The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09.20.04 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 September 20, 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 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (9/7/04) (Regular) b) Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation c) Capital Outlay - Parks d) Approve On-Sale Beer License New Moon Buffet - Administration e) Appointment Recommendation Solid Waste - Human Resources f) Schedule Assessment Hearing Main Street Project - Engineering g) School and Conference - Fire Department h) Adopt Resolution - Call G.O. Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 and G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1997 - Finance i) August 2004 Financial Report - Finance j) Schedule Project Hearing Spruce Street Extension Project - Engineering k) Extension of Fire Wise Dry Hydrant Grant - Administration I) Approve Application for Fire Prevention Grant - Fire Department m) Preliminary Tanker Truck Inspection - Fire Department n) Zoning Map Amendment - Rezone Property from A-I to R-l - Parkview Ponds - Community Development 0) Approve Bills '. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Approve On-Sale Wine License New Moon Buffet - Administration b) Approve <(onditional Use Permit Garvey/Empey Properties - Community Development Action Taken Approved Information Received Information Received Approved Approved R72-04 Approved R73-04 Information Received R74-04 Approved Approved Approved Ord 004-518 Approved Approved Approved 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) Award Rescue Truck - Fire Department 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes Solid Waste Inquiry - Administration b) Consider Maintenance Agreement - Farmington Lanes - Engineering c) Approve Change Order Southeast Area Utility Trunk Project - Engineering d) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Regarding Existing and Proposed Park, Trail and Open Space Plan Map - Parks and Recreation e) Amend Section 10-6-4 of the Zoning Code to Include Commercial Vehicle Parking on Private Property in Residential Districts - Community Development f) Approve Thoroughfare Plan - Community Development 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Great River Energy Power Line Routing Options - Community Development b) Consider Authorizing 20gth Street to TH3 Feasibility Report - Engineering 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Farmington/Castle Rock Joint Planning Board - Community Development 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN Approved Continue Current Practice Approved Approved Tabled 10/4/04 Ord 004-519 Tabled 10/4/04 Submit Letter. R75-04 Councilmember Fogarty 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 September 20, 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 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (9/7/04) (Regular) b) Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation c) Capital Outlay - Parks d) Approve On-Sale Beer License New Moon Buffet - Administration e) Appointment Recommendation Solid Waste - Human Resources f) Schedule Assessment Hearing Main Street Project - Engineering g) School and Conference - Fire Department h) Adopt Resolution - Call G.O. Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 and G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1997 - Finance i) August 2004 Financial Report - Finance j) Schedule Project Hearing Spruce Street Extension Project - Engineering k) Extension of Fire Wise Dry Hydrant Grant - Administration 1) Approve Application for Fire Prevention Grant - Fire Department m) Preliminary Tanker Truck Inspection - Fire Department n) Zoning Map Amendment - Rezone Property from A-I to R-I - Parkview Ponds - Community Development 0) Approve Bills Y. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Approve On-Sale Wine License New Moon Buffet - Administration b) Approve Conditional Use Permit Garvey/Empey Properties - Community Development Action Taken Pages 1-14 Pages 15-17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Pages 21-22 Page 23 Pages 24-31 Pages 32-33 Pages 34-35 Pages 36-39 Page 40 Pages 41-43 Pages 44-48 Page 49 Page 50 Pages 51-55 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) Award Rescue Truck - Fire Department 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes Solid Waste Inquiry - Administration b) Consider Maintenance Agreement - Farmington Lanes - Engineering c) Approve Change Order Southeast Area Utility Trunk Project - Engineering d) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Regarding Existing and Proposed Park, Trail and Open Space Plan Map - Parks and Recreation e) Amend Section 10-6-4 of the Zoning Code to Include Commercial Vehicle Parking on Private Property in Residential Districts - Community Development f) Approve Thoroughfare Plan - Community Development 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Consider Authorizing 20gth Street to TH3 Feasibility Report - Engineering 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street. Farmington. MN 55024 651 463-7111 Fax 651 463-2591 www.ci.fal.J11ington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: David Urbia City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: September 20, 2004 It is requested the following supplemental item be added to the September 20, 2004 agenda: PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS lOb) Consider Maintenance Agreement - Farmington Lanes - Engineering Attached is a revised Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement between the City of Farmington and Farmington Lanes. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 11 a) Great River Energy Power Line Routing Options - Community Development See attached map. 11 b) Consider Authorizing 20Sth Street to TH3 Feasibility Report - Engineering See additional attachments. NEW BUSINESS 12a) Farmington/Castle Rock Joint Planning Board - Community Development Appoint a Councilmember to the Farmington/Castle Rock Joint Planning Board. Respectfully submitted, a~~ ~ David Urbia City Administrator 1ft cu .... ~ ~ cu c ::i c o .~ .- E 1ft C l! I- w a:: CJ cu .~ .... ftl C ... cu .... :;: I~ .... <li ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ //b Rother Farm 20649 Chippendale Ave West Farmington, MN 55024 September 17, 2004 Via e-mail Mr. David Urbia, City Administrator Mr. Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: 20gth Street Extension Feasibility Study Dear David and Kevin, During discussion on the subject at the September 7 City Council meeting, Councilmember Kevan Soderberg seemed concerned that we have not applied for annexation and our timetable for development. Weare waiting for the information from the completed feasibility study that is critical to our decision of both items. When our family met with City Staff on July 9 to discuss development of the property there were many questions on how the 20gth Street Extension would affect our property, the cost to construct the extension and how cost sharing would occur. Weare not able to make any decision on annexation and development until we know where these issues stand. It was determined at the meeting that the best means to get answers to these and many other related questions was to conduct a comprehensive feasibility study by the City Engineer. We believe it is important to have the feasibility study done at this time because development of surrounding properties appear to be eminent and we don't want to become an island in amongst development. All future developments in the area would benefit from the 20gth Street extension and now appears to be a good time to consider how to plan for the cost sharing and associated future thoroughfares. Feel free to share this endorsement letter with the City Council. Contact us if any questions. Respectfully yours, Jerry Rother & Kay Cahill Page 1 of 1 David Urbia From: JREZSt@aol.com Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 11 :30 AM To: Lee Mann Cc: Kevin Carroll; David Urbia Subject: 208th Street Feasibility Study Scope Lee At the July 9 meeting with City Staff, including yourself, and us on the Rother property it was determined a feasibility study would be needed on the 208th Street extension to address many questions for future planning, We understand you are preparing a project request to be presented to the City Council. Our question is will the project scope include the following: Amount of right-away required - width? Exact East-West road location on the property? Information to be used for proposed power line location and development planning. Urban or rural design? Will side streets be accessible? Road height to accommodate railroad overpass? Railroad crossing underpass vs overpass? Cost to construct including road, bridges and property acquisition? Proposed cost sharing among benefiting parties? These are important factors for us to make our decision on annexation, Call me anytime to discuss any questions or our inputs. Jerry Rother 952-835-9204 home 952-893-2255 office 952-994-0453 cell 9/20/2004 /07a::...r .' City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us September 15, 2004 Maralee Rother Castle Rock Township Clerk 2537 240th Street West Farmington MN 55024 VIA FAX RE: Possibility of Joint Castle Rock/Farmington Meetings Dear Ms. Rother, As you may have heard, the September 7th meeting of the Farmington City Council included a discussion regarding the possibility of commencing a series of regular (yet informal) meetings between representatives of Castle Rock Township and the City of Farmington to talk about issues of common interest. The primary topic of discussion would probably be the growth pressures that the City and the Township are both facing, and the best methods for jointly dealing with related development challenges. For the last 2Yz years, the City of Farmington and Empire Township have been engaged in regular discussions of the type referred to above. This City/Township discussion group, which was initially called the Empire/Farmington Joint Planning Board, is now referred to as the Empire/Farmington Planning Advisory Committee [EF-PAC]. The EF-PAC consists of three representatives from each jurisdiction - a City Council or Town Board member, a Planning Commission member, and a staff member or consultant. The current members of the EF-PAC are as follows: Empire Town Board member Ed Gerten Empire Planning Commission member Greg Feely Empire Planning Consultant Dean Johnson Farmington City Council member Christy Fogarty Farmington Planning Commission member Todd Larson Farmington Community Development Director Kevin Carroll The City representatives are appointed annually by the City Council, and it is my understanding that the Township representatives are appointed annually by the Town Board. The EF-PAC meets every six weeks or so, and the meeting locations alternate between Farmington City Hall and the Empire Town Hall. Dean Johnson and I take turns preparing and distributing the agendas and the minutes of the meetings. I've attached, for reference, a sample of one of our recent agendas. I certainly do not mean to suggest that any future joint meetings between the City of Farmington and Castle Rock Township would have to follow the "EF-PAC model." I have provided information about the EF-PAC group merely to indicate one possible method of conducting productive joint meetings. Many other options exist. Something that works well in one place may not work at all in another. The most important thing is that some form of regular communication takes place. The actual format or structure of the discussion process itself is much less important. . .. I have to attend a Planning Commission meeting in Farmington tonight, so I'm not available to attend the Castle Rock Town Board meeting this evening. However, I would be happy to come to one of your future meetings if your Board members would like to informally discuss the possibility of initiating a series of regular City/Township meetings. You can contact me by phone or bye-mail to notify me of the date and time of any Town Board meeting that you might want me to attend. If you have other ideas about how we could begin to explore this topic, I'd be happy to hear them. Feel free to call me at your convenience. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Kevin Carroll Community Development Director 651-463-1860 (w) 651-775-5962 (c) /CG COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR September 7, 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, Soderberg Fogarty Joel Jamnik, 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; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Terry Merritt, Randall Pedersen, Dick Hansen, Terry Pierson, Mark Pierson, Arlo Finey, Arlyn Lamb, David McKnight, Randy Becker, Dan Iverson, Steve Wilson, Mike Zitek, Russell Zellman, Terry Flower, Jim Ozmun, Kay Cahill, Stuerbaults, Jim & Tara Hedlund, Jeff Krueger, Denise May 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Cordes pulled item 7a) Council Minutes 8/23/04 Special to abstain from voting. City Administrator Urbia added under 8a) a revised ordinance, I2a) a budget handout, IIa) CIP memo, 5a) Presentation ofGFOA Award. City Engineer Mann added under 1 Oe) an update on the status of the Southeast Area Trunk: Utility and Pond Project. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Presentation of GFOA Award City Administrator Urbia presented the GFOA Award to Finance Director Roland. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Terry Flower, 13586 Fisher Avenue, Nininger Township, stated he is running for Dakota County Commissioner in District 1. Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 2 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve Council Minutes (8/23/04 Special). Voting for: Ristow, Fitch, Soderberg. Abstain: Cordes. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: b) Adopted RESOLUTION R67-04 - Accept Donation - Parks and Recreation c) Approved Cardboard Recycling Program Agreement - Parks and Recreation d) Authorized Staff to Re-Advertise Sale of Garbage Truck - Parks and Recreation e) Information Received Capital Outlay - Parks f) Approved School and Conference - Fire Department g) Acknowledged Retirement - Human Resources h) Acknowledged Resignation Parks and Recreation - Human Resources i) Received Information Capital Outlay Liquor Operations - Finance j) 2004 Seal Coat Project - Set October 4,2004 Assessment Hearing - Engineering k) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Proposed Garvey/Empey Annexation Petitions - Community Development The City has received two separate petitions for annexations. The first property consists of three parcels south ofHwy 50, east ofHwy 3 and north of 225tti Street. The applicant is Mr. Colin Garvey and he proposes commercial uses on the property. The second annexation is for adjoining property owned by Ms. Judith Empey located to the south of Mr. Garvey's property. The potential annexation of Mr. Garvey's property was envisioned when the negotiations were entered into regarding the Ash Street project. There was a Joint Powers Agreement for this project and these three parcels are included in an area that was considered for annexation. The understanding in the agreement is that if Mr. Garvey wanted to seek annexation it would be done through ajoint resolution between the City and the Castle Rock Town Board. The Joint Powers Agreement does not specifically talk about the Empey property or address the issue of annexation. An ordinance would be needed for annexation of this property. The Garvey and Empey properties have been recommended to receive MUSA. Councilmember Soderberg asked if the Garvey request had any impact on the Empey request. Staff stated Mr. Garvey's plan is to develop both properties. From Mr. Garvey's perspective they are linked, but from a legal standpoint the annexation of one property does not require the annexation of the other. The Garvey property is 40 acres and the Empey property is 45 acres. Mr. Arlo Finey, Berrlng Avenue, asked where the golf course is. He heard a rumor it has been built by adeveloper and homes will be built there. Staff showed the golf course is to the east. Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 3 Ms. Terry Pierson, 22Sth Street, asked ifit was too premature to ask what is being proposed for the Garvey and Empey sites. Mayor Ristow stated commercial has been proposed for the Garvey property. Staff replied for the Empey property, Mr. Garvey has indicated it will be residential development with 15,000 sq. ft. lots. Ms. Pierson stated her concern is the density of housing and whether or not the rumor Mr. Finey has heard is true. She stated the citizens know there is nothing they can do about the sale ofthe properties, and hoped Farmington is not stretching themselves too thin and wanted to see good planning. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to close the Garvey hearing. Mr. Colin Garvey stated both properties relate to the Ash Street project and he does not want to bring in one without the other. Councilmember Fitch stated staff shows two separate actions being requested. Mr. Garvey stated he went through the whole process with the two properties together and he has not heard of them being separated until tonight. Councilmember Soderberg stated they are two separate legal documents so they have to be considered separately. Mr. Garvey asked what if one comes in and not the other. He cannot develop them separately because of the Ash Street project and the cost. City Attorney Jamnik stated ifthe Garvey property comes in, it's in. If the Empey property does not come in, it stays out. Council is not required to authorize the annexation of either or both. It is two separate legal petitions by separate owners and separate legal proceedings. Council's authority is to make the decision for one, both, or neither. Mayor Ristow stated Mr. Garvey has the authority to act for Ms. Empey. City Attorney Jamnik stated he has seen no agency authority and we have a petition from Ms. Empey that gives us jurisdiction to act on her property. Mr. Garvey stated the properties are being developed in conjunction with the Ash Street project. Mayor Ristow stated it is Mr. Garvey's call as to whether he wants his property annexed. Mr. Garvey then asked Council to vote on the Empey property first. Attorney Jamnik stated so far the hearing has been on the Garvey property. The Empey property has not been discussed. Mayor Ristow stated we could go on to the Empey property now and then vote after that. