Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.18.03 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 promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 18, 2003 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. a) Introduce Mr. Bill Fitch 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) Introduce New Employee - Community Development b) Introduce New Employee - Parks and Recreation 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (2/3/03 Regular) (2/8/03 and 2/1 0103 Special) b) Appointment Recommendation - Fire Department c) Adopt Resolution - Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids - Solid Waste Vehicle - Parks and Recreation d) Capital Outlay - Administration e) Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation t) School and Conference - Fire Department g) School and Conference - Police Department h) Dakota County Transportation Policy Open House - Engineering i) Approve Bills j) Approve Appointments Boards and Commissions - Administration (Supplemental) 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Farmington Heritage Landmark Designation - Middle Creek Historic Cemetery - Administration b) Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement Glenview Commercial Addition - Community Development Action Taken Introduced Introduced Approved Approved R7-03 Information Received Information Received Information Received Information Received Information Received Approved Approved R8-03 Continued 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) 2003 CDBG Fund Application - Community Development b) Schedule Workshop - Dakota County East-West Corridor Study - Engineering c) McCarthy Agreement - City Attorney d) Adopt Ordinance - Signs and Billboards - Community Development 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Appoint Councilmembers to ALF, CEEF, and Empire/Farmington Planning Advisory Committee - Administration b) Strategic Planning Retreat - Administration c) Consider Resolution - Akin Road Speed Limit - Engineering 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Update - NPDES Phase IT - Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan- Engineering 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 18, 2003 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. a) Introduce Mr. Bill Fitch 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) Introduce New Employee - Community Development b) Introduce New Employee - Parks and Recreation 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (2/3/03 Regular) (2/8/03 and 2/10103 Special) b) Appointment Recommendation - Fire Department c) Adopt Resolution - Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids - Solid Waste Vehicle - Parks and Recreation d) Capital Outlay - Administration e) Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation f) School and Conference - Fire Department g) School and Conference - Police Department h) Dakota County Transportation Policy Open House - Engineering i) Approve Bills j) Approve Appointments Boards and Commissions - Administration (Supplemental) 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Farmington Heritage Landmark Designation - Middle Creek Historic Cemetery - Administration b) Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement Glenview Commercial Addition - Community Development Action Taken Pages 177-218 Page 219 Pages 220-222 Page 223 Page 224 Pa~e 225 Page 226 Pages 227-228 Page 229 Pages 230-239 Pages 240-244 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) 2003 CDBG Fund Application - Community Development b) Schedule Workshop - Dakota County East-West Corridor Study - Engineering c) McCarthy Agreement - City Attorney d) Adopt Ordinance - Signs and Billboards - Community Development 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Appoint Councilmembers to ALF, CEEF, and Empire/Farmington Planning Advisory Committee - Administration b) Strategic Planning Retreat - Administration c) Consider Resolution - Akin Road Speed Limit - Engineering 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Update - NPDES Phase II - Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan- Engineering 14. ADJOURN 7CL. COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR February 3, 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: Audience: Ristow, Cordes, Fogarty, Soderberg, vacant seat None Joel Jarnnik, City Attorney; Ed Shukle, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public WorkslCity Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Jeff and Shelley Krueger, Beverly Preece, Earl Teporten, Mike Heinzerling, Harbee Tharaldson, Anthony Pena 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Soderberg pulled item 7 g) Set Board and Commissions Interview Date for discussion. Councilmember Cordes pulled item 7m) Approve Bills for discussion. Mayor Ristow pulled item 7a) Approve Council Minutes (1/21/03 Regular) to abstain from voting, item 7i) School and Conference - Community Development, and item 7j) City Attorney Reappointment for discussion. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fogarty to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Introduce New Employee - Administration Jennifer Morical was introduced as the new Receptionist. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Jeff Krueger, 5324 186th Street, stated at the last Council meeting, he discussed the high marks Administrator Shukle had received at his 6-month review. Councilmember Cordes had explained that the review is an average of the points that all the Councilmembers gauge Mr. Shukle on. He received high marks for three different areas. Mr. Krueger wondered how Mr. Shukle could receive high marks when two of the five people on the Council don't think he is fit to be in his seat. Mayor Ristow clarified that Mr. Krueger would like Attorney Jamnik to explain how the evaluations are averaged. Mr. Krueger stated that is correct. The second item Mr. Krueger brought up was that when Mr. Larry Thompson was the Administrator, it cost the city approximately $140,000 in monies paid out. After that came Mr. John Erar. That does not take into 1'77 Council Minutes (Regular) February 3, 2003 Page 2 consideration the expense the city accrues due to the lack of morale and the uncertainty in city staff. That cost could well exceed $200,000. Mr. Krueger then asked the Council what in Mr. Shukle's performance justifies the city paying $200,000 to try to get a new City Administrator? No one can make sense out of what the Council is doing as far as the City Administrator. He has heard no disparaging remarks about him other than from the Mayor and Councilmember Cordes. Mayor Ristow asked when Mr. Krueger heard that from the two of them? Mr. Krueger stated at the last meeting Councilmember Cordes admitted her agenda is to get rid of Mr. Shukle because she feels he is not qualified to fill the role of City Administrator and Mayor Ristow has said in past meetings that Mr. Shukle was not his first choice and that you are also in favor of his dismissal. Mayor Ristow stated he would not debate that now, but suggested Mr. Krueger call him to discuss it. There are data privacy issues Mayor Ristow has been advised by the City Attorney not to discuss, but he would try to answer Mr. Krueger's questions. Mr. Krueger stated we would like to know when we can find out what was discussed and what the issues are with Mr. Shukle. The city would like to know before you dismiss Mr. Shukle. Mayor Ristow stated you are speaking for yourself. Are you' representing other residents? Mr. Krueger replied no, he is not in an elected position. Mayor Ristow stated he is a resident, and he is concerned. The Mayor stated he would take Mr. Krueger's call at any time to sit down and discuss Mr. Krueger's concerns. Mr. Krueger stated other people would like to hear those same issues and not from him, but from the Mayor. Mayor Ristow stated they have the same opportunity to call me as you do. The response at citizen comments is not to set up a debate. Mr. Krueger understood that, but felt the Council could save a lot of time by telling people here and watching on TV right now. Mayor Ristow stated you are the only one who is asking me. Mr. Anthony Pena, 18906 Embry Avenue, spoke regarding the seal coating project. He asked if there was any money allotted in the road and bridge fund to pay for the project, or if residents have to pay the assessment every time? He felt the money in that fund should be used for upkeep of roads and bridges. Mayor Ristow stated the city does, but it is set aside from the developers and is used for the first round of seal coating. After that, there are a lot of tax-exempt properties. If the cost was not assessed, the residents would bear all the cost. When the policy was adopted, Council agreed to assess everyone equally who benefits from the improvements. Councilmember Cordes stated seal coating is done on a seven-year cycle. When your street is seal coated, the residents of those roads are assessed. There are tax exempt properties. If there were no assessments, those properties would not pay for the improvements. Mr. Pena asked if there was money designated for roads and bridges? Councilmember Cordes replied yes. Mr. Pena asked if upkeep of roads wouldn't fall under that category, instead of the citizens being assessed for upkeep? He stated it doesn't seem like the City Council is being very good stewards with our money. Mr. Pena stated residents on the road are being assessed, but all citizens use the road. Councilmember Cordes stated if the city didn't assess a portion of the cost, property taxes would increase to cover the costs not assessed. The project has to be funded somehow. Mr. Pena asked how he could find out how much money is in that fund? Council advised Mr. Pena to contact the Finance Director. Mayor Ristow stated the policy was adopted ten years ago. It is so everyone is treated equally, and projects cannot be assessed unless they show benefit to the property. Mr. Dave PritzlafT, 20255 Akin Road, spoke regarding a comment made by Mayor Ristow, saying that citizen comments was not going to be a debate. Mr. Pritzlaffagreed. /7co Council Minutes (Regular) February 3, 2003 Page 3 He has asked in the past when something is brought to each of you, there is a response. He stated the Mayor, Councilmembers Soderberg and Strachan have responded. There is one Councilmember that seems to think she is exempt from doing that, unless it is a situation where she wants to defend herself, she comes right out and speaks to the person standing here. He stated at the last meeting he brought up some issues and Councilmember Cordes didn't defend herself, nor did she send out a response letter. He stated her excuse' before was that she didn't have time, she worked late at night, or has done this or that. The meetings are two weeks apart, Mr. Pritzlaff felt Councilmember Cordes could find the time to respond to citizens that have any issues. He asked if Councilmember Cordes was going to respond to issues raised at the last meeting or if she was going to play it by ear and defend herself when she needed to. Mr. Pritzlaffstated the defense has been that your attorney has said you cannot say anything. This is public, Mr. Pritzlaff felt the Council needed to defend themselves. Mayor Ristow stated it is up to individual Councilmembers. Mayor Ristow stated your statement is that you had some questions at the last meeting and you expect Councilmember Cordes to respond. Mr. Pritzlaff replied yes, and asked if Councilmember Cordes thinks she is exempt from responding to him? Mayor Ristow stated at the next meeting Councilmember Cordes can choose to respond or not. Mr. Pritzlaff asked so she cannot defend herself and say yes or no now? Mayor Ristow stated the protocol is to respond at the next meeting. Mr. Pritzlaff stated the Mayor needs to explain that to Councilmember Cordes, because at the last meeting, she decided to get into a debate just to defend herself. If she is going to get into that role of defending herself so she doesn't look bad, then she needs to do it consistently with anyone who is at the podium. Mr. Pritzlaffwould like a response to his questions from the last meeting. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: b) Adopted RESOLUTION R3-03 Gambling Event Permit - Administration c) Approved Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - St. Michael's Church- Administration d) Approved Appointment Recommendation - Parks and Recreation e) Adopted RESOLUTION R4-03 TH3 Bridge Agreement - Engineering f) Received Information Capital Outlay - Public Works - Engineering h) Received Information School and Conference - Police k) Approved Senior Center Name Change - Parks and Recreation I) Approved Hoisington Koegler Agreement/Opportunity Grant - Community Development APIF, MOTION CARRIED. a) Approve Council Minutes (1/21/03 Regular) MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg approving Council Minutes (1/21/03 Regular). Voting for: Cordes, Fogarty, Soderberg. Abstain: Ristow. MOTION CARRIED. g) Set Board and Commissions Interview Date - Administration Staff suggested February 22, 2003 to interview candidates for boards and commissions. Councilmember Soderberg is not available on that date. The interviews had been postponed until another Councilmember was appointed. As Council interviews will be held February 8, 2003, Council decided to call a 177' Council Minutes (Regular) February 3, 2003 Page 4 Special Council Meeting for February 10, 2003 to appoint the new Councilmember. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes calling for a Special Council Meeting to be held on February 10, 2003, at 5:00 p.m. to ratify the appointment of a new Councilmember. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Council discussed setting board and commission interviews for February 15,2003. The decision was tabled until the February 10, 2003 Special Council Meeting. i) School and Conference - Community Development Mayor Ristow noted Community Development Director Carroll had requested attendance at a conference in Denver. He asked if there was a conference held in the Twin Cities to save air travel cost. Mr. Carroll replied Minnesota has a branch of the American Planning Association. The one in Denver is the National Conference. The conference is for five days and is a more in-depth educational opportunity. Mayor Ristow asked ifthere would be more benefit to the city by attending this conference, than attending one here? Mr. Carroll replied there are three people handling planning, zoning, and redevelopment issues. There is enough in the budget to cover the City Planner and Assistant Planner going to the Minnesota function. If Mr. Carroll attends the National Conference, they have the benefit of having the department going to two different conferences, bringing back different information, and discussing it collectively. The information brought back could help to secure grant opportunities. The cost for the conference would come from the HRA budget. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty approving attendance at the American Planning Association National Conference for Community Development Director Carroll. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. j) City Attorney Reappointment - Administration Mayor Ristow asked Attorney J amnik regarding the rate schedule. There is a flat rate that has been charged with a slight increase in the criminal portion. When it is broken down by department, Mayor Ristow asked if Attorney Jamnik was receiving the same flat rate per month plus additional charges. Attorney Jamnik replied no, the amount is billed the same no matter what department received service. The only thing that could be different would be a rate passed on to the developer for development review matters. However, there is no change in those rates, they were changed last year. The only change this year is an increase in the civil rate and the cumulative cap. Councilmember Soderberg asked about legal services included in the combined civil/prosecution retainer except criminal appeals, forfeitures of motor vehicles and weapons, and prosecution of ordinance violations and why these things were exempt. He understood criminal appeals could get costly, but asked about the other two exceptions. Attorney J amnik stated the code violations would include a code enforcement or building code violation. The biggest exempt item is litigation, these are analyzed on a case by case basis. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg approving reappointment of Campbell Knutson as City Attorney for 2003. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. /qo Council Minutes (Regular) February 3, 2003 Page 5 m) Approve Bills Councilmember Cordes asked for a clarification as to why there is a mileage reimbursement for $181.08 for Councilmember Soderberg. Councilmember Soderberg stated he went to the legislative conference for Experienced Elected Officials in Grand Rapids. The conference was held in three locations, however this was the only one he was able to attend. There were two full days of meetings with other Mayors and Councilmembers. Mayor Ristow stated he understood the excuses that there are time commitments. However, he stated he attends a lot of conferences at certain places and does not charge the taxpayers for expenses. He burdens the cost. However, that is Councilmember Soderberg's will and thought if it was a benefit to Councilmember Soderberg he could have gone to the conference in St. Louis Park. So Mayor Ristow stated he would not be supporting the reimbursement. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg approving the bills. Voting for: Cordes, Fogarty, Soderberg. Voting against: Ristow. MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) December 31, 2002 Preliminary Financial Report - Finance Staff presented preliminary pre-audited numbers for 2002. The audit will be done in March. Revenues are 103.95% of revised budget numbers. Revenues exceeded budget by approximately $230,000. Expenditures are 102% of budget. There is an increase to the fund balance in the amount of $483,000. The fund balance at the end of 2002 is $2.4 million or 41 % of 2003 expenditures. b) Adopt Resolution - Middle Creek 6th Addition Development Contract - Engineering The 6th Addition is a cul-de-sac containing 10 lots, just south of the former Wilson property. Conditions of approval of the development contract are: 1. the Developer enter into the agreement 2. the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this agreement; and 3. the Developer record the plat with the County Recorder within 6 months after City Council approval ofthe final plat. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to adopt RESOLUTION RS-03 approving the execution of the Middle Creek 6th Addition Development Contract and authorize its signing contingent upon the above conditions and approval by the Engineering Division. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Charter Communications - Administration As of February 1, 2003, Charter Communications will be offering service for high definition TV. Mayor Ristow asked if there were any other offerings for cable /<6'1 Council Minutes (Regular) February 3, 2003 Page 6 service? Administrator Shukle stated the city has a franchise agreement with Charter. Direct TV would be another option for residents. Attorney Jamnik stated he did not know of any city in Minnesota that had two cable franchise operators. Minnesota has one ofthe lowest cable subscriber rates. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - 2003 Seal Coat Project - Engineering The 2003 Seal Coat project is the tenth project in the city's seal coat program established by the city in 1994. The seal coat program is implemented in a seven- year cycle. The streets in East Farmington 5th and 6th Additions, Charleswood 2nd Addition, Nelsen Hills Farm 7th Addition and Euclid Street between Euclid Path and Upper 18300 Street West are to be seal coated for the first time this year. The streets in Dakota County Estates 6th through 8th Additions, Sunnyside Addition, Oak Street between 2nd Street and 4th Street, 300 Street between Elm Street and Spruce Street and the municipal pool parking lot are scheduled to be seal coated this year. The total estimated project cost for the 2003 Seal Coat project is $91,050. The city's special assessment policy indicates a 50150 cost sharing split between the City and the benefiting properties for seal coat improvements. The estimated assessment based on the estimated project costs and the city's special assessment policy is $65.04 per residential equivalent unit. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fogarty adopting RESOLUTION R6-03 receiving the feasibility report, authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications and scheduling a public hearing for March 3, 2003. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Soderberg: He attended the first meeting of the year for the ALF Ambulance Board with the new appointees. He will continue to serve as an alternate for Farmington. The rotation for chair fell to Farmington, so Councilmember Soderberg accepted the position. Prior to ALF's existence the cost for ambulance service was $3/capita. It is now at $.50/capita. In listening to the citizen comments, conversations, letters, phone calls, the citizens are wondering if there is a litmus test for Council appointment, if the Mayor or Councilmember Cordes have an idea or action in mind that someone would engage in prior to making them a qualified candidate. Mayor Ristow stated he has none. He is going by past practice. Councilmember Soderberg stated there seems to be a lot of questions. He knows they have stated they do not have a particular candidate in mind. Councilmember Cordes: Regarding the mileage reimbursement for schools and conferences, for city staff Council approves their attendance. She doesn't think Council should be an exception. She would like a policy adopted that if a Councilmember attends a conference, it is approved by Council. Mayor Ristow thought there was a policy. He stated in the past Council has approved Councilmembers attending a conference. Finance Director Roland stated in the past six years she has not seen that happen. The previous City Administrator would offer Council the opportunity to attend conferences, and she ft:gJ Council Minutes (Regular) February 3, 2003 Page 7 did not believe that ever appeared on the Council agenda. However, staff could put the policy in place if Council wishes. Mayor Ristow suggested staff check to see if a policy is in place before establishing a new policy. Councilmember Soderberg stated this is the third conference he has attended. Councilmember Cordes stated she has also attended conferences and does not recall having them on the agenda. She felt since Council is made aware of conferences for city staff, it would be a good policy for Council also. Councilmember Fogarty: Attended the Chamber of Commerce Board Meeting. Administrator Shukle and Community Development Director Carroll gave a nice presentation and thanked them for that. Glen Anderson was nominated the Business Person of the Year and Frontier Communications as Business of the Year. Council received a report from MnDOT regarding Akin Road and wanted to discuss how to share the information with residents. City Engineer Mann: Regarding the Akin Road letter, he asked Council how they would like to review it, and whether to place it on the next agenda. There are some alternatives offered in the letter and a request by MnDOT as far as Council action in regard to setting the speed limit. MnDOT's study showed they found warrants to make the speed limit from Pilot Knob Road to 19Sth Street 45 mph. From 19Sth Street to Hwy 50 to keep the speed at 50 mph. However, they also offered an alternative knowing the area along Pine Knoll meets the urban district definition, MnDOT would be willing to extend the 45 mph limit to Eaves Way, if the Council would give assurances the urban designated district would not be posted at 30 mph. Council felt this should be discussed at the next Council meeting. Mayor Ristow: Received an e-mail from a student regarding a teen center. He thanked Park and Recreation Director Distad for addressing the request. Councilmember Soderberg stated at the last meeting Councilmember Fogarty asked about the Council interview process being televised. It will be broadcast live. Mayor Ristow asked what that was based on. Councilmember Soderberg stated Councilmember Fogarty asked about it at the last meeting and Council reached a consensus so staff checked into it. Councilmember Cordes asked Attorney Jamnik since it is considered an interview, if there was any data privacy issues. Attorney Jamnik replied generally not. The data practices act distinguishes between applicants for a city employment position or city office before they are finalists and after they are finalists. Before they are finalists the information is private. Once the decision is made to interview them, the information is public. Mayor Ristow stated he doesn't object to it, but is it cost effective, and are we doing it for the boards and commissions also? Councilmember Fogarty stated her concern was the amount of public interest there has been in this issue. She has not heard it so much for boards and commissions. Mayor Ristow stated if a precedent is set it may need to be done for boards and commissions. Councilmember Soderberg stated he does not know if it sets a precedent for Council interviews or not. The community has a huge interest in this particular circumstance and felt it was a good suggestion. Mayor Ristow stated he is not disagreeing, he is concerned if there is additional cost or if it is included in the franchise? Attorney Jamnik stated there may be additional cost for staff to operate the system, but in previous years there wasn't this capability. Council may want to consider after this process if the candidates were uncomfortable or there was a strained atmosphere because it was broadcast live, Council may want to consider if those /'73 Council Minutes (Regular) February 3, 2003 Page 8 interviews should be broadcast. Councilmember Cordes asked because some candidates may be uncomfortable, can we ask them ifthey are comfortable being interviewed on camera, can we have that option for them? Attorney Jamnik stated that is at the discretion of the Council. It has not been an issue for Council positions, because applicants realize Council Meetings are broadcast live on cable. It is slightly different when talking about yourself in an interview process rather than in a business meeting, but generally there hasn't been a problem. There has been more of a concern with Council's broadcasting interviews for commissions and other task forces, which generally do not broadcast meetings. Mayor Ristow stated there are some candidates who are already familiar with the system and have been on TV. Councilmember Cordes stated she would like to give them the option of being on camera, and ifthey are uncomfortable shutting the camera off for that amount of time. Councilmember Soderberg stated if someone is uncomfortable at a Council Meeting, we do not shut the camera ofT. Councilmember Fogarty stated if they are going to be on Council, they will be on TV every two weeks. Councilmember Soderberg stated it is no different than standing at the podium and speaking during citizen comments. Mayor Ristow stated a letter has been received from Mr. David McKnight withdrawing his name. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 8:18 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, 7~-a~ /Y?~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant /<nr COUNCIL MINUTES SPECIAL February 8, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 8:00 a.m. 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Ristow, Cordes, Fogarty, Soderberg None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Kim Soderberg, Nathan Hansen, Aaron Tinklenberg 3. CITY COUNCIL INTERVIEWS There were nine candidates interviewed for the Council seat vacated by Councilmember Strachan. 8:00 a.m. Randy Oswald Councilmember Fogarty: As the city grows, the demands on current recreation facilities also grows. What are your plans for recreation facilities? Oswald: He is currently a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission. He stated we are currently using all the facilities and the facilities do not get a rest between seasons, which makes it hard to maintain them. The facilities definitely need to grow. The city has a new Park and Recreation Director and things are being reviewed. Councilmember Cordes: What are your thoughts on using Ad Valorum taxes for road projects in Farmington? Oswald: Pilot Knob was assessed 1/2 mile on each side and felt it was his duty to be part of that. He felt the city should continue with special assessments. Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? Oswald: A city needs to grow in thee fashions in order to make a well-developed city - residential, commercial and industrial. Each plays unique, important role in the community. It doesn't put so much burden on the residents when all three are in place. He would need to be educated on how to accomplish this. Councilmember Soderberg: an independent thinker? Regarding growth, policy issues, etc. caD you be /C?5 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 2 Oswald: If you are on the City Council, and you are not an independent thinker, you do not need to be on the Council. There are two circles of knowledge. The first is that which is open to the public, the second is the information Council knows that cannot be released to the public due to data privacy laws. Councilmembers need to be open minded and do what is best for the city. Councilmember Soderberg: There has been a lot of discussion regarding the City Administrator. Describe a process you would use to determine that any staff member should be dismissed. Oswald: Staff goes through a review process. There are ranges for excelling, average and need improvements. If an employee is performing the job adequately or above, there is not reason for dismissal. Ifthe review is non-satisfactory, need to review if issues are correctable. If they are, meet with employee. You need to look at what is best for the city. Mayor Ristow: There are always issues regarding transportation routes and safety issues. What would you suggest to make them better and what ideas would you propose to finance them? Oswald: A lot of the transportation routes are controlled by the state and the county, such as speed and where the road is going through. The city needs to work with them to convey their thoughts. There is a current issue with an arterial road. Need to look at if it is worth making traffic adjust or a safety issue. The city is not an independent body that can do what it wants. You have to work within the agencies. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about trying to re-establish the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Oswald: The best way would be through communication. He has been taking a writing class and he wrote a paper on how we view ourselves and how we view people who look or are different from ourselves. Although the issue may be uncomfortable, the more it is discussed, the more comfortable we become. You have to talk out your feelings and why you feel this way. Weare not here for ourselves, or for sole issues, we are here for the good of the entire community. Mayor Ristow: When Council has workshops and yearly group retreats, it is very important that everyone attends so there are not distances between one another. Oswald: Agreed it is very important to attend. Barring special circumstances, if it is scheduled and everyone has agreed to be there, you have to be there. It is all part of the process. /C06 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 3 Councilmember Fogarty: Currently there is a moratorium on property south of Hwy 50 and west of Denmark. Would you have agreed with that decision, and if not, why? Oswald: There are things that need to be simultaneously with the moratorium. The city needs to decide who to tie it in commercially and not be choppy. He agrees with the moratorium. It allows the city time to do what it needs to do in order to accept the developers. Councilmember Cordes: Do you support the city's additional tax levy of approximately $270,000 in the 2003 budget to make up for the anticipated loss of state aid due to the state budget shortfall? If so why? If not, what else would you have proposed to deal with this situation? Oswald: The federal and state governments are in deficit. There was a time the city was in financial trouble. There is no guarantee of income, so you want to be prepared for the worst case. Farmington has since maintained a healthy balance. Part of the money the city receives comes from the state. As a city we need to be prepared, because the costs will still be there. If this is what needs to be done in order to maintain our fiscal responsibility, then that is what we need to do. Mayor Ristow: Please tell me how you feel about the city of Farmington's comp plan and how it is used. Oswald: Being a member of the Park and Recreation Commission and on both task forces, he feels it is important for the comp plan to be used. It is important for it to be used to look forward into the future to use as a guideline. He understands things also change, and you need to be flexible. He would also need more education on it. Mayor Ristow thanked Mr. Oswald for coming and asked ifhe had any additional comments. Additional Comments: Mr. Oswald stated he has prayed for the Council to give them wisdom and level headedness. The precedence was set in 1988. We just had an election with nine candidates. There is no city ordinance for this process. He applauded Council for sticking with what they did in 1988, as it shows consistency. The second thing he would recommend is that once this procedure is done, the full Council should adopt a policy saying if this happens again, this is how we will proceed. He is seeing the city being torn apart. It is important we all get together and work as a team. The city is growing and we need to be prepared. It is his biggest desire the Council makes their decision unanimously. The Council is a representative of the majority of the people who voted at the time you were elected. Whether we voted for you or not, is not important. What's important is that we need to have trust in you. 8:20 a.m. Jeff Krueger /<?? Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 4 Councilmember Soderberg: With the controversy in the city and aU the projects that come before the Council, can you be an independent thinker and open- minded? Krueger: Yes, he considers every issue, and makes and independent decision. There would be no coercion, influence, or persuasion. My vote would be my vote. Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? Krueger: The industrial park needs to be developed. Some businesses will not be coming into play until we get to a certain population level. There are some businesses that could come in in the meantime. Assessments would be involved with the businesses that come in. Transportation is a big issue. Mayor Ristow: Do you feel those ways of funding should be held for the businesses 100%, or use taxes from the taxpayers? Krueger: We should use taxes because we are a community as a whole and we are all in this together. Just as the other roads, it has always been a shared effort. He would disagree with putting 100% of the cost on the businesses. Councilmember Cordes: What are your thoughts on using Ad Valorum taxes for road projects in Farmington? Krueger: He believes in special assessments. The streets should not be paid for by the city as a whole. It has not been done in the past. He paid the assessment on Pilot Knob Road, he was against it in the beginning, but is glad it did go through. As far as the infrastructure, there is a big degrading that is going on with the city streets. They do need to be reconstructed. The citizens living on the street have the most use of the streets. He would advocate the current policy of65/35. Councilmember Fogarty: In the past you had harsh words to members of the City Council. How do you think you could put these differences aside and work with the City Council? Krueger: He has no problem looking past that. Business is business, politics is politics. It is nothing personal. He wholly disagrees with what they are trying to do as far as the City Administrator and what they are trying to do with this City Council appointment. Once we get to a new issue, it is a new issue and the slate would be clean. I don't hold grudges. Councilmember Fogarty: In calling some of your references, I did get a feeling that with your business you travel a lot. Do you see that as a conflict with sitting on the Council? /coC6 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 5 Krueger: He does not travel that much anymore. Currently overnight stays are approximately four nights a month. He sets his own schedule. Councilmember Cordes: Do you support the city's additional tax levy of approximately $270,000 in the 2003 budget to make up for the anticipated loss of state aid due to the state budget shortfall? If so, why? If not, what else would you have proposed to deal with this situation? Krueger: He would try to see where we can cut spending. He would see where we have fluff and cut it from there. If the budget is cut to the bone and not harming services or taking things away from the citizens, he would then propose some type of a tax increase. You have to balance the budget somehow. First you have to cut spending. Mayor Ristow: There are always issues regarding transportation routes and safety issues. What would you suggest to make them better and what ideas would you propose to finance them? Krueger: Regarding the speed issue on Akin Road, the study showed the speed should be 45 mph. He would defer to the engineer's wisdom that would be in the citizen's best interest. As far as transportation corridors, we are building some east-west corridors which are very important for the residents and the commercial end. As far as funding, we would need to look at the different mechanisms that are available. Such as assessments or paid for city wide. Mayor Ristow: would use it? Please explain what Tax Increment Financing is and how you Krueger: The taxes are deferred or eliminated from what the businesses have to pay. There would be more money in their pocket to help with their expansion. Mayor Ristow: Would you suggest using it only for business or use it for housing or blighted areas? Krueger: He would not use TIF for residential, it is more a strictly business mechanism. As far as housing, the residents' hands are tied. It would depend on the road. If it is an east-west corridor, perhaps more of it would have to come from city funds and not have special assessments. If there are only a few properties on the road, you cannot expect those few properties to fund the entire road, so it would have to come out of the city coffers. Councilmember Soderberg: Describe a process you would use to determine whether any city staff should be dismissed? Krueger: He would like to propose another 6-month trial where the citizens themselves are more involved with what is going on. He doesn't believe the citizens I~? Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 6 wholly understand the role of the city administrator and some ofthe staffwe currently have. They definitely do not understand what the expectations are of the City Council. He would like to propose the expectations be put out there for the citizens to see. It would help the public relations factor and the citizens could then assess for themselves whether the city administrator is meeting those expectations, and whether a dismissal would be warranted. He does not feel currently any dismissal is warranted until more communications is brought forward by the Council. That is a huge lacking at this time. Mayor Ristow: Could you please tell me how you feel about the city of Farmington's comp plan and how it is used? Krueger: The comp plan is very effective. He likes the streetscape and feels it will be beneficial in filling up the buildings that now lay empty. There are some interested parties in bringing in business to downtown Farmington. He believes the focus of commerce should stay in the downtown. He would hate for us to turn into another Rosemount or Lakeville where no one goes downtown. Our downtown is the strength of this city. It should be cultivated and not compromised. Mayor Ristow: So you understand when we put the comp plan together that the Council, staff and Planning Commission took the stance we get the residents involved. We had meetings for several months and everyone had an equal opportunity to put forth what their thoughts were and where they wanted to see their community grow. Krueger: He understands it was a community effort. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about trying to re-establish the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Krueger: He believes individual meetings would be appropriate. There should be weekly meetings with the city administrator. As far as with the Finance Director, City Engineer those could be bi-weekly or monthly. The Councilmembers individually need to get together with these people and get to know them more on a personal level. That would enhance the working relationship between Council and staff and better establish what your expectations are and provide constant feedback. Mayor Ristow: We have been doing that type of a concept through workshops, and sometimes you feel like you are a rubber-stamped Council. Do you agree with that if you have the issues worked out and have the knowledge and if you still disagree at the vote? What would you look to get out of these meetings? Krueger: The Council does not need to come to the table agreeing with everything. You do give the perception of being a rubber-stamped Council and that is not a good perception. Any differences helps with communication to the citizens. Ifthere is a 3-2 vote that is fine. We can at least hear the dissention and what that dissention is. The country was not built on a group acting as one, but as individual thinkers. He can 19'0 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 7 guarantee he will not be voting with all of them all of the time. He will go against them. Compromises do need to be hashed out. Some objections should come out in a public forum. Councilmember Soderberg: At the Council table where the disagreements should be after a 3-2 vote what should be the actions and attitudes after the vote? Krueger: If the proposal passes and he is of the minority, he has not choice but to accept what the majority has warranted. Ifthere is a way to go back and redo some ofit, ifit would be damaging to the city, come back with proposals to try to minimize the damages, or accept it as is. He doesn't hold grudges. He tries to take care of business and further what he believes should be happening. He would not say to another Councilmember I won't vote for that because you didn't vote for mine. Mayor Ristow thanked Mr. Krueger for interviewing and asked ifhe had any additional comments. Krueger: He wanted to mention all the candidates were brought in at 8:00 a.m. and are in a private room. That was the Mayor's suggestion and was an excellent suggestion so the candidates would be privy to the questions ahead of time. As of his interview, Bill Fitch had not yet arrived and felt that should be taken into consideration. Most likely he has already head some of the questions and would have an unfair advantage. 8:40 a.m. Todd Larson Councilmember Soderberg: With the different policy decisions council has to make and all the projects, can you be an independent mind? Larson: He would have no problem. He has been on the Planning Commission for seven years. He votes his own mind. Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? Larson: The city is lacking in commercial growth. It is just as important for redevelopment in the downtown as it is for commercial development in the business park. As far as funding, it is hard to say how to fund the area on Hwy 50 and Denmark. The developer with pay for the acreage left out of the moratorium so he will pay for that himself. As far as the industrial park, the city has mechanisms used to pay for the infrastructure. He assumes the business park would be funded the same way. Mayor Ristow: Please tell me how you feel about the city of Farmington's comp plan and how it is used. /9/ Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 8 Larson: He likes the way the comp plan turned out. It is a work in progress and a guide. There should be room for changes. There was a lot of work and planning that went into it. We should be able to work with and not stick to every word and boundary. Mayor Ristow: So you understand it was put together by business people, residents, etc. and there were meetings to see how the city wanted grow. So you understand when a certain area comes and the infrastructures are met, there are certain areas set aside that can accommodate those businesses. Larson: Yes, he was at every meeting. Councilmember Cordes: What are your thoughts on using general property taxes for road projects in Farmington? Larson: The minor roads should be an assessment process. The major roads like Pilot Knob should be equally shared by everyone through property taxes. Mayor Ristow: The plan has been an assessment 1/2 mile on either side. There is also the possibility of Ash Street and Elm Street. Would it be consistently wise to use that same formula? Larson: No, things like Ash Street and Pilot Knob, everyone should be assessed. Councilmember Fogarty: In calling your references, a common theme came up, that you are very much a person who strives to make people happy and you are very good at it. Do you see this as a potential conflict as it is quite difficult to make everyone happy as a Councilmember? Larson: He has a knack for getting the job done and keeping everyone not mad. He deals with 20-45 people as far as directing them and keeping everyone happy is a tough thing to do. He has a knack for getting his point across as far as what needs to be done and keeping them happy. His belief is that you get more done with happy people than with angry people. Councilmember Fogarty: What is your vision for business or retail growth in the growing residential population of Farmington and what would your plans be for attracting business to Farmington? Larson: His vision is he would like to see as much redevelopment right now in the downtown as new development in the business park. We need to be very selective and careful about the kinds of businesses that come into town. Not to take away from the downtown. He doesn't want to see something come to the business park and have three stores downtown close. There should be a way to attract businesses that will mesh with the downtown. It would be nice to have people come from the north side of town to the business park and have the Spruce Street corridor coming into town something nice and pleasant that people would want to drive. If we would have had the streets and sewer /Cfd' Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 9 system in the business park we would have a hotel here already. The commercial is coming and we need to have a spot for it. Mayor Ristow: If there are areas set aside in the north area and it is duplicating what we have downtown, do you feel it is ok for businesses such as barbers, a restaurant? Larson: Sure. