The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04.05.04 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street .....armington, 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 April 5, 2004 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) Dakota County Regional Park Presentation 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open/or Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (3/15/04 Regular) b) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration c) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Event Permit - Administration d) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Premise Permit - Administration e) Adopt Resolution - Supporting Regional Park - Parks and Recreation f) Adopt Resolution - Accept Donation - Parks and Recreation g) Adopt Resolution - 2004 Seal Coat Project Joint Powers Agreement- Engineering h) Approve Arrangement for Watering of Flower Baskets - Parks and Recreation i) Capital Outlay Outdoor Pool- Parks and Recreation j) 4th Quarter/Annual Customer Service Response Report - Administration k) Approve Parking Regulations - 5th Street - Engineering 1) Approve Reimbursement - 203rd Street Lift Station Removal- Engineering m) Approve Reimbursement - Lake Julia Waterway Project - Engineering n) Approve Assessment Agreement - 300 1 st Street - Engineering 0) Adopt Resolution - Set Bid Date - Main Street Project Phase 2 - Engineering p) Approve 2004 Street Sweeping Contract - Engineering q) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS Action Taken Approved Approved R25-04 R26-04 R27-04 R28-04 R29-04 Approved Approved Information Received Approved Approved Approved Approved R30-04 Approved Approved 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT a) City Hall Architectural Firm - Administration 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Main Street Project - Hwy 3 Considerations - Engineering b) Adopt Resolution - Minnesota Zoo Bonding Bill Request - Administration 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Volunteer Recognition Dinner - Administration 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 5, 2004 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) Dakota County Regional Park Presentation CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open/or Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (3/15/04 Regular) b) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration c) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Event Permit - Administration d) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Premise Permit - Administration e) Adopt Resolution - Supporting Regional Park - Parks and Recreation f) Adopt Resolution - Accept Donation - Parks and Recreation g) Adopt Resolution - 2004 Seal Coat Project Joint Powers Agreement- Engineering h) Approve Arrangement for Watering of Flower Baskets - Parks and Recreation i) Capital Outlay Outdoor Poo1- Parks and Recreation j) 4 th Quarter/Annual Customer Service Response Report - Administration k) Approve Parking Regulations - 5th Street - Engineering 1) Approve Reimbursement - 203rd Street Lift Station Removal- Engineering m) Approve Reimbursement - Lake Julia Waterway Project - Engineering n) Approve Assessment Agreement - 300 1 st Street - Engineering 0) Adopt Resolution - Set Bid Date - Main Street Project Phase 2 - Engineering p) Approve 2004 Street Sweeping Contract - Engineering q) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS Action Taken Pages 1-6 Pages 7-8 Pages 9-10 Pages 11-12 Pages 13-43 Pages 44-46 Pages 47-51 Page 52 Pages 53-54 Pages 55-56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Pages 60-64 Pages 65-66 Pages 67-69 Page 70 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) City Hall Architectural Firm - Administration 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Main Street Project - Hwy 3 Considerations - Engineering b) Adopt Resolution - Minnesota Zoo Bonding Bill Request - Administration 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Volunteer Recognition Dinner - Administration 14. ADJOURN 7a... COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR March 15, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Acting Mayor Cordes at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Acting Mayor Cordes led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Cordes, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg Ristow 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; Tim Gross, Assistant City Engineer; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Audience: 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Soderberg stated there was discussion about moving items 1 Oa)-c) to the Consent Agenda. Council agreed. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Proclaim Earth Day April 22, 2004 MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg proclaiming April 22, 2004 as Earth Day. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (3/1/04 Regular) b) Received Information Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation c) Approved Chamber of Commerce Fee Waiver Request - Administration d) Approved CEEF Donation - Administration e) Scheduled Council Workshop April 6, 2004 - Administration Council Minutes (Regular) March 15,2004 Page 2 f) Adopted RESOLUTION R23-04 Approving Gambling Event Permit- Administration g) Approved 195th Street Trail Akin Road Elementary School- Engineering h) Approved Bills 10. a) Received Information February 2004 Financial Report - Finance b) Adopted RESOLUTION R24-04 Approving East Farmington 8th Addition Development Contract - Engineering c) Approved Agreement with Community Season for On-Line Registration Program - Parks and Recreation APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS d) Adopt Resolution - Minnesota Zoo Bonding Bill Request - Administration The Executive Director ofthe Chamber of Commerce asked Council to consider supporting this bonding bill request. Councilmember Fogarty stated she did not have an opportunity to talk to anyone at the Chamber to find out why they are supporting this. She checked the zoo's website and spoke to people at the zoo and found some ofthe information is not accurate. They have opened two major exhibits since 2000, the information states they have not. The website states Governor Pawlenty is supporting the zoo with some money, but not fully funding them. Councilmember Fogarty stated she does support the zoo. She was concerned as to what the Governor would have to give up in funding in order to support this bill. Statistics can be easily changed. Staff will look into the issue further. Councilmember Fitch also was concerned about what would not be funded. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg to table this item. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: She attended a Day at the Capital and Partners in Progress. Farmington was recognized for the grant received from the Met Council. Council Minutes (Regular) March 15, 2004 Page 3 The divers and swimmers competed at State and she congratulated R.J. Rappe who won the State Title and his father, as the Coach. She stated all Councilmembers are on boards, committees and task forces and at the end of the year an attendance list is received for other Boards and Commissions used for re- appointing. She proposed the same thing be done for Councilmembers. She requested staff to compile this for the end of the year. Councilmember Soderberg: At the last Council Meeting he wore a colorful shirt and received a lot of comments on it. Tonight he was wearing a tie which was special to him because it has yellow ribbons and American flags for our service men and women that are defending our country. He was happy to report his daughter-in-law was home and has been discharged. His son has the potential of going. There are still others in the city, state and country that are overseas. This is in their honor and thanked them. Councilmember Fitch: There has been some discussion on the detox issue. He wrote a letter to Commissioner Harris and received a response. Commissioner Harris indicated that the Chiefs of Police have been notified and are working with the County Administrator and the Sheriff on the issue. He stated they have also been meeting with the City Administrators all along, explaining what will happen. Commissioner Harris's explanation was they are paying $205/day for 18 beds/day. Detox wants to raise the amount of money to $300/day/patient. The County at one time talked about raising the amount to $250, but this was not enough. This is their reasoning for closing detox. Councilmember Fitch asked if staff had any other information. He understood they had budget constraints like the city does. The contract was extended for only 6 months in the last negotiation. He spoke to Mayor Ristow about the MUSA Review Committee meeting and he will not be able to attend tomorrow night. When the Mayor returns, Council will discuss the item from the last meeting about boards and commissions. Police Chief Siebenaler stated the State mandates that Counties provide detox services. This can be through contracted services. The service has been provided by Dakota County Receiving Center in Hastings for many years. This year the rates went up. The communication to the City Administrators came 10 days ago at the City Administrators meeting. It came second hand to the Chiefs that day, and directly to the Chiefs five days ago for the first time. The Committee of the Whole will be meeting to discuss this for a recommendation tomorrow. Chief Siebenaler will be attending that meeting. The budgeted amount for detox services in the County will be $1.3 million. That will buy 15 beds/day. Under the current arrangement there is no minimum or maximum number of beds being used, which is a benefit to the County. On a typical week night there may be as few as four clients in detox. On a Friday - Sunday that number jumps to an average of 35. The 15 beds that the County is proposing to contract for at Regions Hospital in St. Paul will mean that on a weekend there could be 20 intoxicated people with no where to put them. The County proposal is under funded in that respect. There is no transportation element to the proposal. When the City has an individual that has to go to Council Minutes (Regular) March 15, 2004 Page 4 detox without choice, that means an officer from the City will drive to Regions Hospital in St. Paul and admit the client into detox. It is not easy to admit someone there. He estimated the time required to take someone from Farmington to Regions and then come back will take two hours. There are already staffing considerations with the Police Department in Farmington and every other city has those same considerations. To take someone off the street would be irresponsible. It would leave someone working alone. It would be necessary to call someone in on overtime. The cost savings would be $45/day for the County. The cost for a Police Officer to transport a client to Ramsey County would be three times that amount in overtime. While the County is saving $45/day~ the local cities can expect to spend three times that amount in transport costs for the first time. When someone is arrested and is required by law to go to jail, but has an alcohol concentration in excess