Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.18.04 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 18,2004 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS / COMMENDATIONS a) 2003 Life Safety Achievement Award 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Openfor Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (10/4/04 Regular) (10/5/04 and 10/8/04 Special) b) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration C) Adopt Resolution - Gambling Event Permit - Administration d) Adopt Resolution - Gambling Event Permit - Administration e) Set Special Meeting - Election Results - Administration f) Capital Outlay - Parks g) Appointment Recommendation Liquor Operations - Human Resources h) Appointment Recommendation Finance - Human Resources i) Appointment Recommendation Parks and Recreation - Human Resources j) Maintenance Facility Fueling Station - Engineering k) September 2004 Financial Report - Finance 1) Quarterly Building Report - Community Development m) Approve Change Order - Southeast Trunk Utility Pond Project - Engineering n) Capital Outlay - Fire Department 0) Change Order Tanker Truck - Fire Department p) Approve Bills r. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - Main Street Project Assessment Hearing - Engineering b) Adopt Resolution - Spruce Street Extension Project - Engineering Action Taken Presented Approved Approved R82-04 R83-04 November 3,2004 Information Received Approved Approved Approved Approved Information Receivtid Information. Received Approved Information Received Information Received Approved R84-04 R85-04 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Customer Service Response Report - Administration b) Approve Metro Watershed Partners Funding - Engineering c) Adopt Resolution - TH3 Functional Classification - Engineering d) Approve Joint Annexation Resolution - Giles Development - Community Development e) Adopt Ordinance - Logo Signs - Community Development f) 2005 CIP Authority to Proceed with Preliminary Planning - Administration g) Vermillion River Crossing Preliminary Plat Update - Administration 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 18, 2004 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) 2003 Life Safety Achievement Award 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open/or Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (10/4/04 Regular) (10/5/04 and 10/8/04 Special) b) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration c) Adopt Resolution - Gambling Event Permit - Administration d) Adopt Resolution - Gambling Event Permit - Administration e) Set Special Meeting - Election Results - Administration t) Capital Outlay - Parks g) Appointment Recommendation Liquor Operations - Human Resources h) Appointment Recommendation Finance - Human Resources i) Appointment Recommendation Parks and Recreation - Human Resources j) Maintenance Facility Fueling Station - Engineering k) September 2004 Financial Report - Finance 1) Quarterly Building Report - Community Development m) Approve Change Order - Southeast Trunk Utility Pond Project - Engineering n) Capital Outlay - Fire Department 0) Change Order Tanker Truck - Fire Department p) Approve Bills , PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - Main Street Project Assessment Hearing - Engineering b) Adopt Resolution - Spruce Street Extension Project - Engineering Action Taken Page 1 Pages 2-19 Pages.20-21 Pages 22-23 Pages 24-25 Page 26 Page 27 Pages 28-30 Pa~e 31 Page 32 Pa1{es 33-34 Pages 35-36 Page 37 Pages 38...41 Pages 42-43 Page 44 Page 45 Pa~es 46-49 Pa~esJO-52 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Customer Service Response Report - Administration b) Approve Metro Watershed Partners Funding - Engineering c) Adopt Resolution - TH3 Functional Classification - Engineering d) Approve Joint Annexation Resolution - Giles Development - Community Development e) Adopt Ordinance - Logo Signs - Community Development f) 2005 CIP Authority to Proceed with Preliminary Planning - Administration 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEWBUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN ~ ~ = ~ .- ~ rIJ. = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rLl QJ .. .- ~ ~ ~ .- ~ = ~ ~ .- rIJ. QJ = /:I ~;..., ....., ta ~B ta ....., = ~ 5 ~ ;J M~ o ..... .11. o~ ~ '+--t '. ~ N ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ '5 \..t::l ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ a ~. ~ ~ ~ .S ~~ ~ t ~j ~ ~ ~ ~ i!I .~ 'N ~ I. ~ ~ ... 43 ~ ~ 'N~ O ~~ ~~ .E ~ .E ~ ~~~ ~ C) 43.f 'N .~ ~~ 6 .~ 'N ~ :~ ~ ~~ ~ e \0;;: ~ l:1; .!i ~ .~ ~ .B = .. ..= 10 = - '" 0> 0;;: ~ ..., ~ ~ ~ ""', ~ :s '" ~ ~ '" ~ {l ~ ~ ~ .~ '" ~~ ~ ::::'" i: ~ a "2 -C,) ~ ;,; t3 ~ ~ ~ ~d tf ~ ~ ~ '" ;s os:: if! ~.~ ~~ ~] C;<~ 8<: ~~ '" ~ J! os:: t~ I~ ~~ ~ .~ ";! "? ~ --..~ "- ~ ~. ~E Ii: '" .. i!!lll" ..t!:;; ~ ~ oEj ~ ~ 0> ~ ~ ""',.., 11 ~ s: ti ~ ~ .~ ""E ~~ 0- '" :'f ;: ] E a ~ ~ .~ ~~ "5 eo ~~ fi'Vl ~~ lIS ~>--l '0 t!8 10 ~c U 0:; ~ = o~ :; :;; l; :a .s ~~ lIS :!: o~ "tS ~ ;:;- i] ~ o 10 '-'- ~ ~ ~ e-:!: ~ u eo ~ c::5 ~ ~ ,e. ~ '" ::; Jj J -5 e 5- ~;:" 111::'- ..:iia . ..= ..J = _J ~~ ~ ~.; ~ o 0 ~U U u ~ u .. ~ = = U 10 "tS = ~ .:~ o..ia J 'i = ~ ~~ <= tz.: u ~dj .: o .. u e .... Q s ~ ~ "G ~ ~ k., COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR October 4, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg None Andrea Poehler, City Attorney; David Urbia, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant David Pritzlaff, Mike Zitek, David McKnight, Dan Iverson, Kevin O'Brian, Paul Hardt, James Munro, John Anderson, Leon Orr 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Cordes pulled item 7a) Approve Council Minutes (9/20/04 Regular) to abstain from voting. City Administrator Urbia added a supplemental item for 7e) adding three new election judges to the list. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Introduce New Employee - Solid Waste Mr. Mike Gulla was introduced as the new Solid Waste Operator. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Paul Hardt, 1117 Bristol Lane, Vice-Chair of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, noted an issue will be discussed in the budget workshop he wanted to comment on. One proposal is for an Economic Development Specialist. The HRA has discussed this position and reached an informal consensus that this would be a very good position to add to the Community Development Department. He noted the City's website has really improved over the last few months. One item that has really improved is the listing of commercial property that is available. The HRA feels this is exactly one of the things that need to be done to help promote commercial development. There were many Council Minutes (Regular) October 4, 2004 Page 2 questions at the candidate meeting regarding the rate of development in the City. The HRA feels it is time the City took some of their resources and dedicated them to economic development in the City. There are many projects this position could take on such as further improving the website and aggressively going out after businesses and bringing them into the City. It is one of the few positions the City could add that could actually bring money into the City. The HRA hoped the Council would seriously consider this position in the budget workshop tomorrow. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: b) Adopted RESOLUTION R76-04 Approving Gambling Event Permit- Administration c) Adopted RESOLUTION R77-04 Accepting Donation to Park Improvement Fund - Parks and Recreation Councilmember Soderberg thanked Anchor Bank for their donation. d) Accepted Resignation Heritage Preservation Commission - Administration e) Adopted RESOLUTION R78-04 Appointing Election Judges, General Election- Administration f) Approved School and Conference - Fire Department g) Approved School and Conference - Fire Department h) Received Information Capital Outlay - Parks i) Approved Agreement with Park Planning Consultant - Parks and Recreation j) Accepted Resignation Finance - Human Resources k) Approved Assessment Methodology and Agreements - Southeast Trunk Utility Proj ect - Engineering 1) Approved Easement Acquisition - Southeast Trunk Utility and Pond Project - Engineering m) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg approving Council Minutes (9/20/04 Regular). Voting for: Ristow, Fogarty, Soderberg. Abstain: Cordes, Fitch. MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Sealcoat Project Assessment Hearing - Engineering The 2004 sealcoat project is completed. The total project cost is $140,276.21. The proposed assessment amount based on the City's policy of splitting the cost 50/50 with the property owners is $66.67 per buildable lot. The City's amount is $70,138.11. The City will be entering into the Joint Powers Agreement for sealcoating again next year. Mr. Kevin O'Brian, 18870 Elgin Avenue, stated he has lived here for four years and this is new to him. He has never had to pay for roads. He asked if this is the first year this is being done. Council replied it is done on a 7-year cycle. Mr. O'Brian asked if there were bids and ifhe could receive a copy. Staff replied the Council Minutes (Regular) October 4, 2004 Page 3 process was to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with Bumsville. Bumsville bids the project and includes the cities that want to go in with them as part of the project. Burnsville actually took the bids for the project and then all of the cities participating in the Joint Power Agreement got the same contractor with the same low bid. Mr. O'Brian stated they had a lot of truck traffic on 187th Street and asked what effect that had on the road. He asked if the construction companies are also helping out with this. With all of the truck traffic, the roads will not last 7 years. Staff replied the improvement is to provide a seal to keep the water out and to minimize or reduce the amount of deterioration due to the freeze-thaw cycle. As far as the truck traffic, and the weight on the roads, that is not something the sealcoat addresses. The more loads on the road, the more they deteriorate. The City does not have a mechanism to recoup any amount from any particular individual. Roads have to be designed with a pavement strength that has an economic balance between how much the road costs and how much truck traffic there will be. Attorney Poehler replied there are no options at this time. As part of the development, it can be designated what route the trucks take. Staff stated when road restrictions are not on, and until a weight limit is posted, it cannot be enforced. They are urged to use the shortest route and not go through neighborhoods. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adopt RESOLUTION R79-04 adopting the assessment roll for the 2004 Seal Coat project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Adopt Resolution - Dakota County 2005-2009 CIP - Engineering Last year Dakota County instituted a new policy that City's adopt a resolution for projects they would like to have requested in the County's CIP. The projects identified were: - Ash Street from the railroad tracks to TH3 - CR64 (195th Street) from the current easterly terminus in Autumn Glen to TH3 - CSAH 50 (Elm Street) from Division Street to TH3 - 20Sth Street from the Middle School to TH3 - Pilot Knob Road from CSAH 50 to Ash Street - 195th Street from Flagstaff to Cedar Avenue - Traffic signals along Pilot Knob Road Staff has received a draft of the County's CIP. Of these projects CSAH 50 from Division Street to TH3 is the only project that has been included for 2005. The County has identified 195th Street from Flagstaff to Cedar Avenue in 2009. Councilmember Soderberg noted the County is proposing the Elm Street project over two years. The funding from the State will be distributed in a way that it will Council Minutes (Regular) October 4, 2004 Page 4 need to be done over two years. Staff will verify this and how it will be phased. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty adopting RESOLUTION R80-04 requesting inclusion of construction projects in the Dakota County 2005-2009 CIP. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Ordinance - Erosion Control- Community Development The City proposed to revise the code to establish erosion control measures to comply with new MPCA requirements. Currently the City does mandate erosion control during the construction project, but there is nothing after construction is completed. The Planning Commission recommended approval with two minor changes that are not included. Engineering reviewed the changes after the meeting and felt they did not have a big effect on the ordinance. The first change is to change "wood fiber blankets" to "erosion control blankets." The second change was to change "mulching" to "hydro-mulching." Staff recommended they not be changed and stay with the original ordinance. Councilmember Cordes noted it does not give the size of the soil surface. Staff noted it states if substantial growth is removed. This addresses projects that are left unfinished for a long period of time. Councilmember Cordes was concerned that it was left to interpretation. Staff stated they are not looking for minor projects, but it provides a tool to enforce the major projects. Staff is trying to prevent significant amounts of soil from flowing into the street and storm sewers and into the ponds. MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes adopting ORDINANCE 004-520 requiring property owners and contractors to implement erosion control measures when landscaping, excavating, or filling. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Regarding Existing and Proposed Park, Trail and Open Space Plan Map - Parks and Recreation Staff proposed to amend this map based on property that has been designated to receive MUSA. The map showed the different locations of proposed trails and parks. Properties included Garvey, Empey, CahilllRother and Murphy (now owned by Tim Giles Construction). MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R81-04 approving the amendments identified for future park and trail locations to the Existing and Proposed Park, Trails and Open Space Plan Map. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Approve Thoroughfare Plan - Community Development The Thoroughfare Plan changes are related to the MUSA process. It covers the area east of Akin Road and south of 1 95th Street. The initial draft showed two north/south roads and three intersections onto Akin Road. A number of residents expressed concerns about this draft due to adding more traffic onto Akin Road and if one of the 195th Street connections were necessary. Staff develoged a revised plan showing a future connection of 19Sth Street to Hwy 3, 20St Street connection to Hwy 3, and there is a north/south road with no driveway access that would eventually connect with Diamond Path. Another major change is Akin Road by 20Sth Street. There will be a new intersection where traffic coming south Council Minutes (Regular) October 4, 2004 Page 5 on Akin Road would take a left and go along the south side of Farmington Lutheran Church. There would be an intersection where traffic could go north on the north/south road or go south on Akin. This would necessitate closing Akin Road north ofthis area and creating a cul-de-sac. Stafftook out the 198t Street connection to Akin Road. There is a plat for the Manley development where a local street connection could be possible, but it would not be a collector street. There is a concept plan for the Manley property and the Giles property. They are wondering where the roads will go and they are discussing how they will pay for them. Councilmember Fitch asked about the closing of Akin Road and forming a cul-de- sac and if that would not happen until development occurs. Staff agreed, which could be at least three years. Councilmember Fitch stated we are also short on north/south roads as well as east/west roads and did not like to see a north/south road (Akin Road) closed off. He did like the revised plan much better than the original plan. One of the new alignments would connect with Embers Avenue at 195th Street. Staff feels traffic will take 195th Street to reach Pilot Knob or the new north/south road. Councilmember Cordes was concerned with this intersection and also 189th Street. She felt it was taking one road and alleviating traffic, but still putting more traffic on neighborhood roads. Closing off Akin eliminates one problem, but it adds more traffic to two other roads. She asked how residents were notified. There were two public hearings and these were noticed in the paper. City Engineer Mann stated the County has intersection spacing guidelines, so staff is somewhat locked into lining up with Embers Avenue based on these guidelines. The intersections shown on the plan meet the County's standards. Councilmember Cordes would like to have a workshop to discuss this. Transportation plans are a high priority and felt it deserves attention. Staff noted Manley Land Development has a preliminary plat under review. There would be a question ifthey held a public hearing and the plat showed roads that were consistent with a draft thoroughfare plan. If the thoroughfare plan gets changed, and the plat was approved, what impact does that have? Staff might have to deny the plat and have them re-apply when the thoroughfare plan is approved. Staff would be willing to have a workshop, bring Planning Commission members, developers, and the traffic engineer. Councilmember Soderberg stated Akin Road would not be cut-off, it would create a different intersection to get to Akin Road, it would still remain open. Staff agreed, it would still be a through street, but there would be a couple oftums. He felt the north/south road made a great deal of sense. He liked the connection to 198th Street shown on the initial draft and felt it provided an opportunity to get to the north/south road. He felt the plan was a great start. Councilmember Fo~arty noted at the beginning of development everything would be going onto 195t Street. She asked if engineering was comfortable with that as 195th is not extended to TH3. Staff replied it is more an issue of public safety. As the Council Minutes (Regular) October 4, 2004 Page 6 projects come in, it needs to be decided how far development can go with the accesses that are available. She thought 19Sth Street could take some traffic off of Embers Avenue, especially as 195th Street goes through to TH3. The extension of 195th Street will go along the outside of the athletic complex. There would be several ways to exit an area that would have high levels of traffic at specific periods of time. She asked if the extension to Diamond Path would be going through the middle of the park. Staff replied there could be an underpass, or a controlled intersection. Councilmember Soderberg noted the primary focus right now is on the area between 195th Street and 20Sth Street due to plat activity. Councilmember Fitch did not feel there were enough east/west connections. Mr. James Munro, Embers Avenue, did not think they needed any more traffic on Embers Avenue, unless the City wanted to explain to his kids what a minor collector is. He cannot get his kids across the street. No more traffic on Embers. The traffic on there now cannot be controlled. There will be quite a few houses lined up with Embers, how many more cars will that bring down Embers Avenue. He has called the police several times because of speeders, nothing changes. Councilmember Soderberg was prepared to approve the plan. Mayor Ristow wanted to discuss it further at a workshop. Councilmember Soderberg noted the Manley plat has come to Council with one access. If it comes again with one access he will not approve it. Staff noted Manley Development has been discussing with Giles Construction to develop the north/south road to provide access. Councilmember Fitch stated he would like to meet with the traffic engineer and one or two members of the Planning Commission in the workshop. He felt they were encouraging the traffic from the Manley Development onto 195th Street and possibly to Embers Avenue. With another east/west connection more ofthe traffic could be diverted to Akin Road and even Pilot Knob. Councilmember Fogarty would rather see developers work on extending 203rd Street. City Administrator Urbia stated there is a MUSA Committee meeting on October 20, and suggested having a joint Counci1/MUSA Committee workshop. However, Council would not be able to act on this until the November 1 Council Meeting. Councilmember Fitch stated ifthey can come to a consensus, a Special Meeting could be called. The issues addressed at the workshop will be wetland issues related to the intersection of Devon port and Akin, the usefulness of 19Sth Street connection to the Manley Eroperty, the location of a road out of the Manley property that intersects with 195 (whether it should be across from Embers or offset), ifthe 203rd Street connection is possible with this development, and estimates of volume increases on Embers Avenue. Discussion will be held at the beginning ofthe meeting with it noted that a Special Council Meeting will follow. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes to table this to the October 20, 2004 workshop. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS Council Minutes (Regular) October 4, 2004 Page 7 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: There will be a candidate forum on October 7 at Trinity Campus at 7:00 p.m. She encouraged residents to attend. City Engineer Mann: There will be a neighborhood meeting October 11. at the Maintenance Facility from 6:00 - 8:30 p.m. It will be an open house to provide residents an opportunity to comment on the aesthetics for the Spruce Street bridge. All boards and commissions have also been invited. There was a meeting last Friday with environmental agencies to discuss the Knutson development. Staff received some direction, but still need to work out some issues. The agencies are willing to work with the City. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes. second by Soderberg to adjourn at 8:57 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, t1. -7'~ . /Z/? ~~.J;/7~J Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant COUNCIL 2005 BUDGET WORKSHOP MINUTES October 5, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Ristow called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. Present: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg Absent: None Also Present: David Urbia, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant 2. