HomeMy WebLinkAbout04.07.03 Council Packet
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Mission Statement
Through teamwork and cooperation.
the City of Farmington provides quality
services that preserve our proud past and
foster a promising future.
AGENDA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April 7, 2003
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) Proclaim April Alcohol Awareness Month
b) Proclaim Arbor Day - April 25, 2003
c) Proclaim Earth Day - April 22, 2003
d) Proclaim Volunteer Recognition Week - April 21-25, 2003
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments)
7. CONSENT AGENDA
a) Approve Council Minutes (3/17/03 Regular)
b) Park and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation
c) Appointment Recommendation - Human Resources
d) Appointment Recommendation - Police Department
e) Adopt Resolution - Accepting Donation Menasha Corp. - Parks and
Recreation
f) Amend Agreement Curbside Recycling - Parks and Recreation
g) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License St. Michael's Church -
Administration
h) Approve Contract Riverland Community College Firefighter Training - Fire
Department
i) School and Conference - Fire Department
j) School and Conference - Administration
k) Approve 2003 Federal Emergency Management Agency Grant - Fire
Department
I) Approve Street Sweeping Contract - Engineering
m) Adopt Resolution - Amending Fees and Charges Resolution - Community
Development
n) Approve Bills
Action Taken
Proclaimed
Proclaimed
Proclaimed
Proclaimed
Approved
Information Received
Approved
Approved
R19-03
Ap~roved
Approved
Approved
Injormation.Received
Approved
Approved
Approved
R20-03
Approved
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a) Main Street Area Reconstruction Project - Engineering
9. AWARDOFCONTRACT
a) 2003 Seal Coat Project - Engineering (Supplemental)
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) February 2003 Financial Report - Finance
b) NPDES Phase II Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program - Engineering
c) Dakota County East-West Corridor Study - FanningtonlLakeville Joint
Resolution - Engineering
d) Adopt Resolution - Street Utility Legislation - Engineering
e) Adopt Resolution - Preliminary and Final Plat and Wetland Alteration Permit
- Emmaus Grove - Community Development
f) Adopt Resolution - Preliminary Plat - Meadow Creek 3rd Addition-
Community Development
g) Quarterly Customer Service Report and Annual Summary for 2002 -
Administration
h) Quarterly Building Report and Population Estimate - Community
Development
i) AUAR Spruce Street Corridor - Community Development
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
12. NEWBUSINESS
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
14. ADJOURN
City of Fannington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Mission Statement
Through teamwork and cooperation,
the City of Farmington provides quality
services that preserve our proud past and
foster a promising future.
AGENDA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April 7, 2003
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) Proclaim April Alcohol Awareness Month
b) Proclaim Arbor Day - April 25, 2003
c) Proclaim Earth Day - April 22, 2003
d) Proclaim Volunteer Recognition Week - April 21-25, 2003
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments)
7. CONSENT AGENDA
a) Approve Council Minutes (3/17/03 Regular)
b) Park and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation
c) Appointment Recommendation - Human Resources
d) Appointment Recommendation - Police Department
e) Adopt Resolution - Accepting Donation Menasha Corp. - Parks and
Recreation
f) Amend Agreement Curbside Recycling - Parks and Recreation
g) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License St. Michael's Church-
Administration
h) Approve Contract Riverland Community College Firefighter Training - Fire
Department
i) School and Conference - Fire Department
j) School and Conference - Administration
k) Approve 2003 Federal Emergency Management Agency Grant - Fire
Department
I) Approve Street Sweeping Contract - Engineering
m) Adopt Resolution - Amending Fees and Charges Resolution - Community
Development
n) Approve Bills
Action Taken
Page 49~
Pages 497..498
Pages 499-500
Pages 501-502
Pages 503-506
Pages 507..509
Page 510
Page 511
Pages 512-513
Page 514
Page 515
Pages 516-521
Page 522
Page 523
Page 524
Pages 525..532
Pages 533-534
Page 535
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a) Main Street Area Reconstruction Project - Engineering
9. A WARD OF CONTRACT
a) 2003 Seal Coat Project - Engineering (Supplemental)
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) February 2003 Financial Report - Finance
b) NPDES Phase II Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program - Engineering
c) Dakota County East-West Corridor Study - FanningtonlLakeville Joint
Resolution - Engineering
d) Adopt Resolution - Street Utility Legislation - Engineering
e) Adopt Resolution - Preliminary and Final Plat and Wetland Alteration Permit
- Emmaus Grove - Community Development
f) Adopt Resolution - Preliminary Plat - Meadow Creek 3rd Addition -
Community Development
g) Quarterly Customer Service Report and Annual Summary for 2002 -
Administration
h) Quarterly Building Report and Population Estimate - Community
Development
i) AUAR Spruce Street Corridor - Community Development
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
12. NEW BUSINESS
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
14. ADJOURN
5C3..J
ALCOHOL A WARENESS MONTH 2003
WHEREAS, alcohol is a factor in the four leading causes of death among persons ages 10-24,
motor-vehicle crashes, unintentional injuries, homicide and suicide; and,
WHEREAS, approximately 9.7 million current drinkers in the United States are between the
ages of 12-20; and,
WHEREAS, alcohol is the most frequently used drug by high school seniors; and,
WHEREAS, young people begin drinking, on average, at 13.1 years of age; and,
WHEREAS, young people who begin drinking before age 15 are four times more likely to
develop alcohol dependence than those who begin drinking at age 21; and,
WHEREAS, alcohol abuse is linked to as many as two-thirds of all sexual assaults and date
rapes of teens and college students and is a major factor in unprotected sex among youth,
increasing their risk of contracting mv or other transmitted diseases; and,
WHEREAS, the typical American young person will see 100,000 beer commercials before he or
she turns 18 (that is more than for sneakers, gum and jeans); and,
WHEREAS, 13 percent of all youth, ages 12-17, had at least one serious problem related to
drinking in the past year.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, MAYOR GERALD RISTOW, do hereby proclaim that April 2003 is
Alcohol Awareness Month in Farmington. As the Mayor I also call upon all citizens, parents,
governmental agencies, public and private institutions, businesses, hospitals and schools in
Farmington to support efforts that will encourage recovery throughout our community.
Mayor
'/9~
.5~
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 f ~
FROM:
Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT:
Arbor Day Proclamation
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The annual Arbor Day activities are scheduled for Friday, April 25, 2003.
DISCUSSION
The City is a Tree City USA designated community. To continue with this designation,
the Council must proclaim Arbor Day in the City of Farmington. The City's Arbor Day
Celebration is planned for April 25, 2003 at 10:00 A.M. in Evergreen Knoll Park.
The City Council is invited to participate through its collective support of the attached
proclamation.
BUDGET IMPACT
Expenditures for the Arbor Day Celebration are included in the 2003 Budget.
ACTION REQUESTED
Proclaim Friday, April 25, 2003 as Arbor Day in Farmington.
1!es ectfullYlIilJsubmitted
., n '.
i ~
Randy Distad
Parks and Recreation Director
~97
Arbor Day Proclamation
April 25, 2003
WHEREAS, native Minnesotans and early pioneers depended upon existing forests to
survive in often harsh, yet beautiful land, as do Minnesota's current
residents and landowners; and,
WHEREAS, the old-growth red and white pine forests in the north, the mature
hardwood forests of the southeast and the oak savannahs bordering the
prairies in the south and the west continue to change; and,
WHEREAS, trees in Minnesota continue to struggle due to insect pests, diseases, severe
weather extremes and human activities including pollution, construction
damage, vandalism and neglect; and,
WHEREAS, citizens must become stewards of their own environment by planting,
maintaining and protecting trees so that the benefits which trees provide
throughout their life cycle continues to improve the quality of life that
Minnesotans enjoy.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the City Council ofthe City of
Farmington designates and proclaims April 25, 2003 as Arbor Day.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and caused the seal of the City of Farmington to be
atTlxed this 7m day of April, 2003.
Gerald Ristow, Mayor
y9~
Sc...,
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farminirton.mn.us
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator fs.
FROM:
Randy Distad
Parks & Recreation Director
SUBJECT:
Proclaim Earth Day
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION & DISCUSSION
Earth Day has been celebrated on April 22 since 1970 and reminds people to rededicate themselves to
another year of continuing care of the Earth. On April 2nd the City of Farmington Rambling River
Center and Independent School District 192 Community Education Youth Development are
partnering to sponsor Clean and Green Camp. The purpose of Clean and Green Camp is to distribute
information on reducing toxicity to 8th graders and Rambling River Center members. Those that
participate will then return to their respective groups and share that information with their peers.
Additional events that will be promoting care of the earth this month are the City's Curbside Clean
Up program which begins on Saturday, April 26th and ends on May 24th. April 26th is also the date of
the Community Pond Clean Up which several Scout troops and citizens of Farmington have already
volunteered to participate in.
ACTION REOUESTED
Proclaim April 22, 2003 to be Earth Day in Farmington.
,RflSpectfullm
'~Wd
Parks & Recreation Director
<199
Office of tlie Mayor
J'armington, Minnesota
J'~~~
'Vir.~ 0>
~jll~
Proclamation
)vJ-fE'R/E54S, tnirty tnree years ago, more tnan twenty mi{Cion .Jlmericans joined' togetfier on
'Eartn 'Day in a d'emonstration of concern for tne environment, and' tneir
corrective action resu(ted'in tne yassage of sweeying new (aws to protect our
air, water and'(and; and'
)VJ-f'E'R'E54S, 'TFie yeoy(e of :Farmington take great prid'e in our City's naturae veauty and'
suyyort a dean and'safe environment; and'
)VJ-f'E'R'E54S, 'Eartn 'Day is a nationa( and' internationa( ca(( to action for a(( citizens to join
in a g(ova( effort to save tne y(anet; and'
)VJ-f'E'R'E54S, 'Eartn 'Day activities and' events wier ed'ucate a(( citizens on tne imyortance of
acting in an environmenta((y sound' fasnion by red'ucing waste, conserving
energy and' water, using efficient transyortation, and' aaoyting more
eco(ogica((y sound' (ifesty(es; and'
)VJ-f'E'R'E54S, 'TFirougn increased' environmenta( awareness, :Farmington can meet tne
cna((enge of naving an eco(ogica((y nea(tny community and' a vigorous
environment for its citizens;
.NO)v TJ-f'E'R'E:FO'R'E, 'E'E IT P'ROCL5U:M'E'D tnat tne City Counci( of tne City of :Farmington
Msignate and' proc(aim .Jlpri( 22, 2003 as 'Eartn 'Day.
In witness wfiereof I nave nereunto set my nand' and'
caused: tfie sear of tnis city to ve affixed:
:Mayor
'Date
500
5d
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmington.mn.us
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator <f \
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director
Proclaiming Volunteer Recognition Week - April 21-25, 2003
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The Farmington Area Chamber of Commerce is requesting your support in proclaiming
the week of April 21-25, 2003 as Volunteer Recognition Week in Farmington.
DISCUSSION
In Farmington and throughout Minnesota, people's lives are touched by caring citizens of
all ages from diverse backgrounds, who bring our communities together through their
involvement and commitment. The result of this tremendous citizen involvement
improves the quality of life for all Minnesotans.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
ACTION REOUESTED
Proclaim April 21-25, 2003 be observed as Volunteer Recognition Week.
Respectfully submitted,
~d~~
Lisa Shadick ..
Administrative Services Director
501
Every Day in Every Way
MINNESOTA VOLUNTEERS
WHEREAS: Over 2 million people - 66 percent of all Minnesotans - provide a multitude of
volunteer services in their communities every day in every way; and,
WHEREAS: This commitment of active, engaged citizens around the state ensures healthy,
vital communities positioned to solve critical problems and to improve the lives of
many; and,
WHEREAS: In Farmington and throughout Minnesota, people's lives are touched by caring
citizens of all ages from diverse backgrounds, who bring our communities
together through their involvement and commitment; and,
WHEREAS: Farmington volunteers generously step forward to mentor at-risk youth, engage in
civic action for local and state government, respond to emergencies and disasters,
preserve the environment, perform chores for senior citizens and provide a
multitude of services to address serious social problems; and,
WHEREAS: The result of this tremendous citizen involvement improves the quality of life for
all Minnesotans.
NOW THEREFORE, I, Gerald Ristow, Mayor of Farmington, do proclaim April 21-25, 2003
shall be observed as:
VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION WEEK
Gerald Ristow, Mayor
S~
7 a..-
COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR
March 17, 2003
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3.
ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Also Present:
Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg
None
Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Ed Shukle, City Administrator; Robin
Roland, Finance Director; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation
Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa
Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt,
Human Resources Director; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner;
Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief; John Powers, Fire Marshal; Cynthia
Muller, Executive Assistant
4. APPROVE AGENDA
MOTION by Cordes, second by Fogarty to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
a) Proclaim Space Day - May 1, 2003
MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes to proclaim May 1, 2003 Space Day.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS
7. CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
a) Approved Council Minutes (3/3/03 Regular)
b) Received Information Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and
Recreation
c) Approved Appointment Recommendation - Fire Department
d) Approved Temporary On-Sale Liquor License St. Michael's Church -
Administration
e) Adopted RESOLUTION R14-03 Gambling Event Permit Dakota County Ducks
Unlimited - Administration
f) Adopted RESOLUTION R15-03 Gambling Event Permit Rotary Club-
Administration
g) Adopted Agreement - Dakota County Fair Board - Finance
S03
Council Minutes (Regular)
March 17, 2003
Page 2
h) Approved Change Order Facilities Project - Engineering
i) Received Information 2002 Recycling Survey - Parks and Recreation
j) Approved Bid Solid Waste Truck - Parks and Recreation
k) Approved Bills
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a) Adopt Resolution - Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement Glenview
Commercial Addition - Community Develogment
This is located on the comer ofTH3 and 213t Street. Two utility easements need
to be vacated. One runs north and south along the old TH3 right-of-way and the
other one is located adjacent to the south line of Outlot A. With the plat Outlot A
will be eliminated and the right-of-way along TH3 in this area was recently
vacated by the state which leaves the city with inadequate easements to cover the
existing water main. With the plat, additional easements will be required for
those water mains. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to close the
public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second by
Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R17-03 vacating the described drainage and
utility easement in the proposed Glenview Commercial Addition. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
9. AWARD OF CONTRACT
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) Adopt Resolution - Glenview Commercial Addition Preliminary and Final
Plat - Community Development
The Glenview Commercial Addition is located on the comer ofTH3 and 213th
Street. There are currently three lots. The lot lines would be eliminated to create
one lot. There would also be an outlot to the east of the newly created 9th Street,
and another outlot in the southern portion. The current Outlot A would remain as
is which is adjacent to a pond that is next to the Glenview Townhomes. There is a
25-foot easement and two lO-foot easements extending south that would be
adequate for the water main. By removing the lot lines, one business could take
the whole area. It is more likely an applicant would come forward with a replat
once businesses are obtained. Lot 1, block 2 could be used as a buffer area
between the commercial area and the homes.
Councilmember Soderberg asked about the easement for the water main on the
west side and why it only goes part way along the front. Staff replied the water
main actually ends at that point. In the future, when the area is developed, there
will be a connection between where it currently ends and it will connect down to
213th Street. Rather than guess the exact alignment, the easement will be obtained
when the water main is connected. Mayor Ristow asked if there was any problem
now with it not being looped. Staff replied it is not serving anything at the
moment, but it will be looped once development occurs.
)5'0 <I
Council Minutes (Regular)
March 17, 2003
Page 3
MOTION by Cordes, second by Fitch adopting RESOLUTION R18-03
approving the preliminary and final plat for the Glenview Commercial Addition.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
b) Approve Tower View Apartment Building Rezoning - Community
Development
The Tower View Apartments are located on the comer of Division Street and
Walnut Street. Last spring the city initiated rezoning as the apartments were non-
conforming due to there being too many units for the lot acreage in the R-2
zoning district. It was rezoned R-4, but it is still non-conforming. The building
has 27 units and the R-4 district allows 12 units per acre. Staff recommended
rezoning the property to R-5 which allows 14 units per acre and would make the
property conforming to the zoning district. MOTION by Soderberg, second by
Fogarty approving a zoning map amendment for the Tower View Apartments
from R-4 to R-5. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
c) Adopt Ordinance - Establishing Standards for Fireworks - Community
Development
Staff has received calls regarding requests to sell fireworks. The ordinance
establishes regulations for fireworks. One issue was to keep fireworks out oftents
due to security issues at night. This would also allow for better enforcement on
the use and sale of fireworks. It also covers display of fireworks. MOTION by
Fitch, second by Cordes adopting ORDINANCE 003-487 adding Title 5, Chapter
5 to the City Code regarding the sale, possession, and use of consumer fireworks.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
d) Schedule City Hall Task Force Workshop - Administration
At the last Council Meeting it was discussed to hold a workshop with the City
Hall Task Force to discuss new City Hall facilities. The workshop will be held
April 30, 2003, at 6:00 p.m. at the Police or Maintenance facility.
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
12. NEW BUSINESS
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
City Administrator Shukle: There will be a Council/staff retreat on Saturday, April 5,
2003, from 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. It will be held at the Police Facility.
City Engineer Mann: MnDOT will have an open house regarding the bridge
project and transportation routes. It will be held at the Maintenance Facility on March
19,2003 from 5:00 - 7:30 p.m.
50S
Council Minutes (Regular)
March 17, 2003
Page 4
The Main Street neighborhood meeting will be held on March 27,2003 at 7:00 p.m. at
the Rambling River Center.
14. ADJOURN
MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 7:19 p.m. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Respectfull y submitted,
,/7 ~/ ~ r-7 ~d-<-/
,~.,. ...,Lfi'~a~
'tynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
5o~
76
DRAFT
Farmington Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission
Minutes from the Regular Meeting on March 12, 2003
Members Present: Randy Oswald, Paula Higgins, Dawn Johnson, Mike Buringa and Debby Ruth
Members Absent: None
Other's Present: Parks and Recreation Director, Randy Distad; Robin Hanson, President of Farmington Youth
Athletic Association and board member of the Farmington Youth Baseball In-House Program; Jon Rowan,
board member of the Farmington Youth Baseball Traveling Program and Scott Retterath, board member of the
Farmington Youth Baseball In-House Program
I. Call To Order
Chair Oswald called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Quorum was present.
II. Approval of Agenda.
Motion of Johnson and seconded by Higgins to approve the meeting agenda. Higgins, Oswald and Johnson
voted in favor. Ruth abstained from voting. Buringa was absent during the vote.
Motion carried.
III. Approval of Minutes.
Motion by Johnson and seconded by Higgins to approve the minutes from the February 26, 2003 meeting.
Voting in favor were Higgins, Oswald and Johnson. Ruth abstained from voting. Buringa was absent during
the vote. Motion carried.
IV. Presentations
A. Farmington Youth Athletic Association (FY AA) and the Farmington Youth Baseball Program
Robin Hanson, President of the FY AA provided a hand-out to PRAC members that gave an overview of the
history ofFY AA and what its mission is in the community.
Commission member Buringa entered the meeting at 6:05 p.m.
Paperwork has been filed with the State of Minnesota to incorporate FY AA as a 501 (c) 3 organization. This
will take several weeks to occur. Hanson also provided a handout on the in-house baseball program. There are
just under 550 youth participating in the in-house baseball program. Jon Rowan from the Farmington Youth
Baseball Traveling Program introduced himself and gave a quick review of who participates in the traveling
baseball program informing PRAC members that there are just under 100 youth that participate in the traveling
baseball program. Scott Retterath, representative from the in-house baseball program, explained that both
programs, while having some of the same needs, also have different needs such as the length of bases. Hanson
informed PRAC members that there is a shortage in youth baseball facilities in Farmington. They are interested
in having the ballfield at Meadowview Elementary and at Prairie View Park upgraded to allow these fields to be
used for older youths since this is where the need for baseball facilities is most critical. Hanson stated that youth
baseball is interested in applying for a Minnesota Twins grant that is available to communities to access that can
be spent on improving baseball fields. This grant requires matching contributions. After some discussion about
how much of the cost should be shared between the City and the baseball programs to improve the ballfield at
Prairie View Park, Buringa moved to upgrade the baseball field at Prairie View Park for use by the in-house and
traveling baseball programs and that the cost to upgrade the ballfield would be split evenly by the City and the
two baseball programs. Seconded by Higgins. Discussion: Johnson thought the split should be one-third by
the City and two-thirds by the baseball program. Voting in favor of the motion were Buringa, Higgins, Ruth and
Oswald. Voting against the motion was Johnson. Motion carried.
So)
Commission member Buringa left the meeting at 6:26 p.m.
V. Old Business
A. Review and Discuss Park Dedication Ordinance
Members asked questions specific to the draft ordinance. Several typing errors were found and corrected.
Members were directed to get final comments to Director Distad within the next week so that the final draft
ordinance could be sent to the City Attorney for initial review. Once the initial review is done by the City
Attorney, Director Distad will bring it back to members for their final comments.
VI. New Business
A. Soft Drink Vending Contract
Director Distad gave an update on his meeting with Coke. Coke was given a list of potential facility sites for its
vending machines. Agreements can be anywhere from 3-12 years. The more years and more facilities that
Coke can secure the more attractive the compensation package is. Coke will be putting some figures together
over the next few weeks and then will be meeting with the City again with a proposal.
B. Fees and Charges
Several items were discussed by PRAC members. There was some disagreement about whether or not a fee
should be charged for the use of picnic shelters. Chair Oswald noted that many communities charge a fee for
picnic shelters. Director Distad suggested that it be called a reservation fee rather than a rental fee.
Commission members requested that Director Distad complete a survey of surrounding communities to see what
kinds of picnic shelter fees are charged and to bring back the survey at a future meeting.
Question was asked by Commission members Ruth and Johnson about what the group rental rates are for the use
of the City's outdoor pool, since this was not indicated on the City's fees and charges schedule. Also Johnson
asked if people were aware of the W AVER (sp) program that provides funding for kids with disabilities to take
private swim lessons. Director Distad stated that he would do some further research about group rental rates at
the outdoor pool and bring back this information at the April meeting.
C. Preliminary Discussion on Recreational Facilities Task Force
PRAC members brainstormed some possible ideas on who might best represent the community if a recreational
facilities task force is ever formed. Suggestions included the following:
. School district member
. YMCA
. Downtown Business Owner
. North Business Owner
. A few at-large members of the community not affiliated with an organization
. Farmington Youth Athletic Association
. Older Adults in the Community
. Teens
Some discussion occurred about how this might be initiated. Commission members thought that it might be best
to not get to far ahead since the City Hall Task Force recommendation has not yet been debated and a decision
made by the City Council on a new city hall. Members agreed that for the task force idea to move forward, it
ought to be a grassroots campaign that is initiated by a community petition to the City Council.
VIII. Additions to the Agenda
Chair Oswald requested that he be allowed to add three items to the agenda. No Commission members opposed
the adding of the items.
A. Charleswood Development
Chair Oswald stated that in looking back at previous meeting minutes, a name for the park in the Charleswood
Development was never formally approved and thus the park has still not been named. Commission members
S09:
by consensus agreed that names for the park should be solicited from the students at Meadowview Elementary
School and requested that Director Distad would work with the school to get possible names for the park.
B. Middle Creek Development
Chair Oswald stated that he would like information on whether or not the park area in the Middle Creek
Development has any street frontage along the west border of the park. Director Distad will research this to
determine if there is any street frontage.
C. Giles Addition
Commission members are interested in finding out if the small park area in the Giles Addition is ready to be
turned over to the City. Director Distad will research this to see if the park area is ready to be turned over to the
City for developing.
IX. Staff Report
Director Distad reported that a Request for Proposal (RFP) went out to three playground equipment vendors for
playground concept plans. The plans will be brought back to the April meeting for Commission members to
reVIew.
Director Distad asked Commission members how they felt about designing and putting in new park signs in City
parks. Commission members supported this idea and would like to see some possible designs for park signs
brought back at a future meeting.
Director Distad informed Commission members that the PRAC's monthly meeting minutes would be included
in the City Council packet. He felt that it was a good communication tool for the City Council to see what the
PRAC is doing at their meetings.
X. April Meeting Agenda Items
There were several items that were identified for the April meeting.
. Review playground equipment concept plans for Charleswood Park
. Discussion on programs for kids with disabilities
. Information to update Commission members on the park areas in the Giles Addition and Middle Creek
Development
. Park Dedication Ordinance draft review from the City Attorney's office
. Update on the Soft Drink Vending Contract
XI. Adjournment
Moved by Johnson and seconded by Ruth to adjourn the meeting. APIF, motion carried. Meeting was
adjourned at 7:46 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted
Randy Distad, CPRP
Parks and Recreation Director and Recording Secretary
509
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7c.....
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator fc
FROM:
Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director
SUBJECT:
Appointment Recommendation - Human Resources
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time HR/Payroll Specialist to fill
a new position authorized in the 2003 Budget in the Human Resources Department, has been
completed.
DISCUSSION
After a. thorough review by the Finance Department and the Human Resources Office, an offer of
employment has been made to Mr. Joseph Fischbach subject to ratification by the City Council.
Mr. Fischbach has been employed with the City in the Public Works Department performing a
variety of functions. He will graduate from Inver Hills Community College in May with an
Associate of Arts Degree. Mr. Fischbach has taken on various administrative tasks in preparation
for this position and meets the minimum qualifications.
BUDGET IMP ACT
Funding for this position is authorized in the 2003 budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the appointment of Mr. Joseph Fischbach as HR/Payroll Specialist in Human Resources,
effective on or about April 21, 2003.
Respectfully submitted,
- /' '/(//-')'/: /1/)'/ t'-
",-,' k'v.i-c / .[,.C lei.. <-t ~'4r .
.' Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR
Human Resources Director
CC: Personnel File
5/0
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
?c/
TO:
fe;.
Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator .
FROM:
Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director
SUBJECT:
Appointment Recommendation - Police Department
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time Police Officer to fill a new
position authorized in the 2003 Budget in the Police Department, has been completed.
DISCUSSION
The City has completed the recruitment, testing, and interview process for a Police Officer. After a
thorough review by the Police Department and the Human Resources Office, an offer of
employment has been made to Mr. Shawn Scovill, subject to ratification by the City Council.
Mr. Scovill is currently a Police Officer for the City of Northfield, MN. He is a Certified Drug
Recognition expert and I ntoxilyzer 0 perator. Additionally, he has served a saD etective for the
Northfield Police Department where he cleared a large number of dead files or previously unsolved
.cases. His knowledge, skills and qualifications more than.meet the minimum qualifications for the
position.
BUDGET IMP ACT
Funding forthis position is authorized in the 2003 budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the appointment of Mr. Shawn Scovill in the Police Department, effective April 28, 2003.
Respectfully submitted,
A . j/ -//' j;/ I...,t-
.. J!jLlliL:/Z{JlafM tic
renda Wendlandt, SPHR
Human Resources Director
S//
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
le-
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator'f, \ ,
FROM:
Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT:
Resolution Accepting Donation
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Menasha Corporation has donated approximately 450 garbage bins for Dew Days. The garbage
bins are of a disposable type that allows the garbage and the bin to be disposed of together.
These garbage bins are set out to be used to collect garbage during the Dew Days Parade.
DISCUSSION
The City has received this donation from Menasha Corporation in the past These bins allow the
City to use them for garbage collection during the Dew Days parade. The bin and garbage being
collected together makes for easy removal after the parade has ended.
BUDGET IMPACT
. The donation of the garbage bins for the Dew Days Parade is valued at $1,000.00. The previous
inventory of bins that were donated to the City by Menasha Corporation has dwindled and needs
to be replenished. This donation, will allow an inventory of garbage bins to be available to the
City that should last in excess of five years.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve a resolution accepting the donation of garbage bins from Menasha at a value of
$1,000.00.
/r5ec'nYSrr1O
~d,
Parks and Recreation Director
cc: Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor
5/01
RESOLUTION NO. R -03
ACCEPTING DONATION OF GARBAGE BINS FOR DEW DAYS FROM MENASHA
CORPORATION
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting ofthe City Council of the City of
Fannington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 7th day of April,
2003 at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following:
WHEREAS, Menasha Corporation has donated garbage bins for Dew Days at a value of
$1,000.00; and
WHEREAS, State Statutes require the City to formally accept donations by resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Fannington hereby accepts with
gratitude the donation of garbage bins for Dew Days from Menasha Corporation.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Fannington City Council in open session on the
ih day of April, 2003.
Mayor
Attested to the 7th day of April, 2003.
City Administrator
SEAL
..5/3
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
)-P
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator ~ <;.,.
FROM:
Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT:
Request to Revise Contract for Curbside Recycling Services
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Dick's Sanitation has requested that the current Curbside Recycling Services Contract rate for
electronics collection and processing be revised.
DISCUSSION
The City of Farmington contracts with Dick's Sanitation from Lakeville, Minnesota to perform
curbside recycling services from 2002 through 2006.
Dick's Sanitation, Inc. is requesting an adjustment for the processing of electronics from .35/lbs
to AO/lbs for the remainder of the term of the contract. The company that Dick's Sanitation uses
to process electronics is requesting this increase to cover increased handling charges. All other
2003 curbside clean up rates will remain the same.
BUDGET IMPACT
There is $92,000 budgeted for Clean Up Days. Based on the amount of electronics recycled last
year, the increased cost to the City would be $2,566.00. Clean Up Day last year cost the City
$84,100.00. The change in the rate does not appear to have a significant impact on the budget.
Curbside recycling services provides a convenience that helps encourage residents to recycle
their electronics.
ACTION REOUESTED
Approve the request from Dick's Sanitation to revise the current contracted rate for electronics
collection and processing from .35/lb to AO/lb for the remainder of the contract
cc: Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor
51'1
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
?J
t:~
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator
FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - St. Michael's Church
DATE: April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
St. Michael's Church is requesting a Temporary on-sale Liquor License for a Spring
Festival to be held May 7, 2003.
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 REOUESTED
Approve the attached application for a Temporary Liquor License for St. Michael's
Church, 22120 Denmark Ave., for their Spring Festival, May 7, 2003. 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,
v~dMa~.
Lisa Shadick
Administrative Services Director
5/.5'
Minnesota Department of Public Safety
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division
444 Cedar St-Suite 133
S1. Paul, MN 55101-5133
(651)296-6439 TDD (651)282-6555
APPLICATION AND PERMIT
FOR A TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE
DATE ORGANIZED
1'6<15
CITY
ZIP CODE
5502. '
HOME PHONE
(GSI) 4\03 --33<':0 ()
TYPE OF ORGANIZATION
o CLUB o CHARITABLE l2nrnLIGIOUS DOTHER NONPROFIT
ADDRESS ~ -1-'
5 ~ 0--5 eL.-Lui Y]
ADDRESS "
TAX EXEMPT NUMBER
2..'''H 3 3
STATE
MN
ADDRESS
.1
.r
Location where license will be used. If an outdoor area, describe
2-212.0 DeY\\'Y\.ll..>'k A~~, - .sCC.id\ \-b\\
Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor services? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service.
Will the applicant carry liquor liability insurance? If so,
(NOTE: Insurance is not mandatory.) It\,o i C
GOO
APPROVAL
APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMlTI1NG TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT
CITY/COUNTY DATE APPROVED
CITY FEE AMOUNT LICENSE DATES
DATE FEE PAID
SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OffiCIAL
APPROVED Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement Director
Note: Do not separate these two parts, send both parts to the address above and the original signed by this division
will be returned as the license. Submit to the city or County at least 30 days before the event.
PS-09079 (6198)
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
7~
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrato~"
FROM:
Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief
SUBJECT:
Riverland Community College Firefighter Training
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The Fire Department has been contacted by Riverland Community College to explain what the
college offered for in-house fire training.
DISCUSSION
The training has been reviewed by the Fire Department's training officers and a meeting was held
with the college's training coordinators to discuss training topics of interest. A total often
sessions were developed to be presented throughout the 2003 calendar year. Bringing the
outside training to the members is very cost effective compared to our members traveling to
other areas of the state to obtain the training. The Fire Department plans to continue this type of
arrangement in the future.
BUDGET IMPACT
The total cost of the training is $2,310 and is provided for in the 2003 budget. A number of the
sessions will require resources to be provided from the college as well.
ACTION REOUESTED
Approve the attached training contract with Riverland Community College.
Respectfully submitted,
r~-k~
Ken Kuchera
Fire Chief
cc: Robin Roland
.s/~
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?f
FROM:
Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief
SUBJECT:
School and Conference - Fire Department
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The Fire Department is planning attendance at the Minnesota State Fire School.
DISCUSSION
Troy Corrigan will be attending the Minnesota State Fire School at the Anoka-Hennepin
Technical College. The school will be held April 26-27, 2003. Topics covered include
Clandestine Drug Lab Awareness, Air Bag Safety, and Lessons Learned.
BUDGET IMPACT
Approved in the 2003 Budget.
ACTION REQUESTED
For information only.
Respectfully submitted,
~K~~
Ken Kuchera
Fire Chief
$070',
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.cLfarmington.mn.us
~,
U
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ed Shukle
City Administrator
SUBJECT: School and Conference - Administration
DATE: April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
As a member ofthe Minnesota City County Management Association (MCMA), I have attended
the organization's annual conference. The conference is an excellent opportunity to obtain
continued training and development within the profession of local government management.
DISCUSSION
In addition to professional presentations on leadership and management, the conference provides
participants to network with other local government managers and administrators. The
conference offers a refreshing new look at what we do and how we can improve our organization
in being more productive and efficient.
Further, as Co-Chair ofthe Host Committee ofthe International City County Management
Association (ICMA) 2005 Conference to be held in Minneapolis, I will be attending a Host
Committee meeting during the MCMA Conference. We hold these annually during the MCMA
Conference for purposes of continued planning and preparation for the ICMA 2005 Conference.
BUDGET IMPACT
The 2003 Budget provides for training and development monies for the conference.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve school and conference request to attend the annual MCMA conference to be held in
Brainerd, Minnesota May 7-9, 2003 for the City Administrator.
5~3
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463~7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7K
TO:
Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator Z-. ~.
FROM:
Ken Kuchera
Fire Chief
SUBJECT:
2003 Federal Emergency Management Agency Grant (FEMA)
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION
The FEMA fire service grant program is in its third year. Each year, the funds available have
increased. The 2003 total available to fire departments in the United States is $750 million. This
program originated after the tragic events of September II, 200 I.
This program requires a 10% commitment from the cities awarded grant funds.
Equipment applied for is Rapid Intervention Team self-contained breathing apparatus and
equipment. Funding to purchase hand held thermal imagers is also being applied for.
BUDGET IMPACT
The total dollar amount is $188,600 which requires a commitment of $18,600 from the city if
this application is a reality.
Several of our neighboring departments have been successful in receiving FEMA grant funds.
The largest award being over $155,000 to the Hastings Fire Department last year.
ACTION REOUESTED
This information is to update Council and obtain the commitment to support the grant if we are
awarded approval on our requests.
Respectfully submitted,
~KL
Ken Kuchera
Fire Chief
cc: Robin Roland
s~'-I
Print Application
Page I of 17
Entire Application
Applicant Information
. Fire Department Name
. Type of Fire Department
If other, please enter the type of Fire Department
. Employer Identification Number
Physical Address
. Headquarters' Physical Address 1
Headquarters' Physical Address 2
. City
. State
'Zip
. Mailing Address1
Mailing Address2
. City
. State
'Zip
Account information
. Type of bank account
. Bank routing number - 9 digit number on the bottom
left hand corner of your check
. Your account number
City of Farmington Fire Department
City
41-6005151
21625 Denmark Avenue
Farmington
Minnesota
55024 - 9468
325 Oak Street
Farmington
Minnesota
55024 - 1374
Checking
091903462
100108
Additional Information
This fiscal year, are you receiving Federal funding
from any other grant program for the same purpose No
for which you are applying for this grant?
This fiscal year, are you receiving Federal funding No
from any other grant program regardless of purpose?
. Is the applicant delinquent on any federal debt? No
If yes, type explanation in space provided below
Contact Information
. Title
Salutation
. First Name
Alternate Contact Information Number 1
Fire Chief
Mr,
Kenneth
https://porta1.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/19/2003
Print Application
Middle Initial
. Last Name
. Day Phone
'Evening Phone
Cell Phone
Fax
Email
. Title
Salutation
. First Name
Middle Initial
. Last Name
. Day Phone
'Evening Phone
Cell Phone
Fax
Email
Department Characteristics (I)
Page 2 of 17
Kuchera
651-463-4771 Ext.
651-463-3671 Ext.
651-755-2424
651-463-1777
kkuchera@ci,farmington,mn.us
Alternate Contact Information Number 2
City Administrator
Mr.
Edward
J
Shukle
651-463-1801 Ext.
952-472-6928 Ext.
651-775-5756
651-463-2591
eshukle@ci.farmington.mn.us
. Are you a member of a Fire Department or
authorized representative of a fire department?
. Are you a member of Federal Fire Department or
contracted by the Federal government and solely
responsible for suppression of fires on Federal
property?
. What kind of Department do you represent?
If you answered combination, above, what is the
percentage of career firefighters in your department?
. What is the square mileage of your primary response 88
area?
. What percentage of your response area is protected
by hydrants?
. How much of your jurisdiction is zoned for
agriculture?
. How much of your jurisdiction is zoned for
commercial or industrial?
. How many structures in your jurisdiction are more
than four stories tall?
. What is the permanent resident population of your
primarylfirst-response area or iurisdiction served?
. How many active firefighters are in the
operations/EMS division of your department?
Yes
No
All volunteer
%
6%
90%
3%
5
16988
39
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j Sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
Print Application
Page 3 of 17
. How many stations are in your department?
. Do you currently report to the National Fire Incident Yes
Reporting System (NFIRS)?
If you answered yes, above, please enter your FDIN? 19104
. What services does your department provide?
Structural Fire Suppression Fighting Wildfire Suppression
Basic Life Support
Hazmat Operational Level
Rescue Operational Level
Department Characteristics (II)
. What is the total number of fire related fatalities in
your jurisdiction over the last three years?
. What is the total number of fire related firefighter 2
injuries in your jurisdiction over the last three years?
. In an average year, how many times does your
department receive mutual/automatic aid?
. In an average year, how many times does your
department provide mutual/automatic aid?
. What was your department's estimated average
operating budget over the last three years?
. What percentage of your annual operating budget is
dedicated to personnel costs(salary, overtime and
fringe benefits)?
. What percentage of your annual operating budget is derived from:
Taxes? 100 %
o
4
4
221500
49%
Grants?
Donations?
Fund drives?
0%
0%
0%
'How many vehicles does your department have in each of the categories below? Enter numbers only and enter
o if you don't have any of the vehicles below
First Line Reserve
a, Engines (or pumpers): 2 0
b, Aerial Apparatus: 0 0
c. Tankers: 2 0
d. Rescue Vehicles: 1 0
e. Brush/Quick attack: 3 0
f, Other: 2 0
Provide in the space below the following information only if you are applying for a firefighting vehicle: List all your
vehicles by type (for example, engines/pumpers, brush, rescue, etc.), Then provide the year each was
manufactured. If the department has more than two of any type, provide the total number of vehicles in that
category and the years the oldest and the newest were manufactured.
Department Call Volume
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
Print Application
Page 4 of 17
. How many responses per year by category? Enter whole numbers only: If you have no calls for any of the categories, enter
zero,
Structure Fires
Vehicle Fires
Vegetation Fires
EMS
Rescue
Hazardous Condition/Materials Calls
Service Calls
Good Intent Calls/False Alarms
Other Calls and Incidents
12
10
8
362
57
43
6
67
25
Request Information
. 1. Select the program for which you are applying, Remember, you can apply for only one program this year.
Within a program you may apply for as many activities as are required.
If you modify your selection, you will lose data entered under the original activity.
Program Name
Fire Operations and Firefighter Safety
. 2. Will this grant benefit more than one department?
Yes
3, If you answered Yes to Question 2 above, please specify how? (You can only enter 4000 characters)
We have mutal aid agreements with a majority of the fire departments in Dakota County, MN. Because of these
agreements, these departments would benefit from the purchases made with funds provided through this
program whenever additional assistance is needed and our services are requested.
Request Details
Activity
FireFighting Equipment
Modify Facilities
Personal Protective Equipment
Wellness and Fitness Programs
Training
Number of Entries
3
o
6
o
o
Total Cost Additional Funding
$ 23,540 $ 0
$ 0 $ 0
$ 165,060 $ 0
$ 0 $ 0
$ 0 $ 0
FireFighting Equipment
Firefighting Details
1. What firefighting equipment will your department purchase with this grant?
Ropes, Harnesses, Carabiners,
Pulleys, etc.
4
2 Number of units
https://porta1.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
Print Application
Page 5 of 17
3 Cost per unit
4. Generally the equipment purchased under this grant program (select one):
Is necessary for basic firefighting capabilities, but has never been owned by this department
If you selected "replacing equipment" (from question 4) above, please specify
the age of equipment in years
5. Generally, the equipment purchased under this grant program (select one)
Will bring the department into voluntary compliance with a national
standard ,specifically
$197
We will have the equipment
necessary to meet the
requirements of NFPA 1500 6-
5.
6. Is this piece of equipment primarily:
7. Will this grant be used primarily for Rapid Intervention Teams (RIT)?
Rescue equipment
Yes
FireFighting Equipment
Firefighting Details
1, What firefighting equipment will your department purchase with this grant? Thermal Imaging Devices
2 Number of units
3 Cost per unit
4. Generally the equipment purchased under this grant program (select one):
Is necessary for basic firefighting capabilities, but has never been owned by this department
If you selected "replacing equipment" (from question 4) above, please specify
the age of equipment in years
5. Generally, the equipment purchased under this grant program (select one)
Will bring the department into voluntary compliance with a national
standard ,specifically
1
$19600
We will have the equipment
necessary to meet the
requirements of NFPA 1500 6-
5.
6. Is this piece of equipment primarily:
7. Will this grant be used primarily for Rapid Intervention Teams (RIT)?
Rescue equipment
Yes
FireFighting Equipment
Firefighting Details
1. What firefighting equipment will your department purchase with this grant?
2 Number of units
Portable Radios
3 Cost per unit
4. Generally the equipment purchased under this grant program (select one):
Is necessary for basic firefighting capabilities, but has never been owned by this department
If you selected "replacing equipment" (from question 4) above, please specify
the age of equipment in years
5. Generally, the equipment purchased under this grant program (select one)
Will bring the department into voluntary compliance with a national
standard ,specifically
4
$788
We will have the equipment
necessary to meet the
requirements of NFPA 1500 6-
5.
https://porta1.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _number=
3/19/2003
Print Application
Page 6 of 17
6, Is this piece of equipment primarily:
7, Will this grant be used primarily for Rapid Intervention Teams (RIT)?
Rescue equipment
Yes
Personal Protective Equipment
Personal Protective Equipment Details
*1. Select the PPE that you propose to acquire
Air-Line Units
If you selected other above, please specify
*2, Number of units 2
*3. Cost per unit 825
*4. What percentage of your "on-duty" active firefighters has 10 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards?
*5. What percentage of your "on_duty" active firefighters will have 100 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards if the grant is awarded?
*6. What is the purpose of this request? to buy equipment for the first time
If you selected "to replace old/obsolete equipment" (from question
6) above, please specify the age of equipment in years
*7. If purchasing a PASS device, what type of pass devices will Not applicable
you be purchasing?
*8. Is this PPE : For use in Rescue incidents
Personal Protective Equipment
Personal Protective Equipment Details
*1. Select the PPE that you propose to acquire
SCBA--45 minutes
If you selected other above, please specify
*2. Number of units 12
*3, Cost per unit 3695
*4, What percentage of your "on-duty" active firefighters has 10 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards?
*5, What percentage of your "on_duty" active firefighters will have 100 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards if the grant is awarded?
*6. What is the purpose of this request? to buy equipment for the first time
If you selected "to replace old/obsolete equipment" (from question
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _number=
3/19/2003
Print Application
Page 7 of 17
6) above, please specify the age of equipment in years
*7. If purchasing a PASS device, what type of pass devices will
you be purchasing?
*8. Is this PPE :
Integrated/Automatic PASS
For protection use against fire
Personal Protective Equipment
Personal Protective Equipment Details
*1. Select the PPE that you propose to acquire
Spare Cylinders--45 minutes
If you selected other above, please specify
*2. Number of units 12
*3. Cost per unit 790
*4. What percentage of your "on-duty" active firefighters has 10 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards?
*5. What percentage of your "on_duty" active firefighters will have 100 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards if the grant is awarded?
*6. What is the purpose of this request? to buy equipment for the first time
If you selected "to replace old/obsolete equipment" (from question
6) above, please specify the age of equipment in years
*7, If purchasing a PASS device, what type of pass devices will Not applicable
you be purchasing?
*8. Is this PPE : For protection use against fire
Personal Protective Equipment
Personal Protective Equipment Details
*1. Select the PPE that you propose to acquire
Spare Cylinders--60 minutes
If you selected other above, please specify
*2. Number of units 2
*3. Cost per unit 975
*4. What percentage of your "on-duty" active firefighters has 10 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards?
*5. What percentage of your "on_duty" active firefighters will have 100 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards if the grant is awarded?
*6. What is the purpose of this request? to buy equipment for the first time
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
Print Application Page 8 of 17
If you selected "to replace old/obsolete equipment" (from question
6) above, please specify the age of equipment in years
*7, If purchasing a PASS device, what type of pass devices will Not applicable
you be purchasing?
*8. Is this PPE : For use in Rescue incidents
Personal Protective Equipment
Personal Protective Equipment Details
*1. Select the PPE that you propose to acquire
SCBA--45 minutes
If you selected other above, please specify
*2. Number of units 24
*3. Cost per unit 3695
*4. What percentage of your "on-duty" active firefighters has 10 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards?
*5, What percentage of your "on_duty" active firefighters will have 100 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards if the grant is awarded?
*6. What is the purpose of this request? to replace old/obsolete equipment
If you selected "to replace old/obsolete equipment" (from question More than 10 years
6) above, please specify the age of equipment in years
*7. If purchasing a PASS device, what type of pass devices will Integrated/Automatic PASS
you be purchasing?
*8. Is this PPE : For protection use against fire
Personal Protective Equipment
Personal Protective Equipment Details
*1. Select the PPE that you propose to acquire
Spare Cylinders--45 minutes
If you selected other above, please specify
*2. Number of units 24
*3. Cost per unit 790
*4. What percentage of your "on-duty" active firefighters has 10 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
OSHA standards?
*5. What percentage of your "on_duty" active firefighters will have 100 %
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and
https://porta1.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
'Print Application Page 9 of 17
OSHA standards if the grant is awarded?
*6, What is the purpose of this request? to replace old/obsolete equipment
If you selected "to replace old/obsolete equipment" (from question 5-10 years
6) above, please specify the age of equipment in years
*7. If purchasing a PASS device, what type of pass devices will Not applicable
you be purchasing?
*8. Is this PPE : For protection use against fire
Total Budget
Budget Obiect Class
a. Personnel
h. Other
$0
$0
$0
$ 188,600
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
b. Fringe Benefits
c, Travel
d. Equipment
e. Supplies
f. Contractual
g. Construction
L Indirect Charges
Indirect Cost Details
Agency Indirect Cost Agreement with
Indirect Cost Rate
Agreement Summary
Federal and Applicant Share
Federal Share
Applicant Share
Federal Rate Sharing (%)
. Non-Federal Resources (The combined Non-Federal Resources must equal the Applicant Share of $ 18,860)
%
$ 169,740
$ 18,860
90/10
a. Applicant
b. State
c. Local
$ 18860
$0
$0
$0
d, Other Sources
If you entered a value in Other Sources, Please identify the source of your cost share, Le., fund reserves,
savings, fund-raisers, donations, etc.
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/19/2003
Print Application
Page 10 of 17
Total Budget
$ 188,600
Narrative Statement
Project Description
Please provide your narrative statement in the space provided below:
The City of Farmington, Minnesota is located approximately 25 miles south of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Because
of it's proximity to the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, as wall as the international airport and major
transportation routs, the community has experienced a substantial amount of growth in population and
industrial/manufacturing businesses the past few years. Between 1990 and 2000, the population of the city has
more than doubled, and there are no indications that this growth will be subsiding in the near future.
THE PROJECT THAT WE ARE REQUESING TO BE FUNDED: After conducting a needs assessment, the
Farmington Fire Department has determined that in order to provide needed protection to the Fire Department
members and community resources, funding is needed to provide additional basic personal protective and
firefighting equipment. The Farmington Fire Department is seeking funding for the program area of Fire
Operations and Firefighter Safety for the activities of Personal Protective and Firefighting Equipment Acquisition.
We are seeking funding in the amount of $188,600 to allow us to purchase new, SCBA units, replacement SCBA
units, spare SCBA bottles, and Rapid Intervention Team equipment consisting of hand held radios, portable
breathing air supply, safety line deployment bags and a thermal imaging device.
In order to provide respiratory protection for 100% of our firefighters, we need to purchase 12 additional SCBA's.
We currently have a compliment of 39 firefighters and only 27 SCBA's in our inventory. If successful in this
process, the awarded funds would be used to purchase 12 additional Scott Air-Pak 4.5 SCBA's equipped with
an integral PASS device that is activated when the air supply is turned on, 45 minute lightweight cylinders,
buddy breathing system, face mask equipped with a voice amplification device, and 45 minute lightweight spare
cylinders.
Of the 27 SCBA's in our current inventory, only 4 meet current NFPA 1852 and Minnesota OSHA standards.
The remaining units in our inventory range from 10 to 20 years in age and vary in models and styles. These
units are no longer compliant with NFPA 1852 and Minnesota OSHA standards and are frequently out of service
because of malfunctions. Some of these units can no longer be used because parts are no longer being
manufactured for them. By not being in compliance with current NFPA and Minnesota OSHA standards or being
inoperable, our firefighters safety is being put in jeopardy because of inadequate and inoperable respiratory
protection equipment.
If successful in this process, the awarded funds would be used to purchase 24 replacement Scott Air-Pak 4.5
SCBA's equipped with an integral PASS device that is activated when the air supply is turned on, 45 minute
lightweight buddy breathing system, face mask equipped with a voice amplification device and 45 minute
lightweight spare cylinders.
NFPA 1500 6-5 requires that fire departments have a Rapid Intervention Team in place for the sole purpose of
rescuing trapped or injured firefighters, This requires us to have personnel and equipment designated solely to
the Rapid Intervention Team. While we have the Standard Operating Guidelines in place and all of our
personnel have been trained to participate on the team, we do not have some of the proper equipment required
to deploy the team if the need arises. As a result, we are not in compliance with NFPA 1500 6-5 and our
firefighters are being put in a situation of additional risk of injury or loss of life if they become trapped or
incapacitated. If successful in this process, the awarded funds would be used to purchase 2 Scott RIT Pak
portable air supplies that is compatible with the SCBA's requested above, complete with 60 minute lightweight
cylinder and supply line, 4 safety line deployment bags with Kevlar line, 4 Motorola HT-1250 handheld radios,
and 1 Bullard MX hand held thermal imaging device.
HOW WE PLAN TO USE THE GRANT FUNDS FOR EACH MAJOR BUDGET ACTIVITY: The Farmington Fire
Department is a member of the Minnesota Fire Agencies Purchasing Consortium. This is a group of Fire
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/19/2003
'Print Application
Page 11 of 17
Departments that jointly bid out common fire department items to get the lowest possible bid. The goal is for
everyone to get quality items at the best possible price. Whenever possible, this program is used to for making
equipment purchases for our Department. Where applicable the bids from this program are reflected in the cost
estimates indicated below as well as the project cost details.
If successful in this process, awarded funds would be used to purchase the following:
Personal Protective Equipment:
12 New Scott 4.5 SCBA's with PASS, buddy breathing system, face mask, 45 minute carbon cylinders and voice
amplifier @ $3,695 each = $44,340.
12 New Scott 45-minute spare carbon cylinders @ $790 each = $9,480.
24 Replacement Scott 4.5 SCBA's with PASS, buddy breathing system, face mask, 45 minute carbon cylinders
and voice amplifier @ $3,695 each = $88,680.
24 Replacement Scott 45-minute spare carbon cylinders @ $790 each = $18,960.
Fire Fighting Equipment (Rapid Intervention Team Equipment):
2 Scott RIT Pak Air Source Kits @ $825 each = $1,650.
2 New Scott 60 minute carbon cylinders for RIT Pak @ $975 each = $1,950.
4 CMC Safety rope deployment bags with 150' of RIT line @ $197 each = $788
4 Motorola HT-1250 handheld radios @ $788 each = $3,152.
1 Bullard MX hand held thermal imaging device @ $19,600.
The Department members and the equipment dealers will handle administrative processing, training on use and
maintenance, and inventory implementation.
As required, 10% of the funding requested in this proposal will be provided from the Department's budget or
funds already obtained through fund raising efforts.
WHY THIS PROGRAM WOULD BE BENIFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY AND/OR TO OUR DEPARTMENT: If
successful in this process, the equipment purchased would benefit the community by having a department that
has the equipment needed to put 100% of our assets to work at an incident. The City of Farmington 5 schools
that over 3,900 elementary age students as well as 6 senior citizen housing facilities that house approximately
1,500 residents. With our current SCBA situation, we could only put about half of our resources to work at an
incident involving one of these facilities. As a result, there is a greater chance of injury or death to these students
and residents. The personal protective equipment requested in this application would allow us to put 100% of
our resources to work protecting these students and residents and quickly and safely eliminate the danger.
Over the past few years, several manufacturing and distribution firms have moved into the City of Farmington.
These facilities include wood, plastics and metal manufacturing and finishing. Because of the chemicals and
hazardous materials used in their processes, the personal protective equipment requested in this proposal are
vital to the protection of our personnel in any response to these facilities. These facilities provide much needed
employment to our community and any down time to these facilities would put great hardship on the employees
and business because of loss of income. At this time, we do not feel that we have the personal protective
equipment to properly combat an incident at one of these facilities. The personal protective equipment requested
in this application would allow us to put 100% of our resources to work in a response to these facilities. This will
allow for a quicker conclusion to the incident. As a result, damage and down time to the facility will be reduced.
The City of Farmington also is the home for the Minneapolis Federal Aviation Administration air traffic control
center that responsible for the movement of aircraft within nine area states as well as part of Canada and a
Northern Natural Gas natural gas pump station that is responsible for providing natural gas to utility companies
in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. These are highly visible facilities, and with recent events, these facilities
could be seen as likely targets for terrorist activities. The services that these facilities provide go well beyond the
area that our department serves and are vital to a great number of people and businesses. It is extremely
important that we be equipped to safely and effectively respond to any incident involving these facilities in order
to keep down time and disruptions to a minimum. At this time, we do not feel that we have the personal
protective equipment to properly combat an incident at one of these facilities. The personal protective equipment
requested in this application would allow us to put 100% of our resources to work to combat any incidents at
these facilities. This will reduce their down time and disruptions to the vital services that they provide.
The benefit to our Department will be the reduction of risk to the fire fighter by having the quantities of reliable
https://porta1.fema.gov/firegrantljsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
'Print Application
Page 12 of 17
personal protective equipment that meets current NFPA and Minnesota OSHA standards that allows us to utilize
100% of our firefighters. This spreads the workload and reduces stress to our firefighters allowing for quicker
conclusions to incidents.
Our firefighters would no longer be putting themselves in a situation of undue risk because, if successful in this
process, we will have the personal protective equipment that they need to combat an incident safely. With our
current situation, there are instances when additional risk is placed on firefighters because we do not have the
quantities of basic personal protective equipment that is needed. We will also be able to effectively respond to a
situation of a firefighter becoming trapped or incapacitated because, if successful in this process, we will be
purchasing equipment required to properly outfit our Rapid Intervention Team.
The Department as well as the community will also by benefit because of reduced maintenance and repair costs
that are currently being incurred as a result of the age and lack of parts availability of the equipment that will be
replaced with the awarded funds.
WHY THIS PROJECT CANNOT BE FUNDED SOLEY THROUGH LOCAL FUNDING: The 2000 census
indicated that the City of Farmington has experienced over 100% growth in population between 1990 and 2000.
This growth has not subsided and the City now has an estimated population of over 19,000. There have also
been major changes in State funding contributions to local municipalities. The State of Minnesota is currently
facing an over $4,000,000,000 budget deficit and has substantially cut their local government aid funding. As a
result of the population growth and funding changes, the City has had to refocus their priorities on expanding the
City's infrastructure to accommodate this growth with a reduced amount of available funding. With the exception
of the Fire Department, every Department within the City has grown. This growth has required the City to
purchase additional equipment and hire additional staff just to maintain a constant level of required services. The
additional staff and equipment has required the City to construct new facilities and remodel existing facilities.
Since the Fire Department has not experienced the growth of the other City Departments, we have had to make
due with what we have because if the City was to fund these requests, additional tax supported debt would be
required, The City's current environment does not leave additional room in the tax levy for the additional debt
required to support the purchase of these items.
ADDITIONAL RELEVANT INFORMATION: We feel that there is a real need within our community and our
Department for the equipment requested within this application. We have a comprehensive inspection and
maintenance program in place for all of our equipment. This will insure a long life span for any equipment
purchased with awarded funds.
Thank you for your consideration.
If you received a grant award in the 2002 process, does
your current request relate to your 2002 award?