of .20, that person is at medical risk and must be placed in detox until they come down to a reasonable level. Another transport would then have to go back to St. Paul, pick them up, take them to Hastings where they will be placed in jail. Now the city has spent five or six times the amount the County is saving. Last week at a meeting of the Dakota County Chiefs ofPolice~ he sat in a room with in excess of300 years of police experience. When presented with this problem, it was the first time he saw this group hang their heads, unable to come up with a solution. Another problem, on a weekend when there is no bed available for an intoxicated person, they cannot be released because they are a threat to themselves or someone else or they need to go to jail. They cannot be hospitalized because the rules for emergency rooms are different than jails and intoxication is not a medical emergency to be admitted to a hospital. If it were, the city would pay the hospital bill. They cannot be placed in a health and welfare hold because the laws in the State say that if a person is a danger to themselves or someone else and is intoxicated, they have to sober up before they can be placed in a health and welfare hold. That leaves one option. That is holding them at our own facility until they are sober or have reduced the alcohol concentration to a point where they can go to jail. We are going to return in that case to something this city has not seen since 1950. That is the Mayberry RFD scenario of Otis, sleeping it off in the jail cell. The County is being short sided in not funding the extra dollars. Staffing levels at detox are at minimums, there is no one to cut. This is a mandate for all counties. The Dakota County detox serves an area 90 miles in radius. They go down as far as Rochester, west as far as Hutchinson, and north of the Metro area. Staff does not know where the Board of Commissioners would get the funding they need. Staff views this as unwise. This is a mandate. This is public health and safety that is involved. It is an ongoing issue and has been in existence for a long time. Ifthis goes through, it will cost the City $10,000 - $ 15,000/year in overtime costs. The city cannot afford to add more. This is a County mandate and they need to step up to the plate and address it. Councilmember Fitch stated it is always interesting to get two different sides. He said Commissioner Harris stated senior programs and other things have been cut~ and it is time for this to get cut too. City Administrator Urbia: Coffee with the Council will be held Thursday, at 7:30 a.m. The topic will be the Main Street closure issue. Council Minutes (Regular) March 15, 2004 Page 5 Community Development Director Carroll: He also met R.J. Rappe. He was selected Student of the Month by the Rotary. Not only is he an exceptional athlete, but he is an excellent student, a leader, and volunteer. He was one ofthe leaders at the High School that generated the record amount of money that went to Toys for Town. He congratulated R.J. on his diving victory and on being such an exemplary student. Parks and Recreation Director Distad: At the last Park and Rec Commission meeting, Mr. Kurt Chatfield from Dakota County made a presentation on the Regional Park. Staff would like to invite him to the April 5 Council Meeting to make a presentation to Council and ask Council to consider a resolution supporting the Regional Park. It is 3 miles east of downtown Farmington. Empire Township has also approved a resolution supporting the park. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to adjourn at 7:24 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, /? .'< / ' // .. .7";.,/.~ ) v7, ,/. '-->""'7Z.t:-. /I-C:c<' ~<'L~, ,-,' Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant \ 76 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.c:i.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator l.-r- FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - St. Michael's Church DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION St. Michael's Church is requesting a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License for a Spring Festival to be held May 5,2004. DISCUSSION This event will be held on St. Michael's property located at 22120 Denmark Ave. Per State Statute, a Temporary Liquor license must first be approved by the City and then forwarded to the State for approval. BUDGET IMPACT A City fee has not been established for a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License. In discussion with the Liquor Control Commission, staffwas informed that the State of Minnesota waives all fees for Temporary Liquor Licenses for non-profit organizations. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the attached application for a Temporary Liquor License for St. Michael's Church, 22120 Denmark Ave., for their Spring Festival, May 5,2004. The City Council has not adopted a fee for this permit, and the State of Minnesota waives all fees in this type of situation, Council may waive any fees associated with this request. Accordingly, no license fee is proposed at this time. Respectfully submitted, ~d~~a~L Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director 7c., 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: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Gambling Event Permit - St. Michael's Church DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION St. Michael's Church is requesting a Gambling Event Permit for their annual Spring Fundraiser and Fall Festival. DISCUSSION Per State Statute 349.166 and pertinent City Code, a Gambling Event Permit must be issued by the City for this type of event. An application has been received, along with the appropriate fees. The City Attorney has reviewed the application and the attached resolution approving the request. BUDGET IMPACT Gambling fees are included in the revenue portion of the 2004 budget. ACTION REOUESTED Consider the attached Resolution granting a Gambling Event Permit to St. Michael's Church at 22120 Denmark Avenue, on May 5, 2004 and September 17-19,2004. Respectfully submitted, ~tl~adL Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -04 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR ST. MICHAEL'S CHURCH 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 5th day of April 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.166, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue or renew a Gambling Event Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said permit; and, WHEREAS, St. Michael's Church has submitted an application for a Gambling Event Permit to be conducted at St. Michael's Church, 22120 Denmark Avenue, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Event Permit for St. Michael's Church to be conducted at 22120 Denmark Avenue is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 5th day of April 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of April 2004. City Administrator SEAL 7d 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: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Gambling Premise Permit - Farmington Lanes DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION The Civil Air Patrol is requesting a Gambling Premise Permit at Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street. DISCUSSION Pursuant to State Statute and pertinent City Code, an organization must first obtain a resolution from the City, granting permission for gambling to occur at a specific location. The Civil Air Patrol is requesting approval to conduct gambling activity at 27 5th Street. The appropriate application and fees have been received and the application has been reviewed by the City Attorney. BUDGET IMPACT Gambling fees are included in the revenue portion of the 2004 budget. ACTION REOUESTED Consider the attached Resolution approving a Gambling Premise Permit at Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street. Respectfully submitted, ~tt~~. Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -04 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CIVIL AIR PATROL 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 5th day of April 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.166, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue or renew a Gambling Premises Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said permit; and, WHEREAS, the Civil Air Patrol has submitted an application for a Gambling Premises Permit to be conducted at Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Premises Permit for the Civil Air Patrol to be conducted at Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the 5th day of April 2004. Mayor Attested to the 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 /e.. TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Supporting Regional Park DATE: AprilS, 2004 ., INTRODUCTION Dakota County (County) has identified that some areas of Farmington, Lakeville and Rosemount are deficient in meeting the County's requirement for a regional park being located within a five mile radius of the communities. The County did a site analysis of potential regional park locations and has determined that property in Empire Township seems to be best suited and appears to be the best location for a future regional park to meet the County's five-mile radius requirement. The property being considered by the County is currently owned by the Butler Family. County staff members have initiated a discussion with the property owners on the potential sale of the property to the County for a regional park. DISCUSSION Included with this memo is information about the proposed County regional park. Steve Sullivan, Dakota County Parks Director, will be in attendance at the City Council meeting to present and discuss further the information that is included with this memo. County staff members have been attending Park and Recreation Advisory Commission and City Councilor Town Board meetings to present this information on the proposed new regional park. The Dakota County Board of Commissioners is also looking for direction from the communities who are in closest proximity to the proposed regional park on whether or not this is a good location. A resolution supporting the location of a new County regional park is attached for the City Council's consideration. Should the resolution be adopted, it will be forwarded for inclusion in the packet that the Dakota County Board of Commissioners receives when they take up a discussion and vote on the approval of a new regional park in Empire Township. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution supporting the location of a new regional park in Empire Township. ~..,.es ectfully Submitted, // l ~ fJ;J;iJ Randy Distad Parks and Recreation Director RESOLUTION No. SUPPORTING THE LOCATION FOR A NEW DAKOTA COUNTY REGIONAL PARK IN EMPIRE TOWNSHIP Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting ofthe City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 5th day of April, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, there has been an identified shortage of a regional park in the Farmington area; and, WHEREAS, Dakota County has identified a parcel ofland owned by the Butler Family in Empire Township that could become a new regional park for Dakota County; and, WHEREAS, the City would benefit by having a Dakota County Regional Park located in close proximity to its residents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby supports the location of a Dakota County Regional Park in Empire Township. This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the 5th day of April 2004. Mayor Attested to the _ day of April 2004. City Administrator SEAL New Southwest D k a ota Cou Siting Stud nty Park July 23, 2002 Y -J Park Siting Conclusions / 2003 Update Why do we need another Regional Park in Dakota County? · 45 percent of Dakota County's population increase between 2000 and 2020 is anticipated to occur in the Lakeville - Farmington area. · The Metropolitan Council's Park and Open Space Policy Plan and the Dakota County Park System Plan identified the Lakeville-Farmington and Rosemount areas as being underserved by the existing regional park system. · The 2002 Dakota County Park Siting Study evaluated seven sites in the southwestern portion of Dakota County and found only two areas that had high quality resource areas suitable for a regional park. · The Empire wetlands area is preferred because it is within the park service area of La keville, Farmington, and Rosemount; it has high quality natural resources; it provides partnership opportunities regarding management, restoration, provision of recreational service and shared funding; and has high acquisition feasibility because there are few landowners, willing sellers, and agricultural land prices. Updated Dakota County Population Forecasts: 2000 Population: 355,904 2030 Population: 509, 770 Population Increase: 153,866 Re2ional Park Acrea2e Comparisons · Dakota County has the second lowest regional park acreage per 1000 people (12.7 acres/lOOOpeople) of the seven metro area counties. The metro area regional average is 18.9 acres per 1000 people. Carver County has the fewest park acres per 1000 people. · By the year 2030, Dakota County's regional park acreage per 1000 people will drop to 10.5 acres/1000 people if the only land added to the park system are the private in-holdings in existing park units. · Dakota County's 2030 population projection is 509,770. To meet the metro area regional park acreage average (18.9 acre/1000 people), Dakota County's 2030 park system would need to add over 4000 acres to reach a total of 9600 acres of land. Re2ional Park Unit Comparisons On average, there is one regional park/park reserve unit for every 57,000 people in the seven county metro area. To meet this standard, Dakota County would have between 6 and 7 regional park units today. By the year 2030, Dakota County would have between 8 and 9 regional park units. Regional Park Summary by Implementing Agency Agency Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Scott Hennepin Ramsey Washington System 2000 Population 298,084 70,205 355,904 1 ,116,200 89,498 511,035 201 , 130 2,642,056 Acquired Acres 7,986 618 4,556 22,568 3,835 6,718 4,556 49,875 Acquired Acres/1000 People 26.79 8.80 12.80 20.22 42.85 13.15 22.65 18.88 Number of Park Units 7 3 4 19 2 9 3 47 Park Units/ 100,000 people 2.35 4.27 1.12 1.70 2.23 1.76 1.49 1.78 ~~ cd.~ ~..c: o ~ .~ (I) OJJs:= ~~ cd~ (I) cd <(1) 00< '-o~ ~ cd cd ~ ';jE (l) cd ~Z (1)'-0 .::= ~ ~cd S~ ~~ ~ ~ Q) z C'--. ~~ ~~ Q)~ Z~ Q) Q.) ~~ o+-J Q5 ~(Z) ..c ~ ~ ,.d ~ ~ ~ > o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o o o " o o ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ OJ) ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o U c\J ~ o ~ ro o "> "'d 8 (l) ~ ~ .~ > ~ ~ ro ~ ~ .~ "'d . ~o ~N a-30 ~N >< 0 ~ ~ .so ~o 00 ~N b1}S ~o 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (l) 0 0 ~u~ o ~ gf N o.~ ~ ~ a (l) V) ro ~~~ "> "'d"'d ~ ~ ~ > c2 ~ (l) rfJ 00 ~ ~ ro ~ ~ "'d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ os ~ Cl) ~ rfJ o 0 U~ c\J"'d ~ ~ ,a c\J ro ~ o B "'dgf. ~ .s -E ~ ~ ro u ro O-l ~~~ ~ "ro o ~ ~ U~O .~ .~ o>bJJ .b ~ (l) ~ ~ ~ ~ ro ~ ~~,.o "> .. .. .. CD .c : -= :: c I .~ en a.. -;: . ~~ -ll-.... I -- f'I u -- II) c: II) e .... Jl! .. .. ;m=cn a.. .. =i' c: r:JJ. II: .. .. ical-i! ~ ~ -;; :S ii: ::I (]) .....a o - .. "" a.. ..: ell - Wa..N ~ IDO .~ C/l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::5' ~1 Q 0 .~ b1) (]) ~ ('l rIJ = 0 ~ ~ rIJ - = - ~ ~ 0 -< 0 ~ = 0 .- ~ ~ ~ ('l .. rI'l ~ ~ ~ QJ ~ ~ ~ ~ = .- ~ ~ = ~ ~ = = = - ~ 0 0 u .- ~ QJ 0 ~ ~ .. ~ - - Q. ~ = .- ,.Q .- OJ.) ~ e Q. e ......- = - - - .: e .- = 0 ~ ~ = u ~ ~ == z z > bJJ ~ .~ ~ .~ r./1 ~ ~ ~ rJJ ~ o .~ rJJ ~ ~ u ~~ ~ 0 aU .~ bJJ~ O)~ ~E C'lr./1 o o C'l cu - <<J . 0 . . 0 0 . u;.~ ou; OUJ en cu.~ >=: .';: e . . 0 . 0 . 0 ~ ::t cut:: 0.0 00. 00. 00 en ~ ~ 8 . 0 . 0 0 0 0 o e e :I: o a.. -~ o ~ . 0 . . 0 0 0 "- 3: cu 0 ..c-c E e ::t CIJ z-! U) >.~ (I,) ~..c . 0 . . 0 0 . Q) <<J - Q) 0.= s.;. 0 <<J 0,,-> 00..<( '- cu en - Q) cu <<J._ e=: c:: o c . . 0 0 0 . 0 0 .- ::t 1;1:: ~ e 0 (I,) uo. Q)o. 0::0 cu Q) c:: ~ ;> (I,) ,,-::t_ . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q)O= -en<<J ~Q)::t 0::0 0 == cu ~~ (I,) tt;::t_ . . 0 . 0 . 0 :> "- 0.- .2enro (I,) <<J cu ::t zO::o (I,) ~ 4) - c cu en .:.:: en 4) c en .2 (1)"0 co co - .gen ..... 4)= "0 - - ... c C..r::: cu .- co ...c ..r:::> a. "0 's ... ..r:::':':: a.= 1::(1) E 0 :;, - "t:=(1) ::s ~ :;, .: 0 :;, ... 4) .fi~ ..r::: 0':':: ~~ co ... 0 Q) .:!:: o ~ i:i) 0 z~ u..C)(I) >0::: zo .... (n --= CL ~ +:; .... CL .... ~ ... ~ - a lo., o ~ i::' ~ II . lo., o cf II o ~ cu :s ~ ~ .s II o "0 o o C-' II o "0 o o C-' ~ ~ " . ~ ~ .~ ~ .~ . . ~ ~ .~ .~ ~ Q) ~ 00 ro 00 ~ ~ ~ 00 = ~ 00 ~ u Q) ~ Q) @ u 00 0 rJJ ~ ~ Q) .~ 7Jj ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ ~ ~ 00 ~ 0 .~ .~ ~ 0 Q) ro 00 ~ ~ t= ~ Q) ~ cT .~ 0 ~ ~ rJJ ~ ~ u .~ ~ 0 ro = Q) bJ) ro ~ ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ U ro u ~ 0 0 ~ ~ Q) . ,....( ~ ~ 00 ..d ~ . ,....( ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) ~ 00 ;;> .9 u 00 ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ro Q) ..d ~ 0 ~ ~ bJ) ro Q) c:r ~ 0 ~ @ ~ (j) ~ 00 ..d Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) 00 ~ ..d .~ 00 Q) Q) ~ ,..c ~ ~ 00 ~ . ,....( ~ 00 ~ . ,....( ~ ro ~ a ~ 00 .~ ..d 0 t..j....i . ,....( ~ '> - " r.rJ. C) ~ rrJ u ~ ro ~ ~ r.rJ. 0 C) z 0 ~ 0 U tn ~ .~ ro ~ ~ 0 I ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ tn o~ ~ ~ ~ on I ~ C\j 0 '-"~ ~ ~ 0 = .~ = Q) QJ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 Q ~ ~ .- <~ Ol.) . ...... < '-'" ~ ~ QJ ~ ~ ~ u ~ aJ ~ = .~ ~ ~ = ~~ ~< . . ~ =~ $:l ~ ..... ~ aJ~ 0 ~ = ~ = ~ .~ ~ ~ z 0 .- ~ ~ = "Q = ~ ...... '"'d 0 ~ ~ e ..... $:l .- o ~ Ol.) z C) C) aJ ~ uZ S ~ Q 0 S . . 0 . . ~ . . N u ~ $:l C) ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 0 .~ .~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ro 0 ~ 0 r./'J . . . ~ o .~ ~ u Q.) ~ .~ ~ Q~ ~~ ~.9 o~ ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o U . . ........-l cd ~ ~ cB~ ~ ~ cd~ ~ ~ o..,~ ~ B~ (/'J cd cd~ S.- cd cd ~S o .~ ........-l b.O CL) Q) ~~ ~ (/'J o ~ ~ ~ ~ .:= ~~~ Q) Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ CL) ~ .~ Q.) ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ r/5~~ . ~ o o N --- ~ N ~ Q.) ~ Q.) U Q.) Q co e <( tn "'C C co - .. Q) ~ Q) L- .- c. E w Q) .c .. c .- tn Q) .- ~ Q) c. o L- a.. L- o .i' :E . V .4 -.... ,,~"'i'." ....~. ..... . ~ "1' :\ .,. "'1 j fc j'" ~ fL." . .}. . -.. I ;" l ( III .". l~ ~ ~~.;'. ~... ~ ! &,;;it' , ,j.. , J It ' ..ii~ " . ..."", ~ t ~.... "' y- . r 1-. f " r ~ I . .j . .- '" :'l Ifi .!> t If I [,_ It ... to, .~ """ , ~ 'II 'l~ "'", ~... ~ ;4". 1',.. !' -'\1~' .:Jr',":" ., ~~J I ~ r .' <l: M o U'5 ~ s g> e c <ll E "6 8 == o >- :; o U <ll -0 .:<: <ll 80 ~l :>.>- ...n 3"8 u- <ll~ -0 2: .:<:0- 8~ . ~ ""'a. ~m s,- ~~ ~ QJ ~ .- ~ = o .- !--c ,.... .- e ~ QJ > QJ ~ -< QJ = ~ = ~ rIl .- = ~ = r ~ ~ r .-" = QJ QJ ~ ~ QJ ~ ~ QJ QJ ~ ~ 00 .: ..... = Q\ ~ rI:J. QJ ,..... ~ QJ ,..... ~ = ~ = o rI:J. ~ o o ~ ~ 1:: = QJ QJ ~ ~o rI:J. ~ = ~ QJ ~ OIJQJ ~';: = = ~~ ....-.... ~ QJ ~ ~ = 00 ~ .,... OIJ o ,..... o .,... ~ ~ ~ = = o U '-'" ~ ~ '- aJ ~ o '- ~ r:IJ aJ ~ ~ ~ = = '- aJ ~ ~ = ~ = o = o .,.. ~ ~ '- o ~ r:IJ aJ '- ~ = ~ ~ ~ aJ ~ I,_.-,i.;t . - .~- .-<1.- J I ~., . J ."__ J; "7 ~ '\. ~ 1" "f.:" . -~ - ~,"'" r \ i,.:~ ~ t.l .! ., " ~ I . ...::;/ "! ~~r_ .:'.J , .. '", " t ",,",.' J I ~ ~ .,.. ~ = aJ ~ o ~ ... ~ , t~... C ",YC, *' II :~~.f ~ ~a;,--rr. y /} " !f :~ J,'<, , .., .~ ,t; tr: f !t ::- ;:P'S-~-t - . ....... ~-' ~ ~ " i ". ~ ...~ ...- ~ .. ~ ;.=~ -= -.,s- i:' ~- .~ b .. :iI. 1 0: ,,~. ~ r~ ~~... ~~- :.~ , QI ~ ~ t" '....':.sJ : .. '\ '" y,> l ",' t ,~ 0.;;. r.::;:.t' ..: ~ " ,~ .k ~ l ; j ~ J ~ ~ :. QJ e- o :. e- rr;, QJ ,... ~ 1 ; ......~,. .,;, ~ I, " i it J I I II ,... ,... o = ~ rr;, rr;, ~ :. OJ) "'i "';... 4 ll..l . ,~ ~, II 'l 1 ,1 ) [T :) ~, .' = aJ ~ = 1- i Ol) ..~ = .- ~ rLJ. !:= ..... = o ~ ..... .-c = = rLJ. rLJ. aJ C.J ~ = ~ aJ ~ .- ~ = o .- ~ ~ .- e ~ aJ > ...- .- 4- "" jw~ i lot. ~'" "it~ '" :11., ....H ,.' '1 ,1 .... . ,. 1 .. , ~ .--:tr - III a~ r;..~~ ~.~ D II IJ ~ I": ... !r 'I ... ,. II!'!. ,i" 111~ ~ ... ~ " 4 ....- . , U;.o:r-:. -- ~ ~ ~ ...... = ..c .~ ~ ...... ~ QJ ~ QJ .~ ~ ~< = QJ o ...... . ~ ...... IIIIIIIIl QJ == = E~ QJ ...... > ~ ..= OIJ = Q '- .: ...... aJ ~ = ~ '- aJ ...... ...... = = ;;! \, : ", ~, . ,- ,.: ," ...... aJ ...... ...... = Q aJ ~ = ...... ~ = = rr.J QJ QJ '- ...... r:I:J. .~ ~ =. = ~ ~ ~ ~ = ..;f'l ,\ $-4 (', '\ ~ ~ = o r:I:J. ~ ~.. = ~ $-4 ~ ~ ~ = ~ - ~ I + !~ - -: r.- '.... .... , l,. . : " c~~ < ..-' .... '\ ~ ...... ,.. .-c ,.. ...... ~ = QJ '- -< -( -? ? ~ L ,"~ ':4 I.!' 1\ l fit' 4. . J; j \ ~i ii I I',' .I.. .~, J f r...~l" : ~1 ' ) QJ ~ = ~ J-.I QJ ~ ~ = ~ \.\ I' I , \. ...- L I I I . g {II fEa tDJ I!Ifl1C M~.IO ~:~ . a ! ~' . -', '(,,1 ~ ~ = ~ '- ~ .... ...... !,I, = ~ LI 1'1 III , , I '~ .~ . J ~j r "') (6 I ,\ .- ~. ~I.l.;;~ g Ii A..A. J!: ~I) 1:1 . "', : . , ~: ..~. .... ...~ I II~ .., ;<~_:,_.-___~ o ...... rI:1 ~ QJ .,.. ~ ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ...... = QJ ~~ .rd-I .. ~..' ....~-:f~. .~ ...~.. <: . ~ ;..;-. . ;o,..~.k.'-' . \;~~'4~~~_' .il_ ~ ....,. ,9 .~.. ..'~^-~ . '" j ~-.'.'~~'. . ~ ~\ ..,...._:::J " . '-c I '1 .. '"<" = I 0 ':' - ~ .~~ I;- ~ = ~ [; \ I ~ "J ~ aJ ~ ~... ~ ~ ~...- ..... , -- . = .-c ." ~, ~ I ~ ~ 0 'l.- ... , ... .. ". "' lit ~ ~ ~ = 0 .s J,.; ~ =QJ~ .s 0;: S ~ = 0 QJ ~ ~ >.-c~ ~ = ~ o = t rLl ~ QJ ~ QJ ~ QJ ~ 0 ..... ..... ~ > ~ ~ ~ = ~ ~~ ~~ QJO =~ j~ ~ r:I:J QJ '- ~ QJ = .- ~ QJ ~ .- ~ ~ 1 ,I I ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ = '; ... e. Q) CJ c: o U . [ ------- ... c: Q) E Q) 0') n:s c: n:s ~ m C a i;;- QlC ~QI ~ E - QI wQlQl o::~m 0=.: ::E1Il!/l ~ .e: :I n:s Q) ~ <( n:s ~ ::J ... n:s Z fn "C c: n:s - ... Q) ~ Q) ~ 'JJ qj !'ii u fU cS; ..li 0<0 ....<D!/l " ~~l ~1Il ~~ ,.-: ml - i g~ I ..~~ J 0:: ,-- ... - . ,.-" '~ "$-, ... w'- ~<i> ....6- <..-~ .;1.) ~"",I; ty /(;l> '1~ ....D .- e. S w 1 I 1 I I I 1- 'aA'V auJ;e::lsl8 c: ~ ro lll- 0>0 '8 ~J;; ... IJ. '" ('a^\f uo~J;el:J) ~g C1:J " ffl j~ o '- ::z: :J qj ~ 1.1 cS; o o "t .... III QI ~ .. C <D E~ <Otll g'.= I:c ~:i ~..!:! :0:0 =:1 ::e:. c Q) ~ f ...- - - .. I qj III ~ 1.1 <( o <D ... __I: !E..:' !G~~ ~1Il;:: aCUtll ::1;5 ..9.!..._ 2: e<<J III QI ~ C cu E QI tll 1Il~ I:tll IIlC :E:C u!! is :10 0'... <{~ ;-\ ;." I . ~,"- .... l' . ~;,.''\. I \. ,{ " .I ,y ~. ,." .:~' - - ~ ...; (f) .r= o o ~ (0 (0 I <{ (f) .,,0 "1. .,. .~ '7t-?