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. DEPARTMENT HEAD PRESENTATIONS Administration covers legislative, boards and commissions, elections, and communications. There were no large increases. Under legislative, dues and subscriptions are up for the League ofMN Cities. There is an increase for office supplies and equipment. Under boards and commissions there is a $200 increase in professional services for the HPC consultant, and a $25 increase in dues and subscriptions. Regarding elections, there is $10,875 budgeted in case there is a need for a special election. If this is not needed for a special election, it can be used at the end of 2005 for new HA V A voting machines. In 2002 it was required to take out FICA and PERA for election judge wages. In 2004 this is not required, so that will reduce the cost. In communications there was a 3% increase for phones and postage. Human Resources - the major change was data processing due to changes in the payroll system. There is an increase in training for attendance at the National Conference for the Human Resources Director and the Human Resources Specialist. Tuition reimbursements funded in 2005 will come out of the employee expense fund. Councilmember Fitch would like to re-address the tuition reimbursement policy. He would like to tie reimbursements to requiring an employee to stay with the City for a certain length of time. In the current policy, any courses not job related need to be refunded. Reimbursements are based on grade. Tuition only is reimbursed, not the cost for books. Councilmember Fitch would like to see the policy re-addressed, even if the courses are job related. This fall there are currently 8 employees in school. This will be addressed at a future Council meeting. Human Resources Director Wendlandt will send out a policy for Council to review. Council 2005 Budget Workshop Minutes October 5, 2005 Page 2 Information Technology - It is proposed to have a full-time IT Specialist. This position would involve setting up computers, maintaining software, and troubleshooting. The concern with using outside consultants is being able to have the same person come each time, getting them up to speed, and security. The City needs someone to manage the system. Councilmember Cordes noted Rosemount and Prior Lake use CIT and pay $30,000/year. He spends half his time in Rosemount, it is always the same person, and he has a security clearance. She stated Rosemount looked at a full-time position, but because ofthe demand and cost to continuously keep up with their training, CIT was more beneficial. Logis charges $90 - $140/hour. There is $11,000 budgeted for equipment and maintenance for 2005. The amount budgeted for training includes Logis courses. Finance - Payroll is now part of Human Resources. Professional Services has been increased to $20,000 for auditing services. In 2004 the cost was $18,000. Under data processing, Logis charges went down because the utility billing software was shifted to the enterprise funds. In 2006 there will be a new utility billing software. There was an increase in training for the Finance Director to attend the National Conference. Community Development - The increase in the Community Development budget comes from two things that are staff related. Staff asked Council if they think Farmington's economic development needs full-time staff. The Community Development Director is working 50 hours/week and 15%-20% of that time is devoted to economic development. If the City wants to see more businesses here, we have to go to them. There are developers prepared to build buildings. We need City staff to bring in the businesses. Staff could provide examples of cities with this position, and a list of duties this person would do. Staff would like to have a full-time staff person and an intern. If the full-time position is approved, there would not be an intern position in 2005. Councilmember Soderberg noted if businesses come to town, that more than pays for the position. Councilmember Fitch had qualms about a new graduate student going out to big businesses. Staff replied the Community Development Director would groom this person for that. Councilmember Cordes would like to see the Community Development Director do the work and the full-time position do the background. When asked where this position would fall, staff replied they would need to analyze that, but it would possibly be equal to an entry level planner. The Economic Development Specialist would report to the Community Development Director. The second position for Community Development was a % Building Inspector. 2005 will be the 5th consecutive year with three building inspectors. There has been some progress made with the backlog due to the intern. With the % position, it would wipe out the backlog. There is an inspector nearing retirement. It would be nice to have an inspector to deal with the rush. The City spent $55,500 for Inspectron in 2003. Police - Increases are related to personnel. The increase in professional services covers dispatching, data processing, legal fees, and animal control. Under Administration, staff would like to increase the part-time position to full-time due to an increased demand on the clerical staff The County Attorney will not consider a case unless all reports are completely typed. Staff also proposed hiring three police officers. There should be an average of 1.26 officers per population. Adding three officers per year for 5 years will bring Farmington to 1.1. Ifwe add two officers per year, we will never get there. The officer assigned to the school is 75%-80% school-funded. Staff proposed promoting two Council 2005 Budget Workshop Minutes October 5, 2005 Page 3 officers to patrol sergeant to provide experience to supervise officers. This would be a promotion from existing staff. It is a huge liability to have officers working alone. It takes three months to train a new officer. Fire Department - They are asking for a captain position and two other positions. Staff received the statement for police and fire aid. For 2004 the fire pension aid was $130,000 which is $55,000 from the city and $75,000 from the state. The aid was received on Friday for 2004 and for the fire department it was $104,000, which is $25,000 more than what the budget reflects. For 2005, that $140,000 is made up of $60,000 from the City and $80,000 from the state. As far as police aid, the revenue budgeted for 2004 was $70,000, the City came in at $95,500. Public Works is holding the line. Over three years the amount in the budget has gone down. Including crack sealing in the Joint Powers Agreement will save the City some money. There has been a decrease in supplies. It was suggested to consider assessing 50/50 for crack sealing. Mayor Ristow felt that was part of maintenance. City Administrator Urbia suggested including the amount for crack sealing as part of the seal coating amount. Parks - Even with the requested $120,000 increase over the general fund programs, they are at 14% of the general fund. Forestry is split between natural resources and parks maintenance. Staff is requesting one full-time position to be split between parks maintenance and facilities maintenance due to five new parks. Staff is trying to be proactive with maintenance. There is an increase in supplies for maintaining parks. There is $4500 listed for landscaping materials to add mulch around the trees in the parks. Staff proposed adding $4500 for chemicals to spray twice a year in parks and right-of-ways. Fuel costs are up, uniforms are for new employees. The increases in maintenance are to cover any surprises. Dues and subscriptions are increased to get staff involved in professional organizations. One staff member will be sent for training to be certified in playground equipment safety. Councilmember Fitch asked about using concrete instead of plastic for the curbing around the playground equipment. Staff noted concrete lasts longer. Under building maintenance the salaries reflect additional staff. Equipment and building supplies is to replace chairs and tables. Professional Services are up a little due to the cleaning service. There is an increase in electric and gas bills. Vehicle maintenance will be broken out into the separate divisions. An increase has been identified in building maintenance for repairs. Recreation numbers have been brought up to reflect what is actually being spent on programs. Outdoor ice has been put into the recreation budget. 4. GENERAL FUND There were no additional questions. s. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Recreation Operating Fund - The Rambling River Center will share the cost of tables and chairs with building maintenance. Professional services include the ROC cleaning contract. Additional money has been requested for part-time salaries for the pool. Under supplies, landscaping materials are for improvements at the pool. It was proposed to move the arena to a special revenue fund from the enterprise fund. There was an Council 2005 Budget Workshop Minutes October 5, 2005 Page 4 operating deficit of $70,000. The negative fund balance would be zeroed out before transferring. The special revenue fund would take over in 2005. This will require additional funds from the liquor store transfer in 2004. There have been 12 new advertisers at the arena over the last two years. Showcase hockey has been added for additional hours. Capital Funds include sewer trunk fund, road and bridge fund, storm water trunk fund, municipal building fund, and the private capital projects fund. Fleet Operation total expenditures in 2003, which included salaries, equipment and supplies was $157,300 and this was charged back to departments. In the future the City is considering installing their own fuel tanks. Councilmember Cordes noted a $15,000 increase for computers under capital acquisition. Staff stated in 2005, $12,000 is to replace the server and have two servers so there will be a backup. It also provides more disk space. This also includes a computer replacement and a printer for Parks and Recreation. Employee Expense Fund - These funds are used to reimburse employees for tuition, workers comp, deferred comp, increases in insurance premiums, contract settlements. Intergovernmental amount is help from the state. Staff does not expect this to continue past 2005. They do expect PERA rates to increase in 2006. 6. ENTERPRISE FUNDS In water, sewer and refuse funds are revenues and expenditures based on the current rates charged to customers. There are a couple of reductions in retained earnings due to expenditures exceeding revenues. Before fees are set for 2005, Finance Director Roland would like to bring to Council an analysis of rates and propose some different rates for water, sewer and garbage in order to fund to the level of breaking even. This will be discussed at the 2nd meeting in November. 7. COUNCIL COMMENTS/QUESTIONS Councilmember Cordes felt Council needed to ask themselves what do they tell the taxpayers as to why taxes are going up. Councilmember Fitch asked if it would be safe to give staff direction to do planning for bids for the Spruce Street Bridge and Fire Hall. Mr. Mike Cox had indicated now was the time to do the planning in order to get favorable bids. Councilmember Soderberg stated there is no fluff in this budget. It is important for Council to have a unified voice on tax increases. Mayor Ristow asked if there were any contingencies for legislative cuts. Finance Director Roland replied the worst case would be all of market value homestead credit goes away, $370,000 out of the $1.2 million which would get us down to the $855,000 which would be a status quo budget. The positions requested total $380,000 out of the general fund. That would be the cut. Councilmember Cordes asked if we could wait on hiring until we know if there will be cuts. Finance Director Roland replied there is the potential we could do that. Revenue forecasts will be out late November/early December. Staff should have a better idea at that time. City Administrator Urbia stated the positions that are outside of the general fund, such as the Solid Waste Operator, we could go ahead with and the police Council 2005 Budget Workshop Minutes October 5, 2005 Page 5 officer. The IT Specialist we might have to look at, and he felt we should go ahead with the Building Inspector. As far as the Economic Development Specialist we could hold it as a temporary position. Mayor Ristow stated it is frustrating to operate like this. We could lose some good people. It has been Council's philosophy to promote from within. Mayor Ristow stated staffhas always been very conservative and asked staff to continue to live within their means. If taxes go up and it is reasonable, everyone should be able to understand that. Staff stated it should be explained to residents that this is in their best interest. 8. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 9:46 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, r~h?JL Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant COUNCIL/CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING MINUTES October 8, 2004 Staff Present Mayor Ristow, Councilmember Cordes, Councilmember Fogarty Barb Thompson, Bev Ersfeld, Josh Rucker, Sarah Miller, Glen Anderson, Mike Heinzerling David Urbia, City Administrator; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Council Present: Chamber Present: DISCUSSION OF CHAMBER/CITY COMMUNICATION ISSUES Suggestions from the Chamber on ways to communicate include sending the management report to the Chamber, and placing an article in the paper similar to Lakeville. They have a page in the paper with weekly updates on projects. Farmington could update residents on the Spruce Street project showing things that have taken place, conversations about the wetlands, etc. Mayor Ristow noted this was looked at four years ago and at that time neither the City nor the Chamber had the funds. It was substituted with the management report and the newsletter. City Administrator Urbia suggested adjusting the information in the management report, and placing it on the website with a sign-up mailing list. Mayor Ristow thought the Coffee with the Council had been dropped because there was nothing to discuss. Mr. Heinzerling assumed everyone received the Monday Memo. He asked how to create a communication vehicle instead of Coffee with the Council. City Administrator Urbia suggested the Chamber find a way to contact someone at the City regarding issues to determine ifrumors are true. This would provide an opportunity to dismiss rumors that are not true. Mr. Heinzerling stated the information was brought to the table at a meeting. The Letter to the Editor was not meant to be bad to the City. The Chamber assumed the City disregarded the Monday Memo invitation. Mayor Ristow stated the Council has protocols, policies and procedures to follow. Rumors that Council is not being cooperative are not always true. Mr. Heinzerling asked how to create better communication. Ms. Thompson stated the Chamber used to meet with one Councilmember prior to Council Meetings. Unless there was something pressing, they just visited. This was eventually dropped. There is never a problem talking with staff. The purpose of the Coffee with Council was to talk with Council. A lot of Chamber members do not know Councilmembers. Councilmember Fogarty was disappointed when the Coffee with Council ended. She attended one meeting with six Chamber members and it was very productive. It provides an informal situation to bring out rumors. Light agendas are okay. The Chamber needs access to Council. Mayor Ristow suggested if there is not enough for the agenda, the meeting could be postponed. Councilmember Cordes stated it was not a lack of information, but a lack of attendance. Councilmember Fogarty replied it provides a casual environment where Chamber members can reach a Councilmember. City Administrator Urbia suggested if the Chamber hears something during the month, they should call or e-mail him and he will obtain an answer. Mr. Heinzerling stated Ms. Thompson should call City Administrator Urbia and ask if information obtained is true. Mayor Ristow CounciVChamber of Commerce Minutes October 8, 2004 Page 2 heard the developer for Spruce Street was going to walk. They have a lot of issues to meet. The developer came to Council and they had a follow-up meeting and discussed the issues. Businesses have to promote themselves. The City has done a streetscape project to enhance the downtown. He agreed Ms. Thompson should communicate with City Administrator Urbia when rumors are heard. Councilmember Fogarty recalled a couple years ago the Independent wanted Council to alternate writing articles. This would be a great way to communicate if the City cannot afford a weekly ad. It would put rumors to rest. Mr. Nathan Hansen, Farmington Independent, stated the City could do a column like the school. In Rosemount, the City Administrator writes the column. He could take the management report and call it City Notes. Mayor Ristow agreed City Administrator Urbia should write it so Council would not be attached. Councilmember Cordes agreed. With the article coming from the City Administrator it would not be construed as one- sided. Mr. Heinzerling stated they could still have the Coffee with the Council either monthly or quarterly. City Administrator Urbia will send the management report to the Chamber, set up a schedule for Coffee with the Council, and work on an article for the Independent. Executive Assistant Muller will send the Monday Memo to Council. Mr. Colin Garvey asked the Chamber's opinion of having the HRA turned back to Council. Ms. Thompson stated this was brought up at the candidate forum. She asked if the HRA was an extra board that is not needed. Mayor Ristow understood there were taxing issues made by non- elected people. He would agree with changing the HRA to Council. Councilmember Fogarty did not like the idea of citizens being removed. She suggested the HRA be re-structured to three Councilmembers and three residents. Mr. Garvey felt during the HRA interviews, some people do not understand what they are applying for. The City needs more commercial growth. It needs to be quicker and easier. Ifa business owner does not want TIF, they should be able to acquire the property easier. Councilmember Fogarty replied Mr. Garvey's experience was that way. It is not a policy. The Spruce Street problems are not related in that way. There are environmental issues, a trout stream, etc. This will set a precedent for the future. Community Development Director Carroll stated as far as Spruce Street, the agencies are not always sure what they require. He invited others to attend the Spruce Street meetings. Ms. Thompson noted the moratorium was lifted in October 2003. She asked how much has changed that these issues could not have been reviewed during that time. Councilmember Fogarty replied the AUAR was being done. Community Development Director Carroll explained there has to be a specific plan from the developer, and the City gives that information to the agencies. The agencies then comment on that information. Mayor Ristow stated it will be even more difficult south of the river with more homes. Ms. Thompson stated people are frustrated with the moratorium and now wonder what was done. An article is needed on this issue. Community Development Director Carroll stated it was erroneous information that Spruce Street was involved in the moratorium. Mr. Peterson is not ready to develop his property, he was not slowed down. Mr. Allen and Mr. Adelmann are not ready to develop their properties. Ms. Thompson felt that needed to be communicated. Mayor Ristow stated the preliminary plat is going to the Planning Commission. It will come to Council when the engineering issues are resolved. Community Development Director Carroll replied the Planning Commission is taking a different stand. They do not like recommending Council/Chamber of Commerce Minutes October 8, 2004 Page 3 plats with too many contingencies. The Spruce Street developer has asked for the plat to go to the Planning Commission. Staffhas to push, but cannot endanger the relationship. If the Chamber receives calls, they should be forwarded to Community Development Director Carroll to address them directly. Mr. Heinzerling felt a monthly article in the Independent should help. Community Development Director Carroll added the Chamber created the CDC. They meet once a month. They have good discussions with 3-5 Chamber members. That is the place to talk about issues. Staff should pass concerns to Mr. Heinzerling or Ms. Peggy Johnson. Mr. Heinzerling apologized for the Letter to Editor stating it was done in frustration. Community Development Director Carroll expressed the need to continue discussions. It is difficult to repair the damage from rumors. The Letter to the Editor stated staffhad turned down a hotel. A hotel was never turned down. The Industrial Park was not the appropriate place for a hotel. Mr. Thelen stated the HRA turned it down, because it did not fit the covenants in the Industrial Park. Community Development Director Carroll stated he met with two people on a regular basis who asked for zoning for hotels. They were shown several sites and were told the zoning in the Industrial Park did not allow a hotel. They were told the process to have the property re-zoned. The Spruce Street plat shows a hotel. Ms. Thompson asked why staff was not working harder with businesses to get them here. There is a difference between marketing and zoning. Community Development Director Carroll replied the City does not have money budgeted for marketing. Ifwe market an area, we have to be ready to deliver. We cannot market the Devney or Berglund properties because the City does not own it. He has sent people to the Spruce Street developer. If Council wants staff to spend money on marketing, they would be glad to do so. Mr. Heinzerling understood with some commercial businesses there has to be more housing. Mr. Heinzerling felt there were some good ideas discussed for communicating. This meeting would cover the September Coffee with Council. They need to set up another meeting for October 21. Community Development Director Carroll suggested this discussion be continued at the next CDC meeting. Respectfully submitted, {~.- ~c.~ 7?--?~g.J ynthia Muller Executive Assistant City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 76 TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator ~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Knights of Columbus #2400 DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Knights of Columbus #2400 is requesting a Temporary on-sale Liquor License for an event to be held November 6,2004 at St. Michael's Church. DISCUSSION This event will be held on St. Michael's property located at 22120 Denmark Ave. Per State Statute, a Temporary Liquor license must first be approved by the City and then forwarded to the State for approval. BUDGET IMPACT A City fee has not been established for a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License. In discussion with the Liquor Control Commission, staffwas informed that the State of Minnesota waives all fees for Temporary Liquor Licenses for non-profit organizations. Accordingly, no license fee is proposed at this time. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the attached application for a Temporary Liquor License for the Knights of Columbus #2400 on November 6, 2004. Respectfully submitted, ~ dl.ACt~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director 7~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator ~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Gambling Event Permit - Cataract Fire Department Relief Association DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Cataract Fire Department Relief Association is requesting a Gambling Event Permit for their Turkey Bingo event at the Farmington Fire Station, 21625 Denmark Avenue, on November 13, 2004. DISCUSSION Per State Statute 349.166 and pertinent City Code, a Gambling Event Permit must be issued by the City for this type of event. An application for the permit has been received and reviewed. The Cataract Fire Department Relief Association is requesting that the $100.00 in permit fees be waived by the City Council. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Consider the attached Resolution granting a Gambling Event Permit and waiving the permit fees for the Cataract Fire Department Relief Association at 21625 Denmark Avenue, for Turkey Bingo on November 13,2004. Respectfully submitted, ~~d.~~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -04 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR CATARACT FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington. Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of October 2004 at 7 :00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.166, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue or renew a Gambling Event Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said permit; and, WHEREAS, the Cataract Fire Department Relief Association has submitted an application for a Gambling Event Permit to be conducted at the Fire Station. 21625 Denmark Avenue, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Event Permit for the Cataract Fire Department Relief Association to be conducted at 21625 Denmark Avenue is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of October 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of October 2004. City Administrator SEAL 7d City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator I}/--- FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Gambling Event Permit - Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club is requesting a Gambling Event Permit for a raffle to be held at the Farmington American Legion. DISCUSSION Per State Statute 349.166 and pertinent City Code, a Gambling Permit must be issued by the City for this type of event. An application has been received, along with the appropriate fees. The City Attorney has reviewed the application and the attached resolution approving the request. BUDGET IMPACT Gambling permit fees are included in the revenue portion of the 2004 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Consider the attached Resolution granting a Gambling Event Permit to Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club at the Farmington American Legion, 10 N 8th Street, on January 15,2005. Respectfully submitted, ~.Il~~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -04 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR SOUTHERN DAKOTA COUNTY SPORTSMEN'S CLUB Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of October 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.166. the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue or renew a Gambling Event Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said permit; and, WHEREAS, the Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club has submitted an application for a Gambling Event Permit to be conducted at the American Legion, ION 8th Street, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Event Permit for the Southern Dakota County Sportsmen's Club to be conducted at 10 N 8th Street is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of October 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of October 2004. City Administrator SEAL 7e City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator tf}~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Set Special Meeting - Accept Results of Election DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Results of the race for Mayor and Council Members at the General Election must be accepted by the Canvassing Board within 7 days of the election. DISCUSSION Council has typically convened as the Canvassing Board on the day following the election at 4:30 p.m. ACTION REQUIRED Set a special meeting for November 3, 2004, 4:30 p.m. to accept the results of the November 2, 2004 General Election. Respectfully submitted, ~d ~4duL Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director 7-F City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: FROM: Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Parks DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION . The Tamarack Park Master Plan identifies a turf area being seeded in the park. DISCUSSION As part of the development of Tamarack Park, a turf area is to be seeded. Staff solicited quotes from three turf contractors and the low quote to seed 2.5 acres of turf, mulch the seed and apply a fertilizer was submitted by Friedges, Inc from Lakeville in the amount of$2,375.00. The two other quotes received were for $3,585.00 and $5,000.00. The seed mix will be a perennial ryegrass and Kentucky bluegrass mixture. Sirice it is late in the growing season, Tamarack Park will be seeded with a dormant seed mix that will germinate in the spring. The mulch will provide erosion protection over the winter. BUDGET IMPACT The low quote submitted was $2,375.00. The budget estimate for seeding Tamarack Park was $3,600.00. The low quote submitted was $1,225.00 less than the budget estimate. Funding for the seeding of Tamarack Park will come from the Park Improvement Fund budget. ACTION REQUESTED No action is requested. This is for informational purposes only. Respectfully >>~ ~fk Parks and Recreation Director ....., City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /3 TO: Mayor, Councilmernbers, and City Administrator tV' FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Liquor Operations Restructuring DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION On September 9,2004, the City Administrator, Finance Director and Human Resources Director met to discuss the options for filling the liquor operations manager position. After some discussion, it was decided that the division should be restructured. The following paragraphs provide the specific details for that restructuring. DISCUSSION The recent retirement of the Liquor Operations Manager provided the City with the opportunity to evaluate and restructure the liquor operations division. Attached are the current and proposed organizational charts to better illustrate this change. With the new structure, the Assistant Liquor Operations Manager would be promoted to Liquor Operations Manager, the position of Assistant Liquor Operations Manager would be eliminated and a new full-time liquor clerk position would be added. A senior liquor clerks will be assigned to each store and will take a lead role in handling the day to day tasks associated with that store. However, both Senior Clerks will rotate between stores to ensure adequate cross training and staff coverage in cases of absences. Because the senior liquor clerks are already responsible for these day to day tasks, there should be no need for an adjustment to their position grade or compensation at this time. A liquor clerk would be hired full-time to ensure that there are two full-time staff members in each store to provide adequate coverage to handle the daily work load. The Acting Liquor Manager has also implemented a plan to more fully utilize the part-time staff to provide coverage to both stores during peak retail hours and seasons. BUDGET IMPACT By eliminating the Assistant Liquor Operations Manager position and adding a full-time Liquor Clerk, there is a cost savings to the City by approximately $17,000 (or approximately $20,900 if calculations are based on actual salary of the assistant manager and the assumed starting salary of a liquor clerk instead of salary range minimums). There are some additional cost reductions for 2004 and into 2005 because the new Liquor Operations Manager will be at the beginning of that salary range (at $56,469.00) while the retiring Manager was at his mid-point ($67,786). This creates a savings of approximately $11,317.00. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the Liquor Operations division restructuring, promote the Assistant Liquor Operations Manager to Liquor Operations Manager, and recruit a new full-time liquor clerk utilizing an external recruitment process. Respectfully Submitted, 1 .. .. "\, ~~Jz~4JL~(- /. Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file ~ c Q) L- L- ::J t) I en c o -- ~ co L- ID C- O L- a ::J c- -- .....J L- a> t)) co c: co ~ en c. L- a L- ::J a> crt)) .- co -I c: ~co ~~ +-' en en .- c. ~O <( cr :.:i en z o - l- e::( ~ w e... o ~ o :J o - ...J ~ -c (]) en o c.. o l- e... ~ c o ~ID L-C') Q) eo C.c Oeo o::E ::J c- ::J I / Q) ~L- L- 0 Q).. +-' -Cf) c..J c '-/.~ 0......0 ::J+J C-c ::J ~ .0 tnio I Q) ~L- L- 0 Q)+-' -Cf) U.c L- 0 o C ::J~ c- .-..~ ...J 0 - ....:a: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ciJarmington.mn.us 7h TO: vr---- Mayor, Councilmembers, and City Administrator ty , FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Finance DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time Utility Billing Accounting Technician has been completed. DISCUSSION The City recruited for this position internally. After a thorough review by the Finance Department and the Human Resources Office, an offer of employment has been made to Deborah Richter. Ms. Richter began employment with the City of Farmington in September of 2003 as a temporary employee and was promoted to a regular full-time employee in January 2004. She has excellent customer service skills and meets the qualifications for the position. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 2004 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the appointment of Ms. Deborah Richter as Utility Billing Clerk in the Department of Finance, effective on or about October 25,2004. Respectfully Submitted, ~" /1 .,-,/ : ,'".' / 1-;1 'V;1(it/~ <",' ,-:tt&J~-- Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~' TO: FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time Facilities Maintenance Worker has been completed. DISCUSSION After a thorough review by the Parks and Recreation Department and the Human Resources Office, an offer of employment has been made to Mr. Jason Place, subject to ratification by the City Council. Mr. Place was previously employed by the City as a Solid Waste Operator in the Solid Waste Division. He has also worked in a seasonal capacity with the City both at the Arena and in the Park Maintenance Divisions and meets the qualifications for this position. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 2004 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the appointment of Mr. Jason Place as Facilities Maintenance Worker in the Department of Parks and Recreation effective on October 19,2004. Respectfully Submitted, A" . ~jl J//'/.d- /:;-ILc1j1--di<-// f:(ld<-tL~l / Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7' o TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Maintenance Facility Fueling Station DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION As part of the Maintenance Facility project, a concrete slab was poured for a future fueling station, just west of the water tower. DISCUSSION Shortly after the concrete slab was installed, staff became aware that the soils beneath the slab were settling, evidenced by a significant crack that appeared in the slab. Upon further investigation, it was identified that the area in which the slab was poured had been a borrow area for sand for the building pads for the building projects. The materials that were put back into the borrow area are compressible and were most likely not fully compacted. In addition, the location of the borrow area was not known at the time the fueling slab was designed and added to the project. The fueling slab as it is would be unusable. Staff has been monitoring the elevation of the slab and it appears that the settling has stopped. The excavating contractor, the architect and the City's structural engineer have determined that a reasonable repair to the slab would be to mud-jack it back into position. Mud-jacking would consist of pumping concrete under the slab until the slab is lifted to the correct elevation. The cracks would be repaired with epoxy. BUDGET IMPACT The total cost to mud-jack the fueling island slab is $7,250. The excavating contractor, Enebak Construction, has agreed to pay for half of the mud-jacking cost. The City would also fund half of the cost in the amount of$3,625. This cost would come out of the facilities project building fund. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the expenditure of $3,625 to perform the mud-jacking repair on the fueling island slab. Respectfully Submitted, ~M~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file 7k CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF REVENUES SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 75,00 % Year Complete .~:au.iGe.r::::::::J;lil';i::i:ii:ii lill:liiJl::::;:I:I:;:l:I::: :i:::llil~],::: ::::::I::.:i::::,::I~:,I:I':ilii:::::: 111,1,111111,,1: ...$... $... .. ............, % .....if .........% GENERAL FUND Property Taxes 3,544,462 1,626,527 45,89 1,538,724 48,27 Licenses/Permits 1,156,976 39,285 631,983 54,62 1,102,655 87,50 Fines 78,100 9,523 53,161 68,07 49,541 61,85 Intergovernment Revenue 322,000 4,179 174,440 54,17 464,357 95,61 Charges for Service 365,200 12,831 142,698 39.07 147,770 41,19 Miscellaneous 380,500 20,234 230,322 60,53 221,305 66,96 Transfers 310,000 25,833 232 500 75,00 167 629 74,50 Total General Fund 6,157,238 111,885 3091,631 50,21 3,691,981 62,28 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating Fund 27,500 1,080 304,864 1108,60 9,187 33.41 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 (912) 6,127 76,11 7,893 78,54 Park Improvement Fund 147,500 6,434 178,847 121.25 46,345 30,39 Recreation Operating Fund 257,500 44,590 212,467 82,51 87,624 34,70 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 247,500 7,690 141,204 57,05 111,211 46,67 Liquor Operations 3,110,000 259,781 2,199,359 70,72 2,005,539 70,64 Sewer 1,383,000 158,266 963,117 69,64 889,695 68.54 Solid Waste 1,409,000 165,329 1,117,188 79,29 871,996 64,19 Storm Water 265,000 33,956 214,097 80,79 205,347 78,98 Water 1,790,000 137,321 1,049484 58,63 1 090 075 60,90 Total Revenues 14,802288 925,420 9,478,385 64,03 9016,893 63,70 CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 .. :::}}}:2001![:/:::::::: ?:J~QPG.l$.1t)]:;QRR~NjY ..... $....'.. ..........$ .... $.... ~;i~;10: !1!!III!IIIIlII:!!I!IIII'II/:!/:/IIR1111: .............%... ..$..% Gi:Ni:RACFUNb Legislative Administration Human Resources MIS Elections Communications Finance Planning/Zoning Building Inspection Community Development Police Administration Patrol Services Investigation Services School Liason Officer Emergency Management Fire Rescue Engineering G.I.S. Streets Snow Removal Signal Maint Park Maint Tree Maint Building Maint Recreation Programs Outdoor Ice Transfers Out Total General Fund SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating Police Forfeitures Fund Park Improvement Fund Senior Center Swimming Pool ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena Liquor Operations Sewer Solid Waste Storm Water Water Utility Total Ex enditures 65,628 430,634 185,833 62,710 10,875 59,848 391,837 173,259 370,674 99,068 526,640 1,161,248 261,204 1,600 397,955 42,033 266,816 9,333 445,612 97,858 101,000 263,005 117,946 125,060 309,412 7,150 173,000 6,157,238 43,180 8,050 134,500 126,650 134,180 262,516 2,870,758 1,653,162 1,413,142 324,323 1 247,822 11,910 46,249 22,625 2,677 3,333 7,060 39,362 19,786 43,871 10,183 43,875 144,962 30,984 17 31,650 8,218 31,149 53 74,471 2,329 8,445 33,070 5,795 8,657 33,118 34 43 250 707 133 261 39,174 14,898 7,563 27,730 260,963 79,035 117,651 15,183 80,459 48,529 314,426 144,778 31,358 3,359 48,078 308,579 132,178 282,400 66,202 404,357 965,472 186,053 2,029 223,133 29,056 237,340 4,320 416,421 53,306 68,166 260,051 47,823 69,943 293,213 3,330 129750 4,773650 275,476 9,066 193,864 107,627 130,385 207,443 2,124,410 921,461 1,056,908 211,126 594755 14,375,521 1,350,050 10,606,171 73,95 73,01 77,91 50,00 30,89 80,33 78.75 76,29 76,19 66.82 76,78 83,14 71,23 0.00 126,81 56,07 69,13 88,95 46,29 93.45 54.47 67.49 98.88 40,55 55,93 94,76 46,57 75,00 77,53 637,97 112.62 144,14 84,98 97,17 79,02 74,00 55,74 74,79 65,10 47,66 73.78 55,402 386,711 103,867 60,268 32,247 279,984 104,455 263,412 131,393 379,743 864,890 124,043 56,136 673 232,706 27,970 217,419 3,103 369,688 49,197 62,081 286,113 20,775 90,695 283,596 3,790 o 4 490,357 60,107 4,575 126,450 101,464 122,457 190,471 1,887,342 844,170 973,203 139,140 807 130 9,746,866 75,65 83,69 66,35 65.27 0.00 44,58 75,12 67,23 77,58 150.42 79,73 75,75 74.63 72,52 42,06 62,72 58.65 75,57 75,68 86,76 60,59 66,33 94,53 40.35 82,03 93,30 51,56 0,00 75,75 78,53 56,83 94,01 82,78 102,72 75.99 69.22 65,01 68.80 66,18 75,64 72,97 7t. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City AdministratorUtIl FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Third Quarter 2004 Building Report and Population Estimate DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The following is a report summarizing (a) the new construction permits issued during the third quarter of 2004 and (b) an updated population estimate for the City of Farmington. DISCUSSION Building Permits: During the third quarter of 2004 (July 1,2004 to September 30,2004) the City issued new residential building permits for 20 single-family homes and 4 owner-occupied townhouse units for a total of 23 new housing units. None of the housing permits issued during the third quarter of 2004 included any new rental housing units. The average building valuation of the single-family homes during the third quarter of 2004 was $198,785, up from $196,747 during the same period last year. The average building valuation of the townhome units during the third quarter of 2004 was $157,755, up from $125,934 during the second quarter of this year. (Note that the valuation averages do not represent the average sale price or average market value of the homes in question, since they do not include the value of the lot or any amenities added to the home that are not part ofthe building code formula). Three new commercial permits were issued during the third quarter of 2004, with a total value of $973,000. Population Estimate: At the beginning of 2003, City staff decided that each quarterly building permit report should also include an updated population estimate for the City of Farmington. After discussing several methods of calculating population, a decision was made to base our population estimates on Certificates of Occupancy rather than upon building permits. Building permit activity is not a "real time" reflection of actual population, given the "lag time" between the issuance of the permit and the actual occupancy of the dwelling unit (i.e., the time required to construct, market and sell the home). Accordingly, staff started with the City population as of April 1, 2000 (as determined by the U.S. Census Bureau) and then determined the number of Certificates of Occupancy [C.O.s] issued by the City since that date. The number of C.O.s was multiplied by 2.95, which was (according to the 2000 Census) the average number of occupants per Farmington dwelling unit. The resulting calculations are as follows: 12,365 + 885 13,250 Estimated Population as of 4/1/00, per 2000 Census = 300 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period 4/1/00 to 12/31/00 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of 1/1/01 + 1478 14,728 + 1888 16,616 + 336 16,952 + 525 17,477 + 434 17,911 + 371 18,282 + 260 18,542 + 241 18,783 + 371 19,154 = 501 Certificates of Occupancy issued for 2001 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of 1/1/02 = 640 Certificates of Occupancy issued for 2002 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of 1/1/03 = 114 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period 1/1/03 to 3/31/03 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of March 31, 2003 = 178 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period from 4/1/03 to 6/30/03 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of June 30, 2003 = 147 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period from 7/1/03 to 9/30/03 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of September 30, 2003 = 126 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period from 10/1/03 to 12/31/03 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of December 31,2003 = 88 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period from 1/1/04 to 3/31/04 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of March 31, 2004 = 82 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period from 4/1/04 to 6/30/04 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of June 30, 2004 = 126 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period from 7/1/04 to 9/30/04 X 2.95 Estimated Population as of September 30, 2004 ACTION REQUIRED No action is required, for City Council information only. Q; ():5 =0 ..0:::: ::l I1l a..c: ~,g Ol ::l z~ III .E ~~ 1ii ~ .:a.!!!. c:j!3 ~ '~ z~ ~'O ~ Ol Ol ::l E ~ E- o~ (JE 3: .... Ol Ol za.. en I- :E 0:: w a.. C) Z ) J .5 lD ~ 0:: w I- 0:: <( ::::> o Iii ., c: Ol :2~ :3 c: 0::::::> 19 o I- Cii 'Eg Ol,- a:: III ::l 3: 0 OlJ: z ~ :;1Il :z:!:! .... c: 3:Ol::::> Ol E - zo=== .r. E c: I1l 3:u. o I- 00000 O~-c-~(t') LOLO.....~~ ~COCOLON 00000 .l!3 'c ::::> x Ol a. ::l Cl ~ Ol Z 00000 .l!3 'c ::::> u. en ~ z LOLO.....~~ ~ooCOLON ~ I1l ::l o 19 o 5 ~ U)-g"E5~ -c-C'\I(f')V-c- I'- 0) 0) ..... lii ~ 0,...00..... 00000 .....000..... N.....NC')~ I'-COI'-CON OOO~~ ONON~ No)N.....~ I'-I'-I'-LON 19 o .... I- a co (j)-g"E5~ ..... C\I('t) v..... 00 0) 0) ..... 0.....00..... 00.....0..... 00000 LOLO'<to)M '<tCOI'-~;;Ii 00~~12 00000 LOLOOC')~ ~OOCOCON .... a c;;-g"E .....NM 0) 0) 0) ..... 00000 .....000..... 00000 N~CO~g ............(]).....v ~<o<o..... LOC')<o~~ ONOON I'-OON 0 I'- COI'-M~~ Iii '0 I- 0) .r.0) .... 0) ~..... 19 o .... I- a 0 u;-g"E58 .....NM~N o o o N .....OO.....N OONON NOON~ .....NCOI'-CO .....ON~CO ,........-c-.....v ~OOO~ CO~~.....I'- .....LOCOI'-~ 00000 CON CO I'- U;~~I'-~ .... a Ui-g"E .....NM o o N 00000 00000 ONOON MNI'-ON .....I'-NI'-CO ,........,...,...1.O 00000 NCOI'-O~ LOCOLOO)N 00000 .....