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Terry Merritt, 7300 147th Street, Apple Valley, Attorney for Castle Rock Township, stated the Joint Powers Agreement covers the jurisdictional basis for the Garvey property. During the discussions on the agreement there was no mention of the Empey property. The Township is opposing the Empey property because they question whether it is necessary or appropriate, and also because of the work that went into the initial planning ofthe Joint Powers Agreement. The township is willing to continue discussions with Farmington in dealing with this and future annexation issues. Mr. Colin Garvey, stated he believes the Empey property was considered to be developed. He showed a map from the township's engineer showing all the areas Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 4 considered for the storm water pond, including the west side of the golf course, ponds 7, 6 on the Empey property and pond 55 on the Empey property. The township paid in excess of $50,000 in fees to the engineering firm for this study which he believed Farmington paid for. At that time, the township wanted him to give them an easement for his property. He told them he would sell them the easement, but they did not have the money to buy it. They did anticipate the property being developed fairly soon or they would not have done the study. He then showed a map from 1964 showing it was all vacant land and the township has developed it over the years. This was the reason for the storm water management plan. In 1998 the township signed an agreement with Farmington and the Met Council when Canton Court was developed that the township participate in the storm water runoff plan. Mr. Garvey does not believe the township has fulfilled their obligation with this, because Farmington is also paying for that. Another concern he had was the delay ofthe project. He had a bid for the ponding and the excavating of this project from Friedges Excavating for under $1 million. Because of the delays by the township, the contract was awarded for $1.3 million. He showed a map with the original design of the pond from the summer of 2002. Then he showed a map ofthe change in the design of the pond by the township from December 4, 2003. He believed this was after the signing of the Joint Powers Agreement. Mr. Garvey did not understand how the township can come back with all these fees spent, all this money from the taxpayers, and say they did not plan on this being developed. Yet, they came back and changed the design of the pond that was approved by their own engineers for over two years. He could not get any answers from the township. The costs on this project have risen dramatically. There is a $721,000 increase in just the price ofthe pond alone. As the drawings show, they did plan on the Empey property being developed. They would not have requested an easement if they did not want it to be developed. He has followed the process and attended the MUSA and Planning Commission meetings. He believed this was only to delay the process more. Regarding the additional $700,000 for the pond, he asked ifthere was a signed bid from the contractor and ifthat included that additional cost. City Engineer Mann replied the estimated construction cost ofthe pond is similar to the bids received. There are other costs such as engineering, studies that were done over various years, etc. He would need to meet with Mr. Garvey to find out which costs he is describing. Councilmember Fitch stated construction will start this fall. Mr. Garvey stated at that time he was doing the pond privately. He was trying to show how much construction has jumped in delaying these projects. When the agreement for Canton Court was signed by the township, it stated that they will participate in the storm water plan. That whole area has been designed to be done at the same time. Councilmember Fitch stated his understanding is there has been a lot of communication between the City and Castle Rock and asked if this has been an issue up to this point. He had not heard any objections to the letters of interest in Council Minutes (Regular) September 7,2004 Page 5 some ofthe areas the MUSA Committee has selected for MUSA. Community Development Director Carroll stated they have done their best to keep the townships informed. One of the first meetings was devoted exclusively to township properties. He did not recall receiving any formal objection from the township to the MUSA issue. He agreed with the township's attorney that there should be more communication over issues like this in the future. Mayor Ristow noted about the properties along Hwy 50, if any of those properties wanted to come in to receive City services, there would be no objection. He asked if that would be the same for the Empey property. Staff stated as far as the Garvey property, yes. As far as the Empey property, probably not. Councilmember Cordes wanted to make it clear, the City did not solicit the annexation petitions. The property owners came to the City. Staff confirmed that the City does not contact property owners to annex, the owners have to contact the City. Mayor Ristow stated the land also has to be contiguous to existing City property and less than 60 acres. Staff agreed both of these properties meet those requirements. Councilmember Soderberg asked about Mr. Garvey's comments regarding the redesign of the pond. City Engineer Mann replied the pond Mr. Garvey initially showed was the basic design ofthe pond. Mr. Garvey's property would have half the pond and Castle Rock Bank would have the other half on their property. The bank would prefer to have a portion of their upland property clear and not with a pond on it. The second design Mr. Garvey showed, which was bid out for the project, does leave a piece of the property for the bank to do something with in the future. Staff worked with Castle Rock Township on the design and their engineer agreed it met all the criteria from the study. Councilmember Soderberg asked if the ponding designs for ponds 55 and 6 become an integral part of that area. City Engineer Mann replied all of those ponds are necessary for that entire area to develop. During the process of the pre-design with Castle Rock's engineer, originally ponds 6 and 55 were going to go to the pond the City is going to build. However, through discussions Castle Rock wanted to send as little water to that pond as possible. Due to the agreement between the township and the City and the City paying for that pond, which is pond 8, ponds 55 and 6 were going to be routed directly across Hwy 50 to the Prairie Waterway and not to pond 8. Mr. Todd Larson, 819 7th Street, stated he is a member ofthe Planning Commission and the MUSA Review Committee, and wanted to emphasize that the Garvey property would come into the City for its commercial value. As far as the Empey property, they thought it was best to bring in the Garvey and Empey properties to develop a Master Plan for all of those properties to work together. He felt if one comes into the City, both should. Mr. Jim Stuerbault, 3422 225th Street W, was curious how this would impact their property if these properties are annexed and developed. He assumed 225th Street Council Minutes (Regular) September 7,2004 Page 6 would be paved and there would be City water and sewer and would they be hooked up to that. Mayor Ristow replied no, the City cannot assess them for it and City policy is new development pays 100%. This should have no bearing on them. Mr. Stuerbault stated the road is gravel and asked ifthere were any plans to pave it, widen it, put in curbs and lights. Mayor Ristow stated it would be premature to answer that. It would depend on what the school district does and what the access would be as it goes through the planning process. Mr. Colin Garvey stated one of the reasons the ponds were not included, is because the property was not available. Through discussions with SEH and City Engineer Mann at the time, as the drawings for ponds 6 and 55 showed, they preferred it to go to pond 8, but the property was not available. He has discussed this with staff since then and talked about putting it to pond 8, but at this point they are working to get Ash Street in. Pond 8 is on Mr. Garvey's property. With the redesign by the township he loses almost 3/4 of an acre more property without being consulted. He talked with the township on developing both properties and the township's main objective, he believes, is to stop the school and future development. He wants to bring this property into the City as it would be the best thing for this community to develop it all at once and do it right. In the Joint Powers Agreement, section C, regarding unserved properties, it states that Farmington and Castle Rock Township agree not to annex properties unserved by sanitary sewer and water services by Farmington in orderly annexation, absent a petition of 100% of the property owners affected. Mr. Mark Pierson, 225th Street, stated it has been said the City does not annex property that is not adjacent to the City. He asked how the Tollefson property became part of the City. Mayor Ristow replied it has been in the City for a number of years and came in with the Tom Thumb property. Mr. Pierson asked how the property is zoned. Mayor Ristow stated the property would come in as Ag-I and then it is rezoned to business, housing, or commercial. Mr. Pierson stated the property owners in Castle Rock are going to be asked to swallow a lot of development in a short amount of time. Mr. Garvey has his property, has acquired the development rights to the Empey property, he has bought the golf course, and the high school is probably going in across the street. Everyone he has talked to is against that much development all at once. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fitch to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Soderberg asked when construction will begin on the ponding and the whole project. City Engineer Mann replied they are hoping to start within the next two weeks. Councilmember Soderberg asked if action on the Empey property could be continued for two weeks and would it adversely hamper the project from proceeding. The township has asked for some dialog regarding annexation of the Empey property. City Engineer Mann replied the improvements are not on the Empey property. They are on the Garvey property. Co ncil Minutes (Regular) Se tember 7,2004 Pa e 7 and the Castle Rock bank property. Mr. Garvey may have issues with regard to the timing, but they are not related to the City's project. Councilmember Soderberg asked if representatives from the township have been at the MUSA meetings regarding the discussion on the township properties. Staff replied some of the representatives have been at some of the meetings. Councilmember Fitch stated they have been invited and there is a comment period at the end of the MUSA meetings for the audience. There has been very little comment. It would be accurate to say they have not objected at all until this petition came forward. Mayor Ristow noted there was no objection at the Planning Commission meeting. Councilmember Fitch stated Mr. Garvey was there as a representative of his property and the Empey property. Mr. Garvey stated he presented plans four months ago to the MUSA Committee and staff. Councilmember Cordes asked because this falls under the MN Statute and it is less than 60 acres, does Council have the authority to deny it. Attorney Jamnik replied yes. It is a property owner's right ifthey fall under this category to petition the City and the City can act after this hearing. Township consent is not needed. Regarding the Garvey parcel, that falls under the Orderly Annexation agreement where the City does have township consent. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fitch adopting ORDINANCE 004-517 extending the corporate limits of the City of Farmington to include certain unincorporated land (60 acres or less) abutting upon the City limits. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch adopting RESOLUTION R68-04 approving the joint resolution of the town of Castle Rock 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. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Appoint City Councilmember to Community Center Feasibility Study Steering Committee - Parks and Recreation Staff requested having a Councilmember appointed to the Community Center Feasibility Study Steering Committee. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to nominate Councilmember Fogarty to this committee. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolution - Spruce Street Feasibility Report - Engineering The project consists of extending Spruce Street from Denmark to the west. There would be a bridge across the Vennillion River and continue through the commercial area. The alignment has been incorporated in the preliminary plat Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 8 design for the Knutson development. The bridge will be located in an environmentally sensitive area and will be highly visible. The estimated project cost is $3,046,000. The City has received a Met Council Livable Communities Development Grant in the amount of $955,000. The remainder ofthe costs would be assessed to benefiting properties. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R69-04 accepting the feasibility report for the Spruce Street Extension Project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) 20Sth Street Connection to TH 3 - Community Development Most ofthe alignment for the future extension of 20Sth Street to Hwy 3 would be through the Rother property. This property is currently within the township as well as all of the roadway alignment. The owners of the Rother property are considering possible development of their property. There is not a clear policy as to whether the Council can authorize staff to prepare a feasibility report for a roadway alignment that is not within the City. The issues with the traffic on Akin Road and 20Sth Street would be addressed in this feasibility report. Councilmember Cordes noted a couple years ago Council approved an extension ofthe bridge on Hwy 3 regarding this road. It is a major thoroughfare and the turn lane is on the bridge for this road. Councilmember Soderberg stated the e- mailed received from the property indicated there might be a question as to whether to petition the City for annexation or the petition could be delayed for 5- 10 years or more. He was concerned with spending $30,000-$40,000 for a feasibility study on a parcel that mayor may not come into the City. It has been approved to authorize MUSA to this property if it is annexed. He felt it was premature to spend the money on this study. Councilmember Fitch stated one in and out was not anticipated for that area in Riverside and the Middle Schools. Regardless of the property coming into the City, at some point, just for traffic and development ofthe industrial park he felt the City has to know what it will cost, because the City may not be able to wait 10 years to make that connection. Staff stated one benefit of the feasibility study would be to address the cost allocation. City Engineer Mann estimated the cost of the feasibility study to be $10,000- $20,000. Mayor Ristow stated the property owner would want to know the cost before making a decision to do anything. Staff agreed there is a risk with doing the feasibility study and spending money on information you cannot immediately use. Some of the issues addressed in the report would be useful. The properties would always be there and it is easier to update a feasibility report than to start from scratch. Staff will bring a request to the next Council Meeting to get approval for doing a feasibility study. d) Approve Budget Presentation Video - Council Councilmember Fitch stated City Administrator Urbia mentioned at the last meeting to put together a video explaining the budget for broadcasting on TV as a Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 9 way of communicating the budget to the residents. This would be done after the budget workshop, sometime in November. Council agreed. e) Status Southeast Area Trunk Utility and Pond Project Update - Engineering This was awarded contingent on finishing negotiations with Castle Rock Bank and obtaining the rights to build the pond on their property. Staff is waiting for the bank to come back with their final thoughts. If a decision is not made by the next Council Meeting, staffwill bring forward an alternative that will allow the project to keep going within the timeframe. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) 2005-2009 CIP - Administration City Administrator Urbia presented the CIP to Council. Included in the CIP was the ranking of buildings, special fund project, public works projects, park improvement projects. Regarding the ranking of City buildings, at the Council workshop it was decided to leave the Fire Station in 2005 and push the City Hall back a year. City Administrator Urbia decided to push City Hall and the Central Maintenance Facility extension back another year to 2007 - 200S for a couple reasons. First, there are a lot of infrastructure projects in 2006 and it would allow some time to let the community's tax base grow and to have another budget year to bolster the operational budgets, and get the fund reserve balance back. The next area is special fund projects which come out of special revenue funds such as road and bridge, storm water, water funds, etc. No changes were made from the budget workshop. The projects in this category would not be assessed or bonded. Public works projects include the sidewalk and curb replacement program which is an annual program, and an annual mill and overlay project. The next projects are Ash Street and Spruce Street for 2005. Industrial Park phase 4 was moved to 2006 and phase 3 to 2007. 20Sth Street extension and signal installation are in 2007. Hill Dee area utility/street reconstruction, 195th Street construction to Hwy 3, and Elm Street reconstruction are proposed for 2006. Spruce Street utility/street construction (City Hall site - 4th Street to 1st Street) and 2nd Street area overlay and curb reconstruction are in 2007. Projects in 200S include 5th Street trunk sewer extension (Elm Street to Walnut Street, 20Sth Street utility/street extension and bridge to TH3, and east Walnut Street area utility/street reconstruction. Pilot Knob Road extension to Ash Street and 193rd Street overlay and curb reconstruction are listed for 2009. Regarding parks improvements, the CIP shows a negative balance in 2007. City Administrator Urbia feels the fund should not have a negative balance. A couple projects could be moved back a year depending on revenues. City Administrator Urbia presented a spreadsheet showing the debt service schedule and projects it through 2019. It also shows the levy projections for each Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 10 ofthe projects identified for City buildings and public works projects that would require a levy. The City is fully responsible for the levy for City building projects, whereas a road project and an infrastructure project in a new development are covered by the developer. In reconstruction projects, there is a 35% assessment and the City pays 65%. City Administrator Urbia then reviewed the 2005 projects and the direction needed to proceed in a timely manner. He attached a memo from Wold Architects giving the service fees for the Fire Station. In order to meet the March 1, 2005 bid date, the design process should start no later than October 1, 2004. Staff will update the 10 year proforma showing how these projects will work along with the operational expenditure projects and the overall impact on the tax levy. Councilmember Fitch asked if the City could outstrip our bonding ability if we get too far ahead with infrastructure for developments. Finance Director Roland replied it is possible, but not likely. Councilmember Cordes thanked City Administrator Urbia and staff for their time and hard work on the CIP. $10 million looks better than $25 million. Councilmember Soderberg stated looking at the numbers, it is safe to say this is going to change. He will take some time and review it. Mayor Ristow stated it was a good start. 