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about trying to re-establish the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Larson: Everyone needs to have an open mind for the team concept to work. He has attended seminars on developing the team concept. There are some good people that could come in to give you ideas. Mayor Ristow: You have been involved in the Council workshops where staff, Council, and Planing Commission try to stick together to discuss the issues. Do you think that should change? Larson: No, we need more of it. He would like to involve the school board more. As far as the workshops themselves, they are excellent. A lot of work gets done. They have been a huge success. The Planning Commission works wonderful as a team. The main problem has been with the Council not getting along as far as the team concept. Councilmember Cordes: Do you support the city's decision to increase the tax levy of approximately $270,000 in 2003 budget to make up for the anticipated loss of state aid? If so why? If not, what else could have been done? Larson: He does support it because the city will lose state aid. It is important for the Council to set the city up so there will not be a shortfall. Mayor Ristow: Governor Pawlenty has said he will put a cap on what cities can raise. What would you do then if there was not enough? Larson: He doesn't know where the city is spending its money. He would have to look into it. He can't take a cold question like that without doing some research. That is very important and a lot of thought has to go into it. Mayor Ristow: Could you explain what tax increment financing is and how you would use it? Larson: He knows a little about it. It has been used in the industrial park. For seven years the business is limited on its taxes. It is to help them get established. After the seven years it gets paid back. The concept is to allow the business to come in without that extra debt of taxes. To allow them to grow and get employees. /93 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 10 Mayor Ristow: It has been a concept the Council and HRA have been agreeable to use for industrial and commercial type growth. It has been used for some residential growth and blighted areas. Are you more in favor of sticking to the concept to bring commercial and industrial growth to the city versus spending it on blighted or residential areas? Larson: He doesn't think we need to use TIP money on residential areas at all. Developers have enough money to finance themselves. He would be very careful where he used it. There should be a minimum amount of employees brought to the city before they could use TIP money. He would hate to give someone TIP money and have three employees come to town. It should be used for bigger manufacturing businesses that bring 35-50 employees to town. Councilmember Soderberg: Would you describe a process you would use to determine if any city staff should be dismissed? Larson: There would have to be a good case against them to be dismissed. He believes in giving people every opportunity to change before they are dismissed. One of the hardest things he has to do at work is let people go. He would rather reform them to get them to change their ways. If they need to be let go, it should be a unanimous vote. That is someone's livelihood. Mayor Ristow thanked Mr. Larson for coming and asked ifhe had any additional comments. Larson: No. It would have been nice to have a couple of the questions in advance to do a little research. Mayor Ristow stated the questions are not designed to trick anyone. They are just to give a general idea of what people think. 9:00 Terry Verch Councilmember Cordes: What are your thoughts on using general property taxes for street projects in Farmington? Verch: Weare already paying taxes. If there are leftovers that would be ok. Councilmember Fogarty: The 2020 comp plan envisioned a wide variety of housing options. How do you propose we achieve this goal? Verch: To go forward with the plans we have. Work with the developers and be tough at the Council. Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? /9'1 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 11 Verch: We definitely need commercial and industrial growth. Once it starts growing, maybe people will see land is cheaper down here. Within 10 years he would see great growth. As far as funding, he doesn't know what excess there would be in the city. The developer has the land, he should put in most of the stuff. Mayor Ristow: So in the commercial and industrial areas, the developer needs to put his buildings in order? Verch: If you want the business to get here, you also have to help them out. Mayor Ristow: Would you use ad valorum or TIF? Verch: He wouldn't know. Councilmember Soderberg: With different policies the Council has to make and different projects, can you be an independent thinker? Verch: Yes. When he was on the Council he took everything in. Ifhe had an issue he brought it up. He would go with what he thought was the best way to do it. Councilmember Soderberg: Would you describe a process you would use to determine if any city staff should be dismissed? Verch: Why am I getting rid of them? He would have to know were they stealing, cheating the city out of money, not doing their job? There would be a different process. There would be guidelines to follow in the city policy. Councilmember Soderberg: Would you choose to evaluate and identify specific areas where they need improvement and allow an opportunity for improvement? Verch: If any employee isn't performing to specifications, then you have to pay the consequences. In every job you get 2-3 warnings. Councilmember Fogarty: You lost your Council seat in the last general election. Why should we appoint you? Verch: I had different thoughts and things in my life. Back then I didn't give it 100%. Now he thought about and maybe he wasn't fair to the public. He knows he can do the job. He feels he can offer something and can give it 100%. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about re-establishing the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Verch: It is hard to get together to talk because everyone works and then there are laws where you cannot talk about things. Everyone is professional enough that if you /9"5 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 12 have a problem you call Cindy or talk to Joel, or the Mayor. We are all old enough where we should be able to talk and work things out and not have to fight. He never had a problem with any of the staff or Council. Mayor Ristow thanked Mr. Verch for coming and asked ifhe had any additional comments. Verch: The candidates were all supposed to be here at 8:00 a.m. One person showed up at 8:50 a.m. He has an advantage because this is on TV. If that person did watch is that fair to the rest? Mayor Ristow stated it was his intention to have everyone here so everyone would be fair. All we could do is ask the candidates to come. Mr. Verch stated it was not fair. The rest of us took the time to get up early on a Saturday to be here. 9:15 Joanne Payne Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? Payne: Farmington has been lack in commercial and industrial business. It is a good tax base that doesn't adversely affect the community. There are a few different options for funding that can be arranged, such as tax breaks, land deals. If the community was more open to having people develop here there would be more interest. Some people have had a very difficult time coming to the city. Whether it be with staff or the Council, they have gone elsewhere. Mayor Ristow: Maybe tax increment financing could be used and if you are agreeable to that could you explain what it is and why you would use it to help businesses? Payne: It is a program where if businesses want to come to Farmington, they put a proposal together with what business they want to bring to Farmington. The Council could discuss possible financing options, either a reduction in their taxes, or a reduction in their land buying situation, or some other deal where they would do something for the community. Councilmember Fogarty: In the past you have had many harsh words for some Councilmembers. How do you think you could put aside those differences and work with the Council? Fogarty: She and her husband campaigned at the Mayor's house before the election and they had a very long and interesting conversation. She told the Mayor that if she was elected, she didn't want to be in an argument all the time about issues. We need to look beyond what happened in the past and look toward the future. She feels a lot of people do not feel comfortable with the representation they were getting before the election. /96 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 13 That is what prompted nine candidates to run. She does not come with any agendas. She put her message out there and that is what got the votes. She has been harsh and critical. Part of that process was people were supporting her because she was willing to state that the residents weren't getting a voice, their opinions were being disregarded at neighborhood meetings and Council meetings. The message she ran on was that she would be an ear and a voice for them. She does not have any personal issues against anyone on the Council. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about trying to re-establish the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Payne: There has been a lot of rhetoric, hard feelings and grudges that need to be set aside. The situation with the city administrator needs to be dealt with and laid to rest. There has been way too much public comment about it. You can't constructively run the City Council and staff the way it should be with all the conflict going on right now. It is up to Council to decide what they want. That needs to be passed down to the city administrator and that should be passed down to the staff. With communication such a problem and issues between the Council and city administrator, that is not going to happen. With the staff trying to support him, it is causing a lot of friction that shouldn't be there. It needs to be put aside. Once that is done and the Council starts working together as a team for the best interest of the residents and listens to them, she thinks it would function just fine. With the city growing the way it is, that needs to happen now. Once a new Councilmember is appointed, a meeting needs to happen with all of you to discuss what the situation is with the city administrator, how to handle it, and get some control on it, and put something out to the voters that explains what the situation is. Council has not been allowed to say anything due to legal counsel advice, but that leaves a perception to the public that there are secrets or things being hidden. Until you can all agree as a united front, it is not going to stop. There are personal dislikes with people. I'm sure some of you don't like me very much, and that is fine. You have to set that aside and act as a team and put the personal dislikes away and try to remember who you are representing it. She discovered some of the Council's campaign issues were very much like her own. They have gotten away from what they originally wanted to do. Councilmember Soderberg: Would you describe a process that you would use to determine if the City Administrator should be dismissed or any city staff. Payne: When you have a problem with an employee, it is unfair and unjust to them without explaining your wants and needs and giving them an opportunity to correct any problems. Reviews are meant to review how an employee is doing. To offer them suggestions, to get them on the same page with what you want them to do and give them an opportunity to correct problems. That is the most key components to making an employee understand where their weaknesses are and what to improve on. By not sharing with them what your expectations are, or everyone's expectations on the Council being different leaves them confused. She understands there are privacy issues that cannot be made public. If an employee is comfortable with the fact of knowing what is put into their review, they could come forward and say what it is. Not everyone is perfect /9';:; Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 14 and not everyone can do the job to everyone's expectations. Put the expectations down with a timeframe to accomplish them and if they cannot accomplish that, she sees no reason not to let someone go. As long as you are performing your functions within the parameters set for you, then you are doing your job. If you're not and you're failing then it goes back to the Council or their supervisors to say you are not performing to the standards we need. That would be the time to discuss letting someone go. Councilmember Soderberg: I would like you to clarify on expectations. Would that be expectations from the Council as a body or expectations of Councilmembers individually? Payne: It is a good thing for everyone to have individual expectations for an employee. That way you are getting more of a broad base. When it comes down to a decision on what you are going to go to that employee with, you can all have your opinions but it should be as a united front. You all need to agree to the same things and everyone's voice is heard and that their problem is not being addressed. Mayor Ristow: There are always issues regarding transportation routes and safety issues. What would you suggest to make them better and what ideas would you propose to finance them? Payne: It will be a constant problem as we grow. When planning developments, roadways need to be a major part ofthat. There are signs at dead ends telling people it will be a future roadway. But what kind of roadway? Most people don't know what a minor collector is. They build their house and the road becomes a minor collector and they are not happy with the amount of traffic. That brings them to Council meetings to complain. When planning roadways, it needs to be looked at as far as how much traffic will be coming out of the development, what the roadways are going to be, where it needs to go. Safety issues need to be planned at the same time. As far as financing, any money that the city spends for safety for the residents is money well spent. As far as stop signs, the cost of those compared to the cost of a life is minimal. Some of the accesses that have been put in haven't been very well thought out as far as what it will do to the area. Mayor Ristow: Could you tell me how you feel about the city of Farmington's comp plan and how it is used? Payne: The comp plan is good. It gives us a view of what we want Farmington to become. When we deviate from that it disrupts the plan that was set forth in the beginning. When you get off track of where we should be, it affects the city negatively. As far as multi-housing units, they have gone up in extreme numbers that weren't in the comp plan as far as how many we were going to have, it causes problems with other services. Sometimes changes need to be made when looking 20 years down the road. The majority of the plan should be kept with, without exceeding too much with development. 11q Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 15 Councilmember Fogarty: At a recent Council meeting, Kevin Carroll told us that some of the new townhomes have been on demand. We have a high population of seniors that don't want the yard work and also young professionals. It sounds like you may disagree with that. Payne: It is good to have a diverse housing community so you are catering to the needs of a large majority but in moderation. It needs to be weighed evenly. There are very few apartment buildings in Farmington and very few rental units. Young people have to leave the community because there isn't enough rental property. There is going to be a demand for every type of housing unit. You have to keep in mind how much are we going to attract, how is it going to come in, and what kind of options and make it a broad base. The large parcels are also lacking. When talking about developing areas and traffic, that would be a nice location for people to not have so much of the traffic. It would also keep a lot of the green space. Councilmember Fogarty: As the city of Farmington continues to grow, the demands on our recreational facilities also grows. What are your plans for city recreational facilities? Payne: We need to invest money into an athletic center. Hosting events at athletic centers does bring in more traffic, which people don't like, but it does bring in additional money for businesses. The money would be well spent in increasing what we have to offer. There isn't a lot of things in the city for the middle school kids. For us to decide what they need, isn't always the best way. We need to get input from the kids as to what they would like to see and then try to make it a reality. Money is always an issue. Spending money on kids youth programs, you will not have objections from parents who have a place for their kids to go and feel safe and have activities for them to do. Present a referendum and let the voters decide what they want for their youth or send out some surveys. The ice arena has always been a pet peeve, when they stopped having ice year round. In the summer, why not do teen dances? There needs to be more youth oriented programs and we need to expand our park system. Councilmember Cordes: We increased the tax levy by approximately $270,000 to make up for the anticipated loss of state aid. Do you agree with that? If not, what else could we have done to make up for that loss? Payne: The state is in such disarray right now, it is better for the city to protect itselffirst. Ifwe do get the money, it needs to be discussed where we want that money to go. Should it be kept for the future? This state is in financial trouble and they will be for quite some time. The city needs to make sure we stay financially solvent. The way to do that is to address the problem before it happens instead of in hindsight. The city is right in taking a proactive approach to the fact we might be losing money and need to cover what we are doing, instead of after the fact and trying to sell it to people. Mayor Ristow thanked Mrs. Payne for coming and asked if she had any additional comments. /W. Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 16 Payne: She is not planning on going away if she is not appointed to the Council. She has two years and she will be back. She does feel strongly about this community and plans on staying for the long haul. She has children in the community and wants to see decisions made in their best interest. There might be times if she is not selected to be on the Council that she will be back. That just shows she is still interested and will continue to be interested. The Council recessed for a few minutes. 9:50 James Payne Councflmember Cordes: What are you thoughts on using general property taxes for street projects in Farmington? Payne: It would depend on the circumstances and whether special assessments could pay for it. Councflmember Fogarty: If you had an interest on sitting on the City Council, why did you not run in the last election? Payne: Because of the developments that have happened with the person that received the third highest votes and this process. He feels he is qualified as much as anyone else. He has some very good ideas and common sense and that is needed. Councflmember Soderberg: With the different policies and projects that come before the city can you be an open, independent thinking mind? Payne: Definitely. He doesn't have any agenda and has his own opinion. You would have to really convince him to change his mind. Mayor Ristow: how it is used. How do you feel about the city of Farmington's comp plan and Payne: The 2020 comp plan isn't being implemented the way it was supposed to be. The way the development is happening and the number oftownhomes is way over. We need to look at our road structure before we keep adding developments. We need to get our tax base with commercial businesses instead of residential taxes. It is hurting our schools with referendums. We need to stick to our 2020 comp plan. Mayor Ristow: There are always issues regarding transportation routes and safety issues. What would you suggest to make them better and what would you propose to finance them? Payne: The development should pay for the roads. There should be more input into developing north-south roads, instead of using the existing roads. Pilot Knob, Akin a{X) Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 17 Road and Hwy 3 are our only north-south routes. He doesn't think any thought has been put into putting new routes in. Mayor Ristow: He looks at 195tb as a collector road to move traffic east-west. How would you suggest the city pay for them, citywide, or just for the benefiting properties? Payne: He was under the impression it was going to be a county road. Would the county pay for it? Mayor Ristow stated the split is 65/35. The city still has a certain amount to cover. Do you believe the city should pick up that share as a whole or actual benefiting properties? Payne: There should be assessments to the developments it will affect. Councilmember Fogarty: As the city continues to grow, the demand on our current recreational facilities will also grow. What are your plans for recreation facilities? Payne: It is very important that we get a park complex into place before all the land is gone for development. The land has to be acquired now. It will be more expensive down the road. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about re-establishing the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Payne: It all starts with the City Council. If the Council cannot act as a team, it reflects on city staff. If city staff cannot do their jobs because of controversy on the City Council it affects the running of the city. Councilmember Cordes: The city increased the tax levy by approximately $270,000 in anticipation of state aid cuts. Do you agree with this and if not, what other mechanisms would you have used to make up for it? Payne: It agrees to a point. We will need that. He didn't agree with the fact that if it wasn't needed, it would be put into the city's general fund. He is not sure if the general fund is being spent wisely. Councilmember Fogarty: If you didn't think it should go into the city's general fund, what would you have done with those monies? Payne: He didn't know. Mayor Ristow stated it is the taxpayer's money. Would you propose giving it back to them? Mr. Payne replied that would have to be a discussion with the City Council. 010/ Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 18 Councilmember Soderberg: With the discussion in the media about the city administrator, would you describe a process you would use to determine if the city administrator or any staff person should be dismissed. Payne: He doesn't think the public has been educated as to what the problems might be with city staff. With the Council not working as a whole and the council controversy, it causes the city staff not to work as they should. He would need to be educated as to why things weren't working or why people on the Council didn't think things are working before he made a decision. Councilmember Soderberg: dismiss somebody? How would you get to the determination to Payne: It would have to be educated. No one seems to know what the problem seems to be. In his profession they are written up. If you are written up 3 times you are dismissed. You receive a warning to straighten your act up. Mayor Ristow thanked Mr. Payne for coming and asked ifhe had any additional comments. Mr. Payne did not have any further comments. 10:00 a.m. Nicholas Roberts Councilmember Fogarty: In talking with your references, you have just recently started running a company. Running a company can be very time consuming as can sitting on the City Council. Do you find these two things will be in conflict? Roberts: No, because currently he is a member ofthe HRA. When he made the decision to apply for Council, you have to draw the line. He made the decision he wanted to devote all his time to this. He does travel, but it has not been a conflict. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about re-establishing the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Roberts: The team concept is very big. He has worked with it in his job. There has to be lines of communication and an open door policy where people can get along. There has to be trust between Council and city members and the boards and commissions. Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? Roberts: With commercial, he has gone through that with relocation of his business. Being on the HRA he has had a great deal of exposure dealing with the industrial park. As far as funding, it can be a gray area. It is beneficial to help companies that want to come in. There should be mechanisms in place to help a start-up business. You need to aro Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 19 work with the city to come up with a plan. There should be something in place, but he couldn't answer as to what that should be. Mayor Ristow: you would use it. Could you explain what tax increment financing is and how Roberts: Being on the HRA for three years, he is not familiar with all the terms. The HRA is going through his first TIF with a proposed sale within the industrial park. He knows there are certain things with having a certain number of employees. Mayor Ristow: You are on the HRA and you will be making a decision what kind of mechanisms you will be using. With all due respect, I would think you would be looking at what kind of building, number of employees, and what kind of income it will generate back. Roberts: At that time I would ask for all the information once we do know what type of funding the company does want. He would talk to the other board members to find out what their experience has been and meet with the appropriate people. Mayor Ristow: Since you have been on the HRA, do you think the concept of how the industrial park has been established to take some of the tax burden off the residents has been a good idea? Roberts: Taking the tax burden off any resident is a good idea. But then you get into that gray area of do you not want to allow a good business to come into the city. You are not going to make everyone happy and you have to walk a fine line. You have to have some aid to businesses to help them get established. Councilmember Soderberg: With the policies and projects that come before the city, can you be an independent mind? Roberts: Yes. Going back to the team concept and his experience on the HRA, each member of a Councilor committee has a specialty and experience that everyone can draw upon. Councilmember Soderberg: With the discussions at citizen comments, and in the paper, can you describe a process you would use to determine whether or not any city staff should be dismissed? Roberts: There has to be a unanimous decision for any employee to be dismissed. If one person does have a strong opinion either way, you need to talk to each other to see if they can be addressed. You may not like an individual, you have to get through it and accept someone for who they are and respect their abilities. Are they doing their job? Councilmember Fogarty: If you are interested in sitting on the City Council, why did you not run in the last general election? dC/a Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 20 Roberts: He felt he could not devote his time to an effective campaign. Councilmember Fogarty: As the city continues to grow the demands on current recreational facilities will also grow. What are your plans for city recreational facilities? Roberts: Recreational facilities are very important. It is great for the residents to come together. There is a big demand for that and he would be in favor of working for that. Councilmember Cordes: Do you support the city's additional tax levy of approximately $270,000 in the 2003 budget to make up for the anticipated loss of state aid? Are there any other things we could have done differently? Roberts: He does support it. We have very prosperous years before two years ago. Unfortunately, you cannot expect one organization to foot the bill for budget shortfalls. Councilmember Cordes: What are your thoughts on using general property taxes rather than special assessments for street projects in Farmington? Roberts: At the last Council meeting, some people brought up some good points. It was an intriguing idea to split the burden between everyone. Some people have bigger portions of land that might get assessed more. Mayor Ristow: We have some rural areas such as Flagstaff that are gravel roads. Do you feel it would be fair for people who live on a gravel road to pay for someone who lives on a blacktop road to pay for their seal coating? Roberts: If anyone is traveling through Farmington, you are going to drive on roads that will be seal coated. If you are looking to blacktop where someone has 10 acres of property, you are in that gray area. Seal coat projects are not huge sums of money compared to someone who has 10 acres that has to pay for blacktop. Mayor Ristow: You do know without an assessment anyone with a tax-exempt property would not be charged. Roberts: You are not going to make everyone happy. A decision has to be made that will upset some people. Mayor Ristow: Could you tell me how you feel about the city of Farmington's comp plan and how it is used? Roberts: It's good, however there was an area where there was some land sold and the comp plan changed and he was stuck having to deal with the ramifications. We have to have something to work to. We have so much potential right now so it is good to have a plan to work to. dO'! Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 21 Mayor Ristow: There are always issues regarding transportation routes and safety issues. What would you suggest to make them better and what would you propose to finance them? Roberts: You have to look at the overall plan to figure out where we are going to be. As far as paying for it, he doesn't know. The burden is split between different bodies. You have to look at what the transportation route will do and who it will affect. Mayor Ristow thank Mr. Roberts for coming and asked ifhe had any additional comments. Roberts: Thanked Council for the opportunity to be interviewed and wished the Council luck. 10:20 Ben Barker Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about trying to re-establish the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? Barker: Being on the Planning Commission they work with staff on a regular basis. As a Councilmember you also need to have better communication and addressing some of the issues. There will be some disagreements, and sometimes you have to agree to disagree. Staffhas to be comfortable to come to Council and say here is what is going on. You have to figure out where the breakdown in communication is. You have to be open-minded to the issue and move forward for the betterment of the city. Councilmember Soderberg: With the policies and projects we face on the Council, can you be an independent mind? Barker: Most definitely. When issues come forward you evaluate it and base everything off the facts. He is employed as a state investigator and the purpose is to gather the facts and make an assessment off the facts. He has been an official for youth hockey for 17 years. You have a rule book and adjusting the situation as it goes. You should always be open-minded, objective, and fair. Councilmember Fogarty: Last fan the city placed a moratorium on some property south of Hwy 50 and west of Denmark. Did you agree with that decision and would you have done the same thing? If not, why? Barker: He did agree with the moratorium. The purpose is to make sure that property is developed correctly and is planned wisely. The city received a grant for $40,000. We only have one opportunity and we need to do it correctly. We need to establish a plan and present it to the landowners and work with them in terms of what they are looking at and find out what the residents want. When businesses come in, they can look at it and say this will meet our needs. o?QS" Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 22 Mayor Ristow: how it is used? Can you tell me how you feel about the city's comp plan and Barker: A lot of work was put into the plan. The Planning Commission uses it on a regular basis as a tool. Over time, things need to be addressed and changed. The Council and Planning Commission have been doing that. Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? Barker: The city needs to look at growth. There is the business park, and an industrial park. Residents want businesses to come in so they do not have to go out of town. To attract different companies, you have the HRA, city staff, the Chamber of Commerce. There are different aspects such as TIF for funding. Councilmember Cordes: In 2003 the city increased the tax levy by $270,000 in anticipation of state aid cuts. Do you agree with this? If not, what other mechanisms would you have sought to deal with this? Barker: He did agree with the levy. Council had several options, to leave it alone, increase it to cover a portion, or increase it to cover all of the loss. By the Council making the decision, they protected the city. Councilmember Cordes: What are your thoughts on using general property taxes for street projects in Farmington rather than special assessments? Barker: It depends on the project. Currently the cost is split. If you live on the road you will be assessed for a portion of the cost. The rest comes out of the road and bridge fund. That is a good approach. Councilmember Soderberg: There has been a lot of controversy at citizen comments and in the newspaper. Describe a process you would use to determine if a staff member should be dismissed. Barker: He would look at the facts and address them. If something has been happening several times, has any action been taken to remedy it? If it hasn't been remedied why not? What needs to be done? You need to address the issue and attack it head on. With the issue of the city administrator, what are the facts? Does it rise to the occasion of termination, or are there other avenues? He would go in with an open mind. As a Councilmember he would say let's spell out all the facts, address the issue, and make a determination as a Council and move forward. da Council Minutes (Regular) February 8,2003 Page 23 Councilmember Soderberg: When you say remedy the issue, would there be an opportunity for the staff member to make corrections or just look at what has occurred in the past in making a determination? Barker: He is open-minded. He will look at all the facts and see what is appropriate. If it is a case where there is an opportunity to remedy things, he will give that opportunity. His background is to be fair and objective and open-minded and open to all options. Councilmember Soderberg: Given your position in the last election and your placement there why should we appoint you to the Council? Barker: He ran because he wanted to represent the citizens. He ran the hardest campaign he could. They were adopting a little girl, so he was not around for half the campaign, he was out of state. That was his choice. He wound up in fifth, but he did the best he could. He feels he could still represent the residents by being open-minded, a good listener and addressing the issues that need to be addressed. He ran in 2000 and thought he did fairly well against two strong incumbents. He had the support of the residents. This year he did the best he could with limited constraints. If appointed, he is looking at running off the same platform as when he ran in 2000 and this year. Representing the residents, listening to them and doing what is best for Farmington. He does it on the Planning Commission and when he was on the City Hall Task Force. Mayor Ristow stated that was two years ago when you ran and you were the third highest vote-getter. Councilmember Fogarty: As the city continues to grow, the demands on current recreational facilities will also grow. What are your plans for city recreational facilities? Barker: First we need to look at the ones we do have. Make sure they are budgeted and kept up to date. Farmington needs to expand them, whether it is a community facility in the middle of Farmington or updating what we currently have. Mayor Ristow: There are always issues regarding transportation routes and safety issues. What would you suggest to make them better and what would you propose to finance them? Barker: Transportation is a tricky subject because you are dealing not only with the city but also with the state. If it is a county or state road you need to negotiate. Part of the comp plan is a 2030 thoroughfare. We need to address the issue and work with the county and Empire Township on 195th Street. We need to meet with surrounding communities and present the plans and try to mesh together. Residents don't want more traffic on their streets. There are different things to help control it. One of the best things Council did was place a 4-way stop on 187th and Embers Avenue. The residents came forward, and Council addressed it. de; '/ Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 24 Mayor Ristow: As you are aware we have other agencies of government to deal with as far as remedies. If they come back not in agreement with us we have to adjust to that. Barker: He realized the traffic engineer also has guidelines. At times you need to be more vocal when explaining the process to residents. Mayor Ristow: Could you explain what tax increment financing is and how you would use it? Barker: It is a tool used to bring in businesses. For a certain amount of time the taxes are offset. You need to look at ifthe development is the best thing for Farmington. Developers are coming in wanting so much financing. If you wait, the demand is still there, but the funding is not so high. It has to be careful planning. Mayor Ristow thanked Mr. Barker for coming and asked ifhe had any additional comments. Mr. Barker did not have any further comments. 10:40 a.m. Bill Fitch Councilmember Soderberg: On your application you indicated you had experience in dealing with the same or similar issues that Council is dealing with at the current time. Could you identify specifically what those issues are? Fitch: Growth is the number one issue. Some think we are growing too fast, some think not fast enough. Some want commercial, some what residential, some just want development. This year the city has a budget surplus. In 2004 he guesses the city's finances are going to look a lot different than today, because there will not be a surplus. One of the issues in 1995 there was a $2 million shortfall that was identified at the end of the year. Council had a 4 or 5 year plan to make that up. These are some of the issues that were quite similar. Councilmember Fogarty: Back in 1998, you withdrew from the City Council race and you were quoted in the paper with no retraction the following week. You were quoted as saying "It is all I can stands, I can't stands no more. You went on to say maybe I was naive. I like politics, but I hate playing politics. I am sick of being the bad guy and nobody knows what it is like until they're sitting in that seat." What has changed? Fitch: In 1995 he had a lot of things happening personally and was making a huge career change that would take a lot more of his time. We had gone through issues with the Catholic Church and the school board and at that point after four years he had his fill. Today, a lot of different things have settled down in his life. As far as being the bad guy, d0t6 Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 25 it is not always the popular place to be. You have to be strong enough to make the decisions that need to be made for the right reasons. Councilmember Cordes: What are your thoughts on using ad valorum or general property taxes for street projects in Farmington versus special assessments? Fitch: In 1997 or 1998 we made a decision on Pilot Knob to do an assessment. At that time, we also talked about policy for major roads and arterial roads that we should continue to use a half mile either side for special assessments. It saved the city $1.2 million to do it that way. In the Pilot Knob situation it was geared toward development along Pilot Knob. Right now, his vote would be for Ash Street and Elm Street to do a special assessment. Ad valorum taxes also affect the city's bond rating and the borrowing capacity of the city. Mayor Ristow: There are always issues regarding transportation routes and safety issues. What would you suggest to make them better and what ideas would you propose to finance them? Fitch: The transportation corridors, depending upon the type of corridor, depends on the type of funding source. We would have to use the road and bridge fund and MSA funds, and special assessments. The special assessment policy has been started on Pilot Knob and in all fairness to the residents, that policy should continue. Safety is always a concern. There were some safety issues on Akin Road. One of the things are speed limits. When he goes through other communities and sees they can take a 4-lane road and bring the speed limit down from 55 to 45, and nothing has changed except for the location of residences, he doesn't understand why Farmington cannot. He doesn't know if we don't have the same pull when we go to MnDOT, to say why can't we make our roads safer for our citizens based upon this information. Some speed limits are set by state statutes. Some of the safety issues are people and enforcement. There isn't always as much time for enforcement because they are busy with accident or other calls. It all comes to personal responsibility. You are responsible for yourself as a citizen to make the road safe for yourself and other people. Government can do only so much to force people to act like they should. People have to want to or do it out of respect for others. Most ofthe roads improvements have made the roads safer. Councilmember Soderberg: With the different policies and projects that come before Council, can you be an independent mind? Fitch: Certainly, he always has been. He look at it based on the value of what is presented. He votes with his mind and not with his heart. To vote with your mind is to take all the facts objectively and different options and look at it independently. If you are making the decision on your own accord in your own reasoning, people can always say there is a block here or there. That becomes immaterial. People always accuse you of blocking together with people even though you have thought about the process for years. d09' Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 26 Councilmember Soderberg: There has been a lot of controversy about the city administrator. Would you describe a process you would use to determine whether any city staff should be dismissed? Fitch: It is not Council's place to dismiss anyone but the City Administrator. His determination has been if there is a problem with an employee try to rectify it through different means such as talking or formal reprimand. If you don't get the response and you aren't getting what you need from that person after a couple of chances, then you need to make a decision. Does this person fit in to the organization as a whole. If they cannot carry out their duties, then you have to make the hard decision. It is an unfortunate one to have to make, but it does need to be made at times. Councilmember Fogarty: In the past you have been able to run an effective campaign and gain a seat on the Council. If you were interested in sitting on the Council again, why did you not run in the last general election? Fitch: The only thing he ever expressed was ifthe Council was going to an appointment or interview process, he would throw his hat in the ring. He would be glad to do it for a couple of years. As he said in 1995, he wasn't here to be a career politician and he doesn't believe in it today. Councilmember Fogarty: So you are only interested in filling in for the next two years? Fitch: Yes, that would strictly be my interest. Councilmember Cordes: For 2003 the city increased the tax levy by approximately $270,000 in anticipation of state aid cuts. Do you agree with this and if not, what else could we have done to deal with the situation? Fitch: You can do that in anticipation. Overall, that was not a lot of money. That fund should not be touched unless there is some dire emergency in this city that requires the use of those funds. Those are taxpayer funds. When he was on the Council, everyone always said spend the money like it's yours. I said no, you want me to spend it like it's yours, because I can spend my money any way I want, and that is still the way I feel. Even though the city made a conscious decision to increase the levy $270,000, it is up to the Council to make sure the money doesn't get spent until the need is actually determined for that money. There was roughly a $400,000 surplus carrying over into this year. That gives you $670,000. If the cutbacks are only $300,000 there should be $370,000 left in the fund at the end ofthe year. He is not worried about 2003. 