not be included for
the capacity expansion.
Needs Summary
Cities Cities
Over 5,000 Under 5,000 Total
• First year needs (million) $15.6 $1.5 $17.1
• 20-year needs (million) $305.0 $30.0 $335.0
CURRENT FUNDING
Expenditures for maintaining and constructing streets and highways in cities are
a large share of overall city expenditures according to information from the
Minnesota Office of the State Auditor.(1X2) In 1993, city expenditures totaled
$548.6 million for street maintenance, construction and additional capital outlay
for streets and highways. This amounts to about 22 percent of total city
expenditures. This includes all sources of revenues, federal, state and local.
(1) Revenues, Expenditures and Debt of Minnesota Cities Under 2,500 in Population, Minnesota Office of the State
Auditor,October 1994.
(2) Revenues, Expenditures and Debt of Minnesota Cities Over 2,500 in Population, Minnesota Office of the State
Auditor,November 1994.
12
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
It is estimated that federal funding available for city street projects has averaged
about $7 million per year. State funding through the MSA system currently totals
$81 million and is available only to cities with populations 5,000 and over.
Therefore, federal and state funding represents about 16 percent of total city
revenues needed for the city street system.
The current year needs are estimated to be $651.4 million. Therefore, current
expenditures of $548.6 million represent about 84 percent of the total need,
leaving in excess of$100 million of annual need currently unfunded.
SUMMARY OF NEEDS STUDY
This study has provided an opportunity to identify the current level of
transportation system needs for all cities in Minnesota. The methodology
developed for this study incorporates several key factors including:
• An optimum roadway life cycle of 50 years was developed for city streets.
• Within the life cycle, there are specific intervals required for major
maintenance activities such as seal coating and overlaying the surface.
• Annual per mile costs for street maintenance and construction activities are
different depending on the width of the street. These differences have been
accounted for by classifying streets as either less than or equal to 42 feet
wide or wider than 42 feet.
• Annual per mile costs for street maintenance and construction activities are
different depending on size of the city. These differences have been
accounted for by classifying cities as either under 5,000 population or 5,000
and over population.
• Annual reconstruction needs should be 2 percent of the total street miles
each year in order to meet the 50 year life cycle.
• Each year, new local streets are built. However, the rate of growth
throughout the state has begun to slow and is expected to continue to slow
down over the next 20 years. The initial construction cost plus the annual
maintenance costs are included in the overall needs.
• City street needs for bridge replacement and safety improvements were
independently accounted for in the study.
13
•
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
Table 4 presents a summary of the current year needs and the sum over the
next 20 years.
Key findings of the study include:
1. Almost 30 percent of the city streets in the state were built before 1955.
In cities under 5,000 population, 43 percent of their streets were built
before 1955.
2. Cities have not been able to keep pace with the 50 year life cycle
reconstruction needs given the age profile of streets in the state.
3. Not all cities have the same level of historical information regarding their
city street system, nor is there wide-spread use of automated pavement
management systems. This will change over the next few years because
of federal requirements for management systems.
4. The total street system needs of cities throughout the state are estimated
at $652 million in the current year and at $12.28 billion over the next
20 years. This corresponds well to the 20 year estimated needs for all
city streets of$11.6 billion by the Transportation Study Board in 1991.
5. The needs in cities under 5,000 population total about $94 million the first
year and $1.8 billion over 20 years. Currently, projects in these areas are
funded almost entirely with local revenues.
6. The total needs in cities 5,000 population and over total about
$558 million the first year and about $10.48 billion over 20 years. Of the
total, roughly 20 percent of the needs will be on the Municipal State Aid
(MSA) system.
7. The annual needs for simple maintenance of the system (includes all
forms of on-going maintenance) amounts to $192 million. Most of these
needs are currently being met through a combination of local and state
funds.
8. The annual reconstruction needs are almost $290 million and in 20 years
will total $5.8 billion. These are based on the 50 year life cycle approach.
This is the activity which does not currently have a solid funding base.
Reconstruction of existing non-MSA streets has historically been funded
largely through assessments to landowners. It is becoming increasingly
difficult to meet the court test of benefits reflected by increased value of
14
CITY STREETS AND HIGHWAYS NEEDS STUDY 3/29/95
assessed property for reconstruction projects. The general property tax
is, by default, becoming the only funding source for many reconstruction
projects.
9. New streets are continually added to the system as cities grow. There
were about 1.8 miles of city streets per 1,000 people in 1950. This grew
to 4.4 miles per 1,000 people by 1990. The rate of growth, however,
appears to have leveled off and is projected to remain so over the next 20
years. Still, almost 2,400 new miles of city streets will be needed over the
next 20 years.
10. In many instances, the cost of initially constructing new streets is funded
locally through assessments to land owners, developers and builders.
11. The needs for bridge reconstruction, safety improvements and capacity
expansion are relatively small compared to the highway maintenance and
construction needs. Over the next 20 years, they amount to almost
$400 million or about 3 percent of the total needs.
12. The current year funding level for MSA is about $81 million. The
estimated needs for MSA under this study, including the needs for new
streets which are generally funded locally, are about $118 million.
Therefore, the current level of MSA funding is capable of meeting about
69 percent of the current needs.
13. Federal funding available for city street projects has averaged about
$7 million per year in recent years. This covers a relatively small share of
total city needs (only about 1 percent).
14. Total city expenditures for maintaining and constructing streets and
highways in 1993 was $548.6 million according to Minnesota Office of
State Auditor. State and federal funds available for city street projects
total about $81 million. This represents about 16 percent of total city
revenues for street projects.
