HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.01.93 Council Packet AGENDA
COUNCIL MEETING
REGULAR
FEBRUARY 1, 1993
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVE AGENDA
3. CONSENT
a. Approve Minutes - 1/19/93 Regular; 1/21/93 Special; 1/23/93 Special
b. Amend Council By-Laws - Agenda
c. Purchase of Replacement Security Camera - Liquor Store
d. Purchase of Used "Back Up" Cash Register - Liquor Store
e. Personnel - Engineering
f. Set Public Hearing - Proposed Ordinance Amendment - Architectural Design/Standards
g. Dakota County Ordinance 113 — Individual Sewer Treatment Systems
h. Set Public Hearing - Proposed Ordinance Amendment - Zoning
i. Transportation Utility
j . Report on 1992 Sewer Bypassing
k. 1992 Sewage Flow Report
1. School/Conference Request - Administration
m. School/Conference Request - Parks and Recreation
n. Maintenance Agreement Contract - VISTA Telephone
o. Nelsen Hills Farm Development - Concerns
p. Orfield Legislation
q. Project 92-15 - ENRON Improvements - Contractor Payment
r. Approve Payment of the Bills
4. CITIZENS COMMENTS
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. 7:15 P.M. - Consider Rezoning Lots 8 & 9, Block 17 - Continued from January Meetings
6. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. Petition Requesting Annexation - Wausau
b. Proclamation - Volunteers of America Week
7. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
a. Relating to Hill Dee/Hillview Drainage
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Discuss Pine Knoll Sanitary Sewer Project
b. Set Special Meeting with. Pine Knoll Residents
c. Public Works Personnel
9. NEW BUSINESS
a. Appointments to Boards and Commissions
10. MISCELLANEOUS
a. Consider Assessment Deferral Policy
b. Solid Waste - General Discussion
c. Ratify Fire Chief Appointment
11. ADJOURN
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No.
Name: Charles Tooker J U r
�t�Y Cc
Department: Administration
Date: January 15, 1993
Meeting Date: February 1, 1993
Category: Consent
Subject: Set Public Hearing on Proposed Architectural Design and Materials
Ordinance
Explanation:
The Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the attached ordinance
after several discussions.
Reference Material/Responsibilty
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Karen Finstuen Administration
Charles Tooker Administration
d,Wk.
Signature
PRO P O S E D
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE
CHAPTER 5
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND MATERIALS
SECTION:
4-5-1: Elevations, Architectural Design, Exterior Facing
4-5-2: Usable Materials
4-5-3 : Alternate Materials
4-5-4: Pole Building
4-5-5: Residential Performance Standards
4-5-6: Zoning Codes
4-5-7: Appeals
4-5-1: Elevations, Architectural Design, Exterior Facing
(A) Building Permit: The application for a building permit, in addition
to other information required, shall include
exterior elevations of the proposed structure which will adequately and
accurately indicate the height, size, design and the appearance of all
elevations of the proposed building and description of the construction and
materials proposed to be used therein. Such information shall indicate
that the exterior architectural design, when erected, will not be so at
variance with, nor so similar to, the exterior architectural design of any
structure or structures already constructed, or in the course of
construction, within two (2 ) lots on each side, directly across from or
diagonally across from the same unit. The exterior architectural design of
a structure shall not be so at variance with the character of the
applicable zoning district established by the Zoning Code of the City as to
cause a substantial depreciation in the property values of said
neighborhood within said district or elsewhere, or adversely affect the
public health, safety or general welfare.
Individuals, builders, or groups of builders shall not construct a house
design which has front elevations substantially like any home or proposed
home where a building permit has been issued, located within two (2) lots
on each side, directly across from or diagonally across from the same unit.
No building permit shall be issued to houses inconsistent with this
requirement. The Building Official shall take into account the following
criteria when reviewing plans to determine substantially like housing.
A building permit will be issued so long as the applicant can prove to the
Building Official that no more than two (2) of the following five (5)
conditions are present in the application with respect to any existing
home, or proposed home, where a building permit has been issued, within two
(2) lots on each side, directly across from or diagonally across from the
same unit:
1. The roof style of the proposed structure is similar to the structure it
resembles .
2 . The roof pitch of the proposed structure is less than three (3) `
vertical units in twelve ( 12) from the structure it resembles.
3 . More than one-half ( 1/2 ) of the exterior surface materials of the
proposed structure are the same as the structure it resembles.
4. The relative location of an attached garage, porch, portico, breezeway,
gable or other major design feature attached to the proposed structure
is similar to the structure it resembles .
5. The relative location of entry doors, windows, shutters or chimneys in
the proposed construction is similar to the structure it resembles .
(B) Required Submittals: When required by the Building Official, the
permit applicant shall be required to submit exterior elevations of
the proposed structure, and photographs of the front exterior of
neighboring homes, in addition to all required materials for building
permit application. As an alternative to the submission of neighboring
home photographs, the applicant may fill out a form provided by the City
which stipulates the architectural character of existing housing. A list
of exterior finish materials and colors may also be required.
(C) Appeals Process : The Building Official will review proposed exterior
elevations as part of the permit review process. In
the event that an elevation is determined to be substantially like a
neighboring home, the permit will be denied. The applicant will have an
opportunity to revise front elevations to be compliant with this Code.
The applicant may appeal the decision of the Building Official within
thirty (30) days as follows :
1 . The applicant shall file with the City Administrator a notice of appeal
stating the specific grounds upon which the appeal is made. The City
Administrator shall attempt to resolve the appeal at this point.
2 . In the event that the issue is not resolved, the City Administrator
shall transmit the appeal to the Planning Commission for study and
review at its next regular meeting.
3. The Planning Commission shall make its decision within thirty (30)
days .
4 . A further appeal of the Planning Commission decision may be made to the
City Council. Applicant shall file with the City Administrator a
notice of appeal within thirty ( 30) days . The City Council shall
thereafter make its decision within thirty (30) days .
4-5-2: Usable Materials: No building permits shall be issued for any
structure for which a building permit is
required which contains exterior facing materials which rapidly deteriorate
or which, for any reason, are or quickly become unsightly. The following
are examples of such materials : concrete masonry units (unless decorative
block) , common clay brick, sand lime brick, concrete brick, unfinished
structural clay tile, sheet metal (either corrugated or plain) and exposed
unfinished concrete. Such materials, however, may be used in a special
arrangement or combination with other materials of a permanent nature with
good architectural design and appeal. The provisions of this Section 4-5-2
shall not apply to building permits issued for structures in Zoning
Districts A-1 or C-i .