2004 when the surpluses are gone is the year you will have to worry about. That is his personal opinion. Councilmember Cordes: How would you go about trying to re-establish the "team concept" between city staff and more so with the City Council? dlO Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 27 Fitch: We always had a good working relationship with Council and city staff. In business or government the number one thing is communication. The second is trust. We have to trust that when staff does something, they did it in the best interest of the citizens. And that they looked at alternatives, or at least bring to the Council, alternatives. The Council has the final decision. If you feel staffs decision is not correct, you have the power to overrule them. It then comes down to trust that the person telling you what the three options were and why they came to that conclusion is right in your heart. And that the best interest of the city is there, and not personal interest. Mayor Ristow: Could you tell me how you feel about the city of Farmington's comp plan and how it is used? Fitch: He thinks the comp plan has been put into place and we are a little ahead of the comp plan. Over the last couple years we have not had commercial growth in our city like we should. Ifwe try to live on residential growth alone, we will be in trouble. We have to continually look at what type of growth are we fostering? Up to now, a lot of it has been residential, and we have not concentrated enough on the commercial aspect. Without that, the city will be a bedroom community and eventually we will have much more serious ramifications budget wise living off of permit money. Mayor Ristow: you would use it. Could you explain what tax increment financing is and how Fitch: Tax increment financing was started by the legislature. TIF should be used primarily for commercial growth. He doesn't believe in using it for residential growth. TIF was a vehicle where you could put in the infrastructure and the land as a city and it would allow you to recover the cost of your infrastructure that you put in. TIF is only part of the tool. You have to go out and sell the city and sell what the benefits of moving to Farmington are. We have the ability and population to attract the commercial end. There is a moratorium on some areas for development, but studies should not go on for two or three years. We need a much stronger commercial growth. Mayor Ristow: What are your thoughts on commercial and industrial growth and what mechanisms of funding would you suggest if there is no infrastructure in place? Fitch: That is the spirit of what TIF was for. It wasn't to give them a free ride. Mayor Ristow thanked Mr. Fitch for coming and asked ifhe had any additional comments? Fitch: The questions were very fair and clear. He wished the Council good luck. 4. SELECTION PROCESS Mayor Ristow asked Council what the process should be. Councilmember Cordes stated she would like to take the weekend to sort out her thoughts. If it is agreeable to everyone, c::; // Council Minutes (Regular) February 8, 2003 Page 28 discuss the appointment on Monday night. Councilmember Soderberg stated that is what we discussed last Monday, that today was set aside for interviews and Monday we would get into the discussion and appointment. Given the limited amount of time on Monday, we need to pare down the field significantly. He suggested each Councilmember come Monday without any discussion and put forth 4 or 5 candidates. Of the 4 or 5, ifthere is an individual put forward more than others, talk about the top 2 or 3. It could identify someone that we could agree on. Councilmember Fogarty asked if they should come with an order of who they would like. Councilmember Soderberg stated not a preference order, that could jade our own thinking. Just 4 or 5 candidates. We should agree today to determine how we are going to do that. That goes back to the question at the beginning. How do we intend to proceed after the interviews? Mayor Ristow stated he was looking at what was done in the past after other interviews. We went through the names and determined if they had any interest. Councilmember Soderberg stated it would be sort of a ballot. I could give Joel 4 or 5 candidates that I would like to put forward in this process. Each of us does that independently. Not a ranked order. Councilmember Fogarty stated Joel could state here are 3 candidates you all agree on. Councilmember Soderberg stated that narrows the field down so we keep it on a positive note. We could talk about the positive attributes ofthe candidates. He would like to keep things upbeat and positive and moving forward. If there is one we can agree on, that is all the better for the city. That moves toward your question, Lacelle, of re-establishing teamwork. Attorney Jamnik stated Council should agree on how many names they are going to bring forward. Councilmember Soderberg suggested each Councilmember bring back 5 names. Of the 5 we will take the top 3 that are identified. Attorney Jamnik wanted to make sure Council had an agreement as to how many you will be thinking of over the weekend of putting into that higher level versus the lower level. It makes no difference as to how many, just so there is an agreement. Councilmember Soderberg stated if we bring 5, it has the potential of identifying a standout. Mayor Ristow stated we will bring those with us Monday night at 5:00 p.m. and we will be televised. Attorney Jamnik stated the first 5 minutes will be us tabulating. When I collect the sheets of paper from you, make sure your names are on them, as that will be public data and we will release that. Mayor Ristow asked if 5 :00 works for everyone. All Council agreed. 5. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 11: 10 a.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, 7~rr7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant ~/d COUNCIL MINUTES SPECIAL February 10, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 5:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Ristow, Cordes, Fogarty, Soderberg None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Ed Shukle, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Nick Roberts, John Fortney, Todd Larson, Jeff Krueger, Kim Soderberg, Ben Barker, Randy Oswald 4. APPRO~AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to approve the Agenda. Mayor Ristow stated, on Saturday we discussed a couple concepts. His intent with the concept was different ways we were going to do things. He thought about it and out of all due respect for the nine candidates, he felt the best way to do it was to come up with one candidate. He didn't think it was appropriate to put it on a list. Ifwe want to write one candidate down each and turn it into Joel, that is fine. He felt out of all due respect, he did not want to debate a higher level and lower level. He thought it was fair to tell all the candidates they are at one level. At the end of the day we have to pick one, so just to give you my intentions that is what I would like to see. Councilmember Soderberg stated the idea is to come up with one candidate. To end up with one, he would like to see the Council be united on that candidate, whatever candidate that is. To winnow the field down, was the idea behind the suggestion made on Saturday, so we do not have to be here and put one candidate forward and debate whether or not that is a good candidate, or why I don't like this particular candidate. I want to keep it positive. So the idea was to put forward a number of candidates because all of us . , have said we are not locked into a single candidate. If that's true, then let's put forward a couple of candidates. We can change the number, but I think we need to put forward more than one to pare the field down. Five was the number that was agreeable to everyone on Saturday and it certainly will identify some candidates all of us can live with, that all of us can agree on. c?/3 Council Minutes (Special) February 10, 2003 Page 2 Mayor Ristow stated he was agreeable to leave and think about it and watch the film. I watched it four times. Our City Attorney pointed out you will have a higher class and lower class and I'm not going to do that. They are all good candidates. I would like to see them all have a seat, but we only have one seat. The bottom line is, at the end of the day we are only going to appoint one. Councilmember Soderberg stated that is true. All I want to do is winnow it down. Councilmember Cordes stated she also watched the tape over and over again. It was kindly broadcast numerous times. Going through my notes and able to watch the rebroadcast of the interview I thought about it too over the weekend. I have my one candidate. If the rest of you agree with that, fine, if not, that is fine. I don't want to be in the position of pointing out strong or weaker points of people, that is not what I do, and I don't want to do that. I have my one candidate. I am more than happy to turn it in. If it is agreed upon fine, if not, I am ok with that. Councilmember Fogarty stated she is confused as to where we will go if we don't agree on that first candidate. Mayor Ristow stated we could start with nominations. If you want to turn it in on paper, or say it out loud, it doesn't matter to me. I'd just as soon say it out loud and get it over with. Let's cut to the chase and get this thing over with. It's been long enough. People are waiting for a representative. Councilmember Soderberg stated what he is hearing is that you are locked into one candidate. Mayor Ristow replied no, I'd like to see all nine of them, but we can't. We need one candidate. There is no higher level, there is no lower level, they are all good candidates. Councilmember Soderberg stated by putting forward three, four, or five, doesn't make one candidate higher or lower. I'm not suggesting we make an order of preference. We had agreed to it on Saturday that this was a process we would use to thin the field down. Mayor Ristow stated we would look at it Saturday. Councilmember Soderberg stated it was a process we agreed to. Councilmember Fogarty stated it is a process we agreed to. Ifwe want to change the process, I'll respect that, and we can change the process. But - I want to make sure I'm understanding you clearly. You've decided that there is one candidate you would like to appoint, both of you. Mayor Ristow and Councilmember Cordes agreed. Councilmember Fogarty stated if we disagree, I'm confused. Is there another candidate you would both find acceptable, or is that it? There is only one candidate that you will discuss and no one else you're saying is acceptable. That is what we're trying to decide that if we don't happen to agree, four of us or three of us, that this one person should be appointed, what next? Does that mean that no one else is acceptable to the two of you, and no one else is open for discussion? Councilmember Soderberg's suggestion of cutting it down to three would at least give us an opening and maybe there is one candidate three of us would agree on. Maybe there is one candidate four of us would agree on if we open it up to at least two or three choices versus one. We may have a very hard time, if we each put in one, of all of us agreeing. So I am understanding, we have one person and no one else is acceptable to you? Mayor Ristow stated that is what it will end up at the end of the line. Weare going to come up with one candidate. Weare not going to come up with four, five, three, or two. Councilmember Fogarty stated she understands that, but you haven't answered my ;;? I </ Council Minutes (Special) February 10, 2003 Page 3 question. Is that what I'm understanding is that there is one candidate you find acceptable and the rest you do not want to appoint, period. Mayor Ristow stated I want to cut to the chase, let's get it over with. Councilmember Fogarty asked Councilmember Cordes if she was feeling the same way and no one else is even going to be discussed? Councilmember Cordes stated she made it very clear. If you three agree on someone else, I'm fine with that, but I have one candidate that I support. Councilmember Fogarty stated then there is no other point in submitting one name or saying one name, because if you two are not going to consider any of the other eight candidates acceptable, then you're right. Then we'll just cut to the chase. Mayor Ristow stated let's get this over with. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Appointment of Councilmember Mayor Ristow asked do you want to have a nomination, or write it down, or what do you want to do? Councilmember Cordes stated she would make a motion. Mayor Ristow stated ok, I am open for nominations. Councilmember Cordes stated I make a motion to appoint Mr. Bill Fitch as Councilmember to fill the vacant seat. MOTION by Cordes, second by Ristow to appoint Mr. Bill Fitch as Councilmember. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes. Voting against: Fogarty, Soderberg. MOTION FAILED. Mayor Ristow asked Attorney Jamnik to read what happens in the case of a tie, in case anyone doesn't know according to Minnesota State Statutes. Attorney Jamnik stated under Minnesota Statute 412.02 in the case of a tie, the Council is deadlocked on the appointment, the Mayor makes the appointment. Councilmember Soderberg stated so we have eight other candidates and we are not going to consider any of those eight? Mayor Ristow stated I make the appointment. We're deadlocked. Councilmember Soderberg stated we are not deadlocked, we have eight other candidates. Mayor Ristow stated we have a tie to break. Councilmember Soderberg stated we have eight other candidates. Mayor Ristow asked Attorney Jamnik, what is the protocol? Attorney Jamnik stated it is really for the Council to decide whether you want to go through another eight motions and deadlock two-two on each of them, but eventually as you go through those motions and you remain two-two, then the statute will be operable, if the Council wants to do that. This motion did not pass. There are another eight candidates that could potentially have motions if you want to go through that. Mayor Ristow asked if there are any more nominations. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to nominate Joanne Payne. Voting for: Fogarty, Soderberg. Voting against: Ristow, Cordes. MOTION FAILED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to nominate Todd Larson. Voting for: Fogarty, Soderberg. Voting against: Ristow, Cordes. MOTION FAILED. QJI5 Council Minutes (Special) February 10, 2003 Page 4 MOTION by Soderberg to nominate Nick Roberts. Mayor Ristow called for a second. Councilmember Fogarty stated she is not going to playa game. Motion died for lack of a second. MOTION by Soderberg to nominate Randy Oswald. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Soderberg stated it seems to me Mr. Mayor that you have made up your mind, that you have deceived the entire city repeatedly in that you did not have a candidate in mind. Both of you have made numerous statements that there was not a single candidate that you had in mind for that appointment. Councilmember Fogarty pointed out Bill Fitch did not follow protocol on Saturday, he really didn't. Mayor Ristow said so what do you want me to do about it? Councilmember Fogarty stated I disagree completely that you would want to appoint someone who couldn't follow simple protocol. We asked four things from our candidates. We asked them to fill out an application, attach a resume, have it in by the 31 st of January, and show up at 8:00 on Saturday. Mayor Ristow asked staff if there were any calls from anyone on Saturday and if they all agreed they would be there at 8:00. Staffreplied Bill Fitch stated he had something else he had to attend and would be here as soon as he could. There was one other candidate who also said they could not be here until 9:00, but did make arrangements to be here at 8:00. Mayor Ristow asked if Councilmember Soderberg had any more comments. Councilmember Soderberg stated obviously you have chosen to deceive this city and you are going to do whatever it is you want to do. Mayor Ristow stated that is your opinion. I don't look at it that way. Councilmember Soderberg stated it is my opinion and I would venture to guess that it is the opinion of everyone that has watched the proceedings since back in October. You have told the viewing audience and you have told the audience in attendance, and you have told people in private that you don't have an agenda and you don't have a particular candidate in mind. Mayor Ristow stated and I don't. Councilmember Soderberg stated you just lied to me again. Mayor Ristow stated don't call me a liar. Councilmember Soderberg stated you just lied. Mayor Ristow stated I'm not lying. You sat here and you asked nine candidates, you wanted independent thinkers. Councilmember Soderberg stated that's right. Mayor Ristow stated ok, I'm an independent thinker. You're not going to change my mind. I heard candidates out there say I'm going to do it, we may not have an agreeable Council, but this is the way it was. We took the candidates, they're there and we had to choose from them and that's what I'm doing. Councilmember Soderberg stated the public can see you for what you are. Mayor Ristow stated you're exactly right. You have your opinion and I have mine. Councilmember Soderberg stated you have actually driven a rift into this Council that will not be healed. Councilmember Cordes stated I don't think this has driven the rift, that's all I'm going to say. Councilmember Soderberg stated it certainly has. I attempted to bring it together die, Council Minutes (Special) February 10, 2003 Page 5 to find some consensus here and you absolutely refused. Councilmember Cordes stated after you tore it apart. Ok, Jerry, make the appointment. Mayor Ristow asked Attorney Jamnik ifhe has any other suggestions. Attorney Jamnik replied, no, Mayor, it would be appropriate at this time for you to make the appointment. Mayor Ristow asked ifhe needed to do it in writing according to statute. Attorney Jamnik replied no, just state it into the record and the appointment would be valid. Mayor Ristow appointed Bill Fitch to serve the term of the vacant seat. Attorney J amnik stated Mr. Fitch will be eligible to take the Oath of Office at any time. If he wants to take it before the next Council meeting, that would be appropriate, or he can take it at the next Council meeting. But he does have to take it before he sits at the Council table. Mayor Ristow stated if he refuses, then we go to something else, correct? Attorney J amnik stated that is correct. b) Set Board and Commissions Interview Date - Administration The interviews were set for Saturday, February 15, beginning at 7:00 a.m. There are 26 applicants for the various seats. The last one would be at 1 :30 p.m. Councilmember Soderberg stated he would have to leave before the end of the interviews. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Jeff Krueger, 5324 186th Street, stated he thought this whole process stinks. I think you two ought to be ashamed of yourselves. If you had any type of self-respect or any conscience. . . Mayor Ristow stated you are out of order. Mr. Krueger replied no, I'm not. Mayor Ristow stated according to our by-laws, I don't have to sit here and take that. youtre out of order. So please take your seat. Mayor Ristow asked Attorney Jamnik if he was correct. Attorney Jamnik replied it is the ruling of the chair. Mayor Ristow stated he is not going to sit here and take that. Mr. Krueger asked how am lout of order? Mayor Ristow stated you are out of order. We have a set of by-laws. Mr. Krueger stated you told nine people that we had an opportunity to be in this, and you didn't give a crap about anyone of us. Mayor Ristow stated you are out of order Mr. Krueger. Dan, (Police Chief Siebenaler) do you want to. . . Mr. Krueger stated I'll sit down, Dan. Mr. Nick Roberts, 5597 180th Street W, stated if the city knew one person wasn't going to make it until 9:00, it would have been fair to everyone, that everyone postpone the starting date to 9:00. Whether someone had something going on or not, who knows? But because of the sensitivity ofthis whole process, it would have been more fair for everyone to start the interviews at 9:00. I understand schedules come up but I think that would have been the fair and right thing to do for everybody. 7. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE d?/7 Council Minutes (Special) February 10, 2003 Page 6 8. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 5: 17 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, // -c :7.~~ n-7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant ~/~ '76 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: M C'l d C' . . ~ L ayor, OunCI members an Ity AdmInIstrator FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Fire Department DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department New Member Committee has completed the process of selecting the additional two members approved in the 2003 budget. DISCUSSION As required within the bylaws ofthe department, new membership selections are subjected to the approval of Council. The two members selected for Council consideration are: Adam Fischer Rick Stevenson The above applicants have successfully completed all steps of the selection process. Pending approval, the above applicants will join us on March 10,2003. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the appointment recommendation for Adam Fischer and Rick Stevenson effective March 10,2003. Respectfully submitted, A~--. ~'-C.R:.~ ~:..-.,-) Ken Kuchera Fire Chief cP)'1 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us 7e, TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator ~ <. FROM: Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for an Automated Refuse Packer and Chassis - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: February 18,2003 INTRODUCTION The 2003 Budget provides for the purchase of an automated refuse packer and chassis for Solid Waste. The City Council needs to approve the plans and specifications and authorize an advertisement for bids for an automatic refuse packer and chassis. DISCUSSION Since the estimated cost of purchasing an automated refuse packer and chassis will exceed $50,000.00, the City will need to advertise for bids and receive sealed bids. Staffhas prepared the plans and specifications and an advertisement for bids for the purchase of an automated refuse packer and chassis. BUDGET IMPACT The adopted 2003 Solid Waste budget identifies $185,000 for the purchase of a new automated refuse packer and chassis. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the plans and specifications and authorizing the advertisement of bids for the purchase of an automated refuse packer and chassis. 12es ectfullYjZ Sitted, ~ I Jd2-/7 ~. ~ Randy Dis ad, Parks and Recreation Director cc: Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor clc:;> 0 RESOLUTION NO. R -03 APPROVE SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS SOLID WASTE - TRUCK CHASSIS with FULLY AUTOMATED REFUSE COLLECTION BODY Pursuant to due c all and notice t hereof, a regular meeting 0 f t he City Council 0 f t he City 0 f Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of February, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution. WHEREAS, specifications have been prepared for the following proposed equipment: Truck Chassis with Fully Automated Refuse Collection Body ; and, WHEREAS, such plans and specifications are now before the Council for its consideration; and, WHEREAS, funding for the truck with Fully Automated Refuse Collection Body has been approved in the 2003 Budget. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Said specifications are hereby approved. 2. The Parks and Recreation Director is authorized to insert in the Farmington Independent and Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids for such equipment and that bids shall be received by the City until 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at which time they shall be publicly opened and read aloud. They will then be considered by the City Council. No bid shall be considered unless accompanied by a bid bond, certified check or cash deposit equal to at least five percent (5%) of the amount ofthe bid. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of February, 2003. Mayor Attested to the _ day of ,2003. SEAL City Administrator c:J;(1 Advertisement for Bids Sealed bids will be received by the City of Farmington, Minnesota, in the City Hall at 325 Oak Street until 10:00 A.M. on Wednesday, March 12,2003 at which time they will publicly open and read aloud for the furnishing of all labor, materials and else necessary for the following: Mechanized Refuse Collection Vehicle including: (1) Truck Chassis with fully automated, side arm loading garbage refuse packer and correlated appurtenances. Plans and specifications, proposal forms and contract documents may be seen at the office ofthe City Clerk, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, Minnesota, 55024. Each bid shall be accompanied by a bidder's bond naming the City of Farmington as obligee, certified check payable to the Clerk of the City of Farmington, or a cash deposit equal to at least five percent (5%) of the amount of the bid, which shall be forfeited to the City in event that the bidder fails to enter into a contract. The City Council reserves the right to retain the deposits of the three lowest bidders for a period not to exceed 90 days after the date and time set for the opening of bids. No bids may be withdrawn for a period of ninety (90) days a fter the date and time set for the opening of bids. Payment for work will be by cash or check. Contractors desiring a copy of the plans and specifications and proposal forms may be obtain them from the office of the City of Farmington Parks and Recreation Department. The City Council reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive irregularities and informalities therein and further reserves the right to award the contract to the best interests of the City. The bids will be awarded in the best interest of the City. Randy Distad Parks and Recreation Director To be published: Construction Bulletin: 2/28/03 Farmington Independent: 2/27/03 ~O? 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, City Administrator f: f FROM: , Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Capital Outlay DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION The 2003 Budget provides for the acquisition of new computers. DISCUSSION There are 14 computers being purchased. Twelve will replace computers with obsolete operating software such as Windows 95 which is no longer supported by Microsoft. The remaining three are needed for new staff. The new computers will provide greater functionality to the end user. BUDGET IMPACT The 2003 Budget allows $22,365 for computers. The actual cost is within the budgeted amount. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, .'<--'\ , .1 -... /1," , I ',)r'" /,:" , ~ , /' /,/j /i /1 ' 'l,,(&" ,,' ",(IV' t" Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director C' Q>QJ3 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us 7e f{,~ TO: Mayor, Councilmember, City Administrator FROM: Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation Department Capital Outlay DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION The 2003 Budget provides for the acquisition of a pickup truck for the Parks and Recreation Department. DISCUSSION The pickup truck is being acquired through the State bid process, which eliminates the requirement to obtain bids. A Chevrolet 1500 4x4 pickup truck will be purchased through the State bid and the cost will be $21,000.00, including tax. BUDGET IMPACT The 2003 Budget allows $28,000.00 for a new pickup truck. The actual cost is within the budgeted amount. ACTION REOUESTED For information only {7~Y&:W Randy Distad . Parks and Recreation Director cc: Dwight Bjerke, Facilities Maintenance Supervisor a~L./ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us 7f: TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator e;J~ FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: School and Conference - Fire Department DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department is planning attendance at the Minnesota State Fire/EMS School. DISCUSSION Two firefighters will be attending the school in Mankato. The school will be held March 1-2, 2003. They will be attending the firefighter II refresher course and follow with a certification test. This is a requirement of the department. BUDGET IMPACT Approved in the 2003 Budget. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, /~? ---;J(c-A?~ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief c".-../ ~Q>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 and City Administrator ~ ~ FROM: Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police SUBJECT: School and Conference DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION / DISCUSSION Two members of the Farmington Police Department serve as members of the Mutual Aid Assistance (MAAG) Team in Dakota County. MAAG is a countywide SWAT Team used in the resolution of critical incidents such as hostage situations or armed, barricaded suspects and as an entry team for drug interdiction. Each year the State Association of Tactical Officers sponsors specialized tactical training. This year the training will be held March 16-18 in Brainerd, MN. This conference provides valuable tactical training that is unavailable locally. The Farmington Police Department will be sending two officers to participate in this tactical training opportunity. BUDGET IMPACT The cost of this training has been included in the 2003 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Information only. Respectfully submitted, -"---~'.. :--. L ( ,) 0 . ):<...... Daniel M. Siebenaler Chief of Police dOlt; 71; 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 WorkslCity Engineer SUBJECT: Dakota County Transportation Plan open House DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION Dakota County is holding a Joint Planning Commission/Open house to provide information and collect comments for its Transportation Policy Plan update. The meeting will be held on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the Dakota County Western Service Center. Room L139. City officials and staff are invited to give input into the County's planning efforts. See the attached letter for additional information. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED For Council's information. Respectfully Submitted, ~Yl1 ~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public W orkslCity Engineer cc: file dc7/ Office of Planning Lynn G. Moratzka,AICP Director Dakota County Western Service Center 14955 Galaxie Avenue Apple Valley. MN 55124 952.891.7030 Fax 952.891.7031 www.co.dakota.mn.us o Printed on recycled paper with 30% post-Consumer' waste. AN EQUAL QPPORT\JNIT'{ EMf'lOYER ~~ /' .. ;'~[~kJ'/ j FJ ----.:.:..' E8 / I ;' ',---.. ~ i. C... "~_ . ----- ~ --'- -.---- '-.~ --~""- .Ii::... ,/:. ~.---::;' February 10,2003 To: City Council members, City Planning Commission members, and interested city staff RE: Dakota County Transportation Plan update open house The Dakota County Office of Planning and Transportation Division is conducting an open house to provide infonnation and collect comments for its Transportation Plan update. It is scheduled for Wednesday, February 26 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Dakota County Western Service Center, Room L139, 14955 Galaxie Avenue, Apple Valley. We have specifically invited city council members and city planning commission members to gain greater insight from members familiar with their city's transportation and land use planning. We contacted city administrators, engineers and planners as well. The open house will be open to the public. The County is beginning an update to its Transportation Policy Plan. The updated plan, Dakota County 2003-2025 Transportation Plan. will provide for a more detailed and comprehensive inventory of the existing County transportation system and its current needs; identification of future County transportation system and its needs; cost estimates and sources of funding for existing and future transportation needs; and process for prioritizing projects proposed for inclusion in the County's Transportation Capital Improvement Program. The previous plan, background infonnation, current plan study infonnation, displays, maps, timelines, opportunities for involvement, and support documents will be available for review and Dakota County staff will be available to answer questions. The event is infonnal. Invited city council members, city planning commission members, interested city staff and residents are welcome to come at any time during the open house to provide ideas, provide comments and identify issues regarding county transportation systems and planning. For more infonnation about the Dakota County 2003-2025 Transportation Plan or the open house, please contact Scott Peters in the Dakota County Office of Planning at 952-891-7027. Sincerely, ~ Scott Peters Senior Planner Dakota County Office of Planning o>en- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: Ed Shukle, City Administrator . SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: February 18, 2003 It is requested that the February 18, 2003 agenda be amended as follows: CONSENT AGENDA 7 0). Approve Appointments Boards and Commissions - Administration Approve appointments to various Boards and Commissions effective February 1, 2003. Respectfully submitted, City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Appointments to Boards and Commissions DATE: February 18,2003 INTRODUCTION / DISCUSSION The City Council, at a special meeting held February 15,2003 interviewed and proposed the following appointments to Boards and Commissions: Seat Applicable Term New Appointment Heritage Preservation 1) 2) 3) 2/1/03-1/31/06 Beverly Preece 2/1/03-1/31/06 Patrick Garofalo 2/1/03-1/31/06 Jonathan Robertson Parks & Recreation I) 2) 2/1/03-1/31/05 Mike Buringa 2/1/03-1/31/05 Paula Higgins Planning Commission I) 2) 2/1/03-1/31/05 Dirk Rotty 2/1/03-1/31/05 Chaz Johnson Senior Center 1) 2/1/03-1/31/06 Beverly Preece 2) 3) 2/1/03-1/31/06 Ruth Reisinger 2/1/03-1/31/06 Lucky (Lucille) Lyle Water Board 1) 2/1/03-1/31/06 Jeff Krueger Upon approval of the City Council the applicants will be notified by letter and will receive an Oath of Office and Certificate of Appointment. ACTION REOUIRED Approve the appointments to the various Boards and Commissions for the above stated terms. Respectfully submitted, $~d~dJ~ Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director . n~ G..- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator~'\. FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Designating Farmington Heritage Landmark DATE: February 18,2003 INTRODUCTION The City Council may designate individual historic sites as Farmington Heritage Landmarks. DISCUSSION The Heritage Preservation Commission has determined that the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery, located north of the Middle Creek Estates subdivision, meets the eligibility criteria for designation as a Farmington Heritage Landmark under City Code 2-11-4(A). The HPC has submitted documentation supporting the Heritage Landmark designation of the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery in a report prepared by Robert Vogel dated September 26~ 2002. The Minnesota Historical Society has also commented favorably on the proposed landmark designation. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt a resolution designating the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery, as a Farmington Heritage Landmark, and noting the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery as a heritage landmark on the Official City Zoning Map. Respectfully submitted, ~d.-JAa~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director cc: HPC Members Robert Vogel ddO RESOLUTION NO. R -03 DESIGNATING THE MIDDLE CREEK HISTORIC CEMETERY AS A FARMINGTON HERITAGE LANDMARK Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of February 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Farmington City Council has declared as a matter of public policy that the preservation, protection, perpetuation, and use of significant historic properties is a matter of public necessity; and, WHEREAS, the Heritage Preservation Commission has determined that the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery, meets the eligibility criteria for designation as a Farmington Heritage Landmark under City Code 2-11-4(A); and, WHEREAS, the Heritage Preservation Commission has submitted documentation supporting Heritage Landmark designation of the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery in a report prepared by Robert C. Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant, dated September 26, 2002; and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Historical Society has commented favorably on the proposed landmark designation; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed landmark designation was held in the City Council Chambers in City Hall on February 18,2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The Middle Creek Historic Cemetery is designated as a Farmington Heritage Landmark. 2. The Middle Creek Historic Cemetery will be noted as a heritage landmark on the Official City Zoning Map. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of February 2003. Mayor day of 2003. Attested to the City Administrator SEAL ~~J Robert C. Vogel & Associates Historians, Archeologists and Preservation Planners 216 Cleveland Avenue S.W. New Brighton, Minnesota 55112-3508 Telephone (651) 604-0175 Fax (651) 604-0250 MEMORANDUM 8 January 2003 *: L' Shadick, Administrative Services Director FR' obert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant . Farmington Heritage Landmark Designation of Middle Creek Cemetery The City is ready to proceed with Heritage Landmark designation of the Middle Creek Cemetery. The Heritage Preservation Commission has already nominated the property based on my report of 26 September 2002. The Minnesota Historical Society has been given an opportunity to comment on the nomination as provided in Minn. Stat. ~471.193. By ordinance (S2-11-4C), the City Council may designate a Farmington Heritage Landmark by resolution, after holding a public hearing. Public hearing notices must be published 10 days prior to the meeting and written notice must be mailed to "all owners of property lying adjacent to the historic property." Because the City of Farmington owns the cemetery, historic site owner notification is not necessary. I have attached the final draft copy of the nomination documents. Cultural resource management consultants since 1978. ~.3~ DOCUMENTATION SUPPORTING HERITAGE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE MIDDLE CREEK HISTORIC CEMETERY COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE PRESBYTERIAN CEMETERY Heritage Landmark Planning Report Prepared by Robert C. Vogel Preservation Planning Consultant September 26, 2002 INTRODUCTION This report documents the historical and architectural significance of the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery, commonly known as the Presbyterian Cemetery and makes the case for the property's eligibility for designation as a Farmington Heritage Landmark pursuant to ~2-11-4 of the Farmington City Code. Farmington Heritage Landmarks are the buildings, sites, and districts so designated by the City Council in recognition of their historical, architectural, archeological, and cultural significance. Properties are nominated by Heritage Landmark designation by the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) following a public hearing. Under state law, the Minnesota Historical Society must also review each nomination. Once a property has been designated a Farmington Heritage Landmark, this report becomes part of the official designation and is used to guide planning for the preservation, protection, and use of the historic property. The Heritage Landmark Planning Report is based on the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. For more information about registration standards and guidelines for preparing the report, please refer to the National Park Service publication, How to Complete the National Register Registration Form; and the Historic Preservation chapter of the City of Farmington Comprehensive Plan. ADMINISTRATIVE DATA Name of Property: The official name of the property nominated for landmark designation is the Middle Creek Historic Cemetery. The site is also commonly known as the Presbyterian Cemetery. Location: Southeast quarter of Section 25 , Township 114 North Range 20 West, immediately north of the Middle Creek Estates subdivision. Owner: On December 17, 2001, the Farmington City Council accepted the cemetery from the First United Presbyterian Church, the owner of record (Resolution RI14-01). o?33 HPC Determination of Eligibility: The Farmington Heritage Preservation Commission evaluated the cemetery and found that it meets the criteria for heritage landmark eligibility. A finding of significance was issued by the HPC on December 6, 2001. State Historic Preservation Office Review: In accordance with Minnesota Statutes S4 71.193, the Minnesota Historical Society will be sent a copy of this report for review and comment before the nomination is heard by the Farmington City Council. Classification: For preservation planning purposes, the property is considered a historic site. Historic and Current Function/Use: Historically, the site was used as a cemetery. It currently functions as open space. DESCRIPTION Site Classification: Abandoned rural cemetery. Boundaries: The boundaries of the heritage landmark are those of the parcel historically associated with the cemetery. Narrative Description: The historic cemetery is situated on the summit oflow, wooded hill (elev. 956 ft. above sea level) near the intersection of Akin Road and Eve's Way, immediately north of the Middle Creek Estates Subdivision. The burial ground encompasses a rectangular shaped parcel measuring approximately 264 by 165 ft. and oriented east-west. Historically, the site was unplatted but removed from routine farming activities. It was in use until the early twentieth century, when it was abandoned and fell into neglect. It does not appear to have been enclosed with any kind of fence. The traditional nineteenth century graveyard ornamental trees, such as pines or cedars, are absent and there is no evidence of any hedgerows, shrubbery, or grave plantings. Near the center of the historic site there is a small open area with a cluster of stone grave makers and scattered fragments of broken gravestones. The largest of these is a marble tablet inscribed in low relief with the names of Charles Seward, S. Anderson, and Caroline Seward. The other stones and stone fragments lack readable inscriptions. The is evidence of an old trail or lane leading to the cemetery from Akin Road, but at present public access to the site is over a pedestrian trail from the city's Pine Knoll lift station. Information about the persons interred at the cemetery is sketchy. According to the 1881 narrative history of Dakota County, the first burial, that of Ada Bacon, occurred in 1859, and in June, 1868, the plot of land was donated by Samuel Osborne to the Trustees of the Farmington Presbyterian Church for use as a cemetery. Charles Seward's obituary in the March 8, 1901, issue of the Dakota County Tribune, notes that he was 2 d3'1 buried in the "old cemetery in Judson's Grove." The obituary written for his wife, Jane Osborne Seward, printed in the Tribune on November 13, 1903, states that she was "interred in the Presbyterian cemetery" alongside her husband and two of their children. The cemetery is located on the map of Farmington published in 1896 but it does not appear on any modern topographical or street map. Local genealogists have documented at least twenty-four burials, including several members of the Seward and Witherell families, and suggest that the cemetery was no longer used after about 1906. The site is visible as a clearing surrounded by farmland on an aerial photograph flown in 1937 and the cemetery is noted on the Farmington Quadrangle USGS topographic map published in 1974. A grave robber is purported to have disturbed at least one grave in 1980. Except for occasional notice in local newspapers and a brief article in the county historical society's newsletter, the cemetery was largely forgotten until 2001, when Arcon Development and D. R. Horton proposed to build a residential subdivision called Middle Creek Estates on a 40.74 acre parcel west of Akin Road. The abandoned cemetery appeared on the site plan as an unregistered parcel of vacant land adjacent to the north boundary of the subdivision. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the Middle Creek Estates preliminary plat application and on October 18, 2001, recommended that the developer survey the cemetery, stake the boundaries, and fence the site as a condition of plat approval. When the Council approved the preliminary plat on December 17, 2001, a contingency of approval stated that the developer had to "re-survey the cemetery site to ensure no additional markers lie outside the property and to identify the property corners." EVALUATION Applicable Heritage Landmark Criteria: The Middle Creek Cemetery is eligible for Heritage Landmark designation because of its documented association with specific patterns of events which have made a significant contribution to Farmington history (City Code ~2-11-4A). Local Historic Context: The property was evaluated within the local historic context, "Churches and Cemeteries," as delineated in the 1995 historic context study. Area of Significance: Social history. Period of Significance: 1859 to ca. 1906. Narrative Statement of Significance: The Middle Creek Cemetery is a vernacular landscape site that was used as a burial ground by residents of Farmington between 1859 and ca. 1906. Evaluated within the local historic context "Churches and Cemeteries," it is historically significant for its association with the First Presbyterian Church (est. 1865) and the broad pattern of nineteenth century cultural values and funerary practices in rural Farmington. The site is distinguishable from its surroundings by the presence of gravestones and shallow depressions in the surface of the ground which are interpreted as graves. Its historic 3 .;;35 function as a cemetery has also influenced the character and composition of surrounding development, both agricultural (1850s through 1960s) and suburban (1970s to the present). The Middle Creek Cemetery is a representative example of the small burial grounds which are scattered across Minnesota's rural landscape. As a cultural relic, the site represents a distinctive folk tradition and helps to tell the stories of the area's earliest settlers and their rural way of life. The rural setting is evocative of the early period of settlement and the surviving gravemarker is typical of the period. Interwoven with the site's landscape history are the lives of the individuals who are buried there. Heritage landmark designation is only a step in the preservation of the historic site, which should be reclaimed for public use as conservancy open space. The Heritage Preservation Commission has recommended that the burial ground be marked with four freestanding masonry columns or obelisks, set approximately 100 ft. apart. The corners should also be staked. Signs and markers would be helpful in informing visitors of the site's historical significance and natural heritage. It should not be necessary to reset fallen gravestones or replace lost monuments with new markers, though it is recommended that the city remove all fallen tree branches, buckthorn, and other undesirable plant material. Routine pruning of trees and shrubs, weeding, and mowing are the keys to historic site maintenance and the natural beauty of the site could be enhanced through appropriate landscaping. Well maintained site and appropriate interpretation will demonstrate the city's commitment to preserving a respectable environment for public use. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties are the required basis for historic site preservation and rehabilitation work, and the National Park Service has also issued guidelines for the treatment of cultural landscapes which are applicable to historic cemeteries. BIBLIOGRAPHY "The Abandoned Cemetery of Farmington Village." Over the Years vol. 32 (Winter 1992). Agricultural Adjustment Administration. Dakota County, Minnesota, aerial survey photographs, 1937. Borchert Map Library, University of Minnesota. Birnbaum, Charles A., and Christine Capella Peters. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. Washington: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1996. History of Dakota County and the City of Hastings, Including the Explorers and Pioneers of Minnesota, by Rev. Edward D. Neill, and Outlines of the History of Minnesota, by J Fletcher Williams. Minneapolis: North Star Pub. Co., 1881. 