If you answered yes, above, which of the following apply?
This request enhances the 2002 award
This request continues the 2002 award
This request completes the 2002 award
No
Assurances and Certifications
FEMA Form 20-16A
You must read and sign these assurances by providing your password and checking the box at the
bottom of this page.
Note: Fields marked with an * are required.
https://porta1.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
'Print Application
Page 13 of 17
Assurances Non-Construction Programs
Note: Certain of these assurances may not be applicable to your project or program. If you have any questions,
please contact the awarding agency. Further, certain Federal awarding agencies may require applicants to
certify to additional assurances. If such is the case, you will be notified.
As the duly authorized representative of the applicant I certify that the applicant:
1. Has the legal authority to apply for Federal assistance, and the institutional, managerial and
financial capability (including funds sufficient to pay the non-Federal share of project costs) to
ensure proper planning, management and completion of the project described in this
application.
2. Will give the awarding agency, the Comptroller General of the United States, and if
appropriate, the State, through any authorized representative, access to and the right to
examine all records, books, papers, or documents related to the award; and will establish a
proper accounting system in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards or
agency directives,
3. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that
constitutes or presents the appearance of personal gain.
4, Will initiate and complete the work within the applicable time frame after receipt of approval
of the awarding agency.
5. Will comply with the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. Section 4728-4763)
relating to prescribed standards for merit systems for programs funded under one of the
nineteen statutes or regulations specified in Appendix A of OPM's Standards for a Merit
System of Personnel Administration) 5 C.F.R. 900, Subpart F).
6. Will comply with all Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include but are not
limited to: (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) which prohibits
discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin; (b) Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. Sections 1681-1683, and 1685-1686), which
prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; (c) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
as amended (29 U.S.C. Section 794), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of
handicaps; (d) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. Sections 6101-
6107), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age; (e) the Drug Abuse Office and
Treatment Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-255), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis
of drug abuse; (f) the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment
and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-616), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on
the basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) Sections 523 and 527 of the Public Health
Service Act of 1912 (42 U.S.C. 290-dd-3 and 290-ee-3), as amended, relating to
confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records; (h) Title VIII of the Civil Rights Acts
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. Section 3601 et seq.), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination in the
sale, rental or financing of housing; (i) any other nondiscrimination provisions in the specific
statute(s) under which application for Federal assistance is being made; and U) the
requirements of any other nondiscrimination statute(s) which may apply to the application.
7. Will comply, or has already complied, with the requirements of Title II and III of the Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-646)
which provide for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or whose property is
acquired as a result of Federal or Federally assisted programs. These requirements apply to
all interest in real property acquired for project purposes regardless of Federal participation in
purchases.
8, Will comply with provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. Sections 1501-1508 and 7324-7328),
which limit the political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are
funded in whole or in part with Federal funds.
9. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. Sections
276a to 276a- 7), the Copeland Act (40 U.S.C, Section 276c and 18 U.S.C. Sections 874),
and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. Sections 327-333),
regarding labor standards for federally assisted construction sub agreements.
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrantljsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/19/2003
'Print Application
Page 14of17
10. Will comply, if applicable, with flood insurance purchase requirements of Section 102(a) of
the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) which requires recipients in a special
flood hazard area to participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance if the total
cost of insurable construction and acquisition is $10,000 or more.
11. Will comply with environmental standards which may be prescribed pursuant to the following:
(a) institution of environmental quality control measures under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190) and Executive Order (EO) 11514; (b) notification of violating
facilities pursuant to EO 11738; (c) protection of wetlands pursuant to EO 11990; (d)
evaluation of flood hazards in floodplains in accordance with EO 11988; (e) assurance of
project consistency with the approved State management program developed under the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. Section 1451 et seq.); (f) conformity of
Federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c) of the Clean
Air Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq.); (g) protection of underground
sources of drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, (P.L. 93-
523); and (h) protection of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended, (P.L. 93-205).
12. Will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. Section 1271 et seq.)
related to protecting components or potential components of the national wild and scenic
rivers system.
13. Will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470), EO 11593 (identification and
protection of historic properties), and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of
1974 (16 U.S.C. 469a-1 et seq.).
14. Will comply with P.L. 93-348 regarding the protection of human subjects involved in research,
development, and related activities supported by this award of assistance.
15. Will comply with the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-544, as amended, 7
U.S,C. 2131 et seq.) pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of warm blooded animals
held for research, teaching, or other activities supported by this award of assistance.
16, Will comply with the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U,S.C. Section 4801 et
seq.) which prohibits the use of lead based paint in construction or rehabilitation of residence
structures.
17. Will cause to be performed the required financial and compliance audits in accordance with
the Single Audit Act of 1984.
18. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other Federal laws, executive orders,
regulations and policies governing this program.
19. It will comply with the minimum wage and maximum hours provisions of the Federal Fair
Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 201), as they apply to employees of institutions of higher
education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations.
FEMA Form 20-16C
You must read and sign these assurances by providing your password and checking the box at the
bottom of this page.
Note: Fields marked with an * are required.
Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibilities Matters; and Drug-Free
Workplace Requirements.
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/1912003
'Print Application
Page 15 of 17
Applicants should refer to the regulations cited below to determine the certification to which they are required to
attest. Applicants should also review the instructions for certification included in the regulations before
completing this form, Signature on this form provides for compliance with certification requirements under 44
CFR Part 18, "New Restrictions on Lobbying; and 28 CFR Part 17, "Government-wide Debarment and
suspension (Non-procurement) and Government-wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants)," The
certifications shall be treated as a material representation of fact upon which reliance will be placed when the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) determines to award the covered transaction, grant, or
cooperative agreement.
1. LOBBYING
A. As required by the section 1352, Title 31 of the US Code, and implemented at 44 CFR Part 18 for persons
into a grant or cooperative agreement over $100,000, as defined at 44CFR Part 18, the applicant certifies that:
(a) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid by or on behalf of the undersigned
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a
Member of Congress, an officer or employee of congress, or an employee of a Member of
Congress in connection with the making of any federal grant, the entering into of any cooperative
agreement and extension, continuation, renewal amendment or modification of any Federal Grant
or cooperative agreement.
(b) If any other funds than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person
for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of
Congress, an officer or employee of congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in
connection with this Federal grant or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and
submit Standard Form LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities", in accordance with its instructions.
Standard Form LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Attached (This form must be attached to
certification if non-appropriated funds are to be used to influence activities.)
(c) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award
documents for all the sub awards at all tiers (including sub grants, contracts under grants and
cooperative agreements and sub contract(s)) and that all sub recipients shall certify and disclose
accordingly.
2, Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters (Direct Recipient)
As required by Executive Order 12549, Debarment and Suspension, and implemented at 44CFR Part 67, for
prospective participants in primary covered transactions, as defined at 44 CFR Part 17, Section 17.510-A, the
applicant certifies that it and its principals:
(a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, sentenced
to a denial of Federal benefits by a State or Federal court, or voluntarily excluded from covered
transactions by any Federal department or agency.
(b) Have not within a three-year period preceding this application been convicted of or had a
civilian judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in
connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or perform a public (Federal, State, or local)
transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or
commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making
false statements, or receiving stolen property,
(c) Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a government entity
(Federal, State, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1 )(b) of
this certification: and
(d) have not within a three-year period preceding this application had one or more public
transactions (Federal, State, or local) terminated for cause or default; and
B. Where the applicant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, he or she shall attach an
https://portaLfema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/19/2003
'Print Application
Page 16 of17
explanation to this application.
3. Drug-Free Workplace (Grantees other than individuals)
As required by the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, and implemented at 44CFR Part 17, Subpart F, for
grantees, as defined at 44 CFR part 17, Sections 17,615 and 17.620:
(A) The applicant certifies that it will continue to provide a drug-free workplace by:
(a) Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture,
distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in
the grantee's workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against
employees for violation of such prohibition;
(b) Establishing an on-going drug free awareness program to inform employees
about:
(1) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
(2) The grantees policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;
(3) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee
assistance programs; and
(4) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse
violations occurring in the workplace;
(c) Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of
the grant to be given a copy of the statement required by paragraph (a);
(d) Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph (a) that, as a
condition of employment under the grant, the employee will:
(1) Abide by the terms of the statement and
(2) Notify the employee in writing of his or her conviction for a violation
of a criminal drug statute occurring in the workplace no later than five
calendar days after such conviction,
(e) Notifying the agency, in writing within 10 calendar days after receiving notice
under subparagraph (d)(2) from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of
such conviction. Employers of convicted employees must provide notice, including
position title, to the applicable FEMA awarding office, i.e. regional office or FEMA
office.
(f) Taking one of the following actions, against such an employee, within 30 calendar
days of receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2), with respect to any employee
who is so convicted:
(1) Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up
to and including termination, consistent with the requirements of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; or
(2) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse
assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a
Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement or other appropriate
agency.
(g) Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug free workplace through
implementation of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f),
(8) The grantee may insert in the space provided below the site(s) for the performance of work
done in connection with the specific grant:
https://porta1.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/19/2003
· Print Application
Page 17 of17
Place of Performance
Street
City
Farmington
Farmington
State
Zip
55024 -1374
55024 -9468
Action
325 Oak Street
21625 Denmark Avenue
Minnesota
Minnesota
If your place of performance is different from the physical address provided by you in the Applicant
Information, click on Add Place of Performance button above to ensure that the correct place of
performance has been specified. You can add multiple addresses by repeating this process multiple
times.
Section 17.630 of the regulations provide that a grantee that is a State may elect to make one certification in each
Federal fiscal year. A copy of which should be included with each application for FEMA funding. States and State
agencies may elect to use a Statewide certification.
Only complete if applying for a grant for more then $100,000 and have lobbying activities. See Form 20-16C for
lobbying activities definition.
Form SF-LLL
This form is not applicable
https://portal.fema.gov/firegrant/jsp/fire/print_app.j sp ?print=true&app _ number=
3/19/2003
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
71.
TO:
M C 'I b C' Ad" fl
ayor, ounCl mem ers, Ity mmlstrator
FROM:
Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Private Development Street Sweeping Contract
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Staff has solicited quotes for street cleaning services in the private developments for 2003. 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.
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 procedure for street cleaning services will be the same as last year. The developments will be
inspected on Tuesdays 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 Tuesdays and Thursdays, on the following day (Wednesday 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 him/her
with street cleaning. If all of the streets within a development are clean at 12:00 p.m. on Tuesdays
and Thursdays, the City's contractor will not be ordered to clean the streets in that development and
5~S
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
The low quote for street cleaning was received from Mike McPhillips, Inc. (see attached). The cost
to the Developer (plus an administrative fee) will be $65/hour for skid loader work and $77/hour for
sweeper work. In 2002, the City of Fannington utilized approximately 376 hours of sweeper time
and 45 hours of skid loader time. There would be no budget impact to the City.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the award of contract for street cleaning services to Mike McPhillips, Inc. by motion.
Respectfully submitted,
~M~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
$~c,
2003 STREET SWEEPING BIDS
RECEIVED BY 2:00 PM
March 27,2003
1
SWEEPER PER HOUR $
77.00 $
80.00
2 SKID LOADER PER HOUR $
65.00 $
65.00
Sc:o'?)
STREET CLEANING CONTRACT
AGREEMENT dated this day of , 2003, by and between
the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and Mike
McPhillips, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Contractor").
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL UNDERTAKINGS HEREIN, THE
PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Scooe of Work.
A. The City hereby engages Contractor to provide street cleaning services within
private developments in the City. Contractor shall clean only those streets identified by the City
Engineer during the 24-hour period prior to the scheduled cleaning date.
B. Contractor will provide street cleaning services on those streets identified by the
City Engineer every Wednesday and Friday, at a minimum.
C. In performing the work under this Agreement, Contractor shall use only those
hydrants approved by the City for Contractor's use. :me City shall provide Contractor with a
water meter which Contractor shall use when obtaining water from City hydrants. Contractor
shall not be charged for City water used in performing work under this Agreement.
D. The City's Inspector shall verify that the work is completed to the satisfaction of
the City. Contractor's failure to clean streets to the City's satisfaction and in a tim~ly manner
shall be cause for termination of this Agreement by the City without notice.
Section 2. Notification.
A. Lists of streets within the City that require cleaning which will be faxed by the
City to the Contractor prior to the scheduled day for cleaning. No verbal street cleaning list will
be supplied. If there are no streets that require cleaning on a scheduled day, the City inspector
will forward a fax indicating that there are no streets to be cleaned that day. If the scheduled
street cleaning day falls on a holiday or there is severe weather, as determined by the City, the
City shall designate an alternate day for performance of Contractor's services.
Section 3. EQuioment.
A. Contractor shall perform the work required under this Agreement usmg the
following fully operational equipment:
l) Street sweeper: must be equipped with right and left gutter brooms with
water discharge; and
2) A skid loader.
Sc:?<:6
Each sweeper will be equipped with an anti-siphon device. Plastic brushes are acceptable.
B. When requested by the City, Contractor shall furnish a complete statement of
equipment condition and previous length of service. on all equipment to be used in the
performance of the work under this Agreement. The City's Public Works Director or designee
may reject any equipment used to perform the work covered under this Agreement.
Section 4. Contract Term.
A. Contractor shall commence services April 8, 2003 through March 31, 2004. This
Agreement may be terminated earlier by either party without cause upon thirty (30) days' notice
to the other party, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement.
Section 5. Payment.
A. The City shall pay Contractor a unit price per hour as follows:
$77.00Ihour for use of pickup broom with water discharge
$65.00Ihour for use of the skid loader
B. The unit price per hour includes only time spent actually operating equipment and
does not include downtime. The unit prices per hour shall cover all of the City's costs associated
with the street cleaning. Contractor shall be responsible for all costs it incurs in the
transportation and disposal of materials off-site.
C. Application for payment shall be made monthly. Contractor shall invoice each
development in the City separately. Upon approval of the invoice by the City, the City will remit
the approved invoice amount directly to Contractor.
Section 6. Documentation.
A. Contractor shall be responsible for keeping and maintaining the following records
on a daily basis.
1) The total number of cleaning hours per development for each piece of
equipment identified in Section 2.
2) The number of dumps and estimated yards of debris per development.
B. These records shall be submitted weekly to the City's Public Works Director or
designee showing the dates, times and street locations where sweeping was done in each
development.
Section 7. Emer2encv Response. During the contract term it may be necessary to have
contract work done on an emergency basis. Upon the City's request for additional work,
Contractor shall respond to the City's request upon 24 hours verbal or written notice. If the
2
.s~9
City's Public Works Director or designee determines it necessary, the City may hire another
entity other than Contractor for completion of the requested work.
Section 8. Independent Contractor. The City hereby retains Contractor as an
independent contractor upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Contractor is
not an employee of the City and is free to contract with other entities as provided herein.
Contractor shall be responsible for selecting the means and methods of perfonning the work.
Contractor shall furnish any and all supplies, equipment and incidentals necessary for
Contractor's performance under this Agreement. The City and Contractor agree that Contractor
shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Contractor or any of Contractor's agents or
employees are in any manner agents or employees of the City. Contractor shall be exclusively
responsible under this Agreement for Contractor's own FICA payments, worker's compensation
payments, unemployment compensation payments, withholding amounts, and/or self-
employment taxes if any such payments, amounts, or taxes are required to be paid by law or
regulation.
Section 9. Extra Service. No claim will be honored for compensation for extra services
or work beyond the scope of this Agreement without the written approval of the City.
Section 10. Insurance. Contractor shall furnish the City certificates of insurance from
insurers duly licensed with the State of Minnesota covering public liability insurance, including
general liability, automobile liability and bodily injury liability in an amount of at least $500,000
for injury or death of anyone person in anyone occurrence; and bodily injury liability in an
amount of at least $1,000,000 for injuries or death arising out of anyone occurrence. Property
damage liability shall be furnished in the amount of at least $200,000. Contractor shall comply
with all applicable insurance requirements of the Worker's Compensation Act. Contractor shall
provide proof of worker's compensation coverage. The City shall be named an additional
insured on the general liability policy.
Section 11. Unsafe Conditions Reportin2. Contractor shall promptly inform the City
by telephone and in writing of any unsafe conditions on City streets or property discovered
during the course of Contractor's duties, whether or not Contractor is able to remedy the unsafe
condition.
Section 12. Indemnification. Contractor shall indemnify and hold hannless the City, its
officers, agents and employees, of and from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of
action, including costs and attorney's fees, arising out of or by reason of negligence in the
execution or performance of the work or services provided for herein and further agrees to
defend at its sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of
asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising hereunder.
3
530
Section 13. Covenant A2ainst Contin2ent Fees. Contractor warrants that it has not
employed any person to solicit or secure this Agreement for a commission, percentage,
brokerage or contingent fee.
Section 14. Governin2 Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State
of Minnesota.
Section 15. Notices. Pursuant to this Agreement, notices shall be hand-delivered or
mailed as follows:
AS TO CITY:
City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
AS TO CONTRACTOR:
Mike McPhillips, Inc
825 Concord Street North
South St. Paul, MN 55075
Section 16. Miscellaneous.
A. Contractor may not assign or subcontract any of the services to be performed hereunder
without the written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
B. This Agreement shall become effective only upon its execution by both the City and
Contractor. This Agreement shall not be modified, amended, rescinded, waived or terminated
without the approval in writing of the City.
4
531
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Agreement as of the day
and year first above written.
,2003.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
Dated:
By:
Gerald Ristow, Mayor
And
Edward Shukle, City Administrator
CONTRACTOR:
Dated:
if Iz.-
,2003.
Mike McPhillips, Inc.
By: A~: )' ~, :=
Its: ,~ P L ,u
And
Its:
5
$..3~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
7h-]
TO:
Mayor, Council Mel]Pers,
City Administrato~ C \I^'V
FROM:
John Powers
Fire Marshal
SUBJECT:
Resolution Amending the 2003 Schedule of Charges and Fees by
Adding a Permit Fee for the Sale of Fireworks.
DATE:
April 7, 2003
DISCUSSION
The City of Farmington recently adopted an ordinance regulating the sale and use of
fireworks. The ordinance requires a permit prior to manufacturing, storing, or selling
fireworks within the City of Farmington. The Fire Marshal would review all permit
applications to determine whether the conditions required in the ordinance have been
satisfied. In order to administer the permit, Staff is recommending an annual fee of
$300.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the proposed resolution adding a permit fee for the sale of fireworks.
Respectfully Submitted,
Attachment:
Proposed Resolution
533
RESOLUTION No. R -03
2003 FEE SCHEDULE ADDITION
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 ih day
of April, 2003 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following:
WHEREAS, the City requires a permit prior to manufacturing, storing, or selling
fireworks within the City of Farmington; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal will review all permit applications to determine whether
the conditions required in the ordinance have been satisfied; and,
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to include an annual fee of$300 in the
2003 Fee resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby adds the
following fee to the 2003 Fee Schedule:
Fireworks
$300
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session
on the 7th day of April, 2003.
Mayor
Attested to the
day of April, 2003.
City Administrator
SEAL
53<1
lib
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~J~'
FROM:
Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Main Street Area Project Feasibility Report
DATE:
March 3, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Forwarded herewith for Council's review is the Main Street Area Project feasibility report.
DISCUSSION
The City Council has requested this report to determine the feasibility to reconstruct the streets and
utilities in the Main Street area. This report is an update to the 1997 Main Street report. The
proposed improvements include: 1) the reconstruction of streets, 2) construction of new storm sewer
and 3) the reconstruction and upgrading of trunk and lateral sanitary sewer, water main and storm
sewer.
It has been determined that the reconstruction of the street and utilities along Main Street also require
street and utility improvements along 4th Street, 5th Street and Willow Street. In order to reconstruct
Main Street, trunk storm sewer needs to be reconstructed along 4th Street from Main Street north to
the river. Also, trunk sanitary sewer needs to be reconstructed along 5th Street from Elm Street to just
north of the river to the MCES interceptor. It is necessary for these trunk improvements to be
completed concurrently with or in advance of the reconstruction of Main Street.
It is recommended that the proposed improvements be bid as two (2) separate projects due to the size
of the projects, timing needs and the financing of the improvements. Phase I would consist of the
reconstruction of the streets and utilities along all of 4th Street and 5th Street north of the railroad
tracks and Willow Street between 4th Street and 5th Street. Phase 2 construction would consist of the
reconstruction of Main Street between 3rd and 8th Streets, 4th Street between Main Street and the
railroad tracks, 5th Street from Elm Street to the railroad tracks and 6th and 7th Streets ~ block north
and south of Main Street.
39r
BUDGET IMPACT
The City's assessment policy indicates that the reconstructed street and lateral utilities (non-trunk
sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main) costs are assessed to benefiting properties at a rate of
35% of the improvement costs. Assessments to benefiting properties for new lateral street and utility
costs are calculated at 100% of the improvement cost. Trunk sanitary sewer, stonn sewer and water
main are funded with City Trunk Funds. The project costs, allocated per City policy (without
factoring in the benefit appraisal) would be as follows:
Project Cost Allocations
Improvement Trunk Costs Cost to be City Funded Residential Cost per REU
Cost assessed Costs Equiv. Units
Phase 1
Street $703,300.00 $246,155.00 $457,145.00 56,3 $ 4,372.20
35% of cost
Sewer $568,100.00 $262,000.00 $107,135,00 $460,965.00 56.3 $ 1,902.93
35% of lateral
Water Main $253,600.00 $88,760.00 $164,840.00 56,3 $ 1,576.55
35% of lateral
Storm Sewer $560,600.00 $285,400,00 $96,320,00 $464,280.00 56.3 $1,710.83
35% of lateral
Miscellaneous $10,000.00 $3,500,00 $6,500.00 56.3 $ 62.17
35% of cost
Total $2,095,600.00 $541,870.00 $1,553,730.00 $ 9,624.69
Phase 2
Street $1,475,800,00 $516,530.00 $959,270.00 82 $ 6,299.15
35% of cost
Sewer $603,800,00 $81,800.00 $182,700.00 $421,100,00 85.7 $ 2,131,86
35% of lateral
Water Main $491,500,00 $31,500.00 $161,000,00 $330,500,00 79 $ 2,037.97
35% of lateral
Storm Sewer $356,400.00 $356,400,00 $0.00 53.3 $ 6,686.68
100% allocation area 100% of lateral
Storm Sewer $257,500,00 $188,800.00 $24,045.00 $233,455,00 28.7 $ 837.80
35% allocation area 35% of lateral
Miscellaneous $10,000,00 $3,500.00 $6,500,00 86.7 $ 40.37
35% of cost
Total $3,195,000.00 $1,244,175.00 $1,950,825.00 $17,196.02
** $11,347.15
* Cost per unit for properties in 100% storm sewer allocation area, Phase 2
** Cost per unit for properties in 35% storm sewer allocation area, Phase 2
A benefit appraisal was performed for the Main Street Project area. The results of the appraisal
indicated that the maximum benefit received by the properties in the project area for the proposed
improvements would be $6000 per residential equivalent unit (REV). The land area of the
commercial properties in the project area would be converted to REV's and the commercial
properties would be assessed for their respective REV's.
39.5'
The assessments calculated based on the City's assessment policy are significantly higher than the
benefit the appraisal indicates will be derived by the properties. Therefore, the City will need to fund
the difference in the costs between the appraised benefit to the properties and the assessment
calculations. Factoring in the appraisal outcome into the funding allocation results in the following
overall cost allocations for the project:
Project Cost Allocations
Improvement Cost to be assessed City Cost
Cost per appraisal
Phase 1
Street, Storm $1,273,900,00 $168,900.00 $1,105,000,00
Sewer & Misc.
Sewer $568,100,00 $84,450.00 $483,650,00
Water Main $253,600.00 $84,450,00 $169,150.00
Total $2,095,600.00 $337,800.00 $1,757,800.00
Phase 2
Street & Storm $2,089,700,00 $242,500.00 $1,847,200.00
Sewer
Sewer $603,800.00 $128,550.00 $475,250.00
Water Main $491,500,00 $118,500.00 $373,000.00
Miscellaneous $10,000,00 $3,500.00 $6,500.00
Total $3,195,000.00 $493,050.00 $2,701,950.00
Total Project $5,290,600.00 $830,850.00 $4,459,750.00
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached resolution accepting the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing for April
7,2003.
Respectfully Submitted,
~7VL ~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.,
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
0~~
RESOLUTION NO. R -03
RECEIVING FEASBILITY REPORT,
AND
CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING
PROJECT 96-1, MAIN STREET RECONSTRUCTION
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of Farmington, Minnesota, was held
in the Council Chambers of said City on the 3rd day of March, 2003 at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following resolution:
WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the City Council adopted the 18th day of November 2002 a report
has been made by the City's Consulting Engineer with reference to the following improvement:
Proi. No.
96-1
Description
Street and Utility Improvements
Location
Main Street from 3rd Street to 8th Street, 4th Street
from Main Street to Willow Street, 5th Street from
Elm Street to Linden Street, Willow Street from 4th
Street to 5th Street, 6th Street for Y2 block north and
south of Main Street and 7th Street for 'l2 block
north and south of Main Street.
; and,
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is necessary, cost effective,
and feasible.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota that:
1. The Council will consider the improvement of such streets in accordance with the report and the
assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of improvement of $5,300,000.00.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 7th day of April, 2003, in the
Council Chambers at Farmington City Hall at 7:00 p.m. and the clerk shall give mailed and published
notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law.
3. Erik G. Peters is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and
specifications for the making of such improvement.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 3rd day of March,
2003.
Mayor
day of
,2003.
Attested to the
City Administrator
SEAL
3'7~
Feasibility Report
for
Main Street Area
Project
Farmington, Minnesota
March 2003
File No. 141-98-080
3~
~
-
1\11
Bonestroo
Rosene
Anderlik &
Associates
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, lnc, is an Affirmative Action/Equal
Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned
Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E. Marvin L. Sorvala, P.E. Glenn R. Cook, P.E. RJbert G.
Schunicht, P.E. Jerry A. Bourdon, P.E.
Senior Consultants: Robert W. Rosene, P.E. Joseph C, Anderlik, P.E. Richard E, Turner,
P,E. Susan M. Eberlin, C.P.A.
Associate Principals: Keith A. Gordon, P.E. Robert R. pfefferle, P.E. Richard W. Foster,
P.E. David O. Loskota, P,E. Mark A, Hanson, P.E, Mchael T. Rautmann, P.E. Ted K.
Field, P.E. Kenneth P. Anderson, P,E. Mark R. Rolfs, P.E, David A. Bonestroo, M.BA
Sidney P. Williamson, P.E., L.S. Agnes M. Ring, M.B,A. Allan Rick Schmidt, P,E. Thomas
W. Peterson, P.E. James R. Maland, P.E. Miles B. Jensen, P.E. L. Phillip Gravel III, P.E.
Daniel J. Edgerton, P.E. Ismael Martinez, P,E. Thomas A, Syfko, P.E. Sheldon J, Johnson
Dale A. Grove, P.E. Thomas A. Roushar, P.E. Robert J. Devery, P.E,
Offices: SI. Paul, SI. Cloud, Rochester and Willmar, MN Milwaukee, WI Chicago, IL
Website: www.bonestroo.com
Engineers & Architects
February 26,2003
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Re: Main Street Area Improvement Project
Our File No. 141-98-080
Dear Mayor and Council:
Enclosed for your review is our Main Street Area Improvements Project Report. The project will
replace aging City utilities and reconstruct the roads identified in this report. Trunk utility
improvements (water main, sewer and storm sewer) will be upgraded to meet flow demands
identified in their respective comprehensive plans.
This report describes the improvements necessary to provide municipal utilities and streets as per
the city comprehensive plan. Cost estimates for the proposed improvements are presented in the
appendices.
We would be pleased to meet with the City Council and Staff to discuss our report at any
mutually convenient time.
Respectfully submitted,
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
U 57 p~
Erik G. Peters, P.E.
I hereby certify that this Report was prepared by me or under
my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered
Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
U J0 jJ~
Erik G. Peters, P.E. Reg. No. 42403
Date: February 26,2003
2335 West Highway 36. St. Paul, MN 55113. 651-636-4600. Fax: 651-636-1311
~ 7'7"
Table of Contents
Page No.
Letter of Transmittal
1.
Table of Contents
2.
Introduction
3.
Discussion
3.
Cost Estimates
7.
Project Financing
8.
Conclusions and Recommendations
10.
Figure 1 - Location Plan
Figure 2 - Typical Sections
Figure 3 - Street Improvements
Figure 4 - Sewer Improvements
Figure 5 - Water Main Improvements
Figure 6 - Storm Sewer Improvements
Appendix - Cost Estimates
Main Street, 4th, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
2
y~
Introduction
The City Council has requested this report to determine the feasibility to reconstruct the streets
and utilities in the Main Street area. This report is an update to the 1997 Main Street report. It
has been determined that the reconstruction of the street and utilities along Main Street also
requires street and utility improvements along 4th Street, 5th Street and Willow Street (see Figure
1&3).
The proposed improvements include: 1) the reconstruction of streets, 2) construction of new
storm sewer and 3) the reconstruction and upgrading of trunk and lateral sanitary sewer, water
main and storm sewer. Trunk utilities proposed to be replaced include the following:
. Trunk sanitary sewer along 5th Street from Elm Street to the Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services (MCES) Interceptor (see Figure 4).
. Trunk water main along Main Street from 3rd St to 8th Street (see Figure 5).
. Trunk storm sewer along 4th Street from Main Street to the Vermillion River (see Figure
6). The reconstruction of Willow Street is necessary in conjunction with the installation
ofthe trunk storm sewer in 4th Street.
The proposed improvements may be bid as two (2) separate projects if necessary due to the size
of the projects, timing needs and financing methods being utilized for the improvements. Phase
2A and Phase 2B projects would need to be designed and constructed concurrently after Phase 1.
The work proposed for each Phase is identified below:
Phase 1: The 4th, 5th and Willow Street Improvements north of the railroad tracks.
Phase 2A: The 4th and 5th Street Improvements south of the railroad tracks.
Phase 2B: Main Street Improvements.
Discussion
Background
The City considered improvements for Main Street in 1997 (City Project No. 96-1). The
improvements identified in the feasibility study were not pursued due to cost issues. The
proposed trunk storm sewer improvements for 4th street and trunk sanitary sewer improvements
for 5th street were not part of the 1997 report.
The trunk sanitary sewer improvements are necessary in order to allow the Main Street sanitary
sewer system to be brought up to desired standards. The trunk sanitary sewer improvement was
identified in the City's 1996 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan (CSSP). The trunk storm
sewer improvements along 4th Street are necessary to improve the drainage for the City's roads
and provide capacity for a wider drainage area. The trunk storm sewer improvements were
identified in the 1997 Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The trunk water main
improvements for Main Street were identified in the 1997 Water Supply and Distribution Plan
and will help the downtown system meet fire flow demand.
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
3
~
Street Improvements
Main Street is an existing street that serves residential and commercial properties. The existing
street surface is in a deteriorated condition with settling and alligator cracking. Main Street is
among the most deteriorated of City streets based on the City's pavement management rankings.
There is currently no storm sewer in Main Street and water ponds at intersections which presents
safety concerns during the winter time and extended yearly maintenance.
Main Street and sections of 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and Willow Streets are proposed to be reconstructed
(see Figure 3). The proposed improvements north of the railroad tracks are necessary due to the
trunk storm sewer and sanitary sewer that needs to be installed. The proposed street
improvements would address the structural and drainage deficiencies of the subject streets. City
standard street sections would be constructed (see Figure 2) and drainage would be improved by
providing grades necessary to allow runoff to flow to catch basins. In general, the streets in the
project area are proposed to be reconstructed to their existing widths and configurations.
However, two street width options are proposed for Main Street and 5th Street south of Willow is
proposed to be narrowed to 32-feet between curb faces (see Figure 3). The Main Street width
options are as follows:
Main Street Option 1: Reconstruct the road to a width of 38 feet (between curb faces). This
width is close to the existing street width of 39.5+/- feet and is a standard City street width.
Main Street Option 2: Reconstruct the road to a width of32 feet (between curb faces).
Both options for Main Street allow for parking on both sides of the road. Option 2, however,
would be less expensive to construct, result in fewer impacts to existing boulevard trees and
provide a runoff water quality benefit due to the reduction in runoff volume generated from less
impervious area. Therefore, Option 2 is recommended for the design width of Main Street.
The current connection between Main Street and T.H. 3 is proposed to be closed with either
option in this project. This will reduce the amount of through traffic on Main Street and will
further the access management goals of the City and MnDOT for Trunk Highway 3.
Sidewalks and driveway aprons will be removed and replaced according to City standards and
policy. Boulevards would be re-graded as part of the re-construction. Boulevard trees would be
protected to the extent possible and those removed would be replaced with 2" caliper trees. It is
not anticipated that a significant number of trees would be removed with the narrowing of the
roadway.
Street lights in the project area would need to be installed to comply with the decorative street
light program. A separate agreement with Xcel Energy would be executed for the installation of
the street lights.
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
4
. ~/If1b<
'.
-~
Sanitary Sewer
The proposed sanitary sewer improvements are shown on Figure 4. The existing sanitary sewer
in the project area is made of vitrified clay pipe (VCP). Sewer televising reports indicate the
sewer is in poor condition with joints that are cracked, displaced and have root penetration. The
existing VCP would be completely removed and replaced with poly-vinyl chloride (PVC) pipe.
Removing and replacing the leaking, broken and cracked pipes would reduce groundwater
infiltration which would reduce the City's sewage treatment costs. The sanitary sewer
improvements would also provide for a more desirable depth and grade of the sanitary sewer
pipe. The pipe is too shallow and too flat in some areas. Sewer services would be replaced from
the main to the property line and connected at that point to the existing services.
The existing trunk sanitary sewer along 5th Street is proposed to be lowered and upsized from the
MCES interceptor sewer, under the Vennillion River up to Elm Street. The provision of the
upsizing of this sanitary sewer main will provide the sewer capacity needed as identified by the
the City's CSSP. Lowering this sewer pipe would also facilitate the design of the sewer system
down Main Street and the construction of the trunk storm sewer improvements on 4th Street.
This line would also incorporate Marigold's sewage flows that are currently conveyed by
Marigold's separate, private pipe to the MCES interceptor. Marigold's pipe would be
eliminated as part of this project.
Water Main
The proposed water main improvements are shown on Figure 5. The existing lateral pipes in the
project area vary from 4-inch to S-inch cast iron pipe (CIP), with a significant amount of 4-inch.
Lateral water mains would be replaced to City standards (S-inch ductile iron pipe). Water
services would be replaced from the main to the property line and connected at that point to the
existing services.
Trunk water main improvements for the pipe system down Main Street will be constructed as
part of this project. A 12-inch pipe would be installed and connected between the existing 12-
inch water main near 3rd and Main Street and the 12-inch main on Sth Street. This looping of the
trunk water main system would improve water quality and provide for fire flow demand.
Storm Sewer
Three separate storm drainage systems will be constructed down 4th Street, 5th Street and Main
Street (see Figure 6). Each system follows existing drainage patterns. A 60"/66" storm pipe will
replace the existing 24"/30"pipe system down 4th Street as planned in the City's 1997 SWMP. A
new storm pipe will be constructed down 5th Street.
The 5th Street storm pipe is needed to alleviate capacity demands on the existing Willow Street
drainage system and improve 5th Street drainage. Marigold's existing clean water return line will
be incorporated into the 5th Street storm pipe system.
Main Street drainage east of 4th Street will be routed to the T.H 3 drainage system. The trunk
highway's storm pipe drains into the Prairie Waterway and regional Pond PW-P1.14 (Wausau
Pond). The Wausau Pond has the capacity to accept the drainage from Main Street from a rate
control and flooding perspective, but it would need to be expanded as planned in the City's
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements 5
o/~
SWMP to fully meet the City's water quality requirements. The expansion of the Wausau Pond
would be addressed in a separate project, however, the work may ultimately be done
concurrently with Phase 2 ofthis project.
Easements and Permits
Easements will be necessary for the trunk sanitary sewer and storm pipe improvements between
the MCES Interceptor and the intersection of 5th Street and Linden Street. -Easements will also
be necessary to run a sanitary sewer pipe down the alley east of 7th Street, north of Main Street.
The MN Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits will be required for the replacement
storm sewer outfalls to the Vermillion River. A DNR permit will also be needed for the
construction ofthe trunk sanitary sewer under the Vermillion River.
A permit from MnDOT will be required for work with replacing and upgrading the storm sewer
connection from Main Street into the T.H. 3 system.
The City will need to obtain an MCES permit to upgrade the existing sewer connection to the
MCES interceptor pipe. As the system improvement was identified in the City's CSSP,
obtaining the necessary permit should be straightforward. A comprehensive plan amendment
will also be required by the MCES due to consolidating Marigold's sewer flow in the City's
pipe. Based on conversations with MCES staff, the amendment will be handled administratively
with a 10-day review process. The shorter than typical review process for a comprehensive plan
amendment is due to the fact that the pipe flow consolidation is not being driven by un-
anticipated flow increases but construction issues.
Replacing the existing sewer pipes will require a MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) permit.
The proposed trunk sewer improvements will allow for a design throughout the project area that
will meet their requirements.
Water main construction will require a permit from the MN Department of Health.
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
6
V~
Cost Estimates
The project costs for these improvements are outlined in this section. The itemized cost estimates
are provided in the appendix. Cost estimates for this report are based on 2003 construction costs
and can be related to the February, 2003 ENR Construction Cost Index of 6640. A summary of
the estimated costs for the proposed improvements is presented below. The estimated costs
presented include 10% for contingencies and 27% for engineering, legal and administration. The
estimated project costs do not include costs for easement or right-of-way acquisition.
Estimated Project Costs
Total Estimated
4th & 5th Street Area Phase 1 Project Costs
Total Part 5 - 4th Street Phase 1 Streets Cost $263,200.00
-ToiaTParT6-~-Willow-Sireei-Phase--f-S-ireeis-Co-st---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------$1-59:300~O-(j'
-Toial-Part-i~-5t-h-S-ire-efPha-s-e-1--Streets-Cost-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------$280:800~O-O'
-Totai-Part-8-~-4th--&-Wiilow-Sireet-Area-Pha-se-TSewer-Cosi------------------------------------------------------------------------$150:000~OO
-Totai-Part-9-~-5th--S-treet-Area-Pha-se-f-Sewer--C-ost------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ $418~-100~OO
-Totai-Part-1-0--~-4th~-willow--&--5ih-Sireet-P-hase-TWatermain--C-osf------------------------------------------------------------$2-53~60(j~O-o
-Totai-Part-1-1--~-4th-Sireei--Ph-ase--fS-torm-Sewer-Cost-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------$321~500J)O
IpI~C~~!!j~~~~~~Iti~~!~~~i~E~~~~I~IQ~~~~~~~EgQ~I=~~~~~~=~~~~~~=~~~~~~~~~=~~~~~~~~=~~=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~==~~~~~~~~~==~~=~~j?39, 1 00 .q_~
Miscellaneaous Costs $10,000.00
Total Phase 1 Cost $2,095,600.00
4th & 5th Street Area Phase 2A
Total Part 13 - 4th Street Phase 2 Streets Cost $183,700.00
IQ~!~par{I~=~~~Iti~~E~~!~fE~~~~~~~~~f~~~!~~gp~C~~==~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~~~~=~~~=~~=~~======-- $~QE~Q9~QQ.
.!Q~!.!:~_r!_!~_.:_~_~~_~!~~~!_J:h_~~~__?_~_~~~!:._g.2~l_________________________________________________________________________________________!~l_QQ;QO
Total Part 16 - 5th Street Phase 2 Sewer Cost $181,700.00
-Totai-PartTf~-4th-&-5th-Streei-Phase-2--Area-Waiermain-C05t----------------------------------------------------------------$f4Iooo])o
-Toiai-Part-18-~-4ih-Streei--Ph-ase-2-S-torm-Sewer-CosT---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------$232:1 00.-00
IpI~C~~!!~I~~~~~~Iti=~!~~~!~E~~~~~~~IQ~~~~~~~i~gQ~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~=~~~=~~~==~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~=~~~~~~=~~~~]~25,~00. 09.
Miscellaneaous Costs $5,000,00
Total Phase 2A Cost $1,119,700.00
Main Street Project Area Phase 28
.TJ?J~!.p~!!J~__:_~_~!~_~!!:.~~1.~!:.~~_.9F!J~_r:!.1__g_<2~L______________________________________________________________________________l~Q~L.?q.9.;Q_9_
.!Q~~!.P..~_r!_!!?--=_~_~!~_~!!:.~~1.~!:.~~__QR!J~_r:!_?__g_<2~!.m_~Q_~fIL_____________________________________________________________--=-~~~~QQl>_Q.
Total Part 2 - Main Street Area Sewer Cost $377,400.00
I~~C~~I~~~~I~~~!~~~!~~~~~~~~I~~~~I~~g~Q~L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~=~~~~~~~~~~=~~=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~~=~~==~~~~=]~~9,5Q9~00
IQ_~~LP~!!_~_:::._~<!l_i.r:!_~!~~~!_~~_~~_~!Q!~__~~~~~__g_<2~L___________________________________________________________________________________~~~6 ,4Q9.;QQ.
Miscellaneaous Costs $5,000.00
Total Phase 28 Cost $2,075,200.00
Total Project Cost:
$3,195,900.00
$5,290,500.00
Total Phase 2 Cost
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
7
".
</05
Project Financing
The project costs would be allocated per the City's Special Assessment policy, subject to
Minnesota Statute 429 limitations. Statute 429 stipulates that City's cannot assess more against a
property than the benefit the property receives from the improvement. Therefore, it is also the
City's policy that a benefit appraisal be obtained to determine the benefit to the properties in the
project area. The City's assessment policy outlines the percentages of improvement costs that
are to be used to calculate the assessments amounts to the benefiting properties. If the benefit
appraisal for the properties in the project area indicates that the benefit to the properties is less
than the calculated assessment amounts, the assessments are reduced to meet the amount
indicated by the appraisal.
A benefit appraisal was performed for the Main Street project area. The results of the appraisal
indicated that the maximum benefit received by the properties in the project area for the
proposed improvements would be $6000 per residential equivalent unit (REV). The land area of
the commercial properties in the project area would be converted to REV's and the commercial
properties would be assessed for their respective REV's.
The assessments calculated based on the City's assessment policy are significantly higher than
the benefit the appraisal indicates will be derived by the properties. Therefore, the City will need
to fund the difference in the costs between the appraised benefit to the properties and the
assessment calculations. Factoring in the appraisal outcome into the funding allocation results in
the following overall cost allocations for the project:
Total Cost
Amount to be
assessed
City Cost
Phase 1
$2,095,600
$3,195,000
$5,290,600
$337,800
$493,100
$830,900
$1,757,800
$2,702,000
$4,459,800
Phase 2
Total
Bonds supported by the Road and Bridge fund and the Vtility funds would fund the City's costs.
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
8
<;0(;,
Conclusions and Recommendations
The proposed improvements in this report are feasible and cost-effective as they relate to general
engineering principals and construction procedures. The feasibility of this project as a whole is
subject to a financial review. The proposed improvements are necessary to provide utility
improvements for the project area. Future utility improvements for upstream areas that drain to
the project area are also dependent on the proposed improvements as outlined in the City's
Comprehensive Utility Plans. Based on information contained in this report, it is recommended
that:
1. That this report be adopted as the guide for the street extension and described utilities;
2. That the City conduct a legal and fiscal review of the proposed project;
3. That Main Street be reconstructed according to Option 2;
4. That the project be implemented in two phases: Phase 1 being constructed in 2003
and Phase 2 being constructed in 2004; and
5. The following tentative schedules be implemented for the projects (subject to
easement acquisition timing):
4th 5th and Willow Street Area Phase 1 1m
Accept Feasibility Report, Schedule Public Hearing,
Authorize re aration of Plans and S ecifications
Meet with benefitin ro ert owners
Hold Public Hearin , Order Pro' ect
Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize
Advertisement for bids
Bid Date
Acc t Bids - Award Contract
Be . n Construction
Com lete Construction
rovements
March 3, 2003
Week of March 17 or 24, 2003
A ril 7, 2003
April 21,2003
Ma 29, 2003
June 2, 2003
June 23, 2003
November 1,2003
Main Street, 4th & 5th Street Area Phase 21m
Accept Feasibility Report, Schedule Public Hearing,
Authorize r aration of Plans and S ecifications
Meet with benefitin ro ert owners
Hold Public Hearin , Order Pro' ect
Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize
advertisement for Bids
Bid Date
Acce t Bids - Award Contract
Be 'n Construction
Com lete Construction
rovements
March 3,2003
Week of March 17 or 24, 2003
A ril 7, 2003
February, 2004
March, 2004
A ril, 2004
Ma , 2004
October, 2004
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
9
l./~
f-
'-"--'1
~
,.,
:i
~
!
J/
I'
hlTl
;; ".IPfJ~[f\llII.L&f" ~...............
,..... ... g;!--T\~~ "
F. ~f~;;r~~1riJ ~ I
, . WJ !ItI:t.. c--'.-'~ h ,
~~~IT~tl(-1
,..,.~W-'~,
l$~:f'- -""'.!
~JP~-r-- /"-"
V~\~""
o .. ~J::1
~//y"-1
l: :Y /"
2..___......
. '
. .
. '
. ,
. '
. ,
. '
. '
. '
. '
. .
. '
. .
. .
. .
. ,
, .
........-....................--.-...------
Ll1
-.,
, :
A
---- 1
"-f--~I
I
------'
! i
.....------1
. .............j
A~M~~!.~_. ...
[]'w'NSHtf"
1~:
...~.~.~.~.
'WEST _ __ -"'J,~:::):""::L::""::::::
; .....L.....
jl
L--
" \.
: !
, .
rJnnrl .
. ..cr--.-------1'
; LL
; ;
: ;
, ,
_c__=-=T'C______J..
rl~~_i~~c~~:t~::Ji: il
l ! "f</l I iil 1/
I /CL~/;/- ; . ill; II
~~]__... .J_LJ --IL
,.,
F
----------
o
1/2 mi.
---.._.___1
mi.
I
,-----i
\...1
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
MAIN STREET RECONSTRUCTION
FIGURE 1
n Bonestroo
Rosene
~ Anderlik &
. \J' Associates
Engineers & Architects
LOCATION PLAN
I
Scale in feet
report\ 14198080fig 1
2/25/03
COMM. 14198080
'1~
~~"~
CURB 01< GUTTER
T.,==~~=
01< 5th ST. (BETWEEN ELM 01< RR) ONLY
RIGHT OF WAY
6.
PROPOSED 5'
SIDEWALK
. -------------
------ ------------------~-.,.,
L_~
B618 CONCRETE
CURB 01< GUTTER
1l!.. TYPE 41B BllUMINOUS WEAR COURSE
2. TYPE 31 B BllUMINOUS BASE COURSE
8. CL 5 AGG, 100" CRUSHED UMESTONE
12. AGGREGATE
7 TON ROAD DESIGN
RIGHT or WAY
6.
PROPOSED 5'
SIDEWALK
TYPICAL SECTION
MAIN
OPTION
2 n Bonestroo
Rosene
G Anderlik &
'\J' Associates
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
MAIN STREET RECONSTRUCTION
report\ 14198080typical.dwg
2/25/03
80' MAIN STREET
OPTION 1 - EXISTING WIDTH. 38' FACE TO FACE
OPTION 2 - 32' FACE TO FACE
I
I
I
I
I
t
MAIN STREET
7 TON ROAD DESIGN
ROW VARIES
EXISTING WIDTH VARIES 28' TO 44' F-F
I
I
I
I
I
I
+
5TH. 6TH. 7TH STREET
7 TON ROAD DESIGN
4TH STREET. WILLOW STREET
9 TON ROAD DESIGN
ST.
OPTION 1 &
FIGURE 2
COMM. 14198080
RIGHT or WAY
L:_J-~------------
------------- .
2. TYPE 41B BllUMINOUS WEAR COURSE
2. TYPE 31B BllUMINOUS BASE COURSE
12' CL 5 AGG, 100" CRUSHED UMESTONE
12. AGGREGATE
9 TON ROAD DESIGN
RIGHT or WAY
9.---.--.--------
---------------------
Engineers & Architects
</09
"" ~ ~ (f)
(1)
'0 )> -1
0 ;0 ;:0
"" Z
..-+ ~
,/ fT1
-> -
~ (/) Z fT1
->
to -j G) -1--';
co ;0 -j
0 fTl 0
co ~
0 ~ z
~ 'lJ
G)
VI ;0 ~ ;:0
0 0
::E fTl Z
G) () ~~
0 z
Z fTl ~ j!
(/)
(/) 0 ~1:
-j
;0 ~
C -1~J
() (f) =1:
-j =m
0
z ~U
1111
jU
=9'
f
1, ,
i i
';J
J1lJ
I'V
,
I'V
(}l
,
o
VI
(')
0
s:::
s:::
-> "TJ
~
-> G)
to
CO C
0
CO ;0
0 fTl
<..N
~
:1
'7
-') r.--''----~.-----._~"..".__...__.._".__._
I
,J
(/)
o
o
CD
o
::::l
---i -n::: (/)
00)> ---i
:::0
CD(/)Z (/) /Tl
/Tl,;(/) ---i /Tl
:::0 ---i
O---i---i I'Tl (/)
r/Tl:::O /Tl
o /Tl ---i ---i
(/)---i1'Tl *r 0
/Tl:::O---i
ClC)> G) CD
Zo I /Tl
"'0 ---i
Z ~
I/Tl G) "'U
~(/) :::0
-<(J) 0
0J <
/Tl
Cl
...,
i ~=~ ~
r[)
iri
:t:.:t:.:::tJ0J
Vl=:300
!<o Vl c.. Vl =:3
h 0 Cl) Cl) Cl)
ii ~.::t ~ Vl
::r .... -.." ,.,.
~ nr'" d
..z ~ VlRo 0
~
N
o
o
z
~
o
o
PI~lq~1 L~J4~J ~ liilJJOOlI] l ()llLill
r-'U~D1~ t~~Dll~ iq~~T~; i~Jij] R?ll-
~d~ ItEAii~ Idm~ [~r~ ~~1go~T : [
.8.8 .8 d:J^ .eH
~ DI~I ~ 'tff~~ ~Im, ,:,' ~~,~~ i-It]T~ i ~
r jOrd! \ xh '1: i"I=~~IBf ~...r='= ,::;:::~ ~"'[: , -,:::cc'=,'-_:: :-1 ! =;=: ,::::;:- - : ~
! di~~ a~~ a~ mr~'_JB ~ 11tlci~J~-1 '~Mot~ i I!
^ .8
[' 9,.a9~9.g I rJ:.:..........:....3~rms(tJLIIV~ Of I' .Do1Dmm~mmm~mnl ~., ~~~I-atB I-~I.. ~'q!" aff&1]" 1;::
I U I ! I loId I : ILJ 1 q'D Im~ (') i d1' I,
~ i~~-~q' iorItrl rt.r~rJ~I~~T :iil ~~~JOi 1 10
-; ~O-LJ ~~ ~--~ ~ ~ 1 I
:::0 dO^ .8 dO^ .8 ri; I'TI d ^ . 1""'/"
! On 133~1~ 3Nld ..m...~ '~1",' o~,.i~mmT",,-~,.I,.,,"'r~ I I
:;E =:: ~ ~~'. I , !UI I
:-< " ,~; I P-l 1 1 1 I // I
0J i ~::L_i '1_/ 1)1/LJJ I ~ ,
dO^.8 I ~
-;lJM ['-', . il f^p.B r --l~Aj 1/11
'0 Oi~J ID ,ID,LJq D, / ); I hi
II Elil" ! II: I! : < ~ I it
dO^ . :~. 'I '. 0 mm 1,.1. "'" I n I eLl ;~mmLl i // f II
Ii ii'!D ! of, t~ rY . II
T~ J_1Dq~l~ r [] .L I
1-'oc=Ull-:~~i~~l[J~,~f- - r! -
[ adJ Ilg JE1J__Ll - Li~ C) ;/ ! I
N m.mmm n' ""jmml f/ \ 't. 1/ /! I
~ I 'J: I I I I
~ U D . \~ I P I
i D "I 0 ".. I II/
r~-~CJ 0 ) ! lis
tj . // f ii, I !
InCl----.r // I 1/1 .
I-L---i/// I I
I [l I I J
.., s: ~ (f)
CD
" )> )>
0 ;0
;+ z Z
/' s:
~ ~
.j>. (f) Z
~ -I G)
(!) :::0
(Xl ;0 -I
0 r'l 0 -<
(Xl
0 r'l Z
'I -I ~ (f)
G5
f'" ;0 s: rrJ
0 :E
::E r'l Z
G) 0 rrJ
0 z :::0
r'l
Z (f)
(f) -
-I 0 ~
;0 ~ \J
c :::0
0
-I 0
0 <
Z rrJ
~
rrJ
Z
-1
(f)
(")
0
s::
s::
~ "'TJ
.j>.
~ G)
(!)
(Xl C
0
()) :::0
0 r'l
~
(j)
()
C
CD
::J
i~~~ -+,
CD
CD
r+
f1l )::.)::.::OOJ
VI VI =:3 00
to!> VI Q.. VI =:3
:b O(1)(1)m
M @. ::t ~ II)
:J" -. t"'t'
@= or""" d
() VlQo 0
, (jj
~
"'"
o
"'U
;;0 "'U
0 ;;0
"'U 0
0 "'U
(j) 0 ITl
ITl
I C) (j) X
ITl
;d C) (j)
~ ~ )>
I c z
Z -l
^ (j) )>
I (j) )> ;;0
)> Z -<
Z -l (j)
)>
I -l ;;0 ITl
)> -< ~
;;0
-< (j) ;;0
ITl
(j) :E
ITl ITl
:E ;;0
ITl
;;0
g N
(J1
o
o
.., 3: ~ :E
CD
"0 )> ~
0 :::0
;4- Z
./ 3: rrl
.....
~ (j) z :::0
.....
CD --I G)
00 :::0 --I ~
0 fTl 0
00
0 ~ z )>
"'T'J w
G) Z
SJ1 :::0 3:
0
=E fTl -
G) () z ~
0 z -0
z fTl :::0
(j)
(j) 0 0
--I
:::0 ~ <
C rrl
() ~
--I rrl
0 Z
z -I
U>
N
""-
N
U'1
""-
o
VI
()
o
s::
s::
.....
~
.....
.,
G)
C
:::0
fTl
(J1
CD
00
o
00
o
frl ~ urL
."IJfI \J
D! Ll' D! DI
1 I I I !
+..._,...."..............1.........,....,
I ' II U U h-1 J j 1
~! Qj ~~I...~tijR
or 0 u~~
,DSJ,D, JI . .
ii, i '
L..,.,L"",..L,'~.......l
I~,.. D,."rl. '01. "I!"D~' ,r=TVfjJl
I ~ IoU: q ..~ ,f~tfi
.,-LdJ,l~ L,..,.. .,Iotgj
,.......,.~. '~"., ..'..T"'................ ..
! ,OJ I ' 0 1
IL~ 1....0 0
I" ':',-,-'
I ff~wl~ ~n11
I IntO I J ILJlo
~Jl"Jfi""LLL...,.
~"""Tlr
Id~t'~~g
1..."L-1-,... .........................~........
..-,-.....T".'. ,.................,......- -.+~.................:..............,-
. U!9 9 . 413~s urt~I'
~~J ,rljcrrcIL~
';-'1 I 0 I [J 1~ [Jq ~l
........O"c:J L,L.",;......~~.......,
.9 .9
I .'.....r........m...T.......~
I '.0' 10,
I I I I I
In I9-JD!
~~l~I,~
/1....").....~"1
/ 10,0, DL
/: i I r+-
ID i I:T
I 10: I
c~~D
\
I
r """,,_..
I D~
I
I
I
I
,
o
/\
U
pjOt9Dto I
(f)D:----L.-.-J
F"lTor--rTi
c;g'D I iliD' 0,
....J I I I
rrll.
~.... l~..rl n [),
I.:::=L" ~ c. ,
,UILU UI U ICJI j.-tJT 1 19?1
ld, I ololdo,l l~", 1..........,iJ
Icv~~~_'~ [Q[r i i~
IYUl~1 ~
I".......L,_,L.....I ~
~~= qOCSJ
'0 '"D,
, ! ., :
, , I I I
........._...... .............m...~. ---i ;,......................----l
'i=i. ~'.T"T.....-",.
DJDI?rT1
LthlL",,~L~
! """'.:....... r----r-'r"l.......-i
!I iO, ,0, ,
! ffi' I I I, '
'. I i. i :,.....-----i,.
I I i OJ ! ~
[.:,:~,~IOj,QJ~~
fd[Jct'aCRJr 17:
I I ~ 9D'~ I ~ '
fq~~' )
.~ ~ i r::v
~,I
:'-/
r ,:; i /1 f
I .' '., .1. '''''''-.// I
i I I I ) I I I
tJ,,~:_,1 I ~'I V?/l..lJ I I
"'''',.".'''''a'''''''''.,..'''''''-'''''!'.",.",'''=-=~ '. /" .1 ((; j
~ . D~ T '~~~// V' I I i
~ I : / ~I II
; i i ~I I
. I /~ f I f
<O~v' , I III
[] {- f
i'
I I
I /
I /
If
I ff I
I
/)/ ) !~
1"""'1 .,OI."I.........D.' "I
i[1i[JJ IU 1
Im9,lol..",,1
q-I~r~~
10' I ~I[]' [ji
,._"I,~,L,~
'O_""'ir" '__"1
~ qo 0 0
!~~ I , ~~:,L "iQ:
I~ ! i lJ I~D'
,J1:nJ'l! I I
~Q~&Q]
(D/""'-'-r"=~]
I I~
f I cD,
, ' I
Lw",I : a
~ ~o~i "
~ L~I
:~ ull U],l!~13~~~~ll i _J~_ !