4-5-3: Alternate Materials: In the event an owner, intending to apply for
a building permit, desires to use any of the
materials included under Section 4-5-2 above as exterior finish materials,
such owner may present to the Building Official a request for preliminary
approval for the use of such materials prior to the preparation of final
drawings and application required by other sections of this Chapter. Such
request for preliminary approval shall include such sketches and other
information as may be necessary to indicate accurately the use to be made
of such materials and the appearance of the exterior of such structure when
completed.
If such request for preliminary approval of materials is granted by the
City Planner and Building Official or the Council, as the case may be, the
sketch and other information shall be properly marked for identification by
the Building Official and be filed in his office and such data shall become
a part of the building permit application when filed.
4-5-4: Pole Building: A pole building shall be permitted in Zoning
Districts A-1 or C-1 and only in any other district
upon approval by the City Council. Said Council shall exercise its
discretion in determining whether or not a building of such type will be
compatible with the surrounding area. Such structures may be authorized by
the Council for use as warehouse, heavy equipment storage, or other uses
which would tend to be compatible with that type of structure and in a
location where it would not be offensive to other property owners or
persons within the City.
4-5-5: Residential Performance Standards:
(A) Uniform Building Code: All residential units shall meet applicable
requirements of the one and two family
dwelling code Cable Edition 1986, which has been adopted by reference by
the City of Farmington.
(B) Dwelling Unit Restrictions:
1 . No garage, tent, accessory building or motor home shall at any time be
used as living quarters, either temporarily or permanently.
\ < a. (9..L4 .c w„
2 . Basements and cellars may be used as living quarters or rooms as a
portion of the principal residential dwelling. Energy conserving
designs such as earth sheltered housing shall be exempt from this
provision.
3 . Tents, playhouses or similar structures may be used for play or
recreational purposes such as children camping out overnight.
4. The minimum dimension of any part of the basic dwelling shall be twenty
two feet (22 ' ) . This shall not be construed to prohibit smaller
individual room additions or to restrict architectural design
flexibility or integrity.
5 . All dwelling units shall be designed for placement on permanent
foundations complying with the Uniform Building Code.
(C) Accessory Buildings:
1 . Only one accessory building shall be permitted on each residential lot.
2 . The same or similar quality exterior building material shall be used in
the accessory and principal building. All accessory buildings shall
also be compatible with the principal building to the extent that the
exterior appearance of the accessory building is not at variance with
the principal building from an aesthetic and architectural standpoint.
3. Accessory buildings exceeding 120 square feet in floor area shall be
designed for placement on a permanent foundation complying with the
Uniform Building Code.
4. The height of an accessory building shall be measured from the mean
ground level to the uppermost point of the roof. Except as expressly
permitted by a conditional use permit, accessory buildings shall be
limited to twenty feet (20' ) in height.
4-5-6: Zoning Code: This Chapter shall be deemed supplementary to the
Zoning Code and the Construction Code of the City and
shall be enforced in harmony and in conjunction with each.
4-5-7 : Appeals: Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Building
Official regarding the use of certain materials or
regarding questions of architectural design shall be entitled to appeal the
Building Official' s decision to the Zoning Officer and, if still aggrieved,
he may appeal to the Board of Adjustment as outlined in Section 10-8-4 of
the City Code.
h.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council
of the City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota
on the 15th day of February , 1993 , at 7:15 (P.M.) (tX)
in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, 325 Oak Street, Farmington,
Minnesota for the purpose of: discussing the adoption of an
Architectural Design and Materials Ordinance.
All persons desiring to be heard, in person or inwriting, will be heard at this
time.
‘94‘74
Larry Thompson
City Administrator
Submitted to the Farmington Independent this 2nd day of February
19 93 for publication 1 time(s) , the last of which being no later than the
4th day of February , 19 93 •
cc: Dakota County Tribune
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
3/ •
Item No.
Name: Tom Kaldunski /
6/4 'n 1v
Department: Public Works �" G
�, t
Date: January 25, 1993
Meeting Date: February 1, 1993
Category: Consent
Subject: Resolution Supporting a Transportation Utility
Explanation: Supporting the passage of enabling legislation
to form transportation utilities.
Reference Material/Responsibilty Memo/Resolution - Tom Kaldunski
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
1:L,‘"Ll
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION UTILITY
DATE: JANUARY 27, 1993
Attached is a proposed resolution for the City Council to consider which is intended
to show the City's support for enabling legislation to create municipal transportation
utilities. If this legislation was passed, the City could consider establishing
this type of utility. It would be similar in nature to the storm water utility.
The main purpose of establishing a transportation utility is to provide funding
for street construction projects.
The Council supported this enabling legislation when the City Administrator brought
up legislative issues for the cities in Dakota County. I am recommending that the
Council adopt this resolution. I will forward it to the appropriate legislators
upon approval.
Tom Kaldunski
City Engineer
cc: file
Larry Thompson
Wayne Henneke
TJK
PROPOSED
RESOLUTION
SUPPORTING ENABLING LEGISLATION ALLOWING
MUNICIPALITIES TO ESTABLISH TRANSPORTATION UTILITIES
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City on
the 1st day of February, 1993 at 7:00 P.M. .
The following members were present:
The following members were absent:
Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution:
WHEREAS, streets under the jurisdiction of Minnesota cities comprise an integral
and necessary component of the overall State transportation system; and
WHEREAS, cities of Minnesota are experiencing large scale deterioration of their
local street systems; and
WHEREAS, funding provided from the State gasoline tax in the form of the Municipal
State Aid Street system is applicable to no more than 20 percent of any city's local
street system; and
WHEREAS, recent court rulings pertaining to special assessment laws have found
limited benefit accrues to affected properties when a deteriorated street is recon-
structed, resulting in a significant reduction in special assessment levies; and
WHEREAS, property taxes at the rates typically being levied do not take into con-
sideration the need to rehabilitate and/or reconstruct city streets.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Farmington, Minnesota, that:
1. Funding street reconstruction and rehabilitation on a user fee basis is consistent
with the State's user fee funding philosophy for sanitary sewer, storm sewer,
and water main facilities and other transportation improvements utilizing gasoline
taxes.
2. Funding provided by a transportation utility based on a user fee concept will
result in a stable, long term funding source to finance street reconstruction
and rehabilitation.