- -'''"'l ;'); i, ';' \. I.~ '"= \ . ~ \~ I i .\ 1 ~, - i- '. ~ I~I (\ 'i' tl ''"', Lkm-- \. ~. ~ " h'i A: .. o ~ (jj E .r= v ro Ji ~ <I> 0.. o 0: (J) ~ ~ ~;,., C'i o 0; o N ~ 2 ~ <5 .~ 1: ~ 0: '0 0$ () Ii: o ~ a U ~ o -'" M~ 8~ N~ '" >.,., E"" ::>-0 o 0\) U(;j ~&:- ~ ~ -'" 0. ~'" '?~ 1=0. ~~ ,., - g-.~ uF ~ "'d"'d Q) ~ ~ ~ ro ro (]) ~ (]) 00 ~ u ~ 0 ~ .~ a ~ ~ ~ o ~ rJJ ~ rJ'J ::s .~ ~ (])..c ..c E ~ .... u .... ~ ro ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 0 .~ ~ .~ ~ ~ Z:.s ~ ro u ~ (]) ~ ro :s~ ~ ""d ~ u (]) (]) . ,.....j ~ .... ..c ~ (]) ~ rJJ ~.s . . 0 ~ rJJ .~ (]) . ~ ~ ~ (]) ~ Ea rJ'J ro ~ ~ (]) ;> ~ ~ ~ ~ . ,.....j ~~ (]) (]) ~ rJ'J ~ rJ'J ro ~ (]) ~cB .~ ~ (]) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro (]) ~ ~ b1)~ a (]) ro ~ ~ ~ I .~ 0 rJJ cB . ~ s (]) b1) = 0 .~ ;> .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ "'d .~ ~ (]) ..c ~ 0 rJ'J ~ U ~ . ,.....j rJJ ~ ~ ~ .~ (]) ~ ~ '> '> ',. - . - ~ Q.) ~ <r:: ~ ro ~ B ~~ .~ ..d 00 ~ ~ ro Q.) ~S ~ ~ ~~ Q.) ~ ~ ~ o .~ ~ ro ~ ~'"'d ~ ~ ~ cd o cd S (l) · (l) ~ ~ rJJ. .~ ,.9 (1) .~ ~ ...c: ~ ~ ~ '"'d U S ~ B S '" 0 0 S ~ u ~ ~ on 0 .~ ~~(l) .~ ~ ..Q S ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ s ~ ~ u ~ ~rJJO .~ .~ .~ ;;> ..Q ~ (l) ~ ~ ~~ ~ (l) ~ ~ ~ '-\j 0 u ~ ~ ~ '" ~ (l) ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ ~~ ;;> S ~ 0 rT'l ~ ~ ~ rJJ. ~ '"'d ~ ~ . ~ cd rJJ ~rJJ~ o (l) (l) ~ u .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ 0 u '"'d rJJ ~ ~ ~ rB ~ (l) rJJ. rJJ. (l) (l) .~ ..Q .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ (l) ~ ~ 0 o ~ ~ ~ ~o o~ ~ ~ (l) ~ .~ 0 rJJ. .~ (l) ~ '"'d ~ ~ b '"'d (l) (l) ~ rJJ (l) rJJ~ (l) .~ ~> >< 8 (l) ~ '" ~ .~ u ~ = o U o .d (l) ~ '" ~ Z Q S o ~ ~ ~ ~ rrJ '> '> ~ ~ ~ (j.) ~ ~ 0 .~ ~ u ~ ro ~ ~ u ::i (j.) 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ...c U u ~ 0 ~ .~ (j.) ~ ~ rJJ ro ...c ~ ~ ~ ~(j.) rJJ ~ ...c .~ ~ ~ (]) ~ ~ ...c:: 0 (j.) .~ rJJ " .~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ C/'J rJJ (j.)~ ~ ro ~ 0 s (j.) Eo ~ (j.) ~ >< ~ S ro~ co d~ (j.) (]) 0 ,... ~ .~ '"'0 ro Z ~ .~ ~ .~ ,... b rJJ ro bJJ~ .~ rJJ ::i 0 .s z co c:r ~ ~Q ~ u ro ~ ~ .~ 0 " '"'0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro ~ (j.) cE (j.) (l) s ~ ~ ::i (j.) 0 u ~ ~ ~ Ea ~ (l) .~ ~ (l) ~ (j.) ~ (j.) ~ > .~ ~ ~ > (l) '"'0 ~ 0 (j.) 0 ~ Q ~ 0 U bJJ ~ ~ . . . . , r . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7.p Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator Patti Norman, Recreation supervisor~ SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Accepting Donations - '04 Spring Skate Competition FROM: TO: DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION Donations have been received by the following businesses on the attached page for the 2004 Spring Skate Competition. DISCUSSION The listed businesses have donated products that were included in program bags for participants, judges and volunteers at the 2nd Annual Spring Skate Competition which was held on Sunday, March 14,2004 at the Farmington Arena. Staff will communicate the City's appreciation on behalf of the Council to the businesses for their generous donations. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution accepting the donations from the businesses listed for the 2nd Annual Spring Skate Competition. a. tf.... ..u lIy ..S... ub..mitted, \ ' (""^, \. \1 \ , ~., "",j; ',,- Patti Norman ""-.,, Recreation Supervisor '--..- RESOLUTION No. R -04 Accept Donations From Listed Businesses for products for the 2nd Annual Spring Skate Competition 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 5th day of April, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the identified businesses have donated products that were included in program bags for participants, judges and volunteers of the 2nd Annual Spring Skate Competition, WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to accept such donations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby accepts with gratitude the generous donations of products from said businesses. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 5th day of April, 2004 Mayor Attested to the day of April, 2004 City Administrator SEAL 2004 Spring Skating Festival March 14,2004 Farmington Civic Arena Donations - to include in 135 participant bags ComDanv Name Scruples Hair Products Anchor Bank - Farmington B & B Pizza Kwik Trip - Farmington napkins Subway - Farmington Northfield Hospital Allina Eye Clinic, Farmington ConAgra Store Brands Ryt-Way Industries, Inc. Edina Realty- Mike Heinzerling Lakeville Super Target US Bank - Lakeville Health Partners Dental - Apple Valley Item Hair Products ($500 value) Memo pads Coupon - free 7" pizza 12 dz. Cookies, cups, Assorted Toys and coupons Pens & bandaids Lens cleaner Granola bars Microwave popcorn Pens Pencils, balloons, pens Key chains Toothbrushes City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7j TO: ''I Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator;;--- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - 2004 Seal Coat Project Joint Powers Agreement DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION At the March 1, 2004 City Council meeting, the Council authorized the City to complete the 2004 Seal Coat Improvements as part of the Joint Powers Agreement administered by the City of Burnsville. DISCUSSION The City of Burnsville approved the Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Farmington at the January 20, 2004 Council meeting (See attached Joint Powers Agreement). The City attorney has reviewed this contract. BUDGET IMPACT The approved low bid amount for the 2004 Seal Coat project is $140,500. These costs fall with the project budget. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City to complete the 2004 Seal Coat Improvements as part of the Joint Powers Agreement administered by the City of Burnsville. Respectfull y submitted, ~YJ1~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -04 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT PROJECT 04-01, 2004 SEAL COAT PROJECT 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 5th day of April 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 1 st day of March 2004 authorized the City to complete the 2004 Seal Coat Improvements as part of the Joint Powers Agreement administered by the City of Burnsville; and, WHEREAS, said Joint Powers Agreement was approved by the City Council of Burnsville on January 20,2004. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, 1. That the 2004 Seal Coat improvements will be completed as part of the Joint Powers Agreement administered by the City of Burnsville and approved by the Bumsville City Council on January 20,2004. 2. The Mayor and the City Administrator are hereby authorized to execute the Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Burnsville. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 5th day of April 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of ,2004. City Administrator SEAL JOINT PO'VERS AGREEMENT 2004-2005 TRAFFIC MARKINGS, STREET SWEEPING CRACK SEALING, SCREENING & SEAL COATING BURNSVILLE & FARMINGTON AGREEMENT made this 20th day of January, 2004, by and between the cities ofBurnsville and Farmington. RECITALS This agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties pursuant to. Minnesota Statutes 471.59. The purpose of this agreement is to provide street maintenance materials and service for the cities of Bumsville and Fannington utilizing one common contractor for each service. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. Subject to the other provisions of this agreement, Burnsville shall prepare any plans, specifications, bid proposals and advertise for bids for the placement of street traffic markings, street sweeping, crack sealing, screening and seal coating services. 2. Fannington shall provide to Bumsville the estimated quantities for these services in each respective community and shall also approve the bid documents. 3. Bumsville shall tabulate the bids upon their receipt and make a recommendation of award to Farmington, and upon their approval, award the contract pursuant to State Law. Joint Powers Agreement Page 2 4. Each city shall be responsible for: · Preparing maps showing the proposed locations for these services including estimating the quantities. · Preparing the streets for markings in accordance with the specifications and coordinating with the contractor as to the timing of the actual work. · Inspecting the contractor's work, measuring the quantities of work performed, approving and certifying the progress or final payments to the contractor. · Pay a percentage of actual construction cost to City of Bumsville for legal and administrative cost ona sliding scale basis as follows: $0 - 50,000 - 2% $50,000 - 100,000 - 1.5% Over 100,000 - 1.0% 5. In accordance with the specifications, the contractor will submit an itemized invoice to each cityseparately for the work performed in each city. Upon approval of the invoice by the respective city, that city will remit the approved invoice amount directly to the contractor. 6. It is agreed that the City of Farmington indemnify, save, and hold harmless the City of Bumsville and all of its agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, actions, or causes of action, for whatever nature, arising out of the contracting procedure by reason of the execution or performance of the work purchased for each respective city under this agreement, and that the City of Farmington further agree to defend, at their sole cost and expense, any actions or proceedings commenced against their respective cities for the purposes of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising hereunder. Joint Powers Agreement Page 3 7. This agreement can be terminated on the part of any individual city by giving sixty (60) days notice to the other city; otherwise the agreement will automatically terminate On March 15, 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date indicate below. DATE: , (, ~ & l v'( I BY: City Manager CITY OF FARMINGTON BY: Mayor DATE: BY: Clerk 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 /J'vM lC FROM: Don Hayes, Park Maintenance supervisor~ SUBJECT: Approving an Arrangement for Watering Hanging Flower Baskets DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION The residents of Cameron Woods Resident Service Committee (the Committee) would like to offer their services again this year to water the hanging flower baskets in the downtown area. DISCUSSION In 2003 the Committee offered their services to come in early every morning, seven days a week to water the hanging flower baskets on the light poles in the downtown area and around City Hall from May 1 st to approximately October 1 st. This service provided by the Committee gave the hanging flower baskets the personal care that was needed to keep them blooming and looking beautiful throughout the growing season. In 2003 the Committee was quite dependable and seemed to take pride in contributing to the beautification of the downtown area. The Committee is willing to make this commitment again in 2004. The arrangement in 2003 was so successful that staff members are requesting permission from the City Council to continue this arrangement in 2004 BUDGET IMPACT In 2003, a stipend of$1,500.00 was paid to the Committee in exchange for their services associated with watering the hanging flower baskets seven days a week from May 1 through October 1. The Committee used the stipend to enhance the wildlife areas around the Cameron Woods property. ACTION REQUESTED Approve an arrangement with the Committee to water the hanging flower baskets from May 1 until October 1, 2004 and in exchange for their services, pay a stipend to the Committee in the amount of $1,500.00. Respectfully Submitted, \" ~ ~~~ . -- Don Hayes Park Maintenance Supervisor 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 Administratorp.