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - 2005 Preliminary Tax Levy and Budget - Finance Finance Director Roland presented the 2005 preliminary tax levy. The levy is to be certified to the County by September 15, 2004. Once the tax levy is adopted, the Council may lower it, but they may not raise it. The proposed preliminary levy is $5,849,302. This is $1.2 million or 25.8% over the 2004 levy of $4,649,302. The entire amount of the $1.2 million would be going towards the general fund. General fund revenues are estimated at $7.12 million with 66.7% coming from property taxes. In the 2004 budget, 58% was coming from property taxes. There are no levy limits in 2005. This budget plays catch-up for the last two years. The state legislature will face a deficit which could be $200 to $400 million. This is due to the fact the state included inflation factors in their revenue expectations, but did not include inflation factors in their expenditures. The state will be looking at cities to resolve their budget deficit. There is no more LGA for the state to take, but what cities do have is market value homestead credit. Cities collect a portion of that. This credit is a portion of the City's certified property tax levy that is paid by the state instead ofthe home owner. In 2005 there should not be any homestead credit cuts. However, ifmid-2005 the state is faced with a deficit and they choose to take away the homestead credit, it could affect the City's budget by up to $370,000. The levy being presented is already an increase of $1.2 million. There are other things the City could look at and that will be discussed at the budget workshop. Expenditures are proposed to increase by 16.4% over the 2004 budget. This is due to operational cost increases, existing contractual obligations and additional staffing. However, for the third Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 11 consecutive year the City's tax base has grown by more than 20%. In 2005, $527,902 in capital outlay will be funded by a certificate of indebtedness, not by levy dollars. Additional staffing proposed includes three new patrol officers, two promotions to sergeant, an IT specialist, an economic development specialist, a 0/.. building inspector and a parks and facilities maintenance position. The 2004 adopted budget is probably a little on the high side for revenues. Staff put additional emphasis on interest earnings and if that does not come through, there will be a problem. We also put an emphasis on non-levy related revenues. The comparison is the revenue goes up 15.6% overall. The permit revenues are more conservative as are the interest revenues. This is based on a shift to a tax levy that would cover more expenditures than building permits and other revenue sources. Councilmember Fitch stated if permits come in higher and interest comes in higher, is it a Council decision where those monies would be allocated such as to put back into budget reserves or would staff make that recommendation. Finance Director Roland replied in most cases when revenues have been higher that balance has rolled over into the fund balance and Council, by adopting the revised budget, has allowed that to happen. Expenditures were broken out by department. Departments with new positions were up for an overall total of 17.6%. In the 2004 adopted budget revenues will not exceed nor fall under budget. The fund balance will be 32.8% of the adopted 2004 expenditures. There is no gain or loss proposed in the 2005 budget. The fund balance falls to 28.3%. That is under the current proposed budget. Revenues overall increased 15.6%. Expenditures are up 17.6%. All of the dollars for new positions total 6.2%. The remaining 11.4% is other expenses. The proposed tax levy results in an increase in tax capacity rate from 41.4039 in 2004 to 44.5586 in 2005. As a result, the market value of a median home was $224,000. That exact home will be valued at $239,000 in 2005. That is an increase of7%. Taxes payable on a median value home in 2004 would be $927, in 2005 it will be $1,065. The total tax increase is 15%. Half is due to market value increase and half due to the tax levy. If you take the average tax increase for the last three years, the average for the last three years would equate to 6-7% per year over those three years, which is less than what the market value is increasing and less than what the population is . . mcreasmg. The resolution requests a property tax levy of $5,849,302, which includes $1,099,009 for debt service and $60,000 for the fire pension. The resolution also establishes December 6, 2004 as the City's truth in taxation hearing. Staff also requested Council to set a budget workshop date. Councilmember Soderberg stated the approach is a more conservative approach than in the past. Finance Director Roland replied correct, they look at historical information as well as existing lots, and existing builder and developer communications with Planning. In 2004 when staff estimated 440 new homes, Council Minutes (Regular) September 7,2004 Page 12 staff believed they had the lots and developer commitment. That did not work out. For 2005, staff budgeted for 350 new building permits. There are no commercial, industrial or retail building permits included in the estimate. Should that happen, that is additional revenue. When staff considered staffing requirements for Community Development they included expenses for the 500 home level. Councilmember Fitch noted the interest was reduced to 2.25% which is a more conservative number. Mayor Ristow stated he is not proud of this kind of budget. He has spoken with City Administrator Urbia who has assured him there are possibilities of cuts that will not restrict the City that will be discussed in the budget workshop. Council set the budget workshop for Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R70-04, certifying the 2005 Preliminary Tax Levy to Dakota County and establishing December 6,2004 at 7:00 p.m. as the City of Farmington's Truth in Taxation hearing for Tax Levy collectible 2005. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Soderberg: He received a request from a resident regarding the stop signs at 6th Street and Ash Street and about painting the street with Stop Ahead. He explained the street will be tom up next summer and this would not be a good time to do that. Perhaps that could be looked at as part of the project. The resident also asked about flashing lights on the stop signs, as traffic drives through the intersection without stopping. City Administrator Urbia stated staff has received that request and they contacted the County. They made sure the obstruction was gone, however he will check on it. The County e-mail was also mailed to the resident. City Engineer Mann will talk to the County regarding including the flashing light in the project. He attended the Rambling River Center's 22nd Anniversary dinner. It was a good presentation and congratulated staff for doing a great job in providing services to our residents through that facility. Council received an e-mail from City Administrator Urbia regarding a City employee, Jen Collova, with praise from a business man in town. Councilmember Fitch: He sat at the stop sign on 20gth Street the first day of school between 7:10 a.m. -7:30 a.m. and observed traffic. The longest anyone was at the stop sign was 35 seconds. Congratulations to the people that travel through that intersection. It was mentioned about getting the budget to the candidates and he also suggested sending them Council packets. City Administrator Urbia stated staff is doing that already and will continue. Mayor Ristow: There is the possibility of a third Council seat being open and asked if Council wanted to address it now. He did not want to see someone else in Council Minutes (Regular) September 7, 2004 Page 13 that situation and have to make a tough call. Councilmember Cordes stated the new sitting Council could change the policy. Precedent had been set from previous years that it was by appointment. City Attorney Jamnik recalled it was decided not to change the policy, but leave it as an appointment without any pre-judgement as to how that appointment would be made. The new Council would struggle with it and determine whether or not to do a special election. Mayor Ristow recalled last time there was concern about the third highest vote getter, so could people be voting for the third highest vote getter this time? City Attorney Jamnik stated they could or they could not. It would be Council's choice as to what priorities and protocols to use. You could not bind a future Council. Councilmember Cordes stated there are still only two Council seats open for election, so people can only cast two votes for Council. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 10:22 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~h7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant 76 Farmington Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes from the Regular Meeting on August 11, 2004 Members Present: Randy Oswald, Mike Buringa, Paula Higgins and Dawn Johnson (arrived 5:45 p.m.) Members Absent: Robin Hanson Other's Present: Jack Olwell and Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director. I. Call To Order Chair Oswald called the meeting to order at 5:34 p.m. Quorum was present. II. Approval of Agenda. Buringa moved and Higgins seconded to approve the meeting agenda. APIF III. Approval of Minutes. Motion by Buringa and seconded by Higgins to approve the minutes from the June 16,2004 meeting. APIF Motion by Buringa and seconded by Higgins to approve the minutes from the July 14,2004 meeting. APIF IV. Presentations A. Physical Fitness and Health by Jack Olwell Jack Olwell gave a presentation on health and fitness titled "Leave No Children on Their Behind". Olwell compared the commonalities between the Parks and Recreation field and physical education in that both fields try to get people active and involved in activities on a voluntary basis. Unfortunately, according to Olwell the two fields are not doing enough to get people active as one only has to look at the rising obesity rate in children and adults in America. V. Old Business A. MUSA Review Committee Update Chair Oswald and Director Distad described the properties that were being recommended by the MUSA Review Committee for approval to the Planning Commission and then on to the City Council. Several of the properties were located outside the current City boundary. Chair Oswald stated that the MUSA Review Committee will reconvene once the Farmington School District determines where the new high school will be located and if the site selected does not currently have MUSA. B. Community Center Feasibility Study Update and Steering Committee Selection Director Distad updated the Commission members about the City Council approving the request to complete a Community Center Feasibility Study. Commission members discussed and fmalized a list of first and second choices for Steering Committee membership. Director Distad will contact potential Steering Committee members inviting them to become a member of the Steering Committee. C. Vermillion River Crossing Concept Plan Director Distad presented a revised concept plan and identified how the new Spruce Street alignment impacts the location of the town square. Director Distad briefly provided information from a meeting that occurred between City staff, City Council members and the developer regarding the location of the town square and the configuration of the big box retailer shown on the concept plan. Director Distad stated that it appears that all of the issues have been resolved with the developer concerning both the configuration of the big box and location of the town square and the preliminary plat will move forward. There are still trails that have not been identified on the preliminary plat that will need to be identified before the plat is approved. VI New Business A. Consider Demolition of Rambling River Park Concession Stand Director Distad provided a description with photos of the current condition of the concession stand at Rambling River Park. Director Distad stated that the concession stand is old, in disrepair and should be removed. In its place he suggested that tables and a canopy could be used by those wanting to run a concession stand for tournaments. Power would continue to be available from a post that would contain electrical outlets. Motion by Buringa and seconded by Johnson to remove the concession stand at Rambling River Park. APIF. B. Amend Existing and Proposed Park, Trails and Open Space Plan Map Director Distad explained that due to MUSA being granted to the Murphy, Garvey, Empey and Rother/Cahill properties, which are currently located outside the City's boundary, there was a need to update the Plan Map so that when these properties are annexed into the City the location of parks and trails are identified for these properties. Director Distad showed staff recommended locations of parks and trails and asked for comments about these locations and whether or not there was support for the location of the parks and trails. Commission members seemed to be in agreement with the staff recommended locations. Motion by Higgins and seconded by Johnson to forward a recommendation to the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the amendments to the Plan Map and forward a recommendation to the City Council in support of the amendments. APIF. C. Dew Days Softball Tournament Concerns Commission member Buringa brought forward a concern about the alcohol that was consumed, tobacco products that were used and the mess that was left on school grounds during the Dew Days Softball Tournament. Buringa stated that the school will be addressing these concerns in a letter to the tournament organ1zer. D. Review Draft Agreement with Farmington Youth Hockey Director Distad stated that youth hockey seemed concerned about the concession stand lease in the agreement and the fact that the drafted agreement identified that the lease would only apply to the existing arena and would not transfer to a new arena if one were ever built. Director Distad stated that perhaps a compromise might be to allow youth hockey to lease the concession stand at the existing arena either for a period of 15 years or if a new arena were built that the agreement would be opened back up to discuss the potential lease of the concession stand in a new facility. Commission members felt that Director Distad should approach youth hockey about this option and then come back to the September Commission meeting with an answer from youth hockey about this option. Higgins moved and Buringa seconded to table this item to the September meeting. APIF. E. Develop Draft Policy on the Sale of Park Property Director Distad stated that the City Attorney has recommended that language in a policy should reflect a no net loss of park property if it is ever sold. Director Distad also stated that he has not had a chance to survey other communities about what their policy is in regards to selling park property. Moved by Buringa and seconded by Higgins to table this item to the September meeting. APIF. VII. Additions to the Agenda There were no additions to the agenda. VIII. Staff Report Director Distad updated Commission members on the status of the development of Tamarack and Meadowview Parks. IX. September Meeting Agenda Following items were identified by Commission member for the September meeting: 1. Policy on sale of park property 2. Review proposals submitted by landscape architectural firms for park master planning 3. Update on MUSA Review Committee 4. Community Center Feasibility Study Task Force Membership Update 5. Summer Recreation Program presentation by Recreation staff X Adjournment Higgins moved and Johnson seconded to adjourn the meeting. APIF Meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m. 11es. ectfully sub~itt:~ fl - r ~AD~ dy Distad Parks and Recreation Director and Recording Secretary '7~ 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 Administrator r FROM: Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Capital Outlay - Parks DATE: September 20,2004 INTRODUCTION Amenities in Tamarack and Meadowview Parks are currently being constructed. DISCUSSION The park master plans for both parks identify garbage containers, benches and bike racks being installed. Before these park amenities can be installed, concrete pads need to be poured. Separate quotes were solicited for each park to complete this concrete work. North Country Concrete has submitted the low quote of $4,020 for the concrete work to be completed in each park. The concrete work that will be completed in each park includes the following: Tamarack Park - Excavate and dispose of material and place new base material for new concrete pads for six benches, a bike rack and five waste containers. Meadowview Park - Excavate and dispose of material and place new base material for new concrete pads for six benches, a bike rack and five waste containers. BUDGET IMPACT There is funding available in the Park Improvement Fund budget to cover this work. The quote received is within the estimated cost that was identified to complete this work. ACTION REQUESTED No action is requested. This is for informational purposes only. Respectfully sg ~, Parks and Recreation Director 7e1 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 AdmiIDstrator~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Approve On-Sale 3.2 Beer License - New Moon Buffet, Inc. DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION The New Moon Buffet Inc. is requesting an On-Sale 3.2 Beer License. DISCUSSION The New Moon Buffet Restaurant located at 115 Elm Street, Suite G, has submitted an application for an On-Sale 3.2 Beer license. The required attachments, fees and insurance information have been submitted with the application. Police Chief Siebenaler has reviewed the forms and approved the application. BUDGET IMPACT The fees collected are as proposed in the revenue portion of the budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve an On-Sale 3.2 Beer License for New Moon Buffet, Inc. Respectfully submitted, ~t1 .//radd- Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director 7e City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator ~ FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: September 20, 2004 lNTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time Solid Waste Operator to fill a vacant position 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. Michael Gulla, subject to ratification by the City CounciL Mr. Gulla has experience as a Solid Waste Operator both with Armor Waste and Waste Management and meets the minimum qualifications for the position. BUDGET IMP ACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 2004 budget. RECOMMENDATION Approve the appointment of Mr. Michael Gulla as Solid Waste Operator in the Department of Parks and Recreation effective on September 27,2004. kRespectfu~IY su~~tt~: , / :/,; ..d- I. . ~ /~ ~ ... .If/(lf{;?)/~/(ax._ . Bren~:mdt, SPHR .. Human Resources Director CC: Personnel File 7.p City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councibnembers, City Administrator /1---- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Main Street Phases 1 and 2 DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION /DISCUSSION The Main Street Project, Phase I IS substantially complete. Phase II IS neanng substantial completion. BUDGET IMPACT The proposed assessments for this project as outlined at the project initiation are set by the benefit appraisal. The proposed assessment roll will be available prior to the assessment hearing. The Council would consider adopting the final project assessment roll at the assessment hearing for the proj ect. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution directing staff to prepare the final assessment rolls and setting the assessment hearings for the Main Street Project Phases 1 and 2 (Project 01-04) for October 18,2004. Respectfully submitted, ~fl1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -04 CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PROJECT NO. 01-04- MAIN STREET PROJECT PHASES 1 & 2 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 ofthe 20th day of September, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution. WHEREAS, a contract has been let and costs have been determined for the following improvements: Prole 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, 5th Street from Elm Street to Linden Street, Willow Street from 4th Street to 5th Street, 6th Street for ~ block north and south of Main Street and ih Street for ~ block north and south of Main Street. ; and, WHEREAS, the improvements for the project are complete. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Staff is hereby directed to prepare the proposed final assessment roll for the project. 2. A hearing shall be held in the Council Chambers in City Hall on the 18th day of October, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. to act upon such proposed assessment at such time and place and all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and the clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. The clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearings. Notice shall be provided in accordance with the requirements provided under M.S. section 429.061 subdivision 1. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 20th day of September, 2004. Mayor Attested to this _ day of , 2004. City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 1 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Adrn;mstrator~ FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: School and Conference - Fire Department DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Rescue Unit is planning attendance at the EMT School. DISCUSSION Mr. Adam Fischer will be attending the school in St. Paul on October 4, 2004. He will be attending an EMT - Basic Class through HealthEast Education. The course includes all topics of emergency care and procedures. BUDGET IMPACT Approved in the 2004 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve attendance at the EMT School. Respectfully submitted, ,f~~%~~~ ~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief 74 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 Administratorr FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Call G.O. Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 and G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1997 - Finance DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION The City has the opportunity and the cash resources to redeem two debt issues prior to their final maturities, with appreciable interest savings. DISCUSSION In 1997, the City issued $2,140,000 in G.O. Water Revenue Bonds to finance the 1.5 million gallon water reservoir (water tower) at Pilot Knob and 195th Street and $635,000 in G.O. Improvement bonds to fund the extension of Elm Street and the construction of Larch Street. The Water Board recommended that the Water Revenue bonds be called at their meeting in January 2004 at the next possible call date, which is December 1, 2004. The Water fund has sufficient cash to redeem the bonds at this time, and as the interest rates on the bonds are higher than the interest rates on cash invested, it is a good time to call the bonds. As for the Improvement bonds, all special assessments have been collected from the benefited properties and the. fund balance is available to pay off the bonds early. BUDGET IMPACT The budget impact of the early redemption of these two bond issues is a savings of $313,566 in interest payable on the Water Revenue bonds over the next ten years and a savings of $16,958 in interest payable on the Improvement bonds over the next three years. ACTION REQUIRED Adopt the attached resolution calling for redemption of the outstanding G.O. Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 and the G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1997. Respectfully submitted, 4/~-/ ~=:~oland Finance Director EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was duly called and held at City Hall in Farmington, Minnesota, on Monday, September 20, 2004. The following members were present: and the following members were absent: Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution No, RESOLUTION CALLING FOR REDEMPTION OF OUTSTANDING: GENERAL OBLIGATION WATER REVENUE BONDS OF 1997, DATED MAY 1,1997 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1997, DATED SEPTEMBER 1,1997 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, issued on behalf of the City of Farmington, Minnesota $2,140,000 General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds of 1997, dated May 1,1997 (the "Water Revenue Bonds of 1997"), of which $1,265,000 still remains outstanding; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, issued on behalf of the City of Farmington, Minnesota $635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1997, dated September 1,1997 (the "Improvement Bonds of 1997"), of which $235,000 still remains outstanding; and WHEREAS, all of the Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 maturing in the years 2003 through 2014, inclusive, are subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City on December 1, 2002, and on any interest payment date thereafter at a price of par, plus accrued interest to the date of redemption, all as provided in the resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota on April 21, 1997, authorizing the issuance of the Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 (the" April 1997 Resolution"); and WHEREAS, all of the Improvement Bonds of 1997 maturing in the years 2002 through 2007, inclusive, are subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City on December 1, 2001 and on any interest payment date thereafter at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date of redemption, all as provided in the resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota on August 18, 1997, authorizing the issuance of the Improvement Bonds of 1997 (the" August 1997 Resolution"); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota deems it desirable and in the best interests of the City of Farmington to call those Water Revenue Bonds of 1997maturing in the years 2005 through 2014, inclusive, totaling $1,130,000 in principal amount, on December 1,2004, in accordance with the April 1997 Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota deems it desirable and in the best interests of the City of Farmington to call those Improvement Bonds of 1997 maturing in the years 2005 through 2007, inclusive, totaling $175,000 in principal amount, on December 1, 2004, in accordance with the August 1997 Resolution; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, as follows: (1) All of the Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 maturing in the years 2005 through 2014, inclusive, totaling $1,130,000 in principal amount shall be redeemed and prepaid on December 1, 2004, at par, plus accrued interest. All of the Improvement Bonds of 1997 maturing in the years 2005 through 2007, inclusive, totaling $175,000 in principal amount shall be redeemed and prepaid on December 1,2004, at par, plus accrued interest (2) The City Administrator of the City of Farmington, Minnesota is hereby authorized and directed to givemailednoticeofcall.prior to December 1, 2004, for the Water Revenue Bonds of 1997, to the Bond Registrar/Paying Agent, U,S. Bank National Association (formerly First Trust National Association), in St. Paul, Minnesota, and to all holders of the Bonds. Said notice shall be substantially in the form shown as Exhibit A. The City Administrator of the City of Farmington, Minnesota is hereby authorized and directed to givemailednoticeofcall.prior to December 1,2004, for the Improvement Bonds of 1997, to the Bond Registrar/Paying Agent, U,S. Bank National Association (formerly First Trust National Association), in St. Paul, Minnesota, and to all holders of the Bonds. Said notice shall be substantially in the form shown as Exhibit B. (3) The City Administrator of the-City of Farmington is hereby authorized and directed to deposit with the Bond Registrar/Paying Agent of the Water Revenue Bonds of 1997, U,S. Bank National Association (formerly First Trust National Association), prior to the call date of December 1, 2004, sufficient funds to pay all principal and interest due on the Bonds as of the call date. The City Administrator of the City of Farmington is hereby authorized and directed to deposit with the Bond Registrar/Paying Agent ofthe Improvement Bonds of 1997, U,S. Bank National Association (formerly First Trust National Association), prior to the call date of December 1, 2004, sufficient funds to pay all principal and interest due on the Bonds as of the call date. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Mayor City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and City Administrator of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on Monday, September 20, 2004, with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes, insofar as they relate to the redemption of certain General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 and General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1997, of the City. WITNESS My hand as City Administrator and the official seal of the City this 20th day of September, 2004. City Administrator City of Farmington, Minnesota (SEAL) EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF REDEMPTION General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds of 1997 Dated May 1, 1997 City of Farmington, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that by order of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, there have been called for redemption and prepayment on December 1, 2004 the following outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds of 1997, dated May 1,1997: Maturity Date December 1, 2005 December 1, 2006 December 1, 2007 December 1, 2008 December 1, 2009 December 1, 2010 December 1, 2011 December 1, 2012 December 1, 2013 December 1,2014 Principal Amount $130,000 125,000 125,000 120,000 115,000 110,000 105,000 105,000 100,000 95,000 Interest Rate 5.00% 5.10% 5.15% 5.20% 5.30% 5.375% 5.375% 5,375% 5.375% 5.375% CUSIP Number* 311297 TT2 311297 TU9 311297 TV? 311297 TW5 311297 TX3 311297 TY1 311297 TZ8 311297 UA 1 311297 UB9 311297 UC7 The bonds are being called at a price of 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest to December 1, 2004, on which date they will cease to bear interest. Holders of such bonds hereby called for redemption should present their Bonds for payment to U.S. Bank National Association (formerly First Trust National Association) at the address below, on or before December 1, 2004. If by Mail U.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Department P.O. Box 64111 St. Paul, MN 55164-0111 If by Hand or Ovemiaht Mail U.S. Bank National Association U.S. Bank Trust Center Bond Drop Window, 1st Floor 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota, MN 55107 It is recommended that you mail your bonds registered or certified mail to guard against loss. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA /s/ Dated: September 20, 2004 Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form, which November be obtained at a bank or other financial institution. *Neither the City nor the Bond Registrar/Paying Agent shall be responsible for the selection of or use of the CUSIP number, and no representation is made as to its correctness indicated in the Notice of Redemption, CUSIP numbers are included solely for the convenience of the Holders. EXHIBIT B NOTICE OF REDEMPTION General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1997 Dated September 1, 1997 City of Farmington, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that by order of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, there have been called for redemption and prepayment on December 1, 2004 the following outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1997, dated September 1,1997: Maturitv Date Principal Amount Interest Rate CUSIP Number* December 1, 2005 December 1, 2006 December 1, 2007 $60,000 60,000 55,000 4.85% 4.90% 4.95% 311297 UQ6 311297 UR4 311297 US2 The bonds are being called at a price of 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest to December 1, 2004, on which date they will cease to bear interest. Holders of such bonds hereby called for redemption should present their Bonds for payment to U.S. Bank National Association (formerly First Trust National Association) at the address below, on or before December 1, 2004. If bv Mail If bv Hand or OverniQht Mail U.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Department P.O. Box 64111 St. Paul, MN 55164-0111 U.S. Bank National Association U.S. Bank Trust Center Bond Drop Window, 1 st Floor 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota, MN 55107 It is recommended that you mail your bonds registered or certified mail to guard against loss. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA /s/ Dated: September 20,2004 Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal employer identification number, properly certified, This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form, which November be obtained at a bank or other financial institution. *Neither the City nor the Bond Registrar/Paying Agent shall be responsible for the selection of or use of the CUSIP number, and no representation is made as to its correctness indicated in the Notice of Redemption, CUSIP numbers are included solely for the convenience of the Holders. 7/' CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF REVENUES AUGUST 31, 2004 66.67 % Year Complete ............... . .... ....... ) n::::n:)))) :))~OO4J?))))):n::::: : :::ffl~rwl!;~m: . . . "2' "3' JUql$.,,*t.:: ...- .... ::::I:..:'....fi~~WI: 11111111111.1111:111:.:.... '11 : : : : I ' I : ::;:":;:' PO :'", ...... ,_...... .......... . :::: :BUDGET::: :'t;;U~JiW1Ir: "YTD'" ::::::: ::2.004:':: :,: .........Y:ttf. . . . JJ~DjJJ ~:~:~:~:~::: . ~:~:;: :~:~:~:~:i:.:: : . ~:~ ~ ~ ~ .. ............ ....,....... . ...... ....... ..... -. .... ...... ....... $ $ $ % $ % GENERAL FUND Property Taxes 3,544,462 18,774 1,626,527 45.89 1,538,724 48,27 Licenses/Permits 1,156,976 31,574 592,698 51,23 965,669 76,63 Fines 78,100 6,430 43,638 55,87 43,260 54,01 Intergovernment Revenue 322,000 7,022 170,261 52,88 224,126 46,15 Charges for Service 365,200 29,073 129,867 35.56 126,942 35.38 Miscellaneous 380,500 21,010 210,088 55.21 200,391 60.63 Transfers 310000 25 834 206,667 66,67 148 944 66,20 Total General Fund 6157238 139717 2979.746 48.39 3 248 056 54,79 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating Fund 27,500 1,081 303,784 1104,67 8,350 30.36 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 126 7,039 87,44 7,889 78.50 Park Improvement Fund 147,500 9,620 172,413 116.89 44,246 29,01 Recreation Operating Fund 257,500 10,721 167,877 65,19 81,317 32.20 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 247,500 11,308 133,514 53.95 107,351 45,05 Liquor Operations 3,110,000 265,965 1,939.578 62.37 1,783,675 62,83 Sewer 1,383,000 85,933 804,851 58.20 818,603 63,07 Solid Waste 1,409,000 134,265 951,859 67.56 726,265 53.46 Storm Water 265,000 23,707 180,141 67,98 172,119 66.20 Water 1 790,000 153 207 912 163 50.96 891 667 49,81 Total Revenues 14802288 835 650 8 552 965 57.78 7 889 538 55.74 CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES AUGUST 31, 2004 66.67 % Year ComDlete Illi:iiiilii,I,IWW~W,II:lliii iillllliillili:li:llI11J11Iijlli~~~~:::,:I~~~:~i=J,:I:I::II=:!!::::::rl~T:111 <<~2003<: ::~~~~tl!T: . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........YTlif.. <<2lil03<:~: :~:~:~:~:~: :: : . ):~: .... ..... .. ..... .... GENERAL FUND $ $ $ % $ % Legislative 65,628 4,469 36,619 55.80 52,427 71.59 Administration 430,634 32,826 268,177 62,27 355,280 76.89 Human Resources 185,833 18,738 122,153 65,73 92,032 58.79 MIS 62,710 2,779 28,681 45.74 52,971 57.37 Elections 10,875 20 26 0.24 0.00 Communications 59,848 5,788 41,018 68.54 29,989 41.46 Finance 391,837 32,050 269,217 68.71 250,685 67.26 Planning/Zoning 173,259 13,850 112,392 64.87 94,013 60.51 Building Inspection 370,674 29,095 238,529 64.35 229,842 67.69 Community Development 99,068 6,812 56,019 56.55 112,076 128.31 Police Administration 526,640 32,949 360,482 68.45 347,841 73.03 Patrol Services 1,161,248 98,288 820,510 70.66 769,843 67.42 Investigation Services 261,204 15,957 155,069 59.37 110,538 66.50 School Liason Officer - - 0.00 49,740 64.26 Emergency Management 1,600 17 2,012 125.75 663 41.44 Fire 397,955 47,958 191,483 48.12 179,866 48.48 Rescue 42,033 17 20,838 49.58 22,591 47,37 Engineering 266,816 30,255 206,191 77.28 193,686 67.32 G.I.S. 9,333 13 4,267 45.72 3,077 75.05 Streets 445,612 53,578 341,950 76.74 329,311 77.29 Snow Removal 97,858 (167) 50,977 52,09 49,012 60.36 Signal Maint 101,000 8,672 59,721 59.13 54,236 57.94 Park Maint 263,005 32,203 226,981 86.30 258,503 85.41 Tree Maint 117,946 4,544 42,028 35.63 13,666 26,54 Building Maint 125,060 13,304 61,286 49.01 78,258 70.78 Recreation Programs 309,412 43,328 260,095 84.06 258,997 85.21 Outdoor Ice 7,150 33 3,296 46,10 3,802 51.73 Transfers Out 173 000 - 86 500 50,00 0 0.00 Total General Fund 6157238 527 376 4 066 517 66,04 3,992 945 67.35 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating 43,180 1,882 275,215 637.37 56,733 74.12 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 593 9,066 112.62 4,575 56.83 Park Improvement Fund 134,500 51,962 154,690 115.01 52,334 38,91 Senior Center 126,650 14,254 92,729 73.22 83,746 68.33 Swimming Pool 134,180 57,225 122,822 91.54 114,856 96.35 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 262,516 24,113 179,713 68,46 160,911 64.19 Liquor Operations 2,870,758 320,985 1,863,447 64,91 1,663,698 61.02 Sewer 1,653,162 77,151 842,426 50.96 775,557 59.73 Solid Waste 1,413,142 105,804 939,257 66.47 892,733 63.11 Storm Water 324,323 20,383 195,943 60.42 104,490 49.70 Water Utility 1 247822 69 255 514296 41.22 738 450 69.20 Total EXDenditures 14,375,521 1,270,983 9,256,121 64,39 8,641,028 64.69 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7, 'J TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administratorft--- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Schedule Project Hearing for Spruce Street Extension Project DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION illISCUSSION The feasibility report for the proposed Spruce Street Extension Project was accepted by Council at the September 7th, 2004 council meeting. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution calling for a public hearing for the Spruce Street Extension Project on October 18th, 2004. Respectfully submitted, ~>>Z~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING PROJECT 04-10, SPRUCE STREET EXTENSION 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 20th day of September at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, pursuant to the City Council ordering the preparation of a feasibility report on January 5th, 2004 for the proposed Spruce Street Extension project, a report was made by the City's Consulting Engineer with reference to the following improvement; Proi. No. 04-10 Description Street and Bridge Improvements Location South of CSAH 50, adjacent to and westerly from Denmark Avenue. ; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution R69-04 said report was received and accepted by the Council on September ih, 2004. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 18th day of October, 2004, in the Council Chambers at City Hall at 7:00 p.m. and the clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 2. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 20th day of September, 2004. Mayor day of ,2004. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL 7* 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: Extension of Fire Wise Dry Hydrant Grant DATE: September 20,2004 INTRODUCTION In October of2004, the fire department applied for the DNR Dry Hydrant Matching Grant. The request was for $10,000 and was awarded in full. The purpose of the grant was to position at least one dry hydrant in each of the townships served. As shared with Council, the commitment of the match would be the decision of the townships. As time has unfolded, a number of steps have had to be taken. DISCUSSION The first part of August we presented our targeted site location with the Empire Town Board. The board is in approval to provide up to a match of $3,333 for the installation of one dry hydrant. The department Representatives of the department will be addressing this subject with the Castle Rock and Eureka Town Board in the month of October. With the shortage of time to get this project completed prior to winter, the department is requesting a one year extension to the grant award. The DNR is in approval to extend the grant until December of2005. Upon receiving the signed documents, the DNR will provide us with the requested extension. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Recommend to approve the grant extension and authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the appropriate grant extension documents. 7/.. 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 Administrator FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Request for FEMA Fire Prevention Grant DATE: September 20,2004 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department would like to submit an application for a FEMA Fire Prevention Grant. . DISCUSSION FEMA, as part of the Firefighter Assistance Grant Program, has made over 80 million dollars available to Fire Departments to fund fire safety, prevention and education programs. Farmington Fire Department would like to take advantage of this program and submit an application for a grant that would assist in purchasing an interactive table top display, public education materials, a set of code books, a vehicle and other items that would be used to assist in the prevention and or minimize the fire threat in Farmington. BUDGET IMPACT The Farmington Fire Department would request $41,000 in grant money. The City of Farmington would be required to match ten percent (10%) or approximately $4,100. Matching funds can be accommodated in the 2006 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve request to submit the grant application. Respectfully Submitted, /~, ~--//~<:!~~~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief 'f../...7 cc: Robin Roland Joel Jamnik /h-J 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 Administrator ~ FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Preliminary Tanker Truck Inspection - Fire Department DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION The Fire Department new tanker committee has been notified by SEMO Manufacturing, Perryville, Missouri that the new tanker truck is completed to the point of being painted. The next step in the process is the pre-paint inspection. The purpose of the inspection is to view and make any needed changes if required prior to the truck being painted. Committee members Dan Meyer, Tim Pietsch, Mark Kindseth and myself are scheduled to fly out of Minneapolis on Sunday, September 26,2004 to St. Louis, Missouri and then on by vehicle to Perryville, Missouri. We will meet with the SEMO folks and view/inspect the new truck on Monday, September 27,2004. Any necessary changes required will be addressed at that time. Our return flight will leave St. Louis on Monday afternoon at 7 p.m. BUDGET IMPACT The cost of the flight will total $864. Additional costs will be possible car rental, lodging for one night and meals. The estimated total cost is $1400. The training portion ofthe Fire Department budget will provide the funding for this visit. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the preliminary tanker truck inspection. Respectfully submitted, ~- );{~~<- e: -../ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief ~ Private Charter (up to 6 people) 1 day trip Item Plane ($800,00 for 1hr,) meals included total Time 4hrs Commercial Airline (to St. Louis, MO) (4 people) 2 day trip Item ?.I&.'O Plane ($45G.Oe-."er person) Lodging (1 night) Meals (30,00 per person/day) Car Rental Total Drive (6 people) 4 day trip Item miles (715m11 way) Lodging (3 nights) Meals (30,00 per person/day) * number of days away from work Time round trip 2 rooms 2 days 2days+ gas Time Cost $3,200.00 $3,200,00 Cost $1,'1300.001/ B'if $200.00 $240.00 $100.00 $%i~O.OO fll ~{) r; ~O Cost gas (,37cents ami) $555.00 3 rooms $800.00 4 days $720.00 $2,075.00 t->Quest: Dnvmg Directions: North America .------------- Total Est. Tlmfhours. 51 m;nu:) Need a place to stay'? '~~ Total Est. Distance: 715.39 miles/ ---~ Choose Hotels by Location, Budget Or Amenities - Upgrade & Save! Discount Hotels Guaranteed Lowest Rates on OrbltzSaver Hotels. Book Now! www.ORBITZ.com Route Overview Map ',~ ~APQVt~,. ~: ~ North Dakota Pier.. South D"~Olt:l * SiMlX F,,~ " South Dakota :--. Neurasl<.a Wichihs t9 Kansas Oklahoma ;:11;3: t.l iii' .., '" .... 0 ;: C ::::l, l T IIIlul ~ e 2004 Ml\PQllflM,Com. Inc. .... 100m1 rn .. Millnesota ) ~ o.-\..... IOWCl ~ t8 Ci ::l ?~;.. ookforct 0.. Moih-. ~ Iowa $' Missouri S~tlh9fi.1d '""~ ~ ~;~~;)O/~ Springfielrj ~ f- Missouri 'jfKennJeky Arkansas Tenn~ssee -::l ~ ~ 10lt1 w,.yntt -. ::l III 1II Indl~Mpolls C(hnn~s. , ~ $ * CinclMIl ' D"yton / ~NUhvil" "$., :~.n'7~:fl, ft:,~,~,"" All riahts reserved, Use Subiect to Llcense/CoDvriaht I MaD Leaend l~~!.~~ These directions are Informational only. No representation Is made or warranty given as to their content, road conditions or route usability or expeditiousness. User assumes all risk of use. MapQuest and Its suppliers assume no responsibility for any loss or delay resulting from such use. Page 2 of2 Site Index I About I Partners I Advertise I Privacy Policv & Leaal Notices @ 2004 MapQuest.com, Inc. All rights http://www.mapquest.comldirections/main.adp?go=l&do=nw& 1 ex= 1 &un=m&2ex= 1 ~2t~ Q 17 /') ()()4 TO: David Urbia, City Administrator FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: New Tanker Pre-paint Inspection DATE: September 9, 2004 This is an update of estimated costs to accommodate four (4) of tanker committee members to travel to SEMO Manufacturing, Perrysville, MO the last weekend in September. The 3000 gallon tanker being built is nearing completion. One of the last steps is the pre- paint inspection. This will provide us with the opportunity to view the unit and pass along whatever changes that may be needed prior to the unit being painted. The inspection of the new tanker is extremely important prior to the targeted date of delivery on or near the 15th of October. I recommend the second option to fly commercial airline to St. Louis, MO. To drive, we would be looking at a minimum of 22 hours on the road plus adding acouple more days to the trip. I assume this may need council approval. If so, please add this request to the September 20th agenda. Respectfully, Ken Kuchera Fire Chief Cc: Robin Roland, Finance Director Tanker Committee Members Attachments City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7J? TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator FROM: Lee Smick, AICP City Planner SUBJECT: Zoning Map Amendment - Rezone Property from A-I to R-I- Parkview Ponds DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION Manley Land Development is proposing to rezone Parkview Ponds from A-I (Agriculture District) to R-I (Low Density Residential District) located south of 195th Street and the Autumn Glen Subdivision and east of Akin Road. The rezoning would be consistent with Farmington's 2020 Comprehensive Plan shown as Restricted Development. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission reviewed the rezoning on September IS, 2004 and recommended approval of the amendment to the zoning map from A-I to R-I for the Parkview Ponds property. On May 6, 2002, the City Council approved the rezoning of the Parkview Ponds property from C-I (Conservation District) to A-I (Agriculture District) because the C-I Zoning District designation was eliminated from the Zoning Map. As shown on the attached zoning map, the subject property is currently zoned A-I (Agriculture District). The property is shown in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan as Restricted Development. This designation is defined as the following in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan: "The restricted development land use designation on the eastern side of the district relates to the vision of preserving natural areas, while creating passive and active recreational areas and utilizing its location as a central community gathering point between the northern and southern sections of the City. The area may be utilized as a residential golf course community, a multi-user trail system, a small lake or a community center to provide recreational, social and residential opportunities for the City." It is further defined in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan policy statement: "5) It is the policy of the City of Farmington to create new parks: a 'Farmington Community Green" connecting the northern and southern sections of the City, new mini- and neighborhood parks. Strategies * Create a Farmington "community green" in the central district of the City where the City's natural assets can beautifully converge and connect the northern, western and greater downtown areas of the City. The community green will be a nature-influenced, activity node where natural, residential and recreational uses dramatically combine to provide distinctive residential opportunities, a variety of active and passive recreational opportunities and a unique community gathering place. This "community green" is predominantly natural. It will reflect conservation of the City's natural assets, while providing sensitive design of residential uses and opportunities for recreational uses by residents of all ages and lifestyles. * Create this community green to be an exciting convergence of complementary land uses consisting ofthe following: 1. a high quality, market rate and high end, golf course or open space residential community where nature and housing are harmoniously woven together; 2. the hub of an extensive multi-user, "green" trail system linking all parts of the City through the environmentally sensitive areas and the river corridor; 3. a focal point of either a small lake with a community center, or a golf course/open space conservation area with a community center; surrounded by well-designed, high amenity housing; 4. active recreation opportunities-soccer and play fields and passive open spaces." The 2020 Comprehensive Plan designates low density residential standards at 1.0 to 3.5 units per acre. Manley Land Development proposes 147 single-family lots at 10,000 square feet or larger with a density of 1.67 units/acre, meeting the policy and strategies of Farmington's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that Parkview Ponds be rezoned from A-I (Agriculture District) to R-l (Low Density Residential District). ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached ordinance approving the rezoning of Parkview Ponds from A-I (Agriculture District) to R-l (Low Density Residential District). Respectfully Submitted, 1/ #f&I:;;2 ~mick, AICP City Planner cc: Manley Land Development, Inc. CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. An Ordinance Amending Title 10 of the Farmington City Code, the Farmington Zoning Ordinance, rezoning the Parkview Ponds property. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 10-5-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended by rezoning the property legally described on the attached Exhibit A from A-I (Agriculture) to R-l (Low Density Residential). SECTION 2. The Zoning Map of the City of Farmington, adopted under Section 10-5- 1 of the Farmington City Code, shall be republished to show the aforesaid zoning. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage. Adopted this _ day of ,2004, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. SEAL CITY OF FARMINGTON MAYOR ATTEST: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Approved as to form the _ day of , 2004. CITY ATTORNEY Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of ,2004. . - - ~ - - ,. -_-.- .-_-__-:_-__-._'_-..-..._..w:_'_:.~:.:.:_-.:-.:.~.'~-._._:~:.~.~..:...w:..:.:..:_:...:_:_~..~..:. Exhibit A "..- ;, ...... ~ LEGAL DESaRIPTION PER TITLE COMMITMENT . That part of \he Southeast Qu arter of Section 24, T ownsh ip 114, Range 20, Dakota County, Minnesota, Iyinp easterly of a line described as. follows: Beginning at a point on the south line of said Sdptheast Quarter distant 1467.46 feet east of the southwest corner of said Southeast QuaXr.ter; thence bearing North, assumed bearing on a line parallel with the west line of said So theast Quarter, a distance of 1025.00 feet; thence North 51 degrees 11 minutes 18 se nds West, a distance of 760.04 feet to a point 875.00 feet east of the west line of saId Southeast Quarter; thence North, parallel with said west line of the Southeost Quarlter, a distance of 1135.00 feet to the north line of said Southeast Quarter and there ter7inating; EXCEPTING T)'lEREFROM, The south .3'3.00 feet thereof. / / ./ ....... ," PREPARED BY PIONEER ENGINEERING, PA. JOHN C. LARSON REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR 19828 REG. NO. N A N A R-1 Subject Properties Curr t Zoning: A-1 Agriculture P/OS A- R-1 R-1 P/OS Subject Properties Proposed Zoning: R-1 ingle Family Residential A- A-1 A-1 <?CL. 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~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Approve On-Sale Wine License - New Moon Buffet, Inc. DATE: September 20, 2004 . INTRODUCTION Pursuant to City Ordinance 3-12-6-2, a public hearing must be held to establish an On-Sale Wine License. DISCUSSION New Moon Buffet submitted an application for an On-Sale Wine License located at 115 Elm Street, Suite G. The required attachments, fees and insurance information have been submitted with the application. Police Chief Siebenaler has reviewed the forms and approved the application. BUDGET IMPACT The fees collected are as proposed in the revenue portion ofthe budget. ACTION REQUIRED Approve an On-Sale Wine License for New Moon Buffet, Inc. Respectfully submitted, ~/!.j{a~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director <86 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: jJ)V Mayor, Council Members, )ki........_____ City Administrator ~ Jim Atkinson ' Assistant City Planner FROM: SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit to allow Excavating/Grading on the Garvey/Empey Properties DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION Mr. Colin Garvey has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow excavating and grading to begin on the subject properties prior to the approval of a preliminary plat for the residential and commercial development that is expected to occur. The Garvey and Empey properties are located south of Highway 50 and east of Highway 3 (see attached Exhibit "A"). Although the properties are currently owned separately by Mr. Garvey and Ms. Empey, Mr. Garvey will be the sole developer for both properties. As outlined below, the public hearing for a grading CUP is conducted by the City Council after review by the Planning Commission. DISCUSSION Normally no excavation or grading would occur on the Garvey/Empey properties until after the City Council approved a preliminary plat. However, Mr. Garvey has indicated a strong desire to begin grading prior to the approval of a completed preliminary plat application package. There is a mechanism by which an applicant can potentially do so. Section 3-22-5 (A) of the City Code provides, in part, that: An application for a mine or excavation permit shall be processed in accordance with the same procedures and requirements... relating to conditional use permits. However, the hearing shall be held by the city council following a review and recommendation from the planning commission. The Garvey property is located in an orderly annexation area established by a joint powers agreement between the City of Farmington and Castle Rock Township regarding the Ash Street improvement project. Properties in the orderly annexation area are required to petition for annexation by joint resolution. The City Council approved the joint resolution for the Garvey property on September 7, 2004. The joint resolution will be on the agenda for the next meeting of the Castle Rock Town Board on or about September 15,2004. The Empey property is not located in the orderly annexation area and therefore must be annexed by ordinance. The City Council approved the annexation ordinance for the Empey property at its meeting on September 7, 2004. The fully executed Joint Resolution regarding the Garvey property and the signed annexation Ordinance regarding the Empey property must be filed with and approved by the Office of Boundary Adjustments to complete the annexation process. The grading would occur in a manner consistent with the concept plans submitted by the applicant (see attached Exhibits "B" and "C"). The applicant will be working in conjunction with the City's Ash Street pond project to move soil from the pond excavation to the areas in which development would occur. The City Engineer must approve all grading plans prior to commencement of excavation and grading work on the site. Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission reviewed the Conditional Use Permit application at its meeting on August 1 0, 2004 and unanimously recommended approval. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the Conditional Use Permit to allow excavating/grading to begin on the Garvey/Empey properties subject to the following conditions: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall not be effective, and no grading shall occur, until the entire annexation process has been completed. 2. The applicant must obtain final City approval of the rough grading plan from the City Engineer 3. The applicant must pay any applicable fees, provide adequate surety in an amount and form approved by the Director of Public Works, and comply with any other reasonable conditions imposed by the Director of Public Works. 4. All excavation and grading activities must be consistent with plans submitted to and approved by the Director of Public Works. 5. The applicant assumes all risk involved with grading a site before final plat and street and utility plan approval. Any changes to the grading of a site, including any corresponding costs necessitated by the resolution of any design issues identified during the approval process for the final plat and street and utility construction plans, are the sole responsibility of the applicant. Respectfully submitted, CI ~ at:=- Jim Atkinson Assistant City Planner cc: Colin Garvey Exhibit "A" L1EE~~D I I I" I ~~ HIIII ~I/ ...... [~ - - ~ m - f---- Jl '- f--- f---- tJ - . -. . r::;n + I I f---- - ...,.. -' - :( ~ - ~ - - - -cry . E llifJ~ ~C; Iffff7 ~I . -=- --' DL~ or. -.5' f-- J L-.. ,". ---1 I - f - - - - - f 11 225th Street I E N A ruuuu: City Boundary I I .-------.... 300 0 I 300 600 Feet , ~ /z -./ i I i ! P d n :! Ii ~ g ; II J ~ II A ~ ;! ~ i~ a ~ a ~ .~ ~ U h ; j In s I '\ , .~. I: I !I I! 0 i il ~I:-" _L..1 'I :1 -r I I "-" I , ! :-1. u I hi: 2 : I~ ,~!.: :; \: g 3 I ~; ~ I !~.: I ~l.. '00'::; s~ ~~ il- i z: I I. ~ ;! : "'I "'r'n~~;Q.. JA .t\,u.ao " H'L['tl w", ", L_ " .t...... ~; =, +; i \ I I., \, .~ !' . ~ ~ I i d ~ ~ ~ u ~ -~.. e ~ i ; ~ ~ ~i i I ~ t:~' ...! 8 .. ~ ~., ~ ~ n ii I - · ~ i!! i~ :; ~ ~ i I ~~ I i r ~ b ~ ii ~. ~ a 3 ~ ~ ~! ~ ~. . . s ~ I f! ~.. 5 e", e 5 ; b ;5 ;~ .i ~~ I ~ 66 ,n5 liSig ~ H ~HunH _::~S:ii ia\ ~ ~ . ~!! d~ e i ~: .. ~ ~ i i ,,~iii ~ 1 ~ l ~ g 5. u ~ l e ~ ~g i~ ; E ~ i I i g e m~~ . ~ i ~ e l ~ d ~.r ! ~ ~ d . I_ %.. ~= 9 e ;i n n~ I ~ i ~ ~ . ..~ II . ~ . ,P I ii"" ;I=!j II ~ i2 .. e ; 5 ~:~ i ~ i I ! ~i ~~; l ~ 5 h .. $;' ;- ~ ;-;:;- Q. ~~ ii% 0' 1-:2 ",- g'i ",8 .... r:;!tJ 1Il111 "" tJ >- 0:: <( Z ~ :=i w 0:: a.. z "" -' Q. ... " "" z < It: o ,aj ~ ~ t'3 -.= . . 3 i . .'( l) &i! !!t t=" .J!! i i I ~ Vl ex: o >- ~ 6~ ~Vl il 8 ~ ;; ~ f5 ! ..... z (3 z w D j ! j ih 11' Iii . ., I' I-J I, It W J ~l II] In Hi I , I I it i I . . . f . e 8 i I Ii "' i .nn~ :: co ,. ... -+- --0 ...:.c. ~ li\ z o >= Q. 0:: u III w o -' <( '" w -' " '" -c "0 ~a: ~~ 0_ %Q. ~i - c - . 00 ~ " . t:'" o c 6~ _ u .." o III " =0 6 ; lilt: " 0 ':6 .,; j " '0 o;;-,.2~5~ :rij~ogog ~~~"i~i~ u;z--::~s ~~o~~ ~~ ~-"~~~5 _O.!"",Z_Ul o28=~~i5 ~5ci5-tOfIJ..: .!!cS~V10~O-t o--~i~.....g :rig~:~:.!o it'lL: 0 :J-N"in N:;~&i~5~; 5~-.!ViVl~:5 ~~i~ l~~~ Q)V)5ci'S~-;;tJ ~oc5~~5~= ;; ~ ~ '0 ~ 0- ~~~Q)_ ..... D~~- ~~_ ~qO ~~~c~-:~~Q) V)~5~o ~~w ;oc o;~~6~l~=~~wo5Zl= o5;w-~o ~=~06~~~o~;~_d~~~~;~a~=8~: =5=~-;;.~=~~t~~~~~o=g~~~og~= 5~ i- ;;;:2 i.!.~-o ~-';:2 iO.E;;; CD;I""} ~ 0 ~.5~g5~~~o!~O~~~~t~~~=~t~g: Q)~o.~ oO:J~ w~ 0_ ~_OO~CD =oa~Z~06~~:]NZ~06g~~zo6~=.!! O_~_~_~~NQ)O =~=~~O€ ~~~g~o _~~~_o.!;~:5~g5-_~;~~a-~;~~~ ]-=~o~o=~o~~~o~o:5;~-o:=-O~ ga~~.!~5~_g_~i~~S=~~~:S~~:5 goz-~o~z5:0~-t~VZ6~~~-~t~S N~~og~.~_-~wogf~:~ooo~:20~Z ~~:~o~;:~~;~~oo;:~606~~8'S~ =~O.!~_~O:~~-~;;~~O~~~~~O~~~~ ~~~o~~~~--~,io;~~~~;~~~~;~5~ ~~~~~~5~~€~~~~c~~~~~~~E~~~~ ~o6~~=o6~~~8~~=o5~~~~~8~=~] .,; " '" - c .. 0 ~a: :Sri -- 0_ Z Q. :5~ c - ~ 00 -~ " . -'" g l5 0:;; _U .. " ~CIl ~o 5 ; lilt: " 0 ':6 '" Q. w U x w '" Q. w U x w o % <( "\ (> !! -"--,,,-,,--..,# i ! I"f.. r ~. oo"y",ri\... ..._' .-' ..lOll?81 .... , ..: t \~.._-;~ Ii! ". f.:\ (,.i~~' "':-" \i r--. '#. ....- . " .'-"""':"" ........r -.i /> ..-., .. ~, .....--.- 'SL - 1\ (. ....' ...-' \> \, .. \.--....;. \ 1._,---.-,-. l c:.~:::::>/ < '..... / i "". '}6.fl,. \ ..- ! I ~ iU :5 '0 ~ vi - " - .. 00 '0.. ~ o- w , -Q. :::l .. <( "'0 . 0 > .c 0 % :;a: :;;: 0_ ~ 1Il,E % c:; ~ii ~ ..t: ... z ;:: _ 0 0' Q. 0 W .. U ~- x - .. w u " <( . 0 .c ~ III ",- ~ ..J "'5 <( ..:% 00( -' ~ a: <( % 'i :; W II:: ~ "" '-iI' /z ~ ~ J; e~e if! 2 : ~ ~ If1: a~.1 I~; ... r~ re ~f ~ d ~~ ~<~ ~i! 9W . 50 i, ~ U i ~ P d R ! U ~ ~f ~I ~e ~ !<< :I !It .g rJ .: w. ~ . ~: ~ ! -!- II~ : ;R~; ~ 5~;~~~ ~il.~~9 ~c.!l !!I ~i~d~ i ;; ;; "....-~41 "'-~'\ N 00'04'2#' W Ii ,/ /~ ..,.4~;;~>:;~:~.,,: '. ./. Yi .' )j l\ '" I. . n ~e'l :3! ill '" V. ~;,,":)r~ ! !\ \ ~\ } I" -. - - I I~I. // 7(?2~ft~~5,f./kr;;"'-".-.i rjj~~",,-"!'-,lt-~ /,/'~, ( - N OO~'3" ~ /:.-~~ (~.__ . '___""<."" .1-.!:...t..!~',._.._.. i . ihi~ H~i ph oJU'Q. .. .... UU It,.o(NIt,. Vl ex: ~ ~ zO:: 0:> I (fl (fl i I 8. al .~ ~ Vl "! ....,15 ~ ! (3 · z I l.IJ ~ ~11 11. II; l~ .. '" f-I II Bi ~h 19 fn m ,II J J I , I i Ii, illd~ Ii , i I ! ... .... u -::; ~ , -0 -..s::" ~ 9a.., 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 Administrator V FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Award Rescue Truck - Fire Department DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION Bids have been received for the new rescue truck. DISCUSSION The Fire Department rescue truck committee opened bids for the new vehicle on August 9, 2004. After thorough review of all four bids received, the committee has determined that E-ONE Manufacturing has met and in a number of areas exceeded the bid specs as well as having the lowest bid amount. The anticipated time required to build the new unit is 8-10 months. BUDGET IMPACT The attached spreadsheet provides the justification of the truck committee's recommendation to Council. ACTION REOUESTED Award the bid for the rescue truck to E-ONE Manufacturing. Respectfully submitted, ~"- ~c~~u (!.F4--\./"" Ken Kuchera Fire Chief ~ c:: o III E 'C o l! ~ III U. ~ III ii: ! q w Ir: W Q Q iii .... I'- CO ~ N @l .... (') <0 N o o It) a> <0 N o ::5 N ~ % glr:~ i=0!:!: o..u.O O...~z ~:i(/)2 j!:~b5 1;(/)%- :li ;:)a'" !:!: w zo o Ww a: 01( :Ii 0.. 0.. W 0.. (/) Q~5C) iii'fg~ ::; E10 ~ ""8-.g :5:w8.5 ciO Q. ci ~ o 0 o 0 N .... ~ ~ "C "C ~ ~ ~ '0 c 'i .e :5 g o W '0 ~ (') 4") (')4") Ol CJ) (,)ClO Ol CJ) NN Ol CJ) Ol CJ) 1'-1'- lis; NN 00 COIlO .... .... ~~ (')4") 00 <0 ClO 1'-1'- It).,) ~n~ (/) z Ow ~~ j!:~ 3:ii5 ~~ g:~ ~~ o o o ci N g ~ +:; a. roen 0::: '" 0'0 en (J) ~8", zan:3 g~ _ 0- roen 0:::", 0'0 en(J) c;[Il", zan:3 c o ~ !E o -~ (/) '" Qj CD :e o 0 o 0 .~:ri ~ :5 ~ ~ :~ ~ !5 !~ ~ CD (/){J {J bj J!j(J) :ll J!j ~ [Il '" 0 '" ~ :e~:3an:3:e (/) %C) 0% 5~ 00 rtlen o o o. CO .... c ,2 ~ I;:: '0 -~ (/) U) Qj (J) :e c c .2.2 ~~ !E!E 00 ~~ J!jJ!j CD CD CD CD :e:iE ~ g . .... Gl ~ i: e u. c: :> c c:: - :5 E :5,- :8 :8 '0 :;; .... z en rJrJ~ rJgrJ.... !E!E~ !Eu:!ElOro ~ ~ ~ I~' (J) ~ ~ .~ Z; ~ ,~1~.2 ~ fIj rI) a."(:5 II) 1"9 fI) 0.. g Q)a;~~1)~G)~~ ~~an~~an~an8 c: .2 fj~ !50 -~,~ en-" o .!I 0 CD-I CD 0 :itz (J) c: c::9 o 0'" ~Q.~:E 1;::J:1;:::Q1 '0 R '0 0::: CD""iS, ~ {J~ .Q J!j:llJ!jg CDoGlo CD x CD x :itw:itw cc:cc: o 0 0 0 ~~~~ I;:: I;:: I;:: I;:: '0'0'0 '0 ii CD CD CD bJbj~bj J!jJ!jJ!jJ!j Gl CD CD CD CD CD CD Gl :iE:iE:iE:iE c: cc c: o 00 ,2 ~Q.