~OO~ COOOI'-CON Cii '0 I- .r.O ~~ 19 o .... I- a N C;;-gE58 .....NC')~N N o o N ON.....,......,. 00000 00000 :6N~~~ ..........T""" to 000 0 C')O~O~ COLOOOLON 00000 ~r:::g~Sl ..... N 19 o .... I- a M 1i)-g "E 58 .....NC')~N M o o N o o 0.....0 ..........M LOI'-~ co co N NOO ~g~ 000 LOI'-O ~MN .... a ....'0'0 III c: .... .....NC') ~ o N Twin Cities home sales dip Page 1 of 1 Posted on Wed, Oct. 13, 2004 Twin Cities home sales dip Performance considered anomaly as prices stay strong BY MIKE HUGHLETT Pioneer Press September was one of the weakest months for new home sales in the Twin Cities this year, though prices remained strong, according to data released Tuesday. Closed home sales totaled 5,256 in September, down 11 percent from the same month last year, according to the St. Paul Area Association of Realtors. That was the worst year-over-year performance since January, when sales were down 19 percent. Still, the median sales price for the 13-county metro area rose 9.7 percent over September 2003, settling in at $220,000. A median is a midway point; half of all sales are above it, half below. Prices are putting on an encore performance in 2004, rising at rates similar to the past few years. For the nine months ending Sept. 30, the median sales price of $214,900 was up 8.5 percent over the same period in 2003. Meanwhile, the number of dosed sales for the nine months ending in September was up 3.1 percent compared to the same time last year. The housing market's continued strength this year is anchored by rock-bottom interest rates and a relatively strong economy, said George Karvel, a real estate professor at the University of St. Thomas College of Business. While job growth has been less than expected, the U.S. unemployment rate is still historically quite low and people have money to spend, Karvel said. So what about September's lame sales performance? Mark Allen, head of the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, said he thinks it's an anomaly. "I definitely don't think it's a trend. If you look at pending sales for September, they're up quite a bit." Pending sales - deals that haven't been closed - were up 7.4 percent over September 2003. Pending sales can be an indicator of future closed sales. Once again, the inventory of homes for sale rose at a strong clip in September. New listings totaled 9,042, up 11.9 percent over the same month last year. New listings have been up 11 percent to 25 percent each month this year. An increase in inventory can help cool down a market that might otherwise overheat. Mike Hughlett can be reached at mhughlett@pioneerpress.com or at 651-228-5428. <<;) 2004 St. Paul Pioueer Press and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. hllp:/ /www.twiucities.com http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/business/9902709.htm ?template=contentMo... 10/14/2004 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 71J7 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~~/" FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Change Order - Southeast Trunk Utility and Pond Project DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Forwarded herewith for Council's review and consideration is Change Order #2 for the Southeast Area Trunk Utility and Pond Improvement Project. DISCUSSION This change order provides for additional project costs related to grading, sanitary and watermain modification work not included in the original bid. This change order modifies the pond grading per the City's negotiations with Castle Rock Bank. The pond revisions will allow for the potential of a northern access to the property directly east of the Castle Rock Bank. The change to the pond grading results in a deduct to the project. This change order also would allow for the extension of sanitary sewer and water main east on Highway 50 and south on Highway 3 to provide utility service for properties that desire to annex into the City. Staff has been contacted by several property owners that have expressed interest in connecting to City services. This change order will also provide for the upsizing of the proposed 12" ductile iron pipe watermain located on the east side of the project to 16" ductile iron pipe. This pipe upsizing will provide capacity if a future school is placed south of 225th Street. BUDGET IMPACT The total cost for change order #2 is $68,738.48 and would be funded through the project budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve by motion Change Order #2 for the Southeast Area Trunk Utility and Pond Improvements in the amount of$68,783.48. Respectfully submitted, ~frt~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file j fUI Bonestroo e Rosene "'1\11 Anderlik & . \J. Associates gineers & Architects Owner: City of Farmington, 325 Oak St., Farmington, MN 55024 Date October 7,2004 Contractor: Barbarossa & Sons Inc., 11000 93rd Ave. N., Osseo, MN 55369 Bond Company: Bond No: CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 SOUTHEAST AREA TRUNK UTILITY AND POND IMPROVEMENTS BRA FILE NO. 141-03-204 SAP NO. 212-030-01 Description of Work Part A: Pond Revisions: Part A of this Change Order provides for Pond contour revisions to address easement acquistion issues. Pond excavation quantities have been revised and a segment of storm sewer added to the plans. The storm sewer will convey T.H. 3 drainage in lieu of a ripraped slope. Part B: Sewer and Watermain Alone TH 50: Part B of this Change Order provides for the extension of sanitary sewer and watermain along T .H. 50 east of MH-l. Part C: Sewer and Watermain Alone TH 3: Part C ofthis Change Order provides for the extension of sanitary sewer and watermain along T.H. 3 south ofMH-8. Part D: Revised Sheet 4.04 Watermain: Part D ofthis Change Order provides for the revision ofwatermain between MH-4 and MH-12 from 12" DIP to 16" DIP and associated fittings adjusted. This revision is to accommodate future school site south of225th Street. Part E: Proiect Manual Section adiustment as follows: Part E ofthis Change Order provides for the revision of the Project Manual: Section -2530- Sanitary Sewer )art 3.05 Measurement and Payment J. A Bid Item has been provided for Riser Pipe for Drop Sections. Drop inlets will be measured according to size by length from the lowest invert of the manhole to the invert of the pipe being served by the drop inlet. Payment shall be considered compensation in full for all work, including encasement, drop pipe, base slab, fittings, DIP, and concrete collar. Add Detail Plate SAN-04 Contract Unit Total No. Item Unit Quantity Price Amount CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART A - POND REVISIONS POND EXCA V A TION (EV) - REVISION TO ORIGINAL CY 8176 ($1.27) ($10,383.52) BID QUANTITY 2 24" RCP STORM SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS 3 LF 124 $34.00 $4,216.00 3 24" RCP FLARED END SECTION, INCL TRASH GUARD EA I $1,280.00 $1,280.00 4 4' DIAMETER STORM CBMH WITH GRATE EA I $1,850.00 $1,850.00 5 CLASS III RANDOM RIPRAP - REVISION TO ORIGINAL CY 138 ($70.00) ($9,660.00) BID QUANTITY TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART A - POND REVISIONS ($12,697.52) CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART B - SEWER AND W A TERMAIN ALONG TH 50 6 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35, 10'-15' DEEP LF 190 $61.00 $11,590.00 7 8" PVC PLUG EA I $50.00 $50.00 8 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLES EA I $1,600.00 $1,600.00 9 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE OVERDEPTH LF 6.5 $80.00 $520.00 0 8" DIP OUTSIDE DROP INLET PIPE LF 5 $170.00 $850.00 II 8" DIP SANITARY SEWER, CLASS 52, 10' - 15' DEEP LF 20 $71.00 $1,420.00 12 8" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 210 $23.00 $4,830.00 13 8" 45 DEGREE BEND EA 4 $120.00 $480.00 14 16" X 8" REDUCER EA I $310.00 $310.00 15 8" X 6" REDUCER EA 2 $1I0.00 $220.00 16 6" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA I $650.00 $650.00 17 8" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA I $850.00 $850.00 18 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL CMP CULVERT LF 40 $22.00 $880.00 14103204CH02 No. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 14103204CH02 Contract Item Unit Quantity RESTRICTED TRENCH LF 210 SA WlNG BITUMlNOUS PAVEMENT LF 50 REMOVE BITUMlNOUS PAVEMENT SY 70 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5, 100% CRUSHED TN 30.8 TYPE LV 3 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (B) TN 16.2 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART B - SEWER AND W A TERMAIN ALONG m 50 CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART C - SEWER AND WATER MAIN ALONG TH 3 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35, 10'-15' DEEP LF 360 8" DIP SANITARY SEWER, CLASS 52,10' - 15' DEEP LF 20 8" PVC PLUG EA 1 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLES EA 1 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE OVERDEPTH LF 2.6 8" DIP OUTSIDE DROP lNLET PIPE LF 4.5 8" DIP WATER MAlN, CLASS 52 LF 380 8"GATEVALVEANDBOX EA 1 8" X 6" REDUCER EA 1 SALVAGE AND RElNST ALL CMP CULVERT LF 55 RESTRICTED TRENCH LF 390 SAWlNG BITUMlNOUS PAVEMENT LF 70 REMOVE BITUMlNOUS PAVEMENT SY 200 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5 TN 88 TYPE LV 3 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (B) TN 46.3 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART C - SEWER AND WATER MAIN ALONG TH 3 CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART D - REVISE SHEET C4.04 WATER MAIN 12" DIP WATERMAlN, CLASS 52 LF 945 12" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 1 12" X 10" TEE EA 1 16" DIP WATERMAlN, CLASS 51 LF 945 16" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 1 16" X 10" TEE EA 1 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART D - REVISE SHEET C4.04 WATER MAIN TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART A - POND REVISIONS TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART B - SEWER AND W ATERMAlN ALONG TH 50 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART C - SEWER AND WATER MAlN ALONG TH 3 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.2, PART D - REVISE SHEET C4.04 WATER MAlN Total CHANGE ORDER NO.2: Unit Price $2.00 $4.00 $6.00 $10.00 $70.00 $56.00 $66.00 $50.00 $1,600.00 $80.00 $170.00 $23.00 $850.00 $110.00 $22.00 $2.00 $4.00 $6.00 $10.00 $70.00 ($28.00) ($1,500.00) ($320.00) $39.00 $4,100.00 $680.00 Total Amount $420.00 $200.00 $420.00 $308.00 $1.134.00 $26,732.00 $20,160.00 $1,320.00 $50.00 $1,600.00 $208.00 $765.00 $8,740.00 $850.00 $110.00 $1,210.00 $780.00 $280.00 $1,200.00 $880.00 $3.241.00 $41,394.00 ($26,460.00) ($1,500.00) ($320.00) $36,855.00 $4,100.00 $680.00 $13,355.00 ($12,697.52) $26,732.00 $41,349.00 $13.355.00 $68,738.48 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 71] TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrato~? FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Rescue Capital Projects Purchase - Fire Department DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The 2004 Rescue CIP provides for $35,000 in funding for extrication equipment. DISCUSSION After thorough review and hands-on training with a number of representatives, the rescue captain along with the input from the squad have selected the manufacturer of Centaur Rescue Extrication Tools and Equipment. The supplier of the equipment is Alex Air Apparatus, Inc. from Alexandria, MN. Attached is an inventory of the tools and equipment being purchased. BUDGET IMPACT The total cost of the equipment being purchased is $27,607. ACTION REOUESTED For Council information. Respectfully submitted, ~...'-' j;{~cL~<-u ~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief I 0('11 tJl( 2004 CIP Hydraulic Rescue Tool Budget Item EQUIPMENT NAME AND MODEL PRICE $ ,. . f(JfJ Centaur 40,00Opsi hose with couplings (olacklblue) · 100' Centaur 40,000psi hose with couplings (redlblue) · Centaur 4s Electric pump . Centaur S28 Spreader · Centaur C6 Cutter (86,000psi) · Centaur MOC2 cutter (151,000 psi) . Centaur T50 3 stage ram . 4Gals Hydraulic Oil · Quick Kick Ram support · Traditional Ram Support $1356.00 $1356.00 Total Cost $5,560.00 $5,240.00 $4100.00 $4800.00 $4000.00 $100.00 $595.00 $500.00 $27,607.00 TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Rescue Capital Projects Purchase DATE: October 8, 2004 The 2004 Rescue CIP provides for $35,000 in funding for extrication equipment. After through review and hands on training with a number of representatives the rescue captain along with the imput from the squad have selected the manufacture of Centaur Rescue Extrication Tools and Equipment. The supplier of the equipment is Alex Air Apparatus, Inc from Alexandria, MN. The total cost of the equipment being purchased is $27,607. I have attached the inventory of the tools and equipment being purchased. This memo is intended for your information. Respectfully, ~K~~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief Cc: Robin Roland, Finance Director Todd Kindseth, Rescue Captain Brad Parker, Rescue Lt. Mike Wise, Rescue Lt. 70 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City AdministralO#-- FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Change Order Notice - New Semo Fire Department Tanker - Fire Department DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION This change order is regarding the striping on the sides of the new truck. DISCUSSION Recent communications with Semo has resulted in differences of understanding related to the required reflectorized striping and the painted dark blue stripe on the sides of the new truck. The intent of the manufacturer was to utilize a decal type stripe. With the riveting of certain areas, the decal would obviously develop pockets of air under the decal. In order to continue with the appearance of the rest ofthe fleet, the stripe would have to be painted which will eliminate any problems as noted above. BUDGET IMPACT The total cost of this change is $3,000. The additional funding will need to be identified through the Capital Acquisition Fund. ACTION REQUESTED For Council information. Respectfully submitted, <~-_~eL~ d-~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Change Order Notice, New Semo Fire Department Tanker DATE; October 8, 2004 Recent communications with the Semo folks has resulted in differences of understanding related to the required reflectorized striping and the painted dark blue stripe on the sides of the new truck. The intent of the manufacture was to utilize a decal type stripe. With the riveting of certain areas' the decal would obviously develop pockets of air under the decal. In order to continue with the appearance of the rest of our fleet, the stripe would have to be painted which will illuminate any problems as noted above. The total cost of this change is $3,000. The additional funding will need to be identified through the Capital Acquisition Fund. Respectfully, ~K~~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief Cc: Robin Roland, Finance Director FFD Board of Directors Tanker Committee <j)a- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer TO: SUBJECT: Main Street Area Reconstruction Project Assessment Hearing DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION The City Council scheduled the Main Street Area Reconstruction project assessment hearing at the September 20, 2004 City Council meeting. DISCUSSION The Main Street Area Reconstruction project is almost complete. Street and utility improvements were done along Main Street from 3rd Street to T.H. 3, 4th Street from Main Street to Willow Street, 5th Street from Elm Street to Linden Street, Willow Street from 4th to 5th Street, 6th Street for 'li block north and south of Main Street, and ih Street for 'li block north and south of Main Street. The improvements were bid as two separate projects; Phase 1 consisted of the reconstruction of the streets and utilities along all of 4th Street and 5th Streets north of the railroad tracks and Willow Street between 4th Street and 5th Street. Phase 2 construction consisted of the rest of the reconstruction south of the railroad tracks. All affected property owners have been notified as to the date and time of this public hearing and that final assessments may be adopted at the public hearing pursuant to M.S. 429. BUDGET IMPACT The City's assessment policy indicates that the reconstructed street and lateral utilities (non-trunk sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main) costs are assessed to benefiting properties at a rate of 35% of the improvement costs with the City funding the remaining 65%. Trunk sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main are funded with City Trunk Funds. The City's portion of the costs are being financed per previous communications. A benefit appraisal was performed for the Main Street Project area. The results of the appraisal indicated that the maximum benefit received by the properties in the project area for the proposed improvements would be $6000 per residential equivalent unit (REU). The land area of the commercial properties in the project area would be converted to REV's and the commercial properties would be assessed for their respective REV's. The assessment roll has been prepared following this methodology. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution adopting the assessment roll for the Main Street Area Reconstruction Project. Respectfully Submitted, '~ )11 'Yna/h/l-- Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -04 ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR PROJECT 01-04 MAIN STREET PHASES 1 & 2 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the City Council and the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of October, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given by the Council, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for the following improvement: Proiect No. 01-04 (formerly 96-1) Description Street and Utility Improvements Location Main Street from 3rd Street to 8th Street, 4th Street from Main Street to Willow Street, Sth Street from Elm Street to Linden Street, Willow Street from 4th Street to Sth Street, 6th Street for ~ block north and south of Main Street and 7th Street for ~ block north and south of Main Street. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, is hereby adopted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of IS years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 200S and shall bear interest at the rate of S% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution until December 31, 2019. To each subsequent installation when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and s/he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 21 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessments shall be collected and paid in the same manner as the other municipal taxes. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of October, 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of October, 2004. City Administrator SEAL ~b City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator#~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Spruce Street Extension Project Hearing DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION The City Council accepted feasibility report for the Spruce Street Extension Project at the September 7, 2004 City Council meeting and scheduled the project hearing at the September 20, 2004 City Council meeting. DISCUSSION The proposed project consists of extending Spruce Street from its current terminus at Denmark Avenue westerly into the Spruce Street commercial area. A bridge over the Vermillion River is a necessary and key component of the project. The project would end at the proposed Town Square in the Vermillion Crossing Development (Knutson property). The proposed design balances roadway geometrics, environmental impacts and the new commercial development proposal on the Knutson property. The alignment has been incorporated in the preliminary plat designs for the Knutson property. BUDGET IMPACT The estimated project cost is $3,046,000. The City has received a Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Development Grant in the amount of $955,000. The remainder ofthe estimated project costs ($2,091,000) would be assessed to the benefiting properties. Staffhas reviewed this project and the future alignment of the roadway westerly to Pilot Knob Road. The conclusion was reached that the costs for this portion of Spruce should not be allocated beyond the Knutson property. The westerly portions of Spruce Street beyond the Knutson property would be paid for by those properties to the west of the Knutson property. Properties south of the river would participate in the costs of the east-west roadway planned for south ofthe river. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution ordering the Spruce Street Extension Project and authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications. Respectfully Submitted, ~M~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -04 ORDERING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 04-10, SPRUCE STREET EXTENSION Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of October, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 20th day of September 2004, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed Spruce Street Extension; and, WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 18th day of October 2004, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasibility report. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted the 7th day of September, 2004. The contracts for the improvements will be let within two years of the adoption of this resolution ordering the improvements. 3. Kevin P. Kielb is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of October, 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of October, 2004. City Administrator SEAL /00- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator. C ~]~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Customer Service Response Report DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION The customer service satisfaction program is designed to evaluate and measure the level of customer satisfaction during service-related interactions. Citizen service requests are documented in terms of complaint type, referring department, priority and service outcomes. Survey responses are typically anonymous to ensure that citizens with negative experiences are just as likely to respond as those with positive service experiences. It is the City's intent to use this information as a customer service tool to improve and promote excellence in customer servIce. DISCUSSION The table below reflects summary statistics generated by Customer Action Request forms over the months of April, May and June 2004. Summary response percentages are generated through the analysis of monthly reports and include response data from all operating City departments. # of # of Surveys Prompt Personally Courteous Month Service Returned Response Satisfied & Helpful Requests I April I May I June I Qtr Summary 72 41 48 161 36 20 17 73 88% 100% 88% 91% 83% 95% 76% 84% 100% 100% 100% 100% The percentages above reflect the number of actual surveys that indicated a response in any given category. Calculations are based on the actual numbers of responses received which may differ from the number of surveys received, as some respondents did not indicate answers to specific survey questions. On average, ninety five percent (95%) of citizen requests for service are handled and addressed within a 1-3 day period for the first quarter. Typically, from that point it requires approximately 90 days or more to receive, process, compile and analyze the survey response data into monthly reports. In terms of how personally satisfied a resident is with a specific service outcome, staff responses are, in most cases, controlled by state statutes, City ordinances, available staff resources and/or service priorities. In some cases, responses are a function of a third party who must respond to a given situation. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Acknowledge the Customer Service Satisfaction report data from April through June 2004. Staff will continue to present customer service satisfaction data to Council as it becomes available. Monthly report data with department breakdowns are available for Council review upon request. Respectfully submitted, >Z;~~/I fi t{dd~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director lOb City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator ~----- FROM: Jennifer Collova, Natural Resources Specialist ~ SUBJECT: Approve Funding for Metro Watershed Partners DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Metro WaterShed Partners is a coalition of over forty public, private and non-profit organizations in the Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota metropolitan area that, through collaborative educational outreach, teaches residents how to care for area waters. The mission of Metro WaterShed Partners is to promote a public understanding that inspires people to act to protect water quality in their watershed. Partners cooperate through educational projects, networking and sharing resources. There are many programs the Metro Watershed Partners have embarked on, one being, Minnesota Water - Let's Keep it Clean campaign which is designed to teach Minnesotans how to protect lakes, rivers and streams from stormwater run-off pollutions. This campaign also provides materials that cities, counties and watershed educators can use to meet the public education requirement of their Federal and State stormwater pollution prevention plans. Other programs include the WaterShed Exhibit, NEMO (Nonpoint Source Education for Municipal Officials, and VSMP (Volunteer Stream Monitoring Program). DISCUSSION The Metro Watershed Partners can assist the City of Farmington in meeting its educational BMP set forth in the city's NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System). The items that will benefit the City include; the Earth Friendly Yard and Lawn Care Flyers, Presentation to City Staff, Park and Open Space Maintenance Training, and Hazardous Materials Awareness Training. The City of Farmington has also used many other brochures, handouts, and the WaterShed Exhibit produced by the Metro Watershed Partners as part of the education and outreach portion of our NPDES Phase II Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. BUDGET IMPACT The City of Farmington has used materials produced by the Metro Watershed Partners for little or no cost. By contributing to this organization we can help ensure that their work will continue and they will be able to provide materials for the City's use. Metro Watershed Partners are currently seeking funding to continue their educational outreach programs. The annual support requested is $1,500, which would come from the City's Stormwater Fund. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the expenditure of $1 ,500 to support the Metro Watershed Partners. cc: file JOe!- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator r FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Trunk Highway 3 Functional Classification DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION The Metropolitan Council is in the process of updating the regions Transportation Policy Plan (TPP). Attached for Council's consideration is a resolution requesting that the Met Council change the functional classification of Trunk Highway 3 from Minor Arterial to Principal Arterial. A draft letter to the Met Council regarding the TPP is included as well as comments from the City's traffic engineer, the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) and Dakota County along with a Copy ofthe draft TPP. DISCUSSION The issues, both present and future, in regards to Trunk Highway 3 are well documented. The development anticipated for the area will require upgrades to Trunk Highway 3. Currently, MnDOT has designated Trunk Highway 3 a "Preservation Corridor". No significant funding of TH3 will occur while it has this status. In recent staff discussions regarding the TH 3 Access Management Study with MnDOT, Dakota County and Empire Township, it has become apparent that it is necessary to petition the Met Council to upgrade the functional classification of TH 3. An upgrade to Principal Arterial will identify that TH 3 has become a higher priority than previously acknowledged. The status of Principal Arterial will also make more funding options available. The attached resolution requesting that TH 3 be upgraded to a Principal Arterial outlines the reasoning for the request. Also attached for your review are comments from the City's traffic engineer, AMM and Dakota County on the Met Council's draft TPP. A draft letter to the Met Council with comments from the City is included for discussion. BUDGET IMPACT None at this time. ACTION REQUESTED . Adopt the attached resolution requesting that the Metropolitan Council changes the functional classification of Trunk Highway 3 from minor arterial to principal arterial. . Discussion regarding the comments the Council wishes to forward to the Met Council on the draft 2030 Transportation Policy Plan. Respectfully Submitted, ~ WI yvz~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -04 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE FUNCTIONAL RECLASSIFICATION OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 3 FROM A MINOR ARTERIAL TO A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL BETWEEN TRUNK HIGHWAY 50 AND CSAH 42 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting ofthe City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of October, 2004 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 of Farmington has participated in the first phase and is participating in the second phase of the Dakota County East- West Corridor Study; and WHEREAS, The City of Farmington is also participating in the Minnesota Department of Transportation Trunk Highway 3 Access Management Study; and WHEREAS, an Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review (AUAR) for approximately 1000 acres adjacent to Trunk Highway 3 in Farmington (Seed/Genstar Property) has identified traffic impacts to Trunk Highway 3; and WHEREAS, mining of regionally significant sand and gravel reserves along Trunk Highway 3 is anticipated to contribute to peak traffic trip generation and congestion within regional transportation corridors, including Trunk Highway 3; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Development Framework identifies and encourages a substantial portion of the region's forecasted urban growth within central Dakota County; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council's "Wastewater System Plan" is being amended to include the expansion of the Empire WWTP Service Area; and WHEREAS, The Metropolitan Council is considering the construction of new outfall lines from the Empire WWTP, which may ultimately convey treated effluent in an amount quadrupling the existing treatment capacity; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council and Dakota County have recently identified a new regional park within Empire Township east of Trunk Highway 3; and WHEREAS, among the findings of the Dakota County East- West Corridor Study, Trunk Highway 3 Access Management Study and Seed/Genstar A UAR are future critical deficiencies in the capacity of Trunk Highway 3 to receive forecasted traffic trip generation from planned developments distributed via existing and planned east-west corridors; and WHEREAS, there are no north-south principal arterial highways located between Interstate 35 and Trunk Highway 52, a distance of approximately 13 miles; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council's guidelines for principal arterial spacing is 3-6 miles in urbanizing areas and 6-12 miles in rural/agricultural areas. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Farmington requests that the Metropolitan Council change the functional classification of Trunk Highway 3 between Trunk Highway 50 and CSAH 42 from a minor arterial to a principal arterial. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of October, 2004. Mayor day of October, 2004. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us October 19, 2004 Mr. Peter Bell, Chair Metropolitan Council 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 1)V~~f1 Dear Chairman Bell: The Farmington City Council thanks you for the opportunity to comment on the draft 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) for the Twin Cities metropolitan region. The City Council forwards the following comments from the regular meeting of October 18, 2003: The City concurs with and supports the comments from the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities dated September 30, 2004 (attached) and the comments from Dakota County dated October 8, 2004 (attached). However, the alignment of the proposed E- W Principal Arterial, CSAH 70/TH 50, would need further study to address constraints in existing areas. The City strongly requests that Trunk Highway 3 be classified as a Principal Arterial from Trunk Highway 50 in Farmington to CSAH 42 in Rosemount. Between these roadways are areas of current and future intense growth in the county, including the cities of Farmington and Lakeville and Empire Township. This highway has become more critical as development continues and demand on the Trunk Highway increases. Based on anticipated development and the forecast traffic volumes, Mn/DOT's TH 3 Access Management Study states that a four-lane facility is needed to handle future traffic volumes. These improvements are needed now and the corridor should be identified as an expansion corridor with funding identified for improvements. Enclosed is a resolution requesting this functional classification change. The City further requests that TH 3 be shown, on Figure 4-12, as a route needing investment in the 2030 unconstrained scenario. Comments regarding the transit element of the plan are as follows: . Figure 4-3: This illustrates the existing transit service areas of which Farmington is a Market III level. The areas north and west of Farmington are Market IV. Those market IV "gaps" should be Market III. . Farmington is shown in a potential transit expansion area Figure 4-4. (The City needs to consider iflwhen they wish to be in the transit taxing district. Realizing that this would require a payment to Metro Transit, it needs to be discussed by the City leaders.) Mr. Peter Bell October 19,2004 . It appears as though there will not be any attention paid to Farmington in the transit areas in the next 25 years according to this plan. The City endorses a Cedar Corridor transit project. (The City is willing to plan for a park-n-ride lot with some type of express bus service to job centers.) Thank you for your consideration of these comments. We believe that addressing these issues will help to best meet the future transportation needs of Farmington, Dakota County and the region. Sincerely, Gerald R. Ristow Mayor, City of Farmington r ".f'1 O,..~ enclosures cc: file Lisa Freese, MnDOT Carl Orhn, Metropolitan Council Mark Krebsbach, Dakota County 2 ~ Bonestroo -=- Rosene ~ Anderlik & 1 \11 Associates Engineers & Architects 2335 West Highway 36 · st. Paul, MN 55113 Office: 651-636-4600. Fax: 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com MEMORANDUM To: Lee Mann From: Shelly Johnson Date: October 14, 2004 Re: Metropolitan Council - Draft 2030 Transportation Policy Plan Project No. 141-04-000 I have reviewed the transit and highway segments of the plan and have reviewed the comments that have been made in the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities September 20, 2004 memo and the review/responses provided by Dakota County in their October 8, 2004 letter to the Metropolitan Council. The two reviews, just referenced, were good, and I believe their points are well stated. Comments regarding the transit element ofthe plan are as follows: . Figure 4-3: This illustrates the existing transit service areas of which Farmington is a Market III level. The areas north and west of Farmington are Market IV. Those market IV "gaps" should be Market III. . Figure 4-4: Farmington is shown in a potential transit expansion area. The City needs to consider if/when they wish to be in the transit taxing district. Realizing that this would require a payment to Metro Transit, it needs to be discussed by the City leaders. . It appears as though there will not be any attention paid to Farmington in the transit areas in the next 25 years according to this plan. The Cedar Corridor transit project should be endorsed by the City, and some type of service running east-west connecting Farmington to that corridor should be mentioned. The City should mention that, in the near future, they will be ready for a park-n-ride lot with some type of express bus service to job centers. · St. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester, Willmar, MN · Milwaukee, WI · Chicago, IL Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned Comments regarding the system plan in regards to Farmington are as follows: . Figure 4-9: The City should definitely request that TH 3 be made a Principal Arterial- echo Dakota County comments. . With regard to Lakeville's request to make 70 a Principal Arterial, I like the way that Dakota County worded the east-west situation in their comments. If the City wishes to back 70 as a Principal Arterial, remember that it is presently routed on Ash Street, and adjacent businesses/homes may be negatively impacted with right-of-way needs for a new Principal Arterial. Some of us still favor that east-west route to go south of Ash Street to miss all of that presently developed land. But there is a need for an east-west Principal Arterial corridor. . The Met Council Principal Arterial spacing requirements for TH 3 and an east-west Principal Arterial are definitely met. . The City should request that TH 3 be shown, on Figure 4-12, as a route needing investment in the 2030 unconstrained scenario. I agree with Dakota County comments that Dakota County gets "shortchanged" in this plan. . st. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester, Will mar, MN . Milwaukee, WI · Chicago, IL Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned September 30, 2004 TO: Metropolitan Council FR: Association of Metropolitan Municipalities RE: 2030 Transportation Policy Plan Thank you for the opportunity to provide our comments on the public hearing draft of the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP). The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities is composed of 70 cities from around the seven-county metropolitan area, who share your assessment that transportation is one of the most important challenges facing our region today. After closely following your work developing the draft TPP and discussing it with our Board of Directors and member cities, the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities offers the following comments for your consideration. 2030 Transportation Policy Plan Overall, the draft plan does a good a job of outlining the situation facing this region - a rapidly growing and increasingly mobile metropolitan area that is expected to add another million residents by the year 2030. The plan is equally clear and direct in recognizing that current funding sources and levels are inadequate to meet the needs of this region. Without additional funding, congestion will worsen, travel times will continue to increase and both our mobility and economic prosperity will suffer. Finally, we are encouraged by the emphasis this plan puts on transit. AMM's members are strong supporters of a multi-modal transportation system that combines highway investments with the regular route bus service and dedicated transitways required in a metropolitan region of our size. Given these areas of agreement, we would, however, like to urge the Council to make several changes to the draft plan before giving it final approval. 1) Transportation and Land Use Planning As an organization of cities, AMM and its members view this plan from a slightly different perspective than other stakeholders. To cities, this is not just another needs analysis or study of our transportation system. It is a statutorily mandated and enforceable component of our planning process. Viewed from this perspective, we have several concerns about what the plan expects of local governments and their comprehensive plans. Policy 18 states that in order for a local comprehensive plan to be in conformance with the regional transportation system, cities must plan for the forecasts allocated to them and that they must do so in a manner that does not add traffic to any already congested roads. Furthermore, it states that extensions or capacity expansions to the regional sewer system will be predicated on the state or local unit of government demonstrating that "adequate transportation improvements will be provided when needed to avoid significant negative impact" on the highway system. This is unrealistic and unachievable in most parts of the region - especially given the congested state we are already in and the lack of funding to address existing problems or future needs. For the vast majority of metropolitan cities it simply will not be possible to accommodate any additional households without adding to already congested roads. There is no reasonable way to enforce this policy without shutting down development in many parts of the region. Given the official role this document plays in our local-regional planning process, it is important that all policies contained in the transportation policy plan are realistic and equally enforceable across the region. This is not the case with the currently drafted policy #18. Secondly, the draft plan talks a lot about encouraging cities to develop higher density and mixed- use centers that are transit-oriented and pedestrian friendly. This brings with it an obligation on the Council's part to commit to providing transit service to that area for the long-term. Unfortunately, this is an obligation the Council does not appear to have the resources to meet - especially in the case of developing cities. Cities cannot be expected to develop areas geared to transit, with higher densities and fewer parking spaces, only to have that transit service significantly reduced or eliminated during the next round of budget cuts. Additionally, the draft plan uses too many ambiguous terms when referring to cities and their comprehensive plans. In some cases, its says cities "must," while in others it says cities are "expected to" or that they "should" do certain things. The plan needs to clearly identify what cities must have in their comprehensive plans in order for those plans to be found in compliance with the system plan, versus what the Council would like to see in those plans as a matter of preference. Finally, the draft plan talks extensively about "managing" traffic and "managing" congestion, but there is very little discussion or mention of "accommodating" traffic or people. This region is so far behind on its transportation infrastructure that the 30-year plan is almost entirely about meeting existing needs. There is very little in this plan to serve future growth. For example, the plan does not identify a single new principle arterial, despite the fact that numerous cities have approached the Council about roads that are already functioning as principle arterials, but lack the appropriate designation, planning or design. Furthermore, despite the Framework's projections of significant population increases for the developing cities in Dakota, Anoka and Scott Counties, the transportation policy plan fails to include any projects to serve that growth. 