~,Vv FROM: Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Capital Outlay - Outdoor Pool DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION The City's 2004 Capital Acquisition Fund budget identified funding for the purchase of new diving boards and a pool vacuum at the outdoor pool. DISCUSSION When staff researched estimated costs associated with the purchase of new diving boards and a pool vacuum for the 2004 Capital Acquisition Fund budget, it was assumed that the cost estimates that were received included freight and sales tax. In early 2004, the Facilities Maintenance Supervisor solicited quotes on new diving boards and a pool vacuum. The low quote for the purchase of these items came in at $26,650.00, which included freight but did not include sales tax. When sales tax was added, the cost to purchase these items came to $28,382.25. While the quotes for the diving boards and pool vacuum including freight came in under the budgeted amount, the addition of sales tax caused the total cost to exceed the budgeted amount of$27,355.00. This means that the outdoor pool's 2004 Capital Outlay budget will be over $1,027.25. After discussing this issue with the Finance Director, she felt that there was adequate funding in the City's 2004 Capital Acquisition Fund budget to cover the additional $1,207.25 needed to fund the purchase of the diving boards and pool vacuum. The current diving boards have rusted over the years and need to be replaced. Additionally there is a safety concern if they are not replaced this year. The pool vacuum that is being purchased is a self-propelled cleaning vacuum that suctions dirt and debris along the bottom and sides of the pool without needing to have staff operate it. The current pool vacuum requires one staff member to operate it at all times. With the purchase of this new pool vacuum, staff will no longer need to operate the vacuum, which will free up time to do other tasks. BUDGET IMPACT There are funds available in the City's 2004 Capital Acquisition Fund budget to cover the purchase of new diving boards and a pool vacuum. ACTION REOUESTED By motion approve the use of additional funding in the amount of $1,027.25 from the City's 2004 Capital Acquisition Fund budget to cover the full cost of purchasing new diving boards and a pool vacuum for the outdoor pool. <p:YjJ1t{J RandYD~ Parks and Recreation Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us 7' u TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato&~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Customer Service Response Report DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION The customer service satisfaction program is designed to evaluate and measure the level of customer satisfaction during service-related interactions. Citizen service requests are documented in terms of complaint type, referring department, priority and service outcomes. Survey responses are typically anonymous to ensure that citizens with negative experiences are just as likely to respond as those with positive service experiences. It is the City's intent to use this information as a customer service tool to improve and promote excellence in customer servIce. DISCUSSION The table below reflects summary statistics generated by Customer Action Request forms over the months of October, November and December 2003, as well as, a summary for the year 2003. Summary response percentages are generated through the analysis of monthly reports and include response data from all operating City departments. # of # of Surveys Prompt Personally Courteous Month Service Returned Response Satisfied & Helpful Requests I October I November I December I I Qtr Summary I 12003 Summary 21 10 12 43 9 4 5 18 88% 75% 80% 81% 100% 100% 80% 93% 100% 100% 100% 100% 355 154 90% 87% 97% The percentages above reflect the number of actual surveys that indicated a response in any given category. Calculations are based on the actual numbers of responses received which may differ from the number of surveys received, as some respondents did not indicate answers to specific survey questions. On average, ninety seven percent (97%) of citizen requests for service are handled and addressed within a 1-3 day period for the fourth quarter and 96% for the year. Typically, from that point it requires approximately 90 days or more to receive, process, compile and analyze the survey response data into monthly reports. In terms of how personally satisfied a resident is with a specific service outcome, staff responses are, in most cases, controlled by state statutes, City ordinances, available staff resources and/or service priorities. In some cases, responses are a function of a third party who must respond to a given situation. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Acknowledge the Customer Service Satisfaction report data from October through December 2003 and annual survey results for 2003. Staff will continue to present customer service satisfaction data to Council as it becomes available. Monthly report data with department breakdowns are available for Council review upon request. Respectfully submitted, J6~C::l fi-4~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director 7r 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 c:f2}.J/'-- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Parking Regulations - 5th Street DATE: AprilS, 2004 INTRODUCTION Marigold Foods has requested that "No Parking" signs be installed on the west side of 5th Street in front of their building and loading docks. DISCUSSION Marigold Foods has been experiencing problems with vehicles parking in front of their loading docks and blocking the egress of trucks from their facility. The placement of the "No Parking" signs has been reviewed with the Chief of Police, Dan Siebenaler BUDGET IMPACT The cost ofthe signs will be paid for by Marigold Foods. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the installation of "No Parking" signs on the west side of 5th Street at the Marigold Foods building. Respectfully submitted, ~frt~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file )1. 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 pv~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Reimbursement - 203rd Street Lift Station Removal DATE: April 5,2004 INTRODUCTION The lift station on 203rd Street in the Pine Knoll development was removed by D.R. Horton with the construction of the Middle Creek East development. DISCUSSION As part of the development of Middle Creek East, gravity sewer became available to the Pine Knoll area that previously could only be served by a lift station on 203rd Street. During the construction, 203rd Street was extended to Pilot Knob Road, gravity sewer was extended to Pine Knoll, and the lift station was consequently removed. BUDGET IMPACT The reimbursement includes removal of the lift station, extension of sanitary sewer and water, street removal and construction, and miscellaneous costs in the total amount of $92,606.35. These costs would be funded from the Sanitary Sewer Trunk fund. ACTION REOUESTED Authorize the reimbursement of $92,606.35 to D.R. Horton for the removal of the 203rd Street lift station. Respectfully submitted, ~YJ1 YJ1~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file //77 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: f}.r--. Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator fY FROM: Lee M. Mann, P .E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Reimbursement - Lake Julia Waterway Project DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION The ditch that discharges Lake Julia to North Creek was improved by Progress Land Company at the request of the City as part of the Meadow Creek development. DISCUSSION The ditch draining Lake Julia to North Creek was widened and deepened for approximately 3000' feet to: 1. Allow Lake Julia to function at its design outlet elevation. 2. Minimize the need for future maintenance activities (dredging) to maintain flow conveyance. 3. Reduce high water elevations of Lake Julia during storm events and flooding of existing residential back lots by restoring its design flood storage volume through item #1. BUDGET IMPACT The cost to improve the Lake Julia drainage ditch including engineering, grading, dewatering and restoration is $207,537.29. These costs will be funded from the Storm Water Trunk fund. ACTION REOUESTED Authorize the reimbursement of $207,537.29 to Progress Land Company for the improvements to the Lake Julia drainage ditch. Respectfully submitted, ;:& YJ1 m~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file 711 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 If)./-- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P .E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Assessment Agreement - 300 1 st Street DATE: April 5,2004 INTRODUCTION The property at 300 1st Street is being redeveloped into a two-family residential use, tentatively assigned the addresses of 32 Elm Street and 38 Elm Street. DISCUSSION Mr. David King and Mrs. Gina Giacherio-King, the property owners of 300 1 st Street have requested that several of the development fees for the project be assessed against the property, in a similar fashion that occurs on larger developments. The proposed Assessment Agreement is attached. BUDGET IMPACT The amount that would be assessed is $3,960.00. This amount would be assessed against the property over a ten year period accruing interest at the rate of six percent per annum. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the Assessment Agreement between the City of Farmington and David M. King and Gina M. Giacherio-King for the property at 300 1 st Street. Respectfully submitted, ~Yh~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT (Parcel 14-77000-021-14) THIS AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") made this day of April, 2004, by and between the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") with offices at 325 Oak Street, Farmington, Minnesota 55024, and David M. King and Gina M. Giacherio-King, owner of property at 300 1 st Street, Farmington, Minnesota 55024 ("Owner"). Recitals: A. The Owner owns the real property located in Dakota County legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Subject Property"), also referred to as Tax Parcels 14-77000-021-14, which owner proposes to abate existing nuisance conditions and redevelop the property into a two-family residential use, tentatively assigned the addresses of 32 Elm Street and 38 Elm Street. B. Pursuant to authority provided by Minn. Stat. ~429.101, the Subject Property shall be assessed costs, fees and charges associated with the provision of sanitary sewer and water services to the Subject Property. The connection of sewer and water service benefits the Subject Property; and C. The actual costs, fees and charges to be assessed against the Subject Property ("Assessments") are set forth on Exhibit "B". NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS SET FORTH HEREIN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Subject Property is hereby assessed by the City for the Assessments. The total Assessments are Three Thousand Nine Hundred and 60/100 ($3,960.00) Dollars. The foregoing amount shall be assessed against the Subject Property over a ten (10) year period accruing interest at the rate of six percent (6.0%) per annum. The principal amount of the Assessments shall not exceed the amounts set forth on Exhibit "B".t 111032 2. The Assessments shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The Owners, by signing this Agreement, acknowledge that all procedural and substantive objections to the Assessment are hereby waived unconditionally, such waiver includes any rights of Owners, their successors or assigns to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the Subject Property. The Owners further waive any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to M.S.A. S 429.081. Ou ;' r/ f11/L ' David M. King ) ~ < . aM. . cJj < 'ng . CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald G. Ristow, Mayor By: David M. Urbia, City Administrator 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, the Mayor and City Administrator of the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) 55. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) it) J'4e foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this .E!:tn day of LIAr h , 2004, by David M. King and Gina M. Giacherio-King. ~NU/[ 4i4/CeA Notary Public . THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Campbell Knutson Professional Association 1380 Corporate Center Curve, Suite 317 Eagan, MN 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 JJJ/cjh . ,~ SUSAN J. MILLEii; l NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOT,\ ~ ~ My Comm. Expires Jan. 31, 2005 ~ .v.v.~...~~~. 111032 EXHIBIT "A" to ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Subject Property North 7S feet of Lots 1 and 2, Block 14, Town of Farmington, Farmington, Minnesota. 111032 EXHIBIT "B" to ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT Fees and Charges to be Assessed TOTAL $ 570 $1 ,220 $1,780 $ 390 $3,960 Water Treatment Plant Fee: Water Benefit Charge: Sewer Benefit Charge: City SAC: 111032 7~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.fannington.mn.us TO: ,/-) Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator /.(?/"l'viV"-. Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Set bid date for Main Street Area Reconstruction Project Phase II DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION At the April 7, 2003 City Council meeting, the Council ordered the Main Street Area Reconstruction Project and authorized the preparation ofthe plans and specifications. DISCUSSION Phase I of the project was initiated in 2003. Phase II is scheduled to commence this construction season in 2004. As discussed in a separate communication, the closure of Main Street at Trunk Highway 3 is not recommended to be part of this construction BUDGET IMPACT The budget impact of the project is outlined in previous communications. The construction of Phase I of the project is currently within budget and the current estimates for Phase II are also within the original proposed budget. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving plans and specifications for Phase II of the Main Street Project and authorizing the advertisement for bids for the project. Respectfully Submitted, . / ~~ )11Yvl,~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -04 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS PROJECT 96-1, MAIN STREET AREA RECONSTRUCTION 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 5th day of April, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 7th day of April 2003, ordered the Main Street Area Reconstruction Project and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for the project; and, WHEREAS, Phase I of the Main Street Area Reconstruction Project was initiated in 2003, with the intent that Phase II of the project would commence in 2004. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The plans and specifications for Phase II of the Main Street Area Reconstruction project are approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the Farmington Independent and the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids for the construction of such improvement under the approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published at least once in the Farmington Independent and in the Construction Bulletin no less than three weeks before the last day for submission of bids. The advertisement shall specify the work to be done, shall state that the bids will be opened for consideration publicly at 10:00 p.m. on the 30th day of April, 2004 in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by two or more designated officers or agents of the municipality and tabulated in advance of the meeting at which they are to be considered by the Council, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the Clerk for 5% of the amount of each bid. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 5th day of April, 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of April, 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 ~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ ~ FROM: Tim Gross, P .E., Assistant City Engineer ~ SUBJECT: Private Development Street Sweeping Contract DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION Staff has solicited quotes for street cleaning services in the private developments for 2004. The request for proposals for street cleaning services was advertised in the Farmington Independent and the Farmington This Week for two weeks. In addition, proposal packets were sent to contractors that had submitted proposals for street cleaning services in the past. Two quotes were received for street cleaning services in 2004. DISCUSSION It is stipulated in all private development contracts that the Developer is responsible to keep the streets clear of soil and debris. It has proven to be very difficult to enforce this issue, and the amount of soil and debris in the streets is significant at times. The City has the right under the Development Contract to perform work and bill the costs to the Developer when there is a default of the contract. Failing to keep the streets clean is considered a default of the Development Contract, and allows the City to take proper remedial action. The streets need to be kept clean for two main reasons. First, if the streets are not kept clean, soil and debris is washed into the storm sewer system and holding ponds during rainfall events. If the debris gets into a system downstream of the development, taxpayer dollars will need to be expended to clean the system and ponds. Secondly, staff has received numerous complaints from residents regarding the difficulties navigating streets coated in dirt and mud. The developments will be inspected on Mondays and Thursdays after 12:00 p.m. The City's contractor will clean those streets that are not clean by 12:00 p.m. on Monday and Thursday, on the following day (Tuesday and Friday). The cost for street cleaning services including an administrative fee will be billed back to the Developer. As in the past, it will be entirely up to the Developer as to whether or not the City assists himlher with street cleaning. If all of the streets within a development are clean at 12:00 p.m. on Monday and Thursday, the City's contractor will not be ordered to clean the streets in that development and the Developer will not be billed for street cleaning at that time. The only exception to this is if staff is made aware of a situation that needs to be addressed immediately and the Developer cannot respond as necessary. BUDGET IMPACT Two quotations were received this year. (please see attached bid summary). The proposals for sweeper services at $75/hour and skid loader services at $65/hour were identical from both contractors. Since the bid amounts are the same, staff is recommending to award the contract to the local contractor, Hoffbeck Trucking - ProS weep, Inc., based out of Lakeville. The cost to the Developer (plus an administrative fee) will be $65/hour for skid loader work and $75/hour for sweeper work. In 2003, the City of Farmington utilized approximately 331 hours of sweeper time and 18.5 hours of skid loader time. There would be no budget impact to the City. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the award of contract for street cleaning services to Hoffbeck Trucking - ProS weep Inc. Re:~ Tim Gross, P .E. Assistant City Engineer cc: file 2004 STREET SWEEPING BIDS RECEIVED BY 2:00 PM March 31, 2004 1 SWEEPER PER HOUR $ 75.00 $ 75.00 2 SKID LOADER PER HOUR $ 65.00 $ 65.00 7' Q., 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: City Hall Architectural Firm DATE: April 5, 2004 INTRODUCTION At the January 5,2004 Council meeting, City Council directed staff to request proposals for architectural services to begin the design phase of City Hall. On my first day of employment, I was made aware by Mr. Siebenaler that a Request for Proposal had been sent to twenty firms and the appropriate advertisement was sent. DISCUSSION The City received sixteen proposals. I asked that the management team assist me with reviewing the proposals, to come to a recommendation to the council. Based upon this review, there were six firms chosen for interviews. Those firms were Horty Elving, Tushie Montgomery, WOLD, BKV, Hay Dobbs, and Parker Durrant. These firms were selected for further consideration based upon their experience with municipal buildings, particularly City Hall buildings, design examples, approach to project design, and their project team (refer to attached RFP document). The interview process occurred over a period of two mornings, allowing one hour for each firm to provide a presentation and a question and answer period. The interview process was extremely informative, and all members agreed that WOLD was the top choice. Additionally, WOLD also had the most competitively priced proposal. BUDGET IMPACT I have attached a letter from WOLD detailing the cost of studying facility information for a city hall relative to the Capital Improvement Plan that will be presented to the council this June. This amount would be $8,000, which would be credited upon approval and notice to begin the project. ACTION REOUESTED Recommend approval of the following: 1) Enter into a contract with WOLD to assist the city with further refinement of space needs and site development in order to determine the estimated costs and construction schedule for the proposed City Hall project for a total fixed fee of$8,000.00. This information is needed for inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) scheduled to be completed in June 2004; and 2) That this $8,000 would be credited towards the project upon approval and notice to begin the project. Respectfully submitted, (-~ ~.:' .