3. The City urges members of the House of Representatives and the Senate to support
and adopt legislation that will allow cities to establish transportation utilities
as a source of funding for the maintenance and improvement of the cities' local
street systems.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open
session on the 1st day of February, 1993.
I
AGENDA REQUEST FORM ...06 .
Item No.
Name: Tom Kaldunski 76,-2 /
Department: Public Works Ac_e_rike
7
Date: January 23, 1993
J
Meeting Date: February 1, 1993
llir
Category: Consent /
Subject: Report on 1992 Sewage Bypassing
Explanation: I will be presenting a report which outlines the impact
of the 9.25 inch rainfall of September as it relates to
sewage bypassing.
Reference Material/Responsibilty Report - Tom Kaldunski
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Glenn Cook Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik
illgelal
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
•
SUBJECT: 1992 BYPASSING REPORT
DATE: JANUARY 29, 1993
The 1992 Bypassing Report will be distributed at the Council meeting on Monday evening.
The report is for informational purposes only and no Council action is required.
.1;14,1(4,44(
Tom Kaldunski
City Engineeer
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 3k
Name: Tom Kaldunski
Department: Public Works
Date: January 23. 1993
Meeting Date: February 1, 1993
Category: Consent
Subject: 1992 Sewer Flow Report
Explanation:
•
Reference Material/Responsibilty MWCC Report - Tom Kaldunski
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Glenn Cook Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik
141/ 4(("1",
Signature
MEMO TO: LARRY THOMPSON
SUBJECT: 1992 SANITARY SEWAGE FLOWS
DATE: JANUARY 28, 1993
Attached you will find a copy of the City's "Survey of Sewer Use Data for 1992"
which is reported annually to the MWCC. The following table, based on MWCC flow
monitoring, indicates the flows from the main portion of the community.
Month MWCC Data * City Data *"
January 24.0 16.54
February 21.0 15.27
March 34.1 22.55
April 37.0 30.92
May 31.5 27.48
June 29.5 24.03
July 39.3 29.78
August 36.4 35.52
September 49.1 39.58
October 59.6 36.55
November 43.9 32.88
December 41.1 29.20
1992 Total 446.5 340.30
1991 Total 259.1
* - Data in million gallons.
It must be noted that the City's sewage flow has increased significantly (72%).
This increase is due to the effects of inflow/infiltration of clear water into the
system. In addition to this quantity, several adjustments are calculated by MWCC
to determine the final sewage flows attributable to the City as follows:
Sanitary Sewer District #1
(Dakota County Estates, Hill Dee/Hillview, Terra, Akin Park Estates, Fair Hills,
Silver Springs and Nelsen Hills Farm)
There are currently 790 connections in this sewer district. The MWCC estiamtes
the flow from this district utilizing the following formula:
1992 Flows = 790 units x 2.8 persons/unit x 95 gpd x 365 days/year = 76.7 mg
Akin Road Elementary - 90% of Water Use = 0.9 x 643,000 gal. = 0.56 mg
The total estimated flow in SSD #1 is 77.26 million gallons. This amount is added
to the total City flow shown above as measured by the MWCC.
The City has installed a flow meter in this District. The following table outlines
the City's measured flows:
1991 (mg) 1992 (mg)
January 6.92 9.34
February 4.95 9.33
March 4.91 9.33
April 6.82 9.03 . . _
May 4.92 8.64
June 6.61 9.34
July 4.40 10.08
August 5.37 9.61
September 2.82 9. 19
October 4.85 9.64
November 3.03 9.90
December 3.27 9.90
Total 58.87 113.29
Note that the City negotiated approximately $10,000 in reductions in its sewer bill
in 1991 based upon the City's flow monitoring. This area has also experienced a
significant increase due to inflow/infiltration in 1992 due to the major rainfalls
in July (4.5") and September (9.25") . The I/I for 1992 in SSD #1 is estimated at
36 million gallons, which translates into a potential treatment plant cost of $36,000.
Attached is a graph of the flow recording for SSD #1 following one of these events.
It appears to be directly related to sump pump discharges.
Empire Township (Edmar Addition)
There are currently 54 homes in this area that are served by a lift station that
discharges to the interceptor upstream of the MWCC meter station at TH 3. The flows
from this area are estimated as follows:
1992 Flow = 54 units x 2.8 persons/unit x 95 gpd x 365 days = 5.24 mg
Due to the similarity of this subdivision and the Henderson and Hunter neighborhoods
of Farmington, it is anticipated that this area experiences significant I/I also.
This is apparent when you review the differences between the MWCC's 1992 data and
the flows measured by the City at 5th and Linden Street, Pine Street/Middle School
and the Industrial Park meters. While this difference indicates a potential I/I
of up to 106.2 mg, a more realistic estimate could bemade by comparing Edmar to
the Hunter and/or Henderson lift station flows.
The City had pointed this out to the MWCC in 1991, requesting a time clock on the
Edmar lift station to document the I/I in the area. I do not know if this was pursued,
however, I am aware that the Township is considering an inspection/compliance certificate
ordinance relating to sump pumps and I/I.
In conclusion, the estimated 1992 sewage flow for the City of Farmington is:
MWCC Monitoring 446.50 mg
+ S.S.D. #1 77.26 mg ktCr
- Empire Township Flow [ 5.24] (Wei-‘1 4/1"
C---518.52 mg my,C` y
This should be compared to the 1991 total of 322.6 mg - a EI increase.
The major reason for this increase is the increased ground water levels that resulted
following the heavy rains in July and September. It is possible that the City could
see a major increase in its MWCC treatment costs as a result. At a cost of $1/1000 gal,
it potentially could be as high as $196,000. This should be reviewed in great detail
to determine the impact to the City. The City experienced a similar situation in
1986.
The data does suggest that the City's rehabilitation programs and storm sewer improvements
have helped. 1986 estimates placed I/I at 250 mg and costs of approximately $250,000.
While the rehab program has been successful, one major source of I/I has not been
reduced; in fact, the problems with sump pumps appears to have spread to the Dakota
County Estates neighborhood.
It is my recommendation that the City take steps to aggressively reduce the impact
of the sump pump discharges. Discharging- of sump pumps into the sanitary sewer
is illegal by code. The City is in the process of preparing a facilities plan to
combat this problem. It is anticipated that the City will need some ordinances
to aggressively remove sump pump discharges from the sanitary sewer, an annual inspection
with compliance certification may be necessary as well as the installation of infra-
structure to handle the sump pump discharge (i.e. Southeast Area Storm Sewer, drain
tile behind curbs, etc.)