~~ ~ I;::J:I;::!E I;:: '0 R 'u '0 'u !!! "" I!!! CD !!! en {J I cI) ~ ciS ~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ "i '0 c E8CD5 ,~ .!! ~ .5 :iE ~ III 1:3 ~ ~ .~ ~ 'jjj .a (/) ow' -1.9.: E U)C?~ 01ij<( ::J,5~-;;; 8:WE,~E.so ~~S.5E.5~ ~~ ~;,B~~ ~Cen~o..CD7ii .q; CDOJ:c:::J lii lii-" ~o';:;'~ $ $ l! ,~ It) ~. x ......a:l....(')ww "C ~ i ~ .s j c: Jil ::J ~ C o :g; o o o ~ W "C CD '0 i CD .a .s "C lB C Jil ::s o ~ c o :s. o C 00 0U) g.E 00 NO ~... ~- ~ coe c:alg (5 0.... ._0 .eo(/) r::: .....c: iii-ol... 1iigl1l ~ 1:e o 0 -0 0 Ol- !EZ !E~O 0 ::::iEc ~.; ~c.; .; ';~E .Qo",.Q.oo 0 0'" ~a~~'fia '-5. at~ Gi[ll.gGi[ll[ll~8~[Il'5i~ ~an'~~anan~an~anE 8 2-g ::l e .c Iii "'0 C '(0 Q) ..... 0- e Eoe .2_E ,g ,-0", ft2~ 0 'ftq~ !Eeno Z !E~O o I..r: , oCD" ~e"" e llIee CiS ,2 ~ ,2 $ CiS Q .2 J!jo..!!! o.oJ!jQ.o. CD(J):ll!l1[1l"CCD(J)(J)(J) ~~.crox,S~~~ia """w~ow~:::!:ww.c c o ~ I;:: ~S (/) U) Qj CD :it c c c: ,2,2.2 ~~~ I;:: I;:: I;:: '0'0'0 !!~ J!jJ!jJ!j CD Gl CD CD CD CD :it:it:it e .2 fj I;:: '0 .~ (/) U) "$ :it c o ~ q:: ~~ en ~ ~ :5Q5 .- E'- ~<(~ I;::oq:: .~ ~;q~ ~{J~ J!j(J)J!j lB [Il ~ :ean:e III I!! ro .~ "0 8 'jjj o I'- o .... .!. .s ro '6 r2 ,5 ~ ~ '0 ~.~ g 11t ~~ ~.a <(.... Ed! oS ::sO ~::l ,5 ~ J: E I!! . ~ 0 o.g <('0 iiio as31...E~ 8,- c CD 1\1 <r2,g~o e ,2 ~ !E o .~ (/) J!j CD CD :e c o ~ !E o ~ en ~ CD :it E .!! ~ (/) g 'C o ~ c o ::! ~ ~ ~ c o ~ I;:: ~~ C/) J!j CIl ~ ,~ ~ I;:: '0 .~ en U) Qj ~ c: o ~ I;:: .~ c% J!j ~ ::! E .~ Q., o ::! (') c o ~ I;:: '0 -~ C/) J!j Gl CIl :it c .2 ~ I;:: ~S (/) ~ CIl :e c o ~ q:: 'u ! ~ CD :e i: i s o CIl e ! c l! l- i: e u. CIl~ c 2 9'" w'O 7ii8 ~'~ 4l!31 o III "C.a NGl .... .c I'- ... N,5 1Il"C .le ~ U) ::J .- U .= ,5 c o ~ o c .2 ~ q:: ~i en ~ ~ <5 e '" (J) o o , e o gE. ;l[ll~ Q.xro OW.c c o ~ o c .2 ~ q:: :~ C/) J!j Gl Gl :e '" '0 (J) 8 x w :5 ~ I;:: '~ ~ ~ CD :e Gi CD u. o o N Gl U) o J: .Q :; l! :g J: ..9l :E ~ J: <<> 8 88 00 00 0 '5i2' oo 00 00 0 c:: lii ('oj ~g gg 00 ('oj ~~ ~ > ...... NO \0 0'" oo ..... N...... 00 en ...... 0 OlD B lij N ~~ 10 ~~ ~ en o.c ~ ~ C') ","(5 !E~c . ~ fIl=:S:: u-<<> . ';: III ~ 8.BE 0 CD ... (/)J::t: 0 ~;O J!la.~ ~ .s08 lD 8 E \0 :t:::co lD x 0 ;;; .21-& l!! :E <<> 0 ..J .- III 0'" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c: ::l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oo '- Iti cO m ~ ('oj ('oj ....: <<>.g ..... ~ C') ...... $ o oo 0 ..... ..... \0 ..... "0 c: 10 ;;; ~ ri ~ ri ~ Cl ,Q ;;; ~ ~ LL. oo ~ :E c: C ~ ~ .Q 'C ~ a.Z'E 8 0. 0 0.0 ~ ~ X ::l 0 Woo..... Z Z 0 0 8 0 0 0 8. CD c 0 0 0 0 0 .2 0 0 0 0 0 0 .2:':0 ... ~ \0 N N \0 N ll() ~1lI::l ll() 10 C') C') N \0 ' co II: N 10 ~ 0.0 ~ ;'l ::lJ!lfll .0 ~ ~ tI't ~ ~ ~,~ .2J . ~ . -0 .... (/) 8 g~~g 11 ~ fIl.c - ,- ~ ~ ~ 8~j ~ ;;; z z 0'O.s", 8 l'j 8 0 0 8 ,g 0 0 l5 0 0 0 ll() 0 .~ 0 g 0 ~ 0 ...... :;:l 18 ~ en i5 0 C') B i ...... 0 lD ...... C') "'" ~ ~ 10 ~ fIl ~ ~ II: III III ~~ ;;; .0 ~ .0 ,5 .5 (/) "D "D 11 lD lD "D "D ::l ::l lD '0 '0 :E c c (/) ~ ~ ..J \0 W ll() 0 0 W I N W .... (/) Z .... 0::: (/) Z 0 0::: W Z ~ w w ::::i w 0 ::l 0 :II! ~ 0 0::: 0::: 0 WO ii2 a.. L5 w 10 c W .... (/)- a.. .g .2 5 1= ~ ::E 03 19 a 0::: 0::: Z ,S; w a.. ::l ~ ILL. 0 I c w ~ I (/) 0 a.. 00 i= lD ;l! E ~ 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: ::::i::::i a.. i z I- ::l ::J ::J ::J ~~ 0 I- 0 I- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ g i= I Z Z Z Z 00 a.. C) w W W W W >->- ..J 0 0 ::::i 0 0 0 0 0 II I- ~ ... City of Farmington 325 9ak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (65'1) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Fire Department Rescue Truck Bids August 9, 2004 4:30 pm Supplier Bid Amount Ferrara Fire Apparatus, Inc. $296,799.00 Crimson Fire, Inc. $293,933.00 Clarey's Safety Equipment $269,500.00 E-One, Inc. $262,500.00 IOav City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ciJarmington.mn.us SUBJECT: Mayor and Councilmembers IJ David Urbia, City Mministratorfr Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes Solid Waste Inquiry TO: FROM: DATE: September 20, 2004 . INTRODUCTION The representative from the management firm, Lori Anne Peterson of Gittleman, requested to place this item on the agenda. DISCUSSION Staff has met on the concerns brought forward from this management firm and the correspondence is available for your review. BUDGET IMPACT Allowing one town home complex to opt- out of organized collection could lead to others, thereby impacting the solid waste fund revenue, and additional trucks on the streets would lead to additional maintenance costs. ACTION REQUESTED Recommend to offer the proposed alternatives outlined in the staff memo. a 1 City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us September 9,2004 Dear Ms. Peterson, In response to your letter of July 23, and the email correspondence on August 12, I have completed some research, discussed your issues with other City staff members, and would like to share with you the information that I have gathered. Just as I have completed this work I noted your letter of September 8th concerning your request to be placed upon the next city council meeting agenda. The next meeting is on Monday, September 20,2004 at 7:00 p.m. I will place your request on the agenda. Minnesota State Statute l15A.930l and Dakota County Ordinance 110 require the city (and all haulers) to have rates established that ensure that waste generated in excess of the base unit size (in this case, 30 gallons) be priced higher than the base unit price and prohibits fees for service that are not based on volume or weight. Essentially, the City is required by law to charge according to usage, or waste generated. In light of these requirements, charging a flat rate for the townhome community would not be possible. As far as allowing the association to hire a private company for solid waste services, townhome complexes do not qualify for an exemption according to City Code. It would be a challenge to compare the city's service to that of a private hauler in another community; but staffhas done a comparison of the rates at some of the other townhome complexes in Farmington and found that they were the same as or similar to Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes. It is my understanding that you requested in the fall of 2003 to have the Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes garbage services changed from 60 gallon to 30 gallons, at which time concerns about potentially overflowing garbage containers as a result of that change were discussed. In a letter dated March 2,2004, city staff suggested alternate options of using one 300 gallon container at each building or billing individual units directly for their garbage service, which would allow them to choose different levels of service. These options are still available if you would like to pursue them. On February 11, 2004, you requested that all units in Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes be changed from 60 gallon to 30 gallon services, however, after city staff met with one of the Board members, it was determined that it wouldn't be feasible based on typical usage. The City's 60-gallon service rate is $49.50 per quarter and includes weekly garbage and recycling pickup. Once a year Christmas tree pickup and an annual Curbside Cleanup Day are also included in the quarterly charge and are benefits of being a City solid waste customer. Curbside Cleanup Day is held in May and allows residents to place at the curb large items such as appliances, furniture, and other difficult to dispose of items. Other services available for an additional fee are: return trips for those who have an extra container of garbage in between regular route days, seasonal yard waste service, temporary dumpsters for big clean outs, and curbside pickup for large items. The City of Farmington's Solid Waste Division is committed to providing high quality, timely, and responsive service to all of its customers. Its customer service approval rating is consistently between 97% and 99% and it will continue to provide the best possible service to all of its customers. Please call me if you have any questions at 651-463-1801. David Mark Urbia City Administrator GI1&~Mf1~{>N~"K"ON GITTLEMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION . GITTLEMAN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION September 8, 2004 City Administrator Attn: Mr. Dave Erbia City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes Rubbish Charges Dear Mr. Erbia: As the managing agent of Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes Association, the Board of Directors requested we write you directly to request that the issue regarding the amount of charges by the City of Farmington for refuse removal for townhome commun~ties be put on the agenda for the next scheduled city council meeting and that notification of such agenda addition be sent to the association via Gittleman Management so that those affected could be notified. The Board remains in the view that the Association is being over-charged for rubbish removal services. Townhome communities are unique in that they have a budget to maintain and do not function like a typical single family home. The rubbish bill is the largest budget item that is incurred every year at Tamarack Ridge, which is atypical of the scores of townhome associations which we manage in other suburban communities throughout the Twin Cities. We wish to thank you in advance for taking the time to look into this matter and hope that the city would be willing to discuss this matter formally. We trust you will get back to us at the earliest possible time. Yours very truly, GITTLEMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION ~ ~ P~I!H6':H.s.. Lori Anne Peterson Association Manager (952) 277-2713 cc: Board of Directors CEDAR BUSINESS CENTER. 1801 EAST 79th STREET. SUITE 21 . BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 . (952) 277-2700 . FAX (952) 277-2739 . EMAIL: gmc@gittleman.com DOWNTOWN OFFICE: THE TOWERS. 15 sourn FIRST STREET. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 . (612) 333-1755 . FAX (612) 333-9051 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: David Urbia, City Administrator FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director cc: Brandi Larson, Randy Distad SUBJECT: Gittleman Management Corporation - Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes August 24, 2004 DATE: This is in response to your question whether we are in a position to charge a flat rate for garbage pick up for this particular town home association, based on their assertion that they are paying less in other communities where they manage town homes. I would say that a flat rate would not be acceptable to maintain the same level of service. Their assertions as to the costs they pay for 'comparably sized' situations are unsubstantiated. We have no idea if the level of service is the same as that provided in Farmington (each unit with a 60 gallon container) or if they receive a reduction from private haulers in other communities based on other criteria that the City is unable to match. Brandi is doing research to identify the amounts paid by other town home associations in Farmington for similar service. She has worked diligently with this association and has spent considerable time to make sure they are getting the best level of service for the dollars spent. Lena has also been involved in this process. They currently have each town home in the development with a 60 gallon container which is picked up once a week. Despite the fact those 121 units are more closely located than other developments, solid waste picks up each container the same as it would for a single family home and the amount of trash collected from each unit is comparable to other single family homes. Therefore, the amount of tipping charge on the truck would be the same and it still takes the same amount of time for the driver to collect and dump the load. There are no 'savings' just because of they are a town home association. We still need to recoup the costs of our operations - which is why we charge the rates we charge. It is apparent that if we were to charge a 'flat rate' for services for town home associations, it would be due to a reduction in the costs of that service based on circumstances such as less collection sites, less waste produced etc. As this is not the case, a flat rate is not an option. As far as 'opting out' of the City's garbage service, the City Code reads that exceptions are only made for Large Commercia1lIndustrial uses (7-1-2(D)) or for special waste (7-1- 2(F)). A town home association would not qualify under these sections of the code. Respectfully submitted, /~ ./J :,,4/- P//.p ,/" .{/ .. C# /L. Y '--~r:> p' 1_ /' Robin Roland Finance Director Message Page I of2 Robin Roland From: David Urbia Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 8:56 AM To: Robin Roland; Brandi Larson Subject: FW: Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes - Rubbish Charges I can assume from this that they understand they are paying appx. $6,900 per quarter or just under $28,000 per year versus $50,000 per year as stated in their letter, but that they feel that other associations they manage the bill is $10,000. Are we in a position to do a flat rate contract or let them did it out? What is our policy or procedure? David M. Urbia -----Original Message----- From: Lori Anne Peterson [mailto:LPeterson@gittleman.com] Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 1:09 PM To: David Urbia Cc: Jason Iverson (E-mail); Don Wylie (E-mail); Neal Alexandra (E-mail); Yvonne M. Flaherty (E-mail) Subject: RE: Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes - Rubbish Charges Thank you for your prompt attention to our request. However this spreadsheet does not do any more for us than before. It only proves how much is being paid and that it is four times the amount of what other associations pay for their rubbish removal. The association is looking to see if the city would consider a flat rate contract for rubbish that is in line with what other associations pay and/or would allow them to have an outside service come in and do their rubbish removal. I look forward to your response. Thank you Lori An ne Peterson -----Original Message----- From: Renea Senander Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 11:43 AM To: Lori Anne Peterson Subject: FW: Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes - Rubbish Charges From: David Urbia [mailto:durbia@CI.FARMINGTON.MN.US] Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 11:01 AM To: GMC Cc: Brandi Larson; Robin Roland Subject: Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes - Rubbish Charges Lori - From your letter of July 23rd, I have asked my staff to look into this. They have and prepared the attached spreadsheet. Please call with any questions or concerns you may have. Thank you. David Urbia 8/24/2004 GI1&~~~tm"".noN GITTLEMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION . GITTLEMAN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION July 23, 2004 City Administrator Attn: Mr. Dave Erbia City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes Rubbish Charges Dear Mr. Erbia: As the managing agent of Tamarack Ridge Carriage Homes Association, the Board of Directors requested we write you directly regarding the amount of charges by the City of Farmington for refuse removal. The Board is of the view that the Association is being over-charged for rubbish removal services. The Association has attempted to work through this problem with staff members of the City of Farmington to no avail. In addition, the refuse bills received from the city early this quarter were approximately double in amount of what they were in the past. Once again, attempts were made with staff personnel to discuss the charges and the differential but without success. Please understand that the purpose of this letter is to seek resolution and not to be critical of city personnel. For your information, we point out that it appears the refuse removal charges by the city will total approximately $50,000 on a yearly basis. There are 134 townhome units at Tamarack. For comparison purposes, we point out that Claret Springs East Association, which is located in Rosemount and consists of 121 townhomes in total, the yearly costs of refuse removal is approximately $10,000, in total. Townhome communities are unique in that they have a budget to maintain and do not function like a typical single family home. The rubbish bill is the largest budget item that is incurred every year at Tamarack Ridge, which is atypical of the scores oftownhome associations which we manage in other suburban communities throughout the Twin Cities. We wish to thank you in advance for taking the time to look into this matter. We trust you will get back to us at the earliest possible time. Perhaps we could arrange a time when I could meet with you at your offices at a time convenient to you. Yours very truly, GITTLEMAN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION .~ "~l,(/c A-Yc'Rkr':Vn/bLCI [ori~e Peterson Association Manager (952) 277-2713 cc: Board of Directors CEDAR BUSINESS CENTER. 1801 EAST 79th STREET. SUITE 21 . BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 . (952) 277-2700 · FAX (952) 277-2739 · EMAIL: gmc@gittleman.com DOWNTOWN OFFICE: THE TOWERS. 15 sourn FIRST STREET. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401. (612) 333-1755 . FAX (612) 333-9051 CITY OF FARMINGTON TOWNHOME COMPARISON 9/1/2004 CHARLESWOOD TOWNHOMES Gittleman Management Billed 8/30/04 Garbage based on each unit having a 60 gallon container UNITS WATER WA CONS SEWER GARB'AGE STORM UT TOTAL 19918 LANGFORD LN 4 $74.08 58 $106.00 $209.44 $12.41 $401.93 19919 LANGFORD LN 4 $76.40 60 $114.80 $209.44 $12.41 $413.05 MIDDLE CREEK TOWN HOMES Keller Property Management Billed 8/30/04 Garbage based on each unit having a 60 gallon container UNITS WATER WA CONS SEWER GARBAGE STORM UT TOTAL 20514 ERIN CT 8 $78.72 62 $212.00 $418.89 $33.82 $743.43 20522 ERIN CT 8 $114.68 93 $212.00 $418.89 $33.82 $779.39 TAMARACK TRAIL TOWNHOMES Gittleman Management Billed 7/30/04 Garbage based on each unit having a 60 gallon container UNITS WATER WA CONS SEWER GARBAGE STORM UT TOTAL 365 TAMARACK TR 8 $115.84 94 $214.20 $418.89 $62.00 $810.93 401 TAMARACK TR 10 $110.04 89 $265.00 $523.61 $77.50 $976.15 FARMINGTON FAMILY TOWNHOMES Farmington Family Housing Billed 7/30/04 Garbage based on each unit having a 60 gallon container UNITS WATER WA CONS SEWER GARBAGE STORM UT TOTAL 800 CATALINA WAY 4 $47.40 35 $106.00 $209.44 $35.03 $436.87 942 CATALINA WAY 4 $187.76 156 $119.20 $209.44 $7.75 $684.15 Storm Utility rates were reviewed Aug. 2004. Tamarack & Farmington Family will be billed revised storm utility charges on their next billing lOb City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us I TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator P---- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Consider Maintenance Agreement - Farmington Lanes DATE: September 20,2004 INTRODUCTION /DISCUSSION Forwarded herewith for Council's consideration is a draft agreement between the City and Farmington Lanes outlining the maintenance responsibilities for the diagonal parking along 5th Street per the previous discussions and understandings. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Consider attached maintenance agreement. Approve agreement by motion. zc;~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file Farmington Lanes ENCROACHMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made this day of , 2004, by and between the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota ("City"), and LLM RLP Partnership, dba FARMINGTON LANES a Minnesota partnership, its successors and assigns ("Landowner"). R E C I TAL S: WHEREAS, Landowner is the fee owner of real property with the street address of 27 5th Street, Farmington, MN 55024, legally described on the attached Exhibit A ("Property"); and WHEREAS, the City currently has a platted street right of way along the western side of the property designated as 5th Street ("Street"); and WHEREAS, Landowner seeks permission from the City to encroach upon the street right of way to locate additional vehicular parking. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows: 1. The City hereby approves an encroachment for the vehicular parking area over the street right of way as depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto. 2. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed a waiver or abandonment of the City's rights over its public rights of way. 3. The Landowner shall be responsible for all cost relating to maintenance, repair and removal of the parking area and all sweeping and snow removal on the parking area. This maintenance agreement is a personal obligation of the Landowner and shall be binding upon its successors and assigns. If the landowner fails to maintain the encroachment area, the City may enter and perform the necessary work and assess any and all of its costs to the property pursuant to M.S. 420.101. 