4 ";;3~ Pinkney, B. F. Plat Book of Dakota County, Minnesota. Philadelphia: Union Publishing Co., 1896. Potter, Elizabeth Walton and Beth M. Boland. Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Cemeteries and Burial Places. National Register Bulletin 41. Washington: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1992. Sloan, David Charles. The Last Great Necessity: Cemeteries in American History. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991. Vogel, Robert C. Farmington Historic Context Document: Final Report of the Historic Context Study, 1994-1995. Unpublished report prepared for the Farmington Heritage Preservation Commission, July, 1995. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION 1. USGS Farmington Quadrangle topographic map. 2. Middle Creek Estates site plan. 3. Photographs of historic site. 5 ~3:> I. USGS Farmington Quadrangle topographic map 6 c?31f ....- -~.~ __...0I:l...._ --- ~ ~L f/!IIUltIlIIiM __ e;. I ~.:....: SETBACKS -..: r-.-,. _.n .....n ~....." .."_..".~~ F.~~..:aw-~;:~ ~==-.=s.':q;i.-:- =-~-:i':====..E$.:'='~ si:E$:.-==.r-~.:r.:;:. ...--.......-..---- -....-..-- {~. '.. 2. Middle Creek Estates site plan MIDDLE CREEK ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLANS FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA ./ \ ..-" -\1- ./ :::.n __A -.... =~5.:'?z::..;:;;=..;.:........-:.= _.~ CO'JER SHEET - SITE PLAN -ARCON 0E'oG.OPMENT. INC. 7 SHEET INDEX ,. COlIER SHEET - SItE PlAN 2. PREIJMINARY PlAT 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS 4. PREUWlNARY GRADING PlAN 5. PREUIIINARY unuTY PlAN 6. PREl.IUINARY lANDSCAPE PlAN 7. DETAR.S LEOEND -- -1. -1.-- --A- --4...___ ----- --.. -..0- .__ ____ -0---- == :::::--1- !!! ~:~':.- 0--- ....--- .._- -"'-'.- .._- --- --- -~~~--~ -- UIDDLL CftEEK PTAlES ~.3<7 3. Middle Creek Historic Cemetery 2002/05/16 MVC 00] 8 2002/05/16 MVC 003 9 ]0 ~b City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us FROM: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator~ ~ Jim Atkinson Assistant City Planner \11Y. v TO: SUBJECT: Consider Easement Vacation - Glenview Commercial Addition DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION As part of the platting process for the proposed Glenview Commercial Addition, a drainage and utility easement must be vacated. As shown on the attached preliminary plat, a portion of the easement is located adjacent to the south line of the existing Outlot "A". The other portion of the easement is located adjacent to the eastern edge of the trunk Highway 3 right of way, which was recently vacated by the State in conjunction with the rerouting of 9th Street to the east. DISCUSSION In order to provide adequate protection for the existing watermain located on the site, the City is requiring the developer to provide easements in conjunction with the proposed plat. The easements currently located on the site are no longer adequate since Outlot "A" would be eliminated with the proposed plat and since a portion of Trunk Highway 3 right of way has recently been vacated. In order to provide new easements, the existing easements must be vacated. A new easement would be provided along the north property line extending 25 feet to the south. An additional easement would be provided from north to south extending ten (10) feet on either side of the existing watermain located along the former Trunk Highway 3 right of way. ACTION REQUIRED Adopt the attached resolution vacating the described drainage and utility easement in the proposed Glenview Commercial Addition. Q)YO Respectfully submitted, 4~~ Jim Atkinson Assistant City Planner cc: Tim Giles .;) lj / RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION VACATING AN EASEMENT Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of February, 2003, at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: seconded the following: Member introduced and Member WHEREAS, Mr. Tim Giles ofT.C. Construction has applied for preliminary and final plat approval of the Glenview Commercial Addition; and WHEREAS, the City of Farmington has a watermain that exists on the site; and WHEREAS, the City of Farmington has determined that the existing easements would no longer be adequate if the plat were approved since Outlot "A" and a portion of Trunk Highway 3 right of way would be abandoned; and WHEREAS, in order to provide new easements, the existing easements must be vacated; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. ~ 412.851, the Farmington City Council has conducted a hearing preceded by published and posted notice to consider the easement vacation requested by the Developer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington: 1. The drainage and utility easement shown on the attached preliminary plat is hereby vacated. 2. The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor and County Recorder in and for Dakota County, Minnesota. c:7 <,I~ This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of February, 2003. Attested to the _ day of February 2003. (SEAL) CITY OF FARMINGTON Mayor City Administrator ~Sl3 I \ I I I \ I \ I I I I , I , I I \ I \ I \ I \ , I '0 I C.O \ I \ \ \ . \ \ \ 1 \ \ /' \.// 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 / II ( I I I I I II' II II 110. 11m \ If! \ 1'_ ./ ~ \ \ \ \ I I \ $ \ \ \ \ 0- Willi Zo g TtLt / ~ I m I <( I ~ J o pp t:.or n ~ I . 0:: 10 o " Z W ~ ~ I ~ l- I Z ~ fi ~ ~ I J>;1 Z L5 ON ~ " (\lgJl I- I ~~: ~ : ~ ~: 6 gl i cI~U" g / I I I I I , I I \ \ \ \ ;;: pp I Z Ol :<t WI :I:'<t I- ,< u.~ 01 N u.I"l c(u :I:W Ul iEu. ::>0 o Ul'<t '- w~ :I: 1-;;: lJ.Z Ow ~iE :Ju. o Iii'<t W'- ;;:~ pp -0- - -I g "- I , / I \ / \./ 10 I GV / ( \ 0Ul.l t! S137030'39"E (:'tJTL.(JT t\ DRAINAGE ANO UTILITY EASEMENT (TO BE VACATED) I ,- ..,.. I I' I ,__...'" I f3 L_ C) C: t\ "- " "- \ / / / I \ / \ '- _ ..JO'?,'O" / / / ;' / / I ( I " \ \ \ " -, \ \ \ \ \ I I I { I I I \ I \ , I I , ( : r",'. 'I ,_......'" I ~_ \ o '\ '-{-. \ \.- 0(, 0\.- / / -r- ) / / ;' / ./ ./ / ,/ / \ \ " " " \ \ \ "- "- ./ pp -0- / / / / / ./ ./ f!:>/ ,~ SOUTH LINE OF ThE SOUTH HALF OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEe 32. EX. SERV. 348 I I { I I \ \ <':i>6\ " " \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \N N I'" I I , I / I / ( I I I I \ \ \ I I I I I I I I I \ -', 196--. ./ -- 89 8 ~_ X EX. OSTRU "" ~ N~ g"J(tJ f'-' ro.... . 0) O(tJ o rn POND 'l'1'l'ZR KLIIV.-8118.8 " " " pp N89048'08"W ------- -- ~ '" ~ = = ~.. _.- .- 0'- - - [~h~~~_ -'=,--= __ !.2~.~5 = = = = = = ~ ---P'~ ;'y -- ~ 213TH STREET OJ r<./ /0 a..... City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farminnon.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator ~ 5. FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: 2003 Community Development Block Grant Application DATE: February 18,2003 INTRODUCTION The City has the right to apply for approximately $54,126 in Community Development Block Grant [CDBG] funds for CDBG Program Year 2003 [July 1,2003 through June 30, 2004]. To secure the grant money that is available, the City must prepare and submit an application that specifies eligible activities or projects to which the City intends to apply the available funding. The completed application must be submitted to the Dakota County Community Development Agency [CDA]. DISCUSSION For the last several years, the City has received [federal] Community Development Block Grant funds, which have been administered and distributed by the Dakota County Community Development Agency [CDA]. The next CDBG "program year" will run from July 1,2003 through June 30, 2004. The amount of money that will be available is presently unknown, but it will probably be about the amount of last year's grant ($54,126). In order to obtain the available CDBG funds, the City must complete and submit an application, as it has done in past years. The application must identify the project(s) for which the CDBG funds will be used, and the specific project activities to which the funds will be applied. CDBG funds can only be used for "eligible" projects or activities that satisfy certain "National Objectives." Typically, such objectives include redeveloping slums or blighted areas, creating or improving housing that benefits individuals who fall within "low to moderate income" guidelines, or creating jobs that pay wages that fall within certain ranges. At the Farmington HRA meeting that was held on February 10th, the HRA Board discussed projects or activities that could potentially be included in the 2003 CDBG application. At that time, City staff provided the Board with general information about the condition of the housing stock in the "older" part of Farmington. It has become apparent to City staff, especially those in the Building Inspections Division, that there are a number of homes in the older part of Farmington that are in poor condition. In some cases, the owners do not have the time, financial resources or inclination to improve or even maintain their properties. These neglected or substandard homes generate relatively little property tax revenue for the City. They also have a negative effect on the values of nearby homes (and, correspondingly, on the property tax revenue generated by those homes). In some cases, they become fire hazards, or they present health or safety risks for their occupants, visitors and neighbors. dsls Some communities in the Twin Cities metro area have initiated proactive city programs that "convert" substandard housing into safer homes that are more attractive and that otherwise improve the city's housing stock. These programs exist in a variety of forms. Some are revolving loan programs that provide money to qualified homeowners so that they can make the repairs and improvements that are needed to remedy Code violations. Some programs provide direct grants (that is, money that does not have to be repaid) to homeowners for the same purpose. Other programs enable a City to acquire substandard properties and then clear the property (by demolishing or moving the house) so that the vacant lot can be sold to someone who is willing and able to build a newer, Code-compliant home on the lot. The proceeds from the sale of the lot are then "recycled" through the program and used for the next acquisition. (I have attached, as an example, a copy of the program guidelines for Mounds View's "Housing Replacement Program.") The City's Building Official has advised me that there are several homes in Farmington that have Code violations that the owners have been unable to remedy, in many cases for financial reasons. Eventually, the City may be forced to initiate condemnation or eviction proceedings if the Code violations remain unresolved. Such proceedings are inevitably unpleasant, expensive and time- consuming for the City and for the affected homeowners. The HRA Board agreed that it is fairer, and that it makes more sense, to try to find mutually acceptable financial solutions to such situations. The HRA is, after all, a Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and my sense is that the HRA members would like to begin devoting more attention to the "housing aspect" of the issues that are within the HRA's purview. After discussing this subject at their meeting on February 10th, the HRA members voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council that the 2003 allocation of CDBG funds be devoted to the development and implementation of a City program designed to improve the City's housing stock. I have attached a proposed Resolution that has been prepared in the format required by the Dakota County CDA. If the Resolution is approved by the Council, an application that is consistent with the terms of the Resolution will be completed, attached to the Resolution and submitted to the Dakota County CDA. City staff can then work with the HRA, the Planning Commission and the City Council to work out the administrative details of a "housing improvement program" of the type referred to above. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REOUESTED Motion to approveladopt the attached Resolution approving the City's application for Program Year 2003 Comm . ty De ment Block Grant funding. c:>? Y'& CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. R -03 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPliCATION OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003 DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Fannington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 18th day of February 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington as follows: 1. The Community Development Director is authorized to submit an application to Dakota County for a Community Development Block Grant in Fiscal Year 2003. 2. The application is approved by the City Council and the Mayor and Community Development Director are authorized to execute it on behalf of the City of Fannington. 3. That the Dakota County CDA be designated as the administrative entity to carry out the program on behalf of the City. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Fannington City Council in open session on the 18th day of February, 2003. Mayor Attested to the _ day of 2003. City Administrator SEAL c2l/'? e~n @U' ~. %. ,0" O""e ~,~~ Ss . Partne(~ City of Mounds View Housing Replacement Program (Revised June 1999) A. Statement of Purnose The Mounds View Economic Development Authority Housing Replacement Program ("Program") is established to reduce the social costs of blight, improves residential neighborhoods and increases the tax base. B. Proe:ram Objectives . Replace deteriorating lower value housing on scattered sites throughout the City with larger, higher value housing designed for families. . Eliminate the blighting influence of substandard housing. . Increase the availability for quality housing for families. c. Proe:ram Fundine: The Program is funded through Tax Increment Financing and administered by the Mounds View Economic Development Authority (EDA). D. Data Privacy All files and information, which identifies property and persons, is private and cannot be released. All information secured through the Program is subject to the Data Privacy Act. E. Proe:ram ODtions The Program offers two options for participation. Option 1: This option involves the sale of substandard single-family homes and land to the EDA. The EDA's goal is to offer the property for sale for the redevelopment of new, standard housing. Option 2: This option involves the property owner retaining the property where a substandard single-family house is located, and receiving funding from the EDA for demolition of the house with an agreement that it will be replaced with standard housing meeting certain EDA guidelines and time frame. F. Publicizine: the Proe:ram: Makine: Application 1. EDA staff, or their appointees ("Program Staff'), will solicit participants by direct mail, advertisement, or other method. The number of applications accepted for participation in the Program will be determined by the availability of personnel and financial resources. d c;:o City of Mounds View Bousine Replacement Proeram 2. Participation in the Program must be on a voluntary basis. Interested participants must be able to furnish proof of ownership of the property, and are required to respond to the EDA solicitation in writing. with a letter indicating: a. For Option 1: (Sale of Property to EDA): (1) An interest in selling their property to the EDA. (2) A willingness to waive relocation benefits. (3) Statement oftenant interest in the property at the time of offer. (4) Consent to the release of relevant information to potential developers and end buyers. b. For Option 2 (Funding for Demolition): (1) An interest in obtaining funding for demolition from the EDA to replace existing housing with standard housing meeting EDA guidelines. (2) Willingness to hold the EDA harmless for demolition activities (3) Willingness to enter into a legal development agreement with the EDA regarding redevelopment of the property 3. Individuals who have indicated an interest in participating shall be contacted by Program Staff to inform them of the estimated project time line and to obtain complete information on the items noted under F.2. above. G. ProDertv Elie:ibilitv Criteria Program Staff shall evaluate each property for which an application is received to determine its eligibility for the Program based on the criteria in this section. Program Staff shall prepare property fact sheets for each property for which owners have expressed an interest in participating in the Program, and shall make a drive by inspection. Properties will be evaluated based on the following criteria outlined below. To be eligible for participation, the house on the property must have one of the characteristics noted in 1, 2, 3 or 4 below. 1. Substandard as to condition, property value, size or usage. 2. Obsolete and having a faulty design for block and area in which it is located. 3. Deterioration which has caused blight to other adjoining properties. 4. Detrimental to the safety or health of abutting properties in the block. If it is determined that the property is eligible for participation based on the condition of the house, it must also meet the following criteria as outlined in 5-8 below. 5. A geographic mix of properties is achieved. 6. The site can be developed with a single family home within city code requirements, including zoning and conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The property may be considered if a variance can be obtained (see Section 1.2.). 7. The property must be owner-occupied or vacant before the owner makes application to the Program. Non-homesteaded vacant property will be considered for acquisition. Tenant-occupied properties will not be considered for purchase or funding for demolition by the EDA on a case-by-case basis. Page 2 .;;,l./9' City of Mounds View Housin2 Replacement Pro2ram 8. Prior to approval by the EDA for participation in the Program, properties over 50 years old must be evaluated for historical significance. This will be accomplished by forwarding general property information and a property photo to the Minnesota Historical Society for review. The EDA will not enter into a purchase agreement or award funding for demolition on a property which qualifies for the National Registry of Historical Structures. H. Proeram Priorities If more than one application for acquisition or demolition funding has been received during a given month, the Program Staff shall rank the applications to determine the best candidates for Program participation based on the information and criteria noted below: 1. Properties that can meet EDA established guidelines and time frame will be considered first. 2. Properties with the lowest values and poorest visible conditions will be considered first. 3. Properties should be equally distributed by location and value throughout the City when possible, and provide a viable financial mix of properties to support Program financial requirements. I. Option 1: Acquisition of Property bv EDA 1. Blight Qualification: Once an offering letter is received from the interested participant, Program Staff shall arrange, by appointment, an inspection of the interior of the home to establish blight qualification as outlined in Section G. The following information will also be obtained during the inspection: a. Demolition information for estimating demolition credit to builder. b. A determination as to the existence of any hazardous materials on the property. This includes: (1) a visual inspection (2) a statement from the interested participant regarding any knowledge of the property's use for production, storage, deposit, or disposal of any toxic or hazardous wastes or substances or asbestos products whatsoever, during the time the interested participant owned the property and prior to the date of interested participant purchased property. Properties with environmental problems or hazards may be considered if the purchase price is reduced sufficiently to cover increased site clearance and preparation costs. If a property meets the blight test, acquisition procedures can continue. If the blight test cannot be met, the interested participant will be notified in writing indicating the reasons why the property cannot be considered for acquisition. Page 3 a 6"0 City of Mounds View Housin2 Replacement Pro2ram 2. Need for Variances: If a variance is required to redevelop the property, the EDA may, at its sole discretion, choose not to acquire the property. This determination will be made based on the project time lines, available resources, and availability of other properties which do not require a variance. If the EDA chooses to pursue a variance to enable the acquisition of the property, an application shall be filed following the usual procedures. If a variance is not approved, the property cannot be considered for acquisition. 3. Appraisal: Determining Purchase Price: If the EDA chooses to continue with the acquisition, a fee appraisal shall be ordered at the EDA's expense and the result shall be used in determining the amount of the purchase price to offer to the interested participant. The independent fee appraiser shall be carefully instructed to document in specific terms the conditions of the property including details regarding structural condition and floor plan. The acceptance of these conditions in the market place should be discussed in the report. The appraiser's value judgement should reflect these conditions. A negotiated price considerably below the assessor's market value, may be accepted without an appraisal on a case by case basis if the interested participant concurs. 4. Purchase Agreement: Closing Procedures a. When both parties have verbally agreed upon a purchase price, Program Staff and Legal Counsel shall prepare a Purchase Agreement to be presented to the interested participant. The purchase price contained in the Purchase Agreement shall be within the range authorized by the EDA. The purchase agreement shall be contingent on the completion of an environmental evaluation suggesting no evidence of hazardous waste on the property. The interested participant shall receive a copy of the purchase agreement including the following information: (1) The purchase price (2) How the purchase price was determined. (3) The amount of earnest money (4) A date to sign the Purchase Agreement (5) A closing date b. To enable the acquisition process to continue, the interested participant must execute the purchase agreement and Awaiver of relocation benefits" form. The waiver of relocation must be clearly explained to the interested participant at this time, if not explained previously. c. The EDA Executive Director and President shall be signatories on the purchase agreement. d. The acquisition and disposition of the property must be in conformance with the Page 4 ~61 City of Mounds View Housine Replacement Proeram Mounds View Comprehensive Plan. e. Following EDA authorization of these agreements, interested participants and/or Program Staffwill be requested to assemble and supply all required documentation prior to closing as outlined below. (1) An Abstract or RPA (as applicable) must be furnished to the Program Staff to facilitate the rendering of a title opinion. The interested participant will bear the cost of updating the Abstract or RP A as part of the closing procedures. (2) EDA Legal Counsel will be responsible for having the Abstract or RP A updated and will provide Program Staff and interested participant with a written opinion oftitle. EDA Legal Counsel will also secure title Insurance. (3) If the title opinion indicates the property has a marketable title, purchase procedures will continue. If the title opinion does not indicate a marketable title, the EDA, at its sole discretion, may choose not to acquire the property. The EDA may determine remedies and evaluate their resolution, including the additional time and expense to provide a marketable title. The EDA may proceed to correct title deficiencies to continue the purchase of the property dependant upon the additional time and expense incurred. (4) Simultaneously with the title opinion, an environmental evaluation may be obtained from an independent environmental engineering firm or other firm performing such service. If environmental hazards are found on the site, the EDA may choose not to acquire the property. f. The seller must be prepared to vacate the property on the day of closing unless other arrangements have been made with Program Staff. g. If the interested participant decides not to sell the property after execution of the purchase agreement then the interested participant must provide the EDA with the following: (1) A letter expressing their desire not to proceed with selling the property. (2) The full amount of earnest money received upon execution of the purchase agreement. (3) Full payment of legal and consulting fees incurred by the EDA after the execution of the purchase agreement in preparation for the closing of the property. Page 5 c;?S' a City of Mounds View Housine Replacement Proeram 5. Selection of Demolition Contractor and Procedures: After the property closing, Program Staffwill select a demolition contractor by sending out Requests for Proposals (RFP) to at least three demolition contractors. The bid received with the lowest price will have priority. The demolition contractor must be able to meet project deadline as outlined in the RFP prior to awarding a contract. The demolition contractor will be required to obtain all necessary City permits and pay applicable fees. Overall a designated Program Staffwill provide demolition supervision. 6. Marketing: Program Staff will advertise sale of the property by contacting the St. Paul Realtors Association, Residential Developers, interested buyers and posting signs on the property. 7. Selection of Developer: Program Staff will negotiate the purchase of the property by an acceptable buyerldeveloper or buyer/builder team. If a buyerldeveloper or buyer/builder team cannot be obtained, the EDA may consider selling property to a developer or builder for sale to the open market after completion. As part of the sale of the property, the buyer/developer team purchasing party must sign a development agreement with the EDA, which will stipulate housing design and time frame for completion. 8. Development Agreement: Closing Procedures a. When a redevelopment proposal submitted by a buyerldeveloper or buyer/builder team has been approved by the EDA, Program Staff and Legal Counsel shall prepare a Purchase and Redevelopment Agreement. The selected developer shall receive a copy of the purchase and redevelopment agreement which will include, but not be limited to, the following information: I) Construction of minimum improvements. 2) Estimated market value of the property and improvements. 3) Purchase price. 4) Completion date. 5) Financial guarantee submitted by the developer with a minimum amount equal to 1 00% of the minimum improvement value. 6) Revesting of Title. Subject to unavoidable delays, if the Developer fails to carry out its obligations with respect to the construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Authority will have the right to re-enter and take possession of the property. The Authority at its option may declare a termination in favor of the Authority of the title and that the title and all rights and interests of the Developer shall revert to the Authority. J. ODtion 2: Fundine of Demolition 1. Blight Qualification: Properties being considered for demolition funding must meet blight qualifications as outlined in Section G. and Section 1.1. Page 6 .::tS'3 City of Mounds View Housinl! Replacement Prol!ram 2. Need for Variances: If a variance is required to redevelop the property, the homeowner must obtain the variance prior to the award of demolition funds. If a variance is not granted, demolition funds shall not be awarded. 3. Comprehensive Plan/Zoning: The Comprehensive Plan designation and the zoning on the property must allow for its redevelopment by construction of a replacement single family residence. 4. Development Agreement: The interested participant must enter into a Development Agreement with the EDA which will stipulate housing design and site development criteria and time frame for completion. The development agreement will include estimate of new taxes generated based on the construction of replacement cost. 5. Demolition Contract: The interested participant must obtain three estimates for demolition which will assist in determining the amount of demolition funds to award for the project. The chosen demolition contractor must be able to meet project deadlines as outline by Program Staff. The demolition contractor will be required to obtain all necessary City permits and pay applicable fees. Overall demolition supervision will be provided by a designated Program Staff in conjunction with the interested participant. Economic Development Authority By: Dan Coughlin, President By: Charles S. Whiting, Executive Director Revised: June 28, 1999 Page 7 dlSt/ \ APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS ~ Applicant Name: City of Farmington CD District: Contact Name: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director Applicant Address: 325 Oak Street City, State, Zip: Farmington MN 55024 Phone: 651-463-1860 Fax: 651-463-2591 Email: kcarroll@ci.farmington.mn.us .., '< ^"- ^ ,,' ~ ' ,r ;"'~,~~>:; ~,~, r~' '-'=r'I~~~'_ 1i7~;'." .r" "'" ~', , P' ,. " :,. - "0 ' ,. ^ " ". , ." - . IfI.~.~~"'t"''#l~' '''l''''".t'''--~j''' ""'Il',',!.a:&I!"'i"-,,, "1'",'~""~"",'C,;" . ..'.' ,0 -. [.. . ',,' .. "~ ,,~ ik~""~i,1=''J-1' ,~~:a:, ~~~ t;.'~ ~,;"~3:iq~l::;"'<"""~:-,~~~.~'I'~;.T-;,~:!,,,,~, ~~"".~~r ,;_,~~ ~J"~ .J ' ~ ,"",,- -' 1! ~, t r.~,*,)i.~tt.:1?i;tt~,..;t".if~1;t*,1-7':~~~-'i~t, ''Ol''lfi-.,-1;1'<''t.'''.~ b~,f......';-t -J;~"_." ;".- -:.....('-1(.1,'... ~;! "','"'~ ~ / ".,''' i ...;<~.,l"- ~{,~t:" ~;'?:,./f....~", >l";;(;~~.l14..~L;,~,~~ ~~\..;:-tl<~;.f.B.~~L_" ,~~.SJw:...~~...~,~.;<: '_ ~<fl.~:':"';l~':'::lW-""""-"" _.u._~ ,~~"''"'. ~.'~ ~', ,:"~",-..!~;.~.,,,~..J;>~ ...~......,. ~.....J Project Title: Housing Improvement Project CDBG Request: $54, 126 (or max. available) Project Title: CDBG Request: Project Title: CDBG Request: Project Title: CDBG Request: I . roject Title: CDBG Request: Total Request: $54, 126 (or max. available) Project Summary (please be as descriptive as possible for each proiect, aHach additional sheets if necessary): The Farmington HRA Board has indicated a strong interest in using the City's 2003 CDBG funding allocation as "seed money" for a new City program designed to improve the City's housing stock. The exact format of the program will be determined after the HRA has verified that funding for the program has been approved. The program will involve one or more of the following components: a. Funds that can be loaned to qualified homeowners for repairs or improvements that are required to remedy Code violations. b. Funds that can be provided to qualified homeowners in the form of grants to assist with costs related to repairs and improvements. c. Funds that can be used for the acquisition and demolition (or removal) of houses that cannot be rehabilitated in a cost-effective manner, with the understanding that the "cleared" lots would then be made available for the construction of new, Code-compliant housing. d;5'5 Describe the Project locations (please attach 0 mop of Projed Area): he project's boundaries would be the City's corporate limits. Any substandard housing located in rarmington, regardless of location, would potentially be eligible for the program. iii. ~ Has this Project received CDBG funding before* DYes ~o Check the activities for which the CDBG funds will be used: ~isition D Public Facilities/Improvements _ Vacant or undeveloped property V-:ommercial property - Residential property ~molition/Clearance _ Buildings _ Infrastructure _ Assessment abatement D Economic Development ~g Rehabilitation V;Owner occupied _ Rental D Public Services D Planning D Homeownership Opportunities - Support services _ Downpayment assistance D Administration D Other: CDBG requires all Projects meet a National Objective. What National Object will your Project meet* g ~ / Mod Area Benefit * D Low/Mod Limited Clientele Benefit ** ~Low / Mod Housing Benefit D Low/Mod Jobs Benefit ~um/Blight Area Benefit ~um/Blight Spot Benefit D Urgent Need (extremely rare; used only for emergencies): * If you checked the Low/Mod Area Benefit box, please answer the following questions: [Not applicable] A. In what Census Tract(s) and Block Group(s) do beneficiaries of your Project Iive* (Please include mops) B. How many residents live in this area? C. What is the percentage of low and moderate-income beneficiaries? D. How was this documented? D HUD Data D Survey (Please include 0 copy of survey) d?b~ ** If you checked the Low/Mod Limited Clientele Benefit box, please answer the following questions: [N/ A] A. How many people/households do you anticipate serving during the program year (July 1 - June 30)' '- B. Of those people/households, how many will be served with CDBG funds* C. Does this Project benefit any specialized population such as: ~ D Disabled D Elderly D Homeless D Other (please explain): In what category would you place your Project? ~Uisition of Real Property g ~blic Facilities & Improvements l5"C1earance & Demolition U}1fehabilitation ~ode Enforcement ~ Historic Preservation D Homeownership Assistance D Economic Development Activities D Public Services D Lead Based Paint Testing & Abatement D Infrastructure Improvements o Planning & Administration How will income be verified? ~me Verification Request Forms D Census Tract Data Persons Households Presently 1 to 20 (est.), undetermined, depending on although the type and Household projection (1-20) amount of financial would be assistance equivalent to 3- provided 60 people Number of Persons or Households to benefit from your Project: How many Low/Mod Persons or Households to benefit? Presently undetermined. o Presumed benefit (HUD presumes the following to be principally low and moderate-income: abused children, boHered spouses, elderly persons, severely disabled persons, homeless persons, persons living with AIDS, migrant form workers) D Survey ~er (please explain): Tax returns or paycheck stubs (if reauired) 0\0/ Nhich Housing or Community Development Need does your Project address? iii. High Priority Needs - Housing D Renter, small related, 0-50% of median income D Renter, large related, 0-50% of median income D Renter, elderly, 0-50% of median income D Renter, all other, 0-30% of median income High Priority Needs - Community Development D Parks/Recreation Facilities and other public facilities not identified as medium or low priorities o Street Improvements D Public Services not identified as medium or low priorities Low Priority Needs - Community Development D Neighborhood Facilities D Health Facilities D Parking Facilities D Solid Waste Disposal D Asbestos Removal Facilities o Employment Training ] Health Services .J Child Care Centers D Micro-Enterprise Assistance D Economic Development Technical Assistance Medium Priority Needs - Housing D Renter, small related, 51-80% of median income bd~ter, all other, 31-80% of median income l...!::t"Owner, 0-80% of median income D Special Populations, 0-80% of median income ~ Medium Priority Needs - Community Development D Non-Residential Historic Preservation D Water/Sewer Improvements o Sidewalks D Storm Sewer Improvements D Handicapped Services o Transportation Services D Substance Abuse Services D Anti-Crime Programs D Youth &/ or Senior Centers D Youth &/or Senior Services D Child Care Services D Other Youth &/ or Senior Programs D Commercial/Industrial Building Rehab D Commercial/Industrial Infrastructure D Other Economic Development Activities o Planning Total Project Cost: $54,126 (or maximum available) Total CDBG Funds: $54,126 (or maximum available) CDBG Percent of Total Cost: 100% Source of Funds Amount Committed Pending City staff time will be the City's contribution to In-Kind ~mmitted D Pending the Project Contributions D Committed D Pending D Committed D Pending D Committed D Pending D Committed D Pending Total: N/A ~ 6'C?- I Expenses (Please itemize*) Total Costs CDBG Funds . Requested nasmuch as this will be a new program, it is difficult to predict exactly where or how the CDBG funds will be used. Generally speaking, and for each substandard housing unit in question, the $54,126 (or $54, 126 (or CDBG funds would be used for EITHER acquisition/demolition OR max. available) max. available) for repair/rehabilitation, depending on the condition of the property and the availability of sufficient fundina. Total: $54,126 (or $54, 126 (or max. available) max. available) iii. ., * Please itemize project expenses using the following as applicable to your Project: . Acquisition & Improvement Costs Including purchase price, closing costs, site improvements, clearance of toxic contaminants, and other acquisition and improvement costs . Construction/Rehabilitation Costs Including site improvements, construction (labor, materials, supplies), installation, permits and other construction/rehabilitation costs . Professional Fees and Personnel Costs Including architectural, engineering and code inspection fees, surveys, appraisals, legal fees, hazardous materials surveys, project management, and other professional/personnel fees Other Development Costs Including relocation, financing costs, environmental reviews, environmental studies, and other development costs . Eligible Costs for Planning Projects Including professional services, project management costs, and other planning costs Estimated Construction Schedule (if applicable): Not applicable Date for Advertisement of Bids: Date for Award of Contract: Start Date of Construction: Completion Date of Construction: Estimated Project Schedule: Proposed duration of the Project: Proposed start date of Project (cannot begin before July 1): 01.59 '- What is the goal of this Project? (If you hove several projects, please discuss the goals of each project separately) The goal of the Project is to begin improving the City's housing stock. City staff has provided the Farmington HRA members with general information about the condition of the housing stock in the "older" part of Farmington. It has become apparent to City staff, especially those in the Building Inspections Division, that there are a number of homes in the older part of Farmington that are in poor condition. In some cases, the owners do not have the time, financial resources or inclination to improve or even maintain their properties. These neglected or substandard homes generate relatively little property tax revenue for the City. They also have a negative effect on the values of nearby homes (and, correspondingly, on the property tax revenue generated by those homes). In some cases, they become fire hazards, or they present health or safety risks for their occupants, visitors and neighbors. ~ Some communities in the Twin Cities metro area have initiated proactive city programs that "convert" substandard housing into safer homes that are more attractive and that otherwise improve the city's housing stock. These programs exist in a variety of forms. Some are revolving loan programs that provide money to qualified homeowners so that they can make the repairs and improvements that are needed to remedy Code violations. Some programs provide direct grants (that is, money that does not have to be repaid) to homeowners for the same purpose. Other programs enable a City to acquire substandard properties and then clear the property (by demolishing or moving the house) so that the vacant lot can be sold to someone who is willing and able to build a newer, Code-compliant home on the lot. The proceeds from the sale of the lot are then "recycled" through the program and used for the next acquisition. 'he City's Building Official has indicated that there a several homes in Farmington that have Code violations that the owners have been unable to remedy, in many cases for financial reasons. Eventually, the City may be forced to initiate condemnation or eviction proceedings if the Code violations remain unresolved. Such proceedings are inevitably unpleasant, expensive and time- consuming for the City and for the affected homeowners. The HRA Board believes that it is fairer, and that it makes more sense, to try to find mutually acceptable financial solutions to such situations, thereby avoiding the condemnation and/or eviction proceedings that would otherwise be required. Who will benefit from this Project? (If you hove several projects, please discuss the beneficiaries of each project separately) The beneficiaries of the project would include the owners and/or tenants of any structures that are currently in poor condition and/or in violation of Code requirements; owners and occupants of neighboring residential units; future owners of the rehabilitated properties; City staff (by virtue of the ability to avoid time-consuming and expensive enforcement actions against property owners); and the residents and citizens of the community as a whole. dl~O ~ution of Governing Body Requesting CDBG funds (REQUIRED) iii. D Benefit Documentation (survey results, census data, etc.) D Additional Project Description/Information D Building/Area Information and/or Photographs D Appraisals D Map of Project Area D Professional Certification/Analysis of Feasibility and/or Cost Estimate D Letters in Support of Project/Commitment Letters D Other (specify): ., I certify that the information contained in this application is true and correct and that it contains no misrepresentations, falsifications, intentional omissions, or concealment of material facts. I further certify that no ontracts have been awarded, funds committed, or construction begun on the proposed project, and that none fill b pr"or to issuance of a Release of Funds Notice by the Program Administrator. ~/03 . Date at:,/ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lOb TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator t;,1 ). FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Schedule Joint Workshop with Lakeville- Dakota County East-West Corridor Study, 2030 Blueprint issues DATE: February 18,2003 INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION Dakota County has requested the opportunity to meet jointly with City officials from Farmington and Lakeville regarding the proposed recommendations for the East-West Corridor Study before the final public open house is held. Lakeville has also requested a workshop with Farmington's Council to discuss 2030 Blueprint issues. Monday, March 10, 2003 has been identified as a date that could work for both Council's and Dakota County to get together and discuss the two issues. Lakeville's Council typically tries to schedule workshops at 5:00 p.m., Farmington typically schedules for 7:00 p.m., so 6:00 p.m. is proposed for the time. Lakeville has offered to host the workshop at Lakeville City Hall. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Set a joint workshop date with Lakeville to meet with Dakota County staff to discuss the proposed recommendations for the East-West Corridor Study and discuss 2030 Blueprint issues, for Monday, March 10, at 6:00 p.m. at Lakeville City Hall. Respectfully Submitted, ~ Yh /11MN-- Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file c;c,d:I Joe-. CAMPBELL KNUTSON Thomas 1. Campbell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel 1. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehler Matthew K. Brokl* .Also licensed in Wisconsin Professional Association Attorneys at Law (651) 452-5000 Fax (651) 452-5550 *** John F. Kelly Matthew J. Foli Soren M. Mattick Marguerite M. McCarron Gina M. Brandt Author's Direct Dial: (651) 234-6219 E-mail Address:jjall1l1ik@ck-law.coll1 To: Farmington City Council ~ <v Ed Shukle, City Administrat0I1,l' From: Joel Jamnik, City Attorney Subject: Proposed Settlement for City Council ConsiderationlMcCarthy v. Stewart Title Date: February 18, 2003 Attached for Council review is a jroposed settlement document regarding the McCarthy property and the City's road right-of-way for 203T Street along the northern boundary of the property. As discussed previously with the Council, the settlement as proposed operates in conjunction with the Development Agreement for the Middle Creek East Development. In that agreement, the Developer agreed to the following provision: The developer shall be responsible for the construction of203rd Street east of the plat according to Plan F as described in this contract. Developer further acknowledges and agrees to move or raze the residential structure currently owned by Daniel and Theresa McCarthy that encroaches into the existing Right of Way in order to facilitate construction of203rd Street east of the plat to effectively serve this Development and other developments undertaken by Developer. Developer further agrees to participate fully in the resolution of any dispute regarding the movement or razing of the residential structure including payment to the City of one third of the agreed-upon costs among and between the McCarthy's, the City and Stewart Title Company in settlement. As security for this commitment, Developer shall post an amount not less than $65,000 with the City upon execution of this Agreement. To summarize briefly, the settlement document provides that the McCarthy's will be paid $165,000 to build a new house on another part of their lot, and Stewart Title, the City and the Developer will split that cost in equal portions, plus the cost of demolishing and restoring the existing homestead. The agreement also includes provisions addressing construction of the new residence, assessments for the public improvements, and related costs. The McCarthy's provide an option to the City that is intended both to further secure performance of the agreement as well as added consideration for the developer to participate in the settlement. In addition, the McCarthy's agree to provide any necessary permanent or Suite 317 · Eagandale Office Center · 1380 Corporate Center Curve · Eagan, MN 55121 c;(~3 temporary easements to the City along the twenty northern-most feet of their property as the road is constructed later this year. Given the possible costs associated with litigating this matter, and the possible ramifications to all of the parties depending on the various outcomes should the matter not be settled, it is my opinion that the agreement constitutes a fair and reasonable settlement for all parties. I recommend the Council by motion approve the execution of the proposed settlement document. Respectfully submitted, ~ .,? ..' / ./~/?-<-?~'d!f /./ v,./ c?4-J Joel Jamnik City Attorney Suite 317 · Eagandale Office Center · 1380 Corporate Center Curve · Eagan, MN 55121 cX~'/ BAXTER ENGEN, LTD. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Telephone (952) 892-6666 Fax (952) 892-1919 www.baxterengen.com February 12, 2003 VIA HAND DELIVERY Ed Shukle City Hall 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55124 Re: Middlecreek East Development 5014 West 203rd St., Farmington, MN Our Clients: Dan and Theresa McCarthy Dear Mr. Shukle: Joel Jamnik advised that I forward this directly to your attention. Enclosed please find an executed original of the Settlement Agreement in the above-referenced matter. Please put this matter on the agenda for the next available City Council meeting. If you have any questions, please contact my office. Sincerely, BAXTER ENGEN, LTD. .;' .