Preliminary estimates from the facilities plan indicate that a minority of homes
(±200) out of the total community of 2000+ homes present this problem. Because
of the magnitude of its impact on sewage flows, all residents in the City will be
affected. It is time for the City to aggressively eliminate the sump pump discharges
from the sanitary sewer system.
Thomas1:441‘14,
ldunski
City Engineer
cc: file
Mayor and Council
Development Committee
Street and Utility Crew
Glenn Cook - Bonestroo
Don Burgardt - Bonestroo
_1 . ,
N
— T Cr,
C Co
c
— =
sl°i"lk_ :T. h .
N
C \.
_ = O
O
i _
: i - N
O
0 4111a1 - _
_ y \
_ O
s-
Q.) W
c._.) r _ rn
G •- o
O ^ o
O - N
Li —
T N
r,
i O CSI
a
Cr) ,....
-C _ rn
CC C 1'- ' ,--• :: :C.D
-.. -- " 4 -
z
.- o
U
r 1 I I 1I I r I I 1 r I
N
N O 00 O d O O
C '-4 1 ) '-4 -
P 6 4....A...1 ) < I L.4 o m a
I _
N
- T c,
C)
c ca
lik _ _ . _ o
I
- ›, O
fi -c)
_ o
�O
ICI
ii-I 2 zCD m - U, \
I V O
I -•-• o
1- , j
C7 i ' _
Z I N
a
I -= N')� CD . - ``
- O h-
I
o
4 a N
I CU . -
CU - -N 7.1 C O
Cr) o • -
I i C•) - - O N
I
I (./) = > (-NJ
I z 1) - a Q)
- Q) \ z
cri
I) Li-= C O Z
Li- z -
I _ � p G'J
O
Q
V N
I z c -
= m - >' O �-
LCNI
I- 1_1-1 W • - O ~
- O O
VI i ....? -
> i i i i i i
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O cfl N
Lri N �t M r- N 00 4- O O
C '-+ ID I-1.4.c1o0
METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION
Mears Park Centre, 230 E. 5th Street
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
SURVEY OF SEWER USE DATA FOR 1992
GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Municipality City of Farmington
B. 1992 Estimated Population 6365
C. 1992 Estimated Sewered Population 5772
D. Total Length of Sewer System 27_7R lei 1 Pa
(Furnish Updated Sewer Map)
II. SANITARY SEWER USE INFORMATION BASED ON CONNECTIONS AND DWELLING UNITS
1991 - 1992
CONNECTIONS AS DWELLING REC * CONNECTIONS DWELLING REC *
OF 12/31/91 UNITS (estimated) UNITS
ON 12/31/92
A. Residential
1. Single Family
Dwellings 1562 1562 1650 1650
2. Multiple Family
Dwellings 387 387 388 388
3. Mobile Homes
4 4 4 4
S. Institutional
11 13
C. Commercial
160 163
D. Industrial 3 11
TOTAL: 2127 2229
* Residential Equivalent Connections
Survey of Sewer Use Data for 1992
Page Two
Municipality Farmington
E. Estimated 1992 sewage flow by class of user
1. Residential 324,424,640
2. Institutional 26,790,000
3 . Commercial 45,543,000
4 . Industrial 49,742,360
TOTAL 446.500.000
F. Estimated 1993 Sewer Connections
CONNECTIONS FOR COMMISSION USE
1. Residential* 88
2. Institutional 1
3 . Commercial 3
4 . Industrial 8
TOTAL 100
* Please indicate number of dwelling units 89
III. MUNICIPAL AND PRIVATE WATER USE INFORMATION
A. Number of connections to municipal water supply
CONNECTIONS CONNECTIONS
AS OF (estimated) ON
12/31/91 12/31/92
1. Residential* 1914 1921
2 . Institutional 11 13
3 . Commercial 164 165
4. Industrial 4 4
TOTAL 2011 2103
* Please indicate number of dwelling units 87
Survey of Sewer Use Data for 1992
Page Three
Municipality Farmington
B. Municipal Water Sold in 1992 T
FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH
OUARTER OUARTER OUARTER OUARTER TOTAL
1. Residential 40.37 159.55 37.47 47.89 285.28
2. Institutional 4.38 4.78 3.37 3.82 16.35
3 . Commercial 7.25 6.77 7.56 6.02 27.60
See attached report.
4 . Industrial Note: Marigold Foods has private water supply.
TOTAL FOR YEAR 52.70 171.10 48.40 57.73 271.62
5. Unit of Measurement million gallons
C. Total Municipal Water Pumped in 1992
First Quarter 52,700,000
Second Quarter 171,100,000
Third Quarter 48,400,000
Fourth Quarter 57.730.000
TOTAL 271,620,000
D. Provide number of sewer connections that are furnished with
flow from private water supplies and estimated flow for 1992 .
CONNECTIONS VOLUME (mq)
1. Residential 0 0
2 . Institutional 0 0
3 . Commercial 0 0
4 . Industrial 1 80,778,000 (Marigold)
Note: All sewer connections in Farmington are also connected to the City water
supply with the exception of Marigold Foods.
Survey of Sewer Use Data for 1992
Page Four
Municipality Farmington
IV. NUMBER AND TYPE OF SEWER CONNECTIONS WHICH FLOW UNMETERED TO -
ANOTHER COMMUNITY
A. Community to Apple Valley interceptor (SSD #1) "
Type 12/31/91 12/31/92
Residential 701 784
Commercial 7 7
Industrial 0 0
Community from Empire Township to Farmington (City expects heavy I/I from
Empire. Empire should be metered
Type 12/31/91 12/31/92 with time clock & lift
station calibration.)
Residential 53 54
Commercial 0 0
Industrial 0 0
Additional Communities - Castle Rock Township (Dak. Cty. Fairgrounds). Flow
is included in metered flow; 1-residential, 11-commercial, 0-industrial.
V. DATA ON ON-SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM
A. Does your community permit the installation of these facilities?
(Yes)
B. If these systems are permitted, please complete the attached
"On-Site Disposal System Survey" .
Survey Completed By:
Thomas J. Kaldunski
Name
Public Works Director/City Engineer
Title
612-463-7111
Phone Number
Please Return the Completed Survey To:
Mr. Don Bluhm, Municipal Services Manager
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
Mears Park Centre
- 230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101 (612) 229-2116
SURV. SEW
r
Marigold Foods, Inc.