-- ~-~"."""" David'M: "~b' City Administrator REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA The City seeks to select an experienced qualified project architect for the design and construction of a 35,000 sq. ft. City Hall Facility within a defined time schedule, within a prescribed budget, and within specific quality and program guidelines. A copy of the formal RFP can be obtained on-line at www.ci.farmington.mn.us or by contacting City Hall offices at 651.463.1803. Submittals must be received in accordance with RFP requirements no later than 4:30 p.m. on February 20, 2004. Proposals not meeting City RFP requirements will be automatically disqualified from further consideration. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA The City of Farmington is considering building a 35,000 sq. ft. City Hall facility on a site owned by the City. The building site is located at the intersection of 3rd Street and Spruce Street. The City seeks to obtain the services of an experienced architectural firm to help with this effort. The City seeks to employ a firm that exhibits the following characteristics: 1. Strong public project experience with recent examples of new similar municipal facilities. 2. Experience in site master planning. 3. An ability to demonstrate value, attractiveness and quality in design, and remain within project budget limitations. 4. A willingness to participate as a part ofa project team that will include the owner. The following information is provided to assist you in preparing your proposal: 1. Number of copies needed: 8 2. Due date: 4:30 p.m., February 20, 2004. Any postmarked proposals received after this date will be automatically disqualified from the selection process. 3. Projected project timetable: a. Appoint Project Architect(s) - March 15,2004 b. Begin Project Design - March 22, 2004 c. Project Construction Start - April 2005 d. Anticipated Owner Occupancy - June 2006 4. Estimated building budget: City Hall $ 6,500,000 5. Mail proposals to: David M. Urbia, City Administrator, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024, with each proposal clearly marked PROPOSAL FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES - CITY HALL. 6. If there are questions about the preparation of your proposal contact: David M. Urbia, City Administrator at 651.463.1801 or Joel Jamnik, City Attorney at 651.452.5000. The City intends to select three to five firms for further consideration. Interviews with these firms are planned to be held March 3-5,2004, with Council awarding a contract to the selected firm on March 15,2004. DISCLAIMER: This request for proposal is only a solicitation for information. The City of Farmington is not obligated to enter into a contract nor is it responsible for any costs associated with the proposals and interviews. FORMAT Interested firms should submit a proposal that contains the following: 1. FIRM BACKGROUND In this section present any information about your firm that you feel is appropriate. Include the size of firm, number of employees by job category, the areas of specialization for which your firm is recognized, and any key features that might set your firm apart. 2. EXPERIENCE List all municipal buildings, and in particular City Hall buildings, completed by your firm over the last five years. For each of these projects, list the date of completion, the total square footage, total overall costs, the construction time frame, the project designer, and project manager. List any design awards won by your firm. Identify the project and date of award. 3. DESIGN EXAMPLES Present example floor plans for representative projects completed by your firm. Exterior photographs and descriptive information would also be helpful. Provide information, layouts, etc. that demonstrates your site planning capabilities. 4. APPROACH TO PROJECT DESIGN Describe how your firm will approach the design of the facility in terms of involvement by the owner. How will your firm approach the overall external design and landscaping attributes of the facility. How will your firm approach internal facility design relative to functionality, durability, attractiveness and customer-oriented services. Proposers should include ideas related to incorporating retail liquor operations (retail sales and storage) into the City Hall facility that will also be shared by other operating divisions of the City. 5. PROJECT TEAM Identify the specific project team that will be committed to this project. If the proposer is selected for an interview, the project team committed to the project must be available for the interview. A statement of human resource commitment will be required by each proposer for the duration of the project. Identify any consultants who will be a part of this team, and identify their firm, experience and areas of expertise. Discuss how you will perform engineering services. Identify the key staff who will be committed to the project, their qualifications, experience and specific areas of experience. 6. REFERENCES Include at least five references for recent (within the last 5 years) projects. Include contact persons, titles, telephone numbers and what their role in the process was. 7. ADDITIONAL REQUIRED INFORMATION a. Does your firm carry insurance to protect clients from errors and omissions? In what amount? Does your firm carry professional liability insurance? Provide evidence in your proposal. b. Has your firm been the subject of litigation, mediation, or arbitration during the last five years? If so, give details of the issues and its resolution. Provide names of clients involved and contact names and telephone numbers. Involvement in litigation will not necessarily disqualify a proposer, however failure to provide accurate information will render the submittal as disqualified from further consideration. c. Has your firm ever been requested by a client to retire from a project? If so, present details. d. Each proposal must be signed by an authorized representative of your firm who can be held accountable for all representations. The Applicant Assurances Form attached hereto as Exhibit A must also be provided with the Proposal. 8. FEES In a separate sealed envelope, provide the following information. Assuming a total project cost as presented above, not including land for the City Hall Facility, provide an estimate of your fee and the method of fee calculation for the project. List basic services included, list additional services and costs, and list reimbursables with applicable rates. Provide a "best guess" estimate of what the reimbursable costs would be. Exhibit A Applicant Assurances The applicant hereby assures and certifies: 1. That the individual signing the assurance form on behalf of the individual, partnership, company or corporation named in the proposal possesses the legal authority to execute a contract for the proposed work. 2. That the firm agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local compliance requirements. 3. That the firm is adequately insured to do business and perform the services proposed. OFFICIAL ADDRESS: (Name of Firm) (Authorized Signature) (Title) (Date) 03/31/04 14:17 FAX 141002/004 .. .......". .." '. .. ...... ............... . WQLD MINNESOTA OPFICE. 305 S~'. P~TJ!lt SUl!1!T ST. P.WL. MINNESOTA 55102 651.227.7773 FAX 651.223.5646 Sr. PAUL, MN ELGIN, IL TROY. Ml DENVER, CO March 31, 2004 ,,15""i~~~~: (,......~......_- ~...~.J.~.~:S. :~.I.~ .\.I.!~...I:_._ Dave Urbia City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: New City Han Commission No. 9999 Dear Dave: We understand the City is studying facility infonnation relative to a Capital Improvement Plan for thc New City Hall. In this regard we are proposing to assist the City with further refinement of space needs and site development in order to detennine total project costs and construction schedule. Facility descriptions, schedule and costs are basic requirements for the Capital Improvement Plan. Our services for this work require meetings, analysis and planning relative to the New City Hall. We propose to provide these services for a total fixed fee of $8,000.00. Previously, we have proposed design and construction administration services based on 6% of the construction cost ofthe New City Hall. Accordingly, we will credit the $8,000.00 study to the City Hall project upon your approval and notice to begin the project. We are pleased and exC'ited to continue work with the oity. Please let me know if I can provide additional information. Sincerely, WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS .J~ cc: John McNamara KP/CCFaJ'mill8ton/9999/m:\I04 . WOLI) ARCHITEC"rS AND ENGINEERS City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Financing Options - City Hall Project DATE: March 26, 2004 INTRODUCTION With the imminent selection of an architectural firm (consistent with Council direction from the Council meeting of January 4, 2004), it would be wise to revisit the financing options and timeline for the City Hall project. Several changes have occurred during the last year which impact earlier recommendations to the City hall task force for the type of bonding to finance the project. DISCUSSION Bonding Attached with this is a memo from the City's financial advisors (Ehlers & Associates) regarding the change in state statute which allows construction of certain municipal facilities using funding derived from General Obligation Bonds without a voter referendum. This bonding option retains the tax capacity valuation basis - meaning that the bond levy is spread based on tax capacity value, not market value, and does not shift the burden more to residential properties as the market valuation method would. In November 2002, it was recommended that Lease Revenue financing be used for the City Hall facility. Although Lease Revenue bonds could still be used, the G.O. bond scenario is preferable as it combines the bonds with the best interest rates with the most equitable spread oftax levy. Voter approved General Obligation Bonds are still not the recommended financing option due to the cost of an election and the inequity of a Market Value spread of bond levy which shifts the tax burden more to residential properties. Timeline Consistent with the timeline followed with the Police/CMF construction project, staff would anticipate the following: Selection of an architect Design of project & preparation of bid documents Bidding Contract Award Bonds sold April- May 2004 May - December 2004 January - February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 Because bonds were sold after solid construction bids were received, the debt issued for the Police/CMF project was less that originally anticipated. Therefore, we would like to use this same procedure as it is most beneficial to the City. Debt Limit The City is limited in the amount of debt it can issue. The following table shows the debt limit comparison from 2002 to 2004. 