15. Current expenditures, $548.6 million per year, are meeting about
84 percent of the total city street needs ($651.7 million). However, the
current annual shortfall is estimated to be about $100 million. This
shortfall occurs primarily in the area of reconstructing existing streets.
16. The life cycle method appears to be a rational and reasonable means of
determining needs and should be evaluated further for possible use in
allocating State Aid funding.
15
•
In
0
0
N
col
cO CO er M '- h r- CO 1,- CO cc) CO
f-- l� c'e) Co c+) N
o 0co Y) o c'OU) N0Nn-
N (�pp
I- 44 44 414 4444 K 44 4444 44 40) 69
I I
j
i CA N- 0Le) U) co ,_i 0) N- C) 0 co
a OiCoC) cjcp C a) T4* O) COu[) N N
•C NO) 0 .c NN) , 0• co
` ci
0 4>444444i4 L 4'`444 6464 44
o
0 0
c ca I
1 O co
O O I
aa)) o
U U) 1 r- r- Co e- c0 U Co M vt CO N .-- N
fQ N 0 c0) O O) ( Nca)) Oe- CO N
I V. O r- (NI
V
, Cr) WrN 464048EA444444444 oa) .. M 44 44
E
I E (f) U'
I a) ow
�
co W CO
t z
0) 0 I 0)
, o N o
Oo H O
0 ).. x 0 A
s ui LU U) m
>- r , 1.. NO) N- NUA c) Ui V Z N CO O 2.' O
0 no, V 0) 001- 1- c+) ° a/ � LI) C 4) 00 CO c6 _
W H 4N46�4dN44443 v N 40 6946469 4fl 10 8
in c LI) c
CDco as 0 a)
UF.• a) c
W •• C.) 1- ^ U
W (0 c m (0)
� �
Z C , 1, a) C j Va)
U Nc a) c
>- _ N w _ ..+
a)
d m d
I C : a) a) C y H
(9
i
H
is)
c_ v CD W v CD
c v
Q m .2v a 2 a) �;n c QM
N vow ca c a)CO
W = c N - to b5 c N u)
W d N a) cUa) co I a) cU) a) >4
Q' C 0 d Ti ..- v U) C o a)j cc i.N...
F- W tot 0 3 � w .. 0 3va ..
CO a) a) c as o a) a) c co 0
U m W '' � � Z0 CO I— W I 2C[ ZmfA F-
4Z W o W o
U I- Z , _ _ , Z Z Z
16
•
Mileages from survey Mileage for reconstruction
Unfactored Factored All miles Reconst
Before 1955 ;42 feet orlees 69.00 69 Pre1955 42'or less 69 0.69
1955.to'1960 42 feetor lees " 0.00 0 Pre`1955 greater than 42' 0 0
1961 in 1965 42 feetorlees " 0.00 • • 0•
1966 to-.1970.42 feet or lees 0.00; 0 1955 or later,42'or less • 17:8 "0.356
1971 to 1975,.42feetor.fees. 290, . ,`,._ 291955criater;,greatertten42' 97....,x' .0194
19761o1980 "42feet or lees - 5.00 5
19811°1985.42 feet or lees 2200 '' ' •;2 Total 96.5 1.24
1986.10'1590".42 feet:or lees5.60 • 5.6
199110'1994 42 feet orlees" _' X2.30 , :2.3 Cost Calculations
Before 1955 ;beater 7han-42-feet •0.
1955 to1960- •Than:4, • 0 Pre 1955 maintenance $170,775
196110'19 G eater"Than 42f'eet 0 Post 1955 maintenance $323.150
1966101970"-GreaterThan 42 feet 4.70 `' : 8.7.Safety $24,696
19711°1975 er;Then"42feet 000 Capacity expansion $55,950
1976101980 f reater-Tlhan42feet 112.00 -0°Bridges $13,705
1981-to 1985-:3reeter Than"42 feet 1.00 4: Reconstruction $1,135,400
198816'1990 "GreaterTan"42"feet 1 W . .11
1991101994-1reaterlhan42"feet 1?iltf 0 Total : • $1,723,676
MSAloliles• " •-011932642487 - 18.
M4es•42 oriels Greetert n 42feet
M :Less rcnstmiles Ur costs'..Costs Less'rcnst era ik casts Codes
1955 0 0 500030,
0 0 X00 $0 0:`� 7,500
1956 X
1957 • 0 0 ,•�
E
1958 0 0• 5000 50 0 r 87 00 $0
•
1959. 0 0 50IX3 -- • :47-A0G, $0
1960" 0
1961 : fJ 0 5000 $0 13.; ,� 17,500 "r
��'• '�
1962 0 0 500E)
1964 0 0 �i000 $0 00 X 1.2
1965
1966 0 0 "5000 174; 17 2 7,5D0 $12,
1967 " 0 0 :SOU $0 17+1 11152 00
1968 ,: :0
1989" 174 7A52 11, 00 1
• 0 :.; 0 5000 $tt
1970 - 0 0
1971 0.58 0.5684 5000 $2,842 0 1;►
1972 ,058 0.5684 5000 2,842 ft 7
1973.< 058.._" 0.5684
1974 0.58 0.56842 '`' '5000 0 -0 437,500 0;:
1975 0.580.5684 : 152500: ".$86,681
1976 .: . : 1 13.98, ,.5000 $4900 T $7,
1977 "1 ._ ., X0.98_ 5400 .. "$4, .. O ,500 1.. .
1978 1 .. • :9.98 9910' $4900 .." 0' � 0 X7,500
1979 1 • :"0.98 I" . 5000 $4,900 : •
1980 ,1" '9.98. 5 "$4,900. 0 47;:500
•
1981 "2414 :0.392 ; :27250 $10,682 • 0 • 131 & .