I__~~I ;;- ..~LL, Ilc
i1 1 D
III ~:~ c
1 rl I
(j) 0
()
o
CD
::J
i ~=~ [
~ ::t:.::t:.:::o 0:1
l/)::Joo
l(o ~ Cl.. l/) ::J
):. C)~~rtl
rl -. -- rtl l/)
:2: ~~ g
or m 0
~ fll/)Ro 0 0
~ 0
r'y...........
...s;f
0..
!~i
!:::o
: rrl
, rrl
l~_.
dIU .21
;::/
-0
::u "U
0 ::u fTl
"U 0 X
0 "U (j)
(j) 0 -l
fTl
0 (j) Z
fTl G")
I -l 0
::u ex> :E
c :>
I z -l
^ :E fTl
:> :;0
:E -l 3::
)> fTl
-l ill! ::u :>
fTl Z
::u 3::
)>
~ Z
)>
Z
~ ~ ~
~ z ~
:: (/) z
lO -1 C)
(Xl ::u -1
g rrJ 0
~ ~ ~
G)
~ ::u ~
:E rrJ Z
G) () z
o rrJ
Z (/)
(/) 0
-1
::u ~
c
()
-1
o
Z
N
"-
N
(J1
"-
o
VI
()
o
s::
s::
~
..,.
~
lO
(Xl
o
(Xl
o
~/'"=~~~~~~~~:i:
~ / + "-<
~"'f I~~ __ /
_,J, I I 3Ltl ~,I HE T I ',> \ -..
- \ /j i'--~~~:_<~==:::::==:::=:::_:;_';~:'_:~:~~_______,___,__
I ! ~)_\ Ll ~\ : I (/1 -'~~'-'-'-~-~~-'--:-;-=~:=:-:=:::::=::=:'==:::='=~:;_:
m I'Ll . 3l~ \ ~ ~ \\~ I)C--C'~~~
_~ I ..J I~ Ibj~ (~J """'~j (~j
c~" hi ... J :::-. -C::::J ~'" ,,_
g, ~~J E -i; ~(j 0~-J '-,
) \.'-"
(j,-'l",,(')
,r']
'-;: D d:~IJ ~l, - -1'\,.. T
le::=c '0' .' [ji,L~ \
ii ~"~l 00", -D F '0tJ~~~\\ ~~~,
I =" lC==if:~::~~" r~~-\ r----L \
,.. I,;~ !t9, !.J 'It: ,~ tT~~l,.:1
1 'w" ,_Ll ";l,,~p ~-Ll [j I Iii II
" G N Ll~ D1h
It'" ~ I 'I~JJt1J
: c I~ ~~_, ~ ~_._
,- R '",-,~ ~ ii' ,,,
i==, L~ I b~L""",~ ~
I ----, Il(FI~ rf---'''l r';"7~"lf;--:J-~~i
'E~~ Ilt.~-[":'~',PHli Ir,.- TR~I ~t".=j,'
" +'~F4~:: I '1)>-' I II' _J ,I
I.L ITI lU 1l ~lI3~="-tjJi[=---E"iJ
Li-i~I'"
I ~- I II -j I,_,~,~,I .
1=.. ~:; i.~_-R' 111...........,.i.W~~~....I. I. il
I"" , I IT'" ..... r~t:Jl_,.. ..,.. "
I ~ "'--' ,~, "",,) '" . j-E ../
I"'" .~. ~~
f
~ll \.~ (3~'~
l~='l, ".::.:~~)
, 'J ! k=6__Ji I l'rJr<C'-]
_m l' ~] t-o CF\fil ul,
"'\. "",
_ :I, '~~m d ~ Cj
1\ JLh= C ILL - I=[,~r
\ r- , ['_/, ~J 'Ll L~ tl[~,-i '
\l , I'])) LJ b-t.., ~ L 'J
- ":;E c\f'--.! LJ-~'
I~ \J\. ~~ ~
Irrl,~ (0 )..,J
'(f) t li~ -'-, ! n l :
J~~ 'c P iJj=,~j
". \~ i
"\ I ~ t} i~ (" -~
\ L.,..
~~ .\" ~
CT ^ TJ:" I
'-' - \' )
.. -..,
I
!
i=ll
.............. Li
='::1
! 7.j. L.. rfTD TILu'J
" I \. I I L I fl'FPi;,' II II
~~_ L c b~ L P
l~ n~ ~~J_:
....../ \='''
.. I
''\.I
\....
.C-lt \
:~HWY. l3
I ___: --/-----..
F
1 [ ~"\
110 ,...'uw
11J-L . m__mm~u__.m.u
Ii
muu_u_~__....".,.........
~:qit.::..:.--'::::.:;;;;;;;L,,~._.....
~
--<il
-~::J _-.--
/
'--::.-""-,. '""L
~ IJ : }l=ul~j
C) I I
~ '~ U"~J11 ~~jU .
8<<r'
':~'1 '\7//
~\/
!~\~( ~
v 'J \'~,~,/
i
( -U
~ :;u fT1
0 X
~ -U (f)
0 -l
I (f) I Z
I -l fT1 G")
:;u 0 I
I c I (f)
I z (f) I -l
I ^ ..rr -l 0
0 ), :;u
I (f) :;u / 3!:
..99 : -l 3!: r
0 I (f)
I :;u (f) fT1
3!: fT1 1 :E
:E fT1
(f) fT1 :;u
fT1 :;u
:E
fT1
:;u
(f) 0
()
o
(1)
i ~~~ i N
~ :h:h::l.JOJ .-+ g
Vl:;:)OO
Q.o VlQ.Vl:;:)
h gmmm
M -.::t ~ Vl
~1lJ~ q-
fir @" 0
~VlRo 0
~
UJ
r
~
o
o
A
r '
--------
!
(>::.~
c
~(;r
=z; L -~.3
( r-j ( \:~:~,=~\
~[J i \~:~'=\
.....
~LLI:r..'!n n
U J
L
I..
"-",..,::':::=
!
~-
,
Appendix
Main Street, lh, 5th and Willow Street Improvements
10
y/y
a Bonestroo
-=- Rosene
1\11 Anderfik &
Associates
Engineers & Architects
MAIN STREET & 4TH AND 5TH STREET AREA RECONSTRUCTION
CITY PROJECT NO. 01-04
BONESTROO FILE NO. 141-98-080
FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA
2003
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part la - Main Street Area Streets Option 1
1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
2 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS I $5,000.00 $5,000.00
3 REMOVE EXISTING TREE EA 21 $500.00 $10,500.00
4 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND LF 5000 $2.75 $13,750.00
GUTTER
5 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 2130 $3.50 $7,455.00
6 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EA 25 $100.00 $2,500.00
7 SA WING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 300 $3.00 $900.00
8 SA WING CONCRETE PAVEMENT LF 40 $5.00 $200.00
9 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 860 $2.50 $2,150.00
10 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 370 $6.00 $2,220.00
PAVEMENT
11 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 12300 $2.00 $24,600.00
12 B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 5000 $10.00 $50,000.00
13 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 1870 $33.00 $61,710.00
14 6" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 270 $37.00 $9,990.00
15 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP EA 34 $225.00 $7,650.00
16 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 500 $38.00 $19,000.00
17 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY 855 $38.00 $32,490.00
18 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 370 $23.00 $8,510.00
19 COMMON EXCA V A TION (EV) CY 11670 $8.00 $93,360.00
20 SUBGRADE EXCA V A TION (EV) CY 5140 $8.00 $41,120.00
21 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW IN 20320 $6.00 $121,920.00
22 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5, 100% IN 6780 $10.75 $72,885.00
CRUSHED
23 TYPE LV NON-WEARING COURSE IN 1450 $32.00 $46,400.00
MIXTURE
24 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL 600 $1.50 $900.00
COAT
25 TYPE LV WEARING COURSE IN 1140 $34.00 $38,760.00
MIXTURE
26 GRAVEL ALLEY RESTORATION SY 307 $10.00 $3,066.67
27 SODDING, LAWN TYPE SY 5200 $2.60 $13,520.00
28 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 290 $11.00 $3,190.00
29 STREET LIGHT EA 13 $2,500.00 $32,500.00
30 REPLACE LOT PINS LS 1 $7,000.00 $7,000.00
31 SWAMP WHITE OAK, 2" CAL. B&B EA 21 $300.00 $6,300.00
Part la - Main Street Area Streets Option 1 Subtotal $749,547
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $74,955
Total Part la - Main Street Area Streets Option 1 Construction Cost $824,501
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $222,615
Total Part la - Main Street Area Streets Option 1 Cost $1,047,117
14198080 ~ feasibility_cost _ est022603final
00410-1
BID FORM <./ /5
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 1 b - Main Street Area Streets - Option 2
32 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 30 $33.00 $990.00
33 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY 150 $38.00 $5,700.00
34 COMMON EXCA V A TION (EV) CY -1040 $8.00 -$8,320.00
35 SUBGRADE EXCA V A TION (EV) CY -470 $8.00 -$3,760.00
36 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TN -1830 $6.00 -$10,980.00
37 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5, 100% TN -610 $10.75 -$6,557.50
CRUSHED
38 TYPE LV NON- WEARING COURSE TN -160 $32.00 -$5,120.00
MIXTURE
39 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL -70 $1.50 -$105.00
COAT
40 TYPE LV WEARING COURSE TN -130 $34.00 -$4,420.00
MIXTURE
41 SODDING, LAWN TYPE SY 690 $2.60 $1,794.00
42 REMOVE EXISTING TREE EA -16 $500.00 -$8,000.00
43 SWAMP WHITE OAK, 2" CAL. B&B EA -16 $300.00 -$4,800.00
44 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 40 $11.00 $440.00
Part 1 b - Main Street Area Streets Option 2 Subtotal (ADD/DEDUCT OPTION I) -$43,139
+ 10% Construction Contingencies -$4,314
Total Part I b - Main Street Area Streets Option 2 Construction Cost -$47,452
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration -$12,812
Total Part Ib - Main Street Area Streets Option 2 Cost (ADDIDEDUCT) -$60,264
Part 2 - Main Street Area Sewer
45 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
46 DEWATERING LS I $53,100.00 $53, I 00.00
47 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 8 $250.00 $2,000.00
48 BYPASS PUMPING LS I $10,000.00 $10,000.00
49 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL CHAIN LF 80 $20.00 $1,600.00
LINK FENCE
50 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER PIPE LF 2300 $3.00 $6,900.00
51 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LF 2600 $3.00 $7,800.00
PIPE
52 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LF 300 $20.00 $6,000.00
TRANSITE PIPE
53 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER EA 5 $300.00 $1,500.00
MANHOLE
54 4" PVC, SCH. 40 SERVICE PIPE LF 2600 $14.00 $36,400.00
55 4" PVC, SCH. 40 RISER PIPE LF 520 $14.00 $7,280.00
56 CONNECT TO EXISTING SEWER EA 65 $130.00 $8,450.00
SERVICE
57 8" X 4" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 65 $50.00 $3,250.00
58 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35, 10'- LF 1500 $26.00 $39,000.00
15' DEEP
59 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35,15'- LF 1450 $30.00 $43,500.00
20' DEEP
60 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLES EA 10 $1,800.00 $18,000.00
61 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE LF 50 $125.00 $6,250.00
OVERDEPTH
62 DROP SECTION FOR DROP EA 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00
MANHOLES
63 8" DIP OUTSIDE DROP INLET PIPE LF 54 $150.00 $8,100.00
64 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA 3 $350.00 $1,050.00
SEWER 8" VCP PIPE
65 CLOSED CIRCUIT TV INSPECTION LF 2950 $1.00 $2,950.00
Part 2 - Main Street Area Sewer Subtotal $270,130
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $27,013
Total Part 2 - Main Street Area Sewer Construction Cost $297,143
+ 27% Engineering, Legal. Fiscal, Administration $80,229
Total Part 2 - Main Street Area Sewer Cost $377,372
14198080 Jeasibility _cost_est022603final 00410-2 BID FORM <//(P
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 3 - Main Street Area Watermain
66 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00
67 DEWATERING LS 1 $47,250.00 $47,250.00
68 REMOVE WATER MAIN LF 2480 $5.00 $12,400.00
69 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 9 $250.00 $2,250.00
70 1" TYPE "K" COPPER WATER SERVICE LF 3150 $8.00 $25,200.00
71 1" CURB STOP AND BOX EA 65 $190.00 $12,350.00
72 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER EA 65 $150.00 $9,750.00
SERVICE
73 CONNECT TO EXISTING 12" WATER EA 2 $800.00 $1,600.00
MAIN
74 CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" WATER EA 3 $800.00 $2,400.00
MAIN
75 6" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 10 $650.00 $6,500.00
76 8" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 11 $850.00 $9,350.00
77 12" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 6 $1,400.00 $8,400.00
78 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL EA 6 $1,500.00 $9,000.00
HYDRANT
79 INSTALL HYDRANT EA 4 $2,000.00 $8,000.00
80 6" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 150 $24.00 $3,600.00
81 8" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 475 $28.00 $13,300.00
82 12" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 2000 $34.00 $68,000.00
83 12" X 8" CROSS EA 3 $375.00 $1,125.00
84 12" X 12" TEE EA 1 $350.00 $350.00
85 12" X 6" TEE EA 10 $300.00 $3,000.00
86 8" X 8" TEE EA 1 $250.00 $250.00
87 8" X 6" REDUCER EA 13 $150.00 $1,950.00
88 8" X 4" REDUCER EA 1 $150.00 $150.00
Part 3 - Main Street Area Watennain Subtotal $250,175
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $25,018
Total Part 3 - Main Street Area Watennain Construction Cost $275,193
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $74,302
Total Part 3 - Main Street Area Watermain Cost $349,494
14198080 Jeasibility _ cost_ est022603final
004]0-3
BID FORM '117
------
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 4 - Main Street Storm Sewer
89 MOBILIZATION LS I $5,000.00 $5,000.00
90 DEWATERING LS I $19,500.00 $19,500.00
91 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 9 $250.00 $2,250.00
92 REMOVE STORM SEWER PIPE LF 185 $15.00 $2,775.00
93 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH EA 4 $500.00 $2,000.00
BASIN
94 15" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 760 $30.00 $22,800.00
95 18" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 130 $35.00 $4,550.00
96 24" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 4 LF 420 $40.00 $16,800.00
97 30" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 3 LF 460 $55.00 $25,300.00
98 33" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 3 LF 360 $65.00 $23,400.00
99 33" STORM SEWER, JACKED LF 60 $450.00 $27,000.00
100 2' X 3' CATCH BASIN EA 10 $1,300.00 $13,000.00
101 4' DIAMETER STORM CBMH EA 10 $1,750.00 $17,500.00
102 4' DIAMETER STORM SEWER MH EA I $1,750.00 $1,750.00
103 5' DIAMETER STORM CBMH EA 4 $2,500.00 $10,000.00
104 5' DIAMETER STORM SEWER MH EA 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00
105 6' DIAMETER STORM CBMH EA I $4,000.00 $4,000.00
106 8' DIAMETER STORM CBMH EA I $7,000.00 $7,000.00
107 CONNECT DRAIN TILE TO EA 58 $125.00 $7,250.00
STRUCTURE
108 4" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN TILE, LF 6900 $5.00 $34,500.00
SCHEDULE SDR 35
109 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA I $250.00 $250.00
110 PROTECTION OF CATCH BASIN IN EA 29 $120.00 $3,480.00
STREET
Part 4 - Main Street Storm Sewer Subtotal $255,105
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $25,511
Total Part 4 - Main Street Area Storm Sewer Construction Cost $280,6 I 6
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $75,766
Total Part 4 - Main Street Area Storm Sewer Cost $356,382
14198080 JeasibilitL cost_ est022603final
004] 0-4
BID FORM Y /?(
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 5 - 4th Street Phase 1 Street
111 MOBILIZA nON LS 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00
112 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
113 SAL V AGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EA 5 $100.00 $500.00
114 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND LF 860 $2.75 $2,365.00
GUTTER
115 REMOVE CONCRETE SlDEW ALK SY 270 $3.50 $945.00
116 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 80 $3.00 $240.00
117 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 340 $2.50 $850.00
118 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 2900 $3.00 $8,700.00
119 B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 860 $10.00 $8,600.00
120 4" CONCRETE SlDEW ALK SY 270 $33.00 $8,910.00
121 8" CONCRETE SlDEW ALK SY 50 $45.00 $2,250.00
122 PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP EA 3 $225.00 $675.00
123 8" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 520 $40.00 $20,800.00
124 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 340 $23.00 $7,820.00
125 COMMON EXCA V A nON (EV) CY 3170 $8.00 $25,360.00
126 SUBGRADE EXCA V A TION (EV) CY 1190 $8.00 $9,520.00
127 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW 1N 3990 $6.00 $23,940.00
128 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5,100% 1N 2290 $10.75 $24,617.50
CRUSHED
129 TYPE LV NON-WEARING COURSE 1N 350 $32.00 $11,200.00
MIXTURE
130 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL 150 $1.50 $225.00
COAT
131 TYPE LV WEARING COURSE 1N 340 $34.00 $11,560.00
MIXTURE
132 SODDING, LAWN TYPE SY 710 $2.60 $1,846.00
133 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 40 $11.00 $440.00
134 STREET LIGHT EA 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00
135 REPLACE LOT PINS LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Part 5 - 4th Street Area Phase 1 Streets Subtotal $188,364
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $18,836
Total Part 5 - 4th Street Area Phase 1 Streets Construction Cost $207,200
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $55,944
Total Part 5 - 4th Street Phase 1 Streets Cost $263,144
14198080 _feasibility _cost_est022603final
00410-5
BID FORM <./ 19
--
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 6 - Willow Street Phase 1 Streets
136 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $10,000.00 $4,000.00
137 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
138 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EA 2 $100.00 $200.00
139 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND LF 300 $2.75 $825.00
GUTTER
140 SA WING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 90 $3.00 $270.00
141 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 120 $2.50 $300.00
142 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 40 $6.00 $240.00
PAVEMENT
143 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 2100 $3.00 $6,300.00
144 B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 300 $10.00 $3,000.00
145 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 40 $38.00 $1,520.00
146 8" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 120 $40.00 $4,800.00
147 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY 40 $38.00 $1,520.00
148 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 120 $23.00 $2,760.00
149 COMMON EXCA V A TION (EV) CY 1830 $8.00 $14,640.00
150 SUBGRADE EXCA V A TION (EV) CY 850 $8.00 $6,800.00
151 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TN 2780 $6.00 $16,680.00
152 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5,100% IN 1670 $10.75 $17,952.50
CRUSHED
153 TYPE LV NON-WEARING COURSE TN 250 $32.00 $8,000.00
MIXTURE
154 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL 110 $1.50 $165.00
COAT
155 TYPE LV WEARING COURSE TN 250 $34.00 $8,500.00
MIXTURE
156 SODDING, LAWN TYPE SY 760 $2.60 $1,976.00
157 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 50 $11.00 $550.00
158 STREET LIGHT EA 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00
159 REPLACE LOT PINS LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Part 6 - Willow Street Phase 1 Streets Subtotal $113,999
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $11,400
Total Part 6 - Willow Street Phase 1 Streets Construction Cost $125,398
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $33,858
Total Part 6 - Willow Street Phase 1 Streets Cost $159,256
14198080 Jeasibility _cost_ est022603final
00410-6
BID FORM Y ~ 0'--, .
-------
No. Item Units Qty EE tJnit Price EE Total Price
Part 7 - 5th Street Phase 1 Streets
160 MOBILIZA nON LS 1 $10,000.00 $4,000.00
161 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS I $5,000.00 $5,000.00
162 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EA 5 $100.00 $500.00
163 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND LF 1200 $2.75 $3,300.00
GUTTER
164 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 520 $3.50 $1,820.00
165 SA WING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 60 $3.00 $180.00
166 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 580 $2.50 $1,450.00
167 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 2800 $3.00 $8,400.00
168 B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 1200 $10.00 $12,000.00
169 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 520 $33.00 $17,160.00
170 8" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 30 $45.00 $1,350.00
171 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 90 $38.00 $3,420.00
172 8" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 570 $40.00 $22,800.00
173 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 580 $23.00 $13,340.00
174 COMMON EXCA V A nON (EV) CY 2650 $8.00 $21,200.00
175 SUBGRADE EXCA V A nON (EV) CY 1180 $8.00 $9,440.00
176 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TN 4640 $6.00 $27,840.00
177 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5, 100% TN 1550 $10.75 $16,662.50
CRUSHED
178 TYPE LV NON- WEARING COURSE TN 320 $32.00 $10,240.00
MIXTURE
179 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL 140 $ 1.50 $210.00
COAT
180 TYPE LV WEARING COURSE TN 250 $34.00 $8,500.00
MIXTURE
181 SODDING, LAWN TYPE SY 500 $2.60 $1,300.00
182 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 30 $11.00 $330.00
183 STREET LIGHT EA 3 $2,500.00 $7,500.00
184 REPLACE LOT PINS LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Part 7 - 5th Street Area Phase 1 Streets Subtotal $200,943
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $20,094
Total Part 7 - 5th Street Area Phase 1 Streets Construction Cost $221,037
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $59,680
Total Part 7 - 5th Street Phase 1 Streets Cost $280,717
14198080 Jeasibility _cost_est022603final
00410-7
BID FORM
<{~I
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 8 - 4th & Willow Street Phase 1 Sewer
185 MOBILIZATION LS I $2,000.00 $2,000.00
186 DEWATERING LS I $19,800.00 $19,800.00
187 BYPASS PUMPING LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
188 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 3 $250.00 $750.00
189 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER PIPE LF 900 $3.00 $2,700.00
190 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LF II $3.00 $33.00
PIPE
191 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER EA 4 $300.00 $1,200.00
MANHOLE
192 4" PVC, SCH. 40 SERVICE PIPE LF 240 $14.00 $3,360.00
193 6" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE LF 200 $18.00 $3,600.00
194 4" PVC, SCH. 40 RISER PIPE LF 50 $14.00 $700.00
195 6" PVC, SDR 26 RISER PIPE LF 40 $18.00 $720.00
196 8" X 4" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 6 $50.00 $300.00
197 8" X 6" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 5 $50.00 $250.00
198 CONNECT TO EXISTING SEWER EA II $ 130.00 $1,430.00
SERVICE
199 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35, 10'- LF 600 $26.00 $15,600.00
15' DEEP
200 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35, 15'- LF 500 $30.00 $15,000.00
20' DEEP
201 24" STEEL CASING PIPE LF 100 $100.00 $10,000.00
202 8" PVC PLUG EA I $50.00 $50.00
203 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLES EA 5 $1,800.00 $9,000.00
204 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE LF 35 $125.00 $4,375.00
OVERDEPTH
205 DROP SECTION FOR DROP EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
MANHOLES
206 8" DIP OUTSIDE DROP INLET PIPE LF 27 $150.00 $4,050.00
207 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA 1 $350.00 $350.00
SEWER 6" VCP PIPE
208 CLOSED CIRCUIT TV INSPECTION LF 1100 $1.00 $1,100.00
Part 8 - 4th & Willow Street Phase 1 Sewer Subtotal $107,368
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $10,737
Total Part 8 - 4th & Willow Street Area Phase 1 Sewer $118,105
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $31,888
Total Part 8 - 4th & Willow Street Area Phase 1 Sewer Cost $149,993
] 4198080_ feasibility _ cost_ est022603final
00410-8
BID FORM <! ~:;
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 9 - 5th Street Phase 1 Sewer
209 MOBIUZA TION LS 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00
210 CLEARING AC 0.5 $5,000.00 $2,500.00
211 DEWATERING LS 1 $26,460.00 $26,460.00
212 BYPASS PUMPING LS I $10,000.00 $10,000.00
213 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 4 $250.00 $1,000.00
214 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER PIPE LF 2540 $3.00 $7,620.00
215 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LF 840 $3.00 $2,520.00
PIPE
216 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER EA 12 $300.00 $3,600.00
MANHOLE
217 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER V AUL T EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00
218 4" PVC, SCH. 40 SERVICE PIPE LF 560 $14.00 $7,840.00
219 6" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE LF 280 $18.00 $5,040.00
220 4" PVC, SCH. 40 RISER PIPE LF 170 $14.00 $2,380.00
221 6" PVC, SDR 26 RISER PIPE LF 90 $18.00 $1,620.00
222 8" X 4" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 14 $50.00 $700.00
223 8" X 6" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 7 $50.00 $350.00
224 CONNECT TO EXISTING SEWER EA 21 $130.00 $2,730.00
SERVICE
225 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35,15'- LF 50 $30.00 $1,500.00
20' DEEP
226 18" PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE, SDR LF 220 $45.00 $9,900.00
35,15-20' DEEP
227 21" PVC SANIT AR Y SEWER, SDR 35, LF 150 $65.00 $9,750.00
15'-20' DEEP
228 21" PVC SANIT AR Y SEWER, SDR 35, LF 650 $65.00 $42,250.00
20'-25' DEEP
229 DIRECTIONAL DRILL 24" O.D. HDPE, LF 150 $250.00 $37,500.00
SDR 17 PIPE
230 24" O.D. HDPE SANITARY SEWER, SDR LF 250 $80.00 $20,000.00
17 PIPE, 10' -15' DEEP
231 30" STEEL CASING PIPE LF 100 $125.00 $12,500.00
232 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLES EA 7 $1,800.00 $12,600.00
233 7' DIAMETER SANITARY SEWER EA 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
MANHOLE OVER MCES
INTERCEPTOR
234 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE LF 84 $125.00 $10,500.00
OVERDEPTH
235 7' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE LF 11 $270.00 $2,970.00
OVERDEPTH
236 DROP SECTION FOR DROP EA 3 $1,000.00 $3,000.00
MANHOLES
237 8" DIP OUTSIDE DROP INLET PIPE LF 81 $150.00 $12,150.00
238 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA 2 $350.00 $700.00
SEWER 8" VCP PIPE
239 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA $500.00 $500.00
SEWER 15" VCP PIPE
240 8" PVC PLUG EA I $50.00 $50.00
241 18" PVC PLUG EA I $75.00 $75.00
242 SEWER FLOW METERING LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
243 CLOSED CIRCUIT TV INSPECTION LF 1470 $1.00 $1,470.00
Part 9 - 5th Street Phase 1 Sewer Subtotal $299,275
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $29,928
Total Part 9 - 5th Street Area Phase 1 Sewer Construction Cost $329,203
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $88,885
Total Part 9 - 5th Street Area Phase 1 Sewer Cost $418,087
14198080 Jeasibil ity _ co,,_ est022603final
00410-9
BID FORM
'1~3
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 10 - 4th, Willow & 5th Street Phase 1 Watermain
244 MOBILIZATION LS I $3,000.00 $3,000.00
245 DEWATERING LS I $38,520.00 $38,520.00
246 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 5 $250.00 $1,250.00
247 REMOVE WATER MAIN LF 2140 $5.00 $10,700.00
248 I" TYPE "K" COPPER WATER SERVICE LF 800 $8.00 $6,400.00
249 I" CURB STOP AND BOX EA 20 $190.00 $3,800.00
250 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER EA 32 $150.00 $4,800.00
SERVICE
251 6" DIP WATER SERVICE, CL 52, LF 600 $24.00 $14,400.00
SEPARATE TRENCH
252 CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" WATER EA 4 $800.00 $3,200.00
MAIN
253 6" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 7 $650.00 $4,550.00
254 8" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 8 $850.00 $6,800.00
255 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL EA 4 $1,500.00 $6,000.00
HYDRANT
256 INSTALL HYDRANT EA 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00
257 6" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 140 $24.00 $3,360.00
258 8" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 2000 $28.00 $56,000.00
259 24" STEEL CASING PIPE LF 100 $100.00 $10,000.00
260 8" X 8" TEE EA 3 $250.00 $750.00
261 8" 45 DEGREE BEND EA 2 $150.00 $300.00
262 8" X 6" REDUCER EA II $150.00 $1,650.00
Part 10 - 4th, Willow & 5th Street Phase I Watermain Subtotal $181,480
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $18,148
Total Part 10 - 4th, Willow & 5th Street Phase I Watermain Construction Cost $199,628
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $53,900
Total Part 10 - 4th, Willow & 5th Street Phase 1 Watermain Cost $253,528
Part 11 - 4th Street Phase 1 Storm Sewer
263 MOBILIZATION LS I $5,000.00 $5,000.00
264 DEWATERING LS I $12,114.00 $12,114.00
265 REMOVE EXISTING TREE EA 3 $500.00 $1,500.00
266 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 2 $250.00 $500.00
267 REMOVE STORM SEWER PIPE LF 870 $15.00 $13,050.00
268 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH EA 8 $500.00 $4,000.00
BASIN
269 15" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 90 $30.00 $2,700.00
270 18" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 50 $35.00 $1,750.00
271 21" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 4 LF 60 $40.00 $2,400.00
272 66" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 4 LF 570 $250.00 $142,500.00
273 66" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 40 $270.00 $10,800.00
274 66" RC LR BEND, CLASS 4 EA 3 $1,600.00 $4,800.00
275 66" RCP FLARED END SECTION EA I $3,500.00 $3,500.00
276 4' D1A STORM SEWER CBMH, WI SUMP EA 6 $1,800.00 $10,800.00
277 48" ON 66" TEE CBMH, CLASS 4 EA 2 $3,500.00 $7,000.00
278 BULKHEAD PIPE EA I $500.00 $500.00
279 CONNECT DRAIN TILE TO EA 8 $125.00 $1,000.00
STRUCTURE
280 4" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN TILE, LF 1040 $5.00 $5,200.00
SCHEDULE SDR 35
281 PROTECTION OF CATCH BASIN IN EA 8 $120.00 $960.00
STREET
Part II - 4th Street Phase I Storm Sewer Subtotal $230,074
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $23,007
Total Part II - 4th Street Phase I Storm Sewer Construction Cost $253,081
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $68,332
Total Part 11 - 4th Street Phase 1 Storm Sewer Cost $321,413
14198080Jeasibility _cosl_esI022603final
00410-10
BID FORM c.j,J. L/
--
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 12 - 5th Street Phase 1 Storm Sewer
282 MOBILIZATION LS I $4,000.00 $4,000.00
283 DEWATERING LS I $14,400.00 $14,400.00
284 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 6 $250.00 $1,500.00
285 REMOVE STORM SEWER PIPE LF 1000 $15.00 $15,000.00
286 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH EA 2 $500.00 $1,000.00
BASIN
287 15" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 400 $30.00 $12,000.00
288 18" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 40 $35.00 $1,400.00
289 24" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 4 LF 200 $40.00 $8,000.00
290 30" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 3 LF 40 $55.00 $2,200.00
291 33" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 3 LF 540 $65.00 $35,100.00
292 36" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 3 LF 180 $75.00 $13,500.00
293 36" FLARED END SECTION, EA I $2,300.00 $2,300.00
INCLUDING TRASH GUARD
294 4' DIAMETER STORM SEWER MH EA I $1,800.00 $1,800.00
295 4' DIA STORM SEWER CBMH, W / SUMP EA 8 $2,000.00 $16,000.00
296 5' DIA STORM SEWER CBMH, W/SUMP EA 6 $2,800.00 $16,800.00
297 6' DIAMETER STORM SEWER MH EA I $3,600.00 $3,600.00
298 6' DIA STORM SEWER CBMH, W/SUMP EA 2 $4,000.00 $8,000.00
299 BULKHEAD PIPE EA I $500.00 $500.00
300 CONNECT DRAIN TILE TO EA 10 $125.00 $1,250.00
STRUCTURE
301 4" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN TILE, LF 2200 $5.00 $11,000.00
SCHEDULE SDR 35
302 PROTECTION OF CATCH BASIN IN EA 15 $120.00 $1,800.00
STREET
Part 12 - 5th Street Phase I Storm Sewer Subtotal $171,150
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $17,115
Total Part 12 - 5th Street Phase I Storm Sewer Construction Cost $188,265
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $50,832
Total Part 12 - 5th Street Phase 1 Storm Sewer Cost $239,097
14198080_ feasibil ity _ cost ~ est022603final
00410-11
BID FORM t.../~s'
--- --
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 13 - 4th Street Phase 2 Area Streets
303 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00
304 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
305 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EA 10 $100.00 $1,000.00
306 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND LF 800 $2.75 $2,200.00
GUTTER
307 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 330 $3.50 $1,155.00
308 SA WING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 90 $3.00 $270.00
309 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 40 $2.50 $100.00
310 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 70 $6.00 $420.00
PAVEMENT
311 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 1990 $3.00 $5,970.00
312 B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER LF 800 $10.00 $8,000.00
313 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 330 $33.00 $10,890.00
314 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 40 $37.00 $1,480.00
315 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY 67 $38.00 $2,533.33
316 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 40 $23.00 $920.00
317 COMMON EXCA V A nON (EV) CY 2250 $8.00 $18,000.00
318 SUBGRADE EXCA VA TI0N (EV) CY 840 $8.00 $6,720.00
319 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TN 2750 $6.00 $16,500.00
320 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5, 100% TN 1650 $10.75 $17,737.50
CRUSHED
321 TYPE LV NON-WEARING COURSE TN 240 $32.00 $7,680.00
MIXTURE
322 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL 100 $1.50 $150.00
COAT
323 TYPE LV WEARING COURSE TN 240 $34.00 $8,160.00
MIXTURE
324 GRAVEL ALLEY RESTORA nON SY 40 $10.00 $400.00
325 SODDING, LAWN TYPE SY 680 $2.60 $1,768.00
326 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 40 $11.00 $440.00
327 STREET LIGHT EA 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00
328 REPLACE LOT PINS LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Part 13 - 4th Street Phase 2 Streets Subtotal $131,494
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $13,149
Total Part 13 - 4th Street Phase 2 Streets Construction Cost $144,643
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $39,054
Total Part 13 - 4th Street Phase 2 Streets Cost $183,697
14198080 JeasibilitLcost_est022603final
00410-12
BID FORM <i ~&,
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 14 - 5th Street Phase 2 Area Streets
329 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00
330 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
331 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL SIGN EA 10 $100.00 $1,000.00
332 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB AND LF 1500 $2.75 $4,125.00
GUITER
333 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 510 $3.50 $1,785.00
334 SA WING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 200 $3.00 $600.00
335 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 480 $2.50 $1,200.00
336 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY SY 160 $6.00 $960.00
PAVEMENT
337 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SY 3230 $3.00 $9,690.00
338 B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUITER LF 1500 $10.00 $15,000.00
339 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 510 $33.00 $16,830.00
340 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 170 $38.00 $6,460.00
341 8" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SY 340 $40.00 $ 13,600.00
342 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY 158 $38.00 $6,016.67
343 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY SY 480 $23.00 $11,040.00
344 COMMON EXCA V A TION (EV) CY 2910 $8.00 $23,280.00
345 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) CY 1300 $8.00 $10,400.00
346 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW TN 5120 $6.00 $30,720.00
347 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5, 100% TN 1710 $10.75 $18,382.50
CRUSHED
348 TYPE LV NON- WEARING COURSE TN 360 $32.00 $11,520.00
MIXTURE
349 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL 150 $1.50 $225.00
COAT
350 TYPE LV WEARING COURSE TN 280 $34.00 $9,520.00
MIXTURE
351 GRAVEL ALLEY RESTORATION SY 80 $10.00 $800.00
352 SODDING, LAWN TYPE SY 1150 $2.60 $2,990.00
353 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) CY 70 $11.00 $770.00
354 STREET LIGHT EA 3 $2,500.00 $7,500.00
355 REPLACE LOT PINS LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Part 14 - 5th Street Phase 2 Streets Subtotal $218,414
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $21,841
Total Part 14 - 5th Street Phase 2 Streets Construction Cost $240,256
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $64,869
Total Part 14 - 5th Street Phase 2 Streets Cost $305,125
14198080 Jeasibility _ cost_ est022603finaJ
00410-13
BID FORM Y~::>
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 15 - 4th Street Phase 2 Sewer
356 MOBILIZATION LS I $1,000.00 $1,000.00
357 DEWATERING LS I $4,680.00 $4,680.00
358 BYPASS PUMPING LS I $5,000.00 $5,000.00
359 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA I $250.00 $250.00
360 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER PIPE LF 300 $3.00 $900.00
361 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LF 2 $3.00 $6.00
PIPE
362 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER EA $300.00 $300.00
MANHOLE
363 4" PVC, SCH. 40 SERVICE PIPE LF 80 $14.00 $1,120.00
364 4" PVC, SCH. 40 RISER PIPE LF 20 $14.00 $280.00
365 8" X 4" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 2 $50.00 $100.00
366 CONNECT TO EXISTING SEWER EA 2 $130.00 $260.00
SERVICE
367 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35, 10'- LF 260 $26.00 $6,760.00
15' DEEP
368 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLES EA 2 $1,800.00 $3,600.00
369 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE LF 14 $125.00 $1,750.00
OVERDEPTH
370 DROP SECTION FOR DROP EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
MANHOLES
371 8" DIP OUTSIDE DROP INLET PIPE LF 27 $150.00 $4,050.00
372 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA I $300.00 $300.00
SEWER 8" PVC PIPE
373 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA $350.00 $350.00
SEWER 8" VCP PIPE
374 CLOSED CIRCUIT TV INSPECTION LF 260 $1.00 $260.00
Part 15- 4th Street Phase 2 Sewer Subtotal $31,966
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $3,197
Total Part 15 - 4th Street Phase 2 Sewer Construction Cost $35,163
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $9,494
Total Part 15 - 4th Street Phase 2 Sewer Cost $44,657
14198080 Jeasibility_cost_est022603final
00410-14
BID FORM 'I ~ <ir
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 16 - 5th Street Phase 2 Sewer
375 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00
376 DEWATERING LS 1 $17,460.00 $17,460.00
377 BYPASS PUMPING LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
378 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER PIPE LF 950 $3.00 $2,850.00
379 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 6 $250.00 $ 1,500.00
380 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LF 520 $3.00 $1,560.00
PIPE
381 REMOVE SANITARY SEWER EA 2 $300.00 $600.00
MANHOLE
382 4" PVC, SCH. 40 SERVICE PIPE LF 480 $14.00 $6,720.00
383 6" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE LF 40 $18.00 $720.00
384 4" PVC, SCH. 40 RISER PIPE LF 150 $14.00 $2,100.00
385 6" PVC, SDR 26 RISER PIPE LF 20 $18.00 $360.00
386 8" X 4" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 12 $50.00 $600.00
387 8" X 6" PVC WYE, SDR 35 EA 1 $50.00 $50.00
388 CONNECT TO EXISTING SEWER EA 13 $130.00 $1,690.00
SERVICE
389 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 35,15'- LF 70 $30.00 $2,100.00
20' DEEP
390 18" PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE, SDR LF 900 $45.00 $40,500.00
35, 15-20' DEEP
391 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLES EA 6 $1,800.00 $10,800.00
392 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE LF 72 $125.00 $9,000.00
OVERDEPTH
393 DROP SECTION FOR DROP EA 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00
MANHOLES
394 8" DIP OUTSIDE DROP INLET PIPE LF 27 $150.00 $4,050.00
395 15" OUTSIDE DROP INLET PIPE LF 27 $350.00 $9,450.00
396 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA 1 $350.00 $350.00
SEWER 8" VCP PIPE
397 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY EA $500.00 $500.00
SEWER 15" VCP PIPE
398 8" PVC PLUG EA 1 $50.00 $50.00
399 18" PVC PLUG EA 1 $75.00 $75.00
400 CLOSED CIRCUIT TV INSPECTION LF 970 $1.00 $970.00
Part 16 - 5th Street Phase 2 Sewer Subtotal $130,055
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $13,006
Total Part 16 - 5th Street Phase 2 Sewer Construction Cost $143,061
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $38,626
Total Part 16 - 5th Street Phase 2 Sewer Cost $181,687
14198080 Jeasibility_cost_est022603final
00410-15
BID FORM 4" ~ CJ
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 17 - 4th & 5th Street Phase 2 Area Watermain
401 MOBlLIZA nON LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
402 DEWATERING LS 1 $25,290.00 $25,290.00
403 REMOVE WATER MAIN LF 1410 $5.00 $7,050.00
404 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 6 $250.00 $1,500.00
405 1" TYPE "K" COPPER WATER SERVICE LF 80 $8.00 $640.00
406 1" CURB STOP AND BOX EA 14 $190.00 $2,660.00
407 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER EA 14 $150.00 $2,100.00
SERVICE
408 CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" WATER EA 3 $750.00 $2,250.00
MAIN
409 CONNECT TO EXISTING 8" WATER EA 4 $800.00 $3,200.00
MAIN
410 6" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 2 $650.00 $1,300.00
411 8" GATE VALVE AND BOX EA 11 $850.00 $9,350.00
412 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00
HYDRANT
413 INSTALL HYDRANT EA 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
414 6" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 30 $24.00 $720.00
415 8" DIP WATER MAIN, CLASS 52 LF 1375 $28.00 $38,500.00
416 8" X 8" TEE EA 1 $250.00 $250.00
417 8" X 6" TEE EA 2 $200.00 $400.00
418 8" X 6" REDUCER EA 3 $150.00 $450.00
419 8" X 4" REDUCER EA 1 $150.00 $150.00
420 6" 90 DEGREE BEND EA 2 $150.00 $300.00
Part 17 - 4th & 5th Street Phase 2 Area Watermain Subtotal $101,610
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $10,161
Total Part 17 - 4th & 5th Street Phase 2 Area Watermain Construction Cost $111,771
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $30,178
Total Part 17 - 4th & 5th Street Phase 2 Area Watermain Cost $141,949
14198080 _feasibility ~ cost_ est022603final
00410-16
BID FORM '-130
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
Part 18 - 4th Street Phase 2 Storm Sewer
421 MOBlLIZA TION LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
422 DEWATERING LS 1 $12,780.00 $12,780.00
423 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 1 $250.00 $250.00
424 REMOVE STORM SEWER PIPE LF 615 $15.00 $9,225.00
425 REMOVE MANHOLE OR CATCH EA 12 $500.00 $6,000.00
BASIN
426 15" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 150 $30.00 $4,500.00
427 18" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 120 $35.00 $4,200.00
428 24" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 3 LF 10 $45.00 $450.00
429 60" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 4 LF 380 $200.00 $76,000.00
430 66" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 4 LF 10 $250.00 $2,500.00
431 66" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 40 $270.00 $10,800.00
432 60" X 66" CONCRETE INCREASER, EA 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
CLASS 4
433 4' DIA STORM SEWER CBMH, WI SUMP EA 8 $1,750.00 $14,000.00
434 5' DIAMETER STORM SEWER MH EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00
435 48" ON 60" TEE CBMH, CLASS 4 EA 2 $3,000.00 $6,000.00
436 48" ON 66" TEE CBMH, CLASS 4 EA 1 $3,300.00 $3,300.00
437 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM EA 2 $600.00 $1,200.00
SEWER
438 BULKHEAD PIPE EA 1 $500.00 $500.00
439 CONNECT DRAIN TILE TO EA 8 $125.00 $1,000.00
STRUCTURE
440 4" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN TILE, LF 640 $5.00 $3,200.00
SCHEDULE SDR 35
441 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 1 $250.00 $250.00
442 PROTECTION OF CATCH BASIN IN EA 12 $120.00 $1,440.00
STREET
Part 18 - 4th Street Phase 2 Storm Sewer Subtotal $166,095
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $16,610
Total Part 18 - 4th Street Phase 2 Storm Sewer Construction Cost $182,705
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $49,330
Total Part 18 - 4th Street Phase 2 Storm Sewer Cost $232,035
Part 19 - 5th Street Area Phase 2 Storm Sewer
443 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
444 PRIVATE UTILITY CROSSING EA 3 $250.00 $750.00
445 REMOVE STORM SEWER PIPE LF 40 $15.00 $600.00
446 15" RCP STORM SEWER, CLASS 5 LF 100 $30.00 $3,000.00
447 4' DIA STORM SEWER CBMH, WI SUMP EA 2 $1,800.00 $3,600.00
448 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM EA $600.00 $600.00
SEWER
449 CONNECT DRAIN TILE TO EA 3 $125.00 $375.00
STRUCTURE
450 4" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN TILE, LF 1600 $5.00 $8,000.00
SCHEDULE SDR 35
451 PROTECTION OF CATCH BASIN IN EA 2 $120.00 $240.00
STREET
Part 19 - 5th Street Area Phase 2 Storm Sewer Subtotal $18,165
+ 10% Construction Contingencies $1,817
Total Part 19 - 5th Street Phase 2 Storm Sewer Construction Cost $19,982
+ 27% Engineering, Legal, Fiscal, Administration $5,395
Total Part 19 - 5th Street Phase 2 Storm Sewer Cost $25,377
14198080 Jeasibility _cost_est022603finaJ
004]0-]7
BID FORM '1..3/
Main Street Reconstruction Project
Resident Comment Card 3/27/2003
Address:
~(jvC !lwh--OJ-~
4/7 fA); /Jo~\ IS~
h,<;/ - LIb (3 -- JJr I ~
Name:
Phone #:
Comments:
fA)A J- ~~f II
~1(L
h~fA. r..J n+
iJL-r j fJLA-+ ("Y+-
,
('~JtL51r-u d/oJ1/ ~?
dr.r ;-p" &J J~
Main Street Reconstruction Project
Resident Comment Card 3/27/2003
Name: IftJd IJY' V ff-'r I eLl Iii-
t
Address: tf j.-o M Jr / IV
Phone #: ~~:J - 7/)/.1-
Comments:
/A 1"'/,.-.....
A
d'"..-IV/
J4- k?t:J (f /4/ L/ 1 J.r CfJI-
/ /
LV N ~(- 7l\.
n
t-v "/'"
ffcu rJMH- c1,1f 7~
L/V /;vI Tl'.I(
5'10
Main Street Reconstruction 'Project
Resident Comment Card 3/27/2003
Name: fcl~ ~ (Jh(,s.!?n5h\
Address: 1 J3 ilIa 1'(17 9f
Phone #: 1-/-&,3 ->JJfFfj ,..
com~ents:_~ r- ~ ~, 1JU::m
U)l/1~,,~~ ~ _ .
- -
.fLY LUI c(/) 4:A~ 3- ~.~ ck.--~
U-d ~ ~~i,
~ /~.-CW ~ 3? jt4 ~_
.5</1
April 1, 2003
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council:
On behalf of the property owners on Main Street and adjacent streets, I am submitting a
Petition for the Closing of Main Street at T .H. #3.
Your favorable consideration of closing Main Street as part of the street reconstruction
project would be appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
..
QU~
Roger & Pat Christensen
713 Main St.
Farmington, MN 55025
6</0?
PETITION FOR CLOSING
MAIN STREET (tV, T .H. #3
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
DATE:
March 28, 2003
WE, the following property owners on Main Street and adjacent streets, do hereby petition
the City of Farmington, to close Main Street at Trunk Highway #3. The reason for this
petition for closing Main Street is due to the following:
1. The huge increase of vehicular traffic,
2. The speed at which these vehicles travel through the intersection and do not stop
at the stop sign at Main & 7th Street,
3. The use of the street by semi-trucks and other trucks even though the street is
posted for no trucks.
NAME
Q~~
~ eiJ-~
f}r)4 /L ~ ~ ~ /&/
ki
ADDRESS
I
7/3 /7)~
7/?? Yh~ $C
~(, 111 II ,'J? SI-
t 0 /I () fV1rtUrt sf.
/// drA sr-
7c~ ~fJ.
'7D~ rY7~
//tJ-j'..# ~
/ )d .,. 'l'7Jw,. F
:tOo g9 .; )11/1//
TELEPHONE #
4h3-K~
t:,S-/ - '1/':!,-R1J'9
(,)"/- Y'o-81t,(P
~{~q 'oD--g IlD 10
bS"/~~?' . ~
w7_~j-f~2'S-
{;,SI-~8-831c, !
{'57-~63,.;JJ4'b
IiJJ lfp9-i.id'
65/....yhc:>.hj///'
~ li3-- d 3 C}..S
J.j to -r7t~
..5~3
PETITION FOR CLOSING
MAIN STREET ~ T.H. #3
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
DATE:
March 28, 2003
WE, the following property owners on Main Street and adjacent streets, do hereby petition
the City of Farmington, to close Main Street at Trunk Highway #3. The reason for this
petition for closing Main Street is due to the following:
1. The huge increase of vehicular traffic,
2. The speed at which these vehicles travel through the intersection and do not stop
at the stop sign at Main & 7th Street,
3. The use of the street by semi-trucks and other trucks even though the street is
posted for no trucks.
\
ADDRESS
I()yr~~~
M_ ~~
5"tJ? AId/II Sfrtt/
5Jo ~:sf
rJ/) ft14;'t f f.
ZlY6 1Pl c;j
~ro 1~S+,
7()g
VY
200
(0 ( ,.., A'~ S\".
-
TELEPHONE #
t.I <.0.... 1) I/o
Lf~3 -~ 90.5
~10-~~
40J-7qo/
f /;J -llrl7
400-'01 q2--
1+0~
4100,- ro C-J I '-I
~(h~ 8""\e\
$'1 V
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farJ11ington.mn.us
TO:
Mayor & Councilmembers
FROM:
Ed Shukle, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda
DATE:
April 7, 2003
It is requested that the April 7 , 2003 agenda be amended as follows:
AWARD OF CONTRACT
9 (a) 2003 Seal Coat Project - Engineering
Three bids were received for the 2003 Seal Coat Project. Allied Blacktop submitted the low
bid in the amount of $59,957.60.
Respectfully submitted,
City Administrator
9'a...
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farrnington.mn.us
~~
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator
FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: 2003 Seal Coat Project
DATE: April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The City Council approved the plans and specifications and authorized advertisement for bids for the
2003 Seal Coat Project at the March 3rd Council meeting. Three bids were received for the 2003 Seal
Coat Project as shown on the attached bid summary.
DISCUSSION
Allied Blacktop has submitted the low bid in the amount of $59,957.60. Based on this bid and
including a 10% contingency and 27% for legal, engineering and administration costs, the total
estimated project cost is $83,761. The estimate from the feasibility study was $91,032.
The streets in East Fannington 5th and 6th Additions, Charleswood 2nd Addition, Nelsen Hills Fann
7th Addition and Euclid Street between Euclid Path and Upper 183rd Street West are to be seal coated
for the first time this year. The streets of Dakota County Estates 6th through 8th Additions, Sunnyside
Addition, Oak Street between 2nd Street and 4th Street, 3rd Street between Elm Street and Spruce
Street and the municipal pool parking lot are scheduled to be seal coated this year as part of the 7
year maintenance program cycle.
Seal coating will start after Dew Days (June 20 - 22) and be completed before the Dakota County
Fair (August 4-10).
BUDGET IMPACT
The 2003 Seal Coat Project is included in the 2003 Capital Improvement Plan. Several streets in the
project area have already been assessed seal coating costs through their respective development
contracts. The property owners benefiting from the improvements to the remaining streets would be
assessed for the project costs pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429 and the City's Special Assessment
Policy. The remainder of the costs would be funded through the Road and Bridge Fund.
The total estimated project cost for the 2003 Seal Coat project based on the low bid received is
$83,761. The Council indicated at the public hearing on the project their intent to assess the
benefiting property owners 50% ofthe project costs, which was estimated to be $65.04 per residential
equivalent unit based on the estimates in the feasibility report. The final assessment per residential
unit will be calculated using the final project costs.
ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached resolution:
1. Accepting the base bid of Allied Blacktop in the amount of $59,957.60 and awarding the project;
2. Directing staff to prepare the proposed final assessment roll allocating 50% of the project costs to
the benefiting properties.
Respectfully submitted,
~ frIYvt~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
attachment: Bid Summary
cc: file
RESOLUTION NO. R -03
AWARD BIDS FOR PROJECT NO. 03-02
PREPARE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
2003 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 7th day of April,
2003 at 7:00 p.m.
Members present:
Members absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following resolution:
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 2003 Seal Coat project, bids were
received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received
complying with the advertisement:
Contractor Total Base Bid
Allied Blacktop Co. ..........................$59,957.60
Caldwell Asphalt Co. ........................$69,701.50
Astech Asphalt ..................................$74,691.00
; and,
WHEREAS, it appears the firm of Allied Blacktop Co. is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The base bid of Allied Blacktop Co., a Minnesota corporation, for $59,957.60 is hereby
accepted and awarded and the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to
enter into a contract therefore.
2. Staff is hereby directed to prepare the proposed final assessment roll allocating 50% of
the project costs to the benefiting properties.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
7th day of April 2003.
Mayor
day of April, 2003.
Attested to the
SEAL
City Administrator
;;::
<:;
.~ V)
.~ ]
:Eb
.... <:>
<:; ;;::
:E ..g
~~
...'1::;
~ ~
>> ~~
..Q '" '"
~ ~ N
~ ~.~
~ tj ~
~
o
o
N
~~
~~
O~
f-I~
U~
r..L1<
--z
00
~cn
~Q
f-I~
<=::l
O~
UO
~z
<0
r..L1~
cnf-l
~<
O~
~;:J
=::l
<
f-I
.....
~
l!')
~~
0.; .
'Z
;;::
;;:: ;;::
<:; <:>
~ .~
. ...
~ .~
'" ~
~P:::
0 0 0 0
Z 0 0 0 0
-0 ~ ~ ,..;
E-< 0 """ 0\
...J .... It) ..... 0 \D
<t: CJ) 0\ N c<) tf
iE Z ('t) ('t)
~
E-<
CJ) ><
<t: ~
::r:: ~ ~ ~ ~
u
~ 0 0 8
t;) t: ~ 0
<t: ..... N lfi
Z N It)
0
~ ~ ~
0 8 ~ 0 0
..... at)
u Z ~ ~ c<5 ,..;
E-< 0 ('t) R
~ ti5 It) 00 ('t)
~ 0 N 0\
~ Z ('t) ('t) \D
~
~
~
...J ~ ~ ~ ~
...J
~
3= 0 """ N
E-< N ~ """
Cl .... ,..; ..... N
~ Z N """
0
u ~ ~ ~
f6 8 0 0
0 Z 0 \D
N lfi d t..:
U 0 ('t) ~ 00 at)
p. ti5 ('t) '" 0\
,..;- ~ ,..;- 0\
0 Z ('t) at)
~ ~
u ~
<t: ~
...J ~ ~ ~ ~
l:Q
Cl 8 ~ 0
~ t: 0
.... ,..; 00 -0
~ Z ..... ('t)
0
~ ~ ~
..-; ~
~ E-<
a
0 0 It)
Ii g N \0 It)
""" """
0 ,..;-
~ ('t)
E-< !:::
.... .9 !::: !:::
Z 1 0 .s
0 ....
Q) Q)
u
u <IS
<IS 'a
'a
.S .S
.... I .l!l
<IS .l!l
0 ~ ~
u
:::E ";;:j Q) a
~ Q) ~
<Il
.... ... <IS <IS
..E .... "0
] <IS Q) Cl
0 $
u ....
... ";;:j "0 j:Q
.l!l 0 ...J
<IS Q) :::E
:::E <Il <
N N b
.... I ~
<t:
i6 ~ ~ Eo<
('t)
o
o
~
"-
e
'It
o
N
o
Q.. It) $ 0
Q.. ~ It) 5S Cl
rf:.....Z~Z
. ~:::E $ 0
...Jl:Q ,('t)l:Q
C ."gs~
..;gOONIt)
...".p.;oe
....
CJ)
~~
ZN
....\O~
~allt)oCl
&J5~j;~
0:5"""~l:Q
0:5 It) ,
.~ t'--- ~ s~
~ ..... .~ N It)
f6~e
o::r::
~
'"
1:: .\0
tIlZffi
... . It) It)
1;; Q) f'o,.
.~ ;> Z :g Cl
g. <t: :::E J., ~
u0:5 ~~l:Q
. '" ...
:::E00c.:>c<)~
...8 Q)\01t)
~Ln~t::..