2002 2004 Market Valuation $ 859,874,400 $ 1,066,406,600 2% debt limit $17,197,488 $ 21,328,132 Debt subiect to limit $ 6,763,371 $ 5,397,753 Remaining Debt Capacity $ 10,434,11 7 $ 15,930,379 Preliminary estimates from Dakota County show an increase in market valuation for 2005 of another 20%. More than adequate capacity exists for the issuance of debt financing the City Hall facility. Respectfully submitted, 4I-~J ./;;:~ Roland Finance Director MEMORANDUM TO: City of Farmington FROM: Sid Inman Ehlers and Associats, Inc. Shelly Eldridge, Ehlers and Associates, Inc. DATE: January 7,2004 RE: New authority for City Capital Improvement Plan and General Obligation Bonds CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN In the 2003 session, the legislature made a change to allow bonding authority by Cities to plan for and finance the "acquisition and betterment of public lands, buildings, and other improvements for the purpose ofa city hall, public safety facility, and public works facility." The new authority mirrors the authority the Counties have had in the past. The law requires that a Capital Improvement Plan be prepared which must cover at least the five-year period beginning with the date of the Plan's adoption. The Plan must set forth: (I) the estimated schedule, timing and details of specific capital improvements; (2) estimated cost of the capital improvements identified; (3) the need for the improvements; and (4) the sources of revenues needed to pay for the improvements. Although the Capital Improvement statute allows the City to issue general obligation bonds to fund any of the improvements identified in the Plan (subject to reverse referendum), it is important to note that it is not a requirement of the Plan that every item be funded by Capital Improvement Bonds or eventually be funded at all. For instance, there may be capital improvements included in the Plan which may be funded with available funds, or by issuance of five-year Capital Notes, or by voted general obligation bonds, or grants. Down the road, the City may decide not to fund an improvement contained in the Plan. The planning of the improvements is most important to the spirit of this authorization. Approval of the Capital Improvement Plan and annual amendments must be approved by the City Council after a noticed public hearing. The Plan must also be submitted to the Community Development Division of the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) for approval. The Commissioner ofDTED has 90 days to approve or disapprove the Plan; however, if the County doesn't hear from the Commissioner within that timeframe, the Plan is considered approved. GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS This statute also authorizes the issuance of General Obligation Capital Improvement Bonds to finance capital improvements identified in the Plan. The City must publish a notice of intent to issue the Bonds and the date and time of a hearing for public comment. The issuance of the Bonds is subject to reverse referendum; i.e., if a petition requesting a vote on the issuance is signed by voters equal to 5% of the votes cast in the City in the last general election and filed with the County Auditor within 30 days after the public hearing, a vote must be held. If no petition is filed, the City may proceed with the issuance of bonds. CITY COUCNIL'S ROLE The City Council must hold a public hearing and approve a Plan by majority vote for it to be considered by DTED. The issuance of Bonds must receive a 3/5 vote of a City Council. The City Council must also consider the following for each project and for the overall plan: (1) the condition of the City's existing infrastructure, including the projected need for repair or replacement; (2) the likely demand for the improvement; (3) the estimated cost of the improvement; (4) the available public resources; (5) the level of overlapping debt in the County; (6) the relative benefits and costs of alternative uses of the funds; (7) operating costs of the proposed improvements; and (8) alternatives for providing services more efficiently through shared facilities with other cities or local government units. DOLLAR LIMITATION ON LEVY FOR BONDS/DEBT LIMIT The City has a limit on the total amount of principal and interest payments for Capital Improvement Bonds which can be payable in anyone year. This limit is equal to .05367% of the County's taxable market value. However, it is anticipated that the law will be changed in the upcoming 2004 legislative session to be some percentage of the City's taxable market value. The statutory debt limit of the City (for all general obligation bonds outstanding which are payable entirely from property taxes) is 2% X taxable market value of the City. 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/,,;1~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Main Street Project - Highway 3 Considerations DATE: Apri1S,2004 INTRODUCTION On March 18, 2004, a Coffee with the Council was held to receive input from downtown business owners regarding the proposed closure of Main Street at Trunk Highway 3. DISCUSSION During the course of the discussion, several issues were identified that would need to be addressed before Main Street would be closed. The primary issues were in regard to the circulation routes currently utilized by Dakota Lumber and the Landscape Depot. There was also discussion regarding the area in general and the future of accessibility to the downtown, specifically in regards to the reconstruction of Elm Street and the opening of Spruce Street to Trunk Highway 3. BUDGET IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the closure of Main Street at Trunk Highway 3 not be completed until such time as the issues identified can be addressed. The Council may wish to consider authorizing a study of the downtown area in regards to access and traffic issues at some time in the future. Respectfully submitted, ~Y11~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file //6 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: David Urbia, City Administrator SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Minnesota Zoo Bonding Bill Request DATE: March 15,2004 (Tabled to AprilS, 2004) INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION At the Farmington Area Chamber of Commerce Board meeting on March 10, 2004, I was asked by the Executive Director if the City Council would consider a resolution of support for the Minnesota Zoo 2004 Bonding Request. I have included a fact sheet that was provided for your review. There is an additional packet (only one copy) that will be available in City Hall for your review at your convenience. ACTION REOUESTED Consider Resolution of Support (included format was used by the City of Lakeville). .,c.. .' David Urbla City Administrator RESOLUTION NO. R_-04 SUPPORTING STATE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE MINNESOTA ZOO 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 5th day of April 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Minnesota Zoo, located in Apple Valley, first opened in 1978 and has now been in existence for over 25 years; and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Zoo is an important state asset in that it attracts approximately one million visitors per year, and has an annual economic impact on the State in excess of $60 million; and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Zoo is facing significant financial pressures that have required the permanent and/or seasonal closure of various zoo exhibits; and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Zoo currently has a backlog of infrastructure refurbishment and repair needs in excess of $30 million; and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Zoo has requested state financial assistance to add new exhibits and to address the Zoo's severe deferred maintenance needs; and, WHEREAS, the Farmington City Council believes that it is in the best interests ofthe citizens of Dakota County, and the State of Minnesota that the Minnesota Zoo be provided with additional state resources to better enable it to carry out its mission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, that it supports the Minnesota Zoo's request for state financial assistance, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington that it encourages Governor Tim Pawlenty and the Minnesota State Legislature to fully fund the Minnesota Zoo's funding request in order to preserve and improve this important state asset. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 5th day of April 2004. Mayor Attested to the day of April 2004. City Administrator SEAL The Farmington Area Chamber of Commerce 2004 Legislative Priorities - Minnesota Zoo Bonding Bill Request Issue The Minnesota Zoo is asking the Minnesota Legislature for $48 million to fund capital improvements and $10 million for asset preservation to address the deferred maintenance on its existing physical plant. The zoo has not opened a new major exhibit since 2000 and its infrastructure is in need ofrepair and refurbishment. Due to operating budget cuts, the zoo has closed exhibits. As a result of all of these factors, attendance at the zoo has been declining over the past several years. For the first time since 1990, the annual budget has been based on attendance of less than one million visitors. With countless venues vying for recreational dollars, the zoo is finding it increasingly difficult to remain financially viable. In the last major bonding bill, the Legislature approved $8.1 million to begin work on improvements but it was vetoed by Governor Ventura. The last unconditional state capital support for the zoo "vas $750,000 in 1989. Currently, the state funds 39% ofthe zoo's operating budget, down from 60% in 1985. The national average for zoos is 50% public SUPPOlt. Principles In 2004, the legislature will consider bonding requests for a wide variety of projects from throughout Minnesota. Projected estimates of the bonding bill are anywhere from $600-$900 million. The following recommendation is based on the principle that the Minnesota Zoo is an impOltant component of Dakota County's economic vitality and quality of life. Visitors to the Minnesota Zoo patronize other local businesses, including approximately 200,000 from greater Minnesota and other states who patronize hospitality-related businesses. A study conducted in 1997 showed that the zoo has an annual economic impact of $60 million statewide, the majority of which affects Dal<ota County Additionally, the Minnesota Zoo offers the state's largest conservation education program and serves over 100,000 K-12 students on field trips, the Zoo Camp, and in other programs. An overwhelming majority of Fannington Area Chamber members live within a ShOlt drive to the Minnesota Zoo, making it an impOltant educational and recreational attraction for their families. To increase attendance and continue to draw visitors to the area, the zoo must offer new, exciting exhibits and make significant capital improvements to enhance the overall experience for visitors. Without these improvements and additional major exhibits, it is expected that the zoo's attendance and revenue will continue to decrease and negatively impact the area economy. Other zoos that have made similar improvements have experienced attendance increases of 20% or more. Recommendations The Fannington Area Chamber of Commerce specifically recommends that the legislature show its SUPPOlt of the ~1Jr~1 'iln Dakota County economy by approving the Minnesota Zoo's bonding request for $48 million to fund capital improvements and $10 million for the zoo's asset preservation and deferred maintenance.