1982 0.4- 9.392 31,960 #1:2 0 $700 41;.470
1983 0.4 17.392 :.. •:5 "41;969:: ' ' •92: 0.196 $7,500 470.
1984 • :0:4 s ",0.:392 '5000 11,960 .-:0.2 .196 $7,500 ,470
1985 04 -" 0392 5000 _ --X1,960 02 .0190 17, _�
1986 , 1.12 _ 1.0876.. • 5000 ''15;488 • 1J 87,500 0
1987 1.12 1. " ` . 5000 s, 8 aD 77,500 $0
1988 1.12 1.0976. ' : 27250 :129,910. :435,7801, $0
1989 1-12 1.0976 5000 $8;494.„,:":- 0: 0 $7,500 $0
1990 1.12 1.0976 5000 45488 33 ? • $7500
1991 0.46 0A508 loop 32,254
1992 •0.46 .` 0.4508 5000..... 42,254:%7, . 47,500
1993 X0.46: • :04508 �i00-o . " 2,254 0 X7,500 $0
1994 0.46 '0.4508 "5000. $2,254 : 0 •.;0 $7,500 $0
:$201,,949 " X121,202
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5q
Name: Ken Kuchera
Department: Fire
Date: October 14, 1995
Meeting Date: November 6, 1995
lir 1
Category: Consent
Subject: Approve Trade In of Self Contained Breathing Apparatus
Explanation: Requesting Council approval to trade in six Scott
Aviation Self Contained Breathing Apparatus
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo - Ken Kuchera
Referred To: (Name) Department
Karen Finstuen Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Ken Kuchera Fire
Signature
MEMO TO : WAYNE HENNEKE , FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT : TRADE- IN OF SELF CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS
DATE : OCTOBER 16 , 1995
Presently , the fire department is equipped with three ( 3) different •
models of Scott Aviation Self Contained Breathing Apparatus . The
oldest model dates back to the 1970s ' and utilizes a face piece
totally different from the two newer models . The goal of the fire
department for sometime was and still is to provide each individual
memberwith their own assigned properly fitted face piece. This will
serve several purposes , the face piece will be readily available as
a part of each members turnout gear and with the concerns of proper
disinfection for each members saftey we will illiminate our present
practice of wearing the first face piece readily available.
My request is to trade- in six ( 6 ) of our older model SCBAs ' and com-
bind the trade- in allowance with our approved funding for 1995. I
have negotiated with our supplier what I believe is a fair and adequ-
ate allowance of $600 per unit. The other option is to advertize and
sell the units . This presents several expenditures to accomplish .
The units will have to be flow tested for libility reasons which will
cost $35 per unit. New approved kevlar straps and harness , new face
piece lense and air cylinder valve overhaul which will total $200 to
complete. The supplier sells the used units for a maximum of $ 1000
•
which would include the required upgrades noted above . Most import-
antly , we cannot overlook the liability if the units would fail to
preform under emergency conditions .
The serial numbers of the units I am proposing to trade-in are :
1 . 39581
2 . 58-60- 1681
3 . 0890-0933
4 . 7770-0260
5 . 67200442
6. 67200495
The total trade- in will allow us to purchase two ( 2) newer style
units .
•
Ken Kuchera
Fire Chief
cc : FFD Board of Directors
•
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 5u
Name: Wayne Henneke z /
V-
Department: Finance VW- (Y11/"
Date: October 27, 1995 \�
Meeting Date: November 6, 1995
Category: Consent
Subject: Approve Joining Drug and Alcohol Testing Consortium
Explanation:
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo - Wayne Henneke
Referred To: (Name) Department
Department Heads
WetytUt tgle44442--
Signature
Memo to: Mayor&Council
Date November 1, 1995
Re Drug&Alcohol Testing
Recommendation
It is recommended to join the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association and their Drug and Alcohol
Testing Consortium.
Background
Effective January 1, 1996 all municipalities which employ commercial driver's license holders must
comply with the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR,Part 382 which requires drug and alcohol
testing. The Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association which traditionally works with municipal
electric and gas utilities has opened its membership to cities that operate water utilities. By being a
member,it opens the door for the City to become a member of the Drug and Alcohol Testing
Consortium.
The Consortium has developed a Substance Abuse Prevention Program to assist member employers in
meeting these federal requirements. As a consortium participant,the City can take advantage of
group prices for laboratory,Medical Review Officer,and testing services;enjoy benefits of central
record keeping and billing services and pool employees for the purpose of random testing. The
Consortium will give notice of required random alcohol testing. Supervisors will be trained regarding
"reasonable suspicion"as required by the law at a cost of$45 each person.
The cost involved in being a member of the consortium are:
* $50.00 one time fee to join
* Annual association dues of$300
* Random drug testing fee of$15 per driver per year.
* Price for pre-employment,post accident,reasonable suspicion,return to
duty or follow-up drug tests at$25 apiece.
* Collection site charges will be handled locally. They range from$10 to
$20.
* Random testing alcohol kits are$5 each
If the City does not join the consortium we are still required to perform the same functions in-house as
the consortium provides. I believe the administration of this requirement can better be and more cost
effective provided through the consortium than in-house.