-:?h ~---- . j/ Minard M. Halverson Southfork Office Centre 17645 Juniper path, Suite 225 Lakevile, Minnesota 55044 a~S' (Reserved for Recording Data) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AGREEMENT entered into as of ,2003, by, between, and among the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), DANIEL McCARTHY AND THERESA McCARTHY, husband and wife ("the McCarthys"), and STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas corporation ("Stewart Title"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the McCarthys are the fee owners of real property situated in the City of Farmington, Dakota County, r..1irm.esota, legally described as That part of the South 140 acres of the Northwest Quarter (NW lf4) of Section Twenty- five (25), Township One Hundred Fourteen (114), Range Twenty (20), Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of the Northwest Quarter (NW lf4) of said Section Twenty-five (25), a distance of 1518.5 feet South of the Northeast comer thereof; thence South along the East line of the said Northwest Quarter (NW lf4) a distance of 550.0 feet; thence West perpendicular to the East line of said Northwest Quarter (NW lf4) a distance of290.0 feet; thence North on a line parallel with and 290.0 fe~t West of the East line of said Northwest Quarter (NW lf4) a distance of 658.0 feet; thence Southeasterly at a deflection angle to the right of 115 degrees 30 minutes a distance of259.5 feet; thence Easterly at a deflection angle to the left of29 degrees 15 minutes a distance of 55.65 feet to the point of beginning, according to the Government Survey thereof. 103291 d~& and commonly referred to as 5014 West 203rd Street West (the "Subject Property"). WHEREAS, previous owners of the Subject Property granted the City of Farmington an easement over the Subject Property in 1971, and WHEREAS, Stewart Title issued title policy 0-9941-531115 ("Policy") regarding the Subject Property when the McCarthys acquired their interest in the Subject Property, and WHEREAS, it was subsequently discovered that the McCarthys' home encroaches on the easement, and WHEREAS, development activities to the west of the Subject Property necessitate the expansion and improvement of the existing roadway by the City, and WHEREAS, McCarthys and the City plan that McCarthys will build a new house on the Subject Property using the funds generated by this settlement, at a location that will not interfere with the easement, and then demolish the exiting residence, all as set forth in this Agreement, and WHEREAS, the McCarthys have filed a claim against Stewart Title under the Policy (for damages incurred or to be incurred as a result of the existing or to be improved road), which claim has resulted in litigation venued in Dakota County District Court and captioned "McCarthy v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company" (the "Litigation"), and WHEREAS the parties desire to resolve the dispute or claims arising out of the foregoing situation; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Acquisition of Existing House. That within five (5) business days of execution of this Agreement, the McCarthys will be compensated in the amount of One Hundred Sixty-five Thousand and No/I00 Dollars ($165,000.00), said amount to be inclusive 2 ;;; fs, 7 of any and all relocation benefits the McCarthys may be eligible for under federal and state law as a result of the nature of this settlement. 2. City and Stewart Title Shares. That of the foregoing amount, the City will pay the McCarthys One Hundred Ten Thousand and No/I 00 Dollars ($110,000.00), and Stewart Title will pay Fifty-five Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($55,000.00). 3. ReleaselDismissal. That upon execution of this Agreement and payment by Stewart Title of its share of the settlement, the McCarthys will execute a standard release to be prepared by Stewart Title relieving Stewart Title from any and all obligations under its Policy, a copy of which Release is attached hereto as Exhibit A. In all other - respects this Agreement shall also serve to release the parties from any and all claims arising out of the 1971 easement and the planned road improvement and upon the execution of this Agreement, McCarthys and Stewart agree that they will instruct their attorneys to enter into a Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice of the Litigation. 4. New Residence. That within ninety (90) days of payment, the McCarthys shall submit an application for a building permit for a new residence to be located on the property. Said application shall be in compliance with all applicable building codes and ordinances of the City. The McCarthys must pay all fees and expenses associated with the issuance of a building permit, including any utility connection fees. The City will issue a building permit upon receipt of the completed application and payment of all fees. The McCarthys will complete construction of the new residence within one hundred eight (180) days after issuance of the building permit. 5. Additional easement. Upon payment to McCarthys of the One Hundred Sixty-five Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($165,000.00), the McCarthys will grant to the City a temporary and/or permanent easement for road purposes for up to an additional twenty (20) feet along the northern part of their property if requested by the City as part of its design approval for construction of203rd Street West. 6. Demolition of Old Residence. Within sixty (60) days after the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new residence, the McCarthys will vacate the existing residence and the City will commence demolition of that structure, to be completed within thirty (30) days of the commencement of demolition. Stewart Title, upon submission of documentation from the City, will reimburse the City for one- third (1/3) of the cost of demolition, removal and restoration, said amount not to exceed Ten Thousand and Noll 00 Dollars ($10,000.00). 7. Utility Service. The City will provide, or have provided, at least one sewer and water connection to the edge of the City's right of way to serve the new single family residence at a location mutually acceptable to the McCarthys. 8. No assessment. As additional consideration for this easement, no assessment or other charge will be made to the McCarthys for any road improvements to 203rd Street 3 c;?~<6 undertaken in 2003 or 2004. The McCarthys will remain responsible for other assessments, previously deferred, for the construction of Pilot Knob Road, however, the assessments shall remain deferred until such time as the McCarthys seek to subdivide all or a portion of the Subject Property. 9. Option. If the McCarthys receive a bona fide written offer to purchase the Subject Property, or a portion thereof, from any third party (a "Third Party Offer") which offer McCarthys wish to accept, or if McCarthys otherwise decide to sell the Subject Property, or a portion thereof, the City shall have the right to purchase the Subject Property (or the portion thereof which is the subject of the Third Party Offer) for the same price and on the same terms as set forth in the Third Party Offer. This option expires five years from the date of the execution of this Agreement. McCarthys shall give the City written notice of their decision to sell the Subject Property, and a copy of the Third Party Offer. The City shall have a period of thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice to elect to purchase the Subject Property (or the portion thereof). If the City so elects to exercise its right to purchase the Subject Property (or the portion thereof), the City shall do so by giving written notice thereof to McCarthys within said thirty-day period (the "Election Notice"). The Election Notice shall specify a date of closing, which date shall be not later than sixty (60) days following the date of the Election Notice. The closing shall follow customary commercial practices as to process and prorations of costs attributable to the Subject Property and/or the closing. The City's obligation to close on the Subject Property following delivery of an Election Notice shall be contingent on the City's satisfaction with all aspects of the condition of the Subject Property, including without limitation, all title matters. The City shall have the reasonable right to enter the Subject Property to make any reasonable inspections. The City may assign its rights under this Paragraph 9 to either D.R. Horton - Minnesota, Inc. or Arcon Development, Inc. in the City's sole discretion. If it does so, the McCarthys agree to fully comply with the terms of this paragraph 9 after receipt of notice of such assignment from the City. In the event the City assigns its rights under this pamgraph to either D.R. Horton - Minnesota, Inc. or Areon Development, Inc., the assignee shall have seven (7) days from notice of a third party offer in which to execute the option. 10. Restrictive Covenant Regarding Enforcement. In order to secure McCarthys' performance under this Agreement, the parties hereby agree that McCarthys may not sell, conveyor further encumber the Subject Property until such time as either a Certificate of Occupancy for the new residence is issued by the City, or until the payments stated in this Agreement have been returned to Stewart and the City. Upon the issuance of such a Certificate of Occupancy by the City, this restrictive covenant shall expire and shall no longer affect the Subject Property. 4 a~q 11. Successors and Assigns. Whenever in this Agreement one of the parties hereto is named or referred to, the successors and assigns of such party shall be included and all covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement by or on behalf of either party shall bind and inure to the benefit of their respective successors and assigns. 12. Amendments. This Agreement, or any provision hereof, may not be changed, waived, discharged or terminated orally, but only by an instrument in writing signed by the party against whom enforcement of the change, waiver, discharge or termination is sought. 13. Governing Law. This Agreement is made and executed pursuant to and is intended to be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald G. Ristow, Mayor By: Edward J. Shukle, City Administrator , _-......Io-J.J' '\.j' Danie} McCarthy . I if // -,,\.' /1 Theresa McC'arthy STE By. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 2003, by Gerald G. Ristow, the Mayor and Edward J. Shukle, City Administrator, respectively, 5 ~/o of the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this l""'\~_ day of ~'~"k"1{1 ' 2003, by Daniel McCarthy and eresa McCarthy, husband and wife. STATE OF I: l\ "", 5 ) jf.t~.i:...~.'.'.~.7..;".:.~...~.: ~.:'...-.~.;":.~.':;'-&.~..>..".h..~<;.:;" ~..... ) ss. ~~. W ~m':,:<:.c"'~;~~!i~{;~EFTA ~ COUNTY OF C \l'~ 1<.. )::~~~;;:_... !::~~'.:.::=::,:~~,...~:.~~:~';: .'; The f~r.egoing instrum. ent w. as acknowledged before me this) "I l1" day of ~ a 2003, by S +u (\ r t F cd.;. \ t. the \L ( e (r-U. &~ of St wart Tit e Guaranty Company, a Texas corporation, on behalf of said corporation. ' (\1/ C-'h- Notary Publ1c v THIS DOCUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: OFFICIAL SEAL Q;RYSTYNA CAMERON NOTARY PUBLIC 51 A. IE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSiON SXl' NOV 24.2006 CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 3 1 7 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 Telephone: 651-452-5000 JJJ 6 a71 . EXHIBIT A RELEASE, AND TERMINATION OF TITLE INSURANCE POLICY Re: POLICY #0-9941-531115 Insured: Daniel J. McCarthy and Theresa McCarthy 523-525 Selby Avenue, St. Paul, MN . Stewart Title Guaranty Company Claim #02-33-00155. For and in consideration of the sum offifty-five thousand dollars ($55,000.00) the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Daniel J. McCarthy and Theresa McCarthy releases and forever discharges Stewart Title Guaranty Company, its affiliates, successors, agents and assigns, from any and all damages, loss, costs, fees, expenses, incidental or consequential damages and attorney fees incurred to date and which may arise in the future by reason of the following: 1. The matters contained in the litigation venued in Dakota County District Court and captioned" McCarthy v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company" (the "Litigation"). 2. The coverages contained in the above referenced title insurance policy #0-9941-531115. " \/\ \. ..,~ Dan~~~~~arthN' \\ j-" 'V'v,\ ./lllj/Ji 1//(1/[ J/'/f Theresa M arthy ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) 55. COUNTY OF ~l\~if\ ) 'LO~Y:, The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this~day of ~\~\.lI)Ju~ 20M, by Daniel 1. McCarthy and Theresa McCarthy. i iij. 'i'-. . ~\. Joy Eljz,~beth Schmaltz . ,::~...~...m. ......j:~ NO'. .~P!.",IIUC MINNESOTA :~b\l1 ~/" C0MMiSSlON .. ; ~:-::. ;:-'\(l~lRES JAN. :)1, 2005 "",'-."''''-"''':';'''- ,.,.""'-".,..\--..o:'.......\..-~..~~- ~/01 jOd City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us FROM: \IA.U Mayor, Council Members, ~ City Administrator,?" ~. Jim Atkinson Assistant City Planner TO: SUBJECT: Ordinance Repealing Title 4, Chapter 3 of the Farmington City Code; Amending Section 10-2-1 of the Farmington Zoning Code; and Adding Section 10-6-3 to the Farmington Zoning Code Establishing Standards for Signs and Billboards. DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington began a comprehensive review of the existing City Code relating to signs and billboards in December of 2001. Staff initiated the review in conjunction with a comprehensive Zoning Code update that has since been adopted. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 9, 2002 and recommended several modifications. Since that time, Staff incorporated the modifications, the City Attorney reviewed the proposed ordinance, and a major reformat occurred. The Planning Commission held a second public hearing on February 11, 2003 to review the final draft of the proposed ordinance. The Commission unanimously recommended approval with no additional modifications. ACTION REQUESTED Repeal Title 4, Chapter 3 of the Farmington City Code, Amend Section 10-2-1 of the Farmington Zoning Code, and Add Section 10-6-3 to the Farmington Zoning Code Establishing Standards for Signs and Billboards as described in the attached ordinance. Respectfully Submitted, Cj--tte:- Jim Atkinson Assistant City Planner Attachment: Proposed Sign Ordinance QJ)3 CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TITLE 4, CHAPTER 3 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE AND ADDING SECTION 10-6-3 OF THE FARMINGTON ZONING CODE ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Title 4, Chapter 3 ofthe Farmington City Code is repealed. SECTION 2. Section 10-2-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended to add the following definitions: ADVERTISING SIGN: A billboard, posterpanel board, painted bulletin board, or other communicative device which is used to advertise products, goods and/or services, any part of which is not sold, produced, assembled, manufactured or furnished or otherwise related to activities conducted on the premises on which such is located. ANIMATED SIGN: Any sign that uses movement or change of lighting to depict action or create a special effect or scene. AREA OF IDENTIFICATION SIGN: A freestanding sign which identifies the name of a neighborhood, a residential subdivision, a multiple residential complex of three or more structures or ten or more units, a shopping center consisting of three or more separate structures, an industrial area consisting of three or more structures or any combination of the above. AWNING: A sign that is part of or attached to an awning, canopy, or other fabric, plastic, or structural protective cover over a door, entrance, window, or outdoor service area. BANNER: Any sign of lightweight fabric or similar material that is mounted to a pole or a building at one or more edges and intended to be displayed for a limited period of time. National flags, state or municipal flags, or the official flag of any institution or business shall not be considered banners. BEACONS: Any light with one or more beams, capable of being directed in any direction or directions or capable of being revolved automatically. BENCH SIGN: A sign attached to or painted on a bench for seating. Cl"/</ BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT: Area legally described as follows: beginning at the point of intersection with the centerline of CSAH 50 and the centerline of CSAH 31 in the City of Farmington, Minnesota, County of Dakota; thence easterly from said point along said centerline of CSAH 50 to the point of intersection with the centerline of CSAH 50 and the centerline of Denmark Avenue; thence southerly from said point along said centerline of Denmark Avenue to the point of intersection with the centerline of the South Creek of the Vermillion River; thence westerly from said point along said centerline of the South Creek of the Vermillion River to the point of intersection the westerly line of Section 36, Township 114 North, Range 20 West; thence northerly from said point along said line of Section 36, Township 114 North, Range 20 West to the point of beginning. CANOPY/w ALKW A Y: A permanent roof-like structure or cover which projects from the wall of a building, or projects over any entrance of walkway. A marquee is not a canopy. CONSTRUCTION SIGN: A sign placed at a construction site identifying the project or the name of the architect, engineer, contractor, financier or other involved parties. Construction signs are meant for temporary identification for not more than 30 days after completion of the project. DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SIGN: A temporary sign located on the site of a new development, listing owners, developers, builders and similar identifying information. DISTRICT: A specific zoning district as defined in the City Zoning Ordinance. ELECTION SIGN: A temporary sign which displays information pertaining to an upcoming governmental district, city, county, state or national election. FACADE: That portion of any exterior elevation of a building extending from grade to the top of the parapet wall or caves and the entire width of the building elevation. FLAG: Any fabric or bunting containing distinctive colors, patterns, or symbols, used as a symbol of a government, political subdivision, or other entity. FLASHING SIGN: An illuminated sign on which the artificial light is not maintained constant in intensity and color at all times in which such sign is in use or any sign which by mechanical means, appears to simulate a flashing sign. HISTORIC DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT: All property designated within the B-2 zoning district. ILLUMINATED SIGN: Any sign which has characters, letters, design or outlines illuminated by artificial light directly to or from the interior of the sign. 2 c;/,.=; INTEGRAL SIGN: A sign carrying the name of a building, its date of erection, monumental citations, commemorative tablets and the like when carved into stone or made of bronze, or other permanent type of material and made an integral part of the structure. MARQUEE: A roof like structure projecting from and attached to a building. Any sign attached to, in any manner, or made a part of a marquee. (i.e. - theater marquees) MONUMENT IDENTIFICATION SIGN: A sign identifying by name a residential, commercial or industrial development which is attached to or supported by a monument structure which is freestanding on the ground, extending horizontally for a minimum of 80 percent (80%) of the entire length of the sign face. The sign shall be constructed of anyone or combination of the following materials: brick, stone, decorative masonry, plastic, aluminum, colored metals, or decay resistive wood. MULTIPLE OCCUPANT SIGN: A sign identifying 2 or more tenants of a building or shopping center. MUNICIP AL ENTRANCE SIGNS: A sign identifying the City name located along roadways at the borders of the City boundary. NAMEPLATE SIGN: A sign indicating the name and/or address of a building, or the name of an occupant thereof, and/or practice of a permitted occupation therein. NONCONFORMING SIGN: Any advertising structure or sign which was lawfully erected and maintained prior to the adoption of this Code which fails to conform to all applicable regulations and restrictions of this Code. OBSOLETE SIGN: Any sign which no longer advertises a bona fide business conducted or products sold. PAINTED WALL SIGN: A sign which has been painted directly onto a building wall, using the wall material as a base of the sign. PORTABLE SIGN: A sign not attached to the ground and designed so as to be movable from one location to another. PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN: Noncommercial signs in the public interest identifying events or public information. PYLON SIGN: Any stationary, self-supporting sign not affixed to any other structure and supported by a pole(s). REAL ESTATE SIGN: A temporary sign erected by a realtor or private individual for purposes of advertising for sale or lease a particular building and/or parcel of property. 3 ~.,.~ READER BOARD SIGN: That portion of the sign used for removable letters and/or numbers to convey messages. ROOF LINE: That line at which an exterior wall surface of a building structure departs from a vertical frame. SIGN: A name, identification, description, display, illustration, structure, device which is affixed to, or painted, or represented directly or indirectly upon a building or other outdoor surface or a piece of land, and which directs attention to an object, product, place, activity, person, institution, organization or business. A sign shall be considered as a structure or part of a structure for the purpose of applying yard and height regulations. SIGN AREA: That area measured within the perimeter lines of the sign which bears the advertisement; or in the case of messages, figures, or symbols, including those attached directly to any part of a building. The sign area encompasses the extreme limits of the written message, representation, emblem or other display used to convey the message of the sign, together with any material or color forming an integral part of the background of the display or used to differentiate the sign from the backdrop or structure against which it is placed. The area of the sign face with more than one sign face shall be computed by adding together the area of all sign faces readable from anyone point. When two identical sign faces are readable from anyone point, both shall be computed. When two identical sign faces are placed back to back, the sign area shall be computed by the measurement of one of the faces provided that both faces are not readable from anyone point and the angle at which the two sign faces are placed does not exceed 45 degrees. SIGN HEIGHT: The height of a sign shall be measured from the base of the sign at the adjacent curb elevation to the top of the highest attached component of the sign. SIGN GRADE: The elevation or level ofthe ground at the place the sign is to be erected. SINGLE OCCUPANT SIGN: A sign identifying 1 tenant of a building or in a development. SPRUCE STREET COMMERCIAL DISTRICT: Area legally described as follows: beginning at the point of intersection with the centerline of CSAH 50 and the centerline of CSAH 31 in the City of Farmington, Minnesota, County of Dakota; thence easterly from said point along said centerline of CSAH 50 to the point of intersection with the centerline of CSAH 50 and the centerline of Denmark Avenue; thence southerly from said point along said centerline of Denmark A venue to the point of intersection with the centerline of the South Creek of the Vermillion River; thence westerly from said point along said centerline of the South Creek of the Vermillion River to the point of intersection the westerly line of Section 36, Township 114 North, Range 20 West; thence northerly from said point along said line of Section 36, Township 114 North, Range 20 West to the point of beginning. SNIPE SIGN: Any sign of any material whatsoever that is attached in any way to a utility pole, tree or any object located or situated on public property. 4 ~) STREET SIGN: For purposes of this Chapter, any reference to street herein shall mean any street or roadway, public or private, but not to include private driveways. TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL SIGN: A sign for the purpose of guiding vehicular and pedestrian traffic in a safe and convenient manner and which bears no advertising information. WALL SIGN: A sign affixed directly to the exterior wall or screening surface and confined within the limits thereof and which project from that surface less than fifteen inches (15") at all points. WINDOW SIGN: Any sign, pictures, symbol, or combination thereof, designed to communicate information about an activity, business, commodity, event, sale, or service, that is placed inside a window or upon the window panes or glass and is visible from the exterior of the window. SECTION 3. Title 10, Chapter 6 of the Fannington City Code is hereby amended by adding a new Section 3 to read as follows: 10-6-3: SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS (A) PURPOSE AND INTENT 1. Purpose: Signs have an impact on the character and quality of the environment as a prominent part of the scenery. They attract or repel the viewing public and affect the safety of vehicular traffic. Their suitability or appropriateness helps to set the tone of the neighborhood. The purpose of this Chapter is to protect and promote the general welfare, health, safety and aesthetics within the City through the establishment of comprehensive standards, regulations and procedures governing the placement, erection, maintenance, use and/or display of devices, signs or symbols. 2. Intent: The provisions of this Chapter are intended to encourage creativity, a reasonable degree of freedom of choice, an opportunity for effective communication and a sense of concern for visual amenities on the part of those designing, displaying or otherwise utilizing needed communicative media of the types regulated by this Chapter. At the same time, the provisions of this chapter are intended to insure that the public is not endangered, annoyed or distracted by unsafe, disorderly, indiscriminate or unnecessary use of such communicative facilities. 5 ~)'i? (B) SIGNS PERMITTED Upon the adoption of this Ordinance, it shall be unlawful and a violation of this Ordinance for any person to erect, construct, paint, alter, relocate, reconstruct, display, or maintain or cause to be erected, constructed, displayed or maintained within the City of Farmington any sign (except as defined in Section 6) without first having obtained a permit from the Zoning Officer. 1. Signs Permitted in All Zoning Districts (a) On-Premises Directional Signs: Where one way access and egress drives are incorporated in a site plan, a sign indicating traffic direction no more than two (2) square feet may be placed at a driveway within five feet (5') of the street right of way. A directional sign indicating the entrance to a two-way driveway may be required where the Zoning Officer deems it is necessary to safely direct the traveling public. (b) Off-Premises Directional Signs: For the purpose of providing off- premise direction to a residential project described in this subsection, or to a new venture less than twelve (12) months following the issuance of an occupancy permit, or to a public, religious or nonprofit institution, or to a use which, in the determination of the Planning Commission, incurs substantial hardship from lack of reasonable identification as a result of its location, a conditional use permit shall be required. Such sign shall not exceed twenty five (25) square feet per face and such sign shall conform to the yard requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. If said sign is lighted, it shall be illuminated only during those hours when business is in operation or when the model homes or other developments are open for conducting business. (c) Real Estate Signs: Temporary signage for the purpose of selling, renting or leasing individual lots, parcels, homes or buildings may be erected provided: (1) One sign may be placed per street frontage and located within 15 feet of the right-of-way line on the property to be sold or leased. (2) The size of such sign shall be a maximum of six (6) square feet for residentially zoned property and a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet for all other properties. (3) The sign shall be removed upon sale, rental, or lease of the property. 6 ~)9 (d) Development Project Sign: Temporary signage for the purpose of selling or promoting a development project or used as construction signs shall comply with the following conditions: (1) For development projects of thirty (30) acres or less, one (1) sign each at a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet of sign area and not exceeding ten (10) feet in height may be erected on the project site. (2) For development projects over thirty (30) acres, two (2) signs each at a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet of sign area and not exceeding ten (10) feet in height may be erected. (3) Signs shall be permitted only after a sign permit has been approved. (4) Signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from the nearest property line on the property to be sold or leased and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. (5) Signs shall be located at least fifty (50) feet from any existing or occupied dwelling unit. (6) Signs shall be removed when the residential development is sold out or the multiple dwelling project is sold or rented. (e) Banners: Banners shall comply with the following conditions: 7 ~'60 (1) A sign permit is required for the banner and shall be valid for thirty (30) consecutive days. No more than three (3) banners may be allowed on a property. (2) Minimum Setbacks: Banners shall be set back at least ten (10) feet from all property lines and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. (3) Banners shall not be erected or maintained in such a manner as may endanger the public safety, interfere with or obstruct pedestrian or vehicular travel, or create a traffic safety problem. (4) The City may place banners on streetlights to display distinctive colors, patterns, or symbols, used as a symbol of the City. (f) Election Signs: Election signs shall be permitted on private property in any zoning district with the expressed consent of the owner or occupant of such property. The following conditions apply: (1) Such signs may not be posted more than sixty (60) days prior to the election and must be removed by those responsible for the erection of the sign or the property owner within seven (7) days following the election. (2) Such signs must be no larger than sixteen (16) square feet of sign area and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height above grade. (3) Such signs shall not be more than three (3) feet in height within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. (4) Any sign found by the City to be in violation of this Section may be, without notice, summarily dismantled, removed or otherwise rendered in compliance with this Section by the City. (5) Shall not be placed upon public right of way or property, except for parks and other public areas approved by the City Council. (6) Installation shall comply with the Fair Campaign Practices Act. 8 d:l%/ (g) Window: Permanent signs printed or otherwise displayed from the inside surface on an individual window shall not exceed two (2) square feet or twenty five percent (25%) of the total window area, whichever is greater. (h) Public Information Signs: Shall be allowed by conditional use permit in all districts. Sign area shall be limited to one-hundred and fifty (150) square feet, and shall comply with setback requirements in each district, and may be illuminated subject to timing and information controls stipulated as a condition to the conditional use permit. (i) On-Premises Signs: For the purpose of identifying or advertising a business, person, activity, goods, products or services located on the premises where the sign is installed and maintained, signs shall be regulated as set forth in subsections-l 0-6-3 (F) 1. (j) No Trespassing: No trespassing signs and no dumping signs shall not exceed two (2) square feet in area per side and not to exceed four (4) in number per lot in "R" Districts. In the "A" Districts such signs shall not be located less than three hundred feet (300') apart. (Ord. 086-173, 2-21-86) (k) Awning Signs: Signs consisting of one line of letters not exceeding nine inches (9") in height may be painted or placed upon the hanging border only of an awning. An identification emblem, insignia, initial or other similar design, not exceeding eight (8) square feet in area may be painted or placed elsewhere on an awning. (1) Painted Wall Signs: Painted wall signs shall be permitted only on structurally sound and homogeneous surfaces. A conditional use permit shall be required. (m) Municipal Entrance Sign: A sign may be placed at the City boundary along a roadway identifying the City name. Such sign shall not exceed one-hundred and fifty (150) square feet and ten (10) feet in height. (n) Open house signs shall not exceed four (4) square feet, six (6) feet in height and the display of signs is limited to the same day of the open house. Said signs may be placed in the City right of way but not exceed three (3) feet in height within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. (0) Temporary holiday signs and displays relating to non-commercial messages associated with national, state or local holidays or festivals. 9 c;;9;~ (p) Garage/rummage sale signs on. private property not to exceed two (2) square feet in size and to be removed on the same day the sale ends. (q) Integral signs displaying only the name, address of the building or date of construction not to exceed two (2) square feet. (r) Flags or insignia of any government (s) Traffic/Street signs approved by the Director of Public Works. 1. Residential Zoning Districts (a) For home occupations: one (1) non-illuminated wall sign not exceeding two (2) square feet in size. (b) For single-family subdivisions and multi-family complexes, one (1) monument sign per street frontage, not to exceed fifty (50) square feet in sign area and five (5) feet in height. Signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from property lines and in no case shall be permitted within the 30 foot triangle of visibility at street intersections. ( c) For permitted nonresidential uses, one (1) free-standing monument sign not to exceed fifty (50) square feet in sign area and ten (10) feet in height. Signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from property lines and in no case shall be permitted within the 30 foot triangle of visibility at street intersections. Wall signs shall not exceed 12% of the building fayade or 300 square feet, whichever is less. (d) Illuminated Signs: Except for temporary signs, illuminated signs shall be allowed in Residential Zoning Districts for nonresidential uses. Such signs shall be illuminated only by steady, stationary, shielded light sources directed solely at the sign, or internal to it, without causing glare for motorists, pedestrians or neighboring premises as outlined in Section 10-6- 8 of the City Code regarding exterior lighting. ( e) Athletic Complex Scoreboards: Freestanding signs shall be permitted on public school property as follows: Scoreboards may be located only at the varsity and junior varsity playing fields at the northeast intersection of Akin Road and CSAH 50 and on the parcel at 800 Denmark Avenue. One scoreboard may be erected for each competitive playing field and is restricted to a maximum of 6'6" in height by 27' in length. The maximum height of the scoreboard at installation is 20 feet. The scoreboards at the varsity and junior varsity baseball fields may display non-illuminated advertisement panels located on the bottom perimeter of the front of the 10 d~3 scoreboard and shall not exceed 2 feet in height or 27 feet in width. A second non-illuminated advertisement panel may be located on the back of the scoreboard at the top of the scoreboard perimeter and shall not exceed 3 feet in height or 27 feet in width. One business may be advertised on both sides of the scoreboard and shall display the exact same sign. Team logos, names and field location may be located on the front of the scoreboard at the top of the scoreboard perimeter and shall not exceed 2 feet in height and 27 feet in width. Team logos, names and field location may also be located on the back of the scoreboard and shall not exceed 2 feet in height and 27 feet in width. The scoreboards located at 800 Denmark Avenue may display non- illuminated advertisement panels on the bottom perimeter of the scoreboard and may not exceed 2 feet in height or 27 feet in length. Team logos, names and field location may be shown on a panel located on the top perimeter of the scoreboard and may not exceed 2 feet in height or 27 feet in length. A second non-illuminated advertisement panel may be located on the back of the scoreboard at the top of the scoreboard perimeter and shall not exceed 3 feet in height or 27 feet in width. One business may be advertised on the back of the scoreboard. 2. B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and 1-1 Zoning Districts (a) WALL SIGNS: One (1) wall sign is permitted per building front as follows for each zoning district: B-1: 10% offa9ade (200 sq. ft. maximum) B-2: 14% offa9ade (300 sq. ft. maximum) B-3: 16% offa9ade (300 sq. ft. maximum) B-4: 16% offa9ade (300 sq. ft. maximum) 1-1: 18% offa9ade (400 sq. ft. maximum) (b) MONUMENT SIGNS are permitted up to one hundred (100) sq. ft. in sign area with a height maximum of ten (10) feet from the ground (including the base) to the top of the sign. The sign must he set back ten (10) feet or more from the property line and shall not be located within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at street intersections. Monument signs in the B-4 district may be illuminated between 8am and IOpm and shall be in compliance with Section 10-6-8 of the City Code. (c) PYLON SIGNS are permitted as follows: 1. No pylon sign shall be located in a required yard. 2. Pylon signs shall not be located closer than five (5) feet from a driveway or parking space.y 11 dl%<l 3. Area and height of pylon signs are determined by the speed of automobile traffic along the frontage street as follows: Speed (mph) Area (sq. ft.) Height (ft) 30 50 18 35 75 20 40 100 22 45 125 24 50 150 26 55 175 28 4. Pylon signs shall not be permitted in the B-4 zoning district. (d)The area identification sign for a shopping center, stating the name of the center and the major tenants, shall be allowed. The maximum size and height shall conform to the requirements of subsection ( c) above. (e) A reader board sign may be attached to the pylon sign and shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the sign area. The reader board shall be included in calculating the allowable sign square footage as required in the individual district. (f) WINDOW SIGNS no more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the total window or two (2) square feet, whichever is greater. (g) MARQUEE SIGNS may be placed on the roof of a covered walk or marquee in a building complex on the vertical face of a marquee and may project from the lower edge of the marquee not more than twenty four inches (24 "), but the bottom of a sign placed on a marquee shall be no less than eight feet (8') above the ground at any point. No part of the sign shall extend above the top of the roof line for a covered walk or above the top of the vertical face ofthe marquee. (Ord. 090-228, 2-5-90) (h) BEACONS: Revolving beacons, beamed lights or similar devices shall be permitted, in all "B" and "I" Districts provided that they do not so distract automobile traffic as to constitute a safety hazard. A conditional use permit shall be required. (i) ILLUMINATED SIGNS: Except for temporary signs, illuminated signs shall be allowed in "B" and "I" Districts. Such sign shall be illuminated only by steady, stationary, shielded light sources directed solely at the 12 ~~ sign, or internal to it, without causing glare for motorists, pedestrians or neighboring premises as outlined in Section 10-6-8 of the City Code dealing with exterior lighting. G) OFF PREMISES ADVERTISING SIGNS: 1. Billboards and other off-premises advertising signs shall be permitted only in the I-I District and only along CSAH 50 and TH 3. 2. A conditional use permit is required for all billboard and other off-premises advertising signs. 3. The maximum sign size shall be three hundred (300) square feet in sign area. Billboards may incorporate cutouts protruding beyond the framed perimeter of the sign face, providing the total sign area does not exceed three hundred fifty (350) square feet. 4. The maximum height to the uppermost portion of any advertising device shall be thirty feet (30'). The building setback limitation for the zoning district in which the sign is located shall apply to setbacks for advertising signs. 5. The minimum radius distance between advertising signs shall be one thousand five hundred feet (1,500'). 6. No billboard or other off-premises advertising sign structure shall be constructed within five hundred feet (500') of any park or residential zoning district. 7. No billboard or other off-premises advertising sign shall be located closer to any intersection than five hundred feet (500'). 8. Billboards and other off-premises advertising signs shall be a single support, metal structure, free of supports or guy wires. The metal shall be treated in such a manner as to prevent deterioration. 9. Billboards may be illuminated provided that there are no flashing, intermittent or moving lights; and that beams or rays of light are not directed toward any portion of public streets. 13 d'%~ 10. Billboards and other off-premises advertising signs are permitted in undeveloped land areas. When a plat is approved and improvements are in place, the billboard must be removed from the site. (Ord. 090-228, 2-5-90) 1. BP and IP Zoning Districts: (a) Single Occupant Building 1. Monument - One (1) monument sign for each principal structure or legal parcel. Lots adjacent to more than one street may have one (1) sign per street frontage. Signs shall not exceed sixty (60) square feet in sign area per sign with a maximum height of six (6) feet. Said signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. 2. Wall- The total sign area on the building shall not exceed 20% of the building fa~ade or 500 square feet in area. (b) Multiple Occupant Building 1. Monument -One (1) monument sign may be erected on a lot. The sign shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square feet in sign area and ten (10) feet in height. Monument signs may include the name of the development and up to four (4) tenants of the development. Said signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. 2. Wall - The total sign area on the building shall not exceed 20% of the building fa~ade or 500 square feet in area. 3. Multiple occupancy buildings shall submit a sign plan that will coordinate signage for the entire project. The plan shall address height, location, size, number type, decorative theme, design, color and materials to be used on the building. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of a sign permit for the building. The owner of the building is responsible for obtaining the sign permit, comply with the 14 d<tr> approved sign criteria, and insure that signs erected are in compliance with the approved sign plan. 2. Spruce Street Commercial Zoning District: (a) Single Occupant Building 1. Monument: a. Under 100,000 square feet - One (1) monument sign for each principal structure or legal parcel. Lots adjacent to more than one street may have one (1) sign per street frontage. Signs shall not exceed one- hundred (100) square feet in sign area per sign with a maximum height of ten (10) feet. Said signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. b. Over 100,000 square feet - One (1) monument sign per street frontage for each principal structure or legal parcel. Lots adjacent to more than one street may have one (1) sign per street frontage. Primary sign shall not exceed one-hundred and fifty (150) square feet in sign area per sign with a maximum height of fifteen (15) feet; secondary street frontage sign shall not exceed sixty (60) square feet in area per sign with a maximum height of six (6) feet. Said signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. 2. Wall- The total sign area on the building may not exceed 16% of the building fa<;:ade or 400 square feet per building face. 15 d~~ (b) Multiple Occupant Building 1. One (1) monument sign per street frontage may be erected on a lot. Lots adjacent to more than one street may have one (1) sign per street frontage. Primary sign shall not exceed two-hundred (200) square feet in sign area per sign with a maximum height of twenty (20) feet; secondary street frontage sign shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square feet in sign area per sign with a maximum height of six (6) feet. Monument signs may include the name of the development and up to four (4) tenants of the development. Said signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from the nearest property line and in no case shall be permitted within the thirty (30) foot triangle of visibility at public or private street intersections or driveway intersections. 2. Wall - The total sign area on the building may not exceed 16% of the building fayade or 400 square feet. 3. Multiple occupancy buildings shall submit a sign plan that will coordinate signage for the entire project. The plan shall address height, location, size, number type, decorative theme, design, color and materials to be used on the building. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of a sign permit for the building. The owner of the building is responsible to obtain the sign permit, prescribe to the approved sign criteria and insure that signs erected are in compliance with the approved sign plan. (c) On-Premise/Traffic Directional Signs - Where one way access and egress drives are incorporated in a site plan, a sign indicating traffic direction no more than two (2) square feet in sign area may be placed at a driveway within five feet (5') of the street right of way. A directional sign indicating the entrance to a two-way driveway may be required where the Zoning Officer deems it is necessary to safely direct the traveling public. (d) Marquee signs are allowed on theater buildings in the sse District and may be placed on the vertical face of the building and may project from the lower edge of the marquee not more than twenty four inches (24"), but the bottom of a sign placed on a marquee shall be no less than eight feet (8') above the ground at any point. No part of the sign shall extend above the top of the roof line for a covered 16 a~9 walk or above the top of the vertical face of the marquee. (Ord. 090- 228, 2-5-90) (C) SIGNS PROHIBITED All signs not expressly permitted under this Ordinance or exempt from regulation hereunder in accordance with this Ordinance are prohibited. Such signs include, but are not limited to: 1. Rotating, Moving, Animated, or Flashing Signs: Rotating, movmg or flashing signs shall not be permitted in any district. 