15 4th Street
Farmington, MN 55024-1099
Bus: (612) 463-7093
Fax: (612) 463-3504 '
KEMP89. "It's the cows."
Russ Matthys
Assistant City Engineer
City of Farmington
325 Oak St.
Farmington, MN 55024
Dear Russ,
Enclosed is the information you requested on Marigold
Foods, Inc. monthly sewage and water quantities, for 1992 .
If you need any additional information or assistance,
feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Gene Cowles
Production Supervisor
Marigold Foods, Inc.
To Sanitary Sewer ( Gals) Water Usage (Gals)
Jan. 4,748, 800 6, 930,000
Feb. 4, 678,600 5,850,000
Mar. 4,582,400 7,836,000
Apr. 4, 311,900 7,266, 000
May 3, 600,200 6,984, 000
June 3,774, 300 5,670, 000
July 3,876,400 5,220, 000
Aug. 3,497,000 6, 660, 000
Sept. 4 , 646,160 7,410, 000
Oct. 3, 975,100 7,380,000
Nov. 3, 993,500 7,596, 000
Dec. 4 , 058, 000 5, 976, 000
Total 49,742, 360 Gals 80,778, 000 Gals
METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION
MEARS PARK CENTRE, 230 EAST FIFTH STREET
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
1992 Survey of On-Site Disposal Systems
I. General Information
A. Municipality: Farmington
B. 1992 Estimated Population: 6365
C. 1992 Estimated Population Utilizing On"Site Disposal
Systems: '593
II. Inventory of On-Site Disposal Systems
A. Number of Systems as of December 31, 1991: 175
B. Number of Systems as of December 31, 1992: 176
C. Any Systems within the Municipalities Serving
Institutions, Commercial Establishments and/or
Industries: 0
If so, please list Name, Location, Size and type of On-
Site System:
III. On-Site System Problems
A. Number of Systems Inspected During 1992: 1
1. New Systems: 1
2. Existing Systems: 0
B. Number of Systems with knc wn problems*:
1. Most Common Problem:
2. Other Problems:
C. Number of Systems Replaced/Rehabilitated in 1992: 1
IV. Septacte Disposal
A. Number of Systems Pumped in 1992: unknown
B. Total Amount (gallons) of Septage Pumped: . unknown
* Attached Map Showing Locations
C. Location of Septage Disposal Site(s) *:
D. List the Installers and Pumpers who serve the
Municipality:
Name Address , Phone,
1.
2.
SEE ATTAC® LIST
3.
4.
5.
V. Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Program
Does your Municipality have an O&M Program for its On-Site
System Owners?:
If so, briefly describe:
Survey Completed Bv:
Thomas J. Kaldunski
Name
Public Works Director/City Engineer
Title
612-463-7111
Phone Number
* Attach Map Showing Locations
Please Return the Completed Survey to:
Mr. Don Bluhm, Municipal Services Manager
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
(612) 229-2116
ONSITE
•
•
•
D• List the Installers and Pumpers who serve the Municipality:
Name Address • Phone
Chandler Concrete - Lakeville Scharff Excavating - Inver Grave Heights
LaYerae's Pumping - Lakeville Farmington Plumbing - Farmington
Bob Freiermnth - Hampton Genz/Ryan - Rosemount
iim Reisinger - Farmington Parcells Sever Service - Eagan
A-I Concrete - Rosemount Jerry Stevens - Castle Rock
John Murphy - Hastings • Peters Excavating - Hastings
Dakota Testing - Hastings Sever Vac - Hastings
Gilmer Excavating - Castle Rock Gartzke Construction.- Hastings
Sauber Plumbing - Farmington Weierke Trenching - Eagan
Bill Peters - Farmington
Bauer/Remer - Hastings
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. ly
Name: Larry Thompson
Department: Administration
Date: January 22, 1993
Meeting Date: February 1, 1993
Category: Petitions, Requests and Communications
Subject: Proclaim March 7th to 14th, 1993 as Volunteers of America Week
Explanation: Self Explanatory
Reference MateriallResponsibilty Proclamation - Larry Thompson
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Department Heads
gra?. th -:1°776414— .
Signature
a rn
VOLUNTEERS
OF AMERICA
MINNESOTA
5905 Golden Valley Road • Minneapolis,MN 55422 • (612)546-3242
January 14, 1993
The Honorable Eugene Kuchera
Mayor of Farmington
City Hall
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Dear Mayor Kuchera:
The Volunteers of America has been serving others for 97 years. Volunteers of America Week,
March 7-14, commemorates the founding of our organization on March 8, 1896.
We are one of Minnesota's largest human service organizations. Year after year, more than
90% of every dollar we receive, we spend directly on program services...for the people we serve.
I am asking you to proclaim the week in our behalf. Your personal proclamation will be
encouraging to those who receive services in Farmington, or its nearby communities.
Through the years, Volunteers of America has demonstrated it is a dynamic organization
keeping pace with the everchanging world around it. Now more than ever, we recognize the
constant need for developing new and more creative ways in solving problems, meeting community
needs, and improving the overall quality of life for all members of our society. We must
continue forming partnerships, bridging the gap between human needs and the resources of the
public and private sector.
Something wonderful is happening in Minnesota, because of you! Your interest and support
makes a significant impact on the success of our organization. And, as you know, our success is
measured through the lives of those we touch.
Respectfully yours,
f
James E. Hogie, Jr.
President
JEH/dc
Enclosures
P. S. Your proclamation, along with other proclamations and letters, will be duplicated and put
into booklet form. A booklet commemorating our 97th birthday will be placed in the
reception area of each of our programs and senior dining sites.
f Pi 's 0a
41
• e t.�� Volunteers of America
,moa �� Minnesota
' °4
t°l 1992-1993
PROGRAM SERVICES
ADULT SERVICES PROGRAM offers board RESIDENTIAL CENTER is a pre-release and
and lodging homes for seniors, developmentally work-release correctional program for men.