Wayn- E.Henneke
Finance Director
c.c. Karen Finstuen,Acting City Administrator
Tom Kaldunski,Public Works Director
Jim Bell,Director of Parks&Recreation
Dan Siebenaler,Police Chief
Ken Kuchera,Fire Chief
file
•
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. ='` 5;f(._:__
Name: Charlie Tookerpio J0-00;Ayk
Department: Administration ,
PfkiLD
Date: September 19, 1995 SH (r-'1
Meeting Date:
Category: Consent (RW6-1-4-
Subje(A:
Set Public Hearing for 11/6/95 at 7: 30 P.M. - Cnnsi_dPr Petitions
for Annexation
Explanation: Several property owners in Empire Township
have petitioned for annexation. Now that the discussions with the
Township have ended, the City should consider these annexations_
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo/Petitions - Charlie Tooker
Note: A list of adjoining property owners will be prepared and notices
mailed prior to the public hearing.
Referred To: (Name) Department
Karen Finstuen Administration
Charles Tooker Administration
/ /
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ANNEXATION PETITIONS
DATE: SEPTEMBER 25, 1995
Genstar Land Company and Sprute-Severson-Oliver have both petitioned for annexation
to the City and are anxious to proceed. The Sprute-Severson-Oliver's have their
property for sale and believe that annexation will eliminate some confusion with
potential buyers if the entire property is within Farmington. They intend to revise
this petition prior to the Council meeting in order to reduce the land area in the
initial request to something less than sixty acres.
Genstar Land Company has approximately one section of land that they wish to develop.
They, too, want to settle potential questions about local jurisdiction. Their
petition was prepared under the less than 60 acre provision of Minnesota Statute with
the understanding that eventually the entire property will be in Farmington.
If the Council decides to proceed with hearings, the first regular meeting date that
can be established for that purpose is November 6, 1995 based upon the thirty day
written notice requirement. Provided that a hearing is set on October 2nd, the staff
can notify the Township and the landowners by October 6th.
In addition to the petitions that have already been filed, both Councilmember Ristow
and a real estate broker representing a single lot owner in the same area have
indicated that they will be petitioning for annexation this week. Both sites are in
an area completely surrounded by the City and may, therefore, be included within one
action, which eliminates the "island" of Township within the City. In the
alternative, the City Council can consider annexing separate but abutting properties.
Either way, a public hearing is required.
diadio
Charles Tooker
City Planner
cc: Development Committee
CITY OF FARMINGTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will beheld by the City Council
of the City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota on
the 6th day of November , 19 9 5 , at 7 : 30 (PM) XEji
in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, Minnesota for the
purpose of: considering the annexation petitions of property owned
Pte, 13a t,�,t� �v q c�-►--�
by Genstar Land Company, Sprute-Severson-Oliver, Herman Olson and
Gerald Ristow from Empire Township to the City of Farmington. All
petitions are under the less than 60 acre rule and are located in
Sections 19 , 29 and 32, respectively, Township 114, Range 19.
All persons desiring to be heard, in person or in writing, will be heard at this time.
City Administrator
Submitted to the Farmington Independent this 3rd day of October
19 95 for publication 1 time(s), the last of which being no later than the 5th
day of October , 19 95 .
cc: Dakota County Tribune
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION BY
45014N 6). O L s o4V , PROPERTY OWNER(s)
FOR ANNEXATION OF LAND TO THE CITY OF FARMINGTON
PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES NO. 414.01 ET. SEQ.
TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
Copies to: Minnesota Municipal Board Dakota County Board of Commissioners
165 Metro Square 1590 West Highway 55
St. Paul, MN 55101 Hastings, MN 55033
TOWN BOARD OF EM P/Rg TOWNSHIP
By signature hereunder, petitioner(s) affirm that he/she (they) is (are) :
JL the sole property owner(s) of the area proposed for annexation; or
all of the property owners of the area proposed for annexation; or
a majority of the property owners of the area proposed for annexation.
It is hereby requested that the City of Farmington annex the property herein described and now located
in the Town of , Dakota County, Minnesota: (Provide the legal description of the
property, parcels of property of area proposed for annexation; provide attachments containing the legal
description if it is too long for inclusion in this space.
S 32 t i i 4 R t a '7p' OE 5 113' 1sa
•
THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION:
(Note: The size of the property will determine the manner and timing of the
process for considering this Petition.)
yLess than 40 acres More than 40 acres but less than 60 acres
Less than 200 acres More than 200 acres
AS TO THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION, ANNEXATION IS SOUGHT BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS:
1. Owned by the City of Farmington
2. Completely surrounded by land within the Farmington City limits.
3. X Abutting the City of Farmington on the® S W E (circle one) boundary
4. Not now served by public sewer facilities and public sewer facilities are not otherwise
available.
5. After August 1,1 995, it has been approved by preliminary or final plat for residential
development lots averaging 21,780 square feet or less in area and is land within two miles of
the boundary of the City of Farmington (applicable only if all property owners join the
Petition) .
6. Not abutting the City of Farmington, but is within an existing orderly annexation area and
all property owners join in the Petition.
7. 40 acres in size or less and at least sixty percent (60%) of the property abuts the City of
Farmington.
8. The property is not located within an area presently under consideration by the City of
Farmington or the Municipal Board for a boundary adjustment.
Note: Before your property can be annexed, Minnesota Law requires that a public hearing be held
preceded by at least 30 days written notice by certified m.ail to the Town or Towns in which the
property is located and to all landowners within and contiguous to the area proposed for annexation.
The costs incurred by the City in identifyiz:g the persons to whom this notice is to be mailed and the
mailing list itself will be charged to the petitioners and must be paid before the mailing goes out.
DATED: / /c=2 ' , 19 9
SIGNATURE(s) OF PETITIONER(s)
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION BY •
Frederick A. Severson
Charlotte S. Oliver
Katharine S SPvorGnn , PROPERTY OWNER(s)
FOR ANNEXATION OF LAND TO THE CITY OF FARMINGTON
PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES NO. 414.01 ET. SEQ.
TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
Copies to: Minnesota Municipal Board Dakota County Board of Commissioners
165 Metro Square 1530 West Highway 55
St. Paul, MN 55101 Hastings, 2.01 55033
j'rEmpe �Ni1�i�..aC _ -- _ - -.. -- - ..�.►aa v..v.p�y�a�ye
3371 197th Street West
Farmington, MN 55024
By signature hereunder, petitioner(s) affirm that he/she (they) is (are) : •
x the sole property owner(s) of the area proposed for annexation; or
all of the property owners of the area proposed for annexation; or
i •
a majority of the property owners of the area proposed for annexation.
It is hereby requested thatsthe City of Farmington annex the property herein described and now located
in the Town:of _Empire c :, Dakota County,_Minnesota: (Provide the .legal description of the
property, parcels of property of area proposed for annexation; provide attachments containing the legal
description if it is too long for inclusion in this space.
12-02900-010-51 - North 662' of West 1077' of SW ' of SW k of Section 29, Township 114, Range 19 (16.5 acres)
12-02900-011-50 - North k of SW k except the West 100' of East 133' of S la thereof and except West
150' of East 183' of N k thereof, subject to rods of Section 29, Township 114, Range 19
(75.20 acres)
THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION:
(Note: The size of the property will determine the manner and timing of the
process for considering this Petition.)
Less than 40 .acres More than 40 acres but less than 60 acres
X Less than 200 acres More than 200 acres
AS TO THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION, ANNEXATION IS SOUGHT BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS:
1. Owned by the City.of_Farnington _
2. Completely-surzounded by land within the Farmington City limits.-. -
3. X Abutting the City of Farmington on the N S W E (circle one) boundary
4. Not now served by public sewer facilities and public sewer facilities are not otherwise
available.
5. After August 1,1 995, it has been approved by preliminary or final plat for residential
development lots averaging 21,780 square feet or less in area and is land within two miles of
the boundary of the City of Farmington (applicable only if all property owners join the
Petition) .
6. Not abutting the City of Farmington, b'= is within an existing orderly annexation area and
all property owners join in the Petition.
7. 40 acres in size or less and at least sixty percent (604) of the property abuts the City of
Farmington.
8. The property is not located within an area presently under consideration by the City of
Farmington or the Municipal Board for a boundary adjustment.
Note: Before your property can be annexed, Minnesota Law requires that a public hearing be held
preceded by at least 3o days written notice by certified mail to the Town or Towns in which the
property is located and to all landowners within and contiguous to the area proposed &r annexation.
The costs incurred by the City in identifying the persons to whom this notice is to be mailed and the
mailing list itself will be charged to the petitioners and must be paid before the mailing goes out.
DATED: 7/51_ , 19?
/// SIGNATUR3(s) 0? PETITIONER(s)
12"f./C-ifiav
11"./
a./7„...,e f ,
.
•
•
IN THE MATTER OF THE PJ11T1ON BY •
•
Grace M. Seed, John C. Seed, and James M. Seed as
trustees of the marital trust created under that •
certain agreement dated March 23, 1979, as
amended, with Fred K. Seed as donor. , Property Owner(s)
FOR ANI‘;E.EATION OF LAN TO TEE CITY OF FARMINGTON
PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES §414.01 ET. SEQ,
TO: The City CciL^cl of the Cry ci Fawi tztor.; Minnesota;
•
COPIES TO: Minnesota MunicipBoard Dakota Cour-ty Board
16.5 Melo Square Building
St. Paul, Manes= 101 ;: zy 'ilinrescta
Town Hca:L of = .-rie Township
BY SIGNATURE R.L DER. P__ ::IO ER( -r_<.ii THAT
IS( -_ E);
yt-
Y the sole property cwner(s); or
CI the croperty:roperowners; Cr
a majority of the property, owners;
OF i AREA PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION.
z �D THA THECITYGTON ANNEX Tr.
IT IS %iy.R�Y RtQLrs�..... . OF F.�l�1P+' T..... .,..�, �.
PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED AND NOW LOCATED LN --- -CV.1 C•-
Ernoire Tovrtshic , DAKOTA COUNTY MIN_`ISOTA:
(Provide the legal desc^pdon of the property, Partes of property cf area proposed
- for annex .t cr; provide attac..ments containing the legal clesc:ipEca if it is we Ion;
for inclusion this space.)
(see attachment)
Petition for Annexation
(Page 2)
THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXTION:
(Note: The size of the property will determine the manner and timing of the process for
considering this Petition.)
Less than 40 acres.
X Less than 60 acres, but more than 40 acres.
Less than 200 acres.
More than 200 acres. •
AS TO THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION, ANNEXATION tS
SOUGHT BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS (CHECK AS APPROPRIATE):
1. _ Owned by the City of Farmington.
2 Completely surrounded by land within the Farmington City Limits.
3. X Abutting the City of Farmington on the N S W(E,(circle one) boundary;
now ,
4, Not served by public sewer facilities and public sewer facilities are no:
otherwise available;
5, , After August 1, 1995, it has been approved by preliminary or final plat fo:
residential development lots averaging 21,780 square feet or less in area and
is land within two miles of the boundary of the City of Farmington (applicabie
only if all property owners jcin the Petition).
6. Not abutting the City of Farmington, but is within an existing orderly
annexation area and all Property owners join in the Petition.
7. 40 acres in size or less and at least 60 percent of the property boundary abuts
the City of Farmington.
8. — The property is not located within an area presently under consideration by
the City of Farmington or the Municipal Beard for a boundary.adjustment.