Q) 0 tIl
p......:::E
.c
Cll
I-
"0
iD
-
Cll
o
U
<<i
CI)
en
('t)
o
o
N
/OCL
CITY OF FARMINGTON
SUMMARY OF REVENUES
AS OF FEBRUARY 28, 2003
16.67 % Year Complete
$ $ % $ %
GENERAL FUND
Property Taxes 3,188,070 - - 0.00 - 0.00
Licenses/Permits 1,033,700 157,307 331,508 32.07 177,262 15.23
Fines 82,500 565 565 0.68 - 0.00
Intergovernment Revenue 876,486 - 74,591 8.51 71,349 8.73
Charges for Service 329,779 11,687 18,381 5.57 20,742 6.46
Miscellaneous 330,500 69 297 0.09 40 0.01
Transfers 225 000 - 0.00 - 0.00
Total General Fund 6 066 035 169 628 425 342 7.01 269.393 4.76
SPECIAL REVENUE
HRA Operating Fund 27,000 280 280 1.04 2,240 9.24
Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 750 750 9.32 600 7.45
Park Improvement Fund 152,500 20,987 20,987 13.76 4,164 1.06
Recreation Operating Fund 186,700 1,941 4,520 2.42 2,500 1.20
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Ice Arena 243,300 7,493 24,187 9.94 49,119 22.58
Liquor Operations 2,410,500 158,783 328,996 13.65 300,133 12.51
Sewer 1,298,000 - - 0.00 100,822 6.52
Solid Waste 1,358,500 2,472 2,472 0.18 4,025 0.32
Storm Water 270,000 22,210 22,210 8.23 3,536 0.58
Water 1 790 000 62 034 115668 6.46 153.816 8.74
Total Revenues 13810585 446 578 945412 6.85 890.348 6.32
I
5</5'
CITY OF FARMINGTON
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES
AS OF FEBRUARY 28, 2003
16.67 % Year Com lete
III:::'!:I:IIIII,IIIII!IIIIIII~III:.I::IIIIIII:I':III,1'11111111111,111.1.111111111111111111111!!11:11111))8uQQe.T):rl::::~~:::::':)m\\mRQ:\::\\\:~:II:llrlll':I:IJ,,11.,.,I::::~::III~:IIIIIIIIIII:I":I:I..11
GENERAL FUND $ $ $ % $ %
Legislative 61,120 8,234 15,195 24.86 10,915
Administration 418,660 43,417 68,111 16.27 50,991
Human Resources 191,820 12,603 15,813 8.24 13,290
MIS 92,330 29,806 31,128 33.71 1,839
Elections 10,870 0.00 5
Communications 76,350 5,495 8,213 10.76 8,282
Finance 372,730 31,054 42,102 11.30 34,707
PlanninglZoning 155,360 13,491 18,945 12.19 21,791
Building Inspection 316,330 33,954 43,156 13.64 39,620
Community Development 87,350 13,304 16,558 18.96 11,853
Police Administration 456,300 49,454 68,924 15.10 46,501
Patrol Services 1,120,280 105,507 148,798 13.28 137,700
Investigation Services 171,980 15,407 22,645 13.17 13,447
School Liason Officer 80,830 7,842 12,286 15.20 13,010
Emergency Management 1,400 34 34 2.43 17
Fire 371,000 30,642 41,395 11.16 30,658
Rescue 47,690 2,746 3,753 7.87 622
Engineering 259,430 23,647 32,980 12.71 27,913
G.I.S. 12,820 3 1,403 10.94 42
Streets 419,200 27,447 39,860 9.51 37,027
Snow Removal 105,640 23,525 25,498 24.14 13,639
Signal Maint 95,600 15,013 15,359 16.07 7,560
Fleet Maint 0.00 19,267
Park Maint 244,162 37,684 50,780 20.80 31,321
Forestry 110,000 507 753 0.68 1,359
Building Maint 105,300 12,434 18,273 17.35 11,918
Recreation Programs 256,850 31,054 43,251 16.84 33,949
Outdoor Ice 27,640 2,252 2,906 10.51 4,583
Transfers Out 100000 0.00
15.42
14.40
10.24
3.24
0.02
12.50
9.15
15.59
14.60
13.71
11.92
14.33
8.92
19.40
1.21
9.18
1.66
11.40
0.40
10.07
16.05
8.83
16.32
15.20
1.32
11.29
11.89
17.71
0.00
Total General Fund 5 769,042 576 556 788 119 13.66 623 826 11.80
SPECIAL REVENUE
HRA Operating 88,840 2,440 2,736 3.08 0.00
Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 894 1,277 15.86 1,588 19.73
Park Improvement Fund 134,500 0.00 12,454 10.66
Senior Center 108,020 10,271 15,851 14.67 966 0.89
Swimming Pool 124,560 352 927 0.74 0.00
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Ice Arena 273,900 28,197 41,887 15.29 43,887 18.46
Liquor Operations 2,247,750 161,172 306,350 13.63 289,188 13.13
Sewer 1,263,767 91,148 168,223 13.31 172,465 14.61
Solid Waste 1,363,631 108,958 185,260 13.59 138,967 11.43
Storm Water 242,939 10,530 11,460 4.72 3,308 1.39
Water Utility 1 104503 33 766 51 218 4.64 123515 8.19
Total Ex enditures 12,729,502 1,024,282 1,573,308 12.36 1,392,814 11.35
51./6
/06
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 f (.
FROM:
Lee M. Mann, P .E., Director of Public W orkslCity Engineer
SUBJECT:
NPDES Phase II - Draft Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The City of Farmington, along with many other cities in the state, is required to submit a permit
application as part of the implementation of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program, Phase II. Attached is the City's draft Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPPP), required by the NPDES Phase II permit regulations, for Council review and approval.
DISCUSSION
The requirements set forth under NPDES Phase II are part of the implementation of the Federal Clean
Water Act. Several info sheets summarizing the background of the program and the required
elements of the permit are attached. The initial deadline for the permit application was March 10,
2003, however, the MPCA granted an extension to May 9, 2003 for submittal of the complete
application with the SWPPP (see attached letter dated 3/7/03).
In summary, the SWPPP addresses the reduction or elimination of pollutant discharges to the City's
storm water system. The program includes implementation of various "Best Management Practices"
(BMP's), ordinance controls, monitoring, and community education. The BMP's chosen to address
the six minimum control measures required by the permit. The six minimum control measures are:
. Public Education and Outreach
. Public Participation/Involvement
. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
. Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control
. Post-Construction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment
. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
Each BMP sheet in the attached SWPPP includes a description, measurable goals, the implementation
schedule, responsible party and other required information.
s</,
BUDGET IMPACT
The majority of the BMP's in the plan (approximately 26 out of 36), are already in place and are a
part of the City's operations. The items in the plan that are not currently part of City operations are
required by the NPDES Phase II regulations. Expenditures relating to maintenance of the storm
sewer system and storm water pollution prevention are funded out of the storm water utility fund.
The SWPPP is implemented over a 5-year period and a budget analysis will be worked up in the
initial stage of the program implementation.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the attached SWPPP by motion.
Respectfully Submitted,
~fr;~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.,
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
slfi'
DRAFT
Storm Water
Pollution
Prevention
Program
Farmington,
Minnesota
May 2003
5l.f9 I
City of Farmington
swppp Summary
1. Public Education and Outreach
Distributing educational materials and performing outreach to inform
citizens about the impacts polluted storm water runoff discharges can
have on water quality.
BMP 1.01 Education Activity Implementation Plan
BMP 1.02 Wetland and Wetland Buffer brochure
BMP 1.03 Drainage and Utility Easement flyer
BMP 1.04 Earth Friendly Yard & Lawn Care Flyer
BMP 1.05 Residential Contractors Erosion Control Meeting
BMP 1.06 Residential Contractors Erosion Control Letter
BMP 1.07 Utility Billing Storm Water Survey
BMP 1.08 Adopt-a-Pond Program
BMP 1.09 Pond Cleanup Day
BMP 1.10 Pollution Prevention Days
BMP 1.11 Storm Drain Stenciling Program
BMP 1.12 Presentation to City Council
BMP 1.13 Presentation to City Staff
BMP 1.14 Wetland Health Evaluation Program
2. Public Participation/Involvement
Providing opportunities for citizens to participate in program
development and implementation, including effectively publicizing
public hearings and/or encouraging citizen representatives on a storm
water management panel.
BMP 1.07 Utility Billing Storm Water Survey
BMP 1.08 Adopt-a-Pond Program
BMP 1.09 Pond Cleanup Day
BMP 1.10 Pollution Prevention Days
BMP 1.11 Storm Drain Stenciling Program
.560
City of Farmington
swppp Summary
BMP 1.12 Presentation to City Council
BMP 2.01 SWPPP Hotline
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Developing and implementing a plan to detect and eliminate illicit
discharges to the storm sewer system (includes developing a system
map and informing the community about hazards associated with illegal
discharges and improper disposal of waste).
BMP 1.02 Wetland and Wetland Buffer brochure
BMP 1.04 Earth Friendly Yard & Lawn Care Flyer
BMP 1.05 Residential Contractors Erosion Control Meeting
BMP 1.06 Residential Contractors Erosion Control Letter
BMP 1.08 Adopt-a-Pond Program
BMP 1.09 Pond Cleanup Day
BMP 1.10 Pollution Prevention Days
BMP 1.11 Storm Drain Stenciling Program
BMP 3.01 Storm Sewer System Map
BMP 3.02 Ordinance prohibiting illicit discharge
BMP 3.03 MS4 Inspection and Maintenance Program
4. Construction Site Runoff Control
Developing, implementing, and enforcing an erosion and sediment
control program for construction activities that disturb 1 or more
acres of land (controls could include silt fences and temporary storm
water detention ponds).
BMP 1.05 Residential Contractors Erosion Control Meeting
BMP 1.06 Residential Contractors Erosion Control Letter
BMP 4.01 Ordinance requiring erosion control measures
56'1
City of Farmington
SWPPP Summary
BMP 4.02 Site plan erosion control review
BMP 4.03 Erosion Control Inspection Program
BMP 4.04 Private Development Street Sweeping Program
BMP 4.05 Sodding Requirements
BMP 4.06 Private Development Erosion Control Inspections
BMP 4.07 Development Contract Erosion Control Requirements
BMP 4.08 City Specifications and Standard Detail Plates
5. Post Construction Runoff Control
Developing, implementing, and enforcing a program to address
discharges of post-construction storm water runoff from new
development and redevelopment areas. Applicable controls could
include preventative actions such as protecting sensitive areas (e.g.,
wetlands) or the use of structural BMPs such as grassed swales or
porous pavement.
BMP 1.08 Adopt-a-Pond Program
BMP 1.09 Pond Cleanup Day
BMP 3.03 MS4 Inspection and Maintenance Program
BMP 5.01 Surface Water Management Plan
BMP 5.02 Sedimentation Ponds
BMP 5.03 Skimmer Structures
BMP 5.04 Sump Catchbasin Manholes
BMP 5.05 Riprap-Cable Concrete
BMP 5.06 Ordinance Regulating Runoff from New and Re-development
55~
City of Farmington
SWPPP Summary
6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping
Developing and implementing a program with the goal of preventing or
reducing pollutant runoff from municipal operations. The program
must include municipal staff training on pollution prevention measures
and techniques (e.g., regular street sweeping, reduction in the use of
pesticides or street salt, or frequent catch-basin cleaning).
BMP 1.13 Presentation to City Staff
BMP 3.03 MS4 Inspection and Maintenance Program
BMP 6.01 Park and Open Space Maintenance Training Program
BMP 6.02 Hazardous Materials Awareness Training
BMP 6.03 MNDOT Certification for Erosion Control Inspector
BMP 6.04 City Street Sweeping Program
5.53
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.01
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
ffi Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Education Activit 1m lementation Plan
BMP Descriotion:
The City of Farmington will implement an Education Activity Implementation plan each year of the
reporting cycle to determine public awareness, attitudes, behaviors, and educational needs relating
to environmental water quality and storm water issues. The City will then utilize the information
gathered to modify educational and outreach programs for future reporting cycles.
Measurable Goals:
. completion of the
Implementation Plan
Timeline Ilmolementation Schedule:
Education Activity Yearly-
. Brochures, flyers and erosion control letter
distributed
. Pond Cleanup Day and Pollution Prevention
Days planned and held
. Utility billing Storm Water Survey created
and distributed
. Storm Drain Stenciling program and Adopt-a-
Pond program planned and implemented
. Com leted meetin sand resentations
Res onsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: Lena Larson De t. or Or .: Cit of Farmin ton Public Works
Title: Public Works Administrative Assistant De t. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1610 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: lIarson ciJarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImannciJarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational comoonent of your SWPPP , briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5.5</
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
54 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.02
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
@ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Wetland and Wetland Buffer brochure
BMP Description:
Distribution of Wetland and Wetland Buffer educational brochure in new resident packets and
through other periodic focused mailings. The Wetland and Wetland Buffer brochure was created to
inform and educate the public about the importance of wetlands and wetland buffers in regards to
water quality.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
Number of brochures distributed New resident packets are distributed regularly
throughout the year to new residents signing up
for City utilities
Responsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
ame: Lena Larson Deot. or Orq.: Enqineerinq Division
Itle: Public Works Administrative Assistant Deot. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Citv EnQineer
Phone: 651-463-1610 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: tQross@ciJarminqton.mn.us E-mail: Imann@ciJarminqton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP , briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The Wetland and Wetland Buffer brochure was created to inform and educate the residents of the
City, particularly those abutting waterbodies, about the importance of wetlands and wetland buffers
in regards to water quality.
555'
Existina BMP? [?J
BMP Description Sheet
I1S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.03
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Draina e and Utilit Easement FI er
BMP Description: .
Post Drainage and Utility Easement flyer in new residences at final inspection and distribute
throughout the year to residents with questions regarding easements and drainage areas. The
Drainage and Utility Easement flyer describes the function of drainage easements, their purpose
and the restrictions that the City and others place on their use.
Measurable Goals:
Number of flyers distributed
inspections
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
with final Final inspections for new residential construction
are conducted regularly throughout the year.
Responsible Department or Organization
De t. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De t. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ciJarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImanncLfarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWppp, briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The audience of this BMP are residents and businesses within the City. The goal of this
educational BMP is to inform those residents and businesses of the importance, use and
restrictions of drainage and utility easements.
.5'5~
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
154 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.04
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
W Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Earth Friendly Yard & Lawn Care Flyer
BMP Description:
Distribute Earth Friendly Yard & Lawn Care Flyer in new resident packets, by mailing annually, and
by posting annually in the City newsletter and local newspaper. The Earth Friendly Yard & Lawn
Care flyer educates residents about the impact that runoff from their yard has on water quality and
provides tips on reducing that runoff and minimizing pollutants. In addition the flyer informs
residents of City ordinances regulating watering and other runoff from yards and landscaping.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. number of new resident packets distributed New resident packets are distributed regularly
. number of flyers mailed throughout the year to new residents signing up
. posted in City newsletter for City utilities. Mailings and postings occur
, posted in local paper during the spring and summer months when the
majority of watering and lawn care occurs.
Responsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: Lena Larson DeDt. or On:l.: Enqineerinq Division
Title: Public Works Administrative Assistant Dept. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/City Enaineer
Phone: 651-463-1610 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: lIarson@cLfarminaton.mn.us E-mail: Imann@ci.farminqton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
557
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
154 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.05
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction storm water management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Residential Contractors Erosion Control Meeting
BMP Description:
Meet with residential contractors building homes within the City regarding erosion control
requirements and BMP's that they must maintain during construction. The meeting provides an
opportunity for contractors to provide input regarding the City's erosion control policy.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. meeting completed Meeting is held each spring approximately when
. number of attendees at meeting the frost comes out of the ground.
Responsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: Timothv Gross Deot. or Org.: Enaineerina Division
Title: Assistant Citv Enaineer Deot. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/City Enaineer
)hone: 651-463-1607 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: tQross@ci.farminaton.mn.us E-mail: Imann@ci.farminQton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
55?r
Existina BMP?
.,,, '
o
BMP Description Sheet
. 54 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.06
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
W Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
EJ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction storm water management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Residential Contractors Erosion Control Letter
BMP Description:
Draft and mail a letter to residential contractors working within the City limits regarding erosion
control requirements and enforcement, and inviting them to a Residential Contractors Erosion
Control meeting to discuss the requirements, and provide an opportunity for their input.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. letter drafted Letter will be drafted and mailed each spring
. number of letters distributed approximately when the frost comes out of the
ground and before the Residential Contractors
Erosion Control Meeting
Responsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
ame: Timothv Gross Deot. or Ora.: Enoineerino Division
itle: Assistant Citv Enoineer Deot. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Citv Enaineer
Phone: 651-463-1607 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: taross@ciJarminaton.mn.us E-mail: ImannlWciJarmington.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your sWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5.5'9
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.07
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Utilit Billin Storm Water Surve
BMP Description:
Develop and distribute a survey to private residents and businesses asking questions to determine
public awareness, attitudes, behaviors, and educational needs relating to environmental water
quality and storm water issues. The City will then utilize the information gathered to modify
educational and outreach ro rams for future re ortin c cles.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Survey completed . September 2003 - draft survey and mail
. Number of surveys distributed . Oct to Nov 2003 - collect survey responses
. Number of responses received . Dec 2003 to Feb 2004 - adjust SWPPP
based on survey responses
. Annual survey each year along similar
timetable
~es onsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: Lena Larson De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
Title: Public Works Administrative Assistant De 1. Head: Lee Mann, PW Director/ Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1610 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: lIarson cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP, briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
.5(;0
Existing BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifying Number: 1.08
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
[E Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
bj Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Ado t-a-Pond Pro ram
BMP Description:
Plan, create, and implement an Adopt-a-Pond program. Program would allow private residents,
business, or other civic groups to adopt a storm water pond. Participants would potentially collect
windblown trash from ponding areas, monitor ponds for illicit discharges and participate in
restoration programs by planting trees, shrubs, grasses, and wetland plantings.
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
Year 1 - Plan pond adoption program
Year 2 - Advertise and promote pond adoption
program
Year 3 - Train volunteers for program
Year 4 -1m lement Pro ram
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW /Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross cLfarmin ton.mn.U5 E-mail: ImanncLfarminton.mn.u5
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWppp, briefly describe the audience and
educational goals for this minimum control measure:
The adopt-a-pond program educates residents, businesses, community groups and programs that
adopt a pond, about water quality and natural resource conservation, and provides a proactive
hands-on ex erience and a sense of ownershi in the watershed of their communit .
Measurable Goals:
. implementation of program
. number of ponds adopted
s~1
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
54 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifyina Number: 1.09
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
W Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Ci ide Pond Cleanu
BMP Description:
Plan and implement an event to clean accumulated trash from storm water ponds and wetland
areas. The Citywide Pond Cleanup Day coordinates an effort to clean up trash that has
accumulated over the winter months in conjunction with a small education fair to educate volunteers
and their families about water quality and storm water runoff.
Measurable Goals:
. completed event
. number of ponds cleaned
. number of volunteers
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Jan/Feb - advertise in City newsletter
. March - Mail letters advertising event
. April - send out reminders
. Ma - hold cleanu da
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The pond cleanup day educates residents, businesses, and community organizations such as the
boy and girl scouts about water quality and provides a hands-on experience and educational
opportunity.
.5c'~
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
154 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.10
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
[!J Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Pollution Prevention Day
BMP Description:
Plan and implement event to educate public about clean water and pollution prevention.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. event completed Annually
. number of attendees
Responsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: Lena Larson Deot. or Org.: Enaineerina Division
Title: Public Works Administrative Assistant DeDt. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Citv Enoineer
Phone: 651-463-1610 Phone: 651-463-1601
:-mail: lIarson@cLfarminaton.mn.us E-mail: Imann@ciJarminoton.mn.us
f this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
Elementary age students are invited to participate in this event and leam from several presenters
why pollution prevention is necessary and how they can help prevent it. Water quality is an integral
part of this event.
.5"~ 3
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
~S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.11
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
Ej Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Storm Drain Stencilin
BMP Descriotion:
Create and implement a storm drain stenciling program. Residents, businesses, or civic groups
would volunteer to stencil a message on storm drains in an area to inform local resident and
passers by that the storm drain ultimately discharges to a river or water body. Participants would
learn about water quality and storm water runoff.
Timeline Ilmolementation Schedule:
. 2003 - plan storm drain stenciling program
. 2004 - advertise program to residents,
businesses and civic groups
. 2005 - im lement ro ram
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ciJarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImanncLfarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational comoonent of your SWPPP , briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The storm drain stenciling program will provide a hands-on educational experience for residents,
businesses and civic groups such as the boy and girls scouts to learn about water quality, and
about community attitudes and knowledge regarding water quality and the local watershed.
Measurable Goals:
. implementation of program
. number of storm drains stenciled
. number of volunteers
5' C; t./
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifyina Number: 1.12
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
B Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Presentation to Cit Council
BMP Description:
Present the SWPPP to City Council annually. This presentation will increase council awareness of
storm water runoff issues and remind the Council of the requirement to implement the SWPPP
provisions.
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. March 2003 - first annual presentation given
to City Council
. Annual presentation each year of permit
c cle
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImanncLfarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The presentation of the SWPPP to City Council will inform and educate the city council and those
viewing the council meeting about the City's SWPPP, and current and future regulations and
mandates that the Ci is or ma be re uired to follow with the SWPPP.
Measurable Goals:
completed presentation
5~5
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
~S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1 .13
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
W Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Presentation to City Staff
BMP Description:
Present the SWPPP to City Staff annually. This presentation will increase staff awareness of storm
water runoff issues remind Staff of the requirement to implement the SWPPP provisions.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
Completed presentation . March 2003 First annual presentation given
to City Staff
. Annual presentation each year of permit
cycle
Responsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
"ame: Timothv Gross Deot. or Ora.: Enaineering Division
Title: Assistant Citv Enaineer Deot. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/City Enqineer
Phone: 651-463-1607 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: taross@cLfarminaton.mn.us E-mail: Imann@cLfarminqton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The presentation of the SWPPP to City Staff will inform and educate City Staff about the City's
SWPPP, and current and future regulations and mandates that the City is or may be required to
follow with the SWPPP.
5~C
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 1.14
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
W Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction storm water management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Wetland Health Evaluation Pro
BMP Description:
The WHEP program is comprised of volunteers that monitor the water quality and health of
wetlands within the City. Wetlands are monitored to observe the long term effect that surrounding
development and storm water runoff have caused.
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Summer 2003 - wetland monitoring
. Winter 2003 - WHEP results published
. Annual program continued on similar
schedule for future re ortin c des
Responsible Department or Organization
De t. or Or .: Dakota Count Environmental Education
De t. Head: Dan Huff
Phone: 651 480-7734
E-mail: t ross ci.farmin ton.mn.us E-mail: DanieI.HuffCO.DAKOTA.MN.US
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The WHEP is used to educate and inform the WHEP volunteers, City Staff, City Council, and
residents, of the current and long term health of the City's wetlands, and the impact that increased
development and the resulting increased storm water may have on the long term health of those
wetlands.
Measurable Goals:
. Implementation of WHEP
. Number of wetlands monitored
.5c,,/
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 2.01
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction storm water management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Pro ram Hotline
BMP Description:
Create a hotline for residents to call with complaints, questions, or comments; and as a source of
information regarding the storm water and water quality components of the City's Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Program.
Measurable Goals:
. number of callers
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Year 1 - create hotline
. Post hotline number on City web page and in
misc. storm water and water quality
ublications throu hout the ear
Res onsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
ame: Lena Larson De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
itle: Public Works Administrative Assistant De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1610 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: lIarson ci.farmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP , briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The SWPPP hotline will provide information to callers regarding the City's SWPPP and associated
BMP's.
5~~
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 3.01
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
W Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
LJ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Storm Sewer S stem Ma
BMP Description:
Create and maintain a storm sewer system map including ponds, streams, lakes and wetlands;
structural pollution control devices; pipes and conveyances equal to or greater than 24" within the
system; outfalls and all discharge points.
Measurable Goals:
Completion of storm sewer system map
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. 2003 to 2004 - update existing storm sewer
basemap to meet requirements of permit
. Annually update storm water system
basema to reflect new construction
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Ci En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ci.farmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5C,9
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
54 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 3.02
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
W Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
Ej Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction storm water management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Ordinance rohibitin illicit dischar e to the MS4
BMP Description:
Develop an ordinance to prohibit non-stormwater discharge into the storm sewer system. During
the first 3 years, the City will review the current ordinance and revise it according to regulatory
agency requirements.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Completion of existing ordinance review and . Year 1 - Review existing ordinance and
comparison with other communities and compare with other communities and
regulatory bodies regulatory bodies
. complete draft of revised ordinance . Year 2 - Produce draft of revised ordinance
. completed ordinance according to year 1 assessments
. Year 3 Completed illicit discharge,
detection, and elimination ordinance.
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Ci En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ci.farmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP, briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5'0
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 3.03
Minimum Control Measures Addressed bv This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction storm water management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BM P Title:
MS4 Ins ection and Maintenance Pro ram
BMP Description:
Program to inspect 20% of the outfalls, sediment basins, and ponds each year as well as 100% of
the pollution control devices such as trap manholes, grit chambers, sumps, floatable skimmers and
traps, separators and other small settling or filtering devices. Maintenance will be scheduled based
on results of inspections. During maintenance inspections, outfalls will also be inspected for illicit
flows and upon detection, the City of Farmington will evaluate proper enforcement procedures and
enforce the provisions of the City ordinance pertaining to illegal discharges into the storm sewer
system. The City will reevaluate the inspection intervals in Year 2 based on the results of the first
two reporting years.
Measurable Goals:
20% of MS4 outfalls,
ponds each year
. Inspect 100% of pollution control devices
each year
. Number of structures receiving maintenance
. Number of illicit discharges detected
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
sediment basins and . Implement inspection program immediately
. Year 2 - reevaluate the inspection rate
based on the results of the inspections for
the first two reporting cycles
57/
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 4.01
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
EJ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Ordinance re U1nn erosion control measures
BMP Description:
Develop an ordinance requiring erosion and sediment control measures, as well as sanctions to
ensure compliance. During the first 3 years, the City will review the current ordinance and revise it
according to regulatory agency requirements.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Completion of existing ordinance review and . Year 1 - Review existing ordinance and
comparison with other communities and compare with other communities and
regulatory bodies regulatory bodies
. complete draft of revised ordinance . Year 2 - Produce draft of revised ordinance
. completed ordinance according to year 1 assessments
. Year 3 Completed erosion control
measures ordinance.
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImannciJarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5/>rA
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
54 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 4.02
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
EJ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
El Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Site Ian erosion control review
BMP Descriotion:
Require all site plans including single site new construction, redevelopment, and new development
plans to be reviewed for erosion control. Review of new construction site plans would be a
requirement before the issuance of building permits; and re-development and new development site
plan review becomes a condition of the required development contract. Review would ensure that
erosion control methods identified in City Specifications and Standard Detail Plates are being
utilized fully, correctly, and in the right locations. Site plan review for erosion control is a
requirement of the Development Contract for all private developments within the City.
Measurable Goals:
. number of new
reviewed
. number of development construction plans
reviewed
Timeline Ilmolementation Schedule:
construction site plans . year 1
1.) review existing site plan inspection
procedure for variance from regulatory
agency requirements
2.) review existing required erosion control
BMP's
. year 2 - implement changes to plan review
procedure based on previous years site plan
ins ection review
Responsible Department or Organization
De t. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De t. Head: Lee Mann. Director of PW/Ci En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ci.farmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational comoonent of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
.5 7....3
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
54 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifyina Number: 4.03
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Erosion Control Ins ection Pro ram
BMP Description:
The City currently inspects every construction site that has undergone a site plan review to ensure
that erosion control is in place and is being adequately maintained. Upon non-compliance, a
warning is issued and 72 hours is allowed for repair. If the problem is not corrected within that
timeframe, a stop work order is issued until repairs or installations are completed.
Measurable Goals:
. number of inspections completed
. number of warnings issued
. number of stop work orders issued
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Residential Contractors Erosion Control
Letter - (BMP 1.06) is sent to residential
contractors when or before the frost comes
out of the ground notifying them of erosion
control requirements and of the Erosion
Control Meeting
. Residential Contractors Erosion Control
Meeting - (BMP 1.05) is held in the spring
when or before the frost comes out of the
ground
. Erosion control inspections occur Mondays
and Thursdays every week during the non-
frost eriod of the ear
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Ci En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross cLfarmin on.mn.us E-mail: ImanncLfarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. brieflv describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
57V
Existing BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
"S4 Name: City of Farmington
UniQue Identifying Number: 4.04
Minimum Control Measures Addressed bv This BMP
EJ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
[4 Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction storm water management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Private Develo ment Street Swee in Pro ram
BMP Description:
Within the development contract, the Developer shall weekly, or more often if required by the City
Engineer, clear from the public streets and property any soil, earth or debris resulting from
construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns. Twice a week City staff inspects
streets within and adjacent to developments to determine which streets need to be swept. The City
contracts with a street sweeping service to sweep streets identified in these inspections and bills
sweeping costs back to the developer.
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. BMP to be implemented immediately
. City staff inspects streets Mondays and
Thursdays weekly during the construction
season when there is no frost
. Street sweeping occurs Tuesdays and
Frida s followin street swee in ins ections
Responsible Department or Organization
De t. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De t. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ciJarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: trossciJarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. brieflv describe the audience and
educational goals for this minimum control measure:
Measurable Goals:
. yards of sweepings collected
. hours of street sweeping
575
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 4.05
Minimum Control Measures Addressed bv This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Soddin Re uirements
BMP Description:
The City currently requires the fronts yard and all easement areas of new residential development
to be sodded to minimize erosion. An escrow is collected at the time the building permit is issued
and is returned after City staff inspects the site and confirms that the sodding requirements are
fulfilled.
Measurable Goals:
. Number of sod inspection performed
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. BMP effective immediately
. Inspections occur when property owner or
builder notifies City that sod requirements
have been met
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: rschimmel ci.farmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP, brieflv describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
Residents constructing new homes are informed of sod requirements for new construction and the
purpose of those requirements to minimize erosion and protect storm water quality entering the
storm sewer s stem.
s/~
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 4.06
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
EJ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Private Develo ment Erosion Control Ins ections
BMP Description:
Private developments are inspected by for compliance with erosion control requirements and to
assess any erosion problems that may be occurring and should be addressed. City construction
inspectors also randomly check for erosion control devices and issues when time allows.
Measurable Goals:
. number of inspections
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. BMP to be implemented immediately
. Inspect private development randomly on a
monthly basis or after a significant rain event
>1/2"
Res onsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
lame: Dave Sanocki De 1. or Or .: Dakota Co. Soil & Water Conserv. District
ille: Civil En ineer De 1. Head: Ja Ri s
Phone: 651-463-1602 Phone: 651 480-7779
E-mail: dsanocki cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: .a.risco.dakota.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
57'
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
154 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 4.07
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
B Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Develo ment Contract Erosion Control Re uirements
BMP Description:
The Development contract for all private developments within the City requires erosion control
measures and site plan review for erosion control measures. The Development Contract allows the
City to impose additional erosion control requirements if it is determined that the methods
implemented are insufficient to properly control erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the
erosion control plan and schedule, or supplementary instructions received from the City, or in an
emergency determined at the sole discretion of the City, the City may take such action as it deems
a ro riate to control erosion immediatel ,without notice to the Develo er
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Number of Development Contracts executed . BMP effective immediately
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Ci En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ci.farmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImannciJarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
S /<6'
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 4.08
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Ci S ecifications and Standard Detail Plates
BMP Description:
The City Specifications and Standard Detail Plates describe required erosion control BMP's and
provide detailed specifications on their construction and implementation. In addition, the
specifications require drainage facilities constructed within the City to conform to the most recent
editions of:
. "City Engineers Association of Minnesota Standard Utilities Specifications"
. "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" (Best Management Practices for Minnesota)
. "National Urban Runoff Program" (NURP)
. City of Farmington's "Storm Water Management Plan"
. The City's Standard Detail Plates, general specifications and comprehensive plans.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Number of City Specifications and Standard . BMP implemented immediately
Detail Plates volumes in distribution . City Specifications and Standard Detail
Plates are reviewed each spring and are
modified based on that review to incorporate
new standards and proven practices and
BMP's. Revised volumes are then
distributed to all recorded volume holders
each ear.
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImanncLfarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
579
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
nS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 5.01
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
B Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Surface Water Manaqement Plan
BMP Descriction:
The Surface Water Management Plan lays out the overall storm water plan for the City to comply
with local, state, and federal regulations. The plan provides information on storm sewer pipe and
open channel sizes, stormwater flows, pond areas, pond storage requirements and pond water
levels, wetland and waterbody classifications, and water quality requirements. The purpose of the
SWMP is to preserve and use natural water storage and retention systems in order to:
a. Reduce to the greatest practical extent the public capital expenditures necessary to control
excessive volumes and rates of runoff
b. improve and preserve water quality
c. prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows
d. promote groundwater recharge
e. protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities
f. secure the benefits associated with proper management of surface water
g. preserve wetlands, lakes and streams
This SWMP presents erosion and sediment control practices and establishes policies for the
treatment of stormwater runoff prior to entering the City's wetlands, streams and rivers.
Measurable Goals: Timeline Ilmclementation Schedule:
. Completed SWMP for the City of Farmington . Effective Immediately
Resconsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: Timothv Gross DeDt. or Oro.: Enoineerino Division
Title: Assistant City Enoineer DeDt. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Citv Enoineer
Phone: 651-463-1607 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: toross@cLfarminaton.mn.us E-mail: Imann@cLfarminaton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational comconent of your SWppp, briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The Surface Water Management Plan was created to guide and educate the City Council, City staff,
and developers and engineers working within the City regarding the management of the watershed
resources that exist within the City, and the plan for protecting and utilizing to the maximum benefit,
those resources.
5t:6'O
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 5.02
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
X Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
[!J Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Sedimentation Ponds
BMP Description:
The City of Farmington requires sedimentation ponds as a BMP in new developments to control
runoff rates, improve water quality, to return stormwater to the groundwater table, and to increase
water amenities for aesthetic, recreational and wildlife purposes.
Measurable Goals:
. Number of sedimentation ponds constructed
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Sedimentation ponds are currently being
im lemented in new develo ments
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
:-mail: trosscLfarminton.mn.us E-mail: ImannciJarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. brieflv describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
S"i? I
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 5.03
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
[3 Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Skimmer Structures
BMP Descriotion:
The City of Farmington requires skimmer structures at the outlet of all sedimentation ponds.
Skimmer structures control the normal water elevation of the pond and provide an overflow in a
high water event. Skimmer structures also remove undesirable floating debris, and protect
downstream waterbodies from contamination caused by spills of oil or other floating contaminants.
Measurable Goals:
. Number of skimmer structures installed
Timeline Ilmolementation Schedule:
. Skimmer structures are currently being
im lemented in new develo ments
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImannciJarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational comoonent of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5~~
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 5.04
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
EJ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Sum Catch basin Manholes
BMP Description:
The City of Farmington requires sump catch basin manholes to be installed at the last accessible
catch basin before the storm sewer discharges to an outlet. The purpose of sump catchbasin
manholes is to allow heavier debris that is traveling down the storm sewer, such as gravel and
sand, a place to settle out before being discharged from the system.
Measurable Goals:
. number of sump CBMH's installed
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Sump CBMH's are currently being
im lemented in new develo ments
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Ci En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ciJarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImanncLfarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWppp , briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5~3
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
'S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 5.05
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
El Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls '
X Post-construction storm water management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Ri ra /Cable Concrete
BMP Description:
The City of Farmington requires riprap or cable concrete to be installed surrounding all skimmer
structures, at all points of juncture between two open channels,. and at all outlets from the MS4.
Riprap/cable concrete helps to slow the velocity of the water as it discharges from the outlet
structure to minimize erosion and promote settling of suspended solids.
Measurable Goals:
. Number of skimmer structures installed
. Number of outlet structures installed
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Riprap/cable concrete is currently being
implemented in new developments
5 ct? t.{
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 5.06
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
~ Construction site runoff controls
X Post-construction stormwater management
Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Ordinance Re ulatin Runoff from New and Re-develo ment
BMP Descriotion:
The City of Farmington currently addresses storm water runoff in both the zoning code and in the
code governing subdivisions, by referencing the Surface Water Management Plan. During the first 3
years, the City will review the current ordinances and either revise the current code, or create a new
ordinance to comply with regulatory agency requirements.
Measurable Goals: Timeline Ilmolementation Schedule:
. Completion of existing ordinance review and . Year 1 - Review existing ordinances and
comparison with other communities and compare with other communities and
regulatory bodies regulatory bodies
. complete draft of revised ordinance(s) . Year 2 Produce draft of revised
. completed ordinance(s) ordinance(s) according to year 1
assessments
. Year 3 - Completed Ordinance(s) Regulating
Runoff from New and Re-develo ment.
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Cit En ineer
Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: t ross ciJarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: ImannciJarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational comoonent of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
5~5'
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
MS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 6.01
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
W Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
W Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction storm water management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Park and 0 en S ace Maintenance Trainin Pro ram
BMP Description:
The City will implement a program to train staff in the appropriate methods of fertilizer application,
pesticide/herbicide application, and mowing techniques to protect water quality in the MS4 as a
whole and to protect critical waterbodies and waterways.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Completed Park and Open Space Maint. . Year 1 - Completion of training program
Training Program design
. number of attendees · Year 2 -Implement training program
Responsible Department or Organization
De 1. or Or .: Park and Recreation De artment
De 1. Head: Rand Distad, Park & Rec. Director
Phone: 651-463-1851
E-mail: dha es ciJarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: rdistadcLfarminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The Park and Open Space Maintenance Training Program is designed to educate City Staff about
maintenance measures that are necessa to rotect water ualit and to minimize erosion
5~C.
Existina BMP? D
BMP Description Sheet
I1S4 Name: City of Farmington
UniQue Identifyina Number: 6.02
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
@ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
X Illicit discharge detection & elimination
@ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Hazardous Materials Awareness Traininq
BMP Description:
The City will create and implement a program to train appropriate City staff to identify, and correctly
and safely address, hazardous spills.
Measurable Goals: Timeline !Implementation Schedule:
. Creation of Hazardous Materials Awareness . Year 1 - Completion of training program
Training design
. Number of attendees . Year 2 - Implement training program I
I
Responsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: John Powers Deot. or Om.: Communitv Develooment
Title: Fire Marshall Deot. Head: Kevin Carroll. Community Dev. Director
)hone: 651-463-1840 Phone: 651-463-1860
E-mail: ioowers(Q)cLfarminaton.mn.us E-mail: kcarroll@cLfarminoton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP , briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The Hazardous Materials Awareness Training is intended to train City staff to control spills of
hazardous materials in a safe way and in such a manner as to protect water quality to the greatest
extent.
5<6)
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
.S4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 6.03
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
B Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
bJ Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
MNDOT Certification for Erosion/Sediment Control Site Inspector/lnstaller
BMP Description:
The City will have a member of staff who is primarily in charge of erosion control inspections
MNDOT certified as an Erosion/Sediment Control Site Inspector/lnstaller. The purpose of the
MNDOT Certification course is to train individuals in the installation or inspection of erosion control
devices.
Measurable Goals: Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Completion of the MNDOT Certification for . Training course is held in the spring of 2003
Erosion/ Sediment Control Site Inspector/ . A refresher course will be taken every 5
Installer training years
~esponsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
lame: Rich Schimmel Dept. or Om.: Minnesota Department of Transportation
Title: EnQineerinQ Technician Dept. Head: Office of Construction & Contract Admin.
Phone: 651-463-1603 Phone: 651-296-3126
E-mail: rschimmelavci.farminaton.mn.us E-mail: www.dot.state.mn.us/constltcp/index.html
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP. briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
The MNDOT Certification for Erosion Control Inspectors is a class to train City Staff to properly
inspect and install erosion control BMP's.
5<=?~
Existina BMP? 0
BMP Description Sheet
IS4 Name: City of Farmington
Uniaue Identifvina Number: 6.04
Minimum Control Measures Addressed by This BMP
~ Public education & outreach
Public participation & involvement
Illicit discharge detection & elimination
W Construction site runoff controls
Post-construction stormwater management
X Pollution prevention/Good housekeeping
BMP Title:
Cit Street Swee in
BMP Description:
The City currently has a program to sweep City streets to remove excess sand and salt from
plowing operations and to remove leaves and other debris in the fall.
Timeline I Implementation Schedule:
. Effective immediately
. Streets are swept in the spring after the snow
melts and in the fall after most of the leaves
have fallen
Res onsible Person for this BMP Responsible Department or Organization
Name: Bill Weierke De 1. or Or .: En ineerin Division
itle: Streets Su erintendent De 1. Head: Lee Mann, Director of PW/Ci En ineer
. hone: 651-463-8957 Phone: 651-463-1601
E-mail: bweierke cLfarmin ton.mn.us E-mail: Imannci.farminton.mn.us
If this BMP is an educational component of your SWPPP, briefly describe the audience and
educational aoals for this minimum control measure:
Measurable Goals:
. hours spent sweeping streets
5~
&EPA
Storm Water Phase II
Final Rule
Fact Sheet Series
Overview
1.0 - Storm Water Phase II Final
Rule: An Overview
Small MS4 Program
2.0 - Small MS4 Storm Water
Program Overview
2.1 - Who's Covered? Designation
and Waivers of Regulated S-mall
MS4s
2.2 - Urbanized Areas: Definition
and Description
Minimum Control Measures
2.3 - Public Education and
Outreach
2.4 - Public Participationl
Involvement
2.5 - Illicit Discharge Detection
and Elimination
2.6 - Construction Site Runoff
Control
2.7 - Post-Construction Runoff
Control
2.8 - Pollution Prevention/Good
Housekeeping
2.9 - Permitting and Reporting:
The Process and Requirements
2.10 - Federal and State-Operated
MS4s: Program Implementation
Construction Program
3.0 - Construction Program
Overview
3.1 - Construction Rainfall
Erosivity Waiver
Industrial "No Exposure"
4.0 - Conditional No Exposure
Exclusion for Industrial Activtty
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4203)
EPA 833-F-00-00l
January 2000
Fact Sheet 1.0
Storm Water Phase II
Final Rule
An Overview
Why Is the Phase II Storm Water Program Necessary?
Since the passage of the Clean Water Act (CW A), the quality of our Nation's waters has
improved dramatically. Despite this progress, however, degmded waterbodies still exist.
According to the 1996 National Water Quality Inventory (Inventory), a biennial summary of
State surveys of water quality, approximately 40 percent of surveyed U.S. waterbodies are
still impaired by pollution and do not meet water quality standards. A leading source of this
impairment is polluted runoff. In fact, according to the Inventory, 13 percent of impaired
rivers, 21 percent of impaired lake acres and 45 percent of impaired estuaries are affected by
urban/suburban storm water runoff and 6 percent of impaired rivers, 11 percent of impaired
lake acres and II percent of impaired estuaries are affected by construction site discharges.
Phase I ofthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) storm water program was
promulgated in 1990 under the CW A. Phase I relies on National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit covemge to address storm water runoff from:
(I) "medium" and "large" municipal sepamte storm sewer systems (MS4s) genemlly serving
populations of 100,000 or greater, (2) construction activity disturbing 5 acres ofland or
greater, and (3) ten categories of industrial activity.
The Storm Water Phase II Final Rule is the next step in EPA's effort to preserve, protect,
and improve the Nation's water resources from polluted storm water runoff. The Phase II
program expands the Phase I program by requiring additional opemtors of MS4s in urbanized
areas and opemtors of small construction sites, through the use ofNPDES permits, to
implement programs and pmctices to control polluted storm water runoff. See Fact Sheets
2.0 and 3.0 for overviews of the Phase II programs for MS4s and construction activity.
Phase II is intended to further reduce adverse impacts to water quality and aquatic habitat by
instituting the use of controls on the unregulated sources of storm water discharges that have
the greatest likelihood of causing continued environmental degmdation. The environmental
problems associated with discharges from MS4s in urbanized areas and discharges resulting
from construction activity are outlined below.
MS4s in Urbanized Areas
Storm water discharges from MS4s in urbanized areas are a concern because of the high
concentmtion of pollutants found in these discharges. Concentrated development in
urbanized areas substantially increases impervious surfaces, such as city streets, driveways,
parking lots, and sidewalks, on which pollutants from concentrated human activities settle
and remain until a storm event washes them into nearby storm drains. Common pollutants
include pesticides, fertilizers, oils, salt, litter and other debris, and sediment. Another
concern is the possible illicit connections of sanitary sewers, which can result in fecal
coliform bacteria entering the storm sewer system. Storm water runoff picks up and
tmnsports these and other harmful pollutants then discharges them - untreated - to
waterways via storm sewer systems. When left uncontrolled, these discharges can result in
fish kills, the destruction of spawning and wildlife habitats, a loss in aesthetic value, and
contamination of drinking water supplies and recreational waterways that can threaten public
health.
S9~
Fact Sheet 1.0 - Storm Water Phase II Final Rule: An Overview
Page 2
Construction Activitv
Uncontrolled runoff from construction sites is a water quality
concern because of the devastating effects that sedimentation
can have on local waterbodies, particularly small streams.
Numerous studies have shown that the amount of sediment
transported by storm water runoff from construction sites
with no controls is significantly greater than from sites with
controls. In addition to sediment, construction activities yield
pollutants such as pesticides, petroleum products,
construction chemicals, solvents, asphalts, and acids that can
contaminate storm water runoff. During storms, construction
sites may be the source of sediment-laden runoff, which can
overwhelm a small stream channel's capacity, resulting in
streambed scour, streambank erosion, and destruction of near-
stream vegetative cover. Where left uncontrolled, sediment-
laden runoff has been shown to result in the loss of in-stream
habitats for fish and other aquatic species, an increased
difficulty in filtering drinking water, the loss of drinking
water reservoir storage capacity, and negative impacts on the
navigational capacity of waterways.
Are Municipally Operated Sources Exempted
by the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act (IS TEA) of 1991 Affected by
the Final Rule?
Provisions within ISTEA temporarily delayed the deadline
for Phase I industrial activities (with the exception of
power plants, airports, and uncontrolled sanitary landfills)
operated by municipalities with populations of less than
100,000 people to obtain an NPDES storm water discharge
permit. Congress delayed the permitting deadline for these
facilities to allow small municipalities additional time to
comply with NPDES requirements. The Phase II Final Rule
ended this temporary exemption from permitting and set a
deadline of no later than March 10, 2003 for all ISTEA-
exempted municipally operated industrial activities to obtain
permit coverage.
How Was the Phase II Final Rule Developed?
Ep A developed the Phase II Final Rule during extensive
consultations with a cross-section of interested
stakeholders brought together on a subcommittee chartered
under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and with
representatives of small entities participating in an advisory
process mandated under the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. In addition, EPA considered
comments submitted by over 500 individuals and
organizations during a 90-day public comment period on
the proposed rule.
Why Does Part of the Phase II Final Rule Use a
Question and Answer Format?
The provisions pertaining to operators of small MS4s are
written in a "readable regulation" form that uses the
"plain language" method. Questions and answers are used to
create more reader-friendly and understandable regulations.
The plain language method uses "must" instead of "shall" to
indicate a requirement and words like "should," "could," or
"encourage" to indicate a recommendation or guidance.
Who Is Covered by the Phase II Final Rule?
The final rule "automatically" covers two classes of storm
water dischargers on a nationwide basis:
(1) Operators of small MS4s located in "urbanized
areas" as delineated by the Bureau of the Census.
A "small" MS4 is any MS4 not already covered by
Phase I ofthe NPDES storm water program. See
Fact Sheets 2.1 and 2.2 for more infonnation on
small MS4 coverage.
(2) Operators of small construction activities that
disturb equal to or greater than I (one) and less
than 5 (five) acres of land. See Fact Sheet 3.0 for
more information on small construction activity
coverage.
Waivers
Permitting authorities may waive "automatically designated"
Phase II dischargers if the dischargers meet the necessary
criteria. See Fact Sheets 2.1 (small MS4 waivers overview),
3.0 (construction waivers overview) and 3.1 (construction
rainfall erosivity waiver) for details.
Phased-in Permit Covera~e
Permitting authorities may phase-in permit coverage for small
MS4s serving jurisdictions with a population under 10,000 on
a schedule consistent with a State watershed permitting
approach.
Additional Desivnations bv the Permittinl! Authoritv
Small MS4s located outside ofurhanized areas, construction
activity disturbing less than I acre, and any other storm water
discharges can be designated for coverage if the NPDES
permitting authority or EP A determines that storm water
controls are necessary. See Fact Sheet 2.1 for more
information on the designation of small MS4s located outside
of urbanized areas.
59/
Fact Sheet 1.0 - Storm Water Phase II Final Rule: An Overview
Page 3
What Does the Phase II Final Rule Require?
Operators of Phase II-designated small MS4s and small
construction activity are required to apply for NPDES
permit coverage, most likely under a general rather than
individual permit, and to implement storm water discharge
management controls (known as "best management practices"
(BMPs)). Specific requirements for each type of discharge
are listed below.
Small MS4s
o A regulated small MS4 operator must develop,
implement, and enforce a storm water management
program designed to reduce the discharge of
pollutants from their MS4 to the "maximum extent
practicable," to protect water quality, and to satisfy
the appropriate water quality requirements of the
CW A. The rule assumes the use of narrative, rather
than numeric, effluent limitations requiring
implementation of BMPs.
o The small MS4 storm water management program
must include the following six minimum control
measures: public education and outreach; public
participation/involvement; illicit discharge detection
and elimination; construction site runoff control;
post-construction runoff control; and pollution
prevention/good housekeeping. See Fact Sheets 2.3
through 2.8 for more information on each measure,
including BMPs and measurable goals.
o A regulated small MS4 operator must identify its
selection of BMPs and measurable goals for each
minimum measure in the permit application. The
evaluation and assessment of those chosen BMPs
and measurable goals must be included in periodic
reports to the NPDES permitting authority. See Fact
Sheet 2.9 for more information on permitting and
reporting.
Small Construction Activity
o The specific requirements for storm water controls
on small construction activity will be defined by the
NPDES permitting authority on a State-by-State
basis.
o EPA expects that the NPDES permitting authorities
will use their existing Phase I general pennits for
large construction activity as a guide for their
Phase II permits for small construction activity. If
this occurs, a storm water pollution prevention plan
will likely be required for small construction activity.
See Fact Sheet 3.0 for more information on potential
program requirements and appropriate BMPs for
small construction activity.
What Is the Phase II Program Approach?
The Phase II program, based on the use of federally
enforceable NPDES permits:
o
Encourages the use of general permits;
o Provides flexibility for regulated operators to
detennine the most appropriate storm water
controls;
o Allows for the recognition and inclusion of existing
NPDES and non-NPDES storm water programs in
Phase II permits;
o Includes public education and participation efforts
as primary elements of the small MS4 program;
o Attempts to facilitate and promote watershed
planning and to implement the storm water program
on a watershed basis; and
o Works toward a unified and comprehensive NPDES
storm water program with Phase I of the program.
How Does the Phase II Final Rule Address the
Phase I Industrial "No Exposure" Provision?
In addition to establishing a deadline for ISTEA facilities
and designating two new classes of dischargers, the
Phase II Final Rule revises the "no exposure" provision
originally included in the 1990 regulations for Phase I of the
NPDES storm water program. The provision was remanded
to EP A for further rulemaking and, subsequently, included in
its revised form in the Phase II rule.
Under the Phase II Final Rule, a conditional no exposure
exclusion is available to operators of all categories of Phase I
regulated industrial activity (except category (x) construction
activity) who can certify that all industrial materials and
activities are protected by a storm resistant shelter to prevent
exposure to rain, snow, snowmelt, and/or runoff. To obtain
the no exposure exclusion, written certification must be
submitted to the NPDES permitting authority. The final rule
includes a No Exposure Certification form for use only by
operators of industrial activity in areas where EP A is the
NPDES permitting authority. See Fact Sheet 4.0 for more
information on the conditional no exposure exclusion for
industrial activity.
S9c:?
Fact Sheet 1.0 - Storm Water Phase II Final Rule: An Overview
Page 4
What Is the Phase II Program Implementation
"Tool Box?"
EPA is committed to providing tools to facilitate
implementation of the final Phase II storm water program
in an effective and cost-efficient manner. The "tool box" will
include the following components:
eo
Fact Sheets;
Guidance Documents;
Menu of BMPs;
Information Clearinghouse/Web Site;
Training and Outreach Efforts;
Technical Research;
Support for Demonstration Projects; and
Compliance Monitoring/Assistance Tools.
eo
eo
eo
eo
eo
eo
eo
A preliminary working toolbox is available on EPA's web
site at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater. Three years after
publication of the fmal rule, when the general pennits are
issued, a fully operational tool box is scheduled to be
available.
What Is the Schedule for the Phase II Rule?
o The Phase II Final Rule was published in the Federal
Register on December 8,1999 (64 FR 68722).
o The Conditional No Exposure Exclusion option is
available February 7, 2000, in States where EPA is
the pennitting authority.
o The NPDES permitting authority will issue general
permits for Phase II-designated small MS4s and small
construction activity by December 9,2002.
o Operators of Phase II "automatically" designated
regulated small MS4s and small construction activity
~ust obtain pennit coverage within 90 days of pennit
Issuance.
o The NPDES pennitting authority may phase-in
coverage for small MS4s serving jurisdictions with a
population under 10,000 on a schedule consistent with
a State watershed permitting approach.
o Operators of regulated small MS4s must fully
implement their storm water management programs
by the end of the first pennit term, typically a 5-year
period.
For Additional Information
Contacts
lIE U.S. EPA Office of Wastewater Management
Internet: www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater
Phone: 202-564-9545
lIE Your NPDES Permitting Authority. A list of names
and telephone numbers for each EP A Region and
State is located at: www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater,
then click on "Contacts."
Reference Documents
lIE Storm Water Phase II Final Rule Fact Sheet Series
Internet: cfpub.epa.gov /npdes/stonnwater/swfinal.cfm
lIE Storm Water Phase II Final Rule (64 FR 68722)
Internet: www.epa,gov/npdes/regulations/phase2.pdf
593
&EPA
Stonn Water Phase II
Final Rule
Fact Sheet Series
Overview
1.0 - Storm Water Phase II Final
Rule: An Overview
Small MS4 Program
2.0 - Small MS4 Storm Water
Program Overview
2.1 - Who's Covered? Designation
and Waivers of Regulated Small
MS4s
2.2 - Urbanized Areas: Definition
and Description
Minimum Control Measures
2.3 - Public Education and
Outreach
2.4 - Public Participation/
Involvement
2.5 - Illicit Discharge Detection
and Elimination
2.6 - Construction Site Runoff
Control
2.7 - Post-Construction Runoff
Control
2.8 - Pollution Prevention/Good
Housekeeping
2.9 - Permitting and Reporting:
The Process and Requiremenls
2.10 - Federal and State-Operated
MS4s: Program Implementation
Construction Program
3.0 - Construction Program
Overview
3.1 - Construction Rainfall
Erosivity Waiver
Industrial "No Exposure"
4.0 - Conditional No Exposure
Exclusion for Industrial Activity
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4203)
EPA 833-F-Oll
January 2000
Fact Sheet 2.9
Storm Water Phase II
Final Rule
Permitting and Reporting:
The Process and Requirements
The Stonn Water Phase II Final Rule requires operators of certain small municipal separate stonn
sewer systems (MS4s) to obtain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit coverage because their stonn water discharges are considered "point sources" of pollution.
All point source discharges, unlike nonpoint sources such as agricultural runoff, are required
under the Clean Water Act (CW A) to be covered by federally enforceable NPDES pennits. Those
systems already pennitted under the NPDES Phase I stann water program, even systems serving less
than 100,000 people, are not required to be pennitted under the Phase II stonn water program.
NPDES stonn water pennits are issued by an NPDES permitting authority, which may be a NPDES-
authorized State or a U.S. EPA Region in non-authorized States (see the For Additional Information
section for a list of U.S. EPA regional contacts). Once a pennit application is submitted by the
operator of a regulated small MS4 and a pennit is obtained, the conditions of the pennit must be
satisfied (i.e., development and implementation of a stonn water management program) and periodic
reports must be submitted on the status and effectiveness of the program.
This fact sheet explains the various pennit options that are available for operators of regulated
small MS4s and details the permit application and reporting requirements. Important compliance
deadlines also are highlighted. Program coverage and requirements for regulated small MS4s are
explained in Fact Sheets 2.0 through 2.8.
What Permitting Options Are Available to Operators of Regulated Small
MS4s?
Unlike the Phase I program that primarily utilizes individual pennits for medium and large MS4s,
the Phase II approach allows operators of regulated small MS4s to choose from as many as
three pennitting options as listed below. The NPDES pennitting authority reserves the authority
to determine, however, which options are available to the regulated small MS4s.
o General Permits
General permits are strongly encouraged by EPA. The Phase II program has been designed
specifically to accommodate a general pennit approach.
· General permits prescribe one set of requirements for all applicable permittees. General
pennits are drafted by the NPDES pennitting authority, then published for public comment
before being finalized and issued.
· A Notice of Intent (NOI) serves as the application for the general permit. The permittee
complies with the pennit requirements by submitting an NOI to the NPDES permitting
authority that describes the stonn water management plan, including best management
practices (BMPs) and mea~urable goals. A Phase II pennittee has the flexibility to develop
an individualized stonn water program that addresses the particular characteristics and
needs of its system, provided the basic requirements of the general permit are satisfied.
S9~
Fact Sheet 2.9 - Permittin~ and Reportin~: The Process and Requirements
P~
Permittees also can choose to share responsibilities for
meeting the Phase II program requirements. Those
entities choosing to do so may submit jointly with the
other municipalities or governmental entities an NOI
that identifies who will implement which minimum
measures within the area served by the MS4.
The permittee then follows the Phase II permit
application requirements (see discussion in next
question below).