2. Traffic Interference: No sign shall be erected that, by reason of position, shape or color would interfere in any way with the proper functioning or purpose of a traffic sign or signal. 3. Snipe Signs: There shall be no use of snipe signs anywhere within the City. 4. Roof Signs: Roof signs, roof advertising symbols, roof logos, roof statues or roof sculptures shall not be permitted in any district. No sign shall extend above the roof line. 5. Business and Advertising Signs: Such signs shall not be painted, attached or in any manner affixed to trees, rocks or similar natural surfaces, nor shall such signs be affixed to a fence or utility pole. 6. Public Rights of Way: No sign shall be upon or overhang any public right of way, with the exception of B-2 Districts where an overhang of fifteen inches (15") is possible. 7. Bench Sign: Bench signs shall not be permitted in any district. (Ord. 086- 173,2-21-86) 8. Advertising Signs: Signs which advertise an activity, business, product or service that has not been produced or conducted on the premises for more than thirty (30) days and are considered obsolete. (Ord. 090-228, 2-5-90) (D) GENERAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS All signs shall be designed, constructed, and maintained in accordance with the following standards: 17 ~90 1. Except for banners, flags, temporary signs, and window signs conforming in all respects with the requirements of this Ordinance, all signs shall be constructed of permanent materials and shall be permanently attached to the ground, a building, or another.structure by direct attachment to a rigid wall, frame, or structure. 2. All signs shall be maintained in good structural condition, in compliance with all building and electrical codes, and in conformance with this code, at all times. (E) NON-CONFORMING SIGNS 1. Continuation of Use - A nonconforming sign lawfully existing upon the effective date of this Chapter may be continued at the size and in the manner existing upon such date except as hereinafter specified. 2. Upon adoption of this Chapter, a nonconforming sign shall not be: a. Structurally changed to another nonconforming sign if altered to prolong the life of the sign, except to meet safety requirements. b. Structurally altered except to bring it into compliance with the provisions of this Chapter. c. Expanded or enlarged so as to increase the degree of nonconformity of the sign. d. Continued in use if a change of use occurs as defined in the zoning ordinance, or if such sign is proposed to be remodeled, repainted or otherwise changed for the purpose of displaying the new name or other new identification of the premises. e. Repaired or otherwise rehabilitated after damage, destruction or deterioration of more than 50 percent, except to bring into conformance with this Chapter. 3. Nonconforming Sign Maintenance and Repair Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed as relieving the owner of use of a legal nonconforming sign or owner of the property on which the legal nonconforming sign is located from the provisions of this Chapter regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signs, provided, however, that any repainting, cleaning and other normal maintenance or repair of the sign or sign structure shall not modify the sign 18 d?9/ structure or copy in any way which makes it more nonconforming or the sign shall lose its legal nonconforming status. 4. Nonconforming Signs Annexed to the City All existing signs located on property annexed into the City after the effective date of this Chapter that are not in conformance with this Chapter shall be brought into conformance with sixty (60) days after such annexation. (F) ADMINISTRA nON AND ENFORCEMENT 1. Enforcement Officer: All administration and enforcement of this Ordinance shall be primarily implemented by the Zoning Officer. Anyone who wishes to report a sign that may be in violation of this Ordinance should do so to the Zoning Officer. 2. Permit Procedure: Except as otherwise provided in this Ordinance, all signs shall require a sign permit prior to being constructed, reconstructed, moved, altered, placed, or repaired. Sign permits shall be issued by the Zoning Officer. 3. Permit Fees: Each application for a sign permit shall be accompanied by the applicable fees, which shall be established by the Farmington City Council. 4. Cancellation A sign permit shall be null and void if the work for which the permit was issued has not been completed within a period of six (6) months after the date of the permit. A permit may be renewed one time and no additional fee shall be collected for renewal. 5. Fines Any person, organization, corporation or their representatives, found in violation of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the maximum statutory amount. Each day that a violation exists shall constitute a separate and distinct offense, punishable as aforesaid. 19 d~ 6. Appeals To provide for a reasonable interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter, a permit applicant who wishes to appeal an interpretation by the Zoning Officer may file a notice of appeal with the Planning Commission and request a hearing. The Commission shall hear appeals or requests in the following cases: a. Appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the Zoning Officer in the enforcement of this Chapter. b. Request for variances from the literal prOVISIons of this Chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship. (Ord. 086-173,2-21-86) 7. Severance Clause If any section, clause or provision or portion thereof, of this Chapter shall be found to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect any other section, clause, provision or portion thereof of this Chapter. (Ord. 086-173, 2- 21-86) 8. Revocation of Permit The Zoning Officer is authorized and empowered to revoke any permit upon failure of the holder of said permit thereof, to comply with any provisions of this Chapter. (Ord. 086-173, 2-21-86) 9. Maintenance All signs shall be maintained in a safe, presentable and good structural condition at all times. Maintenance shall include painting, repainting, cleaning, replacement or repair of defective parts and other necessary acts. Any sign which is found in a dangerous or defective condition, shall be removed or repaired by the owner of the sign or the owner of the premises on which the sign is located. (Ord. 086-173, 2-21-86) SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication according to law. 20 d93 ADOPTED this 18th day of February, 2003, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor ATTEST: By: Ed Shukle, City Administrator Approved as to form the _ day of 2002. By: City Attorney SEAL Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of , 2002. 21 d9V / / City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 - www.d.farmington.mn.us TO: FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: February 18,2003 . I have received a request that the February 18,2003 agenda be amended as follows: PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS ADD: 1 O. e) Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment - Knutsen Property R~Y sub //fjA - Kevin Carroll Community Development Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farminlrton.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment - Knutsen Property DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION Mr. Bob Knutsen and his development consultant, Mr. Matt Alexander, requested on the afternoon of Thursday, February 13th that two issues involving the Knutsen property be placed on the agenda for the City Council's February 18th meeting. The issues in question involve a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and a proposed amendment of the Zoning Map. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. At its meeting on October 7, 2002, the City Council voted to implement a 12 month development moratorium with respect to most of a 450-acre area that is the subject of a Master Plan that is being prepared pursuant to a $40,000 Opportunity Grant that the City received from the Metropolitan Council. T he City Council elected to exclude from the moratorium a 60-acre parcel owned by Bob and Stan Knutsen and/or the Knutsen Family Limited Partnership [hereinafter "the Knutsen property"]. The Knutsen property is located at the southwest comer of CSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue. [See map attached hereto as Exhibit A.] 2. In November of 2002, as part of an effort to (a) help prepare the Knutsen property for future development and (b) ascertain the Planning Commission's preferences regarding the property, City staff initiated (with the property owner's knowledge and consent) a proposed amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and a proposed amendment of the Zoning Map. [See City Planner Lee Smick's Memorandum dated November 12,2002, attached hereto as Exhibit B.] 3. . The proposed amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed amendment of the Zoning Map were considered by the Planning Commission at its meeting on November 12, 2002. During that meeting, Mr. Alexander indicated that he and the Knutsens did not agree with the location of the zoning line that City staffhad proposed to separate the commercial ( developable) property from the non-commercial (undevelopable) property. The line proposed by City staff was based upon FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) floodplain maps. Mr. Alexander indicated his belief that approximately 9.8 aces of property located west of the pipeline easements, but within the FEMA floodplain, should be rezoned for commercial use (i.e., Spruce Street Commercial zoning district) rather than being rezoned to Parks/Open Space. The Planning Commission continued the matter to the December lOth Planning Commission meeting to provide everyone with additional time to study the floodplain issue. [See the Minutes from the November 12th meeting, attached hereto as Exhibit C.] 4. At the subsequent Planning Commission meeting on December lOth, additional discussion occurred regarding the location of the floodplain line and the "flood fringe." The flood fringe is the area of the floodplain where the depth of the water during a 1 DO-year storm event is one foot or less. Typically this area is at the outer edge (the fringe) of the floodplain. Certain types of development-related activities, including grading and the placement offill, are allowed (under some circumstances) in the flood fringe that are not allowed in the remainder of the floodplain. Mr. Alexander indicated his desire to continue re-examining the F EMA floodplain line in 0 rder to maximize the developable area by including all or portions of the flood fringe in the area to be rezoned to Spruce Street Commercial District. He agreed that ''their engineers will give a report to the city showing where that line should or should not be." The Planning Commission ultimately voted to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and the proposed Zoning Map amendment, with specific direction to City staff to "defer sending the issue to Council until more definitive answers are reached" regarding "the FEMA wetland line." [See the Minutes from the December 10th meeting, attached hereto as Exhibit D.] 5. At the December lOth Planning Commission meeting, the Commissioners also discussed the need to conduct some type of review of potential environmental impacts related to the development of the Knutsen property. The Commissioners talked about the relative merits of (a) a succession of separate Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EA Ws) for each 0 fthe four adjacent private property owners or (b) a single, comprehensive Alternative Urban Area-wide Review (AUAR) for the entire 450-acre area in question. Inasmuch as this issue was also unresolved as of December lOth, the Planning Commission directed staff to" research the issues.. .regarding the environmental studies" and to "defer sending the issue to Council until more definitive answers are reached." [See Exhibit D.] 6. On January 28, 2003, Mr. Alexander contacted City staff and asked that the zoning and comprehensive plan issues related to the Knutsen property be immediately placed on the agenda for the February 3rd City Council meeting. At that point, no "report.. . showing where [the floodplain] line should be" had yet been provided by Mr. Alexander's engineer. City staff contacted Mr. Alexander's engineer by telephone to inquire about the availability of that document and/or a grading plan that would show proposed elevation changes in the flood fringe area. (The requested information was needed to establish a line through the Knutsen property to separate the commercial zoning district from the park/open space district.) The engineer indicated that the 2 requested items were not yet available. City staff therefore advised Mr. Alexander that "definitive answers" (as requested by the Planning Commission) to the floodplain and environmental issues had not yet been obtained, and that the Knutsen matter would therefore not be placed on the agenda for the February 3rd City Council meeting. [See letter dated January 28,2003 from Kevin Carroll, attached hereto as.Exhibit E.] 7. On February 5, 2003, Mr. Alexander delivered to City Hall a drawing or survey depicting a proposed floodplain line and a proposed flood fringe line. The grading plan that had been requested in Exhibit E was not provided, but the survey included a handwritten notation to the effect that the volume of "proposed grading in [the flood fringe] area" would be 21,000 cubic feet. City staff began reviewing the survey and calculations. 8. On February 11, 2003, City Planner Lee Smick e-mailed a letter to Mr. Alexander, confirming an earlier telephone conversation with him in which she had indicated that the City would not object to his initiation of an EA W -level environmental review for the Knutsen property, with the understanding that a higher level of review could potentially be required in the future (by the City and/or by any state or federal regulatory agencies that might become involved) if or when more specific information regarding development plans for the property became known. [See letter from Lee Smick dated February 11, 2003, attached hereto as Exhibit F.] 9. On February 11, 2003, Mr. Alexander indicated to City Planner Lee Smick that Mr. Bob Knutsen wanted tom eet with her and with Community Development Director Kevin Carroll. A meeting was scheduled for 3:30 p.m. on February 13t . 10. At 3:30 p.m. on February 13th, Mr. Alexander and Mr. Bob Knutsen met with Community Development Director Kevin Carroll, City Planner Lee Smick and Assistant City Planner Jim Atkinson at City Hall. Mayor Ristow also a ttended the meeting, at the invitation of Mr. Alexander and Mr. Knutsen. During that meeting, Mr. Alexander stated his belief that the issues involving the floodplain line and the environmental review had been "solved," and that City Planning Division was therefore obligated to immediately take the rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment issues to the City Council for a decision. He also indicated his belief that it was improper or unnecessary for City staff to wait (until March) for the results of a Retail Market Analysis that is being prepared for the City by McComb Group, Ltd. City staff had previously indicated [see page 2 of Exhibit E] that information generated by the Market Analysis would enable staff to "respond to questions.. .regarding the potential impact of the proposed [Knutsen] rezoning on other commercial areas located within Fannington." Mr. Alexander was informed that the agenda for the February 18th City Council meeting had already been finalized and distributed. He and Mayor Ristow asked whether it would be possible to put the Knutsen matter on a special Supplemental Agenda for the February 18th City Council meeting. After conferring with the City Administrator, a decision was made to do so, so that the Council members could decide for themselves whether the information that 3 is currently available is adequate to make an informed decision regarding the pending rezoning and comprehensive plan issues. DISCUSSION As noted above, the question that the City Council must answer is whether this is the most appropriate time to make a final, binding decision on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and the proposed Zoning Map revision regarding the Knutsen property. Four factors related to this question are as follows: 1. Floodplain/flood frinf!e issue: This issue is important because the Knutsen property could not be rezoned until a line separating the developable property from the undevelopable property could be agreed upon. Attached hereto as Exhibit G is a modified copy of a topographic map that was prepared by Mr. Knutsen's engineer and delivered to the City on February 5th (see Paragraph #7 above). The engineer used the elevations and contours on the map to create a proposed 906.5 elevation line (the floodplain line) and a proposed 905.5 elevation line (the flood fringe line). The City Engineer has reviewed and approved the proposed locations of these two lines, contingent on the developer providing compensatory flood storage volume as necessary to offset any storage volume lost due to the placement of fill in the existing floodplain (fringe). City staff modified the map by labeling the two aforementioned elevation lines and by shading the flood fringe area between the two lines. The map that was delivered on February 5th provided (for the first time) the specific information that was necessary to make decisions about the placement of the line that was needed to rezone the Knutsen property into two separate zoning districts. Until February 13th, City staff believed that the property owner preferred or intended to use the 905.5 (flood fringe) line as the zoning line, in order to be able to use some 'or all of the (shaded) flood fringe area for commercial development (including structures, parking lots, etc.). The grading plan that had been previously requested would be used to (a) determine which portions of the flood fringe area should be rezoned to the Spruce Street Commercial district and (b) determine whether the grading plan would provide "compensatory storage volume" - that is, provide sufficient new space to store the floodwater that would be displaced by any fill placed in the flood fringe area during development. However, during the meeting that was held on February 13th, Mr. Alexander indicated that he and/or Mr. Knutsen had decided not to request or allow development or construction activity of any kind to occur east of the 906.5 elevation line, thereby eliminating the need for a grading plan for that area. Accordingly, the 906.5 (flood plain boundary) will separate the developable and undevelopable portions of the Knutsen property. The attached Exhibit H has been prepared by City staff to illustrate the [final] proposed Comprehensive P Ian amendment: a mutually agreed-upon line (at 906.5 feet) between the "Commercial" portion of the Knutsen property and the "Environmentally Sensitive" portion. T he same I ine on Exhibit H illustrates the [ final] proposed Zoning Map division 0 f t he Knutsen property: Spruce Street Commercial zoning west of the 906.5 elevation line, and Park/Open Space zoning east of that line. 4 With regard to this issue, staff recommends that the City Council members do the following on Tuesday night: a. Obtain final verbal confirmation from Mr. Knutsen and from Mr. Alexander that the 906.5 elevation line is the proper boundary for purposes of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Zoning Map revision, and that they have agreed not to allow development or construction activity of any kind to occur within the flood fringe area east of the 906.5 line. b. Obtain an opinion from the City Attorney regarding whether the property owner is required to provide the City with a legal description for the agreed-upon zoning (906.5 elevation) line. c. Determine whether a "definitive answer" to the floodplain question has now been obtained, as requested by the Planning Commission. 2. "Environmental studies" issue: Mr. Knutsen and Mr. Alexander indicated on February 13th that their inclination was to make their own arrangements for an EA W on the Knutsen property. At the same time, they expressed some dissatisfaction regarding the City's inability to guarantee that if they begin work on an EA W, they will never be subjected to a higher lever of environmental review (an EIS or an AUAR). The City has not yet received enough information about the anticipated development of the Knutsen property (number/type of buildings, square footage, proposed phasing of development, etc.) to be able to determine which EQB (Environmental Quality Board) thresholds are applicable. EQB thresholds determine the level of environmental review that is required. Further, the City can neither predict nor control how strict or how lenient other regulatory agencies (MPCA, DNR, EQB, Dakota County Soil & Water Conservation District, Vermillion River Watershed District, etc.) will be with regard to high profile issues, such as the Vermillion River's designation as a protected trout stream. At its meeting on December loth, the Planning Commission indicated a strong preference for a single, comprehensive environmental review process (i.e., an AUAR) that would include the Knutsen property and adjacent properties that would presumably begin developing at about the same time. City staff members plan to present the property owners in question with more specific information about the AUAR process (timetable, cost, etc.) at a meeting that has been scheduled for 4:30 p.m. on Thursday, February 20th. At that time, or soon thereafter, staff will be able to determine which property owners (if any) are interested in participating in a joint AUAR, and which owners (if any) intend to have separate EA W s prepared for their particular properties. With regard to this issue, staff recommends that the City Council members determine on Tuesday night whether a "definitive answer" to the environmental review question has yet been obtained, as requested by the Planning Commission. 3. Market Analvsis issue: The City has retained McComb Group, Ltd. to conduct a commercial Market Analysis of the Farmington area. (A "Summary of Qualifications and Experience" is attached hereto as Exhibit I.) One of the goals of the Market Analysis is to determine the number, type and size of retail stores that can be supported, both now and in the future, by Farmington's population and trade area. As an 5 example, a Retail Market Analysis prepared by McComb Group for the City of S1. Michael in August of 2001 has been enclosed with this Memorandum. T he results 0 f t he Farmington Retail Market Analysis are expected to be available in March. The impending arrival of the Market Analysis is relevant to the proposed rezoning of the Knutsen property because its current zoning classification (Business Park) has a relatively limited number of permitted and conditional uses: health clubs, hotels, offices, research laboratories, restaurants (except fast food), warehousing facilities, dental laboratories and public utility buildings. Rezoning the Knutsen property to the Spruce Street Commercial zoning classification would expand the list of permitted and conditional uses to categories such as retail sales and services, grocery stores, convenience stores, gas stations and fast food restaurants. The Market Analysis that is in progress will provide valuable information about how much commercial space (in each of these categories) can be supported by the Farmington trade area. Mr. Alexander has been advised, both verbally and in writing, of City staffs desire to defer the rezoning of the Knutsen property until the Market Analysis is completed in order to "be able to respond to questions.. .regarding the potential impact of the proposed rezoning on other commercial areas located within Farmington." [Exhibit E, page 2]. The Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update indicates that "[t]he City wants to strengthen the downtown commercial district and extend it to its natural northern edge, the Vermillion River." [Land Use Element, page 9.] The City Center development was an important step in that direction. Any City action that undermines the economic viability of City Center (especially its "anchor tenants"), or of other established downtown businesses, will be contrary to the Comprehensive Plan objective quoted above. The pending Market Analysis will help City staff, the City Council, City Center businesses, residents and others determine whether immediately "opening up" the Knutsen property to a wider range of businesses (through rezoning) is likely to damage the downtown commercial district that the City has worked to protect and enhance, OR whether it is more likely that the current and future Farmington trade area is large enough to adequately support both the downtown commercial district and a separate commercial district (with similar businesses) on the Knutsen property. This Market Analysis issue was not specifically addressed by the Planning Commission when it discussed the Knutsen property on November 12th and December 10th, in part because decisions had not yet been made regarding who would conduct the analysis or when it would be completed. However, the Planning Commission members were aware that the Opportunity Grant application that had been submitted several months before had indicated that: "The City desperately needs more commercial, retail and office space to serve its current and future residents and businesses. At the same time, the City does not want to encourage or allow development patterns 0 r practices that will adversely affect the City's "historic" (and currently thriving) downtown area. " It is therefore recommended that the City Council members determine on Tuesday night whether they are willing to wait until March to review the results of the Market Analysis before they proceed with the proposed rezoning of the Knutsen property. 4. "Urf!encv" issue: As part of its analysis, the City Council should objectively assess whether the perceived need to immediately rezone the property in question is so urgent that it absolutely cannot be deferred for a few more weeks. No concept plan, site plan or schematic plan has yet been 6 submitted to the City for formal review and comment. The EA W process has not yet begun. The last five EA Ws that were processed in Farmington (Riverbend, Meadowcreek, Middle Creek, Charleswood, and Vermillion Grove) took six to nine months to complete, and in many ways they involved fewer environmental issues than the Knutsen EA W will present. A sample Environmental Assessment Worksheet form has been attached hereto as Exhibit J, to provide the Council with some insight into the range and complexity of the issues that the EA W process will address. After the EA W is done, the Planning Commission and the City Council will still need to review and approve a Preliminary Plat, and then a Final Plat. If the City Council chooses to not immediately rezone the property, and tow ait until March for the Market Analysis to be completed, its eems exceedingly unlikely that any negative consequences will ensue for the property owner or for the City. ACTION REQUESTED The options available to the City Council would seem to include the following: 1. Table the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and the proposed Zoning Map revision until City staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council have had an opportunity to review the results of the Market Analysis that is currently being prepared by McComb Group, Inc. 2. Send the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and the proposed Zoning Map revision back to the Planning Commission to determine (a) whether the unresolved issues that were identified by the Commission on December 10, 2002 have now been adequately resolved and (b) whether the matter is now ready for final City Council consideration. 3. Amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the Knutsen property from Business Park to Commercial (western portion) and Environmentally Sensitive (eastern portion), in accordance with the attached Exhibit H; and amend the Zoning Map for the Knutsen property from Business Park to Spruce Street Commercial (western portion)and Parks/Open Space (eastern portion), also in accordance with Exhibit H. Based on an objective analysis of all of the relevant facts, City staff recommends Option #1 or Option #2. There appears to be no evidence that would suggest that the implementation of Option #3 is necessary at this time. 7 s..... o -0 . ..... s..... s..... o u ......., OJ OJ s..... ......., V\ 'E OJ ~ ULL. :J15 s.....~ c..~ V\u VI .!!! ~ It'l c:i ~c = (::J 0 = ~~~ o z~ DO ol1 It'l c:i c o ~ on c I'll QJ .... <( >- "0 ~ ., VI ., VI c: ~ ~ 4;:J "'~>t ~1'llii:2 Cll ~~~~Cll-g~ is CO 'E ~ .S ~ "0 8:~li.~~CLJ~ o U > ~ Cl ~ _ ~ E Cll u ClJ o c:: o N 8 N 0' Q to Cll ... U D<<<<~I eo. EX.J/-/B/T /f City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farminJrton.mn.us TO: City Planning Commission FROM: Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator SUBJECT: Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment - Knutsen Property DATE: November 12,2002 INTRODUCTION The City of Fannington proposes to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map for the Knutsen property located at the southwest intersection of CSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue. DISCUSSION City staff is proposing Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendments for the Knutsen property in order to prepare the property for future commercial development. The Knutsen property consists of approximately 60 acres at the southwest comer of the intersection of CSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue. Staff proposes that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan be amended from Business Park (40 acres) to Commercial (37 acres) and Environmentally Sensitive (3 acres), with the remaining 20 acres maintaining its current designation of Environmentally Sensitive. Staff also proposes to rezone the property from BP (Business Park; 60 acres) to SSC (Spruce Street Commercial; 37 acres) and P/OS (Parks/Open Space; 23 acres). The Knutsen property was not included in the moratorium that was approved on October 7, 2002 for the Opportunity Grant study area. In light of the City Council's decision to exclude the Knutsen property, staff is of the opinion that the Knutsen property should be redesignated to allow for future commercial and retail uses. A Comprehensive Plan amendment and Rezoning are required to prepare the property for the commercial/retail uses that are desired or anticipated. The City proposes to designate 37 acres as the Spruce Street Commercial zone, which would allow for a variety of commercial uses such as retail sales and services, restaurants, hotels, grocery stores, and theaters. The remaining 23 acres, which include wetlands, the Vennillion River floodplain, and four underground gas lines, are proposed to be designated as Parks/Open Space. The Business Park designation in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan was approved on May 6, 2002 along with the zoning designation ofBP. (The original Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation for the property was Industrial.) The 2020 Comprehensive Guide indicated that the northern portion of the business park "could be utilized for commercial spaces" and recommended that hotels, restaurants, and open space with trails bed eveloped. Therefore, staff proposes to a mend the 2 020 Comprehensive P Ian from Business Ex.J.II B II B- / Park to Commercial (for 37 of the 40 acres that are currently designated as Business Park). The remaining 3 acres would be changed from Business Park to Environmentally Sensitive. Currently, the 2020 Comprehensive Plan identifies the eastern portion of the Knutson property as Environmentally Sensitive. This land area encompasses approximately 20. acres. Wetlands and floodplains exist in this location. Additionally, there are four gas pipelines that are located on the westerly side of the Environmentally Sensitive area. Development may not occur within the gas easement. Staff proposes to maintain the Environmentally Sensitive designation on these 20 acres and add an additional 3 acres that have also been determined to be undevelopable for environmental reasons. The graphic below illustrates proposed zoning changes. Proposed Zoning Changes for Knutson Property LAKEVILLE BLVD-cSAH 50 Business Park to ParklO I , I , I , I ."~ , , , , , , I , , , , I ", , Busil'J~.s'park tp Parkf'1p~ Spa,e ", , I' I I " I , , I I , ", I II I , ", I ", , " I I I" I II I I ", , ", , , I' I ~~ Business Park to Spruce Street Corridor ACTION REQUESTED 1. Amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Business Park (40 acres) to Commercial (37 acres) and Environmentally Sensitive (3 acres), with the remainder of the Knutsen 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 PIGS (Parks/Open Space; 23 acres). Respectfully Submitted, Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Bob & Stan Knutsen Matt Alexander, New Century Development B-2 Planning Commission Min utes Regular Meeting November 12,2002 1. Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Rotty, Barker, Heman, Johnson, Larson Members Absent: None Also Present: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner 2. Community Development Director Carroll introduced Jim Atkinson as the new Assistant City Planner. 3. Public Hearings Chairman Rotty opened all scheduled public hearings. > a) Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Business Park to Commercial and Zoning Map Amendment from BP to sse and P/OS - Knutsen Property The property consists of approximately 60 acres and is located at the southwest comer of the intersection of CSAH 50 and Denmark Avenue. The Comprehensive Plan and . Zoning Map Amendments are needed to prepare the property for future commercial development. The council placed a moratorium on development for a large portion of the area, however, the Knutsen property was not included in the moratorium. . The property owner has expressed an interest in moving forward with development of the property. Staff suggested 37 acres on the west side designated as Business Park be changed to Spruce Street Commercial. The remaining 23 acres on the east side should be designated as Parks/Open Space. A small portion in the northeast comer which contains gas line easements should also be designated as Environmentally Sensitive. Regarding the area containing the gas lines and wetlands, Commissioner Larson stated it was called an environmentally sensitive area. What is the change? Staff stated the environmentally sensitive designation is in the comprehensive guide plan and the parks/open space designation is a zoning classification. Many environmentally sensitive areas receive the parks/open space designation. Chairman Rotty stated during the rezoning many conservation districts were rezoned to parks/open space for consistency. Commissioner Johnson asked if the 6-8 acres not in the park would be grandfathered into the business park if not in the flood plain? Staff stated the commission could recommend to the Council that staff recommendations be put into place, or the commission could recommend staff examine this issue, try to clarify it, and then staff could provide the City Council with more information. Another option would be to continue the hearing to the next Planning Commission meeting to have time to obtain more information about the EX I/- / 15/ --,- C!. - I Regular Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2002 Page 2 area and whether it should stay park/open space or be included the Spruce Street corridor. After that meeting, it could be taken to the City Council. Commissioner Johnson asked if the piece is sold, will it be tied into the business park? Staff believes the straight through connection is very important. At some point the road will go all the way through. Chairman Rotty then invited Mr. Matt Alexander to present their preliminary plans. Mr. Matt Alexander, New Century Development, is the developer for the Knutsen property. Regarding the area to the west of the pipeline, when the City took the wetland as overflow, it pulled a lot of the floodplain away. They are having a wetland mitigation study done now. A site survey was done showing the total property to be 62 acres. Everything west of the pipeline easement totals to 46.8 acres. Mr. Alexander stated the difference from staffs recommendation of37 acres to 46.8 is just under 10 acres difference. This is very valuable for the Spruce Street commercial area. He would like to see more study done on this. The study would be reviewed by the City's engineering firm. Mr. Alexander stated it is definitely within their goals to have the roadways from the eastern half line up with the western half. They would also support the rezoning of the area. Chairman Rotty gave a definition of the Spruce Street commercial area. It is a new zoning district, and in earlier discussions with the Planning Commission and City Council, it is one of very high quality type of development in a commercial nature. It should be a continuation of the downtown Spruce Street district. Mr. Alexander stated the commission will not be disappointed. Chairman Rotty then addressed Mr. Alexander's question regarding the acreage being viewed as wetlands. The commission will discuss it, and if a resolution is not reached, perhaps the maps could be modified to provide for more commercial property. Mr. Alexander stated it is their goal in order to create a Spruce Street corridor as a pedestrian-friendly store front feel, they would like to reserve the right to use the area for park/open space dedication for the overall development. Chairman Rotty stated that request would have to be referred to. the City Council. There were no comments by the public. Commissioner Johnson wanted to make sure. that if the flood plain study shows the 6-10 acres can be utilized, does the commission have to re-approve it for these additional acres? As the report would be ready by the next meeting, he would like to continue this until that time. The remaining members of the commission were also in favor of continuing the Public Hearing to the November 26, 2002 meeting. After further thought, in order to prepare the information, staff would recommend continuing the meeting to the December 10, 2002 meeting. The commission agreed. MOTION by Johnson second by Larson to continue the Public Hearing to the December 10,2002 Planning Commission meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. C-Z- Planning Commission Minutes 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 CARRIED. 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, MOTION 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. Staff proposed 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 5><4113/-r f)-j Planning Commission Minutes December 10, 2002 Page 2 compensate floodplain volume elsewhere in the flood fringe, or prepare a floodplain study disputing the existing floodplain location and requesting a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA to relocate the floodplain. The second issue is a possible need for an EA W or AUAR to detennine 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. Staffwould like to know 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: 1. 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 PIOS (Parks/Open Space; 23 acres) . 3. If the Plarming 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 Cenrury 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 comp 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 time line 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 comp 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 srudy 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 FEMA's responsibility to look at the boundaries. The amendment and rezone was initiated by the city and the commission is in agreement. MOTION 1>-2- Planning Commission Minutes Dccember 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 FEMA wetland line and the environmental studies and to defer sending the issue to Council until more definitive answers are reached. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Variance Request - Minimum 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 IO acres from the elementary school property, and combine it with his property to form 30 acres. The minimum is 40 acres. A varian.ce 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 apprQve the variance request to the minimum 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 CARRIED. 4. AdjourneMOTION by Johnson, second by Heman to adjourn. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, _ ._~_...--7.~)7 )~~. .Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant ])-3 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ciJarmington.mn.us January 28, 2003 Mr. Matt Alexander New Century, Inc. 6915 W 146th Street Suite One Apple Valley, MN 55124 VIA FAX AND E-MAIL RE: Knutsen Property Dear Mr. Alexander, City Planner Lee Smick informed me today that you have expressed an interest in getting an item onto the agenda for next Monday's City Council meeting. As I understand it, you would like the City Council to make a decision at that time regarding the rezoning issue and the comprehensive guide plan amendment that were discussed by the Planning Commission on December 10th. As you know, rezoning requests and comprehensive guide plan amendments are typically initiated and pursued by property owners or their developers/consultants. City staff elected to initiate the rezoning and comprehensive guide plan matters in connection with the Knutsen property in order to (a) expedite the planning process and (b) determine the Planning Commission's preferences and concerns regarding the development of the Knutsen property. Although the Planning Commission recommended at its December 10th meeting that the proposed rezoning and the proposed comprehensive guide plan amendment be approved, the minutes of that meeting also reflect the following directive: The commission directed staff to further research the issues regarding the FEMA wetland l{ne and the environmental studies and to defer sending the issue to Council until more definitive answers are reached. At this point, the position of City staff is that definitive answers to the aforementioned issues have not yet been obtained. I have been told that your engineer (Bob Wiegert) and the City's consultant (Eric Peters) are in agreement with regard to the location of the FEMA floodplain on the Knutsen property, and with regard to the portion of that floodplain that is considered "flood fringe." There also seems to be general agreement that fill can be placed within the flood fringe (but not within the remainder of the floodplain) in order to make it developable, as long as sufficient" compensatory volume" is.provided on the Knutsen property to replace the storage capacity that will be lost by the placement of the fill. However, what we are currently missing is the information that will enable the City and its consultants to properly analyze the compensatory volume issue. Eric Peters has indicated to me that we need (a) a grading plan that shows "before and after" elevations for any areas in which fill will be placed and any areas that will be excavated to create new storage capacity, and (b) supporting EX+!,!317" E;- J calculations from your engineer that substantiate the fact that newly-excavated areas will provide enough compensatory storage volume to offset the storage areas in which fill will be placed. The grading plan will also help the City verify that fill will not be placed in the "non-fringe" portion of the floodplain. Lee Smick and I spoke with Bob Wiegert by telephone this afternoon, at which time he indicated that the proposed grading plan and the calculations referred to above are not yet available. Without them, the City's engineers cannot complete their analysis of this issue. Without that analysis, City planning staff cannot make an informed recommendation to the City Council regarding the proper boundary between the developable ("Spruce Street Commercial" zoning classification) and undevelopable ("Parks/Open Space" zoning classification) portions of the Knutsen property. A similar problem exists with regard to the amendment of the Comprehensive Guide Plan --- determining the location of the line between the "Commercial" area and the "Environmentally Sensitive" area. For these reasons, and others, we do not presently intend to put this matter on the agenda for the February 3rd City Council meeting (the deadline for which is tomorrow at noon). When the City receives the grading plan and supporting calculations referred to above, we will forward them to Eric Peters for review and comment. He will need a minimum of a week for his analysis, and the City will need to receive his written comments at least two weeks prior to the date of any City Council meeting at which this subject will be addressed. Please bear in mind that the agenda for each City Council meeting is finalized by noon of the Wednesday preceding that meeting. Staff memos regarding each agenda item are also due at that time. As alluded to above, City staff will take the rezoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan issues regarding the Knutsen property to the City Council when we feel that we are prepared to provide definitive answers to the issues that the Planning Commission identified on December 10th (the aforementioned floodplain issue and the "environmental studies" issue, which will be addressed in a separate 1 etter). W e a Iso want to be able tor espond to questions that the Council members ( and others) have already asked regarding the potential impact of the proposed rezoning on other commercial areas located within Farmington. Much of the information needed to answer those questions will come from the Market Analysis component of the Master Plan that we have previously discussed with you. We presently anticipate that the results of the Market Analysis will be available by March 10th. The fact that the City initiated (and intends to pursue) the rezoning and the comprehensive guide plan amendment in this instance does mean that you and your clients are prohibited from doing so on your own. If you wish, you can prepare and submit a rezoning application and an application for a comprehensive guide plan amendment, pay the required filing fees, and work with staff to schedule the required public hearing(s) before the Planning Commission. The next Planning Commission meeting is on February 11 tho Public hearing notices must be published at least 10 days in advance of the hearing date, so any notices for the February 11 th meeting would have to be published in the January 30th issue of the Farmington Independent. The publication deadline for that issue has already passed. Accordingly, the earliest opportunity for a public hearing before the Planning Commission would be at its subsequent meeting on March 11 th. The matters in ~estion could then potentially be presented to the City Council at its meeting on April 7th. (March It will be the submission deadline for the March 17th City Council meeting, so there may be insufficient "turnaround time" after the March 11 th Planning Commission meeting to meet that deadline.) Regardless of who pursues these land use issues, I consider it unlikely that the City Council will approve a rezoning or a comprehensive guide plan amendment until the questions referred to in the preceding paragraph have been answered to the Council's satisfaction. E-Z- I hope that this letter clarifies the City's position and intended course of action regarding the issues addressed above. Please feel free to call me at 651-463-1860 if you have any questions. If you believe we should schedule a meeting to discuss this (or any other) issue in person, please let me know so that we can find a mutually convenient time to do so. Sincerely, Kevin Carroll Community Development Director cc: Lee Smick, City Planner E-3 ~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ciJarmimrton.mn.us February 11,2003 Mr. Matt Alexander New Century 6915 W. 146th Street Suite One Apple Valley, MN 55124 RE: Knutsen Property Dear Mr. Alexander: Staff has preliminarily reviewed, and discussed with you, a variety of environmental issues related to the Knutsen property. At a recent Development Committee meeting, staff discussed (at your request) whether an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) or an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) would be required for the property. That type of determination is typically made after a city has received a site plan, or a preliminary plat application with supporting documentation, or some other type of written submission that is sufficient to enable the city to assess the type (residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) of development that is planned, the relative amounts (acreage or square footage) of such development, the phasing or time span over which the development will occur, and various other factors that ultimately determine the required level of environmental analysis. In this instance, or at this stage in the process, the city has very little written information, and very few specifics, upon which such a determination can be based. The verbal reports that the city has received from you regarding the general plans for the development uf the property in question suggest that an EA W might be an acceptable level of environmental review.l~::*~?;:.and, your clients wish to proceed with the preparation and submission of an EA W, you are certairily welcome to do so. If or whenjhe 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 envirortmental review, you will be immediately notified of that fact. . As you know, a property owners' meeting will be held on February 20, 2003 to discuss the possibility of jointly preparing an AUAR for some or all of the properties located within the Opportunity Grant study area. It is our hope that you and the Knutsens will be able to attend that meeting in order to obtain more infomlation about the potential advantages (in terms of cost, timing, and efficiency) of that type of collaborative effort. If you have any questions concerning this information, please do not hesitate to call me at 651-463-1820. Sincerely, Lee Smick, AICP City Planner cc: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director c./< fhl3~7 po J J Q\;IOCl ),ll~l\liJ 'JlCl '", ;\'\ ; ;( ..' ~: J : f' ...