2) Transportation Funding The plan lacks a clear and specific proposal for funding the needs identified. Experience has shown that this region cannot afford to sit back and wait for additional funding to materialize out of the legislative process. The Metropolitan Council has an obligation to put politics aside and the needs of the metropolitan area first. We invite you to join with local governments and other stakeholders to actively propose and work for additional funding. AMM and its members have long supported a variety of means of raising the funding necessary to build and maintain the transportation and transit system this region needs. Whether it be an increase in traditional funding sources such as the gas tax or license tab fees, or the introduction of new sources such as a metro-area sales tax or county-imposed wheelage tax, AMM and its member cities are ready and willing to work with the Council to develop and pass a multi-modal transportation funding package that can realistically address the needs of this region. Without the voice of our regional planning authority, it will be very difficult to overcome the partisan disagreements and special-interest battles that have left us without a permanent funding increase for 16 years. Given the Council's responsibility to plan the regional transportation system, it is most definitely your role to step into the heart of the issue and contribute to a solution on the funding issues. At a very minimum the plan should provide more specifics about what additional funding would mean on the ground. In order to make the case for additional funding, legislators and citizens need specific information about how additional money would be spent. The transportation policy plan should paint a clear and specific picture ofthe transportation system residents can expect in exchange for supporting higher funding levels. Summary In summary, while the draft plan makes many good points and includes important planned investments, it does not go far enough in proposing a realistic funding plan, identifying the investments necessary to support an additional million residents or providing a realistic foundation for local comprehensive planning. Thank you for the opportunity to share our concerns with you. If you have any questions or would like to discuss any of our comments in more detail, please feel free to contact Kris Wilson, interim executive director, at (651) 215 - 4003. SAMPLE RESOLUTION 2030 Transportation Policy Plan Whereas, forecasts call for almost one million additional residents in the seven-county metropolitan area by the year 2030; Whereas, an effective and efficient transportation system, that includes both roads and transit, is key to the successful growth and development of our region; Whereas, congestion and mobility issues are already among the most pressing challenges facing our region; Whereas, a comprehensive and well-rounded plan for our regional transportation system requires the input of numerous stakeholders, including local governments. . . Now therefore be it resolved, that the City of supports the attached comments prepared by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities in regards to the draft 2030 Transportation Policy Plan and urges the Metropolitan Council to make the requested changes to the draft plan before granting it final approval. October 8, 2004 Mr. Peter Bell, Chair Metropolitan Council 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Chairman Bell: The Dakota County Board of Commissioners thanks you for the opportunity to comment on the draft 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) for the Twin Cities metropolitan region. The County's Board of Commissioners reviewed elements of the TPP on October 5, 2004. On Thursday, September 23, you made the following statement in an article in the St. Paul Pioneer Press: "While growth is a good thing, it poses challenges, as anyone who has been stuck in rush-hour traffic recognizes. In a 2003 survey of metro area residents, traffic congestion ranked as the No. 1 livability issue, outpacing crime, education and housing." Policy 2 of the TPP supports this quote by stating: "Working with the Governor, the Legislature, the business community and other stakeholders, the Metropolitan Council will actively pursue an adequate level of transportation funding to implement this policy plan and address identified but unmet investment needs". (TPP, p.38). Funding is clearly the primary barrier to accomplishing the goals of the TPP. Dakota County strongly encourages the Metropolitan Council to be a strong advocate with the Governor and Legislature for increased levels of transportation funding. Additionally, Dakota County strongly encourages the Metropolitan Council to work with the Governor and Legislature to identify a dedicated, long- term source of funding to support the transit goals of the TPP; to develop a network of transitways and double current transit ridership by 2030 (TPP, p.63). The TPP contains many other policies and themes supported by Dakota County including: . Pursuit of improved transit service and coordination to better match service with demand. (TPP, p.68) . Recognition of the importance of Cedar Avenue BRT by the Council's commitment to seek state funding to provide improved transit service to the County and recognizing the project as a Tier 1 priority transitway. (TPP, p.67) . Recognition 1-35W BRT as Tier 1 priority transitway corridor. (TPP, p.67) Page 2 Mr. Peter Bell October 8, 2004 . Recognition of the Red Rock Corridor as Tier 2 priority transitway corridor. Red Rock Corridor has been designated by the region as a top priority; this should be reflected in the document on pages 66 through 68. . Pursuit of the cost-effective implementation of an integrated regional network of highways and transitways. . Recognition of the Hastings Bridge and Lafayette Bridge as expansion projects. (TPP, p.90) These projects should be listed in Table 4-10 or Table 4-11 on pages 93-96. . Recognition of isolated interchanges and auxiliary lanes as management of the system. (TPP, p.88) . Development of an unconstrained funding scenario that intends to identify unmet 2030 regional transportation needs. (TPP, p.86) . Proposed policies that direct funds to improve the regional transportation system based on system performance measures. (TPP, pA9) . Efforts to develop a regional map and inventory of both on-road and off-road bicycle facilities. (TPP, p.55) . Efforts to establish a regional freight agenda that includes a common vision to assist in the coordination of public and private investments for improvements in freight movement. (TPP, p.52) Dakota County has rapidly growing population and transportation needs. Since 1970, the metropolitan area has grown by more than 40 percent. (TPP, p. 7) Dakota County's population grew 83 percent from 194,266 in 1980 to 355,904 in 2000. In the 1990s, one in seven new residents to Minnesota settled in Dakota County. This growth is expected to continue through 2025 with Dakota County population expected to grow to 488,520. The vehicle miles traveled in Dakota County is expected to increase from 1 billion to almost 2 billion by 2025. The TPP states that the region has seen increased suburbanization and an increase of the region's jobs located outside of the central cities from 44 to 69 percent. (TPP, p.7) Serving and facilitating the County's population growth and vehicle miles driven will place incredible demands on the County's transportation system. The number of miles of congested Dakota County highways is expected to quadruple over the next 20 years. The continued growth of the County will result in future capacity problems on several trunk highway and county A-minor highway corridors. In recognition of the region's anticipated growth, the TPP states liThe TPP and infrastructure investments will support the staged, coordinated expansion of regional systems to help ensure adequate service to communities as they grow and stage their development within an area needed to accommodate 20 years worth of forecasted growth". (TPP, p.3) However, several strategies identified in the TPP and the proposed 2030 regional transportation system do not support this planned growth. . Strategy 18d states, liThe Council and MnlDOT have limited financial capabilities to fund transportation improvements other than those described in this plan. Local, county and private resources are needed in most cases to allow urban development to occur. The capital improvement programs of local and county governments should reflect these investments". (TPP, p.59) Although the goal of this TPP is to accommodate forecasted growth for the region, this strategy clearly puts the responsibility for funding regional transportation investments inappropriately on the local agencies. Page 3 Mr. Peter Bell October 8, 2004 . Regional transportation needs for areas in Dakota County simply are not addressed or recognized with this plan. The TPP regional growth data shows that the majority of future growth will occur outside the 1-494/1-694 beltway; however, only one small project in all of Dakota County is identified in the constrained highway plan. Specific Dakota County transportation needs and corridors that need to be addressed in the TPP include: The TH 52 Interregional Corridor (IRC) between the Twin Cities and Rochester, including a new interchange in Rosemount at the intersection of TH 52 and CSAH 42. Both highways are principal arterials. Improvements to the 1-35W/I-35 corridor between 1-494 in Bloomington and CSAH 70 in Lakeville. Improvements to TH 13 between 1-35W in Burnsville and TH 169 in Shakopee. Improvements to TH 3 between CSAH 42 in Rosemount and TH 50 in Farmington. Improvements to the TH 61 Hastings Bridge crossing the Mississippi River. A lack of trunk highways and principal arterials in the County create an excessive burden on the County highway system. Dakota County alone does not have the ability or authority to address these growing regional transportation needs. The Met Council's guidelines for principal arterial spacing are 3-6 miles for developing areas and 6-12 miles for permanent rural and agricultural areas. . Dakota County lacks east/west regional highways; south of 1-494 there are no cross county trunk highways for 27 miles beyond the County's south border. No east/west principal arterials exist south of CSAH 42 in Dakota County for a distance of 17 miles. In May 2003, Dakota County and the cities of Lakeville and Farmington adopted the East- West Corridor Preservation Study, which identifies new alignment for three minor east- west arterials that extend from 1-35 in Lakeville to TH 3 in Empire Township. Designation of an east-west principal arterial south of CSAH 42 needs to be considered. Potential candidates are CSAH70/TH50 and CSAH 86fTH19. These routes must be included on the 2030 regional system Unconstrained Plan Scenario. . Approximately 13 miles separates the two most prominent north/south principal arterials of 1-35 and TH 52 in Dakota County. Between these roadways are areas of current and future intense growth in the county, including the cities of Farmington and Lakeville and Empire Township. TH 3 exists within this area of existing and anticipated growth. This highway has become more critical as development continues and demand on the system increases. Dakota County requests that TH 3 be functionally classified as a principal arterial from TH 50 in Farmington to CSAH 42 in Rosemount. This route needs to be identified on the 2030 regional system Unconstrained Plan Scenario. Although the TPP does acknowledge new principal arterials, it is under the Constrained Plus 30 Percent Scenario that would only be initiated should additional funds be available. (TPP, p.99) Dakota County strongly encourages the Metropolitan Council to consider proactively addressing the issue of new principal arterials and associated need. The decision to recognize these new principal arterials should be based on need conditions, not funding availability alone. . The capacity of TH 3 south of CSAH 42 needs to be upgraded. The 11 planned residential developments alone (2005 -2020) that are within 1.5 miles of TH 3 add an Page 4 Mr. Peter Bell October 8, 2004 additional 15,000 residential units between Farmington and Rosemount. Estimating that each household generates 10 trips per day, these 11 developments alone will add 150,000 trips per day to the roadway system. Based on anticipated development and the forecast traffic volumes, MnIDOT's TH 3 Access Management Study states that a four-lane facility is needed to handle future traffic volumes. These improvements are needed now and the current designation of TH 3 as a Preservation Corridor is not acceptable. This corridor should be identified as an expansion corridor with funding identified for improvements. The 2030 Unconstrained Metropolitan Highway Scenario does not identify the total needs of the regional highway system. The current Unconstrained Plan Scenario only addresses maintaining the existing system at 1998 congestion levels. All of the unmet needs of the system need to be recognized to reflect the true lack of transportation investment and needed funding. In order for this document to be effective, it should represent the true needs of the system and be used with the Legislature to demonstrate the magnitude of the lack of funding. The following should be included in the Unconstrained Plan Scenario: . Sufficient new principal arterials in the metro region including Dakota County to accommodate the 20 years' worth of forecasted growth. . Interchange locations where new or reconstruction of the existing interchange can improve overall traffic safety and congestion of the highway system. . Jurisdictional transfers that have been discussed as part of the TPP and the appropriate funding identified to initiate the transfer of roadways to the correct agency. (TPP, p.51) Dakota County offers several other comments for your consideration. . The Constrained Plus 30 Percent Plan Scenario assumes a 30 percent increase in highway funding over the Constrained Plan Scenario. Projects that will be accomplished for the additional 30 percent funding are not identified or prioritized. (TPP, p.99) The TPP should identify improvements that would be accomplished with additional funding. Identifying these additional improvements will help support requests to acquire the needed additional funding. . Strategy 12e states, "New or reconstructed highway interchanges to expand capacity or meet safety concerns should be considered only if they are consistent with MnIDOT's TSP". (TPP, p.50) MnIDOT's TSP priorities are based on regional needs and constrained funding. This change in policy does not recognize the needs driven by highways under local jurisdiction or future interchanges located at the intersection of two county highways. Dakota County has identified eight locations within the county where local highway interchanges on A-minor arterials are likely to be required by 2025. . The TPP includes proposed policies on High Priority Projects (HPP) that states construction dollars can only be spent on projects in the TIP or MnIDOT's 10-year plan. If funding is designated for a project not identified in the 10-year plan, the local agency is responsible for the entire local match. (TPP, p.119) MnIDOT's 10-year plan is based on constrained funding for regional priorities. Several needs have been identified within Dakota County, however the Constrained Plan Scenario only includes one small project in Dakota County. It is important that Dakota County's ability to access all sources of funding is not limited based on policies in the TPP. Given the funding deficit identified in the TPP, we believe that all potential funding options should be kept available. The use Page 5 Mr. Peter Bell October 8, 2004 of HPP funds on the local transportation system needs to be addressed separately from expenditures on the trunk highway system. . Specific transit components that should be better addressed in the TPP include the following: Establish a more proactive approach addressing the future transit needs of the region. The TPP identifies a goal of doubling ridership and developing a network of transitways. However, necessary funds associated in achieving these goals are not identified. Identify funding for intermodal transit initiatives such as BRT in the Cedar Avenue Corridor and the 1-35 Corridor. Transit initiatives in the region to address peak period congestion. Identification of pilot projects testing new technology to improve mobility and maximize capacity. Consideration of future additional bus shoulder lanes on 1-35E, TH 52, 1-494 and TH 55. Recognition of suburb-to-suburb transit. Consideration of an extension of the HOV lane on 1-35W south of TH 13. Revising the transit strategies to acknowledge the location of transit stations and service where the need exists. Development along the corridor should be an ancillary result, not the driving force for the positioning of transit stations and service. To alleviate highway construction impacts, we encourage the following strategy: Identify highway construction funds for increased temporary transit services to supplement existing service in a corridor where highway construction impacts have a negative impact on peak hour transportation movements. . Dakota County has jurisdiction over 21 miles of principal arterial highways that are also on the National Highway System (NHS), roadways that serve as important connectors to the state and nation. This is approximately 50 percent of the metro area principal arterials that are not under Mn/DOT jurisdiction. These roadways are CSAH 42, CSAH 23 (Cedar Ave) from 140th St. to CSAH 42 and CSAH 32 from TH 13 to 1-35E. The TPP acknowledges that principal arterial highways are the most heavily used roads in the area, carrying 59 percent of the total vehicle miles traveled in the region (TPP, p.13). The principal arterials are the primary responsibility of Mn/DOT. Mn/DOT directly receives federal funds on an annual basis to upgrade and maintain the principal arterials based on the Metropolitan Council's and Mn/DOT's agreement. There is no opportunity for the local governments with jurisdiction over principal arterials to access this funding. Funding through the TEA-21 solicitation process is extremely limited due to competition with MnDOT principal arterials. If these routes are to remain under local jurisdiction, the available funding sources for these principal arterials need to be available to all agencies that have jurisdiction over principal arterials. . The TPP should identify the need for a planning study for a new bridge between the 1- 494 (Wakota) Bridge and the TH 61 Hastings Bridge or expanding the scope study for the Hastings Bridge to include this topic. Although the TPP does acknowledge this, it is only under a scenario should additional funds be available. Dakota County strongly encourages the Metropolitan Council to reconsider this action and proactively address Page 6 Mr. Peter Bell October 8, 2004 the issue of bridge needs across major rivers. The associated need should be based on conditions and not funding availability alone. . Dakota County encourages the Metropolitan Council to strengthen all land use and transportation policies and strategies by emphasizing the need for a local transportation network to serve local trips. . Policy 14 of the TPP includes emphasis on the important role of an effective and efficient freight transportation system. MnIDOT, in conjunction with the Minnesota County Engineers Association, is undertaking a local 10-ton system study on local highways. Dakota County has intensive concentrations of heavy industrial land uses along county highways; in order to provide an adequate freight system to connect to the state highways, we encourage consideration of a regional 10-ton system including trunk highways and local arterials. Thank you for your consideration of these comments during further refinement of the TPP. We believe that addressing these issues will allow us to work together to best meet the future transportation needs of Dakota County and the region. We look forward to working closely with your staff during further development of these plans. Please contact Kristine Elwood at (952) 891-7104 if you wish to discuss these items in further detail. Sincerely, Nancy Schouweiler, Chair Board of Commissioners c: Tim Henkel, MnlDOT Brian Isaacson, Mn/DOT Lisa Freese, Mn/DOT Carl Orhn, Metropolitan Council Connie Kozlak, Metropolitan Council N:\kris v\draft TPP letter )Od City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato~l'~ FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Joint Annexation Resolution (Empire Township) Property Owners: Bernard Murphy Farms Limited Partnership and Giles Properties DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION Bernard Murphy Farms Limited Partnership has petitioned for the annexation of approximately 93 acres of property, currently located in Empire Township. DISCUSSION Bernard Murphy Farms Limited Partnership is the current fee owner of a 93-acre parcel of property located in Empire Township. Giles Properties, Inc. also apparently has an interest in the property under the terms of a contract for deed. The property in question is east of and adjacent to property that Giles Properties owns (or in which Giles Properties has a legal interest) in the City of Farmington. The 93-acre parcel is also south of and adjacent to land that is locally referred to as the "Seed/Genstar" property. Bernard Murphy Farms Limited Partnership has filed a Petition (see attached) seeking the annexation of the 93-acre parcel referred to above. This parcel has been involved in the current MUSA review process. It is identified as Property "8" on the attached MUSA map. The MUSA Review Committee recommended that Property 8 be included within the MUSA [Metropolitan Urban Service Area] upon annexation. At its meeting on August 16, 2004, the City Council accepted that recommendation and adopted a Resolution to that effect. At the request of City staff, representatives of Giles Properties discussed the potential annexation of the property in question with representatives of Empire Township on several occasions while the MUSA review process was in progress. The potential annexation was also discussed at meetings of the EmpirelFarmington Planning Advisory Committee [EF-PAC]. These informal discussions eventually resulted in the drafting of a proposed Joint Resolution, which was reviewed and approved by the Empire Town Board at a meeting that was held on September 28, 2004. The annexation of this property will facilitate the creation of a well-coordinated development plan that includes all of the contiguous property owned by Giles Properties. The construction of the new transportation routes that will be needed within and near the Giles property will also enable the City (and the region) to address significant deficiencies in the current transportation system. RECOMMENDATION Motion to approve and adopt the attached Joint Resolution regarding the annexation of approximately 93 acres currently owned by Bernard Murphy Farms Limited Partnership and Giles Properties, Inc. Re!pe fully Sub il ~ I le Carroll Community Deve opment Director cc: Bernard Murphy Farms Limited Partnership Giles Properties, Inc. Empire Township PETITION FOR ANNEXATION In the Matter of the Petition by 13l-YVltV'J M t..wph 'I rt'U"M5,. l-p(i3."t'~ /J'tt:.w;:,h,J Property Owner(s) for annexation ofland to the City of Farmington pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 414 To: The City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota Copies to: Dakota County Board of Commissioners 1590 West Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55033 Minnesota Planning Municipal Boundary Adjustments 658 Cedar Street, Suite 300 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Town Board of IE'..... f:vt. 1i Township \vj\ OtO t\~\ ~~d Cl-\~ Clv-t. oRe s~~ ll.v'\ t) vY\~ ~Sblog By signature hereunder, petitioner(s) afirrm 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 € w. p;t--L , 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. Where petition is filed by residents or property owner(s): 1) list the number of petitioners required by statute to commence this annexation proceeding: 1 2) list the number of petitioners who have signed the petition: C:\Documents and Settings\lsmick\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKl \docs- #101424-v2-Annexation Petition revised form.DOC - - - Where the petition is filed by a municipality or town, identify the action taken by the governing body: V Resolution Number: Date: Ordinance Number: Date: Notice of Intent Date: 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 or equal to 60 acres l More than 60 acres More than 200 acres Less than 200 acres As to the property proposed for annexation, annexation is sought because the property is: 1. Owned by the City of Farrnington 2. 