Minimize Duolication of Effort
Two permitting options tailored to minimize duplication of
effort can be incorporated into the general permit by the
NPDES permitting authority. First, the permitting authority
can recognize in the pennit that another governmental entity is
responsible under an NPDES pennit for implementing any or
all minimum measures. Responsibility for implementation
of the measure(s) would rest with the other governmental
entity, thereby relieving the permittee of its responsibility to
implement that particular mea'iure(s). For example, the
NPDES permitting authority could recognize a county erosion
and sediment control program for construction sites that was
developed to comply with a Phase I permit. As long as the
Phase II MS4s in the county comply with the county's
construction program, they would not need to develop and
implement their own construction programs because such
activity would already be addressed by the county.
Second, the NPDES permitting authority can include
conditions in a general permit that direct a pennittee to follow
the requirements of an existing qualifying local program rather
than the requirements of a minimum measure. A qualifying
local program is defined as a local, State or Tribal municipal
storm water program that imposes requirements that are
equivalent to those of the Phase II MS4 minimum measures.
The permittee remains responsible for the implementation of
the minimum mea'iure through compliance with the qualifying
local program.
o Individual Permits
Individual permits are required for Phase I "medium"
and "large" MS4s, but not recommended by EP A for
Phase II program implementation.
The permittee can either submit an individual
application for coverage by the Phase II MS4 program
(see ~122.34) or the Phase I MS4 program (see
U22.26(d)).
For individual coverage under Phase II, the pennittee
must follow Phase II permit application requirements
and provide an estimate of square mileage served by
the system and any additional information requested
by the NPDES pennitting authority. A permittee
electing to apply for coverage under the Phase I
program must follow the pennit application
requirements detailed at ~ I 22.26( d).
The NPDES permitting authority may allow more than
one regulated entity to jointly apply for an individual
permit.
The NPDES pennitting authority could incorporate
in the individual permit either of the two permitting
options explained above in the Minimize Duplication
of Effort section.
o Modification of a Phase I Individual Permit -
A Co-Permittee Option
The operator of a regulated small MS4 could
participate a'i a limited co-permittee in a neighboring
Phase I MS4's storm water management program
by seeking a modification of the existing Pha'ie I
individual pennit. A list of Pha'ie I medium and large
MS4s can be obtained from the EPA Office of
Wastewater Management (OWM) or downloaded
from the OWM web site.
The permittee must follow Phase I permit application
requirements (with some exclusions).
· The permittee must comply with the applicable terms
of the Phase I individual permit rather than the
minimum control measures in the Phase II Final Rule.
What Does the Permit Application Require?
Operators of regulated small MS4s are required to submit in
their NOI or individual permit application the following
information:
o Best management practices (BMPs) are required for
each of the six minimum control measures:
o Public education and outreach on storm water
impacts
@ Public participation/involvement
49 Illicit discharge detection and elimination
o Construction site storm water runoff control
8 Post-construction storm water management in
new development/redevelopment
<D Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for
municipal operations
(See Fact Sheets 2.3 through 2.8 for full descriptions
of each measure, including examples of BMPs and
measurable goals)
o Mea'iurable goals for each minimum control measure
(i.e, narrative or numeric standards used to gauge
program effectiveness);
5'75
Fact Sheet 2.9 - Permittin2 and ReportiDl~: The Process and Requirements
Pas;j
o Estimated months and years in which actions to
implement each measure will be undertaken, including
interim milestones and frequency; and
o The person or persons responsible for implementing
or coordinating the storm water program.
Relvin!! on Another Entity
The Phase II permittee has the option of relying on other
entities already performing one or more of the minimum
control mea~ures, provided that the existing control measure,
or component thereof, is at least as stringent as the Phase II
rule requirements. For example, a county already may have an
illicit discharge detection and elimination program in place and
may allow an operator of a regulated small MS4 within the
county's jurisdiction to rely on the county program instead of
formulating and implementing a new program. In such a case,
the permittee would not need to implement the particular
measure, but would still be ultimately responsible for its
effective implementation. For this reason, EPA recommends
that the permittee enter into a legally binding agreement with
the other entity. If the permittee chooses to rely on another
entity, they must note this in their permit application and
subsequent reports. A Phase II permittee may even rely on
another governmental entity regulated under the NPDES
storm water program to satisfy all of the permittee's permit
obligations. Should this option be chosen, the permittee must
note this in its NOI, but does not need to file periodic reports.
What Does the Permit Require?
The operator of a regulated small MS4 has the flexibility
to determine the BMPs and measurable goals, for each
minimum control measure, that are most appropriate for the
system. The chosen BMPs and measurable goals, submitted
in the permit application, become the required storm water
management program; however, the NPDES permitting
authority can require changes in the mix of chosen BMPs
and measurable goals if all or some of them are found to be
inconsistent with the provisions of the Phase II Final Rule.
Likewise, the permittee can change its mix of BMPs if it
determines that the program is not as effective as it could
be Fact Sheets 2.3 through 2.8 further describe each of the
minimum control measures, while the permit requirements
for evaluation/assessment and recordkeeping activities are
described in separate sections below.
Menu of BMPs
The BMPs for minimum measures 3 through 6 (as listed in
the permit application requirements section, above) are not
enforceable until the NPDES permitting authority provides a
list, or "menu," of BMPs to assist permittees in the design and
implementation of their storm water management progmms.
The NPDES permitting authority is required to provide this
menu as an aid for those operators that are unsure of the most
appropriate and effective BMPs to use. Since the menu is
intended to serve as guidance only, the operators can either
select from the menu or identify other BMPs to meet the permit
requirements. EPA is scheduled to develop a menu of BMPs
by October 27, 2000.
What Standards Apply?
APhase II small MS4 operator is required to design its
program so that it:
o Reduces the discharge of pollutants to the "maximum
extent practicable" (MEP);
o Protects water quality; and
o Satisfies the appropriate water quality requirements of
the Clean Water Act.
Compliance with the technical standard of MEP requires the
successful implementation of approved BMPs. The Phase II
Final Rule considers narrative effluent limitations that require
the implementation of BMPs and the achievement of
measurable goals as the most appropriate form of effluent
limitations to achieve the protection of water quality, rather
than requiring that storm water discharges meet numeric
effluent limitations.
EPA intends to issue Phase II NPDES permits consistent
with its August I, 1996, Interim Permitting Approach policy,
which calls for BMPs in first-round storm water permits and
expanded or better tailored BMPs in subsequent permits,
where necessary, to provide for the attainment of water
quality standards. In cases where information exists to
develop more specific conditions or limitations to meet water
quality standards, these conditions or limitations should be
incorporated into the storm water permit. Monitoring is not
required under the Phase II Rule, but the NPDES permitting
authority has the discretion to require monitoring if deemed
necessary.
What EvaluationlReporting Efforts Are
Required?
Freauencv of ReDorts
Reports must be submitted annually during the tirst permit
term. For subsequent permit terms, reports must be submitted
in years 2 and 4 only, unless the NPDES permitting authority
requests more frequent reports.
59~
Fact Sheet 2.9 - Permitting and Reporting: The Process and Requirements
Page 4
Reauired Reoort Content
The reports must include the following:
o The status of compliance with permit conditions,
including an assessment of the appropriateness of the
selected BMPs and progress toward achieving the
selected measurable goals for each minimum measure;
o Results of any information collected and analyzed,
including monitoring data, if any;
o A summary of the storm water activities planned for
the next reporting cycle;
o A change in any identified best management practices
or measurable goals for any minimum measure; and
a Notice of relying on another governmental entity to
satisfy some of the permit obligations (if applicable).
A Chanf!e in Selected BMPs
If, upon evaluation of the program, improved controls are
identified as necessary, permittees should revise their mix of
BMPs to provide for a more etfective program. Such a change,
and an explanation of the change, must be noted in a report to
the NPDES permitting authority.
What are the Recordkeeping Requirements?
Records required by the NPDES permitting authority must
be kept for at least 3 years and made accessible to the
public at reasonable times during regular business hours.
Records need not be submitted to the NPDES permitting
authority unless the permittee is requested to do so.
What Are the Deadlines for Compliance?
o The NPDES permitting authority issues general
permits for regulated small MS4s by December 9,
2002.
o Operators of "automatically designated" regulated
small MS4s in urbanized areas submit their permit
applications within 90 days of permit issuance, no
later than March 10, 2003.
o Operators of regulated small MS4s designated by the
permitting authority submit their permit applications
within 180 days of notice.
a Regulated small MS4 storm water management
programs fully developed and implemented by the end
of the first permit term, typically a 5-year period
What are the Penalties for Noncompliance?
The NPDES permit that the operator of a regulated small
MS4 is required to obtain is federally enforceable, thus
subjecting the permittee to potential enforcement actions and
penalties by the NPDES permitting authority if the permittee
does not fully comply with application or permit requirements.
This federal enforceability also includes the right for interested
parties to sue under the citizen suit provision (section 405) of
the CW A.
For Additional Information
Contacts
Q> U.S. EPA Regional Storm Water Coordinators I
Region] {ME2, NH2, VT, MA2, RI, CT}:
Region 2 {NY, NJ, PR2. VI}:
Region 3 {PA, DE, DC2, MD, VA, WV}:
Region 4 {KY, TN, NC, SC, MS, AL, GA, FL}:
Region 5 {MN, WI, IL, MI, IN, OH}:
Region 6 {NM2, TX, OK, AR, LA}:
Region 7 {NE, KS, lA, MO}:
Region 8 {MT, ND, WY, SD, UT, CO}:
Region 9 {CA, NV, AZ2, HI}:
Region ]0 {WA, OR, 102, AK2}:
The]ma Murphy
Karen O'Brien
Mary Letzkus
Michae] Mitchell
Peter Swenson
Brent Larsen
Ralph Summers
Veroon Berry
Eugene Bromley
Bob Robichaud
6]79]8-]6]5
2]2637-3717
215814-2087
404 562-9303
3 12 886-0236
214665-7523
913 551-7416
303 312-6234
4]5744-]906
206 553-]448
I The U.S. EPA is the NPDES permitting authority for all federally recognized Indian Country Lands, and for Federal facilities in AK,
American Samoa, AZ, CO, DE, DC, FL, Guam, 10, Johnston Atoll, ME, MA, Midway & Wake Islands, NH, NM. PR, VT, VI, and W A.
2 Denotes a non-authorized State for the NPDES storm water program. For these States only, the U.S. EPA Region is the NPDES
permitting authority. All other States serve as NPDES permitting authorities for the storm water program.
Q> U.S. EPA Office of Wastewater Management
· Phone: (202) 564-9545 · Internet: www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater
597
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farminlrton.mn.us
March 07, 2003
MS4 Storm Water Program
Attn: Deb Charpentier
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
RE: Notice of Intent for Coverage under General Storm Water Permit Application (MN R 040000)
Dear Ms. Charpentier:
This letter accompanies the submittal of the Notice of Intent (NOI) tor the City of Farmington to
obtain coverage under General Storm Water Permit Application (MN R 040000). The NOI does not
include the SWPPP Summary Sheet or the BMP Description Sheets as allowed per the letter from
Donald Jakes of the MPCA dated February 13,2003 and therefore the application is not signed at this
time.
The City considers the SWPPP Summary Sheet and the BMP Description Sheets to be a single
integrated component of the City's permit submittal, since together they will become legally
enforceable part of our NOr. They are not submitted at this time to allow the Farmington City
Council adequate time to review, comment, revise, and approve the SWPPP.
It is the intent of the City to submit the completed SWPPP Summary Sheet and the BMP Description
Sheets by the extended deadline of May 9,2003. At the time of submittal, the City will also include a
revised, signed application form. Please consider this letter to be:
. the written commitment to this effect,
. the description of the City of Farmington's plan to complete the SWPPP, as required in
section II.A. of the application form, and
. the description of the City of Farmington's plan to complete the requirements for each
minimum control measure, as required in Section n.B. of the application form
Sincerely,
~111~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
Ed Shukle, City Administrator
Tim Gross, P .E., Assistant City Engineer
S9~
MS Word Template
NotIce of Intent to obtaIn coverage
General Storm Water Permit Application (MN R 040000)
for Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s)
(Noticed as MN R 580000)
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
Application deadline: March 10, 2003
-
,----
~
Minnesota
Pollution
Control
Agency
Please read the instructions carefully and use the "tab" key to move through the fields of this form. Enter
responses using drop down menus, check boxes and text as indicated. Use the "save as" feature in MS Word to
save this template as a document.
I. MS4 Information
A. Application Type
Application type: Single site or administrative area If multiple sites, number of attached application forms:
MS4s with multiple sites such as campuses, dispersed facilities. or state agency regions/districts, must attach a completed application for each site or
administrative area. An authorized person with overall responsibility or an officially delegated representative must sign each application form.
B. MS4 Owner
City of Farmington
Community, municipality, agency or other party having ownership or operational control of the MS4.
- 25 Oak Street
[ailing Address
Farmington
City
Dakota
MN 55024
State Zip Code
Rush-Vermillion
County
41-6005151
Major Watershed (see enclosed map)
8022052
Federal Tax 1D
State Tax 1D
C. General Contact
Mann
Lee
Public Works Director/City Engineer
Last Name First Name Title
General contact (official. statTmember. consultant or other) for permit compliance issues.
325 Oak Street
Mailing Address
Farmington
City
651-463-1601
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
lrnann@ci.farmington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
II. Certification of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP)
A. Have you developed a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program for your MS4? DYes I8INo
Municipalities must demonstrate how their Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program will be implemented and
enforced over the term of the five-year permit. SWPPPs must incorporate appropriate educational components.
BMPs and measurable goals.
wq-strm 4-52w
MPCA MS4 Storm Water Permit Application
lof7
02106103
599
Provide a brief description of the plan to complete the SWPPP if"No" is marked above.
The content of the SWPPP has been completed, however review and approval of the program is necessary at
a City Council level. The SWPPP will be presented to the City Council for review, comment and approval,
and will be signed and submitted to the MPCA before the 60 day deadline as described in the February 13,
2003 letter from Donald Jakes of the MPCA.
B. Summary of the six minimum control measures. Complete items B. 1. through B. 6.
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Programs must address the specific requirements contained in Part V. G. of the permit. SWPPPs must
outline how the six minimum control measures will be addressed. the contact person. department in charge. time frame and measures that
will be implemented to meet the schedules required by the permit.
1. Public education and outreach measures
Gross Tim
Contact Last Name
325 Oak Street
First Name
Engineering
Department
Mailing Address
Farmington
City
651-463-1607
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
tgross@ci.fannington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
a) Have Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented for this minimum I8IVes DNo
control measure been planned or developed?
b) Have measurable goals for each BMP for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
) Has an estimated timeline for implementing each BMP for this minimum control I8IVes DNo
measure been planned or developed? Timelines should include, in narrative or numerical
fonn, the months and years required actions will occur, interim milestones, and
frequency of action, as appropriate.
d) Have the educational components for this minimum control measure been planned or I8Ives DNo
developed?
e) Provide a brief description of the plan to complete any requirements marked "No" above. Attach a separate
sheet if necessary.
2. Public participation and involvement measures
Gross Tim
Contact Last Name
325 Oak Street
First Name
Engineering
Department
Mailing Address
Farmington
City
651-463-1607
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
tgross@ci.fannington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
a) Have Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented for this minimum I8IVes DNo
control measure been planned or developed?
b) Have measurable goals for each BMP for this minimum control measure been planned or l81Yes DNo
developed?
wq-strm 4-52w
MPCA MS4 Stonn Water Pennit Application
20f7
02106103
~oo
c) Has an estimated timeline for implementing each BMP for this minimum control ~Ves DNo
measure been planned or developed? Timelines should include, in narrative or numerical
fonn, the months and years required actions will occur, interim milestones, and
frequency of action, as appropriate.
d) Have the educational components for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
e) Provide a brief description of the plan to complete any requirements marked "No" above. Attach a separate
sheet if necessary.
3. Illicit discharge detection and elimination
Gross Tim
ConlllCt Last Name
325 Oak Street
First Name
Engineering
Department
Mailing Address
Farmington
City
651-463-1607
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
tgross@ci.farmington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
a) Have Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented for this minimum I8Ives DNo
control measure been planned or developed?
b) Have measurable goals for each BMP for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
c) Has an estimated timeline for implementing each BMP for this minimum control I8IVes DNo
measure been planned or developed? Timelines should include, in narrative or numerical
fonn, the months and years required actions will occur, interim milestones, and
frequency of action, as appropriate.
d) Have the educational components for this minimum control measure been planned or ~Ves DNo
developed?
e) Provide a brief description of the plan to complete any requirements marked "No" above. Attach a separate
sheet if necessary.
4. Construction site storm water runoff control measures
Gross Tim
Contact Last Name
First Name
Engineering
Department
325 Oak Street
Mailing Address
Farmington
City
651-463-1607
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
tgross@ci.farmington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
a) Have Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented for this minimum I8IVes DNo
control measure been planned or developed?
b) Have measurable goals for each BMP for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
wq-strm 4-52w
MPCA MS4 Stonn Water pennit Application
3of7
02106103
~CJ/
c) Has an estimated timeline for implementing each BMP for this minimum control I8IVes DNo
measure been planned or developed? Timelines should include, in narrative or numerical
form, the months and years required actions will occur, interim milestones, and
frequency of action, as appropriate.
d) Have the educational components for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
e) Provide a brief description of the plan to complete any requirements marked "No" above. Attach a separate
sheet if necessary.
5. Post-construction storm water management measures
Gross Tim
ConlllCt last Name
325 Oak Street
First Name
Engineering
Department
Mailing Address
Farmington
City
651-463-1607
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
tgross@ci.farmington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
a) Have Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented for this minimum I8IVes DNo
control measure been planned or developed?
b) Have measurable goals for each BMP for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
) Has an estimated time line for implementing each BMP for this minimum control I8IVes DNo
measure been planned or developed? Timelines should include, in narrative or numerical
form, the months and years required actions will occur, interim milestones, and
frequency of action, as appropriate.
d) Have the educational components for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
e) Provide a brief description of the plan to complete any requirements marked "No" above. Attach a separate
sheet if necessary.
6. Pollution prevention and good housekeeping measures
Gross Tim
Contact last Name
325 Oak Street
First Name
Engineering
Department
Mailing Address
Farmington
City
651-463-1607
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
tgross@ci.fannington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
a) Have Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented for this minimum I8IVes DNo
control measure been planned or developed?
b) Have measurable goals for each BMP for this minimum control measure been planned or I8IVes DNo
developed?
wq-strm 4-52w
MPCA MS4 Stann Water Pennit Application
4of7
02106103
~Od{
c) Has an estimated timeline for implementing each BMP for this minimum control I81Yes DNo
measure been planned or developed? Timelines should include, in narrative or numerical
form, the months and years required actions will occur, interim milestones, and
frequency of action, as appropriate.
d) Have the educational components for this minimum control measure been planned or I81Yes DNo
developed?
e) Provide a brief description of the plan to complete any requirements marked "No" above. Attach a separate
sheet if necessary.
c. Reporting and record keeping requirements.
Have reporting and record keeping requirements for implementation ofthe Storm Water I81Yes DNo
Pollution Prevention Program been planned or developed?
Provide a brief description ofthe plan to complete the reporting and record keeping requirements if "No" is
marked above.
III. Summa of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Pro ram SWPPP
R~ql1ired .-\pplic:.ltion Attachments
Complete a one page SWPPP Summary Sheet and a BMP Description Sheet for C:.lch type ofBMP that will
be implemented. (See last two pages of the application form.)
Is the SWPPP Summary Sheet attached?
B. Is one BMP Description Sheet attached for each BMP?
C. How many BMP Description Sheets are attached?
DYes I81No
DYes I8INo
IV. Limitations of Coverage-
A. Part II Limitations on Coverage and Appendix C
I have read Part II Limitations on Coverage and Appendix C of the MS4 general permit and
certify that we intend to comply with the applicable requirements of those sections.
I81Yes
B. Special Waters
Please refer to the Guidance Manual for Small J\tfunicipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) and the
enclosed map to complete this section.
1. Does the MS4 discharge into Prohibited Waters as defined in Minn. R. 7050.0180, DYes I8INo
subp. 3, 4, and 5? See Attaclunent Four of the Guidance Manualfor Small Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) for further information. If yes, please list below
and contact Lou Flynn at (651) 296-6575 or louis.flynn@state.mn.us. Be advised that
you will be required to obtain an individual permit versus a general permit.
Does the MS4 discharge into waters with a Restricted Discharge as defined in Minn. R. DYes I8INo
7050.0180, subp. 6, 6a, and 6b? If yes, please list below and comply with Part IX,
Appendix C, Item B. See Attaclunent Four of the Guidance Manualfor Small Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) for further information.
wq-strm 4-52w
MPCA MS4 Stonn Water Permit Application
50f7
02106103
&03
3. Does the MS4 discharge into Trout Waters as defined in Minn. R. 6264.0050 subp. 2 & I8IVes DNo
4? If yes, please list below and comply with Part IX, Appendix C, Item C. See
Attachments Two and Three of the Guidance Manualfor Small Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) for further information.
4. Does the MS4 discharge into Wetlands as defined in Minn. R. 7050.0130, subp. F? See I8IVes DNo
Attachment Four of the Guidance Manual for Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
Systems (MS4s) for further information.
5. Does the MS4 have a process to evaluate discharges that require applicable l81Yes DNo
Environmental Review as required by State or federal laws? See Part IX of the
Guidance Manual for Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) for further
information.
6. Does the MS4 have a process to evaluate discharges whose direct, indirect, interrelated, I8IVes DNo
interconnected, or independent impacts may jeopardize a listed Endangered or
Threatened Species or adversely modify a designated critical habitat? See Part IX of the
Guidance Manual for Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) for further
information.
7. Does the MS4 have a process to evaluate discharges which may adversely affect I8IVes DNo
properties listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or
affecting known or discovered archeological sites? See Part IX of the Guidance Manual
for Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) for further information.
If you answered "No" to Item 5, 6, or 7, briefly explain how the MS4 will come into compliance with the
requirements of Appendix C.
wq-stnn 4-S2w
MPCA MS4 Stann Water Pennit Application
60f7
02106103
&,O<.{
V. Owner or Operator Certification
his person must be duly authorized to sign the application (mayor, designated public works director, president
of the university, etc.).
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and
evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief. true, accurate, and complete (Minn. R. 7001.0070). I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment. (Minn. R.
7001.0540)
Authorized Signature (This person must be duly authorized to sign the application for the MS4)
Date
Mann
Lee
Public Works Director/ City Engineer
Title
Last Name First Name
Official notices will be sent to person indicated here.
325 Oak Street
Mailing Address
....armington
ity
651-463-1601
MN 55024
Telephone (include area code)
State Zip Code
lmann@ci.farmington.mn.us
E-Mail Address
wq-strm 4-52w
MPCA MS4 Stonn Water Pennit Application
70f7
02106103
~05
IOe
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:
Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Dakota County East-West Corridor Study - FarmingtonlLakeville Joint Resolution
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Attached is a proposed joint resolution between the City of Farmington and the City of Lakeville
regarding Dakota County's East-West Corridor Study.
DISCUSSION
The Council's of Farmington and Lakeville met on March 10th, 2003 to discuss the issues brought
forward by the County's East-West Corridor Study. In regards to Farmington, the resolution attached
reflects the findings and analysis related to the proposed corridors that were discussed at the meeting
with Lakeville.
BUDGET IMPACT
None at this time.
ACTION REQUESTED
For review and discussion. The resolution will be brought back to Council for final approval at the
April 21, 2003 City Council meeting.
Respectfully Submitted,
~YVl~~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.,
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
~
~b~~
l) 1'\ j- t.l""
CITY OF LAKEVILLE AND CITY OF FARMINGTON
RESOLUTION
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
DATE
RESOLUTION NO.
MOTION BY
SECONDED BY
CITY OF FARMINGTON
DATE
RESOLUTION NO.
MOTION BY
SECONDED BY
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the City Councils and staff representatives of the cities of lakeville and
Farmington have reviewed the proposed Corridors B, C, D, E identified in the Dakota County
East West Corridor Study located in the cities of lakeville and Farmington during a joint meeting
held on March 10, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the cities of lakeville and Farmington have concluded that the proposed
corridors B, C, D, E are generally consistent with their respective Transportation or
Thoroughfare Plans for the cities of lakeville and Farmington; and
WHEREAS, the cities of lakeville and Farmington further support the following positions
or clarifications regarding the proposed corridors:
Corridor B
The City of lakeville does not support the extension of Corridor B east of the lakevitte
City Limits until the mining activities in lakeville and the adjacent areas in Empire Township
have been completed.
Based on the County's 2025 Traffic Forecasts, Corridor B would appear to be more
appropriately classified as a Major Collector rather than a Minor Arterial and thus 100 feet of
proposed right-of-way plus additional 10 foot trail easements from Cedar Avenue to Pilot Knob
Road would be sufficient.
00/
The City of Lakeville would consider acceptance of the turn-back of Dodd Boulevard
from Cedar Avenue to Pilot Knob Road contingent on it being upgraded to a three-lane roadway
from Gerdine Avenue to Pilot Knob Road.
The City of Farmington asserts the necessity of several future connections from
developments in the City of Farmington through Lakeville to Corridor B.
Corridor C
The cities of Lakeville and Farmington support the potential designation of Corridor C as
a Minor Arterial and with a four-lane divided roadway design and concur that the transition of the
alignment of the Corridor C alignment at 185th Street on the east to 195th Street should occur in
the area identified as the Study Area on the Lakeville I Farmington - Work Session - Planned
Land Use Map.
Corridor D
The cities of Lakeville and Farmington support the potential future designation of
Corridor D as a Collector and acknowledge that this corridor would remain a city street in both
cities.
Corridor E
The cities of Lakeville and Farmington support the Corridor E (Ash Street) alignment to
be constructed as a three-lane roadway between Denmark and TH 3 as an interim design until
such time that traffic volumes indicate the necessity of four lanes and Dakota County programs
further improvements to the roadway. Further the cities of Lakeville and Farmington support
long-range consideration of the designation of Corridor E as an Arterial.
NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lakeville City Council and Farmington
City Council support the Dakota County East-West Corridor Study as prepared subject to the
positions and clarifications contained in this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day
of
.2003.
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
BY:
Robert Johnson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Charlene Friedges, City Clerk
(00<=6
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day
of
,2003.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
By:
Mayor
Attested to the
day of
,2003.
City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(
CITY OF LAKEVILLE )
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. is a true and correct copy of the
resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lakeville at a duly
authorized meeting thereof held on the _ day of 2003, as shown by the
minutes of said meeting in my possession.
Charlene Friedges
City Clerk
(SEAL)
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
(
CITY OF FARMINGTON )
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. is a true and correct copy of the
resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Farmington at a duly
authorized meeting thereof held on the _ day of 2003, as shown by the
minutes of said meeting in my possession.
City Clerk
(SEAL)
~c8
,1\\, !il~ II I f
~.it~" ! ~~ iJl ~ g c.
- Q) 0.
~ i ~~ ~
. ~ g 0 ~
~ ~ ~ ~
5 g. ~ ~.
~ g -g VI
~ CII ;:+
~ !!l.
0'
"
"
Ii
1fEj~ · <~~l~~,' I" '.'~X~I
~, ~~..,.. , '. ~...., ~'l!':,~ i.~~', o'~~
.~~~ ~t~M'1,1:;:1;~\r~~{~}''\!~.I;;~~"l\l;;.~~
' ':~'U~~"J"'~' ',., "..,:t"\;~"I._""", ,.'""'.....~
~i:" il\,) ~ r.~. . ,- . -~~~.\,'~ l~ .~ Ilti~?!~",\~;t:W::~~~~"').q'~~;";'~~';:;~i~ !I"':'~f~';"~ ",~'l
G;ll, ~.. -"". ~ -.,,; " '''~..'' ~\' '''' . .< '1: J:l"j! ~
'11/ ~~~ j. (I ~r..\',;", 1":, 'I~. ~W""~ " II~'(~"-' ';;'- -i _ ",-, '.' _, \1<1';.... f'.,
.'" il ~,- ", - '..~", "'_'., I!'o.""~~"'" ';",.. :~~i~:~Xrr,.,
' ," " . '" 'II ":!:\.I_,,", -:'11 .'-' Il.l\'-;h '"~''''''''''''' '!'l>' ,"_.,,~ ~; ~~ . '" :, Hi", .. @' , !.~
. ,r. . - OIl "':l':"f-T.l-.. '114...' ...... -ml:; ~< ., ~ ~l" II~__.. -',. lI.~ l':!' '~''K-!.. ". tl . "riN: f';
( {<.iitlft""--t' :;;:;::; -...~... . W .-", t j ..-g J ,~t '. ~~~~~ .~. ,,\~.~ -~.'t.h lI'.w .' '" UiJ1A i
! "",".u '. " '" 1:\ fl'~'Y:':l'JL.: "l r' ~'F '" ~. ~ _ V :""~ ~~,_, . " "',.
n., ~ t:'. ~~. (J)" "'~:""":'r, 7~~1~:"':" l' '~,;;;;e~, > ;,:. ;~V, ..i<t~:,l..j~."i'IZ_. ~~ " '/
'. e:ufl. '~I! o:i~' .1,. .t" '';';,'' ,. }! ,-,;:"'I~..a'~--';L~~'_ 'I "" o.,.I~~ ~1,\1~.~,';J.~; .i,....~~ ~';;~q,~J .:~
~. .., · l"", ". . ~ ~e · <' "'-,',. ~ l<o" . ""'. '..,,' . _ "" .~i"" ;;:~'A:i" :i...."'"
. 1 i; <, .~, .~' .-rulljj(), ~', ~N. ' '..... ,i;,~~ "::; ~ . .: ., ", _;~~'. ~o,;1. ;,.,; . 'it'!' ; ~~ 1
. '. >l' · -, ."""r: ..~. f" ,. . _'~"'" ,. ." ....... '_ ". . ". . . . , . >,'" .. ,_.
". J lI> .'. .A" ~ ~'" f. -~.. , 'j " ...r- it> - ~ ...~. ~,-...." 'li" ,_. ,; _ _ "":~":!<')7 I., ,_:. ... "i';'. .'., / :'"_' ,
r-, .g7 ,.... ''':}' -,.-." """," d, '. ", ,...~~. ,~.. ..~ w'- . .'- ~ . .. ,
I, I . '" -v [ -, "'" .......~ ~,... ""., ''''.~'.~'.l'; , . .....'. "<I" ", ":" ~ ' . " "", i
"" , . "'''-'<' , p'" . "@"II., .." "~... ~~= . .t~~,...., ~ ..,..". '. I" 'CI'!. i:
LII.. ....r:~. ....~ ri- )I-'~":':; r . 0; -, $ ,~.-' . it'i. ''''''' . ._,; -."'!P...."~:.;~,,. '" y,]i ""':~~i :~. ..~: ,~i:; ? \:"'-'" ~
......" ~ ~ "..- '" ,- I" ,,--- · ,- " '" '" ,_. ,,,' ON . ... ..... _..,
~Ml ~'t!!. . 'I 'fF-~ , '.' "" -"': -lI to ';U,~' .y- . "1,,~ ~. _, ~di.'fi~~,:p .":'::~'!_i~r~:;:I~;". r ; . ~ Y[ I.,
~ ~ ....;,,,; :,~.:.. fI ';" ; .~"~', '" }. ~ " I . .. ~":",",.,, .,,"..;~. '~:;. " ." "~ ". .... P,j_, '( "". '.l~ ; k- . . \. ",
IIII II --m "h- -'!;~'~I:JI':""'/i!~~ "?",,,*. ~"l . '~- - -^-~ l!ll" '11II~~;;}\"~:"?~~i'~:~'r'<'~J'.~"',~:~l{::;";,:1 jri'",:~:,":,,>~
[] ..' U;" ... ~......,. " .. - .. . , '~~". "',. ""'I.:t::' "'0', " ;,.:l.... ~, "'" "
~... l ';:;:";' "".;,,, '",;'~c ,.' .' :";" -. .;.......,,'i. "e' :.~~\\':' "";'::7" '''Jillj: ii,. ":I:;r.,~~. tg,.,. ,_', ;:;~'..:' J I
" . ';::~":'I''[1I~ i' 2~~jl , . ,,!'" ~ d ~ -~ " " 11":~r ~ ~,;<~ ~~" J~\\ ~tBi:' ~"~;I i.'~ ~ ""7., "x-.,':'~'~:"'"''''
" ,,,i;. iI ~ '" """""" " ,.. .' .." ,. '., ''iJI'.~,.~.~, _. :J, "-, ~. I![' ,,-..,. .. ....._"".. ", , I
~ ,,~.~it jll t - . ;;~:~::~::: ?,~;f:r.<'~' '~e';;,,?t~ ~ );.n"". . ;'~~~'ot'. '<;;;'~I ',~'~:. i:~li if '~~L9 ~'~It;~'ri:".J
" irr-," '" " : '~;i'4' 0' . ~.; ,',. ~ <i5':::~' ~~I'~?1 ~' ~ ' !. ',:lr'''~. "D, :L .,,";- 'c.;'.; "",: _.! .1 ," ,
~ "<.. ~ · .".,' " '{"'''' ...,. .~ - {-v ~~ t~ j ;~' ,~.:\ 0:,. ~~ ~).;:."". 1I:l~ '.' '." ""; 'I ,,',
" ~ I-:;'~ :::::~~;-~".. ~~'~':'~~~~lffi - ~"'''~al'l.'Y'(,..ln..R'.. '" ~". ~:: ':\'2,i:! .. . ~\... ......~t'!!h,.:..Hr--- ,
' .. -.. ~ '. -:' " " ..., '- """,,-". """ . H't'. , .,; - '". "".;-; ,'. '0;:;" _" . . ': . '",.
i! CW :W:-' W.. .:: :,:' t L;. r ~. . I_ ,~'" I '" _""..._ "<11 r' _, _'~~.'" ~
~I. ~i~'~~" - ~~'"' i7lil~ f. ,'. ""'. " "'~~~I~ ,',,, "'.o~":"~" ,~
~f:I" :t.~,ljLl~I)i;;~~,~: :~.~~;:?$~~IL~:~~~:'.l ~~ Wi, ~'l i'l\ilI~~;'?~~$$~~~~~IIIfK"~:'-~n'~*t!
" ' > ., ., ~ ~ .. '..... I ~ . "",," '111;;1 '.. _ ~I"!. '. __ _ .' '," _...'
~Yl.' - '.;Ji.\t~ ""'7 .~!.., ~;' ""::. I",. ;;-" n '4' ,To' '.:" t :\:~:%l:~\ ," :W. ~" ~ 'i., - . ~Ii~~: t. .\~~
~ ":', .:,~~ ~ . ;' .'r",",', lil.. " i,,~ ~.I' !I ' I ,,: ~ '\\~~" ',:, '. ,~' :.r f, \; j
J ' ,J '1 ~ ~4f~ ~~I';"jj: ,. '.'j ;'~ . '-'" :. "j '11 . ., rH,',,' -''''iK''~'', '~' "" ~ . ;>, '. ~ ~
I f~t 1 ~ 1 ,..,r~"!Z! ~'i'l: · '" I~t ',~ ' &' t rf.f~' . I" , (p,I;:!! \~wn.wr/~.',~';f ,;' :" ~"\:~ 'Q':' <P" ,,~
i "rfI[l M2~~I" i1~ M. I'...-:l,. -, .' "~t, "hH ~:'. '>'", 'il
".Af~~ :;rh.Sf.r(~t,,__ . '. ~'"ia:..~~L7~'''~' .~-~,'-'- '<-~.l:~~~';~~::;i::;~~~~.;'~::T,~~
. '11i204l' I~ ''Il t ~. ~~~ ~ . .. # II! _ _ _ o;!';,,, ~:JL" _,.,.. '~~-r
~:: ~. ',., \It.l'_~'~,~:"" --, : <Ii '..}, lU ' \'" I ., .__ .:., a ~i ~"If~~ I':': J;
.r. ..1iO",J I~ ''e''l:'~ 1 ,"'" ~I. .....t. ,I ( f ~l .:f: f It1 t _ C/l 13;G-a:',1 .~:,.. ;:.'T ,:.\~.. t ~~,. *
,,=. .~......,' '.., " on .. _ ~,,,_ ,,' "., '~," .,' _ '.
I '~E~!ll .. - .. '.' - , , 0'" "_'" c.'" , It, _ j : I
,- "-, m'::I!" ::;., -. ,. ''iI'f ... tl to ':~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~;r,;~,::: ;,'~ ,~;' r:'). ,)[1. ~' g . ,!
Iti .~ "n " ~, , ",. w ''''''''''_'''_'_''~ ._~ .-"-~
-. ~".;- (f) - .m !;" ~ , i, 'j I u. "t..~ L..!IN"";j,;. r I' ~ 0 'id~~,;~:.~'~;: l~~I'. , ; ,J I:l.{ L!,
'" 0 ~ '""" -=. ""'" ,,_ ,_ _.. ,
' , c.. . ,. -., 'I ~. " .,~. . , ~_1~ "~'''~ < "~'<. ':0.,/';11:1.\- t 'I ,];1 .
!~ g " ~ , " _a . ~~"i. I -., ~ ..s ",' "- ,- ~'"\,, """:~I~.I' '''''' i1'):
. () ~. ., ~,\ ~ ~ f ~ '~ "~~/~lX~:':I~{.g ~~:~,!Jl). t d
~ - . "- - - f ----'0' 3 , ',~l~, v I _
~ m~" '$'~~' ,r- "'~ ',,'; : :;.;' . "'" . "'"''-'!''''cC:';'>:C;;;;:,,,,",, ,.;!'P.. ,
,J ~ . , , . . ,_,,,. ,_ ,_ 0 '='''''''''''~." ~. "!.I:,li], ),..<:I_.!
-u '..... .u'if , ,- ,'. _g'''' ~,' ,'~;' _ "'("'~::ljr.:-;,~~~ '\~,;:, :;;q\ i . ~.. (:>;
... - ,. ~f.t. 1 ~. . ',., ~\" I.':~~ ~.":.~~ _. , '. '.. ,W , '1/ l,Z"i'
~ J .~, ..,.ri ;'J,~ .. '." ~ '-1-~"'^'~?-i · ~ ~r': "'~l~'I'=~;:: '.::- .'~~'4~~1 ~ ~~fu"d
' n' If 1. .' '" . ., _ - " . ;_,. rai'" "'" ''1 ' -W'~'lli', L..l.'
~... '~T';~,r., I'" - ',r-, t~" ;:~~.1'~lt,;;::, ~t~'~lI i~1
",: "" r, .~lj,:,~,. r,~ ..~ ":~':::JII~:~(."-'~:";:i~l~i ~ :~~) ~ ~'&,~:~ ': 1I1.~
,~ " I ~ .... .,'.~ · ="J LUI/,' -, ''-, ., "'." .~~ '-I, g9~ "l- I~._ L...,
. ....' "Y;.I .'*'---..-;,1-'.. .< . '~. !it.-, ll.~..\' ,.,. .:if __ , __ \j
f ..~~. '~ () III /'iff '~-':~~ii,A1&7"~;"',,1"J:l1 II"tll't''''=;;:'''~-:::f'
..' .,:~ . . c '~~ .", ~>.-..., ~~l!I.U~ U" ,. 1K,'. q;;' ,
....,....:::~~:. ,"', W ~ ~(l) 'tt'{'ff"''''''tIl: "":'~""~I"'~k""'--"'-.~,:.:.,~.Wf::'i1 .!Lr", .~ ,. C ,.
.. .. ,... .......... 1""..-.",., , ., ~ '''...~ l' ,
' '''- """~ c--~_=, ~ ,I;I - ",,,', . - L ' -, [1"_ · r -r " . I
,. - " ,.;:0 :;:1' . rla~0t~?}!~_,. 'l?:'Tl'_ ,-1 KlfT ' ~" . _' ~, ,~
1 - : ",", (l) ,!iI.'" ....~ "", ,. .,- ,. '. . _ .", "" . :......... . <'. .0,
J- w --,. .. c~"' "",,,. . '. ~ _ ~ 1- ",. ,.. _"',. " ,
L ,. \ '!il r~" "- ... ' ~~'ll' , :>' _.J F ... -' ,., "y , . "" ,.01, '~: "
I~ """", -.iJ e-~...,..... _', '" '4 ~ . .'
~ c.<;:.." . - "" - ~ .... .. ~'--<. - -" J.)..'~'" [, ',-- . 'b:' --iMJ~' "__
.. -~:'l 'l" . '.~ () ~.x-"I:~. ~.,. , '''''''' "., "'--'_'L _ .'oc;....;
~.... ,i.:> g 'B . '~~"I ~"" "l"'~: ,'.. _ '7 r:t " i; .:' .,;
"'\: r.: ... !1. I ~ , ' ~ v' I '. fif(\~ , '~f.'J:' F " ~
. 't _ ... ~ 0 ,,-, ,., "" ,.. '_
N [' . ~$'....,p c ,.... "--. _. .... j ~ I..' ~ ;" ~ ....;2,.. I
.~~~ .~l~:. '5 ~~,. ~.~,...,- ~I~' ~ .' . .' '\.\: '" .. ~ ; ..~' ~.~;~f-~
L~ /f~~ : J- '~ ") ~ · (i~ 's ,- - '. -7' ,^', 'i "('-"\~J
'I "', . " ~ m . '_, '"'' .
" '-'"~ r.;;! 'Iiii', 11 OJ "'1 " , .- ." L -' ., . ~I ../i~'
'- ". ,- 'c , , ,,' "
~ ." ~,' '" : ,. - c.'. - . 0 · S J' '" ..' . .,
~u,,~ .::-'.::6(:::~ ~::J ~:~1 . '~-6'<9-' .~ .nt _ _ --=-~ '-'::S;: _ '''<:\
.' ,.1',.....':;:;... . (l) g- '~_~ 1 .~, ___ . '~~......:"(
11.'"= - ~"tt;~ :::~ ': ;. ~ ~ ~ I~i' j;' ,: '1' ~L , > , 'r~ il~~~' ~I ~~ L '~
<r;.,J:~~. "':'. < -~"" "'~: I ro,..- I'. ,_ ~"""'.~_' '(f)~ I , ',. .
'.. <.f, "~ <.- · c --"" . 1 " '.. -. '. " " oJ
· '~:' "." . ::;.;.... ~::.,. .. "'" .'" 0" ~ ,~...... = ;'Ir:,_~::.. '. ,~ '_..~ '.' ~ m.~. :J! Ii ,
r ';:,.i :::,. "._,,:c, ,', ~<O, '., '0 I,~.'~' .~\ "'i'~ · "'''''(, ';;,,~ i , ~ l\t I......' '-_ ~". r << r ~ ,,'
~. i, ;, "'''. " I' 3 Ff ..' ~ .....:%.~ '1.. R.1 ';'.." 1 <iY~. '-",", ~ GJ fl.'" II!\ J. I
:"' '. ;;io-~J':~:i~ li~';;~\.~t~~t ~ - !l~ ~ rrJ~l'''' ~ JI - ! i r:: ". f;'; ~:
~~: I ~~,;,~_~.}J: ~~ ~~~I ~~, f' l~ J ~~~'I '{',;{ .,~<'J~ I · II . 1,
~. '~ ,. . ~ 3 y~ ~ II 11
:~,,:~ ~. ,.~ . ti""'llill1i; ~ ,.~. ~. .~ Ij;} L 0'" ~~I "
~:"'~.1 k ':E '\' "" ~'. - - ,,I\: r:".r;J, , L
'", -l. ,. - >' '--~ J.
it~1 _ .- .. ~ _ .
~ - -', t '!-'- I" __
i.l~ ~. 1
(J)
o
c
o
~
o
OJ
,.,.
o
iii
o
o
C
:J
~
$:
z
o
z
;;U
c
o
~
OJ
:J
C.
(J)
m
I
C/l;:: Jl
dl ~ "
Q.(') !:p..
cEg OJ
~~ ~
~~ ~
~.~ ~
(I)~
0;:: " 0.~ 3'
iil.$ .g ~. ~ ~.
~ ~ ~ ~~. ~.
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
m:z: :z: z, _
~~~2$'~
~ a ~ 6' ~
a~ ~~ ~
Q),<
'" "
(3
"
'"
~
I I ~
I ~'
(") ~
~ C:;"
"" ."
'"
..
E'
iO
en
o 5'
::+' (j)
g. 3
a
'"
3.
z
~ ~
,\.:. g'
..
:z: ~ i
m. Cll ltI
Qi ::s _
a ~ ~
- c.
~ en
:;
<
'"
"
o
0=1
II ~
'TI 11 [
S. S. en
~ ~ ~
() r '"
g g 3
::s ~ ."
-< ;0 iii
~ g :J
Q) 0.
0.
o
ro
^
o
.....
ro
()
o
C
:::J
.....
'<
m
ro
CJ)
.....
"tJ
..,
ct>
)>~
t/) ct>
..,
O~'TI
-tt Q. _.
)> (Q
"'tJ en t:
~~~
rr+~
~ ct>
~ 3
O"tJ
w_
Q)
:J
~
CD
CJ)
.....
()
o
-,
~.
Q.
o
-,
(f)
.....
C
Q.
'<
10
(H,
!l
*g
~~
it'<
3
~
/'V
a
o
o
G)
J:>
a
~
!P.
I
!
r
~
~ '
-
I
..............
1
/oel.
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 Administralot'.
FROM:
Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Street Utility Legislation
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
As the Council is aware, it becomes increasingly more challenging to finance street improvements.
The City Engineers Association of Minnesota (CEAM), the Minnesota Chapter of the American
Public Works Association (MPW A) and the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) have collectively
sponsored a report entitled, "Funding Street Construction and Maintenance in Minnesota's
Cities" in order to summarize current street funding mechanisms and recommend new alternatives.
Excerpts of this report are attached.
DISCUSSION
The report outlines seven recommendations for the Legislature to take into consideration to help
communities finance street construction. Four of those recommendations involve State funding or
reallocation of existing revenue sources. The other three recommendations involve enabling
legislation or changes to statutory language that would assist local communities.
The three recommendations that would assist cities directly include: 1) changes to Chapter 429, 2)
legislation that would allow cities to institute a Transportation Utility and 3) legislation that would
authorize communities to collect "impact" fees with building permits (see recommendations 2, 3 and
4 on pages 40 and 41 of the report excerpt attached). Also attached is currently proposed legislation
that would allow cities to institute transportation utility fees.
A list has been provided of Minnesota cities that have passed a resolution in support of the report and
the recommendations therein. Adoption of the attached resolution would show the Legislature
Farmington's support for the three recommendations mentioned above. Adoption of this resolution
does not indicate that Farmington is necessarily committed to instituting a transportation utility fee or
impact fees at this time. If the transportation utility fee and/or impact fee options are enabled by the
legislature, the Council would then be able to decide whether or not to consider instituting those
options here in Farmington.
6/0
BUDGET IMPACT
None at this time.
ACTION REOUESTED
Adopt the attached resolution supporting the adoption of legislation that would provide policy options
to address street funding.
Respectfully Submitted,
~/11 ~
Lee M. Mann, P .E.,
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: file
(;,11
RESOLUTION NO. R - 03
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE IMPROVED FUNDING
OPTIONS FOR CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of Farmington,
Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the ih day of April, 2003 at 7:00
p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member
seconded the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Minnesota contains over 135,000 miles of roadway, and over 19,000 miles-or 14
percent--are owned and maintained by Minnesota's 853 cities; and
WHEREAS, city streets are a separate but integral piece of the network of roads supporting
movement of people and goods; and
WHEREAS, existing funding mechanisms, such as Municipal State Aid (MSA), property taxes,
special assessments and bonding, have limited applications, leaving cities under-equipped to
address growing needs.
WHEREAS, maintenance costs increase as road systems age, and no city-large or small-is
spending enough on roadway capital improvements to maintain a 50-year lifecyc1e; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Farmington fmds it is difficult to develop adequate
funding systems to support the City's needed street improvement and maintenance programs
while complying with existing State statutes; and
WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Minnesota Public Works Association and the
City Engineers Association of Minnesota, have jointly sponsored the development of a report
entitled Funding Street Construction and Maintenance in Minnesota's Cities wherein (1) the
street systems of the cities within the State are inventoried; (2) the existing funding systems are
detailed and evaluated; and (3) recommendations are made; and
WHEREAS, cities need flexible policies and greater resources in order to meet growing demands
for street improvements and maintenance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FARMINGTON that this Council concurs with the findings of the above referenced report, and
fully supports the recommendations contained in that report; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON
that this Council supports the adoption of legislation that would provide cities with the policy
options they need to address current and future challenges in providing adequate street
improvement and maintenance programs.
~/d?
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
ih day of April, 2003.
CITY OF FARMINGTON
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of
2003.
City Administrator
SEAL
0/3
,
,
J
,
,
.
,
,
,
J
,
J
J
J
J
J
,
I
I
J
J
.
.
.
J
.
.
i
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
I
:e
I
I'
.&
..
Funding Street Construction and Maintenance'
in Minnesota's Cities
Providing the tools to help cities preserve their road and bridge
capital assets
Januarv 2003
.,
Sponsored by:
City Engineers Association of Minnesota
The Minnesota Chapter of the American Public Works Association
League of Minnesota Cities
=/ r 'f U~ =
.r.t J:..r.
LMC
MINNESOT ~ CHAPTER APWA
League of Minnesota Cities
Cities promoting exceOence
to Cop~Tight Transportation Policy Institute. 2002
C:,/</
,
.
.
>>
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
)
,
,
)
)
,
\
,
,
,
\
\
\
)
\
)
\
\
\
, ,
, ~/r5
~
Executive Summary
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to assemble in one place much of the "need-to-know" information on
municipal road and bridge funding in Minnesota's 854 cities. This report builds off of the
outstanding work done by MnJDOT and others in their efforts to inform policy makers and citizens of
the state who are interested in gaining a better understanding of the workings of road and bridge
infrastructure investment in Minnesota. Our intent in preparing this report is twofold: First, the
report can serve as a resource for policy makers, city officials, citizens, the news media and others in
order to inform the discussion on city road and bridge infrastructure, and the way it is currently
financed. Second, the report proposes seven specific recommendations that the Legislature can
consider to address the funding challenges identified in the report.
Section 1: What does the city road and bridge system look like?
~ According to the most recent information from the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MnlDOT), Minnesota has over 135,000 miles of roadway in the state. About 14 percent of
that total, equal to more than 19,000 miles is owned and operated by Minnesota's 854 cities.
~ This report distinguishes roadway mileage in Minnesota cities on the basis of two variables:
funding source and city size. The report separately discusses the resulting three categories of
city roads: 1) locally funded in cities under 5,000 population (1,703 miles, nine percent of
total city mileage), 2) locally funded in cities over 5,000 (14,072 miles, 76 percent), and 3)
state funded in cities over 5,000 (2,818 miles, 15 percent).
~ Minnesota cities are responsible for a total of 1,247 bridges representing 6.4 percent of the
total bridges in the state.
Section 2: How is the system funded?
~ Minnesota's cities finance their road and bridge infrastructure through a variety of local, state
and federal resources. The emphasis in this report will be on local and state funding sources,
since the intended audience of this report is state and local officials.
~ The majority of funding for city streets, even among cities eligible to receive state aid, comes
primarily from local resources: property taxes, special assessments, and bonding.
~ The most significant state source of funding is the Municipal State Aid program which is
available only to cities over 5,000 in population and only supports 20 percent of those cities'
total mileage. MSA funding since 1988 (the last state gas tax increase) has failed to keep up
with inflation.
~ Cities derive only a very small proportion of their total funding from federal sources.
Section 3: Why are existing funding sources insufficient?
~ This section details a number of the most important demographic trends that are important to
transportation system planners and elected officials as they consider options to address the
current and future demands on roads and bridges in the state's 854 cities.
1. Traffic volumes are increasing.
2. Growth in city population and new housing is steadily increasing, placing greater demands
on city and residential street systems. .
3. Truck movement is also increasing significantly.
4. City road and bridge infrastructure is aging.
'. -.,
" I
l""'~"'~
I
I
I
,
'"\'(i ~"'.
..,......
:;1-
.' .... r'" . Il<'\ ~ ~ ~
'..::.......~<;fjJ.'It"".,,;,:;ft'1:!"l4tH...":",.
Section 4: Findings and Policy Ootions
Sections I through 3 of this report discuss general information on the current city road and bridge
infrastructure, current funding mechanisms, and future funding challenges. This background
information is critical to understanding the broad trends and policies that affect city policy makers as
they strive to maintain and improve their transportation infrastructure while providing the best
possible value to the taxpayer.
In this section of the report, we attempt to identify and describe a handful of key fmdings that policy
makers should be mindful of as they consider various transportation funding policy options,
particularly as they relate to Minnesota city roads and bridges owned and maintained by Minnesota
cities. The options presented in this section were the outcome of collaborative effort on the part of
city staff and elected officials representing all of Minnesota's cities.
A. All City Systems
Findings:
#A-l: Maintenance costs increase as road systems age.
#A-2: Cities have implemented a variety of strategies to address the maintenance funding
gap.
#A-3: Cities have become more reliant on property taxes and special assessments.
#A-4: City bridges are in needs of repairs.
#A-5: Cities are often required to contribute to Mn/DOT and county road/County State
Aid Highway projects located within city limits.
Policy Options:
1. Provide funding for a "Local Road Improvement Program".
2. Provide cities greater flexibility to generate revenues through special assessments.
3. Provide cities with additional local taxing authority, including the authority to
establish a "Transportation Utility".
4. Enact legislation authorizing cities to establish "Impact Fees".
B. Locally Funded City Streets -Cities Under 5,000
Findings:
#B-I: Most small cities are not spending enough on roadway capital improvements to
maintain a 50 year life cycle.
#B-2: Most small cities don't have a regular, annual road budget.
#B-3: Small cities are heavily reliant on locally generated .revenues.
#B-4: On the whole, small cities don't receive significant resources from other local units
of government for "shared" projects.
I
I
C
C
(
t
C
f
C
t
.
f
C
f
.
Policy Options:
1. Provide funding for a "Local Road Improvement Program".
2. Allocate a portion of the existing 5% special fund to cities under 5,000 population.
3. Allocate a portion of the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax revenues to a special fund for
cities under 5,000 population.
11
~/0
.
.
)
.
~
~
t
)
>>
t
.
.
.
>>
.
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
,
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
.
.
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
C,FJ.
...
c. Locally Funded City Streets - Cities Over 5,000
findings:
#C-l: Most large cities are not spending enough on roadway capital improvements to
maintain a 50 year life cycle.
#C-2: The funding gap in MSA eligible cities is more severe on the locally funded roads
than on the state funded MSA system.
Policy Options:
1.
2.
Provide funding for a "Local Road Improvement Program".
Provide cities greater flexibility to generate revenues through special
assessments.
Provide cities with additional local taxing authority, including the authority to
establish a "Transportation Utility".
Enact legislation authorizing cities to establish "Impact fees".
3.
4.
D. State Funded Streets - Cities Over 5,000
findings:
#0-1: The MSA system has grown much more rapidly since its inception 40 years ago
than the state owned system or the county owned system over the same timeframe,
yet the funding distribution has remained the same.
#0-2: Current MSA funding levels do not cover the full costs of improving these cities'
MSA street systems.
#0-3: MSA systems are being funded at a level that will result in a 53-year life cycle.
Policy Options:
1. Increase the level of funding to the Municipal State Aid program.
Section 5: Recommendations
~ This section of the report provides greater detail on the seven policy
options identified in Section 4.
Conclusion
~ The state should provide assistance to cities to address their current and
future funding shortfall by granting greater local revenue raising authority
and by providing cities with additional tools to allow them to meet their
specific needs.
~ The sponsors of this report are also hopeful that the fmdings identified
herein will encourage state and local policy makers to examine and
consider capital investment policies, such as a statewide pavement
management plan, that would make the most efficient use of scarce'
resources as the demands on the road and bridge network increase in the
future.
III
:;'.' ":';:':\""
.,. ' :~:;
.'.".11.01""
.
C, Ie?,
4
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
i
t
t
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
fi
,
.
.
.
.
,
a
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
II
Ii
.
1. Provide funding for a "Local Road Improvement Program."
One idea that was considered in recent years is the idea of a "local road improvement program". The
idea was initially proposed in 2001 by the Local Road Advisory Committee in a report entitled
Legislative Study oj State FundingJor Local Road Improvements. This program, as it was originally
conceived, would have proyided a source of state funding to support the costs of construction on local
road projects that do not benefit from the current financing structure.
[Note: While the original bill passed by the Legislature would have provided significant assistance to
some cities with special needs, the title of the program - the Local Road Improvement Program - is
somewhat misleading since its focus was actually more limited than the title suggests. Therefore, it is
important to recognize the need for the other options recommended in this report.]
In meetings of the Local Road Advisory Committee, city and county officials identified numerous
examples of situations where both the state and a local unit of government might benefit from special
state assistance beyond currently available state aid. Ultimately, the Local Road Advisory Committee
recommended that the state establish an account to assist cities facing unique circumstances arising
from external demands. The 2002 Legislature received the report and adopted legislation as part of the
2002 bonding bill that would have placed $20 million into the account. Unfortunately, Governor Jesse
Ventura line-item yetoed the funding for the measure, however, the structure of the program is in place
and could be implemented if fundiiig were provided.