4. Landowner and its successors and assigns do hereby agree to defend, indemnify, and hold the City harmless from any and all costs and expenses, all claims and liability, including attorney's fees, relating to or arising out of the grant of the Landowner of permission to encroach on or over the street right of way and from any claims arising out of damages to the parking area that might occur during the City's use, repair and maintenance of the street right of way 5. Either party may terminate this Agreement provided that the terminating party gives the other party thirty (30) days' written notice of its intentions to terminate this Agreement. Upon termination of the agreement, or upon such other date as determined in writing by the City, the Landowner shall timely remove and restore the street right of way to City standards as determined by the City's Public Works Director. If the removal and restoration is not complete within 60 days of termination, the City may enter the property as necessary to remove the encroachment and restore the right of way to city standards, and assess any and all costs to the property owner and landowner hereby waives any appeal rights to the assessment process or amount pursuant to M.S. 429.081 or other law. 6. This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald G. Ristow, Mayor By: David M. Urbia, City Administrator LANDOWNER: FARMINGTON LANES By: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2004, by Gerald G. Ristow and David M. Urbia, respectively the Mayor and City Administrator ofthe City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2003, by , the , ofLLM RLP Parntership, dba Farmington Lanes, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of the company. Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: CAMPBELL KNUTSON, P.A. 1380 Corporate Center Curve 317 Eagandale Office Center Eagan,MN 55121 651-452-5000 JJJ Legal Description of Property: PIN 14-03100-023-11 EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B Sketch of Encroachment of Parking area on City street right of way.. '.. .:' ~. vi;ii~~1t ~ "'10./0 :::-';0 ,.~'. i~. C 0." ~ :" -- :;~.:~:.:;:~j. -J "~I~'.".~~"'!:''; ~ '" :"..*::-'.:',:. L ~ (; ;~'~d~~:::<.=.' :J :r.,~"'!':' U ",. .:1;~;k\:~;1; '" ...~,. ~ ~f~l~! ~ ;:Y~:~;Iji C ....:..~.-.... o ~ ,~~i~f~; -t-> "'..,,: %~j;~ ~ '" CJ) ~ '" I~ i;~;i;~i1~i~ "'~c~ ~~ ~ '" ;~y :" d" LL VI Q) C d ~ :3 ~ ~ W W Ct:: ~ Ul I ~ LD H c)>- I 1~1 m01 ~ ! I Ii! o ~ ~ ~ J Ul - c ! I l. f J I I s - :I ~ {l. ~ I. ~ II . . I I I I I I- c)~ I!.; 1+ I IS 6 ~~~ a'!' I~~ 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 ~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Change Order - Southeast Trunk Utility and Pond Project DATE: September 20,2004 INTRODUCTION Forwarded herewith for Council's review and consideration is Change Order #1 for the Southeast Area Trunk Utility and Pond Improvements. DISCUSSION This change order provides for additional project costs and revises the completion date if the Castle Rock Bank easements are not obtained this fall. In the event that the Castle Rock Bank easements are not obtained, the proj ect will be constructed to the east property line of the Castle Rock Bank property in 2004 and all remaining work west of the east property line of the bank will be completed in 2005 after condemnation of the necessary easements. The change order amount includes all costs to remobilize, dewater and complete remaining project installations on the Castle Rock Bank property as proposed in the approved project plans (Dated 8/5/04) and specifications (Dated 7/21/04) in 2005 instead of 2004. The revised utility installation completion date will be June 1,2005. The contractor agrees to honor the terms of this change order if and when the City executes this change order in the event the necessary easements are not obtained from Castle Rock Bank in time to accomplish the construction in 2004. The purpose of identifying this change order is to facilitate the starting of the project. The project needs to be started as soon as possible in order to meet the desired completion dates. With this change order in place, the City may execute the contracts for the project and the costs are known ahead of time in the case that negotiations with Castle Rock Bank fail. Without this change order in place, if the City allowed the contractor to commence and the easements are not obtained in time for the contractor to complete the work, the City would be at risk for an unknown change order amount. BUDGET IMPACT The total cost for the change order is $50,000 and can be funded with the project budget if it becomes necessary. ACTION REQUESTED Approve by motion, contingent on the failure to reach an agreement with Castle Rock Bank, Change Order #1 for the Southeast Area Trunk Utility and Pond Improvements in the amount of $50,000.00. Respectfully submitted, ~/)1~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file j fl j Bonestroo R Rosene ~ Anderlik & 1 \J 1 Associates ngineers & Architects Owner: City of Fannington, 325 Oak St., Farmington, MN 55024 Date September 14,2004 Contractor: Barbarossa & Sons Inc., 11000 93rd Ave. N" Osseo, MN 55369 Bond Company: Bond No: CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 SOUTHEAST AREA TRUNK UTILITY AND POND IMPROVEMENTS BRA FILE NO. 141-03-204 Description of Work This Change Order provides for additional project costs and revises the completion date if the Castle Rock Bank easements are not obtained. In the event that the Castle Rock Bank easements are not obtained the project will be constructed to the east property line of the Castle Rock Bank property in 2004 and all remaining work west of the east property line of the bank will be completed in 2005. The change order amount includes all costs to remobilize, dewater and complete remaining project installations in 2005 and as proposed in the approved project plans (Dated 8/5/04) and specifications (Dated 7/21/04). The revised utility installation completion date will be June 1,2005. This Change Order provides for additional project costs and revises the completion date if the Castle Rock Bank easements are not obtained. The contractor agrees to honor the terms of this change order if and when the City executes this change order in the event the necessary easements are not obtained from Castle Rock Bank in time to accomplish the construction in 2004. Contract Unit Total No. Item Unit Quantity Price Amount CHANGE ORDER NO.1 REMOBILIZE, DEW A TER AND COMPLETE LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 REMAINING PROJECT INSTALLATIONS IN 2005 Total CHANGE ORDER NO.1: $50,000.00 I4103204CHOI 09/15(94 10:43 FA~ 763 425,0797 BARBAROSSA & SONS INC. SEP-1S-2B04 la:17 ~ITY OF FARMINGTON \ n =1'00 O\1lllCr: Cit ofF . D 325 Oak St.. FlIIll1ln tOtl. MN 550Z4 -=- f "1\11 Ander:"k & ConlJ'nclor: 'B!ltb8t~ & Sons [na., J 1000 93rd Ave. N~ OAll MN 5.5369 1\11 Assoaates . EngIneers Go AKtl~"" Bond C 1 @002 Ssl 463 1611 P.02/03 Ible t.c:Inbcr 14. 2004 Baod No: CHANGE ORDER. NO. 1 \ ' SOUTHEAST AREA TR.UNK UTILITY AND POND IMPROVEME.NTS BRA FILE NO. 14 t -03-204 Descriptio.. of Wor~ \ This Change Order provides for a.d~onal projeot costs and revises the oompletion date if the CaStle Rock Bank easements are not OOtaioed. ' In the event that the Castle Rock BJk easement:! are not obtained the pro.lect will be constructed ~o the east property line of the Castle Rock Bank property in 2~ and all remaining work west of the east property line ofthp bank will be completed in 2005. The chan~ order lUJ)ount i~cludes an CCJlltH to remobilize, dewa1Br IInd complete remaining; project Installations in 2005 and as proposed in the approv$1 project plans (Dated 8/5/04) and specifications (Dated 712l/04). The revised utility ins~l~on completion ~ate wlll be i\~ne t, 20?S. . . _ , ThIs Change Order provIdes for addrona) prOject cl;Ists and revues the completIOn date lfthe CiL~tJe Rock Baok easements are not obtained. The contmctor a~ to honor the terms ofmis cbaoge order ifand when the CIty executes this change order in the event tns necessary ease'.mmb are not obtained. from Castle Rock Bank In time to accomplish the ooostruotion ~~~ i , CooUnct No. Item CRANCY. ORDER NO.1 " Unit Quantity REMOBIUZf, D.EW,l\TER AND COMI"LI:l'l'~ REMAINING PRoon:T lNSi AlLATIONS IN 2005 TOLllI (:UANGE ORDER N(). 1: LS 141 OS2o.tCHO I Unit TOIllI pflce Amount $$0,000.00 sso,ooo.oo 550.000.00 1\;51 463 1611 ': ~003 P.03/03 0\l/15/04 10 :_!;3. FAX 763 SEP-1S-2004 10:17 425 0797 BARBAROSSA & SONS iCITY OF FARMIHTION , f ~ . , I' INC. Original Contract Amount Previous Change Orders This Change Order ! Revised Contract Amount (inclu~ing this change order) I CHANGEINCONTRACTT~S l Original Contract Times: [ Substantial Completion (days ,r date): Ready for final Payment (days!or date); ~ [ Increase oftbls Change Order: l Substantial Completion (days cbr date): ~ Ready for final Payment (days/or date): Contract Time with all approved! Change Oaders: c Substantial C01'l1pletion (days cpr date): Ready fOT final Paym~nt (daysior date): , , I' . $1,301,1~9.5S ~O.OO I' $50,OeO.oo $1.351,149.55 ., Recommended for Approval by:: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANhERLIK& ASSOCIATES, INC. ! r ! t ~ [ I , l Approved by Contractor: [ AROSS SONS INCJ - ~ ~ /hie: Approved by Owner: CITY OF FARMINGTON Date Date cc: Owner COJrtractor Bonding Company Bow:stroo & Assoc. 14103204CHOI TOTAL P.t13 JOel 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 Administrator fItV Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Regarding Existing and Proposed Park, Trail and Open Space Plan Map DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington amended its Comprehensive Plan earlier in 2004 related to the map identifying existing and proposed parks, trails and open space. At that time the Existing Parks, Trails and Open Space Map was amended as a new map titled Existing and Proposed Park, Trail and Open Space Plan Map (Plan Map). The main difference between the two maps was that the new Plan Map addressed the location and size of future parks and the future location of trails and open space. DISCUSSION The City of Farmington recently undertook a Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) review process that examined, analyzed and in the end recommended properties to be included in MUSA. This MUSA designation in turn allows development to occur on these properties should the property owner so desire. The City Council at its August 16, 2004 meeting approved MUSA designation for the properties that were recommended by the MUSA Review Committee and Planning Commission. Four properties currently located outside of the City's boundary were given MUSA. ill order to keep current with potential future development on properties that were granted MUSA but are currently located outside the City boundary, Park and Recreation Department staff and the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) at its August 2004 meeting reviewed the Plan Map for identification of future trails and parks on these properties. The amended Plan Map (Exhibit A) submitted with this memo indicates new trails and parks that are being identified on the four properties that are currently outside the City boundaries but have been granted MUSA. The four properties on the amended Plan Map that new trail and park locations have been shown include the following (identified by last name of property owner): Garvey, Empey, Cahil1/Rother and Murphy(now owned by Tim Giles Construction). Since these properties are either going through the annexation process or still need to be annexed into the City it seems to make sense to identify park and trail locations in the City's Comprehensive Plan as soon as possible and preferably before annexation occurs. In addition to identifying new parks and trails on properties outside of the City boundary that received MUSA, staff and PRAC members would also like to amend the location of parks and trails within the City's boundary. The first location is the Winkler and Devney properties located to the east ofthe East Farmington development. The amended Plan Map identifies the park area being moved more to the northeast from where the current Plan Map identifies it. Trails have also been expanded around the perimeter of both properties that will connect back to the existing trail in the Prairie Waterway and future trail in the Bristol Square Development. Additional trails are shown in the area south of Winkler and Devney properties and just east of the Prairie Waterway. The other recommended amendment to be made to the Plan Map concerns the trail that was previously shown on the east side of Denmark Avenue but is now being recommended to be located on the west side of Denmark Avenue. This trail alignment is being recommended so that it matches the trail alignment identified in the Spruce Street Area Master Plan. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Plan Map amendments at its September 15, 2004 meeting and is recommending that the City Council approve the amendments that have been covered in this memo. ACTION REOUESTED By motion approve the amendments identified for future park and trail locations to the Existing and Proposed Park, Trails and Open Space Plan Map. ~~Y~:iV Randy Distad Parks and Recreation Director /Oe, 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 and City Administrator F FROM: Tina Schwanz, Planning Intern SUBJECT: Amend Sections 10-2-1 and 10-6-4 of the Zoning Code to Regulate Commercial Vehicle Parking in Residential Districts DATE: October 4,2004 INTRODUCTION Staff proposes to amend Section 10-6-4 of the City Code to include regulations regarding commercial vehicle parking in residential districts. The current City Code does not address commercial vehicles and staff would like to specify which types of commercial vehicles are appropriate on private property in residential districts. BACKGROUND Based on complaints staff has received there is a need to determine what types of commercial vehicles mayor may not be permitted to park on private property in residential districts. After reviewing several city codes that regulate commercial vehicle parking in residential districts, staff decided to classify commercial vehicles into two different categories. The categories are: Class I - regulated by gross vehicle weight, and Class II - all commercial vehicles other than Class I commercial vehicles. The reason for separating commercial vehicles into two categories is to enable the City to limit the circumstances under which larger or visually obtrusive vehicles [Class I] can be parked in residential areas, while allowing smaller or more common trucks and vans to be parked at residents' homes. DISCUSSION This matter was considered at public hearings that were conducted by the Planning Commission at its meetings on July 13 and August 10. On both of those dates, the matter was continued to the next meeting to allow staff additional time to conduct research and craft an appropriate Ordinance. A proposed ordinance has been attached for your review. It creates two classes of commercial vehicles: Class I and Class II. With a few specific exceptions, Class I vehicles are prohibited on residential property. Class I vehicles include those that have gross vehicle weight ratings [GVWR] in excess of 18,000 pounds, which is anything above category "H" in the State of Minnesota's GVWR classification system (copy attached). I have attached photos of vehicles in a variety of weight categories, to help illustrate which types of vehicles would be allowed and prohibited under the proposed Ordinance. At the Planning Commission meeting on September 15, the following collateral issues were also addressed: 1. Would commercial vehicles that are presently located on residential property be allowed to remain even if they do not comply with the new commercial vehicle ordinance? The position of City staff is that the new Ordinance should be enforced with regard to any vehicles that are not in compliance with the Ordinance on or after its effective date. The City Attorney agrees with this position. 2. How is a combination unit's (vehicle and trailer) gross vehicle weight determined? The staff recommendation is that (at least initially) the individual weight ratings of a motorized vehicle and its trailer not be combined for purposes of the proposed Ordinance. This initial position can be reviewed and modified later if it proves to be problematic. Planning Commission Review On September 15, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the proposed ordinance, and approval of the staff recommendations regarding the two collateral issues identified above. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the proposed (attached) Ordinance amending Title 10, Chapters 2 and 6 of the Farmington City Code, concerning off-street parking of commercial vehicles. Respectfully Submitted, '-Ilflt~JU[)O Tina Schwanz, Planning Intern CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTERS 2 AND 6 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, CONCERNING OFF-STREET PARKING OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 10-2-1 ofthe Farmington City Code is amended to add a definition of "Commercial Vehicle" to read as follows: COMMERCIAL VEHICLE: Any vehicle used for commercial purposes including but not limited to: trailers, motorized wheeled or tracked vehicles or vehicles displaying company signage, company logos, commercial equipment, fixtures or tools. CLASS I: Vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of more than eighteen thousand (18,000) pounds, or any ofthe following types of vehicles regardless of weight, including but not limited to: semi-trailers, the tractor portion of semi-trucks, garbage trucks, tank trucks, dump trucks, flatbed trucks, tow trucks, cattle trucks, coach buses or school buses designed to carry more than twenty (20) persons or any similar vehicle. CLASS II: All vehicles other than class I commercial vehicles including pickup trucks, vans, trailers and school buses designed to carry twenty (20) persons or less. SECTION 2. Section 10-6-4 ofthe Farmington City Code is hereby amended by adding the following provision as a new subsection N and re-alphabetizing the existing subsections N-P as subsections O-Q: (N) Commercial Vehicle Parking On Residential Property: No commercial vehicles or contracting or excavating equipment may be parked, stored or otherwise located on any residential lot within the City except as provided herein: 1. Class I Commercial Vehicles: a) Class I commercial vehicles may be parked or stored on a residential lot with a minimum lot size of two and one-half (2 ~) acres. The commercial vehicle must be entirely screened from neighboring residential property with a one hundred percent (100 %) opaque screen consisting of wooden fencing, landscaping, berms or a combination of the foregoing. A commercial vehicle shall not be parked or stored within one hundred fifty feet (150') of any neighboring residential dwelling unit. b) Class I commercial vehicles may be parked on a residential lot when loading, unloading, rendering a temporary service benefiting the premises or providing emergency services. 2. Class II Commercial Vehicles: Class II commercial vehicles may be parked on a residential lot if used as the resident's primary form of transportation to the resident's job or if associated with a permitted home business. 3. A Class I or Class II school bus may be parked on a residential lot (Monday-Friday) between the hours of8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this _ day of of Farmington. , 2004, by the City Council of the City CITY OF FARMINGTON (SEAL) Gerald G. Ristow, Mayor ATTEST: David Urbia, City Administrator Approved as to form the day of , 2004. City Attorney Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of , 2004. 41' j / / ':I;/g ....':9 ::r: iOO~ tf.:l"~ ~'~ 'U........O , 0' . l.O...:,'/ ........ . ~./ /1' I. I' .I ) / 07/15/2004 14:38 FAX 8514058188 MSP DISTRICT 4700 ~ 002/002 (al On trucks and tractors except those in this chapter defined as farm truckS, on truck-tractor and semitrailer combinations . except those defined as farm combinations, and on commercial zone vehicles, the tax based on total gross weight shall pe graduated according to the 'Minnesota base rate schedule prescribed in this subdivision. but in no event less than $120. Minnesota BaSe Rate Schedule Scheduled taxes include five percent surtax provided for in subdivision 14. TOTAL GROSS WEIGH:t' IN POUNDS TAX A 0 - 1,500 S 15 B 1.501 - 3,000 20 C 3,001 - 4,500 25 .D 4,501 - 6,000 3S E 6,001 - 9,000 45 F 9,001 - 12,000 7Q G 12,001 15,000 105 a 15,001 - 16,000 145 I 13.001 21,OQU 190 J 21,001 - 26,000 270 K 26,001 - 33,000 360 L 33,001 - 39,000 475 M 39,001 - 45,000 595 N 45,001 - 51,000 715 o 51,001 - 57,000 865 p 57,001 - 63,000 1015 a 63.001 - 69,000 1185 R 69,001 - 73,280 1325 S 73,281 - 78,000 1595 T 76,001 - Bl,OOO 1760 (b) For purposes of the Minnesota base rate schedule, for vehicles with six or more axles in the US" and NTN categories, the base rates are $1,520 and Sl,620 respectively. (c) For each vehicle .ith a 9ross ~eight in excess of 81,000 pounds an additional tax of $50 is i~posed for each ton or fraction thereof in excess of 61,000 pounds, sQbject to subdivision 12. (d) Truck-tractors except those herein defined as farm and commercial 40ne vehicles sh~ll be taxed in accord with the foregoing sross weight tax schedule on the basis of the combined ~ gross weight of the truck-tractor and any semitrailer or semitrailers which the applicant proposes to combine with the truck-tractor. (el Comme.r:cial :!:one trucks include only trucks, tr~ck-tractors, and semitrailer cornbin4t1ons which are: (1) used by an authori4ed local cartage carrier operating under a permit issued under section 22l.29S and whose gross transportation revenue consists of at least 60 percent obtained solely from local cdItage carriag@, and are operated solely 0\^SS ~ 6\ ASs r 75 /Of' 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~ FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Thoroughfare Plan Amendment for the Area East of Akin Road DATE: September 20,2004 INTRODUCTION The City's current Thorou~hfare Plan does not show any collector or arterial roadways in the area east of Akin Road, south of 195t Street, north of 208th Street, and west of Trunk Highway 3. Residential development within this area appears to be imminent, so modifications of the Thoroughfare Plan should be considered at this time. DISCUSSION The City's Comprehensive Plan includes a Thoroughfare Plan (attached hereto as Exhibit A) that identifies future roadways throughout the City. The Plan is an important component of the City's overall planning process. Ideally, the locations of future local and regional roadways and transportation corridors should be determined before plats for new residential or commercial developments are submitted, reviewed or approved. The current Thoroughfare Plan does not include any future roads in the general area east of Akin Road, south of 195th Street, west of Trunk Highway 3, and north of208th Street. Based on the number of MUS A applications and "Letters of Interest" that the City has received for properties located within this area, and in light of the fact that the Council has actually approved MUSA for several such properties, the City anticipates that development in the area will begin soon and will continue for many years. This anticipated development has accelerated the need to amend the Thoroughfare Plan to include future roads in the area prior to the finalization of development concept plans and the approval of preliminary plats. An initial draft of a proposed Thoroughfare Plan Amendment (attached hereto as Exhibit B) was discussed at a public hearing that was conducted at the July 13th Planning Commission meeting. A number of Akin Road property owners and other interested parties commented on the proposed Plan at that time. Many of them were concerned that the three proposed east-west connections (19Sth Street, 203rd Street, and Devonport Drive) between Akin Road and the new development area to the east would funnel new and higher traffic volumes onto Akin Road. Questions were also raised regarding the necessity and/or safety of the proposed 19Sth Street connection. Given the number of questions that were raised at the July 13th Planning Commission meeting, the Commission continued the public hearing until August 10, 2004 in order to receive further input from affected property owners, City staff and the City's traffic engineer. The traffic engineer, however, was unavailable for the August 10, 2004 Planning Commission meeting, so the public hearing was continued to September IS, 2004. At the September ISth Planning Commission meeting, City staff introduced and discussed a "second draft" of the proposed Thoroughfare Plan amendments (attached hereto as Exhibit C). This draft will be explained in more detail at the September 20th City Council meeting, but the major features of this revised draft are as follows: 1. The east-west connection to Akin Road at 198th Street that was initially proposed has been eliminated (as a collector). 2. A major north/south collector has been proposed for the area between Akin Road on the south (just north of the bridge near 208th Street) and 19Sth Street on the north. This roadway would be designed and built in a way that would make it more "attractive" (for current and future drivers) than Akin Road. The features that would help accomplish this objective would include: a. No driveway accesses on the new north/south road (by comparison there are currently at least 48 driveway accesses onto Akin Road between 208th Street and 195th Street; see attached Exhibit D). b. Fewer (and safer) intersections on the new north/south road than there are on Akin Road. c. A straight and relatively level north/south alignment for the new north/south road (as opposed to the curved and elevation changes on Akin Road). d. A creation of new intersections in the vicinity of Devonport Road. Traffic proceeding northbound on Akin Road from CSAH SO and/or 208th Street would be routed directly onto the new north/south road. Drivers who wanted to stay on Akin Road at that point would be required to turn left onto Devonport and then right onto Akin Road. Staff believes that the need to make these turning movements would prompt most northbound drivers to remain on the new road, thereby reducing traffic volumes on Akin Road. This traffic concept would also involve closing Akin Road just south of its intersection with Devonport drive, to avoid a dangerous "Y" intersection where the new north/south road intersects with Akin Road. This closure could also reduce the volume of southbound traffic on Akin Road between 19Sth Street and Devonshire Drive, because drivers might be more inclined to use 19Sth Street and/or the new 203rd Street extension to "cut over" to the new north/south road in order to have a "straight shot" south to CSAH SO. 3. Thoroughfare revisions for certain areas north of 19Sth Street have been added. The new north/south route referred to above is on the same alignment as a planned southerly extension of Diamond Path Road, which currently ends at a "T" intersection at 160th Street (County Road 46) on the Rosemount/Lakeville border. Lakeville intends to extend this road to at least 170th Street, and potentially to the 179th/180th Street area along the Lakeville/Farmington border. A further extension of Diamond Path Road through the Seed/Genstar area would bring it to a point on 19Sth Street where it would "meet up" with the north end of the new north/south route referred to in the preceding paragraph. The eventual result would be a new, major north/south regional corridor mid-way between (and parallel to) Pilot Knob Road and Trunk Highway 3. The members of the public who spoke at the Planning Commission meeting on September 15th expressed strong support for the latest draft of the proposed Thoroughfare Plan amendment, and the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment. oughfare Plan amendment. Exhibit "A" - 2020 Thoroughfare Plan Map City of Farmington 9.1 ,,/ t- ::d L I I :=J I I ~ - - , - I I 1- - I \ \ I P , , .. J- l \ ~ , " , J f n 1'-- - - . P= I , I '\ ~ I -\-' V , ~ , -.... c ( - ~ / I ~ I I ~ ~ l J ~ l II lU I / M -"', ~ 1 n.A rl U--'--- . '. ,.-,~ "..... ..... L I. F - Q).... f----- ~~ 11/ \ ~ r-- \ Ili: [r- -- I-- ~ " \. ~\ i ~ ----- t ~ , f) ~ ~ --- H ".. ...J~ ~ ::::t, '-- h rl ~r ~ ~ lIJ1iI .J ~ U " ~ A -v f C l a - SI I - ~ it- f- > I " ~ Lege nd k~ hmr Existin Minor Arterial N ~ Ii ~Future gMinor Arterial 'l:!\I Existing Collector Zv Future Collector N Existing Minor Collector /' / Future Minor Collector Iv Future Roadway (\/~ City Boundary City Parcel Map W+E s 8)fi.:. .~I t),...;..<. I.... NJTE: THS r.N\P IS Fffi PlANNNG PlRPOSCS CN..Y AND9KlUD />OT BE LSED FCR EXPCr MOA9.JRMONTS Scale 0.5 . o 0.5 1 Miles c.yoIF.ml",,,.,P~,*,gD_,,,lWll E ><h;bif \\ g II Recommended Thoroughfare Plan Amendments Area East of Akin Road .~ 'S:' r;JJiif:jlllllllli~ ~ :<<1'(((1111111111 III '\ II II "'-I './ / ~ , \ J..!'IJ-} ~~ ~ r5J 11111110. ':j ~11111b'A ~?\~ =, .Y H\r- ~B ~ '~~ r<. ~ ,.....{ H ~ \ "'" i 0 / N 'V 1Q'i "- ~~~ r7N..Y~ f--!,--\ !-J ~ -~ .~\. '1 ~ 'd\l::X-\ \ \ '\::\~ ,;;p. DfB\~ \\ f-"\ Ilk"";'\\. Rl~ wlr\ 'i II ~. \~ ~.'.'.. .'. .. ....': . '.: ; ., .',. ,"',;.. ::iil ;Jj ,.. .. . . . ~ .-1- ..- ..... .~ ... .. ... . . . . . __t . . - .... . ., . .:: ..... ..';: ,... :..:'.:.;. ..:.. .,., ',.' ",'.. ,... .:.i,;''', ... .,. ~' ~.'II;, ;:i',:: .. . . . . . . . . :'< i:';. . . .... :~ r'.. ..: ,:'..' .... ..,.,..-'....-,__ ..,,' i . ., '.."..; . . . . . ~ .. . . . _ ; . . . r# '...:"'.';'. Dev nport Dr. I _ · ,. .... ../. "...... ~ /'r 1111111.. '\ ,II.. J. :~... ,'} "',{/ ./ III ~ iN,..,..)." ........- ~I II /~" ;. 7",\",.: 2~eet --..........f...-f=./ r,.r .--../' 1\ i \l. IA" '\ 1\; :"1l"HIIIII" it ~ ) / /iI/1:zri T) / vr li__v ~ -;_ f . . . . .., I . . . ~~ h ):::j ~=r= ~ ~~ ~~ -5 V' r::: ~ ::\ \- V if, A~ "\7\ -5D~\ 4~\ \: ( (-..: :::.l: \~ .F'---.- I--- -------- ~ III III - Future Minor Arterial .~ . . . Future Collector ...... Future Minor Collector Alignment to be Removed from Pla ..... Municipal Boundary c=:I City of Farmington CJ Empire Township ',\ . . . :~. ~; ':: -::~:. ~, ..,. ..:. .. - i ;:: I~~ ..;..;. . --r~ ~ ~ o 0.125 0.25 . ~. , ~,. ,- , Exhibit "e" Recommended Thoroughfare Plan Amendments Area East of Akin Road - --- -..----- Lt- ~ ~11111~18:= ,ril" t, \ ffiffiE ~ ~ m ffiffi!IHl3 \ \\ ~ ~Y-\~~[I. ,~\ ~~ 1~~W7~~ < \\ ~It Illl.67II=1~8'~ '. riilIC > ~ffiHffi3,~ ~~ { \ i!f!f!1lit I ~~ ~~ I 81 ~> ml I ~YV ~)Y .... I m~.m~\J~I~~ ~ .~' ~ ~~ lfu~~~~\:]I,II'~ -"~ / /"''''' ~ _duiJD / !~_ \\ 0' . . . . . I : ....... f.... .......~ \ ~ \l, ~ f f I : /' '<.l.1 11 ':. r:P I. .. -=- Proposed Minor Arterial Im~ ) ~b~J : :..." /D iJ!]"t=~ 'P ~U I. .. e · - - Proposed Collector ~ ~"^ ~ Ii: ~ ....~..... ......t .. i; .. ... Proposed Minor Collector I ~ TI I V :) 'UUt 0 ;'", I. .: j '1 - - - Proposed County Road ~I <. \\\ . 1",\ \\ -1 PI y\\?]"- I :. 2) CI~ "-J . . ~ IlL :Qili:\,.?I - 1 ,",I . - - - - - . -. . -'. '" . n\ -~ 'l'\. ;: ...: ~2p t I ~\ (:jJ ;;(V~ onport Dr $'1 ~ \ ~~../;~..-- ....--- ~ XC ~17" i~ lC'- ~ Re tricte /' ~ ffiH.IHE !) I~- ~t~ _ 1111 :: ~ ~h flL - I / /' ~~h--'L1J jt~ ~ hj t l'l ~ ! i' -, ... . . . I ~ I ..1 L U F ~ ~;jI I \ - Municipal Boundary D City of Farmington D Empire Township .. City of Lakeville N W+E s 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Revised on September 9, 2004 Exhibit "0" Private Driveway Access - Akin Road and Proposed Thoroughfares / .. . . . . . . . -- ............ ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... ............. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .... .......~... . Road Intersection * Existing Driveway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -=- Proposed Collector - No Private Driveway Access · ... Other Proposed Collectors w.' soo o soo 1000 Feet September 13, 2004 Jim Atkinson City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Jim, The purpose of this letter is to let you, the City of Farmington, and the Farmington Planning Commission know that I am not opposed to the proposed plan to extend 203rd Street through and/or next to my property-as long as I am properly compensated for what I think is fair value when I sell my property. My family and I are not opposed to development of the Babe Murphy property. (Giles Properties) and Manly Land Development property ~Parkview Ponds) if I am compensated for my property for what I think is fair value. 203r street is proposed to go through or next to my property. The Babe Murphy property and Manley Land Development properties are adjacent to my 10 acre property at 20218 Akin road. My neighbor Wade Wiebold at 20226 Akin Road is directly affected by the plan to extend 203 rd Street through his property and he has shared with me he is also not opposed to this, as long as he can sell his property for what he thinks is a fair value. Wade Wiebold also indicated he is not opposed to the development of nearby properties as long as he is paid what he thinks is a fair price for his property when he sells it. Please feel free to contact me if you have further questions or concerns on these matters. Respectfully yours, W. Brian Herzfeld 20218 Akin Road Farmington, MN 55024 c.c. Wade Wiebold Lee Smick I I ,O~-( To the Planning Commission, My name is Erick Wefel and I live at 20210 Akin Rd. Farmington, and I have a question about the gravel road easement that is just south of my property. I'm wondering what if anything is going to happen to this road when 203rd St. goes thru. Is there going to be any joining of the two roads, might it be shut off from Akin Rd., might the City purchase the easement and make it a City St. Another question I have is, what is the speed limit going to be on 203rd St. I understand that 203rd is going Minor Collector and my experience living on Akin Rd for the past 6 years the police for some reason have a hard time enforcing the speed limit. I personally would like to see 203rd St. at 30 mph. And now with more traffic, traffic lights that are going to be coming on to Akin Rd. I would like the City to take a look at dropping the speed limit on Akin to 30-35mph just because of more traffic and that everyone now goes at least 5-lOmph over the limit because there's really not much enforcement, this way they'll be going 40-45mph, which was the goal when it was dropped to 45mph.l have seen the revised Thoroughfare Plan Amendments and would just like to say that this is much, much better then the first. I'm in total favor of the North-South Rd. This I believe is very important to have. I really like the idea of the Restricted Access on to Akin, again wonderful idea. For the most part I'm in total favor of the revised plan and think this road system will benefit everyone. Thank you for taking the time to read this and hopefully this plan will go forward. Erick Wefel 20210 Akin Rd. Farmington, MN. /0;;' ~ I/a- 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 Y FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Consider Authorizing 20Sth Street to Trunk Highway 3 Feasibility Report DATE: September 20, 2004 INTRODUCTION /DISCUSSION Per the Council's request from the September 7, 2004 City Council meeting, attached is a proposal outlining the costs involved with the preparation of a feasibility report for the extension of 20Sth Street to Trunk Highway 3. BUDGET IMPACT The estimated cost to complete the feasibility report is $27,650 and would be funded from the Road and Bridge Fund. ACTION REQUESTED Consider adopting the attached resolution authorizing the preparation of a feasibility report for the extension of20Sth Street to Trunk Highway 3. Respectfully submitted, ~Yh~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R - 04 ORDERING FEASIBILITY REPORT for 20Sth STREET EXTENSION TO TRUNK HIGHWAY 3 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 20th day of September, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution. WHEREAS, it is proposed to extend 208th Street easterly from its current easterly terminus including bridge crossings of the Canadian Pacific railway and the Vermillion River and to assess the benefited properties for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429. ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the proposed improvements be referred to the City Engineer for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in conjunction with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 20th day of September, 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of , 2004. City Administrator SEAL ~ Bonestroo _ _ Rosene ~ Anderlil< & 1 \J 1 Associates Engineers & Architects Sonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo. P.E. . Marvin L Sorvala, P.E. . Glenn R. Cook, P.E. . Robert G. Schunicht. P.E. . Jerry A. Bourdon, P.E. . Mark A. Hanson, P.E. Senior Consultants: Robert W. Rosene. P.E. . Joseph C Anderlik. P.E. . Richard E. Turner, P.E. . Susan M. Eberlin, CP.A. Associate Principals: Keith A. Gordon, P.E. . Robert R. Pfefferle, P.E. . Richard W. Foster, P.E. . David O. Loskota, P.E. . Michael T. Rautmann, P.E. . Ted K. Field. P.E. . Kenneth P. Anderson, f'E. . Mark R. Rolfs, f'E.' David A. Bonestroo, M.B.A. . Sidney P. Williamson, f'E., LS. . Agnes M. Ring, M.B.A. . Allan Rick Schmidt, P.E . Thomas W Peterson. P.E. . James R. Maland. f'E. . Miles B. Jensen, P.E. . L Phillip Gravel III, PE. . Daniel J. Edgerton, P.E. . Ismae' Martinez, P.E. . Thomas A. Syfko, PE. . Sheldon J. Johnson. Dale A. Grove, PE. . Thomas A. Roushar, Pf. . Robert J. Devery, PE. Offices: SI. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester and Willmar. MN . Milwaukee, WI . Chicago, IL Website: www.bonestroo.com September 13, 2004 Mr. Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Feasibility Report Proposal 20Sth Street Extension to T.H. 3 Dear Mr. Mann: We are pleased to Eresent our Scope of Services and Fees associated with preparing a Feasibility Study for the 208 Street Extension to T.H. 3 project. The following paragraphs outline our proposed work plan and costs associated with the work. General Project Description The proposed project includes the extension of 208th Street from its existing terminus point to approximately 3000 feet to the east to T.H. 3. The project will include a bridge crossing of the railroad and a bridge crossing of the Vermillion River. Coordination with MnDOT will be required for the connection to T.H. 3. Scope of Work Meetings and Communications The project will require meetings and communication with several agencies. The MnDNR will be contacted for issues related to crossing the Vermillion River. The railroad will be contacted for the bridge crossing. MnDOT will be contacted for issues related to connecting to the Trunk Highway. We anticipate that one meeting and several telephone calls will be required for each of these agencies. We also anticipate that two meetings will be required with City staff as a part of the report preparation. Our estimated fees associated with meeting time, including time associated with preparation of agendas, minutes and exhibits, is $7,400.00. 2335 West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113. 651-636-4600 · Fax: 651-636-1311 Mr. Lee M. Mann, P.E. September 13, 2004 Page 20f2 Alignment Review and Lavout Preparation The base alignment will be generally east-west, with a curve back into the existing 20gth Street. We will complete a layout based upon this alignment for review by the City and other review agencies. This layout will serve as the base exhibit for meetings with the agencies listed under the above work item. Dakota County aerial survey information will be used as the base for the layout. We will verify the Dakota County surveys with site visits and check the data against GIS information. We will use site reviews and GIS mapping for determining potential wetland and floodplain impacts. The soil survey for Dakota County will be used for generating geotechnical information for the area. Our estimated fees associated with alignment review and layout preparation is $9,500.00. Report Preparation We will prepare a Feasibility Level Report detailing the analysis of our study. The report will be prepared in standard City of Farmington format and will outline the project background, project issues, a description of the improvements, an estimate of the project costs and recommendations relative to the feasibility of the improvements. We estimate that the fees associated with report preparation will be $10,750.00. Estimated Fees The estimated fees associated with above referenced work tasks are presented in the following table. The fees include costs associated with reproducing the report, travels expenses and other miscellaneous expenses: Item Estimated Fees Meetings and Communications Alignment Review and Layout Preparation Report Preparation $ 7,400.00 $ 9,500.00 $10.750.00 Total Estimated Fees $27,650.00 We would be pleased to meet to discuss the contents of this proposal at any mutually convenient time. If there are any questions or concerns with the content of this proposal, please call me at (651) 604-4760. Sincerely, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. X~rJ?)/~ Kevin P. Kielb, P.E. Project Engineer