~// :- d\;lW :.'-- - . t' CI.I on c .... l.- lL. "C o .Q lL. t' . ' ;\ ~ I' , , , , >- .~ i. r:'~ ~ J , : 'i' , \ .~ ::t '3 , . ~ .... i. lDJi' . ~ ~ .. '," ;:. . ~ 4 .. .. . . i ~. f' c. " ... i' . <f:e ru l- . / c..' 0 "- 0 0.. S -....... " :::,L ~ .,----l <[ L -' q C/) Wi -. ) ,. ,i ~ ; ~! Ii. ~\~ _~J~ / ~ I ;~ ~:.:-: \'; ~' - -~~J . - f' , , . f' f' . . f' . ' <:; f' . , U . ' ., " '\ , .- I ~.~ . . /' ~ . ') ~ / c " ::J ./, g ..~ C - ~ I' - 0- "U o o u:: o ~ ~ f' '" " . . i!' ,,\0 _,,-~!"<. il ~ r" . " .t , . ~. r' .;.... Olf.-.-.~' " . . . ,,/,.~- .",:'.V, 1.1-::-' ~' t' :"\ u '.:.1 -,. a ~:-:' Ll :1 .q~~_~ tr)l,ll! Fill! IE >< 1-1,/3/7 G "0 c: to c: ~ 0- QJ VI .~ c: VI QJ ~ E .c."O QJ c: '- QJ o.E E < 00. U to "O~ ~on o c: a. .... o c: '- 0 O-N t ~ .r: l~'. ~. f' .~ F::." l: ~ f' '~. ~ f' , . : ~ e.G f' ~'$ \ \ if' i...t ~ J ' ", '~ f i r\ .. ~ . ; J , 1I~1 iU,) QI;iO~ " t. f' f' f' ~ '\ ~ . f' f. ro 'u ~ , . ~. Q) E E , . 0 u - , ." .~ "'. :\ '\':. ~t~ . ., "- - ~'\ f' , , - ~ . ; . f' 0, '. ~ . .. ' i - i . CU '.......... .,--j (,/) w o 0.., '. c. -' L..J ) -...: \ I ..- ',1-." . f . f' 0,. . , . f' . -. J' ''j. .. c: .!2 0- Q) > .- \1\ C Q) .c:. Q) ~ 0- E o u --' CO 'U ~ Q) E E o u ...... Q) Q) .... ...... VI Q) U ::l .... 0- VI -I f' L: ~ ," .'J . . J' i L I . . r' Sl ~ on c: 'C o N .; ~ I :'"1 ~ a Cl _ ~ ~l C' I.:J l.~; ;r lnOt! t:: l '(1 G~I/-1IS/7 -If 1 1 1 j J - . . l SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE BiB MCCOMB GROUB Ltd. ODD REA L EST ATE AND RETAIL CONSULTANTS c'KH Il3/7' ::c - J I I PROFILE McCOMB GROUP, LTD. I I McComb Group, Ltd. was established in 1974 and provides consulting services to the real estate industry based on years of experience with development in the United States and Canada. The firm offers a variety of consulting and analytical services including market and consumer research, financial feasibility, economic impact assessments, design assistance, and development consulting. These services are provided for all types of property. I I McComb Group, Ltd. can provide consulting assistance to every phase of a project's life. Previous engagements have involved product types and services shown below. I REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES I I Product Types Shopping Centers Office Buildings Business Parks Industrial Parks Apartments Hotels Senior Housing Casinos Mixed-Use Developments New Urbanism Developments Services I Site Selection Market Research I I I Consumer Research Remerchandising & Redevelopment Design Review Consulting Financial Feasibility Development Counseling Tax Increment Plans Economic Impact Analysis Litigation Support I McComb Group, Ltd. specializes- in structuring public/private joint ventures for development that combine the strengths of private and public organizations to create unique developments that would not otherwise be feasible. I I These services have been provided to a wide range of clients including the nation's largest institutional investors and development companies as well as small development organizations and state and local government. I I I :1:-2- I I I I - I . . . . . . A . 111 JI -- Jill II QUALIFICATIONS McCOMB GROUP, LTD. Market research for shopping centers, office buildings and residential developments has been a primary activity of McComb Group, Ltd. for the past 25 years. Our experience ranges from: . Convenience centers to mega malls; . Small office buildings to office towers such as Norwest Center and City Center; ! Residential subdivisions, townhomes, apartments, condominiums and senior housing; . New urbanism developments including offices and services mixed with residential. We have worked in markets as small as Biwabik, Minnesota and as large as New York City. Geographically, our experience ranges from New England to Los Angeles and Vancouver to Miami. The diversity of our experience provides an understanding of what types of retail, service, and office uses can be supported by different size markets. The firm's market research capabilities and proprietary purchasing power model have been utilized to determine the size or supportable square footage for convenience centers, neighborhood centers, community centers, regional malls, neighborhood shopping areas, and central business districts. Municipalities rely on McComb Group, Ltd. to determine the amount of retail space that can be supported within their community based on the pace of residential development and full build-out retail potential. This analysis takes into consideration .the geography of the community and the relationship to existing and potential competitive commercial areas or shopping centers. This analysis determines the potential for convenience, neighborhood, community, and regional shopping concentrations based on each community's unique location and growth potential. Recent studies have been conducted in Apple Valley, Shoreview, North Oaks, Brooklyn Park, and Franklin, Wisconsin. McComb Group, Ltd. has extensive experience in determining the number, size and type of retail stores that can be supported by different size population and household trade areas. This experience was gained by working on actual shopping centers whose actual retail sales derived from the trade area could be determined and analyzed with respect to trade area purchasing power by store type. Retail and service purchasing power represented by trade area households is calculated using McComb Group's proprietary purchasing power model. This model makes it possible to estimate sales potential for over 150 types of retail and service establishments and is based on the new NAICS codes. Based on our past experience, we can estimate the likely sales potential for individual store types at any location. This permits us to determine if sufficient sales potential exists to support individual retail or service establishments. This analysis permits us to craft a tenant mix that can be supported by households living within the identified trade area for any proposed development. T-3 I It I I I I JI . . .- II III III JIll III III " JIll ~ CBD AND COMMERCIAL AREA REVITALIZATION McComb Group, Ltd.'s experience ranges from major super-regional to smaller neighborhood and community centers, office, business parks, and housing. Services to these clients include market and consumer research, financial feasibility, and development consulting. McComb Group uses this expense and experience to assist communities to revitalize their older commercial area and achieve the development potential supportable by their trade area population. Services for these engagements typically include, but are not limited to: site evaluation, trade area delineation, estimating purchasing power to determine supportable square footage of retail, service, and office space by business !)'re. These engagements have also included estimating housing potential as well. Communities for which McComb Group has conducted these services are listed below. Area DowntownlCBD Retail Albuquerque, New Mexico Biwabik, Minnesota Chanhassen, Minnesota Chaska, Minnesota Crookston, Minnesota Crystal, Minnesota Maple Grove, Minnesota Nicollet Mall Revitalization Owatonna, Minnesota Pipestone, 11Urunesota Plymouth, Minnesota Rochester, Minnesota St. Peter, Minnesota Shakopee,Minnesota Sioux Falls, South Dakota Wayzata, Minnesota Willmar, Minnesota Columbia Heights, Minnesota Hastings, Minnesota Grand Forks, North Dakota Hennepin Avenue Redevelopment Strategy Moorhead, Minnesota White Bear Lake, Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota Savage, Minnesota Neighborhood Retail Areas Neighborhood Shopping Areas Elliot Park Neighborhood Nicollet and Grant Commercial Area Selby and Snelling Commercial Area Selby Avenue Revitalization Study Selby and Western Nicollet and Lake Commercial Area Chicago and Lake 66th and Cedar Hennepin and Lake Commercial Area Texa-Tonka Area Client City of Albuquerque City ofBiwabik City of Chanhassen City of Chaska City of Crookston City of Crystal City of Maple Grove City of Minneapolis City of Owatonna City of Pipestone City of Plymouth City of Rochester City of St. Peter City of Shakopee City of Sioux Falls City ofWayzata City of Will mar Columbia Heights HRA Hastings HRA Lander Development Minneapolis Downtown Council Moorhead HRA White Bear Lake HRA City of St. Paul City of Savage City of Madison City of Minneapolis City of Minneapolis City of S1. Paul City of S1. Paul City of S1. Paul Northwest Properties Ray Harris Company Richfield HRA Uptown Business Association City of S1. Louis Park ::r-'f I I I I -- . . . . . . . III III ,. JII III III III COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND USE . Rosemount Research Center - Rosemount, Minnesota University of Minnesota Conducted market research 'and financial feasibility as part of a consultant team evaluating the development potential of a 7,635-acre tract owned by the University of Minnesota in Dakota County. Work tasks included identifying long-term demand for residential (single-family and multi-family), business and research park, commercial and other related uses. Specific issues addressed included: absorption rates by use type, development strategy, financial returns, and asset management issues. Upper Mississippi River Master Plan - Minneapolis, Minnesota Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board Conducted market research to determine long-term demand for office, business park, retail, commercial, and residential uses in a 2,600-acre area along the Mississippi River in north Minneapolis. The study area was four miles long and includes both sides of the river. Market research tasks included determining market potential for each type of development including square feet or housing units for specific locations for three alternative master plan concepts. Commerci~l Development Potential- Franklin, Wisconsin City of Franklin Conducted market analysis to determine future commercial and retail space demand in the City of Franklin for its comprehensive plan. Franklin is a rapidly growing Milwaukee suburb and desired to achieve its full retail potential. Work tasks included evaluation of existing and . planned retail areas in Franklin, projecting population growth and resident purchasing power until the community reached full development. The locations of future retail shopping centers, size and type, were determined including square footage and acreage. . Commercial Development Potential- St. Michael, Minnesota City of St. Michael Market analysis was conducted to determine the amount of retail space that could be supported in St. Michael's planned Town Center. The Town Center area encompassed 350 acres in the central part of the City. Market analysis identified market potential for a neighborhood-size commercial area and a town center with a traditional downtown environment. Commercial Potential Analysis - Brooklyn Park, Minnesota City of Brooklyn Park Market analysis was conducted to determine the amount of retail space that could be supported in the northern Brooklyn Park Master Plan area. The master plan area encompassed 64,000 acres of farm land and forests in the northern part of the City. Planned uses including residential, retail, commercial, office, and a large regional park. Market analysis identified market potential for a community-size commercial area in a village environment. . 7- 5 I .. I . . . . . . ", II . . . . II lit . . NEO-TRAPITIONAL DEVELOPMENT River City Center - Shakopee, Minnesota Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Agency Conducted market research to determine market potential for retail component of River City Center, which contains independent living senior housing on the upper two floors. Recommendations included identifying potential tenants, retail sales potential and achievable rental rates for the retail component. CanalSide Commons - Cape Cod, Massachusetts Cubellis Associates, Inc. Market research was conducted fOF- CanalS ide Commons, a neo-traditional, mixed-use development containing 539,000 square feet of retail space, a ten-screen cinema, 100,000 square feet of office, 143,700 technology center, 120-room hotel, and 100 apartment units in a village environment. Common area features included transit station, clock tower, community center, entertainment gazebo, and public park. Block 52 Development - Monticello, Minnesota Monticello Housing & Redevelopment Authority Financial feasibility analysis was conducted for a three-story retail and office mixed-use development in downtown Monticello. The 81,800 square foot building will be constructed in two phases and has retail shops on the first floor, two floors of office, and fifty basement parking spaces. Franklin-Portland Gateway - Minneapolis, Minnesota Central Community Housing Trust Market analysis was conducted for the retail component of a five-building mixed-use residential and retail development. Retail space of 20,600 to 24,000 square feet is included in four of the proposed buildings. Work tasks included identifying supportable gross leasable area, potential tenants, and market rents. The Village - Brooklyn Park, Minnesota City of Brooklyn Park Market research was conducted to identify the demand for retail space in a mixed-use residentiaVcommercial development in the southeast corner of Brooklyn Boulevard and Zane Avenue North in Brooklyn Park. Lowertown Redevelopment St. Paul, Minnesota Market analysis and financial feasibility was conducted for townhouse, mid-rise and high-rise building to launch the next development phase in Lowertown. Prototypical housing developments were created for both rental and for-sale housing consistent with development sites in Lowertown. Each prototypical development type contains the flexibility to accommodate retail service and other commercial uses on the first floor to maintain street-level activity. Other prototypes envisioned urban residential streets with stacked residential units. Financial feasibility was conducted for each residential housing type. ::I=-(p I I I t I I . . GOVERNMENT CLIENTS City of Albuquerque, New Mexico City of Baltimore, Maryland Baltimore Stadium Authority, Baltimore, Maryland City of Bismarck, North Dakota City of Biwabik, Minnesota . City of Bloomington, Minnesota City of Buffalo, New York Chanhassen - Housing Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota City of Chaska, Minnesota City of Crookston, Minnesota City of Crystal, Minnesota City of Eagan, Minnesota City of Grand Rapids, Minnesota Hennepin County Department of Energy and Environment, Minnesota City of Madison, Wisconsin . . Metropolitan State University, Minnesota Metropolitan Transit Commission, Minnesota City of Miami, Florida City of Minneapolis, Minnesota Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, Minnesota . Minnesota Department of Administration Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota State University System Moorhead Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota North Dakota State Highway Department City of Oakland, California Olmsted County, Minnesota City of Owatonna, Minnesota Port Authority of the City of St. Paul, Minnesota Public Works Canada, Ottawa, Canada . . . . Ramsey County, Minnesota City of Richfield, Minnesota City of Rochester, Minnesota City of Rockford, Illinois . City of Rosemount, Minnesota II III City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota City of St. Peter, Minnesota City of Shakopee, Minnesota City of Sioux Falls, South Dakota City ofWausau, Wisconsin . City of Wayzata, Minnesota City of White Bear Lake, Minnesota City of Willmar, Minnesota . -- . :I-7 I .. . . . . -- . .. ", .. II III . III . JI . . CONSULTING CLIENTS The following is a representative list of clients served by the McComb Group. Aetna Real Estate Investments; Hartford, CT Alexander's Department Stores; New York, NY Brookfield Development Corporation; Minneapolis, MN Bechtel Investments, Inc.; San Francisco, CA Carlson Companies; Minneapolis, MN Century Development; Houston, TX Chemical Bank; New York, NY CIGNA Investments, Inc.; Hartford, CT Corporate Property Investors; New York, NY Dayton Hudson Corporation; Minneapolis, MN Dayton's Department Store; Minneapolis, MN Equitable Real Estate Company; Atlanta, GA General Growth Center Companies; Minneapolis, MN Goldman, Sachs & Company; New Y orIc, NY Hill Health Care; Oakland, CA Homart Development Company; Chicago, IL Hubbell Realty Company; Des Moines, IA LucasFilms Ltd.; San Francisco, CA MEPC American Properties; Dallas, TX Merrill-Lynch-Hubbard; New York, NY New England Development; Boston, MA New York State Employees' Retirement System; New York, NY Northern States Power Company; Minneapolis, MN Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance; Milwaukee, WI Northwestern National Bank; Minneapolis, MN Opus Corporation; Minneapolis, MN Palmer Group; Chicago, IL Prudential Real Estate; Minneapolis, MN Pyramid Companies; Syracuse, NY Radisson Hotel Corporation; Minneapolis, MN Richland Mall Associates; Johnstown, P A Rouse Company; Columbia, MD Salomon Brothers, Inc.; New York, NY Shears on-Lehmann; New York, NY Simon Property Group; Indianapolis, IN Skywalker Development Company; San Francisco, CA Trammell Crow Co.; Minneapolis, MN Trump Organization; New York, NY Twentieth Century Fox Real Estate Corp.; Los Angeles, CA Yarmouth Group; San Francisco, CA :r-g . .- . . . . ~ , all III . II . . . JAMES B. McCOMB President . McComb Group, Ltd. Mr. McComb founded the consulting firm that became McComb Group, Ltd. in 1974 to provide specialized consulting services related to real estate development. Mr. McComb has over 30 years of experience with business and government in the areas of real estate development, economic analysis, market and consumer research, business and government finance, and environmental issues. He has been conducing retail impact studies of transportation projecJs for over 20 years, utilizing experience from his private sector consulting. Previous business experience includes serving as a senior staff member and Director of Environmental Development for Dayton Hudson Corporation, one of the nation's largest retailers; Vice President of Fine Associates, a real estate development company; and Partner in Laventhol & Horwath, a national consulting and accounting firm. Government experience includes serving on the staff of Governor Elmer L. Anderson, and numerous consulting assignments for state and local government. Major responsibilities at Dayton Hudson Corporation included developing and implementing programs to revitalize downtown retail areas and stimulate new urban developments. Areas of involvement included comprehensive planning, land assembly, development programming, traffic circulation, parking, pedestrian circulation, and coordinating interests and efforts of business leaders and government officials. These responsibilities were carried out in six major cities: Detroit, Minneapolis, Oklahoma City, Phoenix, Portland, and St.Pau!. . With Fine Associates, Mr. McComb was involved in the ownership and management of residential real estate (both high-rise and low-rise), and market and financial analysis for major office buildings and other types of real estate. Responsibilities at Laventhol & Horwath included directing the Real Estate Advisory Services practice of the Minneapolis office, and national shopping center and retail consulting. During the past 30 years, Mr. McComb has visited and studied over 600 urban developments in the United States, Canada, and Europe. These developments range in size and scope from large downtown multi-use developments and regional centers to small specialty retail centers and adaptive reuse rehabilitation projects. Professional associations include membership in the International Council of Shopping Centers, the Urban Land Institute and its Affordable Housing Council, National Retail Federation (NRF) and the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO). Mr. McComb is a charter member of the Minnesota Chapter of Lambda Alpha, an international fraternity of real estate professionals, and is a member of the Minnesota Retail Merchants Association Board of Directors. . :r-Cf ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to preparers: An electronic version of this fonn is available at www.mnplan.state.mn.us.EAWGuidelines will be available in spring 1999. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EA W is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for - but should not complete - the final worksheet. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. The complete question as well as the answer must be included if the EAW is prepared electronically. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EA Win the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. ' 1. Project title 3. RGU Contact person Title Address City, state, ZIP Phone Fax E-mail 2. Proposer Contact person Title Address City, state, ZIP Phone Fax E-mail 4. Reason for EA W preparation (check one) _ EIS scoping _ Mandatory EA W _ Citizen petition RGU discretion _ Proposer volunteered If EA W or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and subpart name 5. Project location County CityfTownship 'A 1,4 Section Township Range Attach each of the following to the EAW: · County map showing the general location of the project; · U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1 :24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); · Site plan showing all significant project and natural features. 6. Description a. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. tExJ/'~T .:f-l c. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be canied out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneticiaries. d. Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots planned or likely to happen? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review. e. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? 0 Yes DNo If yes, briefly describe the past development, time line and any past environmental review. 7. Project magnitude data Total project acreage Number of residential units: unattached attached maximum units per building Commercial, industrial or institutional building area (gross Boor space): total square feet Indicate areas of specific uses (in square feet): Office Retail Warehouse Light industrial Other commercial (specify) Building height Manufacturing Other industrial Institutional Agricultural If over 2 stories, compare to heights of nearby bui ldings 8. Permits and approvals required. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. Unit of ~overnment Type of application ~ 9. Land use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential cont1icts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. -T- 2 10. Cover types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: Before After Before After Types 1-8 wetlands Wooded/forest Brush/Grassland Cropland Lawn/landscaping Impervious surfaces Other (describe) TOTAL If Before and After totals are not equal. explain why: 11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts. b. Are any state-listed (endangered. threatened. or special concern) species. rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat. colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities on or near the site? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number: . Describe measures to minimize Or avoid adverse impacts. 12. Physical impacts on water resources. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration - dredging, filling. stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment - of any surface waters such as a lake. pond, wetland, stream or drainage qitch? 0 Yes 0 No If yes. identify water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI: . Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. 13. Water use. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells. connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? 0 Yes 0 No If yes. as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply affected, changes to be made. and water quantities to be used; the source, duration. quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers andDNR appropriation permit numbers. if known. Identify any existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on site, explain methodology used to determine. 14. Water-related land use management district. Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district. a delineated 100- year flood plain. or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? 0 Yes 0 No If yes. identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. 15. Water surface use. WiIl the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. .J"" - 3 16. Erosion and sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres ; cubic yards . Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. 17. Water quality: sudace water runoff a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any storm water pollution prevention plans. b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. 18. Water quality: wastewaters a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems. c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary. d. If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: minimum average to bedrock: minimum average Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. b. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. (J-4 20. Solid wastes, hazardous wastes, storage tanks a. Describe types. amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste. indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be moditied for recycling. Ifhazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments. b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission. c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans. 21. Traffic. Parking spaces added daily traffic generated . Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) . Estimated total average . Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of occurrence . Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. 22. Vehicle-related air emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EA W Guidelines about whether a detai led air quality analysis is needed. 23. Stationary source air emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EA W Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone-depleting chemicals (chloro-fluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. 24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.) 25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? 0 Yes 0 No Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? 0 Yes 0 No Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? 0 Yes 0 No Scenic views and vistas? 0 Yes 0 No Other unique resources? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. -::r - 5 26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, explain. 27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? DYes 0 No If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain. 28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? 0 Yes 0 No. If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EA W Guidelines for details.) 29. Cumulative impacts. Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpan 7, item B requires that the ROU consider the "cumulati ve potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item( s) elsewhere on this form). 30. Other potential environmental impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items I to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. 31. Summary of issues. Do not complete this section if the EA W is being done for ElS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the EA W. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require funher investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as perrriit conditions. RGU CERTIFICATION. The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor. I hereby certify that: . The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, pans 4410.0200, subpans 9b and 60, respectively. Copies of this EA W are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Signature Date Title Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for EA W Guidelines, contact: Environmental Quality Board, 658 Cedar St., St. Paul, MN 55155, 651-296-8253, or www.mnplan.state.mn.us Revised 2/99 (f 6 ~1 1 ;-1 :-'1 1 I ST. MICHAEL RETAIL MARKET.ANALYSIS r i n [-1 Prepared for City of St. Michael 1_ , !..] L [-J. L- ; i ~. i Prepared by McComb Group, Ltd. U !....1 I. L August 2001 I 'I I..__.J 'I <9 Copyright 2001 McComb Group, Ltd. ~:] n : j r1 rl I 1._.1 [-1 f""j !' . , .. ,j I. ] t,,-. , 1 UJ [t ! l.J l \ :) ;'..1 Table 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ~ LIST OF TABLES Title Page Downtown 81. Michael Business Establishments Estimated Square Feet by Type ..........................................................,.....................................................4 Traffic Counts; 1999 and 2020 ................................................................................5 Buffalo Business Establishments by TyPe...............................................................7 Monticello Business Establishments by Type .........................................................8 Rogers Business Establishments by Type.............,.. ........ ................... ................ .....9 Albertville Business Establishments by Type........................................................ 1 0 St. Michael and Competitive Shopping Areas, Business Establishments by Type... .................................................................. ...................... ........... ......... ....11 St. Michael Trade Area Survey Respondents by Zip Code ...................................12 Customer Distribution by Business Type; Trade Area and Other .........................13 St. Michael Customer Survey "Why Did You Stop Today?" by Trade Area Home Zip Code; All Respondents..................................................................... 14 St. Michael Customer Survey "Why Did You Stop Today?" by Trade Area Work Zip Code; All Respondents .............................. .......................................14 St. Michael Customer Survey Reason for Stopping by Business Type; All Respondents ................................................... ................. ......................... ....15 St. Michael Customer Survey Participants ............................................................16 1-94 Corridor Communities Population Growth; 1990 to 2000.......:.....................18 1-94 Corridor Building Permits; 1990 to 2000.......................................................19 St. Michael Household Projections; 2000 to 2020, Eight-County Area and Trade Area...... ................................................ .................................. ............... ..20 Downtown St. Michael Trade Area Full Build-Out Households...........................21 St. Michael Trade Area, 1-94 Corridor and Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA Population and Households: 1990 Census; 2000, 2005 and 2010 Estimated ...22 St. Michael Trade Area, 1-94 Corridor, and Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA Average and Median Household Income: 1990 Census; 2000, 2005 and 2010 Estimated...... ..... ... ....................... ........... .............. .................... ....... ....... ..... ..... .23 St. Michael Trade Area Demographic and Income Snapshot.................;..............24 1-94 Corridor Demographic and Income Snapshot................................................25 Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA Demographic and Income Snapshot..........................26 11 ~ 1 l , 1 \ i f. '....] , . 1 [1 t I .1 ,j ~ul r.\ I' L; u I \ I . I. i: l,." . I ! SUMMARY OF FINDINGS St. Michael's downtown is located at the intersection of TH 241 and CSAH 19, about 3.5 miles west of 1-94. An auto-oriented commercial area extends east to MacIver Avenue NE. Town Center is a planned commercial area that will be located between MacIver Avenue and Orleans Road and is planned to be the major commercial and office location in St. Michael. Downtown and Town Center enjoy excellent access by way ofTH 241. The southern portion of Town Center has excellent visibility from the roadway. The site is also located on the going home side of the road, which is important to some convenience goods retailers. Downtown St. Michael has about 81 businesses occupying about 205,000 square feet. Convenience goods total about 44,150 square feet or 21 percent of the total. Other significant categories include food service, personal service, and offices. Access to downtown and Town Center is excellent. Primary access routes are CSAH 19 and TH 241. Town Center will also be served by a new road that will extend north to Albertville and also connect to CSAH 19. Traffic counts in downtown St. Michael, west ofI-94, were 12,100 in 1999 and are estimated to increase to 32,400 in 2020, a 125 percent increase. Traffic counts on CSAH 19 are currently about 10,000 trips per day and are expected to increase to about 24,000 trips in 2020, an increase of over 150 percent. These traffic counts will support the retail planned for downtown and Town Center. Competitive Shopping Centers Residents in the St. Michael trade area will be served by a variety of existing and future shopping centers in nearby communities. Competitive shopping centers function as convenience, neighborhood, or community centers and may contain uncoordinated retail buildings of varying size, quality, and condition. Maple Grove and Minnetonka contain the nearest large regional shopping concentrations. St. Michael will compete with two communities, Buffalo and Monticello, with established commercial areas. Shopping opportunities in these communities will continue to expand as population growth continues. Two other competitive communities, Rogers and Albertville, are emerging concentrations that will also grow and expand. Buffalo contains the largest number of retail and service establishments (212) followed by Monticello with 151. Both of these communities have large supermarkets (Cub Foods) and discount stores. Rogers currently has 95 retail and service establishments, which will increase when a new shopping center and Target Superstore opens. Albertville has 38 retail and service establishments, excluding the outlet mall, which is not competitive. Albertville is smaller than St. Michael, which has 81 business establishments. IV ~J 1 ;J :-'1 [-1 1'1 --...] . . ! I :j , . L". '-I lJ J Communities in the 1-94 corridor captured a total of 16.3 percent of the building permits issued in the seven-county metro area and Wright County. Market share of eight-county building permits has accelerated steadily from 13 percent in 1994 to 21.2 percent in 2000. Trade area communities market share of 1-94 corridor building permits have increased from 3.4 percent to 16.3 percent in 2000. Household growth projections through 2020 for communities in the St. Michael trade area are based on future estimated market share of 1-94 corridor communities and the eight-county region. Households in the eight-county area are estimated to increase at a 1.5 percent annual growth rate. Assuming that the 1-94 corridor continues to achieve a 21 percent market share, households are expected to increase by 76,839 units in 2020. The 8t. Michael trade area is estimated to achieve accelerated market share over the next six years, increasing from 6.3 percent in 2000 to 23 percent in 2006. Market share is stabilized at about 23 percent for ten years and then reduced to 20 percent. By 2005, trade area households are estimated at 8,856, increasing to 13,256 in 2010. By 2020, estimates indicate that the St. Michael trade area could contain 21,835 households. Full build-out housing potential for each trade area community is estimated at about 57,800 households. The St. Michael trade area allocation of this growth is 41,835. Estimated trade area households for 2020 is 21,835 or half of trade area potential. Full build-out households for the community of St. M;ichael are estimated at 33,770. Population and Households Population and households in the St. Michael trade area have been growing at a much faster rate than either the 1-94 corridor communities or the Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA. Trade area population increased at a 9.0 percent rate from 7,210 persons in 1990 to 17,092 in 2000, and is estimated to increase at a 9.5 percent growth rate to 26,902 people by 2005. This compares to the MSA's annual growth from 1990 to 2000 of 1.36 percent and estimated future growth of 1.12 percent from 2000 to 2005. Growth rate for the trade area will decrease slightly to 8.1 percent from 2005 to 2010.- Income Average household income was estimated at $64,373 in 2000, which is below the 1-94 corridor average of $71,184, but slightly above the MSA' s household income of $62,817. It is anticipated that the households with incomes above $75,000 in the trade area will increase from 23.4 percent in 2000 to 42.6 percent by 2010. Employment Trade area employment totaled 2,986 people at 569 business establishments in 1999. Average payroll was over $89 million resulting in an annual average employee salary of $29,921. This is slightly below the Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA average of $32,404. Manufacturing is the largest employer with 941 jobs followed by services with 546 employees. VI J 1 i ~ 1 r."..] L r~ 1 \. . L i I ,'I .1 lJ i......\ -Jo. ,. I I . I Table i ST. MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL BY MAJOR MERCHANDISE AND SERVICE CATEGORIES Category Square Feet Full 2005 2010 2015 2020 Build-Out 8,856 13,256 17,690 21,835 41,835 52,500 68,400 111,300 136,800 263,900 26,300 40,200 51,500 62,000 124,000 11,000 17,000 22,000 22,000 70,000 20,000 40,800 59,000 75,800 312,000 28,000 55,000 67,000 91,000 156,000 13 7 ,800 221,400 310,800 387,600 925,900 61,500 105,100 153,500 199,100 370,000 65,500 99,000 162,000 222,900 270,000 127,000 204,100 315,500 422,000 640,000 264,800 425,500 626,300 809,600 1,565,900 Households Convenience Goods Food Service Gasoline/Convenience Stores Shopping Goods Other Retail Total Retail Services Healthcare Total Services Total Source: McComb Group, Ltd. Convenience stores, services, and food service represent the largest potential for Town Center as shown in Table i. Convenience goods potential increases from 52,000 square feet in 2005 to 136,800 square feet in 2020. The Jubilee store is' adequate for the current market and could expand in the future as population grows. By 2015, household growth projections indicate that a Cub or Rainbow type store could be supported in the market. Other convenience goods categories expand at a similar rate. Other significant retail categories are food service, increasing from 26,300 in 2005 to 62,000 square feet in 2020; and gasoline/convenience stores, which could double in square footage. Shopping goods store potential is relatively limited due to the larger number of households required to support stores in this category. Currently there is an estimated 18,600 square feet in this category, which can double by 2010 and double again by 2020. Services demand will expand steadily with population growth. Many services businesses will choose to locate in professional office type environments, while others will prefer shopping center space. Health represents a significant opportunity for Town Center. This category includes doctors, dentists, and all other medical practitioners including medical clinics such as Fairview. The Town Center trade area could support two medical clinics in the for-profit category. In the nonprofit category, the market is likely to be able to support one to two facilities. viii , j r-'\ INTRODUCTION McComb Group, Ltd~ was engaged to conduct market analysis for downtown St. Michael. The objective of this analysis was to determine future commercial space demand. Work tasks conducted during this engagement are summarized below: r 1 I . n ~'l i ; L_~ . . , - j . [.J t ,J I. U lJ . Downtown St. Michael was evaluated to determine its suitability for commercial development. Business estab'lishments in the study area were categorized by type. Factors evaluated included, but were not limited to: ingress and egress, access, visibility, current and future traffic counts, and relationship to adjacent uses. Competitive shopping areas serving the market area were identified and evaluated to determine competitive impacts on the downtown retail area. Principal competitors were identified and evaluated for tenant mix, retail GLA, and anchor stores. Future retail developments that will affect either downtown St. Michael or its retail market area were identified. To the extent possible, the impact of new competitive retail developments was identified. Business owners and/or managers in St. Michael were interviewed to determine strengths and weaknesses of downtown, and concerns about the future. Selected businesses in St. Michael were asked to participate in a survey of their customers to determine where they live and work. This information was used to identify a trade area for downtown St. Michael. The trade area for downtown St. Michael was delineated based on management and tenant interviews, customer survey results, and McComb Group's experience. The economy of the market area was analyzed to identify and quantify those factors that generate support for retail and service establishments. Factors evaluated included, but were not limited to: employment, population, households, building permits, household income, and retail sales. Comprehensive plans for adjacent communities located in the trade area were evaluated to determine residential and commercial development potential. Retail and service purchasing power of the market area households was estimated. Market area growth trends were evaluated to determine residential growth potential for target years of2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. . Future commercial development potential for downtown St. Michael was estimated taking into consideration competitive impacts, market area demographics, and market area purchasing power and estimated market share. Based on analysis of purchasing power, competitive shopping centers and current retail trends, future retail and service sales potential for downtown St. Michael was estimated by business type. Estimates of retail, service and professional office space supportable by sales potential were prepared for target years 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. This report contains the primary information needed to support the principal conclusions. However, in a report of this nature, it is not possible to include all of the information that was developed and evaluated. Any additional information will be furnished upon request. 1 ~1 , Chapter I TOWN CENTERlDOWNTOWN EVALUATION S1. Michael's original downtown is located at the intersection of TH 241 and CSAH19, about . I 3.5 miles west of 1-94 as shown on Map 1. An auto-oriented commercial area extends east from I the existing downtown to MacIver Avenue NE. This area contains almost all of the existing commercial development in S1. Michael. Town Center is a planned commercial area that will be located between Orleans Road and MacIver Avenue on the north side ofTH 241. Town Center has about 175 acres of land that could be developed for retail, service, commercial, and office uses. The southern portion of the site is bordered by TH 241, providing excellent visibility and access. The site is also located on the going home side of the road, which is important to some convenience goods retailers. 