The purpose of the special Local Road Improvement Program would have been to provide funding
assistance to cities and other local units of government for road construction or reconstruction projects
with statewide or regional significance that cannot be funded through other revenue sources. Despite
the demise of the provision in the 2002 Legislative Session, the need for this mechanism has not
diminished. The sponsors of this report recommend that the funds be restored to the program.
2. Provide cities greater flexibility to generate revenues through special assessments.
Two specific changes in the way that cities are able to use special assessments as a financing source
for local road improvements should be adopted.
First, as noted in Section 2, the courts have limited cities' ability to use special assessments to finance
public improvements - including street improvements - to their ability to prove benefits to the
property. Under current interpretation, "benefit" is interpreted to mean "the increase in market value
of the property". While no specific remedy is proposed within this report, it is suggested that
consideration be given to seeking a remedy to this issue.
Second, in some cases the infrastructure improvements necessary to serve a new development must
pass by or through properties which are not currently ready for development. Under the current law, a
city may choose to defer special assessments for water lines, sanitary sewers and storm sewers against
such properties until later. when those properties develop. However, the deferral of special
assessments for street improvements is not allowed under the current law. It is recommended that
legislation be adopted which allows a city to defer special assessments for street improvements in such
situations.
Another modification to the special assessment laws in Minnesota that would make the tool more
useful for cities looking for additional funding options would be to give special assessments the same
40
,
)
,
,
,
I
J
J
,
,
,
C,19
tax treatment that local property taxes receive. Local property taxes are deductible, thus lowering state
and local income tax burdens by reducing taxable income. The state has no authority to make special
assessments tax deductible for federal income tax purposes, but they do have the authority to extend
this tax deductibility to the state income tax code.
3. Provide cities with additional local taxing authority, including the authority to establish a
"Transportation Utility".
While all cities face major challenges in providing funding for street improvements and maintenance,
mature cities must find ways to provide an appropriate level of maintenance and establish a cost-
effective construction and reconstruction program. Because of the limitations of special assessments,
general fund appropriations, and other potential funding sources, most of these cities find it extremely
difficult to develop a financing program to fund the needed improvement and maintenance program.
Accordingly, it is recommended that the legislature adopt legislation authorizing cities to levy local
taxes dedicated for transportation infrastructure, including authority to establish a "Transportation
Utility" if they so desire.
A Transportation Utility is a system for raising money to support road and bridge maintenanc_e and
construction that is allocated to users based on the amount of traffic generated. The term "utility" is
employed because it is similar to a storm water utility which allocates storm water drainage system
costs to property owners based on the volume of storm runoff draining from their properties.
Under a transportation utility, roadway users pay for roadway costs based on their use. Specific
allocation systems can vary, however, the basic approach is to charge institutions based on the traffic
they generate. Factors to consider include the number of employe,es, frequency of commute, and the
availability of other traffic management strategies, such as subsidized mass transit, carpooling, etc...
Like a storm water utility, a transportation utility could be adopted by individual municipalities. It
could also be implemented on a regional or county basis. State enabling legislation should authorize
but not mandate the use of this tool.
Another option that would achieve the same result would be to grant the authority to local units of
government to levy other local taxes. These tax revenues would be dedicated to support the
construction, reconstruction, and maintenance on roads and bridges within the local government that
approves the tax. Other states currently allow cities to levy local fuel taxes or local sales taxes on fuel
sold within their borders.
4. Enact legislation authorizing cities to establish "Impact Fees".
In Minnesota - as in all states - new development leads to increasing demands for additional streets,
utilities and other public infrastructure and services. Legislature- and voter-initiated limits on
municipal budgets have only increased the pressure on local governnients to find new ways to finance
the infrastructure needed to serve new residential and commercial development. Impact fees are
intended to place financial responsibility for new public facilities at least in part on those who create
the need for them.
Properly designed impact fees can be one of the most equitable solutions to a problem that may at
times be insurmountable to local government. Accordingly, it is recommended that legislation be
enacted which authorizes cities to adopt a system of impact fees, if they so choose.
41
Impact fees have been established in over half of the states, including Wisconsin. In Minnesota, the
Supreme Court weighed in on the issue in the case of Country Joe vs. City of Eagan, identifying a
number of specific standards that a city must meet in order to legally levy impact fees. This subject
has been the focus of considerable planning efforts among Minnesota cities, who have considered
procedures that ensure that the legislation can meet the standards defined by the Court.
The sponsors of this report also suggest that in order to support regionally beneficial growth policies,
cities could be authorized to waive impact fees as an incentive for new developments designed to
address future growth and other changes in the region.
5. Allocate a portion of the existing 5% special fund to cities under 5,000 population.
Another recommendation that would channel funds to small cities ineligible to receive any state aid
funding is to allocate a portion of the "5% Special Fund (5% of the total HUTDF funds) to such a fund
specifically targeted to smaller, non-MSA eligible cities. Because this fund is now distributed between
the Flexible Highway Account and the Township Road and Bridge Fund, it would obviously be
difficult to reduce the current funding level to those accounts. However, it is noted that any increase in
gasoline taxes, license fees or the transfer ofMVST funds to the HUTDF would result in an increase to
the 5% Special Fund. Accordingly, it is suggested that a portion of that increase could be allotted to a
new account for cities under 5,000 population.
6. Allocate a portion of the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax revenues to a special fund for cities under
5,000 population.
The Constitutional amendment which established the MSA and CSAH programs envisioned a system
in which counties assumed the jurisdiction of collector and arterial streets within cities under 5000
population, as well as the principal responsibility to improve and maintain those roads. CSAH rules
also provide that counties must program their CSAH improvement program so that the allocation
"earned" by the money needs of the cities under 5000 must be spent in those cities (collectively). Many
counties have adopted policies and programs which implement that approach. However, for various
reasons, some cities have not been able to obtain the needed improvements to their arterial and
collector street systems. This factor was demonstrated in the 2001 Legislative Study of State Funding
for Local Road Improvements, and in the 2002 legislation which proposed the creation of a "Local
Road Improvement Fund". The direct appropriation ofMVST funds for this purpose is suggested as an
option in the event the more complete program proposed by that legislation is not adopted.
~CJ
\
.
,
,
,
"
.
,
,
t
,
,
,
.
.
I
.
.
.
7. Increase the level of funding to the Municipal State Aid program.
As described in Section 2 of this report, the Municipal State Aid program provides a total of roughly
$120 million annually to the 130 Minnesota cities with populations over 5,000 to support about 2,800
miles of city roadways. The size of the MSA system continues to grow as more and more cities
eclipse the 5,000 minimum population threshold, however, the base funding for the MSA system is
determined by the state Constitution and remains at nine percent of total Highway User Tax
Distribution Fund revenues. While state MSA allotments have certainly been helpful to cities in their
efforts to construct and maintain these eligible road systems, recent reports by MnlDOT's State Aid for
Local Transportation and other reports indicate that the MSA roadway surfaces continue to age and
deteriorate.
42
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
)
)
J
)
.
)
)
.
.
.
,
.
>>
J
}
t
)
~
.
t
,
)
)
~
,
,
.
t
t
t
t
.
.
)
I
.
,.a
cP;1./
Since the distribution of MSA funding to Minnesota cities is determined by the state Constitution,
nothing short of a Constitutional amendment to increase the share of Highway User Tax Distribution
Funds to cities will increase the cities' share of the total pool. The only means of generating additional
MSA revenues without amending the Constituion is to increase total HUTDF revenues. If the size of
the MSA system is to continue to increase (which it is likely to do given demographic trends) then a
reasonable response is to increase total MSA funding.
There are essentially just three options to increase revenues to the Highway User Tax Distribution
Fund.
1. Increase the gas tax from the 20 cents per gallon that was last increased 14 years ago in 1988.
2. Increase vehicle registration fees ("tab fees") that were reduced under Governor Ventura's
administration.
3. Provide other revenue growth to the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund. The most likely
candidate for increasing revenues to the fund would be by dedicating funds currently deposited
into the General Fund, i.e. the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax.
43
Conclusion
Few would dispute the notion that the condition of Minnesota's city streets and highways are
an important aspect of the livability of the state. A quality local road and bridge network
allows safe and easy access to schools, local businesses, recreational and cultural facilities,
and family and friends. Just as importantly, sound local road networks enhance the economic
development potential for businesses in the area, which results in higher employment, a
stronger tax base, and other related benefits. Indeed, roads and bridges are typically the most
valuable capital asset of a city, and like any asset, must be preserved. Cities have a financial
obligation to both the past taxpayer.s who paid to develop the asset, and to future residents
and users of the system who will rely on its use.
The sponsors of this report recognize, however, that given Minnesota's current fiscal
environment, city officials should not expect that the state will be in any position to address
these funding challenges simply by providing significant new state resources. The state can,
however, help cities to address the current and future funding shortfall by granting greater
local revenue raising authority and by providing cities with additional tools to allow them to
meet their specific needs. Providing cities with a more versatile "toolbox" to address their
funding challenges will meet the principal objective of the cities (to protect the road and
bridge capital asset) while addressing a fundamental fiscal policy goal of the state: to enhance
the accountability of the system by aligning the responsibility for raising revenues with the
level of government that is providing the service.
The sponsors of this report are also hopeful that the findings identified herein will encourage
state and local policy makers to examine and consider capital investment policies that would
make the most efficient use of scarce resources as the demands on the road and bridge network
increase in the future. With the new capital infrastructure reporting requirements known as
GASB 34, there exists an opportunity for the state and local governments to work together to
develop broad statewide pavement management guidelines that would maximize resources
used to maintain local roads. These guidelines would be designed to ensure that proper
preventative maintenance activities would take place, adding five to ten years to the life of
existing pavement surfaces, resulting in significant cost savings over the life of the project.
The City Engineers Association of Minnesota, the Minnesota Chapter of the American Public
Works Association, and the League of Minnesota Cities look forward to working with state
and local policy makers this year and in the future to solve these critical challenges.
44
w
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
(
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
\
,
.
.
,
,
,
I
,
,
.
,
,
,
~c;? (
S.F No. 825" as introduced
Page 1 of2
'Rl'i(<
'" ~>~-~.~~.;. "~""~'~
-, ~,"~
, '_ki'~ i -';.' ,,:,,"
House , Senate I Legislation & Bill Status I Laws, Statutes & Rules , Joint Depts. & Commissions
legislature Home' Se.rch I Help' L1nka to t.he World
Minnesota Senate
KEY: ~tri~kgR = old language to be removed
underscored = new language to be added
NOTE: If you cannot see any difference in the key above, you need to change the display of stricken
and/or underscored language.
AuthQr~Ulnd_Slatus · Lisl_y~rsions
H,f.:# CJ~6
S.F No. 825, as introduced: 83rd Legislative Session (2003-2004) Posted on Mar 11, 2003
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
1.12
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.16
1.17
1.18
1.19
1. 20
1.21
1. 22
1. 23
1. 24
1. 25
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.15
2.16
2.17
A bill for an act
relating to transportation; authorizing cities to
impose a transportation utility fee; proposing coding
for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 275.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. [275.084] [TRANSPORTATION UTILITY FEE.]
Subdivision 1. [DEFINITIONS.] For the purposes of this
section, the followinq terms have the meaninqs qiven.
(1) "Municipality" means a home rule charter or statutory
city.
(2) "Governinq body" means the city council of a
municipality.
(3) "Reconstruction" means pavinq, qradinq, curbs and
qutters, bridqe repair, overlays, drainaqe, base work, subqrade
corrections, and boulevard restoration.
(4) "Facility upqrade" means traffic siqnals, turn lanes,
medians, street approaches, alleys, riqhts-of-way, sidewalks,
retaininq walls, fence installation, and additional traffic
lanes.
(5) "Maintenance" means stripinq, seal coatinq, crack
sealinq, sidewalk maintenance, siqnal maintenance, street liqht
maintenance, and siqnaqe.
Subd. 2. [AUTHORIZATION.] A municipality may impose the
transportation utility fee provided in this section aqainst land
located within its boundaries.
Subd. 3. [PROCEDURES FOR ADOPTION.] A municipality may
impose the transportation utility fee provided in this section
by ordinance adopted by a two-thirds vote of its qoverninq
body. The resolution must not be voted on or adopted until
after a public hearinq has been held on the question. A notice
of the time, place, and purpose of the hearinq must be published
at least once in each week for two successive weeks in the
official newspaper of the municipality, or in a newspaper of
qeneral content and circulation within the municipality, and the
last notice must be published at least seven days prior to the
hearinq. The municipality, if adopted, must file the ordinance
of record with the county recorder, and the municipality must
provide a copv to the county auditor.
Subd. 4. [COLLECTION.] The ordinance adopted under this
section must provide for the billinq and payment of the fee on a
monthly, quarterly, or other basis as directed by the qoverninq
body. Fees that, as of October 15 each calendar year, have
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin!getbill.p I ?session=ls83 &version=latest&session _..J 3/24/2003 ~3
S.F No. 825, as introduced
2.18
2.19
2.20
2.21
2.22
2.23
2.24
2.25
2.26
2.27
2.28
2.29
2.30
2.31
2.32
2.33
2.34
2.35
2.36
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
3.16
3.17
3.18
3.19
3.20
'3.21
3.22
3.23
3.24
3.25
3.26
3.27
3.28
3.29
remained unpaid for at least 30 days must be certified to the
county auditor for collection as a special assessment payable in
the followinq calendar year aqainst the affected property.
Subd. 5. [MASTER PLAN REQUIREMENT.] A municipality may not
impose the fee provided in this section unless it has prepared
and adopted a master plan that includes information on the
proposed reconstruction, facility upqrade, and maintenance for
the followinq five years. A capital improvement plan, public
facility plan, or comparable information qualifies as a master
plan. The master plan must include information on the proposed
fundinq sources for all prolects required to be included in the
plan. The master plan must be adopted by resolution of the
qoverninq body followinq a hearinq and publication of notice of
the hearinq, as provided in subdivision 3.
Subd. 6. [USE OF PROCEEDS.] Revenues from the fee
authorized in this section may only be used for specific
prolects listed in the master plan and are limited to prolected
costs of the needs approved in the master plan. The
municipality may not accumulate revenues from the fee beyond the
estimated costs for reconstructions, facility upqrades, and
maintenance that are described in the master plan.
Subd. 7. [TRIP GENERATION DATA.] The fee imposed must be
calculated based on the relationship of the revenues the
municipality proposes to qenerate and a city determined trip
qeneration rate for each type of land use.
Subd. 8. [APPEALS.] A property owner may administratively
appeal the amount of the fee or the trip qeneration rate to the
qoverninq body within 60 days after notice of the amount of fee
due has been mailed to the property owner. The appeal must be
in writinq, siqned, and dated by the property owner, and must
state the reasons why the amount of the fee or the trip
qeneration rate is incorrect. The decision of the qoverninq
body may be appealed to the tax court in the same manner as
appeals of determinations reqardinq property tax matters
provided for in chapter 271. If the qoverninq body does not
make a decision within six months after the filinq of an
administrative appeal, the property owner may elect to appeal to
tax court. The appeal procedures in this subdivision are in
lieu of any appeal procedures relatinq to special assessments
provided for in chapter 429.
Subd. 9. [SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS; BONDS; PROPERTY TAX
LEVIES.] The use of the transportation utility fee by a
municipality does not restrict the municipality from imposinq
special assessments, issuinq bond debt, or levyinq property
taxes to pav the costs of local street reconstruction, facility
upqrades, or maintenance.
[EFFECTIVE DATE.] This section is effective for fees
payable in 2004 and thereafter.
Page 2 of2
~~'-I
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin!getbill.pI?session=ls83 &version=latest&session_..l 3/24/2003
04/02/2006
!
i
10:27
EAGAN ENG+CoM DEV + 94631611
NO. 763
'-"""~
GJ01 ..::
CITIES THAT HAVE PASSED RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING IMPROVED FUNDING
OPTIONS FOR CITY STREET CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
March 27~ 2003
Akeley
Annandale
Argyle
Arlington
Aurora
Austin
Bamsville
Barrett
Battle Lake
Beardsley
Beaver Bay
Belli,ngham
Bemidji
Benson
Braham
Brooklyn Center
Bubl
I BURNSVlLLE
Chaska
Chisholm
Cokato
Comfrey
Currie
Delano
EAGAN
East Bethel
Edina
Elk River
Elmore
I Emily
Eveleth
Fergus Falls
Forada
Fountain,
Ganison
Granite Falls
Hanley Falls
Hartland
HASTINGS
Hewitt
Hoffinan
Holdingford
lNVER GROVE HTS
Jackson
Keewatin
Kimball
La :Prairie
Lake City
Lakefield
LAKEVILLE
Laporte
Little Falls
LtlVeme
Lynd
Mahtomedi
Maple Grove
Maple Plain
Mayer
Milan
Minneota
Mounds View
Mountain Iroll
Murdock
New Market
North Branch
Ogilvie
Okabcna
Olivia
Gronoeo
Grtonville
Osakis
Osseo
Pequot Lakes
Pipestone
Proctor
Riclunond
ROSEMOUNT
Rushford
Sanborn
Sandstone
Sebeka
Shafer
Silver Bay
Spring Lake Park
St. Michael
St. Paul Park
SOUTH ST. PAUL
Strandquist
Tamarack
Taunton
Twin Valley
Vergas
Waldorf
Walters
Wanamingo
Waseca
Waverly
Welcome
Westbrook
Woodbury
Wykoff
ZtUllbro Falls
&~5
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
/c:k.
Mayor, Council Members,
City Administrato~ \. \~ v
Jim Atkinson
Assistant City Planner
Application for Preliminary and Final Plat Approval of Emmaus
Grove Addition and Wetland Alteration Permit- Farmington
Lutheran Church Site
Applicant: Farmington Lutheran Church, 501 Walnut Street
April 7, 2003
PLANNING DIVISION REVIEW
Applicant:
Attachments:
Property Location:
Plat Size:
Existing Zoning:
Farmington Lutheran Church
501 Walnut Street
Farmington, MN 55024
Letter from John Smyth (12/20/02)
Site Plan Packet
East of Akin Road, north of the Riverside
Neighborhood
18.07 acres
R-1 (Low Density Residential)
2020 Comprehensive Plan:
Existing land Use:
Low Density
Agricultural
Single-family residential is located to the south and
west, Bongard Trucking is located to the north and
agriculture is located to the east.
Surrounding land Uses:
Proposed land Use:
Church Facility (CUP approved on June 11, 2002)
~r;.
Streets and Accesses:
The principal access will be provided off the future
public street located along the south property line.
A secondary driveway access will be provided on the
north side of the property.
Utilities (Water, Sewer & Gas): Sanitary sewer, water and gas are all located on the
west side of Akin Road. The utilities will be jacked
under the road to service the property.
DISCUSSION
The applicant, Farmington Lutheran Church, is seeking approval of the Preliminary &
Final Plat for the Emmaus Grove Addition to allow construction of a new Farmington
Lutheran Church facility. The applicant is also seeking approval of a Wetland
Alteration Permit. The applicant received conditional use permit approval on June
11, 2002 to construct a church within an R-1 Zoning District. On September 9, 2002,
the CUP was extended to June 11, 2003 to allow the applicant time to plat the
property before the CUP expires.
The proposed plat consists of one platted lot and five outlots. The lot and outlots
consist of the following:
Block 1 Lot 1
Outlot A
Outlot B
Outlot C
Outlot D
Outlot E
Akin Road R/W
Proposed R/W
Total
Development of Church
Future Development
Future Development
Wetland/Stormwater Pond
Wetland/Stormwater Pond
Future Development
9.16 acres
0.36 acres
0.32 acres
3.57 acres
0.45 acres
2.19 acres
1.27 acres
0.75 acres
18.07 acres
As presently proposed, Outlot C and D will be platted for future storm water retention
ponds and later deeded over to the City. Outlots A (future church addition), B (future
gazebo), and E (future expanded parking lot) will be required to be platted when it
develops.
Existing Site Condition
The property is currently being used as agriculture. A number of out buildings
currently exist on the site and are located to the east and southeast of the property.
A portion of the site is heavily wooded in the west and northern portion of the
property.
The property also contains three electrical transmission towers that are located
within an existing 50-foot easement. The power lines, owned by Excel Energy, bound
~c:?/
the property along the east property line and jog northwest toward the central
portion of the site.
Site Plan
The site contains two wetlands near the northwest corner of the property (shown as
Outlot C and D). The applicant is proposing to place the church on the south central
portion of the site (shown in Lot 1, Block 1), avoiding the wetlands. The wetlands are
classified as utilize on the City's Wetland Classification system and will be graded for
storm water retention purposes (see comments under Wetland Review).
Building Details
Phase I
Total Building Space =
Number of Seats =
21,014 sq. ft.
450
Phase II Expansion =
6,496 sq. ft.
27,510 sq. ft.
Total Building Area =
Parking! Access
Based on 450 seat sanctuary
Phase I Parking
Parking = 231
Handicap = 7
Alternative Parking = 11
Handicap = 4
Total Parking Stalls
Parking = 242
Handicap = 11
Total Phase 1 = 253
Phase II Parking
Master Plan - 900 Seat Sanctuary
Future Parking = 223
+
Phase I Parking = 253
Master Plan Total Parking = 476
The future phase II parking area is shown just north of the main parking lot and would
service the future expansion of the church facility.
The applicant proposes two entrances to the site. The main entrance to the site
would be located on Devonport Drive. Devonport Drive would be extended from Akin
c,,;? ~
Road to the eastern property line, where a temporary hammerhead would be
constructed to provide a turnaround for emergency vehicles.
The applicant also proposes a northerly access to the site that will be built at a later
date. The roadway will act as a secondary driveway and is proposed at 24 feet in
width.
Landscaping/Boulevard Trees
The applicant is proposing to preserve a majority of the existing mature trees to serve
as a buffer from Akin Road. The church building has been shifted in order to preserve
the trees. The landscape plan meets City standards.
Wetland Review
A Notice of Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Application for the Farmington Lutheran
Church project was mailed on November 19, 2002 and initial comments on the
application were due by December 12, 2002. The proposed impact involves fill within
0.63 acres of seasonally flooded wetland for the construction of a secondary driveway
access off Akin Road. The applicant proposes to replace the impacts of 0.63 acres by
purchasing 1.26 acres of wetland banking credits in Rice County.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the Preliminary and Final Plat contingent upon the following items:
. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of
Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and
submission of all other documents required under the Development Contract.
. Any engineering issues shall be addressed and approval of construction plans for
grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division shall be granted.
. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations made by John Smyth in his
memo dated 12/20/02
Respectfully submitted,
//f L~'l ._u"
/' i .
c.'--i ......... . {/' ,
Jim Atkinson
Assistant City Planner
cc: Farmington Lutheran Church, 501 Walnut Street, Farmington, MN 55024
Ann Kuntz, Station Nineteen Architects, Inc. 2001 University Ave, Suite 100,
Minneapolis, MN 55414
~OI~
/Oe...
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT
EMMAUS GROVE ADDITION
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 7th day of April,
2003 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member _ seconded the following:
WHEREAS, an application meeting City requirements has been filed seeking final plat review
and approval of Emmaus Grove Addition; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the preliminary plat on the 11 th
day of February, 2003, preceded by 10 days' published and mailed notice, at which all persons
desiring to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS; the City Council reviewed the final plat on April 7, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly
served by municipal service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above final plat be approved and that the
requisite signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the final plat with the following
conditions:
1. Any engineering issues shall be addressed and approval of construction plans for grading,
storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division shall to be granted.
2. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of Farmington and
submission of security, payment of all fees and cost and submission of all other documents
required under the Development Contract.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the
7M day of April, 2003.
Mayor
Attested to the _ day of April, 2003.
City Administrator
emo
Jl]j Bonestroo
~ Rosene
"Ii1I Anderlik &
. 111 Associates
Engineers & Architects
Project Name: Farmington Lutheran Church
Client: City of Farmington
To: Lee Smick
File No: 141-99-116
From: John Smyth
Date: 12/20/02
Re: Wetland Conservation Act Review
Project Summary
The proposed impact involves fill within 0.63 acres of seasonally flooded wetland for the construction of a secondary driveway access
off Akin Road. The applicant considers this wetland fill necessary since two access points to this parcel were constructed during
improvements to Akin Road, the applicant was assessed for both driveways, and has indicated that the city is requesting two access
point to the property. The applicant proposes to replace the impacts of 0.63 acres by purchase of 1.26 acres of wetland banking credits
in Rice County.
Findings
The City and the Wetland Conservation Act first require looking for opportunities for replacement on-site, then within the same
watershed, and then the same county and finally adjacent counties. The applicant had limited opportunities to expand wetland on-site
if the oak trees are going to be preserved. It appears that the applicant did look for opportunities within the same county and found the
nearest wetland bank was available in an adjacent county.
's wetland is labeled as F-W8.8.l on the Wetland and Waterbody Classification Map and was classified as utilized. The wetland
inance allows excavation in basins classified as utilized if it is limited to the reed canary grass portion of the wetland. This applicant
has proposed excavation within the wetland and has lowered the outlet elevation to 900 (currently 902'+). It was determined that a 2-
YR storm will flood to the 900.8' elevation. The grading currently shows some of the fringe areas having elevations that are higher
then 901 and may not be flooded enough to maintain hydrology to the fringe area of the wetland.
Response to SWCD Comments
The SWCD had no critical concerns or objections to this specific proposal. They did however have the following fundamental
comments to the location of the replacement wetlands.
], Page 3 of the Applicant indicates that the affected wetland and the Rice County wetland bank are located in the same major
watershed (Cannon River - #39), This is inaccurate. As mentioned the project site is locate within Middle Creek of the
Vermillion River, part of the Mississippi River Watershed under WCA rule.
Response:
This will be corrected for the applicant when a notice of decision is sent out to the reviewing agencies. The applicant is still in
compliance with the Wetland Conservation Act due to the Wetland Conservation Act allowing replacement within adjacent counties
and Rice County being adjacent to Dakota.
2. We are aware of existing flooding concerns within the Middle Creek sub-watershed area, Land use within this sub-
watershed is currently less than] 0% developed but future development is proposed throughout the Middle Creek drainage
area. Farmington's approved Wetland Management Plan includes an inventory of wetland restoration opportunities. We
should be evaluating these opportunities to avoid replacing wetlands outside of the Vermillion River Watershed
Response:
We agree with this statement and the City has explored constructing a wetland bank to be used locally in the city at a site located west
lilot Knob Road, north ofCSAH 50 and south of the Charleswood Development as shown on the Wetland Classification Map. This
gonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. www.bonestroo.com
St. Paul Office:
2335 West Highway 36
SI. Paul, MN 55113
Phone: 651-636-4600
Fax: 651-636-1311
Milwaukee Office:
1516 West Mequon Road
Mequon, WI 53092
Phone: 262-241-4466
Fax: 262-241-4901
Rochester Office:
112 ih Street NE
Rochester, MN 55906
Phone: 507-282-2100
Fax: 507-282-3100
Willmar Office:
205 5th Street SW
Willmar, MN 56201
Phone: 320-214-9557
Fax: 320-214-9458
St. Cloud Office:
3721 23rd Street S
SI. Cloud, MN 56301
Phone: 320-251-4553
Fax: 320-251-6252
Grayslake Office:
888 East Belvidere Road
Grayslake, IL 60030
Phone: 847-548-6774
Fax: 847-548-6979 ~3o
Memo
.11. Bonestroc
.... Rosene
8 Anderlik~
1\11 Associate:
Engineers & Architect
is a critical site for storage within the Middle Creek drainage area. We have had problems with acquisition ofland for this restoration
and would anticipate that the Farmington Lutheran Church would have the same problem. It may not be realistic to have them try to
acquire land for restoration. We hope to continue to pursue the restoration of wetlands within the City so a Wetland Bank will soon be
available.
3. Our records indicate the City of Farmington has worked to establish a wetland bank within the Middle Creek sub -watershed
as part of the 195/h Street Improvements, The use of these wetland credits should be evaluated under this proposal.
Response:
We had initially anticigated wetland banking credits would be available from this project, however when we constructed a portion of a
trail as part of the 195 Street improvement project most of our credit was utilized. Once wetland monitoring has been completed and
approvals are received we will now if there are additional credit available.
Recommendations
The following are recommendations for the applicant as a condition of or prior to approval:
1. The applicant should be required to modify the grading to insure the fringe areas of the wetland will not be drained this
will require pulling the 901 contour out to the delineated wetland edge.
2. A landscaping plan that shows how the excavated wetland will be revegetated should be provided. We do not
recommend bringing back the top foot of topsoil as a seed source due to it containing reed canary grass seed. Soil below
the top I-foot will likely not contain reed canary grass.
3. The applicant has indicated that oak trees have limited the mitigation on-site. We agree with this statement but note that
the grading plan currently shows excavation outside the delineated wetland boundary so it appears that the wetland will
be expanded on-site and could provide some mitigation. It also appears that additional expansion could occur without
impacting oak trees,
It is recommended that the applicant consider obtaining as much wetland mitigation credit on-site as possible without
impacting the oak trees. We feel that this would partially address the SWCD and our concerns about the location of the
replacement site. We are allowing most ofthe mitigation to occur off-site due to the fact the applicant has indicated a
desire to protect the oak trees on-site. It is recommended that a protective easement be placed around the oak trees to
insure that they will not be removed.
Ifreplacement is received from expansion along some of the fringe of the wetland we could allow the applicant to claim
credit for a buffer preserved around the wetland if it has an average width of 25 feet. The Wetland Conservation Act
will allow the applicant to receive mitigation credit for the buffer but it cannot exceed the amount of wetland
replacement provided on-site. This would be another way to place some of the oak trees and ground cover under a
protective easement.
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc.
www.bonestroo.com
81. Paul Office: Milwaukee Office: Rochester Office: Willmar Office:
Office:
2335 West Highway 36 1516 West Mequon Road 112 7'h Street NE 205 5th Street SW
Road
SI. Paul, MN 55113 Mequon, WI 53092 Rochester, MN 55906 Willmar, MN 56201
Phone: 651-636-4600 Phone: 262-241-4466 Phone: 507-282-2100 Phone: 320-214-9557
6774
Fax: 651-636-1311 Fax: 262-241-4901 Fax: 507-282-3100 Fax: 320-214-9458
81. Cloud Office:
Grayslake
3721 23rd Street S
888 East Belvidere
SI. Cloud, MN 56301
Phone: 320-251-4553
Grayslake, IL 60030
Phone: 847-548-
Fax: 320-251-6252
Fax: 847-548-6979~..3 /
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
,/
~~~~ ,/
~R!~ /'
i~* .,/
~1lIli: ,/
~~ ,/
~,,/
,/:
/:
/' I
/' 'b "-.
/'
/'
/'
/'
/'
/'
/'
/'
./
iii~:t
:> '"
(/}~z
~~~
;::0-<
8zI
-tNC
o!"~
?; d~
~~-<
:> ':2 i!i
~ 'Oz
:> "" '"
?:!~~
~ ::00
:>..,
o ~-<
"'",I
Vl '"
N
(Xl mVl
<D '"
~ ~
o
<D,
~
~
"":l
l\)
C
~
l\) ~
~
~ Z
~ 1;0 ~
If :i !:l
~
J ~!!
i.1
'~i
U.
~
(})
~
.
o
o C"lVlO
'" :> '" '"
Z l)--1Z
c:; C ~C:;
~ ~:2[:::
:u [ri:>i:r:
OVlZ_
Z oo~
;:: :t;:: I
O"':>OJ
Z::o~-<
C ;!;f;;
~ :<10:;
~ Vl~Z
d 6:tg
~~~:u
o VlO
ZZ
?;::
o
~z
:j~
~~
-<
EAT'" AVE I ~
1.1\('
('>
~ -1-
,..
<
o
z Z
o
Vl-l
~-<
.-
fTl
~
)>
1]
&
~
fTl
(
/
o I
c
r=J I
S/
~
~"
<'1
"'0
0)?
-S
---
~
"" 0""
?
?
~
%-"
(~~
o
/
\
/~
/ "--
~
/to' "-
~
-""? ~
~_ 8
~-i~
""
'"
,
,
,
,
,
.
I ,..-.?"""-
J,'/ ,'_
.:.:.- ~....~
/\1'1 1'0>\\_
a;. ~~c;
~ ~ N:~'O
~ . OI~O
'!.~. ~ ,..
~
SJ:,s
S"6r;"J~
'<b".....
".,
_ ,J'r".''''~o
J680' <I- ,...". 1
NOO'02'SJ"C " '.J>~
...r~~ ,. ~~
...'l>~ <1-" ''b
'~.~~ ')
~ I
20 I
I
I
~ I
~ I
~ 1
laJ
~ I~I
I~O
c: I~
e lin
=l:~^
~ IUI
-<1 ~ I --"
SOO'JO'WW '/ ~ I
~ ~~ 1
~L_________________ I
.1 ~ ORA/NAGf ,4ND UTILITY cAseMeNT.... L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ c: I
Q NORTH .6 - -_~- - - - - 1~ I I
~.'- ~ - -~ - ~ 248.0;--.... -18 120 I
y-___ ~ c L:f_J
I ,.,.s"'; ~ - - - - - ~ ~
I O)"Q6'J5"E =::r - - - - - - - - - - ~;;1H- ;;5-;-5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"I
I
I
I
1:;1
~I
-"'t
JO I
I
I
1
"-"
1
NORTH
'20.10
-
c..~ 1'.....
()c,...c,'.O
,"
~ .
:
~---
\', /'
'X;
./ l'ii
.. "'<I
~~ ~i'
~g ~~
. ~...
'b
a"
t!
=,ji
;~,/
/' ~..
:>!Il
~
I'i
..
--
""
%-"
<~
o
ei
i::J
"
is:>!
!8
!:\~
':~ ~
i 1IJ
,
,
m
III ~
Cll
<0
t.l
l.,
ci ?:
<0
.
::;:
Q
l., :t>
:"-
~
C
en
~
\
j
<;:
r - EAST LINE OF He .. or sc ..
_ _ j ~~.:.o:~~~______
I ......
/.<<=''=:"i~ - ~oo~~..
,...........- ~/ "-. 100 ;#
...."..._......... ~.... \ ..................---------
-..... ~ ......-'
NOO"04'1~"W
105.43
JO
JO
z
co
~~
8~
..r
r
o
-;
...
'"
...
~~ '"
~.li <0
. !J1
"..
l^~ <: 0>
iS~ 01
!~ Cll
<0
I\,j
<0
:l:i' oi
. ...
~. 01
~; .
:>!Il 'IE
;~
, 1lI
'..
o
fTl
<
10
"I;~
~::lO
Q;t:::::O
,-;
...
10
;0
<
fTl
In
co
~
"i
o
'i
,"fll. -'
3~DO.9Z.00S
1- \
\ JO
'-lKSTlINC OF NW t4 OF sw ~
seCTION JO. TOWNSHIP "". RANGe 19
_ S~'2~"L
- -1- - - - --
~
_ _ : : -ORA/NAGE AND
- UTILITY CA5(MENT"
, "
...
...
--
r-
~~
fi
ll~
all
~~
~~
.~~
is
l'<;;j
10~
321.80
--______ ~ S 00'26'00" [900,12 ,.., ---- ;A'"
------ -... 0
----------------~- ~...
~ " - - "" /0" ~~
? ~~
? !;~
)?~~
1}
2.li
~~
r
~~
,
, i
'..,
~~~
~i:!;
Js~~
a~~
h:
_~!6
.;~i'
~;::
~~
;;~
~Lz-
"" ?
?~
\.S) Lz-)?
l;1
~
.. :>
'1:J
::c
n
~~
:>
I:'"
l:%l
,---=--,- .......--/ J
c:::::~"::::::::/'
-:".- OUill
Tl fR'I
;:u ~ t'!
F"
"oJ"
fr
~:=~;~~.'i
,
(;)
]
" 0
Q
1lIZ<'
i!6~
" ~~ <
.. .
.. ~~i
ii: ~"
I~ :;
~~~ m
"O~ ...
,;~~
i~i
~:rqz
, ..~
, ,
,
o
C
---1
I
o
---1
I'l
r -
')
,
1lI~':
i.li~
Js~~
~~~
I~.li
;~~
-~~
'~Il~
I ~
I
~~~
~..~
Il~
ll~~
a..1l
l;.li
~ ---
I
~~
2~
~
ls~
'~i
I~~
I-~
;;..
I~
';;1lI
I"
;;
;;
i/
i /'y
/y/ ~~
. .#' ///',1<
l ,h~./ / I
,/~/ // ' I
,/'/ '/J~\)~dl'
\, I ~
\, \
\, \
~'~~I \ \
" \. \
\ \
~<5> \ >:1 \ \
,~~'" 'ci.f) \\ '\ \
~. ~"4 I \ \
::ff' ....<u'(i" . ./ .J" // \\ \ \
l ~J/ /:; Ci~l \ II \ \
t ,. ."J("xt1'fX'. ' \ \
, / (~{" r 'I jf r.". I.... ~ i t
/ ./ Il.'.. .,~,,,~\ M/"~)j $ th:"I
/;:;.; /' ~}. "'l9 II (' \ '
. i! ,/'~~ ~~ . II i I I
u ~ )-' cJ. 0 II $ ",//'.,,/...._._,.-.,.~) I ~ s I /'
ell!l! / :::// /'. (/~ II \ ,;:~~ij, ~1~\ j JIll
~I ~ ~ ~, ~' ifc'\ \ "a..(9 ~(~ft;~) W(fJ' ~~~L]\\ I I i
51 ,..;' ~~'O:~:.~~~. ~ r#(Q'\ ,.'. [)> (i0 \'.fl~) \'"...,,, , -I, 1m f?: ;r?)/-..\ y / ii'
" 0" ~/~ ,,!;J, 1<5 I, I";}"",; .-;?r~.. tf?1... \ "l:~'{~~~ l !)!
/",,/' . ~v~/ (f'~tMJ 'J.) ~~ il: '-4~ ~ \(f.:r} \.1(f,,'~""'~'" ') ff~~{ \ \.-l' / ~
/ ,,~ . I"~' g~ "'\..{ I; ~; i. ,~."f' ...-' ~ '. i / I
(f' ~ U<. 1'~;1;f"~ \~r~!":'~M~ .,~) ('\ U~;u l19 :i:~ 0 ~~(1ix.Jf~~' \,.., C'~ \ / /
\ ./"\ \V-.JiK-~ ~ .. .II ~1/ " ,.e.)! '!l'r. Y: ""..j ((:"'~ <~~g (~i.> \"U' ",L~ '{ 'ci !f;&\ t-.. Li I
~ ~, 8 -i-: ., 'I ~', ~(.,-:(j ,-C"I""" \.L. " \'l!)f i~',
~~~"~~ d! ,~(i~~ i~1 ~]-,q:t'f.J;!, ..~.~ ,;J (1~b1?~.;;J! ! L~''')
\ '- ,.,\... f .Y;..Yf(. \ r (i ~{l;{'(~ J':luml{~ti l----P~..,'y-----, "<fi. i lc. j ,
,/ \, \ '~. G ~ f 7'}'P:o~ ' ,..~ .,' 1,1;' f1'~~^~~~ \.')1 ..>~': ~)' ~~ l-___~.D~ / !~,~L1I I
./ ~...~ \, '~I 1 (';:~", r.o <r /'{,- 1.1 . ~C~ -'~.I ! _..,.
/' r< :--........ I" . ~'.l'I I' oi 11 ~'" ..... -'ll \ I ' "'"
~ ;,r,v 11- .., S ~..~.. .. \~ \.:r:;N: . u. ::..;:',( 1:. : r----__ ',_ O~iJ I ;l\. ,\ '
N it ~f\:I I r\: ~ a~ '----, -, '.*"- 0 ~. ,- ------_________--1 -, ...., "'V,' \ s )t I
~ ~ I: ~ ~ : I! II \~qh-.- j l-ri ~;I D .. / 'I:q.., l--1!fI .]{~ ~ (4'\ '-.. ~ ~ - f I "l.~f'~
,~ It .~~J2lt1 QI~ mrll~~~~~~, r~'~~':;~...7 -'~~~~~~!-:.. C~J liJ~~Ci)"lj A tt;J~ I'
~'\... z 3 ~~~.. IJ I'I/{ 'I.., ..'.. I '\ it d =< ," :lq~~1 I 7Q -\ _ '.. 1..._
~i \ '- 1 ~ ~ 8~~ 1 ~"''C'~M/...i.0 I~ 4n1~~ ~ lJ i?~'" ,"'" ttl: ,/ I/:(j(~ '.
~--d I:: I .,!l9 ~--- ~ ~~,W~. I?-~, ! : ~($>' !" t"P~~{J~) ~~~......../ "~';f,, :'.~_.... I '~'''_'_
P.. ~' I if" '\. / ~___l__ -__'y' iT! , !~,,)(...
)~~ :g I: ,,~)~ r--J. ~..... }'...;" ~ "..... ,..,r.i\lJ', .. fl.""''.
( ~ LY E .., 'n L' -.f ~ ~~i' r.lfltl. 8 ~-- - ir.(f.il f. '/ '" '..;8 // //, ""':,~,1 "(, \ ~f~{!{ ,)1
( ~ ! S......I~ ~d ~I ~G/~+ ~~~m(0~"I~ ~~ -----i~- .~. ~~~, /:'~.../'--;- //::>{r~ \ (~.~U\ .':' '1;1
i < ~ ~ : ,i__ ~ '(i) ~ I y,,- qlf ~":mf,flI, "...~) 1 I 1 1 VII r-,';<f,..:l~V~.:~'f7. <:l;':;''><:l-~~ ,</ I \' @~ (i~ i~
. " ~ ~ H~ --- -l-, ;; -It_ ~'" N~ml' ~ ,'~.:_LU~!~= 1 'f(ll!i I, ~ !;.':...:...~:::r:~ljJ ...-;...'l... .... {L~......-\ ~ \" i~'
'.{ I) cg :0:::;;: :0 1, ) /S" L.V.... ''''M ~~IJ i ') 1 '- ~-- ~I.:l\( ,T ......!i. .~f (~ ...-;/ i ~~~ \ DII
{'(;:) ~r-f -,~ t'{y!'i15~~:''t ~ f.- ;:-t)!f @ 5~; /I(~j ~), ;'iW ':'~~'~2~ . \~) e /1f.r"~Jl " \ Ji,
~ ( ';:! / N: I: "))\~~fff! . k 1.1.1 J I I It 1111:1 I I ill II r~'111 ,'- - : ....-'" -- --- "'-I.::"..... ---.:;, ... ......... \ \ DI
"'I .,.; (I~;":~~~:<' '''I;t~~ID'' :[ ~;I J1~ ";;'; II i=t I;'~:,r~ ,,&\.~k~11 rr/:/ II(/\~~:
~ \: i, : i f.i- Ilf f..~ , '..' I I" "II ~T I 1 I I ... tl - :,.c'\."'- ., CV ~ ...- ~ ~ .F ~ .1
! : l1- ~ i' (_~ 0"= JI\'i:9> =8 ~,' 110 ~~)' ~_~I.l.,l.. "N VI - ".~. 1~ r.';"...., t:...- ~ ~ ;; \
t---~ ' if; \~~~::: "ll~;!!!!!:mJmii\il~:!!nlllrr~=E"Y/i0J ~ ,. ~,
=:::::~~dil =-~~.~il:~ 8f1 ,~i~; III i'I'1 r II'" III 'II:~ II Hllllli,~~""'"'''' ., .. "~I" ...... .. ........... . nn................. 1 i
... __ is,,,,,. , \ I ,~ ' . 'i 25' ~srA11iIf'ON&tCXJr.lPAN't CA
I~. ;-Jti:KJrih... ~ ~'...,' 8 ~ ~ fA_....~"."'. I ~
i t '-:::-L-.. 'n -.. 1-. .. .. - ~~f-<:: I- .. , -\- .. - - - - - - - - -.-J l
'~ I,.cl::~, '- - t " - . - -~ - . - - . --
1(,1' - .~=17 · -".' '" '( _v :::.........=...:.::......"., - \
~ ~ i:1 'Ii ~ Q "'q .o.",^,., "" ...u~jiz 'H ~u
,.....-~. . ~.:.::l:':'~ ~~~
V'-'- .,',.,,,", a ~
~.. -..---' I
: lJ1JtJ i
I
.
~
;\
$
I
...-..
."-
~ r; i ~ ; i a~ i ~~ i i ~ i ~ i i ~
2 ~ f' \'l ~ ~ ~~ h ~ t\ ~ ~ e ~ ill ~ to
! ~ u~ z ~ i ~ ~! ~~ ~ ~ g ; j ~ i ~ I m
i" ~ ~ ffi m ~ 1ft g~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' n ~ ~ ~ ~
ijm "I !/' ~~ I -< ffi 0 ~ ~ de
~5[)> ~~ ~ ii1 l~~ ~~ Sz
.~ ll~ ~ ffi, Ii ~y, ~z
h-l ~"'i~~il ~m ~o
~rri ~f~ ~!~ ~~,~
~ m ~:ii ~ ~ ~ 0""
~ II > 0 :lI
o ~ij ~~ ~
~ '
.~
~/~
//
,,~/;,'" /
P" ~ !.II '"
I ;l ~ ~ ~I
~ .. ~ ~..
~ ~ -:; - ~;l
m ~ ~ i"R
, ! 1ft ~
~ I I
~ i i
o
i
I
~
~
.
ul
:; ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~
N N j'"
g:l:;l
U
~~ ~ ~ ~ [)>
~~ i1i; ~ i1i'" ~ /'
~~ U ~ ~! I)~
.;I~
N""~"N~q~
t: ~~ Oi ~ ~ ~t z
~~~~!~ ~
...
E
I
~8
~~
qil'
Ul
Ci
~
'"
\1
.
a:
~
!/
..,
r
L
L..
r-
... .....M........... .................-. ..._.......... .,....__..... ....._._..... ....,....._w... ,.................. .....__.. ... .........._...... ..,,,__.....
o
i
I
i
I
V
I
!
:~
I
~
~.
~~
~ n it ~
~ ~ ~= ~
~ I i ~
,/
.....
SQ~NQ~~~~~~~
~ ~ ;l. '" "J ~
. :-'. ~
\
I ---,
U~ "~~ ~
x. i~~ ~
8.~ ;;I".
! ~o ~~~
S ~ ~~~
~ ~S~
~ c
~ "&
;;I
Q~~~ ~r ~s 8~~~
.~ ~'~Q~f'~
~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~.
~ii~ i~ ~_ .o.~~
~e' h 'I ~~~~
.~~;~ ~~ <~
;;i In ~ ~~~
!I:
.11 !~~I~gggg~gg
.... 0
C
~
~~ z
u i
~~ >
.
Ii!
~
I
"
~ '
i
~~
~
~
~~ii~i
~~..~il;<l C
~~;"h z
~hh~ ~
~'r:~,"" ~
~ ~lilllle
~ i~\;g
~ <l~h ~
~ h1i~ 5
~ <ld~ r;j
~ ~Il~m (j)
~ t~~~
~ ~
/-'Y",\
tl~" 't~
.,( ,J
'(~:~J
t~)
'i?':\
.t.)}
)\/
liJ \ -, ",r,7\
}(':I,..,,,", ~~. O,J.!{)i
, '\ . ~ ..~" -.
;'.~/ (I, )i h\ "J:' ..: h
1.. _" '\l'~:""'" ~I
(gjj i!!~,.'y Ii
$. 1{ /~..(", ,~/ \ \ ~;
.....J ' ----....- 6'\ ./. \ "
x:'-;>/ r:W/ \ \ ~I
e __:~t/ \ j"
//tfr~ _ ~\ \ i
./ "J...... ./ ./../' \ \
//:..:/;, \ \
1;<. \.'/ /~ III ~~\\
OS). _ )_
t'Y~
.,.q (;; , .<7. _ ~ ~ ~ ~ I
~
..
~
r--
!
~
g!
,,;
~s
~
~
..-
~ en()
r g ffi~
~ :s::
Cii
~:-'" en
~ 6
z z
.......
6'OO'E
-~~n=-_:".==- . -
1I0.ot..,aonsHffIl4 _1J4~101114'"
?fj
:;.c:J
,
N
at
1:'" or" rY!P[;;>iI' r ~ ~. f III - 15 ~ i::~
z~ :I:C)> f"
m~ C-i:Il i~ 9 9 9 , - ill
0" :Il:I:s: "'I I ~ ii~H ~ II ili~ l Z
~d om- ~ I i i i '!... ~f.il · m )>
;z :I::IlZ 1 ~ ~jll
)>Gl qUI ii ~~ 8i~t -i ~
Zd I II' if
!: 5 " 8:. E... m 0
iii II ..i0 ;;ll!i t ... m
Z S a a - itf
lZ Z
..........~.l mnnHlnnr-iI .............. ................ .................. .............. .............
..
, I(W .TAnOlf N/NEJ'EEN ARCHlTECB INC,
1m
....---..-....
/
!!
~~
-~
!~
H
;
I
111'111
I
i
I I
~~: ~
i i i
i
UI
I !
I
!I
'" '"
~ -
.
;
":,::
"
-~ --~
,
--
-:
~..#'
,
--: --
,
~
'. ."...on;;;.:.",..".".."
,. "._~~'~"'~:,:,~::"i."'~~'ll,\"~,:,::.,~::~,..:~::.-_
...._-_.......~
.
.-:._-~
~....
I
.. - --....-...
.".......
.....-..-.....-....--.
.......
x
.................-.........
/./........._-----
.'
.,'
"
,.'
..........
.......................
--.-""...
",
.....................
...........--
"
,--
..--.......-....
.................
....-----..
........ -"-""
~
~
~~s I..
~~S I
H~
~oo
!il~~
~;;
.'
. .
"
(")..-.."
:J:C30
C~s:::
;0",_
(");oz
:J:)>G'>
zej
z
-
o
~
....-...
,
~
'"
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
",
....--......
--........ ........ .
......,.
..-t--
--....
.....................
1:i
I j.s
~B
I;
I~
I
I 11 I
! .~II .AI I II
51 51' , , , ~ .. 0 (!)II&I; II I i I~.
,I,ll' II .. ". .". i' ' fii::l
ICl olu ill a ill III II 1111111' I' i ! : ! ~ H11 ~ .. o. ! i · \ll7 ...-,::':'fiii.ii:{/if,i .;;\%~;;,;;,;";,,.
i II i II I I " "" I " I' ' 1111' I .... . I ............ ..,..,J.....;. ..:.~~,.d.;;Y:i.....
I Ii I II I i 1111 q . d, i h" Ii 111111 Ii I ~ i -:,"':::::;;;;':""fj,:};.':i:\~' '':;{I,;J,'~ ..:-0;'
a~ ~ II I Iii! ! ~ i I; ~ I ~ ~ ~ i ~ I Ii II i ; ; ;~ I ; :: I . ~ ...,::::I~\~;~~~~fii~-~fj~~~}f1:~ fl~:~>;:/ j.~/
I ' ~,!!. '!. I I II' ~ I : , ~ . i ! 'II ., \ ....:.,.,::::::::;::::.:.::::..'x;".;:1- ,,:1/::;~ / / /'.
! II I I ' i' , , . . I' " ....:::;..........'1".:::""-"::.-:.::.-:..:.':: :..:"..;./ /' / / .,.
. . ! ! i" ! I' 0 ~ .....::\/........:I:.--.::::,,":":..../~:.;:...,,-7~.../ ~').....::-:~.
U llli lift!li! lit; J';I ..; 1'11:; I ,. I ., . .':K::::::~~g:~~;rr;~~Y'.r /' ~:~::;;i{ij;f!i?l-
;1 i,l ifl'I'", n J! hi I.! I . i..;(t';..-V...... ,'" \ (:~~::::.. :"'o;:::!" ...~,-;,::.{ ~\;;!-)\ \...1 .I
'If ,1111 I .llllI II 11{1' I,rll, . . : :.""". ',I \ \ , >, W ". '" L . ,.}-"" ....'/ / j,,". "1i-..:....\...<('. , :
I, 1.' J 'I \ . . '. ,. "'...... i \ ..., '. ,..."" . · ..- · · :'<< . ,.... ,.' '
,r D!lf I II . 1_.... It}"'....,\\",' ~".\ \ ,\'" ?; I~'" .,;r:" ,:
r .f'l J,r' I'll' I II .... . :,.. ".... .... ' .^' \~ ..' '" . ,/ ...,.': ' ' ' .
!lllrl h::I!!I.J~ f'l' i'!~ II!J ~.. ...........~' \.\ \Hji!!\1~~'\" i\~";$':!:-:l':x. ,f~' :t/~j \ \, , \
I l 'I~hl rl,lt II li'i \ ,,/ /;~~---:::: \ \ \ \ \ \:: ..~,...\.:....\ ~ /... ~,' ......-....~.., ~___:'-_n._-..' \ ~.
I J f r" If. Il ill .. .... .--' ">,::,,," , , , .. , ' , " ,. '.' .. . ../.' .ox-' ""......... '.
II I'll''' II ',; " ! ....-? ...,.':.<::/::.....\-,\V::,:;::;:-::::.:..:.,,,.; t' TV:~' It;.~,:f{~:\ ! \,..::::-':::" "'i... !<.. '.
. II 'JJI~1 ~J t I l~' f ,',-";':'1,, /.,//"',>':' ':'~...'; .::::::.~.;.~~~."),\\')O.. '1',)" ,/ '" /<', .~-:.-.;;.".J F....'.. .....,: ". ~
r IJI .fll'l 1 lll'l}J Ilii ~:":: ;,:\.....//:>.::..~.::,,..1i"'...::.::i'i:.... . ." ,/ ::4......;'dJP~lt.,.:-::-,.. \ '\ '-. '-" -', ,-~,.\\ ",
i " flf . l ,." .,'. ,., ." N ... .... ...,...J. ....:..'" .."," ..' . '" .v",""'''' ,.. ........... : . ". ". ,., .
I 1.1 I"l"! .. J . II' IIi I \ ~rJ.....:.y!//::::::::>>.:::::::MJ.' .,. ~:;/../ ,./::,:*,,~;.:::::::::;;;;,:::;,::::::~~..\" \\ '\ .... \ !i,..... ...... .......
~ U: f~!in ill it Hi ii,'! I' ~ \,\.",.f>:s!j;i1i~~;{i{*'i:~:-~/l' :f1lti)~f;(1J/;j.;/<>/ ~;; :;!.4ffJ;,<:::~::s;~&\1f\;~:s;:~:::~:\; \;\ \ ... \J!j "...:::":::.""
III 'I " II rll l f ,do.{)"- '~')-s'::::::::::::~;'::;;f:":~':"';'-'" .,........ / ......"'0'> / :~..:.,.:/; ; ;../ ",x"'- ...,",':...:.:....... 'r-'" \ '. ,'...
J fft"" ..' .' . c.................... .' ..,....... .' .' ~: / .' ...". / ..' "'..'...: .. .... "'.:' .,..... ....... ,...... ,. . ~'~"".
If I _. \.~{' / /...\,::::::;;<;.~.,-:: :.;:,.",. ;.... / .,/"" /:/ <Yo,..:::.'.'; ; ;: -' ..;'i':' II .:::~:. '(: ..........1 ' " ", " \ ':', ~ hh,__,____
! ' ,,' ,'I>,~' J(.~"\--"---""" .,'" ~...... .. .' ,/ ..' ~" r'" " ' "11" .'''' ...... .. ... , I.' .. .. .
\..'" :.........,...>)('t'.::::"'c~:;",/;;:<:.... / .,'/' :.. /'.~ Y"'! ."":'; ! j; ii::':: \......t>. W..' ". :\ :":-- ..... ;;
. '\. . .,# .,,>\ ,,-v / / ,~._"",.;.;.,.. ..'.......' )'~...... h ~.,;:..--., .." ",< ,'jWlI' I::::: ~ ,:,..'t '.',' .'. \, .' ,'--" . : .
.. ,.... /,," ".'>r....,.......,......-... ..", .. do,' .. .. ..' . . .... .... ," ,.." .... .
. , . ' \ :" \____ "...... ..-;;;;?~~v...:.:.0"!\'..i!':...~""/.../ /:l' ..v:.....:.::::.:.... {:'l': . /..:i i I ~n · ~~ ,'..'.\ \.'!. \ j if 'i;;." :, ............
\ \ ....~..\ ........ . ...f:::;:;;::~" . ';".: . T-;:>/ ..,/ ,;:.;" ..."'. ",,,""""" 'i'~ . ',....; ..'%" i ; ~,:: ...~. \ \ \ ... I-'ih: :; j;). ~ l' .....
"'.... It....... \2.........;;..:....0::--:. '-' '.",' :;/.... ../,,,,,- ~.'::.,",:?,:;;....;...;"..'.r.y -liJ . ,; p':: \"" ' " ,\ \," ,,~;> , ...
\~i;i~\~::.::::Ji'i:?0;7f~Mi:;~~;=;; :...:::.:.;/ff;li;fJ:~~~i~!~'t~7t.~f~~:;;;~;;;;;;;i:~, ! f;(t ~~ \ \ \ 1 III! ,11\\\\\\ 'i) .....
: \ \ ,'\,.,,,, ...u__i...i---- I'.... .' ~':..' " ~~~Z;;. :",'.-.t" .,::r:ll;,/ ,',,',"~ I...."""'''~"..'''''.,... ..,.. "", i.. I "...,::",,,' ,,,........... ".