disabled, mentally ill, and/or chemically Telephone: 721-6327
dependent adults. Telephone 1-495-3344
RESPITE CARE for families of children who
BAR-NONE RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT are handicapped with autism,autistic-like and/or
CENTER provides services to boys who are developmental disabilities. Telephone:546-3242
emotionally and/or behaviorally disturbed. SEMI-INDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES
Telephone: 753-2500 provide learning opportunities for individuals
CHILDREN'S EMERGENCY SHELTER with special needs. Telephone: 1-495-3344
offers social and educational services in a SENIOR DINING PROGRAM serves hot noon
protective environment to children in crisis. meals at 45 community locations to anyone 60
Telephone: 753-2319 years of age or older. Telephone:546-3242
CORRECTION GROUP HOMES offer a struc- SETTEVIG HOME is a home for developmen-
tured therapeutic home environment for teenagers tally disabled adults. Telephone: 1-495-3344
with a delinquent history. Telephone 546-3242 SETTEVIG TREATMENT CENTER FOR
FOSTER TREATMENT HOMES provide a CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
supportive, directive environment for behavior- autistic-likeuovidcintensive treatment dseevelopcesmentally
for arable
allydisturbed children and youth. Telephone: hirn. and devel25mentally disabled
y p children. Telephone: 753-2500
546-3242
SHORT-TERM AFTERCARE prepares a child
HOME DELIVERED MEALS hot noon meals for a successful transition from treatment to
are delivered to shut-in seniors who are unable home and community. Telephone: 753-2500
to prepare their own meals. Telephone:546-3242
SPECIALIZED BEHAVIORAL PROGRAM
IN-HOME FAMILY TREATMENT SER- for boys with severe behavioral problems re-
VICES strengthens a family's ability to function quiring secure supervision. Telephone: 753-2500
and to resolve problems. Telephone:546-3242 STEVENCROFT residential care offering life
PRINCETON HOME is a home for mentally coping skills training for developmentally
disabled adults. Telephone: 1-495-3344 disabled young adults. Telephone 644-2514
SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES PRO-
REGIONAL CORRECTIONS CENTER is a GRAMS are provided for developmentally dis-
jail, workhouse and work-release program for abled adolescents and adults with special needs.
women. Telephone: 488-2073 Telephone: 1-495-3344
•
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA . . . was founded March 8, 1896
in New York City. Less than four months later services were begun in Minneapolis.
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, a national Christian human service organization,
has a 97 year history of serving people in need; regardless of their race, color or
creed. It seeks to develop programs in areas where human needs are not being met
by existing services.
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA staff is comprised of individuals who not only have
administrative and/or professional social work expertise, but who also have a
commitment to the Christian mission of the organization; the reaching and uplifting
of all people. Last year, in addition to 340 staff,more than 2100 persons volunteered
their talents to help enrich program services in Minnesota.
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, a 501(c)(3) organization, is eligible to receive tax
deductible donations.
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA meets all regulatory standards such as a certified
audit, annual report, and filings with the Charities Division of the Minnesota
Attorney General's Office.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Of Minnesota In Minnesota
Mark T. Flaten, Chair John S. MacArthur Mary E. Adams, Chair
James E. Hogie Jr, Pres William W. McDonald James E. Hogie Jr, Pres
Mary E. Adams W. Lyle Meyer Jack L. Dignum
Ronald E. Britz John T. Richter Robert E. Nolte Jr
Katie Erickson Erling W. Rockney Edward Settevig
Walter W. Faster William E. Sandvig Edward C. Spethmann
James W. Feil Clayton W. Strandlie
Gordon M. Haga Renee J. Tait
Peter L. Hauser Robert.VanValkenburg
Barbara A. King Dr. Harm A. Weber
Ross E. Kramer
VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA MINNESOTA DISTRICT OFFICE
administrative, accounting, and development offices
are located at
5905 Golden Valley Road, Minneapolis, MN 55422-4490
(612) 546-3242
z t.
Office of t/te mayor
arnthwtou, filituttsata
Ai,_
rotlamatton
WHEREAS, the Votunteem o6 America, a Chnst.i,an human senvdee ongan.LzatLon, 4,s ae.Ubrating At6
97th yeah ob service to the people o6 Minnesota and the nation; tt .e.6, ,thenebone,
certainty appropn,iate bon us, .the City od Fanm.ing.ton to join .in the obsenvanee od this
m-itestone with the commemon.ati.on od Manch 7-14, 1993 a6 Vo!u.nteens od AmenLea Week; and
WHEREAS, the Votunteen.6 od Amen.ica LS making a vat..uabte contribution by pnov.iding these aenv.iee6
to adu.tts and the etdenLy: 5 homes don mentatty dizab.Led, mentatty All, chemLcatty
dependent and/on etden.Ly adults; congregate dining 6env.Lees ban seniors at 45 sites .in
Anoka and Hennepin Counties; home deLLve'.ed meals bon persons 60 years od age and oven;
semi-.independent Living senv.Lces and supported .Eiv.ing senv.iee6; 3 housing eomptexe6 bon
6anALLes, the handicapped, and the elderly; and 4 .Long-tenor health cane bacitities; and
WHEREAS, the Vo.Lu.nteens o6 Amenica pnov.Ldes these services don children and youth: 6 pnogram6
6env.ing autJ tic, aur ztie-tike, and/on devetopmenta ty disabled chi.L.dnen and youth;
a children's emergency shetten.; in-home senv.ices; 59 dosten treatment homes and
connection group homes; a ne6idential treatment eenten bon emotionally handicapped
boys; a spec.Lc.LLzed behay.iorat program don boys with severe pnobtem6; short-team
abten cane don youth with spee.iat needs; and
k. WHEREAS, the Votu.nteen.s od Ame t.Lca pnov.Lde6 2 correctional senv.ices: a pre-neLea4e and wank
ne.Lea.6e connectional pnognam senv.ing men; and a women's Jail, workhouse and work
release connectional program; and
WHEREAS, the Volunteen6 o6 Amentea, through .its dedicated staid and votunteens and the many
peop.Le who help support thein work through 6.inanc i.at contn,ibution6 make a 6t gn id.icant
.impact on the lives od people ,i.n Fanm.ington; and
WHEREAS, the Vo Lunteen2s 06 Ameni.ca .cs eommemonating .its dound.ing .in 1896 and urges others to
join them .in bnidg.ing the gap between human needs and the nesounces od the pubtLc and
pn irate s eetor.
Jn witness wIettof LI Iave hettunto set my
land and caused t/is sear to to affixed.
ATTEST: •
,. ..
DATE
NOW THEREFORE, BE ITRE.SOLVEV that the Week of Mara* 1-14, 1993 be pnoetai.med as VoLunteek44 ,f .1;
,, ¢, 6140,„4,644.,,C44r o,d ton.
W.•
`J COPYRIGHT 1987 • MODERN PRI NTI NG CO., 19.HAM., AL.