3.1- Completely surround by land within the Farmington City limits. Abutting the City of Farrnington on the N S W ~circle one) boundary. The area to be annexed is 60 acres or less, AND the area to be annexed is not now served by public sewer facilities and public sewer facilities are not otherwise available. (Applicable only if all property owners join in the petition) 4. 5. After August 1, 1995, 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 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 boundary adjustment. C:\Documents and Settings\lsmick\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1 \docs- #101424-v2-Annexation Petition revised form.DOC - - 9. The property is platted. 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 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. The following documents/items must be attached with the Petition: 1. Verification of ownership by a current commitment for title insurance, owners' and encumbrancers' report, etc; 2. Certificate verifying the Petition was served on all parties required under Minn. Stat. Ch. 414; 3. Filing fee required under Minn. R. 6000.3400; 4. Map of the annexation area required pursuant to 6000.0800 (c); 5. City application fee. Dated: 7- /cG - ;;;'00 ~ 20 ~ if &~ ~1fPetition~s) p.z: j)- bfI/?- - C> i q DO - (} /i - SO (Aa:oy"//"1? 4 0<< k~ -fc:, ~~ ry q~, 2 f ac v 1! <; (;vet~/74:) C:\Documents and Settings\lsmick\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKl \docs- #101424-v2-Annexation Petition revised form.DOC - - - -~---T------+ 1+--------------+--- ____~--:, I : : : ;' '. I: I ~ I ( /' L_______~ ' ~~;;:::;-- , ;!~ 'I 1- '. ~:-~..;:;--- ) -'.. 1- -IA~I \ __'-_~=J.JI-'~ -- _ _ -~ _ ~ _ _ _ -::;:~- _ --.:. _ --', )_/' I ---\ /' 4 , \..../' .//~~ \\ ~o" ??' /' ~~\Il-9 ~... . - - - - ~~~~: ~~~ - - "'.~. "'~' &.oJ'~ ~..:.,.c:> ~~::' C>~"""" "'+ __:::'r I ~> .1 . H ~ t ~] ~ !~ 01 .!:~ ~~ i~ I g, ~, ~! '! .~ h ~ -. in . ~~ ~I . -, . ;; ~I ~ , , ~ ~t ~: ~.~ r \-> ->\ PROPOSED ANNEXATION CITY OF FARMINGTON. DAKOTA COUNTY. MN FOR: GILES PROPERTIES, INC. "- "t>\ .. , , , .:::_:_=:-\ _ _ -I- - - - L -- I " ~', t 1/ ':,:,,~.s:;.. I I \ ~";;;'~~I ~ J ""''''....... \ ,v..;. I ... i _ Tl1i., R:!O \ :'!ii.:-R1E- ______L______ :',/' ---, ..~~""~ I ~2'......... Q : , <;>"'0<'-;' : j 1 "'.:.~. ~~~'":---~! ; ,...,-,,-J-+.;: ;:::.' ~~-:-,.,.~...,,~)~'-f-.:;- v:. e ,<.~:~t\~;~,-,.:--t~~~,"'...i:r. :.~.:!i:;:~ ~ . .'," -,.,," ~ '. ~;<~f ' t!:>.:;~ ,~::~-,,"'Clf. .:-', --:..-,l~~,~i ~ . . .... '~~~~~ .' . ~..~~,;~~' >:' < . '-,> - ". I~ ,___II[3TUNE or 1N"5C J/'I (}FSf"ClJ(W I#. "'~' ..;;;. ~~f ~ ~ff! ~ :t! ~ ~~;;! . 'j:~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~p' ! i}~ ~~~ !;; I .' i .J. S ;~! ~ ~i . ..- ;; ~ !i ~ iU ~ !t . ,iO..' ., .-' il h ~ ~[ ~~!a. 8~t' g ~t fi~ 's S -~ ! :~ ~i_~ 1< H ~t:I(;' ;: t: [!i ~i If; .. ~'~ " John Oliver & Associates, Inc. a.a~.~8.........._"""""" 680 Dodg~ Avom.ue HUe BiwT. Jlinnnotc (1"63)44'-2872 (FAXj#I-6666 20' ,.. rna.vel.en 7'r'criL Suit.! 288 BU1"R8'tIWe. JlN 55337 (952.)894-8045 (FAX)a94-8849 DATE: 9/09/04 ~ ~TE 8K/PG: X DRAWN BY: JTM CHECKED BY. RMM OWC. 1607N>lNEX.DWC TEXT: X I'lLE NO: 1607.10-03 DESCllPllllN o ~ ~ Q i . t ~ i ~ n )> r TOWN OF EMPIRE CITY OF FARMINGTON IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF EMPIRE AND THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, DESIGNATING AN UNINCORPORATED AREA AS IN NEED OF ORDERLY ANNEXATION AND CONFERRING JURISDICTION OVER SAID AREA TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT OFFICE, PURSUANT TO M.S. ~414.0325 JOINT RESOLUTION The Township of Empire and the City of Farmington jointly agree to the following: 1. That all of the property owners of the property described below have petitioned the City for annexation. The Subject Parcel abuts the existing eastern border of the City and contains approximately 93 acres, and is legally described as: The Southwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 114, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, except the West 990 feet thereof. PID NO. 12-01900-011-50 See Map(s) of Subject Parcel attached as Exhibit A. 2. That the purpose of the annexation of the Subject Parcel is to facilitate the development of a portion of the parcels to urban densities and to provide urban services, including city sewer and water services. 3. That in order to facilitate the construction and financing of the improvements necessary for development that is urban or suburban in character and the efficient delivery of governmental services, all of the properties should be immediately annexed to and made part of the City of Farmington. 4. That as a result of the proposed urban density development, the previously described area in Empire Township, Dakota County, is subject to orderly annexation pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ~414.0325, and the parties hereto designate this area for immediate annexation under this orderly annexation agreement. 113839 5. That both the Township of Empire and the City of Farmington agree, pursuant to M.S. ~414.0325, Subd. l(t), that no alteration ofthe stated boundaries of this agreement is appropriate. 6. Furthermore, each party agrees that pursuant to M.S. ~4l4.0325, Subd. l(g) no consideration by the Office of Boundary Adjustments is necessary, and that upon receipt of this resolution and agreement, passed and adopted by each party, the Director of the Office of Boundary Adjustment may review and comment but shall, within thirty (30) days, order the annexation in accordance with the terms of this joint resolution. 7. That the annexation of the property will not result in any change of electrical service and will not require joint planning since upon final approval of this joint resolution and issuance of the annexation order by the Director the property will immediately be fully subject to the official controls and other ordinances of the City of Farmington, including all land use controls. Further, that differential taxation under M.S. ~414.035, or reimbursement under M.S. ~4l4.036 is not required. 8. That the population of the parcels to be annexed pursuant to this joint resolution is zero (0) and the total area to be annexed is approximately 93 acres. Approved and ~Kr~ thisdK- day of ,2004. Approved and Adopted this _ day of , 2004. CITY OF FARMINGTON BY: BY: Its Mayor AND AND Its Town Board Clerk Its City Administrator 113839 MUSA Allocation Preliminary Draft (7/26/04) MUSA Allocation 1::1 2004 .. Under Review 1::1 MUSA Approved (Orderly Annexation Area) 1::12012 (Ag Preserve) E!l2013 (Ag Preserve) l1li Ag Preserve (No current expiration date) --. Futu re 195th Street Extension --. Future 208th Street Extension o 0.5 , N w*, s 0.5 Miles , JOe City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us J TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator'~ ~., FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Ordinance Amending Title 10 Chapter 6 of the City Code regarding Logo Signs in Public Rights-of-Way DATE: October 18,2004 INTRODUCTION The Farmington Lions Club has sought the City's permission to place their emblem signs at all five (5) Farmington municipal entrance monument locations. The City Code, however, does not allow any sign to be located within a public right-of-way. There are also jurisdictional issues involving State and County rights-of-way. Both jurisdictions have strict guidelines as to what can be placed along State and County roads. These issues are addressed separately below. DISCUSSION MnDOT Three (3) of the locations at which the Farmington Lions want to erect signs are within MnDOT's right-of-way (at the north and south entrances to Farmington on Trunk Highway 3 and at the east entrance on Trunk Highway 50). MnDOT has historically been very restrictive regarding the placing of items within its rights-of-way. For example, it took the City of White Bear Lake several years and many hours of staff time to get MnDOT's consent to put the signs of six local service organizations on the City's entrance monuments. MnDOT took the position that its "Guidelines for Installation of Municipal Identification Entrance Signs" (see attached Exhibit A) prohibited any sign or message that contained "advertising for a commercial product or service or any non-profit organization." White Bear Lake argued that a sign or logo for a local veterans group or service club did not constitute "advertising" for any such organization. MnDOT refused to change its position, so White Bear Lake sought an opinion from the Minnesota Attorney General's Office. The Attorney General's Office concluded, in an opinion dated April 4, 2003 (see attached Exhibit B), that "the placement of logos of veterans and service organizations on the City's entrance signs" is not prohibited by any law or statute of the State of Minnesota. However, the fact that it is not prohibited does not mean that it is automatically allowed under all circumstances. MnDOT still has the right to impose reasonable regulations on the placement of signs within its rights-of-way. Mr. Keith VanWagner, the Roadway Regulation Supervisor for MnDOT's Metropolitan Division, has advised City staff that MnDOT would probably allow the logos or signs of local service organizations to be attached to the City's existing entrance monuments. However, the design of our monuments is such that any attachments to the face of the monument would obscure portions of the text and/or graphics, and would adversely affect the aesthetics of the monument. It is clear that MnDOT would almost certainly not approve service club signs attached to individual posts in the right-of way. There is a slightly greater chance that MnDOT might approve a single structure (separate from, but near, an entrance monument) to which individual service club signs could be attached. To explore this possibility, MnDOT will require that a very specific written request be submitted for review and approval. This is an option that City staff members are prepared to explore with local service clubs in the future. Another possibility that can be explored would involve putting service club "sign panels" on the green "City of Farmington" entrance signs (that is, the signs that show the City's population as of the date of the 2000 census). MnDOT's Traffic Engineering Manual (see attached Exhibit C) includes provisions that allow "community recognition sign" panels to be attached to "City Name Markers" under certain circumstances. This may be a viable alternative to putting service club signs on or near the City's concrete entrance monuments, if or when the City Code is amended to allow such signs. Dakota County Two (2) of the locations at which the Farmington Lions want to erect signs are within Dakota County's rights-of-way (at the north entrance to Farmington on Pilot Knob Road and at the west entrance on CSAH 50). Dakota County's position with regard to the sanctity of its rights-of-way is slightly less restrictive than MnDOT's policy. According to Gordon McConnell, an engineering tech in Dakota County's Transportation Division, Dakota County would strongly prefer that any service club signage be physically attached to the City's entrance monuments (which raises several related issues of the type addressed in the MnDOT section of this Memo, above). However, Dakota County is apparently willing to at least consider signs that are not physically attached to our entrance monuments as long as they are (a) located within the landscaped areas around the monuments and (b) located outside of the "clear zone" (which is determined by the speed limit, road design and other factors). As with MnDOT, however, it appears that Dakota County would strongly prefer a single structure to which individual service club signs could be attached, rather than a collection of individual posts and signs. City of Farmington Even if the requirements of MnDOT and Dakota County can be met with regard to the proposed Lions signs, Section 10-6-3(C)(6) of the Farmington City Code still currently provides that "no sign shall be upon or overhang any public right of way." The City Code will have to be revised in a fashion that will allow certain types of signs to be placed in the right-of-way under specified circumstances. At the request of City staff, the City Attorney has drafted an Ordinance (see attached) that is designed to accomplish that objective. The City Attorney has indicated that there are certain constitutional issues inherent in allowing some types of signs to be placed in the right-of-way, while other types of signs are prohibited. I have attached an explanatory memo that the City Attorney has prepared regarding this subject. Although the attached Ordinance presents some risks, I personally believe that the risks are outweighed by the many benefits of allowing local civic and fraternal organizations to promote their organizations through the use of attractive and unobtrusive signage. Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission reviewed and discussed this issue at its meetings on July 13, 2004, August to, 2004, and September 15, 2004. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed ordinance at its meeting on October 12, 2004. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached ordinance regarding logo signs in public rights-of-way. . . " ~UG. 5.2004 3:18PM WBL CITY H~LL NO. 809 P.5 .,."""EllO~ !'ll Keith VanWag"er Roadway Regulation Supervisor Metropolitan Division 1500 W@st County Road B-2 RoseviIJe. MN 55113 Mobile/Pager: 651.775.0404 Fax:: 651-582.1454 Office. 651-5B2.14.;3 :ltn Dcp:! rtmcn t of TI":tnspr.r.tation ltcnnncc Bulletin Number 97-2 Septem ber 16. 1997 BILL WARDEN TO: Area Maintenance Engineers Maintena.nce Superi ntendents Signing Supervisors "J /)/ L P.nnf~ Specialists . /J. ! i /U,(If- ROdne1 A. PLetan, P.E. 0/1 It.) State Maintenance Engineer . FROM: SUBJECT: Municipal Identification Entrance Signs The following guidelines for the installation of Municipal Identification Entrance Signs have been developed by the Traffic Engineering Organization, have been reviewed by the Federal Highway Administration and have been approved for all Trunk Highway and National Highway System Routes. GUIDELINES FOR INSTALLATION OF MUNICIPAL IDENTIFICATION ENTRANCE SIGNS A MUl.licipal Identification Entrance Sign meeting aU o[the following g~idelines may be considered for installation within trunk highway right of way: . .."A. The sign (Illessage, color) shall not simulate a traffic: control de....ice. t.Y The sign shall not be erected or maintained in such a place or manner as to obscure or otherwise physically interfere with an official traffic: ;:ontrol device or a railroad safety signal or sign, or to obstruct or physically interfere with the dri....ers I view of approac:hing, merging or intersecting traffic. ~ Distracting flashing or moving lights shall not be allowed [MS 173.15, (7)]. Minnesota Department of Transportation issued Technkal Memorandum 92-3S.ES-07 dated October 1, 1992 which states that "Lighting which presents a new message, pictorial image or change illumination at a rate less than once e\'el)' six seconds is determined to be a flashing or mo\'tng light and is in violation of MS 173.l St (7)"'. ~ A sign may b~ installed along any two-lane, two-way convention~~ hihw~ or . c:<:pressway with at-grade intersections. EI<~, IS l-r A. AUG. 5.2004 3:18PM . WBL CITY HALL NO. 809 P.6 t- .. , ~On freeways and expressways with interchanges, signs may be installed only at exit ramps. \ . - 7: Only one sign shall be allowed per trunk highway approach~ into a municipality. ~: Signing is only allowed for inc.orporated municipalities. /fC A sign shall not be placed any further than 2 miles from the corporate limits and not before Or within the limits of another municipality. ~ The sign s~all face traffic enfCring the municipality and may be located on the left-hand or right-hari~'side of the roadway_ . ,..k The sign shall be ground mounted and located outside the clear zone as close to the right- of-way line as practical. . Y~e s.ig~ si~e. including bord_er and trim, should be no larger th~ 250 ;quare feet. This Slze hmltatlon excludes the slgn supports or structure. ~ 5 l( I 0 ~ S;--Orr ~ -+ Z ~ fO .: fii~ F;:V ....r;:"' The sign may incorporate a logo and a short promotional slogan which has ccn historically used in identification of the municipality. Z. . Qe sign mess~J!;'s~ll not cont.in advertising for a commercial product Dr service or any ". . E-O.!'11rofit org""'zal1oo. ~ "'~ ~! v"'.t............. ,. <o-f ~ ~ ~ ......w:- The sign shall not co~tain any animated or moving parts. ~he sign shall not utilize flashing disks. ~.~ Sign lighting shall be in conformance with MS 173.16, Subd. 3. @e sign shall comply with local ordinances. ._ S 'i~ 1....---.-1 ........... SPEC(AL PROVISIONS I have attached, fot" your convenience, special provisions th~t may be used on any limited use permit to be issued to a municipality for the erection of a Municipal Identification Entrance Sign and a copy of Minnesota Department of Transportation form T.P. 1723, currently under revision, for your information and use. cc: ~}< Trogstad-Isaacson, 6A Mik~ Weiss, MS 725 , . AUG. 5.2004 3:18PM WBL CITY HALL NO. 809 P.? ~ SPF.CrA L PROVISrO;"~ ,......t. The pennit issued to the municipality is granted solely for the purpose of establishing, maintaining. and constructing the Municipal rdentification Entrance Sign at the location sho.....n in accordance with the attached drawings. YThe establishment, maintenance, and construction of the Municipal rdentification Entrance Sign will be the responsibility of the City at no expense to the Department of Transportatio n. / It is understood and agreed that the City will be allowed access fromlhe Trunk Highway roadway for the pOTT\ose of maintaining or repairing the Municipal Identification ~~ . Entrance Sign. ; t ~. Approval from the Area Maintenance Engineer Will be required for any changes or deviations from the drawings or special provisions. ,......S': The sign shall be located on the top of the backslope near the right-of-way line. The sign will not be permitted in the clear zone (as determined by Department of Transportation standards.), on the shoulder inslope. or in the ditch bottom. ~The sign cannot be placed at a location where it will interfere with the effectiveness of any signing, traffic control devices, or interfere in any way with the safe operation of ."." motor vehicle traffic, or the safety of pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles. ., ;k" The sign installation shall be maintained in good repair. If this requirement is not met, the applicant will be notified to remove the sign. ~. The City shall be responsible for the installation of temporary erosion control measures concurrent with the construction operations or as soon thereafter as practicable. Temporary erosion control measures are; but not limited to, straw bale structures, silt curtains, sediment traps, or other means to temporarily protect the overall work prior to restoration of the work site. /' The City, upon completion of the Municipal Identification Entrance Sign, shall restore all disturbed slopes and ditches in such a manner that drainage, erosion control, and aesthetics are perpetuated. ;Q No assignment of this permit is allowed and no commercial activities will be allowed on Department of Transportation right-or-way. ,. ~1. No advertising in any form, shape, or size shall be constructed or pennitted to be constructed upon the right-of.\vay subject to this permit. /'2. The City will preserve and protect all utilities located on the lands covered by this permit ,RUG. 5.2004 3:18PM WBL CITY HRLL NO. 809 P.8 ~ at no expense to the Department of Transportation; a.nd it shall be the responsibility of the City to call the Gopher State One Call System at 1-800-252-1 t 66 at least 48 hours prior to performing any excavation or driving any posts. KThe applicant is required to preserve all existing survey monuments, If the: Minnesota Department of Transportation determines that monuments have been disturbed or destroyed during construction activities, the applicant shall accept full responsibility for all costs incurred in the re.establishment of monuments. Ahis permit does not release the City from any liability or obligation imposed by Federal Law, Minnesota Statutes, local ordinances or othe~genciesrelating thereto; and any necessary permi~relating thereto shall be obtained by the City. , ~ ~ Any use permitted by this pennit shall remain subordinate to the right.of-way of the Department of Transportation to use the property for highway and transportation purposes. jkThis permit shall be subject to cancellation and termination by the Department of. Transportation for good cause by giving the City written notice at least 60 days prior to the datf;,when such termination shall become effective. ~Upon cancellation of said pennit, the City shall be required to remove the Municipal Identification Entrance SignJII:td restore the area to a condition satisfactory to the Area Maintenance Engineer. Removal shall be at no expense to the Department of Transportation. " 04/llAUG. 5.2101041- 3:23PM~BL CITY HRLL --.--..---- d~/Q~/iooa 18:21 ,~X a5~1911~38 ATT~JNBY GENERAL apPlCB ~( . NO. SilO P.7g0B;& . " ~~~f:~..~ ~.,~~. . ..~:~~~ '.., ~......- .~.:jt;."""" - ,--io ',f"_ ~)- . , l ." ":1" -~... "~"'.'.'-+, :;::~:~.;.. '~'" J";b' ':;:;~:"~"L:). .~...~.'" ,. ." r..'", :""'-..~:1.'";J~ ~~::tttat~~ . STATE OF MINNESOTA ~ OF 'IlDt ATrO)ZNEY G'EN:lmAL ;rdtK.E HA'tCJ! ATf01lNltY G'DIEIt.ll, April 4. 20tn S:UAP;!l'tJII&T ~.. lIT. r'A~"'~ ~g~1Il 'rI!1II'IIDIilI:I ~ D7.,11111 Mr. Roger A.Jensen ~, BE:.L, CONVnSB k~ON 1500 Minnesota Warld Trade Center 30 Baat Seventh Street St. Paul. MN' 55101 VlAFACS~ AND U.s. MAlL Re: 1bquest for A.UAlrney General?s OpiDioJl for City 01 White Bear Lake - Pla-=ernent of Service and Vetera~1 O~iUltiGD J,.o.:os on Mutrldp.J identification :EntraDee Sip in.Publtc Rights of Way Your File No. 3118.1 Deer Mr. Jens;eni Thank you fer your letter dated. Jannuy 24, 2003 requesting ~ opinion fro.m ~ I:t.cmey General with respect to the p]a~t of Cit)' of White B.Bst I...ab ligns on state trUnk ghway rights-of-way. I apologize for-my late ~p~8e.. . FACTS YOl:l st:l~ tl'!-at you :n the Ci~ Attorney for the City of Whits Bear La.lcc., Mi e.sDta (the uCitYj. Y01l ~ratc that the City hu placed ''municipal identification" sip wi n state highw~ rlghts-of..way at principle emrances to the City~ 'Xbe signs contain ~ CBlIlgc "Welcome. [0 1Nbitc Bear ~ C!ty ofLak=s ck Legends." Belew The: sign panel contain ng that rnessage 1& a sope.rate panel containing ]pgos of v~teran an.d.1I~vicc DJPnizatiOt1S having h~ptm; in the City. including the Rotary, Lions Club, VFW. American t.egiOD and Masons. YDQ a.y that officials of the Minnesota Departme:nt of Tran,portarton (MnDOT) have tabn the posit on that inclusion of the logos on the signs is contrary to Mian. Stat. i 169.07, which prohibits in er t2lia, , any ttaffic sign or signal bearing "coommercial ad.v~sing!' YDU do not b&Uc:ve. tbat Section 169.07 appllea to the present situation because City's entrance signs do not constitute IItraffic signs"', Moreovlirr. you do not believe that the 1 gOIl for the ~ee 1tt)d ve.terans organiza.tions CDNltil;U'U:. L1cor.mn~1'Cial advertl&ing'. yem rcquea;t at this: Office. provide the City with an opinion tbllt tbe City!; CDt:rance J,igns do not violate Mi n. SClt. t 169.07. ~l%SllIlncl c5.!lU 1!)'l'.2.2lS -Tn: (G51) 222-2525 -'TaU !'rDa! Linet1 CROOJ ~'.97B' (Vaic:c). CBDD) 3e&-4112 (Tn)' W\\'\ll,~CIlte. II.UIl An 'Equal Op~uniQ' ~Q\Pl~WhO VrlIUl!S ))1Yl!lIily (I Prillldl em 5Oc;t rli)'dllli Pllpel' n!'io bat Cll1lSIlIl'llll' eoqttntl .. E~J/f IZ" B :,T U4/~UG. 5.20040{ 3:23PM ui.