, )(. 2 ,:::::,::-{'-~1'::~~"~"'-"i' "., . / A'" r' ;;",::.,:&.r .... fj:/A;""" iN,' ~ . .,.: . ,;;;;;;,,'''''''''''''':':'' it',.. Hiii, , i:!, ,1 i ; i ii "H,'H ,i: ..
" .. ,l\'-:'.:l'l;,:"a n" ./ ..;o:n:4'>?' ,,,{: ,,::V ,,'{I " ,ii::'';;'' ,:;: ., ..,"~""'i"" ::"PO , ,,: ,!" "",,'1," , '
; ~ :'\' \ 1/ "i;, .tJNi.':d-,// ... .....;z.V 4 " ~.....""',,j:i:!: i :ldiN ~ ..'ii~ii'./ ."..:.::",;,";,,,,,..';;:l i !i I 'J I Ji i ,i!i HiH" \ \
,\\ '.. "'_ .../ ./ ~ .....~...l,.l'!: 'Ii~ ::"&!~ N~a:' '~~:~~~i:':":':-~:'-~";X'~:" ::!\ ~ \\:\1\ 'i !.~! ,~:~f/p !.~! _~'_....,";;,~"';'}~';j.~W / :: I " Ii i: ::: iP:\ ... \
\C"\''I~'' ,.,' .'" .;J>- {~. K;' . < .' . o' ..:.."........... ,........" . .",....... .........~':..- ,,': ::...:.. .\
~\__ /0. /', ;. ~1I!1'/ ".... ..,>\,>,Vb' 'I' '. ... ." '''2~''^'''''''''' , '., ';::i,. · {",,,I." . . ....~. '!lO'^ Ii:' ". '''il ' ".m"
~~:::'''~~i:g''~'~>''' ;~;~!' '~~:/~'~~~:'-~~~lI!liY) .;\ \. \~,\,''''',-..;:....~'~' \::,:~,*~~~..t; l~'~,~ .{:I~ '.dt: f":} ;~!~2j,i~.~~ f\\h:~\\ ..\) "'\
~ . . ~ ." .' .... < -' . . .. . , '. < " ... ...... ."." ..... ......" .. ~.' ,.."., .. " .
~ .... ~ /'o';i<' '. "",,'" ,. ..... .. ....,....,:'~,. ...:i,";' , .to ..',,, 'I,' ,.ll'''' .'" ...
.. _ / /..~'" -I""" ,'. ..... ....~' '.'",' .-.~, ....,:,~,..' ,I) ~i~ 11~::i i.' ,'..:..: f\,".
/' n_" / .... ..(....'0 ...J,...... , ". '4.. ..... ......' .... ". "'" ",Of" .,,.;%..... · \' ..(" ~ · :! , Ii;' .: : ,-""y' ,
. "'/ ';:,..... C ' ,i..' ;\' ". .....:.,' f...... '. ...... '.i' ,;.> "<o;,:-'i\*'>. ""j~'::~..' " r': r :; - : ! ! /i ! Ii! ",:,:::"""',~c".~...
~/ ,_ .' . ," ". ,..." ........ .., '. 4: q........ .,. ...",....,... ,,,". ',.' . "r : If' ",.. ....-.."..-'"
~2;:;;"~~ ' ' ; 0" '. .............. ............ ....... "'~ :~\r .:<:<~';;;~:,t\,{1~\~';\" ;'1 ;:/~.. ilill ij~a .....m.
.... n , ' .' .... . ....,.... .....n. ........ ........ ,. , :.. /' ' , g~"
.,;..-- ~ '. ...... n .. ." .......,.- .. . .,. . .. ",
..) .i~l.i:l\ " .... 7..... .. ........ ......:.....~~;.... ......i...... .......:::.',..~'i '//':1/ it t::l · .'---.
.. .1 '* .. : " ..,.... ' .. .". '. ". ..... ". i" .. I ~::: l!! / ..
, '. : .' . .~;.."y; . ' d l ". ~..... ...... ....:,,:....... ,.... i /,'. ph" .... '.
II' ,,,,,'; \ " 1- ... ........n.... ........:.. /i I' 'I" '" ... '
~I ., . ' ,,' "-r . ..n_n.... .. t" . .
~ . . ../ II Lw . .iii-...'.... ........j " .Ii! ..... i \
. ... c. 'J"' l ( ...., hi:' '
.. . ." .n,," .. '.' ... , .' '
, ' '. . ." '_. ' . u' 1'<" ,: '
.... n... . _._'" 'I B.' .. ...... ,/ ;,' i ..' :' '
r. .'-' .' -:;'-';-'-'-'1" I r'- ~ j! ,,: L \ , "'" ",,/
'. ,._~.... .-.-.-.J ". ..... . ir ,...' .
, ,~; ~ j'1 \,' !,'. h"., '-'" '",,",;.li \ J. J it ~ "~~ ~
'. ' '.f . \' , .(..... ..... ./-<J!" .' i'" . \: ..'
'. h'.': ,..... ,..,,;......>.. ," ",,,' ",,::
, _ '\ i I ..." ' " }' ~, ,,' II I I ! s "'--' t .
" I' } " ~.\' J;;' "J" :' ,: ' ,
, " ",1'/ t'/<""' /: , :: t :,.:",1 <; ..
. ,..' .' " " . ..J
.,.' " '. ' >" Il 1:'"'' I' .
'_, '. ,/ I i!: i ... ~ ~l, \
/ II It \', l. .
: /' " I: ~\ \ \ .
..r-~:~!:;'j;,/,---l---',\\. \" \..
/~~ //A I) /'\..\\ \ '.
,~,~,.......~~,~....~~'1, '. '.'.:..\(' ,'~'
,/ ./' < ' '.. ' . <:t\,~'\ ",
'....... ,~~'~ 'l)l \~.:..'.;L.'"
, . ,',\.1.. '... .,.//
\ f.;:. \ '-----__h__...'.,'
~/~,~,~'~,:\,. \':\~\ '
... / "...'
~ '" .._ ,.. i'.. \' ...
'" ,.....-/ .., /-- . \. '.'"
\. '. , /~><; .... ' ..... ~ \. ';. .. ..
\'.\ ,.." ...............~- ,~'" ,......
'~ .....-r".,~ /~~ \, ..,
(C .>.-// , )\'.
\0/~ ~'1i"":' ':c?d:}:>'
..& ~;.i~...-;;. -
....?..~=... ........ . r~ -- - 100----- ~.
/:""..,..~
,
,
~.
,
./
...
,.'
'-
".
.--
..~..~........ ..~~~~
. .
'.'
..................
.--
..'
,,',..........-............
....--1
...-.. -. -./....-
1-
::~j
..'
",
.,'
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.....--.............
......~
.-/
~
f'....)
.
..... - ..--..- -..... ..-...... -" -...........-....
-.........-
-',
..................
".....-........
/
..
..
/
/
---..--....-- -..-..""
<,.
---,--/...,'/
",','--........
/
'.
...................
......-~..
....--..-......
.........
,=:-:::.,~
"..,..,-. -.. ---.. -.... -..-
..
/
..
.'
..
,.-........ .....,. ....../
-'.
'.
...........
.........,..
..................
........-.......
........
'.
ii
"'-
"'%
0(;')
~~
n,"'TI
:cc:~
~~~
nlTl-
:c:;:Oz
>G'>
Zd
Z
~~~~
....e....e-l:: !1
ea
~~~...
OJ' 0 ~
~ ~o
; ;;
, nr
I.~ E" i:~
~ ;; rr1 :I:>
",'::.> -
il --l --l
~; ~ ~ rrl -
~ ~rrlO
[::z: :z:
~~
~
~
~ir-' -T-
:; I~' . ~ ~. ~~.
:; ~'''''IPI'I/ . . ~.
H I iljlHtm g ~~, ~ ~i ~r
i 1:'1 ~ ~I ratEil;if I fa I ~
I HI i !j!i!(fli I~ir= a1f-
- .! I' jjf!!Jt ~ti~ ~f _ ~Uti~ ~f _ ~
~ ~" r f'~' 1 pl~f., L !lrfi Ii
~; (I t1tJ) bil ni~hh
~ ~ · Ill! II t~JI~U!!~' ~l ~fl!~ ~I'
rflr i1 H 'i!} J ~RI ~ J Iii ~ ~'i!
lUl II e I Ii r j 4:' ~ f II
~ +
l~ I I~
,. Il' ,- ...,.,:-
, 1!lilfflliU _ .. iLA~. '.
I ~ ~~!lti!l!1 !'o l~ . ~~'rwt. I ~
I ~ I ~ I:!I.III; 1.... !,!.W " I I ~
~ sll~ I ihirl!ltlii!!~, Ijtti~~ ~ Ail
. I: L ; 1:IJlllt.~ ~f - z t~ i f ~ " Is
~ ~ III !IJjlbi1f. /, ~,llufr ' h I: I i ~
~ ~ f t .lrl.I"bif _1 l~ Ji~h II Cl
~ i f P ~dHfl'llf3~i .. -rl';l k1t1 ~
mlij e f p. r J I~li J I mlij
IUUJ .1 Ii 'I UUfJ
I-
I
I I
I ~ - IJ~ i'fl
~ ;~';li;lj. I i~ *! '"
J i !ill~~i! II!!..J :! hlj g
11!1!~JI~1~ I I!'J~
" ~ IIi,. ,'I t.... "I .
I ~ . · 1.,':1; ~ i~.. is !.g fl~~~J!!ffJ f. ?E
~ I' ~ : " ~ . ~!i ;i~~Si'~~I~,
~ !' I f i f I I~; J · ~
9 III i! . I :. I ' (f if ~ f
o III II i I
f..".. ,.,1..,
I~ fiNI~~ IS =9'! f-1j
j ~ I "HI! '! ~
I i: ~ II' -J
~ ~ !~U '
~ II IfJ~
II~I Hit~ ~.IS
~ I~i - .
~ I~
~ I!I i If
~ II ,
f..,...,
I ~ liii!ii!: ~:
I :'I ~ Ic!iil:!:
I II -: ~ ~~ih;
~ III ; 1-T i ~
I i~ : , ''''U''""''._ -1 n
~ (MAll MUM ZO)
m
~
~ ~
~~ t
~~ I'i
j ~ I C
~ \1
......
~ 'OJ
;0, .
~ I
L
C)
LN
0(')
MO
-tZ
>U)
F'-t
u);o
c
(')
.....
6
z \
c:,.:'--_.....,..........,1
...,.. ..:::~,;';,;~~l
;E @
I [iiiU
>-- I~ - ~ -
i ~ ~
. ,GUi1
.
--->0.
, aoll' sr._ ""':1U" MOllie" IIC.
l)\
GJ
"\J
.~,. - - -, I
I
-
Ie' -!.~ ~'~
Ii. I ~ !';I '.~\.
1111 [IFf 'tll r.f7<Lf~1~f I "~"""ir i:.
~ "I ~ If f.~i. : ~f I I n Ha~j~, ~ m::!., :;
z ~ I" i:J II IIIIil~Ut~ e ....'If t
~ ~il! ' H JjI I. "1141/1' ! iiiii! !
~!fi I If I Hili Ifl., t rnn! r
f iDJ r~f 'I 'r.lfllu iiiii
-L
I f l~I"'l!!'~ ~ lmg
;0 z ~ ) ~ ila'tst:r
o r ~ ~_~~.
~ I t ~ [-i~q;
~ } ~i 3-~
~ ~ II !?'l-iiA}
I ~ 'HlIjllf
Vi Ilflmihb~f3lu i' ~~-
II 'IjiI5" -I If' i
I ~ ll!lql'. ll!1 I ~~ ~i
I L,I I (~': I i ~~]
z ~ ~" ~
m" I; ~ ! !;l! II I L
i! It s .il~ ~~"
~ f f~f h i
~
I ~!
r
y
I
I
~
,
J
I
~71' . iF "~11~
'!01~ f t1! JH;~
:;~ I 1'1 ~III
~ J I tIs ,"fl
:;.... ~f f.1~
-~ if-I
I
I
I ij;j !ili! ~. i
I ~ to l~..
..t !" -'..
:'I . ,~! '\....... u
I C" ~ !3.
- a- - . '-..
I ;1 ,= ....
" ~ ill~' 1,.1'"
E l? 5. t f-L-l s
i ~ i~; I .'
~ it i I
f 1m ~ J II
~~.......'...:......'....'.....::-
-~
: :e~ ~
~;,~.
"; ~
o "..'... I
S ',\':, ,:'
'f--"-~
1,.1
-I
-1.L!LL.. ~
fL)
..,~;;. r...
..... ~ No
. .~.:' ~
w':
;:,
"
III
II
i
If), I ~r~ . '. . .II If
J I
"~i r~ j' '., ~ ~
I ~ i I! , : f 'I ql'~ Ii il i- ~ i
~ ; lr J I r II flli \,. ~~
~ I~ hI · HI ~....
m ,; w_ ~ il:li Ilj
._.u _ ___., _
I~
I I
; II
~
'il 'Iij
k 'UfJ
-L
-,
,
.;:) Ow ~ 0\
i: If' r f:
3~. Of' I
i. ~
~q5: I !
if ;!: ~
" ~ f ~
11 ~~ ;;
,I ~.I:
I~ .,
~
,.,
0,
\
~
~
\
..'" n,""
zt IC)>
~!; C --l ::0
lS~ ::0 I ~
~.o nf'Tl-
z I::02
)>0
23
2
"."1
,4"
I ~ .. ~fl "-0.... ~
~ ' I I. <~~ :f
i :'I I ~ )! ~f' I/?' '\ \\ I!
II J ,. b i\:. .I)) !s
II "". , ~~~ If
" =;0 II"" 11th i ~I \f'f r.lW.I"I{ '..{ ~ ii
I i ~ B.'l f.ll; ~! d11,: ,~j I.J:;II~M.f jHi ~- '
8 11:1 I, I ,I 11 f'l 1,1 1-J 1 1I
~ \!i II f' Ai '; Ii l~f~lj;! Iii ' .
~ ~1r I! jlt ,t . IrJI~1 ~l "
~ !II II ;1. jl '
+ -1
I' ~ Uill,.i;'1~li~~.' rN~ -r. ~
~ 1hh:U I!~ la> .
j:'l ig~! Ilt.~ f~ 1~'w'.',il
: ~ ~ill i lHU ..f \ 'I'
· i: fU i l'Uil :, ;;1
~ 'I hi I !Illif i~ ! ~fi'i t 22' I~ ~
E 8 ,{ ~ IftlIt I; Ijh;~~J =;J~ J
~ ~ I, f ~Jiiif :~r :!.t .(1 ~
~ I!! I, fit "f~ Uin if Ii If
rn~' II .~.a I f Ii f,! fr~~ I; ix Ii
.. ~. t l!' .!, ~.. il. .;
~ I 8 ~I ;
1
I ~ t? SM U~ll wn;/H] ~m
i :'I r= If t tit t &
i I II II' "" ,,,,, II'
· ~ BI ) !il 1m m~~ 'ii f iii
~ fA S.. ~~ ~l\:,... l\~l\;.~ :j~~
I II, g
I: : pi 1Il{p- :n-rUf h:r] ~I
~ r I~!I~:' ~f:; lit Ii
~ Hi 11.~Jhl f tori 'I
r I" Jli~! I' ~i:
~ IlI!1 0.. II 1;- I, I t:ll
2 :11 II I .1
....+..,-
I ~ ~,~l ll,. ,.,' e:,
1:'1 I'" ~~f ~ r ~~ lir\),\
i j , " , , I" \~ ~ -./;V
! II iii! · ~ ;i ~I!i!l.f ~If i ~~ 'JI
~ ! ~ ~lJ! II !! i i I~ lii~drll j1lli!
~ j!'~ II A~ Ii It~ I;!ll f~! s Ii, H
[O~ 'OJ :.1, I' ;; I I, t I I 1;;
o , . t ' l.
~ I '
,.1
I
-..J
~=V'l
"'~I · ~ - ---i
~"'~i~ ~:z:x>
~ z~,.,..,
"'~~- ~ g --t ---i
~~~ grrl-
8'''''' .~ '0
~:; ~-< ~ r'lO
~:zz
!H
~~
_, N
h
;;
!~
~;
~
~
~
(\\
0J
d.J
VI
., ., ., VI VI VI VI VI ~
,., ,., ... n n ... n ... ... n ... n
,., ! '" '" 3: '" 3: 3: '" ! '"
VI VI VI :r :r :r c
w IV - '" '" ... w - '"
0 " UI .. IV ,.,
2
P
,.
'"
n
:r
~
.. W '" '" II' W ~ .. W .. .. .. .. .. IV .. IV
"? ~ ': ": ~ c "? c "? "? "? "? "? .. "? .. ...
. ,( ,( ,( ,( ,( -<
C C C C UI W C UI C C C C C W C W 11
~ ~ ~ ~ ': ": ~ ': ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ": ~ ": ,.,
~
i:i
.,
,.,
VI
'" '" n
'" '" '" OJ '" '" OJ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
;;; ;;; W " W W " ;;; ;;; ;;; W W W W W ,.
C C C C C C C c !:::
.. .. ~ ':' ... ... ! .. .. .. ... ... ... ... ...
IV IV '" (I " IV IV '" (I (I (I (I (I ~
'" '" < '" < '" '" '" '"
Cl Cl
'"
%
'" '" l!l l!l '" l!l l!l l!l l!l '" '" '" l!l ~ '" '" ,.,
C C C C C C 0 ~ r
'" UI ... II' UI ... ... UI '" '" '" " ... ... ,.,
g g U. iu ;; U. iu ;; iu 15 w Co Co " :., " <
C C C C C 0 " C ... UI UI ~
!i
I Z
<
,.,
'"
'" '" l!l l!l '" '" '" '" '" '" l!l l!l ~ '" '" l!l l!l l!l l!l ...
c '" '" C C C C C C C ,.,
C " C C '" IV IV IV IV '" IV W W W
U. ~ Co Co ;" iu a- u. Co ~ ;" a- " iu a- iu .. " in r
M
UI c C '" UI '" UI C C C UI UI UI C C UI C <
~
~
... "
!:l .. ... W ,.,
.. .. !" UI \J w W IV UI ... '" .. W W ~
':: :., ~ iu U. ;; Co Co a- ;" " iu a- a- :., iu
c UI '" i:ii c c c UI UI IV C ... Q UI :r
w .. w
.. " UI IV
... :::; ;;; i:ii ~ :::;
'" UI
W Q)
lJl ;;; 0 " OJ
'" ... ... UI IV
'"
00 Q)
0 0
0; 0;
... ...
.. - '"
... 00 ....
III 00 ...
~
-j:::::::..
on
rr10
-tz
~U)
r-t
U);:o
C
n
:;j
o
z
:,-.-":: :," '-:...'~: 1
,..... ~ '",>' 1
..~-'-~..... 1
IUuD!
~
U
/'\"
~
C.J
c.... )
IIiiiJ
t:::J
~l
I,-";-;jl/
>"'1
( I
r"
It)
I" i
' ! !I! ~ I
i I I i I Ii
m r! r!
>' I I II
Ud 'm .~ .~
I I I ~ ;,
: , - '"
r-"
1<<> I
I ~ I
~ III"
~h !
z ~
~ B
1!l Iff]
~ 'lJI
~
it}
I
~
! i
"; =1
~
L"
1:'"1
z~
~I
Oel
;:~
f~l\\i'i
rAa8B I
l',&.t:.~,
i
;\'fl",....
1!2;;~
I~~N
I QQQ
Ii p
NpeC-
i'
! r.
HUI
"U
n._
tNt
l I
, "
I
il! I
'il ..
hI I tl
i~l . It
!I! 8 I
"l~ 8
Ii B
I{I !
ili n
iff I
in
(il
if
I
r--
ii};
1~1
.il
~ ...
~ ~iI
;Ilri~ ;:
I!Uf! J
-.i, 'I
= <tl'
11h_!
! Hi;1
"'p'
ii~tl!
Jail!
1i:(,1
it
J:
.'
Ii
r
./
--r"-
It)
Ii j
II ;i
Ii I
z ..
Z I
~ ~
VI
?
-1..-
I
I
~
II, /
-J"r
u
i
~
It) ~
YI!!I
I i h
I~
I ~ ! a !
~~
~ liI ,.\l liI
lI: ~ ~ ~
Z ~i1 ;; :;! .
z ~ i ~
~ ~
~ 1m
+
It)
I i
I ~ I
i I~
>!
(]Ol
-~
I, t) --n.
.:. '0
A
I i- ~~n~ i II a::
~. I.. '
~I
r
~ I~ i! Ii'~ i f ~
. ; ~ IP III ~ --
; I" tillS
CJ ~ i~
~ I~ R ,I,
)' ~ i"
':;: I .
~ I I
-1__
"'--,
5
.. {,.
11 ,,} 1t"1~ !: - t-
"1 i'': I r.; .~ ~ ~
~t J), ~~ ~ III
11'l 1:1 I I
f ,
11
. .
- 2 = II
" .
-i
,
I
./1
I
I
I
. I
I
I
-1
~ 0 0 0 0 +fIlif]
~oI :S::o]
~o< C)o]
-1
fie
r
!
f l"i Ir8
· ~ii
~ ~i In
I J [
J
I
if
; I; ;t--
~ I '!,~ l('".r
III t I
I.. II II
oil l' I i,
'( .: '.
f ..
--1
n,"
IC)>
C -co
;:oIS::
nf'Tl-
I;:OZ
)>0
z-l
o
Z
.. f: Hl l: = (f)
'l:1 ~ n
i )ioN ~---1
~ ~ II~~ ~ = ::t>
.. r
;II ~iWrr1
'" Oa~--t--l
0
::I --Ii: ~rr1-
ill 8:...~' ~:/ '0
~ N~. ~ ~ rr1 0
.. a.=z:
~~
~~ilil
:!le>o~
r;~~a
<D
~
'"
iI:
o
z
";!"-
"'''/;;i!i
>:u
~l'll~
..~a
~ ..~
~
:!l d
~ ii
III~
~ il
~ ~ laJ
~ i=1~i
p
"'
c:
'"
~
z
~ p
~
S"'
~
~ ~
h
j ~
si
i
VI
+
a
a
;:0
~ CJl
CD '"'-
,,'"
::> ~~
0 r~
0 ...~~
3 ~~-<
~CJl"
D "'o~
0.> t>~
~ f'e>
U1",
lDg~
II
9~
~I
~
t'
~
.J.
t :>,'
~ .._' " ."-")'i
I ,..-.-. ,-,
fi".
~
tlij
a
+
a
a
(Xl
01
U1
II)
N
a
(Xl
II)
a
(Xl
II)
U1
II)
a
a
II)
a
U1
II)
.....
a
II)
.....
U1
..
u:
~
;9C16,8
907.~6:
C)
;~
, ,
~'tts; ~ 59
eVCE:: 90 .73
[I
II
ft
il
il
il
II
il
[I
"
,
"
il
11
II
"
I
11
11
;Ii
c
cO
o
:-\
<D,
~
~
N
~
pI
906,8
907,72
....:
~
! 1
." !
eVCE:! 5'0 .~o
, , I
J,
p
~
~
lD
C)
;-;I
~
01 01 II) II) II) II) II)
II) II) 0 a N
0 U1 0 U1 0 U1 0
OI!
+ '
o
a
01
01
U1
01;0
~fTl
15
01(")
,>
~;:;:I
~fTl
>?<
;:;:I:I:
;od
i::;o
~>
Zz
-l
-(")
Zo
:<z
OIZ
(OfTl
01(")
~-l
ad
~fTl
;o~
-Vl
""::1
-:$z
(;')
Vl
c!
CD
1'1
ICI
I~I
I (T] I
I AJ I
z_..Pt
~~~_~ I
a -,_
VI '
:p. . ".
0, 1 "',.
I~ I "
I '
1\ i '
I I
I
i \i
I )'
j:/l
,'1 I
//i i
" I
\,
1-
\J '
1'\ 1
I ^
,
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
, N
, ,
\;0
,(")
"-0
I
(")
~
~
~,
u, (Xl
Ol ,
N
~
r
;?j
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.....N:I:
mOld
. .
XI
mm
,lL_~
~ j:;i' <'
, IfTl~~
: I i$i
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
I
I
,
,
,
, ,
'.~
--
i::
:I:
N
~
<...
0 0
I
I
I
I I
I ,
I I
I I
, I
I ,
I \ I
, I
I \
, 'f F/
I
I \ I
I I I
I I
I I
Oi I
;:;:I I
l I
I
, i i
, I VI
\ I I ~
\. 1.,1 h
... ICI ~
I I -j 1-0
~ I~I~
... I -jl <<>>
.. I AJI P
... - ;0 (")1 )> 1 :!J
.. ~~CD I ~
I
\ (0.....
.. o~ I I
\\,~,~ I i
", J I I......
'1~:
C'>1o-U1' :
C>OI-
;0 !:o .
__'.._.,,__ ; ~ ~ I .
-.q",__~ I
(;')1'" T---
~t~1
-- --..:-.~ I
~~Zr
~[~ I~I
o
+
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
,
\
,
\
\
\
~~c!
p~~
-oc!~
r i::;o'
:-Izo:
OCI
VlCZ'
;a Vl c:
1(") :
NC I
01;0 :
'-' CD I
,
--
--
,
\
,
\
I
I
,
I
'Ii--
I I
, -----------':
\
I
\
\
,
,
,
\
\
\
I
,
I
--iQ- ,
o
U'
,
I
I
--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
---
---
,
I
I
,
I
,
I
,
,
,
--...-
""",~ --
---~
"'--'
~~~~
::l 0 ~ S!
F.i~aa
.. m ~
~ "
CD
CD
(Jl
CD
(0
o
CD
(0
(Jl
(0
o
o
(0
o
(Jl
(0
o
(0
(Jl
(0
N
o
- - - - - - - -, - - - - - ~ - - - - - ---=-_::..-:--=-'"
,
- - - - - - - - --+-- - - - - - - ....':-:'-..:.:...:..:...-~ - - - --
I
I
I
I
------.
---~- - --
OOH
- -."
", ::'1
l-d 133H5 335
o
N
o
~ ()o'-
I-
I'>
>
"'">" -
'"
I:
o
z
III~
,.-----
iW
P
: ~
I:
B
a ..
~
'II :? rrI ~ Tt;.....
, < '" Vl ,..,
~ II II' : .... M
". '" . II "'<
.l.O ,. CO _ II
000 . . :11
-~ct~
~ ~Ol
::..u.
,...
SEE SH
. .> ----
-)
2,1
,
I I C______________
- I
. >L I
-.'" j :.1...1.....
I ^",
"1'"
" + ~
'of.
I
I
.'~ .-~-tl. ~I~~~~ :~__
- --
I
~:.~+::_::_~-_. ,
--"TOO-'---
t~
1
I
I
,
"'.. ,
~~!;
~.~~
a~';l~
>~e
~eOl
oo(~oo(
~~d
Plzlil~
lil~l&
It~
IS....~
~~jQ
I'ofi
...~.
p ~ i~;
z PI R....
p ~"ilil
I~ ~J~~
~ -",
i \1
PI .
~ ~
!
,"
,
I
I
I
I
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
r;---
i '
I
I
CD.j>. I I
:
~ 1"0 0
:0'1
d
:lJVl
-....
;c;c
U):I
~,...
N
::0.....
-0
VIr
1"'1..,
::01
-10'1
O,j
(D<
CO
" ;= ""
" 0""
"ZN
nb.
~:
.
,
,
,
,~._"
'.~
. ~
o
.
5;;(
~
( j j
BvC$: [1 60
aVeE:! 90 ,69!
... CD
.. ..
I
:::0
fi
CD
:J
o
o
3
D
(l)
~
,..---
:(Q)""
L.. _ __
y
'JH
'JH
VI
,...
:~
e'"
r...
z
a.~~
~~-<
-VI"
",0,.
:~9!
t!!!~
:l:g~
"
, i i
avc~ (5 18
avcE: lIO ,13
,
,
<
>
r
r;;i
'JH
'JH
I
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
I
I.
- +
18
I
1
I I ~ -J;lg..
,.-T :rlj'
\":1 .j; .:, 1
'1 " J.."
\y ",
i z!l;1m
~,-<,i:"
i tOtOcp
~_a,o,,1
'1~ --~~.,
, 1"-0'---
, ,
I
1"-'-'---
I
-+,-,-,---
I
~,-,-,---
+ ~~ ST~H 10
~~
:;; :;;
~ t5
.~ ~
~ r
. ~
m
~
~
~,-,
....!
I,
9,
I,
-= ~ -c:.:[-=r=-== -= = ==.
I '
=1
. I
xx
~,-mQl,-
, :.
.
.
~
....
ui
~
,
,
,
,
,
I /1
I I
~--':'-::'l r-----
1 f ~, I
r'-'-'-'l 'Oor, ,
L-j'H;
I 'F ,.
J H '
N I I r'-'-'-'.j
~. d d ~-,--,j
I I
~ ~ '" I---,-j
r~ J'"
1"'1 > ,
E; ~ .I " ,
1"'1 I ,
./ /.:f;f'., _ _-
-'-'---'lj'~ L06L__~''='-1
. ~, '
, :. -;""~ ~, I
":< '"~I (i." > I
'" .,,~, '\'r~ 133HS 335'/
,',":I. "
"....Jr ~,~ "\ J." / ~ ~ ,
,f\.{:~V\,\/AlO !l\...// E I~ '~-.--
, ,..., _-' H.&....ON
)~ ~_ ~'" "./._..---.....-- ;!l
\ ....J!.. ~ ,..- t.n N
~' 0
,',
~ '.
" \
',.-
"-
\
\
, - ~..
\./
:..':'
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
I-
)::It
""0
:::0
I
N
Fj
--:\
/ --"
-
c-/-/
\.~~ v
--I
~~
tOI
o~
!'\u
(Jl
/- \
\.
\.
\.
\
,
\
,
\
\
\
,
\.
_' gOo ___m.
906~
-
,/ '\
~// ,
..--' ~ \
,/-,/-',-,-\ ~., $ \
/ "" . .~ .
.-' .,../ \
/......./ ......./. ~ \
, //~ _-P \.
,--- \ ~ "-
, ., 0 \
\. ,;! \
\. ~ \-
fill'
"S\~
I ,,6
I\)~~
OJ
OJ
(Jl
CD
(0
o
CD (0
(0 0
(Jl 0
(0
o
Ul
(0
o
(0 (0
N
Ul 0
~~j~ en en en to to to to to
en to to 0 0 ~ ~ N
U1 0 U1 0 U1 0 U1 0
:!lOOS!
F.i~~a ~[~
.. '"
~
;0
;:
o
%
j ~~
e ~
I l
~:i!!-
.=d
~~e
~~~
~l<d
;;t!2i-l
dl!
Ihi
~!:l~
g ~ u~
lij::l:i
f>
I:
!ii
N
~
- ~
~
~;;t
~
~ ~
; i
h
i
::0
~
(\)
:J
o
o
3
D
Q.)
~
r
~I
~I
~
5
~
-
..:=. -
-'
-,
I
.
N
~
"a 6\ !l!
I -" 9
(,) " ~
i ~
I I I , 1/
J I I './
" I I"
,',',' ,'i,'
, I , ':,
, , , I.,
, , I 'II
" J '.,
, I I , "
" " " " I,'
1/ , ':.,
, I I "1
I I I '/1
I , , , "
I. ""
:::: i:
I I ":,
I I I I"
I I I 'II
I I I I .t
.::::J : ::
-0
z<
:<1"'1
;0
lD;J
80
i:a~
o
"
/;,...-......~. .'.:;,:;::::-
.' /-, \', ..
,:/ / I : I ".. .... ..",..
:,,' / ~' I:' ...:;:.;>...'..... ,.
/'UI' Co' ,'.',' " ..",3'
:/).. 1:;1 ':.~, / /,,' ;:g >
" e:rr-,'I ' I' rrtZ
.',' ''"''0>': /.'~,',' /,/ 0
;, ,'r'?:r./Y' "", '$~
I,' : rrr't:5 /i,',',',' N
:: : ~ -1 I':':,',','
I' I ~ ': :!::::
I I I I, ," I I,
'::::':i:::: ~
::<..0 : ~: 1'11'1
!,',o', ',', ':1'" >~
\'.\\\\ rt1
"N ' ,', I', II, 5;::1
I \ \ \\ \\\\\\ "'>
\ \ \', ",\" IZ
, \ \, \ '0 \ \ \ \ ,."
~ \ \\ \'.\ '\'\\, =It::: 0
, , \ \ ... ',' ...'" ... .....
/ \ \', ',~~,," '...:'......
, \ \\ .....,',~~&:.........
",' ~ ~ ~ "" "'::::'::';~;;~,:~:~~~~~~~ti~{~~~~:,:,::::: ",
'"g \ ,,"),,,' , '<::"" '~~l<9~~::,-:::-,_,
: a,' f..} ~~:'> "<:~:<~~,:~~:\~~~~{~{~,{_~_.~~_:
;0" '~~\: .\.:~~ /-:,;.\,-------- -"~'::,', _
~ ", " \,\,:""~dr , "<....:::~:_..
'.' "'~ ------
.. ......J'
-----------. ------------
------ ---:::::-
------
,
,
, ,
, ,
, ,
/({)/
,'co,' ,-
/';v//;
" I I
: " " " :',
:.':,' !,'
", I:'
I "":
I I I "1
:::: :'
1'1 tq
~ " ~ ~ ': '
~ ~ ~ \ '.\
"\ \.
1"'<\\' "
~\,,\
~"\
rr'\\ \ \
V'\' \
" ,
" ,
" ,
, ,
, '
, '
,
,
I
I
"
,,*
~""
"
\
.................
"
"
'.......
"
.......,
"
'\
\,
'\
\',
"
"
,
,
,
"- - -'--'~'- - - -'r - "'~"~"~~ __
Ul
~c;
>'"
c'"
r",
%
~!;!:J
",% "
~~..(
;lS~
f~~
.."'0
~~ a!
...~;ii
J: J:
Ol d d
," ~ .J-
"'."-..
<
M~
,~ ;;;;
,
,
,
,
/" '
"\ "
,
'"
1>...... !
'-I,
i
i "
i ,
" L: __'_'_'_'_':":""';:~:-:_'_'_'_'_'_'
- - ~:::--_.,-'-'-' '-'
r -, '~'-',,"'-'- ,-,~ I',,:
I ,Y, I \
I ! ~,~, \.. '
I ! ~~
I '.. I \."
I "" ,'-'-, '. +
I I '. i i 8
I \ i i
"I ,i i I
._....,.~~\ \ i i
" i \ \ i i
,/ \ I \, i i
\ .. i i
'. .. ! !
\ " I-._..J
': I \1
: ~
,/ 1.--- \
,-'- ...L-.-J-,_._=,-,-,-,_._,_._._,-J ../" \, "
, '~ "r.{),,',
\ -I <"~ ",
" r'....:.-.-' '-,--,-', ~ .... "
\ i/ ! !::c ! i!! ./ \~, ',..
-I I I c-:, I I 1 I "r\~ ') ,
. '. I,.:. I I I /' I .~ ~/ '. \
._._.1._ L.J il ~,~. ~<,/ '-, 1 ~~ ~ \ \.
".: Y ". ,\ " '"
',I "')::' ,>,,'
1. " ,. /,f ,-
: \ " )., '" ' /~><- -'~'
" \. ".' AI !"/ '\', !
/ f,;~. ~~::(,,,!;;
" \ \.; ))
1 '...' \~.
" ;\. .~.,
,
,
,.,--
-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-',
::tlUl '
-..... I
i:: i:: i
J: '
t,_
"
, "
, "
I ,
, "
~ .........
cD ""... I
o 'r,
U1 i '
_,_,_._,_._._.~,_._,_,_,_,J
, -'
,
,
I
I
,
I
I
I
,
, ,
".~---
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
\
,
,
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
/
,
':.
"/
f
r~
,
,
,
,
,
,
, ,
, '
-'
Wt
\.0
o
(jl
---
--
--
.---.-.-,
\
\
\
i
.I
.-
.-
"'."'."
--
/
;0 (/) .....-."'.
~~.-'-
"'-;;"'I "'."'.'"
.... .....'
',0 -4".../'
,0> ~
g\.
, ,
'-..<'Or
'- ,lU~
'f: $li
't""---......O~4f
..............$~~
't" Ii'
~\ '-..../
(\. \ /~
.....,--
--
,--
."'.'"
;:.
-I~
,
"":'" ----;r
EE SHEET P-2 /
> . >,
, ~,>,7' '~__.....__
----::::<::~----'"
,
\,'
,\
, ..
,
\ '
, ,
, '
, \. \
\y'
,
'.
,
,
en
en
U1
to
o
o
to
U1
to
N
o
to
o
U1
to
o
en
to
o
en
to
U1
: I i ':i
~ : : ~ ! ~
,I I 1,1
::: Ii:
I If::1
, " ,.1
,',',',' ,1,'
:::-..__ ....',',' 1:/
--.. -.... -..:-----........:""'./,,
, :-:: : ~ -:: -: ~ -=:'~ ~ ; ~ ~_.--- .-,
---- --_:.::->,,,
n(?~;
~6."
:ll 0 ~
F.i~~e
. CD
:10
(Xl
(Xl
01
(Xl
(Cl
o
(Xl
(Cl
01
(Cl
o
o
(Cl
o
01
(Cl
o
(Cl
~
01
(Cl
N
o
ua-
~~~I
~!a
~~~
~~d
;;l!l! ...
~~!ili
I:JI~
1::11:'
~In
Q ~ I!~
Ift:l~i
~
.
-<
r>
I:
c:
..
~
~ ~
"
.
~;;l
~
~ ~
h
i ~
;i
~
.... -',,: ::-: .:....: =:",,: :::-
y~:: .::}
;:0
~
CD
:J
o
o
3
"0
Q)
~
CJl
-<
~~
~Ol
r",
z
<>>~~
!!l~-< +
.......CI)~ 0
",0> 0
f>~
~!;~
m5l~
p
~~
~2
~I
~
5
J
~:
~
::0
f
N
~
C)
c......,
l' ()"\!l!
CA)~8
)> .1V i!
(Xl
(Xl
01
(Xl
(Cl
o
(Xl
(Cl
01
(Cl
o
o
(Cl
o
(Cl
o
01
(Cl
01
(Cl
N
o
I, I I ,
i 't " i :
i " " ;:
j '.,' i,
; ",' i:
i I' i:
j ,,' i:
i i :
j !i :
; '
; , :
,8<>( ; :
RIq ~....., i:
. o~,,~:
I ! Q.trE~
:1 ;r:
" ,
fg :;
I\..) ,';
I ,';
" " i
" 'I
" ,/ f
" ,'!
" ,'!
, , I
" / i
/ " i
" " j "
, ' J I
" ':.1f1;,'
,/ 1]g fl.,/
,/ ,'f;; ~
" " '81P
, ,
, ,
I I 'I
,/ ,,' $<1
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, I I'
" " I .I
/ " ,t' .'
I I I I
I I I'
,',' I /
~~
L\,u
'~.
VI -VlO
\ r1'1 ~-iC
, ",. ;:0 ;:j
b o?5/TJ
..~ ~2-i
j ;~ ;:0 (')
Vir /I r1'1~
I (Cl ~
(')8 0
~. r
.Q)
....0
A
,....
i ,
; :
j :
, I
i :
i :
~ ;:
,': i:
,,': j: CO
" : i, 0 '
, ,;:1\):
: i " " "
: i " " "
: i " " "
: / " " "
:.1 " " "
" I , I
~. " " "
I " " "
/ " " "
, " " "
l,' " "
,;', , <0
;;',' " 0
I' , """-l
l:' / ,/ "
II, , I
,
,
I
,
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
,
.
.
.
,
,
I
I
,
I
I
,
I
.
I
,
I
I,
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
,
,
I
I
,
I
,
I
,
I
I
~ I ~':
, : I ~t
'. : : ~
I I '
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
, I I
I I (Xl
: I lD
I ~ m
I I I
, I I
I I ,
I I I
I I I
I I I
, I I "
I I' I
, I' I
I "I
f "I
I 1'1
: ' ~ I
t : 'I:
I I ,I
, I I
, , .
, ,
,
00,"
I
''to.........
j;Jzj:::j
(,)<VI
-<(Cl{,,4
(')0
cP
=01
;:oUl
=0
;:0
>
\J
I I
I,
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
. I
I I
I
'(Cl
:0
I~
I I
I I
I I
. I I
I I I
. I I
\ " " I
I , I I
I I I I
: :::,'
I I I I I
I I I I
~::: :
~ t II'
en , I , I
: : ~ ~.._---.
~\\...~:_:_:
,
I
I
I
I
,
,
..-,------------
,
,
,
,
,
~[~
o
'"
~~i~
:!IOO~
F.i~~a
, CD
:$
(Xl (Xl (Xl CO CO CO CO CO , I
, I
(Xl CO CO 0 0 .... N , ,
Ul 0 Ul 0 Ul 0 Ul 0 ',I
\
~
I'
t,
I' \
(,
I' \
(,
I' \
,
I'
I', :1
II 'I
t, ~ \ I
" 'I I
I, 11\ I,
" '1'
~ ~ \:
\ . I'
~ " \
\ \ \
I ' \
: : : ': . \, ',:.,', '..<....................
~,~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ,,:.\ .~\ \ ~, ", '~~.~......:......:.........._...-.._-----
~: ~ ~ " ~ \ \ \'~\ '.\ \ Up ~",. '.:--. ..... ......... ...-----..-..
~~ \ \ \ \\ \'\\'\\ \~~,~ ~ '\ ....:::-~~.::-~.~::::::~
I , , I I ,\ \ ,'\ . \ ., -14f,o, '" '):. "'..... -'" -.'
~\ \ \ '- \ '\\ \\<.~\ ,~, ... 'l...t' ....:~...... ---...---...
",:: ~ I, GJ ':,:,::.,', ..~.~~~:. :'~"':'~'::':~:-~::::'~~:-~~
~~ ~ \ l,lQ \,'\","~'~~' ... .~, ~~.. ............
,. I, .ql '" ",','I. ,', ........9 ----..._____.
~', '. \ " ~ ..,,',...'...:'....~.:::.... ".....~...... 02......_
"'I" ""........ ........... -......
',\~ \', '. ',,'...........<.....~:::-~'":...... ~............... "",
\: '. " '. ~ "..:......:..............:-:::-.:~ '
" I , ' , ....... ...... ........ ......_ .
'. ~ \ " '. \ ........:.......~....." .,'" . "
, :' , ' , ..., , ' I I . , "
'.\'. '. \ '. ,',' /,':;' ,'/ ,'''- '.
, :()), ' , I , I , I, / I' .,,-"
"c..Q' ' , , , / '.., .1,,'
'1',Ql~ ~ 'I ,',',' ,'// // /
',: ~ I, 'I \ " " " /.:,' :',/ /
I' , I ' I , , , , I' I ,.
11:~I,~\1 ,',',',':,' :/,',; -w
~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ " " : " i,' i,'," ..
'I .. ~ ~ ~ ~ : " : : ;' .' !:: I
," 11' j j I 1,1 'I' ,/
I: , , ' , I , I I' .. I
\', " ~ \ " : : : I : : ::: "
\',\\\\ ::::!:!I: r...... "
\\\\\,\ ,':,::: ::': --'*
"".', ',', 'II" ,',',','.1' !: If ,
"\' 'II' ...-.....",' I,',' ,', I ,
','.:, ........' ,,~/,' /,',/./
, ... .', , , .
... '" , .,"
......' /'"
'::-_'::-:;';~::::::>;: "
\$,
~Ui
i-~~
~~a
...~~
"'Id
i\1 !il"
lil Ii
! Ih;
~ ~ lag
~ if I!i
~
~
OJ
OJ
Ul
OJ
co
o
OJ
co
Ul
co
o
o
co
o
Ul
co
o
co
....
Ul
\
I
\
I
,
J
,
~
~' ,
, I
.'-;--
':It '
-~j
~\
~. \',
(\-1
~\
-\-' \\'.
\ '\
I~\l
, "\'"
~ ~ , \
\ ' , ,
" I 1 \ I '.
\ I I I \ ,
~ Ice I I~\ 1
len I I I
'~\ \ I I' '
...... I ,
. ......, ,l ,
, :: ,~
I I I
, ' "
, ~,'
l' I.
, , '1
, , "
\ \ \ _I ~
, ',-' , --_:~'
"__ -- ...~ I
~ ' I
-, '~' ~
! /I/! 'I' '/t
" Z,',' I
I I I
" , I
. ,/ /\ ~\\
" , I I
" ,/ ~: ~I
:' >d \ ~[\
" ~, \ II
, " I 1 I
" " " ~,' I
I , , I I II
:~\\ ~,' -t::
\ ,'lo. :'
,'- "':-.::
;-'........~ ~._-s
':.~-<: _=~ ,1
~..." 'I ,,:lEt
: : 1\
1,-
G'") \ " I \
)> ,I
,~ ,'~ ~I I W
(~ \,': II ...
.. '.. 1 ~ I ,
"' ".. ~ . I ~
" I \
, ,
I I SAN
i\:I\ '.\ ill
l,f!\ ..a: I \
;z. I" I ,
---f- ' , 1-\
... -'" I I ,
~ I" "
, ~ I '. I '
'I" I "
'i,..) \ ~ ~I \ I ~ ~
\ ,,' ~~, \ l'
\ ''-g----'-i .. I "
_....,~--t~~-J\ \, /
,-- ----- \
I 1
. I
~,r,?~ ~~,~,~.1
I I I
, I I
,'.. : " \
I : '
-----~, j;)z;lt
-o<cn
-<'!!-N - -
~s ,-,..-
=ClD
;u
'ij
;u
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
........-
- ~
~
~i\1
~
~ ~
; i
i;
I..
;
--
-'-
---------
-'-
-------907-..-
--
--
<"
-~'--r\)~
." \ 'it.,V"<
"~",~,,\~., '\-.
'-
,
\
,
,
',..'
"'~'
,".~.............
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
.."-..:~':'o
,
I
~ " :
I
"
"
,
I
I
'e
".,
,
,
,
//'
~;:'~"\H' ,
//' ",'
,
,
I
I
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,-
,
,
,
,
,
, \
, :",.',
I ." :,:
I " ~ "
\ G''''S~\ if \:\,\,illI'
\:" ,....--
1\
)I:l{/ < .....~ · '.
~'"
1\ i
I
\ I
,
1
\J
1
1\
,
1
I
,
,
.')
.:~
::0
~ III
-i
, -
'II'"
::::> >'"
c;:'"
0 r~
~ ~~!<l
~~~
~1Il'll
D ",O~
:t~
~ ~!!i1!l
llllil~
r
J
~2
~I
~ ~
,
I
,
I
,
I
,
---.-
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
,
\
,
,
,
,
I
I
,
1
,
,
,
1
I
,
I
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
~ I
,
,
I
,
.'
. . <~"
\
---......
"
,.'
\
,
,
\
,
,
,
\
,
,
,
'r-____
"
1
.
,
,
,
1
,
1
I
.
,
,
~
~
-'-
--,
---
,
,
,
C::.:," ,
c:::::::::-
1 ~ ...............
11-00 \ I............
. \ ~
c
~
:::t:oo
"n
;:0
i
I 'J
l".l
C::J
E3
r--_,
1
,
,
--\
..
--- \ ~
~ _______ F
, ....
,
,
,
,
~:~'~
.~~_._.~,'
<D
N
o
~[~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
/o-P
FROM:
Mayor, Council M~~ers,
City Administrator~ v.tC/
Jim Atkinson
Assistant City Planner
Meadow Creek 3rd Addition Preliminary Plat
TO:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Warren Israelson of Progress Land Company proposes to plat 68 single-family residential
lots on 31.37 acres in the third phase of Meadow Creek. The proposed subdivision is
located east of Prairie Creek and north of Autumn Glen in the northeast corner of the City
of Farmington.
Planninf;! Division Review
Applicants:
Warren Israelson
Progress Land Company
6001 Egan Drive, Suite 100
Savage. MN 55378
952 - 226- 3200
Attachments:
Memo dated 12/20/02 from Lee Mann
Preliminary Plat
Location of Property:
Located in the northeastern portion of the City of
Farmington.
Area Bounded By:
Single-family residential to the west, proposed single-
family residential to the north, open space to the east
and single-family residential to the south.
Existing Zoning:
R-1 Single-Family Residential
Surrounding Zoning:
R-1 Single-Family Residential to the north and south, R-1
PUD to the west and Empire Township to the east.
&W
Existing Conditions:
The property consists of vacant farmland and includes a
man-made drainage ditch that is utilized as an outlet for
lake Julia and runs southwesterly along the northern
boundary of the Third Addition.
lot Coverage and Sizes:
The maximum lot coverage for an R-1 single-family zone
is 30%. The minimum lot size for the development is
10,000 sq. ft. The minimum lot width is 75 feet
measured at the front yard setback.
Topography:
The property is relatively flat.
DISCUSSION
The applicant proposes to plat 68 single-family lots on 31.37 acres in the third phase of
Meadow Creek. A total of three outlots make up the remainder of the plat. Outlot A
consists of a stormwater management pond, Outlot C consists of a stormwater
management pond and wetland areas, and Outlot B consists of wetland areas.
Lot Width Requirement
The zoning code requires a property in an R-1 district to have at least 75 feet of street
frontage as measured from the front yard setback line. As shown on the plat, only the lot
widths at the property line are labeled. Because of this, compliance with the lot width
requirement for nine (9) lots is difficult to determine. The applicant, however, has
verified that the lots meet the minimum standards and therefore are in compliance with
the Zoning Code.
Transportation Analysis
Dunbury Avenue exists along the western border of the Third Addition and would serve as
a collector for this addition. Eaglewood Trail has been changed to 189th Street and should
be labeled as such on the plat. This segment would end at the east border of the Third
Addition, but would eventually extend to the east as development occurs in that area.
Lake Julia Waterway
Meadow Creek Third Addition is bordered on the north by the lake Julia Waterway. The
City has been working with the applicant to determine what improvements to the ditch
would be required and what impact those improvements would have on the Third
Addition. The extent of necessary improvements to the ditch was recently agreed upon
by City staff and the applicant. Given the necessary improvements, it was determined
that the lot configuration of the Third Addition would NOT be impacted and therefore the
preliminary plat could proceed to the Planning Commission.
C, '/5
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the Meadow Creek Third Addition preliminary plat contingent upon the following
items:
1. The applicant shall comply with comments provided by Lee Mann, City Engineer, in a
memo dated 12/20/02 (see attached).
2. No building permits shall be issued for Lots 1-5, Block 1 until construction of the ditch
is complete.
Respectfully submitted,
4~ak-
Jim Atkinson
Assistant City Planner
cc: Mike Olson
t, <-/0
IOF
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT
MEADOW CREEK 3rd ADDITION
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 7th
day of April, 2003 at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Member
introduced and Member _ seconded the following:
WHEREAS, the preliminary plat of Meadow Creek 3rd Addition is now before the Council
for review and approval; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing of the Planning Commission was held on the 11th day of
March, 2003 after notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City
and proper notice sent to surrounding property owners; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended City Council approval
of the preliminary plat at its meeting held on the 11 th day of March, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the preliminary plat on April 7, 2003;
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be
feasibly served by municipal service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above preliminary plat be approved with
the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with comments provided by Lee Mann, City Engineer, in a
memo dated 12/20/02 (see attached).
2. No building permits shall be issued for Lots 1-5, Block 1 until construction of the
ditch is complete.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session
on the 7th day of April, 2003.
Gerald Ristow, Mayor
Attested to the _ day of April 2003
City Administrator
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington. MN 55024
(651) 463-il11 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.d.farmin2ton.mn.us
TO:
Lee Smick. Planning Coordinator
FROM:
Lee M. Mann. Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
Meadow Creek 3rd Addition Preliminary Plat Review
DATE:
December 20, 2002
Engineering staff has reviewed the preliminary plat information that was submitted for the above
referenced project and forwards the following comments:
General Comments
1. Eaglewood Trail has been renamed 1 39th Street West.
2. Show easements over all utilities. which are not within [he right-of-way (Minimum of 20', 10' on
each side of centerline of pipe).
3. Eliminate the outlot areas between lots 1 to 3 and 13 block 2. lots 3 and 4 block 3 and lots 10 and 11
block 3. Maintain a wide easement area but include these areas within the adjacent properties.
4. The watermain from 190th Street will need to be looped into 189th Street (Provide a minimum of a
twenty foot easement for the proposed watermain). It is recommended that the water main run east
from 'l90'h Street parallel to the sanitary sewer to the point where the water can run north. parallel to
the sanitary sewer.
5. Address all comments stated in Erik Peters memo dated 12/2102.
6. Address all comments on the attached worksheet dated 12/2/02.
7. Include the ~WL and HWL for the wetland area between 189'h and 190th Streets. All ponds and
wetland must be outloted to the HWL (Entirely contained within the outlot).
8. Show contours and topography for a minimum of 150' of the project boundaries (East and south sides
of project). Confine drainage to the proposed development. Drainage from one lot may not flow onto
another without a drainage easement.
9. Show and label with dimensions the existing sanitary easement east of proposed 1980th Street.
Further review will not commence until all requested information has been submitted. Please feel free to
discuss these preliminary plat comments with me if you have any questions.
Sincerelv,
~ >>t Y7~~
Lee M. Mann, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
cc: File
Warren Israelson, Progress Engineering, Inc.
Ben Ford, Rehder & Associates
Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director
047
Memo
Project Name: Meadow Creek 3fd Addition
Client: City of Farmington
To: Lee Mann
File No: 141-02-182
From: Erik Peters
Date: December 2. 2002
Re: Review of preliminary grading and drainage
plan dated 11/11/02.
Remarks: The design for the ditch improvements needs to be completed before the review of the
preliminary plat and construction plans can be accomplished. Without the ditch improvement plan. the
issues that have delayed the platting of lots along the ditch with the 15t and 2nd additions can not be
resolved.
Ditch issues that need to be addressed and resolved to review the 3rd Addition include the foHowing:
1. The locations of the back lot lines along the ditch/wetland edge will likely shift due to allow for
widening and deepening of the ditch bottom for reasons stated previously (July 19th. 2001 memo
and an Aprii 9'", 2002 meeting at the City).
2. The trail location along the south side of the ditch and a need to maintain a slope meeting ADA
standards will impact the layout of iots.
To generate plans for the needed ditc:l improvements. additional survey information is needed from the
developer's engineer, On the attac~ed drawing below, given to Mr, Ford af Rehder and Assoc. on August
5th, 2002 is listed what information iSieeded before the City can complete a preliminary design. The
preliminary design will then be presented to agency staff in charge of reviewing wetland issues. We wish
to design the city ditch drainage improvements with the least amount of impact to adjacent wetlands and
hope to pursue a no-net-impact determination.
None of the previous preliminary grading recommendations for Outlot Pond C (memo dated Oct. 9th, 2002)
have been addressed with the submitted plan.
Additional Plan Grading and Drainage Recommendations: The comments from the memo dated Oct.
9th, 2002 have been repeated below and additional comments for this submittal are added.
Outlot A Pond: The pond and its outlet will have a 100-year HWL of 907.2' with a peak discharge of 4.5
cfs. Backwater effects due to the downstream pond limit the peak discharge through the 24-inch outlet
pipe. Due to these backwater effects. street drainage should continue to be routed away from the outlet
pipe to prevent sediment buildup in the pipe.
1. The 908' contour between backlots of lots 2 and 18 should be pushed toward the pond to reduce
the extent where the HWL of Pond A will creep along the backlots.
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc.
2335 West Highway 36 + St Paul, MN 55113 + Phone: 651-636-4600 + Fax: 651-636-1311
Page 1 0'3
(pc.(~
Memo
Outlot C Pond (1st Cell):
1. Revise pond bottom note to read 896' (versus 895'). This will bring the pond into conformance with
the city's maximum depth design criteria (<= 8 feet).
2. Move the overflow spillway away from the top of the equalizer pipe. The minimum bottom width of
the armored spillway should be 10 feet. Lower the spillway elevation to 907.5' to ensure a
functional design given the berm top elevation of 908'+.
In most cases, I would recommend that the spillway elevation be 1 foot above the 100-year HWL
and 1.5 - 2 feet below the top of berm to ensure the spillway and berm will be constructed to
function as intended. However, with a pond on the other side of the berm, I don't feel we need to
apply typical guidelines in this case.
3. The equalizer pipe should be a 30" culvert (versus 24") in order to better serve its intended purpose.
With a 30" diameter outlet pipe, the pond 100-year HWL will be 907.2',
Outlot C Pond/wetland (2nd Cell):
1. Mr. Ford should provide comment on the intended pond slopes below the NWL (904'). A typical 10-
safety/aquatic bench has not been provided. Due to wetland excavation and regulatory issues, 5: 1
slopes may be the intent.
2. A typical skimmer in front of the 24" outlet pipe is recommended over a flared end section to
minimize the potential for obstruction to the outlet.
3. The wetland grading near the outlet should allow for the installation of a skimmer meeting the city's
standard design. The current wetland is too narrow to allow for the necessary depths and should
be widened and deepened accordingly.
Other Issues with the 3rd Addition:
1. The grading plans should show existing ground contours for 150' beyond the southern property line
per city policy. The contours will allow for the design and review of backlot grading and drainage.