71,7259.1
Petition for Annexation
(Page 3)
NOTE: BEFORE YOUR PROPERTY CAN BE ANNEXED, MINNESOTA LAW
REQUIRES THAT A PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD PRECEDED BY AT LEAST 30
DAYS WRri i EN NOTICE BY CE-RTIHt.D MAIL TO THE TOWN OR TOWNS IN
WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AND TO ALL LANDOWNERS WITHLN AND
CONTIGUOUS TO THE AREA PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION.
THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY IN IDENTIFYING THE PERSONS TO
WHOM THIS NOTICE IS TO BE MAILED AND THE MAILING ITSELF WILL BE
CHARGED TO TF1 PETITIONERS AND MUST BE PAID BEFORE THE MAILING
GOES OUT.
DATED:
Petitioner(s) N aine(s) (Please Print) Petiti• s Sign: _re
and Address(es):
Grace M. Seed
1235 Yale P1 #1702 ace M. Seed
Minneapolis MN 55403
=Br'
John C. Seed 41111 111141P
29 Fair Oaks do% C. Seed
St. Louis MO 63124
James M. Seed a-k -
The Astra Ventures, Inc. James M. Seed
One Citizens Plaza .#910
PLuvidsnce RI oZW-1-1,344
71O'i9 1
PROPOSED DESCRIPTION
That part of the Northwest Quarter and the Northeast Quarter of Section
19, Township 114, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, described as
follows:
Beginning et the southwest corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence
on an assumed bearing of South 89 degrees 59 minutes 19 seconds
East, along the south line of said Northwest Quarter and Northeast
Quarter, 3226. 50 feet to the intersection of the westerly line of
Soo Line Railroad; thence North 22 degrees 40 minutes 17 seconds
West, along said Westerly line, 466. 59 feet; thence South 89
degrees 59 minutes 19 seconds East 967.02 feet; thence North 00
degree 00 minute 41 seconds East 209.92 feet; thence South 89
degrees 59 minutes 19 seconds East 139. 00 feet; thence North 00
degree 00 minute 41 seconds East 98.33 feet; thence North 89
degrees 59 minutes 19 seconds West 4152.68 feet to the intersection
with the west line of said Northwest Quarter; thence south, along
said west line, to the point of beginning. Except the right cf way
of said Soo Line Railroad.
1/30/95
#10147
Ib1 ll
MO TM �..�
SEE.. .. . . .. PAGE 22 Jr r n ;
46 novo � cn: 2506.' FGer........... . .. .. . Nc,rd•e SquOre Lrd En rr , Hlberf ' Z1WU:3 :Dorw..rs'::: I' P c fjr Co. se J �i tj Sac
/-tirrner,shrp. J q
;3 ... . ... s.. ...v.aacr..: : '�L7 r 5o Mart • Lauer• 4�,o sem• 1
... ,ro:s'-• 'z.. .::P•RK.. to Moclel •Stone N C•. v. I
... ... .....
........•...
.. ... U/aterh
_ •:.:r .... .......... r. Ervrn J Co case _`�. i 4 c ^i•
a,ALICY: / ,1/SGB .
ern .ter;:. Rech�9e 3/ eaJry C <
U L'u
DO.,w,r3 / 2 III - -. ., Henry a. 9n 93 96. I aern.+e+aeeSi r. Re:aenr�
cotcca , 'U
.nr qE e
,.A N01 Z s' 248 44 n Y,1 ,, err„y(1()en. Brandt len, .� 2Bl GO d r lcf O�c
• _ Jr Jr. • up'Farb F•
• c.n• rror.: 0 t. - 7n/ct -Zi t'I 7, u t-1 zoo Q• 304 30 I Moue.'" •
Ar
, J :.i i/ariv,q I `I J ui o f l Q'• l7O7 sj'w J-- r--
NrlsHan»py:..
r trot tri "� Gilbert G. Frear,c.k
..� lua r •
scow Dale Eor/ oma'I en- a s` I ro Hae I's ' Sev
V 0 ••PQIK W grmoK b ;ester Itnler rr0/ -••79:J
9 I+ • I c.Ernrna.in. rJ,ri//Iatn er cr-
a >rses r / �� hen Bros
Y •y -::: tarns r .step c(/i//rr�+77::"
r • • .- .. 40 40 -io �r J Dwle sDal%rte fDdllene
a c
')••• 4.SJ Cou,rl !! 7.o0ras North 8er'Q
ry Ma Hard Jro NCdberO• /S0
E. • Pond onoa• and Cr ek v7 6 ,u Bera.Ccc
,Nc South .tore • Cco 0nnre
enom (4r).
e" N k Cs': $m,rh I (Lc) 7
• v A .u7 j 7el/eck es '� 12 e Joseph • 32o Robert • q �,i r,.
Morsoret /2.9 I Flenry %+ 1 Fraura b • "i
Group .t M Coyn - \�' l5 . . ••
N/h,tnetJ Snv 77e7 Tu re woo/ eo Noo,7,-c.,,,,,,,,e •s-<,I era nclrion _V ° BrQ!d " 1..
Land r ur • Rvrh t?O �3`k
qi-Meir P Crow..eraJ, 'ES, ;o c?a
LtOI Ebert c • Da/e ( �bArt �te/zert 1
Farine„A" Btrn,Ce
.rt,re woh/ / arrr5 �l ep ma.Cr AI
,60 •p r7 r erVY ✓ ao h - seed:reel •..
..7113 00- ... _90 I • N i7 •.