\.JBL CITY Hi=lLL &l'~"JS~..D.c;.L.J...L.U~y.c;~l).c; 0:4104/1DD3 16; U... FAl U..1.291~lSS ATTOINi! lmNERAL QP1='~c.R NO.S10 P. S'uu. iOD2 . ..., . Roger .A. Jensen April 4, 2003 Page 2 LA. W f\ND ANAL YSlS Responsibility and authority tor management and X'BgW.stion of the gtate trUnk high aye;, . includj,ng highw~ rl2hts-of-w&y, has besn delegated by tha l~zis1~ tD th~ Cosmnissi Cf of Tlil1lSPorta~on. See, e.g. Minn. Stat. ~t 160.02, Eiubd. 25, 161.20, 173_025 (20tU). Sme this Office provides legal advice: and repre~ntatiQl1 to the Commis&ioner in conn~tion w1.! her clutie&, we are unable to pm\lidc to you a fonnaJ opinion on tbB is$UC. Notwithscandin this limitation, I belic,ve that I can provide th~ i'ODowing comments, which I hope that you wi find belpfu1- . It does not appelJ: that the logos of veter3.J1S and 5~ice lOaDS COJl'alitUte "cQ'2I1Sn 'al advertising" for pUIJ'oat!s of Minn. Stat. 1169.07, MinD. Stat. 1169.07 does not efinB "commarcial ar:lvertisin('. As used in comrncm ;parlance, however; "conunen:i:d" is deft as '"pertaining to, Ot =~agcd in ~om.maroe." 'Th~ A71wican H~7irQt:eDicrfo1ft1ry 267 ( 981)- "Conuneroe" is defined B5 "the bJ1~J1g Df selling of goa~ ... business; tra.c1e," ItL The arganiz~tignJ whose logos i!3'C pla.c:cd on me City's entrance signs m:e pres ably nonprofit o~ganizations established to le.tVe the community and its mer.nben. The organiz tionl do not appear to be c:ngage~Jd in what is commDlUy thought of as comm~e csr business, but er philanthropic, membe:rship and comm.unity activities. As Ii tesa]t. we do not beliflve at the placement of thait logos on Oly enlnmCC signs CCQUil:itutee '-Comrn~ S1d'V~rtising". . With resp~ to whether thl5 entrance sigDl ccn!titutc 'lraffic signs," 'Vie do not n d to a.dd.re!s that igaue sinea we do not belisve ma.t the logos. in l!I1)' event, constitUto "CD ercial advstti&ing" . CONCLUSION' I ' : In light of the above, we dD not. believe that thl: placement of logos of "Ie: S=Mce organizations on th~ CitY's ~tm1cc signs il probibirsd by Minn. Stet. 1169.07. m Ii , JR. Assistant Atl'OmeyG~J (liSl) 297-1141 AUG. 5.2004 3: 26PM ,," WBL CITY HALL ' "TRAF~It,EN~INEERING Fax:6S1-20S-4~26 MaS" 8 "01 NO.8ll P.10 ' 11 :34 ,P.O.2 : TRAr:FlC ENGiNEERING '''V~NUA.l '. Julv 1, ~OOO - " 2. Operll,LiomLt Gui Si Sign XlJmb~r ll-3 ~~ 111 nonn~lIy be instail!:d at the: ac: ru 111 corporate ~oundaI)', 5ubje~t to t\1.:= fOllowing guidelir.cs:, ,", ' ' !. YIctI'OpoliCl.l\ eM (Seven .county ~nnneapo1is-St. l.1v1etto Al'ea and'Dulu:th) , " " , ln~ta.11 ~lgn"I2.3 or ne:ar th~ cotpor-ate limits . Ol\' 'l1l1 trunk hig WilY$. inclu.ding intc:rnate , 'highways.' ,', " " . , , .b. AU .ather areas or f , Instill Ssi~ 12.3'at ne'ar the,.coxportte limits , . O!', aU. trUl}k highw i, exc:lu~ing itlt~tatl!! , ~t&n\lld.Y~~ ',' . c:: On interstate high s, ~ following' criteri3. .' ", ,a.pply:' ", 1) if the cotpo ,litniu Df a community llre ". c:rossod by tl terstau: highway, and tbctl'o is . . no i~tert:han 5etvin~' the: cornrnunity, ,inst.:ll1 . ' ~ $ign on e intersutl:: higl:tway llt the , , ,corpOntl~ Iiml rossi~s: 2) If. tbe corpOTllt llmit$ of a.. c:o'nln1Umty SoTC " CT'OlIi$l!:d' by the nterstat~ highway" and an interehlU1gc di'r tly setVes the: community and the: CQmm t1 is not identjfl~d. on either' the miYor inte Cl!lge guidil! si:~lii or on a supplel:nental ide sign, install th~ sign' on ' , ,tile ~tmt!l.~ ghway a.t the l::ot::Pornte ltmit crossing~.," ." 3) If the corpo e limits' of a' community" :at': crossed by interswe' highway., and a.n, interch:Lnge .~tly serves ,[he c:ommunitY and th~ comm ity'is identified on either th.~ . major ime:rch !,I!l' guide, s;i~ns' ot, on a suppl~.entat 2 t'ae $iFI'l. do tlot ,insfAll the, , . sign on the int tat~ hlg~~y. . Where proper city n. ha"e tWO \lIordS. it m-ay' be 'desirllble to arr;mge: th niUne on tWO tines rUhC'r 'th~ . one, "Cfspec:\ally when ~ wordS are lonCJ. City naml!:lt , , shall not be abbrcviim: "c , . . All eil)' ~a.11~ signS sha ,nc:lu,dc the population ti~u~. , The figure used shall th:a.t of the lust official FI,/;C1.e.ral ~r St~te c:ensus. Popul ion figures are: c~ng:c.d ol\ly arter ~ oft1ci~1 census: f il community d~~;cks it. does not want ~Qe 'popu.l:lt:ion lc:1tideQ, on this sign. MnJ,D01: '\l'ilI,eover ~hlS lege~d.' , " , . An ex'c:eption ~o the' II ve applies \0 unincorporated c'omr:.1Ltniti~ which' WiI. nt dty name signs. but for- which popul:ttion cou/\ sie not ~vailabte. The sign inst:llled . llt thl'lsC! 10 tion~ shatl c::arry Qnly the' com:nuni[>, n:t.me: , , ..... I11III1 ~~f@l~ ~~~~ 6-8,'02.04 ComtT1lJn; 'Recognition S;gQs JRane/S} 1. ;ItttrbdllCtlOn & B ackgro\1R " . , There. has ~en' a continuing Sttles of requestS ~y . cities to attach. si.tpplc:mental sign 'p:1l1els [0 [he CitY. Nume MlU'k~rs"s'l!n. The Co~unity Rec;:ognition. Sign Program :illo\lls communities to express' their OWl" idc:ntity~ l'ermittil'U! l' " a. in~ of si anclS' alia ;: ,communi to Ie w at o ,1m cirtant or' Ilt ~Dn on tnln hi",hwa: ~Lg \ts-Q -way. . 2. R.CStr\CllonS . . . . ' Community Recognition Signs ~ill nofbc a11'o~ed , on blter~nll.tl: m:i;wlllY~. s[;U.ewide, Dr on fre~~<\y$ and c:xpressways. in the' s~Ye[J.(:?l.lnlY ~o area (Anoka. CaTV~r. D3kDt3.. ~~nQepln:, Ramsey. Sco~~ ~d W~h1ngton counties). ',:, 3. General GllidcUncs ' , .. a. ~ple~ of' ~n p'anel$ thxl are tlertnitted: 1) Non"pl'ofj.t scrvil:.:~ Q~i7.a.tions 2) Special programs, ~ithcr': pei:manc:nt l;)r t~or:try~ e.g. DARE, Tree,~ity, etc. ' ' 3) City logo .. , - --,. " . ," 4) City,ftcognidon' slo:ans; e.g. State Baseball ' ChtmploJ,15. ' .... ' , ~) D~n.g W:tter Prott:~on Arc:!. sign panel b~ Ths ;ign pllhels shall be initiat,?d rm:d , co~rdinil~d, by the community. c.. v c.'. of !:i nets. ma. , ' ' 1l!:rmiuec1, up to a \ota.! Df 1800 nun ,1[1, . , fell Y GO rom ... -, 10 tl~ t. ese p~e s m:sy. c 1n~ e onzon y eune:r, bs:.low the. City Name Marker sip or. if preferred. by :dle , dismct/divbion.. bldo""," iln e1<;isting 'Star City' rign 'p'me~ if it is mounted on itS ~wn StIUctl11'l!. '. d. The messa~ on "~ign. pan~~' sh~U nOt ~lrnula~l! a " U'i1ftic tontI'Ol device Of contain. directional ~ign mes~ages, or a.dvertising for ..1 commerci3J. p'roduc:t orservic:e. ' , ' . e." PoEtical or eommerl:i:s.l a.d.v~ttising' will, nOI; be 'nl1owed 0\'1 sign panels. , r. TI~e sIgn 'pan.~r d:signs Shll\ be llpproved.1iy ~he distl'ic:eI.d.~...b ion tnffic C'llginccr.' , . GXIh& -r -a..... ~ ~" MEMORANDUM TO: Kevin Carroll FROM: Andrea Poehler DATE: 9/10/2004 RE: Farmington/right of way signs Section 1O-6-3(C)(6) prohibits signs on or over the public rights-of way except within B-2 districts where an overhang of 15" is possible. In amending this ordinance to allow signs within the public right-of-way, the City must consider first amendment issues to avoid the adoption of an unconstitutional provision. First, an ordinance that specifically allows the council unlimited discretion in permitting or excluding certain signs, with no standards, would allow the council by the terms ofthe ordinance to act as an unchecked censor and the courts have squarely held that this is impermissible on its face. Second, there is an issue of whether and in what ways a City can distinguish between certain types of speech, i.e., what are the legitimate grounds for allowing some signs while excluding other signs. For example, some cities have adopted ordinances which seem to allow all signs (subject to the council's discretion) except political signs on city rights-of-way. The only conceivable interest in such a distinction is that the city seeks to avoid actual and perceived favoritism among political candidates. Where cities have adopted similar exclusions, courts have only upheld them where the regulation is the least restrictive means toward that interest. A court might find that since not all right-of-ways carry a close connection between city and message, there are many less restrictive ways of avoiding the appearance of favoritism than a blanket prohibition impacting only political signs and applying to all public rights of way. As a general matter, if a city allows certain commercial signs but does not allow non-commercial signs, the ordinance will almost certainly be struck down. Similarly, if an ordinance distinguishes among non-commercial signs, the regulation will also likely fail. The touchstone for determining validity under the First Amendment is content neutrality. If the regulation picks and chooses among messages, it is subject to strict scrutiny. If, on the other hand, the regulation can be construed as a valid time, place and manner restriction, it will be subject to a less exacting standard. For example, in the leading public property sign case, the Supreme Court upheld a complete prohibition of signs posted on public property. City Council of the City of Los Angeles v. Taxpayersfor Vincent, 466 U.S. 789 (1984). The challengers asserted that the City's ordinance was unconstitutional as applied to political signs. The Court held that because the prohibition did not distinguish either between commercial and non-commercial or among non-commercial messages, the ordinance was content neutral. Further, the Court found that it was narrowly tailored to serve the "weighty, essentially esthetic interest in proscribing intrusive and unpleasant formats for expression." [d. at 806. In short, if the City opens the right of way to some speech, the proper means for regulating it are generally time, place and manner restrictions rather than any sort of content-based distinction. Thus, the City could require permits for signs in the right of way, limit the total number of sign permits, restrict the time period for the signs (as it does now), and further limit the materials and dimensions of the signs. Alternatively, the city could ban all signs from the right of way or, with some additional risk, permit only non-commercial signs in the right of way. 1 CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 CHAPTER 6 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, CONCERNING SIGNS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 10-2-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended by adding the following definition: SIGN, LOGO: A sign carrying a symbol, standard, emblem or insignia, identifying a governmental agency or any civic, charitable, religious, institUtional, patriotic, fraternal or similar non-commercial organization. SECTION 2. Section 10-6-3(B)(I) of the Farmington City Code is amended by adding a new subsection (t) to read as follows: (t) Logo Signs: Logo signs may be permitted within the public rights-of-way if approved by the City's director of public works, provided that: 1. the logo sign is co-located with the City's entrance signs, and does not exceed 24 inches in height and 24 inches in width (if rectangular) or 24" in diameter (if round); 11. the logo sign is sponsored/requested and maintained by the organization's local chapter, with an office located within the City; 111. a responsible person ofthe organization is designated for maintenance issues; and IV. the organization provides written proof that it has obtained any permits and/or approvals that are required by any other governmental entities (State of Minnesota, Dakota County, etc.) for the placement of signs within their rights-of- way. SECTION 3. Section 10-6-3(C)(6) of the Farmington City Code is amended to read as follows: ~ ~I 6. Public Rights Of Way: No sign shall be upon or overhang any public right of way, except: i) as permitted under section 10-6-3(B)(1)(t); or ii) within the B-2 district where an overhang of fifteen inches (15") is possible. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication according to law. r ADOPTED this _day of ,2004, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor ATTEST: By: City Administrator SEAL By: City Attorney Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of , 2004. lOP City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: David Urbia, City Administrator SUBJECT: 2005 CIP PROJECTS - AUTHORITY TO PROCEED WITH PLANNING DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION At the CIPpresentation at the council meeting of September 7th, it was noted that council direction for the 2005 projects early on would be very helpful to staff in preparing plans, specifications and bidding documents. DISCUSSION Below is a summary of the proposed 2005 projects and a progress update: Council approval provided: -Ash Street -Spruce Street -Sidewalk & Curb Replacement Program -Annual Sealcoat Proj ect - Elk River Trail & Pilot Knob Road Signal -2005 Park Master Planning -2005 Park Improvements Council direction pending: -Fire Station - Prairie Creek Drainage Way Dredging -Sewer Meter Replacement Status: process underway Improvement Hearing 10.18.04 program routine by staff - underway program routine by staff - underway schedule driven if signal meets warrants RFP approved planning underway, individual improvement requests will be brought to council in 2005 Status: refer to attached WOLD letter staff has begun preliminary work staff has begun preliminary work Regarding the fire station, included is mapping outlining alternate locations for a future third station. Staff consensus is that three stations will be necessary in this community upon its future build out including the current and potential MUSA and orderly annexation areas. To determine if the second location makes sense, it is important to look at the third location now. Staff consensus is for a third station in the vicinity of Highway 3 and 195th Street. The mapping shows the 1.5 mile radius and how these areas correspond to each other. BUDGET IMPACT · Fire Station -Architectural fees with WOLD would be 70% of the basic services of$85,000 equaling $59,500 to design the facility and ready for the city council with a decision to bid the project, out of the Municipal Building Fund. . Prairie Creek Drainage Way Dredging -Funded by the Storm Water Fund, project implemented by City Staff, assisted by consulting engineers if necessary. .Sewer Meter Replacement -Funded by the Sanitary Sewer Fund, engineering consultant will provide plans and specifications on an hourly basis. ACTION REQUESTED Recommend approval to proceed with necessary planning and design of the three remaining projects. Staffwill bring projects back for Council authorization to obtain bids. September 1, 2004 weLD David Urbia City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 MINNESOTA OFFICE 305 ST. PETER STR ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55 651.227.7773 FAX 651.223.5646 WWW.WOLDAE.COM MAIL@WOLDAE.COM ST. PAUL, MN ELGIN, IL TROY, MI DENVER, CO Re: City of Farmington Commission No. 9999 Dear Dave: Weare pleased to provide a proposal for design services for your new Fire Station #2. The design services are based upon information developed while creating the pre-design studies referred to as the New Fire Station Design Concept Submittal dated August 12, 2004. The study concluded basic construction cost of$1,069,500 with an additional Apparatus Bay of $248,000 and sleeping area for ALF of $49,600. Including all of the components and 50% of the contingency brings the construction cost basis to $1,417,000. Our proposal is consistent with previous work with the City which is based on construction costs, furniture fixture and equipment costs, and "out of pocket" reirribursables expenses as follows: . Basic services fees: 6% x $1,417,000 = $ 85,000 . Selecting, specifying and procuring furnishings, fixtures and equipment: 6% x $ 350,000 Total Services Fees $ 21,000 $106,000 . Reimbursable expenses are at cost and are in addition to the total services fees which include miscellaneous printing, phone, fax, mileage, etc. . Costs for bid set printing are direct pass through cost to the city Weare proposing a fixed fee based on the information as indicated. This approach provides no "surprise" in hidden costs. We look forward to continuing our highly successful relationship with the City of Farmington. Previously, we experienced very good bid results with spring bidding. In order to meet a March, 2005 bid date, we recommend starting the design process no later than October 1,2004. Please let me know if I can provide additional information. Sincerely, WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS 2 ' . }1~J cc: John McNamara tj WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS KP/9999/CI _ Farmingtonlaug04 2005 Park Improvements pending approval of 2004 Park Master Planning Next steps: Staff will prepare a ten year pro-forma showing these projects costs with revenue growth projections and operational expenditure projections to have an idea of the impact to the overall tax levy in years to come. BUDGET IMPACT As outlined and significant. ACTION REQUESTED This program should be worked upon in conjunction with the budget workshop process. Council direction for the 2005 projects earlier than this would be very helpful to staff in preparing plans, specifications and bidding documents. Respectfully submitted, ./'. -, ( / "/./z,/ .../' I L.j~,-J..Lck/ .4-~. L~LLCqJ .c..'y. David M. Urbia City Administrator 3 t--- ~ o N in -=~ ~""3lm lI) w (g~ M~ a; ~ lI) ~(g ~N .... .... .... .... .z- ]nN3^W .uf.l.SOw1J .... .... " i ~' ! ~~,! :i1. ,- , /' , " ,.. " ,," / It) ~ M ~~'"' N"" lI) lI)2iij ...J::::)ow ~~~d oa:::wa::: . I- w:::!O i lI)...J::&::t !z!i~1- c(1/)....O a::: . I IX! ojww >woE! :E:ornll) W-I-I- a:::lI)::::):::l u::3!:OO NON" '-ON!:: Q)C')I/) z o l- e? Z ~ C!: <( LL LL o >- I- U o o Tg 10 tg w I N --' , <( IoU +8 (/) gf ~o / :J1/ ~ _~I ~j i I · ~ ""'~ I I I I I , , , I I I I -..--- :2l \ \ \ \ \ \ II \ " \ 65 , ... ... ,.-'!: .-... ~ ;; ~; .... ~'S. ~ :I' C$AI< " --- ! I 1. ~ i " " B 500 I I I I I o 1000 2000 3000 SCALE ICITY OF FARMINGTONI Figure 1 Existing Fire Station - - - Proposed Fire Station at North Municipal Campus " S1" i _~l ~j ~ I ~ ""'~ I I I I I , , , I I I I -..--- 21 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , , u .. i5 , , , .... .... .... .... "'"" 1 I 500 I I I I I o 1000 2000 3000 SCALE ~ tAJ\::~_~QLu~__ \~,; -', , .... , .... .... .... .... , , , " , , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I I J J , I I I I I I I I I I ,. ,. --- '1 i i Figure 2 Existing Fire Station --- Proposed Fire Station at North Municipal Campus --- Possible Fire Station Location Near Future 195th St. Connection [CITY OF FARMINGTON / ~/ ~ -~ ~j ~ 1- ~ ""'i' I I I I I I I I I I I I -..--- g \ \ \ \ , \ \ \ " '\ " " II .. " " ... ... ... ... .... .... 500 I I I I I o 1000 2000 3000 SCALE 1 I -............... ........ .... ... ... --- -l.s- "I \~ ~~ X 'i, \~ \(1) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 / / \ , \ \ \ \ \ " '\ ..... I'11IUT \1m' , ,. ,. ,. ,. ,. ,. ,." .... --" 's Ii Figure 3 Existing Fire Station --- Proposed Fire Station at North Municipal Campus --- Possible Fire Station Location Between Elm St. and Co. Rd 66 ICITY OF FARMINGTONI / ~/ ~ -~/ "'i Ii '- - ! ,.,,) I I I I I I I I I I I , -..--- ~ , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , , .... .... .... ... ... ... =~- -- 1 I 500 I I I I 1000 2000 JOOO SCALE Figure 4 Existing Fire Station Proposed Fire Station at North Municipal Campus Possible Fire Station Location Near Ash St. and Highway 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \\ '1 \ Ii \ ICITY OF FARMINGTONI ',7A 'U , ,~ \~ \% ~~ \c::. \(1) , , I I I I I I I I I I I I I , , / " ~" ! _~7 "'i ~ '- ~ "") I I I I I I , I I I I I _u___ 21 , , \ \ \ \ \ \ " , " " " " , , ... ...... 500 I I I I 1000 2000 3000 SCALE 1 I --- -- -.... ....... ... ... ... , , ',7#0- 'U , ,,~ \~ \\ ~~ \(::. 'ell I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I , 11 I! Figure 5 Existing Fire Station Proposed Fire Station at North Municipal Campus Possible Fire Station Location East on Highway 50 ICITY OF FARMINGTONI ... City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers . \ FROM: David Urbia City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: October 18, 2004 It is requested the October 18, 2004 agenda be amended as follows: PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS !9.g) Vermillion River Crossing Preliminary Plat Update - Administration Staff will present an update on the status of the preliminary plat. David Urbia City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /()3 TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: David Urbia, City Administrator SUBJECT: Vermillion River Crossing Preliminary Plat Update (Supplemental) DATE: October 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Mr. Randy Pederson requested the preliminary plat be placed upon the council agenda for approval. As the Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat with conditions, and those conditions are being worked upon, the plat was not ready for this meeting's agenda. However, I decided from this request that a progress update will be an appropriate way to inform the council and community of the efforts involved to make this project a reality. DISCUSSION Kevin Carroll will summarize the Planning Commission's recommendation conditions. Lee Mann will provide a progress update on meeting those conditions. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED For your information. Respectfully submitted, David M. Urbia City Administrator Values Statement Excellence and Quality in the Delivery of Services We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional and cost-effective manner. Fiscal Responsibility We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Ethics and Integrity We believe that ethics and integrity are the foundation blocks of public trust and confidence and that all meaningful relationships are built on these values. Open and Honest Communication We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees. Cooperation and Teamwork We believe that the public is best served when departments and employees work cooperatively as a team rather than at cross purposes. Visionary Leadership and Planning We believe that the very essence of leadership is to be visionary and to plan for the future. Positive Relations with the Community We believe that positive relations with the community and public we serve leads to positive, involved, and active citizens. Professionalism We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the development of our employees.