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. 10
Name: Larry Thompson / /
•
► • •
Department: Administration 1-)1,1117/V
Date: January 20, 1993 C
Meeting Date: February 1, 1993Q �- -� -y
Category: Miscellaneous cgt
Subject: Solid Waste General Discussion
Explanation: Overview of Solid Waste
Reference M.terial/Responsibilty Memo - Larry Thompson
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Wayne Henneke Finance
Tom Kaldunski Public Works
Russ Matthys Public Works
Ben Klotz Public Works
6%644/'---
Signature
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE
DATE: JANUARY 20, 1993
Recently, the City has received input from various citizens at Council meetings
and through letters to the editor concerning its solid waste operations. In essence,
the comments have indicated that it may be possible for the City to pass on savings
to its citizens by contracting out its solid waste service. The Mayor and I have
also met with representatives of a local hauler who indicated the City could realize
cost savings. The purpose of this memo is to clarify some of the issues and provide
a basis for future discussion.
The expressed underlying concern does not appear to be the level or quali4014111
service, but one of competitiveness. As stated on numerous occasions, I believe
the City is very competitive when compared to 90 gallon services. Where the City
lacks in competition is offering the 30 gallon/60 gallon and senior citizen options.
The City has patiently held off on implementing the option in anticipation of the
weight based system, which will be addressed later. As a point of reference, the
impact of switching to a 30/604,04011on basis would have a negligible impact on
existing 90 gallon fees, since a vast majority of owners presently use the full
90 gallons and changing over to 30/60 gallon containers would be offset somewhat
by reduced tip fees.
Examples of city contracted services cited have been White Bear Lake and St. Louis
Park. A comparison of the fees are as follows:
30 60 90
White Bear Lake 33.54 38.10 46.11
St. Louis Park w/o recycling N/A N/A 60.96
St. Louis Park w/recycling N/A N/A 54.36
Farmington - Present N/A N/A 49.00
Farmington - Proposed N/A N/A 54.00
A quick review of the figures would indicate White Bear Lake is the least expensive
and St. Louis Park is the most expensive. But one of the major pitfalls (and dilemmas)
of comparing costs is that unless you compare cities with identical demographics,
consumption/disposal habits, densities, landfill destinations, distance to landfills,
haulers, county grants and regulations, City administrative services, hauler and
contracts (I could keep going, but I think you can get a feel for the variables)
you will always be comps ;; For example, St. Louis Park
may seem higher than Farmington, but that may e due to a higher tip fee ($99/ton
versus $62/ton) yet. . .St. Louis Park also issues a $6.60 credit if you recycle,
which may result in more recycling revenues and lower landfill tonnage than Farmington.
Some of the considerations when trying to compare "apples to apnlisidt are:
1. Control - The City Council presently has ultimate control over the services
which would be diminished with a private contractor.
2. Level of County subsidies should be considered.
3. Pursuit of grants. As noted in previous meetings, the City does not actively
pursue grants because it does not have the staff time. Last month the Metropolitan
Landfill Abatement Account Grants Newsletter announced White Bear Lake had
received 3 waste management grants for various capital and administrative expenses.
These are in addition to any County/SCORE grants.
4. Recycling rates.
5. Landfill fees.
6. Cost of containers - provided by customer or hauler.
7. Special pickups.
8. Special services - Christmas tree pickup, clean up days, yard waste.
9. Quality of service.
10. Levels of service (once per week, bi-weekly, etc.)
11. Type of customer (single family, multi-family, commercial) . .
I agree with the comments that the only way the City will know exact rates for
comparison would be to open the service to bida. I would strongly caution, however,
do not open the service to bids unless you are truly committed to getting out of
the business if the bids come in :l . Conversations with haulers indicate it
would not be received favorably if the Council would solicit bids just to compare
prices.
Another point is the inference that the lowest bid Wad traiiirratteltiAit
service. While a low bid would be one factor in determining the best service,
it is not the only factor. As noted above, several factors must be taken into
consideration other than price.
Another concern which has been pointed out is the administrative problems associated
with solid waste. While I concur that solid waste does create an administrative
burden, I would not like to see the City trade one headache for another. Because
of State and County mandates, the City is always going to be in the ,business of
monitoring and regulating solid waste. This could run from generating reports
and following up on citizen complaints with a totally open system to reporting
and enforcing a hauler's contract.
The larger the number of private haulers involved, the larger the amount of City
time and energy needed to regulate haulers. This cost must be considered in addition
to any bids from private haulers.
Referring back to the differential billing, the City presently has two options -
weight based or three cans (30/60/90 gallon) system. As noted previously, the
City has been working with a number of firms to establish a weight based system,
but because the system is brand new, a number of problems have been encountered,
most notably the strength and tolerance of the system. I believe the delays are
not the fault of the contractor, but in fairness to the customer, a cut ;ott
for implementation should be establishati. If the system is not on line by t e
established date, the City could move toward implementing the 3 can system.
In summary, I believe the City's system is competitive with 90 gallon containers.
I agree with the statements regarding the present systems inherent flaw relating
to low volume customers, and administrative burdens, but I feel that as in the
case with water meters, this can be addressed. Every person associated with solid
waste (officials and private haulers) agree that without actual biddingr
between cities cannot biumode because of the many variabl.&. The only way to obtain
a fair comparison on price would be to obtain quotes or bids. But again, I must
caution, the low bid does not necessarily translate to the best service. If the
Council decides to pursue further studies of the solid waste service (survey, quotes,
bids, etc.) , I would prefer the Council hire a private consultant, as it appears
staff's reports have become suspect by some citizens based on the perception of
being self-serving.
I will place this matter on the February 1, 1993 Council meeting for general discussion.
17 470h
Larry Thompson
City Administrator
cc: Wayne Henneke
Tom Kaldunski
Russ Matthys
file
ir• • •
WHITE BEAR LAKE
ATTACHMENT A
Base Dwelling Unit Price Expressed As Monthly Rate
for Weekly Service for the Period
July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993.
30 60 90 Senior Citizens
Gallons Gallons Gallons C= . Door
Disposal Fee 4.11 550 . 6.88 3.76 3.76
Collection Fee ' 5.02 5.15 6.44 3.53 4.78
2.05 • 2.05 2.05 1.40 1.40 .
Recycling Fee 2
Base Dwelling Unit Price 11.18 12.70 15.37 8.69 9.94
- - _
_' Included in collection fee Weekly curbside (unless noted) collection of garbage,
refuse and rubbish,:-aCChristmas tree, aa and bundled branches less
ands/week in lieu ofthan 3e,
po co mpastable volume within level of subscribed service, month-
ly publication of a two-column by sir inch promotion or educational illustration in
local newspaper, collection.at City build'
not less than five puckers or e � without charge, labor and equipment for
equivalent for City clean-up day of spring and fall (two
days) at no charge to the City.