• ':!tonne, C.l`
t P ml Grace 19J oS Q'CennCr ps veal•
,.o n.r, o :(OV»rr- I T M.Seed.%r ,North et ;V,c
�teo est..IBL
o N/hr Mac •• .nd NIltW6/J r0. Inc
John R:.. , Su9..:: __ Gera,,'' 'tip G E. 1-1
LC:ur::
R Pcir/ ersh,P _ /�/ aeH al a`Ste/3 / C7E) Slel3el • P. e2 U1.
r - cer20
,1 " (dr0) ,err Eis. .o• � .L..7e ••;.....Ty I e Orchard. I �
__
Tit ' --// =-- I ¢--- / r; .-- 3-- -- ZRC R,Chcr_ w
—.
Uln/re•-
,rum '1�1 ,11,r)OtIfh,1,CMS'• /Nr/p,•„ f,.1.Lr! GCf'21CJ E .nrSvrd 6CGCt/ra I •2CbCr
:ry_ l !t•rrYnCe Mar /./ ••Nr'„e (i .i/••J•r,urcr , Sl'el.., ' Br'..rC' v <)ve
f Ca1tG'ha.
▪ liie..ey o •• Mary rt.t•OrA it y , (�, etoJ J 3ester -�--
_ rte. : .Devitt lt•/s✓•l 32C
0 o ^••,U,Cllt// .•;'••• J06,c 3G 79 0
P PA last :� '1`•
e Jri r i TJ y',; I \ 2iC..l !I 1 -
Pcluts $T$ ^�.a r •
--� 'varve ' Rau C
Ruth r -••,u 'O :lanrr•, i \.. r..a. \• rieR? \ \ 22007 Jester
.21?'
�•
Thomas rd 0 �e5/r, rk'„rh nl f.•,0 `->' ,�arPr7,�1 f')'nrec^R'IY. CB Suter., -
7B P• 40 1 1 j• .90 rm.lS r 5` t �. ''
,-p- ,Jen yr•n _- .'lr•/ere Grace M SAe T
RD Te K Ann ar Su8 ,,GY,a 4 cCI I !(,.0
• 0 s•'-- t,F7 • PPRc.v '4/ ;; l�lur,nsir P oC Z f•r :: a Jester- •
e. r '''t .
3^ e'•_' `o ny stens � wa rte(
••l,4 Donne,ly. .. {:• r4J rw • 64 ,.Tr• :••� —.-_-.1 I 9`. w Cr„yrr T� O :� J� .
iv,,,' `J \ IJ- .6•V /Z1t iw.,n r Robert 1 rlyd. 1L?LtindeG I•�-;a •
• o/e'; (Trac.- n1 rq+• Curn Steomnrer �"• . ir=;;ro7 i irw ) sr.w = • ,
Elaine �f t/er)M Seed, Tr ,,.,,npe,- � ` i j �ti�
Pi AC 4rs7
Donnell!' v. NOrd3e` ) `ro.vectt-cz (a•,r. 7.- -Z ,,,. /5•B -T % ... ..,77-1,_?__�� C
s.. Id...2 .•?..u,PcfS rVWCn7Cl P/,•� !JAW 1 Sue,•.IFo,b} VNtiL'2 +�
• ,,j73 I I , . 6i7 `�:'�1 /S2 +` y:7.•/ • ei1 ^ { Sud• iSe.� )� !!!
• coono. stw t, •-. I / _ Cui •... •.\ :\, ;,- °, Ic 3JIf/e/1 r j M 1I I.r c �l:' , -/ 0 .
Al
-7, 1„ r' iF` �•.tI^iT,l U M f 'a <- V I `ter- -` ' %,i •. ie ' •r �4• Q j
_....
�` Vernon I. .,3„r;,von1 ; 7t 1-T I v 1^`ff 4 1 './ 1 : E E . , •` /O''err A s3 •r•M
Tonei-re ”- u /39rs cc ;•: a r C. +� _ ewer?rC.a vas
' t7cnsen �, Ela ne . ,c,c C� f r . o �: 01 ,--:••••_ '` .SOC car,-...s.-
'., o r. .'� 3rr,r,t rv. I c_:. r. a ;- Inc. eo
•
v4.7 •u 1 3' _.(5�t 2 L v'� 4. ,;d ~rye' ya s • MCP t.:1,7. ,/.,
-- C T Jar S ou/e f ,j„� .rw ¢o er �-- Fred �v''cY _ ., G
f---,0 hi G f-srJerrS ,i0irn.5 tlekn w _ 1 I-�. I se.J3 7e,.eraon 1 70 " Zi-fie'Tore?
Corn.,e// 'lrrb0r , 01 Tr/ ` �� c a.,
49 Chris/Cr(lC 1 rSf.hr,/r/ ,�..n. �� onn [I
• I Edward D v}} 19707
', 7 • 4�.Iw F= -1'` g -- �' Mme! J.:.`�• kra! :1
1n.P� �. -.40 a /�9- ,..P tit 1 u t. C ° - �r aim B 74 ,1}'
n�ttu •rcd /S_ » q ! c� - IH',• ..- 7 7ror
HOVJ,n9 7, ,. r r�n.d .r N rthern -. ' • � M,ChG=/ ...-r
dernOrtl J• o I J S
• 49-- �,.(bbert i Eloabce/th t( l:qe J.es I Nolura/ I •• E,leen n+ j...._,:*.1c.-
t
4E /yrs •MvrnhTr I r.el:atr sT s Co eei T. 1. Lwnea.e35
/oee / T e0 A ®�'.'.; •On M..rov ,ruro,t7 4•'%,.
iL ,,,sloe
e P it • Sa . Ste/(a• ,/ LudGx�uf Or/omen.
r1 .,3• foc� } j l •• q�, ) •� 4 •• Law? }
E Na,nnter „Sievert A
,�: Tae r'bre9� EeZ: h'rnce natezo•Lawrence)/ ,r,airna
t ei�F i Dons dI �4r �' eoc.