1 ~1 DOWNTOWN AND TOWN CENTER 'l iJ , 1 i I ' I N 0.2 o o 04 Miles City of Albertville , r i l ,. i i ; 'j :.j: ~ , i :1 'J t ,J 3 ~ J n . i . I [} ] i . i 1...1 D r"....:...l. I. I: \ i;j U ['.':J I... F' .... "-- TH 241 is a primary route for residents of S1. Michael to reach 1-94 and travel to the Twin Cities. Some residents in the Buffalo area use TH 241 to commute to the Twin Cities since this highway and 1-94 provide a quicker route to the Twin Cities than does TH 55. Thus, downtown St. Michael benefits from an arterial road network that feeds traffic to TH 241 as the primary connection to 1-94. Traffic Counts Existing traffic counts in downtown St. Michael indicate that TH 241 will serve as the future focal point for customers arriving from the east and west. Traffic counts for TH 241 west ofl-94 were 12,100 in 1999 and increase to 13,800 east of CSAH 19 as shown in Table 2. Traffic. counts at the west, south and north on CSAH 19 and TH 241 range from 9,900 to 10,900. This indicates that downtown 81. Michael is the focal point of traffic originating from the surrounding areas. Table 2 TRAFFIC COUNTS; 1999 AND 2020 Actual Forecast Location 1999 2020 TH 241 West ofI-94 12,100 32,400 East ofCSAH 19 13,800 31,200 West ofCSAH 19 9,900 22,300 CSAH 19 South ofTH 241 10,900 24,600 North ofTH 241 9,900 22,400 Source: City of St. Michael. Traffic counts forecast for 2020 are significantly higher than those in 1999. Traffic counts at the intersection ofCSAH 19 and 241 are estimated to increase by about 125 percent. Traffic counts west of 1-94 on TH 241 are estimated to increase to 32,400, or 160 percent, demonstrating that f... j TH 241 will continue to be a primary route to and from Twin Cities work locations for many St ~ . Michael residents. Lc u : I ; I l.J ,. [ J 5 ~'j rl I '"1 l. i.. : '-I ] '-1 ] ,.'. ] r,. , :. ,,' J C] l.. ESTABLISHED SHOPPING AREAS Buffalo and Monticello are established shopping areas that are adding larger stores as trade area population increases. Buffalo's retail and service offerings are larger than Monticello's, influenced by government and institutional presence. Buffalo Buffalo, located twelve miles west of St. Michael, has three shopping areas: downtown, east side and west side. CSAH 35 provides convenient access to retailers lpcated in Buff~lo. Buffalo contains 212 retail and service establishments. . Downtown Buffalo Downtown is the original business district near Lake Buffalo and is home of the Wright County Government Center. Nearly half of all Buffalo business establishments are located in downtown. Downtown has the largest concentration of businesses with 47 retail stores and 51 services or offices. Shopping goods is the largest concentration with 31 stores, followed by services. This area is dominated by smaller, specialty shopping goods retailers such as The Village Peddler, Minnetonka Moccasin, A Wreath of Franklin, Slack Tuesday, and Hallmark Gold Crown. Table 3 BUFF ALa BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS BY TYPE Category Downtown West East Total Food 1 0 1 2 Drug 1 0 0 I Liquor 0 0 1 1 Hardware 1 2 0 3 Floral 1 0 2 3 Full-Service Food 6 4 2 12 Limited Service Food 3 8 3 14 Convenience Store/Gas 0 4 2 6 Shopping Goods 31 7 7 45 Auto Parts & Service 2 4 16 22 Building Supplies 1 1 3 5 Personal Services 13 4 1 18 Financial 4 3 2 9 Insurance 6 1 1 8 Medical 6 18 0 24 Other Services 8 4 4 16 Recreation 1 1 1 3 Offices 12 4 4 20 Total 97 65 50 212 Source: McComb Group, Ltd. 7 ~ ] l f-] ~<l i. ] Iq o o r'i ! I /. j L<; ! j .,:.:. le.' U LJ J and a modest number of specialty and gift stores. Downtown Monticello 1S also influenced by a considerable number of professional business establishments. . TH 25 The TH 25 shopping area is located south of downtown. Cub Foods, Big Kmart, Monticello Ford, and Gould Chevrolet are the largest businesses in this area and are complemented by a number of food service establishments. A Chrysler dealership is under construction. EMERGING SHOPPING AREAS Two other communities (Rogers and Albertville) are experiencing retail and service growth resulting from recent residential development. Rogers Rogers is emerging as a competitive shopping area, due to accelerated residential growth and its proximity to 1-94 and TH 110. Rogers contains 95 business establishments, 60 percent of the businesses are located south ofl-94 and 40 percent are north ofl-94, as shown in Table 5. Table 5 ROGERS BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS BY TYPE Category Food and Supermarket Drug Liquor Hardware Floral Full-Service Food Limited Service Food Convenience Store/Gas Shopping Goods Auto Parts & Service Building Supplies Personal Services Financial Insurance Medical Other Services Recreation Offices Total South ofI-94 I I 1 1 1 3 5 4 4 7 1 3 o 3 6 4 o 13 58 North ofI-94 o o o o o 2 3 3 8 7 o o 4 o 3 1 1 5 37 Total 1 1 1 1 1 5 8 7 12 14 1 3 4 3 9 5 1 18 9S Source: McComb Group, Ltd. 9 Albertville has 38 retail and service businesses south of 1-94, located in a linear fashion along CSAH 19 and CSAH 37. Albertville is a small convenience and service center. A Coborn's grocery store (approx. 17,000 square feet) is planned south of downtown on CSAH 19. This store and any adjacent retailers will be competitive with merchants in St. Michael. OTHER COMMUNITIES There is little development in Hanover and Hassan Township. Development in Otsego is planned along TH-lOI and a small area in a northeast portion of the city. Otsego is primarily an agricultural .community and has experienced relatively slow residential growth compared to surrounding communities. Growth is planned in the distant future, generally moving westward from TH 101. I. I. r' Summary St. Michael ranks fourth in number of business establishments out of the five competitive communities identified in this report as shown in Table 7. Buffalo, Monticello, and Rogers will be strong competitors to St. Michael. These communities have their own distinct trade areas, which can support planned growth. Albertville's location is more competitive, but its location along the northern edge of residential development reduces its attractiveness as a retail location. St. Michael is well positioned relative to its competition to establish a significant retail and service concentration. Table 7 ST. MICHAEL AND COMPETITIVE SHOPPING AREAS BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS BY TYPE Category St. Michael Buffalo Monticello Rogers Albertville Food 3 2 2 1 2 Drug 1 1 1 1 0 Liquor 2 1 2 1 2 Hardware 1 3 1 1 I Floral 1 3 1 1 0 Full-Service Food 5 12 6 5 2 Limited Service Food 4 14 11 8 0 Convenience Store/Gas 3 6 5 7 4 Shopping Goods 7 45 26 12 1 Auto Parts & Service 5 22 14 14 5 Building Supplies 3 5 4 1 4 Personal Services 10 18 6 3 6 Financial 4' 9 10 4 2 Insurance 7 8 5 3 2 Medical 6 24 13 9 0 Other Services 5 16 13 5 4 Recreation 2 3 3 1 0 Offices 12 20 28 18 3 Total 81 212 151 95 38 Source: McComb Group, Ltd. 11 l :-1 r-l n n ( 1 , L. !: 1 LJ u LJ lJ I I Table 9 CUSTOMER DISTRIBUTION BY BUSINESS TYPE TRADE AREA AND OTHER Trade Business Type Area Other Home Zip Code Convenience Retail 93.6 % 6.4 % Shopping Goods 73.9 26.1 Food Service 69.2 30.8 Automobile Services/Supplies 70.8 30.0 Personal Services 90.0 10.0 Fraternal 93.3 6.7 Work Zip Code Convenience Retail 49.7 % 50.3 % Shopping Goods 61.9 38.1 Food Service 63.9 36.1 Automobile Services/Supplies Personal Services 60.4 39.6 Fraternal 48.9 51.1 Source: McComb Group, Ltd. Survey responses to the question "Why did you stop here today?" are contained in Table 10 by trade area zip code. "Regular customer" had the largest response in the trade area (69.9 percent). There are several reasons why respondents are regular customers. One reason would be a business location close to home or close to work. "Close to home" responses diminished the further the resident lived from St. Michael except for Hanover, which had the largest "close to home" response (82.1 percent). "Driving by" and "running errands" was indicated by 16.0 and 18.1 percent, respectively, of trade area residents. Downtown St. Michael has a large group of regular customers that choose to shop in downtown because it is convenient for them to do so. Convenience responses are indicated by "close to home, close to work, driving by, and running errands." Survey respondents from other zip codes, representing 19.6 percent of survey respondents, also had a large "regular customer" response (46.8 percent). About one-quarter of the respondents indicated "close to home," "close to work," and "driving by," reinforcing convenience as a reason for shopping in St. Michael. Overall, almost two-thirds of survey respondents considered themselves to be regular customers. The reasons for shopping in downtown St. Michael were due to the fact that the store has a convenient location for them. 13 :"1 I' I l ["1 rl n I n l_1 r-j b u u , , .1 U ~J U Responses to "why did you stop here-today" were evaluated by work zip code as shown in Table 11. Half (51.3 percent) of all respondents work in the trade area. Of those respondents, 50.4 percent responded "close to home" and 42.8 percent responded "close to work" indicating that many respondents both live and work in the trade area. The largest proportion of "close to work" respondents work in St. Michael (54.3 percent), followed by Hanover (44.4 percent), and Albertville (39.4 percent). Almost three-quarters (72.0 percent) of those respondents working in the trade area consider themselves to be regular customers of St. Michael businesses. This distribution of responses between trade area and inflow markets also reinforces the convenience nature of shopping in downtown St. Michael. This demonstrates that people shopping in downtown St. Michael do so, generally, because it is convenient and the commercial area is located either close to home, close to work, or a place that they pass in the course of routine travel. Responses to "Why did you stop here today?" (contained in Table 12) indicate that responses vary by type of business. "Close to home" responses were high for convenience retail, auto, personal service, and fraternal. These groups, excluding auto, also had high "regular customer" responses. Food service ranked high on "regular customer" responses due to Russell's, which has strong destination characteristics. Auto services/supplies had the highest responses in "driving by," "running errands" and "other." "Close to home" and "regular customer" are important characteristics formany businesses in St. Michael. Business Type Convenience Retail Shopping Goods Food Service Auto Services/Supplies Personal Services Fraternal Table 12 ST. MICHAEL CUSTOMER SURVEY REASON FOR STOPPING BY BUSINESS TYPE ALL RESPONDENTS Why did you stop here today? Close Close Driving Running Regular to Home to Work By Errands Customer Other Total 673 % 17.3% 31.8 % 21.8 % 61.4 % 21.4 % 31.1 % 39.1 8.7 13.0 19.6 39.1 15.2 6.5 36.1 27.8 3.8 4.5 51.9 22.6 18.8 65.0 40.0 50.0 30.0 35.0 30.0 2.8 57.2 22.7 13.5 17.0 83.8 6.6 32.3 58.3 16.7 11.7 13.3 70.0 8.3 8.5 Source: McComb Group, Ltd. Summary Survey results indicate that businesses in downtown St. Michael tend to serve the same customer base. Some businesses, such as Jubilee Foods, attract a high volume of customers to downtown; while other businesses, such as Russell's, Of Course, attract customers from a further distance. This demonstrates that the strength of downtown St. Michael is its strong representation of 15 ! J 4 ! I I , I ;1 l :-1 ] I o f] 1-1 , , [J ".j I..: l~. ~j U Chapter IV TRADE AREA The trade area for St. Michael was delineated by McComb Group, Ltd. based on customer surveys conducted by merchants in St. Michael, location of existing and future competitive shopping areas, arterial road network, and previous experience. The trade area, shown on Map 3, consists of St. Michael, Albertville, Hanover and a portion of Hassan Township. The Crow River and Crow Hassan Park Reserve is a barrier that limits trade area penetration to the south. The Territorial Road bridge is the only river crossing that serves that portion of Hassan. Map 3 ST. MICHAEL TRADE AREA AND 1-94 CORRIDOR COMMUNITIES Otsego ---- ~-- , . ,,~;: ; ,- ...JiI!J. ,.,=.~,:"- r" i ; St. Michael I I --_.._.__._--~ Trade Area N +~ (] I Miles 17 ',j : I l ,"1 :--] to: Fl o D ~..! i u [J U r..J i b , I I I L I U ~_J l.i ! Building permits for 1-94 Corridor communities are compared with the combined total of Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area and Wright County (eight-county area), in Table 15. A total of 172,335 new construction residential building permits were issued within the eight- county area between 1990 and 2001. The 1-94 Corridor captured a total 16.3 percent share of the eight-county growth during this period. Market share of eight-county building permits has accelerated steadily from 13.0 percent in 1994 to 21.2 percent in 2000. Trade area communities; market share of eight-county building permits have increased steadily from 0.5 percent in 1990 to 3.5 percent in 2000. Trade area communities share of 1-94 Corridor building permits have increased dramatically during the eleven-year period. During the last five years trade area community market share has ranged from 11.2 to 16.3 percent. Table 15 1-94 CORRIDOR BUILDING PERMITS, 1990 TO 2000 1-94 Corridor Metro Market Share Single Multiple Area & Market Trade Area Communities Year Family Family Total Wright Co. Share Number Total 1-94 Corridor 1990 1,533 647 2,180 13,824 15.8% 75 0.5% 3,4% 1991 1,535 345 1,880 12,544 15.0 115 0.9 6.1 1992 1,918 379 2,297 16,284 14.1 195 1.2 8.5 1993 2,225 118 2,343 16,755 14.0 232 1.4 9.9 1994 1,653 307 1,960 15,039 13.0 250 1.7 12.8 1995 1,819 492 2,311 14,839 15.6 220 1.5 9.5 1996 2,109 266 2,375 15,073 15.8 288 1.9 12.1 1997 1,852 356 2,208 14,035 15.7 248 1.8 11.2 1998 2,103 933 3,036 16,951 17.9 359 2.1 11.8 1999 3,073 688 3,761 19,032 19.8 497 2.6 13.2 2000 2,691 1,116 3,807 17,959 21.2 622 3.5 16.3 Total 22,511 5,647 28,158 172,335 16.3 % 3,101 1.8% 11.0% Source: u.s. Census, Metropoiitan Council, Wright County, Albertville, Buffalo, Hanover, Monticello, Otsego, St. Michael, and McComb Group, Ltd. Household growth projections through 2020 for communities in the St. Michael trade area are based on future estimated market share of 1-94 Corridor communities and the eight-county region in Table 16. Households in the eight-county area are estimated to increase at a 1.5 percent annual growth rate, adding 365,900 homes by 2020. Assuming that the 1-94 Corridor continues to achieve a 21.0 percent market share of the eight-county area household growth, households are expected to increase by 76,839 units by 2020. The St. Michael trade area is estimated to achieve accelerated market share over the next six years, increasing from 16.3 percent in 2000 to 23 percent in 2006. Market share is estimated to stabilize at about 23 percent for ten years and then decline to 20 percent. By 2005, trade area households are estimated at 8,856, increasing to 13,256 in 2010. By 2020, estimates indicate that 19 ~ I l I :--1 r~l f.l I. L r-I u [,.1 W 1 .1 i 1 ,. J l.. !u... I . '. i I i d 1:1 ! I multiple-family residential growth. Vacant agriculture/open space represented the largest category, totaling 24,272 acres available for development. Overall, 26,981 acres were identified as potential residential development in the trade area, and nearly 58.0 percent of this available land was in St. Michael. Table 17 DOWNTOWN ST. MICHAEL TRADE AREA FULL BUILDOUT HOUSEHOLDS St. Michael Trade Area St. Michael Albertville Hanover Hassan Total 1997 Residential Potential (acres) Undeveloped SFR 1,713 525 2,238 Undeveloped MFR-Low 322 82 404 Undeveloped MFR-High 67 67 Vacant Agriculture / Open Space 13,535 320 2,033 8,384 24,272 Total 15,637 927 2,033 8,384 26,981 Units Per Acre Undeveloped SFR @ 3.2 units/acre 5,482 1,680 7,162 Undeveloped MFR-Low @ 6 units/acre 1,932 492 2,424 Undeveloped MFR-High @ 12 units/acre 804 804 Vacant Agriculture @ 3.2 units per acre 43,312 1,024 6,506 26,829 77,670 Total Units 51,530 3,196 6,506 26,829 88,060 Residential Percent @ 60% 30,918 1,918 3,903 16,097 52,836 Less Growth 1997-1999 696 354 25 29 1,104 Net Future Growth 30,222 1,564 3,878 16,068 51,732 2000 Households 3,548 1,211 500 823 6,082 Estimated Full Build-out Households 33,770 2,775 4,378 16,891 57,814 Trade Area Allocation 33,700 2,775 4,378 912 41,835 Source: Metropolitan Council, Albertville, St. Michael and McComb Group, Ltd. The number of housing units available for each trade area community was determined by land ' use type, also indicated in Table 17. Assuming that single-family residential areas will develop at a density of 3.2 units per acre, this category has the potential to add 7,162 new housing units. A total of 3,228 multiple-family residential units could be developed, 2,424 low-density units, and 804 high-density units. The vacant agriculture/open space was also assumed to develop at a density of 3.2 units per acre, representing a possible 77,670 new housing units. Overall, this analysis resulted in an estimate of 88,060 total units. Based on previous development trends, only 60 percent of this land is likely to develop as residential. Taking into consideration that land will be acquired for road, schools, neighborhood parks and community facilities, only 60 percent of the potential total units were allocated for residential development, resulting in an estimate of 52,836 units. Growth for the 1997 to 1999 period was 1,104, leaving potential for 51,732 future housing units. The trade area communities were estimated to have 6,082 households in 2000, resulting in an estimated 57,814 households at full build-out. 21 ~'l l [.J r-1 l I o o n .{ u r-J b 1 i , . I L.! u o I I I l I LJ r ] ~~n. Household growth in the primary trade area has shown a more rapid increase than has the 1-94 corridor and the Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA. The number of households in the trade area has more than doubled from 2,255 in 1990 to 5,310 by 2000 at an annual growth rate of 8.94 percent. This is compared to the MSA's 1.62 percent growth rate for the same period. It is estimated that trade area household annual growth rate will peak at 10.77 percent between 2000 and 2005, and slow modestly to 8.40 percent from 2005 to 2010. Projections indicate that household growth rates in the Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA will decrease to 1.42 percent between 2000 and 2005, but increase slightly to 1.47 percent from 2005 to 2010. Income Average household income, described in Table 19, in the trade area in 2000 IS estimated at $64,373, which is below the 1-94 Corridor average of $71,184 and slightly above the MSA's $62,817. It is anticipated that the percentage of households that have incomes above $75,000 in the trade area will increase from 23.4 percent in 2000 to 42.6 percent by 2010, which is comparable to the MSA estimate. Table 19 ST. MICHAEL TRADE AREA, 1-94 CORRIDOR AND MINNEAPOLIS-ST.P AUL MSA AVERAGE AND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 1990 CENSUS; 2000. 2005 AND 2010 ESTIMATED Minneapolis- Trade 1-94 St. Paul Area Corridor MSA Average Household Income 1990 $ 47.565 $ 55.849 $ 51.782 2000 64.373 71.184 62.817 2005 73.087 83.224 72.955 2010 83.102 94.447 82.990 Median Household Income 1990 $ 39.808 $ 44.631 $ 37.652 2000 54.599 62.925 53.029 2005 60.563 71.316 59.880 2010 67.927 79.174 66.629 Source: u.s. Census, Applied Geographic Solutions, Inc. and McComb Group, Ltd. Demographic Characteristics Demographic characteristics for the St. Michael trade area, 1-94 Corridor and the Minneapolis- St. Paul MSA are summarized in the demographic snapshots contained in Tables 20, 21, and 22. These snapshots contain census data for 1990 as well as estimates for 2000, 2005, and 2010. Additional demographic characteristics are contained in Appendix A. These estimates were provided by Applied Geographic Solutions, Inc., a source of demographic information. Significant characteristics of the St. Michael primary trade area include the following: 23 Table 21 r-l g~ g McComb DEMOGRAPHIC AND INCOME SNAPSHOT 000 Group, Ltd. Geographic Area: 1-94 Corridor 8/1012001 SNAPSHOT 1990 Census 2000 Estimated 2005 Projected 2010 Projected Population 217,250 266,101 285,278 308,548 ; 1 74,425 93,419 100,956 II 0,844 i Households Families 57,741 70,244 75,749 82,431 Per Capita Income S 16,877 S 25,037 S 29,501 S 33,980 r'l Median Household Income S 44,631 S 62,925 S 71,316 S .79,174 ,. Average Household Income S 55,849 S 71,184 S 83,224 S 94,447 Average Household Size 2.92 2.85 2.83 2.78 Median Age 29 32 32 32 . Annual Percent Change TRENDS 1990 - 2000 2000 - 2005 2005 - 2010 Population 2.05 % 1.40 % 1.58 % 0 Households 2.30 1.56 1.89 Families 1.98 1.52 1.71 Median Household Income 3.49 2.54 2.II Q Average Household Income 2.46 3.17 2.56 1990 Census 2000 Estimated 2005 Projected 2010 Projected HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 'I Less than S15,000 6,911 9.3 % 5,139 5.5 % 4,721 4.7 % 4,643 4.2 % ..1 S 15,000 - $24,999 8,II4 10.9 6,602 7.1 5,908 5.9 5,199 4.7 I $25,000 - $34,999 10,947 14.7 7,622 8.2 5,618 5.6 4,483. 4.0 S35,000 - S49,999 18,356 24.7 14,502 15.5 13,979 13.8 12,318 11.1 i S50,000 - S74,999 19,501 26.2 26,425 28.3 24,498 24.3 24,181 21.8 1 I S75,000 - S99,999 6,368 8.6 17,514 18.7 22,224 22.0 26,278 23.7 $100,000 - S149,999 2,857 3.8 10,917 11.7 16,774 16.6 22,721 20.5 l_j $ 150,000 + 1,349 1.8 4,698 5.0 7,234 7.2 II,021 9.9 POPULATION BY AGE Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0-4 20,627 9.5 % 20,646 7.8 % 23,339 8.2 % 24,967 8.1 % LJ 5 -13 35,145 16.2 40,444 15.2 42,443 14.9 43,573 14.1 14 - 20 20,485 9.4 27,754 10.4 27,093 9.5 28,827 9.3 .. 21 - 24 11,658 5.4 13,438 5.0 15,140 5.3 16,784 5.4 25 - 34 46,316 21.3 41,378 15.5 45,908 16.1 50,211 16.3 35 - 44 40,052 18.4 52,263 19.6 49,747 17.4 47,489 15.4 L I 45 - 54 21,959 10.1 37,180 14.0 40,654 14.3 44,638 14.5 55 - 64 11,248 5.2 16,918 6.4 21,297 7.5 27,538 8.9 U 65 -74 6,232 2.9 8,728 3.3 9,973 3.5 12,707 4.1 75 - 84 2,741 1.3 5,368 2.0 6,740 2.4 7,709 2.5 85+ 787 0.4 1,984 0.7 2,944 1.0 4,105 1.3 U RACE AND ETHNICITY Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent White 207,606 95.6 % 243,713 91.6 % 257,822 90.4 % 257,822 90.4 % Black 4,092 1.9 10,437 3.9 12,971 4.5 12,971 4.5 Native American 960 0.4 2,227 0.8 2,647 0.9 2,647 0.9 :J AsianlPacific Islander 3,965 1.8 9,012 3.4 II,115 3.9 II,115 3.9 Other Races 627 0.3 712 0.3 723 0.3 723 0.3 Hispanic (Any Race) 1,893 0.9 3,683 1.4 4,237 1.5 4,237 1.5 , 1 1999 Day Time Population = 113,225 1999 Establishments = 9,966 1 j i..:.~ 1999 Payroll = S3,762,877,000 1999 Retail Sales = $2,109,088,000 : J Source: U.S. Census, AGS and McComb Group, Ltd. L,. 25 '; j I. rl ] ,n'1 l j n [j lJ .. FJ. li,.;; I I I I L._ I u u I . I I.. I LJ /"1 In. . Trade area household size is above that of the MSA. Declining household size is consistent with regional and national trends and is caused by older children leaving home and an aging population. . The 2000 estimate indicates that there was a larger percent of males at 51.2 percent than females in the St. Michael trade area. The Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA and the 1-94 corridor both experienced having larger percentages of females, 49.1 percent and 49.8 percent respectively. This trend is expected to continue through 2010. . Married people represented 67.6 percent of the trade area population in 2000. This compares to 60.3 percent in the 1-94 corridor and 53.9 percent in the MSA. . The median age (29 years) of the trade area in 2000 was estimated to be lower than that of the Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA (34 years). It is anticipated that median ages will remain constant through 2010. . In 2000, estimates indicate that there were fewer people over the age of sixty-five (5.1 percent) in the St. Michael trade area than the Minneapolis-St. Paul MSA (10.0 percent). . A larger portion of the workforce in the trade area is employed in the technician/administrative support occupation when compared to the work force of the MSA. Affordable housing, good schools, and convenient access to the Twin Cities have resulted in an influx of younger and larger-than-average sized families into the St. Michael trade area from the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area. Employment Trade area employment totaled 2,986 people at 569 business establishments in 1999 as shown in Table 23. Annual payroll was over $89 million, resulting in an average annual employee salary Table 23 ST. MICHAEL TRADE AREA 1999 BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS, EMPLOYEES, AND PAYROLL Business Occupation Establishment Employees Payroll Agricultural, Forestry, Fishing 54 94 $ 21,721 Mining 3 51 42,222 Construction 89 446 33,064 Manufacturing 66 941 35, I 09 Transportation & Communications 25 143 32,657 Wholesale Trade 38 176 42,764 Retail Trade 77 476 14,264 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate 35 113 40,754 Services 182 546 25,225 Public Administration 0 0 0 Total 569 2.986 $ 29.921 Source: U.s. Census. 27 ....:j. ,. l I ;-] r-l >1 n n 'I I i r j ;'. L. I LJ u u , :1 , j ;1 ~_J !J ,- ,. Table 25 ST. MICHAEL TRADE AREA PURCHASING POWER; 2000 TO 2020 (In Thousands of Dollars) Merchandise Category Convenience Goods Food Drug Liquor Hardware Florists Total Convenience Goods Gasoline/Convenience Stores Shopping Goods General Merchandise Apparel & Accessories Furniture & Home Furnishings Other Shopping Goods Subtotal Total Shopping Goods Eating & Drinking TOTAL Source: McComb Group, Ltd. 2000 $ 20,521 4,361 2,480 1,022 545 $ 28,929 $ 12,618 $ 16,611 5,764' 4,305 8,407 $ 18,476 $ 35,087 $ 14,213 $ 90,847 2005 $ 35,967 7,643 4,347 1,791 955 $ 50,703 $ 22,116 $ 29,113 10,102 7,547 14,737 $ 32,386. $ 61,499 $ 24,911 $ 159,229 2010 $ 56,582 12,023 6,838 2,818 1,503 $ 79,764 $ 34,790 $ 45,799 15,892 11,873 23,182 $ 50,947 $ 96,746 $ 39,185 $ 250,485 2015 $ 79,369 16,865 9,592 3,953 2,108 $ 111,887 $ 48,802 $ 64,243 22,293 16,654 32,518 $ 71,465 $ 135,708 $ 54,968 $ 351,365 2020 $ 102,965 21,878 12,443 5,128 2,735 $ 145,149 $ 63,311 $ 83,342 28,920 21,605 42,186 $ 92,711 $ 176,053 $ 71,309 $ 455,822 Trade area purchasing power for convenience goods is expected to increase from $28.9 million in 2000 to over $50.7 million in 2005, further increasing to $145 million in 2020, an annual 8.4 percent growth. Gasoline/Convenience Store purchasing power is estimated at $12.6 million in 2000 and is anticipated to increase to $22.1 million in 2005, extending to $63.3 million by 2020. Purchasing power for shopping goods is projected to grow from $35.0 million in 2000 to nearly $61.5 million in 2005, expanding to $176 million by 2020. Estimates indicate that eating and drinking places purchasing power is $14.2 million in 2000 and is likely to increase to nearly $25.0 million on 2005. By 2020, eating and drinking purchasing power will exceed $71.3 million dollars. Total purchasing power for the St. Michael trade area will increase five-fold from $90.8 million in 2000 to over $455 million by 2020, an annual 8.4 percent growth rate. Purchasing power for other categories contained in Appendix B, shows similar increases. 29 :- J n I ; .r-j .. rOj ! oj n r.l. I' i. r .1 I . I i l. '..... .] I. . L o ., I I L. I u u ~_i U !;1 .... Table 26 ST. MICHAEL TOWN CENTER MARKET SHARE AND TRADE AREA SALES Trade Market Area Store Type Share Sales Convenience Goods Supermarkets 40% 90% Other Food Stores 35 90 Drug & Proprietary Stores 40 90 Hardware Stores 40 90 Other Convenience Goods 35 90 Food Service 40% 80% Gasoline/Convenience Stores 40% 80% Shopping Goods General Merchandise 25% 80% 0 Apparel & Accessories 15 80 Furniture & Home Furnishings 20 80 Electronics & Appliances Stores 20 80 Other Shopping Goods 15 80 Other Retail Stores Building Materials 35 % 80% Auto Parts & Accessories 50 90 Services 50% 90% Health Care 40% 90% Source: McComb Group, Ltd. Estimating retail and service space demand is a two-step process. Sales potential for each retail or service category is estimated first to determine if retail sales are sufficient to support a store. Next, store size is determined based on sales productivity and typical store size for each category. This methodology is illustrated for 2010 in Tables 27 and 28. These tables use convenience goods stores as an example to illustrate how supportable square footage of retail stores and services is determined. Using supermarkets as an example, resident purchasing power in 2010 is estimated at $49.7 million as shown in Table 27. Market share of 40.0 percent results in $19.9 million in trade area sales. Adding inflow sales of $2.2 million results in total estimated sales of $22.1 million. Estimated sales potential is about $5.3 million for a drug store and $3.8 million for liquor stores. The same approach is used for other retail and services categories. Sales potential for other retail stores and services is contained in Appendix C. Retail gross leasable area (GLA) supported by estimated sales potential for each retail store category is based on estimated sales per square foot (in 2000 dollars) by store type. Sales per 31 : I n :'1 I. r'1 \' fl.-.. l~J o 1,1 ,. . I U Fj L I I , u u L. : u u Table 28 ST. MICHAEL TOWN CENTER SALES POTENTIAL AND SUPPORTABLE SPACE, 2010 BY MERCHANDISE CATEGORY Category Food Stores Grocery stores Supermarkets Convenience food Specialty food stores Other specialty food stores Other Convenience Goods Drug & proprietary stores Hardware Liquor Florist Food/health supplement Estimated Sales Potential Median Store Supportable Square Feet Sales Per Sq. Ft. $ 22,076,000 $ 490 45,053 45,946 570,000 300 1,900 2,000 541,000 300 1,803 2,400 - 1,578,000 300 5,260 1,800 $ 5,343,000 $ 360 14,842 11,153 1,252,000 185 6,768 7,857 3,799,000 375 10,131 3,850 836,000 225 3,716 1,700 147,000 275 535 1,400 Source: McComb Group, Ltd. Development Potential The square footage and categories of retail stores and services that are possible in Town Center, based on trade area sales potential, are summarized in Table 29. Supportable square footage of individual retail stores and services is shown in Table 29A for each target year (2005, 2010,2015 and 2020). These tables, due to their size, are located at the end of this chapter. Retail shopping areas of the type planned for Town Center are typically anchored by larger stores that attract customers to shop at smaller stores. Sales potential analysis indicates the most likely retail stores and services that could locate in Town Center would be convenience businesses normally associated with a large neighborhood shopping area. These stores generally include supermarkets, drug stores, liquor stores, hardware stores, services, and medical uses. Development potential in these tables includes businesses in downtown and along TH 241 east to MacIver Avenue, as well as Town Center. As St. Michael grows, many of these businesses may choose to relocate to a new location. This larger area will provide suitable locations for the wide variety of businesses that are likely in St. Michael. Convenience goods stores, services, and food service represent the largest potential for Town Center as shown in Table 29. Development potential is closely related to trade area household growth. Household growth projections are based on market demand development estimates. If residential development exceeds or is below the estimate, development potential will be higher or lower than projected. Trade area households are shown at the top of Table 29 and illustrate how trade area residential development is projected to increase. Households are estimated to increase from 5,310 in 2000 to about 21,800 in 2020. This is about half of the full build-out estimate of about 42,000 trade area households. 33 '. i I ; I n Table 29 ST. MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL BY MAJOR MERCHANDISE AND SERVICE CATEGORIES Square Feet fJ Full Category 2005 2010 2015 2020 Build-Out I. Households 8,856 13,256 17,690 21,835 41,835 rl CONVENIENCE GOODS Food Stores including Supermarkets 30,000 '33,000 68,000 75,000 146,000 . , Drug & proprietary stores 9,500 15,000 15,000 27,000 60,000 Hardware 4,300 6,800 9,500 12,000 24,000 Liquor 6,400 10,000 14,000 18,000 25,000 Florist 2,300 3,600 4,800 4,800 7,500 FoodIhealth supplement stores 1,400 Sutotal 52,500 68,400 111,300 136,800 263,900 r] Food Service l Full-service restaurants 13,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 60,000 Limited service restaurants 10,000 15,000 20,000 . 24,000 50,000 Snack & beverage places 800 1,200 1,500 2,000 5,000 [-1 Specialized food places 2,500 4,000 5,000 6,000 9,000 Subtotal 26,300 40,200 51,500 62,000 124,000 Gasoline/Convenience Stores 11,000 17,000 22,000 22,000 70,000 r.. SHOPPING GOODS General Merchandise 5,000 6,500 6,500 13,000 133,000 Apparel & Accessories 2,700 6,800 10,000 12,500 41,500 Shoe Stores 2,500 Furniture& Home Furnishings 6,800 11,500 18,000 21,500 49,000 Electronics & Appliances Stores 3,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 25,000 Other Shopping Goods 2,500 7,000 15,500 19,800 61,000 Subtotal 20,000 40,800 59,000 75,800 312,000 OTHER RETAIL STORES L Building Materials & Garden Supplies 20,000 35,000 40,000 61,000 96,000 Motor Vehicles & Parts Dealers 8,000 20,000 27,000 30,000 60,000 Cj Subtotal 28,000 55,000 67,000 91,000 156,000 TOTAL- RETAIL 137,800 221,400 310,800 387,600 925,900 W SERVICES Personal Care Services 16,000 29,700 43,100 57,600 104,000 Other Services 6,000 11,200 16,700 22,000 67,000 Physical Fitness 15,000 30,000 45,000 60,000 100,000 Professional Services 11,000 17,500 27,000 36,000 63,000 U Repair Services 1,000 1,700 1,700 3,500 6,000 Automotive Repair and Maintenance 12,500 15,000 20,000 20,000 30,000 Subtotal 61,500 105,100 153,500 199,100 370,000 U Healthcare , . For Profit 44,200 74,900 111,100 154,000 172,000 Nonprofit 21,300 24,100 50,900 68,900 98,000 Sutotal 65,500 . 99,000 162,000 222,900 270,000 TOTAL - SERVICES 127,000 204,100 315,500 422,000 640,000 GRAND TOTAL 264,800 425,500 626,300 809,600 1,565,900 lJ Source: McComb Group, Ltd. ~J 35 I . i I ,'J f"l ! ;1 "1 ! [] o r-'l I I , I ~j f -:1 U] l__ u u , .1 I ,j : l' , l ; I U ~J Table 31 ESTIMATED TOWN CENTER RETAIL AND SERVICE POTENTIAL; 2020 (Square Feet) Category Convenience Goods Food Services Convenience/Gasoline Shopping Goods Other Retail Stores Automotive Service Personal Services Other Services Professional Services Financial Services Health Care - For Profit - Non-Profit Total Source: McComb Group, Ltd. Gross Leasable Area 125,000 - 52,000 - 16,000 - 25,000 50,000 - 15,000 - 45,000 - 30,000 - 25,000 - 30,000 60,000 20,000 - 493,000 - 135,000 60,000 20,000 50,000 60,000 20,000 60,000 40,000 36,000 45,000 120,000 40,000 686,000 The likely range of GLA by retail and service category that is supportable in 2020 is contained in Table 31. Estimated GLA ranges from 493,000 to 686,000 square feet. The key to achieving the higher end of this range depends on the ability to create a destination character in Town Center that will attract businesses that wish to serve customers from throughout the trade area. Shopping center inclined retail space ranges from about 250,000 to 300,000 square feet. Services that are inclined to occupy office space range from about 245,000 to 385,000 square feet. Attracting one or two large medical uses will be needed to achieve the upper range square footage in the health care category. 37 ~J : j , ' L' 39 , ) r-l : j Category "-1 Health Care - For Profit (cooL) Offices of physical, occup, & speech therapists & audiologists Speech therapist & audiologists Physical & occupational therapists Offices of all other health practitioners Offices of podiatrists Offices ofall other misc. health practitioners [] Outpatient care centers Outpatient mental health & substance abuse centers Other outpatient care centers Kidney dialysis centers All other outpatient care centers r'l L Home health care services i I I ,) Health Care - Nonprofit Outpatient care centers Family planning centers Outpatient mental health & substance abuse centers Other outpatient care centers Home health care services TOTAL !...J. l. Sou=: McComb Group, Ud, u I , ] u u :, I , L,J :'1 L..J ! J J Table 29a ST. MICHAEL DEVELOPMENTPOTENT~ BY SERVICES CATEGORY Square Feet Median Store Size 1,600 1,600 1,800 1,800 2005 125 1,700 175 900 1,300 2,000 2010 2015 Full Build-Out 2020 200 300 400 600 2,900 4,300 5,900 8,400 275 425 600 800 1,500 2,300 3,100 4,400 2,100 3,000 4,300 6,000 1,000 1,000 1,500 2,200 1,600 2,000 3,100 2,000 4,000 6,000 9,000 600 900 1,400 1,900 2,700 1,700 2,200 3,100 4,000 5,800 17,000 28,000 42,000 57,000 81,000 2,000 3,000 4,400 6,000 8,500 120,305 206,285 306,240 413,820 587,100 41 liD- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.c:i.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ S. FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Annual Organization Matters DATE: February 18,2003 INTRODUCTION Each year the City Council appoints council representatives to various boards and committees. DISCUSSION The Council needs to appoint a councilmember to serve on each of the following boards: 1) ALF Ambulance Board Appointment Primary and Alternate - A primary and an alternate Council member will need to be appointed to the ALF Board for 2003. Councilmember Strachan served as the primary representative and Councilmember Soderberg served as alternate on this board in 2002. 2) Castle Rock, Empire, Eureka, Farmington (CEEF) Appointment - Appoint a Council member to this committee. Councilmember Verch served as representative on this multi- jurisdictional board in 2002. 3) Joint Farmington/Empire Planning Board Appointments - Appoint and/or acknowledge a Council member, a staff member and at-large member (Planning Commission representative) to this board. In 2002 Councilmember Soderberg served on this board. The Community Development Director, Kevin Carroll and Planning Commission member, Todd Larson, also served on this board and would again for 2003. ACTION REOUIRED Approve the above actions as indicated Respectfully submitted, t://'/ // /-/ 0-=)(;//,-/( .. .>'J7tAC~L.-~L Lisa ShmUck Administrative Services Director 0795 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Jib FROM: Mayor and City Council t;<;. Ed Shuk1e, City Administrator t TO: SUBJECT: 2003 Leadership and Strategic Planning Retreat DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION In 2002, we held a leadership and strategic planning retreat. It was held on Saturday, April13, 2002, at Dakota Electric's conference room. Participants included the City Council and Management Team. It was facilitated by Don Sa1verda, Donald Sa1verda and Associates. The reaction was very positive by all participants and it was suggested, at that time, that these retreats be held annually. DISCUSSION The primary objectives of the retreat were: 1. To review progress being made by the City of Farmington 2. To enhance communication and develop a renewed team spirit among participants 3. To discuss changes that are likely to impact the City of Farmington 4. To develop consensus on issues and opportunities facing the city (1-3 year perspective) 5. To develop an updated goals program for the city (1-3 year perspective) 6. To review the roles ofthe city's leadership team 7. To be an educational and enjoyable day At the retreat, we developed a mission statement, goals and value statements which have been helpful in executing our work as a municipal organization. These elements were incorporated into a report drafted by Mr. Salverda. The report states the outcomes of the retreat. Action plans were also included in the report as a means to carry out the goals. BUDGET IMPACT There are funds budgeted in the 2003 Budget for a leadership and strategic planning retreat. REOUESTED ACTION Schedule a leadership and strategic planning retreat for 2003. Based upon a review of schedules, the only day that appears to work is Saturday, April 5. I would anticipate bringing Mr. Salverda back to facilitate as he worked with us on our 2002 retreat and would be able to offer the continuity needed to make the 2003 retreat meaningful. d9~ lIe City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us TO: C(\ Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator · FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Akin Road - Speed Study Results and Alternatives DATE: February 18, 2003 INTRODUCTION The State has completed their speed studies on Akin Road. Attached is a letter summarizing the results of the study and outlining alternatives for the posting of the speed limit. DISCUSSION The State's letter indicates that there are two alternatives for posting the speed limit on Akin Road. The warranted speed limit is 50 mph from CSAH 50 to 195th Street and 45 mph from 195th Street to Pilot Knob Road. The second alternative would be to post the speed limit at 50 mph between CSAH 50 and Eaves Way and 45 mph between Eaves Way and Pilot Knob Road. However, for the second alternative to be recommended to the State Traffic Engineer, the City would need to commit to not posting the 30 mph statutory speed in the "urban district" area. Otherwise, if the Council posts the urban district at 30 mph, MnDOT will recommend the first alternative, which would keep the speed limit at 50 mph between the urban district area and 195th Street. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Consider adoption of the attached resolution asserting that the speed limits on Akin Road be posted as identified by the second alternative and agreeing that the City will not post the 30 mph statutory speed limit in the urban district area. Respectfully Submitted, ~ !VI)?1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file ~9/ RESOLUTION NO. - 03 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE APPROVAL OF THE MINNESOT A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO CHANGE SPEED LIMITS FOR AKIN ROAD BETWEEN 212th STREET (CSAH 50) AND PILOT KNOB ROAD (CSAH 31) WITHIN THE CITY OF FARMINGTON 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 18th day of February, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, a the City of Farmington passed Resolution 38-01 requesting the Minnesota Department of Transportation to conduct an engineering and traffic investigation of Akin Road to determine the appropriate speed limit for that road between 212th Street (CSAH50) and Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31) within the City; and WHEREAS, the Department of Transportation has completed that study and by letter dated January 22 to the City indicated two options would be acceptable to the Department upon certain conditions being met by the City; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the two alternatives and suggested conditions and has determined that, in the best interests of the residents of the City of Farmington, and in furtherance of the general health, safety and welfare, that the speed limits along the aforementioned segment of Akin should be adjusted following its recent reconstruction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA, that the street herein discussed should have the following speed limits: 50 mph - between the intersection with 212th Street (CSAH 50) and the intersection with Eaves Way 45 mph - between the intersection with Eaves Way and the intersection with Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon posting the authorized speed limits the City Council of the City of Farmington shall not subsequently seek to unilaterally pursue posting a lower speed limit nor post a 30 mph statutory speed limit for those segments qualifying as an ''urban district", nor seek any modification to the speed limits of that road segment prior to additional study and review by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of February, 2003. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Mayor Attest: City Administrator 103746 ~n ~Ol'of I(t) ~OF,",""''1i /. Minnesota Department of Transportation ,,~" Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road 82 Roseville, MN 55113 January 22, 2003 "'\.~, Mayor Gerald Ristow City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024-1374 Re: Speed Zoning - City of Farmington Akin Road Dear Mayor Ristow: An engineering and traffic investigation has been completed to determine reasonable and safe speed limits for Akin Road between 21ih Street (CSAH 50) and Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31). The investigation was requested by Farmington City Council Resolution No. 38-01. (As previously agreed, the resolution was interpreted as a request for two studies: one prior to, and one after reconstruction of Akin Road.) Based on investigation results, and as Ed Brown discussed with Lee Mann and Police Chief Siebenaler, the following speed limits are currently warranted for Akin Road: 50 mph - between the intersection with 212th Street (CSAH 50) and the intersection with 195th Street (CR 64) 45 mph - between the intersection with 195th Street (CR 64) and the intersection with Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31) We understand that Akin Road speed limits have been an ongoing controversial issue for Farmington. We are also aware that some segments of Akin Road meet the "urban district" definition; and that the City Council could be under pressure to post those segments with the 30 mph urban district statutory speed limit. Considering these facts, we further evaluated Akin Road to determine whether or not lower speed limits than those identified by the investigation could be posted on Akin Road, without creating unreasonable or unsafe restrictions. An equal opportunity employer '" / -.' cEJ99 Gerald Ristow January 22, 2003 Page 2 Based on the additional evaluation, it is our conclusion that a 45 mph speed limit can be posted between Eaves Way and Pilot Knob Road without significantly decreasing the safe operation of the Akin Road. (Some decrease in compliance with the posted speed limit is likely.) A speed limit of less than 45 mph would likely result in high violation rates, and could cause an increased number of crashes due to speed variation. We are therefore willing to recommend authorization of the following alternative speed limits, if they would be more acceptable to Farmington: 50 mph - between the intersection with 212th Street (CSAH 50) and the intersection with Eaves Way 45 mph - between the intersection with Eaves Way and the intersection with Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31) It should be noted that the first alternative is the preferred alternative, based on the investigation results. The alternative proposal is offered as option that might be more acceptable to those favoring a speed limit reduction. Please inform us of the speed zoning option preferred by Farmington. If the alternative speed limits are preferred, we ask for the Council's assurance that: 1) The authorized speed limits will be posted; and 2) The city will not pursue posting a 30 mph statutory speed limit for those segments qualifying as "urban district". If Farmington intends to post statutory speed limit segment(s), there is no reason to recommend speed limits other than those best supported by the investigation --- results. Thank you for working with us, to address concerns regarding Akin Road speed limits. Please contact Ed Brown (651-634-2372) at this office if there are questions. Sincerely, ~,6 David B. EngStror Division Traffic Engineer Cc: Lee Man, Director of Public Works Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager 3ce:>