2 Included in recycling fee Weekly same day curbside collection of newspaper, plastics
(No. I and 2),
glasscans motor oil, automotive batteries, corrugated cardboard,
nuppztnes. p kx and drop-off center, payment of 50 percent of redemption
value of all reeyclables, and monthly representative at Recycling Committee meeting.
- PER MONTHLY RATE
- SINGLE FAMILY/DUPLE%/TRIPLE% ONLY. ALL UNITS BILLED WHETHER OR NOT
RECEIVING SERVICE-
- RESIDENT PROVIDES OWN GARBAGE CAN.
WHITE BEAR LAKE
ATTACHMENT B
White Goods $25.00
Mattresses $13.25
Tires $ 8.65 Large
5.75 Small
Couch/ $20.00
Stuffed Chair
Air Conditioner $28.00
Yard Waste
October through April $ .25 per 30-gallon equivalent
May through September $ 1.00 per 30-gallon equivalent
ST. LOUIS PARK
- Per monthly rate - unlimited volume.
- Single family/duplex/triplex only - All units billed whether or not receiving
service.
- Residents provide their own garbage cans.
- Recycling credit given if customers place recyclables out at least 50% of the
time. Compliance tracked by bar scanner system.
Collection Fee $6.20
Yard Waste Fee .85
Recycling Fee 1.92
Compost Fee .55
Disposal Fee 10.00
Administrative Fee .80
Recycling Credit [ 2.20]
Total with Recycling $18.12
Total without Recycling $20.32
Farmington - Present $16.33
Farmington - Proposed $18.00
MIKE'S DISPOSAL &
Ke RECYCLING SERVICE
•
.Nil ).6 r P.O. BOX 839
� 19784 KEN RICK AVE.
• LAKEVILLE MN 55044 I ',' �r'
01111=10;om BUS: 469-2833
FAX: 469-1557 01-27-93
To : Mayor and Council
From: Russell Schweihs
Re : Solid Waste
Reference is made to the January 20-, 1993 memo to the council
regarding solid waste and recycling services for the city of
Farmington. The purpose of this memo is to further clarify the
issues and facts set forth in the aforementioned memo.
The first issue I would like to address is the competitiveness
of the current system as set forth in the memo. Please .444,40,14-0;
tached what I feel is a true comparison of the present s $
versus the contracted systems of White Bear Lake and `St . LO
Park assuming Farmington was able to secure like tr A -
Secondly, I believe that weight based pricing would be the most
equitable billing method. The question is : Can the same <00.1 '
tives be achieved using the much less administratively inten . :`
volume based method?
Additionally if an administrative fee were assessed similar to
St . Louis Park, Farmington could fund a position to pursue
grants .
Finally, as you can see by the attached comparisons the City
of Farmington would at lea.3t realize a savings and possibly
increase the tax -hasp as a result of competitive bidding .
"YOUR LOCAL GARBAGE & RECYCLING CO."
•
FARMINGTON VS . ST. LOUIS PARK
ST. LOUIS PARK FARMINGTON
Collection Fee 6. 20 6. 20
Yard Waste Fee . 85 N/A
Recycling Fee 1 . 92 1 . 92
Compost Fee . 55 N/A
Disposal Fee 10. 00 @95 . 00/ton 6. 51 @61 . 09/ton
Administrative Fee . 80 . 80
Recycling Credit [ 2 . 20] [ 2 . 20]
Container Costs 0 1 . 00
Monthly $18 . 12 $14. 23
Quarterly $54. 36 $42 . 69
This scenario results in a 13% savings over current rates and a
21% savings over the proposed rate of $54. 00/quarter . This assumes
no volume based pricing .
Special pickups can be made on day of pickup for no additional
charge . Therefore, there is no need for clean up days .
NOTE : The above comparison does not include any material recovery
proceeds or county recycling subsidies .
.
FARMINGTON VS . WHITE BEAR LAKE
WHITE BEAR LAKE
30 60 90 SC CURB SC DOOR
Disposal Fee 4. 11 5 . 50 6. 88 3 . 76 3. 76
@66. 79/ton
Collection Fee 5 . 02 5 . 15 6. 44 3 . 53 4. 78
Recycling Fee 2 . 05 2 . 05 2 . 05 1 . 40 1 . 40
Containers 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00
Monthly $12 . 18 $13. 70 $16 . 37 $9 . 69 $10. 94
Quarterly $36. 54 $41 . 10 $49. 11 $29. 07 $32 . 82
FARMINGTON
30 60 90 SC CURB SC DOOR
Disposal Fee 3 . 76 5 . 03 6 . 30 3. 44 3 . 44
@61 . 09/ton
Collection Fee 5 . 02 5 . 15 6. 44 3 . 53 4. 78
Recycling Fee 2 . 05 2 . 05 2 . 05 1 . 40 1 . 40
Containers 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00
Monthly $11 . 83 $13. 23 $15 . 79 $9. 37 $10. 62
Quarterly $35 . 49 $39. 69 $47 . 37 $28. 11 $31 . 86
White Bear Lake rate includes two clean up days per year at no
charge .
NOTE: The above comparison does not include any material recovery
proceeds or county recycling subsidies .
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
Item No. C
rn777�
Name: Larry Thompson / /
pia.„ Z�Department: Administration "11- f
Date: January 18, 1993
Meeting Date: February 1, 1993 ���
Category: Miscellaneous l/ I
Subject: Ratify Fire Chief Appointment
Explanation: Per recommendation of the Fire Department
Reference MateriallResponsibilty Memo - Larry Thompson
Referred To: (Name) Department
Larry Thompson Administration
Ken Kuchera Fire
1:14
Signature
MEMO TO: KEN KUCHERA
SUBJECT: FIRE CHIEF ELECTION
DATE: JANUARY 18, 1993
Congratulations on your overwhelming election by the Fire Department members as
Fire Chief! It must feel gratifying to be elected by such an overwhelming majority.
I believe the vote demonstrates the respect and confidence the Department membership
has in your ability to lead the Department.
I will be placing this item on the February 1, 1993 agenda for Council ratification.
Again, congratulations!
/47 Y1.774;.°1
Larry Thompson
City Administrator
cc: Mayor and Council
Department Heads
file
•