2. See the storm sewer design worksheet prepared by Matt Stordahl to review the current storm sewer
design layout for design recommendations.
3. The emergency overflow (EOFs) locations should be labeled along with their elevations at each of
the street low points to the downstream pond or ditch.
Sonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc.
. 2335 West Highway 36 + St. Paul, MN 55113 + Phone: 651-636-4600 + Fax: 651-636-1311
Page 2 of3
~ c.f9
Memo
..~~_._--,- .....--.....--.-.
---- .==- .__..._,;s:.: I ~l!l.
- ..._......= -:::.=.=" II · -.=..
.--............-- -- ---
__0.1_"___.__ -- -=.,;- ~ rl.:1
-~--_.--.
H:l1lO ~3JlI:l IoIOlJV]II
NO~N1"HV.:l
...
I ~~~_'_ _--
----/=-: ,~1>;,-
~ 1. ~ "
.... y'~':::
~ -
~ ~ ...,
. '"'"
~
~ ~ -os -"'\
-l'" ~ ~//o
~<::l -. '"
\....; ~'#V'~ <..".
~ ~ ;!
~ ")/
8 'T. :1
C'"'f 1:1
,
.....
...,
~
'7
,
~ \-
~ ~
~ '..(
'V
,
~
~
;...
'--
.
,
<l::
~
~
,
~
,
:-
~
,..
'"
, ~
'J"
,.
" "-
y' ~
~ ) ~..
-:: 7""
~~:--: .>
~ ..~ i~l'
,""i 7:: '
\~ g :f
/
/
\,
I
.\.
\
r-' -.
I
I
I
,. /r
.# '
. ...
} ~
':>
.....
.0 -
-
I. I ~
..." :-
/',..
I~, "..,/'
- //- '. .
...--..\. " :
\" . ,,---
\ ,'---..
". .'\
\ .. [II ----
- \ .,'. \.Y :--..
I ~ I /',
'i"~'~
. "
. ' :~ " ,-' " I \'---- "', /
1/' ^ ,\ ,
~ "~', \
:.; , "~
if' ',', ". ~ ,', I;oool. .-- -
J.'.~ '-.,,:;.,.,./.., \\.\ t~
j ,:;- .. /)<...~~ ~ '
t l /! ,----- ,:;
h },..----..,-------\
W' ~~' /.1 ~',,~.;
..011 I . /'
, , "" -., . ,-......., ' ',',/ -.- ,
,'.'a'~', l/~
" ,'; ~,,~~~\:: ! _ ~.' , ' ;:
. ':~ " \\-.. Ii, ... ,) <
/ /-~ \,. - ......... P'~'.
", ~...,' .,~, ~ ""-_ .: J" ,
;- ;fj;)<.,-,." ~_~ .{~:! -' L-;
, ,.,iV,." >..---~~~
)~,'. .f ~,. ~~ );-~' ~,~(i;T::::::::'
i "ff'"",,'''-'' /;/ .!-'
:.~ ~ ' , :>-..... ---------i' !( .:- ,
I z t ....~." / ~ ~~ ~!~.. 1,:
. . '_'J~, ,~' I; If -.til-
I ' , ~" '''- ,/, . ~~' :i "1 :
,'/ ~!"',,,'" - -'r' l-', III~ ~I~
, j':,& , 'I' ".': ~. tl,__ __ _ !' l-. ' I, ',' :1;1 :,'1 ,~
I ;.,' ~'.' . ,OJ, .r . _."'~ .' - .. " ~
.. '. " . ''-... ,~. '\ : '''-. i " ,;, "I::::
,..~.~I>'1L'/.I'i-I'~h .. HI;j!iL."
, , 1,,'\'. I I ~'I!' ~"-~-",,
.' "- =-_~. ...:... -- I .__/' /--:--r--1'/:l) -......:/:~;/
,-' T \ -- " 1 (ic:.='''x.j '1"\ 84i
:1 ~'l-l.--:,,_: : Ir 'jyjifi \., ,'Pi'
,- ' ,'--Ln. ',' Ib, ' ~'--',~ -.U, /';\.~ ". -: .- :,.jl.
,~i_,\_ . ,- r- 'f-~---:r-rr ,~J.-I!
!~l ill t-,j I .L.tyr r '
----::'~ - :-' ,":-';-" -.<.:.;'~~ < .:> ~ ~
",- ""' '--, , ',/" -.-.' '-., ":; :=;" -~'~ -'~~ -.~t? "
\
\
,
,.
..
~
'"
\_~
'1
<-:
\.
1
,
~ "'Z
!
I
<:\
,.., -
~ C .,..
, : ;)
V\ -r ;~
, ,
i :
..-J
,
,
. ~
Page 3 013
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc.
2335 West Highway 36 + Sl Paul, MN 55113+ Phone: 651-636~OO+ Fax: 651-636-1311
~50
",en
~ 28
~ :~
...Cl",
-",..
,.
CD
, ..
o ..
% .."
"it ~~
ILlLa
~
-a
~:2
a ~
,.Ec
1;.....
2~~
~. <5!
~~lt)
i ~
...:::!
~
CD
:~~
.!! o~
u Ii: Q
,
i ! I i:::
1111~1
I ! : '0
. I ! I~
II i I!l
I ! I! ~ I
IIII~I :1111
~ ~1~li; III~ ~ II
I ~ ~ i ~I~I~ i III! ~ I
fM i :~ ~ 11 ~ ~ I
" c
_ ~ ;: ::! ~ 0" 8!l!j ...
o;;~x"" ~~C":'= :e
... Q ~ ~ en di - J: -I i:.
a. c: CD '" I.;! 3 ::li 31 ::li
~~ i ;I'~ ~ ~.~II~I' I~
I.: a. :: fl BI ~ ~ ~ 3 ifl
en
...
%
'"
::li
::!
o
u
.;;;=
Q,>'"
a:8~
=~
:i:i
...>-"
~~
~~~~
Si:Ug
co;::::-
a. > .u
a:8~
=-
=i>~
ua>3~
a.,SW:::'
!-
~~~
0-.1)
ow::'
i::il
,. ~ -<:1-;
.r~-j&
~
;!g~
~g..::!
~
..
" =
:4 ,:}
.i:~
::i
-a
o
-5
..
2
;;
I:
o
i
a:
.
Ql
..
.::
.
.&
l5
~
.
..
'"
..
~
..
..
:I
..
lIJ
e
,g
lIJ
:t_
O '"
Z -
::J 0
..:.-;
:i ~
d
-s
e
. ,;::
s;oa-
... ug
CD
U
~
..
-5
..,
^
o
CD
u
!!~
:::~I
8~1
~ii
-+-
~1~1
~
;-
-'--
~I~l
"''''I
--r-
-1<01
0'01 I
-Ll-
..::gl
MI_.
+-
"'1'",1
C"'I:~l
--:-:-
101f'l1
...1lX'1
,
++-
i i
i )
-4-
I ,
~!~!
i i
H-l-
~lgl
010!
~
l~~
~ ~~~
~:jj
.I 3
~ ~
""'llOl
it
~~
...U
~
U
~I~I
~
~li~1
+t-
01..1
001
.. ..
iI:!
~
"'101-
~~~'g
! 0
u
;1 ~18 ~ ",il~1
,8lii '" ~.
~l 1;1;11 ;1 ;I~I
-I 1...1..1 ",j ",1",1
01 10:01 "I "101
~I jSlg! I ~I ~1~1
:~I ~I !:::i:::i I ~I ;;I~i
;71,i '" :ol"'j:' N' II
;M .n :~I~I '"' ~i~:
! I 'i' I
Id I I ()!! I I ~I !
15:: i ' I i ~! I II "" i
!; 'I
!~l~l~; ":,.,::!j
i : i
l~!~i~! :~l
:=ICII:::: 01
'"
c:
J
o
U
,~
11.
€
;:;
::li
""""CDI ICD
"'1"'1'" '"
a;1~~1 10
8 ii iil Ii
5l!glg" T:,~
~1881 Ii
I I i I
":1"""", i:"
%"'1"'1,'"
81Q';1~1 ','"
81iiliil l~
",;~lgl
enl "'I '" 1
,00
jC)C\1
! I i
~IQ)IU)I
101-'01
; 1 .
IC'lI~!:!!
i~~M~-~
I ' ,
010101
MIMI"'"
,
r--
1~IMIl.n1
o)ImlO'lI
Ii:
I""",;"" 1"'1
a)1d)Ia)lMj
Iii I I
"',"',"', " I
eol<<lfCD!
j" J '"
"i3 i
o a 0
~~ u
~ ~ 1&
J '0 ..
2 ~.- II~
~i~ 4;
,g. 4 ~ I
11. '! ,,_on,
€ &~ ,...
is ,S ~
::E.~:o
j: 8
""'0
13 g.: i
...(,Jan
^ ^ ~ !
~O~'d
'"
'"
o
...
8
g l:;l",
'" CDW
Ii Ii'"
'" '..,...
N ..,'"
i~1
,0
!Q)
INl
:o!
:...,
,M
,
I 1'51'51 I
::! -",-', I: ~
I ,glgl
I~I~II! ..I
0101 I ~I
N
'"
'"
.. 1."""11 '"
n ,~!~ ~
i i i
;j i;I:::1
I
~l
N 1"'10
~ I~I::
CD
N
'"
~
3
...
o
...
j;
::li
'il
c
g
'6
1il
~
~
S;
) I
-a
'"
<0
~
5
~
..,
^
a
-5
..,
^
a
..,
y
g g .e
... ... ..,
^ ^ y
~%~%::>
~g,~&~
g.~ i-.! :
<J:;UC;U
^!D^O^
auaua
>
..?i
'0
9
..
U
^
a
.....:
"'%
....
N
88
8ii
'"
...
g
....
...
~
"'
N
I"''''
"'CD
'"
..,
I
,......
'''' CD
i""'"
...
o
....
o
~
CD 'CD
"''''
...
...
a
:::
."
:ll
o
"l-
N
"'
o
...
o
...
..,
CD'"
",,,,
....
.f-cn
~~
...
j;
::i
CD
U
!~
j;:i:
::li::li
E
cD
U
8'
E-
<0'0
. c:
'" 0
'"0.
i 0
0-
'0"
013
-....
~..
"<0
'0 U
. C
~ tl,
.. ..
!~
~~
!.!! ~
... ~
U J ..
;~~
11..0'"
....<
"'Z
gJ8
g8
o
0'"
~~
'"
., ....
N'"
~l~;
i
,~~1
::Ie!
II
0",1
'YI
I
~'G:)l
...CD
,
at...
"'CD
.....
~I::
.. -
....
...
'"
o
~ fa
~
51
~
..
...
....
o
...
N
..
~
-
...
...
NC:
o
0'"
..0
......
j;u,
2~
o
~
:
"
c
o
-
"0
'""-
t~
2::::
cD::li
U
c
o
~
I i I
I I I'
I I
! ! !
i , I
;gjSj
i;!~
.I~~
I 'CICI
CD'" 0
..,..,..,
~~l ~j~1
I ,
;~I 1;1~1
o I !..n' i
i,~! lil~1
II ' I
"'..... ionltO
NNllNtNt
~I'~I Jil~t
g~1 !~!gl
~~8
88g
000
<">"'..,
oog
; ;tat
<("''''
z..,..,
., "',...
"'.'"
...;;...
Sl",Sl
"'I~I~
",010
;0;
"'I...ICD
0010
~!;;;i~
"'1..1..
(,",)MIM
!
~I~l~
-lOtIO.
-II
U !
>
a. I
I
"T "Tt"T
.-.JC"4IN
I
~1~1!~
000
I
0101
ilii
:..nllol"ll
I'''''I''TI
"""'I
:010
;C) Q
! I
-,,.....
, , I
;:",iOI
0101 ,C:l-!
1 ! I
;;~!
I
;;;;~!
",joi
c-)!..,.,
I
;cgl'2)l
::...1<....1
i ,
loi""',
~Nl,,",'
; . :
i! I
I :: :
",lOll
Nt..,.!
j 1
'0
"
'"
,.
a.
I j :
~l~:
:"'"...t'li
:::1::11
OiOI
:l."'41_i
:o"1C"q
.='CI
.... "'I'....
........
~b! !~d
I ! i !
III i I
"''''..
......
f'"-.jC'"'t! i""'!C'I'
_1"'1 I""""
;;1.101' !;;I,' 81'
to "', 1:O!",
I I", I
~I~i 12i~1
~I~ll~l~l
~I~ I~i~f
~ ~11~1~1~
~ ~II~I~I~
i ~ ~I ;1~1!
Q. I ,I
=_0 ~,,~ :;f~t:JI
:I' lOON
~~!S~a
ti~:i:;
:U~ ~ B~
Cl
.. I'"
~ ;: ~ j 81:;
~:i::i:=!"!I~
rn 2 ::li !!! "ICD
~ IU
~8
:i:"':"
::li'"
CDw
u'"
~I;I
(;;6/
i!:i!: I;lg.~if ~ :!: ~~1S~ 0
~~ '8 "'...,. ~ ~ ~~~ ~
~~~ ?~~~ ~~ .!II -fTla ~
~~a.~ 8'8 ..
~f~ ' i!.~ ~ I ~ ~..
~f ~ r-~ 0
"-ij> H: QR ~
I g a: ;;:; N ~
~~~ " jl ~~ .... 3
~ o. "" ~ 0
..... S- il- ~ ~
~. p
f~. ~ g ::tl
~~
~'
~
... :u
...
...
0 CD
;;> :T
'- I Q.
~ r 0 CD
s ,
0 , r
'"
... VI '" 0
, 5, Z
.. Cl
'" '" z J
... '" 0.
0 0 '"
'"
~ VI
:;> )> )>
J z
0 Ul
f > Ul
z
, 0 0
:
. VI n
?! <; c:
~ -,
P,1 0
~ 1 ~ r+
, ;0 CD
, .
0 VI
.. Ul
'" ~ ..
...
~ -
I J
..
0 n
'!:
~ ,
~
(J)
~-1
~:::o
:.;r'T'1
~~
l ", r
~.o I l'
i L,o~
: i f
: i i
:L,.)
, I
LL
ir-ri-
: I y
I I 51
" J
: I .
" .
: L20~
I j ~
0: I &'
i
~
a
g'
j:s I'
",-.. n
Q S.
w~ -,
~.g.-:c
::1:
."'Q
",'a
.
~
'"
~
z--
I
I
6-,.\ I
IIW_J
~
........
--
~
}::..
;~: ~::
. - - I
r T, i
I . I ,- ~
:~: =~:
--.
'--
e.~
"'~
3.~
t5.~
,-
n
~3
f~
~.it
.;~
rf
~-
.0
~!
~
!
i
i
!
I
I
I
\.
"" ()
\
\
\.
\.
\
\
I.
\
,
)
/
,)
'SO,"" 50"05'40.['
----<b-- - ---- ----
- - - - - - -- - - -- - - - .0C; -.;7--:'~-r.,o-
00 -.l
fi.'f,pQ,I"
/10 pO. ,/
t.o#' line of tho South.a.' QUo,'.r of
- Seelio" IJ, Township I r.. Ronfl. 20
i
ODl
:~
",
0'"
~~
~~
"X'
."
2..
o ~
=..
.!?
:;.~.
o ,
~.g
in'"
00
.. ~
~Q.
o
.co
~:::
q'
/
/
-'...
/
'....
....,.
......
_._' .-.- ..-.... -""
....."
/
/
...............
~\
\
:/,/
\
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~m
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai
---------~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~.~~-o ~
r-r-r-r-.-.-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-~
2.2.aaaa~~2.~~a~al
:;i::~::oIOQI""'o)Ul"~N-~
~~
[~
~r-r-r-r-~r-r-~~r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-~
~~aa~~~~~aaaaaa~aa~aa~~aaaaaaaaaaaaa2
~~~~~~~~N~~~N~NN~----------~~~~~.~~-~
~~.~N-O~~~~~.~N-O~Q1~~~~~~-O ~
ODl
,,-
~~~
~Qj~
~~~
~~~~~~:::~??;;:.~~?
S'
~
~
ggggggeg8gggg8gg~g888gg~ge~~9ggg228~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oo~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ee~98~8S~e2~2g8~
~~~~~~~~~~~~8~o;~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ii~g~8t;;;g~g80~~
~e~g~iit~~~f~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
r
~
~??~~~?~~~??;;:~????
;::??
~~~~~~~????~~~~??~??~???????~???????
~8~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~ ~~~>>>~>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
QQQ QQQQQ~q~QqqqqQQ~QQQQq~~QQ~~QqQQQ~~~~
all:: a m ~ mmUJaal1 ~ 11111:3 a all:: llllll UJ UJaalA~:::t:aaaaaC4 C4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
~aaiaa~aa3a~a3~~~a
~~~~~b~~~~~~~~
>>>>>>>)a.)a.)I.>>).>
~22~~q~qqq~QQS
IllllAloIIUJW:.maa.aa..
~
--
~
~l!lnD~ ~l.l _ ~'~f2j!J!
I I I luo~GO'''~V80000".1 I 1..0.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~f~i~~~aa
~, ii. ii, i' ~ Q .g ~ ~ ~ :) !! ~ ~ ~ ; g ~ ~ ~ ii a i 3 S: ~ :':J It'"
~~~~5'~iij'~~ s~ ~~O~ Rs:J3 QO~c~ ~
-;tn-;C"loii':J2.Q"tI Q."t!l")2.~2.a,Q.a-Qtn~:)::':oo G')
!lli"'!!.QC tI ,,2. 0'00:)0' 0'. 'II; S':(I)O :):) l'i
~ n. .g .111 Co ~ "0 a tI g. ~ ~ Q.:) :J S' ft ~ 11 !l( ~ ~ ~ z
~: ~. ~ ~ a- ~ ~ ~ ~f ~ ~ ~ -. ~! c
::. ~ ~g~~ ~ == ~-
CD 9. ~ :i ~ ~
, il.
%-
....
--
~
V ""\
~;.o~::o ~;t '" 0 :;9:- s:~ ~ W g' ~ co B
~,~, ~'a. ~.~. S! ~ ~~~ :, 6' S
~~ .. 5' f 3,
0 .. ga 5' ~ ... !!.
a.a.a.a.l:t ~ rn '" "If 'll
'" s .0" ~""'p !!.
~~~~ ~~ S'~'< w !~ " !;. ..
~ " on '" ll. l .g . '"
<0 . ~ 0 ~~ I ~ .
~~&~~r~ ~ -..;, ~~ ~ ~
s ~~~ .0 g ij ~
~~~~~ ~ ~ .. &'~ .. ~ ~
~ ~.~ g fla~~
g~:~ ~[ ~ e=[ ~~ .. 'l' ~ Q
M !!. ~ .. ~ !t~~ <.. ~
!" P3~ ~ . 0>
tH~82 t:~ "- "'rn 0 ~ ~ l'I 5' ..
Z . 0" ~" 5' " il' .
2N ~~ ~ ;ll '" 1 ll:
f'l Q.~ ~'~ t/) ~ ~
" n 8 5.
~ 0 ~3 ao ~ Q .. O>O>,,~ ~ ~ g
'" ~~ " ~ ii'if~~ ~
~ t" .-3' l! I~
~.~ z . ~-!.~. 3 ;0
a. ,. I::l 5' ~' ~ [ ~
~ ="2. '" ~ ~
!2 . !l ili' 8.
, Q.~ ::l '1 8 Q ,.
.Q' b~ 0 ~ " Q ~ l!. g.
i< ~
;?; [w 5' i.. ~ E"
. ll.
!!. n ~ .... ~
Ul" 0 S
. ~-3 0 a- [ ~
a
~ n. 5' 3 Q
~~ ... is S 'C
~ ," 0 .
5~ 0: !!.
~ ~ Q I
~ ~~ 'C
0 !!.
w s. ~
. , . ~ ~
Q~ a 11
3~ ~ ~'
..
" ~
!!.3 'I
'<
~ ../.
I
!
J'
I
/
~....,
I
I
!
J
/
/
I
I
/
/
'..."
",
~..
......
......
\
\
"
I
;'
i
I
{
!
I
\
"
\
\
i
I
/
I /
i /'
,..'
....
g
~
~
0
:E-o
~
~~
~ s"
~Q
~
~~
~Q
0.....
8 0
:1'
-
~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmington.mn.us
/03
TO:
Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator c; j,
FROM:
Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:
Customer Service Response Report
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
In an effort to meet and understand our citizen's needs and concerns, the City has adopted a
customer service satisfaction program. This program is designed to ascertain and measure the
level of customer satisfaction during service-related interactions. All citizen contacts with the
City are documented in terms of complaint type, referring department, priority of service request
and service outcomes.
Responses are typically anonymous ensuring that citizens with negative experiences are just as
likely to respond as those with positive service experiences. Accordingly, it is the City's intent to
use this information as a customer service tool to improve and promote the importance of
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 2002, as well as, a summary for the year 2002.
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
Re uests
I October
I November
I December I
I Qtr Summary I
12002
Summary
15
18
19
52
10
5
8
23
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
310
148
97%
94%
99%
(;,53
The percentages above reflect the number of actual surveys that indicated a response in any
given category. Consequently 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 eight percent (98%) of citizen requests for service are handled and addressed
within a 1-3 day period for the fourth quarter and 93% 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 "promptly the City reacted to citizen requests," City staff received a 100% rating
for the quarter and an overall rating of 97% for the year. The degree of "how personally satisfied
citizens were with service outcomes," for October, November and December was 100% and 94%
for the year. As for how "courteous and helpful" City Staff was in responding to citizen
requests, response data reflects a very impressive 100% rating for the fourth quarter and 99% for
the year.
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
2002 and annual survey results for 2002. 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, .
~d.Ahadr-~
Lisa Shadick
Administrative Services Director
65~
ICJ~
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farmimtton.mn.us
TO:
Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator ( ~ .
FROM:
Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:
First Quarter 2003 Building Report and Population Estimate
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
DATE:
The following is a report summarizing (a) the new construction permits issued during the ftrst quarter of
2003 and (b) an updated population estimate for the City of Farmington.
DISCUSSION
Building Permits: During the ftrst quarter of 2003 (January 1,2003 to March 31,2003) the City issued
new residential building permits for II? single-family homes and 63 owner-occupied townhouse units for
a total of 180 new housing units. No new commercial, industrial or institutional building permits were
approved during the ftrst quarter. None of the housing permits issued during the first quarter of 2003
included any new rental housing units.
The average building valuation of the single-family homes during the ftrst quarter of 2003 was $186,800,
up from $157,477 during the same period last year. The average building valuation of the townhome
units through the first quarter of 2003 was $120,371, up from $111,364 during the same period in 2002.
(Note that the valuation averages do not represent the overall sale or market value of the home; since they
do not include the value of the lot or any amenities added to the home that are not part of the building
code formula).
Population Estimate: In the past, the quarterly reports provided to the City Council by the Community
Development Department have been limited to building permit activity. From this point forward, each
quarterly report will also include an updated population estimate for the City of Farmington. After
discussing several methods of calculating population, a decision was made to base our population
estimates on Certificates of Occupancy rather than upon building permits. Building permit activity is not
a "real time" reflection of actual population, given the "lag time" between the issuance of the permit and
the actual occupancy of the dwelling unit (i.e., the time required to construct, market and sell the home).
Accordingly, staff started with the City population as of April 1, 2000 (as determined by the U.S. Census
Bureau) and then determined the number of Certiftcates of Occupancy [C.O.s] issued by the City since
that date. The number of C.O.s was multiplied by 2.95, which was (according to the 2000 Census) the
average number of occupants per Farmington dwelling unit. The resulting calculations are as follows:
05'5'
12,365
+ 885
13,250
+ 1478
14,728
+ 1888
16,616
+ 336
16,952
Population as of 4/1/00, per 2000 Census
= 300 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period 4/1/00 to 12/31/00 X 2.95
Population as of 1/1/01
= 501 Certificates of Occupancy issued for 2001 X 2.95
Population as of 1/1/02
= 640 Certificates of Occupancy issued for 2002 X 2.95
Population as of 1/1/03
= 114 Certificates of Occupancy issued for the period 1/1/03 to 3/31/03 X 2.95
Population as of March 31, 2003
ACTION REOUlRED
No action is required, for City Council information only.
W~
en
I-
~
0:::
W
0..
C!)
Z
I
!
I
lD
~
0:::
W
Ii:
<(
::>
o
...
Q)
U=
::0
.0:::::
:J tll
o..C 0.... 00 .... 0.... 00 .... 00 00 0 ....0 0.... N 00 00 0 0
~,g
~~
~
]!~
~ :J
~]l
~,gj 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 0 ....0 .... ....0 00 .... 00 NO N 00 00 0 0
~ E
Q) ...
Z~
~~
Qj ~
E I/)
E- O .... .... .... (Y) .... 0 0 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 N~ ON 0 0 N 0
O,gj
UE
~ ...
Q) Q)
zo..
]!
C
Q)
:2$ 10 10 ;'lIj 10 N N (Y) CO 10 Ol (Y) ~ CO 0 .... N CO ~18 (Y) N ..... 0 ~ f5
lfl"2 .... .... 10 ~ N CO
~ CO CO ~ ..... CO ..... CO CO ~ CO ..... (Y) ~ ..... .... Ol ~ (Y) .... 0 N ..... ..... N .....
0:::::> N N ..... ..... ..... ~ ..... .... ..... .....~ ..... ..... .... ..... .....
~
i"~
0:::1/) N 0 0 ON 0 0 0 00 0
:J (Y) (Y)
~~
Z
I
.....
'3$
::E '2
~Ql::> 00 ~ :8R CO CO..... CO i'i!; .......... ~ ~ to ~lX5 (Y)
Q)E~ 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 10 ~ ;'lIj
Zo= ..... ..... ..... CO ~IO .... .....~ CO
.s::.E ..... N
C tll
~u.
I-
,gj
C
::>
x
! 0 0 0 00 0 N 0 N~ 0 0 0 00 0 N 0 ON 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0
:J
0
~
Z
$
'2
::>
u. 10 10 ..... ;'lIj1O N Ol N .....~ 10 10 g (Y)(Y) ..... CO N 0..... q; CO N co..... ..... i'i!; 0 ~:g .....
en ~ CO CO ~ ..... ..... ..... ION ~ CO CO..... CO ..... (Y) 0..... ~ ~ .....~ CO ..... ....
N ....N N ....
~
Z
~ 19 ~ 19 ~ ~ ~
... 0 ~
~ ~ ~ I- ... ~ ~ ~ 5
.....
tll 0 ..... 0 CO 0 Ol 0 =8 0 .s::.O 0 N (Y)
:J iii '0 'E .s::.0l iii '0 'E .s::.0l iii '0 'E .r::0l iii '0 'E iii '0 'E iii '0 'E =8 iii '0 'E =8
C .....Ol C .....Ol C .....Ol C C .....0 C C
0 ..... N (Y) ~..... .... N (Y) ~..... .... N (Y) ~..... ..... N (Y) ~N .... N (Y) ~N ..... N (Y) ~N ..... N (Y) ~N
..... CO Ol 0 .... N (Y)
Ol Ol Ol 0 0 0 8
Ol Ol Ol 0 0 0
..... .... .... N N N N
...
~
(;,57
/0,'
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:
Lee Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:
Spruce Street Corridor Area - Environmental Review
DATE:
April 7, 2003
INTRODUCTION
Direction from the City Council is requested with regard to the level or type of environmental review that
will be required in connection with future development activity in the Spruce Street Corridor Area.
DISCUSSION
The "Spruce Street Corridor Area" consists of approximately 450 acres located south of CSAH 50, west
of Denmark Avenue, north of 220th Street, and east of a [possible] future extension of Pilot Knob Road
(see attached map). Development activity will begin to occur in a portion of this area in the near future,
and areas located nearby are also ripe for development. Approximately 130 acres of the 450 acres in
question are currently within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). A portion of this area (the
60-acre Knutsen parcel) was rezoned to the "Spruce Street Commercial" zoning classification by the City
Council at its meeting on February 18, 2003, and some nearby property (the 70-acre Peterson parcel
adjacent to CSAH 50) currently has a "Business Park" zoning classification.
Under the rules and guidelines of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB), certain types of
development activity must undergo special environmental review procedures before necessary approvals
and permits can be granted. The governmental unit with the "greatest authority over the project as a
whole" is referred to in the EQB rules as the "Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU)." The RGU
decides (at least initially) whether environmental review is mandated in any given instance and, if so, the
type or level of review that will be required.
The City of Farmington will be the RGU with respect to any development activity that is planned or
proposed for the Spruce Street Corridor Area. Based on the current zoning classifications within the
Spruce Street Corridor Area, and the types of development that have been discussed or proposed for that
area, City staff members have concluded that the applicable EQB rules will require that some level of
structured environmental review be conducted before plats can be approved and/or before necessary
permits can be issued. The question then becomes: what type or level of environmental review is the
most appropriate?
There are three basic varieties of environmental review: an Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EA W), an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and an Alternative Urban Area-wide Review
(AUAR). Each type has its own advantages and disadvantages. City staff members have sought input
from a wide variety of sources regarding the preferred method of environmental review for the Spruce
C:,5'??
Street Corridor Area. The Farmington Planning Commission discussed this subject at its meeting on
December 10, 2002. In particular, the Planning Commission weighed the relative merits of (a) having
separate property owners prepare a succession of separate EA W s as development progresses through the
Spruce Street Corridor Area, or (b) having the property owners participate in a single, comprehensive
AUAR that addresses all of the relevant environmental issues at one time and in one document. The
Planning Commission indicated that "... it would be better to have one plan done for all of the property
owners." (See attached minutes.)
City staff also solicited input from some of the regulatory agencies that will be involved in reviewing any
EA W(s), EIS(s) or AUAR that might be prepared for any portion(s) of the Spruce Street Corridor Area.
Staff did so in the belief that it makes more sense to fmd out in advance what those agencies are likely to
prefer or require, rather than devote time and money to a particular environmental review process that
they might later determine to be inadequate or inappropriate. The following agencies have offered
comments pursuant to staff s request:
1. Dakota Countv Soil and Water Conservation District (DCSWCD): District Manager
Brian Watson has indicated that the DCSWCD ".. .encourages the City to include all
parcels within this study area.. .into one environmental review document. Developing
one environmental review document provides better insight to the relationship of natural
resource management actions and implementation of stormwater management practices
within the Vermillion River Watershed." (See attached letter.)
2. Minnesota DeDartment of Natural Resources (DNR): Area hydrologist Patrick Lynch
and Watershed Coordinator Michelle Hanson have indicated that "...environmental
review of the 450-acre area would be best served by the completion of an AUAR rather
than multiple EAWs." They further indicated that "(t]he A UAR process allows for a
broader review of the impacts on a larger scale, and can address the incremental
overlapping impacts of development. The AUAR process allows for review of multiple
development scenarios for a given geographic area." (See attached letter.)
3. Minnesota Pollution Control Aeencv (MPCA): On April 2nd, City staff members
discussed this subject with Keith Cherryhomes, Ph.D., who is a Senior Engineering
Specialist with the Regional Environmental Management Division of the MPCA. During
the course of that meeting, he indicated that the MPCA would prefer an AUAR in this
instance, rather than a series of separate EA W s. He indicated that he would prepare a
letter to this effect, to be delivered to City staff on April 4th or April 7th. A copy of the
letter will be provided to the City Council at its meeting on April 7th if the letter has been
received by then.
4. Minnesota Environmental Oualitv Board (EOB): Gregg Downing of the EQB has
indicated to City staff that an AUAR would be an appropriate type of environmental
review in this instance. He referred City staff to the AUAR section of the EQB's Guide
to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules (see attached), which indicates that the
AUAR's key feature "...is that its subject is a development scenario or several scenarios
for an entire geographic area rather than a specific project." The EQB typically
recommends AUARs for multiple projects in a single area where environmental impacts
may overlap. AUARs have frequently been recommended by the EQB for multiple-
project areas that drain to trout streams, due to the concerns related to cumulative
drainage impacts on these high-quality water resources. Also important is the fact that
"(p ]rojects will not be subject to individual environmental reviews if designers conform
to AUAR assumptions and mitigation plan requirements."
&:,5?
Based on the preceding input and advice, the City of Farmington's Development Committee has
concluded that the preparation of an AUAR would enable the City and all of the property owners in the
Spruce Street Corridor Area to satisfy the EQB's environmental review requirements in the fastest, least
expensive, most comprehensive and least duplicative manner. It should be emphasized that one of the
primary goals of City staff is to avoid or prevent complications of the type that could hinder, delay or
jeopardize the commercial and retail development that the residents of the City desire. The trout stream
issue, for example, is one of several topics that would be costly and time-consuming to continually re-
visit in multiple EA W s spread over several years. Development in the area in question would be greatly
facilitated by an AUAR that properly addresses all of these environmental issues at the same time, and in
one document that could be reviewed and approved by all of the relevant governmental and regulatory
agencies. The cost of the AUAR could (with the Council's consent) be initially paid by the City out ofthe
City's Private Capital Projects Fund, then allocated among the property owners on a pro-rata basis and
collected from them as development occurs.
ACTION REOUESTED
Authorize staff to immediately initiate an AUAR for the Spruce Street Corridor Area in order to complete
the environmental review of that area in the most efficient and cost-effective manner.
Respectfully Submitted,
~N1)U~
Lee Mann, P.E.,
Director of Public Wor
~~
Kevlll Carroll
Community Development Director
ro~o
c:
o
~
on
c:
II>
..!!l
~
It'l
c:i
~o
CJ
Do
=
~~\'
o
."
\)
z~
DO
oCb
It'l
c:i
L-
a
""C
. .....
L-
L-
a
u
.....
OJ
CIJ
L-
.....
Vl OE
OJ ~
ulJ...
::]'0
L-~
c.. o~
Vlu
c: Il'.,r&
~ ~
S 10
ClIO
0..00
/
I
Planning Commission
Min utes
Regular Meeting
December 10, 2002
1.
Call to Order
Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Rotty, Barker, Heman, Johnson. Larson
Members Absent: None
Also Present: Lee Smick, City Planner, Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner
2.
Approval of Minutes
a) October 8, 2002
MOTION by Johnson, second by Larson to approve the October 8,2002 minutes.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
b) November 26, 2002
MOTION by Barker, second by Johnson to approve the November 26, 2002
, minutes. Voting for: Rotty, Barker, Johnson, Larson. Abstain: Heman.
MOTION C.-\RRlED.
3. Public Hearings
a) Ordinance Repealing Title 4 Chapter 3, Amending Section 10-6-3: Signs,
Billboards and Amending Section 10-2~1: Definitions (continued)
Staff is continuing to make revisions to the sign ordinance, therefore staff
suggested that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing for the sign ,
ordinance to the January 14,2003 meeting. MOTION by Larson. second by
Johnson to continue the public hearing until January 14,2003. APIF, iVIOTION
CARRIED.
~ c)
Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment-
Knutsen Property
The public hearing was held to consider a comp plan amendment and a zoning
map amendment for the Knutsen property located at the southwest intersection of
CSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue. The comp plan currently shows business park
and environmentally sensitive. Staff recommended a. comp plan amendment for
37 acres from business park to commercial, and 3 acres from business park to
environmentally sensitive. These 3 acres contain gas line easements. Regarding
the zoning map, the current zoning is business park. Staffproposed the business
park area to be zoned Spruce Street corridor, and the environmentally sensitive
area be zoned parks and open space.
There are two issues that may affect the development of the property. One issue
is a flood fringe which is a portion of the floodplain that has a flow depth ofless
than 1 foot. If this area is developed, the Developer would either be required to
C:,C:,O?
Plaxming Commission Minutes
D~ember 10,2002
Page 2
compensate tloodplain volume elsewhere in the tlood fringe, or prepare a
floodplain study disputing the existing tloodplain location and requesting aLe,
of Map Revision from FE}.,-!A to relocate the floodplain. The second issue is a
possible need for an EA W or AUAR to determine the environmental impacts.
The EA W is required. if the square footage exceeds 200,000 square feet for
commercial property. The Opportunity Grant study area includes 450 acres,
which also might require an EA W. Staff would like to mow if each of the
property owners should have an EA W done on their own, or if there should be an
AUAR done for everyone, which is less time consuming. If there is a mandatory
EA W, it would stop development until the study is done.
The commission felt it would be better to have one plan done for all the property
owners. It would be beneficial to have the Master Plan run consistent with the
AUAR. Staff requested approval on the following issues:
L 'Amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Business Park (40 acres) to
Commercial (37 acres) and Environmentally Sensitive (3 acres), with the
remainder of the Knutson property (20 acres) maintaining the current
designation of Environmentally Sensitive.
2. ,Amend the Zoning Map from BP (Business Park; 60 acres) to SSC
(Spruce Street Commercial; 37 acres) and PI OS (Parks/Open Space; 23
acres).
3. 'If the Planning Commission feels that the above issues need to be resolved
before amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map can be
recommended to the City Council, continue the public hearing to a future
date.
Mr. Matt Alexander, New Century Development, stated they can work with staff
as far as the issues with the river. Whether they want to be part of the long-term
process for the entire 450 acres, or come up with a plan that suits the Knutsen's
and their time line to get the process moving, they have been choosing the latter.
Issues regarding the Spruce Street corridor can be worked out with staff. As far
as the zoning and the camp plan amendment, the current line needs to be defined.
They have already fronted a lot of costs as far as surveys and studies to come up
with the information. Their engineers will give a report to the city showing where
that line should or should not be. New Century's timeline for development is to
start in 2003. The timeline for the Master Plan should be done by October 2003.
New Century will be performing an EA W themselves.
The commission needed to look at the camp plan amendment and the rezone and
review the timing of what is done with the amendment and the rezone. Regarding
the amendment and the rezone, the commission recommended staying with what
is on the books from the FEMA study done in the late 70's. If the developer
wants to challenge that or work on the mitigation with FEMA, they have a right
to. It is FEiYlA's responsibility to look at the boundaries. The amendment and
rezone was initiated by the city and the commission is in agreement. MOTION
~&3
Plann.ing Commission Minutes
December 10, 2002
Page 3
by Barker, second by Johnson to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED. MOTION by Johnson, second by Barker to approve the comp plan
amendment from business park to commercial and environmentally sensitive and
to rezone from business park to Spruce Street commercial and Parks/Open
Spaces. The commission directed staff to further research the issues regarding the
FEN1A. wetland line and the environmental studies and to defer sending the issue
to Council until more definitive answers are reached. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
,
. t
, 1
: I
b) Variance Request - i\1inimum Lot Size Requirement
Applicant: Bob Donnelly
Mr. Donnelly requested a variance to a lot size requirement in the Ag zoning
district to create a 30-acre parcel. Mr. Donnelly has 20 acres, and would like to
subdivide 10 acres from the elementary school property, and combine it with his
property to form 30 acres. The minimum is 40 acres. A variance request must
meet 5 criteria. The main criteria is there must be a hardship present. The
hardship may be the code amendment that occurred. Until May 2002 this could
have been done without a variance. The feedlot on the 10 acres already exists.
Only 3 of the 10 acres would be used for a feedlot. A restriction will be placed on
the remaining 7 acres to prevent any encroachment of the feedlot towards the
school. There was no one in the audience to speak on this issue. The commission
agreed that a hardship was created by the code amendment. MOTION by
Larson, second by Heman to approve the variance request [0 the minimWTI lot size
in the A-I district and to allow the waiver, and to place a restriction on the 7 acres
that would create a buffer between the feedlot operation and the school. APIF"
MOTION CARRlED.
4. Adjourn
LVIOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted, _
a-.;:zc'~ /1 )c..;.~'
.,..,."'""
"., ..'
"Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
&C:,~
DAKOTA COUNTY SOIL AND WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Dakota County Extension and Conservation Center
4100 220th Street West, Suite 102
Farmington, MN 55024
Phone: (651) 480-7777 FAX: (651) 480-7775
www.dakotaswcd.org
March 28, 2003
Lee Mann, City Engineer
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Fannington, Minnesota 55024
RE: Opportunity Grant Study - 450 Acre Development Site
Dear Lee:
The Opportunity Grant Study involves the evaluation of development potential within
approximately 450 acres located south of T .H. 50 and west of Denmark A venue. It is our
understanding that the City is taking into consideration the exclusion of the 55-acre Knutson
Property from the overall environmental review process of this larger scaled development.
The Dakota Soil and Water Conservation District encourages the City to include all parcels
within this study area to be included into one environmental review document. Developing one
environmental review document provides better insight to the relationship of natural resource
management actions and implementation of stormwater management practices within the
Vermillion River Watershed.
If you have any questions you may reach me at (651) 480-7777.
Sincerely,
~ 0.Jr~
Brian Watson, District Manager
Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District
Cc: Suzanne Savanick, Dakota SWCD Board District 2
Vennillion River Watershed Joint Powers Board
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
C:;~b
04/02/2003 14:47
.
6517727977
DNRCENTRALREGION
PAGE 02/03
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
tral Region Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Pau~ M.N 55106-6793
Telephone: (651) 772-7910 Fax: (651) 772-7977
April 2, 2003
Mr. Lee lVlann, Public Works Director
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street
Farmington, 1Minnesota 55024
RE: Southwest Quadrant, CSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue
Dear Mr. Mann:
Thank you for meeting with Michele Hanson and I on March 27th to discuss in general terms the future
development of approximately 450 acres of agricultural land in the southwest quadrant of CSAH 50 and
Denmark Avenue. Our understanding is that the area north of the Vermillion River main stem will likely be
zoned commercial, and the area south as residential.
'VVe discussed the fact that the city has received a Metropolitan Council planning grant to look at the future
development of the area. We further discussed that development of the area would likely exceed some
threshold requiring mandatory enviromnental review.
Michele and I met with other DNR staff to share the information you provided at our meeting last week. It
was agreed that environmental review of the 450-acre area. would be best served by the completion of an
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR.) rather than multiple Environmental Review Worksheets (EA W).
The more common EA W process is best suited for individual projects where anticipated environmental impacts
are limited to the site. The AUAR process allows for a broader review of the impacts on a larger scale, and
can address the incremental overlapping impacts of development. The AvAR process allows for review of
multiple development scenarios for a given geographic area.
Other benefits of performing an AUAR (versus individual EAWs) include reduction in staff time and hearing
expenses, better ability to evaluate how much development can be accommodated in an area without significant
environmental impacts, and, perhaps most importantly, the adoption of a mitigation plan for the project area.
The resultant mitigation plan specifies the physical, legal, and financial measures that are adopted to ensure
environmental impacts of development are adequately addressed.
In regards to your questions about routing of the storm water generated from the development site, Fisheries
would recommend that stormwater be managed within the site's sub-watershed and not be routed to Middle
Creek. In this are<;,Mi~r~c;m~~~~\1f-~~~~~F-~Mp-~~t~~~~.~sJ~~~~on of the Creek is
An Equnl Opp.muniry Employer
Who Valu.... Divcr.lily
~ Prilll.:d <In Rc<,yclcu Paper C',"lainin~ a
c.., Minimum of 1(""', p\)'I.C"n'um~~ WaNJc
(p& r;
04/02/2003 14:47
5517727977
DNRCENTRALREGION
PAGE 03/03
currently used as a reference reach in planning for restoration projects. Incorporating in6ltration practices into
the stormwater management plan for the development site will help to protect water quality, prevent thermal
impacts and ensure the stability of the stream channels. The Vermillion River Volume Study, 2002, bas
identified the area of the development as havin.g soils suitable for infiltration.
lfyou have any questions, please call me at 651-772-7917 or ~chcle Hanson at 651-772-6152.
Sincerely;
-'/I) lfLt.{))/
Michele D. Hanson
Watershed Coordinator
~
9SL
Patrick J. Lynch ill
Area Hydrologist
c: Michele Hanson, DNR Watershed Coordinator
Jason Moeckel, DNR Fisheries
Brian Watson. Dakota SWCD
~c,/
Guide to Minnesota
Environmental Review Rules
I'll ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD
PLANNING
c,(; '6
Substitute methods of environmental review
zrg
Chaf1te.r
'.
;\..../
Substitute methods of environmental review
Several options for environmental review are found at parts 441 0.3600
to 4410.4000. In appropriate circumstances, a Responsible Govern-
mental Unit may consider the following substitute methods:
4410.3600. Alternative Review. This rule allows the Environmental
Quality Board to approve a substitute review process that can replace
an EAW or EIS. An RGU with a review process that might qualify under
4410.3600 should contact board staff to discuss the feasibility of
approval. Since requirements are stringent, only a few approvals have
been issued to date,
4410.3610. Alternative urban areawide review. This substitute
process is covered in detail in the next section,
4410.3700. Model ordinance. This option is available to any local
unit that adopts the model ordinance found at part 4410.3700, The
ordinance does not apply to any project that requires a state
agency permit, therefore, it can only be used for a limited number of
projects.
4410.3900. Joint federal and state review. Any RGU or federal
agency contemplating environmental review under federal law is
advised to contact board staff about coordinating federal and state
review to minimize duplication and delays, Federal and state review
documents are often prepared jointly, however, in some cases it is more
expeditious to complete one review and use the completed documents
in a subsequent review under the other process. Board staff can help
determine the best approach for the situation, Although the same
factual information can often be used, each process has separate and
independent legal requirements. In other words, the state EIS process
requirements cannot be met by following federal procedures,
4410.4000. Tiered EIS. Added to the rules in 1997, this provision is
derived from federal NEPA procedures. It applies to projects for which
decisions are made sequentially over time, allowing environmental
review to be done in stages - or tiers - corresponding to decisions. In
each tier, only information relevant to that stage is developed. The level
of detail usually becomes greater and more site-specific as the review
proceeds from one tier to the next. An appropriate situation for a tiered
review is the siting of a major facility where a general area for the
facility is selected first and the best site within the area is selected later.
ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW
PROCESS
The regular environmental review process is best suited for distinct
projects with environmental impacts that do not overlap. In 1988 the
Environmental Quality Board adopted a process to review incremental
impacts accumulating from a series of sequential projects, development
typical of the rapidly growing suburbs of the Twin Cities metropolitan
area, The Alternative Urban Areawide Review process substitutes for
any EAW or EIS required for specific qualifying projects, provided they
comply with the review assumptions and mitigation measures.
The review's key feature is that its subject is a development scenario or
several scenarios for an entire geographical area rather than a specific
project, Development scenarios are established by the local unit based
upon the comprehensive plan, zoning ordinances, developers' plans and
other relevant information. More than one scenario can be reviewed,
providing at least one is consistent with the adopted comprehensive
plan, A maximum development, .worst case" scenario is usually
included, Development scenarios chosen by the local unit serve as the
project description for the environmental impacts analysis. Specific
projects ready for review within the area can be included, however, the
review can also be done before any specific projects are proposed.
The AUAR process can be used by a local governmental unit if the area
to be reviewed is covered by an acceptable comprehensive plan (defined
at part 4410.361 0, subpart 1, criteria derived from Minnesota Statutes,
section 473.859), Any city, county or township with planning and
zoning authorities, which has adopted a comprehensive plan meeting
these requirements, qualifies to use the AUAR process; the RGU is
required to certify that requirements are met.
Types of development projects that can be reviewed through the Alter-
native Urban Areawide Review process were clarified in the 1997 rule
amendments. Specifically, an AUAR can now substitute for review of:
residential development, commercial development, warehousing, light
industrial development and infrastructure associated with any develop-
ments such as roadways, water, sewer and stormwater systems. Light
industrial development is defined as the assembly of products from
components that are produced off-site. Development with character-
istics that meet thresholds of any industrial mandatory EAW or EIS
categories (part 4410.4300, subparts 2 to 13, 15 to 18 or 24; part
4410.4400, subparts 2 to 10, 12, 13 or 25) are not eligible for AUAR.
A hybrid of the EAW and EIS review processes, the AUAR uses a
standard list of questions adapted from the EAW, providing a level of
analysis for typical urban area impacts comparable to an EIS. Since its
content is uniform, scoping is not necessary; however, it has been vol-
untarily added to several reviews, A draft and final document is
prepared and distributed in a manner similar to an EIS to ensure ade-
quate review, A process for appeal to the Environmental Quality Board
can be invoked by state agencies and the Metropolitan Council.
Environmental Quality Board at Minnesota Phlnning 15
~~9
,''''''l
C/ttiPte,r
'"-, "
Substitute methods of environmental review
Benefits of the AUAR process. The process offers several significant
advantages to developers, city governments, reviewing agencies and to
the environment. It is an excellent tool for review of cumulative impacts
of multiple projects in a given area. AUAR enables city planners to
better integrate environmental review into their comprehensive
planning process. A single review process can address both public infra-
structure construction scheduled in the near future as well as the
ensuing residential and commercial development slated for later years.
By examining multiple development scenarios through the AUAR
process, planners are able to evaluate how much development can be
accommodated in an area without significant environmental impacts.
Moving review to an earlier planning stage helps anticipate and correct
potential problems while project plans are still flexible,
Projects will not be subject to individual environmental reviews if
designers conform to AUAR assumptions and mitigation plan require-
ments. Failure to conform exposes the project to additional time delays
and expenses, thereby encouraging projects to be designed in an envi-
ronmentally conscientious manner,
Initiating the AUAR process. Any local unit considering the AUAR
process should consult with the Environmental Quality Board staff early
in planning, An AUAR process is formally initiated by RGU order, which
must define the review area boundaries and the" anticipated nature,
location, and intensity" of development (part 4410.3610, subpart 3,)
Several development scenarios may be designated, At least one must be
consistent with the most current adopted comprehensive plan; if the
plan is outdated and being revised, but has not yet been adopted, the
AUAR must include a scenario based on the former comprehensive plan,
This scenario takes the place of the no-build alternative required in an
EIS, although the RGU can also include less intense development sce-
narios if it has reason to do so. The review area may be subdivided into
smaller subareas so that variations in land uses and intensities can be
delineated, It is presumed that the RGU will discuss potential devel-
opment scenarios and how to pay review costs with property owners,
The rules do not address the issue of how an AUAR is funded, leaving
this up to the RGU, If disputes or uncertainties arise about the nature,
location or intensity of development within the review area, the RGU
can proceed by incorporating multiple scenarios that reflect differing
view points,
In defining development scenarios, the RGU should keep in mind the
fundamental principal that if actual development - in total or in any
subarea - exceeds the" maximum development" scenario, the AUAR
is invalid as a substitute for an EAW and EIS; therefore, the RGU should
include one that represents the maximum development expected or
allowed. This approach has another advantage to the RGU and devel-
opers: namely if the maximum development level is inconsistent with
state environmental laws - for example, the resulting traffic will cause
air quality standard violations - the AUAR will reveal the problem and
appropriate planning can be done prior to development.
Steps ofthe AUAR are detailed at part 4410.3610, subpart 5, and
summarized below. The process needs to be completed in 120 days
from the RGU's order for the AUAR to adoption of the final document or
mitigation plan.
Step 1. The RGU selects area boundaries to be reviewed and defines
anticipated levels of development on various parcels.
Step 2. An Alternative Urban Areawide Review document is drafted.
Guidance on contents and format is available from Environmental
Quality Board. A draft mitigation plan may be included.
Step 3. The draft document is reviewed in a manner similar to an EAW.
The basic comment period is 30 days, but any state agency or the
Metropolitan Council must be granted a 15-working day extension
upon request.
Step 4. Based on comments received, the RGU revises the document
and adds a "mitigation plan," specifying mitigation measures or
procedures to protect the environment from identified potential
impacts. The RGU may also need to revise development assumptions or
set development limits to protect environmental resources.
Step S. The finalized document and mitigation plan is distributed for
review,
Step 6. If objections are filed by any state agency or the Metropolitan
Council, negotiations ensue after which, if no resolution can be
reached, the Environmental Quality Board decides if the review is
adequate or must be revised, If revised, the documents are again
reviewed according to procedures above.
The mitigation plan. The mitigation plan is probably the most
important result of the AUAR process, commanding careful attention by
both the RGU and reviewers. This plan must specify not only physical
mitigation measures but also the legal and financial measures and insti-
tutional arrangements to ensure mitigation.
The mitigation plan is not merely a list of ways to avoid significant envi-
ronmental effects, rather an action plan for how the effects will be
avoided. It is a commitment by the RGU and other agencies to take
action to prevent impacts that otherwise could occur from project devel-
opment. Failure to develop and implement an adequate mitigation plan
could leave projects exposed to legal action under the Environmental
Rights and Environmental Policy acts for causing" pollution, impairment
or destruction" of the environment for which there are "feasible and
prudent" alternatives,
Updating the AUAR. Subpart 7 provides guidance on when the
review needs to be updated to remain valid, listing six specific examples
of such circumstances. Regardless of any significant changes, the review
must be updated every five years until all development in the area has
been approved, Revisions to the documents are distributed for review in
the same manner as for a final AUAR document.
16 Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules
~.?o
Substitute methods of environmental review
:4il/I
Chapter
~
\--/
Audits. Subpart 8 provides that the board chair may ask the RGU at
any time for a status report on development progress in the area and on
mitigation plan implementation. This provision allows the board to
investigate any allegations of procedural abuse, to make sure that
agreed upon mitigation is being implemented and to make sure that
development is consistent with review assumptions.
Failures to conform to the original assumptions or to implement the mit-
igation plan void the status of the AUAR as a substitute form of review,
which means that individual projects are then subject to EAW and EIS
requirements,
ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW PROCESS
.
RGU ORDERS AUAR
varies
DRAFT DOCUMENT
DISTRIBUTED FOR
COMMENTS
30 days plus 15 calendar days
optional extension
~
:::
";:;
S!
::: varies
~
'1::
<=:=.
'"
.... RGU REVISES AND
DISTRIBUTES FINAL
DOCUMENT
10 working days from receipt
DISPUTE RESOlVED
REVIEW ADEQUATE
CONDITIONAllY ADEQUATE
RGU REVISES REVIEW
Environmental Quality Board at Minnesota Planning 17
t, ?/
City of Farmington
325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024
(651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591
www.ci.farminlrton.mn.us
March 28, 2003
Mr. Matt Alexander/New Century
6915 W. 146th Street, Suite One
Apple Valley, MN 55124
RE: Knutsen Property - EA W / AUAR Issue
Dear Mr. Alexander:
I am writing to briefly address two issues related to the environmental review(s) that will be required in
connection with the Knutsen property. As you may recall, City Planner Lee Smick indicated the following in
her letter to you dated February 11, 2002:
If or when the city receives new or more specific information from you that indicates (to the city and/or any
state or federal regulatory agency) a need for a different or higher level of environmental review, you will be
immediately notified of that fact.
The recent submission of your sketch plan for the Knutsen property provided specific information that was
previously unknown (to the City) with regard to the development plans for the Knutsen property. City staff
members are now in the process of reviewing that information with the DNR, the MPCA and others in order to
determine their views regarding the relative merits of an EA W vs. an AUAR in this case. The City ultimately
has the right to determine the level of environmental review that will be required in any given instance, and we
expect that decision to be made in the very near future.
Also, it is my understanding that you are obtaining quotes from various firms (including the Bonestroo firm)
regarding the projected cost of preparing an EA W for the Knutsen property. I want to make sure that you are
aware, from the outset, that any environmental work that a consultant does for your clients will ultimately have
to be reviewed and approved by the City's engineering division. Engineering review of your project (all
aspects) is billed to the developer per the City's fee schedule. The City allows developers to choose their own
consultants to perform their engineering. However, it is important to understand that documents prepared by
outside consultants typically require significantly more review than documents prepared by the City's
consultant.
If you have any questions concerning this information, please do not hesitate to call me at 651-463-1860.
Sincerely,
Kevin Carroll
Community Development Director
c:, 7 c:?
04/07/2003 14:45 FAX 6512826247
MPCA. METRO DISTRICT/RF
~002
loi
.PARTMENT: POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
SF-00006-05 (4/88)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Office Memorandum
DATE: April 4, 2003
FROM:
TO: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works &
~~ineer, Farmington, Dakota County
~ Cherryholmcs, Ph.D.
(651)296-6945
PHONE:
SUBJECT: Proposed Commercial/Industrial park, City of Farmington, Dakota County
This memorandum is being sent to the pty of Farmington to recap the meeting held at the
Farmington Public Works building on April 2, 2003, at which time city staff and their consultant
outlined a proposed commercial/industrial development. This proposed development would be
located between Denmark Avenue and a proposed extension of Pilot Knob Road. From a map of
the proposed development and conversations that pursued, it is the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency's CMPCA) understanding that the development will consist of six (6) parcels of land that
total 440 acres with specific parcels adjacent to the Vermillion River and its tributaries.
The size of the proposed project requires the Responsible Governmental Unit CRGU) to do an
environmental review. After weighing the fact that all parcels may not be developed at the same
time, coupled with some parcels are adjacent to the Vermillion River or its tributaries, the MPCA
believes that an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) would b,ethe best planning tool to
use for this proposed commercial/industrial park. '
The MPCA would like to encourage the City of Farmington to involve the public in all phases of
the AUAR development and review process. '
If you have any questions regarding this memorandum please do not hesitate to contact me at the
telephone number provided on this memorandum. The.MPCA looks forward to working as a
partner with the City of Farmington on this development project.' ,
. ~. .' ! .
, "
.:\: !
RECYCLaJ PAPER WITH A MINIMUM
OF ,~ I'OSTCONSUNI&R WASTE
o