LnEev�c 4 ,a 's-+ 4�,• 35 Mar9oret3 r r� .::.... •Acrvd T, find e ((�c�
y. -.0.74s• 3 '� 1 b•.•er JO/7n M Peterson a F RM NG-TO ► iFrnKO/CR
^7C. 'V d v •SR
a' R' �.r Devney rho v t e 3 rn"d .': ,. ' 4 ort
Nq�
'fib V ~ On • I Y 1 Senoo� nnr�:.
Y 141Z6 .1?
J [ r .L-r c w Dar • Bab
J /� A kip/hame0 . / 1 ' I/ hErMGtVi Tt 77 L ao
t ggir.FS, ' ?... .t
P
• 4 oG
>• John Al - J. I C ;r T' ....._-..._. .:� C —'
FS"•?lake y ' r lr♦ CV' erne W t e :::_ er,derso,+ -,„;..-,/,...,.._
y: > Lows H It/i///arn• 3 , ,
Grow *cholas 3 " ? eIIau7rC.se0
• 23 - t ;, gnyler. AJdrec/ ki FAR is` ,el
�. < l. Milt
rr/CG< ctn.rcz
ADJ9 J I u - Rcie/ nn t•w Y: 1� •?r...C`C,r
recce/mann r pr•'•G!+ V tTamea N r •' v '2JG 3}• 44 ,...7S C!' C
--w V-_ I .__ I.?.IBCd�rr,. ;x "I MarV K istEJ .,,.�� � � ,..,."2"_• S- w
�L�-i.i✓•T2) S ,SJ eJ . • s,.w. • ^ c M/��i .- rcve, • L. .
1•
V jl� ` cud- 3 4,„0,,,,,
c. •aY=S j
<1.c'cOert F '11 �Q o •'.9rrcu/- o,•,c,a 12 FJnpu= ",,,
t•:'ice, -i IFS ; A•P• �. , turn/ `./ '�4 ,p a -
=CI'C�e`L7 /�o,7�L7 a?�nde/mann _ ,! yid,Soc,e �,� s . [
Rize
� _ �._, •
i Geoele. 0. '- `u� LT. x. /?e c,rc1d� S)4 Bq rn
C r' / , crd -i , Wl+rSoel I ,1'O _ •IQJr I-i.." ra:un �I 2J07a
Donald = Cbe:. JC 1 C-Dories L Kl', is�y
i •..-- .i_ /,.r„_..n / r Hearne• .•i.•-. I. I .,
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION BY
• Gerald Rictow , PROPERTY OWNER(s)
FOR ANNEXATION OF LAND TO THE CITY OF FARMINGTON
PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES NO. 414.01 ET. SEQ.
TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
Copies to: Minnesota Municipal Board Dakota County Board of Commissioners
165 Metro Square 1590 West Highway 55
•
St. Paul, MN 55101 Hastings, MN 55033
TOWN BOARD OF Empire TOWNSHIP
By signature hereunder, petitioner(s) affirm that he/she (they) is (are) :
X the sole property owner(s) of the area proposed for annexation; or
all of the property owners of the area proposed for annexation; or
a majority of the property owners of the area proposed for annexation.
It is hereby requested that the City of Farmington annex the property herein described and now located
in the Town of Empire , Dakota County, Minnesota: (Provide the legal description of the
property, parcels of property of area proposed for annexation; provide attachments containing the legal
description if it is too long for inclusion in this space.
THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION:
(Note: The size of the property will determine the manner and timing of the
process for considering this Petition.)
• X Less than 40 acres More than 40 acres but less than 60 acres
Less than 200 acres More than 200 acres
AS TO THE PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION, ANNEXATION IS SOUGHT BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS:
1. Owned by the City of Farmington
2. Completely surrounded by land within the Farmington City limits.
3. X Abutting the City of Farmington on the tQ S E (circle one) boundary
4. X Not now served by public sewer facilities and public sewer facilities are not otherwise
available.
1
5. After August 1,1 995, it has been approved by preliminary or final plat for residential
development lots averaging 21,780 square feet or less in area and is land within two miles of
the boundary of the City of Farmington (applicable only if all property owners join the
Petition) .
6. Not abutting the City of Farmington, but is within an existing orderly annexation area and
, all property owners join in the Petition.
7. 40 acres in size or less and at least sixty percent (60t) of the property abuts the City of
Farmington.
8. The property is not located within an area presently under consideration by the City of
Farmington or the Municipal Board for a boundary adjustment.
Note: Before your property can be annexed, Minnesota Law requires that a public hearing be held
preceded by at least 30 days written notice by cer:ified mail to the Town or Towns in which the
property is located and to all landowners within and contiguous to the area proposed for annexation.
The costs incurred by the City in identifying the persons to whom this notice is to be mailed and the
mailing list itself will be charged to the petitioners and must be paid before the mailing goes out.
DATED: , 19 / c
SIGNATURE(s) OF PETITIONER(a)
dr4----
•
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 14a
Name: Ernie Darflinger
Department:
Date: November 3 , 1995
Meeting Date: November 6, 1995
Category: Add On
Subject: James Pluntz Conditional URFA
Explanation: Ernie Darflinger, representing James Plunt7 of
20226 Akin Road, will be present at the meeting to discuss
his client' s conditional use issue. •
Reference Material/Responsibilty
Referred To: (Name) Department
Signature